Agenda 04/22/2025 Item # 9D (Ordinance amending the Sierra Meadows Mixed Planned Unit Development (MPUD) by changing the floor area ratio for group housing on Lots 8 and 9 of the Sierra Meadows Subdivision from .45 to .60.)4/22/2025
Item # 9.D
ID# 2025-853
Executive Summary
This item requires that Commission members provide ex-parte disclosure. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending the Sierra Meadows Mixed
Planned Unit Development (MPUD) by changing the floor area ratio for group housing on Lots 8 and 9 of the Sierra
Meadows Subdivision from .45 to .60. The subject property, consisting of 14.3+/-acres of a 90.8+/- acre MPUD, is
located at the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Rattlesnake-Hammock Road (C.R. 864) and C.R. 951, in Section
22, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners (Board) review staff's findings and recommendations
along with the recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) regarding the above-referenced
petition and render a decision regarding the petition, and ensure the project is in harmony with all the applicable codes
and regulations to ensure that the community's interests are maintained.
CONSIDERATIONS: The purpose of this petition is to modify the Sierra Meadows MPUD to include a deviation to
allow for a 0.60 Floor Area Ratio (FAR).
The original Sierra Meadows MPUD, approved in 1994, was repealed by Ordinance 99-91. (See Attachment B-
Ordinance 99-91). The 90.8± acre PUD allows residential and commercial development.
During the review of a Site Development Plan for Lot 6, it was noted that Lot 6 was used for the 0.45 Floor Area Ratio
(FAR) calculation on Lots 8 and 9 when the Discovery Village group housing was developed. The applicant is
requesting an amendment to the PUD to allow for a deviation from the 0.45 FAR to allow a 0.60 FAR to facilitate
commercial development on Lot 6. (See Master Plan/Aerial on page 3 of the Staff Report.) According to information
provided by the petitioner, the proposed development on Lot 6 will consist of two stand-alone commercial buildings,
including a proposed Starbucks, consistent with the currently approved land uses in the PUD.
The approval of the proposed 0.60 FAR will allow for the existing 0.51 FAR on Lots 8 and 9 and the originally intended
commercial development on Lot 6.
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC heard Petition
PUDA-PL20240006561, Sierra Meadows PUD on March 6, 2025. The CCPC recommended that the LDC be amended
to allow a 0.60 FAR for group housing. The CCPC voted 6-0 to forward this petition to the Board with a
recommendation of approval.
See Attachment A-Proposed PUD Ordinance.
Encourage diverse economic opportunities by fostering a business-friendly environment.
FISCAL IMPACT: The PUD Amendment (PUDA) by and of itself will have no fiscal impact on Collier County. There
is no guarantee that the project, at build-out, will maximize its authorized level of development. However, if the PUD
Amendment is approved, a portion of the land could be developed, and the new development will impact Collier
County's public facilities.
The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy to help offset the impact of each new
development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects identified in the Capital Improvement
Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) as needed to maintain the adopted Level of Service (LOS) for public
facilities. Other fees collected prior to the issuance of a building permit include building permit review fees. Please
note that impact fees and taxes collected were not included in the criteria used by staff and the Planning Commission to
analyze this petition.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Comprehensive Planning staff has reviewed the proposed PUDA and has
found it consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP.
Page 240 of 6355
4/22/2025
Item # 9.D
ID# 2025-853
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This is an amendment to an existing PUD. The burden falls upon the applicant to
prove that the proposed rezoning is consistent with all the criteria set forth below. Should it consider denying the
rezone, the burden then shifts to the Board of County Commissioners to determine that such denial would not be
arbitrary, discriminatory, or unreasonable. This would be accomplished by finding that the proposal does not meet one
or more of the listed criteria below.
Criteria for MPUD Rezones and PUD Amendments:
Ask yourself the following questions. The answers will assist you in determining whether or not you approve.
1. Consider: The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical
characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities.
2. Is there adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of agreements, contracts, or other instruments or
for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the
continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public
expense? Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the County Attorney.
3. Consider: Conformity of the proposed MPUD with the Growth Management Plan's goals, objectives, and
policies.
4. Consider: The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, whose conditions may include restrictions
on the location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements.
5. Is there an adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development?
6. Consider: The timing or sequence of development (as proposed) for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of
available improvements and facilities, both public and private.
7. Consider: The ability of the subject property and surrounding areas to accommodate expansion.
8. Consider: Conformity with MPUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the
particular case, based on a determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at
least equivalent to the literal application of such regulations.
9. Will the proposed change be consistent with the goals, objectives, policies, future land use map, and the elements
of the Growth Management Plan?
10. Will the proposed MPUD Rezone be appropriate considering the existing land use pattern?
11. Would the requested MPUD Rezone result in the possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent
and nearby districts?
12. Consider: Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the
property proposed for change.
13. Consider: Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary.
14. Will the proposed change adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood?
15. Will the proposed change create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed
incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including
activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety?
16. Will the proposed change create a drainage problem?
17. Will the proposed change seriously reduce light and air in adjacent areas?
18. Will the proposed change adversely affect property values in the adjacent area?
19. Will the proposed change be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance
with existing regulations?
20. Consider: Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as
contrasted with public welfare.
21. Are there substantial reasons why the property cannot ("reasonably") be used in accordance with existing
zoning? (a "core" question…)
22. Is the change suggested out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County?
23. Consider: Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts
already permitting such use.
24. Consider: The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be required
to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification.
25. Consider: The impact of development resulting from the proposed MPUD rezone on the availability of adequate
public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management
Page 241 of 6355
4/22/2025
Item # 9.D
ID# 2025-853
Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch.106,
art.II], as amended.
26. Are there other factors, standards, or criteria relating to the CPUD rezone request that the Board of County
Commissioners deem important in protecting public health, safety, and welfare?
The Board must base its decision upon the competent, substantial evidence presented by the written materials supplied
to it, including but not limited to the Staff Report, Executive Summary, maps, studies, letters from interested persons,
and the oral testimony presented at the BCC hearing as these items relate to these criteria. Should this item be denied,
Florida Statutes section 125.022(3) requires the County to provide written notice to the applicant citing applicable
portions of an ordinance, rule, statute, or other legal authority for the denial. This item has been approved as to form
and legality and requires an affirmative vote of four for Board approval. (HFAC)
RECOMMENDATIONS: To approve the proposed Ordinance for Petition PUDA-PL20240006561, Sierra Meadows
MPUD.
PREPARED BY: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA, CSM, Planner III, Zoning Division
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Staff Report Sierra Meadows PUDA 2-7-25
2. Attachment A-Sierra Meadows PUD Proposed Ordinance 012725
3. Attachment B-Ordinance 99-91
4. Attachment C-GMP Consistency Memo 1-31-25A
5. Attachment D-Application (5)
6. Sign Affidavit and Photos 2-20-25
7. Updated Public Hearing Sign Photo 3-20-25
8. legal ad - agenda ID 25-853 - Sierra-Meadows PUDA-PL20240006561 - BCC 4.22.25
Page 242 of 6355
PUDA-PL20240006561, SIERRA MEADOWS PUD February 7, 2025
Page 1 of 12
STAFF REPORT
TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: ZONING DIVISION – ZONING SERVICES SECTION
GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT -
PLANNING & REGULATION
HEARING DATE: MARCH 6, 2025
SUBJECT: PUDA-PL20240006561, SIERRA MEADOWS PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (PUD)
______________________________________________________________________________
_
PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT AND AGENTS:
Property Owner: Applicant:
S-H Naples Development Propco, LLC (“Propco”) Florida Property Investment Partners, Inc.
3461 Bonita Bay Blvd., Suite 100 5900 North Andrews Avenue, Suite 410
Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309
Lot 8 Property Owner:
Britton (Naples) LLC
2711 North Haskell Avenue, Suite 1700
Dallas, Texas 75204
Agents:
Patrick Vanesse, AICP Francesca Passidomo, Esq.
The Neighborhood Company Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, PA
5618 Whispering Willow Way 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300
Fort Myers, FL 33908 Naples, FL 34103
REQUESTED ACTION:
The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an
Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance
No. 1999-91, as amended, the Sierra Meadows Mixed Planned Unit Development by changing the
floor area ratio for group housing on Lots 8 and 9 of the Sierra Meadows Subdivision from .45 to
.60, and providing an effective date.
Page 243 of 6355
PUDA-PL20240006561, SIERRA MEADOWS PUD February 7, 2025
Page 2 of 12
Page 244 of 6355
PUDA-PL20240006561, SIERRA MEADOWS PUD February 7, 2025
Page 3 of 12
MASTER PLAN FROM ORDINANCE 99-91
MASTER PLAN/AERIAL OF SUBJECT LOTS
Page 245 of 6355
PUDA-PL20240006561, SIERRA MEADOWS PUD February 7, 2025
Page 4 of 12
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject property, consisting of 14.3+/-acres of a 90.8+/- acre MPUD, is located at the
southwest quadrant of the intersection of Rattlesnake-Hammock Road (C.R. 864) and C.R. 951, in
Section 22, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (See the Location Map
on page 2 of this Staff Report.)
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
The purpose of this project is to modify the Sierra Meadows PUD to include a deviation to allow
for a 0.60 Floor Area Ratio (FAR).
The original Sierra Meadows PUD, approved in 1994, was repealed by Ordinance 99-91.
(See Attachment B-Ordinance 99-91). The 90.8± acre PUD allows residential and commercial
development.
During the review of a Site Development Plan for Lot 6, it was noted that Lot 6 was used for the
0.45 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) calculation on Lots 8 and 9 when the Discovery Village group
housing was developed. The applicant is requesting an amendment to the PUD to allow for a
deviation from the 0.45 FAR to allow a 0.60 FAR to facilitate commercial development on Lot 6.
(See Master Plan/Aerial on page 3.) According to information provided by the petitioner, the
proposed development on Lot 6 will consist of two stand-alone commercial buildings, including a
proposed Starbucks, consistent with the currently approved land uses in the PUD.
The approval of the proposed 0.60 FAR will allow for the existing 0.51 FAR on Lots 8 and 9 and
will allow for originally intended commercial development on Lot 6.
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North: Rattlesnake Hammock Road, a six-lane minor arterial roadway, and then developed
residential, golf course, and commercial with a zoning designation of Naples Lakes
Country Club PUD,
East: Collier Boulevard, a six-lane arterial roadway, and then undeveloped commercial
with a zoning designation of Hacienda Lakes PUD, and a hospital with a zoning
designation of Collier Regional Medical Center PUD
South: Lely Elementary School with a zoning designation of Lely Resort PUD and offices
with a zoning designation of Edison Village PUD
West: Undeveloped land with a zoning designation of Rural Agriculture (A)
Page 246 of 6355
PUDA-PL20240006561, SIERRA MEADOWS PUD February 7, 2025
Page 5 of 12
AERIAL PHOTO
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY:
Comprehensive Planning staff has reviewed the proposed PUD Rezone and found it consistent
with the GMP's Future Land Use Element (FLUE). For further information, please see Attachment
C-GMP Consistency Memo.
Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff reviewed the application and found this
project consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan
(GMP). There is no proposed increase in the number of group housing units and no additional
traffic generation for this development. Additionally, operational impacts will be addressed at
the time of the next development order (SDP, SDPA, or Plat), at which time a new TIS will be
required to demonstrate turning movements for all site access points. Finally, the project’s
development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when
development approvals, including but not limited to any plats and or site development plans or
amendments, are sought. Therefore, the subject amendment can be found consistent with Policy
5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP.
Subject Site
Page 247 of 6355
PUDA-PL20240006561, SIERRA MEADOWS PUD February 7, 2025
Page 6 of 12
Conservation and Coastal Management (CCME): Environmental Review staff has found this
petition to be consistent with the Coastal and Conservation Element (CCME). The proposed
changes do not affect any of the GMP's environmental requirements.
GMP Conclusion: The proposed PUD Amendment may be deemed consistent with the FLUE
of the GMP. STAFF ANALYSIS:
Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition, including the criteria upon
which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in Land Development Code (LDC)
Section 10.02.13 B.5., Planning Commission Recommendation (commonly referred to as the
“PUD Findings”), and Section 10.02.08 F., Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission
Report (referred to as “Rezone Findings”), which establish the legal basis to support the Collier
County Planning Commission’s (CCPC) recommendation. The CCPC uses these same criteria as
the basis for their recommendation to the Board of Collier County Commissioners (BCC), who
in turn use the criteria to support their action on the rezoning request. An evaluation relative to
these subsections is discussed below under the heading “Rezone Findings and PUD Findings.”
In addition, staff offers the following analysis:
Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed the PUD petition to address
environmental concerns. The proposed PUD changes will not affect any of the environmental
requirements of the PUD document, Ordinance 99-91, as amended. A minimum of 38.3 acres of
native vegetation has been placed under preservation (Plat Book 39, Pages 11-13 and OR 2699,
Page 2490).
This project does not require Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as it did not meet
the EAC's scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2-1193 of the
Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. Environmental Services staff recommends
approval of the proposed petition.
Transportation Review: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition and
recommends approval.
Utility Review: The project lies within the regional potable water and north wastewater service
areas of the Collier County Water-Sewer District (CCWSD). The project has already received
CCWSD water and wastewater services. Sufficient water and wastewater treatment capacities
are available.
Any improvements to the CCWSD’s water or wastewater systems necessary to provide sufficient
capacity to serve the project will be the responsibility of the owner/developer and will be
conveyed to the CCWSD at no cost to the County at the time of utility acceptance.
Zoning and Land Development Review: FLUE Policy 5.4 requires new land uses to be compatible
with and complementary to the surrounding land uses. In reviewing the appropriateness of the
requested uses and intensity on the subject site, the compatibility analysis included a review of the
Page 248 of 6355
PUDA-PL20240006561, SIERRA MEADOWS PUD February 7, 2025
Page 7 of 12
subject proposal comparing it to surrounding or nearby properties as to allowed use intensities and
densities, development standards (building heights, setbacks, landscape buffers, etc.), building
mass, building location and orientation, architectural features, amount and type of open space and
location. Staff believes the proposed development will be compatible with and complementary to
the surrounding land uses. Staff offers the following analysis of this project:
The surrounding land uses remain the same as when the Sierra Meadows PUD was approved on
December 14, 1999. The land across Rattlesnake Hammock Road and to the north of the 90.8±
acre Sierra Meadows PUD is a developed golf course, residences, and commercial within the
Naples Lakes Country Club PUD. The land across Collier Boulevard and to the east is a
developed hospital with a zoning designation of Collier Regional Medical Center PUD and
undeveloped commercial with a zoning designation of Hacienda Lakes PUD. The land to the south
is Lely Elementary School, with a zoning designation of Lely Resort PUD, and offices, with a
zoning designation of Edison Village PUD. The land to the west is undeveloped, with a zoning
designation of Rural Agriculture (A).
The development standards will remain the same as previously. The proposed amendment to add a
deviation to increase the FAR from 0.45 to 0.60 does not change any of the previous findings of
compatibility.
REZONE FINDINGS:
Staff offers the following analysis:
1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, policies,
future land use map, and the GMP elements.
The Comprehensive Planning staff has indicated that the proposed PUD Amendment is consistent
with all applicable elements of the FLUE of the GMP.
2. The existing land use pattern.
As described in the “Surrounding Land Use and Zoning” portion of this report and discussed in
the zoning review analysis, the neighborhood’s existing land use pattern can be characterized as
developed and residential, golf course, institutional, commercial, and developing commercial.
3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts.
The proposed FAR deviation of 0.60 will not change the previous finding that the subject parcel is
of sufficient size that it will not result in 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 proposed for change.
The proposed FAR deviation from 0.45 to 0.60 will not change the previous finding that the
district boundaries are logically drawn, as discussed in Items 2 and 3.
Page 249 of 6355
PUDA-PL20240006561, SIERRA MEADOWS PUD February 7, 2025
Page 8 of 12
5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezone
necessary.
The proposed change is not necessary, but it is being requested in compliance with the LDC
provisions to seek such changes because the petitioner wishes to seek a deviation to increase the
FAR from 0.45 to 0.60.
6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood.
The proposed deviation to increase the FAR from 0.45 to 0.60. will not adversely impact living
conditions in the area.
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 proposed change does not increase the previously approved maximum number of daily trips.
8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem.
The proposed PUD Amendment will not create a drainage problem. Furthermore, the project is
subject to the requirements of Collier County and the South Florida Water Management District.
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas.
It is anticipated that the proposed PUD Amendment will not reduce light and air to adjacent areas
inside or outside the PUD.
10. Whether the proposed change would adversely affect property values in the adjacent area.
The proposed change will have little impact on 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.
The proposed change is minor and will have little impact on the improvement or development of
adjacent properties.
12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual
owner as contrasted with the public welfare.
The development complies with the GMP, which is a public policy statement supporting zoning
actions when they are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed
Amendment does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is
Page 250 of 6355
PUDA-PL20240006561, SIERRA MEADOWS PUD February 7, 2025
Page 9 of 12
further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in
the public interest.
13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance
with existing zoning.
The subject property can be used in accordance with existing zoning; however, the proposed
development of Lot 6 cannot occur without a deviation on Lots 8 and 9 to allow a 0.60 FAR.
14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the
county.
The proposed PUD Amendment is not out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or
County.
15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in
districts already permitting such use.
There is no change in the currently approved 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.
Any development anticipated by the PUD Document would require site alteration, and this
project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development
regulations during the SDP and/or PPL processes and as part of the building permit process.
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, as amended.
The development will have to meet all applicable criteria outlined in the LDC regarding
Adequate Public Facilities. The project must also be consistent with all applicable goals and
objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities. This petition has been reviewed by
county staff that is responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the rezoning
process, and staff has concluded that the impacts on the Level of Service (LOS) will remain
unchanged.
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.
Page 251 of 6355
PUDA-PL20240006561, SIERRA MEADOWS PUD February 7, 2025
Page 10 of 12
PUD FINDINGS:
LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5 states that “In support of its recommendation, the CCPC shall make
findings as to the PUD Master Plan’s compliance with the following criteria:”
1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to
physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer,
water, and other utilities.
The currently approved commercial, residential, and conservation land uses will not change.
There is no proposed change to the previously approved traffic, access, and drainage.
The project already receives CCWSD water and wastewater services. There are adequate water
and wastewater treatment capacities to serve the project. Any improvements to the CCWSD’s
water or wastewater systems necessary to provide sufficient capacity to serve the project will be
the responsibility of the owner/developer and will be conveyed to the CCWSD at no cost to the
County at the time of utility acceptance.
2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements,
contract, or other instruments, or for Rezones in those proposed, particularly as they may
relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance
of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense.
Documents submitted with the application provided satisfactory evidence of unified control of
the property. Additionally, the development will be required to gain SDP approval. These
processes will ensure that the developer will provide appropriate stipulations for the provision of,
continuing operation of, and maintenance of infrastructure.
3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the GMP's goals, objectives,
and policies.
County staff has reviewed this petition and offered an analysis of the GMP's relevant goals,
objectives, and policies within the GMP discussion of this staff report. Based on that analysis,
staff has found this petition consistent with the overall GMP.
4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include
restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening
requirements.
The proposed 0.60 FAR will not change the internal and external compatibility of the CPUD.
5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development.
The 30% open space set aside for this project meets the minimum requirement of the LDC.
Page 252 of 6355
PUDA-PL20240006561, SIERRA MEADOWS PUD February 7, 2025
Page 11 of 12
5. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of
available improvements and facilities, both public and private.
The roadway infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project. Operational impacts will
be addressed at the time of the first development order (SDP or Plat). Finally, the project’s
development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when
development approvals, including but not limited to any plats and or site development plans, are
sought.
As previously stated, the project already receives CCWSD water and wastewater services. 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.
6. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion.
The area has adequate supporting infrastructure, including CCWSD potable water and wastewater
mains, to accommodate this project.
7. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in
the particular case, based on a determination that such modifications are justified as meeting
public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to the literal application of such regulations.
This criterion essentially requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards
and deviations proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that would be required
for the most similar conventional zoning district. The petitioner is seeking a deviation to
increase the FAR from 0.45 to 0.60. Please refer to the Deviation Discussion portion of the staff
report below for a more extensive examination of the deviation.
Deviation Discussion:
The petitioner is seeking one deviation from the requirements of the LDC. The petitioner’s
rationale and staff analysis/recommendation are outlined below.
Deviation #1
Deviation #1 seeks relief from LDC section 5.05.04 D.1, Group Housing, which states that the
maximum floor area ratio (FAR) for assisted living facilities (ALF) or independent living
facilities (ILF) shall not exceed 0.45 to allow for a maximum FAR of 0.60 on Lots 8 and 9.
Petitioner’s Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation:
Although the LDC limits FAR for ALFs and ILFs to 0.45, an increase to 0.60 is a
common deviation approved through the PUD rezone or amendment process. During the
approval process for the Discovery Village site development plan amendment (SDPA)
PL20150000071 for Lots 8 and 9, an undeveloped commercial tract (Lot 6) adjacent to
the project site was used as part of the FAR calculation in order for the project to be
Page 253 of 6355
PUDA-PL20240006561, SIERRA MEADOWS PUD February 7, 2025
Page 12 of 12
within the standard maximum FAR of 0.45. Maximum square footage per the FAR was
calculated as follows:
301,174 SF (Lot 8) + 322,538 SF (Lot 9) + 84,937 SF (Lot 6) *0.45 = 318,892 SF
FAR provided: 120,800 SF (Phase 1) + 198,088 (Phase 2) = 318,888 SF
As demonstrated in the approved SDPA, Discovery Village Phases 1 and 2 were built
entirely on Lots 8 and 9; Lot 6 remained undeveloped and was only used for FAR
calculation. The net FAR on Lots 8 and 9 is calculated as follows:
301,174 SF (Lot 8) + 322,538 SF (Lot 9) = 623,712 SF
318,888 SF (Phases 1 and 2) / 623,712 = 0.51
The requested deviation for maximum FAR on Lots 8 and 9 has effectively no impact on
the site as it exists today; Discovery Village has been fully built out in compliance with
all development standards and buffer requirements of the existing MPUD. The use of Lot
6 in the calculation of the FAR for the ALF/ILF on Lots 8 and 9 rendered Lot 6 effectively
undevelopable. Increasing the maximum FAR for group housing unencumbers Lot 6,
allowing it to be developed in accordance with the intent of the MPUD.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommend
APPROVAL, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has
demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety,
and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has
demonstrated that the deviation is “justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least
equivalent to the literal application of such regulations.”
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM):
The applicant conducted a NIM on December 3, 2024, at the Shepard of the Glades Church, 6020
Rattlesnake Hammock Road, Naples, Florida. There were no attendees.
COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW:
The County Attorney's Office reviewed the Staff Report for this petition on February 7, 2025.
RECOMMENDATION:
Planning and Zoning Review staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition PUDA-
PL20240006561, Sierra Meadows PUD, to the BCC with a recommendation of approval.
Attachments:
Attachment A-Proposed PUD Ordinance
Attachment B-Ordinance 99-91
Attachment C-GMP Consistency Memo.
Attachment D-Application
Page 254 of 6355
[24-CPS-02557/1918339/1] 63
SierraMeadows /PL20240006561
1/27/25
1 of 2
ORDINANCE NO. 2025 - ______
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.
1999-91, AS AMENDED, THE SIERRA MEADOWS MIXED PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT BY CHANGING THE FLOOR AREA RATIO
FOR GROUP HOUSING ON LOTS 8 AND 9 OF THE SIERRA
MEADOWS SUBDIVISION FROM .45 TO .60, AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, CONSISTING OF
14.3+/- ACRES OF A 90.8 ACRE MPUD, IS LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHWEST QUADRANT OF THE INTERSECTION OF
RATTLESNAKE-HAMMOCK ROAD (C.R. 864) AND C.R. 951, IN
SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20240006561]
WHEREAS, on September 14, 1999, the Board of County Commissioners approved
Ordinance No. 1999-91, which amended the Sierra Meadows Planned Unit Development (PUD);
and
WHEREAS, the Collier County Hearing Examiner approved insubstantial changes to the
PUD in HEX Decisions 2015-14 and 2017-01 in accordance with the Collier County Land
Development Code; and
WHEREAS, Patrick Vanasse, AICP of The Neighborhood Company and Francesca
Passidomo, Esquire of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. representing Florida Property
Investment Partners, Inc., petitioned the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,
Florida, to amend Ordinance 1999-91, the Sierra Meadows MPUD, as amended.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that:
SECTION ONE: Amendment to Section IV, Commercial District, of the Mixed Planned
Unit Development Document, attached to Ordinance No. 1999-91, as
amended, Sierra Meadows MPUD.
Section IV, Commercial District, attached to Ordinance No. 1999-91, as amended, is
hereby amended to read as follows:
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Page 255 of 6355
[24-CPS-02557/1918339/1] 63
SierraMeadows /PL20240006561
1/27/25
2 of 2
4.6 DEVIATIONS FROM LDC
* * * * * * * * * * * *
C. The following deviation from the Land Development Code is applicable to Lots 8 and 9 of
Sierra Meadows subdivision, according to the plat recorded in Plat Book 39, Pages 11-13.
Deviation #1: Seeks relief from LDC section 5.05.04 D.1, “Group Housing”, which states that
the maximum floor area ratio (FAR) for assisted living facilities (ALF) or independent living
facilities (ILF) shall not exceed 0.45, to instead allow for a maximum FAR of 0.60 on Lots 8 and
9.
SECTION TWO: Effective Date.
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super-majority vote of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this ______day of _____________________, 2025.
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:_________________________ By:________________________________
Deputy Clerk Burt L. Saunders, Chairman
Approved as to form and legality:
_____________________________
Heidi Ashton-Cicko
Managing Assistant County Attorney
Page 256 of 6355
Page 257 of 6355
Page 258 of 6355
Page 259 of 6355
Page 260 of 6355
Page 261 of 6355
Page 262 of 6355
Page 263 of 6355
Page 264 of 6355
Page 265 of 6355
Page 266 of 6355
Page 267 of 6355
Page 268 of 6355
Page 269 of 6355
Page 270 of 6355
Page 271 of 6355
Page 272 of 6355
Page 273 of 6355
Page 274 of 6355
Page 275 of 6355
Page 276 of 6355
Page 277 of 6355
Page 278 of 6355
Page 279 of 6355
Page 280 of 6355
Page 281 of 6355
Page 282 of 6355
Page 283 of 6355
Page 284 of 6355
Page 285 of 6355
Page 286 of 6355
Growth Management Community Development • Planning & Zoning
2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.colliercountyfl.gov/
CONSISTENCY MEMORANDUM
TO: Nancy Gundlach, Planner III, Zoning Services
FROM: Jessica Malloy, Planner II, Comprehensive Planning
Growth Management Community Development Department
DATE: January 31, 2025
SUBJECT: PL20240006561 Sierra Meadows Mixed Use Planned Unit Development Lot 6
(PUDA)
_________________________________________________________________________________
REQUEST: To amend the Sierra Meadows Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) allowable
floor area ratio (FAR) from 0.45 to 0.6 for the existing assisted living facility (ALF) known as ‘Discovery
Village,’ located on Lots 8 and 9 of the MPUD. The adjustment in FAR will facilitate continued commercial
development of the MPUD within Lot 6, proposing two commercial buildings to be consistent with the uses
permitted by Ordinance 99-91.
LOCATION: The subject site comprises the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Rattlesnake
Hammock Road (CR 864) and Collier Boulevard (CR 951).
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMENTS: The subject property is part of Activity Center #7, a
designated Mixed Use Activity Center that is identified in the Mixed-Use Activity Center Subdistrict
(MUAC) of the Urban Commercial District of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and on the Future
Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP).
Although the MUAC subdistrict does not include restrictions on maximum floor area ratios for ALFs and
allows for all commercial uses, the subdistrict text provides a series of factors to consider for projects within
Activity Centers. Many of these factors are already addressed within the initial rezoning in 1994 (Ord. 94-
64) and consequential rezoning (Ord. 99-91); however, an amendment to the zoning of the site presents a
need to ensure that several of the factors will continue to be maintained should the project be approved.
The full list of factors can be found within the MUAC text of the FLUE. The applicable factors considered
during the review are factors j. and k., regarding interconnections:
j. Coordinated traffic flow on-site and off-site, as may be demonstrated by a Traffic Impact
Analysis, and a site plan/master plan indicating on-site traffic movements, access point locations
and type, median opening locations and type on the abutting roadway(s), location of traffic signals
on the abutting roadway(s), and internal and external vehicular and pedestrian interconnections.
k. Interconnection(s) for pedestrians, bicycles, and motor vehicles with existing and future abutting
projects.
Page 287 of 6355
Growth Management Community Development • Planning & Zoning
2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.colliercountyfl.gov/
A review of the property indicated that there is a need to improve pedestrian walkability, particularly
between Lot 6 and the adjacent Discovery Village facility, as increased pedestrian, bicycle, and motorist
traffic will result in the inclusion of this use. The improvements at Sequoia Drive and Sierra Meadows
Boulevard will be reviewed at the time of the submission of the Site Development Plan application.
Certain applicable Future Land Use Element (FLUE) policies are shown as follows in italics followed
by staff analysis in bold text.
FLUE Policy 5.6 (shown below in italics) followed by staff analysis in [bracketed bold text].
New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses, as set forth
in the Land Development Code (Ordinance 04-41, adopted June 22, 2004, and effective October 18, 2004,
as amended). [Comprehensive Planning staff leaves this determination to Zoning staff as part of their
review of the petition.]
Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to
fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating
intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. [The MPUD features multiple access
points to Rattlesnake Hammock Road, Collier Boulevard, and Lely Cultural Parkway through the
Edison Village PUD. The connections provide for a multitude of accessible routes to the site.]
Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle
congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. [The internal
access road, Sierra Meadows BLVD, lends four points of connection to Discovery Village, which
connects to both Rattlesnake Hammock RD and Collier BLVD.]
Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and/or
interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type.
The interconnection of local streets between developments is also addressed in Policy 9.3 of the
Transportation Element. [The development has an existing interconnection point to the Edison Village
PUD. This connection grants access to Sierra Meadows MPUD from Lely Cultural Parkway and the
Lely Resort PUD.]
Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend
of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities, and a range of housing prices and types. [The Sierra
Meadows MPUD features sidewalks throughout the site, allowing pedestrian access throughout the
Activity Center quadrant. Multi-family apartments, known as Sierra Grande, incorporate 300
dwelling units at market rate within the MPUD. The Sierra Grande and Discovery Village buildings
feature common spaces and amenities for residents typical of residential development, including a
clubhouse, pool, and dog park. The commercial uses open to the public (RaceTrac and the future
commercial building proposed to be a drive-thru restaurant) feature outdoor seating, which may be
purposed as common space for patrons, entailing public access. No civic facilities currently exist in
the development.]
CONCLUSION: Based on the above analysis, staff finds the subject petition consistent with the Future
Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan.
• PETITION ON CITYVIEW
Planning Application Status - Collier County - CityView Portal
Page 288 of 6355
Sierra Meadows PUDA Page 1 of 2
PL20240006561
09/26/2024
5618 Whispering Willow Way, Ft Myers, FL 33908 | 239-398-2016
www.theneighborhood.company
September 26, 2024
Eric Ortman
Growth Management Community Development Department
Zoning Division
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34104
Subject: Sierra Meadows Planned Unit Development Amendment (PUDA) Submittal #1
PL20240006561
Mr. Ortman:
Pursuant to the pre-application meeting held on June 6, 2024, The Neighborhood Company is pleased to
submit, on behalf of our client, this PUDA Application for Lots 8 and 9 of the Sierra Meadows Mixed Use
Planned Unit Development (MPUD) located in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Rattlesnake
Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard.
As part of this application, please see the attached Narrative Statement describing the project as well as
the following items included pursuant to the application Submittal Requirement checklist. For clarification,
this amendment proposes no changes to the existing PUD ordinance language other than the addition of a
list of deviations.
1. Narrative Statement
2. Completed PUD Amendment Application
2a. Additional Agents
3. Pre-Application Meeting Notes
4. Affidavit of Authorizations, signed and notarized
5. Property Ownership Disclosure Form
6. Covenant of Unified Control, signed and notarized (see application)
7. Completed Addressing Checklist
7a. Legal Descriptions
8. Warranty Deeds
9. Approved SDP for Discovery Village
10. Statement of Utility Provisions (see application)
11. TIS Waiver Request
12. PUD Exhibits A-F
a. Exhibit A: List of Permitted Uses (N/A - no change)
b. Exhibit B: Development Standards (N/A - no change)
c. Exhibit C: Master Plan (N/A - no change)
d. Exhibit D: Legal Description (N/A - no change)
e. Exhibit E: List of Requested LDC Deviations
f. Exhibit F: List of Development Commitments (N/A - no change)
13. Original Sierra Meadows PUD Ordinance 99-91 and Master Plan
14. Deviations and Justifications
Page 289 of 6355
Sierra Meadows Lot 6 PUDA Page 2 of 2
PL20240006561
09/26/2024
5618 Whispering Willow Way, Ft Myers, FL 33908 | 239-398-2016
www.theneighborhood.company
The PUDA review fees, an estimated total of $10,382.50, for the PUD Amendment, Comprehensive
Planning Consistency Review, Legal Advertising, and Fire Planning Review Fees will be paid upon receipt
of the Payment Slip.
We look forward to your review and are available to answer questions related to this application.
Sincerely,
The Neighborhood Company
Patrick Vanasse, AICP
President
Attachments: Application Submittal Requirements (listed above)
cc: Francesca Passidomo, Esq.
Andrew Rath, P.E.
Page 290 of 6355
Sierra Meadows PUDA Page 1 of 9
Submittal #1
09/12/2024
5618 Whispering Willow Way, Fort Myers, FL 33908 | 239-398-2016
www.theneighborhood.company
SIERRA MEADOWS MPUD
Planned Unit Development Amendment (PUDA)
NARRATIVE STATEMENT AND EVALUATION CRITERIA
BACKGROUND & REQUEST
The purpose of this request is to modify the Sierra Meadows Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD)
floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.45 to 0.6 to reflect the FAR of the existing ALF/ILF facility known as "Discovery
Village" located on Lots 8 and 9 of Sierra Meadows. The MPUD was approved 25 years ago, before a FAR
deviation to 0.6 became a standard request in newer PUDs with the support of County staff. No changes
are proposed to the list of permitted uses, total square footage, or density, or to areas devoted to
conservation, open space, or access, all of which are already platted consistent with the MPUD master
plan.
Sierra Meadows Lots 8 and 9 comprise ±14.3 acres of the MPUD. The subject property is located off Sierra
Meadows Boulevard, approximately 750 feet southwest of the intersection of Rattlesnake Hammock Road
and Collier Boulevard in unincorporated Collier County, Florida.
The original Sierra Meadows PUD was approved for residential development in 1994 via Ordinance 94-64
and was later rezoned to a mixed-use PUD in 1999 via Ordinance 99-91. To date, the MPUD has been
developed with 300 multifamily units, 175 independent living units, 138 assisted living units, and 173,948
SF of commercial uses. A balance of 86,052 SF of commercial uses remains.
During the review and approval process for Site Development Plan amendment (SDPA) PL20150000071,
Lot 6 (an undeveloped commercial tract) was tied to the FAR calculation on Lots 8 and 9 for Discovery
Village, which is subject to a maximum FAR of 0.45 per LDC Section 5.05.04. The applicant is requesting
an amendment to the MPUD to deviate from the maximum group housing FAR to increase the FAR from
0.45 to 0.60 on Lots 8 and 9 in order to facilitate commercial development on Lot 6. The proposed
development on Lot 6 will consist of two standalone commercial buildings, including a Starbucks with drive-
through and one other commercial use consistent with those in the current MPUD ordinance. It should be
noted that lot 6 has always been identified as a commercial development tract on the PUD Master Plan and
that the PUDA does not include an expansion of permitted uses or an increase in permitted commercial
square footage.
As demonstrated in the approved SDPA, Discovery Village Phases 1 and 2 were built entirely on Lots 8
and 9; Lot 6 remained undeveloped and was only used for FAR calculation. The net FAR on Lots 8 and 9
is 0.51 and will not increase as a result of this amendment.
Page 291 of 6355
Sierra Meadows PUDA Page 2 of 9
Submittal #1
09/12/2024
5618 Whispering Willow Way, Fort Myers, FL 33908 | 239-398-2016
www.theneighborhood.company
EVALUATION CRITERIA
LDC Section 10.02.13 B.5:
a. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to
physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer,
water, and other utilities.
Lots 8 and 9 consist of an ALF/ILF within the Sierra Meadows MPUD, located in Activity Center #7
– Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR 864) and Collier Boulevard (CR 951) as designated in the
Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Lot 6, where new
commercial development is proposed, is located on the eastern edge of the MPUD and fronts
Collier Boulevard to the east. Lot 6 was identified as a commercial tract in the original master plan
and the proposed uses are permitted under the current MPUD ordinance. Mixed Use Activity
Centers are identified in the FLUE as preferred locations for the highest concentration of
commercial uses. As demonstrated in Table 1 below, the area surrounding Lots 8 and 9 has been
developed with a variety of uses.
LOT 6
RACETRAC
GAS STATION
MISTER
CAR WASH
DISCOVERY
VILLAGE ALF/ILF
(LOTS 8 AND 9)
EXTRA SPACE
SELF-STORAGE
SIERRA GRANDE
APARTMENTS
Page 292 of 6355
Sierra Meadows PUDA Page 3 of 9
Submittal #1
09/12/2024
5618 Whispering Willow Way, Fort Myers, FL 33908 | 239-398-2016
www.theneighborhood.company
Future Land Use District Zoning District Existing Uses
NORTH Urban Commercial District,
Mixed Use Activity Center
Subdistrict
Sierra Meadows MPUD RaceTrac gas station
with convenience store
and Mister Car Wash
SOUTH Urban Residential District Lely Resort PUD Lely Elementary School
EAST Urban Commercial District,
Mixed Use Activity Center
Subdistrict
Sierra Meadows MPUD Undeveloped lot (Lot 6)
WEST Urban Residential District Sierra Meadows MPUD Sierra Meadows
apartments
b. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements,
contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they
may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and
maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public
expense. Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation
with the County Attorney.
A Covenant of Unified Control has been provided by the current owner of Lots 8 and 9. The
applicant, The Morgan Companies, is the contract purchaser for Lot 6. Operation and maintenance
responsibility for development on Lot 6 shall be assumed by The Morgan Companies or potential
assignees.
c. Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Growth
Management Plan. (This is to include identifying what subdistrict, policy, or other provision
allows the requested uses/density, and fully explaining/addressing all criteria or conditions
of that subdistrict, policy, or other provision.)
I. Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict
The Mixed Use Activity Center concept is designed to concentrate almost all new commercial
zoning in locations where traffic impacts can readily be accommodated, to avoid strip and
disorganized patterns of commercial development, and to create focal points within the
community. Mixed Use Activity Centers are intended to be mixed-use in character. Further,
they are generally intended to be developed at a human-scale, to be pedestrian-oriented, and
to be interconnected with abutting projects–whether commercial or residential. Street,
pedestrian pathway and bike lane interconnections with abutting properties, where possible
and practicable, are encouraged.
Allowable land uses in Mixed Use Activity Centers include the full array of commercial uses,
residential uses, institutional uses, hotel/motel uses at a maximum density of 26 units per acre,
community facilities, and other land uses as generally allowed in the Urban designation.
The Sierra Meadows MPUD was found consistent with the GMP per Ordinance 99-91, permitting
a total of 30 acres of commercial uses. The Statement of Compliance (located on page 3 of
Page 293 of 6355
Sierra Meadows PUDA Page 4 of 9
Submittal #1
09/12/2024
5618 Whispering Willow Way, Fort Myers, FL 33908 | 239-398-2016
www.theneighborhood.company
Ordinance 99-91) confirms the following:
The project development promotes sound planning and ensures land use compatibility as
required by Objective 5 of the Future Land Use Element. The project development is
compatible with and complementary to existing and future surrounding commercial land uses
to the north and east, existing public community facilities to the south and future residential
land uses to the west.
This amendment proposes no change to the commercial uses or overall commercial intensity of
the MPUD and therefore remains consistent with the GMP.
d. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include
restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and
screening requirements.
The proposed amendment has no impact on existing internal or external compatibility. The increase
in FAR from 0.45 to 0.60 is only applicable to Discovery Village ALF/ILF, which has been fully built
out in compliance with all development standards and buffer requirements of the existing MPUD.
Proposed commercial development on Lot 6 will also comply with all development standards and
buffer requirements.
e. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development.
Per Section 2.10 of the MPUD ordinance, the minimum 30% open space requirement has been
met by the conservation reserve tract located in the western half of the MPUD which serves the
open space requirement for the entire project.
f. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of
available improvements and facilities, both public and private.
Lots 8 and 9 have already been developed pursuant to a site development plan approved by Collier
County. Relevant to Lot 6, water and sewer service is available. Roadway capacity was deemed
adequate during the original approval of the MPUD, and the amendment does not propose
increased total commercial square footage. Payment of impact fees and timing of adequate public
facilities certification are mechanisms to assure the development is appropriately serviced.
g. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion.
The subject property has been built out and this amendment does not propose an expansion of the
existing ALF/ILF use. Lot 6 is identified as a commercial tract within the existing PUD. Additionally,
the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict is the preferred location for development of new
commercial uses in Collier County.
Page 294 of 6355
Sierra Meadows PUDA Page 5 of 9
Submittal #1
09/12/2024
5618 Whispering Willow Way, Fort Myers, FL 33908 | 239-398-2016
www.theneighborhood.company
h. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the
particular case, based on determination that such modifications of justified as meeting
public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.
This amendment conforms with existing PUD regulations. The requested deviation to increase FAR
for group housing on Lots 8 and 9 will effectively have no impact on the intensity of the existing
ALF/ILF, which has already reached build-out. Increasing the maximum FAR will allow commercial
development on Lot 6 consistent with the approved PUD, but there will still be significant remaining
square footage in the PUD. Lot 6 development is proposed to be 10,000 square feet of commercial
uses, more or less, which would mean over 75,000 square feet of commercial entitlements remain
in the PUD.
LDC Section 10.02.13 B.5:
1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and
future land use map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan.
The proposed amendment is consistent with the Growth Management Plan and meets the intent of
the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict. See “Consistency with the Growth Management Plan”
section below.
2. The existing land use pattern.
The increased FAR will not change existing land use on Lots 8 and 9 and will not affect the land
use pattern depicted on the Master Plan. The proposed deviation from maximum group housing
FAR to allow commercial development on Lot 6 is consistent with the land use pattern of the Sierra
Meadows MPUD, which identifies Lot 6 as a commercial tract on the current master plan.
Additionally, Lot 6 fronts Collier Boulevard, a six-lane divided arterial, and is at an ideal location for
commercial development.
3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts.
This amendment has no impact on the existing MPUD boundary and therefore does not create 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 proposed for change.
Existing boundaries were not illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions. All commercial tracts
of the Sierra Meadows MPUD are located within the boundaries of Activity Center #7 and no change
to the commercial district boundary is proposed by this request.
Page 295 of 6355
Sierra Meadows PUDA Page 6 of 9
Submittal #1
09/12/2024
5618 Whispering Willow Way, Fort Myers, FL 33908 | 239-398-2016
www.theneighborhood.company
5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment
necessary.
The continued residential growth of eastern Collier County, particularly along the Collier Boulevard
corridor between US 41 and I-75, creates an increased need for goods and services at well
planned, easily accessible commercial nodes. The proposed amendment will allow for commercial
uses on property that has already been deemed ideal for such development, while maintaining the
existing net FAR of the ALF/ILF. This PUDA allows for the logical buildout of a mixed use PUD
within an Activity Center rather than the proliferation of strip-style commercial development.
6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood.
The proposed change will not adversely affect living conditions in the neighborhood. The existing
ALF/ILF site will not change and Lot 6 has long been identified as a commercial tract within the
MPUD and will be adequately buffered per the development standards in the MPUD ordinance.
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.
Roadway capacity was deemed adequate during the original approval of the MPUD, and the
amendment does not propose increased commercial intensity.
8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem.
The proposed change does not create a drainage problem. Lots 8 and 9 are already developed
and will not change. The development on Lot 6 will be designed to meet all Collier County and
South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) stormwater standards.
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas.
This PUDA will not seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas.
10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area.
The proposed change is consistent with the zoning and Future Land Use designations that have
been in place since the original approval of the Sierra Meadows MPUD in 1999 and should
therefore have no adverse impact on property values in the adjacent area. The PUDA enables
commercial development of Lot 6 as contemplated in the existing MPUD, which has the effect of
providing neighborhood commercial uses and services for the local community.
Page 296 of 6355
Sierra Meadows PUDA Page 7 of 9
Submittal #1
09/12/2024
5618 Whispering Willow Way, Fort Myers, FL 33908 | 239-398-2016
www.theneighborhood.company
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 will not be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent
property. Lot 6 will utilize interconnection to the rest of the MPUD via Sequioa Drive and Sierra
Meadows Boulevard.
12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual
owner as contrasted with the public welfare.
The PUDA is consistent with the LDC and GMP and does not constitute a grant of special privilege.
A FAR of 0.6 is consistent with the FAR approved routinely in newer PUDs.
13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with
existing zoning.
The use of Lot 6 in the calculation of the FAR for the Site Plan created for the existing ALF/ILF on
Lots 8 and 9 rendered Lot 6 effectively undevelopable. Increasing the maximum FAR for group
housing unencumbers Lot 6, allowing it to be developed in accordance with the intent of the MPUD
and the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict.
14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the
county.
Sierra Meadows MPUD was found in scale with the needs of the neighborhood and county as of
Ordinance 99-91; this amendment does not propose new commercial uses or an increase in
commercial intensity and is therefore still in scale with the surrounding area.
15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in
districts already permitting such use.
The site is already appropriately zoned for the proposed commercial 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.
The majority of the MPUD is already developed, including Lots 8 and 9 subject to the FAR increase.
The degree of site alteration which would be required to make Lot 6 usable for any of the range of
commercial uses under the existing MPUD is typical of and not different from any other similar
development in Collier County. All open space and preservation requirements for the MPUD have
already been met by the conservation reserve tract.
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
Page 297 of 6355
Sierra Meadows PUDA Page 8 of 9
Submittal #1
09/12/2024
5618 Whispering Willow Way, Fort Myers, FL 33908 | 239-398-2016
www.theneighborhood.company
and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities
Ordinance [Code ch. 106, art. II], as amended.
The proposed project will not decrease the level of service standards for drainage, roadways,
utilities, recreation/open space, solid waste, and schools as well as not cause adverse effects on
the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Coller County.
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 Board of County Commissioners.
CONSISTENCY WITH THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
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 Sierra Meadows MPUD was found consistent with the Growth Management Plan at the time of its
adoption per Ordinance 99-91. The MPUD Statement of Compliance noted the following:
The project development promotes sound planning and ensures land use compatibility as required
by Objective 5 of the Future Land Use Element. The project development is compatible with and
complementary to existing and future surrounding commercial land uses to the north and east,
existing public community facilities to the south and future residential land uses to the west.
The proposed amendment to increase maximum FAR to reflect the actual FAR of the ALF/ILF developed
on Lots 8 and 9 in order to develop Lot 6 maintains the compatible and complementary pattern of
development within the MPUD and with surrounding uses. No new uses or increased commercial square
footage are proposed.
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 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.
The subject property is designated as a commercial tract within the MPUD master plan and all commercial
tracts of the MPUD are located within Activity Center #7. Mixed Use Activity Centers are identified in the
FLUE as the preferred location of the highest concentration of commercial uses. This PUDA allows for Lot
6 to be developed as intended, specifically in an area that is already serviced by adequate public facilities
and services.
Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties
to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without
violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code.
The MPUD has direct access to Collier Boulevard at Sequoia Drive and Sierra Meadows Boulevard, with
additional signalized access to Collier Boulevard at Lely Cultural Parkway via Sierra Meadows Boulevard.
Page 298 of 6355
Sierra Meadows PUDA Page 9 of 9
Submittal #1
09/12/2024
5618 Whispering Willow Way, Fort Myers, FL 33908 | 239-398-2016
www.theneighborhood.company
The MPUD has direct access to Rattlesnake Hammock Road at Sierra Meadows Boulevard and Prestwick
Drive.
Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce
vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals.
As mentioned previously, the MPUD has an existing network of internal access roads.
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 existing ALF/ILF has four interconnections to Sierra Meadows Boulevard, an internal access road with
connections to both Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard. Proposed commercial
development on Lot 6 will have ingress/egress at Sequoia Drive and Sierra Meadows Boulevard, subject
to transportation review at the time of SDP.
Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a
blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types.
The Sierra Meadows MPUD contains a 300-unit multifamily apartment development and 313 ALF/ILF
units that are all connected to the commercial tracts of the MPUD by a network of sidewalks. Providing
pedestrian-accessible commercial development on Lot 6 increases the overall walkability of the
residential units and can help alleviate trips on Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard.
Page 299 of 6355
Page 1 of 11
Planning and Zoning Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400
www.colliercountyfl.gov
Need Help?
GMCD Public Portal
Online Payment Guide
E-Permitting Guides
PUD Rezone (PUDZ): LDC subsection 10.02.13 A.-F., Ch. 3 G.1 of the Administrative Code
Amendment to PUD (PUDA): LDC subsections 10.02.13 E; and 10.03.06.B; and Ch. 3 G.2 of the Administrative Code
PUD to PUD Rezone (PUDR): LDC subsection 10.02.13 A.-F.
File a separate application for an insubstantial or minor change to a PUD.
Name of Property Owner(s):
Name of Applicant if different than owner:
Address: City: State: ZIP:
Telephone: Cell:
E-Mail Address:
Name of Agent:
Firm:
Address: City: State: ZIP:
Telephone: Cell:
E-Mail Address:
If Property is under contract to be sold:
Name of Property Buyer(s):
Name of Applicant if different than buyer:
Address: City: State: ZIP:
Telephone: Cell:
E-Mail Address:
Name of Agent:
Firm:
Address: City: State: ZIP:
Telephone: Cell:
E-Mail Address:
Application for a Public Hearing for PUD Rezone,
Amendment to PUD or PUD to PUD Rezone (PUDZ, PUDA, PUDR)
APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION
PUD Rezone, PUD Amendment, PUD to PUD Rezone Application (PUDZ, PUDA, PUDR) 4/22/24
4
S-H Naples Development Propco, LLC ("Propco")
Florida Property Investment Partners, Inc
5900 N. Andrews Ave Suite 410 Ft. Lauderdale FL 33309
954-637-2023
sfriedman@themorgancos.com
Patrick Vanasse, AICP
The Neighborhood Company
5618 Whispering Willow Way Fort Myers FL 33908
239-398-2016
pv@theneighborhood.company
Page 300 of 6355
PUD Rezone, PUD Amendment, PUD to PUD Rezone Application (PUDZ, PUDA, PUDR) 4/22/24 Page 2 of 11
This application is requesting a rezone from:_______________________________________Zoning district(s)
to the _______________________________________________Zoning district(s).
Present Use of the Property:__________________________________________________________________
Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property: _________________________________________________
Original PUD Name: ________________________________________________________________________
Ordinance No: _____________________________________________________________________________
On a separate sheet attached to the application, provide a detailed legal description of the property
covered by the application:
•If the request involves changes to more than one zoning district, the applicant shall include a
separate legal description for property involved in each district;
•If required to do so at the pre-application meeting, the applicant shall submit four (4) copies of a
recent survey (completed within the last six (6) months, maximum 1" to 400' scale), 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: / /
Lot: Block: Subdivision:
Metes & Bounds Description:
Plat Book: Page #: Property ID Number:
Size of Property: ft. x ft. = Total Sq. Ft. Acres:
Address/General Location of Subject Property:
PUD District (refer to LDC subsection 2.03.06 C):
Commercial Residential Mixed Use Industrial
Community Facilities Research and Technology Park Airport Operations
Other: ________________________________
PROPERTY INFORMATION
REZONE REQUEST
PUD
PUD
Discovery Village ALF/ILF
Sierra Meadows PUD
99-91
22 50 26
8 and 9 Sierra Meadows
39 12 73620100689, 73620100676, 73620100663
14.3
Southwest quadrant of the intersection of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard.
Immediately south of the intersection of Sequoia Drive and Collier Boulevard.
4
Page 301 of 6355
Page 3 of 11
Zoning Land Use
N
S
E
W
If the owner of the subject property owns contiguous property please provide a detailed legal
description of the entire contiguous property on a separate sheet attached to the application.
Section/Township/Range: / /
Lot: Block: Subdivision:
Plat Book: Page #: Property ID Number:
Metes & Bounds Description: _________________________________________________________________
Complete the following for all registered Home Owner / Civic Association(s) that could be affected by this
petition and located within 1,000 feet of the subject property. Provide additional sheets if necessary.
Information can be found on the Civic Associations and Communities page on the Board of County
Commissioner’s website. Applicant is responsible for and shall confirm the current mailing addresses for each
association as registered by the Florida Department of State, Division of Corporations.
Name of Homeowner / Civic Association:
Mailing Address: City: State:
ZIP:
Name of Homeowner / Civic Association:
Mailing Address: City: State: ZIP:
Name of Homeowner / Civic Association:
Mailing Address: City: State: ZIP:
Name of Homeowner / Civic Association:
Mailing Address: City: State: ZIP:
Name of Homeowner / Civic Association:
Mailing Address: City: State: ZIP:
ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE
ASSOCIATIONS
PUD Rezone, PUD Amendment, PUD to PUD Rezone Application (PUDZ, PUDA, PUDR) 4/22/24
Sierra Meadows PUD RaceTrac gas station with convenience store/Mister Car Wash
Lely Resort PUD Lely Elementary School
Sierra Meadows PUD Undeveloped lot
Sierra Meadows PUD Sierra Grande apartments
22 50 26
8 and 9 Sierra Meadows
39 12 73620100689, 73620100676, 73620100663
Naples Lakes Country Club HOA
4784 Naples Lakes Blvd Naples FL 34112
East Naples Civic & Commerce Association
8595 Collier Blvd Naples FL 34114
Page 302 of 6355
Page 4 of 11
Pursuant to LDC subsections 10.02.13 B, 10.02.08 F and Chapter 3 G. of the Administrative Code, staff’s analysis
and recommendation to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission’s recommendation to the
Board of County Commissioners shall be based upon consideration of the applicable criteria. On a separate
sheet attached to the application, provide a narrative statement describing the rezone request with specific
reference to the criteria below. Include any backup materials and documentation in support of the request.
a. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to
physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer,
water, and other utilities.
b. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or
other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to
arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such
areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Findings and
recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the County Attorney.
c. Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Growth
Management Plan. (This is to include identifying what subdistrict, policy, or other provision
allows the requested uses/density, and fully explaining/addressing all criteria or conditions of that
subdistrict, policy, or other provision.)
d. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include
restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening
requirements.
e. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development.
f. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available
improvements and facilities, both public and private.
g.The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion.
h. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the
particular case, based on determination that such modifications of justified as meeting public
purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.
Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded from enforcing deed restrictions; however, many
communities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact the civic or property owners association
in the area for which this use is being requested in order to ascertain whether or not the request is affected by
existing deed restrictions
EVALUATION CRITERIA
PUD Rezone, PUD Amendment, PUD to PUD Rezone Application (PUDZ, PUDA, PUDR) 4/22/24
Page 303 of 6355
Page 5 of 11
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?
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 yes, please provide copies.
This land use petition requires a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM), pursuant to Chapter 8 B of the
Administrative Code and LDC section 10.03.05. Following the NIM, the applicant will submit a written
summary and any commitments that have been made at the meeting. Refer to Chapter 8 B of the
Administrative Code for the NIM procedural requirements.
Within 30 days of adoption of the Ordinance, the owner or developer (specify name) at their expense shall
record in the Public Records of Collier County a Memorandum of Understanding of Developer Commitments
or Notice of Developer Commitments that contains the legal description of the property that is the subject of
the land use petition and contains each and every commitment of the owner or developer specified in the
Ordinance. The Memorandum or Notice shall be in form acceptable to the County and shall comply with the
recording requirements of Chapter 695, FS. A recorded copy of the Memorandum or Notice shall be
provided to the Collier County Planned Unit Development Monitoring staff within 15 days of recording
of said Memorandum or Notice.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS
RECORDING OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS
LDC subsection 10.02.08 D
This application will be considered “open” when the determination of “sufficiency” has been made and the
application is assigned a petition processing number. The application will be considered “closed” when the
petitioner withdraws the application through written notice or ceases to supply necessary information to
continue processing or otherwise actively pursue the rezoning, amendment, or change, for a period of six (6)
months. An application deemed “closed” will not receive further processing, and an application “closed”
through inactivity shall be deemed withdrawn. An application deemed “closed” may be re-opened by
submission of a new application, repayment of all application fees, and the grant of a determination of
“sufficiency”. Further review of the request will be subject to the then current code.
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.
PUD Rezone, PUD Amendment, PUD to PUD Rezone Application (PUDZ, PUDA, PUDR) 4/22/24
N/A
4
Page 304 of 6355
Page 6 of 11
STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS FOR PUD REZONE REQUEST
Name of Applicant(s):
Address: City: State: Zip:
Telephone: Cell:
E-Mail Address:
Address of Subject Property (If available):
City: State: Zip:
Section/Township/Range: / /
Lot: Block: Subdivision:
Metes & Bounds Description:
Plat Book: Page #: Property ID Number:
Check applicable system:
a.County Utility System
b.City Utility System
c.Franchised Utility System
d.Package Treatment Plant
e.Septic System
Provide Name:
(GPD Capacity):
Type:
Check applicable system:
a.County Utility System
b.City Utility System
c.Franchised Utility System
d.Private System (Well)
Total Population to be Served:
Peak and Average Daily Demands:
A.Water-Peak:
B.Sewer-Peak:
Provide Name:
Average Daily Demands:
Average Daily Demands:
TYPE OF WATER SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED
APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION
PROPERTY INFORMATION
TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED
PUD Rezone, PUD Amendment, PUD to PUD Rezone Application (PUDZ, PUDA, PUDR) 4/22/24
The Morgan Companies
5900 N. Andrews Ave Suite 410 Ft. Lauderdale FL 33309
sfriedman@themorgancos.com
22 50 26
8 and 9 Sierra Meadows
39 12 73620100689, 73620100676, 73620100663
No new flow
No new flow
No new flow
954-637-2023
Page 305 of 6355
Page 7 of 11
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. Attach additional pages if necessary.
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.
PUD Rezone, PUD Amendment, PUD to PUD Rezone Application (PUDZ, PUDA, PUDR) 4/22/24
The amendment does not propose any new uses or intensity of uses beyond what is permitted by
the existing MPUD ordinance (99-91).
Page 306 of 6355
ongoing
safeguards
Signature of OwnerThomas Costello. Chietowneef
Development Propсо
limited liability company
of the pl
COLLIER- Pas
Thoas Codelle
V
Chief Financial
t Propeo, LLC
foregoing
16 day
mant wasAug nowl
S-H Naples Development
OTARY PUBTUBL
ATE OF FLOR
pl
online
Vpe
Signa re of Notary PublicDaniela Pa
Page 307 of 6355
Page 9 of 11
The following submittal requirement checklist is to be utilized during the Pre-Application Meeting and at time
of application submittal. At final submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with an up-to-date
application. Please upload the submittal items with cover sheets attached to each section via the GMCD Portal.
Incomplete submittals will not be accepted, or processed. View sample PUD document.
REQUIREMENTS REQUIRED NOT
REQUIRED
Cover Letter with narrative statement including a detailed description of why
amendment is necessary
Completed application with required attachments (download latest version)
Pre-application meeting notes
Affidavit of Authorization, signed and notarized
Property Ownership Disclosure Form
Notarized and completed Covenant of Unified Control
Completed Addressing Checklist (no older than 6 months)
Warranty Deed(s)
Signed and sealed Boundary Survey (no older than 6 months)
Architectural rendering of proposed structures
Current aerial photographs (available from Property Appraiser) with project boundary and, if vegetated, FLUCFCS Codes with legend included on aerial.
Statement of utility provisions
Statement of compliance with Growth Management Plan
Environmental data requirements pursuant to LDC section 3.08.00
Environmental Data Requirements collated into a single Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) packet at time of public hearings. Coordinate with project planner
at time of public hearings. See Chapter 7 A. of the Administrative Code
Listed or protected species survey, less than 12 months old. Include copies of
previous surveys.
Traffic Impact Study (TIS)
Historical and Archaeological Survey or Waiver
School Impact Analysis Application, if applicable with residential uses
Location of existing public facilities that will serve the PUD
Electronic copy of all required documents
Completed Exhibits A-F (see below for additional information)+
List of requested deviations from the LDC with justification for each (this
document is separate from Exhibit E)
Conceptual Master Site Plan 24” x 36”and one (1) 8 ½” x 11” copy
*Checklist continues on next page
Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for:
PUD Rezone- Ch. 3 G.1 of the Administrative Code
Amendment to PUD- Ch. 3 G.2 of the Administrative Code
PUD to PUD Rezone- Ch. 3 G.1 of the Administrative Code
PUD Rezone, PUD Amendment, PUD to PUD Rezone Application (PUDZ, PUDA, PUDR) 4/22/24
Page 308 of 6355
PUD Rezone, PUD Amendment, PUD to PUD Rezone Application (PUDZ, PUDA, PUDR) 4/22/24 Page 10 of 11
Original PUD document/ordinance, and Master Plan 24” x 36” – Only if Amending the PUD
Revised PUD document with changes crossed thru & underlined
Development Commitments (infrastructure and related matters)
Copy of Official Interpretation and/or Zoning Verification
+The following exhibits are to be completed on a separate document and attached to the application
packet:
•Exhibit A: List of Permitted Uses
•Exhibit B: Development Standards Table for each type of land use
•Exhibit C: Master Plan- See Chapter 3 G.1 of the Administrative Code
•Exhibit D: Legal Description
•Exhibit E: List of Requested LDC Deviations and justification for each
•Exhibit F: List of Development Commitments
If located in RFMU (Rural Fringe Mixed Use) Receiving Land Areas, pursuant to LDC subsection 2.03.08 A.2.a.(2)(b)i.c., the
applicant must contact the Florida Forest Service at 239-690-3500 for information regarding “Wildfire Mitigation &
Prevention Plan.”
PLANNERS – INDICATE IF THE PETITION NEEDS TO BE ROUTED TO THE FOLLOWING REVIEWERS:
School District (Residential Components): Amy Lockheart Conservancy of SWFL: Nicole Johnson
Utilities Engineering: Anthony Stolts Parks and Recreation Director:
Emergency Management: Dan Summers; and/or EMS:
Artie Bay
Immokalee Water/Sewer District:
Stormwater Management: Fire:
City of Naples Planning Director: Erica Martin Other:
City of Naples Utilities: Other:
Fire Pre-Application Meeting: $150.00 (Applied as credit towards fire review fee upon submittal of application if
within 9 months of the pre-app meeting date)
Pre-Application Meeting: $500.00
PUD Rezone: $10,000.00* plus $25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre
PUD to PUD Rezone: $8,000.00* plus $25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre
PUD Amendment: $6,000.00* plus $25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre
Comprehensive Planning Consistency Review: $2,250.00
Environmental Data Requirements-EIS Packet (submittal determined at pre-application meeting): $2,500.00
Listed or Protected Species Review (when an EIS is not required): $1,000.00
Transportation Review Fees:
•Methodology Review: $500.00 (Methodology by Email to Staff)
*Additional fees to be determined at Methodology Meeting
•Minor Study Review: $750.00
•Major Study Review $1,500.00
FEE REQUIREMENTS
Page 309 of 6355
Page 11 of 11
Fire Planning Review Fee: ($300 PUDZ, PUDR) ($150 PUDA)
Estimated Legal Advertising fee:
•CCPC: $1,125.00
•BCC: $500.00
If applicable, an additional fee for Property Owner Notifications will be billed to the applicant after
Hearing Examiner hearing date. (Variable)
School Concurrency Fee, if applicable:
•Mitigation Fees, if application, to be determined by the School District in coordination with
the County
All fees are collected at the time of application. Property Notification Letters, if required by The Land Development Code, will be
invoiced after the petition is heard by the Board of County Commissioners.
As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this
submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this
petition. *Additional fee for the 5th and subsequent re-submittal will be accessed at 20% of the original fee.
Signature of Petitioner or Agent Date
Printed Named of Signing Party
*The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to:
Growth Management Community Development Department | GMCD Public Portal:
https://cvportal.colliercountyfl.gov/cityviewweb
Questions? Email: GMDclientservices@colliercountyfl.gov
PUD Rezone, PUD Amendment, PUD to PUD Rezone Application (PUDZ, PUDA, PUDR) 4/22/24
Patrick Vanasse, AICP
12/18/24
Page 310 of 6355
Sierra Meadows PUDA Page 1 of 1
Submittal #1
08/22/2024
5618 Whispering Willow Way, Fort Myers, FL 33908 | PHONE NUMBER
www.theneighborhood.company
SIERRA MEADOWS MPUD
Planned Unit Development Amendment (PUDA)
AGENTS
Patrick Vanasse, AICP
The Neighborhood Company
5618 Whispering Willow Way
Fort Myers, FL 33908
(239) 398-2016
pv@theneighborhood.company
Francesca Passidomo, Esq.
Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A.
The Northern Trust Building
4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300
Naples, Florida 34103
(239) 435-3535
fpassidomo@cyklawfirm.com
Page 311 of 6355
Collier County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliercountyfl.gov
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400
Zoning Pre-Application Meeting Notes
Petition Type: PUD Amendment (PUDA)
Date and Time: Thursday 6/6/24/22/24 at 3:00
Assigned Planner: Eric Ortman
Engineering Manager (for PPL's and FP's):
Project Information
Project Name: Sierra Meadows Lot 6 (PUDA)
PL#: 20240006561
Property ID #: 73620100621
Project Address:
Current Zoning: Sierra Meadows PUD
City: Naples State:FL
Applicant: Tocia Hamlin - Davidson Engineering, Inc.
Andrew
Agent Name:Rath - Davidson Engineering,
Agent/Firm Address: 4365 Radio Rd.STE201
Zip: 34134
Inc.
Phone:239-434-6060
City: Naples State: FL Zip: 34104
Property Owner: S-H Naples Development Propco LLC c/o Discovery Management
Please provide the following, if applicable:
i. Total Acreage: 1.93 (Lot 6)
ii. Proposed # of Residential Units:
iii. Proposed Commercial Square Footage:
iv. For Amendments, indicate the original petition number:
V.If there is an Ordinance or Resolution associated with this project, please indicate the
type and number:
vi. If the project is within a Plat, provide the name and AR#/PL#:
Updated 09/29/2023 Page | 1 of 5
Page 312 of 6355
Collier County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliercountyfl.gov
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(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.colliercountyfl.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=75093
ZONING - ERic олттAn
See ATTACheD emAIL AND NUTES
ON PAGes 2A.12A.2.
SIGNAGe - DiAN COMPAGNONE
CONTACT DIANA WiTh QuesTIONS REGARDING SiGNS
DIANA. COMPAGNONe @ColienCounTYFL, GOU
-ComP
239-252-2429
PLANNING - JessIcA MALLOY
See ATTAcheD eMAIL AND NoTes
ON PAGes 2.B.12.B.3.
If Site is within the City of Naples Water Service Area please send to Naples Utilities and Planning Departments. Then, if thepetition is submitted, we are to send it (by email) to the four persons below in their Utilities and Planning Depts. - along with
a request that they send us a letter or email of "no objection" to the petition. Bob Middleton RMiddleton@naplesgov.comAllyson Holland AMHolland@naplesgov.com Robin Singer RSinger@naplesgov.com Erica Martinemartin@naplesgov.com
Disclaimer: Information provided by staff to applicant during the Pre-Application Meeting is based on the best availabledata 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 providedof required data for an application may not fully outline what is needed. It is the applicant's responsibility to provide allrequired data.
Updated 09/29/2023 Page 2 of 5
Page 313 of 6355
Page 314 of 6355
Page 315 of 6355
Page 316 of 6355
Pre-Application Meeting - Sierra Meadows Lot 6
Jessica Malloy, Comprehensive Planning
PL20240006561 (PUDA)
6/6/2024
The proposed petition seeks to adjust the FAR designated for Lot 6 of the Sierra Meadows Subdivision
and Planned Unit Development (Ord. 99-91) located in the southwest quadrant of the Rattlesnake
Hammock RD (CR864) and Collier BLVD (CR951). This property designated within the Mixed Use
Activity Center Subdistrict (MUAC) of the Urban Commercial District, established by the Future Land
Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP).
In regards to allowable land use, the FLUE allows for a "full array" of commercial uses within Activity
Center Boundaries and does not restrict specific uses. Within the petition, a written analysis of the
GMP is required. Specifically, projects within the MUAC are reviewed based on provisions listed within
the MUAC subdistrict text, which encourages that commercial developments and redevelopments of
projects or portions of projects within Activity Centers meet a series of factors when a rezoning action
is considered.
As Planned Unit Development Amendments such as what is being proposed are considered a change
to the zoning of a site, the petition will need to address how each provision within the list of factors (XV
a. through j.), as applicable, are being met as a result of the improvements made to the site; and, for
existing factors met, identify how the property will continue to maintain conformity upon thedevelopment of Lot 6.
(XV) The factors to consider during review of a rezone petition for a project, or portion thereof, within an Activity Center,
are as follows:
a. Rezones are encouraged to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development. There shall be no minimum acreage
limitation for such Planned Unit Developments except all requests for rezoning must meet the requirements forrezoning in the Land Development Code.
b. The amount, type and location of existing zoned commercial land, and developed commercial uses, both within the
Mixed Use Activity Center and within two (2) road miles of the Mixed Use Activity Center.
c. Market demand and service area for the proposed commercial land uses to be used as a guide to explore thefeasibility of the requested land uses.
d. Existing patterns of land use within the Mixed Use Activity Center and within two (2) radial miles.
e. Adequacy of infrastructure capacity, particularly roads.
f. Compatibility of the proposed development with, and adequacy of buffering for, adjoining properties.
g. Natural or man-made constraints.
h. Rezoning criteria identified in the Land Development Code.
i. Conformance with Access Management Plan provisions for Mixed Use Activity Centers, as contained in the Land
Development Code.
j. Coordinated traffic flow on-site and off-site, as may be demonstrated by a Traffic Impact Analysis, and a site
plan/master plan indicating on-site traffic movements, access point locations and type, median opening locations and
type on the abutting roadway(s), location of traffic signals on the abutting roadway(s), and internal and external
vehicular and pedestrian interconnections.
k. Interconnection(s) for pedestrians, bicycles, and motor vehicles with existing and future abutting projects.
I. Conformance with the architectural design standards as identified in the Land Development Code.
Prbe 2B.2
Page 317 of 6355
Pre-Application Meeting - Sierra Meadows Lot 6
Jessica Malloy, Comprehensive Planning
6/6/2024
The petition will also need to demonstrate consistency with the GMP to include an analysis of the site's
compatibility with smart growth policies 5.6 and 7.1 through 7.4 of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE).
PAGe 2.B.3
Page 318 of 6355
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliercountyfl.gov
Collier County
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400
Meeting Notes
ANDSCAPe Rovien- MAnK TemPLETon
See ATTAChen eMAIL NOTe ON PAG 3A.
ENVIRONMENTAL - CRAIG i3RowN
See AtAcheD eMAIL AND NoTes wiTh
CheckLIsTS ON PAGES 3.31. 3 B.6.
TRANSPONTATION - Mike SAwyen-
CAL or emtil with QwestioNr see PAGey
FOn CONTACT iNOFO
PuD MONiTONING - LAuRme BeAnD
See ATTAchen emMAIL FRUM LAuRie Requestinc
The MANAGING ENTITY TO CUMPlete The AnNUAL Reiеет
See ATTACcheD NoTes oN PAbes 3c.l362
Note: The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy to help offset the
impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects identified
in the Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) as needed to maintain theadopted Level of Service (LOS) for public facilities. Other fees collected prior to the issuance of a buildingpermit include building permit review fees. Please note that impact fees and taxes collected were not
included in the criteria used by staff and the Planning Commission to analyze this petition.
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 theapplicant 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 toprovide all required data.
Updated 09/29/2023 Page | 3 of 5
Page 319 of 6355
Page 320 of 6355
Page 321 of 6355
Page 322 of 6355
Page 323 of 6355
Page 324 of 6355
Page 325 of 6355
Page 326 of 6355
Page 327 of 6355
Page 328 of 6355
Page 329 of 6355
Page 330 of 6355
Page 331 of 6355
Page 332 of 6355
Page 333 of 6355
Page 334 of 6355
Page 335 of 6355
Page 336 of 6355
Page 337 of 6355
Page 338 of 6355
Page 339 of 6355
Page 340 of 6355
See attached Exhibit A
Page 341 of 6355
ge pa
rs,
Collier County
rs, corp pa p
Page 342 of 6355
Collier County
816/2021Date
Page 343 of 6355
EXHIBIT A TO PROPERY OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM OF
S-H NAPLES DEVELOPMENT PROPCO, LLC
With respect to the indirect ownership interest of S-H Naples Development Mezz Holdco, LLC
(the “Sole Member”), the sole Member of S-H Naples Development Propco, LLC, the below
entities are the only individuals and/or entities with more than a five (5%) indirect interest in the
Sole Member:
Jeffrey L. Henning Irrevocable Trust, Todd Carlson and Paul Garnett, Trustees;
Cynthia K. Henning Irrevocable Trust, Jeffrey L. Henning, Trustee;
Richard Hutchinson Revocable Trust, Richard Hutchinson, Trustee;
Hoffman GST Credit Shelter Trust, Dawn Hoffman, Trustee; and
Al Hoffman Revocable Trust, Alfred Hoffman Jr., Trustee
Page 344 of 6355
WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE SOLE MEMBER OF S-H NAPLES DEVELOPMENT PROPCO, LLC The undersigned, being the sole Member of S-H Naples Development PropCo, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Company”) hereby consents to and adopts the following resolutions pursuant to the governing limited liability company agreement and applicable law: WHEREAS, the Company has developed an independent living senior community known as a part of Discovery Village at Naples on the land more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto (the “Land”); WHEREAS, the Company has entered into a purchase and sale agreement (as amended, modified, assigned or otherwise supplemented from time to time) (the “Lot 6 Purchase Agreement”) for the sale of a portion of the Land more particularly described in Exhibit A-1 attached hereto (“Lot 6”); WHEREAS, in connection with the Lot 6 Purchase Agreement, the Company shall, among other things, obtain or cause the purchaser under the Lot 6 Purchase Agreement to obtain (i) a rezone of the Land, and (ii) a modification to the site plan for the Land (the “Modifications”); and WHEREAS, in connection with the Modifications, the Company is required to execute certain affidavits, documents and instruments necessary under the Lot 6 Purchase Agreement or incidental to the Modifications (the “Modification Documents’). NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Company is authorized to enter into, execute and deliver and perform thereunder the Modification Documents, and any and all related amendments, modifications, agreements, assignments, consents, certificates, or documents required by, necessary under or incidental to the Modifications and the Modification Documents, and in accordance with or as contemplated by the Lot 6 Purchase Agreement and containing terms and conditions as the sole Member in its discretion deems necessary or appropriate, such additional terms to be conclusively evidenced by its execution thereof. FURTHER RESOLVED, that Richard Hutchinson and Thomas Costello, as officers of the Company, is each authorized, directed and empowered to execute and deliver the Modification Documents, and any and all related amendments, modifications, agreements, assignments, consents, certificates or documents necessary or appropriate to evidence the Modifications. FURTHER RESOLVED, that any officer of the Company is authorized, empowered and directed to take such other action as may be necessary or desirable in the discretion of such officer(s) to fulfill the purposes and intent of the foregoing resolutions. FURTHER RESOLVED, that any officer of the Company may certify as to the effectiveness of this Written Consent. [signature page follows immediately] 36703\001\4934-9515-7507.v1Page 345 of 6355
Dated: Effective as of December 10, 2024
36703\001 \4934-9515-7507.vl
S-H Naples Development Mezz Holdco,
LLC
By:�
Name: Thomas Costello
Title: Chief Financial Officer
Being the sole member of S-H Naples
Development PropCo, LLC
Signature Page to S-H Naples Development PropCo, LLC Consent
Page 346 of 6355
EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION REAL PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF NAPLES, COUNTY OF COLLIER, STATE OF FLORIDA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL A: LOT 9 OF SIERRA MEADOWS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 39, PAGES 11-13, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND THE LAND CONVEYED JIN DEED FROM NAPLES SENIOR HOUSING I PROPCO, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY TO NAPLES SENIOR HOUSING ITI OPCO, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, DATED AUGUST 23, 2018 AND RECORDED AUGUST 29, 2018 IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 5547, PAGE 3053; AND LOT 6 OF SIERRA MEADOWS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 39, PAGE 11, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND A PARCEL SITUATED IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF COLLIER, LYING IN SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, BEING OVER ACROSS AND THROUGH A PART OF THE LOT 8, SIERRA MEADOWS, AS DESCRIBED IN PLAT BOOK 39, PAGES 11 THROUGH 13, COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC RECORDS, AND BEING FURTHER BOUNDED AND DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8, THENCE S 01° 05' 19" W ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 8 FOR 260.40 FEET; TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PARCEL; THENCE CONTINUE S 01° 05' 19" W FOR 184.40 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8; THENCE N 88° 03' 44” E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 8 FOR 335.49 FEET; THENCE N 63° 53' 56" W FOR 391.73 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE CENTERLINE OF SIERRA MEADOWS BOULEVARD AS BEARING § 88° 03' 44" W, AS DESCRIBED IN SAID PLAT BOOK 39, PAGES 11-13, COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC RECORDS, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. LESS THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCELS: THE EASTERLY 15.00 FEET OF LOT 6, SIERRA MEADOWS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 39, PAGE 11 THROUGH 13, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 6, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE INTERSECTION OF THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF COLLIER BOULEVARD AND THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SEQUOIA DRIVE; THENCE SOUTH 00° 50’ 44" WEST ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 114.62 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF TRACT L, SIERRA MEADOWS, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 39, PAGE 11 THROUGH 13 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE NORTH 89° 09' 16" WEST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE AND ITS WESTERLY PROJECTION, A DISTANCE OF 15.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00° 50’ 44" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 113.82 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID SEQUOIA DRIVE; THENCE NORTH 87° 48' 19" EAST ALONG SAID 36703\001\4934-9515-7507.v1Page 347 of 6355
SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 15.02 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. AND A TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF COLLIER, LYING IN SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, BEING THE WEST 45 FEET OF THE EAST 60 FEET OF THE NORTH 30 FEET OF SAID LOT 6, SIERRA MEADOWS AS DESCRIBED IN PLAT BOOK 39, PAGES 11 THROUGH 13, COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC RECORDS AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 6 OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE S. 88° 03' 44" W. FOR 15.02 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE S. 01° 06' 09" W. FOR 30.00 FEET; THENCE S. 88° 03' 44" W. FOR 45.00 FEET; THENCE N. 01° 06' 09" E. FOR 30.00 FEET; THENCE N. 88° 03' 44" E. FOR 45.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL B: TOGETHER WITH: EASEMENTS, AS CONTAINED IN THAT CERTAIN DRAINAGE AND BERM EASEMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN GREG W. EAGLE, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS TRUSTEE AND ALANDA, LTD., A FLORIDA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP FILED APRIL 03, 2001 RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 2800, PAGE 1319, FOR THE PURPOSES DESCRIBED THEREIN. PARCEL C: TOGETHER WITH: EASEMENTS, AS CONTAINED IN THAT CERTAIN DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RESTRICTIONS AND EASEMENTS FOR SIERRA MEADOWS BY AND BETWEEN ALANDA, LTD., A FLORIDA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; GREG W. EAGLE, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS TRUSTEE; WALLACE R. DEVLIN, SR., AND COLONIAL BANK, AN ALABAMA BANKING CORPORATION, FILED OCTOBER 21, 2002, RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORD BOOK 3135, PAGE 802, AS AMENDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 3415, PAGE 660, OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4009, PAGE 1998 AND OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4057, PAGE 3686, AS AFFECTED BY ASSIGNMENT RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 3330, PAGE 225, ALL OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL D: TOGETHER WITH: EASEMENTS, AS CONTAINED IN THAT CERTAIN RECIPROCAL EASEMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN NAPLES SENIOR HOUSING I PROPCO, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AND NAPLES SENIOR HOUSING IT OPCO, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, FILED AUGUST 02, 2018, RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORD BOOK 5539, PAGE 1394, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. 36703\001\4934-95 15-7507.v1Page 348 of 6355
EXHIBIT A-1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot 6 of Sierra Meadows, according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 39, Pages 11- 13 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, less that portion as described in O.R. Book 4083, Page 2054 and less that portion as described in O.R. Book 5020, Page 1548, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. 36703\001\493 4-95 15-7507,v1Page 349 of 6355
Document Number
FEI/EIN Number
Date Filed
State
Status
Last Event
Event Date Filed
Event Effective Date
Department of State / Division of Corporations / Search Records / Search by Entity Name /
Detail by Entity Name
Florida Profit Corporation
FLORIDA PROPERTY INVESTMENT PARTNERS, INC.
Filing Information
L01645
65-0184666
07/13/1989
FL
ACTIVE
CORPORATE MERGER
03/13/2020
NONE
Principal Address
5900 N ANDREWS AVE
SUITE 410
FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33309
Changed: 01/12/2016
Mailing Address
5900 N ANDREWS AVE
SUITE 410
FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33309
Changed: 01/12/2016
Registered Agent Name & Address
MORGAN, GEORGE AJR.
5900 N ANDREWS AVE
SUITE 410
FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33309
Name Changed: 05/07/1992
Address Changed: 01/12/2016
Officer/Director Detail
Name & Address
Title PD
D C Florida Department of State
11/26/24, 1:31 PM Detail by Entity Name
https://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=EntityName&directionType=Initial&searchNameOrder=FLORIDA…1/3Page 350 of 6355
MORGAN, GEORGE A, JR.
5900 N ANDREWS AVE
SUITE 410
FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33309
Title V
MORGAN, GEORGE A, III
5900 N ANDREWS AVE
SUITE 410
FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33309
Annual Reports
Report Year Filed Date
2022 04/11/2022
2023 02/10/2023
2024 02/12/2024
Document Images
02/12/2024 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
02/10/2023 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
04/11/2022 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
03/26/2021 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
03/13/2020 -- Merger View image in PDF format
02/01/2020 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
04/26/2019 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
10/02/2018 -- Amendment View image in PDF format
04/17/2018 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
01/10/2017 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
01/12/2016 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
01/07/2015 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
03/14/2014 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
04/15/2013 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
04/04/2012 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
04/01/2011 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
01/12/2011 -- ADDRESS CHANGE View image in PDF format
04/01/2010 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
04/27/2009 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
03/11/2008 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
03/19/2007 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
04/27/2006 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
05/05/2005 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
04/30/2004 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
04/29/2003 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
05/08/2002 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
05/02/2001 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
11/26/24, 1:31 PM Detail by Entity Name
https://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=EntityName&directionType=Initial&searchNameOrder=FLORIDA…2/3Page 351 of 6355
04/12/2000 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
04/09/1999 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
04/15/1998 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
04/08/1997 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
04/19/1996 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
04/24/1995 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format
05/07/1992 -- Reg. Agent Change View image in PDF format
Florida Department of State, Division of Corporations
11/26/24, 1:31 PM Detail by Entity Name
https://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=EntityName&directionType=Initial&searchNameOrder=FLORIDA…3/3Page 352 of 6355
Addressing Checklist (Rev 10/2022) Page 1 of 1
Operations & Regulatory Management Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400
www.colliercountyfl.gov
ADDRESSING CHECKLIST
Please complete the following and upload via the CityView Portal with your submittal. Items marked with (*) are required for
every application, other items are optional and may not apply to every project.
Forms are valid for 6 months following their submittal; an updated form will be required for a new submittal after that timeframe
and any time the properties within the project boundary are modified.
Additional documents may be attached to this form and can include:
-* LOCATION MAP and/or SURVEY showing the proposed project boundary.
-List of additional folio numbers and associated legal descriptions.
- E-mail from Addressing Official for any pre-approved project and/or street names.
LOCATION INFORMATION
*FOLIO (Property ID) Number(s) of subject property or properties. [Attach list if necessary]
*LEGAL DESCRIPTION of subject property or properties. [Attach list if necessary]
STREET ADDRESS(ES) where applicable, if already assigned.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Acceptance of this form does not constitute project and/or street name approval and is subject to further review by the Addressing
Official. Pre-Approval may be requested by contacting us at GMD_Addressing@colliercountyfl.gov or 239-252-2482 prior to your
submittal.
CURRENT PROJECT NAME
PROPOSED PROJECT NAME
PROPOSED STREET NAME(s)
LATEST APPROVED PROJECT NUMBER [e.g., SDP-94-##, PPL-2002-AR-####, PL2017000####]
73620100663, 73620100676, 73620100689
See attached list
8417 SIERRA MEADOWS BLVD
8375 SIERRA MEADOWS BLVD
Sierra Meadows PUD
Sierra Meadows PUD
PL20200000780
Page 353 of 6355
$ 25,513,400
$ 22,000,000
$ 21,500,000
$ 1,794,000
$ 3,400,000
$ 0
$ 100
$ 10,333,400
$ 1,584,000
$ 17,037,103
$ 18,621,103
$ 18,621,103
$ 18,621,103
$ 18,621,103
$ 192,234.96
$ 0
$ 192,234.96
Collier County Proper ty AppraiserProperty Summar y
Parcel ID 73620100663 Site Address*Disclaimer 8417 SIERRA MEADOWSBLVD Site City NAPLES Site Zone*Note 34113
Name / Address BRITTON (NAPLES) LLC
6688 NORTH CENTRAL
STE 1400
City DALLAS State TX Zip 75206
Map No.Strap No.Section Township Range Acres *Estimated
5B22 630000 85B22 22 50 26 6.15
Legal SIERRA MEADOWS LOT 8, LESS THAT PORTION AS DESC IN OR 5547 PG 3053
Millage Area 53 Millage Rates *Calculations
Sub./Condo 630000 - SIERRA MEADOWS School Other Total
Use Code 6 - RET. HOMES & MISC. RESIDENCES 4.3132 6.0103 10.3235
Latest Sales Histor y
(Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality)
Date Book-Page Amount
04/26/21 5950-1027
04/01/19 5613-2683
01/29/16 5239-2183
07/09/13 4944-2389
01/19/11 4647-3049
09/04/09 4514-3188
09/04/09 4510-3358
07/01/03 3330-201
2024 Preliminar y Tax Roll
(Subject to Change)
Land Value
(+) Improved Value
(=) Market Value
(=) Assessed Value
(=) School Taxable Value
(=) Taxable Value
Ad Valorem Taxes
(+) Non-Ad Valorem Taxes
(=) Total Taxes
Values are as of Januar y 1st each year. If all values are 0, this parcel was createdafter the Final Tax Roll.
Disclaimer : The actual total property taxes may vary due to changes in millagerates set by taxing authorities, the addition of non-ad valorem assessments, andspecial assessments. For the most accurate and up-to-date tax information,please visit the Collier County Tax Collector's office to see the final Tax bills.
8/23/24, 2:27 PM Collier County Property Appraiser
https://www.collierappraiser.com 1/1Page 354 of 6355
Collier County Proper ty AppraiserProperty Aerial
Parcel ID 73620100663 Site Address*Disclaimer 8417 SIERRA MEADOWSBLVD Site City NAPLES Site Zone*Note 34113
Open GIS in a New Window with More Features.
8/23/24, 2:30 PM Collier County Property Appraiser
https://www.collierappraiser.com 1/1Page 355 of 6355
$ 0
$ 29,571,700
$ 0
$ 21,500,000
$ 1,794,000
$ 3,400,000
$ 0
$ 100
$ 10,333,400
$ 100
$ 0
$ 100
$ 100
$ 100
$ 100
$ 1.02
$ 0
$ 1.02
Collier County Proper ty AppraiserProperty Summar y
Parcel ID 73620100676 Site Address*Disclaimer Site City NAPLES Site Zone*Note 34113
Name / Address S-H NAPLES DEVELOPMENT
PROPCO LLC
% DISCOVERY MANAGEMENT GROUP
27599 RIVERVIEW CENTER BLVD
STE 201
City BONITA SPRINGS State FL Zip 34134
Map No.Strap No.Section Township Range Acres *Estimated
5B22 630000 0 8.15B22 22 50 26 0.75
Legal SIERRA MEADOWS A PORTION OF LOT 8 AS DESC IN OR 5547 PG 3053
Millage Area 53 Millage Rates *Calculations
Sub./Condo 630000 - SIERRA MEADOWS School Other Total
Use Code 10 - VACANT COMMERCIAL 4.3132 6.0103 10.3235
Latest Sales Histor y
(Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality)
Date Book-Page Amount
04/12/19 5618-1507
04/12/19 5617-3664
08/23/18 5547-3053
01/29/16 5239-2183
07/09/13 4944-2389
01/19/11 4647-3049
09/04/09 4514-3188
09/04/09 4510-3358
07/01/03 3330-201
2024 Preliminar y Tax Roll
(Subject to Change)
Land Value
(+) Improved Value
(=) Market Value
(=) Assessed Value
(=) School Taxable Value
(=) Taxable Value
Ad Valorem Taxes
(+) Non-Ad Valorem Taxes
(=) Total Taxes
Values are as of Januar y 1st each year. If all values are 0, this parcel was createdafter the Final Tax Roll.
Disclaimer : The actual total property taxes may vary due to changes in millagerates set by taxing authorities, the addition of non-ad valorem assessments, andspecial assessments. For the most accurate and up-to-date tax information,please visit the Collier County Tax Collector's office to see the final Tax bills.
8/23/24, 2:40 PM Collier County Property Appraiser
https://www.collierappraiser.com 1/1Page 356 of 6355
Collier County Proper ty AppraiserProperty Aerial
Parcel ID 73620100676 Site Address*Disclaimer Site City NAPLES Site Zone*Note 34113
Open GIS in a New Window with More Features.
8/23/24, 2:40 PM Collier County Property Appraiser
https://www.collierappraiser.com 1/1Page 357 of 6355
$ 29,571,700
$ 3,179,800
$ 21,500,000
$ 3,350,000
$ 3,400,000
$ 0
$ 100
$ 10,333,400
$ 3,000,217
$ 27,418,438
$ 30,418,655
$ 30,418,655
$ 30,418,655
$ 30,418,655
$ 314,026.98
$ 0
$ 314,026.98
Collier County Proper ty AppraiserProperty Summar y
Parcel ID 73620100689 Site Address*Disclaimer 8375 SIERRA MEADOWSBLVD Site City NAPLES Site Zone*Note 34113
Name / Address S-H NAPLES DEVELOPMENT
PROPCO LLC
% DISCOVERY MANAGEMENT GROUP
27599 RIVERVIEW CENTER BLVD
STE 201
City BONITA SPRINGS State FL Zip 34134
Map No.Strap No.Section Township Range Acres *Estimated
5B22 630000 95B22 22 50 26 7.4
Legal SIERRA MEADOWS LOT 9
Millage Area 53 Millage Rates *Calculations
Sub./Condo 630000 - SIERRA MEADOWS School Other Total
Use Code 6 - RET. HOMES & MISC. RESIDENCES 4.3132 6.0103 10.3235
Latest Sales Histor y
(Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality)
Date Book-Page Amount
04/12/19 5617-3664
08/01/18 5539-1380
01/29/16 5239-2183
11/08/14 5100-1808
01/19/11 4647-3049
09/04/09 4514-3188
09/04/09 4510-3358
07/01/03 3330-201
2024 Preliminar y Tax Roll
(Subject to Change)
Land Value
(+) Improved Value
(=) Market Value
(=) Assessed Value
(=) School Taxable Value
(=) Taxable Value
Ad Valorem Taxes
(+) Non-Ad Valorem Taxes
(=) Total Taxes
Values are as of Januar y 1st each year. If all values are 0, this parcel was createdafter the Final Tax Roll.
Disclaimer : The actual total property taxes may vary due to changes in millagerates set by taxing authorities, the addition of non-ad valorem assessments, andspecial assessments. For the most accurate and up-to-date tax information,please visit the Collier County Tax Collector's office to see the final Tax bills.
8/23/24, 2:42 PM Collier County Property Appraiser
https://www.collierappraiser.com 1/1Page 358 of 6355
Collier County Proper ty AppraiserProperty Aerial
Parcel ID 73620100689 Site Address*Disclaimer 8375 SIERRA MEADOWSBLVD Site City NAPLES Site Zone*Note 34113
Open GIS in a New Window with More Features.
8/23/24, 2:43 PM Collier County Property Appraiser
https://www.collierappraiser.com 1/1Page 359 of 6355
Sierra Meadows PUDA Page 1 of 1
Submittal #1
08/22/2024
5618 Whispering Willow Way, Fort Myers, FL 33908 | PHONE NUMBER
www.theneighborhood.company
SIERRA MEADOWS MPUD
Planned Unit Development Amendment (PUDA)
LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS
Folio: 73620100663
SIERRA MEADOWS LOT 8, LESS THAT PORTION AS DESC IN OR 5547 PG 3053
Folio: 73620100676
SIERRA MEADOWS A PORTION OF LOT 8 AS DESC IN OR 5547 PG 3053
Folio: 73620100689
SIERRA MEADOWS LOT 9
Page 360 of 6355
INSTR 5698244 OR 5618 PG 1507 E-RECORDED 4/15/2019 3:32 PM PAGES
CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA
DOC@. 70 $0.70 REC $27.00
This instrument was prepared by:
Allison S. Carlton, Esq.
Kayne Anderson Real Estate
1 Town Center Road, Suite 300
Boca Raton, Florida 33486
When recorded return to:
Meltzer, Purtill & Stelle LLC (JSG)
300 South Wacker Drive, Suite 2300
Chicago, IL 60909
3
QUIT-CLAIM DEED
NOTE TO CLERK: THIS DEED HAS BEEN EXECUTED AND DELIVERED WITHOUT PAYMENT OF
CONSIDERATION AND IS NOT SUBJECT TO PAYMENT OF DOCUMENTARY STAMP TAXES.
THIS QUIT CLAIM DEED, is made this 12th day of April, 2019, by NAPLES SENIOR
HOUSING II OPCO, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("Grantor"), whose address is c/o
Kayne Anderson Real Estate Advisors, I Town Center Road, Suite 300, Boca Raton, Florida 33486
and is delivered to S-H NAPLES DEVELOPMENT PROPCO, LLC, a Delaware limited liability
company ("Grantee"), whose address is c/o Discovery Management Group, 27599 Riverview Center
Boulevard, Suite 201, Bonita Springs, Florida 34134.
(Whenever used herein the term "Grantor and "Grantee" include all the parties to
this instrument and the heirs, legal representatives and assigns of individuals, and the
sucessors and assigns of corporations)
WITNESSETH, that said Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of TEN AND NO/100
DOLLARS ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration to said Grantor in hand paid by said
Grantee, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, does hereby remise, release, and quitclaim to
the said Grantee, and Grantee's heirs and assigns forever, all the right, title, interest, claim and
demand which Grantor has in and to the following described land, situated, lying and being in Collier
County, Florida to-wit:66Sec auuched Eaibd "A," wohich ia merperated eret by ejereнs ice
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the same together with all and singular the 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 the said
Grantee forever.
[ REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENITONALLY LEFT BLANK]
(32472: 072: 02571992.DOC: }
Page 361 of 6355
OR 5618 PG 1508
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said Grantor has signed and sealed these presents the day
and year first above written.
Signed, sealed and delivered in our presence:
NAPLES SENIOR HOUSING II ОРСО,
LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
なSignature of Witness
lce
Print Name of/Witness 1 221 :yHPrinted Name: Russell M. Reiter
Title: Secretary
Signature of Witness 2
Malthew Jordar
Print Name of Witness 2
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF PALM BEACH
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged and witnessed before me this 12th day of April, 2019,
by Russell M. Reiter, as the Secretary of Naples Senior Housing II OPCO, LLC, a Delaware limited
liability company, on behalf of the company, who is personally knøwn to me.
I am a commissioned notary public in the State of Florida and my commission expires12/12/2021
[NOTARY SEAL]
MEEGAN T MOTISI
. Notary Public- State of Florida
Commission # GG 167685
My Comm. Expires Dec 12, 2021
Bonded through Nationai Nolary Assn.
MoeNa
Print Name: mucanT Mitis
My Commission Expires: 12/12/2021
(32472: 072: 02571992.DOC: )
Page 362 of 6355
*** OR 5618 PG 1509 ***
Exhibit A
Legal Description
PARCEL A:
A PARCEL SITUATED IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF COLLIER, LYING IN
SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, BEING OVER ACROSS AND THROUGH
A PART OF THE LOT 8, SIERRA MEADOWS, AS DESCRIBED IN PLAT BOOK 39, PAGES 11
THROUGH 13, COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC RECORDS, AND BEING FURTHER BOUNDED AND
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8, THENCE S 01°05'19" W
ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 8 FOR 260.40 FEET; TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF
THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PARCEL; THENCE CONTINUE S 01°05'19" W FOR 184.40 FEET TO
THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8; THENCE N 88°03'44" E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE
OF SAID LOT 8 FOR 335.49 FEET, THENCE N 63°53'56" W FOR 391.73 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING. BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE CENTERLINE OF SIERRA MEADOWS
BOULEVARD AS BEARING S 88°03 44" W AS DESCRIBED IN SAID PLAT BOOK 39, PAGES 11-
13, COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC RECORDS, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
PARCEL B:
TOGETHER WITH:
A NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT CREATED BY THE DRAINAGE AND BERM EASEMENT
AGREEMENT RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 2800, PAGE 1319, FOR THE
PURPOSES DESCRIBED THEREIN.
PARCEL C:
TOGETHER WITH:
NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENTS FOR USE, ACCESS, UTILITIES, DRAINAGE AND RETENTION
AS SET FORTH IN THE DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RESTRICTIONS AND
EASEMENTS FOR SIERRA MEADOWS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORD BOOK 3135, PAGE
802, AS AMENDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 3415, PAGE 660, OFFICIAL RECORDS
BOOK 4009, PAGE 1998 AND OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOК 4057, РAGE 3686, AS AFFECTED BY
ASSIGNMENT RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 3330, PAGE 225, ALL OF THE
PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
PARCEL D:
TOGETHER WITH:
NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR ACCESS AND PARKING AS SET FORTH IN THE
RECIPROCAL EASEMENT AGREEMENT IN OFFICIAL RECORD BOOK 5539, PAGE 1394,
PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
(32472: 072: 02571992.DOC: }
Page 363 of 6355
Page 364 of 6355
Page 365 of 6355
Page 366 of 6355
Page 367 of 6355
Page 368 of 6355
Page 369 of 6355
Page 370 of 6355
Page 371 of 6355
Page 372 of 6355
Outlook
FW: Sierra Meadows (PUDA) PL20240006561-owner's disclosure
From Francesca Passidomo <fpassidomo@cyklawfirm.com>
Date Thu 1/30/2025 10:04 AM
To Rachel Hansen <rh@theneighborhood.company>
1 attachment (2 MB)
RE: Sierra Meadows (PUDA) PL20240006561-disclosure of ownership;
From: Heidi Ashton <Heidi.Ashton@colliercountyfl.gov>
Sent: Monday, January 27, 2025 3:27 PM
To: Francesca Passidomo <fpassidomo@cyklawfirm.com>; Michael Bosi <Michael.Bosi@colliercountyfl.gov>
Cc: Nancy Gundlach <Nancy.Gundlach@colliercountyfl.gov>
Subject: RE: Sierra Meadows (PUDA) PL20240006561-owner's disclosure
Francesca,
As you know, I reached out to Jeff Klatzkow in the a ached email. Since the owner that really gains in the pe on is the owner of Lot 6, I have no issue
with dispensing with the owners disclosure for the owner of Lot 8, Britton (Naples) LLC.
Heidi Ashton-Cicko
Managing Assistant County Attorney
Office of the County Attorney
2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Suite 301
Naples, FL 34104
(239) 252-8773
From: Francesca Passidomo <fpassidomo@cyklawfirm.com>
Sent: Monday, January 27, 2025 3:21 PM
To: Heidi Ashton <Heidi.Ashton@colliercountyfl.gov>; Michael Bosi <Michael.Bosi@colliercountyfl.gov>
Subject: FW: Sierra Meadows (PUDA) PL20240006561
Page 373 of 6355
FRANCESCA PASSIDOMO, Esq.
Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A.
The Northern Trust Building
4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300
Naples, Florida 34103
239.435.3535 (telephone)
239.435.1218 (fax)
239.404.6174 (cell)
fpassidomo@cyklawfirm.com
Visit cyklawfirm.com to learn more about us.
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.
Heidi and Mike – Jeff asked that you 2 review whether documentation is necessary from Britton (Naples) LLC. I do not think Jeff had an issue
with the item moving forward. The item is sufficient and ready for hearing. Let me know where you land.
Thank you,
Francesca
Both Francesca Passidomo and Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s). This message may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt
from disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure or use of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please permanently dispose of the original message and notify
Francesca Passidomo immediately at fpassidomo@cyklawfirm.com or call (239) 435-3535. Thank you.
FRAUD ALERT ---- PLEASE DO NOT WIRE ANY FUNDS TO OUR FIRM UNLESS YOU OR THE SENDING BANK HAVE VERIFIED THE WIRING INSTRUCTIONS DIRECTLY WITH OUR FIRM VIA TELEPHONE
Page 374 of 6355
From: Heidi Ashton <Heidi.Ashton@colliercountyfl.gov>
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2025 12:53 PM
To: Jeff Klatzkow <Jeff.Klatzkow@colliercountyfl.gov>
Cc: Francesca Passidomo <fpassidomo@cyklawfirm.com>
Subject: Sierra Meadows (PUDA) PL20240006561
Jeff,
We have a PUDA pe on to reduce the FAR for an assisted living facility from .45 to .60. This devia on is typically approved. The constructed facility is
shown below in yellow. Since this the devia on results in is an intensifica on, staff is processing this change as a PUDA, going to the CCPC/BCC. The
building was constructed at .45 using Lot 6 below in the FAR calcula on. Developer would like to build on Lot 6, necessita ng the devia on.
The issue is the owner of the fully build Lot 8 [Bri on (Naples) LLC] is unresponsive to providing the owners disclosure ownership, and applicant would like
to go to hearing. Since the owner that really gains in the pe on is the owner of Lot 6, Francesca is going to call you to discuss dispensing with the owners
disclosure for Lot 8. I have copied Francesca on this email. Thanks.
Page 375 of 6355
Heidi Ashton-Cicko
Managing Assistant County Attorney
Office of the County Attorney
2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Suite 301
Naples, FL 34104
(239) 252-8773
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 376 of 6355
Page 377 of 6355
Page 378 of 6355
Page 379 of 6355
Page 380 of 6355
Page 381 of 6355
Page 382 of 6355
Page 383 of 6355
Page 384 of 6355
Page 385 of 6355
Page 386 of 6355
Page 387 of 6355
Page 388 of 6355
Page 389 of 6355
Page 390 of 6355
Page 391 of 6355
Page 392 of 6355
Sierra Meadows Lot 6 PUDA Page 1 of 1
PL20240006561
8/20/2024
5618 Whispering Willow Way, Ft Myers, FL 33908 | 239-398-2016
www.theneighborhood.company
August 20, 2024
Michael Sawyer
Transportation Management Services Department
2685 South Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34104
Subject: Sierra Meadows Lot 6 Planned Unit Development Amendment (PUDA)
PL20240006561
TIS Waiver Request
Mr. Sawyer:
Please accept this letter of No Impact/TIS Waiver request for the above referenced PUDA application. The
original Sierra Meadows MPUD was approved via Ordinance 99-91. The proposed amendment seeks to
deviate from the maximum FAR for group housing by increasing the FAR from 0.45 to 0.60 on Sierra
Meadows Lots 8 and 9 in order to facilitate commercial development on Lot 6. Lot 6 was used in the FAR
calculation for the ALF/ILF development on Lots 8 and 9 under SDPA PL20150000071.
The PUDA does not include an expansion of permitted uses or an increase in permitted commercial square
footage and therefore proposes no additional transportation impacts.
Please feel free to contact me with any additional questions at (239) 398-2016 or via email at
pv@theneighborhood.company.
Sincerely,
The Neighborhood Company
Patrick Vanasse, AICP
President
Page 393 of 6355
4.6 DEVIATIONS FROM LDC
* * *
C. The following deviation from the Land Development Code is applicable to Lots 8 and 9 of Sierra
Meadows, according to the plat recorded in Plat Book 39, Pages 11-13.
Deviation #1: Seeks relief from LDC section 5.05.04 D.1, “Group Housing”, which states that the
maximum floor area ratio (FAR) for assisted living facilities (ALF) or independent living facilities
(ILF) shall not exceed 0.45, to instead allow for a maximum FAR of 0.60 on Lots 8 and 9.
Page 394 of 6355
Sierra Meadows PUDA Page 1 of 1
Submittal #1
08/22/2024
5618 Whispering Willow Way, Fort Myers, FL 33908 | PHONE NUMBER
www.theneighborhood.company
SIERRA MEADOWS MPUD
Planned Unit Development Amendment (PUDA)
DEVIATIONS AND JUSTIFICATIONS
1. Deviation 1 seeks relief from LDC section 5.05.04 D.1, Group Housing, which states that the
maximum floor area ratio (FAR) for assisted living facilities (ALF) or independent living facilities
(ILF) shall not exceed 0.45, to allow for a maximum FAR of 0.60 on Lots 8 and 9.
Justification: Although the LDC limits FAR for ALFs and ILFs to 0.45, an increase to 0.60 is
a common deviation approved through the PUD rezone or amendment process. During the
approval process for the Discovery Village site development plan amendment (SDPA)
PL20150000071 for Lots 8 and 9, an undeveloped commercial tract (Lot 6) adjacent to the
project site was used as part of the FAR calculation in order for the project to be within the
standard maximum FAR of 0.45. Maximum square footage per the FAR was calculated as
follows:
301,174 SF (Lot 8) + 322,538 SF (Lot 9) + 84,937 SF (Lot 6) *0.45 = 318,892 SF
FAR provided: 120,800 SF (Phase 1) + 198,088 (Phase 2) = 318,888 SF
As demonstrated in the approved SDPA, Discovery Village Phases 1 and 2 were built entirely
on Lots 8 and 9; Lot 6 remained undeveloped and was only used for FAR calculation. The
net FAR on Lots 8 and 9 is calculated as follows:
301,174 SF (Lot 8) + 322,538 SF (Lot 9) = 623,712 SF
318,888 SF (Phases 1 and 2) / 623,712 = 0.51
The requested deviation for maximum FAR on Lots 8 and 9 has effectively no impact on the
site as it exists today; Discovery Village has been fully built out in compliance with all
development standards and buffer requirements of the existing MPUD. The use of Lot 6 in
the calculation of the FAR for the ALF/ILF on Lots 8 and 9 rendered Lot 6 effectively
undevelopable. Increasing the maximum FAR for group housing unencumbers Lot 6,
allowing it to be developed in accordance with the intent of the MPUD.
Page 395 of 6355
Page 396 of 6355
Page 397 of 6355
Page 398 of 6355
Page 399 of 6355
Page 400 of 6355
Page 401 of 6355
Page 402 of 6355
Page 403 of 6355
Page 404 of 6355
Page 405 of 6355
Page 406 of 6355
Page 407 of 6355
Page 408 of 6355
Page 409 of 6355
Page 410 of 6355
Page 411 of 6355
Page 412 of 6355
Page 413 of 6355
Page 414 of 6355
Page 415 of 6355
Page 416 of 6355
Page 417 of 6355
Page 418 of 6355
Page 419 of 6355
Page 420 of 6355
Page 421 of 6355
Page 422 of 6355
Page 423 of 6355
Page 424 of 6355
Page 425 of 6355
Page 426 of 6355
Page 427 of 6355
Page 428 of 6355
Page 429 of 6355
Page 430 of 6355
Page 1 of 2
5618 Whispering Willow Way, Fort Myers, FL 33908 | 239.398.2016
www.theneighborhood.company
October 30, 2024
Dear Property Owner:
Please be advised that a formal application has been submitted to Collier County seeking approval of a Planned
Unit Development Amendment (PL20240006561) for the following property:
Lots 8 and 9 comprise ±14.3 acres of the Sierra Meadows Mixed Use Planned Unit Development
(MPUD). The subject property is located off Sierra Meadows Boulevard, approximately 750 feet
southwest of the intersection of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard in
unincorporated Collier County, Florida. The specific address is 8417 and 8375 Sierra Meadows
Boulevard, Naples, FL 34113 (Property IDs: 73620100663, 73620100676, 73620100689).
LOT 6
DISCOVERY
VILLAGE ALF/ILF
(LOTS 8 AND 9)
Page 431 of 6355
Page 2 of 2
5618 Whispering Willow Way, Fort Myers, FL 33908 | 239.398.2016
www.theneighborhood.company
The applicant is requesting an amendment to the MPUD to increase the floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.45 to 0.6 to
reflect the FAR of the existing ALF/ILF facility known as "Discovery Village" located on Lots 8 and 9 of Sierra
Meadows in order to facilitate commercial development on Lot 6. No changes are proposed to the list of permitted
uses, total commercial square footage, residential density, preserve areas , open space, or access ; all of which are
already platted consistent with the MPUD Master Plan.
In compliance with Land Development Code requirements , a Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held to
provide you with an opportunity to fully understand the proposed amendment . The meeting will be held on
December 3 at 5:30pm at the following address:
Shepherd of the Glades Church
6020 Rattlesnake Hammock Road, Naples, FL 34113
If you are unable to attend in person, a Zoom option will be available. If you would like to participate via Zoom,
please send an email to rh@theneighborhood.company prior to December 2 to request the meeting link.
Should you have questions prior to the meeting, please contact me at pv@theneighborhood.company or 239-398-
2016.
Sincerely,
Patrick Vanasse, AICP
President & Partner
Page 432 of 6355
Page 433 of 6355
Page 434 of 6355
Page 435 of 6355
Page 436 of 6355
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners (BCC) at 9:00 A.M. on April 22, 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 OF COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1999-91, AS AMENDED, THE
SIERRA MEADOWS MIXED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT BY CHANGING THE
FLOOR AREA RATIO FOR GROUP HOUSING ON LOTS 8 AND 9 OF THE SIERRA
MEADOWS SUBDIVISION FROM .45 TO .60, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, CONSISTING OF 14.3+/- ACRES OF A 90.8 ACRE
MPUD, IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT OF THE INTERSECTION
OF RATTLESNAKE-HAMMOCK ROAD (C.R. 864) AND C.R. 951, IN SECTION 22,
TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
(PL20240006561)
A copy of the proposed Ordinance is on file with the Clerk to the Board and is available for inspection. All interested
parties are invited to attend and be heard.
Page 437 of 6355
All persons wishing to speak on any agenda item must register with the County Manager prior to presentation of the
agenda item to be addressed. Individual speakers will be limited to three (3) minutes on any item. The selection of any
individual to speak on behalf of an organization or group is encouraged. If recognized by the Chairman, a spokesperson
for a group or organization may be allotted ten (10) minutes to speak on an item. Written materials intended to be
considered by the Board shall be submitted to the appropriate County staff a minimum of seven (7) days prior to the
public hearing. All materials used in presentations before the Board will become a permanent part of the record.
As part of an ongoing initiative to encourage public involvement, the public will have the opportunity to provide
public comments remotely, as well as in person, during this proceeding. Individuals who would like to participate
remotely should register through the link provided within the specific event/meeting entry on the Calendar of Events
on the County website at www.colliercountyfl.gov/our-county/visitors/calendar-of-events after the agenda is posted
on the County website. Registration should be done in advance of the public meeting, or any deadline specified within
the public meeting notice. Individuals who register will receive an email in advance of the public hearing detailing
how they can participate remotely in this meeting. Remote participation i s provided as a courtesy and is at the user’s
risk. The County is not responsible for technical issues. For additional information about the meeting, please call
Geoffrey Willig at 252-8369 or email to Geoffrey.Willig@colliercountyfl.gov.
Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto
and therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the
testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based.
If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are
entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities
Management Division, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380, at
least two (2) days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board
of County Commissioners Office.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BURT L. SAUNDERS,
CHAIRMAN
CRYSTAL K. KINZEL,
CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT & COMPTROLLER
By: Sara Morales,
Deputy Clerk (SEAL)
Page 438 of 6355