Loading...
CCPC Agenda 01/20/2011 R & GMPCCPC AGENDA JANUARY 20.2011 AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 8:30 A.M., THURSDAY, JANUARY 20, 2011, 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 - December 16, 2010 6. BCC REPORT- RECAPS 7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT 8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS A. Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance review and recommendation for approval. [Coordinator: Robert Wiley] 9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Note. This item has been Continued from the January 6, 2011 meeting. CP- 2006 -11, Petition requesting amendments to the Conservation and Coastal Management Element, Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series of the Growth Management Plan, to Reconfigure the boundary and size of the Southeast Quadrant of Mixed Use Activity Center No. 7 (Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard); Increase the maximum allowable density that may be n achieved within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict (URF) portion of a Project lying in more than one Future Land Use designation through enhanced utilization of eligible Transferable Development Rights (TDRs); Provide a definitive access provision for a Business Park located in the URF portion of a Project; and, Allow for Native Vegetation Preservation in the URF portion of a Project to be shifted to the RFMUD Sending Lands portion of the project when the Required Amount of Native Vegetation Preservation is proportionally increased in the Sending Lands portion of the Project — as they relate to proposed Hacienda Lakes Development of Regional Impact (DRI) and Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) Requests. The property is located in Sections 11, 12, 13, 14, 23, 24, and 25, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, and Sections 19 and 30, Township 50 South, Range 27 East, consisting of ±2,262 acres. [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] [Coordinator: Corby Schmidt, Principal Planner] B. BD- PL2010 -1313, Anerzej Lysikiewicz, represented by Jeff Rogers of Turrell, and Associates, requesting a 40 -foot boat dock extension over the maximum 20 -foot limit in section 5.03.06 of the Collier County Land Development Code for a total protrusion of 60 feet to accommodate one boat lift for the benefit of lot 14, Block G, in the replat of Unit 3, Little Hickory Shore Subdivision in Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Mike Sawyer, Project Manager] C. Note: This Item has been Continued from the January 6, 2011 meeting due to re- advertisement. BD- 2008 -AR- 13142, Paul Schneller, represented by Jeff Rogers of Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc., requesting a 133 -foot boat dock extension over the maximum 20 -foot limit as provided in Section 5.03.06 of the LDC to allow a 153 -foot dock facility to accommodate one vessel. Subject property is located at 39 West Pelican Street, legally described as Lot 81, Isles of Capri No. 1, Section 31, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Companion to VA- PL2010 -739) [Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, Principal Planner] D. Note: This Item has been Continued from the January 6, 2011 meeting as a Companion item to 9A. VA- PL2010 -739. Paul Schneller, represented by Jeff Rogers of Turrell, Hall and Associates, requests a Variance of 7.5 feet from the minimum 7.5 -foot side yard setback of Land Development Code (LDC) Subsection 5.03.06 E.6 to allow a 0 -foot setback for a boat dock facility. The 0.18 -acre subject property is located at 39 West Pelican Street, legally described as Lot 81, Isles of Capri No. 1, in Section 31, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Companion item to BD- 2008 -AR- 13142) [Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, Principal Planner] E. Note: This item has been Continued from the December 16, 2010 CCPC meeting per applicant. CP- 2010 -1, Petition requesting an Amendment to the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan, to modify the language of the Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict to allow a grocery/supermarket, physical fitness facility, craft/hobby store, home furniture /furnishing store and department store use to exceed the 20,000 square feet limitation for a single commercial use, up to a maximum of 50,000 square feet, for Parcel 1 (9.2+ acres, zoned Bradford Square MPUD) only, and with the overall maximum development limitation of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses on Parcel 1 to remain; the subject portion of the Subdistrict is located at the northeast corner of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Livingston Road in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East. [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner] F. Note. This item has been Continued from the December 16, 2010 meeting. CPSP- 2010 -21 Petition requesting Amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series (FLUE/FLUM), to: modify the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay (B /GTRO); modify FLUE Policy 5.1; modify applicability of the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict; update the Wellhead Protection Map; update the FLUM and Map Series to reflect annexations, etc.; make FLUM boundary corrections in rural areas; and, add clarity, correct date errors, and make other non - substantive text revisions. [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] [Coordinator: David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager] 10-Is" 10. OLD BUSINESS n 11. NEW BUSINESS 12. PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM 13. DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA 14. ADJOURN 1/10/2011 CCPC Agenda/Ray Bellows /jmp Agenda Item 9A STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION DATE: JANUARY 06, 2011 UPDATED FOR JANUARY 20, 2011 CONSIDERATION RE: PETITION No. CP- 2006 -11, GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] AGENT /APPLICANT /OWNERS: Agent: Dwight H. Nadeau for Emilio Robau, PE RWA Consultants, Inc. 6610 Willow Park Drive, Suite 200 Naples, FL 34109 Attorney: Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. Goodlette, Yovanovich & Koester, RA 4001 North Tamiami Trail, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 Applicant: David Torres for Hacienda Lakes of Naples, LLC 12600 Biscayne Court Naples, FL 34105 Owners: GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: Wilton Land Company, LLC 206 Dudley Road Wilton, CT 06897 Swamp Buggy Days, Inc. PO Box 990010 Naples, FL 34116 Collier County Junior Deputy League, Inc. PO Box 1833 Naples, FL 34106 CP- 2006 -11 pertains to a particular subject property, consisting of approximately 2,262 acres located east of Collier Boulevard (CR 951), with frontages on Collier Boulevard and Rattlesnake Hammock Road Extension (a.k.a., entrance to Swamp Buggy Days PUD's Florida Sports Park), in Sections 11, 12, 13, 14, 23, 24, and 25, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, and Sections 19 and 30, Township 50 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. The property lies within the Royal Fakapalm Planning Community. -1- Agenda Item 9A REQUESTED ACTION: This petition seeks to amend the Conservation and Coastal Management Element, Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series of the Growth Management Plan, to Reconfigure the boundary and Increase the size of the Southeast Quadrant of Mixed Use Activity Center No. 7 (Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard); Increase the maximum allowable density that may be achieved within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict (URF) portion of a Project lying in more than one Future Land Use designation through enhanced utilization of eligible Transferable Development Rights (TDRs); Provide a definitive access provision for a Business Park located in the URF portion of a Project; and, Allow for Native Vegetation Preservation in the URF portion of a Project to be Shifted to the RFMUD Sending Lands portion of the Project when the Required Amount of Native Vegetation Preservation is proportionally increased in the Sending Lands portion of the Project — as they relate to the proposed Hacienda Lakes Development of Regional Impact (DRI) and Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) Requests [Transmittal Hearing] This set of Growth Management Plan amendments is proposed in six parts, as shown in ATTACHMENT HL -1. PURPOSE / DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: This petition seeks to amend the FLUE Mixed Use Activity Center No. 7 (Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard) Map of the FLUE Map Series — along with correlating text changes — to re- designate acreage from the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict of the Urban Mixed Use District, to the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict of the Urban Commercial District. That portion of MUAC No. 7 lying within the Hacienda Lakes development area would increase by 9.16 acres via a Subdistrict - to- Subdistrict redesignation. • Without adoption of this pan` of the GMPA, the Hacienda Lakes of Naples project is currently able to develop 27.5 acres of MUAC No. 7. With the adoption of the GMPA, the Hacienda Lakes of Naples project would be able to develop MUAC acreage of 36.6. The specific revisions proposed by this part of the GMP amendment appear as Part Four in Attachment HL -1. PROVISION EXISTING PROPOSED Acreage Allowed for Southeast Quadrant of MUAC No. 7 27.5 acres 36.6 acres This petition seeks to amend Business Park Subdistrict provisions under the FLUE Urban Mixed Use District to provide a definitive access provision for a business park proposed to be located in the Urban Residential Fringe portion of the proposed Hacienda Lakes development. Such amendment would serve to validate the usefulness of The Lord's Way as access to a business park that may develop on the north side of this thoroughfare. • Without adoption of this pan` of the GMPA, the Hacienda Lakes of Naples project is currently unable to develop a business park situated adjacent to a street providing next -to- immediate egress to and ingress from both Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and the future Benfield Road. The specific revisions proposed by this part of the GMP amendment appear as Part Five in Attachment !� HL -1. -2- Agenda Item 9A PROVISION EXISTING PROPOSED Direct Access for Business Park onto Arterial Roadway The Lord's Way does not provide such access by FLUE provisions The Lord's Way would provide such access with new provision This petition seeks to amend Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict provisions under the FLUE Urban Mixed Use District by introducing a different higher achievable density exclusive to the proposed Hacienda Lakes development. Overall, maximum density increases from 1.5 dwelling units per acre to 2.5 per acre are allowed when development rights are transferred from RFMU Sending Lands within a project under unified control. Maximum achievable density would further "lift ", or increase, from 2.5 dwelling units per acre to 2.8 with this part of the proposed text amendment. Companion PUD application materials summarize that without adoption of the GMPA, the Hacienda Lakes of Naples project is currently able to develop 1,662 dwelling units using all eligible TDRs and other available density. With the adoption of this part of the GMPA, the Hacienda Lakes of Naples project would be able to develop up to 1,850 dwelling units using newly transferable TDRs — for a 187 unit gain — and make use of all available TDRs generated by the 1,016 acres lying within one mile of the Urban portion of the project. The applicant further explains, the project area is unique in that the land area within one mile of the URF boundary, from which TDRs must be generated from for sending into the URF, generates187 more TDR credits than the URF is capable of receiving under current FLUE provisions; and, that the "lift" will have no measurable impact on the URF's "transitional" nature, nor will it affect its surrounding lands. The applicant explains further that by allowing the use of these additional TDRs within the developable portion of this project, the property owner is actually compensated for losing development rights instead of hoping they will be compensated in the future; and, that this is a more effective utilization of those eligible TDRs. The specific revisions proposed by this part of the GMP amendment appear as Part One in Attachment HL-1. PROVISION EXISTING PROPOSED Maximum Residential Density 2.5 DU /acre 2.8 DU /acre (utilizing TDRs) - eligible to receive in URF - eligible to receive in URF with receiving "lift" The 06 -11 application seeks to amend Native Vegetation Preservation provisions of the Density Rating System, Density Blending section under the FLUE Urban Designation to preserve less native vegetation than is otherwise required in the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict portion of the project if more native vegetation is preserved in adjacent RFMUD Sending Lands. This arrangement would preserve two (2) acres of vegetation in areas designated as RFMUD Sending Lands [above the 60% maximum preservation requirement] for every one (1) acre cleared in the Urban Residential Fringe. This text change, if approved, would affect lands designated in both the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict and RFMUD Sending Lands developed as projects under unified control. • Without adoption of the GMPA, the Hacienda Lakes of Naples project would preserve 25% of native vegetation in the URF, and 60% of native vegetation in RFMUD Sending Lands. With the adoption of this part of the GMPA, the Hacienda Lakes of Naples project would preserve -3- Agenda Item 9A less than the required amount of native vegetation and habitat in the URF, and proportionally more of RFMUD Sending Lands acreage. /o,� Under current GMP provisions, the Rural designated portion of the project would demonstrate compliance with the preservation standard of Rural Fringe Sending Lands — preserving ninety percent (90 %) of native vegetation present, not to exceed sixty percent (60 %) of the total project area designated Sending. However, more preserve is offered than the required 60% of the total project area designated Sending — in return for permission to preserve less native vegetation present in the Urban portion of the project. The applicant explains, the proposal to protect higher quality native vegetative communities in the Rural lands portion of the project [provides these vegetative communities] a greater opportunity to function naturally as opposed to protecting Urban native vegetative areas that would be of lesser functional value. Application materials have previously explained how "the density blending provision in the GMP was, in part, specifically developed to apply to this property". One specific blending provision presently provides the density boost from 1.5 du /ac. to 2.5 du /ac. The current provisions were adopted by the County with density capped, or limited, to 2.5 du /ac. to satisfy the need for an acceptable transition balanced between the dense Urban and sparse Rural areas. The specific revisions proposed by this part of the GMP amendment appear as Part Two in Attachment HL-1. PROVISION EXISTING PROPOSED Native Vegetation/ Habitat 25% NV in Urban portion Under 25% NV — Urban portion Retention / Preservation 60% NV in Rural portion 100% NV — Undeveloped Rural FLUE - Required Preservation Area portion - Preservation Area with within 1 mile of URF boundary "shift" This petition seeks to amend Transfer of Development Rights Bonus provisions of the Density Rating System, Density Bonuses section under the FLUE Urban Designation. This part of the proposed amendment would `lift' the maximum density increase [of 1.0 DU /ac.] achieved by transferring development rights from adjacent RFMUD Sending Lands by a greater amount [of 1.3 DU /ac.]. The applicant explains, the proposal [does not ask to increase] the overall number of units presently allowed, [but to] utilize the additional TDR credits generated from [the] project Sending Lands within one mile of the Urban Boundary. The specific revisions proposed by this part of the GMP amendment appear as Part Three in Attachment HL -1. PROVISION EXISTING PROPOSED Maximum Use of TDRs 1.0 DU/TDR per acre 1.3 DUs/TDRs per acre - eligible to transfer into URF from - eligible to transfer into URF from Sending Lands Sending Lands within 1 mile of URF boundary within 1 mile of URF boundary, with "lift" -4- 10�\ Agenda Item 9A Lastly, the 06 -11 application seeks to amend Native Vegetation Preservation provisions under the CCME to preserve more native vegetation than is otherwise required in RFMUD Sending Lands and ^ preserve less native vegetation than is otherwise required in adjacent lands designated Urban. • The applicant explains there is greater value in preservation of additional Rural Lands rather than the lands within the Urban Fringe. The specific revisions proposed by this part of the GMP amendment appear as Part Six in Attachment HL -1. PROVISION EXISTING PROPOSED Native Vegetation/ Habitat 25% NV in Urban portion 25 %— X = Urban NV Retention / Preservation 60% NV in Rural portion 60% + 2X =Rural NV CCME - Preserved - Preserved with "shift" SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING LAND USE ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Subject Site: The subject site is in part, zoned A, Rural Agricultural [approximately 2,133 acres] and lies undeveloped within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use (RFMU) Sending Lands [zoning] Overlay. Another 129 acres is zoned Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) for, and developed with, the Swamp Buggy Days' Florida Sports Park. A portion of this CPUD acreage is used for the Collier County Junior Deputy League's Camp Discovery. The land uses that are expressly allowed by Ordinance No. 84 -26 for the Swamp Buggy Days "PUD for Recreation and Sports Park" are: • Swamp Buggy Race Track and related facilities. • Stock Car Race Track and related facilities. • Motocross Race Track and related facilities (including bicycle and motorcycle). • Target Ranges, including archery. • Fairgrounds Area for expositions similar to the County Fair, including circuses, carnivals, and other recreation /entertainment activities. • Multi- purpose Use Areas (Picnic, Sports Fields, Unpaved Parking, etc.) including picnicking and playground areas; amateur soccer, softball, and similar outdoor recreational sports and activities; stadium, training and practice facilities for professional baseball. • Onsite Roadways. • Related Structures to house offices (including administrative offices and supportive service facilities as Permitted Principal Uses and Structures), ticketing (including concessions, ticketing, bleachers, and other spectator - related facilities as Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures), exhibition activities (including exhibition hall/convention center), spectator and user conveniences and facilities management. The Future Land Use Map designates [approximately 1,637 acres] of the subject site as Rural Fringe Mixed Use District ( RFMUD) Sending Lands, Belle Meade Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA) Overlay. -5- Agenda Item 9A The present RFMUD Sending Lands designation currently allows: participation in the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program; agricultural uses consistent with the Florida Right to Farm Act; habitat preservation and conservation; single - family residences at a 1 dwelling unit per 40 acres or legally nonconforming parcel density; non - residential uses (e.g. passive recreation, essential services, sports and recreation camps, oil and gas exploration, development and production); and limited accessory commercial uses. Another [approximately 588 acre] portion of the subject site is designated as the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict. The land uses that are generally allowed by the Urban Residential Fringe (URF) Subdistrict designation include a variety of residential and non - residential land uses, including mixed -use development via PUDs. Residential development in the URF is typified by a "transitional" density between the County's Urban designated area and the Agricultural /Rural area of a maximum of up to 1.5 units per gross acre, or up to 2.5 units per gross acre via the transfer of one dwelling unit per acre from lands designated Rural Fringe Mixed Use District ( RFMUD) Sending Lands. Certain industrial and commercial uses may also be allowed, including: • Essential services; • Parks, open space and recreational uses; • Water - dependent and water - related uses; • Child care centers; • Community facilities, and their co- location with other public facilities; • Safety service facilities; • Utility and communication facilities; • Earth mining, oil extraction, and related processing; • Agriculture; • Travel trailer and recreational vehicle (TTRV) parks; • Commercial uses per criteria identified for certain Subdistricts or other FLUE policies, including hotels and motels; • Certain accessory commercial uses; • Industrial uses per criteria identified for certain Districts, Subdistricts or other FLUE policies; • Business Park uses per criteria identified for certain Districts and Subdistricts; and, • Research and Technology Park uses per criteria identified for certain Districts and Subdistricts. An approximately 37 acre area is designated as the southeast quadrant of Mixed Use Activity Center No. 7 (Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard) within the Urban Commercial District. The land uses that are generally allowed by the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict designation include concentrations of commercial uses in mixed -use settings, designed and developed at a human - scale, pedestrian- oriented and interconnected with abutting properties, and allowing: • Commercial uses; • Residential uses; • Institutional uses; • Hotel and motel uses at a maximum density of up to 26 units per acre; and, • Community facilities, Residential density in MUAC No. 7 mixed -use developments is the same as that allowed by the Urban Residential Fringe (URF) Subdistrict — a maximum of up to 1.5 units per gross acre, or up to 2.5 units per gross acre via the transfer of one dwelling unit per acre from RFMUD Sending Lands. If density is to be distributed outside the Activity Center boundary, then certain stipulations apply, as follows: Agenda Item 9A ■ Thirty percent (30 %) of Activity Center - accumulated density must be located within the Activity Center [in this instance, it is 37 southeast quadrant acres applied to the 1.5 units per gross acre (for 55.5 units'Activity Center - accumulated density); or, 37 acres applied to the 2.5 units per gross acre via the transfer of one dwelling unit per acre from RFMUD Sending Lands (for 92.5 units' Activity Center - accumulated density).] This allocation works out to 17 residential units located within the Activity Center of 55 accumulated (with the 1.5 factor) or, 28 residential units located within the Activity Center of 92 accumulated (with the 2.5 factor). With regard to the subject property's proximity to the Physicians Regional Medical Center — Collier Boulevard facility, certain GMP and LDC provisions allow for additional special land uses that include: ■ Support medical facilities, such as physicians' offices, medical clinics, medical treatment, research and rehabilitative centers, and pharmacies located within one - quarter mile of the medical center. Surrounding Lands: The 2,262 acre subject site is an unusually- shaped area, appearing somewhat like the State of Louisiana with irregular edges. Describing its surrounding lands may be best accomplished with a virtual walk - around. Beginning our description with land lying adjacently to the north, or at the 12 o'clock position, is the Willow Run commercial extraction operation (including quarry excavation lakes, concrete plant and asphalt plant activities) zoned A, Rural Agricultural district with a Provisional Use (PU); Red Cockaded Woodpecker (RCW) mitigation area. The current Future Land Use designation is predominantly Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict (URF), along with areas of Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) Sending Lands, Belle Meade Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA) Overlay. Further north lies the San Marino RPUD. Located generally north, northeast, at the 1 o'clock position, are rural residential uses and equestrian facilities in the area where Benfield Road, Barton Gilba Drive and Stable Way have their terminal ends. This area is zoned A, Rural Agricultural. The current Future Land Use Designation is Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) Sending Lands, Belle Meade Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA) Overlay. Located generally northeast and east, at the 2 and 3 o'clock positions, is undeveloped land zoned A, Rural Agricultural. The current Future Land Use Designation is Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) Sending Lands, Belle Meade Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA) Overlay. Further east lie Picayune Strand State Forest lands. Located generally southeast, at the 4 o'clock position, is a citrus growing operation, with on -site sales facilities on Sabal Palm Road, zoned A, Rural Agricultural district with a Conditional Use (CU). The subject property surrounds some lands in this area; these properties include State of Florida owned lands and a few privately owned parcels. Located generally south, southeast, at the 5 o'clock position, are undeveloped lands, zoned A, Rural Agricultural. The current Future Land Use Designation is Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) Sending Lands, Belle Meade Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA) Overlay. Located generally south, along a lengthy meandering southerly border, are multiple designations. North of Sabal Palm Road, at the 6 o'clock position, is an area of low- density residential development, zoned A, Rural Agricultural. The current Future Land Use Designation is Rural Fringe -7- Agenda Item 9A Mixed Use District (RFMUD) Sending Lands, Belle Meade Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA) Overlay. Located across Sabal Palm Road, south, at the 6 o'clock position, and south, southwest, at the 7 o'clock position, is the Veronawalk Mixed -Use Planned Unit Development, zoned as part of the Winding Cypress DRI. The current Future Land Use Designation is Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict (URF). Located generally southwest, at the 8 o'clock position, is an area of multi - family residential development zoned as the Rockedge RPUD; FPL Easement; and, the main N -S canal abutting CR 951. North of John's Road is the "Kountree Kampin° RV Resort, zoned Travel Trailer and Recreational Vehicle Campground (TTRVC); and, the Physicians Regional Medical Center, zoned PUD. The current Future Land Use Designation is Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict (URF). Across Collier Boulevard (CR 951) near its intersection with Rattlesnake Hammock Road, is an area of partially developed land zoned Siena Meadows PUD containing an office building and Edison Village PUD. The current Future Land Use Designation is Urban Mixed Use District and SW quadrant of the Mixed Use Activity Center No. 7 (Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard). Located generally west, at the 9 o'clock position, north of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and east of CR 951, is an area of undeveloped land zoned for the Hammock Park Commerce Center CPUD, the McMullen MPUD, the Good Turn Center MPUD and other CR 951- fronting parcels zoned for C -3 through C -5 commercial uses, and tracts zoned A, Rural agricultural; and, FPL Easement. The current Future Land Use Designations are Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict (URF) and NE quadrant of the Mixed Use Activity Center No. 7 (Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard); and, the main N -S canal abutting CR 951. Across Collier Boulevard (CR 951), is the Naples Lakes Village Center commercial development, part of Naples Lakes Country Club MPUD. The current Future Land Use Designations are Urban Mixed Use District and NW quadrant of the Mixed Use Activity Center No. 7 (Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard). Located generally northwest, at the 10 o'clock position, is a place of worship with community services, zoned First Assembly Ministries Education and Rehabilitation Campus MPUD. Across Collier Boulevard (CR 951) near its intersection with The Lord's Way, is the [Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project] LASIP Conservation Area PUD; further north lie the Homes of Islandia and Naples National Golf Club PUDs. The current Future Land Use Designation is Urban Mixed Use District Located generally north, northwest, at the 11 o'clock position, is undeveloped land fronting CR 951 zoned A, Rural Agricultural, as part of the commercial extraction operation lying to the north. The current Future Land Use Designation is Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict (URF). STAFF ANALYSIS: Appropriateness of Changes: The practicalities of the petitioner's proposed amendments are established, in part, through an evaluation of relevant and appropriate data for population growth, commercial inventory, infrastructure development and other considerations in the surrounding geographic area. Certain amendments introduce new provisions allowing for the use of TDRs in manners exclusive to n the subject property. Residential development is currently planned and limited to certain transitional -8- Agenda Item 9A densities, achievable with TDRs transferred into the Urban Fringe. The appropriateness of changing the FLUE and CCME for allowing additional TDRS to be used for residential development is addressed herein. Other amendments introduce an additional amount of commercial and office development, uses and activities to an expanded Mixed Use Activity Center on the subject property. Commercial development is currently planned and limited to certain acreages and floor areas based on the allocation and spatial arrangement of Activity Centers throughout the planning area. The appropriateness of expanding the site for additional commercial and office development is addressed herein. Certain amendments offer to preserve native vegetation and habitat in Sending Lands in a proportional substitution for preserving less native vegetation and habitat in the Urban portion of the project. Preservation of these Sending Lands is a requirement under other provisions of the GMP from which TDR program benefits are derived. The appropriateness of changing the FLUE and CCME to derive dual benefits from preserving a portion of the same land area is addressed herein. Still other amendments introduce new provisions allowing another means of vehicular access to a Business Park proposed at a certain location inside the project. The appropriateness of allowing The Lord's Way for both residential and nonresidential traffic is addressed herein. The compatibility of a Business Park with its surrounding land uses is an issue addressed in consideration of the companion Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) request. Commercial Development: The Mixed Use Activity Center concept is designed to concentrate almost all new commercial zoning in locations where traffic impacts can readily be accommodated, to avoid strip and disorganized patterns of commercial development, and to create focal points within the community. A trend toward commercial development is evident in the area adjacent to the Mixed Use Activity Center proposed by CP- 2006 -11 for expansion. This development is evidenced within the original MUAC No. 7 and in areas where the MUAC has previously expanded. Mixed Use Activity Center No. 7's nearest activity center neighbors are MUAC No. 9 (1 -75 and Collier Boulevard and Davis Boulevard) located approximately 3.1 miles directly north on CR951 [as an Interchange Activity Center], and MUAC No. 18 (US 41 and Collier Boulevard) located approximately 3.4 miles directly south on CR951. MUAC No. 6 (Davis Boulevard and Santa Barbara Boulevard) lies northwest, separated from MUAC No. 7 by approximately four (4) road miles. Mixed Use Activity Center No. 7's nearest non - activity center, non - residential neighbor is the Collier Regional Medical Center facilities located immediately south — both inside and outside the MUAC boundaries. The next nearest non - residential neighbor is the College Park office complex located approximately 0.9 miles directly west on Rattlesnake Hammock Road. Generally, Mixed Use Activity Center No. 7 has no competing general commercial land uses closer than 3.1 miles. The need for an additional 9.16 acres of commercially developable land via a MUAC expansion is evaluated within a "Study Area" described in the Market and Needs Evaluation submitted with this petition [extending two and one -half (2.5) radial miles from the center point of Mixed Use Activity Center No. 7], including the following approved projects: I0 Agenda Item 9A Located within Mixed Use Activity Center No. 7 are a number of Planned Unit Developments and commercially zoned properties, as follows: ❖ North of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and east of CR 951 — the Northeast Quadrant — is an approximately 64.5 acre (gross) area of undeveloped land zoned for the Hammock Park Commerce Center CPUD, the McMullen MPUD, the Good Turn Center MPUD and other CR 951 - fronting parcels zoned for C -3 through C -5 commercial uses. This quadrant has more than 445,000 developable sq. ft. on 56.5 acres (net) available for Mixed Use Activity Center Uses. ❖ North of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and west of CR 951 — the Northwest Quadrant — is an approximately 39.9 acre (gross) area of land zoned, and part of, Naples Lakes Country Club MPUD developed with the Naples Lakes Village [shopping] Center. This quadrant has approximately 75,865 sq. ft. developed of 260,000 developable sq. ft. on 15.3 acres (net) available for Mixed Use Activity Center Uses. ❖ South of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and west of CR 951 — the Southwest Quadrant — is an approximately 38.9 acre (gross) area of land zoned Sierra Meadows PUD, a commercial node adjacent to Lely Resort project. This quadrant has approximately 3,900 sq. ft. developed on 30.1 acres (net) available for Mixed Use Activity Center Uses. ❖ South of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and east of CR 951 — the Southeast Quadrant — is an approximately 41.4 acre (gross) area of land zoned and developed as the Collier Regional Medical Center. Undeveloped land and the commercial component of the Hacienda Lakes of Naples project proposed for expansion also comprise this quadrant. This quadrant has approximately 35.0 acres (net) available for Mixed Use Activity Center Uses. n South of the Southwest Quadrant of MUAC No. 7, fronting CR 951 — is an approximately 5.7 acre area of land zoned and developed as the Edison Village PUD. The (7,100 sq. ft.) 21" Century Oncology and (6,700 sq. ft.) Anchor Health Urgent Care professional and medical facilities are located here. The above - listed sites are located within the project's Study Area, and currently provide approximately 93,520 sq. ft. of commercial use opportunities. Source: March, 2008 Planned Unit Development (PUD)117asterlist (prepared and maintained by the Collier County Tranportation Planning Section) and the Collier County Interactive Growth Model (CTGM). Residential Demand Analysis: An assessment of the area establishes that residential land uses may be allowed at a maximum density of 1.5 units per gross acre, or up to 2.5 units per gross acre via the transfer of up to one dwelling unit per acre from lands designated as Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending Lands, with the exception of a site specific property comprising 55 acres located within the Urban Residential Fringe to include a density bonus of up to 6.0 additional units per gross acre for affordable home ownership for low and moderate income residents. A further assessment of approved developments within this area revealed that the developments included large amounts of environmentally sensitive lands. As a result, the residential components of these developments have been concentrated on smaller tracts of land within the development resulting in net densities greater than the maximum allowable gross density of 1.5 du /ac. The following PUD's are examples of this type of development: -10- Agenda Item 9A 1. Forest Glen of Naples is a 614 -acre PUD approved for 1.26 units per acre or 799 dwelling units. Due to environmentally sensitive land within the project, the 799 residential units are concentrated within Tract "R° of the development comprising 170 acres that equate to 4.7 units per acre net density. [Section 2, Township 50 South, Range 26 East.] 2. San Marino is a 235 -acre PUD approved for 1.5 units per acre or 352 dwelling units. However, the total 352 dwelling units are to be constructed on a 21 acre site within the PUD equating to a net residential density of 16.77 dwelling units per acre. [Section 11, Township 50 South, Range 26 East.] 3. Winding Cypress is a 1,928 -acre PUD approved for 1.2 units per acre or 2,300 dwelling units for the overall development. The residential component of this PUD will comprise 2,300 dwelling units being developed on 448 acres equating to 5.14 dwelling units per acre net. [Sections 24, 34, & 35, Township 50 South, Range 26 East.] The Hacienda Lakes of Naples project is being proposed as a 2,262 acre DR[/PUD planned for 0.78 units per acre or 1,760 dwelling units. However, the 1,760 units are to be constructed on approximately 652 acres equating to 2.8 units per acre net density. In addition to these examples of developments with higher net densities, certain projects are approved in the Urban Residential Fringe that allow greater intensities than the typical 1.5 du /ac. scenario. 1. First Assembly Ministries Education & Rehabilitation Campus is a 79.1 -acre PUD. First Assembly is approved for a mixture of land uses for religious, community social services and residential uses in a campus -type setting, including: 1800 seat auditorium, 600 seat chapel, 300 student school, 450 child /adult care facility, 400 bed care unit facility, 120 travel trailer or park model lots, adult living facility for 400 group housing units, and 57 multi- family units along with numerous inside and outside recreational facilities and accessory uses. [Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East.] 2. The Swamp Buggy Days' Florida Sports Park is a 129 -acre PUD. The Swamp Buggy PUD is approved for intense outdoor sports and recreational activities, including swamp buggy races and a gun shooting range [on portion of subject property]. 3. Growth Management Plan Amendment CP- 2002 -1 was approved (site of the McMullen PUD) to expand the northeast quadrant of Mixed Use Activity Center No. 7. The area added comprises approximately 18.5 acres and is immediately contiguous to the eastern limit of the original activity center boundary. The approved uses are limited to: "personal indoor self - storage facilities offices for various contractor /builder construction trade specialists inclusive of the offices of related professional disciplines and services, warehouse space for various contractor /builder construction trade occupants and related businesses including but not limited to lumber and other building materials dealers, paint, glass, and wallpaper stores, garden supply stores as accessory uses only." [Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East.] 4. The Urban Designation allows for support medical facilities (such as physicians' offices, medical clinics, treatment, research and rehabilitative centers, and pharmacies provided the dominate use is medically related) to locate within '/4 mile of existing or approved hospitals or medical centers which offer primary and urgent care treatment for all types of injuries and traumas. Accordingly, the surrounding lands within one - quarter mile of a hospital can potentially be zoned and developed with support medical uses [affecting a portion of subject property]. -11- Agenda Item 9A 5. Rezone application PUDZ- 2003 -AR -4674 was approved in May 2004 to permit up to 260,000 square feet of hospital and related uses. Pursuant to the aforementioned provision, the site was also approved for 80,000 square feet of medical office and related uses. The entire property is known as the Collier Regional Medical Center. This property is located on the east side of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) adjacently south of Mixed Use Activity Center No. 7. [Section 23, Township 50 South, Range 26 East.] Comprehensive Plan Amendment — Statutory Data and Analysis Requirement Chapter 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code, "Minimum Criteria for Review of Local Government Comprehensive Plans and Plan Amendments, Evaluation and Appraisal Reports, Land Development Regulations and Determinations of Compliance" sets forth the minimum data and analysis requirement for comprehensive plan amendments. More specifically, Section 9J -5.005 "General Requirements" delineates criteria for plan: amendments in sub - section 9J -5.005 (2) "Data and Analysis Requirements." Sub - section 9J- 5.005(2) states in part that "All goals, objectives, standards, findings and conclusions within the comprehensive plan and its support documents, and within plan amendments and its support documents, shall be based upon relevant and appropriate data and analysis applicable to each element. To be based upon data means to react to it in an appropriate way and to the extent necessary indicated by the data available on that particular subject at the time of adoption of the plan or plan amendment at issue... the Department will review each comprehensive plan [amendment] for the purpose of determining whether the plan [amendment] is based on data and analyses described in this Chapter and whether data were collected and applied in a professionally acceptable manner." It is incumbent upon all applicants requesting comprehensive plan amendments to provide supporting data and analyses in conjunction with any relevant support documents. It is not the responsibility of Collier County staff to generate data and analysis for the applicant, rather it is staff's responsibility to review and analyze the petitioner's data and analysis for accuracy, applicability, professional acceptability, sound methodology, etc. Any outstanding deficiencies or other issues with respect to data and analyses that may remain at the time of any requisite public hearing are the responsibility of the applicant. An evaluation of the adequacy of the data and analysis for the subject plan amendment is set forth herein. In preparation for Growth Management Plan amendment petitions, Collier County was provided the October 2009 Florida Senate Interim Report 2010 -107 entitled "POPULATION NEED AS A CRITERIA FOR CHANGES TO A LOCAL GOVERNMENT'S FUTURE LAND USE MAP." In addition to the Interim Report, a draft rule to amend the Florida Administrative Code was provided. The Interim Report identified a primary issue of a "Needs Assessment" in determining whether a comprehensive plan amendment as submitted by a local government provides more land than is needed to accommodate anticipated population growth. Population growth is utilized in the context of projected population during the S and JO year planning time horizons -12- Agenda Item 9A The genesis for the Interim Report was a land use decision in Marion County where the Governor and Cabinet upheld a decision of an administrative law judge (AU) that a ^ proposed comprehensive plan amendment would, if adopted, allow more than five times the residential units needed in Marion County's 10 year planning horizon. The finding of the AU was that the applicant's methodology was not professionally acceptable because it did not demonstrate the need within the adopted planning time horizon. The Report identified several proposed comprehensive plan amendments that were found not in compliance based upon needs criteria, that is, because need was not demonstrated by the applicant. However, the Report also identifies some instances where comprehensive plan amendments were found in compliance despite failing to meet the needs assessment criteria; more about this later in this summary. One amendment highlighted in the Report not meeting the needs assessment involved the re- designation of land for industrial development in Putnam County; another such amendment was for the creation of the Clear Springs Sector Plan that re- designated 17,000+ acres to allow uses that included over 11,000 dwelling units, 6.8 million square feet of Research /Corporate Park /Commercial, and 21.8 million square feet of Industrial uses. The needs analysis is a useful planning tool to ascertain whether a proposed plan amendment will result in a local government's over - allocation of land in a specific land use category. One of the biggest problems identified with the over - allocation of certain land uses is urban sprawl, which causes increased infrastructure costs, a depleted urban core, and the premature development of agricultural lands and natural areas. The needs analysis explained in the Interim Report includes a market factor, planning time horizon, and population projections. As previously noted, the planning horizon for Collier County is presently out to 10 years (2020). The County utilizes medium range population projections as provided annually by the University of Florida's Bureau of Economic and Business Research. The market factor is a numerical tool used to determine the amount of land use supply needed to accommodate anticipated growth. The Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) uses a market factor of 1.25, or 25 percent greater than the anticipated need of land use supply necessary for the population projected in the [10 year] planning time horizon. The additional 25% is designed to allow for market flexibility. Market factor is calculated by dividing the supply of land use by the demand for that land use. The supply could be dwelling unit capacity (all built units plus all units allowed based on existing zoning and future land use designation), commercial capacity (all built commercial square feet plus all commercial square feet allowed based on existing zoning and future land use designation [land converted to building square feet]), or industrial capacity (all built industrial square feet plus all industrial square feet allowed based on existing zoning and future land use designation [land converted to building square feet]). The demand could be dwelling unit demand, commercial square feet demand, or industrial square feet demand — all based upon population projections within the 10 -year planning horizon. -13- Agenda Item 9A Below are fictitious examples of commercial market factors for three different GMP amendments within three different geographic areas, all at the 10 -year planning horizon: 1) supply of 1.25 million SF /demand for 1 million SF = market factor of 1.25 (supply = 125% of demand) 2) supply of 950,000 SF /demand for 800,000 SF = market factor of 1.19 (supply = 119% of demand) 3) supply of 1.5 million SF /demand for 1 million SF = market factor of 1.50 (supply = 150% of demand) In the above examples, based on market factor considerations only, there is a demonstrated need for the first two amendments as the market factor is at or below 1.25, but there is no demonstrated need for the third amendment as the market factor exceeds the recommended 1.25. The Interim Report also notes that the numerical needs assessment (market factor), while a significant factor in determining need, is not the only consideration. Case law indicates commercial or industrial land use need may also be demonstrated by other factors such as suitability of the property for change, locational criteria, and community desires. In the Report's Findings and/or Conclusions section, it states: The needs assessment is a fundamental part of land use planning. Specifically, the numerical needs assessment is a useful tool to determine whether the amendment will cause an area to become over - allocated or exacerbate existing over - allocation. It is also a key indicator of urban sprawl. However, the numerical needs assessment is only one factor to consider when conducting a needs assessment. It is also important to consider other policy factors such as job creation potential, urban infill, form of development, or the promotion of development in areas where it is most efficient for the local government to promote growth." When the numerical needs assessment exceeds the L25 market factor, the above additional factors should be addressed, with specificity, in the proposed GMP amendment petition as part of the data and analysis. The local government can then consider whether the overall needs assessment for a certain land use supersedes the numerical needs assessment and, if so, would need to cite with specificity the polity factors that were relied upon in making that determination. During the Transmittal stage, DCA would make a determination in its Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report as to whether the policy factors articulated provide the rational nexus to exceed the 1.25 market factor; during the Adoption stage, DCA would do that as part of its determination of compliance with state law. As a point of emphasis, the provisions of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, and Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code require that appropriate data and analysis be provided to demonstrate an allocation of additional commercial acreage is needed. Commercial Demand Analysis: The firm of Real Estate Research Consultants, Inc. conducted the Market and Needs Evaluation, which analyzed market conditions within the South Naples and Royal Fakapalm Planning Communities. This analysis provided an overall context for assessing the basic goods and services -14- Agenda Item 9A requirements of the emerging population within the County's easternmost urban area and exurban fringe. The residential figures utilized in the study are as follows: Growth in the eastern fringe of urban Collier County is projected to increase the population of the Planning Communities during the period 2010 to 2030. This area is projected to grow 36.5 percent from 12,447 persons in 2010, to 15,409 persons in 2015, to 17,000 persons in 2030 — an increase of approximately 4,550 persons, according to June, 2010 estimates provided by the County's Comprehensive Planning Section. [An ambitious development schedule indicates about 4,000 of these 4,550 persons will have the opportunity to reside in the Hacienda Lakes of Naples project by 2020.] It is questionable whether there will be 4,000 persons in this development, even at buildout, based on the persons per household, and occupancy /vacancy rates from the 2000 Census. The Research Consultants' Evaluation has faults, particularly in its attempt to dismiss the relevance of, or contribution from, existing and potential commercial lands within the same market area, claiming "[w]e see only a limited relevance for competing lands in the context of this analysis" and "other lands that might also be available to accommodate opportunities generated by the population of Hacienda Lakes are of no material importance in evaluating development options". Comprehensive Planning staff respectfully disagrees with these assertions — which effectually separate the Evaluation further from its geographical setting and market realities — and considers characteristics of the surrounding market area to be wholly relevant and appropriate. To the extent that the analysis provided by the Evaluation is made insubstantial by these claims, the data provided has been useful in staffs evaluation of this part of the proposed GMP amendment, especially for extrapolating a more - accurate analysis. Collier Interactive Growth Model The East of County Road 951 Infrastructure and Services Horizon Study was a two phase planning effort to assess the County's ability to accommodate growth within the County east of Collier Boulevard (CR 951). Included in the second phase of the study was the development of a Collier County Interactive Growth Model (CIGM). The Board adopted the CIGM as a planning tool at its advertised public hearing in February 2009. This model was developed to assist in projecting population and its spatial distribution over time to build -out in all areas lying east of CR 951. The interactive growth model is also utilized to approximate the timing and location of commercial and industrial centers, school facilities, parks and recreational facilities, fire stations, etc. The commercial sub -model is designed to project the demand for neighborhood, community and regional centers that include retail and other commercial uses. This sub -model helps to spatially allocate the optimal locations for these commercial centers required as functions of time and population, and as a result of disposable incomes of the population. The CIGM could not be fully utilized in evaluating the Hacienda Lakes of Naples project proposal, as approximately one -half of the area studied lies west of Collier Boulevard (CR 951). Guidelines for Commercial Development used in the CIGM remain relevant, however, as bases for further computations, as categorized below: • Number of Persons per Neighborhood Center: 13,110 • Number of Persons per Community Center: 34,464 • Number of Persons per Regional Center: 157,324 -15- Agenda Item 9A • Number of Acres per Neighborhood Center: 11 • Number of Acres per Community Center: 28 • Number of Acres per Regional Center: 100 • Square Feet Building Area per Neighborhood Center. 110,734 (8.45 sq. ft. per Capita) • Square Feet Building Area per Community Center. 257,668 (7.48 sq. ft. per Capita) • Square Feet Building Area per Regional Center: 1,000,000 (6.36 sq. ft. per Capita) The above floor area figures are the average sizes of Neighborhood, Community and Regional Centers in existence (built) in Collier County. This means some Centers are larger, and some smaller, than these countywide averages; that is, there is a range in size of each type of Center. Each type of Center is classified based upon size as well as uses. Based on the population thresholds provided by the Real Estate Research Consultants' Market and Needs Evaluation extrapolated by the CIGM Guidelines, staff has developed commercial analysis for petition CP- 2006 -11 as follows (with the referenced map attached and made part of this Staff Report): • Existing and Potential Commercial sq. ft. Within the petition's defined Study Area, there are 93,522 sq. ft. of existing commercial development and 794,440 sq. ft. of potential commercial development (vacant land designated as commercial & vacant land zoned commercial). A total supply of existing and potential commercial space within the Study Area is 887,962 sq. ft. • Population Based on the CIGM, the total population in the Study Area are /will be: 2010 — 14,069 persons; 2015 — 17,416 persons; and, 2030 — 19,204 persons. • Square Footage Demand for a Community Center The total existing /projected population within the Study Area translates into an existing /projected demand for commercial space within the Study Area as follows: 2010 — 14,069 persons yields demand for 105,236 sq. ft.; 2015 - 17,416 persons yields demand for 130,272 sq. ft.; and, 2030 — 19,204 persons yields demand for 143,645 sq. ft. • Square Footage Demand for a Regional Center The total existing /projected population within the Study Area translates into an existing /projected demand for commercial space within the Study Area as follows: 2010 - 14,069 persons yields demand for 89,478 sq. ft.; 2015 - 17,416 persons yields demand for 110,766 sq. ft.; and, 2030 — 19,204 persons in 2030 translate to 122,138 sq. ft. demand for commercial space. Data Sources. The CIGM analysis for this petition utilized (1) the 2007 Commercial Inventory prepared by the Collier County Comprehensive Planning Department, (2) present GAP designations that allow commerzial .Zoning; (3) population projections prepared by the applicant's consultant. There is a minor discrepancy between the GTGA population pr jections and those prepared by the Bureau of Economic and Business Research at the University of Florida (BEBR). Environmental Impacts: The environmental report submitted by Passarella and Associates with a companion petition [as Exhibit "M" in PUDZ materials] was updated in August 2009. This report states that the vegetation surveys and habitat mapping were done in 2003, 2005, 2007 and 2009. The substantive review of -16- Agenda Item 9A this document was done by the Stormwater and Environmental Services Section and a staff report was brought before the Environmental Advisory Council for their review. The environmental report ^ confirms the environmental characteristics of native vegetation and habitat reported at the time the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District was established. Stormwater and Environmental Planning Section — Staff Remarks Stormwater and Environmental Planning Section review staff has reviewed the above referenced amendments to the FLUE and CCME, and their review comments are provided below. Future Land Use Element Density Rating System d. Density Blending Stormwater and Environmental Planning Section staff recommends replacing the word "mitigation" with either "preservation" or "retention" since the requirement in the GMP is a native vegetation retention requirement and not a mitigation requirement. Similarly, replace the words "mitigated for" with the word "shifted" in the same paragraph. The applicant is proposing to be able to shift the native vegetation retention requirement from the Urban designated portion of a project to the portion of a project designated NRPA Sending lands, if the maximum native vegetation retention requirement within the Sending lands portion of the project is met. In keeping with the intent of the GMP to retain as much native vegetation as possible within Sending lands, Stormwater and Environmental Planning Section staff recommends allowing the native vegetation retention requirement to be shifted from the Urban designated portion of a project to the portion of a project designated Sending lands and not just NRPA Sending lands as proposed by the applicant. Proposed changes with regard to archeological sites will not be reviewed by Stormwater and Environmental Planning Section staff, but [from within] the Zoning Services Section. [Stephen Lenberger, Senior Environmental Specialist Stormwater and Environmental Planning Section] Traffic Capacity/Traffic Circulation Analysis: The traffic study submitted by Tindale- Oliver and Associates is dated August 2010. The substantive review of this document was done by the Transportation Planning Section, and their review comments are provided below. Although these comments primarily address aspects of the proposed companion Hacienda Lakes Development of Regional Impact (DRI) and Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) requests, they are included here in supplement, as shown in ATTACHMENT HL -3. Historical and Archaeological Impacts: The historical and archaeological report submitted by the Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Inc. dates to August 2009. This report states that archaeological resources have been identified as present on the 2,262 acre subject property, based on reference to the Collier County Index of Historic/Archaeological Maps, and the sites are identified on County Historical and Archaeological Probability Maps. Application materials illustrate the location and arrangement of these sites on Exhibit "O ". These sites are predominantly hammock formations and are protected as such. They are -17- Agenda Item 9A not located in areas of the subject property where actual development is proposed. Provisions proposed by parts of CP- 2006 -11 require that these sites be preserved and cannot be mitigated for. Public Facilities Impact: The Hacienda Lakes project, if developed as proposed by these amendments, is expected to result in increased impacts upon certain Category A public facilities besides roads (evaluated separately), but these impacts will not be "significant" (generating potential for increased Countywide population greater than 2% of the population projections for Parks and Recreation, Solid Waste Disposal, Potable Water, Wastewater Treatment and Stormwater Management facilities, as defined in Policy 1.2 of the CIE and other applicable GMP Elements). For potable water and wastewater treatment services, the proposed development will demand (as net increases) more than 660,650 gallons per day and 414,250 gallons per day, respectively. Utilizing the level of service standards identified in the CIE, the proposed uses will not result in a significant impact on Category A public facilities. The demand for potable water and wastewater treatment was calculated based on the development of the 1,760 residential units, 375,000 sq. ft. commercial space, 75,000 sq. ft. office space and a 135 room hotel. Absent from the petitioner's impact analysis are other proposed land uses such as a business park with 140,000 sq. ft. use area, specialty residential and medical uses proximate to the Medical Center, and up to two (2) schools. Petition materials indicate the property is located within the Urban Designated area and adjacent Rural Fringe Sending Lands, proximate to more than adequate existing or planned public facilities. The project will not result in a failing LOS of a public facility, except as residential development approaches buildout and inadequate Community Park facilities will be evidenced. It should be noted that the applicant's public facilities impact analysis used residential figures varying persons per household (PPH) numbers of 2.0, 2.05 and 2.5 depending on the specific facility or service analyzed. The County has adopted the PPH figure of 2.39 in this location. However, occupancy /vacancy rates must also be accounted for. The public facilities impact analysis may necessitate re- calculating and adjustments based on this figure, providing different results. 2008 Legislation - HB 697: This legislation, which pertains to energy conservation and efficiency, went into effect on July 1, 2008. Some key phrases in the legislation include: "discouragement of urban sprawl "; "greenhouse gas reduction strategies "; "transportation strategies to address reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector." Among other things, House Bill 697 requires certain amendments to the Growth Management Plan (Future Land Use Element and map, Housing Element, Transportation Element, Conservation and Coastal Management Element) which would be initiated by Collier County. However, in the interim (and perhaps beyond), each GMP amendment petition should include data and analysis to demonstrate how it discourages urban sprawl and reduces greenhouse gas emissions. The Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) reviews GMP amendments for compliance with this legislation. This application has been reviewed for adequacy of data and analysis to demonstrate how the project would discourage or not contribute to urban sprawl, and reduce or not elevate greenhouse gas emissions. -18- Agenda Item 9A Especially because the 06 -11 application predicates a mixed use development of regional impact, the HB 697 response affords an excellent opportunity to include plans for: committing to sustainable, or "green" construction techniques and building designs; establishing commercial recycling programs; providing dedicated parking area(s) to park -n -ride or ride -share vehicles; providing bus stop(s); providing electric vehicle preferred parking and charging stations; committing that service stations dispense more than one alternative fuel; providing pedestrian and bicycle paths interconnecting with neighboring communities, extra bike racks and public seating areas, and community -wide bike share programs; or other energy- conserving ideas. The applicant explains the project will provide opportunities for public schools within the boundaries of the project, and a mix of land uses that provides for a live /work community. Residences will be developed to provide for multiple types of ownership and housing options to serve diverse household incomes. Companion Development of Regional Impact (DRI) application materials address HB 697 energy efficiency measures, and they appear here in part, to reflect developer commitments. • Project preserves some 1,543 acres of land while limiting development footprint to about 700 acres; • The most - intense land uses are oriented adjacent to existing development; • Mix of residential uses, medical and commercial uses, an existing attraction, and a centrally - located elementary school; • A jobs -to- housing balance, reducing automobile trips and minimizing vehicle miles traveled; • Neighborhoods developed with a multi -modal street system, promoting alternative modes of transportation and reducing GHG emissions; • Energy conservation features, incorporating a bicycle and pedestrian system connecting all 11—N land uses, bike racks and storage facilities in recreational, commercial and multi - family areas, select energy - efficient indoor and outdoor building features, prohibition of covenants or deed restrictions that would hamper or prevent energy conservation, vegetative choices and landscape design features that reduce need for water and maintenance, energy efficient lighting in public areas, and others. The connection of this legislation with the actual project design is stronger in the proposed companion Hacienda Lakes Development of Regional Impact (DRI) and Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) requests. Staff reserves the bulk of its evaluation of HB 697 related issues to the review of these development proposals. Other Considerations: The County's ability to manage growth in accordance with its adopted Growth Management Plan is tested by requests to expand or allow commercial development outside Neighborhood Centers, Mixed Use Activity Centers and other planned locations. These planned locations are purposely sized, spatially arranged and separated to encourage and support a healthy business environment County- wide and, discourage and avoid over commercialization and strip development. The petitioner's argument is premised on the unusual idea that regional medical facilities should be discounted from calculations for uses and acres in Mixed Use Activity Center No. 7 because they are not typical commercial uses. This premise is faulted however, as numerous non - retail uses are found and encouraged in Mixed Use Activity Centers generally — and none are discounted elsewhere. -19- Agenda Item 9A Acquiescing to this idea would compensate the petitioner for MUAC acreage used for land uses other than those in the plans of the Hacienda Lakes of Naples project. n NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) SYNOPSIS: A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) was [duly advertised, noticed and] held on Thursday, September 30, 2010, 5:15 p.m. at Edison College Campus Auditorium B -101, located at 7007 Lely Cultural Parkway, Naples. Approximately twenty -eight people other than the applicant's team and County staff attended. Dwight Nadeau, AICP, the applicant's agent provided a full description of the proposed amendments, including developed areas and preserved areas, roads involved and proposed accesses, and the residential density and commercial and office use intensity. Developing the subject property would incorporate the Swamp Buggy Days and Junior Deputy sites at their present locations. Mr. Nadeau explained the GMPA Transmittal process to the group in attendance indicating how if these GMPAs were approved in Transmittal, subsequent GMPA Adoption processes would be required along with the DRI and PUD rezone procedures. The rezone would also be preceded by the holding of another Neighborhood Information Meeting and set of public hearings. The part of this GMPA relating to Mixed Use Activity Center No. 7 would allow the development of additional commercial and professional office space on these approximately 37 acres. Mr. Nadeau provided an overview of the County's Transfer of Development Rights program, and how certain limitations leave the development of the project site with un -used, or surplus TDRs. The part of this GMPA relating to the TDR program would allow more TDRs to be shifted to the urban part of n the property for increased density there. Questions generated during the subsequent discussion focused on the nature of the proposed development, traffic and localized road conditions. One person asked about the Swamp Buggy facility and the potential for compatibility issues with nearby residential land uses. The applicant's team explained how the proposed Business Park would serve as a transition to buffer noise and other impacts between the facility and residential land uses. Land uses allowed at the Swamp Buggy facility will remain the same, where redevelopment into a business park or school site is not planned. Another attendee asked for clarification regarding main vehicular access to the new development. The team explained that . The Lord's Way and Rattlesnake Hammock Road would be extended /improved to serve as the main access points with CR 951. A right -of -way corridor is being reserved at this time for the eventual development of, and connection to, Benfield Road. Their development plans do not include the actual construction of Benfield Road. An attendee asked about the nature of the residential development. The applicant indicated a variety of single - family and multi - family housing options are planned, without age or income restrictions. Another attendee asked for clarification regarding plans for the area located east of the Verona Walk community. The team explained that this area is to be part of the larger preserve acreage. Except for the Benfield Road corridor, these lands are protected from development in perpetuity. In order to derive certain benefits from the TDR program, these preserve lands are conveyed to a public agency responsible for restoration and maintenance. -20- Agenda Item 9A No one in attendance expressed opposition to the project. No major issues or contentions were raised or discussed. No statements of commitment were made by the agent, applicant or developer. The meeting was completed by 6:15 p.m. [Synopsis prepared by C. Schmidt, A/CP, Principal Planner] FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 493.2 acres [with the potential to produce 394.5 TDRs] lie east, beyond 1 mile of the URF boundary, and are identified as an "Area not qualified for Sending" TDR credits into the URF. [This acreage however, is qualified for sending TDR credits into other receiving areas of the County.] PART ONE of SIX: This part of CP- 2006 -11 lifts the FLUE's 2.5 unit - per -acre maximum achievable density to 2.8 units per acre to use all qualifying TDRs within the Hacienda Lakes project. The property's present designation as Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict currently allows residential land uses at a maximum density of 1.5 units per gross acre or via Transfer of Development Rights program up to 2.5 units per gross acre for a maximum of 1.662 dwelling units. The Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict is designed to provide a clear transition between the Urban Residential Subdistrict on the west side of CR 951 and the Agricultural /Rural lands to the east as envisioned when the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict was established in 1989. Because of this amendment, there are no significant impacts to public facilities, as defined in the CIE, with respect to Potable Water, Wastewater Treatment, Stormwater Management, Solid Waste Disposal, Parks and Recreation facilities. PROVISION EXISTING PROPOSED REMARKS Maximum Residential 2.5 DU /acre 2.8 DU /acre Just 507.8 ac would be Density (utilizing TDRs) - eligible to receive in URF - eligible to receive in URF developed residentially Retention / Preservation - Required Preservation with receiving "lift" • 432.4 in rsdntl tracts FLUE Area Rural portion - • 36.6 MUAC residential Preservation Area with * 38.8 in residential/ "shift" medical uses tract PART TWO of SIX: This part of CP- 2006 -11 shifts a portion of the FLUE's native vegetation preservation from Urban lands to RFMUD Sending Lands to protect the highest quality wetlands and habitat within the Hacienda Lakes project. PROVISION EXISTING PROPOSED REMARKS Native Vegetation/ 25% NV in Urban portion Under 25% NV — Urban . 25% of Urban Preserve Habitat 60% NV in Rural portion portion is 72.4 ac. of 289.7 NV Retention / Preservation - Required Preservation 100% NV — Undeveloped . 60% of Rural Preserve FLUE Area Rural portion - is 847.2 ac. of 1,412 NV Preservation Area with "shift" -21- Agenda Item 9A PART THREE of SIX: This part of CP- 2006 -11 lifts the FLUE's 1.0 unit - per -acre maximum transferred TDR density to 1.3 units per acre to use all qualifying TDRs within the Hacienda Lakes project PROVISION EXISTING PROPOSED REMARKS Maximum Use of TDRs 1.0 DU/TDR per acre 1.3 DUs/TDRs per acre Overall Density would be Acreage Allowed for - eligible to transfer into - eligible to transfer into 0.78 DUs /acre (gross) Southeast Quadrant of URF from Sending Lands URF from Sending Lands ft. = Market factor of 6.18 MUAC No. 7 within 1 mile of URF within 1 mile of URF (Supply = 618 % of boundary boundary, with "lift" Demand) PART FOUR of SIX: This part of CP- 2006 -11 expands the size of the Southeast Quadrant of Mixed Use Activity Center No. 7 by 9.16 acres in order to develop a greater intensity of commercial uses. The magnitude of this project (approximately 37 gross acres; 28 net acres) is similar to a Community Center commercial development at the upper limits of size — and approximately one - quarter of a Regional Center commercial development of average size. The Market Area studied has 93,522 sq. ft. commercial floor area, on approximately 17.6 acres described as existing or "developed". Located within Mixed Use Activity Center No. 7 are a number of Planned Unit Developments and commercially zoned properties, totaling approximately 713,962 sq. ft. commercial floor area and more than 136 acres — developed and undeveloped. Approval of this expansion to MUAC No. 7, along with residential development and other proposed land uses for the Hacienda Lakes project, will require intersection improvements at more than one intersection with Collier Boulevard among various road improvements. Based upon total existing commercial inventory in the market study area, additional need for commercial uses to serve the surrounding market area cannot be ascertained. There is an excess of commercial development and commercially developable property in the market area. PROVISION EXISTING PROPOSED REMARKS Supply of 887,962 sq. ft. / Acreage Allowed for 27.5 acres 36.6 acres Demand for 143,645 sq. Southeast Quadrant of ft. = Market factor of 6.18 MUAC No. 7 (Supply = 618 % of Demand) -22- Agenda Item 9A PART FIVE of SIX: This part of CP- 2006 -11 allows The Lord's Way to serve as access to a Business Park as well as to [a] predominantly residential area[s] within the Hacienda Lakes project. Approval of Business Park access via The Lord's Way also has the effect of preliminarily endorsing a Business park at the proposed location within the Hacienda Lakes project. Approval of Business Park access via The Lord's Way may contribute to requirements for eventual various road improvements and intersection improvements at the intersection with Collier Boulevard. Particular considerations should be given to minimizing impacts on other land uses along The Lord's Way and other streets from the Business Park and Business Park access. PROVISION EXISTING PROPOSED REMARKS Direct Access for Business The Lord's Way does not The Lord's Way would Provides additional Park onto Arterial provide such access by provide such access with benefits for access to both Roadway FLUE provisions new provision Collier Boulevard and the CCME future Benfield Road PART SIX of SIX: This part of CP- 2006 -11 shifts a portion of the CCME's native vegetation preservation from Urban lands to RFMUD Sending Lands to protect the highest quality wetlands and habitat within the Hacienda Lakes project. Certain amendments will result with deriving additional benefits from preserving native vegetation and habitat, whose preservation is already a requirement under other provisions of the GMP, from which benefits will also be derived based on the 2:1 preservation factor guaranteed in the "shift" from the Urban designated portion of the project. PROVISION EXISTING PROPOSED REMARKS Native Vegetation/ 25% NV in Urban portion 25% — X = Urban NV - Urban Preserve would Habitat 60% NV in Rural portion 60% + 2X =Rural NV be 47.2 ac. Retention / Preservation - Preserved - Preserved with "shift" - Rural Preserve would CCME be 1,342 ac. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: The Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) heard the proposed amendment at their December 1, 2010 hearing. EAC considerations were limited to the parts of CP- 2006 -11 with environmental significance (parts 1, 2, 3 & 6). These four aspects of the Hacienda Lakes of Naples proposal may be simplified into just two paired changes — one pair of amendments would allow all eligible TDRs generated from adjacent RFMUD Sending Lands to be used in the Urban portion of the project for a greater maximum density (the "lift',, while the other pair of amendments would allow less native vegetation preservation in the Urban portion of the project if a proportionally greater amount is preserved in RFMUD Sending Lands [the "shift']. EAC members discussed the nature of the 187 additional TDRs that would be used to increase the density above the existing 2.5 residential units per acre, and staffs recommendation to limit further participation in the TDR program in some manner. The applicant's agent argued how no such -23- Agenda Item 9A restrictions should be placed on TDR use that would inhibit full participation in the TDR program. Speakers present agreed with the idea to make full use of TDR program. Members discussed the proposal to relax preservation /retention requirements with the intent to preserve the higher quality habitat on the large property while not preserving lower quality habitat — regardless of location. The applicant's agent explained how approximately 25 acres of Urban preserve lands would equate to approximately 50 acres of additional preservation in the Rural portion of the project. EAC members reached consensus that the better habitat on the subject property would be preserved. Members also discussed how subsequent zoning activity would include the redemption and use of TDRs severed and transferred from adjacent RFMUD Sending Lands. EAC members recognized that no objections were raised by NIM attendees. The EAC recommended to the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners to transmit CP- 2006 -11, without staff's recommendations but with one EAC stipulation, to the DCA on a 3 -0 vote. The recommended stipulation requires that all Transferable Development Rights be severed from all Sending Lands to be preserved — whether the TDRs are utilized in the development of the Hacienda Lakes of Naples project or they are held until used elsewhere in the County through the TDR program. The EAC also provided direction for modifying the GMP provisions, as proposed by CP- 2006 -11. Members recommended that the FLUE and CCME language should not identify or include reference to the Hacienda Lakes Development of Regional Impact (DRI) and Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) by name. Staff concurred, and explained that FLUE and CCME provisions being prepared for recommendation to the CCPC were drafted with the same idea for removing or modifying the applicant's proposed provisions in this manner. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: The Office of the County Attorney's review of this Staff Report provided observations and comments on the legal aspects of CP- 2006 -11 planning considerations. These observations and comments were used to update this Staff Report in preparation for January 20 consideration before the CCPC. [REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] -24- Agenda Item 9A STAFF RECOMMENDATION: In consideration of the reviews and analyses provided within this Report, staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward Petition CP- 2006 -11 to the Board of County Commissioners corresponding with the individual parts of the proposal as shown in the figure below. PROVISION EXISTING PROPOSED REMARKS RECOMMENDATION Just 507.8 ac Maximum 2.5 DU /acre 2.8 DU /acre would be To Transmit Residential Density - eligible to receive - eligible to receive developed with Modification (utilizing TDRs) in URF in URF with residentially receiving "lift" • 432.4 in residential tracts • 36.6 MUAC residential • 38.8 in residential/ medical uses tract Native Vegetation/ 25% NV in Urban Under 25% NV — • 25% of Urban Habitat portion Urban portion Preserve is 72.4 To Transmit Retention / 60% NV in Rural 100% NV — ac. of 289.7 NV with Modification Preservation portion Undeveloped Rural • 60% of Rural FLUE - Required portion - Preserve is Preservation Area Preservation Area 847.2 ac. of with "shift" 1,412 NV 1.0 DU/TDR per 1.3 DUs/TDRs per Maximum Use of acre acre Overall Density To Transmit TDRs - eligible to transfer - eligible to transfer would be 0.78 with Modification into URF from into URF from DUs /acre (gross) Sending Lands Sending Lands within 1 mile of within 1 mile of URF boundary URF boundary, with "lift" Supply of 887,962 Acreage Allowed 27.5 acres 36.6 acres sq. ft. / Demand for NOT for Southeast 143,645 sq. ft. = TO Quadrant of MUAC Market factor of TRANSMIT No. 7 6.18 (Supply = 618 % of Demand) Provides additional Direct Access for The Lord's Way The Lord's Way benefits for access To Transmit Business Park onto does not provide would provide such to both Collier Selected Arterial Roadway such access by FLUE access with new Boulevard and the Alternative provisions provision future Benfield Road Native Vegetation/ 25% NV in Urban 25% — X = Urban • Urban Preserve To Transmit Habitat portion NV would be 47.2 with Modification Retention / 60% NV in Rural 60% + 2X =Rural ac. Preservation portion NV • Rural Preserve CCME - Preserved - Preserved with would be 1,342 "shift" ac. Staff recommends that consideration for transmittal include an understanding that the following requirements /conditions, or something similar, be placed in the companion PUD rezone: -25- Agenda Item 9A ■ The Base TDR Gredits, Cady Cntn/ TDR Renl S GFedits Cnvirenmental ReCterntlen and _RP-mus TDR e A llOvert Use Planned 1 Init Development (SARI D) [Previously recommended language] ■ Prior to the issuance of the first residential Development Order in the Hacienda Lakes MPUD, the Base TDR Credits and Early Entry TDR Bonus Credits shall be severed and redeemed from all Sending Lands to be preserved within one mile of the Urban Residential Fringe and the filing of executed Limitation of Development Rights Agreement(s) (County Form °TDR2 ") shall occur for these same lands. [currently recommended replacement language] ■ A permanent conservation mechanism, including Limitation of Development Rights Agreement(s), [shall] be attached /applied to all Sending Lands to be preserved beyond one mile of the Urban Residential Fringe prior to final approval of the first Site Development Plan (SDP) for the Hacienda Lakes project. Staff - recommended modifications to this set of Growth Management Plan amendments shows the FLUE and CCME language proposed in six parts, as shown in ATTACHMENT HL -2. Closing Remarks: Issues raised by the Transportation Planning review staff are of concern but do not affect CP- 2006 -11 directly. These issues will be thoroughly addressed in the evaluations of the companion Hacienda Lakes Development of Regional Impact (DRI) and Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) requests. Still other issues surrounding CP- 2006 -11 are more appropriate to be considered during review of the companion DRI or PUD rezone processes, and will be addressed at that time. [REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] -26- Corby Schmi t, AICP, Principal Planner Date Comprehens ve Planning Section REVIEWED _- _-- 1"2. `l I -r'n David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Manager Date Comprehensive Planning Section Michael Bosi, AICP, Director Date Comprehensive Planning Section r - t *ylarn D. Lorenz, JN. P.E., BVktor Date Land Development Services Department Nick'`Casalanguida, Deputy' , at r Date Growth Management Services Dtv ion — Planning and Regulation PETITION NO.: CP- 2006 -11 Staff Report for the January 6, 2011 CCPC Meeting. NOTE: This petition has been advertised for the February 22. 2011 BCC Meeting. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: Mark P. Strain, Chairman Agenda Item 9A ATTACHMENT HL -1 The Hacienda Lakes of Naples, LLC proposed Growth Management Plan amendments — CP 2006 -1i — are shown below in single strike- through/single underline format, in six parts, as follows: PART ONE of SIX: Future Land Use Element I. URBAN DESIGNATION A. Urban Mixed Use District 2. Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict: [Insert new language — FLUE Page 29] The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide transitional densities between the Urban Designated Area and the Agricultural/Rural Area and comprises approximately 5,500 acres and 5% of the Urban Mixed Use District. Residential land uses may be allowed at a maximum density of 1.5 units per gross acre., exclusive of density bonus that may be achieved via CCME Policy 6.2.5 (6) b.1., or higher through the use of the following: a. Up to 2.5 units per gross acre via the transfer of up to one LLOJ dwelling unit (transferable development right) per acre from lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary and designated as Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending, except in the case of the Hacienda Lakes PUD /DRI, which may achieve a maximum density of up to 2.80 units per gross acre via the transfer of up to 1.30 dwelling units (transferable development rights) per acre from lands designated as Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending, b. In the case of properties specifically identified below, a density bonus of up to 6.0 additional units per gross acre may be requested for projects providing affordable - workforce housing (home ownership only) for low and moderate income residents of Collier County, pursuant to Section 2.06.00 of the Land Development Code, or its successor ordinance, except as provided for in paragraph V below. Within the Urban Residential Fringe, rezone requests are not subject to the density rating system, except as specifically provided in c. below, but are subject to the following conditions: PART TWO of SIX: URBAN DESIGNATION B. DENSITY RATING SYSTEM [insert new language — FLUE Pages 51 — 53] 5. Density Blending: This provision is intended to encourage unified plans of development and to preserve wetlands, wildlife habitat, and other natural features that exist within properties that straddle the Urban Mixed Use and Rural Fringe Mixed Use Districts or that straddle Receiving and Neutral Lands within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. In the case of such properties, which were in existence and under unified control (owned, or under contract to purchase, by the applicant(s)) as of June 19, 2002, the allowable gross density for such properties in aggregate may be distributed throughout the project, regardless of whether or not the density allowable for a portion of the project exceeds that which is otherwise permitted, when the following conditions are met: -1- Agenda Item 9A 2. Density Blending Conditions and Limitations for Properties Straddling the Urban Residential Fringe Sub - District and Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending lands: (a) The project must straddle the Urban Residential Fringe Sub - District and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending Lands; (b) The project in aggregate must be a minimum of 400 acres; (c) At least 25% of the project must be located within the Urban Residential Fringe Sub - District. The project must extend central water and sewer (from the urban designated portion of the project) to serve the entire project, unless alternative interim sewer and water provisions are authorized by Collier County; (d) The Project is currently zoned or will be zoned PUD; (e) The density to be shifted to the Sending Lands from the Urban Residential Fringe is to be located on impacted or disturbed lands, or it is demonstrated that the development on the site is to be located so as to preserve and protect the highest quality native vegetation and /or habitat on -site and to maximize the connectivity of such native vegetation and /or wildlife habitat with adjacent preservation and /or habitat areas; (f) Native vegetation shall be preserved as follows: a. The Urban portion of the project shall comply with the native vegetation requirements identified in the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (for Urban designated lands), or in the case of proiects where the native vegetation requirement for the Sending Lands portion of the project is the maximum required 60 percent of the Sending Land area, in order to promote greater preservation of the highest quality wetlands and listed species habitat, the required native vegetation for the Urban portion of the proiect may be shifted by providing native vegetation preservation in the Sending Lands portion of the project exceeding the 60% maximum preservation requirement as set forth in b. below. The ratio for such native vegetation preservation shall be two acres of Sending Lands (exceeding the 60% maximum preservation requirement) for each acre below the required amount of native vegetation for the Urban portion of the project. Significant Archeological Sites identified by the State of Florida Division of Historic Resources shall be preserved and cannot be mitigated for. b. For those lands within the project designated as Sending, the native vegetation preservation requirement shall be 90% of the native vegetation, not to exceed 60% of the total project area designated as Sending. C. Wetland areas that are impacted through the development process, but which result in enhanced wetland function, including habitat and /or flowways, shall be considered as part of the native vegetation requirement set forth in this provision and shall not be considered as impacted areas. These wetland areas and /or flowways may be used for water storage provided that the water discharged in these areas is pre- treated. (g) Permitted uses for density blending under this provision include residential development and associated amenities, including golf courses meeting the criteria for golf courses within the Neutral area. This provision is not intended to eliminate any uses permitted within the applicable underlying land use designation. -2- Agenda Item 9A PART THREE of SIX: B. DENSITY RATING SYSTEM: [insert new language — FLUE Pages 47 -50] 2. Density Bonuses Consistency with the following characteristics may add to the base density. Density bonuses are discretionary, not entitlements, and are dependent upon meeting the criteria for each bonus provision and compatibility with surrounding properties, as well as the rezone criteria in the Land Development Code. Transfer of Development Rights Bonus To encourage preservation /conservation of natural resources, density transfers are permitted as follows: (c) From Sending Lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary into lands designated Urban Residential Fringe, at a maximum density increase of one (1) unit per gross acre, except for the Hacienda Lakes PUD /DRI. which may transfer TDRs from Sending Lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary into lands designated Urban Residential Fringe, at a maximum density increase of 1.30 units per gross acre. PART FOUR of SIX: I URBAN DESIGNATION C. Urban Commercial Subdistrict 1. Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict [amend language — FLUE Pages 56 -57] 2. The allowable land uses for a Master Planned Activity Center shall be the same as for other designated Activity Centers; however, a Master Planned Activity Center encompassing the majority of the property in two or more quadrants shall be afforded the flexibility to redistribute a part or all of the allocation from one quadrant to another, to the extent of the unified control. The maximum amount of commercial uses allowed at Activity Center # 3 (Immokalee Road and Collier Boulevard) is 40 acres per quadrant for a total of 160 acres maximum in the entire Activity Center; the balance of the land area shall be limited to non - commercial uses as allowed in Mixed Use Activity Centers. The maximum amount of commercial uses allowed at Activity Center #7 (Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard) is 40 acres per quadrant, except that the northeast quadrant may have a total of 59 acres and the southeast quadrant may have a total of 50, for a total of 47-9 189 acres maximum in the entire Activity Center, the balance of the land area shall be limited to non - commercial uses as allowed in Mixed Use Activity Centers. Note: The Activity Center #7 inset map within the FLUE is to be amended to reflect the proposed boundary change. It is not the intent of this amendment request to modify the Future Land Use Map to depict the boundary change. -3- PART FIVE of SIX: URBAN DESIGNATION A. Urban Mixed Use District 4. Business Park Subdistrict Agenda Item 9A [insert new language — FLUE Pages 31 -32] The Business Park Subdistrict is intended to provide for a mix of industrial uses and non - industrial uses, designed in an attractive park -like environment with low structural density where building coverage ranges between 25% to 45% and where landscaped areas provide for buffering and enjoyment by the employees and patrons of the park. Business Parks shall be allowed as a Subdistrict in the Urban -Mixed Use District, Urban Commercial District and Urban Industrial District and may include the general uses allowed within each District, the specific uses set forth below, and shall comply with the following general conditions: * ** * ** * * ** * ** UNAFFECTED PROVISIONS ARE SKIPPED * ** **** * ** ** * h. When located in a District other than the Urban Industrial District, the Business Park must have direct access to a road classified as an arterial in the Transportation Element. [Alternative amendment language 1] The Lords Way shall be considered direct access to Collier Boulevard (CR 951) for Business Parks within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict. [Alternative amendment language 2] Direct access is defined as a driveway and /or local roadway connection to the arterial road provided the portion of the local roadway intended to provide access to the Business Park is not within a residential neighborhood and does not service a predominantly residential area. PART SIX of SIX: Conservation and Coastal Management Element [insert new language — CCME Pages 18 -21 ] GOAL 6: OBJECTIVE 6.1: Policy 6.1.1: For the County's Urban Designated Area, Estates Designated Area, Conservation Designated Area, and AgriculturaURural Mixed Use District, Rural - Industrial District and Rural - Settlement Area District as designated on the FLUM, native vegetation shall be preserved through the application of the following preservation and vegetation retention standards and criteria, unless the development occurs within the Area of Critical State Concern (ACSC) where the ACSC standards referenced in the Future Land Use Element shall apply. Notwithstanding the ACSC requirements, this policy shall apply to all non - agricultural development except for single - family dwelling units situated on individual parcels that are not located within a watershed management conservation area identified in a Watershed Management Plan developed pursuant to policies supporting Objective 2.1 of this Element. -4- Agenda Item 9A The following standards and criteria shall apply to the vegetation retention requirements referenced above. * ** *** * * ** *** UNAFFECTED PROVISIONS ARE SKIPPED * ** * * ** * ** ** * 14. In order to promote -greater preservation of the highest quality wetlands and listed species habitat the required native vegetation for the Urban portion of the proiect may be shifted by providing native vegetation preservation in the Sending Lands portion of the proiect exceeding the 60% maximum preservation requirement for protects that: � (a) Are under unified control: (b) Straddle the Urban Residential Fringe and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Sendinq designations: (c) Meet the maximum required 60 percent preservation requirement for the Sending Lands portion of the project. The preservation ratio shall be two acres of Sending Lands exceeding the 60% maximum preservation requirement) for each acre below the required amount of native vegetation for the Urban portion of the proiect. Significant Archeological Sites identified by the State of Florida Division of Historic Resources shall be preserved and cannot be mitigated for. [END OF HL -1 GMP AMENDMENT ENTRIES] -5- Coastal High Hazard Non - Coastal High Hazard Area Area Residential and Mixed Less than 2.5 acres 10% Less than 5 acres. 10% Use Development Equal to or greater Equal to or greater than 5 acres than 2.5 acres 25% and less than 20 acres. 15% Equal to or greater than 20 ac. 25% Golf Course 35% 35% Commercial and Less than 5 acres. 10% Less than 5 acres. 10% Industrial Equal to or greater Equal to or Development than 5 acres. 15% greater than 5 acres. 15% Industrial 50 %, not to exceed 25% 50 %, not to exceed 25% of the Development (Rural- of the project site. project site. Industrial District only) The following standards and criteria shall apply to the vegetation retention requirements referenced above. * ** *** * * ** *** UNAFFECTED PROVISIONS ARE SKIPPED * ** * * ** * ** ** * 14. In order to promote -greater preservation of the highest quality wetlands and listed species habitat the required native vegetation for the Urban portion of the proiect may be shifted by providing native vegetation preservation in the Sending Lands portion of the proiect exceeding the 60% maximum preservation requirement for protects that: � (a) Are under unified control: (b) Straddle the Urban Residential Fringe and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Sendinq designations: (c) Meet the maximum required 60 percent preservation requirement for the Sending Lands portion of the project. The preservation ratio shall be two acres of Sending Lands exceeding the 60% maximum preservation requirement) for each acre below the required amount of native vegetation for the Urban portion of the proiect. Significant Archeological Sites identified by the State of Florida Division of Historic Resources shall be preserved and cannot be mitigated for. [END OF HL -1 GMP AMENDMENT ENTRIES] -5- Agenda Item 9A ATTACHMENT HL -2 Staff - recommended modifications to The Hacienda Lakes of Naples, LLC proposed Growth Management Plan amendments — CP-2006 -11 — are shown below in double strike- through/double underline format, as follows: These modifications are generally recommended for proper format, use of code language, succinctness, and clarity, except for Part Four -of -Six provisions related to the proposed expansion of Mixed Use Activity Center No. 7. (Note. single underline text is added, and single OnVw threugh text is deleted, as proposed by petitioner, double underline text is added, and double text is deleted, as proposed by staff.) PART ONE of SIX: Future Land Use Element I. URBAN DESIGNATION A. Urban Mixed Use District 2. Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict: [Insert new language — FLUE Page 29] The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide transitional densities between the Urban Designated Area and the Agricultural /Rural Area and comprises approximately 5,500 acres and 5% of the Urban Mixed Use District. Residential land uses may be allowed at a maximum density of 1.5 units per gross acre., exclusive of density bonus that may be achieved via CCME Policy 6.2.5 (6) b.1., or higher through the use of the following: a. Up to 2.5 units per gross acre via the transfer of up to one L1.0 dwelling unit (transferable development right) per acre from lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary and designated as Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending Lands, except in the case of the properties that straddle the Urban Residential Fringe and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Sending Lands designations, and meet the other_ Density Blending criteria provided for in subsection 5.2 of the Density Rating System, which may achieve a maximum density of up to 2.80 units per gross acre via the transfer of up to 1.30 dwelling units (transferable development rights) per acre from lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary and designated as Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending Lan angly or, +e b. In the case of properties specifically identified below, a density bonus of up to 6.0 additional units per gross acre may be requested for projects providing affordable - workforce housing (home ownership only) for low and moderate income residents of Collier County, pursuant to Section 2.06.00 of the Land Development Code, or its successor ordinance, except as provided for in paragraph "c" below. Within the Urban Residential Fringe, rezone requests are not subject to the density rating system, except as specifically provided in c. below, but are subject to the following conditions: - 1 - Agenda Item 9A PART TWO of SIX: I. URBAN DESIGNATION [Insert new language — FLUE Pages 51 — 53] B. DENSITY RATING SYSTEM 5. Density Blending: This provision is intended to encourage unified plans of development and to preserve wetlands, wildlife habitat, and other natural features that exist within properties that straddle the Urban Mixed Use and Rural Fringe Mixed Use Districts or that straddle Receiving and Neutral Lands within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. In the case of such properties, which were in existence and under unified control (owned, or under contract to purchase, by the applicant(s)) as of June 19, 2002, the allowable gross density for such properties in aggregate may be distributed throughout the project, regardless of whether or not the density allowable for a portion of the project exceeds that which is otherwise permitted, when the following conditions are met: 2. Density Blending Conditions and Limitations for Properties Straddling the Urban Residential Fringe Sub - District and Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending lands: (a) The project must straddle the Urban Residential Fringe Sub - District and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending Lands; (b) The project in aggregate must be a minimum of 400 acres; (c) At least 25% of the project must be located within the Urban Residential Fringe Sub - District. The project must extend central water and wastewater treatment facilities (from the urban designated portion of the project) to serve the entire project, unless alternative interim water and wastewater treatment provisions are authorized by Collier County; (d) The Project is currently zoned or will be zoned PUD; (e) The density to be shifted to the Sending Lands from the Urban Residential Fringe is to be located on impacted or disturbed lands, or it is demonstrated that the development on the site is to be located so as to preserve and protect the highest quality native vegetation and /or habitat on -site and to maximize the connectivity of such native vegetation and /or wildlife habitat with adjacent preservation and /or habitat areas; (f) Native vegetation shall be preserved as follows: a. The Urban portion of the project shall comply with the native vegetation requirements identified in the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (for Urban designated lands), or in the case of projects where the native vegetation requirement for the Sending Lands portion of the proiect is the maximum required 60 percent of the total Sending Land area, in order to promote greater preservation of the highest quality wetlands and listed species habitat the required native vegetation for the Urban portion of the proiect may be shifted by providing native vegetation preservation in the Sendinq Lands portion of the proiect exceeding the 60% maximum preservation requirement as set forth in subsection "b "= below. The ratio for such native vegetation preservation shall be two acres of Sending Lands (exceeding the 60% maximum preservation requirement) for each acre below the required amount of native vegetation for the Urban portion of the project. In no instance shall the amount of native vegetation for the Urban portion of the project be fully removed. or shifted entirely to Sending Lands. Significant Archeological Sites identified by the State of Florida Division of Historic Resources shall be preserved and cannot be mitigated for. !� -2- Agenda Item 9A 9004 desionated i��FI 0 �F9F�Ge"v development ' hghmtQt ;and! PFeY;dgd that t-1464 %A9Q_tQ_F iS_G_haF@9d in cii,voyn —tke ' thOOM =00- ic iron A. IL. For those lands within the project designated as Sending the native vegetation preservation requirement shall be 90% of the native vegetation, not to exceed 60% of the total project area designated as Sending. unless the provisions found in subsection "a" above are met c. Wetland areas that are impacted through the development process but which result in enhanced wetland function including habitat and /or flowways shall be considered as part of the native vegetation_reguirement set forth in this provision and shall not be considered as impacted areas These wetland areas and /or flowways may be used for water storage provided that the water discharged in these areas is pre- treated. (provision relocated onjJ (g) Permitted uses for density blending under this provision include residential development and associated amenities, including golf courses meeting the criteria for golf courses within the Neutral area. This provision is not intended to eliminate any uses permitted within the applicable underlying land use designation. PART THREE of SIX: B. DENSITY RATING SYSTEM: [Insert new language — FLUE Page 50] 2. Density Bonuses Consistency with the following characteristics may add to the base density. Density bonuses are discretionary, not entitlements, and are dependent upon meeting the criteria for each bonus provision and compatibility with surrounding properties, as well as the rezone criteria in the Land Development Code. Transfer of Development Rights Bonus To encourage preservation /conservation of natural resources, density transfers are permitted as follows: (c) From Sending Lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary into lands designated Urban Residential Fringe, at a maximum density increase of one (1) unit per gross acre, except for properties that straddle the Urban Residential Fringe and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Sending Lands designations, and meet the other Density Blending criteria provided for in subsection 5.2 of the Density Rating System, which may transfer TDRs from Sending Lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary into lands designated Urban Residential Fringe at a maximum density increase of 1.30 units per gross acre. -3- Agenda Item 9A PART FOUR of SIX: URBAN DESIGNATION [amend language — FLUE Pages 56 -57] C. Urban Commercial Subdistrict 1. Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict 2. The allowable land uses for a Master Planned Activity Center shall be the same as for other designated Activity Centers; however, a Master Planned Activity Center encompassing the majority of the property in two or more quadrants shall be afforded the flexibility to redistribute a part or all of the allocation from one quadrant to another, to the extent of the unified control. The maximum amount of commercial uses allowed at Activity Center # 3 (Immokalee Road and Collier Boulevard) is 40 acres per quadrant for a total of 160 acres maximum in the entire Activity Center; the balance of the land area shall be limited to non - commercial uses as allowed in Mixed Use Activity Centers. The maximum amount of commercial uses allowed at Activity Center #7 (Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard) is 40 acres per quadrant, except that the northeast quadrant may have a total of 59 acres and- the se utheast m ladrant may have a total f 50, for a total of 473 489 acres maximum in the entire Activity Center; the balance of the land area shall be limited to non - commercial uses as allowed in Mixed Use Activity Centers. ...The maximum amount of commercial uses allowed at Activity Center #7 (Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard) is 40 acres per quadrant, except that the northeast quadrant may have a total of 59 acres and the southeast quadrant may have a total of 49.2, for a total of 4�3 449 188.2 acres maximum in the entire Activity Center; [alternate language, if MU-4C expansion approved for Transmittal -- - - - - - - - - MO-F0,10WAY&M-M-TrKV-1 - -- - - - - - - PART FIVE of SIX: I URBAN DESIGNATION [Insert new language — FLUE Pages 31 -32] A. Urban Mixed Use District 4. Business Park Subdistrict -4- Agenda Item 9A The Business Park Subdistrict is intended to provide for a mix of industrial uses and non - industrial uses, designed in an attractive park -like environment with low structural density where building coverage ranges between 25% to 45% and where landscaped areas provide for buffering and enjoyment by the employees and patrons of the park. Business Parks shall be allowed as a Subdistrict in the Urban -Mixed Use District, Urban Commercial District and Urban Industrial District and may include the general uses allowed within each District, the specific uses set forth below, and shall comply with the following general conditions: * ** *** **** * ** UNAFFECTED PROVISIONS ARE SKIPPED * ** **** *** ** * h. When located in a District other than the Urban Industrial District, the Business Park must have direct access to a road classified as an arterial in the Transportation Element, except that a Business Park in Section 14, Township 50 South Ranae 26 East may have access to an arterial road via The Lords Way- if the design and construction of new roadways and improvements or extensions to existing roadways providing said access are commensurate with standards for accommodating industrial and non - industrial traffic and consistent with other applicable Policies of the Transportation Element. PART SIX of SIX: Conservation and Coastal Management Element [Insert new language — CCME Pages 18 -21] GOAL 6: OBJECTIVE 6.1: Policy 6.1.1: For the County's Urban Designated Area, Estates Designated Area, Conservation Designated Area, and AgriculturaURural Mixed Use District, Rural- Industrial District and Rural - Settlement Area District as designated on the FLUM, native vegetation shall be preserved through the application of the following preservation and vegetation retention standards and criteria, unless the development occurs within the Area of Critical State Concern (ACSC) where the ACSC standards referenced in the Future Land Use Element shall apply. Notwithstanding the ACSC requirements, this policy shall apply to all non - agricultural development except for single- family dwelling units situated on individual parcels that are not located within a watershed management conservation area identified in a Watershed Management Plan developed pursuant to policies supporting Objective 2.1 of this Element. -5- Agenda Item 9A The following standards and criteria shall apply to the vegetation retention requirements referenced above. * ** * ** * *** * ** UNAFFECTED PROVISIONS ARE SKIPPED * ** * * ** * ** ** * J14). In order to promote greater preservation of the highest quality wetlands and listed species habitat the required native vegetation for the Urban portion of the proiect may be shifted by providing native vegetation preservation in the Sending Lands portion of the project exceeding the 60% maximum preservation requirement found in Density Blending provisions of the FLUE for proiects that: (a) Are under unified control (b) Straddle the Urban Residential Fringe and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Sending Lands designations=. and. (c) Meet the maximum required 60 percent preservation requirement for the Sending Lands portion of the project. The preservation ratio shall be two acres of Sending Lands (exceeding the 60% maximum preservation requirement) for each acre below the required amount of native vegetation for the Urban portion of the project. In no instance shall the amount of native vegetation for the Urban portion of the project be fully removed, or shifted entirely to Sending Lands. Significant Archeological Sites identified by the State of Florida Division of Historic Resources shall be preserved and cannot be mitigated for. [END OF HL -2 GMP AMENDMENT ENTRIES] Io Coastal High Hazard Non - Coastal High Hazard Area Area Residential and Mixed Less than 2.5 acres 10% Less than 5 acres. 10% Use Development Equal to or greater Equal to or greater than 5 acres than 2.5 acres 25% and less than 20 acres. 15% Equal to or greater than 20 ac. 25% Golf Course 35% 35% Commercial and Less than 5 acres. 10% Less than 5 acres. 10% Industrial Equal to or greater Equal to or Development than 5 acres. 15% greater than 5 acres. 15% Industrial 50°x'0, not to exceed 25% 50 %, not to exceed 25% of the Development (Rural- of the project site. project site. Industrial District only) The following standards and criteria shall apply to the vegetation retention requirements referenced above. * ** * ** * *** * ** UNAFFECTED PROVISIONS ARE SKIPPED * ** * * ** * ** ** * J14). In order to promote greater preservation of the highest quality wetlands and listed species habitat the required native vegetation for the Urban portion of the proiect may be shifted by providing native vegetation preservation in the Sending Lands portion of the project exceeding the 60% maximum preservation requirement found in Density Blending provisions of the FLUE for proiects that: (a) Are under unified control (b) Straddle the Urban Residential Fringe and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Sending Lands designations=. and. (c) Meet the maximum required 60 percent preservation requirement for the Sending Lands portion of the project. The preservation ratio shall be two acres of Sending Lands (exceeding the 60% maximum preservation requirement) for each acre below the required amount of native vegetation for the Urban portion of the project. In no instance shall the amount of native vegetation for the Urban portion of the project be fully removed, or shifted entirely to Sending Lands. Significant Archeological Sites identified by the State of Florida Division of Historic Resources shall be preserved and cannot be mitigated for. [END OF HL -2 GMP AMENDMENT ENTRIES] Io Agenda Item 9A ATTACHMENT HL -3 Transportation Planning Section — Staff Remarks The Collier County Transportation Planning Section review staff would reject CP- 2006 -11 based on the present proposal; and provide the following comments: 1. Traffic Study Comments: A. Appendix is not attached to Traffic Study, no CD is found with appendix (same for DRI). B. Does not include analysis of future Benfield, future Rattlesnake Hammock Extension, The Lords Way, Sabal Palm, etc. The analysis is not consistent with LRTP, in that these roadways are not shown in the TIS. (see next comment) C. (Staff note: No TIS review fees are required.) D. The traffic study, dated 7/2/10 in the PUD and GMPA, is not consistent with the Question 21 responses dated 7/23/10 in the DRI. All of these documents MUST be consistent with one another. (See also DRI - specific comments in the DRI response) E. No mention of the East Central TCMA is made in this traffic study. However, significant impacts on many of the TCMA's are noted. Please revise the analysis to include review of TCMA impacts. F. Table 1- Reconcile all trip generation outputs with the accompanying DRI and PUDZ. Additionally, reconcile the proposed development rights (units /square footage /Uses) between all three documents. G. Analysis of the E +C network requires revision of the Collier Boulevard link from Golden Gate Blvd to 1 -75. Construction is not anticipated to be funded until 2013 (not 2010 as shown). Also - Collier Boulevard improvements due in 2010 (From Davis Blvd to US-41) are complete, as are Santa Barbara Blvd Extension improvements. Please include these as 'existing' segments in the revised traffic study. H. Tables 2a, 2b, and 2c- Comments are withheld at this time until the trip generation and proposed land uses are reconciled. Upon reconciliation of the trip generation outputs between the DRI, PUD, and GMPA, staff anticipates re- calculation of the internal capture and pass -by rates to accurately reflect the final scenario. I. Page 13,second paragraph; the growth rate proposed does not match the DRI and PUD application(s). Please reconcile all documents. J. Table 5- Why were some of the historical growth rates omitted? These rates can be established using previous AUIR documentation. Previous years are available and should be employed. K. Staff disagrees that buildout of all commercial square footage and residential units will occur by 2019. Analysis of this buildout date attempts to sever the development from its respective responsibility towards the future Benfield Road corridor, as well as other improvements demonstrated as 'needs' in the LRTP. The study must analyze the [internal] growth rate of the project, and must discuss any phasing that will be proposed. With consideration for the study that has been presented, Staff requires revision of the buildout dates to better approximate a more feasible buildout date on a less aggressive schedule. This revision necessitates direct comparison to the actual buildout rates experienced by nearby comparable developments such as Lely, Fiddlers Creek, and possibly Verona Walk. L. Table 6- Show two additional columns demonstrating the [PM Peak Hr, peak direction] remaining capacity both with- and without- the project. Calculation should focus on the revised build -out year as per the previous comment (K). M. Page 16 and Tables 7a,7b, 7c; Tables 8a, 8b; Tables 9a and 9b- Staff recommends at this time that all detailed synchro analyses for intersection capacity be omitted from -1- Agenda Item 9A resubmittals until the future roadway network that is analyzed complies with both the LRTP and the County's or FDOT's scheduled improvement plans. N. Page 16/17, CR -951 at US-41 is anticipated to become a failing intersection. Also- Any analysis of potential future improvements must first comply with the county's existing or ongoing plans. Please incorporate the corridor improvement plans for Collier Boulevard from the vicinity of Golden Gate Main Canal at CR -951 South to Davis Boulevard in this traffic study (lane configurations must be adhered to, no reduction to through -lane capacity will be considered). O. A new signalized intersection North of Lords Way on CR -951 shall not be permitted. Please remove this from the analysis and adjust Lords Way intersection to assume future signalization, if warrants are met. 2. Mitigation A. Policy 5.1 mitigation is not appropriately discussed in the proposed GMP amendment. All mitigation pertaining to policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan must be listed in the GMP amendment, the PUD, and the DRI applications alike. All proposed mitigation must be consistent throughout the three submittals, with the only exception being those items that may be required solely for approval of the GMPA in order to allow commencement of either the DRI and /or the PUD applications as subsequent approvals to the GMPA. 3. Pedestrian and Transit Facilities A. A pedestrian facilities map is required in the Growth Management Plan Amendment Application, just as in the accompanying DRI and PUDZ applications. B. A transit master plan must be developed for this application that is consistent with the PUDZ and DRI applications (as amended). /� Hacienda Lakes DRI Review Comments 1. The applicant has not satisfactorily answered companion DRI item Question 21. Although a corridor is shown for Benfield Road that is consistent with the County's corridor study results, the County does not feel that the corridor is adequately protected so as to allow for future development as a parallel reliever to CR 951. At the time of the initial corridor study, the potential alignment(s) of Benfield Road that were established only a cursory alignment, pending further detailed analyses. The Developer has contributed a significant amount of assistance toward the establishment of the potential future alignment(s) through demonstration of the wetland /preserve limits. These newly established boundaries effectively update the alignment(s) proposed by the County's preliminary study, by identifying the incompatibility of the County's conceptual alignment(s) in contrast to the Developer's newly identified preserve boundary. In essence, the additional information from the Developer that has come to light demonstrates that the corridor alignments shown in the County study are infeasible within the boundaries of this development. As a result of recognizing the refinement in the available data, the County has requested revision of the Benfield alignment to a more palatable Westerly alignment (in Rev. 5); to be determined at the Developers discretion, but inclusive of minimum roadway design and engineering criteria. However, the Developer's insistence on considering only the conceptual alignment shown in the County's study is in stark contrast to the Developer's responsibility to maintain a contiguous preserve area. -2- Agenda Item 9A Furthermore, the Developer states that the roadway "will be designed and permitted, for the most part, by the County." The County does not agree, as the County is unable to accept such a financial burden that would be indigenous to the applicant's proposed terms. The network demand for this corridor is not identified sooner than 2030 in the LRTP, yet the applicant's proposed increase in density is anticipated to accelerate the demand for this parallel- relief roadway. This accelerated demand is not accommodated by the Developer in a manner that the County considers to be `financially feasible', in light of the additional information the Developer has provided. As such, the County continues to insist that a less impactful alternative alignment must be shown by the Developer in an effort to maintain financial feasibility of the proposed roadway corridor. Re- alignment of the proposed corridor is warranted in order to achieve compliance with requirements being stated by the multiple environmental reviewing agencies. Further negotiation and discussion with regard to mitigation and proportionate share are anticipated. 2. The companion DRI item Question 21 is insufficiently answered. The pedestrian facilities that are proposed are no greater than what is required by the current LDC, and serve to provide no significant benefit to the non - motorized public. Additionally, the internal design and site planning of this development creates unnecessary segregation of land uses, such that the residential area is not considered to be a reasonable distance from commercial areas in order to promote pedestrian movement. Furthermore, proposed transit amenities are wholly inadequate to serve a development of this size and make -up. The introduction of a single proposed bus stop that is greater than one mile from the nearest residential area cannot be considered a reasonable attempt at employing the Transit network in this area. 3. With comments 1 and 2 stated, Transportation Planning Section review staff do not feel that this development attempts to address the requirements of House Bill 697 adequately. Staff recommends the following in an effort to address the reduction of VMT's that are necessitated by HB 697: A. Relocation of the Benfield corridor top a westerly alignment as previously suggested. The arrangement of this roadway further to the West will result in fewer VMT within the development. B. Revision of the development layout to reduce segregation of land uses within the development; with the intent to create demand for non - vehicular movement of the population throughout the development. C. Creation of comprehensive pedestrian infrastructure facilitating non - vehicular modes of transportation. D. Expansion of the transit facilities to better integrate with the different nodes of this development. -3- Agenda Item 9A TIS Review Comments 1. With respect to the 2019 proportionate share analyses of intersections such as SR -951 @ US-41, the County reminds the applicant that State roadways are not allowed to adopt a minimum LOS of "E ". Table 2 of the applicant's response indicated that three movements at this intersection reach LOS "E° in 2019 (inclusive of the project). However, the analysis does not clarify the extent to which the development causes these degradations in LOS. Staff recommends demonstrating the 2019 buildout with, and without, the project for instances where the County is seeking proportionate share commitments from the Developer for any improvements (such as the example given above). 2. No other significant rejection comments are noted by staff at this time regarding the Traffic Impact Study /Q21 response. However, staff reserves the right to add future commentary based on any changes effected by forthcoming negotiations and discussions intended to finalize mitigation provisions. Some of these improvements, as they become further defined and as the proportionate share is assigned, may necessitate revisions within the TIS analyses. W -4- V AGENDA ITEM 9 -B Co er County STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION, PLANNING AND REGULATION HEARING DATE: JANUARY 20, 2010 SUBJECT: BD- PL2010 -1313, LYSIKIEWICZ BOAT DOCK EXTENSION PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: Owner: Anerzej Lysikiewicz Agent: Jeff Rogers 523 Valley Drive East Turrell, Hall & Associates Bonita Springs, FL 34134 3584 Exchange Avenue Naples, FL 34104 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner is requesting a 40 -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 60 feet into a waterway that is 420 feet wide. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject "boat dock lot" is located at 267 3rd Street West, further described as Lot 14, Block "G" in the replat of Unit 3, Little Hickory Shores Subdivision in Section 5, Township 48 South, Range 25 East. Collier County, Florida. (See location map on the following page) PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The purpose of the project is to construct a dock facility on a boat dock lot located in Bonita Shores. The boat dock lot consists of one lot totaling .01 acres that is too small to accommodate a single family residence. Please note that boat dock lots are allowed without a residential dwelling unit pursuant to PU- 87 -17C (Resolution 87 -260) which is included in the Staff Report back -up materials. The proposed 90 square -foot finger dock will consist of a 6 -foot wide access walkway with one boatlift. The facility will protrude a total of 60.0 feet into a waterway that is approximately 420 feet wide MHWL (Mean High Water Line) to MHWL. There is no dredging proposed for this project. BD- PL2010 -1313, Page 1 of 7 LYSIKIEWICZ BOAT DOCK EXT. December 23, 2010 LEE COUNTY PROJECT BONITA BEACH ROAD C.R7/LE E LOCATION v v 2 1 1 2.2 1 3 MCKDRY 4 5 v 6 7 7 BAY WEST BD IBAR BONITA SHORES > S BCREi001 5 BEACH AUDUBON - NORTH NCOUNTRY 25 2 24 2 23 2 F RESEARCH k TECHNOLOGCLUB PACOUNTY 20 RMF 6 6 A A B BD \L COWBOY MLlAOE NLLA A I F FIRST STREET L WNiRY CLUB LAKE LAKE SIERLNG CLUB MEDITERRA BAY FOREST B FOREST OAKS 10 11 B THE Nq 1 2 2 3 WATERGLADES REPEAT PLAZA PUD GLEN EDEN ON THE BAY MEADOW RBOE( ARBOR TRADE ALICE PLACE ESTATES LITTLE ` ` 2 24 2 - -- - -- -- -_ - - ETERAN6 MEMDRNL BOULEVARD 21 2 20 1 CO ATCHEE CWMATCHFE TARPON ILARCS SANDALWOOD LAWMETKA LAKES BAY \ \O B BAY BAY COVE PLAZA BD CDC LLA 16 us- It/WIGGINS \ S C.R. Be. PA55 ROAD 14 17 15 CASTLE-CD O (� R10GINS LAKE AT IMPERIAL KREHI 10 N1 B IMPERIAL INDUS IES OERMNN BAY WEST \ 1 COCOHAICHEE ?��utYO,nYE 3 4 4 5 5 BAY COCCHATCHEE RSF -4 59.55 C RIVER TRUST g+ U TAMIA C PROFESSIONAL CENTER / a NAN 19 i NA 23 ^�+1 EMILT 21 2 0 9 NAPLES PIPER BLYW. 22 Cq.UER MEDICAL MEDICAL OFFICE 23 O O Z COLUER TRACT HEALTH a 21 PLAZA 21 COLLIE CENTER BR TRACT 22 SII PROF. DEVELOPMENT BID / (DRI) HEALTH PARK VETERANS 25V 24 THIRD STREET THE CLINES Leo BD 4 NAPLEVMMOKALEE PARK ROAD (C.R.NB) COMMONS 43 2 R R M F- GREEN COVENTRY GRANA A CMTKSWE 1R[E SHORE SOVARE SHOPP 5 COMMERCE SURREY CENTER / RMURYCEIAFBFENT 29 lAl(E ST. JOHN THE EVANGELIST NLUS CAINUG LT = ✓ DE NEWB �P 6KN 5 DAILY MEDICAL CE TER 26 n VANDERBILT 26 27 STDNEBRIOGE KAM ESTATES NAPLES PARK SO ¢ a WARM U Y S f (DR0 s PAMUM z MIR.A LANE j u 4 r PA VAION VERCATO PELICAN MARSH a i VANDERSILT 34 (35 32 BEACH R OAD Z 31 WALGREENS MARKER LAKE VALAS VENETAN PLAZA PELICAN IEMUMA SAY iXEALiNLY DN"E"Y 2 4 RWGE 3 LOCH ION MAP 23 / H / 2 QV sW 1 D LITTLE HICKORY BAY I BV 1 D I BD 15 SITE 2 3 BD LOCATION I 3CV W 514 4 BD � 13 RSF -4 A N 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 6 7 6 I 5 BD 0 12 6 BD BD O 6 BD 17 SIXTH STREET WEST o 7 BD B° 21 O BD BD E BD BD BD V 18 19 20 22 23 24 1 25 28 27 2 I B s 9 8 7 6 BD D BD NON -ST CU PUD�-- ST- - - - - -- - - - - - -- ,D so LELY PUD BAREFOOT BEACH AUDUBON COUNTRY LUB PETITION * BD -PL- 2010 -1313 ZONING MAP HICKORY BAY v 1.2 1 v v 2 1 1 2.2 1 3 3 1 4 4 5 v 6 7 7 RMF W WEST BD 16 1- - - - - -- — — — — — — — — — — — — 2 25 2 24 2 23 2 22 2 21 2 20 RMF 6 6 A A B BD y I I F FIRST STREET I B BD 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 6 PUD LITTLE ` ` 2 24 2 23 2 22 2 21 2 20 1 18 BAY \ \O B BD \ S SECOND STREET \ O O \ 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 ST PARC L L 5A R RSF -4 59.55 C C / / 22 21 2 20 1 19 i i6 2 23 O O BID / BD T 25V 24 THIRD STREET Leo BD 4 43 2 R R M F- / H / 2 QV sW 1 D LITTLE HICKORY BAY I BV 1 D I BD 15 SITE 2 3 BD LOCATION I 3CV W 514 4 BD � 13 RSF -4 A N 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 6 7 6 I 5 BD 0 12 6 BD BD O 6 BD 17 SIXTH STREET WEST o 7 BD B° 21 O BD BD E BD BD BD V 18 19 20 22 23 24 1 25 28 27 2 I B s 9 8 7 6 BD D BD NON -ST CU PUD�-- ST- - - - - -- - - - - - -- ,D so LELY PUD BAREFOOT BEACH AUDUBON COUNTRY LUB PETITION * BD -PL- 2010 -1313 ZONING MAP PETITION * BD -PL- 2010 -1313 ZONING MAP SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: SUBJECT PARCEL: Vacant Boat Dock Lot, with a zoning designation of RSF -4 SURROUNDING: North: Little Hickory Bay, with a zoning designation of PUD East: Boat Dock Lots, with a zoning designation of RSF -4 South: 3rd Street West, then Boat Dock Lots, with a zoning designation of RSF -4 West: Boat Dock Lots, with a zoning designation of RSF -4 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION: Environmental Services Staff has reviewed this petition and has no objection to the granting of this request. Section 5.03.06(E)(11) (Manatee Protection) of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) is applicable to all multi -slip docking facilities with ten (10) or more slips. The proposed facility consists of one boat slip and is therefore not subject to the provisions of this section. BD- PL2010 -1313, Page 3 of 7 LYSIKIEWICZ BOAT DOCK EXT. December 21, 2010 11� 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. 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 a finger dock and one boat slip on a boat dock lot, which is less than the allowed 2 -slips per boat dock lot. n 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 petitioner's application, there are existing mangroves along the shoreline and the water depth at the site is not adequate to accommodate the 45 -foot vessel described in the petitioner's application 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 information submitted by the petitioner, there will be no impact on the navigable waterway because of its 220 -wide width. Neighboring existing docks protrude similar distances and therefore this dock will not protrude into or have any adverse impact on navigation within the waterway. 4. Whether the proposed dock facility protrudes no more than 25 percent of the width of the waterway, and whether a minimum of 50 percent of the waterway BD- PL2010 -1313, Page 4 of 7 LYSIKIEWICZ BOAT DOCK EXT. December 21, 2010 n width between dock facilities on either side is maintained for navigability. (The facility should maintain the required percentages.) Criterion not met. According to the information provided by the petitioner, the waterway is 420 feet wide from MHW to MEW. The proposed facility will occupy about 27 percent or 60 feet of the 220 -foot navigable waterway width, which means that the proposed facility does not meet this criteria. 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. Secondary Criteria 1. Whether there are special conditions not involving water depth, related to the subject property or waterway, which justify the proposed dimensions and location of the proposed dock facility. (There must be at least one special condition related to the property; these may include type of shoreline reinforcement, shoreline configuration, mangrove growth, or seagrass beds.) Criterion met. The property is situated along a natural mangrove shoreline. The extension is necessary in order to minimize impacts to existing mangroves which protrude approximately 15 feet into the water. 2. Whether the proposed dock facility would allow reasonable, safe access to the vessel for loading/unloading and routine maintenance, without the use of excessive deck area not directly related to these functions. (The facility should not use excessive deck area.) Criterion met. As shown on the drawings submitted by the petitioner, the 6 foot wide walkway is not excessive and allows limited direct access to the vessel on the boatlift for loading /unloading as well as 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 property's linear waterfront footage. (The applicable maximum percentage should be maintained.) Criterion not applicable as this is a boat dock lot. 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.) BD- PL2010 -1313, Page 5 of 7 LYSIKIEWICZ BOAT DOCK EXT. December 21, 2010 11� Criterion met. The proposed dock facility will not impact the view of the neighboring property owners. The lots in the area are all boat dock lots, and as such, there are no single family homes associated with the lots. 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 200 feet of the proposed dock facility or within this portion of Little Hickory Bay. Therefore, there will be no impact to 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. The proposed facility consists of one boat slip and is therefore not subject to the provisions of this section. Staff analysis indicates that the request meets four of the five 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 Growth Management Division 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. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report for BD- PL2010 -1313 revised on December 21, 2010. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above findings, staff recommends that the CCPC approve Petition BD- PL2010 -1313. Attachments: A. Resolution B. Application C. Provisional Use 87 -260, RSF -4 Boat Dock Lots D. Variance 2000 -51, reduced setbacks BD- PL2010 -1313, Page 6 of 7 LYSIKIEWICZ BOAT DOCK EXT. December 21, 2010 ARED !z.�� . Ito C AEL WY R, PROJECT MANAGER DATE DEPARTMENT OV LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REVIEWED BY: RAYMOND V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DATE DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES vf Z�;ej' 17-- 7-5 Zoi6 LIAM D. LO NZ JR., P.E., DIRECTOR DATE DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES APPROVED BY: NICK CASAL NG , DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR DATE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN DATE BD- PL2010 -1313, Page 7 of 7 LYSIKIEWICZ BOAT DOCK EXT. December 21, 2010 CCPC RESOLUTION NO. 11 RESOLUTION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER BD- PL2010- 1313 FOR A 40 -FOOT BOAT DOCK EXTENSION OVER THE MAXIMUM 20 -FOOT LIMIT IN SECTION 5.03.06 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR A TOTAL PROTRUSION OF 60 FEET TO ACCOMMODATE ONE BOAT LIFT FOR THE BENEFIT OF LOT 14, BLOCK G IN THE REPLAT OF UNIT 3, LITTLE HICKORY SHORES SUBDIVISION 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 40 -foot extension over the maximum 20 -foot limit provided in LDC Section 5.03.06 to allow for a 60 -foot boat dock facility in a residential single family (RSF4) zoning district for property hereinafter described; and WHEREAS, the CCPC has found as a matter of fact that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by LDC Section 5.03.06 and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given the opportunity to be heard by this Commission at a public hearing, and the Commission has considered all matters presented. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: Petition Number BD- PL2010 -1313, filed on behalf of Anerzej Lysikiewicz by Jeff Rogers of Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc., with respect to the property hereinafter described as: Lot 14, Block G, Replat of Unit No. 3, Little Hickory Shores according to the map thereof in Plat Book 6, Page 2 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida Lysikiewicz Dock / BD- PL2010 -1313 Page l of 2 Rev. 12/21/10 14 be and the same is hereby approved for a 40 -foot extension of a boat dock over the maximum 20- foot limit to allow for a 60 -foot boat dock facility as shown on the Proposed Site Plan attached as Exhibit 'W', in the zoning district wherein said property is located. 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 -2011. ATTEST: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Nick Casalanguida, Deputy Administrator Mark P. Strain, Chairman Growth, Management/Planning & Regulation Division Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Steven T.Williams t� 0 Assistant County Attorney � Attachment: Exhibit "N'— Proposed Site Plan CPS 10- CPS -01 osn 11 Lysikiewicz Dock / BD- PL2010 -1313 Page 2 of 2 Rev. 12/21/10 STATE OF FLORIDA N S CITY COLLIER COUNTY .MYERS" KEY WEST ,..e'Z4 lion& LYSWJEWIGZ DOCK — THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES OP 267 3RD ST W LOT 14 AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE. BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34134 — LATITUDE: N26° i9' 38.09" <> LONGITUDE: W81" 49' 55.21' Exhibit A LIM COUNTY AERIAL Terrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. TJJ TA8 MACE: LOCATION Marine &Environmental Conaulling L Y S I K 1 E W 1 CZ [DOCK DRAWN 11 v,x WA CWATW 5- 3.2010 MfA SCALE: WA 3584 [xcbow. nu. mite B. Napier FL 3)603 -3132 LOCATION MAP '0B NO.: 1021 IQA Frail: NL�;WrtetJ•uaociuea.eam Yhane: (239) M3 -0i66 Fax; (239) 633-d612 9ECT1[?N -5 _. T'[>WN6HIP- 486 RANGE- 28E LITTLE HICKORY BAY ADJACENT DOCK APPROX EDGE OF ? APPROX BOTTOM •' - OF BANK MLWL -0.5 APPROX TOP �! OF BANK MHWl.0.0' � , LOT 14 BLOCK G NQTES• "a a — THE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE — ALL DATUM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERE14CED TO MLW. o APPLICANT OWNS 30 L.F. OF SHORELINE. LYSIKIEVNCZ DOCK -?P o WIDTH OF WATERWAY: APPROX. 420' (MHW TO MHW) 2g7 3RD ST W LOT 14 r' - WIDTH OF NAVIGVASL.E WATERWAY: APPROK 220' 80NiiA SPRINGS, FL 34134 - TIDAL DATUM: MLW - -0.6• NAVDU, MHW = 0.0' NAVDU- :. o SURVEY PROVIDED BY: 'COURT GREGORY SURVEYING" -- - -- o SURVEY DATED: 4f30M10 Twell, Hall & Associates Inc. ° ` T.T.F. ` F;tewwE LYSIKIEWICZ QOCKD� BY.v A Merin & Environmental Consulting c "mlo Ivry SCALE: N�,FL34104 -3732 EXISTING CONDITIONS '°�"° 1021 WA ���. �'��_��35S4ExdwwAmStiteB. F�e21I' NORa/'LmYl M Wm w Pbm: (239) 643 -0166 Fax: (239) 643.6632 W/ AERIAL SECTION- 5 TOWNSHIP- 48S RAN<iE- 28E N11 LITTLE HICKORY ' BAY #p ADJACENT DOCK 1� ADJACENT DOCK tip 9 �4 APPROX EDGE OF } Alp It °4 �—�- APPROX BOTTOM OF BANK MLWL -00 APPROX TOP MHWL o.a OF BANK LOT 14 BLOCK •G" LYSIKEWICZ DOCK 267 3RD ST W LOT 14 BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34134 THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE. ALL DATUM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED TO M W, APPLICANT OWNS 30 L.F. OF SHORELINE. WIDTH OF WATERWAY: APPROX. 4201' (MHW TO MHW) WIDTH OF NAVIGVABLE WATERWAY: APPROX. ZM' TIDAL DATUM: MLW - -0.5 NAVD'88. MHW = o.o' NAVD'88. SURVEY PROVIDED BY: "COURT GREGORY SURVEYING' SURVEY DATED: 4rAM18 Terrell, Hall Associates, Inc. LYS 1 K 1 E W I CZ L► O C K Mme: vjZ "�` /. Marine & Environmental Comculting CMATIM. 5 -3-7010 NN SCALE: 3584ExdmrAw -Suite B. NapimFt.34104 -3732 EXISTING CONDITIONS '°g"° '°2' WA 1' ' 12 9D b43 -0I65 Fu: (39)643 663: SECTION- 5 TOWNSHIP - 48S RANGE- 26E LITTLE HICKORY BAY 45' CATAMARAN TYP. ADJACENT DOCK V 's MLWL -0.5' ---y, MHWL 0.0' �! t LYSIKIE1MCa DOCK 267 3RD ST W LOT 114 BONITA SPRINGS, Ft 34134 ADJACENT DOCK 20' x 28' LIFT 8 PILE TYP. a �. APPROX EDGE OF MANGROVES �� r ---- APPROX BOTTOM OF BANK `-- APPROX TOP ( OF BANK \ 6 c NOTES y1 r+ THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE. LOT 14 o ALL DATUM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED TO MLW. BLOCK 'G' a APPLICANT OWNS 30 L.F. OF SHORELINE o PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX 90 SQ, FT. PROPOSED TOTAL STRUCTURE: APPROX 138 SO. FT. WIDTH OF WATERWAY: APPROX. 420' (MHW TO MHW) o WIDTH OF NAVtGVABLE WATERWAY- APPROX, 220' o TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM MHWL: W FT. ca TIDAL DATUM: MLW = -0.3' NAVD'88, MHW - 0.0' NAVOW. o SURVEY PROVIDED BY: "COURT GREGORY SURVEYING' a SURVEY DATED: 4Ij(=10 E 0 ro 20 40 SGAl"E ?N�E'l 16 Turre[[, Hall &Associates, Inc. . T.T.T. REVI810N: TAB NAME: PROPOSM LY S 1 K 1 E W 1 Cz � C> C K CRAY* BY. vJZ WA BHMT: 5 Marine & Environmental Consulting CIWATM s3-X10 na, scuE. ` SM EACimp Ave. Suite B. Naples, FL 34104 -3732 PROPOSED DOCK J°B NO` 1021 WA �Sfl: It>7t11'Y�Ot7�XIDa1 I�Ii0E1t: (ii4)�► -016e Fax: (219) 643-6632 3ECT10N -5 TOWNSHIP-488 RANGE -25E SECTION" ro 20 J'Ya9N 20' x 28' LIFT 8 PILE TYP. 45'CATAMARAN TYP. MF W: U"YQ'B81 t..J 1 E CZ DOCK W LOT 14 GS, FL 34134 r0 - THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE - ALL DATUM SHOWN HEREON 18 REFERENCED TO MLW. - APPLICANT OWNS 30 L.F. OF SHOREUNE. PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX 90 SO. FT. - PROPOSED TOTAL STRUCTURE: APPROX 138 $a FT. — "DTH OF WATERWAY: APPROX. 420' (MHW To MHW) !� WIDTH OF NAIVIGVABLE WATERWAY: APPROX. 220' cs TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM MHWL: SO FT. TIDAL DATUM: MLW = -0.5' NAVIY88, MHW- 0.0' NAVDW. a SURVEY PROVIDED BY 'COURT GREGORY SURVEYING' o SURVEY DATED: 4I30l2410 J Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. Dom: T.T.T. "wok. TASNAME: SECUM - - LYS I K I E W I CZ Cl CJ C K WAVW8Y: V.Z WA BEET. Marir>C 8c Environmental Consulting CREATED: 5-34010 WA scxe 3584 Exchmp Ave. Suite B. Naples, FL 34IW3732 DOCK CROSS SECTION JOB NO.: IIYtI WA h®iirC�lLtlC41'i9 6dmC 1Q1 Phone: (23N) 6434166 Fix: (239) 643 -6632 SECTION-5 TOWNSHIP- 4ZS RANGE- 25E AGENDA ITEM 9 -C Co *e.r County STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION — PLANNING & REGULATION HEARING DATE: JANUARY 20, 2011 SUBJECT: BD- 2008 -AR- 13142, SCHNELLER DOCK COMPANION ITEM: VA -2010 -739 PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: Owner: Mr. Paul Schneller 39 West Pelican Street Naples, FL 34113 REQUESTED ACTION: Agent: Mr. Jeff Rogers Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. 3584 Exchange Avenue Naples, FL 34104 The petitioner is requesting a 133 -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 153 feet into a waterway that is 1,152 feet wide. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located at 39 West Pelican Street, further described as Lot 81, Isles of Capri No. 1, Section 31, Section 31, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (See location map on the following page) PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The purpose of the project is to construct a wood fmger boat dock to facilitate one (1) vessel up to 17 feet in length. The proposed boat dock will be 3 feet wide and 153 feet long (as measured from the mean high water line (MHWL)) and will total 374± square feet over Page 1 of 8 BD- 2008 -AR -13142 December 21, 2010 LOCATION MAP g I I BD (� NON -ST I MARLIN BAY _ ST Y TAHITI CIR. (NASSAU ST.) oiv >i F Q s Q A -ST TAHITI CIR. (TAHITI ST.) BD BD ISLES OF CAPRI eo T BD POMPANO BAY �1 P BD BD �2 a� BD A -ST > 3 INLAND WATERWAY V. BD B o v'BD HAWK ST. odg� LOCIATION BD z _ BD BD s o BD BD PELICAN STREET RMF 12 RMF -16 V PU-h uu�co BD BD BD TONERS BD CAPRI POINT LA PENINSULA CONDO LA PENINSULA LA PENINSULA CONDO CONDO PH I MARCO RIVER ROMERY BAY Ila LOCATION MAP g I I BD (� NON -ST I MARLIN BAY _ ST Y TAHITI CIR. (NASSAU ST.) oiv >i F Q s Q A -ST TAHITI CIR. (TAHITI ST.) BD BD ISLES OF CAPRI eo T BD POMPANO BAY �1 P BD BD �2 a� BD A -ST > 3 INLAND WATERWAY V. BD B o v'BD HAWK ST. odg� LOCIATION BD z _ BD BD s o BD BD PELICAN STREET RMF 12 RMF -16 V PU-h uu�co BD BD BD TONERS BD CAPRI POINT LA PENINSULA CONDO LA PENINSULA LA PENINSULA CONDO CONDO PH I MARCO RIVER ZONING MAP PETITION #1 2008- AR- 13142 water. This boat dock extension variance petition is a companion application to a variance petition (VA- PL2010 -739) from the required side yard riparian line setback of 7.5 feet to allow a dock facility at 0 -foot from the riparian line. SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: SUBJECT PARCEL: single - family home, zoned RSF -4 SURROUNDING: North: Pompano Bay, a 1,152 -foot waterway with a zoning designation of A -ST East: Single- family residence on Lot 80, with a zoning designation of RSF -4 South: Pelican Street right -of -way, then Marco Towers, with a zoning designation of RMF -12 West: Single - family residence on Lot 82, with a zoning designation of RSF -4 Aerial photo taken from Collier County Property Appraiser website. Page 3 of 8 BD- 2008 -AR -13142 December 20, 2010 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION: Environmental Services staff has reviewed this petition and has no objection to the granting of this request. Section 5.03.06(E)(11) (Manatee Protection) of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) is applicable to all multi-slip docking facilities with ten (10) or more slips. The proposed facility consists of one boat slip and is therefore not subject to the provisions of this section. STAFF COMMENTS: 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 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 one boat slip, which is appropriate in relation to the converging riparian lines. The subject property is zoned RSF -4, and a single - family home exists on the property. 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 17 -foot vessel described in the petitioner's application at mean low tide (0.2') without an extension. Furthermore, Page 4 of 8 BD- 2008 -AR -13142 December 20, 2010 nal the proposed boat dock is located within an aquatic preserve and no dredging is allowed. 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 information submitted by the petitioner, the proposed dock is located in Pompano Bay in an area that is too shallow for normal navigation and there are no navigable channels in the vicinity. Furthermore, the proposed dock has been designed in a way that will not impede navigation and is congruent with adjacent existing docks within the surrounding bay. 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 1,152 feet wide at the site as measured by aerial photograph. The proposed facility will occupy about 11 percent of the waterway width, leaving more than 50 percent of the navigable waterway open. 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 and information submitted by the petitioner, the proposed facility will allow use of neighboring docks. Secondary Criteri a 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 located in the back corner of Pompano Bay leaving very little room to construct a dock within the property's riparian lines. Pompano Bay is an aquatic preserve, therefore, no dredging is permitted. This leaves the applicant with the only option of proposing a dock that protrudes a long distance. Page 5 of 8 BD- 2008 -AR -13142 December 20, 2010 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 access to the vessel 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 property's linear waterfront footage. (The applicable maximum percentage should be maintained.) Criterion not met. While the subject property is a 70 -foot wide lot, the beach has filled -in creating land between the rear lot line and water. Furthermore, an approximately 70 -foot wide mangrove island exists between the water, filled -in beach area and residential lot. According to the drawing submitted by the petitioner, the applicant owns 29 feet of shoreline. Therefore, the vessel exceeds more than 50 percent of the water frontage (as measured along the approximate 29 lineal feet of shoreline). 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 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 island that provides a buffer between the proposed dock 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 Pompano 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.) n Page 6 of 8 BD- 2008 -AR -13142 December 20, 2010 24 Criterion met. According to Sections 3.2.3.4 and 4.6.3. of the Manatee Protection Plan, the proposed dock facility will be for the mooring of one vessel at a single - family residence and therefore is not subject to the Collier County Manatee Protection Plan Guidelines. Staff analysis indicates that the request meets all of the primary criteria and five of the six secondary criteria. APPEAL OF BOAT DOCK EXTENSION TO BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS: As to any boat dock extension petition upon which the CCPC takes action, an aggrieved petitioner, or adversely affected property owner, may appeal such final action to the Board of Zoning Appeals. Such appeal shall be filed with the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator within 30 days of the action by the CCPC. In the event that the petition has been approved by the CCPC, the applicant shall be advised that he /she proceeds with construction at his/her own risk during this 30 -day period. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report for BD- 2008 -AR -13142 revised on 12/21/10. -STW -� STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above findings, staff recommends that the CCPC approve Petition BD -2008- 13142, subject to the approval of companion item: VA- PL2010 -739. Page 7 of 8 BD- 2008 -AR -13142 December 21, 2010 PREPARED BY: NANCY GUNOL Ij, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER DEPARTMEN OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REVIEWED BY: K. /�� RAY OND V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES i'�" LIAM D. L RE JR., P.E., DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES APPROVED BY: NICK CASALANGUIDA, DE MINISTRATOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN Attachments: A: Pictures from site visit B: Letter of no objection C: Resolution Page 8 of 8 BD- 2008 -AR -13142 December 20, 2010 2c) (2c(/O DATE /Z- Lm -to DATE DATE DATE DATE View of shoreline frontage where proposed dock will be located. Attachment A Page 1 of 2 View of boat docks to the east of the proposed boat dock. View of mangrove island from subject residE!ntial lot. Attachment A Page 2 of 2 LETTER OF NO OB MON PROJECT SITE: SCHNELLER RESIDENCE 39 W Pelican Street Naples, FL 34113 I hereby state that I am the owner of the adjacent upland riparian property located to the North, of the proposed dock project at address referenced above. I understand that the subject project is proposing to construct a dock within the required side yard setback from my property line as shown on the attached exhibit. I do not object to the proposed dock project and agree to allow the project to be carried out within the required side yard setback as shown. (� ginal signature of adjacent owner) (Printed name off' adjacent owner) Attachment B J ". 4S (Date signed) Mr. & Mrs. Jim Hughes 94 Dolphin Circle Naples, Florida 34113 -4016 16 December 2010 Land Development Services ATTN: Nancy Gundlach AICP 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples FL 34104 Dear Ms. Gundlach; With regard to Paul Schneller's request (BD- 2008 -AR- 13142) for a 125 -foot dock facility to accommodate one vessel: 1) Our dock and three others next to us are all quite lengthy due to the bay's make up. We all have waterfront lots and there is no reason that the Schnellers should not have permission to do the same. 2) On this side of the bay there are no Seawalls, therefore we must get ouiinto deep enough water to accommodate our boats. This project will be next to our dock and we have no objection_ n 3) Kindly permit this project. Yours truly, Mr. & Mrs. Jim Hughes n r CCPC RESOLUTION NO. 2011- RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER BD- 2008 -AR -13142 FOR AN EXTENSION OF A BOAT DOCK ON PROPERTY HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [COMPANION TO VA- 2010 -739] 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 133 -foot extension over the maximum 20 -foot limit provided in LDC Section 5.03.06 to allow for a 153 - foot boat dock facility in an RSF -4 zone for property hereinafter described; and WHEREAS, the CCPC has found as a matter of fact that satisfactory provision and n 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- 2008 -AR- 13142, filed on behalf of Paul Schneller by Jeff Rogers of Turrell, Hall and Associates, Inc., with respect to property hereinafter described as: Lot 81, Isles of Capri No. 1, as recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 41, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, together with that portion of Pompano Bay lying upland of the 1.6' contour contiguous with said Lot 81 as delineated on a survey by A. Trigo & Associates, which is defined by a line extending from said mean high water line and a line extending from the northeast corner of said Lot 81 in a direction of North 55 50'01" east to said mean high water line delineating the approximate limits of Riparian Rights Schneller Boat Dock /BD- 2008 -AR -13142 Revised 12/21/10 Page 1 of 2 be and the same is hereby approved for a 133 -foot extension of a boat dock over the maximum 20 -foot limit to allow for a 153 -foot boat dock facility in the RSF -4 zoning district wherein said property is located. 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 ATTEST: day of , 2011. Nick Casalanguida, Deputy Administrator Growth Management/Planning & Regulation Division Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Steven T. Williams 5f-;, Assistant County Attorney ` Attachment: Exhibit A — Conceptual Site Plan 09- CPS - 00948/21 COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Mark P. Strain, Chairman Schneller Boat Dock /BD- 2008 -AR -13142 Revised 12/21/10 Page 2 of 2 n AI—N '17 - - STATE OF FL®RfDA N ,--No No S cm COLLIER COUNTY DRIVING DIRECTIONS• FT.MYERS" MI KEY WEST SITE ADDRE53: 39 PELICAN STREET WEST NAPLES, FL 34113 - I -75 TO EXIT 101 (COLLIER BLVD. 951) - HEAD SW ON 951 TO CAPRI BLVD, - (R) ON CAPRI BLVD. AND CONTINUE TO PELICAN ST. - (R) ON WEST PEL CAN, HOUSE IS ON RIGHT NOTES: <> THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSI AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE. VICINITY MAP — LATITUDE: N 25° 56'40' <> LONGITUDE: W 81 ° 44' 03" �, Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. Marine & Enviro mrentel COnWhing 3584 F.xclwap Ave. Sube B. Ntptra, FL 34104 -3732 �esoeie m— Mow (239) 643.0166 Fmv (239) 643.6632 COUNTY AERIAL SCHNEL L -a FR SOCK LOCATION MAP Fvhihit A T.T.T. REMM. TAB MANE: L=,n DRAYYNBV: is ta•14TOaB BIEET: 01 Csmnv. OTO& 7 o &itamo -v z som : Mg JOB No.: am 0"I -mlo - viz SECTION- 31 TOWNSHIP- 61 S RANGE- 26E N S 0 20 qo & 4VAtE7NTrET LOT 84 RIPARIAN LINES 12.6' 15.3' WOOD DOCK\ WOOD RAIL' POMPANO BAY 5.5' / //- 113.6'+-3 667'x// ea � SITE ADDRESS: 39 PELICAN STREET WEST NAPLES, FL 34113 5 .23 49 dA -43 .3.1 LOT 81 CONTAINS 0.18 ACRES OF LAND MORE OR LESS, LOT 81 1 LOT BD A --.4.2 .-2.9 PILES NOTES• o THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE. <> ALL DATUM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED TO MLW. <> APPLICANT OWNS APPROX. 29 L.F. OF SHORELINE. <> TIDAL DATUM: MLW -0.2' NOVD, MHW -1.8' NGVD. o TOTAL WIDTH OF WATER IS APPROX. 1,152' o SURVEY COURTESY OF -COURT GREGORY SURVEYING, ►NC- SURVEY DATED: 06 -18-07 Tture�, Hall & ASSOCiates Inc, DESIDNEQ T.T,T. " = Marine Envnoumentai Consuttinp S C H N E L L E R S O C K °R" 1N" T D CREATED: 07.03 �'-' 3584Eacb>1ngeAve,Suif:B. Naplea,FL341043732 EXISTING CONDITIONS WITH DEPTHS J°eNo. 0m Sslaocield cam Fltooe; (23� 643 0166 P9z: (?39)643 6632 SECTI014-31 REVISION: 10- 142006 Ob11- 2010 - WZ WA TOWNSHIP-518 ;i; 5-aiR AS SHOWN - - -4(3E- 26E , 7.3 POMPANO BAY SOD WOOD " �A"0-0 ' z� DOCK \ r -= -0.1 . 07 LOT 82 j6:f .y6 . as -0.7 . b �.9 RIPARIAN / _0 ,06A' •qy� ,S,o -02 -03 -0 LINES tae! a . -0.1. +f.6S 03 •0.0.1 -0�'-0' . .3 10.7' .0-3/ .02 /tA,9 -OA -I .OA O3 A2 . al APPROX El. -- Z /02 (N.O.V.O. RO) Ob"O% ,1Y . 1, l 142 1 •1.7 /'. CIA MANGROVE 2.. .21�a .1 FRINGE UNE 2 / 2 2.1 •22 •2A 2A � APPROX -239 MANGROVE .3 42 .2A f43 / .2A .23 .22 422 APPROX, .2A .2.4 .2d .2A •2A .2A M14.W. ONEI PROPERTY LINE .2A •2.1 n2 RMRAP EL. 18 AREA Qr.O.VD. 7D) -23 117 3 WIDE / //- 113.6'+-3 667'x// ea � SITE ADDRESS: 39 PELICAN STREET WEST NAPLES, FL 34113 5 .23 49 dA -43 .3.1 LOT 81 CONTAINS 0.18 ACRES OF LAND MORE OR LESS, LOT 81 1 LOT BD A --.4.2 .-2.9 PILES NOTES• o THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE. <> ALL DATUM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED TO MLW. <> APPLICANT OWNS APPROX. 29 L.F. OF SHORELINE. <> TIDAL DATUM: MLW -0.2' NOVD, MHW -1.8' NGVD. o TOTAL WIDTH OF WATER IS APPROX. 1,152' o SURVEY COURTESY OF -COURT GREGORY SURVEYING, ►NC- SURVEY DATED: 06 -18-07 Tture�, Hall & ASSOCiates Inc, DESIDNEQ T.T,T. " = Marine Envnoumentai Consuttinp S C H N E L L E R S O C K °R" 1N" T D CREATED: 07.03 �'-' 3584Eacb>1ngeAve,Suif:B. Naplea,FL341043732 EXISTING CONDITIONS WITH DEPTHS J°eNo. 0m Sslaocield cam Fltooe; (23� 643 0166 P9z: (?39)643 6632 SECTI014-31 REVISION: 10- 142006 Ob11- 2010 - WZ WA TOWNSHIP-518 ;i; 5-aiR AS SHOWN - - -4(3E- 26E !E a N S o SO 60 wry 4'GM9NF POMPANO BAY BEGINNING / OF DOCK / / "IMPACTS HAVE BEEN MINIMIZED TO / THE FULLEST EXTENT POSSIBLE" Sr ES rE ADDRESS: "ALL EXOTICS WILL BE REMOVED 39 PELICAN STREET WEST AND MAINTAINED EXOTIC FREE" NAPLES. FL 34113 / / 5.3' TERMINAL PLATFORM IS 30" ABOVE MHWL AND WILL FACILITATE A 1T' SKIFF NOTES: o THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPO SES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE <> ALL DATUM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED TO MLW. <> APPLICANT OWNS APPROX. 29 L.F. OF SHORELINE. <> PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX 5374 SO. FT. <> TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM MHWL :153 FT. <> TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM BEGINNING OF DOCK: 229 FT. o TOTAL WIDTH OF WATER IS APPROX, 1,152 <> TIDAL DATUM: MLW= 0,2' NGVD, MHW -+1.6' NGVD. <> SURVEY COURTESY OF `COURT GREUORV SIlRVEYA1 G' jNC• SURVEY DATED: 06.1607 Terrell, Hall &Associates, Inc. Marine & Environmemal Consulting 3584 Exchange Ave. Sane B. Naples, FL 34IX3732 Email: po ll. wm Ph=:(Z39)643-4166 Fax:(B9)643.9n S C H N E L L E R L7 O C K PROPOSED WALKWAY AND DOCK LAYOUT °�wN T.T.T. Iglu s ,o - „-wos CRF"TM 07-0"7 oerl,,z 10 •viz JOB ND” 0002 09O1- mo-v'R SECTION -31 TOWNSHIP -518 m RANGE- 26E IF r w —IMPACTS HAVE BEEN MINIMIZED TO - 01 THE FULLEST EXTENT POSSIBLE- _ff1E EGINNING 2A OF PON --ALL ExoT;rs WILL REMOVED AND MAINTAINED EXOTIC FREE" 3,7 , _= NOTES: All ­ THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPO SES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE. — ALL DATUM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED TO MLW. <> APPLICANT OWNS APPROX. 29 L.F. OF SHORELINE. PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX S74 $0. FT. <> TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM MHWL: 153 Fr. o TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM BEGINNING OF DOCK: 229 FT. — TOTAL WIDTH OF WATER IS APPROX.1,152' "A' <> TIDAL DATUIM: MLW--O.r NGVD, MHW-+1.6' NGVD. <> SURVEY COURTESY OF' COURT GREGORY SURWMG, jNc- *4 SURVEY DATED: 06-16-07 Hall & Associates, Inc. Marine N EF_ L_ L_ a F:;,b DOCK D E51cmm. T.T.T. T Tm N"N_ Roes DRAWN BY. A 0-14-2M aHmm & EnviromnmW Consulting — 04 3584 ExchW Ave. Suk B. Naph FL 34104-3732 CREATED: 07-03-07 O&II-2DIOV& SCALE: AS AS §00d9mcm Phone; (239 }643-0166 ?=(239)643-W2 PROPOSED WITH AERIAL JOB NO.: OW2 00-0-2010-WZ SECTION-31 TOWNSHIP-516 "4F-- 26E N Am T- s AO 60 SCaIL"E ?N7�iE'T - .5.6 -5.6 POMPANO BAY .1A 51.� •.fit 3,2,0 .1Y i .4A / SITE ADDRESS: 39 PELICAN STREET WEST NAPLES, FL 34113 12A oPs/ 21 AREA 10' i WIDE ,2,3 ' 4.6- .2.4 we 4.3 APPROX. A MANGROVE FRINGE LINE APPROX MANGROVE ROOT LINE M.H.W. LINE! PROPERTY LINE EL = 1.6' (N.G.V.D.'29) "IMPACTS HAVE BEEN MINIMIZED TO THE FULLEST EXTENT POSSIBLE" "ALL EXOTICS WILL BE REMOVED AND MAINTAINED EXOTIC FREE" / x•4.6 / •-� <-3 i .4'a e / 1.4.3 6� / /2.7% -3.5 -4.2 1 29 NOTES: o THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPO SES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE. <> ALL DATUM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED TO) MLW. <> APPLICANT OWNS APPROX. 29 L.F. OF SHORELINE. <> PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX 3374 SO. FT, <> TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM MHWL:153 FT. <> TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM BEGINNING OF DOCK: 229 Fr. o TOTAL WIDTH OF WATER IS APPROX. 1,152' <> TIDAL DATUM: MLW■ -O.2' NGVD, MHW - +1.6' NGVD. <> SURVEY COURTESY OF' COURT GREGORY SURVEYLVG, /MC' SURVEY DATED: 06 -16 -07 Terrell, HaU &Associates, Inc. S C H N E L L E R d O C K Marine &Environmental Consulting 3584 Excbmp Ave. Suite B. Naples, FL 34104 -3732 Emdam@an m Plw=(239)643-0166 I'm(239)643.6832 PROPOSED Wl DEPTHS AND SEC LOCATIONS REVISION: 06-1 1$010 - VJz oao, -z0,o - v,Iz TOWNSHIP- 518 05 SHOO RANGE- 26E .0.0 0.5 DA 6 OA // -0 OA -9A k 0.0 0.6 y0.5 / 0.0 / •0.1 .3 .05 0.7 py /•0.3 'DS -0. 0.1 APPROX. / D 2 M.LW. LINE p4g�,0.6 .0 ..D 3 / a0.1 EL = -o2 OA /0.2 (N.G.V.D. '29) / •0.3 .4A / SITE ADDRESS: 39 PELICAN STREET WEST NAPLES, FL 34113 12A oPs/ 21 AREA 10' i WIDE ,2,3 ' 4.6- .2.4 we 4.3 APPROX. A MANGROVE FRINGE LINE APPROX MANGROVE ROOT LINE M.H.W. LINE! PROPERTY LINE EL = 1.6' (N.G.V.D.'29) "IMPACTS HAVE BEEN MINIMIZED TO THE FULLEST EXTENT POSSIBLE" "ALL EXOTICS WILL BE REMOVED AND MAINTAINED EXOTIC FREE" / x•4.6 / •-� <-3 i .4'a e / 1.4.3 6� / /2.7% -3.5 -4.2 1 29 NOTES: o THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPO SES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE. <> ALL DATUM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED TO) MLW. <> APPLICANT OWNS APPROX. 29 L.F. OF SHORELINE. <> PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX 3374 SO. FT, <> TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM MHWL:153 FT. <> TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM BEGINNING OF DOCK: 229 Fr. o TOTAL WIDTH OF WATER IS APPROX. 1,152' <> TIDAL DATUM: MLW■ -O.2' NGVD, MHW - +1.6' NGVD. <> SURVEY COURTESY OF' COURT GREGORY SURVEYLVG, /MC' SURVEY DATED: 06 -16 -07 Terrell, HaU &Associates, Inc. S C H N E L L E R d O C K Marine &Environmental Consulting 3584 Excbmp Ave. Suite B. Naples, FL 34104 -3732 Emdam@an m Plw=(239)643-0166 I'm(239)643.6832 PROPOSED Wl DEPTHS AND SEC LOCATIONS REVISION: 06-1 1$010 - VJz oao, -z0,o - v,Iz TOWNSHIP- 518 05 SHOO RANGE- 26E N ��X,,� �v E S 0 6 JY:ICE9N�'l -�. i Ili f IF ! t � ;Ill .., . '�' MHW 1.8' NGVD �'�: >, .� �,•� .. ` •...•. 4p _ .l•.;3 MLW -0.2' NGVD N A. mug r s .l�111i�7N'F;�E7 RIIIII A'A o THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE <> ALL DATUM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED, TO MLW. o APPLICANT OWNS APPROX. 29 L.F. OF SHORELINE. o PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX 374 SQ. FT. o TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM MHWL:163 FT. <> TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM BEGINNING OF DOCK: 229 FT. <> TOTAL WIDTH OF WATER IS APPROX. 1,157 TIDAL DATUM: MLW =-0.7 NGVD, MHW=+1.8' NGVD. SURVEY COURTESY OF "COURT GREOoRYSURVEvWc,, INC SURVEY DATED: W16-07 � ��!' :III" •, � I� T IY Y 1 .j i` ... Tht!'i w. .•r.,•,= rvi -;�'' aeM ^�+�- art+'!'W�,! -' ®sue "# ✓'•..e6'�eMS�'a'y.`'pM.T' SECMN B$ "IMPACTS HAVE BEEN MINIMIZED TO THE FULLEST EXTENT POSSIBLE- 12:1 SLOPE TERMINATING AT TERMINAL PLATFORM 10.0' 2.5' 12.0' MHW 1.6' NGVD ;r - °•.tea.. MLW -02 NGVD 91 T ADDR IGSS:.. 39 PELICAN STREET WEST NAPLES, FL 34113j` / f , -• �� .. // /c r. Tumll, Hall i Associates, Inc. S C H N E LL L E FR ID O C K Me>'ine 8c Environmental Consattinng 3584Exch1WAve. Suite B. Nap* FL 34104-3732 SECTIONS A -A AND B -B Erred: hm* mdkstpciilrs,com Pima (239) 643-0166 Fu: (239) 643-6632 TERMINAL PLATFORM "ALL EXOTICS WILL BE REMOVED AND MAINTAINED EXOTIC FREE" 17' SKIFF DRANK BY- I JS 10 -14,2M CREATED: 074307 O&11. 2010 -viz ICOND• 0R4 oe-01 -0a1D -vJZ ae 140E- 26E 191 FIXED SINGLE- FAMILY 0,067 692 MANG5 2OVE 0,253 TOTAL 1 0.320 x� i i / d4. SITE ADDRESS: ar Ills 39 PELICAN STREET WEST " NAPLES, FL 34913 ( "'INIPACTS HAVE BEEN MINIMIZED TO THE FULLEST EXTENT POSSIBLE" "ALL EXOTICS WILL BE REMOVED I , AND MAINTAINED EXOTIC FREE" F o THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY ANDARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE. ro4 o ALL DATUM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED To MLW. "APPLICANT OWNS APPROX. 291.F. OF SHORELINE. 4 ik N PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX 374 3p, FT. Cl TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM MHWL ;153 FT. o TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM BEGINNING OF DOCK: 229 FT. o TOTAL WIDTH OF WATER IS APPROX. J.162- w e> TIOAL DATLA A: MLW=-O.Z NGVD. MHW-+1.8' NGVD. o SURVEY COURTESY OF'COURTGREGORYSURWywG, INC- SURVEY DATED: 06 -16-07 Terrell, Hall & Associates Inc. S C H N E L L E R C7 O C K °�°► ° T.T.r. REVMM: Marine & i.T' VftomneR� CoIL4l1l ]I� DRAWN 9Y: SB 0611 - MO VJZ 3584 ExcbaiV Ave. Sac B. Naples, FL 34IX3732 CREA1Em: 1"3.09 0"1.2ma -v.¢ ISCALE �2.SE Emml: �aaI,= Phame; (zl9} 643-9166 Fmc 939)643.6632 F LUC C S MAP JDS NO.: °ass WA SECTION -31 TOWNSHIP -S1S RANG E N ,AV 4 vm E s 660 SCRCE 9N7�'I SITE ADDRESS: 39 PELICAN STREET WEST NAPLES, FL 34113 'RP`_ 7�'� Tlurell, Hall &Associates, Inc. . _ �-:.2 - Marine & Enviromnemal Consulting 3584 Exchange Ave. Suite B. Naples, Fi, 34104 -3732 �� �-� Pboee: (239)643-0166 Fax: (239) 643b632 LEGEND L �— — TRANSECT LINE \XIA \ t TRANSECT LINE (TYPICAL) NOTES; <> THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE. <> ALL DATUM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED TO) MLW. <> APPLICANT OWNS APPROX. 29 L.F. OF SHORELINE. o PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX 374 SO. FT. <> TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM MHWL:153 FT. <> TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM BEGINNING OF DOCK: 229 FT. <> TOTAL WIDTH OF WATER IS APPROX.1,152' <> TIDAL DATUM: MLW -0.2' NGVD, MHW =+1.8' NGVD. <> SURVEY COURTESY OF •COURT GREGORY SURVEMIQ INC' SURVEY DATED: 06-1&07 SCHNEL..L FEE FR E) CQGK SUBMERGED RESOURCE TRANSECTS DESIGNED: T.T.T. REVISION: I TAB NAME: kRANS-LFNES L da APPROX SHEET: M.H.W. LINE CREATED: EL. = 1.8' 0511010 -VJL (N.G.V.D.'29) LEGEND L �— — TRANSECT LINE \XIA \ t TRANSECT LINE (TYPICAL) NOTES; <> THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE. <> ALL DATUM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED TO) MLW. <> APPLICANT OWNS APPROX. 29 L.F. OF SHORELINE. o PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX 374 SO. FT. <> TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM MHWL:153 FT. <> TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM BEGINNING OF DOCK: 229 FT. <> TOTAL WIDTH OF WATER IS APPROX.1,152' <> TIDAL DATUM: MLW -0.2' NGVD, MHW =+1.8' NGVD. <> SURVEY COURTESY OF •COURT GREGORY SURVEMIQ INC' SURVEY DATED: 06-1&07 SCHNEL..L FEE FR E) CQGK SUBMERGED RESOURCE TRANSECTS DESIGNED: T.T.T. REVISION: I TAB NAME: kRANS-LFNES DRAWN BY: da 11- 19.2005 -TER SHEET: 0E CREATED: 07 -03W 0511010 -VJL SCALE: ASSMOWN JOB ow Oa SECTION -31 TOWNSHIP -519 VOE -26E TO: FROM: HEARING DATE: SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 9 -D Cover County STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION, PLANNING AND REGULATION JANUARY 20, 2011 PETITION VA- 2010 -739 SCHNELLER VARIANCE COMPANION ITEM: BD- 2008 -AR -13142 PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: Owner: Paul Schnelier 39 West Pelican Street Naples, FL 34113 REQUESTED ACTION: Agent: Mr. Jeff Rogers Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. 3548 Exchange Avenue Naples, FL 34104 To have the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an application for a proposed variance from the required side yard riparian line setback of 7.5 feet for property with less than 60 feet of water frontage to zero (0) feet as provided for in Section 5.03.06 E.6 of the Land Development Code (LDC). The requested action (if approved) would allow a dock facility at 0- foot from the riparian line. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located at 39 West Pelican Street, further described as Lot 81, Isles of Capri No. 1, Section 31, Township 51, South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (See location map on following page) PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The .18t acre property has an existing single family home in Isle of Capri on a lot with converging riparian lines into Pompano Bay. The petitioner proposes a wood finger boat dock to facilitate one (1) vessel up to 17 feet in length. The proposed boat dock will be 3 feet wide and VA- 2010 -739 12 -21 -10 Dann 1 of 7 LOCATION MAP g BD NON -ST MARLIN BAY _ ST V TAHITI CIR, (NASSAU ST.) ol a F V A -ST TAHITI CIR. (TAHITI ST.) B � BD ISLES OF CAPRI �r BD e BD POMPANO BAY BD 2 BD BD A -ST P INLAND WATERWAY V, BD SITE HAWK ST. = BD LOCATION �BD BD a 0 BD 0 PELICAN STREET RMF 12 RMF -16 V PU-h MARCO BD BD BD ToMfltS BD CAPRI POINT LA PENINSULA CONDO LA PENINSULA LA PENINSULA CONDO CONDO PH 1 MARCO RIVER cm LOCATION MAP g PETITION #BD- 2008- AR- 13142 ZONING MAP BD NON -ST MARLIN BAY _ ST V TAHITI CIR, (NASSAU ST.) ol a F V A -ST TAHITI CIR. (TAHITI ST.) B � BD ISLES OF CAPRI �r BD e BD POMPANO BAY BD 2 BD BD A -ST P INLAND WATERWAY V, BD SITE HAWK ST. = BD LOCATION �BD BD a 0 BD 0 PELICAN STREET RMF 12 RMF -16 V PU-h MARCO BD BD BD ToMfltS BD CAPRI POINT LA PENINSULA CONDO LA PENINSULA LA PENINSULA CONDO CONDO PH 1 MARCO RIVER PETITION #BD- 2008- AR- 13142 ZONING MAP FATI s 0 3a 60 SOAZZ 9N nZT BEGINNING POMPANO BAY 229 APPROX. M.H.W. LINE/ PROPERTY LINE RIPRAP EL. = 1.6' / AREA (N.G.V.D.'29) �— 10'± WIDE / OF DOCK / / — IMPACTS HAVE BEEN MINIMIZED TO / THE FULLEST EXTENT POSSIBLE - SITE ADDRESS: ' "ALL EXOTICS WILL BE REMOVED 39 PELICAN STREET WEST AND MAINTAINED EXOTIC FREE" NAPLES, FL 34113 153 3.0' APPROX. MANGROVE FRINGE LINE MANGROVE ROOT LINE / 12.0' / / / / 5.3' APPROX. M.L.W. LINE TERMINAL PLATFORM IS 30" EL. = -0.2' ABOVE MHWL AND WILL (N.G.V.D.'29) FACILITATE A 1T' SKIFF NOTES: <> THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPO SES ONLY AND Al2E NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE. <> ALL DATUM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED TO) MLW. <> APPLICANT OWNS APPROX. 29 L.F. OF SHORELINE. <> PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX 3374 SO. FT. <> TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM MHWL: 153 FT. <> TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM BEGINNING OF DOCK: 229 FT. <> TOTAL WIDTH OF WATER IS APPROX, 1,152' <> TIDAL DATUM: MLW = -0.2' NGVD, MHW = +1.6' NGVD. <> SURVEY COURTESY OF "COURT GREGORY SURVEYING, INC" SURVEY DATED: 06 -16 -07 Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. DESIGNED: T.T.T. REVISION: SC H N E L L E R � O C K DRAWN BY: JS 10-14 -2006 r Marine & Environmental Consulting CREATED: 07 -03 -07 1 05-11-2010 -VJZ 3584Exchange Ave. Suite B. Naples, FL 34104 -3732 PROPOSED WALKWAY AND DOCK LAYOUT JOB NO,: 0662 09-01-2010 - VJZ Email: tuna @tunell- associates.com Phone: (239) 643 -0166 Fax: (239) 643 -6632 SECTION-31 TOVVNSH IP- 51 S TAB NAME: PROPOSED SHEET: 03 SCALE: JASSHOWN RANGE -26E 153 feet long (as measured from the mean high water line (MHWL)) and will total 374± square feet over water. This variance petition is a companion application to a boat dock extension petition for a proposed 133 -foot extension to the maximum allowed 20 -foot boat dock which, if approved, would allow a 153 -foot long dock. The Conceptual Site Plan entitled "Schneller Dock - Proposed Walkway and Dock Layout" revised on September 1, 2010 and prepared by Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. illustrates the location of the proposed boat dock and vessel. (See Site Plan on previous page). According to information provided by the applicant, the neighbors to the north (west) of the subject site have existing, single boat docks that are approximately 215 feet long. The neighbor directly to the east of the subject site does not have a boat dock. In addition, the applicant has received a letter of no objection (attached) from the neighbor to the north. SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: North: Pompano Bay, a 1,152 -foot waterway with a zoning designation of A -ST East: Single - family residence on Lot 80, with a zoning designation of RSF -4 South: Pelican Street, then Marco Towers, with a zoning designation of RMF -12 West: Single - family residence on Lot 82, with a zoning designation of RSF -4 Tl F i AERIAL VA- 2010 -739 12 -16 -10 Page 4 of 7 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: The subject property is located in the Urban Mixed Use Residential land use classification on the County's Future Land Use Map (FLUM). This land use category is designed to accommodate a variety of residential uses including single family, multi - family, duplex, mobile home and mixed -use projects. As previously noted, the subject petition seeks a variance for a single family home that is located within a single - family subdivision, which is an authorized use in this land use designation, therefore, the single family home use is consistent with the FLUM. The Growth Management Plan (GMP) does not address individual variance requests; the Plan deals with the larger issue of the actual use. ANALYSIS: Section 9.04.01 of the Land Development Code gives the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) the authority to grant Variances. The Planning Commission is advisory to the BZA and utilizes the provisions of Section 9.04.03 A. through H. (in bold font below), as general guidelines to assist in making their recommendation of approval or denial. Staff has analyzed this petition relative to these provisions and offers the following responses: a. Are there special conditions and circumstances existing, which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land, structure or building involved? Yes. The subject property has narrow pie shaped riparian lines with the narrowest piece located where the proposed dock is to be located. The intersection of the riparian lines restrict the mooring of the applicant's vessel. The vessel will be located within the riparian rights of the applicant and in adequate water for safe ingress /egress to Pompano Bay. b. Are there special conditions and circumstances, which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre - existing conditions relative to the property, which are the subject of the Variance request? Yes. The existing water depths are too shallow within the pie shaped riparian lines to moor a vessel within the required 7.5 -foot riparian side yard setback. C. Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties for the applicant? Yes. The site conditions, mentioned above, make it difficult for the applicant to moor his vessel. d. Will the Variance, if granted, be the minimum Variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety and welfare? VA- 2010 -739 12 -16 -10 Page 5 of 7 Yes. The proposed dock is reasonable while still allowing for safe access for the vessel to n moor within the riparian area. e. Will granting the Variance confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district? No. Most other neighboring properties moor two vessels. This property can only moor one vessel. In addition, the applicant is requesting a finger boat dock that is similar to the three neighboring properties to the north. E Will granting the Variance be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this Land Development Code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare? The proposed encroachment would have an impact mostly on the neighbor to the north. However, the applicant has received a letter of no objection (attached) from the neighbor to the north. In addition, the proposed dock will have no impact to navigation in the adjacent bay. g. Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf courses, etc.? n Yes. There is a sandbar that is approximately 125 feet wide between the docking area and then a mangrove island which pushes the location of the boat dock further into the water. In addition, the proposed boat dock is located in Pompano Bay, which is an aquatic preserve that does not allow dredging. h. Will granting the Variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan? Approval of this variance will not affect or change the requirements of the Growth Management Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: This variance petition was not required to go before the EAC for review and approval. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report VA- 2010 -AR -739, revised December 21, 2010. - STW RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward Petition VA- 2010 -AR -739, Schneller Boat Dock to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) with a recommendation of approval. VA- 2010 -739 12 -21 -10 Anne R n* 7 PREPARED BY: NANCY U A H, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER DEPART NT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REVIEWED BY: /,-� 3�4 RAYM V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES &IAM D. LO NZ J ., P.E., DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES APPROVED BY: NICK CASALANGUIDA, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN 2,00 DATE j.7 • 2,z- 10 DATE DATE DATE DATE Tentatively scheduled for the March 8, 2011 Board of County Commissioners Meeting .tachments: A. Letter of no objection B. Resolution VA- 2010 -739 12 -16 -10 Page 7 of 7 LETTER OF NO OBJECTION PROJECT SITE: SCHNELLER RESIDENCE 39 W Pelican Street Naples, FL 34113 I hereby state that I am the owner of the adjacent upland riparian property located to the North, of the proposed dock project at address referenced above. I understand that the subject project is proposing to construct a dock within the required side yard setback from my property line as shown on the attached exhibit. I do not object to the proposed dock project and agree to allow the project to be carried out within the required side yard setback as shown. j9figinal signature of adjacent owner) (Printed name 6t adjacent owner) Attachment A (Date signed) VA- PL2010 -739 rev:1 SCHNELLER VARIANCE Date: 8/2/10 Due: 8/16/10 to-�'N RESOLUTION -1$ A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER VA- PL2010 -739, FOR A VARIANCE FROM LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 5.03.06 E.5 TO PERMIT A REDUCED SIDE YARD (RIPARIAN) SETBACK FROM 7.5 FEET TO 0 FEET ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 39 WEST PELICAN STREET IN SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [COMPANION TO BD- 2008 -AR- 13142) WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on all counties in Florida the power to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning and such business regulations as are necessary for the protection of the public; and WHEREAS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development Code (LDC) (Ordinance No. 2004 -41, as amended) which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County, among which is the granting of variances; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of Zoning Appeals has held a public hearing after notice as in said regulations made and provided, and has considered the advisability of a variance from Section 5.03.06 E.5 of the Land Development Code to permit a reduced side yard (riparian) setback from 7.5 feet to 0 feet, as shown on the attached Exhibit "A ", in the RSF -4 Zoning District for the property hereinafter described, and has found as a matter of fact that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Section 9.04.00 of the Zoning Regulations of said Land Development Code for the unincorporated area of Collier County; and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given opportunity to be heard by this Board in public meeting assembled, and the Board having considered all matters presented. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: Schneller Variance / VA- PL2010 -739 Rev. 12 106/10 1 of 2 Attachment B Petition Number VA- PL2010 -739 filed by Jeff Rogers of Turrell, Hall and Associates, Inc. with respect to the property hereinafter described as: Lot 81, Isles of Capri No. 1, as recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 41, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, together with that portion of Pompano Bay lying upland of the 1.6' contour contiguous with said Lot 81 as delineated on a survey by A. Trigo & Associates, which is defined by a line extending from said mean high water line and a line extending from the Northeast corner of said Lot 81 in a direction of North 55 50'01" east to said mean high water line delineating the approximate limits of Riparian Rights. Folio M 52343040005 be and the same hereby is approved for a variance to permit a reduced side (riparian) setback from 7.5 feet to 0 feet as shown on the attached Exhibit "A ", in the RSF -4 Zoning District. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the minutes of this 101M. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote this day of 2014. ATTEST: BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: By: Deputy Clerk FRED W. COYLE, Chairman Steven T. Williams o Assistant County Attorney 5tZ'6 t Attachment: Exhibit A — Conceptual Site Plan Schneller Variance l VA- PL2010 -739 Rev. 12/06/10 2 of 2 A Al STATE OF FLORIDA N 7(1 X E S +COLLIER COIV NTY '&,�FTMYE < RS MI KEY WEST . of SrM QDRESS; 39 PELICAN TR ETES" T WEST NAPLES, FL 34113 DRIVING DutF,CTIONS- -1 -75 TO EXIT 101 (COLLIER BLVD. 951) - HEAD SW ON 961 TO CAPRI BLVD, - (R) ON CAPRI BLVD. AND CONTINUE TO PELICAN ST. - (R) ON WEST PEL CAN, HOUSE IS ON RIGHT NOTES: <> THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSI AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE. <> LATITUDE. N 25° S8' 40" <> LONGITUDE: W 81" 44' 03" I, VICINITY A ._ _ .. ��� Tutrell, Hall &Associates, Inc. 3584 Exchaole Ave. Suite B. Naples, FL 34104 -3732 Finail: Nn� Plwaan (239) 643 -0166 Fu: (239) 643�6l2 COUNTY AERIAL SCHNEL.LER CROCK LOCATION MAP EXHIBIT A 161+.low = ww" I o"l -o /o -viz SEC- -CM -31 TOWNSHIP -618 RANGE -26E N s e za qa 80 4Q9ICE 9N�gFI LOT 84 RIPARIAN LINES WOOD RAIL 12.6' 15.3' WOOD DOCK',,,""", -- -- - 113.6'+- 84 SITE ADDRESS: 39 PELICAN STREET WEST NAPLES, FL 34113 WOOD 7,3' —� POMPANO BAY WOOD RAIL DOCK LOT 82 .06 %-� i-%f -w ; -0.s RIPARIAN ° . ' gx .oar 0 �0 LINES oA a oo'A'Q br �� ,OA'0A2 10.7 O,A.,OA ,6A 43 /0.t !: �.�„ as 1' 1� 14 ,,, -�,ap,�' ., as 1A' •..r•� APPROX. 1•a /'`•y�A wwarovE 1Y,a,�`A PwNOEUIrE 'x 741 z4 / APPROX MANGROVE .22 .23 RON UNE 441 3 2.2 4A ,z / ,2A .23 42 /•22 APPROX. •2.4 ,24 23 ,xA M.N.W.ukly .� PROPANN LIRE ,11A� 21 RPRAP EL -10 AREA (N.O VA. M / 4S 1W*WOE .4A � 4.7 LOT 81 CONTAINS 0.18 ACRES OF LAND MORE OR LESS. LOT 81 1 LOT 80 POMPANO BAY 5.5' as -0.7 . -0a rye �9 APPRM W-W. UNE EL, w -02 (N.O.V.D.W) r/ // w -....2 . 2.9 PILES NOTES: o THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE. <> ALL DATUM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED TO MLW. <> APPLICANT OWNS APPROX. 29 LF. OF SHORELINE. <> TIDAL DATUM: MLIN -0.2' NOVD. MHW -*1.6' NOVD. o TOTAL WIDTH OF WATER IS APPROX. 1,15Z o SURVEY COURTESY OF' COURT GREGORY SURVEYING, INC" SURVEY DATED: 06.18-07 TllITCII Hall & Associates, Inc. oe61DNEa TT.T, REVISION raewvAeN26E. S G H N E L. L E FR C7 O C K DRAWN 6w J6 ,0-042006 8!£ET, I Marne EmironmeotslConsulting CWAWD: 07-OW us,1- 010 -vu scams 3584 Exchange Ave,SuhB. Naples, FL 34104 -3132 EXISTING CONDITIONS WITH DEPTHS JoeNO.: OM WA Phm: (239) 643-0166 Fm:: (239) 643 632 SECTION -31 TOWNSHIP -6,8 RAf•IOE N A s 3.0 60 Sl�4C2: ?NT.E,ET POMPANO BAY / BEGINNING / OF DOCK / Ile / "IMPACTS HAVE BEEN MINIMIZED TO / THE FULLEST EXTENT POSSIBLE" SrM ADDRESS: 39 PELICAN STREET WEST NAPLES, FL 34113 :=9 L _: � Turre�l, Ha11 �i Assflciat,�, Inc. `'� i, Marine 8c Eilvitol»mental Consulting 3564 Exchange Ave. Suitice B. Naples, FL 34194.3732 Fms9: dw�artd!•a�oci,ta.cma Phooe: (z39) �a3 -att;� Fxx: (239) �t3 -�32 "ALL EXOTICS WILL BE REMOVED AND MAINTAINED EXOTIC FREE- 153 / / / APPROX. M.L.W. LINE ELa -02 (N.G.V.D.'29) / i / / 5.3' 12.0' TERMINAL PLATFORM IS 30' ABOVE MHWL AND WILL FACILITATE A 17" SKIFF NOTES: o THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPO SES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE o ALL DATUM SHOWN HEREON 18 REFERENCED TO MLW. APPLICANT OWNS APPROX. 29 L.F. OF SHORELINE. <a PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX $74 8Q. FT. o TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM MHWL: 163 FT. o TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM BEGINNING OF DOCK: 229 FT. v TOTAL WIDTH OF WATER IS APPROX 1,167 o TIDAL DATUM: MLW --0.7 NGVD, MHW -+1.6' NGVD. o SURVEY COURTESY OF' CMW GREGORY SURVEym, INC- SURVEY DATED: 0B-16 -07 SCHN ELLER ppCK WRIMIGNED, PROPOSED WALKWAY AND DOCK LAYOUT 10.14 -200S SHEET; 1 Ob11-010 -V.0: BCALE; A68 mol-2010 -V.¢ TOWNSHIP -518 RANGE -26E N 9(1 Z S 0 So ,1�4CE9N r^EE7 / . I -le lo, IVA s / SITE ADDRESS: 39 PELICAN STREET WEST NAPLES, FL 34113 POMPANO BAY AA - -0.8 ■ -0A r 43 .0.0 r.o.3 "44 0.5 0.1 ,OA / .0 . .00.7 / 9 .OA •QA .0.0 S -0�,dlA 1.8 ;0.5 / 0.0 S / ..0.1 .0.5 ,0';' /,0.9 .0 0. APPROX. / .02 0>'- M.L.W. LINE OpA�AB .0.3 / ..1 EL. = -02 / ,GA /02 (N.G.V.D. -20) ,22 211 \�\ \ \\ ' ,2A - - . 01 AREA X2.3 10' i WIDE 4.8 " .2.4 4.9 ,3.7 APPROX 3 A MANGROVE APPROX FRINGE LINE MANGROVE ROOT LINE APPROX. M.H.W.LIIE! PROPERTY LINE EL. m 1.8' (N.G.V.D.'29) "IMPACTS HAVE BEEN MINIMIZED TO THE FULLEST EXTENT POSSIBLE" "ALL EXOTICS WILL BE REMOVED AND MAINTAINED EXOTIC FREE" / / 4.6 // . 2,7, 3.5.-4.2 -2.9 NOTES• o THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPO SES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE <> ALL DATUM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED TO MLW. '> APPLICANT OWNS APPROX. 29 L.F. OF SHORELINE. o PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX 374 $0. FT. o TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM MHWL:153 FT. o TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM BEGINNING OF DOCK 229 FT. o TOTAL WIDTH OF WATER IS APPROX, 1,152 <> TIDAL DATUM: MLW-0.2' NGVD. MHW -+t.V NGVD. "SURVEY COURTESY OF' COURT GREGORY SURVEYING, INC- SURVEY DATED: 05-18-07 Terrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. C H N E L L E R C� C:> C K mm By. is TTT _ Marine & Eavlrnnrnental Consulting oeAnwN sv: is 3584 Exchange Ave. Suite & Naplel, FL 34IW3732 ATM 'rZ EmW:>oea(0)au,e14mdftmm Phm(239)64UI66 FM(239)643 02 PROPOSED W/ DEPTHS AND SEC LOCATIONS JOB NO-' 0B62 SECTION -31 REVna+ON: 0st14010 TOWNSHIP -618 RANGE -2 ®E N r� N •�C'�u+! Jl L s 0 6 tt =ACE 9N77n r MM IN NGVD ",. •••. •�, �> MLW -0.2' NGW N S 0 8 f6 dL^Nt'4f9N�E7 %1-y; J tl „ , F 5.0' i Lil' o THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE e> ALL DATUM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED, TO MLW. o APPLICANT OWNS APPROX. 29 L.F. OF SHORELINE. <> PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX 374 SO. FT. o TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM MHWL:153 FT. <> TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM BEGINNING OF DOCK: 229 FT. <> TOTAL WIDTH OF WATER IS APPROX. 1,15Z ! �I j j <> TIDAL DATUM: MLW = 0.2' NGVD, MHW-+1.6' NGVD. i V! <> SURVEY COURTESY OF `COURT GREGORY KNIVEYMIG, !NI SURVEY DATED: 06-%07 171, i ^III. SECTION S$ "IMPACTS HAVE BEEN MINIMIZED TO "ALL EXOTICS WILL BE REMOVED THE FULLEST EXTENT POSSIBLE” AND MAINTAINED EXOTIC FREE" 12 :1 SLOPE TERMINATING AT TERMINAL PLATFORM 17' SKIFF TERMINAL PLATFORM -- 10.0' MHW 1.S' NGVD 2.5' 12.0' WE ADDRESS:.. ti.�ir h✓ 39 PELICAN STREET WEST. 1 �� .. \♦ ♦ , �v ` mNAPLES, FL 34113� ;``r�' TunvIL Hall & Associates Inc. -- S C H N E L L E R Q C K °A^� is 10.1M2eea Z3584 Marine & Environmental Consulting cFe TW: 074MM W11-2010-viz Exchange Ave. SWW B. Naples, FL 34104 -3732 Jos No.: OM oeol zo o - vrz Emd: etl ftm Ph=(239)643.0166 Fix: (239)643 -6632 SECTIONS A-A AND B -B oa sHOw►a RANGE- 28E 'z �I fi It At NOTES: *t <> THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPO SES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE. - ALL DATUM SHOWN HEREON 18 REFERENCED TO MLW. " <> APPLICANT OWNS APPROX. 29 L.F. OF SHORELINE. a N * „^ — PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX $74 SQ. FT, o TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM MHWL:153 FT. 6 o TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM BEGINNING OF DOCK: 229 FT. %> TOTAL WIDTH OF WATER IS APPROX. 1,152, <a TIDAL DATUM: MLW=0.7 NGVD, MHW —I.8' NGVD. 4 <> SURVEY COURTESY OF' COURT GREGORYSURVEYING, NYC' SURVEY DATED: 06 -18-07 Tul cell, Hall &Associates, Inc. Marine &Environmental Co�ulting 3584 Excbanp Ave. Saito B. Naples, FL 34IW3732 �' u+ �l (239)643.0166 Fax: )643-032 S C H N E L L E R FLUCCS MAP Q C K DEBIONED: T.7.T. REVaiION: TAB NAME: FLUCG DRAWN BY: SB 05-1117D10 V,li SHEET. 07 CRANED: 1"3.06 0"i4 o. V I¢ U+� SCALE, icy JOB NO.: NIA SECTIbN -31 TOWNSHIP -618 RANGE -26E N ..s "-Z SITE ADDRESS: 39 PELICAN STREET WEST NAPLES, FL 34113 e \lp \ **�rmxNSECT LINE \ (TYPIC AL) M.H.W. LINE EL - 1.9 (N.G.V.D.'20) LEGEND TRANSECT LINE NOTES: <a THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE. <> ALL DATUM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED TOO MLW. — APPLICANT OWNS APPROX. 29 L.F. OF SHORELINE. o PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX $74 SO, FT. <> TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM MHWL:153 FT. o TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM BEGINNING OF DOCK: 229 FT. <> TOTAL WIDTH OF WATER IS APPROX.1,162 <> TIDAL DATUM: MLW -0.2' NGVD, MHW -I.V NGVD. <> SURVEY COURTESY OF ' COURT GREGORY BURVE04 XC' SURVEY DATED: 06-1647 Turrell, HaH & Associates, Inc. Marine & Environmental Consulting 3564Exd=geAm Sub B. Naples, FL 34104.3732 W:dm @tu'fen4wd mwm Pham(239)643-0166 Fm(239)643-W2 S C H N E L. LL E FR CD O C SUBMERGED SUBMERGED RESOURCE TRANSECTS K DESIGNED: T.T.T. RMSION: TARN ME: S-UN DRAWN BY: JB 11-M MB-TER amET oB IcFkEAlm: lO'r4YJ-W Wil- 2010 -VJZ l8rALE. IASSHOWN JOBNO" 0M 0 &O1 -2070 -VJZ TOWNSHIP -518 RANGE -26E COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT 2010 CYCLE (TRANSMITTAL HEARING) I Slim I out I lb[I BOB l ■ai I Inl I* =I 1 gills l tal l r - t won 1 ' Q Mann y `LJ u as :a ra ._T --t Camp Cmrft y ! F4orlda Petition: CP- 2010 -1 (CCPC) CCPC: January 20, 2011 BCC: March 22, 2011 9E TABLE OF CONTENTS CCPC - Transmittal of CP- 2010 -1 GMP Amendment 1) TAB: CP- 2010 -1 CCPC Staff Report. 2) TAB: CCPC Advertisement. 3) TAB: Resolution CP- 2010 -1. 4) TAB: CP- 2010 -1 Exhibit "A ". 5) TAB: CP- 2010 -1 Petition DOCUMENT: CP- 2010 -1 CCPC Transmittal Staff Report DOCUMENT: Transmittal Leoal Advertisement DOCUMENT: CP- 2010 -1 Transmittal Resolution DOCUMENT: CP- 2010 -1 Exhibit A text DOCUMENT: CP- 2010 -1 Application/Petition CP- 2010-1 Agenda item 9.E. �i0 E3Y Ci' 14-PMY STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: JANUARY 20, 2011 RE: PETITION NO. CP- 20010 -1, GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] AGENTS /APPLICANT /OWNER Agent: Wayne Arnold, AICP Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Agent: Richard Yovanovich, Esq. Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester, PA 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 Agent/Applicant: Douglas W. Nelson, Vice President EverBank 1185 Immokalee Road Naples, FL 34110 Applicant: Tripp Gulliford, Vice President EverBank 1185 Immokalee Road Naples, FL 34110 Owner: EverBank 1185 Immokalee Road Naples, FL 34110 1 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property, totaling ±9.2 acres, is located at the northeast corner of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Livingston Road, within the Urban Estates Planning Community in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East. r 3 e / 'i• l Pffilbsed 'UUE I I Project Site A , GFPIQ` °` 1N. "Cf i I'1 (Y'• 1 FEIi?'1'f X113"' ,w HISTORY /REQUESTED ACTION: In 2005, the subject site (and Parcel 2, presently zoned CFPUD, The Vanderbilt Trust — 1989) was the subject of a Growth Management Plan amendment (GMPA) request (Petition CP -2004- 3) that established the existing Subdistrict to allow the permitted and conditional uses of the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts, other limited commercial and non - commercial uses, and residential uses up to 16 dwelling units per acre. The Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approved the petition on June 7, 2005 with the limitation that a single commercial user may not exceed 20,000 square feet after discussing neighboring properties' development expectations, potential "big box" development, and future commercial development on the intervening parcels (zoned "A" on the above zoning map) that were not included within the GMPA request (refer to the attached June 7, 2005 BCC Minutes). The applicant now seeks to amend the Subdistrict (Parcel 1 only) to allow a grocery /supermarket, physical fitness facility, craft/hobby store, home furniture /furnishings store or department store use to exceed the existing 20,000 square feet limitation for a single commercial use, up to a maximum of 50,000 square feet; the uses proposed to exceed the square feet cap are allowed uses within the existing Subdistrict. The petitioner's proposed text changes to the Subdistrict are identified below in underlined text. A. Urban Mixed Use District 16. Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide primarily for neighborhood commercial development at a scale not typically found in the Mixed -use Activity Center Subdistrict. The intent is to provide commercial uses to serve the emerging residential development in close proximity, to this Subdistrict, and to provide employment opportunities for residents in the surrounding area. Allowable uses shall be a variety of commercial uses as more particularly described below, and mixed use (commercial and residential). Prohibited uses shall be gas stations and convenience stores with gas pumps, and certain types of fast food restaurants. 114 The Subdistrict consists of two parcels comprising approximately 17 acres, located on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road and east of Livingston Road, as shown on the Subdistrict Map. For mixed -use development, residential density shall be limited to sixteen dwelling units per acres. Residential density shall be calculated based upon the gross acreage of the Subdistrict parcel on which it is located (Parcel 1 or Parcel 2). Rezoning of the parcels comprising this Subdistrict is encouraged to be in the form of a PUD, Planned Unit Development. At the time of rezoning, the applicant must include architectural and landscape standards for each parcel. a. Parcel This parcel is located at the intersection of Livingston Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road. A maximum of 100,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area for commercial uses may be allowed. Allowable uses shall be the following, except as prohibited above: retail, personal service, restaurant, office, and all other uses as allowed, whether by right or by conditional use, in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts as set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance 04 -41, as amended, in effect as of the date of adoption of this Subdistrict (Ordinance No. 2005 -25 adopted on June 7, 2005); other comparable and/or compatible land uses not found specifically in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts, limited to: general and medical offices, government offices, financial institutions, personal and business services, limited indoor recreational uses, and limited retail uses; mixed -use development (residential and commercial uses). The maximum floor area for any single commercial user shall be 20,000 square feet, except for a grocery /supermarket, physical fitness facility, craft/hobby store home furniture /furnishing store, or department store use which shall not exceed a maximum of 50,000 square feet. b. Parcel This parcel is located approximately 1/a mile east of Livingston Road and is adjacent to multifamily residential uses. A maximum of 80,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area for commercial uses may be allowed. Allowable uses shall be the following, except as prohibited above: General and medical offices, community facilities, and business and personal services, all as allowed, whether by right or by conditional use, in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts as set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance 04 -41, as amended, in effect as of the date of adoption of this Subdistrict (Ordinance No. 2005 -25 adopted on June 7, 2005). The maximum floor area for any single commercial user shall be 20,000 square feet. At the time of rezoning of Parcel 2, the developer shall provide restrictions and standards to insure that uses and hours of operation are compatible with surrounding land uses. Permitted uses such as assisted living facilities, independent living facilities for persons over the age of 55, continuing care retirement communities, and nursing homes, shall be restricted to a maximum of 200 units and a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.6. The developer of Parcel 2 shall provide a landscape buffer along the eastern property line, abutting the Wilshire Lakes PUD, at a minimum width of thirty (30) feet. At the time of rezoning, the developer shall incorporate a detailed landscape plan for that portion of the property fronting Vanderbilt Beach Road as well as that portion along the eastern property line, abutting the Wilshire Lakes PUD. Words underlined are added, as proposed by the petitioner SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION Existing Conditions: The subject site is zoned Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD — Bradford Square), and is approved for up to 100,000 square feet of C -1 through C -3 commercial uses, 10 ,.� residential multi - family units, and other non - residential uses such as essential service and open space and recreational uses. The Future Land Use designation is Urban Commercial Mixed Use District, Vanderilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict. The site is undeveloped. Ga Surrounding Land Uses: North: The Pelican Marsh PUD /DRI is located to the north of the subject property and is presently developed with a golf course. The Future Land Use designation is Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. East: The land east of the subject property is zoned Agricultural "A," and is presently developed with a pet hospital and resort, and an equestrian center. The Future Land Use designation is Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. South: The land to the south of the subject property, across Vanderbilt Beach Road, is the Vineyards PUD /DRI and is currently developed with multifamily homes. The Future Land Use designation is Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. West: The land to the west of the subject property, across Livingston Road, is part of the Pelican Marsh PUD /DRI and is developed with a golf course and a golf course maintenance facility. The Future Land Use designation is Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. STAFF ANALYSIS Considerations: The proposed change to allow certain uses to exceed the 20,000 square feet cap for a single commercial user within the Subdistrict is not expected to generate additional impacts. The existing Subdistrict allows the same uses as those proposed by this Growth Management Plan amendment and the existing Subdistrict does not contain development standards specific to this parcel. Additionally, the Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) approved for the subject site contains appropriate development standards to ensure that the existing approved development within the project is compatible with surrounding properties. Further, the proposed increase in commercial intensity, from 20,000 to 50,000 square feet for certain commercial uses, will be reviewed for compatibility with surrounding properties at time of rezoning /PUD amendment. There are no additional public facilities impacts resulting from the proposed GMPA, as noted in the analysis below. Because commercial demand, and project intensity and density were established with the original GMPA approval in 2005, and no additional uses and commercial square feet are proposed by this GMPA, staff did not request a needs analysis for this petition. Environmental Impacts: Environmental conditions have not changed since the original Plan amendment in 2005 and subsequent PUD rezoning. Further, an environmental analysis will be required as part of a subsequent rezoning /PUD amendment. Traffic CapacitvlTraffic Impacts: The proposed amendment does not modify the previously approved maximum intensity of development. The previously approved impact statement for this site had an adjusted Total Daily trip count of 5185 with 480 adjusted PM Peak Hour trips (6880 Total Daily, 635 P.M. Peak Hour Trips — Unadjusted). The PM Peak hour service volume on Livingston Road between Vanderbilt and Immokalee Roads is 3,840 vehicles (Total Volume is 1510 trips and Remaining Capacity is 2330 trips). The PM Peak hour service volume on Vanderbilt Beach Road between Logan and Livingston Roads is 3,540 vehicles (Total Volume is 1934 trips and Remaining Capacity is 1606 trips). 0 Transportation Planning staff has reviewed this petition and concluded that no change to the maximum traffic impact is evident as a result of the proposed re- allocation of commercial square feet within the Subdistrict (certain commercial uses allowed to exceed the existing 20,000 square feet limitation for a single commercial use, up to a maximum of 50,000 square feet, as part of the shopping center use). Further, staff recommends that this application may be found consistent with policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan. Public Facilities Impact: Public Facilities (water, waste water, parks, etc.) conditions have not changed since the original Plan amendment in 2005 and subsequent PUD rezoning. Further, public facilities analyses will be required as part of a subsequent rezoning /PUD amendment. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) NOTES (provided by the agent and reviewed and edited by staff): The Neighborhood Information meeting was held on Monday, November 1, 2010 from 5:35 p.m. to 6:50 p.m. at the Hampton Inn Naples /1 -75, located at 2630 Northbrooke Plaza Drive, Naples, FL, after the agent dully noticed and advertised the meeting as required by the Collier County Land Development Code. D. Wayne Arnold, agent for the applicant opened the meeting at 5:35 p.m. In attendance was Michele Mosca, representing Collier County, and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq., agent for the applicant. At the time the meeting began, eight people were in attendance. A sign -in sheet was provided at the entrance of the meeting room and all eight attendees signed -in. Aerial photographs of the site and surrounding area were displayed. Mr. Arnold explained the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment application process, project location, and description of the proposed text changes to the Future Land Element of the Growth Management Plan. Mr. Arnold emphasized that the proposed increase from 20,000 square feet to up to 50,000 square feet for a limited number of commercial uses is necessary in order to establish a successful commercial center with key anchor tenants. The overall maximum commercial development on Parcel 1 of the Subdistrict will remain unchanged at 100,000 square feet. Ms. Mosca provided the tentative transmittal hearing dates for the CCPC and BCC — CCPC in December and BCC in January/February. Questions were raised in regard to landscape buffering, building heights, traffic volumes, and hours of operation. The neighbors were also concerned about empty store fronts and the over abundance of vacant commercial in the area and asked how this project would benefit the surrounding neighborhoods. The residents also expressed that they did not want to see a Wal -Mart or Target on the site. Mr. Arnold answered questions from the neighbors, and both Mr. Yovanovich and Mr. Arnold agreed that they would work with the neighbors as they had done in the past with the original Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezone. Several attendees indicated their opposition to the proposed amendment in its current form but agreed to meet with the applicant to address outstanding concerns. Mr. Arnold invited anyone with further questions to contact his office or contact Ms. Mosca. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: • The magnitude and scale of this project (100,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area of C -1 to C- 3 commercial uses, and other similar commercial uses) are consistent with neighborhood commercial development at the upper size limits. 5 • The subject site abuts an arterial road — Livingston Road and a collector road — Vanderbilt Beach Road. • No additional commercial uses or overall commercial square feet are proposed by this amendment. • No additional public facilities impacts will be generated as a result of the proposed change. • The petition is generally compatible with surrounding land uses. A more detailed compatibility analysis will be performed at time of rezoning/PUD amendment. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Staff Report has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's office. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition CP- 2010 -1 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval to transmit to the Florida Department of Community of Affairs. Prepared By: Date: -Michele R. Mos P, Principal Planner Comprehensiv anning Section " Reviewed By: � '" Date: David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Plan Manager Comprehensive Planning Section Reviewed By:_ �i Date: Michael Bosi, AICP, Comprehensive Planning Manager Co rehensive Plannim Section Reviewed By: Date: iam D. Lorenz, Yr., PE, Igirector LaDOAaevriopment Services Department Approved B Date: Nick Casal , Dep ty Administrator Growth Management Division PETITION NO.: CP- 2010 -01 Staff Report for the January 20, 2010 CCPC Meeting. / . &_ if / - /Z-// a1 -10 -Z01 NOTE: This petition has been scheduled for the March 22, 2011, BCC Meeting. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN T ` June 7, 2005 CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner Fiala, second by Commissioner Halas -- MS. MOSCA: Commissioners, if I may, I just have a correction for the record. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. MS. MOSCA: If I may. I apologize for interrupting. For the record, Michele Mosca with the comprehensive planning staff. The only change I have is a correction to the ordinance. What we'd like to do is accurately reflect the project acreage. The redesignation of 79 acres, rather than 80 to sending, and the redesignation of 153 acres to receiving, with a total project acreage of 232. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I'm fine. I was going to make a motion, but Commissioner Fiala did. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye. Any opposed by like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us with to the next item, which is Petition CP- 2004 -3. Petition requesting amendment to the future land use element and future land use map to create a new Page 62 June 7, 2005 Vanderbilt Beach Road neighborhood commercial subdistrict to allow for C -1 through C -3 commercial uses, other comparable and/or compatible commercial uses not found specifically in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts. Mixed use development and indoor self - storage on two parcels, one located at the northeast corner of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Livingston Road, which is 9.18 acres, and one parcel further east on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road, eight acres, zoned Vanderbilt Trust PUD, in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, urban estates planning community. And Mr. Arnold, Wayne Arnold, will present. MR. ARNOLD: Thank you, Commissioners. Wayne Arnold for the record, here with Rich Yovanovich, Tammy Kipp, Amy Turner, who are the property owners of the subject petition. Staff report was very clear. The property is two parcels located on Vanderbilt Beach Road; one at the corner of Livingston Road, the other is just slightly removed by two parcels to the east. This started out under your original transmittal to the state with the reference to indoor self - storage. Between the transmittal and our adoption today, and in fact before the planning commission, we held a neighborhood informational meeting out at the Vineyards Community School, well attended by residents from Wilshire Lakes, as well as some residents from Village Walk, which is across the street from the two parcels. And one thing was very clear at that meeting, nobody was supporting indoor self - storage. So after that meeting, we modified our request to eliminate the indoor self - storage reference in this. I understand that the text that's before you today still has one stray reference to indoor self - storage that I think staff s going to tell you it should be removed. But that was probably the largest discussion point at that meeting. And so we eliminated that request. We did have follow -up meetings with certain residents of Wilshire Lakes and Fieldstone Village Condominium that's part of Page 63 June 7, 2005 Wilshire Lakes, as well as representatives from Village Walk board of directors. And after that meeting, I think it was clear that the self - storage was a use that they were very happy that we were willing to give up. Also out of that meeting we learned that there was a concern over gas station uses. We agreed to eliminate gas stations and convenience stores with gas pumps. The other significant amendment was there was a concern about certain types of fast food restaurants. Not all fast food, but -- I could name some of them, but they're primarily the type that serve hamburgers of the fried variety, and we agreed that the most appropriate reference, rather than naming specific chain restaurant names, was to -- I think it was David Weeks who actually coined the phrase, it would be limited fast food restaurants would be prohibited. So you'll now find this a little bit reorganized, but there's prohibition on self - storage, prohibition on gas stations and a limitation on certain types of restaurants, if you will. And the other couple things that we did do, we agreed to provide a minimum 30 -foot buffer adjacent to the Wilshire Lakes property, which would be our eastern boundary, and we agreed to allow the county and Wilshire Lakes to work along our common property line to bring a sound wall, if required, as part of the six -lane improvements for Vanderbilt Beach Road, to turn it north along our common property line to help satisfy some of the noise concerns that the Fieldstone Village residents had with the six - laning. The other thing that we agreed to do that I think both groups that we've primarily worked with here were happy to hear was the fact that we were willing to bring forward a specific landscape plan and architectural standards as part of the zoning that we'll certainly follow so that we can demonstrate to them that this isn't your typical commercial type development. And in fact, on the eastern parcel, with the limitations that we have, there is no retail even permitted, it's Page 64 June 7, 2005 now primarily office, professional service type uses and assisted living type facilities, those types of community facilities. And I think we have concurrence from all of our neighbors that we're on the right track and they would hope that we could move forward endorsing the plan amendment. One of the other suggestions that the planning commission had that would be certainly something tied to zoning was that in the zoning document, they would look for assurances that no Certificates of Occupancy for either parcel would be issued until October of '07, which coordinates with the six -lane improvements for Vanderbilt Beach Road. But with that, that's really my presentation. We would encourage you all to adopt it. We've had unanimous recommendation from Planning Commission. I think you'll hear from at least one of our neighbors here that they're now in favor of it with the elimination of self - storage, the gas stations and limited restaurant uses. CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have one public speaker. Would you like to listen to speakers first, Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sure. MS. FILSON: Your speaker is Kathleen Adams. MS. ADAMS: Kathleen Adams, Village Walk Homeowners Association. Many of you may remember that you did receive a letter from us, along with a petition, asking for residential. And after meeting with the folks from the Turner family and their representation, we're convinced that what they're proposing is something that we can live with and we have absolutely no objection to it, and we urge you to vote for it. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you. Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, I think you were -- what is Page 65 June 7, 2005 the height of the buildings going to be in that general area? I think you were looking at coming up with assisted living and some office space. MR. ARNOLD: That's correct. Right now the assisted living that was approved as part of the Vanderbilt Trust PUD on the easternmost parcel, which is known as parcel two, allows for 50 -foot building heights on that parcel. One of the things that we had talked about was adding a building height to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment language, and the Planning Commission eliminated that early on, thinking that if we put a height then we're entitled to get it. And I think there was a thought that let us be silent on height in the comprehensive plan and let's debate that point of what's the appropriate height when we come back for zoning. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I make a motion for approval. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, motion for approval by Commissioner Halas, second by Commissioner Fiala. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioners, this is boxing in a parcel in between that I can see the only future use for that one would be commercial. And why would you put residential in between two commercials? So my concern is that we limit it, that there won't be any big boxes on either one of these parcels, Parcel A or Parcel B. CHAIRMAN COYLE: So Parcel 1 or Parcel 2? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Both. CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right. MR. ARNOLD: If I might address that. I don't -- in the context that I think of big box retail, if that's like some of the other users that we've had, the Toys R Us, the Sports Authorities, things of that size, your code talks about them being 20,000 square feet or larger Page 66 June 7, 2005 qualifies under the big box regulations that you have in the land development code. The only way that I see any individual user exceeding 20,000 is if we end up with an assisted living facility that would house that much square footage. But otherwise, I really envision on the corner you would end up with more of a retail center that would have outparcels. And that in itself may exceed 20,000 square feet, but I don't think we've envisioned a single user that would connote a big box user -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: And the only for that is this parcel might languish for years and years, and then the people in the middle here come back for a comprehensive amendment and therefore demonstrating a big box, so -- MR. ARNOLD: Well, if it would satisfy the Commissioners' concerns, I guess if we could keep it to single user not exceeding the 20,000 square -foot standard, I think that that's something that works for us. We don't certainly envision that COMMISSIONER HALAS : That's in my motion. MR. ARNOLD: -- on the retail or commercial side of things. No retail or commercial -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's the difference between what I said and what you're saying? MR. ARNOLD: I don't know that there is. I was just trying to clarify that we meant a single use. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I wonder if your assisted living is 20,000? Then all of a sudden you've defeated that, right? MR. ARNOLD: Maybe what we should say is no retail or commercial use would exceed the 20,000. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Retail or commercial. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So we have a motion by Commissioner Halas -- MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, staff has to put a couple of things on the record. Page 67 June 7, 2005 Mr. Moss? MR. MOSS: Good morning, Commissioners, John -David Moss, Comprehensive Planning. As Mr. Arnold mentioned, if you look at the exhibit that's been provided to you, there is in the second line the phrase "and indoor self - storage," which needs to be stricken. So I just wanted to point that out. I also wanted to point out that I did speak with another community group in the neighborhood, and although they were opposed to it initially, they are perfectly satisfied with the changes that have been made and they're 100 percent in support of it also. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Halas, seconded by Commissioner Fiala for approval with the stipulation that no single commercial or retail user will occupy either of these sites and that we will strike any -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Size of the building, less than 20,000 feet -- square feet. CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think it's greater than 20,000 feet. But if we -- is that where we are, no single user -- MR. YOVANOVICH: No individual user can exceed 20,000 square feet of retail. And there's no retail at all on Parcel 2, so -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: You don't mean individual user, you mean individual retail user. Isn't that what you said? MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes. On Parcel 1 where commercial and retail is allowed, no individual single retail user will be allowed to exceed 20,000 square -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Retail or commercial user will be committed (sic) to build there. And we will strike all references to indoor self - storage. Okay, Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think the key word is commercial. That's retail and offices. And the other one about the Page 68 June 7, 2005 indoor storage, Commissioner? n CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, I've already stipulated that and it's included in this motion. I want to make sure we're clear on what you're saying, Commissioner Henning. We're saying retail or commercial. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, if you just say commercial, that takes care of office and retail, that you can only limit it to 20,000 square feet. It would be on both parcels. MR. ARNOLD: Right. I don't think we have an objection to the direction we're headed. I guess the only hesitation I would have is the only C -1 to C -3 use that we would envision that could ever exceed that 20,000 might be something like a supermarket or grocery store. It could be an anchor tenant that has that type of square footage. I don't know if that use is a specific concern, but, you know, I understand which way we're headed. I don't want to make this too confusing, but like I said, I think that would be the only type of use I can envision under those C -1 to C -3 as a retail type commercial use that could gain that kind of square footage. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I'm trying to get the specific language for this motion in place. Are we going to say retail and commercial not to exceed 20,000 feet for a single user, or are we just going to say commercial? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commercial, Commissioner, is anything. It's office, it's retail, it's industrial, it's -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is it assisted living? COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, there's still some discussion about this issue. MR. ARNOLD: Could I just ask clarification? Is there a concern specifically about a grocery store? Because I -- that would be the only hesitation I'd have about boxing ourselves in to something that we didn't intend -- Page 69 June 7, 2005 COMMISSIONER HALAS: I don't think a grocery store even enters into this, with the size of the parcel that's here. And I think from my understanding talking with the particular people that own this property, the discussion was that it may be a certain type of restaurant, it may be little curio shops, and then it may be also assisted living on the other part. So that's my understanding. So as far as exceeding the 20,000, I don't even think that really enters into the picture. MR. ARNOLD: To be honest, Commissioner, it didn't to me either until the issue was raised by Commissioner Henning about the big box. And just not knowing exactly what the mix of tenants is, that was the only tenant that I could envision that could exceed that 20,000 square feet. But I certainly understand and I don't want to overcomplicate something I think we're headed in the direction we need. CHAIRMAN COYLE: What's the motion going to say? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, the motion should say that this is strictly for small -scale retail or restaurants that fit the agenda that's been discussed by not only the petitioner but also by the community that was accepted. And I think the things that were brought forth through all the negotiations with the property owners that surrounded this particular piece of property, I think that's what we need to address in that manner. And I think that everybody realized that what was going to be there is basically assisted living on Parcel No. 2, and on Parcel No. 1 there would be no gas stations, but there could be a restaurant there, an upscale restaurant or whatever else, and maybe some upscale type of coffee shops or whatever else. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Does that help clarify? CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, stop, okay? You guys sit down. Commissioner Henning, go ahead. Page 70 June 7, 2005 COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let me clarify the motion and you can correct me, Commissioner. It's a motion to approve removal of self - storage out of the parcel and limit the square foot of commercial space to single user to 20,000 -- not to exceed 20,000. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Not to exceed 20,000. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And that's okay with your second, Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye. Any opposed by like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: It carries unanimously. MR. ARNOLD: Thank you, Commissioners. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to Petition CP- 2004 -4. It's a petition requesting an amendment to the future land use element to change the rural fringe mixed use district sending lands to add three transfer of development rights, TDR bonus provisions, each for one TDR credit for, number one, early entry into the TDR program; number two, environmental restoration and maintenance; and number three, fee simple conveyance to a government agency by gift and to amend the rural village development standards. And Mr. Bruce Anderson is going to present. MR. ANDERSON: Good morning again, Commissioners. My Page 71 PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER RESOLL TION Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Planning Commission will hold a public meeting on Thursi ay, December 16, 2010 at 8:30 A.M. in the Board of County Commissioners chamber, third floor, County Government C nter, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples. The purpose of the hearing is to consider recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners to trans it to the Florida Department of Community Affairs the Transmittal of the 2010 Cycle Growth Management Plan amendments to the Future Land Use Element and the Future Land Use Map and Map Series. The resolution title is as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COL- LIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMEND- ING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, AND FUR- THERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. L7 Petition CP- 2010 -1, Petition requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan, to modify the language of the Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict to allow a grocery/su- permarket, physical fitness facility, craft /hobby store, home furniture /furnishing store and department store use to exceed the 20,000 square feet limitation for a single commercial use, up to a maximum of 50,000 square feet, for Parcel 1 (9.2+ acres, zoned Bradford Square MPUD) only, and with the overall maximum development limitation of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses on Parcel 1 to remain; the subject portion of the Subdistrict is located at the northeast corner of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Livingston Road in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East. [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner] ❑ Petition CPSP - 2010 -2, staff petition requesting amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Mao and Map Series (FLUE/FLUM), to: modify the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay (B /GTRO); modify FLUE Policy 5.1; modify applicability of the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict; update the Wellhead Protection Map; update the FLUM and Map Series to reflect annexations, etc.; make FLUM boundary corrections in rural areas; and, add clarity, correct date errors, and make other non - substantive text revisions. [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] [Coordinator: David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager] 'iWO AEE -� GR Collier County GR Florida LEE CWN Y C.R. 868 ' CR 846 CP -20147 n!NDRV cwrvr — cc fi�w. PINE RIDGE RD: ul G.G. GATE PKWY. S.R- 84 75 S.R.- 84 Fly Z DAMS 8Lw. I z O OF Y NAPLES 3 All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment will be made available for inspection at the Land Development Services Dept., Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Furthermore the materials will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk's Office, fourth floor, suite 401, Collier County Government Center, East Tamiami Trail, Naples, one week prior to the scheduled hearing. Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the Comprehensive Planning Section. Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to Thursday, December 16, 2010, will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he 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. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. Mark P. Strain, Chairman Collier County Planning Commission No. 678178413 November 30. 2010 RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE NO. 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO CHANGE THE SQUARE FOOT LIMITATION IN THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT FOR CERTAIN USES AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans pursuant to Sections 163.3184 and 163.3187, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County has prepared a plan amendment to the Future Land Use Element of its Growth Management Plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission, on January 20, 2011, considered the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, Florida Statutes, and recommended approval of said amendment to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan amendment, various State agencies and the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) have ninety (90) days to review the proposed amendment and DCA must transmit, in writing, to Collier County, its comments along with any objections and any recommendations for modification, within said ninety (90) days pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DCA, must adopt with changes, or not adopt, the proposed Growth Management Plan amendment within sixty (60) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and CP- 2010 -1 GMP Transmittal Resolution 1 of 2 WHEREAS, the DCA, within forty -five (45) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan amendment, must review and determine if the Plan amendment is in compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Act of 1985; the State Comprehensive Plan; the appropriate Regional Policy Plan and Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code, pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed text amendment to the Growth Management Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan amendment, prior to final adoption and State determination of compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 and Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code, Minimum Criteria for Review of Local Government Comprehensive Plans and Determination of Compliance. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion; second and majority vote this , day of , 2011. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK , Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: 1r %� jo Heidi Ashton -Cicko Assistant County Attorney Land Use Section Chief CP110 -CMP- 00785111 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CP- 2010 -1 GMP Transmittal Resolution 2of2 , Chairman Exhibit A CP- 2010 -1 FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT 1. URBAN DESIGNATION A. Urban Mixed Use District 16. Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide primarily for neighborhood commercial development at a scale not typically found in the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict. The intent is to provide commercial uses to serve the emerging residential development in close proximity to this Subdistrict, and to provide employment opportunities for residents in the surrounding area. Allowable uses shall be a variety of commercial uses as more particularly described below, and mixed use (commercial and residential). Prohibited uses shall be gas stations and convenience stores with gas pumps, and certain types of fast food restaurants. This Subdistrict consists of two parcels comprising approximately 17 acres, located on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road and east of Livingston Road, as shown on the Subdistrict Map. For mixed -use development, residential density shall be limited to sixteen dwelling units per acre. Residential density shall be calculated based upon the gross acreage of the Subdistrict parcel on which it is located (Parcel 1 or Parcel 2). Rezoning of the parcels comprising this Subdistrict is encouraged to be in the form of a PUD, Planned Unit Development. At the time of rezoning, the applicant must include architectural and landscape standards for each parcel. a. Parcel 1 This parcel is located at the intersection of Livingston Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road. A maximum of 100,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area for commercial uses may be allowed. Allowable uses shall be the following, except as prohibited above: retail, personal service, restaurant, office, and all other uses as allowed, whether by right or by conditional use, in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts as set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance 04 -41, as amended, in effect as of the date of adoption of this Subdistrict (Ordinance No. 2005 -25 adopted on June 7, 2005); other comparable and /or compatible land uses not found specifically in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts, limited to: general and medical offices, government offices, financial institutions, personal and business services, limited indoor recreational uses, and limited retail uses; mixed -use development (residential and commercial uses). The maximum floor area for any single commercial user shall be 20,000 square feet, except for a grocery /supermarket, physical fitness facility, craft/hobby store, home furniture /furnishing store or department store use, which shall not exceed a maximum of 50,000 square feet. (Words underlined are added, words stFUsk through are deleted) b. Parcel 2 This parcel is located approximately % mile east of Livingston Road and is adjacent to multifamily residential uses. A maximum of 80,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area for commercial uses may be allowed. Allowable uses shall be the following, except as prohibited above: General and medical offices, community facilities, and business and personal services, all as allowed, whether by right or by conditional use, in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts as set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance 04-41, as amended, in effect as of the date of adoption of this Subdistrict (Ordinance No. 2005 -25 adopted on June 7, 2005). The maximum floor area for any single commercial user shall be 20,000 square feet. At the time of rezoning of Parcel 2, the developer shall provide restrictions and standards to insure that uses and hours of operation are compatible with surrounding land uses. Permitted uses such as assisted living facilities, independent living facilities for persons over the age of 55, continuing care retirement communities, and nursing homes, shall be restricted to a maximum of 200 units and a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.6. The developer of Parcel 2 shall provide a landscape buffer along the eastern property line, abutting the Wilshire Lakes PUD, at a minimum width of thirty (30) feet. At the time of rezoning, the developer shall incorporate a detailed landscape plan for that portion of the property fronting Vanderbilt Beach Road as well as that portion along the eastern property line, abutting the Wilshire Lakes PUD. (Words underlined are added, words sigh are deleted) VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT APPLICATION FOR A REQUEST TO AMEND THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN SECTION 31 TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH RANGE 26 EAST PREPARED FOR: EverBank C/O Douglas W. Nelson, Vice President 1185 Immokalee Road Naples, FL 34110 lava D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 April 22, 2010 Revised October 5, 2010 Revised January 7, 2011 CP- 2010 -1 Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Amendment Justification i'\ The Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict authorizes a maximum of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses on Parcel 1 of the Subdistrict. The property owner is seeking to amend Parcel 1 of the Subdistrict to remove the limitation that no single commercial user can exceed 20,000 square feet. The property owner seeks to permit limited commercial uses to exceed the 20,000 square feet cap, up to a maximum of 50,000 square feet. The overall maximum development limitation of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses on this parcel will remain. The proposed 50,000 square feet maximum size will apply to uses such as grocery stores, department stores, furniture stores and physical fitness facilities -not general retail uses commonly associated as big box uses. The increased square footage will permit development of the site with a key anchor tenant, which will provide the synergy necessary to attract other neighborhood commercial uses to the site. The current market conditions strongly indicate that commercial centers with key anchor tenants are surviving and succeeding despite the poor local economy. According to the Urban Land Institute and other planning journals, traditional anchor tenants for neighborhood centers include the uses suggested in this amendment. The current size restriction has prohibited the property owner from securing a key anchor tenant for the property. Uses such as a grocery store, junior department store, hardware stores and even physical fitness facilities presently require up to 50,000 square feet in support of their successful business models. Although the size limitation was imposed by the County Commission during the plan amendment adoption hearing, it was in the context of attempting to deal with compatibility of large scale retail users adjacent to a single property that was not part of the subdistrict. Nearby property owners were supportive of the proposed subdistrict without the 20,000 square foot commercial user cap. The Land Development Code (LDC) does not define the phrase "big box "; however, additional architectural and site design standards are imposed on buildings exceeding 20,000 square feet in size. The current property owner has been working with commercial realtors and appraisers, and they have determined that the 20,000 square foot size limitation for any individual commercial use is a major factor in why this prominent commercially designated site has not been developed. They have also evaluated many sites in the Naples market and determined that those sites having strong anchor tenants are maintaining higher occupancy rates than those sites where no key anchor tenant exists. The specific uses for which the property owner is seeking to permit above 20,000 square feet are uses commonly found in neighborhood centers and commonly exceed 20,000 square feet in size. The few uses for which the amendment seeks to permit square 11'� Page 1 of 2 n footages above 20,000 square feet are viable uses for the site and are consistent with the . intent and purpose of the Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Subdistrict. Modifying the Subdistrict to permit anchor tenants at sizes cormnonly found in neighborhood centers represents sound land planning, and responds to a land use model that has successfully been implemented in many other locations. The uses cannot exceed the intensity of the C -3 zoning district, and in order to obtain any of the permitted uses within the Subdistrict, the property owner will be required to rezone the properly to a Planned Unit Development. During the PUD rezoning process staff and the County Commission will be able to evaluate specific land uses, the conceptual master plan, and impose conditions to insure that the site remains compatible with surrounding development. The proposed amendment will not increase the overall intensity of development or types of land uses permitted within the subdistrict. Page 2 of 2 110—\ APPLICATION FOR A REQUEST TO AMEND THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN APPLICATION NUMBER GMPT -PL- 2010 -766 (CP- 2010 -1) DATE RECEIVED 4/22/2010 PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE DATE 3/26/2010 DATE SUFFICIENT This application, with all required supplemental data and information, must be completed and accompanied by the appropriate fee, and returned to the Comprehensive Planning Department, Suite 400, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104. 239 -252- 2400 (Fax 239 - 252- 2946). The application must be reviewed by staff for sufficiency within 30 calendar days following the filing deadline before it will be processed and advertised for public hearing. The applicant will be notified in writing, of the sufficiency determination. If insufficient, the applicant will have 30 days to remedy the deficiencies. For additional information on the processing of the application, see Resolution 97-431 as amended by Resolution 98 -18 (both attached). If you have any questions, please contact the Comprehensive Planning Section at 239 - 252 -2400. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS I. GENERAL INFORMATION A. Name of Applicant Douglas W. Nelson, Vice President Company EverBank Mailing Address 1185 Immokalee Road City Naples State FL Zip Code 34110 Phone Number 239.415.5024 Fax Number 239.254.2194 B. Name of Agent* Wayne Arnold • THIS WILL BE THE PERSON CONTACTED FOR ALL BUSINESS RELATED TO THE PETITION. Company /Firm Q. Grady Minor and Associates P.A. Mailing Address 3800 Via Del Rey_ _ City Bonita Springs State FL Zip Code 34134 Phone Number 239.947.1144 Fax Number 239.947.0375 Email Address warnold(agradvminor.com Company /Firm Douglas W. Nelson, Vice President Everbank Mailing Address 1185 Immokalee Road City Naples State FL Zip Code 34110 Phone Number 239.415.5024 Fax Number 239.254.2194 Email Address Douglas.Nelson(a)EverBank.com Company /Firm Richard D. Yovanovich, Esg Coleman Yovanovich and Koester P.A. Mailing Address 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 City Naples State FL Zip Code 34103 Phone Number 239.435.3535 Fax Number 239.435.1218 Email Address rrovanovidh(a)cvklawfirm.com C. Name of Owner(s) of Record EverBank Mailing Address 1185 Immokalee Road City Naples State FL Zip Code 34110 Phone Number 239.415.5024 Fax Number 239.254.2194 D. Name, Address and Qualifications of additional planners, architects, engineers, environmental consultants and other professionals providing information contained in this application. Page 1 of 6 VBRGMPA ,—%% II. DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST INFORMATION: A. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary). Name and Address Percentage of Ownership B. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each, and provide one copy of the Articles of Incorporation, or other documentation, to verify the signer of this petition has the authority to do so. Name and Address, and Office Percentage of Stock EverBank 100% 1185 Immokalee Road, Naples 34110 C. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. Name and Address Percentage of Interest D. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and /or limited partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership E. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contact purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners, and provide one copy of the executed contract. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership Page 2 of 6 VBRGMPA F. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership or trust. Name and Address G. Date subject property acquired (November. 2009) leased ( ): _Terms of lease _ yrs /mos. If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option: option terminates: , or anticipated closing: and date H. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. Page 3 of 6 VBRGMPA III. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY A. LEGAL DESCRIPTION The SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 and the W 1/2 of the W 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 31 Township 48 South Range 26 east Collier County, Florida, less the South 150 feet thereof. LESS AND EXCEPT: That portion described in Warranty Deed in Collier County Florida recorded in Official Records Book 3022, Page 1128, and that portion described in Order of Taking recorded in Official Records Book 3599, Page 121, both of the Public Records of Collier County Florida B. GENERAL LOCATION Subject property is located on the northeast Quadrant of Livingston Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road. C. PLANNING COMMUNITY Urban Estates D. TAZ 159 E. SIZE IN ACRES 9.2t F. ZONING Bradford Square MPUD (Ord. 07 -41) G. SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN Urban Residential Subdistrict, PUD, CFPUD and A zoning. H. FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION (S) Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict IV. TYPE OF REQUEST A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN ELEMENT(S) OR SUB- ELEMENT(S) TO BE AMENDED: _ Housing Element Traffic Circulation Sub - Element _ Aviation Sub - Element _ Sanitary Sewer Sub - Element _ Solid Waste Sub - Element _ Capital Improvement Element ✓ Future Land Use Element Immokalee Master Plan Recreation /Open Space Mass Transit Sub - Element Potable Water Sub - Element NGWAR Sub - Element Drainage Sub - Element CCME Element Golden Gate Master Plan B. AMEND PAGE(S) 44 —45 OF THE Future Land Use ELEMENT AS FOLLOWS: (Use thFaugh to identify language to be deleted; Use Underline to identify language to be added). Attach additional pages if necessary: Exhibit IV.B C. AMEND FUTURE LAND USE MAP(S) DESIGNATION FROM N/A TO D. AMEND OTHER MAP(S) AND EXHIBITS AS FOLLOWS: (Name & Page #) N/A E. DESCRIBE ADDITIONAL CHANGES REQUESTED: N/A V. REQUIRED INFORMATION NOTE: ALL AERIALS MUST BE AT A SCALE OF NO SMALLER THAN 1" = 400'. At least one copy reduced to 8'/ x 11 shall be provided of all aerials and /or maps. A. LAND USE Exhibit V.A.1 Provide general location map showing surrounding developments (PUD, DRI'S, existing zoning) with subject property outlined. Page 4 of 6 VBRGMPA /'\ Exhibit V.A.2 Provide most recent aerial of site showing subject boundaries, source, and date. Exhibit V.A.2 Provide a map and summary table of existing land use and zoning within a radius of 300 feet from boundaries of subject property. B. FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION Exhibit V.B Provide map of existing Future Land Use Designation(s) of subject property and adjacent lands, with acreage totals for each land use designation on the subject property. C. ENVIRONMENTAL Exhibit V.C.1a Provide most recent aerial and summary table of acreage of native habitats and Exhibit V.C.1b soils occurring on site. HABITAT IDENTIFICATION MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE FDOT - FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER AND FORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCCS CODE). NOTE: THIS MAY BE INDICATED ON SAME AERIAL AS THE LAND USE AERIAL IN "A" ABOVE. N/A Provide a summary table of Federal (US Fish & Wildlife Service) and State (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission) listed plant and animal species known to occur on the site and /or known to inhabit biological communities similar to the site (e.g. panther or black bear range, avian rookery, bird migratory route, etc.) Identify historic and /or archaeological sites on the subject property. D. GROWTH MANAGEMENT Reference 9J- 11.006, F.A.C. and Collier County's Capital Improvements Element Policy 1.1.2 (Copies attached). 1. INSERT "Y" FOR YES OR "N" FOR NO IN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING: N Is the proposed amendment located in an Area of Critical State Concern? (Reference 9J- 11.006(1)(a)(5),F.A.C.) If so, identify area located in ACSC. N Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Development of Regional Impact pursuant to Chapter 380 F.S. ? (Reference 9J- 11.006(1)(a)7.a, F.A.C.) N Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Small Scale Development Activity pursuant to Subsection 163.3187 (1)(c), F.S. ? (Reference 9J- 11.006(1)(a)7.b, F.A.C.) Does the proposed amendment create a significant impact in population which is defined as a potential increase in County -wide population by more than 5% of population projections? (Reference Capital Improvement Element Policy 1.1.2). If yes, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. N Does the proposed land use cause an increase in density and /or intensity to the uses permitted in a specific land use designation and district identified (commercial, industrial, etc.) or is the proposed land use a new land use designation or district? (Reference Rule 9J- 5.006(5) F.A.C.). If so, provide data and analysis to support the suitability of land for the proposed use, and of environmentally sensitive land, ground water and natural resources. (Reference Rule 9J- 11.007, F.A.C.) E. PUBLIC FACILITIES Provide the existing adopted Level of Service Standard (LOS, and document the 1.00� impact the proposed change will have on the following public facilities: Page 5 of 6 VBRGMPA �..� Exhibit V.E Potable Water Exhibit V.E Sanitary Sewer Exhibit V.E Arterial & Collector Roads: Name of specific road and LOS Vanderbilt Beach Road Livingston Road Exhibit V.E Drainage Exhibit V.E Solid Waste Exhibit V.E Parks: Community and Regional If the proposed amendment involves an increase in residential density, or an increase in intensity for commercial and /or industrial development that would cause the LOS for public facilities to fall below the adopted LOS, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. (Reference Capital Improvement Element Objective 1 and Policies) 2. Exhibit V.E.2 Provide a map showing the location of existing services and public facilities that will serve the subject property (i.e. water, sewer, fire protection, police protection, schools, and emergency medical services.) 3. Exhibit V.E Document proposed services and public facilities, identify provider, and describe the effect the proposed change will have on schools, fire protection and emergency medical services. F. OTHER Identify the following areas relating to the subject property: Exhibit V.F Flood zone based on Flood Insurance Rate Map data (FIRM). N/A Location of wellfields and cones of influence, if applicable. (Identified on Collier County Zoning Maps). N/A Traffic Congestion Boundary, if applicable. N/A Coastal Management Boundary, if applicable. N/A High Noise Contours (65 LDN or higher) surrounding the Naples Airport, if applicable (Identified on Collier County Zoning Maps). G. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION X $16,700.00 non - refundable filing fee, made payable to the Board of County Commissioners, due at time of submittal. $9,000.00 non - refundable filing fee for a Small Scale Amendment, made payable to the Board of County Commissioners, due at time of submittal. X Plus Legal Advertisement Costs (Your portion determined by number of petitions and divided accordingly. Exhibit V.G. Proof of ownership (Copy of deed). Exhibit V.G. Notarized Letter of Authorization if Agent is not the Owner (see attached form). X 1 Original and 5 complete, signed applications with all attachments, including maps, at time of submittal. After sufficiency is completed, 25 copies of the complete application will be required. " Maps shall include: North arrow, name and location of principal roadways and shall be at a scale of 1 " =400' or at a scale as determined during the pre - application meeting. Page 6 of 6 VBRGMPA EXHIBIT I.D. PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANTS w /'\ ^ Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Exhibit I.D. Professional Consultants Planning /Project Management: . Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. D. Wayne Arnold, AICP 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 (239) 94 1144 (239) 94 03 5 fax Coleman, Yovanovich and oester, P.A. Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 (239) 435 3535 (239) 435 1218 fax Page 1 of 2 D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Principal, Director of Planning Education Master of Urban Planning, University of Kansas, Lawrence Bachelor of Science, Urban and Regional Planning /Geography, Missouri State University Professional Registrations/ Affiliations • American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) • American Planning Association (APA) • Urban Land Institute, S.W. Florida Chapter, Board of Directors 1996 • Collier County Rural Fringe Committee, Chairman, 1999 • Collier County Streetscape Ad hoc Committee, 1999 • Leadership Collier, Class of 2000 • Bonita Springs Chamber of Commerce Government Affairs Committee • Collier Building Industry Association, Board of Directors • Collier County Jr. Deputy League, Inc., Board of Directors GradyMinor Mr. Arnold is a Principal and co -owner of the firm and serves as the Secretary /Treasurer and Director of Planning. As Director of Planning, Mr. Arnold is responsible for and oversees services related to plan amendments, property rezonings, expert witness testimony, ROW Acquisition, public participation facilitation, and project management. Mr. Arnold previously served as the Planning Services Director at Collier County, where he oversaw the County's zoning, comprehensive planning, engineering, platting and Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) functions. Mr. Arnold also has prior Florida planning experience with Palm Beach County Government and the South Florida Water Management District. Mr. Arnold has been accepted as an expert in land planning matters in local and state proceedings. Relevant Projects • Collier County Growth Management Plan • Marco Island Master Plan • Immokalee Area Master Plan • Collier County Land Development Code • Logan Boulevard Right -of -Way Acquisition Planning Analysis • U.S. 41 Right -of -Way Expansion Planning Analysis • Copeland Zoning Overlay • Collier County Government Center Development of Regional Impact (DRI) • Winding Cypress DRI • Pine Ridge /Goodlette Road Commercial Infill District • Lely Lakes PUD Rezoning • Henderson Creek Planned Development/Growth Management Plan Amendment • Orangetree (Settlement Area) Growth Management Plan Amendment • Mercato Mixed Use Planned Development • North Point DRI/MPD • Vornado RPUD • Orange Blossom Ranch WD • Palermo Cove RPD Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. Civil Engineers • Surveyors • Land Planners • Landscape Architects Page 2 of 2 i0-*%\ /"\ �\- / > y \\ -� \ , ; � \� °) ° ± ])i )} \ 44 � \� ƒ \] :: ..,, > lCLES O § r» [NCl!`- �> � « ° :> . :� . t ®Z ± z! <� ®: ) \. �� )� 7 \, . /\ \ 2010 FOR PROFIT CORPORATION ANNUAL REPORT FILED DOCUMENT# P04000142463 Jan 21, 2010 Entity Name: EVERBANK FINANCIAL CORP Secretary Of State Current Principal Place of Business: New Principal Place of Business: 501 RIVERSIDE AVE. 12TH FLOOR JACKSONVILLE, FL 32202 Current Mailing Address: 501 RIVERSIDE AVE. 12TH FLOOR JACKSONVILLE, FL 32202 FEI Number: 52- 2024090 FEI Number Applied For( ) Name and Address of Current Registered Agent: C T CORPORATION SYSTEM 1200 SOUTH PINE ISLAND ROAD PLANTATION, FL 33324 US New Mailing Address: FEI Number Not Applicable ( ) Certificate of Status Desired ( ) Name and Address of New Registered Agent: The above named entity submits this statement for the purpose of changing its registered office or registered agent, or both, in the State of Florida. SIGNATURE: Electronic Signature of Registered Agent Date Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund Contribution ( ). OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS: Title: DCEO Name: CLEMENTS, ROBERT M ddress: 501 RIVERSIDE AVENUE, 12TH FLOOR .:ity -St -Zip: JACKSONVILLE, FL 32202 Title: DNC Name: MEEKS, GARY Address: 501 RIVERSIDE AVENUE, 12TH FLOOR City -St -Zip: JACKSONVILLE, FL 32202 Title: D/P Name: WILSON, W. BLAKE Address: 501 RIVERSIDE AVENUE, 12TH FLOOR City -St -Zip: JACKSONVILLE, FL 32202 Title: D Name: COMMANDER, CHARLES E III Address: 200 LAURA ST City -St -Zip: JACKSONVILLE, FL 32202 Title: EVP Name: SURFACE, JOHN S Address: 501 RIVERSIDE AVENUE, 12TH FLOOR City -St -Zip: JACKSONVILLE, FL 32202 Title: S Name: HAJDA, THOMAS A Address: 501 RIVERSIDE AVENUE, 12TH FLOOR City -St -Zip: JACKSONVILLE, FL 32202 I hereby certify that the information indicated on this report or supplemental report is true and accurate and that my electronic signature shall have the same legal effect as if made under oath; that I am an officer or director of the corporation or the receiver or trustee empowered to execute this report as required by Chapter 607, Florida Statutes; and that my name appears above, or on an attachment with all other like empowered. "GNATURE: THOMAS A HAJDA S 01/21/2010 Electronic Signature of Signing Officer or Director Date ^N 110� 10*"\ EXHIBIT 111,Am LEGAL DESCRIPTION M LEGEND 3 POB = POINT OF BEGINNING POC = POINT OF COMMENCEMENT h OR = OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK o PG(S) = PAGE(S) v ROW = RIGHT -OF -WAY O O Zt -N- j 0 0' 60' 120' 240' SCALE: I"= 120' THIS PLAN MAY HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED FROM INTENDED DISPLAY SCALE FOR REPRODUCTION REASONS LINE TABLE LINE BEARING LENGTH Ll I S 8938'07' W 114.28' L2 N 0077153' W 2650' L3 N 894877" W 8.19' 36 m OR 2632 PGS. 1892 S 89'5642'E 826.29' OR 4509 PGS. 1454 -1455 L3 S 89 58'07' W 704.79' — — — � OR 3022 PGS 1128 -1131 — OR 3599 PGS 121 -124 ^ L1 N — — — — — — — — — — — — V/ANDERBILT BEACH ROAD L 0 31 _ LINE. OF THE SW. 1 4 OF_SECTION 31 6 S 89 5612'E 2644.16' DRAWN BY OLS PROPERTY DESCRIPTION SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4509 PAGES 1454 THROUGH 1455 CHECKED BY: RH THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE OR. 4509 PGS. 1454-1455 A PORTION OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA SOUTHWEST 1/4 AND THE WEST 1/2 OF THE WEST 1/2 OF THE SCALE: 1"= 120' SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST FILE. 1032-00! SC.DWG 1/4 OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, RANDALL MWORA, PSM 4 FL Uc£N:sc 16091 FOR THE FIRM COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LESS THE SOUTH 150 FEET THEREOF. o ti LESS AND EXCEPT: ti THAT PORTION DESCRIBED IN WARRANTY DEED IN COWER 3 COUNTY, FLORIDA RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 3022, o PAGE 1128, AND THAT PORTION DESCRIBED IN ORDER OF y TAKING RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 3599, PAGE 121, ^°o N 0 BOTH OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. CONTAINING 9.18 ACRES MORE OR LESS o N NOTES: 0 1. BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON THE SOUTH LINE j OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COWER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING Q SOUTH 89'56'12" EAST. 2. THIS SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF ABSTRACT OF TITLE AND MAY BE W SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS, RESERVATIONS AND /OR RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. ALL MATTERS OF TITLE SHOULD BE REFERRED TO AN ATTORNEY AT LAW. 3. DIMENSIONS SHOWN HEREON ARE IN U.S. SURVEY FEET AND DECIMALS THEREOF. it o a S. 1 CORNER OF SECTION 31 DRAWN BY OLS - Bonita S rin 239.947.1144 GradyMinor p 3800 NA Da R£Y Fort Myers 239.690.4380 BONITA SPRING. FL 34134 North Port 941.426.5858 Civil Engineers • Land Surveyors • Planners • Landscape Architects CERT. OF AUTH. EB 0005151 CERT. OF AUTH. LB 0005151 BUSINESS LC 26000266 www.GradyMinor.com Q. Grady Minor and Associates, PA. SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION of CHECKED BY: RH JOB CODE x OR. 4509 PGS. 1454-1455 A PORTION OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA W > SCALE: 1"= 120' DATE .• 4/06/10 FILE. 1032-00! SC.DWG SHEET • 1 of 1 RANDALL MWORA, PSM 4 FL Uc£N:sc 16091 FOR THE FIRM EXHIBIT IV.B, PRpPOSED GRQWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN TEXT Exhibit IV.B Amended Language FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION SECTION I. URBAN DESIGNATION A. Urban Mixed Use District (XV) 16. Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide primarily for neighborhood commercial development at a scale not typically found in the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict. The intent is to provide commercial uses to serve the emerging residential development in close proximity to this Subdistrict, and to provide employment opportunities for residents in the surrounding area. Allowable uses shall be a variety of commercial uses as more particularly described below, and mixed use (commercial and residential). Prohibited uses shall be gas stations and convenience stores with gas pumps, and certain types of fast food restaurants. This Subdistrict consists of two parcels comprising approximately 17 acres, located on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road and east of Livingston Road, as shown on the Subdistrict Map. For mixed -use development, residential density shall be limited to sixteen dwelling units per acre. Residential density shall be calculated based upon the gross acreage of the Subdistrict parcel on which it is located (Parcel 1 or Parcel 2). Rezoning of the parcels comprising this Subdistrict is encouraged to be in the form of a PUD, Planned Unit Development. At the time of rezoning, the applicant must include architectural and landscape standards for each parcel. •0001*4% a. Parcel This parcel is located at the intersection of Livingston Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road. A maximum of 100,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area for commercial uses may be allowed. Allowable uses shall be the following, except as prohibited above: retail, personal service, restaurant, office, and all other uses as allowed, whether by right or by conditional use, in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts as set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance 04 -41, as amended, in effect as of the date of adoption of this Subdistrict (Ordinance No. 2005 -25 adopted on June 7, 2005); other comparable and /or compatible land uses not found specifically in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts, limited to: general and medical offices, government offices, financial institutions, personal and business services, limited indoor recreational uses, and limited retail uses; mixed -use development (residential and commercial uses). The maximum floor area for any single commercial user shall be 20,000 square feet., except for a grocery /supermarket, Physical fitness facility, home furniture /furnishing store, or department store use, which shall not exceed a maximum of 50.000 square feet. (XV)b. Parcel This parcel is located approximately % mile east of Livingston Road and is adjacent to multifamily residential uses. A maximum of 80,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area for commercial uses may be allowed. Allowable uses shall be the following, except as prohibited above: General and medical offices, community facilities, and business and personal services, all as allowed, whether by right or by conditional use, in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts as set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance 04 -41, as amended, in effect as of the date of adoption of this Subdistrict (Ordinance No. 2005 -25 adopted on June 7, 2005). The maximum floor area for any single commercial user shall be 20,000 square feet. Exh IVB - Amended Language.doc Page 1 of 2 VBRGMPA .-� At the time of rezoning of Parcel 2, the developer shall provide restrictions and standards to insure that uses and hours of operation are compatible with surrounding land uses. Permitted uses such as assisted living facilities, independent living facilities for persons over the age of 55, continuing care retirement communities, and nursing homes, shall be restricted to a maximum of 200 units and a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.6. The developer of Parcel 2 shall provide a landscape buffer along the eastern property line, abutting the Wilshire Lakes PUD, at a minimum width of thirty (30) feet. At the time of rezoning, the developer shall incorporate a detailed landscape plan for that portion of the property fronting Vanderbilt Beach Road as well as that portion along the eastern property line, abutting the Wilshire Lakes PUD. Exh [VB - Amended Language.doc Page 2 of 2 VBRGMPA EXHIBIT V.A. LAND US- 11-1 co m 0 ROAD (C.R. 846) COMMONS C -3 GREEN w o )VENTRY GRANA A TREE < >w SQUARE SHOPP S i SURREY ENTER APRIL F < - oz PLACE REGENT =LIST CONVALESCENT RAN'S PARK CIRCL o URCH NAPLES DAILY NEWS NORTHSIDE LIVINGSTON CREEKSIDE TER MEDICAL IMMOKALEE = LAKES 29 C_3 COMMERCE (S) 26 ROAD MALIBU GOLDEN GATE ESTATES 26 PARK STONEBRIDGE CENTER 25 30 LAKE UNIT 97 HERIT 27 BOSLEY RIGAS o GREE v BREEZEWOOD Q PELICAN NT �a (S) w 0 nESTC w HAMILTON MARSH p ° GREENS O m ON Z Q E z STANDING 0 C_4 J �-. % O OAKS r M MERCATO N a N� MARSH w U PELICAN ISLANDWALK (DRI) O MARSH va m (DRI) ROAD 34 C -4 a 35 Q (DRI) p 36 GOLDEN GATE ESTATES I WALGREENS p0 WILSHIRE /� WLAKES UNIT 96 L C -4 MARKER LAKE VILLAS V D SITE O PELICAN MARSH 33 (DRI) VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD VANDERBILT BEACH LEMURIA BRADFORD VANDERBILT VINEYARDS SQUARE TRUST VENETIAN (DRI) pm HEAVENLY G PLAZA GARDENS MONTEREY FOUNTAIN VINEYARDS W PARK CITRUS DRI ( ) w D d PINE t EMERALD Y GARDENS OAK VINEYARDS O ui RIDGE V LAKES m ORANGE BLOSSOM (s) GROVE (DRI) z 4 o ir 3 : o D SAVANNAH 2 CAY a LCS 1 5 Q O GOLDEN GATE J PLACE LAGOON O p CARLISLE () A NAPLES 6 O ESTATES 111 ¢ 0 REGENCY LONGVIEW FIRST -� UNIT 95 ~ fr SLEEPY CENTER BAPTIST a _ m w HOLLOW LONE CHURCH V.F.W. 4 y w SUNSHINE (s) a Z -- BEAR -- OAK - -- Q LL 00 (s) CREEK 0 w WILLOW PRINCESS m a PARK PARK LECENp I �°N0 Qy IMmlla.11.us 2311.947.I144 Flrcl MtfM 23..,s U.�UIIU VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD NEICHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRI 08cR88/888 � ® N �^ © Gradyniinor xmncn 23DA,14.2397 EXHIBIT.V.A.1 € O 1000' 2000' °�'' ChIlEnglncers • LandSurvecors • Planners • LandscapeArchllcek GENERAL LOCATION MAP Ct LBxt. UI' \ITI. fLgMlssl tear. uY.\TII. nt IeMY.ul latil86 LLxfdN2W [wm vn a SCALE: 1" = 2000' Peru °n 0a1 Men�pn°n By °...aanaunacn�la uurm. Honor a,,lA iat -r.\. sxser os t > � ;o 0 ZONING: PELICAN MARSH DRIIPUO USE: GOLF COURSE AND SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONED: PELICAN MARSH DRIIPUD USE: FPL EASEMENT, GOLF Z I COURSE AND GOLF COURSE .f MAINTENANCE BUILDING o SUBJECT PROPERTY 6` ZONED: A, AGRICULTURE USE: ANIMAL SAFARI PET HOSPITAL AND RESORT AND BOBBIN HOLLOW EQUESTRIAN CENTER mmilblim EXISTING ZONING: BRADFORD SQUARE PUD EXISTING FLUE: VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD r •, NEIGHBORHOOD / p - � = •s COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT ,* • a ° " ' .• T Jai, .V' -Mj�, EXISTING USE: VACANT COMMERCIAL . ` VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD --- ---� =- --�- � h .` r �"'""'�^+�+.....- �..�.:.. �. ADJACENT PROPERTY c�r:a*n,.a.... .. i . � .- .. . w Pti•• � r •,h '. f ._.. ___. _. _ - �.�_. NORTH •, •A Z ZONING: DRIIPUD(PELICAN MARSH) ' • �' < @ F F 1 Yf w • a ` +RL aY'. rv° - USE: GOLF COURSE AND SINGLE FAMILY k4 RESIDENTIAL ^ a _. ZONED: VINEYARDS DRUPUD !° _ H• +' tl' - ZONED: VINEYARDS DRUPUD l - "',jj,, 20NED: VINEYARDS USE: VILLAGE WALK SINGLE DRIIPUD AND SOUTH ZONING: DRIIPUD (VINEYARDS) .n ® USE: FPL EASEMENT AND ORCHARDS SINGLE AND MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL i .,Keq USE: BERMUDA ISLE ENT AL 1 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL '#,•%Q it MULTI - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE: VILLAGE WALK SINGLE FAMILY 3 RESIDENTIAL - c 7pr �•� .' • � �� r EAST ZONING: A, AGRICULTURE USE: ANIMAL SAFARI PET HOSPITAL AND RESORT AND BOBBIN HOLLOW EQUESTRIAN CENTER • ` WEST " Yr {'•' '�• a ZONING: DRIIPUD (PELICAN MARSH AND VINEYARDS) USE: FPL EASEMENT, GOLF COURSE AND GGG •s •, ORCHARDS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL s a s• w r w- U .. s. .. e. f. P MGM by uonna,lKln 'la! 947.1IJJ 4'urt M!crd !:i!I.fi!111.1%WI ANUMILT BRACH RAID NLI6NBORMOOD COMMEMAL SUBDI ____ .x R. nwo: EXHIBIT V.A.2 ® GradyMinor NnrlliNxt l,.Ii.J'1n.5iifiN ® Napl. 239.+14.2397 0 tOO, N 200 CIvIIEnglneers • Land8—ynr • x Planners . LandscapeArchiwela EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING SCALE' 1" = 200' aulcawr.r ,:" T.O rnm .riiaxiv,ieurr.lu.umlmwnvsi .,...rrmpinna.n�m . rrnro XII.— au,wnnrmre. u nrxixccsccmnxewi P.I. DATE AERIAL FLOWN: JANUARY 2008 ""'�" MM 1 OF I .. „- d H ? --,IT VB",I., 5 1 AMEIAKCM R 25 E R 26 E I R 27 E R 28 E R 29 E R 30 E R 31 E I R 32 E R 33 E R 34 E VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD 2006 — 2016 nENDRY COUNTY URBAN DESIGNATION --A, I,— , ©mx R Mxy,MMN,e. [ NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL FUTURE LAND USE MAP 4r o- xeNEnxNen ■z [Annm ■ex��apRxp ~ SUBDISTRICT en[AUxxu axxe mRn ® ESTATES DESIGNATION N Collier County Florida CONSERVATION DESIGNATION CO EXHIBIT V.B EXISTING FUTURE LAND .mn«az...xp swap OVERLAYS AND N USE DESIGNATION O DETAILSO FTNERLSAOVERLAYAREAARE5HOVM A[sR[nr I•xN[ soaps ®" '"p ■ A0u /sic VMK SPECIAL FEATURES ONTHEFUTUREUNDUSEMAPTIUED: 'COLUER COUNTY RURAL A ADRICULTURAL HE ❑! . ❑" SUBJECT SITE: AREA A55E53MENT DTEWAR05HIP OVERLAY NAP• p[vp[xIw susa¢�xy* °°° mx suepsrnn x.°" /.� xp°"" • "" VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD ■ ■ ® - xx p NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ■ aw; q n ■ �° °e" 0 :. xxA nwv pwNA. SUBDISTRICT 9.2± ACRES N i rsnx n DESIGNATOR RURAL ® w�[H/unxrAiwas ■ txmI/ Fop eorp ❑ AaKU[ wM/AUeu u¢ psTmn r N r e,y ■ v a+'w e�i wno moo : a�e'"°�'� � � ®s""�"wnn -m"�"i mvrtxur SUBJECT SITE ■ „ "p,„e,W„ ",e "� o" „„ "[[ 5 s mnr LEE COUNTY ❑ ■ axs.w wos xTM[ r" [[cxna+ wiei swmxn ® unr5 N W ; rxx. GO - Etl I]I pj �" muc wy u¢ xr, us. 0 xti ou.. .m CLAM _ 5 BAY HENDRY COUNTY NRPA i wr y [Vna[ uxo us[ wp A FLORIDA PANTHER NATIONAL WILDLIFE RENGE ^ �� YI wpc[o - onaxx. ien ♦a �.II.J .xswzo - mo N /oos \\ 1pm - si) FANAHATCXEE STRAND e - _ 2, STATE y xx[ ewe. x. irenm[�aj A (P 0 0 PRESERVE s : \ \x \ \•` 4 aa. - ow -ail�5 wa \\ Cf BIG CYPRESS xse _ ar�Ije. wEU- s[ - E TX 1 ` + NATIONAL x, %c w �isl nysRl[ LV} PRESERVE oe. y 1 w.Ram ejs' y N m...... IF \ mewo xuowe. µ([ e . smse�ivepi: son [(1 uMCp " r- 1 0 V1 CME R AOwiC T[sW W N W xaswx" er�2�s� xrnxv�pw w [: Usme hl M1u[- Nas -�.m[ xewtn pxsox J R 25E R26E R 27E 828E R 29E R.3CE MONROE CODNtt R31E R32E R33E R34E EXHIBIT V.C. iv !M'EN'T,,AL EN". IRON.. /"\ O 3U iv -7mmm7 Tj '- .,' ., Ism 1-FrENT) 14n 1,.dHp 239..N7.1144 GradyAlinor N 0 50' 100' CKII Eng.—I * Land Surveyors , Planners • Landscape Archilecls SCALE: I" = 100 NI--d — 1— 1-1. -BY Olk WM40 I FLUCFCS Legend Code Description Acres 624 Pine, Cypress, Cabbage Palm 4..20+— 411 Pine Flatwood�---- 424 Melaleuca 0.14± 434 Mixed Hardwoods 1.91± T fim AND OcHomm commnm sumsmxi EXHIBIT V.C.10 FLUCKS MAP DATE AERIAL FLOWN: JANUARY 2008 SHEET' 11 Oi' 1 v N 27 M11IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII P ' • TIME t}C d r .. ;'jao PIP da ns T NRCS Soils Legend a :%A N1?EI:13IL'1'Bt.1 Uli1, 0, 117 p Code Description Acres % of Site c 14 Pinada Fine Sand, Limestone Sub. (H) 4.27± 47% 27 Holopaw Fine Sand (H) 4.85± 53% �r . w Total 9.12± ,. _b 'yc o�i r� �nwra a.� � '4g A >•1 1 ECSn0 �• • w 11 Sjfto 231147.11+4 AMDLRBI6! Ma RAID MLICMBMMOOD MUM n.!nnrn, xrl uw!.t:uui,,,N, Grady117inor ® N �,.!!, 11.1 © M.p!r 13'J 1•It 1301 EXHIBIT v.c.1 b 0 50• 100• M��4 Cidl L•'n4lnnclw L;uul SUrvcrnpu Plannrr+ . Landucapc rtrahlLCCls $OIL$ MAP �� 1• = 100 � r � M.atoa ' �•z;r W ;.3y��M t DnaVxrn sNEEI'Kt ar 1 u �L 1.i 4 J 27 M11IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII P ' • TIME t}C d r .. ;'jao PIP da ns T NRCS Soils Legend a :%A N1?EI:13IL'1'Bt.1 Uli1, 0, 117 p Code Description Acres % of Site c 14 Pinada Fine Sand, Limestone Sub. (H) 4.27± 47% 27 Holopaw Fine Sand (H) 4.85± 53% �r . w Total 9.12± ,. _b 'yc o�i r� �nwra a.� � '4g A >•1 1 ECSn0 �• • w 11 Sjfto 231147.11+4 AMDLRBI6! Ma RAID MLICMBMMOOD MUM n.!nnrn, xrl uw!.t:uui,,,N, Grady117inor ® N �,.!!, 11.1 © M.p!r 13'J 1•It 1301 EXHIBIT v.c.1 b 0 50• 100• M��4 Cidl L•'n4lnnclw L;uul SUrvcrnpu Plannrr+ . Landucapc rtrahlLCCls $OIL$ MAP �� 1• = 100 DATE AERIAL FLOWN' JANUARY 2SCALE: x...rromum��r.mm V. .rwU nnn��r um!.wuriarn. r.a. M.atoa Do!• DnaVxrn sNEEI'Kt ar 1 u �. . E'X B Vp E . .■ � . . � UB; I A § } } ] : � ) ) . ) � � . . � \ : < ! , . . \ } ] / 2 : » ƒ.,)`. ) � »\ j..: , EXHIBIT V.E. PUBLIC FACILITIES V.E.1. Provide the existing adopted Level of Service Standard (LOS) and document the impact the proposed change will have on the following public facilities: The subject Growth Management Plan Amendment proposes to permit a maximum of 100,000 square feet of commercial development on the 9± acre property that comprises the Vanderbilt Neighborhood Commercial land use category. Approximately 100,000 square feet of general commercial use will be constructed within this land use category. Additionally up to 10 residential units will be constructed. Potable Water The subject project is located within the urban boundary with standards for Potable Water established in the Capital Improvement Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. Service to this area is provided by Collier County Water and Sewer District. The currently adopted minimum Level of Service (LOS) Standards and 2009 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) for Potable Water are as follows: Potable Water LOS Standard Available Inventory as of 7/09 Required Inventory as of 7/09 Planned CIE FY 09 -14 5 -Year Surplus or (Deficit) 170 GPD /Capita 46.8 MGD 31.9 MGD 2.0 MGD 16.9 MGD Minimum standards for Potable Water are being met or exceeded. It is estimated that potable water demand for the project will be as follows. 100,000 sq. ft. retail at: 0.1 GPD /SF = 10,000 GPD 10 units at: 170 GPD /UNIT = 1,700 GPD TOTAL = 11,700 GPD The total combined demand for potable water for the new land use category is approximately 11,700 gallons per day. Based on the available inventory identified in the 2009 AUIR, this demand will not have a significant impact on the Collier County Regional Water System. Sanitary Sewer The subject project is located within the urban boundary with standards for Sanitary Sewer established in the Capital Improvement Element of the Collier County Exhibit V.E Page 1 of 6 rAo Growth Management Plan. The currently adopted minimum Level of Service (LOS) Standards and 2009 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) for Sanitary Sewer are as follows: Sanitary Sewer LOS Standard Available Inventory as of 7/09 Required Inventory as of 7/09 Planned CIE FY 09 -14 5 -Year Surplus or (Deficit) 100,000 sq. ft. retail at: 10 units at: 120 GPD /Capita 29.1 MGD 23.8 MGD 0.0 MGD 5.3 MGD 0.1 GPD /SF = 10,000 GPD 120 GPD /UNIT = 1,200 GPD TOTAL= 11,200 GPD Standards for Sanitary Sewer are being met or exceeded. It is estimated that wastewater demand for the project will be equal to that identified in the potable water analysis above and is approximately 11,200 gallons per day. This demand is within the available capacity identified in the AUIR, will not have a significant impact on the Regional Wastewater System. Arterial and Collector Roads The proposed amendment does not modify the previously approved maximum intensity of development. The previously approved impact statement for this site had an adjusted Total Daily trip count of 5185 with 480 adjusted PM Peak Hour trips (6880 Total Daily, 635 P.M. Peak Hour Trips — Unadjusted). The PM Peak hour service volume on Livingston Road between Vanderbilt and Immokalee Roads is 3,840 vehicles (Total Volume is 1510 trips and Remaining Capacity is 2330 trips). The PM Peak hour service volume on Vanderbilt Beach Road between Logan and Livingston Roads is 3,540 vehicles (Total Volume is 1934 trips and Remaining Capacity is 1606 trips). No new traffic impacts result from the amendment. Drainage The subject project is located within the urban boundary with standards for Drainage established in the Capital Improvement Element of the Collier County Exhibit V.E Growth Management Plan. The currently adopted minimum Level of Service (LOS) Standards and 1999 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) for Drainage are as follows: Drainage LOS Standard Future Development — 25 year, 3 day storm Existing Development — current service level Available Inventory as of 7/09 373 Canal Miles Required Inventory as of 7/10 373 Canal Miles Planned CIE FY 10 -14 N/A 5 -Year Surplus or (Deficit) N/A The proposed development in the amendment area will be designed to comply with the 25 year, 3 day storm routing requirements. Solid Waste The established Level of Service (LOS) for the solid waste facilities is two years of landfill disposal capacity at present fill rates and ten years of landfill raw land capacity at present fill rates. No adverse impacts to the existing solid waste facilities from the proposed project of 100,000 square feet of commercial uses. Solid Waste Generation: Retail: 100,000 sf x 0.01 lb /sf /day x 1 cy /250 Ibs =1,400 cy /yr Residential: 10 UNITS x 5 Ibs /unit/day x 1 cy /250lbs = 73 cy /yr Data source: "Solid Wastes: Engineering Principles and Management Issues ", Tchobangolous/Theisen and "Environmental Engineering and Sanitation ", Salvato. Parks: Community and Regional A maximum of 10 residential units will be allowed. Computation of projected demand is as calculated below. This demand is nominal and will not adversely affect Park capacity. 1.2 acres /1000 unincorporated population x 10 units x 2.5 pop /unit = fraction of an acre The currently adopted minimum Level of Service (LOS) Standards and 2009 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) for Regional Park Land is as follows: Exhibit V.E Page 3 of 6 /1 Parks LOS Standard 1.2 acres /10( Available Inventory as of 9/30/09 Required Inventory as of FY2016 Planned CIE FY 10 -15 Available Inventory as of FY 2016 5 -Year Surplus or (Deficit) )0 unincorporated population 544.54 Acres 473.70 Acres (47.00) Acres 497.54 Acres 23.84 Acres No adverse impacts to the existing parks are anticipated from this project. Impact fees at the current fee structure will be paid and provide funding for future park needs. The development will be responsible for payment of impact fees if residential development occurs on this site. Exhibit V.E Page 4 of 6 LEGEND ® SCHOOLS PARKS AIRPORTS F FIRE STATIONS E EMERGENCY MEDICAL STATIONS GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS * SHERIFF'S STATIONS AND SUBSTATIONS ❑ LIBRARIES 0 WATER TREATMENT PLANTS H PUBLIC HEALTH SYSTEMS AND HOSPITALS p EXISTING OR MODIFIED WATER RETENTION STRUCTURES SOLID WASTE FACILITIES + WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS ` INDICATES HIGH -�^ VELOCITY ZONE COASTAL HIGH HAZARD ZONE N A SCALE 0 1 /2 MI. 1 MI. IFrVN➢ w A# LL ` ` COASTAL HIGH HAZARD ZONE E3 a o IF o Z MCMORAf Q v firm. > WW1 ♦ ♦ T G4 ® �n NORTH NAPLES M.S. I . C.R. 888 O 6 ` ` ` ` COASTAL HIGH HAZARD ZONE E3 IF o WW1 ♦ ♦ T G4 1 W T O 6 6ETfRANS T ' N W 2 2 COUM. P NORTH COLLIER NORTH NAPLES P PARK R PELICAN x� SHERIFF M MARSH VANDERBIL V VANE E E PELICAN , VAS ERBIyT o o B RD S SITE E NAPLES IMMOKALEE RD C.R. 846 MEDIC 7' PROPOSED ME�42 LAUREL CULTCO® HIGH ELEM. SCHOOL Lo rn ] Z C Q > O OAKR® U J O J W MIDDLE X O CO W r- c V-ANDERBILT BEACH ROAD NN® DS 'T E ELEMENTARY MEDIC 7.3 BIC CYPRESS PROPOSED ® ECfM. 'YARDS COMM. PARK MAX HASSE FF4 COLLIER HICH PINE RIDGE RD L'® I PINE RIDGE RD 1' \V SC2 ualnla sn��ua can luv.nAA ANDERBILP BEACH ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SUBDIS1 P°ftM)i'ra Yan.n!In.A 85. ©GradyMinor N; 1n. n KIl:rl4.=7 M:nuc, zas:uasu� EXHIBIT V. E.2 fivil Gnpineem . Land Sunnyol�, • Planners . Landscape ArclilLecL' PUBLIC FACILITIES MAP I;eln.urnnl.ulmtim , i Iaxror.uml.waas ¢ a 1-11 susnxnml DATE AERIAL FLOWN• JANUARY 2008 �. =u.crar4num�r.ram D. rrmp alewrmid,— mtca. P.A. ' G a) d U sxcer LI °oe , 5 FF4 COLLIER HICH PINE RIDGE RD L'® I PINE RIDGE RD 1' \V SC2 ualnla sn��ua can luv.nAA ANDERBILP BEACH ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SUBDIS1 P°ftM)i'ra Yan.n!In.A 85. ©GradyMinor N; 1n. n KIl:rl4.=7 M:nuc, zas:uasu� EXHIBIT V. E.2 fivil Gnpineem . Land Sunnyol�, • Planners . Landscape ArclilLecL' PUBLIC FACILITIES MAP I;eln.urnnl.ulmtim , i Iaxror.uml.waas ¢ a 1-11 susnxnml DATE AERIAL FLOWN• JANUARY 2008 �. =u.crar4num�r.ram D. rrmp alewrmid,— mtca. P.A. ' G a) d U sxcer LI °oe , 5 G a) d U sxcer LI °oe , 5 V.E.3. Document proposed services and public facilities, identify provider, and describe the effect the proposed change will have on schools, fire protection and emergency medical services. Schools A maximum of 10 residential units will be allowed. Given the mixed use nature of the project and likely residential component, maximum students would be 0.5 /unit or 5 students. This demand is nominal and will not adversely affect School capacity. The development will be responsible for payment of impact fees if residential development occurs on this site. Fire Service The proposed land use category is within the North Naples Fire District service area. No known service deficiencies exist or are anticipated. Fire impact fees will be paid at the time of development, which will offset increases in service demand. EMS Three EMS facilities are located in close proximity to the proposed land use district. No known service deficiencies exist. Impact fees will be paid at the time of development to off -set any increased service demand as a result of commercial development within this district. Exhibit V.E Page 6 of 6 EXHIBIT V.F. OTHER 10"**N ll"� 5 8631N LO -o m ED X Lo =r m or O C --� xO NAM[ RE IAHES FHA. ONE I.-TONE . 1MSHBI LAKE% PHASE 1M0 I .....I T PHASE 1w-A -------- - - - - -- INDICATES SPECIAL TREATMENT OVERLAY P.B. P0. NO NAME P.B. Pµ 2 30 ?B' 19 ill 11 47 n -n 1. ie ]a FRS . B8� ' "s xibi.d ?'Ii�'alBSa�N� sa teea`sga�t�g�s`�ts�9ga dy9Addill_ „lAb: ^ ^c_l:A noon NNE IB 10 CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A PACE OF THE OFOOAL 2DNNC ATLAS REFERRED 10 AND ADOPTED BY REFERENCE BY ORDINANCE NO. 04 -41 OF CONNONIT7 "OMBEFl: 120067 PANEL NUMBER: y120067 PANEL NUMBER: 7N THE CDIINTY OF COLDER. FLORIDA, ADOPTED UNE 22. 2004. PROGRAM: REGULAR EFFECTIVE DATE: NOV. 17, 7005 m Qlk i FLOOD ZONE: ALL-1L_ON AS SHOM ON MAP. .NO ZONE: ALL---. -L22-----OR AS SHONN ON MAP. CHAIRMAN tTWP IER COUNTY, FLORIDA UNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION S RNG 26E SEC(S) 31 SO 1/i MAP NUMBE®R 8631S H b� H H i sz EXHIBIT V.G. SUPPLEMENTAL I Details Page 1 of 1 ...... Property Record Aerial Sketches Trim Notices Current Ownership - ....,... Parcel Nol 00203042108 Property Address 14258 LIVINGSTON RD Owner Name EVERBANK i Addresses 1185 IMMOKALEE RD Cityl NAPLES Statell FL Zip 34110 - 0 t Legal 31 48 26 S112 OF SW1 /4 OF SW 114 LESS S 15OFT LESS E 495FT ­LESS R W DESC IN OR 3022 PG 1128& LESS R DESC IN OR 3599 "For more than four lines of Legal Description please call the Property Appraiser's office. Section Township Range 9 Acres Map No. Strap No. 31 48 26 9.04 3631 1 .03B3-1 a � '" Millaae Rates Sub No. 100 ACREAGE HEADER ' Millaae Area School Other Total Use Code 10 VACANT COMMERCIAL 47 5.fi990 6.1239 11.8229 i *See Instructions for Calculations 2010 Final Tax Roll Latest Sales History (Subject to Change) r If all Values shown below equal 0 this parcel was created after the Final Tax Roll - ­ vu, names exempt value aue to cap on assessment increases. The Information is Updated Weekly. http://w ww. collierappraiser .comIRecordDetail.asp ?Map= &FohoID= 0000000203042108 1/7/2011 INSTR 4485577 OR 4614 PG 2846 RECORDED 10/15/2010 8:33 AM PAGES 6 DWIGHT E. BROCK, COLLIER COUNTY CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT DOC @.70 $27,565.30 REC $52.50 CONS $3,937,824.00 Prepared by and after recording return to: J. Thomas Conroy, III Conroy, Conroy & Durant, P.A. 2210 Vanderbilt Beach Road Suite 1201 Naples, Florida 34109 Folio No.:00203042108 RECEIVER'S DEED (Deed Without Covenant, Representation, or Warranty) STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER This Receiver's Deed is ent the FEDERAL DEPOSIT IN FLORIDA — SOUTHWEST e Baymeadows Way West, ac on SOUTHWEST having been lac din referred to as "Grantee "), ho E t Road, Naples, Florida 3411 . i M day of October, 2010, between CORPO -, RECEIVER OF BANK OF referred to as to "), whose address is 7777 iT� the sai BANK OF FLORIDA - rece vet ' on a 28 20 0, and EVERBANK (herein s p p f usiness is 1185 Immokalee For good and valuabl ideration in hand id t' G hR r by Grantee the receipt and sufficiency of which are here owledged, SELL and CONVEY to Grant out cove nature, express or implied, and was covenants or warranties created by st are excluded, all of Grantor's ri ght, title an being in Collier County, Florida, being more hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Gran (a resents does hereby GRANT, rant, repr on or warranty of any kind or anti rt arise by common law and any cs ereafter amended or superseded, m cract or parcel of land lying and particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached Together with all of Grantor's right, title and interest in any and all improvements and fixtures thereon and thereto (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Subject Property "), and all and singular the rights and appurtenances pertaining thereto, including, but not limited to, any right, title and interest of Grantor in and to adjacent streets, alleys or rights -of -way, subject, however, to all liens, exceptions, easements, rights -of -way, covenants, conditions, restrictions, reservations, encroachments, protrusions, shortages in area, boundary disputes and discrepancies, matters which could be discovered or would be revealed by, respectively, an inspection or current survey of the Subject Property, encumbrances, impositions (monetary and otherwise) access limitations, licenses, leases, prescriptive rights, rights of parties in possession, rights of tenants, co- tenants, or other co- owners, and any and all other matters or conditions affecting the Subject Property, as well as standby fees, real estate taxes, and assessments on the Subject Property for the current year and prior and subsequent years, and subsequent taxes and assessments for prior years due to change in land usage or ownership, and any and all zoning laws, regulations, and ordinances of municipal and other governmental authorities affecting the Subject Property (all of the foregoing being collectively referred to as the "Permitted Record 8 Return To: Conroy, Conroy b Durant, PA. 2210 Vanderbilt Beach Road, Suite 1201 Naples, Florida 34109 "-, 11_1 OR 4614 PG 2848 Further, by its execution and acceptance of delivery of this Receiver's Deed, Grantee or anyone claiming by, through, or under Grantee hereby fully releases Grantor, its employees, officers, directors, representatives, and agents from any and all claims, costs, losses, liabilities, damages, expenses, demands, actions, or causes of action that it may now have or hereafter acquire, whether direct or indirect, known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, liquidated or contingent, arising from or related to the Subject Property in any manner whatsoever. This covenant releasing Grantor shall be a covenant running with the Subject Property and shall be binding upon Grantee, its successors and assigns. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the Subject Property together with all and singular the rights and appurtenances thereto in any wise belonging, unto Grantee, its successors and assigns forever, without covenant, representation, or warranty whatsoever, subject, however, to the Permitted Encumbrances. The fact that certain mentioned, disclaimed, or ex whether in the body hereof warranty of Grantor as to an mentioned, disclaimed, or e c nothing herein shall be cons party of the existence, v li limitations, or other mattersi�, and nothing shall be construe rights, if any, but without enforceability, scope, or locati any way nerem, h exhibit hereto, shall n im ces, s, or o t d d i e c a il' cope c ns i dis deemed as a wai by C ation, to challe e against third p matters or conditions may be specifically or generally, and EL covenant, representation, or er matters or conditions not in to the contrary, however, ,r for or Grantee to any third � on of any encumbrances, excepted in any way herein, or Grantee of its respective ,rce the existence, validity, Grantee hereby assumes the p W ore m taxes, standby fees, and general and special assessments of whatever kind an c aracter affecting the Subject Property which are due, or which may become due, for any tax year or assessment period prior or subsequent to the effective date of this Receiver's Deed, including, without limitation, taxes or assessments becoming due by reason of a change. in usage or ownership, or both, of the Subject Property. [SIGNATURE PAGES TO FOLLOW] OR 4614 PG 2850 Signed, sealed and delivered in the nresence of STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER : 7: RM EVERBANK By: C'Ea—fles Tipton Title: President - -0-24F Address: 1185 Immokalee Road Naples, Florida 34110 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this /_ %/ day of October, 2010, by Charles Tipton as President o behalf of the bank, which person is personally known to me, or _ has cense as identification. ..........ETH 0 ... ............. o BETH ANN K ST O Com #D a 046 ' m i /-Wb Expires:.3�2 s y ,* i Florida »Inc ..........� a•........... M✓ R: (Bank of FloridalBradford Square 1DocumentslReceiver's Deed.docx �1 * ** OR 4614 PG 2851 * ** EXHIBIT "A" The SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 and the W 1/2 of the W 1/2 of the E 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, less the South 150 feet thereof. LESS AND EXCEPT: That portion described in Warranty Deed in Collier County, Florida, recorded in Official Records Book 3022, Page 1128, and that portion described in Order of taking recorded in Official Records Book 3599, Page 121, both of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. v rVAAA1 I"' MI-Em IN 4 EN1661, 'JA-�-L 1 J LETTER OFAUTHORIZATION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN I hereby authorize Douglas W. Nelson- Mice President t3# Everiarik ( Grady Minor and Associates, P A and Coleman. Yovanovich and Koester P.A. (Name ofAgent(s)) to serve as my Agents in a request to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan affecting property identified in this Application. Signed: Date_ Go 12b I ripe Gulliford, Vid Pr ident of Everbank I hereby certify that I have the authority to make the foregoing applic0dh, and that the application is true, correct and complete to the best of my knowledge. s: of Applicant Doutilag W. Nelson, Vice - P.residentof Everbank Name - Typed or Printed STATE OF COUNTY OF S M ta`ane! suliscrioeti before me tl'tis day by .t1IiCUi Pic ) MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: jk ul� (.o, doll 1 Notary Public .Sa nipµY e'F4- lifLL1AN FISHER CHOOSE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING:° ;,�: Notary Public- state of Florida +'z' My COMM. Expires Jut 6, 2014 �� �': Commission # EE 6330 who is personally known to me, Bonded. Thtough.National Notary Assn. who has produced as identifcation and did take an Oath _ y did not take and Oath NOTICE - BE AWARE THAT: Florida Statute Section 837.06 - False Official Law states that: "Whoever knowingly makes a false statement In writing with the intent to mislead a public servant In the performance of his official duty shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided by a fine to a maximum of %500.00 and /or maximum of a sixty day jail term." E A I Unanimous Written Consent of the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors of EverBank December 15, 2010 (Appointing Officers) The undersigned, being all of the members of the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors of EverBank, a federally chartered stock savings bank (the "Bank "), do hereby adopt the following resolutions by unanimous written consent in lieu of a meeting of the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors, and .do hereby instruct the Secretary of the Bank to file this Unanimous Written Consent in the minute book of the Bank. RESOLVED, that Tripp Gulliford is hereby appointed to the position of Vice President of the Bank effective as of September 1, 2010; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Fabriena A. Dorgan is hereby appointed to the position of Vice President of the Bank effective as of November 29, 2010; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that any and all actions taken by each of Tripp Gulliford and Fabriena A. Dorgan relating to or within the terms of the foregoing resolutions before their adoption are hereby approved, ratified, and confirmed as the act and deed of the Bank. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being all of the members of the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors of EverBank, hereby execute this Unanimous Written Consent in lieu of a meeting of the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors, for the uses and purposes herein expressed, as of the 15th day of December, 2010, at Jacksonville, Florida. /,-\ 110'� PRE APPLICATION MEETING NOTES MEETING NOTES COLLIER COUNTY COMPREHENSNE PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PHONE: 239-252 -24000 DATE: TIME: 3.00 ?.i:l NOTES BY: bxya we`"'lrS TOPIC OF MEETING: C� /vL Ph _ VG.r hr ;dk PgAd, ATTENDANCE: 1Qwt) Ulzts�CS���r�v <,4 1 /�► �ltl�bScu Svh+Ntcr /7rlova %byv vSSr7 i(% %iCLiZ 0." /vC KEY POINTS / UNDERSTANDINGS /CONCLUSIONS Urp,.,e o,,- Llfftff G4u ,k41A4A i-e5 A-4 *W Hvt Q� 7-v Pop S -7t //+��k. f"r c:�crt ►� ►/S�t Sa4K�i„ „_, � °u c,- t!�i�Eyi�/`_2� ct�f ��7 f -if»t� �or- U.t -fw1, y1�I� i;•4 aro� � �th�� �i'�;s �w�ih �'da/��b,Qi!•filcy- — ife��,�F �`ta�� �v,,.`� � [./.�� provll�oH n �ca� �hAv7r' - ., 5%2 � �vti5i3�� lU /romra +I±ter� D+1t Ld e., i/ we oy� 7 t c'p' -((a%% Ta., 'f- 01/ r /r44ec S ter l�prc lA ^jt Ufe—J 4A 5ti 4�f V %n-r fw. - -- r E1ly 1,64 A'���( W1 /✓D H�j klkAl Al bdl b k A vpR� ass ; *4;y, "— .��1��� �aPy�Xilfina ��P o•F �a�.i •�- ih tul��l - _C,/��! g •Flw"O D 7 1�liwa flih�b �z l�t,ccr 1 1r, �jr 1J' �Cr�t j tzcnll*, Yt r%� SO1Ne�rlx� 1� - 1 meetiag auks fbn"3 2 S4 o Comp, Pavid BANK of FLORIDA Your $ospitalify Bank Douglas W. Nelson Vice President Real Estate Sales Manager 11851mmokalee Road, Naples, FL 34110.4806 Tel: 239.415.5024 •Fax: 239.254.2194 • Cell: 239.398.2939 dnelson @bankofflorida.com • Nasdaq: BOFL Page 1 of 1 PUD ORD,I,NAN. 20��017 41, RW 25466789 ORDINANCE NO. 07 41 / 70.�" AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004 -41, AS .4 cn 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 THE RURAL AGRICULTURE (A) ZONING DISTRICT WITH A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A CHURCH TO MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (MPUD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR A PROJECT KNOWN AS THE BRADFORD SQUARE MPUD, IN SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 9.18 ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Kerry Kubacki for Livingston Village, LLC, and Tammy Turner Kipp of Vanderbilt Holdings II, LLC, represented by Robert L. Duane, AICP, of Hole Montes, Inc., petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED By THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from the Agriculture (A) Zoning District and a conditional use for a church, which has since expired to a Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) zoning district for project known as the Bradford Square MPUD in accordance with the MPUD Document, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" 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 by the Board of County Commissioners of CollienCounty, Florida, this o2 % day of G'L 12007. ATTESTt' BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROE7C COLLIE OUNT , FLQRIDA bA iQL . BY: A ttR S L � f �.t1A• uty � Clerk J S A AN A�oa8Fa•.am`and legal sufficiency: This ordinance filed wiM rho Sec ry of State Of }ip► .he yjj� r Marjori . Student - Stirling yledy ms�n�` — aM Assistant County Attorney filing received this - -- dill' of Page 1 of 28 BRADFORD SQUARE MPUD A MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PREPARED FOR: Livingston Village LLC 2055 Trade Center Way Naples, FL 34109 And Vanderbilt Holdings II, LLC 6625 New Haven Circle Naples, FL 34109 - 7220 PREPARED BY: Hole Montes, Inc. Robert Duane, AICP 950 Encore Way Naples, FL 34110 (239) 254 -2000 And Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson, PA Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. 4001 Tamiami Trial North Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 DATE REVIEWED BY CCPC DATE APPROVED BY BCC April 24, 2007 ORDINANCE NUMBER 2007 -41 AMENDMENTS AND REPEAL Exhibit A n TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE THE BRADFORD SQUARE MPUD SECTION I: STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE SECTION II: PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, LEGAL DESCRIPTION, PROJECT DESCRIPTION, SHORT TITLE, AND STATEMENT OF UNIFIED CONTROL 2 -1 SECTION III: MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS 3 -1 SECTION IV: PRESERVE SUBDISTRICT 4 -1 SECTION V: DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS 5 -1 LIST OF EXHIBITS AND TABLES EXHIBIT "A" MPUD MASTER PLAN EXHIBIT "B" LIST OF REQUESTED DEVIATIONS FROM LDC Page 3 of 28 SECTION I STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE The development of approximately 9.18 acres of property in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East as a Mixed Use Commercial Planned Unit Development (MPUD) will be in compliance with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP). The project will be consistent with all applicable provisions of the growth policies, land development regulations, and applicable comprehensive planning objectives for each of the elements of the GMP for the following reasons: The subject property is located in the Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict and will provide neighborhood commercial development at a scale not typically found In the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict. The intent is to provide commercial uses to serve the emerging residential development in close proximity to this Subdistrict. Allowable land uses are a variety of commercial mixed uses and residential uses. The Subdistrict includes two parcels and the subject property located at the intersection of Livingston Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road. The project is allowed a maximum of 100,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area whether by right or by conditional use in the C -1 through C -3 Zoning District. The Subdistrict prohibits certain uses including gas stations and convenience stores, Residential densities are permitted up to sixteen dwelling units per acre. The proposed MPUD with ten residential dwelling units and up to 100,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area including the proposed uses can be found consistent with the GMP, FLUE, and the provisions set forth in the Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict. Therefore, consistency with the GMP can be established for this proposed MPUD. 1 -1 CADocuments and Settings\melissazone\Local Settings \Temporary Internet Fi1es \0LK20D\Rcviscd MPUD 4 -23 -07 document per MS 4 -9- 07 ccpc 04- 16- 07.doe Paga-4 -a U SECTION 11 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, LEGAL DESCRIPTION, PROJECT DESCRIPTION, SHORT TITLE AND STATEMENT OF UNIFIED CONTROL 2.1 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP The subject property is owned by Vanderbilt Holdings, LLC located at 6625 New Haven Circle, Naples, FL 34109 and is under contract for purchase by Livingston Village, LLC (Co- Applicants) at the time of rezoning. 2.2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION The southwest quarter of the southwest quarter of the southwest quarter and the west half of the west half of the southeast quarter of the southwest quarter of the southwest quarter of Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, less the south 150 feet thereof. Also less and except: That portion described in warranty deed to Collier County, Florida record in O.R. Book 3022, Page 1128, and that portion described in Order of Taking, recorded in O.R. Book 3599, Page 121, Public Records of Collier County, Florida. 2.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project is comprised of 9.18 acres, more or less, and is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Vanderbilt Beach and Livingston Roads, The MPUD has approximately 820 feet of frontage on Vanderbilt Beach Road and approximately 470 feet of frontage on Livingston Road. Bradford Square is expected to develop with a mixture of office, retail, and residential uses, with a maximum of 100,000 square feet of floor area for office and retail uses. However, the maximum floor area for any commercial user shall not exceed 20,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area. 2 -1 Page 5 of 28 2.4 SHORT TITLE This ordinance shall be known and cited as "BRADFORD SQUARE MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE". 2.5 STATEMENT OF UNIFIED CONTROL This statement represents that the contract sellers, Vanderbilt Holdings, LLC, have the project or property under unified control for the purpose of obtaining MPUD zoning on the subject property. 2 -2 - . -_. -- Page 6 of 28 n SECTION III MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT 3.1 MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY AND NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS The maximum development Intensity is 100,000 square feet of gross leasable office or retail area and a maximum of 10 dwelling units. 3.2 PERMITTED USES A. General Permitted Uses: 1. Essential services as set forth under the Land Development Code (LDC) including but not limited to, gas lines, water lines, sewer lines, pump stations and wells. 2. Water management facilities and related structures. 3. Lakes including lakes with bulkheads or other architectural or structural bank treatments. 4. Guardhouses, gatehouses, and access control structures. 5. Temporary construction, sales, and administrative offices for the developer and developer's authorized contractors and consultants, including necessary access ways, parking areas, and related uses, subject to the procedures for a temporary use permit provided in the LDC. b. Landscape features including, but not limited to, landscape buffers, berms, fences and walls. 7. Any other use, which is comparable In nature with the foregoing uses, consistent with the permitted uses for this MPUD, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals. (BZA) B. Principal Uses: 1. Multi- family dwellings. 2. Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the BZA. 3 -1 Page 7 of 28 C. Accessory Uses: 1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with principal residential uses permitted in this MPUD, including recreational facilities, such as swimming pool, and clubhouse, and maintenance facilities. The location of the recreational area is depicted on the MPUD Master Plan. 2. Any other use, which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses, consistent with the uses for this MPUD as determined by the BZA, D. Commercial and Residential Uses: No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or part, for other than the following: Permitted Principal Uses and Structures (SIC Code) 1. Accounting services (group 8721); 2. Apparel and accessory stores (groups 5611 - 5699); 3. Architectural, engineering and surveying services (groups 0781, 8711 - 8713); 4. Attorney offices and legal services (group 8111); 5. Business services (groups 7311 - 7313, 7322 - 7338, 7361 - 7379, 7384, 7389); 6. Child day care services (group 8351); 7. Depository (financial) institutions (groups 601 1 - 6099); 8. Drinking places (group 5813); No outdoor amplified entertainment shall be permitted for any restaurants (music or television) and no bar areas with outside seating shall be permitted. 9. Eating and drinking places (group 5812 only as outlined as follows: box lunch stands, cafes, coffee shops, dairy bars, diners, eating places), food bars, frozen custard stands, grills, (eating places), Ice cream stands, luncheonettes, oyster bars, pizza parlors, pizzerias, restaurants - carry-out, restaurants- sit -down, restaurant with drive- through window (limited to one only) sandwich bars or shops, snack shops, soda fountains, submarine sandwich shops, tea rooms, (See also Section 32E.3); No outdoor amplified entertainment shall be permitted for any restaurants (music or television) and no bar areas with outside seating n shall be permitted. 3 -2 Page 8 of 28 E. 10. Food stores (groups 5411 - 5499) "except as prohibited in Section 3.2.E of this Document," 11. General merchandise stores (groups 5311 - 5399); 12. Governmental offices (groups 9111- 9199); 13. Hardware stores (group 5251); 14. Health services (groups 8011 - 8049, 8082); 15. Home furniture, furnishings, equipment store (groups 5712 - 5736); 16. Home supply store (group 5531); 17. Insurance agencies, brokers, carriers (groups 6311 - 6399, 6411); 18. Large appliance repair service (group 7623); 19. Management and public relations (groups 8741 - 8743, 8748); 20. Membership organizations (groups 8611 - 8699); 21. Miscellaneous repair services (groups 7629 - 7699); 22. Miscellaneous retail services (groups 5912 - 5963); 23. Museums and art galleries (group 8412); 24. Non - depository credit institutions (groups 6111 - 6163); 25. Office machine repair service (groups 7629 - 7631); 26. Paint, glass, wallpaper store (group 5231); 27. Personal services (groups 7211, 7212, 7215, 7216, 7221 7251, 7291, 7299); 28. Photographic studios (group 7221); 29. Physical fitness facilities (group 7991); 30. Residential multi- family- maximum of 10 dwelling units 31. Real estate (groups 6531 - 6541); 32, Retail nurseries, lawn and garden (group 5261); 33. Security brokers, dealers, exchanges, services (groups 6211 - 6289); 34. Shoe repair shops or shoe shine parlors (group 7251); 35. Travel agencies (groups 4724); 36. Veterinarian's office (groups 0742, 0752) (except for outdoor kenneling); 37. Videotape rental (group 7841); 38. Any other use which Is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses as determined by the BZA. Specifically prohibited uses: 1. Automotive service stations; 2. Convenience stores with or without gas pumps; 3. Fast food restaurants; 3 -3 Page 9 of 28 4. No outdoor amplified entertainment shall be permitted for any restaurants (music or television). 5. No bar areas with outside seating shall be permitted. F. Development Standards for Commercial and Residential Uses: Table 1 below sets forth the development standards for land uses with this MPUD Ordinance. Standards in the LDC, not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in effect as of the date of approval of the site development plan (SDP) or subdivision plat. Table 1: A. Principal Structures 1. Minimum lot width: One - hundred feet (100'). 2. Minimum lot area: Ten- thousand square feet (10,000 s.f.). 3. Front yard setback: Thirty -five feet (35') from both Livingston and Vanderbilt Beach Roads. 4. Rear yard setback: Seventy feet from north property line (70'). 5. Side yard setbacks: Seventy feet from east property line (70' each). 6. Minimum distance between structures: One -half the sum of each building height but not less than twenty feet (20'). 7. Maximum building height: Thirty -five within three stories as zoned but not to exceed fifty (50') feet (actual height). 8. Minimum floor area: One - thousand square feet (1000 s.f.). 9. Minimum preserve area setback: Twenty -five feet (25') See also Subsection 5.6.G of this Ordinance. 3 -4 Page-IG of 2R �1 r\ 110IN B. Accessory Structures: 1, Front setback: Fifteen feet (15'). 2. Side setback: Fifteen feet (15'). 3. Rear setback: Fifteen feet (15'). 4. Preserve setback: Ten feet (10'). 5. Distance between principal structures: *SPS. 6. Maximum height: Fifteen feet (15') Notes: See also Subsection 5.6.G of this Ordinance. ' SPS- same as principal structures. Except as provided for herein, all criteria set forth in the Table 1 above, shall be understood to be In relation to individual parcels or lot boundary lines, Condominium and /or residential dwelling unit boundary lines shall not be utilized for determining development standards. Size Limitations on Uses: A maximum of 20,000 square feet of floor area for any single commercial user. This is the only limit on the size of permitted uses within the 100,000 square foot maximum of gross leasable floor area allowed. Architectural Common Theme: Structures within this MPUD shall have a Mediterranean architectural theme, inclusive of common or compatible use of materials and colors. All buildings will be in the Mediterranean style, and all pitched roofs will be barrel tile or similar material. 3 -5 Paqe 11 of 28 Mixed Use Standards: Residential multi - family dwelling units shall be permitted above commercial structures and shall have a minimum floor area of 1000 square feet and shall be limited to a maximum of ten (10) units. 3 -6 SECTION IV PRESERVE SUBDISTRICT 4.1 USES PERMITTED A minimum of 15 percent of the native vegetation area or 1.38 acres of the MPUD shall be preserved and set aside as a preserve area. No building, structure or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or part, for other than the following. A. Permitted Uses and Structures: 1. Principal Uses: a. Passive recreation areas. b. Water management and water management structures. c. Nature trails and boardwalks that do not reduce the amount of required preserve area to be retained. d. Mitigation areas. Page 13 of 28 SECTION V DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS 5.1 TRANSPORTATION REQUIREMENTS The purpose of this Section is to set forth the transportation commitments of the project development. A. All traffic control devises, signs, pavement markings and design criteria shall be in accordance with Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards (MUMS), current edition, FDOT Design Standards, current edition, and the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), current edition. All other improvements shall be consistent with and as required by the LDC. B. All internal roads, driveways, alleys, pathways, sidewalks and interconnections to adjacent developments shall be operated and maintained by an entity created by the developer and Collier County shall have no responsibility for maintenance of /0�'` any such facilities. C. If a gate is proposed at any /or all development entrance(s), the gate shall be designed so as not to cause vehicles to be backed up onto any adjacent roadway. To meet this requirement, the following shall be the minimum requirements to achieve that purpose: 1. The minimum throat depth from the nearest interconnecting roadway edge of pavement shall be no less than 100 feet to the key pad /phone box for the proposed gate. 2. A turn around area of sufficient width and with sufficient inside turning radii shall be provided between the aforementioned key pad /phone box and the proposed gate. D. Arterial level street lighting shall be provided at all access points. Access lighting must be in place prior to the Issuance of the first certificate of occupancy (CO). 5 -1 v _... P.age t4_of 2$ _ 11-'" E. Access points and proposed streets shown on the MPUD Master Plan are considered to be conceptual. Nothing depicted on any such Master Plan shall vest any right of access at any specific point along any property frontage. All such access issues shall be approved or denied during the review of required subsequent site plan or final plat submissions. All such access shall be consistent with the Collier County Access Management Policy as it may be amended from time to time, and with the Collier County Long Range Transportation Plan. F. Site - related improvements (as apposed to system - related Improvements) necessary for safe ingress and egress to this project, as determined by Collier County, shall not be eligible for impact fee credits. All required improvements shall be in place and available to the public prior to the issuance of the first CO. G. Payment in lieu of construction of sidewalks and bike lanes for Vanderbilt Beach Road frontage shall be required. The amount shall be determined utilizing FDOT's 2004 Transportation Cost Manual estimates, as amended. Payment shall be required within 30 days of the zoning approval by the Board of County Commissioners. H. Nothing in any development order shall vest a right of access in excess of a right -in /right -out condition at any access point. Neither shall the existence of a point of ingress, a point of egress, a median opening, nor the lack thereof, be the basis for any future cause of action for damages against the County by the developer, its successor in title, or assignee. I. If any required turn lane improvement requires the use of any existing County rights -of -way or easements, compensating right - of -way shall be provided without cost to the County as a con - sequence of such improvement. J. A bus stop shall be incorporated into the Vanderbilt Beach Road right -of -way. The bus shelter location and design shall be coordinated with, and approved by, the Collier County ATM Department. A detailed plan of the shelter shall be included in the submittal of the first application for this project. The shelter shall be constructed by the applicant and shall be completed prior to issuance of the first CO. K. If, in the sole opinion of Collier County, a traffic signal, or other traffic control device, sign or pavement marking improvement 5 -2 Page 15 of 28 s'ti within a public right -of -way or easement is determined to be necessary, the developer shall pay Its proportional share of the cost of such improvement and shall be paid to Collier County before the issuance of the first CO. 5.2 UTILITY REQUIREMENTS The purpose of this Section is to set forth the utilities and engineering commitments of the project developer. A. Water distribution, sewage collection and transmission and Interim water and /or sewage treatment facilities to serve the project shall be designed, constructed, conveyed, owned and maintained in accordance with applicable County ordinances, as amended, and other applicable County rules and regulations. B. All customers connecting to the water distribution and sewage collection facilities to be constructed will be customers of the County and will be billed by the County in accordance with the County's established rates. C. The development shall be subject to application for and conditions associated with a water and sewer availability letter from the Collier County Utilities Division. 5.3 EASEMENTS FOR UTILITIES Easements, where required, shall be provided for water management areas, utilities and other purposes as may be required by Collier County. All necessary easements, dedications or other instruments shall be granted to ensure the continued operation and maintenance of all services and utilities in compliance with the applicable regulations in effect at the time SDP and plat approvals are requested. 5.4 ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS A. Detailed paving, grading, site drainage and utility plans shall be submitted to the Development Services Department for review. No construction permits shall be issued unless detailed paving, grading, site drainage and utility plans are submitted and until approval of the proposed construction, in accordance with the submitted plans, is granted by the Development Services Department. 5 -3 -..- . •mil: B. A copy of the SFWMD Surface Water Management Permit, if required, shall be reviewed by the Development Services Staff prior to any construction drawing approvals. 5.5 WATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS The purpose of this Section is to set forth the water management commitments of the project developer. A. Design and construction of all improvements shall be subject to compliance with the appropriate provisions of the LDC. B. An excavation permit shall be required where applicable, in accordance with the LDC and South Florida Water Management District rules. C. A surface water management permit shall be obtained from the (SFWMD) prior to any subdivision or SDP approval, if applicable. D. Any existing or proposed easements for Collier County storm water facilities shall be maintained free of landscaping berm, or .--� any other kind of obstacle that could impede adequate access to maintenance crews and equipment. E. If 3.1 slopes are used in this MPUD, possible guardrail, fencing, outlet and gratings may be required in addition to plantings and ground cover plantings. 5.6 ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS The purpose of this Section is to set forth the environmental commitments of the project developer. A. The MPUD shall be required to preserve 15% of native vegetation. The preservation plans shall meet or exceed the requirements of the LDC. B. All approved agency SFWMD, United States Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), FWC) permits, as applicable, shall be submitted prior to final SDP /construction plan approval. Removal of exotic vegetation shall not be counted towards mitigation for impacts to Collier County jurisdictional wetlands. 5 -4 Page 17 of 28 C. All conservation areas shall be designated as conservation/ preservation tracts or easements on all construction plans and shall be recorded on the plat or SDP, whichever is applicable, with protective covenants per or similar to Section 704.06 of the Florida Statutes. D. in the event the project does not require platting, all areas shall be recorded as conservation /preservation tracts or easements dedicated to an approved entity or to Collier County with no responsibility for maintenance and subject to the uses and limitations similar to or as per Florida Statutes of the Section 704.06. E. An exotic vegetation removal, monitoring, and maintenance (exotic -free) plan for the site, with emphasis on the conservation /preservation areas, shall be submitted to Environmental Services Staff for review and approval prior to final SDP /construction plan approval. F. All Category I invasive exotic plants, as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council, shall be removed from within preserve areas and subsequent annual removal of these plants in 10011\ perpetuity shall be the responsibility of the property owner. This information shall be provided to Environmental Services Staff for review at the time development orders are requested. G. All principal structures shall have a minimum setback of 25 -feet from the boundary of any preserve. Accessory structures and all other site alterations shall have a minimum 10 -foot setback. H. The stormwater management system shall be monitored on an annual basis. If the stormwater management system negatively affects native vegetation in the Preserve Area, then the vegetation shall be recreated. I. A preserve management plan shall be provided to the Environmental Services Staff for approval prior to site construction approval identifying methods to address treatment of invasive species and fire management. 5 -5 Page 18 of 2$�._ EXHIBIT "A" MASTER PLAN Page 19 of 28 i I. t 4 V G) (D i� II �; tt „ ,t ;i t, if a l l I i of �c 11 t; ilk i' i i U) , i Z i 13 1 i l l „ ,t fi ZONED PUD PELICAN MARSH ZONED A WEST FRIENDS PET RESORT) Y --------------- 4! -__________ LEGEND •r� Eili �1° wraE �• .Mol,w or ritlr ® rrwaaa eenoEs w o w m v.. r R iEEI v -• : ,• - is BRADFORD SQUARE rt 950Enrn�W.y ;2115134 ° a °1" °` NEpbE, FL. 3.110 CONCEPTUAL WATER NtAP 4396-03 DEVELOPER .�.. Dart Pnm.:(sE„zstmoo .�° LIVINGSTON VILLAGE LLC of a HOLE 1dOf1fE3 F�w;e.c.c. a. or MANAGEMENT PLAN 3 a 5 �.E iE.E amoneattm w.,m umE ao ______ uR _ _. N/a t': .o• 6Ii®6AA�IiCMiE1Gl6 EXHIBIT "B" LIST OF REQUESTED DEVIATIONS FROM THE LDC The purpose of this section is to set forth the deviations to the LDC that governs the development of this MPUD. A. The Collier County Access Management Policy Resolution No. 01.247 requires a minimum spacing 1320 feet from the intersection of Livingston Road for access location. Due to the size of the parcel, the access onto Livingston Road is shown approximately 420 feet from the intersection of Livingston Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road. This access point was agreed to as part of a stipulated final judgment between Collier County, PL vs. Tiburon Golf Ventures L.P., et al, case # 04- 4678 -CA parcel # 15. B. The requirement for a wall between commercial and residential uses prescribed in Subsection 5,03.02 E 2 and 3 of the LDC shall be waived along the north and east property lines that are adjacent to residential development. The buffer areas shown on the MPUD Master Plan are presumed to provide sufficient screening and buffering and shall provide the some level of screening as to the LDC requirements offer exotic removal. CADocuments and Settings\melissazone \Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files \OLIL?OD \Revised MPUD 4 -23 -07 document per MS 4 -9- 07 ccpc 04- 16- 07.doc Page 21 of 28 r cuae- IL_ -I sLl „x [GSING a.o[ -pi2Rk RETNNED PRCSERA KGETATICN (U5CD A5 15 YIMWN LANM0.G BUFFER) SECTION A -A RTS TRNRp1 GOV COURSE - -t54 rzsn+� a,ei F.51WG B' FENCE WN — LABDFCA.'L ECa urncr o cauNTV RG1T -oE -ter DRAINAGE ,SAL EASENENI PWOPLRTT zD'�e0' t E 0-0 I ERSrwc xw t T -a u.O s SECTION E —E TTPE b' ASPNµi CWB ATS MEA ,0.0' EYSTWG 1' WRE FENCE PROPERTY ISO' LINE ,SAL L q E ELF C %ISIING S' GNA%1 PARKING UNR FENCE Edo �� WARP OUAIITr PNE iAEATULHi • EL. lax TO ux TTPE b' ASPNµi CWB MEA KRY E7FF OPIVE � 4, ,i.m N � BFIr .qty tso 1 MY n[l[MnW ARU -pR 1115 ' 1 � aAtp tanNn uxi -sfa. , %.. OOn,R wAtc -sO- na 1 {j SECTION C —C a KLL �; : ,A3! -LLm so IANDLCAPE� BUFFER PAP[WG 1 PROPERTr n. ua -..p I LwE D) i SECTION D —D M 3 goo BRADFORD SQUARE wn.+ � g DEVELOPER i LIVINGSTON VILLAGE LLC EYSTWG 1' WRE FENCE PROPERTY ISO' LINE L q E ELF C %ISIING S' GNA%1 PARKING UNR FENCE Edo �� • EL. lax TO ux I. µt a:1 SLOPES SNAIL BE RANTED WIN SLO. 2 A'' 1:1 SLOPES SIALL DE PLANTED WTN W— C.— PLANTNGS eso E,mry WuF Nap W, FL. N1t0 PNp4: (9C 1) ZSI -2D00 HOE K40NTES Fwrw c«anor Pr BdB7SA,wBSdRC�mS Aw t.r NO.1172 S€CTIOai -F-€ -- Nu 05134SEC 4396 -0.5 SECTIONS nn.r.e .ma aN 2005134 5 w 5 lit :co ii fEj ;1 100 I C3 o cc 0111 1-- 1 U) 0 z > ZONED PUD PELICAN MARSH (TIBURON GOLF COURSE) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... ........ .................... ................ . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1. 41 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -nNG . . . .......... ::EXIS ............ WETLAND . . . . . . AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . r. . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 4 1. . . . . . . . . .. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . r --------- -------------- CODE (TYPICAL) VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD BRADFORD SQUARE DEVELOPER LIVINGS70H VILLAGE LLC 3 424 2 411 WETLAND LINE --------------------------- I-------- --------- ZONED A (BEST FRIENDS PET RESORT) 4 434 ----------- i L -----------F------ I N" " I PRESERVE AREA WITHIN --- 4.306-04 D5134AER *9m P� P41) 254.2DDO M.P.U.D. AREA — — HOLE fACCITES AND AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH 2005134 4 � 5 4 IK MINIMit 11 a Ir STATE OF FLORIDA) COUNTY OF COLLIER) I, DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk of Courts in and for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Collier County, Florida, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of: ORDINANCE 2007 -41 Which was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on the 24th day of April, 2007, during Regular Session. WITNESS my hand and the official seal of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this 26th day of April, 2007. DWIGHT E. BROf:K Clerk of Courts and Clerk Ex- officio to Board•ot" County Commissioners jukk By: Ann Jennejohn, Deputy Clerk Page.25 of 98 - CHARLIE GRIST Governor June 15, 2007 161718 r 04 �N - ° alp r �o FLORIDA DEPARTMENT 0 STATE rt �C6,60 STATE LIBRARY AND ARCHIVES OF FLORIDA KURT S. BROWNING Secretary of State Honorable Dwight E. Brock Clerk of the Circuit Court Collier County Post Office Box 413044 Naples, Florida 34101 -3044 Attention: Martha Vergara, Deputy Clerk Dear Mr. Brock: Pursuant to the provisions of Section 125.66, Florida Statutes, this will acknowledge receipt of your letters dated June 13, 2007, and copies of Exhibits E -1 through E -4 of Collier County Ordinance No. 2007 -40 which was filed in this office on May 1, 2007 and Exhibit "A" of Collier County Ordinance No. 2007 -41, which was filed in this office on April 27, 2007. As requested, one date stamped copy of each is being returned for your records. Sincerely, A�5" Liz Cloud Program Administrator LC /lbh Enclosure DIRECTOR'S OFFICE R.A. Gray Building • 500 South Bronough Street - Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -0250 850.245.6600 • FAX: 850.245.6735 • TDD: 850.922.4085 • http:Hdlis.dos.state.11.us COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STATE LIBRARY OF FLORIDA STATE ARCHIVES OF FLORIDA 850.245.6600 - FAX: 850.245.6643 850.245.6600 - FAX: 850.245 6744 850.245.6700 - FAX: 850.488.4894 LEGISLATIVE LIBRARY SERVICE RECORDS MANAGEMENT SERVICES ADMINISTRATIVE CODE AND WEEKLY 850.488.2812 • FAX: 850.488.9879 850.245.6750 • FAX: 850.245.6795 850.245.6270 • FAX: 850.245.6282 ......... __ .__. _ _ . ._,._. �._.. Pip, e 0 ._ ._.... r� County. of Collier �. CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT Dwight E. Brock COLLIER COUNTY COURTHOUSE Clerk of Courts Clerk of Courts 3301 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST Accountant P.O. BOAC 413044 , Auditor NAPLES, FLORIDA`I..g 101 -3044 Custodian of County Funds June 13, 2007 Ms. Karlyn Solis Department of State Bureau of Administrative Code RA Gray Building Room 101 500 S. Bronough Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -0250 Re: Ordinance Number: 2007 -41 Dear Ms. Solis: Transmitted herewith for the record is Exhibit "A" Master Plan that was inadvertently omitted from Collier County Ordinance 2007 -41. The ordinance with the enclosed exhibit, was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, on Tuesday, April 24, 2007, during Regular Session. Please place this exhibit with Ordinance 2007 -41 that was filed with your office on April 27, 2007. Thank you. Very truly yours, DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK Martha Vergara, Deputy Clerk Enclosure(s) Phone- (239) 732 -2646 Website- www.cierk.collier.fl.us This ordinance filed with the Secretary of State's Office t e I day of AMC and acknowledgement of that filing received this 1'4+± day Of Joke eo-I By V D*Puty e Fax- (239) 775 -2755 Email- collierclerk (i�.clerk.collier.fl.us . .. Page 27 of 28 � o 0 I ZONED PUD PELICAN MARSH S' MIN. TYPE 'B (TIBURON GOLF COURSE) `• rLANDSCAPE BUFFER I tt NS TIE MEW BERM TIE NEW BERM IN fO .r^ •) ; i •TOP OF ERM INTO EXISTING BERM q EXISTING BERM O. F - - OF BERM - '--PROPERTY LINE .— __— .... -.. —.. _._.._ �. TOE TYPE Y . r CURB RETAINED I I hl -TOE OF BERM _ PRESERVE ah C6 — 4 VEGETATION { pl n f IIIIIIII I (1.78 AC.) I wI I I TYPE D TV 15' O MIN. TYPE 'B' LANDSCAPE BUFFER I I ! , { I 1 100- - -...— -- I PROPERTY t i I �" _ I ' LINE 4 30• I E 1 I TYPE b' I I I ! i Z ; i ? R�'AGE 200 (TYPICAL) �'I ZONED A 1'.Q .i EASEMENT 1 I _ PROPOSED I ' =_ =_,II (BEST FRIENDS 6' ' I - (TYPICAL) I i 1j PET RESORT) I I loj Z 1 E I D LAND S SUMMARY CA 0' MIN. TYPE 'A' ANDSCAPE BUFFER T , •cwa ! nsc., • I +aEY V.a le.a EWA I Iry .w.r.lRrr .x���rlx�1�w�r xrfllEfw au. e:u WATER III carrE�°PA,M a �1.'�rnrw ? t I ' I I WAUTY I I,( ioi.�.efa R..s loo,n aaL I a I 1' 400 I ETREA TMEN FIR 300 (0.42AC.) 71 I II a TYPE 'D' LANDSCAPE • lI 0 lfvf,lfrf" .r Efurni—�, 01FB I Y-F1IO1M,I I !w f )—, IlfE l a11 la oe FFER ' {. -• j f , I i it TOP OF BERM rostu u 1 slAnr.•,t, wlrf �uE rEr.snlD i PROPOSED 5' 1D1K erER f,RlE . f,� K, •' I � rYf lR9 YI[L. Mt• Y.[E. rRf.IH.v(tilwr DEifritw, t , - "-�DE� , e I n cR�H w•I Iwvle"r w RE r.t�o rRfaErin ,ERErurw I • to I PROPERTY LINE I O TYPE b' LANDSCAPE BUFFER PROPO D ��� `L nielD lre s rr D w•rwE of rK ERIf1iRD ♦\ PROPER LINE �1 ratl.D u r I" rx! rllumeD rRfaf..E Mva rn! _ ------- `\ B'ISIDEWALK o[m"YfR.rwfYfnwnw fevn nu"nw Hu or a° _ __._ _ __________ _________ ........... ___... ...... _ _ _ _ _ _ ME EaDT,G k If HRtowcD. I VANDERBILT BEACH RbAd -- -� - - -' - Re i 1 - - - -- --------------------- 1 _ - - la W I; I4M,RE0 INTIYE yEDEiAIid LKtu4r,wf • r •♦ ! � �I I1' � ,•� 1.1E K. • MOPEEIr RIR[• ICwR♦SiELY ffEli RifD, I Iv : -_- � S ..� V I.f! /C. . ,1rnrMN w.rlK YFD[Iq[wl R[i[ti[w IIFQIf•fKri i �� i,H K� -lurfH vEaElllldl MDVtgO 1 , BRADFORD SQUARE 95°E..cw"waY f N"_FL3 I° M.P. U.D. MASTER PLAN ..D. "w en wsol 05134MPUD 4395 -01 DEVELOPER w "01 HOLHMONTES P F°d' " }G y �00a EXHIBIT "A" (CONCEPTUAL PLAN) " L1ViNG5TON VILLAGE LLC npFFRMUFISsllOO6 •.>WrlraROn NO., nz 2005134 1 a 5