Agenda 10/08/2024 Item # 9B (Ordinance - For the property from a Rural Agriculture Zoning District to a Residential Planned Unit Development)10/8/2024
Item # 9.B
ID# 2024-759
Executive Summary
*** This item was continued from the January 23, 2024, BCC Meeting to the September 24, 2024, BCC Meeting and
further continued to the October 8, 2024, BCC Meeting. *** This item requires the Commission members to provide ex-
parte disclosure. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve an ordinance for the property from a Rural Agricultural (A) Zoning District to a Residential Planned Unit
Development (RPUD) Zoning District for the project to be known as Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD, to allow construction
of up to 150 multi-family rental units with affordable housing on property located on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach
Road, approximately 825 feet from the intersection of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Livingston Road, in Section 31,
Township 48 South, Range 26 East, consisting of 5.88± acres, PL20220001011. (This is a companion to item 9A)
OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners (“Board”) review staff’s findings and recommendations
along with the recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) regarding the above-referenced
petition, render a decision regarding this rezoning petition, and ensure the project is in harmony with all the applicable
codes and regulations to ensure that the community's interests are maintained.
CONSIDERATIONS: The subject property is located on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road, approximately 825
feet from the intersection of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Livingston Road, in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26
East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 5.88+/- acres. The petitioner is requesting that the Board of County
Commissioners (BCC) consider an application to rezone the property from a Rural Agricultural (A) Zoning District to a
Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Zoning District for the project to be known as Mattson at Vanderbilt
RPUD, to allow construction of up to 150 multifamily rental units with affordable housing. The subject property is
comprised of two parcels owned by 3333/3375 VBR LLC.
FISCAL IMPACT: 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 (GMP) as needed to maintain the adopted Level of
Service (LOS) for public facilities. Other fees collected prior to the 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 IMPACT: The existing Future Land Use Element (FLUE), Future Land Use Map
(FLUM), and Map Series of the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP) designate the subject property as
Urban, Mixed-Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict.
The Urban Residential Subdistrict provides for higher density residential uses, with the maximum density determined by
the Density Rating System; however, in no case shall the maximum density exceed 16 dwelling units per acre in the
Urban Residential Subdistrict.
Staff calculation of the maximum allowable density, based upon the existing FLUE designation and applicable Density
Rating System criteria, is 59 dwelling units, or ten dwelling units per acre (DU/A) for market rate DUs. This is derived
by adding the eligible base density of 4 DU/A to the two eligible density bonuses of Residential In-fill (3 DU/A) and
TCMA - Transportation Concurrency Management Areas (3 DU/A). If the project included affordable housing per LDC
Section 2.06.00, then the project could be eligible for a density bonus of up to 6 DU/A to achieve the maximum 16
DU/A allowed by the Density Rating System.
The rezoning proposal is for 150 multifamily rental units on 5.88 acres, resulting in a density of 25.5 DU/A (15.5
dwelling units above the maximum density of 10 DU/A that can be achieved through the Density Rating System for
market-rate development). The proposed density cannot be achieved through the Density Rating System and exceeds the
maximum allowable density within the Urban Residential Subdistrict. Therefore, the proposal is inconsistent with the
FLUE. To achieve the proposed density of 25.5 DU/A, a GMP Amendment (GMPA) is required.
Page 653 of 3899
10/8/2024
Item # 9.B
ID# 2024-759
Transportation Element: In evaluating this project, staff reviewed the August 8, 2023 (revised) Traffic Impact
Statement for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) using
the current 2022 Annual Update and Inventory Reports (AUIR).
Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states;
“The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions,
and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or
intensity of permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system,
and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as
identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the
current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently
operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR
planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application has significant
impacts if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occur:
a. For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or
exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume;
b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2%
of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and
c. For all other links the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it is equal to or
exceeds 3% of the adopted LOS standard service volume.
Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted as part of the
traffic impact statement that addresses the project’s significant impacts on all roadways.”
Staff finding: According to the TIS provided with this petition, the proposed development will generate a projected total
of +/- 85 PM peak hour, 2-way trips on the adjacent roadway segments of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Livingston Road.
The trips generated by this development will occur on the following roadway link:
Page 654 of 3899
10/8/2024
Item # 9.B
ID# 2024-759
(1) Source for P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Direction Project Traffic is from the petitioner's August 8, 2023, Traffic
Impact Statement.
o (2) Expected deficiency by trip bank; see State Statute 169.3180 below.
Section 163.3180 of the Florida Statutes requires a local government to satisfy transportation concurrency
requirements if the applicant enters into a binding agreement to pay or construct their proportionate share.
The Statutes further state that any facility determined to be transportation deficient with existing,
committed, and vested trips, plus additional projected background trips from any source other than the
development project under review and trips that are forecast by established traffic standards, including
traffic modeling, consistent with the University of Florida’s Bureau of Economic and Business Research
Page 655 of 3899
10/8/2024
Item # 9.B
ID# 2024-759
medium population projections, without the project traffic under review, the costs of correcting that
deficiency shall be removed from the project’s proportionate-share calculation and the necessary
transportation improvements to correct that deficiency shall be considered to be in place for purposes of the
proportionate-share calculation. The improvement necessary to correct the transportation deficiency is the
entity's funding responsibility, with maintenance responsibility for the facility. The development’s
proportionate share shall be calculated only for the needed transportation improvements that are greater than
the identified deficiency. In addition, per the Statute, the applicant is eligible for a dollar-for-dollar credit
for the road impact fees anticipated for the development.
Based on the TIS, State Statutes, and the 2021 and 2022 AUIR, the subject PUD is consistent with Policy 5.1 of the
Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan. The Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) indicates that the
adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate this project within the 5-year planning period.
Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental review staff has found this project to be
consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME). The project site has been cleared; no
preservation is required. The project site is 5.88 acres and consists of twelve (12) native trees meeting the preservation
standards.
GMP Conclusion: The proposed PUD is inconsistent with the GMP unless the Board approves the companion GMPA
first or concurrently with the PUD and the uses and intensities align.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This is a site-specific rezone to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD)
Zoning District for a project to be known as Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD. The burden falls upon the applicant to prove
that the proposed rezoning is consistent with all the criteria set forth below. Should it consider denying the rezone, the
burden shifts to the Board of County Commissioners 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 RPUD Rezones
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 RPUD with the Growth Management Plan's goals, objectives, and
policies.
4. Consider: 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.
5. Is there an 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) to assure the adequacy of available
improvements and facilities, both public and private.
Page 656 of 3899
10/8/2024
Item # 9.B
ID# 2024-759
7. Consider: The ability of the subject property and surrounding areas to accommodate expansion.
8. Consider: Conformity with RPUD 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.
9. Will the proposed change be consistent with the goals, objectives, policies, future land use map, and the elements
of the Growth Management Plan?
10. Will the proposed RPUD Rezone be appropriate considering the existing land use pattern?
11. Would the requested RPUD Rezone 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?
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 that 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 RPUD rezone 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
Page 657 of 3899
10/8/2024
Item # 9.B
ID# 2024-759
Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch.106, art.II], as amended.
26. Are there other factors, standards, or criteria relating to the RPUD rezone 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 Board hearing as these items relate to these criteria. Should this item be denied,
Florida Statutes section 125.022(3) requires the County to provide written notice to the applicant citing applicable
portions of an ordinance, rule, statute, or other legal authority for the denial. This item is approved as to form and
legality and requires an affirmative vote of four for Board approval (HFAC)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC heard petition
PUDZ-PL20220001011 on December 7, 2023, and by a vote of 6 to 0, recommended to forward this petition to the
Board with a recommendation of approval with required changes to the PUD as explained below. The CCPC approval
was unanimous. No letters of objection have been received, and there was no opposition to this petition. The required
changes and additions to be added to the PUD by the CCPC include:
Exhibit C - Site Plan:
o Denote Deviation #2 Illustration on Master Plan,
o Add Deviation #2 to the Site Summary, reducing the open space from 60% to 40%.
o On Site Summary, adding Deviation#2 reference to the open space section
Exhibit E - List of Deviations:
o Add Deviation#2, language reducing the open space from 60% to 40%. (See Attachment E for justification)
Exhibit F - List of Developer Commitments:
o Increase the affordable housing requirement to 30%
o Add Essential Service Personnel (ESP) language,
The changes were accepted by staff, and these revisions were added to the Ordinance. Post-CCPC, Exhibit F or the
Ordinance was revised to insert the current 2023 Florida Housing Finance Corporation Income and Rent Limits by way
of example, as recommended by the County Attorney.
Staff Recommendation
To approve the applicant’s request to rezone to the RPUD zoning district, subject to the approval of the companion
GMPA PL20220001010. (Item 9A).
PREPARED BY: Timothy Finn, AICP, Planner III, Zoning Division
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Staff Report - Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD
2. Attachment A- Revised Ordinance 011224
3. Attachment B - FLUE Consistency Memo
4. Attachment C - Application-Backup Materials
5. Attachment D - Hearing Advertising Sign
6. Attachment E - Post-CCPC Revised Deviations Justifications
7. Attachment F - Revised Hearing Advertising Sign
8. Oppositional Letter - 2-29-24
Page 658 of 3899
10/8/2024
Item # 9.B
ID# 2024-759
9. Affidavit of Sign Posting 2024-09-03
10. legal ads - agenda IDs 27820 & 27819 (24-760 & 24-759) - Mattson at Vanderbilt GMPA-PUDZ-PL20220001010-PL20220001011
11. Affidavit of Sign Posting 2024-09-18
Page 659 of 3899
PUDZ-PL20220001011 Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD Page 1 of 16
Revised: November 8, 2023
STAFF REPORT
TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: ZONING DIVISION – ZONING SERVICES SECTION
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
HEARING DATE: DECEMBER 7, 2023
SUBJECT: PUDZ-PL20220001011; MATTSON AT VANDERBILT RESIDENTIAL
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD)
COMPANION ITEM: PL20220001010; MATTSON AT VANDERBILT
RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
AMENDMENT (GMPA)
______________________________________________________________________________
PROPERTY OWNER/AGENTS:
Owner/Applicant: Agents:
3333/3375 VBR LLC D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq.
3838 Tamiami Trail North Q. Grady Minor & Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A.
Suite 402 Associates, P.A. 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300
Naples, FL 34103 3800 Via Del Rey
Bonita Springs, FL 34134
Naples, FL 34103
REQUESTED ACTION:
The petitioner is requesting that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an
application to rezone the property from a Rural Agricultural (A) Zoning District to a Residential
Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Zoning District for the project to be known as Mattson at
Vanderbilt RPUD, to allow construction of up to 150 multi-family rental units with affordable
housing. The subject property is comprised of two parcels owned by 3333/3375 VBR LLC.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject property is located on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road, approximately 828 feet
from the intersection of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Livingston Road, in Section 31, Township 48
South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 5.88+/- acres (see location map on
page 2).
Page 660 of 3899
PUDZ-PL20220001011 Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD Page 2 of 16
Revised: November 8, 2023
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
This petition seeks to rezone the property to RPUD to allow for the development of up to 150 multi-
family rental units with affordable housing at 25.5 (DU/AC) for a project to be known as Mattson
at Vanderbilt RPUD.
Page 661 of 3899
PUDZ-PL20220001011 Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD Page 3 of 16
Revised: November 8, 2023
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
This section of the staff report identifies the land uses, zoning classifications, and maximum
approved densities for properties surrounding the boundaries of Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD:
North:
Developed with a golf course with a driving range, with a current zoning
designation of Pelican Marsh DRI/PUD (2.13 DU/AC), which is approved for
single-family and multi-family residential units, golf course, clubhouse with
recreational facilities, community facilities, and activity center
East: Developed with senior living apartments called Sandalwood Village, with a
current zoning designation of Vanderbilt Trust 1989 CFPUD, which is
approved for independent and assisted living facilities, continuing care
retirement facilities, and nursing homes
South: Vanderbilt Beach Road, a six-lane arterial roadway, then developed with
single-family units, with a current zoning designation of Vineyards PUD (2.9
DU/AC), which is approved for residential, commercial, recreation, open
space, institutional, and civic uses.
West: Developed with an independent living retirement community called Bradford
Square Retirement Community, with a current zoning designation of Bradford
Square MPUD, which is approved for commercial and residential
Source: Grady Minor
Page 662 of 3899
PUDZ-PL20220001011 Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD
Page 4 of 16 Revised: November 8, 2023
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY:
Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The existing Future Land Use Element (FLUE), Future Land
Use Map (FLUM) and Map Series of the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP)
designates the subject property as Urban, Mixed-Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict.
The Urban Residential Subdistrict provides for higher-density residential uses, with the maximum
density determined by the Density Rating System; however, in no case shall the maximum density
exceed 16 dwelling units per acre in the Urban Residential Subdistrict.
Staff calculation of the maximum allowable density, based upon the existing FLUE designation
and applicable Density Rating System criteria, is 59 dwelling units, or 10 dwelling units per
acre (DU/A) for market rate DUs. This is derived by adding the eligible base density of four (4)
DU/A to the two (2) eligible density bonuses of Residential In-fill three (3) DU/A and
TCMA - Transportation Concurrency Management Areas three (3) DU/A. If the project
included affordable housing per LDC Section 2.06.00, then the project could be eligible for a
density bonus of up to six (6) DU/A to achieve the maximum 16 DU/A allowed by the Density
Rating System.
The rezoning proposal is for 150 multi-family rental units on 5.88 acres, resulting in a density of
25.5 DU/A (15.5 dwelling units above the maximum density of 10 DU/A that can be achieved
through the Density Rating System for market-rate development). The proposed density cannot be
achieved through the Density Rating System and exceeds the maximum allowable density within
the Urban Residential Subdistrict. Therefore, the proposal is inconsistent with the FLUE. To
achieve the proposed density of 25.5 DU/A, a GMP Amendment (GMPA) is required.
The GMPA petition, in addition to the increase in density, proposes a reduction in Open Space
from that required by Section 4.07.02.G.1 of the LDC, which states, “Within PUD Districts
composed entirely of residential dwelling units, at least 60 percent of the gross area shall be
devoted to usable open space.” The GMPA Subdistrict language proposes reducing open space
from 60 percent to 40 percent.
Comprehensive Planning and Zoning Planning staff agree that a residential project's proposed
open space reduction is appropriately requested through the zoning deviation process rather than
through the proposed GMP text since the open space is an LDC regulation.
Staff has several concerns with the proposed petition. The increase in density to 25.5 DU/A is not
consistent with the surrounding residential densities, and the reduction in open space is not
supported by staff. If the Planning Commission approves the GMPA and PUD petitions,
staff recommends the provision of commensurate public benefit in the form of additional
affordable housing units. The provision of 30 percent affordable units, rather than the 22.6 percent
standard generally utilized in petitions, should be considered for the increase in density to 25.5
DU/A. The commensurate public benefit to offset the reduction in open space would increase the
provision of affordable units to 34 percent. The increase to 30 percent affordable housing
would result in 45 affordable units, 11 additional affordable housing units over the number of
units achieved by the 22.6 percent provision. The public benefit of the 11 additional affordable
units could support the increase in density. The increase to 34 percent affordable housing
would result in 51 affordable units, six additional affordable housing units over the number of
units achieved by the provision of 30 percent. This could support the reduction in useable open
space that would benefit the residents of a dense urban rental project. Instead, a public benefit to
the County, in the form of additional affordable housing units, may be acceptable.
Page 663 of 3899
PUDZ-PL20220001011 Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD Page 5 of 16
Revised: November 8, 2023
Transportation Element: In evaluating this project, staff reviewed the August 8, 2023 (revised),
Traffic Impact Statement for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the
Growth Management Plan (GMP) using the current 2022 Annual Update and Inventory Reports
(AUIR).
Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states;
“The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications,
conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element
(FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development,
with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not
approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment
as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is
deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment
or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below
an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless
specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application has significant
impacts if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occur:
a.For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is
equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume;
b.For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal
to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and
c.For all other links the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where
it is equal to or exceeds 3% of the adopted LOS standard service volume.
Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant
and submitted as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the project’s
significant impacts on all roadways.”
Staff finding: According to the TIS provided with this petition, the proposed development will
generate a projected total of +/- 85 PM peak hour, 2-way trips on the adjacent roadway segments
of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Livingston Road. The trips generated by this development will occur
on the following roadway link:
Link/Roadway Link Current Peak
Hour Peak
Direction
Volume/Peak
Direction
Projected
P.M. Peak
Hour/Peak
Direction
Project Trips
(1)
2021 AUIR
LOS/
Remaining
Capacity
2022 AUIR
LOS/
Remaining
Capacity
111.2/Vanderbilt
Beach Road
Livingston Rd
to Logan Blvd
3,000/East 43/East D/
474 (2)
D/
294 (2)
111.1/Vanderbilt
Beach Road
Livingston Rd
to Airport
Pulling Rd
3,000/East 18/East C/
956 (2)
D/
156 (2)
Page 664 of 3899
PUDZ-PL20220001011 Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD Page 6 of 16
Revised: November 8, 2023
110.2/Vanderbilt
Beach Road
Airport
Pulling Rd to
Goodlette
Frank Rd
2,500/East 7/East C/
849
C/
579
52.0/Livingston
Road
Vanderbilt
Beach Rd to
Immokalee Rd
3,100/North 14/South C/
1,328
C/
1,078
53.0/Livingston
Road
Vanderbilt
Beach Rd to
Pine Ridge Rd
3,100/North 11/North B/
1,610
B/
1,570
54.0/Livingston
Road
Pine Ridge Rd
to Golden
Gate Pkwy
3,100/North 7/North B/
1,714
B/
1,684
67.2/Pine Ridge
Road
Livingston Rd
to I-75
3,900/East 5/West C/
1,166
C/
1,014
42.1/Immokalee
Road
Livingston Rd
to Airport
Pulling Rd
3,100/East 2/East C/
989
D/
266 (2)
42.2/Immokalee
Road
Livingston Rd
to I-75
3,500/East 7/West D/
360 (2)
D/
310 (2)
1.0/Airport
Pulling Road
Vanderbilt
Beach Rd to
Immokalee Rd
2,200/North 2/South C/
621
C/
680
2.1/Airport
Pulling Road
Vanderbilt
Beach Rd to
Orange
Blossom Rd
3,000/North 9/North C/
857
D/
707
•(1) Source for P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Direction Project Traffic is from the petitioner's August 8,
2023 Traffic Impact Statement.
•(2) Expected deficient by trip bank; see State Statute 169.3180 below.
Section 163.3180 of the Florida Statutes requires a local government to satisfy transportation
concurrency requirements if the applicant enters into a binding agreement to pay or construct
their proportionate share. The Statutes further state that any facility determined to be
transportation deficient with existing, committed, and vested trips, plus additional projected
background trips from any source other than the development project under review and trips
that are forecast by established traffic standards, including traffic modeling, consistent with the
University of Florida’s Bureau of Economic and Business Research medium population
projections, without the project traffic under review, the costs of correcting that deficiency shall
be removed from the project’s proportionate-share calculation and the necessary transportation
improvements to correct that deficiency shall be considered to be in place for purposes of the
proportionate-share calculation. The improvement necessary to correct the transportation
deficiency is the funding responsibility of the entity that has maintenance responsibility for the
Page 665 of 3899
PUDZ-PL20220001011 Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD Page 7 of 16
Revised: November 8, 2023
facility. The development’s proportionate share shall be calculated only for the needed
transportation improvements that are greater than the identified deficiency. In addition, per the
Statute, the applicant is eligible for a dollar-for-dollar credit for the road impact fees anticipated
for the development.
Based on the TIS, State Statues, the 2021, and the 2022 AUIR, the subject PUD can be found
consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan. The
Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) indicates that the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity
to accommodate this project within the 5-year planning period.
Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental review staff has
found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element
(CCME). The project site has been cleared; no preservation is required. The project site is 5.88
acres and consists of 12 native trees meeting the preservation standards.
GMP Conclusion: The proposed PUD is inconsistent with the GMP unless the Board approves
the companion GMPA first or concurrently with the PUD and the uses and intensities align.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
Applications to rezone to or to amend RPUDs shall be in the form of a RPUD Master Plan of
development, along with a list of permitted and accessory uses and a development standards table.
The RPUD application shall also include a list of developer commitments and any proposed
deviations from the LDC. Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use
petition, including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted
in 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’s recommendation. The CCPC uses the aforementioned criteria as the basis for
its recommendation to the Board, who in turn use the criteria to support their action on the
rezoning or amendment request. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed below
under the heading “Zoning Services Analysis.” In addition, staff offers the following analyses:
Environmental Review: Environmental Services staff has reviewed the petition to address
environmental concerns. The property has been developed and maintained clear of native vegetation
required to be preserved. The Master Plan does not show a preserve since no minimum
preservation is required. The site does contain 12 native trees that meet the preservation standards
of LDC Section 3.05.07, which will require two (2) trees to be preserved (12 Existing Trees x
15%). No listed animal species were observed on the property; however, the Florida Fish and
Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) wildlife data indicate the presence of a Black Bear
(Ursus americanus floridanus) in the area. A black bear management plan will need to be included
in the PPL or SDP review.
Transportation Review: The Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition for compliance
with the GMP and the LDC. Transportation Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed
Mattson at Vanderbilt PUDZ.
Page 666 of 3899
PUDZ-PL20220001011 Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD Page 8 of 16
Revised: November 8, 2023
Utility Review: The project lies within the regional potable water service area and the North County
Water Reclamation Facility’s wastewater service area of the Collier County Water-Sewer District
(CCWSD). Water and wastewater services are available via existing infrastructure within the
adjacent right-of-way. Sufficient water and wastewater treatment capacities are available.
Any improvements to the CCWSD’s water or wastewater systems necessary to provide sufficient
capacity to serve the project will be the responsibility of the owner/developer and will be conveyed
to the CCWSD at no cost to the County at the time of utility acceptance.
Landscape Review: The applicant is not seeking any deviations related to landscaping. The buffers
labeled on the Master Plan meet or exceed the requirements of the LDC.
Stormwater Review: Stormwater Management Section staff has reviewed the petition for
compliance with the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval of this project.
Zoning Services Review: This request is a rezone from a Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district to a
Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Zoning District to allow construction of up to 150
multi-family dwelling units up to a maximum density of 25.5 dwelling units per acre (DU/A).
Within the proposed Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD boundaries, the minimum PUD front yard
setback is 50 feet, and the minimum PUD setback is 75 feet along the north, east, and west
boundaries. The proposed heights have a zoned height of 50 feet and an actual building height of
60 feet. To the north is the Golf Course, Recreation, and Open Space (GCO) District, with a
maximum height of 50 feet within the Pelican Marsh DRI/PUD. To the south is the Residential (R)
District with a maximum height of 50 feet with the Vineyards PUD. To the west is the Bradford
Square MPUD, with a zoned height of 43 feet and an actual height of 53 feet for group housing. To
the east is the Vanderbilt Trust 1989 CFPUD, with a zoned height of 50 feet and a zoned height of
62 feet for principal structures. As such, the proposed heights within Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD
are compatible with the immediate neighborhoods. As illustrated in the PUD Master Plan, a 15-
foot-wide Type D Buffer is proposed along Vanderbilt Beach Road, a 10-foot Type A buffer is
proposed along the eastern and western perimeters, and an enhanced 15-foot-wide Type B buffer is
proposed along the northern perimeter. As such, the landscaping buffers will provide natural
transitions around and within the RPUD. The development standards will provide adequate
setbacks, limitations on height, and buffers to ensure compatibility with adjacent land uses.
Companion item to this petition (GMPA-PL20220001010; Mattson at Vanderbilt Residential
Subdistrict) will seek to allow for a maximum of 150 multi-family rental dwelling units, 40 percent
usable open space, and affordable housing commitment of 22.6% of the dwelling units identified
as affordable. Regarding the allowance of the 40 percent open space, it should be noted that per
LDC 4.07.02.G.1, PUD Districts composed entirely of residential dwelling units and accessory
uses, at least 60 percent of the gross area shall be devoted to open space. The agent has provided a
rationale as to the reasoning behind the request for the 40% open space requirement in the Mattson
at Vanderbilt Residential Subdistrict; see the italicized excerpt below.
The Mattson at Vanderbilt project represents redevelopment and an infill residential project on
5.9+/- acres. The project proposes constructing 22.6% of the dwelling units as income-restricted
Page 667 of 3899
PUDZ-PL20220001011 Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD Page 9 of 16
Revised: November 8, 2023
affordable housing, for which demand is well-documented. The applicant is proposing a project
with comparable building heights to the adjacent independent rental apartments for seniors and
has proposed locating the 4-story apartment building central to the site. Due to the size of the infill
parcel, meeting the 60% usable open space standard would render the site unusable for buildings
at the proposed 4-story height. A taller building, having less lot coverage, would be necessary to
meet the 60% open space requirement. The proposed building height is in keeping with the two
adjacent senior housing projects and other nearby development. The applicant has proposed an
enhanced project buffer adjacent to the Tiburon Golf Course to ensure compatibility and increase
the effective open space for the site.
Staff cannot support this petition as submitted; if the Planning Commission recommends approval,
then staff recommends that 30% affordable housing be required as a public benefit for the requested
25.5 (DU/AC) and a total of 34% affordable housing if a deviation is granted for the open space
reduction.
CONCURRENT PETITION AT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
On July 25, 2023, the agent submitted Mattson at Vanderbilt - (SDP) PL20230007212 for a
proposed multi-family apartment complex consisting of 150 residential units in a 4-story building.
The project will include an attached amenity area with a pool, pickleball court, outdoor rec areas,
dog run, trash compactor and dumpster, water management areas, and utility infrastructure.
PUD FINDINGS:
LDC Section 10.02.13.B.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 in addition to the
findings in LDC Section 10.02.08”:
1.The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation
to the physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access,
drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities.
Water and wastewater mains are available along Vanderbilt Beach Road. There are adequate
water and wastewater treatment capacities to serve the project.
Any improvements to the CCWSD’s water or wastewater systems necessary to provide
sufficient capacity to serve the project will be the responsibility of the owner/developer and
will be conveyed to the CCWSD at no cost to the County at the time of utility acceptance.
Moreover, stormwater management details will be addressed at the time of SFWMD
Environmental Resource Permitting (ERP) and County Site Development Permit
(SDP)/Plans and Plat Permit (PPL) permitting.
2.Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed 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
Page 668 of 3899
PUDZ-PL20220001011 Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD Page 10 of 16
Revised: November 8, 2023
at public expense.
Documents submitted with the application, which the County Attorney’s Office reviewed,
demonstrate unified property control.
3.Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives, and
policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP).
County staff has reviewed this petition and offered an analysis of conformity with the GMP's
relevant goals, objectives, and policies within the GMP Consistency portion of this staff
report.
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.
As described in the Staff Analysis section of this staff report subsection Landscape Review,
staff is of the opinion that the proposed project will be compatible with the surrounding
area. The buffers proposed in the Master Plan meet or exceed LDC requirements.
5.The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development.
The RPUD is required to provide at least 60% of the gross area for usable open space. No
deviation from the open space requirement is requested; however, 40% open space is
requested within the companion petition - Mattson at Vanderbilt Residential Subdistrict.
Staff recommends removing the GMPA language regarding open space and requesting a
deviation through the zoning petition. Staff does not support the reduction of open space in
a dense urban apartment community. If the Planning Commission approves the reduction in
open space, then Staff recommends that commensurate public benefit be required by
provision of additional affordable housing.
6.The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of ensuring the adequacy of
available improvements and facilities, both public and private.
The roadway infrastructure has sufficient to serve the proposed project, as noted in the
Transportation Element consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at the
first development order (SDP or Plat) when a new TIS will be required to demonstrate
turning movements for all site access points. 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.
Water and wastewater mains are available along Vanderbilt Beach Road. There are adequate
water and wastewater treatment capacities to serve the project.
Page 669 of 3899
PUDZ-PL20220001011 Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD Page 11 of 16
Revised: November 8, 2023
Any improvements to the CCWSD’s water or wastewater systems necessary to provide
sufficient capacity to serve the project will be the responsibility of the owner/developer and
will be conveyed to the CCWSD at no cost to the County at the time of utility acceptance.
7.The ability of the subject property and surrounding areas to accommodate expansion.
Water and wastewater mains are available along Vanderbilt Beach Road. There are adequate
water and wastewater treatment capacities to serve the project.
Any improvements to the CCWSD’s water or wastewater systems necessary to provide
sufficient capacity to serve the project will be the responsibility of the owner/developer and
will be conveyed to the CCWSD at no cost to the County at the time of utility acceptance.
8.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.
One deviation is proposed in connection with this request to rezone to RPUD. See the
deviations section of the staff report beginning on page 14.
Rezone Findings:
LDC Subsection 10.02.08.F states, “When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and
recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners…shall show
that the planning commission has studied and considered a proposed change in relation to the
following when applicable”:
1.Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies
of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan.
The proposed PUD is inconsistent with the GMP unless the Board approves the companion
GMPA first or concurrently with the PUD and the uses and intensities align.
2.The existing land use pattern.
This staff report's Surrounding Land Use and Zoning section describes the existing land use
pattern (of the abutting properties). The proposed use is compatible; however, the requested
density is not compatible.
3.The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts.
The properties that abut the project to the east, north, south, and west allow for residential
uses. Therefore, the proposed petition would not create an isolated district unrelated to
adjacent and nearby districts; however, the requested density is not consistent with the
nearby residential communities.
4.Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property proposed for change.
Page 670 of 3899
PUDZ-PL20220001011 Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD Page 12 of 16
Revised: November 8, 2023
As shown on the zoning map included at the beginning of this report, the existing district
boundaries are logically drawn. The proposed PUD zoning boundaries follow the property
ownership boundaries. The zoning map on page 2 of the staff report illustrates the perimeter
of the outer boundary of the subject parcel.
5.Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezoning
necessary.
The proposed rezoning is not necessary, but it is being requested in compliance with the
LDC provisions to seek such changes. It should be noted that the proposed uses are not
allowed under the current zoning classification.
6.Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood.
The proposed RPUD is not consistent with the density 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
and as outlined above, i.e., GMP 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 Plat). Additionally, the
project’s development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management
regulations when development approvals are sought. The Project will also provide a 5-foot
by 25-foot easement for a future Collier Area Transit (CAT) bus stop on Vanderbilt Beach
Road in lieu of the required turn lane compensating ROW.
8.Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem.
The proposed RPUD request is not anticipated to create a stormwater management problem
in the area, provided an environmental resource permit that adequately addresses
stormwater best management practices, stormwater pollution prevention, urban stormwater
management, on-site stormwater treatment, attenuation storage, flood plain compensation,
and maintenance is obtained from the South Florida Water Management District. County
staff will evaluate the project’s stormwater management system, calculations, and design
criteria at the time of SDP and/or plat review.
9.Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas.
It is not anticipated this RPUD would reduce light or air to the adjacent areas.
10.Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent
areas.
Page 671 of 3899
PUDZ-PL20220001011 Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD Page 13 of 16
Revised: November 8, 2023
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.
11.Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development
of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations.
Properties to the east, north, south, and west are developed. The basic premise underlying
all the development standards in the LDC is that sound application, when combined with
the site development plan approval process and/or subdivision process, gives reasonable
assurance that a change in zoning will not result in deterrence to improvement or
development of 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, contrasting with the public welfare.
The proposed development is inconsistent with the GMP, so the zoning petition cannot be
supported.
13.Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance
with existing zoning.
According to the existing classification, the proposed uses and development standards are
not permitted.
14.Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the neighborhood's or the County's
needs.
The proposed project density is out of scale with the surrounding community; however, the
additional density and reduction in open space may be supported if additional affordable
housing is provided above the 22.6% proposed.
15.Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed
use in districts already permitting such use.
The petition was reviewed for compliance with the GMP and the LDC, and staff does not
specifically review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition.
16.The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration would be
required to make the property usable for any of the range of p otential uses under the
proposed zoning classification.
Any development anticipated by the PUD Document would require considerable site
alteration, and this project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state,
Page 672 of 3899
PUDZ-PL20220001011 Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD Page 14 of 16
Revised: November 8, 2023
and local development regulations during the SDP and/or platting processes and again later
as part of the building permit process.
17.The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services
is 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, as amended.
The development will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in the LDC regarding
Adequate Public Facilities. The project must also be consistent with all applicable goals and
objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities. This petition has been reviewed
by county staff responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the rezoning
process, and staff has concluded that the developer has provided appropriate commitments
so that the impacts to the Level of Service (LOS) will be minimized.
18.Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners
shall deem important in protecting public health, safety, and welfare.
To be determined by the Board during its advertised public hearing.
DEVIATION DISCUSSION:
The petitioner is seeking one deviation from the requirements of the LDC. The deviation is directly
extracted from PUD Exhibit E. The petitioner’s rationale and staff analysis/recommendation are
outlined below.
Proposed Deviation #1: (Parking Spaces)
“Deviation #1 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04, Table 17, Parking Space requirements for
multifamily dwellings, which requires:
All units shall have 1 parking space per unit plus visitor parking computed at 0.5 per efficiency
unit, 0.75 per 1-bedroom unit, and 1 per 2-bedroom or larger unit. Office/administrative buildings
shall have parking provided at 50 percent of normal requirements. Where small-scale recreation
facilities are accessory to a single-family or multifamily project and intended only for the residents
of that project, exclusive of golf courses/clubhouses, the recreation facilities may be computed at
50 percent of normal requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are not within 300 feet
of the recreation facilities and at 25 percent of normal requirements where the majority of the
dwelling units are within 300 feet of the recreation facilities. However, any recreation facility shall
have a minimum of 2 spaces exclusive of parking spaces for dwelling units.
Instead, allow parking to be provided at a ratio of 1.6 parking spaces per unit, with no requirement
to provide additional parking for the recreation facilities.
Petitioner’s Justification: The developer has extensive experience in creating successful multi-
family dwelling units throughout the United States. Typically, they average 1.5 parking spaces per
unit across their portfolio. Four (4) project examples have been submitted with similar site
Page 673 of 3899
PUDZ-PL20220001011 Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD Page 15 of 16
Revised: November 8, 2023
characteristics as this site (location, density, size, etc.). Based on the proposed unit breakdown for
this project, 40% of the units are proposed to be 1-bdrm. This is relatively high percentage of 1-
bdrm units which only require 1.75 space per LDC 4.05.03.
Further, the site has been designed in a manner that places all units in close proximity to the project
amenity area. The master plan identifies the area where the amenities for the project will be located,
and they will be located within a courtyard immediately adjacent to the building. No unit will be
farther than 250’+/- from the project’s amenity area. At this distance, there is no need for any
resident to walk to the parking lot and then drive a distance that may exceed the distance to walk
to the pool or outdoor courts.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff does not support the PUDZ petition; however, if the
Planning Commission recommends approval of this deviation, a finding that the requested deviation
is in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that “the element
may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community,”
and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is “justified as
meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.”
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM):
The applicant conducted a NIM on May 24, 2023, at Collier County Headquarters Library, Sugden
Theater Meeting Room, located at 2385 Orange Blossom Drive, Naples, FL. The meeting
commenced at approximately 5:32 p.m. and ended at 5:39 p.m. Two public attendees were via
Zoom. Wayne Arnold, the agent, conducted the meeting with introductions of the consultant team
and staff and gave a PowerPoint. The presentation consisted of an overview of the proposed RPUD
rezoning application. Following the agent’s presentation, the meeting was open to attendees to make
comments and ask the consultant team questions regarding the proposed development. There was
an inquiry as to where the PowerPoint is available. Wayne responded it’s on the Grady Minor
website. One commitment was made within the PowerPoint presentation that illustrated an
enhanced 15-foot wide type “B” landscape buffer. This enhanced buffer was added to the master
plan in a subsequent submittal. A copy of the NIM Summary, sign-in sheet, and NIM
PowerPoint presentation are included in Attachment C.
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) REVIEW:
This project does not require an Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project did
not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews identified in Section 2-1193 of the
Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances.
COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW:
The County Attorney’s Office reviewed this staff report on October 30, 2023.
Page 674 of 3899
PUDZ-PL20220001011 Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD Page 16 of 16
Revised: November 8, 2023
RECOMMENDATION:
The companion GMPA is recommended for denial; therefore, Staff recommends denial of the
PUDZ petition as submitted. Staff cannot support the requested density at this location; staff does
not support including the usable open space standard in the GMP Subdistrict language and instead,
a zoning deviation should be requested, and staff does not support the proposed deviation to reduce
the usable open space from 60% to 40% in a dense urban rental apartment community.
However, IF the Collier County Planning Commission chooses to recommend approval of this
PUDZ petition, THEN, as an alternative, staff recommends the CCPC consider the following:
•A reduction in the project density to 16 DU/A based on the subject location and inability to
meet development standards and/or,
•An increase in the public benefit in the form of additional affordable housing for the
significant increase in density to a minimum of 30% based upon recent approvals and,
•Staff acknowledges that maintaining the 60% usable open space requirement may
necessitate a density reduction and/or a building height increase. Approving a reduction in
usable open space could be offset by the petition providing increased public benefit in the
form of additional affordable housing units at 34%. This would require the following
changes in the PUD document:
o Exhibit E, List of Deviations:
▪Regarding the GMPA, add a deviation to the PUD, reducing the open space from
60% to 40%.
o Exhibit F, Affordable Housing:
▪Increase the affordable housing requirement from 22.6% to 34%
Attachments:
A)Proposed Ordinance
B)FLUE Consistency Memo
C)Application/Backup Materials
Page 675 of 3899
oRDINANCE NO.2024 -_
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORJDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER
2OO4-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE,
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY' FLORIDA, BV
AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY
CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN
DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A RURAL AGRICULTURAL (A)
ZONING DISTR]CT TO A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (RPUD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROJECT TO
BE KNOWN AS MATTSON AT VANDERI}ILT RPUD, TO ALLOW
CONSTRUCTION OF UP TO I5O MULTI-FAMILY RENTAL UNITS
WITH AFFORDABLE, HOUSING ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE
NORTH SIDE OF VANDERBILT BBACH ROAD' APPROXIMATELY
828 FEET FROM THE INTERSECTION OF VANDERBILT BEACH
ROAD AND LIVINGSTON ROAD, IN SECTION 31' TOWNSHIP 48
SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, CONSISTING OF 5.88+ ACRES; AND BY
PROVTDTNG AN EFFECTM DATE. [PL202200010111
WHEREAS, D. Wayne Arnold, AICP, of Q. Grady Minor & Associates and Richard D'
Yovanovich, Esquire of coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., representing 3333/3375 VBR,
LLC, petitioned the Board of county commissioners of collier county, Florida, to change the
zoning classification ofthe herein described real property.
SE,CTION oNE:
The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Section 31,
Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from Rural Agricultural
(A) Zoning Disrrict to a Residential Planned unit Development (RPUD) for a 5.88+ acre project
to be known as Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD, to allow construction of a maximum of 150 multi-
family dwelling units, in accordance with Exhibits A through F-l attached hereto and
[23-CPS{2327lt 839049/l ] I 09
Manson 8t Vanderbilt RPUD-P1,202200010l I
Ut2D4
I of2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA' thAt:
Page 676 of 3899
incorporated by reference herein. The appropriate zoning atlas map or maps, as described in
Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, is/are
hereby amended accordingly.
SI,CTION TWO:
This Ordinance shall become eflective upon filing with the Department of State and on
the date that the Growth Management Plan Amendment in Ordinance No.
effective.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super-majority vote of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florid4 this day of 2024
becomes
ATTEST:
CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK
By:
, Deputy Clerk
Approved as to form and legality:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COLTNTY, FLORIDA
By:
Chris I latl, Chairman
Ir''v)
Heidi F. Ashton-Cicko t)'
Managing Assistant County Attorney
Exhibit A: List of Permitted Uses
Exhibit B: Development and Design Standards
Exhibit C: Master Concept Plan
Exhibit D: Legal Description
Exhibit E: Deviations
ExhibitF: DevelopmentCommitments
Exhibit F-l: Enhanced Buffer
[23-CPS42327n 839049/t I I 09
Mattson ar Vanderbilr RPTJD-P1,2022000101 I
ul2D4
2 of 2
Page 677 of 3899
Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD PL20220001011 January 12, 2024 Page 1 of 10
EXHIBIT A
LIST OF PERMITTED USES
Regulations for development of this PUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this document and all applicable sections of the Growth Management Plan (GMP), the Land Development Code (LDC), and the Administrative Code in effect at the time of approval of the Site Development Plan (SDP) or plat. Where the PUD ordinance does not provide development standards, then the provision of the specific sections of the LDC that are otherwise applicable shall apply.
PERMITTED USES: A maximum of 150 multi-family rental dwelling units (at a density of 25.5+/- units per acre) shall be permitted within the PUD. No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following:
RESIDENTIAL: A. Principal Uses: 1. Dwelling Units: Multi-family rental units Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) or the Hearing Examiner by the process outlined in the LDC. B. Accessory Uses: Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the permitted principal uses and structures, including, but not limited to: 1. Carports and garages; and 2. Clubhouses, to serve residents and guests; and 3. Community administrative facilities and recreational facilities intended to serve residents and guests; and 4. Construction offices (during active construction only); and 5. Leasing offices; and 6. Open space uses and structures such as, but not limited to, boardwalks, nature trails, gazebos and picnic areas; and 7. Screen enclosures; and 8. Swimming pools and spas for residents and their guests; and 9. Water management facilities to serve the project such as lakes.
Page 678 of 3899
Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD PL20220001011 January 12, 2024 Page 2 of 10
EXHIBIT B
LIST OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The standards for land uses within the development shall be as stated in these development standard tables. Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of approval of the SDP or subdivision plat.
TABLE I
PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES *2 MULTI-FAMILY Minimum Floor Area per unit 650 SF Minimum Lot Area N/A Minimum Lot Width N/A Minimum Lot Depth N/A Minimum Setbacks Front Yard 50 feet PUD Boundary (North, East & West) 75 feet Minimum Distance Between Buildings 20 feet Maximum Building Height Zoned Actual 50 feet 60 feet
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES *2 Minimum Setbacks Front Yard 35 feet *4 PUD Boundary (East & West) *1 10 feet PUD Boundary (North) *1 15 feet Minimum Distance Between Buildings *3 10 feet Maximum Building Height Zoned Actual 25 feet 30 feet SPS – Same as Principal Structure *1 – Does not apply to passive recreational uses such as trails/pathways. *2 – Community structures such as guardhouses, gatehouses, fences, walls, columns, decorative architectural features, streetscape, passive parks and access control structures shall have no required internal setback, except as listed below, and are permitted throughout the PUD; however such structures shall be located such that they do not cause vehicular stacking into the road right-of-way or create site distance issues for motorists and pedestrians. *3 – Zero feet if attached. *4 – Lakes and open space and water management facilities may be reduced to 15 feet. Maximum Height for Guardhouses/Gatehouses: Zoned: 25’ Actual: 30’
Note: nothing in this RPUD Document shall be deemed to approve a deviation from the LDC unless it is expressly stated in a list of deviations.
Page 679 of 3899
VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD
ZONED: THE VANDERBILT TRUST 1989 CFPUD
USE: SENIOR LIVING APARTMENTS
ZONED: BRADFORD
SQUARE MPUD
USE:RETIREMENT
COMMUNITY
ZONED: PELICAN MARSH DRI/PUD
USE:GOLF COURSE / RESIDENTIAL
ENHANCED 15' WIDE TYPE 'B' LANDSCAPE BUFFER (SEE SHEET 3)
15' WIDE TYPE 'D'10' WIDE TYPE 'A' LANDSCAPE BUFFER10' WIDE TYPE 'A' LANDSCAPE BUFFERPOTENTIAL
VEHICULAR/PEDESTRIAN
INTERCONNECTION
LANDSCAPE BUFFER
RESIDENTIAL
BUILDING
POOL
FUTURE CAT BUS STOP
SHELTER EASEMENT
(APPROXIMATE LOCATION)
GradyMinor
Civil Engineers ●Land Surveyors ●Planners ●Landscape Architects
Cert. of Auth. EB 0005151 Cert. of Auth. LB 0005151 Business LC 26000266
Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A.
3800 Via Del Rey
Bonita Springs, Florida 34134
Bonita Springs: 239.947.1144 ZZZ.GradyMinor.coP Fort Myers: 239.690.4380
0 100'50'
SCALE: 1" = 100'
WHEN PLOTTED @ 8.5" X 11"
R RESIDENTIAL
# DEVIATION
1
1 1
2
Page 680 of 3899
GradyMinorCivil Engineers●Land Surveyors●Planners●Landscape ArchitectsCert. of Auth. EB 0005151Cert. of Auth. LB 0005151Business LC 26000266Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A.3800 Via Del ReyBonita Springs, Florida 34134 Bonita Springs: 239.947.1144ZZZ.GradyMinor.coP Fort Myers: 239.690.4380NOTES1.THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND IS SUBJECT TO MINOR MODIFICATION DUE TOAGENCY PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS.DEVIATIONS (SEE EXHIBIT E)1.RELIEF FROM LDC SECTION 4.05.04, TABLE 17, PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENTS FORMULTI-FAMILY DWELLINGS2.RELIEF FROM LDC SECTION 4.07.02.G.1, OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTSSITE SUMMARYTOTAL SITE AREA: 5.88± ACRESRESIDENTIAL:5.48± ACRES (93%)BUFFERS:0.40± ACRES (7%)RESIDENTIAL:MAXIMUM 150 MULTI-FAMILY RENTAL DWELLING UNITSOPEN SPACE:REQUIRED:60%PROVIDED:40% (SEE DEVIATION #2)PRESERVE:REQUIRED: 0± ACRES (0 ACRES NATIVE VEGETATION X 25%)PROVIDED: 0± ACRESTREE PRESERVATION:REQUIRED: 1.8 TREES (12 EXISTING TREES X 15%)PROVIDED: 2 TREESPage 681 of 3899
Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD PL20220001011 January 12, 2024 Page 5 of 10
EXHIBIT D
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
THE EAST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, LESS THE SOUTH 150.00 FEET FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY, AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE RUN S. 89°56'12" E., ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 31, FOR A DISTANCE OF 991.18 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE EAST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 31; THENCE RUN N 02°11'42" W., ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 31, FOR A DISTANCE OF 150.12 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD. A 150 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY AS SHOWN ON FDOT RIGHT-OF-WAY MAP SECTION 03512-2601, DATED 11-21-78, SAID POINT LYING 150.00 FEET NORTH OF, AS MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 31 AND ALSO BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE CONTINUE N. 02°11'42" W., ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 31, FOR A DISTANCE OF 517.35 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 31; THENCE RUN S. 89°56'42' E., ALONG SAID NORTH LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 31, FOR A DISTANCE OF 330.09 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 31. THENCE RUN S. 02°13'16" E. ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 31, FOR A DISTANCE OF 517.41 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD; THENCE RUN N. 89°56'12" W. PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 31 AND ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 330.33 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. AND THE EAST 1/2 OF THE WEST 1/2 OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4, LESS THE SOUTH 150 FEET OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CONTAINING 5.88 ACRES, MORE OR LESS
Page 682 of 3899
Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD PL20220001011 January 12, 2024 Page 6 of 10
EXHIBIT E
LIST OF DEVIATIONS
Deviation #1: Relief from LDC Section 4.05.04, Table 17, Parking Space requirements for multi-family dwellings, which requires: All units shall have 1 parking space per unit plus visitor parking computed at 0.5 per efficiency unit, 0.75 per 1-bedroom unit, and 1 per 2-bedroom or larger unit. Office/administrative buildings shall have parking provided at 50 percent of normal requirements. Where small-scale recreation facilities are accessory to a single-family or multifamily project and intended only for the residents of that project, exclusive of golf courses/clubhouses, the recreation facilities may be computed at 50 percent of normal requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are not within 300 feet of the recreation facilities and at 25 percent of normal requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are within 300 feet of the recreation facilities. However, any recreation facility shall have a minimum of 2 spaces exclusive of parking spaces for dwelling units. To instead allow parking to be provided at a ratio of 1.6 parking spaces per unit, with no requirement to provide additional parking for the recreation facilities. Deviation #2: Relief from LDC Section 4.07.02.G.1, Open space requirements, which requires within PUD districts composed entirely of residential dwelling units and accessory uses, at least 60 percent of the gross area shall be devoted to usable open space to instead allow 40 percent of the gross area be devoted to usable open space.
Page 683 of 3899
Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD PL20220001011 January 12, 2024 Page 7 of 10
EXHIBIT F
LIST OF DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS
PURPOSE: The purposed of this Section is to set forth the development commitments for the development of this project.
GENERAL:
A. 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 PUD approval, the Managing Entity is 3333/3375 VBR LLC, 3838 Tamiami Trail N, Suite 402, Naples, FL 34103. 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 longer responsible for the monitoring and fulfillment of PUD commitments.
B. 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.” (Section 125.022, FS)
C. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the development.
TRANSPORTATION:
A. The maximum total daily trip generation shall not exceed 85 two-way PM peak hour net trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat approval.
B. In lieu of providing compensatory right-of-way for the required turn lane, the owner at the time of SDP shall convey to County, at no cost to County and free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, a 5 foot by 25 foot easement adjacent to the turn lane for use as a future CAT bus stop shelter. The perimeter landscape buffer will be located outside of this easement.
ENVIRONMENTAL:
A. No native preservation area is required as there is no native vegetative community on the property. Twelve native trees exist on-site, and 15%, or 2 trees will be retained or replanted consistent with LDC Section 3.05.07.A.2. The retained or replanted trees will be shown on the Site Development Plan.
Page 684 of 3899
Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD PL20220001011 January 12, 2024 Page 8 of 10
B. The required Type B buffer along the northern property boundary shall be enhanced to include additional tree plantings consisting of Sabal Palms planted at a staggered heights ranging from 14’ to 22’ at time of planting, planted in clusters of 3 trees 10’ on center, with clusters spaced no greater than 50’ on center and Areca Palms (or similar) ranging from 8’ to 10’ at time of planting, planted at 50’ on center. See Exhibit F1, Enhanced Buffer.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A. Of the total units constructed the project shall comply with the following: 15% of the units will be rented to households whose incomes are up to and including 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) for Collier County and 15% of the units will be rented to households whose incomes are up to and including 100% of the AMI for Collier County and the corresponding rent limits. At time of each SDP, no less than 30% of the dwelling units will be identified as affordable and shown on the SDP with the AMI required ranges and fractional numbers will be rounded up to the nearest whole unit. These units will be committed for a period of 30 years from the date of issuance of certificate of occupancy of the first unit. By way of example, the 2023 Florida Housing Finance Corporation Income and Rent Limits are:
Income and rent limits may be adjusted annually based on combined income and rent limit table published by the Florida Housing Finance Corporation or as otherwise provided by Collier County. B. Initial preference to Set Aside Units shall be given to Essential Service Personnel (ESP). a. ESP means natural persons or families at least one of whom is employed as police or fire personnel, a childcare worker, a teacher or other educational personnel, healthcare personnel, or public employee. b. Initially, each Set Aside Unit will be held vacant and advertised for ESP for a minimum of 90 days prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. In the event that no ESP rents the available Set Aside Unit, then the unit may also be offered to the general public (non-ESP) but shall remain a Set Aside Unit and be rent and income restricted accordingly. After the initial offering of a unit, no preference will be given to ESP. However, when a unit becomes available advertising as set forth in paragraph (c) below shall be provided. c. At a minimum, advertising will consist of provided written notice to the Collier County Community and Human Services Division and the human resource departments for local hospitals, the Collier County Public School District, Collier
Page 685 of 3899
Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD PL20220001011 January 12, 2024 Page 9 of 10
County Government, other municipalities within Collier County, all EMS and fire district, and the Collier County Sheriff’s Office. C. As part of the annual PUD monitoring report, the developer will include an annual report that provides the progress and monitoring of occupancy of the income restricted units, including rent data for rented units, in a format approved by Collier County Community and Human Services Division. Developer agrees to annual on-site monitoring by the County.
Page 686 of 3899
GradyMinor
Civil Engineers ●Land Surveyors ●Planners ●Landscape Architects
Cert. of Auth. EB 0005151 Cert. of Auth. LB 0005151 Business LC 26000266
Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A.
3800 Via Del Rey
Bonita Springs, Florida 34134
Bonita Springs: 239.947.1144 ZZZ.GradyMinor.coP Fort Myers: 239.690.4380
Page 687 of 3899
Growth Management Community Development Department
Zoning Division
C O N S I S T E N C Y R E V I E W M E M O R A N D U M
To: Timothy Finn, AICP, Planner III, Zoning Services Section
From: Kathy Eastley, Planner III, Comprehensive Planning Section
Date: November 7, 2023
Subject: Future Land Use Element Consistency Review
PETITION NUMBER: PUDZ-PL20220001011
PETITION NAME: Mattson at Vanderbilt PUD Rezone
REQUEST: Rezone the subject property (+5.88 acres) from Rural Agricultural (A) to a Residential
Planned Unit Development (RPUD) to permit up to 150 multi-family rental dwelling units.
LOCATION: The subject site is located on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road, approximately
825 feet east of Livingston Road, in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County,
Florida.
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMENTS: The existing Future Land Use Element (FLUE),
Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and Map Series of the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP)
designates the subject property as Urban, Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict.
The Urban Residential Subdistrict provides for higher density residential uses, with the maximum
density determined by the Density Rating System; however, in no case shall the maximum density
exceed 16 dwelling units per acre in the Urban Residential Subdistrict.
Staff calculation of the maximum allowable density, based upon the existing FLUE designation and
applicable Density Rating System criteria, is 59 dwelling units, or 10 dwelling units per acre (DU/A)
for market rate DUs. This is derived by adding the eligible base density of 4 DU/A to the two eligible
density bonuses of Residential In-fill (3 DU/A) and TCMA - Transportation Concurrency Management
Areas (3 DU/A). If the project included affordable housing per LDC Section 2.06.00, then the project
could be eligible for a density bonus of up to 6 DU/A to achieve the m aximum 16 DU/A allowed by
the Density Rating System.
The rezoning proposal is for 150 multi-family rental units on 5.88 acres, resulting in a density of 25.5
DU/A (15.5 dwelling units above the maximum density of 10 DU/A that can be achieved through the
Density Rating System for market rate development). The proposed density cannot be achieved through
the Density Rating System and exceeds the maximum allowable density within the Urban Residential
Subdistrict. Therefore, the proposal is inconsistent with the FLUE. To achieve the proposed density of
25.5 DU/A a GMP Amendment (GMPA) is required.
Page 688 of 3899
Mattson at Vanderbilt
Consistency Review Memo 11/7/2023
2
The GMPA petition, in addition to the increase in density, proposes a reduction in Open Space from
that required by Section 4.07.02.G.1 of the LDC which states “Within PUD Districts composed entirely
of residential dwelling units, at least 60 percent of the gross area shall be devoted to usable open space.”
The GMPA Subdistrict language proposes to reduce the open space from 60 percent to 40 percent.
Comprehensive Planning staff and Zoning Planning staff agree that the proposed open space reduction
for a residential project is appropriately requested through the zoning deviation process rather than
through the proposed GMP text since the open space is an LDC regulation.
Staff has several concerns with the proposed petition. The increase in density to 25.5 DU/A is not
consistent with the surrounding residential densities, and the reduction in open space is not supported
by staff. If the Planning Commission approves the GMPA and PUD petitions staff recommends the
provision of commensurate public benefit in the form of additional affordable housing units. The
provision of 30 percent affordable units, rather than the 22.6 percent standard generally utilized in
petitions should be considered for the increase in density to 25.5 DU/A. The commensurate public
benefit to offset the reduction in open space would increase the provision of affordable units to 34
percent. The increase to 30 percent affordable housing would result in 45 affordable units, 11 additional
affordable housing units over the number of units achieved by the 22.6 percent provision. The public
benefit of the 11 additional affordable units could support the increase in density. The increase to 34
percent affordable housing would result in 51 affordable units, 6 additional affordable housing units
over the number of units achieved by the provision of 30 percent. This could support the reduction in
useable open space that would benefit the residents of a dense urban rental project. Instead, a public
benefit to the County, in the form of additional affordable housing units, may be acceptable.
In reviewing for compliance with Policy 5.6 and Policies 7.1 - 7.4 (shown below) of the Future Land
Use Element (FLUE) staff provides the following analysis in [bracketed bold text.]
Policy 5.6: New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land
uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code (Ordinance 04-41, adopted June 22, 2004 and effective
October 18, 2004, as amended). [Comprehensive Planning staff leaves this determination to Zoning
staff as part of their review of the petition in its entirety. However, staff would note that in
reviewing the appropriateness of the requested uses/intensities on the subject site, the
compatibility analysis might include a review of both the subject proposal and surrounding or
nearby properties as to allowed use intensities and densities, development standards (building
heights, setbacks, landscape buffers, etc.), building mass, building location, traffic
generation/attraction, etc.]
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 subject site will have one
access point on Vanderbilt Beach Road, a major collector road as identified in the Transportation
Element, as depicted on the RPUD Master Plan.]
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. [One access
point on Vanderbilt Beach Road is proposed. The project is served by an internal loop road.]
Page 689 of 3899
Mattson at Vanderbilt
Consistency Review Memo 11/7/2023
3
Policy 7.3:
All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and their
interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type.
[The PUD Master Plan locates a “Potential Vehicular/Pedestrian Interconnection” at the east end
of the project that could provide interconnection to the adjacent property. To the west is a
developed project with buildings, water management area and preserve abutting the subject site;
therefore, interconnection is not feasible. To the north is a golf course; there are no streets with
which to connect. Sidewalks within the project will be required to connect with the on-street
sidewalk and bicycle lane system along Vanderbilt Beach Road.]
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 up to 150 multi-family rental units, with a percentage of those units
proposed for affordable housing, thus providing a range of housing prices. The PUD Master Plan
locates a “Potential Vehicular/Pedestrian Interconnection” at the east end of the project that
could provide interconnection to the adjacent property, and project sidewalks will connect with
the on-street sidewalk and bicycle lane system along Vanderbilt Beach Road . Open space and
internal sidewalks must be provided as may be required by the LDC. Civic uses are not proposed;
however, the clubhouses and other common building areas can potentially be used for civic
purposes, e.g. neighborhood association meetings, NIMs, polling places, etc.]
CONCLUSION: The rezoning petition is not consistent with the GMP. A companion Small Scale
GMPA petition (PL20220001010) proposes to create a new Subdistrict within the Urban Mixed Use
District of the FLUE to allow the proposed density of 25.5 DU/A and to reduce the Open Space. Staff
is recommending denial of the petition due to inconsistent density with the surrounding residential
communities, and reduction in open space. If the Planning Commission recommends approval of the
petition, staff recommends that commensurate public benefit of 30 percent affordable housing be
provided for the density of 25.5 DU/A; staff recommends that the reduction in open space be removed
from the GMPA and more appropriately requested through the zoning deviation process in the PUD.
If the Planning Commission recommends to approve the reduction in the open space requirement, staff
recommends an increase in the provision of additional affordable housing, to 34 percent of the dwelling
units constructed in the project for added public benefit to offset the open space reduction. Approval
of this PUDZ petition is contingent upon the companion GMPA petition being approved and becoming
effective.
PETITION ON CITYVIEW
Page 690 of 3899
Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A.
3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239-947-1144 engineering@gradyminor.com www.gradyminor.com
Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD
PL20220001011
CCPC Hearing Backup
Application and Supporting
Documents
Page 691 of 3899
Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. Ph. 239-947-1144 Fax. 239-947-0375
3800 Via Del Rey EB 0005151 LB 0005151 LC 26000266
Bonita Springs, FL 34134 www.gradyminor.com
March 14, 2023
Amended April 27, 2023
Mr. Timothy Finn, AICP
Collier County Growth Management Department
Zoning Division, Zoning Services Section
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34104
RE: Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD Rezone (PL20220001011), Submittal 1
Dear Mr. Finn:
An application for Public Hearing for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) rezone for property
located at 3375 and 3333 Vanderbilt Beach Road. The PUD rezone proposes to rezone the 5.88±
acre property from the A Zoning District to the Mattson at Vanderbilt Residential PUD to allow a
multi-family rental development with a maximum of 150 units.
A companion Growth Management Plan amendment (Mattson at Vanderbilt Residential
Subdistrict PL20220001010) has been filed to authorize the proposed multi-family dwelling units.
Documents filed with submittal 1 include the following:
1. Cover Letter
2. Expedited Review Certification
3. Application for PUD Rezone
4. Evaluation Criteria
5. Pre-Application meeting notes
6. Affidavit of Authorization
7. Property Ownership Disclosure Form
8. Covenant of Unified Control
9. Addressing Checklist
10. Warranty Deed(s)
11. Boundary Survey
12. Environmental Data
13. Traffic Impact Study
Page 692 of 3899
Mr. Timothy Finn, AICP
RE: Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD Rezone (PL20220001011), Submittal 1
March 14, 2023 (amended April 27, 2023)
Page 2 of 2
14. School Concurrency
15. PUD Exhibits A-F
16. FLUE Amendment Language
Please feel free to contact Rich Yovanovich at 435-3535 or me should you have any questions.
Sincerely,
D. Wayne Arnold, AICP
c: 3333/3375 VBR, LLC
Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq.
GradyMinor File (VBRRZ-22)
Page 693 of 3899
Page 694 of 3899
Page 695 of 3899
Page 696 of 3899
Page 697 of 3899
Page 698 of 3899
Page 699 of 3899
Page 700 of 3899
Page 701 of 3899
Page 702 of 3899
Page 703 of 3899
Page 704 of 3899
Page 705 of 3899
Page 706 of 3899
Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD (PL20220001011)
Evaluation Criteria
June 2, 2023
Evaluation Criteria-r1.docx Page 1 of 8
Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A.
3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239-947-1144 engineering@gradyminor.com www.gradyminor.com
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. 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.
The applicant is proposing to rezone the 5.88+/- acre property from A, Agriculture to a
Residential PUD to permit up to 150 multi-family rental dwelling units. The applicant has
committed in the PUD that 22.6% of the constructed dwelling units will be income restricted.
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 site is well-suited for development and is currently developed with a veterinary clinic and
pet resort, and an equine boarding/riding facility. The site has been altered in support of the
existing facilities and has existing access directly onto 6-lane Vanderbilt Beach Road. Water
and sewer services are available to the property. Drainage will be permitted through South
Florida Water Management District.
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.
The applicant is the contract purchaser of the RPUD. All other properties surrounding the site
are developed.
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.)
A companion small-scale growth management plan amendment has been filed which
establishes a new subdistrict which is tailored to this specific property and establishes the
proposed intensity of a maximum of 150 rental dwelling units and includes an income
restriction for 22.6% of the units constructed.
Page 707 of 3899
June 2, 2023
Evaluation Criteria-r1.docx Page 2 of 8
Future Land Use Element
Policy 5.4 requires that all applications must be consistent with the Growth Management Plan
as determined by the Board of County Commissioners. A companion small-scale growth
management plan amendment has been filed which creates a new subdistrict providing for
development of the proposed 150 rental units. Upon approval of the Subdistrict, the project
may be deemed consistent with the Growth Management Plan.
Policies 5.5 and 5.7 discourage unacceptable levels of urban sprawl by utilizing urban areas for
development before redesignating new property for urban intensity. The proposed
development is located within the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. The
site represents infill redevelopment and does not result in sprawl.
Policy 5.6 requires that new projects will be compatible with and complementary to the
surrounding land uses. The proposed project will consist of 4-story rental apartments. The
property is located between two 3-story senior housing apartment facilities. The senior
housing projects were approved to provide for 130 group housing units for seniors within
Bradford Square PUD and 200 group housing units for seniors within the Vanderbilt Trust PUD.
The proposed 150-unit rental apartments with up to 22.6% of the constructed units having
income restrictions is of comparable use and density as the immediately adjacent property. To
the north is the Tiburon Golf Course and to the south across the 6-lane arterial Vanderbilt
Beach Road is TGM Bermuda Island apartment complex and the Village Walk residential
community.
Policy 5.8 encourages clustered development and the use of PUD techniques to conserve open
space and environmentally sensitive areas. The site has been largely cleared of native
vegetation and only scattered native trees exist on the site. The PUD contains a commitment
regarding the preservation or replacement of 15% of the native trees.
Objective 7, and implementing Policies 7.1-7.7, promote smart growth policies to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and to adhere to the development character of the County. The
proposed project cannot be interconnected to the adjoining senior housing community to the
west due to the presence of water management facilities on that site. The Sandalwood Village
senior housing facility to the east was constructed with a potential interconnect to this
property; therefore, a potential interconnect to Sandalwood Village is shown on the PUD
master plan. The site will provide a sidewalk connection to the existing sidewalk located within
the Vanderbilt Beach Road ROW.
Transportation Element
Please see the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared which demonstrates compliance with the Level
of Service Standards for arterial roadways.
Page 708 of 3899
June 2, 2023
Evaluation Criteria-r1.docx Page 3 of 8
Conservation and Coastal Management Element
Policy 6.1.1 requires preservation of 15% of the existing native vegetation on sites ranging in
size from 5 acres to 20 acres. The property has been largely cleared in support of the existing
equine facility and pet hospital. No native vegetative communities exist on the property.
Policy 6.2.5 is directed at reducing impacts to wetlands. There are no wetlands on the subject
property.
Objective 7.1: Direct incompatible land uses away from listed animal species and their
habitats. The availability of suitable habitat for any vertebrate is quite limited. The parcel is
cleared and does not provide potential for any denning, habitation and /or foraging. The
parcel is also surrounded by development. The parcel was traversed and examined. Potential
species for such a small parcel would be fox squirrels and/or gopher tortoises. At the time of
inspection, no burrows and/or small animals were encountered. The project site does provide
some foraging for traversing birds. A Black Bear management plan may be required at the
time of SDP. Please also refer to the listed species management and indigenous preservation
plans prepared by Collier Environmental Consultants, Inc.
Housing Element
Objectives 1 and 2 promote the creation of affordable housing units in the County that address
the needs for various income levels. The proposed PUD requires that 22.6% of the rental units
constructed with meet income levels between 80% and 100% of the Area Median Income and
is consistent with the objectives of the Housing Element.
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 project as proposed is compatible both internally and externally. The proposed infill
development of rental units is located between two rental communities targeted at seniors.
The use is comparable, and it will be compatible with these neighboring uses given the
proposed development standards and buffering provided within the PUD.
e. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development.
The rental community will provide common open space which will consist of recreational
amenity areas, buffers and water management areas.
f. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of
available improvements and facilities, both public and private.
Page 709 of 3899
June 2, 2023
Evaluation Criteria-r1.docx Page 4 of 8
Adequate infrastructure must be in place to support future development on the site. There are
no known infrastructure capacity issues that will impact this project. The residential project
will be developed in a single phase.
g. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion.
The RPUD is surrounded by zoned and developed land. Expansion of the PUD boundary is not
proposed or feasible.
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.
The project as proposed is consistent with the LDC and meets all criteria for approval of a PUD.
10.02.08 - Requirements for Amendments to the Official Zoning Atlas
F. Nature of requirements of Planning Commission report. When pertaining to the rezoning of
land, the report and recommendations of the Planning Commission to the Board of County
Commissioners required in LDC section 10.02.08 E shall show that the Planning Commission
has studied and considered the proposed change in relation to the following findings, when
applicable:
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.
Future Land Use Element
Policy 5.4 requires that all applications must be consistent with the Growth Management Plan
as determined by the Board of County Commissioners. A companion small-scale growth
management plan amendment has been filed which creates a new subdistrict providing for
development of the proposed 150 rental units. Upon approval of the Subdistrict, the project
may be deemed consistent with the Growth Management Plan.
Policies 5.5 and 5.7 discourage unacceptable levels of urban sprawl by utilizing urban areas for
development before redesignating new property for urban intensity. The proposed
development is located within the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. The
site represents infill redevelopment and does not result in sprawl.
Policy 5.6 requires that new projects will be compatible with and complementary to the
surrounding land uses. The proposed project will consist of 4-story rental apartments. The
property is located between two 3-story senior housing apartment facilities. The senior
housing projects were approved to provide for 130 group housing units for seniors within
Bradford Square PUD and 200 group housing units for seniors within the Vanderbilt Trust PUD.
Page 710 of 3899
June 2, 2023
Evaluation Criteria-r1.docx Page 5 of 8
The proposed 150-unit rental apartments with up to 22.6% of the constructed units having
income restrictions is of comparable use and density as the immediately adjacent property. To
the north is the Tiburon Golf Course and to the south across the 6-lane arterial Vanderbilt
Beach Road is TGM Bermuda Island apartment complex and the Village Walk residential
community.
Policy 5.8 encourages clustered development and the use of PUD techniques to conserve open
space and environmentally sensitive areas. The site has been largely cleared of native
vegetation and only scattered native trees exist on the site. The PUD contains a commitment
regarding the preservation or replacement of 15% of the native trees.
Objective 7, and implementing Policies 7.1-7.7, promote smart growth policies to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and to adhere to the development character of the County. The
proposed project cannot be interconnected to the adjoining senior housing community to the
west due to the presence of water management facilities on that site. The Sandalwood Village
senior housing facility to the east was constructed with a potential interconnect to this
property; therefore, a potential interconnect to Sandalwood Village is shown on the PUD
master plan. The site will provide a sidewalk connection to the existing sidewalk located within
the Vanderbilt Beach Road ROW.
Transportation Element
Please see the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared which demonstrates compliance with the Level
of Service Standards for arterial roadways.
Conservation and Coastal Management Element
Policy 6.1.1 requires preservation of 15% of the existing native vegetation on sites ranging in
size from 5 acres to 20 acres. The property has been largely cleared in support of the existing
equine facility and pet hospital. No native vegetative communities exist on the property.
Policy 6.2.5 is directed at reducing impacts to wetlands. There are no wetlands on the subject
property.
Objective 7.1: Direct incompatible land uses away from listed animal species and their
habitats. The availability of suitable habitat for any vertebrate is quite limited. The parcel is
cleared and does not provide potential for any denning, habitation and /or foraging. The
parcel is also surrounded by development. The parcel was traversed and examined. Potential
species for such a small parcel would be fox squirrels and/or gopher tortoises. At the time of
inspection, no burrows and/or small animals were encountered. The project site does provide
some foraging for traversing birds. A Black Bear management plan may be required at the
time of SDP. Please also refer to the listed species management and indigenous preservation
plans prepared by Collier Environmental Consultants, Inc.
Page 711 of 3899
June 2, 2023
Evaluation Criteria-r1.docx Page 6 of 8
Housing Element
Objectives 1 and 2 promote the creation of affordable housing units in the County that address
the needs for various income levels. The proposed PUD requires that 22.6% of the rental units
constructed with meet income levels between 80% and 100% of the Area Median Income and
is consistent with the objectives of the Housing Element.
2. The existing land use pattern.
To the immediate east and west of the site are group housing for seniors rental communities.
To the south across Vanderbilt Beach Road is an existing rental community and a for sale
residential community.
3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby
districts.
The PUD boundary is not proposed to be changed; therefore, no isolated district is created by
this zoning action.
4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property proposed for change.
The PUD boundary represents a logical boundary.
5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed
amendment necessary.
The existing uses are not consistent with the growth management plan in that the property is
located in the Urban area of Collier County and the existing agricultural related uses are not
consistent with the anticipated future residential development at this location.
6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood.
The proposed rezone will not adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The
proposed master plan and development standards will assure compatibility. The proposed
use is similar in use and intensity to the projects located immediately adjacent to the property.
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.
Page 712 of 3899
June 2, 2023
Evaluation Criteria-r1.docx Page 7 of 8
The proposed 150-unit rental community will not create or excessively increase traffic
congestion. The TIS prepared for the PUD rezoning application concludes that the project will
not adversely impact the surrounding road network or cause any roadways to operate below
their adopted level of service.
8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem.
The project will obtain a SFWMD permit for the surface water management system and will
have no impact on surrounding development.
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas.
The proposed rezone will have no impact on light and air to adjacent areas.
10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent
area.
The proposed rezone should have no impact on property values in the adjacent area. The
project will consist of both market rate and income restricted units which will be undiscernible.
11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or
development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations.
The proposed rezone should enhance surrounding properties and will not deter improvement
or development of nearby properties.
12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an
individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare.
Any property owner may propose zoning changes subject to the requirements of the LDC. No
special privilege results from the PUD Amendment.
13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in
accordance with existing zoning.
The proposed PUD provides for an increase in the number of dwelling units above that
authorized by the current zoning. The current zoning is A, Agriculture and does not permit the
proposed multi-family dwelling units. The rezoning is necessary to support the proposed use.
14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood
or the county.
The scale of the project is in scale with the needs of the community.
Page 713 of 3899
June 2, 2023
Evaluation Criteria-r1.docx Page 8 of 8
15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed
use in districts already permitting such use.
It is not impossible to find other sites in the County; however, this infill property has
development surrounding it and it is served by a 6-lane arterial roadway and has water and
wastewater services available to it.
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.
The property has been previously cleared and filled in support of the existing land uses.
Minimal additional site clearing will be required to support the proposed apartment use.
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.
There are adequate roadways and utilities available at the site. There are no public facilities
deficiencies at the present time, and none will occur as a result of this project.
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.
The project is consistent with the proposed Growth Management Plan amendment, and it is
compatible with surrounding development.
Page 714 of 3899
Page 715 of 3899
Page 716 of 3899
Page 717 of 3899
Page 718 of 3899
Page 719 of 3899
Page 720 of 3899
Page 721 of 3899
Page 722 of 3899
Page 723 of 3899
Page 724 of 3899
Page 725 of 3899
Page 726 of 3899
Page 727 of 3899
Page 728 of 3899
Page 729 of 3899
Page 730 of 3899
Page 731 of 3899
Page 732 of 3899
AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION
FOR PETITION NUMBERS($) _P_L2_02_2_00_01_0_1o_a_nd_P_L2_02_2_00_01_0_11 _________________ _
I, David J . Stevens (print name), as President (title, if
applicable) of 333313375 vsR LLc (company, l~licable), swear or affirm
under oath, that I am the (choose one) owner[ZJapplicantOcontract purchaserL_Jand that:
*Notes:
1. 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;
2. 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;
3. 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
4. The property will be transferred, conveyed, sold or subdivided subject to the conditions and
restrictions imposed by the approved action.
5. We/I authorize Q . Grady Minor & Associates , P.A. and Coleman , Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. to act as our/my representative
in any matters regarding this petition including 1 through 2 above.
• 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.
erjury, I declare that I have read the foregoing Affidavit of Authorization and that
' 'oate
STATE OF FLOR DA
COUN OF CO LIER
The foregoing instrument was acknowleged before me by means of ~ical presence or [Jon line notarization this
~ day of Ma,vc.h , 20~, by (printed name of owner or qualifier) David J. Stevens as President .
Suc_,!YPerson(s) Notary Public must check applicable box:
rsr'Are personally known to me
□ Has produced a current drivers license ______ _
□ Has produced~-==.--------as identification . n ,ffi
Notary Signature : ___;':::>=-'...;....:~:..i.::..t~~-------------
CP\08-COA-00115\155
REV 3/4/2020
Notary Seal
_.-:.:_-,:,,~ •i:,;_ .. _ STEP HANIE HOLLY LITTLE _
tf ~"F:\ Nou ry Pub lic • St at e of Flonda \~~Jtft Co mmis sion# HH 0 19619
\~')' OF f'-f .-' My Comm. Expi res Jul 9, 2024
• ...... ·So nded th ro u~h Nii tion il l Notuy •ssn .
Page 733 of 3899
Growth Management Community Development Department
2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104
Phone: (239) 252-1036 | Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov
www.colliercountyfl.gov
01/2023 Page 1 of 3
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
N.A.
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
3333/3375 VBR LLC, 3838 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 402, Naples FL
34103
David J. Stevens (Chairman, Director, President, Treasurer) -
Ownership Interest
Clinton L. Sherwood (Director, Vice President, Secretary) -
Ownership Interest
100
c. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the
percentage of interest:
Name and Address % of Ownership
N.A.
PROPERTY OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM
Page 734 of 3899
Growth Management Community Development Department
2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104
Phone: (239) 252-1036 | Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov
www.colliercountyfl.gov
01/2023 Page 2 of 3
d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the
general and/or limited partners:
Name and Address % of Ownership
N.A.
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:
Name and Address % of Ownership
Roers Acquisitions LLC, Two Carlson Parkway, Suite 400,
Plymouth, MN 55447
Brian Roers – 50% owner
Kent Roers – 50% owner
100
Date of Contract: February 3, 2023
f. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or
officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust:
Name and Address
N.A.
g. Date subject property acquired 2022
Leased: Term of lease years /months
Page 735 of 3899
Growth Management Community Development Department
2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104
Phone: (239) 252-1036 | Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov
www.colliercountyfl.gov
01/2023 Page 3 of 3
If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following:
Date of option: December 31, 2023
Date option terminates: N.A. , or
Anticipated closing date: N.A.
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 failure 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 Community Development Department | GMD Portal:
https://cvportal.colliercountyfl.gov/cityviewweb
Questions? Email: GMDclientservices@colliercountyfl.gov
February 14, 2023
Agent/Owner Signature Date
D. Wayne Arnold, AICP
Agent/Owner Name (please print)
AFFIRM PROPERTY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION
Page 736 of 3899
Page 737 of 3899
Addressing Checklist (Rev 9/2022)Page 1 of 1
Operations & Regulatory Management Division Ɣ1RUWK+RUVHVKRH'ULYHƔ1DSOHV)/Ɣ --
www.colliercountyfl.gov
ADDRESSING CHECKLIST
Please complete the following and upload via the CityView Portal with your submittal. Items ŵĂƌŬĞĚǁŝƚŚ;ΎͿare required for
every application, other items are optional and may not apply to every project.
Forms are valid for 6 months following their submittal; an updated form will be required for a new submittal after that timeframe
and any time the properties within the project boundary are modified.
Additional documents may be attached to this form and can include:
-ΎLOCATION MAP and/or SURVEY showing the proposed project boundary.
- List of additional folio numbers and associated legal descriptions.
- E-mail from Addressing Official for any pre-approved project and/or street names.
LOCATION INFORMATION
ΎFOLIO (Property ID) Number(s)of subject property or properties. [Attach list if necessary]
ΎLEGAL DESCRIPTION of subject property or properties. [Attach list if necessary]
STREET ADDRESS(ES)where applicable, if already assigned.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Acceptance of this form does not constitute project and/or street name approval and is subject to further review by the Addressing
Official. Pre-Approval may be requested by contacting us at GMD_Addressing@colliercountyfl.gov or 239-252-2482 prior to your
submittal.
ΎPETITION TYPE (choose from the drop-down list below). A unique checklist must be created for each application.
CURRENT PROJECT NAME
PROPOSED PROJECT NAME
PROPOSED STREET NAME(s)
LATEST APPROVED PROJECT NUMBER [e.g., SDP-94-##, PPL-2002-AR-####, PL2017000####]
00200240000 and 00202280000
S31/T48/R26
3375 and 3333 Vanderbilt Beach Road
PUDZ (Planned Unit Development Rezone)
N.A.
3375 VBR RPUD
N.A.
Page 738 of 3899
Collier County Property AppraiserProperty Aerial
Parcel No 00200240000 SiteAddress*Disclaimer
3375VANDERBILTBEACH RD Site City NAPLES Site Zone*Note 34109
Open GIS in a New Window with More Features.
Page 739 of 3899
Collier County Property AppraiserProperty Aerial
Parcel No 00202280000 SiteAddress*Disclaimer
3333VANDERBILTBEACH RD Site City NAPLES Site Zone*Note 34109
Open GIS in a New Window with More Features.
Page 740 of 3899
Page 741 of 3899
Page 742 of 3899
Page 743 of 3899
Page 744 of 3899
Page 745 of 3899
Page 746 of 3899
Livingston RDVillage Walk CIR Vanderbilt Beach RD
M
a
r
sal
a
W
A
Y
Wilshire Lakes BLVDCerrito CT
Benicia CT
Andorra CT
Donoso CT
Montalvo CTLos Altos CTGroves
RD
Bermuda Isle CIREl Verdado CT Deepwater CTSandpiper WAYSource: Esri, Maxar, Earthstar Geographics, and the GIS User
Community
Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD
Location Map .
750 0 750375 Feet
Legend
PUD BOUNDARY
Document Path: G:\Planning\PROJ - PLANNING\VBRRZ-22 Mattson at Vanderbilt\Drawings\GIS\GeneralLocationMap-r1.mxdPage 747 of 3899
Page 748 of 3899
Page 749 of 3899
Page 750 of 3899
Page 751 of 3899
Page 752 of 3899
Page 753 of 3899
Page 754 of 3899
Page 755 of 3899
Page 756 of 3899
Page 757 of 3899
Page 758 of 3899
Page 759 of 3899
Page 760 of 3899
Page 761 of 3899
Page 762 of 3899
Page 763 of 3899
Page 764 of 3899
Page 765 of 3899
Page 766 of 3899
Page 767 of 3899
Page 768 of 3899
Page 769 of 3899
Page 770 of 3899
Page 771 of 3899
Page 772 of 3899
Page 773 of 3899
Page 774 of 3899
Page 775 of 3899
Page 776 of 3899
Page 777 of 3899
Page 778 of 3899
Page 779 of 3899
Page 780 of 3899
Page 781 of 3899
Page 782 of 3899
Page 783 of 3899
Page 784 of 3899
Page 785 of 3899
Page 786 of 3899
Page 787 of 3899
Page 788 of 3899
Page 789 of 3899
Page 790 of 3899
Page 791 of 3899
Page 792 of 3899
Page 793 of 3899
Page 794 of 3899
Page 795 of 3899
Page 796 of 3899
Page 797 of 3899
Page 798 of 3899
Page 799 of 3899
Page 800 of 3899
Page 801 of 3899
Page 802 of 3899
Page 803 of 3899
Page 804 of 3899
Page 805 of 3899
Page 806 of 3899
Page 807 of 3899
Page 808 of 3899
Page 809 of 3899
Page 810 of 3899
Page 811 of 3899
Page 812 of 3899
Page 813 of 3899
Page 814 of 3899
Page 815 of 3899
Page 816 of 3899
Page 817 of 3899
Page 818 of 3899
Page 819 of 3899
Page 820 of 3899
Page 821 of 3899
Page 822 of 3899
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):
[ ] School Capacity Review [ ] Exemption Letter
[ ] Concurrency Determination [ ] Concurrency Determination Amendment
For descriptions of the types of review please see page 3,
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I. Project Information:
Project Name:___________________________________________ Municipality:_________________________________
Parcel ID#: (attach separate sheet for multiple parcels): _______________________________________________________
Location/Address of subject property: ____________________________________________________ (Attach location map)
Closest Major Intersection: _______________________________________________________________________________
II. Ownership/Agent Information:
Owner/Contract Purchaser Name(s): _____________________________________________________________________
Agent/Contact Person: ________________________________________________________________________________
(Please note that if agent or contact information is completed the District will forward all information to that person)
Mailing address: _____________________________________________________________________________________
Telephone#: _____________________________ Fax: _________________________Email_________________________
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.
_____________________________________________________ _____________________________
Owner or Authorized Agent Signature Date
_________________________________________________________________________________________
III.Development Information
Project Data (Unit Types defined on page 2 of application)
Current Land Use Designation:Proposed Land Use Designation:
Current Zoning:Proposed Zoning:
Project Acreage:
Unit Type:SF MF MH C G
Total Units Currently Allowed by Type:
Total Units Proposed by Type:
Is this a phased project: Yes or No If yes, please complete page 2 of this application.
Date/time stamp:___________________________
orrect to the best of my y y yyyyyy yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy knowledge.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
gent Signature
No
3375 and 3333 VBR RPUD Collier County
00200240000 and 00202280000
3375 and 3333 Vanderbilt Beach Road
Vanderbilt Beach Road and Livingston Road
Investment Properties Corporation of Naples
D. Wayne Arnold, AICP
Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A., 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134
239.947.1144 warnold@gradyminor.com
October 5, 2022
Urban Residential Subdistrict
A Residential Planned Unit Development
5.88+/-
0
150
✔
Page 823 of 3899
Worksheet is required to be completed by the Applicant only if the project is to be phased:Unit Type Yr1 Yr2 Yr3 Yr4 Yr5 Yr6 Yr7 Yr8 Yr9 Yr10 Yr 11-20 20+ YearsSFMFMHCGTotals by YrGrand TotalGrand TotalInsert totals by unit type by years.Unit Types:SF = Single FamilyMF = Multi-Family/Apartments MH = Mobile HomesC = Condo/Co-OpG = GovernmentEXAMPLE:Unit Type Yr1 Yr2 Yr3 Yr4 Yr5 Yr6 Yr7 Yr8 Yr9 Yr10 Yr 11-20 20+ YearsSF25 25 25 25 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --MF50 0 0 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --MHN/ACN/AGN/ATotals by Yr75 25 25 25 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --Grand Total 150.2Page 824 of 3899
Types of Reviews:
School Impact Analysis:
This review should be divided into two categories:
-School Capacity Review (land use and rezonings), and;
-Concurrency Determinations (site plans and subdivisions).
School Capacity Review is the review of a project in the land use and rezoning stage of development. It is a
review of the impact of the development on school capacity and is considered long range planning. This may
be a review resulting in mitigation being required. In situations where the applicant may be required to
mitigate, capacity may be reserved dependent on the type of mitigation.
Concurrency Determination is the review of residential site plans and subdivisions to determine whether
there is available capacity. When capacity is determined to be available a School Capacity Determination
Letter (SCADL) will be issued verifying available capacity to the applicant and the local government. If a
project exceeds the adopted level of service standards, the applicant is afforded the option of a negotiation
period that may or may not result in an executed/recorded mitigation agreement Mitigation at this stage is
expressed as a Proportionate Share Mitigation Agreement. For those residential developments that may have
an impact but are otherwise exempt from concurrency, an exemption letter will be prepared for the applicant
upon request. For those residential developments that are determined to not have an impact, a letter of no
impact will be prepared for the applicant upon request.
Exemption Letter:
An applicant may request an Exemption Letter as documentation for the local government. These are projects
that would be exempt from school concurrency review or projects that do not impact the public schools.
Exemptions from school concurrency are limited to existing single family or mobile home lots of record;
amendments to previously approved site plans or plats that do not increase the number of dwelling units or
change the dwelling unit type; age restricted communities with no permanent residents under the age of 18; or
residential site plans or plats or amendments to site plans or plats that generate less than one student; or are
authorized as a Development of Regional Impact (Chapter 380, F.S.) as of July 1, 2005.
Concurrency Determination Amendment:
An applicant may request an amendment to a previously issued School Concurrency Determination or to an
application being processed. This review may require additional staff time beyond the initial concurrency
determination review and results in a modified determination being issued. An amendment could result in a
negotiation period and/or a mitigation agreement being issued or a previously approved determination being
modified and reissued.
3
Page 825 of 3899
Collier County Property AppraiserProperty Aerial
Parcel No 00200240000 SiteAddress*Disclaimer
3375VANDERBILTBEACH RD Site City NAPLES Site Zone*Note 34109
Open GIS in a New Window with More Features.
Page 826 of 3899
Collier County Property AppraiserProperty Aerial
Parcel No 00202280000 SiteAddress*Disclaimer
3333VANDERBILTBEACH RD Site City NAPLES Site Zone*Note 34109
Open GIS in a New Window with More Features.
Page 827 of 3899
Mattson at Vanderbilt Residential Subdistrict (PL20220001010)
EXHIBIT IV.B
Future Land Use Element Amendment Language
July 17, 2023 Page 1 of 3
Exhibit IVB Proposed Language-r2.docx
Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A.
3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239-947-1144 engineering@gradyminor.com www.gradyminor.com
Proposed amendment to the Collier County Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and Future Land Use Map
(FLUM) to establish the 5.88± Acre Mattson at Vanderbilt Residential Subdistrict.
Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions.
SECTION I: Amend Future Land Use Map Series, beginning on page v as follows:
* FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES 140
*** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** ***
* Mattson at Vanderbilt Residential Subdistrict
SECTION II: Amend “II. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY”, Policy 1.5 beginning on page 9 as follows:
*** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** ***
Policy 1.5:
The URBAN Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: A. URBAN - MIXED USE DISTRICT 1. Urban Residential Subdistrict 2. Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict 3. Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict 4. Business Park Subdistrict 5. Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict 6. PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict 7. Residential Mixed Use Neighborhood Subdistrict 8. Orange Blossom Mixed-Use Subdistrict 9. Vanderbilt Beach/Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict 10. Henderson Creek Mixed-Use Subdistrict 11. Research and Technology Park Subdistrict 12. Buckley Mixed-Use Subdistrict 13. Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict 14. Livingston/Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict 15. Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict 16. Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict 17. Hibiscus Residential Infill Subdistrict 18. Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict 19. Mini Triangle Mixed Use Subdistrict 20. Goodlette/Pine Ridge Mixed Use Subdistrict 21. Livingston Road/Veterans Memorial Boulevard East Residential Subdistrict 22. Meridian Village Mixed-Use Subdistrict 23. Vanderbilt Beach Road Mixed Use Subdistrict Map 24. Immokalee Road Interchange Residential Infill Subdistrict
Page 828 of 3899
July 17, 2023 Page 2 of 3
Exhibit IVB Proposed Language-r2.docx
25. Creekside Commerce Park East Mixed Use Subdistrict 26. Mattson at Vanderbilt Residential Subdistrict SECTION III: Amend “I. URBAN DESIGNATION”, beginning on page 26 as follows:
*** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** *** A. Urban Mixed Use District *** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** *** 26. Mattson at Vanderbilt Residential Subdistrict [beginning Page 55]
The 5.88-acre subdistrict, as depicted on the Mattson at Vanderbilt Residential Subdistrict map, is located
approximately 1,100 feet east of Livingston Road on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road. The intent
of this subdistrict is to allow for a maximum of 150 multi-family dwelling units to promote affordable and
workforce housing in an urban area with transit, employment centers, and public infrastructure. The
development of this subdistrict will be governed by the following criteria:
a. Development shall be in the form of a PUD.
b. The dwelling units are limited to rental units.
c. The maximum number of dwelling units permitted within the subdistrict is 150 dwelling units.
d. Usable open space shall be 40% of the overall site area.
e. Affordable Housing Commitment:
1. Of the total units constructed the project shall comply with the following: 11.3% of the units will
be rented to households whose incomes are up to and including 80% of the Area Median Income
(AMI) for Collier County and 11.3% of the units will be rented to households whose incomes are
up to and including 100% of the AMI for Collier County and the corresponding rent limits. At time
of each SDP, no less than 22.6% of the dwelling units will be identified as affordable and shown
on the SDP with the AMI ranges and fractional numbers will be rounded up to the nearest whole
unit. These units will be committed for a period of 30 years from the date of issuance of certificate
of occupancy of the first unit. Income and rent limits may be adjusted annually based on combined
income and rent limit table published by the Florida Housing Finance Corporation or as otherwise
provided by Collier County.
2. As part of the annual PUD monitoring report, the developer will include an annual report that
provides the progress and monitoring of occupancy of the income restricted units, including rent
data for rented units, in a format approved by Collier County Community and Human Services
Division. Developer agrees to annual on-site monitoring by the County.
Page 829 of 3899
July 17, 2023 Page 3 of 3
Exhibit IVB Proposed Language-r2.docx
f. The Density Rating System is not applicable to this Subdistrict.
SECTION IV: Amend “FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES”, beginning page 159 as follows:
*** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** ***
Mattson at Vanderbilt Residential Subdistrict [page 160]
Page 830 of 3899
Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD (PL20220001011)
Deviation Justification
June 8, 2023 Page 1 of 1
Deviation Justification-r1.docx
Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A.
3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239-947-1144 engineering@gradyminor.com www.gradyminor.com
1. Deviation #1 requests relief from LDC Section 4.05.04, Table 17, Parking Space
requirements for multi-family dwellings, which requires:
All units shall have 1 per unit plus visitor parking computed at 0.5 per efficiency unit, 0.75
per 1-bedroom unit, and 1 per 2-bedroom or larger unit. Office/administrative buildings
shall have parking provided at 50 percent of normal requirements. Where small-scale
recreation facilities are accessory to a single-family or multifamily project and intended
only for the residents of that project, exclusive of golf courses/clubhouses, the recreation
facilities may be computed at 50 percent of normal requirements where the majority of
the dwelling units are not within 300 feet of the recreation facilities and at 25 percent of
normal requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are within 300 feet of the
recreation facilities.
To instead allow parking to be provided at a ratio of 1.6 parking spaces per unit, with no
requirement to provide additional parking for the recreation facilities.
Justification:
The developer has extensive experience in creating successful multi-family dwelling units
throughout the United States. Typically, they average 1.5 parking spaces per unit across
their portfolio. Four (4) project examples have been submitted with similar site
characteristics as this site (location, density, size, etc.). Based on the proposed unit
breakdown for this project, 40% of the units are proposed to be 1-bdrm. This is relatively
high percentage of 1-bdrm units which only require 1.75 space per LDC 4.05.03.
Further, the site has been designed in a manner that places all units in close proximity to
the project amenity area. The master plan identifies the area where the amenities for the
project will be located, and they will be located within a courtyard immediately adjacent to
the building. No unit will be farther than 250’+/- from the project’s amenity area. At this
distance there is no need for any resident to walk to the parking lot and then drive a
distance that may exceed the distance to walk to the pool or outdoor courts.
Page 831 of 3899
November 8, 2022 Page 4 of 4
Exhibit VE Public Facilities.docx
Existing Services and Public Facilities Map:
Page 832 of 3899
Page 833 of 3899
Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. Ph. 239-947-1144 Fax. 239-947-0375
3800 Via Del Rey EB 0005151 LB 0005151 LC 26000266
Bonita Springs, FL 34134 www.gradyminor.com
Project Location Map
NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING
PETITIONS: PL20220001010 – Mattson at Vanderbilt Residential Subdistrict; and
PL20220001011 – Mattson at Vanderbilt Residential Planned Unit Development
In compliance with the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) requirements, a neighborhood Information
meeting (NIM) hosted by D. Wayne Arnold, AICP, of Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. (GradyMinor) and Richard D.
Yovanovich, Esq., of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., representing 3333/3375 VBR LLC (Applicant) will be held
May 24, 2023, 5:30 pm at the Collier County Headquarters Library, Sugden Theater (2385 Orange Blossom Dr., Naples,
FL 34109).
3333/3375 VBR LLC has submitted formal applications to Collier County, seeking approval of a Small-Scale Growth
Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) establishing the Mattson at Vanderbilt Residential Subdistrict and a Residential
Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Rezone from the A, Agricultural Zoning District to Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD to
allow a maximum of 150 residential dwelling units with a percentage required to be designated for affordable housing.
The subject property is comprised of 5.88± acres and is located at 3375 and 3333 Vanderbilt Beach Road in Section 31,
Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
If you have questions, please contact Sharon Umpenhour with GradyMinor by email: sumpenhour@gradyminor.com
or phone: 239-947-1144. For project information or to register to participate remotely* go to,
gradyminor.com/Planning.
Any information provided is subject to change until final approval by the governing authority. The NIM is an
informational meeting, not a public hearing.
*Remote participation is provided as a courtesy and is at the user’s risk. The applicant and GradyMinor are not
responsible for technical issues. The Collier County Public Library does not sponsor or endorse this program.
PROJECT INFORMATION
GRADYMINOR.COM/PLANNING
Page 834 of 3899
1NAME1NAME2NAME3NAME4 NAME5NAME6LEGAL1LEGAL2LEGAL3LEGAL4FOLIO ADDRESSTYPE3333/3375 VBR LLC3838 TAMIAMI TR N STE #402NAPLES, FL 34103---3586 31 48 26 COMM AT SW CNR SEC 31 ,S89DEG E 991.18FT, N02DEG W 150.12FT TO POB, N02DEG W 517. 35FT, S89DEG E 330.09FT, S02 00200240000 U3333/3375 VBR LLC3838 TAMIAMI TRAIL N #402NAPLES, FL 34103---031 48 26 E1/2 OF W1/2 OF E1/2 OF S1/2 OF SW1/4 OF SW1/4, LESS S 150FT00202280000 UBRADFORD SQUARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITY LLC7101 S 82ND STLINCOLN, NE 68516---0 31 48 26 S1/2 OF SW1/4 OF SW 1/4 LESS S 150FT LESS E 495FT +-LESS R W DESC IN OR 3022 PG 1128& LESS RW DESC IN OR 3599 00203042108 UBURGO, SANDRA L1131 BROOKSHIRE DRNEW CASTLE, PA 16101---0 MARSALA AT TIBURON LOT 3459810000788 UDININO, JOHN M & SUSAN R14455 MARSALA WAYNAPLES, FL 34109---3233 MARSALA AT TIBURON LOT 4159810000924 UHAPPY MONEY TRUST14435 MARSALA WAYNAPLES, FL 34109---0MARSALA AT TIBURON LOT 3659810000827 UMARSALA AT TIBURON HOMEOWNERS ASSN INCC/O BUS MGMT SERV OF THE GULFCOAST PO BOX 10189 NAPLES, FL 34101---0MARSALA AT TIBURON TRACT A59810000021 UPAUL D MORTELL TRUSTJANE H MORTELL TRUST14451 MARSALA WAYNAPLES, FL 34109---0MARSALA AT TIBURON LOT 4059810000908 UPR NAPLES ACTIVE ADULT LLC C/O PGIM REAL ESTATE7 GIRALDA FARMSMADISON, NJ 07940---0 31 48 26 W1/2 OF S1/2 OFSE1/4 OF SW1/4, LESS S 150FT R/W00201000003 USANDWITH TR, JEFFREY SPERPETUAL ASSET SHIELD TRUST 205 BETSY LNRICHMOND, KY 40475---8555 MARSALA AT TIBURON LOT 3559810000801 USOUTH WAVERLEY FLORIDA LTD 14447 MARSALA WAYNAPLES, FL 34109---0MARSALA AT TIBURON LOT 3959810000885 UTGM BERMUDA ISLAND INC1 N LASALLE ST #2100CHICAGO, IL 60602---3918 06 49 26 COM NW CNR VILLAGE WALK PH ONE, S 7DEG 11'31"W 403.11FT, S 4'1"W 380FT,THENCE 408.41FT ALONG ARC OF CURVE 00282520007 UTIBURON GOLF VENTURES L P % RYAN LLCPO BOX 4900SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85261---0 31 48 26 SW1/4 OF NW1/4,NW1/4 OF SE1/4 OF NW1/4, N1/2 OF SW1/4 OF SW1/4, NW1/4 OF SW1/4, N1/2 OF 00199320002 UTIITF /ST OF FL3900 COMMONWEALTH BLVDTALLAHASSEE, FL 32399---3000 31 48 26 PAR 68 I-75 R/W00202520003 UTURNER, DAVID P & RACHELLE L 14439 MARSALA WAYNAPLES, FL 34109---0MARSALA AT TIBURON LOT 3759810000843 UVILLAGE WALK HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION OF NAPLES INC 3200 VILLAGE WALK CIR STE 100NAPLES, FL 34109---1316 VILLAGE WALK PHASE ONE TRACT A (R/W)80400000109 UVILLAGE WALK HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION OF NAPLES INC 3200 VILLAGE WALK CIR STE 100NAPLES, FL 34109---1316 VILLAGE WALK PHASE ONE TRACT B (LAKE/DE), LESS THAT PORTION DESC IN OR 2300 PG 254280400000358 UVILLAGE WALK HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION OF NAPLES INC 3200 VILLAGE WALK CIR STE 100NAPLES, FL 34109---1316 VILLAGE WALK PHASE ONE TRACT D (COMMON AREA)LESS OR 3526 PG 383680400000950 UWOZNIAK, GLENN G & MEI N14443 MARSALA WAYNAPLES, FL 34109---0MARSALA AT TIBURON LOT 3859810000869 UNotice: This data belongs to the Collier County Property Appraiser's Office (CCPA). Therefore, the recipient agrees not to represent this data to anyone as other than CCPA provided data. The recipient may not transfer this data to others without consent from the CCPA.Petition: PL20220001011 & PL20220001010 | Buffer: 500' | Date: 3/31/23 | Site Location: 00200240000 & OthersPOList_500.xlsPage 835 of 3899
Page 836 of 3899
Page 837 of 3899
Page 838 of 3899
Zoom Registration ‐ May 24, 2023 NIM PL20220001010 and PL20220001011
First Name Last Name Email
Bobby Ruiz bruiz@tgmcommunities.com
Robert Campbell rcampbell@tgmcommunities.com
Mary Waller mew4naples@aol.com
Page 839 of 3899
PL20220001010 – MATTSON AT VANDERBILT RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT; AND
PL20220001011 – MATTSON AT VANDERBILT RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
May 24, 2023, NIM Transcript
Page 1 of 4
Sharon Umpenhour: 00:01 Okay, we're recording.
Wayne Arnold: 00:01 All right.
Wayne Arnold: 00:03 Well good evening everybody. I'm Wayne Arnold with
GradyMinor & Associates and we're here tonight to talk about
two applications that are pending with Collier County
Government. We don't have any audience attendees other than
staff and the development team, but we do have a couple of
folks on Zoom. So I hope you all can hear us fine and can see the
video. I'll make some project introductions, but we're here for a
project that is located just east of the intersection of Livingston
Road and on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road. It's about
5.8 acres and it's currently the home of a pet resort and a
defunct equestrian facility. And we're proposing a conference of
plan amendment and a PD rezoning application in order to
develop up to 150 multifamily rental dwelling units on the
property of which we have proposed 22.6% of those to be
affordable units, income restricted.
01:04 So introduce the team. We have Andy Bollig who's here as a
development partner with Roers Acquisitions. Rich Yovanovich
is our land use counsel. I'm Wayne Arnold. Mike Delate, our civil
engineer with GradyMinor & Associates. Jim Bank is our traffic
engineer and we have a biologist who's not in attendance, but
Marco Espinar did the environmental assessment for the site.
01:27 The project is highlighted here on the screen in yellow and you
can see the existing structures. Those are all set to be raised
assuming this project is approved. And again, the property's
about 5.8 acres and located just east of Livingston Road. To our
west is a project called Bradford Square, which is a age
restricted senior housing project and to the east of us, is a
project called Sandalwood Village, which also is an age
restricted independent living facility. And to our north is the
Tiburon Golf Club.
02:04 This is a project information sheet that lets you know that we
are modifying the future land use map. We're creating a new
subdistrict to establish the property to be allowed to have 150
multi-family rental units on that. And again, we're proposing
that 22.6% of those would be income restricted homes.
Page 840 of 3899
PL20220001010 – MATTSON AT VANDERBILT RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT; AND
PL20220001011 – MATTSON AT VANDERBILT RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
May 24, 2023, NIM Transcript
Page 2 of 4
Sharon Umpenhour: 02:27 Just a correction on that Future land use designation, the
proposed, it's incorrect.
Wayne Arnold: 02:33 Okay. We are proposing the new subdistrict and it'll be the
Matson Vanderbilt Beach Road, subdistrict. We have to create a
series of maps for the county as part of our small scale plan
amendment. And this is a map that identifies the location for
the mixed use subdistrict that will be for the subject property.
Again, this is another series of maps with some of our sub-
district language, and here it highlights, in paragraph C, the total
units that are constructed, 22.6% of those would be income
restricted, half of that number at the 80% or less and the others
up to 100%.
03:18 Here's a conceptual master plan that we developed for the
zoning application that identifies a central access point on
Vanderbilt Beach Road, and then it's an 'H" shaped building with
an interior courtyard amenity area with parking surrounding the
building, some of which will probably have carport covered
structures on it. This is a color version, just adds a little more
clarity to where the green space, buffers, water management
and the amenity areas will be located.
03:51 We propose to enhance the buffer adjacent to the Tiburon Golf
Club with a series of clustered sable palm trees. Similar to what
was prepared for the Sable, or excuse me, the Sandalwood
Village project to our east. We have to propose development
standards for the project highlighted here. Maximum building
height. We establish a zone height of 50 feet and we're
proposing an actual height that the maximum building height
for any part of the structure would be 60 feet.
04:22 These are some images from other Roers projects. The building
that's shown there is not a four-story building, but we're
proposing in the 50-foot zone height to have a four-story
apartment building. But you can see the quality of the finish
that Roers intends to provide here with some of their outdoor
amenity areas and just the architectural details.
04:45 So in the process we're required to hold a neighborhood
informational meeting, which we're conducting tonight. Our
next step will be to go to the Collier County Planning
Commission, which we do not have a hearing date established
yet. Separate mail notices will be provided to surrounding
property owners once that date is established. And then after
the planning commission, they will make a recommendation to
Page 841 of 3899
PL20220001010 – MATTSON AT VANDERBILT RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT; AND
PL20220001011 – MATTSON AT VANDERBILT RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
May 24, 2023, NIM Transcript
Page 3 of 4
the Board of County Commissioners. And that meeting has not
yet been set, but those are our next steps and the County
Commission will hold one final hearing and make a decision to
approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application.
05:19 This is an informational sheet. Sharon Umpenhour, who's in
charge of our audio system here tonight, is also our contact in
our office for any of the information. So we upload on our
website this presentation as well as other project information
that is submitted to Collier County for the project and we
continue to update it as we provide any updates to Collier
County staff. So we will continue on through what's known as
our Sufficiency Process until we get to our first planning
commission hearing. And again, signs will be posted on the site
when that hearing's established as well as mail notice is going
out to surround the property members.
05:56 So that's our quick presentation. I'm happy to take any
questions you may have from those attendees on Zoom. If you'd
unmute if you have a question, that would be great.
Robert Campbell: 06:11 The only question I have... Hello. My name's Robert Campbell.
I'm with TGM Communities. We actually own TG and Bermuda
Island directly across the Vanderbilt Road from the proposed
site. I just had a question. Did you say that the document that
you're sharing now will be uploaded onto the gradyminor.com
planning website?
Sharon Umpenhour: 06:35 It's already there.
Wayne Arnold: 06:35 Yes, sir. It's there now. It'll be shared-
Robert Campbell: 06:36 Oh, this version is already there, correct?
Wayne Arnold: 06:37 It is. We uploaded that late this afternoon.
Robert Campbell: 06:39 Okay. Much appreciated. It looks exciting.
Wayne Arnold: 06:46 Thank you. Any other comments or questions? I know there's
another attendee on the Zoom.
Robert Campbell: 06:54 He's actually a colleague of mine.
Wayne Arnold: 06:55 Oh, okay. Great.
Sharon Umpenhour: 06:56 Mr. Ruiz, is that your colleague?
Page 842 of 3899
PL20220001010 – MATTSON AT VANDERBILT RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT; AND
PL20220001011 – MATTSON AT VANDERBILT RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
May 24, 2023, NIM Transcript
Page 4 of 4
Robert Campbell: 06:59 It is, correct.
Wayne Arnold: 07:01 Okay.
Sharon Umpenhour: 07:01 Oh, okay. Thank you.
Wayne Arnold: 07:01 Great. Well, we're happy to answer any questions you may have
as we go through the process or if you all think of anything else,
we're glad to get information to you. We appreciate you.
Robert Campbell: 07:10 No, I think everything looks great. I appreciate the presentation.
Looking forward to seeing how it all plays out.
Wayne Arnold: 07:17 Okay, well great. Thank you so much. Well, with that, I guess
we'll adjourn. Thanks for participating and look forward to
hearing from you. Thanks.
Robert Campbell: 07:24 All right, have a great day.
Robert Ruiz: 07:26 Thank you all.
Page 843 of 3899
PETITIONS:PL20220001010 -MATTSON AT VANDERBILT RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT (GMPA); ANDPL20220001011 -MATTSON AT VANDERBILT RPUD
May 24, 2023, Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM)
Project information and a copy of this presentation can be found on our website:
GRADYMINOR.COM/PLANNING/
Page 844 of 3899
PROJECT TEAM:
•3333/3375 VBR, LLC – Applicant
•Andy Bollig, Development Partner –Roers Acquisitions LLC
•Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq., Land Use Attorney –Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A.
•D. Wayne Arnold, AICP, Professional Planner –Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A.
•Michael Delate, P.E., Civil Engineer –Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A.
•James M. Banks, PE, Traffic Engineer –JMB Transportation Engineering, Inc.
•Marco A. Espinar, Environmental Planning/Biologist –Collier Environmental Consultants, Inc.
*Please note, all information provided is subject to change until final approval by the governing authority.
2
INTRODUCTION
Page 845 of 3899
3
LOCATION MAP
Page 846 of 3899
FUTURE LAND USE (FLU)DESIGNATION:
Existing:Urban Designation,Mixed Use District,Urban Residential Subdistrict
Proposed:Mattson at Vanderbilt Residential Subdistrict
ZONING: Existing:A, Agricultural
Proposed:Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD
PROPOSED REQUEST:
•Modify the FLU map to add The Mattson at Vanderbilt Residential Subdistrict
•Rezone from the A, Agricultural,Zoning District to the Mattson at Vanderbilt
Residential PUD
•To allow a maximum of 150 multi-family rental units.
PROJECT INFORMATION
4Page 847 of 3899
5
FUTURE LANDUSE MAP -EXISTING
Page 848 of 3899
6
FUTURE LANDUSE MAP -PROPOSED
Proposed Subdistrict Language:
Page 849 of 3899
7
PROPOSED MASTER PLAN
Page 850 of 3899
8
CONCEPTUAL SITE RENDERING
Page 851 of 3899
9
CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE RENDERING
Page 852 of 3899
10
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Page 853 of 3899
11
CONCEPTUAL RENDERINGS
Page 854 of 3899
NEXT STEPS
•File resubmittal
•Hearing Notices mailed to adjacent property owners within 500 feet of the subject property.
•Hearing sign posted on property advertising hearing dates.
•HEARING DATES:
•CCPC –T BD, 9:00 a.m., Collier County Government Center, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd
floor BCC Chamber, Naples, FL, 34112
•BCC –TBD, 9:00 a.m., Collier County Government Center, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd
floor BCC Chamber, Naples, FL, 34112
12Page 855 of 3899
Project information and a copy of this presentation can be found online:
WWW.GRADYMINOR.COM/PLANNING
Collier County Growth Management Department (GMD) Public Portal:
CVPORTAL.COLLIERCOUNTYFL.GOV/CITYVIEWWeb
CONTACTS:
•Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A.: Sharon Umpenhour, Senior Planning Technician;
sumpenhour@gradyminor.com or 239.947.1144
•Collier County Staff:T imothy Finn; Timothy.Finn@colliercountyfl.gov, 239)252-4312
Katherine Eastley; Katherine.Eastley@colliercountyfl.gov, (239) 252-2834
PROJECT DOCUMENTS AND INFORMATION
13Page 856 of 3899
SIGN POSTING INSTRUCTIONS
(CHAPTER 8, COLLIER COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT)
A zoning sign(s) must be posted by the petitioner or the petitioner’s agent on the parcel for a minimum of fifteen (15) calendar
days in advance of the first public hearing and said sign(s) must be maintained by the petitioner or the petitioner’s agent through
the Board of County Commissioners Hearing. Below are general guidelines for signs, however these guidelines should not be
construed to supersede any requirement of the LDC. For specific sign requirements, please refer to the Administrative Code,
Chapter 8 E.
1. The sign(s) must be erected in full view of the public, not more than five (5) feet from the nearest street right-of-way or
easement.
2. The sign(s) must be securely affixed by nails, staples, or other means to a wood frame or to a wood panel and then fastened
securely to a post, or other structure. The sign may not be affixed to a tree or other foliage.
3. The petitioner or the petitioner’s agent must maintain the sign(s) in place, and readable condition until the requested action
has been heard and a final decision rendered. If the sign(s) is destroyed, lost, or rendered unreadable, the petitioner or the
petitioner’s agent must replace the sign(s)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - -
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
BEFORE THE UNDERSIGNED AUTHORITY, PERSONALLY APPEARED SHARON UMPENHOUR WHO ON OATH
SAYS THAT HE/SHE HAS POSTED PROPER NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 10.03.00 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ON THE PARCEL COVERED IN PETITION NUMBER(S) PL20220001010
and PL20220001011.
3800 Via Del Rey
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT OR AGENT STREET OR P.O. BOX
Sharon Umpenhour as Senior Planning Technician for Q.
Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. Bonita Springs, Florida 34110
NAME (TYPED OR PRINTED) CITY, STATE ZIP
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF LEE
The foregoing instrument was sworn to and subscribed before me this 17 day of November , 2023, by
Sharon Umpenhour as Senior Planning Technician for Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A., personally known to me or who
produced as identification and who did/did not take an oath.
Signature of Notary Public
Carin J. Dwyer
Printed Name of Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
(Stamp with serial number)
Rev. 3/4/2015
NOTE: AFTER THE SIGN HAS BEEN POSTED, THIS AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE SHOULD BE
RETURNED NO LATER THAN TEN (10) WORKING DAYS BEFORE THE FIRST HEARING DATE TO THE
ASSIGNED PLANNER.
Page 857 of 3899
Page 858 of 3899
Page 859 of 3899
Mattson at Vanderbilt RPUD (PL20220001011)
Deviation Justification
December 12, 2023 Page 1 of 2
Deviation Justification-r2.docx
Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A.
3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239-947-1144 engineering@gradyminor.com www.gradyminor.com
1. Deviation #1 requests relief from LDC Section 4.05.04, Table 17, Parking Space
requirements for multi-family dwellings, which requires:
All units shall have 1 per unit plus visitor parking computed at 0.5 per efficiency unit, 0.75
per 1-bedroom unit, and 1 per 2-bedroom or larger unit. Office/administrative buildings
shall have parking provided at 50 percent of normal requirements. Where small-scale
recreation facilities are accessory to a single-family or multifamily project and intended
only for the residents of that project, exclusive of golf courses/clubhouses, the recreation
facilities may be computed at 50 percent of normal requirements where the majority of
the dwelling units are not within 300 feet of the recreation facilities and at 25 percent of
normal requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are within 300 feet of the
recreation facilities.
To instead allow parking to be provided at a ratio of 1.6 parking spaces per unit, with no
requirement to provide additional parking for the recreation facilities.
Justification:
The developer has extensive experience in creating successful multi-family dwelling units
throughout the United States. Typically, they average 1.5 parking spaces per unit across
their portfolio. Four (4) project examples have been submitted with similar site
characteristics as this site (location, density, size, etc.). Based on the proposed unit
breakdown for this project, 40% of the units are proposed to be 1-bdrm. This is relatively
high percentage of 1-bdrm units which only require 1.75 space per LDC 4.05.03.
Further, the site has been designed in a manner that places all units in close proximity to
the project amenity area. The master plan identifies the area where the amenities for the
project will be located, and they will be located within a courtyard immediately adjacent to
the building. No unit will be farther than 250’+/- from the project’s amenity area. At this
distance there is no need for any resident to walk to the parking lot and then drive a
distance that may exceed the distance to walk to the pool or outdoor courts.
2. Deviation #2 requests relief from LDC Section 4.07.02.G.1, Open space requirements,
which requires within PUD districts composed entirely of residential dwelling
units and accessory uses, at least 60 percent of the gross area shall be devoted to usable
open space to instead allow 40 percent of the gross area be devoted to usable open space.
Justification:
The 40% open space standard is justified. The Mattson at Vanderbilt project represents
redevelopment and an infill residential project on 5.9+/- acres. The project is proposing to
construct 30% of the dwelling units as income restricted affordable housing, for which
demand is well-documented. The applicant is proposing a project that has comparable
Page 860 of 3899
December 12, 2023 Page 2 of 2
Deviation Justification-r2.docx
building heights to the adjacent independent rental apartments for seniors and has
proposed to locate the 4-story apartment building central to the site. Due to the size of
the infill parcel, meeting the 60% usable open space standard would render the site
unusable for buildings at the proposed 4-story height. A taller building, having less lot
coverage would be necessary to meet the 60% open space requirement. The proposed
building height and building scale is in keeping with the two adjacent senior housing
projects and other nearby development. The applicant has proposed an enhanced project
buffer adjacent to the Tiburon Golf Course to ensure compatibility and increase the
effective open space for the site. The project’s location is excellent to provide housing for
our local workforce as it is central to many other employment opportunities and has good
transportation accessibility for east/west and north/south movement. The County has
recently provided data indicating that over 50,000 people per day commute to work from
outside Collier County. The Chamber of Commerce has indicated that housing affordability
is the number one public policy priority. The applicant has agreed to provide an easement
for a future CAT bus stop should the County add a transit route once the Vanderbilt Beach
Road extension is complete.
Page 861 of 3899
Page 862 of 3899
Page 863 of 3899
Timothy Finn
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Barbara Oppenheim < bjoppenheim@gmail.com >
Thursday, February 29, ?024 9:22 AM
Timothy Finn
Ivlattson 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.
As a resident of Village Walk I am opposed to the development proposed on the current stable and pet center. The
traffic on Vanderbilt Beach Road is unacceptable now without the addition of more units. During season it can take 30-
40 minutes to get from Goodlette Road to Village Walk. The roads cannot accommodate the volume oftraffic and
vehicles that are currently using the road. Additional housing will serve to make an awful situation even worse.
The County has failed to keep up with improving the roads to accommodate the increase in housing that has been
permitted. lt's time to evaluate the effectiveness of keeping traffic moving. This will continue to worsen until the County
decides to address the issue.
Barbara Oppenheim
Sent from my iPad
1
Page 864 of 3899
From: Ray Bellows Sent: Monday, April 8, 2024 7:17 AM To: Timothy Finn Subject: FW: The Mattson on Vanderbilt proposal FYI Ray Bellows Manager - Planning Zoning Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov From: JOHN SIELLER <johnsie44@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2024 9:02 AM To: SparrazzaRandy <Randy.Sparrazza@colliercountyfl.gov>; VernonChristopher <Christopher.Vernon@colliercountyfl.gov>; manager@seapointnc.com; FryerEdwin <Edwin.Fryer@colliercountyfl.gov>; KlucikRobert <Robert.Klucik@colliercountyfl.gov>; SheaPaul <Paul.Shea@colliercountyfl.gov>; SchmittJoseph <Joseph.Schmitt@colliercountyfl.gov>; Ray Bellows <Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov>; lockha@collierschools.com Subject: The Mattson on Vanderbilt proposal 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 and Planning Committee Members - I’m John Sieller, a resident of Florida and the Village Walk community on Vanderbilt Beach Road. The Mattson at Vanderbilt development will fill a 5.8 acre space between the Sandalwood Village and Bradford Square condominium developments. I and many of my Village Walk neighbors, as well as your own Collier County Planning Commission Staff, feel the design of this facility does fit in with and of the current developments. In fact CCPC Staff Report states that “the proposed density is not in character with the surrounding low-density residential development”. I believe the plan needs to be significantly modified due to the lack of open space. Open space is a requirement of all Planned Unit Developments (PUDs), and those composed entirely of residential dwelling units require a minimum of 60% usable open space pursuant to Section 4.07.02.G.1 of the LDC. However, the proposed Mattson at Vanderbilt subdistrict language proposes 40% usable open space for the overall site area. Furthermore, I do not believe “packing in” 150 apartments on 5.88 acres aligns spatially or visually with any of the three neighboring Page 865 of 3899
developments. All three neighboring developments have significantly greater setbacks and much more open space around their buildings. According to the CCPC Staff Report “adequate justification for the Mattson on Vanderbilt 25.5 DU/A cannot be found based upon either 1) the low-density residential character of the surrounding community and 2) the provision of only 22.6% affordable housing units.” Quoting from the CCPC staff report - “The inability to comply with LDC standards for required usable open space and parking appears to be a self-created circumstance caused by requesting such a high-density development. CCPC Staff does not support the proposed reduction of usable open space from 60% to 40% in a dense urban rental apartment community. The appropriateness of the site for residential use and the requested density must be justified, and the provision of affordable housing units should be discussed in terms of proximity to employment, goods and services, access, and transit availability. A GMPA must, according to state statute, provide sufficient data and analysis to justify the proposed amendment. Staff has not found this standard to be satisfied.” I also must question the Boards Executive Summary on January 2024 of this development, which stated - • There are no adverse environmental impacts as a result of this petition. • There are no concerns about impacts on other public infrastructure. • The site’s use will create minimal impact on the surrounding area. Fortunately the earlier proposal was withdrawn at your January meeting. Since then, Commissioner Hall has communicated to me that the original proposal of “25.5 units/acre is too much” and should be modified. Apparently, with the county’s “affordable housing bonus”, the Mattson on Vanderbilt development qualifies for 16 units/acre which would equal approximately 95 units. This will reduce the number of residents and cars using the site, which is a reasonable modification. The next proposal is planned to come before you at the May 28, 2024 BOC meeting. I and my Village Walk neighbors are hoping the modified proposal will spatially and visually fit in with the surrounding developments. Sincerely, John Sieller 3236 Benicia Ct Naples, FL 34109 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.
Page 866 of 3899
Page 867 of 3899
Page 868 of 3899
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER ORDINANCES
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
(BCC) at 9:00 A.M. on September 24, 2024, in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room, Third Floor,
Collier Government Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples FL to consider:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AMENDING
ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH
MANAGEMENT PLAN, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE
ELEMENT AND MAP SERIES BY CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF
PROPERTY FROM URBAN, MIXED USE DISTRICT, URBAN RESIDENTIAL
SUBDISTRICT TO MATTSON AT VANDERBILT RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT, TO
ALLOW A MAXIMUM DENSITY OF 150 MULTIFAMILY RENTAL UNITS WITH
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND FURTHERMORE DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF
THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF VANDERBILT
BEACH ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 828 FEET FROM THE INTERSECTION OF
VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD AND LIVINGSTON ROAD, IN SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP
48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 5.88±
ACRES. [PL20220001010]
AND
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE
COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING
ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE
HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A RURAL AGRICULTURAL (A)
ZONING DISTRICT TO A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD)
ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS MATTSON AT
VANDERBILT RPUD, TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF UP TO 150 MULTI-FAMILY
RENTAL UNITS WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE
NORTH SIDE OF VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 828 FEET FROM
THE INTERSECTION OF VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD AND LIVINGSTON ROAD, IN
SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, CONSISTING OF 5.88± ACRES;
AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL20220001011]
(See Map Below)
A copy of the proposed Ordinances is on file with the Clerk to the Board and is available for inspection. All interested
parties are invited to attend and be heard.
Page 869 of 3899
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 is encouraged. If recognized by the Chairman, a spokesperson
for a group or organization may be allotted ten (10) minutes to speak on an item. Written materials intended to be
considered by the Board shall be submitted to the appropriate 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 user’s 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.Willig@colliercountyfl.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
CHRIS HALL, CHAIRMAN
CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK
By: Yani Fernandez, Deputy Clerk
(SEAL)
Page 870 of 3899
Livingston RDVanderbiltBeachRDI-7 5 NI-7 5 S
Livingston RD
GrovesRDVillageWalk CIRMontalvoCTVenturaCTSanCarloCTSanPabloCTDonosoCTBeniciaCTCerritoCTM a rs a la
W A Y
!IProjectLocationPage 871 of 3899
Page 872 of 3899
Page 873 of 3899
Page 874 of 3899