CCPC Agenda 01/16/2025COLLIER COUNTY
Planning Commission
AGENDA
Board of County Commission Chambers
Collier County Government Center
3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor
Naples, FL 34112
January 16, 2025
9:00 AM
Joseph Schmitt, Environmental - Chairman
Chuck Schumacher - Vice -Chair
Paul Shea, Environmental - Secretary
Randy Sparrazza
Charles (Chap) Colucci
Michelle L. McLeod
Mike Petscher
Amy Lockhart, Collier County School Board
Note: Individual speakers will be limited to 5 minutes on any item. Individuals selected to speak on behalf of an
organization or group are encouraged and may be allotted 10 minutes to speak on an item if so recognized by the
chairman. Persons wishing to have written or graphic materials included in the CCPC agenda packets must submit
said material a minimum of 10 days prior to the respective public hearing. In any case, written materials intended
to be considered by the CCPC shall be submitted to the appropriate county staff a minimum of seven days prior to
the public hearing. All material used in presentations before the CCPC will become a permanent part of the record
and will be available for presentation to the Board of County Commissioners if applicable.
Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the CCPC 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 to be based.
1. Pledge of Allegiance
2. Roll Call
3. Addenda to the Agenda
4. Planning Commission Absences
5. Approval of Minutes
S.A. December 19, 2024, CCPC Meeting Minutes (2025-21)
6. BCC Report - Recaps
Page 1 of 245
7. Chairman's Report
8. Consent Agenda
9. Public Hearings
9.A. *** The applicant has requested the CCPC to continue the item to the February 20, 2025,
CCPC Meeting *** PL20230017980- NC Square Mixed Use Overlay (GMPA)- 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
to amend the NC Square Mixed -Use Overlay to decrease the commercial uses from 44,400
square feet to 36,500 square feet of gross floor area, remove the 12,000 square foot daycare
use and increase the maximum residential units from 129 to 249 with affordable housing in the
NC Square Planned Mixed Use Development, and furthermore directing transmittal of the
adopted amendment to the Florida Department of Commerce. The subject property is 24.4f
acres and located at the southwest corner of Immokalee Road and Catawba Street,
approximately 1.6 miles west of Wilson Boulevard in section 29, township 48 south, range 27
east, Collier County, Florida. (Companion Item PL20230017979) [Parker Klopf, Planner
III] (2024-2273)
9.B. *** The applicant has requested the CCPC to continue the item to the February 20, 2025,
CCPC Meeting *** PL20230017979 - NC Square (PUDR) - Immokalee Road and
Catawba Street- An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,
Florida, amending Ordinance Number 2021-18 as amended, the NC Square Mixed Planned
Unit Development to decrease the commercial uses from 44,400 square feet to 36,500 square
feet of gross floor area, remove the 12,000 square foot daycare use and increase the maximum
residential units from 129 to 249 with affordable housing. The property is located at the
southwest corner of Immokalee Road and Catawba Street, approximately 1.6 miles west of
Wilson Boulevard in Section 29, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida,
consisting of 24.4f acres, and by providing an effective date. (Companion Item
PL20230017980) [Coordinator: Timothy Finn, Planner III] (2024-2208)
9.C. PL20210002929 - Polly Avenue Rezone - 6145 Polly Avenue - 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 Estates (E) district to
allow up to three single-family dwelling units with a maximum density of up to one dwelling
unit per 2.47± acres on 7.4± acres of property located approximately 1,600 feet east of Santa
Barbara Boulevard between Polly Avenue and Everett Street, at 6145 Polly Avenue, in Section
16, township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Nancy
Gundlach, Planner III]
(2024-2282)
9.1). PL20240009067 - Guesthouse Rentals in Urban Estates - An ordinance of the Board of
County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance Number 04-41, as
amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which includes the comprehensive land
regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, to modify the prohibition of
renting guesthouses on lots zoned Estates (E), located west of Collier Boulevard, to allow for
such rentals if all new requirements are met, by providing for Section One, Recitals; Section
Page 2 of 245
Two, Findings of Fact; Section Three, Adoption of Amendments to the Land Development
Code, more specifically amending the following: Chapter Two - Zoning Districts And Uses,
including Section 2.03.01 Agricultural Districts and Chapter Five - Supplemental Standards,
including Section 5.03.03 Guesthouses; Section Four, Conflict and Severability; Section Five,
Inclusion in the Collier County Land Development Code; and Section Six, Effective
Date. [Coordinator: Eric L Johnson, AICP, CFM, LEED Green Associate, Planning Manager]
(2024-2135)
9.E. PL20240004018 - RLSA Town Size GMPA - Recommendation to approve an Ordinance of
the Board of County Commissioners proposing amendments to the Collier County Growth
Management Plan, Ordinance 89-05, as amended, relating to the Rural Lands Stewardship
Area Overlay and specifically amending the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay of the
Future Land Use Element, to eliminate the cap on the size of a town and include qualified
target industries as a goods and services use, and furthermore directing transmittal of the
amendments to the Florida Department of Commerce. [Coordinator: James Sabo, AICP,
Planner III] (2024-2363)
10. Old Business
11. New Business
12. Public Comments
13. Adjourn
Page 3 of 245
December 19, 2024, CCPC Meeting Minutes
ATTACHMENTS:
12-19-2024 CCPC Meeting Minutes
1/16/2025
Item # 5.A
ID# 2025-21
Page 4 of 245
December 19, 2024
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Naples, Florida
December 19, 2024
LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Collier County Planning Commission, in and for the County
of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR
SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following
members present:
Joe Schmitt, Chairman
Chuck Schumacher, Vice Chairman
Paul Shea, Secretary
Michael Petscher
Michelle L. McLeod
Amy Lockhart, Collier County School Board Representative
ABSENT:
Charles "Chap" Colucci
Randy Sparrazza
ALSO PRESENT:
Raymond V. Bellows, Zoning Manager
Sean Sammon, Planning III
Heidi Ashton-Cicko, Managing Assistant County Attorney
Derek Perry, County Attorney's Office
Ailyn Padron, Management Analyst I
Oscar Alonso, Specialist III
Page 1 of 40
Page 5 of 245
December 19, 2024
PROCEEDINGS
MR. SAMMON: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Thank you.
Good morning, all, and welcome to the December 19th, 2024, Collier County
Planning Commission meeting.
If I could ask all to please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I'd like to ask, Commissioner Shea, would you please
take the roll.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Chairman Schmitt?
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Here.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Vice Chair Schumacher?
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Here.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Secretary Shea is here.
Commissioner Sparrazza?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: He is absent.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Commissioner Colucci?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Commissioner McLeod?
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Here.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Commissioner Petscher?
COMMISISONER PETSCHER: Here.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Ms. Lockhart?
MS. LOCKHART: Here.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: We have a quorum, sir.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And I would assume that the two commissioners are
excused absences. So we'll note for the record. They -- so noted.
Okay. Ray, any addenda to the agenda?
MR. BELLOWS: Good morning, Commissioners. Yes, we do have a change to
the agenda. In order to accommodate Dan Summers for Items 9B and 9C, we'd like to
move those to the first items under public hearings, and 9A becomes the last item.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. So can I ask my colleagues to make a motion
for that change.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: So moved.
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Second.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All in favor?
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Any opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: No opposed. It passes.
Page 2 of 40
Page 6 of 245
December 19, 2024
So for the record, Mr. Yovanovich and his team are first, two items first, and then
we'll do the signal tower.
All right. The next meeting is January 16th, 2025, a new year. Are there any
projected Planning Commission absences -- absences for that meeting?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I will most likely miss that meeting. I may try and call
in, but I'm on travel that day. So it's, unfortunately, another day I have to travel.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: I'm not going to be here then. I'm not
going to be here.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: So, Ray, any items they want to move, we'll gladly
move them to the next meeting, if you --
MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. We'll send out a request to see who's going to be in
attendance. If we don't have a quorum --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah, if there's any meetings [sic] -- anything that can
move to the next meeting will be helpful.
MR. BELLOWS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Approval of minutes. We have minutes from
November 21 st, 2024. Any comments, changes, recommendations?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Can I have a motion to approve?
COMMISSIONER SHEA: So moved.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And I second.
All in favor?
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Any opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SCHUMACHER: All right.
Ray, can we go with the BCC report?
MR. BELLOWS: Yes. On December loth, the Board of County Commissioners
heard the PUD amendment, the Growth Management Plan amendment, and the
development order amendment for the Fiddler's Creek, and that was approved unanimously
subject to some minor tweaks to the ordinance -- proposed ordinance. And on the
summary agenda, the Board approved the Palm River residential PUD. That was, again,
on the summary agenda.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Ray, thanks.
I'm going to make some comments on the Fiddler's Creek and -- for my colleagues
that were on the Planning Commission at that time, Paul and Chuck and, I know, Randy.
Of course, there was a three-day meeting. I had to recuse myself because of my past
involvements with Fiddler's Creek, and -- but I did provide a document to the
commissioners to kind of recap what I thought took place during the Planning
Commission, because I certainly watched every minute of the meeting. Either I was here
or was at home watching it.
Page 3 of 40
Page 7 of 245
December 19, 2024
But I did send a document, and I'll be glad to share that with the commissioners.
And the document basically defined what a preserve is and what -- a preserve under the
LDC, how preserves are identified, and then it also clarified the issue of what a protective
covenant is under -- the criteria under the federal permitting process; Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act; Section 7, consultation -- through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife and their
Section 7 consultation. So I had to -- I clarified that in detail at least from the standpoint
so they would understand, because there was a lot of -- I believe during the Planning
Commission, there was a lot of misinformation or misunderstanding between a preserve,
protective covenant, and when a preserve is actually codified and placed into a protective
covenant or a preserve.
And that was noted on the record. Commissioner Hall and Commissioner
LoCastro both mentioned that during the meeting and thought it was helpful. So I just
wanted to make that -- make you all aware that I did send that, and for the record. And so
I will share that.
And, Ray, in order to ensure that we comply with the Sunshine Law, I'll probably
send it to you and Mike, and you can send it to the commissioners. That way it won't be
perceived as a violation of the Sunshine, that I'm directly communicating with the
commissioners.
MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, we'll be glad to forward it.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. So that was -- that -- but the -- I don't
know -- Paul, I know you saw it, anybody else that watched it, and there was a discussion
of the Planning Commission. I've been on the Planning Commission for a while, and I
appreciate everybody's participation and what they -- how they go through the process in
the Planning Commission. And in fact, Commissioner Saunders made the same statement
and said our work is well respected, and we do help the commissioners vet some of these
petitions.
And in fact, for the new colleagues, I'm not sure if you're aware, but typically if it's
a unanimous decision, if there's no objection, the item typically goes on the consent
agenda, and that's the kind of work we do here.
So it does, certainly in most cases, take a workload off their back. So I just wanted
to make sure you -all understand from my perspective, my years both as a -- on the staff
and on the Planning Commission, your work is well respected and appreciated.
So I don't know if any of my other colleagues had heard those comments. I
know -- Paul, do you want to say anything or no? He's not.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: And this isn't negative; I think they have different
priorities.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: I think our mission is with the Growth Management
Plan, and they have a whole bunch of other priorities that we don't have that can cause
them to override it.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yes. Yeah, and that's understandable. We're an
advisory board and advisory board only, and we maybe look at things through a different
lens, and that's understandable.
So with that, anything on -- nothing on the consent agenda. We'll move to the first
public hearing, Ray.
MR. BELLOWS: ***Yes. The first item is 9 -- was originally 9B on your
Page 4 of 40
Page 8 of 245
December 19, 2024
agenda, and it's the Tamiami Trail Greenway Road mixed -use, and the applicant is here.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Oh, yes. We have to do -- we have to swear in, if we
could, and we have to have disclosures. Thank you.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the testimony you will give
will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Disclosures, Amy.
MS. LOCKHART: None.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Staff materials.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I spoke with Mr. Yovanovich and with Bob Mulhere,
both, on this project.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Staff materials and a conversation with
Rich Yovanovich.
COMMISISONER PETSCHER: Staff materials.
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Visited the site, reviewed the materials, met with
staff.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Thank you.
So now we can proceed, Mr. Yovanovich. It's all yours.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you.
Good morning. For the record, Rich Yovanovich on behalf of the applicant, the
property owner, and the entire team. David Stevens and Rob Carroll are the applicant
representatives, Mr. Mulhere is our professional planner, Mr. Trebilcock is our
transportation consultant, and Mr. Chastain is also a planner on our team, and Mr. -- I don't
know how to say his last name, but Jacob from Passarella & Associates is our
environmental consultant.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Just a confirmation, when you read the description
here, it's not the same as -- they're talking about 22 and 9 is still printed. Do I have an
outdated agenda in terms of the --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: There was a change to the agenda. We need to put that
on the record, the title. And, of course, it should be the Comp Plan amendment followed
by the rezoning application.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: But the -- in this one he's got the lower number of
affordable housing, and the updated one is the higher number. I'm just looking at what I
was given.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I will go through the details of what the actual petition is.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: I'm just saying the published page is not consistent.
MR. MULHERE: It was republished.
MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows.
The agendas that are mailed to the Planning Commissioners, that was an older
version, but what was advertised is the correct version. So we are consistent with
advertising.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Thank you for bringing that up.
MR. YOVANOVICH: The property is outlined in yellow. It's 24.41 acres.
Page 5 of 40
Page 9 of 245
December 19, 2024
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Hold it, Rich. We've got -- we're all on the -- we're all
on the "you can't see" screens, I guess. Okay. There it is. You've got to hit HDMI on
the bottom. We'll let the -- we'll have to admonish Troy for not checking these. He's in
the back room now. I'm not going to get a Christmas present now for discussing that.
MR. YOVANOVICH: You know, I'm all for going back to flip charts and --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Paul, did you get it? Push the side.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yep.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: There it is. Thank you.
MR. TROY MILLER: Do you need me, Joe?
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: No, we've got them.
MR. YOVANOVICH: He forgot to turn on the monitors.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: No Santa Claus for me.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Are we ready?
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yes, thank you. Go ahead. It's all on our screens.
MR. YOVANOVICH: All right. Outlined in yellow is the property that we're
here to discuss today. It's 24.41 acres.
And I almost feel like I think we found the formula for moving forward with
apartment complexes that request additional density. The requirement under your Growth
Management Plan amendment is that if we bring forward a petition that requests additional
density, we're required to provide affordable housing or some other form of public benefit.
What we're bringing forward to you today is both an affordable housing -- I mean,
sorry -- Growth Management Plan amendment to increase the density. The property is
currently -- or is located in the urban area. As you all are aware, the urban area has a base
density of four units per acre with the ability to have increases.
The county -- and I think they're going to talk today about scheduling a future
amendment to the Land Development Code to change the affordable housing density
matrix. But since that density matrix is a little outdated, you see companion Growth
Management Plan amendments to increase the density above what the current Land
Development Code allows because the current Land Development Code does not allow
enough density for there to be economically viable projects that would include
income -restricted housing.
So this petition is consistent with the last several petitions that have come through.
It's a request to increase -- to allow for 300 units and 64,000 square feet of commercial that
Bob will take you through the master plan in greater detail. It includes the 30 percent
income -restricted units. Fifteen percent of those units will beat the 100 percent and
below, and 15 percent will be at the 80 percent and below, which has been the typical
commitment for affordable housing with -- that the Board of County Commissioners has
said they want to see when we bring forward projects that increase density.
Bob will get into greater detail, but when you look at the location of this project,
you will see that we have a 7-Eleven at the corner of Greenway and 41, and then
we -- across the street we have Publix, and there are other attributes of this property that
Bob will get into. It makes sense to have income -restricted housing as part of this
proposal to serve what everybody acknowledges is a crisis in Collier County with regard to
providing housing to allow teachers and nurses, firefighters, police officers to actually live
here and not temporarily work here until they can find a job in -- where they live, Lee
County, Cape Coral, or other areas. So this project addresses what the County
Page 6 of 40
Page 10 of 245
December 19, 2024
Commission has directed, to address affordable housing from a policy perspective.
I'm going to let Bob get into the master plan and the greater details. Obviously,
your staff is recommending approval.
We have met with Dan Summers to address what he deems is necessary. And I
know the Chairman asked Mr. Summers to be here to address how he came up with what
our commitment is to address hurricane -related issues.
I know that Elliot is here from Fiddler's Creek, and I spoke to the Chairman about
this during our presentation. We have a transportation -related commitment that we will
pay our fair share towards intersection improvements when we move forward, so that
includes not only, you know, the intersection buildout itself but also the traffic signal. So
we do have a -- we will be helping to offset some of the costs that Fiddler's Creek is
incurring to put in the traffic signal at Greenway and 41. So that's in our -- that's already a
commitment in our PUD.
With that, I think we're -- Bob is ready to kind of take you through where we are
and the details of our master plan, and we're available as a team to answer any of the
questions you may have regarding the project. I know you've all read the materials, so
we're going to try to do a short and brief --
And I just want to add one thing to the record. I'm sure Mr. Petscher doesn't
remember, but we did have a brief conversation earlier this week regarding this specific
project. I just want to make sure if anybody saw us talking briefly they don't accuse either
one of us of not disclosing that conversation, so...
COMMISISONER PETSCHER: Yeah, at an ale house passing.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yeah. Very brief, but I did want to make sure. It was at
lunch, so...
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: That's like me running into Bob at Costco.
MR. MULHERE: Yes, we had a conversation.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: We had a conversation.
For the record, Bob Mulhere with Bowman. Rich, I think, pointed out most of the
attributes. I just did want to briefly reiterate that immediately to the east is a 7-Eleven
which got approved probably seven or eight years ago, maybe 10 years ago. And across
the street is that Publix shopping center that's within the Fiddler's Creek PUD DRI.
But also to the east, immediately adjacent to Greenway, there's a project that is
coming forward for multifamily on this property right here, and then the Alonto RPUD,
which was recently approved.
Oh. Well, thank you. Now Rich is giving me tips on technology.
MR. YOVANOVICH: It feels pretty good.
MR. MULHERE: I did also want to point out -- because this is -- I want to
reiterate that this is an urban designated piece of property. And, you know, I was -- when
we first started looking at it, I was like, ah, this is in the urban area. Immediately east of
here is the Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District, and you move over to the rural area. So this
is different than those other properties in that it is in the urban area where, obviously,
higher density and growth is expected.
One of the other reasons we're doing a mixed -use -- I mean, excuse me, a
Comprehensive Plan amendment is because this is a mixed -use project. There's really no
easy way to get to a mixed -use project unless you're in an activity center or you already
have some commercial zoning. So that's the other reason.
Page 7 of 40
Page 11 of 245
December 19, 2024
I also wanted to also point out -- where's that -- where's that -- oh, here -- that there
is a transit stop that runs along Tamiami Trail, which is another good component or
element.
So as Rich said, it's a small-scale amendment to allow 300 multifamily dwelling
units, which translates to 12.29 units per acre, and a maximum of 64,000 square feet of C-3
commercial uses adjacent to the -- and just west of the 7-Eleven.
This is the county's Comprehensive Plan. It's a little funky because that big dark
line designates the transition from urban to rural, but this property and the 7-Eleven are
both within the urban area. So that black -- underneath that black line would be yellow if
it wasn't there. That's just a thick designation of the transition.
This is the PUD master plan. We have several access points out to Greenway for
the residential component. The main -- the main entrance to the project, both the
commercial and the residential, will be off Tamiami Trail, right here. We have also
identified potential interconnections to the east, the 7-Eleven, and to the west future
development there. We'll have to obviously negotiate that, if it's possible, with the
7-Eleven, but it would make sense. They're both commercial. So we hope to be able to
do that.
I wanted to just briefly discuss an additional deviation that was added somewhat
late in the process. And Mike Sawyer is here if you need a confirmation from Mike. He
sent us an e-mail on December 1 lth basically saying he had spoken with Trinity.
This Cecil Road, which is right here, is really only the width of a driveway. There
really is no room or feasibility for adding a sidewalk there. So Mike had suggested that
we request a deviation for that requirement; otherwise, we'd be paying in lieu or
constructing it.
We did add that definition. I made sure that Jeremy notified Heidi and staff of
that, because I didn't want to get in trouble, and so that's now there as Deviation No. 4.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: But Cecil Road will stay, and that's an access --
MR. MULHERE: Yes. It's like -- yes, yes.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- for the homes that are back there?
MR. MULHERE: Now, I have an exhibit. If we get to it, I could show it to you.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Where's Lake 4?
MR. MULHERE: Where's Lake 4? That's a good --
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's a test.
MR. MULHERE: Why are you asking that?
MR. YOVANOVICH: We go 1, 2, 3, 5.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Because I'm an engineer, and I don't know where 4 is.
MR. MULHERE: Yeah. That's a good question. Do you have any idea?
We just wanted to see if you were paying attention.
So as Rich indicated, 90 units will be reserved for affordable housing. That's 30
percent of the overall: 45 at 100 percent or below, 45 at 80 percent or below.
Our traffic -- Norm is the traffic consultant. We have a p.m. peak -hour trip
generation with the commercial and the residential, combined, of 492 units, so that's a
condition in the PUD, as the county uses that as an overall intensity limiter. Maximum
number of trips, p.m. peak hour, which is the highest trip -generation period.
We do have a staff recommendation of approval on both the Comprehensive Plan
and the zoning.
Page 8 of 40
Page 12 of 245
December 19, 2024
And this was the deviation I requested. Let me just show you that. That's an
exhibit that shows you a little closer aerial perspective. It's only about 20 feet, and there's
no room for a sidewalk there, nor does it make any sense, so...
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: But there is a buffer.
MR. MULHERE: Yeah, yes. So that brings us to any questions you may have,
and anyone on the team can answer them.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Well, I have a question. I'm going to start first. Bob,
the entrance off of 41, is that a full opening, or is that just right -in, right -out?
MR. MULHERE: It's -- it's a directional. Left -in, right -in, right -out.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: So it will be a left -in -- there will -- so you will have to
put a left -turn lane in?
MR. MULHERE: There is one. I don't know if we have to extend it.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Here comes Norm.
MR. TREBILCOCK: Hi. Norm Trebilcock. We prepared the traffic study for
the project.
Yeah, so there's an existing directional median opening that we're going to line up
to. Right now there's an existing left turn in.
Oh, thanks. Oh, gosh, Rich, you're good. All right.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Well, he's well trained after 20 years or so. He's
starting to get -- next will be "which direction?"
MR. TREBILCOCK: So of course it's -- where all our text is, it's got it covered,
but there is an existing directional median opening.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yes.
MR. TREBILCOCK: And so we would plan to use that and then make sure it's
sized correctly for the project based on our queues and things like that. So there would be
right -in, right -out, and left -in, and then the left -out is left out. There's no left -out.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And then there will be an interconnect? Because there
is a throat there going into --
MR. TREBILCOCK: 7-Eleven.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- 7-Eleven.
MR. TREBILCOCK: Yes, sir. Yeah. We're making provisions for that to allow
that, and we'll just need to coordinate with them on that as well. Yep, yes, sir.
And then the same -- Bob had mentioned, to this future parcel over here, we would
have an interconnect available to them as well so it would serve everybody in the area.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Good.
Colleagues? Commissioners, anything?
MR. TREBILCOCK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I have some questions of Dan Summers, if I could,
because in the staff report -- and I just want to get this for the record. It's not that I oppose
it, but it's just a matter of making sure this does not appear to be an exaction where we're
forcing the developer to give up something for the sake of trying to get the zoning
approved.
But in the staff report, staff cites -- let me go to the page. Sorry I wasn't on it. Go
back.
Dan, it's a planning factor for cots, and that is -- it was on -- it's on Page 5 of your
staff report, Page 332 of 702 of our packet. And it says, approximately 40 percent total
Page 9 of 40
Page 13 of 245
December 19, 2024
occupancy. That's the planning factor for the requirement of estimating how many people
will actually evacuate to a shelter. So I just want you to put on the record where that 44
percent comes from.
MR. SUMMERS: Very good. For the record, Dan Summers, director of
Emergency Management. Thank you.
And again, historically, I appreciate the Planning Commission understanding the
challenges we have associated with growth and evacuation sheltering. I think with all of
us experiencing hurricane events, we all have a pretty good understanding of what those
demands and challenges can be from a community, and our only resource is to use Collier
schools.
I do want to share just one component with you that I think is real important when
we get into making public schools emergency shelters. First of all, we could not be as
successful as we have been over recent years without the full support of Collier schools.
This is the case statewide, that the county employees, as well as the school district
employees, under an agreement process and a reimbursement process, operate these
shelters. There are no more volunteers involved in sheltering and hasn't been for probably
close to 20 years. So it is a county staff function.
Secondly, we continue to see older and frail populations in these evacuation
shelters that just simply cannot -- without deteriorating substantially, not get by with some
basic electricity, some air movement, some basic -- basic lighting and those type of
fundamental resources.
The other component about this is that you -all need to know that as we -- pardon
me. As we have dug into this over the years and asked school districts to provide more in
the way of backup power or other capability building within these shelters, understand that
the State Board of Education puts a cap on every student work station, and with today's
construction costs, this is no way to build additional capability without breaking the law to
exceed that student work station cap.
So any of the additional school sheltering hardening or any additional generator
support, air handling support has been something that, creatively, we have fallen back to
the local level to try to find a way to fix that or in most cases receive supplemental
legislative funding. But again, I can't say enough about the cooperation in the school
district.
The 40 percent factor has been historically a factor that goes all the way back to the
Florida Division of Community Affairs, Florida Emergency Management, and has been the
40 percent planning factor of what you'd have for a population or for a community using
shelter.
Obviously, demographics, age groups change, storm intensity, storm track,
recent -- there's a thousand different behavioral things that kind of go into that. But we
have settled as an industry on the 40 percent planning factor.
When we come to a developer who has a situation like this that is subject to storm
surge inundation, we have only asked two things one time, either a contribution of the cots
so that we can staff those -- staff those shelters or bring some resources. It's a one-time
contribution. And then the towable generator, which we have the ability to manage,
deploy, maintain. And I use supplemental grant money to connect that generator to
temporary resources such as fans, spot coolers, area lighting.
So it has worked out to be a very good cost-effective program. Instead of asking
Page 10 of 40
Page 14 of 245
December 19, 2024
for a million -dollar generator to be placed on site, we're asking for roughly a $48,000
generator and a couple thousand dollars' worth of cots one time. That allows us the
accommodation to help build some capability within our school districts' buildings for that
one-time shelter cost.
And as I mentioned in the report to you, Joe, you know, we've had as many as
23,000 people in shelters, and had we not had some of these supplies on hand -- not that
sheltering is -- we call it a lifeboat, not the love boat. It's very, very tough conditions if
you've never been in one, but it does provide a refuge. And so this one-time developer
contribution -- we have had probably eight or nine of these, I think, that have come
through over the last nine or 10 years, and it's been a tremendous success, even evaluated
by Corps of Engineers as an excellent strategy for sheltering.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: How many generators do you have now?
MR. SUMMERS: I have roughly 11.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And where are they located?
MR. SUMMERS: They are located at our emergency services center. I have a
logistics staff that tows them. So we bring them back to our headquarters. They are
under a preventative maintenance program. We do load testing on those generators.
About the end of July, they go to each school shelter, along with two or three landscape
size trailers that have all of the disaster supplies and equipment in them so we can instantly
deploy.
And we have deployed for wildfires, severe weather, and certainly the hurricane
events. So we are kind of Johnny -on -the -spot in terms of being able to provide some very
basic resources for refuge.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Well, that's my -- what I wanted to get on the
record, because I did not want this to appear that they were being -- there was
arm -twisting, and I would like the applicant, at least for the record, to acknowledge that
they concurred based on the request of emergency management for these generators.
Because I was concerned about the cost to maintain.
And, Dan, your explanation is -- it's certainly answered all my questions.
Particularly, I was -- I did not want to see an applicant having to purchase a generator and
having it sit in the yard, and then three years from now, it's -- you know, it's covered with
leaves, and nobody's operating it. I'm -- as you well know my career, I know a lot about
generators as a battalion commander, and as a company commander, even in the Army, I
had a lot of generator power in my units, and it's a lot of maintenance and a lot of cost.
MR. SUMMERS: It is, and we are able -- and that is very well supported by
FEMA as well as reimbursement during the particular time.
So -- and also understand that we build dual use into everything. For example, my
generators are the same as Public Utilities. So if Public Utilities needs to power a lift
station and they're short, mine are available. We rotate that through. So it is not isolated
to a single mission. It is here to build for the county, but its primary mission is to go to
the shelters.
And let me also mention that we open the additional space in these schools because
the school district has agreed to provide a port in every major large space area within the
school. So we pull that generator up, run a large cord through the wall, and then from
there go into temporary construction -type power distribution to serve the clients.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: So there's no switch or a -- what do you want to call it?
Page 11 of 40
Page 15 of 245
December 19, 2024
MR. SUMMERS: No transfer switch.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Changeover transfer switch.
MR. SUMMERS: Right. It's all a manual process. It's all very safe, and it has
certainly kept the cost way down.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: So it doesn't put a burden on the school --
MR. SUMMERS: No, no.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- to provide the transfer switch or --
MR. SUMMERS: No. We provide -- we train the staff to pull the cable, plug
everything in, turn the switch on, and they've got a reliable 48 hours' worth of power.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Dan, thanks --
MR. SUMMERS: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- for answering my questions. I would like, for the
record, the applicant agrees that these are -- this is a justified requirement for this type of a
project.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I don't know how many years I've worked with you, Dan.
How long have you been at the county?
MR. SUMMERS: Twenty -some years.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Way too long.
MR. YOVANOVICH: So I've been working with Dan on these issues for
20-something years. If you recall, in another hearing I recognized that he's the expert in
this area, and we've never had an issue with what Dan recommends, and we are perfectly
fine with paying this to the county for the increase in density, which the Comprehensive
Plan and state statutes require us to do.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. All right. Thanks.
MR. SUMMERS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Colleagues, go ahead. Mike, you --
COMMISISONER PETSCHER: Michelle.
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Oh, Chairman Schmitt, do you we have any other
presentations or --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I know we have public speakers.
MS. LOCKHART: Staff.
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: We have staff.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: We have staff first, and then we'll -- it came up "Mike"
on my screen here, but I'll recall it's Michelle.
All right. Staff?
MR. SAMMON: Good morning. Sean Sammon, Planner III in the Zoning
division regarding -- Agenda Item 9C, the rezone petition for the East Trail Mixed -Use
Planned Unit Development, was reviewed by staff, and staff believes this petition is
consistent with the LDC as well as with the GMP. As mentioned, the applicant provided
an added Deviation No. 4 after the staff report review was completed. The deviation was
guided, reviewed, and approved by staff.
Staff received no calls, and there has been no public opposition pertaining to this
petition.
Based on the analysis in the staff report, staff recommends that the Planning
Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the Board of Commissioners.
Page 12 of 40
Page 16 of 245
December 19, 2024
That concludes staff presentation. I'll be happy to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah, I'm looking at uses. Item 88, videotape rentals,
good luck if you want to put a videotape rental in there. I think it will -- you might as well
put a flower shop or something, but I just -- that was one that I kind of thought was sort of
obsolete. There was another one on here. But I have no problem with it. You can -- and
I think that was the only one I saw.
Stand by a minute as I go through. It's hard to see my highlights on this version.
Say again.
MR. MULHERE: We thought maybe Blockbuster --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Blockbuster, coming back. I mean, you know.
I think that was it. Anybody -- nobody else is highlighting.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: I was going to wait till after public --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Public speakers, please. How many -- do
we have any registered public speakers?
MR. ALONSO: Yeah, we only have one, and they're physically here. So the first
and only speaker for this is going to be Elliot Miller.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And I would recognize Elliot Miller -- Honorable Elliot
Miller as the elected official of CDD2, Fiddler's Creek, and chair, by the way.
MR. MILLER: Thank you very much, Joe.
I'm here to address the cost of the traffic light. CDD2 was the initiator of the light.
It was our application. We pursued it. We've entered into contracts for its construction
and erection, and we are bearing all of the contractual obligations for the cost of it, which
continues monthly to exceed the prior month, with no end in sight.
On the other hand, CDD1, of which Mr. Schmitt is chairman, has agreed -- we have
a contract -- that they're going to be sharing the cost with us. So both CDDI and CDD2
have a serious interest in allocating the cost of the light among the appropriate and proper
parties.
The developer here is a proper party. Greenway is directly across from the Publix
shopping center. That Publix property used to be CDD2 property, Fiddler's Creek, and
ended up as part of Publix's property, and the developer, Halvorsen, has an arrangement
with us with regard to the construction of its property and the traffic light.
We need to have -- we and CDD I both need to have a fair allocation of the cost of
that light. And it's clear to us, and I think to CDDI, too --it's clear that the developer of
this property, which is going to be -- end up a significant development residential,
commercial, et cetera, has an equal share of benefit attributable to this light, and therefore,
should make a material contribution to its cost.
We, the two CDs, share a lot of the personnel that the developer has here. For
example, Bowman is our engineer and CDD I's engineer as well, as the engineer for the
developer here. My suggestion is -- and I address this to Rich really. My suggestion is
that our engineer from Bowman, Terry Cole, speak with his partner here and go through
the costs which have been established so far and which are likely to continue and then
allocate a fair responsibility between the two CDDs on the one hand and the developer
here on the other for the developer to share the cost with the CDDs.
By the way, 7-Eleven is also going to be separately making a contribution as well.
They have the same -- Bowman is their engineer as well.
So my suggestion is that the developer representative from Bowman talk to our
Page 13 of 40
Page 17 of 245
December 19, 2024
engineer, Terry Cole, and get a detailed analysis of what the costs have been so far and
what it is likely for the costs to continue and then come up with a proposal for the two
CDDs for a fair and equitable contribution by the developer.
Now, my point is that should happen now, not in three years when the property is
developed and people start moving in because we, the two CDDs, have to make payments
now when the property is completed, the light's up. So we think it's fair and equitable for
the developer here to make its contribution at the present time.
So what I would like to suggest is that the Bowman representative here meet with
Terry Cole, get an analysis of the costs, and come up a proposal for both CDDs at our next
meeting.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Thank you, Elliot.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Can you explain what the hell he's talking about?
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yes. CDD, Community Development District.
MR. MILLER: I'm sorry. I thought it was --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: As you well know, we have -- in the State of Florida,
Section 189 and 190 of the Florida code allows for special districts, and a CDD is a special
district with elected officials who maintain -- basically have a budget to maintain the
infrastructure, landscaping, and other community needs within the -- within the
development, and almost -- I don't know how many CDDs exist now within Collier
County. Probably --
MR. MILLER: More every day.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Probably at least 30 or more. Most of the major
developments have Community Development Districts.
What Elliot is saying -- and I have to make sure, for the record, I am no way
pushing in anyway, shape, or form. CDD 1 is obligated to pay monies to CDD2. They're
the contracting entity that is erecting -- has permitted and erecting the light. We are just
obligated to pay our fair share --
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Where is the light?
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- in accordance with the interlocal agreement.
The light will be at Greenway Road, intersection of Greenway Road, right across
the street from Greenway, and it was aligned that way. When Fiddler's Creek was
designed, that was -- that's the interconnection right there. It leads into the back -- the
gate going into what is called Sandpiper. So there will be -- that's going to be a major
intersection. That's a six -lane road and a full opening.
The light has probably been, Elliot, what, probably almost four years now?
MR. MILLER: Years, yes.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: It was years ago contemplated. And, Norm, you're the
traffic engineer, fortunately or unfortunately, for all of these. You were the traffic
engineer, I believe. If -- Norm, if you could come up, because it's -- Norm's -- Norm, you
were the -- you're the traffic engineer for the light. You're the traffic engineer as well; is
that correct?
MR. MILLER: Yes. He's on our payroll, too.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah. And you're the traffic engineer for this
development as well. So it's all in the same family in Bowman, which was Hole Montes,
of course, the engineer who is doing the -- actually filed for the permits through the state.
So it is fully warranted. There's been several rather severe accidents at that location, and
Page 14 of 40
Page 18 of 245
December 19, 2024
so the state has already approved it. It's just a matter of now getting the light erected,
constructed.
And I believe when 7-Eleven came in -- Bob, if I'm not mistaken, that was -- you
were the petitioner on that.
MR. MULHERE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: You and Jeff Wright. Maybe four years ago. I have
the minutes. And there was a proportionate share requirement based on the impact. And
on this it states as well that the proportionate share is based on the impact.
MR. MILLER: Joe, Terry Cole is already going to be meeting with them with
regard to the 7-Eleven.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. But I need to know, what is it -- what -- are we
looking -- are you looking to ask to change the language in the proportionate share, or are
you looking for the developer to come up with some kind of a solution?
MR. MILLER: My request is that after Terry Cole sits down --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Terry Cole from Bowman.
MR. MILLER: Bowman, yeah -- sits down with the gentleman from Bowman
here and goes through the costs, that the developer come up with a proposal for now, for
payment now --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay.
MR. MILLER: -- based on a fair share of the allocation of the benefit of the light.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay.
MR. MILLER: And let me just indicate, I'm -- first of all, let me say I'm sorry I
didn't explain what a CDD was. We own -- we operate and manage the infrastructure, the
roads, the traffic, the lights, the landscaping, et cetera, in the District, and there are two
districts in Fiddler's Creek, CDD2 and CDD1. And we are both involved in the finances
of this traffic light. So we have a very significant interest in having a fair share of those
costs allocated to third parties who would benefit equally.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah. I mean, for my colleagues, a CDD -- the only
thing the county really maintains in any of these CDDs -- and we can go through all the
developments that are Community Development Districts. Typically, the fire suppression
and water and sewer infrastructure, but everything else in the -- in the community is the
community's requirement, and it's not the county.
MR. MILLER: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah.
MR. MILLER: But the community is -- we are so involved with the community
that the pressure is on us all the time, as you know.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: The CDDs, for those who don't know, are -- have the
ability to tax. It's a yearly O&M tax that they can tax the residents for the operations and
maintenance of the District.
MR. MILLER: Good point, and that's why we're here, because we don't want our
residents to be unfairly burdened financially by having to pay for the entire light that's
going to benefit the developer equally to us.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: When they go through the transportation, the fair share
and all that, that will come out?
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I don't know. I have to ask Norm that. So that's my
question to Norm. What was the question?
Page 15 of 40
Page 19 of 245
December 19, 2024
COMMISSIONER SHEA: I thought his question was it will come out, but they
should be paid now while the work's --
MR. MILLER: That's right. We are -- we have to pay now.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Exactly.
MR. MILLER: As the light is built, we have to pay for its construction, we have
to pay for its insertion, for the testing, for the land, for the nature of the light itself in the
ground, so -- and ultimately, we're going to have that shared with CDD -- Community
Development District No. 1.
But both of us have an obligation to the residents of Fiddler's Creek, and both of us
are equally fairly compensated by the developer here who's going to develop -- who's
going to benefit from this traffic light as much as we will.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. All right. Elliot, thank you.
MR. MILLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Any questions of Mr. Miller?
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: I do.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Chuck, sorry. You're on here.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Mr. Miller, how many units are in CDD2?
MR. MILLER: At this -- at this point it's in excess of 2,000.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Excess of 2,000. And then CDDI?
Because I would expect you would just divide the cost amongst the number of units.
MR. MILLER: We have an agreement with the two CDDs. CDDI initiated the
traffic light on 951 years ago, and we agreed to split the cost of that traffic light with
CDDI if they would agree to split the cost of the light on CDD -- on 41 when we
developed that. So it goes back a long time.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: What was -- what was the estimated cost?
I know costs are growing, but what was the initial estimated cost for that traffic light?
MR. MILLER: Initially it was much lower than it's turned out to be. I think it
was initially guesstimated around three-quarters of a million dollars. I think now we're
coming close to two million.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: It was 750,000, Norm, if I'm correct, and we're
somewhere approaching almost two million.
MR. MILLER: Two million.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Rich, you want to make a statement?
Thank you, Mr. Miller.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Are we done with public comment? I don't want to --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Are there any other public speakers?
MR. YOVANOVICH: People stood up, so I wasn't sure if they were here to talk
about --
MR. ALONSO: No other public speakers.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Thank you. No other public speakers.
Then we'll close the public hearing.
Say again.
MS. ABBOTT: I was wondering if I could ask a question.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Have you been sworn in?
Page 16 of 40
Page 20 of 245
December 19, 2024
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Have you been sworn in?
MS. ABBOTT: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Please come up, and if you come to the podium.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Use the right side.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Either one.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the testimony you will give
will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
MS. ABBOTT: Yes.
So my name is Laura Abbott, and I own the only other property on Cecil Road, and
I purchased that to do a little horse farm. And I'm wondering if Cecil Road is going to be
used at all for this project.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: No. As far as what I just heard for the record, it's --
MS. ABBOTT: That was --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- not part of the development at all.
MS. ABBOTT: Okay. That was my understanding as well.
So I'm wondering -- and I don't know whether you would have the answer to that, if
I could fence that property in, the road, so that I don't have people coming and going up
and down the road. Is that something you could answer the question? Over the road?
Across the --
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: You have to go through permitting.
MS. ABBOTT: Well, I'm dealing with them now, so --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Well, it's zoned --
MS. ABBOTT: Agriculture.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- agriculture.
MS. ABBOTT: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: You would technically -- ag., even if they get a permit,
if they're putting a fence on ag property --
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Who owns the road?
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Who owns the road?
MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. That would be the question, if it's legal access or not.
If it's an access easement to some other place, that would have to be investigated;
Permitting.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: So you'd have to probably go through -- you'd have to
go through Permitting. You'd have to coordinate with the county.
MS. ABBOTT: So --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: But is there going to be a wall -- Bob, is there a wall
back there or any type of berm, or is this --
MS. ABBOTT: Just natural, right? Natural.
MR. MULHERE: Natural buffer.
MS. ABBOTT: So I'm the only person that lives on that road, and I do share that
road with my neighbor who has the property on Greenway. Yeah, on Greenway --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yes.
MS. ABBOTT: -- right before mine. So he wouldn't care. He doesn't really
need to use it.
MR. MULHERE: That may be a little bit better exhibit.
MS. ABBOTT: So I don't see any need for anyone else to use the road, and I just
Page 17 of 40
Page 21 of 245
December 19, 2024
would like to make my horses safe from that 41 and across that road and be able to, you
know --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. I can't answer that question. We'd have
to -- the county would have to investigate.
MS. ABBOTT: But this project needs no --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: If you put a fence on the north side of Cecil Road,
which is -- you're fencing your property.
MS. ABBOTT: Right, my boundary, and then -- or at the end there where that
house is --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah. I don't see that --
MS. ABBOTT: Any other person that needed to get down that road would be
whoever owned that house when I bought it.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Well, it has to provide access, but it looks like right
now that road will end right at the boundary of this development, so --
MS. ABBOTT: That was my understanding as well. So I just wanted to clarify
that.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. I'll ask the applicant to clarify. Thank you.
MS. ABBOTT: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Go ahead, Michelle.
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Mr. Chairman, I wanted to know when is this light
going to be installed?
MR. YOVANOVICH: We don't control it.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Elliot, please, with the microphone, if you could.
MR. MILLER: Oh, sorry. Sure.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: When was it -- it was hoping to be -- the
word -- operative word was "hope" -- February or March, but now they've encountered a
fiber-optic cable that has to be relocated for another $50,000 or thereabouts.
MR. MILLER: The initial expectation was in January --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Go ahead.
MR. MILLER: -- this coming month -- next month. But as Joe just indicated,
there's now this special issue about the cable that has to be cured, and that's going to put it
off for another three, four months. So it will be early next year, hopefully March or April.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: But all the materials have been purchased?
MR. MILLER: Yes. Oh, yeah.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Everything --
MR. MILLER: And being constructed. The components have been bought, and
the light is being constructed. The issue is installing it now because of this -- the issue
that just arose that Joe just mentioned.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Thank you.
Rich -- now that does close the public hearing. Anybody else wishes to speak that
did not register?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Thank you.
Rich, it's yours.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I think we have to -- first of all, in response to giving a
check now, we're not going to give a check now. We have to -- we have to take a step
Page 18 of 40
Page 22 of 245
December 19, 2024
back. Fiddler's Creek, as you all are aware, is a 6,000-unit DRI. That's what it will be at
ultimate buildout.
The need for the traffic signal at both of those locations, at 951 and at Tamiami
Trail, were triggered by Fiddler's Creek. We don't have any development on our property,
so clearly, we're not the cause for the need for that traffic signal.
We do not share equally in the benefit of that traffic signal. We will have far less
traffic on Greenway going through that intersection than the residents of Fiddler's Creek
and the general public traveling back and forth on Tamiami Trail.
There will be other developments along Greenway that you will be seeing in the
near future that are rezones that are occurring that will have traffic on Greenway.
We have committed to paying our proportionate share. We will pay that when we
have actual traffic impacts. If I were the CDD, I'd be looking at this as found money that
they didn't originally have coming their way for constructing the traffic signal. And we're
happy to pay a proportionate share. Typically, the way that's done is you have traffic
analysis, and you look at how many trips we're going to put on there, the capacity at that
intersection, and then we would stroke a check for that when the signal's actually in place
at the time we have actual impact. I think that's fair.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. The language is clear.
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's clear.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: It basically says at first --
MR. YOVANOVICH: CO.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- CO.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I think that's fair. I think that's when we should have to
pay money towards that. And I understand that costs go up. I understand that there are
unforeseen circumstances. But had this been installed when you -all originally -- and
when I say "you -all," meaning the two CDDs -- you'd have paid 100 percent. You would
have had no money coming back to you.
So at this point you're at least going to get something. You're going to get
something back based upon a fair proportionate share formula, and you're going to get that
at the time that we actually develop the property and actually have a benefit from the
signal.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. For the record, then, if I could ask Norm -- and,
Elliot, I know you want to make a statement, but we closed the public hearing. But
I -- since -- since this does involve -- specifically, I will ask you again if you could come to
the microphone, please, because it's -- I just want to make sure it's clear.
MR. YOVANOVICH: We're not going to negotiate a dollar amount today.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. I understand.
MR. MILLER: Thank you, Joe.
Just let me say this to Rich. I understand your point. What I'm suggesting is that
if you do make a payment now, it be discounted. So I'm not -- I'm suggesting that you can
get a fair and equitable discount by paying it now.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, that -- we could talk about a fair and equitable
discount.
MR. MILLER: That's what I'm saying. I understand your point, and it's -- it was
contemplated. I'm saying, if you come forward with an arrangement that gives you a fair
and equitable discount for an early payment, that will be taken into account.
Page 19 of 40
Page 23 of 245
December 19, 2024
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Well, I -- for the record, then, I leave -- between CDD2
and the developer, you can negotiate off-line.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yep.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: The zoning is clear. They're going to pay their
proportionate fair share. If the -- if the developer and the CDD come to a separate
agreement, it's not part of the zoning. Elliot, you'll have to work that off-line.
MR. MILLER: Sure. I just wanted to respond to Rich's point.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Thank you.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I just want to make sure that's not findings its way into a
recommendation --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: No, it's not in a recommendation. That is -- that's
off-line.
And I would only ask for -- Norm, if you could put on the record, though -- because
that payment is actually made to the county, and the county then reimburses the permittee;
is that correct?
And, Norm, you're the engineer?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yeah, but he's not -- he's not the lawyer on the deal.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I know it, but I --
MR. YOVANOVICH: That's between -- I don't know how the county is entering
into -- whether even the county has an agreement with the CDD to talk about -- we're
going to pay. How the money gets to the CDD, we don't know.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I just ask Norm, for the record, that he understands that
it is a proportionate share. He's the -- he's the -- he did the traffic study for your
application, did he not?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Sure.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. So if you could just explain for the record the
proportionate share for my other colleagues to understand.
MR. MILLER: He's also our traffic engineer.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I understand.
Thank you, Elliot.
MR. TREBILCOCK: Yes, sir.
So we'll prepare these fair share analyses for signals, because the signal
warrants -- it's not just, like, appear, like, units this is [sic]. It deals with turning
movements. Typically, your left turning movement is causing the need for the signal, and
then on the minor street, the through movements cause that need. You know, the through
movements on the main line road do not.
So what we normally will do is do a proportionate share, like you're talking about,
Joe. And where the county's involved is their traffic folks, you know, independently will
review it and just make sure that it is a fair share analysis on behalf of that study that's
being done.
And actually, just for the record, on the signal warrant for Fiddler's Creek, the
traffic analysis that was done for the warrants and as such, it was Jim Banks. It wasn't
myself.
MR. MILLER: Right.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. I thought it was --
MR. TREBILCOCK: Okay. We prepared the traffic plans and stuff like that,
Page 20 of 40
Page 24 of 245
December 19, 2024
working together and everything like that. But it's fine to do that analysis and, you know,
the proportionate share, and that's very objective. It's a numbers, specifically, and staff
would review it to make sure objectively it makes sense for this very, you know, finite,
like, location and as such.
So -- and then, you know, work with Terry on reviewing it as well to
make -- objectively that it makes sense. So it's a normal course of things, yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: But you and Jim both know what's going on?
MR. TREBILCOCK: Yes, sir. Yep.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Chuck.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Norm, how many -- how many vehicles
would you estimate are going to use Greenway?
MR. TREBILCOCK: As far as from our --
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: From your project, how many cars do you
estimate are going to use Greenway? I know the main entrance will be off of 41.
MR. TREBILCOCK: Right.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: There's two -- there's two ingresses and
egresses onto Greenway from this project. How many vehicles would you estimate are
going to use those access points?
MR. TREBILCOCK: I would have to -- I would have to look at the numbers here
and calculate that and get back to you on that, okay?
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Okay.
MR. TREBILCOCK: Because that -- again, that -- what happens is we look at that
very specifically at the time of site development where we'll look at the percentages of
traffic using it. Right now, as a planning study, really, what we looked at is the overall
project on the main road network, and we didn't get into the intersection itself.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: That has nothing to do with the light, Rich.
Rich looks like he's about to hop off that --
MR. YOVANOVICH: No, I'm good.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: I'm just worried about that road, because
like you just said, there's more projects coming upon that road itself. Obviously, the
owners that bought on Greenway initially X amount of years ago never imagined -- I
mean, I can see from the map here, you've got -- Naples Reserve is plugged into that road
as well, which Rich could argue that's their fair share to get on that, too.
MR. YOVANOVICH: We -- just so -- there are significant improvements being
planned to that intersection for Greenway on the north side because of not only -- there's
will hopefully be --
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: There's a farm down there. There's --
MR. YOVANOVICH: What will ultimately be the first Live Local project
approved where I just put the arrow.
Right, Bob?
MR. MULHERE: Yep.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Then there is another project up here that's winding its way
through the process that also has income -restricted housing in it. All of that is being
considered by your Transportation staff to how do we -- how do we improve -- whoops,
wrong way, sorry -- the intersection at Greenway.
So there will be improvements at that intersection. That will -- maybe we should
Page 21 of 40
Page 25 of 245
December 19, 2024
go to the CDD and say, "We'd like you to contribute your fair share towards those
improvements as well." We're not doing that.
There are --just so you're aware, Mr. Schumacher, that all of that is being factored
in. So your legitimate concerns about what's the impact on Greenway are being -- are
being addressed as all of these projects as a whole are winding their way through this
process.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: I know that road itself is not very wide.
MR. YOVANOVICH: No, but where the issue is is really at the intersection, and
that all is being addressed with additional lefts, additional rights --
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Okay.
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- both within 41 and on Greenway.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Elliot, I don't have any questions. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Okay, thanks.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: So based on -- Mr. Yovanovich, we understand. And
it doesn't change your petition in anyway way nor are we adding any stipulation. I guess,
for the record, it is going to be a future payment made at some time to the Community
Development District, who is the applicant and the permittee.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Our commitment --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- is with Collier County.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Well -- to be the Collier County, correct.
MR. YOVANOVICH: We have a commitment to Collier County to pay our fair
share --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah.
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- of the intersection improvements, and within that, it
said, "Traffic signal." We will pay our fair share to Collier County. We don't have any
contractual obligation nor does our commitment say we're stroking a check to anybody
other than Collier County.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Mike Sawyer, can I ask you to come up,
then, just to clarify. Just for the record, state your name, please.
MR. SAWYER: Good morning, Commissioners. Mike Sawyer, Transportation
Planning.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And you and I discussed this by e-mail, and in fact,
when I chatted with the staff. This is a commitment that you will follow, and eventually
you are the recipient of any -- the analysis is done, and you are then -- you, the county, are
the recipient, between you and the Transportation Department, and then you will evaluate
how much monies will actually go to the entity that permitted -- was the permit applicant
for this traffic light; is that correct?
MR. SAWYER: Yeah. Whenever they come in for their first SDP plat, however
it comes in --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah.
MR. SAWYER: -- you know, when we get that trigger, those plans are reviewed
by our operational people as well as the transportation reviewers and Development
Services. So we work in concert with each other when those come in, and we'll look at
that, we'll look at the evaluation, and we'll make a judgment based on the numbers.
Page 22 of 40
Page 26 of 245
December 19, 2024
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Thank you.
Any other questions for my colleagues? Yes.
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Not on this matter. Just for the petitioner.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Of the petitioner. Yeah, go ahead, please.
MR. SAWYER: Okay. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. I just wanted to make two points. First
off, I was glad to see that the car wash that you originally wanted to place on this
commercial area was eliminated based on the neighbor's concern, so I was really happy to
see that.
And then I have a big -picture ask of you. You ready? So -- and I talked to Mike
Bosi about this before I put this together. But because this area is practically unchartered
territory and we're seeing petitions come before us and we're going to start seeing a lot of
development in this area, I think it's important that we set, early on, a desirable design
pattern on where we want building placement and orientation to help create an
environment with current urban planning elements instead of falling into old planning
trends.
For instance, before, in the past, when you would do commercial projects, you
would put parking in the front and then the building in the back. But today's urban
designs try to create more walkable and appealing spaces by bringing buildings up and
softening and improving the overall site design. This is -- an example of this is on Fifth
Avenue in the City of Naples.
Before, years ago, you would see the parking in the front and the buildings in the
back, but through their years of redevelopment, in trying to create that walkable,
impressionable space, they put the parking in the back and then brought the buildings up
front to the road. And interestingly enough, this trend is now moving down 41.
So right now the development standard for an MPUD is a minimum front setback
of 20 feet. Would you be willing to agree to a maximum setback of 50 feet to help initiate
this desired building placement and orientation to set the pattern for future developments
that are coming right around the corner?
And I worked with Mike Bosi in kind of figuring out what would be needed in
order to create this -- the current urban planning elements that we want to see here. And,
again, it's just a maximum setback of 50 feet.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I can't agree to that on the fly. We haven't laid this out. I
understand your ask, and I understand your desire. I don't -- in Rich Yovanovich's humble
opinion, as a lawyer who's represented projects at this point and I understand planning, I
don't think that this is the same scenario as a typical urban project like Fifth Avenue.
This is a six -lane highway. We're talking 64,000 square feet. I don't know how it
would layout if I can't have a building that is more than 50 feet from U.S. 41. I don't
think it would work. To require -- I think you'd probably end up with something you don't
want, which would be one big, long building for us to figure out how to get all that square
footage in there. I don't know if it fits for the uses we're proposing to happen.
I can't agree to that. My client -- I've already looked back, and they've told me,
"No, we can't agree to that requirement." I don't think it fits. I don't think this is -- this is
not an urban, walkable --
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: It will be, though.
MR. YOVANOVICH: It won't be.
Page 23 of 40
Page 27 of 245
December 19, 2024
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: We can make it that way. You're already seeing
the trend happening on 41 anyway, past the city. I just made that as an example --
MR. YOVANOVICH: No, I understand --
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: -- of what we're starting to see.
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- but it's not happening. I mean, it's a great desire, but it's
different on Fifth Avenue than being on 41. I mean, it's --
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Again, the trend is moving past -- onto 41 past the
city. On Goodlette. You're seeing it everywhere. Again, to just soften what we're
seeing on the roads.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, you're going to have nice landscape buffers along
41. Those are required in our code. And to now try to make this where you have the
building lines that you would find in a more -- I'll call it a more dense area, downtown
Naples to out here in a -- in a less dense urban area, we cannot -- we can't agree to that
commitment.
In fairness to us, I'm hearing about this for the very first time at 10:10 when I've got
a petition in front of you. I can't -- we can't react that quickly, and I don't think it's apples
to apples. So I'd love to give it to you, but I can't.
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: All right. Well, is Mike Bosi on the line? I
just --
MR. YOVANOVICH: I know he was thinking about participating by Zoom. I
don't know if he's on right now.
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: So I just met with him yesterday and shared with
him my desire because, you know, as the Planning Commission, we're looking at what are
counties going to be looking like in the future, and I think it's just so important that we
make sure we get it right now so that we're proud of it in the future. And this is just
something that -- I just am all about how to plan properly for these up-and-coming areas.
And again, this is -- this is going to be hot, and you are one of the first properties here
where we could really make a difference.
So of that's my ask. I understand that you're not prepared to take that now, but
maybe just consider that as you move forward with your design.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. I mean, we could look at anything as we're doing
our design, but to change our PUD to require it, we cannot --
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: What's the maximum right now?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Maximum what?
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: The maximum setback.
MR. YOVANOVICH: There is no maximum. In Collier County, we do
minimums.
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And -- you know, because a lot of people don't want
buildings right on top of the road. So we've --
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Well -- but a lot of people don't -- I mean, it's not
that attractive when you see all parking up front.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I mean, this is -- this is only, what, seven acres.
MR. MULHERE: Six acres and change.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Six acres and changes. I mean, it's not a big parcel.
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: It's just an ask, you know.
Page 24 of 40
Page 28 of 245
December 19, 2024
MR. YOVANOVICH: I understand.
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Just bring the building up, make less parking, put it
in the side.
MR. MULHERE: So there's a couple of things I -- Bob Mulhere, for the record.
We're providing the main access through the commercial development which now
separates us into two parcels. That's going to go all the way to the residential component.
So we have basically two parcels; one west, one east. It really complicates the design.
You know, the county has spent several years looking at a Tamiami Trail/U.S.
41/East Naples Overlay. Where is it? That's the process to incorporate significant
changes here so landowners can have an opportunity to determine what those impacts are,
not on the fly with one petition coming before you that we've been in the works for some
time.
I'm not sure where that project is. It doesn't go that far east. But there is an
opportunity to do planning, and it starts with a comprehensive, public advertised, overall
plan that would incorporate these ideals, these planning ideals, and everyone would have
an opportunity to have some weigh -- some opportunity to weigh in on things. I don't -- I
don't think this very small, separated, segregated commercial parcel can meet those
substantial design elements.
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: You can --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I'll make a comment because -- Michelle, I understand
your request. The problem is is from intersection of 41 and Collier Boulevard, there's
already a frontage road.
The drugstore, the Tractor Supply, or whatever it is, all those have a frontage road
almost all the way down. This is going to have a frontage road and an interconnect. So
it -- it would be -- I think, it's -- from a traffic perspective, it's going to be difficult because
it would be far better off to keep some of this traffic off of Tamiami Trail if they're going
to be doing interconnects.
So there's going to be -- again, there's an interconnect with the 7-Eleven, and I
suspect that there will be some kind of a frontage road, meaning for traffic to go across and
then eventually go into the main entrance here. So that -- you know, we don't get into
planning design even though we're the Planning Commission. Bob is right, there's been a
U.S. 41 study ongoing, various versions, for almost 20 years, and various aspects, and I
think they're in the final throes of another one they're going to complete.
Is that right, Ray? The U.S. 41 study, they were looking at the community
character and -- I don't know -- I don't know where that's at.
MR. BELLOWS: I can give you an update later, but...
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: I think it's on hold.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: It's on hold again. They were discussing -- it had to do
primarily --
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: There was that civil action that came in
after Ian where the state came down and said you can't do any large-scale community
development on the county side until 2026. So we pretty much had a hard stop until that
expires.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: But that was focused temporarily on --
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Down to 951.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: 951 and trying to eliminate the proliferation of storage
Page 25 of 40
Page 29 of 245
December 19, 2024
facilities and car washes, which is really what was happening on 41. The problem is most
of 41 lacks the depth of the -- in the -- if you're going north from Collier Boulevard, there's
not sufficient depth in a lot of the parcels. That's why -- so you might see some of the
units a little bit closer to the road. But out here, especially from the intersection heading
south, there's -- a lot of them now have the little frontage road that you can connect. But
anyways --
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: But these overlay plans kind of call for these kinds
of things.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: And so, like, trying to think ahead, how can we
best create these spaces? And I'm not suggesting we require it. It was only an ask, and
so --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Well, Rich noted it as an ask for the record, so I think
that's okay.
Any other comments? I don't see any commissioners lighting up their -- we have
no public speakers. We closed the public hearing.
That closes your rebuttal, Rich?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Do we have any motions from the floor?
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: I'd make a motion to approve as presented.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Is that for both petitions?
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: For both petitions.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: That's for the -- both the comp -- small-scale Comp
Plan amendment and the PUDZ?
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Correct.
COMMISISONER PETSCHER: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All in favor?
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Anybody opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Thank you.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you.
MR. MULHERE: Thank you.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And I hope everybody has a happy holiday and gets some
good rest.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And I'll let you and -- I'll let you and Elliot Miller
discuss any future negotiations.
MR. YOVANOVICH: That's fine. I've known Elliot a while, too.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Well, you attorneys, you get together. You talk talk
that we don't even know what you're talking about, so...
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: And then don't forget to save that bill for
the rest of the communities on that road, Rich.
Page 26 of 40
Page 30 of 245
December 19, 2024
MR. YOVANOVICH: What's that?
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Save the bill for the rest of those
communities that are being built on that road.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Save the bill? I will.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Well, that same language will probably go in the rest of
them as well. It will be in future payments, because the costs have escalated amazingly
what it costs for one of those lights.
* * *All right. That moves us to the next petition. That's the FPL Summit
substation communications tower, PL20230004408.
And I'm going to ask, are there any disclosures? Amy.
MS. LOCKHART: None.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Staff materials.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Staff materials only for me, and I did discuss with staff
the denial for the fence.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Staff materials and a drive -by of the
property.
COMMISISONER PETSCHER: Staff materials and drive -by.
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Visited the site, reviewed the materials, and met
with staff.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Could I ask the petitioner, are we going to take
our -- anybody wishing to speak, or the petitioner, please take our oath, please.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the testimony you will give
will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Are we going to need a break?
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yeah, why don't we --
THE COURT REPORTER: Is it going to be quick?
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I don't know. There's going to be some questions.
There will be some questions. I would recommend we take a break before we actually get
into the petition, if we could. It's getting close to 10:30. Normally that's our break. If
you don't mind, we'll take a 10-minute break. We'll adjourn at 10:30.
MR .JOHNSON: No problem.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Thank you.
(A brief recess was had from 10:19 a.m. to 10:30 a.m.)
MR. SAMMON: It's 10:30, Mr. Chairman. You have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Thank you. And thank you for indulging
and allowing us to take the break. So if you could state your name, please, and start with
the petition.
MR. JOHNSTON: Great. Thank you. My name is James Johnston with Shutts
& Bowen, 300 South Orange Avenue in Orlando, on behalf of Verizon. And I have with
me Bill Compton who is with Verizon. He's a Verizon RF engineer.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Bill's been here before, though, haven't you?
Certainly, yes. Welcome back.
MR. COMPTON: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: We didn't give you a hard time, though.
MR. COMPTON: No, not yet.
Page 27 of 40
Page 31 of 245
December 19, 2024
MR. JOHNSTON: And Happy Holidays and, again, appreciate everyone being
out here so close to the holidays.
So this request is for a conditional use to permit the installation of a 150-foot-tall
monopole communication tower on property with Estate future land use and zoning. The
tower will be owned by Florida Power & Light with Verizon as the anchor licensee,
meaning the top antennas on the tower. It's located at 191 Weber Boulevard North, again,
on an FPL-owned electric substation property. That use will remain.
And just before we get too far into this, I want to let you know we are fine with the
staff recommendation and conditions, including their recommendation of denial of the
fencing. So I think we'll eliminate that as an issue. So our only deviation will be the
separation deviation.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Well, that makes it certainly far more acceptable
because that was going to be the -- was going to be a requirement anyway. So you now
have accepted that as the requirement as per the code?
MR. JOHNSTON: Per the code.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Thank you.
MR. JOHNSTON: Okay. Then, just really quickly, there is a picture
showing -- with the 191 Weber Boulevard shown there abutting -- that property butts up
against Collier Boulevard and Weber Boulevard. This is a closeup of the electric
substation site, as you can see, accessed off Weber Boulevard. There is the -- from Weber
Boulevard --
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Weber.
MR. JOHNSTON: Weber, sorry. Thank you for not letting me get too far into
that -- but from Weber Boulevard with the fencing and gate there for the access point.
And so the -- what is proposed is a 150-foot-tall monopole communication tower.
Monopole design generally is considered to have reduced visual impacts from other tower
types like a guyed or a lattice tower type. This location abuts the existing electric
substation. As indicated, access from Weber Boulevard.
It's designed to accommodate not only Verizon antennas on the top but two
additional providers to prevent communication tower proliferation in the area. It's a code
requirement for coalition.
The setbacks from the property lines are 84 feet to the north, 239 feet to the south,
445 feet to the east, and 449 feet to the west. Again, we are requesting a deviation from
the separation requirement to the north, which is, under the code, 100 percent of tower
height, which would be -- as a 150-foot-tall tower, it would be 150 feet. Although I will
note the code allows a 50 percent reduction in that if it's an alternative tower design, like a
tree camouflage design, but a tree design is not possible on this site because it's next to an
electric substation site. And there are times when the branches on those trees can come
off, and so that would be problematic for the substation.
And this tower, again, is being owned and will be constructed by FPL and designed
to meet their transmission pole requirements, including wind loading.
This is a -- just showing kind of an overlay on the site where the site will be. As
you can see, it utilized the existing driveway and paved area to access it, and so that paved
area will also serve to meet the parking and turnaround requirements. And the -- we
ended up on this location on the FPL property based on certain property constraints such as
existing stormwater ponds, electric transmission lines leaving the substation, separation
Page 28 of 40
Page 32 of 245
December 19, 2024
requirements from the substation control house that are FPL requirements, septic field,
underground conduit, and conservation easements that are already in existence on the
property.
As mentioned, this requires a reduced separation from the property to the north, but
we would note there's an existing mature tree canopy on the property that already -- that
has been there and is, again, mature and provides necessary buffering and screening from
the surrounding property areas.
And this, again, is something we submitted showing the -- you know, kind of
problematic areas on the property which are how we ended up with the proposed location
on the site in working, you know, with FPL.
And, again, we would note that this provides direct access from the existing
driveway and paved area.
And this is just a closeup of the actual ground equipment and where the tower
location will be. And as noted, you know, this -- the difference from what is shown on
here is there will be fencing, you know, around that -- around the communication tower as
is shown around the ground equipment on this drawing.
And this is an elevation of the tower. You know, a typical monopole tower with
the Verizon antennas on the top, and then, again, two other potential collocation locations
below that.
And Verizon has an existing coverage and capacity gap in this area. There have
been significant customer complaints. And in fact, the Estates area of the county are one
of Verizon's top 10 areas with covering and capacity needs in the state. There are some
real problems out there and need for this tower. In fact, when we had our community
meeting in April, we had a hard time. Part of it was being done virtually, and we had a
very hard time finding a signal in the area where we were having the community meeting
in order to hook up and do the -- do the virtual portion of the meeting. We had to move
the computer back to the office where the router -- close to the router because we couldn't
get a signal otherwise in the location.
The 150-foot tower height is necessary by Verizon to get the antennas at a height
that will help to resolve their coverage and capacity issues. We note that the closest
towers range in height in this area from 125 feet to 190 feet. So again, what we're
proposing is not anything abnormal from what's in this area, and the height is permitted by
code.
Closest existing tower is 1.8 miles away. There are no existing towers or
structures in our search ring where we have this need for this tower on which Verizon
antennas can be located.
And we think the site will significantly enhance the coverage and capacity and
result in major network performance improvements for the area.
And these are the RF maps that should be in your package. This is the before, and
you see the black dot in the middle along Collier Boulevard. That's where the tower is
proposed to be located. The red indicates unreliable coverage with the green reliable
coverage. With the tower constructed, you can see it obviously improves along Collier
Boulevard as well as the neighbor -- surroundings residential neighborhoods in the area.
And, again, this is a map showing the other existing towers in the area and why
there's a need in this specific -- in this specific location for a new tower.
And so I think the communication tower benefits will obviously improve coverage
Page 29 of 40
Page 33 of 245
December 19, 2024
and capacity in the area from a public health and safety aspect. I think most people know
people rely on their -- you know, on their cell phones and wireless devices. Over
80 percent of all 911 calls are now made from wireless devices, so having quality coverage
is important. This will help improve e91 I Phase 2, which is how they identify where 911
wireless calls are coming from.
And, again, we think this is providing a service that has become essential to the
public, certainly, over the last 20 years, and it's important to have this kind of coverage and
capacity in the area.
You know, the need for this is created by the residential, you know, that has been
developed in the area and the uses they have. And so we're trying to find -- and you can't
locate something five miles away to then serve that area. You have to -- you have to have
your tower and your antennas in the area that need to be served.
So we've tried to locate the most appropriate site to serve the surrounding
residential community, and we think we have found that on an existing electric substation
site. This will be an unmanned facility, so no impacts -- real impact to public services,
including roads.
Typically, we've had appraisers studies shown that -- or conducted that show
proximity to communication towers don't impact property values. Again, we think, based
on people's reliance on wireless communications now, having good quality and coverage is
actually an asset.
And so in conclusion, you know, this tower at the height and location is required by
Verizon, you know, to fill its significant coverage and capacity gap. We think it's
important for public safety and welfare. We think it's located on an appropriate property
to provide the services to the surrounding neighborhood and that we think the tower at this
location is what was intended by the recent code changes that were done to -- I think done
by the county and adopted in February to help make it -- I wouldn't say easier for towers,
but certainly to streamline the process in moving forward. And so we're taking advantage
of those code -- new code requirements here.
And again, we're -- staff has recommended approval subject to certain conditions
which we're in agreement with. And so we would just ask for a recommendation of
approval.
And I'm here to answer any questions. And then also I think there are some people
in the public, but we'd just like an opportunity to come back and address any comments.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yes. Oh, I don't see anybody in line. I'm going to ask
the first question.
MR. JOHNSTON: Sure.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: This is a monopole.
MR. JOHNSTON: Yes.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Typically the monopoles we've seen in the past have a
structured or designed breakpoint so that when it fell, of course, you reduce the fall
perimeter requirement. This is a single pole, monopole, and it will be designed for a
Category 5 hurricane?
MR. JOHNSTON: Correct.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: So there's no fracture point. This is designed to
withstand a Category 5?
MR. JOHNSTON: It's designed by FPL like their transmission towers, and they
Page 30 of 40
Page 34 of 245
December 19, 2024
do not allow breakpoints on towers, especially up against substations like that.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. I just want to make sure that's for the record.
Any colleagues have anything? Go ahead, please.
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: I'll wait till after.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Well, with that, then, staff?
MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows, planning manager for Zoning
Services. I'm filling in for Laura DeJohn.
The applicant did a great job of outlining this request. And in your staff report,
there's conditional -use findings. Staff has found this request consistent with the
conditional -use criteria.
We did have an issue with one of their deviations, but they withdrew that deviation
in regard to screening around the tower. The other deviation staff is supporting due to the
unusual site constraints they have to deal with being so close to the FPL substation.
And we have one condition of approval basically trying to prevent a
nonconforming situation if there's a future lot split. So we do not want a future lot split.
And I'll be happy to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Okay. Thank you. That opens -- do we have
any registered speakers?
MR. ALONSO: We have one in person and two virtual. So starting with Jill
Snyder.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Thank you. Either microphone is fine. Were you
sworn in?
MS. SNYDER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Thank you.
MS. SNYDER: Good morning. My name is Jill Snyder, and I live at 3430 Third
Avenue Northwest. I'm hopefully going to be in that green area because I'm currently in
that red area that was shown on the map.
First of all, I'd like to thank Florida Power & Light and Verizon for coming up with
what I think is a very creative solution to cell coverage in the Estates. I just -- I just want
to thank them. And I think this might be the first on an FPL site? But I think it's -- I
think it's a very creative solution for everybody involved.
I did file a complaint with the FCC in 2022 for lack of cell coverage in this area,
along with hundreds of -- maybe thousands of others. So as was stated earlier, it's
certainly a known problem within the state of Florida.
If I can make a cell call from my home -- which about 50 percent of the time it
might connect, and if it connects, it doesn't stay connected, so it's very frustrating. It's
very difficult to work from home, which many of us do in that area.
I realize you can do WiFi calling, which we try to use as well, but Internet isn't
good in that area either, so WiFi calling is problematic, and WiFi calling can impact your
911 calls if you're trying to call for assistance as well.
Most important to me, and it was stated a few minutes ago, is the impact for calling
911, and as he stated, 80 percent of the calls to 911 are cellular. I have personally had an
impact where it impacted our family because dialing 911 isn't always possible from where
we're at. So it is definitely a public safety and welfare issue.
And I just -- I can't believe it's 2024, almost 2025,1 live in Naples, Florida, and I
can't call 911. There's just -- there's just something wrong here. So I really appreciate
Page 31 of 40
Page 35 of 245
December 19, 2024
the efforts that are being taken to address this issue. I'm fortunate I'm in the area that can
be positively impacted by this. I support this request. And I hope that you will, too.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Thank you.
MS. SNYDER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Next public speaker, please.
MR. ALONSO: Yeah. We have another in -person speaker, followed by two
virtual speakers. Cary Mitchell.
MS. MITCHELL: Hi. I'm Cary Mitchell. I live on Third Avenue Southwest.
And I've been studying this 5G extensively and finding out about all the health
impacts it has on people, children. It has all types of cancer, depression, behavior issues,
sleeping problems, brain fog. It has pregnancy issues, DNA changing in your brain, and
it's, like -- I keep seeing more and more towers going up, and it's like there's -- at
Vineyards Elementary are two giant towers, and there's children in that school, and it's all
electromagnetic pollution that is getting to those children every day.
And it would be interesting to do a study of how many kids have cancer from that
or how many kids have autism or how many kids are being affected in their brains. And
it's just -- I think the public needs to be more aware of these issues.
And the towers are usually recommended to be 200 meters away from homes, and
they're asking 84 feet. It's like --I'm just hereto object to this. They haven't done any
study since 1996 as far as federal guidelines go, and that was probably when 2G started,
and now we have 5G, and now next is 6G. And it's -- I'm talking about all of our health.
And I go downtown Naples, they have a tower right on Fifth Avenue, giant tower.
I don't think people are aware of all the physical -- and diseases and types of health
implications these have. And I don't know how many megabytes you've got going there
on this tower.
But I mean, that's just what I would like to say. And I have all kinds of
information I want to leave with you because I would really like you to study, because I
know that there's more towers going up every single day, and I've -- and it's a major health
impact on our population and our children. And I just would like to leave that with you.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Thank you.
MS. MITCHELL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Mr. Johnston, I would hope that you would be prepared
at least to discuss that, because I will have a point on that as well, but...
Okay. Next public speaker, please.
MR. ALONSO: We're transitioning to our virtual speakers starting with Sue
Zimmerman, followed by Carlos de Miguel, III.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Ms. Zimmerman? Hello, are you there? She is
connected?
MS. PADRON: She was.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: She was. All right. Let's go to the next speaker,
please.
MR. ALONSO: Ah, she just appeared. Let's see if --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Is she on again? Ms. Zimmerman, are you there?
MR. ALONSO: Ms. Zimmerman, can you try to unmute yourself, perhaps? We
can't hear you.
MS. SNYDER: Maybe she's trying to call from Third Avenue.
Page 32 of 40
Page 36 of 245
December 19, 2024
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Well, we will have to go to the next speaker,
please.
MR. ALONSO: Our next speaker's going to be Carlos de Miguel, III.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: The name?
MR. ALONSO: Carlos de Miguel, III.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Carlos, are you online, please? We're not getting
anything.
MR. ALONSO: He appears on video and appears to be unmuted, but we can't
hear him as well.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Here comes tech.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Well, I'll see if Troy can maybe do some magic here.
MR. TROY MILLER: We should be hearing them.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. We can try again. Ms. Zimmerman, are you
on the line? We'll go back.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. We'll give them another minute here to see if
they can solve this problem.
Troy, what do we think; doable?
MR. TROY MILLER: We should be hearing them. We should be hearing them,
sir.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right.
MR. TROY MILLER: Oh, they're very low. I know what's going on. We've got
something loose on the computer, sir. I'm going to need a flashlight. You're going to
have to give me a minute.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. With that -- with that, let's take a
five-minute break until we get this fixed. Thank you.
(A brief recess was had from 10:52 a.m. to 10:54 a.m.)
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. We're back on. So can we try
Ms. Zimmerman.
MR. ALONSO: Ms. Zimmerman, can you hear us? It appears that she's speaking
but we still cannot get any audio.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Oh, boy. Well, I would -- how about our -- Carlos,
was it; is he available?
MR. de MIGUEL: Yes, I'm here. Can you hear me?
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Yes.
MR. de MIGUEL: Excellent, excellent.
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I live on Third Avenue Southwest, and I am
within the project location map on the notice. And this is -- I just want to echo what the
gentleman from Shutts & Bowen said about being a life -safety issue. These are all homes
that are on over two acres of property. A lot of them have a lot of dense trees and what
have you, and a lot of neighbors of mine, we work in our yards.
Aside from that, my neighbor directly to the east is a 6-acre vacant triple parcel,
and my neighbor to the rear is a vacant two -and -a -half -acre parcel, and it has become a
refuge for Florida panther and black bear, which I think is wonderful; however, wildlife
possess risks.
A lot of the neighbors in my area are -- they're fearful of taking out their trash
Page 33 of 40
Page 37 of 245
December 19, 2024
containers past sundown. When mama bears have their cubs, we all know they can be
very unpredictable.
I have absolutely no cell phone coverage whatsoever at my home; therefore, with a
cell phone in the pocket, if I'm working in the yard further away from my home, if I have
an accident with a power tool or a tree, you know, that may happen to come down, or if
I'm, God forbid, attacked by a panther or a bear, reaching in my pocket and calling 911 and
the inability to do so at this time could cost myself, an elderly person, or even a child their
life.
So I want to echo the life -safety issue here, and I don't think it was touched upon
with enough emphasis.
And then number two, upon a quick search, there does not seem to be any
quantifiable evidence from neither the American Cancer Society nor the World Health
Organization on the radiological effects of a cell phone radio tower.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Thank you for your comments.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Can I ask a question, sir? Is he still there?
MR. de MIGUEL: Yes. Yes, I'm still here.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Do you use Verizon for your cell phone?
MR. de MIGUEL: Yes, sir, I do.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Got it. Thank you.
MR. de MIGUEL: You're welcome.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Can we, one more time, with Ms. Zimmerman.
And that's a --
MR. ALONSO: Ms. Zimmerman, you're unmuted now. You can go ahead and
speak.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Well, we'll have to move on. Sorry, Ms. Zimmerman.
James, if you could discuss this. On this issue with the -- of course, with the
impact of 5G, it's been discussed several times in past petitions. We've had at least those
who attested with their credentials as experts, and as was stated, there's never -- there's
always a debate on the conclusive evidence.
In fact, I asked one question during one of our past meetings. I believe there's
more radiation when you hold the phone to your ear and you're using the phone than there
is standing 10 feet from a tower.
MR. JOHNSTON: Right.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: So anybody that uses a phone, sits there and has the
phone up to their ear, they're getting more radiation than they would ever get from a tower.
But if you could clarify what you know or what your studies have shown.
MR. JOHNSTON: Sure. And I would be remiss if I didn't say, per federal law,
the federal government has preempted this issue on health, and it's not allowed to be a part
of a decision in a local zoning hearing --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Correct.
MR. JOHNSTON: -- and that was in your staff report as well. So I want to
mention that first.
But then also, you know, say to address that, yes, you know, we don't think there is
risk with proposed communication towers because they meet the conservative FCC RF
requirements. And again, the FCC, which has the -- has the duty and the responsibility to
set the RF standards, has set them, and when setting them, they were very conservative.
Page 34 of 40
Page 38 of 245
December 19, 2024
And the RF emissions from towers are hundreds if not a thousand levels below that
conservative max allowed by the FCC.
So again, I think, as the Chairman mentioned, their RF comes from everywhere,
from your actual phone, Bluetooth devices, a baby monitor, all, you know, utilizes RF
frequencies. And so a tower set where antennas are set at 150 feet radiating out to the
horizon do not generate health impacts for people.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Thank you.
And, Ms. Mitchell, I encourage you, again, when this goes before the Board of
County Commissioners -- but it is clear it is not a criteria for denying a request. It is
not -- there's no criteria at all involved in discussing the health impacts of this. This is
strictly a zoning issue from the standpoint -- we look at it in accordance with the criteria
that's described in the Land Development Code.
So understand your concerns, but again, it's -- the health concerns is an issue -- if
the county commissioners -- and I hate to say I'm punting it to the county commissioners,
I'm not, but if they want to look at it from a different perspective -- but we, as planning
commissioners, we understand. We understand your concerns, but it is not a criteria.
And in fact, as stated, it cannot be a criteria for the direction and location of these various
towers.
it.
values.
Any other -- Ms. Zimmerman, is she back?
MR. ALONSO: She chatted her question, if it's okay for me to go ahead and ask
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Go ahead.
MR. ALONSO: She wanted to know if the issue would impact any property
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Mr. James, if you, Mr.-- James Johnston, if you could
address that.
MR. JOHNSTON: Sure. And again, we have had studies done on various tower
sites that show proximity to a communication tower does not impact property values one
way or the other. And in fact, you know, in talking to local, you know, county property
appraisers, they don't use that in factoring property values, proximity to a tower.
And again, we would say we've tried to locate this on what we think is the most
appropriate property in this area, which is an existing electric substation site.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Thank you.
Michelle.
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Yes. Just to clarify, Mr. Johnston, so you are
going to be putting a fence around that area that the staff has suggested?
MR. JOHNSTON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER McLEOD
MR. JOHNSTON: Yep.
COMMISSIONER McLEOD
represent Verizon?
MR. JOHNSTON: Correct.
Okay. So that's going to be there?
Okay. And then the other question is, you
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: And there -- we understand, two other carriers that
can go there. I understand it's AT&T and T-Mobile. That's what I heard?
MR. JOHNSTON: I mean, those are the two primary national providers other than
Verizon.
Page 35 of 40
Page 39 of 245
December 19, 2024
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: And do we know when they're going to
be -- because, for instance, I have AT&T, and if I lived in this area, this would not benefit
me. Do we know when those other two carriers --
MR. JOHNSTON: I can't speak to T-Mobile and AT&T. Again, RF systems are
design systems, so it depends on where your antennas are, number of customers, all those
antennas. So everyone's is a little different, so I can't tell you where AT&T exactly needs
one in the area, but if -- again, you know, the code, if there is a need by AT&T or
T-Mobile or another provider in the area, the code requires them to look first in their
search ring, is there an existing tower on which they could collocate, so this tower would
have the capability of collocating.
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Okay. All right. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Chuck. Go ahead.
MR. ALONSO: Ms. Zimmerman has a follow-up question here in regards to her
previous question. She wants to know if there's any way to receive the studies based on
the property value question.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Is there any what?
MR. ALONSO: She would like to know if she could receive the studies that were
used around the question around the property values.
MR. JOHNSTON: I mentioned I haven't -- there's not been a study done for this
specific site. I'm saying there are studies out there that we have looked at which do
not -- which show this. So, I mean, I'm sure they're, like everything, available on the
Internet as well for viewing.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: That answers her question. I don't have a study, and
for -- Ms. Zimmerman is listening. It's not -- again, it's not a criteria we look at as part of
the zoning. We don't take into consideration any what I would call impact on the value of
housing. We can look at it from a Comp Plan amendment -- or Comp Plan consistency,
but this is not a Comprehensive Plan. This is strictly just a zoning request.
With that, Chuck, go ahead, please.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: What other -- I don't know. I'm not trying
to get into Verizon's business, but what other carriers use Verizon's signal? I'm trying to
figure out how many carriers from day one will be receiving cell phone service. Not
AT&T, just -- is it purely just Verizon customers?
MR. JOHNSTON: I mean, these are Verizon antennas, so therefore, Verizon
customers.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Got it.
MR. JOHNSTON: I'll have the Verizon RF person come up. He can better
answer the question.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Perfect.
MR. JOHNSTON: But -- again, this is Bill Compton.
MR. COMPTON: Hi, William Compton.
THE COURT REPORTER: You didn't stand up to be sworn.
MR. COMPTON: I did earlier, but I'll do it again.
THE COURT REPORTER: Oh, you did? I didn't see you. It's okay.
MR. COMPTON: Okay. William Compton --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: State your name please, for the record. I know you did
before, but state your name and company you work for.
Page 36 of 40
Page 40 of 245
December 19, 2024
MR. COMPTON: Yes, sir. William Compton, Verizon Wireless, 7701 East
Telecom Parkway, Tampa.
The answer to your question is you see a lot of advertisements and commercials.
Cricket is a big one right now. What's the other one? Mint Wireless. They advertise,
"We don't own the towers. We just sell the service." Those type of services --I can't tell
you which ones. You can look it up on the Internet. I'm not supposed to disclose that to
the public, but it's public record. You can look it up and see whose networks
those -- basically, they're called MVNOs. I can't remember what the acronym stands for.
Basically they resell service on the other carriers.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Got it.
MR. COMPTON: So yes, there are other customers.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Other customers that --
MR. COMPTON: That pay a bill to Mint Mobile that then use Verizon service,
then Mint pays Verizon, yes.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: I'm just trying to broaden the scope of
who's going to receive service. Because this is a dead zone. That's in District 3, which is
my district, and I can tell you that I live out there, and I don't have any services, so -- and I
understand where other folks are coming from.
You know, if -- I don't want to sound abrupt, but if the concern is not having 911
coverage, there is CenturyLink. You can get a landline.
MR. COMPTON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: But everybody does cell now. That's just
been the way it's gone.
How far does this signal go out? Because from the map alone, it looks like you're
literally only servicing basically what would be called Weber Woods and Collier Woods,
which is from Vanderbilt south to a little bit past Golden Gate Boulevard. So it's not like
we're getting very deep into Golden Gate where there really is no signal. I know there's
another tower out there that's going to be -- I think that still has to go through the Board of
County Commissioners, or has it already been passed?
MR. COMPTON: There's one to the east. We called it Golden Gate Boat. It's
been through zoning for about two years now, and we're still trying to build it. But, yes.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Okay.
MR. COMPTON: But to answer your question, the way we determine what we
call reliable and unreliable coverage, we used to give what was called propagation maps,
which were just signal level based. The problem now is we have different frequency
bands. Each one of those frequency bands goes a different distance. Each one of those
frequency bands has a different amount of capacity associated with that frequency band
because of how much spectrum we have in that band.
So to broadly answer your question, the reliable service that we're providing, that's
going to be very good service. Does it mean as soon as you step out of the green you have
no service? Absolutely not. It's just that's where we're saying that's going to give us
really reliable service. You can use our home Internet service there. You can actually
use your phone as a hot spot to actually do, you know, stuff like that. That's what that
definition is. So yes, you -- the footprint will be bigger.
(Simultaneous crosstalk.)
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: And as you go further out, you lose bars,
Page 37 of 40
Page 41 of 245
December 19, 2024
let's say. You're going to lose signal bars.
MR. COMPTON: Correct.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: You're still going to have the benefit of
some type of service whereas if somebody has none right now.
MR. COMPTON: Absolutely. And also to be accurate as well, if you're out in
that area with an AT&T phone today and you don't have service with AT&T, your phone
will then -- as you try and make a 911 call, it will go to any available service. That's a
requirement of 911. And it will use Verizon's network.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: That's a great note. Thank you for that.
How long do these towers typically take to construct?
MR. COMPTON: Actual construction, a month, six weeks.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Month.
MR. COMPTON: The problem is once we get through this, as I stated with our
Golden Gate Boat site, it's been through -- October of this past year was our two-year
anniversary of getting through Board of County Commissioner zoning approved. So
we're still trying to go through all kinds of other stuff that has to go through the county.
So we're ready to build them yesterday.
And then also to preempt your question -- or to answer your question, a lot of my
job, as an RF design engineer, I also do traffic planning for the state, and as part of that, we
are notified of areas where, hey, AT&T built a tower over here, and now we're at a
competitive disadvantage. So it behooves us to go on that tower.
So a lot of times build it, and they will come; it happens. So I can't speak as to
how soon we'd be able to fit into AT&T and T-Mobile's budget. Usually it's a yearly type
cycle. But as soon as we get our side on there, they'll be on notice, and they'll be wanting
to come here. When, I don't know.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Sorry to keep asking you questions.
MR. COMPTON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: But I know I asked you at the last meeting,
why not go with, like, a micro tower? Why not -- like those smaller ones that you see like
on lights poles and things like that?
MR. COMPTON: I have a great answer to that. And the problem is -- a lot of
you probably remember the -- it wasn't this past hurricane season, maybe even the one
prior, but the entire Golden Gate area, the Estates planning area all went out without
Internet service because the CO for their actual wire line system went out, and that went
out because they had a roof blown off or they had a power outage there.
Our small cell sites, just by definition, because they're in the right-of-way, they're
along the road, we can't put a generator there, and we also can't put any substantial battery
backup power. So as soon as you get a power outage, all that service goes away.
So these macro sites, they have either a generator on site that we cycle to make
sure, just like the previous, they cycle it and make sure that it's going to work, or they have
provisions for a mobile that we can pull up. These small cells don't have any of those
provisions.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: All right. Thank you. Sorry I kept
rambling on there, but I appreciate it.
MR. COMPTON: I love educating. I love it. No problem.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Any other discussions? I see none. You
Page 38 of 40
Page 42 of 245
December 19, 2024
do -- do you have another question?
MR. ALONSO: Yes. One of our speakers has another question, and the question
is, why are landlines not a solution?
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Why are landlines not sufficient?
MR. de MIGUEL: Actually --
MR. ALONSO: Correct, and it came from Carlos, so he's able to, I guess --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: I can't answer that. I would say landlines are a
solution, and you can go VoIP as well, Voice over Internet Provider.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: All of the houses --
MR. de MIGUEL: Good morning. The gentleman misunderstood my comment.
It wasn't a question. The comment I wanted to raise was that landlines, I believe, are not a
solution, and I'll tell you why. All these properties are two -and -a -half -acre properties,
everyone, and if you're out walking the dog or you're out working 300 feet and you're in
the back of your property, which you have all the right to do so to clean it and what have
you, or you're walking the dog, there's no wireless/landline type that you're going to have
any signal to the house. And if you're walking the dog, get attacked by a bear, well, you
need to be able to call 911.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay.
MR. de MIGUEL: And you won't be able to do that with a landline, sir.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. I understand. Again, we closed the public
hearing, but I just took that one last -- or public comment, but I accepted and took that last
comment.
So any other questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Do we have a motion on the floor?
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: I'll make a motion to approve as presented.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: And second from anyone? Subject to the removal of
Condition No. 2.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Correct.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Second.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER PETSCHER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER McLEOD: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT:
And with that --
It passes; unanimous.
MR. JOHNSTON: Happy Holidays.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: -- do we have any other comments or concerns?
For my colleagues, we did -- the Board did approve a Bert Harris claim for the
rezoning of the Links development, and that just moves forward, as I understand, then,
based on that Bert Harris settlement claim. So there's no rezone application that comes in,
correct? So that's another development on U.S. 41, just -- 370 units, was it? I think
Page 39 of 40
Page 43 of 245
December 19, 2024
somewhere in that neighborhood.
MR. BELLOWS: I don't recall.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: All right. Well --
MS. ASHTON-CICKO: Something like that. I don't have the exact number,
but --
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: Okay. Thanks. And with that, we are adjourned.
MR. BELLOWS: And we wish Mike well, and hopefully he --
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: I hope so, too.
CHAIRMAN SCHMITT: We extend a Merry Christmas, Happy New Year,
Happy Hanukkah, and stay healthy. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Thank you.
There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of
the Chair at 11:13 a.m.
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
JOE SCHMITT, CHAIRMAN
These minutes approved by the Board on , as presented or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF FORT MYERS COURT REPORTING BY
TERRI L. LEWIS, RPR, FPR-C, COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC.
Page 40 of 40
Page 44 of 245
1/16/2025
Item # 9.A
ID# 2024-2273
*** The applicant has requested the CCPC to continue the item to the February 20, 2025, CCPC Meeting ***
PL20230017980- NC Square Mixed Use Overlay (GMPA)- 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 to amend the NC Square Mixed -Use Overlay to decrease the commercial uses from 44,400 square feet
to 36,500 square feet of gross floor area, remove the 12,000 square foot daycare use and increase the maximum
residential units from 129 to 249 with affordable housing in the NC Square Planned Mixed Use Development, and
furthermore directing transmittal of the adopted amendment to the Florida Department of Commerce. The subject
property is 24.4f acres and located at the southwest corner of Immokalee Road and Catawba Street, approximately 1.6
miles west of Wilson Boulevard in section 29, township 48 south, range 27 east, Collier County, Florida. (Companion
Item PL20230017979) [Parker Klopf, Planner III]
ATTACHMENTS:
None
Page 45 of 245
1/16/2025
Item # 9.13
ID# 2024-2208
*** The applicant has requested the CCPC to continue the item to the February 20, 2025, CCPC Meeting ***
PL20230017979 - NC Square (PUDR) - Immokalee Road and Catawba Street- An Ordinance of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance Number 2021-18 as amended, the NC Square Mixed
Planned Unit Development to decrease the commercial uses from 44,400 square feet to 36,500 square feet of gross floor
area, remove the 12,000 square foot daycare use and increase the maximum residential units from 129 to 249 with
affordable housing. The property is located at the southwest corner of Immokalee Road and Catawba Street,
approximately 1.6 miles west of Wilson Boulevard in Section 29, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County,
Florida, consisting of 24.4f acres, and by providing an effective date. (Companion Item PL20230017980)
[Coordinator: Timothy Finn, Planner III]
ATTACHMENTS:
None
Page 46 of 245
1/16/2025
Item # 9.0
ID# 2024-2282
PL20210002929 - Polly Avenue Rezone - 6145 Polly Avenue - 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 Estates (E) district to allow up to three single-family dwelling
units with a maximum density of up to one dwelling unit per 2.47f acres on 7.4f acres of property located approximately
1,600 feet east of Santa Barbara Boulevard between Polly Avenue and Everett Street, at 6145 Polly Avenue, in Section
16, township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, Planner III]
ATTACHMENTS:
PL20210002929 - Polly Avenue Rezone Staff Report 12-17-24
Attachment A -Proposed Ordinance - 12-16-24
Attachment B-NIM Documents I
Attachment C-NIM Documents II
Attachment D-Application
Affidavit of Public Hearing Sign Posting
Page 47 of 245
_S_'1
Collier County
STAFF REPORT
TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: ZONING DIVISION — ZONING SERVICES SECTION
GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT -
PLANNING & ZONING
HEARING DATE: JANUARY 2, 2024
SUBJECT: RZ-PL20210002929, POLLY AVENUE REZONE
PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT:
Applicant/Owner:
Peter (Petru) Catana
6475 Carema Lane
Naples, FL 34113
REQUESTED ACTION:
Agent:
Mr. Joshua Philpott, AICP
Stantec Consulting Services, Inc.
1821 Victoria Avenue
Fort Myers, FL 33901
The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider a rezoning
of the subject 7.42 f acre site from the Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district to the Estates (E)
zoning district.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject 7.42± acre parcel is located east of Santa Barbara Boulevard on the south side of Polly
Avenue and the north side of Everett Street, at 6145 Polly Avenue, in Section 16, Township 50
South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (See the location map on the following page.)
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
The subject property consists of a single 7.42± acre Rural Agricultural (A) zoned parcel with a 1350
square -foot single-family residence along with a 3200 square -foot garage. The petitioner is
requesting to rezone the 7.42± acre (A) parcel to three 2.25± acre minimum Estates (E) zoned
parcels to allow for the development of three single-family residential parcels.
RZ-PL20210002929, POLLY AVENUE REZONE
Page 1 of 11
October 12, 2022
Page 48 of 245
B
�]
u
i
LM
h
Ew
C-0 a
2
F ~
0 u
°
•0
F Z
W F
IL
&T jlwva.�
w
..
t
.I-
s
Cs
'M
0,
s
Mr SSI14'
HQ SPOOM
Ia ps us
uVI 04unil
u
$
IH
d `
RZ-PL20210002929, POLLY AVENUE REZONE
C-
CU
O
N
CL
0
—f
Ca
0
December 17, 2024
CV
0)
CAI
[V
CAI
J
QL
L
E
z
OL
Page 2 of 11
RZ-PL20210002929, POLLY AVENUE REZONE
Master Plan
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
a
December 17, 2024
It
N
O
O
Ln
N
(6
d
Page 3 of 11
The current (A) zoning designation permits a maximum density of 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres. The
requested (E) zoning designation permits a density of 1 dwelling unit per 2.25± acres, hence the
subject rezoning request.
The proposed request to rezone will bisect the existing single-family residence. The proposed
request to rezone will also create a parcel containing a garage without a principal structure, such as
a single-family residence. For reference, see the Master Plan on the preceding page.
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North: Polly Avenue (ROW), Single -Family Residential, with a zoning designation
of Rural Agricultural (A)
South: Everett Street (ROW), Single -Family Residential, with a zoning designation
of Rural Agricultural (A)
East: Single -Family Residential, with a zoning designation of Rural Agricultural (A)
West: Single -Family Residential, and a vacant parcel, with a zoning designation of
Rural Agricultural (A)
Aerial Map - Collier County Property Appraiser
RZ-PL20210002929, POLLY AVENUE REZONE
OEM,
December 17, 2024
Page 4 of 11
Page 51 of 245
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY:
Comprehensive Planning staff has reviewed the proposed PUD Amendment and found it consistent
with the GMP's Future Land Use Element (FLUE).
The project 7.42± acres site is designated in the FLUE as Urban, Urban Mixed -Use District, Urban
Residential Subdistrict. The applicant is proposing to rezone from Agricultural to Rural Estates
Zoning District with three dwelling units on 7.42± acres, which equals one dwelling unit on 2.47±
Acres. This is consistent with the Urban Residential Subdistrict, which could allow four dwelling
units per acre. (Four times 7.42± acres equals 29.68 dwelling units). The land use will remain
Urban Residential Subdistrict. The surrounding area is zoned Agricultural with legal non-
conforming lot sizes.
Because the applicant's intention for the project is to rezone to Estates, the applicant is trying to
ensure that the "agricultural" feel will be continued with approximately one dwelling unit per 2.25
acres. This project density is lower than many parcels zoned Agricultural (non -conforming).
The development standards of the Estates Zoning District should continue the Agricultural feel.
Transportation Element: The Transportation Department staff has determined the proposed
rezone is consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan,
which 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 ofpermissible 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. "
According to the information provided by the applicant, the proposed rezone request will generate a
de minimus number of trips on the adjacent roadway network. The application includes a TIS
RZ-PL20210002929, POLLY AVENUE REZONE
December 17, 2024
Page 5 of 11
Page 52 of 245
waiver noting that the proposed rezone will allow three single-family residential dwelling units
consistent with the Estates zoning district, resulting in a de minimus transportation impact.
Transportation Planning staff agrees with this request and that the rezone represents a de minimus
impact on the roadway network. Therefore, the subject Rezone is found to be consistent with
Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan.
Conservation and Coastal Management Element (COME): Environmental staff evaluated the
petition. The property is 7.42f acres, and the project is consistent with the CCME's goals,
objectives, and policies.
Based on the above analysis, Comprehensive Planning staff finds the proposed rezone consistent
with the Growth Management Plan (GMP) 's Future Land Use Element (FLUE).
ANALYSIS:
Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition, including the criteria upon
which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in LDC Subsection 10.02.08. F., Nature
of Requirements of Planning Commission Report (referred to as "Rezone Findings") establishes the
legal bases to support the CCPC's recommendation. The CCPC uses these same criteria as the basis
for their recommendation to the BCC (Board of Collier County Commissioners), who in turn use
the criteria to support their action on the rezoning request. An evaluation relative to these
subsections is discussed below under the heading "Rezone Findings." In addition, staff offers the
following analyses:
Transportation Review: Transportation Department Staff has reviewed the petition request and
recommends approval.
Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed this petition. The property is
vegetated and will be required to preserve 15% of the existing native vegetation as part of the
SDP/PPL review process. Additionally, no listed animal species were observed on the property.
However, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) wildlife data indicates
the presence of Black Bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) in the area. A black bear management
plan will need to be included in the PPL or SDP 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. Environmental Services staff recommends approval
of the proposed petition.
Utility Review: Utility staff has reviewed and approved the petition. The project lies within the
regional potable water service area and the south wastewater service area of the Collier County
Water -Sewer District (CCWSD). However, since no active water and wastewater infrastructure is
readily available, it will be served by private wells and septic systems.
Should the connection to the CCWSD's water and/or wastewater system(s) be considered in the
future, water and wastewater mains are more than 200 feet from the property boundary. Sufficient
water and wastewater treatment capacities are available.
RZ-PL20210002929, POLLY AVENUE REZONE
December 17, 2024
Page 6 of 11
Page 53 of 245
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.
Zoning Review: As previously stated, the subject property consists of a single 7.42f acre Rural
Agricultural (A) zoned parcel with a single-family residence and accessory buildings. The
petitioner is requesting to rezone the 7.42f acre (A) parcel to three 2.25± acre minimum Estates (E)
zoned parcels to allow for the development of three single-family residential parcels. The proposed
density is lower than many of the nonconforming lots in the (A) zoning district.
The Conceptual Site Plan depicts the three proposed residential lots along with 10-foot-wide
landscape buffers along the perimeter of the subject 7.42± acre parcel.
The existing land use pattern in the vicinity of the subject property is single-family. The proposed
rezoning to permit single-family homes is compatible and complementary to the other single-family
homes in the area and is consistent with the land use pattern.
However, the proposed rezoning and subsequent subdivision will bisect the existing single-family
residence, resulting in the parcel containing the garage becoming non -compliant. The Collier
County Land Development Code (LDC) does not permit an accessory structure, such as a garage,
without a principal structure, such as a single-family residence.
Therefore, staff recommends the following Conditions of Approval, which have been agreed upon
by the petitioner:
The existing single-family residence shall be removed at the time of/prior to subdivision plat
approval.
2. The southern parcel containing the garage shall submit a building permit for a single-family
residence at the time of/prior to subdivision plat approval.
To date, no letters of objection or support have been received.
REZONE FINDINGS:
LDC Subsection 10.02.08. F. states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and
recommendations of the Planning Commission to the Board of County Commissioners... shall show
that the Planning Commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the
following findings when applicable" (The criteria is italicized, Staffs responses to these criteria
are provided in regular font):
Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, policies, and
future land use map and the elements of the GMP
RZ-PL20210002929, POLLY AVENUE REZONE
December 17, 2024
Page 7 of 11
Page 54 of 245
The Comprehensive Planning Department has indicated that the proposed rezone is consistent
with all applicable elements of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth
Management Plan (GMP).
2. The existing land use pattern.
As described in this report's "Surrounding Land Use and Zoning" portion, the neighborhood's
existing land use pattern is characterized by primarily developed residential single-family to the
north, east, south, and west. The proposed rezones from (A) to (E) will not create any
incompatibility issues.
3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts.
As previously stated, the subject site is already developed with a single-family dwelling. It is
not an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. It is also comparable with
expected land uses by virtue of its consistency with the FLUE of the GMP.
4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions
on the property proposed for change.
The existing district boundaries are logically drawn, as shown on the zoning map on page two of
this staff report.
S. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment
necessary.
The proposed change is not necessary, but it is being requested in compliance with the LDC
provisions to divide a 7.42± acre lot into three 2.25± minimum acre lots.
6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood.
The proposed change from (A) to (E) will not substantially change the allowable uses on the
subject site. Therefore, staff believes the proposed change will not adversely influence living
conditions in the neighborhood.
7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create
types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses because of peak volumes or
projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the
development, or otherwise affect public safety.
The roadway infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the project at this time. This project
was evaluated for GMP consistency, as shown in that section of this report. In addition, when
development approvals are sought, the project's development must comply with all other
applicable concurrency management regulations.
8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem.
RZ-PL20210002929, POLLY AVENUE REZONE
December 17, 2024
Page 8 of 11
Page 55 of 245
The proposed development will not create a drainage problem. Furthermore, the project is
subject to the requirements of Collier County and the South Florida Water Management District.
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas.
This development should not significantly reduce light and air to adjacent areas; thus, if
approved, it should not negatively affect light and air permeation into adjacent areas.
10. Whether the proposed change would adversely affect property values in the adjacent area.
The subject site is already single-family residential, so this rezone will not adversely impact
property values in the adjacent area.
IL Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of
adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations.
As previously noted, the surrounding properties are primarily residential developments. The
basic premise underlying all of 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 rezone should not be a deterrent
to the improvement of adjacent properties.
12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual
owner as contrasted with the public welfare.
The proposed development complies with the GMP, a public policy statement supporting
Zoning actions when they are consistent with said Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the
proposed change does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is
further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are
in the public interest.
13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with
existing zoning.
The subject property could be developed in accordance with existing zoning. However,
according to the petitioner, a rezone is sought to divide a 7.42± acre lot into three 2.25±
minimum acre lots.
14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the
county.
As previously stated, the subject site is already developed residential. In addition, the proposed
development complies with the GMP requirements for the uses proposed. The GMP is a policy
statement evaluating the scale, density, and intensity of land uses deemed acceptable throughout
Collier County. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed (E) zoning district will ensure that the
project is not out of scale with the needs of the community.
RZ-PL20210002929, POLLY AVENUE REZONE
December 17, 2024
Page 9 of 11
Page 56 of 245
1 S. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in
districts already permitting such use.
There may be other sites in the County that could accommodate the uses proposed; however,
this is not the determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness of a zoning decision. The
petition was reviewed on its own merit for compliance with the GMP and the LDC; staff does
not review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition.
16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration that would be
required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed
zoning classification.
Any development anticipated by the proposed zoning district would require some site alteration,
and this project will undergo evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development
regulations during the site development plan approval process and again later as part of the
building permit process.
17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services is
consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County GMP and as defined and
implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance.
The project will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in the LDC regarding Adequate
Public Facilities and 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. Those staff persons have
concluded that no Level of Service will be adversely impacted.
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 BCC during its advertised public hearing.
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM):
The applicant duly noticed and held the required meeting on June 23, 2022, at 5:30 p.m. at the South
Regional Library, located at 8065 Lely Cultural Parkway, Naples, Florida. Six people, along with
the applicant and County Staff, attended the meeting. For further information, see Attachment B—
NIMDocuments I.
Due to the passing of more than one year, another NIM was held on May 14, 2024, at 5:30 p.m. at
the South Regional Library, located at 8065 Lely Cultural Parkway, Naples, Florida. Fourteen
people, along with the applicant and County Staff, attended the meeting. For further information,
see Attachment C NIM Documents II.
COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW:
The County Attorney's Office reviewed this staff report for content and legal sufficiency on
December 16, 2024.
RZ-PL20210002929, POLLY AVENUE REZONE
December 17, 2024
Page 10 of 11
Page 57 of 245
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Planning and Zoning Review staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition RZ-
PL20210002929 — Polly Avenue Rezone to the BCC with a recommendation of approval including
the following Conditions of Approval (already incorporated into the draft ordinance):
1. The existing Single -Family Residence shall be removed at the time of/prior to subdivision
plat approval.
2. The southern parcel containing the garage shall submit a building permit for a Single -Family
Residence at the time of/prior to subdivision plat approval.
Attachments:
Attachment A -Proposed Ordinance
Attachment B-NIM Documents I
Attachment C-NIMDocuments II
Attachment D-Application.
RZ-PL20210002929, POLLY AVENUE REZONE
December 17, 2024
Page 11 of 11
Page 58 of 245
ORDINANCE NO.2025 -
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 200441, 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 ESTATES DISTRICT (E) TO
ALLOW UP TO THREE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING
UNITS WITH A MAXIMUM DENSITY OF UP TO ONE
DWELLING UNIT PER f2.47 ACRES ON 7.4f ACRES OF
PROPERTY LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 1600 FEET
EAST OF SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD BETWEEN
POLLY AVENUE AND EVERETT STREET, AT 6145
POLLY AVENUE, IN SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 50
SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA. [PL202100029291
WHEREAS, Joshua Philpott, AICP, of Stantec Consulting Services Inc., on behalf of
property owner Petru Catana, petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the
zoning classification of the herein described real property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION ONE:
The zoning classification of the herein described real property more particularly
described as:
PARCEL I: THE WEST 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE
NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP
50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LESS A
STRIP OF LAND 15 FEET WIDE EACH ALONG THE EAST AND NORTH
LINES FOR HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY; AND PARCEL II: THE SOUTH 1/2
OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST
1/4, LESS THE WEST 110 FEET, LESS THE EAST 132 FEET, AND LESS
THE SOUTHERLY 30 FEET FOR ROADWAY PURPOSES (AS CONTAINED
IN OR BOOK 371, PAGE 740, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY,
[22-CPS-02209/ 194793 5/ 11
Polly Avenue Rezone (RZ) Pagel of 2
RZ-PL20210002929 12/16/2024
Page 59 of 245
FLORIDA) OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
PARCEL ID: 00418880003
located in Section 16, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed
from a Rural Agricultural (A) Zoning District to an Estates (E) Zoning District to allow up to
three single family dwelling units with a maximum density of one dwelling unit per ±2.47 acres
for a f7.4-acre project, limited to single-family dwelling use, subject to the Conceptual Site Plan
as shown in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and the
Conditions of Approval, as shown in Exhibit "C", attached hereto and incorporated herein by
reference. 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.
SECTION TWO:
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super -majority vote of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this day of
ATTEST:
CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK
, Deputy Clerk
Approved as to form and legality:
Derek D. Perry
Assistant County Attorney
Attachments:
Exhibit "A" - Conceptual Site Plan
Exhibit `B" - Location Site Map
Exhibit "C" - Conditions of Approval
[2 2-CPS-02209/190793 511 ]
Polly Avenue Rezone (RZ)
RZ-PL20210002929 12/ 16/2024
2025.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
M.
Page 2 of 2
Burt L. Saunders, Chairman
Page 60 of 245
2
/
W 0
m Q
® E
2 -0 CD
CU
I
=
@
C $
m
2 0
e
cm
C
/
-
@ �
z
\
j
0 CD \
/
y
o
2 �
'xCIL
Q
CZ)
c
2
c- C
w
=
o
0
o %
E
o
\
§ k CL
_
Q U
-i
-
!9
m
2
X
W
6
'lj
•
9
VJ
®
@
x
LU
E
J
°
F
Z
Lu
ou
W
=
s;eoeas
WN
ssoly
U
o
� AAJ
Ha�o�;k
UAZ9 lasuns
AID
uol uijunH
u
I2
Z
ti�
O
$
w
asnt
C
8 po M IRAa-8
m
N
m
CN
0
0
N
O
N
J
L
E
c
0
0-
CA(N
4_
0
N
m
a-
EXHIBIT "C"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The existing single-family residence shall be removed at the time of/prior to
subdivision plat recordation.
2. The southern parcel containing the garage shall submit a building permit for a
single-family residence at the time of/prior to subdivision plat recordation.
Page 1 of 1
Page 63 of 245
® Stantec
To: Nancy Gundlach, AICP From
Collier County Growth Management
File: Polly Avenue Rezone (PL20210002929) Date:
Neighborhood Information Meeting
Synopsis
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Lindsay Robin, AICP
Stantec
June 24, 2022
Memo
Stantec Consulting Services Inc., and Collier County Staff conducted a Neighborhood Information
Meeting (NIM) on Thursday, June 23, 2022.
The meeting was held at 5:30 p.m. at the South Regional Library at 8065 Lely Cultural Pkwy.,
Naples, Florida 34113. The meeting was hybrid and therefore an online option was also provided
for participants to attend virtually by computer or phone. Approximately 0 participants attended
using the link and number provided.
The sign -in sheet is attached as Exhibit "A". Six (6) residents were in attendance as well as the
consultant team, the applicant and Staff. Handouts were distributed providing information on the
proposed amendment and are attached as Exhibit "B".
Lindsay Robin (Agent) conducted the meeting with introductions of the consultant team and Staff,
and an overview of the proposed rezone application, including the location of the subject property.
She also outlined the rezone processes and opportunities to provide input at public hearings.
Following the presentation, the meeting was opened up to the attendees to make comments and
ask the consultant team questions regarding the proposed development. The following is a
summarized list of the questions asked and responses given. The Applicant's representatives'
responses are shown in bold.
Question/Comment 1: Will the zoning remain agricultural?
➢ Response: No, the request is to rezone the property from Rural Agricultural (A) to Estates
(E) for the purpose of allowing a minimum lot size of 2.25 acres.
Question/Comment 2: Will this designation run with the property?
➢ Response: Yes, it will.
Design with community in min-'
11us0255-ppfss011shared_projects\215616929\planni ng\analysis\Rezon e1N I M\N I M_Synopsis.docx
Page 64 of 245
June 24, 2022
Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Page 2 of 3
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Question/Comment 3: Are there any plans for a common driveway from Polly Avenue to Everett?
➢ Response: No.
Question/Comment 4: What is the elevation of the property?
Y Response: The elevation will be the FEMA flood zone plus one foot.
Question/Comment 5: Who will this Estates zoning district apply to?
Response: This will only apply to the Applicant's 7.45+/- acre property. The reason we
chose to go for the Estates district is because it is the next available zoning district that
has the minimum lot size that makes sense while remaining an "agricultural" zoning
district per the LDC. We are not asking to go to an RSF-4 or RMF-20 or any other sort of
zoning district that may cause incompatibility with the existing surrounding Rural
Agricultural zoning district. Additionally, to further enhance the compatibility and provide
a level of assurance to the community, the Applicant is willing to eliminate a good
number of the permitted, accessory and conditional uses in the proposed Estates district.
Question/Comment 6: The zoning will be estates, isn't this like spot zoning?
Response: If you will notice on the handout [Permitted Uses Table], the left-hand column
shows all the uses that the applicant can do today by right in the Rural Agricultural
district. Without rezoning he can go and build any of those uses. The applicant wants to
do subdivide the property and build three (3) single family homes, but because the
minimum lot size in the Rural Agricultural zoning district is 5 acres you can't and because
it is a conventional zoning district, he can't do a variance or anything like that. This
request provides protection for the community because it will greatly limit some of the
more incompatible, existing permitted uses.
There were no further questions or comments. Ms. Robin thanked the attendees for coming and
noted that their contact information is available for those who wished to reach out with any
further questions. The meeting concluded at approximately 6:00 p.m. The meeting was recorded
per the audio attached as Exhibit "C".
Design with community in mind
Page 65 of 245
June 24, 2022
Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Page 3 of 3
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
Lindsay F. Robin MPA, AICP
Associate, Community Development
Phone: 239 985 5502
Lindsay. Robin@stantec.com
Attachments: Exhibit A, Exhibit B, Exhibit C
Design with community in mind
Page 66 of 245
CK
0
0
E
Y
N
Q
J
N
00LU
Q
w
U
z
0
N
r-
r.,
W
o
N
c�
CL
ry
LLJ
D
`
N
W
�
Q
z
Lu
4}
c
Lu
Q
�
W
w
2
z
_0
0
LL
z
0
0
ry
0
co
T
3
J
•ar N�
�
u
E
U m
�ECL=
Q
° C 0
-
> v
O u
c CD
LU
�
-
N w
s
On� o
a0
b c c
0 ° -
Q.
V 0 O
u a m
m = =
M
d
-0
O' Gf >
c °
d ° 0 u
,=
L A'
W
�yD
`a • � a u, V
vcL E�'a
=
0 CR 0 0 3
� u
�
E c .c Q
-a
w
.�
s03E
V C Q-
a1
4A
0
c�i u °
° -0 a
ha_E�
.a
nD vt Q
� � E
E i7 O
'L
> >� 0
c
--
o c=
c t a u°
E
o Q 3 > >
E ° °c >, >
w o C
•D 41 °
a,a0
a m N
V 1181HX3
EXHIBIT B
Handout
Property Size: 7.45+/- acres
Proposed Estates Density: 1 unit per 2.25 acres
® Stantec
Polly Avenue Rezone
Permitted Uses Table
Rural Agricultural District (A) Estates District (E)
Existina Zonina/Current Allowable Uses Proaosed Zonina/Uses
Permitted Uses
• Single-family dwelling
• Agricultural Activities (i.e. crop raising,
horticulture, etc.)
• Wholesale reptile breeding and raising
• Wildlife management, plant and wildlife
conservancies, wildlife refuges and sanctuaries
• Conservation uses
• Oil and gas exploration
• Family care facilities
• Communications towers
• Essential Services
• Schools, public, including "Educational Plants"
• Single-family dwelling
• Family G a faGiR es
• Essential Se. ip-es
• Ed Gatie al p!aRto
Accessory Uses
• Uses and structures that are accessory and
incidental to the uses permitted as of right in
the A district
• Farm labor housing
• Retail sale of fresh, unprocessed agricultural
products
• Packinghouse or similar agricultural processing
of farm products
• Excavation and related processing and
production
• Guesthouses
• Private boathouses and docks
• Use of a mobile home as a temporary
residence while a permanent single-family
dwelling is being constructed
• Use of a mobile home as a residence in
conjunction with bona fide agricultural activities
• Recreational facilities that serve as an integral
part of a residential development
Design with community in mind
• Uses and structures that are accessory and
incidental to the uses permitted as of right in
the E district
• Fruits, vegetables, and nursery plants grown
for both personal consumption and off -site
retail sale
• Keeping of fowl or poultry
• Keeping of horses and livestock
• One guesthouse
• ReGreatiGRal facilities that serve
0Rtegral part of a r sirleRtial deyeler,ment
• EXGa„atien and relator! PFGGessing Rd
pred6lGtOGR
Page 68 of 245
® Stantec
Rural Agricultural District (A) Estate District (E)
Conditional Uses
• Extraction or earthmining, and related
processing and production not incidental to the
agricultural development of the property
• Sawmills
• Zoo, aquarium, aviary, botanical garden, or
other similar uses
• Hunting cabins
• Aquaculture for nonnative or exotic species
• Wholesale reptile breeding or raising
(venomous)
• Churches
• Private landing stripes for general aviation
• Cemeteries
• Schools, private
• Child care centers and adult day care centers
• Collection and transfer sites for resource
recovery
• Communication towers above specified height
• Social and fraternal organizations
• Veterinary clinic
• Group care facilities, care units, nursing
homes, assisted living facilities, continuing
care retirement communities
• Golf courses and/or golf driving ranges
• Oil and gas field development and production
• Sports instructional schools and camps
• Sporting and recreational camps
• Retail plant nurseries
• Asphaltic and concrete batch making plants
• Cultural, ecological, or recreational facilities
that provide opportunities for educational
experience, eco-tourism or agri-tourism and
their related modes of transporting participants,
viewers or patrons where applicable..., tour
operation, such as, but not limited to airboats,
swamp buggies, horses and similar modes of
transportation
Design with community in mind
• ryes
• SGGial and fraternal a zatiGns
• Child GaFe eRtero Rd adult day Gare
caters
• SGheels private
• Gr.,U P e faGili+ieS Rits
homes assisted liViRg faGili+ieS ORtiR YiR
,.are retirement r,i+ion
• Extron+i.,n a ar+hminiRg and related
the deVel.,nmon+ of then pei4y
Co n+'ol o
Model h. M.P-s -;;Ad- m. d-691 GeRtero
A..AG411ar„ nlan+o
M.fi+he h aR on+ with
• (h��'ihhmm,-nines+inn towers up to a specified
'� t
Page 69 of 245
® Stantec
• Agricultural activities on parcels less than 20
acres in size
• The commercial production, raising or breeding
of exotic animals, other than animals typically
used for agricultural purposes or production
• Essential services
• Model homes and model ales centers
• Ancillary plants
Source: Collier County LDC §2.03.01
Design with community in mind
Page 70 of 245
® Stantec
Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. 3510 Kraft Road Suite 200, Naples, FL 34105
June 6, 2022
Re: NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING
Polly Avenue Rezone (PL20210002929)
Dear Property Owner:
In compliance with Collier County Land Development Code please be advised that Petru Catana
has filed an application with Collier County. The application is seeking approval of a standard
rezone from Rural Agricultural (A) to Estates (E) for the 7.45+\- acre subject property located east
of Santa Barbara Blvd, south of Polly Avenue, and north of Everett Street. The rezone is seeking
to allow for the development of three (3) single-family detached residential dwelling units on lots
with a minimum size of 2.45 acres.
In compliance with the Land Development Code requirements, a Neighborhood Information
Meeting will be held to provide you an opportunity to hear a presentation about this application
and ask questions. The Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held on Thursday, June
23, 2022 at 5:30 p.m. at the South Regional Library, Room A, 8065 Lely Cultural Pkwy,
Naples, Florida, 34113.
A virtual meeting option is also available: TEAMS Meeting: https:/Ibit.ly/pollyavenue or call
TOLL FREE: United States, (833) 436-6264 Conference ID: 452 683 282#
Should you have questions prior to the meeting, please contact me directly at (239) 985-5502, or
Lindsay. robin@stantec.com.
Sincerely,
ST TEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC.
endsay F. Robin, MPA, AICP
Associate, Planning
\\us0255-ppfss01 \shared_projects\215616929\planning\analysis\rezone\nim\pollyave_mailnotice_20220531.docx
Page 71 of 245
NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD
INFORMATION MEETING
In compliance with Collier County Land Development Code the public is invited to attend a
neighborhood information meeting held by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. on behalf of Petru
Catana (Applicant), at the following time and location:
DATE: Thursday, June 23, 2022
TIME: 5:30 p.m.
ADDRESS: South Regional Library, Room A, 8065 Lely Cultural Pkwy., Naples, Florida, 34113
VIRTUAL MEETING OPTION: TEAMS Meeting: https:Hbit.ly/pollyavenue or call TOLL FREE:
United States, (833) 436-6264 Conference ID: 452 683 282#
The Applicant has filed an application with Collier County (case number PL20210002929). The
application is seeking approval of a standard rezone from Rural Agricultural (A) to Estates (E) for
the 7.45+\- acre subject property located east of Santa Barbara Blvd, south of Polly Avenue, and
north of Everett Street. The rezone is seeking to allow for the development of three (3) single-
family detached residential dwelling units on lots with a minimum size of 2.45 acres.
CAA ".1 WAv
LOCATION MAP
Business and property owners and residents are welcome to attend the presentation and discuss
the project with the owners' representatives and Collier County staff. If you are unable to attend
this meeting, but have questions or comments, they can be directed to:
Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. c/o Lindsay Robin
3510 Kraft Road Suite 200, Naples, FL 34105
(239) 985-5502 OR Lindsay. robin(a-),stantec.com
*The Collier County Library does not endorse or sponsor this project in any way.
Page 72 of 245
June 6, 2022
TO: Sonia Morgan (Josh Philpott, Project Manager)
PROJECT: File 215616929 Charge to 215617371
TASK: 950
Mailing — Neighborhood Workshop for Lindsay Robin
r
Used: $6410 590
C Q Available: $254 4101
U. Total Pieces: 1 01 20 1
I
Control Sum: $6665 . b 0 0
f
Used: $6430,440
0 Available: $234.5601
C 0.LI
oaeces: 1 01 5 6 1
i W Ttl Pi
I
Control Sum: $6665 . li00
JUN 06 2022
9:48A
Batch Count: 1 01 20
Batch Value: $641 0 590
PBP Serial Number: 0 9 2 8 511
JUN 06 20221
9:51A
Batch Count: 1 01 5 6
Batch Value: $6430 440
PBP Serial Number: 0 9 2 8 511
Thank you,
Laura Mooneyham
941-907-6900, Ext 293
IlusflYY7 pplss�llprnan atllmopnryhamlmisc-1ltemplatcs�poa agc 6atch-maHinglpost ago- balchnotiee_polly ave-rctonr_If r_7022f1b[16.dac�
Page 73 of 245
Naples Daily News - 06/07/2022
NAPLESNEWS.COM I TUESDAY, JUNE 7, 2022 1 SC
Page : C05
Classifieds
Business
oppodunites, lease, Invest...
FOR SALE - SIGN SHOP!
0... 30 years in Naples.
Gr emtion aaaonnss.
[Aw someloration. JJ
lllkill Terry: 239-])]b9�
Adopt Me
all YoN�i
E�Eye�L�l%1f1.1
Cavalier King Charles
l female $25UO3]waeeks
old, Black and Tan. Playful,
afton."te, s gg bile,
great with adultsl chelt eo
and other pets. Includes a
n-y—inealth guaran-
non mmuni-i"
red, bill of sale and AKC
egcoriPuation aepfroa�ion,
ppies a
Champpion Bloodline
(423)646-8328
CHOCOLATE LABOR DOODLE
PUPPIESI $1Bad 10 WEEKS -
$111, A HEALTH CERTIFICATE
- TEXT/CALL FOR MORE
INFONICS (443)E30-1128
English Golden Retriever
Pups- AKC, ales 8 females,
champion bloodlines. $2,5W
For re info call Rob 941-
S856b431 �
Goldendoodle Mml/Petite
house trained,
C9lO-]o44
myperfeRco panionscom
FsV d+F4 sv t
HAVANESE PUPPIES- Home
Raised AKC, Best Health!
SiViiitn9whsl 2leatk.co8m5 .
Assorted
allall kind��
A NEW ENGLAND CoIIMor
e�y all types of
fine antiy . Before you
2ndell. please call for
opinion, you may be
pleasantly surprised.
802-23fi-S6fi9
ANTIQUES & ART WANTED
Courteous Palm Beach
Buyer seeks: Quality
paintings, sculpture, glass,
porcelain, silver, watches,
jewelry, Tiffany, Cartier,
modern art, Picasso, Warhol,
old masters, Chinese
ant Qu$56i) BU1.0222e'
Enyclopetlis Britannia 1981
print, 30 volumes, Rarely used,
new,$99 (,3,)325-8609
Private COIIMOr buying base-
ball cards, sports memorabilia,
gold & silver coins. Cash Paid,
Top $. Larry: 954288-2935
2Nangle n Chas (0 ly Corns
Cremat rn ) Hope Chapel
Tranqu hry N F10811 Call
Shelley 239 339 3909
iT
DIAMONDS 5 CT Cushion
4 CT Canary, E rrinn 2 Cr
Per
ear. 10 CT Tennis brace-
IM. Rolex. 239-250-3832
]tin Rod Dining Table, Glass
top. Magnificent brushed
gold solid metal base. Seats 8.
Mintcontlition., f2]5.
(9)3)499-6612
8 Uphrrooylstered Dining Chghairs,
Excelle tCond ti n�f 165.
(973)494-6612
Antique Cherryy Desk, Green
leatherto .3 dr r 58wx
28d x 30t, $1]5. (9]3)494-6612
Berkshire lakes turn -key 2bd
c ndo fumitur ; i ludin9
1 specialty made 8 piee
bedrooms t4tarl. c
$6000/obo. 239-333-5535
URT DEA
Generator,MCCullough
Portable -Excellent
Condition, $399.00.
(239)290-3598
CIALIS 60 MG. (GENERIC)
$3.50a pill. DI01's Health
.-in (239)450-6495
Rubicon Platinum WOO, let.
h"Khair, Imo " perteR
Nape, S]50. Exercise bike,
6mo, f50. Call 34]-35-85]
Portable Mas er Mazsage�
Tame, Fate cattle, carry case.
Like New. f99. (9]3)494-fi612
GOLF CLUB$- Memorial Day
Special I TM M4 Driver A
3 wood. Callaway, Hybrids 3 8
4. 4-9 M2lrons Graphite
Rf/Rh+3 wedges, no puffer.
13 clubs Ex Cord. Taylormade
Bag. Was f 1, 100. Now SESD
Eft Thule, good _d! SS.
508-680-2615
WANTED, I am looking for a
Villa Pelican Bay, prefer
36d, 2bth, garage, well settle
for 26tl. For personal se
h deal., (Negotiable.
Real Estate
starting fresh,..
ny at A
ems ode , caasx.
Finding a job
shouldn't
feel like one.
ZipT ftcruiter
jobs,usatoday.com
CAR WASH IN BONITA FOR SALE
s 1
1
1 1
I 1 I
1 1
Ifi SELF SERVICE BAYS I
1 1 AUTOMATIC DRIVE THRU BAY 1
L CALL CRMG 239350-]999J
G OPPORTUNITY
All rea�esta�te9adve t ng in
this newspaper is subj_ ra
the Federal Fair Housing AR
of 1968 which makes it
-xi to advertise any
preference, limitation or
discrimination based on
al., religion, sex,
national origin, handicap or
familial status or an
intention to make any such
preferencoinationnon.ion or
r scr
Tknow" $aaccewtl anot
advertising fo real estate
which is in violation of the
law. Our read,a hereby
informed that .11 dwellings
advertised in this
wspaper. are availabble on
n equal opportunity asis.
OPPORTUNITY
EGGual Housing Opportunity
All real estate advertising in
this newspaper a sub." to
the Federal Fair Housing AR
f 1968 which makes it
illegadrtise al to veany
preference, limitation or
discrimination based on
national origin,Ihandicap or
am"" aus
intention to make any such
preference, limitation or
rstor
This ews alder will not
knowin9$Y oo.Ptany
adv u gvfo realestate
which u i olation of the
Iaw. Our read— , hereby
info- d that II dwellings
advertisein this
L.wspaper are ava!lable on
n aqua opportunity basis.
EOVAL HOUSING
yy OPPORTUNITY
All red ertalte advertising in
then newspaper a subjeR to
th Federal Fair HouUng AR
f 1968 wh!ch makes it
illg9al to advemse any
p,a _ e, limitation or
discrim'mcation based on
or, religion, sex,
national origin.
handicap or
familial status or an
intention to make any such
preference, limitation or
discrimination.
This newspaperwill not
knowingly accept any
advertng fo real estate
which u in violation of the
law. Our reade a hereby
informed that.11 dwellings
Ad —Nod in this
wspaper are available on
n equal opportunity basis.
Real Estate
greatgreat pl��
Marco Island - Turn -Key
..usspa-
beach fro t, 2BR2BA, island views, for lease.
No Pets. No Smoking
Call —811-152 3
irG6b'�<r
NAPLES Co... W/D I. tni
SS+Over Comm, lr" in unit,
g Ifview,2n r.b.sr calb
tr
building. Waterrbasic cable
incl'd, no pets, turn. 1 S _B
Yearly rental. 312-315-]369
gz3oo, z
Livingston. Tiled, new appls.
Pool. Pet '.led
1239)200-5869
Lakeside - gg red community,
N. Naples-]/15, unfurn., new
floor, appli. 154Zs'
ft z car
nd . On lake, tennis 2 pools, o
pets. S3000 239_200-5869
QWheels/Recreation
Ntind your next car here!
Monterre
Beautiful 3 bedroom, Z bath
aver front unit available
for 2023 season - no pets
12th floor, (84])41]-1]48
Retiretl Couple looking to reM
2BR Condo in Naples area.
Jan a :Edo.
Non smokers,
no peets.lmpecc ble credit8
Ilene references.
Call M0.55&]363
WANTED- 18-week oral
(11/20R2 - 03/2723) in North
Naples. Furnished 26r w/
lanai. Pet friendly, wi lap
Pool,
woodyhb �aol.cosme2 or
1C<
Boat Slips For Rent 2ga,4 '
Near Tn City. le Bridges.
Deep water. Eler/water.
239-8251144
Automotive
[Test est d��
AA. TOP DOLLAR PAIDI
for Oassits Cars, Muule
Cars, 8 Sp its Cars.
(239)221.3000
ABSOLUTELY
ted! Dead or Alive TIo WaOPP S
FREE PICK UPI 239-265-6140
CLASSIC/VINTAGE CARS
CASH PAID, LOCAL BUYER.
ANY CONDITION
CALL: 941-993-g060
WANTED
WE BUV CARS, TRUCKS, SUVS,
Etc AnvUing from E1.y0o00-
,1_.all $am[239-595-0021 u
016 Audi®
Quattre S Tronic. Immaculate,
garaged, dealer serviced. Gray
Metallic, Blk Int. Sun root,
A,/FM/Sirius 9 E26 640 Mill
000. ]]4-)22-31)4
.
Mini Cooper Hatckback 2009,
2 door, sunroof, manual
ctrans.,, An4Kreyko
ont owmem
e],500.
Call 239-821-2236
f ZipRecruitet'
jobs.usatodaycom
To advertise, visit:
classifieds.naplesnews.co m
a Classi ads Phone: 239.263.4700
a Classifieds Emailclassified@naplesnews.com
I Public Ntices/Legds Email: legals@napkonews.com
W,-r VISA 0
Wheels/Recreation Wheels/Recreation
0 0
Find your Find your
next car here next car here
PUBLIC NOTICE
The Distdd School Board of Collier County, Florida, will hold a
Regular School Board MN,r Tuesday, June 14, 2022, at
4:30 p.m. at the Dr. Martin Luther King lr. Administrative
Center, 5]]5 Oueola Trail, Naples, Florida, 3a— The purpose
f the meeting will be to discuss any matters legally brought be-
fore the Board.
Th. l So a.ile
he webste (rwwwh toll erschools.mm) eting atllyou, Im,Iablbrary
on Tuestlay, June ], 2022. n
IF A PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE
SCHOOL BOARD WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED,
HE HE WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND,
THEREFORE, MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS 15 MADE. THE RECORD MUST INCLUDE
THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS
TO BE BASED.
June.7,2022 #5282682
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA PROBATE DIVISION
IN RE: ESTATE OF File No 2022-CP-M-9
RICHARD HILL
Deceased.
NOTICE TO CREDITORS
The administration of the estate of Richard Hill, deceased,
whose date of death was January 12, 2022, is pending in the Cir-
it Court for Collier County, Florida, Probate Division, the ad-
dress of which is 3315 Tamiami Trail East, Ste. 102 Naples, FL
34112-5324, The names and addre 1 of the p^rsonal represen-
ve and the personal representatives atto ey are set forth
be
All I editors of the decedent and othr' Persons havingclaims or
demands against decedent's estate on hop a copy o f this no-
tice is required to be served must file their claims with this court
ON OR BEFORE THE LATER OF 3 MONTHS AFTER THE TIME OF
THE FIRST PUBLICATION OF THIS NOTICE OR 30 DAYS AFTER
THE DATE OF SERVICE OF A COPY OF THIS NOTICE ON THEM.
All he, creditors of the decedent and other persons having
claims or demands g decedent's file heir
claims with this court WITHIN 3 MONTHS AFTER THE DATE OF
THE FIRST PUBLICATION OF THIS NOTICE.
ALL CLAIMS NOT FILED WITHIN THE TIME PERIODS SET FORTH
IN FLORIDA STATUTES SECTION ]33.]02 WILL BE FOREVER BAR-
RED.
NOTWITHSTANDING THE TIME PERIODS SET FORTH ABOVE,
ANY CLAIM FILED TWO (2) YEARS OR MORE AFTER THE DECE-
DENT'S DATE OF DEATH IS BARRED.
The date of first publication of this notice is M4/z2.
Attorney R. Nadine David, Esq., FBN: 89004, Florida Probate
Law Group, PO Box 111131, 6ainewille, FL 32614 Phone: (352)
354-2654, ndavidgfloridaprobatelawgroup.tom
.f!oridapfebat ati— Karen
Personal Rep WLUn Karen Marie Hill, 41 Ashlyns Road
Bane 14,,20 HP43BL United Kingdom
June ],19, 2022 N5289117
NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD
INFORMATION MEETING
lnc. on neneea dew celene (applicec0. 9 .. loluriowlrg Ime-d o mlm M�
n'TPLm ro,iond udan, room A. eves L I, cularw P"...
,PwNavenue re MI
TOLL FREE. Unnw—. (-) ass bz a4cmhren-ID: eaz eee 2azs
And— nm alee m ePpncallm vnln erne- county Kc numem
n. The apPliwtbn Is warn, appreval of a nanaara rezone 6om PI2t aguUu rebel io rs o so re wbjct 'Opesoeet m
rezone is aeebn, I an. lo, rho awalwmam a mrea D) r'nal—il, dauchea
z:*j
�� 41-
op.m owna,s aia reeia.iaa are w.kore. to mma m• presamalan
Pm1en coumyrta
(eam ses-ssm oR unn.,mn P„en
Public Sale Public Sale Public Sale
NOTICE OF SALE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the undersigned intends to sell the personal property described be-
low to enforce a lien imposed on said property a der The Florida Self Storage Facility AR Statutes
(SeRion 83.801-83.809). The untlersi9 d will II at public sale by Competitive bidding on Wed-
n tla the 22ntl tla f June 2022 at 10:00 A.M. Lrckerfo . m sa d pp pp strtyy has been stored
d which are located st IItoraae Nao ez. 3836 Tolloate Blvd. Naolas. FL,o341f0. Collier Counn
The following:
Name: unit Contents
George Mostiller 547 Assorted Household Items
Cameron Shaba. 368 Assorted Household Items
Donovan Ides z 368 Assorted Household Items
Sergio Valdes 3�6710 Assorted Household Items
Jonathan Mills 310 Assorted Household Items
$(even Knipprath 31] Assorted Household Items
Purchases rt be paid fort the time of purchase by cash only. All purchased items are sold as is,
here is, and must be removed at the time of the sale. Sale iz subject to cancellation io the event
of settlement between --and obligated party.
Dated this 31st Day of May 2022 and the ]th Day of June 2022.
Pub: Mav 31, June ], 2022, #52]]330
June 8, 2022 9:26 am (GM -4:00) Powered b69CM& 245
® Stantec Memo
To: Nancy Gundlach, AICP From
Collier County Growth Management
File: Polly Avenue Rezone (PL20210002929) Date:
Neighborhood Information Meeting
Synopsis
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Josh Philpott, AICP
Stantec
May 17, 2024
Stantec Consulting Services Inc., and Collier County Staff conducted a Neighborhood Information
Meeting (NIM) on Tuesday, May 14, 2024.
The meeting was held at 5:30 p.m. at the South Regional Library at 8065 Lely Cultural Pkwy., Naples,
Florida 34113. The meeting was hybrid and therefore an online option was also provided for
participants to attend virtually by computer or phone.
The sign -in sheet is attached as Exhibit "A". Fourteen (14) residents were in attendance as well as
two consultant team members, one County staff member, and two virtual participants. One of these
virtual attendees left after the first few minutes and did not communicate any comments or
questions and the contact information for the other virtual attendee was added to the sign -in sheet.
Handouts were distributed providing information on the proposed rezone and allowable uses and
are attached as Exhibit "B".
Josh Philpott (Agent) conducted the meeting with introductions of the consultant team and County
staff, and then provided an overview of the why this meeting was being held and the details of the
proposed rezone application. He discussed that this is a second neighborhood information meeting
on the rezone and that the boundary survey issues delayed this petition moving forward sooner. He
explained that due to the extended delay on that issue, County regulations required a second
neighborhood information meeting to be held. The application details and the project which were
presented at the neighborhood information workshop in 2022 is largely the same information
presented at this neighborhood information meeting. He outlined the rezone processes and future
opportunities to provide input at public hearings.
Following the presentation, the meeting was opened to the attendees to make comments and ask
questions regarding the proposed rezone application. The following is a summarized list of the
questions asked and responses given. The Agent responses are shown in bold.
Question/Comment 1: What will happen with the new building on the site?
➢ Response: The existing structure shown on the boundary survey which straddles the
property line of the two home sites on Polly Avenue will need to be removed. All other
Design with community in min
11us0255-ppfss011shared_projects\215616929\planning\analysis\Rezone\NIM, 5.14.241summary\NIM_Synopsis.docx
Page 75 of 245
May 17, 2024
Page 2 of 4
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
structures on the property will need to comply with the zoning setbacks. The recently
constructed building will remain.
Question/Comment 2: Concern was expressed pertaining to new development along the Everett
Street area and that three new homes are being proposed on this property after a new garage has
been recently constructed on the property.
Question/Comment 3: Concern was expressed about the clearing of the exotics on the site.
➢ Response: As part of the permit, there is a requirement to clear exotics.
Question/Comment 4: What is the boundary survey that held everything up?
➢ Response: The boundary survey that was done had a discrepancy. The property owner's
surveyor and County surveyor are working through the issue now. Once the boundary
survey issue is resolved, the application will be deemed sufficient. Once it is sufficient the
next step will be scheduling the rezone for consideration with the Collier County Planning
Commission who will make a recommendation and then presented to the Collier County
Commissioners.
Question/Comment 5: Where are these public meetings posted?
Response: There will be a sign posted on the property before future public meetings.
There will also be a public notice published in the newspaper and notices will be mailed
nearby residents. Any email addresses written on the sign in sheet will also receive an
emailed copy of the public notices.
Question/Comment 6: Concern was expressed about the use of that new building and whether it is
a truck garage and for what purpose it is being used. Concern was expressed that the garage is for a
business being run on this road.
Response: The intent of the use of this site is to develop it as 3-single family homes. Only
permitted uses within the current zoning category are allowed. Once rezoned, uses on
the site must comply with the new zoning designation. The use of the new building
structure will have to be in compliance with the Estates zoning district and will need to be
an accessory use to a single-family home.
Question/Comment 7: Is Everett Street a public or private road? (Concern was expressed about the
current condition of the road and needing to have it repaved.)
➢ Response: It is public and non -County maintained.
Question/Comment 8: What is the list of what will not be on the site and how is that documented?
Response: The allowable use list (shown in the PowerPoint presentation and provided as
a handout in Exhibit B) reflects certain permittable uses that are being struck -out in the
Estates zoning. The permitted uses will be recorded as part of the zoning change.
Design with community in mind
Page 76 of 245
May 17, 2024
Page 3 of 4
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Question/Comment 9: Concern was expressed about the approval of any new development
occurring on Polly Avenue and truck traffic and impacts.
Question/Comment 10: Who owns the property owner and where are they located?
➢ Response: Petru Catana of Catana Construction. They are located here in Collier County.
Question/Comment 11: Concern about the variances being requested.
➢ Response: The Agent clarified that this is not a variance request and further provided an
explanation of what the rezone request is. The rezone change is required to allow the
density on site which would permit three (3) single family homes.
Question/Comment 12: Concern was expressed about any increase in density being approved
throughout Collier County.
Question/Comment 13: Was there a Traffic Impact Statement done on this project?
➢ Response: A waiver was approved due to the projects de minimis impact for a three (3)
single family home project.
(VIRTUAL Attendee) Question/Comment 14: Zoning will not approve a variance?
➢ Response: A variance could not be approved to increase the density on the property within
the existing zoning. Variances do not allow for an increase in density. Therefore, the
property owner is going through this rezone process to increase the density for these
homes.
(VIRTUAL Attendee) Question/Comment 15: Can you do the housing without changing the zoning?
➢ Response: No. You cannot put three (3) homes on the property in the current zoning
designation. Only one is currently permitted to be on this property within the existing
zoning and property acreage.
Question/Comment 16: Can you put more than 3 homes on the property?
➢ Response: Estates zoning requires 2.25 acres per home, therefore three (3) is the maximum
number of homes that could be allowed in the Estates zoning on this size property.
Question/Comment 17: Support was expressed that all future meetings on this rezone application
would be held in the evenings.
➢ Response: It was explained that the Planning Commission and County Commission
meetings are held during the day and outside of our control in the scheduling of time.
There were no further questions or comments. Josh Philpott thanked the attendees for coming and
noted his contact information and availability for those who wished to reach out with any further
Design with community in mind
Page 77 of 245
May 17, 2024
Page 4 of 4
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
questions. The meeting concluded at approximately 6:20 p.m. The meeting was recorded per the
audio transcript attached as Exhibit UU.
Design with community in mind
Page 78 of 245
m
w
C
O
C
U
O
�
Q
•3
O
E
C
a
a
C
r n
a�
V
Z
•U
a
N
�
a
u L
o
o�-
Q
o
LLJ
L1J
N-a�C�'
O
>
O
a)
.0
u
O
Ua)
O
O
v
Z
E�—
u
-a
O
O
�
J
Ix
Q-
C
O
O>
a
a,
O
U
* v
u
"
LO
�
Ll.J
�
Q
a
"
Z
�
ai
� L
a
N
t
t
L�
O
�
�
Q) Q
4)
E
"
Z
r�
N
O
W
4 "_
�'
a
�,
O O
3
—
LLJ
o
0
C]
W
2'2o-0aa
Q
12
r-
s
Q
Z
W
'
E
c
t
=
W
J
o
o
t
LL
>
\
u
CD
O
�
O
Q
C
O
O
�
� �
"
=
>
U
°
U
'a
a
U a
a
O
O C
W
O
t
E
O
.� a
Z
N
E
O
t
c
0
0
O
O
C
a
a
U O
CL
3
> >
_o
a
"
O
0 0
0
c
v
a
H
N„
u
a
h
W
Ct
hA
S
K-
j
CN
O
Q
\
vV
ti
s
cN
C
"
a
-
I
lip
i
LA
d
d
V,
LIN
J,
�1
V
V
�
d
cr
Handout
Property Size: 7.45+/- acres
Proposed Estates Density: 1 unit per 2.25 acres
® Stantec
Polly Avenue Rezone
Permitted Uses Table
Rural Agricultural District (A) Estates District (E)
Existina Zonina/Current Allowable Uses Proaosed Zonina/Uses
Permitted Uses
• Single-family dwelling
• Agricultural Activities (i.e. crop raising,
horticulture, etc.)
• Wholesale reptile breeding and raising
• Wildlife management, plant and wildlife
conservancies, wildlife refuges and sanctuaries
• Conservation uses
• Oil and gas exploration
• Family care facilities
• Communications towers
• Essential Services
• Schools, public, including "Educational Plants"
• Single-family dwelling
• Family G a faGiR es
• Essential Se. ip-es
• Ed Gatie al p!aRto
Accessory Uses
• Uses and structures that are accessory and
incidental to the uses permitted as of right in
the A district
• Farm labor housing
• Retail sale of fresh, unprocessed agricultural
products
• Packinghouse or similar agricultural processing
of farm products
• Excavation and related processing and
production
• Guesthouses
• Private boathouses and docks
• Use of a mobile home as a temporary
residence while a permanent single-family
dwelling is being constructed
• Use of a mobile home as a residence in
conjunction with bona fide agricultural activities
• Recreational facilities that serve as an integral
part of a residential development
Design with community in mind
• Uses and structures that are accessory and
incidental to the uses permitted as of right in
the E district
• Fruits, vegetables, and nursery plants grown
for both personal consumption and off -site
retail sale
• Keeping of fowl or poultry
• Keeping of horses and livestock
• One guesthouse
• ReGreatiGRal facilities that serve
0Rtegral part of a r sirleRtial deyeler,ment
• EXGa„atien and relator! PFGGessing Rd
pred6lGtOGR
Page 80 of 245
EXHIBIT B
® Stantec
Rural Agricultural District (A) Estate District (E)
Conditional Uses
• Extraction or earthmining, and related
processing and production not incidental to the
agricultural development of the property
• Sawmills
• Zoo, aquarium, aviary, botanical garden, or
other similar uses
• Hunting cabins
• Aquaculture for nonnative or exotic species
• Wholesale reptile breeding or raising
(venomous)
• Churches
• Private landing stripes for general aviation
• Cemeteries
• Schools, private
• Child care centers and adult day care centers
• Collection and transfer sites for resource
recovery
• Communication towers above specified height
• Social and fraternal organizations
• Veterinary clinic
• Group care facilities, care units, nursing
homes, assisted living facilities, continuing
care retirement communities
• Golf courses and/or golf driving ranges
• Oil and gas field development and production
• Sports instructional schools and camps
• Sporting and recreational camps
• Retail plant nurseries
• Asphaltic and concrete batch making plants
• Cultural, ecological, or recreational facilities
that provide opportunities for educational
experience, eco-tourism or agri-tourism and
their related modes of transporting participants,
viewers or patrons where applicable..., tour
operation, such as, but not limited to airboats,
swamp buggies, horses and similar modes of
transportation
Design with community in mind
• ryes
• SGGial and fraternal a zatiGns
• Child GaFe eRtero Rd adult day Gare
caters
• SGheels private
• Gr.,U P e faGili+ieS Rits
homes assisted liViRg faGili+ieS ORtOR YiR
,.are retirement r,i+ion
• Extron+i.,n a ar+hminiRg and related
the deVel.,nmon+ of then pei4y
Co n+'ol o
Model h. M.P-s -nrl m. d-691 GeRtero
A..AG411ar„ nlan+o
M.fi+he h aR on+ with
• (h��'ihhmm,-nines+inn towers up to a specified
'� t
Page 81 of 245
EXHIBIT B
® Stantec
• Agricultural activities on parcels less than 20
acres in size
• The commercial production, raising or breeding
of exotic animals, other than animals typically
used for agricultural purposes or production
• Essential services
• Model homes and model ales centers
• Ancillary plants
Source: Collier County LDC §2.03.01
Design with community in mind
Page 82 of 245
Coffie' r County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
STANDARD REZONE APPLICATION
LDC Section 10.02.08
Chapter 3 H. of the Administrative Code
PROJECT NO
PROJECT NAME To be completed by staff
DATE PROCESSED
APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION
Name of Property Owner(s): Peter (Petro) Catana
Name of Applicant if different than owner: Same as Owner
Address: 6475 Carema Lane City: Naples
Telephone: 519-573-4299
Cell: 239-895-5291
E-Mail Address: Michael.Crijan@gmail.com
Name of Agent
Lindsay F. Robin, AICP
Firm: Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
Address: 3510 Kraft Road #200 City: Naples
Telephone:239-985-5502 Cell:239-560-5466
E-Mail Address: Lindsay. Robin@Stantec.com
PROPERTY INFORMATION
State: FL
Fax. N/A
ZIP: 34113
State: FI ZIP: 34105
Fax: 239-939-3412
Provide a detailed legal description of the property covered by the application, if space is
inadequate, attach on separate page:
• If the request involves changes to more than one zoning district, the applicant shall include a
separate legal description for property involved in each district;
• The applicant shall submit 4 copies of a recent survey (completed within the last six months,
maximum 1" to 400' scale), if required to do so at the pre -application meeting; and
• The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If questions arise
concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed survey may be required.
Section/Township/Range: 16 50 26
Lot: Block: Subdivision:
Plat Book: 1440 page #: 445
Property I.D. Number: 418880003
09/28/2017 Page 1 of 8
Page 83 of 245
Coth,er County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
Size of Property: 656 ft. x 600 ft = 323,215 Total Sq. Ft. Acres: 7.42_
Address/ General Location of Subject Property: 6145 Polly Avenue
South Side of Polly Avenue approximately 1300 feet west of Santa Barbara Blvd.
ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE
Zoning
Land Use
N
Rural Agricultural (A)
Public ROW (Polly Avenue); Single Family Residential
S
Rural Agricultural (A)
Public ROW (Everett Street); Single Family Residential
E
Rural Agricultural (A)
Mobile Home; Single Family Residential
W
Rural Agricultural (A)
Vacant Agricultural; Single Family Residential
If the owner of the subject property owns contiguous property please provide a detailed legal
description of the entire contiguous property: (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page)
Section/Township/Range:
Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number:
Lot: Block: Subdivision:
Metes & Bounds Description:
REZONE REQUEST
This application is requesting a rezone from:
Rural Agricultural (A) Zoning district(s) to the Estates (E) zoning district(s).
Present Use of the Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the subject property: 3 Single Family Dwelling Units
Be aware that Collier County has lobbyist regulations. Guide yourself accordingly and ensure that
you are in compliance with these regulations.
09/28/217 Page 2 of 8
Page 84 of 245
Coth,er County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
ASSOCIATIONS
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
Requirement: List all registered Home Owner Association(s) that could be affected by this petition.
Provide additional sheets if necessary. Information can be found on the Board of County
Commissioner's website at http://www.colliergov.net/index.aspx?page=774.
Name of Homeowner Association: Parker's Hammock c/o Sue Orschell
Mailing Address: 6266 Adkins Ave. City: Naples
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address:
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address:
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address:
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address:
City:
State: FL Zip: 34112
State: ZIP:
City: State: ZIP:
City: State: ZIP:
City: State: ZIP:
EVALUATION CRITERIA
Pursuant to LDC section 10.02.08, staff's recommendation to the Planning Commission and the
Planning Commission's recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners shall be based upon
consideration of the applicable criteria. On a separate sheet attached to the application, please
provide a narrative statement describing the rezone request with specific reference to the criteria
noted below. Include any backup materials and documentation in support of the request.
1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, policies, future
land use map and elements of the Growth Management Plan.
2. The existing land use pattern.
3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts.
4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on
the property for the proposed change.
5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment
(rezone) when necessary.
6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood.
7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create
types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or
projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the
development, or otherwise affect public safety.
8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem.
09/28/217 Page 3 of 8
Page 85 of 245
Coth,er County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas.
10. Whether the proposed change will seriously affect property values in the adjacent area.
11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of
adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations.
12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner
as contrasted with the public welfare.
13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with
existing zoning.
14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the
county.
15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in
districts already permitting such use.
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.
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].
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.
Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded from enforcing deed restrictions; however, many
communities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact the civic or property owners
association in the area for which this use is being requested in order to ascertain whether or not the
request is affected by existing deed restrictions.
Previous land use petitions on the subject property: To your knowledge, has a public hearing been
held on this property within the last year? If so, what was the nature of that hearing?
N/A
Official Interpretations or Zoning Verifications: To your knowledge, has there been an official
interpretation or zoning verification rendered on this property within the last year?
❑ Yes ❑■ No if so please provide copies.
09/28/217 Page 4 of 8
Page 86 of 245
Coibe' r County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS
FOR STANDARD REZONE REQUEST
APPLICANT INFORMATION
Name of Applicant(s): Michael Crijan on behalf of Owner Petru Catana
Address:
Telephone:
E-Mail Address:
Cell:
City: State: ZIP:
Address of Subject Property (If available): 6145 POLLY AVE
City: Naples
State: FI ZIP: 34112
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Section/Township/Range: 16 / 50 / 26
Lot: Block: Subdivision:
Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number:
Fax:
16 5026 W112 OF N1/2 OF N1/2 OF NE1/4 OF SW114 LESS R/W 4.25 AC, AND S1 /2 OF N W 114 OF NE114 OF SW1/4, LESS W 11 OFT, LESS E 132FT 3.17AC OR 1440 PG 445
Metes &Bounds Description:
TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED
Check applicable system:
a. County Utility System
b. City Utility System
C. Franchised Utility System Provide Name:.
d. Package Treatment Plant (GPD Capacity):
e. Septic System ✓
I TYPE OF WATER SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED I
a. County Utility System
b. City Utility System
C. Franchised Utility System Provide Name:
d. Private System (Well)
Total Population to be Served: 3 Residential Units
Peak and Average Daily Demands:
A. Water -Peak: 3.2 GPM
B. Sewer -Peak: 2.3 GPM
Average Daily: 1,050 GPD
Average Daily: 750 GPD
09/28/217 Page 5 of 8
Page 87 of 245
Codier County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
If proposing to be connected to Collier County Regional Water System, please provide the date
service is expected to be required:
Narrative statement: Provide a brief and concise narrative statement and schematic drawing of
sewage treatment process to be used as well as a specific statement regarding the method of affluent
and sludge disposal. If percolation ponds are to be used, then percolation data and soil involved shall
be provided from tests prepared and certified by a professional engineer.
Typical Single Family Septic System
Collier County Utility Dedication Statement: If the project is located within the service boundaries of
Collier County's utility service system, a notarized statement shall be provided agreeing to dedicate
the water distribution and sewage collection facilities within the project area to the Collier County
Utilities. This shall occur upon completion of the construction of these facilities in accordance with
all applicable County ordinances in effect at that time. This statement shall also include an agreement
that the applicable system development charges and connection fees will be paid to the County
Utilities Division prior to the issuance of building permits by the County. If applicable, the statement
shall contain an agreement to dedicate the appropriate utility easements for serving the water and
sewer systems.
Statement of Availability Capacity from other Providers: Unless waived or otherwise provided for at
the pre -application meeting, if the project is to receive sewer or potable water services from any
provider other than the County, a statement from that provider indicating adequate capacity to serve
the project shall be provided.
I PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS
This land use petition requires a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM), pursuant to Chapter 3
H. of the Administrative Code and LDC section 10.03.06. Following the NIM, the applicant will submit
a written summary and any commitments that have been made at the meeting. Refer to Chapter 8
of the Administrative Code for the NIM procedural requirements.
Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code requires that the applicant must remove their public hearing
advertising sign(s) after final action is taken by the Board of County Commissioners. Based on the
Board's final action on this item, please remove all public hearing advertising sign(s) immediately.
09/28/217 Page 6 of 8
Page 88 of 245
Project: Polly Avenue Rezone (RZ)
Sta me c Project NO.: Josh 6929
Mueller
Calculated By: Josh Mueller
Checked By: Patrick Noll
Date: 12/16/2021
Task: Detemine the estimated wastewater flows generated for the project.
Wastewater Flows Generated
CALCULATIONS:
F = Avrg Daily
Sewer Flow
G = Avrg
H = Avrg
A = Type of Service Connection
B = # of
C = Average
D = Total
Per Service
Daily Sewer
Daily Sewer
I = Peak
J = Peak
Service
Occupancy
Occupancy
E = Capita
Connect
Flow (GPD)
Flow (GPM)
Hourly
Hrly Flow
Connect
per Unit.
(BxC)
Flow (GPD)
(GPD) (CxE)
(BxF)
(G/24/60)
Factor
(GPM) (Hxl)
Polly Avenue Rezone (RZ)
Residential Units
3
2.5
8
100
250
750
0.5
4.4
2.3
Total Phase 1
-
-
-
-
-
750
0.5
-
2.3
Peak Hourly 18 + (P) 2 = 4.4 Population = 7.5 = Average Daily Flow / 100 GPD
Factor = 4 + (P)112 where P = Population / 1,000 = 0.0075
ASSUMPTIONS:
C,D,E,F) Wastewater systems shall be designed to maintain adequate flows and standards as established by Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP),
using the equivalent residential connection (ERC) value of 250 gallons per day per residential unit (broken down to 100 gallons per day per person and 2.5 people per
household) and F.A.C. 62-6.008 for non-residential (per design criteria manual Part 2)
E) Peak wastewater flows for each non-residential use below are calculated per F.A.C. 62-6 (Table 1, Estimated Sewage Flows)
1) Peak Hourly Factor = (18+ (Population/1000)A.5)/(4+(Population/1000)A.5) (from Recommended Standards for Wastewater Works , 1997) using Ten States Standards
(4.5 max).
Polly Avenue Rezone (RZ):
The rezone proposes 3 residential units as utilized for water and wastewater calculations.
CONCLUSIONS:
The wastewater peak hourly flow and average daily sewer flow were detemined to be 2.3 GPM and 750 GPD respectively.
Page 89 of 245
Project: Polly Avenue Rezone (RZ)
0� Stantec Project By: Josh
Calculated By: Josh Mueller
Checked By: Patrick Noll
Date: 12/16/2021
Task: Determine the estimated potable water demand generated by the project using estimated wastewater flows.
Total potable demand for the project
CALCULATIONS:
E = Avrg Daily
F = Avrg Daily
G = Avrg
H = Max
I = Peak
K = Peak
A = Type of Service
Water Demand
Water
Daily Water
Daily
Daily
J = Peak Hrly
Hrly
Connection
B = # of
C = Rooms,
Per Service
Demand
Demand
Demand
Demand
Demand
Demand
Service
Seats, SQ FT,
D = Capita
Connect (GPD)
(GPD)
(GPM)
(gpm)
(gpm)
(GPD)
(GPM)
Connect
Units, Etc.
Flow (GPD)
(CxD)
(BxCxD)
(F/24/60)
(G-1.35)
(G*0.5)
(FxPeak)
(J124160)
Polly Avenue Rezone (RZ)
Residential Units
3
2.5
140
350
1,050
0.73
1.0
0.4
4,647
3.2
Total (Phase 1)
1 _
I
_
_1
1,050
1 0.73
1.0
0.4
4,647
3.2
ASSUMPTIONS:
D) Per wastewater flows x 1.4 per FDEP
H) Maximum day demand peaking factor of 1.35 per 2014 Water & Wastewater Master Plan
J) Peak Hourly Factor = (18+ (Population/1000)A.5)/(4+(Population/1000)A.5) (from Recommended Standards for Wastewater Works , 1997) using Ten States Standards (4.5 max).
Polly Avenue Rezone (RZ):
The rezone proposes 3 residential units as utilized for water and wastewater calculations.
CONCLUSIONS:
- The potable water peak hourly demand and average daily water demand were detemined to be 3.2 GPM and 1,050 GPD respectively.
Page 90 of 245
Co[C7er County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
Pre -Application Meeting and Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for:
Standard Rezone
Chapter 3 H. of the Administrative Code
The following Submittal Requirement Checklist is to be utilized during the Pre -Application Meeting and at time of
application submittal. At time of submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with the application
packet. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below, with cover sheets attached to each
section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted.
REQUIREMENTS FOR REVIEW
COPIES
REQUIRED
NOT
REQUIRED
Completed Application (download current form from County website)
1
Pre -Application meeting notes
1
✓
Project Narrative
1
✓
Affidavit of Authorization, signed and notarized
1
Completed Addressing Checklist
1
Property Ownership Disclosure Form
1
Utility Provisions Statement with sketches
1
✓
❑
Signed and Sealed Survey
Conceptual Site Plan
1
�/
Architectural Rendering
❑
List identifying Owner & all parties of corporation
1
✓
Warranty Deeds
1
Environmental Data Requirements, pursuant to LDC section 3.08.00
1
❑
Listed Species Survey; less than 12 months old. Include copies of previous
1
Elsurveys
Current aerial photographs (available from Property Appraiser) with project
boundary and, if vegetated, FLUCFCS Codes with legend included on aerial.
❑
❑
Historical Survey or waiver request
1
❑✓
Traffic Impact Statement, with applicable fees
1
School Impact Analysis Application — residential projects only
1
✓
Electronic copy of all documents and plans
1
r7i
*If located in Immokalee or seeking affordable housing, include an additional set of each submittal
requirement
If located in RFMU (Rural Frinee Mixed Use) Receiving Land Areas
Pursuant to LDC subsection 2.03.08.A.2.a.2.(b.)i.c., the applicant must contact the Florida Forest Service at 239-
690-3500 for information regarding "Wildfire Mitigation & Prevention Plan."
09/28/217 Page 7 of 8
Page 91 of 245
COAT County
N/A
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
Planners: Indicate if the petition needs to be routed to the following additional reviewers:
Bays hore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment:
Executive Director
❑
Historical Review
❑
City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director
❑
Immokalee Water/Sewer District:
❑
Conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Johnson
❑
Parks and Recreation: Barry Williams and David Berra
❑
Emergency Management: Dan Summers; and/or
EMS: Artie Bay
School District (Residential Components): Amy
Lockheart
❑
Other:
❑
Other:
FEE REQUIREMENTS
X Pre -Application Meeting: $500.00 (Applications submitted 9 months or more after the date of the last
pre -application meeting shall not be credited towards application fees and a new pre -application
meeting will be required)
X Rezone Petition (regular): $6,000.00 plus $25.00 an acre (or fraction thereof)
o Additional Fee for 5tb and subsequent reviews: 20% of original fee
® Comprehensive Planning Consistency Review: $750.00
Listed/Protected Species Survey: $1,000.00 N/A for straight rezone
IX Estimated Legal Advertising:
R CCPC- $1,125.00
Q BCC- $500.00
N/A[] Transportation Fee:
o Methodology Review: $500.00 (Additional fees to be determined at Methodology meeting)
X School Concurrency Review: If required, to be determined by the School District in coordination with
the County
Fire Code Plans Review Fees are collected at the time of application submission and those fees are set forth by
the Authority having jurisdiction. The Land Development Code requires Neighborhood Notification mailers for
Applications headed to hearing, and this fee is collected prior to hearing. 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.
All checks payable to: Board of County Commissioners.
The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to:
Growth Management Department
Planning and Regulation
ATTN: Business Center
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34104
Digitally signed by Robin, Lindsay
4
V/p„a',"-- Date: 2022.02.25 10:57:58-05'00'
Agent/Owner Signature
Lindsay Robin, AICP
2-24-22
Date
N/A
Applicant/Owner Name (please print)
09/28/217 Page 8 of 8
Page 92 of 245
Co er County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliercountyfl.gov (239) 252-2400
Pre -Application Meeting Notes
Petition Type:
Date and Time
Standard Rezone(RZ)
Wednesday 12/1/21 — 1:30 PM
Assigned Planner: Nancy Gundlach
Engineering Manager (for PPL's and FP's):
Project Information I
f
Project Name: Polly Avenue Rezone (RZ)
PL#: 20210002929
PropertylD#: 418880003 Current Zoning: Agricultural (A)
Project Address: 6145 Polly Ave. City: Naples State: FL Zip: 34112
Applicant: Lindsay Robin - Stantec
Agent Name: Lindsay Robin Phone: 239-985-5502
Fort Myers FL 33966
Agent/Firm Address: 3800 Colonial Blvd. City: State: Zip:
Property Owner: Petru Catana
Please provide the following, if applicable:
i. Total Acreage: 7.42
ii. Proposed # of Residential Units:
iii. Proposed Commercial Square Footage: W6
iv. For Amendments, indicate the original petition number: 91A
V. If there is an Ordinance or Resolution associated with this project, please indicate the
type and number: WA
vi. If the project is within a Plat, provide the name and AR#/PL#:
Updated 1/12/2021
Page 1 1 of 5
Page 93 of 245
Co*rr County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliercountyfl.gov
Meeting Notes
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400
As of 10/16/2017 all Zoning applications have revised applications, and your associated
Application is included in your notes; additionally a *new Property Ownership Disclosure
Form is required for all applications. A copy of this new form is included in your pre-app
Note — link is https://www.colIiercountyfl.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=75093
TO S42 Md
l"Triffix I V i A- -4
N rAIN !%yAr ITA)MA I R I MAE I J SAME) 110 01
•
&L ,011 'S 5u4.V-" S�uuLl� flr�Gr}LckZnr.� 1�ertertdt �u� Tb �X ir., �—
or(,
If Site is within the City of Naples Water Service Area please send to Naples Utilities and Planning Departments. Then, if the
petition is submitted, we are to send it (by email) to the four persons below in their Utilities and Planning Depts. - along with
a request that they send us a letter or email of "no objection" to the petition. Bob Middleton RMiddletonna.naplesgov.com
Allyson Holland AMHollandCa)naplesgov.com Robin Singer RSingera.naplesgoy.com Erica Martin
emartin(cDnaplesgoy.com
Disclaimer: Information provided by staff to applicant during the Pre -Application Meeting is based on the best available
data at the time of the meeting and may not fully inform the applicant of issues that could arise during the process.
The Administrative Code and LDC dictates the regulations which all applications must satisfy. Any checklists provided
of required data for an application may not fully outline what is needed. It is the applicant's responsibility to provide all
required data.
Updated 1/12/2021
Page 1 2 of 5
Page 94 of 245
Thom0asClarkeVEN
From: 8eUowsRev
Sent: Wednesday, December U1'20Z1 319PK4
To: ThomasC|arkeVEN
Cc Gund|achNancy
Hi Tom, the activity Scan & Attach Pre'AppChecklist has been assigned toyou for PL2O21O0O2929.
This isrequired to be completed by 1112:00:00 AM
Comments: I checked the Historic & Archaeological Maps and the subject property is just outside an area of
archaeological probability. Therefore, no cultural assessment or waiver is required.
This email was sent from Collier County, FL - 2021.2.5.
Under Florida Lmvv e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a
Page 95 of 245
Coffer, County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliercountyfl.gov (239) 252-2400
Meeting Notes
P 3 4-
U,ti 1°n- G -t 'S B . 1
Q-,,kn-L- Dw /Y4Cs�3C1�`JC?.
Other required documentation for submittal (not listed on application):
Disclaimer. • Information provided by staff to applicant during the Pre -Application Meeting is
based on the best available data at the time of the meeting and may not fully inform the
applicant of issues that could arise during the process. The Administrative Code and LDC
dictates the regulations which all applications must satisfy. Any checklists provided of required
data for an application may not fully outline what is needed. It is the applicant's responsibility to
provide all required data.
Updated 1/12/2021
Page 1 3 of 5
Page 96 of 245
ThomasClarkeVEN
From: SawyerMichael
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2021 1:46 PM
To: ThomasClarkeVEN; GundlachNancy
Subject: Poly Ave Rezone Pre App Notes
Thomas,
Please provide the following pre app meeting notes:
For this petition request please provide a letter of no impact TIS Waiver; (separate letter on letterhead requesting the
waiver based on deminimis transportation impacts). Note that the request is consistent with estates district and is
requesting allowance for 3 residential lots -parcels.
Please let us know of any questions -concerns.
Respectfully,
Michael Sawyer
Principal Planner
Growth Management Department
Transportation Planning
2685 South Horseshoe Drive, Suite 103
Naples, Florida 34104
239-252-2926
michael.sawyer(&colliercountyfl.gov
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 97 of 245
ThomasClarkeVEN
From: BrownCraig
Sent: Monday, December 06, 2021 11:18 AM
To: ThomasClarkeVEN
Subject: RE: Pre-App Notes for Polly Avenue Rezone(RZ) - PL20210002929
Attachments: Straight Rezone checklist 2016.doc
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Thomas,
Here are my notes sorry for the delay.
If the request will be a Straight Rezone without a Master Concept Plan, I only need a FLUCFCS Map of the
property the rest can be provided at Development order time.
Please address how the proposed project is consistent with Conservation Coastal Management
Element (CCME) Policy 6.1 and Objective 7.1.
If a Master Concept Plan is provided add a note to state no preservation is required.
Check the box for FLUCFCS Map only. (No fee)
These items will need to be addressed at First Development order submittal:
Please provide Environmental Data: Please provide FLUCFCS aerial map of the subject
property please include the invasive exotic plant percentage amounts and indicate which
FLUCFCS are being considered Native Vegetation. Identify on a current aerial the acreage, location
and community types of all upland and wetland habitats on the project site, according to the Florida Land
Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS), and provide a legend for each of the FLUCFCS
Codes identified. Aerials and overlay information must be legible at the scale provided.
Please provide a current Listed species survey, which should include listed plants for the subject
property. Provide supporting exhibits (i.e. Panther zones ect.) be sure to include Black Bear, and
Florida Bonneted Bat as part of the evaluation. Provide a wildlife survey for the nests of bald eagle and
for listed species known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site. The
survey shall be conducted in accordance with the guidelines or recommendations of the Florida Fish
and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).
Provide a survey for listed plants identified in 3.04.03.
6. Indicate how the project design minimizes impacts to listed species. Describe the measures that are
proposed as mitigation for impacts to listed species. (If found onsite).
7. Indicate wetlands to be impacted and the effects of the impact to their functions and how the project's
design compensates for wetland impacts.
8. Demonstrate that the design of the proposed stormwater management system and analysis of water
quality and quantity impacts fully incorporate
the requirements of the Watershed Management regulations of 3.07.00.
?tt&ago9� J 245
The County Manager or designee may require additional data or information necessary to evaluate the
project's compliance with LDC and GMP requirements. (LDC 10.02.02.A.3 f)
Craig Brown
Senior Environmental Specialist
Craig Brown
Senior Environmental Specialist
Development Review Division
(239) 252-2548.
How are we doing? Please CLICK HERE to fill out a Customer Survey.
We appreciate your Feedback!
From: ThomasClarkeVEN <Thomas.Clarke@colliercountyfl.gov>
Sent: Friday, December 3, 2021 10:31 AM
To: BrownCraig <Craig.Brown @col liercountyfl.gov>
Subject: Pre-App Notes for Polly Avenue Rezone(RZ) - PL20210002929
Hi Craig,
Need your notes for Polly Ave RZ. See attached research and Ray's comment on Historical/
Archaeological.
Thanks
Tom
71tawaj &4T&
Operations Analyst - Zoning Division
2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104
Phone:239-252-2526
Tell us how we are doing by taking our Zoning Division Survey at http://bit.ly/CollierZoning
(,—O er CoKrcty
Exceeding Expectations Everyday
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.
3 kg 99 of 245
Environmental Straight Rezone (non-RFMU)
Project Name &: ZoZt t&oA9'2�
The Preserve is not required to be designated at the time of Rezone for a Straight Rezone as long as a site plan is
not included with the resolution.
I. Is the project is in compliance with the overlays, districts and/or zoning on the subject site and/or the surrounding
properties? (CON, ST, PUD, RLSA, RFMU, etc.) (LDC 2.03.05-2.03.08; 4.08.00)
2. Submit a current aerial photograph (available from the Property Appraiser's office) and clearly delineate the
subject site boundary lines. If the site is vegetated, provide FLUCFCS overlay and vegetation inventory
identifying upland, wetland and exotic vegetation (Admin. Code Ch. 3 G.1. Application Contents #24).
PROVIDE AT TIME OF REZONE
The following 3-10 are to be Provided only in the case that a detailed site plan is being provided with the Rezone
Ordinance. Otherwise, the following are to be provided at time of SDP/Plat
3. Clearly identify the location of all preserves and label each as "Preserve" on all plans. (LDC 3.05.07.A.2).
TO BE DONE AT TIME OF PLAT
4. Provide calculations on site plan showing the appropriate acreage of native vegetation to be retained, the max.
amount and ratios permitted to be created on -site or mitigated off -site. Exclude vegetation located within utility
and drainage easements from the preserve calculations (LDC 3.05.07.13-13; 3.05.071; 3.05.07.H. Ld-e). P547
TO BE DETERMINED AT TIME OF PLAT/SDP
S. Created and retained preserve areas shall meet the minimum width requirements per LDC 3.05.07.H. Lb.
NEED TO MEET THIS REQ UIREMENT AT TIME OF PLAT/SDP
6. Retained preservation areas shall be selected based on the criteria defined in LDC 3.05.07.A.3, include all 3 strata,
be in the largest contiguous area possible and shall be interconnected within the site and to adjoining off -site
preservation areas or wildlife corridors. (LDC 3.05.07.A.1-4)
NEED TO MEET THIS REQUIREMENT AT TIME OF PLAT/SDP
Principle structures shall be located a minimum of 25' from the boundary of the preserve boundary. No accessory
structures and other site alterations, fill placement, grading, plant alteration or removal, or similar activity shall be
permitted within 10' of the boundary unless it can be shown that it will not affect the integrity of the preserve (i.e.
stem wall or berm around wetland preserve). Provide cross -sections for each preserve boundary identifying all
site alterations within 25'. (LDC 3.05.07.H.3; 6.01.02.C.)
NEED TO MEET THIS REQ UIREMENT AT TIME OF PLAT/SDP
8. Wildlife survey required for sites where an EIS is not required, when so warranted. (LDC 10.02.02.A.2.f)
Listed Species - P522 PROVIDE AT TIME OF PLAT/SDP
9. Provide Environmental Data identifying author credentials, consistency determination with the GMPs, off -site
preserves, seasonal and historic high water levels, and analysis of water quality. For land previously used for farm
fields or golf course, provide soil sampling/groundwater monitoring reports identifying any site contamination.
(LDC 3.08.00) PROVIDE AT TIME OF PLAT/SDP
10. Site Plan shall state the minimum acreage required to be preserved only in the case that a detailed site plan is
being provided with the Rezone Ordinance. (LDC 10.02.13.A.2)
Fees: Listed Species Survey fee will be required at time of Plat/SDP.
'5.a 3
Page 100 of 245
ThomasClarkeVEN
From: HansenRachel
Sent: Friday, December 03, 2021 3:23 PM
To: ThomasClarkeVEN
Subject: Pre-App notes PL20210002929 - Polly Ave Rezone
Attachments: PL20210002929 - Polly Ave Rezone.docx
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Hi Tom,
Here are my pre-app notes. I did have Sue review first.
Thanks!
Rachel Hansen
Senior Planner
Planning & Zoning Division
Rachel. Hansen ()colIiercou ntvfl.aov
2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104
Phone: (239) 252-1442
COter c01414ty
"Tell us how we are doing by taking our Zoning Division Survey at https://goo.ol/eXivgT."
Information contained in this email is subject to verification by the Zoning Manager and/or Planning Director; if this information is
being used as a basis for the purchase/lease of a property or as a guide for the design of a project, it is recommended that a Zoning
Verification Letter or Zoning Certificate Application is submitted to zoning services. Applications for a Zoning Verification Letter can
be found here: https://www.colliercountvfl.gov/home/showdocument?id=69624
Zoning Certificate applications can be found here: https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/vour-government/divisions-f-r/operations-
regulatory-management/zoning-or-land-use-application/zoning-other-land-use-applications
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 101 of 245
Coffier County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.collierizov.net (239) 252-2400
Meeting Notes
As of 10/16/2017 all Zoning applications have revised applications, and your associated
Application is included in your notes; additionally a *new Property Ownership Disclosure
Form is required for all applications. A copy of this new form is included in your pre-app
Note — link is https://www.colliergov.net/Home/ShowDocument?id=75093
Comp Planning: PL20210002929 — Polly Ave Rezone (RZ). The subject site is 7.42 acres and currently
has one single family residence with two accessory structures. The Future Land Use Element of the
Growth Management Plan (GMP) designates this site as Urban, Urban Mixed Use District, Urban
Residential Subdistrict and the current zoning designation is Rural Agricultural (A), which has a
minimum lot size of 5 acres. The applicant would like to rezone the site to Estates Zoning District to
develop three separate dwelling units on lots of 2.25 acres each, an allowable lot size under the
Estates zoning district.
Rezoning from Rural Agricultural to Estates would be consistent with the GMP per the purpose of the
Urban Residential Subdistrict, which is to provide for higher densities in areas with fewer natural
resource constraints and where existing and planned public facilities are concentrated. The intent of
the Estates district is to provide for residential development in a semi -rural to rural environment with
limited agricultural activities. It is therefore staff's opinion that a Growth Management Plan
Amendment (GMPA) is not required.
Please note that while the subject site can be split into 3 lots of at least 2.25 acres, the minimum lot
width for the Estates district is 150 feet.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions.
Rachel Hansen, Senior Planner
12/3/21
Disclaimer.' Information provided by staff to applicant during the Pre -Application Meeting is
based on the best available data at the time of the meeting and may not fully inform the
applicant of issues that could arise during the process. The Administrative Code and LDC
dictates the regulations which all applications must satisfy. Any checklists provided of required
data for an application may not fully outline what is needed. It is the applicant's responsibility to
provide all required data.
Updated 7/24/2018
Page 1 1 of 1
3 C.';L ..
Page 102 of 245
Co*,r County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliercountvfi.gov (239) 252-2400
Pre -Application Meeting Sign -In Sheet
PL# 20210002929
Collier County Contact Information:
Name
Review Discipline
Phone
Email
❑ Maggie Acevedo
North Collier Fire
252-2309
macevedo@northcollierfire.com
❑ Steve Baluch
Transportation Planning
252-2361
stephen.baluch@colliercountyfl.gov
El Shar A.Beddow
MSM/Deputy Fire Marshal -
Greater Naples Fire
241-1422
sbeddow@gnfire.org
❑ Ray Bellows
Zoning, Planning Manager
252-2463
raymond.bellows@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Laurie Beard
PUD Monitoring
252-5782
laurie.beard@colliercountyfl.gov
Craig Brown
Environmental Specialist
252-2548
craig.brown @colIiercountyfLgov
Heidi Ashton Cicko
Managing Asst. County Attorney
252-8773
heidi.ashton@colliercountyfl.gov
Thomas Clarke
Zoning Operations Analyst
252-2584
thomas.clarke@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Jamie Cook
Development Review Director
252-6290
Jaime.cook@colliercountyfl.gov
lb Gabriela Castro
Zoning Principal Planner
252-4211
gabriela.castro@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Maggie DeMeo
North Collier Fire
252-2308
pdemeo@northcollierfire.com
❑ Eric Fey, P.E.
Utility Planning
252-1037
eric.fey@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Tim Finn, AICP
Zoning Principal Planner
252-4312
timothy.finn@colliercountyfl.gov
Sue Faulkner
GMP - Comprehensive Planning
252-5715
sue.faulkner@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Michael Gibbons
Structural/Residential Plan Review
252-2426
michael.gibbons@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Storm Gewirtz, P.E.
Engineering Stormwater
252-2434
storm.gewirtz@colliercountyfl.gov
Cormac Giblin, AICP
Development Review -Planning
Manager
252-5095
Cormac.giblin@colliercountyfl.gov
Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Zoning Principal Planner
252-2484
nancy.gundlach@colliercountyfl.gov
Rachel Hansen
GMP—Comprehensive Planning
252-1142
Rachel. hansen@colliercountyfLgov
❑ Richard Henderlong
Zoning Principal Planner
252-2464
rchard.henderlong@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ John Houldsworth
Engineering Subdivision
252-5757
john.houldsworth@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Alicia Humphries
Right -Of -Way Permitting
252-2326
alicia.humphries@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Anita Jenkins
Planning & Zoning Director
252-5095
Anita.jenkins@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ John Kelly
Zoning Senior Planner
252-5719
john.kelly@colliercountyfl.gov
®` Parker Klopf
GMP — Comprehensive Planning
252-2471
Parker.klopf@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Troy Komarowski
North Collier Fire
252-2521
tkomarowski@northcollierfire.com
❑ Sean Lintz
North Collier Fire
597-9227
slintz@northcollierfire.com
❑ Diane Lynch
Operations Analyst
252-8243
diane.lynch @colIiercountyfLgov
❑ Thomas Mastroberto
Greater Naples Fire
252-7348
thomas.mastroberto@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Jack McKenna, P.E.
Engineering Services
252-2911
jack. mckenna@colliercountyfLgov
Updated 1/12/2021
Page 1 4 of 5
Page 103 of 245
CoT;r County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliercountvfl.gov (239) 252-2400
❑ Matt McLean, P.E.
Division Director - IF, CPP & PM
252-8279
matthew.mclean@colliercountyfl.gov
Michele Mosca, AICP
Capital Project Planning
252-2466
michele.mosca@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Richard Orth
Stormwater Planning
252-5092
richard.orth@colliercountyfl.gov
L� Eric Ortman
Zoning Principal Planner
252-1032
Eric.Ortman@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Derek Perry
Assistant County Attorney
252-8066
Derek.perry@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Brandi Pollard
Utility Impact fees
252-6237
brandi.pollard@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Todd Riggall
North Collier Fire
597-9227
triggall@northcollierfire.com
❑ Brett Rosenblum,
P•E•
Development Review
Principal Project Manager
252-2905
brett.rosenblum@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ James Sabo, AICP
GMP, Comp Planning Manager
252-2708
james.sabo@colliercountyfl.gov
Michael Sawyer
Transportation Planning
252-2926
michael.sawyer@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Corby Schmidt, AICP
Comprehensive Planning
252-2944
corby.schmidt@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Linda Simmons
North Collier Fire
252-2311
Linda.Simmons@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Peter Shawinsky
Architectural Review
252-8523
peter.shawinsky@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Mark Templeton
Landscape Review
252-2475
mark.templeton@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Connie Thomas
Client Services Supervisor
252-6369
Consuela.thomas@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Jessica Velasco
Client Services
252-2584
jessica.velasco@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Jon Walsh, P.E.
Building Review
252-2962
jonathan.walsh@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Kirsten Wilkie
Environmental Review Manager
252-5518
kirsten.wilkie@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Christine Willoughby
Development Review - Zoning
252-5748
christine.willoughby@colliercountyfl.gov
❑ Daniel Zunzunegui
North Collier Fire
252-2310
Daniel.Zunzunegui@colliercountyfl.gov
Additional Attendee Contact Information:
Name
Representing
Phone
Email
%.
_
S 1 A ,,1 e
3y-
fqS- C
4 -2$ . RvPwu P 5TA, reG , "
Updated 1/12/2021
Page 1 5 of 5
Page 104 of 245
Co ter County
Growth Management Department
Zoning Division
Applicant/Agent may also send site
plans or conceptual plans for
review in advance if desired.
PL20210002929 — Polly Avenue Rezone(RZ) Planner: Nancy Gundlach
Assigned Ops Staff: Thomas Clarke
STAFF FORM FOR SUPPLEMENTAL PRE -APPLICATION MEETING INFORMATION
• Name and Number of who submitted pre-app request
Lindsay Robin — 239-985-5507
• Agent to list for PL#
Lindsay Robin
• Owner of property (all owners for all parcels)
Petru Catana
• Confirm Purpose of Pre-App: (Rezone, etc.)
Rezone from Ag to Estates
• Please list the density request of the project if applicable and number of homes/units/offices/docks (any that
apply):
3 dwelling units. 1 unit per 2.25 acre lot once subdivided after rezone.
• Details about Project:
The owner intends to develop three (3) separate dwelling units on 2.25 acre lots, which is below the
minimum lot size for AG zoning. Rezoning to Estates to allow the 2.25 acre lots.
REQUIRED Supplemental Information provided by:
Name: Lindsay Robin
Title: Planner
Email: Lindsay.robin@stantec.com
Phone: 239-985-5502
Cancellation/Reschedule Requests: Contact Connie Thomas -Client Services Supervisor
Consuela.Thomas@colliercountyfl.gov Phone:239-252-2473
Created April 5, 2017 Location: G:\CDES Planning Services\Current\Zoning Staff Information
Zoning Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, Florida 34104. 239-252-2400 • www..cdfergov.net
Page 105 of 245
Co*er COunt
y
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
Pre -Application Meeting and Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for:
Standard Rezone
Chapter 3 H. of the Administrative Code
The following Submittal Requirement Checklist is to be utilized during the Pre -Application Meeting and at time of
application submittal. At time of submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with the application
packet. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below, with cover sheets attached to each
section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted.
REQUIREMENTS FOR REVIEW
# OF
COPIES
REQUIRED
NOT
REQUIRED
Completed Application (download current form from County website)
1
Pre -Application meeting notes
1114
Project Narrative
1
Affidavit of Authorization, signed and notarized
1
Completed Addressing Checklist
1
Property Ownership Disclosure Form
1
Utility Provisions Statement with sketches
1
❑
Signed and Sealed Survey
1
Conceptual Site Plan
1
Architectural Rendering
List identifying Owner & all parties of corporation
1
Warranty Deeds
1
Environmental Data Requirements, pursuant to LDC section 3.08.00
1
Listed Species Survey; less than 12 months old. Include copies of previous
surveys
1
❑
Current aerial photographs (available from Property Appraiser) with project
boundary and, if vegetated, FLUCFCS Codes with legend included on aerial.
m
IJ
❑
Historical Survey or waiver request
1
Traffic Impact Statement, with applicable fees u 14%e- ortJo y.A P&ekk
School Impact Analysis Application — residential projects only
1
Electronic copy of all documents and plans
1
*If located in Immokalee or seeking affordable housing, include an additional set of each submittal
requirement
If located in RFMU (Rural Fringe Mixed Use) Receiving Land Areas
Pursuant to LDC subsection 2.03.08.A.2.a.2.(b.)i.c., the applicant must contact the Florida Forest Service at 239-
690-3500 for information regarding "Wildfire Mitigation & Prevention Plan."
09/28/217 Page 7 of 8
Page 106 of 245
Co*er County
W,
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliereov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
Planners: Indicate if the petition needs to be routed to the following additional reviewers:
/
Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment:
Executive Director
❑
Historical Review
/-
❑
City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director
❑
Immokalee Water/Sewer District:
❑
Conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Johnson
❑
Parks and Recreation: Barry Williams and David Berra
❑
Emergency Management: Dan Summers; and/or
EMS: Artie Bay
School District (Residential Components): Amy
Lockheart
❑
Other:
❑
I Other:
FEE REQUIREMENTS
Pre -Application Meeting: $500.00 (Applications submitted 9 months or more after the date of the last
pre -application meeting shall not be credited towards application fees and a new pre -application
sheeting will be required)
V Rezone Petition (regular): $6,000.00 plus $25.00 an acre (or fraction thereof)
o Additional Fee for 5th and subsequent reviews: 20% of original fee
eComprehensive Planning Consistency Review: $750.00
❑ isted/Protected Species Survey: $1,000.00 61'1,1 r.'
Estimated Legal Advertising:
,t,/CCPC- $1,125.00
D% BCC- $500.00
N/o❑ Transportation Fee:
o Methodology Review: $500.00 (Additional fees to be determined at Methodology meeting)
V-1,S'chool Concurrency Review: If required, to be determined by the School District in coordination with
the County
Fire Code Plans Review Fees are collected at the time of application submission and those fees are set forth by
the Authority having jurisdiction. The Land Development Code requires Neighborhood Notification mailers for
Applications headed to hearing, and this fee is collected prior to hearing. 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.
All checks payable to: Board of County Commissioners.
The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to:
Growth Management Department
Planning and Regulation
ATTN: Business Center
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34104
Agent/Owner Signature Date
Applicant/Owner Name (please print)
09/28/217 Page 8 of 8
Page 107 of 245
® Stantec
March 4, 2022
REVISED JUNE 2022
Ms. Nancy Gundlach, AICP, RLA
Zoning & Land Development Review Department
Community Development
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34104
Re: Polly Avenue Standard Rezone
PL20210002929
Dear Ms. Gundlach:
Enclosed for your review is the Application for a Standard Rezone for the Polly Avenue
rezone ("Property"), a 7.45+\- acre project generally located east of Santa Barbara Blvd,
south of Polly Avenue and north of Everett Street in unincorporated Collier County, Florida.
The Property is identified as Parcel 00418880003 per the Collier County Property Appraiser.
The Property is designated within the Urban Residential Subdistrict future land use
designation and is zoned Rural Agricultural (A) per the Collier County zoning map. The
Property is currently developed with one (1) single-family residence and a pole barn
accessory structure.
BACKGROUND/PROJECT HISTORY:
The Property has historically been zoned Rural Agricultural (A) pursuant to the Collier
County Zoning Map, allowing for a maximum density of 1 unit per 5 acres. The Property
was originally purchased in 1996 and at the time was 7.45+\- acres in size. The current
Property Owner purchased the Property in 2021 and intends on splitting the site into three
(3) distinct lots, with a minimum lot size of 2.25 acres, in order to develop the Property with
three (3) single-family residential units. The proposed amendment will provide a
residential development option that is complimentary and compatible with the
surrounding land uses, which reflect the 1 unit per 2.25-acre density standard present in
the Estates (E) zoning district.
REQUEST:
The applicant is requesting approval of a standard rezone from Rural Agricultural (A) to
Estates (E) to allow for the development of three (3) single-family detached residential
dwelling units on 2.25-acre minimum lots. Adjacent properties, designated as Rural
Agricultural (A) represent legal, non -conforming development, due to their land use
pattern more so reflecting the Estates (E) density standards of 1 unit per 2.25 acres
Design with community in mind
Page 108 of 245
® Stantec
over the Rural Agricultural (A) standard of 1 unit per 5 acres. The proposed rezoning will
promote a consistent land use in this area of the County, while preserving the rural
character. The applicant is also proposing to remove many of the allowable Estates zoning
district uses for compatibility assurance purposes.
SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT
The subject property is located in a semi -rural portion of the county and is surrounded by
low -density residential uses. The property is also proximate to existing and approved
urban levels of development, as well as major public facilities including, schools, hospitals,
and libraries.
Please refer to Table 1 below, which provides an inventory of the immediately adjacent
Future Land Use Categories, zoning districts, and existing land uses.
TABLE 1: INVENTORY OF SURROUNDING LANDS
Direction
Future Land Use
Zoning District
Existing Land Use
Rural Agricultural
Public Right -of -Way
North
Urban Residential
(A)
(Polly Avenue); Single
Family Residential
Public Right -of -Way
South
Urban Residential
Rural Agricultural
(Everett Street);
(A)
Single Family
Residential
Single Family
East
Urban Residential
Rural Agricultural
Residential; Mobile
(A)
Home
Single Family
West
Urban Residential
Rural Agricultural
Residential; Vacant
(A)
Agricultural
As evidenced by the surrounding land uses, the proposed rezoning to allow for single-
family residential is consistent and complimentary to the existing land uses. The proposed
three (3) single-family residential dwelling units is consistent with the surrounding land use
pattern and will be an appropriate use of the 7.45+\- acre property.
INFRASTRUCTURE
Two (2) of the proposed three (3) residential units will be accessed via Polly Avenue and
one (1) unit will be accessed via Everett Street. The subject property is less than three (3)
Design with community in mind
Page 109 of 245
® Stantec
miles to Collier Boulevard, a 6-lane, county -maintained, arterial roadway, and U.S.
41 /Tamiami Trail also a 6-lane, county -maintained, arterial roadway.
As outlined in the pre -application meeting notes, a Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) will not
be required for this property based on de minimis transportation impacts generated by
the proposed three (3) single-family residential units.
Potable water and sanitary sewer for this project will be provided by a private well system
and on -site septic system.
The Property is in close proximity to available public infrastructure including parks, (Sugden
Regional Park, East Naples Community Park), schools (Lely Elementary School, Lely High
School) fire (Fire Rescue Station 21), and EMS services. This data reflects that the subject
property is in an appropriate location for the proposed residential units.
ENVIRONMENTAL
As outlined in the pre -application meeting notes, this property is not required to provide
on -site preservation due to the nature of the standard rezone request, which will not
include a site plan as part of the final resolution, if approved. As shown on the FLUCCS
Map prepared by Tropical Environmental Consultants, the Property contains 2.63 acres of
'Pine - Mesic Oak, 0-25% Non -Native' land cover; 3.38 acres of 'Residential, Low Density'
land cover; and 1.47 acres of 'Mixed Pine, 0-25% Non -Native' land cover.
EVALUATION CRITERIA
LDC Section 10.02.08.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,
policies, future land use map and elements of the Growth Management Plan.
The proposed change is consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) goals,
objectives, and policies, and Future Land Use Map (FLUM), and the goals,
objectives, and policies as applicable, of the Growth Management Plan.
Design with community in mind
Page 110 of 245
® Stantec
The rezoning will remain consistent with the Growth Management Plan (GMP) as follows:
Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME)
CCME Objective 6.1: Protect native vegetative communities through the application of
minimum preservation requirements. (The Policies under this Objective apply to all of
Collier County except for that portion of the County which is identified on the Countywide
Future Land Use Map (FLUM) as the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay.)
The subject property's inventory of vegetation consists of 414E1 Pine - Mesic Oak, 0-25%
non-native on 2.63 acres and 415E1 Mixed Pine, 0-25% non-native on 1.47 acres, as
displayed in the provided FLUCCS Map prepared by Tropical Environmental Consultants.
Both vegetative land covers do contain native species; thus, they will be required to
comply with LDC regulations for estates zoned lands, but due to the FLU category they do
not require significant protection under GMP regulations. Additionally, per the pre -
application meeting notes, the preserve is not required to be designated at the time of
rezone for a straight rezone as long as a site plan is not included with the resolution. The
conceptual site plan provided will not be included in the resolution as it is provided for
conceptual purposes only.
CCME Objective 7.1: Direct incompatible land uses away from listed animal species and
their habitats. (The County relies on the listing process of State and Federal agencies to
identify species that require special protection because of their endangered, threatened,
or species of special concern status. Listed animal species are those species that the
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission has designated as endangered,
threatened, or species of special concern, in accordance with Rules 68A-27.003, 68A-
27.004, and 68A-27.005, F.A.C. and those species designated by various federal agencies
as Endangered and Threatened species published in 50 CFR 17.)
The subject property will direct incompatible land uses away from relevant animal species
and their habitats by integrating the findings from the FLUCFS map and animal species list
into the site's design.
The FLUCFS map provided showcases land uses present within the subject property. An
animal species list will be provided at the time of the development order submittal, as
outlined in the pre -application meeting notes.
Future Land Use Element (FLUE)
FLUE Policy 1.1: Unless otherwise permitted in this Growth Management Plan, new or
revised uses of land shall be consistent with designations outlines on the Future Land Use
Map.
Design with community in mind
Page 111 of 245
® Stantec
The proposed rezone to allow for three (3) single-family residential dwelling units is
consistent with the Future Land Use Map's Urban Residential Subdistrict designation,
which provides for higher densities in areas with fewer natural resource constraints and
where existing and planned public facilities exist.
FLUE Policy 5.4: All applications and petitions for proposed development shall be consistent
with this Growth Management Plan, as determined by the Board of County Commissioners.
FLUE Policy 5.6: New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the
surrounding land uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code (Ordinance 04-41,
adopted June 22, 2004 and effective October 18, 2004, as amended).
The proposed amendment will provide a residential development option that is
complimentary and compatible with the surrounding land uses. Currently, the property is
surrounded by single-family residential uses on lot sizes consistent with the standards
present in the Estates (E) zoning district, which requires a 2.25-acre minimum lot size. The
addition of three (3) single-family residential units, conforming with the Estates zoning
district lot size standards, will not negatively impact compatibility with these existing
residential uses. Additionally, the property will provide required landscape buffers for
appropriate separation and screening from surrounding neighbors.
FLUE Objective 7: Promote smart growth policies, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and
adhere to the existing development character of the Collier County, where applicable,
and as follows:
The subject property is an infill site, which promotes smart growth policies and reduces
greenhouse gas emissions. By rezoning and redeveloping the Property with three (3) single-
family detached residential units, the property will provide a more compact and
sustainable development, in contrast to the one (1) unit that would be allowable under
the current zoning district, which limits the property to 1 unit per 5 acres and does not take
full advantage of the available public infrastructure and directly contributes to urban
sprawl. Additionally, the subject property will adhere to the existing development
character of Collier County by developing in accordance with its surrounding uses and
applicable county and state development regulations.
FLUE Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their
local streets and/or interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other
developments regardless of land use type. The interconnection of local streets between
developments is also addressed in Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element.
Design with community in mind
Page 112 of 245
® Stantec
As shown on the conceptual site plan, the subject property will contain three (3)
driveway connection points to local streets. The two (2) northern lots will connect to Polly
Avenue and the one (1) Southern lot will be connected to Everett Street.
Public Schools Facilities Element (PSFE)
PSFE Policy 2.1: The County shall not approve any non-exempt residential development
application for a new residential preliminary plat, site plan or functional equivalent until the
School District has issued a School Capacity Availability Determination Letter (SCADL)
verifying available capacity to serve the development.
As required by the pre-app notes, a School Impact Analysis Application is enclosed with
this application.
2. The existing land use pattern.
The proposed rezone is compatible and complimentary with the existing,
surrounding land use pattern. Properties to the north, south, east, and west are
within the Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district and consist of single-family
residential, mobile home, and passive agricultural uses.
Additionally, as displayed in the provided Surrounding Parcels Lot Size Exhibit, the
existing land use pattern demonstrates an average lot size of about 2.2 acres, which
is a calculation that includes lots within 500 feet of the property. Thus, the proposed
rezone, and subsequent lot split, will ensure the subject property is redeveloped to
reflect a land use pattern that is consistent with adjacent and nearby properties.
3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby
districts.
The creation of an Estates zoning district is compatible with adjacent and nearby
districts because of its comparable permitted uses, as well as its regulations on
density. The maximum density of residential uses within the Estates zoning district is 1
unit per 2.25 acres. Although the surrounding land parcels are designated within the
Rural Agricultural zoning district, which allow for residential uses at 1 unit per 5 acres,
many exceed this regulation with smaller lot sizes, similar to the regulations present
in the proposed Estates zoning district. The proposed Estates zoning district is
Design with community in mind
Page 113 of 245
® Stantec
intended to provide lands for low -density residential development in a semi -rural to
rural environment. The permitted uses within the Estates zoning district mirror the uses
allowed in the existing, Rural Agricultural zoning district except in their limitations. By
rezoning the proposed property to the Estates zoning district, the property will be
entitled to a more compatible and significantly shorter list of permitted uses.. The
proposed rezoning will create an area of isolated Estate zoning district surrounded
by the Rural Agricultural zoning district. However, the creation of this district is not
unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts and serves to provide consistency with
the surrounding, existing legal non -conforming land uses. By rezoning the parcel to
the Estates zoning district, the property is able to develop in a more compatible
manner to its surroundings.
4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property for the proposed change.
Existing district boundaries are not illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions
on the property for the proposed change. The existing district boundaries do not
correspond with the Rural Agricultural (A) district's lot size requirements of 1 unit per
5 acres. The proposed zoning amendment to the Estates (E) district will create a
more consistent and compatible land use pattern.
5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed
amendment (rezone) when necessary.
The property's surrounding parcels and their current land uses display a reality that
does not uphold the prescribed density standards for the Rural Agricultural zoning
district. The Rural Agricultural zoning district allows for 1 unit per 5 acres, which many
of the surrounding Rural Agricultural designated properties exceed. Refer to the
Surrounding Parcel Size exhibit, which depicts the surrounding parcel lot sizes. As
shown on the exhibit, only two (2) parcels located south of Everett Street and within
500 feet of the site, meet this criteria. To create a more compatible development
from a lot size and density standpoint, the proposed rezone to the Estates zoning
district designates a density of 1 unit per 2.25 acres; thus, allowing the property to
be developed consistent with the lot sizes and densities of the surrounding parcels
while maintaining the intent of a semi -rural area.
6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood.
Design with community in mind
Page 114 of 245
® Stantec
The proposed change will not adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood. The proposed change will enhance compatibility in the
neighborhood by providing a more consistent residential development pattern in
terms of lot sizes and proposed uses. The proposed three (3) single-family residential
units will not adversely impact the living conditions in the neighborhood from a
noise, light, or pollution standpoint.
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 requested change will not create or excessively increase traffic congestion or
create types of traffic demand deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses or
otherwise affect public safety. As noted on the pre-app notes, the applicant is
requesting a waiver from the Transportation Impact Analysis due to the de-minimis
impact associated with the proposed three (3) single-family residential dwelling
units. The Property is located in an area of the county with an established and
functioning roadway network. As shown on the enclosed Conceptual Site Plan, the
subject property will contain three (3) driveway connection points to local streets.
The two (2) northern lots will connect to Polly Avenue and the one (1) Southern lot
will be connected to Everett Street.
8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem.
The proposed change will not create a drainage problem. The sites will be
designed to meet all County standards.
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas.
The proposed change will not reduce light and air to adjacent areas. The proposed
rezone will allow for the development of three (3) single-family detached residential
dwelling units that will be developed in compliance with the Estates zoning district
development regulations. The maximum allowable height in the Estates zoning
Design with community in mind
Page 115 of 245
® Stantec
district is 30 feet and therefore the proposed single-family residential uses will not
block light to the surrounding properties.
10. Whether the proposed change will seriously affect property values in the adjacent
area.
The proposed change will not adversely affect property values in the adjacent
area because it will encourage the project site to be developed in a compatible
manner with the existing neighborhood. Due to the proposed rezoning, the ±7.4
acre project site will be entitled to develop three (3) single-family detached
residential units, instead of one (1) single-family detached residential unit; thus,
enabling the property to be divided into three (3) balanced lot sizes, comparable
to the surrounding properties.
11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or
development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations.
The proposed change, allowing the property to be developed with three (3)
residential units, will not be a deterrent to the improvement or development of
adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. This rezone will allow the
site to be developed in a slightly denser manner, similar to the existing surrounding
land use pattern and creating a more compatible development scenario.
12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an
individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare.
The proposed change will not constitute a grant of special privilege to an
individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. The applicant is requesting
approval of the proposed rezone through the standard rezone process outlined in
the land development code and administrative code. The proposed change will
allow the Property to be developed in a more consistent manner relative to
adjacent parcels, therefore increasing compatibility throughout the area and
benefitting all surrounding properties.
13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in
accordance with existing zoning.
Design with community in mind
Page 116 of 245
® Stantec
The existing zoning designation of Rural Agricultural limits the minimum lot size to 5-
acres, which precludes the property owner from developing three (3) separate lots
for single-family residences on 7.45+/- acres of land. The existing zoning requirement
for a minimum 5-acre lot is not consistent with the surrounding existing single-family
residential uses, which are legal non -conforming lots that are well under the 5-acre
minimum lot size. Approval of this rezone to the Estates zoning district is intended to
enhance the compatibility of the Property with the surrounding neighborhood and
to allow for the property owner to develop the property in a similar fashion to those
in the immediate area. The rezone proposes three (3) lots with a minimum lot size of
2.25 acres, which is consistent with the average lot size in the immediate area of
±2.2 acres.
14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood
or the county.
The change suggested is not out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or
the county. The proposed rezoning will allow the subject property to develop three
(3) residential units with a minimum lot size of 2.25 acres. On the contrary, the
current Rural Agricultural zoning district limits the ±7.45 acre Property to a
maximum of one (1) single-family residential dwelling unit. The surrounding land
use pattern largely consists of lot sizes averaging at about ±2.2 acres; therefore,
the proposed change would allow the site to be developed at a scale that is
more compatible with the neighborhood in this area of the county.
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 adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in
districts already permitting such use; however, the proposed development limited
to single-family residential is the best use of this property as it is neighbored by
existing, similarly sized single-family residential uses.
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.
Design with community in mind
Page 117 of 245
® Stantec
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 is typical of and not different from
any other similar development in Collier County. The lots will not require significant
site alteration for development of three (3) single-family residential units.
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 is 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, to serve the project. The subject property is in close proximity to parks
(Sugden Regional Park, East Naples Community Park), schools (Lely Elementary
School, Lely High School), fire rescue (Fire Rescue Station 21), and EMS services.
Additionally, pursuant to the pre -application meeting notes, the applicant is
requesting a waiver from providing a traffic impact statement due to the de
minimis impact associated with the proposed rezone, to allow three (3) single-
family residential units, which will not have a significant impact on the surrounding
roadway network.
18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the board of county commissioners
shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare.
To be determined by the BCC.
Design with community in mind
Page 118 of 245
® Stantec
CONCLUSION
In summary, the proposed standard rezone will allow for the development of three (3)
single-family residential dwelling units that are complimentary and compatible to the uses
in this area of the county. As outlined in the attached application, the proposed rezoning
is consistent with the LDC and Growth Management plan.
Per the Pre -Application Meeting Notes, the following items are enclosed for your review:
1. Completed Standard Rezone Application;
2. Pre -Application Meeting Notes;
3. Project Narrative including Evaluation Criteria;
4. Affidavit of Authorization;
5. Completed Addressing Checklist;
6. Property Ownership Disclosure Form;
7. Statement of Utility Provisions;
8. Signed and Sealed Boundary Survey;
9. Conceptual Site Plan;
10. Current Zoning Map;
11. Proposed Zoning Map;
12. Surrounding Lot Size Exhibit;
13. List identifying Owner and all Parties of Corporation;
14. Warranty Deed;
15. FLUCCS Map on Aerial;
16. Letter of No Impact Transportation Impact Analysis Waiver; and
17. School Impact Analysis Application.
Should you require additional information or have any questions, please feel free to
contact me directly at (239) 585-9902, or lindsay.robin@stantec.com.
Sincerely,
STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC.
Lindsay F. Robin, MPA, AICP
Urban Planner
Enclosures: Peter Catana, Property Owner
Design with community in mind
Page 119 of 245
AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION
FOR PETITION NUMBERS(S) PL20210002929
I, Pel u Cetana (print name), as Propeay 0-nor (title, if
applicable) of 6145 PoIIVAve., Naples, FL 34112 (company, If applicable), swear or affirm
under oath, that I am the (choose one) owner= applicant=contract purchaser=and that:
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. 1 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. Well authorize stantec consulting services Inc, to act as our/my representative
in any matters regarding this petition including 1 through 2 above.
*Notes:
• If the applicant is a corporation, then it is usually executed by the corp. pres. or v. pres.
• If the applicant is a Limited Liability Company (L.L.C.) or Limited Company (L.C.), then the documents should
typically be signed by the Company's "Managing Member."
• If the applicant is a partnership, then typically a partner can sign on behalf of the partnership.
• If the applicant is a limited partnership, then the general partner must sign and be identified as the "general
partner" of the named partnership.
• If the applicant is a trust, then they must include the trustee's name and the words "as trustee".
• In each instance, first determine the applicant's status, e.g., individual, corporate, trust, partnership, and then
use the appropriate format fdr that ownership.
Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have read the foregoing Affidavit of Authorization and that
the facts sta%4 in it are true.
3-8-22
-A!T
Signature Date
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
The foregoing instrument was ackhowleged before me by means of ® physical presence or []online notarization this
O'�iay of Pdfi d i,— , 20a2,-by (printed name of owner or qualifier)
Such person(s) Notary Public must check applicable box:
Are personally known to me
Has produced a current drivers license :; TMCEYL. HAY
•; myCOMMISSION # GG 3"2"
Has produced as identification. , ; EWKS: March 12, 2023
Notary Signature:' gz4gr C JI
CP\08-COA-00115\155
REV 3/4/2020
Page 120 of 245
Collier County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
ADDRESSING CHECKLIST
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-5724
Please complete the following and email to GMD_Addressing@colliergov.net or fax to the Operations Division
at 239-252-5724 or submit in person to the Addressing Section at the above address. Form must be si , n�Y
Addressing personnel prior to pre -application meeting, please allow 3 days for processing.
Not all items will apply to every project. Items in bold type are required. FOLIO NUMBERS MUST BE
PROVIDED. Forms older than 6 months will require additional review and approval by the Addressing Section.
PETITION TYPE (Indicate type below, complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition type)
❑
BL (Blasting Permit)
❑
SDP (Site Development Plan)
❑
BD (Boat Dock Extension)
❑
SDPA (SDP Amendment)
❑
Carnival/Circus Permit
❑
SDPI (Insubstantial Change to SDP)
❑
CU (Conditional Use)
❑
SIP (Site Improvement Plan)
❑
EXP (Excavation Permit)
❑
SIPI (Insubstantial Change to SIP)
❑
FP (Final Plat
❑
SNR (Street Name Change)
❑
LLA (Lot Line Adjustment)
❑
SNC (Street Name Change — Unplatted)
❑
PNC (Project Name Change)
❑
TDR (Transfer of Development Rights)
❑
PPL (Plans & Plat Review)
❑
VA (Variance)
❑
PSP (Preliminary Subdivision Plat)
❑
VRP (Vegetation Removal Permit)
❑
PUD Rezone
❑
VRSFP (Vegetation Removal & Site Fill Permit)
0
RZ (Standard Rezone)
❑
OTHER
LEGAL DESCRIPTION of subject property or properties (copy of lengthy description may be attached)
S16, T50, R26 also see attached
FOLIO (Property ID) NUMBER(s) of above (attach to, or associate with, legal description if more than one)
904188880 3 00418880003
STREET ADDRESS or ADDRESSES (as applicable, if already assigned)
6145 Polly Ave
• LOCATION MAP must be attached showing exact location of project/site in relation to nearest public road right
of -way
• SURVEY (copy -needed only for unplatted properties)
CURRENT PROJECT NAME (if applicable)
PROPOSED PROJECT NAME (if applicable)
Polly Avenue Rezone name not yet approved
PROPOSED STREET NAMES (if applicable)
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NUMBER (for existing projects/sites only)
SDP - or AR or PL #
Rev. 6/9/2017 P leol � 1 of 245
Collier County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-5724
Project or development names proposed for, or already appearing in, condominium documents (if application;
indicate whether proposed or existing)
Please Return Approved Checklist By: 0 Email
Applicant Name: Lisa Colburn/ Lindsay Robin
Phone:
❑ Fax ❑ Personally picked up
Email/Fax: lisa.colburn@stantec.com
Signature on Addressing Checklist does not constitute Project and/or Street Name
approval and is subject to further review by the Operations Division.
FOR STAFF USE ONLY
Folio Number 00418880003
Folio Number
Folio Number
Folio Number
Folio Number
Folio Number
Approved b : a f � Date: 11 /09/2021
pp Y
Updated by: Date:
IF OLDER THAN 6 MONTHS, FORM MUST BE
UPDATED OR NEW FORM SUBMITTED
Rev. 6/9/2017 PPWJ0 L2 of 245
Collier County Property Appraiser
Property Summary
Site 6145 Site Zone
Parcel No 00418880003 Address POLLY AVE Site City I NAPLES *Note 34112
*Disclaimer
Map No. Strap No. Section Township Range Acres *Estimated
51316 000100 007 5B16 16 50 26 7.42
16 50 26 W1/2 OF N1/2 OF N1/2 OF NE1/4 OF SW1/4 LESS R/W 4.25 AC, AND
Legal S1/2 OF N /4 OF NE1/4 OF SW1/4, LESS W 110FT, LESS E 132FT 3.17AC OR
1440 PG 445
Millaae Area O 105 1 Millaae Rates O *Calculations
Sub./Condo 100 - ACREAGE HEADER School Other Total
Use Code O 1 - SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 4.889 6.5293 11.4183
Latest Sales History 2021 Certified Tax Roll
(Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality) (Subject to Chance)
Date
Book -Page
Amount
07/09/21
5984-1390
$ 0
02/21/18
5480-724
$ 0
01 /03/08
4317-1745
$ 0
04/16/07
4213-4001
$ 0
05/13/96
2182-397
$ 45,000
02/01/86
1 1181-615
$ 30,000
02/01/86
1 1181-610
$ 0
Land Value
$ 519,400
+)
Improved Value
$ 170,887
(_)
Market Value
$ 690,287
(-)
Save our Home
$ 407,837
(_)
Assessed Value
$ 282,450
(-)
Homestead
$ 25,000
(_)
School Taxable Value
$ 257,450
(-)
Additional Homestead
$ 25,000
(_)
Taxable Value
$ 232,450
If all Values shown above equal 0 this parcel was created after the
Final Tax Roll
Page 123 of 245
Collier County Property Appraiser
Property Aerial
Site 6145 Parcel No 00418880003 I Address OLL Site City NAPLES Site Zone 34112
*Disclaimer PLLY AVE Note
Open GIS in a New Window with More Features.
Page 124 of 245
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliereov.net
Co*er County
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
PROPERTY OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM
This is a required form with all land use petitions, except for Appeals and Zoning Verification
Letters.
Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the
date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the
applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form.
Please complete the following, use additional sheets if necessary.
a. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in
common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the
ICIL,CIILd6C UI JUL.II IIILCICJL.
Name and Address % of Ownership
Petru Catana 100
6475 Carema Lane
Naples, FL 34113
b. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the
CI L,CI magt=UI )LUt- UVVI ICU LJy CdL.l 1.
Name and Address
of
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
Created 9/28/2017 Page 1 of 3
Page 125 of 245
C0 er County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliereov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the
general and/or limited partners:
Name and Address % of Ownership
e. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation,
Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the
officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners:
Name and Address % of Ownership
Date of Contract:
f. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or
of
IICCIS, lid LUIIJUIdLIUII, PdILIICIJIIIIJ, UI LIUNL.
Name and Address
g. Date subject property acquired 07/09/2021
❑ Leased: Term of lease years /months
If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following:
Created 9/28/2017
Page 2 of 3
Page 126 of 245
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
Date of option:
Coder County
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
Date option terminates: , or
Anticipated closing date:
AFFIRM PROPERTY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION
Any petition required to have Property Ownership Disclosure, will not be accepted without this form.
Requirements for petition types are located on the associated application form. Any change in ownership whether
individually or with a Trustee, Company or other interest -holding party, must be disclosed to Collier County
immediately if such change occurs prior to the petition's final public hearing.
As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is
included in this submittal package. I understand that 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 Department
ATTN: Business Center
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 14104
Lp2Z
Agent/Owner Signature Date
Agent/Owner Name (please print)
Created 9/28/2017
Page 3 of 3
Page 127 of 245
Coibe' r County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS
FOR STANDARD REZONE REQUEST
APPLICANT INFORMATION
Name of Applicant(s): Michael Crijan on behalf of Owner Petru Catana
Address:
Telephone:
E-Mail Address:
Cell:
City: State: ZIP:
Address of Subject Property (If available): 6145 POLLY AVE
City: Naples
State: FI ZIP: 34112
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Section/Township/Range: 16 / 50 / 26
Lot: Block: Subdivision:
Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number:
Fax:
16 5026 W1/2 OF N112 OF N1/2 OF NE1/4 OF SW114 LESS R/W 4.25 AC, AND S1/2 OF NW 1/4 OF NE114 OF SW1/4, LESS W 110FT, LESS E 132FT 3.17AC OR 1440 PG 445
Metes &Bounds Description:
TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED
Check applicable system:
a. County Utility System
b. City Utility System
C. Franchised Utility System Provide Name:.
d. Package Treatment Plant (GPD Capacity):
e. Septic System ✓
I TYPE OF WATER SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED I
a. County Utility System
b. City Utility System
C. Franchised Utility System Provide Name:
d. Private System (Well)
Total Population to be Served: 3 Residential Units
Peak and Average Daily Demands:
A. Water -Peak: 3.2 GPM
B. Sewer -Peak: 2.3 GPM
Average Daily: 1,050 GPD
Average Daily: 750 GPD
09/28/217 Page 5 of 8
Page 128 of 245
Codier County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
If proposing to be connected to Collier County Regional Water System, please provide the date
service is expected to be required:
Narrative statement: Provide a brief and concise narrative statement and schematic drawing of
sewage treatment process to be used as well as a specific statement regarding the method of affluent
and sludge disposal. If percolation ponds are to be used, then percolation data and soil involved shall
be provided from tests prepared and certified by a professional engineer.
Typical Single Family Septic System
Collier County Utility Dedication Statement: If the project is located within the service boundaries of
Collier County's utility service system, a notarized statement shall be provided agreeing to dedicate
the water distribution and sewage collection facilities within the project area to the Collier County
Utilities. This shall occur upon completion of the construction of these facilities in accordance with
all applicable County ordinances in effect at that time. This statement shall also include an agreement
that the applicable system development charges and connection fees will be paid to the County
Utilities Division prior to the issuance of building permits by the County. If applicable, the statement
shall contain an agreement to dedicate the appropriate utility easements for serving the water and
sewer systems.
Statement of Availability Capacity from other Providers: Unless waived or otherwise provided for at
the pre -application meeting, if the project is to receive sewer or potable water services from any
provider other than the County, a statement from that provider indicating adequate capacity to serve
the project shall be provided.
I PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS
This land use petition requires a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM), pursuant to Chapter 3
H. of the Administrative Code and LDC section 10.03.06. Following the NIM, the applicant will submit
a written summary and any commitments that have been made at the meeting. Refer to Chapter 8
of the Administrative Code for the NIM procedural requirements.
Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code requires that the applicant must remove their public hearing
advertising sign(s) after final action is taken by the Board of County Commissioners. Based on the
Board's final action on this item, please remove all public hearing advertising sign(s) immediately.
09/28/217 Page 6 of 8
Page 129 of 245
Project: Polly Avenue Rezone (RZ)
Sta me c Project NO.: Josh 6929
Mueller
Calculated By: Josh Mueller
Checked By: Patrick Noll
Date: 12/16/2021
Task: Detemine the estimated wastewater flows generated for the project.
Wastewater Flows Generated
CALCULATIONS:
F = Avrg Daily
Sewer Flow
G = Avrg
H = Avrg
A = Type of Service Connection
B = # of
C = Average
D = Total
Per Service
Daily Sewer
Daily Sewer
I = Peak
J = Peak
Service
Occupancy
Occupancy
E = Capita
Connect
Flow (GPD)
Flow (GPM)
Hourly
Hrly Flow
Connect
per Unit.
(BxC)
Flow (GPD)
(GPD) (CxE)
(BxF)
(G/24/60)
Factor
(GPM) (Hxl)
Polly Avenue Rezone (RZ)
Residential Units
3
2.5
8
100
250
750
0.5
4.4
2.3
Total Phase 1
-
-
-
-
-
750
0.5
-
2.3
Peak Hourly 18 + (P) 2 = 4.4 Population = 7.5 = Average Daily Flow / 100 GPD
Factor = 4 + (P)112 where P = Population / 1,000 = 0.0075
ASSUMPTIONS:
C,D,E,F) Wastewater systems shall be designed to maintain adequate flows and standards as established by Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP),
using the equivalent residential connection (ERC) value of 250 gallons per day per residential unit (broken down to 100 gallons per day per person and 2.5 people per
household) and F.A.C. 62-6.008 for non-residential (per design criteria manual Part 2)
E) Peak wastewater flows for each non-residential use below are calculated per F.A.C. 62-6 (Table 1, Estimated Sewage Flows)
1) Peak Hourly Factor = (18+ (Population/1000)A.5)/(4+(Population/1000)A.5) (from Recommended Standards for Wastewater Works , 1997) using Ten States Standards
(4.5 max).
Polly Avenue Rezone (RZ):
The rezone proposes 3 residential units as utilized for water and wastewater calculations.
CONCLUSIONS:
The wastewater peak hourly flow and average daily sewer flow were detemined to be 2.3 GPM and 750 GPD respectively.
Page 130 of 245
Project: Polly Avenue Rezone (RZ)
0� Stantec Project By: Josh
Calculated By: Josh Mueller
Checked By: Patrick Noll
Date: 12/16/2021
Task: Determine the estimated potable water demand generated by the project using estimated wastewater flows.
Total potable demand for the project
CALCULATIONS:
E = Avrg Daily
F = Avrg Daily
G = Avrg
H = Max
I = Peak
K = Peak
A = Type of Service
Water Demand
Water
Daily Water
Daily
Daily
J = Peak Hrly
Hrly
Connection
B = # of
C = Rooms,
Per Service
Demand
Demand
Demand
Demand
Demand
Demand
Service
Seats, SQ FT,
D = Capita
Connect (GPD)
(GPD)
(GPM)
(gpm)
(gpm)
(GPD)
(GPM)
Connect
Units, Etc.
Flow (GPD)
(CxD)
(BxCxD)
(F/24/60)
(G-1.35)
(G*0.5)
(FxPeak)
(J124160)
Polly Avenue Rezone (RZ)
Residential Units
3
2.5
140
350
1,050
0.73
1.0
0.4
4,647
3.2
Total (Phase 1)
1 _
I
_
_1
1,050
1 0.73
1.0
0.4
4,647
3.2
ASSUMPTIONS:
D) Per wastewater flows x 1.4 per FDEP
H) Maximum day demand peaking factor of 1.35 per 2014 Water & Wastewater Master Plan
J) Peak Hourly Factor = (18+ (Population/1000)A.5)/(4+(Population/1000)A.5) (from Recommended Standards for Wastewater Works , 1997) using Ten States Standards (4.5 max).
Polly Avenue Rezone (RZ):
The rezone proposes 3 residential units as utilized for water and wastewater calculations.
CONCLUSIONS:
- The potable water peak hourly demand and average daily water demand were detemined to be 3.2 GPM and 1,050 GPD respectively.
Page 131 of 245
w w x,:x3m awo Z66b£'VORlO13'S31dVN'3nN3AVAll0d91769
SSaldQQV Alliad02Id
Noi�d i3a�o 0
1SV3 9Z 3`0NVLI 'H1f10S 09 dIHSNM01'9l N01103S rr m O
o HIM AHAWIS ua O n Z
z �? H
m:113d 'VNV1VO g z O ~
w 9WvN 1N3I'I0iffi
zs9� € w�i;lh- N _ spy R1 ae� m �
HAW o� � ��o g as �� ��w�€ 2 �� ���� iz �p
ogs gE
16
oa . g e° "� 'm
H as
e�"m pj<°pa���p
< �5
ys� ' �w INN€�p
zoa � w
�� �a m h»€g €;° �sF€ dam a =i.o �_
rum � z
raa,�a
om
- ----- ------ � ---- - - - - - - ------
0330
�g e � ' �".� sl oss �oEms aofsrvao4nso Fxeo 6a ao axn.ss3 — w�� � «��
,m.oeuaa. — oaseofms �oEax eofxaoFs ao FM�axi-svar — —
8b- I I
w =' j
Z.
o
IT pN it
Ng
w
I� a alga
IN w LL w l W w
o�
Sao
I� I Io
vjl
EE
11 I
r y__
C �
_= I
Jirvf:ooe`s'".wmmx -- el seoEms aoEaxioF�aoiaao {meosxn isaw� o� i z
qw m a 3s.ofms,o{3x,oFxMoFrvwo M o3xn.a3m ww WU t;w SI��tt�t
Idlmroiewi.xx
3M/�_'3__awn3lnoe tuVBXVe VINJs�_-_-_-_-_-_�_-___-_-_- °
I.9orszaaaa m
§
w iffi
/ 4-
0
� \
/
2 n
_
0 0 4-1
2
%
I
\
C/)
LU
y
�
%
� �•� �
g
0 0 o >
/
E
o I% n
E
W
0)
U 0in a-
i
�
_-
�
-
�
�
-
�
_
i
\
-
§j5
--- -- --ƒ 2
5
2/}2 �
}
i
i
CD
\5
E�
-2
�
2\\
�
---
-----------
r
}
Collier County Property Appraiser
Property Summary
Site 6145 Site Zone
Parcel No 00418880003 Address POLLY AVE Site City I NAPLES *Note 34112
*Disclaimer
Map No. Strap No. Section Township Range Acres *Estimated
5B16 000100 007 5B16 16 50 26 7.42
16 50 26 W1/2 OF N1/2 OF N1/2 OF NE1/4 OF SW1/4 LESS R/W 4.25 AC, AND
Legal S1/2 OF NW1/4 OF NE1/4 OF SW1/4, LESS W 110FT, LESS E 132FT 3.17AC OR
1440 PG 445
Ila a Area v
105 _
100 - ACREAGE HEADER
Milla
School
a Rates a *Calculations
Other Total
Sub./Condo
Use Code O
1 - SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
4.889
6.5293
11.4183
Latest Sales History
(Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentialitv)
Date
Book -Page
Amount
07/09/21
5984-1390
$ 0
02/21/18
5480-724
$ 0
01 /03/08
4317-1745
$ 0
04/16/07
4213-4001
$ 0
05/13/96
2182-397
$ 45,000
02/01/86
1 1181-615
$ 30,000
02/01/86
1 1181-610
$ 0
2021 Certified Tax Roll
(Subject to Change)
Land Value $ 519,400
+� Improved Value $ 170,887
(_) Market Value $ 690,287
(-) Save our Home $ 407,837
(_) Assessed Value $ 282,450
(-)
Homestead
$ 25,000
(_)
School Taxable Value
$ 257,450
(-)
Additional Homestead
$ 25,000
(_)
Taxable Value
$ 232,450
If all Values shown above equal 0 this parcel was created after the
Final
Tax Roll
Page 134 of 245
INSTR 6098410 OR 5984 PG 1390 E-RECORDED 7/20/2021 3:19 PM PAGES 2
CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA
Doc@.70 $0.70 REC $18.50
CONS $10.00
This document was prepared without
examination or opinion of title by:
Alec M. Pearson, Esq.
Grant Fridkin Pearson, P.A.
5551 Ridgewood Dnve Su a 501
Naples, FL 34108
239-514-1000 ,
Parcel No. 00418880003';
Consideration amount: $1
Space Above This Line For Recording Data]_
Quit Claim Deed
This Quit Claim Deed made: is /Z day of July, 2021 between Fredrick C. Moscato, Jr., a single person,
whose post office address is c/o ., llnianl- ehrke & Associates, P.A., 2235 Venetian Court, Suite 5, Naples,
Florida 34109-8728 ("Grantor"), and Pe,, a married man, whose post office address is 6475 Carema. Ln.,
Naples, FL 34113 ("Grantee"):
(Whenever used herein the terms "grantor" and "grantee" i
and the successors and assigns of corporations, trusts and
Witnesseth, that Grantor, for and in consideratido
good and valuable consideration, the receipt and suf
release, and quitclaim to Grantee, and Grantee's h&
demand which Grantor has in and to the following
Florida to -wit:
to this instrument and the heirs, legal representatives, and assigns of individuals,
TEN AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($10.00) and other
f which is hereby acknowledged, do hereby remise,
l gns forever, all the right, title, interest, claim and
4nd, situate, lying and being in Collier County,
THE WEST % OF THE NORTH %z OF THE NORM', '/,y,MTHE NORTHEAST t/4 OF THE
SOUTHWEST'/a OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 504, ,,RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, LESS A STRIP OF LAND 8-' E " WIDE EACH ALONG THE
EAST AND NORTH LINES FOR HIGHWAY RIGHT WAVAND THE SOUTH t/2 OF
THE NORTHWEST t/4 OF THE NORTHEAST t/4 OF TTHWEST 1/4, LESS THE
WEST 110 FEET, LESS THE EAST 132 FEET, AND LESS.;, SQUTHERLY 30 FEET
FOR ROADWAY PURPOSES (AS CONTAINED IN O.R. BO ;AGE 740, PUBLIC
RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA) OF SECT N ` 6, TOWNSHIP 50
SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
Subject to ad valorem and non -ad valorem real property taxes for the year of closing and' subsequent years; zoning,
building code and other use restrictions imposed by governmental authority; and outtrdoil, gas and mineral
interests of record, if any; and restrictions, reservations and easements common to the subdivision.
The Grantor herein represents that he is the sole beneficiary of the Estate of Kimbra Lynn Griffin, deceased.
To Have and to Hold, the same together with all and singular the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances
thereto belonging or in anywise appertaining, and all the estate, right, title, interest, lien, equity and claim
whatsoever of Grantor, either in law or equity, for the use, benefit and profit of Grantee forever.
[Remainder of Page Intentionally Blank. Signature Page to Follow]
Page 135 of 245
*** OR 5984 PG 1391 ***
In Witness Whereof, Grantor has hereunto set Grantor's hand and seal the day and year first above written.
Signed, sealed and delivered in our presence:
#1
Printed
ri-on 1+,\,i r f rM1
Printed Name of Witness
State of 1 L..
County of ��e
The foregoing instrument was acknowk
notarization, this q day of July, 2021 by An
[I is personally known to me or who [)(] has
[Notary Seal]
a
IAL SEAL"A. LEANOS, STATE OE ILLINOISEXPIRES OI/15/2024
Fredrick C. Moscato, Jr., by Amanda Moscato, his
attorney -in -fact
befaze me by means of 0 physical presence or ❑ online
Mgsc4, as attorney -in -fact for Fredrick C. Moscato, Jr., who
c u1' i5 i(.-e VA st, as identification.
W
Name typed, printed°nor stamped
My Commissichn x i s: f}` 1 1 5 Iy )"I
Page 2 of 2
Page 136 of 245
Polly Avenue Rezone s`a69C0P, f a5Pk-E
s<� 6t" P " Pkwy ,
(3 .. T, Stantec °�mP aasoto FL 34240 N
S," Location Map I94�BO7. 0
f_mP �omPm p �:�"�r January 2022 f 941.907.6910
Page 137 of 245
This record search is for informational purposes only and does NOT constitute a
project review. This search only identifies resources recorded at the Florida Master
Site File and does NOT provide project approval from the Division of Historical
Resources. Contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical
Resources at CompliancePermits@dos.MyFlorida.com for project review information.
April 20, 2022
Adina Hoffman
Urban Planner
In response to your request on April 20, 2022, the Florida Master Site File lists no cultural resources
recorded for a property located east of Santa Barbara Blvd, south of Polly Avenue, and north of Everett
Street in unincorporated part of Collier County, Florida (PID: 00418880003).
When interpreting the results of our search, please consider the following information:
• This search area may contain unrecorded archaeological sites, historical structures
or other resources even if previously surveyed for cultural resources.
• Because vandalism and looting are common at Florida sites, we ask that you limit
the distribution of location information on archaeological sites.
• While many of our records document historically significant resources, the
documentation of a resource at the Florida Master Site File does not necessarily
mean the resource is historically significant.
• Federal, state and local laws require formal environmental review for most
projects. This search DOES NOT constitute such a review. If your project falls
under these laws, you should contact the Compliance and Review Section of the
Division of Historical Resources at CompliancePermitskdos.MyFlorida.com.
Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions regarding the results of this search.
Sincerely,
Eman M. Vovsi, Ph.D.
Florida Master Site File
Eman. Vovsi(a�DO S . MyFlorida. com
500 South Bronough Street • Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 • www.flheritage.com/preservation/sitefile
850.245.6440 ph 1 850.245.6439 fax I SiteFile@dos. state.fl.us
Page 138 of 245
J
er
40
CN
i t t j t y
v tfs'Ij�..S J No
dp
il IL s
7' �•, � - �� .� *�, � .i is .
TA
Sy
Kill
.tF `�' r• y _ �, 'Z- ,', Feu
t �� t: r !t•�� �, far{
'�' � � •!� � yam: � 1� w k t�!�`*' � h•� E
i � � � � s'w•
r >, F. L. fit: •A � x s � �+rjok� y��f � � s , -.a j�
TW� ram' i ' •l A?Y�:.
_ • .,LlrtF °•'yam _~ ... f`j_-'r
® Stantec
February 22, 2022
Mr. Michael Sawyer
Principal Planner
Growth Management Department
Transportation Planning
2685 S. Horseshoe Dr. #103
Naples, FL 34104
RE: Polly Avenue Standard Rezone (PL20210002929) TIS Waiver Request
Dear Mr. Sawyer,
Please accept this letter as a request for a waiver from providing a Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) with the
Polly Avenue Standard Rezone application submittal, PL20210002929. The request to allow for three (3)
single-family residential dwelling units is consistent with the Estates zoning district. The Applicant is
requesting this waiver based on de minimis transportation impacts associated with three (3) residential
lots. We greatly appreciate your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC.
(indsavy F. Robin, MPA, AICP
Urban Planner
Enclosures: Peter Catana, Property Owner, 6145 Polly Avenue
Design with community in mind
11us0255-ppfss0l1shared_projects�215616929\planning\analysis\rezonelinitial submittalltis waivecdou
Page 140 of 245
Strict School
0
[� Q
Collier Cou'�'��
Collier County School District
School Impact Analysis Application
Instructions: Submit one copy of completed application and location map for each new
residential project requiring a determination of school impact to the Planning Department of
the applicable local government. This application will not be deemed complete until all
applicable submittal requirements have been submitted. Please be advised that additional
documentation/information may be requested during the review process.
For information regarding this application process, please contact the Facilities Management
Department at 239-377-0267.
Please check [�] type of application request (one only):
QSchool Capacity Review ❑ Exemption Letter
F--JConcurrency Determination 0 Concurrency Determination Amendment
For descriptions of the types of review please see page 3,
I. Project Information:
Project Name: Polly Avenue Standard Rezone Municipality: Collier County
Parcel ID#: (attach separate sheet for multiple parcels): 418880003
Location/Address of subject property: 6145 Polly Avenue, Naples, FL 34112
Closest Major Intersection: Santa Barbara Blvd. & Davis Blvd.
II. Ownership/Agent Information:
Owner/Contract Purchaser Name(s): Petru Catana, Property owner
Agent/Contact Person: Lindsay Robin, AICP
(Attach location map)
(Please note that if agent or contact information is completed the District will forward all information to that person)
Mailing address: 3510 Kraft Rd., Suite 200, Naples FL 34105
Telephone#: 239-985-5502
Fax: N/A
Email lindsay.robin@stantec.com
I hereby certify the statements and/or information contained in this application with any attachments submitted
herewith are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
, n - V-) r
er or
nt Signature
III. Development Information
2-23-22
Date
Project Data (Unit Types defined on page
2 of application)
Current Land Use Designation: Urban Res. Subdistrict
Proposed Land Use Designation: urban Res. Subdistrict
Current Zoning: Rural Agricultural
Project Acreage: 7.42+/-
Unit Type: Single -Family Detached
(A)
SF
Proposed Zoning: Estates (E)
MF MH C G
Total Units Currently Allowed by Type:
1
0 0 0 0
Total Units Proposed by Type:
3
0 0 0 0
Is this a phasedproject: Yes o No
If yes, please complete page 2 of this application.
Date/time stamp:
Page 141 of 245
® Stantec
To: Nancy Gundlach, AICP From
Collier County Growth Management
File: Polly Avenue Rezone (PL20210002929) Date:
Neighborhood Information Meeting
Synopsis
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Lindsay Robin, AICP
Stantec
June 24, 2022
Memo
Stantec Consulting Services Inc., and Collier County Staff conducted a Neighborhood Information
Meeting (NIM) on Thursday, June 23, 2022.
The meeting was held at 5:30 p.m. at the South Regional Library at 8065 Lely Cultural Pkwy.,
Naples, Florida 34113. The meeting was hybrid and therefore an online option was also provided
for participants to attend virtually by computer or phone. Approximately 0 participants attended
using the link and number provided.
The sign -in sheet is attached as Exhibit "A". Six (6) residents were in attendance as well as the
consultant team, the applicant and Staff. Handouts were distributed providing information on the
proposed amendment and are attached as Exhibit "B".
Lindsay Robin (Agent) conducted the meeting with introductions of the consultant team and Staff,
and an overview of the proposed rezone application, including the location of the subject property.
She also outlined the rezone processes and opportunities to provide input at public hearings.
Following the presentation, the meeting was opened up to the attendees to make comments and
ask the consultant team questions regarding the proposed development. The following is a
summarized list of the questions asked and responses given. The Applicant's representatives'
responses are shown in bold.
Question/Comment 1: Will the zoning remain agricultural?
➢ Response: No, the request is to rezone the property from Rural Agricultural (A) to Estates
(E) for the purpose of allowing a minimum lot size of 2.25 acres.
Question/Comment 2: Will this designation run with the property?
➢ Response: Yes, it will.
Design with community in min-'
11us0255-ppfss011shared_projects\215616929\planni ng\analysis\Rezon e1N I M\N I M_Synopsis.docx
Page 142 of 245
June 24, 2022
Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Page 2 of 3
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Question/Comment 3: Are there any plans for a common driveway from Polly Avenue to Everett?
➢ Response: No.
Question/Comment 4: What is the elevation of the property?
Y Response: The elevation will be the FEMA flood zone plus one foot.
Question/Comment 5: Who will this Estates zoning district apply to?
Response: This will only apply to the Applicant's 7.45+/- acre property. The reason we
chose to go for the Estates district is because it is the next available zoning district that
has the minimum lot size that makes sense while remaining an "agricultural" zoning
district per the LDC. We are not asking to go to an RSF-4 or RMF-20 or any other sort of
zoning district that may cause incompatibility with the existing surrounding Rural
Agricultural zoning district. Additionally, to further enhance the compatibility and provide
a level of assurance to the community, the Applicant is willing to eliminate a good
number of the permitted, accessory and conditional uses in the proposed Estates district.
Question/Comment 6: The zoning will be estates, isn't this like spot zoning?
Response: If you will notice on the handout [Permitted Uses Table], the left-hand column
shows all the uses that the applicant can do today by right in the Rural Agricultural
district. Without rezoning he can go and build any of those uses. The applicant wants to
do subdivide the property and build three (3) single family homes, but because the
minimum lot size in the Rural Agricultural zoning district is 5 acres you can't and because
it is a conventional zoning district, he can't do a variance or anything like that. This
request provides protection for the community because it will greatly limit some of the
more incompatible, existing permitted uses.
There were no further questions or comments. Ms. Robin thanked the attendees for coming and
noted that their contact information is available for those who wished to reach out with any
further questions. The meeting concluded at approximately 6:00 p.m. The meeting was recorded
per the audio attached as Exhibit "C".
Design with community in mind
Page 143 of 245
June 24, 2022
Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Page 3 of 3
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
Lindsay F. Robin MPA, AICP
Associate, Community Development
Phone: 239 985 5502
Lindsay. Robin@stantec.com
Attachments: Exhibit A, Exhibit B, Exhibit C
Design with community in mind
Page 144 of 245
CK
0
0
E
Y
N
Q
J
N
00LU
Q
w
U
z
0
N
r-
r.,
W
o
N
c�
CL
ry
LLJ
D
`
N
W
�
Q
z
Lu
4}
c
Lu
Q
�
W
w
2
z
_0
0
LL
z
0
0
ry
0
co
T
3
J
•ar N�
�
u
E
U m
�ECL=
Q
° C 0
-
> v
O u
c CD
LU
�
-
N w
s
On� o
a0
b c c
0 ° -
Q.
V 0 O
u a m
m = =
M
d
-0
O' Gf >
c °
d ° 0 u
,=
L A'
W
�yD
`a • � a u, V
vcL E�'a
=
0 CR 0 0 3
� u
�
E c .c Q
-a
w
.�
s03E
V C Q-
a1
4A
0
c�i u °
° -0 a
ha_E�
.a
nD vt Q
� � E
E i7 O
'L
> >� 0
c
--
o c=
c t a u°
E
o Q 3 > >
E ° °c >, >
w o C
•D 41 °
a,a0
a m N
V 1181HX3
EXHIBIT B
Handout
Property Size: 7.45+/- acres
Proposed Estates Density: 1 unit per 2.25 acres
® Stantec
Polly Avenue Rezone
Permitted Uses Table
Rural Agricultural District (A) Estates District (E)
Existina Zonina/Current Allowable Uses Proaosed Zonina/Uses
Permitted Uses
• Single-family dwelling
• Agricultural Activities (i.e. crop raising,
horticulture, etc.)
• Wholesale reptile breeding and raising
• Wildlife management, plant and wildlife
conservancies, wildlife refuges and sanctuaries
• Conservation uses
• Oil and gas exploration
• Family care facilities
• Communications towers
• Essential Services
• Schools, public, including "Educational Plants"
• Single-family dwelling
• Family G a faGiR es
• Essential Se. ip-es
• Ed Gatie al p!aRto
Accessory Uses
• Uses and structures that are accessory and
incidental to the uses permitted as of right in
the A district
• Farm labor housing
• Retail sale of fresh, unprocessed agricultural
products
• Packinghouse or similar agricultural processing
of farm products
• Excavation and related processing and
production
• Guesthouses
• Private boathouses and docks
• Use of a mobile home as a temporary
residence while a permanent single-family
dwelling is being constructed
• Use of a mobile home as a residence in
conjunction with bona fide agricultural activities
• Recreational facilities that serve as an integral
part of a residential development
Design with community in mind
• Uses and structures that are accessory and
incidental to the uses permitted as of right in
the E district
• Fruits, vegetables, and nursery plants grown
for both personal consumption and off -site
retail sale
• Keeping of fowl or poultry
• Keeping of horses and livestock
• One guesthouse
• ReGreatiGRal facilities that serve
0Rtegral part of a r sirleRtial deyeler,ment
• EXGa„atien and relator! PFGGessing Rd
pred6lGtOGR
Page 146 of 245
® Stantec
Rural Agricultural District (A) Estate District (E)
Conditional Uses
• Extraction or earthmining, and related
processing and production not incidental to the
agricultural development of the property
• Sawmills
• Zoo, aquarium, aviary, botanical garden, or
other similar uses
• Hunting cabins
• Aquaculture for nonnative or exotic species
• Wholesale reptile breeding or raising
(venomous)
• Churches
• Private landing stripes for general aviation
• Cemeteries
• Schools, private
• Child care centers and adult day care centers
• Collection and transfer sites for resource
recovery
• Communication towers above specified height
• Social and fraternal organizations
• Veterinary clinic
• Group care facilities, care units, nursing
homes, assisted living facilities, continuing
care retirement communities
• Golf courses and/or golf driving ranges
• Oil and gas field development and production
• Sports instructional schools and camps
• Sporting and recreational camps
• Retail plant nurseries
• Asphaltic and concrete batch making plants
• Cultural, ecological, or recreational facilities
that provide opportunities for educational
experience, eco-tourism or agri-tourism and
their related modes of transporting participants,
viewers or patrons where applicable..., tour
operation, such as, but not limited to airboats,
swamp buggies, horses and similar modes of
transportation
Design with community in mind
• ryes
• SGGial and fraternal e zatiGns
• Child GaFe eRtero Rd adult day Gare
caters
• SGheels private
• Gr.,U P e faGili+ieS Rits
homes assisted liViRg faGili+ieS ORtiR YiR
,.are retirement r,i+ion
• Extron+i.,n a ar+hminiRg and related
the deVel.,nmon+ of then pei4y
Co n+'ol o
Model h. M.P-s -;;Ad- m. d-691 GeRtero
A..AG411ar„ nlan+o
M.fi+he h aR on+ with
• (h��'ihhmm,-nines+inn towers up to a specified
'� t
Page 147 of 245
® Stantec
• Agricultural activities on parcels less than 20
acres in size
• The commercial production, raising or breeding
of exotic animals, other than animals typically
used for agricultural purposes or production
• Essential services
• Model homes and model ales centers
• Ancillary plants
Source: Collier County LDC §2.03.01
Design with community in mind
Page 148 of 245
® Stantec
Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. 3510 Kraft Road Suite 200, Naples, FL 34105
June 6, 2022
Re: NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING
Polly Avenue Rezone (PL20210002929)
Dear Property Owner:
In compliance with Collier County Land Development Code please be advised that Petru Catana
has filed an application with Collier County. The application is seeking approval of a standard
rezone from Rural Agricultural (A) to Estates (E) for the 7.45+\- acre subject property located east
of Santa Barbara Blvd, south of Polly Avenue, and north of Everett Street. The rezone is seeking
to allow for the development of three (3) single-family detached residential dwelling units on lots
with a minimum size of 2.45 acres.
In compliance with the Land Development Code requirements, a Neighborhood Information
Meeting will be held to provide you an opportunity to hear a presentation about this application
and ask questions. The Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held on Thursday, June
23, 2022 at 5:30 p.m. at the South Regional Library, Room A, 8065 Lely Cultural Pkwy,
Naples, Florida, 34113.
A virtual meeting option is also available: TEAMS Meeting: https:/Ibit.ly/pollyavenue or call
TOLL FREE: United States, (833) 436-6264 Conference ID: 452 683 282#
Should you have questions prior to the meeting, please contact me directly at (239) 985-5502, or
Lindsay. robin@stantec.com.
Sincerely,
ST TEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC.
endsay F. Robin, MPA, AICP
Associate, Planning
\\us0255-ppfss01 \shared_projects\215616929\planning\analysis\rezone\nim\pollyave_mailnotice_20220531.docx
Page 149 of 245
NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD
INFORMATION MEETING
In compliance with Collier County Land Development Code the public is invited to attend a
neighborhood information meeting held by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. on behalf of Petru
Catana (Applicant), at the following time and location:
DATE: Thursday, June 23, 2022
TIME: 5:30 p.m.
ADDRESS: South Regional Library, Room A, 8065 Lely Cultural Pkwy., Naples, Florida, 34113
VIRTUAL MEETING OPTION: TEAMS Meeting: https:Hbit.ly/pollyavenue or call TOLL FREE:
United States, (833) 436-6264 Conference ID: 452 683 282#
The Applicant has filed an application with Collier County (case number PL20210002929). The
application is seeking approval of a standard rezone from Rural Agricultural (A) to Estates (E) for
the 7.45+\- acre subject property located east of Santa Barbara Blvd, south of Polly Avenue, and
north of Everett Street. The rezone is seeking to allow for the development of three (3) single-
family detached residential dwelling units on lots with a minimum size of 2.45 acres.
CAA ".1 WAv
LOCATION MAP
Business and property owners and residents are welcome to attend the presentation and discuss
the project with the owners' representatives and Collier County staff. If you are unable to attend
this meeting, but have questions or comments, they can be directed to:
Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. c/o Lindsay Robin
3510 Kraft Road Suite 200, Naples, FL 34105
(239) 985-5502 OR Lindsay. robin(a-),stantec.com
*The Collier County Library does not endorse or sponsor this project in any way.
Page 150 of 245
June 6, 2022
TO: Sonia Morgan (Josh Philpott, Project Manager)
PROJECT: File 215616929 Charge to 215617371
TASK: 950
Mailing — Neighborhood Workshop for Lindsay Robin
r
Used: $6410 590
C Q Available: $254 4101
U. Total Pieces: 1 01 20 1
I
Control Sum: $6665 . b 0 0
f
Used: $6430,440
0 Available: $234.5601
C 0.LI
oaeces: 1 01 5 6 1
i W Ttl Pi
I
Control Sum: $6665 . li00
JUN 06 2022
9:48A
Batch Count: 1 01 20
Batch Value: $641 0 590
PBP Serial Number: 0 9 2 8 511
JUN 06 20221
9:51A
Batch Count: 1 01 5 6
Batch Value: $6430 440
PBP Serial Number: 0 9 2 8 511
Thank you,
Laura Mooneyham
941-907-6900, Ext 293
IlusflYY7 pplss�llprnan atllmopnryhamlmisc-1ltemplatcs�poa agc 6atch-maHinglpost ago- balchnotiee_polly ave-rctonr_If r_7022f1b[16.dac�
Page 151 of 245
Naples Daily News - 06/07/2022
NAPLESNEWS.COM I TUESDAY, JUNE 7, 2022 1 SC
Page : C05
Classifieds
Business
oppodunites, lease, Invest...
FOR SALE - SIGN SHOP!
0... 30 years in Naples.
Gr emtion aaaonnss.
[Aw someloration. JJ
lllkill Terry: 239-])]b9�
Adopt Me
all YoN�i
E�Eye�L�l%1f1.1
Cavalier King Charles
l female $25UO3]waeeks
old, Black and Tan. Playful,
afton."te, s gg bile,
great with adultsl chelt eo
and other pets. Includes a
n-y—inealth guaran-
non mmuni-i"
red, bill of sale and AKC
egcoriPuation aepfroa�ion,
ppies a
Champpion Bloodline
(423)646-8328
CHOCOLATE LABOR DOODLE
PUPPIESI $1Bad 10 WEEKS -
$111, A HEALTH CERTIFICATE
- TEXT/CALL FOR MORE
INFONICS (443)E30-1128
English Golden Retriever
Pups- AKC, ales 8 females,
champion bloodlines. $2,5W
For re info call Rob 941-
S856b431 �
Goldendoodle Mml/Petite
house trained,
C9lO-]o44
myperfeRco panionscom
FsV d+F4 sv t
HAVANESE PUPPIES- Home
Raised AKC, Best Health!
SiViiitn9whsl 2leatk.co8m5 .
Assorted
allall kind��
A NEW ENGLAND CoIIMor
e�y all types of
fine antiy . Before you
2ndell. please call for
opinion, you may be
pleasantly surprised.
802-23fi-S6fi9
ANTIQUES & ART WANTED
Courteous Palm Beach
Buyer seeks: Quality
paintings, sculpture, glass,
porcelain, silver, watches,
jewelry, Tiffany, Cartier,
modern art, Picasso, Warhol,
old masters, Chinese
ant Qu$56i) BU1.0222e'
Enyclopetlis Britannia 1981
print, 30 volumes, Rarely used,
new,$99 (,3,)325-8609
Private COIIMOr buying base-
ball cards, sports memorabilia,
gold & silver coins. Cash Paid,
Top $. Larry: 954288-2935
2Nangle n Chas (0 ly Corns
Cremat rn ) Hope Chapel
Tranqu hry N F10811 Call
Shelley 239 339 3909
iT
DIAMONDS 5 CT Cushion
4 CT Canary, E rrinn 2 Cr
Per
ear. 10 CT Tennis brace-
IM. Rolex. 239-250-3832
]tin Rod Dining Table, Glass
top. Magnificent brushed
gold solid metal base. Seats 8.
Mintcontlition., f2]5.
(9)3)499-6612
8 Uphrrooylstered Dining Chghairs,
Excelle tCond ti n�f 165.
(973)494-6612
Antique Cherryy Desk, Green
leatherto .3 dr r 58wx
28d x 30t, $1]5. (9]3)494-6612
Berkshire lakes turn -key 2bd
c ndo fumitur ; i ludin9
1 specialty made 8 piee
bedrooms t4tarl. c
$6000/obo. 239-333-5535
URT DEA
Generator,MCCullough
Portable -Excellent
Condition, $399.00.
(239)290-3598
CIALIS 60 MG. (GENERIC)
$3.50a pill. DI01's Health
.-in (239)450-6495
Rubicon Platinum WOO, let.
h"Khair, Imo " perteR
Nape, S]50. Exercise bike,
6mo, f50. Call 34]-35-85]
Portable Mas er Mazsage�
Tame, Fate cattle, carry case.
Like New. f99. (9]3)494-fi612
GOLF CLUB$- Memorial Day
Special I TM M4 Driver A
3 wood. Callaway, Hybrids 3 8
4. 4-9 M2lrons Graphite
Rf/Rh+3 wedges, no puffer.
13 clubs Ex Cord. Taylormade
Bag. Was f 1, 100. Now SESD
Eft Thule, good _d! SS.
508-680-2615
WANTED, I am looking for a
Villa Pelican Bay, prefer
36d, 2bth, garage, well settle
for 26tl. For personal se
h deal., (Negotiable.
Real Estate
starting fresh,..
ny at A
ems ode , caasx.
Finding a job
shouldn't
feel like one.
ZipT ftcruiter
jobs,usatoday.com
CAR WASH IN BONITA FOR SALE
s 1
1
1 1
I 1 I
1 1
Ifi SELF SERVICE BAYS I
1 1 AUTOMATIC DRIVE THRU BAY 1
L CALL CRMG 239350-]999J
G OPPORTUNITY
All rea�esta�te9adve t ng in
this newspaper is subj_ ra
the Federal Fair Housing AR
of 1968 which makes it
-xi to advertise any
preference, limitation or
discrimination based on
al., religion, sex,
national origin, handicap or
familial status or an
intention to make any such
preferencoinationnon.ion or
r scr
Tknow" $aaccewtl anot
advertising fo real estate
which is in violation of the
law. Our read,a hereby
informed that .11 dwellings
advertised in this
wspaper. are availabble on
n equal opportunity asis.
OPPORTUNITY
EGGual Housing Opportunity
All real estate advertising in
this newspaper a sub." to
the Federal Fair Housing AR
f 1968 which makes it
illegadrtise al to veany
preference, limitation or
discrimination based on
national origin,Ihandicap or
am"" aus
intention to make any such
preference, limitation or
rstor
This ews alder will not
knowin9$Y oo.Ptany
adv u gvfo realestate
which u i olation of the
Iaw. Our read— , hereby
info- d that II dwellings
advertisein this
L.wspaper are ava!lable on
n aqua opportunity basis.
EOVAL HOUSING
yy OPPORTUNITY
All red ertalte advertising in
then newspaper a subjeR to
th Federal Fair HouUng AR
f 1968 wh!ch makes it
illg9al to advemse any
p,a _ e, limitation or
discrim'mcation based on
or, religion, sex,
national origin.
handicap or
familial status or an
intention to make any such
preference, limitation or
discrimination.
This newspaperwill not
knowingly accept any
advertng fo real estate
which u in violation of the
law. Our reade a hereby
informed that.11 dwellings
Ad —Nod in this
wspaper are available on
n equal opportunity basis.
Real Estate
greatgreat pl��
Marco Island - Turn -Key
..usspa-
beach fro t, 2BR2BA, island views, for lease.
No Pets. No Smoking
Call —811-152 3
irG6b'�<r
NAPLES Co... W/D I. tni
SS+Over Comm, lr" in unit,
g Ifview,2n r.b.sr calb
tr
building. Waterrbasic cable
incl'd, no pets, turn. 1 S _B
Yearly rental. 312-315-]369
gz3oo, z
Livingston. Tiled, new appls.
Pool. Pet '.led
1239)200-5869
Lakeside - gg red community,
N. Naples-]/15, unfurn., new
floor, appli. 154Zs'
ft z car
nd . On lake, tennis 2 pools, o
pets. S3000 239_200-5869
QWheels/Recreation
Ntind your next car here!
Monterre
Beautiful 3 bedroom, Z bath
aver front unit available
for 2023 season - no pets
12th floor, (84])41]-1]48
Retiretl Couple looking to reM
2BR Condo in Naples area.
Jan a :Edo.
Non smokers,
no peets.lmpecc ble credit8
Ilene references.
Call M0.55&]363
WANTED- 18-week oral
(11/20R2 - 03/2723) in North
Naples. Furnished 26r w/
lanai. Pet friendly, wi lap
Pool,
woodyhb �aol.cosme2 or
1C<
Boat Slips For Rent 2ga,4 '
Near Tn City. le Bridges.
Deep water. Eler/water.
239-8251144
Automotive
[Test est d��
AA. TOP DOLLAR PAIDI
for Oassits Cars, Muule
Cars, 8 Sp its Cars.
(239)221.3000
ABSOLUTELY
ted! Dead or Alive TIo WaOPP S
FREE PICK UPI 239-265-6140
CLASSIC/VINTAGE CARS
CASH PAID, LOCAL BUYER.
ANY CONDITION
CALL: 941-993-g060
WANTED
WE BUV CARS, TRUCKS, SUVS,
Etc AnvUing from E1.y0o00-
,1_.all $am[239-595-0021 u
016 Audi®
Quattre S Tronic. Immaculate,
garaged, dealer serviced. Gray
Metallic, Blk Int. Sun root,
A,/FM/Sirius 9 E26 640 Mill
000. ]]4-)22-31)4
.
Mini Cooper Hatckback 2009,
2 door, sunroof, manual
ctrans.,, An4Kreyko
ont owmem
e],500.
Call 239-821-2236
f ZipRecruitet'
jobs.usatodaycom
To advertise, visit:
classifieds.naplesnews.co m
a Classi ads Phone: 239.263.4700
a Classifieds Emailclassified@naplesnews.com
I Public Ntices/Legds Email: legals@napkonews.com
W,-r VISA 0
Wheels/Recreation Wheels/Recreation
0 0
Find your Find your
next car here next car here
PUBLIC NOTICE
The Distdd School Board of Collier County, Florida, will hold a
Regular School Board MN,r Tuesday, June 14, 2022, at
4:30 p.m. at the Dr. Martin Luther King lr. Administrative
Center, 5]]5 Oueola Trail, Naples, Florida, 3a— The purpose
f the meeting will be to discuss any matters legally brought be-
fore the Board.
Th. l So a.ile
he webste (rwwwh toll erschools.mm) eting atllyou, Im,Iablbrary
on Tuestlay, June ], 2022. n
IF A PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE
SCHOOL BOARD WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED,
HE HE WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND,
THEREFORE, MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS 15 MADE. THE RECORD MUST INCLUDE
THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS
TO BE BASED.
June.7,2022 #5282682
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA PROBATE DIVISION
IN RE: ESTATE OF File No 2022-CP-M-9
RICHARD HILL
Deceased.
NOTICE TO CREDITORS
The administration of the estate of Richard Hill, deceased,
whose date of death was January 12, 2022, is pending in the Cir-
it Court for Collier County, Florida, Probate Division, the ad-
dress of which is 3315 Tamiami Trail East, Ste. 102 Naples, FL
34112-5324, The names and addre 1 of the p^rsonal represen-
ve and the personal representatives atto ey are set forth
be
All I editors of the decedent and othr' Persons havingclaims or
demands against decedent's estate on hop a copy o f this no-
tice is required to be served must file their claims with this court
ON OR BEFORE THE LATER OF 3 MONTHS AFTER THE TIME OF
THE FIRST PUBLICATION OF THIS NOTICE OR 30 DAYS AFTER
THE DATE OF SERVICE OF A COPY OF THIS NOTICE ON THEM.
All he, creditors of the decedent and other persons having
claims or demands g decedent's file heir
claims with this court WITHIN 3 MONTHS AFTER THE DATE OF
THE FIRST PUBLICATION OF THIS NOTICE.
ALL CLAIMS NOT FILED WITHIN THE TIME PERIODS SET FORTH
IN FLORIDA STATUTES SECTION ]33.]02 WILL BE FOREVER BAR-
RED.
NOTWITHSTANDING THE TIME PERIODS SET FORTH ABOVE,
ANY CLAIM FILED TWO (2) YEARS OR MORE AFTER THE DECE-
DENT'S DATE OF DEATH IS BARRED.
The date of first publication of this notice is M4/z2.
Attorney R. Nadine David, Esq., FBN: 89004, Florida Probate
Law Group, PO Box 111131, 6ainewille, FL 32614 Phone: (352)
354-2654, ndavidgfloridaprobatelawgroup.tom
.f!oridapfebat ati— Karen
Personal Rep WLUn Karen Marie Hill, 41 Ashlyns Road
Bane 14,,20 HP43BL United Kingdom
June ],19, 2022 N5289117
NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD
INFORMATION MEETING
lnc. on neneea dew celene (applicec0. 9 .. loluriowlrg Ime-d o mlm M�
n'TPLm ro,iond udan, room A. eves L I, cularw P"...
,PwNavenue re MI
TOLL FREE. Unnw—. (-) ass bz a4cmhren-ID: eaz eee 2azs
And— nm alee m ePpncallm vnln erne- county Kc numem
n. The apPliwtbn Is warn, appreval of a nanaara rezone 6om PI2t aguUu rebel io rs o so re wbjct 'Opesoeet m
rezone is aeebn, I an. lo, rho awalwmam a mrea D) r'nal—il, dauchea
z:*j
�� 41-
op.m owna,s aia reeia.iaa are w.kore. to mma m• presamalan
Pm1en coumyrta
(eam ses-ssm oR unn.,mn P„en
Public Sale Public Sale Public Sale
NOTICE OF SALE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the undersigned intends to sell the personal property described be-
low to enforce a lien imposed on said property a der The Florida Self Storage Facility AR Statutes
(SeRion 83.801-83.809). The untlersi9 d will II at public sale by Competitive bidding on Wed-
n tla the 22ntl tla f June 2022 at 10:00 A.M. Lrckerfo . m sa d pp pp strtyy has been stored
d which are located st IItoraae Nao ez. 3836 Tolloate Blvd. Naolas. FL,o341f0. Collier Counn
The following:
Name: unit Contents
George Mostiller 547 Assorted Household Items
Cameron Shaba. 368 Assorted Household Items
Donovan Ides z 368 Assorted Household Items
Sergio Valdes 3�6710 Assorted Household Items
Jonathan Mills 310 Assorted Household Items
$(even Knipprath 31] Assorted Household Items
Purchases rt be paid fort the time of purchase by cash only. All purchased items are sold as is,
here is, and must be removed at the time of the sale. Sale iz subject to cancellation io the event
of settlement between --and obligated party.
Dated this 31st Day of May 2022 and the ]th Day of June 2022.
Pub: Mav 31, June ], 2022, #52]]330
June 8, 2022 9:26 am (GM -4:00) Powered66TJcaf2
v& 245
® Stantec Memo
To: Nancy Gundlach, AICP From
Collier County Growth Management
File: Polly Avenue Rezone (PL20210002929) Date:
Neighborhood Information Meeting
Synopsis
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Josh Philpott, AICP
Stantec
May 17, 2024
Stantec Consulting Services Inc., and Collier County Staff conducted a Neighborhood Information
Meeting (NIM) on Tuesday, May 14, 2024.
The meeting was held at 5:30 p.m. at the South Regional Library at 8065 Lely Cultural Pkwy., Naples,
Florida 34113. The meeting was hybrid and therefore an online option was also provided for
participants to attend virtually by computer or phone.
The sign -in sheet is attached as Exhibit "A". Fourteen (14) residents were in attendance as well as
two consultant team members, one County staff member, and two virtual participants. One of these
virtual attendees left after the first few minutes and did not communicate any comments or
questions and the contact information for the other virtual attendee was added to the sign -in sheet.
Handouts were distributed providing information on the proposed rezone and allowable uses and
are attached as Exhibit "B".
Josh Philpott (Agent) conducted the meeting with introductions of the consultant team and County
staff, and then provided an overview of the why this meeting was being held and the details of the
proposed rezone application. He discussed that this is a second neighborhood information meeting
on the rezone and that the boundary survey issues delayed this petition moving forward sooner. He
explained that due to the extended delay on that issue, County regulations required a second
neighborhood information meeting to be held. The application details and the project which were
presented at the neighborhood information workshop in 2022 is largely the same information
presented at this neighborhood information meeting. He outlined the rezone processes and future
opportunities to provide input at public hearings.
Following the presentation, the meeting was opened to the attendees to make comments and ask
questions regarding the proposed rezone application. The following is a summarized list of the
questions asked and responses given. The Agent responses are shown in bold.
Question/Comment 1: What will happen with the new building on the site?
➢ Response: The existing structure shown on the boundary survey which straddles the
property line of the two home sites on Polly Avenue will need to be removed. All other
Design with community in min
11us0255-ppfss011shared_projects\215616929\planning\analysis\Rezone\NIM, 5.14.241summary\NIM_Synopsis.docx
Page 153 of 245
May 17, 2024
Page 2 of 4
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
structures on the property will need to comply with the zoning setbacks. The recently
constructed building will remain.
Question/Comment 2: Concern was expressed pertaining to new development along the Everett
Street area and that three new homes are being proposed on this property after a new garage has
been recently constructed on the property.
Question/Comment 3: Concern was expressed about the clearing of the exotics on the site.
➢ Response: As part of the permit, there is a requirement to clear exotics.
Question/Comment 4: What is the boundary survey that held everything up?
➢ Response: The boundary survey that was done had a discrepancy. The property owner's
surveyor and County surveyor are working through the issue now. Once the boundary
survey issue is resolved, the application will be deemed sufficient. Once it is sufficient the
next step will be scheduling the rezone for consideration with the Collier County Planning
Commission who will make a recommendation and then presented to the Collier County
Commissioners.
Question/Comment 5: Where are these public meetings posted?
Response: There will be a sign posted on the property before future public meetings.
There will also be a public notice published in the newspaper and notices will be mailed
nearby residents. Any email addresses written on the sign in sheet will also receive an
emailed copy of the public notices.
Question/Comment 6: Concern was expressed about the use of that new building and whether it is
a truck garage and for what purpose it is being used. Concern was expressed that the garage is for a
business being run on this road.
Response: The intent of the use of this site is to develop it as 3-single family homes. Only
permitted uses within the current zoning category are allowed. Once rezoned, uses on
the site must comply with the new zoning designation. The use of the new building
structure will have to be in compliance with the Estates zoning district and will need to be
an accessory use to a single-family home.
Question/Comment 7: Is Everett Street a public or private road? (Concern was expressed about the
current condition of the road and needing to have it repaved.)
➢ Response: It is public and non -County maintained.
Question/Comment 8: What is the list of what will not be on the site and how is that documented?
Response: The allowable use list (shown in the PowerPoint presentation and provided as
a handout in Exhibit B) reflects certain permittable uses that are being struck -out in the
Estates zoning. The permitted uses will be recorded as part of the zoning change.
Design with community in mind
Page 154 of 245
May 17, 2024
Page 3 of 4
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
Question/Comment 9: Concern was expressed about the approval of any new development
occurring on Polly Avenue and truck traffic and impacts.
Question/Comment 10: Who owns the property owner and where are they located?
➢ Response: Petru Catana of Catana Construction. They are located here in Collier County.
Question/Comment 11: Concern about the variances being requested.
➢ Response: The Agent clarified that this is not a variance request and further provided an
explanation of what the rezone request is. The rezone change is required to allow the
density on site which would permit three (3) single family homes.
Question/Comment 12: Concern was expressed about any increase in density being approved
throughout Collier County.
Question/Comment 13: Was there a Traffic Impact Statement done on this project?
➢ Response: A waiver was approved due to the projects de minimis impact for a three (3)
single family home project.
(VIRTUAL Attendee) Question/Comment 14: Zoning will not approve a variance?
➢ Response: A variance could not be approved to increase the density on the property within
the existing zoning. Variances do not allow for an increase in density. Therefore, the
property owner is going through this rezone process to increase the density for these
homes.
(VIRTUAL Attendee) Question/Comment 15: Can you do the housing without changing the zoning?
➢ Response: No. You cannot put three (3) homes on the property in the current zoning
designation. Only one is currently permitted to be on this property within the existing
zoning and property acreage.
Question/Comment 16: Can you put more than 3 homes on the property?
➢ Response: Estates zoning requires 2.25 acres per home, therefore three (3) is the maximum
number of homes that could be allowed in the Estates zoning on this size property.
Question/Comment 17: Support was expressed that all future meetings on this rezone application
would be held in the evenings.
➢ Response: It was explained that the Planning Commission and County Commission
meetings are held during the day and outside of our control in the scheduling of time.
There were no further questions or comments. Josh Philpott thanked the attendees for coming and
noted his contact information and availability for those who wished to reach out with any further
Design with community in mind
Page 155 of 245
May 17, 2024
Page 4 of 4
Reference: Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis
questions. The meeting concluded at approximately 6:20 p.m. The meeting was recorded per the
audio transcript attached as Exhibit UU.
Design with community in mind
Page 156 of 245
m
w
C
O
C
U
O
U
a
t O
.`
a
•3
o
C
a
a
c
O
( �
L
4
'
"
�
Y a
V
Z
0
U •
'a -)a
N
�Q2oo
a2UL
o�
LLJ
L1J
N
CD
-a
>
C
C
O
.0
O
O
O
O
v
Z
r—
�u
`
-aCD
O
O
Q
W
�'
C
°
CD
a
a o
o
Q
n
W
w
o
>
-
LO
J
o
W
U
Q
p"
N U
O
Z
O
-0 -O
L
t
" U
LL
O
a) 0-
a,
E
a
Z
r�
N
O
W
4 "_
Q):
a
O O
3
LLJ
,
O
o
OLLJ
N
lc;)
-a
E
o °'
�
�
Q
aai
�
c
Q
o
Z
W
'
E
Or-
t
=
W
J
o
o
t
"
LL
>
\
a
s
r O
O
Q
C
oa"
O
O
�
"
� �
=
>
U
°
U
'a
a
U a
a
J"a0C
W
O
�
.0
E
.� a
.0
Z
n
N
E
O
0
t
c
0
>Z
0
` C
C
O
C
O
—
C
a
C 3
a
U O
CL
3
> >
_o
a
"
O
� >.
0
0
-0
H
v
N„
u
a
h
ILI411
W
M
-Zr
P—
K—
V)
a
v l,Ln
O
V)
Q21
\
vV
' '
ti
s
J
cN
C
Z
r
9>
i
LA
d
d
V,
LIN
J,
�1
V
V
�
d
cr
Handout
Property Size: 7.45+/- acres
Proposed Estates Density: 1 unit per 2.25 acres
® Stantec
Polly Avenue Rezone
Permitted Uses Table
Rural Agricultural District (A) Estates District (E)
Existina Zonina/Current Allowable Uses Proaosed Zonina/Uses
Permitted Uses
• Single-family dwelling
• Agricultural Activities (i.e. crop raising,
horticulture, etc.)
• Wholesale reptile breeding and raising
• Wildlife management, plant and wildlife
conservancies, wildlife refuges and sanctuaries
• Conservation uses
• Oil and gas exploration
• Family care facilities
• Communications towers
• Essential Services
• Schools, public, including "Educational Plants"
• Single-family dwelling
• Family G a faGiR es
• Essential Se. ip-es
• Ed Gatie al p!aRto
Accessory Uses
• Uses and structures that are accessory and
incidental to the uses permitted as of right in
the A district
• Farm labor housing
• Retail sale of fresh, unprocessed agricultural
products
• Packinghouse or similar agricultural processing
of farm products
• Excavation and related processing and
production
• Guesthouses
• Private boathouses and docks
• Use of a mobile home as a temporary
residence while a permanent single-family
dwelling is being constructed
• Use of a mobile home as a residence in
conjunction with bona fide agricultural activities
• Recreational facilities that serve as an integral
part of a residential development
Design with community in mind
• Uses and structures that are accessory and
incidental to the uses permitted as of right in
the E district
• Fruits, vegetables, and nursery plants grown
for both personal consumption and off -site
retail sale
• Keeping of fowl or poultry
• Keeping of horses and livestock
• One guesthouse
• ReGreatiGRal facilities that serve
0Rtegral part of a r sirleRtial deyeler,ment
• EXGa„atien and relator! PFGGessing Rd
pred6lGtOGR
Page 158 of 245
EXHIBIT B
® Stantec
Rural Agricultural District (A) Estate District (E)
Conditional Uses
• Extraction or earthmining, and related
processing and production not incidental to the
agricultural development of the property
• Sawmills
• Zoo, aquarium, aviary, botanical garden, or
other similar uses
• Hunting cabins
• Aquaculture for nonnative or exotic species
• Wholesale reptile breeding or raising
(venomous)
• Churches
• Private landing stripes for general aviation
• Cemeteries
• Schools, private
• Child care centers and adult day care centers
• Collection and transfer sites for resource
recovery
• Communication towers above specified height
• Social and fraternal organizations
• Veterinary clinic
• Group care facilities, care units, nursing
homes, assisted living facilities, continuing
care retirement communities
• Golf courses and/or golf driving ranges
• Oil and gas field development and production
• Sports instructional schools and camps
• Sporting and recreational camps
• Retail plant nurseries
• Asphaltic and concrete batch making plants
• Cultural, ecological, or recreational facilities
that provide opportunities for educational
experience, eco-tourism or agri-tourism and
their related modes of transporting participants,
viewers or patrons where applicable..., tour
operation, such as, but not limited to airboats,
swamp buggies, horses and similar modes of
transportation
Design with community in mind
• ryes
• SGGial and fraternal a zatiGns
• Child GaFe eRtero Rd adult day Gare
caters
• SGheels private
• Gr.,U P e faGili+ieS Rits
homes assisted liViRg faGili+ieS ORtOR YiR
,.are retirement r,i+ion
• Extron+i.,n a ar+hminiRg and related
the deVel.,nmon+ of then pei4y
Co n+'ol o
Model h. M.P-s -nrl m. d-691 GeRtero
A..AG411ar„ nlan+o
M.fi+he h aR on+ with
• (h��'ihhmm,-nines+inn towers up to a specified
'� t
Page 159 of 245
EXHIBIT B
® Stantec
• Agricultural activities on parcels less than 20
acres in size
• The commercial production, raising or breeding
of exotic animals, other than animals typically
used for agricultural purposes or production
• Essential services
• Model homes and model ales centers
• Ancillary plants
Source: Collier County LDC §2.03.01
Design with community in mind
Page 160 of 245
EXHIBIT C
Audio Transcript
The full audio recording was provided to the assigned County Planner in the form of .mp4 file. A
copy of this recording is available for inspection with Collier County, as required by Collier County
Land Development Code.
Page 161 of 245
[ 2 f
i
t
!Adkins Ave r
m
`m
N
N
RP'UD
r
•
A -
(Rural Agriculture)
u
sun
r � r•
f
y�
•K
rod.
�
Project Parcel RSF-5 RSF-3
Zoning Boundary
Parcel Boundary Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoE- Eartlti har Geo"Taph� ics, CNE�S/Airbus DS,
�SDA,GS, A GR D,d the GIS User Community
® Stantec
Polly Avenue Rezone
Permitted Uses Table
Rural Agricultural District (A) Estates District (E)
Existing Zoning/Current Allowable Uses Proposed Zoning/Uses
Permitted Uses
• Single-family dwelling
• Agricultural Activities (i.e. crop raising,
horticulture, etc.)
• Wholesale reptile breeding and raising
• Wildlife management, plant and wildlife
conservancies, wildlife refuges and sanctuaries
• Conservation uses
• Oil and gas exploration
• Family care facilities
• Communications towers
• Essential Services
• Schools, public, including "Educational Plants"
• Single-family dwelling
• Family G a faGiR es
• Essential Se. i,.es
• Ed Gatie al p!aRto
Accessory Uses
• Uses and structures that are accessory and
incidental to the uses permitted as of right in
the A district
• Farm labor housing
• Retail sale of fresh, unprocessed agricultural
products
• Packinghouse or similar agricultural processing
of farm products
• Excavation and related processing and
production
• Guesthouses
• Private boathouses and docks
• Use of a mobile home as a temporary
residence while a permanent single-family
dwelling is being constructed
• Use of a mobile home as a residence in
conjunction with bona fide agricultural activities
• Recreational facilities that serve as an integral
part of a residential development
Design with community in mind
• Uses and structures that are accessory and
incidental to the uses permitted as of right in
the E district
• Fruits, vegetables, and nursery plants grown
for both personal consumption and off -site
retail sale
• Keeping of fowl or poultry
• Keeping of horses and livestock
• One guesthouse
• ReGreatiGRal facilities that serve
0Rtegral part of a r sirleRtial deyeler,ment
• EXGa„atien and relator! PFGGessing Rd
pred6lGtOGR
Page 163 of 245
® Stantec
Rural Agricultural District (A) Estate District (E)
Conditional Uses
• Extraction or earthmining, and related
processing and production not incidental to the
agricultural development of the property
• Sawmills
• Zoo, aquarium, aviary, botanical garden, or
other similar uses
• Hunting cabins
• Aquaculture for nonnative or exotic species
• Wholesale reptile breeding or raising
(venomous)
• Churches
• Private landing stripes for general aviation
• Cemeteries
• Schools, private
• Child care centers and adult day care centers
• Collection and transfer sites for resource
recovery
• Communication towers above specified height
• Social and fraternal organizations
• Veterinary clinic
• Group care facilities, care units, nursing
homes, assisted living facilities, continuing
care retirement communities
• Golf courses and/or golf driving ranges
• Oil and gas field development and production
• Sports instructional schools and camps
• Sporting and recreational camps
• Retail plant nurseries
• Asphaltic and concrete batch making plants
• Cultural, ecological, or recreational facilities
that provide opportunities for educational
experience, eco-tourism or agri-tourism and
their related modes of transporting participants,
viewers or patrons where applicable..., tour
operation, such as, but not limited to airboats,
swamp buggies, horses and similar modes of
transportation
Design with community in mind
• ryes
• SGGial and fraternal e zatiGns
• Child GaFe eRtero Rd adult day Gare
caters
• SGheels private
• Gr.,U P e faGili+ieS Rits
homes assisted liViRg faGili+ieS ORtiR YiR
,.are retirement r,i+ion
• Extron+i.,n a ar+hminiRg and related
the deVel.,nmon+ of then pei4y
Co n+'ol o
Model h. M.P-s -;;Ad- m. d-691 GeRtero
A..AG411ar„ nlan+o
M.fi+he h aR on+ with
• (h��'ihhmm,-nines+inn towers up to a specified
'� t
Page 164 of 245
® Stantec
• Agricultural activities on parcels less than 20
acres in size
• The commercial production, raising or breeding
of exotic animals, other than animals typically
used for agricultural purposes or production
• Essential services
• Model homes and model ales centers
• Ancillary plants
Source: Collier County LDC §2.03.01
Design with community in mind
Page 165 of 245
AdkinsAve--
—PollAve
-91
Everett St
4
�I
Opt
45 4t.
IP
1 4,
I RSF-3
AAV I
Ir
cl!
+1
w
u
m
sh
o
+1
w
+1
w
+1
rn
c3i rn
Q
M. w � JL
(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.
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.
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.
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
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.
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
BEFORE THE UNDERSIGNED AUTHORITY, PERSONALLY APPEARED Josh Philpott
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
PL2021002929
1412 Jackson Steet, Suite 3
RE ��"LICANT OR AGENT STREET OR P.O. BOX
Josh Philpott
NAME (TYPED OR PRINTED)
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
Fort Myers, FL 33901
CITY, STATE ZIP
The foregoing instrument was sworn to and subscribed before me this 6th day of January , 20 25, by
Josh Philpott . personally known to me or who produced Drivers Licenses -as identification
and who did/did not take an oath.
My Commission Expires:
(Stamp with serial number)
Rev. 3/4/2015
01"& � O'le- "&
Signature of Notary Public
4-ti ji e- tbj- e-- Mt
,tedName of Notary Public
r4otary Public State of Florida
A Christine Marie Mitchell
Ilil My Commission HH 388661
Expires 5/16/2027
Page 168 of 245
'.'#'HEARING NOTICE
Polly Avenue Rezone
Jtion No. PL 0 10002 2
y
3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34112
Nancy # '4 —
';�.�5'' � -��M1y y �5�'' .��1c' . � * � �#`'i� hoc } r l�4*1 ..' �: •'
..+co- }�� ,�f�"�' '�`'���q�: ;• �'�'•• 'f�
. �i�� =. o�k'..i i?' ��.: �=��1l�A:.'�.1�.rrti%.';;sx;., n �`A.:.<...,'i�.'•} , . . . .
1/16/2025
Item # 9.1)
ID# 2024-2135
PL20240009067 - Guesthouse Rentals in Urban Estates - An ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of
Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance Number 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code,
which includes the comprehensive land regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, to modify the
prohibition of renting guesthouses on lots zoned Estates (E), located west of Collier Boulevard, to allow for such rentals
if all new requirements are met, by providing for Section One, Recitals; Section Two, Findings of Fact; Section Three,
Adoption of Amendments to the Land Development Code, more specifically amending the following: Chapter Two -
Zoning Districts And Uses, including Section 2.03.01 Agricultural Districts and Chapter Five - Supplemental Standards,
including Section 5.03.03 Guesthouses; Section Four, Conflict and Severability; Section Five, Inclusion in the Collier
County Land Development Code; and Section Six, Effective Date. [Coordinator: Eric L Johnson, AICP, CFM, LEED
Green Associate, Planning Manager]
ATTACHMENTS:
LDCA (12-12-2024)
Draft Ordinance (12-02-2024)
Draft Resolution (12-12-2024)
Exhibit A - Boundary Map
Exhibit B - Public Comment at DSAC-LDR
Exhibit C - Apartment Survey
Page 170 of 245
..,)Collier County
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT
PETITION
PL20240009067
ORIGIN
Board of County
Commissioners (Board)
HEARING DATES
Board TBD
CCPC TBD
DSAC 11/06/2024
DSAC-LDR 10/15/2024
DSAC-LDR
Approval
SUMMARY OF AMENDMENT
This LDC amendment establishes interim regulations for the rental of
guesthouses within urban Estates zoned lots. LDC amendments are
reviewed by the Board, Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC),
Development Services Advisory Committee (DSAC), and the Land
Development Review Subcommittee of the DSAC (DSAC-LDR).
LDC SECTION TO BE AMENDED
2.03.01 Agricultural Districts
5.03.03 Guesthouses
ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS
DSAC
Approval with recommendations
CCPC
TBD
BACKGROUND
The provisions for guesthouses were first adopted in 1974 when the Coastal Planning Area District regulations
were established. This ordinance defined them as an "accessory dwelling unit," which was to be "used
exclusively for the non-commercial accommodation of friends or relatives of the occupant or owner of the
principal dwelling." In 1976, the provisions were clarified to prohibit the leasing or renting of a guest
accommodation facility and to allow one guest house to be a permitted accessory use in both the Agricultural (A)
and Estates (E) zoning districts. Since then, the guesthouse provisions have been amended from time to time, but
the prohibition of renting them has remained.
On February 14, 2023, the Board discussed an item sponsored by Commissioner McDaniel that sought to amend
the LDC to allow the rental of guesthouses. During the presentation, Commissioner McDaniel suggested that the
rental of guesthouses should be restricted to homesteaded properties located in the urban Estates —the rationale
of the restriction being that on -site landlords do a good job of managing the actions of their tenants. The Board
members further discussed the prospect of amending the LDC but later agreed that Commissioner Hall should
first discuss the matter with the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee (AHAC) before the Board gives
direction to staff. On May 15, 2023, staff presented the prospect of guesthouse rentals within the Urban Golden
Gate Estates to the AHAC. The AHAC supported looking at the rental of guesthouses as a possible solution to
the affordable housing shortage within the County. The motion recognized that it was the desire of AHAC to
increase supply and to allow this in the urban Estates. It was also their desire to recommend exploring guesthouse
rental for the rural Estates. Finally, the program should be offered to homesteaded properties (and the exemption
would remain) and it should be kept at market -rate rents. The AHAC wanted staff to provide the Board with the
rent -ranges and the percentage of homesteaded properties out of the 3,559 targeted properties.
On May 14, 2024, the Board discussed Item 11.A. under the County Manager's Report, which was a
recommendation to provide staff direction on the Board's request for staff to gather input on the community's
desire to allow for the legal renting of guesthouses within the urban Estates Zoning District, based upon the
conclusions provided for within the Guesthouse Rental White Paper. By a vote of 4-1, the Board directed staff
to move forward with an LDC amendment with the provision in writing of the one-year revisit and a specific
report from Code Enforcement.
The provisions for the Density Rating System in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth
G:\LDC Amend ments\Adviso ry Boards and Public Hearing s\CCPC\2025\01-16\Materials\Word Versions\PL20240009067 Guesthouse Rentals
- LDCA (12-12-2024).docx
Page 171 of 245
..,)Collier County
Management Plan (GMP) recognizes that guesthouses are considered accessory dwellings and are not counted
toward density. However, the Density Rating System in the FLUE is only applicable to certain geographic areas
of the County and yields to either the Immokalee Area Master Plan or Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP),
where applicable, in matters of density and application. The geographic area encompassed by this LDC
amendment is located within the jurisdiction of the GMP but with a majority of the lots located within the
GGAMP, specifically the Urban Golden Gate Estates Sub -Element (see Exhibit A). According to the Estates
Designation of the Urban Golden Gate Estates Sub -Element of the GGAMP, this designation is characterized by
low density semi -rural residential lots within limited opportunities for other land uses. Typical lots are 2.25 acres;
however, there are some legal non -conforming lots as small as 1.14 acres. Residential density is limited to a
maximum of one unit per 2.25 gross acres, or one unit per legal non -conforming lot of record, exclusive of
guesthouses. Multiple family dwelling units, duplexes, and other structures containing two or more principal
dwellings are prohibited in all Districts and Subdistricts in the Estates Designation. The density exclusion for
guesthouses is also provided for in the Residential Estates Subdistrict of the Estates — Mixed Use District. Since
the Urban Golden Gate Estates Sub -Element is silent with respect to the rental of guesthouses, no GMP
amendment will be necessary or required to amend the LDC to allow guesthouse rentals in the Estates zoning
district. Transportation Planning staff reviewed the proposed Amendment and anticipates that there will be
minimal impacts on the road network based on the following findings:
• There are a limited number of parcels effected by the amendment.
• The Urban Subdistrict contains an established road network with major north -south and east -west arterials
and collectors.
• Traffic impacts resulting from the rental units should more widely be distributed within the subdistrict
compared to traditional PUD developments with single point trip impacts.
• There is a reasonable network of interconnected local -neighborhood roads providing alternative routes.
• There are numerous goods/services/employment opportunities adjacent to this subdistrict area to reduce trip
lengths on the network compared to longer rural commuter -residential trips.
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENTATION: The CCPC
will review this LDC amendment on January 16, 2025.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE (DSAC) RECOMMENDATION: The
DSAC recommended approval of the amendment on November 6, 2024. The DSAC specifically wanted 1) the
CCPC and BCC be fully apprised of the potential tax implications; and 2) the staff report to be revised to indicate
the aforementioned as a potential fiscal impact (e.g., the fiscal impact to the County may be positive given the
additional revenue, but the increase additional tax rate to the homeowner may impact rent, which may impact the
portability). Two members of the DSAC voted in opposition to the amendment.
The DSAC-LDR Subcommittee recommended approval of the amendment on October 15, 2024. Two noteworthy
changes were made after the hearing, which were presented to DSAC. The first change was to incorporate a
sunsetting clause of five years. The second change was to specify a minimum duration of nine month for any
lease agreement between a lessor and lessee of the guesthouse. A minimum duration will help to ensure the
guesthouses will not be used for short-term lodging but to remain as part of the County's housing supply, to
indirectly promote the goal of addressing the affordable housing problem.
FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS GMP CONSISTENCY
There are no anticipated fiscal impacts to the The proposed LDC amendment has been reviewed by
County, except for the cost of advertising an Comprehensive Planning staff and may be deemed
ordinance amending the LDC, which is consistent with the GGAMP.
estimated $50.00. Funds are available within
2
G:\LDC Amend ments\Adviso ry Boards and Public Hearing s\CCPC\2025\01-16\Materials\Word Versions\PL20240009067 Guesthouse Rentals
- LDCA (12-12-2024).docx
Page 172 of 245
Collier County
the Unincorporated Area General Fund (1011)
and Zoning & Land Development Cost Center
(138319). Property owners who wish to rent
their guesthouse will bear the cost of a
registration fee, which is anticipated to be an
annual fee of $125 from Zoning. Homeowners
may experience an increase in their property
taxes due to the loss of the homestead
exemption on the guesthouse structure when
the guesthouse is rented.
EXHIBITS: A) Boundary Map; B) Public Comments at DSAC-LDR; and C) Apartment Survey
3
G:\LDC Amend ments\Adviso ry Boards and Public Hearing s\CCPC\2025\01-16\Materials\Word Versions\PL20240009067 Guesthouse Rentals
- LDCA (12-12-2024).docx
Page 173 of 245
DRAFT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Amend the LDC as follows:
2.03.01 - Agricultural Districts
A. Rural Agricultural District (A). The purpose and intent of the rural agricultural district (A) is
to provide lands for agricultural, pastoral, and rural land uses by accommodating
traditional agricultural, agricultural related activities and facilities, support facilities related
to agricultural needs, and conservation uses. Uses that are generally considered
compatible to agricultural uses that would not endanger or damage the agricultural,
environmental, potable water, or wildlife resources of the County, are permissible
as conditional uses in the A district. The A district corresponds to and implements the
Agricultural/Rural land use designation on the future land use map of the Collier County
GMP, and in some instances, may occur in the designated urban area. The
maximum density permissible in the rural agricultural district within the urban mixed use
district shall be guided, in part, by the density rating system contained in the future land
use element of the GMP. The maximum density permissible or permitted in A district shall
not exceed the density permissible under the density rating system. The
maximum density permissible in the A district within the agricultural/rural district of the
future land use element of the Collier County GMP shall be consistent with and not exceed
the density permissible or permitted under the agricultural/rural district of the future land
use element.
1. The following subsections identify the uses that are permissible by right and the
uses that are allowable as accessory or conditional uses in the rural agricultural
district (A).
b. Accessory uses.
6. One questhouse Guesthous subject to LDC section 5.03.03.
# # # # # # # # # # # # #
5.03.03 — Guesthouses
Where a guesthouse is an allowable use, it shall be permitted only in compliance with the following
standards. See LDC section 1.08.02 Guesthouse for additional information.
A. No guest accommodation facility in a single-family residential district, whether a
freestanding guest house or guest accommodations which are structurally integrated with
the main dwelling, may be utilized for commercial purposes.
B. Leasing or renting a guest accommodation facility shall constitute a violation of this LDC,
exceDt as Drovided for in LDC section 5.03.03 F.
4
G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\01-16\Materials\Word Versions\PL20240009067
Guesthouse Rentals - LDCA (12-12-2024).docx
Page 174 of 245
AA-A121
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
C. If the principal dwelling a main residence is leased or rented, a guest accommodation
facility accessory to it may not be occupied by the property owner, since that would
constitute the unlawful utilization of single-family zoned property for two-family dwelling
purposes.
D. The following site design standards apply to all guest-houses:
Minimum lot area shall be 43,560 square feet.
2. Minimum lot width shall be 105 feet.
3. The maximum floor area shall be forty (40) percent of the air-conditioned, enclosed
living area (excluding garages, carports, patios, porches, utility areas, and the like)
of the principal dwelling.
4. Detached guest-houses shall not be closer than twenty (20) feet to the principal
dwelling.
E. A guesthouse may be constructed prior to a principal dwelling, provided the guest house
meets the minimum requirements of a single-family residence in the district in which it is
being constructed. At such time as a principal residence is constructed, then the floor area
percentages listed above shall apply.
F. The leasing or renting of a guesthouse shall be prohibited unless the following
requirements are met:
1. The subject property is located within the Estates (E) zoning district west of Collier
Bnulevard.
2. The subject property is owner -occupied where the landlord, as defined by Florida
Statutes section 83.43, makes permanent residence within the principal dwelling
and to whom a homestead exemDtion. as defined in Florida Statutes section
196.031, has been granted and continues or remains.
3. If the ProDerty ADDraiser determines the landlord is no lonaer eliaible. entitled. or
_qualified to receive the homestead exemption, the continued leasing or renting of
the questhouse shall constitute an unlawful utilization of the questhouse, effective
upon the date when the Property Appraiser provides written notification via certified
letter of the denial of the homestead exemDtion.
4. The guesthouse must contain sleeping facilities, a bathroom, and a kitchen.
5. A minimum of one off-street parking space shall be required for each guesthouse
permitted under this subsection.
6. The Administrative Code for Land Development shall establish the process and
application submittal requirements to lease or rent a questhouse under this
section-
5
G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\01-16\Materials\Word Versions\PL20240009067
Guesthouse Rentals - LDCA (12-12-2024).docx
Page 175 of 245
A.T_121
1 7. The minimum duration of any lease between a lessor and lessee shall be nine
2 months.
3
4 8. The provisions of LDC section 5.03.03 F. shall sunset five years from [the adoption
5 date of this LDC amendment] unless extended by the Board of County
6 Commissioners by resolution.
7
8 # # # # # # # # # # # # #
6
G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\CCPC\2025\01-16\Materials\Word Versions\PL20240009067
Guesthouse Rentals - LDCA (12-12-2024).docx
Page 176 of 245
DRAFT 1212124
ORDINANCE NO. 2025 —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 04-41, AS
AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH
INCLUDES THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND REGULATIONS FOR THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, TO MODIFY
THE PROHIBITION OF RENTING GUESTHOUSES ON LOTS ZONED
ESTATES (E) LOCATED WEST OF COLLIER BOULEVARD, TO ALLOW FOR
SUCH RENTALS IF ALL NEW REQUIREMENTS ARE MET, BY PROVIDING
FOR: SECTION ONE, RECITALS; SECTION TWO, FINDINGS OF FACT;
SECTION THREE, ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, MORE SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE
FOLLOWING: CHAPTER TWO — ZONING DISTRICTS AND USES,
INCLUDING SECTION 2.03.01 AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS AND CHAPTER
FIVE — SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS, INCLUDING SECTION 5.03.03
GUESTHOUSES; SECTION FOUR, CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY;
SECTION FIVE, INCLUSION IN THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE; SECTION SIX, SUNSET PROVISION; AND SECTION
SEVEN, EFFECTIVE DATE. (PL20240009067)
Recitals
WHEREAS, on October 30, 1991, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
adopted Ordinance No. 91-102, the Collier County Land Development Code (hereinafter LDC),
which was subsequently amended; and
WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (Board) on June 22,
2004, adopted Ordinance No. 04-41, which repealed and superseded Ordinance No. 91-102, as
amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which had an effective date of October
18, 2004; and
WHEREAS, on March 18, 1997, the Board adopted Resolution 97-177 establishing local
requirements and procedures for amending the LDC; and
WHEREAS, all requirements of Resolution 97-177 have been met; and
WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission, sitting as the land planning
agency, did hold an advertised public hearing on , 2025, and reviewed the proposed
amendments for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and did recommend approval; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners, in a manner prescribed by law, did
hold an advertised public hearing on 2025, and did take action concerning these
amendments to the LDC; and
WHEREAS, the subject amendments to the LDC are hereby determined by this Board to
be consistent with and to implement the Collier County Growth Management Plan as required
by Subsections 163.3194 (1) and 163.3202 (1), Florida Statutes; and
Page 1 of 7
Words 6tFUGk thFeugh are deleted, words underlined are added
CAO
Page 177 of 245
DRAFT 1212124
WHEREAS, this ordinance is adopted in compliance with and pursuant to the
Community Planning Act (F.S. § 163.3161 etseq.), and F.S. § 125.01(1)(t) and (1)(w); and
WHEREAS, this ordinance is adopted pursuant to the constitutional and home rule
powers of Fla. Const. Art. Vill, § 1(g); and
WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of the law have
otherwise been met.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Collier County, Florida, that:
SECTION ONE: RECITALS
The foregoing Recitals are true and correct and incorporated by reference herein as if
fully set forth.
SECTION TWO: FINDINGS OF FACT
The Board of Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, hereby makes the following
findings of fact:
1. Collier County, pursuant to § 163.3161, et seq., F.S., the Florida Community
Planning Act (herein after the "Act"), is required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan.
2. After adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, the Act and in particular §
163.3202(1), F.S., mandates that Collier County adopt land development regulations that are
consistent with and implement the adopted comprehensive plan.
3. Section 163.3201, F.S., provides that it is the intent of the Act that the adoption
and enforcement by Collier County of land development regulations for the total unincorporated
area shall be based on, be related to, and be a means of implementation for, the adopted
comprehensive plan.
4. Section 163.3194(1)(b), F.S., requires that all land development regulations
enacted or amended by Collier County be consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan, or
element or portion thereof, and any land regulations existing at the time of adoption which are
not consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof, shall be
amended so as to be consistent.
5. Section 163.3202(3), F.S., states that the Act shall be construed to encourage
the use of innovative land development regulations.
Page 2 of 7
Words StFUGk thFeugh are deleted, words underlined are added
QA p
Page 178 of 245
DRAFT 1212124
6. On January 10, 1989, Collier County adopted the Collier County Growth
Management Plan (hereinafter the "Growth Management Plan" or "GMP") as its comprehensive
plan pursuant to the requirements of § 163.3161 et seq., F.S.
7. Section 163.3194(1)(a), F.S., mandates that after a comprehensive plan, or
element or portion thereof, has been adopted in conformity with the Act, all development
undertaken by, and all actions taken in regard to development orders by, governmental
agencies in regard to land covered by such comprehensive plan or element shall be consistent
with such comprehensive plan or element as adopted.
8. Pursuant to § 163.3194(3)(a), F.S., a development order or land development
regulation shall be consistent with the comprehensive plan if the land uses, densities or
intensities, and other aspects of development are compatible with, and further the objectives,
policies, land uses, densities, or intensities in the comprehensive plan and if it meets all other
criteria enumerated by the local government.
9. Section 163.3194(3)(b), F.S., states that a development approved or undertaken
by a local government shall be consistent with the comprehensive plan if the land uses,
densities or intensities, capacity or size, timing, and other aspects of development are
compatible with, and further the objectives, policies, land uses, densities, or intensities in the
comprehensive plan and if it meets all other criteria enumerated by the local government.
10. On October 30, 1991, Collier County adopted the Collier County Land
Development Code, which became effective on November 13, 1991. The Land Development
Code adopted in Ordinance 91-102 was recodified and superseded by Ordinance 04-41.
11. Collier County finds that the Land Development Code is intended and necessary
to preserve and enhance the present advantages that exist in Collier County; to encourage the
most appropriate use of land, water and resources consistent with the public interest; to
overcome present handicaps; and to deal effectively with future problems that may result from
the use and development of land within the total unincorporated area of Collier County and it is
intended that this Land Development Code preserve, promote, protect and improve the public
health, safety, comfort, good order, appearance, convenience and general welfare of Collier
County; to prevent the overcrowding of land and avoid the undue concentration of population; to
facilitate the adequate and efficient provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools,
parks, recreational facilities, housing and other requirements and services; to conserve,
develop, utilize and protect natural resources within the jurisdiction of Collier County; to protect
human, environmental, social and economic resources; and to maintain through orderly growth
and development, the character and stability of present and future land uses and development
in Collier County.
Page 3 of 7
Words 6tFuGk through are deleted, words underlined are added
Page 179 oFAg)
DRAFT 1212124
12. It is the intent of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County to
implement the Land Development Code in accordance with the provisions of the Collier County
Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 125, Fla. Stat., and Chapter 163, Fla. Stat., and through these
amendments to the Code.
SECTION THREE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
SUBSECTION 3.A. AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 2.03.01 - AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS
Section 2.03.01, Agricultural Districts, of Ordinance 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land
Development Code, is hereby amended to read as follows:
SECTION 2.03.01 —Agricultural Districts
A. Rural Agricultural District (A). The purpose and intent of the rural agricultural district (A)
is to provide lands for agricultural, pastoral, and rural land uses by accommodating
traditional agricultural, agricultural related activities and facilities, support facilities related
to agricultural needs, and conservation uses. Uses that are generally considered
compatible to agricultural uses that would not endanger or damage the agricultural,
environmental, potable water, or wildlife resources of the County, are permissible
as conditional uses in the A district. The A district corresponds to and implements the
Agricultural/Rural land use designation on the future land use map of the Collier County
GMP, and in some instances, may occur in the designated urban area. The
maximum density permissible in the rural agricultural district within the urban mixed use
district shall be guided, in part, by the density rating system contained in the future land
use element of the GMP. The maximum density permissible or permitted in A district
shall not exceed the density permissible under the density rating system. The
maximum density permissible in the A district within the agricultural/rural district of the
future land use element of the Collier County GMP shall be consistent with and not
exceed the density permissible or permitted under the agricultural/rural district of the
future land use element.
1. The following subsections identify the uses that are permissible by right and the
uses that are allowable as accessory or conditional uses in the rural agricultural
district (A).
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
b. Accessory uses.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
6. Guesthouses One guesthouse, subject to LDC section 5.03.03.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
SUBSECTION 3.B. AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 5.03.03 — GUESTHOUSES
Page 4 of 7
Words 6tF Gk thFo gh are deleted, words underlined are added
Page 180 of 2�4
DRAFT 1212124
Section 5.03.03, Guesthouses, of Ordinance 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land
Development Code, is hereby amended to read as follows:
SECTION 5.03.03 — Guesthouses
Where a guesthouse is an allowable use, it shall be permitted only in compliance with the
following standards. See LDC section 1.08.02 Guesthouse for additional information.
A. No guest accommodation facility in a single-family residential district, whether a
freestanding guest house or guest accommodations which are structurally integrated
with the main dwelling, may be utilized for commercial purposes.
B. Leasing or renting a guest accommodation facility shall constitute a violation of this LDC'
except as provided for in LDC section 5.03.03 F.
C. If a main residence the principal dwelling is leased or rented, a guest accommodation
facility accessory to it may not be occupied by the property owner, since that would
constitute the unlawful utilization of single-family zoned property for two-family dwelling
purposes.
D. The following site design standards apply to all guest houses:
Minimum lot area shall be 43,560 square feet.
2. Minimum lot width shall be 105 feet.
3. The maximum floor area shall be forty (40) percent of the air-conditioned,
enclosed living area (excluding garages, carports, patios, porches, utility areas,
and the like) of the principal dwelling.
4. Detached guest houses shall not be closer than twenty (20) feet to the principal
dwelling.
E. A guesthouse may be constructed prior to a principal dwelling, provided the guest house
meets the minimum requirements of a single-family residence in the district in which it is
being constructed. At such time as a principal residence is constructed, then the floor
area percentages listed above shall apply.
F. The leasing or renting of a guesthouse shall be prohibited unless the following
requirements are met:
1. The subject property is located within the Estates (E) zoning district west of
Collier Boulevard.
2. The subject property is owner -occupied where the landlord, as defined by Florida
Statutes section 83.43, makes permanent residence within the principal dwelling
and to whom a homestead exemption. as defined in Florida Statutes section
196.031, has been granted and continues or remains.
3. If the Property Appraiser determines the landlord is no longer eligible, entitled, or
qualified to receive the homestead exemption, the continued leasing or renting of
Page 5 of 7
Words stF6lsk thFGUgh are deleted, words underlined are added
Page 181 of F440
DRAFT 1212124
the guesthouse shall constitute an unlawful utilization of the guesthouse,
effective upon the date when the Property Appraiser provides written notification
via certified letter of the denial of the homestead exemption.
4. The questhouse must contain sleeping facilities, a bathroom, and a kitchen.
5. A minimum of one off-street parking space shall be required for each questhouse
permitted under this subsection.
6. The Administrative Code for Land Development shall establish the process and
application submittal requirements to lease or rent a questhouse under this
section.
7. The minimum duration of any lease between a lessor and lessee shall be nine
months.
8. The provisions of LDC section 5.03.03 F. shall sunset five years from [the
adoption date of this LDC amendment] unless extended by the Board of County
Commissioners by resolution.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
SECTION FOUR: CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY
In the event that any provisions of this ordinance should result in an unresolved conflict
with the provisions of the Land Development Code (LDC) or Growth Management Plan (GMP),
the applicable provisions of the LDC or GMP shall prevail. In the event this Ordinance conflicts
with any other Ordinance of Collier County or other applicable law, the more restrictive shall
apply. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court
of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent
provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion.
SECTION FIVE: INCLUSION IN THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
The provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Land
Development Code of Collier County, Florida. The sections of the Ordinance may be
renumbered or re -lettered to accomplish such, and the word 'ordinance" may be changed to
"section," "article," or any other appropriate word.
SECTION SIX: SUNSET PROVISION
Subsection 3.B., Amendments to Section 5.03.03 — Guesthouses, of this Ordinance,
shall sunset and are repealed effective as of the date that is five years after the date of this
Page 6 of 7
Words StF„^k thre gh are deleted, words underlined are added
NO
Page 182 of245
DRAFT 1212124
Ordinance's Effective Date, unless extended by Resolution of the Board of County
Commissioners.
SECTION SEVEN: EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Florida Department of State.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida, this day of 2025.
ATTEST:
CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK
M
, Deputy Clerk
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Bv:
Approved as to form and legality:
l �
Derek D. Perry v\v
Assistant County Attorney �\
04-CMD-01077/ (_/_/25)
24-LDS-00332/ (_/_/25)
Burt L. Saunders, Chairman
Page 7 of 7
Words r*WGk thFeugh are deleted, words underlined are added
Page 183 oW5
RESOLUTION NO.2025 -
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
AMENDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE FOR LAND
DEVELOPMENT, WHICH WAS CREATED BY
ORDINANCE NO.2013-57, BY AMENDING CHAPTER SIX,
WAIVERS, EXEMPTIONS, AND REDUCTIONS, TO ADD
SECTION O., ADMINISTRATIVE GUESTHOUSE
LEASING OR RENTAL FOR URBAN ESTATES ZONED
LOTS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners ("Board") adopted Ordinance No.
2004-66 on October 12, 2004, which created an Administrative Code for Collier County; and
WHEREAS, the Board subsequently amended Ordinance No. 2004-66 through the
adoption of Ordinance No. 2013-57 on September 24, 2013; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 2013-57 provides for the adoption of Exhibit "B", the
Administrative Code for Land Development, which shall be maintained by the County Manager
or designee; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 2013-57 also provides that amendments required to maintain
the Administrative Code shall be made by resolution adopted by the Board; and
WHEREAS, the Board desires to revise the Administrative Code for Land Development,
to provide procedures for the leasing or renting of guesthouses on lots zoned Estates and located
west of Collier Boulevard, as described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the Administrative Code for
Land Development, which was created by Ordinance No. 2013-57, is hereby amended as
follows:
SECTION ONE: AMENDMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE CODE FOR LAND
DEVELOPMENT
Chapter 6, Waivers, Exemptions, and Reductions, of Exhibit `B", the Administrative
Code for Land Development, is hereby amended to add Section O., Administrative Guesthouse
Leasing or Rental for Urban Estates Zoned Lots, as set forth in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference.
[24-LDS-00332/1909244/1] 94
Admin Code Amendment - PL20240009067 Page 1 of 2
Page 184 c5i
SECTION TWO: EFFECTIVE DATE
This Resolution shall become effective on the date of adoption by the Board.
THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED upon majority vote this day of 2025.
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
IC
By:
Deputy Clerk Burt L. Saunders, Chairman
Approved as to form and legality:
Derek D. Perry
Assistant County Attorney
Attachment:
Exhibit "A" - Chapter 6, Waivers, Exemptions, and Reductions, Section O.,
Administrative Guesthouse Leasing or Rental for Urban Estates Zoned
Lots
[24-LDS-00332/1909244/1]94
Admin Code Amendment - PL20240009067 Page 2 of 2
C•
Page 185 of 2451r
EXHIBIT "A"
Collier County Land Development Code I Administrative Procedures Manual
Chapter 6 J Waivers, Exemptions, and Reductions
O. Administrative Guesthouse Leasing or Rental for Urban Estates
Zoned Lots
Reference
LDC sections 1.08.02 and LDC section 5.03.03,
Applicability
This process applies to a request for rental use of guesthouses on lots of zoned Estates and
located west of Collier Blvd. A guesthouse rental certificate is required prior to the leasing
or renting of the guesthouse. An annual renewal registration will be required to be
submitted to the Operations and Regulatory Management Division.
Pre -Application
A pre -application meeting is not required.
Initiation
The applicant files a "Guesthouse Rental Registration Application" with the Zoning
Division.
pSee Chapter 1 D. for additional information regarding the procedural steps for
initiating an application.
Application
The application must include the following:
Contents for
Guesthouse Rental
1. Applicant contact information.
2. Property information, including:
a. Property identification number and proof of homestead exemption.
b. Address of owner -occupied subject property and guesthouse.
c. Subdivision name, unit, block and lot number, if applicable; and
3. Current zoning of subject property.
4. Provision of at least one parking space dedicated to the guesthouse and a minimum of
two parking spaces for the principal dwelling unit.
S. Attestation that the duration of the lease will be a minimum of nine months.
6. A copy of the certificate of occupancy.
7. Affirmation that the guesthouse contains each of the following, in accordance with LDC
section 5.03.03 FA.: sleeping facility, bathroom, and kitchen.
Completeness pSee Chapter 1 D.5 for the acceptance and processing of an application.
and Processing
of Application
Notice No notice is required.
Public Hearing None.
Decision Maker The County Manager or designee.
Review Process The Operations and Regulatory Management Division will review the application, identify
whether additional materials are needed, and review the application for compliance with
the criteria established in LDC section 5.03.03. If the application is approved, a
Guesthouse Rental Registration and Number will be issued.
Page 1 of 2
Exhibit "A" to Resolution n
71
Page 186 of 24�
Collier County Land Development Code I Administrative Procedures Manual
Chapter 6 / Waivers, Exemptions, and Reductions
Updated
Page 2of2
n
9
Page 187 of 2�
Collier county
Growth Management
Community Development Department
Date: 10/21 /2024
Guest House Study Area
(Estates zoned parcels west of Collier Blvd.)
0 Parcels in Study Area
- Parcels in Study Area but Outside
the Urban GGAMP
N
Feet
0 2,500 5,000 10,000
Exhibit B
Page 189 of 245
Comments for Tuesday, October 15t" DSAC LDC Subcommittee
1) The study identified 352 guest houses within the Urban Golden
Gate Estates, however, it did not identify which of these were
homesteaded vs. non -homesteaded properties. I requested this
information and was sent a link to Building Permit Reports. Does
anyone have this information? If not, how do I go about getting
this?
2) The consultant, Agnoli, Barber & Brundage, Inc. stated in their
May 5, 2023 memorandum that there are "many nuances to the
impacts a rented guest house would have on the taxable value of
a property,"
a. On Homesteaded Properties — the guest house structure is
lessed out of the assessed value of the Homestead portion
and then assessed separately as a non -homestead structure.
This would subject the non -assessed portion to a 10% cap
on property taxes (instead of 3%), plus in my opinion it also
removes the structure from the homestead liability
protection. Homestead protection is a fundamental
property right and removing that protection, can subject
the non -homestead structure to judgment creditors. This
may be an unintended consequence and should be
addressed prior to implementing this program.
b. If the property owner decides to discontinue renting the
guest house, then the guest house structure will be
reassessed at the current market value, which will be higher
than the original assessed value before renting the guest
house. Resulting in an increase in taxes. (Which, if the house
has been homesteaded for a significant portion of time,
can be unduly burdensome increased cost on the property
owner).
c. If the property appraiser can prove that the guest house has
been historically rented, then the property owner can be
Page 190 of 245
back charged to recoup taxes not paid at the non -
homesteaded valuations.
d. Tax collector would collect taxes on guest houses rented for
six (6) months or less. These short term rentals would also
require a Business Tax License, sales taxes and Tourist
Development Taxes. How will this program deter short-
term rentals? Who will monitor registration of short-term
rentals?
e. Attachment 1 to the Memo shows there are 6 parcels within
Urban GGE that have 2 guest houses. Are any of those
homesteaded properties and, if so, will the property owner
be permitted to rent both guest houses.
f. The consultant recommended a 5 year pilot program,
however the County Attorney stated at a BCC meeting that
once you grant property rights to a property owner, you
cannot restrict those rights in the future. You can always
expand property rights, but cannot restrict property rights.
In fact, the only way the County would be able to restrict
those rights afterwards would be upon payment of "just
compensation," since it would in effect be a "taking" by the
County under Constitutional�Law.
3) A number of issues were raised at the various Affordable Housing
Advisory Committee (AHAC) meetings that have yet to be
answered and/or addressed:
a. The guest house would be reclassified as an investment
property, which can affect mortgages, homeowners
insurance, federal income tax, business registration and
taxes, and potential annual inspections.
b. Water/Sewer/Septic/Well Issues. Guest houses are typically
sporadically used. Full-time use will put a strain on water,
sewer, septic and well systems. Staff had advised AHAC that
the Department of Health and DEP would need to look into
whether the property owner would be required to add
Page 191 of 245
additional septic systems or wells. Will this also have an
adverse effect on those homes with County water and
sewer? (This could be a very big issue and a large
unexpected expense).
c. Cannot prohibit short-term rentals. The State has pre-
empted short-term rentals and once a rental is available,
short-term rentals cannot be prohibited (unless the
prohibition was grandfathered, which is not the case here).
There was a lot of discussion about the problems Collier
County already faces with short-term rentals, such as,
damaged property, litter on property and beaches,
weddings with 50-60 guests on site. Big parties and too
many cars and people causing lots of chaos.
d. The proposed program will most -likely have little effect on
the housing shortage. Throughout all of the AHAC meetings,
there were numerous comments that this program would
not really help the housing shortage and maybe 2 dozen
rentals will be added. Others stated time, money and effort
was better spent on multi -family housing in the Activity
Centers.
4) Costs — What has this proposed program cost the taxpayers so
far? At the 2/24/2023 BCC meeting the agenda stated that the
fiscal impact would only be $1,625 for legal ads, since the Zoning
Division maintains a fully -budgeted sub -section staff whose sole
responsibility is to amend the LDC. However, at that same
meeting it was disclosed that there was inadequate staff
available, due to current staff assignments at that time and a
third: -party consultant was needed. From the materials I've
reviewed, it appears there were expenses for the consultant and
report, the online survey company, legal ads for the Public
Information Meetings, post -cards for the PIM meetings, etc. What
other costs are anticipated and if it will only add a couple dozen
units to the housing inventory, do the costs outweigh the benefit?
Page 192 of 245
..,)Collier County
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT
PETITION
PL20240009067
ORIGIN
Board of County
Commissioners (Board)
HEARING DATES
Board TBD
CCPC TBD
DSAC 11/06/2024
DSAC-LDR 10/15/2024
T-14D
DSAC-LDR
Approval T4�B
SUMMARY OF AMENDMENT
This LDC amendment establishes interim regulations for the rental of
guesthouses within urban the. Golden Gate Estates zoned lots. LDC
amendments are reviewed by the Board, Collier County Planning
Commission (CCPC), Development Services Advisory Committee
(DSAC), and the Land Development Review Subcommittee of the DSAC
(DSAC-LDR).
LDC SECTION TO BE AMENDED
2.03.01 Agricultural Districts
5.03.03 Guesthouses
ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS
DSAC
TBD
CCPC
TBD
BACKGROUND: The provisions for guesthouses were first adopted in 1974 when the Coastal Planning Area
District regulations were established. This ordinance defined them as an "accessory dwelling unit," which was
to be "used exclusively for the non-commercial accommodation of friends or relatives of the occupant or owner
of the principal dwelling." In 1976, the provisions were clarified to prohibit the leasing or renting of a guest
accommodation facility and to allow one guest house to be a permitted accessory use in both the Agricultural (A)
and Estates (E) zoning districts. Since then, the guesthouse provisions have been amended from time to time, but
the prohibition of renting them has remained.
On February 14, 2023, the Board discussed an item sponsored by Commissioner McDaniel that sought to amend
the LDC to the allow the rental of guesthouses. During the presentation, Commissioner McDaniel suggested that
the rental of guesthouses should be restricted to homesteaded properties located in the urban Estates —the
rationale of the restriction being that on -site landlords do a good job of managing the actions of their tenants. The
Board members further discussed the prospect of the amending the LDC but later agreed that Commissioner Hall
should first discuss the matter with the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee (AHAC) before the Board gives
direction to staff. On May 15, 2023, staff presented the prospect of guesthouse rentals within the Urban Golden
Gate Estates to the AHAC. The AHAC supported looking at the rental of guesthouses as a possible solution to
the affordable housing shortage within the County. The motion recognized that it was the desire of AHAC to
increase supply and to allow this in the Urban Estates. It also was their desire to recommend exploring guesthouse
rental for the Rural Estates. Finally, the program should be offered to homesteaded properties (and that the
exemption would remain) and that it should be kept at market -rate rents. The AHAC wanted staff to provide the
Board with the rent -ranges and the percentage of homesteaded properties out of the 3,559 targeted properties. On
May 14, 2024, the Board discussed Item 1 LA. under the County Manager's Report, which was a recommendation
to provide staff direction on the Board's request for staff to gather input on the community's desire to allow for
the legal renting of guesthouses within the urban Estates Zoning District, based upon the conclusions provided
for within the Guesthouse Rental White Paper. By a vote of 4-1, the Board directed staff to move forward with
an LDC amendment with the provision in writing of the one-year revisit and a specific report from Code
Enforcement.
The provisions for the Density Rating System in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth
G:\LDC Amend ments\Adviso ry Boards and Public Hearing s\DSAC\2024\1 1-06\Materials\PL20240009067 Guesthouse Rentals LDCA (10-30-
2024).docx
Page 193 of 245
..,)Collier County
Management Plan GMP recognizes that guesthouses are considered accessory dwellings and are not counted
toward density. However, the Density Rating System in the FLUE is only applicable to certain geographic areas
of the County and yields to either the Immokalee Area Master Plan or Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP),
where applicable, in matters of density and application. The geographic area encompassed by this LDC
amendment is located within the jurisdiction of the GMP but with a majority of the lots located within the
GGAMP, specifically the Urban Golden Gate Estates Sub -Element (see Exhibit A). According to the Estates
Designation of the Urban Golden Gate Estates Sub -Element of the GGAMP, this designation is characterized by
low density semi -rural residential lots within limited opportunities for other land uses. Typical lots are 2.25 acres;
however, there are some legal non -conforming lots as small as 1.14 acres. Residential density is limited to a
maximum of one unit per 2.25 gross acres, or one unit per legal non -conforming lot of record, exclusive of
guesthouses. Multiple family dwelling units, duplexes, and other structures containing two or more principal
dwellings are prohibited in all Districts and Subdistricts in the Estates Designation. The density exclusion for
guesthouses is also provided for in the Residential Estates Subdistrict of the Estates — Mixed Use District. Since
the Urban Golden Gate Estates Sub -Element is silent with respect to the rental of guesthouses, no GMP
amendment will be necessary or required to amend the LDC to allow guesthouse rentals in the Estates zoning
district. Transportation Planning staff reviewed the proposed Amendment and anticipates that there will be
minimal impacts on the road network based on the following findings:
• There are a limited number of parcels effected by the amendment.
• The Urban Subdistrict contains an established road network with major north -south and east -west arterials
and collectors.
• Traffic impacts resulting from the rental units should more widely be distributed within the subdistrict
compared to traditional PUD developments with single point trip impacts.
• There is a reasonable network of interconnected local -neighborhood roads providing alternative routes.
• There are numerous goods/services/employment opportunities adjacent to this subdistrict area to reduce trip
lengths on the network compared to longer rural commuter -residential trips.
The DSAC-LDR recommended approval of the amendment on October 15, 2024. However, two
noteworthy changes were made since the hearing. The first change was to incorporate a sunsetting
clause of five years. The second change was to specify a minimum duration of nine month for any lease
agreement between a lessor and lessee of the guesthouse. A minimum duration will help to ensure the
guesthouses will not be used for short-term lodging but to remain as part of the County's housing supply,
to indirectly_ promote the goal of addressing the affordable housing problem.
FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS GMP CONSISTENCY
There are no anticipated fiscal impacts to the
The proposed LDC amendment has been reviewed by
County, except for the cost of advertising an
Comprehensive Planning staff and may be deemed
ordinance amending the LDC, which is
consistent with the GGAMP.
estimated $50.00. Funds are available within
the Unincorporated Area General Fund (1011)
and Zoning & Land Development Cost Center
(138319). Property owners who wish to rent
their guesthouse will bear the cost of a
registration fee, which is anticipated to be $50
from Zoning and any fee that is typically
charged for the Business Tax Receipt. Final
EXHIBITS: A) Boundary Map; None B) Public Comments at DSAC-LDR; and C) Apartment Survey
2
G:\LDC Amend ments\Adviso ry Boards and Public Hearing s\DSAC\2024\1 1-06\Materials\PL20240009067 Guesthouse Rentals LDCA (10-30-
2024).docx
Page 194 of 245
DRAFT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Amend the LDC as follows:
2.03.01 - Agricultural Districts
A. Rural Agricultural District (A). The purpose and intent of the rural agricultural district (A) is
to provide lands for agricultural, pastoral, and rural land uses by accommodating
traditional agricultural, agricultural related activities and facilities, support facilities related
to agricultural needs, and conservation uses. Uses that are generally considered
compatible to agricultural uses that would not endanger or damage the agricultural,
environmental, potable water, or wildlife resources of the County, are permissible
as conditional uses in the A district. The A district corresponds to and implements the
Agricultural/Rural land use designation on the future land use map of the Collier County
GMP, and in some instances, may occur in the designated urban area. The
maximum density permissible in the rural agricultural district within the urban mixed use
district shall be guided, in part, by the density rating system contained in the future land
use element of the GMP. The maximum density permissible or permitted in A district shall
not exceed the density permissible under the density rating system. The
maximum density permissible in the A district within the agricultural/rural district of the
future land use element of the Collier County GMP shall be consistent with and not exceed
the density permissible or permitted under the agricultural/rural district of the future land
use element.
1. The following subsections identify the uses that are permissible by right and the
uses that are allowable as accessory or conditional uses in the rural agricultural
district (A).
b. Accessory uses.
6. One questhouse Guesthous subject to LDC section 5.03.03.
# # # # # # # # # # # # #
5.03.03 — Guesthouses
Where a guesthouse is an allowable use, it shall be permitted only in compliance with the following
standards. See LDC section 1.08.02 Guesthouse for additional information.
A. No guest accommodation facility in a single-family residential district, whether a
freestanding guest house or guest accommodations which are structurally integrated with
the main dwelling, may be utilized for commercial purposes.
B. Leasing or renting a guest accommodation facility shall constitute a violation of this LDC,
exceDt as Drovided for in LDC section 5.03.03 F.
3
G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\DSAC\2024\11-06\Materials\PL20240009067 Guesthouse Rentals
LDCA (10-30-2024).docx
Page 195 of 245
AA-A121
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
C. If the principal dwelling a main residence is leased or rented, a guest accommodation
facility accessory to it may not be occupied by the property owner, since that would
constitute the unlawful utilization of single-family zoned property for two-family dwelling
purposes.
D. The following site design standards apply to all guest-houses:
Minimum lot area shall be 43,560 square feet.
2. Minimum lot width shall be 105 feet.
3. The maximum floor area shall be forty (40) percent of the air-conditioned, enclosed
living area (excluding garages, carports, patios, porches, utility areas, and the like)
of the principal dwelling.
4. Detached guest-houses shall not be closer than twenty (20) feet to the principal
dwelling.
E. A guesthouse may be constructed prior to a principal dwelling, provided the guest house
meets the minimum requirements of a single-family residence in the district in which it is
being constructed. At such time as a principal residence is constructed, then the floor area
percentages listed above shall apply.
F. The leasing or renting of a guesthouse shall be prohibited unless the following
requirements are met:
1. The subject property is located within the Estates (E) zoning district west of Collier
Bnulevard.
2. The subject property is owner -occupied where the landlord, as defined by Florida
Statutes section 83.43, makes permanent residence within the principal dwelling
and to whom a homestead exemDtion. as defined in Florida Statutes section
196.031, has been granted and continues or remains.
3. If the ProDerty Appraiser determines the landlord is no lonaer eliaible. entitled. or
_qualified to receive the homestead exemption, the continued leasing or renting of
the questhouse shall constitute an unlawful utilization of the questhouse, effective
upon the date when the Property Appraiser provides written notification via certified
letter of the denial of the homestead exemDtion.
4. The guesthouse must contain sleeping facilities, a bathroom, and a kitchen.
5. A minimum of one off-street parking space shall be required for each guesthouse
permitted under this subsection.
6. The Administrative Code for Land Development shall establish the process and
application submittal requirements to lease or rent a questhouse under this
section-
4
G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\DSAC\2024\11-06\Materials\PL20240009067 Guesthouse Rentals
LDCA (10-30-2024).docx
Page 196 of 245
AkDE121
1 7. The minimum duration of any lease between a lessor and lessee shall be nine
2 months.
3
4 8. The provisions of LDC section 5.03.03 F. shall sunset five years from [the adoption
5 date of this LDC amendment] unless extended by the Board of County
6 Commissioners by resolution.
7
8 # # # # # # # # # # # # #
5
G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Head ngs\DSAC\2024\11-06\Materials\PL20240009067 Guesthouse Rentals
LDCA (10-30-2024).docx
Page 197 of 245
Collier county
Growth Management
Community Development Department
Date: 10/21 /2024
Guest House Study Area
(Estates zoned parcels west of Collier Blvd.)
0 Parcels in Study Area
- Parcels in Study Area but Outside
the Urban GGAMP
N
Feet
0 2,500 5,000 10,000
Exhibit B
Page 199 of 245
Comments for Tuesday, October 15t" DSAC LDC Subcommittee
1) The study identified 352 guest houses within the Urban Golden
Gate Estates, however, it did not identify which of these were
homesteaded vs. non -homesteaded properties. I requested this
information and was sent a link to Building Permit Reports. Does
anyone have this information? If not, how do I go about getting
this?
2) The consultant, Agnoli, Barber & Brundage, Inc. stated in their
May 5, 2023 memorandum that there are "many nuances to the
impacts a rented guest house would have on the taxable value of
a property,"
a. On Homesteaded Properties — the guest house structure is
lessed out of the assessed value of the Homestead portion
and then assessed separately as a non -homestead structure.
This would subject the non -assessed portion to a 10% cap
on property taxes (instead of 3%), plus in my opinion it also
removes the structure from the homestead liability
protection. Homestead protection is a fundamental
property right and removing that protection, can subject
the non -homestead structure to judgment creditors. This
may be an unintended consequence and should be
addressed prior to implementing this program.
b. If the property owner decides to discontinue renting the
guest house, then the guest house structure will be
reassessed at the current market value, which will be higher
than the original assessed value before renting the guest
house. Resulting in an increase in taxes. (Which, if the house
has been homesteaded for a significant portion of time,
can be unduly burdensome increased cost on the property
owner).
c. If the property appraiser can prove that the guest house has
been historically rented, then the property owner can be
Page 200 of 245
back charged to recoup taxes not paid at the non -
homesteaded valuations.
d. Tax collector would collect taxes on guest houses rented for
six (6) months or less. These short term rentals would also
require a Business Tax License, sales taxes and Tourist
Development Taxes. How will this program deter short-
term rentals? Who will monitor registration of short-term
rentals?
e. Attachment 1 to the Memo shows there are 6 parcels within
Urban GGE that have 2 guest houses. Are any of those
homesteaded properties and, if so, will the property owner
be permitted to rent both guest houses.
f. The consultant recommended a 5 year pilot program,
however the County Attorney stated at a BCC meeting that
once you grant property rights to a property owner, you
cannot restrict those rights in the future. You can always
expand property rights, but cannot restrict property rights.
In fact, the only way the County would be able to restrict
those rights afterwards would be upon payment of "just
compensation," since it would in effect be a "taking" by the
County under Constitutional�Law.
3) A number of issues were raised at the various Affordable Housing
Advisory Committee (AHAC) meetings that have yet to be
answered and/or addressed:
a. The guest house would be reclassified as an investment
property, which can affect mortgages, homeowners
insurance, federal income tax, business registration and
taxes, and potential annual inspections.
b. Water/Sewer/Septic/Well Issues. Guest houses are typically
sporadically used. Full-time use will put a strain on water,
sewer, septic and well systems. Staff had advised AHAC that
the Department of Health and DEP would need to look into
whether the property owner would be required to add
Page 201 of 245
additional septic systems or wells. Will this also have an
adverse effect on those homes with County water and
sewer? (This could be a very big issue and a large
unexpected expense).
c. Cannot prohibit short-term rentals. The State has pre-
empted short-term rentals and once a rental is available,
short-term rentals cannot be prohibited (unless the
prohibition was grandfathered, which is not the case here).
There was a lot of discussion about the problems Collier
County already faces with short-term rentals, such as,
damaged property, litter on property and beaches,
weddings with 50-60 guests on site. Big parties and too
many cars and people causing lots of chaos.
d. The proposed program will most -likely have little effect on
the housing shortage. Throughout all of the AHAC meetings,
there were numerous comments that this program would
not really help the housing shortage and maybe 2 dozen
rentals will be added. Others stated time, money and effort
was better spent on multi -family housing in the Activity
Centers.
4) Costs — What has this proposed program cost the taxpayers so
far? At the 2/24/2023 BCC meeting the agenda stated that the
fiscal impact would only be $1,625 for legal ads, since the Zoning
Division maintains a fully -budgeted sub -section staff whose sole
responsibility is to amend the LDC. However, at that same
meeting it was disclosed that there was inadequate staff
available, due to current staff assignments at that time and a
third: -party consultant was needed. From the materials I've
reviewed, it appears there were expenses for the consultant and
report, the online survey company, legal ads for the Public
Information Meetings, post -cards for the PIM meetings, etc. What
other costs are anticipated and if it will only add a couple dozen
units to the housing inventory, do the costs outweigh the benefit?
Page 202 of 245
Exhibit C
Page 203 of 245
Property Name
Property Address
Phone #
Minimum Rental Duration
Goodlette Arms
950 Goodlette Rd N
(239) 262-3229
no limit / waiting list 4-5 years
Naples, FL - 34102
Wolfe Apartments
462016th PI SW #303,
(239)-353-8746
recovery program 1 year long lease up to 2 years max
Naples, FL 34116
Bembridge- The Harmony on
4640 Santa Barbara Blvd
(239) 686-0050
12-Month
Santa Barbara (Ekos)
Saddlebrook Village
8685 Saddlebrook Cir,
(239) 354-1122
12-Month
Naples, FL 34104
Whistler's Green*
4700 Whistlers Green
(239) 352-2999
12-Month
Cir, Naples, FL 34116
Bear Creek
2367 Bear Creek Dr,
(239) 514-0600
12-Month
Naples, FL 34109
Brittany Bay
14815 Triangle Bay Dr,
(239) 354-2002
11-Month
Naples, FL 34119
Brittany Bay II
14925 Lighthouse Rd,
(239) 354-2002
11-Month
Naples FL 34119
Brittany Bay III- Vanderbilt
14915 Lighthouse Rd,
(239) 354-2002
Not part of Brittany Bay - Vanderbilt Place Condo Assoc. /
Place
Naples FL 34119
LiftMaster Dealer or Installer today
Osprey's Landing
100 Ospreys Landing,
(239) 261-5454
12-Month
Naples, FL 34104
Jasmine Cay
100 Jasmine Circle
(239) 963-9920
12-Month
Naples, FL - 34102
Noah's Landing- Golden Gate
10555 Noah's Cir,
(239) 775-7115
12-Month
Commerce Park PUD
Naples, FL 34116
Tuscan Isle - Saddlebrook
8650 Weir Dr, Naples, FL
(239) 304-3668
12-Month
Village
34104
Whistler's Cove
11400 Whistlers Cove
(239) 417 3333
12-Month
Blvd, Naples, FL 34113
Villas of Capri
7725 Tara Cir, Naples, FL
(239) 455-4600
12-Month
34104
Page 204 of 245
1/16/2025
Item # 9.E
ID# 2024-2363
PL20240004018 - RLSA Town Size GMPA - Recommendation to approve an Ordinance of the Board of County
Commissioners proposing amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance 89-05, as amended,
relating to the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay and specifically amending the Rural Lands Stewardship Area
Overlay of the Future Land Use Element, to eliminate the cap on the size of a town and include qualified target
industries as a goods and services use, and furthermore directing transmittal of the amendments to the Florida
Department of Commerce. [Coordinator: James Sabo, AICP, Planner III]
ATTACHMENTS:
CAO Final Staff Report 1-16-25 RLSA GMPA PL24-4018
Ordinance 121224
CCPC Backup Materials PL2024-4018 GMPA
Legal Ad CCPC 12-27-24 web print
Page 205 of 245
-4 !1)
Collier County
STAFF REPORT
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT, ZONING DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING
SECTION
HEARING DATE: JANUARY 16, 2025
SUBJECT: PL20240004018 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT
GMPA; RURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY
TRANSMITTAL HEARING
ELEMENTS: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT —GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
AGENT/APPLICANT:
Agents: Christopher Scott, AICP
Peninsula Engineering, Inc.
2600 Golden Gate Parkway
Naples, FL 34105
Owner: Ave Maria Development, LLLP
1500 Golden Gate Parkway
Naples, FL 34150
Rich Yovanovich, Attorney
Coleman, Yovanovich, Koester, PLLC
4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300
Naples, FL 34103
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The existing Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay is comprised of f 185,000 acres. It is located
within the eastern and northern portions of Collier County. The property is known as the Rural
Lands Stewardship Area.
Page 206 of 245
RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY MAP
UNC
i q ru'd
NORTH GDRRIOCA GENERAL LOCAMN
SA 1S
RIVERSPASS
VILLAGE
4
SSA
i IYDE PARK
VILLAGE SRA 55J� BE
L NGWATER
VILLAM
SRA
I
EELLMJkR
OLLAC,E
SSA I
SR,4
GO -EN C
F Alwn
W RA
l4
W
a
�
u
RD
p L INtLL LO
Ss: l.'• VVRJk
5RA if '
'A FLA
U=ti v
SMrrm C;OFBIDCM
GENERALL GATiDN
Y�'Rf5
WRA
NSA
J.cSc
Fnddl Rhem M
Xr64ra *Idr4 glfupl
'Awph
Sun Fo-r1e
AI
A.
1-F5 I-?5 Legend
M4+EN6E6 1Jl+M1ffIYPFS. £GAF xn o.f.*ra■ xarm�r.�stR■.
Ord. hia 24D7 19 _
.%R1.'k�}rr'�- OGr44GR iJ, 74M y ■ �LJ 4 4v-woah. Fi+v■41vaa��raaijaS
f4w+ NO wv"-50 4ohr}■.wiSR4 IY�a w k. WbAj 1
.WENDED • BEPTEYe#R 1�. SrD• � +
Qrd. ND 21311Y,25P arm
AYt4 - ime 1 1 "" -"-" 4RE Caid.
, k 2017-22
AW -JLLY 13, 1
Ne 2081 tS ■w.-a, ,. jW M�1 hiF sil9h■ NY INYLl9 �■YW �W rIN
RmlMeomclel oeeignatm W* 0 53ASCan bela-Ind*Min amcredil A}reenrpBw
Page 207 of 245
REQUESTED ACTION:
The applicant, Ave Maria Development, LLLP, proposes a Growth Management Plan
Amendment (GMPA) for text changes to the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay of
the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP). The proposed amendment will remove the
maximum acreage for a Town in the Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA). The current maximum
area for a Town is 5,000 acres. Additionally, the applicant seeks to clarify that Goods and
Services includes certain business and industry type uses, such as Florida Qualified Target
Industries. The proposed amendment also includes text changes to Future Land Use Element
(FLUE) Policy 4.7.1, Policy 4.7.4, and Attachment C. (Rural Lands Stewardship Overlay,
Stewardship Receiving Area Characteristics).
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
The applicant states that the amendment seeks to remove the maximum 5,000-acre size of a
Town and clarify that "goods and services" required within Town and Village SRAs "may"
include employment centers, such as manufacturing and Florida Qualified Target Industries. The
applicant states that goods and services should not be limited to retail and office uses.
EXISTING CONDITIONS:
Subject Property:
The RLSA is a broad area of land in the eastern and northern portions of the County.
Surrounding Lands:
North: Hendry County, Okaloacoochee Slough, Agricultural and Residential Uses.
East: Hendry County, Dinner Island Ranch Wildlife Area, Agricultural Uses.
South: Collier County, Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge, Agricultural Uses.
West: Audubon Corkscrew Swamp, Golden Gate Rural Estates, Agricultural and
Residential Uses.
In summary, the surrounding land uses are primarily agricultural and wildlife refuge areas with
greater residential uses toward the west.
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS:
Collier County established the RLSA program in 2002. The program is part of the Future Land
Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. The County implemented a stewardship program to address
environmentally sensitive land in the eastern portions of the County. The program was designed
to assess and address growth pressures in those same eastern rural and agricultural lands. The
RLSA program established goals that retain agricultural activities, direct incompatible uses away
from wetlands, enable the conversion of rural land to other uses, discourage urban sprawl, and
encourage creative development and land use planning techniques through incentives.
The RLSA encompasses approximately ±185,000 acres in eastern Collier County. The RLSA
program incentivizes the preservation and restoration of environmentally sensitive areas into
Stewardship Sending Areas (SSA) in exchange for SSA Credits (Credits). These Credits are
available to allow higher -intensity mixed -use developments, known as Stewardship Receiving
Areas (SRA), in appropriate locations and subject to specific design criteria. SRAs can be
developed as Towns, Villages, or Compact Rural Developments.
Page 208 of 245
The RLSA Overlay Map on page 2 identifies significant environmental areas such as water
resource areas (WRA), Habitat Stewardship Areas (HSA), and Flowway stewardship areas
(FSA). Lands not identified as WRA, HSA, or FSA are designated as Open Lands and are the
appropriate location for new Towns, Villages, or Compact Rural Development SRAs. The Open
Lands generally consist of predominantly agricultural lands that have been cleared or altered.
Additionally, the Open Lands include a 500' Restoration Area located adjacent to FSAs and two
potential Panther Corridor locations on the Overlay Map.
EXISTING AND PENDING SRAs
In 2021, the Board approved Ordinance 2021-28, which revised the RLSA program to limit the
number of SSA credits available for the development of SRAs. Currently, the RLSA has
established 18 SSAs protecting approximately 48,000 acres of sensitive lands (SSA Credits
spreadsheet attached). There are three additional SSAs pending approval. They are SSAs 19, 20,
and 21, which would potentially increase the acreage by 5,128 for an approximate total of 53,000
acres. They are listed here:
SSA 19:
560.2 acres / 4,481.6 credits
SSA 20:
655.7 acres / 1,271.7 credits
SSA 21:
3,912.41 acres / 10,659.0 acres
The above SSAs, pending and approved, have provided for eight existing SRAs and one pending
SRAs on approximately 11,000 acres. The SRAs are detailed in the table below:
SRA Name
SRA
Type
Total Acres
Public
Benefit
Net Acres
Ave Maria
Town
5,928.00
998.00,
4,930.00
Lon water*
Village
0
0
Rivergrass
Village
997.53
997.53
Hyde Park
Village
642.52
642.52
Bri htshore
Village
681.50
681.50
Bellmar
Village
999.74
999.74
Big Cypress
Town
1,544.46
1,544.46
Horse Trials**
Village
1,217.84
1,217.84
Collier Rod & Gun
CRD
259.60
259.60
TOTAL
12,271.19
998.00
11,273.19
1 Ave Maria approval excludes Public Benefit Use acreage, including University District, from SRA acreage
* The 991.81-acre Longwater Village was incorporated into the Town of Big Cypress
** Under Review/Pending
If project PL20240004018 GMPA for the RLSA is approved and adopted by the Board of
County Commissioners, the maximum Town size of 5,000 acres would be removed. Moving
forward, the appropriate action for staff would be to include the total SRA acreage to date
against the 45,000-acre cap each time we review a new town or village.
PETITIONER NEEDS ANALYSIS:
The applicant states that approval of the GMPA will further the RLSA's ability to:
• create mixed -use, self-sufficient SRAs that utilize shared services, facilities, and
infrastructure.
4
Page 209 of 245
• further enable economic prosperity through development of planned land uses and
Employment centers
• increase internal capture and reduce trip length and long-distance travel.
The RLSA Group 4 Policies pertain to the development of SRAs. SRAs can be in the form of a
Town, Village, or Compact Rural Development (CRD). Policies 4.7.1, 4.7.2, and 4.7.3 and
Attachment C, RLSA SRA Characteristics outline the minimum standards for each type of SRA.
The primary differences are summarized below:
SRA Standards:
Town
Village
CRD
Size
1,500-5,000 acres
300-1,500 acres
300 acres or less
Goods and Services
170 sf per du
53 sf per du
10 sf per du
Civic, Gov, Inst
15 sf land area per du
10 sf floor area per du
n/a
Community Park
200 sf per du
n/a
n/a
The applicant contends that Towns, being the largest and most diverse type of SRA, require
substantially more "goods and services" than a Village or CRD. Additionally, Towns are
required to provide Community Parks within their boundaries. During the recent public hearings
for the RLSA restudy and GMP Amendments, the consensus from the public and commissioners
was that Towns are preferable to Villages and smaller projects. The applicant further states that
Towns and larger developments provide greater flexibility and more opportunity for smart
growth by creating areas that can create jobs.
The petitioner states that as noted in Policy 4.2, SRA's can be designated on "privately owned
lands within the RLSA..., except land delineated as a FSA, HSA, WRA or land that has been
designated as an SSA." The Policy also states that "the specific location, size, and composition
of each SRA cannot and need not be predetermined in the GMP." The RLSA program does not
include a minimum separation between SRA's. Therefore, if an existing Town wanted to expand
above the 5,000-acre limit, the only recourse would be to establish a separate, adjacent SRA.
The applicant provided the following table that compares the additional non-residential uses and
community park area required for an existing Town to add 1,500 acres and 4,000 dwelling units
if done as an expanded Town without an acreage cap or by adding an adjacent Village. An
expanded Town requires significantly more commercial floor area and community park acreage
than if developed as a separate Village.
Development Example
Expanded Town
Adjacent Village
Size
+1,500 acres
+1,500 acres
Dwelling Units
+4,000 dwelling units
+4,000 dwelling units
Goods and Services
+680,000 sf gross floor area
+212,000 sf gross floor area
Civic, Gov, Inst
+1.38-acres
+40,000 sf gross floor area
Community Park
+18.37-acres
None Required
The petitioner contends that by removing the maximum size of Towns allows for additional
residential units and population within the Town. The resulting increase in population provides a
larger consumer base and demand for a variety of goods, services, and amenities. This increase
in population is attractive to investors and businesses looking for new markets to help meet this
demand. As more businesses locate within the Town, they support each other through supply
Page 210 of 245
chains and business -to -business services, creating a synergistic environment that fosters further
economic growth and job creation. This critical mass is essential for attracting major employers
with higher -paying wages.
The petitioner further contends that Towns, with a full array of goods and services, public
amenities, and employment centers, allow residents to meet most of their needs within the Town.
This increases the internal capture of the SRA's anticipated vehicular trips, reducing the number
of external trips onto the County roadways and the overall vehicle miles traveled by Town
residents.
Allowing the additional land to be incorporated into the existing Town SRA boundary, as
opposed to a separate Village or CRD, requires more non-residential floor area and employment
opportunities, additional community parks, and more land area for civic, governmental, and
institutional uses. The location and distribution of those uses, roads, stormwater, and utilities can
be better coordinated and planned. Additionally, having a single SRA document allows for easier
implementation by staff and developers.
Staff finds that the information provided here by the petitioner satisfies the Needs Analysis
requirement based on the research provided. Compliance with applicable Florida Statutes is
provided here.
CRITERIA FOR GMP AMENDMENTS FLORIDA STATUTES:
Data and analysis requirements for comprehensive plans and plan amendments are noted in
Chapter 163, F.S., specifically as listed below.
Section 163.3177(1)(f), Florida Statutes:
(f) All mandatory and optional elements of the comprehensive plan and plan amendments shall
be based upon relevant and appropriate data and an analysis by the local government that
may include, but not be limited to, surveys, studies, community goals and vision, and other
data available at the time of adoption of the comprehensive plan or plan amendment. To be
based on data means to react to it in an appropriate way and to the extent necessary, as
indicated by the data available on that particular subject at the time of adoption of the plan or
plan amendment at issue.
Surveys, studies, and data utilized in the preparation of the comprehensive plan may not
be deemed a part of the comprehensive plan unless adopted as a part of it. Copies of such
studies, surveys, data, and supporting documents for proposed plans and plan
amendments shall be made available for public inspection, and copies of such plans shall
be made available to the public upon payment of reasonable charges for reproduction.
Support data or summaries are not subject to the compliance review process, but the
comprehensive plan must be clearly based on appropriate data. Support data or
summaries may be used to aid in the determination of compliance and consistency.
2. Data must be taken from professionally accepted sources. The application of a
methodology utilized in data collection or whether a particular methodology is
professionally accepted may be evaluated. However, the evaluation may not include
whether one accepted methodology is better than another. Original data collection by
6
Page 211 of 245
local governments is not required. However, local governments may use original data so
long as methodologies are professionally accepted.
3. The comprehensive plan shall be based upon permanent and seasonal population
estimates and projections, which shall either be those published by the Office of
Economic and Demographic Research or generated by the local government based upon a
professionally acceptable methodology. The plan must be based on at least the minimum
amount of land required to accommodate the medium projections as published by the
Office of Economic and Demographic Research for at least a 10-year planning period
unless otherwise limited under s. 380.05, including related rules of the Administration
Commission. Absent physical limitations on population growth, population projections
for each municipality and the unincorporated area within a county must, at a minimum,
be reflective of each area's proportional share of the total county population and the total
county population growth.
Section 163.3177(6)(a)2. Florida Statutes:
2. The future land use plan and plan amendments shall be based upon surveys, studies, and
data regarding the area, as applicable, including:
a. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth.
b. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area.
c. The character of undeveloped land.
d. The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services.
e. The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the
elimination of nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of
the community.
f. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military
installations.
g. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35
and consistent with s. 333.02.
h. The discouragement of urban sprawl.
i. The need for job creation, capital investment, and economic development that will
strengthen and diversify the community's economy.
j. The need to modify land uses and development patterns within antiquated
subdivisions.
Section 163.3177(6)(a)8. Florida Statutes:
(a) A future land use plan element designating proposed future general distribution, location, and
extent of the uses of land for residential uses, commercial uses, industry, agriculture,
recreation, conservation, education, public facilities, and other categories of the public and
private uses of land. The approximate acreage and the general range of density or intensity of
use shall be provided for the gross land area included in each existing land use category. The
element shall establish the long-term end toward which land use programs and activities are
ultimately directed.
8. Future land use map amendments shall be based upon the following analyses:
Page 212 of 245
a. An analysis of the availability of facilities and services.
b. An analysis of the suitability of the plan amendment for its proposed use
considering the character of the undeveloped land, soils, topography, natural
resources, and historic resources on site.
c. An analysis of the minimum amount of land needed to achieve the goals and
requirements of this section.
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) NOTES:
The application is not for a site -specific location for a Growth Management Plan Amendment. A
Neighborhood Information Meeting is not required for this application.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS:
The RLSA program designates environmentally sensitive areas, including Flowway Stewardship
Areas (FSAs), Habitat Stewardship Areas (HSAs), and Water Retention Areas (WRAs), and
prohibits the development of towns, villages, and compact rural developments.
The proposed GMP amendment has no effect on either the requirements of the Conservation and
Coastal Management Element (CCME) of the GMP or the requirements to create Stewardship
Sending Areas (SSAs) on environmentally sensitive lands to entitle development elsewhere.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS:
• The Rural Lands Stewardship Overlay Amendment petition proposes a large-scale
Growth Management Plan amendment to update the RLSA to allow Town size to exceed
5,000 acres and to clarify that employment centers may include Qualified Targeted
Industry businesses.
• There are no adverse environmental impacts as a result of this petition.
• No historical or archaeological sites are affected by this amendment.
• There are no public utility -related concerns as a result of this petition.
• There are no concerns about impacts on other public infrastructure.
LEGAL REVIEW:
The County Attorney's office reviewed the staff report on 8/28/2024.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Collier County Planning Commission forward petition PL20240004018
Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay GMPA to the Board of County Commissioners with a
recommendation to transmit the proposed Ordinance to the Florida Department of Commerce
and other statutorily required agencies.
NOTE: This petition has been tentatively scheduled for the February 11, 2025, BCC meeting.
Page 213 of 245
ORDINANCE NO. 2025-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AMENDING ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER
COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, RELATING TO THE
RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY AND
SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP
AREA OVERLAY OF THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, TO
ELIMINATE THE CAP ON THE SIZE OF A TOWN AND INCLUDE
QUALIFIED TARGET INDUSTRIES AS A GOODS AND SERVICES
USE; AND FURTHERMORE DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE
AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
COMMERCE. [PL20220006512]
WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the
Community Planning Act, formerly the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and
Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan;
and
WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier
County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and
WHEREAS, the Community Planning Act of 2011 provides authority for local
governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to
amend adopted comprehensive plans; and
WHEREAS, Chris Scott of Peninsula Engineering and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire
of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. representing Ave Maria Development, LLP requested
amendments relating to Policy 4.7.1, Policy 4.7.4 and Attachment C, Stewardship Receiving
Area Characteristics of the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay of the Future Land
Use Element; and
WHEREAS, Collier County transmitted the Growth Management Plan amendment to the
Department of Commerce for preliminary review on November 21, 2024, after public hearings
before the Collier County Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Commerce reviewed the amendment to the Rural Lands
Stewardship Area Overlay of the Future Land Use Element to the Growth Management Plan and
transmitted its comments in writing to Collier County within the time provided by law; and
[24-CMP-01223/1908861/1 ]68
PL20220006512 / RLSA Words underlined are additions; Words struck through are deletions. 1 of 3
12/10/24 *** *** *** *** are a break in text
Page 214 of 245
WHEREAS, Collier County, has 180 days from receipt of the Comments Report from the
Department of Commerce to adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed amendments to
the Growth Management Plan; and
WHEREAS, Collier County has gathered and considered additional information, data and
analysis supporting adoption of these amendments, including the following: the Collier County
Staff Report, the documents entitled Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendments and
other documents, testimony and information presented and made a part of the record at the public
hearings of the Collier County Planning Commission held on , and the
Collier County Board of County Commissioners held on ; and
WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of the law have been
met.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that:
SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT
PLAN
The amendment to the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay of the Future Land Use
Element attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby adopted
in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, and shall be transmitted to the Florida
Department of Commerce.
SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY.
If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court
of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent
provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion.
SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE.
The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged,
shall be 31 days after the state land planning agency notifies the local government that the plan
amendment package is complete. If timely challenged, this amendment shall become effective
on the date the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order
determining this adopted amendment to be in compliance. No development orders, development
permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commenced before it has
become effective.
[24-CMP-01223/1908861/1 ]68
PL20220006512 / RLSA Words underlined are additions; Words struck through are deletions. 2 of 3
12/10/24 *** *** *** *** are a break in text
Page 215 of 245
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida this day of 2025.
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
Deputy Clerk Burt L. Saunders, Chairman
Approved as to form and legality:
wx_
Heidi Ashton-Cicko 12-12-24
Managing Assistant County Attorney
Attachment: Exhibit A — Text amendments and attachments
[24-CMP-01223/1908861/1 ]68
PL20220006512 / RLSA Words underlined are additions; Words struck through are deletions. 3 of 3
12/10/24 *** *** *** *** are a break in text
Page 216 of 245
EXHIBIT A
V. OVERLAYS AND SPECIAL FEATURES
F. Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay
Group 4 — Policies to enable conversion of rural lands to other uses in appropriate
locations, while discouraging urban sprawl, and encouraging development that utilizes
creative land use planning techniques by the establishment of Stewardship Receiving
Areas.
Policy 4.7.1:
Towns are the largest and most diverse form of SRA, with a full range of housing types and mix
of uses. Towns have urban level services and infrastructure that support development that is
compact, mixed use, human scale, and provides a balance of land uses to reduce automobile
trips and increase livability. Towns shall be greater than 1,500 acres and Up to 5,000 aGFes and
are comprised of several villages and/or neighborhoods that have individual identity and
character. Towns shall have a mixed -use town center that will serve as a focal point for community
facilities and support services. Towns shall be designed to encourage pedestrian and bicycle
circulation by including an interconnected sidewalk and pathway system serving all residential
neighborhoods. Towns shall include an internal mobility plan, which shall include a transfer station
or park and ride area that is appropriately located within the town to serve the connection point
for internal and external public transportation. Towns shall have at least one community park with
a minimum size of 200 square feet per dwelling unit in the Town, subject to Level of Service
Requirements.
Towns shall also have parks or public green spaces within neighborhoods. Towns shall include
both community and neighborhood scaled retail and office uses, described in Policy 4.15.1.
Towns may also include those compatible corporate office, research, development companies,
and light industrial uses such as those permitted in the Business Park and Research and
Technology Park Subdistricts of the FLUE and those included in 4.7.4. Towns shall be the
preferred location for the full range of schools, and to the extent possible, schools and parks shall
be located abutting each other to allow for the sharing of recreational facilities and as provided in
Policies 4.15.2 and 4.15.3. Design criteria for Towns are included in the LDC Stewardship District.
Towns shall not be located within the ACSC.
Policy 4.7.4
Existing urban areas, Towns and Villages shall be the preferred location for business and industry
within the RLSA, to further promote economic sustainability and development, diversification and
lob1ob creation. The business and industry use allowed includes, but is not limited to, those as
defined as Florida Qualified Target Industries. These uses shall count towards the goods and
services required for Towns and Villages by Policy 4.15.1 and Attachment C. The appropriate
scale and compatibility of these uses within a Town or Village will be addressed during SRA
application process.
Words underlined are added; words 6tFUGk threwgI4 are deletions Page 1 of 2
08/21i2024
Page 217 of 245
Attachment C
Collier County RLSA Overlay
Stewardship Receiving Area Characteristics
Typical Characteristics
Town-
Village
Compact Rural Development
Size (Gross Acres)
Greater than 1,5005000 acres
300-1,500 acres"
300 Acres or less"
Residential Units (DUs) per gross acre base density
1-4 DUs per gross acre^'
1-4 DUs per gross acre—
1.4 DUs per gross acre"'
Residential Housing Styles
Full range of single family and mufti -family
Diversity of single family and muBFfamily
Single Family and limited mWfi-lamily••••
housing types, styles, lot sizes
housing types, styles, lot sizes
Maximum Floor Area Ratio or Intensity
Retail 8 Office -.5
Retail & Office -.5
Retail & Office -.5
Civic/Govemmentaylnstitutional-.6
Civic/Governmental/Institutional-.6
Civic/Govemmentalllnstituaonal-.6
ManufacturingAfght Industrial -.45
Group Homing-.45
Group Homing-.45
Group Housing-.45
Transient Lodging -28 ups net
Transient Lodging -26 ups net
Transient Lodging- 26 upa net
Goods and Services_
Town Center with Community and
Village Center with Neighborhood Goods and
Convenience Goods and Services: Minimum
Neighborhood Goods and Services in Town
Services in Village Centers: Minimum 53 SF
10 SF gross building area per DU; research,
and Village Centers: Minimum 170 SF gross
gross building area per DU
education, tourismirecreation
building area per DU; Corporate Office,
Manufacturing and Light Industrial
Water and Wastewater
Centralized or decentralized community
Centralized or decentralized community
Individual Well and Septic System; Centralized
treatment systems
treatment systems
or decentralized community treatment system
Interim Wlill and Septic
Interim Well and Septic
Recreation and Open Spaces
Community Parks (200 SFIDU), subject to
Parks 8 Public Green Spaces wlin
Public Green Space for Neighborhoods
Level of Service Requirements
Neighborhoods (minimum 1 % of gross acres)
(minimum 1 % of gross acres)
Parks B Public Green Spaces win
Active RecreatiorlGol/Courses
Neighborhoods
Lakes
Active ReamationdGolf Courses
Open Space Minimum 35 % of SRA
Lakes
Open Space Minimum 35% of BRA
Civic, Governmental and Institutional Uses
WSde Range of Services - minimum 15 SF/DU
Moderate Range of Services -minimum 10
Limited Services
of gross land area/DU
SF/DU;
pre-K through Elementary Schools
Full Range o/Schools
FWI Range of Schools
Transportation
Auto- interconnected system of collector and
Auto- interconnected system of collector and
Auto- interconnected system of local roads
local roads; required connection to collector or
local mads; required connection to collector or
Pedestrian Pathways
arterial
arterial
Equestrian Trails
Interconnected sidewalk and pathway system
Interconnected sidewalk and pathway system
County Transit Access
County Transit Station or Park and Ride
Equestrian Trails
Facility
County Transit Station or Park and Ride
Facility
Towns are prohibited within the ACSC, per Policy 4.7.1 of the Goals, Objectives and Policies.
Villages and Compact Rural Developments within the ACSC are subject to location and size limitations, per Policy 4.21, and are subject to Chapter 28-25, FAC.
- Density can be increased beyond the base density through the Affordable Housing Density Bonus or through the density blending provision, per Policy 4.7.
" - Those CRDs that include single or mufti -family residential uses shall include proportionate support services.
Goods and Services for Towns and Villaaes may include those business and industry uses. including Florida Qualified Tamet Industries, as described in Policv 43_4,
Italicized uses are not required uses
Words underlined are added: words strata.0 `1,4ejgh are deletions
08/21/2024
Page 2 of 2
Page 218 of 245
PENINSULA��
ENGINEERING
March 27, 2024
Collier County Growth Management Department
Planning & Zoning
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34104
RE: Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay GMPA
GMP Amendment — PL202420004018
Vt Review
To Whom It May Concern,
Please find the attached Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) application to make minor text changes
to the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay. This GMPA is not specific to an individual parcel and does not
change the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) or the RLSA Overlay Map. The GMPA requires both a Transmittal and an
Adoption Hearing.
The following have been included for your review and approval:
1. Cover Letter
2. Email from Mike Bosi waiving Pre -Application Meeting
3. GMPA Application
4. Affidavit of Authorization
5. Property Ownership Disclosure Form
6. Proposed FLUE Text
7. Existing Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Map
8. Narrative, Criteria and Consistency
Please feel free to contact me at (239) 403-6727 or by email at cscott@pen-eng.com should you have any
questions or require additional information.
Sincer ly,
Ch istopher O. Scott, AICP
Planning Manager
2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797
Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479
Page 219 of 245
Chris Scott
From: Michael Bosi <Michael.Boni@colliercountyfl.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, March 6, 2024 2:37 PM
To: Chris Scott
Cc: James Sabo; Nick Casalanguida
Subject: RE: RLSA GMPA - Maximum Town Size
Chris,
Please utilize this e-mail with your GMP-A application submittal to recognize our meeting ON 2-28-24 as satisfying the
pre -application meeting requirement for the GMP-A.
Sincerely,
Mike
Michael Bosi AICP
Division Director - Planning & Zoning
Zoning
Office:239-252-1061
Mobile:239-877-0705
2800 North Horseshoe drive
Naples, Florida 34104
Michael. Bosi(a)colliercountyfl.gov
From: Chris Scott <cscott@pen-eng.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 6, 2024 2:20 PM
To: Michael Bosi <Michael.Bosi @colliercountyfl.gov>
Oyer of
Cc: James Sabo <James.Sabo@colliercountyfl.gov>; Nick Casalanguida <ncasalanguida@barroncollier.com>
Subject: RLSA GMPA - Maximum Town Size
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.
Mike
I appreciate your time meeting with me and Nick last week. As discussed, we are planning on submitting a privately
initiated GMPA to remove the maximum acreage for a Town and provide clarification language that "goods and
services" are not solely limited to retail and service uses, but also includes employment centers, such as the Arthrex and
Dialum Glass (manufacturing uses) facilities in Ave Maria. We understand this would be a full Comprehensive Plan
Amendment that would apply to all of the Rural Land Stewardship Area, requiring both a transmittal and adoption
hearing before the BOCC.
Given the limited nature of the proposed GMPA, may we submit without a formal pre -application meeting? I am copying
in James Sabo for awareness and am happy to reach out to the assigned planner prior to submitting.
Page 220 of 245
Christopher O. Scott, AICP
Planning Manager
PENINSULA ENGINEERING
Direct: 239.403.6727
www.pen-eng.com
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.
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Page 221 of 245
Co per County
Growth Management
Community Development Department
Need Help?
GMCD Public Portal
Online Payment Guide
E-Permitting Guides
Application to Amend The Growth Management Plan
LDC subsection 10
Chapter 3 of the Administrative Code
The application is to be reviewed by staff for sufficiency within 30 calendar days following the filing
deadline. The applicant will be notified, in writing, of the sufficiency determination. If insufficient, the
applicant will have 30 days to remedy the deficiencies. For additional information on the processing of the
application, see Resolution 12-234. If you have any questions, please contact the Comprehensive Planning
Section at 239-252-2400.
APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION
Name of Property Owner(s): Ave Maria Development, LLLP
Name of Applicant if different than owner:
Address: 1500 Golden Gate Pkwy City: Naples State: FL —Zip: 34150
Telephone:
E-Mail Address:
Cell:
Name of Agent:Richard Yovanovich / Christopher Scott
Firm: Coleman Yovanovich Koester / Peninsula Engineering
Fax:
Address: 1500 Golden Gate PkwyCity: Naples State: FL Zip:34150
Telephone: 239-435-3535
Cell:
Fax:
E-Mail Address: ryovanovich@cyklawfirm.com / cscott@pen-eng.com
Name of Owner(s) of Records:
Address:
Telephone:
E-Mail Address:
City:
Cell:
State: ZIP:
Fax:
*On an additional paper include the Name, Company, Address and Qualifications of all
consultants and other professionals providing information contained in this application,
as well as Qualifications of the Agent identified above
Revised 2023 Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 Page 1 of 8
www.colliercountvfl.ciov/ Page 222 of 245
Need Help?
CD ier COunty GMCD Public Portal
Online Payment Guide
Growth Management E-Permitting Guides
Community Development Department
DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST INFORMATION
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. (Use additional sheets if necessary).
NAME: PERCENTAGE OF OWNERSHIP:
See Attached
B. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the
percentage of stock owned by each.
NAME: PERCENTAGE OF OWNERSHIP:
C. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the
percentage of interest.
NAME: PERCENTAGE OF OWNERSHIP:
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: PERCENTAGE OF OWNERSHIP:
Revised 2023 Page 2 of 8
Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400
www.colliercountvfl.gov/ Page 223 of 245
CD 76Y COunty
Growth Management
Community Development Department
Need Help?
GMCD Public Portal
Online Payment Guide
E-Permittina Guides
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:
DATE OF CONTRACT:
PERCENTAGE OF OWNERSHIP:
F. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or
officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust.
NAME:
G. Date subject property acquired ❑ leased[]:- Term of lease: yrs./mos.
If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option: and date option
terminates: , or anticipated closing:
NOTE:
H. 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.
Revised 2023 Page 3 of 8
Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400
www.colliercountyfl.gov/ Page 224 of 245
CD 76Y COunty
Growth Management
Community Development Department
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
A. PARCEL I.D. NUMBER: N/A
Need Help?
GMCD Public Portal
Online Payment Guide
E-Permittina Guides
B. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: (multi -line, fillable areas will hold as much text as needed)
N/A
C. GENERAL LOCATION
GMPA is not site/parcel specific; text change applies to the Rural Land Stewardship Area (RLSA)
D. Section: Township: Range:
E. PLANNING COMMUNITY:
G. SIZE IN ACRES:
F. TAZ:
H. ZONING: RLSAO
I. FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION(S):
J. SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN:
TYPE OF REQUEST
A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN ELEMENT (S) TO BE AMENDED:
❑ Housing Element ❑ Recreation/Open Space
❑ Traffic Circulation Sub -Element Mass Transit Sub -Element
0
U
Aviation Sub -Element
❑
Sanitary Sewer Sub -Element
❑
Solid Waste Sub -Element
ELCapital
Improvement Element
❑✓
Future Land Use Element
❑
Immokalee Master Plan
AMEND PAGE (S): 140-141
❑ Potable Water Sub -Element
U NGWAR Sub -Element
❑ Drainage Sub -Element
U CCME Element
UGolden Gate Master Plan
OF THE: Future Land Use Element ELEMENT
Revised 2023 Page 4 of 8
Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400
www.colliercountyfl.gov/ Page 225 of 245
CO 76Y COunty
Growth Management
Community Development Department
Need Help?
GMCD Public Portal
Online Payment Guide
E-Permittina Guides
AS FOLLOWS: (Use Strike -through to identify language to be deleted; Use Underline to
Identify language to be added). (multi -line, fillable areas will hold as much text as needed)
See Attached
C. AMEND FUTURE LAND USE MAP(S) DESIGNATION FROM: N/A
TO: N/A
D. AMEND OTHER MAP(S) AND EXHIBITS AS FOLLOWS: (Name & Page #)
Attachment C, Collier County RLSA Overlay, Stewardship Receiving Area Characteristics
E. DESCRIBE ADDITINAL CHANGES REQUESTED:
REQUIRED INFORMATION
NOTE: ALL AERIALS MUST BE AT A SCALE OF NO SMALLER THAN I"=400'. At least one copy reduced
to 8-1/2 x 11 shall be provided of all aerials and/or maps.
LAND USE
❑ Provide general location map showing surrounding developments (PUD, DRI's, existing zoning) with
subject property outlined.
❑ Provide most recent aerial of site showing subject boundaries, source, and date.
❑ Provide a map and summary table of existing land use and zoning within a radius of 300 feet from
boundaries of subject property.
FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION:
❑ Provide map of existing Future Land Use Designation(s) of subject property and adjacent lands, with
acreage totals for each land use designation on the subject property.
ENVIRONMENTAL
❑ Provide most recent aerial and summary table of acreage of native habitats and soils occurring on
site. HABITAT IDENTIFICATION MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE FDOT-FLORIDA LAND USE,
COVER AND FORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCCS CODE). NOTE: THIS MAY BE
INDICATED ON SAME AERIAL AS THE LAND USE AERIAL IN "A" ABOVE.
❑ Provide a summary table of Federal (US Fish & Wildlife Service) and State (Florida Game &
Freshwater Fish Commission) listed plant and animal species known to occur on the site and/or
known to inhabit biological communities similar to the site (e.g. panther or black bear range, avian
rookery, bird migratory route, etc.) Identify historic and/or archaeological sites on the subject property.
Revised 2023 Page 5 of 8
Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400
www.colliercountyfl.gov/ Page 226 of 245
CO 76Y COunty
Growth Management
Community Development Department
GROWTH MANAGEMENT
Need Help?
GMCD Public Portal
Online Payment Guide
E-Permittina Guides
INSERT "Y" FOR YES OR "N" FOR NO IN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING:
Is the proposed amendment located in an Area of Critical State Concern? (Reference , F.A.C.).
IF so, identify area located in ACSC.
Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Development of Regional Impact
pursuant to Chapter 380 F.S.? (Reference , F.A.C.)
N Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Small Scale Development Activity
pursuant to Subsection 163.3187 (1)(c), F.S.? Does the proposed amendment create a significant
impact in population which is defined as a potential increase in County -wide population by than 5%
of population projections? (Reference Capital Improvement Element Policy 1.1.2). If yes, indicate
mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment.
N Does the proposed land use cause an increase in density and/or intensity to the uses permitted in a
specific land use designation and district identified (commercial, industrial, etc.) or is the proposed
land use a new land use designation or district? (Reference F.A.C.). If so, provide data and
analysis to support the suitability of land for the proposed use, and of environmentally sensitive land,
ground water and natural resources. (Reference , F.A.C.)
Provide map of existing Future Land Use Designation(s) of subject property and adjacent lands,
with acreage totals for each land use designation on the subject property.
PUBLIC FACILITIES
Provide the existing Level of Service Standard (LOS) and document the impact the proposed change
will have on the following public facilities:
❑ Potable Water
❑ Sanitary Sewer
❑ Arterial & Collector Roads; Name specific road and LOS
N/A
❑ Drainage
❑ Solid Waste
❑ Parks: Community and Regional
If the proposed amendment involves an increase in residential density, or an increase in intensity for
commercial and/or industrial development that would cause the LOS for public facilities to fall below the
adopted LOS, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment.
Revised 2023 Page 6 of 8
Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400
www.colliercountyfl.gov/ Page 227 of 245
CD 76Y CO-W lty
Growth Management
Community Development Department
(Reference Capital Improvement Element Objective 1 and Policies):
Need Help?
GMCD Public Portal
Online Payment Guide
E-Permittina Guides
Provide a map showing the location of existing services and public facilities that will serve the
subject property (i.e. water, sewer, fire protection, police protection, schools and emergency.
Document proposed services and public facilities, identify provider, and describe the effect the
proposed change will have on schools, fire protection and emergency medical services.
F. OTHER
Identify the following areas relating to the subject
property:
❑� Flood zone based on Flood Insurance Rate Map data (FIRM).
Location of wellfields and cones of influence, if applicable. (Identified on Collier County Zoning
Maps) Coastal High Hazard Area, if applicable
High Noise Contours (65 LDN or higher) surrounding the Naples Airport, if applicable (identified
❑ on Collier County Zoning Maps).
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
❑� $16,700.00 non-refundable filing fee made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at
time of submittal. (Plus, proportionate share of advertising costs)
❑ $9,000.00 non-refundable filing fee for a Small -Scale Amendment made payable to the Board of
County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus, proportionate share of advertising costs)
❑ Proof of ownership (copy of deed)
❑ Notarized Letter of Authorization if Agent is not the Owner (See attached form)
* If you have held a pre -application meeting within 9 months prior to submitted date and paid the
pre -application fee of $500.00 at the meeting, deduct that amount from the above application fee amount
when submitting your application. All pre -application fees are included in the total application submittal
fee if petition submitted within 9 months of pre -application meeting date. Otherwise the overage will be
applied to future proportionate share advertising costs.
* Maps shall include: North arrow, name and location of principal roadways and shall be at a scale of
1 "=400' or at a scale as determined during the pre -application meeting.
* All attachments should be consistently referenced as attachments or exhibits, and should be labeled to
correlate to the application form, e.g. "Exhibit I.D."
* Planning Community, TAZ map, Traffic Analysis Zone map, Zoning maps, and Future Land Use Maps.
Some maps are available on the Zoning Division website depicting information herein:
Zoning Services Section:
Comprehensive Planning Section:
Revised 2023 Page 7 of 8
Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400
www.colliercountyfl.gov/ Page 228 of 245
LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
I hereby authorize Richard Yovanovich and Christopher Scott
(Name of Agent)
to serve as my Agent in a request to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan affecting property
identified in this Application.
Signed: Ave Maria Development, LLLP Date: 55/l 6! 2+
(Name of Owner(s) of Record)
hereby certify that I have the authority to make the for ing pplication, and that the application is true,
correct and complete to the best of my knowledge.
Signature of Applicant
David Gensen, VP of Barron Collier Corporation, as
General Partner of Ave Maria Development, LLLP
Name - Typed or Printed
STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF COLLIER
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me by means of El physical presence or Q online registration
this � day of--GL�3t1�— , 202-` , by who is El
known to me
or ❑ has produced as identification.
Signature of Notary Public
SABINA HAWY
`+ •_' MY COMMISSION # HH 313836
EXPIRES: January14,2027 Print Name of Notary Public
NOTICE - BE AWARE THAT:
Florida Statute Section 837.06 - False Official Law states that:
"Whoever knowingly makes a false statement in writing with the intent to mislead a public servant in the
performance of his official duty shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as
provided by a fine to a maximum of %500.00 and/or maximum of a sixty day jail term."
Revised 2023 Page 8 of 8
Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 •239-252-2400
www. c o l l l e rco unW. a o v/
Page 229 of 245
CO�ler County
Growth Management Community Development Department
2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104
Phone: (239) 252-1036 1 Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov
www.colliercountyfl.gov
'ROPFRTY n%AiKirR-,miD nlSCLOc-1 iRF FnRn/1
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:
C
Name and Address I % of Ownership
If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the
percentage of stock owned by each:
Name and Address I % of Ownership
If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the
percentage of interest:
Name and Address I % of Ownership
01/2023
Page 1 of 3
Page 230 of 245
Coder Count
y
Growth Management Community Development Department
2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104
Phone: (239) 252-1036 1 Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov
www.colliercountyfl.gov
d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list then a me of the
general and/or limited partners:
Name and Address
% of Ownership
Ave Maria Development, LLLP
100
GP Barron Collier Corporation (0.0500%)
GP Nua Baile, LLC (0.0500%)
LP BCAM, LLLP (49.9500%)
LP Thomas B. Monaghan Irr. Grantor Trust (49.9500%)
(See attached Ownership Detail)
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
er 1 1 1 1 f•
-I I IL, C17, 7L L/l•h11%J CI-31 LICI IC711U C1I IC7, UI P01 LI IC17.
Name and Address of Ownership
Date of Contract:
f. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or
officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust:
Name and Address
g, Date subject property acquired 1994
❑ Leased: Term of lease
years /months
If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following;
01/2023 Page 2 of 3
Page 231 of 245
Coder Count
y
Growth Management Community Development Department
2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104
Phone: (239) 252-1036 1 Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.gov
www.colliercountyfl.gov
Date of option:
Date option terminates: , or
Anticipated closing date:
AFFIRM PROPERTY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION
Any petition required to have Property Ownership Disclosure, will not be accepted without this form.
Requirements for petition types are located on the associated application form. Any change in ownership whether
individually or with a Trustee, Company or other interest -holding party, must be disclosed to Collier County
immediately if such change occurs prior to the petition's final public hearing.
As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is
included in this submittal package. I understand that 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 I GMD Portal:
https://cvportal.colliercountyfl.gov/cityviewweb
Questions? Email: GMDclientservices@colliercountyfl.gov
Agent/Owner Signature
Christopher O. Scott
Agent/Owner Name (please print)
11 /14/2023
Date
01/2023
Page 3 of 3
Page 232 of 245
AVE MARIA DEVELOPMENT
GP Barron Collier Corporation 0.0500%
GP Nua Baile. LLC 0.0500%
LP BCAM, LLLP 49.9500%
LP Thomas S. Monaghan Irrevocable Grantor Trust 49.9500%
BARRON COLLIER CORPORATION (GP)
Share Holder
Juliet C. Sproul Family Inheritance Trust
25.000000%
Share Holder
Barron Collier III
25.000000%
Share Holder
R. Blakeslee Gable
6.250000%
Share Holder
M. Wells Gable 2021 Trust
6.250000%
Share Holder
Christopher D. Villere
4.166666%
Share Holder
Mathilde V. Currence
4.166667%
Share Holder
Lamar G. Villere
4.166667%
Share Holder
Phyllis Gable Alden Trust dtd 06-21-1988, as amended
12.500000%
Share Holder
Donna G. Keller Irrevocable Trust
12.500000%
NUA BAILE, LLC (GP)
Manager: Thomas S. Monaghan
Manager: Paul Roney
Manager: George Forrest III
BCAM, LLLP (LP)
GP Barron Collier Corporation 0.1000%
LP Barron Collier Partnership, LLLP 99.9000%
BARRON COLLIER CORPORATION
Share Holder
Juliet C. Sproul Family Inheritance Trust
25.000000%
Share Holder
Barron Collier III
25.000000%
Share Holder
R. Blakeslee Gable
6.250000%
Share Holder
M. Wells Gable 2021 Trust
6.250000%
Share Holder
Christopher D. Villere
4.166666%
Share Holder
Mathilde V. Currence
4.166667%
Share Holder
Lamar G. Villere
4.166667%
Share Holder
Phyllis Gable Alden Trust dtd 06-21-1988, as amended
12.500000%
Share Holder
Donna G. Keller Irrevocable Trust
12.500000%
Page 233 of 245
Barron Collier Partnership, LLLP, a Florida limited liability limited partnership
Barron Collier Manaizement LLC - GP - 1%
Juliet C. Sproul -
0.25000%
Barron G. Collier IV-
0.06250%
Alexandra E. Collier-
0.06250%
Lara C. Grady (Collier)-
0.06250%
Christopher C. Collier -
0.06250%
Robert B. Gable-
0.06250%
Michael Wells Gable-
0.06250%
Christopher D. Villere-
0.04167%
Mathilde V. Currence-
0.04167%
Lamar G. Villere-
0.04166%
William Cameron Doane-
0.06250%
Mary Marguerite Doane-
0.06250%
Ashleigh N. Ora (Keller)-
0.02500%
Chelsea K. Kunde (Keller)-
0.02500%
Kathryn E. Keller-
0.02500%
Matthew D. Keller-
0.02500%
Stephen B. Keller-
0.02500%
Juliet C. Sproul Family Inheritance Trust - LP - 24.75%
Juliet C. Sproul - 24.7500%
Barron Collier III Lifetime Irrevocable Trust - LP - 24.75%
Barron G. Collier IV - 6.1875%
Alexander E. Collier - 6.1875%
Lara C. Grady (Collier) - 6.1875%
Christopher C. Collier - 6.1875%
Lamar Gable Lifetime Irrevocable Trust - LP-12.375%
Robert B. Gable - 6.1875%
Michael W. Gable - 6.1875%
Frances G. Villere Lifetime Irrevocable Trust for Christopher D. Villere Family - LP - 4.125%
Christopher D. Villere - 4.1250%
Frances G. Villere Lifetime Irrevocable Trust for Mathilde V. Currence Family - LP - 4.125%
Mathilde V. Currence - 4.1250%
Frances G. Villere Lifetime Irrevocable Trust for Lamar G. Villere Familv - LP - 4.125%
Lamar G. Villere - 4.1250%
Phyllis G. Alden Lifetime Irrevocable Trust - LP-12.375%
Page 234 of 245
William Cameron Doane - 6.1875%
Mary Marguerite Doane - 6.1875%
Donna G. Keller Lifetime Irrevocable Trust - LP — 12.375%
Ashleigh N. Ora (Keller) - 2.4750%
Chelsea K. Kunde (Keller) - 2.4750%
Kathryn E. Keller - 2.4750%
Matthew D. Keller - 2.4750%
Stephen B. Keller - 2.4750%
Thomas S. Monaghan Irrevocable Grantor Trust (LP)
Page 235 of 245
RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY MAP
.•
■ It •
Lake
NORTH CORRIDOR GENERAL LOCATION
;8
z
m
Of
: m NINST
-AKE TRAFFORDRO
U)
yin
NO —4
Okaloacoochee
Slough
State Forest
IDOR
.-
GENERAL L ATION
VILLAGE
SRAWRA
'>
WRA
-�
cn
HYDE PARK
VILLAGE SRA
. r - -TOI
L WELL - .
LONGWATER
"M
LSRA
VILLAGE
Imn
VILLAGE
G�
AMENDEDGOLDEN
::
(Ord. No. 2007-"8
. JUNE 2017
AMENED
�
�
0rd � )
_
AMENDED
36 of 245
iwLc. i IlU vii LULOL UUWyi LOMU UUGO Ui - —I — iUui iu vviu HE Qor — cU a ryi cci i icnw.
PENINSULA~1)6-
ENGINEERING
RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY GMPA - TOWN SIZE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (PL20240004018)
PROJECT NARRATIVE, CRITERIA AND CONSISTENCY
Details of Request
Ave Maria Development, LLLP is submitting this Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) to make
text changes to the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay provisions of the Collier County GMP,
Section V.F. The amendment proposes to eliminate the maximum 5,000-acre size of a Town Stewardship
Receiving Area (SRA) and to clarify that "Goods and Services" include business and industry uses, including
Florida Qualified Target Industries. The amendment includes text changes to Future Land Use Element
(FLUE) Policy 4.7.1, Policy 4.7.4 and Attachment C, Rural Lands Stewardship Overlay, Stewardship
Receiving Area Characteristics.
RI CA ()vnrviaw
Collier County established the incentive based RLSA program as part of the Future Land Use Element
(FLUE) of the GMP (Ord. 2002-54, as amended) to assess and address growth pressures in Collier County's
eastern rural and agricultural lands. The RLSA program has the goal of "retaining agricultural activities,
directing incompatible uses away from wetlands and upland habitat, enabling the conversion of rural land
to other uses in appropriate locations, discouraging urban sprawl, and encouraging development that
employs creative land use planning techniques through the use of established incentives."
The RLSA encompasses approximately 185,000 acres in eastern Collier County. The RLSA program
incentivizes the preservation and restoration of environmentally sensitive areas into Stewardship Sending
Areas (SSA) in exchange for SSA Credits (Credits). These Credits are available to allow higher intensity
mixed -use developments, known as Stewardship Receiving Areas (SRA), in appropriate locations and
subject to specific design criteria. SRAs can be developed as Towns, Villages or Compact Rural
Developments.
The RLSA Overlay Map identifies significant environmental areas as Water Resource Areas (WRA), Habitat
Stewardship Areas (HSA), and Flowway Stewardship Areas (FSA). Lands not identified as WRA, HSA, FSA
Rural Lands Stewardship Area GMPA Page 1 1
G M PA — P L20240004018
Revised: May 31, 2024
2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797
Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479
Page 237 of 245
are designated as Open Lands and are the appropriate
location for new Towns, Villages or Compact Rural
Development SRAs. The Open Lands generally consist of
predominantly agriculture lands which have been
cleared or altered. Additionally, the Open Lands include
a 500' Restoration Area located adjacent to FSAs and
two potential Panther Corridor locations on the Overlay
Map.
The RLSA Overlay Map Areas
RLSA
Designation
Acres
Percent
of Total
W RA
31,100
17.05
HSA
40,000
21.93%
FSA
18,200
9.99%
Open
93,100
51.04%
TOTAL
182,400
100.00%
Source: Collier County RLSA Study Phase I Technical Report, 2008
To date, the RLSA has established 18 SSAs protecting
over 47,000 acres and there are seven (7) approved and
one (1) pending SRAs on approximately 11,000 acres.
The most recent amendments to the RLSA program
(Ord 2021-28) placed limits on the number of SSA
PENINSULA~i
ENGINEERING
RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY YAP
.Y
•, ��r�!
ggqyyy
y
Credits that could be generated and established a
maximum of 45,000 acres that can be designated as a SRA.
Existing and Pending SRAs
SRA Name
SRA Type
Total Acres
Public Benefit
Net Acres
Ave Maria
Town
5,928.00
998.001
4,930.00
Longwater*
Village
0
0
Rivergrass
Village
997.53
997.53
Hyde Park
Village
642.52
642.52
Brightshore
Village
681.50
681.50
Bellmar
Village
999.74
999.74
Big Cypress
Town
1,544.46
1,544.46
Horse Trials"
Village
1,217.84
1,217.84
TOTAL
12,011.59
998.00
11,013.59
'Ave Maria approval excludes Public Benefit Use acreage, including University District, from SRA acreage
* The 991.81-acre Longwater Village was incorporated into the Town of Big Cypress
** Under Review/Pending
Rural Lands Stewardship Area GMPA
G M PA — P L20240004018
Revised: May 31, 2024
2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797
Page 1 2
Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479
Page 238 of 245
PENINSULA~i
ENGINEERING
Justification:
This amendment seeks to remove the maximum 5,000-acre size of a Town and to provide clarification
that "goods and services" required within Town and Village SRAs may include employment centers, such
as manufacturing and Florida Qualified Target Industries, and is not limited to retail and office uses.
Approval of the GMPA will further the RLSA's ability to:
• create mixed -use, self-sufficient SRAs that utilize shared services, facilities and infrastructure;
• further enable economic prosperity through the development of planned land uses and
employment centers; and
• increase internal capture and reduce trip length and long-distance travel.
The RLSA Group 4 Policies pertain to the development of SRAs. SRAs can be in the form of a Town, Village
or Compact Rural Development (CRD). Policies 4.7.1, 4.7.2, and 4.7.3 and Attachment C, RLSA SRA
Characteristics outline the minimum standards for each type of SRA. The primary differences are
summarized below:
SRA Standards:
Town
Village
CRD
Size
1,500-5,000 acres
300-1,500 acres
300 acres or less
Goods and Services
170 sf per du
53 sf per du
10 sf per du
Civic, Gov, Inst
15 sf land area per du
10 sf floor area per du
n/a
Community Park
200 sf per du
n/a
n/a
Towns, being the largest and most diverse type of SRA, require substantially more "goods and services"
than a Village or CRD. Additionally, Towns are required to provide Community Parks within their
boundaries. During the recent public hearings for the RLSA restudy and GMP Amendments, the consensus
from the public and commissioners was that Towns are preferable to Villages and smaller projects. Towns
and larger developments provide greater flexibility and more opportunity for smart growth by creating
areas that can create jobs.
As noted in Policy 4.2, SRAs can be designated on "privately owned lands within the RLSA..., except land
delineated as a FSA, HSA, WRA or land that has been designated as a SSA." The Policy also states that "the
specific location, size and composition of each SRA cannot and need not be predetermined in the GMP."
The RLSA program does not include minimum separation between SRAs. Therefore, if an existing Town
wanted to expand above the 5,000-acre limit the only recourse would be to establish a separate, adjacent
SRA.
The following table compares the additional non-residential uses and community park area that is
required for an existing Town to add 1,500 acres and 4,000 dwelling units if done as an expanded Town
without an acreage cap or by adding an adjacent Village. An expanded Town requires significantly more
commercial floor area and community park acreage than if developed as a separate Village.
Rural Lands Stewardship Area GMPA Page 1 3
G M PA — P L20240004018
Revised: May 31, 2024
2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797
Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479
Page 239 of 245
PENINSULA~i
ENGINEERING
Development Example
Expanded Town
Adjacent Village
Size
+11500 acres
+1,500 acres
Dwelling Units
+4,000 dwelling units
+4,000 dwelling units
Goods and Services
+680,000 sf gross floor area
+212,000 sf gross floor area
Civic, Gov, Inst
+1.38-acres
+40,000 sf gross floor area
Community Park
+18.37-acres
None Required
Removing the maximum size of Towns allow for additional residential units and population within the
Town. The resulting increase in population provides a larger consumer base and demand for a variety of
goods, services and amenities. This increase in population is attractive to investors and businesses looking
for new markets to help meet this demand. As more businesses locate within the Town, they support each
other through supply chains and business -to -business services, creating a synergistic environment that
fosters further economic growth and job creation. This critical mass is essential for attracting major
employers with higher paying wages.
Towns with a full array of goods and services, public amenities and employment centers allow residents
to meet most of their needs within the Town. This increases the internal capture of the SRA's anticipated
vehicular trips; reducing the number of external trips onto the County roadways and the overall vehicle
miles traveled by Town residents.
For example, the Town of Ave Maria SRA, which was originally approved in 2005 and later amended in
2020 and 2022, has a significantly higher internal capture. Ave Maria's higher internal capture rate was
based on an impact fee study of the Town Core, prepared by Benesch on February 2022, which suggests
an internal capture rate of 89% for the smaller retail/restaurant establishments, 74% for other non-
residential land uses and 62% for residential uses.
Allowing the additional land to be incorporated into the existing Town SRA boundary, as opposed to a
separate Village or CRD, requires more non-residential floor area and employment opportunities,
additional community parks and more land area for civic, governmental and institutional uses. The
location and distribution of those uses, roads, stormwater and utilities can be better coordinated and
planned. Additionally, having a single SRA document allows for easier implementation by staff and
developers.
The GMPA is consistent with Florida Statutes and the Collier County Growth Management Plan, as
provided in the succeeding section.
Rural Lands Stewardship Area GMPA Page 14
G M PA — P L20240004018
Revised: May 31, 2024
2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797
Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479
Page 240 of 245
PENINSULA~i
ENGINEERING
CONSISTENCY WITH FLORIDA STATUTES AND THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
FS Section 163.3177(6)(a)(2) — Required and Optional Elements of a Comprehensive Plan
The future land use plan and plan amendments shall be based upon surveys, studies, and data regarding the
area, as applicable, including:
a. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth.
b. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area.
c. The character of undeveloped land.
d. The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services.
e. The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of
nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community.
f. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations.
g. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and consistent with
s. 333.02.
h. The discouragement of urban sprawl.
i. The need for job creation, capital investment, and economic development that will strengthen and
diversify the community's economy.
j. The need to modify land uses and development patterns within antiquated subdivisions.
Response: The RLSA Overlay was originally established as part of the Collier County GMP in 2002 and most
recently amended in 2021 following extensive surveys and studies. The Collier County RLSA program is
recognized by the State of Florida as being found in compliance with FS Section 163.3248 as a statutory
rural land stewardship area. The proposed GMPA does not negatively impact the existing RLSA program.
The RLSA Overlay Map identifies areas that are suitable to be designated as an SRA and does not require a
minimum separation between SRAs. The Collier County RLSA program establishes a maximum of 45,000
acres that can be designated as an SRA, which is not affected by this amendment. The proposed GMPA to
eliminate the 5,000 acre maximum Town size and to clarify that "goods and services" include employment
centers allows for SRAs that provide additional non-residential uses and employment opportunities for
residents, thereby increasing internal trip capture and reducing overall vehicle miles traveled. Allowing for
larger towns, as opposed to adjacent but separate SRA applications, allows for the better coordination of
roads, parks, utilities, and stormwater design, as well as a more efficient distribution of residential, goods
and services, civic and employment centers. The proposed changes further the goal of establishing SRAs
that are self-sufficient in the provision of services, facilities and infrastructure, and that promote economic
sustainability, diversification and job creation.
FS Section 163.3177 (81 Future Land Use Map Amendments
8. Future Land use map amendments shall be based upon the following analyses:
a. An analysis of the availability of facilities and services
b. An analysis of the suitability of the plan amendment for its proposed use considering the character
of the undeveloped land, soils, topography, natural resources, and historic resources on site.
Rural Lands Stewardship Area GMPA Page 15
G M PA — P L20240004018
Revised: May 31, 2024
2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797
Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479
Page 241 of 245
PENINSULA~i
ENGINEERING
c. An analysis of the minimum amount of land needed to achieve the goals and requirements of this
section.
Response: The proposed GMPA does not change the Future Land Use Map or the Rural Lands Stewardship
Overlay Map.
FS Section 163.3248 Rural Land Stewardship Areas
(1) Rural land stewardship areas are designed to establish a long-term incentive -based strategy to balance
and guide the allocation of land so as to accommodate future land uses in a manner that protects the
natural environment, stimulate economic growth and diversification, and encourage the retention of land
for agriculture and other traditional rural land uses.
(5) A rural land stewardship area shall be not less than 10,000 acres, shall be located outside of municipalities
and established urban service areas, and shall be designated by plan amendment by each local
government with jurisdiction over the rural land stewardship area. The plan amendment or amendments
designating a rural land stewardship area are subject to review pursuant to s. 163.3184 and shall provide
for the following:
(a) Criteria for the designation of receiving areas which shall, at a minimum, provide for the following:
adequacy of suitable land to accommodate development so as to avoid conflict with significant
environmentally sensitive areas, resources, and habitats; compatibility between and transition from
higher density uses to lower intensity rural uses; and the establishment of receiving area service
boundaries that provide fora transition from receiving areas and other land uses within the rural land
stewardship area through limitations on the extension of services.
(b) Innovative planning and development strategies to be applied within rural land stewardship areas
pursuant to this section.
(c) A process for the implementation of innovative planning and development strategies within the rural
land stewardship area, including those described in this subsection, which provide for a functional
mix of land uses through the adoption by the local government of zoning and land development
regulations applicable to the rural land stewardship area.
(d) A mix of densities and intensities that would not be characterized as urban sprawl through the use of
innovative strategies and creative land use techniques.
(11)lt is the intent of the Legislature that the rural land stewardship area located in Collier County, which was
established pursuant to the requirements of a final order by the Governor and Cabinet, duly adopted as
a growth management plan amendment by Collier County, and found in compliance with this chapter,
be recognized as a statutory rural land stewardship area and be afforded the incentives in this section.
Response: The Collier County RLSA Overlay has been recognized by the State as a statutory Rural Land
Stewardship Area. The proposed text amendments to the County's RLSA Overlay are consistent with the
overall intent of Section 163.3248. The proposed amendments seek to remove the maximum size for SRA's
Rural Lands Stewardship Area GMPA Page 1 6
G M PA — P L20240004018
Revised: May 31, 2024
2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797
Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479
Page 242 of 245
PENINSULA~i
ENGINEERING
designated as Towns and to provide clarifying language that minimum "Goods and Services" include
business and industry uses that further promote economic sustainability and development, diversification,
and job creation, including Florida Qualified Industries. The proposed amendment does not make changes
to the Rural Lands Stewardship Overlay Map, including areas designated as FSAs, HSAs, WRAs, or Open
Land. Per the County RLSAO, open lands may be designated as Stewardship Receiving Areas (SRA) as either
Towns, Villages or Compact Rural Developments. The amendment does not affect where SRAs can be
located and the RLSAO limits the total acreage that can be designated as an SRA at 45,000-acres.
GIMP Future Land Use Element:
OBJECTIVE 5: Implement land use policies that promote sound planning, protect environmentally
sensitive lands and habitat for listed species while protecting private property rights, ensure compatibility
of land uses and further the implementation of the Future Land Use Element.
Response: The RLSA program has been found to promote sound planning, protect environmentally
sensitive lands and habitats, while protecting private property rights and ensuring compatibility of land
uses. The proposed amendment to remove the maximum size of a Town SRA and to clarify that "goods
and services" includes employment centers, including Florida Qualified Target Industries, does not
conflict with this Objective.
Policy 5.7: Encourage the use of land presently designated for urban intensity uses before designating
other areas for urban intensity uses. This shall occur by planning for the expansion of County owned and
operated public facilities and services to the existing lands designated for urban intensity uses, the Rural
Settlement District (formerly known as North Golden Gate), and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District,
before servicing new areas.
Response: The RLSA program already allows for the establishment or designation of SRAs within areas
not classified as WRAs, HSAs, or FSAs. These Open Lands have been deemed suitable for urban intensity
uses in the form of SRAs. The proposed amendment does not alter where SRAs can be located. The GMPA
only clarifies what can be counted toward required "Goods and Services" and allows for Town SRAs that
exceed 5,000 acres without affecting the maximum 45,000 acres of SRAs within the RLSA.
Conservation and Coastal Management Element:
Objectives 6.1: Protect native vegetative communities through the application of minimum preservation
requirements.
Objective 6.2: Protect and conserve wetlands and the natural functions of wetlands pursuant to the
appropriate policies under Goal 6.
Objective 7.1: Direct incompatible land uses away from listed animal species and their habitats. (The County
relies on the listing process of State and Federal agencies to identify species that require special protection
because of their endangered, threatened, or species of special concern status. Listed animal species are those
species that the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission has designated as endangered,
Rural Lands Stewardship Area GMPA Page 1 7
G M PA — P L20240004018
Revised: May 31, 2024
2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797
Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479
Page 243 of 245
PENINSULA~i
ENGINEERING
threatened, or species of special concern, in accordance with Rules 68A-27.003, 68A-27.004, and 68A-27.005,
F.A.C. and those species designated by various federal agencies as Endangered and Threatened species
published in 50 CFR 17.)
Response: The RLSA program designates environmentally sensitive areas as WRAs, HSAs and FSAs and
prohibits new Towns, Villages and Compact Rural Developments from these areas. The development of an
SRA can only be accomplished through the use of SSA Credits, which are created through the preservation
and potential restoration of environmentally sensitive lands. Additionally, any proposed SRA must include
a Natural Resource Inventory (NRI) assessment to verify that land is appropriate for more intensive
development and limits what can occur on properties that score a 1.2 or higher.
Rural Lands Stewardship Area GMPA
G M PA — P L20240004018
Revised: May 31, 2024
2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797
Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479
Page 1 8
Page 244 of 245
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Planning Commission
(CCPC) at 9:00 A.M. on January 16, 2025, 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, RELATING TO THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA
OVERLAY AND SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP
AREA OVERLAY OF THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, TO ELIMINATE THE
CAP ON THE SIZE OF A TOWN AND INCLUDE QUALIFIED TARGET INDUSTRIES
AS A GOODS AND SERVICES USE; AND FURTHERMORE DIRECTING
TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
COMMERCE. [PL20240004018]
All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Ordinance will be made
available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk's office, fourth floor, Collier County Government
Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Suite 401, Naples, FL 34112, one (1) week prior to the scheduled hearing.
Written comments must be filed with the Zoning Division, prior to January 16, 2025.
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 Ray Bellows at
252-2463 or email to Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov
Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC)
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.
Collier County Planning Commission
Joseph Schmitt, Chairman
Page 245 of 245