Loading...
CCPC Backup 04/02/2009 RCCPC REGULAR MEETING BACKUP DOCUMENTS APRIL 2, 2009 AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 8:30 A.M., THURSDAY, APRIL 2, 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 MAY BE ALLOTTED 10 MINUTES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM IF SO RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIRMAN. PERSONS WISIIING TO HAVE WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC MATERIALS INCLUDED IN THE CCPC AGENDA PACKETS MUST SUBMIT SAID MATERIAL A MINIMUM OF 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC HEARING. IN ANY CASE, WRITTEN MATERIALS INTENDED TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CCPC SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MATERIAL USED IN PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CCPC WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF THE RECORD AND WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IF APPLICABLE. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE CCPC WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND "THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. ROLL CALL BY SECRETARY 3. ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA 4. PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES— FEBRUARY 26, 2009 RLSA, MARCH 2, 2009 SIGN CODE, MARCH 5, 2009 6. BCC REPORT - RECAPS —MARCH 24, 2009 7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT 8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS A. Petition: CU- 2003 -AR -3725, Close Up Creatures, Inc., in reference to NGALA, represented by Robert J. Mulhere, AICP of RWA, Inc. and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire, of Goodlette, Coleman, Johnson, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., is requesting Conditional Uses pursuant to the Land Development Code Section 2.03.01.A.I.C. The conditional uses being requested are as follows: Number 5, to allow aquaculture for non - native or exotic species subject to Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission permits; Number 23, to allow a Cultural, Ecological or Recreational Facility; and Number 25, commercial production, raising or breeding of exotic animals. The subject property which has a Rural Agriculture zoning district designation and consists of 21± acres, is located on Inez Road S.W., at the northwestern corner of the intersection of Inez Road and Kearney Avenue, approximately '/4 mile south of Keene Avenue, in Section 30, Township 49 South, Range 27 East. Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Kay Deselem, AICP) 1 B. Petition: PUDA- 2007 -AR- 11546' Longshore Lake Foundation, Inc., represented by Robert L. Duane, AICP of Hole Montes, Inc., requesting a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment to Longshore Lake PUD Ordinance No. 93 -3, Section 3.2.13. to allow an off premise sign for Saturnia Falls (aka Terafina PUD) in 'Tract B of the Longshore Lake, Unit 5C Subdivision; or, in the alternative to allow the off -site premise sign to become an on -site premise sign for Longshore Lake; to amend Section 3.2.B. to allow an existing maintenance building to remain as an accessory use; to reinsert omitted Traffic Requirements into Section V; and to add Exhibit C, Deviations. The subject sign is located on a .5± acre property located on the southeast corner of the Longshore Lake PUD, at the northwest corner of the intersection of Immokalee Road (CR 846) and Logan Boulevard in Section 20, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, AICP) CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 20, 2008 C. Petition: PUDZ -A- 2007 -AR- 12046, IM Collier Joint Venture, represented by Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq., of Goodlette, Coleman, Johnson, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., and Wayne Arnold, of Q. Grady Minor and Associates, is requesting a rezone of the Mirasol PUD from the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district to the Residential Planned Unit Development zoning district (RPUD) to remedy the sunsetted status of the project in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.D.6. The number of dwelling units originally approved, 799 dwelling units, is not proposed to change. Ordinance No. 01 -20 will be repealed and a five acre tract will revert to Agricultural zoning. The subject 1,543 acre tract is located on the north side of Immokalee Road, bordered on the east by Broken Back Road and future Collier Boulevard in Sections 10, 15 and 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Kay Deselem, AICP) 9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Pettion: VA- 2008 -AR -13977 Tim Chess of McDonalds USA, LLC, represented by Jeffrey Satfield of CPH Engineers, Inc., is requesting a Variance from the landscape requirements of Land Development Code Subsection 4.06.02, Buffer Requirements, in the General Commercial (C -4) and Gateway Triangle Mixed Use Subdistrict (GTMUD -MXD), to allow a modification of the required 7.5 -foot wide buffer on the western side of the property; and to reduced buffer widths on the property's northern side from 15 feet to ten feet, the eastern side from 7.5 feet to five feet, and the southern side from 10 feet to five feet. The 0.86 -acre subject property is located at 2886 Tamiami Trail East, in Section 11, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: John -David Moss, AICP) (CONTINUED FROM MARCH 19, 2009) B. Petition: VA- 2008 -AR- 14017, Merit Petroleum Company, represented by Bert Thomas, is requesting five Variances from the minimum 50 -foot front yard setback requirement of nC cTMevelopment Code (LDC) Subsection 5.05.05, Automobile Service Stations, for two gasoline pump dispenser islands and a canopy in the General Commercial (C -4) and Main Street Overlay Subdistrict (MSOSD) to allow a reduced setback along West main Street to 48 feet and 31 feet for the dispenser islands and 38 feet for the canopy; and along 7 °i Street South to 33 feet for the westernmost dispenser island and 41 feet for the canopy. The 0.45 -acre subject property is located at 617 West Main Street, in Section 4, Township 47 South, Range 29 East, Immokalee, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: John -David Moss, AICP) C. Petition: RZ- 2008 -AR- 13951, Olde Florida Golf Club, Inc., represented by John Passidomo of Cheffy Passidomo, and Margaret C. Perry, AICP, of WilsonMiller Inc., is requesting a standard rezone from the Golf Course (GC) zoning district to the Agriculture (A) zoning district. The subject property, consisting of 553.67± acres, is located on the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension, approximately 2 miles east of the Vanderbilt Beach Road (CR 862) and Collier Boulevard (CR 951) intersection, in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Kay Deselem, AICP) F D. Petition PUDA - 2008 -AR- 13792, Naples Botanical Garden, Inc. and the Florida Gulf Coast University Foundation, Inc., represented by R. Bruce Anderson of Roetzel and Andress LPA; and Margaret Perry, AICP, of Wilson Miller, Inc., are requesting an Amendment to Ordinance Number 03 -29, The Naples Botanical Garden Planned Unit Development (PUD), by amending Section 4.14, Design Guidelines; Section 6.2, Development Parameters; Section 6.4, Permitted Uses and Structures to allow interim or temporary structures; Section 6.5 Development Standards so the interim or temporary structures have a greater setback distance than the principal structures; revisions to Section 7.2, Transportation Commitments of the PUD Document; and adding Section 7.6 to provide Deviations from the Land Development Code (LDC). The subject property (171.2± acres) is located at 4820 Bayshore Drive at the southwest corner of the intersection of Bayshore Drive and Thomasson Drive, in Section 23, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Melissa Zone) E. Petition: PUDZ- 2008 -AR- 13048, Nadesha Ranasinghe represented by Richard Yovanovich of Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson, PA and Ronald Nino of Vanasse & Daylor, LLP are requesting a PUD rezone from the Estates (E) Zoning District to the Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) Zoning District to allow a 45,000 square foot commercial development including retail, service and office uses to be known as Singer Park CPUD. The subject property, consisting of 5.14 + /- acres, is located on Everglades Boulevard south of Immokalee Road (CR 846) in Tract 128 of Golden Gates Estates, Unit 47, in Section 30, Township 47 South, Range 28 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, AICP) 10. OLD BUSINESS 11. NEW BUSINESS A. Comprehensive Planning Department request to schedule public hearing dates for Growth Management Plan amendments 12. PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM 13. DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA 14. ADJOURN 4/2/09 CCPC Agenda/Ray Bellows/cr 3 April 2, 2009 CCPC Car C"r County MEMORANDUM TO: Collier County Planning Commission Item 1 I.A., New Business FROM: David Weeks, AICP, Planning Manager, Comprehensive Planning Dept. DATE: March 24, 2009 RE: Scheduling of Transmittal and Adoption Hearings for GMP Amendments Staff requests the CCPC approve the proposed hearing schedules identified below for the 2007/2008 combined cycle of GMP amendment petitions (10 private sector petitions, and 1 or 2 County- initiated anticipated), and the Immokalee Area Master Plan (TAMP) GMP amendment petition. The schedule reflects the staff - preferred dates but also includes alternative date(s). All of the proposed dates are special meeting dates, and all hearings are scheduled for the Boardroom. It is anticipated that two meeting dates will be needed for both Transmittal and Adoption hearings. The CCPC Consent Agenda review of these petitions occurs on regularly scheduled hearing dates so those dates are not shown. Given how far in advance these proposed meeting dates need to be scheduled, and the many variables involved, some of which are beyond staff s control, it is possible one or more of these dates may have to be re- scheduled at some time in the future. Should that occur, staff will provide as much advance notice to the CCPC as possible. Thank you. 2007/2008 cycle CCPC Transmittal Hearings: Tuesday, October 20 and Thursday, October 29, 2009. Alternative date: Monday, October 19. CCPC Adoption Hearing: Tuesday, July 20 and Friday, July 23, 2010. Alternative date: Monday, July 19. LAMP CCPC Transmittal Hearings: Friday, January 29 and Tuesday, February 16, 2010. Alternative dates: Tuesday, February 2 and Friday, February 26 CCPC Adoption Hearing: Thursday, October 28 (9:00 -5:00 only) and Friday, October 29, 2010. April 2, 2009 CCPC Item 1 l.A., New Business Notes: • Regular Thursday CCPC meetings proximate to the proposed schedules: Oct. 15 and Nov. 5, 2009; Jan. 7 and 21, Feb. 4 and 18, Mar. 4, July 1 and 15, Aug. 5, Oct. 7 and 21, Nov. 4, 2010. • There are statutory requirements for adoption of GMP amendments (within 60 days after the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) issues its Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report). • The combination of limited boardroom availability, lead time for internal review of staff report and executive summary, requirement for consent agenda to allow the CCPC to review their recommended revisions for accuracy, and other factors, make scheduling of GMP amendment hearings difficult with few meeting dates from which to choose. cc: Joe Schmitt, Administrator, CDES Division Randy Cohen, AICP, Director, Comprehensive Planning Department Susan Istenes, Director, Department of Zoning and Land Development Review Ray Bellows, Manager, Department of Zoning and Land Development Review memo to CCPC dated 3 -24 -09 re GMPA hearing scheduling WComprehensive \Camp. Planning GMP DATA1Comp. Plan AmendmenW2007- 2008 combined cycle petitions dw13 -24 -09 AGENDA ITEM 8 -A RESOLUTION NO. 09 - A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS O F COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CONDITIONAL USES TO ALLOW A CULTURAL ECOLOGICAL OR RECREATIONAL FACILITY PURSUANT TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE (LDC) SECTION 2.03.0l.A.1.C.23; TO ALLOW AQUACULTURE FOR NON - NATIVE OR EXOTIC SPECIES PURSUANT TO LDC SECTION 2.03.01.A.1.C.5; AND TO ALLOW COMMERCIAL PRODUCTION, RAISING OR BREEDING OF EXOTIC ANIMALS, PURSUANT TO 2.03.0l.A.1.C.25: ALL FOR A 21t ACRE TRACT LOCATED ON INEZ ROAD, APPROXIMATELY ONE QUARTER MILE SOUTH OF KEENE AVENUE IN SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 27 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, 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 Conditional Uses to allow a cultural ecological or recreational facility pursuant to the Land Development Code (LDC) Section 2.03.01.A. 1.C.23, to allow aquaculture for non - native or exotic species pursuant to 2.03.0l.A.I.C.5 and to allow commercial production, raising or breeding of exotic animals pursuant to 2.03.0l.A.1.C.25 on the property hereinafter described in Exhibit B, and the CU- 2003 -AR -3725 NGALA Page 1 of 3 Revised 03/24/09 Collier County Planning Commission has found as a matter of fact (Exhibit A) 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: The petition filed by Close Up Creatures, Inc., d/b /a NGALA, represented by Robert J. Mulhere, AICP of RWA, Inc. and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire, of Goodlette, Coleman, Johnson, Yovanovich & Koester P.A., with respect to the property hereinafter described in Exhibit B be and the same is hereby approved to allow a cultural ecological or recreational facility in the Rural Agricultural (A) Zoning District pursuant to the Land Development Code (LDC) Section 2.03.01.A.1.C.23, to allow aquaculture for non - native or exotic species pursuant to 2.03.0l.A.1.C.5 and to allow commercial production, raising or breeding of exotic animals pursuant to 2.03.0l.A.I.C.25 in accordance with the Site Plan attached as Exhibit C and subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit D attached hereto and incorporated by reference. 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. Done this day of '12009. CU- 2003 -AR -3725 NGALA Page 2 of 3 Revised 03/24/09 ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Steven T. Williams Assistant County Attomey3;M'09 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA F DIANA FIALA, CHAIRMAN Attachments: Exhibit A— Findings of Fact Exhibit B —Legal Description Exhibit C —Site Plan, dated March 24, 2009 Exhibit D - -- Conditions of Approval CU- 2003 -AR -3725 NGALA Pagc 3 of 3 R=emised 03/24/09 FINDING OF FACT BY COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR CU- 2003 -AR -3725 The following facts are found: 1. Sections 2.03.02.E.1.c.5 and 2.03.07.L.5.c.v. of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. 2. Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of: A. Consistency with the Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan: Yes t/ No B. Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ingress & egress Yes t/ No _ C. Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic or odor effects: No affect or ✓ Affect mitigated by 6,c--�4 rS __ Affect cannot be mitigated D. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district: Compatible use within district Yes 1/ No Based on the above findings, this conditional use should, with stipulations, (copy attached) be recommended for approval to the Board of Zoning Appeals. DATE: - ° 5 CHAIRMAN: C J EXHIBIT A FINDING OF FACT BY COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMAUSSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR CU- 2003 -AR -3725 The following facts are found: 1. Sections 2.03.02.E.1.c.5 and 2.03.07.L.5.c.v. of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. 2. Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of: A. Consistency with the Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan: Yes A— No B. Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ingress & egress Yes No C. Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic or odor effects: No affect or — Affect mitigated by _ Affect cannot be mitigated D. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district: Compatible use within district Yes /- No Based on the above findings, this conditional use should, with stip ations, (copy attached) be recommended for approval to the Board of Zoning Appeals. DATE: MWor 1q,2cr)q EXHIBIT A FINDING OF FACT BY COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION CU- 2003 -AR -3725 The following facts are found: 1. Sections 2.03.02.E.1.c.5 and 2.03.07.L.S.c.v. of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. 2. Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of A. Consistency with the Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan: Yes Z— No B. Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ingress & egress Yes / No C. Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic or odor effects: No affect or Affect mitigated by Affect cannot be mitigated D. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district: Compatible 7No thin district Yes Based on the above findings, this conditional use should, wi s ulations, (copy attached) be recommended forlapproval to the Board of Zoning Appeals. DATE: 931/ / t— MEMBER: EXHIBIT A FINDING OF FACT BY COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR I CU- 2003 -AR -3725 The following facts are found: 1. Sections 2.03.02.E.I.c.5 and 2.03.07.L.5.c.v. of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. 2. Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of: A. Consistency with the Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan: ht Yes / No B. Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ingress & egress Yes / No C. Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic or odor effects: o affect or _ Affect mitigated by Affect cannot be mitigated D. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district: Compatible use within district Yes / No Based on the above findings, this conditional use should, with stipulations, (copy attached) be recommended for approval to the Board of Zoning Appeals. _ - -- DATE: EXHIBIT �be2' (iiGt��rri FINDING OF FACT BY COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION CU- 2003 -AR -3725 The following facts are found: I. Sections 2.03.02.E.1.c.5 and 2.03.07.L.5.c.v. of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. 2. Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of: A. Consistency with the Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan: Yes `' No B. Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ingress & egress Yes I No C. Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic or odor effects: ✓ No affect or _ Affect mitigated by Affect cannot be mitigated D. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district: Compatible use within district Yes ✓ No Based on the above findings, this conditional use should, with stipulations, (copy attached) be recommended for approval to the Board of Zoning Appeals. DATE: MEMBER: z� EXHIBIT A FINDING OF FACT BY COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION CU- 2003 -AR -3725 The following facts are found: 1. Sections 2.03.02.E.1.c.5 and 2.03.07.L.5.c.v. of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. 2. Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of: A. Consistency with the Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan: Yes V No B. Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ingress & egress ItiS�Ny OAJLy 8USE.�, llbFAtS Yes � No C. Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic or odor effects: No affect or VllAffect mitigated by Affect cannot be mitigated D. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district: Compatible use within district Yes V/ No Based on the above findings, this conditional use should, with stipulations, (copy attached) be recommended for approval to the Board of Zoning Appeals. DATE: M l_ 12 C 4�{ ( �GIO 1 MEMBER: 4222 ri x' /C� G(J� ate_ EXHIBIT A FINDING OF FACT BY COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION CU- 2003 -AR -3725 The following facts are found: 1. Sections 2.03.02.E.1.c.5 and 2.03.07.L.5.c.v. of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. 2. Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of: A. Consistency witlythe Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan: Yes ,I// No B. Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate in7No egress Yes C. Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic or odor effects: �/ ts No affect or Affect mitigated by Affect cannot be mitigated D. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district: Compatible use within district Yes I No Based on the above findings, this conditional use should, with stipulations, (copy attached) be recommended for approval to the Board of Zoning Appeals. DATE: U` MEMBER: EXHIBIT A CU-2003-AR-3725 NGALA Conditional Use Project: 2002090086 Date: 6/10/08 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 AND THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 AND THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. CU- 2003 -AR -3725 Exhibit B �y _ o a C o � INEZ ROAD P o OCU_ l 1 O l•J HH 9 Vf b r z O C. 9 ;•I S Z y E� � [ %e ' ^4 Y�r^� EY {1:'� €� {E�•[te��! .RY�t z4(: _ A „� �.:�.FF.. xE lyf9 L A 4� tA ,qF [ Ep S {�f VS r' 0 n as Ili'I; I:I �I i'l il;li I I'I;1, I X901 � II I, I E ..S I ICI, I.I RSI 1,1 =fie^. N CU- 2003 -AR -3725 6� `F.E � ,- [ �. ��� � • � - Exhibit C L "CLOSE -UP CREA TURES, INC •,• N ,••••, u, NGALA �,( `n //` vim+�mrion VIVA LJ E A 1 S1 TIN INEZ ROAD P o OCU_ l 1 O l•J HH 9 Vf b r z O C. 9 ;•I S Z y E� � [ %e ' ^4 Y�r^� EY {1:'� €� {E�•[te��! .RY�t z4(: _ A „� �.:�.FF.. xE lyf9 L A 4� tA ,qF [ Ep S {�f VS r' 4 A N CU- 2003 -AR -3725 6� `F.E � ,- [ �. ��� � • � - Exhibit C L "CLOSE -UP CREA TURES, INC •,• N ,••••, u, NGALA �,( `n //` vim+�mrion VIVA ww S1 TIN 1 %. � 1 Swvrymg Mnppng CONDITIONAL USE SITE PLAN mmg CU- 2003 -AR -3725 NGALA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The Conditional Use is limited to what is shown on the conceptual site plan, identified as "Nagala," prepared by RWA Consultants, Inc., dated March, 2008, and last revised February 9, 2009, and as further limited below. The site plan noted is conceptual in nature for conditional use approval. The final design must be in compliance with all applicable federal, state, and county laws and regulations, and receive appropriate and required approvals thru all federal, state and county agencies. There shall be no more than 1,000 guests on site at any one time. Visitors shall be transported to the site using buses, van or limousines. Arrival by private vehicle is prohibited. 4. Overnight stays by visitors /patrons is prohibited. 5. The facility shall not be open to the general public. All visitors must be guests by prior appointment only. 6. Upon issuance of any tropical storm or higher intensity storm watch or warning, the property owner shall ensure that all tents and any other temporary structures are disassembled and removed from the site, or secured on site, immediately. Parking on site is limited to the three gravel parking areas shown on site; unless additional approvals are sought and approved thru the SDP or SIP processes. 8. Note #4 on the site plan shall be revised to indicate that any future expansion shall be subject to complete review in compliance with the applicable requirements /processes in effect at the time. This Conditional Use approval shall not usurp the need for any required development order (or amendments) or permit approvals. 9. Any change in use of the existing single family house shall be subject to review as a change of use to include, but not limited to review of the use for issues such as, but not limited to, handicap access, landscaping and parking for the proposed use. 10. Within 90 days of the approval of this Conditional Use application, the developer shall submit a complete Site Improvement Plan Application to depict existing and proposed structures and uses. Revised (2) 3120109 EXHIBIT D page 1 of2 11. Event hours shall be limited. No event can commence before 8:30 a.m. Five events per week may remain open until I I p.m., all other events must end by 8 p.m. on any day of the week, except that any New Year's Eve event may remain open until 1 a.m., however, no more than 150 events ending after 8 p.m. shall be allowed per year. Staff, such as clean up crews, may remain beyond the time the event closes. 12. The developer shall retain a 30 -foot wide indigenous buffer area around the entire site, except for the preserve area and those areas shown on the site plan where existing structures or improvements encroach. In those areas where such encroachments exist, the development shall comply with this buffer requirement to the maximum extent possible. Any further expansion of the uses or additions to existing structures or new structures on site shall require that this buffer, where the vegetation does not achieve opacity to a height of six feet, be augmented to provide two rows of #10 shrubs that are 4 foot on center, 60 inches high at time of planting. The shrubs shall be maintained at least at that height. The buffer shall also include a double row of staggered trees, with the trees to be a minimum of 10 -feet high, with a four -foot spread and a 1.5 -inch caliper at time of planting. The trees shall be maintained at no less than 10 feet high. 13. All additions to any existing or any new structures or tents shall not be located closer than 60 feet from any property lines abutting or within Kearney Avenue or Inez Road. 14. This project must obtain an Environmental Resource Permit from the South Florida Water Management District. 15. Additional Environmental Conditions: a) Provide a Preserve Management Plan on the Site Plan including methods of exotic vegetation removal and maintenance along with Florida black bear and Big Cypress fox squirrel Management Plans. b) Fulfillment of any Florida panther mitigation as required by either the United States Fish and Wildlife Service or the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. c) Provide a legally sufficient title opinion and conservation easement. The Conservation Easement shall be recorded within 90 days of the determined final Development Order. 16. Removal of fill from this site is prohibited. Revised (2) 3120109 EXHIBIT D page 1 of 2 AGENDA ITEM 8 -13 ORDINANCE NO. 09- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 93 -03, THE LONGSHORE LAKE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, BY AMENDING THE COVER PAGE; AMENDING THE TABLE OF CONTENTS; AMENDING SECTION 3.2.B.4 TO ALLOW AN OFF -SITE PREMISES SIGN FOR THE TERAFINA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO BE LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE LONGSHORE LAKE PUD OR AN ON -SITE SIGN; PROVIDING FOR ADDITION OF SECTION 3.2.B.7 TO ALLOW AN EXISTING MAINTENANCE BUILDING TO REMAIN AS AN ALLOWABLE ACCESSORY USE; AMENDING SECTION V, TRAFFIC REQUIREMENTS, OF THE LONGSHORE LAKE PUD DOCUMENT; PROVIDING FOR ADDITION OF EXHIBIT B -1, ARCHITECTURAL /GRADING PLAN; EXHIBIT B -2, LANDSCAPE PLAN AND DETAILS; EXHIBIT B-3, PROJECT SIGN IRRIGATION AND LIGHTING PLAN; EXHIBIT B-4, IRRIGATION PLAN DETAILS AND NOTES; EXHIBIT B -5, PROJECT SIGN AREA CALCULATION; AND EXHIBIT C, LIST OF DEVIATIONS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, on January 12, 1993, the Board of County Commissioners adopted Ordinance No. 93 -03, the Longshore Lake Planned Unit Development, in accordance with the Planned Unit Development document attached thereto (the "PUD Document'); and WHEREAS, Robert L. Duane, of Hole Montes Inc., representing Longshore Lake Foundation, Inc., petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to amend Ordinance No. 93 -03, the Longshore Lake Planned Unit Development, and the PUD Document. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: AMENDMENTS TO COVER PAGE OF ORDINANCE NO. 93 -03, LONGSHORE LAKE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT The Cover Page of the PUD Document is hereby amended to read as follows: �I. - VINES AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 715 Tenth Street South Naples, Florida 33940. Words atuek-tkreugh are deleted; words underlined are added. Page 1 of 6 I., , .1 REVISED BY: HOLE MONTES, INC. 950 Encore Wav Naples, Florida 34110 SECTION TWO: AMENDMENTS TO TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE OF ORDINANCE NO. 93-03, THE LONGSHORE LAKE PUD The Table of Contents page of the PUD Document is hereby amended to read as follows: TITLE: This ordinance shall be known and cited as the "Longshore Lake Planned Unit Development Ordinance". TABLE OF CONTENTS Title i Table of Contents i SECTION I- Property Ownership and Description 4-1-1 SECTION II- Project Development -52-1 SECTION III- General Development Regulations 93-1 SECTION IV- Environmental Requirements 4-54-1 SECTION V- Traffic Requirements 4-95-1 SECTION VI- Utilities Stipulations 2"-1 SECTION VII- Engineering/Water Management Requirements 27-7 =1 SECTION VIII- Additional Commitments 299-1 Exhibits: EXHIBIT A Master Development Plan Exhibit "A" 30 EXHIBIT 13-1 Architectural/GradingPI B_l EXHIBIT 13-2 Landscape Plan and Details B -2 Words stmsk- 4#eugh are deleted; words underlined are added. Page 2 of 6 EXHIBIT B -3 Proiect Sign Irrigation and Lighting Plan BB =3 EXHIBIT B -4 Irrigation Plan Details and Notes 11_4 EXHIBIT B -5 Proiect Sign Area Calculation BB =5 EXHIBIT C List of Deviations C -1 SECTION THREE: AMENDMENTS TO DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS SECTION 3.2.11.4 OF ORDINANCE NO. 93-03, THE LONGSHORE LAKE PUD Section 3.2.13.4 of the PUD Document is hereby amended to read as follows: 4. Signs as permitted by the Collier County Land Development Code at the time Permits are requested including an °ff site premkpgign re-- SAwmin Falls WEa Teraf.«„ P DI o ift the „ lt..,. ate to allow the off site sign to L used for- 1 .. ....1,ere take in the event the lease is t .-.. ,1 L Falls. See also B) obit "B" and including an off -site premises sign for the Terafina Planned Unit Development. The off -site premises sign use shall terminate no later than when the Logan Boulevard Extension between Immokalee Road and Bonita Beach Road is constructed and accepted by Collier County. In the event the lease dated August 30, 2007, between Longshore Lake Foundation. Inc. and GL Homes of Naples Associates II, Ltd., as it may be amended or superceded terminates and is no longer in effect then the off -site premises sign for Terafina shall be permitted to convert to an on -site premises sign for Longshore Lake PUD. The permissible conversion shall be limited to modifying the sign face of the sign from Satumia Falls to Longshore Lake See also Exhibits "B -1 ", `B -2 ", `B -3 ", "134", 4 ", `B -5" and "C." SECTION FOUR: AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS TO ADD SECTION 3.2.11.7 OF ORDINANCE NO. 93 -03, THE LONGSHORE LAKE PUD Section 3.2.B.7 of the PUD Document is hereby added to read as follows: Words stpask thfoug are deleted; words underlined are added. Page 3 of 6 7. Maintenance buildings presently located in the southeast comer of the PUD on Tract B of the subdivision plat, Plat Book 32, Page 33, Sheet 2 of 2, are a permitted accessory use to provide maintenance of the residential areas in the Longshore Lake PUD. The existing or replacement structures of a similar size and location shall be deemed consistent with all other provisions of this ordinance. SECTION FIVE: AMENDMENTS TO SECTION V, TRAFFIC REQUIREMENTS, OF ORDINANCE NO. 93-03, THE LONGSHORE LAKE PUD Section V of the PUD Document is hereby amended to read as follows: SECTION V TRAFFIC REQUIREMENTS 5.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this section is to set forth the traffic improvement requirements which the project developer must undertake as an integral part of the project development. 5.2. STIPULATIONS 1. The security gate at the main entrance shall be designed and located so as not to cause entering traffic to back up onto Valewood Drive. A separate north bound right turn lane shall be provided on Valewood Drive. 2. At the time that the intersection of CR 846 and Valewood Drive meets the warranted requirements for a signal system, the developer shall, at his option, design/install a traffic signal acceptable to the county and state, if CR 846 is a state road at the time of meeting the signal warrants, or make payment to the county upon receipt of invoice the amount of $27,500 (55% of the estimated signal cost of $50,000) which would allow the county to proceed with signal design and installation. Alternatively, if at the time the traffic signal is warranted, there is an applicable county ordinance which determines the fair share contribution toward the cost of the signal, the ordinance requirements may be met in lieu of the above noted options. The developer's obligation toward traffic signal improvement will be considered an improvement subject to subdivision security. Words stfu6k thmugH are deleted; words underlined are added. Page 4 of 6 1 If approved by the Longshore Lake Homeowners Association either direct or emergency access shall be provided from the Longshore Lake PUD to the Logan Blvd Ext. at the time that Logan Blvd. roadway improvements are accented by the County as a public roadway. This determination will be left up to the Longshore Lake Homeowner's Association as to the type of access to be provided. SECTION SIX: ADDITION OF EXHIBIT B -1 ARCHITECTURAL /GRADING PLAN; EXHIBIT B -2, LANDSCAPE PLAN AND DETAILS; EXHIBIT B -3, PROJECT SIGN IRRIGATION AND LIGHTING PLAN; EXHIBIT B -4, IRRIGATION PLAN DETAILS AND NOTES; EXHIBIT B-5, PROJECT SIGN AREA CALCULATION, TO ORDINANCE NO. 93 -03, THE LONGSHORE LAKE PUD Exhibit B -1, Architectural/Grading Plan; Exhibit B -2, Landscape Plan and Details; Exhibit B -3, Project Sign Irrigation and Lighting Plan; and Exhibit B -4, Irrigation Plan Details and Notes; and Exhibit B -5, Project Sign Area Calculation, attached hereto and incorporated herein, are hereby added to the PUD Document. SECTION SEVEN: ADDITION OF EXHIBIT C, LIST OF DEVIATIONS, TO ORDINANCE NO. 93-03, THE LONGSHORE LAKE PUD Exhibit C, List of Deviations, attached hereto and incorporated herein, is hereby added to the PUD Document. SECTION EIGHT: EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super- majority vote by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this day of ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk , Deputy Clerk 2009. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA UZ DONNA FIALA, Chairman Words stmek fteugh are deleted; words underlined are added. Page 5 of 6 Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: 2��oh Heidi Ashton -Cicko Assistant County Attorney Attachments: EXHIBIT B -1 EXHIBIT B -2 EXHIBIT B -3 EXHIBIT B -4 EXHIBIT B -5 EXHIBIT C CP \07- CPS- 00775 \45 Rev. 3/23/09 Architectural/Grading Plan Landscape Plan and Details Project Sign Irrigation and Lighting Plan Irrigation Plan Details and Notes Project Sign Area Calculation List of Deviations Words struek dffeugis are deleted; words underlined are added. Page 6 of 6 ©zaav o.i n .... . is ... ....v a...p.ea...a o. a.w.a i...nv ra......rv..a «...ama... <n. . :e.....n. • o � r«....�.,.� \�/� ��`' IMM Corner Identification Signage Plan for v 1 M1J� 11Lai Saturnla Falls In .H.rne LANDS CAPv A CM�TECTURE b G.LHOmes Collier County, FlorMa EXHIBIT B•l p r \ Q2 N y m m O \ O N m o � rr -r v D r mm m ym w m £m� O SEC ION LINE N BLVD. EXTENSION F TUBE LOG :�E- C:E o_ � In En i� i r m F� 3 Q§ � yn i _ A � om xo io Im Y ©zaav o.i n .... . is ... ....v a...p.ea...a o. a.w.a i...nv ra......rv..a «...ama... <n. . :e.....n. • o � r«....�.,.� \�/� ��`' IMM Corner Identification Signage Plan for v 1 M1J� 11Lai Saturnla Falls In .H.rne LANDS CAPv A CM�TECTURE b G.LHOmes Collier County, FlorMa EXHIBIT B•l C., ldenIflallon Sl,,a Plan fo.� III ^1I t` o Saturnia Falls s � ES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE a cmn ®. ea... ...—W. EXHIBIT B -2 I 0 _ \ \\ M \• /1 X D P \ \ , 1 1 C•—) � I I �o I � • �Z x m � m C •� n m A i ZX VN MAIN r nIz • - - -- O cp a �IR •gym 4 9 2c C., ldenIflallon Sl,,a Plan fo.� III ^1I t` o Saturnia Falls s � ES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE a cmn ®. ea... ...—W. EXHIBIT B -2 nA W.Qim �Fg oa a? >�^ Vii pC 0 FR be R M 2Inm �5 v'" k ° �Ao og9 4pg M €�� ^F Fg 40 6 '.99 Nj $saw �� >A� � p RSO tg a �5 g�o� moo T$ Gin 11 $F' 51 MY Q F �p 8� ^ =g m � �r o s s9 ga�F' mR >�4 go2E m N�� y _osi ia9g goy o�F q98 g➢C F� S?n'8 aA b t= =R Me a€ Rm ° rn 2 g 2� nil o£ y Q o m q FR R ° >F Y. m� Corner Identification $Ignage Plan for � n3 �! I:1�;� {; ax; Saturnia Falls '� �� i' by t3.LHOmes 4 f t collier County. Florida - EXHIBIT B -4 OO O Q m )D 6ss�eo y 42 €A A mF�e i In i i wLL - r�REE -� uALF _ WARIER N -1 o 8 N T 0 w -5t HOMES NDLANDSCAPE ARCHWECTURE d D D C ETG d OO O Q m )D 6ss�eo y 42 €A A mF�e i In i i wLL - r�REE -� uALF _ WARIER N -1 o 8 N T 0 w -5t HOMES NDLANDSCAPE ARCHWECTURE T 0 w -5t HOMES NDLANDSCAPE ARCHWECTURE ODD T m L _Om m D x L3 m� m3 x NN � L• Z� L L Dm A= m AN ➢L r➢ A� O Dm Om DN �o R—r, pml— vp «r 024 - 09.awg. 112412 ov 10.1) m AM.IS -nnb, Corner IdentiM1cation Si na a Plan for a �p a 9 9 i oz calls FSFdi '{ �t ;; ; saturnia FailsHOMES__ {''s p F o N e i mwm...r i a..awe .• LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE a_ byG LHomes a Gollle� Cauny, FlaMtla EXHIBIT B -5 EXHIBIT "C" List of Deviations For an Off -Site Premises Sign: 1 Deviation # 1 seeks relief from Section 5.06.04 C.16.a. of the Land Development Code (LDC) which requires placement of signs in non - residentially zoned areas, to allow an off -site premises sign as depicted in Exhibits "B -1 ", 'B -2 ". `B -3", `B -4" and "B -5" of this PUD, in the residentially zoned property known as the Terafina PUD, located in Section 16, Township 48 South, Range 26 East. 2. Deviation # 2 seeks relief from Section 5.06.04 C.16.b.i. of the LDC, which requires a maximum total area of 12 square feet for a sign, to allow up to 53 square feet of sign area, as depicted in Exhibits `B -1 ", `B -2 ", "B -3 ", `B -4" and `B -5 ". 3. Deviation # 4 seeks relief from Section 5.06.04 C.16.b.v. of the LDC, which requires the off - site premises sign to be located within 1,000 feet of the intersection of the arterial roadway serving the proposed use. The Terafina PUD is located approximately one mile from lmmokalee Road, the arterial roadway that would serve Terallm's uses,_and the proposed location for the sign. This distance between_Teratina and the arterial roadway creates the need for the sign location. 4. Deviation # 5 seeks relief from Section 5.06.04 C. 16.c. of the LDC, which requires the off - site premises sign to be located at least 50 feet from a residentially zoned district. The subject property for the off- premises directional sign is residentially zoned, Longshore Lake PUD. Rev. 3-23-09 LONGSHORE LAKE PUD A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) Prepared for: Longshore Lake Foundation Prepared by: Robert L. Duane, A.I.C.P Hole Montes, Inc. 950 Encore Way /P.O. Box 111629 Naples, FL 34110/34108 HM PROJECT 1995087 MARCH, 2008 Date Reviewed by CCPC: Date Approved by BCC: Amendments & Repeals EXHIBIT "A" • • • Date Reviewed by CCPC: Date Approved by BCC: Amendments & Repeals EXHIBIT "A" TITLE: This ordinance shall be know and cited as the "Longshore Lake planned Unit Development Ordinance ". TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Title i Table of Contents i SECTION 1- Property Ownership and Description 1 11 -11 SECTION II- Project Development 52-1 SECTION III - General Development Regulations 93-1 SECTION IV- Environmental Requirements 4-54-1 SECTION V- Traffic Requirements 49 5 -1 SECTION VI- Utilities Stipulations 24-6-1 SECTION VII- Engineering /Water Management Requirements 2-7-7_1 SECTION VIII- Additional Commitments 298-1 SECTION IX- Deviations 9 -1 Exhibits: EXHIBIT A Master Development Plan Exhibit ",V 39 A-1 EXHIBIT B -1 Architectural /Grading Plan B I EXHIBIT B -2 Landscape Plan and Details BB2 EXHIBIT B -3 Project Sign Irrigation and Lighting Plan B3 EXHIBIT B -4 Irrigation Plan Details and Notes B -4 EXHIBIT 13-5 _ Project Sian Area Calculation B -5 EXHIBIT C _ Project Si n Area Calculation C -1 LONGSHORE LAKE P.U.D. DOCUMENT SECTION I PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND DESCRIPTION 1.1. PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the location and ownership of the property, and to describe the existing conditions of the property to be developed under the project name of LONGSHORE LAKE. 1.2. LEGAL DESCRIPTION Follows this page. 1.3. PROPERTY OWNERSHIP This property is owned by Longshore Lake Joint Venture, a Florida general partnership, 4500 Executive Drive, Suite 110, Naples, Florida 33999. 1.4. GENERAL DESCRIPTION A. The property is basically the east half of Section 20, Township 48 S, Range 26 E. It is bounded on the south by Immokalee Road, on the west by Quail Creek Village, on the north by Quail Creek Country Club Estates, and on the east by the planned Woodlands PUD. 1 -1 DESCRIPTION OF LONGSHORE LAKE PROPERTY A parcel of land located in Section 20 and Section 17, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida; being more particularly described as follows: Commence at the Southeast corner of Section 20, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida; said comer being the POINT OF BEGINNING of the following described parcel; thence run North 01 °00'25" West along the East line of said Section 20 for a distance of 2,660.17 feet to the East quarter corner of said Section 20; thence North 01 °00'42" West along the East line of said Section 20 for a distance of 2,660.00 feet to the Northeast corner of said Section 20; thence South 89 °04'09" West along the North line of said Section 20 for a distance of 2,627.60 feet to the East line of the West 20 feet of the East half of aid Section 20; thence South 01'05'14" East along the East line of the West 20 feet of the East half of said Section 20 for a distance of 3,293.03 feet; thence 165.93 feet along the are of a tangential circular curve having a radius of 605.00 feet, curving to the right, through a central angle of 15 °42'52" subtended by a chord 165.41 feet at a bearing of South 06 °46'12" West; thence non- tangent North 88 °54'46" East for a distance of 62.61 feet to the Fast line of the West 60 feet of the East half of said Section 20; thence South 01 005'14" East along the East line of the West 60 feet of the East half of said Section 20 for a distance of 1,860.00 feel to a point on the South line of said Section 20; thence North 89 °08'41" East along the South line of said Section 20 for a distance of 2,580.38 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Also the South 30.00 feet of the Southeast quarter of Section 17, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, less and except the West 20.00 feet thereof. Containing 320.51 acres, more or less. 1 -2 B. Zoning Classification of the property is A -2. The primary development objective is a residential community which will surround a large meandering manmade lake. 1.5. PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION Elevations of the property range from 12.1 feet to 13.5 feet above mean sea level. The site contains no wetlands and has for many years been in agricultural production. There is no natural vegetation on the property except for scattered pines in a narrow band along the property edges. Natural drainage is southerly to a canal on the north side of Immokalee Road which flows westerly to the Cocohatchee River. Water management is to be the lake detention type. Excess stormwater will be discharged to the Immokalee Road Canal via a single control structure. 1.6. STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE Development of Longshore Lake as a Planned Unit Development will be in compliance with the planning goals and objectives that Collier County has set forth in the Growth Management Plan. The project's residential and associated recreational facilities will be consistent with the growth policies and land development regulations of the Growth Management Plan Future Land Use Element and other applicable documents for the following reasons: 1. The subject property lies within the Urban Residential Land Use designation as identified on the Future Land Use map. 2. The planned development conforms to the Density Rating System of the Growth Management Plan Future Land Use Element. 1-3 3. The development will be compatible with and complementary to the surrounding land uses. 4. All improvements will be in substantial compliance with applicable regulations. 5. The PUD Master Development Plan, with its extensive lake area and centrally located recreational club facility, will insure that the developed project will be an enjoyable residential neighborhood. 6. Although the project abuts ]nunokalee Road, no direct access is planned to that road and thus the impact of the project generated traffic on lmmokalee Road will be minimized. 7. The project will be served by a complete range of services and facilities. 1 -4 SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT 2.1. PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth basic development regulations and to generally describe the project development plan. 2.2. GENERAL A. Development of this project shall be governed by the contents of this document and applicable sections of the Collier County Land Development Code. B. Unless otherwise noted, the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set forth in 14iViSiRB A. R the Collier County Land Development Code. 2.3. PROJECT PLAN A. The project development plan is graphically indicated by Exhibit "A," the PUD Master Development Plan. The plan indicates single family lots, a single - family cluster tract, streets, a recreational club site, a lake, and an entry gate facility. B. In addition to the plan elements shown on the PUD Master Development Plan, such easements and rights -of -way shall be established within or adjacent the project site as may be necessary or desirable for the service, function, or convenience of the project. 2.4. MAXIMUM PROJECT DENSITY No more than a maximum of 566 single family dwelling units shall be constructed in the 320.51 acre total project area. If all 566 dwelling units are constructed, gross project density will be approximately 1.77 units per acre. 2 -1 2.5. PROJECT PLAN APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS Prior to development of all or any portion of the recreational club site and the single- family cluster site, detailed development plans shall be submitted to and approved via the Collier County Land Development Code Division 3.3 Site Development Plan Approval process. 2.6. RECORD PLAT APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS Prior to recording of the record plat, final plans of the required improvements shall receive the approval of the Development Services Director and appropriate other Collier County Departments and Officials to insure compliance with the project PUD document, the PUD Master Development Plan, the Collier County Growth Management Plan, the Collier County Land Development Code Agile 3 Development Requirements, and platting laws of the State of Florida. 2.7. MODIFICATIONS TO COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS The following Collier County Land Development Code Development Requirements shall be waived or modified: A. Seetion 3.2.8.3.47. Sidewalk/bike paths shall be required as shown on the approved PUD Master Development Plan. B. Seetion 3.2.4.4.16.5. The project's private streets shall meet local street standards except that the divided entry /exit way surrounding the security gatehouse shall be approved by the Development Services Director and except that, if approved by the Development Services Director, the cul -de -sac streets along which there is no jogging /bicycle path may have 50 foot rights -of -way and two ten foot travel beams lanes. 2 -2 C. Seetien 2.2.8.4.16.4: The 1,000 foot length dead end street maximum shall be waived. Dead end street lengths shall be as shown on the approved PUD Master Development Plan. D. Seetio 3.2.9.4.16. °: The curb radius standard shall be waived except at the intersection of the project entrance drive with Valewood Drive. Curb radii shall be as approved by the Development Services Director. E. Seetion 22.9.4.16. 9: The requirement that curved streets have a minimum tangent at intersections shall be waived and shall be as approved by the Development Services Director. F. Se on 3.2.8.4.16.10-. The requirement for tangents between street curves may be reduced, subject to approval by the Development Services Director. 2.8. STREETS TO BE PRIVATE All platted project streets shall be private. 2.9. IMPACT FEES The Longshore Lake project shall be subject to all lawfully adopted impact fees applicable to it at the time of project approval. In the event future impact fees are adopted to assist with school, fire, or other public service financing, such fees shall be applicable to the Longshore Lake project in accord with the terms of the adopted impact fee ordinances. 2 -3 SECTION III GENERAL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS 3.1. PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the development regulations applicable to the LONGSHORE, LAKE project. 3.2. USES PERMITTED No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land use, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Principal Uses: 1. Single family detached dwellings in the areas indicated on the PUD Master Development Plan as individual lots. 2. Single family dwellings in the area indicated on the PUD Master Development Plan as "Single - Family Cluster." B. Accessory Uses: 1. Accessory uses and structures customary in single family residential projects, including a clubhouse and recreational facilities on the club site, and a security gatehouse. 2. Project sales and administrative offices, which may occur in a residential or recreation building. 3. Model dwellings in the single family areas, during the period of project development and sales. Model dwellings shall be converted to permanent residences at the end of a two year period unless otherwise specifically approved by the county. 3 -1 4. Signs as permitted by the Collier County Land Development Code at the time Permits are requested inehidinR an off site premige, sign for Saturnia P it ( 1 / T F PUP) or in h alternate allow h off site preffligs. sii4n to be used for heaRshefe Lake in the evefA the leas&4s-�� between rTVSr-shere Lake and Saturnia ❑ lls. See aise Exhibit ibit Brand ...including an off -site premises sign for the Terafina Planned Unit Development. The off -site premises sign use shall terminate no later than when the Logan Boulevard Extension between Immokalee Road and Bonita Beach Road is constructed and accepted by Collier County. In the event the lease dated August 30, 2007, between Longshore Lake Foundation, Inc., and GL Homes of Naples Associates II, Ltd., as it may be amended or superseded, terminates and is no longer in effect, then the off -site premises sign for Terafina shall be permitted to convert to an on- site premises sign for Longshore Lake PUD. The permissible conversion shall be limited to modifying the sign face of the sign from Satumia Falls to Longshore Lake. See also Exhibits `B -P'. `13-2 ", `B -3 ", `B -4 ", "B -5" and "C." 5. At the option of the County Supervisor of Elections, any community recreation building within the project may be utilized as a polling place during general or special elections. 6. Material which is excavated during construction of the 88.3 acre lake which exceeds in amount the material required for development of the upland portion of the project may be removed from the project in accordance with Section 3.5 the LBG. Land Development Code. 3 -3 7. Maintenance buildings presently located in the southeast comer of the PUD on Tract B of the subdivision plat, Plat Book 32, Page 33, Sheet 2 of 2 are a permitted accessory use to provide maintenance of the residential areas in the Longshore Lake PUD. The existing or replacement structures of a similar size and location shall be deemed consistent with all other rLoovisions of this ordinance, 3.3. MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS A maximum of 566 dwelling units may be constructed in this 320.51 acre project. 3.4. MINIMUM LOT AREA A. Single family lots: 10,000 square feet in Longshore Lake Units 1, 2, 3, and 4 7,700 square feet in Unit 5 B. 6,000 square feet per dwelling unit in the single - family cluster tract 3.5. MINIMUM LOT WIDTII A. 80 feet in Units 1, 2, 3 and 4 B. 55 feet in Unit 5 C. 50 feet in the single - family cluster tract NOTE: In the case of pie - shaped and other non - rectangular lots, lot width shall be determined by averaging the lot width at the front and rear setback lines. 3.6. MINIMUM RESIDENTIAL YARD REQUIREMENTS A. Single family detached residence, Units 1 through 5 Front Yard: 25 feet Side Yard: 10 feet in Longshore Lake Units 1, 2, 3 and 4 7 feet in Unit 5 Rear Yard: 30 feet (20 feet for pool enclosures) 3 -4 B. Single - family cluster tract, platted phase one: as approved by the Site Development Plan C. Single - family cluster tract, area south of platted phase one: Interior lots: Front Yard: 20 feet Side Yard: 5 feet Rear Yard: 25 feet (7.5 feet for pool enclosure) Comer lots: The yard abutting the shorter segment of street shall be a front yard, the opposite yard shall be a rear yard. The yard abutting the longer segment of street shall be a minimum of 10 feet, the opposite yard shall be a side yard. For corner lots which abut Longshore Way West, the setback from the Longshore Way West right -of- way shall be 15 feet, the easterly 10 feet of which shall be a 10 -foot landscape easement, dedicated to the property owners' association. Note: In the event sidewalks are developed along some or all streets, minimum separation between sidewalk and garage door opening shall be 25 feet. D. Recreational club complex Principal Structures: Front Yard: 50 feet Side Yard: 25 feet Waterfront: 25 feel. 3 -5 Accessory Structures: Front Yard: 25 feet Side Yard: 15 feet Waterfront: None 3.7. MINIMUM FLOOR AREA A. 1,800 square feet in Units 1, 1 3 and 4 B. 1,600 square feet in Unit 5 C. 1,400 square feet in the single - family cluster tract 3.8. MAXIMUM I IEIGII]' Two stories 3.9. OFFSTPEEF PARKING REQUIREMENTS As required by the Collier County Land Development Code in effect at the time permits are requested. 3.10. CLUSTER HOUSING TRACT In the event a cluster housing project with a common architectural theme is proposed for all or any portion of the single - family duster site, the Development Services Director may permit variations from the previously listed residential development regulations via the Site Development Plan approval process. Prior to approval of cluster housing site development plans, the Development Services Director shall ensure that the plans are appropriate for and compatible with the surrounding area, and that the basic intent of the PUD standards are complied with. 3 -6 3.11. SPECIAL BUFFER REQUIREMENTS Site development plans for the single - family cluster tract shall indicate a dense planting screen, wall or other buffer along the tract's west and south boundaries. Buffer installation shall occur at the time of or prior to construction of the dwelling units planned to occur nearest the west and south boundaries of the single - family cluster tract. 3.12. SPECIAL SIDEWALK/BIKE PATH REQUIREMENTS A sidewalk/bike path will be constructed from the Longshore Lake loop road along the entry drive, then along the east side of Valewood Drive to the east /west road in the Quail II Plaza commercial tract. Installation of this sidewalk shall occur at the time improvements are made to Phase lI of the Quail Plaza subdivision plat. 3 -7 SECTION IV ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS 4.1. PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the requirements established by the Environmental Advisory Board. 4.2. SITE CLEARING petitioner shall be subject to the Collier County land Development Code tfor the tree /vegetation removal ordinance in existence at the time of permitting), requiring the acquisition of a tree removal permit prior to any land clearing. A site clearing plan shall be submitted to the Development Services Director for review and approval prior to any work on the site. This plan may be submitted in phases to coincide with the development schedule. The site clearing plan shall clearly depict how the final site layout incorporates retained native vegetation to the maximum extent possible and how roads, buildings, lakes, parking lots, and other facilities have been oriented to accommodate this goal. 4.3. NATIVE PLANT SPECIES UTILIZATION Native species shall be utilized, where available, to the maximum extent possible in the site landscaping design. A landscaping plan will be submitted to the Development Services Director for review and approval. This plan will depict the incorporation of native species and their mix with other species, if any. The goal of site landscaping shall be the re- creation of native vegetation and habitat characteristics lost from the site during construction or due to past activities. 4 -1 4.4. EXOTIC PLANT REMOVAL All exotic plants, as defined in the Collier County Land Development Code, shall be removed during each phase of construction from development areas, open space areas, and preserve areas. Following site development, a maintenance program shall be implemented to prevent reinvasion of the site by such exotic species. This plan, which will describe control techniques and inspection intervals, shall be filed with and subject to approval by the Development Services Director. 4.5. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL SITES If, during the course of site clearing, excavation, or other constructional activities, an archaeological or historical site, artifact, or other indicator is discovered, all development at that location shall be immediately stopped and the Development Services Director notified. Development will be suspended for a sufficient length of time to enable the Development Services Director or a designated consultant to assess the find and determine the proper course of action in regard to its salvageability. The Development Services Director will respond to any such notification in a timely and efficient manner so as to provide only a minimal interruption to any constructional activities. 4.6. AQUATIC WEED CONTROL The petitioner will design and conduct a program to reduce or prevent the growth of "weed species" (e.g., such as cattail [Typha latifolia], hydrilla [Hydrilla verticillata], etc.) in the littoral shelf zone of the lake to be constructed within the project. Details of the program will be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Director. Petitioner shall consider vegetating at least portions of the littoral zone with 4 -2 native species of aquatic plants (the Development Services Director would be pleased to provide pertinent information and /or suggested species). 4.7. LAKE, SIDE SLOPES Littoral zones along lake margins should be at a side slope ratio of no less than 4:1 out to a depth of three feet from mean low water levels. 4.8. WATER QUALITY MONITORING A water quality monitoring program shall be designed and conducted by the petitioner, subject to review and approval by the Development Services Director. The appropriate Federal Environmental Protection Agency water quality standards shall form the basis of the monitoring parameters. Details of the monitoring program shall be mutually agreed upon by the petitioner and the Development Services Director prior to commencement of the site development. Details of the agreed monitoring program are hereby incorporated by reference in this PUD document. The monitoring program shall include: Surface water in the lake and other retention areas. 2. Groundwater monitoring of selected locations. 3. Lake sediment monitoring. 4. A sampling frequency adequate to allow assessment of pollution. Periodic water quality sampling shall occur as required by the approved monitoring program until enactment of a county well field protection ordinance, at which time the water quality monitoring requirements set forth by this PUD document shall be terminated. 4 -3 SECTION V TRAFFIC REQUIREMENTS 5.1. PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the traffic improvement requirements which the project developer must undertake as an integral part of the project development. 5.2. STIPULATIONS The security gate at the main entrance shall be designed and located so as not to cause entering traffic to back up onto Valewood Drive. A separate north bound right turn lane shall be provided on Valewood Drive. 2. At the time that the intersection of CR 846 and Valewood Drive meets the warranted requirements for a signal system, the developer shall, at his option, design/install a traffic signal acceptable to the county and state, if CR 846 is a state road at the time of meeting the signal warrants, or make payment to the county upon receipt of invoice the amount of $27,500 (55% of the estimated signal cost of $50,000) which would allow the county to proceed with signal design and installation. Alternatively, if at the time the traffic signal is warranted, there is an applicable county ordinance which determines the fair share contribution toward the cost of the signal, the ordinance requirements may be met in lieu of the above noted options. The developer's obligation toward traffic signal improvement will be considered an improvement subiect to subdivision security. 3. If approved by the Longshore Lake Homeowner's Association, either direct or emergency access shall be provided from the Longshore Lake PUD to the Logan Blvd. Ext. at the time that Logan Blvd. roadway improvements are accepted by the County as a public roadway. This determination will be left up to the Longshore Lake Homeowner's Association as to the type of access to be provided. 5 -1 SECTION VI UTILITIES STIPULATIONS 6.1. PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the utilities stipulations which must be accommodated by the project developer. 6.2. STIPULATIONS The January 26, 1987 memorandum from John E. Madajewski, Utilities Engineering Director to Ann McKim, Planning Department re: Petition R- 87 -2C, Longshore Lake PUD, sets forth Utilities Department Stipulations, which are agreed to by the Longshore Lake applicant. The January 26, 1987 memorandum follows this page and its stipulations are made an integral part of this PUD. 6 -1 SECTION VII ENGINEERING /WATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS 7.1. PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the requirements established by the Environmental Advisory Board, which requirements shall be accommodated by the project developer. 7.2. REQUIREMENTS 1. Detailed site drainage plans shall be submitted to Project Plan Review for review. No construction permits shall be issued unless and until approval of the proposed construction in accordance with the submitted plans is granted by Project Plan Review. 2. Construction of all water management facilities shall be subject to compliance with the appropriate provisions of the Collier County Land Development Code. 3. An excavation Permit will be required for the proposed lake in accordance with Division 3.5 €the Collier County Land Development Code. 4. The existing canal crossing south of the project may be utilized as a construction traffic access point during project buildout. Upon completion of project development, the project developer shall remove the existing canal crossing. 5. This project is recommended for approval for rezone purposes only. A Preliminary Subdivision Plat shall be submitted which complies with all of the applicable design standards of Division ?. o the Collier County Unified Land Development Code (ULDC) unless, in accordance with the ULDC, specific exceptions to the design standards are requested and supported by sound 7 -1 engineering reasoning during its approval process. Approval of this rezone does not constitute an approval to any subdivision design standards which are not specifically cited by the approved PUD document or the approved Master Development Plan. The zoning petition Master Plan submitted shall not be considered to suffice for the Preliminary Subdivision Plat required pursuant to the Collier County Unified Land Development Code. 6. This project shall be required to meet all applicable County ordinances in effect at the time final construction documents are submitted for development approval. 7 -2 SECTION VIII LONGSHORE LAKE JOINT VENTURE (DEVELOPER) COMMITMENTS TO THE LONGSHORF, LAKE FOUNDATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND THE LONGSHORE LAKE RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION 1. The Longshore Lake developer has entered into an agreement with the Longshore Lake Foundation Advisory Committee and the Longshore Lake Residents Association that the 83 lots in Longshore Lake Unit 5 will be sequentially platted from the northwesterly portion of the Unit to the northeasterly portion of the Unit. Further commitment has been made that, prior to platting ofthe last 22 lots, a majority vote of the combined Foundation Advisory Committee and Board of Directors of the Residents Association shall be obtained. In the event that the vote results in majority disapproval, the last 22 lots planned for Unit 5 will be platted as 10,000 square foot minimum area lots, with the number of lots to be reduced as required by the increase in tot size. 2. Commitment has been made by the developer that the owner of the southernmost existing residence in Longshore Lake Unit 3, which is the nearest existing residence to Unit 5, may participate in the development organization's review and approval of the landscape plan for the first five dwelling units constructed in Longshore Lake Unit 5 8 -1 SECTION IX DEVIATIONS For an Off -Site Premises Sign: 1. Deviation # 1 seeks relief from Section 5.06.04 C.16.a. of the Land Development Code (LDC), which requires placement of signs in non - residentially zoned areas, to allow an off -site premises sign as depicted in Exhibits `B -1 ", `B -2 ", `B -3 ", `B -4" and `B -5" of this PUD, in the residentially zoned property known as the Terafina PUD, located in Section 16, Township 48 South, Range 26 East. 2. Deviation # 2 seeks relief from Section 5.06.04 C.16.b.i. of the LDC, which requires a maximum total area of 12 square feet for a sign, to allow up to 53 square feet of sign area as depicted in Exhibits `B -1 ", `B -2 ", `B -3 ", `B -4" and `B -5 ". 3. Deviation # 4 seeks relief from Section 5.06.04 C.16.b.v. of the LDC, which requires the off - site premises sign to be located within 1,000 feet of the intersection of the arterial roadway serving the proposed use. The Terafina PUD is located approximately one mile from Immokalee Road, the arterial roadway that would serve Terafina's uses, and the proposed location for the sign. This distance between Terafina and the arterial roadway creates the need for the sign location. 4. Deviation # 5 seeks relief from Section 5.06.04 C.16.c. of the LDC, which requires the off - site premises sign to be located at least 50 feet from a residentially zoned district. The subject property for the off - premises directional sign is residentially zoned, Longshore Lake PUD. 9 -1 f >1 I :v atoK 059p,u286 J i � d Np •!OJ O 00 icy a0U SEE >o U =3 W o' {Ju > K W O e> s� W Q �ZW F�u z z IoW rS. r39 O N �UN W you jOn NW Wno 6 O.O s +S VpW 1 O�= En Pn N pf OP $g _e is F-- _m 2 x w N O D O [P Z Z m MAIN X DN 3 { �N {D N G= �m r � A 8 p g sg "�9e' Ne a e^•y i a '�^e ma. e. '•�,oaVOea Corner IAmtlfiwlo, sl,n., PWn for m a Saturnia Falls 1 i ° °m carom ce...ny. sm.ma EXHIBIT B -2 n 0 V 11 1� m N L X m O N { �P 4 "HOMES LANDSCAPE A�RCHH ECTURE oX o 4 "HOMES LANDSCAPE A�RCHH ECTURE Ts "'f F;-'^1 "i 2 fs N g�g zzgg 3Pg a $ F9 T o^ F 1 25 mF JAI a 2g �nm g�9 €im g _gg F� g9g S v 2�4�� ggg wo i8 S €x uF g. mod OFF N� ��t Fi =� gF NR z� g �� f � g g 9$g X94 0 9� g o�Foo_g F� - 3 =B E� �o y= o�F0l $o �2 Fig° g x mr �a � F^ h �F Y q o�9 2:M ou Tpi Ste- mgg'F Fqa r �A a m5 m .m .. � s o0 0 0 000 o 00 0 0 000 lid 11 lidifli R L \\ \000 \O 9 or00 0 00 000.0 S Cod U O m� e�P €A ��F�e ATI � B 3 n F 6 v gin 0 1`J e \e O P b ®6 D wu O THREE -QTR O HALF C CJARIER _ . U N i m m g ° N 3 n F 6 v gin 0 1`J e \e Corner IdNntificatton SI na a Plan for f m zF B-1 Saturnia Falls LANDSCAPEE1YARCHITECTURE VIII l lfl n 9 9 �o �f �_ ?NP• Er �reP oP a' nY GL.HOcna5 N j a d C.111— county, Mania. EXHIBIT B -4 P b ®6 D D C c� iaoez ODD T Ill s _Om J � mmD x m � m3 x d, � T\ ZZ nIn Ym A Ll t M A N Di A� O Ym Om ,O L� A O m ` N ®aao ie�e'° f Iii P m P _ S P y 3 .. Corner Identification Signage Plan for a; t saturnia Paiis o nu by G L Homes g r collla� County. Florida a ,� � ES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE EXHIBIT B -5 AGENDA ITEM 8 -C ORDINANCE NO. 09- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004 -41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH INCLUDES THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT (PUD) TO A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR A PROJECT KNOWN AS THE MIRASOL RPUD, A PROJECT WITH A TOTAL OF 799 DWELLING UNITS. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF IMMOKALEE ROAD (CR 846) BORDERED ON THE EAST BY BROKEN BACK ROAD AND FUTURE COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR 951), IN SECTIONS 10, 15 AND 22, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 1,543 + /- ACRES; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 2001 -20, THE MIRASOL PUD, AND REVERSION OF FIVE ACRE TRACT TO AGRICULTURAL; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, IMCOLLIER JOINT VENTURE, represented by Richard Yovanovich, Esq., of Goodlette, Coleman, Johnson, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: ZONING CLASSIFICATION The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Sections 10, 15 and 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from a Planned Mirasol, PUDZA- 2007 -AR -12046 Page 1 of 3 Revised 03/18/09 HFAC 6',.-. _ -,_V Unit Development Zoning District to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Zoning District for a 1,543 + /- acre project to be known as the Mirasol RPUD, in accordance with Exhibits A -F, attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. The appropriate zoning atlas map or maps, as described in Ordinance Number 04 -41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, is/are hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO: REPEAL OF ORDINANCE AND REVERSION OF FIVE -ACRE TRACT Ordinance Number 01 -20, known as the Mirasol PUD, adopted on April 24, 2001 by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, is hereby repealed in its entirety. The five acre parcel of property identified as Folio No. 00179240005 was inadvertently added to the legal description in Ordinance 01 -20 and shall revert to its base zoning of Agricultural. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super - majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK , Deputy Clerk Mirasol, PtJD2^A- 2007 -AR -12046 Page 2 of 3 Revised 03/18/09 HFAC day of 2009. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 0 DONNA FIALA, CHAIRMAN Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: \o t Heidi Ashton -Cicko Assistant County Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A Permitted Uses Exhibit B Development Standards Exhibit B2 Flag Lot Scenario Exhibit C Location Map Exhibit C2 Master Plan Exhibit D Legal Description Exhibit E Deviations Exhibit F Developer Commitments 08- CPS -00860\17 Mixasol, PUDZ -A- 2007 -AR -12046 Page 3 of 3 Revised 03/18/09 HFAC EXHIBIT A FOR MIRASOL RPUD PERMITTED USES: A maximum of 799 residential units and a maximum of 36 golf course holes may be developed within the RPUD. I. Residential/Golf Tracts (RG): A. Principal Uses: 1. Single - family detached dwelling units. 2. Zero lot line dwellings. 3. Single - family attached and townhouse dwellings. 4. Two - family and duplex dwellings. 5. Multiple - family dwellings. 6. Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and which the Board of Zoning Appeals determines to be compatible in the "RG" district. B. Accessory Uses /Structures: 1. Uses and structures customarily associated with principal uses permitted 2. Guest houses. 3. Common area recreation facilities. 4. Clubhouse or recreation centers for residential uses. 5. Open space uses and structures such as, but not limited to, boardwalks, nature trails, bikeways, gazebos, boat and canoe docks, fishing piers, picnic areas, fitness trails and shelters. 6. Model homes, welcome centers and sales trailers. 7. Golf course, practice areas and ranges, golf cart barns, rest rooms, shelters snack bars and golf course maintenance yards. Revision date 3 -25-09 1 8. Golf Club Complex as located on the Master Plan: i) Retail establishments accessory to the permitted uses in the District such as, but not limited to, golf, tennis and recreation related sales. ii) Restaurants, cocktail lounges, and similar uses intended to serve club members and club guests iii) Pro - shops, golf club, tennis clubs, health spas and equestrian clubs. 9. Shuffleboard courts, tennis courts, swimming pools, and other types of accessory facilities intended for outdoor recreation. 10. Guardhouses, gatehouses, and access control structures. 11. Essential services, pursuant to the LDC. 12. Water management facilities and related structures. 13. Lakes including lakes with bulkheads or other architectural or structural bank treatments. 14. Community and neighborhood parks, recreational facilities, community centers. 15. Temporary construction, sales, and administrative offices for the developer, builders, and their authorized contractors and consultants, including necessary access ways, parking areas and related uses. 16. Landscape features including, but not limited to, landscape buffers berms, fences and walls. 17. Any other accessory use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and which the Board of Zoning Appeals determines to be compatible in the "RG" district. 11. Conservation/Preserve Tract: A. Principal Uses: Revision date 3 -25 -09 Passive recreation uses limited to the following so long as clearing for such uses does not result in the reduction of Preserve acreage below the minimum requirement: i. Boardwalks ii. Environmental uses (wetlands and conservation areas) iii. Pedestrian bridges iv. Equestrian trails V. Pervious nature trails except where American Disabilities Act requires otherwise. vi. Native Wildlife sanctuary vii. Inclement weather shelters, in preserve upland areas only unless constructed as a part of a permitted boardwalk system. The shelters shall be a maximum of 150 square feet each. 2. Environmental research 3. Drainage and water management facilities subject to all required permits. 4. Any other use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list or permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals through the process outlined in the LDC. Revision date 3 -25 -09 EXHIBIT B FOR MIRASOL RPUD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: Table I below sets forth the development standards for land uses within the RPUD. Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of approval of the site development plan (SDP) or subdivision plat. TABLE I DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR "RG" RESIDENTIAL AREAS Revision date 3 -25 -09 4 -Wo"Mwnraft Single Zero Two Single Multi- Clubhouse/ PERMITTED Family Lot Family and Family Family Recreation USES Detached Line Duplex Attached and Dwelling Buildings AND Townhouse *6 STANDARDS 1 2 3 4 5 6 Principal Structures Minimum Lot 5,000 SF 4,000 3,500 SF per 3,500 SF 9000 SF n/a Area SF lot or unit *3 Minimum Lot 50' *7 40' *7 35' per lot 35' *7 90' n/a Width *4 *7 or unit *7 Front Yazd 20' *2 *7 20' *2 20' *2 *7 20' *2 *7 20' *2 25' Setback *2 *7 Side Yard 7.5' *7 0 or 10' 7.5' *7 *3 7.5' *7 *8 15' *5 5' Setback *7 Rear Yazd 15' *7 15' *7 15' *7 15' *7 15' 0' Setback *1 Setback From 10' *7 — 10' *7 — 10' — 10' — 10' — 20' Golf Course Setback From 25' 25' 25' 25' 25' 25' Preserves Maximum 35` 35' 35' 35' 50'(5 50'(2 stories over Zoned Height stories )*9 azkin Actual Height 45` 45' 45' 45' 65' 75' Floor Area 1000 SF 1000 SF 1000 SF 1000 SF 750 SF n/a Min. S.F. Distance 10' 10' 10' 10' 20' *5 15' or .5BH Between whichever is greater Principal *6 Structures Revision date 3 -25 -09 4 -Wo"Mwnraft Front yards for all uses shall be measured as follows: A. If the parcel is served by a public road right -of -way, setback is measured fmm the adjacent right- of5way line. B. If the parcel is served by a pnvate road, setback is measured from the back of curb (if curbed) or edge of pavement (if not curbed). *1 - Rear yards for principal and accessory structures on lots and tracts which abut lakes and upen spaces- Setbacks from lakes for all principal and accessory uses my be 0 feet provided architectural bank treatment is incorporated into design and subject to written approval from the Collier County Engineering Review Section. *2 - Single- family dwellings which provide for two parking spaces within an enclosed garage and provide for guest parking other than in private driveways may reduce the front yard requirement to 10 feet for a side entry garage. Multi - family dwellings which provide for two parking spaces within an enclosed garage and provide for guest parking may reduce the front yard to 15 feet. This reduction shall not result in an approval to impede or block the sidewalk. Front loaded garages shall be a minimum of 23 feet from the edge of sidewalk. *3 - Each half of a duplex unit requires a lot area allocation of 3,500 square feet for a total minimum lot area of 7,000 square feet. *4 - Minimum lot width may be reduced by 20% for cul -de -sac lots provided the minimum lot area requirement is maintained. *5 - Building distance may be reduced at garages to half the sum of the height of the gmagm *6 Although neither setbacks nor separation between structures are applicable to the clubhouse and other recreation structures located on a clubhouse tract, neither the clubhouse not any other recreational structure shall be located closer than 25 feet from any residential or preservation boundary. *7 —'Me use of flag lots is allowed to provide maximum flexibility in subdivision design and may vary from the minimum lot widths However, neither the minimum lot area, nor the minimum distance between structum may he reduced. *g - Zan foot (0') setback for internal units. *9 Inclusive of under building parking BH — Building Height SPS = Same as Principal Structure Revision date 3 -25 -09 Single Zero Lot Two Family Single Family Multifamily Clubhouse/Recreation Accessory Structures Family Detached Line and Duplex Attached and Townhouse Dwelling Buildings *6 Front Yard SPS *7 SPS *7 SPS SPS SPS SPS Setback *2 Side Yard 5' *7 0 or 10' 5' 5' 10' 5' Setback *7 Rear Yard 10' *7 10' *7 10' 10' 10' 10' Accessory Setback *1 Setback From 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' Preserves Distance 0' or 10' 0' or 10' 0' or 10' 0' or 10' 0' or 10' 0' or 10' Between Accessory Structures on the same lot Distance 0' or 10' 0' or 10' 0' or 10' 0' or 10' 0' or 10' 0' or 10' Between Accessory and Principal Structures on same lot Maximum SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS Zoned Height Actual Hei t SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS Front yards for all uses shall be measured as follows: A. If the parcel is served by a public road right -of -way, setback is measured fmm the adjacent right- of5way line. B. If the parcel is served by a pnvate road, setback is measured from the back of curb (if curbed) or edge of pavement (if not curbed). *1 - Rear yards for principal and accessory structures on lots and tracts which abut lakes and upen spaces- Setbacks from lakes for all principal and accessory uses my be 0 feet provided architectural bank treatment is incorporated into design and subject to written approval from the Collier County Engineering Review Section. *2 - Single- family dwellings which provide for two parking spaces within an enclosed garage and provide for guest parking other than in private driveways may reduce the front yard requirement to 10 feet for a side entry garage. Multi - family dwellings which provide for two parking spaces within an enclosed garage and provide for guest parking may reduce the front yard to 15 feet. This reduction shall not result in an approval to impede or block the sidewalk. Front loaded garages shall be a minimum of 23 feet from the edge of sidewalk. *3 - Each half of a duplex unit requires a lot area allocation of 3,500 square feet for a total minimum lot area of 7,000 square feet. *4 - Minimum lot width may be reduced by 20% for cul -de -sac lots provided the minimum lot area requirement is maintained. *5 - Building distance may be reduced at garages to half the sum of the height of the gmagm *6 Although neither setbacks nor separation between structures are applicable to the clubhouse and other recreation structures located on a clubhouse tract, neither the clubhouse not any other recreational structure shall be located closer than 25 feet from any residential or preservation boundary. *7 —'Me use of flag lots is allowed to provide maximum flexibility in subdivision design and may vary from the minimum lot widths However, neither the minimum lot area, nor the minimum distance between structum may he reduced. *g - Zan foot (0') setback for internal units. *9 Inclusive of under building parking BH — Building Height SPS = Same as Principal Structure Revision date 3 -25 -09 EXHIBIT B FOR MIRASOL RPUD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: Uwe Table I below sets forth the development standards for land uses within the RPUD. Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of approval of the site development plan (SDP) or subdivision plat. TABLEI DEVELOPMENTSTANDARDSFOR "RG" RESIDENTIAL AREAS Revision date 4date 4 Single Zero Two Single Multi- Clubhouse/ PERMITTED Family Lot Family and Family Family Recreation USES Detached Line Duplex Attached and Dwelling Buildings AND Townhouse *6 STANDARDS 1 2 3 4 5 6 Principal Structures Minimum Lot 5,000 SF 4,000 3,500 SF per 3,500 SF 9000 SF n/a Area SF lot or unit *3 Minimum Lot 50' *7 40' *7 35' per lot 35' *7 90' n/a Width *4 *7 or unit *7 Front Yard 20' *2 *7 20' *2 20' *2 *7 20' *2 *7 20' *2 25' Setback *2 *7 Side Yard 7.5' *7 0 or 10' 7.5' *7 *8 7.5' *7 *8 15' *5 5' Setback *7 Rear Yard 15' *7 15' *7 15' *7 15' *7 15' 0' Setback *1 Setback From 10' *7 10' *7 10' 10' 10' 20' Golf Course Setback From 25' 25' 25' 25' 25' 25' Preserves Maximum 35` 35' 35' 35' 50' (5 50' (2 stories over Zoned Height stories not to parking not to exceed exceed 50') 50') Actual Height 45` 45' 45' 45' 65' 75' Floor Area 1000 SF 1000 SF 1000 SF 1000 SF 750 SF n/a Min. (S.F.) Distance 10' 10' 10' 10' 20' *5 15' or.5BH Between whichever is greater Principal *6 Structures Revision date 4date 4 Front yards for all uses shall be measured as follows: A. If the parcel is served by a public road right -of -way, setback is measured from the adjacent right -of -way line B, If the parcel is served by a private road, setback is measured from the back of curb (if curbed) or edge of pavement (if not curbed). * I - Rear yards for principal and accessory structures on lots and tracts which abut lakes and open spaces. Setbacks from lakes 1'or all principal and accessory uses may be 0 feet provided architectural bank treatment is incorporated into design and subject to written approval from the Collier County Engineering Review Section *2- Single- family dwellings which provide for two parking spaces within an enclosed garage and provide for guest parking other than in private driveways may reduce the front yard requirement to 10 feet for a side entry garage_ Multi - family dwellings which provide for two parking spaces within an enclosed garage and provide for guest parking may reduce the front yard to 15 feet This reduction shall not result in an approval to impede or block the sidewalk. Front loaded garages shall be a minimum of 13 feet hom the edge of sidewalk *3 - Each half of a duplex unit requires a lot area allocation of 3500 square feet for a total minimum lot area of 7,000 square feel. *4 - Minimum lot width may be reduced by 20% for cul -de -sac lots provided the minimum lot area requirement is maintained_ *5 - Building distance may be reduced at garages to half the sum of the height of the garages. *6 Although neither setbacks nor separation between structures are applicable to the clubhouse and other recreation structures located on a clubhouse tract, neither the clubhouse nor any other recreational structure shall be located closer than 25 feel from any residential or preservation boundary. *7 —The use of flag lots is allowed to provide maximum flexibility in subdivision design and may vary from the minimum lot widths. However, neither the minimum lot area, nor the minimum distance between structures may be reduced. *8 —Zero foot (0') setback for internal units. BH = Building Height SPS = Same as Principal Structure Revision date 4 -01 -09 Single Zero Lot Two Family Single Family Multifamily Clubhouse /Recreation Accessary Structures Family Detached Line and Duplex Attached and Townhouse Dwelling Buildings *6 Front Yard SPS *7 SPS *7 SPS SPS SPS SPS Setback *2 Side Yard 5' *7 0 or 10' 5' 5' 10' 5' Setback *7 Rear Yard 10' *7 10' *7 10' 0' 10' ]0' Accessory Setback *1 Setback From 10 10' 10— 10— 10— 10' Preserves Distance 0' or 10' 0' or 10' 0' or 10' 0' or ]0' Between Accessory :T7 Structures on the same lot Distance 0' or 10' 0' or 110' 0' or 10' 0' or 10' 0' or 10' Between Accessory and Principal Structures on same lot Maximum SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS Zoned Height Actual Height SPS SPS SPS SPS I SPS SPS Front yards for all uses shall be measured as follows: A. If the parcel is served by a public road right -of -way, setback is measured from the adjacent right -of -way line B, If the parcel is served by a private road, setback is measured from the back of curb (if curbed) or edge of pavement (if not curbed). * I - Rear yards for principal and accessory structures on lots and tracts which abut lakes and open spaces. Setbacks from lakes 1'or all principal and accessory uses may be 0 feet provided architectural bank treatment is incorporated into design and subject to written approval from the Collier County Engineering Review Section *2- Single- family dwellings which provide for two parking spaces within an enclosed garage and provide for guest parking other than in private driveways may reduce the front yard requirement to 10 feet for a side entry garage_ Multi - family dwellings which provide for two parking spaces within an enclosed garage and provide for guest parking may reduce the front yard to 15 feet This reduction shall not result in an approval to impede or block the sidewalk. Front loaded garages shall be a minimum of 13 feet hom the edge of sidewalk *3 - Each half of a duplex unit requires a lot area allocation of 3500 square feet for a total minimum lot area of 7,000 square feel. *4 - Minimum lot width may be reduced by 20% for cul -de -sac lots provided the minimum lot area requirement is maintained_ *5 - Building distance may be reduced at garages to half the sum of the height of the garages. *6 Although neither setbacks nor separation between structures are applicable to the clubhouse and other recreation structures located on a clubhouse tract, neither the clubhouse nor any other recreational structure shall be located closer than 25 feel from any residential or preservation boundary. *7 —The use of flag lots is allowed to provide maximum flexibility in subdivision design and may vary from the minimum lot widths. However, neither the minimum lot area, nor the minimum distance between structures may be reduced. *8 —Zero foot (0') setback for internal units. BH = Building Height SPS = Same as Principal Structure Revision date 4 -01 -09 FLAG LOT FLAG LOT DENOTES LOT LINE NOTE: THIS EXHIBIT IS FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES TO SHOW HOW CERTAIN GEOMETRY OF A GIVEN TRACT WOULD FACILITATE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A "FLAG LOP DESIGN LAYOUT. BUILDING FOOTPRINT nFLUAGLOT 0 50 100 200 SCALE IN FEET J I/1 a a 0 a 0 lu 0 2 0 S W C mcm- LM. COLLIER JOINT VENTURE MIRASOL PUDA ��pp Gn'dwW"fAmh.rimi""Na.U)W �d FI )iN DRAWING NAME: Uon,riGNOLI mall"' FLAG LOT SCENARIO EXHIBIT 'B2' mm �C r ARBER & 141 It lu.■■■rBRUNDAGE, INC. DRAWN BY: RDP ASS rROJECI No.: 7883 Professional Engineers, Planners & Lwd Surveyors RENEWED BY. ROP ACRD FILE NANEt 9814 X8 -B2 Olinri�lT >.ii L.WiTni H.- N.pin. A.Jllp �.: Wnf)) -811 •f.a: O10 )Isom DATE: OJ OB DRAWING FILE No.: N A SCALE: N/A SNEEF. i OF I �771 - • — i i�91�..rz.csr/ITrJ%,.. ] � �y, rti; ... _ - '-+ °OCOwu p. P j' I iI 1.. �1No . 4 _. , '1 r . L _ ORE �V µms\ I MCAFA IY:110FYT — — f I . Yc .d. :. _ . .A CH VANDERBII T B ` 1 MOeNMRd PII[ - t 1, - 02000 4000 �T SCALE IN FEET Z%REVI SION DATE II .04.OBStl1PUDASUBMITTAL t, CLIENT: VRO.ECT NAME I.M. COLLIER JOINT VENTURE MIRASOL PUD AMENDMENT ■ ■t■■ /p rs,J'drcne el,J.tM1oin.,ivn NO,. LLJW ad ®f661 DRANTNG NAME: MOMENT ii►AGNOLI LOCATION MAP autt ■a ::::::BARBER & EXHIBIT 'C' ■ ■t ■ ■ ■� al■t■■ta DRANK BY: RCP ABB PROJECT No.: 7883 t■t■■■r RIINDAGEJ INC. Professional Engineers, Planners 8t Land Surveyors DATE: BY: RCP ACAD FILE NAME: 94186 GRm G.T. NdI T,.umi Tna N.Na�l,yRdJIOJ R:(1J9JfOJpl. rni RJW SfillO DATE: OS Da DRAWING FILE No.: 94 18 -5 SCALE: I'm a00D' SHEET: 1 OF I NOTE: FOR PLAN LEGEND AND SPECIAL NOTES SEE SHEET 3 OF 3 k MATCH LINE - SEE SHEET 2 OF 3 L m TFRAFINA L /E I pO (POD) RIG f"��� JI SWING C R/G Q PRESERVE f L 4'----- -R- --' L a - -- o `L \ IU L L ;i,, R/G o L IV Le% RIG L If L 15 14 L \ If fl L 3 SIGN A DE ` \ MIRASDL u « a - -- PROPERTY w a u IV TYPE LR. BOUNDARY 47 s. 'B't.E L RIG EW Mf L RIG (TYP -) MAINTENANC as TYPE 'R LR.E. FACILTY ) ro0' MPOSEO RI EXT. R.O.Y. DEPIDATION IS ME POSSIBLE ,1'L.P.E. FUTURE INTERCONNECT TREE FARM POSSIBLE (POD) FUTURE INTERCONNECT HERITAGE BAY IPUD) MIRASOL PROPERTY O'mE BOUNDARYeII� -POSSIBLE FUTURE 0 50 � 07 ITERGONNECT FUTURE T RY SCALE IN FEET CENTER ///"""EXISTING -ENTRY DIRT ROAD 951 SIGNASE x:zly mms I.M. COLLIER JOINT VENTURE R/G L 8 DRAMNO NAME: iiiiF-AGNOLI �Py L BBBZ v 1 Imo' EXHIBIT 'C2' B=BBBBL BBBBBBR RUNDAGE, INC RIG DRAWN BY: ROP ® CONCEPTUAL L RENEWED BY: ROP CLUB HOUSE -- 1 DRAWING FILE No.: 9418 -1 COMPLEX SCALE, V-1000 I SHEET: 1 OF 3 LOCATION s m Is'TYPE a % 'Y LLE. RIG OLDF CYPRESS w (PUD) ` \ MIRASDL u « a - -- PROPERTY w a u IV TYPE LR. BOUNDARY 47 s. 'B't.E L RIG EW Mf L RIG (TYP -) MAINTENANC as TYPE 'R LR.E. FACILTY ) ro0' MPOSEO RI EXT. R.O.Y. DEPIDATION IS ME POSSIBLE ,1'L.P.E. FUTURE INTERCONNECT TREE FARM POSSIBLE (POD) FUTURE INTERCONNECT HERITAGE BAY IPUD) MIRASOL PROPERTY O'mE BOUNDARYeII� -POSSIBLE FUTURE 0 50 � 07 ITERGONNECT FUTURE T RY SCALE IN FEET CENTER ///"""EXISTING -ENTRY DIRT ROAD 951 SIGNASE x:zly mms I.M. COLLIER JOINT VENTURE MIRASOL PUD AMENDMENT Bppi N.,. u x. -d P336W DRAMNO NAME: iiiiF-AGNOLI CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN BBBZ I"111BARBER & EXHIBIT 'C2' B=BBBBL BBBBBBR RUNDAGE, INC DRAWN BY: ROP ABB PROTECT No.: 788 BBBBBBP Professional Engineers, Planners & Land Surveyors RENEWED BY: ROP ACAD FlLE NAME 947802 DATE: 05/08 1 DRAWING FILE No.: 9418 -1 arse N. -v.qe, A..3YtW n.: psflsn slit. F., :IVq ssclxw SCALE, V-1000 I SHEET: 1 OF 3 as C+nF. Y)YYCamu.9C. EUU IOI.Imua Spiq,iLMl3F P6n ry)f15Yldill -F.e (llflYgllli I.M. COLLIER JOINT VENTURE MIRASOL PUD AMENDMENT 01017 Cuuficn¢ol AuJ—fi.. N-1E 3.11 mG E336 DRAWING NAME: 0:11AGNOU CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN iii =ii ARBER & EXHIBIT 'C2' �mwmms m " mmmmmm "" RUNDAGE, INC. DRAWN BY: ROP ABB PRQCCT No.: 7883 MEMO., Professional Engineers, Planners & land Surveyors REVIEWED BY: FOP ACA D FILE NAME: 941802 CNIivCwryf YDO TVi T1.1 N. N.,b R NIDD IT.:(211) 317-1 11L 11n a3l"3 2. DATE: PA I" I DRAWING FILE No.: 9418 -2 f�('s�h: D33D laewi Rl. fv�u 1% -�auu Sp .rL34133 Dh.: (11313174111 fac Rlq 3 %3fL SCALE: 1 *-IDDD I SHEET,. Dr 3 LEGEND L CONCEPTUAL LAKE LOCATIONS * R/6 RESIDENTIAL / GOLF NATIVE PRESERVE OTHER PRESERVES RIGHT -OF -WAY * LAND USE AREAS ARE CONCEPTUAL AND SUBJECT TO RELOCATION /CHANGE PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION PERMITTING SPECIAL NOTES: J PC h Q a. 0 d M A a 0 5 r Q i) WHERE APPLICABLE ALONG PROJECT BOUNDARY AND UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED PRESERVE AREAS SHALL SERVE AS BUFFERS. IF AFTER EXOTIC REMOVAL THE PRESERVE VEGETATION FAILS TO MEET MINIMUM CODE BUFFER STANDARDS ADDITIONAL PLANT MATERIAL MAY BE REQUIRED. NATIVE HABITAT SUMMARY: EXISTING NATIVE HABITAT = 853.2 Ac. i- REQUIRED NATIVE HABITAT (60%) = 511.9 Ac.--t PROVIDED NATIVE HABITAT (ON SITE) = 461.6 Ac.-F NATIVE HABITAT PROVIDED (OFF -SITE) = 50.3 Ac.-} I.M. COLLIER JOINT VENTURE MIRASOL PUD AMENDMENT Me'*', C.Ni 11,1 Ambonitl N11- III" MF 11" UNAMNV NNR: pp::R1�GNOLI CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN ���� ` 1111 'rBARBER & EXHIBIT 'C2' LEGEND & SPECIAL NOTES ■■■■■ ■L ......� RUNDAGE, INC DRAWN BW. ROP ABS PROJECT No.: 7883 women! Professional Engineers, Planners & Land Surveyors RENEWED BY: ROP ACRD FILE NAVE: 9418C2 C Wa' w.pr9100 nm—i T.1 N. -N.,k R. NIw m:p191)91301 Fa J33'fKIIW DATE: 05 DRAWING FLE No.: 9478 -3 4[fnro. {: W90 Cn mm: Rdn S"u 10) {oW Sp.q PLN�35 T.: p) %S9l- )t))- F..:�llvl %]])5 SCALE: I' -2001 SHEET, 3 DF 3 EXHIBIT D FOR MIRASOL RPUD LEGAL DESCRIPTION SECTION 10 ALL THAT PART OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; LESS AND EXCEPT THE FOLLOWING FOUR (4) PARCELS: 1) THE SOUTH 112 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4, 2) THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4, 3) THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4, 4) THE EAST HALF OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 SECTION 15 ALL THAT PART OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA LESS & EXCEPT THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4, AND THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4, SECTION 22 ALL THAT PART OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 114, AND THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4, THE WEST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 114, THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4, THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4, Revision date 3 -25 -09 11 THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; AND THE WEST 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, THE WEST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 114 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4, THE EAST 1/2 OF THE WEST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4, LESS & EXCEPT THE SOUTH 100 FEET, THE WEST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER, LESS & EXCEPT THE SOUTH 100 FEET, THE EAST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER, LESS & EXCEPT THE SOUTH 100 FEET, THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE WEST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4, THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4, THE WEST 1/2 OF SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 114, LESS & EXCEPT THE SOUTH 100 FEET, THE WEST 3/4 OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4, LESS & EXCEPT THE SOUTH 100 FEET Revision date 3 -25 -09 12 EXHIBIT E FOR MJRASOL RPUD DEVIATIONS Deviation #1 seeks relief from Appendix B of the LDC, entitled "rypical Street Sections and Right -of -way Design Standards ", which requires cul -de -sacs and local streets less than one thousand feet (1,000') in length to have a minimum sixty foot (60') right -of -way width and two ten foot (10') wide travel lanes, to allow a minimum right -of -way width of forty feet (40') for private streets and fifty feet (50') for spine, collector and interconnecting roads. 2. Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01J. Street System Requirements, to allow that Cul -de -sacs in excess of one thousand feet (1,000') in length. For any cul -de -sac exceeding 1,200 feet in length, the roadway must include at approximately 1,200 feet intervals design features which provide for the ability of emergency vehicles to turn around. Traffic roundabouts, eyebrows, hammerheads or similar design features shall be allowed. Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.0LQ. Street System Requirements, which requires that street name markers shall be approved by the County Manager or designee for private streets or in conformance with U.S.D.O.T.F.H.W.A. This requirement shall be waived. However, breakaway posts shall be used. 4. Deviation #4 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.R. Street Requirements which requires that street pavement painting, striping and reflective edging of public roadway markings shall be provided by the developer as required by the U.S.D.O.T.F.H.W.A. This requirement shall be waived for private roadways with 40' widths. Traffic circulation signage shall be in conformance with U.S.D.O.T.F.H.W.A. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Device standards. Revision date 3 -25 -09 13 EXHIBIT F FOR MIRASOL RPUD LIST OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS Regulations for development of the Mirasol RPUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this RPUD Ordinance and applicable sections of the LDC and Growth Management Plan (GMP) in effect at the time of issuance of any development order in which said regulations relate. Where this RPUD Ordinance does not provide development standards, then the provisions of the specific sections of the LDC that are otherwise applicable shall apply. A. RPUD MASTER PLAN Exhibit "C2 ", the RPUD Master Plan, illustrates the proposed development and is conceptual in nature. Proposed tract, lot or land use boundaries or special land use boundaries, shall not be construed to be final and may be vaned at any subsequent approval phase such as platting or site development plan application. Subject to the provisions of Section 10.02.13 of the LDC, RPUD amendments may be made from time to time. B. TRANSPORTATION Upon the County's adoption of a CR -951 extension corridor alignment, and within 180 days of the County's request, the Developer, its successors or assigns, shall dedicate to County fee simple right -of -way for the roadway and drainage system at the predetermined amount of $45,000 per acre, for those areas located outside the limits of the residential/Gotf Course areas depicted as "RIG" on the PUD master plan. Upon recordation of the deed or other conveyance instrument in the public records of Collier County for the dedication of the right -of -way, the Developer shall become eligible for Transportation Impact fee credits in accordance with the consolidated impact fee Ordinance in effect at the time of recordation of the dedication. If the project is built out or has prepaid transportation Impact Fees to be assessed for the project, then the Developer or its successors or assigns shall be eligible to request cash reimbursement. The Developer shall not be responsible to obtain or modify any permits on behalf of the County related to the extension of CR -951. 2. The Developer shall construct a 10' multi -use pathway to be located along the Immokalee Road right -of -way on the North side of the Revision date 3 -25 -09 14 Cocohatchee Canal as a part of the entrance construction. Completion of construction of the pathway shall be completed concurrently with the vehicular connection to the existing bridge over the Cocohatchee Canal. The Developer entered into a Developer Contribution Agreement with Collier County on May 3rd, 2007. Pursuant to the terms of that agreement, the project is vested for 799 dwelling units for the purposes of transportation concurrency. 4. The Developer, its successors, or assigns, agree that at the time of any subsequent Development Order approval within this PUD, the Developer, or its successors or assigns, shall be responsible for their respective fair share of the North leg of the CR- 95 1 /Broken Back Road intersection with hmmmokalee Road, which includes modification, replacement, or relocation of the at -grade bridge crossing the Cocohatchee Canal. C. ENVIRONMENTAL As a part of the environmental resource permitting process of the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) and the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) permitting, recommendations from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) regarding impacts to protected wildlife species will be incorporated into the permits issued for this project. The developer shall comply with the guidelines set forth within those permits. Habitat management plans shall be provided for protected listed species. The property will be required to preserve 511.9 acres of native habitat. This will be done through a mix of on -site and off -site preservation. Mirasol will provide water quality testing as defined in the Mirasol Water Quality Monitoring Plan which is Exhibit #6 of the Mirasol Environmental Resource Permit # 11- 02031 -P. Any deviation from these testing and monitoring procedures will require prior approval from the District Environmental Compliance Staff. Such request must be made in writing and shall include (1) reason for the change and (2) an outline of the proposed change. The results of the Water Quality Monitoring referenced above shall be submitted to Collier County's Director of Engineering and Environmental Services. If the Petitioner is not in compliance with standards in condition #3 (condition #33 of the SFWMD, ERP referenced above), remediation shall occur at the Petitioners' expense. Revision date 3 -25 -09 15 4. The project is proposing impacts to 586 acres of wetlands The project has identified 515.2 acres of 586.2 acres (88 percent) of the required wetland mitigation acreage. The remaining 71 acres of off -site mitigation shall be identified prior to SDP ap roval 5. The minimum preserve acreage shall be maintained. Additional preserve acreage shall be added onsite or offsite to compensate for any clearing needed for private access to out parcels within the preserve D. EXCAVATION Excavation activities shall comply with the definition of a commercial or development excavation pursuant to Section 22 -106 of the Code of Laws and Ordinances of Collier County Florida. The entire water management pass -thru system will be constructed at one time as per South Florida Water Management permit #11-0203 1 -P, as amended, prior to the residential development under an administratively issued "development" excavation permit as long as no more than 20,000 c.y. of material is removed off -site. As per Section 22 -106 of the Code of Laws and Ordinances, a commercial excavation permit will be required for removing more than the approved 20,000 c.y. of material off -site. E. OUTPARCEL IN SECTION 10 A temporary access easement shall be granted to the owner of parcel number 00178760007, at a location specified by IM Collier Joint Venture it's successors and assigns. At such time that the northern portion of the Mirasol RPUD has access to a public road, the developer shall provide reasonable access from the parcel number 00178760007 across the Mirasol RPUD to the public road. Both the temporary and permanent easements shall be granted to the owner of this parcel, at no cost to the County or the owner of this parcel. Revision date 3 -25 -09 16 AGENDA ITEM 9 -A Co ewr County SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION DATE: APRIL 2, 2009 RE: VA- 2008 -AR- 13977, McDONALD'S GULF GATE PLAZA This item was originally scheduled for the Collier County Planning Commission's (CCPC) March 19, 2009 public hearing. However, after the publication of the staff report and three days before the hearing, the applicants' concurrently submitted site development plan (SDP) for the project was rejected by Architectural Review staff due to the location of the restaurant's drive - through lane in front of the building (i.e. along its US 41 frontage), which is prohibited by Land Development Code (LDC) Subsection 5.05.08.E.5., Drive - Through Facilities Standards, unless vegetation required by a Type B buffer is installed "within the required buffer width required for the project." Because the applicants were requesting a Variance of five feet from the required 15 -foot Type D buffer along US 41, it was staff's opinion that they were automatically precluded from pursuing this design alternative. Nevertheless, in an attempt to have the CCPC resolve the dilemma by granting a Variance from this requirement at the hearing, the applicants raised the issue on the floor before the planning commissioners. However, because the CCPC could not legally render a decision on a Variance request that was not included as part of the application before them, the applicants instead requested a two -week continuance in order to have time to evaluate alternative site designs. The applicants' consultants met with staff to create a mutually acceptable site design. With their new plan, the applicants are still requesting the same four Variances as proposed at the March 19 hearing. However, instead of providing only ten feet of buffer width along the site's US 41 frontage, the applicants now propose to provide a total of 15 feet of buffer width in two separate locations: 10 feet of width that would be located immediately adjacent to US 41, and an additional five feet of width in a landscape island running the length of the entire drive - through aisle on the front side of the building, to further screen queuing vehicles from view of US 41 (see Exhibit A to the resolution). It is staff's opinion that this solution would allow the applicants to successfully achieve the intent of the Type B buffer requirement of LDC Subsection 5.05.08.E.5. (In addition to the Type B buffer plantings within the requisite buffer width required for the project, Subsection 5.05.08.E.5 also requires a "permanent, covered porte- cochere or similar W'.. ,...;alp% structure" to be installed along the length of the drive - through, with the roof covering the service windows. At the time of SDP, this secondary criterion will also be satisfied by the applicant's provision of a standing seam metal awning in this location.) In order to accommodate the new five -foot wide buffer, the applicants amended their previously approved parking deviation (APR- 2008 -AR- 13978), which permitted a reduction of only one space from the 33 required parking spaces, to allow for a further nominal reduction (which is yet to be determined). By doing so, they could eliminate the spaces proposed for handicap parking on the southern side of the building (and relocate them elsewhere), thereby creating sufficient space to shift the building's footprint southward. As a result of this alteration, additional area along the northern side of the building could then be opened up for the new five -foot wide buffer area between the proposed drive - through lane and the ten -foot US 41 buffer. Staff is amenable to this further reduction in parking due to the abundance of existing parking spaces within Gulf Gate Plaza, and the shared parking agreement the applicant has with the plaza's owner. As the outcome of this new design would result in full compliance with LDC Subsection 5.05.08.E.5., the applicants are requesting that the CCPC consider the same four (4) Variances from the LDC Subsection 4.06.02, Buffer Requirements, to: 1. Reduce the minimum 15 -foot Type "D" buffer width to 10 -feet on the property's northern boundary; 2. Reduce the minimum 7.5 -foot Type "A" buffer width on the eastern side to 5 -feet; 3. Reduce the minimum 10 -foot Type "D" buffer width on the southern side to 5 -feet; and 4. Modify the minimum 7.5 -foot wide Type "A" buffer requirement on the western side of the property by providing five, 10 -foot wide landscape islands. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney's office has reviewed and approved this staff report, as shown in the email attached to this staff report. RECOMMENDATION: The Department of Zoning and Land Development Review staff's previous recommendation remains the same, as noted in the original staff report dated March 19, 2009. Therefore, staff recommends that the CCPC forward VA- 2008 -AR -13977 to the Board of Zoning Appeals with a recommendation of approval, subject to stipulations contained in the Exhibit B, "Conditions of Approval," dated March 3, 2009, which are attached to the resolution. VA- 2008 -AR- 13977, MCDONALD 5 AT GULFGATF. PLAZA PREPARED BY: JOHNeIJAVID MOSS, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER DATE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REVIEWED BY: RAYM D BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DATE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW S SAN M. ISTENES, AICP, DIRECTOR DAT DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVED BY: 3 O PH K. SC I T, ADMIT ISTRATOR AT C MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN DATE Tentatively scheduled for the April 28, 2009 Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting VA- 2008 -AR- 13977, MCDONALD .S AT GULFGATE PLAZA RESOLUTION 09- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER VA- 2008 -AR- 13977, FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS OF LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SUBSECTION 4.06.02 LOCATED IN SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on all counties in Florida 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 (LDC) (Ordinance No. 2004 -41, as amended) which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County, among which is the granting of variances; and WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Appeals, being the duly elected constituted Board of the area hereby affected, has held a public hearing after notice as in said regulations made and provided, and has considered the advisability of a variance from the landscape requirements of Land Development Code Subsection 4.06.02 in the General Commercial (C -4) and Gateway Triangle Mixed Use Subdistrict (GTMUD -MXD) zoning districts for the property located at 2886 Tamiami Trail East in Section 11, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, and has found as a matter of fact that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Section 4.06.02 of said Land Development Code of Collier County; and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given opportunity to be heard by this Board in 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: Page 1 of 2 The Petition VA- 2008 -AR -13977 filed by Albert Lopez of CPH Engineers, Inc. representing McDonalds USA, LLC, with respect to the subject property, be and the same hereby is approved for a variance from the landscape requirements of Land Development Code Subsection 4.06.02 in the General Commercial (C -4) and Gateway Triangle Mixed Use Subdistrict (GTMUD -MYD) zoning districts wherein said property is located, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution relating to Petition Number VA- 2008 -AR -13977 be recorded in the minutes of this Board. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote, this day of ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK Lo Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Steven T. Williams Assistant County Attorney T, Exhibits Attached: A: Master Plan B: Conditions 2009. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: DONNA FIALA, Chairman Page 2 of 2 11"I WWI N�d NOIGNaWla 911S I I 11w; 0 0 2 2 24 A .2 jqf ' W, I , I i; I Wo 0 pomuMW :p < ii I lei i H 14 r4l IsM Iii 0 P9 Q m. Qm M !go hn L, HN IM Ell 0 P9 Q m. Qm M CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VA- 2008 -AR -13977 March 3, 2009 The Variances approved are strictly limited to the landscape buffer width requirements as depicted on the applicant's conceptual site plan, entitled "Site Dimension Plan," prepared by CRH Engineers, Inc., dated February 11, 2009, as further restricted below. 2. The five -foot buffer width Variance granted is limited to the northern, US -41 property boundary, as depicted in the "Site Dimension Plan" included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 15 -foot wide buffer requirement; 3. The 2.5 -foot buffer width Variance granted is limited to the eastern property boundary, as depicted in the "Site Dimension Plan" included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 7.5 -foot wide buffer requirement; 4. The 5 -foot buffer width Variance granted is limited to the southern property boundary, as depicted in the "Site Dimension Plan" included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 10 -foot wide buffer requirement; 5. The 7.5 -foot buffer width Variance granted is limited to the western property boundary, as depicted in the "Site Dimension Plan" included as Exhibit A, to allow five, 10 -foot minimum width landscape buffers. 6. All the plant materials required by the LDC for screening and buffering shall be accommodated to the extent feasible in the modified and/or reduced width buffers' respective areas, in locations to be approved by the County Landscape Architect. 7. Irrespective of that shown on the "Site Dimension Plan" included as Exhibit A, the proposed use shall be required to comply with the Architectural and Site Design Standards of LDC Section 5.05.08 and all other applicable regulations at the time of site development plan (SDP) review and approval. EXHIBIT B MossJohndavid From: WilliamsSteven Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 8:04 AM To: MossJohndavid Cc: bonham_g Subject: RE: Supp Staff Report 13977 JD, I have reviewed and approved. Gail has the hard copy that I have initialed. Steve S1evu. T. INS 4, A4,� Co",.zy Amr.4y (2311) 252 -9424 From: Mosslohndavid Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 9:38 AM To: WilliamsSteven Cc: bonham_g Subject: Supp Staff Report 13977 Importance: High << File: Supplemental Staff Report.doc >> Steve, This is a 1.5 page supplement. I will need an email reply from you that it's ok, per our new procedure. Thanks!! ,john - David -Noss, AICP Principal Plainer Zoning & Iwid Development Review Community Development & Environmental Services 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FI.34104 tel. 239.252.4237 fax 239.252.6968 AGENDA Co) EY County STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION HEARING DATE: APRIL 2, 2009 SUBJECT: PETITION VA- 2008 -AR- 14017, SHELL STATION PUMP CANOPY PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: Owner: Merit Petroleum Corporation PO Box 816 LaBelle, FL 33975 REQUESTED ACTION: Agent: Bert Thomas, Architect 314 West Windhorst Road Brandon, FL 33510 To have the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider five Variances from the minimum 50 -foot front yard setback requirement of Subsection 5.05.05.B. of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC), Automobile Service Stations, to permit the relocation and replacement of a gas station dispenser island canopy and the station's two fuel pump dispensers, which are being upgraded to meet the 2009 Florida Department of Environmental Protection's (DEP) mandated environmental requirements. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The approximately 0.45 -acre subject property is located at 617 West Main Street, in the General Commercial (C -4) Zoning District and Main Street Overlay Subdistrict (MSOSD), in Section 4, Township 47 South, Range 29 East, Immokalee, Collier County, Florida (refer to the location map on the preceding page). PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: The petitioner is requesting the following five variances from the requirements of LDC Subsection 5.05.05.B: VA- 2008 -AR -14017 Page 1 of 9 &. • Q z 0 N EA Q Z O U O J M19 " V W Illlllalll�l Illll�ll�u HIFI l Y ull�lll m _ ry m _ n C ry 2 p1 v Q i ■ F Z O O W r OQ m a � � <a wlielll 1111111:111 i��l�iil 8 111111111111,111 X11= _ ON MAIN! �II`IIIIII 1111111 1� • �Ilelli����� �� �■. �� �IIII�IIII � �0 � � u•�, - X111111111 �IIII�IIII ■ 1111111= w I���u �� 1 Q z 0 N EA Q Z O U O J M19 " V W Y h9n m _ ry m _ n C ry 2 p1 v Q i 6Z 'e'S F Z O O W r OQ m a � � <a Q z 0 N EA Q Z O U O J N a 2 m m x m �m H z W � r m m N () y s i F T y a m °s 0 SOUTH 7th STREET L C 1 � Z � N A 9N�,yGS x'02 Dg m m N j p 9T �jQC, F � [ i • "H� i "9� "9� [ x A® 6� � � t I �4�g f� pG R� ��]n] �� � O A��� �� p @E •y �ppE 4E � E9 {�f }�� E E i ° • fl ° ° i ¢ i �$� �` �F i �x� q� �� yP� �°. B �• 3 �C. Yg5 E � A �� 3 ': R � � 4 � e a�g7 if if $ oa ry0. GATE NE VISION yP e ,1 � b Q ""` •5... IMMOKALEE SHELL tiWSeR RCantvvt 3 a "s e 6 ec FREE € CzCCg E C e Y 5 $ e BERTRAM AUBREY THOMAS, ARCHITECT )v x'FST wINDNOR]T 0.0AD NMNDON. 11.ON D.S . ])SV 11 )6v Hf) I . A 12 -foot Variance from the 50 -foot front yard setback along West Main Street (SR 29) to permit a 38 -foot setback for the dispenser island canopy; 2. A nine -foot Variance from the 50 -foot front yard setback along 7th Street South to permit a 41 -foot setback for the dispenser island canopy; 3. A 19 -foot Variance from the 50 -foot front yard setback along West Main Street to permit a 31 -foot setback for the easternmost fuel pump dispenser island; 4. A two -foot Variance from the 50 -foot front yard setback along West Main Street to permit a 48 -foot setback for the westernmost fuel pump dispenser island; and 5. A 17 -foot Variance from the 50 -foot front yard setback along 7th Street South to permit a 33 -foot setback for the westernmost fuel pump dispenser island. According to the Property Appraiser's records, the building on the site has existed since 1960, and the canopy was added in 1987. As shown on the site plan, entitled "Proposed Renovations to Immokalee Shell," prepared by Bertram Aubrey Thomas, Architect, and dated December, 2008, as revised through March 10, 2009, the property is bordered by two roadways: West Main Street to the north and 7th Street South to the west. Because of this location, the site is considered to have two front yards; and pursuant to LDC Section 5.05.05.13, Table of Site Design Requirements, front yard setbacks for service stations must be a minimum of 50 feet. As depicted on the site plan, the proposed canopy and dispenser pumps would be relocated to the northwestern (from the northeastern) side of the building in order to improve traffic circulation, particularly for delivery trucks utilizing the drive aisle along the site's southern boundary. Presently the canopy and pumps are, respectively, approximately 38 feet and 39 feet from West Main Street. Once relocated, the new canopy's setback would be 34 feet from West Main Street (as measured from the support columns, not the edge of the eaves); and the two, new dispenser pumps would be set back approximately 31 feet and 48 feet. Just as the existing canopy and pumps do not meet the required setbacks for their second yard (a side yard to the east), they would not meet the setbacks for their newly proposed second yard, which would be a front yard due to the location of the 7th Street South right -of -way to the west. Instead, they would be set back approximately 41 feet and 33 feet, respectively, from this roadway. As such, the applicants are requesting five different front yard setback Variances, as outlined on page one. As part of the aforementioned changes, the applicants are also proposing to replace the existing underground storage tanks and its associated piping to meet the new safety standards mandated by the Florida DEP. They would also reduce the present width of the site's West Main Street entrance from 100 feet to 30 feet; decrease the overall amount of impervious area on the site by 100 square feet; bring the landscaping up to current LDC standards to the extent feasible; erect a masonry wall along the southern boundary of the site where it adjoins residential zoning; extend the West Main Street sidewalk and provide crosswalk striping to an ADA- compliant access ramp; and bring the number and dimensions of parking spaces and the widths of drive aisles up to current LDC standards. It should be noted that six similar setback Variances have been approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) in the immediate neighborhood. These Variances were: 1. A 17 -foot front yard Variance and 10 -foot side yard Variance for a single - family home in the VR Zoning District (Resolution No. 93 -528); 2. A 30 -foot front yard setback Variance and 45 -foot front yard setback Variance for two VA- 2008 -AR -14017 Page 2 of 9 mobile homes in the VR Zoning District (Resolution No. 96 -161); 3. A 15 -foot front yard setback Variance for a covered walkway and a 5 -foot front yard setback Variance for a church in the Community Facilities (CF) Zoning District (Resolution No. 04 -183); 4, A 15 -foot front yard setback Variance for a church in the Village Residential (VR) Zoning District (Resolution No. 05 -135); 5. A seven -foot and 17 -foot front yard setback Variances for gas pump dispensers and their associated canopy, respectively, in the VR and General Commercial (C -4) zoning districts with a Main Street Overlay Subdistrict (MSOSD) (Resolution No. 08 -136); and 6. A 14 -foot front yard Variance for a single - family home in the VR Zoning District (Resolution No. 93 -528). While these Variances are not established precedents for the automatic approval of the proposed Variances, they do illustrate the existence of numerous, non - conforming structures in the area due to its relatively older age. SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: North: West Main Street right -of -way, then a commercial use zoned C -4 and MSOSD. East: Commercial use zoned C -4 and MSOSD. South: Single - family home zoned VR. West: Seventh Street South right -of -way, then church and a single - family home; zoned VR. AERIAL MAP VA- 2008 -AR -14017 Page 3 of 9 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: The subject property is designated Commerce Center Mixed Use District, as identified on the Immokalee Area Master Plan (LAMP) of the GMP. The purpose of this designation is to create a major activity center that services the entire Immokalee Urban Designated Area and surrounding agricultural areas, and encourages commercial uses consistent with the Commercial Professional and General Office (C -1) Zoning District through the General Commercial (C -4) Zoning District. The property is also within the boundaries of the MSOSD, which overlay encourages development and redevelopment that enhances and beautifies the downtown Immokalee Main Street area through flexible design and development standards. The GMP does not address individual Variance requests but focuses on the larger issue of the actual use. As previously noted, the subject Variances are sought to allow a reduction of the 50- foot front yard setback requirement for an automobile service station canopy and gasoline pump islands. As the commercial use on the subject site is consistent with the C -4 Zoning District, it is an authorized use in the Commerce Center Mixed Use District and, therefore, deemed consistent with the LAMP. ANALYSIS: Section 9.04.01 of the LDC gives the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) the authority to grant Variances. The CCPC is advisory to the BZA and utilizes the provisions of Subsection 9.04.03 A. through H., in bold font below, as general guidelines to assist in making a recommendation of approval or denial. Staff has analyzed this petition relative to these provisions, and offers the following: 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. As previously noted, the subject site was developed almost 40 years ago, which poses inherent difficulties for its renovation in terms of meeting contemporary LDC development standard criteria. Furthermore, the site has two roadways frontages instead of one, which triggers the more stringent 50 -foot setbacks on two sides of the property instead of the typical 40 -foot setback requirement for gasoline service station side yards. As the existing building is 69 -feet at its closest point to each of its two abutting roadways, it would be impossible for the applicants to install their dispenser pumps or their standard 24 -foot wide canopy anywhere on the site without some sort of Variance. 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 is the subject of the Variance request? Yes. As mentioned, the Property Appraiser's records reveal that the gasoline service station was constructed in 1960, and the canopy was added in 1987. In both of these eras the zoning regulations required only 25 -foot front yard setbacks in the C -4 Zoning District, with which these structures did comply. Regardless, the applicant did not even purchase the property until February of 1993, long after the structures were already built. Therefore, these conditions are pre - existing. VA- 2008 -AR -14017 Page 4 of 9 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? No. If the Variances were denied, the applicant would still be able to replace the pumps and canopy in their existing locations. However, it should be noted that the relocation of the pumps and canopy as proposed with the petition are a vast design improvement over the existing conditions for several reasons. First, the access point on West Main Street would be reduced from 100 feet in width to 30 feet, thereby enhancing traffic safety and converting 100 square feet of impervious area on the site into a landscaped buffer. Secondly, all of the existing landscape buffers on the site would be brought up to current LDC standards to the extent feasible, which would include a masonry wall along the site's southern boundary to separate it from the neighboring residences there. To enable accessibility for pedestrians and the handicapped, crosswalk striping would link the sidewalk to an ADA- compliant access ramp; and the number and dimensions of parking spaces and the widths of drive aisles would be brought up to current standards. As a result of the proposed relocations, traffic would also circulate better on the site since delivery trucks presently tend to block access to the pumps for patrons desiring to purchase gasoline. d. Will the Variances, if granted, be the minimum Variances that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety and welfare? Yes. The Variances requested would be the minimum to make possible the reasonable use of the gas pumps and their associated canopy. Since the applicant's moving these accessory structures is severely limited due to the constraints posed by existing conditions on the site, relocating them to the proposed location is the only viable option that would solve traffic circulation problems; and working within the narrow space constraints, the structures have been positioned on the site and oriented in a way that requires the fewest number of needed Variances from the BZA while still providing for the safe and efficient travel of vehicles. As previously noted above, the proposed design would actually enhance the standards of health, safety and welfare by ameliorating numerous other deficiencies on the site. However, if the Variances were not approved, the petitioner would still have reasonable use of the land. e. Will granting the Variances 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, as noted on pages two and three of this report, six similar Variances have been granted in the vicinity. f. Will granting the Variances 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? VA- 2008 -AR -14017 Page 5 of 9 Yes. The proposed Variances would allow the applicant to improve the conditions on the subject property while performing state- mandated safety upgrades to the site's gasoline pumps. Such changes would be consistent with the MSOSD of the LDC, which encourages development and redevelopment that enhances and beautifies the downtown Immokalee Main Street area through flexible design and development standards. The proposed project has also been endorsed by the Immokalee Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA), who has provided staff with their letter of support (see Appendix 1). 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, the properties most affected by the Variances, if granted, would be separated from the subject site by roadways. Across Main Street West to the north is another commercial use on a similarly C -4 -zoned parcel. To the west, across 7th Street South, is a vacant lot, also zoned C -4. To mitigate the impacts of the service station on these uses, the applicant would be required to provide a Type D landscape buffer along each of the site's roadway frontages. To the south, the applicant would also be required to provide a Type B buffer and construct a masonry wall to diminish the visual impacts of the service station from the homes situated there. Finally, a Type A buffer would also be required along the boundary to the east, to buffer the gas station form the abutting commercial use. h. Will granting the Variances be consistent with the Growth Management Plan (GMP)? Approval of this Variance petition will not affect or change the requirements of the GMP. As previously noted, a gasoline service station is an authorized use in the Commerce Center Mixed Use District of the IAMP. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: The EAC does not normally hear Variance petitions and did not hear this one. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward Petition VA- 2008 -AR -14017 to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) with a recommendation of approval, subject to the following conditions: 1. The Variances approved are strictly limited to the front yard setbacks, as depicted on the applicant's conceptual site plan, entitled "Proposed Renovations to Immokalee Shell," prepared by Bertram Aubrey Thomas, Architect, and dated December, 2008, as revised through March 10, 2009, and as further restricted below. 2. The 12 -foot setback Variance granted for the dispenser island canopy is limited to the northern, West Main Street (SR 29) property boundary, as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 50 -foot front yard setback requirement; vA- 2008 -AR -14017 Page 6 of 9 3. The nine -foot setback Variance granted for the dispenser island canopy is limited to the western, 7th Street South property boundary, as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 50 -foot front yard setback requirement; 4. The 19 -foot setback Variance granted for the easternmost fuel pump dispenser island on the site is limited to the northern, West Main Street (SR 29) property boundary, as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 50- foot front yard setback requirement; 5. The two -foot setback Variance granted for the westernmost fuel pump dispenser island on the site is limited to the northern, West Main Street property boundary, as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 50 -foot front yard setback requirement; and 6. The 17 -foot setback Variance granted for the westernmost fuel pump dispenser island on the site is limited to the western, 7th Street South property boundary, as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 50 -foot front yard setback requirement 7. Irrespective of that depicted on the conceptual site plan, the site shall comply to the extent feasible with the landscaping requirements of LDC 5.05.05, and all other applicable regulations, as determined by County Zoning and Land Development Review staff at the time of site development plan (SDP) review and approval. VA- 2008 -AR -14017 Page 7 of 9 PREPARED BY: 3111b7 JOHN— DAVID MOSS, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER UfAV DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REVVIEEWED BY: C , r X36 RAYMONO V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DATE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW " -" . I <-t� SAN MURRAY- ISTENES, AICP, DIRECTOR DAT DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 3la?) Io'I r , DATE ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY APPROVED BY: J E H K. SCHMITT, ADMINI TRATOR DA T MUNITY DEVELOPMENT & E IRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN DATE Tentatively scheduled for the April 28, 2009 Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting. VA- 2008 -AR -14017 Page 8 of 8 Commissioner Donna Fiala Chair Commissioner Tom Henning Commissioner James N. Coletta Commissioner Fred W. Coyle Commissioner Frank Halas Fred N. Thomas, Jr. Chairman Denise Handapangoda, PhD. Bernardo Barnhart Capt. Tom Davis Robert Halman Ex- officio Julio Estremera Kitchell Snow Ira Ma]amut Floyd Crews Ana Salazar Richard Rice Rick Heels Eva Deyo faster Plan & Visionin¢ Committee Fred N. Thomas, Jr. Chairman Edward (Ski) 01esky Clarence S. Tears, Jr. Pastorjean C. Paul Came Williams Floyd Crews Rick Heels Dick R ce CRA start Penny Phillippi Executive Director 2392522310 Bradley Muckel Project Manager 239.252.5549 Christie Betancourt Sdmirvstrative Assistant 239.252.2313 IMMOKALEE CRA APPENDIX Community Redevelopment Agency i The Place to Call Home! C r-WED September 18, 2008 OCT 2 7 2008 uo FiT%1cNT Collier County Building Review & Permitting Attn: Ms. Susan Istenes, Director of Zoning and Land Development 2800 Horseshoe Drive North Naples, Florida 34104 Re: Zoning /Permitting Issues; Property Located at 617 West Main Street Immokalee, Florida, 34142 (folio #25581920008) Dear Ms. Istenes: The Immokalee Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) Advisory Board would like to take this opportunity to address the permitting issues surrounding the above referenced project. This parcel has been engineered for redesign by the owner, Merit Petroleum, to ultimately be operated as a Shell gas station. However, the owner's representative, Mr. Jack Milbolland of Merit Petroleum, and his engineer have had verbal correspondence with your staff regarding two points of concern with the fueling pump canopy which have halted both Building and Zoning Department approvals. The Building Department issue is related to the proposed color of the planed fuel pump canopy. The color scheme of this pump canopy has been proposed as yellow and red, which is the standard color scheme for Shell Corporation's pump canopies. Feedback from the Collier County Building Department is that this does not correspond with the County earth tone color regulations. The Zoning Department issue is related to the proposed location of this pump canopy. Apparently the proposed location, which is 22' off of the Main Street ROW, would not satisfy the Collier County 50' setback requirement. Unfortunately, adherence to this regulation would place the pump canopy in the footprint of the existing structure. The CRA Advisory Board supports Mr. Milholland in his efforts to revitalize downtown Immokalee and has advised Mr. Milholland to seek a variance for the two items outline above. Please feel free to contact me for clarification should it be required. Sincerely> -- Fred N. Thomas, Jr., Chair CRA Advisory Board bsm SOUTH 7th STREET _: ; 1. 9 n Ill D Z ®m x � m z D � m N z � o � $ D mm v o D �? z z s o m m � a m z 0 F a zm9boyc a SZ a y x = v £ < c AA qRF � e g� x z l R H epR gg "-�- a} J9'° jR 4F 3£yyy 3 e '" a 9g @e `e ee € = F € xBF R 0 s s C s sdf; 2 1.a8 B N9a[g n a E a Y� c r R -Ik5£ s" 34 N £ o f gA�6 t5 €k `-` h c, '- EES, a� g¢ R a q m= 3e a �n d �_ s B£ R -a f g _ g• €� c = g � .'�. i• Q � it ^84 � F3� e F �q3 F = � � �^ 3Y�� e xo. o.re BERTRAM AUBREY THOMAS, ARCHITECT IMMOKALE�E SHELL ,�. Es „v,xoxoas. QO o.xs.xoox, «oa,on. ,,,�.e .��.... «,- A14 7' k S C i N m�, a y x = v £ < c AA qRF � e g� x z l R H epR gg "-�- a} J9'° jR 4F 3£yyy 3 e '" a 9g @e `e ee € = F € xBF R 0 s s C s sdf; 2 1.a8 B N9a[g n a E a Y� c r R -Ik5£ s" 34 N £ o f gA�6 t5 €k `-` h c, '- EES, a� g¢ R a q m= 3e a �n d �_ s B£ R -a f g _ g• €� c = g � .'�. i• Q � it ^84 � F3� e F �q3 F = � � �^ 3Y�� e xo. o.re BERTRAM AUBREY THOMAS, ARCHITECT IMMOKALE�E SHELL ,�. Es „v,xoxoas. QO o.xs.xoox, «oa,on. ,,,�.e .��.... «,- A14 7' k S C i CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VA- 2008 -AR -14017 March 12, 2009 1. The Variances approved are strictly limited to the front yard setbacks, as depicted on the applicant's conceptual site plan, entitled "Proposed Renovations to Immokalee Shell," prepared by Bertram Aubrey Thomas, Architect, and dated December, 2008, as revised through March 10, 2009, and as further restricted below. 2. The 12 -foot setback Variance granted for the dispenser island canopy is limited to the northern, West Main Street (SR 29) property boundary, as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 50 -foot front yard setback requirement; 3. The nine -foot setback Variance granted for the dispenser island canopy is limited to the western, 7th Street South property boundary, as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 50 -foot front yard setback requirement; 4. The 19 -foot setback Variance granted for the easternmost fuel pump dispenser island on the site is limited to the northern, West Main Street (SR 29) property boundary, as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 50 -foot front yard setback requirement; 5. The two -foot setback Variance granted for the westernmost fuel pump dispenser island on the site is limited to the northern, West Main Street property boundary, as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 50 -foot front yard setback requirement; and 6. The 17 -foot setback Variance granted for the westernmost fuel pump dispenser island on the site is limited to the western, 7th Street South property boundary, as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 50 -foot front yard setback requirement. 7. Irrespective of that depicted on the conceptual site plan, the site shall comply to the extent feasible with the landscaping requirements of LDC 5.05.05, and all other applicable regulations, as determined by County Zoning and Land Development Review staff at the time of site development plan (SDP) review and approval. EXHIBIT B RESOLUTION 09- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER VA- 2008 -AR- 14017, FOR FIVE VARIANCES FROM LDC SUBSECTION 5.05.05.B. TO ALLOW REDUCED FRONT YARD SETBACKS ALONG WEST MAIN STREET AND 7TH STREET SOUTH FOR GASOLINE PUMP DISPENSER ISLANDS AND GASOLINE PUMP CANOPIES ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 617 WEST MAIN STREET, HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED IN IIvfMOKALEE, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on all counties in Florida 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 (LDC) (Ordinance No. 2004 -41, as amended) which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County, among which is the granting of variances; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of Zoning Appeals has held a public hearing after notice as in said regulations made and provided, and has considered the advisability of a variance from LDC subsection 5.05.05.13, which requires a minimum front yard setback of 50 feet for automobile service stations, to allow reduced front yard setbacks, in order to install gasoline pump dispenser islands and gasoline pump canopies as shown on the attached Exhibit "A ", in the General Commercial (C -4) zoning district and Main Street Overlay Subdistrict (MSOSD) for the property hereinafter described, and has found as a matter of fact that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Section 9.04.00 of the Zoning Regulations of said Land Development Code for the unincorporated area of Collier County, and 1 WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given opportunity to be heard by this Board in 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: The Petition Number VA- 2008 -AR -14017 filed by Bert Thomas on behalf of Merit Petroleum Company with respect to the property located at 617 West Main Street, in Section 4, Township 47 South, Range 29 East, Immokalee, Collier County, Florida, and further described as: Lots 4 and 5, Block 5, Carson's Subdivision, according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 40, Public Records of Collier County, Florida, LESS the Northerly 20 feet of the above parcel conveyed to the State of Florida by deed recorded in Deed Book 9, Page 452, Public Records of Collier County, Florida be and the same hereby is approved for variances from LDC subsection 5.05.05.13 to allow: 1. A 12 -foot Variance from the 50 -foot front yard setback along West Main Street (SR 29) to permit a 38 -foot setback for the dispenser island canopy; 2. A 9 -foot Variance from the 50 -foot front yard setback along 7th Street South to permit a 41 -foot setback for the dispenser island canopy; 3. A 19 -foot Variance from the 50 -foot front yard setback along West Main Street to permit a 31 -foot setback for the easternmost fuel pump dispenser island; 4. A 2 -foot Variance from the 50 -foot front yard setback along West Main Street to permit a 48 -foot setback for the westernmost fuel pump dispenser island; and 5. A 17 -foot Variance from the 50 -foot front yard setback along 7th Street south to permit a 33 -foot setback for the westernmost fuel pump dispenser island as shown on the attached Exhibit "A", incorporated herein and by reference made a part hereof, in the zoning district wherein said property is located, and subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Exhibit `B ". PA BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the minutes of this This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote this 2009. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK 0 , Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Heidi Ashton -Cicko Assistant County Attorney 08- CPS -00911 /15 HFAC 3/10/09 3 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA M DONNA FIALA, Chairman day of SOUTH 7th STREET 9 �ID S r' m 9 D m y x K m m - D L) m v Z O m u, v z 2 i m m y a v z z 0 Tv F B N A m" m L � N Ic_ . C F c� �� R � € ��" A.� �R �� _ &� �. �d Y,g§ �� �•[ p -p§ �� d Rib �� � � � € E.� � a O 5 L e, 3 6 C oxrz Ne A ~ n 'r•.'. »•"'� :iory IMMOKALEE SHELL • � £ � Q ' •'" �u•dA1LEMMCx Y�.z I' _j F a plc oZ iw 3 0 g e e e CCCC p C �e �C� 5 • e =a a PE 4 c d 4 toBERTRAM AUBRE ti THOMAS,, ARCHITECT v. wEer wmuxour5oen.xunuorv.rtomo�. nsv .u.5nun x rt I CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VA- 2008 -AR -14017 March 12, 2009 1. The Variances approved are strictly limited to the front yard setbacks, as depicted on the applicant's conceptual site plan, entitled "Proposed Renovations to Immokalee Shell," prepared by Bertram Aubrey Thomas, Architect, and dated December, 2008, as revised through March 10, 2009, and as further restricted below. 2. The 12 -foot setback Variance granted for the dispenser island canopy is limited to the nor-them, West Main Street (SR 29) property boundary, as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 50 -foot front yard setback requirement; 3. The nine -foot setback Variance granted for the dispenser island canopy is limited to the western, 7th Street South property boundary, as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 50 -foot front yard setback requirement; 4. The 19 -foot setback Variance granted for the easternmost fuel pump dispenser island on the site is limited to the northern, West Main Street (SR 29) property boundary, as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 50 -foot front yard setback requirement; 5. The two -foot setback Variance granted for the westernmost fuel pump dispenser island on the site is limited to the northern, West Main Street property boundary, as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 50 -foot front yard setback requirement; and 6. The 17 -foot setback Variance granted for the westernmost fuel pump dispenser island on the site is limited to the western, 7th Street South property boundary, as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 50 -foot front yard setback requirement. 7. Irrespective of that depicted on the conceptual site plan, the site shall comply to the extent feasible with the landscaping requirements of LDC 5.05.05, and all other applicable regulations, as determined by County Zoning and Land Development Review staff at the time of site development plan (SDP) review and approval. EXHIBIT B Page 1 of 4 I% �1J Subj: RE: Shell Pump Station Date: 4/1/2009 4:03:13 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time From: BradleyMuckel @colliergov.net To: BATARCH @aol.com CC: jmilh_olland @atcomc.com, JohndavidMoss @colliergov.net PennyPhillippi @colliergov.net, ChristieBetancourt@colliergov.net Mr. Thomas, Please find attached an executed letter of addendum to the original letter of support for your project dated 9/17/08. I have also attached the official meeting minutes which document the CRA Advisory Board's support of your variance request. As you will see from page three, section H, item 4b of the minutes, the Board voted in support of your variance request of all 50' setback requirements in their entirety. This vote is all- inclusive of the 50' setback limitations as bulleted in your email below, and now as identified in the subsequent addendum letter attached. If you or Mr. Moss should require further clarification on this matter please do not hesitate to contact me at 252 -5549. Thank you and best of luck on the future development of your Immokalee Shell project. IMMOKALEE CPA Community Redevelopment Agency iThe place to call home! www colliercra. com/immokalee Bradley Muckel Project Manager 510 Ahcbua 5treet Immakalee, H_'54142 (239)252 -5549 OfCice (239)285 -8270 Cell (239)252 -645'5 Fax BradleyMuckel @colliergov.net From: BATARCH @aol.com [mailto:BATARCH @aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 1:58 PM To: MuckelBradley Cc: jmilholland @atcoinc.com; MossJohndavid; PhillippiPenny; BetancourtChristie Subject: Re: Shell Pump Station Mr. Muckel: thanks for getting back to me ..... I have copied /pasted from Mr. Moss' staff report the 5 variances requested.... REQUESTED ACTION: To have the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider five Variances from the minimum Wednesday, April 01, 2009 AOL: BATARCH IMMOKALEE CRA Community Redevelopment Agency IThe Place to Call Home! CRA Covemine Board April 1, 2009 Collier County Building Review & Permitting Commissioner James N. Coletta Chair Attn: Ms. Susan Istenes, Director of Zoning and Land Development 2800 Horseshoe Drive North convnissfoner •rom I lerudng Naples, Florida 34104 Conaninionce Donna Fiala Re: Zoning /Permitting Issues; Property Located at 617 West Main Street Immokalee, Florida, 34142 (folio #25581920008) Cummiswoacr Fred \V. Coyle Dear Ms. Istenes: Conunissioner Frank Halas CRA Advisory Board This letter has been drafted as an addendum to the letter sent to you on & September 18, 2008 for the above referenced project. The Immokalee Sure Enterprise "" Agency Board Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) Advisory Board would like to take this opportunity to address the permitting issues surrounding the above Fred N.Thmmas,Jr. referenced This has been engineered for redesign by the owner, Chairman project. parcel Merit Petroleum, to ultimately be operated as a Shell gas station. However, the Fred N. Thomas, Jr. owner's representative, Mr. Jack Milholland of Merit Petroleum, and his engineer. Chairman Edward ^skr. olrsky have had written and verbal correspondence with your staff regarding six points Bcmardo Barnhart of concern with the redesign which have halted both Building and Zoning Capt. Tom Davis Robert Halman Department approvals. Ex-officio Julio ESlremera Michael Facundo Please let this letter represent the lmmokalee CRA Advisory Board's support Kitchell same of Mr. Milholland in the following variance items: Floyd Crews Richard Rica Ana Salazar • A 12 -foot Variance from the 50 -foot front yard setback along West Rick Heers James wall Main Street (SR 29) to permit a 38 -foot setback for the dispenser island Eva Deyo canopy; %raster Plan &yJalonina • A nine -foot Variance from the 50 -foot front yard setback along 7th Street South to permit a 41 -foot setback for the dispenser island canopy; committee Fred Wllaomas.Jr• • A 19 -foot Variance from the 50 -foot front yard setback along West Chairman Main Street to permit a 31 -foot setback for the easternmost fuel pump Edward (ski) DJcsky dispenser island; Clarence S. Tears, Pastor Jcan C. Paul C.Paul • A two -foot Variance from the 50 -foot front and setback along West Y g Carrie Williams Main Street to a 48 -foot setback for the westernmost fuel pump Floyd crews Pam Brown permit dispenser island; and Rick 11mrs • A 17 -foot Variance from the 50 -foot front yard setback along 7th Street Dick Rice Extil Null South to permit a 33 -foot setback for the westernmost fuel pump dispenser island. cW-Mrz • Acceptance of the proposed color of the planed fuel pump canopy. The Pennye color scheme of this pump canopy has been proposed as yellow and red, Direct Executive Director 259.252.2310 which is the standard color scheme for Shell Corporation's pump canopies. Feedback from the Collier County Building Department is that this does Bradley Muckel Project Manager not correspond with the County "earth tone" color regulations. 239.2525549 Christie Berancourt Administrative Assistant 239.252.2313 The CRA Advisory Board supports Mr. Milholland in his efforts to revitalize CRA Govern Bna ne a d downtown Immokalee and has advised Mr. Milholland to seek a vatiance for the items outlined above. Please feel free to contact me for clarification should it be Comnntissionrr, required. Cl James N. Coletu Chair Commissioner S' cerely v "3 Tom Henning Commissioner Donna Fiala Commissioner _' Fred N. homa , Fred W. Coyle - -Mif ---- -- Commissioner CRA Advisory Board Frank Was CRA Advisoty Board bsm State Enterprise .nn Bnard Aaenw Fred N. Thomas, Jr. Chairman Fred N. Thomas, Jr. Chairman Edward "Ski" Olesky Bernardo Barnhart Capt. Tom Davis Robert Halman fix-officio Julio Estremern Michael Facundo Kitchell Snow Floyd Crews Richard Rice Ana Salazar Rick Bern James Wall Eva Deyo Master Plan & visioning Comminee Fred N. Thomas, Jr. Chairman Edward (Ski) Olesky Clarence S. Teats, Jr. Pastor Jean C. Prod Carrie Williams Floyd Crews Pam Brown Rick Berm Dick Rice Estil Nail CRA Staff Penny Philfippi Executive Director 239,2522310 Bradley Muckel Project Manager 239.252.5549 Christie Itcmncourt Administrative Assistant 239.2522313 IMMOKALEE CPA_ Community Redevelopment Agency iThe Place to Call Home! JOINT MEETING MINUTES Immokalee Master Plan and Visioning Committee and Community Redevelopment Agency Advisory Committee September 17, 2008 Enclosure 1 A. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order by Fred N. Thomas, Jr. at 8:35 A.M. B. Roll Call and Announcement of a Quorum. • CRA Advisory Board/EZDA Members Present: Fred N. Thomas, Jr., Richard Rice, Rick Heers, Ana Salazar, Kitchell Snow, Eva Deyo, Robert Halman, Floyd Crews, Ira Malamut, Captain Tom Davis, and Julio Estremera. • CRA Advisory Board/EZDA Members Absent/Excused: Denise Handapangoda, PhD, Bernardo Barnhart, and one vacancy. Action: A quorum was announced as beingpresent. • Immokalee Master Plan and Visioning Committee Members Present: Fred N. Thomas, Jr., Edward (Ski) Olesky, Carrie Williams and Richard Rice, Floyd Crews, Pam Brown and Rev. Jean Paul. • IMPVC Mambers Absent/Excused: Clarence A. Tears, Jr. and two vacancies. Action: A quorum was announced as beingpresent. • Others Present: Noah Strandridge, Brooke Gabrielsen, Tracy Crowe, Bob Mulhere, Patrick Vanasse, Paula McMichael, Essie Serrata, Dottie Cook, Susi Winchell, Felix Medina, Cristina Meyer, Valerie Pike, Bill Oliver, Fabricio Ponce, Kirsten Wilkie, Alexandra Sulecki, Rozalyne Wright, Diane Flagg, Amber Crooks, Mitch Hutcheraft and Jack Milholland. • Staff: Penny Phillippi, Brad Muckel and Christie Betancourt. C. Introductions. Each person introduced themselves. D. Adoption of Agenda. Action: The Agenda was adopted unanimously upon a motion by sbfr. Olesky that was seconded by Afr. Rice. E. Approval of Minutes. August 20, 2008. Action: The August 20, 2008 minutes were approved unanimously upon a motion by Mr. Rice and a second by Ms. Deyo. F. Communications. CRA staff directed members to the email from Joe Schmitt regarding LDC amendment cycles. Mr. Thomas provided a background explanation. Bob Mulhere of RWA Consulting, Inc. provided additional explanation and announced that he and Ms. Phillippi will be attending a meeting with Collier County Comprehensive Planning on 9/18/08 to explain the interim LDC action and to clarify pricing based on one amendment. G. Consent Agenda: Bob Mulhere of RWA Consulting, Inc. provided a brief report on the advantages of the LDC amendments referencing the Race Track at the Airport and Density by Right for affordable housing in Immokalee. Action: 14r. Rice made a motion that the CRA Advisory Committee support the LDC amendments proposed by Collier County Comprehensive Planning (Enclosures 2, 2a and 2b). Mr. Heers seconded the motion and it was passed by unanimous decision. H. Old Business. 1. Update on Immokalee Area Master Plan Review Process /LDC Update Process. a. Bob Mulhere of RWA Consulting, Inc. reviewed the RWA Monthly Reporting process and the overall structure of the document (Enclosure 3). Fred Thomas directed the board to please review. Action: The RWA monthly report was approved unanimously upon a motion by Al4r. Rice and a second by 11r. Olesky. b. Mr. Mulhere and Tracy Crowe of LDI, Inc. briefly discussed the new town design proposal. Fred Thomas expressed his concerns about the cost. Action: A motion was made by ills. Williams to recommend (to the CRA Governing Board) the amendment to the RTVA contract. d/r. Olesky seconded the motion and the motion passed on a 5 to 1 vote. c. Bill Oliver of Tindale Oliver and Associates, Inc. provided a presentation on the Immokalee area transportation plan currently being constructed by his firm as part of the RWA Master Plan Update project. d. Status of LDC amendments. Discussed under F. Communications. e. Chairman Thomas asked the Board to review the RWA Draft Master Plan prior to the public workshop scheduled for 9/25 at 5:30 PM. Staff added that a quorum will be required to vote on items at the workshop. 2. Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory Committee (HCPAC) Mr. Crews and Mr. Thomas provided an explanation as to why the CRA Advisory Board took issue with the actions of the Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory Committee's going to the BCC before further discussions were held with the IMPVC as requested. 3. Pepper Ranch — Presentation Alexandra Sulecki, Coordinator in the Conservation Collier, Land Acquisition, provided a presentation on the purchase of the Pepper Ranch property in Immokalee and discussed points relating to the cost, opportunities and objections of the purchase. She received input form those present as to potential uses for the property. Ms. Solecki asked that if anyone thinks of any additional comments on the purchase to please email to her directly. Mr. Thomas asked for three community members to volunteer to attend Ms. Sulecki's monthly meetings in the future. Robert Halman, Carrie Williams and Susi Winchell volunteered to attend. 4. Red Fla Ig ssues. a. Mr. Thomas provided a brief update on the status of Mr. Herrera's lot. lie outlined the outcome of he and CRA staffs meeting with Collier AGENDA ITEM 9 -C .r Co er County STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION HEARING DATE: APRIL 2, 2009 SUBJECT: PETITION: RZ- 2008 -AR- 13951, OLDE FLORIDA GOLF CLUB, INC. PROPERTY OWNER/AGENTS: Owner: Olde Florida Golf Club, Inc. 9405 Vanderbilt Beach Rd Ext. Naples, FL 34120 Agents: Margaret C. Perry AICP Senior Project Planner Wilson Miller 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200 Naples, FL 34105 REQUESTED ACTION: John Passidomo, Esquire Cheffy Passidomo 821 5th Ave. South Naples, FL 34102 The petitioner wishes to rezone 553.67± acres from the Golf Course (GC) zoning district to the Agriculture (A) Zoning District for a project known as the Olde Florida Golf Club. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located on the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension, approximately 2 miles east of the Vanderbilt Beach Road (CR 862) and Collier Boulevard (CR 951) intersection, in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. (See illustration on following page) RZ- 2008 -AR -13951 Olde Florida Golf Club Page 1 of 14 Revised (2) 3/17109 ■ �Mim / I- � « � O 2 2 O & � 4 � 2 _O w « U O � ; ! � « � O 2 2 O & � 4 � 2 _O w « U O � PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: As described in the narrative statement included in the application, the petitioner proposes to rezone the subject site to Agriculture to allow "for a broader range of uses" and to provide a "greater flexibility for the land owner by allowing agriculture, golf course, single - family dwelling units and other uses by right, in accordance with the FLUE [Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan] and the Land Development Code." Given the GMP FLUE designation, up to 110 dwelling units could be developed on site. The petitioner's agent states in the Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) that, "The proposed rezone intends to preserve the existing 18- hole golf course and permit the addition of up to 110 single family homes." The subject property was rezoned from the Rural Agricultural Zoning District to the Golf Course (GC) Zoning District with the approval of Ordinance Number 91 -16 on February 12, 1991 (Petition Number R- 90 -23). As part of that rezoning action, an agreement was entered into by the petitioner wherein certain improvements would be required as part of site development approval. Most of the improvements or conditions are reiterations of site development plan requirements. Subsequent to that rezoning approval, the site was developed with an eighteen -hole golf course and its supporting facilities. It should be noted that the proposed rezone back to the Rural Agricultural Zoning District utilized the "conventional or standard" rezoning procedure that does not require a master plan to be submitted as would be required if the property was rezoned to a PUD. However, the boundary survey provided with the petition indicates there is a large conservation easement over lands in the northeastern portion of the site. Site development issues will be addressed as part of any future development approvals that may be sought should the rezone be approved. Similarly, deviations from the Land Development Code (LDC) cannot be sought as part of this rezone petition; any subsequent development would need to be in compliance with all federal, state and local development regulations unless variances are sought and approved through the appropriate procedure in effect at the time. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: A mixture of five, ten and twenty -acre tracts, most of which are either used for agriculturally (several tracts have single - family home also) or are undeveloped, all of which have a zoning designation of Agricultural with a mobile home overlay (A- MHO) East: Eight, 10 -acre tracts and an 80 -acre tract, all of which are undeveloped and under one ownership, with a zoning designation of Agricultural with a mobile home overlay (A -MHO) South: scattered single - family homes, zoned Estates (E) West: Golf Club of the Everglades, a 260 -acre golf course, zoned Agricultural (A) with Conditional Use approval for a golf course granted in Resolution Number 99 -61 RZ- 2008 -AR -13951 Olde Florida Golf Club Page 2 of 14 Revised 3/17/09 Aerial Photo GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The Old Florida Golf Club property lies within the Agricultural/Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD), Neutral Lands, as depicted on Collier County's Future Land Use Map (FLUM). Golf courses and single - family residential units are allowed by right in the Neutral Lands designated areas. The 18 -hole golf course, its clubhouse and maintenance facilities occupy the developed portions of the subject property. An existing conservation area comprising approximately 51 acres will remain unchanged. The County's Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program provisions were not applicable at the time of Olde Florida original approval. TDR program provisions apply only to extent that they prohibit the transfer of development rights into or out of Neutral Lands. The Olde Florida development will utilize only the base density entitlements generated by developing property located in Neutral Lands. RZ- 2006 -AR -13951 Olde Florida Golf Club Revised 3/17/09 Page 3 of 14 The Collier County Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and Land Development Code (LDC) contain specific requirements applicable to new development within Neutral Lands. Certain requirements pertain to residential development. These items are discussed below. In the following review, FLUE and other GMP provisions are shown in italics, while staff analysis and commentary is provided in normal type. Neutral Lands: Neutral Lands have been identified for limited semi -rural residential development. Available data indicates that Neutral Lands have a higher ratio of native vegetation, and thus higher habitat values, than lands designated as Receiving Lands, but these values do not approach those of Sending Lands. Therefore, these lands are appropriate for limited development, if such development is directed away from existing native vegetation and habitat. A lower maximum gross density is prescribed for Neutral Lands when compared to Receiving Lands. Additionally, certain other uses permitted within Receiving Lands are not authorized in Neutral Lands. Within Neutral Lands, the following standards shall apply: 1. Maximum Density: I dwelling unit per S gross acres (0.2 units per acre). Maximum density: There are 553.6 acres in the Olde Florida property, which would allow a maximum density of 110 dwelling units. 2. Clustering: Clustering of residential development is allowed and encouraged. Where clustered development is employed, it shall be in accordance with the following provisions: a) If within the boundaries of the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District, and consistent with the provisions of the Potable Water and Sanitary Sewer Sub - elements of this Plan, central water and sewer shall be extended to the project. Where County sewer or water services may not be available concurrent with development in Neutral Lands, interim private water and sewer facilities may be approved. b) The maximum lot size is one acre. c) The clustered development shall be located on the site so as to provide to the greatest degree practicable: protection for listed species habitat; preservation of the highest quality native vegetation; connectivity to adjacent natural reservations or preservation areas on adjacent developments; and, creation, maintenance or enhancement of wildlife corridors. d) The minimum project size shall beat least 40 acres. The amount of detailed development information necessary to address provisions (a) through (c) above is absent as this is a standard rezone petition. The specifics of these provisions may be addressed fully at the time a subdivision plat is submitted for review. Olde Florida is a 553.6 acre development and meets the minimum project size requirement. 3. Allowable Uses: Agricultural uses; Single -family residential dwelling units, including mobile homes where a Mobile Home Zoning Overlay exists; Multi family residential structures; Dormitories, duplexes and other types of staff housing, as may be incidental to, and in support of conservation uses; Group housing; Staff housing as may be incidental to, and in support of safety service facilities and essential services; Farm labor housing; Sporting and Recreational camps; Essential services; Golf courses or driving ranges; Zoos, aquariums, botanical gardens, or other similar uses; Public educational plants and ancillary plants; Facilities for the collection, transfer, processing and reduction of solid waste; Community facilities, such as, places of worship, RZ- 2008 -AR -13951 Olde Florida Golf Club Page 4 of 14 Revised 3/17/09 childcare facilities, cemeteries, social and fraternal organizations; Sports instructional schools and camps; Earthmining, oil extraction and related processing; Parks, open space, and recreational uses; and, Private schools. Golf courses or driving ranges are subject to the following standards: (1) Golf courses shall be designed, constructed, and managed in accordance with the best management practices of Audubon International's Gold Signature Program and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. (2) In order to prevent the contamination of soil, surface water and ground water by the materials stored and handled by golf course maintenance operations, golf courses shall comply with the Best Management Practices for Golf Course Maintenance Departments, prepared by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, May 1995. (3) To protect ground and surface water quality from fertilizer and pesticide usage, golf courses shall demonstrate the following management practices: (a) The use of slow release nitrogen sources, (b) The use of soil and plant tissue analysis to adjust timing and amount offertilization applications, (c) The use of an integrated pest management program using both biological and chemical agents to control various pests; (d) The coordination of pesticide applications with the timing and application of irrigation water; (e) The use of the procedure contained in IFAS Circular 1011, Managing Pesticides for Golf Course Maintenance and Water Quality Protection, May 1991 (revised 1995) to select pesticides that will have a minimum adverse impact on water quality. (4) To ensure water conservation, golf courses shall incorporate the following in their design and operation: (a) Irrigation systems shall be designed to use weather station information and moisture - sensing systems to determine the optimum amount of irrigation water needed considering soil moisture and evapotranspiration rates. (b) As available, golf courses shall utilize treated effluent reuse water consistent with Sanitary Sewer Sub - Element Objective 1.4 and its policies; (c) Native plants shall be used exclusively except for special purpose areas such as golf greens, fairways, and building sites. Within these excepted areas, landscaping plans shall require that at least 75 percent of the trees and 50 percent of the shrubs be freeze- tolerant native Floridian species. At least 75 percent of the required native trees and shrubs shall also be drought tolerant species. (5) Stormwater management ponds shall be designed to mimic the functions of natural systems: by establishing shorelines that are sinuous in configuration in order to provide increased length and diversity of the littoral zone. A Littoral shelf shall be established to provide a feeding area for water dependent avian species. The combined length of vertical and rip- rapped walls shall be limited to 25 percent of the shoreline. Credits to the site RZ- 2008 -AR -13951 Olde Florida Golf Club Page 5 of 14 Revised 3/17/09 preservation area requirements, on an acre -to -acre basis, shall be given for littoral shelves that exceed these littoral shelf area requirements. (6) Site preservation and native vegetation retention requirements shall be the same as those set forth in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District criteria. Site preservation areas are intended to provide habitat functions and shall meet minimum dimensions as set forth in the Land Development Code. These standards shall be established within one year. Based on FLUE provisions for golf courses in the RFMUD, requirements specify they shall be designed, constructed and managed in accordance with Audubon's Signature program. The Olde Florida Golf Course however, was designed and constructed before the RFMUD was created and before Audubon Signature program certification was required. Audubon's Signature program is available only to newly proposed projects, including golf courses in the design or development stages. Audubon's Cooperative Sanctuary Program (ACSP) is the alternative program available to existing golf courses like Olde Florida. Both the Signature and the Sanctuary programs are characterized as education and certification programs, and the two embrace significantly similar land management and natural resource conservation practices. Both include comprehensive management programs. Primary differences between the two programs involve not the land management or conservation practices themselves, but whether verification of ongoing program participation and compliance are conducted with on- site Audubon - certified visits or by submitting documentation to Audubon International — and the associated costs for doing so. 4. Native vegetation and preservation requirements: Native vegetation shall be preserved as set forth in CCME Policy 6.1.2. The petitioner has indicated that the existing 51 -acre conservation area will be incorporated into the required preservation area. Strict compliance with CCME Goals, Objectives and Policies will be determined as part of any subsequent development order reviews. 5. Density Blending shall be permitted subject to the provisions set forth in the Density Rating System. No density blending is proposed for the subject property. In reviewing for compliance with FLUE Objective 7 and subsequent Policies regarding Smart Growth principles derived from the Toward Better Places, Community Character Plan for Collier County, staff provides the following analysis. Policy 7.1 The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. The project has direct access to Vanderbilt Beach Road extension, a collector road. RZ- 2008 -AR -13951 Olde Florida Golf Club Page 6 of 14 Revised 3/17/09 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. Policy 7.3 All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and their interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. Policy 7.4 The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. The amount of detailed development information necessary to address these Policies is absent as this is a standard rezone petition. The specifics of these Policies shall be addressed fully at the time of SDP or a subdivision plat is submitted for review. Based on the above analysis, staff concludes that the rezone may be deemed consistent with the FLUE. Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petitioner's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) and has determined that the roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate this 110 -unit project within the 5 -year planning period. Vanderbilt Beach Road Impacts: The first concurrency link that is impacted by this project is Link 113, Vanderbilt Beach Road East of CR -951. The project generates 52 PM peak hour, peak direction trips on this link, which represents a 6.8 percent (significant) impact on this roadway. This segment of Vanderbilt Beach Road is currently in the right -of -way acquisition process to accommodate a planned expansion beginning outside the five year capital improvement plan. The remaining capacity and Level of Service are not currently reflected in the adopted 2008 AUIR. Please note that portions of the project's access along Vanderbilt Beach Road are held in private ownership and are granted via easements as shown on the Access Management Plan included in the application. No subsequent links of Vanderbilt Beach Road are significantly impacted. County Road 951 Impacts: No subsequent links of County Road 951 are significantly impacted in the Peak Direction during PM Peak Hour. Therefore, the subject application can be deemed consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Environmental Element: There are no CCME issues for this petition as part of the rezone action. All Environmental Impact Study (EIS) , wetland and preservation issues will be addressed as part of any subsequent development order review. ANALYSIS: Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and has reviewed the criteria on which a determination must be based. These criteria are specifically noted in Section 10.03.05.H. of the LDC. The staff evaluation establishes a factual basis to support the recommendations of staff. The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) uses these same criteria as the basis for the recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), who in turn use the criteria to support their action on the rezoning request. These evaluations are completed as part of the Zoning and Land Development Review provided below. RZ- 2008 -AR -13951 Olde Florida Golf Club Page 7 of 14 Revised 3117/09 Transportation Review: Transportation Department Staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC. Transportation Planning staff can recommend approval of this project. Environmental Review: Environmental Review staff has reviewed this petition, and recommends approval. The Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) did not review this petition, and an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) was not required because a conventional rezone does not require a site plan. An EIS will need to be provided with any subsequent development order approvals that may be sought if the rezoning is approved. Preservation areas will be addressed as part of development order review. Wetland line(s) will have to be verified and approved by the SFWMD prior to completion of next development order. Utilities Review: Public utilities staff has reviewed this petition and has no objection. According to the current 2008 Water and Wastewater Master Plan Updates, the project location is within the Collier County Water - Sewer District Service Area. Per GIS, there is an existing 10 -inch water main on Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension. GIS does not show that the County owns sewer utilities in the right -of -way contiguous to this development. Since the project site is not presently serviced with centrally provided sewer, the project will need to utilize a septic system until central sewer is available. This project is located in the zone of the existing North Hawthorn Wellfreld of the North County Regional Water Treatment Plant. The rules and regulations for protection of wellfields will need to be followed. All well sites and pipeline easements located on and close to this project will need to be shown on all future site development plans, PPL or any other site plan applications. Zoning and Land Development Reviews: 'Zoning staff has reviewed this petition and concurs with the findings of Comprehensive Planning. The proposed rezone and use is found to be consistent with the GMP. In addition, the proposed project will meet the Agricultural Zoning District criteria. According to LDC Section 2.03.01, the purpose and intent of the rural agricultural district is to provide: ....lands for agricultural, pastoral, and rural land uses by accommodating traditional agricultural, agricultural related activities and facilities, support facilities related to agricultural needs, and conservation uses. Uses that are generally considered compatible to agricultural uses that would not endanger or damage the agricultural, environmental, potable water, or wildlife resources of the County are permissible as conditional uses in the A district. The A district corresponds to and implements the Agricultural /Rural land use designation on the future land use map of the Collier County GMP, and in some instances, may occur in the designated urban area. The maximum density permissible in the rural agricultural district within the urban mixed use district shall be guided, in part, by the density rating system contained in the future land use element of the GMP. The maximum density permissible or permitted in the A district shall not exceed the density permissible under the density rating system. The maximum density permissible in the A district within the agricultural /rural district of the future land use element of the Collier County GMP shall be consistent with and not exceed the density permissible or permitted under the agricultural /rural district of the future land use element. RZ- 2008 -AR -13951 Olde Florida Golf Club Page 8 of 14 Revised 3/17/09 As noted on page 2, the petitioner is seeking this rezone to allow agricultural uses as well as single - family dwellings and golf courses and other uses by right. The proposed intent of the rezone appears to be in agreement with the purpose and intent of the Agricultural zoning district and the list of uses permitted within it because the RI MUD- Neutral designation allows these uses by right. That designation is an overlay district which supersedes the limitations of the Agricultural zoning designation to allow additional uses (the golf course use) that would otherwise require conditional use approval in a non RFMUD - Neutral GMP land use designation. The subject property is surrounded by agricultural zoning on three sides —north, east and west. To the north and east the lands are either undeveloped or used for agricultural activities. To the west is a golf course. To the south is the proposed Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension and then single family houses within the Estates zoning district. If the rezoning is approved, the developer will be required to provide the minimum landscape buffers as provided for in the LDC in effect when future development is sought. At the present time, residential zoning or uses that abut agricultural zoning or uses would be required to provide a Type A buffer, which is a 10 -foot wide landscape buffer with trees spaced no more than 30 feet on center. As indicated in the GMP discussion of this staff report the 553.6 acres in the subject site would allow a maximum density of 110 dwelling units. Excerpts from Lot Design Requirements for Principal Uses (LDC Section 4.02.0l.A) [in feet, unless otherwise noted] Zoning District Front Yard Side Yard Rear Yard Lot Area (sq ft) Lot Width Floor Area of Buildings (sq. ft.) A 50 30 50 217,800 165 550 GC None None None None None None All numbers shown are the required minimum amounts Maximum Building Height of 35 feet is the same in both districts LDC Subsection 10.03.05.1.2 states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners ... shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the following when applicable." [Staff's responses to these criteria are provided in non - italicized font]: Rezone Findings: 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and future land use map and the elements of the GMP. RZ- 2008 -AR -13951 Olde Florida Golf Club Page 9 of 14 Revised (2) 3/17/09 As noted in the GMP Consistency portion of this report, the proposed uses and development standards would generally further the goals and objectives of the FLUE and the applicable portions of the CCME and the Transportation Element. 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 agriculturally zoned and used lands to the north and east; agriculturally zoned lands uses as a golf course to the west; and the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension then Estates zoned lands with residential uses to the south. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The proposed rezoning would not create an isolated zoning district because, as noted above the parcel is surrounded by agricultural zoning on three sides. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. As shown on the zoning map included at the beginning of this report, the existing district boundaries are logically drawn. The proposed zoning boundaries follow the property ownership boundaries. The location map on page two of the staff report illustrates the perimeter of the outer boundary of the subject parcel. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. The proposed change is not necessary, per se; it is being requested in compliance with the LDC provisions to seek such changes. The proposed zoning change is appropriate because its relationship to the FLUE (Future Land Use Element of the GMP) is positive. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The County's land use policies that are reflected by the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP support the approval of the uses proposed at this location. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed rezone is consistent with the County's land use policies that are reflected by the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. If the 110 dwelling units are developed on site, the LDC required buffers and development standards should ensure that any future residential development is compatible with the neighborhood. Therefore, staff is of the opinion that the proposed change will not adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. RZ- 2008 -AR -13951 Olde Florida Golf Club Page 10 of 14 Revised 3/17/09 The proposed change will not create or excessively increase traffic congestion over the amount currently generated under the CG zoning. However, the surrounding property owners may perceive the rezone to the Agriculture Zoning District to allow additional dwelling units to be constructed as adversely impact traffic flow on the local streets. Since the transportation analysis does not indicate that the traffic generated by this project would be considered excessive, staff does not believe the additional traffic would be considered incompatible. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The development that the rezoning could allow should not create drainage or surface water problems because the LDC specifically addresses prerequisite development standards as part of the local development order process 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 The proposed change will not seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas since projects in Collier County are subject to the development standards that are unique to the zoning district in which it is located. These development standards and others apply generally and equally to all zoning districts (i.e. open space requirement, corridor management provisions, etc.) were designed to ensure that light penetration and circulation of air does not adversely affect adjacent areas. 10. Whether the proposed change would adversely affect property values in the adjacent area. Since the proposed change is deemed to be consistent with the GMP and LDC, staff is of the opinion that property values should not be adversely affected. 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; zoning by itself may or 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. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. Properties around this property are already partially developed as previously noted. The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in the LDC is that sound application, when combined with the site development plan approval process and/or subdivision process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in deterrence to improvement or development of adjacent property. Therefore, the proposed rezone should not be a deterrent to the improvement of adjacent properties. RZ- 2008 -AR -13951 Olde Florida Golf Club Page 11 of 14 Revised 3117/09 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. The proposed development complies with the GMP, a public policy statement supporting Zoning actions when they are consistent with said Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed change does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. There is no reason the property could not be used in accordance with existing zoning. Any petition for a change in land use is reviewed for in compliance with the GMP and the LDC with the Board of County Commissioners ultimately ruling what uses and density or intensity is approved or, on the contrary, if the petition is denied. This petitioner is proceeding through the proper channels to gamer that Board ruling. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. The proposed development complies with the GMP requirements for the uses proposed and density would not be allowed to exceed the GMP allowances. The GMP is a policy statement which has evaluated the scale, density and intensity of land uses deemed to be acceptable throughout Collier County. Staff is of the opinion that the zoning district will ensure that the project is not out of scale with the needs of the community. 15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. There may be other sites in the County that could accommodate the uses proposed; however, this is not the determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness of a zoning decision. The petition was reviewed on its own merit for compliance with the GMP and the LDC; 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. Any development anticipated by the proposed zoning district would require considerable site alteration and this project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the site development plan approval process and again later as part of the building permit process. RZ- 2008 -AR -13951 Olde Florida Golf Club Page 12 of 14 Revised 3/17/09 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 GMP and as defined and implemented through the Collier County adequate public facilities ordinance. The project will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in LDC Section 6.02.00 regarding Adequate Public Facilities for and the project will need to be consistent with all applicable goals and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities. This petition has been reviewed by county staff that is responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the rezoning process and those staff persons have concluded that no Level of Service will be adversely impacted. 18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety and welfare. To be determined by the BCC during its advertised public hearing. Based upon the above analysis, staff is of the opinion that the proposed change to the Agricultural Zoning District is not anticipated to have an adverse effect upon the surrounding area. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The meeting was duly noticed by the applicant and held on February 19, 2009 at 5:30 p.m. at the Golden Gate Estates Library. Five people from the public attended, as well as the applicant's team (Margaret Perry, Jeff Perry and Tom Trettis of WilsonMiller, Inc. and Bill Barton and Tom Wildenhaus from Olde Florida Golf Club) and county staff. Ms. Perry presented an overview of the requested Rezone their client is seeking. Ms. Perry explained that by rezoning the property from its current Zoning of Golf Course to Agriculture this would allow the property owner more uses, such as single family homes. There was no opposition to the rezone, but the following comments were made by those in attendance. One resident wanted to know where the access to the property would be. The petitioner responded that it would be in the same place as it is today; no change is proposed. The same resident wanted clarification that no commercial uses could be built with this rezone, and the petitioner assured him that commercial use is not an approved use under agriculture or in the Rural Fringe Neutral Area and that in order to allow commercial uses, a Growth Management Plan Amendment would be required. Several residents asked if there were any plans to remove the golf course. The property owner stated that he intends to keep the current golf course intact. A discussion also occurred regarding the alignment of the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward a recommendation of approval of Petition RZ- 2008 -AR -13951 to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC). RZ- 2008 -AR -13951 Olde Florida Golf Club Page 13 of 14 Revised 3/17/09 PREPARED BY: cea4 & 313 -09 KA SELEM, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER DATE DEPA TMENT OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW r1 w/UwA1-w1 I HE DI ASHTON -CICKO CHIEF ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY -2> DATE RAYMO D V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER ATE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW _ wn , I stL� 3 USAN MURRAY ISTENES, AICP, DIRECTOR DAT DEPARTMENT OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVED BY: 3 K. SCHMITTV ADMINISTRATOR A NITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION Tentatively scheduled for the June 9, 2009 Board of County Commissioners Meeting COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN RZ- 2008 -AR -13951 Olde Florida Golf Club Revised 3/12/09 DATE Page 14 of 14 ORDINANCE NO. 09- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004 -41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A GOLF COURSE (GC) ZONING DISTRICT TO AN AGRICULTURE (A) ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS OLDE FLORIDA GOLF CLUB, LOCATED AT 9405 VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION, IN SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 554 + /- ACRES; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF ORDINANCE 91 -16; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Margaret C. Perry, AICP, of WilsonMiller, Inc., and John Passidomo, Esq., representing Olde Florida Golf Club, Inc., petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: The zoning classification of the real property more particularly described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, located in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from a Golf Course (GC) Zoning District to an Agriculture (A) Zoning District for a 554 + /- acre project known as Olde Florida Golf Club. The appropriate zoning atlas map or maps, as described in Ordinance Number 2004 -41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, is /are hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO: Ordinance 91 -16 is hereby repealed in its entirety. Olde FL Golf 2008 -AR -13951 rev. 3/16/09 1 SECTION THREE: This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super- majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this day of 2009. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk LE , Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: p� h a Heidi Ashton -Cicko Assistant County Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA M Attachments: Exhibit A — legal description 09- CPS- OM2/20 Olde FL Golf 2008 -AR -13951 rev. 3/16/09 2 DONNA FIALA, Chairman ORB j '48 P9 140 OOROTHY H. NILHENi CLERK PE - 'C'JNT'i, FL EXHIBIT "A" All of Section 3I, Township 49 South, Range 27 East, less the East half of the Northeast quarter thereof, Collier County, Florida, And Less: Alf the pan of Secelon 31, Township 41 South, Range 27 Eal, Collier County, Florida, being more pati"laly desa0wd a foitotuo; aEOINNINO a the aethWal Corner of Seddon 51, Townthlp 48 South, Ituge 27 Ear; thence OWNS the wool IhW of uW Section 51, North 01 •t19'74• Wat 171.66 feet; theme #MIPS SeW WWI line North t 8'50'16• Eul 127.49 fen; thence NN* 68.11'27' FJn 212.21 Is"; thence South 15.57'40' Eat 1074.79 red; Nude North 12.58.29' am 90.32 root thence North 74'3444* Woo 419.14 few: theme Noca 89.59'36' Woe $28.05 feet; theme& North 4772'40' Was 224.001 ,r theme North 2977.477.34• Woo 121. ; �liR co thence monk 068' W a 2 thence North 82'09'12' Ere theme North 0470'44' W few: thence Nash 0117.31' these Nosh 22.40'09' 5 theme North 32'2475• se 1.81 red. theta North 24.20'12 E+N 0 v/ theme Nab 6s'OS147 14d 8. fw theme Sot& 60624,49• 6 f-• tMre Soto 71. thence Sooth 66.4514• .17 tea; theme $et& 41'2173' feet: theta Sotth 60'J6'If' Es . 4 fed; GO ethhem* s u 663.47*JS* gag gaf IN. �l'S theme South 61.42.9• Ear 160.72 2 FIE CIRC thence S" 11'0970' Ent 246.90 rest: thence South 17.08'46' Eel 111.69 ftet; thence Sot& 0543670• Ent 174.19 fen; then" Sor& 36.22'19• Feet 65.19 red; thenes Sou& 01979029' Wed 191,59 fen; them" Seth 20143.161 Won 57.51 fed; these Norio 0.2113' Eett 157.49 feet; thence South 00036'07' em eitom fed: theme Nesth 117040.00' Rat 1319.77 fee to a point on the cut 114 corner of toW SMlo4 31; theme dOOg M an IW of rW Section 31, Sough 0079'23' Ful 760.52 fed to W anuthesd MW of Need Saetlom 31; Nate aieg the south no, of toed section 11, South 87.53'34' Wat 5136.0 feet to the Point of lgiedlp N the pared bade dacrlbed: coNdnin6 214.14 s m mere or legs: WWI" to tasernenle ettd ra01et1on of record; burings ore hued a the meth fine of Wd Section 31, being South t7•SS'34' Wat. r the 5°0 N ey a W r 4.Ia n► w Em 1861 000812 _ WILSON, MILLER, BARTON d. PEW AM.K r9041 _ .4.+"'Rn+.�.N"4ant'�""!R`w..�. �.�N, x.�iw�ian�ni°»".n`�. "A�•aw ownNOx er pY NWYx Otlrtlxx nw I bYxt L vmaaxtllex Sr, iAwfnb u irO, Aur n tul G0M rwr.'lorlrx Ap W Oxtl tl SxnM 11, ThNrNy at SexO, 4stx n SnG ONw taxtlY..NAaf• Nbt Ixelx yNWiWJ)trwilfLYOMq lFAINrUNO M W x�A mnw d tmbn SI•'M!WY at._.. MrP ]S Fan: Orr YLN MwIIW NMY SmW ]I, NW 121.0t'N' wm IfIEO rm: O LlltWI NaIOtt•WIS'TilISSAS tm: uN.r NW* NNUa•n»'ran gun me n.xr a.n n•n•a' Fil Ior4lP rm; !Y.a Nms 74-34'M' Ia•0t74-34'M' 'M• Wm ' W SISO ON: aNr. xwa SM) um M' Ylxn[x NxM M•H' Wm 5140] fm; ' ONw NNOO.1l'LO' wal P1001m: Um SrO t6.10'W FAtl UxNA SW 6f•Il]f' FAY MMON. Mg S k BAnM t Nat "tlY W m MauY W U. NelmbxYl rm. W.O. ImS W. .41011 (NA:YM DO ®1T "A" Oa AxtaN11• M mrrewutl � AlrFr. M1 OIIIWCY M1AiMA ?1T f NIIAxtlY i� IdNw1 Y ylalm I p1AWtlA w 1N• roa u OII�r1r1 tr .r N W fIII fgxXfl�Nfl MILNT E. tIWR. [t(- lb! p IA . 1 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: y �L 12 AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: � PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY PLACE COMPLETED FORM ON THE TABLE LEFT OF THE DIAS IN THE BOARD ROOM PROR TO THE SUBJECT BEING HEARD. NAME: & ^6A14&— ADDRESS: �/ D REPRESENTING: PETITIONER: y OTHER: 0&? 41CAI COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 07 -24 REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE. ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT, 4T" FLOOR, W. HARMON TURNER BUILDING, 3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FL. YOU ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES FOR YOUR COMMENTS AND ARE TO ADDRESS ONLY THE CHAIR. AGENDA ITEM TITLE: AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: UG l� 24�)n� PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY PLACE COMPLETED FORM ON THE TABLE LEFT OF THE DIAS IN THE BOARD ROOM PROR TO THE SUBJECT BEING HEARD. '- r r NAME: i vl mC�'12 ADDRESS: 7 rr�-� i( (Gt C REPRESENTING: PETITIONER: OTHER: COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 07 -24 REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE. ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT, 4T" FLOOR, W. HARMON TURNER BUILDING, 3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FL YOU ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES FOR YOUR COMMENTS AND ARE TO ADDRESS ONLY THE CHAIR. AGENDA ITEM 9 -D Coder C014ftty STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION HEARING DATE: APRIL 2, 2009 SUBJECT: PUDA- 2008 -AR- 13792, NAPLES BOTANICAL GARDENS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) A1i - Naples Botanical Gardens, Inc. 4820 Bayshore Drive, Suite D Naples, FL 34112 Agents: Margaret Perry, AICP Wilson Miller, Inc 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200 Naples, FL 34105 REQUESTED ACTION: Florida Gulf Coast University, Inc. 10501 FGCU Boulevard, South Fort Myers, FL 33965 R. Bruce Anderson, Esquire Roetzel & Andress, LPA 850 Park Shore Drive Naples, FL 34103 To have the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an application for an amendment to Ordinance Number 03 -29, The Naples Botanical Garden Planned Unit Development (PUD). The proposed amendment is to revise Section 4.14, Design Guidelines; Section 6.2, Development Parameters; Section 6.4, Permitted Uses and Structures, to allow interim or temporary structures; Section 6.5 Development Standards, so the interim or temporary structures have a greater setback distance than the principal structures; Section 7.2, Transportation Commitments, of the PUD Document; and add Section 7.6 to provide Deviations from the Land Development Code (LDC). March 20, 2009 1 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The 171.2± acre subject property is located at 4820 Bayshore Drive at the southwest corner of the intersection of Bayshore Drive and Thomasson Drive, in Section 23, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida (see location map on the following page). PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The petitioner is requesting to amend five (5) sections of the Naples Botanical Gardens PUD and to add a section for deviations from the LDC. The amendment to Section 4.14, Design Guidelines, provides an alternative compliance process for architectural and design standards as outlined in Section 5.05.08 of the LDC, except for the proposed interim or temporary structures and maintenance structures, which will not require architectural and design standard review. To compensate for not following the architectural requirement, the interim or temporary structures will have a greater setback from the right -of -way (ROW) than the principal structures set forth in Section 6.5.13 of the PUD document. The amendment to Section 6.2, Development Parameters, will require the proposed interim or temporary structures to be approved through the site development plan process to ensure the developer will comply with the Collier County Building Code and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) regulations. The amendment to Section 6.4, Permitted Uses and Structures, is to allow interim or temporary structures and to set time limits on the structures for an initial period of three (3) years. If needed, the applicant can requests for an extension of the interim or temporary structures beyond the three (3) years administratively utilizing the insubstantial change to the approved SDP. Certificates of occupancy for a permanent structure will not be issued until the interim or temporary structure housing a particular use is removed from the site. The amendment to Section 6.5, Development Standards, is to guarantee the interim or temporary structures will have a greater setback distance than the principal structures. As well, the developer is requesting revisions to Section 7.2, Transportation Commitments, of the PUD Document, which are explained in detail under the Transportation Review provided on page four (4) of this report. In addition to the amendments listed above, the developer requests to add Section 7.6, which will permit Deviations from Section's 5.03.02, and Section 5.05.08 of the LDC, which are explained in detail under the Zoning Review deviations on page six (6) of this report. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: Thomasson Drive, Single- Family and Multi- Family homes, and undeveloped property; zoned Residential Multi - Family (RMF -6), and Commercial Intermediate (C -3), and the Bayshore Mixed Use Overlay District. East: Bayshore Drive, Single - Family homes, and commercial property; zoned Residential Multi- Family (RMF -6), Village Residential (VR), Residential Single - Family (RSF -3), and Heavy Commercial (C -5), Commercial Intermediate (C -3), Commercial Convenience (C -2) , and the Bayshore Mixed Use Overlay District. March 20, 2009 2 MIN 1 11 �M "m r 1111111- e R 5 M nnu ■ C YE � M1111�1111� —s ININIIIINN R _ • E1'�u' �_ - it rr � 0 " Jz a< Jg�e / 7 e R 5 *Ng�1N € O 6 C YE � l— —s / 7 =.- ���� a-Mmi _ gOICO OF GULF C� C V z O N 75 Z O Q U O J x e R 5 € O 6 C YE � R =.- ���� a-Mmi _ gOICO OF GULF C� C V z O N 75 Z O Q U O J x South: Single - Family homes, and Conservation property; zoned Residential Single - Family (RSF -3), and Residential Multi- Family (RMF -6), and the Bayshore Mixed Use Overlay District. West: Hamilton Avenue, Single - Family and Multi - Family homes, Golf Course and Conservation property; zoned Windstar PUD, Southpointe Yacht Club PUD, Sabal Bay MPUD. Aerial View GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property is located within the Urban Designated Area (Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict and Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay), and is within the Coastal High Hazard Area as identified on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). This district is intended to accommodate a variety of residential and non- residential uses including parks, open space, recreational uses and community facilities. Within the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict, and in order to facilitate hurricane evacuation and to protect the adjacent environmentally sensitive Conservation designated area, March 20, 2009 3 residential development is permitted at a maximum density of four (4) units per acre, except as allowed by certain FLUE Policies and in the Bayshore Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. However, properties in the Naples Botanical Garden PUD are limited to non - residential uses, except for caretaker, dormitory, and other housing related to the Botanical Garden or other institutional and/or recreational open space uses. The Naples Botanical Garden PUD is approved for recreational and open space uses, and accessory commercial uses, which are consistent with those allowed in the Urban Coastal Fringe. Based upon the above analysis, Comprehensive Planning staff finds the proposed PUD amendment consistent with the FLUE. Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff have reviewed the petition and has determined that the proposed amendments do not present an additional impact on the adjacent roadway network. As such, the roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate this project within the five (5) year planning period, and staff recommends that this project be found consistent with Policies 5.1 and 5.2 of the Transportation Element of the GMP. ANALYSIS: Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in Land Development Code (LDC) Subsections 10.02.13.B.5, Planning Commission Recommendation, and 10.03.05.I, Planning Commission Hearing and Report to the Board of' County Commissioners, which establish factual bases to support a 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 their action on the rezoning request. These evaluations are completed as part of this staff report. Environmental Review: Environmental Services staff have reviewed this application and have found that the amendment did not affect the previously approved preserve locations of the PUD. For that reason, the PUD remains compliant with the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME), GMP and LDC. Transportation Review: Transportation Planning staff have reviewed the application for Naples Botanical Gardens PUD related to roadway impacts and found that no additional traffic impacts are presented by the proposed amendments to the PUD commitments. Furthermore, Transportation Planning staff have reviewed the petition and the proposed Transportation Commitments in Section 7.2 of the PUD document. The proposed changes to the PUD commitments have been reviewed for consistency with conceptual intersection improvements that have been evaluated by the Bayshore Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) "Bayshore Gateway Triangle Study" (Attachment A). This study recommends a roundabout design at the intersection of Bayshore Drive and Thomasson Drive with an alternative of installation of signalization within the limits of the existing conditions. Staff has agreed that the turn lane requirements stated in the Naples Botanical March 20, 2009 4 Garden's PUD are not currently required and would constitute greater than the Naples Botanical Garden's proportionate share towards intersection improvements. Therefore, Transportation staff has no objection to the amendment of these requirements, to be replaced with a new requirement to provide proportionate share of the future improvements that are to be constructed under the authority of the Bayshore CRA when the improvements are constructed. Transportation Planning staff is also recommending approval of the sidewalk provisions set forth in Section 7.2 of the PUD document. These provisions will provide a sidewalk along the length of the Naples Botanical Gardens property on Thomasson Drive and along Bayshore Drive from Thomasson Drive to the out parcel located on the west side of Bayshore Drive. The developer shall provide a payment in lieu for the un -built 2,280 linear feet of sidewalks along Hamilton Avenue, and for the un -built 845 linear feet of sidewalk along the west side of Bayshore Drive from the out parcel opposite Republic Drive to the preserve area. This payment in lieu will be used for sidewalk improvements along Bayshore Drive as part of the Bayshore Drive South improvement project. Utility Review. According to the Section 7.3 of the approved PUD document, water distribution facilities to serve the project are to be designed, constructed, conveyed, owned and maintained in accordance with the requirements of the City of Naples. Sewage collection facilities shall be designed, constructed and maintained in accordance with Collier County Ordinance No. 2004 -31, as amended. Zoning Review: As previously stated, the proposed uses are consistent with those allowed in the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict set forth in the GMP. To achieve compatibility with adjacent uses, the site has been designed to minimize its impact on the surrounding residential neighborhood by providing a masonry wall or prefabricated concrete wall for the out parcel located east and west of Bayshore Drive, and along the out parcel located on Thomasson Drive. Furthermore, the subject site will follow the Landscape requirements of Subsection 4.06.02.C.4 of the LDC for buffering from the residential and commercial land uses. Additionally, the PUD provides for 56f acres of preserve area, which will provide added buffering to the surrounding land uses along the western, southern and eastern portion of Naples Botanical Gardens. The PUD would provide appropriate setbacks for the interim or temporary structures from the abutting ROWS. To ensure compatibility with the residential and commercial uses that surround it, the interim or temporary structure will be required to be set back a minimum of 300 feet from the property boundary along Bayshore Drive, 500 feet from Hamilton Avenue and the southern property boundary, and 150 feet from Thomasson Drive. The maintenance structures along Bayshore Drive will not be required to meet Section 5.05.08 of the LDC. The distance from the maintenance building to the closest residential property line is 350 feet, and there is a six -foot (6') high wall and landscape buffer at the Naples Botanical Gardens property line, both of which serve to mitigate the impacts of the visibility of the structure. March 20, 2009 5 Staff acknowledges and supports the requested amendment for the maintenance structures not meeting the architectural requirements of the LDC, but that request was not discussed at the Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM). Staff has requested the applicant to provide foundation plantings around the interim or temporary structures as well as the maintenance structures to mitigate the appearance of the structures for not adhering to the Architectural and Site Design Standards of the LDC, which have been incorporated into the PUD ordinance. With the remaining development standards contained in the approved PUD, and the stipulation for approval recommended by staff, the project would remain compatible with the residential and commercial land uses which have coexisted since 2003. Deviations: Section 7.6 of the proposed PUD amendment exhibit, the petitioners seeks approval of three (3) deviations from the LDC, and has provided justification to support these deviations. Staff has analyzed these requests and offers the following analyses and recommendations: Deviation 1 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.A.l.a.i, Fences and Walls Requirements; Chain link and wood fences are prohibited forward of the primary facade and must be a minimum of 100 feet from a public right -of -way. The deviation will allow a chain link fence to be permitted and set back at a minimum of ten (10) feet from a public right -of -way, except when located adjacent to a preserve where the setback shall be a minimum of five (5) feet. Also, a chain link fence may be permitted at the preserve boundary on the southern Naples Botanical Gardens property line. Proposal The applicants are of the opinion that since there is an existing recorded conservation easements within ten (10) feet of the property line on Thomasson Drive and Hamilton Avenue, a minimum setback of five (5) feet is needed to allow the fence to be meandered to avoid as much existing vegetation as possible and allow the fence to blend more seamlessly with the surrounding preserve vegetation. If needed the developer would like the option to construct a fence along the southern boundary at the property line. Staff's Determination: Since the site has an existing recorded conservation easements within ten (10) feet of the property line on Thomasson Drive and Hamilton Avenue, staff has recommended the alternative noted above so as not to disturb the existing vegetation. All fences and walls shall be maintained in a manner that will not detract from the neighborhood or community. To achieve the intent of the fences and walls requirement, staff is requesting the chain link fence be the color of black to mitigate the impact of the height and look of a chain link fence closer to the ROW. Also, staff is requesting the applicant to limit the chain link fence to Thomasson Drive, Hamilton Avenue, and the preserve area of Bayshore Drive. It should be noted that the applicant has already installed an aluminum picket fence along Bayshore Drive adjacent to the Naples Botanical Gardens. March 20, 2009 6 Deviation 2 seeks relief from Section 5.03.02.A.l.a.ii. (a), Fences forward of the primary facade, excluding chain link and wood are permitted under the following conditions: (a) Fences must not exceed four feet in height. The deviation will allow a chain link fence to be permitted at a height of five (5) feet. Proposal: A four foot (4') high fence will not provide adequate security for this facility. The Naples Botanical Garden functions as an outdoor museum and as such requires that admissions be controlled and the facilities secured when the Garden is not open. The applicant proposes to install a five -foot (5') high, chain link fence along its perimeter in order to adequately secure the facility. The additional height will assist in providing better security for this facility and adjoining residential property. Staff's Determination: When this deviation was presented during the NIM, the neighbors agreed that this is a reasonable alternative. Staff has recommended approval because of the unique security issues associated with an outdoor museum. The additional foot will not obstruct views nor will it detract from the neighborhood or community. Deviation 3 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.05.08, Architectural and Site Design Standards; The purpose of these standards is to supplement existing development criteria in order to complement, enhance and enrich the urban fabric of Collier County with an abundant variety of architecture. The deviation will allow maintenance, interim or temporary structures to be exempt from the required architectural and design standard review. Proposal: Due to the nature of the use and/or duration of the use it is not appropriate to require maintenance, interim or temporary structures be reviewed for architectural standards. Permanent structures are still required to comply with the Purpose and Intent Section 5.05.08, Architectural and Site Design Standards, of the LDC. Staff's Determination: The proposed deviation would fulfill the LDC requirement relative to the Florida Building Code and ADA compliance, while at the same time comply with the site development plan process. Furthermore, these structures will be setback farther from the ROW than the principal structures, and for those reasons staff supports this deviation. To achieve the intent of the Architectural and Site Design Standards, the applicant intends to comply with Section 4.06.05, Foundation Plantings of the LDC. Compliance with Sub - section 10.02.13.B.5. of the LDC: Planning commission recommendation. The planning commission shall make written findings as required in section 10.02.08 of the LDC, and shall recommend to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) either approval of the PUD rezoning as proposed; approval with conditions or modifications; or denial. In support of its recommendation, the planning commission shall March 20, 2009 7 make findings as to the PUD master plan's compliance with the following criteria in addition to the findings in section 10.02.08. a. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. The proposed amendment will not adversely impact the approved mitigation measures that are contained in the Naples Botanical Gardens PUD Ordinance, and will assure compliance with all the Level of Service (LOS) as recommend by the GMP. The subject petition has been reviewed by the appropriate staffs that are responsible for oversight of the LOS spelled out in the GMP. Additionally, a Transportation Impact Statement (TIS) was not required as part of the PUD amendment application. A TIS Waiver for the PUD Amendment was granted at the Pre - Application Conference on July 24, 2008. The applicant was not asked to resubmit the previously submitted SDP TIS for October 2007. The only update that was required for this petition was a supplemental narrative supplied on July 2008 for the FGCU - Botanical Garden parcel SDP. b. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the county attorney. Documents submitted with the application provide evidence of unified control. c. Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives, policies and the Future Land Use Element of the growth management plan. On page three (3) of this staff report, the Comprehensive Planning Department provided a detailed analysis of how this project meets the goals, objectives, policies and FLUE of the GMP. d. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. The Naples Botanical Gardens PUD has been designed to optimize internal and external land use because of the development standards, landscape, buffering requirements contained in the PUD Ordinance. Furthermore, the PUD's approved land uses are consistent with the land uses permitted in Section 2.03.07.I, of the LDC, Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. e. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. March 20, 2009 8 The amount of usable open space for the Naples Botanical Garden PUD is 66.8± acres. This project exceeds the minimum requirement of the LDC. f. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. Development has already commenced, and has been through concurrency requirements which were triggered during the site development process. Additionally, any future development will have to adhere to the transportation commitments contained in the PUD Ordinance as well as be in compliance with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when the development approvals are sought. g. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. Comparative to this petition and the development of the subject site is timely because supporting infrastructure such as capacity of roads, wastewater, and utilities which are currently available. When the developer comes in to expand the project, it will be reviewed again for supporting infrastructure, and must be in compliance with all LOS to accommodate the expansion. h. 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 development standards and deviations proposed are similar to the design standards for the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay Bayshore Mixed -Use District (BMUD) Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict development standards set forth in Section 4.02.16, of the LDC. Compliance with Sub- section 10 03 051 of the LDC: Nature of requirements of planning commission report. When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations of the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners required in 10.02.12 D. shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered the proposed change in relation to the following, when applicable: 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and future land use map and the elements of the growth management plan. The Comprehensive Planning Department has provided a detailed analysis on page three (3) of this report, on how this petition is consistent with all applicable elements of the GMP. The property is located within the Urban Designated Area (Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict and Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay), and is within the Coastal High Hazard Area, as identified on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). This March 20, 2009 9 district is intended to accommodate a variety of land uses including recreational uses, and community facilities. 2. The existing land use pattern. The subject 171.2± acres site is approved for recreational and open space land uses with commercial accessory land use. The Naples Botanical Gardens provide an education center, exhibition gallery, nursery and maintenance structures. The existing land to the north is Single - Family and Multi - Family homes and undeveloped property. The existing land to the east is Single - Family homes and Dell's grocery store. The existing land to the south is Single - Family homes and conservation/preserve land. The existing land to the west is Single - Family and Multi - Family homes, conservation/preserve land and a golf course. The Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay permits commercial, residential, recreational and open space development. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The approved Naples Botanical Gardens PUD (Ordinance No. 03 -29) was deemed to be of sufficient size (171.2± acres) and did not result in an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. Furthermore, the amendment request does not change the projects consistency with the FLUE. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. The Naples Botanical Gardens PUD boundaries have not changed since June 24, 2003 when the original approval of the subject PUD was deemed to be logically drawn when the Ordinance No. 03 -29 was approved. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. The applicant is seeking to modify the PUD to alter that provision that require the applicant to pay proportionate share for any future improvements when deemed necessary by the County. The applicant feels the tum -lane commitments in the current PUD allows the County the right to come back to the Naples Botanical Gardens at any time in the future to ask for intersection improvements when the County deems it necessary. This would require the applicant to pay for improvements that may be triggered by another development. Furthermore, the applicant is modifying the Naples Botanical Garden PUD language to reflect partial payment -in -lieu for the perimeter sidewalks. The payment -in -lieu will be earmarked for improvements to the Bayshore Drive South improvement project. Additionally, because of the current economy, the Naples Botanical Gardens are unable to procure funding to complete the construction of the principal structures. March 20, 2009 10 For that reason, the applicant is requesting to include interim or temporary structures as a permitted use until the applicant is able to construct the permanent structures, at which time, the interim or temporary structure will be removed prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The proposed amendment should not adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood because the setbacks for the interim or temporary structures are greater than the principal and accessory structures. Also, the current development standards and landscape buffering requirements contained the PUD are designed to ensure the least amount of adverse impact on the adjacent developments. 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 Naples Botanical Gardens PUD is planned to incorporate natural systems for water management purposes in accordance with their natural functions and capabilities as required by the Drainage Sub - Element of the Public Facilities Element of the GMP. In addition, all final development orders for this project are subject to the Concurrency Management System of the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. Section 7.4 of the PUD document requires the developer to adhere to all County Ordinances related to paving, grading, site drainage and utility plans. The developer is also required to provide a copy of the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) permits prior to any construction drawing approvals. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. The development standards for Naples Botanical Gardens PUD are not being amended other than to allow maintenance, interim or temporary structures, which have a greater set -back from the ROW than the principal and accessory structures. The permitted maximum height is three (3) habitable stories; however, the Tropical Rainforest Conservatory was approved to be eighty -five (85) feet to the eave and one - hundred twenty feet (120) to the peak. Accessory structures are permitted at a maximum height of twenty -five (25) feet. It should also be noted that the subject site is located near preserve tracts of the Sabal Bay PUD to the south and west. March 20, 2009 11 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area. The Naples Botanical Gardens PUD was approved June 24, 2003 and was found during the original approval that the rezone should not adversely affect property values. However, this is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results which may be internal or external to the subject property. Since property valuation is affected by several factors including zoning, zoning by itself may or may not affect the values of the adjacent area. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. The current landscape and buffer requirements in conjunction with the preserve area and setbacks, and the proposed development standards combined with the site development plan approval process, provides assurance the previously approved PUD will not result in a deterrence to the adjacent properties. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. On June 24, 2003 the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approved the Naples Botanical Gardens PUD (Ordinance No. 03 -29), at that time, the BCC determined that this PUD will not constitute a special privilege. On page three (3) of this report, the PUD amendment request did not alter the land use and was found consistent with the FLUE. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. The property is being used in accordance with the existing zoning which is Naples Botanical Gardens PUD. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. Naples Botanical Gardens PUD was designed to meet the intent of the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay District. The PUD is pedestrian- oriented, with a mix of land uses including gift shop, offices and civic amenities that complement each other. Additionally, the proposed interim or temporary structures will be set -back from the ROW at a greater distance than the principal structures and will not be out of scale with the existing neighborhood. 15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. This criterion does not apply since the Naples Botanical Gardens PUD has existed since June 24, 2003 (Ordinance No. 03 -29). March 20, 2009 12 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. The extent of the site alteration will be required to go through extensive evaluation by federal, state, and local development regulations during any site development plan approval process. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County growth management plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch. 106, art. II], as amended. The project will have to meet all applicable criteria describe in the PUD Ordinance, as well as all the regulations set forth in the LDC and the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. 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. This will be determined by the BCC during the advertised public hearing. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC): Since the subject site has already been developed, the applicants were not required to submit an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for this petition. As a result, they were not required to have a hearing before the EAC. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The meeting was duly noticed by the applicant and held on January 6, 2009 at 5:30 p.m. at the Naples Botanical Gardens. Twenty (20) people from the public attended, as well as the applicant's team (Margaret Perry, Jared Brown and Jeff Perry of Wilson Miller, Inc., and Brian Holley, Executive Director of the Botanical Gardens) and county staff. Margaret Perry presented an overview of the requested PUD amendments and deviations their client is seeking. There was no opposition from those in attendance on the requested amendments or deviations; however below are suggestions and comments: 1. One resident suggested adding more stops for the Collier County Area Transit (CAT) public transportation service along Bayshore Drive in front of the Naples Botanical Gardens to help those who want to visit the facility, and to lead to less traffic in the area. 2. Most in attendance seemed very pleased with the installation of sidewalks on Thomasson Drive and Bayshore Drive. 3. The residents did not have concerns with the revised tum lane requirements added to the PUD. March 20, 2009 13 4. The neighbors were supportive of the deviations from the LDC requirement for fences and walls by allowing a fence height of five (5') feet, instead of the required four -foot (4') requirement. 5. The neighbors also supported the interim or temporary facilities until the permanent structures are built. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report for PUDA- 2008 -AR -13792 revised on March 20, 2009. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition PUDA- 2008 -AR -13792 to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) with a recommendation of approval subject to the deviations requested by the applicant contained in Section 7.6 of the PUD amendment and the following recommendation: 1. Fences and Walls are subject to all LDC requirements except the applicant has the option to use a black chain link fence not to exceed five feet (5') in height. If the applicant opts to use chain link, it shall be black and only be used along Thomasson Drive and Hamilton Avenue and the portion of Bayshore Drive where the preserves are located. ATTACHMENT: A. Bayshore Gateway Triangle Study March 20, 2009 14 PREPARED BY: MELISSA ZONE, PIQ30PAL PLANNER DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND REVIEWED BY: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW RAYM D ELLOWS, ON1NG MANAGER DATE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SAN M. ISTENES, AICP, DIRECTOR ATE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVED BY: 3 0 J PH K. SCAM- ITT ADMINISTRATOR DATE MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL RVICES DIVISION Tentatively scheduled for the May 26, 2009 Board of County Commissioners Meeting COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN DATE March 20, 20009 15 7.0 RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS The transportation improvements recommended for the PIA included, but not limited too, mobility improvements and traffic calming measures. These improvement measures are discussed in this section. 7.1 Mobility Improvement Measures In addition to the intersection improvements discussed in Section 6.5, improvements recommended to improve overall traffic mobility include the installation of a new roundabout, implementation of access management policy recommendations, and modifications to access at Shadowlawn Elementary School. These improvements, and their potential benefits and impacts, are discussed in detail below. 7.1.1 Roundabout Installation of a roundabout at the Bayshore Drive/Thomasson Drive intersection is recommended to enhance mobility and provide traffic calming. The roundabout would have two circulatory lanes and would serve all traffic movements. Based on the guidelines presented in the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) publication 'Roundabouts: An Informational Guide', the minimum inscribed circle diameter for a roundabout should be 150 feet (Figure 7 -1). Currently, neither Collier County nor the City of Naples requires specific design guidelines for the construction of a roundabout. Preliminary analysis indicates that such a roundabout would require right -of- way acquisition in one or more quadrants of this intersection. Installation of a roundabout is not expected to deteriorate the traffic operations at this intersection and Table 7 -1 shows the results of the LOS analysis. Table 7 -1 Roundabout Level of Service Analysis irce: Carter 8 Burgess, Inc. (2006) -72- Attachment "A" Peak Hour AM I PM Intersection Lane Group Maximum vlc High Maximum We Low Lane Group Maximum We High Maximum We Low j sy hore Drive & Thomasson Drive Whound LTR 0.12 0.15 LTR 0.13 0.17 'estbound LTR 0.30 0.36 LTR 0.42 0.51 xthbound LTR 0.13 0.13 LTR 0.16 0.19 )uthbound LTR 0A2 0.50 LTR 0.67 0.81 Intersection OA2 0.50 Intersection 0.67 0.81 A c tersection Level of service ores: L = Left Turn, T = Through, R = Right Turn. Deft = Defacto Leff Turn: LOS = Level of Service irce: Carter 8 Burgess, Inc. (2006) -72- Attachment "A" 7.1.2 Access Management Through the community involvement efforts, several specific locations were identified as present safety or mobility issues in regardsto access. This study recommends development of guidelines for future developments to prevent such issues in the future. Gulfgate Plaza, identified area of concern, at the southwest corner of the Bayshore /US 41 intersection has one access point onto US 41 and one access point onto Bayshore Drive, The Bayshore Drive access point allows all movements in and out, while the US 41 access point does not allow left turns outbound. The left turn movement at the Bayshore Drive access point causes traffic conflicts as vehicles often make the movement in two steps, stopping in the median before proceeding into northbound traffic. The PIA recommends [making the necessary regulatory or process changes] to: • Encourage or allow the use of single points of access for multiple destinations, even if the properties are not under the same ownership, and • Encourage the use of side - street access points to minimize new access points on existing major facilities, especially along Bayshore Drive. 73- 7.1.3 School Access at Shadowlawn Elementary During school pick -up and drop -off times, vehicles currently park in undesignated areas in front of the school. This creates turbulence in the traffic flow on Bayshore Drive and increases the potential for vehicle /pedestrian conflicts. The PIA suggests moving the automobile drop- off /pick -up point to the northern side of the school (current bus pick -up point) and switching the bus pick -up /drop -off location to the horseshoe driveway adjacent to Shadowlawn Drive. While this measure was recommended by the PIA, additional coordination would be required between the school district and the County. 7.2 Traffic Calming Measures Previously mentioned in Sections 1.0 through 3.0, there is a perception that of the roads within study area are being used by vehicles to bypass congestion on nearby arterials. This cut - through traffic can produce increased pedestrian /vehicle conflicts for those living on local streets. In 1995, the Collier County MPO developed the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) and established the Traffic Calming Task Force to provide the resources for local neighborhoods to combat cut - through traffic issues. The program's intent is to make: "...strategic changes to streets in order to reduce vehicle speeds and to decrease the cars' dominance in the neighborhood. Traffic calming devices, such as those included in this program, are designed and located to keep through traffic on major roads. " — Collier County MPO NTMP (1995) Following is a description of several recommended traffic calming techniques, the goals of each technique, and the qualitative effect under the PIA. Each of the subsequent traffic calming techniques were developed through the public outreach effort. 7.2.1 Gateway Treatments and Neck -downs Gateway Treatments are street amenities that include signs, banners, landscaping or other structures that communicate a sense of place or identify a neighborhood. Neck -downs are the physical reduction of a roadway lane width through the use of curbing reduction or center median. Goal The combination of a center median gateway treatment and lane narrowing through a neck -down is intended to accomplish two goals: 1) to create a sense of place with signage and landscaping; 2) to slow speeds by constraining roadway lane width. The placement of elements at the entrance to streets, as highlighted in Table 5 -1, is intended to indicate to motorists using local streets as a cut - though that they have entered a residential neighborhood. This change is intended to reduce the number of through vehicles. The physical neck -down in lane width is intended to slow vehicle speeds on local streets and to further deter through traffic, providing incentive for these trips to stay on the major arterial. It should be noted that the gateway treatments recommended along Bayshore /Shadowlawn Drives do not include median gateway treatments or reduction in lane width. In these areas, the gateway treatment consists of aesthetic amenities located at the side of the roadway only. Theoretical Effect of Recommended Measure Under the PIA Studies have shown a reduction in speeds (of up to 7 mph) correlating with a reduction in lane width. Roadway narrowing also often results in high (80 % +) levels of public satisfaction with the traffic calming technique, while resulting in no change in through - vehicle volume. (McCourt, Survey of Neighborhood Traffic Management Performance and Results, 1997.) -74- It could be expected that the lane -width reduction due to the neckdown, combined with the visual gateway treatment, would result in reduction in vehicle speeds in the vicinity of the treatments. In comparison to other recommendations in PIA, this particular technique is likely to have the greatest impact of reducing cut - through traffic within the study area. Figures 7 -2 and 7 -3 graphically suggest the potential appearance of Linwood Avenue before and after the construction of gateway treatments and neck - downs. 75 7.2.2 Speed Enforcement An increase in speed enforcement activities was suggested by the public during the workshop. As a result, the PIA recommends increased speed enforcement activities in conjunction with other traffic calming measures in order to achieve the greatest effectiveness. Another recommendation with public support is the reduction of the posted speed limit along Bayshore Drive from 35 miles per hour (mph) to 30 mph. However, during the December 2006 public meeting, participants indicated that there may not be general support for this measure. Goal The goal of speed enforcement efforts and posted speed limit changes would be to reduce through - vehicle speeds and cut - through traffic volumes. Theoretical Effect of Recommended Measure under the PIA Enforcement activities generally achieve some short-term reduction of vehicle speeds. The reduction in the posted speed limit in coordination with speed enforcement would also generally achieve a short-term reduction of vehicle speeds. If combined with the installation of other permanent features, the effect could be longer - term. -76- 8.0 RECOMMENDED AESTHETIC IMPROVEMENTS Aesthetic amenities incorporate various elements along streets within the study area, primarily within the neighborhood streetscape. Streetscaping lies in the public right -of -way between building facades and the roadway. It includes the street, sidewalks, lighting, planting, furniture, public art, and other elements. As a result of the public outreach effort several aesthetic amenities were identified as recommended improvements under the PIA (described in detail below); all result in creating a sense of place and connectivity between the neighborhoods, north and south of US 41. 8.1 Landscaping and Sidewalk Furniture Suggested landscaping improvement recommendations consist of plantings within the streetscape. The maintenance of these improvements can be costly and therefore only native species are recommended under the PIA. Sidewalk furniture includes benches, bike racks, trash cans, and other similar elements. Below are descriptions and recommended locations of the landscaping and sidewalk furniture elements included in the PIA. Further study is recommended to design the appearance, structure, and placement of these landscaping or sidewalk furniture amenities. 8.1.1 Purpose and Goal The intention of this amenity can be defined as providing enhanced community character and a sense of place. Through the use of consistent design elements, the Bayshore /Shadowlawn corridor can be quickly identified as one community by visitors and residents alike. Street furniture elements invite and promote a lively street where residents and visitors feel comfortable. 8.1.2 Shadowlawn Drive Currently, Shadowlawn Drive does not have any landscaping improvements. The PIA recommends landscaping amenities to promote pride and a strong sense of place while providing a visual connection to the areas along Bayshore Drive. Roadway medians are not recommended; however, landscaping is suggested along Shadowlawn Drive to provide a buffer between the sidewalk and moving vehicles. These landscaping improvements should not impede the line of sight for drivers. Sidewalk furniture would be placed uniformly along the corridor with particular attention to areas near Shadowlawn Elementary School. Figures 8 -1 and 8 -2 graphically depict the potential appearance of Shadowlawn Drive before and after the construction of landscaping and sidewalk furniture treatments. 8.1.3 Bayshore Drive Bayshore Drive south of US 41 has recently implemented several landscaping elements and no further improvements are recommended. However, street furniture amenities are recommended, specifically at bus stop locations where benches and bike racks would benefit patrons of the local transit system. 8.1.4 Linwood Avenue, Andrew Drive, and Other Local Streets Based on community input, several local streets within the study area were not recommended for additional landscaping or street furniture improvements. -77- �x 7 o 4 fyr: Corridor Study Figure 8 -1 Figure 8 -2 Looking North N if Along 5hadowlawn Drive 8.2 Themed Lighting Themed lighting is the use of aesthetically pleasing lights which illuminate pedestrian sidewalks. These lights generally range in height from 15 to 20 feet and aesthetically signify the corridor's sense of neighborhood or community. They may include banners with the community's name that further enhance a sense of place for the neighborhood. Additional study would be required to determine the appearance of the themed lighting scheme and to coordinate it with other aesthetic amenities. 8.2.1 Purpose and Goal The intention of implementing themed lighting amenities within the study area can be defined as providing enhanced community character and a sense of place. Through the use of consistent lighting schemes and neighborhood banners, residents and visitors would quickly identify the Bayshore /Shadowlawn corridor as one community. 8.2.2 Bayshore /Shadowlawn Corridor Currently, there is themed lighting in place along Bayshore Drive south US 41. However, there are no themed lighting elements along Shadowlawn Drive. It is recommended that a consistent lighting scheme be implemented for both Bayshore Drive and Shadowlawn Drive. Consistency would enhance neighborhood connectivity and distinguish the study area as a whole community. Themed lighting is recommended for Shadowlawn and Bayshore Drives only, signifying the central corridor of the study area, whereas side - streets would not merit the implementation of themed lighting. Figures 8 -1 and 8 -2 graphically suggest the potential appearance of Shadowlawn Drive before and after the construction of themed lighting treatments. 8.3 Visual Screening During the May 2006 public outreach efforts an existing water tank located north of the Lois Avenue intersection (along the western edge of Shadowlawn Drive) was identified as a neighborhood "eye -sore' or an aesthetically unappealing structure. 8.3.1 Purpose and Goal The PIA recommends a strategy for reducing the visual impact of the water tank structure by planting mature trees or palms to buffer the appearance of the water tank from Shadowlawn Drive. However, due to the height of the structure, landscaping alone could not fully buffer the visual appearance of the water tank. It is also recommended that the structure be painted to camouflage or subdue the visual appearance. A metal link fence used to secure the grounds around the water tank is also visible from Shadowlawn Drive and the construction of an aesthetically pleasing fence would further reduce the visual impact of the water tank. Figures 8 -1 and 8 -2 graphically suggest the potential appearance of Shadowlawn Drive before and after visual screening treatments. 79- 8.4 Landscaping Line of Sight Issues During the public outreach process, several sections of the landscaped median along Bayshore Drive were identified as an obstruction to motorists' line of sight. The PIA recommends that the landscaping in question be either trimmed or removed to reduce line of sight obstructions. This recommendation does not include the complete removal of landscaping within the center median. F.0 9.0 RECOMMENDED MODAL AMENITY IMPROVEMENTS Modal amenities in the PIA are elements related to transit facilities, pedestrian facilities, and other multi -modal types of infrastructure. These amenities focus on facilitating and promoting alternate modes of travel by providing connectivity to transit while promoting a safe, pedestrian - friendly environment. 9.1 Extended Transit Service As identified in Sections 1.0 and 2.0 the Collier Area Transit (CAT) bus service operates the Orange Route 2 northbound only along Bayshore drive between Thomasson Drive and US 41, The PIA recommends that CAT consider adding additional transit service southbound along the same portion of Bayshore Drive. As new commercial and mixed -use development occurs along Bayshore, many study area residents are likely to make short trips up and down the corridor. However, these distances may be too far to walk, especially for individuals with mobility impairments. Extension of transit service to include both directions along Bayshore would provide transit options for these residents to circulate throughout the area without relying on an automobile. Additional transit service would also provide area residents with greater connectivity to the City of Naples and Collier County. In the Collier MPO's LRTP, the 2006 -2015 Transportation Development Plan Update (Section 8. 1.1) recommends expanding service hours and operations. As future development intensifies in the study area, the PIA also recommends additional study to determine if increased frequency of bus service along Bayshore Drive is warranted. During the course of this study, the public identified that CAT is currently considering this recommended measure and the PIA would coordinate with any and all recommendations brought forth by Collier County. 9.2 Bus Shelters An important consideration for all transit patrons is the condition of transit stop amenities. The PIA recommends the construction of bus shelters at each CAT bus stop along the Orange Route 2 on Bayshore Drive. These bus stop shelters would provide cover from the elements and provide comfort and convenience for patrons, promoting the use of transit. It is recommended that these shelters emulate the characteristics of the bus shelter located at the northeast corner of Bayshore Drive and Thomason Drive. These shelters would be designed to enhance or integrate into the corridors streetscape and remain consistent with other corridor amenities. 9.3 Bike Paths The LRTP, Section 8.2, "Pathways" indicates that Shadowlawn Drive between Davis Boulevard and US 41 is designated as a top priority for addition of bike lane facilities. More than ten participants in the public workshop indicated the need for similar facilities along the corridor. Therefore, bike lanes and paths have been incorporated into the PIA. 9.3.1 Purpose and Goal Bike paths provide residents and visitors with a designated corridor where they can safely ride their bicycles. The provision of such a facility separates bicycle traffic from vehicle traffic for increased safety. Due to the presence of a safe bicycling environment, residents and visitors are more likely to utilize bicycles for making short trips within the study area. This type of bike facility is recommended for Shadowlawn Drive between Davis Boulevard and US 41. HI Figures 8 -1 and 8 -2 graphically suggest the potential appearance of Shadowlawn Drive before and after the construction of bike path amenities. 9.4 New and Widened Sidewalks Several public outreach participants, during the May 2006 meetings expressed major concerns with the condition of existing sidewalks within the study area. Over 26 participants supported the implementation or construction of new or widened sidewalks. 9.4.1 Purpose and Goal The construction or widening of sidewalks within the study area is intended to provide residents and visitors a comfortable and safe walking environment. The sidewalk is an integral part of any neighborhood's streetscape and functions as a meeting place for residents and visitors moving along the corridor. More importantly, the sidewalk provides a safe place for pedestrian travel separated from vehicle traffic. If no sidewalks are available, residents and visitors are forced to walk within the street in direct conflict moving vehicles. 9.4.2 Bayshore /Shadowlawn Corridor Study Area The PIA recommends the construction of sidewalk infrastructure. The majority of these sidewalk improvements are recommended for streets located north of US 41. Bayshore Drive, south of US 41 generally provides ample sidewalks that integrate an aesthetically pleasing brick paver design, enhancing the existing streetscape. For locations where sidewalks improvements are recommended, a similar aesthetic quality could be integrated to enhance neighborhood character and aesthetics. To reduce construction costs, alternatives to the brick pavers design could be considered. Alternatives include colored or textured concrete or stamped asphalt. The PIA recommends the following sidewalk improvements: • Construction of a new five -foot wide sidewalk along both sides of ConnecticutAvenue between Shadowlawn Drive and Airport Pulling Road, • Construction of a new five -foot wide sidewalk along both sides of Linwood Avenue between Pine Street and Airport Pulling Road, • Construction of a new five -foot wide sidewalk along both sides of Francis Avenue, • Construction of a new five -foot wide sidewalk along both sides of Andrew Drive north of US 41, • Construction of a new five -foot wide sidewalk along both sides of Caledonia Avenue between Andrew Drive and Airport Pulling Road, • Construction of a new five -foot wide sidewalk along both sides of Pineland Avenue between Andrew Drive and Airport Pulling Road, • Construction of a new five -foot wide sidewalk along both sides of Calusa Avenue between Andrew Drive and Airport Pulling Road; and, • Widen the existing five -foot wide sidewalk to eight -feet wide along both sides of Shadowlawn Drive between Davis Boulevard and US 41. Figures 9 -1 and 9 -2 graphically suggest the potential appearance of Linwood Avenue before and after the construction of sidewalk amenities. -82- orelShadowlawn Corridor Study 4, Figure 9 -1 Figure 9 -2 9.5 Pedestrian Refuge Pedestrian refuge areas are constructed within the roadway median to provide a safe location for pedestrians to wait before crossing the remaining lanes of vehicle traffic. These refuge areas are highly visible and shield or protect the pedestrian from vehicles traveling along the corridor or turning onto local side streets and driveways. 9.5.1 Purpose and Goal Crossing streets at uncontrolled (i.e., no traffic signal or STOP sign) intersection locations can pose a serious risk to pedestrians. Adequate crossing gaps may be relatively infrequent on wide streets where vehicle volumes and speeds are high. In addition, the driver may not see the pedestrian because the pedestrian is obscured by a vehicle in another lane or other visual obstructions. At night, crosswalks and pedestrians can be extremely difficult for motorists to see in time to stop. 9.5.2 Bayshore Drive The pedestrian refuge area is of particular importance along Bayshore Drive where pedestrians must cross across four lanes of high -speed traffic, separated by a landscaped median. As indicated in Sections 2.0, the majority of vehicles are traveling at or above the posted speed limit and none of the unsignaHzed intersections on Bayshore drive provide pedestrian refuge in the median. The PIA recommends the construction of pedestrian refuge areas that are clear of elements that might obscure the presence of the pedestrian and that are lighted (theme lighting applicable) for visibility after dark. These pedestrian refuges should also integrate seamlessly into the high - visibility crosswalk infrastructure described in subsequent sections. Use of pedestrian refuges is not appropriate for Shadowlawn Drive or other streets that do not have a center median. Construction of pedestrian refuge areas are recommended for the following locations under the PIA: • Bayshore Drive at Week Avenue, • Bayshore Drive at Bayview Drive, • Bayshore Drive at Gulfview Drive, • Bayshore Drive at Lakeview Drive, Bayshore Drive at Barrett Avenue, Bayshore Drive at Van Buren Avenue, • Bayshore Drive at VWndstar Boulevard; and, • Bayshore Drive at Thomasson Drive. It should be noted that the pedestrian refuge areas at the intersection of Bayshore and Thomasson Drives would be incorporated into the design of the recommended roundabout. Figures 9 -3 and 9-4 graphically suggest the potential appearance of Bayshore Drive before and after the construction of pedestrian refuge treatments. -84- aw \ \d /ak! lawn Corridor Study �< .. .. � � \ ` MIA South Along Baysbore Dm � /\ < \� � 9.6 Pedestrian Safety Buffer During the May 2006 public outreach efforts participants indicated a need for a pedestrian safety buffer. The PIA recommends the construction of a pedestrian guardrail along the western edge of the Andrew Drive and Calusa Avenue intersection. This recommendation is intended reduce pedestrian /vehicle conflicts between students and residents walking to the entrance of Shadowlawn Elementary School and vehicles traveling along Calusa Avenue and Andrew Drive. 9.7 Pedestrian Yield Signs Pedestrian yield signs are intended to alert motorists to the presence of pedestrians, especially at locations where motorists may not expect to see pedestrians. These signs increase the likelihood that a pedestrian would have the benefit of a motorist yielding to him or her. 9.7.1 Purpose and Goal The use of advanced pedestrian warning signs and yield signs are intended to reduce the number of vehicle and pedestrian accidents with the study area. These efforts to reduce accidents, enhances the pedestrian walking environment with safer neighborhood streetscapes that add to community character. 9.7.2 Bayshore /Shadowlawn Corridor The PIA recommends the use of pedestrian yield signs at all unsignalized intersections with pedestrian crosswalks. The sign itself should be offset from the intersection to provide ample warning time for motorists. Along the multi -lane Bayshore Drive another sign at the intersection with lane markings should also indicate advance stop lines, encouraging motorists to stop farther back from a crosswalk. When motorists stop too close to a crosswalk, their vehicles block the view of pedestrians to drivers in adjacent lanes, and a multiple- threat pedestrian crash could result. When motorists stop farther back, sight distances improve between pedestrians and drivers in adjacent lanes, allowing them a better opportunity to avoid a crash. It is recommended that each intersection where pedestrian crosswalk facilities are located would include additional lighting to illuminate the crosswalks at night. Additional signage should also be provided to alert pedestrians to be aware of oncoming vehicle traffic, reducing the false sense of safety a pedestrian may experience at high visibility crosswalk locations. 9.8 Lighted School Crosswalk A lighted pedestrian crosswalk is intended to alert motorists of the presence of pedestrians, especially at school crosswalk locations where motorists may not expect to see children crossing the street. This crosswalk element consists of flashing lights embedded into the roadway on both side of the crosswalk and should be coordinated with peak school activity periods. 9.8.1 Purpose and Goal Lighted school crosswalks are intended to reduce the number of vehicle and pedestrian accidents with the study area. These efforts enhance the pedestrian walking environment by providing safer neighborhood streetscapes. -86- The PIA recommends replacing the existing school crosswalk in front of the Shadowlawn Elementary School with a lighted crosswalk. Flashing, strobe -like, lights would be activated when a pedestrian trips sensors at either entrance to the crosswalk. These sensors could be calibrated to be actuated by elementary- school -aged children and during peak school activity periods. Power supply to operate the flashing lights and sensors can be supplied to the unit via a small solar panel array connected to a battery located within the vicinity of the crosswalk. It should be noted that this recommended improvement was identified in the final public meeting on December 14, 2006, as a measure that should be implemented in several other locations where high visibility crosswalks have been recommended. Figures 9 -5 and 9 -6 graphically suggest the potential appearance of Shadowlawn Drive before and after the construction of a lighted school crosswalk. 9.9 High Visibility Crosswalks High visibility crosswalks are defined as pedestrian crosswalks that use high visibility markings on the roadway to alert motorists to the presence of a pedestrian crossing. It is recommended that textured or stamped asphalt also be used to further enhance the visual impact and aesthetic appeal of the crosswalk. 9.9.1 Purpose and Goal Similar to other modal amenities identified, the purpose of the high visibility crosswalk is to reduce the number of vehicle and pedestrian accidents. These efforts to reduce accidents enhance the pedestrian walking environment and provide safer neighborhood. The recommended use of textured or stamped asphalt provides increased awareness to the presence of the crosswalk while adding an additional aesthetic amenity that can significantly enhance the streetscape. 9.9.2 Bayshore /Shadowlawn Corridor The use of high visibility crosswalks is recommended at several intersections along the corridor. At the recommended implementation of a roundabout style intersection at Thomason Drive at Bayshore Drive, these crosswalk elements would be incorporated into the design of the roundabout. High - visibility crosswalk elements are recommended at the following locations • Davis Boulevard and Shadowlawn Drive, • Linwood Avenue and Shadowlawn Drive, • Francis Avenue and Shadowlawn Drive, • Caledonia Avenue and Shadowlawn Drive, • Calusa Avenue and Shadowlawn Drive, • US 41 and Shadowlawn Drive, • Week Avenue and Shadowlawn Drive, • Bayview Drive and Shadowlawn Drive, • Gulfview Avenue and Shadowlawn Drive, • Lakeview Avenue and Shadowlawn Drive, • Barrett Avenue and Shadowlawn Drive; and, • Van Buren Avenue and Shadowlawn Drive. Figures 9 -7 and 9 -8 graphically suggest the potential appearance of Shadowlawn Drive before and after the construction of high visibility crosswalks. Corridor Study Figure 9 -5 Looking We (In Front of m' Figure 9 -6 Looking West Ac (In Front of Shad clowlawn Drive Elementary School) ayshorelShadowlawn Corridor Study Figure 9 -7 .. it west.Alafiadowlawn Drive & Linwood p Figure 9 -8 10.0 RECOMMENDED DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS In an effort to maintain consistency with the transportation analysis, the following drainage section and the resultant recommendations are based on comparisons between the existing condition and two future condition assessments. The following describes the three conditions in detail. 10.1 Existing Conditions Assessment 10.1.1 Study Area North of US 41 The study area north of US 41 is defined as the area bounded by US 41 (Tamiami Trail) to the south, Davis Boulevard to the north and Airport- Pulling Road to the east. Over the past several years, this area has been identified as experiencing significant flood events during even routine rainfall events. Development over the years has hydraulically isolated this area from positive drainage discharge. There are several small connections to the piped systems along Davis Boulevard and US 41, but these systems do not provide significant discharge since they are over capacity. In the eastern portion of this area including and adjacent to Shadowlawn Drive, drainage of the existing roadways is accomplished by either closed storm drain systems or existing roadside ditches. Shadowlawn Drive, between Davis Boulevard and US 41, utilizes roadside ditches, ditch bottom inlets, storm drain segments and side drains to collect and convey stormwater runoff south to the US 41 offsite outfall system that runs parallel to the US 41 storm drain system. The ultimate ouffall is Naples Bay. The majority of side streets in the study area utilize roadside swales to convey their minor runoff to these larger systems. No stormwater management is presently provided (treatment or attenuation) for Shadowlawn Drive or side streets within the immediate study area. 10.1.2 Bayshore Drive Bayshore Drive, from US 41 south to Thomasson Drive, utilizes a closed storm drain system, consisting of curb inlets and pipes to collect and convey stormwater runoff to its outfall, Lake Kelly Ditch. The majority of side streets in the study area utilize roadside swales to convey their minor runoff to these larger systems. No stormwater management is presently provided (treatment or attenuation) for Bayshore Drive or side streets within the immediate study area. 10.2 2015 Future Baseline Condition 10.2.1 Study Area North of US 41 In 2005, HDR, Inc. conducted an analysis of the existing conditions (Historic Drainage Conditions Analysis Report) and proposed improvements for the existing drainage system within this area (Gateway Triangle Drainage Improvement Report) of Collier County. Proposed improvements included upgrading the existing stormwater conveyance system and the construction of a regional stormwater facility. In an effort to alleviate the extreme flooding in the Gateway Triangle, Collier County has purchased property to construct a 6 -acre pond and is seeking to expand this facility in the future to provide additional stormwater relief. In order to provide positive discharge from the detention /retention facility to Naples Bay, the facility will include a duplex pump station. This pump station will convey stormwater runoff via a 30 -inch force main outfall, which is to be constructed within the Pine Street and Linwood Avenue rights -of -way. The 30 -inch force main will then tee at the intersection of Linwood Avenue and Commercial Drive. The northern branch will continue as a 24- inch force main along the east side of Commercial Drive, cross Davis Boulevard, and outfall into the existing _qp_ gravity system on the west side of Brookside Drive. The southern branch of the outfall (14 -inch force main) will continue south down Commercial Drive, cross US 41, and outfall into the existing gravity system on the west side of Palm Avenue. Future projects are planned to improve the stormwater collection and gravity conveyance system to the pond. The current design of the regional stormwater facility would alleviate flooding conditions primarily in the western and central portions of this area. However, it is expected to have minimal impact on the immediate study area. 10.2.2 Bayshore Drive The only significant drainage improvement project proposed for Bayshore Drive and the surrounding area is the Haldeman Creek Dredging project. Forty thousand cubic yards of material will be dredged, leaving 2 to 3 feet of water at low tide on the west side of the Bayshore Drive Bridge. The dredging project will run from U.S. 41 East, including the finger canals, to where Haldeman Creek connects with Naples Bay. The primary purpose of the project is to improve boater navigation and access and enhance water quality and flow. The expected completion date is February 2007. 10.3 2015 Future Development Condition 10.3.1 Preferred Improvement Alternative (PIA) Drainage improvements are limited to the infrastructure necessary to construct the recommended improvement elements included in the PIA. These improvements are primarily related to the addition of curb and gutter along Shadowlawn Drive and valley gutter along Connecticut, Linwood, Francis, Andrew Drive, Pineland, Calusa and Caldonia Avenues. Converting from open to closed conveyance systems will require the construction of inlets and pipes in order to collect the stormwater and convey it to the appropriate outfall. Although no additional travel lanes are proposed under the PIA, an environmental resource permit will likely be required to meet water quality and quantity standards. Under water quality requirements, the project should compensate for filling in the existing ditches. The loss of treatment volume within these ditches must be replaced. Under water quantity standards, the project should provide attenuation for the slight increase in discharge due to the increased impervious area (curbing and sidewalk). It is estimated that a stormwater management facility (SMF), approximately 2.0 acres in size, would be required. Based on Laser Imaging and Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) contour information, the most hydraulically appropriate locations for this SMF would be west of Shadowlawn Drive, along Francis Avenue or Linwood Drive. Additionally, the possibility of expanding the Regional Stormwater Facility discussed previously could be explored. 10.3.2 Further Analysis Required As the PIA moves toward design, additional information would be required to properly design the storm drain systems, outfalls and stormwater management facility: Utility information, including horizontal and vertical location, would be required in order to determine the location of the storm drain system and the need for utility relocation Survey information and geotechnical data (soil borings and seasonal high water elevation) would be required to properly design the stormwater management facility, once an appropriate site is chosen Location and elevation of outfalls would be required in order to properly design the storm drain systems along Shadowlawn Drive and the side streets It should be noted that the drainage elements included in the PIA do not address the current flooding problems within the immediate study area. A detailed study would be required in order to propose improvements which -91- would alleviate flooding in the future. The drainage improvements proposed in the PIA ensure that the elements of the PIA can be constructed and permitted. -92- 11.0 CONCLUSION The PIA uses recommended improvement strategies, developed through public participation, to decrease the volume and speed of cut - through vehicle traffic within the study area. The PIA also aims to maintain mobility along the Bayshore /Shadowlawn corridor and reduce the likelihood of vehicle /pedestrian conflicts. The primary goal of these improvement measures is to provide a more livable and cohesive neighborhood. 11.1 Summary of Recommendations After evaluating public comments, travel demand forecasts, and intersection LOS analyses; the PIA includes the physical re- configuration and signal timing plan revisions to all signalized study area intersections. These recommendations would effectively increase intersection capacity, improving operations and mobility along the Bayshore /Shadowlawn Drive corridor. The identification of future parking needs is also included in the PIA. The PIA qualitatively and quantitatively considers the impact of recommended transportation improvements and traffic calming measures. As a result, the construction of a roundabout, access management guidelines, and school access strategies are recommended. Traffic calming techniques recommended by the PIA include gateway treatments with roadway neck -downs and speed enforcement. The PIA identifies several aesthetic amenities which would create a sense of place and connectivity between neighborhoods, north and south of US 41. These recommendations include landscaping, street furniture, themed lighting, and others. Modal amenities such as transit service, bus shelters, bike paths, sidewalks, and crosswalks in conjunction with aesthetic amenities would provide a safe, pedestrian - friendly, and cohesive neighborhood. 11.2 Implementation of Recommendations The implementation of the PIA improvement measures requires drainage, and maintenance. A cost consideration combined effectiveness provides a basis for prioritization. 11.2.1 Capital Cost careful consideration to design, capital cost, with the improvement measure's perceived Table 11 -1 summarizes a few of the approximate capital costs for several improvement measures. The approximate cost ranges have been extrapolated from information provided by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and do not include the cost of acquiring parcels of land or right -of -way. Appendix D provides a detailed description of approximate cost by location and specific element. Each capital cost estimate is based on approximate information which was readily available in December 2006 and does not reflect future market driven cost changes. These capital cost estimates would also require detailed engineering and design considerations to determine actual cost. Recommendations not described in the table are generally elements that have too great a range of cost to accurately approximate. Factors that influence this inability to approximate cost include design, quality of materials used, and /or labor. Special Cost Considerations for Roundabout As indicated in Tables 11 -1 and Table D -3 (Appendix D), the approximate cost for the construction for a roundabout at this intersection would be between $135,000 and $150,000. This cost estimate does not include right -of -way acquisition costs. As indicated by Collier County Property Appraisers Office, the current average (2006) cost per acre of land within this portion of the study area is approximately $15 per square foot. Using a conservative worst case scenario, it has been assumed that an additional 1/4 acre of right -of- -93- Table 11 -1 Recommended Improvements' Capital Cost Summary Improvement Measure Total Approximate Cost ($) Widen Sidewalks 108,000- 257,000 Construct New Sidewalks 75,000 - 201,000 Bike Paths 1,018,000 - 1,272,500 Speed Enforcement 2,0.00 (per month/ per location Pedestrian Safety Buffer _ 12,500 - 15,500 Drainage construction of retention and 186,000 - 232,500 Pedestrian Yield Signs 12,500 - 15,500 Drainage curb & gutter 1,813 ,500 - 2,267,000 Drainage (valley utter) 4,218,000- 5,272,500 High Visibili Crosswalks 351,000- 438,500 Lane Restri in 5,000 - 6,500 Turning Lane Capacity 75.000 - 100,000 Roundabout 134,500 - 159,000 Source: Carter & Burgess (2006) way would need to be acquired to successfully implement the proposed roundabout and all its approaches. A multiplier of six to eight is generally applied to the cost of acquisition to cover damages and litigation. As a result the total approximate cost to implement the proposed roundabout at this location would be between $1,000,000 and $1,130,000 (10,890 sq. ft. @ $15 x 6 + construction cost). Comparatively, a signal with mast arm at this intersection location would cost approximately $250,000. 11.2.2 Prioritization of Improvement Measures The identification of an improvement measure's impact on the PIA and subsequent cost to implement are the basis for prioritizing each measure. As shown in Table 11 -2, each measure was ranked by comparing its potential benefit to cost ratio. The improvement measures which require the least capital and have the greatest benefit to the study area are recommended to be implemented first and are shown at the top of Table 11 -2. The improvement measures which require the most capital and have the least effect on the study area are located toward the bottom of Table 11 -2. The more costly improvement measures could be implemented last or constructed in phases over longer time periods. The potential benefits of each improvement measure were given qualitative numerical rankings for the following categories: • Safety impact, • Enhance vehicle mobility, • Enhance vehicle access, • Bike and pedestrian mobility, • Aesthetic enhancement, • Traffic calming benefit; and, • Public support. The public support category was completed by public participants in attendance at the final public presentation, held December 14, 2006. At this final public presentation, participants were asked to indicate their improvement measure preferences. Results were then added to Table 11 -2. The potential costs associated with each improvement measure were qualitatively ranked by a capital cost and maintenance categories. -94- It is important to note that drainage improvements (see Section 10.0) are required to support the construction of several improvement measures. For example, improvement measures such as improved streetscapes with landscaping, street furniture, sidewalks, and other aesthetic or modal amenities described in Sections 8.0 and 9.0 would all require drainage infrastructure support. As a result, drainage improvement measures described in Section 10.0 are not included in Table 11 -2. In summary (Table 11 -2), improvement measures are recommended for implementation according to cost/ benifit ranking as follows: 1) School Access 2) Pedestrian Yield Signs 3) Access Management 4) Reduce Speed Limit 5) Landscaping Line of Sight 6) Pedestrian Safety Buffer 7) Lighted School Crosswalk 8) Gateway Treatments /Neckdowns 9) Pedestrian Refuge 10) High Visability Crosswalks 11) Construct Sidewalks 12) Themed Lighting 13) Bike Paths 14) Speed Enforcement 15) Widen Sidewalks 16) Bus Shelter 17) Roundabout at Thomasson/ Bayshore 18) Landscaping and Sidewalk Furniture 19) Visual Screening 20) Extended Transit Route -95- m m N d C E T d E v m C E E 0 U K O O m m m N U n m m H 96 0 v `o c m a a l7 �O � o — N w = a E m Z .m. v m v S ui r � 0 0 I Z N N A c m � N - - - ,., n -. o - o e e o duo f V U O d nN N °- H fJ m u i c w" n q ry ry o o M n N N e o � O a c a w 'a c -^ _- p Y O N Ld p n o o o ry o 0 � ¢ W A V 1p a - 't � V O � x u2<2 �mrno n � v 5 a o Q a n c v E E � u `v v = � ¢ v q C O W v M E rn F mN 9 Q K J �u'S 96 0 v `o c m a a l7 �O � o — N w = a E m Z .m. v m v S ui r � 0 0 I Z N ORDINANCE NO. 09 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 03 -29, THE NAPLES BOTANICAL GARDEN PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD), BY AMENDING SECTION 4.14, DESIGN GUIDELINES; SECTION 6.2, DEVELOPMENT PARAMETERS; SECTION 6.4, PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES; SECTION 6.5 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; AND SECTION 7.2, TRANSPORTATION OF THE PUD DOCUMENT FOR THE NAPLES BOTANICAL GARDEN; BY ADDING SECTION 7.6 TO PROVIDE FOR DEVIATIONS FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE; REVISING THE PUD MASTER PLAN; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, on June 24, 2003, the Board of County Commissioners approved Ordinance No. 03 -29, which established the Naples Botanical Garden Planned Unit Development (PUD); and WHEREAS, said Ordinance Number 03 -29 was previously amended by Ordinance Number 04 -38 and approved by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners on June 22, 2004 to correct a scrivener's error. WHEREAS, R. BRUCE ANDERSON, representing Naples Botanical Garden, Inc., petitioned the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, to amend Ordinance 03 -29, as amended, the Naples Botanical Garden Planned Unit Development. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: SECTION ONE: Section 4.14, Design Guidelines, of the PUD Document for the Naples Botanical Garden is amended as follows: Words struck through are deleted; words underlined are added. SECTION ONE: Section 4.14, Design Guidelines, of the PUD Document for the Naples Botanical Garden is amended as follows: 4.14 Design Guidelines A. Development of structures within the Naples Botanical Garden PUD, due to their unique characteristics in a natural setting, shall comply with the Purpose and Intent Section of Division 2.8 Section 5.05.08, Architectural and Site Design Standards of the LDC, as amended, only. Structures within the Naples Botanical Garden PUD will not be consistent with the actual architectural guidelines of DiViSiOR 2.8 Section 5.05.08 as amended. The applicant will follow the alternative compliance process for review of architectural and design standards as outlined in Section 5.05.08.F. of the LDC as amended, except that maintenance, interim or temporary structures do not require architectural and design standard review. The applicant shall comply with Section 4.06.05 Foundations Plantings of the LDC for interim or temporary structures as well as the maintenance structures to compensate for deviating from the Architectural and Site Design Standards of the LDC. B. Decorative walls and /or fencing shall be provided in accordance with the standards of Section 'TA 11 4 2 5.03.02.E.2 of the LDC. At a minimum, the two out - parcels depicted on the PUD Master Plan and the eveFflew paPkiag potential future expansion area on the east side of Bayshore Drive shall meet the requirements of Section 2.6� 11.4.2 5.03.02.E.2 of the LDC for a decorative wall. SECTION TWO: Section 6.2, Development Parameters, of the PUD Document for the Naples Botanical Garden is amended as follows: 6.2 Development Parameters The PUD Master Plan, Exhibit "A ", depicts the proposed use areas. The maximum development intensity is based on a floor area ration (F.A.R.) of .05 which translates to a maximum square footage of 372,438 square feet. Institutional, recreational, administrative, research and educational facilities, accessory retail and housing uses including other support facilities are included uses within the 372,438 square feet. Within the allotted development intensity there will be a 200 seat cafe within a 5,000 square foot structure and indoor and outdoor seating areas. An accessory retail use area of up to 5,000 square feet shall also be permitted within the entrance building. Dormitory housing for the research center also is included within the total maximum permitted floor area. Interim or temporary structures may be used to provide the facilities described in Section 6.4. A temporary use permit is not required, and the Words underlined are additions, words stru& thpeugh are deletions. 32512W9- 205095 -Ver 11- MPERRY 034460 0W PWRK -3238] 2 interim or temporary structures shall be approved through the site development plan SECTION THREE: Section 6.4, Permitted Uses and Structures, of the PUD Document for the Naples Botanical Garden is amended as follows: 6.4 Permitted Uses and Structures No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land use, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Principal Uses: 1. Arboretta and botanical garden (group 8422) 2. Amusement and recreational services (natural wonders and tourist attraction: commercial only) and exhibition operation (group 7999) 3. Non - commercial research organizations (group 8733) 4. Commercial, physical and biological research (group 8731) 5. Commercial, economic, sociological, educational research (group 8732) 6. Auditoriums 7. Interim or temporary structures to provide the principal and accessory uses described above in 1 -6. The interim or temporary structures shall be allowed for an initial period of three (3) years. If needed, requests for extensions for uses of the interim or temporary structures beyond three (3) years may be approved administratively utilizing the insubstantial change to the approved SDP process. Certificates of occupancy for a permanent structure will not be issued until the interim or temporary structure housing a particular use is removed from the site. SECTION FOUR: Section 6.5, Development Standards, of the PUD Document for the Naples Botanical Garden is amended as follows: B. Minimum Setbacks A minimum setback of fifty (50) feet shall be maintained on all sides of the property for principal structures. However, the existing administration building located at the intersection of Bayshore Drive and Thomasson Drive shall be permitted a minimum setback of fifteen (15) feet from Bayshore Drive after the optional conveyance of right -of -way for the widening of Bayshore Drive. The interim or temporary structures shall be set back a minimum of three hundred (300) feet from the property line along Bayshore Drive, five hundred (500) feet from the property line along Hamilton Avenue and the southern propert y boundary and one hundred fiftv (150) feet from the property line along Thomasson Drive. Maintenance structures along Bayshore Drive shall be permitted a minimum setback of thirty (30) feet. Accessory structures shall be set back twenty (20) feet from property lines where landscaping buffers are required. Words underlined are additions, words struck thFoug-i are deletions. 3'292008 205095 Ver 11 MRERRY 03 48 V 000 - MRK - 32387 SECTION FIVE: Section 7.2, Transportation, of the PUD Document for the Naples Botanical Garden is amended as follows: H. The developer shall provide 5 -foot wide sidewalks inclusive of bike lanes along the length of its property limits on €er„Street,, Thomasson Drive and along Bayshore Drive from Thomasson Drive to the out parcel located on the west side of Bayshore Drive opposite Republic Drive consistent with LDC provisions and the following: 1. All sidewalk and bike lane design criteria used shall be in accordance with the Minimum Standards, as adopted by the Florida Department of FDOT — Design Standards, as amended, as required by Florida Statutes — Chapter 316, Uniform Traffic Control Law. 2. The developer shall provide a 5 -foot wide sidewalk along the length of its property limits on reFn t;eet, Thomasson Drive and on Bayshore Drive from Thomasson Drive to the out parcel located on the west side of Bayshore Drive ^.Rt ^^^^°"°'h° . Pursuant to the provisions of the Land Development Code, the developer shall provide a payment of $78,125.00 (based upon FDOT standards) in lieu of constructing a sidewalk along the east side of Hamilton Avenue and a sidewalk along the west side of Bayshore Drive from the out parcel opposite Republic Drive to the preserve area. This payment in lieu will be used for sidewalk improvements along Bayshore Drive as part of the Bayshore Drive South improvement project. Five -foot wide sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with County Standards. No sidewalk nor sidewalk mitigation shall be required where Bayshore Drive abuts a preserve area. The developer shall provide a fair share contribution toward the capital cost of a traffic signal and turn lanes at the intersection of Bayshore Drive and Thomasson Drive, Of justified by app ants. J. The developer(s) shall provide a separate right turn lane on Bayshore Drive for the southbound to westbound traffic movement into the Main Entrance/Visitor Parking Area. Said improvements are considered site related, and therefore, do not qualify for impact fee credits. When said turn lane improvement(s), whether left turn lane(s) and /or right turn lane(s), are determined to be necessary, right -of -way and /or compensating right- Words underlined are additions; words stwsk through are deletions. 3/25/2W9 205095 Ver 11 MPERRY 0344&0 000 P W - 32301 of-way, shall be provided .. determined by the Collier County Transportation tUPR IaRe imprevempnts ;hall bp as fellows- P"N W1 411-2110 N. L- K. All turn lane design criteria shall be in accordance with the minimum standards as adopted by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) — Design Standards, as amended, as required by Florida Statues — Chapter 316, Uniform Traffic Control Law. The turn lane queue length determinations shall be in accordance with the criteria /calculations within the Highway Capacity Manual — Chapter 17. M-L. All work within the Collier County right -of -way shall meet the requirements of Collier County Right -of -Way Ordinance. N-M. If a gate is proposed at any and /or all development entrance(s), the gate shall be designed so as not to cause vehicles to be backed up onto any and all adjacent roadways. Gates shall be recessed a minimum of 50 feet from the edge of the public roadway for the main /visitor's entrance; the research /education entrance and eveFflew paFkiRg 8RtPaRG8S potential future expansion area. Gates at other locations shall be a minimum of 25 feet from the edge of the roadway. SECTION SIX: The PUD Document for the Naples Botanical Garden is amended to include new Section 7.6, Deviations from the LDC, as follows: 7.6 Deviations from the LDC 1. Deviation from LDC Section 5.03.02.A.1.a.i. Chain link fence shall be permitted to be constructed at the preserve boundary on the southern property Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions. 02512000- 205W5 -Ver 11- MPERRV 0360 &008000- PWRK - 32387 5 line and chain link fence shall be permitted and set back a minimum of ten (10) feet from the public right-of-way, except when located adiacent to a preserve where the setback shall be a minimum of five (5) feet. 3. Deviation from LDC Section 5.05.08. Maintenance, interim or temporary structures do not require architectural and design standard review. SECTION SEVEN: The PUD Master Plan for the Naples Botanical Garden PUD is as indicated on Exhibit 'A" attached hereto. SECTION EIGHT: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective upon receipt of notice from the Secretary of State that this Ordinance has been filed with the Secretary of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this day of ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK Deputy Clerk Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency Assistant County Attorneys,,, pa J.* ►11• BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Bv: Donna Fiala, Chairman Words underlined are additions; words stwsk t#redgh are deletions. T2W.M 2o.95 vPr:,i - MPEFFV 0344 CM&OW PWRK 32387 �` ;f |� ■§ E §! \| || /§§` ± (j A) |)�' \. �2ƒ@ i ,,!| § §§! || , , ,( | }� . I "■ ! . ,!!.. � §�•��� |�| ,� |� �� ! � =el� #� ; :� -��! ��u °,/ ... ( AGENDA ITEM 9 -E Co ier County STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION HEARING DATE: APRIL 2, 2009 SUBJECT: PETITION PUDZ- 2008 -AR -13048 — SINGER PARK CPUD (COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: OWNER: Nadesha Ranasinghe 450 Henely Drive Naples, Fh 34104 AGENTS: Mr. Ron Nino Mr. Richard D. Yovanovich Vanasse Daylor, LLP Goodlette, Coleman and Johnson, P.A. 12730 New Brittany Boulevard, Suite 600 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Fort Myers, FL 33907 Naples, FL 34103 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider a rezone of the subject 5.15± acre site from the Estates (E) Zoning District to the Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) Zoning District for a project to be known as the Singer Park CPUD. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject PIJD is located in Golden Gate Estates on the western side of Everglades Boulevard, approximately 290 feet south of Immokalee Road (CR 846) in Section 30, Township 47 South, Range 28 East, Collier County, Florida. (,See location map on following page) PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The subject 5.15± acre site is currently vegetated and undeveloped and contains 3.20 acres of Singer Park CPUD -AR -13048 Revised: 3 -20 -09 Page 1 of 20 u I- �o wa a o \ a pa p. i Q Z O N E3 CL Q 0 a O 1 I i. i a ir a � o u I- �o wa a o \ a pa p. i Q Z O N E3 CL Q 0 a O _O O 4 O r S r O SS3 b'�SS SdJ �J OZ � ^y0 2 �N ��Utio A30RC eUQOCR mqg�p� �Gmmh �U �� OO�Lt Ub 3o sd �"W'wne� De 2y Jo 111N000 3H1 01 '1509 ON 1V '031�OI030 ON13B 51 MON ,09 V COON 337VAOWNI 30 3015 H1005 01 F,St sad mV15 d31N39 OO�OHdO9HO13N NMV00 dad N333OB ,SZ I \ " I aw FaF "FL WNQ WU W Q 4 �7v m Z� N W h O_ w u a a n Y U O m F Q a W ° 1- 1 N pWUU m � a?Z 1 F m"x Z mWkJ NQL 0 1 i dW0 3" 30 NOIl bl dOddNVd1 3H1 30 l H1IM 39NVOd099V Ni f SY d1N000 3H1 01 IV '031VJ1030 ON13B 51 Mi „r N aW e W � 3 U N O� q>miZ ¢��Ia �HWWd Zvt�0 ti h irl in^ 2,�3�Nti bOyRjO ly 4WZ e F^d lnpW O¢YWO °H� O _ 3W373 N j�WOS 2 W gZi gUWn fi Ns 2W2$YN ep¢xW 4 wiOiZW� WO Wp� I 3✓�Cp�n eWm^iU� �4�0 OOry OO ul p jQ' OUp Q Q Q Q Q �w�o� u2�p� U2 Q S 2¢ h 20¢ 'OA78 530Y7083A3 F i ��W2 U dW0 3" 30 NOIl bl dOddNVd1 3H1 30 l H1IM 39NVOd099V Ni f SY d1N000 3H1 01 IV '031VJ1030 ON13B 51 Mi „r N '' W QuQ 32 E - N333O0 3dV950NV1 SZ /M�J.' .,a33jOB 3Ad353dd,'.','.'.' NO11V1303A 3n /1tM SL. . _ _. , S 6I( L _J ti° ti s � e W � 3 U N 3 � 2 iU U h q Uryryti Z m W '' W QuQ 32 E - N333O0 3dV950NV1 SZ /M�J.' .,a33jOB 3Ad353dd,'.','.'.' NO11V1303A 3n /1tM SL. . _ _. , S 6I( L _J ti° ti s � W o. r Y 0 m F R m o w m � w " a F "!Z W"a WU � a 4 U N 3 w3ti pg8 F U 4 g ph� F U �QOQ w 4 Gov W 2 In N¢p p 02 p N q N N W ie2N? � p h 2 W¢ W C e W � 3 U N 3 � 2 U h q Uryryti UU QJ° W O _ 3W373 N �II 2 VOl1 /W 970l)O0 U ¢U¢QUe UOtiU UU � U °y ON gONh OS V T"^� W o. r Y 0 m F R m o w m � w " a F "!Z W"a WU � a 4 U N 3 w3ti pg8 F U 4 g ph� F U �QOQ w 4 Gov W 2 In N¢p p 02 p N q N N W ie2N? � p h 2 W¢ W C h II O h NU Ue Q b Q ¢ II p W A U S U � 4 a u v X44 WH W ww O o 0 W W V U Q q Uryryti h�w . n o W 11 4 N �II Q� U ¢U¢QUe UOtiU UU � U °y gONh hYV ^�h T"^� OOry OO ul p jQ' OUp �w�o� u2�p� U2 Q S 2¢ h 20¢ npp ¢¢ °pW i ��W2 U wpb j O b SORB 0230 QO O h II O h NU Ue Q b Q ¢ II p W A U S U � 4 a u v X44 WH W ww O o 0 wetlands. This Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) Ordinance proposes up to 45,000 square feet of mixed commercial development that may include retail, medical and office uses. Retail uses are limited to 5,000 square feet of gross floor area in the principal structure. Eating establishments are limited to 6,000 square feet of gross floor area in the principal structure. However, if retail services or eating establishments are developed in an individual structure that is part of a component of the shopping center, there is no maximum floor area limitation. The buildings will be a maximum of I -story and will have a maximum zoned height of 35 feet and an actual height of 40 feet. A 75 -foot wide native vegetation preserve area will be provided along the west and south property lines. A 10 -foot wide Type A landscape buffer will be provided along the north property line and a 25 -foot wide landscape buffer will be provided along the east property line adjacent to the Everglades Boulevard right -of -way in accordance with the Growth Management Plan (GMP) as described in PUD Exhibit "E" Developer Commitments in the "Landscape and Buffering" section. The Conceptual Master Plan depicts the limits of the commercial development area, a water management area, preserve area and landscape buffer areas. The Conceptual Master Plan also shows 2.23± acres of impervious area, 2.16± acres of open space and .38± acres of right -of -way area. The site has an ingress /egress point on Everglades Boulevard. There are no deviations being sought as part of this CPUD rezoning petition. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: Developed, Big Corkscrew Island Fire Control Rescue District Station, Conditional Use on property with a zoning designation of Estates (E). East: Everglades Boulevard, then undeveloped property with a zoning designation of Estates (E). South: Undeveloped property with a zoning designation of Estates (E). West: Undeveloped property with a zoning designation of Estates (E). Singer Park CPUD -AR -13048 Revised: 3 -20 -09 Page 4 of 20 Aerial Photo GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property is located within the Estates designated area (Estates — Mixed Use District, Neighborhood Center Subdistrict aka the Immokalee Road and Everglades Boulevard Center) as identified on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan ( GGAMP) Element of the GMP. The Neighborhood Center Subdistrict of the GGAMP allows the opportunity to request commercial zoning, and contains rural criteria, as noted below, under which Neighborhood Centers may be developed, each followed by staff's analysis: • Commercial uses shall be limited to intermediate commercial so as to provide for a wider variety of goods and services in areas that have a higher degree of automobile traffic. These uses shall be similar to C -1, C -2, or C -3 zoning districts outlined in the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) (Ordinance number 91 -102, adopted October 30, 1991), except as prohibited below. (The proposed uses listed in "Exhibit A, Permitted Uses ", are similar to those allowed in the C -1, C -2, or C -3 zoning districts of the LDC, either by right or by Conditional Use (CU). The Neighborhood Center Subdistrict does not specifically include or exclude the uses allowed as CU in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts. Historically, all uses of the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts have been allowed by right, except those uses specifically prohibited by this Subdistrict.) Singer Park CPUD - AR -13048 Revised: 3 -20 -09 Page 5 of 20 • Parcels immediately adjacent to commercial zoning within the Neighborhood Centers located at the intersections of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard, Golden Gate Boulevard and Everglades Boulevard, Everglades Boulevard and Immokalee Road may qualify for Conditional Use under the transitional conditional use provision of the Conditional Uses Subdistrict of this Master Plan Element. (Criteria not applicable to the subject petition. The proposed CPUD is located within the Immokalee Road and Everglades Boulevard Center. However, if this rezone is approved, the adjacent property would become eligible,for an Estates zoning district CU) • A single project shall utilize no more than 50 percent of the total allowed commercial acreage. This percentage may be increased at the discretion of the Board of County Commissioners (BCC). (In accordance with the GGAMP, the Immokalee Road and Everglades Boulevard Center is ±14.35 acres. The proposed CPUD is 5.15+ acres, 2.23± acres of which is proposed to be comprised of building footprint, parking, driveway, sidewalks, and impervious areas; 2.16+ acres to be comprised of buffers, native vegetation preserve, water management and open space; and 0.76+ acres are part of the Everglades Boulevard right -of -way and right -of -way for future roadway expansion. Therefore, the proposed project is less than 50 percent of the allowed commercial acreage in this Neighborhood Center.) • The project shall make provisions for shared parking arrangements with adjoining developments. (The proposed CPUD exhibits and Conceptual Master Plan do not contain provisions for shared parking arrangements with adjoining developments. However, the subject site comprises all land in the southwest quadrant of the Neighborhood Center that is eligible for commercial zoning.) • Access points shall be limited to one per 180 feet commencing from the right -of -way of the major intersecting streets of the Neighborhood Center. A maximum of three curb cuts per quadrant shall be allowed. (The proposed Conceptual Master Plan of CPUD depicts only one access point to the project and it is in excess of the 180 feet from the northerly property line. The subject property site is 330± feet south of the Immokalee RoadlEverglades Boulevard intersection, thus the site's access point is far in excess of the 180 feel from the intersection right -of- -way. The property to the north, which is not within the Neighborhood Center, does not have access to Everglades Boulevard.) • Driveways and curb cuts shall be consolidated with adjoining developments, whenever possible. (The property to the north, outside of the Neighborhood Center, is developed with afire station and has no access to Everglades Boulevard. The property to the south, also outside the Neighborhood Center, is presently limited to a single- family dwelling. Shared access is not possible andlor,feasible.) • Driveways accessing parcels on opposite sides of the roadway shall be in direct alignment, except when the roadway median between the two parcels has no opening. (To date, no rezone petition has been requested for the property opposite to the subject CPUD; that site is still zoned E, Estates.) • Projects shall provide a 25 -foot wide landscape buffer abutting the external right -of -way. This buffer shall contain two staggered rows of trees that shall be spaced no more than 30 feet on center, and a double row hedge at least 24 inches in height at time of planting and attaining a Singer Park CPUD - AR -13048 Revised 3 -20 -09 Page 6 of 20 minimum of three feet height within one year. A minimum of 50 percent of the 25 -foot wide buffer area shall be comprised of a meandering bed of shrubs and ground covers other than grass. Existing native trees must be retained within this 25 -foot wide buffer area to aid in achieving this buffer requirement; other existing native vegetation shall be retained, where possible, to aid in achieving this buffer requirement. Water retention/detention areas shall be allowed in this buffer area if left in natural state, and drainage conveyance through the buffer area shall be allowed if necessary to reach an external outfall. (Criterion included in Exhibit E, Developer's Commitments, Landscape and Buffering section, item A.) • All buildings shall have tile roofs, `Old Style Florida' metal roofs, or decorative parapet walls above the roofline. The buildings shall be finished in light, subdued colors, except for decorative trim. (Criterion included in Exhibit B, subsection B, Architectural and Related Requirements, item B.) • Building heights shall be limited to one (1) story, with a maximum height of thirty -five (35) feet. This provision only applies east of Collier Boulevard. (Criterion included in Exhibit B, subsection A, Commercial Development Standards.) • All lighting facilities shall be architecturally — designed, and shall be limited to a height of twenty -five (25) feet. Such lighting facilities shall be shielded from neighboring residential land uses. (Criterion included in the Developer's Commitments, Exhibit E, Lighting section.) • Commercial uses shall encourage pedestrian traffic through placement of sidewalks, pedestrian walkways, and marked crosswalks within parking areas. Adjacent projects shall coordinate placement of sidewalks so that a continuous pathway through the Neighborhood Center is created. (Criterion included in Exhibit B, subsection B, Architectural and Related Requirements, item C.) • All buildings and projects within any single specific quadrant of the Subdistrict shall utilize a common architectural theme. This theme shall be applicable to both building design and signage. (Criterion included in Exhibit B, subsection B, Architectural and Related Requirements, item A.) • No building footprint shall exceed 5,000 square feet, unless the project is submitted in the form of a PUD. (Project submitted as PUD so footprint requirement not applicable.) Walkways or courtyards shall connect adjacent buildings. This provision only applies east of Collier Boulevard. (Criterion included in the Developer's Commitments, Exhibit E, Landscape and Buffering, item D.) • Drive- through establishments shall be limited to banks, with no more than three lanes; the drive - through areas shall be architecturally integrated with the rest of the building. This provision only applies east of Collier Boulevard. (Criterion included in Exhibit B, subsection B, Architectural and Related Requirements, item D.) • Fences or walls may be constructed on the commercial side of the required landscape buffer between adjacent commercial and residential uses. If constructed, such fences or walls shall not exceed five (5) feet in height. Walls shall be constructed of brick or stone. Fences shall be of wood Singer Park CPUD -AR-13048 Revised: 3 -20 -09 Page 7 of 20 or concrete post or rail types, and shall be of open design (not covered by slats, boards or wire). (Criterion included in the Developer's Commitments, Exhibit E, Landscape and Buffering, item B.) • Projects directly abutting residential property (property zoned E- Estates and without an approved conditional use) shall provide, at a minimum, a 75 -foot wide buffer in which no parking uses are permitted. Twenty -five (25) feet of the width of the buffer along the developed area shall be a landscape buffer. A minimum of 50 feet of the buffer width shall consist of retained native vegetation and must be consistent with subsection 3.9.5.5.6 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). The native vegetation retention area may consist of a perimeter berni and be used for water management detention. Any newly constructed berm shall be revegetated to meet subsection 3.9.5.5.6 of the LDC (native vegetation replanting requirements). Additionally, in order to be considered for approval, use of the native vegetation retention area for water management purposes shall meet the following criteria: a. There shall be no adverse impacts to the native vegetation being retained. The additional water directed to this area shall not increase the annual hydro- period unless it is proven that such would have no adverse impact to the existing vegetation. b. If the project requires permitting by the South Florida Water Management District ( SFWMD), the project shall provide a letter or official document from SFWMD indicating that the native vegetation within the retention area will not have to be removed to comply with water management requirements. If SFWMD cannot or will not supply such a letter, then the native vegetation retention area shall not be used for water management. C. If the project is reviewed by Collier County, the County engineer shall provide evidence that no removal of native vegetation is necessary to facilitate the necessary storage of water in the water management area. (Criterion included in the Developer's Commitments, Exhibit E, Landscape and Buffering; item C.) • Projects within the Neighborhood Center Subdistrict that are submitted as PUDs shall provide a functional public open -space component. Such public open -space shall be developed as green space within a pedestrian- accessible courtyard, as per Section 2.4.5.4 [4.06.03] of the Collier County Land Development Code, as in effect at the time of P.U.D. approval. (Criterion included in the Developer's Commitments, Exhibit E. Landscape and Buffering, item D.) • The following principal permitted uses are prohibited within Neighborhood Centers: Drinking Places (5813) and Liquor Stores (5921) Mail Order Houses (5961) Merchandizing Machine Operators (5962) Power Laundries (7211) Crematories (7261) (Does not include non - crematory Funeral Parlors) Radio, TV Representatives (7313) and Direct Mail Advertising Services (733 1) NEC Recreational Shooting Ranges, Waterslides, etc. (7999) General Hospitals (8062), Psychiatric Hospitals (8063), and Specialty Hospitals (8069) Elementary and Secondary Schools (8211). Colleges (8221), Junior Colleges (8222) Libraries (823 1) Correctional Institutions (9223) Waste Management (951 1) Homeless Shelters and Soup Kitchens. Singer Park CPUD - AR -13048 Revised: 3 -20 -09 Page 8 of 20 (Criterion met Exhibit A, subsection C, lists the aforementioned uses as prohibited uses in the proposed CPUD.) GGAMP Policy 5.1.1 contains specific provisions pertaining to street and parking lot lighting in Golden Gate Estates, which need to be incorporated into the CPUD as follows: a. If a streetlight or an area light is required, it shall be of the type specified to protect neighboring properties from direct glare. Area lighting shall be shielded such that direct rays do not pass property lines. Low - pressure sodium lamps are encouraged while halogen type lights are discouraged. 1. Where required, the street lamp shall be of the high pressure sodium type and have a 'cobra head with flat bottom" style or be fully shielded so that light is directed only downward. Street lamps shall be mounted on a wood pole at a height and wattage recommended by the appropriate electric utility and as appropriate for a rural area. 2. Parking lot lamps shall be low- pressure sodium type lamps and shall be mounted so that they point downward without direct rays extending past the parking lot, building entrance, walkway, or other area intended to be illuminated. b. Where lighting of recreational areas is required, such lighting shall be mounted so as to focus illumination on the areas intended to be illuminated, and to limit the amount of light that extends outside of the intended area. (Criterion included in the Developer's Commitments, Exhibit E, Lighting section.) Future Land Use Element (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." This determination is the responsibility of the Zoning and Land Development Review staff as part of their review of the petition in its entirety. However, staff would note that in reviewing the appropriateness of the requested uses /densities on the subject site, the compatibility analysis might include a review of both the subject proposal and surrounding or nearby properties as to allowed use intensities and densities, development standards (building heights, setbacks, landscape buffers, etc.), building mass, building location and orientation, architectural features, amount and type of open space and location, traffic generation /attraction, etc. FLUE Objective 7 and relevant policies are stated below; each policy is followed by staff analysis. 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, where 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 connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. (The Master Concept Plan depicts direct access to Everglades Boulevard, a collector road as identified in the Transportation Element.) Singer Park CPUD - AR -13048 Revised: 3 -20 -09 Page 9 of 20 Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. (The proposed CPUD exhibits and Master Concept Plan do not contain provisions for internal access or loop roads. however, due to the small size of the project and likely development with limited number of individual lots, such is not feasible.) Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and their interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. (There is no proposed cross access to the adjoining properties. Native vegetation preserve is required between the subject property and the adjoining vacant properties to the west and south, zoned Estates (E). Therefore, interconnection to said properties is not feasible or appropriate. There is no proposed interconnection to the property to the north. Applicant bases justification for not meeting this criterion on the type of land use, a fire station. Traffic circulation between the proposed commercial development and a fire station 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. (Mostly not applicable. Open spaces are provided in excess of that required by the LDC. Sidewalks must be provided as required by the LDC as no deviations are requested) Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petitioner's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) and has determined that the roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate this project within the five year planning period. 'I herefore, the subject application is consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP. Everglades Boulevard Impacts: The first concurrency link that is impacted by this project is Link 136, Everglades Boulevard between Oil Well Road and Immokalee Road. The project generates 93 p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips on this link, which represents a 10.33 percent (significant) impact on Everglades Boulevard. This segment of Everglades Boulevard has a remaining capacity of 499 trips, and is currently at Level of Service "C" (LOS "C ") as reflected by the adopted 2008 Annual Urban Inventory and Review (AUIR). The first concurrency link south of the project that is impacted is Link 135, Everglades Boulevard between Golden Gate Boulevard and Oil Well Road. The project generates 13 p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips on this link, which represents a 1.44 percent impact on Everglades Boulevard. This segment of Everglades Boulevard has a remaining capacity of 563 trips, and is currently at LOS "C" as reflected by the adopted 2008 AUIR. Oil Well Road Impacts: Link 119, Oil Well Road between Immokalee Road (CR 846) and Everglades Boulevard, required analysis as a result of the 2 percent -2 percent -3 percent impact evaluation. The project generates 7 p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips on this link, which represents a 0.69 percent impact on Oil Well Road. This segment of Oil Well Road is scheduled for construction in 2011, has a remaining capacity of 346 trips, and is currently at LOS "C" as reflected by the adopted 2008 AUIR. Link 120, Oil Well Road between Everglades Boulevard and Desoto Singer Park CPUD - AR -13048 Revised. 3 -20 -09 Page 10 of 20 Boulevard, also required analysis. The project generates 7 p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips on this link, which represents a 0.69 percent impact on Oil Well Road. This road segment has a remaining capacity of 673 trips, and is currently at LOS "C" as reflected by the adopted 2008 AUIR. Immokalee Road (CR 846) Impacts: The first concurrency link north of the project that is impacted by this project is Link 46, Immokalee Road between (CR 846) Oil Well Road and SR 29. The project generates 27 p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips on this link, which represents a 3.1 percent impact on Immokalee Road (CR 846). This segment of Immokalee Road (CR 846) has a remaining capacity of 518 trips, and is currently at LOS "C" as reflected by the adopted 2008 AUIR. The significance test was not extended beyond the first impacted link of Immokalee Road (CR 846). Trip Generation Maximum: The applicant has proposed a development with a potential convenience market use, but it is recognized by Transportation staff that a convenience market with fuel pumps could not reasonably occupy the entire square footage sought by this application. Consequently, the applicant has provided analysis demonstrating that the maximum trip generation for the proposed land uses has been evaluated. Staff has stated a stipulation that the maximum number of two -way p.m. peak hour trips shall not be allowed to exceed 277 total trips; allowing for flexibility in uses without creating unforeseen impacts on the adjacent roadway network. Miti ag tion: The applicant has proposed the following paraphrased commitments to satisfy Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP. These have been included in Exhibit "E" Developer Commitments in the Transportation subsection under items B and D: 1. This PUD will be limited to a maximum of 277 p.m. peak hour trips generated for any mix of proposed uses. 2. The developer or his successors shall pay their fair share towards future improvements at the Everglades Boulevard /Oil Well Road intersection and the Everglades Boulevard /Immokalee Road intersection. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): The Project as proposed is consistent with the policies in Objective 6.1 and 7.1.2 of the Conservation and COME, for the following reasons: Policy 6.1.: A total of 1.47± acre (15 percent of the site less the right -of -way area or 0.66 acres is required) will be set aside as a preserve area with a conservation easement prohibiting further development. Selection of preservation areas are consistent with the criteria listed in Policy 6.1.1. of the COME. Policy 7.1.2: In accordance with Policy 7.1.2, a wildlife survey has been conducted in accordance with the requirements of Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission and the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service guidelines. No listed species or signs thereof were observed on this site. Singer Park CPUD - AR -13048 Revised: 3 -20 -09 Page 11 of 20 GMP Conclusion: Based upon the above analysis, Comprehensive Planning staff finds the proposed rezone consistent with the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, as noted above. ANALYSIS Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and the criteria upon which a favorable determination must be based. These criteria are specifically noted in Sections 10.02.13 and 10.02.13.13.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) and required Staff evaluation and cominent. The staff evaluation establishes a factual basis to support the recommendations of staff. The Collier County Planning Commission (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 their action on the rezoning request. Environmental Review: Environmental Services staff has reviewed the petition and the CPUD Ordinance to address any environmental concerns. As previously stated, Staff has found that there are no listed species on the site. 'This petition was not required to submit an EIS. Staff recommends approval of the petition subject to the following recommendation: 1) The South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) wetland line shall be delineated on the site plan at the next development order. Transportation Review., Transportation Department Staff has reviewed this petition and the documents that accompany this request. Staff recommends approval subject to the following conditions that have been included in Exhibit "E" "Developer Commitments" in the 'Transportation subsection. Any turn lanes (or modifications to turn lanes) serving this site that are required to be installed during any subsequent Development Order on this site shall be the responsibility of the developer, his successors, or assigns to fund or construct. 'fhe developer shall not relocate the Easterly edge of paving of Everglades Boulevard to accommodate turn lanes unless otherwise approved by the County. The turn lane design at the time of the first subsequent development order application shall anticipate a 45mph design speed. 2. The additional right -of -way shown on the CPUD Master Plan shall be dedicated on the plat or conveyed in fee simple by deed to the County at no cost to Collier County within 180 days of approval of the Singer Park CPUD. More specifically, this additional right - of -way shall be 50 feet in width along the project's entire frontage along the Everglades Boulevard right -of -way. This dedication shall satisfy LDC requirements for compensating right of way to accommodate turn lanes. Also,_any existing lands located within the existing Everglades Boulevard right of way or easement shall also be dedicated in fee simple to the County at no cost to the County, to avoid severance of the underlying parcel. No credit for mitigation shall be construed from the dedication of lands within the existing roadway boundary. Singer Park CPUD - AR -13048 Revised: 3 -20 -09 Page 12 of 20 Utility Review: The Utilities Department Staff has reviewed the petition and has no objection. This project is not located within the Collier County Water and Sewer Service Area. The proposed water source is well water and proposed sewage shall be disposed of through a septic system. Zoning and Land Development Review: Relationship to Existing and Future Land Uses: A discussion of this relationship, as it applies specifically to Collier County's legal basis for land use planning, refers to the relationship of the uses that would be permitted if the proposed zoning action is approved, as it relates to the requirement or limitations set forth in the FLUE of the GMP. The proposed uses, as limited in the CPUD Ordinance, are consistent with the GMP, as previously noted. The actual uses proposed, as limited in the CPUD Ordinance, should be compatible with the land uses that have been developed on adjacent tracts. As previously noted, this site is located on the west side of Everglades Boulevard and is surrounded on three sides by undeveloped land in the Estates (E) zoning district. To the north is a Conditional Use for an existing fire station called the Big Corkscrew Island Fire Control Rescue District Station. To the east is Everglades Boulevard, a 200 -foot wide right -of way and then undeveloped land in the Estates (E) zoning district. To the south and west is undeveloped land in the Estates (E) zoning district. The Singer Park CPUD is buffered by a 75 -foot wide preserve area from the undeveloped land with an Estate zoning designation to the south and west. A 10 -foot wide Type A landscape buffer will be provided along the north property line adjacent to the fire station and a 25 -foot wide landscape buffer will be provided along the east property line adjacent to the Everglades Boulevard right -of- way. This rezone petition requests a total of 45,000 square feet of commercial land uses including retail, medical and office uses. The retail land uses have been limited to a maximum of 5,000 square feet of floor area in the principal structure. The maximum zoned height proposed for this CPUD is 35 feet and one story. LDC Subsection 10.03.05.I. states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners ... shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the following when applicable." Additionally, Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County LDC requires the Planning Commission to make findings as to the PUD Master Plans' compliance with the additional criteria as also noted below: Rezone findings are designated as RZ and PIJD findings are designated as PUD. (Staff s responses to these criteria are provided in non -bold font): Rezone Findings: 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and future land use map and the elements of the GMP. As noted in the GMP Consistency portion of this report, the property is located within the Neighborhood Center Subdistrict as identified in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. Specific development requirements are established in the GMP, and the CPUD document contains Singer Park CPUD -AR -13048 Revised: 3 -20 -09 Page 13 of 20 appropriate references assuring compliance with the provisions of the Neighborhood Center Subdistrict. 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 undeveloped residentially zoned lands to the west and south and across Everglades Boulevard to the east. To the north is a Conditional Use for a fire station which has been developed. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The proposed Singer Park CPUD is located within a Neighborhood Center Subdistrict as identified in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. In addition, the PUD includes adequate ameliorating elements for buffering and building height, setback, and architectural design have been provided to ensure the project is compatible with the adjoining residential land uses, and the fire station. Therefore, staff is of the opinion that the proposed CPUD will not result in an isolated district unrelated to nearby districts. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. The proposed PUD district boundaries are logically drawn and conform to the "Neighborhood Center Subdistrict" identified in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan of the GMP. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. The site is designated for a mix of commercial and retail uses that are specified within the parameters of the "Neighborhood Center Subdistrict" and the applicant intends to develop the property within the parameters of the "Neighborhood Center Subdistrict ". The lack of commercially zoned property in the Estates and within the "Immokalee Road and Everglades Boulevard Neighborhood Center Subdistrict" provides ample justification for the passage of this proposed amendment. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The proposed Singer Park CPUD is compatible with the "Neighborhood Center Subdistrict" as identified in the GGAMP of the FLUE. The proposed "Immokalee Road and Everglades Boulevard Neighborhood Center Subdistrict" criteria create ameliorating elements. 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. Singer Park CPUD - AR -13048 Revised: 3 -20 -09 Page 14 of 20 The Transportation Services Division has reviewed the proposed CPUD and has incorporated appropriate mitigation of the projects traffic impacts into the CPUD document which renders the CPUD consistent with the Transportation Element. No change in the level of service impacts result from this project. The conceptual Master Plan proposes the dedication of 50 feet of right of way along Everglades Boulevard. Therefore, the proposed CPUD will not excessively increase traffic congestion and is consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The project will be reviewed and approved subject to requirements of Collier County and the South Florida Water Management District. CPUD document Exhibit "E" incorporates appropriate references to insure that no adverse drainage conditions will result from the proposed development and incorporates the criteria for utilizing the 75- foot -wide buffer area for stormwater management. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. The proposed commercial intermediate uses, as specified in the `Neighborhood Center Subdistrict' of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, will be required to meet building setbacks and single -story height restrictions. When meeting these requirements, light and air will not be reduced to adjacent properties. 10. Whether the proposed change would adversely affect property values in the adjacent area. Since the project is consistent with the GGAMP and the LDC, staff is of the opinion this CPUD will not adversely impact property values. However, this is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results which may be internal or external to the subject property. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning; however zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since 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. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in the LDC is that their sound application, when combined with the site development plan approval process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in deterrence to improvement or development of adjacent property. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. The proposed rezone to CPUD is in compliance with the GMP. The GMP is a public policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are consistent with said plan. In light of this fact the proposed CPUD does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is Singer Park CPUD - AR -13048 Revised: 3 -20 -09 Page 15 of 20 further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. The property is presently undeveloped. The subject property could be developed within existing Estates zoning regulation. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. The request is consistent with the GMP, and is therefore, within the needs of the community. The "Neighborhood Center Subdistrict" limits the uses allowed and identifies prohibited uses. The "Neighborhood Subdistrict" provides regulations for buffering, preservation areas, access, and open space requirements. An "Old Florida" architectural style is required and the building height is limited to one (1) story, with a maximum height of 35 feet. Therefore, staff is of the opinion that the proposed CPUD is not out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood. 15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. There may be other sites in the County that could accommodate the uses proposed; however, this is not the determining 1 =actor when evaluating the appropriateness of a zoning decision. 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. Any development anticipated by the PUD document would require considerable site alteration and this project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the site development plan approval process and again later as part of the building permit process. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County GMP and as defined and implemented through the Collier County adequate public facilities ordinance. The project will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in the LDC regarding Adequate Public Facilities for and the project and will need to be consistent with all applicable goals and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities. This petition has been reviewed by county staff that is responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the rezoning process, and that staff has concluded that no Level of Service will be adversely impacted. Singer Park CPUD -AR -13048 Revised 3 -20 -09 Page 16 of 20 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. PUD Findings: 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. As previously stated, the property is designated for commercial intermediate uses as identified by the Neighborhood Center Subdistrict of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP). 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, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Documents submitted with the application provided satisfactory evidence of unified control. The CPUD document and the general LDC development regulations make appropriate provisions for the continuing operation and maintenance of common areas. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives and policies of the GMP (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 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 and the use mixture within the project itself. Staff believes that this petition is compatible, both internally and externally, with the proposed uses and with the existing undeveloped land. Additionally, the Development Commitments contained in the PUD document provide additional requirements the developer will have to fulfill. Singer Park CPUD -AR -13048 Revised: 3 -20 -09 Page 17 of 20 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. Although development of the project has not yet commenced, the timing or sequence of development in light of concurrency requirements does not appear to be a significant problem for this project based upon the transportation commitments contained in the PUD document and discussed in considerable detail in the GMP Transportation section of this report. In addition, the project's development must be in compliance 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. Ability, as applied in this context, implies supporting infrastructure such as wastewater disposal system, potable water supplies, and capacity of roads, is supportive of conditions emanating from urban development. 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. This criterion essentially requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards and deviations proposed for this CPUD depart from development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. "I 'he development standards in this CPUD are similar to those standards. The petitioner is not seeking any deviations. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): Synopsis provided by Cheri Rollins, Administrative Assistant: The meeting was duly noticed by the applicant and held on January 12, 2009 at 5:30 p.m. at the Big Corkscrew Fire House. Seven people from the public attended, as well as the applicant's team: Ron Nino of Vanasse Daylor, LLP, and Rich Yovanovich of Goodlette, Coleman, & Johnson and county staff. Mr. Nino presented an overview of the requested Planned Unit Development (PUD) Rezone from the Estates (E) zoning district to Commercial Planned Use Development (CPUD) their client is seeking. There was no opposition from those in attendance to the requested rezoning. However, they asked if there was a site plan they could look at. The applicant responded, "Not at this time, however the Singer Park CPUD - AR -13048 Revised: 3 -20 -09 Page 18 of 20 building(s) will be one story not to exceed 35 feet in height when built ". The participants also asked what kind of uses the applicant was seeking with the rezone. Mr. Nino responded that they are seeking C -I through C -3 uses only, and a hand -out listing those uses was passed out to those in attendance. The meeting concluded at approximately 6:15 p.m. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: This petition was not heard by the EAC because the site is under the size threshold (10 acres) to require an Environmental Impact Statement. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report for PUDZ,- 2008 -AR -13048 revised on March 20, 2009. RECOMMENDATION: Zoning and Land Development Review Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PUDZ- 2008 -AR -13048 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval for the rezoning request from the (E) Estates Zoning District to Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD). Singer Park CPUD -AR -13048 Revised: 3 -20 -09 Page 19 of 20 PREPARED BY: NANCY N C1-1 AI P, PRINCIPAL PLANNER DA 4 DEPAR EN OP ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REVIEWED BY: i R RAYMON V. htLLOVS, CONING MANAGER DATE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW - - -- - `y'17 �. =Q-d� S SAN ISTENES, AICP, DIRECTOR DALE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVED BY: K. SCHMITT TOR llA'1: DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION MARK P. STRAIN. CHAIRMAN DATE Tentatively scheduled for the May 26, 2009 Board of County Commissioners Meeting Singer Park CPUD - AR -13048 Revised 3 -20 -09 Page 20 of 20 ORDINANCE NO. 09- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004 -41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH INCLUDES THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM AN ESTATE (E) ZONING DISTRICT TO A COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (CPUD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR A 5.14 + /- ACRE PARCEL TO BE KNOWN AS THE SINGER PARK CPUD LOCATED EAST OF EVERGLADES BOULEVARD AND SOUTH OF IMMOKALEE ROAD (CR 846), IN SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 28 FAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Nadesha Ranasinghe, represented by Ron Nino, of Vanasse and Daylor, LLP, petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Section 30, Township 47 South, Range 28 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from an Estate (E) Zoning District to a Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) Zoning District for a 5.14 -t/- acre parcel to be known as The Singer Park CPUD, in accordance with Exhibits A through E attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. The appropriate zoning atlas Page l of 2 map or maps, as described in Ordinance Number 2004 -41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, is /are hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO: This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super - majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this _ _ day of 2009. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By' - - - -- - - -- By: - - -- - -- Deputy Clerk DONNA FIALA, CHAIRMAN Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Heidi Ashton -Cicko Assistant County Attorney Exhibit A: Permitted Uses Exhibit B: Development Standards Exhibit C: Master Plan Exhibit D: Legal Description Exhibit E: Developer Commitments 08- CPS - 00959/9 HFAC Page 2 of 2 Singer Park PUDZ- 2008 -AR -13048 EXHIBIT "A" February 20, 2009 Page 1 of 5 EXHIBIT "A" 1. GENERAL. DESCRIPTION The CPUD Master Plan is intended to provide for commercial land uses. The Commercial area designated on the CPUD Master Plan is intended to provide retail and/or office uses up to a floor area of 45,000 square feet. All commercial areas shall be developed with a common architectural theme, which includes buildings and signs. 2. PERMITTED USES No building, structure or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or part, for other than the following: A. Principal Uses and Structures 1. Accounting 2. Adjustment and collection services 3. Advertising agencies 4. Apparel and accessory stores 5. Architectural services 6. Auditing 7. Auto and home supply stores 8. Banks, credit unions and trusts 9. Barber shops 10. Beauty shops 11. Bookkeeping services 12. Business associations 13. Business consulting services 14. Business credit institutions 15. Business services — miscellaneous 811 vrn 1,1 a_.t.'iG s ....�e.... Group 8721 Group 7322 Group 7311 Groups 5611 -5699 with 5,000 square feet or less of gross floor area in the principal structure Group 8712 Group 8721 Group 5531 with 5,000 square feet or less of gross floor area in the principal structure Groups 6011 -6099 Group 7241, except for barber schools Group 7231, except for beauty schools Group 8721 Group 8611 Group 8748 Groups 6153 -6159 Group 7389, except auctioneering service, automobile recovery, automobile repossession, batik work, bottle exchanges, bronzing, cloth cutting, contractors disbursement, cosmetic kits, cotton inspection, cotton sampler, directories- telephone, drive -away automobile, exhibits- building, filling pressure containers, field warehousing, fire extinguisher, floats - decoration, folding and refolding, gas systems, bottle labeling, liquidation services, metal slitting and shearing, packaging and labeling, patrol of electric transmission or gas lines, Singer Park PUDZ- 2008 -AR -13048 EXHIBIT "A" February 20, 2009 Page 2 of 5 16. Child day care services 17. Churches 18. Civic social and fraternal associations 19. Commercial art and graphic design 20. Commercial photography 21. Computer and computer software stores 22. Computer programming, data Processing and other computer related services 23. Credit reporting services 24. Drug stores 25. Eating places 26. Engineering services 27. Essential services, subject to Section 2.01.03 of the LDC 28. Federal and federally sponsored credit agencies 29. Food stores 30. Funeral services 31. Gasoline service stations 32. General merchandise stores 33. Group care facilities pipeline or powerline inspection, press clipping service, recording studios, repossession service, rug binding, salvaging of damaged merchandise, scrap steel cutting, shrinking textiles, solvent recovery, sponging textiles, swirmning pool cleaning, tape slitting, textile designers, textile folding, tobacco sheeting, window trimming and yacht brokers. Group 8351 Group 8641 Group 7336 Group 7335 Group 5734 with 5,000 square feet of less of gross floor area in the principal structure Groups 7371 through 7376 and 7379 Group 7323 Group 5912 Group 5812, except contract feeding, dinner theaters, food service - institutional, and industrial feeding with 6,000 square feet or less in gross floor area in the principal structure. Group 8711 Group 6111 Groups 5411 through 5499 with 5,000 square feet or less of gross floor area in the principal structure. Group 7261, except crematories Group 5541, not to exceed 12 refueling stations; subject to the LDC requirements Groups 5331 through 5399 with 5,000 square feet or less of gross floor area in the principal structure. Category I and II (except for homeless shelters); care units (except for homeless slichers); nursing homes, assisted living facilities pursuant to F.S. § 400.402 and ch. 5SA -5 F.A.C.; and continuing care retirement communities pursuant to F.S. § 651 and ch. 4- 193 F.A.C.; all subject to LDC requirements. Singer Park PUDZ- 2008 -AR -13048 EXHIBIT "A" February 20, 2009 Page 3 of 5 34. Health services, offices and clinics 35. Home furniture and furnishing stores 36. Home health care services 37. Household appliance stores 38. Insurance carriers, agents and brokers 39. Labor unions 40. Landscape architects, consulting and planning 41. Laundry, cleaning and garment services 42. Legal services 43. Loan brokers 44. Management services 45. Membership organizations, miscellaneous 46. Mortgage brokers and loan correspondents 47. Museums and art galleries 48. Musical instrument stores 49. Paint, glass and wallpaper stores 50. Personal credit institutions 51. Personal services, miscellaneous 52. Personnel supply services 53. Photocopying and duplicating services 54. Photofinishing laboratories 55. Photographic studios, portrait 56. Physical fitness facilities 57. Political organizations 58. Professional membership organizations 59. Public administration 60. Public relations services Groups 8011 through 8049 Groups 5712 through 5719 with 5,000 square feet or less of gross floor area in the principal structure. Group 8082 Group 5722 with 5,000 square feet or less of gross floor area in the principal structure. Groups 6311 through 6399 and 6411 Group 8631 Group 0781 Group 7212, 7215, 7216, non - industrial dry cleaning only Group 8111 Group 6163 Groups 8741 and 8742 Group 8699 Group 6162 Group 8412 Group 5736 with 5,000 square feet or less of gross floor area in the principal structure. Group 5231 with 5,000 square feet or less of gross floor area in the principal structure. Group 6141 Group 7299 — babysitting bureaus, clothing rental, costume rental, dating service, debt counseling, depilatory salons, diet workshops, dress suit rental, electrolysis, genealogical investigation service, and hair removal only. Groups 7361 and 7363 Group 7334 Group 7384 Group 7221 Group 7991 Group 8651 Group 8621 Groups 9111 through 9199, 9311, 9411 through 9451, 9512 through 9532, 9611 through 9651 Group 8743 Singer Park PUDZ - 2008 -AR -13048 EXHIBIT "A" February 20, 2009 Page 4 of 5 61. Radio, television and consumer electronics stores 62. Real estate 63. Record and prerecorded tape stores 64. Religious organizations 65. Repair services — miscellaneous 66. Retail nurseries, lawn and garden supply stores 67. Retail services — miscellaneous 68. Secretarial and court reporting services 69. Security and commodity brokers, dealer, exchanges and services 70. Shoe repair shops and shoeshine parlors 71. Social services, individual and family 72. Surveying services 73. Tax return preparation services 74. Travel agencies 75. United State Postal Service 76. Veterinary services 77. Videotape rental Group 5731 with 5,000 square feet or less of gross floor area in the principal structure. Groups 6531 through 6552 Group 5735 with 5,000 square feet of less of gross floor area in the principal structure. Group 8661 Groups 7629 through 7631 and 7699 — bicycle repair, binocular repair, camera repair, key duplicating, lawnmower repair, leather goods repair, locksmith shop, picture framing, and pocketbook repair only. Group 5261 with 5,000 square feet or less of gross floor area in the principal structure. Groups 5921 through 5960 except pawnshops and building materials, Groups 5992 through 5999 except auction rooms, awning shops, gravestones, hot tubs, monuments, swimming pools, tombstones and whirlpool baths with 5,000 square feet or less of gross floor area in the principal structure Group 7338 Group 6211 through 6289 Group 7251 Group 8322, activity centers, elderly or handicapped only; day care centers, adult and handicapped only. Group 8713 Group 7291 Group 4724 Group 4311, except major distribution center Group 0742, excluding outdoor kenneling Group 7841 with 5,000 square feet or less of gross floor area in the principal structure Any other commercial use allowed in the C -1, C -2, or C -3 Zoning Districts that is deemed appropriate by the Board of Zoning Appeals by the process set forth in the LDC. Note: Any of the foregoing uses that are subject to a gross floor area limitation shall be permitted by right without the maximum floor area limitation if the use is developed as an individual structure that is part of a component of a shopping center. Singer Park PUDZ- 2008 -AR -13048 EXHIBIT "A" February 20, 2009 Page 5 of 5 B. Accessory Uses Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to the Permitted Uses within this CPUD depicted on the CPUD Master Plan, except drive- through facilities limited only to banks with a maximum of three (3) drive - through lanes per bank. C. Prohibited Uses: 1. Hardware stores Group 5251 2. Drinking places Group 5813 3. Liquor Stores Group 5921 4. Mail order houses Group 5961 5. Automatic merchandizing machine Group 5962 operators 6. Crematories Group 7261 7. Radio, TV representatives Group 7313 8. Direct mail advertising services Group 7331 9. Amusement and recreation services Group 7999 10. General hospitals Group 8062 11. Psychiatric hospitals Group 8063 12. Specialty hospitals Group 8069 13. Elementary and secondary schools Group 8211 14. Colleges Group 8221 15. Junior colleges Group 8222 16. Libraries Group 8231 17. Correctional institutions Group 9223 18. Waste management Group 9511 19. Homeless shelters and soup kitchens ��;�„ , _ Singer Park PUDZ- 2008 -AR -13048 EXHIBIT `B" February 12, 2009 Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT `B" TABLE H A. COMMERCIAL, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS PRINCIPAL USES MINIMUM LOT AREA 10,000 Square Feet MINIMUM LOT WIDTH 100 Feet MINIMUM YARDS (External) From Everglades Blvd ROW From other CPIJD Boundaries MINUMUM YARDS (internal) Front Yard Setback Side Yard Setback Rear Yard Setback MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN STRUCTURES MAXIMUM HEIGHT Zoned Actual MINIMUM FLOOR AREA MAX GROSS FLOOR AREA PRESERVE EASEMENT SETBACK 25 Feet 25 Feet 10 Feet 10 Feet 15 Fect 15 Feet 35 Feet and I Story 40 Feet and 1 Story 700 Square Feet* 45,000 Square Feet 25 Fect *Per principal structure on the finished first floor. SPS = Same as Principal Structure ROW = Right -of -Way ACCESSORY USES Not Applicable Not Applicable SPS SPS 10 Feet 10 Feet 10 Feet 10 Feet 20 Feet and 1 Story Not Applicable Not Applicable 10 Feet Table 11 above sets forth the development standards for land uses within the Singer Park CPUD. Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in applicable sections of the Land Development Code (LDC) in effect as of the date of approval of the site development plan or subdivision plat. Singer Park PUDZ- 2008 -AR -13048 EXHIBIT `B" February 12, 2009 Page 2 of 2 B. ARCHITECTURAL AND RELATED REQUIREMENTS a. All buildings and structures shall utilize a common architectural theme. This theme shall be applicable to both building design and signage. b. All buildings shall have tile roofs, `Old Style Florida' metal roofs, or decorative parapet walls above the roofline. The buildings shall be finished in light, subdued colors, except for decorative trim. C. The project shall be designed to encourage pedestrian traffic through placement of sidewalks, pedestrian walkways, and marked crosswalks within parking areas. d. Drive- through establishments shall be limited to banks, with no more than 3 lanes; the drive - through areas shall be architecturally integrated with the rest of the building. e. Trash receptacles shall be screened on three (3) sides by a six (6) to eight (8) foot high opaque masonry wall or fence with an opaque gate on the remaining side for access. O 0 4Vo II G I^ ^ S3 d J �S -7 OZ h roo 0000 0 %us two$° Q MID V °4y �mw0 WN�Ww�` 2R4� W^Obo °� ��j2h0 ��11W .�6 iWwCC� O� UN000 3H1 01 '150J ON 1V '03101030 9N136 SI MOM ,09 V SOMVONVIS n3L se 000HbO9N013N dWPJO Mad 83J30B ,SZ I \ I \ I dW0 3H1 Ji NOUV1bOdSNVd1 A& 3O HIM a NVOMOJJV NI SV d1N00J 3H1 01 IV "OJIVJI030 DN139 51, W W N e a� 0 O W J Op QF AS AS R9WW1 ti ° 4 QF 2 h ¢ *M tl °i VJ NQ 1130d J�oa eZh�o hln= � w I Q?z e ab° IW N U °1 z$ �cwio¢ Ell fin, °zb;W w mm W o �UtS�W j¢WOS pg YV� IUN \- N p R T2Jh° °U rc 2�KU� W 2 3 W p ] OOOOOOVI 3�n riON ¢W0^iUU �-U . N N ^W Op0 g¢m ti0 O O rcmu w W W In W>Wti ° UU UUUUWUj 4 O Vl v10 b O� 24 Wp Q krn N U Ti Till U p I hp AN N N . An O O p U �i W W ° WW -L[NN dYl1 LV3If3513 MI) Q In K �n � O nag 530V7man °w < z¢mn dW0 3H1 Ji NOUV1bOdSNVd1 A& 3O HIM a NVOMOJJV NI SV d1N00J 3H1 01 IV "OJIVJI030 DN139 51, W W N � � w Rai b UN WU O W J Op QF Qp+O Q O 4 QF 2 h J1 F Z *M tl °i VJ NQ 1130d F � Q mut 2 wj� WU Q � w I Q?z izi N N U °1 O� N w mm .'M3ddO6 3dV950NV1.5Z /,d.1'. '. VFW i� m.� Ory4 IUN \- N p W °U rc I -ya F tlQ i U W p ] OOOOOOVI n w Rai b UN WU O W J Op L1 Qp+O Q O Q 2 h tl *M tl °i N U 1130d F � Q mut 2 wj� 09 ON 00 ON � w I Q?z izi N N U .'M3ddO6 3dV950NV1.5Z /,d.1'. '. Nrniv1303n 3nuVN ,sZ .err tio_ c� W W U Zo�� enom ae k e Wotip W II 4 v, �II U O �tiUti wow U to V s ¢`[ ni m2W too; ryooy b ¢i i omn ZOh ¢-ti -6ti 'O vi b¢O Uj$ N w � 2w0 h lu b � m2W Z 1 i^ R i I^2W ¢ U �'rc wwmb Oi N N k N %U µ N Q II w W J a o U � a 4 W W 2 � � U o c °3 WOE°. w Rai b UN WU W tL rob Op F vjpe li Qp+O Q O to U U 2 W W 2 p N kO4 *M 13W313 O �ti °i o�m vl 2 0 1130d *O 09 ON 00 ON OS V N .err tio_ c� W W U Zo�� enom ae k e Wotip W II 4 v, �II U O �tiUti wow U to V s ¢`[ ni m2W too; ryooy b ¢i i omn ZOh ¢-ti -6ti 'O vi b¢O Uj$ N w � 2w0 h lu b � m2W Z 1 i^ R i I^2W ¢ U �'rc wwmb Oi N N k N %U µ N Q II w W J a o U � a 4 W W 2 � � U o c °3 WOE°. - ')N_b -qb tiO b0°cbb0 o Vryti'�10 kO4 *M *� *MMN *O N N U ¢m�0 ¢¢iui¢¢QGGQ p nOnbO^rO UI i 1 61 0 OOOOOOVI bU_ N ti0 O O w W W In p 4. ��kiow krn N U I hp ~O 6iw OOry ° WW kk�ppo no °w 2 z¢mn New � to to rcfi mm hl�i p ° OCGNb fib° °0y121 w mm °K4� � 0oomm suck, �� 6O jam �IgO° in vl >p �w$iia �p2Z2� 4�WWW�� pOp20 .UOj �.4 W w� W �W IaWi �bw vWi PUDZ -A R- ] 3048 EXHIBIT "D" LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE NORTH 180 FEET AND THE SOUTH 150 FEET OF TRACT 128, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT NO. 47, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 7 AT PAGE 32 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. Singer Park PLIDZ-2008 -AR -13048 EXHIBIT "E" Page] of 3 EXHIBIT "E" DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS The development of the Singer Park CPUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this Ordinance and applicable sections of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) and Growth Management Plan (GMP) in effect at the time of issuance of any development order, such as, but not limited to, final subdivision plat, final site development plan, excavation permit, and/or preliminary work authorization, to which such regulations relate. Where these regulations fail to provide developmental standards, then the provisions of the most similar district in the LDC shall apply. UTILITIES The project shall utilize well and septic systems until it is within an authorized water and sewer service area and central water and sewer services are available. TRANSPORTA'T'ION A. Any tum lanes (or modifications to tun lanes) serving this site that are required to be installed during any subsequent Development Order on this site shall be the responsibility of the developer, his successors, or assigns to fund or construct. The developer shall not relocate the Easterly edge of paving of Everglades Boulevard to accommodate turn lanes unless otherwise approved by the County. The turn lane design at the time of the first subsequent development order application shall anticipate a 45mph design speed. B. Fair share payment shall be required of the Developer, his successors, or_ assigns toward improvements (either under County contract, planned, or conceptual) at the Oil Well Road/Everglades Boulevard intersection and the Immokalee Road/Everglades Boulevard Intersection. Developers' fair share estimate(s) will require approval from the County prior to approval of the first Development Order, and payment must be received by the County prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy_ C. The additional right -of -way shown on the CPUD Master Plan shall be dedicated on the plat or conveyed in fee simple by deed to the County at no cost to Collier County within 180 days of approval of the Singer Park CPUD. More specifically, this additional right -of -way shall be 50 feet in width along the project's entire frontage along the Everglades Boulevard right- of-way. This dedication shall satisfy LDC requirements for compensating right of way to accommodate turn lanes. Also,_any existing lands located within the existing Everglades Boulevard right of way or easement shall also be dedicated in fee simple to the County at no G iC1111flGundf111TUU Fe,a ... ISi,,,, 4vk CaUU 4R- 13648FFh,dil F I..CammGnen6 3 20- 19.d,c Singer Park PUDZ- 2008 -AR -13048 EXHIBIT "E" Page 2of3 cost to the County, to avoid severance of the underlying parcel. No credit for mitigation shall be construed from the dedication of lands within the existing roadway boundary. D. This PUD shall be limited to a maximum total p.m. peak hour trip generation of 277 trips for any mix of proposed land uses. ENVIRONMENTAL A A minimum of 0.66 acres (15% of the 4.39 acres of native vegetation on site) shall be required to be retained. LANDSCAPE AND BUFFERING A. A 25 -foot wide landscape buffer shall be provided along Everglades Boulevard. This buffer shall contain two (2) staggered rows of trees that shall be spaced no more than thirty (30) feet on center, and a double row hedge at least two (2) feet in height at time of planting and attaining a minimum of three (3) feet in height within one (1) year. A minimum of fifty (50) percent of the twenty -five (25) foot wide buffer area shall be comprised of a meandering bed of shrubs and ground covers other than grass. Existing native trees shall be retained within this twenty- five (25) -foot wide buffer area to aid in achieving this buffer requirement; other existing native vegetation shall be retained, where possible, to aid in achieving this buffer requirement. Water retention /detention areas shall be allowed in this buffer area if left in its natural state, and drainage conveyance through the buffer area shall be allowed if necessary to reach an external outfall. B. Fences or walls may be constructed on the commercial side of the required landscape buffer between adjacent commercial and residential uses. If constructed, such fences or walls shall not exceed five (5) feet in height. Walls shall be constructed of brick or stone_ Fences shall be of wood or concrete post or rail types, and shall be of open design (not covered by slats, boards or wire). C. Projects directly abutting residential property (property zoned E- Estates and without an approved conditional use) shall provide, at a minimum, a seventy five (75) feet wide buffer in which no parking uses are permitted. Twenty-five (25) feet of the width of the buffer along the developed area shall be a landscape buffer_ A minimum of fifty (50) feet of the buffer width shall consist of retained native vegetation and must be consistent with LDC requirements. The native vegetation retention area may consist of a perimeter berm and be used for water management detention. Any newly constructed berm shall be revegetated to meet requirements of the LDC (native vegetation replanting requirements). Additionally, in order to be considered for approval, use of the native vegetation retention area for water management purposes shall meet the following criteria: G. ICUUVnAGUmnaChPUO R02on iSo,rP,rk MUD PP -0]04 F. hi'bp F DeComnilmenls 320099oc Singer Park PUDZ- 2008 -AR -13048 EXHIBIT °E" Page 3 of 3 (1) There shall be no adverse impacts to the native vegetation being retained. The additional water directed to this area shall not increase the annual hydro - period miless it is proven that such would have no adverse impact to the existing vegetation. (2) If the project requires permitting by the South Florida Water Management District, the owner /applicant shall provide a letter or official document from the District indicating that the native vegetation within the retention area will not have to be removed to comply with water management requirements. If the District cannot or will not supply such a letter, then the native vegetation retention area shall not be used for water management purposes. (3) If the project is reviewed by Collier County, the County engineer shall provide evidence that no removal of native vegetation is necessary to facilitate the necessary storage of water in the water management area. D. The project shall he designed to provide a Junctional public open -space component. Such public open -space shall be developed as green space within a pedestrian - accessible courtyard, as per the LDC, as in effect at the time of PUD approval. Walkways or courtyards shall connect adjacent buildings. LIGHTING A. All lighting facilities shall be architecturally -- designed, and shall be limited to a height Of twenty -five (25) feet. Such lighting facilities shall be shielded from neighboring residential land uses. (1) Where a streetlight or an area light is required, it shall be of the type specified to protect neighboring properties from direct glare. Area lighting shall be shielded such that direct rays do not pass property lines. Low- pressure sodium lamps are encouraged while halogen type lights are discouraged. (2) Where required, the street lamp shall be of the high pressure sodium type and have a "cobra head with flat bottom" style or be fully shielded so that light is directed only downward. Street lamps shall be mounted on a wood pole at a height and wattage recommended by the appropriate electric utility and as appropriate for a rural area. (3) Parking lot lamps shall be low- pressure sodium type lamps and shall be mounted so that they point downward without direct rays extending past the parking lot, building entrance, walkway, or other area intended to be illuminated. (4) Where lighting of recreational areas is required, such lighting shall be mounted so as to focus illumination on the areas intended to be illuminated, and to limit the amount of light that extends outside of the intended area. CIC', a, A )i'.. -zo-e Jinye ratlCUDA.. -.Jl L1..D"C', 1,1:(- ''�JOc