Agenda 09/23/2025 Item #17C (Ordinance - Rezoning 8.27± acres from a General Commercial (C-4) zoning district and General Commercial (C-4) zoning district within the Gateway Triangle Zoning Overlay-Mixed Use District9/23/2025
Item # 17.C
ID# 2025-2772
Executive Summary
Recommendation to approve an ordinance rezoning 8.27± acres from a General Commercial (C-4) zoning district and
General Commercial (C-4) zoning district within the Gateway Triangle Zoning Overlay-Mixed Use District (GTZO-
MXD) to the Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) zoning district partially within the Gateway Triangle
Zoning Overlay-Mixed Use District (GTZO-MXD) for a project to be known as the Davis Brookside MPUD to allow 66
multi-family residential dwelling units and a 120-boat slip marina; and providing for repeal of Ordinance No. 23-42. The
subject property is located on the north side of Davis Boulevard, approximately 2/10 of one mile east of Tamiami Trail
East. [PL20240010963]
OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners ("Board") review staff's findings and recommendations
along with the recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) regarding the above-referenced
petition, render a decision regarding this rezoning petition, and ensure the project is in harmony with all the applicable
codes and regulations in order to ensure that the community's interests are maintained.
CONSIDERATIONS: The subject property is located on the north side of Davis Boulevard, approximately 2/10 of one
mile east of Tamiami Trail East in Section 2, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, consisting of 8.27± acres. This
petition seeks to allow the rezoning from a General Commercial (C-4) zoning district and General Commercial (C-4)
zoning district within the Gateway Triangle Zoning Overlay-Mixed Use District (GTZO-MXD) to a Mixed Use Planned
Unit Development (MPUD) zoning district, partially within the Gateway Triangle Zoning Overlay-Mixed Use District
(GTZO-MXD), for a project to be known as the Davis Brookside MPUD to allow 66 multi-family residential dwelling
units and a 120-boat slip marina; and providing for repeal of Ordinance No. 23-42. Five parcels are owned by Naples
Marina Holdings, Inc., and the sixth parcel is owned by 1933 Davis, LLC.
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC heard Petition
PUDZ-PL20240010963, Davis Brookside MPUD, on August 21, 2025, and voted 6-0 to forward this petition to the
Board with a recommendation of approval. There were two public attendees with concerns about parking, the number of
marina slips, ramps, mangroves, the Freedom Boat Club (FBC) lease, and dock damage by FBC boats. The agent
explained that the property purchaser will inherit the lease from the current owner and strictly enforce the terms of this
lease. It should be noted that these were only concerns and did not object to the project. As such, these concerns have
been resolved, and this petition will be placed on the Summary Agenda.
This item advances the Collier County Strategic Plan Objective within Quality of Place to support and
enhance the character of our community.
FISCAL IMPACT: The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy to help offset
the impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects identified in the
Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) as needed to maintain the adopted Level of
Service (LOS) for public facilities. Other fees collected prior to the issuance of a building permit include building permit
review fees. Please note that impact fees and taxes collected were not included in the criteria used by staff and the
Planning Commission to analyze this petition.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT:
The subject property is located along the north side of Davis Boulevard, which, according to the Future Land Use Map,
is located within the Urban Residential Subdistrict of the Urban Mixed-Use District, as well as the Bayshore/Gateway
Triangle Overlay District. Furthermore, this property was identified as improved property through the implementation of
the Zoning Reevaluation in the early 90s, Ordinance 90-23, deeming the property “consistent by policy 5.11”.
According to the Future Land Use Plan, the Urban designated areas are intended to accommodate most of the population
growth, and new intensive land uses are to be located within them. Furthermore, the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle
Overlay allows for additional neighborhood commercial uses and increased intensity and higher residential densities that
will promote the assembly of property, or joint ventures between property owners, while providing interconnections
Page 3541 of 3896
9/23/2025
Item # 17.C
ID# 2025-2772
between properties and neighborhoods.
Properties that have been deemed consistent by policy were developed and therefore determined to be improved
properties before the aforementioned zoning reevaluation from 1990 was adopted. The applicant has cited the allowance
for increased density on this project to 16 units per acre by identifying the conversion of commercial density bonus for
properties deemed consistent by policy. This density bonus states that if a project includes the conversion of commercial
zoning that has been found to be “Consistent By Policy” through the Collier County Zoning Reevaluation Program
(Ordinance No. 90-23), then a bonus of up to 16 dwelling units per acre may be added for every one (1) acre of
commercial zoning that is converted to residential zoning. This is being achieved by redesignating 4.1 acres of the
existing commercial zoning to a residential designation to allow the proposed 66-unit development. Staff agrees that the
provision of the conversion of commercial bonus is applicable and is supported by the Future Land Use Plan.
This rezone also includes the allowance for a 120-slip marina. This property has been the site of a marina since the
1960s and was officially approved via rezoning from a residential designation to commercial, via Ord. 23-42, to allow
the reinstallation of wet slips in the western basin of the submerged lands after their removal due to hurricane damage.
Within Urban designated areas, water-dependent and water-related land uses are permitted and encouraged within the
coastal region of this District, making the addition of marina use consistent with the FLUE. Based upon the above
analysis, the proposed PUD rezone for 66 multi-family dwelling units and a maximum 120-boat marina has been
deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element. Comprehensive Planning staff conclude that the project is
consistent with the Growth Management Plan (GMP) as the proposed uses are considered complementary and
compatible with surrounding development.
Transportation Element: In evaluating this project, staff reviewed the applicant’s January 23, 2025, Traffic Impact
Statement for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) using
the 2024 Annual Update and Inventory Reports (AUIR).
Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states;
“The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and
proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of
permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not
approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current
AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which
significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to
operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific
mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application has significant impacts if the traffic impact
statement reveals that any of the following occur:
a. For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds
2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume;
b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of
the adopted LOS standard service volume; and
c. For all other links the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it is equal to or
exceeds 3% of the adopted LOS standard service volume.
Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted as
part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the project’s significant impacts on all roadways.”
Staff finding: According to the TIS provided with this petition the proposed Davis Brookside MPUD will generate +/-
50 PM peak hour trips on the adjacent roadway Davis Boulevard. This represents a reduction of +/- (80) fewer PM peak
hour trips compared to the currently approved PUD. The trips generated will occur on the following adjacent roadway
network links:
Page 3542 of 3896
9/23/2025
Item # 17.C
ID# 2025-2772
Roadway/Link Link Current Peak
Hour Peak
Direction
Volume/Peak
Direction
Projected P.M
Peak Hour/Peak
Direction
Project Traffic
(1)
2024 Level of
Service
(LOS)
2024
Remaining
Capacity
Davis
Boulevard/12.0
US-41 to
Airport Road
2,700/EB 36/EB C 1,075
1. Source for P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Direction Project Traffic is January 23, 2025; Traffic Impact Statement
provided by the petitioner.
Based on the TIS provided by the applicant, the 2024 AUIR, the subject PUD can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of
the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan. Transportation Planning staff finds this petition consistent
with the GMP.
Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental review staff have found this project to be
consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME). The project site consists of 0.05 acres of
native vegetation. A minimum of 0.01 acres (25%) of native vegetation is required to be preserved.
GMP Conclusion: The GMP is the prevailing document to support land use decisions, such as this proposed
rezoning. Staff is required to make a recommendation regarding a finding of consistency or inconsistency with the
overall GMP as part of the recommendation for approval, approval with conditions, or denial of any rezoning petition.
This petition is consistent with the GMP.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS:
This is a site-specific rezone to a Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) Zoning District for a project to be
known as the Davis Brookside MPUD. The burden falls upon the applicant to prove that the proposed rezone is
consistent with all the criteria set forth below. The burden then shifts to the Board of County Commissioners, should it
consider denying the rezone, to determine that such denial would not be arbitrary, discriminatory or unreasonable. This
would be accomplished by finding that the proposal does not meet one or more of the listed criteria below.
Criteria for MPUD Rezones
Ask yourself the following questions. The answers assist you in making a determination for approval or not.
1. Consider: The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to
physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other
utilities.
2. Is there an 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 goals, objectives and policies of the Growth
Management Plan.
4. Consider: The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include
restrictions on 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
Page 3543 of 3896
9/23/2025
Item # 17.C
ID# 2025-2772
of available improvements and facilities, both public and private.
7. Consider: The ability of the subject property and of the 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 literal application of such regulations.
9. Will the proposed change be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and 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 to adjacent areas?
18. Will the proposed change adversely affect property values in the adjacent area?
19. Will the proposed change be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in
accordance with existing regulations?
20. Consider: Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner
as contrasted with the public welfare.
21. Are there substantial reasons why the property cannot (“reasonably”) be used in accordance with existing
zoning? (a “core” question…)
22. Is the change suggested out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county?
23. Consider: Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in
districts already permitting such use.
24. Consider: The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration 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 Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public
Facilities Ordinance [Code ch.106, art.II], as amended.
Page 3544 of 3896
9/23/2025
Item # 17.C
ID# 2025-2772
26. Are there other factors, standards, or criteria relating to the MPUD rezone request that the Board of County
Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of public health, safety, and welfare?
The Board must base its decision upon the competent, substantial evidence presented by the written materials supplied
to it, including but not limited to the Staff Report, Executive Summary, maps, studies, letters from interested persons,
and the oral testimony presented at the 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 request for Petition PUDZ-PL20240010963, the Davis Brookside MPUD
and the proposed Ordinance.
PREPARED BY: Timothy Finn, AICP, Planner III, Zoning Division
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Staff Report - Davis Brookside MPUD (PUDZ)
2. Attachment A - Proposed Ordinance
3. Attachment B - Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA meeting minutes
4. Attachment C - City of Naples - Letter of Availability Water Only
5. Attachment D - Application-Backup Materials
6. Attachment E - Hearing Advertising Sign
7. Legal Ad - agenda ID 25-2772 - Davis Brookside MPUD (PUDZ) (PL20240010963) BCC 9-23-25
Page 3545 of 3896
PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD Page 1 of 22
Revised: August 5, 2025
STAFF REPORT
TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: ZONING DIVISION – ZONING SERVICES SECTION
GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
HEARING DATE: AUGUST 21, 2025
SUBJECT: PL20240010963 PUDZ- REZONE, DAVIS BROOKSIDE MPUD
PROPERTY OWNER/AGENTS:
Owners:
1933 Davis, LLC Naples Marina Holdings, LLC
976 Tivoli Dr. 801 E. Venice Ave
Naples, FL 34104 Venice, FL 34285
Contract Purchaser:
Project Brookside JVDevCo, LP
194 Mahogany Court
Naples, FL 34108
Agents:
Robert Mulhere, FAICP Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq.
Ellen Summers, AICP Coleman, Yovanovich &
Bowman Koester, P.A.
950 Encore Way
Naples, FL 34110
4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300
Naples, FL 34103
REQUESTED ACTION:
The petitioner is requesting that the Collier County Planning commission (CCPC) consider an
application to rezone property from a General Commercial (C-4) zoning district and
General Commercial (C-4) zoning district within the Gateway Triangle Zoning Overlay-Mixed
Use District (GTZO-MXD) to the Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) zoning
district partially within the Gateway Triangle Zoning Overlay-Mixed Use District (GTZO-MXD)
for a project to be known as the Davis Brookside MPUD to allow 66 multi-family residential
dwelling units and a 120-boat slip marina; and providing for repeal of Ordinance No. 2023-42.
Naples Marina Holdings, Inc. owns five parcels, and 1933 Davis, LLC owns the sixth parcel.
Page 3546 of 3896
PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD Page 2 of 22
Revised: August 5, 2025
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject property is located on the north side of Davis Boulevard, approximately 2/10th of
one mile east of Tamiami Trail East in Section 2, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, consisting
of 8.27± acres, Collier County, Florida (see location map below).
PURPOSE AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
The subject property is 8.27± acres and located on the north side of Davis Boulevard,
approximately 575 feet east of the intersection of Davis Blvd. and Tamiami Trail E., and is
comprised of six parcels. The Property includes approximately 4.04± acres of submerged land,
and the remaining 4.23± acres are upland. The entirety of the Property is currently zoned C-4,
with the upland portions of the Property located within the Gateway Triangle – Mixed Use
District Zoning Overlay (GTZO-MXD). The Property is located within the Urban Residential
Subdistrict of the Urban Mixed-Use District and the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle
Page 3547 of 3896
PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD Page 3 of 22
Revised: August 5, 2025
Redevelopment Subdistrict of the Future Land Use Element of Collier County. The purpose and
intent of the C-4 district is to provide the opportunity for the most diverse types of
commercial activities delivering goods and services, including entertainment and recreational
attractions, at a larger scale than the C-1 through C-3 districts. As such, all the uses permitted
in the C-1 through C-3 districts are also permitted in the C-4 district. Outside storage of
merchandise and equipment is prohibited, except to the extent that it is associated with
commercial activity conducted on-site, such as, but not limited to, automobile sales, marine
vessels, and the renting and leasing of equipment. Activity centers are suitable locations for
the uses permitted by the C-4 district because most activity centers are located at the
intersection of arterial roads. Therefore, the uses in the C-4 district can be mostly sustained by
the transportation network of major roads. The uplands portion of the PUD encompasses the
Gateway Triangle Zoning Overlay Mixed Use Subdistrict (GTZO-MXD). The purpose and
intent of this subdistrict is to provide for pedestrian-oriented commercial and mixed-use
developments and higher density residential uses. Developments will reflect traditional
neighborhood design building patterns. Individual buildings are encouraged to be multi-story
with uses mixed vertically, with street level commercial and upper-level office and residential.
Included in this District is the "mini triangle" formed by US 41 on the South, Davis Boulevard
on the North, and Commercial Drive on the East, which is intended to serve as an entry
statement for the Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA and a gateway to the City of Naples.
To accommodate the proposed multi-family residential and marina, a rezoning is requested
from C-4/GTZO-MXD to the Davis Brookside Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD)
zoning district. The MPUD is proposed to permit multi-family dwellings and limited
commercial uses to a marina, water transportation of passengers, water transportation services,
and amusement and recreation services as listed in Exhibit A of the Draft Ordinance attached to
this staff report (Attachment A). For the proposed residential, the maximum zoned building
height is 60 feet (consistent with the C-4/GTZO-MXD zoning district) with a proposed
maximum actual height of 86 feet. For the proposed marina and water related uses, the
maximum zoned building height is 56 feet (consistent with the C-4/GTZO-MXD zoning
district) with a proposed maximum actual height of 86 feet.
The submerged lands portion of the Property includes an existing marina with an existing
approval of 120 boat slips (memorialized via Ordinance No. 2023-42), and the upland portion of
the Property is currently developed with a mix of retail, commercial, and pawn shops, as well as
a parking lot for the marina. There are three existing accesses from Davis Boulevard to the
upland parcels of the Property, providing a single access to the pawn shop and shared access
from Davis Boulevard to the marina, marina parking, and the remaining retail commercial area.
The proposed PUD Master Plan depicts the development area for Tract M (Marina) at 4.17
acres and Tract R (Residential) at 4.10 acres to be developed for 66 multi-family (16 DU/AC on
Tract R) and a maximum 120-boat marina. There are two proposed entrances into the Davis
Brookside MPUD, with a potential future connection on the west side of the PUD near Davis
Blvd. The proposed PUD Master Plan also shows a 10’ Type D landscape buffer at the southern
boundary of the PUD fronting Davis Blvd, a 5’ Type A landscape buffer and a 10’ Type A
landscape buffer at the western boundary, and a 5’ Type A landscape buffer on the eastern
boundary.
Page 3548 of 3896
PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD Page 4 of 22
Revised: August 5, 2025
1.To allow recreation facilities parking requirements to be zero (0) when structurally part of the
principal multi-family structure.
2.To allow roofed and enclosed balconies to encroach a maximum of 5 feet beyond the bulkhead
line in the location identified within Exhibit C of the MPUD and as depicted on Exhibit C-2 of
the MPUD – Building Height Exhibit.
3.To allow principal structures to have a 20-foot setback from the boundary of the on-site
preserve.
Petitioners proposed Master Concept Plan
(Exhibit A of the Draft Ordinance attached to this staff report)
Three deviations are proposed:
Page 3549 of 3896
PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD
Page 5 of 22 Revised: August 5, 2025
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
This section of the staff report identifies the land uses, zoning classifications, and maximum
approved densities for properties surrounding the boundaries of Davis Brookside MPUD. The
subject site zoned C-4/GTZO-MXD District, is developed with six parcels. It features an existing
marina in the submerged lands and an existing mix of retail, commercial, pawn shop, and a
parking lot in the uplands portion of the property.
North: Developed with single family residential with a current zoning designation of
Residential Single Family (RSF-4) district
South: Davis Boulevard (six lane arterial), then developed with multi-family dwellings
and commercial uses, with a current zoning designation of Mini-Triangle MPUD
(91.8 DU/AC), which is approved for multi-family residential, commercial, and
office uses
East: Brookside Drive (local road) developed with single family residential with a
current zoning designation of Residential Single Family (RSF-4) district
West: Developed commercial within the City of Naples, with a current zoning
designation of Highway Commercial (HC) District, then to the south is developed
commercial within Collier County jurisdiction with a current zoning designation
of General Commercial (C-4) district.
Source: Aerial Photo (Bowman)
Page 3550 of 3896
PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD Page 6 of 22
Revised: August 5, 2025
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY:
Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property is located along the north side of
Davis Boulevard, which, according to the Future Land Use Map, is located within the Urban
Residential Subdistrict of the Urban Mixed-Use District as well as the Bayshore/Gateway
Triangle Overlay District. Furthermore, this property was identified as improved property
through the implementation of the Zoning Reevaluation in the early 90s, Ordinance No. 1990-
23, deeming the property “consistent by policy 5.11”.
According to the Future Land Use Plan, the Urban designated areas are intended to
accommodate most of the population growth, and new intensive land uses are to be located
within them. Furthermore, the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Overlay allows for additional
neighborhood commercial uses and increased intensity and higher residential densities that will
promote the assembly of property or joint ventures between property owners while providing
interconnections between property and neighborhoods.
Properties that have been deemed consistent by policy were developed and therefore determined
to be improved properties before the aforementioned zoning reevaluation from 1990 was
adopted. The applicant has cited the allowance for increased density on this project to 16 units
per acre by identifying the conversion of commercial density bonus for properties deemed
consistent by policy. This density bonus states that if a project includes the conversion of
commercial zoning that has been found to be “Consistent by Policy” through the Collier County
Zoning Re-evaluation Program (Ordinance No. 1990-23), then a bonus of up to 16 dwelling
units per acre may be added for everyone (1) acre of commercial zoning that is converted to
residential zoning. This is being achieved by re-designating 4.1 acres of the existing commercial
zoning to a residential designation to allow the proposed 66-unit development. Staff agree that
the provision of the conversion of a commercial bonus is applicable and is supported by the
Future Land Use Plan.
This rezone also includes the allowance for a 120-slip marina. This property has been the site of
a marina since the 60s and was officially approved via rezone from a residential designation to
commercial, via Ordinance No. 2023-42, to allow the reinstallation of wet slips in the western
basin of the submerged lands after their removal due to hurricane damage. Within Urban
designated areas, water-dependent and water-related land uses are permitted and encouraged
within the coastal region of this District, making the addition of marina use consistent with the
FLUE. Based upon the above analysis, the proposed PUD rezone for 66 multi-family dwelling
units, and a maximum 120-boat marina has been deemed consistent with the Future Land Use
Element. Comprehensive Planning staff conclude that the project is consistent with the Growth
Management Plan (GMP) as the proposed uses are considered complementary and compatible
with surrounding development,
Transportation Element: In evaluating this project, staff reviewed the applicant’s January 23,
2025, Traffic Impact Statement for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of
the Growth Management Plan (GMP) using the 2024 Annual Update and Inventory Reports
(AUIR).
Page 3551 of 3896
PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD Page 7 of 22
Revised: August 5, 2025
Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states;
“The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications,
conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element
(FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with
consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not
approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as
identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as
identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent
roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted
Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific
mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application has significant impacts if
the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occur:
a.For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is
equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume;
b.For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to
or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and
c.For all other links the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it
is equal to or exceeds 3% of the adopted LOS standard service volume. Mitigating
stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted
as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the project’s significant impacts on all
roadways.”
Staff findings: According to the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) provided with this petition, the
proposed Davis Brookside MPUD will generate +/- 50 PM peak hour trips on the adjacent
roadway, Davis Boulevard. This represents a reduction of +/- (80) fewer PM peak hour trips
compared to the currently approved PUD. The trips generated will occur on the following adjacent
roadway network links:
Roadway/Link Link Current Peak
Hour Peak
Direction
Volume/Peak
Direction
Projected
P.M. Peak
Hour/Peak
Direction
Project
Traffic (1)
2024 Level
of Service
(LOS)
2024
Remaining
Capacity
Davis
Boulevard/12.0
US-41 to
Airport
Road
2,700/EB 36/EB C 1,075
1.Source for P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Direction Project Traffic is January 23, 2025; Traffic Impact Statement provided by
the petitioner.
Based on the TIS provided by the applicant, the 2024 AUIR, the subject PUD can be found
consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan.
Transportation Planning staff finds this petition consistent with the GMP.
Page 3552 of 3896
PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD Page 8 of 22
Revised: August 5, 2025
Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental review staff have
found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element
(CCME). The project site consists of 0.05 acres of native vegetation. A minimum of 0.01 acres
(25%) of native vegetation is required to be preserved.
GMP Conclusion: The GMP is the prevailing document to support land use decisions, such as this
proposed rezoning. Staff are required to make a recommendation regarding a finding of consistency
or inconsistency with the overall GMP as part of the recommendation for approval, approval with
conditions, or denial of any rezoning petition. This petition is consistent with the GMP.
STAFF ANALYSIS: Applications to rezone to or to amend PUDs shall be in the form of a PUD
Master Plan of development, along with a list of permitted and accessory uses and a development
standards table. The PUD application shall also include a list of developer commitments and any
proposed deviations from the LDC. Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use
petition, including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in
LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5, Planning Commission Recommendation (commonly referred to as the
“PUD Findings”), and Section 10.02.08.F, Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report
(referred to as “Rezone Findings”), which establish the legal basis to support the CCPC’s
recommendation. The CCPC uses the aforementioned criteria as the basis for its recommendation to
the Board, which in turn uses the criteria to support its action on the rezoning or amendment request.
An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed below, under the heading “Zoning Services
Analysis.” In addition, staff offer the following analyses:
Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff have reviewed the petition to address
ecological concerns. The property has been developed and consists of existing commercial uses;
only a small area of mangroves exists on-site (0.05 acres). The required preserve is 0.01 acres (25%
of 0.05 acres). The Master Concept Plan provides for 0.04 existing mangroves to remain in place.
No listed animal or plant species were observed on the property. The property contains thirty-nine
(39) existing dock slips; the applicant proposes to construct an additional seventy-three (73) multi-
slip docking facility. The property is located adjacent to a man-made basin, which connects to Rock
Creek. In accordance with LDC section 5.05.02, all proposed multi-slip docking facilities with ten or
more slips are required to be reviewed for consistency with the Manatee Protection Plan (MPP). The
MPP was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners and approved by the Florida Department
of Environmental Protection (DEP) in 1995. The MPP has been established to protect manatees by
limiting slip counts in sensitive marine habitats and improving manatee awareness. The subject
property has obtained a Collier County MPP determination, which resulted in a preferred ranking
dated November 2, 2018 (PL20180002738).
A Manatee Awareness and Protection Plan will be required at the SDP/PPL review in accordance
with LDC 5.05.02.B.
Transportation Review: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with
the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval.
Page 3553 of 3896
PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD Page 9 of 22
Revised: August 5, 2025
Utility Review: The project lies within the City of Naples potable water service area and the
south wastewater service area of the Collier County Water-Sewer District (CCWSD).
Wastewater services are available via existing infrastructure within the adjacent right-of-way.
Sufficient wastewater treatment capacity is available. Developer commitments are listed in
“EXHIBIT F” of the MPUD document under the “UTILITIES” section. 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 utilities acceptance. The City of Naples Utilities Department
furnished a letter of water service availability on September 3, 2024.
Landscape Review: The buffers labeled on the PUD Master Plan are consistent with the LDC.
Stormwater Review: The proposed PUD request is not anticipated to create a stormwater
management problem for the area. The site is currently covered by an FDEP permit (173190-
009-EI). A modification to this Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) will be required prior to
any proposed change in land use or development. That process will ensure consistency with all
applicable state standards for stormwater systems. In addition, site development approval (SDP)
will be required from Collier County to ensure that local development standards are maintained
and that the proposed stormwater system design is consistent with relevant LDC and County
Ordinances for water quality and water quantity during both the interim construction phase and
final implementation. Stormwater staff have reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP
and the LDC and recommend approval of this project.
Bayshore Gateway Triangle (CRA): The subject property is located within the Bayshore
Gateway Triangle CRA. As such, the CRA serves as the primary vehicle for community and
professional input on petitions. The agent presented the project at the March 6, 2025, CRA
Meeting, and the Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA Advisory Board passed a motion supporting
the PUDZ request. (See Attachment B – Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA Minutes)
Zoning Services Review: Zoning Division staff have evaluated the proposed uses related to
intensity and compatibility. Also, we reviewed the proposed development standards for the
project. The land use pattern in the local area contains a mix of residential and commercial uses.
The site is situated along a six-lane arterial roadway, and the current zoning of the property is
C-4/GTZO-MXD zoning district that allows commercial uses delivering goods and services,
including entertainment and recreational attractions. The western side of the PUD is developed
commercially within the City of Naples, and to the south of this property is developed
commercially within Collier County jurisdiction. Development to the south is with multi-family
dwellings and commercial uses. Developed to the north and east is with single family residential
According to the Future Land Use Map, the subject property is located within the Urban
Residential subdistrict of the Urban Mixed-Use district, as well as the Bayshore Gateway
Triangle Overlay district. Furthermore, this property was identified as being developed and
zoned for commercial prior to the adoption of the Future Land Use Plan, making it “consistent
by policy” through the Collier County Zoning Re-evaluation Program (Ordinance No. 90-23).
The subject property consists of 8.27± acres, of which approximately 4.23± acres is uplands,
and the rest is submerged lands, which cannot be included in the density calculation as it is
Page 3554 of 3896
PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD Page 10 of 22
Revised: August 5, 2025
tidally affected. The applicant has proposed a redevelopment of the property to include 66
residential units and a maximum of 120 boat slips, of which a majority are reserved for marina
use. This proposed density increase is being applied for in conjunction with the conversion of
commercial density bonus which states that if a project includes the conversion of commercial
zoning that has been found to be “Consistent by Policy” through the Collier County Zoning Re-
evaluation Program then a bonus of up to 16 dwelling units per acre may be added for every one
(1) acre of commercial zoning that is converted to residential zoning. Comprehensive Planning
staff agree that this provision of the density rating system is applicable to the property and will
allow this rezone to move forward without the requirement of a GMPA. The uplands portion of
the PUD encompasses the Gateway Triangle Zoning Overlay Mixed-Use Subdistrict (GTZO-
MXD). The purpose and intent of this subdistrict is to provide for pedestrian-oriented
commercial and mixed-use developments and higher density residential uses. Development
will reflect traditional neighborhood design patterns. Individual buildings are encouraged to
be multi-story with uses mixed vertically, with street level commercial and upper-level office
and residential. As such, the Davis Brookside MPUD is proposed to permit a maximum of 66
multi-family dwelling units and a maximum 120-boat marina, consistent C-4/GTZO-MXD
subdistrict allowances.
Surrounding land use patterns consist of single family, multi-family, marina, and commercial
uses. There are three existing accesses from Davis Boulevard to the upland parcels of the
Property, providing single access to the pawn shop and shared access from Davis Boulevard to
the marina, marina parking, and the remaining retail commercial area. The site is currently
serviced by the City of Naples - Public Works and has provided a letter of availability for
potable water service, dated September 3, 2024, see Attachment C.
Proposed development standards are outlined in Exhibit B, List of Development Standards, in
the draft ordinance attached to this staff report (Attachment A). The proposed development
standards are generally consistent with C-4/GTZO-MXD District dimensional standards of the
LDC Section 4.02.01, as summarized in the table on the next page:
Page 3555 of 3896
PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD Page 11 of 22
Revised: August 5, 2025
Development Standards for Principal Uses
RSF-4
Residential
Single-Family
District
C-4 General
Commercial
Zoning District
GTZO-
MXD
Mini-
Triangle
MPUD
Proposed
Davis
Brookside
MPUD
Min. Lot
Area
7,500 s.f. 10,000 s.f. n/a 20,000 s.f. n/a
Min. Lot
Width
75 feet corner
70 feet interior
100 feet Mixed-Use -
100 feet
100 feet n/a
Max.
Building
Height
35 feet (zoned) 75 feet (zoned) Mixed-Use –
56 feet
160 feet
(zoned)
162.8 feet
(actual)
Tract R:
60 feet (zoned)
86 feet (actual)
Tract M:
56 feet (zoned)
86 feet (actual)
Min. Front
Yard
25 feet 50% of the
building height,
but not less than
25 feet.
Structures 50
feet or more in
height = 25 feet
plus one
additional foot of
setback for each
foot of building
height over 50
feet
Mixed Use -
6.5 feet
Adjacent to a
public street
–20 feet
All other
perimeter
yards – 5 feet
South Property
line (Davis
Boulevard):
Tract R and M
– 6.5 feet
Min. Side
Yard
7.5 feet
10 feet of
waterfront
Commercial:
50% of the
building height,
but not less than
15 feet
Residential: 25
feet
Mixed-Use –
10 feet
Adjacent to a
public street
–20 feet
All other
perimeter
yards – 5 feet
East and West
Property Line:
Tract R and M -
10 feet and 0
feet for marina
Min. Rear
Yard
25 feet Commercial:
50% of the
building height,
but not less than
15 feet
Residential: 25
feet
Mixed Use –
5 and feet
Waterfront –
25 feet
Adjacent to a
public street
–20 feet
All other
perimeter
yards – 5 feet
North Property
Line and
Waterfront:
Tract R and M -
20 feet and 0
feet for marina
Page 3556 of 3896
PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD Page 12 of 22
Revised: August 5, 2025
PUD FINDINGS:
LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5 states that, “In support of its recommendation, the CCPC shall make
findings as to the PUD Master Plan’s compliance with the following criteria in addition to the
findings in LDC Section 10.02.08”:
1.The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in
relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and
access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities.
Zoning Division staff has reviewed the proposed MPUD and finds suitability of the area
for the 8.27± acre project to permit a maximum of 66 multi-family dwelling units and a
maximum 120-boat marina. According to the Future Land Use Map, the subject property
is located within the Urban Residential subdistrict of the Urban Mixed-Use district, as
well as the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Overlay district. Furthermore, this property was
identified as being developed and zoned for commercial prior to the adoption of the
Future Land Use Plan, making it “consistent by policy” through the Collier County
Zoning Re-evaluation Program (Ordinance No. 90-23). The subject property consists of
8.27± acres, of which approximately 4.23± acres is upland, and the rest is submerged
lands, which cannot be included in the density calculation as it is tidally affected. The
applicant has proposed a redevelopment of the property to include 66 residential units
and a maximum of 120 boat slips, of which a majority are reserved for marina use. This
proposed density increase is being applied for in conjunction with the conversion of
commercial density bonus which states that if a project includes the conversion of
commercial zoning that has been found to be “Consistent by Policy” through the Collier
County Zoning Re-evaluation Program then a bonus of up to 16 dwelling units per acre
may be added for every one (1) acre of commercial zoning that is converted to
residential zoning. Comprehensive planning staff agrees that this provision of the
density rating system is applicable to the property and will allow this rezone to move
forward without the requirement of a GMPA. The uplands portion of the PUD
encompasses the Gateway Triangle Zoning Overlay Mixed-Use Subdistrict (GTZO-
MXD). The purpose and intent of this subdistrict is to provide for pedestrian-oriented
commercial and mixed-use developments and higher density residential uses.
Developments will reflect traditional neighborhood design patterns. Individual
buildings are encouraged to be multi-story with uses mixed vertically, with street level
commercial and upper-level office and residential. As such, the Davis Brookside
MPUD is proposed to permit a maximum of 66 multi-family dwelling units and a
maximum 120-boat marina, consistent C-4/GTZO-MXD subdistrict allowances.
The site is comprised of six parcels. Three of these parcels front Davis Boulevard, a six-
way arterial road. The development pattern in the surrounding area is characterized by
multi residential development to the south (Mini-Triangle PUD, also known as Aura and
Ascent at Metropolitan Naples) and single family residential to the north and east. To
the west are commercial lands within the City of Naples and Collier County
jurisdictions. Two entrances are proposed into the PUD, and another potential future
connection is proposed that will connect to the properties to the west. The site will
Page 3557 of 3896
PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD Page 13 of 22
Revised: August 5, 2025
conform with the requirement to designate 30% of the site open space, surround the
property to the north and west, and the buffering will meet or exceed LDC requirements.
Prior to development, the stormwater management details will be evaluated both by the
State (Environmental Resource Permit by the FDEP) and Collier County (Site
Development Permit - SDP).
Wastewater mains are available along the north side of Davis Boulevard. There is
adequate wastewater treatment capacity 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 utilities acceptance. The City of Naples
Utilities Department furnished a letter of water service availability on September 3rd,
2024.
2.Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements,
contracts, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly
as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing
operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided
or maintained at public expense.
Documents submitted with the application, which the County Attorney’s Office
reviewed, demonstrate unified control of the property.
3.Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives,
and policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP).
County staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis of conformity with
the relevant goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP within the GMP Consistency
portion of this staff report.
4.The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may
include restrictions on the location of improvements, restrictions on design, and
buffering and screening requirements.
As described in the Staff Analysis section of this staff report subsection Landscape
Review, staff is of the opinion that the proposed project will be compatible with the
surrounding area. The Master Plan proposes the appropriate perimeter landscape buffers.
5.The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development.
For Mixed-Use PUDs, 30% of the gross area shall be devoted to usable open space
according to LDC 4.07.02.G.2. The PUD Master Plan indicates compliance with this
standard, with 30% to be provided as open space.
Page 3558 of 3896
PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD Page 14 of 22
Revised: August 5, 2025
6.The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of ensuring the adequacy of
available improvements and facilities, both public and private.
Wastewater mains are available along the north side of Davis Boulevard. There is
adequate wastewater treatment capacity 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 utilities acceptance. The City of Naples
Utility Department furnished a letter of water service availability on September 3, 2024.
Transportation Planning staff finds this petition consistent with the GMP. Operational
impact will be addressed at time of first development order (SDP 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, are sought.
7.The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate
expansion.
The subject property is proposed to permit a maximum of 66 multi-family dwelling units
and a maximum 120-boat marina. The subject site would likely not be able to expand
north as that property is developed with single family residential. The properties to the
south and east are developed with multifamily and single family residential, respectively.
The property to the west is developed with commercial.
Wastewater mains are available along the north side of Davis Boulevard. There is
adequate wastewater treatment capacity 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 utilities acceptance. The City of Naples
Utility Department furnished a letter of water service availability on September 3, 2024.
8.Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such
regulations in the particular case, based on a determination that such modifications
are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal
application of such regulations.
Three deviations are proposed in connection with this request to rezone to MPUD.
Rezone Findings:
LDC Subsection 10.02.08.F states, “When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and
recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners…shall
show that the Planning Commission has studied and considered the proposed change in
relation to the following when applicable”:
Page 3559 of 3896
PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD Page 15 of 22
Revised: August 5, 2025
1.Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and
policies of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth Management
Plan.
The petition has been found consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the
(FLUM) as outlined on page 6 of this staff report.
2.The existing land use pattern.
The existing land use pattern of the surrounding area is described in the Surrounding
Land Use and Zoning section of this staff report. According to the Future Land Use Map,
the subject property is located within the Urban Residential subdistrict of the Urban
Mixed-Use district, as well as the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Overlay district.
Furthermore, this property was identified as being developed and zoned for commercial
prior to the adoption of the Future Land Use Plan, making it “Consistent by Policy”
through the Collier County Zoning Re-evaluation Program (Ordinance No. 90-23). The
subject property consists of 8.27± acres of which approximately 4.23± acres are uplands,
and the rest is submerged lands, which cannot be included in the density calculation as it
is tidally affected. The applicant has proposed a redevelopment of the property to include
66 residential units and a maximum of 120 boat slips, of which a majority are reserved
for marina use. This proposed density increase is being applied for in conjunction with
the conversion of commercial density bonus which states that if a project includes the
conversion of commercial zoning that has been found to be “Consistent by Policy”
through the Collier County Zoning Re-evaluation Program then a bonus of up to 16
dwelling units per acre may be added for every one (1) acre of commercial zoning that is
converted to residential zoning. Comprehensive planning staff agrees that this provision
of the density rating system is applicable to the property and will allow this rezone to
move forward without the requirement of a GMPA. The uplands portion of the PUD
encompasses the Gateway Triangle Zoning Overlay Mixed-Use Subdistrict (GTZO-
MXD). The purpose and intent of this subdistrict is to provide for pedestrian-oriented
commercial and mixed-use developments and higher density residential uses.
Developments will reflect traditional neighborhood design patterns. Individual
buildings are encouraged to be multi-story with uses mixed vertically, with street level
commercial and upper-level office and residential. As such, the Davis Brookside MPUD
is proposed to permit a maximum of 66 multi-family dwelling units and a maximum
120-boat marina, consistent with C-4/GTZO-MXD subdistrict allowances.
3.The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby
districts.
Should the rezoning to MPUD be approved, it would not create an isolated MPUD
district, as to the south is the Mini Triangle MPUD (91.8 DU/AC) that is approved for
multi-family residential, commercial, and office uses. The Mini Triangle MPUD and the
proposed Davis Brookside MPUD are within the Gateway Triangle Zoning Overlay
Page 3560 of 3896
PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD Page 16 of 22
Revised: August 5, 2025
Mixed-Use Subdistrict (GTZO-MXD). The purpose and intent of this subdistrict is to
provide for pedestrian-oriented commercial and mixed-use developments and higher
density residential uses. Development will reflect traditional neighborhood design
patterns. Individual buildings are encouraged to be multi-story with uses mixed
vertically, with street level commercial and upper-level office and residential. As such,
the proposed PUD uses are consistent with the existing subdistrict allowances and
further effectuate the intent of the Urban Residential subdistrict of the Urban Mixed-Use
district as well as the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Overlay district.
4.Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property proposed for change.
The MPUD boundary follows the boundaries of the existing parcels.
5.Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed
rezoning necessary.
The proposed rezone is not specifically necessary, but it is being requested in compliance
with the LDC provisions to seek such changes. The petitioner is seeking to construct 66
multi-family residential dwelling units and a 120-boat slip marina through a mixed-use
planned unit development which is not permitted in the C-4 district. In order to increase
the intensity on the property, adding multi-family residential and requesting deviations, a
PUD rezoning is needed. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a rezoning to MPUD.
6.Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood.
The proposed change is not anticipated to adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood. The site will conform with the requirement to provide 30% of the site as
open space. It’s important to note that in 2023, the Brookside Marina Rezone petition
(PL20190001540) was approved on September 26, 2023, via Ordinance 2023-42. The
conditions of approval from Ordinance 2023-42 were requested by the property owner
with assistance and oversight from neighboring property owners located to the north and
were approved via Ordinance 2023-42. These conditions of approval were carried over
and incorporated into the Davis Brookside MPUD as developer commitments.
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.
Transportation Planning staff finds this petition consistent with the GMP. Operational
impacts will be addressed at the time of first development order (SDP or Plat).
Additionally, the project’s development must comply with all other applicable
concurrency management regulations when development approvals are sought.
Page 3561 of 3896
PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD
Page 17 of 22 Revised: August 5, 2025
8.Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem.
The proposed PUD request is not anticipated to create a stormwater management
problem for the area. An FDEP permit currently covers the site. A modification to this
Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) will be required prior to any proposed change in
land use or development. That process will ensure consistency with all applicable state
standards for stormwater systems. In addition, site development (SDP) approval will be
required from Collier County, to ensure that local development standards are maintained
and that proposed stormwater system is designed consistent with relevant LDC and
County Ordinances for water quality and water quantity, during both the interim
construction phase and final implementation.
9.Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas.
It is not anticipated this MPUD will reduce light or air to the adjacent areas.
Development of the site will need to meet the site design standards as set forth in the
LDC.
10.Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent
areas.
This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results, which may be internal
or external to the subject property. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors,
including zoning; however, zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since market
forces drive value determination.
11.Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or
development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations.
The approval of the MPUD rezone request is not likely to deter development activity of
the surrounding properties.
12.Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an
individual owner, as contrasted with the public welfare.
The proposed maximum of 66 multi-family dwelling units and a maximum 120-boat
marina are consistent with the Urban Residential subdistrict of the Urban Mixed-Use
district as well as the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Overlay district. Furthermore, this
property was identified as being developed and zoned for commercial prior to the
adoption of the Future Land Use Plan, making it “Consistent by Policy” through the
Collier County Zoning Re-evaluation Program (Ordinance 90-23). The proposed uses
are consistent with the Urban Residential subdistrict of the Urban Mixed-Use district,
which constitutes a public policy statement supporting the development parameters
being found to be appropriate, and the zoning action would subsequently be consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed change does not
constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further
Page 3562 of 3896
PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD Page 18 of 22
Revised: August 5, 2025
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 the existing C-4 district zoning to
develop commercial uses and the marina; however, the proposed marina and the multi-
family residential mixed-use project cannot be achieved without this PUD rezoning
action.
14.Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or
the County.
The subject site is in the Urban Residential subdistrict of the Urban Mixed-Use district
as well as the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Overlay District Commercial Mixed-Use,
which is intended to provide for pedestrian-scaled, higher density residential and mixed-
use development, employment and recreational opportunities, cultural and civic
activities, and public places to serve residents of, and visitors to, the Bayshore Area. The
proposed PUD uses are consistent with the existing subdistrict allowances and further
effectuate the intent of the Urban Residential subdistrict of the Urban Mixed-Use
district, as well as the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Overlay.
Moreover, the abutting properties to the north and east are developed with single family
residential and zoned Residential Single Family (RSF-4) district. It’s important to note
that in 2023, the Brookside Marina Rezone petition (PL20190001540) was approved on
September 26, 2023, via Ordinance 2023-42. The conditions of approval from
Ordinance 2023-42 were requested by the property owner with assistance and oversight
from neighboring property owners located to the north and were approved via Ordinance
2023-42. These conditions of approval were carried over and incorporated into the Davis
Brookside MPUD as developer commitments. The petition proposes a 10’ Type D
landscape buffer at the southern boundary of the PUD fronting Davis Boulevard, a 5’
Type A landscape buffer and a 10’ Type A landscape buffer at the western boundary,
and a 5’ Type A landscape buffer on the eastern boundary.
Compliance with the Urban Residential subdistrict of the Urban Mixed-Use district, as
well as the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Overlay, and implementation of enhanced
development standards and commitments contribute to keeping in scale with the needs
of the community.
15.Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed
use in districts already permitting such use.
The petition was reviewed based on the location and proposed use of the subject site,
and staff does not specifically review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition.
Page 3563 of 3896
PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD Page 19 of 22
Revised: August 5, 2025
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 site is already developed. The re-development will be evaluated relative to all
federal, state, and local development regulations during the SDP and/or platting
processes, and again later as part of the building permit process.
17.The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and
services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth
Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County
Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended.
The development will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in the LDC regarding
Adequate Public Facilities. The project must also be consistent with all applicable goals
and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities. This petition has been
reviewed by county staff that are responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as
part of the rezoning process, and staff have concluded that the developer has provided
appropriate commitments so that the impacts to the Level of Service (LOS) will be
minimized.
18.Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare.
To be determined by the Board during its advertised public hearing.
DEVIATION DISCUSSION:
The petitioner is seeking three deviations from the requirements of the LDC. These deviations
are directly extracted from PUD Exhibit E. The petitioner’s rationale and staff
analysis/recommendation are outlined below.
Proposed Deviation #1: (Multi-Family Dwellings – Parking Space Requirements)
“Deviation # 1 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04 G. Table 17 – Parking Space
Requirements, specifically for multi-family dwellings, which allows small-scale recreation
facilities that are accessory to a multi-family project and intended only for the residents of that
project, exclusive of golf courses/clubhouses, may be computed at 50 percent of normal
requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are not within 300 feet of the recreation
facilities and at 25 percent of normal requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are
within 300 feet of the recreation facilities to instead allow recreation facilities parking
requirements to be zero (0) when structurally part of the principal multi-family structure.”
Petitioner’s Justification: The small-scale recreation facilities that will serve as accessory uses
to the multi-family project are exclusive to the residents and will be structurally connected to
the principal multi-family structure. As the small-scale recreation facilities are structurally
connected to the principal multi-family dwelling structure and will be located within 200 feet of
Page 3564 of 3896
PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD Page 20 of 22
Revised: August 5, 2025
the majority of the dwelling units, additional parking for residents to commute to the recreation
area are not warranted.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff see no detrimental effect if this deviation request is
approved. Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation,
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,” The petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is “justified as meeting public
purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.” finding that in
compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h.
Proposed Deviation #2: (Waterfront Lots – Design Standards)
“Deviation # 2 seeks relief from LDC section 4.02.05.B.1. – Specific Design Standards for
Waterfront Lots, which states “waterfront lands along which a bulkhead line has been
established, buildings may be erected out to, but not beyond, the bulkhead line.” Instead, to
allow roofed and enclosed balconies to encroach a maximum of 5 feet beyond the bulkhead line
in the location identified within Exhibit C of the MPUD and as depicted on Exhibit C-2 of the
MPUD – Building Height Exhibit.”
Petitioner’s Justification: This deviation is requested to allow for a desirable amenity (i.e.
large waterfront balconies) for the multi-family units that pose no impact to the surrounding
area. The waterfront area is an existing marina basin that is a man-made drainage area.
Submerged lands are fully deeded to and commonly owned by the upland entity and does not
constitute a submerged land lease.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff see no detrimental effect if this deviation request is
approved. Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation,
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 finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner
has demonstrated that the deviation is “justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least
equivalent to literal application of such regulations.”
Proposed Deviation #3: (Preserve Setbacks)
“Deviation # 3 seeks relief from LDC section 3.05.07.H.3.a. – Required Setbacks to Preserves,
which states “All principal structures shall have a minimum 25-foot setback from the boundary
of any preserve.” to instead allow principal structures to have a 20-foot setback from the
boundary of the on-site preserve.”
Petitioner’s Justification: This deviation is requested to allow the principal structure to
encroach by 5 feet into the required preserve setback. The existing native vegetation on the site
is comprised of 0.05 acres of mangroves, of which 25%, or 0.01 acres, is required to be
designated as preserve. The site has been impacted for decades by development that consists of
Page 3565 of 3896
PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD Page 21 of 22
Revised: August 5, 2025
an existing commercial marina, retail commercial uses in the upland area, and an existing
gravel parking lot that abuts the mangroves with no buffer.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Environmental staff recommends the APPROVAL of
the deviation request (LDC 3.05.07.H.3.a). The existence of a parking lot has impacted the area
adjacent to the proposed preserve. A reduction of five feet will allow for flexibility of design
since the area has already been impacted. Environmental Services staff support the deviation
request to allow the setback to be reduced from twenty-five feet (25’) to twenty feet (20’). As
such, Environmental and Zoning Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is
approved 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 literal application of such regulations.”
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM):
The applicant conducted a NIM on March 24, 2025, at New Hope Ministries – Room 209, located
at 7675 Davis Boulevard, Naples, FL. The meeting commenced at approximately 5:31 p.m. and
ended at 6:30 p.m. There were 10 members of the public in attendance in person and 7 members
of the public in attendance via Zoom. Ellen Summers, the agent, conducted the meeting,
introducing the consultant team and staff, and gave a PowerPoint presentation. The presentation
consisted of an overview of the proposed MPUD rezoning application. Following the agent’s
presentation, the meeting was opened to attendees to make comments and ask the consultant team
questions regarding the proposed development. The concerns discussed were parking, multifamily
unit type, building heights, murals, airport noise, property ownership, variances, water retention,
boat ramps, existing buildings to be demolished, unit prices, camera installations, AirBNB's,
fueling pumps, development timelines, curb cuts/median cuts to Davis Boulevard, and residential
building configurations. No commitments were made. A copy of the NIM Summary, sign-in
sheet, NIM advertisements, and NIM presentation are included in Attachment D.
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) REVIEW:
This project does require an Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project did
meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2-1193 of the
Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. Specifically, the project is requesting a
deviation to allow the preservation setback to be reduced from twenty-five feet (25’) to twenty
feet (20’) as required by LDC Section 3.05.07.H.3.a. Environmental Services staff recommend
approval of the proposed petition.
COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW:
The County Attorney’s Office reviewed this staff report on July 18, 2025.
Page 3566 of 3896
PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD Page 22 of 22
Revised: August 5, 2025
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) accept staff’s findings
and forward Petition PUDZ-PL20240010963 Davis Brookside MPUD to the Board of County
Commissioners (BCC) with a recommendation of approval.
Attachments:
A.Proposed Ordinance
B.Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA meeting minutes
C.City of Naples – Letter of Availability Water Only
D.Application/Backup Materials
E.Hearing Advertising Sign
Page 3567 of 3896
[24-CPS-02572/1955195/1]98
Brookside / PUDZ-PL20240010963
6/30/25 1 of 2
ORDINANCE NO. 2025-_____
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.
2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY
AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS
BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN
DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A GENERAL COMMERCIAL
(C-4) ZONING DISTRICT AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL (C-4)
ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE GATEWAY TRIANGLE ZONING
OVERLAY-MIXED USE DISTRICT (GTZO-MXD) TO THE MIXED
USE PLANNING UNIT DEVELOPMENT (MPUD) ZONING DISTRICT
PARTIALLY WITHIN THE GATEWAY TRIANGLE ZONING
OVERLAY-MIXED USE DISTRICT (GTZO-MXD) FOR A PROJECT
TO BE KNOWN AS THE DAVIS BROOKSIDE MPUD TO ALLOW 66
MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS AND A 120-
BOAT SLIP MARINA; AND PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF
ORDINANCE NO. 23-42. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED
ON THE NORTH SIDE OF DAVIS BOULEVARD APPROXIMATELY
2/10 OF ONE MILE EAST OF TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST IN SECTION 2,
TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, CONSISTING OF 8.27±
ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
[PL20240010963]
WHEREAS, Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP and Ellen Summers, AICP of Bowman
Consulting, and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A.,
representing Project Brookside JV DevCo, LP petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to
change the zoning classification of the herein described real property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION ONE:
The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Section 2,
Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from the General
Commercial (C-4) Zoning District and General Commercial (C-4) Zoning District within the
Page 3568 of 3896
[24-CPS-02572/1955195/1]98
Brookside / PUDZ-PL20240010963
6/30/25 2 of 2
Gateway Triangle Zoning Overlay-Mixed Use District (GTZO-MXD) to the Mixed Use
Planning Unit Development (MPUD) partially within the Gateway Triangle Zoning Overlay-
Mixed Use District (GTZO-MXD) for a 8.27+/- acre project to be known as the Davis Brookside
MPUD, to allow 66 multi-family residential dwelling units and a 120-boat slip marina, in
accordance with Exhibits A through F attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
The appropriate zoning atlas map or maps, as described in Ordinance Number 2004-41, as
amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, is/are hereby amended accordingly.
SECTION TWO:
Ordinance No. 23-42, the Brookside Marina rezone is hereby repealed as to the property
described in this Ordinance.
SECTION THREE:
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
Attachments: Exhibit A - List of Permitted Uses
Exhibit B - List of Development Standards
Exhibit C1 - Master Plan
Exhibit C2 - Building Height Exhibit
Exhibit D - Legal Description
Exhibit E - List of Deviations
Exhibit F - List of Developer Commitments
Page 3569 of 3896
Page 1 of 13
C:\Users\ashton_h\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\Y925N6VT\Davis Brookside MPUD (PL-20240010963)(6-27-2025)_.docx
EXHIBIT A
DAVIS BROOKSIDE MPUD
LIST OF PERMITTED USES
Regulations for the development of the MPUD shall be in accordance with the content of this
document and all applicable sections of the Growth Management Plan (GMP), the Land
Development Code (LDC), and the Administrative Code in effect at the time of approval of the
Site Development Plan (SDP) or plat. Where the MPUD Ordinance does not provide development
standards, then the provision of the specific sections of the LDC that are otherwise applicable shall
apply.
TRACT R (RESIDENTIAL)
A. Principal Use:
1. Multi-family dwelling units, not to exceed 66 total dwelling units (16 dwelling units
per gross acre of Tract R).
B. Accessory Uses:
1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the permitted principal
uses and structures permitted by right in this MPUD.
2. Recreational uses and facilities that serve the residents of Tract R only, such as
swimming pools, fitness centers, dining facilities (which may include the sale of
food and alcoholic beverages), sports courts, and clubhouse/recreation buildings.
3. Customary accessory uses and structures to residential units, including parking
structures, gazebos, fountains, trellises, signage, entry gates and gatehouses,
administrative offices, and similar structures.
4. Stormwater management treatment, conveyance facilities, and structures, such as
berms, swales, and outfall structures.
5. A maximum of 5 guest suites, as defined in LDC Section 1.08.02, for use of owner’s
guests only. The guest suites shall not be rented or utilized by the general public
and are excluded from the maximum dwelling unit count.
6. Restrooms or office space, not to exceed 260 square feet, to serve the Residential
Tract and the Marina Tract of the MPUD. The 260 square feet associated with the
restrooms or office space have been excluded from the residential density
calculation for purposes of the commercial conversion bonus density in the Growth
Management Plan.
Page 3570 of 3896
Page 2 of 13
C:\Users\ashton_h\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\Y925N6VT\Davis Brookside MPUD (PL-20240010963)(6-27-2025)_.docx
TRACT M (MARINA)
The entirety of Tract M shall not exceed 120 wet slips.
A. Principal Uses:
1. Marina (4493 and 4499 – except canal operation, cargo salvaging, ship dismantling,
lighterage, marine salvaging, marine wrecking and steamship leasing), not to
exceed 120 wet slips. Of the permitted 120 wet slips, up to 74 may be dedicated as
commercial wet slips, and additional commercial wet slips may be dedicated should
sufficient off-site parking be approved, at time of SDP as determined by the County
Manager or designee. The remaining wet slips may be designated accessory wet
slips for the residential units of Tract R.
2. Water Transportation of Passengers (4489 – except airboats/swamp buggy rides).
3. Water Transportation Services (4499), limited to boat cleaning, boat hiring (except
pleasure), boat livery (except pleasure), commercial boat rental, and chartering of
commercial boats.
4. Amusement and Recreation Services (7999), limited to recreational/pleasure boat
rentals, operation of charter or party fishing boats, canoe/kayak/rowboat rentals,
houseboat rentals (except not for liveaboard purposes within the MPUD), and
tourist guides.
B. Accessory Uses:
1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the permitted principal
uses, including, but not limited to, boat slips (wet), piers, walkways, davits, boat
lifts, boat lift canopies, and boat ramps. No boats shall be permitted to be docked
to any marina structure, except to the dedicated 120 wet slips.
Page 3571 of 3896
Page 3 of 13
C:\Users\ashton_h\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\Y925N6VT\Davis Brookside MPUD (PL-20240010963)(6-27-2025)_.docx
EXHIBIT B
DAVIS BROOKSIDE MPUD
LIST OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
A. Residential and Marina Development Standards
The table below sets forth the development standards for the uses within the Davis
Brookside MPUD. Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in
applicable sections of the LDC, including LDC Section 4.02.16 – Design Standards for
Development in the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Area, in
effect as of the date of approval of the SDP or subdivision plat.
TABLE I: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Tract R Tract M
PRINCIPAL
USES
ACCESSORY
USES
PRINCIPAL
USES
ACCESSORY
USES
MIN. LOT AREA N/A N/A N/A N/A
MIN. LOT WIDTH N/A N/A N/A N/A
MIN. FLOOR AREA 700 S.F. N/A N/A N/A
MINIMUM YARD (EXTERNAL – MEASURED FROM THE PUD BOUNDARY)
WATERFRONT1 20’ / 0’ 10’ 20’ / 0’ for
Marina
10’ / 0’ for
Marina
NORTH PROPERTY
LINE
20’ / 0’ for
Marina SPS 20’ / 0’ for
Marina SPS
SOUTH PROPERTY
LINE (DAVIS BLVD.)2 6.5’ SPS 6.5’ SPS
EAST PROPERTY
LINE
10’/ 0’ for
Marina SPS 10’/ 0’ for
Marina SPS
WEST PROPERTY
LINE
10’/ 0’ for
Marina SPS 10’/ 0’ for
Marina SPS
PRESERVE
SETBACKS3 20’ 10’ 20’ 10’
MIN. DISTANCE
BETWEEN
STRUCTURES
10’ SPS 10’ SPS
MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT4
Zoned 60’ SPS 56’ SPS
Actual 86’ SPS 86’ SPS
N/A - not applicable; SPS - same as principal structures; S.F - square feet.
Notes:
1. Pursuant to LDC section 4.02.05, waterfront lands along which a bulkhead line has been established, buildings
may be erected out to, but not beyond the bulkhead line, except as provided within Exhibit E – MPUD Deviations.
2. In no case shall the required minimum yard permit the encroachment of a structure within a utility easement
unless a letter of no objection or utility deviation is provided by the easement holder at time of SDP.
3. Setbacks from Preserves shall be set forth in LDC Section 3.05.07 H.3., except as otherwise provided within
Exhibit E- MPUD Deviations, and balconies may encroach into the required preserve setback, up to the preserve
boundary, where the vertical clearance of the native vegetation below is maintained.
4. Pursuant to LDC Section 4.02.01 D.2, and as depicted on sheet 4 of Exhibit C – MPUD Master Plan, the zoned
building height shall be measured from the first finished floor to allow on-street parking within the principal
structure.
Page 3572 of 3896
Page 4 of 13
C:\Users\ashton_h\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\Y925N6VT\Davis Brookside MPUD (PL-20240010963)(6-27-2025)_.docx
EXHIBIT C
DAVIS BROOKSIDE MPUD
MASTER PLAN
Page 3573 of 3896
Page 5 of 13
C:\Users\ashton_h\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\Y925N6VT\Davis Brookside MPUD (PL-20240010963)(6-27-2025)_.docx
Page 3574 of 3896
Page 6 of 13
C:\Users\ashton_h\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\Y925N6VT\Davis Brookside MPUD (PL-20240010963)(6-27-2025)_.docx
Page 3575 of 3896
Page 7 of 13
C:\Users\ashton_h\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\Y925N6VT\Davis Brookside MPUD (PL-20240010963)(6-27-2025)_.docx
EXHIBIT D
DAVIS BROOKSIDE MPUD
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
PARCEL I:
COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH,
RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF
SAID SECTION 2, EASTERLY 862.10 FEET; THENCE PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE
OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST
QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 2, NORTHERLY 41.51 FEET TO THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-
WAY LINE OF DAVIS BOULEVARD (SR-858) AS ESTABLISHED BY DEED RECORDED
IN DEED BOOK 11. PAGE 59, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, FOR
A PLACE OF BEGINNING OF THIS DESCRIPTION.
THENCE CONTINUING PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST
QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID
SECTION 2, NORTHERLY 200.00 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING NORTHERLY
DEFLECTING 0°39'20" TO THE RIGHT, 270.05 FEET; THENCE PARALLEL WI TH THE
NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID DAVIS BOULEVARD, EASTERLY, DEFLECTING
88°52'30" TO THE RIGHT, 195.45 FEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY, DEFLECTING
90°17'30" TO THE RIGHT, 470.00 FEET TO THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID
DAVIS BOULEVARD; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, WESTERLY
200.00 FEET TO THE PLACE OF BEGINNING.
BEING A PART OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF
SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
PARCEL II:
COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH,
RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF
SAID SECTION 2, EASTERLY 862.10 FEET; THENCE PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE
OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST
QUARTER SAID SECTION 2, NORTHERLY 41.51 FEET TO THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY
LINE OF DAVIS BOULEVARD (SR-858) AS ESTABLISHED BY DEED RECORDED IN
DEED BOOK II. PAGE 59, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE
ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, EASTERLY 200.00 FEET TO THE PLACE
OF BEGINNING OF THIS DESCRIPTION.
THENCE NORTHERLY DEFLECTING 89°42'30" TO THE LEFT 470.00 FEET; THENCE
EASTERLY DEFLECTING 89°42'30" TO THE RIGHT, 70.00 FEET, THENCE SOUTHERLY
DEFLECTING 90°17'30" TO THE RIGHT, 470.00 FEET TO THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY
LINE OF SAID DAVIS BOULEVARD; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY
LINE, WESTERLY 70.00 FEET TO THE PLACE OF BEGINNING,
BEING A PART OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF
SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
Page 3576 of 3896
Page 8 of 13
C:\Users\ashton_h\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\Y925N6VT\Davis Brookside MPUD (PL-20240010963)(6-27-2025)_.docx
PARCEL III:
ALL THAT PART OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE
SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 2, THENCE ALONG
THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 2, NORTH 89°38'05" EAST 662.10 FEET TO THE
WEST LINE OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF
SECTION 2; THENCE ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST
1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 2, NORTH 00°17'20" WEST 40.00 FEET TO THE
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R. 2, PAGE 454, PUBLIC
RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA: THENCE CONTINUE ALONG SAID WEST
LINE OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION
2, NORTH 00°17'20" WEST FOR 202.40 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THOSE
LANDS AS DESCRIBED IN SAID O.R. 2, PAGE 454 AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF
THE PARCEL HEREIN DESCRIBED:
THENCE CONTINUE ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST
1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 2, NORTH 00°17'20" WEST 267.60 FEET TO
THE NORTH LINE OF THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.118, PAGE 361, PUBLIC
RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R. 236, PAGE 681, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE CONTINUE ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF THE EAST 1/2
OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 2, NORTH 00°17'20"
WEST 160.26 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF BROOKSIDE SUBDIVISION, UNIT 3, PLAT
NO. 2, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 3, PAGE
99, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTH
LINE OF BROOKSIDE SUBDIVISION NORTH 89°37'20" EAST 100.00 FEET TO THE EAST
LINE OF THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN SAID O.R. BOOK 236, PAGE 681; THENCE
SOUTH 00°17'20" EAST AND PARALLEL WITH WEST SAID LINE OF THE EAST 1/2 OF
THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 2, A DISTANCE OF 159.53
FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN SAID O.R. 118, PAGE 361;
THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN SAID O.R. 118,
PAGE 361, NORTH 89°12'16" EAST 103.10 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF THOSE LANDS
DESCRIBED IN SAID O.R. 118, PAGE 361; THENCE ALONG SAID EAST LINE, SOUTH
00°22'00" WEST 267.97 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN
SAID O.R. BOOK 2, PAGE 454; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH LINE SOUTH 89°18'29"
WEST 200.00 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF
THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 2, AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL
HEREIN DESCRIBED.
BEING A PART OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST
1/4 OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA;
Page 3577 of 3896
Page 9 of 13
C:\Users\ashton_h\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\Y925N6VT\Davis Brookside MPUD (PL-20240010963)(6-27-2025)_.docx
PARCEL IV:
THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF
THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER AND THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST
QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER; BOTH LYING AND BEING IN SECTION 2,
TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; EXCEPTING
THEREFROM THE FOLLOWING PARCELS OF LAND:
1. LANDS DESCRIBED IN OR BOOK 2, PAGE 454, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER
COUNTY FLORIDA;
2. LANDS DESCRIBED IN OR BOOK 118, PAGE 361, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER
COUNTY FLORIDA;
3. LANDS DESCRIBED IN OR BOOK 236, PAGE 681, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER
COUNTY FLORIDA;
4. ANY PORTION OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE FOREGOING LEGAL
DESCRIPTION EAST OF THE WEST LINE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN O.R.
BOOK 233, PAGE 228, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
5. DAVIS BOULEVARD DESCRIBED IN RIGHT OF WAY DEED RECORDED IN DEED
BOOK 11, PAGE 59, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
PARCEL V:
A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST
QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH,
RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE SPECIFICALLY
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE
SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP
50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SAID POINT BEING NORTH
89°38'10" EAST DISTANCE 662.10 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID
SECTION 2; THENCE NORTH 0°16'20" WEST, ALONG THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF
THE SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE
SOUTHWEST QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 242.25 FEET TO A CONCRETE MONUMENT;
THENCE NORTH 89°16'10" EAST 200 FEET TO A CONCRETE MONUMENT; THENCE
SOUTH 0°16'20" EAST AND PARALLEL TO THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID
SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST
QUARTER, 243.53 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SAID SECTION;
THENCE SOUTH 89°38'10" WEST, ALONG SAID SECTION LINE, 200 FEET TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPTING THEREFROM A STRIP OF LAND DEEDED BY
NAPLES LAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY TO THE COUNTY OF COLLIER FOR
HIGHWAY PURPOSES AS RECORDED IN DEED BOOK 11, PAGE 59, PUBLIC RECORDS
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
Page 3578 of 3896
Page 10 of 13
C:\Users\ashton_h\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\Y925N6VT\Davis Brookside MPUD (PL-20240010963)(6-27-2025)_.docx
EXHIBIT E
DAVIS BROOKSIDE MPUD
LIST OF DEVIATIONS
1. Deviation from LDC Section 4.05.04 G. Table 17 – Parking Space Requirements,
specifically for multi-family dwellings, which allows small-scale recreation facilities that
are accessory to a multi-family project and intended only for the residents of that project,
exclusive of golf courses/clubhouses, may be computed at 50 percent of normal
requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are not within 300 feet of the
recreation facilities and at 25 percent of normal requirements where the majority of the
dwelling units are within 300 feet of the recreation facilities to instead allow recreation
facilities parking requirements to be zero (0) when structurally part of the principal multi-
family structure.
2. Deviation from LDC section 4.02.05 B.1. – Specific Design Standards for Waterfront Lots,
which states “waterfront lands along which a bulkhead line has been established, buildings
may be erected out to, but not beyond, the bulkhead line.” to instead allow roofed and
enclosed balconies to encroach a maximum of 5 feet beyond the bulkhead line in the
location identified within Exhibit C of the MPUD and as depicted on Exhibit C-2 of the
MPUD – Building Height Exhibit.
3. Deviation from LDC section 3.05.07 H.3.a. – Required Setbacks to Preserves, which states
“All principal structures shall have a minimum 25-foot setback from the boundary of any
preserve.” to instead allow principal structures to have 20-foot setback from the boundary
of the on-site preserve.
Page 3579 of 3896
Page 11 of 13
C:\Users\ashton_h\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\Y925N6VT\Davis Brookside MPUD (PL-20240010963)(6-27-2025)_.docx
EXHIBIT F
DAVIS BROOKSIDE MPUD
LIST OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS
The purpose of this section is to set forth the development commitments for the development of
this project.
A. GENERAL
1. One entity (hereinafter the Managing Entity) shall be responsible for MPUD
monitoring until close-out of the MPUD, and this entity shall also be responsible
for satisfying all MPUD commitments until close-out of the MPUD. At the time of
this MPUD approval, the Managing Entity is Project Brookside Developments LP.
Should the Managing Entity desire to transfer the monitoring and commitments to
a successor entity, then it must provide a copy of a legally binding document, to be
approved for legal sufficiency by the County Attorney. After such approval, the
Managing Entity will be released from its obligations upon written approval of the
transfer by County staff, and the successor entity shall become the Managing Entity.
As Owner and Developer sell off tracts, the Managing Entity shall provide written
notice to the County that includes an acknowledgment of the commitment required
by the MPUD by the new owner and the new owner’s agreement to comply with
the Commitments through the Managing Entity, but the Managing Entity will not
be relieved of its responsibility under this Section. When the MPUD is closed out,
then the Managing Entity is no longer responsible for the monitoring and
fulfillment of MPUD commitments.
2. Issuance of a development permit by a county does not in any way create any rights
on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and
does not create any liability on the part of the county for issuance of the permit if
the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligation imposed by
a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or
federal law. (Section 125.022, FS)
3. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before
commencement of the development.
B. TRANSPORTATION
1. The maximum total daily trip generation for the MPUD shall not exceed 50 two-
way PM peak hour net trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip
generation rates in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision
plat approval.
2. At time of Plat or SDP, the owner of Tract R will convey an access easement to the
owner of Tract M so that it is not landlocked.
Page 3580 of 3896
Page 12 of 13
C:\Users\ashton_h\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\Y925N6VT\Davis Brookside MPUD (PL-20240010963)(6-27-2025)_.docx
C. UTILITIES
1. At the time of application for subdivision Plans and Plat (PPL) and/or Site
Development Plan (SDP) approval, as the case may be, offsite improvements and/or
upgrades to the wastewater collection/transmission system may be required to
adequately handle the total estimated peak hour flow from the project. Whether or
not such improvements are necessary, and if so, the exact nature of such
improvements and/or upgrades shall be determined by the County Manager or
Designee during PPL or SDP review. Such improvement and/or upgrades as may
be necessary shall be permitted and installed at the developer's expense and may be
required to be in place prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any portion
or phase of the development that triggers the need for such improvements and/or
upgrades.
2. The Davis Brookside MPUD is located within the City of Naples potable water
services area. The City of Naples Utilities Department has verified that there is
adequate potable water capacity to serve this project. Prior to approval of a
subdivision plat or SDP, the Developer shall provide written documentation that the
development plans for the plat or SDP, as the case may be, have been reviewed and
approved by the City of Naples Utility Department with respect to the provision of
potable water service to the project.
D. ENVIRONMENTAL
1. Native vegetation preservation will be located on-site, as depicted on the Master
Plan.
E. MARINA (TRACT M)
1. The Owner, its successors or assigns, will ensure that access to/from Brookside
residents’ dock is not impeded and that the dock/pier structures associated with the
39 existing wet slips along the southern shoreline of the subject property will not
be extended any further north into the marina basin.
2. The Owner, its successors or assigns, will ensure that Freedom Boat Club installs
two cameras to monitor the marina basin no later than the date of completed of the
installation of the 73 additional wet slips in the western basin, at no cost to the
County or the Brookside residents.
3. The Owner, its successors or assigns, will offer to install a third camera on the
property at 1736 Harbor Lane (to monitor vessel activity entering and exiting Rock
Creek), subject to the property owner’s consent and at no cost to the County or
Brookside residents. If the owner of 1736 Harbor Lane accepts the offer and
consents, the camera will be installed no later than the date of completion of the
installation of the 73 additional wet slips in the western basin.
Page 3581 of 3896
Page 13 of 13
C:\Users\ashton_h\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\Y925N6VT\Davis Brookside MPUD (PL-20240010963)(6-27-2025)_.docx
4. The Owner, its successors or assigns, will ensure that Freedom Boat Club sends a
manned vessel to the entrance of Rock Creek to monitor activity at anticipated high
use times, such as holiday weekends or during water events such as the “Great Dock
Canoe Races”.
5. The Owner will offer 10 additional cameras for donation to waterfront property
owners along Harbor Lane, on a first come/first serve basis, at no cost to the County
or the Brookside residents, no later than the date of completion of the installation
of the 73 additional wet slips in the western basin.
6. The Owner will designate and reserve one wet slip to a marine law enforcement
vessel.
7. Liveaboards are prohibited from mooring at wet slips or anchoring in the canal or
marina basin.
8. Personal watercraft (e.g., Jet Skis, Sea-Doos, WaveRunners, etc.) are prohibited
from mooring at wet slips or anchoring in the canal or marina basin.
9. The maximum number of boat wet slips shall not exceed 120.
10. Each wet slip is limited to one boat.
Page 3582 of 3896
Bayshore CRA Office: 3335 Tamiami Trail E, Unit 102, Naples, Florida 34112
Phone: 239-252-8844
Online: www.bayshorecra.com
March 06, 2025, Meeting Minutes
BAYSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BOARD
MINUTES OF THE March 06, 2025, MEETING
The meeting of the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Local Redevelopment Advisory Board was
called to order by Chairman, Maurice Guiterrez, at 6:01 p.m.
I. Meeting Called to Order: Meeting called to order by Maurice Guiterrez @ 6:01pm.
II. Roll Call: Advisory Board Members Present: Steve Rigsbee, Maurice Gutierrez, Al
Schantzen, James Talano, Kristin Hood, Mike Sherman and Sam Saad Jr., Ron Fowle,
Jr. Excused Absence, Bonnie Hawley
Staff present in Person:
John Dunnuck, CRA Director
Shirley Garcia, CRA/MSTU Manager
Tami Scott, CRA/MSTU Project Manager
Kizzie Fowler, Intern
III. Invocation & Pledge of Allegiance
Maurice Guiterrez led the Pledge of Allegiance
IV. Adoption of Agenda:
Motion made by Al Schantzen to accept the agenda; second by James Talano;
approved unanimously. 7-0
V. Public to be Heard (Non-Agenda Items)
a. Branimir Brankov resident of Danford St. requested that staff add as a discussion
item on April 1, CRA public meeting a review and discussion about the Clerk’s
March Newsletter regarding Bayview Park because he read the article as being
completely different from the discussion with the City of Naples and the CRA
Board and since staff did not have an opportunity to read the newsletter with its
content regarding Bayview Park we asked for a consensus to add as an agenda item.
The Advisory Board agreed to add it but requested the article ahead of time.
VI. Approval of Consent Agenda:
CRA Action: Motion made by Al Schantzen to accept the agenda; second by James
Talano; approved unanimously 7-0
VII. County Agencies and Presentations:
Page 3583 of 3896
Bayshore CRA Office: 3335 Tamiami Trail E, Unit 102, Naples, Florida 34112
Phone: 239-252-8844
Online: www.bayshorecra.com
a. Public Safety Report by Corporal Spartz:
Corporal Spartz provided updates on tracking speeders in the community.
Corporal Spartz stated that there is a heavy presence of law enforcement in the
community to help combat speeders. Corporal Spartz noted the presence of law
enforcement is helping to decrease number of speeders and accidents throughout
the county. Corporal Spartz asked if there were any question, he would gladly
answer them.
b. Collier County Wastewater Matt Collins:
Matt Collins did not have any updates at the time; however, he asked if there are
any questions he will answer.
c. Collier County Code Enforcement, Adam Collier E. Naples Supervisor
Adam Collier noted that code enforcement has been getting a high volume of calls
for numerous issues throughout the county.
Adam Collier noted that code enforcement has issued a notice of violation to
Rebecca’s for having valet on a privately owned vacant lot next to her business,
which is a violation for both the property and business owner.
d. Brookside Marina MPUD Ellen Summers, Bowman Consulting
Ellen Summers provided information on the Brookside Marina project and was
asking for support from the CRA board for this project. Ms. Summers noted the
construction for this project will be located on the northside of Davis Blvd. and
the development will be an urban residence with mix use. Ms. Summers noted the
rezoning for the development was approved in 2023, as a mix use property. Ms.
Summers referenced the enhanced landscaping.
Kristin Hood asked if restaurants will be open to the public?
Mrs. Summers replied, no, only for the residence. Mrs. Summers also noted that
there will be designated parking spaces for the residences.
Mrs. Summers noted the project will not have any connection to wastewater, and
there will be no stores or offices on the property.
Kristin Hood had concerns about the traffic as there are already five projects in
progress near Brookside Marina project.
John Dunnuck noted the Brookside Marina has low density and is a great project
for the community.
CRA Action: Motion made by Maurice Guiterrez to support project and
requested they address any community concerns; second by Sam Saad; Al
Schantzen thinks it’s best to wait until after the development meet with the
community for a schedule neighborhood informational meeting on March 24,
2025, before voting. Passed 6-1
Page 3584 of 3896
Bayshore CRA Office: 3335 Tamiami Trail E, Unit 102, Naples, Florida 34112
Phone: 239-252-8844
Online: www.bayshorecra.com
e. Development Report by Laura DeJohn, Johnson Engineering
Laura DeJohn noted that there was an administrative request for a variance for a
fence placed on Kirktwood Ave. Ms. DeJohn noted that there will be a new car
sales business on 2281 Lindwood Ave. and to expect variance to go higher that
has already been approved.
VIII. Old Business:
a. 17 Acre Boardwalk Update
Tami Scott discussed the 17-acre boardwalk has been in progress for five weeks.
Ms. Scott noted that exotics has been removed and four acres has been
completed. Mrs. Scott noted the construction has moved to the Northern portion
of the project. Mrs. Scott noted that that big wood chips has been left on site.
Mrs. Scott noted that 4 acres found of concrete construction debris. Mrs. Scott
noted the CRA has received first payment of $60,000.
Mrs. Scott noted that she had a great meeting with Naples Botanical Garden
regarding getting the mulch that was left on site.
Mrs. Scott noted that there is a 12-month project in progress in which she will
start having bi-weekly meeting with contractors.
IX. New Business
a. FY25/26 Goals and Priorities Worksheet
Shirley Garcia provided project information on the worksheet with updated costs
and expenditures to date. Will provide updates as needed.
X. Financials- Project Update
a. Mr. Dunnuck noted that the financials are in line with the projects, and he will
provide a road map for more projects coming online.
XI. Advisory and Communication
a. Public Comments
None.
b. Correspondence
1. Cleanup- Great American Cleanup- March 22, 2025 & April 8, 2025
2. St. Matthews Justin Village Article
3. South Bayshore Dr. Neighborhood Clean-Up April 7, 2025-10am-2pm
Page 3585 of 3896
Bayshore CRA Office: 3335 Tamiami Trail E, Unit 102, Naples, Florida 34112
Phone: 239-252-8844
Online: www.bayshorecra.com
XII. Next Meeting: April 1, 2025 @ 6pm. Tuesday BCC Boardroom
XIII. Adjournment: Meeting adjourned at 7:53 p.m.
_______________________________________
Chairman, Maurice Gutierrez
Page 3586 of 3896
City of Naples
PUBLIC WORKS
UTILITIES
TELEPHONE (239) 213-4745 ● FACSIMILE (239) 213-4799
380 RIVERSIDE CIRCLE ● NAPLES, FLORIDA 34102
September 3, 2024
Jeffrey Anez-Zubieta, E.I.
J.R. Evans Engineering, P.A.
9961 Interstate Commerce Drive, Suite 230
Fort Myers, Florida 33913
Phone: (239) 405-9148
Subject: Potable Water Service Availability for Proposed 67-Unit Multi-Family Residential
Project
Site Addresses:
1933 Davis Blvd, Naples, FL 34104 - Folio #: 00386320006
1949 Davis Blvd, Naples, FL 34104 - Folio #: 00386160004
2015 Davis Blvd, Naples, FL 34104 - Folio #: 00386280007
(sent via email: janez@jreeng.com)
Dear Mr. Anez-Zubieta:
We are in receipt of your request for a Letter of Availability for potable water service (domestic,
fire, and/or irrigation use) for a proposed 67-unit multi-family residential project, received via
email on August 15, 2024. This office has reviewed the subject site addresses for available
potable water service. Based on the referenced information and review, this office confirms the
following:
1. The subject properties are located within the City of Naples potable water service area.
2. The City of Naples has adequate treatment plant capacity for the proposed project.
3. The proposed improvements must meet current City of Naples Utilities Standards and
must be submitted to the Utilities Department for review and approval.
4. Should the scope of proposed project change to impact City utility services, the project’s
engineer of record shall remain responsible to contact the City for appropriate reviews
and analysis.
This letter does not imply or guarantee that adequate potable water distribution main facilities of
sufficient size and capacity exist at the property; such utilities as may be needed for new site
development shall remain the developer’s responsibility to design, permit and construct.
Page 3587 of 3896
Ethics above all else ... Service to others before self ... Quality in all that we do.
Page 2 of 2
Based on the above, this office has no objections to this project subject to appropriate reviews by
all utility service providers (including the City of Naples), Collier County, and the Fire District.
Should you have any questions or require any additional information or action from this office,
please do not hesitate to call this office at (239) 213-4713 or e-mail mbaines@naplesgov.com.
Sincerely,
Michelle Baines, P.E
Public Works Deputy Director – Utilities
Cc: Bob Middleton, Public Works Director
Annette Keeney, Utilities Permit Coordinator
Page 3588 of 3896
Page 3589 of 3896
Page 3590 of 3896
Page 3591 of 3896
Page 3592 of 3896
Page 3593 of 3896
Page 3594 of 3896
Page 3595 of 3896
Page 3596 of 3896
Page 3597 of 3896
Page 3598 of 3896
Page 3599 of 3896
Page 3600 of 3896
Page 3601 of 3896
Page 3602 of 3896
Page 3603 of 3896
Page 3604 of 3896
Page 3605 of 3896
Page 3606 of 3896
Page 3607 of 3896
Page 3608 of 3896
Page 3609 of 3896
Page 3610 of 3896
Page 3611 of 3896
Page 3612 of 3896
Page 3613 of 3896
Page 3614 of 3896
Page 3615 of 3896
Page 3616 of 3896
Page 3617 of 3896
Page 3618 of 3896
Page 3619 of 3896
Page 3620 of 3896
Page 3621 of 3896
Page 3622 of 3896
Page 3623 of 3896
Page 3624 of 3896
Page 3625 of 3896
Page 3626 of 3896
Page 3627 of 3896
Page 3628 of 3896
Page 3629 of 3896
Page 3630 of 3896
Page 3631 of 3896
Page 3632 of 3896
Page 3633 of 3896
Page 3634 of 3896
Page 3635 of 3896
Page 3636 of 3896
Page 3637 of 3896
Page 3638 of 3896
Page 3639 of 3896
Page 3640 of 3896
Page 3641 of 3896
Page 3642 of 3896
Page 3643 of 3896
Page 3644 of 3896
Page 3645 of 3896
Page 3646 of 3896
Page 3647 of 3896
Page 3648 of 3896
Page 3649 of 3896
Page 3650 of 3896
Page 3651 of 3896
Page 3652 of 3896
Page 3653 of 3896
Page 3654 of 3896
Page 3655 of 3896
Page 3656 of 3896
Page 3657 of 3896
Page 3658 of 3896
Page 3659 of 3896
Page 3660 of 3896
Page 3661 of 3896
Page 3662 of 3896
Page 3663 of 3896
Page 3664 of 3896
Page 3665 of 3896
Page 3666 of 3896
Page 3667 of 3896
Page 3668 of 3896
Page 3669 of 3896
Page 3670 of 3896
Page 3671 of 3896
Page 3672 of 3896
Page 3673 of 3896
Page 3674 of 3896
Page 3675 of 3896
Page 3676 of 3896
Page 3677 of 3896
Page 3678 of 3896
Page 3679 of 3896
Page 3680 of 3896
Page 3681 of 3896
Page 3682 of 3896
Page 3683 of 3896
Page 3684 of 3896
Page 3685 of 3896
Page 3686 of 3896
Page 3687 of 3896
Page 3688 of 3896
Page 3689 of 3896
Page 3690 of 3896
Page 3691 of 3896
Page 3692 of 3896
Page 3693 of 3896
Page 3694 of 3896
Page 3695 of 3896
Page 3696 of 3896
Page 3697 of 3896
Page 3698 of 3896
Page 3699 of 3896
Page 3700 of 3896
Page 3701 of 3896
Page 3702 of 3896
Page 3703 of 3896
Page 3704 of 3896
Page 3705 of 3896
Page 3706 of 3896
Page 3707 of 3896
Page 3708 of 3896
Page 3709 of 3896
Page 3710 of 3896
Page 3711 of 3896
Page 3712 of 3896
Page 3713 of 3896
Page 3714 of 3896
Page 3715 of 3896
Page 3716 of 3896
Page 3717 of 3896
Page 3718 of 3896
Page 3719 of 3896
Page 3720 of 3896
Page 3721 of 3896
Page 3722 of 3896
Page 3723 of 3896
Page 3724 of 3896
Page 3725 of 3896
Page 3726 of 3896
Page 3727 of 3896
Page 3728 of 3896
Page 3729 of 3896
Page 3730 of 3896
Page 3731 of 3896
Page 3732 of 3896
Page 3733 of 3896
Page 3734 of 3896
Page 3735 of 3896
Page 3736 of 3896
Page 3737 of 3896
Page 3738 of 3896
Page 3739 of 3896
Page 3740 of 3896
Page 3741 of 3896
Page 3742 of 3896
Page 3743 of 3896
Page 3744 of 3896
Page 3745 of 3896
Page 3746 of 3896
Page 3747 of 3896
Page 3748 of 3896
Page 3749 of 3896
Page 3750 of 3896
Page 3751 of 3896
Page 3752 of 3896
Page 3753 of 3896
Page 3754 of 3896
Page 3755 of 3896
Page 3756 of 3896
Page 3757 of 3896
Page 3758 of 3896
Page 3759 of 3896
Page 3760 of 3896
Page 3761 of 3896
Page 3762 of 3896
Page 3763 of 3896
Page 3764 of 3896
Page 3765 of 3896
Page 3766 of 3896
Page 3767 of 3896
Page 3768 of 3896
Page 3769 of 3896
Page 3770 of 3896
Page 3771 of 3896
Page 3772 of 3896
Page 3773 of 3896
Page 3774 of 3896
Page 3775 of 3896
Page 3776 of 3896
Davis Brookside MPUD
Rezone
Neighborhood Information Meeting
Monday, March 24, 2025
PL20240010963
Page 3777 of 3896
Project Team
•Applicant – Project Brookside Developments, LP
•Gavin Gillette, Manager, Gillette Development
•Daniel Zuvia, Senior Development Manager, Gillette Development
•Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq., Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester (CYK)
•Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP, Senior Vice President, Bowman
•Ellen Summers, AICP, Lead Planner, Bowman
•Norm Trebilcock, AICP, PTOE, PE, Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, Inc.
•Chris Mitchell, PE, J.R. Evans Engineering, P.A.
•Alvaro Yusty, PE, J.R. Evans Engineering, P.A.
•Jeremy Sterk, Earth Tech Environmental, LLC
2
Page 3778 of 3896
General Information
•Required Neighborhood Information Meeting (must be held after 1 st round of staff review
& prior to Planning Commission public hearing).
•Public hearings (CCPC & BCC) have not been scheduled.
•We offer Zoom participation as a courtesy. On occasion there have been issues associated
with this technology. We have worked hard to avoid such issues, arriving hours before this
meeting to be sure everything is functioning properly.
•We are also recording this meeting (both audio and video). After the team presentation,
we will open the meeting for comments and questions. You must use the microphone,
identify yourself, and indicate where you live.
•No comments or questions will be recognized if not made on the microphone.
•We will be happy to make this recording available to anyone. You can email us at NIM-
SWFL@bowman.com to request a link or to ask any additional questions you may have.
3
Page 3779 of 3896
Location 4
Page 3780 of 3896
Future Land Use
5
Page 3781 of 3896
Zoning
6
Page 3782 of 3896
Existing Zoning
•C-4 Zoning: intended to provide the opportunity for the most diverse
types of commercial activities delivering goods and services, including
entertainment and recreational attractions, at a larger scale than the C-1
through C-3 zoning districts.
•C-4 uses may include (to name a few): Automotive services; Automotive
vehicle and equipment dealers; Carwashes; Drycleaning plants; Eating
and drinking establishments; Equipment rental and leasing; Gasoline
Fueling Stations; Etc.
•Gateway Triangle Zoning Overlay intends to “…encourage
revitalization of the Gateway Triangle area, promote traditional urban
design…provide appropriate landscaping and buffering…”
7
Page 3783 of 3896
History of Property
•Several of the subject property parcels have been utilized as a
marina, that included both wet- and dry-boat slips, for decades.
•Many of the existing commercial structures have been in
existence for decades.
•The submerged lands portion of the site was rezoned in 2023
from RSF-4 to the C-4 Zoning District, by way of Ordinance 2023-
42.
•Ordinance 2023-42 included a list of conditions that have been
carried over to the proposed MPUD.
8
Page 3784 of 3896
Request
•Rezone the property from the C-4 / C-4-GTZO-MXD zoning district to
the Davis Brookside Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD)
zoning district, remaining within the GTZO-MXD.
•MPUD will permit a maximum of 66 multi-family dwelling units and a
maximum 120-boat slip marina.
•The proposed density is permitted based on the conversion of
commercial density bonus that allows for up to 16 dwelling units per acre
for every one acre of commercial zoning that is converted to residential
zoning
9
Page 3785 of 3896
Permitted Uses
•Tract R:
•Multi-family dwelling units, not to exceed 66 units
•Associated accessory uses: recreational uses and facilities, dining facilities, swimming
pools, fitness centers, and clubhouse/recreation buildings
•Tract M (consistent with Ord. 23-42):
•Marina, not to exceed 120 wet slips
•Water Transportation of Passengers (except airboats/swamp buggy rides).
•Water Transportation Services, limited to boat cleaning, boat hiring (except pleasure), boat
livery (except pleasure), commercial boat rental, and chartering of commercial boats.
•Amusement and Recreation Services, limited to recreational/pleasure boat rentals,
operation of charter or party fishing boats, canoe/kayak/rowboat rentals, houseboat
rentals (except not for liveaboard purposes within the MPUD), and tourist guides.
10
Page 3786 of 3896
Page 3787 of 3896
Development Standards
12
Page 3788 of 3896
Developer Commitments
•Transportation:
•A maximum total daily trip generation for the MPUD shall not exceed 50 two-way PM
Peak Hour Net Trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in
effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat approval
•Marina (Tract M): consistent with existing zoning ordinance (Ord.23-42)
•The Owner, its successors or assigns, will ensure that access to/from Brookside residents’
dock is not impeded and that the dock/pier structures associated with the 39 existing wet
slips along the southern shoreline of the subject property will not be extended any further
north into the marina basin.
•The Owner, its successors or assigns, will ensure that Freedom Boat Club installs two
cameras to monitor the marina basin no later than the date of completed of the
installation of the 73 additional wet slips in the western basin, at no cost to the County or
the Brookside residents.
13
Page 3789 of 3896
Developer Commitments (Tract M continued)
•The Owner, its successors or assigns, will offer to install a third camera on the property at 1736 Harbor Lane
(to monitor vessel activity entering and exiting Rock Creek), subject to the property owner’s consent and at no
cost to the County or Brookside residents. If the owner of 1736 Harbor Lane accepts the offer and consents,
the camera will be installed no later than the date of completion of the installation of the 73 additional wet
slips in the western basin.
•The Owner, its successors or assigns, will ensure that Freedom Boat Club sends a manned vessel to the
entrance of Rock Creek to monitor activity at anticipated high use times, such as holiday weekends or during
water events such as the “Great Dock Canoe Races”.
•The Owner will offer 10 additional cameras for donation to waterfront property owners along Harbor Lane, on
a first come/first serve basis, at no cost to the County or the Brookside residents, no later than the date of
completion of the installation of the 73 additional wet slips in the western basin.
•The Owner will designate and reserve one wet slip to a marine law enforcement vessel.
•Liveaboards are prohibited from mooring at wet slips or anchoring in the canal or marina basin.
•Personal watercraft (e.g., Jet Skis, Sea-Doos, WaveRunners, etc.) are prohibited from mooring at wet slips or
anchoring in the canal or marina basin.
•Each wet slip is limited to one boat.
14
Page 3790 of 3896
Architectural Renderings
15
Architectural renderings are conceptual in nature.
Page 3791 of 3896
Architectural Renderings
16
Architectural renderings are conceptual in nature.
Page 3792 of 3896
Architectural Renderings
17
Architectural renderings are conceptual in nature.
Page 3793 of 3896
Architectural Renderings
18
Architectural renderings are conceptual in nature.
Page 3794 of 3896
Process to Amend the GMP and Rezone to PUD
•Receive staff comments and respond to staff comments.
•Hold a Neighborhood Meeting – this meeting.
•Receive a “finding of sufficiency” from staff.
•Hearing before the Collier County Planning Commission – the planning commission makes a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners.
•Hearing before the Board of County Commissioners. The board decides to approve, approve with conditions, or deny.
Page 3795 of 3896
Questions?
20
Page 3796 of 3896
Page 3797 of 3896
Page 3798 of 3896
Page 3799 of 3896
Page 3800 of 3896