Agenda 09/13/2022 Item # 9A (Ordinance - Amending Ordinance for the Grand Lely Resort)9.A
09/13/2022
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This item requires that all participants be sworn in, and ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 92-15,
as amended, Lely, a Resort Community Planned Unit Development (PUD), by allowing the 9+/-
acre C-3 parcel at the southwest corner of Collier Blvd. (CR 951) and Grand Lely Drive to have C-3
or residential development limited to 184 dwelling units. The subject PUD consists of 2,892 acres
located between U.S. 41 and Rattlesnake -Hammock Road, west of Collier Blvd. (CR 951), in
Sections 21, 22, 27, 28, 33, and 34, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida; and
by providing an effective date.
OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners ("Board") review the staff s findings and
recommendations along with the recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC)
regarding the above -referenced petition and render a decision regarding the petition, and ensure the
project is in harmony with all the applicable codes and regulations in order to ensure that the community's
interests are maintained.
CONSIDERATIONS: The subject 9± acre C-3 Tract is a portion of the 2,892.5± acres Lely Resort
PUD, specifically Ordinance 92-15, recorded on March 23, 1992, as amended. The current
ordinance/PUD permits a variety of uses including 8,946 dwelling units, 820,000 square feet of
commercial uses, 350 hotel rooms, and educational facilities. See Attachment B-Ordinance 92-15 and
Attachment C- Ordinance 15-39.
The petitioner proposes to add residential dwelling units to the permitted uses in the C-3 designated
portion of the PUD located at the southwest corner of Grand Lely Drive and Collier Boulevard. The
proposed 184 multi -family and townhouse dwelling units are already accounted for in the previously
approved 8,946 dwelling units.
Because this PUD is already partially developed, the petitioner cannot prepare a new PUD document
using the latest format, e.g., Exhibits A-F rather than sections. To do so could create non -conformities in
the existing development. Instead, the petitioner is providing the proposed changes in a strike
thm/underline format, showing the new information in underlined text, and showing the text to be
removed in a strike thru format. There are no deviations proposed. There are no changes to the current
density of 3.1+/- dwelling units per acre. See Attachment A -Proposed PUD Ordinance.
FISCAL IMPACT: The PUD Amendment (PUDA) by and of itself will have no fiscal impact on Collier
County. There is no guarantee that the project, at build -out, will maximize its authorized level of
development. However, if the PUD Amendment is approved, a portion of the land could be developed, and
the new development will result in an impact on Collier County public facilities.
The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy to help offset the
impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects
identified in the Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan as needed to maintain the
adopted Level of Service (LOS) for public facilities. Other fees collected prior to issuance of a building
permit include building permit review fees. Please note that impact fees and taxes collected were not
included in the criteria used by staff and the Planning Commission to analyze this petition.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) IMPACT: Comprehensive Planning staff has reviewed
the proposed PUDA, and the subject petition is consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of
the GMP.
Packet Pg. 150
9.A
09/13/2022
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPQ RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC
heard Petition PUDA-PL20210001795, Lely Resort PUDA on July 7, 2022, and voted 6-0 to forward this
petition to the Board with a recommendation of approval subject to the following conditions of approval:
1. There shall be no access from Celeste Drive except for emergency access unless the subject parcel is
developed with commercial land uses. Right -in, right -out access shall be from Grand Lely Drive.
2. The buildings along Celeste Drive shall be a maximum of 2-stories without understory parking and
shall be a maximum of 3-stories elsewhere.
3. The apartment manager shall commit to the following:
a. A minimum tenant lease of one year.
b. Subleases shall be prohibited.
c. A background check of all tenants.
4. The developer shall explore the alternative to connect to the Lely central irrigation system if
economically feasible.
The above Conditions of Approval have been incorporated into the proposed PUD Ordinance. See
Attachment A -Proposed PUD Ordinance.
The CCPC also acknowledged the Traffic Study that was submitted has not been accepted by staff and
therefore has not been considered in the evaluation of this petition.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This is a site -specific amendment to a Planned Unit Development
(PUD) Zoning District for a project known as Lely, a Resort Community Planned Unit Development.
The burden falls upon the applicant to prove that the proposed rezoning is consistent with all the criteria
set forth below. The burden then shifts to the Board of County Commissioners, should it consider
denying the rezone, to determine that such denial would not be arbitrary, discriminatory, or unreasonable.
This would be accomplished by finding that the proposal does not meet one or more of the listed criteria
below.
Criteria for PUD Amendments
Ask yourself the following questions. The answers assist you in making a determination for approval
or not.
1. Consider: 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.
2. Is there adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of agreements, contracts, 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.
3. Consider: Conformity of the proposed PUD Amendment with the goals, objectives, and
policies of the Growth Management Plan.
4. Consider: The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may
include restrictions on the location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and
screening requirements.
Packet Pg. 151
9.A
09/13/2022
5. Is there adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development?
6. Consider: The timing or sequence of development (as proposed) for the purpose of assuring
the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private.
7. Consider: The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate
expansion.
8. Consider: Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such
regulations in the particular case, based on a determination that such modifications are
justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to the literal application of
such regulations.
9. Will the proposed change be consistent with the goals, objectives, policies and future land use
map, and the elements of the Growth Management Plan?
10. Will the proposed PUD Amendment be appropriate considering the existing land use pattern?
11. Would the requested PUD Amendment result in the possible creation of an isolated district
unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts?
12. Consider: Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property proposed for change.
13. Consider: Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed
amendment necessary.
14. Will the proposed change adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood?
15. Will the proposed change 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?
16. Will the proposed change create a drainage problem?
17. Will the proposed change seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas?
18. Will the proposed change adversely affect property values in the adjacent area?
19. Will the proposed change be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent
property in accordance with existing regulations?
20. Consider: Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an
individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare.
21. Are there substantial reasons why the property cannot ("reasonably") be used in accordance
with existing zoning? (a "core" question...)
22. Is the change suggested out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county?
Packet Pg. 152
09/13/2022
9.A
23. Consider: Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the
proposed use in districts already permitting such use.
24. Consider: 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.
25. Consider: The impact of development resulting from the proposed PUD Amendment 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.
26. Are there other factors, standards, or criteria relating to the PUD Amendment request that the
Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of public health,
safety, and welfare?
The Board must base its decision upon the competent, substantial evidence presented by the written
materials supplied to it, including but not limited to the Staff Report, Executive Summary, maps, studies,
letters from interested persons, and the oral testimony presented at the BCC hearing as these items relate
to these criteria. The proposed Ordinance was prepared by the County Attorney's Office. This item has
been approved as to form and legality and requires an affirmative vote of four for Board approval. (DDP)
RECOMMENDATION: Staff concurs with the recommendation of the CCPC and further recommends
that the Board of County Commissioners approve the request for Petition PUDA- PL20210001795, Lely
Resort PUDA.
Prepared by: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA, Principal Planner, Zoning Division
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. Lely Staff Report 6-3-22 (PDF)
2. Attachment A -Proposed Ordinance - 071222 (PDF)
3. [LINKED] Attachment B-Ord. 92-15 (PDF)
4. Attachment C-Ord. 15-39 (PDF)
5. Attachment D-NIM Synopsis 1 and 2 7-12-22 (PDF)
6. [LINKED] Attachment E-Letters of Objection 6-7-22 (PDF)
7. Attachment F-Petition 1-5-22 (PDF)
8. [LINKED] Attachment G-Application (PDF)
9. legal ad - agenda ID 22853 (PDF)
Packet Pg. 153
9.A
09/13/2022
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Item Number: 9.A
Doe ID: 22853
Item Summary: This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by Commission members. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending Ordinance No.
92-15, as amended, Lely, a Resort Community Planned Unit Development (PUD), by allowing the 9+/-
acre C-3 parcel at the southwest corner of Collier Blvd. (CR 951) and Grand Lely Drive to have C-3 or
residential development limited to 184 dwelling units. The subject PUD consists of 2,892 acres located
between U.S. 41 and Rattlesnake -Hammock Road, west of Collier Blvd. (CR 951), in Sections 21, 22,
27, 28, 33, and 34, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, and by providing an
effective date.
Meeting Date: 09/13/2022
Prepared by:
Title: Planner, Principal — Zoning
Name: Nancy Gundlach
07/20/2022 1:24 PM
Submitted by:
Title: Zoning Director — Zoning
Name: Mike Bosi
07/20/2022 1:24 PM
Approved By:
Review:
Zoning
Growth Management Department
Growth Management Department
Growth Management Department
County Attorney's Office
County Attorney's Office
Office of Management and Budget
Office of Management and Budget
County Manager's Office
Board of County Commissioners
Mike Bosi
Zoning Director Review
Diane Lynch
Growth Management Department
Trinity Scott
Transportation
James C French
Growth Management
Derek D. Perry
Level 2 Attorney Review
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow Level 3 County Attorney's Office Review
Debra Windsor
Level 3 OMB Gatekeeper Review
Laura Zautcke
Additional Reviewer
Amy Patterson
Level 4 County Manager Review
Geoffrey Willig
Meeting Pending
Completed 08/08/2022 2:56 PM
Completed 08/09/2022 1:59 PM
Skipped 07/29/2022 9:34 AM
Completed 08/13/2022 9:57 PM
Completed 08/24/2022 5:04 PM
Completed 08/25/2022 9:29 AM
Completed 08/25/2022 9:42 AM
Completed 08/25/2022 11:57 AM
Completed 09/07/2022 3:17 PM
09/13/2022 9:00 AM
Packet Pg. 154
9.A.a
s
Co per
amoop
County
STAFF REPORT
TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: ZONING DIVISION — ZONING SERVICES SECTION
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT - PLANNING &
REGULATION
HEARING DATE: DULY 7, 2022
SUBJECT: PUDA-PL20210001795 LELY RESORT MIXED -USE PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (MPUD)
PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT AND AGENTS:
Property Owner/Applicant:
David Development, Inc.
3330 Cumberland Blvd. SE # 425
Atlanta, GA 30339
Agents:
Lindsay Robin, AICP Richard Yovanovich, Esquire
Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Coleman, Yovanovich, and Koester, P.A.
5801 Pelican Bay Blvd. #300 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300
Napless, FL 34108 Naples, FL 34103
The C-3 parcel at the corner of Collier Boulevard and Grand Lely Drive is owned by David Development, Inc.,
There are numerous other property owners in the Lely Resort PUD.
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 92-
15, the Lely Resort Planned Unit Development (PUD), to allow a 9± acre C-3 Tract located at the
southwest corner of Grand Lely Drive and Collier Boulevard to add residential dwelling units to the
permitted uses.
PUDA-PL20210001795. LELY RESORT PUD
June 3, 2022
Page 1 of 13
Packet Pg. 155
9.A.a
❑
Z E
U 0 m
q a
a
IL ° y
16 �q
CIAIS
e�egaeg
as Uaea Y
A4uno3
PUDA-PL20210001795. LELY RESORT PUD
a
m
c
C
0
N
�n
d7
ti
0
0
a
r
N
0
N
J
CL
a�
E
Z
C
O
a-
Q
0
U
J
a
c
D
IL
1`
0
N
21
as
J
Ln
O
0
0
0
N
O
N
J
a
ch
0
0
N
N
N
N
M
m
0
a
m
Cn
21
J
c
m
t
m
Q
June 3, 2022
Page 2 of 13
Packet Pg. 156
9.A.a
Is LY
r
tGhl �, %c
f �w R t}
c c
p ..f R R R
.ai r
Pg � R � q •-�` OC R
AL
�a
R
R
ac 1t R
Low
L ■ I� �
1
R R R � 1 7wl F_'17S
w•.
adoeeol ue � ao
R ,
e
C # R
LEGEND
f
f
R Fd;slPEwrlaL
rt, {Orr;FF,ik rG4W4r4'/�'6}14NFL�Tr 1e.0 /
�W■
C■SWId•Y'RSIFL r•R#E1#.4 f
R
416.0 A.
E4 j [WN SGLL[CE 44.0 # R IR 'RR
r... if., •7r+
:eFj 444[x>uR+L CLddT[R �s,s "• 0
[Red K#O�wi S[ddY[R i7.p gg � QC R
�� 8pL► PPllRSi�i �—� �a45.4 � "'� � {
CORiERvaTd4N r6Filf tdFCC t3f.V 6YFqq��
RE3! Nt[3[FvR Y77.5 Ge-A co �}?
�F riGigOL LAKr �77
4J41fE 405.5
MAadt C47LLEC TOM 70A r j
[� 1■HOR C44LEV" 64.43 J Y J H
ell 40LA4 R4iP 3e.1 1'Vf ��
slid RA,k. FEAIRVI _ R.a •4 1
VWDLL AC1EUi[FFtF 2972.0 ~ {
MAL VW ERCIALdO. R. i.IIFD p
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20210001795 Words s0eek-thFeag# are dtleled;
Last Revised: May 18, 2022 ¢ of 1 Words underlined are added
MASTER PLAN
PUDA-PL20210001795, LELY RESORT PUD
Page 3 of 13
Q
D
IL
V-
O
to
2,
d
J
E[1
O
O
O
N
O
N
J
IL
LO
Do
N
cm
N
M
to
r—
O
M
m
cn
d
J
C
V
m
Q
June 3, 2022
Packet Pg. 157
9.A.a
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The overall PUD, consisting of 2,892.5± acres, is located to the west of Collier Boulevard (CR 951),
east of Tamiami Trail East (US 41), and south of Rattlesnake Hammock Road, within Sections 21-
22, 27-28, and 33-34, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, and Section 3, Township 51 South, Range
26 East, Collier County Florida. (See the Location Map on page 2 of this Staff Report.)
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
The subject 9± acre C-3 Tract is a portion of the 2,892.5± acre Lely Resort PUD, specifically
Ordinance 92-15, recorded on March 23, 1992, as amended. The current ordinance/PUD permits a
variety of uses including 8,946 dwelling units, 820,000 square feet of commercial uses, 350 hotel
rooms, and educational facilities. See Attachment B-Ordinance 92-15 and Attachment C- Ordinance
15-39.
The petitioner proposes to add residential dwelling units to the permitted uses in the C-3 designated
portion of the PUD located at the southwest corner of Grand Lely Drive and Collier Boulevard. The
proposed 184 multi -family and townhouse dwelling units are already accounted for in the previously
approved 8,946 dwelling units.
Because this PUD is already partially developed, the petitioner cannot prepare a new PUD document
using the latest format, e.g., Exhibits A-F rather than sections. To do so could create non -conformities
in the existing development. Instead, the petitioner is providing the proposed changes in a strike
thru/underline format, showing the new information in underlined text and showing the text to be
removed in a strike thru format. There are no deviations proposed. There are no changes to the
current density of 3.1+/- dwelling units per acre. See Attachment A —Proposed PUD Ordinance.
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING (of Subiect Parcel):
North: Grand Lely Drive, a 4-lane divided collector roadway, then a developed 8.8± acre "C-3"
parcel with a zoning designation of Lely Resort PUD. This property is developed with a
commercial strip shopping center and out parcels.
East: Collier Boulevard, a 6-lane divided arterial roadway, then the SFWMD 951 Canal, and a
developed residential area with a zoning designation of Winding Cypress PUD.
South: Celeste Drive, then a single-family development with a zoning designation of Lely Resort
PUD.
West: Celeste Drive, then a single-family development with a zoning designation of Lely Resort
PUD.
PUDA-PL20210001795. LELY RESORT PUD
June 3, 2022
Page 4 of 13
Packet Pg. 158
9.A.a
T
AERIAL PHOTO -CLOSE UP
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.
PUDA-PL20210001795. LELY RESORT PUD
June 3, 2022
IL
1`
O
m
,
m
J
V7
O
r
O
O
O
r
N
O
N
J
(L
M
lf)
O
N
N
N
N
M
O
i`
O
d
R
r
U)
2,
am
J
C
N
L
V
cC
Q
Page 5 of 13
Packet Pg. 159
9.A.a
Transportation Element: According to the revised PUD document and the Traffic Impact Study
(TIS) Waiver request provided with this petition the proposed change will have no net increase or
decrease in the number of trips generated by the Lely Resort PUD development. Lely Resort is a
vested development under the recorded Developer Agreement, instrument 3341317, OR 3498, PG
0233 which vests Lely Resort with a total of 9,150 dwelling units. According to the most recent PUD
Monitoring Report dated May 21, 2021, the current built residential unit count is 5,442. Therefore,
there are 3,708 residential units remaining of the 9,150 vested units total.
This PUD Amendment is not requesting any additional dwelling units and following Collier County
TIS guidelines the applicant provided a TIS waiver request which staff reviewed and approved due
to the noted no additional impacts -vested development status.
Based on the proposed PUD Amendment request and Lely Resort's vested status, the subject petition
can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management
Plan. There are no additional traffic impacts resulting from the proposed change. Staff further notes
that operational impacts will be addressed at the time of the first development order (SDP or Plat), at
which time a new TIS will be required to demonstrate turning movements for all site access points
and impacts to the existing road network. Finally, the project's development must comply with all
other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals, including but
not limited to any plats and or site development plans, are sought.
Conservation and Coastal Management Element (COME): Environmental Planning staff found
this project to be consistent with the CCME. The proposed changes do not affect any of the
environmental requirements of the GMP.
GMP Conclusion: The proposed PUD Amendment may be deemed consistent with the FLUE of
the GMP.
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
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 the PUD petition to address
environmental concerns. The proposed PUD changes will not affect any of the environmental
requirements of the PUD document (Ordinance 92-15). The native vegetation has been placed under
preservation and dedicated to Collier County.
This project does not require Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project did not
PUDA-PL20210001795, LELY RESORT PUD June 3, 2022
Page 6 of 13
Packet Pg. 160
9.A.a
meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2-1193 of the
Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. Environmental Services staff recommends approval
of the proposed petition.
Transportation Review: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with
the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval.
Staff further notes that the agent submitted, post review, a `Traffic Study" document which is not a
Traffic Impact Study (TIS). This study was not used in the determination of consistency with the
GMP for this request. The study is a trip generation comparison scenario that is based on potential
land uses. It does not distribute trips on the road network, does not evaluate impacts, and does not
meet minimum TIS requirements. The limited data provided appears mathematically accurate.
However, it also contains extraneous information and conclusions that should be removed from the
record to avoid unintended consequences at the time of Development Review. To clarify, the "Traffic
Study" was not used as part of the Transportation Planning Staffs' review, evaluation of GMP
consistency, or the above recommendation.
The submitted "Traffic Study" does not meet minimum TIS submittal standards and contains
extraneous sections and conclusions. Therefore, Transportation Planning staff recommends approval
subject to the following stipulation:
1. The "Traffic Study" shall be removed from the record.
Utilities Review: The project lies within the regional potable water and south wastewater service areas
of the Collier County Water -Sewer District. Water and wastewater services are readily available via
existing infrastructure along the project's frontages on Celeste Drive, Grand Lely Drive, and Collier
Boulevard. Sufficient water and wastewater treatment capacities are available.
School Board Review: At this time there is existing or planned capacity for the proposed development
at the elementary, middle, and high school levels. At the time of SDP or Plans and Plat (PPL), the
development will be reviewed to ensure there is capacity. The Development of Regional Impact
(DRI) that the proposed project is located within was approved prior to 2000, and therefore is not
subject to concurrency.
Zoninz 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
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:
As previously stated, the petitioner proposes to add residential land uses to the commercial (C-3) tract
at the southwest corner of Grand Lely Drive and Collier Boulevard. The subject site is pie -shaped
PUDA-PL20210001795, LELY RESORT PUD June 3, 2022
Page 7 of 13
Packet Pg. 161
and surrounded on three sides by roads. The subject site is across the street from an existing
commercial shopping center to the north, and single-family residential to the east and the west.
At the Neighborhood Information Meetings (NIMs) the petitioner stated 184 four-story multi -family
residential dwelling units including townhouses are proposed on the subject site. The 184 dwelling
units are already accounted for in the previously approved 8,946 dwelling units. The residential uses
proposed for the C-3 tract will utilize the currently approved residential development standards in the
PUD.
Multi -family land uses are considered to be a transitional use between commercial development and
single-family development. In this case, rather than the currently prescribed commercial land use only,
residential land uses are proposed. The request is similar to the 2014 request that allowed the current
residential land uses on the C-3 tract located at the southwest corner of Grand Lely Drive and
Rattlesnake Hammock Road. Therefore, staff finds the proposed PUD amendment to be compatible
with the existing surrounding residential development.
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.
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 commercial and residential.
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.
PUDA-PL20210001795. LELY RESORT PUD
June 3, 2022
Page 8 of 13
Packet Pg. 162
9.A.a
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 residential
land uses.
6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood.
The proposed change from commercial development to multi -family residential development will
not change the overall intensity of land uses allowed by the current PUD. The proposed change from
commercial to residential should be more compatible with the adjacent residential development than
commercial development. Therefore, the proposed change should 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 PPL). 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.
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.
PUDA-PL20210001795, LELY RESORT PUD June 3, 2022
Page 9 of 13
Packet Pg. 163
9.A.a
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
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.
PUDA-PL20210001795, LELY RESORT PUD June 3, 2022
Page 10 of 13
Packet Pg. 164
9.A.a
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 activity proposed by this amendment will have no adverse impact on public utilities facility
adequacy.
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 10.02.13.13.5 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 within the Celeste Drive,
Grand Lely Drive, and Collier Boulevard rights -of -way, and there is adequate water and wastewater
treatment capacity to serve the proposed PUD.
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.
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 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 screening
requirements.
The landscaping and buffering standards are compatible with the adjacent uses.
PUDA-PL20210001795. LELY RESORT PUD
June 3, 2022
Page 11 of 13
Packet Pg. 165
9.A.a
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.
Collier County has sufficient treatment capacity for water and wastewater services to the project.
Conveyance capacity 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 adjacent Collier County Water -Sewer
District potable 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.
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 December 14, 2021, at the South Regional Library
located at 8065 Lely Cultural Parkway, Naples, Florida. Approximately 90 residents attended the
meeting in -person along with 10 remote participants along with the Agent's team and Applicant.
A second, non -required NIM was held on March 10, 2022. Approximately 160 residents attended
the meeting. For further information, see Attachment D - NIM Synopsises.
The neighboring residents are opposed to the proposed residential development. They do not want
additional traffic on Celeste Lane, they are opposed to tall buildings, and they prefer the originally
prescribed commercial development on the subject parcel.
Staff has received 45 Letters of Objection along with a Petition. Please see Attachment E-Letters of
Objection and Attachment F-Petition.
COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW:
The County Attorney's Office reviewed the Staff Report for this petition on June 3, 2022.
PUDA-PL20210001795. LELY RESORT PUD
June 3, 2022
Page 12 of 13
Packet Pg. 166
9.A.a
RECOMMENDATION:
Planning and Zoning Review staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition PUDA-
PL20210001795, Lely Resort PUD to the BCC with a recommendation of approval subject to the
following stipulation:
1. The "Traffic Study" shall be removed from the record.
A ttarhmPntc
Attachment A -Proposed PUD Ordinance
See Attachment B-Ordinance 92-15
See Attachment B-Ordinance 15-39
Attachment D-NIM Synopsises
Attachment E-Letters of Objection
Attachment F-Petition
Attachment G-Application
PUDA-PL20210001795. LELY RESORT PUD
June 3, 2022
Page 13 of 13
Packet Pg. 167
9.A.b
ORDINANCE NO.22 -
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 92-15, AS AMENDED,
LELY, A RESORT COMMUNITY PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (PUD), BY ALLOWING THE 9+/- ACRE
C-3 PARCEL AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
COLLIER BLVD. (CR 951) AND GRAND LELY DRIVE TO
HAVE C-3 OR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LIMITED
TO 184 DWELLING UNITS. THE SUBJECT PUD
CONSISTS OF 2,892 ACRES LOCATED BETWEEN U.S. 41
AND RATTLESNAKE -HAMMOCK ROAD, WEST OF
COLLIER BLVD. (CR 951), IN SECTIONS 21, 22, 27, 28, 33
AND 34, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, AND
SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. (PL20210001795]
WHEREAS, on March 10, 1992, the Board of County Commissioners ("Board")
approved Ordinance No. 92-15 which established the Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit
Development (the "PUD"); and
WHEREAS, on November 13, 2007, the Board approved Ordinance No. 07-72 which
amended the PUD; and
WHEREAS, on July 7, 2015, the Board approved Ordinance No. 15-39 which further
amended the PUD;
WHEREAS, Lindsay F. Robin, MPA, AICP of Stantec Consulting Services, Inc.,
representing Davis Development, Inc., petitioned the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida, to further amend Ordinance No. 92-15, as amended, the Lely, A Resort
Community Planned Unit Development.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION ONE: List of Exhibits and Tables.
The List of Exhibits and Tables, of Ordinance No. 92-15, as amended, is hereby amended
as follows:
* * * * * * * * * * * *
LIST OF EXHIBITS AND TABLES
EXHIBIT H Revised Master Land Use Plan (Prepared by
Stantec Consulting Services, Inc.)
[21-CPS-02159/1724511/2] 7/12/2022 Page 1 of 4 Words struck through are deleted;
PL20210001795 — Lely Resort PUD - Tract 12 words underlined are added.
Packet Pg. 168
9.A.b
SECTION TWO:
Section II, Project Development.
Section II, Project Development, of Ordinance 92-15, as amended, is hereby amended to
add the following language:
SECTION II
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
2.14 PUD Monitoring
One entity (hereinafter the Managing Entily) 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 Stock Development LLC. 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 Ionizer responsible for the
monitoring and fulfillment of PUD commitments.
2.15 Miscellaneous
Pursuant to Section 125.022(5) F.S., issuance of a development permit by a county does
not in any wgy create anrights 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 colMly 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.
All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of
the development.
SECTION THREE: Section VI, C-3 Commercial/Neighborhood
Section VI, C-3 Commercial/Neighborhood, of Ordinance 92-15, as amended, is hereby
amended as follows:
[21-CPS-02159/1724511/21 7/12/2022 Page 2 of 4 Words struok through are deleted;
PL20210001795 — Lely Resort PUD - Tract 12 words underlined are added.
Packet Pg. 169
9.A.b
SECTION VI
C-3 COMMERCIAL/NEIGHBORHOOD
* * * * * * * * * * * *
6.02 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES a
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land or water a
used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: N
d
A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures: 21
Ln
J
C"
21) The C-3 parcel at the southwest corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and c
Grand Lely Drive and the C-3 parcel at the southwest corner of Collier
Blvd. (CR 951) and Grand Lely Drive may be developed allowing C-3 N
uses, as outlined in Section VI of Ordinance 92-15, as amended, and/or a
residential dwelling units.
# * # # * * * * # * * * N
6.03 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS N
0
10 To the extent the C-3 parcel located at the southwest corner of Collier Blvd.
(CR 951) and Grand Lely Drive contains residential development, except for any
required emergency vehicular access there shall be no vehicular access to Celeste
Drive.
11. To the extent the C-3 parcel located at the southwest corner of Collier Blvd.
(CR 951 )and Grand Lely Drive contains residential development, a right -in only
shall be provided on Grand Lely Drive providing vehicular access to the parcel
and a dedicated right -turn lane shall be provided on Grand Lely Drive providing
access to Collier Blvd. (CR 951).
12 To the extent the C-3 parcel located at the southwest corner of Collier Blvd.
(CR 951) and Grand Lely Drive contains residential development, a decorative
fence shall be provided along the western project boundary, adjacent to Celeste
Drive.
13 Residential development on the C-3 parcel located at the southwest corner of
Collier Blvd (CR 951) and Grand Lely Drive is limited to a maximum of 184
dwelling units Development on this parcel shall be limited to either commercial
or residential development, not both.
[21-CPS-02159/1724511/2] 7/12/2022 Page 3 of 4 Words str-aek through are deleted;
PL20210001795 — Lely Resort PUD - Tract 12 words underlined are added.
Packet Pg. 170
9.A.b
14 To the extent the C-3 parcel located at the southwest corner of Collier Blvd.
(CR 951) and Grand Lely Drive contains residential development, no building
shall be greater than three stories and only two-story townhouses with no
understoryparking shall be located adjacent to Celeste Drive.
15 To the extent the C-3 parcel located at the southwest corner of Collier Blvd.
(CR 951) and Grand Ley Drive contains residential development, the following
shall apply to rentals: minimum one-year lease term required, background checks
required, and sub -leasing is prohibited.
16 To the extent the C-3 parcel located at the southwest corner of Collier Blvd.
(CR 951) and Grand Lely Drive contains residential development, if it is available
and economically feasible irrigation shall connect to the Lelirrigation system.
SECTION FOUR: Exhibit H, Revised Master Land Use Plan
Exhibit H, the Revised Master Land Use Plan, of Ordinance 92-15, as amended, is hereby
amended as follows:
See Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION FIVE: 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
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this 13th day of September 2022.
ATTEST:
CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK
go
Deputy Clerk
Approved as to form and legality:
Derek D. Perry I, -
Assistant County Attorney `Z
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
am
William L. McDaniel, Jr., Chairman
Attachments: Exhibit "A" — Exhibit H, Revised Master Land Use Plan
[21-CPS-02159/1724511/2] 7/12/2022 Page 4 of 4 Words stmea'�gh are deleted;
PL20210001795 — Lely Resort PUD - Tract 12 words underlined are added. rl�
Packet Pg. 171
9.A.b
Exhibit " A "
Q
0
D
IL
r-
0
a�
m
J
T
ti
O
O
O
N
O
N
J
d
M
O
N
N
N
N
N
ti
O
r
Q
11-1
Packet Pg. 1,72
9.A.b
SYMe
ITEM
ACRES
I P
RESIDENTIAL r.+-w wwr
1166.0
-CU
COMMERCIAL/COMMVNITY
38.0
aCRiCOMMERCIAL/PROFESSIONAL
wwN ii
16.0
�C J1
COMMERCIAL/NEIGHBORHOOD
36.0
EC i
EDISON COLLEGE
44.0
`CCj
CULTURAL CENTER
46.5
�MCI
RESOw..RT CENTER
49.0
GOLF COURSE
495'0
CONSERVATION/OPEN SPACE
233.0
CYPRESS PRESERVE
171.S
(0.8
PARK/SCHOOL
21.S
LAKE
40S.5
UM
MAJOR COLLECTOR
70.$
MINOR COLLECTOR
64.0
SON
LOCAL ROAD
26.5
`aoa
ACREAGE
XXX.K
961 RAW. RESERVE
9.0
TOTAL ACREAGE AREA
2392.0
TOTAL UNITS
8.940
TOTAL COMMERCIAL $0. FT.
1,135.000
EXHIBIT H
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20210001795 Words str-uek-tlr-e t are deleted;
Last Revised: March 16, 2022 Words underlined are a
Packet Pg. 173
9.A.d
ORDINANCE NO. 15- 3 9
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 92-159
AS AMENDED, WHICH RE-ESTABLISHED LELY, A RESORT
COMMUNITY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD), BY
REDUCING THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS FROM
10,150 TO 8,946; BY AMENDING SECTION 2.06 ENTITLED "PROJECT
DENSITY" AND SECTION 2.07 ENTITLED "PERMITTED VARIATIONS
OF DWELLING UNITS"; BY AMENDING THE MARKET ABSORPTION
SCHEDULE; BY AMENDING SECTION 3.02 ENTITLED "MAXIMUM
DWELLING UNITS"; BY AMENDING SECTION V, C-2
COMMERCIAL/PROFESSIONAL TO PROVIDE THAT THE SQUARE
FOOTAGE LIMITATION DOES NOT APPLY TO RESIDENTIAL
DWELLING UNITS PERMITTED AS PART OF A MIXED USE
PROJECT; AND BY AMENDING SECTION VI, C-3
COMMERCIAL/NEIGHBORHOOD TO ALLOW C-3 USES AND ALL
TYPES OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS AS MIXED USE OR
STAND ALONE FOR THE C-3 PARCEL AT THE CORNER OF
RATTLESNAKE -HAMMOCK ROAD AND GRAND LELY DRIVE; BY
ADDING SECTION XV, DEVIATIONS, FROM THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF SIGNS AND
THE SIZE OF SIGNS; AMENDING EXHIBIT H, THE PUD MASTER
PLAN TO MOVE A C-3 PARCEL TO THE EAST OF GRAND LELY
DRIVE AND ADJUST ACREAGES TO DECREASE RESIDENTIAL USES
AND INCREASE COMMERCIAL USES BY 6t ACRES; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
CONSISTS OF 2,892 ACRES LOCATED BETWEEN U.S. 41 AND
RATTLESNAKE -HAMMOCK ROAD WEST OF C.R. 951, IN SECTIONS
21, 22, 27, 28, 33 AND 34, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, AND
SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PUDA-PL20140002040]
WHEREAS, on March 10, 1992, the Board of County Commissioners (Board) approved
Ordinance No. 92-15 which established the Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit
Development (PUD); and
WHEREAS, on November 13, 2007, the Board approved Ordinance No. 07-72 which
amended the PUD; and
[14-CPS-01392/1188398/1] 108 —rev. 6/18/15 Page 1 of
Lely Resort —PUDA-PL20140002040
Words struck through are deleted; words underlined are added.
Plin,
Packet Pg. 174
9.A.d
WHEREAS, Alexis Crespo, AICP of Waldrop Engineering and Richard Yovanovich,
Esquire of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. representing Stock Development, LLC,
petitioned the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida to further amend
Ordinance No. 92-15, as amended, the Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION ONE: Amendments to Index.
The Index to Ordinance No. 92-15, as amended, (the Lely, A Resort Community Planned
Unit Development) is hereby amended to add the following:
SECTION XV Deviations from the LDC
noted
15-1 Lpplicable to entire PUD unless otherwise
SECTION TWO. Amendment to List of Exhibits and Tables.
See Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION TWO: Amendments to Project Density.
Section 2.06 entitled "Project Density" of Ordinance No. 92-15, as amended (the Lely, A
Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended as follows:
See Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION THREE: Amendments to Permitted Variations of Dwelling Units.
Section 2.07 entitled Permitted Variations of Dwelling Units" of Ordinance No. 92-15, as
amended, (the Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended to
read as follows:
See Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION FOUR: Amendment to Estimated Market Absorption Schedule.
The estimated Market Absorption Schedule, Table 1, of Ordinance No. 92-15, as
amended, (the Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended as
follows:
[14-CPS-01392/1188398/11 108 —rev. 6/18/15 Page 2 of
Lely Resort —PUDA-PL20140002040
Words stmek 0wough are deleted; words underlined are added.
Packet Pg. 175
9.A.d
See Exhibit C, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION FIVE: Amendment to Maximum Dwelling Units.
Section 3.02 entitled "Maximum Dwelling Units" of Ordinance No. 92-15, as amended,
(the Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended as follows:
3.02 Maximum Dwelling Units.
A maximum number of 1 n� 8,946 dwelling units may be constructed on lands
designated as "R" except as permitted by Section 2.07 or "C-2" or "C-3" where expressly
permitted.
SECTION SIX: Amendments to Section V, C-2 Commercial/Professional.
Section V, C-2 Commercial/Professional of Ordinance Number 92-15, as amended,
(Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended to read as follows:
See Exhibit D, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION SEVEN: Amendments to Section VI, C-3 Commercial/Neighborhood.
Section VI, C-3 Commercial/Neighborhood of Ordinance Number 92-15, as amended,
(Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended to read as follows:
See Exhibit E, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION EIGHT: Amendments to Section XIV, General Developer Commitments.
Section XIV, General Developer Commitments of Ordinance Number 92-15, as
amended, (Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended to add the
following:
C. Transportation
10) Prior to SDP approval of improvements on the C-2 parcel that has frontage on US 41,
the owner shall post a performance guarantee such as a bond or letter of credit in the
amount of $50,000 in order to secure owner's fair share of transportation
improvements to Triangle Boulevard including but not limited to, turn lanes, median
modifications and/or a traffic circle along Triangle Boulevard. The performance
guarantee shall be released by County upon execution of a developer's contribution
agreement by owner or upon creation of a commercial municipal service taxing
district and/or benefit unit by County. The amount of the contribution shall be
determined at time of execution of the developer's contribution agreement or
calculated in accordance with the taxing district.
[14-CPS-01392/1188398/11108— rev. 6/18/15 Page 3of4
Lely Resort —PUDA-PL20140002040
Words stFuek thfeegh are deleted; words underlined are added.
Packet Pg. 176
9.A.d
SECTION NINE: Amendments to Add Section XV, Deviations from LDC.
Section XV, Deviations from LDC of Ordinance Number 92-15, as amended, (Lely, A
Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby added to read as follows:
See Exhibit F, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION TEN: Amendment to Master Plan.
Exhibit H, "Master Land Use Plan" of Ordinance No. 92-15, as amended, (the Lely, A
Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended as follows:
See Exhibit H, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION ELEVEN: 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
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this q:�01 day of ,T�1 t , 1 , 2015.
..........
signature oll#.'
Managing Assistant County Attorney
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:
TIM NANCE, Chairman
Attachment: Exhibit A - List of Exhibits and Tables
Exhibit B - Section II, Sections 2.06 and 2.07 r
Exhibit C - Estimated Market Absorption Schedule Q
Exhibit D - Section V, C-2 Commercial/Professional
Exhibit E - Section VI, C-3 Commercial/Neighborhood
Exhibit F - Section XV - Deviations from LDC
Exhibit H to Ord. 92-15, as amended - Revised Master PlanThis ordinance filed with the
Exhibit I to Ord. 92-15, as amended - Buffer Exhibit set f day o �Ul ate'�f2o l 5-
and acknowledgement of that
filing received this ff2 day
of �1 ,
[14-CPS-01392/1188398/11 108 -rev. 6/18/15 Page 4 of
Lely Resort —PUDA-PL20140002040
Words stfu& thfeagh are deleted; words underlined are added.
Packet Pg. 177
9.A.d
LIST OF EXHIBITS AND TABLES
EXHIBIT H Revised Master Land Use Plan (Prepared by ` ilsen, Miller, Bai4en
& ve k hie. File Ne B Z i �Q Waldron Engi ���A_)
TABLE I Estimated Market Absorption Schedule
TABLE II A Development Standards `R' Residential Areas
TABLE II B Development Standards `R' Residential Areas
EXHIBIT A
ii
rn
M
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040 Words struck thfougk are deleted;
Last Revised: June 12, 2015 Words underlined are added
Packet Pg. 178
9.A.d
SECTION II
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
2.06 PROJECT DENSITY
The total acreage of the Lely Resort property is approximately 2892.5 acres. The maximum number of
dwelling units to be built on the total acreage is 10,50 &246. The number of dwelling units per gross
acre is approximately 3.1-5. The density on individual parcels of land throughout the project may vary
according to the type of housing placed on each parcel of land but shall comply with guidelines
established in this document.
2.07 PERMITTED VARIATIONS OF DWELLING UNITS
All properties designated for residential uses may be developed at the maximum number of dwelling units
as assigned under Section 2.05, provided that the total number of dwelling units shall not exceed 10,1 50
&9A . The Development Services Director shall be notified of such an increase and the resulting
reduction in the corresponding residential land use or other categories so that the total number of dwelling
units shall not exceed 10,150 &4 . Approximately 1850 single family units and $300 7.M multi -family
units have been planned. Variations from these numbers without an adjustment to the maximum number
of units within the project shall be permitted provided that the maximum number of dwelling units by
type shall not vary by more than twenty (20) percent. The maximum number of dwelling units shall
include all caretaker's units but does not include the designated hotel rooms. The project may exceed the
variation of twenty (20) percent of the unit types set forth in this section provided that for every single
family unit permitted in excess of 2220, the maximum number of dwelling units shall be reduced by
1.667 units.
EXHIBIT B
2-1
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040 Words stfuek thfough are deleted;
Last Revised: June 12, 2015 Words underlined are added
Packet Pg. 179
9.A.d
ESTIMATED MARKET ABSORPTION SCHEDULE
TABLE 1
PHASE
YEAR
RESIDENT
COMMER.
GC
EC
RC
CC
UNITS
S . FT.
HOLES
STUDENTS
HOTEL RMS
SEATING
I
1985-
264
3,600
18
1990
II
1991-
1328
300,400
36
364
*350 Rooms
1995
III
1996-
1482
56,000
736
1850
2000
IV
2001-
1526
2005
V
2006-
1250
90,000
1400
2010
VI
2011-
44W QQQ
100,000
2015
VII
2016-
4-SW 1
135,000
2020
VIII
2021-
4-500 1,M
135,000
2025
TOTALS
40
10, KD-&M
820,000
54
2500
350 Rooms
1850
315,000 S.F.
*3 i 5,000 SF of hotel commercial space is included
EXHIBIT C
2-9
Q
D
a
r-
0
N
T
m
J
O�
ti
0
0
0
N
O
N
J
d
M
uO
0
N
N
CD
M
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040 Words stfusk thfough are deleted;
Last Revised: June 12, 2015 Words underlined are added
Packet Pg. 180
9.A.d
SECTION V
C-2 COMMERCIAL/PROFESSIONAL
5.01 PURPOSE
The purpose of this &Section is to set forth the regulations for the areas designated on Revised Exhibit
`H', Master Land Use Plan RZ 198, as `C-2'. The C-2 tract is intended to provide for the professional,
office, and business related needs of area residents, supplementing the retail nature of the adjacent C-1
tract.
5.02 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURE
Q
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land or water used, in whole a
or in part, for other than the following: a.
0
A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures:
21
1) Business and professional offices; banks; financial institutions. q4)
rn
2) Churches and other places of worship; civic and cultural facilities; educational facilities. o
0
0
3) Funeral homes. N
0
N
J
4) Homes for the aged; hospitals; hospices and sanitoriums, hotels and motels. a-
M
u�
5) Medical laboratories; medical clinics; medical offices; mortgage brokers; museums. N
N
CD
6) Parking garages and lots; private clubs. M
7) Real estate offices; research design and development activities; restaurants; rest homes;
convalescent centers; and nursing homes.
U
.r
c
8) Laboratories, provided that: m
E
No odor, noise, etc., detectable to normal senses from off the premises are generated;
a
All work is done within enclosed structures; and c
m
E
No product is manufactures or sold, except incidental to development activities. U
r
r
Q
9) Transportation, communication and utility offices — not including storage or equipment.
10) Water management facilities and essential services.
11) The C-2 parcel fronting U.S. 41 may be developed allowing C-2 and/or C-3 uses, as outlined in
Section V and Section VI of Ordinance 92-15, as amended, and up to 175 residential dwelling
units to provide for a mixed -use project.
5-1
EXHIBIT D
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040 Words sirxsk thfough are deleted;
Last Revised: June 12, 2015 Words underlined are added
Packet Pg. 181
9.A.d
Any other commercial use or professional service which is comparable in nature with the
foregoing uses and which the Board of Zoning Appeals QrHearing Examiner determines to be
compatible in the district.
B. Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures:
1) Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with uses permitted in this district.
2) Caretaker's residence.
5.03 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS:
1) Minimum Site Area: As approved under Section 2.04
2) Minimum Site Width: As approved under Section 2.04
3) Minimum Yard Requirements for parcel boundaries: Thirty (30) feet
4) Maximum Height of Structures: Fifty (50) feet above the finished grade of the site, plus ten (10)
feet for under building parking.
5) Minimum Floor Area of Principal Structures:
One thousand (1,000) square feet per building on ground floor.
6) Minimum Distance Between Principal Structures: 30' or '/2 the sum of the building heights,
whichever is greater.
7) Minimum standards for signs, parking, lighting, and landscaping shall conform with applicableCD
I?
Collier County Regulations in effect at the time permits are sought.. or as ap rop ved by a deviation
in Section XV of the PUD. -a
8) The area of the C-2 and C-3 uses referenced in Paragraph 5.02 A.11) above shall be limited to a
maximum of 100,000 square feet in the aggregate. This limitation does not ann y to the 175
u,sidential dwelling units permitted as hart of a mixed use row
•The of eaeh, individual C= 2 and C 3 uses r-efer-eneed in Paragraph 5.02 A.! 1) above shall -I —
limited to ..•. square feet, _
referenced in Paragrap 5,02.A. I I is allowed• to 61 111 • of • floor
.Qthcr buildings containingand be • to 20,000 square
4-4)9� Any restaurant uses permitted by or associated with any use permitted by either the C-2 and C-3
land use designations of this Ordinance, only if those uses are located on the C-2 parcel fronting
U.S. 41, shall be subject to the following additional regulations:
a) No televisions shall be permitted in outdoor seating areas.
b) No amplified sounds, including music, shall be permitted in outdoor seating areas after 10:00
p.m.
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040 5-2 Words stfueli thr-eugh are deleted;
Last Revised: June 12, 2015 Words underlined are addedl`
Packet Pg. 182
9.A.d
c) No live entertainment shall be permitted in outdoor seating areas after 10:00 p.m.
d) All windows and doors shall be closed after 10:00 p.m.
443-1M9 The 175 residential dwelling units and C-3 uses referenced in paragraph 5.02 A.11) above shall be
subject to the C-2, Commercial/Professional development standards set forth in this PaFagr-aph
(Paragraph Section 5.03).
11) Amplified outdoor n.ic-�&ted for C-2 ,n• •YtAwed within the C-2 parcel
,Parcel
rn
M
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040 Words stfusk thr-eugh are deleted;
Last Revised: June 12, 2015 Words underlined are a
Packet Pg. 183
5-3
9.A.d
SECTION VI
C-3 COMMERCIAL/NEIGHBORHOOD
6.01 PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the regulations for the areas designated on Revised Exhibit `H',
Master Land Use Plan RZ 198, as `C-3'. The C-3 tract'-s are intended to provide residents with
conveniently located commercial facilities and services that are typically required on a regular basis.
6.02 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land or water used, in whole
or in part, for other than the following:
Q
0
A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures:
a
r-
0
1) Antique shops; appliance stores; art studios; art supplies; automobile parts stores; automobile
N
service stations.
1
m
J
2) Bakery shops; banks and financial institutions; barber and beauty shops; bath supply stores; blue
T
print shops; bicycle sales and services; book stores.
o
0
0
3) Carpet and floor covering sales (including storage and installation); child care centers; churches
o
and other places of worship; clothing stores; confectionary and candy stores.
a
4) Delicatessen, drug stores; dry cleaning shops; dry goods stores and department stores.
LO
N
Nrn
5) Electrical supply stores.
M
6) Fish stores; florist shops; food markets; furniture stores; furrier shops and fast food restaurants.
L
7) Gift shops; gourmet shops.
0
8) Hardware stores; health food stores; hobby supply stores; homes for the aged; hospitals and
c
E
hospices.
�
ca
9) Ice cream stores; ice sales; interior decorating showrooms.
a
10) Jewelry stores.
c
m
E
U
a
r
I ) Laundries — self-service; leather goods and luggage stores; locksmiths and liquor stores. Q
12) Meat market; medical office or clinic for human care; millinery shops; music stores.
13) Office (retail or professional); office supply stores.
14) Paint and wallpaper stores; pet shops; pet supply stores; photographic equipment stores; post
office.
EXHIBIT E
6-1
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040 Words str-xck thr-etigh are deleted;
Last Revised: June 12, 2015 Words underlined are a
Packet Pg. 184
9.A.d
15) Radio and television sales and service; small appliance stores; shoe sales and repairs; restaurants.
16) Souvenir stores; stationary stores; supermarkets and sanitoriums.
17) Tailor shops; tobacco shops; toy shops; tropical fish stores.
18) Variety stores; veterinary offices and clinics (no outside kenneling).
19) Watch and precision instrument sales and repair.
20) Water management facilities and essential services
Q
21) The C-3 parcel at the southwest corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Gmud Leh, Drive
may be developed allowing C-3 uses,usts, as outlined in Section VI of Ordinance 92 1 S as amo dD a.
and/or residential dwelling unit G
N
T
} Any other commercial use or professional service which is comparable in nature with the
foregoing uses and which the Development Sem,iees Difeete Board of Zoning Anneals oLn
Hearing Examiner determines to be compatible with the district. ~
0
0
0
N
0
B) Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures: N
J
a-
1) Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the uses permitted in this district.
LO
Go
2) Caretaker's residence. N
N
O�
M
6.03 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
L
1) Minimum Site Area: As approved under Section 2.04
U
.r
2) Minimum Site Width: As approved under Section 2.04
E
3) Minimum Yard Requirements from parcel boundaries:
ca
Abutting non-residential areas: Twenty five (25) feet a
r
c
Abutting residential areas: Thirty five (35) feet in which an appropriately designed and
landscaped buffer shall be provided, as determined under Section 2.14.
M
4) Distance between principal structures: None, or a minimum five (5) feet with unobstructed passage Q
from front yard to rear yard.
5) Maximum Height of Structure: Fifty (50) feet above the finished grade of the site.
6) Minimum Floor Area of Principal Structures: One thousand (1,000) square feet per building on the
ground floor.
6-2
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040 Words str-usltgh are deleted;
Last Revised: June 12, 2015 Words underlined are added
Packet Pg. 185
9.A.d
7) Minimum standards for signs, parking, lighting, and landscaping shall be in conformance with
applicable Collier County regulations in effect at the time permits are sought, or as annro__a
deyiation:in Section XV of the BUD,
rn
M
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040 Words stfuelE are deleted;
Last Revised: June 12, 2015 Words underlined are added
6-3 Packet Pg. 186
9.A.d
�y DT�711�7�7►ii�1
Deviation 1• Deviation from LDC
Sqclion 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 sign or banner
a maximum of 32 square feet in
area and a
maximum of 8 feet in heightsubject
to approval under
temporary sign permit procedures
in the LDC,
The temporary sign or banner
shall be limited to 14 day
duration, not to exceed 28 days per
calendar year_
This deviation applies
to the entire PT D When ono/
V � V/ V
of the dwelling units are sold within
each subdivision
utilizing this deviation
request this deviation
terminates and reverts to the LDC
for such subdivision.
Deviation 2: Deviation from LDC Section 5 06 02 B 6 b which permits two (2) ground or wall signs
per entrance to the development with a combined sign area of 64squane feet to allow for two (2) ground
or wall signs at the entrance to residential projects within the PUD with a gnmhined sign area of &Q e f
per sign, and not to exceed the height or length of the wall upon which it is located This deviation
applies to the entire PUD
Deviation 3: Deviation from LDC Section 5 06 02136 which permits a maximum sign height of.8 feet
for up to 2 ground or wall signs at each entrance to a multi family or single family development to
allow a maximum sign height of 10 feet This deviation applies to the entire P D
Deviation 4: Deviation from LDC Section 5 06 02 B 12 a which permits
a maximum of 1 wall sign
pursuant to LDC requirements for signs within non-residential districts
and a maximum of two
(2)
ground signs with a height of 8 feet and sign copy area of no more
than
32square feet per sign at
the
main entrance to internal residential community amenity facilities,to
allow
for a maximum of one
(l)
ground or wall sign for each individual amenity within the Player's
Club
at Lely Resortin addition
to
the main amenity entrance signs, not to exceed a height of ten (10) feet and
sign cony area of 64 square
feet per sign. The deviation applies solely to the Players Club at Lely
Resort (Parcel No 55425003006).
and is limited to a total of six (6) amenity site signs
Deviation 5: Deviation from LDC Section 5 06 02 B 6 14 b which permits one boundary marker sign at
each residential development property corner with a maximum sign face area of 24 square feet to allow
for one boundary marker sign with a maximum sign face area of 32 square feet at each property corner
of the C-3 tract at the southwest corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Grand Lely Drive . -This
deviation applies solely to the 20-acre tract designated as `C-3' on Revised Exhibit `H'_ Master rand
Use Plan, and located at the southwest corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Grand Lely Drive
Parcel No. 53570100063, 53570100241, and 535701002251.
Deviation 6: Deviation from LDC Section 5 06 04 F. 1 which permits an additional pole or ground sign
for parcels having frontage of 150 ft. or more on a public street, or combined public street frontage of
220 lineal feet, where there is a minimum of a 1,000 feet separation between such signs to allow for a
maximum of two (2) signs on the C-2 tract that fronts on U.S. 41, one of which may he located on the
US
EXHIBIT F
15-1
a
0
0
0
N
w
21
a�
J
LO
CD
ti
0
0
o_
N
O
N
J
a
M
00
N
CD
M
0
U
a�
E
m
a
r
c
d
E
0
a
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040
Last Revised: June 12, 2015
Words stmek threttgh are deleted;
Words underlined are a
Packet Pg. 187
9.A.d
41 frontage and the second which may he lnQated on the 'Triangle Blvd, frnntave with a minimum
spacing of 400 feet between signs This deviation applies solely to the 9-acre tract de ignated as `C 2°
on Revised Exhibit `H' Master Land Use Plan and located at the northwest corner of Tamiami Trail
East and Triangle Blvd. (Parcel No. 55425001008).
Deviation 7• Deviation from LDC Section 5 06 04 F 1 c which permits --a maximum allowable sign area
of 80 square feet for a pole or ground sign located on an arterial roadway to allow for a maximum sign
area of 100 square feet for a pole or ground sign located on the C-2 tract that fronts on U. S. 41 and on
the C-3 tract at the southwest corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Grand Lelv Drive Thi
deviation applies solely to the 9-acre tract designated as `C 2' on Revised Exhibit H. Master T and 1 i3K
Plan, and located at the northwest corner of Tamiami Trail East and Triangle Blvd (Parcel No
55425001008), and the 20-acre tract designated as `C-3' on Revised Exhibit `H'_ Macter Land Use Plan
and located at the southwest corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Grand Lely Drive (Parcel To
3570100063, 53570100241, and 53570100225).
0
d
21
m
J
ti
T
0
0
0
r
N
O
N
J
a
m
Ln
00
N
N
C1
M
L
0
U
c
d
E
s
t�
Q
c
m
E
s
ca
a
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040 Words stmelEfreugh are deleted;
Last Revised: June 12, 2015 Words underlined are added
15-2 1 Packet Pg. 188
9.A.d
LEGEND
SYMe
ITEM
ACRES
R
RESIDENTIAL rw..ww rw.r«
1166.0
1 -
COMMERCIAL /COMMUNITY
38.0
C2.
COMMERCIAL/PROFESSIONAL
16.0
C3
r
COMMERCIAL/NEIGHBORH000
36.0
''EC
E ID SON COLLEGE
44.0
oCt
CULTURAL CENTER
46.5
RCt
RESORT CENTER
49.0
�O C�
GOLF COURSE 49S.0
CONSERVATION/OPEN SPACE
233.0
CYPRESS PRESERVE
171.S
tP._S.i
PARK/SCHOOL
21.5
CV
LAKE
40S.S
MAJOR COLLECTOR
70.5
00
MINOR COLLECTOR
64.0
N1811
LOCAL ROAD
26.5
ACREAGE
XXX.X
961 R.O.W. RESERVE
9,0
TOTAL ACREAGE AREA
2892.0
TOTAL UNITS
8.940
TOTAL COMMERCIAL 90. FL
1.135,000
EXHIBIT H
I
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040 Words stmek thr-eugh are deleted;
Last Revised: June 12, 2015 Words underlined are aqded
Packet Pg. 189
9.A.d
mr �A
Dm
,
T
my
mm
CNI_t S
n
N
Ul
EXHIBIT I
Packet Pg. 190
9.A.d
TI1E�Sr'
e
--------------
t
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT 0 f STATE
RICK SCOTT
Governor
July 9, 2015
Honorable Dwight E. Brock
Clerk of the Circuit Court
Collier County
Post Office Box 413044
Naples, Florida 34101-3044
Attention: Ms. Martha S. Vergara, BMR Senior Clerk
Dear Mr. Brock:
KEN DETZNER
Secretary of State
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 125.66, Florida Statutes, this will acknowledge receipt of your
electronic copy of Collier County Ordinance No. 15-39, which was filed in this office on July 9, 2015.
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
rn
M
www.dos.state.il.us Packet Pg. 191
9.A.e
® Stantec Memo
To: Nancy Gundlach, AICP From
Collier County Growth Management
File: Lely Tract 12 PUDA (PL20210001795) Date
Neighborhood Information Meeting
Synopsis
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Lindsay Robin, AICP
Stantec
January 24, 2022
Stantec Consulting Services Inc., and Collier County Staff conducted a Neighborhood Information
Meeting (NIM) on Wednesday, December 14, 2021.
The meeting was held at 5:30 p.m. at the South Regional Library at 8065 Lely Cultural Pkwy.,
Naples, Florida 34113. The meeting was hybrid and therefore an online option was also provided
for participants to attend virtually. Approximately 10 participants attended using the link provided
The sign -in sheet is attached as Exhibit "A" and demonstrates 86 residents were in attendance.
Handouts were distributed providing information on the proposed amendment and are attached as
Exhibit "B".
Lindsay Robin (Agent) conducted the meeting with introductions of the consultant team and Staff,
and an overview of the proposed PUD amendment application, including the location of the subject
property and the request to add residential uses to the C-3 tract as an option for development.
She also outlined the amendment processes and opportunities to provide input at public hearings.
Fred Hazel, the Applicant representative from Davis Development, also spoke about the project
and provided input on details relating to the proposed luxury apartments, and the market demand
to create a residential project on this parcel.
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.
Question/Comment 1: Does Davis Development own the property?
➢ Response: [Developer] No, Stock Development owns the property. Davis Development is
the contract purchaser.
Question/Comment 2: It's zoned C-3 and curb cuts were always planned on to Collier Blvd. from
this lot for the last 30 years.
Design with community in mind
rl11us0227-ppfss011workgroup\2156\active\215616630\planning\analysis\puda\nim\summarylnim synopsis_rev1.dou
Packet Pg. 192
9.A.e
January 24, 2022
Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Page 2 of 11
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Response: [Planner] Yes, it will remain a C-3 parcel. We are adding the option to do
residential on the C-3 parcel.
Question/Comment 3: Is there a process to change the land from commercial to residential?
Response: [Planner] Yes, that is the process we are currently in now with the County. We
are requesting approval to add residential uses to this parcel.
Question/Comment 4: The entrance and exit was supposed to be on Collier Blvd. This property has
always been zoned C-3 with planned entrances and curb cuts on Collier Blvd. and at the time of
that zoning Collier Blvd. was a two-laned country road. We're asking to not reduce the number of
curb cuts that have long been planned on to Collier Blvd.
Response: [Attorney] It was zoned C-3 when this was originally rezoned back in 1992.
Looking at the PUD master plan, there is no access from this C-3 parcel to Collier Blvd., so
there is no currently approved access for the commercial project that could be built on
this property on to Collier Blvd. We will be talking to County staff about access, and what
they think about the access. We go through the Site Development Plan process, that is the
next step after we go through the first process, which is to amend the current PUD. It was
pointed out, but I will point it out again, this process requires us to go through the CCPC
first, they will make a recommendation whether they agree or don't agree with our
adding residential units to this particular piece of property. Then we'll go to BCC. The BCC
will consider both staff's recommendations and the CCPC recommendation and they will
make the ultimate decision as to whether or not to add residential to this particular piece
of property. They may say yes it makes more sense to have residential than commercial
on this piece of property, they may say no they don't agree with that. We have not asked
for any changes to the development standards that already exist on this C-3 piece of
property. We haven't asked to go taller than what we could do for commercial and that's
what we are proposing to do. The purpose of this meeting is to explain that's what we
want to do, get your feedback, I get that you don't like that access solely on Celeste. I get
that, but access currently is on Celeste after the commercial, so let's make sure we
understand what's currently approved. Nancy is going to go back to transportation staff at
the county and say there is concern about the traffic going on to Celeste.
Question/Comment 5: We're concerned about the 4-story building.
Response: [Attorney] I'm hearing now you don't like the four-story as currently could be
built.
Design with community in mind
rl11us0227-ppfss011workgroup\21561active1215616630\planning\analysislpudalnim\summarylnim synopsis_rev1.docx
Packet Pg. 193
9.A.e
January 24, 2022
Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Page 3 of 11
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Question/Comment 6: Are these being leased on an annual basis? Or could there be potential for
VRBO, Air BNB, or what do you anticipate for that?
➢ Response: [Developer] This would be a market -rate, for -rent, with year -plus leases, so no
this is not a short-term rental of any sort. This is a luxury multi -family project.
Question/Comment 7: Who can reside in your community?
➢ Response: [Developer] To reside in our community you have to be on the lease if you're
going to live in the unit. You have to be background checked to be accepted into the
community. We will know the name of every person living in the community.
Question/Comment 8: We agree to disagree on that potential. My name is Tim Schofield, I'm a new
resident to Tiger Lilly estates and was very displeased to find out a couple days after we closed that
the plans are changing for this to go to residential from commercial. I think most of us agree here
the density, the size, and the traffic, but more the density. Take a look at that aerial. There are 12
homes across Collier on less space than 184 units. The absolute mass you are proposing to plunk in
across the street from our homes is not acceptable. To drop this to 3-stories, doesn't look like the
money wouldn't work for me, to build the project, that makes it 1/4 better, but the density is still
15X and anything near that. I don't believe that the traffic, environmental, and all the beautiful
things my wife and I could bring from the state of California with us, is going to make this project
worth your while.
➢ Response: The comment was acknowledged. No response was provided.
Question/Comment 9: We are very concerned about the traffic because people take the path of
least resistance. So, if the exit/egress is onto Celeste only people are going to come out on to
Celeste and go through the residential neighborhoods rather than going to the light because the
lights take 3+ minutes. We met the department of transportation and they actually wanted to
increase the speed limit because so many people were speeding, but we said no thank you. How
many parking spaces are provided? The height is a big issue. Access/egress only on Celeste is a
major issue. Someone else is going to get hurt and die.
➢ Response: The comment was acknowledged. 370+\- spaces.
Question/Comment 10: Since Stock developed everything in Lely, why is he not developing this
property?
,ith community in mind
rl11us0227-ppfss011workgroup\2156\active\215616630\planning\analysis\puda\nim\summarylnim synopsis_rev1.docx
Packet Pg. 194
9.A.e
January 24, 2022
Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Page 4 of 11
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Response: [Attorney] The reason Stock's not developing it is they do not want to develop
this piece of property, so it went out to market and Davis Development responded to that
going out to market and currently is the contract purchaser on the site and is taking this
through the process to change or add the use of residential. Frankly, I am Stock's lawyer. I
have done all of Stock's zoning and changes, I've done all of the projects that Stock has
done.
Question/Comment 11: I'd like to understand the approval process a bit more. After the BCC
approves this, it is after the approval that the traffic study is done and that doesn't make sense to
me. When will a true traffic study be done?
Response: [Engineer] A traffic analysis is done at the time of SDP approval. After the
zoning approval. We could submit concurrently for SDP — Site Development Plan — but
right now we're looking at seeking approval of the zoning process and then come back
and submit the SDP and traffic study, which is a part of that process.
Question/Comment 12: So, what if they say then that the site can't handle the traffic? Then what?
Response: [Engineer] Then we can't build. If traffic improvements were necessitated out
of that then the County may come along and force those improvements on the project in
order to receive approvals.
Question/Comment 13: 1 would just encourage you all to call and email your county commissioners
please. Rick Locastro could not be here tonight he had another meeting. We met with him about
the traffic going in and out and he's fully in agreement with us, but they need to hear from you. All
five commissioners have to vote, so I would email all 5 with your issues and concerns.
➢ Response: The comment was acknowledged.
Question/Comment 14: 1 would hope that our commission would take a look at the fact that we did
not have Ole in 1992.
➢ Response: The comment was acknowledged.
Question/Comment 15: The way Lely is set up now is different than what was envisioned back
when 10,000 units were approved [in 1992]. What you're doing on that corner needs to be
considered. They envisioned it differently. Why aren't you putting a strip center there instead of
apartments?
Design with community in mind
rl11us0227-ppfss011workgroup\21561active1215616630\planning\analysislpudalnim\summarylnim synopsis_rev1.docx
Packet Pg. 195
9.A.e
January 24, 2022
Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Page 5 of 11
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
➢ Response: [Attorney] The truth is right now retail is not the most desirable option on
various pieces of property. We've all been through our recent experiences with COVID
and we know typical retail uses are not demanded. The reality is retail is not marketable
on that piece of property. They [Stock] sought solicitation and Davis made a proposal.
Question/Comment 16: What is the purchase price of the lot that you are going to pay Stock?
Celeste is very busy and I don't see any bicycle lanes. Also, noise of the traffic right now is very
loud.
➢ Response: The comment was acknowledged.
Question/Comment 17: 1 disagree with you about retail. If you go downtown, you will notice
restaurants are packed not just now but during summers. We need more resources in this area to
accommodate and enhance our lifestyle here. We need coffee shops and places to go.
➢ Response: The comment was acknowledged.
Question/Comment 18: The issue is size. The height. That's the big concern —the scale. I also don't
think there should be any ingress on to Celeste Drive. Find a way to get that on to Collier and
extend the wall that ends at Ole and bring that up and around to give us some privacy.
➢ Response: The comment was acknowledged.
Question/Comment 19: If you want this community not to oppose what you are doing you are
going to need to change it. You can't have the density and you can't have the access on Celeste.
Otherwise, you will force us to hire our own traffic engineer to do an analysis and oppose your
project. You want to look for our support.
➢ Response: The comment was acknowledged.
Question/Comment 20: 1 personally think having residential there instead of retail is a better thing
if done right. What's the perimeter of the project?
➢ Response: [Developer] We want to match the richness of the landscaping around the
resort. We do that in-house [landscaping]. We will bring forth a very lush landscaping for
the buffers and interior. We use larger caliper trees and do everything in a nicer fashion.
At this time no wall is planned.
,ith community in
rl11us0227-ppfss011workgroup\2156\active\215616630\planning\analysis\puda\nim\summarylnim synopsis_rev1.docx
Packet Pg. 196
9.A.e
January 24, 2022
Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Page 6 of 11
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Question/Comment 21: If you add 184 additional units, you're going to have so many problems and
it's too much density.
➢ Response: The comment was acknowledged.
Question/Comment 22: Seems to me like Davis is not ready for this meeting. You will do a traffic
study after the fact, you will do a landscape study after the fact, we pay taxes now, we want
answers now about how this is going to impact us. We spent a lot of money to be here to retire
here to enjoy it here and you keep saying we will do this after the fact. You should be doing this
before the fact and then we'd be supporting you, but we can't support this.
Response: [Developer] There's a process that's been talked about that we have to go
through. We're not trying to short-circuit the process in fact we're just trying to be right in
our approach there are steps that have to be taken, which we will take as the County
asks. The traffic will be discussed with the jurisdiction to make sure it works.
Question/Comment 23: One thing I see looking at the website for Founders Square that Davis is
proud of, is that it's a pet -friendly development. Will this be a pet -friendly development? Looking
at the site plan with the only entrance on Celeste we know where 200+ dogs are going to go do
their business. What's your plan to manage the dog poop that's deposited further down Celeste
and in Tiger Island along with the Verandas and surrounding neighborhoods?
Response: [Developer] We area pet -friendly community and how you deal with that is 1—
we have breed restrictions, 2- we have dog love stations throughout, we have play areas
for dogs and water for dogs. We know our residents will have dogs and we know how to
deal with that.
Question/Comment 24: The amount of U-Haul's, moving trucks, and vans will affect our traffic
greatly if these are rentals. How will you make sure this doesn't affect us who live along this road?
Response: [Developer] We will have appropriate space at each building for move-
in/move-out activity obviously that's an anticipated part of the lifestyle of the deal. To
the extent we have moving vans coming in there's places for them to park interior to the
deal to get access to the elevator to get moved in.
Question/Comment 25: Why have you not prioritized looking for a tract of land to develop that
already allows zoning for residential development?
Design with community in mind
rl11us0227-ppfss011workgroup\21561active1215616630\planning\analysislpudalnim\summarylnim synopsis_rev1.docx
Packet Pg. 197
9.A.e
January 24, 2022
Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Page 7 of 11
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Response: [Developer] We found this site that Stock wasn't developing and liked the
location and we feel it's a good spot for the product and will be well -received. We're
always looking for opportunities and they come with varying stages of approval.
Question/Comment 26: My question is for the County — what is the probability that an access to
Collier Blvd. would be possible?
,- Response: County staff is here for observation tonight, not to be directly questioned.
Question/Comment 27: At this juncture have we [Davis Development] tried to achieve other access
points other than Celeste?
Response: [Developer] No. There will be a time and place for that. There is a curb cut also
on the parcel I believe to the north that accesses the main boulevard, Grand Lely, and we
aren't even showing use of that at his point, feeling that the access point ingress/egress is
better served as it is shown on Celeste. Again, we're going to go through that process and
listen to what the experts have to say, the County says, and so that is an open item that
has to be addressed.
Question/Comment 28: Other than the fact that you're required to hold his meeting do you really
care what we have to say?
Response: [Developer] Yes, I do care what you think and how you feel and what your
thoughts are — that's why we're here. I've been doing this for 25 years and have stood in
front of a lot of homeowners for this very purpose. My goal is to be a good development
partner and a good neighbor in the community. We're not an unknown corporate entity,
we work for one gentleman this is his private company, so that gives us a lot more
flexibility that other developers. But again, obviously we're businessmen and we're trying
to make money on this endeavor.
Question/Comment 29: That property was used as a dumping spot during Irma. Is there a separate
plan for the construction? How long will it take?
Response: [Developer] The construction entrance will have to be a permitted item with
the jurisdiction. As for the trucks coming and going from the site, obviously there will be
traversing in and about a third of the construction is deliveries, so one we're governed by
not making a mess in the street. We will be the same folks constructing this so my phone
will be ringing — it's still employees that work for me, I'm managing that process. To the
extent we can place that at the best location, which may not be on Celeste, but we will
Design with community in mind
rl11us0227-ppfss011workgroup\21561active1215616630\planning\analysislpudalnim\summarylnim synopsis_rev1.docx
Packet Pg. 198
9.A.e
January 24, 2022
Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Page 8 of 11
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
see what the jurisdiction will allow and then we manage that process. We will be good
neighbors in that process. From groundbreaking to vertical about 16-month process.
Question/Comment 30: My question is not for you [the developer] what about property values? I
really like the neighborhood ... but.
➢ Response: The comment was acknowledged.
Question/Comment 31: 1 don't see a lot of options for dogs to go walking. Where are they going to
walk? To my house? Also, retail is not dead. You can't get a parking space at Home Goods.
➢ Response: The comment was acknowledged.
Question/Comment 32: Entrance on Celeste would be on a one-way street, does that mean
everyone coming out has to take a left? Or will you eliminate that?
Response: [Developer] There is a median with a break and a curb cut that's what our
initial plans show.
Question/Comment 33: What percentage are you willing to offer the county for Section 8 housing
to sweeten the pot because that has happened in some of the bigger communities?
Response: [Attorney] None of them are section 8. It's 120% of the median income. They
have been imposing that for growth management plan amendments, not for rezones that
are consistent with the existing growth management plan. I don't anticipate having to set
aside any units. We haven't committed to that in any of our submittals and I don't expect
that ask to come from the BCC or County staff, and if so, we would obviously fight back.
Question/Comment 34: My biggest concern is that all of those people trying to get in and out of
that space in an emergency. Traffic needs to be considered for the safety of this community.
➢ Response: The comment was acknowledged.
Question/Comment 35: There's nothing that is going to benefit us with this project. Name
something that we, the residents, will benefit from?
Response: [Developer] Maybe someone doesn't have the ability to maintain their home in
Lely Resort and want to stay — I have elevators. Maybe some new neighbors you can
meet. We will bring nice residents to the area. And it's another housing option.
Design with community in mind
rl11us0227-ppfss011workgroup\21561active1215616630\planning\analysislpudalnim\summarylnim synopsis_rev1.docx
Packet Pg. 199
9.A.e
January 24, 2022
Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Page 9 of 11
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Question/Comment 36: It seems like there is a better option for that Property. We're open to
commercial. It seems like adding that much traffic, people, and blocking of views is hard for us to
imagine. Appreciate you thinking about that and knowing where we're coming from.
➢ Response: The comment was acknowledged.
Question/Comment 37: What's the benefit to us? You'll have lots of lights there, you'll light up the
whole place.
Response: [Developer] One of the things you're required to do is a light study. Fixtures
have to be shielded down and directed away from other homes. The design will be
sensitive to light pollution. That is part of the permitting and process we have to do.
Question/Comment 38: Will there be rental signs posted along Celeste to market this building?
y Response: No, we are not planning on anything except our base sign, which will be a
monument sign permitted through the appropriate jurisdiction. Just one sign at the entry
and that will be all the signage for the community.
Question/Comment 39: Is this a unique situation for you all? Have you ever built something like this
in a residential area like this? Is this typical, or atypical for you? What is your historical experience
with property values being maintained once you are built? Congestion? People assimilating? What
is your experience?
Response: [Developer] Because we develop very upscale communities the residents and
community tend to be upscale. As long as it's done properly and tastefully its an
enhancement to the community, its another housing option, an important part of the
housing stock in our country at a time where we have a very high shortage of housing.
That's why single-family houses as soon as they hit the ground are being bought at record
pace with escalating prices, so there is a need for the housing. I have not heard or seen
any deteriorating of values of single-family homes.
Question/Comment 40: How long do you typically hold on to the property?
Response: [Developer] We hold some for over a decade, and some we sell soon after
construction. They are sold to top-notch owners and operators in the country. It will
always be run as a high -end institutional asset that will maintain its value because of the
investment we're making, and if we have a buyer, the investment they are making.
Design with community in mind
rl11us0227-ppfss011workgroup\21561active1215616630\planning\analysislpudalnim\summarylnim synopsis_rev1.docx
Packet Pg. 200
9.A.e
January 24, 2022
Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Page 10 of 11
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Question/Comment 41: How many parking spaces? Any parking restrictions?
y Response: [Developer] 373 parking spaces including interior garages that could be rented
to residents of the building We don't allow commercial trucks or bring -home vehicles. We
have restrictions for that.
Question/Comment 42: It goes against the previous planners and approvers who originally zoned
this as C-3 with valid reasons and rationale to do so and I'm not sure residential use of C-3 is the
right move.
y Response: The comment was acknowledged.
Question/Comment 43: 1 want to reiterate the concern for our 108 residents [the Verandas] who I
feel will be directly affected by the increased traffic that I believe will occur as the only entrance
being located on Celeste. We are not a gated community and people already use our roadway as a
cut -through from Celeste to Tiger Island, so our community will be affected by the traffic and also
by noise that we already hear from 951 [Collier Blvd.].
y Response: The comment was acknowledged.
Question/Comment 44: 1 think you would have been better off if you showed a connection to 951
[Collier Blvd.] This is common sense.
Response: [Attorney] Collier County is here for a reason as well. They have told us you're
not getting access on 951, so that's why we didn't show access on 951. That's why we're
here so we can tell them the residents want them to change their mind. So one of the
benefits of this meeting is Nancy is here from the County and she will go back and tell
transportation staff that the residents think the better option is to put access on 951. So,
we showed you a realistic plan, and I appreciate your comments about 951.
There were no further questions or comments. Ms. Robin 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 6:45 p.m. The meeting was recorded
per the CD attached as Exhibit "C".
Design with community in mind
rl11us0227-ppfss011workgroup\21561active1215616630\planning\analysislpudalnim\summarylnim synopsis_rev1.docx
Packet Pg. 201
9.A.e
January 24, 2022
Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Page 11 of 11
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
dL
Lindsay F. Robin MPA, AICP
Urban Planner
Phone: 239 985 5502
Lindsay. Robin@stantec.com
Attachment: Attachment
c. C.C.
Design with community in mind
rl \\us0227-ppfss01\workgroup\2156\active\215616630\planning\analysis\puda\nim\summary\nim synopsis_rev1.docx
Packet Pg. 202
9.A.e
z
LU
LU
z
O
ry
O
H
z
Q
O
O
2
O
m
(2
V
LU
z
z
LLJ
O
LJ
LU
0
z
LU
z
z
Q
I..L.
I
0
OL
01-1
O Q
O O
N
O Lo
0-4
O
CN
:^:D `
I..L
Z
LU
E
0 �
Z U
LU
a
LU
u
z
w
CL
LU
LU
a
CL
� Q
Gl
E
u u
Gl
CL
a� o
N
o
* u
� c v
v
Q u
C3 Q
a
Q 'n v
N
Q y
E
O O
� L
v
o0
u u
_r
a
a
W
M
YIA
f-0
IZ
n�
v�
M
4A
10
�.
V
i
Q.
0
W
"1/
H
Y
u
�V
1
In
b
L
1v 1
z
r �
a.
❑ w
QQ
-� u
n
J
_�
r.
fYM M o ✓�
0
0
N
CD
r� L
0
.�� N
N
N
N_
N Q
v Mn
0 J .,
( c
E 40
v
lYl11
u �_ r
Packet Pg. 203
v� S
9.A.e
u o s o
c u o'v
o 9
op
v.� o
a� =
Z `oEo3°c
{L o
LU
> ; ,
Z OL L H°OUuo
I— O O� ��o
LU J C-v c.
LU W a°i>°
u 0o 3
w O Q
ua�_m
Z n00� ��-��
' u v m �
O(� �i °- c 0 > o
Z O �1 Q -oa0-
� J l�J W � u c
IL J a p N d
Q U S'Q) 7 U 00 N u
—� > u -p y
O LUN ~ -0 ' ° y
O 0 0 a N t h
z 0 (� Z 0) 6. E
LLM Z v
z � � °' 0
�3
`o 0
Q .. =1 h y
Q
L W -`° E u
O °� v E o w
a °
O Q Lu w oEcvC
E J ° o &I t
� t t y �
0 >� u c - v) 0
O
(� c �S 0
Z
C w Q o v c a
O M = c°•
rn :�v._0
LU � 6 c �
Z yEo0
m c 0 W
� � c
J c N � c
LU °00�0
J 0
E H o � �
Cn
c v Q v
0 0 0 0 H
F-
� Z
W
]
-OM
J
`
4
h
�
M
�
®
I
J
J
N
4)
I
nf1
Zz
a
'o►
c
r
E
z
to
'
A
j;
Packet Pg. 204
W
W
12
Z
LU
OL
O
J
W
W
0
F—
z
0
W
Z
Z
Q
n
I
0
D
0—
EM
v °
,vo m
.�E�3�
c y ro O
a�>;
°gt o
00 u `
o 0
� oc
a0
7 y i > u
E 0 0
a�0000u
O
>-m
p � � N �C
�•`-'ter a
0 y i
•0 0' Q: y u
` t N
E
o
s 0 3
Cn H O O y
''00 N W
O
C C
Q
0
o �
t t0 a _ EE
u C 0- _
a .O vi C O
O W
u u
0 a
o _ E
•a 0
v o E
� E-
y o
t c 0
oo C c 0 0
O v u
O CL 3 > >
75
ui O
O
�-v CT0
o y
9.A.e
v
�
W
r
rl
N
jr)
[v�
N
�J
`
U
.r1
Z
q
,
Alk
LA
Q+
Q�
r
M
A
PA
ti
I
�.
ow
c
�
O
CZ
�'
��
2
O
0
Z
�0
W
-
b
�Aa,
vW
Packet Pg. 205
(D
Z
LU
CW
L
Z
CW
L
O
J
W
W
0
F—
Z
n
W
Z
Z
Q
n
C)
Q-
O
W
ry
LU
O�
O Q
O p
r— (Y)
N '•-
C:)L /
I
Q O
C) N
^: `
I..L
Z
LU
L E
0
Z U
LU�
L �
El
J
J
u
Z
9L
LU
LU
Q
.J
CL
Q rn
c 'Q
Ev
u u
m
a
o
� 0
a u
c w
Q u
> 0
a o a
a
Q N
N % N
C) rn 4.1
a) c
a
° a
� 0
O
W
E
O O
0
u c
0 •o
o a
c
H 0
t(D
N E
Vl
c
O
O
o a
0 v
E y
O N
c
ta
0
N
w
Q
9.A.e
a-
a
g0
W
0l
le
144
cc
twi
M
_
1
0
0
z
0
Q.
7,
?
Packet Pg. 206
9.A.e
Z.
N
u °
a
.V
s
'o
c
Z
E
o
3 c
r n
W
w
0 >
j_
C
U
`J
C p)
O
v 'p
Z
L
�p1u°
P-
OO
�
��
o�
W
J
W
r—
�v�r.
°
CW
w >
EFD
Cw0O
u°O3
CY)
J
a c
N>
O
O
Z
N
• •
pC
W 0
u
Q
N
J
��11
l�J
W
*
0
u
y
0
m
C
Q
[�
�
�- u
-p
W u
O
N
O
v
>
�
���
p
�IV
tL
Z
Q
�
a�
aaa�t
w
E
� °
Z
Z
�
�y
�i
�
LA
:EN
°
-E
O
O
3
J
�
0y
�
p y
O°
�
i
W
�
� �
E u
`
O
W
E
_
�
<
E
,Qua,
J
o
�, °
tCy
O
� r
L
QCL
U C
° 'p
a
p) 0
C
~
0
Z
_
°u u—'
h
@
:p h
a
m
=
O
W
Q
M
° 0
a
a
_
v_
W
Q
u w
Ems_°
W
�
y E
°
p 0
Z
t C
O
W
W
° o
° o
J
° CL
°
u
'0
46 V
O
0
>� >�
° �_p
?�°
H
Q
�
7
J
H
"
k
M
.p
r6
W�o"
to
J�
)rj
A!;
J
U
�
ZL
.�
.J
r
LoIC
` uvvv
M
9%
tool6?00,(''
C
4
1
Packet Pg. 207
9.A.e
.
w > o ' 0
vouu
m ` 0 E
° v r o
F— v° �
Z E a °c
E 0) o
W ° c
> > .v
`/ C crn'��v
Z CL Lr) �vvuv
�0o�
LU —I I� 5 -0 E c y
CW W a°i > o
L % E�0
• u u M a,
W O Q
Z p O O 0w=-c
M u '0 4)
O � J > o
I_- CN •• �060u
Q� � W u N m
,_1 p N N is
QOL V
U -`p N u
N > U ht
OW Q � •2 O y
z NO ao-o� H
H Q a� m E v
Q , 0 0-
m
� o o y
J C y z v
OEoai
CCL
C
O o W W 0Ecvw
I J O O� s
t t y
OLQ EL u c am 0
U Hv
Z u Wu -`°v u
M o
2 O W o 1-r0-
- r n ._ v ._ E
LU r t-00c
y E 0
Z tMn 'c O W �
W O O c v 0
v u
—� 00.3>>
h o°. �°•
° �' 'o 0
c v :) Q v
O H
sC
y
a,
UJ
2
d
`�
I
�°
74
'oft
-
U�
flo
HIV)M�
•
`4
,o
IL
rtv
U
y
i
'
a�
t
z
,.
W
a
Packet Pg. 208
9.A.e
SECTION II
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
2.14 PUD Monitoring
One entity (hereinafter the Managing ntity) shall be responsible for PUD monitoring until close-out of the
PUD, and this entity shall also be responsible for satisfying ing all PUD commitments until close-out of the PUD.
At the time of this PUD approval, the Managing Entity is Stock Development, LLC. 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
Enti , 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.
2.15 Miscellaneous
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_
All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the development.
SECTION VI
C-3 COMMERCIAL/NEIGHBORHOOD
6.01 PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth regulations for the areas designated on Revised Exhibit `H',
Master land Use Plan, as `C-3'. The C-3 tracts are intended to provide residents with conveniently located
commercial facilities and services that are typically required on a regular basis.
6.02 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land or water used, in whole
or in part, for other than the following:
A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures:
1) Antique shops; appliance stores; art studios; art supplies; automobile parts stores; automobile
service stations.
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20210001795 Words stfue'�= are deleted;
Last Revised: December 14, 2021 Words underlined are added
Page 1 of 3
Packet Pg. 209
2) Bakery shops; banks and financial institutions; barber and beauty shops; bath supply stores;
blue print shops; bicycle sales and services; book stores.
3) Carpet and floor covering sales (including storage and installation); child care centers;
churches and other place or worship; clothing stores; confectionary and candy stores.
4) Delicatessen; drug stores; dry cleaning shops; dry goods stores and department stores.
5) Electrical supply stores.
6) Fish stores; florist shops; food markets; furniture stores; furrier shops and fast food
restaurants.
7) Gift shops; gourmet shops.
8) Hardware stores; health food stores; hobby supply stores; homes for the aged; hospitals and
hospices.
9) Ice cream stores; ice sales; interior decorating showrooms.
10) Jewelry stores.
11) Laundries — self-service; leather goods and luggage stores; locksmiths and liquor stores.
12) Meat market; medical office or clinic for human care; millinery shops; music stores.
13) Office (retail or professional); office supply stores.
14) Paint and wallpaper stores; pet shops; pet supply stores; photographic equipment stores; post
office.
15) Radio and television sales and service; small appliance stores; shoe sales and repairs;
restaurants.
16) Souvenir stores; stationary stores; supermarkets and sanitoriums.
17) Tailor shops; tobacco shops; toy shops; tropical fish stores.
18) Variety stores; veterinary office and clinics (no outside kenneling).
19) Watch and precision instrument sales and repair.
20) Water management facilities and essential services.
21) The C-3 parcel at the southwest corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Grand Lely Drive
and the C-3 parcel at the southwest corner of Collier Blvd. (CR 951) and Grand Lely Drive
may be developed allowing C-3 uses, as outlined in Section VI of Ordinance 92-15, as
amended, and/or residential dwelling units.
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20210001795
Last Revised: December 14, 2021
Words stfue'�� are deleted;
Words underlined are added
Page 2 of 3
Packet Pg. 210
9.A.e
22) Any other commercial use of professional service which is comparable in nature with the
foregoing uses and which the Board of Zoning Appeals or Hearing Examiner determines to
be compatible with the district.
B) Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures:
1) Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the uses permitted in this district.
2) Caretaker's residence.
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20210001795
Last Revised: December 14, 2021
Words stfue'�� are deleted;
Words underlined are added
Page 3 of 3
Packet Pg. 211
9.A.e
® Stantec
Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 5801 Pelican Bay Boulevard, Suite 300, Naples FL 34108-2709
November 12, 2021
Re: NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING
LELY RESORT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD)
Amendment to a Planned Unit Development (PUDA) (PL20210001795)
Dear Property Owner:
In compliance with Collier County Land Development Code please be advised that Davis
Development, Inc. has filed an application with Collier County. The application is seeking approval
of an amendment to the Lely Resort Planned Unit Development to allow residential uses on the
C-3 tract located at the southwest corner of Collier Boulevard and Grand Lely Drive. The proposed
amendment does not seek to increase density or to add residential units to the Lely Resort PUD.
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 Tuesday,
December 14 at 5:30 p.m. at the South Regional Library, Room A, 8065 Lely Cultural Pkwy,
Naples, Florida, 34113.
A virtual meeting option is also available: TEAMS Meeting: https://bit.ly/3D4aTYV or call
TOLL FREE: United States, (833) 436-6264 Conference ID: 561 649 706#
Should you have questions prior to the meeting, please contact me directly at (239) 985-5502, or
Lindsay. robin@stantec.com.
Sincerely,
STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC.
Lindsay F. Robin, MPA, AICP
Urban Planner
Packet Pg. 212
9.A.e
NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD
INFORMATION MEETING
In compliance with Collier County Land Development Code the public is invited to attend a
neighborhood information meeting held by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. on behalf of Davis
Development, Inc., at the following time and location:
DATE: Tuesday, December 14, 2021
TIME: 5:30p.m.
ADDRESS: South Regional Library, Room A, 8065 Lely Cultural Pkwy., Naples, Florida, 34113
VIRTUAL MEETING OPTION: TEAMS Meeting: https:Hbit.ly/3D4aTYV or call TOLL FREE:
United States, (833) 436-6264 Conference ID: 561 649 706#
Davis Development, Inc. has filed an application with Collier County (case number
PL20210001795). The application is seeking approval of an amendment to the Lely Resort
Planned Unit Development to allow residential uses on the C-3 tract located at the southwest
corner of Collier Boulevard and Grand Lely Drive. The proposed amendment does not seek to
increase density or to add residential units to the Lely Resort PUD.
ATTLES .KE HAMMOCK RD Z7,
'LELY
�•
RESORTARLINNA
�
•
`•SOUTH
LOCATION MAP
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:
Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. c/o Lindsay Robin
5801 Pelican Bay Blvd., Suite 300, Naples, FL 34108
(239) 985-5502 OR Lindsay. robin(a)stantec.com
*The Collier County Library does not endorse or sponsor this project in any way.
Packet Pg. 213
Nalitt,15,,1, cI11J �`t ws
9.A.e
PART OFT HE USA TODAY NETWORK
Published Daily
Naples, FL 34110
STANTEC
5801 PELICAN BAY BLVD # 300
NAPLES, FL 34108-2709
Affidavit of Publication
STATE OF WISCONSIN
COUNTY OF BROWN
Before the undersigned they serve as the authority,
personally appeared said legal clerk who on oath says that
he/she serves as Legal Clerk 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
Naples, 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 said newspaper
issue(s) dated:
Issue(s) dated: 11/17/2021
Subscribed and sworn to before on November 17. 2021:
otary, tat u f Brown
�5
15-�3
My commission expires
Publication Cost: $364.00
Ad No: 0005005606
Customer No: 1307920
PO #:
# of Affidavits 1
NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD
INFORMATION MEETING
In compliance with Collier County Land Development Code the
public is invited to attend a neighborhood information meeting
held by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. on behalf of Davis De-
velopment, Inc., at the following time and location:
DATE: Tuesday, December 14, 2021
TIME: 5:30p.m.
ADDRESS: South Regional Library, Room A, 8065 Lely Cultural
Pkwy., Naples, Florida, 34113
VIRTUAL MEETING OPTION: TEAMS Meeting: https://bit.ly/3D4aT
YV or call TOLL FREE: United States, (833) 436-6264 Conference
ID: 561 649 706#
Davis Development, Inc, has filed an application with Collier
County (case number PL20210001795). The application is seek-
ing approval of an amendment to the Lely Resort Planned Unit
Development to allow residential uses on the C-3 tract located
at the southwest corner of Collier Boulevard and Grand Lely
Drive.. The proposed amendment does not seek to increase den-
sity or to add resid
PUD.
;OCATION MAP
Business and property owners and residents are welcome to at-
tend the presentation and discuss the project with the owners'
representatives and Collier County staff. If you are unable to at-
tend this meeting, but have questions or comments, they can be
directed to:
Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. c/o Lindsay Robin
5801 Pelican Bay Blvd., Suite 300, Naples, FL 34108
(239) 985-5502 OR Lindsay. robin@stantec.com
*The Collier County Library does not endorse or sponsor this
project in any way.
Nov 17, 2021 #5005606
NANCY HEYRMAN
Notary Public
State of Wisconsin
This is not an invoice
Packet Pg. 214
9.A.e
® Stantec
To: Nancy Gundlach, AICP From
Collier County Growth Management
File: Lely Tract 12 PUDA (PL20210001795) Date
Second Neighborhood Information
Meeting Synopsis
Lindsay Robin, AICP
Stantec
April 1, 2022
Reference: Second Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Memo
Stantec Consulting Services Inc., and Davis Development Inc. conducted a second Neighborhood
Information Meeting (NIM) on Thursday, March 10, 2022.
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 approximately 167 residents were in
attendance.
Fred Hazel, the Applicant representative from Davis Development Inc., conducted the meeting and
provided an overview of the adjustments that were made to the plan after the first NIM.
Following the presentation, the meeting was opened 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.
Question/Comment 1: How many units will the development have?
➢ Response: The proposed development will have the same number of units as we have
discussed in the previous meeting- no change [184 units].
Question/Comment 2: Will there be an exit onto Collier Boulevard?
➢ Response: Yes, the primary entry/exit point for the project will be via Collier Boulevard
Question/Comment 3: Thank you for addressing many of the issues that we brought up in the first
neighborhood information meeting (NIM). Will there be an exit onto Celeste Drive? Will the
median stay there?
➢ Response: Yes, there will be an exit onto Celeste Drive and the median will be staying
there.
Design with community in mind
rl11us0227-ppfss011workgroup\2156\active\215616630\planning\analysis\puda\nim\second niminim2_synopsis_20220314.docx
Packet Pg. 215
9.A.e
April 1, 2022
Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Page 2 of 7
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Question/Comment 4: Many of the residents here always thought this parcel of land would be
commercial, which we want. The land is zoned commercial, we shouldn't assume residential would
work here.
Response: I appreciate your thought. The property was marketed for commercial for
years, but no one bought it. Our intent is to the best neighbors we can be if this
development is successful, that is why we are here to listen to and address your concerns.
Question/Comment 5: 1 appreciate the effort you've done here, but I stand on the idea that
residential does not work for this area. What will the rent be for this project? We are worried about
having low rent rates near our community.
Response: Rental rates have certainly increased since our last NIM, so those we spoke
about previously may be inaccurate now. The development's rental rates will be some of
the highest in the market.
Question/Comment 5: Will the entrances/exits from the townhomes be contained to the project?
We are concerned about the density being too high.
Response: Yes, the townhomes will have rear -loaded garages, so their natural front door
will be street -side, but the walk system will feed these entrances back internally to the
development. There will be significant landscape buffering between the townhomes and
Celeste Drive. As for the density, we try to maintain a certain core number of units for this
development model.
Question/Comment 6: We understand you want to make money here, but we feel like this project
is an infringement on our community. We bought our homes with an understanding of the
neighborhood and now you are trying to change that. Traffic is already bad here and we are
worried this project will worsen it. We want the only project exit to be onto Collier Boulevard, we
don't want anything onto Celeste.
Response: The exit point on Celeste was a suggestion given by the County, not a mandate.
We are happy to look more into this suggestion.
Question/Comment 7: I'm distraught by this project. We thought this land was zoned light
commercial. Has this changed and/or is this in the process of being changed?
r, Response: We are going through the application to make this zoning change.
n with community in mind
rl 11us0227-ppfss011workgroup\21561active1215616630\planning\analysislpudalnim\second nirnWrn2_synopsis_20220314.docx
Packet Pg. 216
9.A.e
April 1, 2022
Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Page 3 of 7
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Question/Comment 8: Exit on Celeste- what would stop people from making a U-turn here?
Response: It is unlikely that someone would take this route. We work closely with traffic
engineers, from the County and our project team, to understand these potential issues.
Question/Comment 9: At the last NIM meeting you said you would conduct a Traffic Impact Study
(TIS) after the proposal, is this still happening?
Response: Yes, this is the correct process, but we are moving the TIS up because you
wanted this. We are now doing a TIS which will be included in the resubmittal.
Question/Comment 10: 1 thought the county said no access to Collier Boulevard?
Response: Collier Boulevard is a limited access road, but you made it very clear to us that
you wanted the project's access points to be on Collier, so we went back to the County
and fought for this. We are working towards having these access points.
Question/Comment 11: We are worried that people will use the roundabout on Celeste and cut
through the neighborhood, instead of taking Collier Boulevard. Additionally, we are worried that
pedestrians will use our sidewalks/roads to walk their dogs.
Response: We have great experience with residents with pets and we don't find this as a
problem. People may take a stroll through the neighborhood, we cannot stop this.
Landscape and buffering along Celeste will be present.
Question/Comment 12: The high rents will persuade tenants to home more than one family in their
units.
Response: This will not occur. Our communities utilize lease agreements to limit
occupancy in the units. Additionally, any person living in our community will be required
to undergo a background check. This is all industry standard.
Question/Comment 13: Are there renderings of a side view of the development?
Response: Not yet, but I can assure you that the architecture will remain compatible with
the existing neighborhood aesthetics.
Question/Comment 14: Why did you originally ask for the TIS waiver?
with community in mind
rl 11us0227-ppfss011workgroup\21561active1215616630\planning\analysislpudalnim\second nirnWrn2_synopsis_20220314.docx
Packet Pg. 217
9.A.e
April 1, 2022
Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Page 4 of 7
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
y Response: We weren't increasing density to the Lely Resort PUD, so the County granted us
this waiver.
Question/Comment 15: How long is the setback from the townhomes to the sidewalk (on Celeste
Drive)?
y Response: I would guess this setback would be about 60-70 feet. We can get an exact
measurement for you later if you'd like.
Question/Comment 16: Where will the stormwater runoff go?
y Response: At the appropriate time in the application process, Stantec will help us
engineer the stormwater system which will be designed and permitted through the
jurisdiction. The stormwater will most likely be held underground.
Question/Comment 17: How does the rezoning process work? How can the community apply input
into this process?
y Response: (The rezoning process is explained). There are plenty of opportunities for
community input. You can participate in public meetings, send letters/email, etc.
Question/Comment 18: Over 2,300 people signed a petition opposing this development, there's
still a lot of concern. Your application states that this project is compatible with our community,
how do you measure compatibility? How is this project compatible with the surrounding area?
Response: We assess the architecture of Lely Resort and surrounding community. Our
goal is to bring complementary architecture to keep up with the aesthetic of Lely Resort.
We can assure you that the architecture will be pleasing because there is a demand for it.
Mixed -type housing is very common, and we believe that our development will provide
an asset to your community.
Question/Comment 19: 1 feel there's some inconsistencies shared here tonight. Was there an EIS
done for the stormwater runoff? How would residents enter the development when going North?
Response: Stormwater is required to go through a permitting process. The jurisdiction
governs over our plans. Residents have a few options for getting to the development
when traveling North. They can make a U-turn at the intersection and enter via Collier
Boulevard, they can make a left turn and enter via Grand Lely, etc.
,) with community in mind
rl 11us0227-ppfss011workgroup\21561active1215616630\planning\analysislpudalnim\second nirnWrn2_synopsis_20220314.docx
Packet Pg. 218
9.A.e
April 1, 2022
Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Page 5 of 7
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Question/Comment 20: There will be a meeting on Monday night with Commissioner LoCastro -
Come to the meeting!
Response: Thank you for your comment.
Question/Comment 21: We need to watch what we're wishing for. We have more control over a
residential development, over a commercial development. We have a group who is working with
us. If commercial comes here, they can put many different things, C-3 has a very broad group of
uses. If we shoot this down, we may not get heard in the future- I'd rather have a group that works
with us.
Response: Thank you for your comment.
Question/Comment 21: We are worried that rentals, which are higher density, may change the
community feel.
y Response: Thank you for your comment. [Community Member] There are already rentals
within Lely Resort.
Question/Comment 22: Would that main road need state approval?
Response: No, it's a County road.
Question/Comment 23: Would this development be a part of the Lely Homeowners Association
(HOA)?
y Response: We wouldn't be opposed to this.
Question/Comment 24: Where will the residents leave their trash/recycling?
y Response: All the trash bins will be inside the buildings. There will not be any exterior
trash facilities. Townhomes will have traditional street -side waste bins.
Question/Comment 25: We want you to reduce the units.
Response: Thank you for your comment.
Question/Comment 26: What will the name of the development be? Lely Resort?
I with community in mind
rl 11us0227-ppfss011workgroup\21561active1215616630\planning\analysislpudalnim\second nirnWrn2_synopsis_20220314.docx
Packet Pg. 219
9.A.e
April 1, 2022
Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Page 6 of 7
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
y Response: We do not have a name for this project yet, but it will not be Lely Resort.
Question/Comment 27: Will the townhomes have a connection to the sidewalk (off Celeste Drive)?
We don't have access to their community, why should they be able to use ours? Also, our roads are
outdated, we don't have any room for more pedestrians/bicyclists.
y Response: Thank you for your comment, we will investigate your concerns. We can
consider helping with road improvements.
Question/Comment 28: Will there be another meeting so we can see the revisions you make?
y Response: Yes, we would be happy to come back and meet with you folks.
Question/Comment 29: Who oversees traffic in the County?
y Response: Trinity Scott is the Deputy Department Head at Collier County.
Question/Comment 30: Do you have other projects in Collier County?
y Response: Yes, we have one, four-story community here in the Naples area.
Question/Comment 31: How can we access the new site plan?
y Response: We would be happy to share site plan once it is more concrete.
Question/Comment 32: The landscaping looks sparse compared to what we're used to. What is the
depth of the landscaping buffer?
y Response: I'm guessing the buffer area is around 50 feet. We'd be happy to have any
community input for the landscaping plan.
Question/Comment 33: I'm concerned about affordable housing in Collier County. Are you
considering making any of the units affordable?
y Response: We have not included affordable housing in our project.
Question/Comment 34: Neighborhood information meetings (NIM) are helpful. Can you make a
commitment for another one after revisions?
Response: We wouldn't be opposed to coming back for another NIM.
J with community in mind
rl 11us0227-ppfss011workgroup\21561active1215616630\planning\analysislpudalnim\second nirnWrn2_synopsis_20220314.docx
Packet Pg. 220
9.A.e
April 1, 2022
Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Page 7 of 7
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Question/Comment 35: 1 don't think that you are proposing enough parking for this project
➢ Response: Thank you for your comment. This project will have about 2.02 parking spots
per unit. The county has parking standards, which we abide by.
There were no further questions or comments. Mr. Hazel 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 7:10 p.m. The meeting was recorded
and provided to the County as Exhibit "C".
Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
Lindsay F. Robin MPA, AICP
Project Manager, Planning
Phone: 239 985 5502
Lindsay. Robin@stantec.com
Attachment: Attachment
c. C.C.
,ith community in mind
rl11us0227-ppfss011workgroup\2156\active\215616630\planning\analysis\puda\nim\second niminim2_synopsis_20220314.docx
Packet Pg. 221
9.A.e
EXHIBIT "A"
C
u
o
D
o
s
o
�
°
c
u
r
s
•3
c
r�
z
.O
�
C
°
c
v
�,�..�
`�
o
L
0
4)
v
W
w
O
p�
H°Uuo
°�
0
-6
L
W
v>o
L
Z
W
O
EUW
�
u
a�
W
3
0Q0
J
u
C
Gl
o
>
m
o
N
�
J
.
LO
W
*
v
coy
H
0
Q
^\
v
J
�uY�t0
a�
u
p
LL
W
��
/�
V
1
�•o�°yu
�
�
y
i
Z
z
\`
Q
N
Z
�a-
oEw:Ea
Z
O
Q
�y
�+
0
=
C
—
3
Q
a�
`o0
I
-
W
w
���
w
a�
a
E
u
O
,
a
E0
=Qw��,�S
U
J
o
�
O
CL
�,O
u
c
a
js
o
o
Z
Z
0
0
.�
_
C�
ry
O
W
u
u
-°
u°
`CL
°
E
C
Ly
i
y
ma
E
�
C
0
0
s
c
0
N
w
ooco0
J
o
a
a
3
:
5
y
o
0
N
-0
N
O
�
v`
�
or
0
H
ak 3
m
Z
T-
�y
�n
l
tv�
a�
lA
y
N
�
u
\
N)
J
�
a�
h
SS
ct
Ee
o
j
It
Packet Pg. 222
9.A.e
C
o
rn
0
._
u E
: p
.3
(�
v
z
W
.o
c
Ems°'°
CL
v
c
Z>;
F-
°'ut
U.
LLJC
v
J
r�-,
v5-cy
L
W
a°i
>
u
Z
>
CDE'°'
20
0
00
OWo�
0
-0
u
(L)
F—N
p
w
2
0
0
0 u
CQ
Zp�a
N
��vo
C
ry
io
OW
�/
�/
��
>
y�
Z
z
N
Z
Q)•o•aai
a
O
_
-0
0
N
0
-
C)
Q
00
fin
On
oLL,*���EU
O
i
F-
r-
��Eov
=
0
w
a
�vr�°
CL
U
L
�
0
t
t
:E
O
�
o
u
o
c
arn0
H
c
0/'�
r=rvz
O
W
u
.0-MAc
u
-°u
O
v
c CL
V
.°O�
C
W
W
Q
�o-
Z
ry
�,vE�o
�
h
.00cB
E
a O
C
=a
o�
0
N
J
W
°
>�
v o
J
o
o
a
o
3
u
> >
o
0>� >0.
c
v
Q v
H
.- Ni
N
IN
\a
0
v
Q
:
9
`I
Q
QJ
U
—
rai
V
IlL
7
rl
_
_
M
M
N
ON
V�
•
T
l
V
IN
c
�J
r
r
(�
�
Jo
.4
�7
0N
56
Packet Pg. 223
rr rn� Z
V W
Z :�E
W OL
w0
C W
Z >
O LU
F— F—
CQ Z
ry L ::D
0
O LU Z ZZ
Q Q
Or
Oi
= Q
ry Ool
�
F—
= ry
C� O
W V)
LU
Z r/
-0 >-
c J
N w
J
Q
0
OL
Z
LU
L
0
Z
LU
L
E
CD W
Co
Q�
..a
J
u
N Z
O
N CL
O uu
U LU
CL
R
E
a,u`on
� u u
rn
0
v a u
va m �
E o, •3
o a
E h Co
u > o �
c rn � u
00
c
> u° o
Zi
E 0 w 0
N O
a �
* 75 0
* ; u
2 C O O N
° uA.
m
a h
0 O O.Os
-Q 0. `v o O
a� N O O
rn-oEo
N a C C
'o E 2 u
5. O o 5
u u •`p u
o c o c
;n a _ E
i o
wo
t . c
E a
c o
a)
O 0 c p
r a u
00.3:)
E�'��
-°a
a'
r v >
9.A.e
N
H
j00
g
1
`b
'-
LU
y,
ZZ
CA'
v
rQ
I�
C
y
�
�Q
N
fn
eel
�
R
3
r
v
F
PIA
a
.r.
,
1
r
�
�
0
oll
v
Ir1
11)
❑
4
(r
Skuhr-
,`
d
C^
POO
eA
Packet Pg. 224
9.A.e
rr rr�� Z
V LU
Z :�i
W CL
Lu O
L LU
Z >
O LU
F—
Q 7
ry
LL. LU
Z Z
0 Q
On
Oi
= Q
ry
OOL
m
_ ry
C� O
LU (/)
Lij
Z r/
N LU
J
Z
LU
Z
LU
L
E
Q
Cd
Co
LU
..a
rJ
l�J u
N Z
O
N CL
O uu
�a
iLU
�
CL
R
y..
U O m
� a�ui u
0 o u s
.� E a •3
O 0
c h
>0 W>
rn c �v U
�0mu
c
°u a m
� v o
aaio�v
N �
u Tv
* c N H
> u -o h
-0 " 0 H
C) o a 0 s
Q) or0��
`0 0
o
E
rn��o
O c u
u c CL
C vy! c
ou u
c 0 c
vi 0 _
.0 O
O N E ME
t 0 c
Ln
ram-- C 0 0
c c
0 o c v
_ v u
o a 3
E C
O
Q
V
a
Lu
TJ
Ito
M
M
in
M
N
'_j
O
,0
40
qol
Ti
00
u
IZZC
01
Packet Pg. 225
V
9.A.e
L W
Z >
O w
C�C Z
L/L .G�. Q
O 1U
`L
Z ZZ
0 Q
On
Oi
^= 0
rv
O ^�
1..�
_ ry
C� O
w V)
LU
Z ry
� J
N W
J
LO
011,
O
O
O
^J
Z
W
Z
LU
L
Q
E
Q J
O ad
J
u
N Z
O —
N I. �
O W
�a
U J
,a
.o = w i•
E
u O p
ou
rn
v o u
:2 C:)
E •3
0 0
c rn
a� > >
r �, '0
u
mu
aoi>uo
Euu�o
�oa�
a >
as 0
75 o �
Ai y
O L1 0 t
Q a � o 0
H s
0 0 0
CL
a� v
*o�E
c c
'o E u
O O UD
u c Q p)
C in
C
uu�—'
o c o c
M 0
'� O
.0 ME
N c
H E o
'c 0 v
o
O O U
0 a :)
E°cam
o ao aD
Cr
t v >—
Y
0
V;
%J
M�
)�
C',
>
Ilk
h
N
�
cl
U
4
—
`
�
.
�-
Ze
0
c
t
LIR
W
j
z
%:
vi
�
Packet Pg. 226
9.A.e
Z
rr rn� F—
V W
Z :�E
LU
wO
LU
Z >
O w
0
CQ z
ry
L �
Q
O W
� Z ZZ
� Q
On
Oi
= C)
ry =)
O OL
2 W //'����
LL
C� O
w V)
LU
Zry
C J
N Lu
_I
Z
Lu
Q
Z
CW
L
Q
'0 = H i►
E
o
� o u
v c � s
` E
O E HO 01
W W
>>
c D'o 0
t
Up
C
C
E u a
� v o
a�o�v
h � t
* C N H
> u .O H
o o. o s
Q) o. 0 o c
O O
H O O
E
* a�E�
c c
'o EE ^� u
u C CL
N S
uu IV—'
o o c
N
H '0 O
o E'er
w E � o
s C O N
O 0 c p
C t v u
00.3=)
` N
O 0,0 N
07
t o �` 0
V
V
an
d�
Q
t3
�
M
IDO
�
�rq
a
�
ly,�n
M
U�
,
�►
2
�
V
3
Z
z
a�N
,'S
a
�-
•
41
ro
I�
Packet Pg. 227
(�
Lu
Z
w
Lu O
w
Z >
O "U
Q 7
ry Q
O 11J
`L Z
Z Z
Q
On
Oi
= Q
ry =)
O�
= LL
C� O
Lu V)
LU
Z r/
C J
N Lu
I
Q
Q
Z
LLU
L
Q
Z
LULU
L
E
O ad
..a
u
N Z
O '-"
N CL
O ui
� a
U J
CL
,4
•o'= h
E
u `o
0 L i
-p N
'o E °- •3
O
o c
v o u
r 0)
WU mu
E CL
U W 0
V
�- c >
N O _
N
-Co u H
a v` ° o
rnH `o o
CL a� E
o�EE
c c
'o E csi
>,005
s h
u a rn
C y C
u U p u
O C 0 C
;n v _ E
E
t v c
y E v
c O 0
° ° o °u
00.3:)
E °' c
o W -°p W
Cr
L o >
F
M
o
ty
1r'V�IV�a
W
r
N
U
01,
J
o
YI)
Q
a
v
�Qv
Zrr
J\'
-
�`��
�.�
a
r
E
Z
NQ
,+1
S
V
�1
9.A.e
Packet Pg. 228
9.A.e
C
C
O
C
u
O
y..
F—
O
D
r
V
LLI
o
LL
�
i
CL
v:
z
O
Qi
>
aA
>
�
0
.
toi
U
s
o
LU
LLI
O
O',
(AO
-o
�
_V
O
_O
O
O
'
O
a)
y
U-i
W
>
0
a
m
zu
O
N
0
3
O
LLJO
C)
o
]-
'0
O
'—
D-J
fl-
u
c
v>
m
D
O
F--
N
O
O�
�'
°
a
s
Z
NO
n�
�.:
Q
,�
o
�
a)
o
t
.�
ry
J
L1J
*
'a
0
u
u
y
a)
O
Q
u
v
a�
u
u
LLI
'�
'
v
•^
�
v
y
N
s
u
z
z
N
Q-
w
E
o
z
::DO
-0
a)�
N
O
N�
O
0—
N
Q
N
u`o03
O
I
*
E
O
O
_
LZ
-�
a
4)
0
=
w
LU
o'
u
u
a'
C
O-
0
C
0
Co
�
%
C
L
C
O
u
'Cry
N
u
y
-0V
N
v
rrI
V
O
w
r
v
c
W
(�
LL
Q
N
v
inv
�
E�'v
E
O
0
C
z
ry
L
N
E
C
m
O
A
t
>
C
>
O
.�
N
O
—
N
J
LL
c
o
�
o
c
o
0
J
o
a
v
3
u
:
5
v
N
O
5.
>.
O
>-
O
N
F-
N
O
cQ
C
W
Tf
V
N
�
e
a�
v
ti
m
zv
a
(n
Packet Pg. 229
L W
Z >
OW
0
Q 7
ry Q
O `W
L Z
Z Z
0 Q
On
O
Ti
i Q
r
O�
2 ry
CD O
Li V)
LU
Z r/
� J
N W
J
LO
O�1
O •
O E
O �
O co
N
J LO
Q N
O
N
O
Z �
W U
0
Z
W
R
C
E >� 72
u
0
a o u
o c v
a� > 0
c 0) •N
�vaui
� c
aoi > u
E �' 0
u
a u �
N 0 0
� H 0
c 0 H
p � 0
u ._
� v
Q a 0
0. m o
t v
:E f
cm 0
4) a�
N C
's 0
u c fl-
_ 'C H
u u a
o C �
O
t
y E 0
N >
c 0
c
0 >�
0 o c
v
o a 3
E N c
•- v -0
0 '0 0`
�l
9.A.e
1�
V
io
NJ
�
�
b
ao
�-
W
Y
'
J
M
IV
N
d,�
U
�
v
N
d
a,
Q
�
(1
J
I
V
/
nCl
\
IQ
0
a
,d
.,a
Packet Pg. 230
9.A.e
Z
U W
Z :2
W CL
W0
C W
Z >
O W
_ 0
F-
7
ry
OW
� Z
Z Z
Q
0n
0i
= p
ry ::D
0�
m �--.
_ ry
C� 0
W V)
LU
Z ry
C J
N W
J
I
0
0 E
0 Ci
0 Co
N ••
J LO
Q N
0
:D N
0
r
Z
W U
Z
W
E 20
u O
C u O
� 0 u
o
U- E y rn
v
ai>>
c 0) (D 0
u
awu
0.0 .� O
C
N > u a
E
u 0 O
D 0
fl- C (D >
0 O
h N
0 O 'O
c 0 H
O u
N
O Q 0 s
y i C
01 H O O
O C U
>. O O =)
r s h
u C fl. 0)
0
°uu—'
o 0 c
:n 0 E
rn 0 O
N O E .--
t C
'^ E 0
'_^
C O N
C � C
O C c 0
s
C a u
0 CL :)
E N O v►
.0 0 >` N
H
V
W
�
\
a
W
v
N
N
U
h
N
�
a
v
ti
I�
N
E
z°
�\
Packet Pg. 231
LO
O,
L W
Z >
O "J
p
5Q Z
L
ry p
O W
� Z Zz
p Q
On
Oi
= p
Ev
O�
CL
CO
= ry
(
V_
LLJ V)
LU
Z ry
� J
N W
J
t
u `O Z)
0 ou
o rn o
a.-
•` E °• •3
o v
E N rn
w > >
'arn•o aui
u
� v u
o
E w o
u o o
a c >
0 O o �
N
o
a V N >-
a O � �
u
O Q N
a o E
toso
`o 0
N N a
�ar�
o C u
5,Oo5
4- t t N
u c a)
c •� h c
* U •`Oa z
'0c
O 'o
c v •-
H a = E
E o
t v c
N E . v
c O N
c
O °
00.3�
gn O N
O w -a N
9.A.e
N
v
a
LU
c
V
IV
y`
�
4
U
�
9
1
d
a�
Ci
VO
c
E�
J
�
z
l
J
Packet Pg. 232
L W
Z >
_O W
Q Z
CN
{..i Q
O W
� Z ZZ
Q
On
Oi
= Q
ry O�
_ ry
CD O
W V)
z ry
c >-
J
N W
I
LO
O1-1
O
O
O Q
O �
N
J LO
�1
Q N
C O
N
� O
Z
W U
0
Z
W
�i
C
J
Q
J
i►
f—
Z
CL
LU
LLJ
J
CL
9.A.e
NN
la
v
�
MM
M
a
r
N
i
N
U
`
4
1
4-
3�
v�
C
�
d
IL
W
)J
E
d�
v
yh
Packet Pg. 233
C W
Z >
O W
0
Z
Q
O W
� Z ZZ
n Q
Oni
Oi
2 �
ry ::D
O 0-
CO F—
I LL
V
W V)
LU
Z r/
N W
J
LO
011
r4
ON
I
N c u O
o a) u
rn
� v_vs
p c .sa t
.=E°'•3
o v
0 E rn
w c
c rn •0
v N u
C
a
E�a�o
a a m >
N O
o o
o a o s
at o
:E H _
v� H O 0
N .O♦ v
L
V
V
O = u
1 co t h
u = a rn
_ •C h C
u u -,a
o o
c
N = E
E �.
t c
w E v
C O W
C �
0 o c v
= 0
0 0.3
� �c>'
i y 0 y
0 N -O 0
v
t v � 0
H
9.A.e
�
�
I
M
1
R
�
�Y
Packet Pg. 234
9.A.e
® Stantec
Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 3510 Kraft Road, Suite 200, Naples FL 34105
February 17, 2022
Re: NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING
LELY RESORT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD)
Amendment to a Planned Unit Development (PUDA) (PL20210001795)
Dear Property Owner:
Please be advised that Davis Development, Inc. has filed an application with Collier County. The
application is seeking approval of an amendment to the Lely Resort Planned Unit Development
to allow residential uses on the C-3 tract located at the southwest corner of Collier Boulevard and
Grand Lely Drive.
A second Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held to provide attendees the opportunity to
review plan revisions, based on the feedback we received at our last Neighborhood Information
Meeting. Attendees will also have a chance to ask questions. The Neighborhood Information
Meeting will be held on Thursday, March 10, 2022 at 5:30 p.m. at the South Regional
Library, Room A, 8065 Lely Cultural Pkwy, Naples, Florida, 34113.
Should you have questions prior to the meeting, please contact me directly at (239) 985-5502, or
Lindsay. robin@stantec.com.
Sincerely,
STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC.
r -P-tb�-
Lindsay F. Robin, MPA, AICP
Urban Planner
Packet Pg. 235
9.A.e
NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD
INFORMATION MEETING
The public is invited to attend a second neighborhood information meeting held by Stantec
Consulting Services Inc. on behalf of Davis Development, Inc., at the following time and location:
DATE: Thursday, March 10, 2022
TIME: 5:30p.m.
ADDRESS: South Regional Library, Room A, 8065 Lely Cultural Pkwy., Naples, Florida, 34113
Davis Development, Inc. has filed an application with Collier County (case number
PL20210001795). The application is seeking approval of an amendment to the Lely Resort
Planned Unit Development to allow residential uses on the C-3 tract located at the southwest
corner of Collier Boulevard and Grand Lely Drive.
ATTLES ALE H MMOCK RD
�.
LE
I■
LY
ORT
WWI
,••SOUTH
LOCATION MAP
Business and property owners and residents are welcome to attend the presentation and discuss
the project with the owners' representatives. If you are unable to attend this meeting, but have
questions or comments, they can be directed to:
Stantec Consulting Services Inc. c/o Lindsay Robin
3510 Kraft Road, Suite 200, Naples, FL 34105
(239) 985-5502 OR Lindsay. robin(a-)stantec.com
*The Collier County Library does not endorse or sponsor this project in any way.
Packet Pg. 236
9.A.e
Tcapirs +�ails Nrll%q
PART OF THE USA TODAY NETWORK
Published Daily
Naples, FL 34110
STANTEC
5801 PELICAN BAY BLVD # 300
NAPLES, FL 34108-2709
Affidavit of Publication
STATE OF WISCONSIN
COUNTY OF BROWN
Before the undersigned they serve as the authority,
personally appeared said legal clerk who on oath says that
he/she serves as Legal Clerk 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
Naples, 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 said newspaper
issue(s) dated or by publication on the newspaper's
website, if authorized, on
Issue(s) da I; 0212 022
Subscribed and sworn to before on March 21. 2022:
Notary, State of WI, Co ty of Brown
My commission expires
Publication Cost: $217.00
Ad No: 0005142059
Customer No: 1307920
PO #:
# of Affidavits: 1
This is not an invoice
1 — 7 "�S_
NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD
INFORMATION MEETING
The public is invited to attend a second neighborhood informa-
tion meeting held by Stantec Consulting Services Inc. on behalf
of Davis Development, Inc., at the following time and location:
DATE: Thursday, March 10, 2022
TIME., 5:30p.m.
ADDRESS: South Regional Library, Room A, 8065 Lely Cultural
Pkwy.., Naples, Florida, 34113
Davis Development, Inc. has filed an application with Collier
County (Case number PL20210001795). The appliration is seek-
ing approval of an amendment to the Lely Resort Planned Unit
Development to allow residential uses on the C-3 tract located
at the southwest corner of Collier Boulevard and Grand Lely
Drive.
Business and property owners and residents are welcome to at-
tend the presentation and discuss the project with the owners'
repfesentatives. If you are unable to attend this meeting, but
have questions or comments, they can be directed to:
Staritec Consulting Services Inc, c!o Lindsay Robin
3510 Kraft Road, Suite 200, Naples, FL34145
1239) gas-5s02 OR Lindsay.robin0stantec.cvm
*The Collier County Library does not endorse or sponsor this
project in any way.
Feb 24, 2022 #5142059
E
EEN ALLEN
ary Public
of Wisconsin
Packet Pg. 237
9.A.g
Resolution opposing the requested zoning amendment to the vacant
C-3 Commercial lot, bordered by Celeste Drive, Collier Blvd, and Grand
Lely Drive, that would allow for the construction of 184 multifamily
units.
Whereas Davis Development has requested that Collier County amend the zoning restrictions
of C-3 Commercial Parcel #55425003255, aka Lely Resort Phase I Tract 12, Naples, FL., from the current
commercial designation to allow for the construction of 184 multifamily units;
Whereas this lot has an entrance/exit at the east end of Tiger Island Boulevard, which would
lead to apartment traffic using 2 lane quiet residential streets such as Tiger Lily Drive and Lely Island
Circle to access Rt. 41 as well as result in excessive traffic on 2 lane Celeste Drive through the center of
Ole', and create traffic backups at the dangerous intersection with Grand Lely Drive at the north end of
Celeste Drive;
Whereas the 7/23/21 Zoning Verification Letter (ZLTR) review prepared by Eric Ortman, Sr.
Planner Collier County Zoning Services Section inaccurately compares this zoning amendment request to
June 2015 Ord. 15-39 which amended Ord. 92-15 to permit a similar change for the C-3 parcel at the
corner of Rattlesnake -Hammock Road and Grand Lely Drive, both of which are 4 lane high volume
straightaway through roads without residential frontage, as opposed to the 2 lane winding residential
streets through which traffic would flow from/to this proposed dense residential apartment
development; and
Whereas this dense 4-story development proposed for construction in the midst of quiet 1
and 2-story residential neighborhoods was not incorporated into approved plans during the 40-year
build out of Lely Resort, and would negatively impact the quality of life for residents; now, therefore be
it
Resolved, that the
116 Households of the Alden Woods Home Owners Association — President Robert Vigorito
63 Households of the Caldecott Home Owners Association — President Luis Alvarado
84 Households of the Calumet Reserve Home Owners Association — President James Mengarelli
44 Households of the Chase Preserve Home Owners Association — President Terry Basch
248 Households of the Classics Plantation Estates Home Owners Association— President John Campbell
64 Households of the Coral Falls Home Owners Association — President Ginny Jefferson
32 Households of the Flamingo Fairways Home Owners Association — President Ray Webb
Packet Pg. 238
9.A.g
87 Households of the Falcons Glen Home Owners Association — President Kevin Gomes
76 Households of the Hawthorne Home Owners Association — President Laurel Hendrickson
24 Households of the Hidden Sanctuary Home Owners Association — President Bruce Watson
44 Households of the Indian Wells Home Owners Association — President Bill Fox
88 Households of the Legacy Home Owners Association — President Harlan Dam
191 Households of the Lely Island Estates Home Owners Association — Vice -President Lyle Ackerman
142 Households of The Majors Home Owners Association — President Tony Pusillo
135 Households of The Masters Reserve Home Owners Association — President Irving Waldman
84 Households of the Moorgate Point Home Owners Association — President Anthony Bottalico
185 Households of the Mustang Island Home Owners Association — President Anne Marie Bularzik
60 Households of the Mustang Villas Home Owners Association — President Holly Balante
60 Households of the Mystic Greens Home Owners Association — President Chuck Nelson
623 Households of the Ole' Home Owners Association — President Art Celuszak
97 Households of the Prestwick Place Home Owners Association — President David Molnar
96 Households of the Saratoga Home Owners Association — President Bill Penny
76 Households of the Signature Club Home Owners Association — President Scott Harper
120 Households of the Sunstone Home Owners Association — President Amy Strietzel
145 Households of the Tiger Island Estates Home Owners Association — President Andy Fox
56 Households of the Tasori @Lely Resort Home Owners Association — President Dan Brunell
108 Households of the Verandas Home Owners Association — President Barbara Capogna
Urges the Collier County Commissioners: Rick LoCastro- Dist. 1, Andy Solis -Dist. 2, Burt Saunders -Dist.
3, Penny Taylor -Dist. 4, and William McDaniel Jr. -Dist. S.
to oppose the proposed amendment to current C3 Commercial Zoning for parcel #55425003255 that
would allow for 4 story multifamily housing.
1/3/22
Packet Pg. 239
dAs3
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE { F INTENT TO CONSIDER AN -ORDINANCE
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be helii by the Co111er.CaKnty Hoard of County Comm fsslono rs
(BCC) at 9:00 A.M. on September 13,2D22,in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room, Third Floor, Collier
Government Center, 3299 East Tamiaml Trail, Naples, FL to consider:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO.92-15, AS AMENDED, LELY, A RESORT COMMUNITY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD), BY
ALLOWING THE 9+/- ACRE C-3 PARCEL AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF COLLIER BLVD. (CR 961) AND GRAND
LELY DRIVE TO HAVE C-3 OR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LIMITED TO 184 DWELLING UNITS. THE SUBJECT PUD
CONSISTS OF 2,892 ACRES LOCATED BETWEEN U.S.41 AND RATTLESNAKE -HAMMOCK ROAD, WEST OF COLLIER
BLVD. (CR 951), IN SECTIONS 21, 22, 27, 28, 33 AND 34, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, AND SECTION 3,
TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL202100017951
A copy of the proposed Ordinance is on file with the Clerk to the Board and is available for inspection. All Interested
parties are invited to attend and be heard.
NOTE: All persons wishing to speak on any agenda item must register with the County
Manager prior to presentation of the agenda item to be addressed. Individual speakers will be limited to three (3)
minutes on any item. The selection of any Individual to speak on behalf of an organization or group 16 encouraged. If
recognized by the Chairman, a spokesperson for a group or organization may be allotted ten (10) minutes to speak
on an Rem.
Persons wishing to have written or graphic materials included in the Board agenda
hearing. In any case, ackets must written matert said ials intended rial a �to be considered by nimum of three the Board prior lbe submitted to theca eropr ate
County staff a minimum of seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. All materials used in presentations before the
Board will become a permanent -part of the record.
As part of an ongoing initiative to encourage public involvement, the public will have the
opportunity to provide public comments remotely, as well as In person, during this
proceeding. Individuals who would like. to participate remotely should register through the link provided within
the specific event/meeting entry on the Calendar of Events on the County website ;at www.colliercountyfl.
gov/our-county/visitors/calendar-of-events after the agenda Is posted on. the' County website. Registration
should be done in advance of the public meeting, or any deadline specified within the• public meeting notice.
Individuals who register will receive an email in advance of the public hearing 'detailing how they can
participate remotely in this meeting. Remote participation is provided as a courtesy and
IS at the users risk.. The- County is not responsible for technical Issues. For additional
information about the meeting, please call Geoffrey Willig at 252.8369 or email to Geoffrey.WilligOcolliercountyfl.gov.
Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Board 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 based.
If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you
are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities
Management Division, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380, at
least two (2) days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board
of County Commissioners Office.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
WILLIAM L. MCDANIEL, JR.,
CHAIRMAN
CRYSTAL K. KINZEL,
CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT CQURT'& COMPTROLLER
By: Ann Jennejohn
Deputy Clerk (SEAL)
9.A.i
Packet Pg. 240
M
M
ORDINANCE 92-15
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER
91-102 THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH INCLUDES THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA AND AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING
ATLAS MAPS NUMBERED 0621N, 06215,0622,
06%7H, 0627S, 0628N, 06285, 0633S, 0633N,
06341:, 0634S AND 1603N BY CHANGING THE
ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN
DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM "PUD" TO
"PUD" PLJkNNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT KNO;,11 AS
LELY, A RESORT COMMUNITY, FOR PRCPERTY
LOCATED BETWEEN U.S. 41 AND
RATTLESNAKE -HAMMOCK ROAD WEST OF C.R.
951, IN SECTIONS 21, 22, 27, 28, 33 AND
34, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, AND
SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26
EAST COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING
OF 2892 ACRES; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL
OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 85-17, AS AMENDED,
THE FORMER LELY, A RESORT COMMUNITY PUD;
AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
w
m
m
Nv
!-
<
O
rT1
m
WHEREAS, Alan D. Reynolds of Wilson, Miller, Barton &
Peek, Inc., representing Lely Development Corporation,
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;
The Zoning Classification of the herein described real
property located in Sections 21, 22, 27, 28, 33 and 34,
Township 50 South, Range 26 East, and Section 3, Township 51
South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed
from "PUD" to "PUD" Planned Unit Development in accordance
with the PUD Document, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" which
is incorporated herein and by reference made part hereof.
The Official Zoning Atlas Maps Numbered 0621N, 0621S, 0622,
0627N, 06275, 0628N, 06285, 06335, 0633N, 0634N, 06345 and
1603N, as described in Ordinance Number 91-102, the Collier
County Land Development Code, are hereby amended accordingly.
-1- book f R PASS 181
SECTION_TWO:_
Ordinance Number 85-17, as amended, known as Lely, A
ah
Resort Community PUD, adopted on May 21, 1985 by the Hoard of
County Commissioners of Collier County is hereby repealed in
its entirety.
SECTION THREE:
+, This Ordinance shall become effective upon receipt of
notice from the Secretary of State that this Ordinance has
been filed with the Secretary of State.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this loth day of
March , 1992.
�:' pUAriJ U
AT)'FST s "
JAMES: C:•:`O2LE3 Clerk
i
APPROVEb•e'A�. TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY
`711.r ,,,a.t f r . �71 • ,11t1x.� O.zc�
MARJORIE M. STUDENT
ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY
PUD-84-20(2) ORDINANCE
nb/7156
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER OUNTX, FLORI A
BY: �lly(il�
HICHAEL J. VOLPE,-CHAIRMAN
Richard S. Shanahan, Vice-Chairom
-2-
This ordinance flied with the
cza�Se�c��ggtory of State's Office e
day o cR
and acknowledgement of that
filing received thiss t— day
0
By
aver CM.k
BOOK AR PAGE 182
ATTACHMENT 15
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT
FOR
LELY, A RESORT COMMUNITY
A�,
PREPARED BY:
WILSON, MILLER, BARTON & PEEK, INC.
ENGINEERS, PLANNERS & LAND SURVEYORS
3200 Bailey Lane at Airport Road
Suite 200
Naples, Florida 33942
tj
March 1992
Date Approved by CCPc: May 2, 1985
Date Approved by BCC*'May 21, 1985
Ordinance Number: 85-17
Date Amended by BCC:'
Amending Ordinance Number:
ei
8-
EXHIBIT "A" WK (151PAQ183
INDEX
PAGE
List of Exhibits and Tables
ti
Statement of Compliance and Short
Iii
Title
SECTION
I
Property Description and Ownership
1-1
SECTION
II
Project Development
2-1
SECTION
III
R Residential
3-1
SECTION
IV
C-1 Commercial/Community
4-1
SECTION
V
C-2 Commercial/Professional
5-1
SECTION
VI
C-3 Commercial/Neighborhood
6-1
SECTION
VII
EC Edison College
7-1
SECTION
VIII
CC Culttiral Center
8-1
SECTION
IX
RC Resort Center
9-1
SECTION
X
GC Golf Course
10-1
SECTION
XI
CO Conservation/Open Space
11-1
SECTION
XII
PR Cypress Preserve
12-1
SECTION
XIII
PS Park/Elementary School
13-1
SECTION
XIV
General Development Commitments
14-1
BOV V51PAGE 184
LIST OF EXHIBITS AND TABLES
EXHIBIT H Master Land Use Plan
(Prepared by Wilson, Miller, Barton
Peek, Inc. File No.RZ-198
TABLE I Estimated Market Absorption Schedule
TABLE II A Development Standards IRI Residential Areas
TABLE rl B Development Standards IRI Residential Areas
WK P51PAG[185
i i
SECTION I
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND OWNERSHIP
1.01 INTRODUCTION, LOCATION AND PURPOSE
It is the intent of Lely Development Corporation
(hereinafter called "applicant or developer") to develop A
Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) on approximately 2892.5
acres of property located in Collier County, Florida. The
subject property is generally bordered on the west by Lely
4 Estates, on the north by CR 864 (Rattlesnake Hammock
Road), on the east by CR 951 (isle of Capri Road), and on
the south by U.S. 41 (Tamiami Trail East). it is the
purpose of this document to establish the standards and
guidelines for the future development of this property.
I
BOOK (151 PAGE 186
1-1
1.02 LEGAL DESCRIPTION
K,•.
¢'
All that part of Section 21, Township 50 South, Range 26
'
East, Collier County Florida being more particularly
F;
described as follows:
Commencing at the Northwest corner of said Section 21,
thence -along the west -line of said Section 21, South
20-58'-09" West, 50.11 feet to the South right-of-way line
of C.R. 864 (Rattlesnake Hammock Road); thence along said
right-of-way line, South 890-13'-25" East, 1596.21 feet to
the POINT OF BEGINNING of the parcel herein described:
thence c$ntinue along said right-of-way line,
South 89-13'-25" East, 1049.56 feet;
thence cSntinue along said right of -way line,
South 89-14'-25" East, 2617.27 feet to a point on the east
line of said Section 21;
thence along the east line of said Section 21, South
40-03'-03" West, 5134.63 feet to the Southeast corner of
said ,Section 21;
thence a;ong the south line of said Section 21,
North 89-28-16" West, 5166.93 feet to the Southwest corner
of said Section 21;
thence $long the west -line of said Section 21,
North 2-58'-08" East, 2187.29 feet;
thence lgaving the west line of said Section 21,
North 51-51'-57" East, 1418.70 feet;
thence northeasterly and northerly, 695.56 feet along the
arc of a circular curve concave to the northwest, having a
radius of 810.20 feet and being subtended by a chord which
bears North 27-15'-56" East, 674.39 feet;
thence North 20-39'-54" East, 2.58 feet;
thence northerly 136.03 feet along the arc of a circular
curve concave to the west, having a radius of 1390 00 feet
and being subtended by a chord which bears North 0-08'-19"
West, 135.98 felt;
thence North 87-03'-29" East, 227.18 feet;
thence North 160-18'-47" East, 890.35 feet;
thence North 18-20'-17" West, 483.06 feet to a point on the
South right-of-way line of C.R. 864 (Rattlesnake Hammock
Road) and the point of beginning of the parcel herein
.
described:
Continued on next page
�r
aooK V,51 PACE 187
1-2
Continued from previous page
AND
`.
Section
22, Township
50 South, Range 26 Fast, less and
except
the North 1/2
of the Northwest 1/4 and less and
except
the Northeast
1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of the
Northeast
1/4, lying
west of C.R. 951, Collier County,
Florida,
AND
Section 27, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, lying west
of C.R. 951, Collier County, Florida,
AND
Section 28, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, less and
except that land as described in O.R. Book 542, page 765,
X. Collier County Public Records,
AND
That part of the East 1/2 of Section 33, Township 50
South, Range 26 East, lying north of U.S. 41, (Tamiami
Trail) Collier County, Florida,
AND
That part of Section 34, Township 50 South, Range 26 East,
rf lying west of C.R. 951, Collier County, Florida,
AND
That part of Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East,
lying North of U.S. 41, (Tamiami Trail) and west of C.R.
951, less and except a 220' x 220' lot at the intersection
of U.S. 41 (Tamiami Trail) and C.R. 951, and more
particularly described in O.R. Book 124, Page 459 of the
Public Records of Collier County, Florida.
All subject to easements and restrictions of record.
1.03 TITLE TO PROPERTY
The subject property is currently under the ownership and
control of Lely Development Corporation, Triangle
Properties Southwest, Inc., Resort Development of Collier
County, Inc., Flamingo Investment Southwest, Inc., Eagle
Consolidated, Inc. and Associated Real Estate Southwest,
Inc.
. BOOK P51 PAGi 188
1-3
I
01
I
SECTION II
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
2.01 PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to generally describe the
plan of the development and delineate the general
conditions that will apply to the project.
2.02 GENERAL PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT
Lely Resort is a planned community including a mixture of
residential use, commercial -and community -oriented
facilities, and recreational, conservation, and water
management -related elements.
2.03 COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE ORDINANCES
a. Regulations for development of Lely Resort PUD shall
be in accordance with the contents of this document,
DRI Development Order 85-3 as amended by Resolution
85-249, together with sections of the Collier County
Land Development Code and Ordinances in effect at the
time subsequent development order applications, to the
extent applicable ordinances or codes do not conflict
with or restrict development rights, development
conditions, and development mitigation contained in
this document or the Development Order. Where these
regulations fail to provide development standards, the
provisions of the most similar district in the County
Land Development Codes shall apply.
b. Unless otherwise noted, herein or in the development
order, the definitions of all terms shall be the same
as the definitions set forth in Collier County Land
Development Code in effect at the time of future
development order applications.
2.04 FRACTIONALIZATION OF TRACTS
a. When the developer sells an entire Tract or a building
parcel (fraction of a Tract) to a subsequent owner, or
proposes development of such property himself, the
developer shall provide to the Development Services
Director or his designee (hereinafter called
Development Services Director) for approval, prior to
the sale or development of such property, a boundary
2-1
BOOK F51 PAC,[ 189
M
i
M
drawing showing the tract and the building parcel
therein (when applicable) and in the case of a
residential area, the number of dwelling units of each
residential type assigned to the property and in the
case of a commercial area, the square footage assigned
to the property.
r. In the event any residential tract or building parcel
is sold by any subsequent owner, as identified in
Section 2.04(a), in fractional parts to other parties
_..:.far development, the subsequent owner shall provide to
the Development Services Director, for approval, prior
to the sale or development of a fractional part, a
boundary drawing showing his originally purchased
tract or building parcel and the fractional parts
therein and the number of dwelling units assigned to
each of the fractional parts.
The drawing shall also show
access to those fractional
public street.
the location and size of
parts that do not abut a
In the event a commercial tract or building parcel is
sold by any subsequent owner, as identified in Section
2.01(a), in fractional parts to other parties for
development, the subsequent owner shall provide to the
Development Services Director, for approval, prior to
the sale or development of a fractional part, a
boundary drawing showing his originally purchased
tract: or building parcel and the fractional parts
therein, and the commercial square footage assigned to
the property. The drawing shall also show the
location and size of access to those fractional parts
that do not abut a public street.
In evaluating the fractionalization plans the
Development Services Director's decision for approval
or denial shall be based on compliance with the
critssria and the development intent as set forth in
this document, conformance with allowable
accessibility of the fractional parts to public or
private roadways, common areas, or other means of
ingress and egress.
If approval or denial is not issued within fifteen
(15) working days, the submission shall be considered
automatically approved.
This section is intended to provide a mechanism
whereby developer, its successors and assigns, could
2-2
BOOK R51 PAGE 1.90
convey tracts or parts of tracts prior to development,
whether platted or unplatted, and assign dwelling
units or commercial square footage thereto. The
contents of this section are not intended, nor do they
alleviate, the requirement, if any, to plat any tract
or parcel created by fractionalizat•ioii prior to
physical development of said tract or parcel.
2.05 LAND USES
Land use types with approximate acreages and total
dwelling units are indicated on Exhibit "H" Master Land
Use Plan RZ-198. Changes and variations in design and
acreages shall be permitted to accommodate topography,
vegetation, and other site conditions during construction
plan and final plat approval. The specific location and
size of individual tracts and the assignment of dwelling
units thereto shall be determined at the time of Site
Development Plan approval in accordance with the Collier
County Land Development code.
:
The final size of the recreation and open space lands will
depend, on the actual requirements for water management,
golf course layout, roadway pattern, and dwelling unit
size and configuration.-
2.06 PROJECT DENSITY
The total acreage of the Lely Resort property is
approximately 2892.5 acres. The maximum number of
dwelling units to be built on the total acreage is 10,150.
The number of dwelling units per gross acre is
approximately 3.5. The density on individual parcels of
land throughout the project may vary according to the type
of housing placed on each parcel of land but shall comply
with guidelines established in this document.
2.07 PERMITTED VARIATIONS OF DWELLINGS UNITS
All properties designated for residential uses may be
developed at the maximum number of dwelling units as
assigned under Section 2.04, provided that the total
number of dwelling units shall not exceed 10,150. The
Development Services Director shall be notified in
accordance with Section 2.04 of such an increase and the
resulting reduction in the corresponding residential land
use or other categories so that the total number of
dwelling units shall not exceed 10,150. Approximately
1850 single family units and 8300 multi -family units have
2-3
BOOK P51 PACE 191
been planned. Variations from these numbers shall be
permitted provided that the maximum number of dwelling
units by type shall not vary by more than twenty (20)
percent. The maximum number of dwelling units shall
include all caretaker s units but does not include the
designated hotel rooms.
2.06 DEVELOPMENT SEQUENCE AND SCHEDULE
The applicant has not set "stages" for the development of
the property. Since the property is to be developed over
an estimated 40-year-time period, any projection of
project development can be no more than an estimate based
on current marketing knowledge. The estimate may, of
course, change depending upon future economic factors.
Table III indicates by phase, the estimated absorption of
units for the estimated 40 year development period.
Recreational facilities shall be constructed upon
completion of the corresponding phase as shown on Table
I.
2.09 PRESERVATION OF NATURAL VEGETATION AND TREE REMOVAL
Clearing, grading, earthwork, and site drainage work shall
be performed in accordance with the Development Standards
outlined in this document subject further to applicable
provisions of the Land Development Code.
2.10 EASEMENTS FOR UTILITIES
Easements shall be provided for water management areas,
utilities and other purposes as may be needed. Said
easements and improvements shall be in compliance with
Division 3.2 of the Collier County Land Development Code
in effect at the time a permit is requested or required.
All necessary easements, dedications, or other instruments
shall be granted to insure the continued operation and
maintenance with applicable regulations in effect at the
time approvals are requested.
2.11 EfXCEPTIONS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
The following requirements shall be waived:
a. Division 3.2, Section 3.2.8.4.1. of the Land
Development Code: Access. The Development Services
Director may approve minor relocation of proposed
access points as shown on the P.U.D. Master Plan.
Additional access points shall be subject to the
2-4
600K PAGE 192
approval of the Collier County Planning Commission.
The petitioner shall submit an access plan to Project
` Rev;.ev Services for review prior to the CCPC Hearing.
b. Division 3.2, Section 3.2.8.4.16.5. of the Land
Devi-lcpment Ccde I Screet Pavement Widths (Waive
requirements for local roads to ave two (2) twelve
foot lanes, subject to the approval of the County
Engineer.
c. Division 3.2, Section 3.2.8.4.16.6. of the Land
Development Code: Dead End Streets. (Waive
requirements that cul a sac streets sha not exceed
one thousand (1,000) feet in length.)
d. Division 3.2, Section 3.2.8.4.16.8. of the Land
Development Code: Curb Radii (Reduce requirements
from forty (401) foot radii to thirty (301) foot
radius at local to local road and local to minor
collector road intersections only).
e. Division 3.2, Section 3.2.8.4.16.9. of the Land
Development Code: Intersections requiring curved
streets to have a minimum tangent of 75 feet at
intersections.
2.12 LAKE SITING
As depicted on Exhibit H, Master Land Plan (RZ-198), lakes
and natural retention areas have been sited adjacent to
existing and planned roadways. The goals of this are to
achieve an overall aesthetic character for the project, to
permit optimum use of the land, and to increase the
efficiency of the water management network. Accordingly,
the setback requirements described in Division 3.5. of the
Land Development Code may be reduced with the approval of
the County Engineer. Fill material from lakes is planned
to be utilized off -site, subject to the provisions of the
excavation ordinance in effect at the time permits are
sought.
2.13 ROADS
Major and minor collector roads indicated on the Master
Plan will be public roads. Local roads within the
development may be either public or private roads,
depending on location, capacity, and design.
�51 193
BOU PbGE
tir r�:• .
2-5
2.14 SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL
The provisions of Division 3.3 of the Land Development
code shall apply to all projects requiring Site
Development Plan approval.
a. In the case of clustered buildings and/or zero lot
line with common architectural theme, or non-
residential uses listed in Section 3.06, required
property development regulations may be waived or
reduced provided a site plan is approved under
Division 3.3 of the Land Development Code.
2.15 MODEL HOMES AND MODEL UNITS
Model Homes and units shall be permitted in conjunction
with the promotion of the development subject to the
following:
a. Models may be constructed prior to approval of a plat.
b. Models permitted as "dry" models (which have no water
and sewer connections) must obtain a conditional
certificate of occupancy for model purposes only.
"Wet" models (which have utilities connections) may
not be occupied until a permanent certificate of
occupancy is issued.
C. "Wet" models utilized as "sales offices" must obtain
approval by and through the Site Development Plan
(SDP) process or whatever approval process is in
effect at that time. The SDP process shall not be
required for dry models pursuant to this Section.
d. Prior to recorded plats, metes and bounds legal
descriptions shall be provided to and accepted by
Collier County as sufficient for building permit
issuance. Said metes and bounds legal descriptions
must meet proposed plat configurations and all models
constructed pursuant hereto shall conform to
applicable minimum square footages, setbacks, and the
like as set forth herein.
e. Temporary access and utility easements may be provided
in lieu of dedicated right-of-ways for temporary
service to model homes or units.
f. Sales, marketing, and administrative functions are
permitted to occur in designated "wet" model homes or
a-:
units within the project only as provided herein.
2-6
600( 051 nu 194
9. The "wet" model may be served by a temporary utility
system with ultimate connection to the central system.
Interim fire protection facilities in accordance with
NFPA requirements are required unless a permanent
water s-stem is available. A water management plan
must be provided which accommodates the runoff from
the model home, parking, access road/driveway and
other impervious surface. The system shall be
designed and constructed so that it is integrated with
the master system for the entire development.
2.16
SALES CENTERS
a. "Sales Centers" may be constructed prior to recording
of a plat. "Sales Centers" may be serviced by a
temporary utility system (i.e. dry well and septic
tank/drainfield) prior to availability of central
utility systems at which time connection to the
central system will be made. Interim fire protection
facilities, in accordance with NFPA requirements or as
approved by the appropriate fire district are required
unless a permanent water system is available to serve
the Center.
b. Review and approval of "Sales Centers" shall follow
the requirements of the Zoning ordinance in effect at
that time. A metes and bounds legal description shall
be -provided as part of the application. Access to the
"Sales Center" shall be provided by a paved road or
temporary driveway which meets applicable County
standards as determined by the Development Services
Director. A water management plan must be provided
which accommodates the runoff from the "Sales Center",
the required parking and access road/driveway and any
other impervious surfaces. The system shall be
designed to fit in with the master water management
system for the -entire development.
4
tOOK C51 PAGJ95
2-7
m
m
}�
\�
}!
t�\
26
+w
�
/ \
i
=Et7 RESOD COMMUNITY
LAND USE sur.MARY
Refer to Exhibit H
Master Land Use Plan RZ-I§eh
BOOK P,3IPc�l12O
2-a
Pw ..
m
ESTIMATED MARKET ABSORPTION SCHEDULE
TABLE I
4
PLESMEN7.
CONMER.
GC
EC
RC
cc
PHASE
YEAR
UNITS
SQ. Fr.
HO.
STUDENTS
HOTEL PNIS
SEATNO
1985
264
3,600
is
1990
II
1991 -
1328
300,400
36
364
350 Rooms
1995
m i
1996
996-
1482
56,000
736
1850
2000
W
2001-
1526
2005
v
2006-
1250
90,000
1400
2010
V1
2011-
1300
100,000
2015
VIE
2016-
1500
135,000
2020
Nm
2021-
ISDO
135,ODO
2OZ
TOTALS
1 7
40
10,150
820,0DO
54
2500
35C Rooms
F315,000
1850
1
_ _ _
15,( S.F.
I
315,000 SF of hotel commercial space is included
2-9
b I OCK V51PAGA97
=I
�J
�a
:4
t
1
t
/S
t�
f•
3.01 PURPOSE
SECTION III
'R' RESIDENTIAL LAND USE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the
regulations for the areas designated on Exhibit 'H' Master
Land Use Plan RZ-198 as 'R'. _
3.02 MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS
A maximum number of 10,150 dwellings units may be
-- -.constructed on lands designated as 'R' except as permitted
by Section 2.07.
:r
3:03 GENERAL DESCRIPTION
Areas designated as 'R' on the Master Land Use Plan
approximately total 1171.0 acres and 'are designed to
accommodate a full range of residential dwelling types,
- recreational facilities, essential services, customary
accessory uses, and compatible land uses such as
religious, governmental, and educational facilities
-'--"" provided —•such uses meet the development standards as set
forth in this document.
Approximate acreages of all residential tracts have been
indicated on the P.U.D. Master Plan, in order to indicate
relative size and distribution of the residential uses.
These acreages are based on conceptual designs and must be
considered to be approximate. Actual acreages of all
development tracts will be provided at the time of
fractionalization in accordance with Section 2.04.
Residential tracts are designed to accommodate internal
roadways.
3.04 PERMITTED PRINCIPAL USES AND STRUCTURES
1) Single family detached conventional
2) Patio and zero lot line
3) Single family attached and townhouses
4) villas, and garden apartments/condominiums
5) Midrise apartments/condominiums
3-1
600K P-51 PAS! 19 '
i
-tip.;.
A?
4
_
�jAT>�
3.0 5
3.06
PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES
1) Accessory uses and structures customarily associated
with uses permitted in this district
2) Essential services and facilities
PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES REQUIRING DEVELOPMENT PLAN
APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 2.14(a)
1) Religious facilities
2) Civic and cultural facilities
3) Educational facilities
4) Private clubs
5) Child care centers - owner occupied
6) Rest homes, foster homes, rehabilitation center,
hospices, adult congregate living facilities
7) other non-residential uses customary in residential
districts
8) A' welcome 'center facility to encompass sales,
marketing and project administrative functions. The
welcome center facility shall be removed or converted
to an -allowable use as listed in Section 3.04, 3.05,
3.06, 1) thru 7, at such time as 60% of allowable
residential units have been developed within the Lely,
A Resort Community PUD. (Note: The Lely, A Resort
Community PUD is restricted to one such welcome center
at any given time.)
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Tables II A and B set forth the development standards for
land uses within the 'R' Residential District.
Site development standards for category 1, 2, and 3 uses
apply to individual dwelling unit parcels. Standards for
category 4, 5, and 6 uses apply to fractionalization
parcel boundaries in accordance with Section 2.04 of this
document.
Front yard setbacks shall be measured as follows:
1) If the parcel is served by a public right-of-way,
3-2
BOOK f151 PAGE 199
I
N
a�A
setback is measured from the adjacent right-of-way
line.
2) If the parcel is served by a private road, setback is
measured from the back of curb or edge of pavement
whichever is closer.
standards for parking, landscaping, signs and other land
uses not 'specified herein are to be in accordance with
Collier County Land Development Code in effect at the time
permits are requested. Unless otherwise indicated,
setback, heights, and floor area standards apply to
principal structures.
3-3
BOOK r:51 PAGE 200
a
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
'R' RESIDENTIAL AREAS
TABLE II A
PERN=7ED USES
STANDARDS
SINGLE
FAMILY
DETACHED
SINGLE
FAMILY
ATTACHED
PATIO &
CLUSTER
HOMES
TOWN
HOUSE
GARDEN
APT.
MIDRLSE
APT.
Category
1
2
3
4
5
6
Minimum Site Area
9000 SF
6000 SF
3000 SF
1 AC
I AC
I AC
Site Width Min. Avg.
75
50
50
150
150
I50
Site Dcpth Min. Avg.
120
120
60
150
200
200
Prom Yard Suback
30
30
20
30
30 or BH
30 or BH
Side Yard Setback
10
0 or 10
0 or 10
15
20
20
Lakc Setback (Cannot)
20
20
0
20
20
20.
Rear Yard Setback
20
20
10
20
BE
BH
Rear Yard Setback
Accessory
10
10
0
10
10
10
Maximum Building
Height Slone Above
Puking
2
2
2
3
4
6
Distttace Between
Principal Strucatres
20
0 or 10
0 or 10
.5 SBH
.5 SBH
.5 SBH
Floor Area Min. (SF.)
1200
1000
750
1000
1000
750
SITE DEFIV AVERAGE• Determined by dividing the site arts by the site width
SITE WIDTH: The t crwge dimmer bcrw•een straight Iiau connecting front wad may pucel limes at urb ride of the site, mcasnred as straight tines between the foremast
points of the tide p.rccl lines in the ftoat (at the point of iaterteciam with the front parcel line) nd the rearmost point of the parcel limes at the tw (point of intersection
with the teat paced line).
SBH: (Sum of Building Heigbu): Combined height of two adjacent buildings for the purpose of drurta_ g uaback scgvirtmenu.
avow P51 PAGE 201
3.4
3,
2/23,92-01010005P1P
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
'R' RESIDENTIAL AREAS
TABLE it B
Vn c a ride or rear yard is adjacent to a Lake, the lake bank setback ,hall govem, and the aide yard tesbadk shall be waived.
SrM DF7M AVERAGE Daar>mned by dividing the site area by the rite width
SRE WMTH: The avers fe distance beaweess ani& lines cooneaing front sad tear parcel lima at each tide of the rite, measured ae rtr;i gbt lines bat ceo the forcm
points of the aide parcel Tina in the front (at the point of intersection with the front parcel line) and the rearmost point of the parcel lines a the tear (point of inItsseQ
with the rear Pared line).
SHH: (Sum of Building Hcighu): Combmod haght of two adjacent buildings for the purpose of determining setback requirrmrnts.
f 1713N2A101000SPtl
BOOK V51 PAGE 2Q2
i
t
SECTION IV
C-1 COMMERCIAL/COMMUNITY
4.01 _..PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is ' to set forth the
regulations. for the areas designated on Exhibit 'HI,
Master Land Use Plan RZ-198 as C-1. The C-1 tract is
intended to- provide for a broad range of community
oriented commercial uses to serve residents of the Lely
development and the surrounding area. The types of uses
anticipated include general retail, professional and
business offices, shopping centers and highway oriented
facilities.
4.02 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be
erected, altered or used, or land or water used, in whole
__or..in... part,_for_other than the following: _
A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures
1) Antique 'shops; appliance stores; art studios; art
- supply shops; automobile parts stores; automobile
service stations, awning shops.
2) Bakery shops; bait and tackle shops; banks and
financial institutions; barber and beauty shops;
bath supply stores; bicycle sales and services;
blueprint shops; bookbinders; book stores;
business machine services.
3) Carpet and floor covering sales - which may
include storage and installation; churches and
other places of worship; clothing stores; cocktail
lounges; commercial recreation uses, commercial
schools; confectionery and candy stores; childcare
centers.
4) Delicatessens; department stores; drug stores; dry
cleaning shops; dry goods stores; and drapery
shops.
S) Electrical supply stores; equipment rentals.
`, : 4-1 BOOK �'51 PAGE 203
6) Fish market - retail only; florist shops;
fraternal and social clubs; funeral homes;
furniture stares; furrier shops.
7) Garden supply stores - outside display in side and
rear yards; gift shops; glass and mirror sales -
including storage and installation; gourmet shops.
8) Hardware stores; hat cleaning and blocking; health
food stores; homes for the aged; hospitals and
hospices; hotels and motels.
9) Ice cream stores.
10) Jewelry stores.
11) Laundries - self service only; leather goods;
legitimate theaters; liquor stores; locksmiths.
12) Markets - food; markets - meat; medical offices
and clinics; millinery shops; motion picture
theaters; museums; music stores.
13) New car dealerships - outside display permitted;
news stores.
14) Office - general; office supply stores.
15) Paint and wallpaper stores; pet shops; pet supply
shops; photographic equipment stores; pottery
stores; printing; publishing and mimeograph
service shops; private clubs; professional
offices.
16) Radio and television sales and services; research
and design labs; rest homes; restaurants.
17) Shoe repair; shoe stores; shopping centers;
souvenir stores; stationery stores; supermarkets
and sanitoriums.
18) Tailor shops; taxidermists; tile sales - ceramic
tile; tobacco shops; toy shops; tropical fish
stores.
19) Upholstery shops.
20) Variety stores; vehicle rental - automobiles only;
veterinarian offices and clinics - no outside
kennels.
4-2
BDDK A511 PAGE 204
21) Watch and precision instrument repair shops.
22) Water management facilities and essential
services.
23) Any ether commercial use or professional service
which is comparable in nature with the foregoing
uses and which the Development Services Director
determines to be compatible in the district.
B) Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures
1) Accessory uses and structures customarily
associated with the uses permitted in this
district.
2) Caretaker's residence.
4.03 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
1) Minimum Site Area: As approved under Section 2.04
2) Minimum Site Width: As approved under Section 2.04
3) Minimum Yard Requirements from parcel boundaries:
Twenty-five (25) feet plus one (1) foot for each
two (2) feet of building height over fifty (50)
feet.
4) Distance between principal structures - None, or a
minimum of five (5) feet with unobstructed passage
from front to rear yard.
5) Maximum Height of Structure: one hundred (100) feet
above the finished grade of the site.
6) minimum Floor Area of Principal Structures: One
thousand (1,000) square feet per building on the
ground floor.
7) Minimum standards for signs, parking, lighting, and
landscaping shall be in conformance with applicable
Collier County Regulations in effect at the time
permits are sought.
4-3
4
r€1
t
5.02
p
SECTION V
C-2 COMMERCIAL/PROFESSIONAL
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the
regulations for the areas designated on Exhibit 'H',
Master Land Use Plan Rz-198, as IC-21. The C-2 tract is
intended to provide for the professional, office, and
business related needs of area residents, supplementing
the retail nature of the adjacent C-1 tract.
PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be
erected, altered or used, or land or water used, in whole
or in part, for other than the following:
A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures:
1) Business and professional offices; banks;
financial institutions.
2) Churches and other places of worship; civic and
cultural facilities; educational facilities.
3) Funeral homes.
4) Homes for the aged; hospitals; hospices and
sanitoriums, hotels and motels.
5) Medical laboratories; medical clinics; medical
offices, mortgage brokers; museums.
6) Parking garages and lots; private clubs
7) Real estate offices; research design and
development activities; restaurants; rest homes;
convalescent centers; and nursing homes.
8) Laboratories, provided that:
No odor, noise, etc., detectable to normal senses
from off the premises are generated;
All work is done within enclosed structures; and
No product is manufactured or sold, except
incidental to development activities.
5-1
BOOK 1 i51 PAGC 2UU
5.03
I
9) Transportation, communication and utility offices
- not including storage or equipment.
10) Water management facilities and essential
services.
11) Any other commercial use or professional service
which is comparable in nature with the foregoing
uses and which the Development Services Director
determines to be compatible in the district.
a Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures:
1) Accessory uses and structures customarily
associated with uses permitted in this district.
2) Caretaker's residence.
nr�trr now�rwim rmwwrrwone .
1) Minimum Site Area: As approved under Section 2.04
2) Minimum Site Width: As approved under Section 2.04
3) Minimum Yard Requirements from parcel boundaries:
Thirty (30) feet
4) Maximum Height of Structures: Fifty (50) feet above
the finished grade of the site, plus ten (10) feet for
under building parking.
5) Minimum Floor Area of Principal Structures:
One thousand (1,000) square feet per building on
ground floor.
6) Minimum Distance Between Principal Structures; 30' or
1/2 the sum of the building heights, whichever is
greater.
7) Minimum standards for signs, parking, lighting, and
landscaping shall conform with applicable Collier
County Regulations in effect at the time permits are
sought.
5-2
soot (151 PAGE 207
6.02
SECTION VI
C-3 COMMERCIAL/NEIGHBORHOOD
FURPCSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the regulations
for the areas designated on Exhibit 'H', Master Land Use
Plan RZ-198, as 'C-31. The C-3 tract's are intended to
provide residents with conveniently located commercial
facilities and services that are typically required on a
regular basis.
PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES
No •building or structure, or part thereof, shall be
erected, altered or used, or land or water used, in whole
or in part, for other than the following:
A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures
1) Antique shops; appliance stores; art studios; art
supplies; automobile parts stores; automobile
service stations.
2) Bakery shops; banks and financial institutions;
barber and beauty shops; bath supply stores; blue
print shops; bicycle sales and services; book
stores.
3) Carpet and floor covering sales (including storage
and installation) child care centers; churches and
other places of worship; clothing stores;
confectionary and candy stores.
4) Delicatessen, drug stores; dry cleaning shops; dry
goods stores and department stores.
5) Electrical supply stores.
6) Fish stores; florist shops; food markets; furniture
stores; furrier shops and fast food restaurants.
7) Gift shops; gourmet shops.
8) Hardware stores; health food stores; hobby supply
stores; homes for the aged; hospitals and hospices.
9) Ice cream stores; ice sales; interior decorating
showrooms.
6-1 600K ' ,51 PAGE 208
X
rt:
6.03
�a
10) Jewelry stores.
11) Laundries - self-service; leather goods and luggage
stores; locksmiths and liquor stores.
i2) meat market; medical office er clinic for human.
care; millinery shops; music stores.
13) Office (retail or professional); office supply
stores.
14) Paint and wallpaper stores; pet shops; pet supply
stores; photographic equipment stores; post office.
15) Radio -and television sales and service; small
appliance stores; shoe sales and repairs;
restaurants.
16) Souvenir stores; stationery stores; supermarkets
and sanitoriums.
17) Tailor shops; tobacco shops; toy shops; tropical
fish stores.
18) Variety stores; veterinary offices and clinics (no
outside kenneling).
19) Watch and precision instrument sales and repair.
20) Water management facilities and essential services.
21) Any other commercial use or professional service
which is comparable in nature with the foregoing
uses and which the Development Services Director
determines to be compatible in the district.
B) PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES:
1) Accessory uses and structures customarily
associated with the uses permitted in this
district.
2) Caretaker's residence.
1) Minimum Site Area: As approved under Section 2.04
2) Minimum Site width: As approved under Section 2.04
6-2
book 051 PAG` 209
14.4"
5:-1:
3) Minimum Yard Requirements from parcel boundaries:
Abutting non-residential areas: Twenty five (25)
feet
Abutting residential areas: Thirty (35) feet in
which an appropriately designed and landscaped
buffer shall be provided, as determined under
Section 2.14.
4) Distance between principal structures: None, or a
minimum five (5) feet with unobstructed passage from
front yard to rear yard.
5) Maximum Height of Structures: Fifty (50) feet above the
finished grade of the site.
6) Minimum Floor Area of Principal Structures: One
thousand (1,000) square feet per building on the ground
floor.
7) Minimum standards for signs, parking, lighting, and
landscaping shall be in conformance with applicable
Collier County regulations in effect at the time
permits are sought.
D00K V-51 PAGE 210
6-3
f
7.02
a
e
k�.
M M
SECTION VII
'EC' EDISON COLLEGE
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the regulations
for the area designated on Exhibit 'H', Master Land Use
Plan RZ-198, as 'EC'.
PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES:
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be
erected, altered, or used, or land or water used, in whole
or in part, for other than the following:
A) Permitted Principal Uses and Structures
1) All uses normally associated with a community
college campus including but not limited to:
Auditoriums, classrooms, cafeterias, gymnasiums,
laboratories, lecture halls, libraries, offices,
theaters, etc.
217 Water Management facilities and essential services.
B) Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures
1) Accessory uses and structures customarily
associated with principal uses permitted in this
District.
2) Caretaker's residence.
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
1) Minimum Site Area: As approved under Section 2.04
2) Minimum Site Width: As approved under Section 2.04
3) Minimum Yard Requirements:
50, from all 'EC' tract boundaries for principal
structures, 20' from lake banks
4) Maximum Height: 100'
7-1 bask (151PAG�211
5) Minimum Floor Area of Principal Structures:
One thousand (1,000) square feet per building on
the first habitable flonr
6) Distance between principal structures:
1/2 the sum of the building heights or 301,
whichever is greater.
7) Minimum standards for signs, parking, lighting, and
landscaping shall be in conformance with applicable
Collier County regulations in effect at the time
permits are sought.
8) Lighting facilities shall be arranged in a manner
which will protect roadways and neighboring
properties from direct glare or other interference.
BOOK ('51 PALE 212
7_2
Kr:
8.02
;
SECTION VIII
'CC' CULTURAL CENTER
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the regulations
for the areas designated on Exhibit 'H', Master Land Use
Plan RZ-198, as 'CC'.
PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES:
No building or structure or part thereof, shall be erected,
altered or used, or land or water used, in whole or in part
for other than the following:
A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures
All uses normally associated with a cultural center
including but not limited to:
1) Performing Arts Center, Theater, Auditorium,
Amphitheatre, Art Galleries, Museums, Library,
Educational facilities, other uses of similar
nature.
2) Water Management facilities and essential services.
B) Permitted Accessory Use and Structures:
1) Accessory uses customarily associated with the
principal uses permitted in this district.
2) Caretaker's residence.
3) Recreational facilities.
4) Offices, gift shops, restaurants.
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
1) Minimum Site Area: As approved under Section 2.04
2) Minimum Site Width: As approved under Section 2.04
8-1
took f151 PAGE 213
N'•t
3) Minimum Yard Requirements:
50' from all 'CC' tract boundaries for principal
structures.
20' from lake banks
4) Maximum height: 100,
5) Minimum Floor Area of Principal Structures: One
thousand (1,000) square feet per building on the
first habitable floor.
6) Distance between principal structures: 1/2 the sum
_ _.._..-. of the building heights or 301, whichever is
greater.
7) Minimum standards for signs, parking, lighting, and
landscaping shall be in conformance with applicable
Collier County regulations in effect at the time
permits are sought.
8) Lighting facilities shall be arranged in a manner
which will protect roadways and neighboring
properties from direct glare or other interference.
8-2 600K P51 PAG[ 214
f
9.02
SECTION IX
'RC' RESORT CENTER
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the regulations
for the areas designated on Exhibit 'H', Master Land Use
Plan RZ-198, as 'RC'. The Resort Center tract is intended
to provide a mix of uses including 350 transient lodging
rooms, 315,000 square feet of related commercial space
such as conference facilities, restaurants, and shops;
recreational facilities such as tennis courts, clubhouses,
and outdoor activities; and related residential uses.
PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected
altered, or used or land or water used, in whole or in
part, for other than the following:
A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures
, 1), Hotel, motel, and transient lodging facilities.
2) Clubhouse, convention facilities.
3) Tennis and health clubs.
4) Recreational facilities.
5) Cluster and multi —family residential uses in
accordance with Section III of this document,
including interval ownership facilities.
6) Restaurants and lounges.
7) Retail commercial uses, specialty shops.
8) Water Management facilities and essential services.
9) Other uses of a similar nature to those described
above.
B) Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures
1) Accessory uses customarily associated with the
principal uses permitted in this district.
2) Caretaker's residence.
9-1
BOOK r:51 PAGi 215
15
4'
rtp,
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
1) Minimum Site Area: As approved under Section 2.04
2) Minimum Site Width: As approved under Section 2.04
3) Minimum Yard Requirements:
50, from all RC tract boundaries for principal
structures
20' from lake banks
4) Maximum Height: 100,
5) Minimum Floor Area of Principal Structures:
One thousand (1,000) square feet per building on the
— first habitable floor.
6) Distance between principal structures:
1/2 the sum of the building heights or 301, whichever
is greater
7) Minimum standards for signs, parking, lighting, and
landscaping shall be in conformance with applicable
Collier County regulations in effect at the time
permits are sought.
8) Lighting facilities shall be arranged in a manner which
will protect roadways and neighboring properties from
direct glare or other interference.
9-2
r
BOOK P51 PAGE 216
q
Mf,
__. ___ SECTION X
+.,
'GC' GOLF COURSE
'i
10:01
PUP.PGSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the regulations
for the areas designated on Exhibit 'H' Master
Land Use
<i
Plan RZ-198, as 'GC'.
10.02
PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES
No building or structure, or part thereof,
shall be
erected, altered or used, or land or water used,
in whole
or in part, for other than the following:
A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures
1) Golf Course
2) Water management facilities and essential
services.
B. Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures
Accessory uses customarily associated with principal
uses permitted in this district including but not
limited to:
1) Clubhouses, pro -shop, practice driving range and
other customary accessory uses of golf courses, or
other recreational facilities.
2) Small commercial establishments, including gift
shops, golf equipment sales, restaurants, cocktail
lounges, and similar uses, intended to exclusively
serve patrons of the golf course or other permitted
recreational facilities, subject to the provisions
of the applicable supplementary regulations of the
Land Development Code of Collier County.
3) Shuffleboard courts, tennis courts, swimming pools,
and other types of facilities intended for outdoor
recreation.
4) A maximum of two (2) residential units in
conjunction with the operation of each golf course.
5) A welcome center facility to encompass sales,
marketing and project administrative functions.
The welcome center facility shall be removed or
converted to an allowable use as listed in Section
10-1
DOOK a1 PAGE 217
10.02.E 1) thru 4) at such time as 80% of the
allowable residential units have been developed
within the Lely, A Resort Community PUD.
(Note: The Lely, A Resort Community PUD is
restricted to one such welcome center at any given
`3 time.)
10.03 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
1) Overall site design shall be harmonious in terms of
landscaping, enclosure of structures, location of
"access streets and parking areas and location and
treatment of buffer areas.
2) Buildings shall be set back a minimum of thirty
(30) feet from abutting residential districts and
an appropriately landscaped and maintained buffer
zone shall be provided.
3) Lighting facilities shall be arranged in a manner
which will protect roadways and neighboring
properties from direct glare or other interference.
4) Maximum Height of Structures:
Fifty (50) feet.
5) Minimum distance between principal structures:
1/2 the sum of the building heights or 301,
whichever is greater.
f 6) Minimum standards for parking, lighting, signs, and
landscaping shall conform with applicable Collier
County Regulations in effect at the time permits
are sought.
f ,
.s
WK P-51 PAU 218
10-2
11.02
SECTION xI
'CO' CONSERVATION/OPEN SPACE
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the regulations
for -.the areas designated on Exhibit 'HI, Master Land Use
Plan RZ=198, as 'CO'.
PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be
erected, altered or used, or land or water used, in whole
or in part,. for other than the following:
1) Passive Parks. Active Parks only in development areas
approved under 11.02 7).
2) Biking, hiking, canoeing, and nature trails.
,
3) Equestrian paths.
4) Wildlife sanctuary.
5) Water management' facilities, lakes, and impoundment
area,_ subject to further review by Collier County
Project Review Services Environmental Staff to ensure
that -water management facilities do not degrade the
vegetation or hydroperiod on the conservation/open
space areas.
6) Recreational shelters and restrooms upon review and
approval of Collier County Project Review Services.
7) Residential land uses as listed in Section 3.04 and
governed by development standards as shown in Table II
A s B and providing the following criteria are met:
a) The project density as listed in Section 2.06 shall
not be increased.
b) The maximum developed area in all 'CO' areas shall
not exceed 20% of the total and shall be contiguous
to existing approved development areas.
c) Every effort shall be made to protect the floral
character of the 'CO' areas; landscaping shall
consist exclusively of native species.
11-1
000K P51 PAGE 219
h3;
i;
.x
^f
.4
i d) All runoff from developed area shall be pre-treated
prior to discharge into surrounding natural water
management areas.
}
e) Clearing shall be permitted only in those areas
specifically required to facilitate the residential
clusters, and shall be limited as much as possible.
8) Any other open space activity or use which is similar
in nature with the foregoing uses and which the
Development Services Director determines to be
compatible -with -the intent of this district.
11.03 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
s,
1) Overall site design shall be harmonious with the areas
natural ecological characteristics in terms of
landscaping, enclosure of structures, location of
access streets, parking areas, and location and
treatment of buffer areas as determined by the Collier
County Development Services Director.
2) Development standards as listed in Table II A & B in
Section III shall apply to permitted residential uses.
3) All work proposed in or directly impacting conservation
areas designated on the Master Plan shall be reviewed
and approved by the Development Services Director prior
to the commencement of any such activity.
600K ' 5l PAGE 2,20
11-2
SECTION XII
'PR' CYPRESS PRESERVE
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the regulations
for the areas designated on Exhibit 'H', Master Land Use
Plan RZ-198, as 'PR'.
PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be
erected, altered or used, or land or water used, in whole
or in part, for other than the following:
1) Environmental preservation.
2) Foot paths, boardwalks, and nature trails.
3) Wildlife management sanctuary.
4) Water management facilities and essential services,
subject to further review by Collier County Project
Review Services Environmental Staff to ensure that
water management facilities do not degrade the
vegetation or hydroperiod on the Cypress Preserve
areas.
5) Any other preservation or open space activity or use
which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses
and which the Development Services Director determines
to be compatible with the intent of this district.
12.03 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
;.z;. 1) All work proposed in or directly impacting preservation
areas designated on the Master Plan shall be reviewed
y? and approved by the Development Services Director prior
to the commencement of any such activity.
12-1
boot FU PAGE M
MM
¢♦
Y.'
F_.
SECTION XIII
'PS' PARK/SCHOOL
;y
+�
13.01
PURPOSE
`_:•
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the regulations
�-
for the areas designated on Exhibit 'H', Master Land Use
Plan RZ-198, as 'PS'.
The PS- site includes 17 acres reserved for use of an
elementary school site and 5 acres to be used for a
neighborhood park facilities. The 5 acres of undesignated
land reserved for community use referred to in the DRI/ADA
document will be applied to this site.
13.02
PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be
erected, altered or used, or land or water used, in whole
or in part, for other than the following:
1) Elementary school and facilities.
2) Parks and playgrounds.
3) Bicycle, hiking and nature trails.
4) Recreational shelters and restrooms.
5) Recreational fields, sports facilities and courts.
i
6) Community centers.
7) Restaurant or snack bar in conjunction with
recreational activities.
8) Water management facilities and essential services.
9) Any other recreational, athletic, or open space
activity or use which is comparable in nature with the
foregoing uses and which the Development Services
Director determines to be compatible with the intent of
this district.
.AP
>'
�?
13-1
C51PAGI
°`
boor
$now M M
S �y:
13.03
DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS
1)
Minimum
Site Area: None
2)
Minimum
Setback from 'PS' Tract Boundaries:
25'
3)
Maximum
Haight of Structures: 35'
4)
Minimum
Distance Between Buildings: 1/2
the sum of
their heights.
5)
Minimum
standards for parking, lighting,
signs, and
landscaping shall conform with applicable Collier
County
Regulations in effect at the time
permits are
sought.
41
q•`r
��
r
Sig,
j
t``o'
t
L 1
l'
(t.
yL.
BOOK (?51 PA�t 223
13-2
J'
.. �e• yY
L.
�i
e;
a
,i
SECTION XIV
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS
14.01 PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the general
development commitments for the project.
14.02 DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS
A. ENERGY
1) Construction shall comply with applicable local and
state energy codes.
2) Reasonable "good faith" efforts to utilize
state-of-the-art energy conservation techniques
shall be made where practically and economically
feasible. Such techniques may include, but shall
not be limited to the following:
a. Provision of bicycle racks and/or storage
facilities in office and commercial areas and
in multi -family residential areas.
b. Cooperation in the locating of bus stops,
shelters and other passenger and system
accommodations when a transit system is
developed to serve the project area.
c. Use of energy -efficient features in window
design (e.g., shading and tinting).
d. Use of operable windows and ceiling fan.
e. Installation of energy -efficient appliances and
equipment.
f. Reduced coverage by asphalt, concrete, rock and
similar substances in streets, parking lots and
other areas to reduce local air temperatures
and reflected light and heat.
g. Installation of energy -efficient lighting for
streets, parking areas, recreation areas and
other interior and exterior public areas.
14-1
600K V51 PAGE 224
h. Selection of native plants, trees and other
vegetation and landscape design features that
reduce requirements for water, fertilizer,
maintenance and other needs.
i. Plantinq or retention of native shade trees to
provide reasonable shade for dll recreation
areas, streets and parking areas.
j. Placement of trees to provide needed shade in
the warmer months while not overly reducing the
benefits of sunlight in the cooler months.
k. Planting or retention of native shade trees for
each residential unit.
1. Orientation for structures, as possible, to
reduce solar heat gain by walls and to utilize
natural cooling effects of the wind.
M. Provision for structural shading (e.g.,
trellises, awnings and roof overhangs) wherever
practical when natural shading cannot be used
effectively.
n. Inclusion of porch/patio areas in residential
units.
3) Deed restrictions and other mechanisms shall not
prohibit or prevent the use of alternative energy
devices such as solar collectors (except when
necessary to protect the public health, safety and
welfare).
B. AIR QUALITY
1) The developer shall comply with applicable codes
and apply for required permits relative to air
quality, where such permits are required.
C. TRANSPORTATION
1) Lely, a Resort Community, shall commit to
contributing its pro-rata or fair share
contribution to the costs of improving local
transportation facilities, when such improvements
are deemed to be necessary, based on Lely Resort
Community's proportionate impact on such
facilities, as part of an area wide funding
program, including, but not limited to, impact
lA-2
BOOK VK wE 225
G.�
4 fees, special taxing districts, etc. Any
-Y
donations, dedications, or other required
contributions made by the project sponsors to the
County's Transportation facilities shall be
credited towards future peoportional sharc
assessments levied against the project, except for
right-of-way dedications listed undsr 8) below.
2) Provision of a bicycle/pedestrian system connecting
all land uses, to be placed along all major and
minor collectors within the project. This system
is to be consistent with Collier County
requirements.
3) Unless four laning has been completed or is about
to begin, the developer shall provide separate left
and right turn lanes at all accesses along
Rattlesnake Hammock Road and isles of Capri Road.
4) The developer shall provide a fair share
contribution toward the capital cost of traffic
signals at accesses to Rattlesnake Hammock Road,
Isles of Capri Road and Tamiami Trail when deemed
warranted by the County Engineer. The signals
shall be owned, operated and maintained by Collier
County.
5) The developer shall bear the full cost of all
traffic signals which may become needed at the
intersections within the project.
6) The developer shall provide or reimburse the County
for sidewalk/bikepaths along all perimeter roads to
be phased to correspond with the development phases
and future road widening plans, unless such
improvements are incorporated into design plans
and/or alternative funding methods are available,
such as road impact fees.
7) The developer shall provide arterial level street
lighting at all accesses. The operating and
maintenance costs of these units will be assumed by
the County at such time as street lighting systems
are established along the roads involved.
8) The developer shall dedicate 17.5 feet of
additional right-of-way along the south side of
Rattlesnake Hammock Road and 25 feet of additional
right-of-way along the west side of Isles of Capri
road for future roadway widening. This shall be
14-3
w
aonK VM PAGE 226
a
V
I
done at the convenience of the developer or when
requested by the County, whichever occurs first.
9)
The County Transportation Department and the
developer shall reach agreement regarding
alignments and intersection configurations at the
time of re-examination. Improvements shall be
consistent with good design practices and
transportation planning principles and the long-
range planning needs of the County,
D. WATER MANAGEMENT
1)
Detailed water management construction plans shall
be submitted for approval to the Development
Services Director prior to commencement of
construction.
2)
Surface Water Management Permits shall be obtained
from the South Florida Water Management District
prior to the commencement of development.
3)
The water management for the Lely Resort Community
shall implement water quality "best management
practices" to the extent possible.
4')
Water quality will be provided for the development
in the lake system in accordance with South Florida
Water Management District's current permitting
regulations.
5)
An Excavation Permit will be required for the
proposed lakes in accordance with Collier County
Land Development Code, Division 3.5
6)
Contingent upon acquiring appropriate permits,
developer shall be responsible for the following
along its entire U. S. 41 frontage:
1. Construct necessary improvements to the
borrow canal along the northerly side of U.S.
41.
7)
During Phase I, developer shall be responsible for
the following along Rattlesnake Hammock Road:
a. Clean -out of the two crossings under the road
near .the N 1/4 post of Section 21, Township
50 South, Range 26 East.
14-4
600k V51 PAGE 227
`v
,e
LL
•c�
;s
i
t
b. improvements to the Swale along the south
side of the road along the entire development
frontage to serve as a spreader facility in
the adjoining low lying wetlands.
8) The "e-3 s 4" Canal (from northwest cornet of
Naples Manor across U.S. 41 to sufficient outlet
in wetlands in Section 3, Township 50 South,
Range 26 East) shall be subject to developer/
County negotiations at the time of involvement
with that outfall.
E. UTILITIES
1)
A central water supply system shall be made
available to all areas of the project. The water
supply source for the project shall be the Collier
County system.
2)
All areas of the project shall be served by a
central wastewater collection system.
3)
The development shall be in substantial compliance
with applicable County laws and ordinances
governing utility provisions and facilities.
4)
Telephone, power and T.V. cable service shall be
made available to the site.
5)
Utilities Division stipulations: (Per Memorandum
dated June 25, 1984 attached).
6)
A non -potable water system for irrigation purposes
will be implemented for the project utilizing
sources including renovated effluent, surface, and
ground water.
7)
Design and construction of the water and sewer
facilities must be in compliance with Ordinance
88-76, as amended.
8)
For any required subdivision improvement that is to
be constructed by the Lely Community Development
District, no subdivision performance security shall
be required under Section 3.2.9 of the County Land
Development Code.
19 - 5 (151 PAGL 228
WK
j�
, 1'. GENERAL
1). The design and development standards as describnd
f in the Lely Resort Community DRI/ADA document are
hereby incorporated by reference into this P.U.D.
ordinance.
G. ENVIRONMENTAL:
. i
1) The following table summarizes native vegetation to
be retained in the Lely Resort Community:
PR District 172.5 acres +
CO District 182.4 acres +
GC District 111.3 acres +
Subtotal 466.2 acres
NOTE: Acreages and land use districts shall be as defined
yt, in Collier County Ordinance 85-17 as amended.
An additional 45.6 acres of native vegetation shall
be retained in the CO District, until such time as
the developer elects to utilize Section 11.02(7) of
the PUD that allows for development of up to 20% of
the CO district. At that time the developer shall
demonstrate, as a condition of Final Approval from
Collier County for development of any "CO" area,
that an equivalent amount of native vegetation has
been retained elsewhere in the project (not
including platted single family lots) to compensate
for any permitted CO development acreage, up to a
total of 45.6 acres.
2) Prior to approval of any proposed development in
jurisdictional wetlands (as determined by SFWMD),
the petitioner shall submit a mitigation plan to
Collier County Project Review Services
Environmental Staff for review and approval, in
accordance with South Florida Water Management
District Appendix 7.
3) "Prior to any final approvals outside of Phase I
and the Classics Golf Course, the petitioner shall
submit protected species surveys and management
plans as required and approved by Florida Game and
Fresh Water Fish Commission."
14-6
I
Z1, .1: O. f.
500K P-51 PAGE 229
Rk' J
t
4) Hammock areas, as identified in the DRI/ADA will be
protected with clearing permitted only in those
areas specifically required to facilitate the
residential clusters and limited as much as
possible.
5) Existing topographical control elevation in
sub -basins C-1 and A-5 shall be maintained.
�s
if.
v
a..
ln:3417
`+ 3/10/92
n.�•i
b40K P51 PAGE 230
$
14-7
1':
Y;
-R
NOT El
PER SECTION 4.C.4 Of ORDINANCE OS-S AS AMENDED CY ORDINANCE , PROTECTIVE MEASURES
NAVE BEEN IMPOSCD ON TMLS MASTER PLAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LELY RESORT COMMUNITY
PHASE III, IV, AND V CLASSICS GOLF COURSE 6 CLVBHOUSE PLATS RED -COCKADED WOODPECKER
y
MANAGEMENT PLAN, WM" IS PART OF THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA. -- .
ca �u —
►M f Pe itVol
LEGEND
t.r0 IT(.
.u[f
jC11 ItWWt.CUL/CO III.wTY
)a.0
',pit tw.�wcuL /rww[[s�o+aL
�a o
..C41 cwri.c uL/w[Nw00.wo0O
w o
rc
.CCU
12 .ilo:r .
u 0
Figc[wrn
e Gov CM+�a(ru+u •wr ...ce
.ff.6
cO.a[.v.Tro./olf N arAc[
i1a.0
•� CTI.9 Is M[.c—t
.,I')
422 At
•of f
r IAI COLL[CTM
rfw YOIO. COLI[CTO.
[a.f
aa.1a LOC4.O.0
la.f
Q OCIIC.K
[II,a
TOTAL /,Cw[:aO( NU
2l11,0
100aL uwra- ie. i so
S;f
FrOOPOSM PLAN
W-- Lw.W LA.. Pl— •.hit ft N G.esr.Irn
BOOK P51 PAG[ 231
STATE OF FLORIDA )
COUNTY Or COLLIER )
I, JAMES C. GILES, Clerk of Courts in and for the
Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Collier County, Florida, do
hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of:
Ordinance No. 92-15
which was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on
the 10th day of March, 1992, during Regular Session.
WITNESS my hand and the official seal of the Board of
County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this 17th
day of March, 1992.
s JAMES C. GILES .r s
Clerk of Courts and ClerV
Ex-officio to Board of
County Commissioners
By: /s/Ellie Hoffman
Deputy Clerk
BOOK P51PAGE232
DEVELOPMENT ORDER 92- 2
RESOLUTION NUMBER 92-166
A RESOLUTION AMENDING DEVELOPMENT ORDER
NUMBER 85-3, FOR LELY, A RESORT
COMMUNITY, AS PREVIOUSLY AMENDED BY
RESOLUTIONS 85-249 AND 91-5; BY PROVIDING
FOR: SECTION ONE A, AMENDING THE MASTER
PLAN (EXHIBIT H); SECTION ONE B, AMENDING
SECTION 2, PARAGRAPH D, LAND USE
DISTRIBUTION; SECTION ONE C, AMENDING
SECTION 4.C.4, VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE
AND SECTION 4.C.6, OTHER CONSIDERATIONS;
SECTION ONE D, AMENDING SECTION 4.D.4,
4.D.5 ANO 4.D.6, DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS;
SECTION ONE E, AMENDING SECTION 12;
SECTION TWO, FINDINGS OF FACT; SECTION
THREE, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW; AND SECTION
FOUR, EFFECT OF PREVIOUSLY ISSUED
DEVELOPMENT ORDER, TRANSMITTAL TO DCA,
AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Board Of County Commissioners of Collier County,
Florida approved Development Order 85-3, known as Lely, A resort
Community on May 21, 1985; and
WHEREP,S, the Board of County Commissioners approved Resolutions
85-249 and 91-5, which amended the Lely, A Resort Community Development
Order, on November 26, 1985 and January 8, 1991 respectively; and
WHEREAS, the Application for Development Approval (ADA) was
incorporated into and by reference made*a part of the Development
Order; and
;tHEREAs, the real property which is the subject of the Development
Order is legally described and set forth in Exhibit "A" to the
Development Order; and
WHEREAS, the owners of the DRI property are desirous of amending
the Development Order; and
WHEREAS, Alan D. Reynolds, AICP of Wilson, Miller, Barton and Peek,
Inc., representing the Lely Development Corporation, has petitioned the
Board of County Commissioners to further amend the Lely, a Resort
Community Development Order; and
WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission has reviewed and
considered the report and recommendations of the Southwest Florida
Regional Planning Council (SWFRPC) and held a publichearing on the
Petition on February 6, 1992; and HOW 051nu233
Words underlined are additions; Words struck -through are deletions.
-1-
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County has
reviewed and considered the reports of the SWFRPC and the Collier
County Planning Commission and held a public hearing on the petition on
March 10, 1992;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION ONE: AMENDMENTS:TO DEVELOPMENT ORDER:
A. Development Order 85-3, ns amended, for Lely, a Resort
Community, is hereby amended to read as follows:
The Master Land Use Plan for Lely, A Resort Community, Development
Order 85-3, as previously amended is hereby further amended to effect a
new Master Land Use Plan as shown on Exhibit H, attached hereto and
incorporated by reference herein. Master Land Use Plan, Exhibit H, as
herein referenced replaces the Master Land Use Plan made a part of the
ADA and PUD documents originally adopted.
B. Section 2, paragraph D. of Development Order 85-3, as amended
for Lely, a Resort Community is hereby amended to read as follows:
D. The applicant proposes the development of Lely, A Resort
Community, Planned Unit Development, for 2,892 acres, 10,150
residential dwelling units, a A2 58 acre resort center with
50 hotel rooms and 315 000 sf of related commercial space.
three (3) golf courses, 820,000 square feet of retail/office
space on 84 acres, a 46.5 5e acre cultural center site, and a
21.5 22 acre school site and a 44.0 acre Community College
site.
C.
Section 4, Paragraph C.4, Vegetation and Wildlife and
Paragraph
C.6, Other Considerations, of Development Order 85-3, as
amended,
for Lely, a Resort Community, is hereby amended to read as
follows:
4.
Vegetation and Wildlife
•.r� .
The applicant shall implement detailed site inspection for
rare, endangered, threatened and special concern wildlife and
plant species, with special attention to the Red -Cockaded
Woodpecker, for each phase proposed for final plat approval.
The Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission and DCA may
provide the applicant with suggested methodology and
information on plant and animal species to be inventoried.
The applicant shall notify the Florida Game and Fresh Water
d
Fish Commission and DCA of the results of the survey and the
methodology used prior to any development within that phase.
Should the survey indicate the presence of rare, endangered,
threatened and special concern species, the applicant shall
o
undertake appropriate protection measures, which measures
o
shall be approved by these agencies within thirty (30) days
of submittal by the applicant and prior to final plat
approval land any site development.
Words underlined are additions; Words strdek-through are deletions.
-2-
P-11 ..
6. Other Considerations
The Lely site plan includes a provision for a 44.0 59 acre
Community College site to be donated to Edison Community
College. The ADA indicates that the College will serve
approximately 2500 students. Chapter 27F-2, F.A.C.,
:Developments Presumed -to be of Regional Impact specifies that
any post -.secondary educational campus which provides for a
design population of 3000 full-time students or any expansion
of more than 20% of design population to an existing campus
is presumed to be a Development of Regional Impact.
D. Section 4,'Paragraph D.4, Water Management, Paragraph D.5,
Utilities, and Paragraph D. 6, Environmental Advisory Council of
Development Order 85-3, as amended, for Lely, a Resort Community, is
hereby amended to read as follows:
4. Water Management
a. Detailed water management construction plans shall be
submitted for approval to the county -Engineering
Department Development Services Director prior to
commencement of construction.
b. Surface Water Management Permits shall be obtained from
the South Florida Water Management District prior to the
commencement of development.
C. The water management for the Lely Resort Community shall
implement water quality "best management practices" to
the extent possible.
dr 'Fhe-fo}lowing-types-ef-deve}epment-will-provide-en-cite
treter-management-eyeteme-to-retain-the-ve}ume-produced
by-either-the-first-inch-of-runoff-or-the-3-year;-�-hoar
eterm-event--ahiehever-ie-greater---reoidenttal-eeee
except-typed-}--4;-and-3-{6ec-�abie-}V,�}--e-}--e-2--end
e-3-development-pareele;-Ee7-ee7-Re7-end-PS-development
paree}s-
Water duality will be provided for the development in
the lake system in accordance with SWFWMD's current
permitting regulations.
e: Water-Management-,advisory-Board-stipu}ationst
4: Beta#led-site-drainage-p}ape-ehn}}-be-enbmitted-to
lf� the-Water-Mnnngement-,�dvi3ory-Hoard-fer-review-on-e
C"' phnee-bneie-na-cut}fined-in-the-HR}T--Ho
N eonetruetion-permite-ahali-be-ieened-un}eee-end
anti-npprova}-ef-the-proposed-eonetraetion-in
t-1 accordance-with-the-enbmitted-p}ape-fie-granted-by
the-WHAB.
An Excavation Permit will be required for the
o proposed lakes in accordance with Collier County
.o Land Development Code, Division 3.5., Ordinance
Words underlined are additions; Words struek-through are deletions.
-3-
.. Ner-88-�6;-ea-amended-by-9rdinenee-Ner-83-3,--and-es
_. mny-be-emended-#n-the-future:
Beveloper-shall-cooperate-with-Eoenty-Water
Henegement-Bepnrtment-in-een+p}etien-ef-prepesed
B#ntriet-Nor-6-ue-4u-eanal-{from-UTS r-4i,--aeress
Price-street-to-the-north-line-of-£ogle-ereek
pre�eet}-by-being-responsible-for-the-following:
nr Performing -necessary -field -surveys -end
-- prepernt#en-ef-detailed-leeetion-maps-of
proposed-imprevementas
br Providing-eennty-staff-with-necessary-legal
desiri-ptionsr-or-ether-doeuments--required-by
the-Eennty-in-ita-effects-te-seenra-the
necessary-properties-nrdtor-resements-thnt
will-be-ebte#nod-nt-the-2ecsntyls-erponse-by
e#then-negot#at#ans-er-by-means-of-eminent
downier
e: enbm#ttnl-ef-necessnry-parmits-to-appreprinte
egene#es-for-the-proposed-improvements:
"� dr Preperetien-ef-detailed-construction-pines-end
apeeifieetiens-for-use-by-Eoenty-#n-the
eentreet#ng-phase-of-the-proposed-improvements
projects:
er Preparation -of -an -Agreement -between -the
developer-end-Eoenty-te-ebl#gnte-the-developer
for-48eir-ef-the-total-construction-cost-ef-the
proposed -improvements:
fr Perform#ng-necessary-f#old-inyout-surveys
during-the-construct#en-phase-of-the-prepesed
improvements-projects-and-ether-aasiatanee-to
eennty-staff-as-required-by-the-Eoenty-#n-its
ndm#n#stretien-end-inspection-of-the-eontrnets
for-the-prepesed-#mprerementsr
2, 4r Contingent upon acquiring appropriate permits,
developer shall be responsible for the following
along its entire U.S. 41
frontage:
a. Construct necessary improvements to the borrow
canal along the northerly side of U.S. 41.
3. Sr During Phase I, developer shall be responsible for
the following along Rattlesnake Hammock Road:
a. Clean -out of the two crossings under the road
near the N1/4 post of Section 21, Township 5o
South, Range 26 East.
b. Improvements to the Swale along the south side
of the road along the entire development
N frontage to serve as a spreader facility in
the adjoining low lying wetlands.
gt 6r The "B-3 & 411 Canal (from northwest corner of
�- Naples Manor across U.S. 41 to sufficient outlet in
wetlands in Section 3, Township 50 South, Range 26
East) shall be subject to developer/County
negotiations at the time of involvement with that
outfall.
Words underlined are additions; Words struck -through are deletions.
-4-
5. Utilities
a. A central water supply system shall be made available to
all areas of the project. The water supply source for
the project shall be the Collier County system.
b. All areas -of -the project shall be served by a central
wastewater collection system. end -by -a -wastewater
treatment-p}entr--'Phe-p}ant-she}}-be-expended-es
required -to -meet -the -project -demands: The wastewater
C. The development shall be in substantial compliance with
applicable County laws and ordinances governing utility
provisions and facilities.
d. Telephone,. -power and T.V. cable service shall be made
available to the site.
e. Water and Sewer
1. Central water distribution and sewage collection
and transmission- system will- be constructed
throughout the project development by the developer
pursuant to all current requirements of Collier
County and the State of Florida. The proposed
water and sewer facilities will be constructed
within easements to be dedicated to the County for
Utility purposes or within platted rights -of -way.
Upon completion of construction of water and sewer
facilities within the project, the facilities will
be tested to insure they meet Collier County's
minimum requirements at which time, they will be
dedicated to the County pursuant to appropriate
County Ordinances and Regulations in effect at the
time dedication is requested, prior to being placed
into service.
2. All construction plans and technical specifications
and proposed plats, if applicable, for the proposed
water distribution and sewage collection and
transmission facilities must be reviewed and
approved by the Utilities Division prior to
commencement of construction.
3. All customers connecting to the water distribution
and sewage collection facilities will be customers
of the County and will be billed by the County in
accordance with a rate structure and service
agreement approved by the County. Review-ef-the
proposed-rates-and-subsequent-appreva}-b7-the-Board
ef-E?ountY-8enunissieners-mast-be-comp}eted-prior-to
activation-ef-the-inter-end-serer-fee#}itics
servicing-the-proZcetr--bate:-reviews-Meet-be-in
fu}}-eetnp}lance-xith-2onnty-Ardinanees-No:-�6-4}
and-B3-�9-es-emended--revived-or-superseded:
4. It is anticipated that the County Utilities
Division will ultimately supply potable water to
meet the consumptive demand and/or receive and
treat the sewage generated by this project. Should
the county system not be in a position to supply
100K PK PAGE 237
Words underlined are additions; Words struek-through are deletions.
-5-
I
potable water to the project and/or receive the
project's wastewater at the time a phase of the
development commences, the Developer, at his
expense, or the Lely Community Development
pistrict, will install and operate interim water
supply and on -site treatment facilities and/or
interim on -site sewage treatment and disposal
facilities adequate to meet all requirements of the
appropriate regulatory agencies.
5.. -An agreement shall•be entered into between the
County and the Owner, or the Lely Community
Development District legally acceptable to the
County, stating that:
i. The proposed water supply and on -site
treatment facilities and/or on -site wastewater
treatment and disposal facilities, if
required, are to be constructed as part of the
proposed project and must be regarded as
interim; they shall be constructed to State
and Federal standards and are to be owned,
operated and maintained by the Owner, his
assigns or successors including the Community
Development District, until such time as the
County's Central Water and/or�ewer Facilities
are available to service the project. Prior
to -piecing -the -water -treatment -supply -and
distribution-nndfer-sewage-eelleetien�
transmission-nnd-treatment-fncilities-into
aerviee-the-eevelepar-shall-submit--to-the
Eeantx-fi3ti�it7-Rnte-Regn�ating-Bonrd}-for
their-review-end-npproval--e-sehednle-ef-the
rotes-to-be-eherged-for-providing-preeessed
Hater-andtor-sewage-treatment-to-the-prejeet
arenr
ii: the-proposed-dse-bY-the-belt'-Resort
Bevelopment-ef-the-existing-and-petentiellY
expandable -belt -Estates -Wastewater -Treatment
Paeility-shall-be-regarded-es-en-interim
method -of -providing -sewage -treatment -and
disposal-services-te-the-projeet: When the
County Water -Sewer District's Central Water
and/or Sewer facilities are extended to and
available to provide service to this project,
all -wastewater -generated -from the project
shall be permanently connected diverted into
the County's Central Water and/or Sewer
Facilities.
iii: upon connection to the County's Central Water
Facilities, and/or Central Sewer Facilities,
the Owner, his assigns or successors shall
abandon, dismantle and remove from the site
the interim water and/or sewage treatment
facility and discontinue use of the water
supply source, if applicable, in a manner
consistent with State of Florida standards.
All work related with this activity shall be
performed at no cost to the County.
fii.iv- Connection to the County's Central Water
and/or Sewage Facilities will be made by the
owners, their assigns or successors at no cost
to the County within 90 days after such
facilities become available.
e00K �'51 PAGE 238
Words underlined are additions; Words struek-through are deletions.
-6-
M
M
All construction plans and technical
specifications related to connections to the
County's Central Water and/or Sewer Facilities
will be.submitted to the Utilities Division
for review and approval prior to commencement
of construction.
4 r The owners, their assigns or successors shall
agree to pay all applicable system development
charges at the time that Building Permits are
required,pursuant to appropriate County
Ordinances and Regulations in effect at the
______._time _.of Permit request. This requirement
shall be made known to all prospective buyers
of properties for which building permits will
be required prior to the start of building
construction.
The County at its option may .lease for
operation and maintenance the water .
distribution and/or sewer collection and
transmission system to the project owner or
his assigns for the sum of $10.00 per year.
Terms of the lease shall be determined upon
completion of.the proposed utility
construction and prior to activation of the
water supply, treatment and distribution
facilities -and/or sewage collection,
transmission and treatment facilities.
Data required under County Ordinance No. 80-112
showing the availability of sewage service, must be
submitted and approved by the Utilities Division
prior to approval of the construction documents for
the project. Submit a copy of the approved DER
permits for the sewage collection and transmission
systems and the wastewater treatment facility to be
utilized, upon receipt thereof.
Qne3t#en-$4B-ahe##-be-mad#fled-te-refloot-only-the
inter#m-nac-of-the-be#Y-Estates-8exege-'Treatment
Fne###tY-as-a-seuree-ef-sewage-treatment-and
d#sposn�-for-the-prejeetis-wastewater-fiexsr--the
ultimate-use-ef-a-County-awned-end-maintained
treatment-and-d#spesa�-fne#�#tY-aha��-be-e�enr�Y
addressed:
within the ADA document which conflict
above stipulation shall be considered
Council Stipulations:
A-site-e#oaring-p#en-sha#�-be-submitted-te-the-Nntnra#
Reaoarees-Management-Bepartment-and-the-2onunnnity
Bevelopment-Department-far-their-review-and-apprevaI
prier-te-nn7-sabstnntia#-work-on-the-sitar--'This-p#an
may-be-submitted-in-phaoeo-to-ee#neide-with-the
development-seheduler--The-site-clearing-plan-shal}
e#enrlY-dap#et-hex-the-f#Tn�-s#t r#aYeut-#neerperates
retained -native -vegetation -to -the -maximum -extent
possible-and-hex-rends;-buildings--�nkes-parking-dots;
nnd-ether-fne#fit#es-have-been-oriented-to-neeonunednte
this-geaI7
W. T i• • _ be in
Acc9rdance with Section 3.9,6 of -the Collier County Lai;
pevelopment Code,
Words struck -through are deletions.
Native-species-shall-be-atiliaed;-where-available,--to
the-maximum-extent-possible-in-the-site-lnndaeaping
designr--l�-lnndseaping-plan-w#ll-be-submitted-te-the
Hatarel-Resoarees-management-Department-end-the
eemmunity-Bevelepment-Department-for-their-review-and
approval:--This-plan-will-dep#et-the-#neorperation-of
native-species-and-their-mix-with-other-species,--#f-onyr
the-gea}-of-site-landscaping-shall-be-the-reerention-of
native-vegetation-and-habitat-eherneteriat#es-lost-on
the-site-daring-conatrnetion-er-due-to-past-ectivit#es-
.•�.s• :... •. ..- •
�,}}-eYotie-plants--es-defined-#n-thc-Haanty-cede; shall
be-removed-dnr#r.q-eneh-phase-of-eonatraet#en-from
development-nren,e--open-apace-and-preserve-ereaos
Pel}owing-site-development-n-meintennnee-program-shall
be-#mplemented-to-prevent-re#n�nsion-ef-the-site-by-saeh
exetie-speeiear--'Phis-plan,--which-will-describe-eentrel
teehnigaes-end-#nspeetion-intervals--shell-be-filed-with
end-nppreved-by-the-Nntarnl-Resoarees-Management
Be;enrtment-and-the-eemmunity-Bevelopment-Bepartmentr
MINNTICTRIFAIN-IfICTMI-MM". we Id -VA
911MI..
lf--dur#ng-the-coarse-ef-site-clear#ng;-exenvatfen;-er
ether-eonstraet#anal-set#vit#es--an-nrehaeelogieal-or
h#stories}-site,--art#fnet�-er-ether-#nd#enter-is
d#seovered--ell-development-nt-that-leant#en-shall-be
immediately-stopped-end-the-Netarel-Resoarees-Henngement
Bepartment-notifiedr--Hevelopment-will-be-suspended-for
n-saffieient-length-ef-time-to-enable-the-Nntarnl
Resoarees-Management-Bepartment-er-n-designated
eonaaltant-te-assess-the-find-and-determine-the-proper
eearse-ef-act#en-in-the-find-and-determine-the-proper
course-of-notion-in-regard-te-its-salvegenbil#tyr--the
Nntnral-Resoarees-Hnnegement-Bepartment-will-respond-to
any-aaek-net#f#eat#en-in-a-timely-and-off#eient-manner
ae-as-to-provide-Daly-a-m#nimel-interrupt#on-to-any
eenatraetiona}-eat#vit#esr
IIS •-• EvI • IFT-T-1.2 MT • ••
rMr
• •• emu• •- .• -
•
RUTZ3•I7.11
172.5 acres i
182.4 acres i
111.3 acres i
466.2 acres
60DK • "A PAGE M
are additions; Words struck -through are deletions.
-8-
I
inc.0ritaq-
Platted single family• to compensate forany
Permitted gI development acreage, VP to a total Of
45,6 acres..
Prior to approval of ADY pronoped development in
lurisdictional wctlands (as determined by SWF_WMD). the
g, er -Hammock areas, as identified in the DRI/ADA on -Exhibit
P, will be protected given-apeeial-eeneideratien-in-the
review-ef-the-site-elenring-pinn�-per-stipulation-4r}
with clearing permitted only in those areas specifically
required to facilitate the residential clusters and
limited as much as possible.
fr Existing topographical control elevation in sub -basins
C-1 and A-5 shall be maintained.
gr Re-enhaneement-ef-the-existing-low-end-high-level
control-en-Basin-B-2-to-the-historical-levels-which-will
be-marked-b7-Brr-Bnrbin-4'ebb-and-verified-bp-the-Natural
Reaonree-Mnnngement-Bepertmentr
E. Section 12 of Development Order 85-3, as amended, for Lely, a
Resort Community is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 12. The Collier County Project Services Director
eozmtinity-Bevelepment-Administrator shall be the local official
responsible for assuring compliance with this Development Order.
SECTION TWO: FINDINGS OF FACT
A. That the real property which is the subject of the proposed
amendment is legally described as set forth in Exhibit A, attached
hereto and by reference made a part hereof.
B. The application is in accordance with Section 380.06(19),
Florida Statutes.
C. The applicant submitted to the County a Notice of Change to
Previously Approved DRI known as Exhibit B, and by reference made a
part hereof.
D. The applicant proposes the development of Lely, a Resort
Community on 2892 acres of land for commercial, residential, cultural
and residential tourist uses. 600K
f151 PAGE 241
h Words undo fined are additions; Words struck-threagh are deletions.
Oyu, -9-
E. A comprehensive review of the impact generated by the
proposed changes to the previously approved development has been
conducted by the County's departments and the SWFRPC.
F. The development_.is_not_.in_an-area_designated an Area. of
Critical State Concern pursuant to the provisions of Section 380.06,
Florida Statutes,. -as amended.
:S" SECTION THREE: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
A. The proposed.changes to the previously approved Development
order do not constitnte_a substantialdeviation.pursuant to Section
380.06(19), Florida Statutes. The ccope.of the development to be
permitted pursuant to this Development Order Amendment includes
operations described in the Notice of Change to a Previously Approved
DRI, Exhibit B, and the Lely, a Resort Community, Planned Unit
Development Document, Exhibit C, attached hereto and by reference made
a part hereof.
B. The proposed changes to the previously approved Development
Order are consistent with the report and recommendations of the SWFRPC.
C. The proposed changes to the previously approved development
will not unreasonably interfere with the achievement of the objectives
of the adopted State Land Development Plan applicable to the area.
D. The proposed changes to the previously approved development
are consistent with the Collier County Growth Management Plan and the
Land Development Regulations adopted pursuant thereto.
SECTION FOUR: EFFECT OF PREVIOUSLY ISSUED DEVELOPMENT ORDER,
TRANSMITTAL TO DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND
EFFECTIVE DATE
A. Except as amended hereby, Development Order 85-3, together
with previous amendments, shall remain in full force and effect,
binding in accordance with its terms on all parties thereto.
B. Copies of this Development Order 92- 2 shall be transmitted
immediately upon execution to the Department of Community Affairs
Bureau of Land and Water Management and the Southwest Florida Regional
Planning Council.
C. This Development Order shall take effect as provided by law.
nox P51 PAGE 242
Words underlined are additions; Words struck -through are deletions.
-10-
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the
minutes of this Board.
commissioner Saunders offered the foregoing
Resolution.and.moved.for its adoption, seconded by Commissioner
Goodnigbr- and upon roll call, the vote was:
AYES: Ccamissioner Saunders, ConTnissioner Goodnight, Comnissioner Shanahan and
Commissioner Hasse
NAYS:
ABSENT AND NOT VOTING: Commissioner Volpe
ABSTENTION:
Done ,t�is 1.0th day of Marsh 1992.
"j
ATTEST:- ZBOZONING APPEA4S
T CO Y APP
JAMES C. G,ILES; 'Clark COL COUNTY, FLORIO
N..
BY*
I I J. VOLP (;H
CHAEL J. VOLPE/, CHAIRMAN
Richard S. Shanahan, Vice -Chairman
Approved as to form and legal sufficiency:
MARJOVIE M. STUDENT
ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY
DOA-91-5 Resolution/nb/7419
BOOK P51PAGE
24
Words underlined are additions; Words struck -through are deletions.
r
SCRIPTION
All that part of Section 21, Township 50 South, Range 26
East, Collier County Florida being more particularly
described as follows:
Commencing at the Northwest corner of said section 21, thence
along the west line of said Section 21, South 20-58'-09"
West, 50.11 feet to the South right-of-way line of C.R. 864
(Rattlesnake Hammock Road); thence along said right-of-way
-line, South 89°-131-25" East, 1596.21 feet to the Point of
Beginning of the parcel herein described:
thence continue along said right-of-way line, South
89°-13'-25" East, 1049.56 feet;
thence continue along said right-of-way line, South
890-14125" East, 2617.27 feet to a point on the east
line of said Section 21;
thence along the east line of said Section 21, South
40-03'-03" West, 5134.63 feet to the Southeast corner of
said Section 21;
thence along the south line of said Section 21, North
89°-28'-16" West, 5166.93 feet to the Southwest corner
of said Section 21;
thence along the west line of said Section 21, North
2'-58'-08" East, 2187.29 feet;
thence leaving the west line of said Section 21, North
514-518-57" East, 1418.70 feet;
thence northeasterly and northerly, 695.56 feet along
the arc of circular curve concave to the northwest,
--- _-_=•-Waving - a radius of 810.00 feet and being subtended by a
chord which bears North 270-15'-56" East, 674.39 feet;
thence North 2°-39'-54" East, 2.58 feet;
thence northerly 136.03 feet along the arc of a circular
curve concave to the west, having a radius of 1390.00
feet and being subtended by a chord which bears North
00-08'-19" West, 135.98 feet;
thence'North 870-031-29" East, 227.18 feet;
thence North 160-181-47" East, 890.35 feet;
thence North 160-20'-17" West, 483.06 feet to a point on
the South right-of-way line of C.R. 864 (Rattlesnake
Hammock Road) and the point of beginning of the parcel
herein described:
AND
Section 22, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, less and except
the North 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 and less and except the
Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4,
lying west of C.R. 951, Collier County, Florida,
AND
Section 27, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, lying west of
C.R. 951, Collier County, Florida,
AND
Section 28, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, less and except
that land as described in O.R. Book 542, Page 765, Collier
County. -Public Records,
AND
That part of the East 1/2 of Section 33, Township 50 South,
Range 26 East, lying north of U.S. 41, (Tamiami Trail)
Collier County, Florida.
AND
That part of Section 34, Township 50 South, Range 26 East,
lying west of C.R. 951, Collier County, Florida, rbl M
6DOK PAGE
AND
That part of Section 3, Township 51, South, Range 26 East,
lying North of U.S. 41, (Tamiami Trail) and West of C.R. 951,
less and except a 220' x 220' lot at the intersection of U.S.
41 (Tamiami Trail) and C.R. 951, and more particularly
described in O.R. Book 124, Page 459 of the Public Records of
Collier County, Florida. ,. ,, n "
STATE OF FLORIDA BRM-08-86
` DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
DIVISION OF RESOURCE PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
BUREAU OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
2571 Executive Center Circle, East
Tallahassee, Florida 32399
(904) 488-4915
NOTIFICATION OF A PROPOSED CHANGE TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED
[ DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL, IMPACT (DRI)
SUBSECTION 380.06 (19). FLORIDA STATUTES
Subsection 380.06 (19), Florida Statutes (1985), requires
that submittal of a proposed change to a previously approved DRI
be made to the local government, the regional planning council,
and the state land planning agency according to this form.
t 1. I, Alan D. Reynolds, Aloe , the undersigned owner
(authorized representative) of Lei, Development Corporation_
(developer)
hereby
give notice of a proposed change to a previously
approved Development of Regional Impact in accordance with
Subsection 380.06 (19), Florida Statutes (193S). In support
thereof, I submit the following information concerning the
Lely, A Resort Commuuirr
(original s current project names)
development, which information is true and correct to the
best of my knowledge. I have submitted today, under
separate cover, copies of this completed notification to
Collier Couuty ,
(local government)
to the Southvest Florida Regional Planning Council, and
to the Bureau of Resource Management, Department of
Community Affairs. •
I yet
it (Dat ) (Signature)-
2. Applicant (name, address, phonc). SEE Arucumm A
3. Authorized Agent (name, address, phone). SEE A'CTACMUN'r A
4. Location (City, County, Township/Range/Section) of approved
DRi a.nd proposari, chango. " �vuIR�T "nn
bDDK 1151 PAGE 245
�RK
age Two
Provide -a complete description of the proposed change.
1� Include an
y proposed changes to the plan of development,
phasing, additional lands, commencement date, build —out date,
�. development order conditions and requirements, or in the
representations contained in either the development order or
the Application for Development Approval. SEE ATTACHMENT A
Indicate such changes on the project m4er site plan,
supplementing with other detailed maps, as appropriate.
Additional information may be requested by the Department to
clarify the nature of the change or the resulting impacts.
REFER TO ATTACHMENT Z. 3 and A
Complete the following table for all land use types approved
in the development. If no change is proposed or has
occurred, please indicate no change.
SDBSTANTIAL DEVIATION CHART
■
TYPE OF CHANGE PROPOSED ORIGINAL PRLTIOUS D.O.
LAND USE - CATEGORY PLAN PLAN CHANGE + DATE
IlAttraction/ i Parking Spaces
Recreation I Spectators
i Seats
Site locational changes N/A
Acreage, including
drainage, ROW, easements, etc.
t External Vehicle
Trips
D.O. conditions
ADA representations
s�Airports
Runway (length)
Runway (strength)
Terminal (gross square feet)
Y`"►'
1 Parking Spaces
i Gates
Apron Area (gross square feet) N/A
Site locational changes
Airport Acreage, including
drainage, ROW, easements, etc.
t External Vehicle Trips
D.O. conditions
ADA representations
Hospitals
# Beds
t Parking Spaces
_
Building (gross square feet)
Site locational changes N/A
Acreage, including
drainage, ROW, easements, etc.
t External Vehicle
T�/.e
DODK V51PAG1246
BRM-08-86
Page Three
<: SUBSTANTIAL DEVIATION CHART (continued)--
Ail
TYPE OF CHANGE PROPOSED ORIGINAL PREVIOUS D.O.
LAND USE CATEGORY PLAN PLAN CHANGE + DATE
Industrial- Acreage, including
drainage, ROW, easements, etc.
# Parking Spaces
Buildings (gross square feet) N/A
# Employees
" Chemical storage
(barrels and lbs.)
Site locational changes
# External Vehicle
Trips
D.O. conditions
ADA representations
Mining Acreage mined (year)
Operations - Water Withdrawal (Gal/day)
-Siie of Mine (acres), including
drainage, ROW, easements, etc.
Site locational changes
# External Vehicle
Trips
D.O. conditions
ADA representations
Office Acreage, including
drainage, ROW, easements, etc.
Building (gross square feet)
# Parking Spaces
# Employees
j Site locational changes
# External Vehicle
Trips
D.O. conditions
ADA representations
Petroleum/Chem. Storage Capacity
Storage (barrels and/or lbs.)
. Distance to Navigable
Waters (feet)
. Site locational changes
Facility Acreage, including
drainage, ROW, easements, etc.
# External Vehicle
Trips
D.O. conditions
N/A
NO CHANGES OTHER TI
MINOR SITE RELOCAT:
AND PHASING OF
SQUARE FOOTAGE
N/A
ADA representations n5 ..E 247
60DK Pa
{1+
gRH-08-86
Page Four
SUBSTANTIAL
DEVIATION CHART (continur.d)
TYPE OF
CHANGE PROPOSED ORIGINAL
PREVIOUS-D.O.
LAND USE
CATEGORY PLA14 PLM
CHMIGE + DATE
Ports Ovarinas)
t boats, wet sterace
t boats, dry storage
Dredge and fill (cu.yds.)
Nis
Petroleum storage (gals.)
Site locational changes
Port Acreage, including -
drainage, ROW, easements, etc.
# External Vehicle
Trips
D.O. conditions
ADA representations
Residential
# dwelling units
Minor acreage and site
'�
Type of dwelling units
locational changes and
vhk#
lots
phasing of units.
."
Acreage, including
(Refer to Attachments
drainage, ROW, easements, etc.
2 and 11)
Site locational changes
# External Vehicle
Trips
D.O. conditions
ADA representations
'. Wholesale,
Acreage, including
Minor acreage and site
Retail_,
drainage, ROW, easements, etc.
locational changes and
Service
Floor Space (gross square feet)
phasing of square
# Parking Spaces
footage. (Refer to
# Employees
Attachments 2 and 11)
Site locational changes
# External Vehicle
Trips
D.O. conditions
ADA representations
'; Hotel/Motel
# Rental Units
*,;..
Floor Space (gross square feet)
h�
i Parking Places
No change other than
�.�;.
f Employees
phasing of hotel rooms
g
'
Site locational changes
and square footage.
Acreage, including
drainage, ROW, easements, etc.
# External Vehicle
.:
Trips
D.O. conditions
ADA representations
*
m
too(
V-51 wt 24
a
k,.
BRM-08-86
-'' Page Five
'- SUBSTANTIAL -DEVIATION CHART (continued)
TYPE OF CHANGE PROPOSED ORIGINAL PREVIOUS D.O.
LAND USE CATEGORY PLAN PLAN CHANGZ + DATE
R.V. Park Acreage, including
drainage, ROW, easements, etc.
t Parking Spaces
Buildings (gross square feet) NIL
# Employees
Site locational changes
# External Vehicle
Trips
D.O. conditions
' - ADA representations
iy.
Open Space Acreage
(All natural Site locational changes ACREAGES INCREASED
and vegetated Type of open space
non -impervious D.O. conditions
surfaces) ADA representations
Preservation, Acreage ACREAGES INCREASED
Buffer or Special Site locational changes
Protection Areas Development of site proposed
D.O. conditions
ADA representations
Note: If a response is to be more than one sentence, attach
a detailed description of each proposed change and copies of
the proposed modified site plan drawings. 'The Bureau may
request additional information from the developer or his agent.
7. List all the dates and resolution numbers `(or other
appropriate identification numbers) of -all modifications or
amendments to the originally approved DRI development order
that have have been adopted by the local government, and
provide a brief description of the previous changes (i.e. any
information not already addressed in the Substantial Deviation
Chart). Has there been a change in local government
jurisdiction for any portion of the development since the last
approval or development order was issued? If so, has the
annexing local government adopted a new DRI development order
for the project? SEE ATTACBZUM A
S. Describe any lands purchased or optioned within 1/4 mile of
the original DRI site subsequent to the original approval or
issuance of the DRI development order. Identify such land,
its size, and intended use on a project master site plan or --
other map. x(A
BOOK 1151 PACE 249 .
M
`r
BR1S-08-86
-,. Page Six
.SUBSTANTIAL DEVIATION DETEPWINATION
_. If the proposed change to the previously approved DRI or
development order condition does not meet or exceed any of the
criteria listed in the DRI development order or in Subsnr*i.n m
380.06i19) (b), Florida Statute_, then the iocai
jurisdiction over the development must hold a public hearing zi%J
make a determination as to.whether•such proposed changes constitute
a substantial deviation and Will cause the development to be
subject to further developnent-of- regional -impact review. If the
local government determines that the proposed change does not
require further development -of -regional -impact review and is
otherwise approved, the local government must issue an amendment to
the development order incorporating the approved change and
conditions of approval relating to the change, subject to the
appeal provisions of Subsection 380.06(19)(f), F.S., and Section
380.07, F.S.
Provide the following for incorporation into such an amended
development order, pursuant to Subsections 380.06 (15), F.S., and
9J-2.025, Florida Administrative Code:
9. An updated master site plan or other map of the development
portraying and distinguishing the proposed changes to the
previously approved DRI or development order conditions.
Refer to Attachment 2, (Master Land Use Plan RZ-198b).
10. Pursuant to Subsection 380.06(19)(f), F.S., include the
precise language that is being proposed to be deleted or
added as an amendment to the development order. This
language should address and quantify:
a. 'A,11 proposed specific changes to the nature, phasing, and
build -out date of the development; to development order
conditions and requirements; to commitments and
representations in the Application for Development Approval;
to the acreage attributable to each described proposed change
of land use, open space, areas for preservation, green belts;
to structures or to other improvements including locations,
square footage, number of units; and other major
characteristics or components of the pr posed change;Refer to
Attachment 10. and Attachment 11 for propose changes.
b. An updated legal 'description of the property, if any project
acreage is/has been added or deleted to the previously
approved plan of development;
NO CHANCE
C. A proposed amended development order deadline for commencing
physical development of the proposed changes, if applicable;
NO CHANCE
d. A proposed amended development order termination date that
reasonably reflects the time required to complete the
development; NO CHANCE
600K P,51 PAG1 Z50
'T,
.. Page Seven
i
xQ _ e. A proposed amended development order date to which the local
' government agrees that the changes to the DRI shall not be
subject to down -zoning, unit density reduction, or intensity
reduction, if applicable; and
A
f. Proposed amended development order specifications for the
annual report, including the date of submission, contents,
and parties to whom the report is submitted as specified in
Subsection 9J-2.025 (7), F.A.C.
• MIA
If the proposed change meets or exceeds substantial
deviation criteria listed in the DRI development order, or in the
criteria listed in Subsection 380.06(19) (b), F.S., then the
proposed change U a substantial deviation and shall be subject
to further DRI review Y—LUM—u—t the necessity for a public hearing
and determination by the local government.
tr
f"
j
Boor OJZ PAG 251
ATTACHMENT 15
y�. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMLNT DOCUMENT
C
FOR
'r
A.
LELY, A RESORT COMMUNITY
rEr.
J�.
PREPARED BY:
r •;
WILSON, MILLER, BARTON & PEEK, INC.
ENGINEERS, PLANNERS & LAND SURVEYORS
3200 Bailey Lane at Airport Road
Suite 200
Naples, Florida 33942
March 1992
a;c' Date Approved by CCPC:_May 2, 1985
Date Approved by BCC: MaX 21,
Ordinance Number: 85-17-
Date Amended by BCC: March 10, 1992
Amending Ordinance Number:
EXHIBIT "C"
BOOK A51 Pace 252
I
Now M
L"—
INDEX
List of Exhibits and Tables
Statement of Compliance and Short
Title
SECTION
I
Property Description and Ownership
SECTION
II
Project Development
SECTION
III
R Residential
SECTION
IV
C-1 Commercial/Community
SECTION
V
C-2 Commercial/Professional
SECTION
VI
C-3 Commercial/Neighborhood
SECTION
VII
EC Edison College
SECTION,VIII/
CC Cultural Center
SECTION,
IX
RC Resort Center
SECTION
X
GC Golf Course
SECTION
XI
CO Conservation/Open Space
SECTION
XII
PR Cypress Preserve
SECTION
XIII
PS Park/Elementary School
SECTION
XIV
General Development Commitments
i
PAGE
boo( P51 PAGE 253
LIST OF EXHIBITS AND TABLES
EXHIBIT H Master Land Use Plan
(Prepared by Wilson, Miller, Barton
t Peek, Inc. File No.RZ-198
TABLE I Estimated Market Absorption Schedule
TABLE II A Development Standards 'R' Residential Areas
TABLE II B Development Standards 'R' Residential Areas
ii
BOOK f151 PAGE 254
SECTION I
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND OWNERSHIP
1.01 INTRODUCTION, LOCATION AND PURPOSE
It is the intent of Lely Development Corporation
(hereinafter called "applicant or developer") to develop A
Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) on approximately 2892.5
acres of property located in Collier County, Florida. The
subject property is generally bordered on the west by Lely
Estates, on the north by CR 864 (Rattlesnake Hammock
Road), on the east by CR 951 (Isle of Capri Road), and on
the south by U.S. 41 (Tamiami Trail East). It is the
purpose of this document to establish the standards and
guidelines for the future development of this property.
1-1 500( n51 Pxu 255
GundlachNancy
From: James Abbatemarco <kleinker@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2022 8:13 PM
To: Lindsay.robin@stantec.com; Adrianaaleman@davisdevelopment.com;
FredHazel@davisdevelopment.com; mikedavis@davisdevelopment.com;
GundlachNancy
Subject: The Davis Development REJECTION
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.
Dear Mr/ Ms,
Nancy Gundlach, Principal Planner, Davis Development;
Fred Hazel- Vice Presiden;
Adriana Aleman- Operations Coordinator;
Lindsay Robin,
I am a resident of Lely Resort in Naples, FL where Davis Development is proposing a 4 story, multi -family, densely -
populated apartment complex on the small parcel bounded by Collier (951) / Grand Lely Drive and Celeste Drive PL #
20210001795.
I am strongly opposed to the development as this type of construction is entirely out of character for this residential area.
Not only is it unacceptable in terms of its aesthetics, it will bring:
1) Intolerable traffic congestion to Celeste Drive, which is a small artery intended for light traffic for existing single family
homeowners
2) Debris, delays and chaos throughout the approx. 2 year construction phase from constant trucks back and forth to the
site through the single access street, Celeste.
3) Potentially unstable renters who will not have the investment we have in our neighborhoods which could bring litter,
animal waste and excessive noise
4) An unsightly, tall structure which will throw this carefully and beautifully designed Lely community completely out of
balance.
5) Potentially lower property values for the residents in Lely, many of whom are retirees who have counted on their homes
to maintain a stable value.
6) The destruction of the quiet, peaceful, safe, small-town quality of Lely Resort which made this area so desirable to all of
us and the reason we purchased here in the first place.
I attended the meeting on Dec. 14th at the Naples Library lead by Linsday Robin and we were all genuinely outraged. We
intend to make our voice heard at every meeting going forward. We urge you to vote down the re -zoning of this parcel
and urge Davis Development to build elsewhere.
Sincerely.
James Abbatemarco
9067 Capistrano Street North
Unit 4506
Naples, FI 34113
GundlachNancy
From: Lin Agostinacchio <laugust7@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2022 5:57 PM
To: GundlachNancy
Subject: Re -zoning
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.
Dear Ms. Gundlach:
We are residents of
the Ole community
within Lely Resort
where Davis
Development is
proposing a 4 story,
multi -family, densely
populated apartment
complex on the small
parcel bounded by
Collier Boulevard
(951) / Grand Lely
Drive and Celeste
Drive (PL #
20210001795).
We
are vehemently opp
osed to the
development as this
type of construction is
entirely out of
character for this
residential area, was
never intended in the
original Lely Master
Plan, creates
significant safety
hazards, and is
unacceptable in terms
of aesthetics for the
area. More
specifically, it will
bring:
1. Intolerable
traffic congestion to
Celeste Drive, which
we live mere feet
from, which is a small
artery intended for
light traffic for existing
homeowners.
2. An
unacceptable safety
hazard. The
increased traffic from
hundreds of
occupants of the
proposed complex,
whose only point of
access is Celeste
Drive, will make
Celeste Drive a busy
thoroughfare that it
was never designed
to be. Celeste Drive
goes right through the
heart of the Ole's
Village Center where
there is significant
foot and bicycle traffic
that should not be
exposed to the
increased car volume
that would absolutely
result from the
proposed apartment
complex as that
would be the shortest
route to shopping and
access to Northbound
Route 41 (Tamiami
Trail). This
significant safety
issue for the
existing Lely
communities,
particularly those
along Celeste Drive,
and their residents,
by itself is reason
enough not to
approve the re-
zoning.
3. Debris, delays
and chaos throughout
the approximate 2-
year construction
phase from constant
trucks back and forth
to the site through the
single access street,
Celeste Drive.
4. Approximately
500 potentially
unstable renters who
will not have the
investment we have
in our neighborhoods
which could bring
litter, animal waste
and excessive noise.
5. An unsightly, tall
structure which will
throw this carefully
and beautifully
designed Lely
community
completely out of
balance.
6. Lower property
values for the existing
property owners in
Lely, many of whom
are retirees like
ourselves who have
counted on their
homes to maintain a
stable value.
7. The destruction
of the quiet, peaceful,
safe, small-town
quality of Lely Resort
which made this area
so desirable to all of
us and the reason we
purchased here in the
first place.
In our view, that this
type of project is even
being considered is
outrageous. We urge
you to vote down the
re -zoning of this
parcel.Thanks,
Sincerely,
Nick and Lin
Agostinacchio
9107 Capistrano South
Unit 7802
Naples FI 34113
GundlachNancy
From: Alex Albacarys <alexalby7@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2021 7:35 AM
To: VernonChristopher; FryerEdwin; Joesephschmitt@colliergov.net; KarlFry;
GundlachNancy; LoCastroRick; eastmath@collierschools.com; HomiakKaren; Shea Paul;
KlucikRobert
Subject: Development on Collier and Grand Lely Drive
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.
Dear all
First, wishing you all a safe, peaceful holiday season and best wishes for 2022.
Secondly, I'm very concerned about the proposed change for the corner of Collier and Grand Lely
Dr. development. Whilst I am aware that plans can change, changing it from commercial to residential is a huge change
in my view.
My wife and bought in Players Cove in 2012 with full awareness of the development of Stock Plaza and something
similar on the opposite corner - changing it now to residential with a high concentration of living units totally changes
the feel and attractiveness of Lely, not to mention the increased traffic both inside Lely and on Collier.
To the point that there is little land left for residential development, I respectfully disagree - there is lots of land for
development east of Collier.
Please consider working with Davis Development on a separate parcel for their residential project and keep the current
designation of "Commercial" for this plot of land.... Developing it for commercial purposes will increase the attraction of
Lely to future residents while continuing to expand the commercial offerings to Lely and beyond.
Thank you for considering this as you make your final determination.
Respectfully,
Alexander and Lourdes Albacarys
8080 Players Cove Dr. Unit 101
Naples, FL
34113
Alexalby7@gmail.com
Alex Albacarys
GundlachNancy
From: Carolina Bernhardt <naniinfl@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2022 9:02 AM
To: GundlachNancy
Subject: Lely Resort
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 live in Lely Resort, And it has come to my attention that A new project at the entrance of 9511-las been planed. I am
deeply concerned about this project because The Entrance and exit from the project is within Lely and Traffic will be
Unbearable. At the very least there should be an entrance and exit on 951Known as Collier boulevard... Furthermore the
height of the buildings is opressive. This piece of land was Designated as small shops Not big tall buildings.
Carolina B Bernhardt
GundlachNancy
From: Yvan Bourdeau <ybourdeau@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2022 12:11 PM
To: GundlachNancy
Subject: Davis Development Project
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.
Dear Ms Gundlach,
We reside in the Classics Plantation Estate which would directly impacted if the project below is approved. The rationale
against the project is as follows:
The Davis Development project, on the corner of Grand Lely Drive and Collier Boulevard (7665 Collier
Blvd), if built as proposed, will have a negative impact on the surrounding communities.
The impact this project will have on the surrounding communities is as follows;
1. The 2 building, 4 story complex is NOT what the residents of Lely Resort expected when their
residences were purchased. They were aware that the parcel was zoned C-3 commercial, NOT
residential .
2. The ONLY entrance/exit access would be on Celeste Drive. This could cause a traffic jam in the event
of an emergency. How would emergency vehicles enter the area and residents leave if there was a fire,
or other emergency?
3. Celeste Drive has had repeated speeders and traffic accidents, even though the speed limit is 30 MPH.
This proposed project would increase traffic on Celeste Blvd through Ole and Tiger Island because of
the number of residents expected and a greater number of cars that would use it as a shortcut between
Route 41 and Collier Blvd.
4. The Lely Traffic Committee has already worked with the Collier Country Department of Transportation
regarding 4 safety issues in Lely Resort. This project would result in additional traffic safety issues.
5. This project should not be compared to Inspira at the opposite end of Grand Lely drive because there
are no single-family homes within sight and traffic for Inspira does not pass through residential
neighborhoods. Inspira traffic exits onto Grand Lely drive.
6. Ole will be the most impacted community as Ole residents live on both sides of Celeste Blvd, and many
walk across Celeste to reach the communities' Village Center.
7. There would be a significant impact on local schools from the potential influx of up to 184 families.
8. The proposed structures are not visually compliant with the surrounding architecture.
9. It is a density concern, as the 2 buildings being planned are both to be 4 stories high.
Yours truly, Yvan Bourdeau
GundlachNancy
From: amhb123@aol.com
Sent: Monday, January 3, 2022 1:02 PM
To: SolisAndy; McDanielBill; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; LoCastroRick
Cc: GundlachNancy; amhb123@aol.com
Subject: Fwd: To Lely Residents: Regarding Lely Resort tract 12 PUDA C-3 being rezoned: here
is what you can do to oppose this
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.
Jan. 3, 2022
To: Collier County Commissioners and Nancy Gundlach, see the note below from Marlene Landa,
who lives in Lely Resort.
I am in opposition of the zoning amendment and the building of 184 units. See the
information below.
Anne Marie Bularzik
Anne Marie H. Bularzik, 8718 Mustang Island Circle, Lely Resort, Naples FL 34113, tel:
978-337-4388, email: amhb123@aol.com
Roles:
MI HOA President,
MI Roadway President,
President of the Lely Resort Presidents Association, and
Elected Supervisor- LCDD (Lely Community Development District)
If you are in opposition to the requested zoning amendment to the
vacant Lely Resort tract 12 PUDA C-3 Commercial lot, bordered by
Celeste Drive, Collier Blvd, and Grand Lely Drive, that would allow for
the construction of 184 multifamily units read the information below.
Here are some steps you can take.
First:
For those not in Naples, below is the link to watch the news clip about the proposed
development, which was on Fort Myers NBC-2 news.
httDs://nbc-2.com/news/local/2021 /12/20/lelv-resort-residents-worried-about-possible-traffic-
from-proposed-apartment-complex/
Second:
1
Here is a website that posted information by a group called: Save Lely, click on the
link Savelely.org
Third: Here is the link to the Collier County Application:
https://cvportal.colliercountyfl.gov/CitVViewWeb/Planning/GetFile/l 2002460
Fourth: Here is a letter from the planner/developer dated September 15, 2021. It is a request
for a traffic study waiver for the new rental complex on Celeste Dr. From Claudette Klinkerman
whose husband found this online. RE: Lely Resort PUDA (PL20210001795) TIS Waiver
Request
Dear Mr. Sawyer
Please accept this letter as a request for a waiver from providing a Traffic Impact Statement
(TIS) with the Lely Resort PUDA application submittal, PL20210001795. The Lely Resort PUD
is a vested development, and no other residential units are proposed; therefore, the proposed
amendment to allow residential uses on the C-3 tract will have no transportation impacts. We
greatly appreciate your consideration of this request
Sincerely, STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC Lindsay F. Robin, AICP Urban Planner
Fifth: Collier County will have an info session sometime in the future and then they will
review the application. Write to Nancy Gundlach, (after the first of the year), she is the
principle planner for Collier County that will be reviewing the application listed in the third
section of this email. She was at the info session on Dec. 14t", but we were not allowed to
ask her questions and she was not allowed to speak. She was there to observe.
Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA
Principal Planner
Zoning Services
(239)252-2484
Nancy.Gundlach(c)colliercountyfl.gov
Sixth: Finally, this proposal will be reviewed in the future by the Collier County
Commissioners.
There are 5 Commissioners and the proposal would need to be approved by a
supermajority, which means 4 of the 5 Commissioners would need to vote to approve this
change from Commercial to Residential and the 4 story structure with only access/egress
from Celeste Blvd.
Write to theCollier County District Commissioners, again after the new year:
District 1: Rick LoCastro Rick. LoCastro(c-colliercountyfl.gov 239 252-8601
District 2: Andy Solis, Esq. Andy. Sol is(a)-colIiercountyfl.gov 239 252-8602
District 3: Burt L Saunders Burt.Saunders(cDcolliercountyfl.gov 239 252-8603
District 4: Penny Taylor Penny.Taylor(a)colliercountyfl.gov 239 252-8604
District 5: Williams L. McDaniel, Jr. Bill. McDaniel(cDcolliercountyfl.gov 239 252-8605
Express the points that are most relevant to you, re: The Davis Development project, on the
corner of Grand Lely Drive and Collier Boulevard (7665 Collier Blvd), if built as proposed,
will have a negative impact on the surrounding communities.
The impact of this project will have on the surrounding communities are as follows;
1- The 2 building, each 4 story complex is not what the residents of Lely, expected when
their residences were purchased. They were aware that the parcel was zoned C-3
commercial, NOT residential .
2- The only access would be on Celeste Drive. This could cause a traffic jam in the event of
an emergency. How would emergency vehicles enter the area and residents leave if there
was a fire, or other emergency?
3- Celeste Drive has had repeated speeders and traffic accidents even though the speed
limit is 30 MPH. This proposed project would increase traffic on Celeste Blvd and going
through Ole and Tiger Island because of the number of residents expected and a greater
number of cars would use it as a shortcut between Route 41 and Collier Blvd.
4- The Lely Traffic Committee has already worked with the Collier Country Department of
Transportation regarding 4 safety issues in Lely Resort. This project would result in
additional traffic safety issues.
5- This project should not be compared to Inspira at the opposite end of Grand Lely drive
because there are no single-family homes within sight and traffic for Inspira does not pass
through residential neighborhoods. This traffic exits onto Grand Lely drive.
6- Ole will be the most impacted community as Ole residents live on both sides of Celeste
Blvd and many walk across Celeste to reach the communities' Village Center.
7- There would be a significant impact on local schools from the potential influx of up to 184
families.
8- The proposed structures are not visually compliant with the surrounding architecture.
9- It is a density concern, as the 2 buildings being planned are both to be 4
stories high.
For all the above reasons, I am OPPOSED to BOTH the proposed project on Celeste Dr
& Grand Lely Drive and amending the existing C-3 Commercial code for this parcel.
Anne Marie Bularzik, Anne Marie H. Bularzik, 8718 Mustang Island Circle, Lely Resort,
Naples FL 34113, tel: 978-337-4388, email: amhb123@aol.com
GundlachNancy
From: patricia carlson <pattycarlson1014@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 6, 2022 4:27 PM
To: GundlachNancy
Subject: Opposed to the Davis Development #PL20210001795 on Collier & Celeste, Lely Resort
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.
Dear Ms. Gundlach,
My husband and I moved to Naples from California less than one year ago and purchased our home in Lely in Sept. 2021.
At that time we had high hopes of making Lely Resort our "forever" home as we were so taken with the vast green
spaces, lush landscaping and quiet single-family homes. We felt that each neighborhood & sub -section was beautifully
and thoughtfully designed and even though we knew there was a vacant lot near us in Tiger Lily Estates, we were
assured by our Realtor that this was zoned as "commercial" property to serve the Lely residents if it was ever purchased
from Stock. Suffice it to say we are furious about the proposal by Davis Development to put a high -density rental
apartment complex on this small 9 acre lot. I'm sure you've heard our community concerns and hundreds of us have
attended each and every meeting held by the Davis Group as well as the meeting held by Commissioner LoCastro. While
Davis Development has made some modifications to their original plan, we still find it intolerable for the following
reasons:
1) There is NO value to current residents of Lely Resort if this complex is built, rather it represents an enduring burden
on the community
2) The apartments will result in unacceptable traffic congestion as well as high impact use of pedestrian traffic from the
500+ people using our small roads, green belts/ walk ways and bicycle paths
3) The architectural design of the apartments is dramatically different than the single-family homes in Lely and it will be
an eye -sore as one approaches the Lely entrance from Collier BLVD. There will be a shocking architectural disconnect
from the existing surroundings not just in style, but in scale.
4) We are concerned about the stability and safety of our neighborhoods as this is a 100% rental complex. I understand
this can't be disclosed in a filing by Davis, but it must be said as this is a serious concern of the residents
5) We are concerned that our property values will decline over time if his complex is built
These are top of mind, but there are many other objections residents have raised over the last few months. I can't afford
an attorney to represent my interests. The only thing I can do is voice my objections, vote and hope to appeal to your
sense of duty to the residents who have invested, in many cases, their life savings to retire here.
Sincerely,
Patricia Schofield
GundlachNancy
From:
Rich Cobuzio <rcobuzio@me.com>
Sent:
Sunday, February 6, 2022 7:05 PM
To:
GundlachNancy
Cc:
Cobuzio Monica
Subject:
Re -Zoning PL # 20210001795
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.
Dear Ms. Gundlach,
We are residents of the Ole community within Lely Resort where Davis Development is proposing a two 4 story multi -family densely
populated apartment buildings on the small parcel bounded by Collier Boulevard (951) / Grand Lely Drive and Celeste Drive (PL #
20210001795).
With any new development plan, there may be some small inconveniences that can be expected and justified. In this instance
however, there is a significant impact to the immediate surrounding communities. We are strongly opposed to the development of this
housing for many reasons, but the most critical being the safety hazard it will undeniably cause.
Major Safety Hazard: The increased traffic from close to 200 units of the proposed complex, whose only point of access is Celeste
Drive, will make Celeste Drive a thoroughfare that it was never designed to be. Celeste Drive goes right through the heart of the Ole
Resort's Village Center where there is significant foot and bicycle traffic that should not be exposed to the increased car volume that
would absolutely result from the proposed apartment complex. There are a plethora of grocery stores, restaurants, banks, Starbucks,
Xfinity, Home Goods, Dollar Store (and the list goes on and on), that will be much easier accessed by these occupants driving on
Celeste Drive through Ole Resort vs. a less direct route via Collier Boulevard. By itself this is reason enough not to approve the re-
zoning.
There are many more legitimate and material negative impacts that would result from this proposal:
1. These multi -story buildings are entirely out of character for this residential area and was never intended in the original Lely Master
Plan which calls for this area to be commercial if used at all. These tall buildings will stand out like a sore thumb and undo the
careful attention to aesthetics of the entire area.
2. Debris, delays and chaos throughout the approximate 2-year construction phase from constant trucks, contractor activity, etc. to the
site through the single access street, Celeste Drive.
3. There would be a significant impact on local schools from the potential influx of up to 184 families
4. Lower property values for the existing property owners in Lely, many of whom are retirees like ourselves who have counted on their
homes to maintain a stable value.
5. The destruction of the quiet, peaceful, safe, small-town quality of Lely Resort which made this area so desirable to all of us and the
reason we purchased here in the first place.
We respectfully request that you vote down the re -zoning of this parcel. It will create a significant safety hazard and cause irreparable
harm to existing homeowners.
Sincerely,
Rich and Monica Cobuzio
9085 Chula Vista Street, Unit 10606
Naples, FL 34113
GundlachNancy
From: Mary Egan <maryegan01@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2022 8:09 AM
To: GundlachNancy
Subject: Davis Development
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.
Hello Nancy,
I am writing to voice my opposition to the proposed development by
the Davis Development project on the corner of Grand lely Dr and
Collier Blvd.
I have several concerns:
1. The traffic affecting Ole and Celeste Blvd. The only access is
proposed to be on Celeste thus overloading that small road and
pushing excess traffic into Tiger Island and Ole.
The amount of development on Collier Blvd is immense. Causing
great backups already in that area and especially at the major
intersection of 41 and 951.
The influx of 180 + families, cars and demands on services is much
in an area that is being taxed already.
I do favor the commercial use originally proposed for that track of
land. I am opposed to both the proposed project and amending the
existing C-3 commerical code for this parcel. We are in major need
of the following in the area:
1. Upscale restaurants -- we have none and most go to downtown
naples to enjoy better food == Organic food options would be well
received
1
2. A great bakery -- again none in the area
3. A good florist shop - we have only Publix
4. Pickleball courts -- I know hard to do but the demand is huge and
we do not have courts in the area that can be used by the
public. Players has 2 and is private and East Naples is over
crowded
5. Pet retreat... the area is lacking pet boarding
6. Car repair -- a jiffy Lube A OK Tire is great but huge demand.
7. Upscale womens clothing like what they have in Venetician
Village ... we have NONE
8. A wellness center
Put that track to use for the people that live here. I would offer jobs.
Thank you for your time.
Mary Egan
8811 Mustang Island Circle
Naples
0
Mary Egan - Nutrition, Arthritis, Wellness, Coach
Call 443-994-6003
Check out my new website Solutions to Wellness
like me on Facebook Solutions to Wellness, Instagram HappyjointsSTW
Enjoy life - we only have one!
4
GundlachNancy
From: Terry Endress <terryendress@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 6, 2022 8:57 PM
To: GundlachNancy; HomiakKaren; VernonChristopher; KarlFry; FryerEdwin; KlucikRobert;
SheaPaul; Joesephschmitt@colliergov.net; eastmath@collierschools.com
Cc: LoCastroRick; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill
Subject: PROJECT #PL20210001795
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.
Dear Planning Commission and County Commissioners
The project set out above is very close to my home at the address set out below,
The proposed 184+/- apartment complex overloads the property with people
and vehicles.
The area is already plagued with high traffic and high accident counts
Approval of this zoning change would only create a more dangerous situation
The density requested is also very high.
The 4 story height requested does not work in the mostly residentially populated.
Please reject this request
Your consideration is appreciated
TERRY ENDRESS
7873 Hawthorne Drive
Unit 203
Naples FL 34113
330 5713730
terrvendress@gmail.com
GundlachNancy
From: crnabarb@nycap.rr.com
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2022 12:15 PM
To: michaelsawyer@colliergov.net.; GundlachNancy
Cc: LoCastroRick; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill
Subject: traffic Impact Statement Lely Resort
Attachments: Resolution Opposing the requested zoning amendment to the vacant C.docx
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.
February 17, 2022
Mr. Michael Sawyer
Principal Planner
Growth Management Department
Transportation Planning
2685 S. Horseshoe Dr. #103
Naples, Florida 34104
We are writing at this time as a community to voice our objections to the request of Stantec Consulting Services Inc. for
a waiver from providing a Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) for Lely Resort PUDA application submittal. (PL20210001795)
The request makes the claim that, "the LELY Resort PUD is a vested development, and no other residential units are
proposed, therefore, the proposed amendment to allow residential uses on the C-3 tract will have no transportation
impacts"
To argue that traffic will not be increased by the development of this particular project because no other residential
units are proposed is a non sequitur. Future development or lack thereof does not relate in any way to the faulty
conclusion that this project will not affect traffic congestion in this area. Moreover, to imply that the addition of 184
families and most likely upwards of 360 additional vehicles to the area will not increase traffic flow is an insult to our
common sense. It is a false narrative predicted on a baseless assumption.
Please see attached resolution that was signed by 27 HOA's representing 3,192 doors/73% of total Lely Resort
homeowners. These communities are focused on the effect on traffic congestion this project will engender, and their
concerns are expressed in the attached resolution.
Barbara Capogna
President Lely Verandas at Flamingo Island HOA
crnabarb@nvcap.rr.com
GundlachNancy
From: Eileen Fusco <efusco1160@yahoo.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2022 11:19 AM
To: GundlachNancy
Subject: Reject PROJECT #PL20210001795
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.
Dear Ms Gundlach,
My husband and I are relatively new residents and taxpayers in the Classics neighborhood of Lely. We rented for years
in Lely before purchasing our house here, so we are familiar with the neighborhood and the growth in the area.
I recently learned that Davis Development is seeking a variance on the small parcel of land bounded by Collier (951),
Grand Lely Dr. And Celeste Dr. PL 20210001795. We understood for many years that this parcel was zoned for
commercial use, similar to Stock Plaza. Davis Development is now proposing a a four story multi -family apartment
complex which will be densely populated. (I've read estimates of 500 residents.)
We are strongly opposed to the variance for many reasons, which I have outlined below:
The ingress and egress for the proposed complex is on Celeste Drive. Celeste Drive is already the entrance for numerous
two story multifamily condos and single family homes on the west side of Celeste Dr. A new complex of this size would
add intolerable traffic to this relatively small artery frequented by bicyclists and walkers.
Celeste Dr offers existing Lely residents an escape from the Collier/Rt. 41 congestion to access basics like Publix.
Celeste Dr. enters Grand Lely exactly across from the entrance to our Classics neighborhood, and there is already
considerable vehicle congestion at the traffic circle on Grand Lely between our entrance and Celeste Dr.
The obstruction of traffic, noise and debris during construction would add to the already over burdened Celeste Dr. We
are still living with the construction of the traffic circle at Celeste and Triangle Blvd.
The proposed four story buildings are very much out of character with the character of the many single family homes of
bordering Lely neighborhoods. It is 12 times more dense per acre than any other area in South Naples.
Lely is already fairly densely populated, and could definitely use more commercial infrastructure in that area, much
more than additional residents. This was the original and anticipated use for many (30) years.
Renters could presumably turn these units into AirBnb or similar short term rentals, adding noise and debris to the area
in addition to increasing traffic.
We purchased in Lely because we believed it to be fully developed. That was one of the appeals of this area. We did not
want to be near new construction or added congestion.
For all of these reasons, we oppose the variance to allow for this proposed additional residential units. We strongly urge
you to vote down the re -zoning of this parcel. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. Thank you for your
consideration of this matter.
Respectfully, Eileen and Cono Fusco
7437 Byrons Way
Naples, FL 34113
917-825-2870
(PROJECT #PL20210001795)
1
GundlachNancy
From: Ben Garfunkel <bgarfunkel@icloud.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2022 4:56 PM
To: GundlachNancy
Subject: Re -Zoning PL # 20210001795
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.
Dear Ms. Gundlach:
We are residents of the Ole community within Lely Resort where Davis Development is proposing a 4 story,
multi -family, densely populated apartment complex on the small parcel bounded by Collier Boulevard (951) /
Grand Lely Drive and Celeste Drive (PL # 20210001795).
We are vehemently opposed to the development as this type of construction is entirely out of character for
this residential area, was never intended in the original Lely Master Plan, creates significant safety hazards,
and is unacceptable in terms of aesthetics for the area. More specifically, it will bring:
1. Intolerable traffic congestion to Celeste Drive, which we live mere feet from, which is a small artery
intended for light traffic for existing homeowners.
2. An unacceptable safety hazard. The increased traffic from hundreds of occupants of the proposed
complex, whose only point of access is Celeste Drive, will make Celeste Drive a thoroughfare that it was never
designed to be. Celeste Drive goes right through the heart of the Ole's Village Center where there is
significant foot and bicycle traffic that should not be exposed to the increased car volume that would absolutely
result from the proposed apartment complex as that would be the shortest route to shopping and access to
Northbound Route 41 (Tamiami Trail). This significant safety issue for the existing Lely communities,
particularly those along Celeste Drive, and their residents, by itself is reason enough not to approve the re-
zoning.
3. Debris, delays and chaos throughout the approximate 2-year construction phase from constant trucks
back and forth to the site through the single access street, Celeste Drive.
4. Approximately 500 potentially unstable renters who will not have the investment we have in our
neighborhoods which could bring litter, animal waste and excessive noise.
5. An unsightly, tall structure which will throw this carefully and beautifully designed Lely community
completely out of balance.
6. Lower property values for the existing property owners in Lely, many of whom are retirees like ourselves
who have counted on their homes to maintain a stable value.
7. The destruction of the quiet, peaceful, safe, small-town quality of Lely Resort which made this area so
desirable to all of us and the reason we purchased here in the first place.
In our view, that this type of project is even being considered is outrageous. We urge you to vote down the
re -zoning of this parcel.
Sincerely,
Ben and Gina Garfunkel
9076 Rialto Street, Unit 6204
Naples, FL 34113
GundlachNancy
From: J Gentile <jeffglmg@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2021 11:43 AM
To: GundlachNancy
Subject: Residential Rezone on Celeste Drive Near my Home 34113
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.
Nancy,
I live in Ole and the proposed re zone to residential for high density living Apartments or any apartments would ruin our
neighborhood. Only 1 access from Celeste Drive would also be a disaster and dangerous to all of us who use it for biking,
walking and access to our community. NO is my VOTE!
Jeff Gentile
9086 Capistrano St N 34113
J Gentile
jeffglmg@gmail.com
GundlachNancy
From: BellowsRay
Sent: Tuesday, January 4, 2022 3:20 PM
To: Greg Koch
Cc: GundlachNancy
Subject: RE: Please Reject Proposed 180 unit Apartment at Grand Lely & Collier Blvd
Attachments: Submittal 1 - Request Narrative - Prepared.pdf; Submittal 1 - Application.pdf
Good afternoon,
I have forwarded your comments to Nancy Gundlach since she is the Principal Planner for
the County in the review of this proposed PUD amendment. She can also provide copies of
the latest revised plans for this amendment. Furthermore, she will discuss your comments with
the applicant to see if they are willing to modify their application to better address your
concerns. Lastly, she will forward your concerns to all the Planning Commission members as
well as to incorporate all correspondence into a staff report that is presented to the Planning
Commission and to the BCC for their review and consideration.
Please let me or Nancy know if you have any questions concerning this matter and we will
be glad to assist.
R"
Raymond V. Bellows, Zoning Manager
Zoning Division - Zoning Services Section
Growth Management Department
Telephone: 239.252.2463; Fax: 239.252.6350
CiO1L76Y �iOLlYlty
Exceeding expectations, every day!
TO us how we are doing by taking our Zoning Division Survey at https://goo.gl/eXjvgT.
From: Greg Koch <kocgd@aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2022 1:59 PM
To: BellowsRay <Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov>
Subject: Please Reject Proposed 180 unit Apartment at Grand Lely & Collier Blvd
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.
Mr Bellows,
I am contacting you as Planning Commission County Liaison.
1
First, I wanted to communicate to you that we oppose the Proposed 180 unit Apartment Complex at Grand Lely & Collier
Blvd.
A. The area surrounding this property is Single Family Homes. We do not want Apartments that will lower our property
values.
B. Homes in the area are one or two stories. We do not want two four story apartment buildings. They would be out of
place and an eyesore for the community.
C. When we purchased our home, very close to the subject property, it was with the understanding that this area is zoned
for much needed commercial establishments, like desperately needed restaurants. We need restaurants, doctors offices,
etc to support the local community.
D. The roads and infrastructure at this intersection will not support a 180 unit very dense apartment complex. Traffic and
safety are already a problem. Please do not make it worse by sticking all these people and cars in there.
Second, can you please provide email addresses so I can communicate this to the Planning Commission Members?
And third, is there anyone else in county government that I could contact to voice our opposition to this horrible apartment
proposal ?
Thank you
Greg Kochendorfer
7616 Winding Cypress Dr
Naples, FL 34114
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.
GundlachNancy
From: Greg Koch <kocgd@aol.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 5, 2022 5:14 PM
To: GundlachNancy
Cc: BellowsRay
Subject: Fwd: Please Reject Proposed 180 unit Apartment at Grand Lely & Collier Blvd
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.
Nancy,
I ask for your support to reject the Proposed 180 unit Apartment at Grand Lely and Collier Blvd.
This proposal will adversely affect living conditions in the area.
The proposal can not be changed to address the many many issues that local residents have. The only way to
change it is to reject it.
The Zoning for that parcel should continue to promote commercial establishments that support and contribute to
the community..... like restaurants, etc...
I would welcome the opportunity to talk to you by telephone; may I make an appointment? I would like to
understand what the community can do to ensure this proposal is rejected.
Thank you
Greg Kochendorfer
-----Original Message -----
From: BellowsRay <Ray.Bel lows@colt iercountyfl.gov>
To: Greg Koch <kocgd@aol.com>
Cc: GundlachNancy <Nancy.Gundlach@colliercountyfl.gov>
Sent: Tue, Jan 4, 2022 3:20 pm
Subject: RE: Please Reject Proposed 180 unit Apartment at Grand Lely & Collier Blvd
Good afternoon,
I have forwarded your comments to Nancy Gundlach since she is the Principal Planner for the County
in the review of this proposed PUD amendment. She can also provide copies of the latest revised
plans for this amendment. Furthermore, she will discuss your comments with the applicant to see if
they are willing to modify their application to better address your concerns. Lastly, she will forward
your concerns to all the Planning Commission members as well as to incorporate all correspondence
into a staff report that is presented to the Planning Commission and to the BCC for their review and
consideration.
Please let me or Nancy know if you have any questions concerning this matter and we will be glad to
assist.
Ray
Raymond V. Bellows, Zoning Manager
Zoning Division - Zoning Services Section
Growth Management Department
Telephone: 239.252.2463; Fax: 239.252.6350
Exceeding expectations, every day!
TO us how we are doing by taking our Zoning Division Survey at https://goo.gl/eXbvgTT.
From: Greg Koch <kocgd@aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2022 1:59 PM
To: BellowsRay <Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov>
Subject: Please Reject Proposed 180 unit Apartment at Grand Lely & Collier Blvd
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.
Mr Bellows,
I am contacting you as Planning Commission County Liaison.
First, I wanted to communicate to you that we oppose the Proposed 180 unit Apartment Complex at Grand Lely &
Collier Blvd.
A. The area surrounding this property is Single Family Homes. We do not want Apartments that will lower our
property values.
B. Homes in the area are one or two stories. We do not want two four story apartment buildings. They would be
out of place and an eyesore for the community.
C. When we purchased our home, very close to the subject property, it was with the understanding that this area
is zoned for much needed commercial establishments, like desperately needed restaurants. We need restaurants,
doctors offices, etc to support the local community.
D. The roads and infrastructure at this intersection will not support a 180 unit very dense apartment complex.
Traffic and safety are already a problem. Please do not make it worse by sticking all these people and cars in
there.
Second, can you please provide email addresses so I can communicate this to the Planning Commission
Members?
And third, is there anyone else in county government that I could contact to voice our opposition to this horrible
apartment proposal ?
Thank you
Greg Kochendorfer
7616 Winding Cypress Dr
Naples, FL 34114
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.
GundlachNancy
From: amhb123@aol.com
Sent: Monday, January 3, 2022 12:57 PM
To: SolisAndy; McDanielBill; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; LoCastroRick
Cc: GundlachNancy
Subject: Fwd: To Lely Residents: Regarding Lely Resort tract 12 PUDA C-3 being rezoned: here
is what you can do to oppose this
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.
To: Collier County Commissioners and Nancy Gundlach, see the note below from Marlene Landa,
who lives in Lely Resort.
-----Original Message -----
From: Marlene Landa <marlenelanda@me.com>
To: amhb123@aol.com
Sent: Wed, Dec 29, 2021 12:14 pm
Subject: Re: To Lely Residents: Regarding Lely Resort tract 12 PUDA C-3 being rezoned: here is what you can do to
oppose this
Anne Marie,
Thank you for keeping us informed.
I have filled out the form below..... please forward it to the appropriate parties.
Unfortunately, we have a lot on our plate right now, and this issue is not top of mind .... but I am certainly against the
proposed development.
Wishing you and yours a Happy and Healthy New Year.
Marlene
Sent from my Pad
On Dec 29, 2021, at 8:58 AM, amhb123@aol.com wrote:
If you are in opposition to the requested zoning amendment to the
vacant Lely Resort tract 12 PUDA C-3 Commercial lot, bordered by
Celeste Drive, Collier Blvd, and Grand Lely Drive, that would allow for
the construction of 184 multifamily units read the information below.
Here are some steps you can take.
First:
For those not in Naples, below is the link to watch the news clip about the proposed
development, which was on Fort Myers NBC-2 news.
1
:Hnbc-2.com/news/local/2021 /12/20/leIv-resort-residents-worried-about-possible-traffic-
from-proposed-apartment-complex/
Second:
Here is a website that posted information by a group called: Save Lely, click on the
link Savelely.org
Third: Here is the link to the Collier County Application:
https://cvportal.colliercountyfl.gov/CitVViewWeb/Planning/GetFile/l 2002460
Fourth: Here is a letter from the planner/developer dated September 15, 2021. It is a request
for a traffic study waiver for the new rental complex on Celeste Dr. From Claudette Klinkerman
whose husband found this online. RE: Lely Resort PUDA (PL20210001795) TIS Waiver
Request
Dear Mr. Sawyer
Please accept this letter as a request for a waiver from providing a Traffic Impact Statement
(TIS) with the Lely Resort PUDA application submittal, PL20210001795. The Lely Resort PUD
is a vested development, and no other residential units are proposed; therefore, the proposed
amendment to allow residential uses on the C-3 tract will have no transportation impacts. We
greatly appreciate your consideration of this request
Sincerely, STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC Lindsay F. Robin, AICP Urban Planner
Fifth: Collier County will have an info session sometime in the future and then they will
review the application. Write to Nancy Gundlach, (after the first of the year), she is the
principle planner for Collier County that will be reviewing the application listed in the third
section of this email. She was at the info session on Dec. 14t", but we were not allowed to
ask her questions and she was not allowed to speak. She was there to observe.
Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA
Principal Planner
Zoning Services
(239)252-2484
Nancy. Gundlach(c-DcolIiercountyfl.gov
Sixth: Finally, this proposal will be reviewed in the future by the Collier County
Commissioners.
There are 5 Commissioners and the proposal would need to be approved by a
supermajority, which means 4 of the 5 Commissioners would need to vote to approve this
change from Commercial to Residential and the 4 story structure with only access/egress
from Celeste Blvd.
Write to theCollier County District Commissioners, again after the new year:
District 1: Rick LoCastro Rick. LoCastro(@colliercountyfl.gov 239 252-8601
District 2: Andy Solis, Esq. Andy. Sol is(DcolIiercountyfl.gov 239 252-8602
District 3: Burt L Saunders Burt.Saunders(a)colliercountyfl.gov 239 252-8603
District 4: Penny Taylor Penny.Taylor colliercountyfl.gov 239 252-8604
District 5: Williams L. McDaniel, Jr. Bill. McDaniel(a)colliercountyfl.gov 239 252-8605
Express the points that are most relevant to you, re: The Davis Development project, on the
corner of Grand Lely Drive and Collier Boulevard (7665 Collier Blvd), if built as proposed,
will have a negative impact on the surrounding communities.
The impact of this project will have on the surrounding communities are as follows;
1- The 2 building, each 4 story complex is not what the residents of Lely, expected when
their residences were purchased. They were aware that the parcel was zoned C-3
commercial, NOT residential .
2- The only access would be on Celeste Drive. This could cause a traffic jam in the event of
an emergency. How would emergency vehicles enter the area and residents leave if there
was a fire, or other emergency?
3- Celeste Drive has had repeated speeders and traffic accidents even though the speed
limit is 30 MPH. This proposed project would increase traffic on Celeste Blvd and going
through Ole and Tiger Island because of the number of residents expected and a greater
number of cars would use it as a shortcut between Route 41 and Collier Blvd.
4- The Lely Traffic Committee has already worked with the Collier Country Department of
Transportation regarding 4 safety issues in Lely Resort. This project would result in
additional traffic safety issues.
5- This project should not be compared to Inspira at the opposite end of Grand Lely drive
because there are no single-family homes within sight and traffic for Inspira does not pass
through residential neighborhoods. This traffic exits onto Grand Lely drive.
6- Ole will be the most impacted community as Ole residents live on both sides of Celeste
Blvd and many walk across Celeste to reach the communities' Village Center.
7- There would be a significant impact on local schools from the potential influx of up to 184
families.
8- The proposed structures are not visually compliant with the surrounding architecture.
9- It is a density concern, as the 2 buildings being planned are both to be 4
stories high.
For all the above reasons, I am OPPOSED to BOTH the proposed project on Celeste Dr
& Grand Lely Drive and amending the existing C-3 Commercial code for this parcel.
Signature Marlene
Landa
Print Name
Marlene Landa
Community _Ascot
Address 6827 Ascot Drive Unit 101
City, State, Zip Florida 34113
GundlachNancy
From: Gae Lennox <gaelennox@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, January 3, 2022 12:56 PM
To: GundlachNancy; mikedavis@davisdevelopment.com; fred hazel@davisdevelopment.com;
adrianaaleman@davisdevelopment.com; lindsay.robin@stantec.com; HomiakKaren;
VernonChristopher; KarlFry; FryerEdwin; KlucikRobert; SchmittJoseph;
eastmath@collierschools.com
Subject: PROJECT# PL20210001795
Attachments: location of my condo vs development.pdf
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 am a resident of Lely Resort in Naples, FL where Davis Development is proposing a 4 story, multi -family, densely -
populated apartment complex on the small parcel bounded by Collier (951) / Grand Lely Drive and Celeste Drive PL #
20210001795.
I am strongly opposed to the development as this type of construction is entirely out of character for this residential area.
Not only is it unacceptable in terms of its aesthetics, it will bring:
1) Intolerable traffic congestion to Celeste Drive, which is a small artery intended for light traffic for existing single family
homeowners
2) Debris, delays and chaos throughout the approx. 2 year construction phase from constant trucks back and forth to the
site through the single access street, Celeste.
3) Potentially unstable renters who will not have the investment we have in our neighborhoods which could bring litter,
animal waste and excessive noise.
4) An unsightly, tall structure which will throw this carefully and beautifully designed Lely community completely out of
balance.
5) Potentially lower property values for the residents in Lely, many of whom are retirees who have counted on their homes
to maintain a stable value.
6) The destruction of the quiet, peaceful, safe, small-town quality of Lely Resort which made this area so desirable to all of
us and the reason we purchased here in the first place.
7) 1 am in the closest condo to this entrance at Celeste. I will be the most affected by this development. Please see the
picture of my condo on Panther Trail marked as 8003.
I attended the meeting on Dec. 14th at the Naples Library led by Linsday Robin and we were all genuinely outraged. We
intend to make our voice heard at every meeting going forward. We urge you to vote down the re -zoning of this parcel
and urge Davis Development to build elsewhere.
Sincerely,
Gae Lennox
8003 Panther Trail, Apt 702
Naples, FL 34113
GundlachNancy
From: Tom Rodeheaver <trodeheaver@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 7:07 PM
To: GundlachNancy; LoCastroRick; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt;
PennyTaylor@colliercountyfl.gov; Bill.McDaniel@colliercou9ntyfl.gov
Subject: proposed apartment complex in the area bounded by Collier Boulevard, Grand Lely
Drive, and Celeste Drive
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.
Dear Ladies and Gentleman,
I am writing in regards to a proposed zoning amendment to allow construction of two apartment buildings in a lot
bounded by Grand Lely Drive, Collier Blvd, and Celeste Drive and now zoned commercial.
I understand that you all will be involved in reviewing and approving this project if it is to come to fruition.
Many of my neighbors have concerns about the proposed re -zoning and construction project, and I share many of their
concerns. I am opposed to this project and urge you not to approve it as proposed.
My main concern is the effect on traffic in the current Lely Resort, especially the developments of Ole, Tiger Island, and
Lely Island Estates (where I live). I have seen excerpts from a letter from Standec Consulting Services requesting a
waiver to the requirement for a Traffic Impact Study for this project. My mind boggles at the idea that there is no need
for such a study, unless it is because the project will have such an obvious deleterious effect on traffic that it should be
rejected out of hand.
Specifically, I note that:
1. The only access to the apartment complex would be on Celeste Drive. This will result
in additional traffic through the nearby neighborhoods, which already receive
considerable drive -through traffic from people seeking short-cuts to Freedom Square,
Lely High School, Tamiani Trail north and south of Collier Blvd, and Collier Blvd
south of Tamiani Trail. The streets in these neighborhoods were planned and are
acceptable for local traffic and some drive -through traffic, but in many places even
the current level of drive -through traffic is too high. Speed limits of 20 to 30 MPH
on these streets are frequently exceeded and not enforced. The addition of 184
apartments worth of people driving through our neighborhoods would be a real safety
concern.
2. The limitation of ingress and egress to one entrance on Celeste Drive would cause a
traffic jam in the event of an emergency. How would emergency vehicles enter the area
and residents leave if there were a fire or other emergency?
3.Ole will be the most impacted community as Ole residents live on both sides of
Celeste Blvd and many walk across Celeste to reach the community's Village
Center. Additional traffic will make that crossing, and any walking or bicycling
along Celeste, more dangerous.
People are moving to Southwest Florida for the same reasons as many of us who live here already. I get that they have
to live somewhere. But they don't have to make the areas where they live so much worse because of their presence.
1
I object to this project and urge you to reject it. I would withdraw my objection if you required safe, reasonable access
from Collier Blvd directly in to and out of the apartment project.
Thank you for your consideration.
Thomas N. Rodeheaver
8992 Lely Island Circle
Naples, FL 34113
571-331-8968
trodeheaver@gmail.com
GundlachNancy
From: Renee Lokay <rclokay@comcast.net>
Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2021 2:44 PM
To: GundlachNancy
Subject: STOP Lely apartments
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.
Hello
Need your help regarding the proposed Apartment Building adversely affecting our "Award Winning" Lely Resort!
I am sure you know by now that there is a major outrage by THOUSANDS of Lely Resort and surrounding neighborhood
residents objecting to the rezoning of the parcel of land on Grand Lely Drive and 951!
What are the steps for Rezoning??While many residents are concerned about dangerous traffic conditions and flow that
is only one of the many reasons this rezoning should never be approved! I am a 20 year resident of our Beautiful Lely
Resort!
I am also responsible for the costs as well as all residents of Lely Resort for money spent making this an aesthetically
beautiful community with our famous Freedom Horses and landscaping! I get sick thinking of the thought of a four story
monstrosity on the corner of our beautiful entrance Please help us to squash this rezoning request before it even gets
any traction Renee Valant
Sent from my iPhone
GundlachNancy
From: SawyerMichael
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2022 11:11 AM
To: Renee Lokay; GundlachNancy
Cc: VargaCecilia
Subject: RE: Is this legal???
Ms. Lokay,
Thank you. I appreciate your clarification and I apologize ahead of time for the length of this response.
There are two parts to our transportation reviews in the county, the first is with the current phase for the proposed PUD
use change at Lely. I know I'm repeating information you already have but to be clear, the requested change to the Lely
PUD is proposing allowing residential uses in addition to commercial uses in this location. Our current transportation
review is limited to determining if there is available capacity on the adjacent roadways to accommodate the proposed
use change. In this case the current PUD residential units for Lely are vested and counted already on the road network
traffic counts. Vesting is basically pre -payment of transportation impacts and putting the traffic on the road network
trip counts before they are built -occur. The proposed change is not requesting additional residential units. In this case
the TIS waiver request meets the provisions of our TIS guidelines for the PUD change because the residential units at
Lely have already been counted on the road network due to vesting.
You are asking about the operational impacts which are reviewed as part of the second transportation review for actual
development projects.
This second transportation review is done as part of the development review process and is known as a Site
Development Plan (SDP) reviewed by our Development Services Department. This is a much more detailed set of plans
and documents showing the actual proposed development, building layout, parking, landscaping, etc. and is required
before building permits can be obtained. PUD's set development standards and SDP's show what is actually proposed
for construction which is why we have this two review process for transportation impacts. First review, is there capacity
on our road network for potential new development; and second review, what are the actual impacts operationally to
that network.. When submitted the SDP will require a TIS including those operational impacts at access points,
intersections and the network. The SDP has not yet been submitted for this location so our offices do not have that TIS
available yet. That being said staff is aware of homeowner concerns at Lely including the same access points,
intersection conflicts and the overall roadways within your community. The SDP review will include staff from our
Transportation Operation staff as well as Development Services.
I've copied additional transportation staff above so that your concerns and interest in this development are know and
can be addressed.
Please let me know of your follow-up questions.
Respectfully,
Michael Sawyer
Principal Planner
Growth Management Department
Transportation Planning
2685 South Horseshoe Drive, Suite 103
Naples, Florida 34104
239-252-2926
michael.sawyer@colliercountyfl.gov
-----Original Message -----
From: Renee Lokay <rclokay@comcast. net>
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2022 8:27 AM
To: SawyerMichael <Michael.Sawyer@colliercountyfl.gov>
Subject: Is this legal???
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.
Hello Mr Sawyer
As we all know Stocks Comercial Property on Celeste in Lely Resort is submitted for Re -Zoning for Apartment building I
know you this has been submitted to you with the paragraph:
My question is:
Is this legal
To make this request???
This can't be legal!?!!
And the residence of Lely Resort and Verona Walk Will be affected by horrible conditions and accidents that are already
happening at CelesteM
I am requesting that this property stays as is "Zoned Commercial" as this was the reason we have all made our Life's
Highest Investment "Our Homes"!
I am requesting a copy of the traffic study you will be doing because obvious this should kill this project and can't be
legal not to do one??!!
Please reply to this letter
Renee Valant
8982 Lely Island Circle
Naples FI 34113
> Request Dear Mr. Sawyer Please accept this letter as a request for a
> waiver from providing a Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) with the Lely
> Resort PUDA application submittal,
Sent from my iPhone
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.
GundlachNancy
From: Renee Lokay <rclokay@comcast.net>
Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2021 2:15 PM
To: GundlachNancy
Subject: Lely Resort Appointments
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.
Hello
There are thousands of Residents that these proposed rental unit will affect our in a very negative way.
It will make very dangerous traffic conditions and ruin and affect most all of Lely Resort Please put a STOP to this
project!!
What are the Steps that are taken for Rezoning???
Please help
Renee Valant
Sent from my iPhone
GundlachNancy
From: BellowsRay
Sent: Friday, December 31, 2021 1:57 PM
To: GundlachNancy
Subject: FW: Lely Apartments
Hi Nancy,
I think this is your project.
Ray
Raymond V. Bellows, Zoning Manager
Zoning Division - Zoning Services Section Growth Management Department
Telephone: 239.252.2463; Fax: 239.252.6350
Exceeding expectations, every day!
Tell us how we are doing by taking our Zoning Division Survey at https://goo.gl/eXjvgT.
-----Original Message -----
From: Renee Lokay <rclokay@comcast. net>
Sent: Friday, December 31, 20219:15 AM
To: BellowsRay <Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov>
Subject: Lely Apartments
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.
>> The Davis Development project, on the corner of Grand Lely Drive and Collier Boulevard (7665 Collier Blvd), if built as
proposed, will have a negative impact on the surrounding communities.
>> The impact of this project will have on the surrounding communities are as follows;
>> 1- The 2 building, each 4 story complex is not what the residents of Lely, expected when their residences were
purchased. They were aware that the parcel was zoned C-3 commercial, NOT residential .
>>2- The only access would be on Celeste Drive. This could cause a traffic jam in the event of an emergency. How
would emergency vehicles enter the area and residents leave if there was a fire, or other emergency?
>> 3- Celeste Drive has had repeated speeders and traffic accidents even though the speed limit is 30 MPH. This
proposed project would increase traffic on Celeste Blvd and going through Ole and Tiger Island because of the number
of residents expected and a greater number of cars would use it as a shortcut between Route 41 and Collier Blvd.
>> 4- The Lely Traffic Committee has already worked with the Collier Country Department of Transportation regarding
4 safety issues in Lely Resort. This project would result in additional traffic safety issues.
>> 5- This project should not be compared to Inspira at the opposite end of Grand Lely drive because there are no
single-family homes within sight and traffic for Inspira does not pass through residential neighborhoods. This traffic exits
onto Grand Lely drive.
>> 6- Ole will be the most impacted community as Ole residents live on both sides of Celeste Blvd and many walk
across Celeste to reach the communities' Village Center.
>> 7- There would be a significant impact on local schools from the potential influx of up to 184 families.
>> 8- The proposed structures are not visually compliant with the surrounding architecture.
>> 9- It is a density concern, as the 2 buildings being planned are both to be 4 stories high.
>> For all the above reasons, I am OPPOSED to BOTH the proposed project on Celeste Dr & Grand Lely Drive and
amending the existing C-3 Commercial code for this parcel.
>> Signature Renee
>> Valant
>> Print Name
>> Community Lely Resort
>> Address 8982 Lely Island Cr
>> Unit City, State, Zip Naples FI
>> 34113
Sent from my iPhone
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.
GundlachNancy
From: Amy Malley <amy.d.malley@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2021 8:48 PM
To: GundlachNancy
Subject: Proposed development near Lely Resort
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.
As a 13 year resident of Lely (originally in Ole and most recently within the Classics), I am writing to express my most
sincere disapproval of the apartment complex being proposed near the Celeste/Grand Lely intersection. As this area has
grown in recent years, we've seen more and more 'cut through' traffic through an area that was never intended to serve
anything but the residents of Lely Resort. Accidents (and many near accidents) are a regular occurrence at the circle
right at the aforementioned intersection. Pedestrians and bicyclists as well as are at risk daily... even with today's traffic
levels. The addition of the proposed apartment complex, with no egress from 951 will only complicate an already
dangerous intersection.
Please do not allow such development to proceed on this plot. Please preserve the safety of the residents of Lely.
Thank you for your consideration.
Amy Malley
7793 Hawthorne Dr
Naples, FL 34113
GundlachNancy
From: Karen Manross <kamanross@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2021 8:00 PM
To: GundlachNancy
Subject: Regarding rezoning of Lely Resort tract 12 PUDA C-3
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.
Dear Ms. Gundlach, Mr,LoCastro, Mr. Solis, Mr. Saunders, Ms. Taylor, and Mr. McDaniel:
Please do not change the zoning from commercial to residential. It would create even more undo stress and the
traffic safety issues that we already have here in Lely especially at the intersection including Celeste Drive, Collier Blvd.
and Grand Lely Drive. It's bad enough that the Lely exit from Grand Lely Drive doesn't have a designated right turn lane
to alleviate the backup of traffic that occurs from people driving straight across 951 into Verona Walk. Adding a large
residential high rise would exacerbate this problem, not to mention the speeders that race through Lely's main
thoroughfares. If this tract remains zoned for commercial use instead of residential , the busy times would be fewer and
the volume of traffic would be far less.
Please do not rezone tract 12 PUDA C-4 to residential.
Thank you and Happy New Year,
Karen Manross
Lely Resort resident
Sent from my iPad
Dear Ms, Gundlach,
I am a resident of Lely Resort in Naples, FL where Davis Development is proposing a 4 story, multi -family,
densely -populated apartment complex on the small parcel bounded by Collier (951) / Grand Lely Drive and
Celeste Drive PL # 20210001795.
I am strongly opposed to the development as this type of construction is entirely out of character for this
residential area. Not only is it unacceptable in terms of its aesthetics, it will bring:
1) Intolerable traffic congestion to Celeste Drive, which is a small artery intended for light traffic for existing
single family homeowners
2) Debris, delays and chaos throughout the approx. 2 year construction phase from constant trucks back and
forth to the site through the single access street, Celeste.
3) Potentially unstable renters who will not have the investment we have in our neighborhoods which could
bring litter, animal waste and excessive noise
4) An unsightly, tall structure which will throw this carefully and beautifully designed Lely community
completely out of balance.
5) Potentially lower property values for the residents in Lely, many of whom are retirees who have counted on
their homes to maintain a stable value.
6) The destruction of the quiet, peaceful, safe, small-town quality of Lely Resort which made this area so
desirable to all of us and the reason we purchased here in the first place.
I attended the meeting on Dec. 14th at the Naples Library lead by Linsday Robin and we were all genuinely
outraged. We intend to make our voice heard at every meeting going forward. We urge you to vote down the
re -zoning of this parcel and urge Davis Development to build elsewhere.
Sincerely.
Thomas G Mockler
Veronawalk Resident
7991 Valentina Ct
Naples, FL 34114
GundlachNancy
From: Bonnie M <bonniemurphy357@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2022 8:45 PM
To: GundlachNancy
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.
Dear Ms, Gundlach
I am a resident of Lely Resort in Naples, FL where Davis Development is proposing a 4 story, multi -family, densely -
populated apartment complex on the small parcel bounded by Collier (951) / Grand Lely Drive and Celeste Drive PL #
20210001795.
1 am strongly opposed to the development as this type of construction is entirely out of character for this residential
area. Not only is it unacceptable in terms of its aesthetics, it will bring:
1) Intolerable traffic congestion to Celeste Drive, which is a small artery intended for light traffic for existing single
family homeowners
2) Debris, delays and chaos throughout the approx. 2 year construction phase from constant trucks back and forth to
the site through the single access street, Celeste.
3) Potentially unstable renters who will not have the investment we have in our neighborhoods which could bring litter,
animal waste and excessive noise
4) An unsightly, tall structure which will throw this carefully and beautifully designed Lely community completely out of
balance.
5) Potentially lower property values for the residents in Lely, many of whom are retirees who have counted on their
homes to maintain a stable value.
6) The destruction of the quiet, peaceful, safe, small-town quality of Lely Resort which made this area so desirable to all
of us and the reason we purchased here in the first place.
I attended the meeting on Dec. 14th at the Naples Library lead by Linsday Robin and we were all genuinely outraged.
We intend to make our voice heard at every meeting going forward. We urge you to vote down the re -zoning of this
parcel and urge Davis Development to build elsewhere.
Sincerely.
Bonnie Murphy
8941 Malibu St, Naples, FL 34113 unit 103.
732 575 2209 phone
GundlachNancy
From: Gary Nolte <garynolte@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2021 4:14 PM
To: GundlachNancy
Subject: Lely Lot
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.
Please do not allow the apartment complex project to proceed! The roads in Lely were never built to allow the amount
of traffic they will bring to our community! Celeste is only a 2 lane road & like all other Lely roads there are no bicycle
lanes which already make our roads very unsafe!
Gary & Connie Nolte
Verandas
Sent from my iPhone
GundlachNancy
From: BellowsRay
Sent: Friday, January 7, 2022 10:28 AM
To: GundlachNancy
Subject: FW: Opposed to rezoning on Isle of Capri
FYI
,Racy
Raymond V. Bellows, Zoning Manager
Zoning Division - Zoning Services Section
Growth Management Department
Telephone: 239.252.2463; Fax: 239.252.6350
C gffe_Y Cioui4ty
Exceeding expectations, every day!
Tell us how we are doing by taking our Zoning Division Survey at https://aoo.gl/eX*vgT.
From: Lorraine Painter <lorrainekaypainter@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2022 10:14 AM
To: BellowsRay <Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov>
Subject: Opposed to rezoning on Isle of Capri
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 am opposed to rezoning of the Fiedler's Creek property parcel on Isle of Capri because of the density of population on
that small parcel that it would cause which would be hard to support with infrastructure and particularly roads on that
small island. It would be a financial burden for the Isles of Capri.
Lorraine Painter
414 Panay Ave.
Naples. FL 34113 (Isles of Capri)
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.
GundlachNancy
From: Steven Pergola <sgpergola @gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, February 7, 2022 8:31 PM
To: GundlachNancy
Subject: Proposal for construction
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.
Dear Ms. Gundlach,
I would like to know the current status of the proposed construction at the intersection of Grand Lely Drive and
Collier Boulevard. I am strongly opposed to changing the use of this property to high density, high rise residential
use. Maintaining low rise commercial use would serve the community better. It would change the whole atmosphere in
the area for the worse, increase traffic at this busy intersection, adversely impact safety and lower property values.
Residents should be be able to vote on this proposal and be able to voice their opinions.
Thank you,
Steven Pergola
GundlachNancy
From: Kevin Steele <kmsteelel @gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 2, 2022 8:25 AM
To: GundlachNancy
Subject: Proposed Lely Development
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.
As I am sure you are abundantly aware we have a potential development going into Lely
Resort. I am adding my voice to many who find various components of this project totally
unacceptable.
To Wit:
1. The only access and egress would be from Celeste. There is currently no
design to have access and egress to this complex from 951. Steering all
traffic through this small pedestrian trafficked road is completely unrealistic
and dangerous This would put significantly more traffic not only onto
Celeste but also through the Lely residential areas of Ole, Verandas, Tiger
Island, etc. Putting many more cars through the Lely residential communities,
traversing to Lely Resort Blvd... to drive "the back roads" to get to US 41.
What if a fire occurred, how would all these residents be able to exit that area,
all would be converging through one egress? Also then how would emergency
vehicles (fire, police, first responders get into the complex, with people trying
to exit all from on access/egress point?
2 Lely already has issues with driver speeding through the neighborhoods,
this would add to this.
3. The Lely Traffic Committee has already worked with Collier County DOT
(Department of Transportation) on 4 safety issues in the Lely
Community. There have been several deaths of drivers and traffic
intervention was needed. I think that this is going to result in further
traffic/safety issues.
4 It is a density concern, as the 2 buildings are both to be 4 stories high. Is it
within fire code to over 500 residents with only one small exit in an
emergency? When will a traffic study be done? We are told that it happens
after approval --really! Talk about too little too late.
5 This should not be compared to Inspira. Inspira has access and egress
onto Grand Lely Blvd, and those renters do not then travel through the
residential neighborhoods of Lely.
As I stated in the subject line we need your help. I would like to see it stopped
completely but that may be unrealistic. At the very least the density should be
reduced significantly and there should be no entrance or exit from Celeste. If
Collier is not an option then the project should not be approved -period.
PS - I have been very pleased with your energy and efforts to date for our
county.
Best regards
Kevin Steele
6665 Alden Woods Cir 201
Naples Fl 34113
978-807-8283
GundlachNancy
From: Stephanie Rhodes <strhodes49@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2021 4:13 PM
To: HomiakKaren; VernonChristopher; KarlFry; FryerEdwin; KlucikRobert; Shea Paul;
GundlachNancy
Subject: Planned development on Collier and Grand Lely
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.
December 17,2021
Dear Collier County Planning Commission,
I am writing this letter to express my strong opposition to allowing an amendment to the C-3 Commercial zoning on the
parcel at the SW corner of Collier Blvd and Grand Lely.
I attended the neighborhood information meeting on 12/15/21 presented by Davis Development with Q&A from Davis
personnel and a Stock Management attorney.
As a resident of The Verandas, I live directly across the street. I have served on the Verandas HOA BOD (not currently
serving) and am presently on the Verandas 1 Association BOD.
I have a few questions:
How can the Planning Commission make a recommendation to the Commissioners before a traffic study is
conducted? We were told that's the process
Is there is a need for the zoning amendment?
Was a mistake made when the neighborhood was originally zoned? If not, is there sufficient land elsewhere for high
density residential use? The fact that Davis Development wants to develop on this parcel is not enough to justify a zone
amendment.
Will the zoning amendment be consistent with surrounding uses?
Clearly this zoning change will not be consistent with surrounding uses. Verandas residents own their condos.
Apartment renters are not vested in our community. As the Verandas is not a gated community and will never be one,
we have no control of who uses our neighborhood as a cut through. Our road is private and our residents pay for the
upkeep. We have had has issues in the past with non-residents damaging our pool, using our dumpsters and with crime.
I personally have had my garage burglarized twice.
Will the zoning amendment have an impact on our traffic?
Renters will be entering and exiting Celeste 24/7. The original C-3 allowing for commercial use is acceptable as most
commercial business hours are usually 9 AM to 9 PM.
A few years ago, I wrote to the county traffic engineer about the hazards at the "round about" at Celeste and Grand
Lely. They agreed that the signage was not sufficient, so they erected new signs. However, the issue still exists. I often
see a car heading in my direction on the one-way lane because motorists do not know where to turn. Adding the traffic
of 185 residents (not to mention construction trucks that will use Celeste for approximately 1 % years) will turn that
circle and all of Celeste into a congested mess.
In closing, I sincerely ask that you consider the impact to our entire Lely Resort community and especially to The
Verandas.
Sincerely,
Stephanie Rhodes
8025 Tiger Cove
Apt304
Naples, FL 34113
GundlachNancy
From:
Schofield, Tim <Timothy.Schofield@usfoods.com>
Sent:
Saturday, August 21, 2021 9:35 AM
To:
AshtonHeidi; ThomasClarkeVEN; FeyEric; FaulknerSue; GiblinCormac; GundlachNancy;
LynchDiane
Cc:
Susan Vicedomini; Frank Lo Monte; patricia carlson
Subject:
Development of Grand Lely & 951. PL# 20210001795
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.
Good Afternoon,
My wife Patty and I are purchasing the home at 8028 Tiger Lily Drive in Lely and have concerns regarding the
vacant land on the SW corner of Grand Lely and 951, PL# 20210001795. We have been informed this property
may be re -zoned and developed into 180-184 high density apartments. At the time of our purchase
agreement in July 2021 we were told this would be developed as a small commercial/ retail property. We
would like to go on record as strongly opposing the development of this area for apartment units for the
following reasons:
1. Apartments, rather than condominiums/ townhouses, would be a destabilizing force in Tiger Island
Estates. Renters tend to be transitory, and we feel this will change our stable neighborhood
feeling. We realize there are existing apartments in other sections of Lely, but we feel this number of
units on only 9 acres (the application states 20 acres, but the parcel is only 9), would increase
the population density diminishing the quality of life in our local neighborhood within Lely Resort.
3. We have no gate in Tiger Island Estates. We feel a dense population of renters could potentially pose a
security risk.
4.
Adding 460+ residents to an already congested area presents safety, traffic, and noise concerns for the
current residents of Lely Resort.
A
7. We are concerned that these apartments will be used for short term rental (Airbnb, VRBO) further
decreasing the quality of our stable, neighborhood environment.
9. We are concerned that the magnitude of the development with so many rental units will decrease our
property values.
We would like to be informed of any public comment period and/or hearing regarding this potential re-
zoning/development.
Thank you so much,
Tim and Patty Schofield
Tim Schofield
Vice President- Supply Planning, Replenishment
US Foods
Rosemont, IL
847.962.2603
This email message and any attachments are for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information
that is confidential or proprietary to US Foods. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by
reply, and delete all copies of this message and any attachments.
GundlachNancy
From: Kevin Steele <kmsteele1 @gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 2, 2022 8:25 AM
To: GundlachNancy
Subject: SteeleProposed Lely Development
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.
As I am sure you are abundantly aware we have a potential development going into Lely
Resort. I am adding my voice to many who find various components of this project totally
unacceptable.
To Wit:
1. The only access and egress would be from Celeste. There is currently no
design to have access and egress to this complex from 951. Steering all
traffic through this small pedestrian trafficked road is completely unrealistic
and dangerous This would put significantly more traffic not only onto
Celeste but also through the Lely residential areas of Ole, Verandas, Tiger
Island, etc. Putting many more cars through the Lely residential communities,
traversing to Lely Resort Blvd... to drive "the back roads" to get to US 41.
What if a fire occurred, how would all these residents be able to exit that area,
all would be converging through one egress? Also then how would emergency
vehicles (fire, police, first responders get into the complex, with people trying
to exit all from on access/egress point?
2 Lely already has issues with driver speeding through the neighborhoods,
this would add to this.
3. The Lely Traffic Committee has already worked with Collier County DOT
(Department of Transportation) on 4 safety issues in the Lely
Community. There have been several deaths of drivers and traffic
intervention was needed. I think that this is going to result in further
traffic/safety issues.
4 It is a density concern, as the 2 buildings are both to be 4 stories high. Is it
within fire code to over 500 residents with only one small exit in an
emergency? When will a traffic study be done? We are told that it happens
after approval --really! Talk about too little too late.
5 This should not be compared to Inspira. Inspira has access and egress
onto Grand Lely Blvd, and those renters do not then travel through the
residential neighborhoods of Lely.
As I stated in the subject line we need your help. I would like to see it stopped
completely but that may be unrealistic. At the very least the density should be
reduced significantly and there should be no entrance or exit from Celeste. If
Collier is not an option then the project should not be approved -period.
PS - I have been very pleased with your energy and efforts to date for our
county.
Best regards
Kevin Steele
6665 Alden Woods Cir 201
Naples Fl 34113
978-807-8283
0
F�
U
r1"
To Collier County District Commissioners Date i"oi2 -ac),.
District 1: Rick LoCastro Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov 239 252-8601
District 2: Andy Solis, Esq. Andy.Solis@colliercountyfl.gov- 239 252-8602
District 3: BurtL Saunders Burt.SaundersC@colliercountyfl.gov 239 252-8603
District 4: Penny Taylor Penny.Taylor@colliercountvfl.gov 239 252-8604
District 5: Williams L. McDaniel, Jr. Bill. MCDaniel@colliercoun fl. ov 239 252-8605
The Davis Development project, on the corner of Grand Lely Drive and Collier Boulevard (7665 Collier Blvd), if built as
proposed, will have a negative impact on the surrounding communities.
The impact of this project will have on the surrounding communities are as follows;
1- The 2 building, each 4 story complex is not what the residents of Lely, expected when their residences were
purchased. They were aware that the parcel was zoned C-3 commercial. NOT residential
2- The only access would be on Celeste Drive. This could cause a traffic jam in the event of an emergency.
3- Celeste Drive has had repeated speeders and traffic accidents and deaths even though the speed limit is 30
MPH. This proposed project would increase traffic on Celeste Drive because of the number of residents
expected and a greater number of cars would use it as a short cut between Route 41 and Collier Blvd.
4- The Lely Traffic Committee has already worked with Collier Country Department of Transportation regarding 4
safety issues. This project would result in additional traffic safety issues.
5- This project should not be compared to Inspira at the opposite end of Grand Lely drive because there are no
single family homes with sight and traffic for Inspira does not pass through residential neighborhoods. This
traffic exits onto Grand Lely drive
6- This project would negatively affect home values and ultimately tax revenues.
7- Ole will be the most impacted community as Ole residents live on both sides of Celeste Drive and many walk
across Celeste to reach the communities' Village Center.
8- Lely has exiting water and drainage problems that have not been resolved by the developer and this project
would exacerbate this problem.
9- There would be a significant impact to local schools from the influx of 184 families.
10- The application for an amendment will invalidate the rationale, decision making and planning in designing Lely
and the C-3 commercial zoning.
11- Davis development has admitted that they have not searched for other parcels in Collier County that already
have the proper zoning for this type of project.
12- The proposed structures are not visually compliant with the surrounding architecture.
For all the above reasons, I am OPPOSED to BOTH the proposed project on Celeste Dr & Grand Lely Drive and amending
the existing C-3 Commercial code for this parcel.
Signature
Print Name
Community OLE' ZIE: L.fz� _ Address 9gcj (fA.A' �"k ---j /1 l3041
Unit ,c4a City, State, Zip rJVLltS
GundlachNancy
From: Bruce Topol <brucemtopol@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2021 9:46 AM
To: GundlachNancy
Subject: Proposed Zoning Change next to Lely Resort
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.
Dear Ms. Gundlach,
My name is Bruce Topol and my wife Brenda and I have chosen to retire and live in the Verandas section of Lely Resort.
We have been there almost 10 years.
We write you today to ask that you advise against the proposed apartment complex next to our home by Davis
development.
This proposed development calls for a density 12 times that of our contiguous communities and at four stories high it
would tower over our neighborhood and all of Lely.
No traffic study has been done but with the likely addition of several hundred cars all entering and leaving on Celeste
Boulevard the traffic congestion would overwhelm the contiguous current neighborhoods.
Please understand that the people who live here have done so for almost 30 years with the knowledge that this parcel of
land has been zoned commercial. Hundreds of us have bought homes or condominiums here with that knowledge. This
zoning change would devastate our communities.
Please support the people who live here. We are counting on you to look after our homes and neighborhoods.
Sincerely,
Bruce and Brenda Topol
Sent from my iPhone
GundlachNancy
From: tom Weiss <tom.weiss21 @gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2022 10:29 AM
To: LoCastroRick; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDaniel Bill; GundlachNancy
Subject: Davis Development
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.
DEAR COLLIER COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.
District 1: Rick LoCastro Rick.LoCastro(kcolliercountyfl.gov 239 252-8601
District 2: Andy Solis, Esq. Andy.(ae,colliercountyfl.gov 239 252-8602
District 3: Burt L Saunders Burt. Saunders(ae,colliercountyfl.gov 239 252-8603
District 4: Penny Taylor Penny.Taylor(kcolliercountyfl.gov 239 252-8604
District 5: Williams L. McDaniel, Jr. Bill.McDanielkcolliercountyfl.gov 239 252-
8605
Nancy Gundlach Planner Nancy.Gundlachkcolliercountyfl.gov
The Davis Development project, on the corner of Grand Lely Drive and Collier
Boulevard (7665 Collier Blvd), if built as proposed, will have a negative impact on
the surrounding communities.
There are many impacts of this project will have on the surrounding communities.
The 2 building, each 4 story complex is not what the residents of Lely, expected
when their residences were purchased. They were aware that the parcel was zoned
C-3 commercial, NOT residential.
The only access would be on Celeste Drive. This could cause a traffic jam on an
every day basis. How would emergency vehicles enter the area and residents leave
if there was a fire, or other emergency?
Celeste Drive has had repeated speeders and traffic accidents even though the
speed limit is 30 MPH. This proposed project would greatly increase traffic on
Celeste Blvd and going through Ole and Tiger Island because of the number of
residents expected and a greater number of cars would use it as a shortcut between
Route 41 and Collier Blvd.
The Lely Traffic Committee has already worked with the Collier Country
Department of Transportation regarding 4 safety issues in Lely Resort. This project
would result in additional traffic safety issues.
This project should not be compared to Inspira at the opposite end of Grand Lely
drive because there are no single-family homes within sight and traffic for Inspira
does not pass through residential neighborhoods. This traffic exits onto Grand Lely
drive.
Ole will be the most impacted community as Ole residents live on both sides of
Celeste Blvd and many walk across Celeste to reach the communities' Village
Center. The roundabout in Ole will be over run with cars all day long as people
short cut to Publix.
There would be a significant impact on local schools from the potential influx of up
to 184 families.
The proposed structures are not visually compliant with the surrounding
architecture.
THIS PROJECT IS A DENSITY CONCERN, TRAFFIC AND SAFETY
CONCERN, AND VISUAL NIGHTMARE!! (the 2 buildings being planned
are both to be 4 stories high.)
DO NOT APPROVE THIS PROJECT!!!!!
For all the above reasons, I am OPPOSED to BOTH the proposed project on
Celeste Dr & Grand Lely Drive and amending the existing C-3 Commercial code
for this parcel.
Signature THOMAS and DIANA
WEISS tom.weiss2I @gmail.com
Print Name
Community _ALDEN WOODS
Address 6665
City, State, Zip NAPLES, FL
Powered by CINC Community Association Management Software
Unit _101
GundlachNancy
From: Adele Wilson <siehsta@aol.com>
Sent: Monday, January 3, 2022 12:26 PM
To: GundlachNancy
Subject: Save Lely construction
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.
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
Dear Ms. Nancy Gundlach
I am a resident of VeronaWalk in Naples, FL where Davis Development is proposing a 4
story, multi -family, densely -populated apartment complex on the small parcel bounded by
Collier (951) / Grand Lely Drive and Celeste Drive PL # 20210001795.
1 am strongly opposed to the development as this type of construction is entirely out of
character for this residential area. Not only is it unacceptable in terms of its aesthetics, it
will bring:
1) Intolerable traffic congestion to Celeste Drive, which is a small artery intended for light
traffic for existing single family homeowners. Traffic on Grand Lely and Collier Blvd.
2) Debris, delays and chaos throughout the approx. 2 year construction phase from
constant trucks back and forth to the site through the single access street, Celeste.
3) Potentially unstable renters who will not have the investment we have in our
neighborhoods which could bring litter, animal waste and excessive noise
4) An unsightly, tall structure which will throw this carefully and beautifully designed Lely
community completely out of balance. Including communities opposite the site.
5) Potentially lower property values for the residents in Lely, many of whom are retirees
who have counted on their homes to maintain a stable value. Including Verona Walk.
This will be an eyesore.
6) The destruction of the quiet, peaceful, safe, small-town quality of Lely Resort which
made this area so desirable to all of us and the reason we purchased here in the first
place.
I attended the meeting on Dec. 14th at the Naples Library lead by Linsday Robin and we
were all genuinely outraged. We intend to make our voice heard at every meeting going
forward. We urge you to vote down the re -zoning of this parcel and urge Davis
Development to build elsewhere.
Sincerely.
Adele Wilson
Sent from my Phone
GundlachNancy
From: Tom Z <tomzuk7@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, December 27, 2021 9:41 AM
To: Lisa Gillingham
Cc: GundlachNancy; mikedavis@davisdevelopment.com;
FredHazel@davisdevelopment.com; Adrianaaleman@davisdevelopment.com;
Lindsay.robin@stantec.com; HomiakKaren; VernonChristopher; KarlFry; FryerEdwin;
KlucikRobert; Shea Paul; Joesephschmitt@colliergov.net; SchmittJoseph;
eastmath@collierschools.com; LoCastroRick; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny;
McDanielBill
Subject: Re: Davis Development Project - Please reject this zoning change and development
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.
The Davis Development project, on the corner of Grand Lely Drive and Collier Boulevard (7665 Collier Blvd), if
built as proposed, will have a negative impact on the surrounding communities.
The impact of this project will have on the surrounding communities are as follows; 1- The 2 building, 4 story
complex is not what the residents of Lely expected when their residences were purchased. They were aware
that the parcel was zoned C-3 commercial. NOT residential 2- The only access would be on Celeste Drive. This
could cause a traffic jam in the event of an emergency. 3- Celeste Drive has had repeated speeders and traffic
accidents and deaths even though the speed limit is 30 MPH. This proposed project would increase traffic on
Celeste Drive because of the number of residents expected and a greater number of cars would use it as a
shortcut between Route 41 and Collier Blvd. 4- The Lely Traffic Committee has already worked with the Collier
Country Department of Transportation regarding 4 safety issues. This project would result in additional traffic
safety issues. 5- This project should not be compared to Inspira at the opposite end of Grand Lely drive
because there are no single-family homes with sight and traffic for Inspira does not pass through residential
neighborhoods. This traffic exits onto Grand Lely drive 6- This project would negatively affect home values and
ultimately tax revenues. 7- Ole will be the most impacted community as Ole residents live on both sides of
Celeste Drive and many walk across Celeste to reach the communities' Village Center. 8- Lely has exiting
water and drainage problems that have not been resolved by the developer and this project would exacerbate
this problem. 9- There would be a significant impact on local schools from the influx of 184 families. 10- The
application for an amendment will invalidate the rationale, decision making, and planning in designing Lely and
the C-3 commercial zoning. 11- Davis development has admitted that they have not searched for other parcels
in Collier County that already have the proper zoning for this type of project. 12- The proposed structures are
not visually compliant with the surrounding architecture.
For all the above reasons, I am OPPOSED to BOTH the proposed project on Celeste Dr & Grand Lely Drive
and amending the existing C-3 Commercial code for this parcel.
Tom Zukowski
8077 Players Cove Drive, Unit 201
Naples FL 34113
0 '-. ReplyReply allForward
On Mon, Dec 27, 2021 at 8:44 AM Lisa Gillingham <Ilg237@gmail.com> wrote:
The Davis Development project, on the corner of Grand Lely Drive and Collier Boulevard (7665 Collier Blvd), if
built as proposed, will have a negative impact on the surrounding communities.
The impact of this project will have on the surrounding communities are as follows; 1- The 2 building, 4 story
complex is not what the residents of Lely expected when their residences were purchased. They were aware
that the parcel was zoned C-3 commercial. NOT residential 2- The only access would be on Celeste Drive.
This could cause a traffic jam in the event of an emergency. 3- Celeste Drive has had repeated speeders and
traffic accidents and deaths even though the speed limit is 30 MPH. This proposed project would increase
traffic on Celeste Drive because of the number of residents expected and a greater number of cars would use
it as a shortcut between Route 41 and Collier Blvd. 4- The Lely Traffic Committee has already worked with the
Collier Country Department of Transportation regarding 4 safety issues. This project would result in additional
traffic safety issues. 5- This project should not be compared to Inspira at the opposite end of Grand Lely drive
because there are no single-family homes with sight and traffic for Inspira does not pass through residential
neighborhoods. This traffic exits onto Grand Lely drive 6- This project would negatively affect home values and
ultimately tax revenues. 7- Ole will be the most impacted community as Ole residents live on both sides of
Celeste Drive and many walk across Celeste to reach the communities' Village Center. 8- Lely has exiting
water and drainage problems that have not been resolved by the developer and this project would exacerbate
this problem. 9- There would be a significant impact on local schools from the influx of 184 families. 10- The
application for an amendment will invalidate the rationale, decision making, and planning in designing Lely and
the C-3 commercial zoning. 11- Davis development has admitted that they have not searched for other parcels
in Collier County that already have the proper zoning for this type of project. 12- The proposed structures are
not visually compliant with the surrounding architecture.
For all the above reasons, I am OPPOSED to BOTH the proposed project on Celeste Dr & Grand Lely Drive
and amending the existing C-3 Commercial code for this parcel.
Lisa Gillingham
8077 Players Cove Drive, Unit 201
Naples FL 34113
Co*er Count
y
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliercounty.gov
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
Application for a Public Hearing for PUD Rezone, Amendment to PUD of
PUD to PUD Rezone
PETITION NO
PROJECT NAME To be completed by staff
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): Stock Development, LLC
Name of Applicant if different than owner:
Davis Development, Inc.
Address: 3330 Cumberland Blvd. SE #425 City: Atlanta
-
Telephone:
770-644-0075 Cell: 239-220-9776
State: GA ZIP: 30339
Fax: 770-644-0078
E-Mail Address: GSCHAUFLER@DAVISDEVELOPMENT.COM
Name of Agent: Lindsay Robin, AICP & Richard Yovanovich, Esq.
Firm: Stantec Consulting Services Inc. & Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A.
Address: 5801 Pelican Bay Blvd. #300 City: Naples
Telephone: 239-985-5502
Cell: N/A
State: FL ZIP: 34108
Fax: N/A
E-Mail Address: lindsay.robin@stantec.com & rovanovich@cyklawfirm.com
Be aware that Collier County has lobbyist regulations. Guide yourself accordingly and ensure that
you are in compliance with these regulations.
March 4, 2020 Page 1 of 11
Co*er Count
y
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliercounty.gov
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
REZONE REQUEST
This application is requesting a rezone from: PUD Zoning district(s) to the
PUD zoning district(s).
Present Use of the Property:
Vacant Commercial
Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property: Multi -Family Residential
Original PUD Name: Lely Resort
Ordinance No.: 92-15
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: 24 50 26
Lot: Block: Subdivision:
Metes & Bounds Description:
Plat Book: Page #:
Size of Property: 515+\_ ft. x
LELY RESORT PHASE I TRACT 12
Property I.D. Number:
1073+\- ft. = 398,138 Total Sq. Ft. Acres: 9.14
Address/ General Location of Subject Property: 7665 Collier Blvd.
Directly south of Grand Lely Drive, east of Celeste Dr., and west of CR 951
PUD District (refer to LDC subsection 2.03.06 Q
❑ Commercial ❑ Residential ❑ Community Facilities
❑■ Mixed Use ❑ Other:
❑ Industrial
March 4, 2020 Page 2 of 11
Co*er Count
y
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliercounty.gov
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE
Zoning
Land Use
N
PUD (Lely Resort)
Grand Lely Drive; Commercial
S
PUD (Lely Resort)
Celeste Drive; Residential
E
PUD (Verona Walk)
CR 951; Residential
W
PUD (Lely Resort)
Celeste Drive; Residential
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/]ndex.aspx?page=774.
Name of Homeowner Association: Lely Resort Golf & Country Club
Mailing Address: 7989 Grand Lely Drive City: Naples
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address:
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address:
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address:
City:
State: FL Zip: 34113
State: ZIP:
City: State: ZIP:
City: State: ZIP:
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address: City: State: ZIP:
March 4, 2020 Page 3 of 11
CACT Count
y
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliercounty.gov
EVALUATION CRITERIA
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
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 ascertain whether or not the
request is affected by existing deed restrictions.
March 4, 2020 Page 4 of 11
Co*er Count
y
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliercounty.gov
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
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?
No
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.
'UBLIC 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.
March 4, 2020 Page 5 of 11
Co*er Count
y
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliercounty.gov
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
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.
N/A
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.
N/A
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.
March 4, 2020 Page 7 of 11
Co*er Count
y
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliercounty.gov
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS
FOR PUD REZONE REQUEST
APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION
Name of Applicant(s): Davis Development, Inc.
Address: 3330 Cumberland Blvd. SE #425 City: Atlanta
Telephone:770-644-0075 Cell: 239-220-9776
State: GA ZIP: 30339
Fax: 770-644-0078
E-Mail Address: GSCHAUFLER@DAVISDEVELOPMENT.COM
Address of Subject Property (If available): 7665 COLLIER BLVD
City: Naples
State: FL ZIP: 34113
r20PERTY INFORMATION
Section/Township/Range: 3/ 5/ 26
Lot: Block: Subdivision:
Metes & Bounds Description:
Plat Book: Page #:
LELY RESORT PHASE I TRACT 12
Property I.D. Number: 55425003255
TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED
Check applicable system:
a. County Utility System
0
b. City Utility System
❑
C. Franchised Utility System
❑ Provide Name: South County WRF
d. Package Treatment Plant
❑ (GPD Capacity): 16 MGD
e. Septic System
❑
I TYPE OF WATER SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED I
Check applicable system:
a. County Utility System
x❑
b. City Utility System
❑
C. Franchised Utility System
❑
d. Private System (Well)
❑
Provide Name: South County Regional WTP
Total Population to be Served: 184 muti-family residential units
Peak and Average Daily Demands:
A. Water -Peak: 178.6 GPM Average Daily: 64,400 GPD
B. Sewer -Peak: 127.5 GPM Average Daily: 46,000 GPD
If proposing to be connected to Collier County Regional Water System, please provide the date
service is expected to be required: September 2023
March 4, 2020 Page 6 of 11
Project: Lely Resort PUD Amendment
Sta nt Project No.: M
�i ` Calculated By: Josh Josh Mueller
Checked By: Patrick Noll
Date: 9/9/2021
Task: Detemine the estimated wastewater flows generated for the project.
Wastewater Flows Generated
CALCULATIONS:
F = Avrg Daily
Sewer Flow
G = Avrg
H = Avrg
A = Type of Service Connection
B = # of
C = Average
D = Total
Per Service
Daily Sewer
Daily Sewer
I = Peak
J = Peak
Service
Occupancy
Occupancy
E = Capita
Connect (GPD)
Flow (GPD)
Flow (GPM)
Hourly
Hrly Flow
Connect
per Unit.
(BxC)
Flow (GPD)
(CxE)
(BxF)
(G/24/60)
Factor
(GPM) (Hxl)
Lely Resort Phase 1 Tract 12 (Proposed)
Multi -Family Residential Units
184
2.5
460
100
250
46,000
31.9
3.99
127.5
Clubhouse (Ancillary)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0
0.00
0.0
Total Phase 1
46,000
1 31.9
127.5
Peak Hourly 18 + (P)"2 = 3.99 Population = 460.0 = Average Daily Flow / 100 GPD
Factor = 4 + (p)1/2 where P = Population / 1,000 = 0.46
ASSUMPTIONS:
C,D,E,F) Wastewater systems shall be designed to maintain adequate flows and standards as established by Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP),
using the equivalent residential connection (ERC) value of 250 gallons per day per residential unit (broken down to 100 gallons per day per person and 2.5 people per
household) and F.A.C. 64E-6.008 for non-residential (per design criteria manual Part 2)
E) Peak wastewater flows for each non-residential use below are calculated per F.A.C. 64E-6 (Table 1, Estimated Sewage Flows)
1) Peak Hourly Factor = (18+ (Population/1000)A.5)/(4+(population/1000)A.5) (from Recommended Standards for Wastewater Works , 1997) using Ten States Standards
(4.0 max).
- Clubhouse; no additional contributed wastewater flow generated considering it is an ancillary facility to the residential units.
Lely Resort Phase 1 Tract 12:
The proposed maximum of 184 multi -family residential units was utilized for wastewater calculations.
CONCLUSIONS:
- The wastewater peak hourly flow and average daily sewer flow were detemined to be 127.5 GPM and 46,000 GPD respectively.
Sta me
Project: Lely Resort PUD Amendment
Project No.: 630
c
Calculated By:
Josh M
Josh Mueller
Checked By:
Patrick Noll
Date: 9/9/2021
Task: Determine the estimated potable water demand generated by the project using estimated wastewater flows.
Total potable demand for the project
CALCULATIONS:
E =Avrg Daily
F =Avrg Daily
G =Avrg
H =Max
I =Peak
K =Peak
A =Type of Service
Water Demand
Water
Daily Water
Daily
Daily
J =Peak Hrly
Hrly
Connection
B = # of
C =Rooms,
Per Service
Demand
Demand
Demand
Demand
Demand
Demand
Service
Seats, SQ FT,
D =Capita
Connect (GPD)
(GPD)
(GPM)
(gpm)
(gpm)
(GPD)
(GPM)
Connect
Units, Etc.
Flow (GPD)
(CxD)
(BxCxD)
(F/24/60)
(G*1.35)
(G*0.5)
(FxPeak)
(J/24160)
Lely Resort Phase 1 Tract 12 (Proposed)
Multi -Family Residential Units
184
2.5
140
350
64,400
44.7
60.4
22.4
257,122
178.E
Clubhouse (Ancillary)
0
0
0
0
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
Total (Phase 1)
64,400
44.72
60.4
22.4
178.6
Cofer Count
y
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliercounty.gov
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
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
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
COPIES
REQUIRED
NOT
REQUIRED
Cover Letter with Narrative Statement including a detailed description of
why amendment is necessary
1
❑
❑
Completed Application with required attachments (download latest version)
1
Pre -application meeting notes
1
0
❑
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
0
❑
List Identifying Owner and all parties of corporation
1
0
❑
Signed and sealed Boundary Survey
1
❑
0
Architectural Rendering of proposed structures
1
❑
0
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
❑
El
Historical Survey
1
❑
ED
School Impact Analysis Application, if applicable
1
0
❑
Electronic copy of all required documents
1
0
❑
Completed Exhibits A-F (see below for additional information)'
❑
❑
0
List of requested deviations from the LDC with justification for each (this
document is separate from Exhibit E)
0
❑
❑
Checklist continues on next page
March 4, 2020 Page 9 of 11
Co*er Count
y
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliercounty.gov
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
Revised Conceptual Master Site Plan 24" x 36"and One 8 %" 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:
El
School District (Residential Components): Amy
Lockheart
El
conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Johnson
❑ ■
Utilities Engineering: Eric Fey
❑■
Parks and Recreation: Barry Williams (Director)
0
Emergency Management: Dan Summers
❑
Immokalee Water/Sewer District:
❑
City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director
❑E
Other: Enviro Review by Craig Brown
❑
I City of Naples Utilities
❑
Other:
ASSOCIATED FEES FOR APPLICATION
X 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
X PUD Amendment: $6,000.00* plus $25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre
X 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
*Additional fees to be determined at Methodology Meeting.
o Minor Study Review: $750.00
o Major Study Review $1,500.00
March 4, 2020 Page 10 of 11
CACT Count
y
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliercounty.gov (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
Legal Advertising Fees:
X CCPC: $1,125.00
X BCC: $500.00
X School Concurrency Fee, if applicable:
X Mitigation Fees, if application, to be determined by the School District in
coordination with the County
Fire Code Plans Review Fees are not listed, but 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. All checks payable to: Board of County Commissioners.
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.
*Additional fee for the 5t' and subsequent re -submittal will be accessed at 20% of the original fee.
9/ 15/21
Signature of Petitioner or Agent
Lindsay Robin, AICP
Printed named of signing party
Date
March 4, 2020 Page 11 of 11
Coder Count
y
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliercountyfl.gov (239) 252-2400
Assigned Planner:
Pre -Application Meeting Notes
Petition Type: B UDA
Date and Time: Tuesday 8 / 10 /21 at 10 : 30 AM
Nancy Gundlach
Engineering Manager (for PPUs and FP's):
Project Information
ProjectName: Lely Resort Tract 12 (PUDA)
PL#: 20210001795
Property ID #: 55425003255 Current Zoning: PUD
Blvd., Maples FL 34113
Project Address: 7 6 6 5 C o 11 i e r City: State: Zip:
Applicant: Lindsay Robin- Stantec
Agent Name: Lindsay Robin phone. 239-985-5502
2639 Professional Cir#101,Fort Myers, FL 33966
Agent/Firm Address: city: State: Zip:
Property owner: Stock Development LLC
Please provide the following, if applicable:
i. Total Acreage: 9.14
ii. Proposed # of Residential Units:to
olo
iii. Proposed Commercial Square Footage:
iv. For Amendments, indicate the original petition number:
V. If there is an Ordinance or Resolution associated with this project, please indicate the
type and number:
vi. If the project is within a Plat, provide the name and AR#/PL#:
Updated 1/12/2021 Page 1 1 of 5
Co*ier county
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliercountvfl.gov
Meeting Notes
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400
As of 10/16/2017 all Zoning applications have revised applications, and your associated
Application is included in your notes; additionally a *new Property Ownership Disclosure
Form is required for all applications. A copy of this new form is included in your pre-app
Note — link is htt s:l/www.coiliercount I. ov/Home/ShowDocument?id=75993
�Lc�irlL fit.` �i. i twzs ELC- F h.4 s c�'3 �fi�� A Fe, ,¢
t;t tk L, r k.a (,.,v a...� z' L4_4 U- 6,er is fe.k- 1 a JPPLIC4,, i
If Site is within the City of Naples Water Service Area please send to Naples Utilities and Planning Departments. Then, if the
petition is submitted, we are to send it (by email) to the four persons below in their Utilities and Planning Depts. - along with
a request that they send us a letter or email of "no objection" to the petition. Bob Middleton RMiddleton na les ov.com
Allyson Holland AMHolland naplesclov.com Robin Singer RSin er na les ov.cvm Erica Martin
emartl n(a7naviesgov.com
Disclaimer: Information provided by staff to applicant during the Pre -Application Meeting is based on the best available
data at the time of the meeting and may not fully inform the applicant of issues that could arise during the process.
The Administrative Code and LDC dictates the regulations which all applications must satisfy. Any checklists provided
of required data for an application may not fully outline what is needed. It is the applicant's responsibility to provide all
required data.
Updated 1/12/2021
Page 1 2 of 5
Coffier County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400
Meeting Notes
As of 10/16/2017 all Zoning applications have revised applications, and your associated
Application is included in your notes; additionally a *new Property Ownership Disclosure
Form is required for all applications. A copy of this new form is included in your pre-app
Note — link is httas:llwww.colliereov.net/Home/ShowDocument?id=75093.
Comp Planning: PL20210001795-Lely Resort Tract 12 (PUDA). The subject site (parcel C-3)
is approximately 20.02 acres and designated Urban Designation, Urban Mixed Use District,
Urban Residential Subdistrict as shown on Future Land Use Map of the Growth
Management Plan.
Lely is approximately 2,892 acres and is currently approved for a total 8,946 dwelling units
as amended with Ordinance #15-39. The applicant stated that adding approximately 184
DUs to the subject site are included in the previously approved 8,946 DUs.
Comp Planning does not anticipate any GMP consistency issues with this project but does
requestthatthe applicant provide an evaluation of Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Policies
5.6 and 7.1 - 7.4.
The subject site is an Urban Designation area that will accommodate many types of
residential uses.
Therefore, this PUD amendment should continue to be consistent with the GMP.
Sue Faulkner, Comprehensive Planning Principal Planner
8/10/21
Disclaimer. Information provided by staff to applicant during the Pre -Application Meeting is
based on the best available data at the time of the meeting and may not fully inform the
applicant of issues that could arise during the process. The Administrative Code and LDC
dictates the regulations which all applications must satisfy. Any checklists provided of
required data for an application may not fully outline what is needed. It is the applicant's
responsibility to provide all required data.
d'Ar
Updated 7/24/2018 Page I4—of-T-
CAa
ier County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliercountvfl.gov (239) 252-2400
Meeting Notes
7-n--nu' -- F-V- AJu .
,, ,ry V I"�L7N1T�7!�I{V{y ku
Other required documentation for submittal (not listed on application):
Disclaimer: information provided by staff to applicant during the Pre -Application Meeting is
based on the best available data at the time of the meeting and may not fully inform the
applicant of issues that could arise during the process. The Administrative Code and LDC
dictates the regulations which all applications must satisfy. Any checklists provided of required
data for an application may not fully outline what is needed. It is the applicant's responsibility to
provide all required data.
Updated 1/12/2021 Page 1 3 of 5
Thomas[larkeVEN
From: SawyerMichael
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2021 10:51 AM
To: ThomasClarkeVEN; GundlachNancy
Subject: Pre app meeting for Lely this morning
Thomas,
Please provide the following pre app meeting notes:
For this petition please provide a TlS Waiver fetter; (separate letter on letterhead) requesting the waiver based on no
transportation impacts because Lely is a vested development and no additional residential units are proposed.
Please let us know of any questions -concerns.
Respectfully,
Michael Sawvver
Principal Planner
Growth Management Department
Transportation Planning
2685 South Horseshoe Drive, Suite 103
Naples, Florida 34104
239-252-2926
michael.sawyer@colliercountvtl.gov
colliercountyt].nov
Michael Sanyer
Principal Planner
Growth Management Department
Transportation Planning
2685 South Horseshoe Drive, Suite 103
Naples, Florida 34104
239-252-2926
michael.sawyerC&,,colliercountyfl gov
Linder 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.
?A -GE 3./4 -
l�
Transportation Planning and PUD Monitoring Pre-App Notes
Developer 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 CPUD approval, the Managing Entity is the Insert
Company Name Here. 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."
Miscellaneous
"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.
All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the
development."
7c (r— 3.g-
ThomasClarkeVEN
From:
Templeton Mark
Sent:
Tuesday, August 10, 2021 8:54 AM
To:
ThomasClarkeVEN
Subject: RE: Pre-app Research for Lely Resort Tract 12 (PUDA) - PL20210001795 - virtual meeting tomorrow
Tuesday 8/10/21 at 10:30 AM - via Skype or Bridge Line
Morning Thomas,
I won't be able to attend this meeting.
Below is my comment for the pre-app notes for this one:
Landscape: Label the required perimeter LSE's on the updated Master Plan
Respectfully,
Mark Templeton, RLA
Principal Planner/Landscape Review
Co per County
Development Review Division
Exceeding Expeclations, Every boy?
(VOTE: Email Address has Changed
2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Napes Florida 34104
Phone: 239.252.2475
How are we doing? Please CLICK HERE to fill out a Customer Survey.
We appreciate your Feedback!
Disclaimer- this entail is not to be interpreted as an endorsement or approval of any permit, plan, project, or deviation
from the Land Development Code.
From: Thom asClarkeVEN <Thomas -Cl arke@ col Iiercountyfl.gov>
Sent: Monday, August 9, 20214:06 PM
To: AshtonHeidi ¢Heidi.Ashton@colliercountyfl.gov>; Beard Laurie Laurie.Beard@colliercountyfl.gov>; BrownCraig
<Craig.Brown@colliercountyfl.gov>; Cooklaime Jaime.Cook@colliercountyfl.gov>; CrotteauKathynell
<Kathynell.Crotteau@colliercountyfl.gov>; FaulknerSue <Sue.Faulkner@colliercountyfl.gov>; FeyEric
<Eric.Fey@colliercountyfl.gov>; JosephitisErin Erin.Josephitis@colliercountyfl.gov>; ❑rthRichard
Richard.Orth@colliercountyfl.gov>; PollardBrandi <Brandi.Pollard@colliercountyfl.gov>; AshkarSally
<Sally.Ashkar@coIliercountyfl.gov>; SawyerMichael <Michael.Sawyer@coIIiercountyfl.gov>; Templeton Mark
<Mark.Templeton@colliercountyfl.gov>; WilkieKirsten <Kirsten.Wilkie@colliercountyfl.gov>
Cc: GundlachNancy Nancy.Gundlach@colliercountyfl.gov>; YoungbloodAndrew
<And rew.Youngblood @colliercountyfl.gov>
Subject: Pre-app Research for Leiy Resort Tract 12 (PUDA) - PL20210001795 - virtual meeting tomorrow Tuesday
8/10/21 at 10:30 AM - via Skype or Bridge Line
Good Afternoon All,
��Q 3.C:<
Go er count
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliercount I. o(239) 252-2400
Pre -Application Meeting Sign -In Sheet
PL# 20210001795
Collier County Contact Information:
Name
Review Discipline
Phone
Email
_ Maggie Acevedo
North Collier Fire
252-2309
macevedo@northcollierfire.com
Steve Baluch
Transportation Planning
252-2361
stephen.baluch@colliercountyfl.gov
Ray Bellows
Zoning, Planning Manager
252-2463
raymond.bellows@colliercountyfl.gov
Laurie Beard
PUD Monitoring
252-5782
laurie.beard@colliercountyfl.gov
Craig Brown
Environmental Specialist
252-2548
craig.brown @colIiercountyfLgov
Alexandra Casanova
Operations Coordinator
252-2658
Alexandra.casanova@col liercountyfl. ov
Heidi Ashton Cicko
Managing Asst. County
Attorney
252-8773
heidi.ashton@colliercountyfl.gov
Thomas Clarke
Zoning Operations Coordinator
252-2584
thomas.clarke@colliercountyfl.gov
=1 Jamie Cook
Prin. Environmental Specialist
252-6290
Jaime.cook@colliercountyfl.gov
Jackie De la Osa
North Collier Fire
252-2312
jdelaosa@northcollierfire.com
I- AAaggie DeMeo
North Collier Fire
252-2308
pdemeo@northcollierfire.com
Eric Fey, P.E.
Utility Planning
252-1037
eric.fey@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Tim Finn, AICP
Zoning Principal Planner
252-4312
timothy.finn@coiliercountyfl.gov
Sue Faulkner
Comprehensive Planning
252-5715
sue.faulkner@coil iercount I. ov
Jeremy Frantz
LDC Manager
252-2305
Jeremy,Frantz@colliercountyfl.gov
LI Michael Gibbons
Structural/Residential Plan
Review
252-2426
michael.gibbons@colliercountyfl.gov
1 Storm Gewirtz, P.E.
Engineering Stormwater
252-2434
storm.gewirtz@colliercountyfl.gov
C rmac Giblin, AICP
Development Review -Planning
Manager
252-5095
Cormac.giblin@colliercountyfl.gov
Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Zoning Principal Planner
252-2484
nancy.gundiach@colliercountyfl.gov
I.__I Richard Henderlong
Zoning Principal Planner
252-2464
rich ard.hen derlong@colliercoun fl. ov
i ! John Houldsworth
Engineering Subdivision
252-5757
John.houldsworth@colliercountyfl.gov
Alicia Humphries
Right -Of -Way Permitting
252-2326
alicia.humphries@colliercountyfl.gov
- Anita Jenkins
Planning & Zoning Director
252-5095
Anita.jenkins@colliercountyfl.gov
John Kelly
Zoning Senior Planner
252-5719
john.kelly@colliercountyfl.gov
Parker Klopf
Zoning Senior Planner
252-2471
Parker.klopf@colliercountyfi.gov
Troy Komarowski
North Collier Fire
252-2521
tkomarowski@northcollierfire.com
Sean Lintz
North Collier Fire
597-9227
slintz@northcollierfire.com
Diane Lynch
Operations Analyst
252-8243 1
diane.lynch @co11iercountyfLgov
Thomas Mastroberto
Greater Naples Fire
252-7348
thomas.mastroberto@colliercountyfl.gov
Updated 1/12/2021 Page 1 4 of 5
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.col liereountyfl.eov
L 1
Jack McKenna, P.E.
r
Matt McLean, R.E.
❑
Michele Mosca, AICP
Annis Moxam
❑
Richard Orth
❑
Brandy Otero
^'
Derek Perry
❑
Brandi Pollard
Todd Rieeall
_
Brett Rosenblum, P.E.
LI
James Sabo, AICP
Michael5awyer
!
Corby Schmidt, AICP
Linda Simmons
Peter Shawinsky
Mark Templeton
Connie Thomas
Ll
Jessica Velasco
Jon Walsh, P.E.
Lll
Kirsten Wilkie
Christine Willoughby
l
Daniel Zunzuneeui
Co*er C rant
y
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400
Engineering Services
elopment Review Director
apitai Project Planning
Addressin
Stormwater Planning
Transit
Assistant County Attorney
Utility Impact fees
North Collier Fire
Development Review
Principal Project Manager
Zoning Principal Planner
Transportation Planning
Comprehensive Planning
North Collier Fire
Architectural Review
Landscape Review
Client Services Supervisor
Client Services
Buildin Review
Environmental Review Manag
Development Review - Zonin
North Collier Fire
Additional Attendee Contact Infnrmatinn-
252-2911
jack. mckenna@colliercounty
252-8279
matthew.mclean@colliercou
252-2466
michele.mosca@coiliercounl
252-5519
annis.moxam@colliercount
252-3092
richard.orth@colliercountyfl,
252-5859
bra ndy.otero@coiliercountyl
252-8066
Derek.perry@colliercountyfl.
252-6237
bra ndi.pollard@colliercounty
597-9227
triegallannrthrrnlliarfirn rnm
252-2905
brett.rosenblum@colliercou
252-2708
'ames.sabo@colliergo.net
252-2926
michael.sawyer@colliercour
252-2944
corby.schmidt@colliercount,
252-2311
Linda.Simmons@colliercoun
252-8523
peter.shawinsky@colliercour
252-2475
mark.templeton@colliercour
252-6369
Consuela.thomas@colliercou
252-2584
jessica.velasco@col lie rcount
252-2962
jonathan.walsh@colliercouni
252-5518
kirsten.wilkie@colliercountyi
252-5748
christine.willoughb @collier(
252-2310
Daniel.Zunzunegui@coilierco
N) j., Alin OYA%l r��fj .v w tY or, Vvktari0?- - 5']- 0, 1-11- .A&,V i G,',-L F"o Lw:+�D
Updated 1/12/202I
Page 1 5 of 5
coiller C01.11ty
Growth Management Department
Zoning Division
Applicont/Agent may also send site
plans or conceptual plans for
review in advance if desired.
PL2O21OOO1795— Lelly Resort Tract 12 PUDA Planner- Nancy Gundlach PRE-APP INFO
Assigned ❑ps Staff: Thomas Clarke
STAFF FORM FOR SUPPLEMENTAL PRE -APPLICATION MEETING INFORMATION
Name and Number of who submitted pre-app request
Lindsay Robin, AICP
Lindsay.Robin@5tantec.com
Direct: 239-985-5502
Mobile: 239-560-5466
3800 Colonial Boulevard, Suite 100
Fort Myers FL 33966-1075
■ Agent to list for PL#
Lindsay Robin, AICP
• Owner of property (all owners for all parcels)
Stock Development, LLC
Confirm Purpose of Pre-App: (Rezone, etc.)
Propose an amendment to the PUD to allow 184 multifamily units on Parcel C-3.
■ Please list the density request of the project if applicable and number of homes/units/offices/docks (any that
apply):
184 MF units on 20.02 acres = 9.19 du/ac
• Details about Project:
The subject property is located on a C-3 Commercial tract as shown on the Master Plan.
Lely Resort Planned Unit Development/Development of Regional Impact (PUD/DRI) is a 2,892+/- acre
development zoned PUD pursuant to Ordinance 92-15, as amended. The current PUD permits a variety of
uses including 8,946 dwelling units, 820,000 sq. ft. of commercial uses, 350 hotel rooms and educational
facilities.
REQUIRED Supplemental Information provided by:
Name: Josh Philpott, AICP
Title: Senior Planner
Email: Josh.Philpott@Stantec.com
Phone: 239-313-3025
Cancellation/Reschedule Requests: Contact Danny Condom ina-Cllent Services Supervisor
dann .condomina colliercount fl Phone: 239-252-6866
Zoning OMsion • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive - Naples, Florida 34104.23-0252-2400 - www.col rg osr.net
Coder C)UHt
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX. (239) 252-6358
PROPERTY OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM
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 INDIV117UAL, 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:
191
C.
Name and Address I % of Ownership
If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the
oT stock ownea oy eacn:
Name and Address I % of Ownership
If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the
CIL.CIILdgC UI IHMICaL.
I Name and Address I % of Ownership
Created 9/28/2017 Page 1 of 3
COAT Count
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliereoy.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-5358
d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP list the name of the
1--rdi dnU/Qr iimneo partners:
I Name and Address I % 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:
f.
g
I Name and Address I % of Ownership
Date of Contract:
If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or
Is]I
ilk-Cl7, 11 d [. 1PUrdLiUn, parinersnip, or Lrusi:
Name and Address
Date subject property acquired
❑ Leased: Term of lease
years /months
If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following:
Created 9/28/2017 Page 2 of 3
CO&Y Count
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.callier>;av net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-5358
Date of option:
Date option terminates: or
Anticipated closing date:
AFFIRM PROPERTY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION
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
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 fa0ureto 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
Agent/Owner Signature Date
Agent/Owner Name (please print)
Created 9/28/2017
Page 3 of 3
CO&T Count
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.col liercou nty.gov
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
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
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
F
REQUIRED
REQUIRED
Cover Letter with Narrative Statement including a detailed description of
why amendment is necessary
1
,;-,/
lf�
❑
Completed Application with required attachments (download aatestversivn)
1
Pre-appIication meeting notes
1
❑
Affidavit of Authorization, signed and notarized
1
Property Ownership Disclosure Form
1
Notarized and completed Covenant of Unified Control
1
Completed Add resit 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 "V- 6! -rfs
1
❑or
Historica I 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
March 4, 2020 Page 9 of 11
Co*r County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliercoun�t f.go
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
Revised Conceptual Master Site Plan 24" x Wand One 8 %" x 11" copy
❑
M
❑
Original PUD document/ordinance, and Master Plan 24" x 36" — Only if
Amending the PUD
❑
0
❑
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:
ii 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
0 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.yi.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:
ZSchool
District (Residential Components): Amy
,Lockheart
❑
11 Conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Johnson
Utilities Engineering: Eric Fey
Parks and Recreation: Barry Williams (Director)
Emergency Management: Dan Summers
immokalee Water/Sewer District:
City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director
Other: r-Kc- Pehe yr*.t. 41"H4 a4XW
City of Naples Utilities
Other:
ASSOCIATED FEES FOR APPLICATION I
i' 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
VI
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
*Additional fees to be determined at Methodology Meeting.
o Minor Study Review: $750.00
o Major Study Review $1,500.00
March 4, 2020 Page 10 of 11
Ca*ier C MMt
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www,colliercounty.gov
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-5358
Legal Advertising Fees:
0/CCPC: $1,125.00
/ p� BCC: $500.00
i" School C ncurrency Fee, if applicable:
:ilitigation Fees, if application, to be determined by the School District in
coordination with the County
Fire Code Plans Review Fees are not listed, but 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. All checks payable to: Board of County Commissioners.
As the authorized agentjappIicant 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.
*Additional fee for the 5"h and subsequent re -submittal will be accessed at 20% of the original fee.
Signature of Petitioner or Agent
Printed named of signing party
Date
March 4, 2020 Page 11 of 11
Stantec Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
5801 Pelican Bay Boulevard, Suite 300, Naples FL 34108-2709
September 16, 2021
Ms. Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Collier County Development Services
2800 N. Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34104
Subject: Lely Resort PUD — Tract 12
Planned Unit Development Amendment (PUDA) - PL20210001795
Dear Ms. Gundlach:
Enclosed for your review is an application for a Planned Unit Development Amendment to the Lely
Resort Planned Unit Development (PUD), a 2,892.5+/- acre project generally located south of
Rattlesnake Hammock Road, east of U.S. 41, and west of Collier Blvd. in unincorporated Collier
County, Florida.
The PUDA request is specific to a 9+/- acre section of the PUD, known as Lely Tract 12, located
directly adjacent to Collier Blvd., and directly south of Grand Lely Drive and designated as
Commercial/Neighborhood (C-3) on the PUD Master Plan.
BACKGROUND/EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Lely Resort PUD was established in 1992 pursuant to Ordinance 92-15, as amended. The
current Ordinance 2015-39/PUD permits a variety of uses including 8,946 dwelling units, 820,000
square feet of commercial uses, 350 hotel rooms, and educational facilities. The PUD has been
amended several times through the insubstantial change to a PUD process pursuant to HEX No.
2014-04, HEX No. 2016-32, HEX No. 2017-03, HEX No. 2019-30. These amendments all related to
signage deviations.
The most recent PUD amendment was completed in 2015 pursuant to Ordinance 2015-39. The
amendment allowed a few changes, but as it relates to this request, it allowed multi -family
dwellings as a permitted use in the C-3 tracts, specifically the C-3 tract located at the NW corner of
Rattlesnake Hammock and Grand Lely Drive. Specifically, the amended condition allows C-3 uses
and/or residential dwellings, which allows the C-3 parcel to be developed as a standalone
residential development within the overall PUD.
The subject parcel is surrounded by Grand Lely Drive, a public roadway, to the north; Celeste Drive,
a public roadway, to the west and south; and by Collier Boulevard, a county -maintained arterial
public roadway to the west. Access to the parcel is provided on Celeste Drive via an existing stub -
Design with community in mind
1\us0227-ppfss0l1workgroup12156\active12156166301planninglanalysislpuda\initial submittallpuda_request_narralive.dou
September 16, 2021
Page 2 of 10
out. For safety reasons, an additional point of vehicular access may be provided at the southern
end of Celeste Drive.
REQUEST
Davis Development, Inc. ("Applicant") is requesting approval to allow C-3 and/or multi -family
residential uses on a C-3 designated portion of the PUD located at the southwest corner of Grand
Lely Drive and C.R. 951. The Applicant is proposing to amend Condition 21 of section 6.02 of the
PUD document to add this specific C-3 tract in addition to the C-3 tract located at the NW corner
of Rattlesnake Hammock and Grand Lely Drive, which permits C-3 uses and/or residential
dwellings. The proposed condition reads as follows:
21) The C-3 parcel at the southwest corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Grand Lely Drive
and the C-3 parcel at the southwest corner of Collier Blvd. WR 951) and Grand Lely Drive may
be developed allowing C-3 uses, as outlined in Section VI of Ordinance 92-15, as amended, and/or
residential dwelling units.
This proposed amendment is consistent with the 2015 approval, which permitted multi -family
residential uses in the C-3 tract. Through this amendment process the Applicant is not seeking any
other changes, deviations, reductions in required open space or native preserve, or any increase
to the permitted density or intensity. The proposed multi -family development seeks to provide a
maximum of 184 dwelling units, which is well below the remaining units in the PUD pursuant to
the 2021 PUD Monitoring Report.
EVALUATION CRITERIA/COMPLIANCE WITH LDC §10.02.13.B:
The request complies with the thresholds for the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the following
criteria as outlined in LDC §10.02.13.13 as follows:
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 proposed multi -family use and property development regulations are compatible
with the development approved in the area. The commitments provided in the PUD
provide adequate assurances that the proposed change should not adversely affect
living conditions in the area. Furthermore, the project will provide the required
landscape buffers and open space.
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
Design with community in mind
1\us0227-ppfssOl1workgroup12156\active12156166301planninglanalysislpuda\initial submittallpuda_request_narralive.dou
MJ
September 16, 2021
Page 3 of 10
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.
The documents submitted as part of this application demonstrate unified control of the
property. Additionally, the development will be required to gain site development
approval, which ensures appropriate stipulations for the provision of and continuing
operation and maintenance of infrastructure will be provided by the developer.
c. Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives, policies, and the Future Land Use
Element of the Growth Management Plan.
The proposed amendment is consistent with the Collier County GMP goals, objectives
and policies. A further analysis of the compliance with the GMP is provided below.
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 result in a project that is compatible with the
surrounding area. The approved uses within the PUD are not proposed to change as
part of this amendment and the previous amendment already added the multi -family
use to the C-3 tract's list of permitted uses. The uses approved in the previous PUD
amendments were determined to be compatible and continue to be compatible with
the change proposed by this request.
e. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve
the development.
The amount of native preserve set aside for this project meets the minimum
requirement of the LDC.
f. 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. The project is seeking a waiver from the Transportation Impact Statement due to
the project being vested and no additional units being requested through this
amendment. The project will comply with all other applicable concurrency management
regulations when development approvals are pursued. Additionally, the PUD document
contains developer commitments that should help ensure there are adequate facilities
available to serve this project.
Design with community in mind
\\us0227-ppfss01\workgroup\2156\active\215616630\planning\analysis\puda\initial submittal\puda_request_narrative.dou
MJ
September 16, 2021
Page 4 of 10
g. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion.
The area has adequate supporting infrastructure such as road capacity, wastewater
disposal system, and potable water supplies to accommodate this project based upon
the fact that adequate public facilities requirements will be addressed when
development approvals are sought.
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.
Through this amendment request the Applicant is not seeking any deviations. The
request is limited to allowing C-3 and/or residential uses on the C-3 tract located at the
SW corner of Grand Lely Drive and C.R. 951.
REZONE FINDINGS/COMPLIANCE WITH LDC §10.02.08.F:
The request complies with the criteria for rezone petitions as outlined in LDC §10.02.08.F as
follows:
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.
The property is within the Urban, Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential
Subdistrict, as depicted on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and in the Future Land Use
Element (FLUE) of the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP). This FLU
category is intended for PUDs that include both residential and commercial uses. The
proposed amendment is consistent with the GMP FLUE Policy 5.4 requiring the project
to be consistent with the GMP. The proposed amendment is also consistent with the
following GOPs:
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.
The proposed amendment will result in a multi -family development located on a
parcel primarily surrounded by roadways. The main land use in the general area is
residential, and multi -family is a form of residential. The project will provide the
required landscape buffers and open space, which will further enhance the
projects compatibility with the surrounding area.
Design with community in mind
\\us0227-ppfss0l\workgroup\2156\active\215616630\planning\analysis\puda\initial submittal\puda_request_narrative.dou
MJ
September 16, 2021
Page 5 of 10
FLUE Objective 7: Promote smart growth policies, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and
adhere to the existing development character of the Collier County, where applicable,
and as follows:
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.
The proposed amendment will provide access to the site via Celeste Drive, which is
a public roadway that leads to Grand Lely Drive, a major collector roadway, and to
C.R. 951, a major arterial roadway. The project is part of an overall PUD that
provides miles of internal connections via sidewalks and bikeable public streets.
Providing a connection to C.R. 951 is not possible as the roadway is considered a
controlled access road and access to this parcel is not provided direct access.
Access to CR 951 is available from Grand Lely Drive.
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.
FLUE 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.
The project provides direct connection to the interior road system that is part of
the overall PUD.
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.
The proposed development will provide a housing type and price that is highly
desirable in this area of the county. The project will connect to the existing
sidewalk network in the PUD as well as providing internal sidewalks in
compliance with the LDC.
Conservation and Coastal Management Element: the proposed amendment is consistent
with the CCME because there are no proposed changes to the environmental provision of
the PUD.
Design with community in mind
\\us0227-ppfss0l\workgroup\2156\active\215616630\planning\analysis\puda\initial submittal\puda_request_narrative.dou
MJ
September 16, 2021
Page 6 of 10
Transportation Element: the proposed amendment is consistent with the policies of the
transportation element because no amendments are proposed to the transportation
requirements of the PUD.
2. The existing land use pattern.
The proposed amendment is consistent with the existing land use pattern in this
area. The surrounding area contains residential, roadway, and commercial uses,
all of which are approved uses in the PUD. Through the use of setbacks and
landscape buffers the project will be not only compatible but also
complementary to the surrounding uses.
3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts.
The proposed PUD amendment does not create an isolated zoning district
because the subject site is already zoned PUD and there are no land additions
proposed as part of this amendment.
4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions
on the property proposed for change.
The applicant is of the opinion that the district boundaries are logically drawn
given the current property ownership boundaries and the existing PUD zoning.
5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment
necessary.
The proposed amendment is not necessary, per se; but it is being requested in
compliance with the LDC provisions to seek such amendment to allow the owner
the opportunity to develop the land with uses other than what the existing
zoning district would allow. Without this amendment, the property could be
developed in compliance with the existing PUD ordinance regulations. There is a
demand for rental housing in this area of the County. Approval of this
amendment will provide the County with a variety of housing options and costs.
6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood.
The proposed amendment will result in a project that includes restrictions
through development standards that are designed to address compatibility of
the project. Development of this parcel as proposed should not adversely impact
living conditions in the area. Furthermore, the residential land use proposed is a
Design with community in mind
\\us0227-ppfss01\workgroup\2156\active\215616630\planning\analysis\puda\initial submittal\puda_request_narrative.dou
MJ
September 16, 2021
Page 7 of 10
less intensive land use than commercial. Commercial development creates
impacts to surrounding residential that a multi -family project would not create
such as delivery trucks and traffic associated i.e. very large trucks using the same
roads and delivering goods during early morning or evening hours.
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.
8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem.
The proposed amendment should not create drainage or surface water
problems. The developer of the project will be required to adhere to a surface
water management permit from the SFWMD in conjunction with any local site
development plan approvals and ultimate construction on site.
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas.
If this amendment is approved, any subsequent development would need to
comply with the applicable LDC standards for development or as outlined in the
PUD document. The location of the proposed buildings, combined with the
setbacks and project buffers will help ensure that light and air to adjacent areas
will not be reduced.
10. Whether the proposed change will 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 values are driven by market conditions.
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 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.
Design with community in mind
\\us0227-ppfss01\workgroup\2156\active\215616630\planning\analysis\puda\initial submittal\puda_request_narrative.dou
MJ
September 16, 2021
Page 8 of 10
The proposed amendment and resulting development complies 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 could be developed within the parameters of the existing
zoning designations; however, the Applicant is seeking this amendment in
compliance with LDC provisions for such action. The petition can be evaluated
and action taken as deemed appropriate through the public hearing process. The
Applicant believes the proposed amendment meets the intent of the PUD district
and the public interest will be maintained.
14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the
county.
As previously noted, the subject property already has a zoning designation of
PUD; the PUD rezoning was evaluated at the rezoning stage and was deemed
consistent with the GMP. The GMP is a policy statement which has evaluated the
scale, density and intensity of land uses deemed to be acceptable throughout
the urban -designated areas of Collier County. The Applicant believes the
development standards and commitments will ensure that the project is not out
of scale with the needs of the community.
15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in
districts already permitting such use.
This petition is intended to be reviewed on its own merit for compliance with the
GMP and the LDC. The Applicant did not review other sites in conjunction with
this petition. The proposed amendment is consistent with the GMP.
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.
Additional development anticipated by the PUD document would require
considerable site alteration. This project will undergo extensive evaluation
relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the site
Design with community in mind
\\us0227-ppfss01\workgroup\2156\active\215616630\planning\analysis\puda\initial submittal\puda_request_narrative.dou
September 16, 2021
Page 9 of 10
development plan approval process and again later 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 Growth Management Plan
and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities
Ordinance [Code ch. 106, art. II], as amended.
No Level of Service will be adversely impacted with the commitments contained
in the PUD document.
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.
CONCLUSION:
In summary, the proposed amendment will allow for the ability to provide C-3 and/or residential
uses on the C-3 tract located at the southwest corner of Grand Lely Drive and C.R. 951. The PUD
and the requested amendment will remain consistent with the LDC and GMP; the change meets
all criteria for a PUD amendment; and the request will not impact internal or external compatibility
of the project.
The following items are enclosed for your review:
1. One (1) copy of the Cover Letter/Project Narrative detailing the purpose of the request;
2. One (1) copy of the completed PUDA Application;
3. One (1) copy of the Pre -Application Meeting Notes;
4. One (1) copy of the Current Master Plan;
5. One (1) copy of the Proposed Master Plan;
6. One (1) copy of the PUD document with changes crossed through & underlined;
7. One (1) copy of the Affidavit of Authorization;
8. One (1) copy of the Covenant of Unified Control;
9. One (1) copy of the Evidence of Authority;
10. One (1) copy of the approved Addressing Checklist;
11. One (1) copy of the Property Ownership Disclosure Form; and
12. One (1) copy of the School Impact Analysis.
Design with community in mind
1\us0227-ppfss0l1workgroup12156\active12156166301planninglanalysislpuda\initial submittallpuda_request_narralive.dou
September 16, 2021
Page 10 of 10
If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me directly at (239) 985-5502,
or Iindsay.robin@stantec.com.
Sincerely,
STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC.
Li say F• Robin, MPA, AICP
Urban Planner
Enclosures
cc:
Gray Schaufler & Lance Chernow Davis Development, Inc.
Richard Yovanovich, Esq., Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A.
Katie LaBarr, AICP; Ray Piacente, PMP; John Scott, P.E., Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
Design with community in mind
11us0227-ppfss0l1workgroup\2156\active\2156166301planninglanalysislpuda\initial submittallpuda_request_narrative.doa
Cor county
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
ADDRESSING CHECKLIST
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-5724
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)
❑
SDP (Site Development Plan)
❑
BD (Boat Dock Extension)
❑
SDPA (SDP Amendment)
❑
Carnival/Circus Permit
❑
SDPI (Insubstantial Change to SDP)
❑
CU (Conditional Use)
❑
SIP (Site Improvement Plan)
❑
EXP (Excavation Permit)
❑
SIPI (Insubstantial Change to SIP)
❑
FP (Final Plat
❑
SNR (Street Name Change)
❑
LLA (Lot Line Adjustment)
❑
SNC (Street Name Change — Unplatted)
❑
PNC (Project Name Change)
❑
TDR (Transfer of Development Rights)
❑
PPL (Plans & Plat Review)
❑
VA (Variance)
❑
PSP (Preliminary Subdivision Plat)
❑
VRP (Vegetation Removal Permit)
❑
PUD Rezone
❑
VRSFP (Vegetation Removal & Site Fill Permit)
❑
RZ (Standard Rezone)
❑o
OTHER PUD Amendment
I2EGALDDESCRIPTION of subject property or properties (copy of lengthy description may be attached)
T60834, R26 LELY RESORT PHASE I TRACT 12 also see attached
FOLIO (Property ID) NUMBER(s) of above (attach to, or associate with, legal description if more than one)
55425003255
STREET ADDRESS or ADDRESSES (as applicable, if already assigned)
7665 COLLIER BLVD
4 LOCATION MAP must be attached showing exact location of project/site in relation to nearest public road right-
of-way
• SURVEY (copy - needed only for unplatted properties)
CURRENT PROJECT NAME (if applicable)
PROPOSED PROJECT NAME (if applicable)
PROPOSED STREET NAMES (if applicable)
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NUMBER (for existing projects/sites only)
SDP - or AR or PL # n/a
Rev. 6/9/2017 Page 1 of 2
COlLier County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-5724
Project or development names proposed for, or already appearing in, condominium documents (if application;
indicate whether proposed or existing)
Please Return Approved Checklist By: M Email
Applicant Name: Lisa Colburn
Phone:
❑ Fax ❑ Personally picked up
Email/Fax: lisa.colburn@stantec.com
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 55425003255
Folio Number
Folio Number
Folio Number
Folio Number
Folio Number
Approved by: Date: 7 / 2 0 / 21
Updated by: Date:
IF OLDER THAN 6 MONTHS, FORM MUST BE
UPDATED OR NEW FORM SUBMITTED
Rev. 6/9/2017 Page 2 of 2
Collier County Property Appraiser
Property Summary
Site 7665 Site Zone
Parcel No 55425003255 Address COLLIER Site City NAPLES *Note 34113
i *Disclaimer BLVD
Name / Address ISTOCK DEVELOPMENT LLC
2639 PROFESSIONAL CIR #101
Citv I NAPLES I State I FL I Zia 134119 1
Map No.
Strap No.
Section
Township
Range
Acres *Estimated
51334 1
46210012151334
34
50
26
9.14
Legal I LELY RESORT PHASE I TRACT 12
Milla a Area O
245
Milla a Rates O *Calculations
Sub./Condo
462100 - LELY RESORT PHASE 1
School
Other
Total
Use Code O
10 - VACANT COMMERCIAL
5.016 6.2924
11.3084
Latest Sales History
(Nn+ all Calae ara lietarl Am M [nnfirlantialitvl
Date
Book -Page
Amount
04/22/02
3022-2088
$ 20,000,000
06/00/87
1278-1475
4t 0
2020 Certified Tax Roll
(Subiect to Change)
Land Value
$ 3,185,104
+�
Improved Value
$ 0
(_)
Market Value
$ 3,185,104
(_)
Assessed Value
$ 3,185,104
(_)
School Taxable Value
$ 3,185,104
(_)
Taxable Value
$ 3,185,104
If all Values shown above equal 0 this parcel was created after the
Final Tax Roll
Collier County Property Appraiser
Property Aerial
Site 7665 Site Zone
Parcel No 55425003255 Address COLLIER Site City NAPLES *Note 34113
*Disclaimer BLVD
Open GIS in a New Window with More Features.
AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION
FOR PETITION NUMBERS(S) PL20210001795
1. Lance Chernow (print name), as General Counsel and Corporate Secretary (title, If
applicable) of Davis Development Inc. (company, If applicable), swear or affirm
under oath, that I am the (choose one) owner= applicant contract purchaser=and that:
I have full authority to secure the approval(s) requested and to impose covenants and restrictions on
the referenced property as a result of any action approved by the County in accordance with this
application and the Land Development Code;
All answers to the questions in this application and any sketches, data or other supplementary matter
attached hereto and made a part of this application are honest and true;
I have authorized the staff of Collier County to enter upon the property during normal working hours
for the purpose of investigating and evaluating the request made through this application; and that
The property will be transferred, conveyed, sold or subdivided subject to the conditions and
restrictions imposed by the approved action.
Well authorize Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. & Coleman,yovanovlch & Koester, P.A. to act as our/my representative
in any matters regarding this petition including 1 through 2 above.
*Notes:
• If the applicant is a corporation, then it is usually executed by the corp. pres. or v. pres.
• If the applicant is a Limited Liability Company (L.L.C.) or Limited Company (L.C.), then the documents should
typically be signed by the Company's "Managing Member."
• If the applicant is a partnership, then typically a partner can sign on behalf of the partnership.
• If the applicant is a limited partnership, then the general partner must sign and be identified as the "general
partner" of the named partnership.
• If the applicant is a trust, then they must include the trustee's name and the words "as trustee".
• In each instance, first determine the applicant's status, e.g., individual, corporate, trust partnership, and then
use the appropriate format for that ownership.
Under penalties of perjury, I clare that I have read the foregoing Affidavit of Authorization and that
the facts stated in it arelme.
1W2,1
1 1 Date
STATE OF� 4�ISA4,4*4
COUNTY OF-GeWER ffQV y
The foregoing instrument was acknowleged before me by means of [35hysical presence or []online notarization this
day of 20L, by (printed name of owner or qualifier) ,(otter A, 4kaA l4 u%
Such person(s) Notary Public must check applicable box:
-Are personally known to me ,',q%%I����,,.
%MARTjN y
❑ Has produced a current drivers license �~P.•�,�Y�•I. ��.
❑ Has produced as identification. [0}4.� �Q �•
Notary Signature: • W
• ��• C3:
,.no
ip
,' %
CP\08-COA-00115\155
REV 3/4/2020
Col*eer County
Growth Management Department
Zoning Services Section
July 23, 2021
Mr. Gary Schaufler
Davis Development
403 Corporate Center Dr., Suite 201
Stockbridge, GA. 30281
ZLTR-PL20210001505: Zoning Verification Letter for a vacant parcel Folio #55425003255, aka Lely Resort
Phase I Tract 12, Naples, FL., located in Section 34, Township 50, Range 26 of unincorporated Collier County,
Florida. Folio #55425003255 is comprised of f9.14 acres.
Mr. Schaufler,
This letter is in response to a Zoning Verification Letter (ZLTR) Application that you submitted on or
about July 7, 2021. The applicant has requested verification of the questions listed below in bold print
which are followed by staff s responses. Documentation supporting staff s responses follows this letter.
Zoning:
The current official zoning atlas, an element of the Collier Land Development Cost (LDC), Ordinance 04-
41, as amended, shows that the subject property is in the Lely Resort Planned Unit Development (PUD).
Question:
1. What entity is the zoning authority having jurisdiction over the subject parcel?
The Collier County Government is the authoritative entity over the subject parcel.
2. What is the current zoning of the subject parcel?
The parcel is a part of Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development PUD.
3. Are there any pending rezoning applications, hearings, cases, appeals or other proceedings
which would affect the zoning classification of the subject parcel?
An application has been submitted (PL20210001795) for the subject parcel requesting a change in
the existing PUD to allow for residential uses on C-3 Track 12 which includes the subject parcel.
Ord. 15-39 which amended Ord. 92-15, as amended, contains a similar permitted use change "to
allow C-3 uses and all types of residential dwelling units as mixed use or stand alone for the C-3
parcel at the corner of Rattlesnake -Hammock Road and Grand Lely Drive" Ord. 15-39 §6.02.21
contains the amended language.
The information presented in this verification letter is based on the Collier County LDC and/or Growth
Management Plan in effect as of this date. It is possible that subsequent amendment(s) to either of these
documents could affect the validity of this verification letter. It is also possible that development of the
Zoning Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.colliercountyfl.gov
Zoning Verification Letter
ZLTR-PL20210001505 Page 2 of 2
subject property could be affected by other issues not addressed in this letter, such as, but not limited to,
concurrency related to the provision of adequate public facilities, environmental impact, and other
requirements of the Collier County LDC or related ordinances.
This letter represents a determination of Zoning Services Section staff. Should you disagree with this
determination, you may request an Official Interpretation by the Zoning Director of the provisions of the
Land Development Code pursuant to Sections 1.06.0l.A and 10.02.02.F.1 of that Code. The fee for an
Official Interpretation is identified in the most recent GMD Fee Schedule Resolution as approved by the
Board of County Commissioners. To obtain copies of any document referenced herein, please contact
Kathleen VanSickle with the GMD Records Section at (239)252-2536. The LDC may be viewed online at
/ Municode Library / Florida / Collier County. Validated Ordinances may be viewed online via the Clerk
of Court's website, www.collierclerk.com / Records Search / BMR Records / Boards, Minutes, Records /
BMR Validated Ordinances.
Disclaimer: Issuance of a development permit by the County does not 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. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the
development.
Should you require additional information, please do not hesitate to call me at (239) 252-1032.
Researched and prepared by:
Eric Ortman, Senior Planner
Zoning Services Section
Reviewed by:
Raymond Bellows, Zoning Manager
Zoning Services Section
Zoning Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.colliercountyfl.gov
Collier County Property Appraiser
Property Summary
Site 7665 Site Zone
Parcel No 55425003255 Address COLLIER Site City NAPLES *Note 34113
*Disclaimer JBLVD
Name / Address
STOCK DEVELOPMENT LLC
2639 PROFESSIONAL CIR #101
City
NAPLES
I State
I FL
I Zip
34119
Map No.
Strap No.
Section
Township
Range
Acres *Estimated
51334 1
4621001215B34
34
50
26
9.14
Legal I LELY RESORT PHASE I TRACT 12
Millage Area O
245
Millage Rates o *Calculations
Sub./Condo
462100 - LELY RESORT PHASE 1
School
Other
Total
Use Code ■
10 - VACANT COMMERCIAL
5.016 6.2924
11.3084
Latest Sales History
lNnt all Salac ara lictarl Am to Cnnfirlantialitvl
Date
Book-Paa
Amount
04/22/02
3022-2088
$ 20,000,000
06/00/87
1278-1475
it 0
2020 Certified Tax Roll
(Subject to Change)
Land Value $ 3,185,104
+� Improved Value $ 0
(_) Market Value $ 3,185,104
(_) Assessed Value $ 3,185,104
(_) School Taxable Value $ 3,185,104
(_) Taxable Value $ 3,185,104
If all Values shown above equal 0 this parcel was created after the
Final Tax Roll
Collier County Property Appraiser
Property Aerial
Site 1 7665 Site Zone
Parcel No 55425003255 Address COLLIER Site City NAPLES *Note 34113
*Disclaimer IBLVD
Open GIS in a New Window with More Features.
Zoning Map for Vacant Parcel Folio #55425003255
(Blue arrow points to subject parcel.)
Players COve DR
Grand Lely DR---,
5Q Rr 6 y��7
FLU. UR
�rT�T _tiSy OR
SV, DR
71Dflip,
o
i
;C
L
4
ORDINANCE NO. 1S- 39
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 92-15,
AS AMENDED, WHICH RE-ESTABLISHED LELY, A RESORT
COMMUNITY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD), BY
REDUCING THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS FROM
10,150 TO 8,946; BY AMENDING SECTION 2.06 ENTITLED "PROJECT
DENSITY" AND SECTION 2.07 ENTITLED "PERMITTED VARIATIONS
OF DWELLING UNITS"; BY AMENDING THE MARKET ABSORPTION
SCHEDULE; BY AMENDING SECTION 3.02 ENTITLED "MAXIMUM
DWELLING UNITS"; BY AMENDING SECTION V, C-2
COMMERCIALIPROFESSIONAL TO PROVIDE THAT THE SQUARE
FOOTAGE LIMITATION DOES NOT APPLY TO RESIDENTIAL
DWELLING UNITS PERMITTED AS PART OF A MIXED USE
PROJECT; AND BY AMENDING SECTION VI, C-3
COMMERCIAL/NEIGHBORHOOD TO ALLOW C-3 USES AND ALL
TYPES OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS AS MIXED USE OR
STAND ALONE FOR THE C-3 PARCEL AT THE CORNER OF
RATTLESNAKE -HAMMOCK ROAD AND GRAND LELY DRIVE; BY
ADDING SECTION XV, DEVIATIONS, FROM THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF SIGNS AND
THE SIZE OF SIGNS; AMENDING EXHIBIT H, THE PUD MASTER
PLAN TO MOVE A C-3 PARCEL TO THE EAST OF GRAND LELY
DRIVE AND ADJUST ACREAGES TO DECREASE RESIDENTIAL USES
AND INCREASE COMMERCIAL USES BY 61: ACRES; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
CONSISTS OF 2,892 ACRES LOCATED BETWEEN U.S. 41 AND
RATTLESNAKE -HAMMOCK ROAD WEST OF C.R. 951, IN SECTIONS
21, 22, 27, 28, 33 AND 34, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, AND
SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PUDA-PL20140002040]
WHEREAS, on March 10, 1992, the Board of County Commissioners (Board) approved
Ordinance No. 92-15 which established the Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit
Development (PUD); and
WHEREAS, on November 13, 2007, the Board approved Ordinance No. 07-72 which
amended the PUD; and
[ 14-CPS-0139211188398111 108 —rev. 6/18/15 Page 1 of 4
Le[y Resort—PUDA-PL20140002040
Words ugh are deleted; words underlined are added.
Cq
WHEREAS, Alexis Crespo, AICP of Waldrop Engineering and Richard Yovanovich,
Esquire of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. representing Stock Development, LLC,
petitioned the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida to further amend
Ordinance No. 92-15, as amended, the Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION ONE: Amendments to Index.
The Index to Ordinance No. 92-15, as amended, (the Lely, A Resort Community Planned
Unit Development) is hereby amended to add the following:
SECTION XV Deviations from the LDC. 15-1__japplicable to entire PUD unless otherwise
noted
SECTION TWO. Amendment to List of Exhibits and Tables.
See Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION TWO: Amendments to Project Density.
Section 2.06 entitled "Project Density" of Ordinance No. 92-15, as amended (the Lely, A
Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended as follows:
See Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION THREE: Amendments to Permitted Variations of Dwelling Units.
Section 2.07 entitled Permitted Variations of Dwelling Units" of Ordinance No. 92-15, as
amended, (the Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended to
read as follows:
See Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION FOUR: Amendment to Estimated Market Absorption Schedule.
The estimated Market Absorption Schedule, Table 1, of Ordinance No. 92-15, as
amended, (the Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended as
follows:
114-CPS-0139211188398111 108 —rev. 6/18/15 Page 2 of 4
Lely Resort —PUDA-PL20140002040
Words are deleted; words underlined are added.
c�
See Exhibit C, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION FIVE: Amendment to Maximum Dwelling Units.
Section 3.02 entitled "Maximum Dwelling Units" of Ordinance No. 92-15, as amended,
(the Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended as follows:
3.02 Maximum Dwelling Units.
A maximum number of 10,150 8,946 dwelling units may be constructed on lands
designated as "R" except as permitted by Section 2.07 or "C-2" or "C-3" where expressly
permitted.
SECTION SIX,: Amendments to Section V, C-2 Commercial/Professional.
Section V, C-2 Commercial/Professional of Ordinance Number 92-15, as amended,
(Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended to read as follows:
See Exhibit D, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION SEVEN: Amendments to Section VI, C-3 Commerciat/Neighborhood.
Section VI, C-3 Commercial/Neighborhood of Ordinance Number 92-15, as amended,
(Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended to read as follows:
See Exhibit E, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION EIGHT: Amendments to Section XIV, General Developer Commitments.
Section XIV, General Developer Commitments of Ordinance Number 92-15, as
amended, (Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended to add the
following:
C. Transportation
1 Prior to SDP approval
Qfim r
v m frontage on US
4.1,
the owner shall
post a performance guarantee such as a bond or letter of credit in
the
amount of $50,000
in order
to secure owner's_air share of transportation
improvements
to Triangle Boulevard
including but not limited to. turn lane& median
modifications
and/or a traffic
circle along Triangle Boulevard. The performance
guarantee shall be released by
County upon execution of a developer's contribution
agreement by
owner or upon creation of a commercial municipal service taxing
district and/or
benefit unit by
County. Tshall
b
determined at
time of _ exeQution
of the developer's contribution agreement
or
ca_lcuIated in accordance with the_lxing-
istrict.
[I 4-CPS-0 1392/1I88398/1) 108 — rev. 6/18115 Page 3 of 4
Lely Resort —PUDA-PL20140002040
Words sa%ek thFeuo are deleted; words underlined are added.
SECTION NINE: Amendments to Add Section XV, Deviations from LDC.
Section XV, Deviations from LDC of Ordinance Number 92-15, as amended, (Lely, A
Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby added to read as follows:
See Exhibit F, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION TEN: Amendment to Master Plan.
Exhibit H, "Master Land Use Plan" of Ordinance No. 92-15, as amended, (the Lely, A
Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended as follows:
See Exhibit H, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION ELEVEN: 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
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this q� day of —It) 1,1 _—, 2015.
ner��
ATTE&P
D.l],LT,ryS1� C LERK
�s?�'..
r .q
Attest es
Signature QI��. i
Managing Assistant County Attorney
Attachment: Exhibit A — List of Exhibits and Tables
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
TIM NANCE, Chairman
Exhibit B -- Section I1, Sections 2.06 and 2.07
Exhibit C — Estimated Market Absorption Schedule
Exhibit D — Section V, C-2 Commercia"rofessional
Exhibit E — Section VI, C-3 Commercial/Neighborhood
Exhibit F — Section XV — Deviations from LDC
Exhibit H to Ord. 92-15, as amended — Revised Master P1anThis ordinance filed with the
Exhibit I to Ord. 92-15, as amended - Buffer Exhibit tart of fate`s Off1Ge the
day of ul �o !
and cscknowledgement f that
f i l ing rouived th-0 day
Of zw
U Z9
[14-CPS-01392/1188398/11108—rev.6/18/15 Page 4of4 8Y oar
Lely Resort—PUDA-PL20140002040
Words ugh are deleted; words underlined are added.
LIST OF EXHIBITS AND TABLES
EXHIBIT H Ke j5 Master Land Use Plan {Prepared by Wilson,Miller-, BeFten
A Peek hie File Ne D 7 198Waldron En in�i?,. P,A.)
TABLE I Estimated Market Absorption Schedule
TABLE II A Development Standards `R' Residential Areas
TABLE 11 B Development Standards `R' Residential Areas
EXHIBIT A
ii
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040 Words are deleted;
Last Revised: June 12, 2015 Words underlined are added
SECTION II
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
2.06 PROJECT DENSITY
The total acreage of the Lely Resort property is approximately 2892.5 acres. The maximum number of
dwelling units to be built on the total acreage is 10,15 L24-6. The number of dwelling units per gross
acre is approximately 3.1-5. The density on individual parcels of land throughout the project may vary
according to the type of housing placed on each parcel of land but shall comply with guidelines
established in this document.
2.07 PERMITTED VARIATIONS OF DWELLING UNITS
A11 properties designated for residential uses may be developed at the maximum number of dwelling units
as assigned under Section 2.05, provided that the total number of dwelling units shall not exceed 10, 159
& . The Development Services Director shall be notified of such an increase and the resulting
reduction in the corresponding residential land use or other categories so that the total number of dwelling
units shall not exceed 10,15 $& . Approximately 1850 single family units and &-MG 2M multi -family
units have been planned. Variations from these numbers without an adjustment to the maximum number
of units within the project shall be permitted provided that the maximum number of dwelling units by
type shall not vary by more than twenty (20) percent. The maximum number of dwelling units shall
include all caretaker's units but does not include the designated hotel rooms. The project may exceed the
variation of twenty (20) percent of the unit types set forth in this section provided that for every single
family unit permitted in excess of 2220, the maximum number of dwelling units shall be reduced by
1.667 units.
EXHIBIT B
2-1
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040 Words s#-fuek througli are deleted;
Last Revised: June 12, 2015 Words underlined are added C�
J i J, vVV UL Vl AI.VLLI 1yV11 i 111G[ l,[a l JJJ4..
III M 11101 L-il l
EXHIBIT C
2-9
1E
RC
HOTEL RMS
CC
SEATING
*350 Rooms
1850
350 Rooms
315,000 S.F.
1850
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040
Last Revised: June 12, 2015
Words 94iiek through are deleted;
Words underlined are added ,;
R
SECTION V
C-2 COMMERCIALIPROFESSIONAL
5.01 PURPOSE
The purpose of this sSection is to set forth the regulations for the areas designated on Rey' Exhibit
`H', Master Land Use Plan IZ-M, as `C-2'. The C-2 tract is intended to provide for the professional,
office, and business related needs of area residents, supplementing the retail nature of the adjacent C-1
tract.
5.02 PERMITTE❑ USES AND STRUCTURE
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land or water used, in whole
or in part, for other than the following:
A. Permitted Princil2al Uses and Structures:
1) Business and professional offices; banks; financial institutions.
2) Churches and other places of worship; civic and cultural facilities; educational facilities.
3) Funeral homes.
4) I3omes for the aged; hospitals; hospices and sanitariums, hotels and motels.
5) Medical laboratories; medical clinics; medical offices; mortgage brokers; museums.
6) Parking garages and lots; private clubs.
7) Real estate offices; research design and development activities; restaurants; rest homes;
convalescent centers; and nursing homes.
8) Laboratories, provided that:
No odor, noise, etc., detectable to normal senses from off the premises are generated;
All work is done within enclosed structures; and
No product is manufactures or sold, except incidental to development activities.
9) Transportation, communication and utility offices -- not including storage or equipment.
10) Water management facilities and essential services.
1 1) The C-2 parcel fronting U.S. 41 may be developed allowing C-2 and/or C-3 uses, as outlined in
Section V and Section VI of Ordinance 92-I5, as amended, and up to 175 residential dwelling
units to provide for a mixed -use project.
5-1
EXHIBIT D
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040 Words sib are deleted;
Last Revised: June 12, 2015 Words mttdrlined are added
O
Any other commercial use or professional service which is comparable in nature with the
foregoing uses and which the Board of Zoning Appeals at Hearing Fxaminer determines to be
compatible in the district.
B. Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures:
1) Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with uses permitted in this district.
2) Caretaker's residence.
5.03 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS:
I ) Minimum Site Area: As approved under Section 2.04
2) Minimum Site Width: As approved under Section 2.04
3) Minimum Yard Requirements for parcel boundaries: Thirty (30) feet
4) Maximum Height of Structures: Fifty (50) feet above the finished grade of the site, plus ten (10)
feet for under building parking.
5) Minimum Floor Area of Principal Structures:
One thousand (1,000) square feet per building on ground floor.
5) Minimum Distance Between Principal Structures: 30' or '/s the sum of the building heights,
whichever is greater.
7) Minimum standards for signs, parking, lighting, and landscaping shall conform with applicable
Collier County Regulations in effect at the time permits are sought-, gLgLW urovr,�eVlsi
in Section XY of the PUD.
8) The area of the C-2 and C-3 uses referenced in Paragraph 5.02 A.11) above shall be limited to a
maximum of 100,000 square feet in the aggregate. yto tht 175
rosidrmtial dwelliatz-mts yermiUed as part of a -mixed use project.
I { J _ __F
E _ ■ =KIN { ■ - ■ {
{ ■ t I ■J.-ra
1I go -Al i! �, ■' it ■ ■ 1 IF1 ■
4-0)-9-) Any restaurant uses permitted by or associated with any use permitted by either the C-2 and C-3
land use designations of this Ordinance, only if those uses are located on the C-2 parcel fronting
U.S. 41, shall be subject to the following additional regulations:
a) No televisions shall be permitted in outdoor seating areas.
b) No amplified sounds, including music, shall be permitted in outdoor seating areas after 10:00
P.m.
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040 5_2 Words are deleted;
Last Revised: June 12, 2015 Words are added c�Q
c) No live entertainment shall be permitted in outdoor seating areas after 10:00 p.m.
d) All windows and doors shall be closed after 10:00 p.m.
44}jjM The I75 residential dwelling units and C-3 uses referenced in paragraph 5.02 A. i 13 above shall be
subject to the C-2, Commercial/Professional development standards set forth in this PPea-gfaph
4laf� Section 5.03).
i111 '! ■_ 1■■ it 1 ■1 1 '1 ■ .11 � �' ■1"� ■ 1 F i" ■.
■� 1 � i 1' <1 a I 1 1 �' "■ 1 ■.lei - ■ 1
1. .U.I IMMIX1 .i■ —
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040
Last Revised: June 12, 2015
Words stmeh thFeugk are deleted;
Words underlined are added
SECTION VI
C-3 COMMERCIAL/NEIGHBORHOOD
6.01 PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the regulations for the areas designated on 11eyj SQd Exh ibit `H',
Master Land Use Plan RZ ! 98, as `C-3'. The C-3 tract -is are intended to provide residents with
conveniently located commercial facilities and services that are typically required on a regular basis.
6.02 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land or water used, in whole
or in part, for other than the following:
A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures:
1) Antique shops; appliance stores; art studios; art supplies; automobile parts stores; automobile
service stations.
2) Bakery shops; banks and financial institutions; barber and beauty shops; bath supply stores; blue
print shops; bicycle sales and services; book stores.
3) Carpet and floor covering sales (including storage and installation); child care centers; churches
and other places of worship; clothing stores; confectionary and candy stores.
4) Delicatessen, drug stores; dry cleaning shops; dry goods stores and department stores.
5) Electrical supply stores.
6) Fish stores; florist shops; food markets; furniture stores; furrier shops and fast food restaurants.
7) Gift shops; gourmet shops.
8) Hardware stores; health food stores; hobby supply stores; homes for the aged; hospitals and
hospices.
9) Ice cream stores; ice sales; interior decorating showrooms.
10) Jewelry stores.
1 I ) Laundries — self service; leather goods and luggage stores; locksmiths and liquor stores.
12) Meat market; medical office or clinic for human care; millinery shops; music stores.
13) Office (retail or professional); office supply stores.
14) Paint and wallpaper stores; pet shops; pet supply stores; photographic equipment stores; post
office.
EXHIBIT E
6-1
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040
Last Revised: June 12, 2015
Words are deleted;
Words underlined are added
�r
15) Radio and television sales and service; small appliance stores; shoe sales and repairs; restaurants.
16) Souvenir stores; stationary stares; supermarkets and sanitoriums.
17) Tailor shops; tobacco shops; toy shops; tropical fish stores.
18) Variety stores; veterinary offices and clinics (no outside kenneling).
19) Watch and precision instrument sales and repair.
20) Water management facilities and essential services.
NT
Loire �1-1
. 1 � a �- 1 �■ 1 l
2-I--)2Q Any other commercial use or professional service which is comparable in nature with the
foregoing uses and which the Board of Zgpj g_ Annea�
Hei gyring Examiner determines to be compatible with the district.
B) Permitted Accesso Uses and Structures:
1) Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the uses permitted in this district.
2) Caretaker's residence.
6.03 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
1) Minimum Site Area: As approved under Section 2.04
2) Minimum Site Width: As approved under Section 2.04
3) Minimum Yard Requirements from parcel boundaries:
Abutting non-residential areas: Twenty five (25) feet
Abutting residential areas: Thirty &2 (35) feet in which an appropriately designed and
landscaped buffer shall be provided, as determined under Section 2.14.
4) Distance between principal structures: None, or a minimum five (5) feet with unobstructed passage
from front yard to rear yard.
5) Maximum Height of Structure: Fifty (50) feet above the finished grade of the site.
6) Minimum Floor Area of Principal Structures: One thousand (1,000) square feet per building on the
ground floor.
RIP)
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040 Words stmelc through are deleted;
Last Revised: June 12, 2015 Words uadmlined are added '.
r
7) Minimum standards for signs, parking, lighting, and landscaping shall be in conformance with
applicable Collier County regulations in effect at the time permits are sought,pr as a we
deyiatiozip n V of -the PUD.
RE
■ell l!■ , �... ,1• <F� �
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040 Words strasl�hmugh are deleted;
Last Revised: June 12, 2015 Words underlined are added
6-3
UFM
-
583
Devi 2• D vi tin - gr9n 5.06.,Q2 B 6 b which Hermits two f2� ergund or wall suns
per entrancQ IQ the d v l nt)yith_a combinedgign area of-64.ugareallow- 2
signs at the entrance residgmtial projectsi in the F D witb a cDmbined sigaMa
pgrsign, and not to exceed the height-w length oche wall upaa.�yhich it�5_ locate] is deviation
applies to the entire P D
a ! = a 1. ■ ■ !.. a ■ _ !! . ! ! �� o . . a a !1 1 411ML
allow a maximum sign h
Deviali on ILDeviation _y_Qm LDC
Sgction 5.06.02,E
12 „ which permits
a maximum
of 1 wall sign.
Rursuant to LDC_requirements for
suns wilbin
non-residential distrids,
d a maximum
o_ f two f2�
grQund signswith a height of 8 feetand
sign
ea Qf n e thanf&et
per sign at the
main entranec_to_ internal re idel ntial
community-
amenity facilities. to a_flow
for a max__imum
of one W
gmund or wall sign foreach individual
amenity
within the Pl=r's Club
at Lely R
addition
in amenity entrance signs,t
to excQed
a height of t n f
i r-Qpy
am of
f i. The is i n appfics-s-plely
tQ the
Players1 1 Re(Parcel
N o
42
and is limited to a total of six (6) wnenity
sile sign&
D vi i n Deviation c i B 4.b. -which vermils wic boundary marker sign at
each i en 1 e t r comer with imum i r f allow
for one boundgamarker sin with a maximum sign face ar o of 32 square feet at caph propert r
o-Lik-C-3 tract thw f RattltmaLe Hammock R 1 This
deviation apRIjes solely tQ the 20-acrer nated as ` Revised xhi it `H' Master Land
Use Plan, and located athe Southwest comer f 1 nak Road r Drive
{Parcel No. 53570100063. 53570100241, and 535701002251.
Deviation -6jDeviation fr¢mLDDC_ Section 5.06.04, F. 1. which permits an additional vole or_pround sign
for els havinLfr_Qptage of 150 ft. or more on a Public_ street, or combined public street frontage of
220 lineal feel, whcre there i5 q minimum of a 1,000 feet separation between such -Signs, tQ all-mfor a
maximum two 2 i nDu the - -2 tract thatfronts on U. . 11. one of whi -h may be located on the
M.61
EXHIBIT F
15-1
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040 Words are deleted;
Last Revised: June 12, 2015 Words underlined are added
C;� �.
R I db
$J $
S. / M
.l ;Ma.1 ! �1 ■ S ��
_
-11.!!1
East and TrianilIQ
Blvd, (P=el No,
55425001008�
� it . _!
� .i - �
� . • � �
-.
r rll.
1 Ir f
r rr
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040 Words strciele 4hr-augh are deleted;
Last Revised; .Tune 12, 2015 Words underlined are added
15-2 CDC
LEGEND
SYMe _ lTEM ACRES
I R
RESIOENTIAL .-- *--
1165.0
Cr1
COY MES CPAL /C OMMON PT
w.�w ■
3810
CY
C OM M ER C IAL JP ROF E S SIONAL
IK�w r
16.0
C 3
COMMERCIAL /N El G H BORHOOO
36.0
EC
EOISON COLLEGE
44.0
ACC.
CULTURAL CENTER
46.5
fk1 .
RESORT CENTER
44-0
ILOC.
GOLF COURSE
49S-0
CONSERVATION/OPEN SPACE
233.0
lv
CYPRESS PRESERVE
171.5
■6
PARK/SCHOOL
21.5
LACE
40S.S
MAJOR COLLECTOR
7015
MINOR COLLECTOR
64.0
A�
LOCAL ROAD
2G.S
Liw�
ACREAGE
xxx,%
951 R.O.W. RESERVE
9.0
TOTAL ACREAGE AREA
2992.0
TOTAL ONFTS
&90
TOTAL COMMERCIAL $O. F7.
1.135X00
EXHIB1T H
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040 Words 94uek through are deleted;
Last Revised: June 12, 2015 Words underlined are added
�
@ / all |� (
j �
2.
-
�
�c
7
2
f� , r
\
§
EXHIBIT |
FLQRTDA DEPARTMENT 0 STATE
i SCOTT
wernor
July 9, 2015
Honorable Dwight E. Brock
Clerk of the Circuit Court
Collier County
Post Office Box 413044
Naples, Florida 34141-3444
Attention: Ms. Martha S. Vergara, BMR Senior Clerk
Dear Mr. Brock:
KEN DETZNER
Secretary of State
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 125.66, Florida Statutes, this will acknowledge receipt of your
electronic copy of Collier County Ordinance No. 15-39, which was filed in this office on July 9, 2015.
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
Coiner County}
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliercounty.gov (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
COVENANT OF UNIFIED CONTROL
The undersigned do hereby swear or affirm that we are the fee simple titleholders and owners of record of property
commonly known as Lely Phase I Tract 12
7665 Collier Blvd., Naples, FL 34108
(Street address and City, State and Zip Code)
and legally described in ExhibitA attached hereto.
The property described herein is the subject of an application for Amendmentto planned unit development
( Lely Resort PUD) zoning. We hereby designate Davis Development Inc. , legal representative thereof, as the legal
representatives of the property and as such, these individuals are authorized to legally bind all owners of the property in
the course of seeking the necessary approvals to develop. This authority includes, but is not limited to, the hiring and
authorization of agents to assist in the preparation of applications, plans, surveys, and studies necessary to obtain zoning
approval on the site. These representatives will remain the only entity to authorize development activity on the property
until such time as a new or amended covenant of unified control is delivered to Collier County.
The undersigned recognize the following and will be guided accordingly in the pursuit of development of the
project:
1. The property will be developed and used in conformity with the approved master plan including all conditions placed
on the development and all commitments agreed to by the applicant in connection with the planned unit
development rezoning.
2. The legal representative identified herein is responsible for compliance with all terms, conditions, safeguards, and
stipulations made at the time of approval of the master plan, even if the property is subsequently sold in whole or in
part, unless and until a new or amended covenant of unified control is delivered to and recorded by Collier County.
3. A departure from the provisions of the approved plans or a failure to comply with any requirements, conditions, or
safeguards provided for in the planned unit development process will constitute a violation of the Land Development
Code.
4. All terms and conditions of the planned unit development approval will be incorporated into covenants and
restrictions which run with the land so as to provide notice to subsequent owners that all development activity within
the planned unit development must be consistent with those terms and conditions.
5. So long as this covenant is in force, Collier County can, upon the discovery of noncompliance with the terms,
safeguards, and conditions of the planned unit development, seek equitable relief as necessary to compel
compliance. The County will not issue permits, certificates, or licenses to occupy or use any part of the planned unit
development and the County may stop ongoing construction activity until the project is brought into compliance with
all ter conditions and safeguards of the planned unit development.
Owner Owner
John Ferry, Stock Development ,LLC
Printed Name Printed Name
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
The foregoing instrument was acknowleged before me by means of E15hysical presence oroonline notarization this
day of ,J�L•f 20J by (printed name of owner or qualifier) John Ferry, Stock Development ,LLC
Such person(s) Notary Public must check applicable box:
re personally known to me
OHas produced a current drivers license t!Yo STACEYLYNNANDERSON
Has produced as identification. =�
p * MY COMMISSION # HH 155125
Q�- EXPIRES: November 18, 2025
Notary Signature: �- -�. _- `- r,�-� O`.`O' �11uuNota�yrub�CUnde�writera
March 4, 2020 Page 8 of 11
LEGEND
SYMe _ lTEM ACRES
I R
RESIOENTIAL .-- *--
1165.0
Cr1
COY MES CPAL /C OMMON PT
w.�w ■
3810
CY
C OM M ER C IAL JP ROF E S SIONAL
IK�w r
16.0
C 3
COMMERCIAL /N El G H BORHOOO
36.0
EC
EOISON COLLEGE
44.0
ACC.
CULTURAL CENTER
46.5
fk1 .
RESORT CENTER
44-0
ILOC.
GOLF COURSE
49S-0
CONSERVATION/OPEN SPACE
233.0
lv
CYPRESS PRESERVE
171.5
■6
PARK/SCHOOL
21.5
LACE
40S.S
MAJOR COLLECTOR
7015
MINOR COLLECTOR
64.0
A�
LOCAL ROAD
2G.S
Liw�
ACREAGE
xxx,%
951 R.O.W. RESERVE
9.0
TOTAL ACREAGE AREA
2992.0
TOTAL ONFTS
&90
TOTAL COMMERCIAL $O. F7.
1.135X00
EXHIB1T H
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040 Words 94uek through are deleted;
Last Revised: June 12, 2015 Words underlined are added
9/9/21, 11:50 AM Detail by Entity Name
DIVISION OF CORPORATIONS
- f - - - — 41's rdr a rrul rttfN ,f l7r,reda sveh we
Department of State / Division of Corporations / Search Records / Search by Entity Name /
Detail by Entity Name
Florida Limited Liability Company
STOCK DEVELOPMENT, LLC
Filing Information
Document Number
L01000011007
FEI/EIN Number
59-3740488
Date Filed
07/09/2001
State
FL
Status
ACTIVE
Last Event
LC STMNT OF AUTHORITY 21
Event Date Filed
11/21/2017
Event Effective Date
NONE
Principal Address
2639 PROFESSIONAL CIRCLE
SUITE 101
NAPLES, FL 34119
Changed: 01/15/2016
Mailing Address
2639 PROFESSIONAL CIRCLE
SUITE 101
NAPLES, FL 34119
Changed: 01/15/2016
Registered Agent Name & Address
GOODLETTE COLEMAN JOHNSON YOVANOVICH ET AL
4001 TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH
SUITE 300
NAPLES, FL 34103
Name Changed: 01/15/2008
Address Changed: 04/19/2006
Authorized Persons) Detail
Name & Address
Title MGR
search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=EntityName&directionType=Initial&searchNameOrder=STOCKDEVELO... 1 /3
9/9/21, 11:50 AM Detail by Entity Name
STOCK, BRIAN K
2639 PROFESSIONAL CIRCLE, SUITE 101
NAPLES, FL 34119
Ferry, John
2639 PROFESSIONAL CIRCLE
SUITE 101
NAPLES, FL 34119
Annual Reports
Report Year
Filed Date
2019
03/15/2019
2020
06/09/2020
2021
04/09/2021
Document Images
04/09/2021 --ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
06/09/2020 -- ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
06/27/2019 -- AMENDED ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
03/15/2019 --ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
02/20/2018 -- ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
11/21/2017 -- AMENDED ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
11/21/2017 -- CORLCAUTH
View image in PDF format
02/21/2017 -- ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
01/15/2016 --ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
11/25/2015 -- CORLCAUTH
View image in PDF format
02/27/2015 -- ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
04/30/2014 -- ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
04/25/2013 -- ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
01/13/2012 --ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
04/12/2011 --ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
04/20/2010 --ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
04/23/2009 -- ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
04/30/2008 -- ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
01/15/2008 --ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
04/30/2007 -- ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
04/19/2006 -- ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
04/29/2005 -- ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
10/26/2004 -- Amended and Restated Articles
View image in PDF format
04/30/2004 -- ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
04/21/2003 -- ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
12/19/2002 -- ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
04/22/2002 -- ANNUAL REPORT
View image in PDF format
07/09/2001 -- Florida Limited Liabilites View image in PDF format
search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=EntityName&directionType=Initial&searchNameOrder=STOCKDEVELO... 2/3
9/9/21, 11:50 AM
Detail by Entity Name
Florida Department of State, Division of Corporations
search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=EntityName&directionType=Initial&searchNameOrder=STOCKDEVELO... 3/3
strict School
�V*Collier Cou���
Collier County School District
School Impact Analysis Application
Instructions: Submit one copy of completed application and location map for each new
residential project requiring a determination of school impact to the Planning Department of
the applicable local government. This application will not be deemed complete until all
applicable submittal requirements have been submitted. Please be advised that additional
documentation/information may be requested during the review process.
For information regarding this application process, please contact the Facilities Management
Department at 239-377-0267.
Please check [�] type of application request (one only):
QSchool Capacity Review ❑ Exemption Letter
OConcurrency Determination 0 Concurrency Determination Amendment
For descriptions of the types of review please see page 3,
Project Name: Leiy Resort Tract 12
Project Information:
Municipality: Collier county
Parcel ID#: (attach separate sheet for multiple parcels): 55425003255
Location/Address of subject property: 7665 Collier Blvd.
Closest Major Intersection: SW Corner of Grand Lely Drive and C.R 951
II. Ownership/Agent Information:
Owner/Contract Purchaser Name(s): Stock Development LLc
Agent/Contact Person: Lindsay Robin, AICP
(Attach location map)
(Please note that if agent or contact information is completed the District will forward all information to that person)
Mailing address: 5801 Pelican Bay Blvd. #300, Naples FL 34108
Telephone#: 239-985-5502
Fax: n/a
Email lindsay.robin@stantec.com
I hereby certify the statements and/or information contained in this application with any attachments submitted
herewith
are
true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
Y.-P 9/15/2021
Owner or Authorized Agent Signature
III. Development Information
Date
Project Data (Unit Types defined on page 2 of application)
Current Land Use Designation 0rban, Urban Mixed Use Distri
Urban Residential Subdistrict
t,Proposed Land Use Designation: Same
Current Zoning: PUD
Proposed Zoning: PUD
Project Acreage:
Unit Type: Multi Family
SF
IMF MH C G
Total Units Currently Allowed by Type:
7,096
Total Units Proposed by Type:
184
Is this a phased project: Yes o No If yes, please complete page 2 of this application.
Date/time stamp:
(3 Sta ntec
September 15, 2021
Mr. Michael Sawyer
Principal Planner
Growth Management Department
Transportation Planning
2685 S. Horseshoe Dr. #103
Naples, FL 34104
RE: Lely Resort PUDA (PL20210001795) TIS Waiver Request
Dear Mr. Sawyer,
Please accept this letter as a request for a waiver from providing a Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) with the
Lely Resort PUDA application submittal, PL20210001795. The Lely Resort PUD is a vested development,
and no other residential units are proposed; therefore, the proposed amendment to allow residential uses
on the C-3 tract will have no transportation impacts. We greatly appreciate your consideration of this
request.
Sincerely,
STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC.
(indsayy F. Robin, AICP
Urban Planner
Enclosures: Gray Schaufler & Lance Chernow, Davis Development, Inc.
Richard Yovanovich, Esq., Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A.
Katie LaBarr, AICP & John Scott, P.E., Stantec Consulting Services, Inc.
Design with community in mind
1\us0227-ppfss0l1workgroup12156\active12156166301planninglanalysislpuda\initial submittalltis waiver.docx
This instrument was prepared
without review or opinion of title by
John M. Passidotno
Chaffy Parssidotno
Wilson dt Johnson. LLP
821 Fifth Avenue South
Naples, Florida 34102
(%1)261-9300
2969115 OR: 3022 PG: 2088
UCOVIO is O11ICI11b "Coss of C0UI11 0001fl, Ili
04/22/2002 at O7:31U HIM 1. IIOCI, CUK
C011 20111111.11
Ut ns 11.51
10C-.10 141111.11
Iats:
GOO/Wen COUM 17 U
4001 TUIUI TUIL 10M 1I00
Ul611 IL 31103
_. 'Al WARRANTY DEED
THIS WARRANTY DEED, made the _j_ day of A,P I L , 2002, by Commercial
4
Properties Southwest, Inc. a Florida corporation, Commercial Properties Southwest, Inc., a Florida
corporation. as succes orpora squ* merger to Resort Development of Collier County, Inc., a Florida corporation,
Lely Development Corporati,o, hj Texas corporation, and Associated Real Estate Southwest, Inc., a Florida
corporation, whose post office address is 8823 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, Florida 34113. (singularly or
collectively "Grantor"), to Stock Dev lopment, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, whose post office
address is 8946 Mustang Island C"i e' Naples, Florida 34113 (singularly or collectively "Grantee"):
(Wherever used herein, the tc "Ojrantor" and "Grantee" include all parties to this instrument and
the heirs, legal representat`tvsn(i assigns of individuals, and the successors and assigns of
corporations)
WI TNESSETH: That the Grantor:
other valuable considerations, receipt of which
remises, releases, conveys and confirms unto
Florida, viz:
The real property more particularly described
"D." Exhibit "E." Exhibit "F," Exhibit "G," I
Exhibits are incorporated herein by reference.
TOGETHER with all the tenements,
anywise appertaining.
iideration of the sum of Ten Dollars (S 10.00) and
know!edged, hereby grants, bargains, sells, aliens,
all that certain land situated in Collier County,
"A," Exhibit "B," Exhibit "C." Exhibit
' and Exhibit "I" attached hereto, which
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the same in fee simple forever.
thereto belonging or in
AND, the Grantor hereby covenants with said Grantee that the Grant6rii 14,Wfully seized of said land
in fee simple; that the Grantor has good right and lawful authority to sell, ccar> vey said land, that the
Grantor hereby fully warrants the title to said land and will defend the same a i ttielawful claims of all
persons whomsoever; and that said land is free of all encumbrances, except taxes fr the current and
subsequent years, zoning and use restrictions imposed by governmental authority, iestrictiot and easements
common to the subdivision, outstanding oil, gas and mineral interests of record, if any, and those items set
forth on attached Exhibit "A -I." which is incorporated herein by reference. As to`Grantor Commercial
Properties Southwest. Inc., the conveyance, covenants. and warranties stated herein are limited to and shall
only apply to the real property described in attached Exhibit "A." Exhibit "C." and Exhibit "D." As to
Grantor Lely Development Corporation. the conveyance. covenants, and warranties stated herein are limited
to and shall only apply to the real property described in attached Exhibit "B" and Exhibit "H." As to Grantor
Associated Real Estate Southwest, Inc., the conveyance, covenants, and warranties stated herein are limited
to and shall only apply to the real property described in attached Exhibit "D," Exhibit "E." Exhibit "F."
Exhibit ' G." Exhibit "H. ' and Exhibit ' I."
OR: 3022 PG: 2089
WARRANTY DEED
PAGE 2
Prop.1.D.11s:76775000945 (Lo123); 76775000961(LAX 24); 76775001245 (Lot 38). 76775001261 (LAX 39),
76775001287 (La 40); 76775001643 (La 58) 76775001724 (La 62): 767750017112 (La 65);
76775001805 (La 66); 76775001902 (Lot 71); 76775W1929 tLot 72); 76775WI%4 (Lot 73);
76775W1960 (Lot 74); 76775=341 (Lot 94); 7677SW2480 (LA* 101); 76775002626 (Lot 108);
5542SW3235 (Tract 12): 55440009001 and 55440009109 (Tract 138), 53440009852 (Twct 130;
35440010359 (Tract 13D); 00438720004, 00438940007. 00438920008, and 00446840002 (Twos 40, 43, and 44-49)
Want kh W La Prop. I.D.11s attached
This con eynce is subject to those covenants, conditions. restrictions, and reservations set forth on
attached Exhib t "k- `which is incorporated herein by reference.
GRANTEE. BY ACCEPTANCE OFTHIS WARRANTY DEED, ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THE PROPERTY
CONVEYED IS LOCAL WITHIN THE LELY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, THAT THE
LELY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT MAY IMPOSE AND LEVY TAXES OR ASSESSMENTS,
OR BOTH TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS, ON THE PROPERTY. THESE TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS
PAY THE CONSTRU ON,'OPE n a TION, AND MAINTENANCE COSTS OF CERTAIN PUBLIC
FACIIJTIFS AND SERVICES, OF . DISTRICT, AND ARE IN ADDITION TO COUNTY AND OTHER
LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL T XES AND ASSESSMENTS AND ALL OTHER TAXES AND
ASSESSMENTS PROVIDED FOR B�1-4W. GRANTEE AGREES THAT IT SHALL PAY ALL SUCH
ASSESSMENTS DUE AFTER THE'!�'E. OF RECORDATION HEREOF, TOGETHER WITH INTEREST
THEREUPON, IF ANY.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has
Signed, Sealed and Delivered as
to Each Grantor in the Presence of:
State of Florida )
ss:
County of Collier )
these presents the day and year first above written.
Properties Southwest, Inc., a Florida
as successor by merger to Resort
I of Collier County, Inc., a Florida
t de Lange,
t�
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this t2 day of
2002. by Margriet de Lange, President of Commercial Properties Southwest, Inc., a Florida
is personally known to me or who has produced
.7C L
l
:orporation, who
as identification.
NOTARY PUBLIC
mummms�eo� Name:
E0cP8iS:lrnd &W (Type or Print)
~"a"'t"" "'r""M'1s My Commission Expires:
OR: 3022 PG: 2090
WARRANTY DEED
PAGE 3
[7�Rl.PRl6IT1 '
-
i� 1
State of isd_-
Lely Development Corporation, a Texas
corporation
By: 6
Y)S*ph Ryan, 6dent
) ss:
County of Collier
The foregoing instrumenoas acknowledged before me this /2 day of _ P
2002, by Joseph Ryan, President4L.ely Development Corporation, a Texas corporation, who is personally
known to me or who has produced, as Iderkification.
NOTARY PUBLIC
Name:
f (Type or Print)
wutwt.uactY
W COINAIBSION 1 CC 911002
My Commission Expires:
sue nw ww r�10 u�w.�ww ,„ .
OR: 3022 PG: 2091
WARRANTY DEED
PAGE 4
C►111. , :0...... 14
. 1 u • >1APmv,
Witness Name:
State of Florida
Associated Real Estate Southwest, Inc., a Florida
corporation,
Margrit de Lange, President
County of Collier )
The foregoing instrument w�is acknowledged before me this day of ,
2 argn e, President of Associated Real Estate Southw ac., a F40riporation, who
ersonally known to me ho has prucel lion.
w cmus" r cc gig
WMI mom t:oa
F:%wpdm1JtEU.F.LYDEVICDD SaleVosing
Name:
(Type or Print)
My Commission Expires:
MUSTANG ISLAND FOLIO NUMBERS OR: 3022 PG: 2092
60080=23
Tract
60699000041
Lot
60698000067
Lot
60698000063
Lot
60698000106
Lot 4
60698=122
Lots
6069M148
Lo16
60698=164
lot 7
60698000180
LAIR
6069NW203
L 19
6069MM229
lot 10
60698W0245
La 11
60693OW261
La 12
60698=287
L I I3
606980W3W
Lot 14
6069WW326
La 15
60698000368
Ld 17
60698=394
Lot 18
60699000407
L01 19
6069M M►t23
La 20
60698000449
Lot21
6069B000463
Lo122
60698000481
Lot23
606980009M
Lot24
6069MM20
Lo123
60698000346
L0126
60699000362
Lo127
606981100588
l ut 28
60698000601
Lot 29
6069B000627
WOO
60698000643
Lut31
60698000669
L0t32
60698000683
1033 -
6069MM708
W 34
60698000724
Lot35
60699000740
Ld 36
60698000766
La 37
6069MU782
Ld 38
60698000803
Lo139
60698000821
l ut 40
60699000847
L 141 b*84)00863
Lo142
606980ON89
L)I 43
60698000902
Lot 44
tom..
6069800D028
Lo145
60698W0944
Lot46
606980009W
Lo147
60698000986
lot48
60698WIWS
Lo149
606ONQ010 4
L.450
60699001040
lot 31
60698001066
Lot 32
6069SWI092
Lo133
6061103
Lo134
6069SWI 121
L0155
60698WI 147
Lot 36
60698W 1163
Ld 37
60698W l"!
` L`% 58
6069SM1202
La 39
60698001228
L ut 60
."
60698001244
Lo161
60699WI26Q
Lot 62
60698001286
Lo163
60698001304
Lot 64
60699W1325
Lo165
6069SWI341
to,1,66"¢'�
60698001367
Lo167
6069SW1383
L0168
60698001406
LAN 69
6069SM 1422
lat M
�' . 60698001448
l ut 71
60698W 1464
l ut 72
s
6069SM1490
Lot 73
60698001503
Lot 74
60698W 1526
Lot 73
60698001545
Lot 76
60698W 1561
Lnt 77
6069800I387
La 78
00698001600
LAN 79
60698W 1626
Lot 80
6069MO1642
L0I 81
6069SW I668
Lot 82
1694
Lol 83
6069SW 1707
Lot 84
60698W 1723
Lot 83
60698W 1749
Lo186
6�169 I763
Lut 87
6069OW1781
Lut 88
60698001804
L0189
6069SW I S20
Lot 90
606980 I446 �
, Lot 91
60698001888
Lot 93
60698001901
Lot 94
60698001927
LAN 93
6069$00194
`tot 96
60698W I969
l ut 97
60698002W7
Lot 99
6069BW2023
Lot 100
60698002049 ,,.
lot 101
60698W206S
Lol 102
60698W2W I
Lol 103
6069BW2104
LAN 104
6069SM2120
L 105 b
6069SW2146
Lot 106
6069IM162
Lot 107
60698002188
Ld 108
6069BW2201
La 109
60698002227
Lot 110
60698002243
Lot 111
6069BW2269
Lot 112
60698W2283
Lot11
r 60698W22308
La 114
6069®002324
Lol 113
6069SW2340
Ld 116
60698W2366
LotIli
69~2332
lax I IS
6069BW2405
Lol 119
6069SW2421
LAN 120
60698002447
Lot 121
61 2463
LA 122
600=2489
Lol 123
60O W2502
Lol 124
6069BW2528
Lot 125
000906iM
LAX 126
60698002360
La 127
6069BW2596
La 128
6069SM2609
Ld 129
60698=625
La 130
6069OW2641
La 131
6069BW2667
La 132
6ORM2683
Lot 133
606%W2706
La 134
60698002722
La 135
6069SW2748
La 136
6069SW2764
La 137
60698002780
La 138
60698W2903
LAN 139
6069BW2829
LAN 140
6069BW2945
Lot 141
60698002861
La 142
60698002887
Lot 143
6069SW29W
Ld 1"
60698002926
lot 145
6069SM2942
l ut 146
60699002968
WOW
6069BW2994
Lot 148
6069BW3006
Lot 149
PAwpdotjlRE U.ZLYDEV\CDD
SakClosiab DOcummts%Musl.hl.(olio.00s.wpd
OR: 3022 PG: 2093
k:X111B1T "A-1"
Grantor hereby declares and Grantee agrees for itself, its successors and assigns, that title to the
Property is subject to the following covenants, conditions, restrictions, reservations, and conditions
subsequent which shall run with the Property and shall be binding upon all parties having any right, title or
interest in and to the Property, or any portion thereof, their successors and assigns, and shall inure to the
benefit of Grantor, its successors and assigns. The title to the Property conveyed under this deed is conveyed
subject to, and shall be held, sold and subsequently conveyed subject to, the following covenants, conditions,
restrictions, reservations, and conditions subsequent.
1.1. Assignment gf D
as recorded in Offtcial`RR6 o
"PUD" ), Grantor, as devel
respective Parcels of the Pn
or multi -family units on the
b.
d.
e.
9.
h.
Exhibit "A" P
residential unit
11: In accordance with Section 11 of the Lely Resort Community PUD,
1909. Page 1296, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida (the
the PUD, hereby assigns the following number of dwelling units to the
wept as otherwise designated in this Article I, development of single
.)shall be governed by the PUD):
hereby assigned, and shall contain no more than, One (1)
4 described in Exhibit "A."
Exhibit "B" Property - Is hefebj
Forty-six (146) residential`units.
Exhibit "C" Property - is hereby,
commercial use permitted in th
Exhibit "D" Property - Is hereby
Exhibit "E" Property - is hereby
assigned, and shall contain no more than, One Hundred
One Hundred Thousand (IMAM square feet of
ne district.
Hundred (400) residential units.
Exhibit " F" Property - is hereby assigned Two"I
Exhibit "G" Property - is hereby assigned Two`U
Exhibit "H" Property - is hereby assigned Eight It
Exhibit "1" Property - is hereby assigned One H
Ninety-six 0%) residential units.
(200) residential units.
Forty-nine (249) residential units.
(889) residential units.
(158) residential units.
1.2. Modification: These covenants may not be modified, and the numberofre�le tial units assigned
to each individual parcel of the Property under Paragraph 1.1 hereof shall not -,be. ex ed, without the
written consent of Grantor, its successors and/or assigns.
1.3. Severability: If any provision hereof is held to be invalid in whole or in part by any court of
competent jurisdiction. then such holdings shall in no way affect the validity of the retraining provisions,
all of which shall remain in full force and effect.
1.4. ISM: Unless terminated earlier by recorded instrument executed by Grantor and Grantee (or their
respective successors or assigns), the restrictions stated herein shall retrain in full force and effect for a
period of Twenty (20) years after the date that this Deed is recorded in the Public Records for Collier County,
OR; 3022 PG; 2094
Florida. and thereafter Grantee's title shall automatically be relieved, released, and discharged from their
effect.
Witnesses:
C.
F:%wpd=\RE%ALY DEVrCDD
Accepted by Grantee:
Stock Developme t, LLC, a Florida limited
liability company
By: Brian Stock, its managing member
EXHIBIT A OR: 3022 PG: 2095
Lots 23, 24, 38, 39, 40, 58, 62, 65, 66, 71, 72, 73, 74, 94, 101 and
108, TIGER ISLAND ESTATES, according to the plat thereof as recorded in
Plat Book 19, Pages 87 through 92 of the Public Records of Collier
County, Florida.
EXHIBIT "B" LANDS OR; 3022 ?G: 2096
All of MUSTANG ISLAND according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat
Book 37, Pages 37 through 40, of the Public Records of Collier County,
Florida.
LESS AND EXCEPT THEREFROM THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LANDS:
Lots 16, 92 and 98 of MUSTANG ISLAND according to the plat thereof as
recorded in Plat Book 37, Pages 37 through 40, of the Public Records of
Collier County, Florida.
EXHIBIT "C" OR: 3022 PG: 2097
BEING TRACT 12, LELY RESORT PHASE ONE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS
RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 16, PAGES 87 THROUGH 99, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
EX11IDIT "D" OR: 3022 PG: 2098
BEING TRACT 13B, LELY RESORT PHASE ELEVEN, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT
THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 23, PAGES 52 THROUGH 55, OF THE PUBLIC
RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
EXImi)r"t:
OR: 3022 PG: 2099
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
OF PART OF TRACT 13C LELY RESORT PHASE ELEVEN,
PLAT BOOK 23, PAGES 52 THROUGH 55,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
ALL THAT PART OF TRACT 13C, LELY RESORT PHASE ELEVEN, PLAT BOOK 23, PAGES 52
THROUGH 55 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHERLYMOST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 13C;
THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT 13C IN THE FOLLOWING THREE DESCRIBED
COURSES:
1) NORTH'45052'00" EAST 132.07 FEET;
2) NORTH 41'34'00- WEST 107.91 FEET;
3) NOR Id 6'00" EAST 597.90 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE.CO, INUE,ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT 13C IN THE
FOLLOWING=TwLV DESCRIBED COURSES:
1) NORTH 18�036 g,O" EAST 14.02 FEET:
2) NORTH O'V 3 00"``:FAST 316.00 FEET;
3) NORTH 13.291'00,''AMEST 300.00 FEET;
4) NORTH 61'34!0" EAST 95.00 FEET;
5) SOUTH 24000'00" EAST;150.00 FEET;
6) SOUTH 80.34'00" EAST150.00 FEET;
7) NORTH 56'30100w EAST 110.00 FEET:
8) NORTH 29008'00. W T 70.,00 FEET;
9) NORTH 12*30130" E ST„49 :0,0 FEET,
10) NORTH 60*38100" EAST 0.00 FEET,
11) NORTH 25015'00" WEST `27M00`r,FEET,
12) NORTH 27.27100" EAST -410.00. 'FEET TO THE BOUNDARY OF THE PLAT
THE CHASE PRESERVE OF LELY R°*SOR'1f¢PHASE ONE, PLAT BOOK 23,
PAGES 96 THROUGH 98, OF TllE.P_1�LIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA; �, .f
THENCE ALONG SAID BOUNDARY IN THI FOLLOWING THREE DESCRIBED
COURSES:
1) SOUTH 83'52'27" EAST 88.60 FEET'..
2) NORTHERLY 7.65 FEET ALONG THE i O `'NON -TANGENTIAL
CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY HAVINK�- �I�ADIUS OF 466.00
FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00'56'2'ANfBEING SUBTENDED
BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 06'35'47" EAST 7 65 FEET;
3) ALONG A NON -TANGENTIAL LINE SOUTH 82*S, �" EAST 124.00 FEET TO
THE BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT 13C SAID BOUND Y�,LSO=,BEING THE
WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF CELESTE DRIVE At(V9D ING TO
SAID PLAT OF LELY RESORT PHASE ELEVEN;
THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE IN THE FOLLOWING'FIVE
DESCRIBED COURSES:
I) SOUTHERLY 24.77 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A NON -TANGENTIAL
CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 3, 0%
FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 04'09"00" AND BEING 3UPTiE DED
BY A- CHORD WHICH BEARS SOUTH 04'59"30" WEST 24.77 FEET;a,'
2) SOUTH 02o55100" WEST 766.39 FEET; l
3) SOUTHERLY 547.77 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE
CONCAVE WESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 958.00 FEET THROUGH b �
CENTRAL ANGLE. OF 32'45'39" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD
WHICH BEARS SOUTH 19.17'50" WEST 540.34 FEET;
4) SOUTH 35*40139" WEST 407.29 FEET;
5) SOUTHWESTERLY 221.71 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE., -" _
CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 742.00 FEET THROUGH
Page t ot'_
nA1nn;; -. U'A1U1lI)VJ)
OR: 3022 PG: 2100
A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 17007112" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD
WHICH BEARS SOUTH 27'07'03" WEST 220.89 FEET;
- THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE ALONG A NON -TANGENTIAL
LINE NORTH 73035*10" WEST 230.95 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD.
BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT 13C BEING
NORTH 45052*00" EAST.
Pate 2 an
EXHIBIT "E"' OR: 3022 PG: 2101
BEING TRACT 13D, LELY RESORT, PHASE ELEVEN, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT
THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 23, PAGES 52 THROUGH 55 OF THE PUBLIC
RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
EXHIBIT "G"
(TRACT 40) OR; 3022 PG; 2102
A PORTION OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGIN AT THE SOUTHWESTERLY MOST CORNER OF WILDFLOWER WAY, LELY RESORT PHASE
EIGHT, AS RECORDED IN PIAT BOOK 23, PAGES 33 i 34 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE S. 83'40'04" E., ALONG THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-
WAY LINE OF SAID WILDFLOWER WAY, A DISTANCE OF 778.07 FEET; THENCE DEPARTING
FROM THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SAID WILDFLOWER WAY, S. 24'50'00" W., A
DISTANCE OF 210.04 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY, 221.24 FEET
ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE EASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 400.00
FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 31'41'26" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD
WHICH BEARS S. 08059'17" W., 218.43 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE;
THENCE SOUTHERLY; 66.07 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE
WESTERLY, HAVI I RADIUS OF 400.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 38'06'44"
AND BEING SUB4'iJD_D, Y A CHORD WHICH BEARS S. 11011156" W., 261.20 FEET TO A
POINT OF CON POUN �VATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY, 109.50 FEET ALONG THE ARC
OF A CIRCULAR CURVF.;COIAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 188.00 FEET,
THROUGH A CENTRAL`ANGL$ oP,,33'22'13" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH
BEARS S. 47'56'25"'W.0 16795 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE S. 64'37'32"
W., A DISTANCE OF 296.15,-fEEt TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY,
167.83 FEET ALONG THE AkC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A
RADIUS OF 88.00 FEET, THROUGH AkCENTRAL ANGLE OF 109'16'11" AND BEING
SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHI(*_BEARi N. 60'44'22" W., 143.52 FEET TO A POINT OF
TANGENCY; THENCE N. 06'06'17" W., A DISTANCE OF 237.44 FEET TO A POINT OF
CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTE'PtY, 90: 6 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE,
CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A`RIUq OF 62.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE
OF 83'13'43" AND BEING SUBTENDED,BY"AjCHORD WHICH BEARS N. 47'43'08" W., 82.35
FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCL,Nt. $9'20'00" W., A DISTANCE OF 232.96 FEET
TO A POINT THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAYI,INEOF LELY HIGH BOULEVARD, LELY RESORT
PHASE SEVEN, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOR 21,:/PAGES 30 THROUGH 32 OF THE PUBLIC
RECORDS OF AFORESAID COLLIER COUNTY,',,FLORJ-DA`, THE SAME BEGIN A POINT ON A NON -
TANGENTIAL CURVE; THENCE RUN THE FOLLO Q.°THEE (3) COURSES AND DISTANCES
ALONG THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF S iI Ll',Y HIGH BOULEVARD; COURSE NO.
1: NORTHERLY, 195.00 FEET ALONG THE ARC O A C R`OULAR CURVE, CONCAVE WESTERLY,
HAVING A RADIUS OF 330.00 FEET, THROUGH A-CRAAL'ANGLE OF 33*51*22" AND BEING
SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS N. 20'!6'41"1s,"192.17 FEET TO A POINT OF
TANGENCY; COURSE NO.2: N. 03'21'00" E., 390.Sf F'E'T,";Q A POINT OF CURVATURE;
COURSE NO. 3: NORTHEASTERLY, 42.02 FEET ALONG Tit ARC F A CIRCULAR CURVE,
CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 "-:4HROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE
OF 96'18'46" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH. AR�,N,5.1'30'23" E., 37.25
FEET TO A NON -TANGENTIAL LINE, THE SAME BEING A POIN71-OH.THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-
OF-WAY LINE OF AFORESAID WILDFLOWER WAY; THENCE S. 8� O'09*.E., ALONG THE
SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID WILDFLOWER WAY, ADIS"1'AN OF 78.46 FEET
TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
ripc 141
KX11LUL'1' "11- (Payu L fit 4)
(INCLUDES PART OF TRACT 43, ALL OF TRACT 44, TRACT 45, TRACT 46 AND TRACT 47)
A PORTION OF SECTIONS 28 & 33, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGIN AT SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, THE SAME BEING A POINT ON THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE
OF NAPLES MANOR LAKES, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 3
AT PAGES 86 THROUGH 67 (INCLUSIVE) OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF SAID COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE N. 02*47*55" E., ALONG THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE, OF
SAID PLAT OF NAPLES MANOR LAKES AND ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 28. A
DISTANCE OF 1,226.36 FEET; THENCE DEPARTING FROM LAST SAID LINES, S. 87*12*05"
E., A DISTANCE OF 969.84 FEET; THENCE N. 02047'40" E., A DISTANCE OF 1,702.00
FEET; THENCE N. 38047'48" W., A DISTANCE OF 165.06 FEET TO A POINT ON THE
SOUTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF LELY HIGH BOULEVARD, LELY RESORT PHASE
SEVEN DING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 23, PAGES ,30
THROUG 32 f4f4CLUSIVE) OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF SAID COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;
THENCE N?I9"4310" E., ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID LELY
HIGH BOULEVARD,', 4' DISTANCE OF 1,179.37 FEET; THENCE DEPARTING FROM THE
SOUTHEASTERLY R 1it-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID LELY HIGH BOULEVARD, S. 40017'00" E.,
A DISTANCE 01 89 06,.FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY, 237.42
FEET ALONG THE OF* A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE WESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF
117.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 116016106" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A
CHORD WHICH BEARS S.-17° 103" w., 198.73 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE
CURVATURE; THENCE..5OUTI.141STERLY, 55.51 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE,
CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 62.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE
OF 51'17'41" AND BEI140 SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS Sc. 50'20115" W., 53.6.7
FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENY THENCE S. 24'41'25" W., A DISTANCE OF 265.24 FEET
TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THEROR,SOUTHERLY, 167.80 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A
CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE EAS ERLY;,, HAVING A RADIUS OF 212.00 FEET, THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 45°20'57" Ap,-BEING, SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS S.
02000157" W., 163.45 FEET TO A EO NT OF TANGENCY; THENCE S. 20°39,31" E., A
DISTANCE OF 75.54 FEET TO A PINT OP'tCURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY, 266.02 FEET
ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CU "CONCAVE WESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 200.00
FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL -ANGLE OF 7-f2''31" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD
WHICH BEARS S. 17'26'44" W., 246.�', 4 f'F 4"``�'O A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE S.
55'33'00" W., A DISTANCE Of' 105.9T;'�QA POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE.
WESTERLY, 222.70 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF, CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY,
HAVING A RADIUS OF 300.00 FEET, THRUU1'A CENTRAL. ANGLE OF 42'32'00" AND BEING
SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS S. 76'9'0"W „ 217.63 FEET TO A POINT OF
TANGENCY; THENCE N. 81°55'00" W., A DISTANCE F.�82.82 FEET; 'THENCE S.
02'47'40" W., A DISTANCE OF 236.83 FEET; T NCB N:, 83'55'00" F., A DISTANCE OF
633.81 FEET; THENCE S. 15055'00" W., A DISTAN'C£`'O1,**,608.11 FEET; THENCE S.
31050100" W., A DISTANCE OF 839.38 FEET; THEN�C,� N�'. °E5'17'00" W., A DISTANCE OF
61.35 FEET TO A POINT ON A NON -TANGENTIAL CURVE; THE- E SOUTHERLY, 167.48 FEET
ALONG THE AJtC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE WEStFRLY 'HAVING A RADIUS OF
1,030.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 0901940' AND, BEING SUBTENDED BY A
CHORD WHICH BEARS S. 09°22'30" W., 167.30 FEET TO A PO
11T OF TANGENCY; THENCE
S. 14002'00" W., A DISTANCE OF 232.63 FEET TO A POINT,OFzC7RVATURE; THENCE
SOUTHERLY, 392.44 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CUR', -/CONCAVE EASTERLY,
HAVING A RADIUS OF 460.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE,O "�1-8'52'51" AND BEING
SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS S. 10024126" E., 380.65°,FEE' O A POINT OF
COMPOUND CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY, 52.23 FEET ALONG ARC OF A
CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF t00.6 EET, THROUGH
A CENTRAL ANGLE. OF 29'55'35" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD"" ZIlliaARS S. -
49'48'39" E., 51.64 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE; THENCE
SOUTHEASTERLY, 92.79 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE.s
SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 150.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAANGLE OF
fare 1 of d
O
7�J
N
O
W
35'26'42" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS S. 47'03'06" E., 91.32
FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY, 52,23 FEET ALONG
THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE,- CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00
FEET, Through A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 29*55135" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD
WHICH BEARS S. 44017,32" E., 51.64 FEET TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVATURE;
THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY, 8.44 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE
NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 460.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL -ANGLE OF
01003104' AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS S. 59*46152" E.. 8.44
FEET TO A NON -TANGENTIAL LINE; THENCE N. 00026159" F., A DISTANCE OF 349.99
FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY, 21.01 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A
CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE WESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 24'04114" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS N.
11035108" W., 20.85 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE; THENCE EASTERLY,
721.28 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, HAVING A -
RADIUS OF 190.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 229'35124" AND BEING
SUBTENDED BY A_CHORD WHICH BEARS S. 88'49'33" E., 326.81 FEET TO A POINT OF
REVERSE Vj4 E; THENCE SCUTHERLY, 11.13 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR
CURVE, CONCAVE EASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL
ANGLE OF 2 ,'Jkq0"�AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS S. 13*12134" W.,
11.04 FEET TO'A PUNT OF TANGENCY; THENCE S. 00'26'59" W., A DISTANCE OF
414.11 FEET, T E S`;E 89'33'01" E., A DISTANCE OF 5,63 FEET TO A POINT OF
CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY, 380.82 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR
CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 470.00 FEET, THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 4702311,59" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS N.
66*45100" E., 377.83 FEET I0 THE END OF SAID CURVE AND "POINT A'; THENCE N.
46057100" W., A DISTANCE W 130.00 FEET TO A POINT ON A NON -TANGENTIAL CURVE;
THENCE NORTHEASTERLY,:25.41_.FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE'
NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS`QF 340.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
36018100" AND BEING SUBTENDED BA CHORD WHICH BEARS N. 24'54'00" E., 211.82
FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY';�TI'NCE N. 06'45100" E., A DISTANCE: OF 495,59 FEET
TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY, 569.34 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A
CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHE ,TE"Y,, HAVING A RADIUS OF 760.00 FEET, THROUGH
A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 42*55120" ANQ BEW&,SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS N.
28'12140" E.., 556.12 FEET TO A P 1'-OF,RFVERSE CURVATURE, THENCE NORTHERLY,
69.23 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCUU CURVE, CONCAVE WESTERLY, HAVING A
RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THROUGH A CEr RAL;AWLE OF 79*19141" AND BEING SUBTENDED
BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS N. 10'00130" F.#. 6 V'83 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE
CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY, 601 55 F1' ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR
CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A.,R DIUS QF 180,00 FEET, THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 191*28142" AND BEING SUBTkNDie,,PY A CHORD WHICH BEARS N.
66.05'00" E., 358.20 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERS�URVATURE; THENCE
SOUTHEASTERLY, 69.23 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF'AIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE
NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEEf', THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
790191410 AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHIC11'40Frl'1R5,`S, 57050130" E.. 63.83
FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE; THENCE WTERI�Y,-..447.75 FEET ALONG THE
ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, HAVING A DIUS OF 760.00 FEET.
THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 33*45120" AND BEING SUJR4 VEED BY A CHORD WHICH
BEARS S. 80*37140" E., 441.30 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY_;`THF.NCE S. 63045100"
E., A DISTANCE. OF 331.72 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE HENE SOUTHEASTERLY,
591.97 FEET ALONG THE ARC bF A CIRCULAR CURVE. CONCAVI±`SOUt WESTERLY, HAVING A
RADIUS•OF 695.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 48'48--&6" AND,BEINC
SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS S. 39'20157" E., 5'74.23 FET 'f A POINT OF
REVERSE CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY, 64.68 FEET AIANGI,TIHE,�RC''OF A
CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 £ THROUGH
A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 74'06145" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD Wf(lCjt, S S.
52'00117" E., 60,26 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY,
569.42 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE WESTERLY, < ",VjA`1jAA
RADIUS OF 180.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 181015406" AND"BtING
SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS S. 01'33054" W., 359.98 FEET TO A POINT OF
REVERSE CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY, 57.56 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A
CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50,00 FEET, THROUGH
Pap 2 of 4
EXHIBIT "II" (Page 3 of 4)
OR; 3022 PG; 2105
A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 65'57'16" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS S.
59'12'49" W., 54.43 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE; THENCE
SOUTHWESTERLY, 337.29 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE.
NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 390.04 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
49'32'49" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS S. 51000135" W., 326.88
FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY! THENCE S. 75'47'00" W., A DISTANCE OF 273.84 FEET
TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY, 287.77 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A
CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 540.00 FEET, THROUGH
A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 3'0032'00" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS S.
60°31'00" N., 284.38 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE S. 45*15*00" W., A
DISTANCE OF Z 5.93 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY, 124.99
FEET ALONG TE,ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS
OF 410. FE1rT THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE. OF 17'28'01" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A
CHORD WHICH AARS'I.$. 53059101" W., 124.51 FEET TO A POINT ON A NON -TANGENTIAL
CURVE; THENCEfSOUT ERLY, 1.40 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE
WESTERLY, HAILING A/RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00'47'59"
AND BEING SUBT 'ED`B,,A CHORD WHICH BEARS S. 03'5031" V., 1.40 FEET TO A
POINT OF REVERSEIAtURE, THENCE SOUTHERLY, 45.10 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A
CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE EASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET, THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 25*50_'31`"•,AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS S.
08*40145" E., 44.72,FEET+T� A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE S. 21036100" E., A
DISTANCE OF 15.45 FEET,Tq'A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY, 247.05
FEET ALONG THE ARC OVA/CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS
OF 470.00 FEET, THROUGH A'CRAL ANGLE OF 30'07'00" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A
CHORD WHICH BEARS S. 36'39` 0";F., 244.21 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE
S. 51'43'00" E., A DISTANCE OF 66.`g4 FEET; THENCE. S. 38'17'00" W., A DISTANCE:
OF 60.00 FEET; THENCE N. 51 43106" W., A DISTANCE OF 66.44 FEET TO A POINT OF
CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLt. ? :-59 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR
CURVE, CONCAVE. NORTHEASTERLY, HFIVINC- At RADIUS OF 530.00 FEET, THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 30'07'00" AND B G-SUOTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS N.
36039'30" N., 275.39 FEET TO A POINT"O .TANGENCY; THENCE. N. 21'36'00" W., A
DISTANCE OF 15.45 FEET; THENCE S.' '2,4/�',�0", W., A DIS'I'ANCF: OF' l l.'l9 FEET;
N. 89*33101" W., A DISTANCE OF '.62f87 FEET TO THE. POINT OF BEGINNING.
LESS AND ACCEPT
COMMENCE AT AFOREMENTIONED "POINT A"; THENCE I: 77:09119" E., A DISTANCE OF
269.52 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF TH PMCEiL'OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED
AND A POINT ON A NON -TANGENTIAL CURVE; THENCE.NORt0kRLY, 190.49 FEET ALONG THE
ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE WESTERLY, HAVING DIUS OF 660.00 FEET,
THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16032'13" AND BEING SU&END'D BY A CHORD WHICH
BEARS N. 15°01'07" E., 189.83 FEET TO A POINT OE' T,3 .NCY; THENCE N.
06045'00" E., A DISTANCE: OF 495.59 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE
NORTHEASTERLY, 818.33 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR IRV CONCAVE
SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 440.00 FEET, THROUGH 'A CCETRAL ANGLE OF
106'33138" AND HEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS N-W01144" F., 705.38
FEET TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY,'81 1L iEET ALONG THE
ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE WESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS 'OF <'00 FEET,
THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE: OF 92056'22" AND HE:LNG SUHTENDE:D HY CIi RD WHICH
BEARS S. 20'13'11" E., '12.50 FEET TO A POINT OE' TANGENCY; THENvF'. 26"l5'00"
W., A DISTANCE OF 143.30 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SO W TERLY,
" 139.89 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY.HAVING A
RADIUS OF 140.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 57'15'00" AND ElV96"
SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH REARS S. 54'52'30" W., 134.14 FEET TO A POINT OF
TANGENCY; THENCE: S. 83"30'00" W., A DISTANCE; OF' 3?.24 FEET TO A POINT OF'
haht 1 "1.1
G]Slllul'l 'lt %rage Y OL a►
OR: 3022 PG: 2106
CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY, 21.01 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE,
CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
24'04'14" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS N. 84'27'53" W., 20.85
FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE, THENCE SOUTHERLY, 709.55 FEET ALONG THE
ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE EASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 160.00 FEET,
THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 225'51'27" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH
BEARS- S. 05021'29" E., 331.56 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE; THENCE
EASTERLY, 38.03 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY,
HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE: OF 21047'12" AND BEING
SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS N. 72036'24" E., 37.80 FEET TO A POINT OF
TANGENCY; THENCE N. 83'30'00" E., A DISTANCE OF 22.12 FEET TO A POINT OF
CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY, 459.63 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR
CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 460.00 FEET, THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANOL -OF 57'15100" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS N.
54'52'30" E1,0-440.75 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE N. 26'15'00" E., A
DISTAN' .56 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE EASTERLY, 69.12 FEET
ALONG THE ARC, OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00
FEET, THROUG,H"`A "NTRAL ANGLE OF 102007138" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD
WHICH DEARS N, 77 18.'49" F., 77.79 FEET TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVATURE;
THENCE SOUTH �$RLY"-,305.14 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE
SOUTHWESTERLY, HA�V,,f4Go>A RADIUS OF 375.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
46'37'22" AND BE NG SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS S. 28*18141" E., 296.80
FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE S. 05000'00" E., A DISTANCE. OF 100.06 FEET
TO A POINT OF CURVATM ;,'HENCE SOUTHWESTERLY, 96.75 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A
CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVEMORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 70.04 FEET, THROUGH
A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 80'7'00"=AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS S.
35'23'30" W., 90.77 FEET T0-=A,E?OINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE S. 75'47'00" W., A
DISTANCE OF 273.84 FEET TOf A PgTNT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY, 458.30
FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRC,LAReCURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A Radius
OF 860.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTR Ala ANGLE OF 30°32'00" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A
CHORD WHICH REARS S. 60°31'00"..W 452.90 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE:
S. 45'15'00" W., A DISTANCE O£'17'1.9i'tlFEF.T TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE
WESTERLY, 164.47 FEET ALONG THE ARC"-OF'A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY,
HAVING A RADIUS OF 200.00 FEET, TH H.°A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 47°07'00" AND BEING
SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS S. 68° kM' W., 159,87 FEET TO A POINT OF
TANGENCY; TIIE:NCE: N. $17°3H'OO" W., A D .,TIAq,. OF 221.1�5 EE:E"1' TO A POINT OE'
CURVATURE; THENCE. NORTHWESTERLY, 96.80-FEE+ ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CARVE,
CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS F W .,00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE
OF 110'55'13" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A R6- WHICH HEARS N. 32°10'23" W.,
82.37 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Kv40A
EXHIBIT "I"
(TRACT 49) OR; 3022 PG; 2107
A PORTION OF SEC"l'ION It, 'IYIWNSHII' 1,0 :3OUT11, RANUF «6 EAST. Colllur COUNTY.
BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGIN AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 76, MUSTANG ISLAND, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT
THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 37, PAGES 37 THROUGH 40 (INCLUSIVE) OF THE
PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA: THENCE N. 85'24'02" E., ALONG THE
SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID I.OT 78, A DISTANCE OF 286.27 FEET TO A POINT ON THE
SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF MUSTANG ISLAND CIRCLE, A 60.00 FOOT PUBLIC
RIGHT-OF-WAY, THE SAME BEING A POINT ON A NON -TANGENTIAL CURVE; THENCE
SOUTHEASTERLY, 253.25 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID
MUSTANG ISLAND CIRCLE AND ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE
NORTHEASTERLYI, HAVING A RADIUS OF 490.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
29'36'44,"� N.lIEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS S. 53'54'43" E., 250.44
FEET TO''THE E,OF SAID CURVE; THENCE DEPARTING FROM THE SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT
OF -WAY LINV0F,SA`IYD MUSTANG ISLAND CIRCLE, S. 21916'55" W., A DISTANCE. OF
256.00 FEET"TfS A P INT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY, 321.51 FEET ALONG THE
ARC OF A CIRCULA CURVE, CONCAVE EASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 350.00 FEET,
THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 52037'55" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH
BEARS S. 05'02102"=f:e>310.33 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE S. 31*21,00"
E., A DISTANCE O 435.19 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY,
117.78 FEET ALONG THE,ARCkOF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE WESTERLY, HAVING A
RADIUS OF 88.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 76'41'00" AND BEING SUBTENDED
BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS 06'59'30" W., 109.18 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY;
THENCE S. 45'20'00" W: A DISTANCE OF 75.12 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE;
THENCE WESTERLY, 206.34 FEE A�.ONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE
NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUSF,19.60 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
69'42'37" AND BEING SUBTENOE BY A: CHORD WHICH BEARS S. 80*11,18" W., 193.85
FEET TO A NON -TANGENTIAL LINE v'MtE13CE N. 36'51'00" W., A DISTANCE OF 79.90
FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE, `T1ifNC"E,,WESTERLY, 255.08 FEET ALONG THE. ARC OF A
CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY,,HAYING A RADIUS OF 185.00 FEET, THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 79'00'00" AND H IIN- S�IHTENDFD BY A CHORD WHICH HEARS N.
76'21'00" W., 235.35 FEET TO A POIN wtl'F 'TANGENCY; THENCE. S. 64'09'00" W.. A
DISTANCE OF 190.29 FEET TO A POINTON,TIIF`NORTH-SOUTH 1/4 LINE. OF AFORESAID
SECTION 33; THENCE N. 02*43123" F..,.A G i1klE NORTH -SOUTH 1/4 LINE OF SAID
SECTION 33, A DISTANCE OF 1,262.94 F�'fOA'NE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Page 1 of 1
Cother County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT MAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.collierp,ov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
-IROPERTY OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM
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
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
BRIAN STOCK (Stock Development LLC) 100%
2639 Professional Circle #101
C.
Naples, FL 34119
If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the
percentage of interest:
Created 9/28/2017 Page 1 of 3
Cotber County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the
general and/or limited partners:
CName and Address % 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
C
�IIICCrS, DLmKriwuerS, uurlelluldrle5, Ur PdrLnerb;
Name and Address % of Ownership
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:
g. Date subject property acquired
❑ Leased: Term of lease years /months
If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following:
Created 9/28/2017 Page 2 of 3
411- er County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2300 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
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
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 thatfailure 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
ent/Ownq ignature
,;ik 6fille-Y,
Agent/Owner Name (please print)
Date
Created 9/28/2017 Page 3 of 3
Co*er Count
y
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliercounty.gov
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS
FOR PUD REZONE REQUEST
APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION
Name of Applicant(s): Davis Development, Inc.
Address: 3330 Cumberland Blvd. SE #425 City: Atlanta
Telephone:770-644-0075 Cell: 239-220-9776
State: GA ZIP: 30339
Fax: 770-644-0078
E-Mail Address: GSCHAUFLER@DAVISDEVELOPMENT.COM
Address of Subject Property (If available): 7665 COLLIER BLVD
City: Naples
State: FL ZIP: 34113
r20PERTY INFORMATION
Section/Township/Range: 3/ 5/ 26
Lot: Block: Subdivision:
Metes & Bounds Description:
Plat Book: Page #:
LELY RESORT PHASE I TRACT 12
Property I.D. Number: 55425003255
TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED
Check applicable system:
a. County Utility System
0
b. City Utility System
❑
C. Franchised Utility System
❑ Provide Name: South County WRF
d. Package Treatment Plant
❑ (GPD Capacity): 16 MGD
e. Septic System
❑
I TYPE OF WATER SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED I
Check applicable system:
a. County Utility System
x❑
b. City Utility System
❑
C. Franchised Utility System
❑
d. Private System (Well)
❑
Provide Name: South County Regional WTP
Total Population to be Served: No increase in population within the PUD
Peak and Average Daily Demands:
A. Water -Peak: NSA Average Daily: N/A
B. Sewer -Peak: N/a Average Daily: NSA
If proposing to be connected to Collier County Regional Water System, please provide the date
service is expected to be required: September 2023
March 4, 2020 Page 6 of 11