The URL can be used to link to this page

CCPC Backup 09/02/2010 Rccpc REGULAR MEETING DOCUMENTS SEPTEMBER 12010 AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 8:30 A.M., THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 2010, IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, 3301 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST, NAPLES, FLORIDA: NOTE: INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES ON ANY ITEM. INDIVIDUALS SELECTED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZATION OR GROUP ARE ENCOURAGED AND MAY BE ALLOTTED 10 MINUTES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM IF SO RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIRMAN. PERSONS 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 —June 15, 2010 GMP Amendments, June 17, 1010, July 1, 2010 6. BCC REPORT - RECAPS — July 27, 2010 7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT 8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. BD- PL2009 -1157 Michael and Debra Rotkvich, represented by Michael A. Kelly of Paradise Docks, is requesting a 28.5 -foot boat dock extension over the maximum 20 -foot limit as provided in section 5.03.06 of the LDC to allow a 48.5 -foot dock facility to accommodate two vessels_ Subject property is located at Lot 43 of Southport on the Bay, Unit 2 subdivision in the Lely Barefoot Beach Planned Unit Development in Section 6, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida (street address: 54 Southport Cove). [Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, Principal Planner] [CONTINUED FROM THE JUNE 3, 2010 CCPC MEETING, CONTINUED AGAIN FROM THE JULY 1, 2010 MEETING] 1 B. Petition: PUDZ-2004 -AR -6829 Collier Davis, LLC, represented by Robert Andrea of Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc., is requesting a rezone from the Estates (E) zoning district to the Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) zoning district for a project to be known as the Davis Reserve MPUD to allow for the development a maximum of 234 dwelling units including affordable housing and a maximum of 35,000 square feet of commercial retail and office uses. The subject property, consisting of 22.83 acres, is located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Davis Boulevard and County Barn Road, in Section S, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Kay Deselem] C. Petition: PUDZ-2008 -AR -14048 Robert E. Williams, Trustee of the Robert E. Williams Trust dated October 5, 2004, represented by D. Wayne Arnold, AICP of Q. Grady Minor and Associates, Inc. and Richard Yovanovich of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., is requesting a rezoning from Commercial (C -2) and Mobile Home (MI) zoning districts with a Rural Fringe Mixed Use Neutral Lands overlay to a Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) zoning district, with removal of the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Neutral Lands overlay, for a project to be known as Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD. The rezoning petition allows for a maximum 60,000 square feet of commercial, retail, office, church and school uses. The subject property consists of 8 +/- acres which is located at the northwest corner of Immokalee Road and Platt Road in Section 27, Township 47 South, Range 27 Fast, in Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach] 10. OLD BUSINESS 11. NEW BUSINESS A. Introduction of Mr. Jack McKenna, Engineering Review Manager, Land Development Services Dept. 12. PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM 13. DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA 14. ADJOURN 6/21/10 CCPC Agenda /Ray Bellows /jmp I ivi UIn LWV Lei WLz NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING v .,m�gz:.+(b 'M41lf,�YkH �+5rr4r�T xrfl w{w-,�. i7�rprs Notice is hereby gven that a public h1grtng will be held by the CollieF I y ,tanning Cc9htmission (ddpd: 'et 8:30 A M Thursday. September 2 2010, in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room, 3rd Floor, Administration Building, Collier Government Center, 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples Florida, to consider: Petition: BD- PL2009 -1157, Michael and Debra Rot - kvich, represented by Michael A. Kelly of Paradise Docks, is requesting a 28.5 -foot boat dock extension over the maximum 20-foot limit as provided in sec- tion 5.03.06 of the LDC to allow a 48.5 -foot dock fa- cility to accommodate two vessels. Subject property is located at Lot 43 of Southport on the Bay, Unit 2 subdivision in the Lely Barefoot Beach Planned Unit Development in Section 6, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida (street address: 54 Southport Cove). All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Individual speakers will be limited to 5 min- utes on any item. Expert witnesses shall be limited to 10 minutes each. Persons who have been authorized to represent a group or organization should limit their presentation to ten minutes. 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. Writ- ten comments must be filed with the Department of Zoning and Land Development Review prior to Sep- tember 2, 2010, in order to be considered at the pub- lic hearing. All materials used in presentation 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 pertain- ing thereto, and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which includes ail testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Collier County Planning Commission Collier County, Florida Mark P. Strain, Chairman YUSLIC NU'110E 11U11LJu NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING :7b4'.1,M�.(nF x+Md44*h4 vfiW.a;. r;Uwlpu s.'Nk' Notice tst ere y given that a public'h>taring will bariefd by tthill< liferl0 intitloanning Calmmissism(CA .PQ at 8,3 M TbAirsday.Sgptember22 2010, in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room, 3rd Floor, Administration Building, Collier Government Center, 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples Florida, to consider: Petition_P 1ZD 2_Q04 _qR =6829, Collier Davis, LLC, represented by Robert Andrea of Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc., is requesting a rezone from the Es- tates (E) zoning district to the Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) zoning district for a project to be known as the Davis Reserve MPUD to allow for the de- velopment a maximum of 234 dwelling units including affordable housing and a maximum of 35,000 square feet of commercial retail and office uses. The subject property, consisting of 22.83 acres, is located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Davis Bou- levard and County Barn Road, in Section 8, Town- ship 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Individual speakers will be limited to 5 minutes on any item. Individuals selected to speak on behalf of an organization or groups are encouraged and may be allotted 10 minutes to speak or) an item if so recog- nized by the chairman. Persons wishing to have writ- ten or graphic materials included in the CCPC agenda packets must submit said material a minimum of 10 days prior to the respective public hearing. Written comments must be filed with the Department of Zon- ing and Land Development Review prior to Septem- ber 2, 2010, in order to be considered at the public hearing. All materials used in presentation before the CCPC will become a permanent part of the record and will be available for presentation to the Board of Coun- ty Commissioners, if applicable. .10 flOAD IR BR1 PROJECT rF a, rvT LOCATION [- �€ fl 1,a L L.S r a� LET I All crni J ... ,� It COUNTY enr. d PROJECT onvs�e'o I.11Ae A _ LOCATION Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the CCPC will need a record of the proceedings pertain- ing thereto, and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which includes ail testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Collier County Planning Commission Collier County, Florida Mark P. Strain, Chairman YUSLIC NU'110E 11U11LJu NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING :7b4'.1,M�.(nF x+Md44*h4 vfiW.a;. r;Uwlpu s.'Nk' Notice tst ere y given that a public'h>taring will bariefd by tthill< liferl0 intitloanning Calmmissism(CA .PQ at 8,3 M TbAirsday.Sgptember22 2010, in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room, 3rd Floor, Administration Building, Collier Government Center, 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples Florida, to consider: Petition_P 1ZD 2_Q04 _qR =6829, Collier Davis, LLC, represented by Robert Andrea of Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc., is requesting a rezone from the Es- tates (E) zoning district to the Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) zoning district for a project to be known as the Davis Reserve MPUD to allow for the de- velopment a maximum of 234 dwelling units including affordable housing and a maximum of 35,000 square feet of commercial retail and office uses. The subject property, consisting of 22.83 acres, is located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Davis Bou- levard and County Barn Road, in Section 8, Town- ship 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Individual speakers will be limited to 5 minutes on any item. Individuals selected to speak on behalf of an organization or groups are encouraged and may be allotted 10 minutes to speak or) an item if so recog- nized by the chairman. Persons wishing to have writ- ten or graphic materials included in the CCPC agenda packets must submit said material a minimum of 10 days prior to the respective public hearing. Written comments must be filed with the Department of Zon- ing and Land Development Review prior to Septem- ber 2, 2010, in order to be considered at the public hearing. All materials used in presentation before the CCPC will become a permanent part of the record and will be available for presentation to the Board of Coun- ty Commissioners, if applicable. .10 flOAD IR BR1 m fl 1,a �e r a� crni J ... ,� enr. d PROJECT onvs�e'o I.11Ae A _ LOCATION fl s� r 4L 1 ,wo r L �<fl I .11 !IT 111Afl1111 Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the CCPC will need a record of the proceedings pertain- ing thereto, and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which includes all testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Collier County Planning Commission Collier County, Florida Mark P. Strain, Chairman YUI51-1k, AVlIII —E NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AX. Thursday. September 2.201 0, in the Board of Coun- ty Commissioners Meeting Room, 3rd Floor, Administration Building, Collier Government Center, 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples Florida, to consider: Petition; PUDZ- 2008 -AR- 14048, Robert E. Williams, Trustee of the Robert E. Williams Trust dated October 5, 2004, represented by D. Wayne Arnold, AICP of D. Grady Minor and Associates, Inc. and Richard Yovanovich of Cole- man, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., is requesting a rezoning from Commercial (C -2) and Mobile Home (MH) zoning dis- tricts with a Rural Fringe Mixed Use Neutral Lands overlay to a Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) zoning district, with removal of the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Neu- tral Lands overlay, for a project to be known as Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD. The rezoning petition allows for a maximum 60,000 square feet of commercial, retail, of- fice, church and school uses. The subject property consists of 8 +/- acres which is located at the northwest corner of Immokalee Road and Platt Road in Section 27, Township 47 South, Range 27 East, in Collier County, Florida. All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. In- dividual speakers will be limited to 5 minutes on any item. Individuals selected to speak on behalf of an organization or groups 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 mini- mum of 10 days prior to the respective public hearing. Writ- ten comments must be filed with the Department of Zoning and Land Development Review prior to September 2, 2010, in order to be considered at the public hearing. All materials used in presentation before the CCPC will become a perma- nent part of the record and will be available for presentation to the Board of County Commissioners, if applicable. PROJECT LOCATION \ L[P C„uxry � CP. PSN 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 includes all testimony and evi- dence upon which the appeal is to be based. Collier County Planning Commission Collier County, Florida Mark P. Strain, Chairman AGENDA ITEM 9 -A Cofer County SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION, PLANNING AND DESIGN HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 2, 2010 SUBJECT: BD- PL2009 -1157, ROTKVICH DOCK PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: Owner: Michael & Debbie Rotkvich Agent: Michael A. Kelly 54 Southport Cove Paradise Docks Naples, FL 34134 1405 SW IOhPlace Cape Coral, FL 33991 REOUESTED ACTION: The petitioner is requesting a 28.5 -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 48.5 feet into a waterway that is 550 feet wide. PROJECT STATUS: The Collier County Planning Commission (CPCC) heard the Rotkvich Dock Extension petition at its June 3, 2010 and July 1, 2010 meetings. The petition was continued a second time because the CCPC requested a revision to the boat dock to minimize decking and to design it for a maximum of two (2) vessels. (The previous design potentially allowed for three (3) vessels.) The petitioner has submitted a revised dock plan depicting a new dock layout with less decking and mooring for up to two (2) vessels. The Department of Land Development Services Staff recommendation for approval remains the same as noted in the previous Staff Report dated May 18, 2010 and Supplemental Staff Report dated June 3, 2010. Analysis indicates that this dock extension request is consistent with the Land Development Code and is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Therefore, Staff recommends that the CCPC approve this request. ATTACHED INFORMATION: Attachment A: Revised Boat Dock Plan, Attachment B: Staff Report prepared for the July 1, 2010 Planning Commission hearing, Attachment C: Staff Report prepared for the June 3, 2010 Planning Commission hearing, Attachment D: Resolution. BD- PL2009 -1157, ROTKVICH DOCK August 9, 2010 Page 1 of 2 PREPARED BY: NANCY G DL H, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER DEPARTM T LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REVIEWED BY: RAYMOND BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES LLIAM D. L RE Z JR., P.E., DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES APPROVED BY: 4 j NICK C' SALANG IDA, DE Y ADMINISTRATOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN BD- PL2009 -1157, ROTKVICH DOCK August 9, 2010 Page 2 of 2 O R. v ! g•9• /o DATE C) 8• 0 5 -2oli DATE g- 1.3 -zc) iV DATE [IY�J I SETBACK HINES Key We.-;,, skiff' 166SK Pding are r nlhzagoca 0 &e —rar cta WHIVY Akoll V :j RIPARIAN :31'e" SETBACK LINES ------------ -------------- — -- 56, 4-4' 3V 2-8' 2 6- Angler"s Mar qovp D-ip 1.4' Frojecl, ll-essnpt=or- PARADISE DOCKS Wali a 4'x 35'a--cess docv, a 4'x 19'morginal dLvk ar CGC 15 .8687 7'6" x 14'6" ten1nal dock, tree gullwirg& a 13 00G# Boat '405 8W 1 Cr.h PI Lift US writh alurniqurnwalk-lxwd- a 5 step, aluminum Cape Coral, FL 33991 retractable laddef-- ard an arg.e's as s�hcwn above. Phncv! /;941;=x.} , "I I F'), "For the Discriminating Boater" CJ .4' 550' Bay DesigriQe For: Miu-tael Rotwi& 54 Southpon Cove Ban-ta Sprims, FL 215"741.7113 :C---: I'; 63FJ-7114.78982 (Fax) Attachment A AGENDA ITEM 9 -A Cotter County SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION, PLANNING AND DESIGN HEARING DATE: JULY 1. 2010 SUBJECT: BD- PL2009 -1157, ROTKVICH DOCK PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT.- Owner: Michael & Debbie Rotkvich 54 Southport Cove Naples, FL 34134 REOUESTED ACTION: Agent: Michael A. Kelly Paradise Docks 1405 S W l0a' Place Cape Coral, FL 33991 The petitioner is requesting a 28.5 -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 48.5 feet into a waterway that is 550 feet wide. PROJECT STATUS: The Collier County Planning Commission heard the Rotkvich Dock Extension petition at its June 3, 2010 meeting. The petition was continued because the CCPC requested a revision to the water depths exhibit and for the accurate Mangrove fringe line to be shown on the plans. The petitioner has submitted a revised dock plan depicting water depths and a revised boundary survey depicting water depths along with the mangrove fringe line. The Department of Land Development Services Staff recommendation for approval remains the same as noted in the previous staff report dated May 18, 2010. Analysis indicates that this dock extension request is consistent with the Land Development Code and is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Therefore, Staff recommends that the CCPC approve this request. ATTACHED INFORMATION: Attachment A: Revised Boat Dock Plan, Attachment B: Revised Dock Cross Section, Attachment C: Revised Boundary Survey with Drip line, Attachment D: Staff Report prepared for the June 3, 2010 Planning Commission hearing. BD- PL2009 -1157 6/3/10 1 - Attachment B -- PREPARED BY: DEPAR REVIEWED BY: 3, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES /� . lz�— kAYMOP V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES LLIAM D. LO Z JR. .E., DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES APPROVED BY: NICK CASALANGUIDA, DEPU Y ADMINISTRATOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION COLLIER COUNTY. PLANNING COMMISSION: MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN BD- PL2009 -1157 6/10/10 WNW� G•10•/0 DATE U G - 1 1 -Zo/o DATE DATE DATE - -- - - -- RIPARIAN -- — - - LINES — SETBACK LINES h —126 II of � NI O! Yellow Highlighted o' a' Piling are piling with pagoda lights': Ladder 250, MHW — -- N N 550' Bay Project Description PARADISE DOCKS Install a 4'x 30 access dock, a 4'x 16' marginal dock, an CGC1508887 84 x 19' terminal dock, three gullwings, a 13,000# Boat 1405 SW tOth Pl. Lift US with aluminum walkboard, a 5 step aluminum Cape Coral, FL 33991 i. retractable ladder, and an angler's station as shown above. Phone 239-415 -8111 Fax: 239.415 -8118 Seale:: V =10' Attacho. A A Michael Rotkvich 54 Southport Cove, Bonita Sptings, FL 219 -741 -7113 (Cell) 630 - 734- 7B982(Fax) C6 bo II of � NI O! Yellow Highlighted o' a' Piling are piling with pagoda lights': Ladder 250, MHW — -- N N 550' Bay Project Description PARADISE DOCKS Install a 4'x 30 access dock, a 4'x 16' marginal dock, an CGC1508887 84 x 19' terminal dock, three gullwings, a 13,000# Boat 1405 SW tOth Pl. Lift US with aluminum walkboard, a 5 step aluminum Cape Coral, FL 33991 i. retractable ladder, and an angler's station as shown above. Phone 239-415 -8111 Fax: 239.415 -8118 Seale:: V =10' Attacho. A A Michael Rotkvich 54 Southport Cove, Bonita Sptings, FL 219 -741 -7113 (Cell) 630 - 734- 7B982(Fax) i) • 221611 20'0!' –4 1271 LI 2 Ofo,� 25TO" 35'0!' 35'0" 401.011 . . . ...... . . . ..... ve . .. . ................... ...... Dock Cross Section with Water Depth fromMHWL Scale: V, = 1:01 MHWL .30' ---------- M LWL -1.61' .......... 6.1 ' 5.91 6.01 6.1' 6.01 6. 115" PARADISE DOCKS CGC1 508887 1405 SW 10th PI; Cape Coral, FL 33991 Phone: 239-415-8111 Fax: 230-415-8118 — "For the Discriminating Boater" Attachment B Michael Rotkvich 64 Southport Cove, Bonita Springs, FL 219-741-71113 630J34-78982 (Fax) .A•L .APJ'1111 -A,1 PHIL L IP M. MOULD A9 gAR --j q.a A6 SPECIFIC PURPOSE SURVEY, q PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR AND MAPPER BOUNDARY AND MEAN HIGH, MEAN LOW WATER '56 9 NORTH 458 CANDLEWICK CIRCLE NORTH WITH RIPARIAN DELINEATION FDR, 5 LEHIGH ACRES, FLORIDA 33936 LET 43, SDUTHPDRT DN THE BAY, UNIT TWD 6 �1' 'S 6 PHONE (239) 645 -1348 AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 16, PAGES100 -101 ' S TT`e pO'PTION "5 EMAIL: phillipmould @live.com AMONG THE PUBLIC RECDRDS DF 6.3 bA 5? '�'r� LS # 651 5 COLLIER COUNTY, FL DRIDA. \ "5• �� SI7 E LOCATION SKETCH (NDT TO SCALE) 7 _5? 32 -47 -25 gJ+'9N -5 9 6.1 \ , 1 -5' SR 865 BONITA BEACH ROAD �2F. eVgT TFjj !,%9 ,6.2 F gdOf' '\ 'S9 -50 T Icy t E.H l��r "2• �A' �� A' �'P "6•0 �l '5-9 9 ,5.9 ��S -6p S.OQ /6.0 ,5•` 'P' NW 1/4 NE 1/4 ��p 2A 9Ld X09 LITIL[ M �°o -25 9 T� ,5.9 ��' /y,1 60 6� -6•Z "61 -g.l UCK6PY q� q y l''f y ,5.8 ��P/ "6.0 "5.9 ,6.0 BAY 5 -4B -25 FCFLOq'lTh' I✓ d,Pl'°oi -FC �Qp 6 `/'vim\ 2,5: I�6.2 -6.3 9Tf�N j) OATF� <IN� <P I ,3 8 "5• ��/ 6a\ ylr l '6-0 SW 1/4 SE 1/4 0�o G <r "2• p r5� �`/ h �5 d�60og -20 /4 STING 5� -5. ,5? -58 S 6 d�'PO, N °-nw T, 11 1NE SP � A ?6'(H ��-\ 'rs9, '� / ? "2•s <INFr<�� N E P� 8' IRON 1NPG 11`d0 1p1 ' CN�� R�'�`i9..�..2• J �aT) 66j1 qA SO UN11PG 100 PAZ coN� ��T6'OS \ f01�� 4O1 pB�o \ Fa Q \\ �w 5 /a. 1 R • �/E, CM� I . 0 a� �` <.�T Cy�v,9l �ATOS <1�'E Y 5 ' D0 103 00 N' 661 373 \ -19 EXISTING I✓O 0 a dgB MfyTrp 30 OD DOCK 9 \ r o W Fp1N 6,56 N1IE1E1 I1 . 0 40 q0, 16 9 �1G EPS mA b F .2 Q , \DRP1N 9.3 PN6ODE 5 A NLE R ri i RES w O ��C,�LC`(pw NOTE, \ z 1�T1 BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN HEREON ARE ACCORDING THE REFERENCED DEED (D), PLAT (P) UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED AS O .-1 \ A N 1NE 1 (bti21�aE MEASURED (M) OR CALCULATED (G, MEAN HIGH WATER PROCEDURE AS SHOWN AND DEPICTED HEREON AO' SONY 3 SO UN71OG jOp'jp1 O� y h9 ESTABLISHED BY EXTENDING INTERPOLATION TPOINT 100235(MEAN HIGH AT Curve number 1 \1Z'1 \1 v� q' �Di A P8 ]6 P 5/8• IRON ,\./QQ6 TO SUBJECT PARCELss, MEAN LOW WATER -1.617 AND EXTENDING Radius= 280.00' 3 O �^ A P�NNN 6569 SOJ�h MEAN HIGH , MEAN LOW WATER LOCATED BY ANGLE, DISTANCE Delta= 14.0401' 1 1 ,3b QPo AND VERTICAL MEASUREMENT DEPICTED BY STATION AND OFFSET Arc= 68.74' 6 0 ,� FROM WITNESS LINE SHOWN HEREON. Tangent= 34.55' , VO SOURCE, WWV.LABINSDRG Chord= 68.57' p. W 140,5 7(�,,�) VERTICAL DATUM TIDAL BM D248 11.93' CLOSED LEVEL LOOP Chord Brg.= S.167725E. ° O S g0 ^44'21'x✓' i CONTOURS ( -1.2= TYPICAL SPOT ELEVATIONS) = NAVD 88 £ 5/9, 9 ,RUN THE ThLs survey s in compliance with the minimum technical CERTIFIED TDr BAY C 30.00 FOUND 6 LOT 42 SDUTHpOR51 X53 standardsyas set forth In Chapter 61G17 -6, Florida MICHAEL RDTKVICH LOT m T ON PIN P.8 15 AdmZlstrative Code. This Survey Map Is not valid PARADISE DOCKS li THE BAY without the signature and raised seal of a Florida PB15 PG 51 -53 ! NOTESBeearings anidnDistances shown hereon are GRAPHIC SCALE according the referenced DEED (D) or PLAT (P) unless PHILLIP M MOULD SCALE 1' = 40' otherwise noted as measured (M). SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS AND RESERVATIONS PROF PROF ESSIONAL SURVEYOR AND MAPPER - STATE 17F FLORIDA NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE DATA, OF RECORD, THREE ARE NO VISIBLE ENCROACHMENTS COMMUNITY COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AND UNLESS SHOWN HEREON. ONLY ABOVE GROUND EVIDENCE OF INCORPORATED AREAS UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN. DATE, JULY 8, 2009 MAP NUMBER 12021C01795, 6p�m�� FEDERAL FLOOD ZONE AE, ELEVATION 13' NAVD86 0 10 20 40 80 DATE, DRIPLINE 6 -4 -2010 DATE, attachment C Page 1 of 2 63'� ".u''.-r^,;s.; 7. .ss„ <r st ..g w-•sr �., a.y�..;�s•,piCl�+ r'a, . e 5 -48 4 -48 -25 56 -5.5 x• / .S -5.7 -5.6 ;q. SE 1/4 .4 °5.7 y/^ F�; ? -5.7 0 -5 B --5.6 c S. 59 gN�F\Ci�z58 -S.T� I -57 - 8 -48 -25 0�, 6.0 �i.31 ��. -6�1 -6.0 -6 l -5.9 ' r Eqs �o h� - s.0 -6.2 o W S s -s.0 F� C .' v -2.4 y ...... �' (, - 25 8 -... 6.l .... -61 -14P U.r 156.1 _62 s. l 0. -6 o 9 -6.0 i6.2 -6.2 Y F S��N Hio 3.8 8 -5.6 2s$ o QJ -6.'2 -6:3 q 1 0 N,. 5 7 _ .. O ,)�Pp0141P �+j00- 40 30 OgrB 1.8 - 94.:0 �� -6.6 Ny I?ip00y ` .0 -5/7 Q -5.7 / -5.8 -2 6 -% 2 6, u? Z 4\11' W \ 2O l/ .7 EXIS/7NG ��i JOCk WOOS POCK 75.5 °�s°oy� ,SF\��s� 9 `� I'Uil �; 9 a' 6569 OEpK D.'r` �.3 �SEiyF �•��.� ,� - 1.71.9 C p Qo A I tt, e \C\ 0r 05�� \RVgUca MgNC»5 ga �a �\\� kkL� �• LOT 43 11 eRF �. o0 SOUTHPORT ON THE : Y ��`'�' N 30.0 10.0\ 483 UNlT TwO ; ,��1 ` Mom t �' p 6°' \ PB 16, PG 100 -101 X11 1 ��' oE�� ti�� LOT 35 E 13AY 9.� `1 gP "�oH 5 SOUTHPORT PG 51 53 PB 15, ,C-) "' 1 i 16.3 FoU !up SKETCH OF SURVEY W l 44Z1•,W 1g0.57�(M% siB.."Ro 0: PIN # 5569 580 H p/N SCALE 1" NOUN 5I8" IRON � 6S. ►.-,T,TMpoR'l . I LOTON THE BAY Attachment C Page 2 of 2 69 0 7.5 '15 30 60 i 1_ Collier County STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING AND ZONING SERVICES GRO 4A EMENT DIVISION HEARING DA JUNE 3, 2010 SUBJECT: BD- PL2009 -1157, ROTKVICH DOCK PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: Owner: Michael & Debbie Rotkvich Agent: Michael A. Kelly 54 Southport Cove Paradise Docks Naples, FL 34134 1405 SW I U h Place Cape Coral, FL 33991 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner is requesting a 28.5 -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 48.5 feet into a waterway that is 550 feet wide. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located at 54 Southport Cove, further described as Lot 43, Southport on the Bay, Unit 2, Section 6, Township 48 South, Range 25 East. Collier County, Florida. (See location map on the following page) PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROTECT: The purpose of the project is to remove the existing 25 -foot dock and construct a dock facility consisting of two lifts to accommodate two vessels. The facility will protrude a total of 48.5 feet into a waterway that is approximately 550 feet wide. BD- PL2009 -1157 - 1 — Revision: 5/18/10 Attachment C LEE COUNTY PROJECT A I. LOCATION BONITA BEACH ROAD CR 865 YR 047A gg F 4 d9 wr m UU° v - LEE COUNTY BAY WEST A -ST PDCu I 6 �xb Il _ RMF -16 - B 10 xm� v 47 0 mFx b B I/YM ryNR [STAR BE PUD A. 6 BEACH s+ to B SITE PUD sx LOCATION a LITTLE s5 .. BD HICKORY D Fl�R1n6 BD BAY n .3 K 32 33 r B 36 B V 55 9 mWf4 BD 29 BD O ba4� N..xAn nIw)n v. ttMltivMr �j 59 � oAO RA..b 3] 61 SAN MATE 25 0 uMIF RMOI �v �� Y °m6 Ax r _ x0 2] umu[ISl R6 BD BD mJ BD A 00.1E 16 SOUTHPORT 15 23 +i t3 iJ H BD 6) $ 10 A. B BD B BD 3 °. �6 Li 0[Agl bn 3A � mnl M v 21 V.196(FNS wlrn.x 30 m r[uax vp6 32 : I6xl 6� ��g RtPEY3 B u LITTLE �� e LEE COUNTY BONITA BEACH ROAD CR 865 6 5 CKOR CF BAY WEST A -ST PDCu I _ RMF -16 - v 47 0 b B BE PUD 56 LELY BAREFOOT BD BD 6 BEACH s+ B SITE PUD sx LOCATION LITTLE s5 .. BD HICKORY D Bo BD BAY n .3 32 33 ST PARCEL SA BD 36 B V 55 9 BD 29 BD Bo s6 39 59 � 6 3] 61 SAN MATE 25 BD 66 63 64 53 fix 16 BE BD BD mJ BD A 00.1E 16 SOUTHPORT 15 23 +i t3 iJ H BD �e TRE HIG[ORY BM LIME 10 B BD B BD 3 20 21 BD 30 m 32 B u LITTLE 2 BD iee-S' HICKORY BD 27 m BAY 35 Q PUD 34 yOty ELY BAREFOOT BEACH LOCATION MAP ZONING MAP PETITION #BD -PL- 2008 -1157 SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: SUBJECT PARCEL: single - family home, zoned PUD SURROUNDING: North: single - family home, zoned PUD East: waterway, zoned PUD South: single - family home, zoned PUD West: Southport Cove right -of -way, single - family home, zoned PUD Aerial photo taken from Collier County Property Appraiser website. 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 BD- PL2009 -1157 -3— Revision: 5/18/10 more slips. The proposed facility consists of two boat slips and is therefore not subject to the provisions of this section. STAFF COMMENTS: The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny, a dock facility extension request based on the following criteria. In order for the CCPC to approve this request, it must be determined that at least four of the five primary criteria and four of the six secondary criteria have been met. (The previous LDC addressed this situation in Section 2.6.21.3. That section was inadvertently omitted from the current LDC. It will be incorporated into the LDC in an upcoming amendment in Section 5.03.06). Staff has reviewed this petition in accordance with Section 5.03.06 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 facility consists of two boat slips, which is appropriate in relation to the 90 -foot waterfront length of the property. The subject property is zoned PUD, and a single - family home exists. 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 survey submitted by the petitioner, the water depth at the site is not adequate to accommodate the 25 -foot and 10 -foot vessels described in the petitioner's application at mean low tide without an extension. 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, there will be no impact on any navigable channel. According to the information submitted by the BD- PL2009 -1157 -4— Revision: 5/18/10 petitioner, the proposed dock is located 56 feet from the navigable channel as shown on surveys provided within the application. 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.) Criterion met. According to the information provided by the petitioner, the waterway is 550 feet wide at the site as measured by aerial photograph. The proposed facility will occupy about 9 percent of the waterway width, and about 91 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. The proposed dock provides a 25 -foot setback to each riparian line, as shown on the drawings submitted with the application. 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. According to the application, the property is situated along a natural mangrove shoreline. The extension is necessary in order to minimize impacts to existing mangroves. The dock has been designed to keep the same access point through the mangroves as the existing dock uses. 2. Whether the proposed dock facility would allow reasonable, safe access to the vessel for loadinglunloading and routine maintenance, without the use of excessive deck area not directly related to these functions. (The facility should not use excessive deck area.) Criterion met. As shown on the drawings submitted by the petitioner, the deck area is not excessive and it allows safe access to the vessels for loading /unloading and routine maintenance. 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 BD- PL2009 -1157 -5— Revision: 5/1 8/10 property's linear waterfront footage. (The applicable maximum percentage should be maintained.) Criterion met. The subject property contains 90 feet of water- frontage, and the vessels listed in the application are 25 and 10 feet, or 35 feet in combination, consisting of approximately 39 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. According to the information submitted by the petitioner, the proposed dock facility will not impact the view of the neighboring property owners. The property and neighboring properties have a mangrove shoreline that provides a buffer between the uplands development and visibility of the waterway. 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 information submitted by the petitioner, no seagrass beds are located within this area of Little Hickory Bay, and there will be no impact to any seagrass beds. 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)(11) 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 two vessels at a single - family residence and therefore is not subject to the Collier County Manatee Protection Plan Guidelines. Staff analysis indicates that the request meets all of the primary criteria and all of the 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. BD- PL2009 -1157 - 6 -- Revision: 5/18/10 COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report for BD- PL2009 -1157 revised on 5/18/10. -HFAC STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above findings, staff recommends that the CCPC approve Petition BD- PL2009 -1157 subject to the following stipulations: 1. The construction easement area shall be restored by removal of exotic vegetation species and replanting with native species in accordance with the Planting Plan attached to the Resolution as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein prior to issuance of a Certificate of Completion for the boat dock. 2. As set forth in the conservation easement created in Plat Book 16, Page 11, "land modifications or structures are prohibited in the conservation easement except for nature trails, boardwalks and docks. No building structure will be established within 5 feet of said easements and with the exception of mandatory removal of exotic species, there shall be no removal, trimming, fill, transplanting or planting of any vegetation within this conservation easement without the approval of Collier County." Attachments: A. Pictures from site visit BD- PL2009 -1157 -7— Revision: 5/18/10 PREPARED BY: Ast—i". C-- 5.17 • 10 ASHLEY CASERTA, SENIOR PLANNER DATE DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING AND ZONING SERVICES REVIEWED BY: - //� �-' 62=�- 5-/8./o RAYMO V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DATE DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING AND ZONING SERVICES LIAM D. LO ENZ A., P.E., DIRECTOR DATE DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING AND ZONING SERVICES APPROVED BY: ✓� 5 � \ NIC { CASALANGU ADMINISTRATOR DATE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: ,t li, (�' - 3 — /(-) ARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN DATE Petition Number: BD- PL2009 -1157 Staff report for the June 3, 2010 Collier County Planning Commission Meeting BD- PL2009 -1157 - 8 -- Revision: 5/17/10 _ i � 1 •T -F t 7 i n xt i a gax u Standing on existing dock looking north at neighboring property. Standing on existing dock looking across waterway. BD- PL2009 -1157 - 10 — Revision: 5/17/10 CCPC RESOLUTION NO. 10- RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER BD- PL2009 -1157 FOR AN EXTENSION OF A BOAT DOCK FOR LOT 43 OF THE SOUTHPORT ON THE BAY UNIT 2 SUBDIVISION IN THE LELY BAREFOOT BEACH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 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 duly appointed, has held a properly noticed public hearing and has considered the advisability of a 28.5 -foot extension over the maximum 20 -foot limit provided in LDC Section 5.03.06 to allow for a 48.5 -foot boat dock facility on submerged lands adjacent to a single family home in the Lely Barefoot Beach Planned Unit Development; 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: Petition Number BD- PL2009 -1157, filed on behalf of Michael and Debra Rotkvich by Michael A. Kelly of Paradise Docks, with respect to the property hereinafter described as: Lot 43, Southport on the Bay, Unit 2, as described in Plat Book 16, Page 100 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida be and the same is hereby approved for a 28.5 -foot extension of a boat dock over the maximum 20- foot limit to allow for a 48.5 -foot boat dock facility, as shown on the proposed site plan attached hereto as Exhibit "A ", on submerged lands adjacent to a single family home in the Lely Barefoot Beach Planned Unit Development, subject to the following conditions: Rotkvich Southport Cove / BD- PL2009 -1 157 Page] of 2 Attachment D Rev. 08 /10/10 1. The construction easement area shall be restored by removal of exotic vegetation species and replanting with native species in accordance with the Planting Plan attached hereto as Exhibit `B" and incorporated herein prior to issuance of a Certificate of Completion for the boat dock. 2. As set forth in the conservation easement created in Plat Book 16, Page 100, "land modifications or structures are prohibited in the conservation easement except for nature trails, boardwalks and docks. No building structure will be established within 5 feet of said easements and with the exception of mandatory removal of exotic species, there shall be no removal, trimming, fill, transplanting or planting of any vegetation within this conservation easement without the approval of Collier County." 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. Done this day of ATTEST: Nick Casalanguida Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Heidi Ashton -Cicko 4 " Assistant County Attorney Section Chief, Land Use /Transportation Attachments: Exhibit A — Proposed Site Plan Exhibit B — Planting Plan CP \10- CPS - 01012 \30 2010. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Mark P. Strain, Chairman Rotkvich Southport Cove / BD- PL2009 -1157 Page 2 of 2 Rev. 08/10/10 RIPARIAN SETBACK LINES IN 550' Bay 25';Y' S-E I BACK UNES 25V 12'6" - ' 1. i -------------------------------------------- -------------------- Key byes; skill 166SK Maln txl�-JO --------------- .-T V", X/ w / 44 -- ------------- ------- ---------- --- NIP u 3 cl, ---- --- ---------- 7 ---- ------ 2 8' • Yellow Highfightedl IN Piling are piling w 'th pagoda C3 f flghts 1 X -2 Fj' "' J lOgler s pIt D�-ip 20V 5 1.4' ReTac6tile Laude; 11 25-0" X, 4010 2 510 mm.", Project G—escriptor I PARADISE DOCKS ins*alla4'x35'e.4,:cessdoi-*,a4'x';9'(r,irgin,ildof,k,ar CGC 1 155G8887 �7'6*xl4'6"terr..iinaidork,-hre-egu,;IAlir,.gs,al3,00allBo,-,t '405 SV%f 10-171 PI Lift US with aluminumwalkboard, a 5 step aluminum Cape Coral, FL 33991 rptracable ladder, ard an arg.ef's sm-don as ssiovvr above., Mnr4;- 2.5A-415 Ril, F;)%, J39-41'j 81•R w k--:: I "For the Discriminad ngboater" Exhibit A De-.4iqoeb For: Michael Rofkvich 54 SOLIthpo-1 Cove. Bonfta Springs. FL 219.741-7113 (Cefil 630'734=78982 (Fax.) F9 SUBJECT PROPERTY Q� MLW: -1.61' / (NAVD88) / o / MHW: 0.30' (NAVD88) R O ° o OAFS O v 0 0 QFT \/ BD- PL2009- 1157liREV:3 ROTKVICH DOCK DATE: 3/11 /10 PROPOSED DUE. 3/25/10 DOCK 1111 1 Rot' 0 0 0 0 a O S •". ° 0 G ° .^ ti p O ° Oo �o o CONSERVATION �� O EASEMENT <> The conservation easement shall contain 80% native vegetative coverage within 2 years of initial planting and will be maintained In perpetuity. <> Sod, flagpole, and ornamental landscaping will be removed and replanted with the native species listed above. Terrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. "' O T DESIGNED: T T.T. Marine & Environmental Consulting �J O RT O V DRAWN aY: BCa 3584 Exchxnge Ave. $trite B. Naples, FL 34143732 CREATED: 01 -2 &10 Gna11; hMA@t U- a3- iAtM.00M Phone: (239) 643 -0166 Fax: (239) 643 -6632 PLANTING PLAN JOB NO 1005 SECTION -B REVISION: N/A N/A N/A TOWNSHIP -46 M X TAB NAME: 1 PLANTING SHEET: i SCALE: RAN C3 E- 25 PLANT SCHEDULE SYMBOL QUANTITY TYPE SPECIFICATION LINEAGE • � White STRATA / 6 Mangrove 12 GALLON NATIVE CANOPY or similar O 5 Green or Silver Buttonwood 7 GALLON NATIVE MIDSTORY 65 Spartina 8 ------j �-' Sea Oxeye Dais 1 GALLON NATIVE GROUNDCOVER Q� MLW: -1.61' / (NAVD88) / o / MHW: 0.30' (NAVD88) R O ° o OAFS O v 0 0 QFT \/ BD- PL2009- 1157liREV:3 ROTKVICH DOCK DATE: 3/11 /10 PROPOSED DUE. 3/25/10 DOCK 1111 1 Rot' 0 0 0 0 a O S •". ° 0 G ° .^ ti p O ° Oo �o o CONSERVATION �� O EASEMENT <> The conservation easement shall contain 80% native vegetative coverage within 2 years of initial planting and will be maintained In perpetuity. <> Sod, flagpole, and ornamental landscaping will be removed and replanted with the native species listed above. Terrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. "' O T DESIGNED: T T.T. Marine & Environmental Consulting �J O RT O V DRAWN aY: BCa 3584 Exchxnge Ave. $trite B. Naples, FL 34143732 CREATED: 01 -2 &10 Gna11; hMA@t U- a3- iAtM.00M Phone: (239) 643 -0166 Fax: (239) 643 -6632 PLANTING PLAN JOB NO 1005 SECTION -B REVISION: N/A N/A N/A TOWNSHIP -46 M X TAB NAME: 1 PLANTING SHEET: i SCALE: RAN C3 E- 25 Collier County Growth Management Division Planning & Regulation Land Development Services September 9, 2010 Mr. Michael A. Kelly Paradise Docks 1405 SW 10th PL Cape Coral, FL 33991 Reference: BD- PL2009 -1157, Rotkvich Dock Dear Mr. Kelly: On Thursday, September 2, 2010, the Collier County Planning Commission heard and approved Petition No. BD- PL2009 -1157. A copy of CCPC Resolution No. 10 -05 is enclosed approving this petition. Please be advised that Section 10.03.05 B.3 of the Land Development Code requires an applicant to remove their public hearing advertising sign(s) after fmal action is taken by the Board of County Commissioners. Based on the Board's final action on this item, please remove all public hearing advertising sign(s) immediately. If you have any questions, please contact me at (239) 252 -2484. Sincerely, 2 tAbk Nancy Gun ch, AICP Principal Planner Enclosure CC: Michael & Debra Rotkvich, 54 Southport CV, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Land Dept. Property Appraiser Mariam Ocheltree, Graphics Minutes & Records (BD, PSP & PDI) File Land Development SeNices • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, Florida 34104.239- 252 -2400 • www.colliergov.net CCPC RESOLUTION NO. 10- 05 RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER BD- PL2009 -1157 FOR AN EXTENSION OF A BOAT DOCK FOR LOT 43 OF THE SOUTHPORT ON THE BAY UNIT 2 SUBDIVISION IN THE LELY BAREFOOT BEACH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 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 duly appointed, has held a properly noticed public hearing and has considered the advisability of a 28.5 -foot extension over the maximum 20 -foot limit provided in LDC Section 5.03.06 to allow for a 48.5 -foot boat dock facility on submerged lands adjacent to a single family home in the Lely Barefoot Beach Planned Unit Development; 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: Petition Number BD- PL2009 -1157, filed on behalf of Michael and Debra Rotkvich by Michael A. Kelly of Paradise Docks, with respect to the property hereinafter described as: Lot 43, Southport on the Bay, Unit 2, as described in Plat Book 16, Page 100 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida be and the same is hereby approved for a 28.5 -foot extension of a boat dock over the maximum 20- foot limit to allow for a 48.5 -foot boat dock facility, as shown on the proposed site plan attached hereto as Exhibit "A ", on submerged lands adjacent to a single family home in the Lely Barefoot Beach Planned Unit Development, subject to the following conditions: Rotkvich Southport Cove / BD- PL2009 -1157 Page 1 of 2 Rev. 08/10/10 The construction easement area shall be restored by removal of exotic vegetation species and replanting with native species in accordance with the Planting Plan attached hereto as Exhibit `B" and incorporated herein prior to issuance of a Certificate of Completion for the boat dock. 2. As set forth in the conservation easement created in Plat Book 16, Page 100, "land modifications or structures are prohibited in the conservation easement except for nature trails, boardwalks and docks. No building structure will be established within 5 feet of said easements and with the exception of mandatory removal of exotic species, there shall be no removal, trimming, fill; transplanting or planting of any vegetation within this conservation easement without the approval of Collier County." 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. Done this 2� ATTEST: day of ;Wt 52010. Nick Casalanguida Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator Approved as to form and 1 gal sufficiency: NL- -�o Heidi Ash on- icko Assistant County Attorney Section Chief, Land Use /Transportation Attachments: Exhibit A — Proposed Site Plan Exhibit B — Planting Plan CP \10- CPS - 01012\30 COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Mark Strain, Chairman Rotkvich Southport Cove / BD- PL2009 -1157 Page 2 of 2 Rev. 08/10/10 0 io I I I I I 25'0" I I I I I � � I -- t- - - - - -- — — — — — I I I o I �o \ � 1 Yellow Highlighted — - Piling are piling with pagoda lights co �1 C c1 5 Step CN 1' Retractable — - Ladder 25'0" co I ��- MHW RIPARIAN 25'0" I 55550' Bay SETBACK LINES 1 I at lift designed for a 13' Gillgetter Pontoon 113' 0 "► r Project Description Install a 4'x 33' access dock, a 4'x 20' marginal dock, a 4'x 11' access dock, a 5' x 19' terminal dock, three gullwings, an 8,000# and a 13,000# Boat Lift US with aluminum walkboard, a 5 step aluminum retractable ladder, and an angler's station as shown above. Scale:: 1" =10' Angler's Statio n 20'0" I — _.. _ 1 5.9' 1 I I 111 N 5.6' 1 i i t I I 11 1 1 I 4.5' N I 1 4.0' 0) 1 I 1 1 I \ 11 ( 3.75' 1 I _s � 1 I 3.0' 1 I M 1 I Mangrove Drip 1 Line 1 I 1.7' C? I I 1 1 I 1 I 11 I 11 1.4' 11 i 40'0" 2510" PARADISE DOCKS CGC1508887 1405 SW 10th PI. Cape Coral, FL 33991 Phone: 239 - 415 -8111 Fax: 239 - 415 -8118 _ "For the Discriminating Boater" EXHIBIT A Designed For: Michael Rotkvich 54 Southport Cove Bonita Springs, FL 34134 219 - 741 -7113 (Mobile) 630 - 734 -8982 (Fax) SYMBOL QUAN \CO� O 6 0 5 65 Q MLW: -1.61' (NAVD88) / 'mow. MHW:0.30' q SUBJECT (NAVD88) 0 PROPERTY 0 O � 0 00 •.` O PLANT SCHEDULE TYPE SPECIFICATION LINEAGE STRATA White Mangrove 12 GALLON NATIVE or similar CANOPY Green or NATIVE Silver Buttonwood 7 GALLON MIDSTORY Spartina 8 Sea Oxeye Daisy 1 GALLON NATIVE GROUNDCOVER LIFT BD- PL2009 -11571-1 REV: 3 ROTKVICH DOCK DATE: 3/11 /10 PROPOSED DUE: 3/25/10 DOCK 1� Enio: 0 0 0 on M,gtic . RO `�,... 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 00 _00 CONSERVATION 0 EASEMENT <> The conservation easement shall contain 80% native vegetative coverage within 2 years of Initial planting and will be maintained in perpetuity. <> Sod, flagpole, and ornamental landscaping will be removed and replanted with the native species listed above. T & l Associates e DESIGNED T.T.T. REVISION ie Envoent Cn54 S O U T H P R T C ® V DN BV: BCB u O E N/A 3584 Exchange Ave. Suite B. Naples, FL 34104 -3732 CREATED: 01 -28-10 wA 3.com Phone: (239) 643 -0166 Fax: (239) 643.6632 PLANTING PLAN JOB NO 1005 N/A SECTION -6 TOWNSHIP -48 03 TAB NAME: PLANTING SHEET 1 SCALE 1 -_P0 Rp NGE- 2 6 I I I I I 25'0" I I I I I IG I -- fi- - - - - -- - - -- I c I � � 0 I I � O I Yellow Highlighted — Piling are piling with pagoda lights io o \ _ cfl N co \ i 5 Step Retractable — 4 Ladder 25'0" MHW - Project Description RIPARIAN - LINES SETBACK Install a 4'x 33' access dock, a 4'x 20' marginal dock, a 4'x 11' access dock, a 5'x 19' terminal dock, three gullwings, an 8,000# and a 13,000# Boat Lift US with aluminum walkboard, a 5 step aluminum retractable ladder, and an angler's station as shown above. Scale:: 1" =10' 25'0" LINES 1 1 Angler's Statio n m5 J�--------- - - - - -! -, 11 I11 ` -I- - - - - - - - 4- 1 5.9' 11 1 5.6' 11 I I I 1 1 - 11 4.5' 1 I �I I - II 4.0' Il ) \ 3.75' 3.0' r I� Mangrove Drip 1 I� Line 1.T 1 I � 11 11 1.4' i 40'0" 260" PARADISE DOCKS CGC1508887 1405 SW 10th PI. Cape Coral, FL 33991 Phone: 239 - 415 -8111 Fax: 239 - 415 -8118 "For the Discriminating Boater" 550' Bay Designed For: 1 11 1 �1 of 1 1 1 11 11 11 11 V �I Michael Rotkvich 54 Southport Cove Bonita Springs, FL 34134 219 - 741 -7113 (Mobile) 630 - 734 -8982 (Fax) Boat lift designed for a 13' Gillgetter Pontoon Install a 4'x 33' access dock, a 4'x 20' marginal dock, a 4'x 11' access dock, a 5'x 19' terminal dock, three gullwings, an 8,000# and a 13,000# Boat Lift US with aluminum walkboard, a 5 step aluminum retractable ladder, and an angler's station as shown above. Scale:: 1" =10' 25'0" LINES 1 1 Angler's Statio n m5 J�--------- - - - - -! -, 11 I11 ` -I- - - - - - - - 4- 1 5.9' 11 1 5.6' 11 I I I 1 1 - 11 4.5' 1 I �I I - II 4.0' Il ) \ 3.75' 3.0' r I� Mangrove Drip 1 I� Line 1.T 1 I � 11 11 1.4' i 40'0" 260" PARADISE DOCKS CGC1508887 1405 SW 10th PI. Cape Coral, FL 33991 Phone: 239 - 415 -8111 Fax: 239 - 415 -8118 "For the Discriminating Boater" 550' Bay Designed For: 1 11 1 �1 of 1 1 1 11 11 11 11 V �I Michael Rotkvich 54 Southport Cove Bonita Springs, FL 34134 219 - 741 -7113 (Mobile) 630 - 734 -8982 (Fax) AGENDA ITEM 9 -13 Coder County SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING SERVICES - -LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION -- PLANNING & REGULATION HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 2, 2010 SUBJECT: PUDZ- 2004 -AR -6829; DAVIS RESERVE MPUD Owner: Barry Goldmeier, President Collier Davis LLC 250 Catalonia Ave, Suite 702 Coral Gables, FL 33134 Agent(s): Robert Andrea Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc. 3106 South Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider a rezone of the subject site from the Estates (E) zoning district to the Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) zoning district for a project to be known as the Davis Reserve MPUD. PROJECT STATUS: The Collier County Planning Commission originally heard this petition on May 7, 2009. At that hearing, the petitioner continued the petition to address concerns raised by the CCPC at that hearing. The petitioner has submitted a letter dated July 21, 2010 that summarized the issues to be addressed (see copy attached). The applicant's agent has also submitted a revised PUD document; a revised Master Concept Plan; a revised Growth Management Plan analysis; a revised Statement of Utility Provisions; Parcel 131 documents; a copy of the access easement and the access easement agreement (with Berean Baptist Church; a memo from TR Transportation Consultants, Inc., addressing Transportation issues; and conceptual road cross - sections. Davis Reserve MPUD, PUDZ- 2004 -AR -6829 Page 1 of 8 September 2, 2010 CCPC Revised: 8/9/10 Y I. SQUARE 1 GOLF COURSE TU COMMUNITY CENTER PUD (A,EN EAGLE BLVD. FOUNDERS COMMERCIAL 97E NAWTENANCE N I PARCEL 5B PARKWAY PLAZA ASHLEY'S SERVICE STATION NAPLES COLONADES AT PROMENADE Z SANTA BARBARA JACARANDA rLO E GOLDEN GATE TION 29 CENTER F-E CRGOLDEN OAIE EST4JE5 26 FOUNDERS PUZA 27 CITY GOLOEN GATE PARKWAY UNIT 30 DEN GATE ESTATES PARKWAY PLACE'S) UNIT 2B PARKWAY CENTER (S) MAGNOLIA GOLDEN GATE BERKSHIRE LAKES HERON LAKES POND COMMERCE (S) PARK (DRI) COLLIER BLVD. INTERSTATE 75 40 CIOMMEFGGE z O CEN ER ti r55 BR MRWOOD 32 33 34 36 .. PROGENY ] 31 BERKSHIRE LAKES GREEN PARK sr,a NAPLE6 COMMERCE } #Q{ (DRp (oPo> TMw 3E ALIGA CENTER LANE PARK �J ; W ALLEY RADIO IRPoR a SQUARE RADIO ROAD (C.R.556) m LIEBIG MANOR ¢q¢q WESTVE.W PLA A IS 6 B LINES WESTPORi REGENCY LAKES (DRI) C TWELVE COMMERCE CENTER AUTg1AU5 BRETONNE 5P AIRPORT SUNMERWOOD (m) 5 MD 4 3 PLAZA 1 FOKRRE MDDN BEMBRIDGE ESTATES CEDAR M SIR LLA GLEE LAKE ps SNOPPES HAMMOCK SPRI"G"'00D MTN1D1 n 8 G SANTA BAR6ARA PROJECT VATON N�TN DAVIS ¢¢ BOULEVARD g� (S.R.64) LOCATION GOLNAPES HERITAGE AND COUNTRY UB NMER ENTRY ins iRL6T P LEVEL MNTER PARK FRR TM H Ulff DEVOE PONMC 9 II TAIXMINA AND Golumm KINS LAE g K NEEIT 8 ,LLINS G WAT COUNTRY �II I RESERVE CLUB NAPLES MAMMAL GOLF C UB 1 2 7 2 Sd100. / 1 I� ID u COLLIER COUNTY GOVTDRCOMPLEX I CRREOWN Ilk POWTE I I HOMES OF ISLANDIA co R vuo II LADIP CONSERVATION AREA gVERNADO LAO0 HAVEN II sHAOaw- II WATERFOR BVDO O VERDE I ESTATES QLAKE CRICKET I HAUNTS LANES Z COLOW, I6 17 ROYAL WOODS 11 i6 � COUNTRY CLUB m 13 2 LAKE AVALON S GOLF ESTATES 0!C CLUB II N NGTON w j ST. PETER'S CATHOLIC 1 6 II YANDAUV CHURCH WINDSONO THDNASSON DRIVE RATTLESNAKEI HAMMOCK RD SIERRA T (C.R. BN L MEADOWS E. WAKES COMMU ITY MY PALMS C01-LEGEWOOD PARK COUNTRY COLLEGE CLUB (DRI) 21 PARK VILLAGE VILLAGE 22 24 BASAL 19 BAY 20 LELY SOIIA LELY. A T COMMUNITY NAPLES MANOR MI) 25 � 30 29 uICELI 28 27 SABAL BAY (S) WENTWORTH ESTATES —ME WOODS Y I. SQUARE 1 GOLF COURSE TU COMMUNITY CENTER PUD (A,EN EAGLE BLVD. i BERKSHIRE LAKES COMMERCIAL 97E NAWTENANCE N I PARCEL 5B 17.35 ACRES PUD BRETTONE PARK I ST GOLF COURSE NON -ST rLO E DA VIS BOULEVARD (S.R. -84) TION V I FALLING WATERS RMF -6(4) ROSE — CONDO CFPUD SEACREST UPPER AND LOWER SCHOOL E E P.M.• LOCATION MAP PETITION #PUDZ- 2004- AR- 6829 CU PUD E I LAKE 1 [I FALLING I WATERS ZONING MAP .DDITIONAL ANALYSIS: The Department of Land Development Services Department Staff recommendation has changed to reflect the petitioner's changes in the PUD document. The original staff recommendation was a recommendation of approval subject to the stipulation that either of two things must occur: 1) The AHDBA and PUD document shall be revised to expressly limit residential development to 234 units, resulting in a density of 10.25 units per acre, based upon a consistent application of the density bonuses allowances of the GMP to with 187 of the 234 dwellings comprising the residential component, while no less than 47 affordable and workforce residential units would be located above ground floor commercial establishments in mixed -use buildings, OR 2) The BCC makes a policy decision regarding whether: A. The overall density is limited because additional density cannot be derived from locating affordable- workforce housing in the commercial part of the PUD, where additional density is already awarded; and B. Density bonuses can be derived from affordable- workforce housing units that are not geographically located in the residential part of the PUD; and C. Density blending, as residential density generated from calculations including the commercial tract can be transferred to the residential part of the PUD. An affirmative determination for ALL three issues would therefore deem this petition, as proposed, consistent with the FLUE /FLUM The petitioner no longer seeks additional density using an Affordable Housing Density Bonus Agreement ( AHDBA), and the petitioner has revised the density to limit it to a maximum of 234 units and agreed to place residential units within the commercial portion of the project. Final determination of GMP compliance for the residential unit placement will be addressed during plat/SDP review as noted in Exhibit 17.3.13 that states: Compliance to applicable zoning and sub - district standards and criteria shall be verified during the design and Site Development Plan (SDP) phase of the project. Therefore, those stipulations no longer need to be included. Analysis of the current documents now indicates that this PUD can be deemed consistent with the Growth Management Plan (GMP). ATTACHED INFORMATION: The Staff Report prepared for the May 7, 2009 Planning Commission meeting is attached. A June 30, 2010 GMP Consistency Review memo is attached that addresses the revised position of the avis Reserve MPUD, PUDZ- 2004 -AR -6829 Page 2 of 8 September 2, 2010 CCPC Revised: 8/9/10 Comprehensive Planning staff. In addition, the items referenced above are also attached - -a revised PUD document; a revised Master Concept Plan; a revised Growth Management Plan analysis; a revised Statement of Utility Provisions; Parcel 131 documents; a copy of the access easement and the access easement agreement (with Berean Baptist Church; a memo from TR Transportation Consultants, Inc., addressing Transportation issues; and conceptual road cross - sections. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): This petitioner has held four Neighborhood Information Meetings. The first NIM was held on March 2, 2005, and the second was held on May 29, 2007, the third was held on June 30, 2008, and the fourth on November 3, 2009. The synopses of those meetings are provided below. The agent/applicant held the first NIM at the Unity of Naples Church, Fellowship Hall, 2000 Unity Way, Naples on March 2, 2005. Five persons other than the applicant's team and county staff attended. The applicant and agent began the presentation with comments referencing the area to a GMP Amendment for mixed -use sub - district Davis Blvd. /County Barn Road "neighborhood commercial" center that was approved by the BCC: CP- 2004 -5 and is currently being reviewed by the Department of Community Affairs. The applicant stated that the conceptual project shown on the graphics was to follow the "Community Character" plan recommendations with possible joint shared access with the Baptist church, be bike /pedestrian friendly and include up to 45,000 sq. ft. of retail /office in a "traditional" neighborhood design, including residential over commercial, parking in rear of buildings facing and near streets. The applicant also went on to state the following points: Three and 2 bedroom residential town -homes 3 stories buildings 4 stories total including parking Multi- family, no single family units 34 -35 "Semi- affordable" loft condominiums Up to 248 residential units, then 280 -290 units stated later Developer committed to sidewalks per code Access through courtyards Ingress, egress at Davis Blvd and County Barn Roads Buffering requirements negotiated with Seacrest School. Concern stated by Falling Waters resident Mr. Simonelli, over traffic impacts, saying that Falling Waters and Countryside have asked FDOT for traffic signal and stated his name and address for public notice as Mr. Simonelli, Falling Waters Master Association, 7200 Davis Boulevard, Naples, 34104. Mr. Peter Costello of Glen Eagle questioned whether the proposal would include a Homeowners Association, to which the applicant responded yes. Project planner, Mike Bosi advised the applicant and agent to hold another NIM based on the new information; agent for the applicant agreed stating "we'll come back and do another meeting; we've made some amendments since the required advertising ". Davis Reserve MPUD, PUDZ- 2004 -AR -6829 Page 3 of 8 September 2, 2010 CCPC Revised: 8/9/10 'he second NIM was held on May 29, 2007 at 5:30 p.m. at the Berean Baptist Church. Thirty two persons signed the attendance sheet that was provided. Residents of Glen Eagle and Falling Waters were both represented at the meeting as well as residents or persons from other areas. Attendees asked about the proposed density and the intensity of the commercial uses and about the intended preservation and buffering amounts. Concerns were raised about the proposed affordable housing component and the density proposed in the overall project citing concerns that the project would be too concentrated. A discussion ensured among the attendees regarding personal experiences relative to affordable housing. Questions were raised and answered by the petitioner's agent about Davis Boulevard improvements and about the project's proposed access on Davis Boulevard. Concerns were raised about the price points mentioned by the petitioner. Responding to an inquiry about how the project would look, the petitioner mentioned several projects of his in other locales. The petitioner presented drawings to show what the project might look like upon completion. Staff noted that these drawings would not be binding upon the petitioner. The pastor of Berean Baptist Church inquired about alcohol service within the project given the project's proximity to a school and a church. The petitioner noted that the project would need to comply with the county regulations regarding the separation distance requirements for alcohol use and sale. In response to audience inquiries about the proposed size of the units, the petitioner indicated that he could not commit to any specific measurements at this time, but it was his intention as of today to provide larger units. In response to questions regarding the number of stories proposed, the petitioner's agent 'ndicated that the residential units would be three story structures. A discussion ensued regarding which residents would be noticed about upcoming hearings. The petitioner's agent explained that signs would be posted, an ad would be placed in the newspaper, and letters would be sent to those property owners within the distance required by the LDC. Neighbors were encouraged to contact the staff with specific questions. The meeting ended with the petitioner's attorney stating that the petitioner's team had already met with some property owners' associations and would be happy to meet with others if it was requested. The third NIM was duly noticed by the applicant and held on June 30, 2008 at 5:30 p.m. at the Berean Baptist Church. Thirteen people from the public attended, as well as the applicant's team (Shaun Malarkey and Robert Andrea of Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc, Barry Goldmeier property owner along with County staff Kay Deselem). Shaun Malarkey with Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc., representing the applicant presented an overview of the requested rezone from the Estates (E) zoning district to the Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) zoning district. Of those who had questions or concerns, the applicant's consultants responded as follows: 1. The participants were concerned with the increase of traffic on both County Barn Road and Davis Blvd, which Shaun (with Coastal Engineering) responded, that this project cannot move forward until avis Reserve MPUD, PUDZ- 2004 -AR -6829 Page 4 of 8 September 2, 2010 CCPC Revised: 8/9/10 they received a passed traffic report from the County. He also mentioned that a new traffic report, by the County, has shown a reduction in traffic on both roadways. 2. There was also concern regarding the right turn only onto Davis Blvd., which would then force more vehicles to make U -turns in front of the Countryside entrance and asked if a traffic light could be installed at that location. Kay Deselem (county staff) responded that that would be a decision the Transportation Division would make during the plan review stage. 3. It was asked how much commercial space would be located at this site and what type of restrictions are in place with commercial establishments with neighboring schools (Seacrest school is located next to this location), which Shaun responded no more than 35,000 square feet of commercial space would be on site and he would have to check on the types of establishments regarding the school. 4. Participants also wanted to know what type of residential living facilities were planned for this development. Shaun responded that 20 percent of the residential property will be set aside for affordable housing, of which property could only be leased /sold to people in the medium income level (maximum $56,000 - $70,000) and the maximum building height could be no more than 65 feet. The residential property will be both rental and ownership properties. The meeting ended at approximately 6:20 p.m. The fourth NIM was duly noticed by the applicant and held on November 3, 2009 at 5:30 p.m. at the Berean Baptist Church. Sixty -six people from the public signed in and County Commissioner Fiala attended as well as the applicant's team (Robert Andrea of Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc, Barry Goldmeier property owner along with County staff Kay Deselem and Ray Bellows and Corby Schmitt). Of the public attendees, Glen Eagle, Falling Waters, Countryside and Napoli were represented as well as residents from other East Naples neighborhoods. Concerns expressed by the residents and the consultants responses follow: 1. The residents were concerned about the affordable housing aspect and the kind of people it would bring to the neighborhood and questioned the need for more housing and commercial space in today's market. Residents did not agree that the proposal fit in with the current surrounding neighborhoods. Residents also expressed concern as to whether the units could be rental units, how many of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom residences would there be and what the maximum number of stories and height of buildings would be. The consultant responded by stating the targeted income levels they would be marketing to. The affordable housing would be targeted for people who made between $39,650 and $48,900 per year; It has not yet been determined if the units will be rentals; The SDP phase would indicate the layout and number of each unit type; the maximum number of stories would be 3 and the max height would be 55' with the architectural elements. 2. Residents also asked the Consultant to explain the need for the rezone and what the current zone is now for the property. Residents also asked what Estates Zoning meant and how many homes could be built in its current zoning. The consultant responded indicating the property was currently zoned Estates however the GMP amendment that was passed required a rezoning as it could no longer be developed in Estates zoning district. The subdistrict is mixed use and the GMP dictates what the development must include. Ray Bellows explained the Estates "Zoning regulations such as setbacks and lot size. Zone change has to be found consisted with the GMP. This is what staff reviews for as well as compatibility. Davis Reserve MPUD, PUDZ- 2004 -AR -6829 Page 5 of 8 September 2, 2010 CCPC Revised: 8/9/10 ,_Ray explained the lots were preplatted, some may be 2.25 acres or 5.0 acres so it was not clear at the time f the meeting what the number of homes would be allowed at this time. 3. The residents expressed concern for the type of commercial business that could potentially be built. They wanted to know the maximum square footage that any one business could have. There was concern over whether it could be a superstore of some sort and if that was the case the concern about the amount of traffic it would bring to the roads. The consultant stated the maximum space allowed for one business is 15,000 sq ft unless it was a grocery store then it could go up to 20,000 sq ft but also noted that the area could not support that. It is in the PUD that way as the maximum. County will make sure project does not move forward until capacity dictates it can. It was also said that the project could not move forward until County Barn Road was expanded. There would be an access point on County Barn Road and Davis Boulevard into the development and access easement would be shared between the development and Berean Baptist with a turn lane. 4. Residents expressed frustration about the changes made /not made as a result of the Commissioners last meeting where the Consultant was instructed to get together with the neighborhoods and find a way to work this out. Residents have not heard anything since the meeting and want to know what was changed and whom they contacted. Residents also want to see more than just the Master Plan, something they "can sink their teeth into ". The consultant pointed out the number of residential units was reduced from 286 to 234, the setbacks and building spacings have been included in the PUD and the SIC codes have been identified. Consultant indicated he sent letters out to the Master Associates for Napoli, Countryside, Glen Eagle and Falling Waters. Consultant is unable to provide more than Master Plan at this time. 5. Residents wanted to know if the consultant knew what the schools position was about the project and - *he affordable housing "right next door to one of the best schools in town ". One resident indicated he new that Seacrest offered to buy the property a couple years ago. The consultant advised he had not received any objections from the school. 6. Residents wanted to know about the impact to the other area schools with the possibility for additional children and how the school would accommodate busing and where would all these potential children play. If there are to be parks, what the definition of park is. The Consultant indicated it was up to the school to make the busing arrangements and that it would not have a detrimental impact for the school with the additional school children. It was also pointed out on the Master Plan where the areas for parks would be designated and they are defined as "green open space ". 7. Residents questioned if the developer was going to receive any State of Federal funding for the affordable housing or if it was just private enterprise. The Consultant responded that there would not be any funding and that they were following the regulation guidelines of the subdistrict. The developer was asked to provide the 20% affordable housing. Kay stopped the Consultant to clarify if the remark about Federal or State funding was a commitment or just a statement. The Consultant responded indicating there was nothing at this time setup for State or Federal funding. 8. One resident suggested that they contact the Advisory Board members to have a meeting with them. Kay Deselem advised them that the Sunshine Law prohibits Board members from meeting without it being advertised. She encouraged all of them to come to the Board meetings to express their feelings about the project. Commissioner Fiala stood up and acknowledged the residents concern and explained that it is the County Commissioners who have the final say. 9. Residents questioned what Kay Deselem's role was in the process and wondered if the resident's concerns were weighed before the decision. Another resident questioned if a signed petition would be avis Reserve MPUD, PUDZ- 2004 -AR -6829 Page 6 of 8 September 2, 2010 CCPC Revised: 8/9/10 advantageous. She indicated she is the Project Manager for Zoning, she compiles every reviewers (County Staff) comments and write a staff report and indicates whether the project is consistent with the GMP or it is not. From that, she recommends approval or denial. The driving force is the GMP. Resident's concerns can be heard during the Board Meetings. Kay would not tell the residents what they should or should not do. 10. Residents wanted to know where the GMP comes from and is it specific to the land. Kay stated it was adopted by the BCC and is reviewed by the CCPC. Yes, it is very specific to this particular piece of land and hearings were held. 11. If this were approved, the developer could sell to someone else. The Consultant acknowledged this could happen. Kay clarified that the zoning goes with the land, not the owner, so the new owner would be subject to the same guidelines and regulations. Kay Deselem advised the residents many times during the meeting that they could send her letters that she would provide to the Board and they could also request she send them any paperwork submitted by the Consultants or any documents going before the Board. The residents indicated they wanted copies of the PUD documents, of which the Consultant was not prepared to provide. Kay invited the residents to make an appointment with her to go over items such as the SIC or PUD documents and encouraged them to stay involved. The meeting ended at approximately 7:00 p.m. (Sign in sheets from this meeting are included in the back up material.) Several letters from neighbors have been included in the back up material. As noted above, to date there have been four NIMs for this petition. Staff does not believe anything would be gained from holding another since the petitioner is responding to issues raised during the public hearing. Interested parties who attended the public hearing are therefore assumed aware of the issues to be addressed. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report for this petition on August 2, 2010. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PUDZ- 2004 -AR -6829 to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) with a recommendation of approval subject to the conditions of approval that have been incorporated in the PUD Ordinance of Adoption. Davis Reserve MPUD, PUDZ- 2004 -AR -6829 Page 7 of 8 September 2, 2010 CCPC Revised: 8/9/10 PREPARED BY: 6, & "'Y� KAY DE LEM, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REVIEWED BY: RAYMO,AD V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES IL IAM D. LORE , JR., .E., DIRECTOR DATE DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES kPPROVED BY: NICK CASALANGUID , DE TY ADMINISTRATOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION 7/0-6 // o DATE DATE z�) -z.0710 o d - D �-,Z&)0 DATE Tentatively scheduled for the November 9, 2010 Board of County Commissioners Meeting COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN DATE Davis Reserve MPUD, PUDZ- 2004 -AR -6829 Page 8 of 8 September 2, 2010 CCPC Revised: 7/26/10 pcc D2 . T CLEARLY) Agenda Item �/ °� �' 6 v9-2A ' (PLEASE PRIM � ) � � MEETING DATE S o� ova_ (Circle Meeting Type) egular Special Workshop Budget {� D AGENDA ITEM TITLE X 15 R60 V �' T uD NAME `.I 2 D L %: ADDRESS VEND - %(Jl' -� Representing / Petitioner: Other: COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003 -53, AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE 2004 -05 AND 2007 -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. YOU ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES FOR YOU COMMENTS AND ARE TO onnnFCC_nPJL.V P _ (PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY) Agenda Item # DATE Zpj D (Circle Meeting Type) Regular Special Workshop Budget MEETING DA --4 AGENDA ITEM TITLE . w� Si o 7 -! ADDRES v c E NAME i''� _ �-- �' — S p h � R�,. _�.E _ . Representing/ Petitioner " `� .Other: COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003 -53, AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE 2004 -05 AND 2007 -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. YOU ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES FOR YOU COMMENTS AND ARE TO ADDRESS ONLY THE CHAIR R TO THE SUBJECT BEING HEARD PLACE COMPLETED FORM ON THE TABLE,LEFT OF THE DIAS IN THE BOARD ROOM PRIO (PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY ) Agenda Item #° r, MEETING DATE _ - (Circle Meeting Type) Regular Special Workshop Budget AGENDA ITEM TITLE !J NAME A / 0L 4)-4 t;,L.. %Z ADDRESS tj rr.� Representing/ Petitioner: ZU ' Other: COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003 -53, AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE 2004 -05 AND 2007 -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 YOU ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES FOR YOU COMMENTS AND ARE TO ADDRESS ONLY THE CHAIR PLACE COMPLETED FORM ON TWG TAM IC I T ••� _.._ _ -_ __e.�._.._...�.�_ (PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY) MEETING DATE Agenda.. Item # ( XP Circle Meeting Type) Special Workshop Budget AGENDA ITEM TITLE l (" J �J /U 1-5 CJ 1 /V�-i� -- � ADDRESS NA 'ME .�}% -l% Other: Representing /Petitioner: - GL COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003 -53, AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE 2004 -05 AND 2007 -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 YOU ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES FOR YOU COMMENTS AND ARE TO ADDRESS ONLY THE CHAIR PLACE COMPLETED FORM ON THETA BLE'LEFT OF THE DIAS IN THE BOARDROOM PRIOR TO THE SUBJECT BEING HEARD (PLEASE. PRINT CLEARLY _ ) A genda Item_# MEETING DATE Z6 1 a (Circle Meeting Type) Regul r Special Workshop Budget AGENDA ITEM TITLE 106 ,, `i _ z NAME ADDRESS �Q ts/ ��✓� 31� Representing/ Petitioner: Other: ''C�� COLLIER COUNTY,ORDINANCE NO. 2003 -53, AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE 2004 -05 AND 2007 -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: YOU ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES FOR YOU COMMENTS AND ARE TO ADDRESS ONLY THE CHAIR (PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY ) Agenda Item # MEETING DATE � lar ( Circle Meetin T YP) Re uS Special Workshop Budget AGENDA ITEM 117TLE NAME F/ ► c,,1 ADDRESS , _p 64w (ale t2 Representing /Petitioner: D t f/1 Other: COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO'. 2003 -53, AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE 2004 -05 'AND 2007 -24; REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE IENGAGING 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. IYOU ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES FOR YOU COMMENTS AND ARE TO ADDRESS ONLY THE CHAIR PLACE COMPLETED FORM ON THE TABLE LEFT OF THE DIAS IN THE :BOARD ROOM PRIOR TO THE SUBJECT BEING HEARD AGENDA ITEM 9 -C Comer C014nty STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION, PLANNING AND REGULATION HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 2, 2010 SUBJECT: PETITION PUDZ- 2008 -AR -14048 — CORKSCREW COMMERCIAL CENTER CPUD (COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT) PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: OWNER: Mr. Robert E. Williams, Trustee 3240 5h Avenue S.W. Naples, FL 34117 AGENTS: Mr. D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Mr. Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire Goodlette, Coleman and Johnson, P.A. 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider a rezone of the subject 8.0± acre site from the Commercial Convenience (C -2) and Mobile Home (MH) Zoning Districts with a Rural Fringe Mixed Use Neutral Lands Overlay to a Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) Zoning District with removal of the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Neutral Lands Overlay, for a project to be known as the Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject PUD is located in Golden Gate Estates on the northwest corner of Immokalee Road (CR 846) and Platt Road, approximately 3 mites north of Oil Well Road in Section 27, Township 47 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. (See location map on following page) Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD PUDZ — 2008 -AR -14048 Revised: 8 -24 -10 Page 1 of 21 LOCATION MAP i PETITION # PUDZ - 2008 - AR - 14048 ZONING MAP HENDRY COUNTY COLLIER COUNTY t� PROJECT LOCATION LEE COUNTY C.R. 846 COLLIER COUNTY I C.R. 858 N K U I -75 S.R. 84 CITY OF NAPLES N m GS, 0 V1 ¢ 9 V1 7 O OQ r0 Q EVERGLADES -CITY (J CEO CJ o cam, 9Q� Vb��o ° a D COLLIER COUNTY MONROE COUNTY LOCATION MAP i PETITION # PUDZ - 2008 - AR - 14048 ZONING MAP SITE SUMMARY ZONING: A. HO SITE -Bi ACRES LAND USE PUBLIC COMMERCIAL -5.601 ACRES (70%) OPENSPACE "2.401 ACRES (30%) MAXIMUM GROSS FLOOR AREA • 60,000 SQUARE FEET 10' WIDE TYPE 'A LANDSCAPE BUFFER DEVIATIONS DEVIATION pl SEEKS RELIEF FROM LDC SECTION 5.05.06.C.9, il■ I ■1 ■1 ■I■ ■I ■I ■I I ■1 ■1 ■1 I ■I 1 ■1 ■1 ■ {4�1 ■I ■I' I ■I ■}A{ ■I ■ ■I ■. �T..1 ■1 ■I ■�I ■I ■. ■.1 ■11,I ■I■ , N « (Su•/,y. yvy' 1Aa•._Jl 1N•YSl- '�^ s# w .._.. _.. . _._ _.,r..• ._.. . . . ARCHITECT L DESIGN STANDARDS. WHICH REQUIRES ALL SIDES ■ • 1• OF ANON- RESIDENTIAL BUILDING WITHIN A PUD TO BE TREATED AS . . • . . . • 3 PRIMARY FACADES. TO ALLOW THE SIDES OF BUILDINGS 1 AND 2 • • . . . • • • • • • • • _ . •Inj < i Wp WHERE ADJACENT TO THE NORTHERN OR WESTERN PROPERTY ■ • . • . • . • . • . • . • . • . • ❑j - "' l`,JSI - BOUNDARY TO BE NON - PRIMARY FACADES. . • . • . • O I W . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. /• I 15'WIDE TYPE -D- FENCES �.. rDQ DEVIATION i']SEEKS RELIEF FROM LDC SUBSECTION 5.03.02.H.1.C, . • . • • • • 'D�IILUIFI�CQ • • • • • • • {•' • •I Co j ... • • • • • • I LANDSCAPE BUFFER FENCES AND WALLS. WHICH REQUIRES AN EIGHT FOOT HIGH . . • i Z i • • .....+..... :v� MASONRY WALL WITHIN THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG PLATT 1 ❑4 ROAD TO ALLOW FOR A DOUBLE ROW FOUR FOOT HIGH HEDGE M PLANTED THREE FEET ON CENTER IN LIEU OF THE WALL. ZONING: A - LAND USE: S HO INGLE FAMILY ,. �.•.•.•.• • • • • • • ♦ • •••'•'•• RESIDENTIAL f DEVIATION®3SEEKS RELIEF FROM LDC SUBSECTION 5.03.02.H.1,A. ■ •!•'•_••'•••••••••••••• •••••••••�•�I• I I} FENCES AND WALLS. WHICH REQUIRES A SIX TO EIGHT FOOT HIGH BUILDING 2 • . • CRY DETENTION• • • 1 ]0' WIDE RESERVATION MASONRY WALL WITHIN THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG THE ' • • id roRY • f • • • • • • YT/j7ER MARAGWENT • • I ! FOR FUTURE ROW WESTERN PROPERTY LINE TO ALLOW FOR A DOUBLE ROW SIX TO ■ UI O25• . AREA. • 1 EIGHT FOOT HEDGE PLANTED FOUR FEET ON CENTER IN LIEU OF - '1 -1 THE WALL. _ 15' WIDE ENHANCED TYPE •B' • J LANDSCAPE BUFFER DEVIATION p9 SEEKS RELIEF FROM LDC SUBSECTION 5.05.05.0.1. ■ AUTOMOBILE SERVICE STATIONS, WHICH REQUIRES A MINIMUM 25 ■ ' . • . • . • . . • . • . • • • • • . •. •. •.•. •.• {y WIDE TYPE O LANDSCAPE BUFFER, ■ .........',....... ....._........................' . . IMMOKALEE ROAD NOTES: 100' ROW WIDTH 0 O 1, THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND IS SUBJECT TO MINOR MODIFICATION m ; DUE TO AGENCY PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS. ■ 1 m 1 Z 2. ALL ACREAGES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO MODIFICATION AT THE TIME OF ■ ! I -I' SDP OR PLAT APPROVAL. D I BUILDING 3 P I' 3. GAS STATIONS AND ACCESSORY CAR WASH MAY ONLY BE LOCATED IN AREA 1. ALL ■_ 1-BTORY UP TO 2S' j ± OTHER USES MAY BE LOCATED IN AREA 1 AND AREA 2. ■_ 15' WIOEI PE'D-❑4 4. SIDEWALKS ALONG IMMOKALEE ROAD WILL BE ADDRESSED AT TIME OF SITE LANDSCAPE BUFFER DEVELOPMENT PLAN( SDP) REVIEW, (,1p^1I: i£IN!(:ni: C(in3Nllrl:;1k :,4riTCY "'7r - •T.-+ I AREA 1 I . LL+?<M41N1 bolter Ow.ya �-- -'L... ( I AUTOMOBILE ' ®c w ■ SERVICE STATION OR xr''°"ma`m.a. ae.r:gnvex fix£ a„A" - f • • • 2 ACRES) COMMERCIAL ��yyVit S`N41mrT1YW T1'M!?hr 3 ❑1 > O 4 F'H1 ■ p R PUMPS 1• Il t 30 N UILDING .L nFx: a ZONING: A -MHO • BI T RYI FORFUTUREROW F COB N CE O '� '"'T m'r• "I — ''' G LAND USE: SINGLE FAMILY UP TO 25' 13 O =y. CANOPY RESIDENTIAL O •�I •• x. tlr�w:.a,. i w i •1 t p �ka'.MkS III S'WIDETURN LANE r �"� + ]] ■ 25'WIDE LANDSCAPE •!'fl; _a I V : BUFFER PER LDC 5.05.05.D (IF AU TOMOBILESERVICE STATION ••I• 'i 1 1S' Au- t—bllc Sew.e Slanon 0vRc, ,;,w • . . • . ,._ _ (Platt Road) ■ �__ .._.._.. _.. SS .A,...,.u.,.,. ,4'•� � LI U� �I�. I I MINI 011 * 1 I TYPE'O�ANpBCAPE BUFFER I e i1 sa<. T♦ ��!i!� 10' WIpE ENHANCED �'`I'''",(+``'! TYPE '17 LANDSCAPE BUFFER r � I1 ,�`\\ PLATT ROAD o","e ae.N • D. ROW WIDTH 15' MDd'V.x.M ServKT! 51� ti0n BVRer I. LEGEND it DEVIATIONS SIDEWALKS I PLAZA AREA OPEN SPACE Onaglbn GradyMinor " "almN " " "° " "rl3NTlr 23'.:"7'8., 239.090.4380 CORKSCREW COMMERCIAL CENTER CPUD lovoa� N"M PoM1 V1113115115n � By ov�Tm ovum Nat- PlUn — . .: ° 0. Grad]'Nln"r nnG 1Nmclalrn. P.1.'3000 w.l:rn4v111:mr.rnm \'I., nH No.. mmll,, SP IM. H, 34134 l Onaglbn GradyMinor " "almN " " "° " "rl3NTlr 23'.:"7'8., 239.090.4380 CORKSCREW COMMERCIAL CENTER CPUD N"M PoM1 V1113115115n CINI FrIgln"Bra • Lund Somyu • n"r. " "AUl.ummn,nl nnN.. nPAlw wmmnln Nat- PlUn — . 239.1112397 Land=,.,. An:lUlrc4 m— rc2nmm2Rl EXHIBIT C MASTER PLAN 0. Grad]'Nln"r nnG 1Nmclalrn. P.1.'3000 w.l:rn4v111:mr.rnm \'I., nH No.. mmll,, SP IM. H, 34134 b 2 O 2 e The subject 8± acre site is currently vacant. Half of the property was previously used for mobile home dwellings. It has since been cleared of previous improvements, except for a driveway. This Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) Ordinance proposes up to 60,000 square feet of mixed C -1 and C -2 commercial development that includes an automobile service station and convenience store in Area 1, along with retail, personal services and office uses in Area 2. As depicted on the Master Plan, the proposed buildings will be a maximum of one -story and will have a maximum zoned height of 25 feet and an actual height of 30 feet. A 10 -foot wide Type A landscape buffer will be provided along the north property line and a 15 -foot wide enhanced Type B landscape buffer will be provided along the west property line. A deviation is being sought to allow a 15 -foot wide Type D landscape buffer along the Immokalee Road right -of -way. Where the automobile service station (Tract A) abuts these rights -of way, a 25 -foot wide landscape buffer will be provided. If no gas station is developed, then the minimum code required 10 -foot wide Type D landscape buffer will be provided along Platt Road and a 15 -foot wide Type D landscape buffer will be provided along Immokalee Road. The Master Plan also depicts the general location of the septic area, water management areas, preserve areas and landscape buffer areas. It also shows the 5.60± acre commercial area and the 2.40± acres of open space. The site depicts two ingress /egress points on Platt Road. There are four (4) deviations being sought as part of this CPUD rezoning petition which are further discussed under PUD Findings item number 8. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: Undeveloped property, with a zoning designation of Agriculture with a Mobile Home Overlay (A -MHO). East: Immokalee Road, a 100 -foot wide right -of -way, then a lot with a single - family residence with a zoning designation of Agriculture with a Mobile Home Overlay (A -MHO). South: Platt Road, a 60 -foot wide private right -of- way, then a lot with a single - family residence and a lot that is undeveloped property with a zoning designation of Agriculture with a Mobile Home Overlay (A -MHO). West: a single - family residence, with a zoning designation of Agriculture with a Mobile Home Overlay (A -MHO). Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD PUDZ — 2008 -AR -14048 Revised: 8 -24 -10 Page 4 of 21 Aerial Photo GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property is currently vacant land zoned C -2, Commercial Convenience District (easterly 3.25 acre portion), and MH, Mobile Home District - RFMUO, Rural Fringe Mixed Use Overlay District, Neutral Lands (westerly 4.75 acre portion). PUD materials (particularly the rezone Ordinance) must specify this as a rezoning from these multiple zoning designations, including the RFMUO Neutral Lands Overlay, to CPUD. The entire site is within the Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict, of the Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District, under the Agricultural/Rural Designation, as identified on the Future Land Use Map and in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE). The subject property is eligible for neighborhood commercial uses through this Subdistrict designation. The FLUE provisions for this Subdistrict are given below, with [bracketed staff analysis] following each provision. Corkscrew Commercial Center CPU PUDZ — 2008 -AR -14048 Revised: 8 -24 -10 Page 5 of 21 Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict This Subdistrict, comprising approximately S acres, is located on the northwest corner of the Immokalee Road and Platt Road intersection. The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide neighborhood commercial uses - lower order retail, office, and personal service uses - conveniently located to serve the surrounding rural area and passerby - traffic. Development in this Subdistrict shall comply with the following requirements and limitations: a. Rezoning is encouraged to be in the form of a PUD. [This rezone is proposed as a Commercial PUD. J b. The Subdistrict shall be developed as a unified planned development with a common architectural theme. [PUD provisions are found proposing a common architectural theme.] C. The Subdistrict shall be limited to a maximum gross leasable floor area of 70,000 square feet. [Exhibits A and B indicate that 60,000 square feet is proposed.] d. Uses shall be limited to those permitted and conditional uses set forth in the C -2, Commercial Convenience, Zoning District of the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance Number 04 -41, in effect as of the date of adoption of this Subdistrict. [See staff remarks under the Review of PUD Documents section below. J e. At the time of rezoning, access shall be restricted as deemed appropriate so as to provide safe ingress and egress. [The development has been designed with two (2) full access connections between the project and Platt Road to the south, which provides indirect access to Immokalee Road (CR 846), to "ensure safe ingress to and egress from the site ".] f. At the time of rezoning, careful consideration shall be given to maximum building heights, maximum building floor area for each use or structure, maximum building floor area for the total site, landscaping and buffering requirements, building setbacks, and other site design considerations, as well as to allowable uses, so as to insure compatibility with surrounding uses and the rural character in which the Subdistrict is located. Further, since a private well and septic system will be utilized, allowable uses may be restricted so as to preclude those with high water demand (e.g. car washes) and those that utilize residual chemicals or solvents (e.g. dry cleaners). Insuring compatibility with the surrounding Rural Fringe Mixed Use, Neutral Lands should take into account provisions which effectively limit allowable uses to those appropriate for limited, semi -rural residential development, as falloms: Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD PUDZ — 2008 -AR -14048 Revised: 8 -24 -10 Page 6 of 21 • Agricultural land uses, including farm labor housing • Detached single - family residences, including mobile homes where a Zoning Overlay exists • Multi - family residential units, when clustered • Group homes • Golf courses and driving ranges • Botanical gardens, zoos, and aquariums • Public and private schools • Community facilities, such as cemeteries, places of worship, childcare facilities • Habitat preservation and conservation areas, including incidental staff housing • Parks, open space, and recreational uses • Sporting and recreational camps • Essential services • F.arthnnning, oil extraction and processing FLUE Objective 7, Policies 7.1 through 7.7, of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) were approved on October 26, 2004. This Objective and policies incorporate certain "Smart Growth" provisions into the FLUE. This formulative process was one of Collier County's earliest opportunities to apply more of the practices found in the Toward Better Places - The Community Character Plan for Collier County. Florida. The Community Character Plan provides the County with a policy document featuring the most useful aspects of traditional neighborhood design (TND), smart growth, traffic calming, new urbanism and other contemporary planning practices. FLUE Policy 7.1 The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code (LDC). [The conceptual PUD Master Plan indicates two (2) full access connections between the project and Platt Road to the south, which provides indirect access to Immokalee Road (CR 846), classified as a principal arterial roadway. The application GMP Consistency section indicates this access arrangement will "ensure safe ingress to and egress from the site ". J FLUE Policy 7.2 The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. [The PUD Master Plan indicates one (1) internal access connection between the two "areas" comprising the subject property. Internal drive layout incorporates a modified roundabout, which serves to distribute traffic to more than one other internal drive to and from the single access connection. Nearly all of the parking is arranged to reduce vehicle congestion. The portion of the arrangement which is not so designed, and introduces congestion is the single- outlet parking area located immediately west of the car wash facility. The re- design of this "closed, hammer- head" parking area to open another lane or drive will be addressed fully during Site Development Plan (SDP) consideration. Further, there are not proposed access points onto Immokalee Road. The Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD PUDZ— 2008 -AR -14048 Revised: 8 -24 -10 Page 7 of 21 application GMP Consistency section indicates this internal access arrangement will "be consistent with Policy 7.2".] Review of PUD Documents Exhibit A, Sections I.A and I.B of the PUD lists the permitted principal and accessory uses proposed to be allowed within Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD. Exhibit A, Section I.A.15. Car Wash (single bay, drive - through) — Group 7542; is allowed in the C -4 zoning district but should also be removed from this PUD because it is a high water demand use and is specifically identified as precluded from this Subdistrict. Same for Exhibit A, Section LB.3. Petitioner's current response — Car wash technology has evolved over time. Car washes are no longer considered high water use facilities when utilizing water recycling systems. A typical recycling system re- circulates 75 — 90 percent of the water used, which results in only right (8) gallons per vehicle used per wash. ...Further, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection now issues a General Permit under FAC 62- 660.803 for Car Wash facilities to discharge in grass Swale percolation system... if Best Management Practices are followed and the discharge is limited to no more than 4,000 gallons per week. [Acknowledged with restrictions, based on these informational updates. A car wash facility accessory to a gas station must utilize water recycling system(s) and follow Best Management Practices, as found in. FDEP guidelines. Amend Exhibit A, Permitted Uses, to read, "Car Wash (designed, built and operated as a single bay, drive- through facility, utilizing water recycling system(s) and following Best Management Practices, as found in FDEP administrative codes, allowed in Area I only) — Group 7542"]. Exhibit A has not been amended as stated, therefore, staff has added this as a condition of approval. Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petitioner's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) and has determined that the roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate this project within the five year planning period. Therefore, the subject application is consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP. Immokalee Road (CR 846) Impacts: The first concurrency link that is impacted by this project is Link 46, Immokalee Road (CR 846) between Oil Well Road and SR -29. The project generates 99 p.m. peak hour, peak direction trip on this link, which represents a significant 11.51 percent impact on Immokalee Road (CR 846) upon reaching build -out condition. This concurrency link reflects a remaining capacity of 484 trips in the adopted 2009 AUIR (Annual Urban Inventory Report) and is at Level of Service "C ". The project does not cause failure of the link over the 5 year planning term. Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD PUDZ — 2008 -AR -14048 Revised: 8 -24 -10 Page 8 of 21 Subsequent Link Analysis: The subsequent links of Immokalee Road (Link 45), Oil Well Road (Link 119), and SR -29 (Link 84) have been analyzed using the 2 % -2 % -3% requirements, and do not indicate significant impacts (over 2 percent) beyond the first impacted segment. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): The Project is consistent with the policies in Objective 6.1 of the CCME, GMP Conclusion: Based upon the above analysis, Comprehensive Planning staff finds the proposed rezone consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) subject to the condition of approval stated in the Recommendation at the end of this Staff Report. ANALYSIS: Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and the criteria upon which a favorable determination must be based. These criteria are specifically noted in Sections 10.02.13 and 10.02.13.B.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) and required Staff evaluation and comment. The staff evaluation establishes a factual basis to support the recommendations of staff. The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) uses these same criteria as the basis for their recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), who in turn use the criteria to support their action on the rezoning request. Environmental Review: Environmental Services staff has reviewed the petition and the CPUD Ordinance to address any environmental concerns. Staff has found that the property was cleared prior to 1975 and there are no listed species on the site. This petition was not required to submit an EIS or be reviewed by the Environmental Advisory Council. In addition, the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) wetland line shall be delineated on the site plan at the next development order. Transportation Review: Transportation Department Staff has reviewed this petition and the documents that accompany this request. Staff recommends approval subject to the following conditions that have been included in Exhibit "F" "Developer Commitments:" Compensating right -of -way (15 -foot wide) for a right turn lane shall be dedicated by the owner to the County as a road easement to reimburse the County for the use of the existing Immokalee Road right -of -way. The compensation shall be along the length of the turn lane along Immokalee Road only. Such dedication shall be considered site related and there shall be no road impact fee credit due the Developer. The dedication shall be performed prior to the first certificate of occupancy on the site. 2. Owner shall reserve a thirty (30) -foot wide strip along the entire Immokalee Road property frontage and shall convey to the County a stormwater easement prior to receipt of its first certificate of occupancy. As compensation for the thirty (30) -foot wide stormwater easement, Collier County shall grant to the Developer transportation _ impact fee credits equal to the fair market value of the stormwater easement on the Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD PUDZ — 2008 -AR -14048 Revised: 8 -24 -10 Page 9 of 21 date of its' conveyance. The amount of the transportation impact fee credits shall be based upon an appraisal done by the County which appraisal shall be completed within 90 days of the approval of the PUD. If the owner disagrees with the County's appraisal or the County fails to timely complete its appraisal, the owner may obtain its own appraisal and the amount of the transportation impact fee credits shall be the average of the two appraisals. If the County fails to timely complete its appraisal, the owner may obtain its own appraisal and the amount of the transportation impact fee credits shall be the amount in the developer's appraisal. The owner shall also be permitted to utilize the storm water easement for storm water management and open space. Collier County shall incorporate the storm water management into the roadway design for Immokalee Road. Utility Review: The Utilities Department Staff has reviewed the petition and has no objection. This project is not located within the Collier County Water and Sewer Service Area. The proposed water source is well water and proposed sewage shall be disposed of through a septic system. Emergency Management Review: Emergency Management staff provided the following comment: The Emergency Management Department has no issues with this rezone. Zoning and Land Development Review: Relationship to Existing and Future Land Uses: A discussion of this relationship, as it applies specifically to Collier County's legal basis for land use planning, refers to the relationship of the uses that would be permitted if the proposed zoning action is approved, as it relates to the requirement or limitations set forth in the FLUE of the GMP. The proposed uses, as limited in the CPUD Ordinance, are consistent with the GMP if Staff Recommendation number 1 is followed, as previously noted. The actual uses proposed, as limited in the CPUD Ordinance, should be compatible with the land uses that have been developed on adjacent tracts. As previously noted, this site is located at the northwest intersection of Immokalee Road and Platt Road and is surrounded by land within the Agriculture with a Mobile Home Overlay (A -MHO) zoning designation. To the north is an undeveloped property that according to the applicant, has a lease on it for a cell tower. To the east is Immokalee Road, a 100 -foot wide right -of -way, then a lot with a single- family residence. To the south is Platt Road, a 60 -foot wide private right -of- way, then a lot with a single - family residence and a lot that is undeveloped property. To the west is a single - family residence. The Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD is buffered by a 15 -foot wide landscape buffer enhanced with an additional 6 to 8 -foot high hedge row along the west property line adjacent to the single - family residence. A 15 -foot wide landscape buffer will be provided along Immokalee Road, a 10- foot wide landscape buffer will be provided along Platt Road. If an automobile service station is developed, a 25 -foot wide landscape buffer will be provided along Platt Road. A deviation is being sought to provide a 15 -foot wide landscape buffer (instead of a 25 -foot wide landscape buffer) along Immokalee Road. A 10 -foot wide landscape buffer will be provided along the north property line adjacent to the undeveloped property. Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD PUDZ— 2008 -AR -14048 Revised: 8 -24 -10 Page 10 of 21 This rezone petition requests a total of 60,000 square feet of commercial land uses including retail, personal services and office uses. The maximum zoned height proposed for this CPUD is 30 feet and one story. REZONE FINDINGS: LDC Subsection 10.03.05.1. states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners ... shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the following when applicable." Additionally, Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County LDC requires the Planning Commission to make findings as to the PUD Master Plans' compliance with the additional criteria as also noted below: Rezone findings are designated as RZ and PUD findings are designated as PUD. (Staff's responses to these criteria are provided in non -bold font): 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and future land use map and the elements of the GMP. As noted in the GMP Consistency portion of this report, the property is located within the "Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict" as identified in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE). General development requirements are established in the GMP, and the CPUD document contains appropriate references assuring compliance with the provisions of the "Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict." If the Staff Recommendation is incorporated into the Developer Commitments, then this proposed development can be found consistent with the GMP. 2. The existing land use pattern. As described in the "Surrounding Land Use and Zoning" portion of this report, the neighborhood's existing land use pattern is characterized by developed agriculturally zoned lands with a mobile home overlay to the west, across Immokalee Road to the east and Platt Road to the south. To the north is an undeveloped agriculturally zoned land with a mobile home overlay that according to the applicant has a cell tower lease on it. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The proposed Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD is located within the "Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict" as identified in the FLUE. In addition, the PUD includes adequate ameliorating elements for buffering and building height, setback, and architectural design have been provided to ensure the project is compatible with the adjoining agricultural land uses, and the single family residences. Therefore, staff is of the opinion that the proposed CPUD will not result in an isolated district unrelated to nearby districts. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. The proposed PUD district boundaries are logically drawn and conform to the "Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict" identified in the Future Land Use Element of the GMP. Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD PU DZ — 2008 -AR -14048 Revised: 8 -24 -10 Page 11 of 21 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. The site is designated for a mix of commercial and retail uses that are specified within the parameters of the "Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict" and the applicant generally intends to develop the property within the parameters of the Subdistrict. The lack of commercially zoned property in the Agricultural/ Rural area and within the "Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Commercial Center Subdistrict." provides ample justification for the passage of this proposed amendment. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. If the Staff Recommendation number 1 is followed then the proposed Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD is compatible with the "Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict" as identified in the FLUE. The "Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict" criteria creates ameliorating elements. Therefore, Staff is of the opinion that the proposed change will not adversely impact the 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. The Transportation Services Division has reviewed the proposed CPUD and has verified that the applicant has proposed sufficient and appropriate mitigation of the projects traffic impacts into the CPUD document to render the CPUD consistent with the Transportation Element. The Master Plan proposes the right -of way reservation of 15 feet for a turn lane and an additional 30 feet along Immokalee Road to accommodate the future widening consistent with the County's adopted 2010 Long Range Transportation Plan. S. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The project will be reviewed and approved subject to requirements of Collier County and the South Florida Water Management District. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. The proposed CPUD will be required to meet building setbacks and single -story height restrictions as identified in CPUD document Exhibit "B" "Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD Development Standards." When meeting these requirements, light and air will not be reduced to adjacent properties. 10. Whether the proposed change would adversely affect property values in the adjacent area. Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD PUDZ — 2008 -AR -14048 Revised: 8 -24 -10 Page 12 of 21 If the Staff Recommendation number 1 is followed, then the project will be consistent with the GMP and the LDC, staff is of the opinion this CPUD will not adversely impact property values. However, this is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results which may be internal or external to the subject property. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning; however zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since value determination is driven by market value. There is no guarantee that the project will be marketed in a manner comparable to the surrounding developments. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in the LDC is that their sound application, when combined with the site development plan approval process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in deterrence to improvement or development of adjacent property. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. If the Staff Recommendation number l is followed, then the proposed rezone to CPUD is in compliance with the GMP. The GMP is a public policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are consistent with said plan. In light of this fact the proposed CPUD does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. The property is presently vacant. The subject property could be developed within existing Commercial Convenience (C -2) and Mobile Home (MH) zoning regulation. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. If the Staff Recommendation number 1 is followed then, the request is consistent with the GMP, and is therefore, within the needs of the community. The "Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict' limits the gross leasable floor area and the uses allowed. A common architectural theme and unified planned development is required. Therefore, staff is of the opinion that the proposed CPUD is not out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood. 15. Whether it is impossible to rind other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. There may be other sites in the County that could accommodate the uses proposed; however, this is not the determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness of a zoning decision. The petition Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD PUDZ — 2008 -AR -14048 Revised: 8 -24 -10 Page 13 of 21 was reviewed on its own merit for compliance with the GMP and the LDC; and staff does not review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. Any development anticipated by the PUD document would require considerable site alteration and this project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the site development plan approval process and again later as part of the building permit process. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County GMP and as defined and implemented through the Collier County adequate public facilities ordinance. The project will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in the LDC regarding Adequate Public Facilities for and the project and will need to be consistent with all applicable goals and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities. This petition has been reviewed by county staff that is responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the rezoning process, and that staff has concluded that no Level of Service will be adversely impacted. 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: LDC Subsection 10.02.13.13.5 states that, "In support of its recommendation, the Planning Commission shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the following criteria:" 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. As previously stated, the property is designated for commercial intermediate uses as identified by the Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict of the Future Land Use Element. The type and pattern of development proposed (with the exception of the current proposal for the car wash) should not have a negative impact upon any physical characteristics of the land, the surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. Furthermore, this project, if developed, will be required to comply with all county regulations regarding drainage, sewer, water and other utilities pursuant to Section 6.02.00 Adequate Public Facilities of the LDC. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD PUDZ — 2008 -AR -14048 Revised: 8 -24 -10 Page 14 of 21 relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Documents submitted with the application provided satisfactory evidence of unified control. The CPUD document and the general LDC development regulations make appropriate provisions for the continuing operation and maintenance of common areas. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives and policies of the GMP (GMP). County staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis of the relevant goals, objectives and policies of the GMP within the GMP discussion of this staff report. Based on that analysis, staff is of the opinion that this petition can be found consistent with the overall GMP if Staff Recommendation number 1 is followed. 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. The development standards, landscaping and buffering requirements contained in this petition are designed to make the proposed uses compatible with the adjacent uses and the use mixture within the project itself. Staff believes that this petition is compatible, both internally and externally, with the proposed uses and with the existing undeveloped land. Additionally, the Development Commitments contained in the PUD document provide additional requirements the developer will have to fulfill. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The amount of open space set aside for this project meets the minimum requirement of the LDC. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. Although development of the project has not yet commenced, the timing or sequence of development in light of concurrency requirements does not appear to be a significant problem for this project based upon the transportation commitments contained in the PUD document and discussed in considerable detail in the GMP Transportation section of this report. In addition, the project's development must be in compliance with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals are sought. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD PUDZ — 2008 -AR -14048 Revised: 8 -24 -10 Page 15 of 21 Ability, as applied in this context, implies supporting infrastructure such as wastewater disposal system, potable water supplies, and capacity of roads, is supportive of conditions emanating from urban development. 8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. This criterion essentially requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards and deviations proposed for this CPUD depart from development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. The development standards in this CPUD are similar to those standards. The petitioner is seeking four deviations from the requirements of the LDC. Deviation Discussion: The four deviations are found in PUD Exhibit "E" "Deviations." Deviation #1 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.05.08 C.9., Architectural Design Standards, which requires all sides of a non - residential building within a PUD to be treated as primary facades, to allow the sides adjacent to the northern or western property boundary to be non - primary facades. Petitioner's Rationale: The subject property is designed to serve the needs of area residents in the most efficient, low- impact way possible. Although the LDC architectural design standards are intended to create human -scale developments, the back of a commercial building is not within the public domain. The provision in question was intended to shield residents within the same PUD from non - residential buildings they would see from all sides. The requested deviation only removes the requirement from the north and west sides of the property. The property to the north has been owned by the State of Florida since 1983 (O.R. Bk. 1058 Pg. 1179) and is managed by the Internal Improvement Trust Fund. In fact, the State leased the site to the Department of Agriculture. Division of Forestry for 99 years for forestry and recreation uses. No detrimental impact is anticipated from the reduced standard on this side. The property located west of the site is developed with one single - family home and accessory structures. The home is approximately 135 feet from the shared property line. Appropriate landscape buffers, height limitations and setbacks are proposed to shield this neighbor from any potential impacts. No detriment to public health, safety or welfare is anticipated from the approval of this request. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends approval finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13 A.3., the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community" and LDC Section 10.02.13 B.S.h., the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." However, staff has added language to clarify that this deviation shall apply only to the west fagade of Building 1 and to the north faQade of Building 2 as depicted on Exhibit C Master Plan. Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD PUDZ — 2008 -AR -14048 Revised: 8 -24 -10 Page 16 of 21 Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Subsection 5.03.02 H.I.e., Fences and Walls, which requires an eight (8) foot high masonry wall within the landscape buffer along Platt Road to allow for a double row four (4) foot high hedge planted three (3) feet on center in lieu of the wall. Petitioner's Rationale: The requested deviation applies to the southern property line. The applicant wishes to retain the natural character of the surrounding environment by replacing the required masonry wall with a hedge on Platt Road, which is a private, local road. The property to the south is partially cleared and developed with a mobile home. The proposed hedge will provide an equivalent amount of shelter from on -site activity in a more natural, attractive manner. The purpose of the wall is to shield the neighboring site from noise and glare. The height of the proposed hedge will shield the neighbors from the lights of vehicles that may drive on the site or be parked there. Noise will be attenuated through containment indoors and appropriate selection and limitation of uses. The adjoining private right -of -way is approximately 60 feet wide, and the landscape buffer is another 10 feet in width. Use of the property would be located beyond these. The separation and proposed landscaping is an adequate buffer for the southern boundary. Additionally, the neighboring property owner has expressed support for a hedge in place of a wall. (See attached letter.) No detriment to public health, safety or welfare is anticipated from the approval of this request. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends approval finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13 A.3., the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community" and LDC Section 10.02.13 B.5.h., the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Subsection 5.03.02 H.l.a., Fences and Walls, which requires a six (6) to eight (8) foot high masonry wall within the landscape buffer along the western property line to allow for a double row six (6) to eight (8) foot hedge planted four feet on center in lieu of the wall. Petitioner's Rationale: Similar to the previous request, the rural character of the area lends itself more to a vegetated buffer than to a masonry wall. The proposed landscape buffer would be 15 feet wide and the building would be set back at least 25 feet from this common property line. The height of the commercial building is limited to 25 feet. Noise and glare can be appropriately mitigated by the hedge and will soften the look of the buffer. No detrimental impacts to neighbors are anticipated from approval of this deviation request. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends approval finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13 A.3., the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community" and LDC Section 10.02.13 B.5.h., the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD PUDZ — 2008 -AR -14048 Revised: 8 -24 -10 Page 17 of 21 Deviation #4 seeks relief from LDC Subsection 5.05.05 D.1., Automobile Service Stations, which requires a minimum 25 -foot wide landscape buffer to allow for a minimum 15 -foot wide type D landscape buffer. Petitioner's Rationale: The reduction in the required landscape buffer along the Immokalee Road portion of the parcel which may be developed with a convenience store with gas pumps is warranted due to the 30 -foot right of way reservation requested by Collier County. The project will continue to provide the required vegetation within the 15 -foot wide buffer. The reduced buffer width will not create any health, safety or welfare concerns. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends approval finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13 A.3., the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community" and LDC Section 10.02.13 B.5.h., the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): Synopsis provided by Cheri Rollins, Collier County Administrative Assistant The meeting was duly noticed by the applicant and held on May 21, 2009 at 5:30 p.m. at the Big Corkscrew Fire House. Six people from the public attended, along with the applicant's representative: Heidi Williams of Q. Grady Minor, and county staff. Ms. Williams presented an overview of the requested rezone from Commercial (C -2) and Mobile Home (MH) zoning districts to a Commercial Planned Unit Development zoning district that her client is seeking. There was no opposition from those in attendance; however the following comments were expressed: 1. One resident was concerned with outside noise from either a gas station or restaurant, as she would prefer there be no amplified music coming from either place of business and would like the noise kept to a minimum. The applicant responded that the current proposal does not allow for amplified music. 2. Lighting was also a concern by those in attendance, as the Corkscrew Sanctuary often holds night classes and bright lights would make it difficult to continue holding these classes. A resident requested that "night friendly" lights be required in this proposal. The applicant responded that they would look into lighting options. 3. Another resident asked where the access point would be located for this development. The applicant responded that access will be off Platt Road and it would be paved, per Collier County Transportation requirements. The meeting concluded at approximately 6:30 p.m. Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD PUDZ— 2008 -AR -14048 Revised: 8 -24 -10 Page 18 of 21 SECOND NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): Synopsis provided by Sharon Umpenhour, Planning Technician, of Q. Grady Minor and edited by Nancy Gundlach, Principal Planner of Collier County: A second meeting was held because one year had past since the first NIM was held. The meeting was duly noticed by the applicant and held on July 14, 2010, at 5:30 p.m. at the Big Corkscrew Fire House. D. Wayne Arnold, the agent, introduced the property owner, Mr. Robert E. Williams. At the time the meeting began, six residents were in attendance (two additional residents arrived 5:45 p.m.). Aerial photographs of the site and surrounding area, and a copy of the conceptual site plan were displayed. Mr. Arnold gave a brief explanation of the rezone application, project location, description of the proposed uses and requested deviations. Mr. Arnold requested that anyone in attendance wishing to obtain updated information about the project could provide their e-mail address and his office would provide notice of the public hearing schedule. Mr. Arnold also provided tentative hearing dates to those in attendance. Mr. Arnold concluded his presentation and asked for questions. Questions were raised in regards to operation hours, noise and lighting. Mr. Arnold indicated the applicant's willingness to address issues such as lighting and hours of operation for outdoor uses. Mr. Doug Wilson of the Corkscrew Island Homeowner's Association indicated their organizations support generally for the project and desire for further discussion with the applicant. Mr. Arnold indicated that parties would continue to discuss issues as the project moves forward. Mr. Arnold invited anyone with further questions to call his office or to contact Ms. Gundlach. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 6:00 p.m. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: This petition was not heard by the EAC because the site is under the size threshold (10 acres) to require an Environmental Impact Statement. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report for PUDZ- 2008 -AR -13048 revised on August 13, 2010. RECOMMENDATION: Zoning and Land Development Review Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PUDZ- 2008 -AR -14048 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval for the rezoning request from the Commercial Convenience (C -2) and Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD PUDZ — 2008 -AR -14048 Revised: 8 -24 -10 Page 19 of 21 Mobile Home (MH) Zoning Districts to the Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) Zoning District for a project to be known as the Barefoot Commercial Center CPUD with the following condition: Amend Exhibit A, Permitted Uses, to read, "Car Wash (designed, built and operated as a single bay, drive - through facility, utilizing water recycling system(s) and following Best Management Practices, as found in FDEP administrative codes, as may be amended, allowed in Area 1 only) — Group 7542 ". 2. Deviation # 1 shall apply only to the west fagade of Building 1 and to the north fagade of Building 2 as depicted on Exhibit C Master Plan. Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD PUDZ — 2008 -AR -14048 Revised: 8 -24 -10 Page 20 of 21 PREPARED BY: Y"� (11JA �mh 6A, 91 (A 0 NANCY G DLAC , AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER TE DEPARTM T OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REVIEWED BY: z-2'� K-1�?-J— 3.11-10 RAYMOVb V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DATE DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES k-,Oj P3 -i3-2 e!b Wli D. LOR Z JR' P.E., DIRECTOR DATE DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES APPROVED BY: v✓ � ©8- l6,Zo10 NICK CASALANGU , DE ADMINISTRATOR DATE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN DATE Tentatively scheduled for the October 26, 2010 Board of County Commissioners Meeting Attachments: Attachment A: Ordinance Attachment B: 2- Neighborhood Letters Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD PUDZ — 2008 -AR -14048 Revised: 8 -9 -10 Page 21 of 21 ORDINANCE NO. 10- 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 COMMERCIAL (C -2) AND MOBILE HOME (MI) ZONING DISTRICTS WITH A RURAL FRINGE, MIXED USE NEUTRAL LANDS OVERLAY TO A COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (CPUD) ZONING DISTRICT, WITH REMOVAL OF THE RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE NEUTRAL LANDS OVERLAY, TO BE KNOWN AS THE CORKSCREW COMMERCIAL CENTER CPUD. THE PROJECT WILL ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF A MAXIMUM OF 60,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL, RETAIL, OFFICE, CHURCH AND SCHOOL USES. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF IMMOKALEE ROAD AND PLATT ROAD, IN SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CONSISTING OF 8 ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Wayne Arnold of Q. Grady Minor and Associates, Inc. and Richard Yovanovich, Esquire of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., representing Robert E. Williams, Trustee of the Robert E. Williams Trust dated October 5, 2004, 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 27, Township 47 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from Commercial (C -2) and Mobile Home (MH) Zoning Districts with a Rural Fringe Mixed Use Neutral Lands Overlay Corkscrew Commercial Center PUDZ- 2008•AR -14048 Rev. 8123/10 Page I of 2 Attachment A to a Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) Zoning Distsict, with removal of the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Neutral Lands Overlay, to be known as the Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD in accordance with Exhibits A through F, attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. The appropriate zoning atlas map or maps, as described in Ordinance Number 2004 -41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, is /are hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO: This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super- majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK , Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: L� Heidi Ashton -Cicko Assistant County Attorney Land Use Section Chief Attachments: Exhibit A — Permitted Uses Exhibit B — Development Standards Exhibit C — Master Concept Plan Exhibit D - Legal Description Exhibit E — List of Deviations Exhibit F - Developer Commitments CP\08 -CPS- 00915144 day of , 2010. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Corkscrew Commercial Center Pt1DZ- 2008 -AR -14048 Rev. 8/23/10 Page 2 of 2 FRED W. COYLE, Chairman EXHIBIT A CORKSCREW COMMERCIAL CENTER CPUD PERMITTED USES I. Permitted Uses The 8t acre commercial project shall be developed with no more than 60,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area. No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Principal Uses: I . Accounting — Group 8721 2. Adjustment and collection services — Group 7322 3. Advertising agencies -- Group 7311 4. Apparel and accessories store (up to 1,800 square feet) — Groups 5611, 5621, 5632, 5641, 5651, 5661, 5699 5. Architectural services — Group 8712 6. Auditing — Group 8721 7. Automobile parking, parking garages & structures — Group 7521 S. Banks, credit unions and trusts — Groups 6011, 6019, 6021, 6022, 6029, 6035, 6036, 6061, 6062, 6081, 6082, 6091, 6099 9. Barber shops (except barber schools) — Group 7241 10. Beauty shops (except beauty schools) — Group 7231 11. Bookkeeping services — Group 8721 12. Business consulting services — Group 8748 13. Business credit institutions — Groups 6153, 6159 14. Child day care services — Group 8351 15. Churches — Group 8661 16. Civic, social and fraternal associations — Group 8641 17. Commercial art and graphic design — Group 7336 18. Commercial photography - Group 7335 19. Computer and computer software stores (up to 1,800 square feet) — Group 5734 20. Computer programming — Groups 7371, 7372, 7373, 7374, 7375, 7376, 7377, 7378, 7379 21. Credit reporting services — Group 7323 22. Debt counseling only — Group 7299 23. Direct mail advertising services — Group 7331 24. Eating places — Group 5812 25. Education services — Groups 8211, 8221, 8222 26. Educational plants 27. Engineering services — Group 8711 August 9, 2010 Page 1 of 9 BCCZ 28. Essential services, subject to LDC Section 2.01.03 29. Food stores, except supermarkets (up to 2,800 square feet) — Groups 5411, 5421, 5431, 5441, 5451, 5461, 5499 30. Funeral services (except crematories) — Group 7261 31. Garment pressing, and agents for laundries and drycleaners — Group 7212 32. Gasoline service station, subject to LDC Section 5.05.05 (allowed in Area 1 only, with a maximum of 5,000 square feet and 12 vehicle fueling positions) — Group 5541 33. General merchandise stores — Groups 5331, 5399, 34. Group care facilities (category I & II, except homeless shelter), subject to LDC Section 5.05.04. 35. Hardware stores — Group 5251 36. Health services — Groups 8011, 8021, 8031, 8041, 8042, 8043, 8049 37. Home furniture, furnishings, equipment store — Groups 5713, 5714, 5719 38. Home health care services — Group 8082 39. Insurance agencies, brokers, carriers — Groups 6311, 6321, 6324, 6331, 6351, 6361, 6371, 6399, 6411 40. Landscape architects, consulting & planning — Group 0781 41. Legal services — Group 8111 42. Libraries (except regional libraries) — Group 8231 43. Loan brokers — Group 6163 44. Management and public relations — Groups 8741, 8742 45. Mortgage bankers and loan correspondents — Group 6162 46. Musical instrument stores — Group 5736 47. Paint, glass, wallpaper stores — Group 5231 48. Personal credit institutions — Group 6141 49. Photocopying and duplicating services — Group 7334 50. Photofinishing laboratories, pick -up and drop -off establishments only — Group 7384 51. Photographic studios — Group 7221 52. Physical fitness facilities (physically integrated and operated in conjunction with another permitted use in this district) — Group 7991 53. Public relations services — Group 8743 54. Radio, television and consumer electronics store — Group 5731 55. Radio, television and publishers advertising representatives — Group 7313 56. Real estate— Groups 6531, 6541, 6552 57. Record and prerecorded tape stores — Group 5735, excluding adult oriented sales and rentals 58. Religious organizations — Group 8661 59. Repair services — miscellaneous, excluding aircraft, business and office machines, large appliances, and white goods such as refrigerators and washing machines — Groups 7629, 7631 60. Retail services - miscellaneous — Groups 5912, 5942, 5943, 5944, 5945, 5946, 5947, 5948, 5949, 5961 61. Secretarial and court reporting services — Group 7338 August 9, 2010 Page 2 of 9 BCCZ 62. Security and commodity brokers, dealers, exchanges services — Groups 6211, 6221, 6231, 6282, 6289 63. Shoe repair shops or shoeshine parlors — Group 7251 64. Social services, individual and family — Group 8322 65. Surveying services — Group 8713 66. Tax return preparation services — Group 7291 67. Travel agents, and no other transportation services — Group 4724 68. United States postal service, excluding major distribution center— Group 4311 69. Veterinary services — Group 0742, Excludes outdoor kenneling 70. Videotape rental — Group 7841, excluding adult oriented sales and rentals 71. Any other commercial use or professional service which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals. B. Accessory Uses /Structures: Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the permitted principal uses and structures, including, but not limited to: 1. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to the permitted principal uses. 2. Cocktail lounges (Group 5813), only in conjunction with eating places (restricted to inside of building number 3). 3. Car Wash (single bay, drive - through, allowed in Area 1 only) — Group 7542 4. Caretaker's residence, subject to LDC Section 5.03.05. 5. Outdoor Seating (no amplified music or sound shall be permitted) 6. Sidewalk sales, subject to LDC Section 4.02.12. August 9, 2010 Page 3 of 9 BCCZ EXHIBIT B CORKSCREW COMMERCIAL CENTER CPUD DEVELOPMENTSTANDARDS Table I below sets forth the development standards for land uses within the Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD. Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in the applicable sections of the Land Development Code (LDC) in effect as of the date of approval of the Site Development Plan (SDP) or Subdivision plat. TABLE Development Standards for Commercial District * Per subdivided lot, excluding parking areas under buildings SPS = Same as Principal Structure August 9, 2010 Page 4 of 9 BCCZ Principal Structures Accessory Structures Minimum Lot Area 10,000 square feet N/A Minimum Lot Width 75 feet N/A Minimum Setbacks — External From External Rights -of -way 25 feet SPS From Western and Northern Boundary 25 feet SPS Minimum Setbacks — Internal Internal Drives /ROW 10 feet 10 feet Preserve 25 feet 10 feet Minimum Separation of Structures 10 feet or `/2 sum of building heights, whichever is greater 10 feet Maximum Building Height Maximum Zoned Height 1 story, not to exceed 25 feet not to exceed 1 story, 25 feet Maximum Actual Height 1 story, not to exceed 30 feet not to exceed 1 story, 30 feet Minimum Floor Area 1,000 square feet * N/A Maximum Gross Leasable Area 60,000 square feet N/A * Per subdivided lot, excluding parking areas under buildings SPS = Same as Principal Structure August 9, 2010 Page 4 of 9 BCCZ SITE SUMMARY ZONING: A-MHO LAND USE: PUBLIC SITE =BS ACRES COMMERCIAL = 5.602 ACRES (70%) OPEN SPACE = 2.40: ACRES (30%) nl 1G WIDE TYPE 'A LANDSCAPE BUFFER MAXIMUM GROSS FLOOR AREA = 60,000 SQUARE FEET , I■ I■ DEVIATIONS I ■1 ■I ■I I ■I 1 ■I ■I ■11 ■I ■I 1 1 ■I ■f4� — — _ _ — —; (ll 7.UF.. dots I ■illill DEVIATION 91 SEEKS RELIEF FROM LDC SECTION S.OS.O6.C.8, .. ._ . .• -- • • • j+ 1 ARCHITECTl1RAL DESIGN STANDARDS, WHICH REQUIRES ALL SIDES — „ • + • + • + • + OF A NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING WITHIN A PUD TO BE TREATED AS • • ••• � PRIMARY FACADES, TO ALLOW THE WEST SIDE OF BUILDING i AND THE NORTH SIDE OF BUILDING 2 TO BE TREATED AS NON-PRIMARY ! • • • • ' +' • ' • ' • ' + • FACADES. •••. . ■ ��rl1 H .lL�tuu. ✓�J99 O u L DEVIATION ®SEEKS RELIEF FROM LDC SUBSECTION 5.03.02.H.1.C, - . i FENCES AND WALLS, WHICH REQUIRES AN EIGHT FOOT HIGH • +FI • I 2 MASONRY WALL WITHIN THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG PLATT ROAD TO ALLOW FOR A DOUBLE ROW FOUR FOOT HIGH HEDGE ZONING: A -MHO •�^� PLANTED THREE FEET ON CENTER IN LIEU OF THE WALL. LAND USE: SINGLE FAMILY • • ' + • ` • RESIDENTIAL ■ • . . . • • • . • • • DEVIATION Ci3ISEEKS RELIEF FROM LDC SUBSECTION 5.03.02.H.1 A. •' • ~IL �• )•tII I FENCES AN AULS, WHICH REQUIRES A SIX TO EIGHT FOOT HIGH BUILDING 2 1 • ORY DETENTION+ • .{�.y I 30 WIDE RESERVATION . • . 1STORY 1 • • ' ' .w TER MARAGEMENT • • • • I v' ( FOR FUTURE ROW MASONRY WALL WITHIN THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG THE • '9 WESTERN PROPERTY LINE TO ALLOW FOR A DOUBLE ROW SIX TO 1111 UP T02S i .AREA . EIGHT FOOT HEDGE PLANTED FOUR FEET ON CENTER IN LIEU OF • t • If'A..� E THE WALL l{ I 4 15' HA TYPE'B' — LANDS �I I LANDSCAPE E BUFFER _ � • • • • • • • + • • • • • ' DEVIATION ® SEEKS RELIEF FROM UDC SUBSECTION 5.05,05.D.1, • • • + • • • • • + • • • • • • • • +) ■ �. r AUTOMOBILE SERVICE STATIONS, WHICH REQUIRES A MINIMUM 25 . (. • • 41 +� ! D FOOT WIDE LANDSCAPE BUFFER TO ALLOW FOR A MINIMUM 15 FOOT �yy,,77 • 't•. WIDE TYPE D LANDSCAPE BUFFER. SJ ■ + • ; .,•_��_� — .^......� • ' • I IMMOKALEE ROAD I ■ y 100' ROW WIDTH NOTES: ^ C= Z 1 ■ l.�J �/ • 1 I m j 1. THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND IS SUBJECT TO MINOR MODIFICATION 1 ; DUE TO AGENCY PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS. m ! 2. ALL ACREAGES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO MODIFICATION AT THE TIME OF ■ •, i YN I BUILDING SDP OR PLAT APPROVAL. I TOR 3 � STORY I I y 3. GAS STATIONS AND ACCESSORY CAR WASH MAY ONLY BE LOCATED IN AREA 1. ALL ■_ UP TO2W I OTHER USES MAY BE LOCATED IN AREA 1 AND AREA 2. I 1S WIDE( PE'D'© LANDSCAPE BUFFER 4. SIDEWALKS ALONG IMMOKALEE ROAD W BE ADDRESSED AT TIME OF SITE ILL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (SDP) REVIEW. ■ narerDOr ewNnwaal �cllel E ° ",'`1',,� AREA 1 • • I CaicOptuK1 Barter DasMI 14,r�•. AUTOMOBILE SERVICE STATION OR • h-') 1 I COMMERCIA L t j /�y!•.4/C�.n. 1'^'"T" ..rm.:im (2 ACRES) i I �Nl- - ""�'It�'- -"- I r_ t • �"� �ti+'^� , ■ 3 1❑ a'� 30' WID (RESERVATION IO'oe_ 4'Tn*n rWN'IT auRm A NLI FOR FUTURE ROW U '�'w1`�' �^•�^^ Is BUILDING CONY N E PUMPS Vol ZONING: A -MHO — 1STORY PUMP I 6,tt X LAND USE: SINGLE FAMILY UP TO 26• 0 t CANOPY 1� ; W:}_MlFylxl� UP 2S RESIDENTIAL i O i • � 15' WIDE TURN LINE tai 5'S.i. x ■ 26' WIDE LANDSCAPE —� •.d'Axiry + r m. nnm I v+! ■ BUFFER PER LOC 6.05.05.D ' • ' (IF AUTOMOBILE SERVICE STATON 25' Automobile Setb$re SURIM Buller ■ 2 (Plan Road) ISpgpmN rrw'Y'M�I!tt +('�I• Isl ■1 I 1! fbw l ■ _ _ ��`JI .. —. 1 1• ■1 ■I ■■ I 1 I■ 1tl WIDE ENHANCED I n On�nle ^yL�;��S5 ■' TYPE '0' LANDSCAPE BUFFER »' . IgR12'a I $ 10 WIDE ENHANCED + Wtl> TVPE'D' LANDSCAPE DUFFER PLAOT� W OTH I � V'41 "r ` 60 R T `� t fftt crwroaaW..' I i Is, mw S eSletWn BDITM _ Lcam F1 DEVIATIONS SIDEWALKS I PLAZA AREA E] OPEN SPACE 4 1 2 0 RENEE D ATDN CORKSCREW COMMERCIAL CENTER CPUD 4 e o ] 10 REND PFR STAFF MIIIIFNIB I 3 1 0 SEa PLR W EXHIBIT C 2 1 4 S ■ { RENSm PFA 91iF10D1CY RENEW rAIYFNTS RENSED PER ■1FT10D1CY IENEW ed --- Aa Data GradyMinor IMmW SpHxyA 23a.94T.1'N CORKSCREW COMMERCIAL CENTER CPUD © "t, 941.426.W.4 NaDlm 2.18.4J423m EXHIBIT C CIYII Engineers Land SUlYey.. crnr. nr.um. ren MAIrca.Ulamam Planners . Landscape Architects as MASTER PLAN .. 0_ fraM 5111mr and.lnwlaWleE. I•.A.. 3811 Ne UN K Spttf ML 54134 wnw.OralNanix�r.mWi aEw 2 0P 2 i EXHIBIT D CORKSCREW COMMERCIAL CENTER CPUD LEGAL DESCRIPTION The subject property is 8.0 +/- acres, is located in Section 27, Township 47 South, Range 27 East, and is more fully described as follows: THE NORTHEAST ONE - QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST ONE - QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE - QUARTER OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, LESS THE SOUTH 30 FEET THEREOF, RESERVED FOR ROAD PURPOSES AND EXCEPT THE RIGHT -OF -WAY FOR STATE ROAD 846, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. August 9, 2010 Page 6 of 9 BCCZ EXHIBIT E CORKSCREW COMMERCIAL CENTER CPUD DEVIATIONS 1. Deviation #1 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.05.08 C.9, Architectural Design Standards, which requires all sides of a non - residential building within a PUD to be treated as primary facades, to allow the sides adjacent to the northern or western property boundary to be non - primary facades. 2. Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Subsection 5.03.02 H.l.c, Fences and Walls, which requires an eight (8) foot high masonry wall within the landscape buffer along Platt Road to allow for a double row four (4) -foot high hedge planted three (3) feet on center in lieu of the wall. 3. Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Subsection 5.03.02 H.I.a, Fences and Walls, which requires a six (6) to eight (8) foot high masonry wall within the landscape buffer along the western property line to allow for a double row six (6) to eight (8) foot hedge planted four feet on center in lieu of the wall. 4. Deviation 44 seeks relief from LDC Subsection 5.05.05 D.1, Automobile Service Stations, which requires a minimum 25 foot wide landscape buffer to allow for a minimum 15 -foot wide Type D landscape buffer. August 9, 2010 Page 7 of 9 BCCZ EXHIBIT F CORKSCREW COMMERCIAL CENTER CPUD DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS 1. Regulations for development of the Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this CPUD Document and applicable sections of the LDC and Growth Management Plan (GMP) in effect at the time of issuance of any development order to which said regulations relate. Where this CPUD Ordinance does not provide development standards, then the provisions of the specific sections of the LDC that are otherwise applicable shall apply. 2. The Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD shall be developed using a common architectural theme throughout the project. All buildings will be designed to reflect a rural or rustic character. 3. The Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD shall be designed and developed to minimize unnecessary outdoor lighting. Due to the rural character of the surrounding area, all light fixtures will be shielded to direct illumination only onto the subject property and will use the minimum brightness necessary. The developer will use the International Dark Sky Association recommendations, or similar technical standards, to ensure minimal impact to the area while providing safety for those using the site. 4. Because ambient noise levels are typically lower in rural areas than in urban areas, the developer shall minimize intrusive noise by prohibiting outdoor amplified music or television and will eliminate as many other sources of unnecessary sound as possible. 5. Only one, single -bay car wash facility may be permitted within the PUD, and shall only be permitted in Area 1 identified on the conceptual master plan. The car wash facility must be designed to utilize a recycled water system in order to minimize water and wastewater demand for the facility. 6. Compensating right -of -way (15 foot wide) for a right turn lane shall be dedicated by the owner to the County as a road easement to reimburse the County for the use of the existing Immokalee Road right -of -way. The compensation shall be along the length of the turn lane along Immokalee Road only. Such dedication shall be considered site related and there shall be no road impact fee credit due the Developer. The dedication shall be performed prior to the first certificate of occupancy on the site. 7. Owner shall reserve a thirty (30) foot wide strip along the entire Immokalee Road property frontage and shall convey to the County a stormwater easement prior to receipt of its first certificate of occupancy. As compensation for the thirty (30) foot wide stormwater easement, Collier County shall grant to the Developer transportation impact August 9, 2010 Page 8 of 9 BCCZ fee credits equal to the fair market value of the stormwater easement on the date of it's conveyance. The amount of the transportation impact fee credits shall be based upon an appraisal done by the County which appraisal shall be completed within 90 days of the approval of the PUD. If the owner disagrees with the County's appraisal or the County fails to timely complete its appraisal, the owner may obtain its own appraisal and the amount of the transportation impact fee credits shall be the average of the two appraisals. If the County fails to timely complete its appraisal, the owner may obtain its own appraisal and the amount of the transportation impact fee credits shall be the amount in the developer's appraisal. The owner shall also be permitted to utilize the stormwater easement for stormwater management and open space. Collier County shall incorporate the stormwater management into the roadway design for Immokalee Road. August 9, 2010 Page 9 of 9 BCCZ GundlachNancy From: Douglas Wilson [douglaswilson @earthlink.netj Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2010 5:24 AM ro: maureen bonness; JeriCobb @johnrwood.com Cc: GundlachNancy; warnold@gradyminor.com, BigIslandBilI @aol.com Subject: Re: CINA 8/17/10 Corkscrew Commercial Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Maureen, You are of course welcome to submit any comments you like regarding this project as a private citizen, but originating this memo as "Maureen Bonness, Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Association" suggests that you are speaking for the Association, as do your references throughout. This is misleading. As you know, the Association speaks officially only through formal resolutions by the membership. At our meeting on August 17 there were no motions or resolutions regarding this project. The only resolutions we have passed have already been made a part of the county's record for the project. Doug Wilson ecretary Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Association At 10:16 PM 8/20/2010, maureen bonness wrote: >attached are comments concerning Corkscrew Commercial PUD and Corkscrew > Island Neighborhood Association. E >No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Wersion: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3084 - Release Date: 1 Attachment B page 1 of 5 Date: August 20, 2010 To: Bobby & Jeri Williams cc: Wayne Arnold, Nancy Gundlach, Doug Wilson From: Maureen Bonness, Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Association RE: Corkscrew Commercial Center CPUD Bobby & Jeri It was good to see you at the CINA meeting on August 17, and to hear your comments about your commercial area. 1) CINA members appreciate your willingness to participate in Dark Sky practices to reduce light pollution at night, and your willing prohibition against amplified outdoor music or TV. 2) Concerning the variances you have requested on wall construction on the north border (toward Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary), we are far more concerned about noise than appearance. The adjacent parcel to the north is owned by the State of Florida and will likely never be a homestead. There is questionable value to requiring a hedge at this location — it wi It not abate noise, and there are no neighbors. However, I suggest adding a provisional clause that one year after the Commercial Center opens for business, the issue of noise be revisited to determine if other measures are required (e.g., an earthen berm or other wall construction). 3) Some CINA members continue to disagree with you about the closing time of the establishment, preferring 10 pm. 4) You have expressed cooperation in accommodating safety of school children at the bus stop at Platt /Immokalee Rd, as well as providing access for riders of a CAT transit bus stop if one is located near that intersection in the future. I appreciate your cooperation, and request that these items be specifically included in your plans and /or Conditions. School bus stop at Platt Rd /Immokalee Blvd west side of intersection This location is the school bus stop for 14 parcels on Platt Rd west of Immokalee Rd. There are six schools (elementary, middle, high schools in both Orange Tree area and in Immokalee) that have routes covering this intersection. (Note: the east side of the intersection has separate bus routes.) Since vehicles will be using Platt Rd. to access the Corkscrew Commercial Center, there must be consideration for the safety of children at the bus stop, as well as potential congestion problems due to parents /vehicles waiting near the bus stop. A possible solution is to provide a protected waiting area for the children at the far southeast corner of your Attachment B page 2 of 5 property (might need to reduce landscape vegetation), with pedestrian access between the waiting area and your parking lot. CAT bus stop: If a CAT bus stop is located at the turning lane adjacent to Corkscrew Commercial, you will construct ADA- compliant access between the transit stop and your parking lot. Sincerely Maureen Bonness Attachment B page 3 of 5 V ��Vl mlU%K Bob, Z I wish you had been able to attend last week's CINA meeting, because sure enough, the members discussed your project at length and passed a bunch of motions about it. I don't think �J J any of them will come as a big surprise, but if you had been there, you might have shed some light or alleviated some concern. My primary purpose in writing today is to ask you if you or your consultants could send us your current submissions to the County in PDF form so I can circulate them to our Association members. Anyway, here are the motions: MOTION 1: That all establishments in the Williams mall be open no later than 10 pm in the evening. Moved by Jean McCollem, seconded by Maureen Bonness, carried unanimously. MOTION 2: That the light pollution in the Williams mall be reduced to the maximum feasible extent. Moved by Robera Wooster, seconded by Jean McCollem, carried unanimously. MOTION 3: That all external lights in the Williams mall be shut off at 10 pm. Moved by Mike Duever, seconded by Nancy Wilson, carried unanimously. MOTION 4: That six foot walls be installed on the west and north property lines of the Williams mall. Moved by Maureen Bonness, seconded by Mike Duever, carried unanimously. MOTION 5: That the developers of the Williams mall work with Collier Area Transit (CAT) when designing their parking lot so as to facilitate access of buses. Moved by Maureen Bonness, seconded by Mike Duever, carried unanimously. MOTION 6: That the developers of the Williams mall consult with the School Board and the County Transportation about the safety of children getting on and off the buses. Moved by Roberta Wooster, seconded by Maureen, carried unanimously. MOTION 7: That the Transportation Department revisit whether a turn lane can be put in in the northbound and the southbound lanes at Platt Road to accommodate the Williams project. Moved by Roberta Wooster, seconded by Marie Tabraue, carried unanimously. MOTION 8: That Bobby Williams be asked to provide us with detailed information, hopefully in electronic PDF form, about the progress of the project with ample time to evaluate it. Moved by Jean McCollom, seconded by Maureen Bonness, carried unanimously. The consensus of the meeting was that the above concerns should be communicated to County staff and the Planning Commission prior to its upcoming deliberation on the project. Attachment B page 4 of 5 AWP PLASTERING AND DRYWALL INC. 1580 40TH TERR.SW NAPLES, FL. 34116 Attention: Mr. Williams Re: Platt Road Dear Mr. Williams, My name is William L. McDaniel Jr., I am the managing member of McIvey L.L.C., and we own the SW corner of Platt and Immokalee Roads. It would be our hope that your project does install a hedge, in lieu of a wall, as a buffer towards Platt, we feel this would be a far more appealing representation, and better reflection of the rural character of our neighborhood. It is assumed that this buffer will be of substance sufficient to reduce the impacts of your project, that being said, a hedge is better than a wall. Sincerely, .&Iff Attachment B page 5 of 5