The URL can be used to link to this page

CCPC Backup 11/19/2009 R CCPC REGULAR MEETING BACKUP DOCUMENTS NOVEMBER 19, 2009 AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 8:30 A.M., THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 2009, IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, 3301 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST, NAPLES, FLORIDA: NOTE: INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES ON ANY ITEM. INDIVIDUALS SELECTED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZATION OR GROUP ARE ENCOURAGED AND MAYBE ALLOTTED 10 MINUTES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM IF SO RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIRMAN. PERSONS WISHING TO HAVE WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC MATERIALS INCLUDED IN THE CCPC AGENDA PACKETS MUST SUBMIT SAID MATERIAL A MINIMUM OF 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC HEARING. IN ANY CASE, WRITTEN MATERIALS INTENDED TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CCPC SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MATERIAL USED IN PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CCPC WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF THE RECORD AND WILL BE A V AILABLE FOR PRESENT A TION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IF APPLICABLE. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE CCPC WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. ROLL CALL BY SECRETARY 3. ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA 4. PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - OCTOBER 15, 2009, OCTOBER 19, 2009 GMP, AND OCTOBER 20, 2009 GMP 6. BCC REPORT- RECAPS -NOVEMBER 10, 2009 7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT 8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS - 2007/2008 TRANSMITTAL CYCLE GMP AMENDMENT A. Petition: CP-2008-3, Petition requesting an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map and Map Series, to create the Golden Gate Parkway Mixed- Use Subdistrict to allow 100,000 square feet of commercial uses of the C-l through C-3 zoning districts, and residential multi-family use at a base density of3.55 dwelling units per acre with allowance for higher density for provision of affordable housing and for conversion of un-built commercial squan property located at the southwest corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Boul site of Naples Christian Academy (NCA) and a church), in Section 29, Township 49 South, Rani consisting of 0,20.71 acres. (Coordinator: Leslie Persia, Senior Planner) 1 ,,--, ".- -'" "-,.-~'-"~'"'''''' - ". ._.",,,~~~~-~--------..,- ..."._~<<.~. . -~.." B. Petition: V A-PL2009-1162, Elke Remmlinger-Behnke, as Trustee of the Bernd Schoenherr 1998 Irrevocable Trust, represented by Karen Bishop of PMS, Inc. of Naples, is requesting two (2) after-the- fact variances from Section 8.16 of Ordinance No. 82-52, Kings Lake Planned Unit Development, to reduce a required rear yard setback from 15 feet to 12.5 feet and to reduce a required side yard setback from 7.5 feet to 4.84 feet to permit a screened pool enclosure for a single family home. The subject .2H acre property is located at 2454 King's Lake Boulevard, in the King's Lake Unit 3, in Plat Book 13, Pages 33 and 34 of the Public Records of Collier County, in Section 7, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, AICP) C. Petition: CU-PL2009-170, First Haitian Baptist Mission, Inc., represented by Frederick E. Hood, AICP, of Davidson Engineering, Inc., is requesting a Conditional Use expansion in the Agricultural (A) zoning district pursuant to Land Development Code (LDC) Subsection 2.03.0 I.A.l.c.7. The proposed Conditional Use will permit expansion of a church by adding 1.550 square feet to an existing church building and by adding a new 19,281 square foot general purpose building. The 4.59 acre site is located at 14600 Tamiami Trail East in Section 12, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County. Florida. (Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, AICP) D. Petition: PUDZ-2007-AR-I2294, Theresa Cook, Executive Director of the Collier County Airport Authority and CDC Land Investments, Inc., represented by D. Wayne Arnold, AICP, of Q. Grady Minor and Associates, requests a rezone from the Industrial (I) and the Rural Agricultural with a Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO) Zoning Districts to the Airport Operations Planned Unit Development Zoning District (AOPUD) for a project to be known as the Immokalee Regional Airport Planned Unit Development. This project proposes to allow development of a maximum of 5,000,000 square feet of aviation and non-aviation development on 1,4840, acres of land located north of CR 846, in Sections 25, 26, 27, 34, 35, 36, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, and Sections 2 and 3, Township 47 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Kay Deselem, AICP) 10. OLD BUSINESS 11. NEW BUSINESS 12. PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM 13. DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA 14. ADJOURN 11/6/09 cepe Agenda/Ray Bellows/ld 2 AGENDA ITEM 9A Petition: CP-2008-3, Petition requesting an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map and Map Series, WILL BE SENT SEPARATELY VA-PL2009-1162 Date: 10-28-09 Page 1 of 8 ''''''''",,___~,._w . ''''..- . -......----- "..- AGENDA ITEM 9-B Co1ff:r County - ~ - STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION HEARING DATE: NOVEMBER 19, 2009 SUBJECT: V A-PL2009-1162, KING'S LAKE UNIT 3 LOT 26 PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: Owner: Elke Remrnlinger-Behnke, as Trustee of the Bernd Schoenherr 1998 Irrevocable Trust 2454 Kings Lake Boulevard Naples, FL 34112-5400 Agent: Karen Bishop PMS, Inc. of Naples 2335 Tamiami Trail North Suite 408 Naples, FL 34103 REOUESTED ACTION: To have the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an application for two (2) after-the-fact variances to allow for a screened pool enclosure for a single family home. The first variance is to reduce a required rear yard setback of 15 feet to 12.5 feet. The second variance is to reduce a required side yard setback of 7.5 to 4.84 feet as provided for in Section 8.16 of Ordinance Number 82-52, King's Lake Planned Unit Development. The requested action would allow a screened pool enclosure at ] 2.5 feet from the rear yard property line and 4.84 feet from the side yard property line. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject .26ct acre property is located at 2454 King's Lake Boulevard, in the King's Lake Unit 3, Block R, Lot 26, in Plat Book 13, Pages 33 and 34 of the Public Records of Collier County, in Section 7, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (See the location map on the following page.) VA-PL2009-1162 Date: 10-28-09 Page 1 of 8 " ~:il:::: .,,:5 _ Ii co. ~'" ~ _."> ~ if '" ~~,~ ;::.-;:; <;>~ t~ ':!I g ;: gl!~'~ ~/ .0 >-~ ~~ :3::'i ~ ~ /~ ;~ "f:C~~ f'''' ~~:/ '0 "'I!~< iJ!i It"lJ 'J' S--j ~~ ,/;~ '''' d J) il~ \- j';z,/ J_:,'L ~~f '- I 1--' \ '>-:1'1 ,,- a'~Q~ 'J"LllndJdOdlJl~~ IT .1 L h~ 1 ~~ - -'11 .~l I ~~" I ~ 1 ~ '" \lr' ,.. I JCo"" ~ "" ~,"J', I, .1 ", I I::,c i ':'''_ L' I [ .::::' '/:'-if,:/ ;/ ;;,j~: I Il ,,:'. ";::F:'""----~. -! ',";:;,:; ~-'c,,'-"'3 I.l~; ,". j' "f/.;. ';' '1,1,.1'"" ,/ '_,'0'," . ,'f' _._j~, i' '"i( il ' ".i ,~ Ii' ":1 'I '\ _.l. J. ;1 ~I " I ' 1 -' , , - , r," I I' ,II IU" ': '- II 'I . -- r II ,~_,'!)/ ill" 'v,/::ulll~r-:,I 'I~~lll,.-<-"-,'i ~ ,I, I ' ~_L of'''''' -._~, --'-,,,,,,,,,,,,,,"~__;;.-_.<,.__r~..,,,_~_~~_." "-~C__>T__ ,~_ ,_,.' ,. ,_.~-~,.c_."",-_" ~.. ,'_,'_ ,,",_~c._1. "=.~~_.." _~~ _..~~. _ "_n"".~......,.""",.M"h_&.....",,,,,,,,,,-,....,,....,_,,....~,_,. ~..,.."",~_ "'u.'~ ^" f:- 15~ II , " "" " ,-- I , . , W w w " " ---- ---1M ~--. , ~--1 " c I~G~---i -------\ \ w .. \ \ )e I, < . ef---__ -- ~ , , .. ';:' ~ o " " - C < , . co ~ 0- - C < , z o w r-~ 000 o ~ - ,Ja.~ i O~1:f^3lnOa 31NIOd NM01;l,J l$]M lN3l"l3SI'] 1'1' <jJ ./" 1:>~>ll If,' // " ~, #(>- ~ \ @ 01Jv^:nnos ]>1\11 S?NI>1 I ! ".. i @ ~. 'y / w - 03 :=>.. Cl.~ , r< ~:Jc '. "-.'---- ~ I@ ~jt.-/" , o " < > w w o o . @-(/74f /Zf /" .) '< <i' //\ !\It-) \' 't..--------\ raY/" "/',, c--- ~~ i/l , ---f-~..j 11 ~ ~ I ~,~-o -1\<>; '\ @ .. - , , -- ~ " --. .~ , 0- i ....j 0- , . , , , 105:;; .," "' 13:i'8 .. ,. ,e, , -' ", -.,,~ >- 5'~':> ~~3 ,!S<<,;;" -. " .. - . , 0- > , . , ,< ~ 3~.' '.B>'5 '" .. .. ". '. "'~-- "<'" ~,-- '" "'''' " ., 0, Ii ;i NO"."..... .. 0- , ~ .....'mn..-s V1NlfS ! i'; , .. '.-- 0- il -CllllIlltl/V_ ! ! . r-Z 00 w- .~ 00 "'0 <L~ ! < .. , , N' --" . . .. . . e , j\"- s!! . . ,. ., c:.il o < o . o ! !,-- _., 1'-- avo~ N>1'fe AJ.N{l()) 86'" ~;:o! .. <:Un" O.llll'lJ.1.HI< DdJ9H31'''' ._, '''.'''0 - " :;, J ~ ~'~ ~ 0< "] ~,' '" 55~~ ~15<l':;' "'-' '" ll~IO" ".'U." .11 " ""Vl00OMHl .. I 0- . OOO-~)'ld'" , ., '0 ..0' -0- I .. . ~ ,> "dO '" _'j eO' """, .- .- . 0- .. -:;=- .. '^" 0" . " 0" c.. ~ ~, ',' ., , .. , , "' ~ '5 o . , -" " ,. " , .. .. OVOIlNO!SONlI\ll II ~ .., , G''" ..t' _...:!: , , c . LA - \~- \\( 7 /"-- /1/' -"--. '\ /-.. L_--l -..- -- -- n___ -. . >-" ~'" /' ,c 0- ~I"",=- ~-"'" w~~c ~,;;,,~ .. . N ~ " " . . , . '" " .. J' --+;1 -- ~'- ..J w;~;: [';:--I'il----1 I' _ :~i ilL_ _ji_,__~__ J f'ii ;11 II , '1 ,~i,' :' 11__ -<c. :-: i" ,~~.J ::','L; I' , "' ',~ ~ .- ',--, I I.,. T'i 'i I ..' "" 'I.,', "'J,J"" .'- I i --- < " o~ ::>~ Cl.~ o o / , , -- . . " - ,. " e .. 0- " , ,.:" -;~' , ~ n~ XCQ! 01;l\l^31nOS3N?'>'1"I]l0l1:fH:J "" \ \:2I31:J101:1 31S~ 31138 - '-' / 1'. ~ ;(' . - , , \y-.< " C f; J , , '" o , " .. ~ // .. / , " C 0- . .. I ; ~/O: '" g o . i:'r--- ~ / vi) ,,^S ~ ~ (f S~"o yi' l 00,</ '> / , ,,~ " , '\ I I I I ~Ol_1 ~ " -- ~ 'I J ' '" , , .. -- . toE ~ " e -- " , , , , .. . , 1 , N , , " , , . " " ... " , 0- - .. , ! , i '\ \ I o , " D ~ , , F , , , " " ". '" ~ .. - " _r ._J I , , " ,"-, '-','~ " '-J i " . , n "-j, ,., ;, ',:";".~.-:j':,,, ':',::'-:"'";.-;p-:.~-~...n:::.::,;;r,:;:!!"!:1., a.. <( ~ CD Z - z o N N '" ~ ~ '" o o N --' a. " > ... Z o r- r- w a. a.. <( ~ z o - I- <( () o ....J lOT 26 APPROX. LOCATION EXISTING 1 STORY BUILDING (2454 KINGS LAKE BLVD) , v ~cI ;/~ LAKE TRACT 0 (DRAINAGE EASEMENT) E lO.D'p,ur APPROXIMATE] TOP OF BANK - P.R.M.- C2 , L2 SCALE: 1" ; 30' -:-10" - -, f21.21 POOL I 10,53' I SCREENED CONCRETE I POOL DECK , 17.97' }C. o " \0 .. - \jt:.,<<t.O <P CO -l' 'u'_ -;)'1-.--' ~.I,.1' , ;> ~ g - LOT 25 11 '" ~ 0 - ~ , , 10,0'P.U.E, ~ I I 5.0-----1 I I I -' , , 1--5.0 , , I BLOCK "R" - . PROPERTY / _'\ L1NE~ \ \ 484'_______ \ // \~ 5.09 - - / / EDGE OF CONCRETE POOL DECK - ~ \ V. '0>.' - 9.79' \ EDGE OF SCREEN CAGE , \ __-- <P \ />.,<<O"u'_ \ \\...~o v~ ~ . \ .0.... \ C> o. . ~, \ \ \ \ LOT 27 DETAIL NOT TO SCALE 10.0' \ \ P,U.E, / \-- \ \ 00"\- , \ \ / \ / ../ "....--5.0 \ _/ ~ / / /" /" - - (EXISTING DRIVES, WALKS AND UTILITIES NOT SHOWN) - --r BLOCf< "Q" I lOO'P.U.[, L I- " " 8 '" in (51 I- " " F.I.R. F,IR. L1 PCP. 274.73'(P) 274,73' (M) 1 ;<1 "I' _a . a . . alN " . ~I I ~ P,C.P. N89'55'41"E (BASIS OF BEARINGS) , ,0-0.-- KINGS LAKE BOULEVARD 84' RIGHT-Of-WAY (ROADWAY NOT SHOWN) -,--- ~ ~ LOT :3 LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT 25, BLOCK R, KINGS LAKE UNIT No, 3 ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 13 AT PAGES 33 AND 34 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA. LEGEND P.R.M. PERMANENT REFERENCE MONUMENT FOUND 4"x4" CONCRETE MONUMENT (BROKEN) FOUND PERMANENT CONTROL POINT (5/8" IRON ROO WITH ALUMINUM CAP) FOUND S/8" IRON ROD (NO ID) PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT INCORPORATED PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR AND MAPPF.R LICENSED BUSINESS ~~~~IDA ADMINISTRAT1VE CODE PRINTED MEASURED D P.C.P, @ F.I.R, P.U.E INC. P,S.M. L.B. F.AC. (P) (M) o SEP'. IGOg LINE TABLE 66LS SURVEYORS & MAPPERS. 'NC. LINE BEARING DISTANCE Ll NB9'SS'41"E 22.73 L2 Sa9'55'41"W 22.73 CURVE TABLE CURVE " C2 C3 RADIUS 272.00 9500 230.00 DELTA 44'30'00" 25'52'51" 25'52'51" CHORD BEARING N67"40'40"[ N76"59'lS,5"[ N76"S9'15"E LENGTH 211,25 42.91 103,89 CHORD 205,98 42,55 103,01 ~ - ~ - -~ - - C3 \ /" N44.34'20"W 137.16' 84,00 / " - ~ ------- - -------- / / / - -- -------- LOT 5 - \ LOT 4 NOTES: 1.) THIS SURVEY WAS PREPARED SPECIFICALLY AND EXCLUSIV(L Y TO SHOW THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE FIELD LOCATED POOL AND POOL DECI, TO THE FIELD LOCATED BOUNDARY OF LOT 26, BLOCK R. KINGS LAKE UNIT No, 3, 2.) BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON REFER TO THE CENTERLINE OF KINGS LAKE BLVD., KINGS LAKE UNIT No, 3 ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 13 AT PAGES 33 AND 34 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. 3,) lHIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECl TO EASEMENTS, RESERVA1IONS OR I<ESTRICTIONS OF RECORD, - cO W " < , ~ ^ , 4) DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON ARE IN rEET AND DECIMALS THEREOF. 5.) THIS SURVEY IS NOT VALID WITHOUT THE SIGNATURE AND THE ORIGINAL RAISED SEAL OF A FLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER 6,) FOUNDAT10NS BENEATH ,HE SURFACE. IF ANY, HAVE NOT BEEN LOCATED. , o o , , - ~ , , o CERTIFIED TO: 1.) PMS INC, OF NAPLES . w " . o w . , o CERTIFICATION: o '- o o w ^ W . I HEREBY ctRTIFY THAT O1-1IS SPECIFIC PURPOSE SURVEY WAS SURVEYED UNDER en RESPONSIBLE CHARGE ON 09/28/09 THIS SURVEY MEETS THE. MINIMUM TECHNICAL ST,l.ND~,RDS SET FORTH BY THE FLORIDA BOARD OF- PRon;:SSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS IN CHAPTER 61G17-6. F.A C PURSUANT TO S~jj()H ,1,U..Dn >~"'- STATUTES .:.:~ .1 "-- ---= t:J;J-I_~~1 O!} STEPHE,~ t:. BErRY, STATE OF fLORIDA. (P.L.S. #5295) BBLS SURVEYORS & ~.~APP[RS INC.. (L,B. #6753) . " o o " . ~ " w :2 " " " . a SPECIFIC PURPOSE SURVEY BBLS SURVEYORS & , ~ m D w n , . a n MAPPERS INC. a ,m 0 " LOT 26, BLOCK R, KINGS LAKE UNIT No.3, PLA T BOOK 13, N n m , ., . 1502-A RAILHEAD BL VD. " 8' . " - ~G6~&~A~R=N~SITTI~0 a " ~ "'2, NAPLES, FLORIDA 34110 ~ 9' ~ ~ ~ TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, ~~ ~ 0 COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA (239) 597-1315 D 0 . PURPOSEillESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: In 1983, the .26"= acre property was developed with a single family home. In 1991, a previous owner had applied for a pool and screen enclosure permit. In 1993, the pool and screen enclosure were constructed and received a certificate of occupancy from Collier County. In 1994, the present owner purchased the property. In 2005, the screen enclosure was damaged by a hurricane. In 2007, the owner attempted to replace the damaged screen enclosure in tne same location and was informed by Collier County permitting staff that the screen enclosure is encroaching into the required side and rear yard setbacks. Building Department Records show that the owner hired a different contractor from the original contractor who had applied for the building permit. The new contractor installed the encroaching screen enclosure without obtaining the required building permits. An anonymous complaint was filed with Code Enforcement; the case number is 2007060321. (Please see attached Code Case Detail Report and Building Permit Listing Report at the end of this Staff Report,) The minimum rear yard setback as provided for in Section 5.4.4.C. of the Kings Lake PUD is IS feet. The minimum side yard setback as provided for in Section 5.4.4.B. of the Kings Lake PUD is 7.5 feet. This variance request seeks two (2) after-the-fact variances as follows: I. A 2.5-foot reduction from a required rear yard setback of IS feet to allow a 12.5-foot rear yard setback. 2. A 2.66-foot reduction from a required side yard setback of 7.5 feet to allow a 4.84-foot side yard setback. The site plan entitled "Specific Purpose Survey" dated September 29, 2009, and prepared by BBLS Surveyors & Mappers Inc., illustrates the location of the screened concrete pool deck along with the existing 12.50 and 4.84 setbacks. (See the Site Plan on the previous page.) There have been no other variances granted within the King's Lake PUD. As previously stated, this screen enclosure along with the encroachrnent has been in existence since 1993. To date, no known complaints have been received from any neighboring properties. SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: North: A lake/drainage easement, with a zoning designation of King's Lake Planned Unit Development (PUD) East: Single-family residences on Lot 27, with a zoning designation of King's Lake Planned Unit Development (PUD) South: King's Lake Boulevard, an 84-foot right-of-way, then single-farnily residences with a zoning designation of King's Lake Planned Unit Development (PUD) West: Single-family residence on Lot 25, with a zoning designation of King's Lake Planned Unit Developrnent (PUD) VA-PL2009-1162 Date: 10-28-09 Page 4 of 8 qIlI. AERIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: The subject property is located in the Urban Mixed Use Residential land use classification on the County's Future Land Use Map (FLUM). This land use category is designed to accommodate a variety of residential uses including single family, multi-family, duplex, mobile home and mixed-use projects. As previously noted, the subject petition seeks a variance for a single family home that is located within a single-family subdivision, which is an authorized use in this land use designation, therefore, the single family home use is consistent with the FLUM. The Growth Management Plan (GMP) does not address individual variance requests; the Plan deals with the larger issue of the actual use. ANALYSIS: Section 9.04.01 of the Land Development Code gives the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) the authority to grant Variances. The Planning Cornmission is advisory to the BZA and utilizes the provisions of Section 9.04.03 A. through H. (in bold font below), as general guidelines to assist VA-PL2009-1162 Date: 10-28-09 Page 5 of8 in making their recommendation of approval or denial. Staff has analyzed this petition relative to these provisions and offers the following responses: a. Are there special conditions and circumstances existing, which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land, structure or building involved? Yes. The subject property is slightly pie shaped with the narrowest piece Incatt:d to the rear of the property where the existing screened pool enclosure is located. b. Are there special conditions and circumstances, which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property, which are the subject of the Variance request? Yes. The current homeowner purchased the home in 1994. The original home has a swimming pool and screen enclosure which was reviewed and permitted in 1991. The certificate of occupancy was granted in 1993 by Collier County. When a hurricane blew the screen enclosure over in 2005, the homeowner had expectations that it could be replaced in the same location. c. Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties for the applicant? Yes. A portion of the screen enclosure would have to be removed if a literal interpretation of the zoning code were applied. d. Will the Variance, if granted, be the minimum Variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety and welfare? No. The Variance proposed would not be the rninimum Variance to allow reasonable use of the existing screen enclosure. The screen enclosure has existed on the site for at least 12 years without complaint or issue. Approval of this Variance would not have a negative impact on standards of health, safety and welfare. e. Will granting the Variance confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district? Yes. A Variance by definition confers some dimensional relief from the zoning regulations specific to a site. However, no similar Variances have been granted in this immediate neighborhood. f. Will granting the Variance be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this Land Development Code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare? Yes. As previously stated, the encroachment by the existing screen enclosure has been in existence from 1993 until a hurricane blew the screen enclosure over in 2005. There have VA-PL2009-1162 Date: 10-28-09 Page 6 of 8 been no complaints from the neighbors regarding the 14 year location of the screen enclosure. g. Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf courses, etc.? Yes. There is lake located to the rear of the property. The existing location of the screen enclosure within 2.5 feet of the rear setback and 2.84 feet of the side setback does not obscure the lake view of the other neighboring properties. In addition, there is a dense landscape buffer between the screen enclosure and nearest neighbor, mitigating for the encroachment. h. Will granting the Variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan? Approval of this variance will not affect or change the requirements of the Growth Management Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: The EAC does not normally hear Variance petitions. Since the subject variance doesn't impact any preserve area, the EAC did not hear this petition. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report V A-PL2009-1162, revised October 27, 2009. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward Petition V A- PL2009-1162 Kings Lake Unit 3 Lot 26 to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) with a recommendation of approval. V A-PL2009-1162 Date: 10-28-09 Page 7 of 8 PREPARED BY: NANCY G DEPART Jh, {ttt Z\ A H, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER DAT ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REVIEWED BY: ((. 10 Z~ 0 RA YM D V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER D TE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ~-rn. SUSAN M. ISTENES, AICP, DIRECTOR DA T DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVED BY: S PH K. SCHMITT, ADMINISTRATOR MUNITY DEVELOPMENT & IRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION Collier County Planning Commission: MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN DATE Attachment: A. Pool Permit B. Pool Screen Permit C. Code Case Detail Report D. Building Permit Listing Report Tentatively scheduled for the January 12,2010 Board of County Commissioners Meeting V A-PL2009-1162 Date: 10-26-09 Page 8 of 8 . ATTACHMENT A , PLICATION DATE 11,")1/91 PERM IT NUMBER 910011611 WNER.. ITTMAN 454 KINGS LAKE BLVD. APLES FL 339620000 CONTRACTOR- NASSAU POOLS CONSTRUCTION. INC. 3420 WESTVIEW DRIVE NAPLES FL 339420000 643-0990 ROJECT NAME-PVT POOL DB ADDRESS- 2454 KINGS LAKE BLVD. EI, LOCATION-EAST UBDIVISIoN-KINGS ECTI oN- HJP- EGAL NAPLES LAKF RANGE - I~AP/AREA- GEo-CODE- TRACT-OOO BLK- LoT/PARCEL- UNIT- ERMIT TYPE- SWIMMING POOLS 1&2 FAMILY OST OF CONSTRUCTION- $22,000 APPROVAL DATE-l1/01/91 CONTACT PERSON-CONT CONTACT PHONE #- 643-0990 The above application has been examined and is hereby approved subject to the payment of $ provided by the Collier County Building Code and Ordinances. I J Payment Received by: Date Issued: T ilL ReceiptNo. ../ . 6\) f/q I Z 7 , , as All worlc under the approved build n permit shall comply with all applicable laws. codes. ordinances and additional stipulations and/or Conditions of Permit. The approved permit expires if worlc authorized is not commenced within six (6) months from date of issue. The permit fee will be doubled. plus a maximum daily penalty of $500.00 if work is staned without an approved permit. The permittee further understands that only licensed contractors may be employed and that the structure h In r until a Cenificate of Occupancy is issued. , t:... /1 P A J '=' (' ".> ./--' C'--. .' /,' c?-- / > .. . - - NOTICE: In addition to the requirements of this permit, there may be additional restrictions applicable to this property that may be found in the public records of this county. and there may be additional permits required from other governmental entities such as water management districts, Slate agencies. or federal agencies. Signature of Contractor . te . Customer ow - Records Room . Property Appraiser I .. Lobby File 1-91 WARNING TO OWNER: YOUR FAILURE TO RECORD A NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT MAY RESULT IN YOUR PAYING TWICE FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO YOUR PROPERTY. IF YOU INTEND TO OBTAIN FINANCING, CONSULT WITH YOUR LENDER ORAN ATTORNEY BEFORE RECORDING YOUR NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT. _.. ._,_____.~_.,_ '0- '" _~ ""'_' .,',=~~_",,,. ,"_'''',',., ,,,_,._.,,"~_~_' Y .,,',......,"".._..M.._ -, ._....."'...__..,,.~""_.,"'''_'''_'_''H~''.~.._ " '._.".,-.. , .~--,"'-~--_..._..._-_..._-,.__.. ". '. ... ~,,\1:Jl cou4- 8 ? ~ . 'd ..~ ~ COLLIER COUNTY CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION '" . "' '" OJ; c:> '" ?:! S ~/f ANt) oJ' PERMIT NO-910011611 . -"I~ ~ .J - . -. " CONTRACTOR-THRELKELD. THOMAS L. OWNER-PITTMAN JOB ADDR-2454 KINGS LAKE BLVD. TRACT- LOT- BLOCK- UNIT- FOLIO #- SUBDIVISION-KINGS LAKE TYPE OF OCCUPANCY-R/STRUC OTHER THAN BUILDINGS PROJECT NAME-PVT POOL WORK DESCRIPTION- THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS PROOF THAT SCOPE AS DESCRIBED ON THE PERMIT. DATE-06/24/93 n --- , . . .. .' - INSPECTION HISTORY JOB LOCATION-004-EAST NAPLES SUBDIVISION-KINGS LAKE JOB ADDRESS- 2454 KINGS LAKE BLVD. JOB NAME- DWELLING UNITS-OOOOO CONTRACTOR-NASSAU POOLS CONSTRUCTION, INC. PHONE- 643-0990 NO- PERMIT NO-910011611 MAIN PERMIT NO- OWNER-PITTMAN DATE ISSUED- 11/04/91 DATE APPROVED- 11/01/91 S.D.C. RECEIPT- WATER- BLOCK LOT/PARCEL UNIT TRACT SEWER- 000 COASTAL ZONE USE/OCC-R/STRUC OTHER THAN FLOOD EL- STRUCTURE-PVT POOL ~ BENCH MARK- COMMENTS-. vl LOCATION- CONTACT PERSON-CONT PHONE- 643-0990 ,******************************************************************************* SECTION TOWNSHIP RANGE MAP/AREA ,INE # NOTE LINE ******** INSPECTION HISTORY ********* 910011611 DATE TYPE COMMENCEMENT & GROUND INSP-MOORE, KERM INSP-MOORE, KERM .00 .00 11/07/91 PASS 11/07/91 PASS TOTAL FEES- .00 (. - ;;J. "]-'13 /.:J:/c. "67 () (<: /'tJ / 0;:: Screel'1 I I , / ,,- " 1\) ( , , . i -ri i-.../ , , \~. .. , \ . /), 1 ;.. U V.. I ,', .I '. I! I"'! \./ (, ( ~. , -._.-_~_.___.,",,"~.,__,.. ""'__"',~ '__"...~o____,"'"..~.._"._;_. . __.__._~ -",,,-- COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTACHMENT B PERMIT PERMIT #: ISSUED: ['lASTER #: 910011613 11-01-91 BY: LOAD o COA #: PERMIT TYPE: SCCG APPLIED DATE: 11-01-91 VALID #: APPROVAL DATE: 11-01-91 JOB ADDRESS: 2454 KINGS LAKE BLVD NB JOB DESCRIPTION: CPOOi:S~::::EN ) JOB PHONE: SUBDIVISION #: FLOOD MAP: ZONE: FOLIO #: 0000000000000000 BLOCK: LOT: ELEVATION: SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RANGE OWNER INFORMATION: PITTMAN 2454 KINGS LAKE BLVD KING LAKES NAPLES, FL 33962 CONTRACTOR INFORMATION: TRELKELD. THOMAS L. 3420 WESTVIEW DRIVE NAPLES,FL 34104 CERTIFICATE #: 10865 PHONE: 1941> 643-0990 FCC CODE: 329 CONSTRUCTION CODE: JOB VALUE: - STRUCT OTH THAN BLDG-POOL/SEAWALL/DOCK/F 10 / OTHER TOTAL SQFT: SETBACKS FRONT: REAR: SEWER: SEPTIC =ONTACT NAME: CONT :ONTACT PHONE: 19411643-0990 LEFT: WATER: RIGHT: WELL Per Collier County Ordinance No. 2002-01, as it may be amended, all ""rk must comply with all applicable laws, codes, ordinance~ and any additional stipulations or oonditions of this permit This pennit expires if""rk authorized by the permit is not commenced within six (6) months from the date of issuance ofthe permit Additional fees for failing to obtain permits prior to the commencement of oon!truction may be imposed. Permittee(s) further understands that any contractor that may be employed must be a licensed contractor and that the !tructure must not be used or occupied until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued. ~OTICE: PRIOR TO THE REMOVAL OF ASBESTOS PRODUCTS OR THE DEMOLITION OF A STRUCTURE, FEDERAL <\.ND STATE LAWS REQUIRE THE PERMITTEE (EITHER THE OWNER OR CONTRACTOR) TO SUBMIT A NOTICE OF mE INTENDED WORK TO THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (DEP), FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT DEP AT (239) 332-6975. In addition to the conditions ofthis permit, there may be additional restrictions applicahle to thi<> property that may be found in :he public records of this county, and there may be additiooal permits required from other governmental entities such as water nanagement districts, state agencies, or federal agencies. WARNING TO OWNER: YOUR FAILURE TO RECORD A NOTICE OF CO:MMENCEMENT MAY RESULT IN YOUR PAYING TWICE FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO YOUR PROPERTY. IF YOU INTEND TO OBTAIN FINANCING, CONSULT WITH YOUR LENDER OR AN ATTORNEY BEFORE RECORDING YOUR NOTICE OF CO:MMENCEMENT . I co Plus PAi"1ElA JUOY c:onneded to 8 l(J!'fU {;f):pW,.:,.Cot.l1fR:' . , , :' ,:: ,," '"4. . 'S\,...,._"'''-''.,........,. ".",e...,''- ,.. "~-'l'1''-'A'' .....-~~., >: """'" , , ,"''-' ......:-".-.,:;;:;,' ,."., .,.....__..~.:." .............' --.' ~~l..,__ ,..fjf, '.L~,""...+~'...,.., 1''' v..,,-,0,.y...::......;S. ;i:,,\;?:l,,',"ii,.v~.iid"+,0:;;' _~,;." ff':i~;;;<''''-:;;';%i'f0, ' ','" ..~ ...J.!;lJ2!.l File, Edit \liew Help CD-PlusThl ~ ~ ~ tor wmao,., l5/jGIl!r ,11. ~ ii g X ... ... J:<:I ",. , Add!""",IP"",,,~ I Cod. Enil"cement Permiltno I Dov. Review I Com Management I Qu6r CerU~~,,* Perm~!I; Impection$ Catt-Dce ~ CONo. I 22.90 Ceil Of Doc. Type .IF'NAL .:J Stawi I'SSUEO .:J Pcmwtt:lo. I 910011613 PermitT ype ISCCG Oetal J Addtioh~IDelai I A$;oci~ted T abIe.IUpdote Info I ~~---~~-- ".- [;::'~~I~-2~5'---P"f~:lu:~--.S~'~~~~:' I~INGS~=KE~:~O _ -~-=:-TY:'-I ---~- :n, I-__.~-] .-Qwner-..-....-.....--""...."....'...'"""'"""-...-' N~e IPITTMAN 'location Information~-~--~~-- Addre:$$ I Subdivi$ion I 0"", Block I Lol I Folio Number I R""" I T ow",h~ I S eellon I I "---_.._~---.------,._~-_.~-,_.__...._"._-"._-,,._---,------.._..~_.._----------~-~-~ 'tJtiity---......"'"'...-.---.'.----... C"""eny IELECTR'C "R.~ Name INMO Meter$ I Rel~a$eDale 16/24/1993 IilIlI II) startl J Ili 1_1c.1 ~ IDeSktop>> !MYoocuments n J ~'If';~:;""r,~;',D~'.kt(l~ . p IMyo""".n" >>ld>"-!~~4J)e,"1Jl 9:20AM Thursday, Oct 29, 2009 09:20 AM .-.......,"~..__.~-....-...." ""-._--,-"",. ..~.,_.__._-- - -,""~-'~"'" - .." . "'-~. CDPR2025 COlliER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY This Certificate 15 issued persuant to the certifying that at the time of issuance this ordinances of the county regulating building requirments of the Florida Building Code structure was In compliance with the various construction or use. For the following: PERMIT NBR: 910011613 CO NBR: 22490 STATUS: ISSUED CO TYPE: FINAL ISSUED DATE: June 24, 1993 ADDRESS: 2454 KINGS LAKE BLVD NB 3UBDIVISION: LOT: BLOCK: T.R.S.: SLUC CODE: UTILITY COMPANY: ELECTRIC JOB DESC: POOL SCREEN NUMBER OF METERS: OWNER: PITTMAN 2454 KINGS LAKE BLVD KING LAKES NAPLES FL 33962 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Note: A new certificate 15 required if the use of changed, or if alterations are made to the building certificate voids any certificate of prior date. the building or premises is or property described. A new :ollier County Board of County Commissioners :D-Plus for Windows 95/NT Printed on: Page 10/29/200' 1 of 9:20:03AM 1 --~~ _.~ HPIMlI08 HPIMl109 , ,- L. ~____.,,_..! ,-"_._.^----~ ____-1 t-PIMi161 HPIMI110 HPIMl111 HPIMl112 I-PIM1160 ~ YA C~'A L~/-JO ,[otvArl\c+ 60 ~ 0 ~ 5fl~(-otf Monday, Aug 13, 2007 09:13AM S lit l- 00 f(;/L, _ .__ ___._~~._._,___~__'_.__...~._ ___"___ ._.._.~___.w,""""_._. -......"" '...--- ~ ~ ~ode Case Detail Report CDPR4204 - Code Case Detail Report ATTACHMENT C CASE NBR: 2007060321 STATUS: OPEN CASE TYPE: ZONING ADDR NBR: 137942 LOCATION: FOLIO: 0000053003680005 AO NBR: INSPECTOR: 308306 MARIOBONO LEVEL: NOV 2454 KINGS LAKE BLVD KINGS LAKE UNIT 3 BLK R LOT 26 LOT: TAZ: 26 137 BLOCK: R PLANNING COMM: SUBDIV: (988)-Kings Lake Unit 3 EN ZIP: 341120000 OPEN DATE: DIRECTIONS: 06/13/2007 OPEN USER~ELICIAPULSE SEE Notes for ATF CLOSE DATE: DISPOSITION: CEB CLOSE CATEGORY: SWIMMING PRIORITY: 0 HEARING DATE: DESCRIPTION: NO POOL CAGE POOL ENCLOSURES LAST VISIT: 1015144 CONTACT? : PHYSICAL FILE ID: OR PERMANENT FENCE IN PLACE SINCE HURRRICANE WILMA 10/24/05. CONTACT INFORMATION: REMMLINGER-BEHNKE TR, PHONE: ELKE FAX TENANT INFORMATION: REMMLINGER-BEHNKE TR, PHONE: ELKE FAX: OWNER INFORMATION: REMMLINGER-BEHNKE TR, ELKE THE BERNARD SCHOENHERR REV/TR UTD 1/13/98 NAPLES, FL 341120000 PHONE: FAX: VIOLATOR INFORMATION: REMMLINGER-BEHNKE TR. ELKE THE BERNARD SCHOENHERR REV/TR OTD 1/13/98 NAPLES, FL 341120000 PHONE: FAX: COMPLAINANT INFORMATION: NAME/ADDRESS: PHONE: (239) 597-2711 FAX: 2425 KINGS LAKE BLVDRAY MONNOT VISITS: VISIT NBR INSPECTOR 997340 MARIOBONO SCHEDOLED DATE 06/13/2007 VISIT DATE 06/13/2007 REMARKS 155--205 ON SITE KNOCKED ON DOOR, NOH. HOUSE APPEARS VACANT. OBS POOL W/O PERMANENT PROTECTIVE BARRIER. TEMP BARRIER IS NOT SECURED. PHOTOS TAKEN PREPARE NOV. RESEARCH PERMITS. PERMIT ATTACHED HOWEVER CONTACT INFO ON PERMIT INDICATES CONTRACTOR HAS NOMBER DIS CONNECTED OTHER NUMBER IS ASSOCIATED W/INCORRECT PARTY. MAIL NOV CERTIFIED MAIL ALONG W/ORDINANCE. MAIL ANOTHER NOV W/ORDINANCE FIRST CLASS MAIL. MESS R/C 7-14-07 DSP :ollier County :D-Plus for Windows 95/NT Printed on: Page 10/20/2009 1 of 2:33:34PM 3 997587 MARIOBONO 07/20/2007 07/20/2007 1'05-1'15: - PERMIT - CANCELLED - SEE ATTACHED - ON SITE TO CONFIRM TEMP BARRIER STILL IN PLACE. DISCOVERED POOL ENCLOSURE ERECTED W/O PERMITS - RESIDENT/CONTRACTOR CANCELLED PERMIT DUE TO ENCLOSURE NOT MEETING SET BACK REQUIREMENTS . OWNER THEN HIRED NEW CONTRACTOR AND HAD POOL CAGE BUILT WITHOUT PERMITS. PHOTOS TAKEN - RETURN CASE FOR CEB PREP. ATTEMPTS TO CONTACT MS. CONVES (SIGNER OF GREEN CARD) UNSUCCESSFUL AFTER SEVERAL TRIES. LEFT CARD AT FRONT DOOR. . R/C 7/30/07 - MB#55 - IR 07/31/2007 450--455 ON SITE LEFT BUSINESS CARD. RESPONDENT LEFT MESSAGE ON MY PHONE WHILE I WAS ON VACATION. EXCHANGED MULTIPLE VMS. AWAITING RETURN CALL AND EXPLANATION OF POOL ENCLOSURE. MB55 R/C 8-6-07 DSP 08/09/2007 11'00 - 11'20: MET W/OWNER ON 8/8/07 - FURNISHED COPY OF PROPOSAL OF CONTRACTOR - PROPOSAL STATES PERMIT WOULD BE OBTAINED - CONTRACTOR APPEARS UNLIC. IN COLLIER COUNTY - IAN JACKSON HAD MEETING W/OWNER TODAY ( (ALEXANDRA COWLES) AND IS BEGINNING CASE- CONTRACTOR HAS YET TO RESPOND TO OWNER. R/C 9/10/07 - MB#S5 - IR 1002419 MARIOBONO 07/30/2007 1003348 MARIOBONO 08/09/2007 1004447 MARIOBONO 09/12/2007 * MS COWLES HAS ALREADY OBTAINED A GC/ENGINEER TO OBTAIN PERMITS* 09/12/2007 10'00-11'05: - MET WITH ALEXANDRA COWLES, OWNER'S DAUGHTER, ALSO IN ATTENDANCE WAS KAREN BISHOP OF PMS (435-9080 X 3 AND 825-7230) AND IAN JACKSON OF CONTRACTOR LICENSING. DISCUSSED POOL ENCLOSURE THAT EXCEEDED SIDE SETBACKS. MS. BISHOP ALLUDED TO THE FACT THAT THIS ENCLOSURE WAS A REPLACEMENT THAT MIRRORED THE INITIAL POOL ENCLOSURE. NO FOOT PRINT WAS CHANGED OR SLAB EXTENDED. MS. BISHOP IS REQUESTING A MEETING WITH MICHELLE ARNOLD TO DISCUSS CASE, TENTATIVELY PLANNED FOR MONDAY SEPT 17TH. WENT ON SITE VIEW ENCLOSURE WITH ALL IN ATTENDENCE. MS. BISHOP BELIEVES THAT NO SETBACKS WERE COMPROMISED BASED ON A POOL ENCLOSURE THAT WAS COED BY THE COUNTY IN 1991. BEFORE SETTING FOR CEB, I SUGGEST WE AWAIT MICHELLE'S RULING. - R/C 9/18/07 - MB#5S - IR 'oIlier County :D-Plus for Windows 95/NT Printed on: Page 10/20/2009 2 of 2:33:34PM 3 ,.., _.._~--~~._._._--,'. ---">'_"'--,~<~,~",~"-'.- .. -. '-" ~~.- .-..."........... , _._._.u~'''"..,.,_,. , ..__," '_._"_ 1015144 MARIOBONO 11/08/2007 09/11/2007 SPOKE TO MS. COWLES, SHE HAS RETAINED ALL PAPERWORK AND ENLISTED THE AID OF KAREN BISHOP OF COMPANY PMS. MEETING SET FOR lOAM WED. 9-12-07 MB 1:00-1:15 R/C9-12 09/28/2007 10'00-10'30: - CEB PACKET PREPARED. R/C 10/15/07 - MB#55 - IR 10/23/2007 10'55-11'00: - CEB PACKET ALREADY PREPARED/OWNER PROVIDED NEW SITE SURVEY AND CONTINUES TO ATTEMPT TO RESOLVE ISSUE PRIOR TO HEARING. OWNER AND I EXCHANGED VOICE MAILS TO UNDERSTAND LATEST DEVELOPMENT. R/C 11/8/07 - MB#55 - IR 11/09/2007 l' 50-1' 55: - VIOL. REMAINS - CORRECTED CEB DOCS. SUBMITTED TODAY. R/C 11/30/07 - MB#55-IR 1008798 MARIOBONO 10/11/2006 1010296 MARIOBONO 09/28/2007 1011863 MARIOBONO 10/15/2007 1017500 MARIOBONO 11130/2007 LETTERS : REF TYPE CC VIOLATIONS: STATUS VIOLATION LETTER NAME 1ST PAGE NOV/ST RQST DATE 06/14/2007 PRINT DATE SEND DATE 06/14/2007 06/14/2007 STATUS SENT RECV DATE 6/19/2007 GROUP CODE 8721 VIOL. DATE 6/13/2007 DESCRIPTION/REMARKS SWIMMING POOL ENCLOSURE IMAGES: IMAGE DATE IMAGE DESCRI PTION 6/13/2007 pool w/o barrier and unsecured temp barrier mb55 6/13/2007 pool w/o barrier and unsecured temp barrier mb55 6/13/2007 id property mb55 6/13/2007 id property mb55 7/20/2007 pool cage w/o permits mb55 7/20/2007 pool cage w/o permits mb55 7/20/2007 pool cage w/o permits mb55 COMENTS: STATUS ORIG USER ORIG DATETIME COMMENT: NOTES: :ollier County :D-P1us for Windows 95/NT Printed on: Page 10/20/2009 3 of 2:33:34PM 3 ::omment Listing Report D~R1D07 - Comment Listing Report ATTACHMENT 0 REF TYPE REF KEY AD 137942 STATUS WARN ORIGINAL USER PETRULLIPATTI ORIGINAL DATE/TIM 7/20/2007 COMMENT On 7/20/07 it erected after (Peter Bell). setback issues. another company LAST UPDATE USE LAST UPDATE DATE PETRULLIPATTI 7/20/2007 was discovered that this property had ascreen enclosure resident canceled a permit through JC Marshall Construction The owner was told that she needed redo application due to Instead of reapplying for the permit the resident had do the screen enclosure without permits. oIlier County D-Plus for Windows 95/98/NT Printed on 2:29:43PM 10/20/2009 Page 1 of 1 _,_",--_,.".'._.. ,~.,,-~".- ,-" _'., .<<O>",..~~_~~..~~,...",. ~~_._..~... -...-_...~._._-----._,-_.'_~_._-,~-,--_. . ~-,-,~,~-"- ~ ___.....o..._.'._m. AGENDA ITEM 9-( er c:: ~unty ~ STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION HEARING DATE: NOVEMBER 19,2009 SUBJECT: CU-PL2009-170, FIRST HAITIAN BAPTIST MISSION CHURCH PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: Owner: First Haitian Baptist Mission, Inc. 14600 Tamiami Trail East Naples, FL 34114 Agent: Me. Frederick E. Hood, AICP Davidson Engineering, Inc. 3530 Kraft Road Suite 301 Naples, FL 34105 REQUESTED ACTION: To have the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an application for Conditional Use No.7 of the Rural Agriculture (A) Zoning District, as provided for in Section 2.03.01.A.l.c.7. of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC), to permit an expansion of a church by adding 1,550 square feet to an existing church building and by adding a new 19,281 square-foot general purpose building. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject 4.59,r acre property is located on the south side of Tamiami Trail East (US-4I) and approximately 100 feet east of Abiaka Way at 14600 Tamiami Trail East in Section 12, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (See the location map on the following page.) PURPOSEIDESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The petitioner seeks a Conditional Use approval to expand an existing Conditional Use allowing a 345 seat church facility that consists of an existing sanctuary and a fellowship hall. As previously stated, this Conditional Use petition proposes to permit an expansion of an existing church by adding 1,550 square feet to an existing church building and by adding a new 19,281- square foot general purpose building. The addition to the existing church building (sanctuary GU-PL2009-170 Page 1 of 12 Revised: 10-30-09 ",". m, ,,_ ,._ _~_.__.~.____M".____, , ~--'-""."'----~--"'--~.'- ," ..",,,,, --_....._"-"~, . _...-'. .- .- - --,." u Z < , I ~ J___ , / "', / ~, , , o z < " . , 2 o W >-!< ",0 o ~ , .' ,." " ."2-, "/"-'/ f/s' /", . I"t , . / / ;-::-' / ,-,' / .<, ./ "' r----i , ---..-- ,. , / ~ ~ ~ S' . - . . .. 0 " St::. --< . , ___=-._<11 . . / I"~, , , .. 0 i~ :'" , , . . .. 0 ~I 5r < " " a z < , , .. " , ' '" z < " . "" .. 0 "" " . "" , , ~ c;: .. , . . < " "" 0 .. "" ;:J ';:' o .. . .. "" :;; " ~ ;:' u .. <( , o ;:; ~ > s g :<: ;> }N\fl Hd3S0r '11' :J: ::;: . . o ( ( Cl :;) Cl. ,- , o [t c, 0 L..,'" '" ~, o '" < < <"l:Ct: " .' , , I , I , I I I I , ___L. I I , I I , , I -I I . cOw'- --~'" ,-. ",;i:;>, ,"" .., , , I I I I . .. 1--- . >-2 00 Woo '!< 00 "'0 <L~ r~ c o I I _I" . , . -- "0 'c '" <. c' , i " , , . ~"' <. t1~ .. ~ .. '" .. 'Oo "< /.- " '''" , . . . . .. , , ,. 1 " 5';! ~- '~L _J I I I ----r---- I , I I ,~ oo' ,"'~ ., Q",.. I "r' Ow'-'I ~6 I ., , 0"- I I L- I ' -, , , , i Ij; / I' i~-~ -_L'-~:--/<;~1-?J' -,-too i" <I'<.::',~.. /"", .'i ~~ "~;''I / "~'I T'~\, If _.;'i~ ;' 11(; ,'", ':\( ,(, eo '0K_Jg,c ~~ \ ~j~ I " _z,-; .. I s;--- ,r~::::::--- _-1"- 1// / c:~: ' ;:- --1'- - '~::, ,,,~=~[-;F=:t.<l...,-~....,,,,,~.~&"-(.' - ~_ ",',. l!;.' -,- z , " , . .. , ,"" ~"'--- ,''"<<,'" """d ~~~ .,. '" i"'- C<i5lr"' ~jOe " ,n - --.",", --I ;i:~G I "flY.: .,:]' 1 L. ,- , " .\" ""2, , , _L =~, ~ / 4 "I' "-,.1 ./,,-,,: ,. , , I - ~-\; ':i; I '" co , ~ - " ~- i .0 o .. . . '" '" " o . o - - . " , , '" !-' , , '.i " , " , " . , , " " " . '" , " , < ( ! I I \, - '" , , j I i ," / ( " " " , , " , " " . '" , , " , " , , , , F~~ p~ ~ "-'1 ( "--~-1r-- 5--0:;-1 Cl.. -"--~ _:",.0 i!' __ _~ I Cl.c! r:: I a " G"; c- o . ~-- "- -~---.~--- , I, " /" \1 "- - ~ -~ -~ ~- " " , " :ji-. ,g; . . . , ;, I'), '1- , , , I __'-:."-- III-I-F~ ;T IB~ : II ';~ i I,. j ~~~ l), 10-< ,.~ I u ~ IS ~ ~,----' r-i ~2 ,,- fl .' I _~~'d ~.~, "...,,~" -- " '::l H!no:J Nn<J80 ~ " " " " , , ., , , , " ;.. , . . " " " " , ._~~ j~ ;~j\ ~ ;", ( r---- :IN\;Il 00\11;00 fn( ;"'"' r---; .'-1 i ~* / I", I I -- -' .' .' " " 9 LO l~Ym " .. , ~ JJYlli ]W)~ 0110' / -- -.- I' ,'1] i' _~ g~ ji j~sV .. ... g~ I..'" "'",3 ,,.,,- c_ ~g ::!c I I , ~-- , , . . ----- -- \ l , , . . , , - .. , , '. N , o . " ----- ---- i '\t 'I \\ ~' II '\,,~ 1 I "I ~~\J \ i I ~-~ \" i {I~"-) I' \ -, .---,~~ .'I'-'-~-~---'" , '" '-. a.. e:( ~ <9 :z - z o N a.. e:( ~ z o - l- e:( () o ...J o .... ~ , '" o o N -' <l. ::> U '" Z o I-- I-- W <l. a r I .<1 <1 I . I . . .' ! ! I ~h I . . . . - ; , . . . , ! ~ ill . , ~~t ! - III iii ~ , ! f !! I ~ u~ I . . I!;".... ..:..: I ! -- . - .. , -- . . . , " . , .._~~ "'~~ , ! . - . - US! <1 . . !I!!n~!! . - . - ~ . . I ., i , - ':'r , . . In <1 , . I - l ~! . I ,. " I ~ , .. , . ! .. '" . . II 0 ~ ! I' . ~ L iii ~ ~ . w , . , , .1, '" . ! Z III i~ ~ i\ Ii w I . 2 I! ; . i " 'II III 'j!! ,I w , , w " 0 l , . . ! . . c ~ i II . - . " 0 III . I" .! · ~ I~ . . . . z ~ ~ z I , > ,- j . ~ nhl iii : i i i I II z I ! z .r H 5 "II " 0 i :;.. i Ej 5 " - , " ! ' I' w '"j , d' . S . ! 5 . . ~ . . , ~ ~ e :,.-.-.....-.,:. . . . .. . . . . " . , "'....... 0'- , . . . Rj Z 0 .' - ... . u -'-~ - 5 , :( ... ~ . 0 en . . z ~ ~ I 0 u ~ ~ ~ '! I :( f;;1ll g ::!: 0 i::: 0 t " '" .. z .. 11:i' .::i 8 ~ '-< .' . . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;. , - . :( t < Z - ~ - ...l '" :( "- / ~... '.", ~., ., ., ". . ~ " ~ ~~ ~- a!Z~lil OWOO ~~ . (f.lwUW Wel~Cl !<<l:m~ "";:0:::0::: (f.l~=:Iu. w .. W~W wwoo a!~:::J ~~D :r: ..~ uw~ ... ~ow zo~ z3~ D ~ N ~ / '1 J: ,I ., " 0' ,. Ii ) ! ~.o~5J I " ~Ii d Iii ~ "~I ~ !! ~j ~ ~ ~ n c , . <" '1-.( "- ":'a rl..t"'o.:.t,s.:I),s.~ QJ qJ Di\t, o.iS'Yd,- -1-J.....-llQi :1)<:( ......),..u&,':T S'J'.f ~~'?~ ~ ""'.illS''') S'Y.$>}e'\ftO'\!l>t ~""iS'_.:;.; -i'~ .'Vv;s".., i?J~ tl o",....~ "'''I>'' 'i" z Q ., ., ;;. ti~.. -"";; ",t-iP .- ........... '!: c(-" !.!:' lD~" o z~! i'!i' ~- . ~ ., e; ~ "' "",.,~" ...".,. ...,~"",.....,~>'."""""",." "~',''''~W><i~ ~~,.,,,,.., "'." ,~,~ _..,.,,,,_,,, --,._-_._.._--~~._,- -. - -_..,.,-~_._--._-- .~..".., ~,.... ..~-~..^-,~,,<_..~._....,. -- ,....._,--.. ,--~----~--~--- ,---..~._... .- and fellowship hall) will increase the area for administrative offices, entryways and storage. The proposed general purpose building will house a fellowship hall and associated kitchen, offices, reception area, rest room facilities, a conference area and classrooms. The original Conditional Use (Resolution Number 93-190) was approved on May II, 1993. It allowed for the construction of the original church and accessory uses to a church. The existing sanctuary building will continue to be used for worship services, adult Sunday school, wedding ceremonies and funeral services. The existing fellowship hall will continue to be used for youth and children Sunday school, youth activities and small receptions and fcllow3hip. The proposed general purpose building will be used for adult Sunday school, youth and children Sunday school and administrative offices. The number of seats in the church will not increase as a result of the proposed expansion. The number of seats will remain at 345 seats. The days and hours of operation of the church are as follows: Sundays: 9 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. - Worship Service 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. - Men's Worship Service 6 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. - Worship Service Mondays: 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. - Women's Ministry Wednesdays: 7 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. - Youth and Adult Bible Study Thursdays: 7 p.m. to 9 p,m. - Choir Rehearsal Fridays: 8 p.m. to 10 p.m. - Prayer Meeting There are no anticipated daycare or weekday school activities. Planned Special Events and Holiday Celebrations include the following: Annual Fundraiser (March), Good Friday Service, Easter Sunday Service, Anniversary Party of the Church (September) and Christmas Pageant. The Conceptual Site Plan (see previous page) dated August 26, 2009 depicts the proposed 10,374 square-foot Church, the 19,281 square-foot General purpose building, 41 parking spaces, 3 loading spaces, along with water management areas that are part of this Conditional Use application. The Conceptual Site Plan also depicts IS-foot widc Type B landscape buffers along the south and west property boundaries, a IS-foot wide Type D landscape buffer along the street right-of-way boundary, and a 10-f()ot wide Type A landscape buffer along the east property boundary. Along the east property line on the adjacent property there is a 50-to 300-foot wide lake separating the Church from the neighboring homes. A wall that is 6 to 8 feet in height is also required between the Church and the residential land uscs. This wall has been added as a Condition of Approval. Site ingress/egress is dcpicted from Tamiami Trail East (USA1). Water and sewer scrvice will be provided by the Collicr County Watcr-Sewer District. SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: SUBJECT PARCEL: The site is currently developed, zoned (A) Rural Agriculture CU-PL2009-170 Page 4 of 12 Revised: 10-30-09 SURROUNDING: North: Tamiami Trail East (USAl), then vacant land zoned C-2 (Commercial Convenience district) East: retention lake, then single family homes. zoned Charlee Estates PUD (Planned Unit Development) with a density of 4.37 dwelling units per acre South: single family homes, zoned Charlee Estates PUD with a density of 4.37 dwelling units per acre West: single family homes, zoned Charlee Estates PUD with a density of 4.37 dwelling units per acre . .' ~_l L. .. , .. _.~,........._,-,.... ~ .. C_(,.~~(Mjn1~~-;;:~_~'~-14!~Fl: CU-PL2009-170 Revised: 1 0-30~09 Aerial Page 5 of 12 " '-' - '". "'---'---'-~~"---'---'--_.'~---' ,',. ,-,_." .,-_.__...._,,-,_._..__...q.,_.,""--_..,......._--~-,~,'"&..._, -"""""-",.--~=-~_."'~"-~--~._-,,.--_...__.,,._-, _.~---_. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Comprehensive Planning staff has reviewed this request and offers the following comments: Future Land Use Element (FLtJE): The subject property, as identified on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM), is within the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict land use designation. The Urban Mixed Use district is intended to accommodate a variety of residential and non-residential land uses , including mixed-use developments such as Planned Unit Developments. The purpose of the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict is to provide transitional densities between the Conservation designated area and the remainder of the Urban designated area. Relevant to this petition, the designation permits non-residential uses including community facilities such as chun;;hes. The project is reviewed within the context of this Subdistrict and the Future Land Use Element (FLUE). The site is zoned Rural Agricultural (A), which allows churches subject to conditional use (CU) approval. The site currently has an approved CU for a church. Consistency with the FLUE ofthe GMP: The following standards contained within the "Urban Designation" provisions of the FLUE are relevant to this conditional use application. Staff comments and analysis is shown in italic. "Urban designated areas will accommodate the following uses: b. Non-residential uses including: 5. Community facilities such as churches..." The applicant has requested a conditional use to expand the ancillary uses of a church, including a proposed fellowship hall to be used by the congregation for events and functions such as weddings and receptions, Sunday School, Bible Study and other church related events for its members. In view of the above listed allowable conditional uses in the Urban Designation, this proposed conditional use may be found consistent with paragraph 5 above. FLUE Policy 5.4: "New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding lands uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code" Please refer to the compatability analysis on pages 8 and 9 of this Staff Report. Objective 7: "In an effort to support the Dover, Kohl & Partners publication, Toward Better Places: The Community Character Plan for Collier County, Florida, promote smart growth policies, and adhere to the existing development character of Collier County, the following policies shall be implemented for new development and redevelopment projects, whcrc applicable." Policy 7.1: "The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such conncction can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Devcloprnent Code" GU-PL2009-170 Revised: 10-30-09 Page 6 of 12 As depicted on the Master Concept Plan, this project has one existing ingress/egress direct access onto Tamiami Trail (US-41), an arterial road, which is the only vehicular access to the property and may be found consistent with this policy. Policy 7.2: "The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals." No internal roads are proposed as both the small size of the site and type of project make a loop road not feasible. This project may be found consistent with this policy. Policy 7.3: "All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and their interconnection point with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type." The Master Concept Plan does not show access to the aqjoininf!. Charlee Estates Habitat for Humanity development, which directly abuts the subject property to the east, SOUlh uml woo,. Tho subject property has no local streets, having just internal private driveways and parking. Due to the small size of this project and the absence of local streets, connection of local streets is not feasible. Policy 7.4 "The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types." As this is a non-residential project, some of the items of this policy are not applicable (i.e. densities, housing prices and types, etc.). The applicant's Master Concept Plan provides sidewalk connections along the street frontage of property, as well as from the street along the south-eastern boundary of to the site to the existing church location. However, the applicant has not placed the proposed fellowship hall closer to street frontage in order to move most of the parking behind and along side of the proposed building, stating the current location is necessary ''for building continuity, efficiency and functional pattern of development. Required buffering, grass parking '" will be sufficient to shield the right-of-way from the proposed community facility development. " Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petitioner's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) and has determined that the adjacent roadway network has insufficient capacity to accommodate this project within the 5 year planning period. Therefore, the subject application cannot be deemed consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) without mitigation. US-41 (Tamiami Trail East) Impacts: The first concurrency link that is impacted by this project is link 95, US-41 (Tamiami Trail East), between CR-951 and Greenway. If mitigation were provided as suggested below, the 15 percent reduction in trips would be allowed as presented in the TIS and would qualify under Policy 5.2. The project would generate 3 new p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents a 0.28 percent impact; and 6 new a.m. peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents a 0.56 percent impact on US-41 (Tamiami Trail East). This segment ofUS-41 (Tamiami Trail East) currently has a remaining capacity of -64 trips, and is currently at LOS "F" (Level of Service "F") as reflected by the 2008 AUIR (Annual Urban Inventory Report). The Volume to Capacity (V/C) ratio today with the project would be 1.062 percent. The project would be diminimus with the CU-PL2009-170 Revised: 10-30-09 Page 7 of 12 --'- ,.-._.+-_."_._-_..~,'--" _,_,.~~_.__ _"_'~"_"_"'__.''', "_"'_'"'"~"__"""_'____""''''"~,_",~~_",,,_,,-,=,,~'''''''''''~_'~. " ...."__m>*_...._...__."~_...,___"'_ .........._-~ proposed trip reduction and it would be allowed with mitigation since the total VIC is less than 110 percent. Under a Conditional Use review the project must evaluate a 5 year growth period. The historical growth is less than 2 percent, therefore the guideline directed 2 percent minimum growth was evaluated. The currently adopted background volurne plus approved trip bank volume exceeds the 5 year growth analysis. Therefore, the project traffic was analyzed against the background volume plus the trip bank. No subsequent links beyond this segment of USA I (Tamiami Trail East) are significantly impacted. Thus no further analysis was required for p.m. peak hour impacts. Mitigation: The Master Plan shows that the petitioner has provided project mitigation in the form of an ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) accessible pedestrian interconnection to the adjacent neighborhood. Representatives from the church have documented that nearly 15 percent of their attendance is from residents of the adjacent neighborhood. This pedestrian access would sufficiently reduce the number of vehicular trips on USA I and is required in order to support the petition. Based upon the above analysis and mitigation, Transportation staff concludes that the proposed conditional use may be deemed consistent with the FLUE. ANALYSIS: Before any Conditional Use recommendation can be offered to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA), the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) must make findings that: I) approval of the Conditional Use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property of uses in the same district of neighborhood; and 2) all specific requirements for the individual Conditional Use will be met; and 3) satisfactory provisions have been made concerning the following matters, where applicable: 1. Section 2.03.01.A.1.c.7., of the LDC permits conditional uses in the Rural Agriculture (A) zoning district. The requested use for a Church is permitted as conditional uses in the Rural Agriculture (A) zoning district, subject to the standards and procedures established in section 10.08, conditional uses procedures, of the LDC. 2. Consistency with the Land Development Code (LDC) and the Growth Management Plan (GMP). This request is consistent with the Growth Management Plan (GMP) and this project will be in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Land Development Code (LDC). 3. Ingress and egress to the property and proposed structures thereon, with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of firc or catastrophc. CU-PL2009-170 Revised: 10-30-09 Page 8 of 12 Ingress and egress to the subject property would be limited to Tamiami Trail East (US-4I). The minimum parking requirements for a Church are as stated in LDC Section 4.05.04, Table 17, Parking Space Requirements, are 3 parking spaces for every 7 seats. Since the Church provides 345 seats, a minimum of 148 parking spaces are required. The applicant has provided 241 parking spaces, which is 98 parking spaces above the minimum required. In addition, the petitioner has agreed to provide a pedestrian walkway that connects the Church with the neighborhood to the south. The petitioner is also providing a sidewalk along their Tamiami Trail East (US-4I) street frontage and is providing a walkway from the Churoh [Q that sidewalk. The proposed sidewalk along the Tamiami Trail East (US-41) ,treet frontage will connect to existing sidewalks that are to the west and east of the Church property. The purpose of providing a pedestrian access to the adjacent neighborhood to the south is to provide safe ingress/egress to Church members from that neighborhood. The Fire Code official's office has no objection to the ingress/egress, and will review the Site Development Plan (SDP) upon its submission to ensure compliance with applicable fire codes. 4. The affect the Conditional Use would have on neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic or odor effects. If approved, the proposed expansion of an existing church by adding 1,550 square feet to an existing church building and the addition of a new 19,281-square foot general purpose building should have minimal impact on neighboring properties in relation to glare, economic or noise effects. Activities at the subject property are generally concentrated inside the church and multi-purpose buildings. To mitigate for any noise or glare impacts to the existing and future neighbors, the applicant will provide a IS-foot wide Type B landscape buffer along the south and west property boundaries. Adjacent to the east property boundary a IO-foot wide Type A landscape buffer will be provided. Along the right-of-way a IS-foot wide Type D landscape buffer will be provided. In addition, the Church is required to provide a wall that is 6 to 8 feet in height between the Church and the residential land uses. Staff has added this requirement as a Condition of Approval. 5. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district. As previously noted, this Church has been in existence since the mid 1990's. The proposed general purpose building will be set back 50 feet from the southern property line (the same setback as the existing Church structures). Also, the proposed building will be restricted to one-story not to exceed 35 feet in height. Furthermore, the proposed expansion of an existing church and the addition of a new general purpose building will be mitigated by the provision of the required landscape buffers. Impacts on surrounding neighbors would be minimized and compatibility with the surrounding properties insured, as required by Policy 5.4 of the FLUE. Based on the above findings, this conditional use is recommended for approval. CU-PL2009-170 Revised: 10-30-09 Page 9 of 12 , ._,,', ".' .. "'-"''"-''''-".._-~-.' ... - ,~~"-~,._~..._, '--"""'''-''<~'--~-'--'''-----'~'''-''"''''--''-''- -_...."'~.,.....,.= ,,- - ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: The EAC did not review this petition because the site is under the size threshold (10 acres) to require and Environmental Impact Statement. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIMl.;, Synopsis provided by Lea Derence, Technician: The meeting was duly noticed by the applicant and held on October 13,2009, at 5:30 p.m. at the First Haitian Baptist Church. Two property owners attended, as well as the applicant's team, Fred Hood, of Davidson Engineering, and county staff. Fred Hood gave an overview of the project. He explained that the proposed Conditional Use will expand an existing Church by adding a 19,281 square-foot general purpose building and by adding 1,500 square feet to an existing church building. He further explained that the conditional use will not expand the congregation size: it is to provide additional meeting space for the existing congregation. The property owners in attendance had several concerns. The first was regarding landscape buffering. Mr. Hood stated that adequate buffering will be provided per the Collier County Land Development Code on all sides. A IS-foot wide Type D buffer is being proposed on the north side of property and a IS-foot wide Type B buffer is being proposed on the west, and south side of the property. The buffer will be opaque within the first year. A lO-foot wide Type A landscape buffer is proposed along the east property line. The second concern was if a wall or vegetation was required. Mr. Hood explained that a 6-foot height wall, fence, or hedge was required. He further explained that the owner could choose to do one of the three or a combination of two. The third concern was regarding access to the property. Mr. Hood explained that there is only one access point, which exists from Tamiami Trail. He further explained that transportation has requested a pedestrian interconnect to the neighborhood to the south in order to lessen the vehicular tfips onto Tamiami Trail. However, this pedestrian interconnect will require the approval ofthe homeowner's association. The meeting ended at approxirnately 5:50 p.rn. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report for CU-PL2009-170 revised on October 29,2009. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward Petition CU- PL2009-170 to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) with a recommendation of approval subject to the following conditions: CU-PL2009-170 Revised: 10-30-09 Page 10 of 12 1. The Conditional Use is limited to what is shown on the site plan, identified as "Master Concept Plan" prepared by Davidson Engineering, Inc. dated August 26, 2009. The final design must be in compliance with all applicable federal, state and county laws and regulations. The Department of Zoning and Land Development Review Director may approve minor changes in the location, siting, or height of buildings, structures, and improvements authorized by this conditional use, so long as these minor changes remain consistent with all applicable development standards. 2. The uses shall be limited to Church services, Sunday School, Bible Study, and receptions. Day care uses are prohibited. The Church services shall be limited to Sunday, Wednesday evenings, religious holidays and a maximum of 20 special events per year. Bible Study shall be excluded from this limitation. 3. The general purpose building shall be limited to one-story and shall not to exceed a zoned height of 35 feet. 4. The petitioner shall acquire a cross access agreement or public access easement to provide a pedestrian interconnection as shown on the Master Concept Plan that connects the Church property to the residential neighborhood to the south prior to Site Development Plan approval. This interconnection shall be shown on the Site Development Plan and shall be constructed prior to the certificate of occupancy for the General Purpose Building. 5. A wall that is 6 to 8 feet height between the Church and the residential land uses shall be provided per the LDC. GU-PL2009-170 Revised: 1 O~30-09 Page11of12 _...~..._.___..M_.._..._......_..~__..__", ~__~~'_". "...__."._._.._._.,_,. _______.. . -_.--_._--" ,- PREPARED BY: , 0,' ' ; CH, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REVIEWED BY: . " jo '2b'0'1 RA Y ND V. BE LOWS, "ONING MANAGER DATE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ~ o-n,J~ JOM'7109 S0'SAN M. ISTENES, AICP, DIRECTOR DATE ' . DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVED BY: /0/...30 J(J 9- H K. SCHMITT, ADMINI TRA TOR DA IE I . MUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION CoIlier County Planning Commission: MARK STRAIN, CHAIRMAN DATE Staff Report for the November 19,2009 Collier County Planning Commission Meeting Tentatively scheduled for the January 12,2010 Board of County Commissioners Meeting Attachments: A. Resolution GU-PL2009-170 Revised: 10-26-09 Page 12 of 12 Attachment A RESOLUTION NO. 09- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR THE EXPANSION OF A CONDITIONAL USE TO ALLOW THE ADDITION OF 1,550 SQUARE FEET TO AN EXISTING CHURCH BUILDING AND ADDING A NEW 19,281 SQUARE FOOT GENERAL PURPOSE BUILDING WITHIN THE AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION 2,03.01.A.I.C.7 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 14600 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST IN SECTION 12, ToWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 67-1246, Laws of Florida, and Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on Collier County the power to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning and such business regulations as are necessary for the protection of the public; and WHEREAS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development Code (Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended) which includes a Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance establishing regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County, among which is the granting of Conditional Uses; and WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 93-190, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A," the Board of County Commissioners approved a Conditional Use for the establishment of the Conditional Use for the First Haitian Baptist Mission, Inc. pursuant to Section 2.2.2.3.6 of the then-current Zoning Regulations, subject to a number of conditions; and WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Appeals (Board), being the duly appointed and constituted planning board for the area hereby affected, has held a public hearing after notice as in said regulations made and provided, and has considered the advisability of the expansion of the Conditional Use to allow the addition of 1,550 square feet to an existing church building and the construction ofa separate 19,281 square foot general purpose building within the Agricultural (A) Zoning District pursuant to Subsection 2.03.0 I.A.I.c. 7 of the Collier County Land Development Code on the property hereinafter described, and the Collier County Planning Commission has made findings that the granting of the Conditional Use will not adversely affect the public interest and the specific requirements governing the Conditional Use have been PL2009-0000170 Rev. 10130/09 Page 1 ,...... _._._..,_.~_.,..,._-_.~. ,._--_._-"'_.._~-_._--,."... -'-~~ ~._-'",. - ---..-"-- _'f - ~" met and that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Subsection 10.08.00.D. of the Land Development Code; and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given opportunity to be heard by this Board in a public meeting assembled and the Board having considered all matters presented. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: Petition Number PL2009-0000 170 filed by Frederick E. Hood, AICP, of Davidson Engineering, Inc., representing First Haitian Baptist Mission, Inc, with respect to the property hereinafter described in Exhibit "B", be and the same is hereby approved for the addition of 1,550 square feet to an existing church building and adding a new 19,281 square foot general purpose building within the Agricultural (A) Zoning District pursuant to Subsection 2.03.01.A.1.c.7 of the Collier County Land Development Code, in accordance with the Conceptual Site Plan described in Exhibit "c" and subject to the conditions found in Exhibit "D". Exhibits "B", "C" and "D" are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution hereby supersedes and replaces Resolution No. 93-190, excepting the conditions set forth therein, which are incorporated by reference into this Resolution, and that the remainder of Resolution No. 93-190 is accordingly repealed. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the minutes of this Board. This Resolution adopted after motion, second, and super-majority vote, this day of ,2009. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA , Deputy Clerk By: DONNA FIALA, Chairman By: PL2009-0000170 Rev. 10130109 Page 2 Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: DRAFT Steven T. Williams Assistant County Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A: Resolution 93-190 Exhibit B: Legal Description Exhibit C: Conceptual Site Plan Exhibit D: Conditions of Approval CP109-CPS-00957\18 PLZ009-0000170 Rev. 10/30/09 Page 3 EXHIBIT A Page 1 of 6 EXHIBIT A Page 2 of 6 _" '" _"'''__..~__ ,......__u..__._. --. ,~--,---'-'.."- ""_'_'_W_'___~""_"'<O"_"~'~"'_""_~~'_'_""_"'___ _.~._"_____._n""_ ,._~,.__._----"._.. . ~ ._-"..,----~_... EXHIBIT A Page 3 of 6 I I , EXHIBIT A Page 4 of 6 ----.----, -.".--..---.- ,-~- ,-,,~...~. m'._w.,___.~~~""""_,,~,,...,,""""___"~"~_."'"_'_~"""""."~_'~'_~"~_ _ ._..c.._.....__~~__. .. _~_',~~_ ~~~"..K_'~__~_~.,__._>'____.~_._,_. EXHIBIT A Page 5 of 6 EXHIBIT A Page 6 of 6 "."..._---~.._",~-,--'... , -_..,~ -""-<,' ......-......- , "...~_..."~,..__."., - ,_..,,""""......-.-...-~,-~._-~. ,_._~,_.,-,~. LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR CU-PL2009-170 PARCEL AS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORD BOOK 1833, PAGE 298 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS COMMENCING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA WITH THE SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 90 (US. 41, TAMIAMI TRAIL); THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE N 54' 21' 00" W 1000.00 FEET FOR A PLACE OF BEGINNING; THENCE S 35' 39' 00" W 400,00 FEET; THENCE N 54' , 21' 00" W 500.00 FEET; THENCE N 35' 39' 00" E 400,00 FEET TO SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE: THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT S 54' 21' 00" E 500.00 FEET TO THE PLACE OF BEGINNING CONTAI~JING 4.59 ACRES (+ / -) EXHIBIT B i I I a , II i II!!' , .,1 .. 1;:1;:0 .;" .' " !;~ . t !~ !"t ;: .' > ~ > ~ . w . o o z 5 i Ii! ,. , ." ~ ~ ~ .<1 <1 ~ i i ; ~ ~ , . I , ! . i . - III .., '" ~ i ~ w r ;~~~~~..~~~ "' ::II~. ~ ;:; ~ " ..: .. - . ~ ~ i . l r i !IiI! , ., . " ? L:J . , . k"' Z ! 0 . . - ,.. u ~ ,., - ,.. '" z 0 U 0: 0 :-. ... , z ;.< 0: < z ... :;' ~ . ~ '" ,., - .. ~ , ~ !.ll S ' o ~ "'.. ::! " U n" .-.:ll .. - . I' . I ; . . I ; ,. ., ,,, .,- . I . . , <1 , . o ! , . o . . . , - i , , ! ! , - iii '"Jls ~ !J ~ ~ffi Iii " w . . . w . ~ ~ . z z 5 , . , " I', I'i iUl !~~ i!"! m Ji~. m . . .H! , · I ip o ! . ~ ! ~ I .1 !! <EJ ~~ Ul j; . 'I G ~ ii I:J:! iI ~ !; ~~ r.!J ~ ~~ ~:I! :t U 5 ! ~ ~! !D ';l ~. ~ 'H '. :i ~). ,., . tu ~~ !"t ~ CIl if> " ~ ~n / . u ~~ .'" nl-lI)Cl z.oo ::Jwo::J C-::!;()tn illWzW ~~~~ ....:;;0-:0:: cn~::JlL w .. w<>'W ww. ~.o <>'~o ~~z GUi:) ..[I)lJ.J ~O<>, ~Cl::J Zz. O~O N~. / . "! l, ,. "" ~, " ., .. n ) ~=z:zb=:JJ ~ ~ll U I!l n i5::l. ,HI ~ " .. ~ VI "' . . n ~ .. 0 - , . <0, ~< >i,. ~S'/Q '.,(1'v2J,"-<8':/78'.s-, ~ 0,) D~. o::s'~cY 4',,;OV<!.- '?<y 1~ ;s>&.~ S'.:)......r"'b-'?'" "':t .;f~..:%-I) U's ><') 0'\1; ~..y;:~S',~ ~~-~8'..y&1) V. r'J,..'J_ '0 v~'VI.:t ~"" b) 0" '" """"-.,,, ,"-CM~ """.""'_.,...,......,,"""~. "~'_'...",.."" ~""'_~, ..". """''''''''''''' ~"",., --'<--~-~-_._--~.__.._- . ..... -,-~-. .........,,,. .-.-----. ~ "----, --.~..~"" -_.- " . ........ 0'- r . I . . 5 ~ ~ 5 ~ -i. 6 .0;:.... "iN f.. D.. g i: i '0. . i;:: z t g e; 0 - :! '" " 0 . . ~ ~ - ~ .! :ii ::::!! .. ~ > . . t;; iq ~ f!! I ~ !~ ! . . U Z~ _0 ~ -~ O~ z.. ii2~1 11I"- III~ , Z~- _Z~ .ft~N ..0- ZM~ W~ III.. _ 0 ~O' Zlll",X On~ U)a::'" 0 -' C....""ci .M_ -o(!::!.> ><>'W' ~Z< COO~ C&1::l:0 M'O III~ Ww: a~ .' ~ U I- - lD - J: >< W z Q '" '" 2- .' ",-. -"';: '. !;" ~ ~ ... .......-' ~ 0<:( ilL_ ;:jc:as" U :i!l E~' ~- z . '" <>' ~ CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL FOR CU-PL2009-170 1. The Conditional Use is limited to what is shown on the site plan, identified as "First Haitian Baptist Mission Church Master Concept Plan," prepared by Davidson Engineering, dated August 26, 2009. The final design must be in compliance with all applicable federal, state and county laws and regulations. The Department of Zoning and Land Development Review Director may approve minor changes in the location, siting, or height of buildings, structures, and improvements authorized by this conditional use, so long as these minor changes remain consistent with all applicable development standards. 2. The uses shall be limited to Church services, Sunday School, Bible Study, and receptions. Day care uses are prohibited. The Church services shall be limited to Sunday, Wednesday evenings, religious holidays and a maximum of 20 special events per year. Bible study shall be excluded from this limitation. 3. The general purpose building shall be limited to one-story and shall not to exceed a zoned height of 35 feet. 4. The petitioner shall acquire a cross access agreement or public access easement to provide a pedestrian interconnection as shown on the Master Concept Plan that connects the Church property to the residential neighborhood to the south prior to Site Development Plan approval. This interconnection shall be shown on the Site Development Plan and shall be constructed prior to the certificate of occupancy for the General Purpose Building. 5. A wall that is 6 to 8 feet height between the Church and the residential land uses shall be provided per the LDC. EXHIBIT D . J..;i~c:':;(;. :::f' "",~:<,., "..." "1; "~Ii'\ """'~<'" . 01 ,,}t" .""."1" , ~~"(I- ~ .~ ' . .''. .,' ,I" ,.~~, ;~ J.IX {. ~~.. :t';. '" "'., . f~ / It i i\H i).'I"'I/i0;'" . ,. .i / '., 'F' /:;.... "/ " , . , "r.t'l / .1".:./ . /1 '.. j f~~"'''>'''''. . /h.$' "/~~I/. j,//.,~ #'$. . "". . ., . " R"!.4ftf '. ~"'''~.'.. . I . ~'.". . ~..",&, I.. l~ /i '-'." cf .l' . . / _', 'i, "" 1 / ." ~,~J (' .'l),;, i i.,. /i/ Ei> I .. '" ii, <i' ('-A'c".! . / ,a ~. "'110 If iU ~'.t( ~[ " / 1"/ /".... '.I:~I ' -.Pj( .>.{;;/ I.' .;.J / it(. fi- . 'J 1 ";/ /.,. ". ~ '-J/,. it.'! /. /'. " ;! 'I$~ i:'; / " ' ii I/;rt(i)'i/;' /~; 1'1 · 'I <, ~<h /i /~,;' ~ 1:< ' < .,~ .~/ /;/ 111 om L '.' .o' '"'I ',s .':)!:., .".4"...,....;,. ./' ;z~iCl '<... ". i.' If" ".. ~~J .... .~. /; .... /,," .I !!i~ "", /.' r!f'<c}:/,i/ < .' .j ~ '" .! </. . f' .."t....$' ~I'~O . . "';>h c:::: ~~l/ ,/);, . ' ''';.' ..' / ~, ,. q, "'.n ".. < " ~.. ~~~.. ">."" ''''. "'. \,::. .' j;),'Y ~ Z .~~ "'"' .~.. ". ';Yo'! /"._ , ~!Gl <on '''"''' ", .' "'. . .~___~__. 1'> ." "I ": "<"', '. ~, /!> . li'i ,li!~~/.. V 5' i . z .. ~H" .Y I .~ .9 ~ ~S~~ I....CO Oz i ~s~o ~ p '" . . "" III ,:; ~ 'm"I;.r--:Oi'HI~~~~s~1i . ,~ ;' ,.. ., .-- r '! illll I' Hi i ,',!!! ! II, 'ii.'!! ~ D i1 1,1 111n.! I ii, 1!: ',-I!! :', 1.1 ill i!!! l '. !I J "..; :'1' , !, , ",' I ,.t 'I H, l' I' .., il . I. ~ II' ... . IIiI' l ! . , , I,., ;~ ~ i!" " I!" " .' i!P !~ n. I. --FI'" i'!! ,. "Ii, ":; ',.'\ ~ i Hi! 'I."", , ill'l ~ :~ = I I 'I _0 . :. ~ ' . , ",' u;q i "Ii ~ !:~ 0, H" . ~ % !I~ ~ ;l~ 'i~ I -.(, 'i mill ~e~ -~ !ll '. !i . , ('ill u;~! I'. '''1_ "' , I : ~ 'n!! I I ." ;; .. ... J: .> 13 ~~ ~.. ~ -> ~~ . ".. S... .1: in .. o z t.l~ n " ~ ~ . ~ ~i thr=~ -2 (. II '0 !! Ii " I! ," . < "0 '~. 6~r--' -<,."" :gm" '0 iz O"al.o>a iB~" :~"'< ~,,;:- 6~~a Z";;II(I) 0\::00 Ig~z ...8~ =""~m ~IlZ "N....Ci) ~z- .>Z \::'Dm i:~m il ;l!;a iil- -Z ~G) lO:'" gi !" "0 r::; t"' ~ ~ z :>- !I: ~ ~ ~ ~ ril !! ~ ~ '" .... - :z ~ ~ ~~ -3 n. "" ~~",~~o ,"!! a ~ :<l ~ .. ~ ~ ~ rll s; 0 0 " < z... 'Z '" '.'l Q fJ:J ~ ii -3 ~ g ~ n ., ~ o z . ...... ~ ......ffi ~CN C:zO ~o~ "c:Z m{Jl0 ),:!'!I{'"J z~J: O;t>~ c:-<r ",mm m"m "c:~rn ;;o;;tlz-l z~>~ ~z~rn CI'l8~"1J ~~~a .-< "'> ~r " -< / m ~~ ~ . " " d d ~ Hil" " ! c I g ~ ~~ ~ r 0 ~ ~ z 0 ~ .. ~ ;l! ~ Ill.' ~ " . .. ~ f;! ~~ , n 1 ! ' ! 0 ~: , , ! " , ~ ~I , ! c IF m 1 m , 5 I ,I m '! " . m ,. " Iii , c !! m I nd. . ~ "'. ! . ~~ "',.,. g ,. i !W! i!! , ~ , I> ~~ ~ ",..", '" :~ , j " , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;;;; , pq ~ / ~~ i 0 ! Iml , , , <; !! ~ I i , z 0'81 z I" ~ , , . , I lh "" , , "1 n " I I ! !! z II . 0 , i . . -< '" , m ! , , ~!li m i . ! & , ! , ! 1 i m~ I"" , U:l~ , I; ! r" I I , , , "" ! ! , , , -, i . , '~ll! I I i AA ! I ! ~" ~ . ~ ! 1 >- 0 i3. i3. AGENDA ITEM 9-D er ( :Ounty -+- - STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION HEARING DATE: NOVEMBER 19,2009 SUBJECT: PUDZ-2007-AR-12294; IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT AIRPORT OPERATIONS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (AOPUD) PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: Owner: Collier County 3301 Tamiami Trail East Naples, FL 34112-4961 Owner & Petitioner: CDC Land Investments, Inc. 3003 Tamiami Trail N Naples, FL 34103 Petitioner: Collier County Airport Authority 2005 Mainsail Drive Suite #1 Naples, FL 34114 Agent: Wayne Arnold, AICP Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider a rezone of the subject site from the Industrial (1) and the Rural Agricultural with a Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO) Zoning Districts to the Airport Operations Planned Unit Development Zoning District (AOPUD) for a project to be known as the Immokalee Regional Airport Planned Unit Development. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject 1,4840, acre project is located on the north side of Immokalee Road (CR 846), at the intersection with Main Street (SR 29), in Sections 25, 26, 27, 34, 35, 36, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, and Sections 2 and 3, Township 47 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida. (See location map on follow ing page) PUDZ-2007-AR-12294; Immokalee Airport AOPUD Revised 10/30109 Page 1 of 21 _'^"'_'__'___"h~'",_~_~_,~_,O_"___~..__.__,___.___",_~",, ___"_____.__,,'-"___.____,___~..,.... _ _._ ........~___." ._...._ ._. "-~.4_....___~...__ ~ _ w ~_~._~~____._._.__w"'. o . . , . o . ~ . ~ ~ % % H > " , . ~ ~ .. .. .. .. . . ,. o . . , . z o W t-~ 000 o ~ o . ~ . ..."", ~"", o li . . t-z 00 w- ,~ 00 "'0 ..~ ,/ o . . , . . u > c . . z " " 0 0" W W w 0 o 8 . ~ . 51 <;;L~I ~ i" (; i_' , , .... , :~:- (,- . - I I :1 o li , . o . ~ . o li , . -'~~.".. -. o . ~ . a.. ., <( c ~ 0 . ~ . C9 z - - Z 0 N - -'4--- -:.:~~~~~.- - (<;;6,r:) -. I .. '" N N - , '" '" "- 0 0 N N 0 ::> "-, ... , , Z 0 l- e C - % % 1-. 8 8 w ffi . "- 3 ~ o , o . ~ . ~ . ,---- \ - I .,....,_1 - ,. ".'---'-'- , . . , , ,--- DC .::-i ,:i ,'.... - ~ lTt?SOJ.lON ~ 6l -,rs . . " ~ o D^V'D U{] 0 c; <:::J~ ~ Q o C) ~ "I] ,p ~ . , o~ D 6 lSf; Irs ~- ~ o\~a ,j' <>" ..\- -- .w Ow ,< C. 0% a.. <( ::iE z o - I- <( o o ....J t;> N ~ m 0 ", ,~~ Z m '00 mo" m < '00 01::'" ~ > .-. C_, 0 O:lJO jjZ): r <~, mO 0 f!':--<~ c"' z z ' -0 mc- 0 om "8. '. ~ 0 ~ '. .-~ m " ; ~, ~o W ~m rn. ~m -' ~, o~ -, <, n mO 00 ~, c_ m< . .1 ~< O' o~ ." ,m . o' 0' ! (t) ,< mm 0 <. I '. '! . >c i "" "- " mc m 'c 0 Cc ~ ~~ ~ I 0 -m <0 0" ; . "~ " , , . HH . , ~ , , .... ,.,. nn IT ,I I = = ~ ~ 1 I ZN ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ . 0 R j '.ii ~ ~ c ~ ~ ,S:_...!l!-~__",".""."".,." " '_Coo,' "~c.~,__'_'_;,___ :,' ~ ll~ ~_ Je2_~:~;~u " 11/ t;' !II j" . ,- ,.! 'I" . . . " . , . I i ! I , 1 , , !~ , , , , '-, ~ ~ , - l'l. 'ill" ~ ~ ~', ~ I' rl'! I' .f i' .' " ~I =~-- , " , "'" .,~. ..,-" ~ g ~ .0 ~ -. :;) ~ . ..., ii',"" I:i;J ~ '" :::: -, " o ~ "m",,:: !i'1 ~~ I , ~ ,- , , , j .. ~ , , . '" .~ , ~'fo ~ ;> . . ,'~ ~ 1 ,q'YO",.u",," ,,'''Ok'''' " j ! I -- 0-' '0 .~f ~~ ! . " .e , . '! . - ~"." '" :;un " ",. ~ if r-'".;;" ~ J i ~ , . l, . .,,"'" ,-11" ~ ~~ to'" ::;f~~ ~-" .~ ~:.. '"-~ :t~~t; ..."'....- ",":;: ~ ,,~ ~~ ~g. i;' o z it: ~ " o~m -> '" -:::0)(2- '" "1)<-;0 -1m-co::u (lUll-ell '" ::Ommm :I:mzUlQ ~ '" OGl)(O o~Ul:il~ >m " <mUle -...;-1- -1mOl>o Wx <J o>z:ll ,;II m-lG"Jm I Z'\l "in i:' o. 0 m--1-10m o Z'- ;.tl~;:Om.;u ~~ " Z>" (/) 0):> <::r> ~n _~o C-lOm-l " X." ::0 -l,- Z :;; <. ~ 00 ~ mo > ~Z '" 0 > o ~W co n m m~ '" ~ ~ z~ m .., ~ ~ ~n ~ ~ ~~ m ~ co ~ ~ '" 0 8 ~ " " " " " " " ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ 0 "0 ~ ~ " N ~,., N ~ o ~ $~g:: ~ ~N ~ >> 1+1+1+1+1+ nn J>}>)>)>}> ~~ o(")()OO mm ;:0;0;:0;:0;:0 ww mmmmm (JJUl(J)(JJ1j) - ," i i ,i"PI ~^.~~~~ : i . ~ R ~ < o ~ m '00 -,. ~ ~ il ~ 11' g- - . . L. '. . Iil":!i!W i!'il,a il ~ ... .-' H! '.' ~"l1 ~ .,. h'i W H ., S'P. >, c. 0< . , . . , -" ~',c""'oc -' ~..;>. " !!r ...1 '!' , - l . ''''''''[-- ---. , ,. , ,. .. , " ,hZ" !, '"e ~ E ~ ." ~ii.: ,- IOTY""",u'". l>~~N "/"I p , Ii q ! ~ o ~ > r ~ " m '" "" m o " "" " ,."'"OJ-"_.,'D""""""_'"'''''''-"......t'''''\"......"'~.,,..'.'''''M'''''''''''." "'__' ',.., __,_"",_,,_'.' .__."__ "~~~'_W..._~~'_"__"_'_~'__ !~iiii' s- ~''ll "- 5''''''01 S-11 ~ g- ~ ~'~ ~ ~~, ~ * 01 ~ ~ " ~!~ i '''j' .~ ' i!~l ~ "8""''- " ~ lo! '" ~r.... " h-~& "f ~ a i'o ~ __ 'I' " . .' -, H~ -0'''' 'q ,-, < ~ ~ ,,' U ~D G;> 1-~H~H ;; ~ i~: ~ f I" ,I:,. ~5,l.lj,U !!lnili c.. ~ Z 0.3 "'I ' - .,.. , llll 5 "t!- ~ ~. ~"'i 6"..- 'S."l;5"li !~<f 9'!,i!~ <3 .. ~.' ~n:!!-F ilf'W "',1, -, "'c; -~ C1ooH" ...! ~ '" ii ,.. ~l;.j>l::il w ~.S i!.. S i~io.t5.t !!!~p~~~ .. I'! .. ;-!~," 8 ~ _ 3 _ ~ " _ ~ g ~ Ii ii ~ ~ if" ~ o _ , ' t;> 'IlH li=,j ! a,f '" ~ 'I '.. liS' "2" ;U3~ , 'j"" . 'I ' , , ,< :!.-"'.. ~,i: Q ,,'" ~ ~ '1-'0 - .~ ~ ;> Ill:' ~f g'!l !:$ll.o o....a Qg.~-'" 11.~:-::il ", 0 ,- . ''" .,.,' i'i' ~!': .-' -- , ~ 'il ~ " :-!!.g. >-.... , " ~'~'o_{~~~ . ~'" ---,f@:_ . . . ...... -"'~-- , '. I ' , . . . ~ ~~. . h. "I' , o i , .' " '"7 I 1 , , , . . , , , ""'AV .h ~~~ " '""'P,-,""'''. G;> t;> ..~"'....~ !l:-~~i . ~ ,., :1'=''5"'1'' !!. <> ~ .. ~ j!''';;ff'''<-> ~ ~ Ii" F":: ': F";i_~! o If" 'It ~ ~i e! d~ ''''1' ~~5" 3 ~~~~ib ~'gd'-~(1 i ~ H~ ~ ff<'ll )>1"- ,'.. . '!;l3g, '" ~glO!lt;;: :H~~~5: - c .. .. ~ f :nfgdl~ g 3 Ii a ~ 9- pn:;,Q:j .. ~ 1: ~. c ~ !: ;~ .i -< <> ~ " 0_<> .. ~ "l;:. = ~u-o ~'; i ~ ~ oil ~ "~li .-, 1,0", , ' , ~h: s-..'" -" '0. iio DO ,0 . . ." , , ," " ... ;;: l'E~ ~llQ -," --, 3..." 3;- -.0 ~ ~ ~ i ~ .> ,. , , '1- ~ II ,,~.. Iii n ;/1 -I , , i ,~,- ~, . , t;> [;>0 m < ~ o z W , " " , . . o , , I , c - -, H. ~;,.. gi~ ., - , D ,- U . , .- " l! , _ 0 ,0 .0 -. D' o 05 " . ~~ 1:0 n ~~ . - '; c_ " " c' o . ~ n . w o o z o > . m w -. ) 7"',,~,,_ .-,......, .--~ . ",""-'~"'- ',"',.'< -""'--,,--~--""". . . ~~~~ ...-.~~o "'~'''--- """ , I,~ " ! I'''! ,II!I , , I 'I 'I ,I!; '11\ \ I _-==--_-. , . . " I ! , < , i , , . ! . I . , o < l . ~-:, , 1.; : , ., " ---.-',' (r" I: I , i'> " </'~I ,,-' !I " I :~ II t;> t;> ! I ! ! < I , " " ~! " II " " , , , . \: ~ \ I, " I \ J <!'- , 0' d' 1hl n , ^;..:",.,,,;~ ~ " "~f c-r~:l! ~J t;>t;> "'i'> , ~II " .I!' Iii , , , , I: l < ,I ! < , . I . ~~~~ " .oj, ,I .. g~.~ , " ~I!l . .. ,- > , I , n , ~ m W o < ! . , , -- H -, < '.g"p<'.',"O,,," ,.----'J II " ii , ""_~.,M~...._,__"_,...___,~._~'~~,."..._'''_....._~~.-.','' ,." _____..."~".____.____,.__-"" ^ ~ , " ~~ . ,< ! , , ! i , I , , I' i! I~ ,I , , , J D. .".',,"', '. ' ..... ..' .~ , . m W m ~ m .m ex <. ." >z <0 '> .z 00 " mc n. "c 0> Zm N o Z m ~ " , N . . , , , , , i , I 0-- "----0-- -~-~-- !I'I I . !J i H , ! ! ------,-- ---'-.--..., PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The Immokalee Regional Airport Operations Planned Unit Development (AOPUD) consists of the existing Immokalee Regional Airport facility located north of C.R. 846 in the lmmokalee Urban Area, plus an additional 103eJe acres adjacent to the east end of the future runway expansion area. The lmmokalee Regional Airport presently consists of airport operations and related functions, which include two 5,000eJe foot long runways, taxiways linking hangar and airport adrninistration functions with the runways, fueling areas, and hangars for storage of general aviation aircraft. Also on site is a one-eighth mile long drag racing track. That track is located on one of the unused runway areas. ,& &L , ?/ Approximate location of drag strip INOl.1STRIAI.. OEvel..oPMIilNT T""'T / Large tracts of land remain available for development of additional airport and aviation-related uses. The majority of the property is currently zoned Industrial (I), which permits a range of industrial activities in accordance with the Land Development Code (LDC). The site has been utilized for dccades for aviation-related purposes. Collier County was deeded the airport property in the 1960s by the Federal government and it is now operated by the Collier PUDZ-2007-AR-12294; Immokalee Airport AOPUD Revised 10/30109 Page 2 of 21 County Airport Authority (CCAA). The Immokalee Regional Airport was originally a WWII bomber-training base. The Federal Surplus Act eventually turned the airport over to the County in the 1960s. For approximately thirty years, the airport sat dormant. Shortly after its creation in 1993, the Collier County Airport Authority drew up innovative plans for the site, including extensive designs to expand the runways, bring in cargo-carrying businesses, and turn some of the land into an industrial park. Initial grants helped to build a fuel farm, a road, aircraft hangars, a ramp, taxiway, and the first building. Over time, the original plans of the Authority have changed to suit the changing needs at the airfield, but the long-term goals remain essentially the same: to turn the historic facility into a viable industrial park attracting businesses that will hire and train local workers, to bring in international cargo carriers and U.S. Customs officials, and to contribute new and vital industry to the local economy. The Airport Authority, through adoption of the AOPUD zoning district, intends to expand the permitted uses on the site consistent with the most recent Airport Master Plan which envisions the expansion of aviation and non-aviation activity. The Immokalee Regional Airport AOPUD proposes to permit a maximwn of five million (5,000,000) square feet of aviation and non- aviation related development consistent with the adopted Airport Master Plan. [Note: The existing industrial zoning designation for 1,4000, acres could allow more than the proposed 5 million square feet of industrial uses. This PUD would put a cap on the amount of development that would not be done if the land remained industrially zoned.] The AOPUD master plan identifies the existing airfield and airport operation improvements, as well as the future development tracts. A small portion of the property (103010 acres) is zoned Rural Agricultural (A). That tract has been used for agricultural purposes for many years. That area is shown on the Master Plan as the future runway protection zone. No development activities may occur on that tract unless and until the Immokalee Urban Boundary is amended to include it. The Immokalee Regional Airport "Airport Operations Tract" is one component of the AOPUD subject property, encompassing approximately 552 acres. The "Industrial Development Tract" has approximately 692 acres, the "Expansion Tract" has approximately 103 acres, and the "Preserve Tract" makes up the remaining 137 acres. This project is not a Development of Regional Impact (DRl) in compliance with the Florida Statutes because airports and their related activities are exempt. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: Citrus Groves, with an Agricultural with a Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO) zoning designation East: Agricultural uses; with an A-MHO zoning designation South: Industrial, commercial, and agricultural operations, with Industrial (I), Commercial, with an Agribusiness Overlay Subdistrict (C-5/AOSD), and A-MHO zoning designations West: Industrial, and commercial, uses; a county park area and citrus groves, with zoning designations of!, C-5/AOPD, Public (P) and A-MHO, respectively PUDZ-2007-AR-12294; Immokalee Airport AOPUD Revised 10/30109 Page 3 of 21 __. _,_", '_.'___~,_._~M'...__' ._._~_.,_~...~_~_____'"_____~__~ -,..._---~-, AERIAL OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The following comments provide a summary of the Comprehensive Planning Review Memo dated September 16, 2009. A complete copy of that document is provided with the application materials. The original 1,381-acre proposed development is located in the Urban Designation, Urban- Industrial District, Industrial Subdistrict, as depicted on the Immokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map (lAMPFLUM). The additional 103 acres, more or less, is located in the Agricultural/Rural Designation, Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO), as depicted on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Growth Management Plan. PUDZ-2007-AR-12294; Immokalee Airport AOPUD Revised 10/30/09 Page 4 of 21 Generally, the Agricultural/Rural Designation, Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District allows a variety of low intensity uses, including agriculture, low-density residential development, and sporting/recreation camps. Industrial development is not allowed within the designation. The petitioner limits this area stating, "No development activities may occur on the site until such time as the Immokalee Urban Boundary is amended to include it." The DRAFT Immokalee Area Master Plan (December 2008) was reviewed for future changes in the boundary to include this 103 acre addition. No changes to the boundary of the Immokalee Area Master Plan are proposed. The Immokalee Area Master Plan (lAMP) Urban - Industrial District is described below: The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide for industrial type uses, including: airports; uses related to light manufacturing, processing, storage and warehousing, wholesaling, distribution, packing houses, recycling, high technology, laboratories, assembly, storage, computer and data processing; business services; limited commercial uses, such as child care centers, restaurants and other basic commercial uses, except retail uses, as described in the Land Development Code jor the Industrial and Business Park Zoning Districts; and, vehicle racing, subject to conditional use approval. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the uses allowed in this Subdistrict, include, but are not limited to, ojjices and retail sales; campgrounds accessory to vehicle racing; and, campgrounds accessory to ;,pecial events at the airport, such as air shows. The application of these Subdistrict provisions has consistently included the uses described in the Land Development Code for the Industrial and Business Park Zoning Districts. This Airport Operations PUD is limited to those uses already found in the Industrial zoning district to be consistent with the lAMP Industrial Subdistrict. Economic Element (EE): The following objective and policy are applicable to this petition: Objective 3 (New And Existing Industries): Collier County will support programs which are designed to promote and encourage the recruitment of new industry as well as the expansion and retention of existing industries in order to diversify the County's economic base. Policy 3.7: Collier County will support the location of business and industry in the Foreign Trade Zone located at the Immokalee Airport. Policy 3.7 of the Economic Element supports the growth and expansion of business and industry at the Immokalee Regional Airport. The Immokalee Regional Airport Master Plan and this Airport Operations PUD are part of this effort. The airport is in a designated Florida Rural Enterprise Zone and a HUB Empowerment Zone, which supports economic revitalization in high unemployment or otherwise economically dorrnant areas within the state by offering tax incentives to businesses, located within the Enterprise Zone. The HUB Zone Empowerment Contracting Program is a United States Small Business Administration program that provides PUDZ-2007-AR-12294: Immokalee Airport AOPUD Revised 10/30/09 Page 5 of 21 -. ..._..._---'-- " --' --'-- . -"-'-'."'--"-_.~'~-'->-- _._.._.'~ ~~.._._- - ',------ '-~--'~- federal contracting assistance for qualified small businesses in historically underutilized business (HUB) areas, or zones. Additionally, a 60-acre zone in and around the Airport is a designated Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ), and Immokalee is designated a Foreign Entrepreneurial Investment Zone by the Florida Department of Labor and Employment Security. The FTZ designation offers companies the convenience of deferring any duties or taxes until the business ships the goods outside of the FTZ. The Entrepreneurial Investment Zone designation allows foreign business owners seeking permanent residency in the U.S. to invest $500,000 in capital over a two-year period in a new or existing business within the Immokalee area. The Florida Tradeport, located adjacent to the Immokalee Regional Airport, provides business opportunities in both aviation and non-aviation related fields. With a U.S. Customs Port of Entry located on the property, the airport is well suited for tenants specializing in international air cargo. A newly built customs processing facility at the Immokalee Regional Airport enables businesses to clear customs for import and export in Collier County. The facility, which is part of the Immokalee Manufacturing and Technology Center at the Immokalee Regional Airport, allows a carrier to either land at the airport and immediately clear customs, or even bring cargo by any method through one of the other Ports of Entry in the State of Florida with the customs clearing taking place in Immokalee. Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petitioner's application, and has determined that the proposed zoning action does not present a significant difference in trip generation from the currently existing zoning. The rezoning is viewed as an encapsulation of the existing trips, and a maximum square footage cap is established in the narrative (5,000,000 square feet) that was not previously in place. Transportation Department Staff accepted the petition without a Traffic Impact Statement (TIS), noting that the existing Industrial zoned tracts would allow equal intensity of uses as what is proposed in the PUD. However, the 103 acre "Expansion Tract" shown at the easterly extension of the airport runway (zoned Agricultural) was not included in the Transportation Planning assessment. A stipulation has been added, in the form of a developer's commitrnent, noting that if a comprehensive plan amendment is sought by the owner to allow development within that tract that could allow increased trip generation for the AOPUD, then the potential traffic impacts will require additional analysis for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP. The stipulation is included in PUD document, Exhibit F.A2. With that caveat, Transportation Planning staff recommends that this petition be deemed consistent with the Transportation Element of the GMP. Portions of this facility may be exempt trom concurrency, as determined by Florida. Statute Section 163.3180 (4)(b), as amended by Senate HB 7203. However, there are no proposed square footage limitations in the proposed zoning district that would define or delineate the uses that would be considered exempt [trom concurrency requirements], versus those uses that would remain subject to concurrency. In other words, both 'exempt' and 'non-exempt' facilities would be allowed within the proposed zoning district with no distinction on that status being determined here. PUDZ-2007-AR-12294; Immokalee Airport AOPUD Revised 10/30109 Page 6 of 21 It should be noted that the applicability of concurrency (or lack thereof) does not eliminate the necessity to accommodate operational deficiencies that might be caused by the projects allowed in the proposed zoning district. As such, each development application Site Development Plan (SDP), Site Development Plan Amendment (SDPA), or Plat (PPL), etc. within the AOPUD shall be required to submit a TIS consistent with the TIS guidelines whether it is to be exempt from concurrency or not. At the time each traffic study is approved, each forthcoming project shall be responsible to identify and remediate any operational deficiencies caused by that project. Additionally, those land uses being proposed within this zoning district that are subject to concurrency shall be required to address capacity issues on the adjacent roadway network. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Objective 2.2 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Growth Management Plan states, "All canals, rivers, and flow ways discharging into estuaries shall meet all applicable federal, state, or local water quality standards." To accomplish that policy 2.2.2 states "In order to limit the specific and cumulative impacts of stormwater runoff, storm water systems should be designed in such a way that discharged water does not degrade receiving waters and an attempt is made to enhance the timing, quantity, and quality of fresh water (discharge) to the estuarine system." This project is consistent with Objectives 6. I and 6.2 regarding the selection of preserves. The property site contains 1484.00 acres of which 363.48 acres is considered native vegetation. The proposed native vegetation preserve of 137.03 acres fulfills the minimum requirement of 54.52 acres or 15 percent of the existing native vegetation on site. As required by Policy 6. 1.4, prohibited exotic vegetation shall be removed from the site and the site will be maintained exotic free in perpetuity. The EIS required by Policy 6. 1.8 was prepared and reviewed by the Environmental Advisory Council. (The outcome of which is addressed later in this report.) As required by Policy 6.2.1, a wetland jurisdictional determination has been conducted by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). (See EIS Exhibit 3). In accordance with Policy 6.2.6, required preservation areas are identified on the PUD master plan. Allowable uses within the preserve areas are included in the PUD document. Uses within preserve areas shall not include any activity detrimental to drainage, flood control, water conservation, erosion control, or fish and wildlife conservation and preservation. As required by Policy 7.1.2, a listed species survey was conducted on the property and it is contained in the EIS (Exhibit 10). In accordance with Policy 11.1.2, correspondence was sent to the Florida Department of the State Division of Historical Resources (DHR) regarding possible archaeological or historical sites within the majority of the Project area. In a letter dated January 31, 2005, the DHR stated that no cultural resources are known to exist in the Project area that was reviewed and that no cultural resources will be affected by the Project (Exhibit 14). PUDZ-2007-AR-12294; Immokalee Airport AOPUD Revised 10/30109 Page 7 of 21 __*..__."._....~_._~A""___~_,.,,~.~____ __._.". ,~__......_..."..M~"____-.._"....",,",,'~_"'*.,. ",~__,'___'__ ._._.,,_....'~..._. __ _____n.,__.'. "-"~__ .. -,.---,.- GMP Conclusion: The GMP is the prevailing document to support land use decisions such as this proposed PUD rezone. Staff is required to make a recommendation regarding a finding of consistency or inconsistency with the overall GMP as part of the recommendation for approval, approval with conditions, or denial of any rezoning petition. A finding of consistency with the FLUE and FLUM and the lAMP designations is a portion of the overall finding that is required, and staff believes the petition is consistent with the FLUM, the FLUE and the lAMP as indicated previously in the GMP discussion. The proposed amendment is consistent with the GMP Transportation Element, the Economic Element and The CCME Elements also as previously discussed. Therefore, staff recommends that the petition be found consistent with the overall GMP. ANALYSIS: Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in LDC Subsection 1O.02.13.B.5, Planning Commission Recommendation (commonly referred to as the "PUD Findings"), and Subsection 10.03.05.1, Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report (referred to as "Rezone Findings"), which establish the legal bases to support the CCPC's recommendation. The CCPC uses these same criteria as the basis for their recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), who in turn use the criteria to support its action on the rezoning request. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed below, under the heading "Zoning and Land Development Review Analysis." In addition, staff offers the following analyses: Environmental Review: Environmental Services staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD documents to address any environmental concerns. This petition was required to submit an Environment Impact Statement (EIS) and a hearing before the Environmental Advisory Commission (EAC) was held as noted later in this report. As part of the EAC hearing, Environmental staff prepared and presented a staff report which is included in the back up material for this petition. The EAC staff report included the following conditions of approval: 1. Provide an updated listed species survey as part of the next development order. 2. Provide Florida black bear, Big Cypress fox squirrel, and burrowing owl management plans as part of the next development order. 3. Provide a gopher tortoise relocation management plan as part of the next development order. 4. Provide a report to the Environmental Services statf on the results of the relocation of the gopher tortoises within thirty days of relocation. The report must contain the following injc)rmation: the number of burrows excavated, the number of tortoises relocated, and thefinal relocation site, 5, Prior to the CCPC hearing. the pun document and legal description shall exclude the wetland ditch acreage as part of the preservation requirement. PUDZ-2007-AR-12294; Immokalee Airport AOPUD Revised 10/30109 Page 8 of 21 Stormwater Manazement Review: Storm water Management Review Staff (Engineering) has reviewed this as part ofthe EAC staff report. Those comments are provided below: The Immokalee Regional Airport Project sits mostly within the Barron River North sub-basin and partially within the Urban Immokalee sub-basin of the Barron River Canal (BRC) basin. The allowable Discharge Rate within those sub-basins is 0.15 cfs per acre and the discharged flow goes into the SR 29 canal and southward down the SR 29 canal to the Barron River and the 10,000 Islands in the Everglades City area. The entire 1381 acres of the Immokalee Regional Airport project are covered for surface stormwater management under SFWMD Environmental Resource Permit #11-00999-S (with modifications). Section 2 -1193(0) of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances states "The surface water management aspects of any petition, that is or will be reviewed and permitted by South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), are exempt from review by the EAC except to evaluate the criteria for allowing treated stormwater to be discharged into Preserves as allowed in Section 3.05.07." Transportation Review: Transportation Department Staff has reviewed the petition and accepted the petition without a Traffic Impact Statement, therefore the extent of any necessary improvements cannot be determined at this time. The determination will be made at the next development order stage. Additionally, Transportation Planning staff has included a stipulation to require additional traffic analysis should a GMP amendment be submitted to allow uses that could increase traffic. The stipulation is included in PUD document, Exhibit F.A.2, reading as follows: If a comprehensive plan amendment is sought to allow development within that tract [the Expansion Tract] that could allow increased trip generation for the AOPUD. then the potential traffic impacts shall require additional analysis for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP. Utility Review: The Utilities Department Staff has reviewed the petition and notes the following: The project does not impact the Collier County Water and Sewer District. The project location is not within Collier County Water and Sewer Service Area. This development is within the Immokalee Water and Sewer District. When this project reaches the SDP process, a letter from the franchised utility system must be submitted to Collier County Community Development Engineering Services Department stating the available capacity; and Collier County Ordinance 90-30 (as amended) and Ordinance 2004-50 (as amended) shall apply when referencing Solid Waste and Recycling. No comments were received from the Immokalee Water and Sewer District regarding this petition. Emergency Management Review.- Emergency Management staff provided the following comment: The Immokalee Regional Airport is not located in hurricane surge zone. The Emergency Management Department has no issues with this project. The petitioner did not evaluate nor is it proposing mitigation to offset any demands that may be created by the rezone action. PUDZ-2007-AR-12294; Immokalee Airport AOPUD Revised 10/30/09 Page 9 of 21 ,~,,"~,~_~,__,_,,___~,~'~'~_'"."_'._.___"_"_"_"__"_',",_"__.",,._",~_~~"_..'__.~_'~~._~__'_H_""__'''___.__ ..~.,. -_.-.'._,..- ~- _M.~"__..~.. Affordable Housinf! Review: The Housing & Human Services staff did not review this petition because the majority of the uses proposed are industrial or commercial. The petitioner did not evaluate nor is it proposing mitigation to offset any housing demands that may be created by the rezone action. Zoninf! Review: According to LDC Subsection 2.03.06.C.5, the AOPUD zoning district is intended "to accommodate and regulate those lands on which public airports and ancillary facilities are to be located." As noted previously. the subject site is already partially developed for those uses, with expansion proposed. The development standards proposed for this site are unique in that Collier County does not have an Airport Zoning District; therefore, there are no conventional zoning district standards to mimic. The Airport Operations Tract development standards contains a caveat that all structures must be in compliance with FAA standards recognizing that aircraft will be utilizing this portion of the site as well as the special configuration required to house aircraft. The Industrial Development Tract development standards are similar to the Industrial Zoning District standards but recognize the distinctiveness of industrial uses that will be utilizing the airport operations as well as conventional land transportation. PUD Findings: LDC Subsection IO.02.l3.B.5 states that, "In support of its recommendation, the CCPC shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the following criteria": 1. The suitability of the area jilr the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, trajJic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. As discussed in the staff report and the following Rezone Findings, the type and pattern of development proposed should not have a negative impact upon any physical characteristics of the land, the surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. Furthermore, this project, if developed, will be required to comply with all county regulations regarding drainage, sewer, water and other utilities pursuant to Section 6.02.00 Adequate Public Facilities of the LDC. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contracts, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas andfacilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense, Documents submitted with the application provide satisfactory evidence of unified control. The general LDC development regulations make appropriate provisions for the continuing operation and maintenance of common areas. ], Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). County staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis of the relevant goals, objectives and policies of the GMP within the GMP discussion of this staff report. Based PUDZ-2007-AR-12294; Immokalee Airport AOPUD Revised 10/30109 Page 10 of 21 on that analysis, staff is of the opinion that this petition can be found consistent with the overall GMP. 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. The development standards, landscaping and buffering requirements contained in this petition are designed to make the proposed uses compatible with the adjacent uses. The staff analysis contained in the staff report support a finding that this petition is compatible, both internally and externally, with the proposed uses and with the existing surrounding uses. Additionally, the Development Commitments contained in the PUD document provide additional guidelines the developer will have to fulfill. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The amount of open space set aside for this project meets the minimum requirement of the LDC. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. Currently, the roadway infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project at this time, i.e., GMP consistent at the time of rezoning as evaluated as part of the GMP Transportation Element consistency review indicates, with the notation that some portions of the project are exempt from concurrency requirements. However, as noted in that Transportation Element analysis, the developers will be required to provide a TIS as part of subsequent development orders to prove that adequate capacity exists, or to correct deficiencies. In addition, the project's development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals are sought. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. See #6 above. 8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. The petitioner is seeking six deviations to allow design flexibility in compliance with the purpose and intent of the Planned Unit Development Districts (LDC Section 2.03.06A). This criterion requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards and deviations proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. Staff believes all the deviations proposed can be supported, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section lO.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the elements may be waived without a detrimental effect PUDZ-2007-AR-12294; Immokalee Airport AOPUD Revised 10/30109 Page 110121 "_',_,, ,,,_.,_",..o_.~~~__w___m_'~_."__>._."..__ ...., _, ',_ _._,..._"w.~_..._._. "" """" " ...," . .....____,._.-~"__._"___..~_ -~ -- - ---,^'-',,,-,,-- on the health, safety and welfare of the community" and LnC Section IO.02.I3.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviations are "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Please refer to the staff report for a more extensive examination of the deviations. Rezone findings: LDC Subsection 10, OJ. 05./. states, "'When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recomrnendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners...shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the following when applicable" (<Staff's responses to these criteria are provided in boldfont): 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, & policies of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth Alanagement Plan. As noted in the GMP Consistency portion of this report, the proposed development standards revision would not affect the project's prior consistency finding. The project remains consistent with the goals and objectives of the FLUE and the applicable portions other elements. Therefore, staff recommends that this petition be deemed consistent with the GMP. 2. The existing land use pattern; As described in the "Surrounding Land Use and Zoning" portion of this report, the neighborhood's existing land use pattern is characterized by industrially or agriculturally zoned and used lands in all directions and on all sides. The uses proposed in this petition should not create incompatibility issues. The airport as well as many of the other uses already exist on site with seemingly no adverse affects on the neighborhood. Historically speaking, the airport use on site may predate many if not most of the existing uses. J, The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts; The proposed pun rezone would not create an isolated zoning district because, with the exception of the Expansion Tract, the zoning boundary mirrors the existing property ownership boundary and current Industrial Zoning District boundary lines. 4, Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposedjiJr change. The proposed pun boundaries are inclusive of the existing airport and the Industrial Zoning District boundaries. In addition, the Expansion Tract's location is shown in a logical location, at the terminus of the planned runway expansion. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezoning necessary The proposed change is not necessary, but is appropriate for this location based upon the county's future airport use plans, the site's FLUE designation. PUDZ-2007-AR-12294; Immokalee Airport AOPUD Revised 10/30109 Page 12 of 21 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood; Staff is of the opinion that the proposed change, with the commitments made by the applicant, is consistent with the County's land use policies that are reflected by the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. Therefore, the proposed change should not adversely impact living conditions in the area. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. The roadway infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project at this time. This project was evaluated for GMP consistency as shown in that section of this report. That evaluation notes that some portions of the project are exempt from concurrency requirements. However, as noted in that Transportation Element analysis, the developers will be required to provide a TIS as part of subsequent development orders to clearly prove that adequate capacity exists, or to correct deficiencies (See PUD document Exhibit F.A.3.). In addition, the project's development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals are sought. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem; The proposed change should not create drainage or surface water problems because the LDC specifically addresses prerequisite development standards that are designed to reduce the risk of flooding on nearby properties. Any proposed water management and drainage system will need to be designed to prevent drainage problems on site and be compatible with the adjacent water management systems. Additionally, the LDC and GMP have regulations in place that will ensure review for drainage on new developments. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas; If this petition were approved, any subsequent development would need to comply with the applicable LDC standards for development or as outlined in the PUD document. This project's property development regulations would encourage compact development thus the developed project should not significantly reduce light and air to adjacent areas; thus the development proposed, if approved, should not negatively affect light and air permeation into adjacent areas. 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area; This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results which may be internal or external to the subject property. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning; however zoning by itself mayor may not affect values, since value determination is driven by market value. There is no guarantee that the project will be marketed in a manner comparable to the surrounding developments. PUDZ-2007-AR-12294; Immokalee Airport AOPUD Revised 10/30/09 Page 13 of 21 , ,..,......._.. _,.. ',"_""""''''~'___.~_~_''M",_'M..,,,_.....,,_~____-...~~..,~__~,.' _'__"~"_'"_,~""""""'.'_''''''''''''''-_,,,,",,'''''''_,~ ._......_-~-~-.... ".... . ---'-'_..._~- .".--.-.-- 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent properly in accordance with existing regulations: Properties around this property are already partially developed. The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in the Land Development Code is that their sound application, when combined with the site development plan approval process and/or subdivision process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in deterrence to improvement or development of adjacent property. Therefore, the proposed zoning change should not be a deterrent to the improvement of adjacent properties. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare: The proposed development complies with the Growth Management Plan, as stipulated for approval, a public policy statement supporting Zoning actions when they are consistent with said Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed change does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance wlfh existing zoning; The property is zoned for industrial and agricultural purposes, and could be developed within the parameters of those zoning districts; however, the petitioner is seeking this amendment in order to respond to future needs of the airport. LDC Section 2.03.06 which sets forth the purpose and intent of Plan Unit Development Districts says in part: It is further the purpose and intent of these PUD regulations to encourage ingenuity, innovation and imagination in the planning, design, and development or redevelopment of relatively large tracts of land under unified ownership or control. PUDs . . . . may depart from the strict application of setback, height, and minimum lot requirements of conventional zoning districts while maintaining minimum standards by which flexibility may be accomplished, and while protecting the public interest. . . . Staff believes the proposed rezone meets the intent of the PUD district and further, helieves the puhlic interest will be maintained. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County; As noted previously, the proposed rezone houndary follows the existing airport property boundary with the exception of the Expansion Tract which is a logical extension area. The GMP is a policy statement which has evaluated thc scale, density and intensity of land uses PUDZ-2007-AR-12294; Immokalee Airport AOPUD Page 14 of 21 Revised 10/30109 deemed to be acceptable tbroughout the urban-designated areas of Collier County. Staff is of the opinion that the development standards and the developer commitments will ensure that the project is not out ofscale with the needs of the community. 15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. This criterion is not applicable to this amendment as the airport use is already established on this site. In addition, the petition was reviewed on its own merit for compliance with the GMP and the LDC; and staff does not review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. This site has already been altered and partially developed in compliance with the applicable LDC requirements. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended. The project will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in LDC Section 6.02.00 regarding Adequate Public Facilities and the project will need to be consistent with all applicable goals and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities, except as it may be exempt by federal regulations. This petition has been reviewed by county staff that is responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the amendment process and those staff persons have concluded that no Level of Service will be adversely impacted with the commitments contained in the PUD document. 18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. To be determined by the BCC during its advertised public hearing. Deviation Discussion: The petitioner is seeking numerous deviations from the requirements of the LDC. The deviations are listed in PUD Exhibit E with the petitioners' rationale provided to support each deviation provided in a separate document that is included in the application material. Deviation 1 seeks relief from LDC Section 3.05.10 which regulates littoral plantings to allow water quality to be met according to SFWMD regulations. Petitioners' Rationale and Staff Analysis: The petitioner states this deviation is needed because littoral plantings zones create habitat and attract wildlife. Birds attracted to these areas create a PUDZ-2007-AR-12294; Immokalee Airport AOPUD Revised 10/30109 Page 15 of 21 - --.--.-...-......"....-..-..--.-,....-.... -"'....__._-_.._~.._.__..__....._-" ,....-.... '--'-'-'''-'--~'--~-- .: ." ,...,..... ........,....,.; '. .............-...-..._-~,---".,-~_. ,. ~ ...~-~-~-- ---,~---- dangerous environment for aircraft, and should not be encouraged to nest, feed or fly into the airport area. Littoral plantings are also a way to improve water quality in the required water management lakes. In lieu of littoral plantings to address water quality, the applicant proposed to utilize sodded dry detention areas and drainage ditches. As explained by the petitioner in the Deviation Justification: These dry sodded areas will treat the water passing through them, removing pollutants and unwanted nutrients more effectively than a littoral planting area would. Based on the lake area shown on the Conceptual Water Management Plan, we would be required to provide an estimated 122,000 square feet of littoral area; however, more than 360,000 square feet of sodded drainage ditches are anticipated, and thousands more square feet of dry detention areas are yet to be delineated. The drainage ditches and dry detention are in addition to the water quality treatment that will be provided in compliance with the South Florida Water Management District's criteria and the Environmental Resource Permit issued fiJr this project, which require an additional half inch of pre-treatment prior to discharge into the proposed lakes, and an additional 50% water quality volume prior to discharge into the Fakahatchee Strand. Recommendation: Staff believes the alternative proposed in this deviation will be adequate. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 1 0.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public R.!!!Poses to a degree at least equivalent to literal aRPlication of such regulations." Deviation 2 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.08 which requires bicycle parking to allow secured access facilities or sites that will have access to the taxiways of the airport to be exempt from the requirement. Petitioners' Rationale and Staff Analysis' The petitioner states this deviation is needed because: The Immokalee Regional Airport will have areas that are subject to very limited access for security purposes, These may be developed over time as stand-alone hangars or other secured sites, It is unnecessary to provide bicycle parking .lor these areas and for areas that will be accessible .trom the runways, No detriment to public health, safety or welfare is anticipatedji-om approval of this request. Staff concurs with the applicant's assessment of the situation for this particular project. For areas where there will be no pedestrian or bicycle acccss or rcquired parking spaces, there seems to be no need to provide facilities to park bicycles. Recommendation: Staff believes this deviation can be supported given the exclusive airport situation. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section ] 0.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 1O.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated PUDZ-2007-AR-12294; Immokalee Airport AOPUD Revised 10/30109 Page 16 0121 that the deviation is "justified as meeting public QillPoses to a degree at least equivalent to literal !!Qjllication of such regulations." Deviation 3 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.05.08 which requires all sides of all buildings to meet primary fas;ade/architectural design standards to allow buildings within the Airport Operations Tract and all aviation-related structures to be exempt from the requirement and to allow all other buildings to have primary fas;ade requirements only on sides that face a roadway accessible to the general public. Petitioners' Rationale and Staff Analysis: The petitioner states this deviation is needed because: Many of the structures that are anticipated on this site will serve aviation purposes, such as hangar buildings, which are large structures traditionally not subject to architectural embellishment. Large overhead doors or doors that slide open sideways are commonly necessary for these sites. These features preclude compliance with the Code's architectural design regulations. The LDC already provides separate standards for warehousing and industrial uses, however, this property cannot be subdivided which will complicate the application of those regulations, Devising a separate process will simplifY reviews and will further the economic development goals of the County. No detriment to public health, safety or welfare is anticipated from the granting of this deviation. This is actually a multi-faceted deviation. The petitioner is seeking to: I) eliminate any primary fas;ade/architectural design standards within the Airport Operations Tract for all portions of any building, and 2) eliminate any primary fas;ade/architectural design standards for all portions of all aviation-related structures in all Tracts; and 3) reduce the requirements for all other for any portion of any building located in the Industrial Development tract except that buildings that "face a roadway accessible to the general public" will meet the primary fas;ade requirements, but only on that roadway side. Recommendation: Staff believes this deviation can be supported given the exclusive airport situation. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.B.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community," and LDC Section lO.02.B.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public llli!Jloses to a degree at least equivalent to literal !!Qjllication of such regulations." Deviation 4 seeks relied from LDC Sections 5.06.01-5.06.07 which restricts the number, type and location of signs to allow additional on-site signs as though the property were subdivided and Airpark Boulevard were a platted right-of-way, and to allow roof signs as a permitted sign type. Petitioners' Rationale and Stalj"Analysis,' The petitioner provided the following justification in support of this deviation: PUDZ-2007-AR-12294; Immokalee Airport AOPUD Page 17 of 21 Revised 10/30109 ,,___,.,,__~_<..w__^, ".. ."__.._...,_.~ . ..._,----=-_".,_.,...........__,~""'.;_~~~_-,......~_.' ,."'._=_~____. ._~,__~...~._~.._._.-.. __..,_..~,~~_~ Signage at airports serves a greater purpose than many facilities. It not only serves to advertise, but to guide the traveling public on the ground, as well as those traveling by air, The regulations contained in the Land Development Code do not consider this factor, the need for additional way:finding signs, or the need to ensure that lighting regulations do not interfere with safe air travel. In addition to the unusual use of the site, this property will not be subdivided, so technically, there could be many more signs necessary to advertise various businesses than would be permitted by a strict interpretation of the Code. Development of the airport will progress over several years, which makes it difficult to predict the specific needs of the future tenants, Therefore, alternative designs will be determined in cooperation with staff, in accordance with the interlocal agreement. This deviation is requested to protect public health, safety and welfare, Staff concurs with the applicant's assessment of the situation for this particular project. Recommendation: Staff believes this deviation can be supported given the exclusive airport situation. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 1O.02.I3.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community," and LDC Section I 0.02.l3.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public Q!Lrposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal ill2plication of such regulations." Deviation 5 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.06.03, which contains landscape requirements for vehicular use areas and rights-of~way, to require an area equal to ten percent of paved, marked automobile parking spaces only to be planted with vegetation to be maintained at less than 36 inches in height. Required trees will be relocated to a more appropriate location within the PUD. This deviation shall apply only to developrnent within the secured, fenced airport area. Petitioners' Rationale and Staf/Analysis. The petitioner provided the following justification in support of this deviation: The developed areas within the securedfence of the airport will contain large amounts of pavement for airplane movement and parking. Trees and shrubs can interfere with sightlines and with the movement of the planes given the clear area needed to accommodate their wingspan. The applicant wishes to clearly differentiate between areas used by airplanes and areas used by automobiles, Required trees for the automobile parking areas may be relocated to a more appropriate location. This deviation request will increase safety and welfare by reducing potential conflicts between planes and landscape materials, Staff concurs with the applicant's assessment of the situation for this particular project. Recommendation: Staff believes this deviation can be supported given the exclusive airport situation. Zoning and Land Development Rcview stan recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 1O.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety PUDZ-2007-AR-12294; Immokalee Airport AOPUD Revised 10t30t09 Page 18 0121 and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meetingjlublic QillPoses to a degree at least equivalent to literal @Plication of such regulations." Deviation 6 seeks relief from LDC Subsection 4.06.05.B which requires one canopy tree per 3,000 square feet of pervious surface to waive this requirement. This deviation shall apply only to development within the secured, fenced airport area. Petitioners' Rationale and Staff Analysis: The petitioner provided the following justification in support of this deviation: An airport has a much larger amount of pervious surface than most developments. It would be onerous to require the traditional number of trees. This amount of vegetation could create an undesirable, unsafe situation by attracting additional birds and other wildlife to the area. The property will still provide required perimeter buffering which will soften the effect of this deviation. Additionally, the overall PUD is preserving an area in excess of the native vegetation requirement. Only 54.52+/- acres of preserve are required but more than 13 7 acres are provided. This likely more than offsets the general trees that will not be provided due to this deviation. No detriment to public health, safety or welfare is anticipated ji-om approval of this request. Staff concurs with the applicant's assessment of the situation for this particular project. Recommendation: Staff believes this deviation can be supported given the exclusive airport situation. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 1O.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 1O.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public pJ!!Poses to a degree at least equivalent to literal @plication of such regulations." ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: The EAC heard this petition on October 6, 2009, and voted 5 to 0 to approve this petition with the following stipulations: 1. Provide an updated listed species survey as part of the next development order. 2. Provide Florida black bear, Big Cypress fox squirrel, and burrowing owl management plans as part of the next development order with the most recent FWC telemetry points jor Florida black bear and wading bird rookeries, 3, Provide a gopher tortoise relocation management plan as part of the next development order. 4. Provide a report to the Environmental Services staff on the results of the relocation of the gopher tortoises within thirty days of relocation. The report must contain the following information: the number of burrows excavated, the number of tortoises relocated, and the final relocation site, PUDZ-2007-AR-12294; Immokalee Airport AOPUD Revised 10/30109 Page 19 of 21 5. Prior to the cepe hearing, the PUD document and legal description shall exclude the wetland ditch acreage as part of the preservation requirement. Stipulations 1,2,3 and 5 have been added to the PUD document Exhibit F. Stipulation 4 has been addressed by the applicant on Exhibit C. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM)~ The meeting was duly noticed by the applicant and held on March 3, 2009 at 5:30 p.m. at the Immokalee Regional Airport. Nine people from the public attended, as well as the applicant's team (Heidi Williams, of Grady Minor, Inc.) and county staff. Ms. Williams presented an overview of the requested rezone from the Industrial Zoning District to the Airport Operations Planned Unit Development (AOPUD) Zoning District. There was no opposition from those in attendance on the requested Rezone; however the following questions were asked: Is the property currently owned by Collier Enterprises included in the rezone? Ms. William replied yes, as they were considered co-applicants on this request. How much runway can the airport put down if the rezone is approved? Ms. Williams replied that there are currently plans for two phases of expansion; however, that cannot occur until the zoning is approved. Ms. Deselem offered as a rough guess about 1,500 more feet of run way could be added. Participants asked what kind vegetation would be on the site. Ms. Williams responded that the western edge of the property will be native vegetation. The meeting ended at approximately 6:25 p.m. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report for PUDZ-2007-AR-12294 revised on October 30, 2009. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition PUDZ-2007-AR-12294 to the BCC with a recommendation of approval subject to the conditions of approval as incorporated in Exhibit "F" of the AOPUD Ordinance. Attachments: A. B. C. Ordinance EAC Staff Report Comprehensive Planning Memo, dated September 16, 2009 PUDZ-2007-AR-12294; Immokalee Airport AOPUD Revised 10/30/09 Page 20 of 21 PREPARED BY: IO/J./!Ot] KA SELEM, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER DATE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REVIEWED BY: ID '7-7' ace RA YM D V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DA TE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW In. USAN M. ISTENES, AICP, DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 10 /z.?~9 DATE APPROVED BY: /~ 30 0 EPH K. SCHMITT ADMINISTRATOR DA T MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION Tentatively scheduled for the January 12,2010 Board of County Commissioners Meeting COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN DATE PUDZ-2007-AR-12294; Immokalee Airport AOPUD Revised 10/21/09 Page 21 of 21 ___,__"__,_",,.,_'_-'-_._",_~'._M"_~, .. _,_.~ ',.--- - --_.- c C -;.ou:n.ty Consistency Review Memorandum To: Kay Deselem, AleI', Principal Planner Zarung and Land Development Review Dcpartment From: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner ComprehensIve Planning Department Date: September 16, 2009 Subject: Immokalee Area Master Plan (lAMP) Consistency Review (4B)* PETITION NUMBER: pUDZ-2007-AR-12294 PETITION NAME: Immokalee Regional Airporl- AIrport Operations Planned Unit Development REQUEST: The petitioner has submitted a proposed rezone for the Immokalee Regional Airport from the I, Industrial and A, Rural Agricultural districts [including the MHO, Mobile Home Overlay] to the Airport Operations Planned Unit Development (AOPUD). Typical airport facilities are situated on a portion of the 1,484-acre subject property. The updated petition includes an additional 103 acres, increasing the subject property from 1,381 acres Hutially proposed. The additional acreage is designatcd as the "Expansion Tract" and intended as a Runway Protection Zone for the future east/west runway extension and as additional area for limited developmem. Other areas may continue to be used for agricultural purposes and arc reserved for future industrial development and, preserve and upland habitat management areas. *jNote:Venion 4B relJisiollS to COfl-ristelUY Review 1\10. 4 put a re-emphasis on stqff concerns, and minor re:formatting and editing.) LOCATION: The proposed Airport Operations PUD is located in Sections 25, 26, 27, 34, 35 and 36, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, and Sections 2 and 3, Township 47 South, Range 29 East. It lies generally north of Immokalee Road (CR 846) and east of Airport Road/ Airways Avenue and Alachua Street/Florida Tradeport Way at the northeast edge of town. Agricultural land uses lie beyond. The Immokalee Regional Airport "AIrport Operations Tract" is one component of the AOpUD subject property, encompassing approximately 552 acres, The "Industrial Development Tract" has approximately 692 acres, the "Expansion Tract" has approximately 103 acres, and the "Preserve Tract" makes up the remaining 13 7 acres. BACKGROUND The Immoka1ee Rcgional Airport was originally a WWII bomber-training base. The Federal Surplus Act eventually turned the airport over to the County in rhe 1960s. Par approximately thirty years, the airport sat dormant. Shortly after its creation in 1993, the Collier County Airport Authority drew up innovative plans for the slte, including extensive designs to expand tJ,C runways, bring in cargo-carrying businesses, and turn some of the land into an industrial park. PUDZ-2007-AR-12294 16 September 2009 Page-2 - Initial grants helped to build a fuel farm, a road, aircraft hangars, a ramp, taxiway, and the first building. Over rime, the original plans of the Authority have changed to suit the changing needs at the airfield, but the long-term goals remain essentially the same: to turn the historic facility into a viable industrial park attracting businesses that will hire and train local workers, to bring in international cargo carriers and U.S. Customs officials, and to contribute new and vital industry to the local economy. The airport is configured with two active 5,000-foot by ISO-foot asphalt runways (orientations: 18/36 and 09/27), and provides general aviation facilities such as pilot's lounge and shop, passenger tenninal, aviation-grade gasoline and jet fuels, plus ground transportation and a casino shuttle. The airport is in a designated Florida Rural Enterprise Zone and a HUB Empowerment Zone, which supports economic revitalization in high unemployment or otherwise economically dormant areas within the state by offering tax incentives to businesses, located within the Enterprise Zone. The HUB Zone Empowerment Contracting Program is a United States Small Business Administration program that provides federal contracting assistance for qualified small businesses in historically underutilized business (HUB) areas, or zones. Additionally, a 60-acre zone in and around the Airport is a designated Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ), and Immokalee is designated a Foreign Entrepreneurial Investment Zone by the Florida Department of Labor and Employment Security. The FTZ designation offers companies the convenience of deferring any duties or taxes until the business ships the goods outside of the FTZ. The Entrepreneurial Investment Zone designation allows foreign business owners seeking permanent residency in the U.S. to invest $500,000 in capital over a two-year period in a new or existing business within the Irnmokalee area. The Florida Tradeport, located adjacent to the Irnmokalee Regional Airport, provides business opportunities in both aviation and non-aviation related fields. With a U.S. Customs Port of Entry located on the property, the airport is well suited for tenants specializing in international air cargo. A newly built customs processing facility at the Immokalee Regional Airport enables businesses to clear customs for import and export in Collier County. The facility, which is part of the Immokalee Manufacturing and Technology Center at the Irnmokalee Regional Airport, allows a carrier to either land at the airport and immediately clear customs, or even bring cargo by any method through one of the other Ports of Entry in the State of Florida with the customs clearing taking place in Irnmokalee. The airport is also used for aerial fire fighting and crop dusting operations, and hosts International Hot Rod Association (IHRA) sanctioned drag racing events. COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMENTS: The original 1,381-acre proposed development is located in the Urban Designation, Urban-Industrial District, Industrial Subdistrict, as depicted on the Irnmokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map (IAMPFLUM). The additionall03 acres, more or less, is located in the Agricultural/Rural Designation, Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO), as depicted on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Growth Management Plan. The Irnmokalee Airport Operations PUD plans for five million square feet of aviation and non-aviation activities consistent with the Airport Master Plan. Plans include continuing certain unconventional airport land uses, specifically, cornpetitive automobile racing and its accompanying weekend camping. Irnmokalee Airport has facilities for both straight line (drag) racing and carting. The clitninutive road course for go- carts shares a small amount of pavement with the drag strip. ,_ ,._.__. .m__"_...__. ___~._~__m__.."_.__~______'_~"~_~_~ _.. _ ......._..,_._...,.,_.._~__.",._._..."'"._____.._._,~~~,'_" '__~~~~~"..__,__"'"'~~.' .-' - ----".."..~,,-~-~--,,-_., ~ _.~--_...-. PUD 2-200 7-AR-12294 16 September 2009 Page -3- The Collier County Future Land L.:se Element (FLUE), Immokalee Area Master Plan (lAMP), and the Land Development Code (LDC) contain specific requirements applicable to development within this part of Collier County. Certain requirements pertain to industrial development. [Please note that in the following review, FL liE, lAMP and other G MP provisions are shown ill italicized print, while staff analysis and commentary are provided in bold type.] FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT (FLUE) Policy 4.2: A detailed A1aster Plan.!or tbe Immokaiee Urban desic~nated area bas been delJeloped and was incorporated into tbis Growth Management Plan in February 1991. Major revicion.' were adopted ZIl 1997jollowing the 1996 Evaluation and Appraisal Report. The Immokalee Area /viaster Plan addresses con.rm'ation, jilture land use, population, recreation, transportation, bousing, and tbe local economy. Major pUlposeJ 0/ Ibe Masler Plan are coordination of land uses and transportation planning, redevelopment or renewal olbll;~hted areas, and Ihe promotion o/emnomic de/'elopment. Provisions of the Immokalee Area Master Plan are address cd separately. FLUE Policy 5.4 states, "New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses, as Jet ftrth in the Land Development Code ': It is the responsibility of the Zoning and Land Development Review staff, as part of their review of the pention in its enl1Iety, to perform the compatibility analysis. Staff notes that although PUD documents list all land uses in this AOPUD as "permitted uses", vehicle racing facilities are identified by the lAMP and LDC as Conditional Uses "subject to conditional use approval", and are to be listed accordingly. Vehicle racing activities should also be recognized and noted as a legal nonconforming use under its conditional use listing, if it holds the status of a legal nonconforming use. The petitioner's response to questions regarding the treatment of the racing facilities purports, "[t]he racetrack use is limited to the existing facility, therefore no Conditional Use is required. The use is a legally non-conforming use of the site". However, this claim is not entirely accurate. Staff contends the racetrack use commenced at a time when the I, Industrial zoning district did not allow it. Moreover, it was recognized after-the-fact in the lAMP with the Industrial Subdistrict provision that "vehicle racing [be allowed], subject to conditional use approval". The ImmokaJee Area Master Plan explicitly reqlllrcs the conditional use process, and a PUD rezone triggers this requirement to be met. Either the lAMP reqwrement that vehicle racing [is] subject to conditional use approval rnust be rernoved, or, the conclitional use process must be provided for within the Planned Unit Development so this reqwremenr is fulfilled, ;\ significantly similar situation occurred in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP), where it required the conclitional use process. In that instance, the County Attorney's Office advised that the peD cannot override that CGAMP requirement. In tills occurrence, the proposed rezone from the I, Industrial and A, Rural Agricultural districts to the Airport Operations Planned Unit Development WIll not be found consistent until such conclitional use provisions arc written into PUD documents. PUDZ-2007-AR-12294 16 September 2009 Page-4 - FLUE Objective 7 and its applicable policies (Toward Better Places - Conununity Character Plan) require that new development be pedestrian oriented, show traclitional neighborhood design, provide interconnections (vehicular, pedestrian, bicycle) to nearby residential areas, and to nearby conunercial areas (pedestrian, bicycle). These policies are less applicable to the proposed industrial land use(s) on the subject property. II. Agricultural/Rural Designation The Agricultural/ Rural Land Use Designation is for those areas that are remote from the existing development pattern, lack public/acilities and services, are environmentally sensitive or are in agricultural production. Urbanization is not promoted, therefore most allowable land uses are of low intensity in an effOrt to maintain and promote the rural character of these lands. A. Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District The purpose of this District is to protect and encourage agricultural activities, conserve and preserve environmentally sensitive areas, provide for low-density residential development, and other uses identified under the Agricultural/ Rural Designation. These areas generally lack public facilities and services. Urbanization IS not promoted, therefore most allowable land uses are of low intensity in an effort to maintain and promote the rural character of these lands. D. Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overla)l Goal Collier County seeks to address the long-term needs of residents and property owners within the lmmokalee Area Study boundary of the Collier County Rural and Agn'cultural Area Assessment. Collier County s goal is to protect agricultural activities, to prevent the premature conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural uses, to direct incompatible uses away from wetlands and upland habitat, to enable the conversion of rural land to other uses in appropriate locations, to discourage urban sprawl, and to encourage development that utilizes creative land use planning techniques. Objective To meet the Goal described above, Collier County's objective is to create an incentive based land use overlay system, herein referred to aJ tbe Collier County Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, based on the pn'nciples of rural land stewardship as defined in Chapter 163.3177(11), FS. The Policies that will implement this Goal and Objective are set forth below in groups relating to each aspect of the Goal. Group 1 policies describe the structure and organization of the Collier County Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay. Group 2 policies relate to agriculture, Group 3 policies relate to natural resource protection, and Group 4 policies relate to converSlOn of land to other uses and economic diversification. Group 5 are regulatory policies that ensure that land that is not voluntarily included in the Overlay by its owners shall nonetheless meet the minimum requirements of the Final Order pertaining to natural resource protection. The adclitional 103 acres at the far eastern edge of the proposed development site is located within the Agricultural/Rural Designation, Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use Distnct, as well as the RLSA Overlay. These adclitional acres are designated on the RLSAO Map as "Open" and Water Retention Area" (WRA) lands. RLSAO Policy 4.6 designates these Open lands for establishing Stewardship Receiving Areas (SRA). Once established, SRAs serve as "urban village.!, new towns, satellite communitiex, area-based allocations, clustering and open space provisions, and mixed-u.!e development that allow the conversion of nfral and agricultural lands to other uses whzle protecting environmentally sensitive areas, maintaining the economic 'Jiability of agricultural and other predominantly rural land uses, and providingfor the cost-efficient delivery of public facilities and services". ^,~-""'-""^"~---",~..._--~-,.'- ~--'. ~~--,~--._-".-_.^.-._,-,_..,_.._,"---,,~-,....,,",._----~"^,,"~"'"..;--,-_..~~---',.,------ ~._" -----< PUDZ.2007-AR-12294 16 September 2009 Pa,~e - 5- RLSAO Policy 3.3 explains WRAs are established as, "further protection jor surface water quality and quantity". WRAs are described as, "plivately owned land.e that have been permitted by the South Florida Water Management District to function as agricultural water retention areas. In many instances, these U/RAs consist of native wetland or upland vegetation; in other cases thry are excavated water bodies or mqy contain exotic lJegetation" and goes on to say, 'The Overlay provides an incentive to permanently protect lr/R~l.r by the. .. elimination of incompatible uses and establishment of . n protectwn measures . Generally, the Agricultural/Rural Designation, Agricultural/Rural l\1ixed Use District allows a variety of low intensity uses, including agriculture, low-density residential development, and sporting/recreation camps. Industrial development is not allowed within the designation. The petitioner does state, "No development activities may occur on the site until such time as the Immokalee Urban Boundary is amended to include it." The DRAFT Immokalee Area Master Plan (December 2008) was reviewed for future changes in the boundary to include rhis 1 en acre addition. No changes to the boundary of the lmmokalee Arca Master Plan are proposed. Reviewing the RLSAO Goals and Objectives, the intent is generally to prevent the premature conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural uses, discourage urban sprawl, and encourage development in appropriate locations. The non-agrlcultural uses that are allowed within the RLSAO do not include industrial uses as a group. In addition to rhe inconsisrency with the RLSAO designation, the revised PUD including the 103 acres is also inconsIstent with the IU"SJ\O Goals and Objectives. Its addition presumes that the RLSAO designation will change, and that it will he changed to allow I1ldustrial development. It is inappropriate to assume some future GMP amendment will be submittcd, approved by the BCC, found "In Compliance" by the Florida Department of Community Affairs, and not challenged by an affected party . If retained, uses proposed for the additional 103-acre portlOn must be specifically limited to those consistent with the present designation. Applicant Response: Since the last submittal of tms pUD application, the proposed Immokalee Area Master Plan (lAMP) has been revised to add area to the Immokalee Urban Area boundary. The 103 acres within this project that are presently designated Rural Land Stewardship Area will be included in the new Urban designation when approved. The lAMP revisions will also propose a new Airport Subdistrict to tailor the Growth Management Plan to the needs of the Airport. That being said, the proposed pUD exhibits have been revised to address as many of the Comprehensive Planning staff review comments as possible. REVIEW 4 STAFF REMARKS: ResubmittaI of the next iteration of the lAMP amendments has not occurred until recently, and staff cannot confirm the above statements. Expanding the Immokalee Urban Boundary to match the AOPUD and introducing an airport-specific Subdistrict were however, recommended by staff. Industrial land uses have been removed from those uses proposed for the new "Expansion Tract". The Zoning and Land Development Review staff, as part of their review of the petition in its entirety, are expected to give special attention to new "Expansion Tract" uses in conducting their compatibility analysis. PUDZ-2007-AR-12294 16 September 2009 Page-6 - IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN (lAMP) C. Urban - Industrial Distnd 1. Industrial Subdistrict The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide for industrial type uses, including: airports; uses related to light manufactunng, processing, storage and warehousing, wholesaling, distribution, packing houses, recycling, high technology, laboraton'es, assemblY, storage, computer and data processing; busineJS .reroices; limited commercial uses, such as child care centers, restaurants and other basic commenial uses, except retail uses, as described in the Land Development Code for the Industrial and Business Park Zoning Districts; and, vehicle racing, subject to conditional use approvaL Accessory uses and stmctures customarily associated with the uses allowed in this Subdistrict, include, but are not limited to, offices and retail sales; campgrounds accessory to vehicle racing,' and, campgrounds acceJsory to special events at the airport, such as air shows. The plain reading of the lAMP Industrial Subdistrict provisions, stating, "[t]he purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide for industrial type uses, including. .. uses related to light manufacturing, processing, storage and warehousing, wholesaling, distribution, packing houses, recycling, high technology, laboratories, assembly, storage, computer and data processing" might infer that the proposed list of uses will pennit more industrial intensity than the Subdistrict allows. Nevertheless, the practical application of these Subdistrict provisions has consistently included the uses "described in the Land Development Code for the Industrial and Business Park Zoning Districts". [fhis Airport Operations PUD is limited to those uses already found in the Industrial zoning district to be consistent with the lAMP Industrial Subdistrict.] TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT (TE) B. INTERMODAL & MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION 2. Aviation Airport Master Plans were prepared for the Immokalee Regional Airport, Everglades Airpark, and the Marco Island Executive Airport. These plans provide insight as to existingfacilities and conditions, and make recommendations regarding potential opportunities and necessary future facilities at the three airports. a, Existing Facilities The development of separate master plans for Immokalee R(~ional Airport, EvergladeJ Airpark, and Marco Island Executive Airport required the collection and evaluation of information relative to each of the airports and surrounding areas including the following: . Pbysical inventories and descriptions offacilities and services currently provided by eacb of the airports . Background information pertaining to aircraft )leet mix and historical activity levels . Regional plans and studies potentially affectingfuture airport development activity Immokalee Regional Airport: Tbe airport is located on a 1,100-acre site in the north-central part of the County, approximately 40 miles northeast of Naples. Located on the northeast side of Immokalee, the airport is only one mile from tbe Central Business District. Primary acceH to tbe airport is pia State Route 29 to County Route 846, which intersects with Airpark Boulevard to the south of the airport. Little development has occurred at the airport since its transftr of ownership in 1960 from the United States Government. Both landside and airside facilities are located at tbe airport. .. ,--~.. ..."'....-.--- ._.....,,_.~~-,.~ _.~_"_ _,",__ ." _. .__,', __'__"_~___'_'~~"" ,~~_ ,",,,..,~__"__..."'...,, ' __ _... """"'_M"~'_"_'~__"""'" ___'' ,.. ""_'U..~_~_~,_,~~~,_.'~_' .--~'.."_..". PUDZ-2001-AR-12294 16 .september 2009 Page. 1- Landside facilities include the aircraft storage hangars, fuelinc~jacilitzes, etc_ Airsidefacilitles included at lmmokalee are three runways, each 5,000 feet lo'!g and ISO feet zvide. Taxiways are aI)azlab!e as welL The airsidefacilities presently available provide for opportunities that are not alJazlable at other ,general aViation airports within the County. The three 5,000/00t runways and pallement strenc~th provide operational rapabilzty exceeded only by Napkr Municipal Airport. Additionally, only a portion o[ the 1,100 acres at the lmmoka!ee Regional Airport is currently being used for airfield purposes. Large tracts o[ land remain available jorjuture dtl)elopment o[additional landrideJacilities and future economic dtlJelopment activity. b. Future Potential Opportunities lmmokalee Regional Airport: Accordi,!g to the lmmokalee Regional Airport Master Plan, a number oj factors support the notIon that this airport could become a r~gional air/ine/ aircraft mazntenance base in the future. The length, width, and pavement Itrength oj the exirting airfield ZJ capable o[ accommodating nearly all oj the aircraft in the national regional air/inefleet. There is ample open land aliailablejorjilture development of additional hangar space. The establishment of the airport in conlunction Illith the Southwest Flonda International Airport as a Foreign Trade Zone (l-'1Z) could provide some opportunities for expanded air cargo operations. TlJe Immokalee Regional Airport can offer space .for industn'al dtlJelopment and warehozmng takmg ad/lantage o[ the fTZ. Such semices could involve turboprop, business jet, or even smaller commercial jet actitJity. , , Additionally, the shipping ofJreIh produce ji-om the airport may be a pos.!}bility_ Considering the large agniultural base in the Immoka!ee area, specialty produce opportunitieS could be developedjor movement by air to restaurants and retazlers within the region, or nationallY. The regional climate may olJer an incentive a.r welljorjidturejlzght tramingfacilities. The weather in Southwest Norida is ideal.for trainil(g operationI. The airport IJm the land area al)a/lable on site to mpport this type o[ operation and development oj the neanary bancgar and terminaljadlitzeJ. Policy 11.1: The County .rhall herem incorporate by rrjemrce tbe lmmokalee Regional Airport, Everglades Airpark, and Marco Island ExecutirJe Airport /;1a.rter Plan.!. Intermodal transportation involves the transport of cargo in containers or vehicles, using multiple modes of transportation (rail, ocean vessel, aircraft and truck), WIthout any handling of the freight itself when changing modes. Multi-modal transportation generally refers to a system involving more than one mode of transport, Comprehensive Planning leaves the transportation planning determinations to Transportation Planning staff as part of their review of the petition. However, staff would note that in reviewing the appropriateness of the requested uses/intensities on the subject site, the analysis might include: ,/ [ntermodal transfer and transport of produce to and from local and regional markets; ,/ Intermodal transfer and transport of cargo to and from regional destinations; ,/ Intermodal transfer and transport of cargo to and from national and international destinations; ../ Aviation support operations including flight and maintenance training, aircraft storage, service and maintenance, and flight shuttles to tnajor airports; ../ Special events such as air shows and their accompanying spectators, camping and traffic control; ./ Non-aviation activities including drag racing events and their accompanying spectators, camping and traffic control; ./ Aviation support operat1CH1S [or non-aviation activities including automobile transfer and transport to and from national and international destinations. PUD 2-200 7-AR-12294 16 September 2009 Page - 8- ECONOMIC ELEMENT (EE) OBJECTIVE 3 (New and Existing Industries): Collier County will support programs which are designed to promote and encourage the recruitment of new induJt') aJ well as the expansion and retention of existing industries in order to diversijj the County's economic baJe. Policy 3.7: Collier County will support the location of business and induJt') in the Foreign Trade Zone located at the lmmokalee Airport. Policy 3.7 of the Economic Element supports the growth and expansion of business and industry at the Immokalee Regional Airport. The Immokalee Regional Airport Master Plan and this Airport Operations PUD are parts of this effort. However, this policy is not a land use mandate. That is, Policy 3.7 does not obviate the need for this PUD to be consistent with the lAMP or other Elements of the GMP, and other regulatory policies and provisions. REVIEW OF PUD EXHIBITS 1) Sections J, II and III, Exhibit A. (NOTE: The beginning.portion of this comment is dcrived from previous reviews. and is reiterated here.) Certain land uses are erroneously proposed to be "permitted uses". The lAMP Industrial Subdistrict provides for industrial type uses, including: airports; uses related to light manufacturing, processing, storage and warehousing, wholesaling, distribution, packing houses, recycling, high technology, laboratories, assembly, storage, computer and data processing; business services; limited commercial uses, such as child care centers, restaurants and other basic cOlnmercial uses, except retail uses, as described in the Land Development Code for the Industrial and Business Park Zoning Districts; and, vehicle racing, subject to conditional use approval. Restructure these use listings (adding a new "1. Principal Uses" under a new "B. Conditional Um" under Section "1. Airport Operations Tract'; jor example) to correctly distinguish "permitted uses" from "conditional uses". Also: properly list accessory uses allowed in this Subdistrict [adding a new "2. Accessory UseJ" under the new "B. Conditional UseJ';for example], including, but not limited to, offices and retail sales, up to the maximum percentage allowed by the I, Industrial zoning district; campgrounds accessory to vehicle racing; and, campgrounds accessory to special events at the airport, such as air shows. Make comparable modifications to Sections II and III as necessary to correctly distinguish "pennitted uses" from "conditional uses". These modifications are necessary to be consistent with the lAMP and also the recent lAMP implementing LDC Amendments to the "I", Industrial zoning district (Ord. No. 2008 - 63). Also note that the PUD cannot list uses as "permitted uses" when the lAMP requires that they be conditional uses, per the County Attorney's Office as stated under a similar circumstance pertaining to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. Zoning districts, whether in the LDC or established through rezone process in the LDC (such as this proposed PUD), are subordinate to the GMP and must be consistent with the GMP. Applicant Response: The existing racing facilities, which were approved by the Board of County Commissioners, remain listed as a permitted use in the pun As discussed with staff, the rezoning process fulfills the intent of the Comprehensive Plan by providing a forum for public comment prior to approval by elected officials. During the required Ncighborhood Information Meeting, members of the public did not express any opposition to the ongoing operation of the track. The applicant understands that staff PUDZ-2007-AR-12294 16 September 2009 Page. 9- may not agrce with this position, but would like to agree to disagree on this point so the project can move forward to hearings. REVIEW 4 STAFF RE1\iARKS: Instead of recognizing GMP and LDC provisions, application materials try to characterize two distinctly different sets of policies, procedures and considerations as being sufficiently similar. In an attempt to circumvent the Conditional Use process, when it is explicitly required by Immokalee Area Master Plan (lAMP) provisions, PUD documents are proposed instead, with these uses as both "permitted" and "principal". Statements in PUD documents contend that the mere opportunity to discuss a certain use during a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) for this PUD satisfactorily substitutes for the formal Conditional Use consideration and approval process. In some instances in the past, the informal NIM meeting has been allowed to "fulfill the intent" of LDC provisions for proposed Conditional Uses. However, the vehicle racing activities at the Immokalee Regional Airport are specifically addressed in the lAMP, and are not entitled to the same, general interpretation. Also, NIM letters are sent to owners of surrounding property within 1,000 feet, whereas the noise impacts may extend beyond this distance. And, new residential development is allowed on lands adjacent to the west of the ImmokaIee Airport property (designated Low Residential Subdistrict on the lAMP FLUM); these lands are about '/4 mile from the north-south taxiway and about 1/3 mile from the north-south runway. Consideration should be given to future development as allowed by the lAMP, not just what presently exists (ag uses). Differences between Conditional Use and permitted use considerations are significant enough when considering this vehicle [drag] racing facility and its accompanying weekend camping to take pause to reconsider this interpretation here: Conditional Uses Permitted Uses Special limitations may be applied Monitored Compatible with sufficient conditions applied Start-up & Phase-out can be regulated Requires specific CU public notices & hearings Timeliness is considercd Unique to property, location or other feature Operates without such limits Unmonitored Compatible with other uses in district Can start, operate and return thm time No specific notice or hearing Open schedule or timeframe Could be located at other locations Take special note of how application materials have been modified from the earlier, vehicle racing, "limited to the existing facility" [when a baseline would be established by Conditional Use] to the updated, "limited to [the] existing racetrack" [when no baseline can be established as a permitted use] - a change affecting new consideration and interpretation. 2) Section II, Exhibit A. In conjunction with review item I) above, certain !,'Toupings of uses have included SIC ranges that are not allowed in the lAMP Subdistrict. One such exarnpIe is listing A,1.b, "Agriculture, forestry and fishing (Croups 01110191, 0211-0291, 0711-0783)". Not all of rhe land uses ranging between 0711 and 0783 would be allowed and should be spccitlcally removed as exceptions. Another example is listing 1\.1.1, "Services (Groups 7011, 7211-7299, 731]7389, ..)". PUDZ-2007-AR-12294 16 September 2009 Page-10- Applicant Response: The Airport Authority currently relies on revenue from agricultural leases on property subject to the PUD zoning. These uses, such as sod farms, watermelon fields, and cattle grazing are compatible with the neighboring orange groves and cattle production sites. The Comprehensive plan anticipates conversion of airport land to non-agrarian uses, however, the lands should not be required to lay fallow simply because one paragraph in the plan describes the future vision for the property. As with the racetrack issue, the applicant respectfully requests to agree to disagree on this point and allow the County Commission to make this determination. REVIEW 4 STAFF REMARKS: Staff acknowledges the value of certain businesses [such as hotels) to a growing airport operation, and of agricultural activities on portions of the property which are least affected by airport operations and facilities. Remarks above regarding the introduction of an airport-specific Subdistrict are understood to include specific provisions for these special land uses. Correct the SIC Group, Industry Group or Industry classification number ranges and provide the correct uses wherever similar situations apply. In addition, the groupings of multiple types (i.e. 1., Services and n., Public recreation areas) should be broken down into headings that are more descriptive. TIlls level specificity is particularly important to limit the range of possible recreational uses to only those documented in the lease with Collier County Parks and Recreation Department for the area located at the southwest corner of the PUD property. Applicant Response: Recreational uses have not been limited as requested. Although there are presently no plans for recreational uses other than the area leased to Parks and Recreation, in the southwest corner of the property, this limitation could hinder the provision of public amenities unnecessarily. We believe that recreational uses are consistent with the lAMP and compatible with on-site airport operations and adjacent land uses. REVIEW 4 STAFF REMARKS: Recreational land uses remain at issue. The Zoning and Land Development Review staff, as part of their review of the petition in its entirety, are expected to give special attention to these uses in conducting their compatibility analysis. Listing for "Accessory Uses", in Section 1I.A.2 should be extended to add the closing phrase, "of this AOPUD, as accessory to those principal uses located in this Tract;" Applicant Response: To clarify the accessory uses on the Industrial Development Tract, the accessory uses allowed in the Airport Operations tract have been repeated. This eliminates the possibility that accessory uses will be provided without an associated principal use. REVIEW 4 STAFF REMARI<:S: Acknowledged as an acceptable alternative to staff's suggestion. Listing for "Retail trade", in Section ILA.2.e should be extended to add the closing phrase, "Retail trade, subject to the square footage percentage limitations as per the I, Industrial zoning district;" Applicant Response: Additional limitations on the retail sales and campground uses have been added as requested. _~__"4'_""""_'_"_ ",.~__"_,,__"-'4. _,___, .". '--"__'__' T .__~__ PUDZ-2007-AR-12294 16 September 2009 Page - 11 . REVIEW 4 STAFF REMARKS: Acknowledged. 3) Section A, Exhibit F. The DRAFT Immokalee Area Master Plan (December ?008) was reviewed for future changes to the boundary to include this 103-acre addition. No changes to the boundary of the Immokalee Area Master Plan are proposed. However, review of the DRAFT Conceptual 2025 Roadway Network for Eastern Collier County for the RLSA Committee does lOdicate two large tracts of land in the vicinity of the 103- acre addition designated as "Runway Extension". Please update to indicate any status/proposals of updates to the Immokalee Urban boundary. Consideration is also given herein with respect to the continuing mixture of aviation activities with non-aviation activities, especially in the post 9-11 era. Serving as a U.S. Customs Port of Entry, the ImmokaIee Regional Airport and the Tradeport developments present new levels of security issues, considerations and challenges now and for the foreseeable future. Security may be compromised, on both the Airport and the adjacent Tradeport properties, by allowing less- secure land uses and activities on-site. The extent to which these [possible] compromises impact airport activities will be measured by how cffectively all proposed land uses are accommodated. Security considerations such as access controls, use separation, and surveillance monitoring will actually increase in their significance as the Airport/Tradeport activities increase in size, intensity and complexity. The proposal for co-mingling aviation activities with non-aviation activities - especially security- sensitive operations involving international air cargo handling and intermodal transport located in immediate proximity to general access motorsports facilities - deserves careful scrutiny during the present rezone and in the subsequent Conditional Use review. Finally, the petitioner is encouraged to conduct a formal noise study for the subsequent Conditional Use review. Noises coming from motorsports activities do not exhibit the same sound dynamics as noises coming from the normal operations of aircraft and airports, and are subject to the Collier County Noise Control Ordinance. Applicant Response: A noise study has not been conducted despite staff's request that we provide one. Theresa Cook, Executive Director of the Collier County Airport Authority has noted that no complaints have been received regarding noise from the existing racing on the site. The nearest home is more than half a mile from the track, and is separated by a 137-acre preserve and industrial developments. Since the PUD limits racing to the existing facilitics, there have bccn no complaints and the nearest home is far from the track, the applicant felt this was an unnecessary expense. REVIEW 4 STAFF REMARKS: Presented with this Applicant response, staff is compelled to recommend conditions to the AOPUD at this timc - which would normally be formulated during Conditional Use consideration - and make them part of our recommendation. Furthermore, staff is put in the position of formulating conditions without the site-specific data, which would otherwise have been a basis of Conditional Use considerations. This data set includes, but would not be limited to: the formal noise study; a survey of racing facilities, and summary describing the nature of event activities during the racing season; a security assessment and, proposal for security facilities and procedures; and any other items which are typically indicated as PUD Z-2007-AR-12294 16 September 2009 Page-12- forthcoming in PUDs and expected as components of Conditional Uses. Such information is considered essential for preparing a sound recommendation and beneficial in decision-making. The additional 103 acres at the far eastern edge of the proposed development site is located within the Agricultural/Rural Designation, Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District, as well as the RLSA Ovcriay. Industrial uses are not allowed in this designation. The DRAFT Immokalee Area Master Plan (December 2008) was reviewed for future changes to the boundary to include this 103-acre addition. Changes to the boundary of the Immokalee Area Master Plan are now proposed to accommodate this area. The uses proposed for the additional 103 acres are now consistent with the designation and the RLSA Overlay Goals and Objectives. Review of the DRAFT Conceptual 2025 Roadway Network for Eastern Collier County for the RLSA Committee does indicate two large tracts of land in the vicinity of the l03.acre addition designated as "Runway Extension". It should also be noted that a future 2-lane roadway is also depicted on the Conccptual 2025 plans at the eastern edge of the eastern Runway Extension parcel. Applicant Response: The 103 acres that are currently outside the Urban Area have been removed from the "Industrial Development Tract" and pkLced within a new "Expansion Tract" within the pun The Expansion Tract ouly allows uses that are permitted in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area, [which addresses the expressed GMP consistency issue]. REVIEW 4 STAFF REMARKS: Acknowledged. Based on the above analysis, staff concludes that the Airport Operations PUD cannot be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element and Immokalee Area Master Plan Element of the Growth Management Plan. The applicant acknowledges, but disagrees with, staff's positions, and requests the petition proceed to hearing. Outstanding issues include, listing the existing racing facilities as "permitted uses" in the PUD, and, not conducting a noise study of vehicle racing activities. The Airport Operations PUD could be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element and Immokalee Area Master Plan Element if PUD documents are revised to list racing facilities twice, as "permitted uses", if lAMP amendments currently underway are adopted to provide for a change allowing them as such, and as "conditional uses", if lAMP amendments are adopted without a change to this provision. ON CD-PLUS cc: Susan M. lstenes, AlCP, Zoning and Land Development Review Department, Director Ray Bellows, Zoning and Land Development Review Department, Manager Randy Cohen, AlCP, Comprehensive Planmng Department, Director David Weeks, AlCP, Comprehen.rive Planning Department, Planning Manager File .. _.__M.._____,___..___.._...~.__~~~___,_.__.,,~__~"^_"'~.."._~.~_...,__,.__~~.._~______,___^"~..~. _.._.~. ,,~,,'><~'. .. _.~..~-~~,-,.,..~' ..... _.....~_...,-~"..._., ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL Agenda Item VI A STAFF REPORT MEETING OF October 7th 2009 I. NAME OF PETITIONERlPROJECT Petition No: Planned Unit Development Rezone No: PUDZ-2007-AR -12294 Petition Name: Immokalee Regional Airport PUD Applicant/DeveIoper: Collier County Airport Authority Engineering Consultant: Q. Grady Minor and Associates, Inc. Environmental Consultant: Passarella and Associates, Inc. II. LOCATION The subject property consisting of 1,4840, acres of land located north of CR 846, in Sections 25, 26, 27, 34, 35, 36, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, and Sections 2 and 3, Township 47 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida. III. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ZONING DESCRIPTION N -Agricultural with a Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO) Citrus Groves S -Industrial (I), Commercial, with an Agribusiness Overlay Subdistrict (C-5/AOSD), and A-MHO Industrial, commercial, and agricultural operations E -A-MHO Agricultural uses W -I, C-5/AOPD, Public (P) and A-MHO Industrial, and commercial uses, a county park area and citrus groves . EAC Meeting Page 2 of26 IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION According to the applicant's narrative, the Irnmokalee Regional Airport Operations Planned Unit Development (AOPUD) consists of the existing Irnmokalee Regional Airport facility located north of C.R. 846 in the Irnmokalee Urban Area, plus an additional 1030, acres adjacent to the east of the Airport. The property subject to this rezoning petition is located on approximately 1,4840, acres within portions of Sections 25, 26, 27, 34, 35 and 36, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, and Sections 2 and 3, Township 47 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida. The Irnmokalee Regional Airport presently consists of airport operations and related functions, which include two 5,0000, foot long runways, taxiways linking hangar and airport administration functions with the runways, fueling areas, and hangars for storage of general aviation aircraft. Large tracts of land remain available for development of additional airport and aviation-related uses. The site has been utilized for decades for aviation-related purposes. Collier County was deeded the airport property in the 1960s by the Federal government and it is now operated by the Collier County Airport Authority (CCAA). The majority of the property is currently zoned Industrial (I), which permits a range of industrial activities in accordance with the Land Development Code (LDC). The Airport Authority, through adoption of the AOPUD zoning district, intends to expand the permitted uses on the site consistent with the most recent Airport Master Plan which envisions the expansion of aviation and non-aviation activity. The Irnmokalee Regional Airport AOPUD proposes to permit a maximum of five million (5,000,000) square feet of aviation and non-aviation related development consistent with the adopted Airport Master Plan. The AOPUD master plan identifies the existing airfield and airport operation improvements, as well as the future development tracts. A small portion of the property (1030, acres) is zoned Rural Agricultural (A). That tract has been used for agricultural purposes for many years. That area is shown on the Master Plan as the future runway protection zone. No development activities may occur on that tract unless and until the Irnmokalee Urban Boundary is amended to include it. V. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY Future Land Use Element: The original 1,38l-acre proposed development is located in the Urban Designation, Urban-Industrial District, Industrial Subdistrict, as depicted on the Irnmokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map (IAMPFLUM). The EAC Meeting Page 3 of26 additional 103 acres, more or less, is located in the AgriculturaI/Rural Designation, Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO), as depicted on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Growth Management Plan. The Immokalee Airport Operations PUD plans for five million square feet of aviation and non-aviation activities consistent with the Airport Master Plan. Plans include continuing certain unconventional airport land uses, specifically, competitive automobile racing and its accompanymg weekend camping. lnunokalee Airport has facilities for both straight line (drag) racing and carting. The diminutive road COUIse for go-cans shares a small amount of pavement WIth the drag stnp. The Collier County Future Land Use Element (fLUE), lmmokalee Area Master Plan (TAMP), and the Land Development Code (iDC) contain specific requirements applicable to development within this part of Collier County. Certain requirements pertain to industrial development. [Please note that in the following reVIew, FLUE, L\MP and other GMP proVIsions are shown in italicized pnnt, while staff analysis and commentary are provided in bold type.! Policy 4.2: A detailed Master Plan fOr the lmmokalee Urban designated area has heen delleloped and was mcorporated into this Growth Management Plan in February 1991. Major remSzons were adopted in 1997 fOllowing the 1996 Evaluation and Appraisal Report. The lmmokalee Area Master Plan addresses conservation,jitture land use, population, recreation, tran.sportation, housing, and the local eeono,,!y. Mqjor purposes rf the Master Plan are coordination tif land lises and transporlation planning, redevelopment or renewal rf blighted areas, and the promotion 0/ economic development. Provisions of the lmmokalee Area Master Plan are addressed separately. FLUE Policy 5.4 states, "New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses, as set fOrth in the Land Development Code". It is the responsIbility of the Zoning and Land Development Review staff, as part of their review of the petition in its entirety, to perform the compatibility analYSIS. Staff notes that although PUD documents list all land uses m this AOPUD as "permitted uses", vehicle racing facilities are identified by the lAMP and LDC as Conditional Uses "subject to conditional use approval", and are to be listed accordingly. Vehicle racing actiVIties should also be recognized and noted as a legalnonconfonning use under its conditional use listing. ifit holds the status of a legal nonconforming use. EAC Meeting Page 4 of26 The petitioner's response to questions regarding the trea.tment of the racing facilities pw:ports, "[t]he racetrack use is limited to the existing facility, therefore no Conditional Use is required. The use is a legally non-conforming use of the site". However, this claim is not entirely accurate. Staff contends the racetrack use commenced at a time when the I, Industrial zoning district did not allow it. Moreover, it was recognized after- the-fact in the lAMP with the Industrial Subdistrict provision that "vehicle racing [be allowed), subject to conditional use approval'~ The Immokalee Area Master Plan explicitly requites the conditional use process, and a PUD rezone triggers this requirement to be met. Either the lAMP requirement that vehicle racing [is] subject to conditional use approval must be removed, or, the conditional use process must be provided for within the Planned Unit Development so this requirement is fulfilled. A significantly similar situation occurred in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP), where it reql1ired the conditional use process. In that instance. the County Attorney's Office advised that the PUD cannot override that GGAMP requirement. In this occurrence, the proposed rezone from the I, Industrial and A, Rural Agricultural districts to the Airport Operations Planned Unit Development will not be found consistent Wltil such conditional use provisions are written into PUD documents. FLUE Objective 7 and its applicable policies (foward Belter Places - Community Character PLm) require that new development be pedestrian oriented, show traditional neighborhood design, provide interconnections (vehiculat, pedestrian, bicycle) to nearby residential areas, and to nearby commercial areas (pedestrian, bicycle). These policies ate less applicable to the proposed industrial hnd use(s) on the subject property. II. Agricultural/Rural Designation The Agricultural! Rural LInd Use Dwgnation is for those areas that are remote from the existing development pattern, lack public facilities and sentices, arc environmentallY sensitive or an: in agricultural production. Urbanization is not promoted, therefore most allowable /and uses are of low intensity in an effirt to maintain and promote the rural character of these land.\. A. Agflcultural/RuraJ Mixed Use District The purpose rif this District is to protect and encourage agricultural activities, conserve and preserve environmentally sensitive areas, provide for low-density residential development, and other uses identified under the Agricultural! Rural Designation. These areas generally lack public facilities and services. Urbanization is not promoted, therefore most allowable land uses are r!f low intensity in an dJort to maintain and promote tbe ",rat character of these lands. D. Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay - - Goal Collier County seeks to address the long-tem needs of residents and property owners within the lmmoka/ee Area Study boundary of the Collier County Rural and Agricultural Area Assessment. Collier County's goal is to protect agricultural activities, to prevent the premature conversion if agricultural land to non- --_. EAC Meeting Page 5 of26 agricultural uses, to direct incompatible uses awqy from wetlands and upland habitat, to enable the conversion 0/ rural land to other uses in appropn'ate locations, to discourage urban sprawl, and to encourage development that utiliZes creative land use planning techniques. Objective To meet the Goal described above, Collz-er Coun(y'.r of?jective is to create an incentive based land 1/se over/cry system, herein referred to as the Collier County Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, based on the principles of mral land stewardshIp as defined In Chapter 163.3177(11), ES. The Poncies that we/I implement thIS Coal and Objective are set forth hekiw in groups relating to each aspect of the CoaL Croup 1 policies describe the stmcture and organization of the Collier County Rural LAnds Stewardship Area Overlay. Croap 2 policies relate to agriculture, Group 3 polleies relate to natural resource protection, and Group 4 policies relate to conversion qf land to other uses and economic diversification. Group 5 are regulatory poliezes that ensure that land that IS not voluntarily included in the Overlay by its owners shall nonetheiess meet the minimum requirements if the Final Order pertaining to natural resot/rce protection. The additional 103 acres at the far eastern edge of the proposed development site is located witlun the Agricultural/Rural Designation, Agricultural/Rural MIxed Use District, as well as the RLSA Overlay. These additional acres 'lte designated on the RLSAO Map as "Open" and Water Retention Area" (WRA) lands. Policy 4.6 designates these Open lands for establishing Stewardslup Receiving Areas (SRA). Once established, SRAs serve as (~/rb{}n villages, new towns, satellite communities, area~based alloeations, clustering and open space provisions, and mixed~Jlse development that allow the conversion of rural and agricultural lands to other uses while protecting environmentallY sensitive areas, maintaining the economic viability of agn"cu/tural and other predominantlY rom! land uses, and providingfor the cost~efficient delivery qf public facilities and senices': RLSAO Policy 3.3 explams WRAs are established as, 'further protection for surface water quality and quantity". WRAs are described as, "privately owned lands that hal'e heen permitted by the South Flonda 'Fater Management Dtjtnd to function as agn'cultural water "tention areas. In ma'!] instances, these W'R/1s consist of native wetland or upland wgetation,. in other cases thry are excavated water bodies or may contain exotic vej!,etation" and goes on to say, (The Overlqy provides an incentive to permanentlY protect WRAs I?J the... elimination ifincompatible uses and establishment 0/ protection measures': Generally, the Agricultural/Rural Deslgnatlon, Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District allows a variety of low intensity uses, including agriculture, low-density residential development. and sporting/recreation camps. Industrial development is not allowed within the designation. The petitioner does state, "No development activities may occur on the site unnl such time as the Immokalee L~rban Boundary is amended to include it," The DRAfT Immokalee Area Master Plan (December 7008) was reviewed for future changes in the boundary to mclude tlus 103 acre addition, No changes to the boundary of the Irnmokalee Area Master Plan are proposed, Reviewing the RLSAO Goals and Objectives, the intent is generally to prevent the premature conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural uses, discourage urban sprawl, EAC Meeting Page 6 of26 and encourage development in appropriate locations. The non-agricultural uses that are allowed within the RLSAO do not include industrial uses as a group. In addition to the inconsistency with the RLSAO designation, the revised PUD including the 103 acres is also inconsistent with the RLSAO Goals and Objectives. Its addition presumes that the RLSAO designation will change, and that it will be changed to allow industrial development. It is inappropriate to assume some future GMP amendment will be submitted, approved by the BCC, found "In Compliance" by the Florida Department of Community Affairs, and not challenged by an affected party. If retained, nses proposed for the additional 103-acre portion must be specifically limited to those consistent with the present designation. Applicant Response: Since the last submittal of this PUD application, the proposed ImmokaIee Area Master Plan (rAMP) has been revised to add area to the Immoka1ee Urban Area boundary. The 103 acres within this project that are presently designated Rural Land Stewardship Area will be included in the new Urban designation when approved. The lAMP revisions will also propose a new Airport Subdistnct to tailor the Growth Management Plan to the needs of thc Airport. That being said, the proposed PUD exhibits have been revised to address as many of the Comprehensive Planning staff review comments as possible. REVIEW 4 STAFF REMARKS: Resubmittal of the next iteration of the lAMP amendments has not occurred until recently, and staff cannot confirm the above statements. Expanding the lmmokalee Urban Boundary to match the AOPUD and introducing an airport-specific Subdistrict were however, recommended by staff. Industrial land uses have been removed from those uses proposed for the new "Expansion Tract". The Zoning and Land Development Review staff, as patt of their review of the petition in its entirety, are expected to give special attention to new "Expansion Tract" uses in conducting their compatibility analysis. IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN (IAMP) C. Urban - Industrial District 1. Industrial Subdistrict The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide for industrial !ype uses, including: airports; uses related to light manufacturin~ processing; storage and warehousing; wholesaling; distribution, packing houses, reryc/ing, high technology, laboratories, assemblY, storage, computer and data processing; business semces; limited commercial uses, such as child care centers, ITJtaurants and other basic commercial uses, except retail uses, as described in the Lmd Development Cod, for the Industrial and Business Park Zoning Districts; and, vehicle racing, suf?ject to conditional use approval Accessory uses and structures customanly associated with the uses allowed in this Subdistrict, include, but are not limited to, cifJices and retail sales; campgrounds accessory to vehicle racing; and, campgrounds accessory to special events at the airport, such as air shows. ~~.- ,_______ _'''''_44 -- ~..--- EAC Meeting Page 7 of26 The plain reading of the LAMP Industm.1 Subdistnct provisions, s",ring, "[t]he purpose of trus Subdistrict is to provide for industrial type uses, including... uses related to light manufacturing, processing, storage and warehousing, wholesaling, distributlon, packing houses, recycling, high technology, laboratories, assembly, storage, computer and data processing" might infer that the proposed list of uses will pennit more industrial intensity than the Suhdistrict allows. Nevertheless, the practical application of these Subdistrict provisions has consistently included the uses "described in the Land Development Code for the Industrial and Business Park Zoning Districts". [This Airport Operatlons PUD is !inuted to those uses already found in the Industrial zoning district to be consistent with the LA.MP Industrial Subdistrict.] TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT (TE) B. INTERMODAL & MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION 2. Aviation Airport Master Plans were prepared for the lmmokalee Regional Airport, Everglades Airpark, and the Marco Island Executive Airport. These plans provide insight as to existing facilities and conditions, and make recommendations regardingpotentiaf opportunities and necessary future facifities at the three airports. a. Existing Facilities The development of separate master plans for Immokalee Regional Airport, EI,erglades A.rpark, and Marco Island Executive Airport requzred tbe coffection and evaluation if information relative to each rif the airports and sUTTOunding areas including the following: . Physical inventoTles and descriptions of jacilit.es and sennces currently provided by each of the airports . Background information pertaining to aircraft fleet mix and historical activity levels &gional plans and studies potentially aJfectingfuture airport development actiVIty . /mmokalee Regional Airport: The atrport tS located on a " 1 OO~acre site in the north-central part qf the County, approximately 40 miles northeast of Naples. Located on the northeast side of lmmokalee, the aiport is onlY one mtie from the Central Business District. Primary access 10 the airport is via State &Jute 29 10 County Rnute 846, which tntersects with Airpark Boult/Jard to the south of the airport. Little development has occumd at the airport smce its transfer q( ownership in 1960 from the United States Government. Both landside and airside facilities are located at the airport. l..andS/de facilities Include the aircrqft storage hangars, fueling facililies, etc, Airside facilities included at lmmokalee are three nmwt!Ys, each 5,000 feet long and 150.feet wide. Taxiway.r are al'ailahle as well. The airside jacilities presently available provide for opportunities that are not available at other general aviation airports within the County. The three 5,0001oot runways and pavement .rtrength provide operational capability exceeded only by Naples Municipal Airport. Additionally, only a portion of the 1,100 acres at the Immokalee fugional Airport is currently helng used for airfield purposes, l.arge tracts of land remmn available for juture development of additional landside faa/ilies andjutuTf economit: development activiry. Page 8 of26 EAC Meeting b. Future Potential Opportunities Immokalee Regional Aitport: According to the lmmokalee Regional Airport Master Plan, a number of factors support the notion that this airport could become a regional airline/aircraft maintenance base in the futun. The length, width, and pavement stnngth of the existing airfield is ctJjJable of accommodating nearly all of the aircraft in the national regional airime fleet. Then is ample open land available for futun development of additional hangar rpace. The establishment of the airport in c01yimetion with the Southwest };lorida International Airport as a Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ) could provide some opportunities for expanded air catgo operations. The lmmokalee Regional Airport can offer space for industrial development and warehousing taking advantage of the HZ. 511ch seroices could involve turboprop, business jet, or even smaller commercia/jet ac/iviry. Additionally, the shipping of fmh produce from the azport may be a possibility. Considering the latge agricultural base in the lmmokalee area, specialty produce opportunities could be developed for movement by air to restaurants and retazlers within the region. or nationallY. The ngional climate may offer an incentive as well for futu,., jltght training facilities. The weather in Southwest Florida is ideal for training operations. The airport has the land area available on site to support this type of operation and development of the necessary hangar and terminal facilities. Policy 11.1: The County shall henin incorporate by reference the Immokalee Regional Airport, Eve'l,lades Airpark, and Marco Island Executive Airport Master Plans. Intennodal transportation involves the transport of cargo in containers or vehicles, using multiple modes of transportation (rail, ocean vessel, aircraft and truck), without any handling of the freight itself when changing modes. Multi-modal transportation genetally refers to a system involving more than one mode of transport. Comprehensive Planning leaves the transportation planning determinations to Transportation Planning staff as part of their review of the petition. However, staff would note that in reviewing the appropriateness of the requested uses/intensities on the subject sire, the analysis might include: ../ Intennodal transfer and transport of produce to and from local and regional markets; ../ lntermodal transfer and transport of cargo to and from regional destinations; ./ lntermodal transfer and transport of cargo to and from national and international destinations; ./ Avliltion support operations including flight and maintenance training, aircraft storage, service and maintenance, and flight shuttles to major airports; ./ Special events such as air shows and their accompanying spectators, camping and traffic control; ./ Non-aviation activities including drag racing events and their accompanying spectators, camping and traffic control; ./ Aviation support operations for non-aviation activities including automobile transfer and transport to and from national and intemational destinations. ,"-_..-,.. . - - ._,-",- -- ..,.~"-, ..... ".- -- . . - EAC Meeting Page 9 of 26 ECONOMIC ELEMENT (EE) OBJECTIVE 3 (New and Existing Industries): Collter County will support programs which arr designed to promote and encourage the recruitment of new industry as we!! as the expansion and retention of existing industries in order to diverJifJ the Coun(y's economic base. Policy 3.7: Collier County will support the location of husiness and industry in the Forrign Trade Zone located at the lmmokalee Airport. Pohcy 3.7 of the Econormc Element supports the growth and expansion of business and industry at the lmmokalee Regional Airport. The lmmokalee Regional Airport Master Plan and this Airport Operations peD arc parts of this effort. However, this policy is not a land use mandate. That is, Pohcy 3.7 does not obviate the need for this PUD to be conslstent with the L'\.MP or other Elements of the GMP, and other regulatory policies and provisions. REVIEW OF pun EXHIBITS 1) Sections L II and III, Exhibu A. (NOTE The beginning portion of this comment 15 derived from-Frevious reviews, and is reiterated here.) Certain land uses are erroneously proposed to be "permitted uses". The lAMP Industrial Subdistrict provides for industrial type uses, including: airports; uses rehted to light manufacturing, processing, storage and warehousing, wholesaling, distribution, packing houses, recycling, high technology, laboratories, assembly, storage, computer and data processing; business services; limited corrunercial uses, such as child care centers, restaurants and other basic commercial uses, except retail uses, as described in the Land Development Code for the Industrial and Business Park Zoning Districts; and, vehicle racing, subject to conditional use approval. Restructure these use listings [adding a new 1(1. Pn'ncipal Uses" under a new ''B, Conditional Uses" under Section '7. A..irport Operations Tract'~ for example] to co:rrecdy distinguish "pennitted uses" from "conditional uses". Also; properly list accessory uses allowed in this Subdistrict [adding a new "2. /1ccessory Uses" under the new '23, Conditional Use,f': for example}, including, but not limited to, offices and retail sales, up to the maximum percentage allowed by the I, Industrial zorung district; campgrounds accessory to vehicle racing; and, campgrounds accessory to special events at the airport, such as air shows. Make comparable modifications to Sections 1I and III as necessary to correcdy distinguish "permitted uses" from "conditional uses", These modifications are necessary to be consistent -with the IA1\.1P and also the recent lAMP implementing LDC Amendments to the "1", Industrial zoning district COrd. No. 2008 - 63). Also note that the PUD cannot list uses as "pemutted uses" when the lAMP reqJ.lires that they be conditional uses, per the County Attorney's Office as stated under a similar circumstance pertaining to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. Zoning districts, whether in EAC Meeting Page 10 of 26 the LDC or established through rezone process in the LDC (such as this proposed PUD), are subordinate to the GMP and must be consistent with the GMP. Applicant Response: The existing racing facilities, which were approved by the Board of County Commissioners, remain listed as a permitted use in the PUD. As discussed with staff, the rezoning process fulfills the intent of the Comprehensive Plan by providing a forum for public comment prior to approval by elected officials. During the required Neighborhood Information Meeting, members of the public did not express any opposition to the ongoing operation of the track. The applicant understands that staff may not agree with this position, but would like to agree to disagree on this point so the project can move forward to hearings. REVIEW 4 STAFF REMARKS: Instead of recognizing GMP and LDC provisions, application materials try to characterize two distinctly different sets of policies, procedures and considerations as being sufficiently similar. In an attempt to circumvent the Conditional Use process, when it is explicitly required by Immokalee Area Master Plan (lAMP) provisions, PUD documents are proposed instead, with these uses as both "permitted" and "principal". Statements in PUD documents contend that the mere opportunity to discuss a certain use during a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) for this PUD satisfactorily substitutes for the formal Conditional Use consideration and approval process. In some instances in the past, the informal NIM meeting has been allowed to "fulfill the intent" of LDC provisions for proposed Conditional Uses. However, the vehicle racing activities at the Immokalee Regional Airport are specifically addressed in the lAMP, and are not entitled to the same, general interpretation. Also, NIM letters are sent to owners of surrounding property within 1,000 feet, whereas the noise impacts may extend beyond this distance. And, new residential development is allowed on lands adjacent to the west of the lmmokalee Airport property (designated Low Residential Subdistrict on the lAMP FLUM); these lands are about '/, mile from the north-south taxiway and about 1/3 mile from the north-south runway. Consideration should be given to future development as allowed by the lAMP, not just what presently exists (ag uses). Differences between Conditional Use and permitted use considerations are significant enough when considering this vehicle [drag] racing facility and its accompanying weekend camping to take pause to reconsider this interpretation here: Conditional Uses Permitted Uses Special limitations may be applied such limits Monitored Compatible with sufficient conditions applied other uses in district Start-up & Phase-out can be regulated and return thru time Operates without Unmonitored Compatible with Can start, operate -"..~- ..._-~ -,-- -- Requites specific CU public notices & hearings heating Timeliness is considered timeframe Unique to property, location or other feature other locations No specific notice or EAC Meeting Page J J of26 Open schedule or Could be located at Take special note of how application materials have been modified from the earlier, vehicle racing, "limited to the existing facility" [when a baseline would be established by Conditional Use] to the updated, "limited to [the] existing racetrack" [when no haseline can be established as a permitted use] - a change affecting new consideration and interpretation. 2) Section II. Exlubit 1\. In conjunction with review item 1) above, certain groupmgs of uses have included SIC ranges that are not allowed ill the lAMP Subdistrict. One such example is listing A.l.b, "Agriculture, forestry and fishing (Groups 0111-0191, 0211.0291, 0711-0783)". Not all of the land uses ranging between 0711 and 0783 would be allowed and should be specifically removed as exceptions. Another example IS listing A.ll, "Services (Groups 7011, 7211- 7299,7311-7389, ...)". Applicant Response: The A.irpoIt Authority currently relies on revenue from agricultural leases on property subject to the PUD zoning. These uses, such as sod farms, watermelon fields, and cattle grazing are compatible with the neighboring orange groves and cattle production sites. The Comprehensive plan anticipates conversion of airport land to non- agrarian uses, however, the lands should not be required to illy fallow simply because one pa1"agraph in the plan describes the future vision for the property. As with the racetrack issue, the applicant respectfully requests to agree to disagree on this point and allow the County Commission to make this determination. REVIEW 4 STAFP REMARKS: Staff acknowledges the value of certain businesses [such as hotels] to a growing airport operation, and of agricultural activities on portions of the property which are least affected by airport operations and facilities. Remarks above regarding the introduction of an airport-specific Subdistrict are understood to include specific provisions for these special land uses. Corrcct the SIC Group, Industry Group or Industry classification number ranges and provide the correct uses wherever similar Situations apply. In addition, the groupings of multiple types (i.e. L, Services and n., Public recreation areas) should be broken down into headings that are morc descriptive. This level specificity is particularly important to limit the range of possible recreational uses to only those docmnented in the lease with Collier County Parks and Recreahon Department for the area located at the southwest corner of the PUD property. EAC Meeting Page 12 of26 Applicant Response: Recreational uses have not been limited as requested. Although there are presently no plans for recreational uses other than the area leased to Parks and Recreation, in the southwest cornet of the property, this limitation could hinder the provision of public amenities unnecessarily. We believe that recreational uses are consistent with the lAMP and compatible with on-site airport operations and adjacent land uses. REVIEW 4 STAFF REMARKS: Recreational land uses remain at issue. The Zon;ng and Land Development Review staff, as part of their review of the petition in its entirety, are expected to give special attention to these uses in conducting their compatibility analysis. Listing for "Accessory Uses", in Section II.A.2 should be extended to add the closing phrase, "of this AOPUD, as accessory to those principal uses located in this Tract;" Applicant Response: To clarify the accessory uses on the Industrial Development Tract, the accessory uses allowed in the Airport Opera.tions tract have been repeated. This eliminates the possibility that accessory uses will be provided without an associated principal use. REVIEW 4 STAFF REMARKS: Acknowledged as an acceptable alternative to staff's suggestion. Listing for "Retail trade", in Section ILA.2.e should be extended to add the closing phrase, "Retail trade, subject to the square footage percentage limitations as per thc I, Industrial zoning district;" Applicant Response: Additional limitations on the retail sales and campground uses have been added as requested. REVIEW 4 STAFF REMARKS: Acknowledged. 3) Section A. Exhibit F. The DRAFT Irnmoka/ee Atea Master Plan (December 2008) was reviewed fot future changes to the boundary to include this 103-acre addition. No changes to the boundary of the Irnmokalee Area Master Plan are proposed. However, teview of the DRAFT Conceptual 2025 Roadway Network for Eastern Collier Counry for the RLSA Committee does indicate two large tracts of land in the vicinity of the l03-acre addition designated as "Runway Extension". Please update to indicate any status/proposals of updates to the Irnmokalee Urban boundary. Consideration is also given herein with respect to the continuing mixture of aviation activities with non-aviation activities, especially in the post 9-11 era. Serving as a U.S. "-~-''',"-' .. ,----_._-~"..- '''~_._-" .. ~__.__ .~ ",",_' T r .. ,~ , ~......,,_..--. -- .~_"___,w.~_'" .....__0_. EAC Meeting Page 13 of26 Customs Port of Entry, the ImmokaIee Regional Airport and the Tradeport developments present new levels of security issues, considerations and challenges now and for the foreseeable future. Security may be compromised, on both the Airport and the adjacent Tradeport properties, by allowing less-secure land uses and activities on-site. The extent to which these (possible] compromises impact airport activities will be measured by how effectively all proposed land uses are accommodated. Security considerations such as access controls, use separation, and surveillauce monitoring will actually increase in their significance as the Airport/Tradeport activities increase in size, intensity and complexity. The proposal for co-mingling aviation activities with non-aviation activities especially security-sensitive operations involving international air cargo handling and intermodaI transport located in immediate proximity to general access motorsports facilities - deserves careful scrutiny during the present rezone and in the subsequent Conditional Use review. Finally, the petitioner is encouraged to conduct a formal noise study for the subsequent Conditional Use review. Noises coming from motorsports activities do not exhibit the same sound dynamics as noises coming from the normal operations of aircraft and airports, and are subject to the Collier County Noise Control Ordinance. Applicant Response: A noise study has not been conducted despite staff's request that we provide one. Theresa Cook, Executive Director of the Collier County Airport Authority has noted that no complaints have been received regarding noise from the existing racing on the site. The nearest home is more than half a mile from the track, and is separated by a 137- acre preserve and industrial developments. Since the PUD limits racing to the existing facilities, there have been no complaints and the nearest home is far from the track, the applicant felt this was an unnecessary expense. REVIEW 4 S'lAFF REMARKS: Presented with this Applicant response, staff is compelled ro recommend conditions to the AOPUD at this time - which would normally be formulated during Conditional Use consideration - and make them part of our recommendation. Furthermore, staff is put in the position of formulating conditions without the site-specific data, which would otherwise have been a basis of Conditional Use considerations. This data set includes, but would not be limited to: the formal noise study; a survey of racing facilities, and snmmary describing the nature of event activities during the racing season; a security assessment and, proposal for security facilities and procedmes; and any other items which are typically indicated as forthcoming in PUDs and expected as components of Conditional Uses. Such information is considered essential for preparing a sound recommendation and beneficial in decision.making. EAC Meeting Page ]4 of26 The additional 103 acres at the far eastern edge of the proposed development site is located within the Agricultural/Rural Designation, Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District, as well as the RLSA Overlay. Industrial uses ate not allowed in this designation. The DRAFT' Immokalee Area Master Plan (December 2008) was reviewed for future changes to the boundary to include this 103-acre addition. Changes to the houndary of the Immokalee Area Master Plan are now proposed to accommodate this area. The uses proposed for the additional 103 acres are now consistent with the designation and the RLSA Overlay Goals and Objectives. Review of the DRAFT' Conceptual 2025 Roadway Network for Eastern Collier County for the RLSA Committee does indicate two large tracts of land in the vicinIty of the 103-acre addition designated as "Runway Extension". It should also be noted that a future 2-lane roadway 15 also depicted on the Conceptual 2025 plans at the eastern edge of the eastern Runway Extension parcel. Applicant Response: The 103 acres that are currently outside the Urban Area have been removed from the "Industrial Development Tract" and placed within a new "Expansion Tract" within the pun The Expansion Tract only allows uses that are permitted in the Rural Lands Stewardship Atea, [which addresses the expressed GMP consistency issue]. REVIEW 4 STAFF REMARKS: Acknowledged. Based on the above analysis, staff concludes that the Airport Operations pun cannot be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element and Irnrnokalee Area Master Plan Element of the Growth Management Plan. The applicant acknowledges, but disagrees with, staffs positions, and requests the petition proceed to hearing. Outstanding issues include, listing the existing racing facilities as "permitted uses" in the pun, and, not conducting a noise study of vehicle racing activities. The Airport Operations pun could be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element and ImmokaIee Area Master Plan Element if PUD documents are revised to list racing facilities twice, as "permitted uses", if lAMP amendments currently underway are adopted to provide for a change allowing them as such, and as "conditional uses", if lAMP amendments are adopted without a change to this . . prOVISIon. EAC Meeting Page 15 of26 Conservation & Coastal Manal!ement Element Objective 2.2 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Growth Management Plan states "All canals, rivers, and flow ways discharging into estuaries shall meet all applicable federal, state, or local water quality standards. To accomplish that policy 2.2.2 states "In order to limit the specific and cumulative impacts of stormwater runoff, stormwater systems should be designed in such a way that discharged water does not degrade receiving waters and an attempt is made to enhance the timing, quantity, and quality of fresh water (discharge) to the estuarine system. This project is consistent with Policies 6.1 and 6.2 regarding the selection of preserves. The property site contains 1484.00 acres of which 363.48 acres is considered native vegetation. The proposed native vegetation preserve of 137.03 acres fulfills the minimum requirement of 54.52 acres or 15% of the existing native vegetation on site. As required by Policy 6.1.4, prohibited exotic vegetation shall be removed from the site and maintained in perpetuity. The EIS required by Policy 6.1.8 has been prepared and is supplied as part of the review packet for this submittal. As required by Policy 6.2.1, a wetland jurisdictional determination has been conducted by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). (EIS Exhibit 3). In accordance with Policy 6.2.6, required preservation areas are identified on the PUD master plan. Allowable uses within the preserve areas are included in the PUD document. Uses within preserve areas shall not include any activity detrimental to drainage. flood control, water conservation, erosion control, or fish and wildlife conservation and preservation, As required by Policy 7.1.2, a listed species survey was conducted on the property and is contained in the EIS (Exhibit 10). In accordance with Policy 11.1.2, correspondence was sent to the Florida Department of the State Division of Historical Resources (DHR) regarding possible archaeological or historical sites within the majority of the Project area. In a letter dated January 31, 2005, the DHR stated that no cultural resources are known to exist in the Project area that was reviewed and that no cultural resources will be affected by the Proj ect (Exhibit 14). EAC Meeting Page 16 of26 VI. MAJOR ISSUES Stormwater Manallement The lmmokalee Regional Airport Project sits mostly within the Barron River North sub-basin and partially within the Urban lmmokalee sub-basin of the Barron River Canal (BRC) basin. The allowable Discharge Rate within those sub-basins is 0.15 cfs per acre and the discharged flow goes into the SR 29 canal and southward down the SR 29 canal to the Barron River and the 10,000 Islands in the Everglades City area. The entire 13 8 1 acres of the Immokalee Regional Airport project are covered for surface stormwater management under SFWMD Environmental Resource Permit #11-00999-S (with modifications). Section 8.06.03 0.2. of the Collier County Land Development Code states "The surface water management aspects of any petition, that is or will be reviewed and permitted by South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), are exempt from review by the EAC except to evaluate the criteria for allowing treated stormwater to be discharged into Preserves as allowed in Section 3.05.07." Environmental Site Description The project site consists of 363.48 acres of native vegetation according to the definition in the GMP and LDC and has been verified by staff on site. The following Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) vegetation associations and land uses were found on site: Commercial (FLUCFCS Code 140) A small commercial area is located on the southeast comer of the property and occupies 1.960, acres or 0.1 percent of the Project area. Race Track (FLUCFCS Code 183) This area consists of a drag racing strip and facilities for observers of the races that occupy 17.880, acres or 1.2 percent of the Project area. Park (FLUCFCS Code 185) _.~ ~ --._-,,--------'...._~---- ..,--~~._-, .- .-._- _.....- ... ~""-."_.. ,-,..,... - ..._" ._-._....__.~.._"... ""....,.. ,,__._<__.__'"_....._,_,,~.._. .'._.__0" EAC Meeting Page 17 of26 A county maintained park is shown at the southwest comer on the FLUCFCS map. Though this park is County owned, it is not part of the airport property. However, the RV park in Phase I is part of the airport. This area occupies 4.450, acres or 0.3 percent of the Project area. ImProved Pasture (FLUCFCS Code 211) Pasture occupies 639.240, acres or 42.6 percent of the Project area. The ground cover is dominated by bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum) and smutgrass (Sporobolus indicus) with Widely scattered saw palmetto (Serenoa repens). The sub-canopy is open with widely scattered Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius), wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera), and cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto). The canopy is open with widely scattered slash pine (Pinus elliottii), live oak (Quercus virginiana), laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), and cabbage palm. Low Pasture, Hydric (FLUCFCS Code 262) This wetland community occupies 10.6<)0, acres or 0.7 percent of the Project area. These low-lying pasture areas have no canopy or sub-canopy. The ground cover includes St. John's wort (Hypericum sp.), sawgrass (Cladiumjamaicense), maidencane (Panicum hemitomon), and Asiatic pennywort (Centella asiatica). Dry Prairie (FLUCFCS Code 310) The upland community occupies 18.080, acres or 1.2 percent of the Project area. There is no canopy. The sub-canopy includes wax myrtle, scattered live oak, gallberry (Ilex glabra), and scattered slash pine. The ground cover includes dwarf live oak (Quercus minima), broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus), lopsided indiangrass (Sorghastrum ecundum), greenbriar (Smilax sp.), yellow-eyed grass (Xyris sp.), saw palmetto, joint weed (Polygonella polygama), wiregrass (Aris/lda stric/a), and black root (Pterocaulon virgatum). Dry Prairie/Palmetto Prairie (FLUCFCS Code 310/321) This upland community occupies 20.880, acres or ].4 percent of the Project area. There is no canopy. The sub-canopy includes scattered live oak, wax myrtle, gallberry, and slash pine. The ground cover includes dwarflive oak, saw palmetto, yellow-eyed grass, and wire grass. Palmetto Prairie (FLUCFCS Code 321) This community occupies 208.730, acres or 13.9 percent of the Project area. There is no canopy. The sub-canopy includes scattered slash pine and gallberry. The ground cover includes saw palmetto, dwarf live oak, wiregrass, staggerbush (Lyonlafru/lcosa), gallberry, and pennyroyal (Piloblephis rigida). Palmetto PrairielXeric Oak (FLUCFCS Code 321/421) This community occupies 50.4&0, acres or 3.4 percent of the Project area. There is no canopy. The sub-canopy includes scattered slash pine, sand live oak (Quercus gemina/a), dwarflive oak, wiregrass, and gallberry. EAC Meeting Page 18 of26 Palmetto Prairie, Disturbed (FLUCFCS Code 3219) This disturbed community occupies I2.79ic acreS or 0.9 percent of the Project area. There is no canopy. The sub-canopy includes Brazilian pepper, scattered slash pine, and gallberry. The ground cover includes saw palmetto, Brazilian pepper, wiregrass, staggerbush, and gallberry. Pine Flatwoods (FLUCFCS Code 411) This community occupies 19.3Oic acres or 1.3 percent of the Project area. The canopy is dominated by slash pine. The sub-canopy includes slash pine, scattered cabbage palm, and wax myrtle. The ground cover includes saw palmetto, gallberry, wiregrass, dwarf live oak, and tar flower (Bejaria racemosa). Pine Flatwoods, Disturbed (FLUCFCS Code 41 19) This disturbed community occupies 2.720, acres or 0.2 percent of the Project area. The canopy is dominated by slash pine. The sub-canopy includes slash pine, scattered cabbage palm, and Brazilian pepper. The ground cover includes saw palmetto, wiregrass, and Brazilian pepper. Pine (FLUCFCS Code 415 This community occupies 0.070, acre or less than 0.1 percent of the Project area. The canopy includes slash pine. The sub-canopy includes slash pine, cabbage palm, and wax myrtle. The ground cover includes slash pine seedlings, wire grass, and chocolate weed (Me lochia corchorifolia). Pine, Hydric (FLUCFCS Code 4151) This community occupies 0.080, acre or less than 0.1 percent of the Project area. The canopy includes slash pine. The sub-canopy includes slash pine and wax myrtle. The ground cover includes slash pine seedlings, wiregrass, gulfdune (Paspalum monostachyum), and pipewort (Ericaulon decangulare). Pine, Disturbed (FLUCFCS Code 4159) This community occupies 1.82ic acres or 0.1 percent of the Project area. The canopy includes slash pine. The sub-canopy includes slash pine, wax myrtle, Brazilian pepper, and cabbage palm. The ground cover includes slash pine seedlings, wire grass, and chocolate weed. Scrubby Pine Flatwoods (FLUCFCS Code 416) This community occupies 0.960, acre or 0.1 percent ofthe Project area. The canopy includes slash pine. The sub-canopy includes myrtle oak (Quercus myrtifolia), Chapman's oak (Quercus chapmanii), and live oak. The ground cover includes saw palmetto. "....-.. ~ .-..- A'___, --,.~,"-- . ..~ - ';' -.. --.. ,--_..,., , ." -,--- ~ EAC Meeting Page 190f26 Wetlands The construction proposed for this PUD will result in wetland impacts to 11.l4clo acres of on-site SFWMD wetlands. The wetland impacts are limited to small, isolated wetlands on-site (EIS Exhibit 11). SFWMD Permit No. 11-00999-S authorized the wetland impacts in Phase I (1.l5clo acres) and conceptually approved l3.54clo acres of wetland impacts in future phases due to their low ecological value. Wetland Rapid Assessment Procedure (WRAP) was used to determine mitigation credits required to offset wetland impacts (Exhibit 18). A WRAP analysis was conducted to determine the functional units provided by the existing wetlands that will be impacted. According to this analysis, it was estimated that 1.l5clo acres provide a total of 0.76 functional units for Phase I and that 1.52 freshwater marsh credits would need to be purchased from Panther Island Mitigation Bank (PIMB). The 1.52 credits were purchased from PIMB to offset the l.15clo acres of wetland impacts. The remaining 9.99clo acres provide a total of 6.31 functional units for Phases II and 1II and 12.62 freshwater marsh credits will need to be purchased from PIMB to offset these impacts. One wetland area will be preserved within this project. The wetland preserve consists primarily of short hydroperiod herbaceous habitat types that typically have a 120 to 180 day inundation period. The wetland preserve area will be hydrated during rainfall events. Preservation Requirements A total of 133.27clo acres (36.7 percent) of existing native upland vegetation on the airport property will be retained. In addition, 0.7H acres of wetlands will be preserved. A 2.99 acre wetland ditch area or "other surface water" runs east and west across the upland preserve area. This ditch conveys water to the drainage canal to the west. The water conveyed within this ditch area would only invade the upland areas during a significant rainstorm event and should have no negative hydrological effects on the upland preserve. Listed Species A listed species survey was conducted on the property on October 24 and 25, 2006; November J, 2, and 8, 2006; and September 3, 4, 5, 9, and 10, 2008 by Passarella and Associates, Inc. (EIS Exhibit !O). Eleven Florida scrub jays, one gopher tortoise, ] 59 gopher tortoise burrows, two bald eagles, two crested caracara, nine white ibis, four wood storks, three burrowing owls, three little blue herons, six sandhill cranes, one tri-colored heron, and one American alligator were observed on the site (EIS Figures 2 and 3). EAC Meeting Page 20 of 26 Florida Scrub Jays (Aphelocoma coerulescens) Florida scrub jays have been observed by wildlife biologists utilizing both scrub and non-scrub habitats at the Immokalee Regional Airport since 1991. In 1998, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) issued a Biological Opinion (BO) (EIS Exhibit 16) to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The BO concluded the Florida scrub jays at the airport are a subpopulation that is geographically isolated and does not significantly contribute to the range-wide species population. The BO includes a plan to manage and preserve the upland management area (UMA) of native scrub and plant communities for the benefit of the Florida scrub jay. The lJMA (the current proposed preserve area) is located on the west side of the Immokalee Regional Airport. Habitat types within the conservation area include palmetto prairie, pine tlatwoods, scrubby pine tlatwoods, and xeric oak. The BO states that the UMA would be managed for optimal scrub habitat and is of adequate size to support six Florida scrub jay breeding pairs. The UMA was placed under a conservation easement as part of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) permitting for the project (E1S Exhibit 20). QQpher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) Gopher tortoise burrows were observed in the project area. The gopher tortoise is currently listed as a threatened species by the FWCC. In 1999, the FWCC issued an Incidental Take Permit (E1S Exhibit 17) for the development activities at the Immokalee Regional Airport. The permit authorized the take of gopher tortoises, their eggs, and their burrows within the airport's development boundaries where such taking is incidental to development activities. However, Collier County does not allow the entombment of tortoises; therefore, a gopher tortoise relocation permit would be required to move the tortoises. The Incidental Take Permit for the airport allows the tortoises to be moved within the property boundaries to minimize taking. The UMA was placed under a perpetual conservation easement granted to the FWCC to protect at least 114 acres of gopher tortoise habitat and could serve as a relocation area. A gopher tortoise survey shall be conducted in the project area prior to construction of the proposed project. Gopher tortoise burrows in development areas will be excavated prior to any site work and any gopher tortoises and their commensals found will be relocated to appropriate habitat within the UMA or other habitat on the airport property as approved by the FW CC. The management of the UMA includes conducting controlled bums during the non-nesting season to maintain a suitable habitat for the Florida scrub jay_ Controlled burns of the UMA have been conducted and available information on the most recent burns is provided in Exhibit 21 of the EIS. The purpose for establishing a burn program for the UMA is to provide optimal habitat for listed species, primarily for the gopher tortoise and Florida scrub jay. The measurement for success of the burn program will be determined by the level of listed species ,,>C . ._ . _..... ...,.~~~.'__. . ',-"-'''-- --~~_.. - ~.",..._-,~.,----,_.".._---".....- ,. ... ,~ .._.~_..,--_.._.._-_...~..~_.._"__~.~.. . 1 ____ utilization. A monitoring program for both gopher tortoises and scrub jays is included in the EIS (Exhibit 22). Ifthe results of the monitoring program document continued utilization by gopher tortoises and scrub jays, the burn program will be deemed successful. EAC Meeting Page 21 of26 Bald Eagle (Haliaee/us leucocephalus) Bald Eagle Nest CO-034 is located in the northeastern portion of the property. This nest was recorded as an active territory in 2007 and two adult eagles were observed on the project site during the September 2008 listed species surveys. The next nearest recorded eagle nest is CO-021located about two miles east of the Project site in Section 1, Township 47 South, Range 29 East. Bald Eagle Nest CO-02l has not been an active territory since 1999. The bald eagle is protected by USFWS under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, as well as the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918. Crested Caracara (Caricara cheriwayl Two crested caracara wer observed during the listed species surveys documented on the Project site. Wading Birds The Florida Atlas of Breeding Sites for Herons and Their Allies (Runde et al. 1991) was referenced for the location of breeding colonies for both listed and non-listed wading birds including the snowy egret (Egre//a /hula), tri-colored heron (Egre//a tricolor), little blue heron (Egretta caerulea), wood stork (Myc/eria americana), and white ibis (Eudocimus albus). No rookeries were listed as occurring on-site (ElS Figure 1). The nearest recorded site (No. 619142) is located northeast of the Project site over three miles away. This site is an active wood stork rookery. Burrowing Owls (A/hene cunicularia) and Sandhill cranes (Grus Canadensis) Burrowing owls and sandhill cranes were documented to the north on improved pasture habitat. Red-Cockaded Woodpecker_(Picoides borealis) To date, no red-cockaded woodpeckers were observed or heard on the property. No red-cockaded woodpecker cavity trees have been documented on the project site. The nearest documented red-cockaded woodpecker cavity trees are approximately a half mile west of the project site. llig Cypress Fox Squirrel (Sciurus niger avicennia) Potential Big Cypress fox squirrel habitat exists within the pine tlatwoods habitat. No Big Cypress fox squirrels have been documented on the project site. EAC Meeting Page 22 of 26 Florida Panther (Puma concolor corvJl The FWCC has documented telemetry points from a radio-collared Florida panther in the vicinity of the site. The nearest documented panther telemetry point is approximately one mile east of the Project site. The majority of the property does not occur within a panther primary or secondary zone as identified by the Florida Panther Subteam of MERIT. There are portions of the northern and eastern property limits that extend into the panther primary and secondary zones. However, the close proximity of neighboring development would deter any panthers from utilizing the site. A Biological Opinion was issued for Phase I of the Project for the Florida panther (ElS Exhibit 19). Black Bear ( Ursus americanus floridanus) No black bear or their signs (i.e., tracks, scat, etc.) were observed during the listed species surveys conducted on the property. No black bear telemetry points have been documented on the project site. The nearest documented black bear telemetry point is approximately three miles northeast of the project site. The project site is listed as primary Florida Black Bear habitat according to FWC. -~.-._._..-'-,--- __n'__'~~_ ._ ._ ._. ~,..__^ .. OM ,.__,,,..'________,_~........._......=,._,~~"'__o_~~'...N~._.".~_~.,,""'*,'.._.....m"_#_'._.__~.".__.<< ,.',_n_ EAC Meeting Page 23 of 26 VII. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval of Planned Unit Development Rezone No: PUDZ- 2007-AR -12294 "Immokalee Regional Airport PUD'. with the following conditions: Stormwater Manaeement I)None Environmental 1) Provide an updated listed speCles survey as part of the next development order. 2) Provide Florida black bear, Big Cypress fox squirrel, and burrowing owl management plans as part ofthe next development order. 3) Provide a gopher tortoise relocation management plan as part of the next development order. 4) Provide a report to the Environmental Services staff on the results of the relocation of the gopher tortoises within thirty days of relocation. The report must contain the following information: the number of burrows excavated, the number of tortoises relocated, and the final relocation site. 5) At the next development order, the PUD document and legal description shall exclude the wetland ditch acreage as part of the preservation requirement. ~ EAC Meeting Page 25 of 26 PREPARED BY: 2!JSlQJt!8 DATE AN CHRZANO ENGINEERING RE EW MANAGER ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ~ ' - ~y~/ DATE CHRIS D' ARCO ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT J{~!1o 9 KA SELEM PRINCIPAL PLANNER DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW -- ,_.....__..__..__.~._--~----- -~-- .,,.,,-,, - . -_...-,._,--- EAC Meeting Page 26 of 26 REVIEWED BY, of} -2j...o3 DATE 0';] -l.~- C(j DATE JL ? ~U . STEVEN WILLIAMS ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE OF THE COLLIER COUNTY ATTORNEY ":23'0,/ DATE APPROVED BY, PH K. SCHMITT MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES MINISTRA TOR