CCPC Agenda 04/07/2011 RCCPC
REGULAR
MEETING
AGENDA
APRIL 7, 2011
AGENDA
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 9:00 A.M., THURSDAY, APRIL 7, 2011, IN
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING,
COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, THIRD FLOOR, 3299 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
6. BCC REPORT- RECAPS
7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT
8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
A. PUDZ- 2005 -AR -8674: Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples CFPUD. An Ordinance of the
Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance Number 04 -41, as
amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which includes the comprehensive zoning
regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning
atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from an
Agricultural (A) zoning district with a portion of the real property in a ST overlay (Special Treatment) to a
Community Facility Planned Unit Development (CFPUD) zoning district with removal of the ST overlay
1
for a project known as Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples CFPUD. The project will allow
development of a 500 seat church, a single family residence and preschool of up to 150 students along with
other permitted and accessory uses commonly associated with a church and preschool use. The property is
located at the corner of Learning Lane and Livingston Road in Section 13, Township 48 South, Range
25 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 12 +/- acres and by providing an effective date.
[Coordinator: Kay Deselem, AICP, Principal Planner]
9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. PUDZ - 2007 -AR- 12292: Cope Reserve RPUD -- An ordinance amending Ordinance Number 2004 -41,
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 Estates (E) Zoning
District to the Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Zoning District for a project to be known as
the Cope Reserve RPUD. The project proposes a total of 43 dwelling units comprised of single - family
detached, single - family attached, multi - family and townhouse unit types, in Section 8, Township 50 South,
Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 14.3± acres; and by providing an effective date.
[Coordinator: Kay Deselem, AICP, Principal Planner]
10. OLD BUSINESS
11. NEW BUSINESS
A. Comprehensive Planning section staff requesting coordination for the availability of the Collier County
Planning Commission for upcoming "Special' CCPC meetings for FY 2011/2012. [Coordinator: Mike
Bosi, Comprehensive Planning Manager]
12. PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM
13. DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA
14. ADJOURN
3/28/2011 CCPC Agenda/Ray Bellows /jmp
AGENDA ITEM 9 -A
Co*e-,r County
STAFF REPORT
TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: ZONING SERVICES - -LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION -- PLANNING & REGULATION
HEARING DATE: APRIL 7, 2011
SUBJECT: PUDZ- 2007 -AR- 12292, COPE RESERVE RPUD
PROPERTY OWNER & APPLICANT /AGENT:
Owner /Applicant Agents:
Highland Properties D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Mr. Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire
of Lee & Collier County, Ltd. 3800 Via Del Rey Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A.
6980 Sandalwood Lane Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Northern Trust Bank Building
Naples, FL 34109 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300
Naples, FL 34103
REQUESTED ACTION:
The petitioner is asking the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) to consider an
application for a rezone from the Estates (E) Zoning District to the Residential Planned Unit
Development (RPUD) Zoning District for a project to be known as the Cope Reserve RPUD.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The 14.3± acre subject property is located at the southeastern corner of Cope Lane and County
Barn Road in Section 8, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (See
location map and proposed PUD Master Plan on the following pages)
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
Approval of this project, known as Cope Reserve RPUD, will allow development of a total of 43
dwelling units comprised of single - family detached, single - family attached, multi - family and
townhouse unit types. As depicted on the PUD Master Plan on the following page, sole access to
the property would be from Cope Lane, an east -west roadway that would form the northern
boundary of the property. The development would be served by a single, 50 -foot wide cul -de -sac
roadway, subject to approval of two associated deviations being requested. The exact alignment,
Cope Reserve RPUD, PUDZ- 2007 -AR -12292 Page 1 of 17
April 7, 2011 CCPC
Revised: 3/21/11
7--
W6>
5
�3
w
CL
Z
W
O
w —
� a u
W U
ovoa Nwa uwwo
t0
U.
2
F t
ui W b
arvrvos of lox
**
q
�¢!
k
^ � (t 'a'o)
oatln3vioa a31t10�
i
-gig
O
°
$
W
IL
w
LL
v,
a�
U a
dw W�o �5 Q Q
-
W +
n
n cr
OJ
•mv
vrn irevs p d
S
49
xouvixvu €
i
vatle�atle vanes "vixvs -- --
-- --------------- — - - - - -
— - --- -
---- -- - - - - -w
vavewe vuutls
ovoa Nwa uwwo
t0
U.
2
F t
ui W b
arvrvos of lox
L
J
z
z^
V
N
O
N
N
Q
r
O
O
N
N
cl
a
z
O
F
W
t.
CL
Z
O
Q
U
O
**
q
�¢!
k
^ � (t 'a'o)
oatln3vioa a31t10�
i
-gig
dw W�o �5 Q Q
W +
n
n cr
OJ
•mv
vrn irevs p d
S
49
xouvixvu €
i
vatle�atle vanes "vixvs -- --
-- --------------- — - - - - -
— - --- -
---- -- - - - - -w
vavewe vuutls
$
�
N
i
n
w '� � ��`
as
� g
€fig
avoa xava uraroo
aeP" �
�x
o�"
'Jtl3911i111xM
a
u.
-H Fs
H � 3L3'�
IWA
i3
Y
N
53Xtl1 400MY31
m ]
n
r9i
n
aooA�n
B
�
>
zn�8�
cts
83 3
Wb
xo>
avoa -Mrn lm 'y
L
J
z
z^
V
N
O
N
N
Q
r
O
O
N
N
cl
a
z
O
F
W
t.
CL
Z
O
Q
U
O
50' WIDE
EASEMENT
RESERVATION
FOR DRAINAGE/
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
ZONED: E, ESTATES i O
O
c
ID
2
O
D
I v
WILMAR LANE
VACANT,UNDEVELOPED
ZONED: E, ESTATES
.ales.
— 1— CgVp�ryC -le BE MoD 1-A9 —E—V TO CWPCV Wrtl•CRWGES MM RV OixER
TYPICAL LOCAL ROADWAY SECTION
SITE = 14.31 ACRES
COLLIER COUNTY WATER RETENTION
ZONED: E, ESTATES
COPELANE
I W +• ° y
'� II
� K yyyy yy R I I
I I
�yy J. y P yyyyW II
ryp� 1
r 1
Y y y y I
A I
1
� pkyy yyyy y
DETENTION
y
, y i AREA `
m 1 `•
RESIDENTIAL "R" = 6.783 ACRES (47 %)
PRESERVE "P" = 1.921 ACRES (13 %)
02.81 ACRES NATIVE X 0.15 = 1.92 ACRES)
ROW = 1.571 ACRES (11 h)
MAXIMUM RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS: 43 UNITS (14.3 X 3 UNITS /ACRE = 42.9)
DENSITY - 3 DWELLING UNITS /ACRE
LECENO „ol.
m ab
3 r7127M R.— ex'a D .,D r n 0 P b e.a, N e Mnod n N9aIx1br c ,w
b L
ee of pnx
R xnm
ZIMMERMAN EDUCATION CENTER
ZONED: E, ESTATES
i
r
!
------ - - - - --
I ,
I
-
20' WIDE
--I
TYPE C OR 10' WIDE
TYPE A BUFFER
(SEE NOTE 4)
R I
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
I I �
ZONED: E, ESTATES
ZONED: E, ESTATES
E
I
I ,
20' WIDE TYPE C OR
-
10' WIDE TYPE A BUFFER
I
(SEE NOTE 4)
I
11
)\\
T
DE TENTION 20' WIDE
DETENTION
AREA
-
TYPE C OR 10' WIDE
AREA T EA BUFFER
(SEE NOTE 4)
------- ----- - - -___ �I4 - SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCE
R , ZONED: E, ESTATES
15' WIDE
j TYPE B OR 10' WIDE
TYPE BUFFER
I' (SEE NOTE 4)
*r -R �.�_� �.� .c �____.___ � eex_� L'EJ• �_�e_!n_.!n_r.it JIR �= r_iiiL_�_ee � __
15' WIDE TYPE B OR
10' WIDE TYPE A BUFFER
VACANT,UNDEVELOPEO
ZONED: E, ESTATES
NOTES:
1. THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND IS SUBJECT TO MINOR
MODIFICATION DUE TO AGENCY PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS.
DEVIATIONS:
2. ALL ACREAGE IS APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO MODIFICATION AT T7 1E- _
- - -- - - -TIME-OFSDP OR PLAT APPROVAL. 0 FROM LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE (LDC) SECTION 6.06.01.0, STREET SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
AND APPENDIX B, TYPICAL STREET SECTIONS AND RIGHT -OF -WAY DESIGN STANDARDS, WHICH
3. THE PRESERVE AREA MAY COUNT TOWARDS THE REQUIREMENT OF A ESTABLISHES A 60 FOOT WIDE LOCAL ROAD (CUL -DE -SAC) CROSS -SECTION TO PERMIT A 50
TYPE D LANDSCAPE BUFFER, IF IT MEETS THE EQUIVALENT OF A TYPE D FOOT WIDE LOCAL ROAD (CUL -DE -SAC) CROSS -SECTION.
LANDSCAPE BUFFER AFTER THE EXOTIC PLANT MATERIAL IS REMOVED.
E221 FROM LDC SECTION 6.06.01.J, STREET SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS, WHICH LIMITS CUL -DE -SACS TO
4. A 20' WIDE TYPE C BUFFER SHALL BE UTILIZED WHERE NOTED ON THE A MAXIMUM LENGTH OF 1,000 FEET TO PERMIT A CUL-DE-SAC APPROXIMATELY 1,225 FEET IN
CONCEPTUAL PUD MASTER PLAN SHOULD MULTI - FAMILY OR TOWNHOME LENGTH.
UNITS BE DEVELOPED ON THE PUD,
nnam"- 204.47'" COPE RESERVE RPUD
GradyMinor FnM Me Zq0 40. {0q0
Nnna lbn •IJ I.JI0.5458
" +IIM` ?1x.JJJ.?g41 EXHIBIT C
CNII 131 191 . - Land SU PNI-- • Lud—Pa ArchAWs CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN
uv. Drnum. se s"rlm CDII. a rrecore .lunl.uuw.sln � vasuxwwuees
cv..cnm'mgnr.� „a 0. Rao' Mlnw and \muAR4ai. l'B \.1
as well as the placement of dwelling units along it, would be determined at the time of platting or
site development plan (SDP) approval. Approximately 1.92 acres along the property's eastern
and northeastern boundary, representing 60 percent of the site, would be maintained as preserve.
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North: Cope Lane, then a County -owned water retention area
South: a five -acre tract developed as a school, and an undeveloped five -acre tract, both tracts
have a Provisional Use [now called a Conditional Use] for a private school and a Conditional
Use for the replacement of an existing 280 foot tall communication tower (there does not appear
to be a tower on site), both tracts have an underlying zoning designation of Estates
East: single - family home sites with a zoning designation of Estates
West: County Barn Road, then 1.92 -2.5f acre sized tracts along Wilmar Lane some of which
are developed with single - family homes with a zoning designation of Estates
Aerial Photo (subject site depiction is approximate)
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: The subject site is designated
Urban (Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict) as depicted in the Future Land
Use Element [FLUE] and on the Future Land Use Map in the GMP. This Subdistrict permits
residential development (variety of unit types) at a base density of four dwelling units per acre
(DU /A). This district is intended to accommodate a variety of residential and non - residential
uses, including mixed -use developments such as Planned Unit Developments (PUD). The
Cope Reserve RPUD, PUDZ- 2007 -AR -12292 Page 2 of 17
April 7, 2011 CCPC
Revised: 3/21/11
x�
4Y 5
AMA
Subject
Property
Y
•
% Tsr
$
3
.r� Q.
�
S
NO
— sett ' x..
Aerial Photo (subject site depiction is approximate)
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: The subject site is designated
Urban (Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict) as depicted in the Future Land
Use Element [FLUE] and on the Future Land Use Map in the GMP. This Subdistrict permits
residential development (variety of unit types) at a base density of four dwelling units per acre
(DU /A). This district is intended to accommodate a variety of residential and non - residential
uses, including mixed -use developments such as Planned Unit Developments (PUD). The
Cope Reserve RPUD, PUDZ- 2007 -AR -12292 Page 2 of 17
April 7, 2011 CCPC
Revised: 3/21/11
purpose of the Urban Residential Subdistrict is to allow higher densities in an area with fewer
natural resource constraints and where existing and planned public facilities are concentrated.
The residential uses proposed in this PUD are consistent with the Urban Mixed Use
District/Urban Residential Subdistrict. The Density Rating System provides for a base density of
4 dwelling units per acre in the Urban Residential Subdistrict. The site lies within the residential
density band around Mixed Use Activity Center #6, thus the site is eligible for a density bonus of
up to three DU /A. Density is calculated based upon the gross project acreage. Therefore, based
upon the project's location, it is eligible for up to 7 DU /A.
Base Density 4 DU /A
Density Band + 3 DU /A
Eligible Density 7 DU /A x 14.3 acres = 100 DUs
This request proposed to develop the 14.3 -acre site at a density of 3 DU /acre for a total of 43
dwelling units. That density is within the eligible density for the FLUE.
In reviewing for compliance with Objective 7 and subsequent Policies (shown in italics)
regarding Smart Growth principles (interconnections, loop road, sidewalks /trails, etc.), staff
provides the following analysis in bold text.
Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their
properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be
made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. (The
project will have access to Cope Lane, a local road that exits onto County Barn Road, a
collector road. Transportation Planning staff has determined direct access to County Barn
Road is not desirable, and is prohibited in Exhibit F, item 2.A.)
Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help
reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for
traffic signals. (The PUD Master Plan indicates a single access point directly onto Cope
Lane; direct access to County Barn Road is not provided and is prohibited. The project has
one internal, cul- de-sac road. Due to the small size and configuration of the subject site, a
loop road is not possible.)
Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets
and their interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless
of land use type. (Given the project's small size and configuration, and its proposed
development pattern, interconnections to the north, east and south are not feasible and
would arguably serve little purpose. To the north are two parcels of about 2% acres each,
fronting on Cope Lane; both are zoned E- Estates and each contains a single - family
dwelling. To the east is a 2% -acre parcel zoned "E" and containing a single - family
dwelling, also fronting Cope Lane. To the south is an institutional use (private school) on a
5 -acre parcel zoned "E," fronting on County Barn Road; and east of that is an undeveloped
5 -acre parcel zoned "E ".)
Cope Reserve RPUD, PUDZ- 2007 -AR -12292 Page 3 of 17
April 7, 2011 CCPC
Revised: 3/21/11
Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities
with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and
types. (A sidewalk will be provided within the community. The PUD provides preserve
areas and allows for a variety of housing unit types.)
Based upon the above analysis, Comprehensive Planning Staff finds the proposed PUD
consistent with the Future Land Use Element.
Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petitioner's Traffic
Impact Statement (TIS) and has determined that the adjacent roadway network has sufficient
capacity to accommodate this project within the five -year planning period. Therefore, the
subject application can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the
Growth Management Plan (GMP). Mitigation is provided as required. This mitigation is
proposed in the form of Cope Lane improvements up to the project driveway, as well as an
agreement to accept, attenuate, and store stormwater for Cope Lane improvements along the
property frontage (at no cost to the County). Also, the owner has provided a 50 -foot wide
reservation along County Barn Road for the purposes of accommodating drainage and utilities
associated with the future County Barn Road widening.
Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental staff has
evaluated the proposed changes to the PUD documents. Environmental review staff found this
project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME).
GMP Conclusion:
The GMP is the prevailing document to support land use decisions such as this proposed
rezoning to CPUD. Staff is required to make a recommendation regarding a finding of
consistency or inconsistency with the overall GMP as part of the recommendation for approval,
approval with conditions, or denial of any rezoning petition. A finding of consistency with the
FLUE and FLUM designations is a portion of the overall finding that is required, and staff
believes the petition is consistent with the FLUM and the FLUE as indicated previously in the
GMP discussion with the additional buffering and setbacks to be provided to ensure consistency
with GMP FLUE Policy 5.4 (See Zoning Analysis later in this report). The proposed rezone is
consistent with the GMP Transportation Element as previously discussed. Environmental staff
also recommends that the petition be found consistent with the CCME. Therefore, zoning staff
recommends that the petition be found consistent with the goals, objective and policies of the
overall GMP.
ANALYSIS:
Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition including the criteria
upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in Land Development Code
(LDC) Subsection 10.02.13.B.5, Planning Commission Recommendation (commonly referred to
as the "PUD Findings "), and Subsection 10.03.05.I, Nature of Requirements of Planning
Commission Report (referred to as "Rezone Findings "), which establish the legal bases to
support the CCPC's recommendation. The CCPC uses these same criteria as the bases for their
recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), who in turn use the criteria to
Cope Reserve RPUD, PUDZ- 2007 -AR -12292 Page 4 of 17
April 7, 2011 CCPC
Revised: 3/21/11
support its action on the rezoning or amendment request. An evaluation relative to these
subsections is discussed below, under the heading "Zoning Services Analysis." In addition, staff
offers the following analyses:
Environmental Review: Environmental Services staff is recommending approval subject to the
Environmental condition contained in Exhibit F of the PUD document. Due to the amended
LDC requirements, this project is not required to be heard by the Environmental Advisory
Council unless that action is a directive of the CCPC or BCC. The project site consists of 12.8
acres of native vegetation that generally consists of cypress /pine /cabbage palms, palmetto
prairie, pine flatwoods and hydric Melaleuca. A minimum of 15% of the existing native
vegetation shall be placed under preservation and dedicated to Collier County. The proposed
1.92 -acre wetland/upland preserve area is located along the western portion of the project site.
No listed species were found on site. Impacts to the jurisdictional wetlands on the rest of the
project site shall be mitigated for through the South Florida Water Management District
(SFWMD) permitting process at the first development order.
Transportation Review: Transportation Division staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD
document and Master Plan for right -of -way and access issues.
County Barn Road Impacts: The first concurrency link that is impacted by this project is Link
10, County Barn Road between Davis and Rattlesnake Hammock. The project generates 16 p.m.
peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents a 1.86% impact. This segment of County Barn
Road currently has a remaining capacity of ( -2) trips, and is currently at LOS "F" as reflected by
the 2010 AUIR
The applicant has agreed to provide mitigation in the form of Cope Lane improvements up to the
project driveway, as well as an agreement to accept, attenuate, and store stormwater for Cope
Lane improvements along the property frontage (at no cost to the County). Also, the owner has
provided a 50 foot wide reservation along County Barn Road for the purposes of accommodating
drainage and utilities associated with the future County Barn Road widening.
No subsequent concurrency links are significantly impacted by this project.
Fire Review: Fire Review staff has reviewed this petition and recommends approval if the
following stipulations are included:
1. The cul -de -sac shall comply with the adopted fire code and shall measure a
minimum 40 feet from center of cul -de -sac to the center of the roadway. This will
require a minimum 100 foot diameter; and
2. Fire hydrants shall be installed pursuant to NFPA 24 and spaced in accordance
with Collier County Fire Prevention and Protection Code Policy and Procedure
Article Numbers HYD 09 -1, HYD 09 -2, HYD 09 -3 and HYD 09 -4.
The petitioner's agent the petitioner has revised the PUD document to include these items.
Cope Reserve RPUD, PUDZ- 2007 -AR -12292 Page 5 of 17
April 7, 2011 CCPG
Revised: 3/21/11
Zoning Services Review: The Master Plan shows the location of the preserve area, detention
areas and the internal cul -de -sac roadway. The residential area is shown along both sides of the
roadway. The residential areas can be developed with any combination of the uses proposed;
there are no delineations on the Master Plan to show specific areas that may be developed with a
particular product type, such as detached single - family dwellings, townhouses or multi - family
structures. In all cases, the proposed property development regulations would govern where
units would be placed. Buffers are shown, with a note stating the buffer type , either 15 foot
wide Type B or a 10 foot Wide Type A, will be determined when development approvals are
sought—Site Development Plan or Plat. The LDC requires a Type A buffer to separate single
family uses from adjacent single- family development, and a Type B buffer to separate single -
family uses from multi- family uses, as shown below (within different projects not lot line to lot
line within the same development). The proposed buffers are LDC compliant for the use
separations involved.
TYPE 'A' BUFFER
910 SHROBS, 4' O.C, 60" HZaH AT PLANT7:N15
Z5' G.C.
+y +- r
DCUI
TYPE 'S' BUFFER
10
—
With the setbacks proposed in Exhibit B of the PUD document, the Property Development
Regulations Table, principal structures built within this project can be within 40 feet of the
perimeter property line. (Note: Accessory uses could be within 6 -10 feet depending upon
whether the setback is a side or rear boundary.)
FLUE Policy 5.4 requires new land uses to be compatible with, and complementary to, the
surrounding land uses. In reviewing the appropriateness of the requested uses /densities on the
subject site, the compatibility analysis might include a review of both the subject proposal and
surrounding or nearby properties as to allowed use intensities and densities, development
standards (building heights, setbacks, landscape buffers, etc.), building mass, building location
and orientation, architectural features, amount and type of open space and location, traffic
generation/attraction, etc. There has to be a balance between the adjacent existing uses and what
is allowable by the GMP. The FLUE designation for this site would allow the neighboring
property owners as well as this applicant to seek much higher density that what is proposed in
this project. The site is eligible for up to 7 dwelling units per acre, but the applicant is only
seeking to develop at a density of three units per acre (see previous GMP discussion).
Cope Reserve RPUD, PUDZ- 2007 -AR -12292 Page 6 of 17
April 7, 2011 CCPC
Revised: 3/21/11
However, the adjacent Estates zoning district is a much less intense zoning district and is in fact
categorized as an Agricultural zoning district in the LDC nomenclature (LDC 2.02.02.A). The
lots in this zoning district are much larger, with bigger setbacks than what is proposed within this
development (see table above). The adjacent eastern tracts along Cope Lane are developed with
single - family homes; there are no zero -lot line, townhouse or multi - family uses. As originally
proposed, the homes in Cope Reserve could be as close as 155 feet from a three- story, 45 -foot
high multi - family structure (135' as shown below plus the proposed 20 -foot rear setback for a
multi - family structure). The master plan does indicate that a detention area will be located in the
"corner," which will help separate the uses to some extent. That separation will soften the
effects of this development upon the easternmost house, but as originally proposed, this
development could have structures relatively close to the house in the middle.
DEVELOPMENT
COPE RESERVE RPUD
ESTATES
STANDARDS
SINGLE
TOWNHOME
SINGLE
MULTI-
FAMILY
FAMILY
FAMILY
Principal structures
DETACHED
ATTACHED &
ZERO LOT
LINE
Minimum lot area
5,000 sf /unit
1,408 sf /unit
3,500 s.f. per
N/A
2.25 ac
unit
Minimum lot
width 2
50 feet
16 feet
35 feet
N/A
150 feet
Minimum floor
1,000 s.f
1,000 s.f
800 s.f
800 s.f
1,000 s.f.
area
Min front yards
20 feet
20 feet
20 feet
20 feet
75 feet
Min side yard
6 feet
0 feet feet3 or
feet3r 6
0 feet or 6 feet3
7.5 feet
30 feet
Min rear yard6
15 feet
15 feet
15 feet
20 feet
75 feet
Min preserve
25 feet
25 feet
25 feet
25 feet
25
setback
Min. Distance
12 feet
12 feet4
12 feet4
20 feet
0 feet
between structures
Max. Building
height
Zoned
35 feet
35 feet
35 feet
35 feet
Actual
35 feet
40 feet
35 feet
40 feet
30 feet
Not to exceed
3 stories
2 stories
COMPARISON TABLE BETWEEN PROPOSED PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS AND THE ESTATES ZONING DISTRICT STANDARDS
Cope Reserve RPUD, PUDZ- 2007 -AR -12292 Page 7 of 1 i
April 7, 2011 CCPC
Revised: 3/21/11
(Depictions are approximate)
In response to staff concerns, the petitioner has agreed to reduce the height to 35 feet zoned
height (40 feet actual) for multi - family and townhouse units, provide a perimeter property
setback in addition to the side and rear setbacks for the houses located along Cope Lane —to the
north and east of the subject site as shown in the dotted line above. The petitioner has revised
the PUD to include a 25 -foot wide building setback for single - family detached structures and a 40 -foot
wide building setback for any structure other than a detached single family home. In addition, the
petitioner has agreed to provide an enhanced buffer in that same area should the subject site be
developed with townhouses or multi - family units. This enhanced buffer would be a C buffer
type as shown below.
Jr UU:J lSLt KV W Ut J [AC'WtKtU iKttJ
�-- -
420 SHRUB, 4' O.D. 60" HIGH 'AT PLANTING
30' O.C. r
r'
r
r C r ♦/—� 1a I� /—t! F 't/{J,.� Jf +�j/—
TYPE 'C` BUFFER
With the reduced height, increased setbacks and enhanced buffer, staff is of the opi ion that this project
will be compatible with the adjacent uses and zoning in that area shown.
Lope Reserve RPUD, PUDZ- 2007 -AR -12292 Page 8 of 17
April 7, 2011 CCPC
Revised: 3/21/11
Deviation Discussion:
The petitioner is seeking two deviations from the requirements of the LDC. The deviations are
listed in PUD Exhibit E.
Deviation #1 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.0 that requires a local road right -of -way to
be a minimum of 60 feet wide, to allow a 50 -foot wide right -of -way for roadways within the
development.
Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant provided the following justification for this deviation:
The revised roadway width and cross - section are justified for the Cope Reserve RPUD
due to the limited number of units served by the local street. The site does have native
vegetation which must be retained and requiring additional right -of -way that is
unnecessary would only serve to further impact the developer's ability to retain and
impact the least amount of native vegetation. The 50 foot wide local road cross - section is
sufficient to accommodate necessary paving and utilities for the project, and the 50 foot
cross- section has been previously approved by the County as an acceptable width.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: This deviation would allow the developer to provide
narrower roadways within the development. The HOA can control traffic via posted speed limits
and project design. The petitioner could reduce the number of units proposed to accommodate
the required right -of way, however because the roadways will not be county - maintained, staff
does not object. Therefore, the deviation seems appropriate.
Zoning and Land Development Review staff would recommend APPROVAL of this deviation,
finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that
"the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the
community" and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation
is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of
such regulations."
Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Section Section 6.06.01.J, Street System Requirements,
which limits cul -de -sacs to a maximum length of 1,000 feet to permit a cul -de -sac approximately
1,225 feet in length
Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant provided the following justification for this deviation:
The deviation is warranted due to the necessity to retain 2-+ acres of native vegetation in
the largest contiguous configuration. Further, the County Transportation Department has
requested project access from Cope Lane rather than County Barn Road. If project
access were provided from County Barn Road, the cul -de -sac would not exceed 1, 000 feet.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Having the access to serve this project on Cope Lane
rather than County Barn Road will help preserve the capacity of County Barn Road to serve as a
collector road. Staff does not object.
Cape Reserve RPUD, PUDZ- 2007 -AR -12292 Page 9 of 17
April 7, 2011 CCPC
Revised: 3/21/11
Zoning and Land Development Review staff would recommend APPROVAL of this deviation
finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that
"the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safetv and welfare of the
community" and LDC Section 10.02.13.13.51, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation
is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of
such regulations."
LDC Subsection 10.03.05.I.2 states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and
recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners ... shall
show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the
following when applicable." Additionally, Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County LDC requires
the Planning Commission to make findings as to the PUD Master Plans' compliance with the
additional criteria as also noted below. [Staff s responses to these criteria are provided in bold,
non - italicized font]:
PUD Findings: LDC Subsection 10.02.13.B.5 states that, "In support of its recommendation, the
CCPC shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the following criteria"
(Staffs responses to these criteria are provided in bold font):
1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to
physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer,
water, and other utilities.
Staff has reviewed the proposed rezone and believes the uses and property development
regulations are compatible with the development approved in the area. The commitments
made by the applicant provide adequate assurances that the proposed change will not
adversely affect living conditions in the area.
2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements,
contracts, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may
relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance
of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense.
Documents submitted with the application, which were reviewed by the County Attorney's
Office, demonstrate unified control of the property. Additionally, the development will be
required to gain platting and/or site development approval. Both processes will ensure that
appropriate stipulations for the provision of and continuing operation and maintenance of
infrastructure will be provided by the developer.
3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives, and
policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP).
County staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis of the relevant goals,
objectives and policies of the GMP within the GMP discussion and the zoning analysis of
this staff report. Based on that analysis, staff is of the opinion that this petition can be
found consistent with the overall GMP.
Cope Reserve RPUD, PUDZ- 2007 -AR -12292 Page 10 of 17
April 7, 2011 CCPC
Revised: 3/21/11
4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include
restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening
requirements.
Staff has provided a review of the proposed uses and believes that the project will be
compatible with the surrounding area.
5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development.
The amount of open space set aside for this project meets the minimum requirement of the
LDC.
6 The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of
available improvements and facilities, both public and private.
Currently, the roadway infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project
at this time, i.e., GMP consistent at the time of rezoning as evaluated as part of the GMP
Transportation Element consistency review. In addition, the project's development must
comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development
approvals are sought.
7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion.
The area has adequate supporting infrastructure such as road capacity (with the limitation
noted above), wastewater disposal system, and potable water supplies to accommodate this
project based upon the commitments made by the petitioner and the fact that adequate
public facilities requirements will be addressed when development approvals are sought.
8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in
the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting
public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.
The petitioner is seeking two deviations to allow design flexibility in compliance with the
purpose and intent of the Planned Unit Development Districts (LDC Section 2.03.06A).
This criterion requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards and
deviations proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that would be
required for the most similar conventional zoning district. Staff believes the deviation
proposed can be supported, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the
petitioner has demonstrated that "the elements may be waived without a detrimental effect
on the health, safety and welfare of the community" and LDC Section 10.02.13.11.5.11, the
petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a
degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Please refer to the
Deviation Discussion portion of the staff report for a more extensive examination of the
deviations.
Cope Reserve RPUD, PUDZ- 2007 -AR -12292 Page 11 of 17
April 7, 2011 CCPC
Revised: 3/21 /11
Rezone Findings: LDC Subsection 10.03.051 states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land,
the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County
Commissioners ... shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed
change in relation to the following when applicable" (Staff's responses to these criteria are
provided in bold font):
1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, & policies of
the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan.
The zoning analysis provides an in -depth review of the proposed changes. Staff is of the
opinion that the project as proposed is consistent with GMP FLUE Policy 5.4 requiring the
project to be compatible with neighborhood development. Staff recommends that this
petition be deemed consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. The petition can also be deemed
consistent with the CCME. Therefore, staff recommends that this petition be deemed
consistent with the GMP.
2. The existing land use pattern;
Staff has described the existing land use pattern in the "Surrounding Land Use and
Zoning" portion of this report and discussed it at length in the zoning review analysis.
Staff believes the proposed rezone is appropriate given the existing land use pattern.
3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts;
The proposed PUD rezone) would not create an isolated zoning district because lands to the
east (Falling Waters) and lands to the north (Seacrest Upper and Lower School) are also
zoned PUD.
Excerpt from PUD Map
4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property proposed for change.
Staff is of the opinion that the proposed district boundaries are logically drawn, bringing
the Estates zoned land within the FLUE Urban Mixed Use District into a more urban
zoning district.
Cope Reserve RPUD, PUDZ- 2007 -AR -12292 Page 12 of 17
April 7, 2011 CCPC
Revised: 3/21/11
SEACRE7FALLING
UPPER
ATERS
AND
LOWER
COPE
SCHOO
RESERVE
(P)
Excerpt from PUD Map
4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property proposed for change.
Staff is of the opinion that the proposed district boundaries are logically drawn, bringing
the Estates zoned land within the FLUE Urban Mixed Use District into a more urban
zoning district.
Cope Reserve RPUD, PUDZ- 2007 -AR -12292 Page 12 of 17
April 7, 2011 CCPC
Revised: 3/21/11
S. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezoning
necessary.
The proposed rezone is not necessary, per se; but it is being requested in compliance with
the LDC provisions to seek such the rezone to allow the owner the opportunity to
development the land with uses other than what the existing zoning district would allow.
Without rezoning, the Estates zoned tracts could not be developed with the proposed uses
or with the proposed property development regulations.
6 Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood;
Staff is of the opinion that the proposed rezone, with the commitments made by the
applicant, can been deemed consistent County's land use policies that are reflected by the
Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. Therefore, the proposed rezone should not
adversely impact living conditions in the area.
7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or
create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes
or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the
development, or otherwise affect public safety.
The roadway infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project at this
time. The project will minimally increase traffic at the intersection of Cope Lane and
County Barn Road. However, the vehicles entering and exiting this site will not be
travelling past this subject tract's property eastern boundary (Cope Lane does not
currently connect with any other public roads to the east—it dead ends at the Santa
Barbara Boulevard extension), thus the roadway east, where other single -family home sites
exist will be not impacted by passerby traffic.
8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem;
The proposed rezone should not create drainage or surface water problems because the
LDC specifically addresses prerequisite development standards that are designed to reduce
the risk of flooding on nearby properties. Additionally, the LDC and GMP have other
specific regulations in place that will ensure review for drainage on new developments.
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas;
If this petition were approved, any subsequent development would need to comply with the
applicable LDC standards for development or as outlined in the PUD document. This
project's property development regulations do not indicate that exceedingly tall structures
would be included in the project; therefore the project should not significantly reduce light
and air to adjacent areas; thus the development proposed, if approved, should not
negatively affect light and air permeation into adjacent areas.
mope Reserve RPUD, PUDZ- 2007 -AR -12292 Page 13 of 17
April 7, 2011 CCPC
Revised: 3/21/11
10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area;
This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results, which may be internal or
external to the subject property. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors
including zoning; however zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since value
determination is driven by market value. There is no guarantee that the project will be
marketed in a manner comparable to the surrounding developments.
11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of
adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations;
The proposed zoning change should not be a deterrent to the improvement of adjacent
properties.
12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual
owner as contrasting with the public welfare;
The proposed rezone does not constitute a grant of special privilege.
13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance
with existing zoning;
The property currently has a zoning designation of Estates. The tract could be developed
within the parameters of that zoning designation; however, the petitioner is seeking this
rezone in compliance with LDC provisions for such action. The petition can be evaluated
and action taken as deemed appropriate through the public hearing process. Staff believes
the proposed rezone meets the intent of the PUD district and further, believes the public
interest will be maintained.
14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the
County;
The petitioner proposes to develop a maximum of 43 residential units (at a density of 3
units per acre). The units could be any combination of single -family or multi -family
dwelling units. The petitioner has proposed property development regulations to allow
establishment of those uses. Staff is of the opinion that the development standards and the
developer commitments ensure that the project is not out of scale with the needs of the
community if the Transportation Planning staff stipulations are adopted.
15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in
districts already permitting such use.
There may be other sites in the County that could accommodate the uses proposed;
however, this is not the determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness of a
particular zoning petition. The petition was reviewed on its own merit for compliance with
Cope Reserve RPUD, PUDZ- 2007 -AR -12292 Page 14 of 17
April 7, 2011 CCPC
Revised: 3/21/11
the GMP and the LDC; and staff does not review other sites in conjunction with a specific
petition. The proposed rezone is consistent with the GMP as discussed in other portions of
the staff report.
16 The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, which
would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the
proposed zoning classification.
Any development anticipated by the PUD document would require considerable site
alteration and this project would undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state,
and local development regulations during the site development plan or platting approval
process and again later as part of the building permit process.
17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services
consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and
as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance,
as amended.
The project will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in LDC Section 6.02.00
regarding Adequate Public Facilities and the project will need to be consistent with all
applicable goals and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities, except as it
may be exempt by federal regulations. This petition has been reviewed by county staff that
is responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the rezone process and
those staff persons have concluded that no Level of Service will be adversely impacted with
the commitments contained in the PUD document.
18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC)
shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare.
To be determined by the BCC during its advertised public hearing.
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM):
The NIM meeting was duly noticed by the applicant and held on September 30, 2010. D. Wayne
Arnold, agent for the applicant opened the meeting at 5:35 p.m. In attendance was Kay Deselem
representing Collier County. At the time the meeting began, four residents were in attendance.
A sign -in sheet was provided at the entrance of the meeting room and three of the four attendees
signed in. Aerial photographs of the site and surrounding area, and a copy of the conceptual site
plan were displayed.
Mr. Arnold gave a brief explanation of the rezone application, project location, and description
of the proposed uses. Mr. Arnold requested that anyone in attendance wishing to obtain updated
information about the project could provide his or her email address and his office would provide
notice of the public hearing schedule.
Cope Reserve RPUD, PUDZ- 2007 -AR -12292 Page 15 of 17
:April 7, 2011 CCPC
Revised: 3/21/11
Due to the size of the meeting, questions were allowed to be asked during the presentation.
Questions raised were in regards to water management, landscape buffering, size of berm,
improvements to Cope Lane, building types and heights, project density and compatibility with
the surrounding area, hearing dates, zoning process and development time frames. Mr. Arnold
addressed the water management preliminary design and requirements of the State and County,
the landscape buffer types and widths adjacent to the residences on the northern boundary, Cope
Lane improvements and the proposed building heights. Ms. Deselem addressed the hearing
process, Cope Lane improvements and project density.
Mr. Arnold invited anyone with further questions to call his office or to contact Ms. Deselem.
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 6:20 p.m. [Submitted by the petitioner's agent]
COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW:
The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report for this petition on March 17, 2011.
RECOMMENDATION:
Zoning and Land Development Review Services staff recommends that the Collier County
Planning Commission forward Petition PUDZ- 2007 -AR -12292 to the BCC with a
recommendation of approval.
Cope Reserve RPUD, PUDZ- 2007 -AR -12292 Page 16 of 17
April 7, 2011 CCP%
Revised: 3/21/11
PREPARED BY:
KAY ESELEM, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER
DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
REVIEWED BY:
/ I -)� &Y,
RAY ND V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER
DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
LIAM D. LO Z, J ., P.E., DIRECTOR
D PARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
APPROVED BY:
(ax0"7'zz1"'-7
NIC CASA G ADMINISTRATOR
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION
,,31i5/l/
DATE
3- m - //
DATE
DATE
-3 -z/ -)/
DATE
Tentatively scheduled for the June 14, 2011 Board of County Commissioners Meeting
Cope Reserve RPUD, PUDZ- 2007 -AR -12292 Page 17 of 17
April 7, 2011 CCPC
Revised: 3/18/11
ORDINANCE NO. 2011-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER
2004 -41 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
ESTATES (E) ZONING DISTRICT TO THE RESIDENTIAL
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD) ZONING
DISTRICT FOR A PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS THE
COPE RESERVE RPUD. THE PROJECT PROPOSES A
TOTAL OF 43 DWELLING UNITS COMPRISED OF
SINGLE - FAMILY DETACHED, SINGLE - FAMILY
ATTACHED, MULTI - FAMILY AND TOWNHOUSE UNIT
TYPES, IN SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26
EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF
+/- 14.3 ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE. (PETITION PUDZ- 2007 -AR- 12292)
WHEREAS, D. Wayne Arnold, AICP of Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A.,
representing Highland Properties of Lee and Collier, LTD, 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 8,
Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from an Estates (E)
Zoning District to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Zoning District to be known
as Cope Reserve RPUD in accordance with Exhibits A through F attached hereto and
incorporated herein and by reference made part hereof. 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.
Cope Reserve / PUDZ- 2007 -AR -12292
Revised 3/16/11 1 of 2
SECTION TWO:
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida, this day of , 2011.
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
, Deputy Clerk
Approved as to form
and legal sufficiency:
Steven T. Williams
Assistant County Attorney '?�'��
Attachments: Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit C
Exhibit D
Exhibit E
Exhibit F
07- CPS - 00748 \35
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:
FRED W. COYLE, Chairman
- List of Permitted Uses
- Development Standards (Table I)
- Conceptual Master Plan
- Legal Description
- List of Requested Deviations
- List of Developer Commitments
Cope Reserve / PUDZ- 2007 -AR -12292
Revised 3/16/11 2 of 2
o-,
I
EXHIBIT A
FOR
COPE RESERVE RPUD
Regulations for development of the Cope Reserve RPUD shall be in accordance
with the contents of this RPUD Document and applicable sections of the LDC and
Growth Management Plan (GMP) in effect at the time of issuance of any
development order to which said regulations relate. Where this RPUD Ordinance
does not provide development standards, then the provisions of the specific
sections of the LDC that are otherwise applicable shall apply.
PERMITTED USES:
A maximum of 43 dwelling units shall be permitted within the RPUD. No
building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or
land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following:
RESIDENTIAL
A. Principal Uses:
1. Single family dwellings, attached and detached
2. Zero lot line dwellings
3. Townhome
4. Multi- family dwellings
Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the
foregoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board
of Zoning Appeals ( "BZA ") by the process outlined in the Land
Development Code (LDC).
B. Accessory Uses:
1. Model homes and model home centers including offices for
project administration, construction, sales and marketing.
2. Recreational facilities such as parks, playgrounds, and
pedestrian /bikeways.
3. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the
principal uses permitted in this District, including but not limited to
swimming pools, spas and screen enclosures, recreational
facilities designed to serve the development, and essential
services as described in Section 2.01.03 of the LDC.
4. Guardhouses, gatehouses, and access control structures.
Rev 5 (3- 15- 2011) clean.doc Page 1 of 9 AR- 12292, Cope Reserve RPUD
PRESERVE
A. Principal Uses:
1. Any other conservation and related open space activity or use
which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and which
the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) or designee determines to be
compatible in the Preserve Area.
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Exhibits B sets forth the development standards for land uses within the RPUD
Residential Subdistrict. Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those
specified in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of approval
of the SDP or subdivision plat.
Rev 5 (3 -15 -201 1)dean.doc Page 2 of 9 AR- 12292, Cope Reserve RPUD
EXHIBIT B
FOR
COPE RESERVE RPUD
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS
SINGLE FAMILY
DETACHED
TOWNHOME
SINGLE FAMILY
ATTACHED &
ZERO LOT LINE
MULTI - FAMILY
PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES
MINIMUM LOT AREA
5,000 S.F. PER UNIT
1,408 S.F. PER UNIT
3,500 S.F. PER
UNIT]
N/A
MINIMUM LOT WIDTH2
50 FEET
16 FEET
35 FEET
N/A
MINIMUM FLOOR AREA
1,000 S.F
1,000 S.F
800 S.F
800 S.F
MIN FRONT YARDS
20 FEET
20 FEET
20 FEET
20 FEET
MIN SIDE YARD
6 FEET
0 FEET or 6 FEET3
0 FEET or 6 FEET3
7.5 FEET
MIN REAR YARD6
15 FEET
15 FEET
15 FEET
20 FEET
MIN PRESERVE SETBACK
25 FEET
25 FEET
25 FEET
25 FEET
MIN PUD PERIMETER
SETBACK
25 FEET
40 FEET
25 FEET
40 FEET
MIN. DISTANCE BETWEEN
STRUCTURES
12 FEET
12 FEET4
12 FEET4
20 FEET
MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT
ZONED
ACTUAL
35 FEET
35 FEET
35 FEET
40 FEET
35 FEET
35 FEET
35 FEET
40 FEET
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
FRONT
20 FEET
20 FEET
20 FEET
20 FEET
SIDE
6 FEET
0 FEET or 6 FEET
0 FEET or 6 FEET
6 FEET
REAR
10 FEET
10 FEET
10 FEET
10 FEET
MIN PUD PERIMETER
SETBACK
20 FEET
30 FEET
20 FEET
30 FEET
MIN PRESERVE SETBACK
10 FEET
10 FEET
10 FEET
20 FEET
DISTANCE FROM
PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE
10 FEET UNLESS
ATTACHED
10 FEET UNLESS
ATTACHED
10 FEET UNLESS
ATTACHED
20 FEET
MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT
NOT TO EXCEED
35 FEET
35 FEET
35 FEET
35 FEET
*I — Each half of a two- family unit requires a lot area allocation of 3,500 square feet for a total minimum lot area of 7,000 square
feet.
*2 — Minimum lot width may be reduced by 20% for cul -de -sac lots provided the minimum lot area requirement is maintained.
*3 — Zero foot (0') minimum side setback on one side of building as long as a minimum 12 foot separation between principal
structures is maintained.
*4 — Distance between garages may be reduced to 10 feet if garages detached; or 0 feet if attached.
*5 — Building garages must be set back a minimum of 23 feet from edge of any provided sidewalk for front entry garages. Front yard
may be reduced to 15 feet where the residence is served by a side - loaded or rear entry garage.
*6 — Principal and accessory uses shall not be permitted to encroach into any landscape buffer.
Rev 5 (3- 15- 2011)clean.doc Page 3 of 9 AR- 12292, Cope Reserve RPUD
50' WIDE
EASEMENT
RESERVATION
FOR DRAINAGE/ s
UTILITIES i
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
ZONED: E, ESTATES i O
O
i
D
2
O
D
WILMAR LANE
i
yPO1 VACANT, UNDEVELOPED
ZONED: E, ESTATES
I -vz- m0
lu
s . swur lz Lns,o
w N+ I1
�z szauzee swca.x has )
COLLIER COUNTY WATER RETENTION
ZONED: E, ESTATES
rr y rr " ry r
rr rrr rrr rr ry ryy
i r R
� �yyyrryrryyrrryr
�rr r r r r y
� �rr yrr F rr rrr
' � rrrr ryry rrrr r'L
1
!y r 1
1
r y r i DETENTION
AREA
Div r r
SITE = 14.31 ACRES
RESIDENTIAL'R' = 6.781 ACRES (47%)
PRESERVE "P' = 1.921 ACRES (13 %)
(12.81 ACRES NATIVE X 015 = 1.92 ACRES)
ROW = 1.571 ACRES (11 %)
MAXIMUM RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS: 43 UNITS (14.3 X 3 UNITSIACRE = 42.9)
DENSITY - 3 DWELLING UNITS/ACRE
TAGENR - r ..°so.v. wn.o n.l.
ZIMMERMAN EDUCATION CENTER
ZONED: E, ESTATES
0
DETENTION
AREA
15' WIDE TYPE B OR
10' W IDE TYPE A BUFFER
(SEE NOTE 4)
VACANT,UNDEVELOPED
ZONED: E, ESTATES
NOTES:
'
20' WIDE
SINGLE FAMILY
TYPE C OR 10' WIDE
RESIDENCE
' TYPE A BUFFER
I , ZONED: E, ESTATES
(SEE NOTE 4)
6 W
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
TYPE B R . WIDE
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE 20NED: E. ESTATES
1 TYPE A BUFFER
ZONED: E, ESTATES
�' (SEE NOTE 4)
LANDSCAPE BUFFER AFTER THE EXOTIC PLANT MATERIAL IS REMOVED.
' 20' WIDE TYPE C OR
02 FROM LDC SECTION 6.06.01.J, STREET SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS, WHICH LIMITS CUL -DE -SACS TO
10' WIDE TYPE A BUFFER
A MAXIMUM LENGTH OF 1,000 FEET TO PERMIT A CUL -DE -SAC APPROXIMATELY 1,225 FEET IN
(SEE NOTE 4)
LENGTH.
' __l. 1. ..I. -- `-- I - -1 --
_. _.__. __.__.__.__.__.__.__.__.__.__._
20'WIDE
`
1 DETENTION
1 AREA
TYPE C OR 10' WIDE
TYPE A BUFFER
l
R
- -,
(SEE NOTE 4)
15' WIDE TYPE B OR
10' W IDE TYPE A BUFFER
(SEE NOTE 4)
VACANT,UNDEVELOPED
ZONED: E, ESTATES
NOTES:
t 2
MODIFICATION DUE TO AGENCY PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS.
SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCE
2 ALL- ACREAGE IS APPROXiMATE -AND SUBJECT -TO MODIFICATION AT THE
I , ZONED: E, ESTATES
R
6 W
TYPE B R . WIDE
3. THE PRESERVE AREA MAY COUNT TOWARDS THE REQUIREMENT OF A
1 TYPE A BUFFER
TYPE D LANDSCAPE BUFFER, IF IT MEETS THE EQUIVALENT OF A TYPE D
�' (SEE NOTE 4)
15' WIDE TYPE B OR
10' W IDE TYPE A BUFFER
(SEE NOTE 4)
VACANT,UNDEVELOPED
ZONED: E, ESTATES
NOTES:
1. THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND IS SUBJECT TO MINOR
MODIFICATION DUE TO AGENCY PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS.
DEVIATIONS:
2 ALL- ACREAGE IS APPROXiMATE -AND SUBJECT -TO MODIFICATION AT THE
TIME OF SDP OR PLAT APPROVAL.
01. FROM LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE (LDC) SECTION 6.06.01.0, STREET SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
AND APPENDIX B. TYPICAL STREET SECTIONS AND RIGHT -OF -WAY DESIGN STANDARDS, WHICH
3. THE PRESERVE AREA MAY COUNT TOWARDS THE REQUIREMENT OF A
ESTABLISHES A 60 FOOT WIDE LOCAL ROAD (CUL-DE-SAC) CROSS-SECTION TO PERMIT A 50
TYPE D LANDSCAPE BUFFER, IF IT MEETS THE EQUIVALENT OF A TYPE D
FOOT WIDE LOCAL ROAD (CUL -DE -SAC) CROSS-SECTION.
LANDSCAPE BUFFER AFTER THE EXOTIC PLANT MATERIAL IS REMOVED.
02 FROM LDC SECTION 6.06.01.J, STREET SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS, WHICH LIMITS CUL -DE -SACS TO
4. A 20' WIDE TYPE C BUFFER SHALL BE UTILIZED WHERE NOTED ON THE
A MAXIMUM LENGTH OF 1,000 FEET TO PERMIT A CUL -DE -SAC APPROXIMATELY 1,225 FEET IN
CONCEPTUAL PUD MASTER PLAN SHOULD MULTI - FAMILY OR TOWNHOME
LENGTH.
UNITS BE DEVELOPED ON THE PUD.
name ynrmF. Ta0.9n.naa
Pnr ul.crs Tn9.99D.999n
Grady Minor
Val•Ira T99.IJJ.T39i
flvil �nl;incrl% Lentl Survc�mrn Y19nnrre • Lnntlxrapr. Archllccl9
,cn. nvalmr. to lwl;lsl � ss u: xnm°aan
nvw.franrFllnrl... mas0, 11, a4 Lllnnr nnll Atis°[L Mn, PA.
COPE RESERVE RPUD�olrxsR / ➢FVELOPF
EXHIBIT C „cHVa+D vnovsmas
OF IF£ NiD CIX➢FA. Ll
CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN
EXHIBIT D
FOR
COPE RESERVE RPUD
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
O.R. 1199, PAGE 849
THE WEST 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 114 OF THE
SOUTHWEST 1/4, LESS THE NORTH 30 FEET AND THE WEST 50 FEET OF SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 50
SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
AND
O.R. 1200, PAGE 199
THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4, SECTION
8, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, LESS 50 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE FOR RIGHT -OF-
WAY, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
THE OVERALL PARCEL BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED BY METES AND BOUNDS AS
FOLLOWS:
COMMENCE AT THE SOUTH QUARTER (1/4) CORNER OF SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH,
RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE RUN NORTH 00 044'56" WEST, ALONG
THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 8, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1357.40 FEET
TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE RUN
NORTH 89 01758" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTH WEST
1/4 OF SAID SECTION 8, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,281.70 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST RIGHT -
OF -WAY LINE OF COUNTY BARN ROAD A 100 FOOT WIDE RIGHT -OF -WAY; THENCE RUN
NORTH 00 043'48" WEST, ALONG SAID EAST RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 645.58
FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE OF COPE LANE A 60 FOOT WIDE RIGHT -
OF -WAY; THENCE RUN SOUTH 89 026'18" EAST, ALONG SAID SOUTH RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE, FOR
A DISTANCE OF 615.70 FEET; THENCE RUN SOUTH 00 048'22" EAST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF
THE WEST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTH WEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 8 FOR A
DISTANCE OF 308.54 FEET; THENCE RUN SOUTH 89 °22'08" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF
THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID
SECTION 8, FOR A DISTANCE OF 665.42 FEET, THENCE RUN SOUTH 00 044'56" EAST, ALONG
THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 8, FOR A DISTANCE OF 339.35 FEET
TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; CONTAINING 14.315 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
Rev 5 (3- 15- 2011)clean.doc Page 5 of 9 AR- 12292, Cope Reserve RPUD
N
EXHIBIT E
FOR
COPE RESERVE RPUD
LIST OF REQUESTED DEVIATIONS
1. From Land Development Code (LDC) Section 6.06.01.0, Street System
Requirements, and Appendix B, Typical Street Sections and Right -of -Way
Design Standards, which establishes a 60 foot wide local road (cul -de -sac)
cross - section to permit a 50 foot wide local road (cul -de -sac) cross - section.
2. From LDC Section 6.06.01.J, Street System Requirements, which limits cul -de-
sacs to a maximum length of 1,000 feet to permit a cul -de -sac approximately
1,225 feet in length.
Rev 5 (3- 15- 2011)clean.doc Page 6 of 9 AR- 12292, Cope Reserve RPUD
EXHIBIT F
FOR
COPE RESERVE RPUD
LIST OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS
1. UTILITIES
A. Water distribution, sewage collection and transmission systems shall be
constructed throughout the project by the developer. Potable water
and sanitary sewer facilities constructed within platted rights -of -way or
within dedicated County utility easements shall be conveyed to
Collier County, pursuant to the Collier County Land Development
Code, as amended, except as may be provided in this Ordinance.
B. The developer shall provide for a minimum 50 foot wide drainage and
utility easement adjacent to County Barn Road. This easement shall
be recorded prior to SDP or Plat approval.
2. TRANSPORTATION
A. The sole point of ingress /egress to the RPUD shall be onto Cope Lane.
No access will be provided from County Barn Road.
B. The developer, his successors, or assigns agrees to improve Cope
Lane, including any turn lanes warranted by this project, from County
Barn to the site driveway as part of the first SDP or Plat. The design of
the roadway cross - section (whether rural or urban) must include bike
lanes and sidewalks, and requires County approval. No impact fee
credits are available for this roadway improvement that will serve this
project.
C. The developer, his successors, or assigns agree to accept, attenuate,
and store stormwater management along property frontage for Cope
Lane improvements associated with this project at no cost to the
County. All drainage, access, and maintenance easements
necessary to accommodate this developer commitment shall be
dedicated /conveyed (at no cost to Collier County) as part of the first
SDP or Plat.
2. FIRE CODE
A. The cul -de -sac shall comply with the adopted fire code and shall
measure a minimum 40 feet from center of cul -de -sac to the center of
the roadway. This will require a minimum 100 foot diameter; and
B. Fire hydrants shall be installed pursuant to NFPA 24 and spaced in
accordance with Collier County Fire Prevention and Protection Code
Rev 5 (3- 15- 2011)clean.doc Page 7 of 9 AR- 12292, Cope Reserve RPUD
L,
Policy and Procedure Article Numbers HYD 09 -1, HYD 09 -2, HYD 09 -3
and HYD 09 -4.
3. ENVIRONMENTAL
A minimum of 15% of the on -site native vegetation must be retained. 12.8
acres of native vegetation exists requiring preservation of 1.92 acres of
native vegetation.
4. PLANNING
A homeowner's association or similar entity will be established and will be
responsible for maintenance of common elements.
5. LANDSCAPING
Should multifamily or townhome dwelling units be constructed on the north
or east side of the internal project roadway, the required landscape buffer
shall be increased from a 15' wide Type B buffer to a 20' wide Type C buffer
in the areas depicted on the conceptual PUD Master Plan.
CN0 M ivt
Rev 5 (3- 15- 2011)dean.doc Page 8 of 9 AR- 12292, ope Reserve RPUD