The URL can be used to link to this page

CCPC Backup 04/16/2009 RCCPC REGULAR MEETING BACKUP DOCUMENTS APRIL 16, 2009 AGENDA Revised COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 8:30 A.M., THURSDAY, APRIL 16, 2009, IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, 3301 TAMLkMI 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 WISHING TO HAVE WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC MATERIALS INCLUDED IN THE CCPC AGENDA PACKETS MUST SUBMIT SAID MATERIAL A MINIMUM OF 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC HEARING. IN ANY CASE, WRITTEN MATERIALS INTENDED TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CCPC SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MATERIAL USED IN PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CCPC WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF THE RECORD AND WILL BE 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— MARCH 19, 2009 6. BCC REPORT- RECAPS —APRIL 14, 2009 7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT 8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 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) B. 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) C. 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) 9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Petition: BD- 2009 -AR- 14138, Hussein Wafapoor represented by Joshua Maxwell of Turrell, Hall and Associates, Inc., requesting a 10 -foot Boat Dock Extension over the maximum 20 -foot limit as provided in section 5.03.06 of the LDC to allow a 30 -foot dock facility to accommodate one vessel. Subject property is located at 140 Conners Avenue, legally described as Lot 22, Conner's Vanderbilt Beach Estates Unit No. 3, Section 28, Township 48 S, Range 25 E, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Ashley Caserta) B. Petition: VA- 2009 -AR- 14139, Hussein Wafapoor represented by Joshua Maxwell of Turrell, Hall and Associates, Inc., is requesting a variance from Section 5.03.06 E.6. to reduce a required side yard setback of 7.5 feet for a dock facility to 0 feet. The subject property is located at 140 Conners Avenue, Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, AICP) C. Petition: PE- 2008 -AR -14071 Sandbanks LLC, represented by Michael R. Fernandez, AICP of Planning Development Incorporated is requesting a Parking Exemption pursuant to Land Development Code Subsection 4.05.02.K, to allow onsite parking on the contiguous 0.69 acres located at 3114 and 3126 N. Tamiami Trail of Residential zoned land all under common ownership. More than 67 percent (132 of the 195 spaces) of the required parking are located within the commercial zoned portion of the parcel. Subject property is located in Section 22, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Melissa Zone) D. Petition: PUDA- 2008 -AR- 13801, William L. Hoover, President of Catalina Land Group, Inc. the Manager of Wolf Creek Estates LLC and Buckstone Estates LLC; and Larry Mayer Abbo, Vice President of Prime Homes at Portofino Falls, Ltd., all of which are represented by William L. Hoover, AICP of Hoover Planning and Development, Inc. and Richard Yovanovich, of Goodlette, Coleman et al and Josh Froth of Davidson Engineering, Inc. are requesting a PUD Amendment for Wolf Creek RPUD to revise traffic stipulations. The applicant is proposing to change Section 5.7, Paragraph N and Paragraph O of the RPUD Document. Subject property is located on 167.96± acres in Section 34, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Kay Deselem, AICP) F1 10. OLD BUSINESS 11. NEW BUSINESS 12. PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM 13. DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA 14. ADJOURN 4/16/09 CCPC Agenda/Ray Bellows /cr AGENDA ITEM 8 -A 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 -MXD) 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 S , Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Steven T. Williams Assistant County Attorney Exhibits Attached: A: Master Plan B: Conditions 2009. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: DONNA FIALA, Chairman Page 2 of 2 71111d4� p ®OR om �isr�3 �pmuixviwrt ease F�IEE3ELI000w �1� `m NY'1d NOISN3WIO 3115 nom � o ciom room €€ ¢lipE A i oe{ `� _p § p e =F :Se. a•,. E. -••�. alEsEj �1� � { {iiF a s3� jE {F j1`E�?.:! ?i= ;•.e "s E.... i F 6�e' s jFjtpt f (t ii 5 55 � fill yE�6: �g(a [hd �� ®��F�t, =�Ee ii4 SIEIS3i 4Sp{"e! �B�HICt�E[aor6� ®eEliiE�e. 41El EE F Fe FvSe E`e.i p.i § a a R1 E3tE C.iaEE e i tlSie1M# {.9 2= 3 sg 85 C� a Me .Q W �muov'uxnaa aamoa �isr�3 �pmuixviwrt ease F�IEE3ELI000w �1� `m NY'1d NOISN3WIO 3115 R1 E3tE C.iaEE e i tlSie1M# {.9 2= 3 sg 85 C� a Me .Q W I M' F1v2 c ` {p g$ j1 Q WWa .�1 aj a$p VQO o0p I � aWW R N r nbuonLL Q O o- 3 V J N' p L7 N N m Z w} w o a p LL tt a o 7_ w r = aLL I �aa I - 1 m 1 I k OL }+e 8 xM y rf ills ��,��_� Illlllill • '� � ° = a c I M' CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VA- 2008 -AR -13977 April 4, 2009 Staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition VA- 2008 -AR -13977 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 landscape buffer width requirements as depicted on the applicant's conceptual site plan (Exhibit A), entitled, "Site Dimension Plan, prepared by CPH Engineers, Inc., dated December 2008, as revised through February 11, 2009; and as further depicted in the landscape plan, entitled "McDonald's, Naples, Collier County, Florida" dated April 1, 2009 (Exhibit A -1), 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 conceptual site 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 conceptual site 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 conceptual site 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 conceptual site 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 conceptual site 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 AGENDA ITEM 8 -B 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 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: 4.14 Design Guidelines Words stfack threugh are deleted; words underlined are added. Page 1 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 Di,Asien 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 ofDiNrision 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 5.05.081. of the LDC as amended, to allow for innovative design of structures within Naples Botanical Garden, exce tttthat 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. v.....eyef, Cher n,...i ng requirements shall ,...piyi r�er!ete�nrn. .. - . .. . - . - •- - - B. Decorative walls and/or fencing shall be provided in accordance with the standards of Section 2.6� 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 overflow parking and/or potential future expansion area on the east side of Bayshore Drive shall meet the requirements of Section 2.6.11.4. 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 interim or temporary structures shall be approved through the site development plan process. 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: Words &tFaek4hFetigli are deleted; words underlined are added. Page 2 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. Noncommercial research organizations (group 8733) 4. Commercial, physical and biological research (group 873 1) 5. Commercial, economic, sociological, educational research (group 8732) 6. Auditoriums 7. Interim or temporary structures to provide the principal and accessory uses. 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 for two (2) three (3) year extensions utilizing the insubstantial change to the approved SDP process. Requests for additional extensions may be approved by the Board of County Commissioners through the public petition 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 property boundary and one hundred fifty (150) feet from the Droverty 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. 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 F.,=. r o�t, 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. Words stmek4hFeagh are deleted; words underlined are added. Page 3 2. The developer shall provide a 5 -foot wide sidewalk along the length of its property limits on F m StrR , Thomasson Drive and on Bayshore Drive from Thomasson Drive to the out parcel located on the west side of Bayshore Drive apeint eppesite the everflew parking let. 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 alone 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, his successors, or assigns shall provide a fair share contribution toward the capital cost of a traffic signal and turn lanes (or alternative intersection roundabout design) at the intersection of Bayshore Drive and Thomasson Dnve at such time that the improvements are constructed. Payment shall be provided to the applicable Public agencv(ies) responsible for desiming and constructing the improvements. ifjus4ied by J. The developer(s) shall provide a separate right turn lane on Bayshore Drive for the southbound to westbound traffic movement into the Main EntranceNisitor Parking Area. and eJI site Y-ela*d tFanspeftation iffqwevement(s) ineluding, but flat limited to, any-and 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 -of -way, shall be provided in conjunction with said improvement(s), as determined by the Collier County Transportation Staff. - ne-sah4eot development Pam lane inipfavements sh&4-b�. Words ,moo a #i ^' are deleted; words underlined are added. Page 4 1✓ 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 researchleducation entrance and overflow parking entrances and/or 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. La.i. Chain link fence shall be permitted to be constructed at the preserve boundary on the southern property 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 adjacent to a preserve where the setback shall be a minimum of five (5) feet. 2. Deviation from LDC Section 5.03.02.A.l.a.u.(a). Black chain link fence shall be permitted at a height of five (5) feet. If the applicant opts to use the black chain link fence it may be used along the southern property line. Thomasson Drive and Hamilton Avenue and the portion of Bayshore Drive where the preserves are located. 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. Words stpdek thfou are deleted; words underlined are added. Page 5 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by 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: Deputy Clerk DONNA FIALA, Chairman Approved as to Form and legal Sufficiency STEVEN T. WILLIAMS 57J Assistant County Attorney y--7•0q Attachment: Exhibit A — PUD Master Plan Words stfuekthroug are deleted; words underlined are added. Page 6 � {QE § , • ! m | , Fig mOEM !© m\ ) \* 4 / u \ ! � ; § < e LU 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 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 DvMIOKALEE ROAD (CR 846), IN SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, 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 + /- 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 1 of 2 a, 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 0 C , Deputy Clerk DONNA FIALA, CHAMMAN Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: �u ,off, Heidi Ashton -Cicko 'c Assistant County Attorney t� Exhibit A: Permitted Uses Exhibit B: Development Standards Exhibit C: Master Plan Exhibit D: Legal Description Exhibit E: Developer Commitments 08LPS- 00859/9 HFAC Page 2 of 2 Singer Park PUDZ- 2008 -AR -13048 EXHIBIT "A" February 20, 2009 Page I 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 r F,,3l i_S[ na u.. 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 rta�niS,, I'AO:cn 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, swimming 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 shelters); nursing homes, assisted living facilities pursuant to F.S. § 400.402 and ch. 58A -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 MUM "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 ew:olzcrs�.a,ueioe�zw�., �r�nr�nd submmNr�r,;�:!n cuoe9 ax 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 !:!PrL.eGV61 TP*66CO i q'Q?lr=;dal SanT;aAEiniC. A 220,'9.cc; Singer Park PUDZ- 2008 -AR -13048 EXHIBIT `B" April 2, 2009 Page I of 2 EXHIBIT `B" TABLE II 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 25 Feet From West & South CPUD Boundaries 75 feet From other CPUD Boundaries 25 Feet 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 10 Feet 10 Feet 15 Feet 15 Feet 1 Story not to exceed 35 Feet 1 Story not to exceed 40 Feet 700 Square Feet* 45,000 Square Feet 25 Feet *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 SPS 10 Feet 10 Feet 10 Feet 10 Feet 1 Story not to exceed 20 Feet Not Applicable Not Applicable 10 Feet Table II 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. ,dY,cn.. _. JS I,�i n. ✓��oa.. '.K2 .Yrtit�r ,.n „, -aXf57 �..PJ�,]!.mc Singer Park PUDZ- 2008 -AR -13048 EXHIBIT `B" April 2, 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. Cwncamscts and SaY, ingsWancyGundlacnLLxal SatlirSSifempwery lnhma;;:#oQLN15P Vl8_9407,0912i doc Z `w O N i fD eQ5 _ v'r w 3l NZ o° m N N a� tnt � A 'o m 0 S2 Z A rT k Q n oa. mea na NNm =m e^ a �nm 025 r Aqn oa °c F�2 ><o >, a u� n b a A Fp �nl L ba � n A � i z m $ C U1 O A C ooi II a N � � q a n n� a v Nun u c,o2 N >'ek kkHM Mhka T H N C A 0 O m N TO Z i C Z D Nm D N Z�m vD 1 m1u u q°. m v r jm ° p J 4 m N a r a - -_ WIVE WCUAVCW c„aa _ _ _ _ _ _ _ a�n A 50' b n mANp k 0° rr n R c� N2 t` O O p abbb NO C( MRIGA - SAP r < R R� bbbbnb n�T T Tn N 2NAyO T^�^�nTN a O nm s ELEME o n�E ZZD � n Nr o�co a a as FTT o nF Obbbb m Z n .eay 00UT Ap q W Dl pp m a batsx�f saw o�b� TOOT c H x°oTT d .aa C bib (°ii�Ni °� N Z> ^rT�AOUI O NgSi AA�� A ^1 ^lo O �AAOA� 0°N!n �22r"p° tnNOp ougil IR op�b °�I aakmm �0mg11H X{00 + °OOkk O��I N X �k „O Ko Nnkn ° N nN r N U 000000, 00000 > i. 4Vq poar..0 OV ON b`.0 nb nana >a aaana i� n K WµkµW SOH OpwWI+KµW p lnWNd�♦ o<. mN4Dp p�gga °q qb -`-O rT oa. mea na NNm =m e^ a �nm 025 r Aqn oa °c F�2 ><o >, a u� n b a A Fp �nl L ba � n A � i z m $ C U1 O A C ooi II a N � � q a n n� a v Nun u c,o2 N >'ek kkHM Mhka T H N C A 0 O m N TO Z i C Z D Nm D N Z�m vD 1 m1u u q°. m v r jm ° p J 4 m N ^��%� PLAT BOOK 7, Pq GE 32 2Oh-L rl9�esr Sr r 90 FSas�. v� 9T9 9h y 'J C`S PS J TinSF� �n a r a - -_ WIVE WCUAVCW 2 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ``.•_• - PR&SER✓E BUFFER.'. , A 50' b n mANp k 0° rr n R c� N2 t` O O p _ _ _ NO C( MRIGA SAP r < R R� T yO�a00tn N 2NAyO NN a O 22 s ELEME o n�E ZZD � n Nr o�co a a as O T o m Z n .eay 00UT Ap q W Dl pp m a pm saw o�b� TOOT c H a °zn a i d .aa C ^��%� PLAT BOOK 7, Pq GE 32 2Oh-L rl9�esr Sr r 90 FSas�. v� 9T9 9h y 'J C`S PS J TinSF� �n a r a - -_ WIVE WCUAVCW 2 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ``.•_• - PR&SER✓E BUFFER.'. , � ao � ,W/ 25' IANDSCAPE BUFFER -'' � (rw' DISMNI rue xulr -1 _ _ _ T N SAP r < m ^ C p Z T yO�a00tn o ma NN � Zak N2no� s o n�E ZZD � n Nr o�co a a as O T o m Z __r._-A D pp a pm saw o�b� TOOT nn�mxa OCO uO�un �^yi� bib (°ii�Ni °� ” O 1 15 BEING DEDICATED, AT TO THE couN AS 1N ACCOROANCE WITH OF THE TRANSPORTATION o a a r a o� 2 EVERGLADES BLVD. n � � ao � � (rw' DISMNI rue xulr -1 8 2�� SAP r < T yO�a00tn o ma NN � Zak N2no� s o � Nr o�co a a as O T N VA��nnn Z __r._-A D pp a pm saw o�b� TOOT nn�mxa OCO uO�un �^yi� bib (°ii�Ni °� 1 15 BEING DEDICATED, AT TO THE couN AS 1N ACCOROANCE WITH OF THE TRANSPORTATION o a a r a o� 2 EVERGLADES BLVD. n � � ao � � (rw' DISMNI rue xulr -1 8 2�� SAP r < T yO�a00tn o ma NN � Zak N2no� s o � be o�co a a as as nn VA��nnn __r._-A n n saw o�b� TOOT nn�mxa OCO uO�un �^yi� bib (°ii�Ni °� a n S nni A 50' ROW IS BEING r s° iTm$p -'O im °nQa ' nOs °a0 o °o ° q$ x 25- BUFFER PER CLAMP NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER STANDARDS AT NO COST, TO THE COUNTY s �� es esr H � o o � O o� n N2 Oy 0p � b pn0 iizb mOAZq 8 2�� SAP r < o ma n' � Zak N2no� o � a n S nni A 50' ROW IS BEING r s° iTm$p -'O im °nQa ' nOs °a0 o °o ° q$ x 25- BUFFER PER CLAMP NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER STANDARDS AT NO COST, TO THE COUNTY s �� es esr H � o o � O PUDZ -AR -13048 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 PUDZ- 2008 -AR -13048 EXHIBIT °E" Page 1 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. TRANSPORTATION A. 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. 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 1CunenfiGUndfaOh UD RezonesOngez Pa& CPUD AR 1304Mxhibd E DevommMnenis 3 -1009 dx Singer Park PUDZ- 2008 -AR -13048 EXHIBIT "E" Page 2 of 3 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: Gl mrenOGund nWUD Renn Gngar Park CPUD AR 1304M1 hibdE DevCommu'men(s 32609.d.c 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 unless 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 be designed to provide a functional 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. G)Gu anMtopOfachPUO RezonatSinyer Pao CPUO AR- 1304MxhirU E Oev ommiimenfs 3 20 -09 eoc AGENDA ITEM 9 -A Coen County STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FRONT: DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION HEARING DATE: APRIL 16, 2009 SUBJECT: BD- 2009 -AR- 14138, WAFAPOOR BOAT DOCK EXTENSION (COMPANION ITEM: VA- 2009 -AR- 14139) PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: Owner: Hussein Wafapoor Agent: Joshua W. Maxwell 140 Conners Avenue Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. Naples, Florida 34108 3584 Exchange Avenue Naples, Florida 34104 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner is requesting a 10 -foot boat dock extension from the maximum permitted protrusion of 20 feet for waterways greater than 100 feet in width, which will allow construction of a boat docking facility protruding a total of 30 feet into a waterway that is 709 feet wide to allow construction of a new dock with one boat lift. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located at 140 Conners Avenue, legally described as Lot 22, Conner's Vanderbilt Beach Estates Unit No. 3, Section 28, Township 48 S, Range 25 E, Collier County, Florida. (See location map on next page.) PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The purpose of the project is to demolish the existing dock and replace it with a new dock consisting of a walkway on each side of the boat lift. The facility will include a boat dock and lift to be used by a single family home existing on the property. The subject property's limited water frontage creates a unique situation. The proposed dock has been configured in a way to allow for a vessel to safely approach and moor on the lift. The design requires a 10 -foot boat dock extension and a 7.5 -foot Variance from the North -West and South -West riparian lines as described in the companion petition VA- 2009 -AR- 14139. BD- 2009 -AR -14138 3/26/09 Page 1 of 1 q *-15 Josh Maxwell From: Kay Ziegler [EVG_ACA_KZ @nwoca.org] Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 5:16 PM To: Josh Maxwell To whom it may concern, We will be removing the floating jet ski lift on Friday April 17. We have no objections to Mr. Wafapoor's proposed Boat Dock Extension or Variance Petition as long as it stays within the limitations on the proposed plans that we signed. Thankyou Kay Ziegler 4/15/2009 � (| |_ }• . � ( § �\r w 'n - : /] - - U - <'\( __ }- °f , ° (` \ ` - _ % ,% �B. / ME .( . . (| |_ }• . � � ( § w /] U � Ln c« 0 mx; E 4 � O Z_ 2 O w E 4 5 2 / w w U O a � ( § w Ln c« 0 mx; E 4 � O Z_ 2 O w E 4 5 2 / w w U O a SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: SUNJECT PARCEL: Existing single - family residence, zoned RSF -3 SURROUNDING: North — Single - family residence, zoned RSF -3 South — Single - family residence, zoned RSF -3 East - Vanderbilt Lagoon waterway West - Conners Avenue Right -of -Way Aerial BD- 2009 -AR -14138 3/26/09 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION: Environmental Services staff has reviewed this petition and has no objection to the granting of this request. Section 5.03.06(E)(11) (Manatee Protection) of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) is applicable to all multi -slip docking facilities with ten (10) or more slips. The proposed facility consists of one boat slip and is therefore not subject to the provisions of this section. STAFF COMMENTS: In order for the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) to approve the boat dock extension request, it must be determined that at least four out of the five primary criteria and four out of the six secondary criteria, have been met. Section 2.6.21.3 of the previous Collier County Land Development Code (LDC), Ordinance No. 91 -102, as amended, states in part that, "the Collier County Planning Commission, at a duly advertised public hearing, shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny, a dock facility extension based on the criteria below." This language fails to appear in the current LDC. Section Five: Conflict and Severability, of the current Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04 -41, states in part that, "...in the event that any provisions of the adopted recodified LDC should result in the unintended consequences of an unresolved conflict with the provisions of the previously adopted LDC, as amended, the prior provisions will be considered to apply." It has been determined that the omission of this language is the result of an inadvertent error in the compilation of the current LDC and that the provisions of Section Five cited above therefore apply. There are no provisions in the code to limit the length of a vessel, or to limit the maximum protrusion that can be granted by a boat dock extension petition. Staff has consistently evaluated requests for boat dock extension petitions based on the criteria in Section 5.03.06, and has reviewed this petition in accordance with the section and finds the following: Primary Criteria 1. Whether the number of dock facilities and /or boat slips proposed is appropriate in relation to the waterfront length, location, upland land use and zoning of the subject property. Consideration should be made of property on unbridged barrier islands, where vessels are the primary means of transportation to and from the property. (The number should be appropriate; typical single - family use should be no more than two slips; typical multi- family use should be one slip per dwelling unit; in the case of unbridged barrier island docks, additional slips may be appropriate.) Criterion met. The proposed two -dock facility consists of one boat slip, which is appropriate in relation to the 50 -foot waterfront length of the property to serve one 27 -foot vessel. The subject property is zoned RSF -3, and a single family residence exists. 4 BD- 2009 -AR -14138 3/26/09 2. Whether the water depth at the proposed site is so shallow that a vessel of the general length, type and draft as that described in the petitioner's application is unable to launch or moor at mean low tide (MLT). (The petitioner's application and survey should establish that the water depth is too shallow to allow launching and mooring of the vessel(s) described without an extension.) Criterion met. According to the application submitted by the petitioner, the water depths at the site restrict the layout of the dock to be a pull -in design, rather than a parallel docked style. 3. Whether the proposed dock facility may have an adverse impact on navigation within an adjacent marked or charted navigable channel. (The facility should not intrude into any marked or charted navigable channel thus impeding vessel traffic in the channel.) Criterion met. According to the drawing submitted by the petitioner, the proposed dock will not encroach into any marked or charted navigable channel. Standing in yard looking south -east across waterway. 4. Whether the proposed dock facility protrudes no more than 25 percent of the width of the waterway, and whether a minimum of 50 percent of the waterway width between dock facilities on either side is maintained for navigability. (The facility should maintain the required percentages.) BD- 2009 -AR -14138 3/26/09 Criterion met. According to the information provided by the petitioner, the waterway is 709 feet wide at the site as measured by aerial photograph. The proposed facility will occupy about four percent of the waterway width, and about 96 percent of the width will be maintained for navigability. 5. Whether the proposed location and design of the dock facility is such that the facility would not interfere with the use of neighboring docks. (The facility should not interfere with the use of legally permitted neighboring docks.) Criterion met. According to the drawings submitted by the petitioner, the proposed facility will not interfere with the use of neighboring docks. Although the proposed dock encroaches completely into the required 7.5 -foot setback, the layout of the proposed dock for the subject property and the existing dock on the neighboring property to the east are parallel to one another and do not interfere with access. The neighboring property's dock to the south will not be affected. Standing on seawall looking at dock to the northeast. 6 BD- 2009 -AR -14138 3/26/09 Standing on seawall looking at dock to the south. Secondary Criteria 1. Whether there are special conditions not involving water depth, related to the subject property or waterway, which justify the proposed dimensions and location of the proposed dock facility. (There must be at least one special condition related to the property; these may include type of shoreline reinforcement, shoreline configuration, mangrove growth, or seagrass beds.) Criterion met. The seawall and shoreline configuration and limited riparian rights of the property create a restricted area for a dock facility. The proposed dimensions and location of the dock facility are a result of the constricted area. 2. Whether the proposed dock facility would allow reasonable, safe access to the vessel for loading/unloading and routine maintenance, without the use of excessive deck area not directly related to these functions. (The facility should not use excessive deck area.) Criteria met. As shown on the drawings submitted by the petitioner, the deck area is not excessive. The dock facility allows the owner to safely access both sides of the vessel for loading/unloading, maintenance and cleaning. 3. For single- family dock facilities, whether the length of the vessel, or vessels in combination, described by the petitioner, exceeds 50 percent of the subject 7 BD- 2009 -AR -14138 3/26/09 property's linear waterfront footage. (The applicable maximum percentage should be maintained.) Criterion not met. The subject property contains 50 feet of water frontage, and the vessel is 27 feet, or 54 percent of the waterfront footage. 4. Whether the proposed facility would have a major impact on the waterfront view of neighboring property owners. (The facility should not have a major impact on the view of a neighboring property owner.) Criterion met. The property to the northeast has a dock facility that is similar to the proposed dock on the subject property, and according to the application submitted by the petitioner, the homeowner of that property has provided a State Setback Waiver, giving consent for the proposed dock. 5. Whether seagrass beds will be impacted by the proposed dock facility. (if seagrass beds are present, compliance with subsection 5.03.06(I) of the LDC must be demonstrated.) Criterion met. According to the application submitted by the petitioner, no seagrass beds will be impacted by the proposed dock facility. 6. Whether the proposed dock facility is subject to the manatee protection requirements of subsection 5.03.06(E)(11) of this Code. (If applicable, compliance with section 5.03.06(E)(I l) must be demonstrated.) Criterion met. According to Sections 3.2.3.4 and 4.6.3. of the Manatee Protection Plan, the proposed dock facility will be for the mooring of one vessel at a single - family residence and therefore is not subject to the Collier County Manatee Protection Plan Guidelines. The application indicates that the facility will be constructed per the manatee construction standards. The survey shows that the lot has approximately 50 feet of shoreline and the proposed dock facility accommodates one boat slip. Staff analysis indicates that the request meets five of the five primary criteria and five of the six secondary criteria. APPEAL OF BOAT DOCK EXTENSION TO BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS: As to any boat dock extension petition upon which the CCPC takes action, an aggrieved petitioner, or adversely affected property owner, may appeal such final action to the Board of Zoning Appeals. Such appeal shall be filed with the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator within 30 days of the action by the CCPC. In the event that the petition has been approved by the CCPC, the applicant shall be advised that he /she proceeds with construction at his /her own risk during this 30 -day period. 8 BD- 2009 -AR -14138 3/26/09 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the CCPC approve Petition BD- 2009 -AR -14138 subject to the following stipulations: 1. Corresponding permits, or letters of exemption, from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, shall be provided to Collier County prior to the issuance of a building permit. 2. Reflectors and dock numbers of no less than four inches in height shall be installed at the outermost end, on both sides of all docks or mooring pilings, whichever protrudes the furthest into the waterway, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Completion. 3. Manatee Protection signs will be posted in accordance with the agreement between the State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the Hickory Bay West Condominium Association recorded in OR Book 2123, Page 0115 and in accordance with the Collier County Manatee Protection Plan. The required signage shall be posted in a conspicuous manner as close as possible to the furthest protrusion of the dock into the waterway, prior to the issuance of Certificate of Completion. 4. All prohibited exotic species, as such term may now, or hereinafter, be established in the LDC, shall be removed from the subject property prior to issuance of the required Certificate of Completion, and the property shall be maintained free from all prohibited exotic species in perpetuity. 5. Subject to the Collier County Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) approving petition VA- 2009 -AR- 14139. 0 BD- 2009 -AR -14138 3/26/09 PREPARED BY: AG cll, lyz_ 3 f -z-co 1 0 5 ASHLEY CASE TA, SENIOR PLANNER DATE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REVIEWED BY: RA ND V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DATE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REVIEWED BY: -'SUSAN M. ISTENES, AICP, DIRECTOR DA E DEPARTMENT OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVED BY: C3s7O PH K. SCHMITT, ADMINISTRATOR ATE MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & VIRONMENTAL SERVICES Petition Number: BD- 2009 -AR -14138 Staff Report for meeting of CCPC on April 16, 2009 COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN DATE Petition Number BD- 2009 -AR -14138 Staff Report for the April 16, 2009 Collier County Planning Commission Meeting l0 BD- 2009 -AR -14138 3/26/09 "cPScio93� From: hley Sent: Friday, To: W illiamsSteven; bonham_g Subject: Staff report for BD- 2009 -AR -14138 RLS: 09- CPS-00931 Attachments: Title.pdf; RLS.pdf; Reso.pdf; BD-2009-AR-14138—staff report.docx Hi Steve, Please review the attached staff report for CAO approval. This is the first one I've sent via email, please let me know if you need additional information. I'm not sure if you kept a copy of the application materials. Thanks. Tftle.pdf (16 KB) RLS.Pdf (36 KB) � ® Reso. KB) BD-2009-AR-14138 _staff report.... Ashley Caserta, Senior Planner Department of Zoning and Land Development Review 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 Office: 239.252.2942 Fax: 239.252.6353 www colliergev.net/zonina f° q 3, LL. CCPC RESOLUTION NO. RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER BD- 2009 -AR -14138 FOR AN EXTENSION OF A BOAT DOCK ON PROPERTY HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED 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 04 -41, as amended) which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County, among which are provisions for granting extensions for boat docks; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), being drily appointed, has held a properly noticed public hearing and has considered the advisability of a 10 -foot extension over the maximum 20 -foot limit provided in LDC Section 5.03.06 to allow for a 30- foot boat dock facility in an RSF -3 zone for the property hereinafter described; and WHEREAS, the CCPC has found as a matter of fact that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by LDC Section 5.03.06; and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given the opportunity to be heard by this Commission in public meeting assembled, and the Commission having considered all matters presented. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: Revised 3/25/09 - STW Petition Number BD- 2009 -AR- 14138, filed on behalf of Hussein Wafapoor by Joshua Maxwell of Turrell, Hall and Associates, Inc., with respect to the property hereinafter described as: Lot 22, Block R, Unit No. 3, Conner's Vanderbilt Beach Estates according to the plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 89, as described in Plat Book 4299, Page 0234, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida be and the same is hereby approved for a 10 -foot extension of a boat dock over the maximum 20- foot limit to allow for a 30 -foot boat dock facility in the RSF -3 zoning district wherein said property is located, subject to the following conditions: 1. All docks, or mooring pilings, whichever protrude the greater into the water, regardless of length shall have reflectors and house numbers four (4) inches minimum size installed at the outermost end on both sides, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Completion. 2. At least one (1) "Manatee Area' sign must be posted in a conspicuous manner as close as possible to the furthest protrusion of the dock into the waterway, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Completion. 3. Permits or letters of exemption from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection shall be presented to Collier County prior to issuance of a building permit. 4. All prohibited exotic species, as such term may now or hereinafter be established in the LDC, must be removed from the subject property prior to the issuance of the required Certificate of Completion and the property must be maintained free from all prohibited exotic species in perpetuity. 5. Subject to the Collier County Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) approving petition VA- 2009-AR- 14139. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the minutes of this Commission and filed with the County Clerk's Office. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote. Revised 3/25/09 - STW Done this day of 2009. ATTEST: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION COLLIER COUNTY- FLORIDA Joseph K. Schmitt Mark P. Strain, Chairman Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Steven T. Williams 96� A Assistant County Attorney I. 09 -CPS- 00931 \10 Revised 3/25/09 - STW ,42 iL`t 75 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: X TL NS/ o/l� 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: _81/ t!'[= /31 /RKr/A�2D ADDRESS: _A 9-3 O 4te) A V 4E /,),f i'4 L s �'L 3 cjlPb, REPRESENTING: PETITIONER: , OTHER: Ui3/44 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: III C "2GC q H (� `�� f �� j AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: (7 — fi �- /5' PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY PLACE COMPLETED FORM ON THE TABLE LEFT OF THE DIAS IN THE BOARD ROOM PROR TO THE SUBJECT BEING HEARD. NAME: 13 j S 4 U Lj t I - B COY, kc- ADDRESS: `f % y` i Il Z_GIi1 REPRESENTING: PETITIONER: OTHER: X 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: i PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY PLACE COMPLETED FORM ON THE TABLE LEFT OF THE DIAS IN THE BOARD ROOM PROR TO THE SUBJECT BEING HEARD. NAME: , _ �J REPRESENTING: PETITIONER: j /, } F f} 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 -13 Co*e6r County STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION HEARING DATE: APRIL 16, 2009 SUBJECT: VA- 2009 -AR- 14139, WAFAPOOR BOAT DOCK COMPANION ITEM: BD- 2009 -AR -14138 PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: Owner: Hussein Wafapoor Agent: Joshua W. Maxwell 140 Conners Avenue 3548 Exchange Avenue Naples, FL 34108-2151 Naples, FL 34104 -3732 REQUESTED ACTION: To have the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an application for a proposed variance from the required riparian line setbacks of 7.5 feet for property with less than 60 feet of waterfrontage to zero feet as provided for in Section 5.03.06 E.6. of the Land Development Code (LDC). The requested action (if approved) would allow a dock facility at 0 feet from the riparian line. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located at 140 Conners Avenue, legally described as Unit 3, Block R and Lot 22 of Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (See location map on following page) PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The .25f acre property has an existing single family home with a single wood dock and swing lift. The petitioner proposes to replace the existing boat dock with two docks totaling 195 square feet with a boat lift centered between the two docks. This variance petition is a companion application to a boat dock extension petition for a proposed 10- foot extension to the maximum allowed 20 foot boat dock which would (if approved) would allow a 30 -foot long dock. VA- 2006 -AR -14139 Date: 3 -25 -09 Page 1 of 7 z � [ ;!\ :« � � } \�011� \ \ \/` : �,§ - - -�� at #,� ©^ \ LL � ~ [ [ ©9 ° �;. / RO & «*up sv [ ;!\ :« � � } \�011� \ \ \/` � - - -�� at - [ - & «*up sv \ >� m p < « • G 2, ƒ ( \ \/� / \�• \\ / � !) /� A: - \ � GULF 0 MEXICO � Q � 3 2 2 O N � 4 � 2 O_ w Q U O � - - -�� Ey� !) /� A: - \ � GULF 0 MEXICO � Q � 3 2 2 O N � 4 � 2 O_ w Q U O � The conceptual site plan entitled "Wafapoor Dock Proposed Site Plan" revised on November 7, 2008 and prepared by Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. illustrates the location of the proposed boat docks and boat lift along with the required 7.5 setbacks (See Site Plan on previous page). The neighbor to the north of the subject site has an existing approximately 38 -foot long single boat dock. The dock is approximately 7 feet from the subject dock. Attached to the neighboring boat dock is a floating dock which is proposed to be removed. The neighbor to the south of the subject site has an existing single 20 -foot long subject dock. SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: dock that is approximately 100 feet from the Northwest: Conner's Avenue then Single - family residences on Lots 29 and 30, with a zoning designation of RSF -3 Northeast: Single - family residences on Lot 21, with a zoning designation of RSF -3 Southeast: Vanderbuilt Lagoon, a 709 -foot waterway Southwest: Single - family residence on Lot 23, with a zoning designation of RSF -3 VA- 2008 -AR -14139 Date: 3 -25 -09 AERIAL, Page 4 of 7 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: The subject property is located in the Urban Mixed Use Residential land use classification on the County's Future Land Use Map (FLUM). This land use category is designed to accommodate a variety of residential uses including single family, multi - family, duplex, mobile home and mixed -use projects. As previously noted, the subject petition seeks a variance for a single family home that is located within a single - family subdivision, which is an authorized use in this land use designation, therefore, the single family home use is consistent with the FLUM. The Growth Management Plan (GMP) does not address individual variance requests; the Plan deals with the larger issue of the actual use. ANALYSIS: Section 9.04.01 of the Land Development Code gives the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) the authority to grant Variances. The Planning Commission is advisory to the BZA and utilizes the provisions of Section 9.04.03 A. through H. (in bold font below), as general guidelines to assist in making their recommendation of approval or denial. Staff has analyzed this petition relative to these provisions and offers the following responses: a. Are there special conditions and circumstances existing, which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land, structure or building involved? Yes. The subject property is pie shaped with the narrowest piece located on the waterfront where the proposed dock is to be located. The subject property at the waterfront is concavely shaped and has only 50 feet of length. In addition, the existing site conditions restrict the applicants' riparian rights. The curvature of the seawall and the intersection riparian lines restrict the mooring of the applicants' current vessel to the western side of his riparian lines. This will keep the vessel within the riparian rights of the applicant and in adequate water for safe ingress /egress to the navigatable channel. b. Are there special conditions and circumstances, which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre- existing conditions relative to the property, which are the subject of the Variance request? No, the petitioner has use of the existing boat dock facility that was constructed without the need for a variance. However, the petitioner would not be able to moor a 27 -foot long boat. C. Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties for the applicant? Yes. The site conditions, mentioned above, make it difficult for the applicant to moor his vessel. VA- 2008 -AR -14139 Date: 3 -25 -09 Page 5 of 7 d. Will the Variance, if granted, be the minimum Variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety and welfare? Yes. The proposed docks are the reasonable while still allowing for safe access for the vessel to moor within the riparian area. The variance, if approved, will result in the northern dock having a location that is 7 feet from the existing neighboring dock to the north. The applicant has stated that the reason for this dock is to allow for maintenance to both sides of the vessel. In addition, the applicant has received a letter of concurrence (attached) from the neighbor to the north. e. Will granting the Variance confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district? No. Most other neighboring properties moor two vessels. This property can only moor one vessel. In addition, the applicant is requesting two docks which is the same number of docks the neighbor to the north has. f. Will granting the Variance be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this Land Development Code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare? The proposed encroachment would have an impact only on the neighbor to the north. As previously stated, the variance, if approved, will result in one of the docks having a location that is 7 feet from the existing neighboring dock to the north. However, the applicant has received a letter of concurrence (attached) from the neighbor to the north. In addition, the proposed docks will have no impact to navigation in the adjacent lagoon. 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.? No. h. Will granting the Variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan? Approval of this variance will not affect or change the requirements of the Growth Management Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EACI RECOMMENDATION• The EAC does not normally hear Variance petitions. Since the subject variance doesn't impact any preserve area, the EAC did not hear this petition. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report VA- 2009 -AR- 14139, revised March 27, 2009. VA- 2008 -AR -14139 Date 3 -25 -09 Page 6 of 7 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward Petition VA- 2009-AR- 14139, Wafapoor Boat Dock to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) with a recommendation of approval. PREPARED BY: IM &( 20 7�Q� NANCY D CH, A CP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER DATE DEPART NT F ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REVIEWED BY: RAYMO V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DATE DEPART ENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW "- � I sck/-� 3 z& 0 1 91USAN M. ISTENES, AICP, DIRECTOR DATE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVED BY: K. SCHMITT, ADMINISTRATOR 4'DAS NITY DEVELOPMENT & NMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION Collier County Planning Commission: MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN DATE Attachment: Letter of Concurrence dated August 18, 2009 Tentatively scheduled for the May 26, 2009 Board of County Commissioners Meeting VA- 2008 -AR -14139 Date: 3 -23 -09 Page 7 of 8 LETTER OF CONCURRENCE FOR SETBACK WAIVER TO: Mr. Hussein Wafa000r (owner /applicant) 140 Conners AVE (address of project) Naples FL 34108 -2151 File No.: FROM: Mr. & Mrs Jeffrey Ziegler (adjacent property owner) 152 Conners AVE Naples FL 34108 Section 18- 21.004(3)(d), Florida Administrative Code, provides: Except as provided herein, all structures, including mooring pilings, breakwaters, jetties and groins, and activities must be set back a minimum of 25 feet inside the applicant's riparian rights lines. Marginal docks, however, must be set back a minimum of 10 feet. Exceptions to the setbacks are: private residential single - family docks or piers associated with a parcel that has a shoreline frontage of less than 65 feet, where portions of such structures are located between riparian lines less than 65 feet apart, or where such structure is shared by two adjacent single - family parcels, utility lines; bulkheads, seawalls, riprap or similar shoreline protection structures located along the shoreline; structures and activities previously authorized by the Board; structures and activities built or occurring prior to any requirement for Board authorization; when a letter of concurrence is obtained from the affected adjacent upland riparian owner; or when the Board determines that locating any portion of the structure or activity within the setback area is necessary to avoid or minimize adverse impacts to natural resources. I hereby state that I am the owner of the adjacent upland riparian property located to the (north / south / east / west) of the facility or activity proposed to be constructed or conducted by Mr. Hussein Wafa000r (the applicant), as shown in the above referenced file (and on the attached drawing). I understand that the subject project will be located entirely within the applicant's riparian rights area, and I do not object to the proposed structure or activity being located within the area required as a setback distance from the common riparian rights line, as required by Chapter 18- 21.004(3)(d), F.A.C. This file shows the structure will be located entirely within the applicant's riparian rights area and within 0 feet of the common riparian rights line between our parcels. (Ongin� f ( rintedr: sing Pure f djacent owner) iame�of ad;a ent owner) Y Tate signed) This form is not adopted by rule; therefore, any letter of concurrence of similar content may be accepted. (1/30/03) LETTER OF CONCURRENCE FOR SETBACK WAIVER PAGE 2 — DRAWING, SKETCH, OR SURVEY OF PROPOSED DOCK LOCATION >s r a A 0 0 / 3 y , Y �rj50 c+ WI W, x j (Initials of adjacent owner) (Date) RESOLUTION— 09- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER VA- 2009 -AR- 14139, FOR A VARIANCE FROM LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 5.03.06.E.6 TO PERMIT A REDUCED SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM 7.5 FEET TO 0 FEET ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 140 CONNERS AVENUE IN SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 48 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 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 Section 5.03.06.E.6 of the Land Development Code to permit a reduced side yard setback from 7.5 feet to 0 feet, as shown on the attached Exhibit "A ", in the RSF -3 Zoning District 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 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- 2009 -AR -14139 filed by Joshua Maxwell of Turrell, Hall and Associates, Inc. with respect to the property hereinafter described as: Lot 22, Block R, Unit No. 3, Conner's Vanderbilt Beach Estates, according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 89, as described in Plat Book 4299, Page 0234, Public Records of Collier County, Florida Folio No. 27630880000 be and the same hereby is approved for a variance to permit a reduced side yard setback from 7.5 feet to 0 feet, as shown on the attached Exhibit "A ", in the RSF -3 Zoning District , as shown on the attached Exhibit "A ", in the zoning district wherein said property is located. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the minutes of this This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote this _ 12009. ATTEST: BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: BY: Deputy Clerk DONNA FIALA, Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Steven T. Williams Assistant County Attorney 2 day of o „ J, 'taw � � LL 0 O j X W a N F E w ff � ti .Z Zwv,q aiitr�' ` s H R az ww�. WfliNO�j s,p k' z � N s a i V. .Xy o:Z�3..Jby m d y t`O wailgg'�t p': n °' - Z05tna wo'. 0 x ,Z OZ��tj c 47 to= flJ iaQ K'F Qb1= 8 W Z ..fl ZnZzNG.y>3�+j�j; y m ry Z� OY>O QFZ'G �d uxiaSFya z Z.- U O H O ZO {?'�' i"f ,`,C �r a� C '.: a a o N a m Z O Q OO V Y w Q (� m O owh U w �gZ J Z cr 0 F O O W LL QO cD � \��1�� \. 93 1 ki� 92, J ci �• °.34 uy,s o Q t w o w:E o II O t Cllr LL Z Z> }�'�•'� y ' -CZa Q OW H w U }�© Om wW w F��; ¢: of 0 O Jx = v P \0917 WaWmar Docl,Or, t9C.q EXHIBIT A AGENDA ITEM TITLE:_ (- T, 1 )O Ij , V H c�oC 7 -/ I k -14 / 3? AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: -1 - 8 PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY PLACE COMPLETED FORM ON THE TABLE LEFT OF THE DIAS IN THE BOARD ROOM PROR TO THE SUBJECT BEING HEARD. NAME: (J J J A U' i I� O �C�Y� ADDRESS: REPRESENTING: PETITIONER: -p G+ t, V41 Ct KI f2L F OTHER: Oe 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. 39 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: to 17e 2 5c`� AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY PLACE COMPLETED FORM ON THE TABLE LEFT OF THE DIAS IN THE BOARD ROOM PROR TO THE SUBJECT NAME: /�� G7r�2 CT BEING HEARD. ADDRESS: 9f? z REPRESENTING: PETITIONER. 17-c T= OTHER: I gl 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 BOA R THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT, 4T" FLOOR, W. HARMON TURNER BUILDING, 3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES , L. FL. YOU ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES FOR YOUR COMMENTS AND ARE TO ADDRESS ONLY THE CHAIR. AGENDA ITEM 9 -C Co -r County STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION HEARING DATE: APRIL 16, 2009 SUBJECT: PE- 2008 -AR- 14071: MIDTOWN POINT PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: Owner: Sandbanks, LLC Agent: Michael R. Fernandez, AICP 700 Old Trail Drive Planning Development, Inc. Naples, FL 34103 5133 Castello Drive, Suite 2 Naples, FL 34103 REOUESTED ACTION: To have the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an application for approval of a Parking Exemption (PE) pursuant to Subsection 4.05.02.K.3.c of the Land Development Code (LDC) to allow 63 parking spaces of a proposed 195 -space parking lot to be placed off -site on property zoned Residential Single Family (RSF -4). The proposed parking lot would serve the Midtown Point development which has a General Commercial (C -4) zoning designation and is limited to a maximum of 10,000 square feet of retail and 50,000 square feet of office space. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The total subject site consists of 2.55± acres and the proposed off -site parking lot consists of 0.69± acres, and is located on the east side of US -41 North, on the north side of Rosemary Lane and on the south side of Ridge Street, in Section 22, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, of Collier County, Florida. (See location map on following page) PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant seeks a parking exemption to allow 63 parking spaces to be located off -site on a 0.69± acre lot in the Residential Single - Family (RSF -4) Zoning Designation. The subject C -4 parcels currently contains a strip commercial development and restaurant that is approximately 12,000 square feet in size. The off -site lots contain vacant cleared land and a single - family home which will be razed for the Page t of 7 PE- 08- AR- 14071, March 22, 2009 � � « » 3 2 2 O & ON z AF / vil, ® } to ` x a — - - -a - - f -- , _ .. � L ) $a \ \ ® M . ` 77, — � « » 3 2 2 O & ON z AF / � « � 2 O_ w 4 U O � vil, , _ — - - -a _ .. $a \ \ ® M . ` — E ONE ) % `) `- ��_�■ �& u• � « � 2 O_ w 4 U O � RM1V WIDTH BUFFER'. COLLIER COUNN LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE (LDC)'RE D 10 FT. MINIMUM WIDTH BUFFER WITH INTEGRATED 4 FOOT HIGH PREFABRICATED CONCRETE WALUFENCE WITH SHRUBS ON BOTH SIDES TO BE MAINTAINED AT A MINIMUM HEIGHT OF 6 FEET: AND, TREES 30 FEET ON CENTER INSTALLED WITH A MINIMUM HEIGHT OF 14 FEET, RSR4 PRI illanliel ZOniED D'aNCt CE Cp mm Btciel OPENS D'ls t RON BUFFER'. COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE (LOCI TYPE D 10' FT. MINIMUM WIDTH BUFFER WITH TREES 25 FEET ON CENTER INSTALLED WITH A MINIMUM HEIGHT OF 10 -12 FEET', AND DOUBLE ROW HEDGE OF SHRUBS MAINTAINED AT A MINIMUM OF W INCHES IN HEIGHT. HATCH NET ® Pervuus /Clutel v...xsM ■ S.RGrye III 0 E I 14 I REMMMI y }} KEY PLAIN SCALE 100' CONDITIONS EXHIBIT SCALE: 1' -100' -LEt A F�4� Art .p FF NOTES 1) SITE PLAN WITHIN PARKING EXEMPTION AREA SHALL BE BUSSTAMIALLY CONBIBTEN( WITH DEPICTION. 2) THE PARKING EXEMPTION PARKING SPACES EFF BE RESTRICTED TO MEETING PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR OFFICE SPACE. SITE RAN. BUILDING FOOTPRINT AND LAND USE WITHIN G ZONED SITE AREA ARE CONCEPTUAL AND MAY CHANGE PROVIDED THE CHANGE($) ARE CONSISTENT WITH APRICABLE LCD DEVELOPMENT BTANDAROS AND PARKING EXEMPTION COMMITMENTS, S) DEVELOPMENT OF A PARKING GARAGE ON THE COMMERCIALLY ZONE III IS PROHIBITED. aolR IFEAKINSFER ISIAL ISIONFEARESEV .1 FINS., FEET HOBEFFER INAITESTABOURE-E, —I, ED "EAHANI THE HERIBEFF 01 TIE NOBVIG BEENSTEFFER IS OR EATER RON PAN HERNET 11 Ell. OR OF AS "IT all PLANNING GRDE DVEEL�OPMEN T INCORPORATED XREJ Cq..FpIIxLI@EI Sxw/NA f W w1 RRR1 KEY PLAN I COMES RCIAL MESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNAT IONS SCALE: 1'•10' I HE UFF .1 THE ADDITIONAL HANNEENT N, OEYEWDWxFwwr. BE POSTED HISTACIT NES THE FRAMING E%EE9ox sscEe lO-HE OF WE PERSIAN I AM AND l PAM. 3 NOW RE W174NTHETem.'Tpx4INNEFFHO F%EEMPHS:l EEOmM AREnAs RE IFBJi sIwFKE REFFORE vacF. RERKINO OPERA E)MOVIE aERxFIp xOd[xsnONI PADKI NO AREA Sxxy A POV E OwnH mxbE OE BpwTixL TIE PawmD AN 5 PRAMENG OF LID"" "I N �A SELDIDDRAL IIARIINN I 'FOREST ASIA IBEI ED BE FT FT I A TO IN F PAT III. FAHANT AN D THIN PmpNE MG.dut BE EV INF 0.PERANDATLY —IF HAREPITV. Tn 410ARxItn E %fwotiw:I Prw %ixC N[A Cass ALINyPAq%mp TIN FIESSEENA STANDARD EANDIF FARMERS PAR %iW NEAnWyEKEFO FELLER �xirlpEEELW wEMI "HER, HERNES, FUNDED 1miRLLtlEgMLND ON 'FINE onunNE THAT waaGRTL A PALw TREE HANro A UimwIn RVR RE B. THE DUANE RE FIBER t xEPM nuxiIDW EV woTloxnvu TO TxF AptACE NT SHE 6 REALL BE IS ANNITHIS RE �TCONTROL i - m ONE 11rtARpf ME mSTAUAM OF ARE L��S BE UNDATED ORDEENA OF THE FARMLAND W RET wRwTw FASTER wM SERFAGE 70 AFTER THE DOOTIONLEND EFENSELITY ED 1. NEENIATREE I TREE PER SE FEET THE OFFESEE AT THE 1.1 ON BEEFEATER — A, A RAW A twxw CONTEND VT tE UCxEB AaO <ARE ANYONE) AND A U— HIL.wof yLAUOxR, RInFEx It01 PEEL ix xFwxT, A SEAT PREFABRICATED EFORGETTE WALL RIIINT A IS FOOT NORRE FOLITHE FRINTE FAR —PARENT EARNINGS IHEn BLUE LATE INI PExOmOF OFF ANwD FE¢E IR DOE ($R OF TIE1 uAOx OFRU DFL RATNEL AN IRwAAE� E9TEN.wALL BE IHElALANNI NONNI NOR FE p E IFEYNRENExi SxuL BE FELT HAVE A iHwaI CALDER AL 12 S UEB— 'BE DEPEND INTO AxE4J PREEND oALLOx¢FwDTEEx IIAIFFET IN teiolrt, MIDTOWN POINT 1°evnu°swu n'E CONCEPTUAL SITE PUN EAST PROPERTY LINE! B 15 FOOT MINIMUM WIpTM (VARIES FRO M 15 Fi TO a0 FTI BUFFER WITH INTEGRATED B FOOT HIGH PREFABRICATED CONCRETE WAWFENOE WITH SHRUBS ON BOTH SIDES TO BE MAINTAINED AT A MINIMUM HEIGHT CF E FEET; AND TREES 25 FEET ON CENTER INSTALLED WITH A MINIMUM HEIGHT OF 'A FEET. 1p I 'A III tq -. It' q~ -- PARKING EXEMPTION AREA RAN BUFFER COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE(LDC) TYPE D 1P FT. MINIMUM WIDTH BUFFER WITH INTEGRATED /FOOT HIGH PREFABRICATED CONCRETE WALUTENCE WITH SHRUBS ON BOTH SIDES TO BE MAINTAINED AT A MINIMUM HEIGHT OF 5 FEET; AND, TREES SO FEET ON CENTER INSTALLED WITH A MINIMUM y y HEIGHT OF IC FEET. PROVIDED PARKING: (PARKING EXEMPTION AREA) 63 PARKING SPACES IFi% RSF-0 ReONenlul Z,NmnBAD &1 - ____ y y (WEST OF PARKING EXEMPTION) p 132 PARKING SPACES AHEM) C. COERINS.1 Zonitq GROSS, 1a5 TOTAL PARKING SPACES L,w %) CONTINUOUS WA L EXiENOU W UMARD COVERED DROPOFF y= - ► 14 Ft CLEAR MIN. y =� TOLANDSOAPED DRIVEWAYENTRY ISLANDS ON RIDGE STREET AND - ROSEMARY LANE AS DEPICTED m lzma wilcocir. _ W.000y tl� - W BUFFER NiHIBLIIJviJ tl Z CO COWER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT (n _ 76 TB0( ®pMNlbtl g CODE (MINIM PAD byft _ 1P FT. MINIMUM WITH +} Giabg DlEBIY +} Y ON CENTER INS TREE. N FEET ON CENTER INSTALLED - WITH AMINIM UM HEIGHT OF ID -12 FEET; W AND DOUBLE ROW HEDGE OF SHRUBS MAINTAINED AT A MINIMUM OF 36INCHES O y }} KEY PLAIN SCALE 100' CONDITIONS EXHIBIT SCALE: 1' -100' -LEt A F�4� Art .p FF NOTES 1) SITE PLAN WITHIN PARKING EXEMPTION AREA SHALL BE BUSSTAMIALLY CONBIBTEN( WITH DEPICTION. 2) THE PARKING EXEMPTION PARKING SPACES EFF BE RESTRICTED TO MEETING PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR OFFICE SPACE. SITE RAN. BUILDING FOOTPRINT AND LAND USE WITHIN G ZONED SITE AREA ARE CONCEPTUAL AND MAY CHANGE PROVIDED THE CHANGE($) ARE CONSISTENT WITH APRICABLE LCD DEVELOPMENT BTANDAROS AND PARKING EXEMPTION COMMITMENTS, S) DEVELOPMENT OF A PARKING GARAGE ON THE COMMERCIALLY ZONE III IS PROHIBITED. aolR IFEAKINSFER ISIAL ISIONFEARESEV .1 FINS., FEET HOBEFFER INAITESTABOURE-E, —I, ED "EAHANI THE HERIBEFF 01 TIE NOBVIG BEENSTEFFER IS OR EATER RON PAN HERNET 11 Ell. OR OF AS "IT all PLANNING GRDE DVEEL�OPMEN T INCORPORATED XREJ Cq..FpIIxLI@EI Sxw/NA f W w1 RRR1 KEY PLAN I COMES RCIAL MESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNAT IONS SCALE: 1'•10' I HE UFF .1 THE ADDITIONAL HANNEENT N, OEYEWDWxFwwr. BE POSTED HISTACIT NES THE FRAMING E%EE9ox sscEe lO-HE OF WE PERSIAN I AM AND l PAM. 3 NOW RE W174NTHETem.'Tpx4INNEFFHO F%EEMPHS:l EEOmM AREnAs RE IFBJi sIwFKE REFFORE vacF. RERKINO OPERA E)MOVIE aERxFIp xOd[xsnONI PADKI NO AREA Sxxy A POV E OwnH mxbE OE BpwTixL TIE PawmD AN 5 PRAMENG OF LID"" "I N �A SELDIDDRAL IIARIINN I 'FOREST ASIA IBEI ED BE FT FT I A TO IN F PAT III. FAHANT AN D THIN PmpNE MG.dut BE EV INF 0.PERANDATLY —IF HAREPITV. Tn 410ARxItn E %fwotiw:I Prw %ixC N[A Cass ALINyPAq%mp TIN FIESSEENA STANDARD EANDIF FARMERS PAR %iW NEAnWyEKEFO FELLER �xirlpEEELW wEMI "HER, HERNES, FUNDED 1miRLLtlEgMLND ON 'FINE onunNE THAT waaGRTL A PALw TREE HANro A UimwIn RVR RE B. THE DUANE RE FIBER t xEPM nuxiIDW EV woTloxnvu TO TxF AptACE NT SHE 6 REALL BE IS ANNITHIS RE �TCONTROL i - m ONE 11rtARpf ME mSTAUAM OF ARE L��S BE UNDATED ORDEENA OF THE FARMLAND W RET wRwTw FASTER wM SERFAGE 70 AFTER THE DOOTIONLEND EFENSELITY ED 1. NEENIATREE I TREE PER SE FEET THE OFFESEE AT THE 1.1 ON BEEFEATER — A, A RAW A twxw CONTEND VT tE UCxEB AaO <ARE ANYONE) AND A U— HIL.wof yLAUOxR, RInFEx It01 PEEL ix xFwxT, A SEAT PREFABRICATED EFORGETTE WALL RIIINT A IS FOOT NORRE FOLITHE FRINTE FAR —PARENT EARNINGS IHEn BLUE LATE INI PExOmOF OFF ANwD FE¢E IR DOE ($R OF TIE1 uAOx OFRU DFL RATNEL AN IRwAAE� E9TEN.wALL BE IHElALANNI NONNI NOR FE p E IFEYNRENExi SxuL BE FELT HAVE A iHwaI CALDER AL 12 S UEB— 'BE DEPEND INTO AxE4J PREEND oALLOx¢FwDTEEx IIAIFFET IN teiolrt, MIDTOWN POINT 1°evnu°swu n'E CONCEPTUAL SITE PUN development of the off -site parking exemption lot. The property owners intend to redevelop the subject site with office and commercial land uses and will increase the maximum building area to 60,000 square feet with a maximum height of 75 feet. Exhibit B for this petition depicts generalized areas of development, parking and traffic access which is from Ridge Street and Rosemary Lane. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: Ridge Street, Professional Offices, with a zoning designation of Planned Development in the City of Naples, and Single - Family homes, with a zoning designation of Residential Single- Family (RSF -4) East: Single - Family homes, with a zoning designation of Residential Single - Family (RSF -4) South: Improved Commercial, with a zoning designation of General Commercial (C -4), and Single- Family and Multi - Family homes, with a zoning designation of Residential Single - Family (RSF -4) West: Tamiami Trail (US -41), Improved Commercial with a zoning designation of Highway Commercial in the City of Naples AERIAL PHOTO Page 2 of 7 PE- 08- AR- 14071, March 22, 2009 CITY OF NAPLES ZONING MAP M HC, Highway Commercial ❑ PD, Planned Development GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property (2.55± acres in total) is designated Urban/ Urban Mixed Use District/Urban Residential Subdistrict, as identified on the Future Land Use Map and in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan. The principal commercial site, comprising 1.86± acres, is zoned General Commercial (C -4). The C -4 zoning at this location is not consistent with the locational criteria in the FLUE for commercial development. However, this site is identified as "improved property" on the Consistent by Policy Maps in the FLUE, therefore, this property's zoning is deemed consistent by policy and, pursuant to policy 5.9 in the FLUE, the site may be developed or redeveloped in accordance with the C -4 zoning on the property. The site is presently developed with commercial uses and redevelopment of the site is proposed. Page 3 of 7 PE- 08 -AR- 14071, March 22, 2009 The proposed off -site parking lot, comprising 0.69± acres, is zoned Residential Single - Family (RSF -4). Parking for uses not permitted in this zoning district, such as commercial uses as proposed on the abutting (principal) site, is not typically allowed; however, Section 4.05.02.K, of the LDC provides for this requested parking exemption to allow off -site parking on land not zoned commercial. The FLUE is silent regarding off -site parking use, however, the LDC provides for off -site parking on non - commercial zoned property to serve commercial uses, and that provision was deemed consistent with the FLUE by the Board of County Commissioners via its adoption and incorporation into the LDC, in other words, consistent by policy. Based upon the above analysis, the proposed off -site parking may be deemed consistent with the FLUE. ANALYSIS: Transportation Review: The Transportation Services Division staff has reviewed this petition and found no cause for objection to the placement of parking east of the C -4 zoning line. Zoning Review: Section 4.05.02.K.3 (a) 2, of the LDC allows a parking exemption to be sought when a lot proposed for off -site parking is not zoned for commercial uses. As part of its review of this application, staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of the parking exemption criteria outlined in Section 4.04.02.K.3 (b), of the LDC, upon which a determination for any parking exemption must be based. The criteria are italicized, followed by staffs comments below. This evaluation will form the foundation of the Collier County Planning Commission's recommendation, which is then forwarded to the Board of Zoning Appeals Board (BZA) for a final decision. (I) Whether the amount of off -site parking is required by LDC Section 4.05.04 G. and 4.05.09, or is in excess of these requirements. Parkin 4 Calculations Retail: Proposed retail area = 9,600 SF 1 space per 250 square feet 38 spaces Office: Proposed office area = 47,100 SF I space per 300 square feet 157 spaces Total Parking Required 195 spaces Total Parking Provided 195 spaces As shown in the table above, the parking for the proposed site requires a minimum of 195 parking spaces. Total parking provided on the C -4 lots is 132 spaces and meets Section 4.05.02.K criteria that at least 67 percent of the required parking is on the lot with the principle structure; total parking provided on the RSF -4 lots is 63 spaces. The proposed 195 -space parking lot would serve the Midtown Point office /commercial development. The 63 spaces will be restricted to employee parking. Therefore, the amount of off -site parking is not in excess of the LDC required parking. (2) The distance of the farthest parking space from the facility to be served. The farthest parking space will be approximately 118 feet from the building and 180 feet from the buildings nearest entrance. (3) Pedestrian safety if the lots are separated by a collector or arterial roadway; Page 4 of 7 PE- 08 -AR- 14071, March 22, 2009 The lots are not separated by a collector or arterial roadway. The proposed parking will be contained on site with a proposed covered drop -off internal access roadway running north and south and interconnecting Ridge Street and Rosemary Lane. (4) Pedestrian and vehicular safety. There are no safety issues foreseen with this request. The proposed design of the parking exemption area along the eastern property line adjacent to residential property will have a minimum 15 -foot wide buffer along the northeastern portion and a 40 -foot wide buffer along the southeastern portion. The parking lot will have a six -foot high prefabricated concrete wall /fence along the eastern boundary, and adjacent to the right -of -way (ROW) the parking lot will have a four -foot high prefabricated concrete wall /fence. The wall /fence will have shrubs and trees on both sides. Furthermore, sidewalks, crosswalks, circulation striping and signage will be in compliance with all the LDC requirements. (5) The character and quality of the neighborhood and the future development of surrounding properties. The character and quality of the neighborhood will be enhanced by the redevelopment of the existing property, and the enhanced landscaped buffer and wall noted above should improve the compatibility of the proposed 63 space off -site parking lot with the surrounding properties. The exempt parking area will be restricted to serve normal office business hours of operation, and signage will be posted restricting the parking exemption spaces to hours of use between 7:00 AM and 6:00 PM, Monday through Friday. (6) Potential parking problems for neighboring properties. There is no direct access to the adjacent residential parcels and all vehicles must access the parking lot from the parcels zoned C -4. (7) Whether the internal traffic flow is required to leave the site to reach the proposed off -site parking. Internal traffic flow is designed so cars will not have to leave the site to access the parking exemption area. (8) Whether vehicular access shall be from or onto residential streets. Vehicular access will be from Rosemary Lane and Ridge Street which are residential streets. The Transportation Planning Department has approved the ingress /egress to the site. (9) Whether buffers adjacent to the property zoned residential are 15 feet in width and include a wall in addition to required landscaping. The landscaping is designed to include buffers at minimums of 15 feet and 40 feet in width with a six -foot concrete /fence wall. Furthermore, landscape shrubs and trees will be placed on both sides of the wall /fence. (10) Whether the off -site parking area will be used for valet parking. The parking lot exemption area will not be used for valet parking. (11) Whether the off -site parking area will be used for employee parking. The applicant has indicated on the site plan (Exhibit B), that the off -site parking area is to Page 5 of 7 PE- 08- AR- 14071, March 22, 2009 be utilized by employees only. (12) Whether there are more viable alternatives available. Staff concurs with the applicant that the proposed site is the most feasible alternative for the proposed parking area without significantly reducing the scope of the project. (13) Off - street parking areas must be accessible from a street, alley or other public right -of -way and all off - street parking facilities must be so arranged that no motor vehicle shall have to back onto any street, excluding single-family and two-family residential dwellings and churches approved under section 2.3.16. The parking lot has been designed so motor vehicles will not be required to back onto the adjacent streets. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS: For parking exemptions, the LDC requires the petitioner to notify all neighboring property owners by mail. No Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) is required. The petitioner provided documentation to show that the required letter was sent on January 15, 2009. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report for PUDA- 2008 -AR -14071 revised on March 22, 2009. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward Petition PE- 2008 -AR- 14071 to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) with a recommendation of approval subject to the following conditions of approval. 1. The off -site Parking Exemption is limited to a maximum of 63 parking spaces and limited to employees who work at The Midtown Point development. 2. The Parking Exemption commitments as depicted on the conceptual site plan (Exhibit C) of the resolution. Attachment 1: Pictures of the current conditions of the site. Page 6 of 7 PE- 08 -AR- 14071, March 22, 2009 PREPARED BY: aq � MELISSA ZONE, P CIP L PLANNER DA DEPARTMENT OF ZONTNG & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REVIEWED BY: 'Vi lo RAYM V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DA E DEPARTMENT OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 1�n-�5UA'-,4 0/7-/09 - SAN M. ISTENES, AICP, DIRECTOR DAYE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVED BY: K. SCH ITT, ADMIT ISTRATOR DATE NITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION Tentatively scheduled for the June 9, 2009 Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN Page 7 of 7 PE- 08 -AR- 14071, March 22, 2009 DATE PE- 2008 -AR- 14071, Midtown Point Figure 1- Lots 2,4 & 6 (front view) US -41 and Rosemary Lane Figure 2 - Lots 6,8 & 10 on Rosemary Lane Attachment 1 � a'. '' .. _ .. iS %, ' 6::5*' .. � � 2 ✓: ��. t r '�� '.a .° ��. � ..x r... , ,s �u_.. Q �'s �.7 , ., $�5yi .. � s e � �.. y. • *$ 1�I iii , � � 'a iw ;�4 f !gyp l Y`dpY�'y #• Y.� yTj PE- 2008 -AR- 14071, Midtown Point Figure 5 - Lots 41, 43 & 45 (front view) US -41 and Rosemary Lane Attachment 1 kin n i 4 � i i y� . Y RESOLUTION NO. 09- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, GRANTING PARKING EXEMPTION PETITION PE- 2008 -AR- 14071, IN ORDER TO PERMIT OFF -SITE PARKING ON A CONTIGUOUS LOT ZONED COMMERCIAL (C -4), LOCATED BETWEEN ROSEMARY LANE AND RIDGE STREET, IN SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST IN COLLIER COUNT, 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 adopted a Land Development Code (Ordinance No. 04 -41, as amended) which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County; and WHEREAS, Section 4.05.00 of the Land Development Code sets forth requirements and standards for off - street parking and loading facilities and permits an exemption from these standards under certain circumstances; and WHEREAS, after proper notice, the Board of Zoning Appeals held a public hearing to consider Parking Exemption Petition PE- 2008 -AR -14071 and found that the criteria set forth in Section 4.05.02.K.3 of the Land Development Code has been met and the Petition should be approved; and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given opportunity to be heard by this Board in a public meeting and the Board having considered all matters presented. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: Pagel of 2 Petition PE- 2008 -AR -14071 filed by Michael R. Fernandez of Planning Development Incorporated representing Sandbanks, LLC is approved to permit off -site parking on contiguous land zoned Commercial (C -4), more particularly described in Exhibit A. The off - street parking shall comply with the Site Plan dated December, 2008, and prepared by Planning development Incorporated., attached hereto as Exhibit B, and shall be subject to the conditions attached in Exhibit C. C.. . BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the minutes of this PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida, this day of ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK , Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Steven T. Williams sr� 09 Assistant County Attorney Exhibits: A Legal Description B Site Plan C Conditions of Approval 111' BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: DONNA FIALA, CHAIRMAN Page 2 of 2 • It HATCH KEY ® Pe WARG.' -MEN ❑ Pea nl 0 BmieiRpe y } KEY PLAIN EXISTING EXHIBIT SCALE. 1' =ID0' snLF 1 v OIT pR NOTES'. 11 SITE PLAN WITHIN PARKING EXEMPTION AREA SHALL BE SLIESTANTMLLY CONSIS TENT WITH OEMCTION. 2) THE PARKING EXEMPTION PARKING SPACES SHALL BE RESTRICTED TO MEETING PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR OFFICE SPACE. 3) BITE RAN, BUILDING FOOTPRINT AND LAND USE WITHIN CAI ZONED SITE AREA ARE CONCEPTUAL AND MAY CHANGE PROVIDED THE CHANGES) ARE CONSISTENT WITH APPLICABLE UDC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND PARKING EXEMPTION COMMITMENTS. TH DEVELOPMENT OF A PARKING GARAGE ON THE COMMERCIALLY ZONE PORTION IS PR BET.EED. NOTTING OF I.-PEN PAPIE. BE I GRABS, OFFICE FEET A ANG SF AFT GRAM INNOR I.P. REAL. NA, III r—PIEHE EN 'NOT IN 18FING OF PARTARTH xuwooanvlArw BE�anwm.a i A�A I KEY PLAN / COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS SCALE: P =100' I 'HE RE OF THE u IP.wpxO ElEwnpNT Paanrq ME' sPUI BE ANSTRACEPp TO.xxn roxwL OPgR GREAT.IGD16 OF OPERATION SONENCEN WILL HE POSTED RESTRICTING THE GAINING MENTION REACES TO HINTER OF GEM SEEM IN INAT ANTE PAR MONDAY THROWN GREAT 2 THE KATHT B E OFFICE wnc[ S PMxNGwHm TTE�' TRA— Mu HE GETAGWI PMUNG MEn PORTHOLE O11.DUCE PAPgp u THERMAN TATEPPW I PATENS. AS N SHALL M POSTED wrtH A.—A NERAGNATxO THE PARENT M 5 INASKING LET LIGHTING PAT RESTwcTEOro EUPWRE . N I.'F bruU Pmnw E¢wRON, ENTERING MEN NEU BE RE SwcTE D TO LIGHT FlmURES wxNG N: a HERE SHALL HEIGHT RE NO GREAT U ACRES THE TIONBL(PARKING EXEMPTION) PmxING AREA AGES RE D THIS P MNA THE COMER HOURLY SEEMS INNER PITY ' NGWIKNIME AALP lMEuWTID)PARKwAREA E.EDm ERCOUNTYLANOOENELGP.xw GCDE BR AI . e: M.pC THE w UFFR lTERIMWE AMERICANS EDxwND THAT .11-1 A THIN 11 HATING A WHEMEN CLAM FREE HEIGHT OF 7 FEET RENG A WI GA ORATRALL ROGER � 14 FIT 5 'HE NATIONS BEGAN THE PARAFTESE 1—TICH BEEF TO THE NUATEIT ATE HALL RE A PAT PREFABRICATED CONCRETE NALL COLTRA COCAINE LAND D YwL BEEEXCEED EXRWULxiOAiHHEE xµL RNIDRK RACE IN,CNTHAT TRRATE ING PERCENT OF THE FALL ENGAGE FOOT IS ONE (I IYEMm THE R¢Tx4TgN OF SU.UTAirvE MATERIAL AawTiNwOS NEXT SREL HE LOWNETE I TREE PER 25 FEET THE TREES AT THE 70W OF uMF A EATERS EATEEN(IB1 FEET IN NIGHT xAT�NG)AN AM TT 1. NNIMW OF wW ASUKII pLRERIAi 12 Iti1IEe MOW TIRO IMDAn+wT snEM 4 FOOT awluRp AnrcxETE PEARL wrtMx A 10 E Wl wICE w.uEx —A' Nrl`al Rac[x�MCE THE rowALL MPM[P¢ REATERENEDBITTRIN ONE (1) NEAR OF THE OF AND WATATENTE EXTEREAT. AN SAPPOINGEN SMITH THAT HE FIFETALTO TO �RAFURF THE CONTINUES AN-Ey OF THE WORTANNEW SCATTER THE MEMBERS NAME ERE NEWT INSENTIENT SEOUL BE SALE YTIATINALL .1 A L.uxa<.wr[x TREES .11 NCIe :MTO°NNET i�wxm. mawu eeaprB w.nGB Zs ONIONS FwxreER nwRT x HEIGHT. ( PLANNING DEVELOPMENT INCORPORATED MIDTOWN POINT CONCEPTUAL d ,ai.mmnw,.tilN..NN aau�Mws..Nea. mmlis�.�� eN.e. x.� NSI PUN STAE P `ERS ArGw^wxIFFECTS ERE M ARB ICHLESSFELCITORPRE TURN. — ..- EAST PROPERTY LINE )ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL) BUFFER'. 15 FOOT MINIMUM WIDTH (VARIES FROM 15 FT TO 00 FT) BUFFER WITH INTEGRATED 5 FOOT HIGH PREFABRICATED CONCRETE PARKING EXEMPTION AREA WALL/FENCE WITH SHRUBS ON BOTH BIDES TO BE MAINTAINED AT A MINIMUM HEIGHT OF 6 FEET', AND TREES 35 FEET ON CENTER INSTALLED WITH A MINIMUM HEIGHT OF 15 FEET RAW BUFFER COLLIER COUNTY tANO DEVELOPMENT CODE (MINIMUM 0 E PAY WIDTH BUFFER. 10' FT MINIMUM WIDTH BUFFER WITH ND COLLIER COUNTY )AND DEVELOPMENT G FOOT CODE PREFABRICATED CONCRETE PREFABRICATED ED CONCRETE DBUFF)ttPEO IP FT. MINIMUM WIDTH BUFFER WITH I IN SHRUBS SIDES INTEGRATED FOOT HIGH A ABOTH TORE MAINTAINED MINIMUM HEIGHT OF PREFABRICATED ABRICATED 6 HEIGHTORINSTA:LED, BOTH WALUTENCE SHRUBS j WITH AM6FEET STALLED WITHAMINIMUM AT HIDESTOF MINIMUM TO BE MINT) MAINTAND y y 0_ HEIGHT OF . HEIGHT OF I< FEET TREAMINIMUM 0 FEET HEIGHT OF6 FEET: AND.TREES I OR CENTER wsruLEO WITH AMINIMUM PROVIDED PARKING: HEIGHT OF IO FEET. +} }} (PARKING EXEMPTION AREA) 63 PARKING SPACES (ROSS) RBFi ReeiEenliel ZONE, D¢NCl I RSF <Re HTS -1.1 Z.Firtp DieO Y Cl GOmmemUl ZEN, D'EFE. y y (WEST OF PARKING EXEMPTION) IV PARKING SPACES O6TF) CA c —PERAG &I Z.F., A. y } } } ♦ 14S TOTAL PARKING SPACES (1W%) COVEREG DROP -OFF �' CONTINUOUS WA XTN.WESTWARD y y tO FT. CLEAR IN '► TO LANDSCAPED DRIVEWAY ENTRY ISLANDS ON RIDGE STREET AND ROSEMARY LANE AS DEPICTED a NO Elf a F 11 1 oM-I'aO lzme b Rny BUFFER: 111 perlM6r• _ = m.DmK 111 ROLLIER COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT 0 IIJ of COLLIER COUNTY IANO DEVELOPMENT O CODE (LDC)RWI H - r - CODE (LDL)ttPEO 10 FT m _ _ 10' FT. MINIMUM WIDTH BUFFER WITH 25 FEET CENTEUFSTALLED TREES ZS FEET ON CENTER INSTALLED WITH A MINIMUM HEIGHT OF IO -12 FEET', LL1 (� } •ul Yb MWMl } ♦ T i } TREES SO FEET ON CENTER INSTALLED WITH A MINIMUM HEIGHT OF I0 -13 FEET', AND. DOUBLE ROW HEDGE OF SHRUBS AN. DOATOW OF SHRUBS MAINTAINED AT A MINIMUM OF 3E MAINTAINED HEDGE OF 3B HEIGHT _ _ N . HEIGHT O ir • It HATCH KEY ® Pe WARG.' -MEN ❑ Pea nl 0 BmieiRpe y } KEY PLAIN EXISTING EXHIBIT SCALE. 1' =ID0' snLF 1 v OIT pR NOTES'. 11 SITE PLAN WITHIN PARKING EXEMPTION AREA SHALL BE SLIESTANTMLLY CONSIS TENT WITH OEMCTION. 2) THE PARKING EXEMPTION PARKING SPACES SHALL BE RESTRICTED TO MEETING PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR OFFICE SPACE. 3) BITE RAN, BUILDING FOOTPRINT AND LAND USE WITHIN CAI ZONED SITE AREA ARE CONCEPTUAL AND MAY CHANGE PROVIDED THE CHANGES) ARE CONSISTENT WITH APPLICABLE UDC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND PARKING EXEMPTION COMMITMENTS. TH DEVELOPMENT OF A PARKING GARAGE ON THE COMMERCIALLY ZONE PORTION IS PR BET.EED. NOTTING OF I.-PEN PAPIE. BE I GRABS, OFFICE FEET A ANG SF AFT GRAM INNOR I.P. REAL. NA, III r—PIEHE EN 'NOT IN 18FING OF PARTARTH xuwooanvlArw BE�anwm.a i A�A I KEY PLAN / COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS SCALE: P =100' I 'HE RE OF THE u IP.wpxO ElEwnpNT Paanrq ME' sPUI BE ANSTRACEPp TO.xxn roxwL OPgR GREAT.IGD16 OF OPERATION SONENCEN WILL HE POSTED RESTRICTING THE GAINING MENTION REACES TO HINTER OF GEM SEEM IN INAT ANTE PAR MONDAY THROWN GREAT 2 THE KATHT B E OFFICE wnc[ S PMxNGwHm TTE�' TRA— Mu HE GETAGWI PMUNG MEn PORTHOLE O11.DUCE PAPgp u THERMAN TATEPPW I PATENS. AS N SHALL M POSTED wrtH A.—A NERAGNATxO THE PARENT M 5 INASKING LET LIGHTING PAT RESTwcTEOro EUPWRE . N I.'F bruU Pmnw E¢wRON, ENTERING MEN NEU BE RE SwcTE D TO LIGHT FlmURES wxNG N: a HERE SHALL HEIGHT RE NO GREAT U ACRES THE TIONBL(PARKING EXEMPTION) PmxING AREA AGES RE D THIS P MNA THE COMER HOURLY SEEMS INNER PITY ' NGWIKNIME AALP lMEuWTID)PARKwAREA E.EDm ERCOUNTYLANOOENELGP.xw GCDE BR AI . e: M.pC THE w UFFR lTERIMWE AMERICANS EDxwND THAT .11-1 A THIN 11 HATING A WHEMEN CLAM FREE HEIGHT OF 7 FEET RENG A WI GA ORATRALL ROGER � 14 FIT 5 'HE NATIONS BEGAN THE PARAFTESE 1—TICH BEEF TO THE NUATEIT ATE HALL RE A PAT PREFABRICATED CONCRETE NALL COLTRA COCAINE LAND D YwL BEEEXCEED EXRWULxiOAiHHEE xµL RNIDRK RACE IN,CNTHAT TRRATE ING PERCENT OF THE FALL ENGAGE FOOT IS ONE (I IYEMm THE R¢Tx4TgN OF SU.UTAirvE MATERIAL AawTiNwOS NEXT SREL HE LOWNETE I TREE PER 25 FEET THE TREES AT THE 70W OF uMF A EATERS EATEEN(IB1 FEET IN NIGHT xAT�NG)AN AM TT 1. NNIMW OF wW ASUKII pLRERIAi 12 Iti1IEe MOW TIRO IMDAn+wT snEM 4 FOOT awluRp AnrcxETE PEARL wrtMx A 10 E Wl wICE w.uEx —A' Nrl`al Rac[x�MCE THE rowALL MPM[P¢ REATERENEDBITTRIN ONE (1) NEAR OF THE OF AND WATATENTE EXTEREAT. AN SAPPOINGEN SMITH THAT HE FIFETALTO TO �RAFURF THE CONTINUES AN-Ey OF THE WORTANNEW SCATTER THE MEMBERS NAME ERE NEWT INSENTIENT SEOUL BE SALE YTIATINALL .1 A L.uxa<.wr[x TREES .11 NCIe :MTO°NNET i�wxm. mawu eeaprB w.nGB Zs ONIONS FwxreER nwRT x HEIGHT. ( PLANNING DEVELOPMENT INCORPORATED MIDTOWN POINT CONCEPTUAL d ,ai.mmnw,.tilN..NN aau�Mws..Nea. mmlis�.�� eN.e. x.� NSI PUN STAE P `ERS ArGw^wxIFFECTS ERE M ARB ICHLESSFELCITORPRE TURN. — ..- PE- 2008 -AR -14071 Midtown Point Commitments: 1. The use of the additional 0.69± acres parking exemption area shall be restricted to serve normal office business hours of operation. Signage will be posted restricting the parking exemption spaces to hours of use between 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM, Monday through Friday. 2. The parking exemption parking spaces shall be restricted to meeting parking requirements for office space. 3. Parking within the additional parking exemption area is restricted to surface parking. 4. Parking within the additional parking exemption area shall be posted with signage designation the parking as restricted to employee parking. 5. Parking lot lighting within the parking exemption area will be restricted to light fixtures having an overall height no greater than 42 inches. 6. There shall be no direct access from the adjacent streets to the parking exemption area. Access to this parking area shall be via the commercially zoned property. 7. Landscaping within the parking exemption area shall exceed Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) requirements by providing landscaping to the following standard: Each parking space shall abut a landscape buffer; an interior parking lot landscape island; or a tree diamond that supports a palm tree having a minimum clear height of 7 feet and a minimum overall height of 14 feet. 8. The buffers from the parking exemption area to the adjacent uses shall be: a. To Abutting Residential Lots: • A 6 -foot prefabricated concrete wall, located a minimum of 4 feet from the common property line; within a 15 -foot wide Collier County LDC Type B Landscape Buffer; • Vegetative plantings shall be located external to the wall and/or fence such that 50 percent of the wall and/or fence are screened within 1 year of the installation of said vegetative material. A continuous hedge shall be installed to ensure the continued viability of the vegetative screen; • 1 tree per 25 feet, the trees at the time of installation shall be a minimum of 30 gallons, 16 feet in height, have a 2.5 inch caliper (at 12 inches above the ground) and a 6 -foot spread. b. To Ridge Street and Rosemary Lane Right -of -Way: • A 4 -foot prefabricated concrete wall within a 10 -foot wide LDC Type D Landscape Buffer; • Vegetative plantings shall be located external to the wall and /or fence such that 50 percent of the wall and/or fence are screened within 1 year of the installation of said vegetative material. An irrigation system shall be installed to ensure the continued viability of the vegetative screen. The required double row hedge requirement shall be split by the wall. The composite hedge shall be grown and maintained to a height of 6 feet. • One (1) tree per 30 feet, the trees at the time of installation shall be a minimum of 25 gallons, 14 feet in height, have a 2.5 inch caliper (at 12 inches above the ground) and a 5 -foot spread. Exhibit C TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION HEARING DATE: APRIL 16, 2009 SUBJECT: PETITION PUDA- 2008 -AR- 13801, WOLF CREEK PROPERTY OWNERS /AGENTS: Owners: Larry Abbo, Vice President Prime Homes at Portofino Falls, Ltd. 21218 St Andrews Boulevard # 510 Boca Raton, FL 33433 Agents: Josh Fruth Davidson Engineering, Inc. 3530 Kraft Road, Suite 301 Naples, FL 34119 REQUESTED ACTION: William L. Hoover President of Catalina Land Group, Inc. & Manager of Wolf Creek Estates LLC 3785 Airport Road, North # B -1 Naples, FL 34105 Richard D. Yovanovich Goodlette, Coleman, Johnson, Yovanovich & Koester, PA 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 The petitioners request that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an amendment to the Wolf Creek Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) to revise the traffic stipulations. The applicant is proposing to change Section 5.7, Paragraphs N and O of the RPUD Document. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road (CR 862), approximately one half mile west of Collier Boulevard (CR -951) in Section 34, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (see illustration on the following page). PUDA- 2008 -AR -13801 Wolf Creek RPUD Page 1 of 11 April 16, 2009 CCPC Rev: 3/26/09 i CL Q c� z z 0 N c� G 0 0 e" 0 0 Wo 1 dg `� a 6E a G C _ C = LT, - wm xu L =x s a CL Q c� z z 0 N c� G 0 0 PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The petitioners are seeking an amendment of the Wolf Creek Planned Unit Development (PUD) that was approved in Ordinance No. 03 -45, on September 23, 2003, and amended in Ordinance No. 07 -46 on May 22, 2007 to revise the traffic stipulations. The subject property was originally zoned from Agricultural (A) to PUD with the adoption of Ordinance No. 03 -45. That ordinance was repealed and replaced by Ordinance No. 07 -46. 'That ordinance added 20.26+ acres (zoned Agricultural) and 80 dwelling units to the Wolf Creek RPUD for a total of 167.96+ acres and 671 dwelling units. The PUD document allows development of single- or multi - family dwellings, with the maximum height of multi - family structures limited to 38 feet and 2 stories. Ordinance No. 03 -45 allowed nursing homes, private schools, adult living facilities and churches as allowable conditional uses but those uses were eliminated in the 2007 action. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: Palermo Cove, a 131+ -acre developing residential project that was approved at a density of 4 units per acre, with a zoning designation of RPUD and Scenic Woods, which was recently rezoned to RMF -6(4) East: Sonoma Oaks, a 37.5+ -acre mixed use project whose residential portion was approved at a density of 4 units per acre with a zoning designation of MPUD; and Mission Hills PUD, a partially developed commercial project on 33.45± acres, with a zoning designation of CPUD South: Carolina Village, a 15.88± -acre mixed use project with a zoning designation of MPUD whose residential portion was approved at a density of 4.03 units per acre; and Vanderbilt Beach Road West: Island Walk PUD /DRI; a built out 705+ -acre mixed use project whose residential portion was approved at a density of 3.04 dwelling units per acre Aerial Photo (subject property depiction is approximate) PUDA- 2008 -AR -13801 Wolf Creek RPUD Page 2 of 11 April 16, 2009 CCPC Rev: 3126/09 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 Residential Subdistrict) as identified on the countywide Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the GMP. This district is intended to accommodate a variety of residential and non - residential uses including Planned Unit Developments (PUD). Within the Urban Residential Subdistrict, residential development is permitted at a base density of four (4) units per acre, and a maximum of 16 units per acre, as allowed under the Density Rating System of the FLUE. The subject PUD permits residential uses (single and multi family type units), and is approved for a maximum of 671 dwelling units, or 3.99 units per acre. The proposed development standard change does not affect uses or intensities. Comprehensive Planning staff finds the proposed PUD amendment consistent with the FLUE. Transportation Element: Transportation staff has reviewed the proposed amendment for consistency with the Transportation Element of the GMP and recommends that this petition be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the GMP Transportation Element. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (COME): Environmental staff has evaluated the proposed PUD amendment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was not required for this petition. The changes proposed in this amendment do not affect any environmental issues. This petition was deemed consistent with the GMP in the review of the most recent PUD rezone; that analysis remains germane. GMP Conclusion: The GMP is the prevailing document to support land use decisions such as this proposed PUD amendment. Staff is required to make a recommendation regarding a finding of consistency or inconsistency with the overall GMP as part of the recommendation for approval, approval with conditions, or denial of any rezoning petition. A finding of consistency with the FLUE and FLUM designations is a portion of the overall finding that is required, and staff believes the petition is consistent with the FLUM and the FLUE as indicated previously in the GMP discussion. The proposed rezone is consistent with the GMP Transportation Element as previously discussed. Environmental staff is recommending that the petition be found consistent with the CCME. Therefore, staff recommends that the petition be found consistent with the overall GMP. ANALYSIS: Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and the criteria on which a determination must be based. These criteria are specifically noted in Land Development Code (LDC) Sections 10.02.13 and 10.02.13.B.5. 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. Environmental Review: Environmental Services staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD documents to address any environmental concerns. 'This petition was not required to submit an EIS nor was a hearing before the Environmental Advisory Commission (EAC) required pursuant PUDA- 2008 -AR -13801 Wolf Creek RPUD Page 3 of 11 April 16, 2009 CCPC Rev: 3/26/09 to LDC section 10.02.02 2 (a) (b) (c). The petition does not propose any changes that affect environmental issues, thus Environmental Services staff recommends approval. Transportation Review: Transportation Department Staff has reviewed the petition and recommends approval of this amendment seeking to revise the transportation improvement timing. Utilitv Review: The Utilities Department Staff has reviewed the petition and notes the following: This PUD amendment does not impact the utilities provision. Per the 2008 Water and Wastewater Master Plan Updates, this project is located within Collier County Water -Sewer Service Area. Per County GIS, there an existing 30 -inch water main and 16 -inch force main on Vanderbilt Beach Road. Emergency Management Review: Emergency Management staff did not provide comments for this petition. Parks and Recreation Review: Parks and Recreation staff did not provide comments for this petition. Engineering /Water Management: Collier County Engineering staff did not offer any comments for this petition. Zoning Review: Staff evaluated the uses proposed and their intensities and/or densities; the development standards such as building heights, setbacks, landscape buffers; building mass; building location and orientation; the amount and type of open space and its location; and traffic generation/attraction of the proposed uses as part of the initial rezone and previous amendment requests. No changes to development standards are proposed therefore additional analysis of those issues is not warranted for this amendment request. The uses should still be compatible with the surrounding area and staff is of the opinion that this project can be deemed consistent with GMP FLUE Policy 5.4. LDC Subsection 10.03.05.I.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." [Staffs 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. 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 recommendation that this petition be deemed consistent with the GMP. PUDA- 2008 -AR -13801 Wolf Creek RPUD Page 4 of 11 April 16, 2009 CCPC Rev: 3/26/09 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 residentially zoned and used lands in all directions and on all sides. No change in uses is proposed as part of this amendment. 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 no change is proposed to the subject property of this already zoned PUD. Full consideration was given to this issue during the previous rezoning actions. This amendment action is a reiteration of the previous rezoning approvals for the same parcel to allow the same uses; the only changes proposed address transportation commitment timing issues. 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 and as noted previously, no changes to zoning boundaries are proposed as part of this amendment... 'the PUD 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. S. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. The proposed change is necessary because of changed conditions in the surrounding area and the slowed economy. The petitioners' agent provides the following analysis: This traffic stipulation was put in the RPUD at the request of the owners' representatives of the Palermo Cove PUD that is located directly north of the subject RPUD. Their reasoning.for having the traffic stipulation in the Wolf Creek RPUD was the Palermo Cove PUD was only allowed to use Vanderbilt Beach Road for access until the 6- laving of Collier Boulevard was complete and Pristine Drive would have provided them this north-south access. In late August 2008, all 6 lanes of Collier Boulevard were open north of Vanderbilt Beach Road so the Palermo Cove no longer is limited to only Pristine Drive as they may now use their direct access onto Collier Boulevard via Wolfe Road. ... Pristine Drive was constructed about halfway from Vanderbilt Beach Road to Wolfe Road... to provide access to the Falls of Portofino (multi family homes) being developed by Prime Homebuilders on the west side of Pristine Drive and to Black Bear Ridge Subdivision (100 single family homes) being developed by Buckstone Estates, LLC on the east side of Pristine Drive. The extension of Pristine Drive is intended to provide access for the proposed Pristine Lake Subdivision that is still in permitting and is located on the west side of Pristine Drive at the intersection with Wolfe Road. All 3 of these residential projects are within the Wolf Creek RPUD. Currently, the Palermo Cove PUD is not under construction, the Falls of Portofino PUDA- 2008 -AR -13801 Wolf Creek RPUD Page 5 of 11 April 16, 2009 CCPC Rev: 3126/09 has roughly 25 percent of their buildings constructed, and Black Bear Ridge has 15 percent of their homes either finished or under construction. This slow pace of construction is obviously due to the substantial slowdown in sales of new residential homes. Staff agrees with the petitioners' assessment of the issues, recognizing the economic issues warrant a revisit of the transportation commitments for this project. 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 amendment is consistent with the County's land use policies that are reflected by the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. Also, the PUD document provides assurances that the site improvements will include adequate landscaping, setbacks and buffering for the development. 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. It should be noted that this PUD amendment does not increase the size or intensity of the currently approved PUD. In addition, development of the subject property is consistent with provisions of the Transportation Element of the (IMP. Therefore, this project should not create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses and it should not affect the public safety. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. Appropriate stormwater management has been provided on the Master Plan to address this issue as part of the previous rezone process. The proposed development 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 PUD document provides adequate property development regulations to ensure light and air should not be seriously reduced to adjacent areas. The Master Plan further demonstrates that the locations of proposed preserve and open space areas should further ensure light and air should not be seriously reduced to adjacent areas. PUDA- 2008 -AR -13801 Wolf Creek RPUD Page 6 of 11 April 16, 2009 CCPC Rev: 3/26109 10. Whether the proposed change would adversely affect property values in the adjacent area. This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results which may be internal or external to the subject property. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning; however zoning by itself 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 PUD amendment should not be a deterrent to the improvement of adjacent properties. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as 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. The proposed change is necessary because without this amendment, the petitioners cannot receive permit approval from Collier County because the petitioners are not in compliance with the requirements of the PUD document. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. The proposed development was found consistent with the GMP subdistrict requirements when the rezoning was originally approved; no changes are proposed as part of this amendment that would jeopardize that finding. The GMP is a policy statement which has evaluated the scale, density and intensity of land uses deemed to be acceptable throughout the urban- designated areas of Collier County. Staff is of the opinion that the development standards and the developer commitments will ensure that the project is not out 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. PUDA- 2008 -AR -13801 Wolf Creek RPUD Page 7 of 11 April 16, 2009 CCPC Rev, 3/26/09 This criterion is not applicable to this amendment as the uses have already been approved and no changes to those uses are proposed as part of this amendment. The petition was reviewed on its own merit for compliance with the GMP and the LDC; and staff does not review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. This site has already been altered and partially developed in compliance with the applicable LDC requirements, and further there is no "proposed zoning classification" as noted above. The zoning to PUD was previously approved; only an amendment is being considered. Therefore, this criterion is not applicable to this petition. 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 amendment 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. 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. The type and pattern of development have already been reviewed and found compliant with all applicable LDC and GMP regulations. Furthermore, this project, as it develops, 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. PUDA- 2008 -AR -13801 Wolf Creek RPUD Page 8 of 11 April 16, 2009 CCPC Rev: 3/26/09 Documents submitted with the application provided satisfactory evidence of unified control. The RPUD 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 were already reviewed and approved during the rezoning process; no changes are proposed to those requirements as part of this amendment. 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. As noted above, the timing of improvements is the crux of the issue for this amendment. The slowed economy and the improvements to Collier Boulevard prompted the petitioners to seek this amendment. Transportation staff has evaluated the revised conditions, and is recommending approval of the request, believing that the proposed timing changes will still assure that this project will provide "the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private" as required above. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. Please refer to PUD Finding number 6 above. 8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. 'This criterion essentially requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards and deviations proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. No deviations are being sought in conjunction with this amendment therefore this criterion is not applicable. PUDA- 2008 -AR -13801 Wolf Creek RPUD Page 9 of 11 April 16, 2009 CCPC Rev: 3/26/09 ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: This petition did not trigger the need for a hearing before the EAC because no environmental issues are being amended. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The required meeting was duly noticed by the agents and held on December 11, 2008 at 5:30 p.m. at the Black Bear Ridge Clubhouse. Six persons from the public attended, as well as the applicant's team, Bill Hoover, Manager of Wolf Creek Estates and Rich Yovanovich of Goodlette, Coleman and county staff. Rich presented an overview of the requested PUD amendment for the Wolf Creek PUD. The applicant explained that the petitioners are asking to revise a traffic stipulation which would extend the timeframe to construct the extension of Pristine Drive to Wolf Road. There were no questions or concerns from the participants at this meeting. The meeting ended at approximately 6:00 p.m. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report for PUDA- 2008 -AR -13801 revised on March 26, 2009. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward Petition PUDA- 2008 -AR -13801 to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) with a recommendation of approval. PUDA- 2008 -AR -13801 Wolf Creek RPUD Page 10 of 11 April 16, 2009 CC PC Rev: 3/26/09 PREPARED BY: KA 4SELEM, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER DATE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REVIEWED BY: RAYMOND V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DATE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DFVELOPMENT REVIEW %JSAN M. ISTENES, AICP, DIRECTOR DATE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVED BY: fPH CHMITT ADM NISTRA FOR A Y DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION Tentatively scheduled for the June 9, 2009 Board of County Commissioners Meeting COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN DATE PUDA- 2008 -AR -13801 Wolf Creek RPUD Page 11 of 11 April 16, 2009 CCPC Rev: 3/23/09 ORDINANCE NO. 09 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 07 -46, WOLF CREEK RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD), BY AMENDING THE COVER PAGE; BY AMENDING SECTION 5.7, PARAGRAPHS "N" AND "O ", FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD (C.R_ 862), APPROXIMATELY ONE -HALF MILE WEST OF COLLIER BOULEVARD (C.R. 951), IN SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 167.96 t ACRES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, on May 22, 2007, the Board of County Commissioners approved Ordinance No. 07 -46, which established the Wolf Creek Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD); and WHEREAS, William L. Hoover, President of Catalina Land Group, Inc., the Manager of Wolf Creek Estates, LLC and Buckstone Estates and Larry Mayer Abbe, Vice - President of Prime Homes at Portofino Falls, Ltd., all of which are represented by William L. Hoover of Hoover Planning and Development, Inc. and Richard Yovanovich of Goodlette, Coleman, Johnson, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. and Josh Fruth of Davidson Engineering petitioned the Board of Collier County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, to amend Ordinance 07 -46, the Wolf Creek Residential Planned Unit Development. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: AMENDMENTS TO THE COVER PAGE OF ORDINANCE NO. 07- 46, WOLF CREEK RPUD, A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. The Cover Page of the Residential Planned Unit Development previously attached as Exhibit "A" to Ordinance 07 -46, the Wolf Creek RPUD, is hereby amended to read as follows: Words stFdekt a-eugh are deleted; words underlined are added. Wolf Creek RPUD, PUDA- 2008 -AR -13801 Page 1 of 4 Revised 3/30/09 EXHIBIT 00A" WOLF CREEK RPUD A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND SUPPORTING MASTER PLAN GOVERNING THE WOLF CREEK RPUD, A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PURSUANT TO PROVISIONS OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE PREPARED FOR: LARRY MAYER ABBO, V.P. PRIME HOMES, INC. 21218 ST. ANDREWS BLVD., #510 BOCA BATON, FLORIDA 33433 and WILLIAM L. HOOVER, PRES. of CATALINA LAND GROUP, INC., the MANAGER of WOLF CREEK ESTATES, I.LC and BUCKSTONE ESTATES, LLC 347-5 -3785 AIRPORT ROAD N., SUITE B -1 NAPLES, FLORIDA 34105 PREPARED BY: B A,NXS ENGP" RRP4' HOOVER PLANNING & DEV., INC. 25 15 NORT-11BROOKE R&A—Z-A PR-WE 3785 AIRPORT ROAD N., SUITE 200 B_1 NAPLES, FLORIDA 3411 34105 and RICHARD D. YOVANOVICII GOODLETTL-', COLEMAN, & JOHNSON, YOVANOVICH & KOESTER, P.A. 4001 TAMIAMI TRAIL N., #300 NAPLES, FLORIDA 34103 DATE FILED DATE REVISED Seotem1er_5, 2008 DATE REVISED DATE REVIEWED BY CCPC DATE APPROVED BY BCC ORDINANCE. NUMBER 2093 --45 AMENDMENTS AND REPEAL. 03 -45 07-46 Words are deleted; words underlined are added. Wolf Creek RPUD, PUDA- 2008 -AR -13801 Page 2 of 4 Revised 3/30109 SECTION TWO: AMENDMENT TO SECTION 5.7, ENTITLED "TRAFFIC ", PARAGRAPHS "N" AND "O". Subsection 5.7, Paragraphs "N" and "O" of the Residential Planned Unit Development previously attached as Exhibit "A" to Ordinance 07 -46, the Wolf Creek RPUD, are hereby amended to read as follows: N. The developers owning the property fronting Pristine Drive shall convey in fee simple to Collier County the right -of -way necessary for the two -lane construction of Pristine Drive. Each developer shall convey 30 feet for the Pristine Drive right -of- way. The anticipated width of the right -of -way is 60 feet. The turn lanes required for each individual project shall be accommodated within the project's boundary. There are existing SDPs and plats within the PUD issued to individual developers within the PUD. No further Certificates of Occupancy or development orders shall be issued to any individual developer within the PUD within an already approved SDP or plat until that individual developer conveys all of the right of way for the portion(s) of Pristine Drive owned by that individual developer whether the right of way is located within an approved SDP or plat or located outside of an approved SDP or plat. O The developer shell stai4 .. ..,d. -uetion of within e year of the .. _ ...1 of this v,�1QUD [v Feed....... shall Said Feed sh ll be . enstriaeted to Ge....t y standards and - a eptea by Collier !`oust., tt,_,....,h the .. _....,1 e eptanee preeess. Said _ ..a. shall be complete ..,ithie a ma-ximum of two years from tl... ., ....1 .i. _f: this RPUD rezone No further SDPs or plats shall be approved for any individual owner within the PUD until Pristine Drive from its current terminus to Wolfe Road is under construction and all of the necessary right of way has been dedicated. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. THIS ORDINANCE ADOPTED after motion, second and super- majority vote favoring same this day of 12009. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: _ By: Deputy Clerk DONNA FIALA, Chairman Words struek-threugh are deleted; words underlined are added. Wolf Creek RPUD, PUDA- 2008 -AR -13801 Page 3 of 4 Revised 3130/09 Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Steven T. Williams 5 {J Assistant County Attorney 3.3u OPI CP \08- CPS - 00892/22 Words dough are deleted, words underlined are added. Wolf Creek RPUD, PUDA- 2008 -AR -13801 Page 4 of 4 Revised 3/30/09 Page 1 of f DeselemKay From: DeselemKay Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 2:09 PM To: WlliamsSteven Cc: bonham_g, bellows_r, RollinsCheri Subject: PUDA- 2008 -AR- 13801: Wolf Creek Staff Report Attachments: Staff Report 3- 23- 09.doc, RLS for CCPC STAFF REPORT.doc Attached is the RLS and the staff report for review and comment. Kay Deselem, AICP zoning ,& Land Development Review Department Community Development & Environmental Services Division 2800 N Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239.2522931 Fax: 239.252.6357 cue �C-) 3/23/2009