Ordinance 2008-37
ORDINANCE NO. 08--2.L
ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
OMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
STABLISHING AND NAMING THE NAPLES RESERVE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT; DESCRIBING THE
EXTERNAL BOUNDARIES OF THE DISTRICT; NAMING THE
INITIAL MEMBERS OF THE DISTRICT'S BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS; PROVIDING STATUTORY PROVISIONS AND
COMMITMENTS GOVERNING THE DISTRICT; PROVIDING
FOR CONSENT TO SPECIAL POWERS; PROVIDING FOR
CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR
INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Naples Reserve, LLC, has petitioned the Board of County Commissioners
of Collier County, Florida, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, to establish the
NAPLES RESERVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (District); and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners, after proper published notice has
conducted a public hearing on the petition and determined the following with respect to the
factors to be considered in Section 190.005(l)(e) Florida Statutes, as required by Section
190.005(2)( c), Florida Statutes:
I. The petition is complete in that it meets the requirements of Sections 190.005,
Florida Statutes; and all statements contained within the petition are true and
correct.
2. Establishment of the proposed District is not inconsistent with any applicable
element or portion of the local comprehensive plan of Collier County, known as
the Collier County Growth Management Plan, or the State Comprehensive Plan.
r-
3. The area of land within the proposed District is of sufficient size, is suffi'crentl'YCJ
compact, and is sufficiently contiguous to be developable as om: fun'c~ional',-
interrelated community. ..J ..
4. The District is the best alternative available for delivering community~'
development services and facilities to the area that will be serviced by the DfstricC~
5. The community development services and facilities of the District will not be
incompatible with the capacity and uses of existing local and regional community
development services and facilities.
6. The area that will be served by the District is amenable to separate special-district
government; and
Page I of4
WHEREAS, it is the policy of this State, as provided for in Section 190.002(2)(c),
Florida Statutes, that the exercise by any independent district of its powers as set forth by
uniform general law comply with all applicable governmental laws, rules, regulations, and
policies governing planning and permitting of the development to be serviced by the district, to
ensure that neither the establishment nor operation of such district is a development order under
Chapter 380, Florida Statutes, and that the district so established does not have any zoning or
permitting powers governing development; and
WHEREAS, Section 190.004(3), Florida Statutes, provides that all governmental
planning, environmental, and land development laws, regulations, and ordinances apply to all
development of the land within a community development district. Community development
districts do not have the power of a local government to adopt a comprehensive plan, building
code, or land development code, as those terms are defined in the Local Government
Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act. A district shall take no action
which is inconsistent with applicable comprehensive plans, ordinances, or regulations of the
applicable local general-purpose government.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION ONE:
AUTHORITY FOR ORDINANCE
.
This Ordinance is adopted pursuant to Section 190.005(2), Florida Statutes, and other
applicable provisions oflaw governing county ordinances.
SECTION TWO: ESTABLISHMENT OF THE NAPLES RESERVE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
The Naples Reserve Community Development District is hereby established within the
boundaries of the real property described in Exhibit "A," attached hereto and incorporated by
reference herein.
SECTION THREE: DISTRICT NAME
The community development district herein established shall henceforth be known as the
"Naples Reserve Community Development District."
Page 2 of 4
SECTION FOUR: DESIGNATION OF INITIAL BOARD MEMBERS
The following five persons are herewith designated to be the initial members of the Board
of Supervisors:
I.
Anthony Salce
3292 Green Dolphin Lane
Naples, FL 34102
4.
Jay Malamphy
11521 Longshore Way W.
Naples, FL 34110
2.
Mark Lazar
489 Raven Way
Naples, FL 34110
5.
Tom Andrea
1190 26th Avenue N.
Naples, FL 34103
3. Don Mazzarella
649 Bowline Drive
Naples, FL 34102
SECTION FIVE: STATUTORY PROVISIONS GOVERNING THE DISTRICT
The Naples Reserve Community Development District shall be governed by the
provisions of Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, and all other applicable general and local law.
SECTION SIX:
CONSENT TO SPECIAL POWERS
Upon the effective date of this Ordinance, the Naples Reserve Community Development
District will be duly and legally authorized to exist and exercise all of its general powers as
limited by law; and has the right to seek consent from the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners for the grant of authority to exercise special powers in accordance with Section
190.012(2), Florida Statutes.
SECTION SEVEN: PETITIONER'S COMMITMENTS
The adoption of this Ordinance is predicated upon the following: that the Petitioner, its
successors and assigns, shall (I) elect one resident of the District to the five member Board of
Supervisors at such time as residents begin occupying homes in the District, and (2) record a
Notice of Assessments containing the specific terms and conditions of any special assessments
imposed to secure bonds issued by the District, which notice shall be recorded immediately after
any such bond issuance. The Board shall retain any and all rights and remedies available at law
and in equity to enforce Petitioner's Commitments against Petitioner, its successors and assigns.
Page 3 of 4
SECTION EIGHT: CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY
In the event this Ordinance conflicts with any other ordinance of Collier County or other
applicable law, the more restrictive shall apply. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held
invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a
separate, distinct, and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portion.
SECTION NINE: INCLUSION IN CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES
The provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Code of Laws
and Ordinances of Collier County, Florida. The sections of the Ordinances may be renumbered
or relettered to accomplish such, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section,"
"article," or any other appropriate word.
SECTION TEN:
EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Florida Department of State.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida, this .;J (t no<. day of 1d 1- ' 2008.
ATTES1:~DWIGfiT E. BROCK
,...,.,,' . - --.... . l?.('
-;'-, ~
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
.
.~.
By::'
;; 'j'. .,'
Att.st :J'to <:WIl.,
i '~1 !t,~r'.~,1v4l~:, '. "')
~ .... ,- ."
By:
TOM
Approved as to form
and legal sufficiency:
LD)fI~ 1 -' if{) . ~~-./J:U/u!.-l'l~
MaJjo'e tudent-Slirhng U
Assistant County Attorney
Page 4 of 4
Exhibit "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
(NAPLESR(SERVE)
ALL OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARnCUlARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;
~ENCE N,00'40'55"E FOR 2,749.79 FEET TO THE WEST QUARTER (1/4) CORNER Of SAID SECTION I;
THENCE N.OO'40'07~E. fOR 2,801.80 fEET, TO ~E NOR~WEST CORNER at SAID SECTION 1;
THENCE S.89']6'17"E. FOfl 2,690.60 FEET, TO ~E NOR~ QUARTER (1/4) CORNER Of SAID SECTION 1;
THENCE N.89'57'27"E FOR 2,708,42 fEET, TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER Of SAID SEC'T10N 1;
THENCE S.DO'19'59'"W. FOR 2,754.12 FEET. TO THE EAST QUARTER (1/4) CORNER OF 5,01,10 SECTION 1:
THENCE S_OO'19'23"W. FOR 2,76],64 fEET, TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER Of SAID SECTION 1:
THENCE S.89'SS'32"W. FOR 2,715,41 fEET, TO THE SOUTH QUARTER (1/4) CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1;
THENCE S.89'55'38'"W. fOR 2,716.33 FEET. TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING Of THE PARCEL DESCRIBED H[REIN.
CONTAINING 29,971.643 SOIJARE FEET OR 688.1 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
SUBJ[CT TO [ASEMENTS AND R[STRICTIONS OFRECORO
BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE SOUTH UNE Of THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (1/4) OF SECTWN I AS BEING S89'SS']8"W, FLORIDA STATE PLANE COORDINATE
SYSTEM, EAST lONE, 1983 NORTH AMERICAN OATUl.4. (1999) AOJUSTl.4ENT.
N
W+E
sei'JUn26ag,6JlII
S89' '1Z"E2aiO.45P
S6i~L~l.l
S8i~T23.W 27Oft.43 P
s
I
,
I
I
:~ I
~~ I
I'-l~ I
~~ I
~~ I
I
,
I
I
I
II
,011
"" II
'" I
~f II
~~ II
~ ~ II
I I /
II
:: L--/
Ly;;
NAPi1:S
RESERVE
I:
I
I
In
I ~~'
I ::
I €S
IH
,
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
In
I ;;
I ::~
I
, ..
H
I
I
I
I
SECTION 1 TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH,
RANGE 26 EAST
688.1 ACRES+/-
/~
"
I
\
POINT'"
BEGlNNlNlG
----------~---------------
SSi'55'.lJI.W 2na.33 l.l
S6i~5'22.W 2716.4J P
SSi'55'J2"W 2716.41l.l
Se9'5!;'11'"W2716.JOP
rlJbr~a'Y 7. 2008 1006 AM 0\2004\0401250006 Naples Reserve CDO\OOC2 COD C,lobllShm"nl\4012SXOI dwg
nATE CLIENT
FEB. 2008
D\Xl^n<c~
CONSULTING CivilEnginr:.cring
.&. '" ,~ .a. S....".",&_.
SCAl(
1" 1000'
NAPLES RESERVE, LLC.
RY
TITLE:
D,N,
METES & BOUNDS LEGAL DESCRIPTION
;~~ ~~~t~~T 040125.06 ~~~~T[R 1 OF 1 ~lb~B[R 40125X01
~610Wllo...-Parkom.,SuilI200
N.....FbrId&341118
Phant'(238I587-l157fi
FAX: (23ll) 587.QS78
CHEC<W8v
,cC ,wp
51S
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE PURSUANT
TO SECTION 190.005(2), FLORIDA
STATUTES TO ESTABLISH THE
NAPLES RESERVE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
/
PETITION FOR ESTABLISHMENT BY COUNTY
ORDINANCE OF A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
Petitioner, Naples Reserve, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company (the
"Petitioner"), by and through its undersigned attorney, petitions the Board Of
County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida (the "Commission"), to enact an
ordinance establishing on the property proposed in this Petition the Naples Reserve
Community Development District (the "District") as a community development
district under and pursuant to the Uniform Community Development District Act of
1980, codified as Chapter 190 Florida Statutes, as amended and supplemented (the
"Act"). In support of this Petition, Petitioner states as follows:
1. Petitioner's principal place of business is at 515 Terracina Way,
Naples, Florida 34119.
2. The land area to be serviced by the proposed District is located wholly
within the unincorporated area of Collier County. The land area of the proposed
District is bounded by Picayune State Forest to the north, agricultural lands and
the Walnut Lakes PUD to the south, agricultural and disturbed lands to the east,
and an undeveloped portion of Winding Cypress PUD to the west. A map showing
the location of the land area proposed to be serviced by the District is attached as
Exhibit "1".
1 of 5
3. A metes and bounds legal description of the proposed external
boundaries ofthe District is attached as Exhibit "2". There is no real property
within the proposed boundaries of the District which is to be excluded from the
jurisdiction of the District.
4. Written consent to the establishment ofthe District by the owners of
one hundred percent (100%) of the real property to be included in the land area
proposed to be serviced by the District is attached as Exhibit "3".
5. The five (5) persons designated to serve as the initial members of the
Board of Supervisors ofthe District, all of whom are citizens of the United States
and residents of the State of Florida and who shall serve in that office until replaced
by elected members as provided in the Act, are:
(1) Anthony Salce
3292 Green Dolphin Lane
Naples, FL 34102
(2) Mark Lazar
489 Raven Way
Naples, FL 34110
(3) Don Mazzarella
649 Bowline Drive
Naples, FL 34102
(4) Jay Malamphy
11521 Longshore Way W.
Naples, FL 34119
(5) Tom Andrea
1190 26th Avenue N.
Naples, FL 34103
6. The proposed name of the District is "Naples Reserve Community
Development District."
2 of 5
7. A map of the land area of the proposed District is attached as Exhibit
"4". There are no major trunk water mains, sewer interceptors, utilities or
storm water outfalls on the property within the proposed District.
8. A good faith estimate of the proposed timetable for construction of the
District systems, facilities and services and the estimated costs of constructing the
same, based upon available data which are subject to change, is attached as Exhibit
"5".
9. Collier County (the "County") has adopted its Local Government
Comprehensive Plan (the "County Plan") in accordance with the requirements of
Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. The Plan designates the land area proposed to be
included in the District as Urban - Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Fringe
Subdistrict (310.94 acres) and Agricultural/Rural- Rural Fringe Mixed Use District
(RFMUD) (377.16 acres). A copy of the relevant FLUE map showing this
classification, and also showing the future general distribution, location and extent
of public and private uses of land contemplated by the Plan for the land area
proposed to be serviced by the District is attached as Exhibit "6".
10. A Statement of Estimated Regulatory Costs (SERC") of the
Commission's granting this Petition, in accordance and in compliance with sections
190.005 (1)(a)(8) and 120.541, FS., is attached as Exhibit "7".
11. The District, if established on the proposed property, would not be
inconsistent (and in fact, is consistent) with the policies of any applicable element of
the County Plan and also the State Comprehensive Plan.
12. The land area proposed to be included within the District is of
sufficient size, compactness and contiguity to be developed as one functional,
interrelated community and the District is planned to be developed as such.
13. The creation of the District represents the best alternative available
for delivering the community development services and facilities to the property to
be served by the proposed District.
3 of 5
14. The community development systems, facilities and services to be
provided by the District on the proposed property will supplement, and will not in
any way be incompatible with, existing roads and other local and regional
community development systems, facilities and services on the proposed property..
15. The area proposed to be served by the District is amenable to separate
special district government.
16. As required by the Act, Petitioner will provide full disclosure of
information relating to the public financing of District facilities and the
rnaintenance of District improvements.
17. In support of the factual assertions and conclusions set forth in this
Petition, Petitioner has attached the written pre-filed testimony and affidavits of
those professionals whose testimony is attached as Exhibit 8.
WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests the Commission to:
A. Determine this Petition is complete and in accordance with the
requirements of the Act and direct its staff to notice, as soon as practicable, a local,
public, non-emergency public hearing pursuant to the requirements of Section
190.005(2)(b) and (c) ofthe Act, on the subject of whether to grant this Petition for
the establishment of the proposed District and whether to enact an ordinance
establishing the proposed District;
B. Hold a public hearing in accordance with the Act to consider the
Petition; and
C. Grant this Petition and enact an ordinance to establish the
Naples Reserve Community Development District.
4 of 5
Respectfully submitted this /1 ~ay of Ifla rc. ~
,2008.
By:
ih ~./i7YY ~.
Dona~
Donald A. Pickworth, PA
5150 Tamiami Trail North
Suite 502
Naples, FL 34103
PH: 239-263-8060
Email: picklaw@earthlink.net
Attorney for Petitioner
5 of 5
)
26
25
30
35
36
PROJECT
LOCATION
31
4
2
6
~
7
16
13
Exhibit "1"
D\lT^INCt~on
CONSUL TING Civil Engineering
.&. ....., , .L ... Surveying & Mapping
'^.,
MAY. 2007
N.T.S,
CLIENT:
NAPLES RESERVE, LLC
"'.f,,;
C.l.N.
TITLE:
NAPLES RESERVE RPUD
VICINITY MAP
04-0125.00 ::.V, 1 1 ,,:, 4012500X06
661QWlUaw PalkOrIYe, Suite 200
Naples, Florida 34109
Phone: (239) 597-0575
FAX: (239) 597.0578
, "
D.H.N,
'.~ ' ~(;; ; .... '~I '" J'
/l- \:J'/""I;
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
(NAPLES RESERVE)
ALL OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTlCULARl Y DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;
THENCE N.OO'40'SS"E. FOR 2,749.79 FEET TO THE WEST QUARTER (1/4) CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1:
THENCE N.OO'40'07"E. FOR 2,801.80 FEET. TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTlON 1:
THENCE 5.89'.36'17"[. FOR 2,690.60 FEET, TO THE NORTH,aUARTER (1/4) CORNER OF SAID SECTlON 1:
THENCE N.89'S7'27"E FOR 2,708.42 FEET, TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1;
THENCE S.OO'19'S9"W. FOR 2,764.12 FEET, TO THE EAST QUARTER (1/4) CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1:
THENCE S.OO'19'23"W. FOR 2,763.64 FEET, TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1;
THENCE S.89"SS'32"w, FOR 2,716.41 FEET, TO THE SOUTH QUARTER (1/4) CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1;
THENCE S.89'SS'38"W. FOR 2,716.33 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL DESCRIBED HEREIN.
CONTAINING 29,971,643 SQUARE FEET OR 688.1 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD.
BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (1/4) OF SECTION 1 AS BEING S89"SS'3B"W, FLORIDA STATE PLANE COORDINATE
SYSTEM, EAST ZONE, 1983 NORTH AMERICAN DATUM, (1999) ADJUSTMENT.
I
II
,u II
~~ II
~~ II
NN
:;:~ II
HII
~~ II
II /
II
II \ /
II (./-./
0/
N
'+E
s
POtNT OF
BEGINNINIG
S89'310.1~E 2(190.6.0 M
S89"~6'12"E: 2690.45 P
S89'57'2rW. 27Q6.42 I.l
S69"57'23"W 2708.43 P
I
I
I
I
~~ I
<c!"!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~~
NN
}'-I.:'"
,~
ON
~~
8'g
zz
NAPLES
RESERVE
SECTION 1 TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH.
RANGE 26 EAST
666.1 ACRES+ /-
/~
"\
I
\
~
S89'55'38"W 2716.33 I.l
S89'55'22"W 2716.43 P
S89"55'32"W 2716.41 I.l
S89'55'11"W 2716.30 P
~J:-;H ";<6 _~M C\;(:_:~\04()')'jr;ccr; ,\'(]r:;ito.c> ,'-1<,';("" .-i:n,OOI~'2 CUI) .~()L.I::'nmc,,\4(iI?';XO~'iwq
'FEB. 2008 CLIENT:
0\11 ^ INC.~=tion
CONSULTING Civil Engineering
..&. ...., ,.A. ... Surveying & Mapping
6610 WIllow Park Drtva,&JIte2ClO
Nap/e8,Florida34109
Pf1one: (239) 59H1575
FAX: (239) 597-0578
NAPLES RESERVE, LLC.
EXHIBIT "2"
METES & BOUNDS LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Do" ;~, ~~~:~,\:040125.06 ~'~~~I' 1 01 1 ~:""," 40125X01
';':r,.
'''-1000'
:I?',W", 'n
TITLE:
RY
C1':.C~I--) .:w
O.N,
~) 1 :;
I:
I
I
I 88
JJ
I ~~
Iii
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NN
~~
..
..
0:""
~N
H
~~
gg
JJ
..
~-~.
~."
NN
~~
..
ww
;"'0,
..
~<
AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND CONSENT TO CREATION OF COD
STATE OF FLORIDA)
COUNTY OF COLLIER)
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this ,iJ..day of March, 2008, personally
appeared Anthony Salce, and having been sworn and under oath, deposes and states:
1. Affiant is over the age of twenty-one (21) years, is otherwise sui juris, and has
personal knowledge of the facts asserted herein.
2. Affiant is the managing member of Naples Reserve LLC, a Florida limited liability
company (the "LLC").
3. The LLC is the owner of 100% of that real property located in Collier County,
Florida and described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof (the "Property").
The Property constitutes all of the property to be included in the proposed Naples Reserve
Community Development District and there are no other lands sought to be included in the
District.
4. The Affiant has the authority to execute this Affidavit and the Petition for the
establishment of the Naples Reserve Community Development District (the "District") and to
consent to the inclusion of the Property in the District, and does by this Affidavit so consent.
FURTHER AFFIANT SA YETH NAUGHT.
</O~~~;r" of M,,,h 2008.
~/Anthony &lIte /
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me
Salce, [who is personally known to me]["'hg
identification] .
-f"'-
this '7_ day
J3r8eh~S8e
of March, 20086 by Anthony
as
Notar
My C
NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF FLORJOA
~ Mark A. Lazar
Commission # 00440355
Expires: JUNE 13, 2009
HOi1ded Thru Atlantic Bonding Co., Inc.
f. ~II /1f rr ~
;.
,.. '" f" ~ f'<f'" ,..
;IIIIITlli II'
I.! Iii II I
~!ll -11'li , I
! 11111 I:: il
" ~
: !1I1 !I; !!
i Inl Ii!; Ii li
!i1 ~~ g~!i! ..
, I i~1 ill! II
I IP I " .
n'lllI; Ir
" I .Ii
H! ~Ij 11'1
\ .
IIP!l! I II.
II i Ii ,
! ,
,L J ! . !i
, I .
I
Exhibit "4"
.. JfC. noI'1Ia> NAPLES RESERVE. LLC
AUGU\T2001 I ~lS J/iE
=
o.-<lIiaOO.OO I"-!JIJO'
.012500/'02 AA RPUD MASTER PLAN
_...~;......~ 0"0'<1>
.
I, !
I:
I!
........
.......""-,
I~ ~H~ I
I~! ~; ~,~~
I. ~ 'l:; ~
H ~
d ~ it;
~ ill ~
~~
~ ~ Ii
H IIi liil jl
=~ p., 7Jr
':~ '"
Ii ~ ~ ~ I
11~ ~ I .
~ 1.+.
liedi .
~~:~I
""
!t! ~~~~
~
Naples Reserve
RPUD
~
II
~
~
~
-
~~
II~~
!!~~
.. ~~J C'.l
~(t)
~~~
~
~\j
". ,
~:g ,.,
.c 5
~~ 0
f;; ,
.
, 0
~ ~
~ ~
" ::I
~ ~
~
i~" c:: ~;lJ ~
:,.O~I ~il ~
~V1p VIe
,-,,~tD;%I ~~ il
O!ij'-'ll! ~Sl z "";:1 ...,
~,.,~~ ~:i! g ro g
~~Yl~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~
UlSl::E." o~~5! zff ~
~!-"~a! ~f"1J:!z ~,..,. ,.,
1"'*zg Z~zt;l Nl:i '\
>.... Ull..<-fC ""
ox>: ~"'::r~
~:~ ~"""'Ul
.~
,
r"
0",
00
".~
=101
00
z-<
D\lT^"'C~
CONSULTING Civil &,inoering
...'-, ,... ... -"-
~~~~~~~--- -.!!.~!.~~~....
n tr
.a =r
~ 6'
2
II ~ t Hi ;:;:
. i '" ... w f <J1
~ '" (XI .... '" '"
. I I ,.
, I
n Hi .... 0 0 " ~ " m :;; C :D
a i
a . ;; ~_ 0 0 ~ =t: =t: I <t> " ~ '" I
~ iii: in in =>. r a:
. li. ~ 8' Q. 3
. ; ~ Bl 0 ~ s 2 i m :;
. I g s: i
~ ,. ~ " 3' g c ;< ~
~ => I !;;'
. ~ ii H. '" "0 !l>. 11r .l'l '"
n i 3 ~ [J) ~ => C
0 3 ~ ~. g Q. ~ "
" . ~ . .Q j '" i:
g & iF g ~ ".
~ ;;
~ 3 g =>
. ~r !l>. '" '" ~
~. . i · [J) Ii1 "
. m " "
~ . . ~ <1> ~
~ ~. 21.
. ~ ~p => "-
~. . m ". '&
~l '"
I . m <t> 0
J =>
.
I ;i
. H
0 ~
. Ii
~
~ a J ~
i ~ r 1: 1(; 1(; 81 is g: 1(; ~ 1(; U>
~I ~ ~ '" w 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ c
J '" ~ ~ 3
i , 0 ~ <5 3
i 8 ; 8 8 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (")
~ . " 0
, M 7-
I g a 3
,
a . . 0 3
, ~
. ~ i ..,
t ll! ~ '" ~ 1: 81 1(; 1(; 1(; :; c
H i <5 ~ 0' ::::J
~ N 8! ~ ~ " ~ ~ 8 ~ =>
t !$l f<:l ;:;:z
~ ~ - a '< III
.." ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0
U ~ c~
0 if CD CD
0 - .
- 0 'il. < Ul
h '"
a i Ii' !!.J:I
- t H !I ~ ~ ~ 1(; 1: i 1: ~ ~ !!: n o CD
.... ~ ~ ~ ... en ~ 0
~~ ~ <5 ~ ~ "'ClI!
0 ffi 15 ....
~ ~~ w ~ ~ ~ ... - 3 ..
rm ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - !l
] ol!. a. CD <
o j & ::::J CD
i ~il -
~ ~~ 3 C
,
~ ~i !1 ~ 1(; i 1(; ~ !!: !!: i ~
~ <5 ~ ~ ~ g ..
g g g .... !l
L ~ ~ ~ ~ ... 3'
s" ~ ~ ~ ~ '"
7~ i
H
I] Ii'
h 1:1 I ~ ~ g !!: M
i! :.. ~
", III g g 0 g <5 g '"
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -
h ~ ~ w
j'
~~
. .
~ :. !I
' 8 ~ 1(; !!: ~ i i
h ~ III g g <5 g III g ~ g
, M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
ai ~ ..
j,
H
u
a7
rl !I ~ ~ 1(; 1: ~ !:l ~ ~ ~ is
- 0 ... '"
j ; '" N 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ....
, , ~ ~ 8 iii ~
o . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
il ~
.~
~~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ; 0;; i ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ *
'" '" i ~
i.. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ f i ;: i: : ~ ~ (m
iiiti [i,'tl'
IIi'l rllf f
f t I J !
! ;
r,
I I I I I f li~ I ~ ~ ~ ~
15 15 15 15 15 g 15
~~~I~~~~8f~~~~
j J f J f I Ii' i j
Ii if f f
t f
I
! l ~
. I ,
t
f
I ,i
I i I
i
f~~I~~f
I
I '
"",!! !1!'H!i,t
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g g g g g g g ~'-,
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 8111~1~11 U
, :'~
o 0 ~ ~ I 0 .! I
~~~~~~~~,~88ji" ;
~'g ~
~ ~
j... . . .
."'~8i~i".~
i ~ i ~ i ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~
I I ~ I I i I Ii, i
g ! ! !
~ ~ i @ ! i ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ i !
i!!ii~iii~iii;1
~ ~ i ; ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ i i ~ i
i i i i i ~ ~ i i i i I ii,
i
! ! ! !
~
~lj ....~ r I~ tttt!..
~~~ ~8.'"" "~.~~'g,~...~
i Ii' ~ ~ ~,~ 0 ~. · · · · I Iii ~ i ~ ~ ,i ~ i
. I .
. , .
I i~
I
.
!i ! !
i
~ii~~ill
i~~~~~,i
-. --
i .. i ~ i i
~ ~~lli
. . .
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
.
~ .
~
i i ~
I I I
. .
~ "
I i
---
J-+- - --
I
~ . i ~ .
i '~~
.
t
i" ·
! I! i ;
'~ ~
a!!!!
. . .
. ! '!
I · · · · · ~ ~
. ..
. . ~ ~
i i I
! ~ ! j ~ ~ ~ ~
i ~~ill
! ! ! ! ! !
. .
.. .. .. ~
ii!i8i
,,'i'~1
Ii Ii. ..
~'.~!~i~
--~-
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
.. 1:'" ...
I ~ . i . . . . J ~
i'~ I ~'~
...........:.,i...ii.'..........'....ii.,.'. ...'........... ,............'......, .,..........i
~ ~ !~ ~ I~ ~ !~ I~ !~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ii l:i :i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~
... ~ ~ ~ ~ t
~ I ~ ~ ~ i
I ~ ~ i ~ ~
....'.. '.'
~ !:! !:! I'
I :8 ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
, . I
I~ I~ ~ i~
!~~~~I~i~~
" I~ "
~ ( ~
~~~~~~;;ii~~lii~1i
i ~ ~ ;; ~ j ~ j j ~ ~. ~
I u; <i - 0 u; u; - ~ !_
~~j"""j~'~1
~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ Ii ~
~ ~
~ ~ Ii ~ li ~ ~ Ii Ii Ii li , Ii Ii Ii Ii Ii j ~ ~ j li j i j ~ j
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~li~lii~~~~~
. --t----
j j j ~ j j j j j
-,
II
j j j j j j j j ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
.. __u.
~ ~ ~ j j j j j
f
m
"
"
0'
..
'"
'"
C
"
'8
~
;.
"
"
g
c
3
1
a
o'
,
i
:'
i
f
i
.
.
I
i
.
~
f
i
J
n
~
3
~
~
~f
:r'!!.
~~
.g II
3 !l
aii
i
"
ii
~
o
~
!
--
~
!
i
i
!
~ i
I
! .
___ I
1
~ ;
!
i
.."". RFR
UR
-"4;1':'~~;f.igK,,,",," ~
1(7),
Ii.""
.,,/,
._....~~
!
Naples Reserve CDD
Exhibit 6, Page 1
Future Land Use Map
....
'.0
,
-
DlXTK'
CONSUL TINa
.&.. ...., '.L .A.
'P1anninJ 'Ylsuali23tioo
. Civil Engi.....rinJ.S....oyins& Mappinll
6
N
_"._ _.... T.-"'_.,><_"__........
, .
~H ;
~~ - ~
!~~
~~
...
..L
H ~
~,~ "
.. ; --d~."
H~!';i
I! {
,
,
"
.
! ,
--
~~[~~-
?~i
..
," .
~~ ..
- .
1'_-
~,
1lG(21E-J,
I
:1
"
"i
~l
.,
1;
f~
o
i: ~
;~ 6
',rTJ
\ "
(/)
,.
o
l, f"::: ::;;; 'l~;
'~d ~~
~ ~,[. t
,~~~ ~i ~~
'"
:;! .
-0
o
,.
r
r
o
o
,.
r
(/)
..,
00
M
M
..,
(/)
)_-=TI'-
I.,,,
" :' i~:~
I',' -- ~_!t
,.
J i
00
:<ITl
-0'"
o~
"z
ro
(/)M
..,
oor
MO
MO
..,,.
..,
(/)(5
, tjz
^:jo
000
Zo
(/)
(/)
(/)
M
o
..,
(5
z
~ I
" ~
" :~ c
f "
" "
. "
, 0
- ,c:: "
"
0
" c (. .
'! . " ~ .
. ~ . ;
~-',!
'. " " "
.
:-
t~
PW/n'I,"''''''''''''''''''"'
CURllENl1.VuNDEVUOPlD
,
I I'"''''''
I:,
- -'.'T',~
--I'
(:
I
,
Exhibit 6 Pa e 2
~ ~- - NAPLES RESERVE. LLe
~- , ~'J _
-- <~
1)4-1)1211110.01/ r_.-r
_M ~ RPUD MASTER PLAN
IIfMJ'CW.QJTfPG ....!IE.1I'.
-- -
"
~~
~ ~ -
<<
\...~ ,,,{ ';'
~~ . z '<
~~q c~ '"
<~! <
! ~
'"
G
,
:~ ~
Naples Reserve
RPUD
(0 ,.,...,>---
't't
.-
~~~
'~~~
~~
t~
~ ~
'~t
~!
I~
~
s
"
II
T5ll
DYXT^"C~
CONSULTING aviI.~
..&. '"' ,..... ~ SIIlVCying&Mapping
:::=:...~_.....::-__..,.. -""~,=,'"'.o::..lI
STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED REGULATORY COSTS
Naples Reserve Community Development District
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Purpose
This statement of estimated regulatory costs ("SERe") supports the
petition to establish the Naples Reserve Community Development District
("District" or "CDD").
The proposed District comprises approximately 688 acres all of which are
in the County of Collier. The proposed District will provide community
infrastructure and services to the Naples Reserve residential community
("Development") as described below.
The new District will provide community Infrastructure that will serve all, or
a substantial portion of, the land in the proposed District. The District
plans to provide localized infrastructure improvements and services
("District Infrastructure") to serve the land in the District and any offsite
mitigation required by the Project's Development Order. The District may
finance community Infrastructure by issuing bonds from time to time
("Bonds") secured by, among other things, proceeds of non-ad valorem
special assessments (the "Assessments") levied on land within the
District.
1 .2 Scope of the Analysis
The limitations on the scope of this SERC are explicitly set out in Section
190.002(2) (d), F.S. (governing District formation or alteration) as follows:
"That the process of establishing such a district pursuant to uniform
general law shall be fair and based onlv on factors material to manaaina
and financina the service delivery function of the district, so that any
matter concernina oermittina or olannina of the develooment is not
material or relevant (emphasis added)."
1.3 Overview of the Development Plan for the Naples Reserve District
As noted above, the Naples Reserve District will provide community
infrastructure and district infrastructure, services, and facilities along with
their operations and maintenance, to the Naples Reserve Development.
The land contained in the District is currently planned for the land uses
shown in Table 1. These are preliminary plans and are subject to change.
EXHIt1,-r 7
Naples Reserve is a master planned residential community in
unincorporated Collier County being developed by Naples Reserve,
L.L.C.. ("Developer"). The Naples Reserve Community Development
District, if approved, will encompass a total of approximately 688 acres.
Current plans envision approximately 500 single family detached homes,
240 4-plex (coach home) units, 270 6-plex units and 90 4-story multi-
family units for a total of 1,100 residential units along with recreational
facilities.
Table 1. Naples Reserve COO Currently Planned Land Uses
Category Amount
Total Gross Acres: 688.0
Single Family Homes: 500
Coach Homes: 240
Six Plex Homes: 270
Multi-Family Units: 90
Naples Reserve, l.L.C. ("Developer")
1.3 Requirements for Statement of Estimated Regulatory Costs
Section 120.541(2), F.S. (2002), defines the elements a statement of
estimated regulatory costs must contain:
"(a) A good faith estimate of the number of individuals and entities likely to
be required to comply with the rule, together with a general description of
the types of individuals likely to be affected by the rule.
(b) A good faith estimate of the cost to the agency, and to any other state
and local government entities, of implementing and enforcing the
proposed rule, and any anticipated effect on state and local revenues.
(c) A good faith estimate of the transactional costs likely to be incurred by
individuals and entities, including local governmental entities, required to
comply with the requirements of the rule. As used in this paragraph,
"transactional costs" are direct costs that are readily ascertainable based
upon standard business practices, and include filing fees, the cost of
obtaining a license, the cost of equipment required to be installed or used
or procedures required to be employed in complying with the rule,
additional operating costs incurred, and the cost of monitoring and
reporting.
2
,
(d) An analysis of the impact on small businesses as defined by Section
288.703, F.S., and an analysis of the impact on small counties and small
cities as defined by Section 120.52, F.S. Collier County is not defined as
a small County for purposes of this requirement.
(e) Any additional information that the agency determines may be useful.
(f) In the statement or revised statement, whichever applies, a description
of any good faith written proposal submitted under paragraph (1) (a) and
either a statement adopting the alternative or a statement of the reasons
for rejecting the alternative in favor of the proposed rule."
2.0 A good faith estimate of the number of individuals and entities likely
to be required to comply with the ordinance, together with a general
description of the types of individuals likely to be affected by the
ordinance
If this petition to establish the District is approved, the District will
encompass approximately 688 acres. All of the ultimate property owners
in the District will be required to comply with District rules and their
properties will be encumbered with District obligations to pay for
infrastructure and operations and maintenance expenses incurred by the
District. Of course prior to the sell out of the real estate, all of the
undeveloped land owned by the Developer and any other landowner will
also be under the jurisdiction of the District.
3.0 Good faith estimate of the cost to state and local government
entitles, of Implementing and enforcing the proposed ordinance, and
any anticipated effect on state and local revenues
3.1 Costs to Governmental Agencies of Implementing and Enforcing
Ordinance
State Governmental Entities
The cost to State entities to review or enforce the proposed ordinance will
be very modest. The District comprises less than 1,000 acres. Therefore,
the County will review and act upon the petition to establish the District.
3
There are minimal additional ongoing costs to various State entities to
implement and enforce the proposed ordinance. The District is a special
purpose unit of local government, and it is required to file various reports
to the State of Florida, the Department of Community Affairs and other
agencies of the State. The filing requirements are outlined in Appendix A.
However, the additional costs to the State and its various departments to
process the additional filings from the District are very low, since the State
routinely processes filings from over 100 similar districts. Finally, the filing
fees paid by the District are designed to offset any additional costs to the
State.
Collier County
This petition to establish the District will require the County to review the
petition and its supporting exhibits. In addition, the County will hold public
hearings to discuss the petition and to take public input. These activities
will absorb staff time and time of the County Commission.
However, these costs are very modest at most for the following reasons.
First, the review of this petition to form the District does not include an
analysis of the Development itself. In fact, such a review of the Project is
prohibited by statute. Second, the petition contains all of the information
necessary for its review. Third, the County already has all of the staff
necessary to review the petition. Fourth, no capital costs are involved in
the review. Fifth, the County routinely processes similar petitions for land
use and zoning changes that are far more complicated than this petition to
form the District. Finally, the $15,000 filing fee is designed to offset these
costs.
The County will incur only a small additional annual cost if this petition is
approved. The proposed District is an independent unit of local
govemment, so the District is responsible for its own budget, reporting,
and the full conduct of its powers within its boundaries. The District will
provide the County with its budget each year, but no County action is
required.
3.2 Impact on State and Local Revenues
Adoption of the proposed ordinance will have no negative impact on State
or local revenues. The District is an independent unit of local government.
It is designed to provide community facilities and services to serve the
development. It has its own sources of revenue. No State or local
subsidies are required or expected.
4
In this regard it is important to note that any debt obligations incurred by
the District to construct its infrastructure, or for any other reason, are not
debts of the State of Florida or any unit of local government. By State law
debts of the District are strictly its own responsibility.
In this regard it is important to note that any debt obligations incurred by
the District to construct its infrastructure, or for any other reason, are not
debts of the State of Florida or any unit of local government. By State law
debts of the District are strictly its own responsibility.
4.0 A good faith estimate of the transactional costs likely to be incurred
by individuals and entities required to comply with the requirements
of the ordinance
The District plans to provide various community facilities and services to
the property in the District. as outlined in Table 2. The District plans to
fund, construct, own and manage the water management system and the
land acquisition. In conjunction with the Developer, the District will fund
and construct the roadways and lighting, utilities, drainage system,
earthwork, perimeter landscape features and offsite improvements
required by the project's development order. The utilities will be owned
and operated by the County while the roadways & lighting, drainage
system, earthwork and perimeter landscape features will be owned and
maintained by the project's property owners association ("POA"). The
offsite improvements required by the Project's development order will be
owned and maintained by the Florida Department of Transportation
("FDOT"). The District's costs may include acquisition of land on which the
infrastructure will be constructed.
Table 2. Proposed Facilities and Services
FACILITY
Roads & Lighting
Utilities
Water Management
Drainage
Earthwork
Perimeter Landscape Features
Land Acquisition
Offsite Improvements
FUNDED BY
Developer/COD
Developer/COD
Developer/COD
Developer/COD
Developer/COD
Developer/COD
Developer/COD
Developer/COD
O&M BY
POA
County
COD
POA
POA
POA
COD
FOOT
OWNERSHIP
POA
County
COD
POA
POA
POA
COD
FOOT
The costs for providing the capital facilities outlined in Table 2 consist of
District Infrastructure. Table 3 on the next page presents the District's
share of costs associated with the Community Infrastructure and offsite
mitigation along with a time table for its installation.
5
Table 3. Summary of Estimated Capital Costs for
Community Infrastructure for the District
Category
Roadways & Lighting
Utilities
Water Management & Drainage
Earthwork
Perimeter Landscape Features
Land Acquisition
Offsite Improvements
Professional Service Fees
10% Contingency
Estimated Cost
$9,600,000
$11,160,000
$7,900,000
$22,440,000
$3,100,000
$16,000,000
$24,700,000
$7,600,000
$10,250,000
Estimated
Commencement/Completion
Date
2009/2014
2009/2014
2009/2014
2009/2012
2009/2014
2009/2011
2009/2014
2009/2014
2009/2014
----------
----------
Total
$112,750,000
Source: RWA, Inc., Engineers
Prospective future landowners in the District may be required to pay non-
ad valorem assessments levied by the District to secure the debt incurred
through bond issuance. In addition to the levy of non-ad valorem
assessments for debt service, the District may also impose a non-ad
valorem assessment to fund the operations and maintenance of the
District and its facilities and services.
It is important to note that the various costs outlined in Table 3 are typical
for developments of the type contemplated here. In other words, there is
nothing peculiar about the District's financing that requires additional
infrastructure over and above what would normally be needed. Therefore,
these costs are not in addition to normal development costs. Instead, the
facilities and services provided by the District are substituting in part for
developer-provided infrastructure and facilities. Along these same lines,
District-imposed assessments for operations and maintenance costs are
similar to what would be charged in any event by a property owners'
association common to most master planned developments.
6
Real estate markets are quite efficient, because buyers and renters
evaluate all of the costs and benefits associated with various alternative
locations. Therefore, market forces preclude developers from marking up
the prices of their products beyond what the competition allows. To
remain competitive the operations and maintenance charges must also be
in line with the competition.
Furthermore, locating in the District by new residents is completely
voluntary. So, ultimately, all owners and users of the affected property
choose to accept the District's costs in tradeoff for the benefits that the
District provides.
The District is an alternative means to finance necessary community
services. District financing is no more expensive, and often less
expensive, than the alternatives of a municipal service taxing unit (MSTU),
a neighborhood association, County provision (directly or via a dependent
special district), or through developer-bank loans.
5.0 An analysis of the impact on small businesses as defined by
Section 288.703, F.S., and an analysis of the Impact
on small counties and small cities as defined by Section 120.52, F.S.
There will be no impact on small businesses because of the formation of
the proposed District. If anything, the impact may be positive. This is
because the District must competitively bid certain of its contracts. This
affords small businesses the opportunity to bid on District work.
The development is located in the County of Collier. As of the latest
Census date, the 2000 Census, the County has a population of 251,377.
Therefore, the proposed District is not located in a County defined as a
"small" (75,000) according to Section 120.52, F.S.
6.0 Any additional useful information.
The analysis provided above is based on a straightforward application of
economic theory, especially as it relates to tracking the incidence of
regulatory costs and benefits. Inputs were received from the Developer's
Engineer and other professionals associated with the Developer.
7
Finally, it is useful to reflect upon the question of whether the proposed
formation of the District is the best alternative to provide community
facilities and services to the Development. As an alternative to the
District, the County could approve a dependent special district for the
area, such as an MSBU or a special taxing district under Chapter 170,
F.S. Either of these alternatives could finance the improvements
contemplated in Table 2 in a fashion similar to the proposed District.
However, each of these alternatives is inferior to the District. Unlike the
District, the alternatives would require the County to continue to administer
the project and its facilities and services. As a result, the costs for these
services and facilities would not be sequestered to the land directly
benefiting from them, as the case would be with the District.
A District also is preferable from a government accountability perspective.
With a District as proposed, residents and renters in the District would
have a focused unit of government under their direct control. The District
can then be more responsive to resident needs without disrupting other
County responsibilities.
Another alternative to the District would be for the developer to provide the
infrastructure and to use a property owners association (POA) for
operations and maintenance of community facilities and services. A
District is superior to a POA for a variety of reasons. First, unlike a POA a
District can impose and collect its assessments along with other property
taxes. Therefore, the District is far more assured of obtaining its needed
funds than is a POA. Second, the proposed District is a unit of local
government. Therefore, unlike the POA the District must abide by all
governmental rules and regulations.
(Rest of Page Left Intentionally Blank)
8
Fishkind & Associates certifies that this SERC meets the requirements for
a SERC as set out in Chapter 120.541, F .S.
We have developed over 40 SERCs. Below is a listing of some of these
SERCs.
. Urban Orlando Community Development District
. Marshall Creek Community Development District
. Cedar Hammock Community Development District
. Mediterra Community Development District
. Brooks Community Development District
. Pelican Marsh Community Development District
. Pelican Landing Community Development District
. Fiddler's Creek Community Development District 1
. Monterra Community Development District
. Quarry Community Development District
. Capital Region Community Development District
. Deerfield Preserve Community Development District
. Cypress Shadows Community Development District
9
.>,,,
APPENDIX A
LIST OF REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
FLORIDA
STATUTE
REPORT CITE DATE
Annual Financial Audit 11.45 12 months after end of
fiscal year
Annual Financial Report (AFR) 218.32 by March 31
TRIM Compliance Report 200.068 130 days after
Form 1 - Limited Financial Disclosure 112.3144 by July 1
Public Depositor 215 by November 15
Proposed Budget 218.34 by September 1
Public Facilities Report 189.415 March 1
Public Meetings Schedule 189.417 beginning of fiscal year
Bond Report 218.38 When issued
Registered Agent 189.417 30 Days after
10
EXHIBIT 8
WRITTEN, PRE-FILED TESTIMONY OF:
G. RUSSELL WEYER
ROBERT MULHERE, AICP
CHRISTOPHER WRIGHT, P.E.
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
INRE:
PETITION TO ESTABLISH NAPLES RESERVE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
/
AFFIDAVIT ADOPTING WRITTEN. PRE-FILED TESTIMONY
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
I, G. Russell Weyer, of Fishkind & Associates, Inc., being first duly sworn, do hereby
state for my affidavit as follows:
I. I have personal knowledge of the matters set forth in this affidavit.
2. My name is G. Russell Weyer, and I am employed by Pishkind & Associates, Inc.
3. The prepared, written, pre-filed testimony, submitted under my name to Collier
County relating to the establishment of Naples Reserve Community Development District, and
attached hereto, is true and correct.
4. In were asked the questions contained in the pre-filed testimony orally at any
hearing before the Board of County Commissioners relating to the Petition to establish Naples
Reserve Community Development District, my oral answers would be the same as the written
answers presented in my pre-filed testimony.
5. My pre-filed testimony generally addresses the truth and accuracy of the Petition
to establish the proposed Naples Reserve Community Development District, the six factors that
must be considered in a determination to establish a community development district, and the
estimated regulatory costs associated with the establishment of a community development
district.
Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have read the foregoing and the facts alIeged
are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Executed this lfiiay of rrlIUlr,/.{ ,2008.
~
, ----....
C~
G. Russell Weyer
SWORN TO and SUBSCRIBED before me by the Affiant, on this / J day of
J1{//f/A-- ,2008.
,
~'II""'II'''''II''''II''''''''IIII'''""".
: C. LAURENT :
! !m~'~'~~ Com"" 000689386 i
! i. ,iii Explllltl 6/29/2011 !
: "'U",.~I' :
: ~.""~ Florida Notary Alan.tlne :
"'."............1111..............1111.......;
~
I: ""~~
j
,..---
,
(? Ldtl,'f?[ r
Printed Name of Notary
Personally Known~
Type of identification produced
TESTIMONY OF G. RUSSELL WEYER FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF
NAPLES RESERVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
1. Please state your name and business address.
My name is Russell Weyer and my business address is 1415 Panther Lane, Suites
346/347, Naples, Florida 34109.
2. By whom are you employed and in what capacity?
I am a Senior Associate with Fishkind & Associates, Inc.
3. Please briefly summarize your duties and responsibilities.
As a Senior Associate for Fishkind & Associates, I am responsible for the day-to-
day operations of the Naples branch of the company. My client services include
fiscal and economic analysis for real estate development, local, regional, and state
governments and serving as the financial analyst for nine community development
districts in the State of Florida.
4. Do you work with both public and private sector clients?
Yes
5. Please describe your educational background.
I hold a Bachelor of Arts in Communication from Michigan State University, East
Lansing, Michigan, and a Masters in Business Administration from the University
of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida.
6. Please describe your work with community development districts in Florida.
As the Financial Advisor to a community development district, I advise the district
on a variety of financial issues, including the development of the district's
assessment methodology, assistance in the bond validation process including
. determination of the validation amount and expert witness testimony, calculation
of the preliminary and final assessment rolls, performing true-up tests at their
appropriate times and administering the assessment methodology during platting,
lien book and release of liens at closing.
7. Are any of the community development districts ("CDDs") of about the same
size as the proposed Naples Reserve Community Development District?
Yes
8. What has been your role with respect to this Petition to establish the Naples
Reserve Community Development District?
My firm assisted the Petitioner in evaluating the feasibility of establishing a
district for this land from a financial and economic perspective. Concluding a
community development district was appropriate for this project, our firm
prepared the Statement of Estimated Regulatory Costs, attached to the Petition as
Exhibit 7.
9. We will begin by addressing portions of the Petition to establish the proposed
District that relate to certain economic analysis matters and your related
expert opinions. You stated that your firm prepared Petition Exhibit 7?
That is correct. Exhibit 7 is the Statement of Estimated Regulatory Costs
("SERC") required by Chapters 120 and 190, Florida Statutes.
10. Are there any changes or revisions to the SERC at this time?
No
11. In general terms, please summarize the economic analyses you have
presented in the SERC.
The SERC reviewed and evaluated four major categories of potential impacts as
outlined in Section 120.541(2) (t), Florida Statutes.
(a) A good faith estimate of the number of individuals and entities likely to be
required to comply with the ordinance, together with a general description of the
types of individuals likely to be affected by the ordinance;
(b) A good faith estimate of the cost to the agency, and to any other state or local
government entities, of implementing and enforcing the proposed ordinance and
any anticipated effect on state and local revenues;
(c) A good faith estimate of the transactional costs likely to be incurred by
individuals and entities, including local government entities, required to comply
with the requirement of the ordinance;
(d) An analysis of the impact on small businesses as defined by Section 288.703,
Florida Statutes, and an analysis of the impact on small counties and small cities
as defined by Section 120.52, Florida Statutes.
(e) Any additional information that the agency determines may be useful.
After reviewing these categories, we are of the opinion, as stated in the SERC, that
there is no adverse impact on any affected person that would result from
establishment of the proposed District.
12. Please describe briefly the data and methodology you used in preparing the
SERC and related analyses.
The data used in preparing the SERC was compiled from the Petitioner and our
expertise with other community development districts. The data was analyzed
according to standard methodologies in our industry and consistent with the
statutory elements of estimated regulatory costs defined in Section 120.541(2),
Florida Statutes.
13. Based on your training and experience in the financial aspect of community
development districts, do you have an opinion regarding the financial
viability and feasibility of the proposed District?
Yes
14. What is that opinion?
My professional opinion is that the proposed Naples Reserve Community
Development District will be financially viable and feasible.
15. Do you have an opinion from an economic analysis perspective as to whether
the proposed Naples Reserve Community Development District is of sufficient
size, compactness and contiguity to be developable as a functionally
interrelated community?
Yes. I believe that the proposed Naples Reserve Community Development District
encompasses enough area and is compact and contiguous such that it may be
developed as a functional interrelated community.
16. When you gave that opinion, what were you including within the term
"functionally interrelated community"?
It means that each functional need of a community must be planned to interrelate
to facilitate the development and maintenance of the larger community. Roads,
drainage, water, sewer, recreation, lighting and other community infrastructure
needs and services must be incorporated into a long-range plan to effectively
accommodate the needs of a community's development. Being functionally
interrelated means that each of these infrastructure needs and services are planned
in comprehensive and supporting relationship to one another.
17. In your opinion, you said the proposed District is of sufficient size to be
developable as one functionally interrelated community. Please explain this
portion of your opinion.
The District will cover 688 acres as proposed. This is certainly large enough to be
developed as a functionally interrelated community. Certainly, there are many
smaller community development Districts that have been developed as a
functionally interrelated community. The District is also compact and contiguous
enough to allow for the effective delivery of infrastructure services and facilities to
the area within the District. The configuration of the proposed District will
maximize the economies of scale benefits available from the services and facilities
to be provided.
18. You also opined that the proposed District is of sufficient compactness. Please
explain this portion of your opinion.
Compactness relates to the proposed District's ability to efficiently and effectively
provide the anticipated community infrastructure improvements and services.
Compactness is a measure of the spatial relationship between the lands and land
uses within a community. Sufficient compactness is present here, in my
professional opinion.
19. You also opined that it was sufficiently contiguous. Would you please explain
this portion of your opinion.
Contiguity relates to the subject property to be included within the District being
of such a shape to allow efficient design and use of infrastructure. Contiguity of
the lands is present for efficient infrastructure design and use.
20. From an economic analysis perspective, do you have an opinion as to whether
the proposed Naples Reserve Community Development District is the best
alternative available for providing the proposed community development
services and facilities to the area to be served?
Yes. I believe the proposed District is the best alternative available to provide the
proposed community development services and facilities to the lands anticipated
to be included within the proposed District.
21. Why is that?
These improvements could be provided by the purpose local government utilizing
special assessments or general funds. Or, the developer and/or a property owners'
association could provide these facilities through private financing.
There are several important criteria to consider in evaluating these alternatives,
including which alternative provides the best focus, whether the alternative can
effectively and efficiently manage and maintain the facilities on a long term basis,
whether the alternative has the ability to secure future funding of operation and
maintenance expenses, and whether the alternative can secure low cost, long-term
public financing.
A general purpose local government provides the long term perspective and is a
stable and relatively low cost source of financing and provider of services at
sustained levels. However, regardless of the specific mechanism, the general
purpose local government will incur costs associated with the financing and
management of the construction. The source of the necessary construction funds
would be the general purpose local government's general revenue fund or issuance
of additional debt through a dependent taxing or assessing mechanism. If general
revenue is use, these costs, along with annual maintenance costs, would be born by
all residents of the general purpose local government, not just property owners
within the proposed District. Financing improvements through a CDD would
impact the general purpose local government's total bonding capacity and would
have a number of management implications discussed later in my testimony.
Dependent district financing would be on the balance sheet of the general purpose
local government. Furthermore, this would require the general purpose local
government to continually administer, operate and maintain the development
infrastructure. Thus, the general purpose local government would be increasing its
responsibility and hence potential liability for the variety of actions that will take
place in the development. For these reasons, general purpose local government
responsibility for the development would divert economic resources that could be
directed elsewhere.
The other alternative is the use of private means - either through a property
owner's association ("PO A") or through the developer, or both in combination.
This combination can provide focused service and facilities and managed delivery.
However, only a public entity can assure a long-term perspective, act as a stable
provider of services and facilities, qualify as a lower cost source of financing and
pay for services at sustained levels. The developer could try to obtain private
financing, but it is difficult and, when available, is customarily more expensive.
This may result in housing that is less affordable or a decrease in the level of
services provided. Likewise, a POA also lacks the ability to effective finance
improvements. A POA will not likely have access to lower cost bank or third party
financing in today's market and would not be able to engage in the financing
program necessary to provide the needed infrastructure because a POA is
generally not considered, in its infancy, a "bankable entity." In addition, annual
maintenance would likely be delegated to a POA, which does not have the same
legal backing as does a CDD to enforce assessments for operations and
maintenance. Neither the developer nor a POA would be able to provide an as
effective long-term financing of services and facilities as would a CDD.
A CDD is a special-purpose unit of local government designed to focus its
attention and financial resources on providing the best long-term service to its
specific benefited properties and residents. It has limited power and a limited area
of jurisdiction, but the proposed District has the ability to obtain adequate funds
for sustained levels of maintenance. In addition, the proposed District will incur
the cost of issuing bonds or other indebtedness necessary to finance the
construction of the necessary infrastructure and will oversee and manage all
phases of construction. Further, the sources of funding and manner of collection of
funds will assure that the CDD facilities will be managed at the sustained leve4rls
of quality desired by residents well into the future. All costs associated with these
activities will be born only by property owns within the proposed District that
benefit from the improvements. No general purpose local government funds will
be used and no costs will be insured by any residents who do not own property
within the District.
In sum, a CDD allows for the independent financing, administration, operations
and maintenance of the land within the District. For these reasons, a CDD is the
best alternative to provide these facilities and services to the Naples Reserve
development.
22. Do you have an opinion from an economic analysis perspective as to whether
the services and facilities to be provided by the proposed Naples Reserve
Community Development District will be incompatible with the uses and
existing local and regional facilities and services?
Yes. My professional opinion is that the services and facilities anticipated to be
provided by the District are compatible with the uses and existing local and
regional facilities and services.
23. Why is that?
Any services required of the proposed District are necessary to support new
growth in the area. Further, a CDD, unlike a property owners' association, must
adhere to higher governmental rules, procedures and standards because it operates
like a government to ensure public oversight to avoid duplication or
incompatibility. There are no incompatible use issues for the lands to be included
within the proposed District.
In addition, Petitioner presently expects the proposed District to finance and
construct and/or maintain roadways, entrance features, recreation improvements,
storm water management system and other infrastructure. Ultimately, the District
may own and maintain certain of those improvements and the applicable general
purpose local government may own and maintain others. However, there will be
no overlap or incompatibility because the facilities and improvements expected to
be provided by the proposed District either do not exist or exist in a manner
consistent with the development plan anticipated for the proposed District.
24. Does this conclude your testimony?
Yes, it does.
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
INRE:
PETITION TO ESTABLISH NAPLES RESERVE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
/
AFFIDAVIT ADOPTING WRITTEN, PRE-FILED TESTIMONY
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
I, Christopher O. Wright, P.E., ofRW A, Inc., being first duly sworn, do hereby state for
my affidavit as follows:
1. I have personal knowledge of the matters set forth in this affidavit.
2. My name is Christopher O. Wright, P.E., and I am employed by R W A, Inc.
3. The prepared, written, pre-filed testimony, submitted under my name to Collier
County relating to the establishment of Naples Reserve Community Development District, and
attached hereto, is true and correct.
4. In were asked the questions contained in the pre-filed testimony orally at any
hearing before the Board of County Commissioners relating to the Petition to establish Naples
Reserve Community Development District, my oral answers would be the same as the written
answers presented in my pre-filed testimony.
5. My pre-filed testimony generally addresses the tntth and accuracy of the Petition
to establish the proposed Naples Reserve Community Development District, the six factors that
must be considered in a determination to establish a community development district.
\\Dts-naples\03-04\2004\040125.00.06 Naples Reserve CDD\Oa02 COD Establishment\2008-03-18 Affidavit for Wright COD Establishment.doc
lof2
Under penalties of peri ury, I declare that [ have read the foregoing and the facts alleged are true
and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Executed this I if day of h, ~ A" [r(
,2008.
/,,'"' {J
,/
Christopher O. Wright, P.E.
(~
L-\...--.-~~
2--
SWORN TO and SUBSCRIBED before me by the Affiant, on this I q day of
hA,,<-C 1-\ ,2008.
. .<\l....u:... 11l1SHA MCl'HERllOII
~>>.~ MYCOMMISSIQN,0063Zl9ll
~., i; EXPIRES: January 23, 2011
~:U' BondedThnJNotaryPublcUndtrwrllerS
'nr".
)~vY\ LP~r--
\~\s\-\(.\ M Q P<-\c(z'SON
Printed Name of Notary
Personally Known
Type of identification produced
\//
\\Dfs~nap]es\03-04\2004\040125.00_06 Naples Reserve CDD\0002 CDD Establishment\2008-0J-] 8 Affidavit for Wright CDD Establishment-doc
20f2
TESTIMONY OF CHRISTOPHER O. WRIGHT, P.E. FOR THE ESTABLIHSMENT OF
THE NAPLES RESERVE COMMUNITY DEVLEOPMENT DISTRICT
1. Please state your name and business address.
My name is Christopher O. Wright. My business address is 6610 Willow Park Drive, Suite
200, Naples, Florida 34109.
2. By whom are you employed and in what capacity?
I am currently employed as a professional engineer with RW A, Inc. and I am the Chief
Executive Officer ofRW A, Inc.
3. And what is the nature of your firm's business?
RW A, Inc. provides civil engineering, land survey and mapping and land planning
consulting and design services to private and public clients.
4. Please describe your experience and credentials, including your current employment.
I am a Registered Professional Engineer in the State of Florida with over 19 years of civil
engineering and project management experience.
5. Please describe your educational background, with degrees earned, major areas of
study, year of degree, and institutions attended.
I graduated from the University of Florida with a Bacbelor of Science in Civil Engineering
Degree (BSCE).
6. Do you hold any professional designations or certifications?
I am a Professional Engineer in the State of Florida, P.E. #47059.
7. Are you a member of any professional associations?
I am a member of the Florida Engineering Society, American Society of Civil Engineers, the
National SocIety of Professional Engineers. and the Florida Institute of Consulting
Engineers.
8. Prior to your current employment, by whom were you employed and in what position?
I was employed as a Professional Engineer for WilsonMiller, Inc. as a Senior Project
Manager.
9. Do you consider yourself an expert in civil engineering?
Yes.
\\Dfs.napJ~s\03-04\:004\040]25 00 06 Naples Re~ervc COO\0002 CDD Es,ablishmemI200S-03-181Jpdated Te5limony for Wright COD Establishmcm,DOC
10f4
TESTIMONY OF CHRISTOPHER O. WRIGHT, P.E. FOR THE ESTABLIHSMENT OF
THE NAPLES RESERVE COMMUNITY DEVLEOPMENT DISTRICT
10. Please describe your experience with civil engineering relating to community
development districts ("CDDs") and special districts.
I have provided civil engineering services to several CDDs throughout my career. I currently
serve or have served as CDD Engineer for: Lely Resort, Pelican Marsh, Vasari, and Village
Walk at Bonita Springs CDD's
11. Do you consider yourself an expert in civil engineering, capable of rendering expert
opinions on CDDs, and specifically on infrastructure for CDD services?
Yes.
12. What has been your role with respect to the Petition to Establish ("Petition") Naples
Reserve Community Development District ("Naples Reserve CDD)?
My firm has provided civil engineering and consultation services to the proposed CDD.
13. Are you familiar with the Petition filed to establish Naples Reserve CDD?
I have reviewed the Petition and its attachments, and I am familiar with the materials.
14. Have you reviewed the contents of the Petition and the exhibits attached to the
Petition?
Yes.
15. Are there any changes or corrections to the Petition or exhibits at this time?
No.
16. To the best of your knowledge, based on your familiarity with the Naples Reserve CDD
and CDD's generally, is the Petition and its contents true and complete?
Yes.
17. Are you generally familiar with the geographical areas, type, and scope of development
and the available services and facilities within Naples Reserve CDD?
Yes. I am familiar with the area within Naples Reserve CDD and I am also familiar with the
services and facilities available within Naples Reserve CDD.
18. Please provide us with a brief description of Naples Reserve CDD boundaries and
location?
The proposed Naples Reserve CDD is 688" acres, as described in the legal description
contained in Exhibit 2 and shown on the location map which is Exhibit I, both prepared by
our firm.
\\Dfs-naplesl03.04\2004\04012500 06 \Japles Reserve CDO\OOO~ COO ESlublishment\2U08.0J_18:Dpdated Testimony for Wright COD Establishmefll DOC
20f4
TESTIMONY OF CHRISTOPHER O. WRIGHT, P.E. FOR THE ESTABLIHSMENT OF
THE NAPLES RESERVE COMMUNITY DEVLEOPMENT DISTRICT
19. Please describe Exhibit 4?
Exhibit 4 is the PUO Master Plan for the COO property, and shows generally how the
property will be developed as a residential community. There are no existing stormwater
sewer interceptors or outfalls, water mains or sewer force mains on the COO property. Such
facilIties will be installed during the development of the property.
20. Based on your experience, do you have an opinion as to whether the proposed Naples
Reserve eDD is of sufficient size, sufficient compactness, and sufficient contiguity to be
developed as a functionally interrelated community?
Yes.
21. What is your opinion?
Based on my previous experience and review of the Petition and exhibits thereto, the
proposed Naples Reserve COO is of sufficient size, compactness and contiguity to be
developed as a functional interrelated community and it has been master planned as such.
22. What is the basis for yonr opinion?
The project is compact with land use typical of a planned community. The development of
the land has been planned to be a functional interrelated community.
23. Based on your experience, do you have an opinion as to whether Naples Reserve eDD is
the best alternative available to provide community development services and facilities
to the area that will be served?
Yes.
24. What is. your opinion and the basis for it?
Given the locational and functional constraints of providing such services in the area of the
COO, Naples Reserve COO is the best alternative to provide community development
facilities to the area to be served.
25. Based on your experience, do you have an opInion as to whether the services and
facilities to be provided by Naples Reserve eDD will be compatible with the uses and
existIng local and regional facilities and services?
Yes.
26. What is your opinion and the basis for it?
Naples Reserve COO's facilities and services within its boundaries will not duplicate any
available regional services or facilities within Naples Reserve COO.
\\Dfs-naplesI03_04\:'.004\04012S00 06 Naples Reserve (001000::' COD EstablishmentI2008_03_1Sj!pdated Testimony for Wright COD EstablishmentDOC
30f4
TESTIMONY OF CHRISTOPHER O. WRIGHT, P.E. FOR THE ESTABLlHSMENT OF
THE NAPLES RESERVE COMMUNITY DEVLEOPMENT DISTRICT
27. Based on your experience, do you have an opinion as to whether the area to be included
within Naples Reserve eDD is amenable to being served by a separate special district
government?
Yes, I do, It is my opinion that the area designated to be included in Naples Reserve CDD is
amenable to continued existence as a separate special district government
28. What is the basis for your opinions?
It is clear that the lands in Naples Reserve CDD will continue to have the need for basic
infrastructure.
The land area for Naples Reserve CDD has been evaluated for sufficiency of size,
compactness, and contiguity and meets those tests. Therefore, from a professional
engineering perspective, the area to be served by Naples Reserve CDD is clearly amenable to
separate special-distinct governance.
The Naples Reserve CDD will have the ability to provide facilities and services to the benefit
of its owners and residents, and the size and compactness of the area will not be inconsistent
with Naples Reserve CDD's ability to provide those services,
29. Does this conclude your testimony?
Yes.
\\DI:S-naples\03.04\2004\0401~5 00 Ilb ~Jples Reserve COO\0002 COD F_Ilabli.lhmeolI.2008-03-Is4pdaled TeSlimony for Wright CDO ESlobl;shment DOC
40f4
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
INRE:
PETITION TO ESTABLISH NAPLES RESERVE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
I
AFFIDAVIT ADOPTING WRITTEN, PRE-FILED TESTIMONY
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
I, Robert Mulhere, ofRW A, Inc., being first duly sworn, do hereby state for my affidavit
as follows:
I. I have personal knowledge of the matters set forth in this affidavit.
2. My name is Robert Mulhere, and I aJll employed by RW A, Inc.
3. The prepared, written, pre-filed testimony, submitted under my name to Collier
County relating to the establishment of Naples Reserve Community Development District, and
attached hereto, is true and correct.
4. If! were asked the questions contained in the pre-filed testimony orally at any
hearing before the Board of County Commissioners relating to the Petition to establish Naples
Reserve Community Development District, my oral answers would be the same as the written
answers presented in my pre-filed testimony.
5. My pre-filed testimony generally addresses the truth and accuracy of the Petition
to establish the proposed Naples Reserve Community Development District, the six factors that
must be considered in a determination to establish a community development district and the
consistency of the proposed community development district with the state and local
comprehensive plans.
Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have read the foregoing and the facts alleged
are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Executed thisli day of ~MA <<.c. f.f , 2008.
I~
Robert Mulhere
SWORN TO and SUBSCRIBED before me by the Affiant, on this ljday of
{v\A\<.c..1-\ ,2008.
Personally Known
Type of identification produced
/
c j~~~
---t(<..6I-lA Mc..PHc:.i<.Sc~
Printed Name of Notary
,1"J'\, TIlISHA MCPHERSON
Wi ,;.; MY COMMISSION' DO 632390
'. . . i EXPIRES, January 23, 2011
. Bor1dtdThruNcWyPublcUncllrwlllllta
TESTIMONY OF ROBERT J. MULHERE, AICP, PLANNER, FOR THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE NAPLES RESERVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT
1. Please state your name, business, business address, and position and duties within
your business.
My name is Robert J. Mulhere, AICP. By profession I am an urban planner. I am a Senior Vice
President and Director of Planning with RW A, Inc., whose address is 6610 Willow Park Drive,
Naples Florida.
2. Please describe your education, experience and credentials as a planner.
I have 25 years of experience in planning and permitting related to land development activities,
including: Developments of Regional Impacts, comprehensive plan amendments, property
rezonings, land development code amendments, site development plans, feasibility studies, and
assessing alternative ways to provide infrastructure to permitted and planned community
developments. I have a BA Degree in Political Science from St. Michael's College and a
Masters Degree in Public Administration from Florida Gulf Coast University. I am a Certified
Planner with the designation of AICP from the American Institute of Certified Planners and
member of the Urban Land Institute.
3. Have you qualified and been accepted as an expert in planning matters.
I have been qualified as an expert in urban planning and in local, regional, and state growth
management planning in numerous hearings in front of various Zoning Boards, Local Planning
Agencies, and County Commissions.
4. What aspects of the Petition for the Establishment of the Naples Reserve
Community Development District will you address in your testimony?
Based on my experience and training, I will address planning aspects and consequences
of the Naples Reserve Community Development District on the proposed property of the
community development project. I have assessed from a planning perspective the management
of the delivery or provision of basic infrastructure to community development districts and
related financing. I have assisted in the preparation of the Petition, its required exhibits and
additional information pertinent to the planning consequences of establishing the District.
5. Could you describe the proposed Naples Reserve CDD
Naples Reserve is located at 10097 Greenway Road in Section I, Township 51 South,
Range 26 East. Naples Reserve is an amenitized residential project encompassing approximately
688.1 acres, and is to include 1154 dwelling units in a mix of product type including single
family detached, single family attached and multifaJilily dwellings amenitized by an 18 hole golf
course and lake system. Naples Reserve will provide a unified community framework, which
accommodates a variety of housing opportunities. Design guidelines and an integrated plan for
landscaping, signage, utility service, stormwater management, and community services will tie
the neighborhood together, creating a viable community stmcture.
6. Are you familiar with the statutory procedure for the establishment of a community
development district and the six factors that must be considered in the establishment of a
district and why these factors must be considered?
The law requires that certain factors be addressed in the determination ofthe
establishment ofa CDD. In addition, a consideration of the statutory factors and procedures for
the establishment of a District tends to identify problem areas which can be addressed by the
District Board of Supervisors after establishment of the District, or by the staff and members of
the Board of County Commissioners and the District review team during the petition process.
7. Do you have an opinion with regard to Factor One, that the petition is true and
correct?
In my professional opinion from a planning perspective, the Petition and its attached
exhibits satisfy the requirements of the statute and contain information that is both true and
correct. Therefore, factor one in my opinion is satisfied from a planning perspective.
8. Do you have an opinion with regard to Factor Two, that the establishment of the
district is consistent with the State and Local Comprehensive Plan?
Regarding factor number two, I have done a considerable amount of analysis of both the
State Comprehensive Plan and the Collier County Comprehensive Plan because this factor seeks
consideration of information on whether creation by law and establishment by county ordinance
of the District is inconsistent with any applicable element or portion of the State Comprehensive
Plan or the Collier County Comprehensive Plan.
The State Comprehensive Plan is set forth in Chapter 187, Florida Statutes. I have
analyzed this State Plan upon the assumption that the District will exercise all of its systems,
facilities and services and related specialized powers set forth in the uniform charter of the
District, Sections 190.006 through 190.041, Florida Statutes.
As to methodology, I looked at all 26 subjects, 26 goals and several related policies under
each goal in the State Plan from this perspective. First, I eliminated all subjects, goals and
policies of the State Plan that related neither to the development itself, nor to the creation and
establishment of the District to serve the development. Further, I rejected any goals, subjects and
policies that related only to the development and land use project. As a result, I was able to
identify certain remaining subjects, goals and policies, and to review, evaluate and consider
them, as they related, in my opinion, to the creation and establishment of a Community
Development District.
Using this methodology, I have determined that four goals and related policies actually
2
apply to the subject of this petition, the establishment of the Naples Reserve Community
Development District. Because the Florida Legislature, consistent with section l87.20121)(b)2,
FS., created the District by general law and provided that it should be established on the
proposed property, I will focus on the establishment aspect in this testimony. I have analyzed
each subject and goal and then identified various specific policies under each of them which
related to the District, once again, applying all of these factors to the assumption that the District
would exercise on the particular property in Collier County all of its specialized powers in
subsections (I) and (2) of Section 190.012, Florida Statutes.
Subiect and Goal 16
(16) LAND USE.-
(a) Goal.- In recognition of the importance of preserving the natural resources and
enhancing the quality of life of the state, development shall be directed to those areas which
have in place, or have agreements to provide, the land and water resources, fiscal abilities,
and service capacity to accommodate growth in an environmentally acceptable manner.
First, Subject Number 16 and its related goal apply because the subject of development
being directed to areas having, or programmed to have funded land and water resources, and
service capacity to serve growth in an environmentally responsible manner relates directly to the
District purpose of fiscal responsibility and adequate service supply through District provided
infrastructure improvements. I determined that establishment on the proposed property of the
District would not be inconsistent with this goal and subject because the Legislature Chapter 190,
F.S., has found already that services provided by a District can be "...a timely, effective,
responsive and economic..." means of accommodating development demands "...without
overburdening other governments and their taxpayers."
Policy 16(b)1. Promote state programs, investments, and development and redevelopment
activities, which encourage efficient development and occur in areas which will have the
capacity to service new population and commerce.
Regarding policy 16(b) I, establishment ofthe District is not inconsistent because Chapter
190, F.S., requires efficiency and responsibility in the utilization of District powers in providing
services to supply development demand and the requirements of county land use and
development decisions.
Policy 16(b )2. Develop a system of incentives and disincentives, which encourage
separation of urban and rural land uses while protecting water supplies, resource
development, and fish and wildlife habitats.
Regarding policy 16(b)2, a District, when established, is required by law to provide
service capacity in areas designated for urban services, and to provide such services in an
environmentally sensitive manner. The District is not inconsistent with policy 16(b)2 of Chapter
187, F.S.
3
Policy 16(b )5. Encourage and assist local governments in establishing comprehensive
impact-review procedures to evaluate the effects of significant development activities in
their jurisdictions.
Based on the fact that the District, when established, must report annually for such
facilities using comprehensive review procedures set forth in Section 189.415, F.S., it is not
inconsistent with Policy 16(b)5 of Chapter 187, F.S.
Subiect and Goal 18
(18) PUBLIC FACILITlES.-
(a) Goal.- Florida shall protect the substantial investments in public facilities that already
exist and shall plan and provide for and finance new facilities to serve residents in a timely,
orderly, and efficient manner.
Next, I determined that Subject 18 and its related Goal would be directly implemented
through the establishment of the District through the responsible provision of services and
facilities when needed. Based on that determination, the District would not be inconsistent with
this subject and goal.
Policy 18(b)3. Allocate the costs of new public facilities on the basis of the benefits received
by the existing and future residents.
Through an understanding of the principle behind the establishment of a District, where
facilities and services provided by the District are paid for by those whose property benefits from
those facilities and services through ad valorem taxes, non-add valorem special assessments or
user fees, [find that the District will implement policy 18(b)3, and therefore, in my opinion, is
consistent with the policy.
Policy 18(b )4. Create a partnership among state government, local governments, and the
private sector, which would identify and build needed public facilities and allocate the costs
of such facilities among the partners in proportion to the benefits accruing to each of them.
In regard to Policy l8(b )4, the District ~ a partnership between and a coinciding of State
government, other local government, and the private sector, given that a District's charge is to
utilize its statutory powers for the provision of infrastructure only in conformance with local and
state regulations as applied to the development and developer. Thus, establishment of the
District is not inconsistent with this policy.
Policy 18(b)5. Encourage local government financial self-sufficiency in providing public
facilities.
In regard to Policy l8(b)5, the District, if established, would be a single and special
purpose local government, and would be self-sufficient in the provision of infrastructure systems,
4
--...., -
services and facilities given that it would not draw upon other County resources. The
establishment of the District on the proposed property would not be inconsistent with this policy.
Policy 18(b)6. Identify and implement innovative but fiscally sound and cost-effective
techniques for financing public facilities.
The establishment of the District is the demonstration of Policy 18(b )6's intent, whereby
the District is an innovative means of providing fiscally sound and cost effective service and
facility improvements. Establishing the District is not inconsistent with this policy. Further, the
District, when established, being a special purpose local government, would have limited powers
to design, fund and construct services and facilities necessary to accommodate the project's
facility and service demand. The long-term management ofinfrastmcture, at sustained levels of
quality, is both fiscally sound and cost effective as an infrastructure management tool, which then
eliminates the need for excessive financing of the facilities. The District is not inconsistent with
this policy.
Policy 18(b)7. Encourage the development, use, and coordination of capital improvement
plans by all levels of government.
Given that the District, when established, is subject to the reporting provisions of Section
189.415, Florida Statutes, which in paragraph (6) states, "For purposes of the preparation or
revision of local government comprehensive plans required pursuant to s. 163.3161, a district
public facilities report may be used and relied upon by the local general purpose government or
governments within which the special district is located. The District, if established, will
implement this policy statement, and is therefore consistent.
Subiect and Goal 21
(21) GOVERNMENTAL EFFICIENCY.-
(a) Goal.- Florida governments shall economically and efficiently provide the amount and
quality of services required by the public.
Subject 21 deals with Government Efficiency and it, along with its goal, applies because
of the statutory finding that a District is a means to deliver services and facilities in a timely,
efficient and cost effective manner. The District is not inconsistent with Goal 21.
Policy 21(b)1. Encourage greater cooperation between, among, and within all levels
of Florida government through the use of appropriate inter-local agreements and mutual
participation for mutual benefit.
The Naples Reserve Community Development District, when established, becomes a
separate special purpose local government with the authority to provide public services and
facilities within a limited land area. As a local government, the District has the ability to enter
into inter-local agreements with mutual participation for the benefits to the land and residents
within the District, and the rest of the County. Given that any action on the part of the District
5
-
cannot be inconsistent with any portion of Collier County's Comprehensive Plan, including the
Intergovernmental Coordination Element, both governments will be operating within the
parameters of the Comprehensive Plan. This leads to close communication and coordination
between the levels of government, which provide a mutual benefit for both the County and
District. The District, in my opinion, implements this policy and is therefore consistent.
Policy 21(b)2. Allow the creation of independent special taxing districts, which have
uniform general law standards and procedures and do not overburden other governments
and their taxpayers while preventing the proliferation of independent special taxing
districts, which do not meet these standards.
Policy 21(b)2, captures the intent of why Community Development Districts are an
important and integral component in the management and financing of community development
facilities and services. The District government, created by uniform general law, and established
pursuant to that uniform general law on the proposed property, has the single and special purpose
of providing infrastructure to the community development through the exercise of its
management powers with related powers to fund that management function. Therefore, the
District meets general law standards expressly. It may attain its funding in part to pay for its
management functions through the sale ofbonds. If so, bonds are repaid by the landowners who
receive the special benefits of the systems, facilities and services provided by the District to
property; therefore, the District does not burden the general taxpayer with obligations to pay for
systems, facilities and services within the District boundaries.
Given that all Chapter 190, F.S., Districts are created by law and established by ordinance
or rule pursuant to the specific general factors considered by the county and petitioner as
specified by the law. The establishment of this type of District is consistent with the policy not to
allow the needless fragmentation, duplication or proliferation of local government systems,
facilities and services by independent taxing districts, which do not have those specific law
factors and standards. The District would serve to implement this policy, and in my opinion, can
be considered consistent.
Policy 21(b)5. Eliminate needless duplication of, and promote cooperation in, governmental
activities between, among, and within state, regional, county, city, and other governmental
units.
As stated previously, a District is statutorily required to report as to operation and demand
on its facilities pursuant to Section 189.415, F.S., which Collier County may utilize in its Annual
Update and Inventory Report pursuant to its Comprehensive Plan. This, along with a District's
charge to operate in conformance with local, regional and state growth management
requirements, including the State mandated Intergovernmental Coordination Element's inter-
local agreements, proves, in my opinion, that the District would not be inconsistent with Policy
21(b)5.
Policy 21(b)9. Encourage greater efficiency and economy at all levels of government
through adoption and implementation of effective records management, information
management, and evaluation procedures.
6
Information and records analysis and management are an operational requirement of
Chapter 190, F.S., through record keeping, disclosure, and government-in-the-sunshine. This, in
my opinion, effectively implements the call for efficiency in government set forth in Policy
21 (b)9, thereby making a District consistent with that policy.
Subiect and Goal 26
(26) PLAN IMPLEMENT ATION.-
(a) Goal.- Systematic planning capabilities shall be integrated into all levels of government
in Florida with particular emphasis on improving intergovernmental coordination and
maximizing citizen involvement.
Subject No.26 addresses plan implementation. Its related goal sets forth that systematic
planning capabilities shall be integrated into all levels of government in Florida, with particular
emphasis on improving intergovernmental coordination and maximizing citizen involvement. As
stated previously, a District has a statutory mandate to report information concerning District
operations. Further, a District being a special purpose government must advertise its regularly
scheduled meetings, ensuring the opportunity for public comment. The District, if established, in
my opinion, is consistent with this goal and would implement it.
The Legislature provided for the establishment of a district by ordinance or rule on
proposed property to coincide the best aspects of three different interests while eliminating the
less desirable growth management aspects of those three alternatives so far as provision of
infrastructure to community developments is concerned. First, the best interest or capabilities of
the county involve planning and implementing public policy based on health, safety and welfare
requirements and state and local comprehensive planning and related environmental and land use
permitting and development orders. This set of county strengths is coincided with the expertise
of a landowner-developer to market the development and to tie marketing to phasing and
absorption rates and other matters involving the art, science and technology of high quality
community development enhanced by county policies, regulations and requirements; these
strengths are then coincided with the strength of the District to construct and maintain at
sustained levels of high quality the basic infrastructure in a manner that is not inconsistent with
the joint work product of the county and the landowner-developer. The permitting and planning
process jointly exercised by the county and the landowner-developer adds value to the raw land
and this intrinsic value is enhanced further as found by the Florida Legislature, through the use of
the independent community development district. The reason is because the community
development district has one single special purpose that it exercises through pinpointed and
focused management accountable to the people and landowners closest to the District. The
Florida Legislature created the District charter, and authorized its establishment by rule or
ordinance, in order to provide this highly specialized single-purpose, efficient and accountable
alternative to manage the delivery of infrastructure. The coinciding of these three interests then
allows for collaboration through such mechanisms as inter local government agreements under
section 163.01, FS., and the provision of capital improvements with related financing tied to
land-use phasing through sections 189.415(2) and (6), FS. This coinciding would not allow for
7
,.,~,-,,-
appropriate collaboration ifit were not for the fact that the less desirable aspects of the county
and the landowner-developer alternative were not eliminated through this approach. Such less
desirable aspects for the county alternative are the fact that it has a plethora oflegitimately
countervailing economic, financial and political duties, responsibilities and goals and has
substantial overhead, which raised serious questions in the Legislature about the efficacy of using
the general purpose county government for the provision of certain specific and special purpose
infrastructure phased out to a particular community development. The Legislature was also quite
concerned that the county horizons for the exercise of its economic, political and legal
imperatives were relatively short-term in thinking and approach (re-election cycles). The
negatives for the landowner-developer alternative were its relative lack of accountability and the
Legislature was in particular concerned about the even shorter time frames for political,
economic and business imperatives because developers would be looking mostly to quarterly and
annual profit statements as benchmarks, therefore putting into question seriously the long-term
consistency and longevity of constructive developer involvement as a way to respond to the
interests of the landowners and residents. Even private homeowner associations as determined
by the Legislature are essentially private entities without the power of governmental enforcement
and without professional management with expressed and focused attention, not just on common
areas, but on the planning, construction, implementation and maintenance of basic infrastructure,
short-term and long-term. Therefore, the coinciding as envisioned by chapter 190, FS.,
eliminates the negative and enhances the positives of the three basic alternatives to provision of
infrastructure, which can be collaborated with more efficiency, accountability and fairness.
Policy 26(b )2. Ensure that every level of government has the appropriate operational
authority to implement the policy directives established in the plan.
By virtue of the fact that the District, as created by and established on this proposed
property pursuant to Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, must not be inconsistent with any applicable
portion of the State Comprehensive Plan, a District is granted the operational authority to
implement policies of the Plan. The District is not inconsistent with Policy 26(b)2.
Policy 26(b)3. Establish effective monitoring, incentive, and enforcement capabilities to see
that the requirements established by regulatory programs are met.
Policy 26(b)3 calls for measures to assure that regulatory programs are adhered to. A
District is not exempted from any applicable local, regional or state growth management
regulatory programs, thus the Naples Reserve Community Development District is not
inconsistent with this policy.
Policy 26(b)8. Encourage the continual cooperation among communities which have a
unique natural area, irrespective of political boundaries, to bring the private and public
sectors together for establishing an orderly, environmentally, and economically sound plan
for future needs and growth.
The District is required to operate in the sunshine, encouraging public participation, and
8
as stated previously, reporting of the District's facilities and services status to the County
government provides a mechanism for cooperation between the general purpose and special
purpose governments. A District, in my opinion, not only is consistent with Policy 26(b)8, it
implements it.
I have also reviewed all the subjects, goals and policies which I have determined do not
apply to the District, and it is my professional opinion that establishment ofthe District is
therefore, not inconsistent with any of those subjects, goals and related policies.
From a planning perspective, (as to management and financing of all the basic
infrastructure systems, facilities and services which the District by law is chartered to provide),
my opinion is that the creation by law and establishment by ordinance of the District is not
inconsistent with any subject, goal and policy of the State Comprehensive Plan, as amended.
The Collier County Local Government Comprehensive Plan is set forth in Collier County
Ordinance No. 89-05, as amended. This Plan is currently in force and effective in Collier
County subject to general law. No county plan or ordinance, under charter home rule or non-
charter home rule, may be inconsistent with the plan or any other general law. Therefore, the
county plan may not be inconsistent with Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, the express general law
by which the community development district was created and pursuant to which it is to be
established by county ordinance on the proposed property.
Under the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development
Regulation Act, Chapter 163, part II, Florida Statutes, as amended, the Plan consists of various
components, elements and other designations. By way of methodology, I applied each special
power available to the Community Development District under all of Section 190.012, Florida
Statutes, to every element, component, section and other aspect of the Collier County
Comprehensive Plan. I have applied this Plan as a planner in order to determine whether there is
any particular inconsistency with the Plan from creation and establishment of the District.
The detailed methodology I used to make this determination is similar to that I outlined
with regard to the State Plan. First, I eliminated certain goals, objectives, policies, elements,
components, sections and portions, which do not address creating and establishing the District on
the proposed property; I also rejected those which relate strictly to community developments.
These subjects are irrelevant to the creation and establishment of the District. After eliminating
these matters, I identified and evaluated the remaining parts of the Plan as to whether creation
and establishment of the District, exercising any and all of its special powers, would be
inconsistent.
As to these goals, policies, components, elements, sections and other aspects of the Plan
which relate to creation and establishment of the District, I noted five for the purposes of this
planning analysis.
The establishment of the Community Development District, whose purpose is to provide
its governmental services attendant to Naples Reserve's basic infrastructure, complies fully with
9
the goals, objectives and policies of the Collier County Growth Management Plan.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT
Objective 1.2: Financial Feasibility. Future development will bear a proportionate cost of
facility improvements necessitated by growth. Future Developments payments may take
the form of impact fees, dedication of land, provision of public facilities, and future
payments of user fees, special assessments and taxes.
Naples Reserve CDO will pay fees to the County, property taxes and non-ad valorem
special assessments and fees and charges to the District.
PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT--POTABLE WATER SUBELEMENT
Policy 1.2.6: Where Community Development Districts, or other similar special districts
are established to provide a tool for developers to finance infrastructure or other purposes,
wholly or partially within the Collier County Water-Sewer District, water service shall be
connected to the regional system, and internal facilities shall be conveyed when acceptable
to the Collier County Water-Sewer District for operation and ownership...
Naples Reserve CDD will provide and maintain potable water infrastructure to support
the proposed development, and will connect the system to Collier County consistent with the
Collier County Utilities Ordinance. The ~istrict is consistent with this Policy.
RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT
Objective ].4: Continue formal mechanism to improve and coordinate efforts among levels
of government and the private sector in order to provide recreation a] opportunities.
Naples Reserve CDD will provide extensive passive and active recreation and open space
facilities throughout the project site. The project will include natural preserves, lakes, parks, and
active recreation facilities such as tennis, swimming, and health club. Naples Reserve CDD,
through its management and related financing of value enhancing improvements, is consistent
with the Collier County Policy 1.4 in its commitment to provide on-site recreational facilities.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT
Goal] and Objective 1.1.: Provide for the continual exchange of information and the use
of any intergovernmental coordination mechanisms to achieve compatible and coordinated
plans.
Naples Reserve has extensively coordinated with various public and private sector
agencies in the delivery of services, such as Collier County and Florida Power and Light to insure
that services are coordinated and non-duplicative.
10
Once established, the Naples Reserve CDD may enter into interlocal agreements such as, but not
limited to, the Collier County Water-Sewer District, Collier County, or other Community
Development Districts.
FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT
Objective 5 and Policy 5.1: In order to promote sound planning, ensure compatibility of
land uses and further the implementation of the Future Land Use Element. All rezonings
must be consistent with the Collier County Growth Management Plan.
Naples Reserve is a mixed use master planned community, which has utilized the Planned
Unit Development zoning district alternative to establish the development program, and the
establishment of the Community Development District to provide specialized local governmental
infrastructure systems, facilities and services. The project site is located in the area designated
Urban, Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict of the Mixed Use District, and Receiving lands
within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, of the Agricultural/Rural Designation, as depicted on
the County Future Land Use Map. The project is consistent with the permitted land uses,
densities and policies of the Future Land Use Element of the Collier County Growth
Management Plan, and the Community Development District is consistent with these policies
because the District plans, implements, constructs and maintains, both short-term and long-term,
basic systems, facilities and services implementing to the county capital improvement element
which is tied to the county future land use element.
Having thoroughly reviewed the Plan of Collier County as it may be related to the
creation and establishment of a District pursuant to Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, I found that the
District on the proposed property is not inconsistent with goals, objectives, policies, sections or
portions which were found not to be applicable to the establishment ofa District.
Based upon the aforementioned findings, the creation and establishment of the District on
the proposed property would not be inconsistent with any goals, policies, sections or portions of
the Plan, even if it were to exercise any and all of its statutory powers. In fact, the District
would further the Plan in general, and many of its specific components.
Further, the creation and establishment of the District would not be inconsistent with
those parts of the Plan which do not relate to the creation and establishment of a District.
9. Do you have an opinion as to Factor Three relating to size, compactness and
contiguity?
Factor three deals with whether the area ofland proposed by the petitioner to be within
the District is of sufficient size, is sufficiently compact, and is sufficiently contiguous to be
developable as one functional interrelated community.
Key terms and words need to be defined or put in proper context from a planning
perspective as related to the factor and infrastructure delivery. A "community" is a unified body
11
-"'...-.
of individuals living in a particular area linked by common, social, political or economic interest.
Community governments provide people with those facilities and services they desire to live in
the community. These include water, sewer, police, fire protection, roads, parks libraries and
some social services such as childcare, affordable housing assistance and health care.
From the planning perspective the term "functional interrelated community" means that the
ftmemlmrnf'tr'MT!mlll'tlly I'!ItIst'l'f~'~'i'l"lnl6'[i6fig-range plan to analyze the future needs of
the community. Each function requires a funding source and an understanding of the size of the
community's needs so as to handle the growth and development of the community. Additionally,
the land area of a community must be of sufficient size to accommodate the permitted land uses
and the required, interrelated infrastructure facilities and services. Functional interrelation means
that each community function has mutual relationship to the other. Each function must be
designed to contribute to the development or maintenance of the larger whole, or as used here,
the community.
Under this factor, using the understanding I outlined of a functional interrelated
community above, I can determine whether the actual physical area within Collier County on
which the District would function to provide infrastructure to the proposed community
development raises any particular problems as to size, compactness or contiguity.
The size of the land area for the Community Development District is approximately 688.1
acres. In my opinion, the size is sufficient to operate as a community because it has been master
planned to be efficient in land utilization, to provide for all land uses necessary to be physically,
and socially self sustaining.
Compactness relates to closeness in distance between the lands within the development.
It is a spatial term used to describe property that is close together. Having reviewed the Naples
Reserve Community Development District's land area, I find that its boundaries are sufficiently
compact, have no major obstacles separating the land uses, and are not irregular in shape. It is
not substantially divided and the land area is such that there can be both physical and social
functions. In my opinion, therefore, the land area within the proposed community development,
which would be serviced by the District, is sufficiently compact to be a functional interrelated
community.
Contiguity is another spatial term, which can describe lands, which are adjacent, where all
parts of a project are either in actual contact or are separated by no more than a road or street or a
small separation. The properties must be close enough to allow the cost effective and efficient
use of infrastructure, services and design. The actual touching of property lines is not required
for property to be sufficiently contiguous for planning purposes. In reviewing the land area
which will be serviced by the Naples Reserve Community Development District, I believe that
the land is sufficiently contiguous to be a functional interrelated community because it is
spatially close together, completely contiguous, and it is large enough in land area to allow for
the efficient provision of infrastructure systems, facilities and services.
10. Skipping to Factor Six, relating to the amenability of the development to special
district governance, what is your professional opinion with regard to compliance with this
12
factor?
This factor, dealing with land area, is more appropriately analyzed out of numerical order
so as to be associated with the preceding factors, which also deal with land area issues. Factor six
deals with whether the area that will be serviced by the District is amenable to separate special-
district government. I have reviewed information about this proposed land area from the District
governance perspective. In order to do so, I have determined that the terminology "separate
special district-governance" means governance, created by law and established by law through
petition and vote pursuant to the Board of County Commissioners, with limited special functions
and powers to levy taxes or special assessments and non-lienable charges and fees within a
legally defined geographical area. The District, if established, would be a special district
government with such capabilities.
The term "amenable" can be defined to be an appropriateness for accountability, or
responsIve.
Having determined that the land area is sufficient size, and is sufficiently compact and
sufficiently contiguous to be functional as an inter-related community, I now, as a planner, must
determine whether that land area is also amenable to being governed by the Community
Development District as set forth in its uniform charter created by law as set forth expressly in
Section 190.006 through 190.041, Florida Statutes. I have reviewed this subject from the
potential exercise by the District of any and all of its special powers in that charter.
In my opinion the land area for the District is amenable to special district governance
because the land area proposed to be established as a District has the need for the services and
would benefit from the facilities that the special district would provide, and through my previous
findings, the land area is of sufficient size, sufficiently compact and contiguous to be a functional
interrelated community.
11. Do you have a professional opinion as to Factor Five which relates to compatibility
with existing services and facilities?
Factor five deals with whether the community development services and facilities of the
District will be incompatible with the capacity and uses of existing local and regional community
development services and facilities,
By legislative mandate, all actions and implementation of any or all of the District powers
are governed by and must not be inconsistent with the Collier County Growth Management Plan.
This insures compliance with County land development regulations and concurrency
requirements.
I have reviewed the proposed property on which the state-created District will be
established to determine if there are any regional systems, services or facilities, which through
their existence may be problematic as to incompatibility, related to District functions, and found
no such facilities. Therefore, no problems would be created.
13
12. Finally, what is your opinion with regard to Factor Four relating to alternatives to
providing services?
Factor four must logically be taken out of numerical order. lt deals with alternatives,
essentially requiring the Board of County Commissioners to use relevant, material and pertinent
information as to the various alternative ways to provide basic systems, facilities and services to
the community development.
From a planning perspective there are three alternative ways to provide basic systems,
facilities and services to the community development on this property in Collier County. The
first is private, through developer managed improvements, separate private infrastructure
contractors, a private utility company, a homeowners association, or any combination of these
private means of providing community development services and facilities along with related
financing powers. The second alternative would be local general purpose public, either through
the County itself or by County management and financing through dependent districts, or county
management but with financing through the use of County Municipal Service Taxing Units
(MSTU), or County Municipal Service Benefit Units (MSBU). Finally, the third alternative
would also be public, but through the specialized, limited and single purpose Community
Development District provided for by Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, which coincides both public
and private interests and capabilities.
As previously stated in response to Goal 26, the Legislature provided for the
establishment of a district by ordinance or rule on proposed property to coincide the best aspects
of three different interests while eliminating the less desirable growth management aspects of
those three entities so far as provision of infrastructure to community developments is concerned.
First, the best interest or capabilities of the county involve planning an implementing public
policy based on health, safety and welfare requirements and state and local comprehensive
planning and related environmental and land use permitting and development orders. This set of
county strengths is coincided with the expertise of a landowner-developer to market the
development and to tie marketing to phasing and absorption rates in other matters involving the
art, science and technology of high quality community development enhanced by county policies,
regulations and requirements; these strengths are then coincided with the strength of the District
to construct and maintain at sustained levels of high quality the basic infrastructure in a manner
that is not inconsistent with the joint work product of the county and the landowner-developer.
The permitting and planning process jointly exercised by the county and the landowner-
developer adds value to the raw land and this intrinsic value is enhanced further by the intent of
the Florida Legislature through the use of the independent community development district. The
reason is because the community development district has one single special purpose that it
exercises through pinpointed and focused management accountable to the people and landowners
closest to the District. The Florida Legislature created the District charter, and authorized its
establishment by rule or ordinance, in order to provide this highly specialized single purpose
efficient and accountable alternative way to manage the delivery of infrastructure. The
coinciding of these three interests then allows for collaboration through such mechanisms as
14
interlocal government agreements under section 163.0 I, FS., and the provision of capital
improvements with related financing tied to land-use phasing through sections 189.415(2) and
(6), FS-. 'Ihio M;nl'i~!.\IOu.ld not ali0w for appropriate collaboration if it were not for the fact
that the less desirable aspects of the county and the landowner-developer were not eliminated
through this approach. Such less desirable aspects for the county are the fact that it has a
plethora of legitimately countervailing economic financial and political duties, responsibilities
and goals and has substantial overhead, which raised serious questions in the Legislature about
the efficacy of using the county for the provision of certain specific infrastmcture phased out to a
particular community development. The Legislature was also quite concerned that the county
horizons for the exercise of political and legal imperatives were relatively short-term in thinking
and approach (re-election cycles). The negatives for the landowner-developer were lack of
accountability and the Legislature was in particular concerned about the even shorter time frames
for political economic and policy imperatives because developers would be looking mostly to
quarterly and annual profit statements as benchmarks, therefore questioning seriously the long-
term consistency and longevity of developer involvement as a way to respond to the interests of
the landowners and residents. Even private homeowner associations as determined by the
Legislature are essentially private entities without the power of governmental enforcement and
without professional management with expressed and focused attention not just on common
areas but on the planning, construction, implementation and maintenance of basic infrastructure,
short-term and long-term. Therefore, the coinciding as envisioned by chapter 190, FS.,
eliminates the negative and enhances the positives, which can be collaborated with more
efficiency, accountability and fairness.
Planning considerations needed to determine the best alternative to deliver basic
infrastructure to community developers are whether the alternative was able to provide the
highest quality services and facilities; whether the alternative was capable to deliver the facilities
and services in a timely manner when the community development service and facility demand
occurs; whether the alternative had a means of management to be responsive to the community
development over the long term; and whether the alternative could obtain and maintain short-
term and long-term financing to facilitate the management benefits.
Regarding the supply of infrastructure in advance of the impacts of the actual
development, concurrency is an important consideration. In this regard, it is vital to have an
understanding of the community development infrastructure commitments during the master
planning process to properly and efficiently phase the construction of the community
development facilities. This allows a full utilization of constructed facilities before new branches
of those facilities are constructed. The statutory District reporting mandates described previously
can be utilized by Collier County as a concurrency management mechanism to implement
applicable provisions (i.e., Future Land use Element, Capital1mprovement Element, etc.), of its
Growth Management Plan. The Community Development District alternative means of
providing community development systems, facilities and services allows for a cooperative
concurrency management program between the County general purpose government and the
District special purpose local government.
Long term and sustained adequacy and efficiency of infrastructure are important, and I
t5
note that among the three alternatives, the District would more closely and efficiently manage
services and facilities given the District's sole responsibility is the community development's
infrastructure needs, both immediate and in the long term. Further, a District can be more
responsive to the residents of the community development and other affected parties, than can be
provided by the alternatives, which either have a broader public accountability, or narrowed
interests.
Regarding the important planning principle oflong term implementation and
maintenance, I find that among the three alternatives the District's unique operational and
management role would provide the community development residents greater assurance of the
maintenance of the community development services and facilities which would not be otherwise
be provided for by the alternatives at such a high level of quality, particularly in the long term.
Collier County could supply the community development infrastructure, but it does not have the
unfettered opportunity for phasing flexibility, nor does it have the luxury of sole focused
attention for monitoring and maintenance as would a District. This is again due to Collier
County's general purpose, where it must be responsive to multiple community developments and
other special interests, whereas a District created by and established pursuant to Chapter 190,
Florida Statutes, has a singular and special purpose of providing to the community development
that it serves specific systems, facilities and services. The private installation of community
development infrastructure, while it may provide, at least for the short-term, quality systems,
services and facilities may not have the management and maintenance longevity, particularly
when the community development is "built-out" and traditionally turned over to homeowners
and/or condominium associations which traditionally are only interested in their individual
association matters.
The establishment of the Naples Reserve Community Development District on the
proposed property is the most appropriate means of providing community development systems,
services and facilities because it is functionally involved in the overall physical master planning
of the development, equitably distributes the costs and responsibilities to the users of the
systems, services and facilities, provides for long term maintenance, and provides a greater
assurance that the Naples Reserve Community Development District is the most appropriate
means of providing community development systems, services and facilities because it is
functionally involved in the overall physical master planning of the development, equitably
distributes the costs and responsibilities to the users of the systems, services and facilities,
provides for long term maintenance, and provides a greater assurance that the residents served by
the Naples Reserve Community Development will have a sustained quality oflife.
13. Does this conclude your testimony?
Yes, it does
16
STATE OF FLORIDA)
COUNTY OF COLLIER)
I, DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk of Courts in and for the
Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Collier County, Florida, do
hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct
copy of:
ORDINANCE 2008-37
Which was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners
on the 22nd day of July, 2008, during Regular Session.
WITNESS my hand and the official seal of the Board of
County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this 28th
day of July, 2008.
DWIGHT E. BROCK
Clerk of Courts and Clerk
Ex-officio to B?ard'/'o.f
County Commissi'oners
By: Martha
Deputy
~.