HEX Agenda 06/26/2014 COLLIER COUNTY
HEARING EXAMINER
HEARINGS
AGENDA
JUNE 26, 2014
AGENDA
THE COLLIER COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER WILL HOLD A HEARING AT
9:00 AM ON JUNE 26, 2014, IN CONFERENCE ROOM 610 AT THE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION BUILDING, 2800 N. HORSESHOE DRIVE, NAPLES, FLORIDA.
INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES UNLESS OTHERWISE WAIVED BY THE HEARING
EXAMINER. PERSONS WISHING TO HAVE WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC MATERIALS INCLUDED IN THE HEARING
REPORT PACKETS MUST HAVE THAT MATERIAL SUBMITTED TO COUNTY STAFF 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE
HEARING. ALL MATERIALS USED DURING PRESENTATION AT THE HEARING WILL BECOME A PERMANENT
PART OF THE RECORD.
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER 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. DECISIONS OF THE HEARING EXAMINER ARE FINAL UNLESS APPEALED
TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.
HEARING PROCEDURES WILL PROVIDE FOR PRESENTATION BY THE APPLICANT, PRESENTATION BY STAFF,
PUBLIC COMMENT AND APPLICANT REBUTTAL.THE HEARING EXAMINER WILL RENDER A DECISION WITHIN
30 DAYS. PERSONS WISHING TO RECEIVE A COPY OF THE DECISION BY MAIL MAY SUPPLY COUNTY STAFF
WITH THEIR NAME, ADDRESS, AND A STAMPED, SELF-ADDRESSED ENVELOPE FOR THAT PURPOSE.
PERSONS WISHING TO RECEIVE AN ELECTRONIC COPY OF THE DECISION MAY SUPPLY THEIR EMAIL
ADDRESS.
1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. REVIEW OF AGENDA
3. APPROVAL OF PRIOR MEETING MINUTES—
4. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. PETITION NO. BD-PL20130002506 — Keith and Shannan Jacoby request a 10.4-foot boat dock
extension over the maximum 20 feet limit in Section 5.03.06 of the Collier County Land
Development Code for a total protrusion of 30.4 feet to replace and expand the existing docking
facility to accommodate two vessels for the benefit of Lot 23 and a portion of Lot 22, Bayfront
Gardens subdivision, also described as 215 Bayfront Drive, in Section 6, Township 48 South,
Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Fred Reischl, Principal Planner]
B. PETITION NO. PDI-PL20140000504 — 6900 Airport Pulling, LLC is requesting an insubstantial
change to the Naples View RPUD, Ordinance No. 2012-22, to remove townhouse dwelling units
and two-family, duplex dwelling units from the list of permitted uses; reduce the maximum
development density from 66 to 33 dwelling units; amend the Master Plan to reflect changes to
dwelling unit density and access to adjacent property; add new LDC deviations relating to
boundary marker signs and project entrance ground or wall signs; change the name of the PUD
Managing Entity; and delete development commitments relating to the Transportation
Concurrency Management density bonus and requirements for vehicular, pedestrian, and
bicycle access and facilities. The subject property is located on the east side of Airport Pulling
Rd,south of Orange Blossom Dr., in Section 1,Township 49 South, Range 25 East,Collier County,
Florida, consisting of 11.32±acres. [Coordinator: Kay Deselem, Principal Planner]
3. OTHER BUSINESS
4. ADJOURN
AGENDA ITEM 4-A
•
Co er County
STAFF REPORT
TO: COLLIER COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
FROM: PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION
HEARING: JUNE 26,2014
SUBJECT: BD-PL20130002506.JACOBY BOAT DOCK EXTENSION
PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT:
Owners: Keith& Sharman Jacoby Agent: Ben Nelson
215 Bayfront Drive Nelson Marine Construction, Inc.
Bonita Springs, FL 34135 10923 Enterprise Avenue
. Bonita Springs, FL 34135
REQUESTED ACTION:
The petitioner requests a 10.4-foot boat dock extension over the maximum permitted protrusion of 20
feet for waterways greater than 100 feet in width, which will allow construction of a boat docking
facility protruding a total of 30.4 feet into a waterway that is 258 feet wide.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject site is located at 215 Bayfront Drive in Bonita Springs and is further described as Lot 23
and a portion of Lot 22, Bayfront Gardens. "Ilse folio number is 23095002304.
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
The purpose of the project is a request for a 10.4-foot boat dock extension beyond the maximum of 20
feet for the subject lot. There is an existing dock on the site. The dock will be reconfigured to contain
two slips. 'Ile dock will protrude a total of 30.4 feet into a waterway that is approximately 258 feet in
width. There is no dredging proposed for this project and the total length shoreline is approximately
120 linear feet.
A single-family house exists on the site.
•
BD-PL20130002506 Page I of 8
Jacoby Boat Dock Extension.
•
ii
4 arc-cia \ c* '`I•
\ ...„.....
1
•
LOCATION 1
14:2...• - I
./ LEL COLN T'' RI IP
f a 1 Pi
MIS..4W4ik PIM
UST 1101700T NAM
tx. ceikv, /
012 Ell% ie
IF AO
-- 4t, 1111(11 eig
. ,
- 4PSAI4N4 ask%*. 4biti;!4?
= ....
, M.
i16.4 . "TieW .M..,./ " ''..." fft 47.4.7, NANEBECV:4111041/
hk. .— ......'at 1 _ ,.',..'"' " RI: ' iat
0,
1,9
r ,
„ .
t AI 411C.nr - =WY ,N.. 0 any Mil"t,
41,104
-‘ - ,,,,,,,01.• .., u: 441 litill19" . LoSixrte
'°;i1"litg#4\W 1111 . 0
••■■ 1.1 4., 0 {ON
I....1.• N I 'I, . .....=I =1..1
der1' ' 1.Pr. ■.
1 r
05101032 Er
.01014, IOU
MCIRM
_ .
. 0.43 Vitra
_
_....ikia
il■lib 1 la Ai
... F. - ii,_ ., l'i- - .0„....,;:;);•-rrif #v"
1
,
. .
. , •„.„ ,11•SNIMI
1111P
SO fil
V 12"
kOXICO *iii„huid 4
u,, ........
.
,.....
=WNW Maw," 0 JIB ■
cc----17
s."' .. .tlim
It ----i
LOCATION MAP ZONING MAP
PETITION 113O-PL-2013-2506
•
•
SURROUNDING LAND USE& ZONING:
SUBJECT PARCEL: Single-family house,zoned PUD(Lely Barefoot Beach)
SURROUNDING:
North: Vacant lot,zoned PUD
East: Bayfront Drive,across which is a preserve area, zoned PUD
South: Single-family house with a boat dock,zoned PUD
West: Little Hickory Bay,across which are single-family houses,zoned PUD
•
tit
kF
o
t r
�! fyr i
t•Y
•V
Aerial of subject property tr. ( i'A
4" I
sf
7
s- k
°... -
1
; 47;'1*-17, 4‘.
Bird's eye view of subject property(Bing)
ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION:
BD-PL20130002506 Page 3 of 8
Jacoby Boat Dock Extension.
Environmental Planning Staff has reviewed this petition and has no objection to the
granting of this request. Section 5.03.06(E)(11). of the Land Development Code (Lnc),
Manatee Protection, is applicable to multi-slip docking facilities with ten (10)or more slips.
The proposed facility consists of two boat slips and is therefore not subject to the provisions
of this section.
STAFF COMMENTS:
The Collier County Hearing Examiner (HEX) shall approve, approve with conditions, or
deny, a dock facility extension request based on certain criteria. In order for the I LEX to
approve this request. it must find 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 recommends the
following findings to the HEX:
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 dock facility consists of 2 boat slips, which is
appropriate in relation to the 120 linear feet of water frontage of the subject lot.
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 the water depth for the
proposed dock facility is too shallow to accommodate the vessels..
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.)
BD-PL20130002506 Page 4 of 8
Jacoby Boat Dock Extension
Criterion met. According to the information submitted by the petitioner, the
proposed facility will not adversely impact navigation due to the width of the
existing waterway. The applicant notes that the facility has been designed to
protrude less than neighboring docks,so that it does not impede navigation.
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. Information provided in the application indicates that the proposed
dock will protrude 30.4 feet (12 percent) into a waterway that is 258 feet in width.
Therefore. the dock facility will maintain more than the required minimum of 50
percent of the waterway as 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 submitted and noted by the petitioner, the
proposed facility has been designed to fall within the subject riparian lines (with a
• required side-yard of greater than 15 feet) and does not interfere with adjacent
neighboring docks or access.
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 he 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 subject shoreline is natural, not hardened. and it supports a
mangrove fringe. Florida Statutes permit minimal trimming, however the dock
protrusion permits the preservation of the existing mangrove fringe.
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 drawing submitted by the petitioner, the dock area
is not excessive, permitting the docking of two vessels.
•
BD-PL20130002506 Page 5 of 8
Jacoby Boat Dock Extension.
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. (Thc applicable maximum percentage
should be maintained.)
Criterion met. As indicated on the application, the width of the vessels is 55 feet:
therefore, the proposed dock is less than 50 percent of the property's 120 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. The view shed of neighboring properties will not be impacted.
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 were found within 200 feet of the proposed dock facility. Therefore. there will
be no impact to seagrass beds.
6. Whether the proposed dock facility is subject to the manatee •
P P subject 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 not applicable. The petitioner's property is a single-family lot with two
slips and is not subject to the provisions of the Manatee Protection Plan.
Staff analysis indicates that this request meets five of the live primary criteria. Regarding
the six secondary criteria, criterion 6 is not applicable. and the request meets five of the
remaining five secondary criteria.
APPEAL OF BOAT DOCK EXTENSION TO BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS:
As to any boat dock extension petition upon which the HEX 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 tiled with the Growth Management Division
Administrator within 30 days of the Decision by the HEX. In the event that the petition has
been approved by the HEX. the applicant shall be advised that he/she proceeds with
construction at his/her own risk during this 30-day period.
•
BD-PL20130002506 Page 6 of 8
Jacoby Boat Dock Extension.
•
COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW:
The Office of the County Attorney reviewed the Staff Report for BD-PL20130002506 on
June 10. 2014. SAS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the above findings. Staff recommends that the Hearing Examiner approve Petition
BD-PL20130002506.
•
BD-PL20130002506 Page 7 of 8
Jacoby Boat Dock Extension.
0
PREPARED BY:
•
FRED 1 EISCIIL. AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER DATE
PLANNING &ZONING DEPARI•MENI
REVIEWED BY:
r? 6 (?e) 4 -7 I i '
RAY D V. BELLOWS.ZONING MANAGER DATE
PLA G &ZONING DEPARTMENT
APPROVED BY:
�-2 %� ( - ;`(
MIKE BOSI, AICP, DIRECTOR DATE
PLANNING&ZONING DEPARTMENT
•
BD-PL20130002506 Page 8 of 8
Jacoby Boat Dock Extcnsion.
COILiei County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358
www.colliergov.net
DOCK FACILITY EXTENSION I BOATHOUSE PETITION
THIS PETITION IS FOR (check one): ❑ DOCK EXTENSION ❑ BOATHOUSE
BD-PL20130002506 REV: 2
PROJECT NUMBER 215 BAYFRONT DRIVE
PROJECT NAME DATE:2124/14
DATE PROCESSED DUE: 3/10/14
APPLICANT INFORMATION
NAME OF APPLICANT(S) Keith & Shannan Jacoby
ADDRESS 215 Bayfront Drive CITY Bonita Spings STATE FL zip 34135
TELEPHONE # (239) 821-0816 CELL# N/A FAX# N/A
• E-MAIL Keith.jacoby @wfadvisors.com
NAME OF AGENT Ben Nelson
FIRM Nelson Marine Construction, Inc.
ADDRESS 10923 Enterprise Ave CITY Bonita Springs STATE FL zip 34135
TELEPHONE # (239) 992-4443 CELL# N/A FAX# (239) 992-0765
E-MAIL
Beth@nelsonmarine.com
BE AWARE THAT COLLIER COUNTY HAS LOBBYIST REGULATIONS. GUIDE YOURSELF
ACCORDINGLY AND ENSURE THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE REGULATIONS.
•
CAcuny
•
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239)252-2400 FAX (239)252-8358
www.coliiergov.net
PROPERTY LOCATION
Address of Subject Property 215 Bayfront Drive, Bonita Springs, FL 34134
Section/Township/Range 6 148 /35 Pro a rit;D.ti
Subdivision Bayfront Gardens Unit Lot(s)°FAa Block(s)
Current Zoning and Land use of Subject Property PUD (Single Family Residential)
ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE
Zoning Land Use
i N PUD Single-Family Residential
S PUD Single-Family Residential
E PUD Single-Family Residential
W PUD Single-Family Residential
•
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
Narrative description of project(indicate extent of work,new dock,replacement,addition to
existing facility,any other pertinent information):
Proposed 4.5'x30'dock expansion, 150 sq. ft. decking replacement, 13,000lb lift installation.
The following must be accompanying this application:
1) A signed, sealed survey depicting mean high water (MHW) and mean low water (MLW), and
relevant water depths measured at no less than 5-foot increments
2) A chart, drawn to scale, of the waterway at the site, depicting the waterway width, the proximity of
the proposed facility to any adjacent navigable channel, the proximity of the proposed facility to
docks, if any, on the adjacent lots, and the unobstructed waterway between the proposed facility and
the opposite bank or any dock facility on the opposite bank
3)A site plan to scale showing dimensions and location of existing and proposed dock structures, as
well as a cross section showing the facility in relation to MHW/MLW and shoreline (bank, seawall or
rip-rap revetment).
•
Collier County
• COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION! NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239)252-2400 FAX (239)252-6358
www.colliergov.net
SITE INFORMATION
Width of waterway: 258 ft.;
Measurement from ❑ plat ❑ survey ❑ visual estimate❑ other(specify)
Total property water frontage: 120 ft.
Setbacks: provided 29-3' ft. required 15 ft.
Total protrusion of proposed facility into water: 3 0-rt ft.
Number and length of vessels to use facility: 1. 30 ft., 2. 25' ft., 3. ft.
List any additional dock facilities in close proximity to the subject property and indicate the
total protrusion into the waterway of each: All docks in close proximity extend 45' plus.
For all petitions, in the case of signs located on properties 1 acres or more in size, the
applicant shall be responsible for erecting the required sign(s). what is the size of the
IIIproperty? 0.44 acres
Official Interpretations or Zoning Verifications:
To your knowledge, has there been an official interpretation or zoning verification rendered on this
property within the last year? ❑ Yes ❑ No If so, please provide copies.
The following criteria. (pursuant to Section 5.03.06 of the Land Development Code) shall be used as
a guide by staff in determining its recommendation to the Collier County Planning Commission
(CCPC), and by the CCPC in its decision to approve or deny a pa-ticular Dock Extension request. In
order for the CCPC to approve the request, it must be determined that at least 4 of the 5 primary
criteria, and at least 4 of the 6 secondary criteria, must be met. Please provide a narrative response
to the listed criteria and./or questions. Attach additional pages if necessary.
i
i
i
•
Cofer County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE •
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252-2400 FAX (239)252-6358
www.colliergov.net
PRIMARY CRITERIA
1. Whether or not 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))
The(1)proposed slip is consistent with other surrounding properties and appropriate in relation to waterfront length,upland use&zoning.
2. Whether or not 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 show that the water
depth is too shallow to allow launch and mooring of the vessel (s) described without an
extension))
Water depth is too shallow to accommodate the boat at mean low tide without the addition(boats may draw as much as 3.5 at MLT.)
3. Whether or not 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))
Facility will not have adverse effect on navigation within adjacent marked/channel and does not intrude navigable or impede vessel traffic
4. Whether or not the proposed dock facility protrudes no more than 25 percent of the width of the
waterway, and whether or not a minimum of 50 percent of the waterway width between dock
facilities on either side of the waterway is maintained for navigability.((The facility should maintain
the required percentages)).
Facility does not protrude more than 25%of width of waterway and more than 50%of waterway will be maintained for navigation.
5. Whether or not 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))
The proposed design and location of the dock facility will not interfere with the use of neighboring docks.
COley County
• COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION! NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252-2400 FAX (239)252-6358
www.colliergov.net
SECONDARY CRITERIA
1. Whether or not 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))
The dock needs to be extended to provide proper distance from mangrove fringe.
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))
The proposed dock provides reasonable safe access to the vessel for loading/unloading.routine maintenance without the use of excessive dock area.
1 I tl
whether or not the length of the vessel, or vessels in corrtt�it at u ,
3. For single-family dock facilities, g
described by the petitioner exceeds 50 percent of the subject property's linear waterfront footage.
• ((The applicable maximum percentage should be maintained))
This is a single-family residential lot and the total length MN boat wit not exceed 50°.of the total width of the lot(25+30.55 x 2 110i as the lot is 120'wide,
4. Whether or not the proposed facility would have a major impact on the waterfront view of
neighboring waterfront property owners. ((The facility should not have a major impact on the view
of either property owner.))
The proposed facility will not have a major impact on the waterfront view of neighboring property owners.
5. Whether or not seagrass beds are located within 200 feet of the proposed dock facility. ((If
seagrass beds are present, compliance with subsection 5.03.06.1 of this code must be
demonstrated))
There are no known seagrass areas within 200 feet of the proposed dock facility.
6. Whether or not 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.ii must be
demonstrated))
Single-family docking tacilities are not subject to the requirements set forth in the Collier County Manatee Protectbrt Plan.
•
Collier County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358
www.colliergov.net
I HEREBY ATTEST THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS APPLICATION IS
TRUE AND ACCURATE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.
I UNDERSTAND THAT, IN ADDITION TO APPROVAL OF THIS DOCK EXTENSION, A BUILDING
PERMIT IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION.
I UNDERSTAND THAT IF THIS DOCK EXTENSION PETITION IS APPROVED BY THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, AN AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNER MAY FILE AN
APPEAL WITHIN 14 DAYS OF THE HEARING. IF I PROCEED WITH CONSTRUCTION DURING
THIS TIME, I DO SO AT MY OWN RISK.
rYTh
Signature of Petitioner or Agent
•
BD-PL20130002506 REV: 2
215 BAYFRONT DRIVE
DATE: 2/24/14
DUE: 3/10/14
Cot[ier County
• COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239)252-2400 FAX (239)252-6358
www.colliergov.net
As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, 1 attest that all of the information indicated on this
checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary
submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition.
Keith M. Jacoby& AFFIDAVIT
We/l, Shaman P.Jacoby being first duly sworn, depose and say that well am/are the owners
of the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing; that alt the
answers to the questions in this application, including the disclosure of interest information, all
sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application, are
honest and true to the best of our knowledge and belief. Well understand that the information
requested on this application must be complete and accurate and that the content of this form,
whether computer generated or County printed shall not be altered. Public hearings will not be
advertised until this application is deemed complete, and all required information has been submitted.
As property owner Well further authorize Nelson Marine to act as our/my representative in any
matters regarding this Petition.
Signature of Property Owner Slgr(ayre of Property'Owner)(
•
Keith M.Jacoby Shaman P.Jacoby
Typed or Printed Name of Owner Typed or Printed Name of Owner
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 7 day of S5-:= ;1,4 20 1-3,
by .5",i-fa <u 3Y who is personally known to me or has produced
it ,u-,a,‘:Y - as identification.
State of Florida (Signature of Notary Public-State of Florida)
County of Collier
(Print, Type, or Stamp Commissioned Name
of Notary Public)
;rt%'; TIM FARRELL
MY COMMISSION 0 EE853542
r EXPIRES November 25,2016
ei„
(407)396-0153 FbeNNouneorme colt
BD-P1.20130002506 REV: 2
215 BAYFRONT DRIVE
DATE 2/24/14
DUE: 3110,14
— mss— -,-- --
:' ' Nom'
`,' ° �1 + y`+} 0, NI
t 4 t il
,'' \ "+
i 0 ,
ti 4:� i-' + y at+4.
,,.. y +'' +o- At ,' ;> `t +~ t
+.` RIPARIAN UNE '' r>+ t'° ; SCALE: 1"=20'•+' _' ,p s• r9
1.,, .4„, . 7,,,,,C.4 + ' •,■,io i 1 -•*--- •
.. ( 3C . / Rc0 MANGROVE \ •
+'e 0 a i
FRINGE
:, + -- /
,T a
a. ,+ .,T 7�°+ T.,+•'y O ' ' ` +,5 `'�•+ ' 4�, x, . •e+`.4 5 `1.4 t --'' MEAN LOW \
WATER LINE
PROPOSED INSTALLATION ±' 4: ,t" _ t' MEAN HIC I WATER LINE,
OF A '3,000 LB. ± ?'"A°a , PROPERTY LINE
AL UN'-A-HOIST BOAT r o• ':!
LIFT ATOP (4) 10" BUTT '1 T.O.B. '
LIFT PILES �, - 1 E.O.W. "•+ � ' o SURVEY TRAVERSE LINE '.� ,
�CETAIL BELOVJ__J//+A a+ 4_ - y, +,! +ti///�\\ 7 !I4,10„- .
4.5' W:DE x 30 LONG r .. r-PROPOSED 4' WIDE x 12'
i ,, LONG REPLACEMENT OF • t.•1
PROPOSED DOCK EXPANSION , + EXISTING WALKWAY 5-
,+ !
47, + ,to 4r, . 3 '�\' DEMO EXISTING r%'
+° , + �C %.it ,, WALKWAY AND • k�' 0
+ - +} / 'fir. a, ~� `{.4 .0. . BUTT PILINGS :` L.N,,DEMO EXISTING BUTT + v Qt1„`;"•/,•'', I P,SP�, LIFT PILINGS +/..\ +G� �llt ; �' 1
` .... PROPOSED REPLACEMENT 1-----"` �,: " 00/ '
CF 15C�S.F. DECKING ),> 03.;.;"..-=7-2 , , _ a••Oh EXISTING DOCK t�<" , , '. ±' i`s,z
MOST RESTRICTIVE - . EXISTING LIFT, ,IN t ���• 'W�� �I•
I►
POINT: J TO REMAIN �� LL +�4,��� �`
e;,.„...,00.: _Psi. TOP r i 4.∎W 2" �44/'
OF BANK . c, �s ,+ :� V** �I••
s s t
r FURr--EST EXTENT '� ,,�• - '± APPROXIMATE
OF DUCK .� .9. ,d+, .>"t..• RIPARIAN LINE+, Win
t ',,.7/■...•••,„•...■•.•.•.
t'j �\ COOK a�_, .� •
/� ay+ " .4.:‘,, '9 4�;C E N She
,,
N.T.S. ,+ EXI jING• i
2 13,m.4 .ENS PP Ca..,Caw4trns ../.11 ' _� � �.+ `rMAN($R tV�[` s
1 i 2120't�.f�ES PER arum�wli.tf ..r — ,, FRINGE '
Revsion 1 Date Descant On 0 ;�° ��, �. * 1
JACOBY DOCK EXPANSION ' . ' ' ° �" `-
0.0+011 urn..c An.e1am.PA �'
i
le GradyMinor fn.Inoaea -�� • R 4 ,�; •
fair ORre.Merida 01W
Civil Engineers • Land Surveyors - Planners • Landscape Atddtet1e SITE PLAN
��� •�f ',
Om.of mat m 1001151 tat raaz U 0031$1 , .mina u 2/0.01 /P '/ONAV riiii;B oom Son.,*.- -1'IO47.1144 ra'..creey.itt,er.rex ten llx+ 2>9.c+o.a- �"_b ,!_i
BD-PL20130002506 REV: 3
215 BAYFRONT DRIVE
DATE: 4/23/14
DUE: 5/7/14
4 4
4.5'
•
ASrEN
W/STAINLESS
STEEL RING
SHANK SCREWS
(2) 1/2- 2'x6' DECKING
CARRIAGE .40 ASO f 1
BOLTS(NP.) MATCH (XST1NC TOP OF DECK CLEV.
(2)S/8'•i.G. P� �� -
MACMNE 80.'S
19. ` 1. -,
i c
-.9-� -(3) 2"4e'
(2)2".B'co SI.ONCLR$ 4C
ONE EA.SKIE ASO AS SHOWN
Ol PUNS(TIP)
S=MPS0N N5 �8'BUTT PRE 2.5
STS•MID C.C.A. 33R
STRINGER. PENETRATION OR
`•P.EA 4' PUNCHED T IRU
COIMECT10N, ROCK
4-6*NAPLES
TOP WT.
SEAN HIGH WATER EL..(-)0.02' .— —
-- MEAN LOW WATER EL.=(-)0.58'
I
I
III DOCK SECTION
)/z°=1'-0°
PROPOSED
EXIST, DOCK DOCK EXPANSION
1 PROPOSED ISSTA;UIION 01 r
I=A00 LB.T AT-A-NOWST
;r*TOP(4) 10'MITT
LAT PILINGS.
■
OENO EXISTING BUTT
PILINGS MD WALKWAY I
_ _s._,_,_„ ,,,_, .. . ,.,T„,„,...,__‘•_„,,. , ___—_ ___. _.
_ _____ MEAN HIGH-WATER- i 1 - - --iIF °MEAN LOW WATER EL..(-)0.58Y
`\\\ �o0ooy,�s�,,� i
DOCK CROSS SECTION � �fro. 5324 ��9 c,
I t e I�
1. VCGTICAL DATUM IS NA.YD 198e. -0; 7 a
2.PROPERTY 'S LOCATED WT:IIN FLOOD ZONE AE. ►la •f STA) �T' i Cu --3
• 12 Gratly �T JACOBY DOCK EXPANSION �� �R`�p.'<' =1 t•Minor 0 Grady u+`e """”` ,+ , ___-
lWYw.alersnluNlN �( \\.�
Civil 6nglnee.IS Lana Suntyas • Planners . Landscape Ateh&tects DOCK SECTIONS �f// /O�A� '°'
Cent.Pt Pe.13C001131 Cert.W*CLAM*MI Paws ILIDta[N1 1/11111111
Bonny Slalom V36-17.I144 .en6.LrsO.eAlie.e.e.e Fn.Ill 7P 1W)X180 - .rot•i - __ SIISGT 2 or 2 !
nr4m 46 ums ne ow. 2
MIL
AGENDA ITEM 4-B
Cottier County
MEMORANDUM
TO: COLLIER COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
FROM: PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION. PLANNING AND REGULATION
HEARING DATE: JUNE 26. 2014
SUBJECT: PDI-PL20140000504.NAPLES VIEW PUD
PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: AGENT:
6900 Airport Pulling LLC Alexis Crespo,AICP
c/o William Depietri Waldrop Engineering. P.A.
259 Turnpike Road,#100 28100 Bonita Grande Dr.#305
Southborough. MA 01772 Bonita Springs, FL 34135
REQUESTED ACTION:
The petitioner requests that the Hearing Examiner approve an insubstantial amendment to the Naples
View PUD to allow the following change:
• Exhibit A—List of Permitted Uses
• Combine"RI"and "R2" Residential Tracts into a single"Residential Tract"category.
• Remove two—family and townhouse dwelling units from the schedule of uses.
• Add reference to the Hearing Examiner process for determining comparable uses.
• Modify Development Density statement to reduce density from 66 dwelling units (5.84
du/acre)to 33 dwelling units(2.9 du/acre).
Exhibit B—Development Standards
• Remove Two-Family and Townhome column from development standards table
Exhibit C—RPUD Master Plan
• Remove"Vehicular/Bicycle/Pedestrian Linkage to Future PUD"label and arrows.
• Remove reference to"RI"and"R2"tracts and re-label as"Residential Tract."
• Revise Land Use Summary Table to reflect reduced unit count and density.
Naples View PUD.PDI-PL20140000504 Page 1 of 6
June 26,2014 Hearing Examiner
Last Revised: May 5,2014
Exhibit E—List of Requested Deviations from LDC
• Add New Deviation 6 to allow one (1) boundary marker sign at the southern property
corner fronting on Airport Pulling Road, in addition to residential entrance signs.
• Add New Deviation 7 to allow 80 square feet of combined entry signage.
Exhibit F—PUD Commitments
• Modify Managing Entity to reflect current owner, 6900 Airport Pulling, LLC.
• Remove Commitment 5 regarding bonus density criteria.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject property, consisting of 11.3± acres, is located on the east side of Airport-Pulling Road,
approximately 800 feet south of the intersection of Airport-Pulling Road (County Road 31) and
Orange Blossom Drive. in Section 1, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida.
(See anal map below and location map on the following page)
4 _ (
y�+
his f r•
(" ter. ;`t.
4,41*
,INI,01
t` k�r _ �. �6 a � —+--- ' v..s t., -t' •^1.0 (i)
I. '� -"' . . St.btect� t
t
„Lt r_..........s....„ • i 1 kii . ..„
. x , ;), :g.U , ,v7. ,iliti________71
- ,‘ - - - 1,-.,...,ir'1,10,1 I 4111 hog' , ire?ti -triV.-..r er f e,.' * -24 (
,ti.-.•.;.., -4:$ ,', ----: _lb.. 1,1 i'-',.: O./.4 #1.*A
.« t t 44c.4 r .y4� sz= ,it� i
,.,,,,,,„,*,,,,
R'
. VC_'e•, ,. --C•' - ; 'Ali—am
Aerial Photo(subject site depiction is approximate)
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF MAP AND TEXT CHANGES:
The Naples View PUD was originally rezoned to PUD on June 26,2012. in Ordinance Number 2012-
22, allowing development of up to 66 dwelling units on the subject 111 acres. The site was divided
into RI and R2 tracts with the RI tract containing single-family detached, zero lot line and two-
family, duplex dwelling units and the R2 tract to contain townhouse units for a gross density of 5.84
units per acre. The R2 uses were to be developed along the Airport Road corridor rather than
adjacent to the Walden Oaks subdivision to the east. As part of that approval the applicant was
Naples View PUD,PDI-PL20140000504 Page 2 of 6
June 26,2014 Hearing Examiner
Last Revised: May 5,2014
rAmtaam Mkt MAL 01.41
,
2gl
r 1 )
"I It
/.
‘ ;
10 A
, a
t/v . ,_'"* ; i
,-g , 1- - 1
1 tol Ey .
(-) ,,,. u,..11 ...t
: 1 I ;.1 ._..... 1 L Iii 1 illvto' .11 11'
• qlt i - - a - I t I
Id -, -- ,, .
a tf 11 i -- fx r , --- - -Ill
—I - -"--- --- -- --,..-;—- - ,il r- i;,„ p,,,...ga—
-------j t , ..--....:i ik Al _ .•_„,, _.„,„,...,.,,1
11141 „,,
44 if rj
lig . 11 1 11
........-..., "'A 1 •"A" e.,... ,,_.....„,__:„ , 1: ...----'
. -- .. :.------=---------T—.
> i : • 1 ..................._
.......
GI :ell 1-71
7111.144 ------1-'
7 . g$ 1 ,,... 14 : ,. :,.; i r : ,?..
V.-----4 ,
. u rl
-4.';iit 'II 411 '..'',-1 Y. '
. .
..,,,... - , „..--"--------‘"1,"--
1
, f
. ' N
+4 rEnS,AA ,f, el il.
1 ,1.-
.1
..,,..?. t 1
,,,
!,,,,„ -.1 :-,,,„,. x „.,0 1,,,..
A ii. A
4 ;; 1 i ;
3; :11
t i
. d
a
z ..... .-- .1. , „, ,,,.......,..,,,,,,...:
7
/11-17/111rifolania*".....–AGAIA
11:
,--:
:. \
1 1i, , 1, • :1-■ ;2
- ,
... : .
-.:
;
A
f i
: 0
la 11
1
— ---------mm-G-
• ,„„,„„, ••- . , ,. ,
2 ,
0 ' .
.2 . i/ //i • 1 4 -.'
4 . '
z - 6 0 /
'
E 2 liligNVOlt I i P'S;''; 71,
0 ----A
. / .
K -
*WW •-•''''-1 1
> ......_ .
. .
ti
,......',-.„., .... .
-13 7- ' . ' . • 'V'' 11: -...' f r-----)
• ,
(
' •=1
• .R. i -_-_.0,,, ' . ...-.-+ :r-----. .i :, ,
t: . 0 .. ....... ,
. 3 Aww,'Wilk
t.....rot. .... —'
lb ti
. ..,/ t•..1 a alt, ,....,. ! 1
• 1 ,..... IIII i
. ,
.... ...... .
42.10-07 Ng046,100,,0,001.01 0,000110,11.040,041000,2611-07,404 MC00:0,004111140,00941E11.01-ExtlAm0
4104014 910,11144149
f
m(4, AIRPORT PU,LLING ROAD. ..
_ ........ „
O -1:1 0 MY RO.W.
Ii x c
M FP
(47• "LI X X en - < ,-- 73 73
0 M nizOm0 < "-7 CI
M -4 s$, tn m z AIRPORT RO_AILCANAL t
O NI to z 0 c
• - rl 4> V) -4
Z z rn t i ,
1 A 0 ,
O co m
.'-X
-/-
I 4$44 111 0 frri c
i >
1. C
- i
zli 2.
rn s, t 2- t ,642, oz>
Cl) ,,z c.....Z
,> 4 Z-4 xi 0 * 1
z
e- er$ A $
> , (/) 4-
0 $ 4 13 On;
0 6
c t...
P i 1
1 0r1
c.44 -...
-4 -, . vs
0 ri cz:tv to
i.., •?:n ii. 0 1 '
C
. ._ ,23
m K 1 0- r 1 Z C4
. rct z 0
z .. —.7.
z 1 k Z Z 444.
ill 6:4 z
rn st.m x
.... c
[ -tt
I E4
LI to -‹ _ -
;IS 0
0 M rn • m I ) 0 0 c
1 \tr4-....._...
O 0 6 0 m c>:
1 I --- , m z m
1 R.O.VIt , rn z c
$ al C al
1
C in
m I
4 )1 C A (74
..,• 17 17 X 3'..
0 Z I 44 M 0 -1
> C C 0 0 .r191 1 8 S Ii. 24 a;
O 0 0 -"' !"4.* -"L
'''° *44 44 'i4' 0
--I
.w ,• c
oj
a m
-7*.
2311•CrT"13 oz r 007> -4>-I > 3' -I-- \ 1 I
M>>0M z0 k- -41C4- E zx z z i t
foomoo ..crT. mOtT45, 0 x t
M x > 0
rn
70.7.3,3m> mrn II 1-0 -n m m
c.„,.... _. ),c z z •-•'--,0 I
>474:M t 5 rti
• E"T±T 0 , X X T 0 0- X
>> Z C70‹ M (13°0 frit-CA M --I,,.;0 Z
cn
cm z-...4 0 m -t
m' Mr- T4'T f MOFP- °24C) X
2,40 co?..; .5z -v-n, 17 Q0 ..... m (4)
Z 0 i -4
111,, T•
,...,•44.7,0),-.4- Z/i) M ,301 Te" - W 1
-5, 0 Z>
Z 0-1 ch70 > z_40 a.0 c z.... 0 ,
i f .0 m
4-
0 '71 .rfi, .4 4 44
I 4 C C
>
0 " f> Z()- --I 0 z i -n
rn t,-- t:7i I .4.4 1 IP.1,
m C
m
'-n▪ -z.--.< -al )44.- •4 M • -4 Z I
• , P C7 fil -4> 7:>> (/)
M 1.."` > M ZZ z-4 I
ni rnz,- 0 c mo co C
z -u-< 1,. ...m ›im' -i
> 7, - --• m,,,r4 m
1 f >co -rt'40°40)
O C 0, 4-0 A-_, K -1 r.-.
O m N. I ''': - z-
>_0
- 0m 1- -4 cl.
•
0
,44- > I $ I
m
al I b
t-
M 0
, V i rot Co3
I . ' § I -1 1-.---1
F: 0 1 tn.._ Z 0
-4 V)"
A i 1 1 ). -4
,., ''''■
. -
, -, --„,...) in"...
4....$0 0 /
74 m M .1.71
I 13
7.- 111 if PottI PULLING R.OAD - -
, -;_i en r
.. 1 0 c 4
,
I
> > Z
, z /
- $ M> /"" I S 1•1 ' 0
_
0 M? >
-4 X.=,,,, A
A i
) 5',mm
°)
-
.., F.-- 1\ 171 17 73
$.-' --
,. .,.
., ., .
--.-:i i.iv INGSTON it,Al) .-....---,---_-
/
, --'.- /
0;-...,;;ft> 8 ti.cs:.M
,..,
11 0
0 0 m-0 >-7 X xl m
,Fw 02
f--<c z 4 z
0 ctl.11
-INTER- ATI'i`, , / >co 0 ,.,("I 2>. -0 m R m
4- M z x z..IIIIIMINAA--
\ . 0 r.
z - -4 .-
SCALE: N T S.
4475,N 14 44V I Tibri;
2:, '' & C44/29/14 REVISED PER STAFF COMMENTS 1, WA
LDROP
P
NALES VIE W
1 ENGINEERING
1;
..„ CLIENT;6900 AIRPORT PULLING,LLC. .------------ ------
. KILD MASITR PLAN -- ,...........--,.....-.-
...
_ EXHIBIT"C*
.. ,
!.! !
required to provide an interconnection to the north as required by the Transportatio concurrency
Management Area (TCMA) to achieve the requested bonus density (5.84 units per acre instead of 3
units per acre).
As noted above the current PDT request seeks to remove the two-family, duplex dwelling units and
townhouse use and reduce the development to 33 dwelling units. The applicant also wishes to
remove the interconnection requirement along the project's north property line based upon the
request to reduce density to 3 units per acre. Two deviations are being added addressing signs.
ANALYSIS:
Section 10.02.13.E.1 and 2 of the Land Development Code sets forth the criteria by which
insubstantial amendments to a PUD Master Plan are to be reviewed before they can be approved.
The criteria and a response to each criterion of 10.02.13.13.1 have been listed as follows:
Is there a proposed change in the boundary of the Planned Unit Development (PUD)?
No,there is no proposed change in the boundary of the PIM.
b. Is there a proposed increase in the total number of dwelling units or intensity of land
use or height of buildings within the development?
No. there is no proposed increase in the number of dwelling units or intensity of land use or
height of buildings within the development. The applicant is reducing the number of units
and the density.
c. Is there a proposed decrease in preservation, conservation, recreation, or open space
areas within the development in excess of five(5) percent of the total acreage previously
designated as such,or five(5)acres in area?
No, there is no proposed decrease in preservation, conservation, recreation, or open space
areas within the development as designated on the approved Master Plan.
d. Is there a proposed increase in the size of areas used for non-residential uses, to include
institutional, commercial and industrial land uses (excluding preservation,conservation
or open space),or a proposed relocation of nonresidential land uses?
No, the proposed amendment will not increase the size of institutional„ commercial, industrial
uses since the PUD does not allow those uses. The governing ordinance allows residential
and associated accessory uses. No additional uses are being requested; the applicant is
seeking to remove uses.
e. Is there a substantial increase in the impacts of the development which may include, but
are not limited to increases in traffic generation; changes in traffic circulation; or
impacts on other public facilities?
There are no substantial impacts resulting from this amendment.
Naples View PUD,PD1-PL20140000504 Page 3 of 6
June 26,2014 Hearing Examiner
Last Revised: May 5,2014
f. Will the change result in land use activities that generate a higher level of vehicular
traffic based upon the Trip Generation Manual published by the Institute of
Transportation Engineers?
No, as noted above, the proposed change will not create any additional vehicular generated
trips.
g. Will the change result in a requirement for increased stormwater retention,or otherwise
increase stormwater discharge?
No, the proposed change to the Master Plan Site should not increase stormwater retention, or
otherwise increase stormwater discharge. it is assumed that reducing the number of units and
removing the multi-family will cause a reduction.
h. Will the proposed change bring about a relationship to an abutting land use that would
be incompatible with an adjacent land use?
No. The proposed change to remove the multi-family units and reduce the overall number of
units should make the project more compatible with the adjacent Walden Oaks community.
Are there any modifications to the PUD Master Plan or PUD document or amendment
to a PUD ordinance which is inconsistent with the Future Land Use Element or other
elements of the Growth Management Plan or which modification would increase the
density of intensity of the permitted land uses?
No, this modification is in compliance with the Future Land Use Element of the Growth
Management Plan. However, in a review memo dated May 20, 2014, Comprehensive
Planning Staff offered the following comments in reference to the Futter Land Use Element
(FLUE) Policies quoted below [FLUE relevant policies are stated below(in italics):each policy is
followed by staff analysis(in hold)].
Policy 7.3 --All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local
streets and/or interconnection points with adioining neighborhoods or other developments
regardless of land use type. The interconnection of local streets between developments is also
addressed in Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element. (The subject site is a small infill
property with limited interconnection/access potential to neighboring properties.
Properties to the east and south are fully developed but there is the ability to provide an
interconnection to the approved mixed use project to the north (Longview Center PUD)
—and such interconnection is presently approved in the existing Naples View PUD. The
applicant is proposing to remove both the vehicular and bike/pedestrian
interconnections to the north that this Policy 7.3 encourages. Staff agrees,in part,with
the applicant's explanation of possible negative impacts to the subject site if the
vehicular interconnection is retained. Further, staff acknowledges the small size of this
project (33 units), thus limited benefit of vehicular or bike/ped interconnections. Staff
disagrees that the existing sidewalk along the east side of Airport-Pulling Road,which is
less than 150 feet from the bike/ped interconnection shown on the existing HID Master
Plan, negates the need for such an interconnection. There is an intervening canal and
no access from Airport-Pulling Road into Longview Center, thus a resident of Naples
Naples View PUD,PDI-PL20140000504 Page 4 of 6
June 26,2014 Hearing Examiner
Last Revised: May 5,2014
view would have to walk to the project entrance, north on the Airport-Pulling Road
sidewalk, east on the Orange Blossom Road sidewalk to the Longview Center entrance.
The distance between the two project entrances alone is±-1/4 mile,thus a round trip just
between entrances would be ±Vi mile; when the additional distances are added to walk
within each development to reach the respective entrances, the round trip exceeds V2
mile. Despite the small size of the development, staff sees some value in having a
bike/ped interconnection.)
Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities
with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices
and types. (The small size of the site limits design flexibility and ability to provide
different neighborhoods with different unit types and prices, but both single family and
two-family dwellings are proposed. Recreational facilities are allowed and open space
will be provided per LDC requirements. As no LDC deviation is requested, sidewalks
will be required per the LDC. Adding to the walkability of the community are
pedestrian interconnections with neighboring projects;please see above discussion.)
Based upon the above analysis, Comprehensive Planning staff finds the proposed PUD
insubstantial change (amendment) petition to be consistent with the FLUE. However,
staff encourages the applicant to retain the bike/pedestrian interconnection to the north.
j. The proposed change is to a PUD District designated as a Development of Regional
Impact (DM) and approved pursuant to Chapter 380.06, Florida Statues, where such
change requires a determination and public hearing by Collier County pursuant to Sec.
380.06 (19), F.S. Any change that meets the criterion of See. 380.06 (19)9e)2., F.S., and
any changes to a DRI/PUD Master Plan that clearly do not create a substantial deviation
shall be reviewed and approved by Collier County under Sec. 2.7.3.5.4 or Sec. 2.7.3.5.6
of this Code.
The project is not a On
k. Are there any modifications to the PUD Master Plan or PUD document or amendment
to a PUD ordinance which impact(s) any consideration deemed to be a substantial
modification as described under Section(s) 10.02.13 E.?
Based upon the analysis provide above, the proposed changes are not deemed to be
substantial.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
LDC Subsection 10.02.13.E.2 also requires an evaluation of the findings and criteria used for the
original PUD application. The staff report for the original rezone petition. PUDZ-PL20110001519,
contained the PUD and Rezoning Findings from LDC Subsection 10.02.13.13.5 and 10.02.08.F,
respectively. This amendment does not negatively impact any of those findings.
COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW:
The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report on May 29..2014.
Naples View PUD,PDI-PL20140000504 Page 5 of 6
June 26,2014 Hearing Examiner
Last Revised: May 5,2014
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Collier County Hearing Examiner approve Naples View PHD., PDI-
PL20140000504.
PREPARED BY:
(IC
/4,
KAaEl,LEM,AICP,PRINCIPAL PLANNER DA E
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
REVIEWED BY:
r
/ fi.,A
RAYMOND V.BELLOWS.ZONING MANAGER DATE
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
..5 —
MIKE BOSI,AICP, RECTOR DATE
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING
Naples View PIJO,PDI-PL20140000504 Page 6 of 6
June 26,2014 Hearing Examiner
Last Revised. May 5,2014
EXHIBIT A
LIST OF PERMITTED USES
NAPLES VIEW RPUD
PERMITTED USES:
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used,or land used, in whole or in part,f or
other than the following:
A. Principal Uses and Structures:
4421,Residential Tracts
1. Single-family detached dwelling units
2. Zero lot line units
3. :
4, Recreational uses and facilities that serve the residents,including swimming pools,tennis courts,
volleyball courts,fishing docks,walking paths,picnic areas,recreation buildings,and basketball/shuffle
board courts.
41... 344tesidemial4Fatas
beard-court :
Any other principal and related use that is determined to be comparable to the foregoing by the Board of
Zoning Appeals and Hearing Examiner pursuant to the process outlined in the Land Development Code
(LDC).
B. Accessory Uses:
Accessory uses customarily associated with Permitted Principal Uses including but not limited to
1. Customary accessory uses and structures including carports,garages,and utility buildings.
2, Recreational uses and facilities that serve the residents, including swimming pools, tennis courts,
volleyball courts, fishing docks, walking paths, picnic areas,recreation buildings, and basketball/shuffle
board courts.
3. Temporary sales trailers and model units.
4. Entry Gates&Gatehouse.
S. Essential services,including interim and permanent utility and maintenance facilities.
6. Water management facilities.
Any other accessory use and related use that is determined to be comparable to the foregoing by the Board
of Zoning Appeals, pursuant to the process outlined in the Land Development Code(LDC).
Naples View RPM)-PL2014-0504 Words struck through are deleted, Page 1 of
last Revised:May 29,2014 Words underlined are added
C Development Density
A maximum of 66 33 dwelling units shall be constructed within the RPUD, pef-the,--T-Fanspectation
gross project area is 113±acres and the residential density maximum shall be 5.84 2.9 units per acre.
Naples View liPLID—PL2014-0504 Words stfoek-tnretigh are deleted; Page 2 of 7
Last Revised;May 29,2014 Words underlined are added
EXHIBITS
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
NAPLES VIEW RPUD
Development of the Naples View RPUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this Ordinance and
applicable sections of the LDC and Growth Management Plan (GMP) in effect at the time of issuance of any
development order, such as, but not limited to, final subdivision plat, final site development plan, excavation
permit and preliminary work authorization, to which such regulations relate. Where these regulations fail to
provide developmental standards,then the provisions of the most similar district shall apply.
Table i below sets forth the development standards for land uses within the Naples View RPUD. Standards not
specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of
approval of the SDP or subdivision plat.
TABLE I
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS4°
PERMITTED USES AND Single Family Zero Lot TING Tovionhome Recreation
STANDARDS Detached Line r.afriity,
0419104
MM.Lot Area 5,000 SF 4,000 SF 27504SF 41400--SF N/A
Min.Lot Width 50' 40' 35- 1.6.!. N/A
SETBACKS I
i 1
Front1-41121 15 15' 1$" S- 20'
,
Side 5' 5'/O' 5,10. 5401 20'
...
Rear(Principal) 15' 10' 40 K 40! 10'
Rear(Accessory) 0' 0' Ot 0!, 0'
Water body 20' 20' 20! 2V 20'
Airport Pulling Rd. 25' 25' ZS! .2st 25'
Min,Distance Between
10' 101/e aoye 44Q Sum of 14 BH
Principal Structures
Max.Building Height
Zoned 35' 35. 451 3,5,. 35'
Actual 40' 40' 40 e 40, 40'
No.of Stories 2 2 2 2 2
1_1124 Minimum lot width may be reduced by 25%for cul-de-sac lots provided the minimum lot area requirement is maintained.
f2141The minimum 15'front yard setback may be reduced to 10'where the residence has a recessed,side entry,or rear
entry garage. in no case shall there be less than a clear area of 23 feet between the back of the sidewalk and the face of
the garage door for front entry garages.
131(414For corner lots,only one(1)front yard setback shall be required.The yard that does not contain the
driveway/vehicular access to the residence shall provide 10'setback.
a dings maybe-
40t-nlifknon474f-tietaehet4"..
Naples View RPUD—P12014-0504 Words struck through are deleted; Page 3 of 7
Last Revised:May 29,2014 Words underlined are added
EXHIBIT C RPUD MASTER PLAN
zaerme mow VW*PON 43,44444104444rweet04404647/404 MCPNCRoVert VlantiZSPEON1106,1tMg
.1.0000•MIttlbtrMi
V 4„NirgIftrALAILK164.__
A r „
. ,.._. .4, vii , 2SICR.O.W.
a r" AI as 51 m rn
_
4 '*. 1 is
g6 § AiRpoitt RO.,±_11.1ANN• 7 ,:. - .
g 8 1g I m fl) M 4.
'
,A
0 4 2 ii! i
-4
0 "C Z
,
( A
I 111 P c
i C
•
„ 2
4 i
rn *
X.:
4
C L,..... 11?)
, i E
4 — _
_J L 1 I
I 's
..,. 1
5 1 ,
a a
1 ill I 1 /m
5 0
0'.ii
4 5 !
S. il i to
PC
7/ I 7 No
i I----
G)
ç I
til.z. el 00 mAtiS m
g M, Z
f 0
sci, 2F. Ali, A0.91 r""
z c 1 li,
-4 "
, ?, 1
,. -40, Pi5 a v1 of co i * 1 ; z
A Ag rn0 ag NA
4 N r ''
m A I ti I " 02
- z
----17t: "-i ,, ,, ,,-.', I §
0 1
4„.....) .7..., I .....1,........i 1
4:- ::-,,,,,,, ,: ': :',',-''!'''''''' MP g
1 , ,,,, '7,-. - "; ill gl----;"
A; 7
* a.
or e
1 ):4:0_,I A....,........ 1 ,V' ■4 10
!
1' .‘: T-- -; '''' I ''. *iitik
'-'•.. ' ,r, I P
I
'
'vv..
m
e„R
0 r - , i. ‘LI
...,, ......,..
1 , ,1 ...,__-, A Q 1'P o 2 il
• r"11: ) g 5 d al . .i. '.7,S
gi q,.is (s. 4.r.ii,i.
.....•
• o 21 ,‘ ,\,..„., t,,,.. z,-0 j z-I
....011.-------'-. 4-:, Akre 7S ..,.., ,•—
F - '4'g g$ Ar
alillsm.--
', SCALE:N.T.S.
1,3i PLAT;RTKISIOKi
A, -
0,09,44 asileea PER STAFF 0001008 NAPLES VIEW WALDROP
Inn
ENGINEERING
T PULLING„LLC.
AI
'1 NM CLIENT:6900 AIRPOR ,..„....,,..--... ----.
.,, MD MASTER PLAN
EXHIBIT '''-
....................1.RW..
•,......”.•..,............................
Naples View RPUD 41110140504 Words st-Fuek-teugh are deleted; Page 4 of 7
Last Revised:May 29,2014 Words underlined are added
EXHIBIT E
UST OF REQUESTED DEVIATIONS FROM 00C
NAPLES VIEW RPUD
Deviation 1' �\a�� �� L� ��mu��� whi� �u� a �� v� T� ~� b�r �e�
1:
proposed residential uses abut existing commercial uses,to allow for a 10-foot wide Type "B buffer where the
property abuts the commercial use to the north.
Deviation No 2 Deviation from LIX Section 5 0406 A 3 e which allows temporary signs on residentially zoned
properties up to 4 square feet in area or 3 feet in height,to allow a temporary sign or banner up to a maximum
of 32 square feet in area and a maximum of 8 feet in heights subject to approval under temporary sign permit
procedures in the(DC.The temporary sign or banner shall be limited to 28 days per calendar year.
Deviation No.3 Deviation from LDC Section 6.06.01,which requires a minimum width of 60 feet for cul-de-sac
and local street rights-of-way, to allow for a minimum 45-foum right-of-way internal to the proposed
development.
Deviation 4: Deviation from WC Section 6.06.01J which prohibits dead-end streets, to allow the dead end
street shown on the RPUD Master Plan.
Deviation 5: Deviation from LDC Section S.03.02.C.2, which permits a maxim um wall height of six (6)
feet in residential zoning di thct s* to allow fora maximum height of eight (8) feet for a combination
wall and berm along the property lines.
Deviation 6:Deviation from LDC Section 5.06.02.8.6,which permits two (2)ground or wall signs UP to 8 feet in
he1Rhtper entrance to the deVe|uQn�ent. toaU U marker
property corner fronting along Airport Pulling Road, in addition to the two (2) permissible project entry signs
d16 feet, ra
The Bo �ndary marker sign is limited to the community name and �no, and will not exceed square .o
height or le greater than the wall upon which it is placed.
Deviation 7: Deviation from LD (2)ground orwaUsigosparentrance
to the development with a combined sign area of 64 square feet to allow for two(2)ground or wall signs at the
project entrance with a combined sign area of 80 s.f.
Naples View Rpuo-PL2mz4-oso4 Words=tr-*ok4t4rou0are deleted: Page sof7
Last gevisedt May 29,2014 Words derflned are added
� |
EXHIBIT F
DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS
NAPLES VIEW RPUD
1. PURPOSE
The purpose or this Section is to set forth the general development commitments for the project. One
entity (hereinafter the Managing Entity) shall be responsible for PUD monitoring until close-out of the
PUD, and this entity shall also be responsible for satisfying all PUD commitments until close-out of the
PUD. At the time of#is the PUD approval amendment dated 2014,the Managing Entity
is Naples View LL[ 6900 Airport Pulling, LLC. Should the Managing Entity desire to transfer the
monitoring and commitments to a successor entity, then it must provide a copy of a legally binding
document that needs to be approved for legal sufficiency by the County Attorney. After such approval,
the Managing Entity will be released of its obligations upon written approval of the transfer by County
staff, and the successor entity shall become the Managing Entity. As Owner and Developer sell off
tracts,the Managing Entity shall provide written notice to County that includes an acknowledgement of
the commitments required by the PUD by the new owner and the new owner s agreement tomommp|y
with the Commitments through the Managing Entity, but the Managing Entity shall not be relieved of its
responsibility under under this Section When the PUD is closed-out, then the Managing Entty is no longer
responsible for the monitoring and fulfillment of PUD commitments.
2. UTILITIES
2.1 The project shall connect to the Collier County Water Sewer District(CWSD)potable water system
at a locaticm determined by CCWSD when capacity is available.
2.2 The project shall connect to the CCWSD wastewater collection and conveyance system at a location
determined by ccwso when capacity is available.
2.3 The project shall connect to the CCWSD Irrigation Quality water system at a location determined by
CCWSD when capacity is available.
2.4 Should the Collier County Water Sewer District determine that it does not have sufficient capacity
to serve the project; the Developer shall either construct interim potable water, wastewater
treatment and/or non-potable water facilities, or shall postpone development until such tune as
the Collier County Water- Sewer District service capacity is available to service the project. Any
interim facilities constructed by the Developer shall be constructed to Collier County
Utilities Division Standards, and shall be dismantled, at the Developer's expense, upon
connection to the Collier County Water-Sewer District facilities. Whether potable water,
wastewater treatment and/or non-potable water facilities are provided on-site or off-site, the
Developer shall demonstrate to Collier County that adequate capacity is available at the time of
final utilities plan submittal,
2.5 All customers shall be customers of the CCWSD.
3. TRANSPORTATION
A. The project shall maintain a minimum of 100' throat distance between the Airport Pulling right-of-way
and the face of the entrance gates.
Naples VIew RPM)—PL2uz4'o5o* are deleted; Page 6 of 7
Last Revised:May 29,2014 Words underlined are added
B. The developer shall pay a proportionate fair share for improvements to the Orange Blossom Drive and
Airport Pulling Road intersection. The proportionate fair share of the project's impacts to the
intersection shall be determined at the time of construction plan approval based upon the project's trips
as percentage of capacity improvements for the turning/through movements utilized by this site.
Payment shall be made to Collier County within 90 days of the County's request.
4. ENVIRONMENTAL
No preservation area is required as all existing,on-site vegetation is exotic.
5. PLANNING
eriter-ia-as4ellows:
Naples View RPIJD—P12014-0504 Words sta4e1E414paugh are deleted; Page 7 of 7
Last Revised:May 29,2014 Words underlined are added
Naples View RPUD insubstantial Change
COVER LETTER/DETAILED
DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
•
•
������ ENGINEERING
\ I CIVIL ENGINEERING&LAND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS ' 4 1",f
� ----- -- -- - --' - ---- ---�---�` ���
0.4 March 31,2014
REVISED April 30,2014
Ms. Kay Deselem,AICP
Zoning& Land Development Review Department
Community Development&Environmental Services
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples,Florida 34104
RE: Naples View RPUD-Insubstantial Change(PQI)
PD}4P110140000504
Dear Ms. Deselem:
Enclosed for your review is the Insubstantial Change to a PUO in regards to the Naples View RPUD
("Property"), an 11+/' acre project located at 6900 Airport Road N. in unincorporated Collier County,
Florida. The Property is within Section 1, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, and is designated within the
Urban Residential Subdistrict per the Collier County Future Land Use Map.
BACKGROUND/EXISTING CONDITIONS: ~-
The Property was historically utilized as a retail tree nursery, known asVVizzand Lake Nursery, which was
relocated a number of years ago. Currently, the Property is vacant and contains a 2.4+/-acre pond and
remnants of the former tree nursery.
In 2012, the Property was rezoned from Rural Agriculture (A) to Residential Planned Unit Development
pursuant to Ordinance 12-22 to allow for a maximum of 66 dwelling units, accessory uses and associated
infrastructure.The approval allowed for bonus density under the Transportation Concurrency Management
Area (TCMA) Bonus, defined in Policy 6.3 of the Future Land Use Element. Specifically, the Applicant
committed to provide the two (2)Transportation Demand Management (TOM) criteria per Commitment 5
of the PUD Document as follows:
"1. Provide vehicular access to the future mixed use subdistric to the north as shown on the PUD
Master Plan, in the form of a non-exclusive access easement to the adjacent property
owner/developer to the North, conveyed prior to issuance of the first building permit.
2. Provide pedestrian and bicycle facilities within the project and a bicycle/pedestrian
interconnection to the future mixed use district to the north shown on the PLID Master Plan."
Naples View Pat-p12oz^050*
Cover Letter/Request Narrative
Pagel of7
REQUEST:
6900 Airport Pulling, LLC ("Applicant') is requesting approval to: 1) eliminate the requirement for a
vehicular/pedestrian interconnection to the property to the north; 2) reduce the unit count to 33 dwelling
units, and 3 eliminate townhouse dwelhng types from the schedule of uses and consolidate the uses into
a single residential category;4) modify two (2) approved deviations regarding temporary signage and wall
height;
^
Deviation Justification Narrative for detailed descriptions of these requests,
The Property is located within the Urban Residential Subdistrict, as well as the Traffic Congestion Area.
Therefore, the base density of three (3) du/acre, or thirty-three (33) dwelling units complies with the
Growth Management Plan. The proposed modifications to the PUD will not impact the project's
consistency with all applicable goals, objectives and policies within the GMP.
COMPATIBILITY:
In terms of adjacent uses,the Walden Oaks community abuts the property to the south,east,and a portion
of the northern property Une, aretaUp|antoumeryubutstheprnpertytonorth; andtheAirportRoadcana|
and Airport.Pulling Road right-of-way abut the property to the west.
The request will not impact the perimeter buffers, which will continue to comply with the LDC
requirements, except where a deviation has been approved. No additionml deviations to buffer
requirementsare proposed through this application.
The request will reduce the project's density, which will postiveIy impact the Walden the Walden Oaks community
Additionally, the proposed use arid density of the Naples View project is being reduced to a gated,
single-family community with a maximum density of 2.9 du/acre, or 33 units. As such,the project is no
longer compatible with the intended uses and allowable intensity/density permitted within the Orange
Blossom Mixed Use District to the north (Please also refer to the GMP analysis below). Pedestrian
connections between neighboring uses are addressed via the existing sidewalk on Airport Pulling Road
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN COMPLIANCE:
As noted above,The Property is located wit in the Urban Residential Subdistrict and the Traffic Congestion
Area,which allows for a maximum base density of 3 du/acre and a variety of residential uses.The proposed
PDI wilt allow for a maximum density of 2 9 du/acre and dwelling units limited to single-family detached
and zero lot line, in compliance with the underlying Future Land Use.
At the time of the original PUD rezoning, the Applicant and Owner(Naples View, LLC) intended to develop
the Property with higher density residential uses under the bonus density provisions of the Growth
Management Plan. Initially, the application proposed multi-family dwelling types to be permitted
throughout the project (in addition to single-family, two-family and townhomes) in order to realize the
maximum density of 6 du/acre,or 66 dwelling units.Without the approval for higher density dwelling types
the bonus density could not be achieved due to the site's constraints.
Naples View xyWo pL204*504
Cover Letter
Page 2 of 7
Through the PUD review process it became known that Wa'den Oaks to the east and south were strongly
opposed to higher density product types, specifically multi-famby dwellings (see N|04 Meeting Minutes
attached as Exhibit "A°). In order to demonstrate cooperation and compromise with the Walden Oaks
�
community, the Applicant removed multi-family dwellings from the list of permitted uses in the PUD
Document, and Umited the town home dwelling type to only the western portion of the project clase5t to
Airport Pulling Road, and furthest away from existing single-family dwellings within Walden Oaks. The
result of these limitations is that the maximum density of 66 du/acre, attained through bonus density
provisions,could not be constructed,
The Property was acquired by 6900 Airport Pulling, LL[ in March 2014. The new owner has revised the
developmert program to allow for the development of the Property as a gated, low-density single-family
community. This development program is based upon current market demand for new inventory within a
single-family gated community in close proximity to schools, entertainment,beaches and other attractants
in western Collier County.
The change to the development program resulted in the evaluation of the project's compatibility with the
Orange Blossom Mixed Use District to the north, specifically in regards to a pedestrian, bicycle and
vehicular interconnection between the properties.
The following factors were evaluated by the Applicant, resulting in the current request to omit the
interconnection between the Naples View PUD and the Ora ge Blossom Mixed Use District to the north:
1) Intensity Mixed Use
`
The Longview CenterP|aonedUnitDeve)upmentsetsfortbamax|rnmmof73,S0Q SF of commercial
retail uses and 70\000 square feet of office uses in accordance with the GIMP Policies guiding
development of the Orange Blossom Mixed Use Subdistrict,The residential component is limited to
15 multi-family dwelling units, While this PUD has sunsetted and will require further Board action
prior to development, this approval exemplifies the anticipated build-out of the project with high
intensity commercial uses, which could include drive'thruu and other non-residential uses that
contribute to noise, light and vehicular trip generation.
2) Proposed Naples View Density
As noted above, the original owner's develop the p ect with higher density uses
that could be compatibly integrated with the neighboring mixed-use district through the
bicycle/pedestrian/vehicular interconnection. The interconnection was proffered to meet Growth
Management Plan bonus density provisions in order to achieve 66 du/acre Staff did not opine
during the PUD review process that the interconnection was a requirement of the project if
developed with the base density of 3 du/acre.
The current Owner/Applicant is limiting development of the Property to 2.9 du/acre, or 33 units, in
order to develop the property solely with single-family uses. The community will be gated to
provide a level of security that is common to many residential developments across Collier County.
The proposed low-density use is entirely compatible with the intent of the Urban Residential
Subdistrict, and is consistent with the permitted base dersity; however vehicular interconnection
Naples View Rpuo—P12n14-u504
Cover Letter
Page 3 of 7
/
/
4���/
�m�'
between a single-family gated community and an intense mixed-use district will result in
incompatibility issues due to the anticipated number of trips entering and exiting the residential
community to gain access to the mxeduse node. To be clear, the developments themselves are
not incompatible in that the required landscape buffers ed wall provide screening and
mitigation. The incompatibility concern is raised by vehicles using the entrance to the proposed
residential community as a "cut through" to a commercial development containing 140K square
feet of retail and office uses.
When bonus density was proffered it was anticipated that the Naples View ct would achieve a
higher density build-out that would warrant closer integration with the mixed-use subdistrict. The
removal of the bonus density through this PD) application concurrently with the removal of the
interconnection recognizes that lower density residential requires additional design sensitivity
when located near a mixed-use activity center, particularly in regards to the flow of traffic between
the sites.
Policy 7,3mf the Growth Management Plan states the following "All new and existing developments$holl
be encouraged to connect their local streets and their interconnection points with adjoining
neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use typa° The policy specifically states that
interconnections are"encouraged", and acknowledges that interconnections are not possible between
all types of development due to differing uses, location of environmentally sensitive lands, or other
issues.
IPLDC Section 4.04.02'8,3 sets forth criteria where interconnections between developments may be
prohibited, One of the specific criteria is when the abutting use is found to be incompatible with the
existing or proposed use", The Applicant respectfully submits based upon the proposed development
program that requiring a vehicular interconnection between a high intensity mixed-use development and a
single-family gated community will result in potential incompatibility and vehicular movements that that
will negatively impact the Naples View project
ENVIRONMENTAL:
Per the previous PUD approval it wa determined that no state or fe isted species were observed on-
site or within the projects vicinity. Furthermore, the site does not contain any native vegetation, and is
comprised wholly of abandoned nursery and stormwater management pond FLUCCS codes..The proposed
Insubstantial Change has no impact to the site's environmental factors.
INFRASTRUCTURE:
The subject property will be accessed via the existing i along Airport Pulling Road,as depicted
on the RPUO Master Plan A Traffic Impact Statement(TIS)prepared by TR Transportation Consultants, Inc.
was submitted with the original RPUQ rezone application demonstrating the impact of 66 single-family
dwelling units.The TIS demonstrated that Airport Pulling Road will have adequate capacity under the 2016
projected traffic conditions to service the project.The Applicant is proposing a decrease in density,which
will result in a decrease to the p ect's trips generation and impact to surrounding roadways.
III
Naples View oPuo—pL2V1^-0504
Cover Letter
Page 4 of 7
Potable water and sanitary sewer for this project will be provided by Collier County Utilities (CCU)through
existing infrastructure located along Airport Pulling Road.The Applicant is proposing a decrease in density,
which will result in a decrease to the project's demand for utilities,
JUSTIFICATION/COMPLIANCE WITH LDC§10.02.13.E:
The request complies with the thresholds for insubstantial changes to PUDs as outlined in LDC§
10.02,13,E as follows:
a. A proposed change in the boundary of the PUD;
No,the request will not impact the existing PUB boundary.
b. A proposed increase in the total number of dwelling units or intensity of land use or
height of buildings within the development;
No, the request proposes to substantially decrease the total number of dwelling units
within the development.
c. A proposed decrease in preservation, conservation, recreation or open space areas
within the development not to exceed 5 percent of the total acreage previously
designated as such, or 5 acres in area;
(11/
No, the request will not result in a decrease preserve, conservation, recreation, or
open space area The RPUD does not contain native vegetation/preserve, and is
entirely comprised of abandoned nursery,lake and exotic vegetation FLUCCS codes.
d. A proposed increase in the size of areas used for nonresidential uses, to include
institutional, commercial and industrial land uses (excluding preservation, conservation
or open spaces), or a proposed relocation of nonresidential land uses;
No, the RPUD does not permit nonresidential uses, and the proposed change does not
request nonresidential uses.
e. A substantial increase in the impacts of the development which may include, but are
not limited to, increases in traffic generation; changes in traffic circulation; or impacts
on other public facilities;
No, the request will result in a decrease to the external impacts of the development
based upon the lowered density„ including traffic generation and impacts on public
facilities.
110
Naples View RPUD PL2014-0504
Cover Letter
Page 5 of 7
f. A change that will result in land use activities that generate a higher level of vehicular
traffic based upon the Trip Generation Manual published by the Institute of
Transportation Engineers;
No, the request will decrease the project's trip generation based upon the proposed
reduction to density.
g. A change that will result in a requirement for increased stormwater retention, or will
otherwise increase stormwater discharges;
No, the request will not result in increased requirements for stormwater retention or
increase stormwater discharges.
h. A change that will bring about a relationship to an abutting land use that would be
incompatible with an adjacent land use;
No, the request does not impact abutting land uses, or modify any of the approved
land uses,location of uses,or landscape buffers.
i. Any modification to the PUD master plan or PUD document or amendment to a PUD
• ordinance which is inconsistent with the Future Land Use Element or other element of
the Growth Management Plan or which modification would increase the density or
intensity of the permitted land uses;
No, the request does not impact the project's compliance with the Growth
Management Plan. As noted above, the request will reduce the density of the project
to the standard base density permitted in the underlying Urban Residential
Subdistrict. The Application also addresses the GMP's encouragement of
interconnections, where possible.
j. The proposed change is to a PUD district designated as a development of regional
impact (DR I) and approved pursuant to F.S. § 380.06, where such change requires a
determination and public hearing by Collier County pursuant to F.S. § 380.06(19), Any
change that meets the criterion of F.S. § 380.06(19)(e)2, and any changes to a DRI/PUD
master plan that clearly do not create a substantial deviation shall be reviewed and
approved by Collier County under this LDC section 10.02.13; or
No,the RPUD is not located within a Development of Regional Impact.
k. Any modification in the PUD master plan or PUD document or amendment to a PUD
ordinance which impact(s) any consideration deemed to be a substantial modification
as described under this LDC section 10,02.13
Naples View RPUD PL2014-0504
Cover letter
Page 6 of 7
No, based upon the meeting with Staff held on March 26, 2014 the ~�w~
request is not deemed a substantial
CONCLUSION:
In summary, the proposed Insubstantia Change will serve to reduce the project's density and remove the
interconnection to the north.The proposed deviations will allow for enhanced design fleuibUUvtodevelop
an infi|| community, while protecting public health, safety and welfare. The RPUD will remain consistent
with the LOC and Growth Management Ian(GMP)and will serve as an overall enhancement to the area.
Per the Pre-Application Meeting Notes,the following items are enclosed for your review:
1. A check)bn the amount of$2425 for the application fees;
2. Fourteen(14)copies of the submittal cover letter detailing the purpose of the request;
3, Fourteen(14) copies of the completed PDI Application;
4. One(1) copy of the Pta-Application Meeting Notes;
5. Fourteen(14)copies of the current PUD Master Plan and one(1) reduced copy;
6. Fourteen(14) copies of the revised PUD Master Plan and one(1) reduced copy in
strikethroughiunderline format;
7. Fourteen(14)copies of the PUD document in strikethrough/underline format;
8. Fourteen(14)copies uf Bullet List of PUD changes;
9. Three (3)copies of the bou ry survey;
1O. One(1)original and one (1)c�pyoftheex*cuie�Af�daxitofAuthodrabonxvi�hUstofpartieoiu �1��
(1) �N�n
organization;
11. Three(3)copies of the Warranty Deed
12. One [1Lc�o����theap�roveMAddre��BChechUs�
. . copies
13. One(1)copies of the Location Map;
14. Fourteen (14)copies
- '
15. Three(3)copies of the entire submittal documents on COROM;
Should you require additional information or have any questions, please feel free to contact me direc ly at
(I39)405-7777ora|exisc@vva|dnopemgineer|mgzom.
Sincerely,
WALDROP ENGINEERING,P.A.
�4-,a
Alexis V.Crespo,4lCP LEED AP
l Planner
Enclosures
cc: William DepietM,6900 Airport Pulling, LLC
James 0u|f,G900 Airport Pulling, LLC
Naples View upms_PL2o14-nsww
Cover Letter
Page rof,
Naples View RPUD--insubstantial Change
P12014-0504
COMPLETED
APPLICATION
er County 410
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104
vvwvv.colliergou.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358
INSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE TO A PUD(P01)
LOC subsection 10.02.13 E&Code of Laws section 2-83—2-90
Ch.3 G.3 of the Administrative Code
Pursuant to LOC subsection 10.02.13 E.2, a PUD insubstantial change includes any change that
is not considered a substantial or a minor change. A PUD insubstantial change to an approved
PUD ordinance shall be based upon an evaluation of LOC subsection 10.02.13 E.1 and shall
require the review and approval of the Hearing Examiner. The Hearing Examiners approval
shall be based on the findings and criteria used for the original application.
PETITION NO
PROJECT NAME To h compIeted h ialf
DATE PROCESSED
APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION
10
Name of Applicant(s): 6900 Airport Pulling, LLC do William Depietri
Address: 259 Turnpike Road, #100 City: Southborough state: MA zip: 01772
(503)357-8825
Telephone: Cell; Fax
E-Mail Address: wdepietrime.com
Name of Agent: Alexis Crespo, AICP
Firm: Waldrop Engineering, P.A.
28100 Bonita Grande Dr., #305 Banda Spnno FL 34135
Address: City: State: ZIP:
(239) 405-7777 Fax: (239) 405-7899
Telephone: Cell: (239) 850-8525
E-Mail Address: alexise@waldropengineering.com
1 DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST INFORMATION
Is the applicant the owner of the subject property? 0 Yes ri No
E] 1. If applicant is a land trust,so indicate and name the beneficiaries below.
x 2. If applicant is corporation other than a public corporation,so indicate and name officers
and major stockholders below.
2/6/2014
Page 1 of 5
WT.
CO et County
COWER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104
vm^mvcm0mvmovnwt (23g)252-2400 FAX:(a3g)25]-6s58
O 3. If applicant is a partnership, limited partnership or other business entity,so indicate and
name principals below,
�l
4. If applicant is an owner, indicate exactly as recorded,and list all other owners, if any,
• 5. If applicant is a lessee,attach copy of lease,and indicate actual owners if not indicated on
the lease.
O 6. If applicant is a contract purchaser,attach copy of contract,and indicate actual owner(s)
name and address below: (If space is inadequate,attach on separate page)
William Deoietri, Managing Member 1O0& ownership
| �
DETAIL OF REQUEST
On a separate sheet attached to the application,describe the insubstantial change request,
1 �� |dentifvhom/the request does not meet the PUD substantial change o|te�aestabUshedin��C
�- subsection 10.02.13 El
PROPERTY INFORMATION
PUD NAME: Na pies View ORDINANCE NUMBER 2012-22
Provide a legal (if PUD Is recorded) or graphic description of area of amendment (this may be
graphically illustrated an Amended PUD Master Plan), If applying for a portion of the PUD, provide a
legal description for subject portion.
Attach on a separate sheet, a written description of the map or text change.
Does amendment comply with the Growth Management Plan? la Yes No
If no, please explain;
Has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? 1"- Yes 0 No
If yes, in whose name?
Has any portion of the PUD been SOLD and/or U DEVELOPED?
Are any changes proposed fOr the area sold and/ar developed? E Yes [lNo
if yes, please describe on an attached separate sheet.
2/6/2014 Page 2ofs
Co*er County a 1
....----46.--0...‘„,,,
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104
www.colliereov.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS cHEcKusr
See Chapter 3 G.3 of the Administrative Code for submittal requirements. This completed checklist is to
be submitted with the application packet in the exact order listed below, with cover sheets attached to
each section, Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. .. .
It OF NOT
REQUIREMENTS FOR REVIEW REQUIRED
COPIES REQUIRED
Completed Application(download current form from County website) ti
Pre-Application Meeting notes 1 0 0
Project Narrative,including a detailed description of proposed changes ri
0 0
and why amendment is necessary
Detail of request
...
Current Master Plan&1 Reduced Copy 0 0
Revised Master Plan&1 Reduced Copy 0 0
.—
Revised Text and any exhibits al la
List identifying Owner&all parties of corporation 2 H C3
Affidavit of Authorization signed¬arized 2 0
Completed Addressing Checklist 1 0 0
Copy of 8)1 in,x 11 in,graphic location map of site 1 0 0
ID
Electronic copy of all documents and plans
*Please advise:The Office of the Hearing Examiner requires all 0 0 0
materials to be submitted electronically in PDF format. . .
if located in Immokalee or seeking affordable housing,include an additional set of each submittal
requirement.
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS:
• Following the completion of the review process by County Review staff, the applicant shall
submit all materials electronically to the designated project manager.
• Please contact the project manager to confirm the number of additional copies required.
FEE REQUIREMENTS:
X PUD Amendment Insubstantial(P01):$1,500.00
Pre-Application Meeting:
o Planning and Zoning Fee-$500.00
x Estimated Legal Advertising fee for the Office of the Hearing Examiner:$925.00
The completed application,all required submittal materials,and fees shall be submitted to:
Growth Management Division/Planning and Regulation
i
•., ATTN:Business Center
f
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples,FL 34104 --.1
,) )./-* /Y
--
Applicant/Owner Signature Date
I
i.... mi lam Depteirt
Applicant/Owner Name(please print) II
2/6/2014 Page 3 of 5
Naples View RPUD—insubstantial Change
PL2014-0504
PRE-APPLICATION
MEETING NOTES
111,
. ,
.. ,
. 4111
pt# OL-al 0 —65-aq
Date: Q1a3114 Time: 3 4,frl GuloortAi) Assigned Planner: + 1 i, ,'!., .4 lir, i 1
Project Name:_ N AP 1/,.-41 VI r...W --'trip
iii
Applicant Name: 'I
Ali': -l __I' i '-',13C , Phone: 405 -
Owner Name:
Owner Address: — Phone:
Meeting Attendees: (attach Sign in Sheet)
Meeting Notes NO C:E E: COLI—EcrED
coLLEE.c-r- --ri-r-P4, ry
Four -Pt coasb lanai° upot,1 . 1).-131-41 (iv\
a
........
kHeikli),,,,% lif,A 4. 'sbel,,,lett;, 1\,\.,IiL'EitiAtiii n'ok_ bell ,
,:olkl Cu..t 141 L i'ttripk-L
PLANNER MARK IF NEEDED TO BE ROUTED TO REVIEWERS BELOW:
Comments should be forwarded to the Planner prior to the due date
[SCHOOL DISTRICT—Amy Taylor h1/4 PARKS&REC—Vicky Ahmad kliA
SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS
Wil City of Naples—Robin Singer AWA 1
DR/EMI —EMER.MGMT—Jim Von Rinteln AI/4 IMMOKALEE WATER/SEWER DISTRICT rthlA
i SAYSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE bed UTILITIES ENGINEERING—Paulo Martins 0,6
i m i
REDEVELOPMENT Executive Director 7
.,,T ,0 ni P 0 1,)_.., V"
V
i-Vr...k 0 t 1.4,6i4 ro 1,3
a
GACDES Planning ServiceskCurrentTre-Application Forms 2011kPre-aoP Forms-JUNE 2011\PM-PUD Amendment
Pre-application June 20114oc revised: 815/02,rev.5/26/10
■ —
' THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION PACKET IN THE EXACT ORDER LISTED BELOW
W/COVER SHEETS ATTACHED TO EACH SECTION.
NOTE:INCOMPLETE SUMBITTALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED
REQUIREMENTS #OF NOT
COPIES SUBMITTED REQUIRED
(1 additional copy if located in Immokalee)
111111 v/ 1
(1 additional copy if for affordable housing)If project includes an
Affordable Housing component,you are required to schedule a meeting before
the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee by contacting the Collier County i
■ Housin. and Human Services De•ortment at 239-252-22731
Com•leted A.plication(download from website for current form)
Pre-a.plication Meetirt• notes ,---
I '' 11.0.11.111
Current Master Plan & 1 Reduced Copy ..,----' 1111111110111111
Revised Master Plan & 1 Reduced Co. IIIIEMIIIIMIIIIIIIIIIIIIMI
Detailed descri•tion of wh amendment is necessa MINEMEIMMINIME
PUD document with chan.es crossed ihrou.h& underlined WM.
PUD document as revised with amended Title Pa.e with Ordinance # 11111111111.1
Detailed descri•tion of •roposed changes/Project Narrative 1?-11"*t r- V 11111.111111111
Deeds Le.al's&Survey 3 v''. 11.1111.1
List identif ing Owner&all •arties of cor•oration 2 INSINIONIMENIEN
Owner A t eat Affidavit si•ned ¬arized )(y.64.xii tr
Cop of completed Acldressin. Checklist
Co. of 8 .1/2"X 11" •raphic location map of site 1
0
Traffic Im.act Statement(TIS ,./ 1111111111111111111
11111M1111111111111.1=111.1111
Copy of Traffic impact Statement(TIS)on CDROM .1311111.11111111111 ,-/
Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)and digital/electronic copy of EIS
NM ,,./
Electronic copy of all documents and plans(CDRorn or Diskette)or
exemption justification
Fee Calculations:
Z $1500.00(Insubstantial)
rE
$100.00 Fire Code Review Fee
E
$500.00 Pre-application fee
(Applications submitted 9 months or mare after the dale of the last pre-app meeting shall not be credited
towards application fees and a new pre-application meeting will be required.)
E $92500 Legal Advertising Fee—CCPC meeting
$2500.00 EIS Review
Transportation Fees,if required (please attach a separate check for transportation fees)
$500.00 Methodology Review Fee,if required
A,/4 $750.00 Minor Study Review Fee,if required
SI E $L500,00 Major Study Review Fee,if required
Al Other.
Property Owner Notifications: $1.50 Non-certified
(To be paid after receipt of invoke from Planning Department)
4110
GACDES Planning Sennres\CurrenhPre-Appltcatton FOrMS 2011kPre-app Forms-JUNE 2011‘PDI-PUD Amendment
Pre-application June 2011 doe revised: 815/02.rev 5/2e/10
_ _ ...
Naples View RPUD_..Insubstantial Change
p12014.0504
CURRENT PUD CONCEPTUAL
MASTER PLAN
4.,
MP
}
j£
I j
0 1` k
. A:'42Hry4l" CCd6Nk
III j" 4, 9
I. f.$ !
A.
tl
� I
•
E ,,„,i 1f1M
4'1 ,t�
k
V ( I „ s
III Ilti : ill 1
t 1 iEim. . 1 x !`! rr I
v. J q `;!'1 ! f;;' 1 1
. Hp a4[ to , a 1:'€€.
I I
di
di
' ( ; 1! 4
v ”
_ Mme: t s 14,I � ;�
1,, . ; i„,,i,jilt ..,,,l;
1. i
I I
t
` ,
1I $ e
I ` , j ` 1 4-
I f t
I 1
I i ; I
1 I
1"
}
I
� u a $ILa4:t
_z ._.
I 6APLLS VII W I WALD OP
" „w„ . .. , ENGINEE131NG
i''',4 _...... CI;IFNTPI1 \Ih '.Ld.t: w.�«n.el
PutsMMCKSit1.,v �- +h;
1 g;..-- _ ......_ tix}IMIT'C" .. ....s—...+an+n..a.,wr..,.s..a
---.- —---
- _
i. ; __,......„
,...-
•
----r---- _
, 1 1
-
----y------
' ..i. ft
/ , Is
4/ __—
C,,
111
i ',
1( ,
1
/
ft I ! 4g 4 1 g 1
1 4$
'.i
:
A qt
i 1 r"
i
I 1. 1i 4 Z
fill IN ''
rat 1 i t
j .--
__'•1 1
..
PI I i e 1
1
lit t 4 t 1
is,
Fp
. ,
- I:• ,
1 I
, il
. - s
ngliPt, ,
till. Ili . 1 II
6 # 1
,
11,
lit I
i' Ili
I
;al
i I
_,
' 1
Ir" ,r• p - 0 s• f t,, „ t
1
/ %.
;1.?f, 1..'• tta I
Alat i ;,-. /1 i'It
,
, I 4st
-4 ,,-,--3*-033,3 „,,,------, II '
,
0 1 # if#,.■, ; I t I,i i
.1, 1 -,
k; 1
4 • x. ,, i ; ,.
0
r, . , , 1 1 kt
0 z
, l',
,...
Et it
I : ,
I ;
1 I 1 t t
1
.,
I ,, t
t : ,
1 g
I i
I i
.---
i .A t
I 11 -I. :11:ill
il 1 -J
1'-I 4; ALAN AA-7,3AYAA
NAPLES VIEW 11 \I
' WALDROP
t i
t 1
;A ASNAAA.7747*,1:AA.•%."..,
.
i Ong •----
1" %74 ;a CLIENT NAPLES VIE-W.1-1-C
l'UD MASTER PLAN
EXtlitlIT`C"
„. ENGINEERING
1
101%*•047.91.KIMA■wA111.0 IIAMAA11,14.14A.ID
A As•Aoserrn x tax....peR foidsoore............ 110
.- ,
NtoMs‘Nik0.1.4,10‘.72654t4,MCPA4m11.512650,010143,13,dom
SI.V2012 15:1-1 PM
AtRpokT puLotIG Rp„ P,„,„_
0 -a 0 -a E -P-2.--w....r- 2oty R.o. < .
....
.,,..-<
rn x c m r".5.; 0 m
z 0 z m 0 m m co .I) m V X
> IS < > C M
x m — < Tx.- m
m . ■
=1 0 m rn z Q m m < 0 .
4 A to `- r — 0 ' z
0 N 17 CA M 6 C
N 0 > --6 _Z, to e
a z o , za m co
Z z rn rn co 4
4=4CreCt-
o
e.... •11 0 ^i P.m 5 c-->
-I z I .52 7i 1 17c rncl a 0
M CP it: i i C Z .4 P -o z
/ii <
& : m
ro i ■ .
x 5
c 1,4
0
0
. ...... . . > z„. - I
C k4 ic bl
RI z 0
14 }4 FA
:71 z 2 X
I '17 (11 0 M
-..
-< -4
g 1 114 F C 0
c M 04• * t+ 1+ "V 0
rn r"
a th > P
z 0
0 0 z
c -,0
•,.. , rn-n .../ 0 A / .4.
- z g
'..n -.' f••••,. !"•2 :-
I /
Nt''', ■
oz r o > -.>— 1 -
--.1 t._.,
m4-->mrn z0 z -ngF czi 1. I
0E-1.>22 -2) rn 1M>
Vt M-1 rn -1 t- 0 0 Va 17
:
.-c..tmrn).0. rnm it 0 z -n,„c m
I
Amur
(pr, r" -' . ›ci
Z -,
Z--0
>^-rt, I 1 t
,
X2,1 mi.> 0.z.m v.mt., m --■ I -4
,,
-
OT=4.7. zw c23S.17) z,CI) 2. ,'I
,.
z 0
."j4101g M2 gal.C. -.2). 0
m 4
,
,, c g 1
,
‘ntn c
,
,.4 f x, 0",1.9
. z
_ I -
0 Z
7 ',.
t'.1 NI
-4 0 rn
In m m P.. I
z
-‹ --i
e >
1
M Va M)
t)rtc Co-
1
1, ..r Z:
''''''''') ,
II: '''''s ll IF , •-:--4 70 .,...-5,
--..-
I FA. m
70 .. I.,o , •titi_t- All o i.,
1 rn
t:1 ,,,i,.....,
„. 1
,..,r' .--- 1,'".• .i i 0, , .
_I 1,1
t MI
71 CA
i'?5 .. "\,: -siej. . 1
,
I ■ k.,, 1 >K ..._._
..-,0 0.
,. ,,„
•k',... r
, ,
, , ,
,....... .....„4.. ..-,,,2.<
›. ''' 6„,
0 °I • — ,......-i M 1,..,.
j4 j
-
f---) i '
,L,,..____ ,
- 0 ismicit. tOirl,/' k ..
-
tia -n
i r-CI WI
,4 0 z m Z N--4
„
i M 13 °m4 C 0-0
. .
. 1 ,
;0 C
0 tn r-> -4—4• ..n ' e§`n
rrt
_,
1 . : :
"....•.."6...L.--' • - if•iTtft•• riTE r-, Z -,....,, .....,00 r••
>
en/4 2>
Z.Illali...--
os z
1 , SCALE; W.T.S.
PLAN REVISIONS
44.1L9 .1
/ \ WALEIROP'
1.,..,,,f:1 i ,v2/iii REvisED PER COUNTY CONISAENTS NAPLES VIEW / A \
o3i0i112 'REVIS.5.D PER coustry commENTs
1 ., ENGINEERING
' oatown REVISED PER COUNTY ODieti44ENTs V ,
CLIENT: NAPLES V I F W.I...LC. --.....„
q., i•
O5/O2 REASED PER OOLIRTY COMMENTS
PLAN
EXIiiiir'C Mkt........t OMPot,pitk.4.•Vakt.Assrotlb,“WU
...Br',"v 2.......Cu.rels..........*
.. _
Naples View RPUD—Insubstantial Change
P12014-05434
REVISED PUD CONCEPTUAL
MASTER PLAN
9
•
•
----i:=;-':-, ------ - , 1.7----,
I,
\ 1
II q
q
i . 1
,
11 1 !
'-,..
I ' n 58E
1 t 1.1 81,t,
if
1 ii
rut ,
i • i
kii i 1 f ' r ...r i
rt'I t ■ i . ' I
4.11**j 0 *
i
r } r
;1 i' 114?1 t
$; t 1 it 4
* 4 ..0.
1
i il S I i ! I 11;11 ■ i
!
.. I ' i 1 1
..._.... .., 4 h 1
x Z I
: I 1 . 7,—-----s..\.,,,
1 1
1 1 —
1^ti 1 1 1
ill 1 1 1 I
1 I il
•
MN - J 1 Cili(_f g
I ;
1--
0 a
z p OR*,
"s,
i —8S'
1
> , „A-7, I 6 , g 1
i I I
-t, •
1
-7
I 1 i.
I l''
INIPSiiii ,
1 ,
t
,..... i
11, , I
1 1 i
t 1 Hi t
l' t
t 18 f - L
t : , 1
1 - r
/
i I r'
,
/ I tlf
i t
i 1
I
1 i 7 il
1 1 :
k I:
1 ,
/ill ,i1 1.
IP
„ gn74,. t.,1
I ` 1
,. ..z.iikr..—
f f
•
11 g n,guvmots.
NAPLES VIEW I/ \ WALDROP
i ___,_ EERING
,i, EN
ill......et
ail
II 5 ' .... CLIENT 6900 AIRPORT ExIcP,ULLING LLC
•, II I„ PUD MASTER PLAN OIRADOWNts.abaft
V**.04.OWL+1.110 110.001.7711.9,016.
y r sawresstr,...WM..4.............M.
1
1
>JFCtr...CfrKYV3;9 '!EQ d1
1 : _(i
1„ '1
1
R (1
1 ,,,,, 'f,, 1
i 0 ` 'i : R ;i
s!I
1 i
11 1 ii
Iiiij; i Bg41 { 1 xi i r a
SS@@ 1
4
W
i I , i
1 g cil i i i tail
i[
i
I ; .
i
I M..
is
is
xw � r Vr
,1
w iz€"h { 1 i£!
_ ."1 I& 1
$ �r
cy," ,--
■ Ii
III 1 €i.
1( :ii
1, fi
1 1 i }4.
{ 11 1
I 1i
ij 1 i
If ?
i, \<,,,,_,_,,,,„,/1,/ !1
i
0 i h"
'`�, WALDROP
f i�AP .ES VIE V f' ENGINEERING
ffi __ _ _...._ CI JF,.NT:6�90Q AIRPORT NULLING,LW. r
r .
t :. t>,�IIRFIRI""C" ow.a.......w:.wn wwmr+..w«.w,.,.+
nwwnssrn....rcaer+w. ,.
IIH I I
JRPOR
WIND i I I;1 l'E-i5nri:
vs.4.it-14,1mI Ce40,414/0,..,44-E44.4444200-EIN MCP,04 tent Plam28.5.0E040 Ift.i 4.40
wyr20.*19-3,AM
Cq 0 PO
0 17 0 ZI I
m X C m
o m x 0 t.l.g o rri m
tr) 17 27 .5. -
..., 0 m 0 „, <
A z g 2 o
IV• 0 *6 ri) 0
III
rr . . 1
, ,
1 1 ;n q ( A
n., ..,-
1 ) rap,,,,:i
0 0 Z I --4
m 0 0
C 1
0 x 444 m
M-;,..'.4' f
c 0?. I D rt rn
>
" 73 73 1111111
0- m c
K
)>
X
-‹
1. r II
'''....„i
/
4 0 r_l
m -Z
.4 -4
t4 .‹P
-4 -
, Z
(.3,
-4 1
,
;
rrt
{R
6
-
t 1, -tt
o
11 '-.----)--77: '1 R■t"..;-::lr:"----'' 1 M
Du
o S
c N.,cr:
to 0 0
1.7 2 o
'41)2,,c'i
o 0
r- C
C
> FA 0 X CO
>
CS 0 0 8 rli tr, z r,
-4 Z -4
> E z c
- - z c to
;z o
0
ri A 01 —-----—----..1
C ..D .0 1111 ria
ZI Z
?-i. 8 8
0 > ',4 IV 7'.• 0 C ;1, ,''';- . - ,, I
ZMV-Z OZ r o >
M )0 In ZO MC,,c: RZZ Z Z 1 1
09..Ano 6-0 , .7.1■E> mc'eli 0 :0
G)
--Jrnn
NI ry
Z 0, f , z
M 11 e
55:-.45:11 r11,,,11.4 44 r-qz "no; rn 23 2-, 1 u, i rn
....,›0.
f -4
....,
rn• z -4-1 171 0 E5 CI 4 0 4A;•1 > > I > Z
O 77„-11 a'.,5 - P•o> -<...,z > C 0 r i , r C
-00seqi,' 4.0-z •i ;rill) 410,9 r-
2 rn tn ,
i
'0 . r
2-47447C-- Z5 M 74e51' .244 -ii a 1 4 1 0 ;21 11111
,, a i , -..■ , '',/
0
=
0 a, xo 0 i-zp -Mr- 0 71 I -
34'ZZK 1 , , x 4 M rn $
P 0
, -4 Z-4
1 I 0 0 5 tn MI
; '4- M z
-"' 0 Z>
- 1 ,
* i . *7:1. r• X
Z XI X > M Z >rn >
r 1 - ;44-1
r...x m N m
0 LA
O 0 40 m F4. C 444t 0 i 4 q I r-
M
' I-
D
1 ' Z
-‹ --,
ot4 7;
- , ---- -r
ill tit, i I
r- ' 441 m om
-4 5)
I 4 1 ?- 5a4
a
I ,.:
, .„,,,.f- '' 1!1
,
1 ......
,-...,.
/ :r,r1 -....1
11 G81301.a.0 I!. El":2,:.:03 ozn:
, I Z
7, 0■;?: - '-..
.,„ > "
, , "V 6_
1 - 1 _ i
Ln..1-1, 4 ga E., ' - :
1,--C NI lar4 i "
rr, , -,_____ iti 6 i m C- m)> 7
--„7-, -,1 __.,1,,.._ ' r-
... 4 14444_el ji 0 b` , ,, ,
r' .,-- '0.14114 '' I -•0 17 ...,
r n t,, I L ?-' 1_- -'1, -s \ m m
r. _ ,
..'.1 I r-I r" ,
>
1 IL
— I ,
i'l , 7 0.---
M
(iff 0
\ › ,
-4
__.Z e r-0 0 rn ,z c
Z .4 0 6 71
4-- INTERN
i
r,il 4 rri t tlit
ZATE 7
rdesma"1 1 m 1111■11..--
SCALE.. N.T.
ELAN'KEN LS.104'.
IAI WALI)Rt._
9 A 04120114 REVISED PER STAFF COMMENT'S NAPLES VIEW ENGINEERING
t IIIIIIIIIIIIII , , ----
C LIEN 6900 AIRPORT PULLING,LLC.
M,'D MASTTIt PLAN
-711 LX11113 I'V w,......................o..y....il■SN
..r.....MT.00.11,0.k.VINOL,........41.0.416...
....----...
Naples View RPUD—Insubstantial!Change
PL2014-0504
ORDINANCE 2012-22
411
11-\\cv
0.. 1 ' I-- ORDINANCE NOW2- 22
_ ..5::„---------
ev
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE ,"*. ..
2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY
DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED --n
....,_--
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR T-44* i,
---
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAW
AMENDING THE THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAP ' al ill
CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE Hugra , 0 ,
DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A RURAL AGRICULTU
(A) ZONING DISTRICT TO A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED 2 ")
DEVELOPMENT(RPUD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROJECT TO
BE KNOWN AS THE NAPLES VIEW RPUD TO ALLOW
CONSTRUCTION OF A MAXIMUM OF SIXTY-SIX RESIDENTIAL
DWELLING UNITS ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6900 AIRPORT
ROAD NORTH IN SECTION 01, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25
EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,CONSISTING OF 11+1-ACRES,
AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
41110 WHEREAS, Alexis Crespo, AICP of Waldrop Engineering, P.A., representing Naples
View LLC, petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of
the herein described 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 01,
Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County,Florida is changed from a Rural Agricultural
(A) zoning district to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district for a
project to be known as the Naples View RPUD, to allow construction of a maximum of 66
residential dwelling units in accordance with Exhibits A through F, attached hereto and
incorporated by reference herein. The appropriate zoning atlas map or maps, as described in
Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, is/are hereby
amended accordingly,
4111
,
Naples View RPUD\PUDZ-PL2011-1519
Rev.6107/12 1 of 2
SECTION TWO:
ill
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super-majority vote of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County,Florida. this...026114 day of it .ii e. 2012.
(4.et04109 ,.
AThtif_ .... BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
DWIGNT-E. am'ivic CLERK COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA
.
- . - ...
1.4 C „ .,
15,............._.A.,- . I 0 111 By: /LI4L
1 k FRED W. COYLE,Chairman
dø -' 4010*
Approved as to form
and legal sufficiency:
Elk i: ill
*eis1 A hton-Cicko
Section Chief, Land Use/Transportation
Attachments: Exhibit A-List of Permitted Uses
Exhibit B-Development Standards
Exhibit C- Master Plan
Exhibit D- Legal Description
Exhibit E-List of Requested Deviations
Exhibit F-Development Commitments
CP11-CPS-01121\51
This ordinance filed with the
Seeletory of State's Office the
2.0 te---
and ockno*ledgerne t qfvfhest
fill • received this 'Idoy
1,..._
of „..,
DePuty Chkrit
a
Naples View RPUD\PUDZ-P1.2011-1519
Rev. 5/07/12 2 of 2
EXHIBIT A
LIST OF PERMITTED USES
NAPLES VIEW RPUD
PERMITTED USES;
No building or structure,or part thereof,shall be erected,altered or used,or land used, in whole or in part,for other
than the following:
A. Principal Uses and Structures;
"R1"Residential Tracts
1. Single-family detached dwelling units
2. Zero lot line units
3. Two-family,duplex dwelling units
4, Recreational uses and facilities that serve the residents,including swimming pools,tennis courts,volleyball
courts,fishing docks,walking paths,picnic areas,recreation buildings,and basketball/shuffle board courts,
"R2"Residential Tracts
1. Single family detached dwelling units
2. Zero lot line units
3. Two-family,duplex dwelling units
4. Townhouse dwelling units
5. Recreational uses and facilities that serve the residents,including swimming pools,tennis courts,
volleyball courts, fishing docks, walking paths, picnic areas, recreation buildings,and basketball/shuffle board
courts.
Any other principal and related use that is determined to be comparable to the foregoing by the Board of Zoning
Appeals pursuant to the process outlined in the Land Development Code(LOC).
B. Accessory Uses:
Accessory uses customarily associated with Permitted Principle Uses including but not limited to:
1. Customary accessory uses and structures including carports,garages,and utility buildings.
2. Recreational uses and facilities that serve the residents, including swimming pools, tennis courts, volleyball
courts,fishing docks,walking paths,picnic areas,recreation buildings,and basketball/shuffle board courts,
3, Temporary sales trailers and model units.
4. Entry Gates&Gatehouse,
5. Essential services,including interim and permanent utility and maintenance facilities.
6. Water management facilities.
Any other accessory use and related use that is determined to be comparable to the foregoing by the Board of
Zoning Appeals,pursuant to the process outlined in the Land Development Code(LDC).
C.Development Density
A maximum of 66 dwelling units shall be constructed within the RPUD per the Transportation Concurrency
Management Area ITCMA)bonus density provisions set forth in Exhibit F,Section 5, The gross project area is
411 11.3±acres and the residential density maximum shall be 5.84 units per acre.
Naples View RPUD—PUDZ-P12011.1519 Page 1 of 7
last Revised:May 3,2012
EXHIBIT B
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
NAPLES VIEW RPUD alli
Development of the Naples View RPUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this Ordinance and applicable
sections of the LDC and Growth Management Plan(GMP) in effect at the time of issuance of any development order,
such as,but not limited to,final subdivision plat,final site development plan,excavation permit, and preliminary work
authorization, to which such regulations relate. Where these regulations fail to provide developmental standards,
then the provisions of the most similar district shall apply.
Table I below sets forth the development standards for land uses within the Naples View RPUD. Standards not
specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of approval
of the SDP or subdivision plat.
TABLET
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS;'!
I PERMITTED USES AND Single Family Zero Lot Two Townhorne Recreation
STANDARDS Detached Line Family,
Duplex
Min.Lot Area 5,000 5F 4,000 SF 3,500 SF 1,400 SF N/A
Min,Lot Widthin SO' 40' 35' 16' N/A
SETBACKS
fronts in 15' 1 15' 15' 15' 20'
Side 5' 570' 5'/O' 570' 20'
Rear(Principal) 15' 10' 10' 10' 10'
Rear(Accessory) 0' 0' 0' 0' 0'
—
Water body 20' 20' 20' , 20' 20'
Airport Pulling Rd. 1.25' 25' 25' 25' 25'
Min.Distance Between 10' 1010'153 1010'1s/ 1O'/0'111 Sum of Y2 BM
Principal Structures
Max.Building Height l
Zoned 35' 35' 35' 35' 35'
1 Actual 40' 40' 40' 40' 40'
No.of Stories 2 2 , 2 2 . 2
(1) each half of a duplex unit requires a lot area allocation of 3,500 SF for a total minimum lot area of 7,000 SF,
(2) Minimum lot width may be reduced by 25%for cul-de-sac lots provided the minimum lot area requirement is maintained.
(3) The minimum 15'front yard setback may be reduced to 10'where the residence has a recessed,side entry,or rear entry
garage. In no case shall there be less than a clear area of 23 feet between the back of the sidewalk and the face of the garage
door for front entry garages.
(4) For corner lots,only one(1)front yard setback shall be required.The yard that does not contain the driveway/vehicular
access to the residence shall provide 10'setback.
(5) Distance between buildings may be reduced at garages to a minimum of 0'where attached garages are provided,and a 10'
minimum,if detached.
411
Naples view SPUD—PU02-PL201I.1513 Page 2 of 7
Last Revised:May 3,2012
1
b... _
1110 MIMI SON"wagoAU000111111141.0 Am
110Art t red Pii
r
11
19—
il zils i
4 W ..... t
1 - ^ 1
, .
. ... ' 1
,
4 A 1 i 11 ( ,.* „/ -
1 , - a
P 0 i.., .
A h. 1 I , il 1 al I i
a 4. / / =
i C
01 i" 4,
I 2 i (i * -- I i fit
01
C 1.‘i iii
. .....
... 0 *
1 •• vo I. rt i i i
* ss ow 11
„..... ....„. il 1 4 1
-.< -. 4 A.a
t bi g 1 ) ;
I 10; 4 i
1 51 i 1
5 1 i
4 m e I
0, 0, 11 10 *.
: 1 I ti:2—
g i g
'Mil iv )1 ill 8 8 ,
i I i
gd lg. 1 i 1 :t 9
i AI 118; Iti” rn i4
• iiig I!1 111 181 t 4
iii I t ql il 6
i .i
- g 5
1fl
2 g I 2
g
..... roilln
144 -1
A ?ill i
1— ' 10
ma-- -- -1
im -1 I
• . 1 . . ,
Y f 4 L .
l:., :....; ::::.11...„
si
iii.
1 -
,
- i /
i
1 li 4 1! !!
- ..,.. 1 , . 11 •
,4. _ A 2 Iii0 I
q 1 iig ,m 1 R21511,
1
,i.
1 r A, 'lip ''' r.,••• i
Ptilem.... '4.V.--
Vt:SA-Z iiiilanWerng illiillin REP • x 1=04.64 r.t.T.s.
,..,..
li ,„ 114174 4 11=0.1104 001.11,11-1 ocareairn NW WALD119P
NAPLES VIEW
I . PKVISO Mdt WAIN'COMMEOMI
AVMS°Pet 00IXTY COMI/Pelt CLIENT:NAPLES VIEW,LIZ,
W 111------- --aragii--
• F ir=731 weer)oat=gay camera
argiemeni PUP MASTIOIMAIN
EvinBST V"
Naples View OW)—PLIDZ-PL2011-1519 Page 3 of 7
Last Revised-May 3.2012
EXHIBIT 0
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
NAPLES VIEW RPUD
NORTH 4 OF THE NORTH Yx OF THE SOUTHWEST X OF THE SOUTHWEST''/,OF SECTION 1,TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,
RANGE 2S EAST,COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA,EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE WEST 100 FEET THEREOF FOR STATE RIGHT-
OF-WAY,
a
Naples View APIA Page 4 0f T
Vi
Last Revised:May 3,2012
EXHIBIT E
LIST OF REQUESTED DEVIATIONS FROM LDC
NAPLES VIEW RPUD
Deviation 1: Deviation from LOC Section 4.06.02.0 which requires a 15-foot wide Type "8" buffer where proposed
residential uses abut existing commercial uses, to allow for a 10-foot wide Type"8" buffer where the property abuts
the commercial use to the north.
Deviation No 2:Deviation from LDC Section 5.04.06.A.3.e which allows temporary signs on residentially zoned
properties up to 4 square feet in area or 3 feet in height,to allow a temporary sign or banner up to a maximum of 32
square feet in area and a maximum of 8 feet in height.The temporary sign or banner shall be limited to 28 days per
calendar year.
Deviation No.3: Deviation from LDC Section 6.06.01,which requires a minimum width of 60 feet for cul-de-sac and
local street rights-of-way,to allow fora minimum 45-foot right-of-way internal to the proposed development.
Deviation 4: Deviation from LDC Section 6.06.01.3 which prohibits dead-end streets, to allow the dead end street
shown on the RPUD Master Plan.
Deviation ra Deviation from LDC Section 5.03.02.0.2,which permits a maximum wall height of six(6)feet in
residential zoning districts,to allow for a maximum height of eight(8)feet for a combination wall and berm
along the property lines.
S
Maples View RPUD—PUOZ-P12011.15t9 Page S of 7
Last Revised:May 3,2012
EXHIBIT F
DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS
NAPLES ViEW RPUD
1, PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the general development commitments for the project.One entity
(hereinafter the Managing Entity)shall be responsible for PUG monitoring until close-out of the PUD,and this
entity shall also be responsible for satisfying all PUD commitments until close-out of the PUG. At the time of
this PUG approval,the Managing Entity is Naples View,LLC. Should the Managing Entity desire to transfer the
monitoring and commitments to a successor entity,then it must provide a copy of a legally binding document
that needs to be approved for legal sufficiency by the County Attorney. After such approval, the Managing
Entity will be released of its obligations upon written approval of the transfer by County staff, and the
successor entity shall become the Managing Entity. As Owner and Developer sell off tracts, the Managing
Entity shall provide written notice to County that includes an acknowledgement of the commitments required
by the PUD by the new owner and the new owner's agreement to comply with the Commitments through the
Managing Entity, but the Managing Entity shall not be relieved of its responsibility under this Section. When
the PUD is closed-out,then the Managing Entity is no longer responsible for the monitoring and fulfillment of
PUG commitments.
2. UTILITIES
2.1 The project shall connect to the Collier County Water Sewer District (CCWSD) potable water system at a
location determined by CCWSD when capacity is available.
2.2 The project shall connect to the CCWSD wastewater collection and conveyance system at a location
determined by CCWSO when capacity is available.
2.3 The project shall connect to the CCWSD Irrigation Quality water system at a location determined by
CCWSD when capacity is available.
2.4 Should the Collier County Water Sewer District determine that it does not have sufficient capacity to serve
the project; the Developer shall either construct interim potable water, wastewater treatment and/or
non-potable water facilities,or shall postpone development until such time as the Collier County Water-
Sewer District service capacity is available to service the project. Any interim facilities constructed by the
Developer shall be constructed to Collier County Utilities Division Standards, and shall be
dismantled, at the Developer's expense, upon connection to the Collier County Water-Sewer District
facilities. Whether potable water, wastewater treatment and/or non-potable water facilities are
provided on-site or off-site, the Developer shall demonstrate to Collier County that adequate capacity is
available at the time of final utilities plan submittal.
25 All customers shall be customers of the CCWSD.
3. TRANSPORTATION
A. The project shall maintain a minimum of 100' throat distance between the Airport Pulling right-of-way and the
face of the entrance gates.
B. The developer shall pay a proportionate fair share for improvements to the Orange Blossom Drive and Airport
Pulling Road intersection. The proportionate fair share of the project's impacts to the intersection shall be
Pase5vf7
Naples View RPUO—PUOZ•PL2011-1519
Last Revised:May 3,2012
determined at the time of construction plan approval based upon the project's trips as percentage of capacity
improvements for the turning/through movements utilized by this site. Payment shall be made to Collier
County within 90 days of the County's request.
4. ENVIRONMENTAL
No preservation area is required as all existing,on-site vegetation is exotic.
5. PLANNING
The RPUD shall be developed with up to 66 units per Transportation Concurrency Management Area(TCMA)
bonus density,as defined in Policy 6.3 of the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan.The
developer shall provide the two(2)Transportation Demand Management(TOM)criteria as follows:
1. Provide vehicular access to the future mixed use subdistrict to the north as shown on the PUD
Master Plan, in the form of a non-exclusive access easement to the adjacent property
owner/developer to the North,conveyed prior to issuance of the first building permit.
2. Provide pedestrian and bicycle facilities within the project and a bicycle/pedestrian
interconnection to the future mixed use subdistrict to the north shown on the PUD Master Plan.
41)
S Page 7 of 7
Naples View RPUO PU0Z-P12011
Last Revised:May 3,2012
0
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 2012-22
which was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners
on the 26th day of June, 2012, during Regular Session.
41110
WITNESS my hand and the official seal of the Board of
County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this 27th
day of June, 2012.
DWIGHT E. BROCK
Clerk of Courts and Clerk
Ex-officio to Board,r0HF10,
County Commissionr*;,..,.
B : Teresa Cannon, -- ...,-'
Deputy Clerk •
al
..................
Naples View RPUD—Insubstantial Change
P12014-0504
BULLET LIST OF PROPOSED
CHANGES
4110
,
OP ENGINEERING
iti0MiiI .
��-
BULLET LIST OF PROPOSED INSU AL CHANGES
NAPLES VIEW RPUD
PUODOCWKdENT/p8DMASTER PLAN CHANGES:
• Exhibit A—List of Permitted Uses
> Combine "R1"and "R2" Residential Tracts into a single"Residential Tract"category
> Remove two—family and townhouse dwelling units from the schedule of uses
> Add refe he Hearing Examiner process for determ comparable uses
> Modify Devel ment0enaitystatementtoreducedenmityfrom66dvve\|ingunity(G.84
du/oore)to33 dwelling units(2.9 du/acre).
• Exhibit B—Development Standards
> Remove Two-Family and Townhome column from development standards table
• EuhibitC—RPUD Master Plan
ill
> Remove"Vehicular/Bicycle/Pedestrian Linkage to Future PUD" label and arrows
> Remove reference to "Rl"and"R2" tracts and re-label as "Residential Tract"
> Revise Land Use Summary Table to reflect reduced unit count and density
• Exhibit D—Legal Description
> No changes
• Exhibit E—List of Requested Deviations from LOC
� Add New Deviation 6 to allow one(1)boundboundary mancer sign at the southern property
corner fronting on Airport Pulling Road, in addition to residen l entrance signs.
�p Add New Deviation 7 to allow 80 square feet of combined entry gQna8e.
• Exhibit F—PUD[onmmbments
> Modify Managing Entity to reflect current owner,6900 Airport Pulling, LLC
> Remove Commitment S regarding bonus density criteria
10
Naples View POI—poos^-0504
Bullet List of Proposed Changes
Page zmz
Naples View RPUD—Insubstantial Change
PL2014-0504
{
BOUNDARY S
S
, .„
0 k T'
101 2 , ,, j
7 , ' 4 r pEr,
: : '!.. 1 : 5,
::i:: ::1 1 l' KR ill.
.
---11—\ ----71714":774.717"u' K t .4,
, g
4 i ..., ...____
V 0—
°
'7k IS
1-1111
4 I : li l'..' „ , * ••• s s
„- ■ a• - la,
i. * tuV 5
- • ah.* .., ;.1a. 1 "' 1 igt
;•- )1 It V•1 [s,
,
1.!$!•1
-•f, 0 1 I *
1 4 re 4 1 t
gif
t ;t, :I g, 6.lk
t ,I ‘1 1 I& .- tf4.. a $
t *4
k It
. \
\ 4 4 4
'lip
1 1
' '
i :i * 4 40 00
1 A g
i i 4
i
,.- 0 0
/ 1,.,
-
i.
1 " ", 1 R•71,vo p 1
Li!li
. v
i ,1 Ji
-,4
.-..... , ,.. 4 @ 41144 ''.4,(4 4 I '
I . ( _
-
•
t* * PI 4 Oh: *i .,
1 t 7 I ztiti
1%.= I ; I I f
W.!' =
f I
ri , Ht, , :-,j!
4 i '*,'0
A 4 i i 1, Zi: irt 1 i liIii
2 1
g ---i
tii 1 X . t t
Att 4.;i 4t A 3
, ....---v. ix W 2
Li
It
1111 4 I- i'V 1. i t
1,4
s
4 k @
4i(, J.J i
. „ I':.:3:-!:::::::-... *:-.-:
::)1111:1:
I
--1„,.,1 ,/,/ liet' .0- t,,,
k...—..„„/ ,3/
'
1
1 I I, ,
,, / 7
i ' 1 ;
I i , ,,
t I . , 1 ' /
° -1.--, r-
vi i ,..
4 {*--.,' "•..
i .... I
-4•••• 4 !
ti 4 .r..."' ' \\& ;••••fe*Saiaafli-
t ,
I tg i
4
„,.._ ____
----,zi--- 1:
0
b r
. I
i
1 h i
‘,..„
_..........r....._-1---"4
_____---------- ag tw 1 NV(katwar
...... ...—..._ ....-- i
Naples View RPPLLT0-111751103rantial Change
OWNER AFFIDAVIT SIGNED &
NOTARIZED & LIST OF
PARTIES IN THE
� ORGANIZATION
•
Glitr County •
-----n--Ni.".------.
COWER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104
www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX (239)252-6358
AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION
FOR PETITION NUMBERS(S) P1,2014**0"
1,Williarr Depietri tprint name).as Manaaing Member (title.it
applicable)of 6900 Airport Pullirig,,14..0 ___ (company.Ira plkahiel.swear or affirm
I- I.
under oath.that I ant the t choose one)c;;;;Ti I appli lit----7.C:11tract purchaser and that
I_ f have !hit authority to secure the approvahs)requested and to impose covenants and restrictions on the
referenced property as a result of any action approved by the County in accordance with this
application and the Land Development Code:
2. All answers to the questions in this application and any sketches,data or other supplementary mutter
attached hereto and made a part oithis application are honest and true:
3 I have authorized the stair of Collier County to enter upon the property during normal working hours
liar the purpose of investigating and evaluating the request made through this application:and that
.1 rhe property, will he ti ansictrcd, conveyed sold or subdivided unencumbered by the conditions and
restrictions imposed by the approved action,
5 We!) nut hurt te waklum,insoo."Isi f'A Ad"Ca"Pa AP _ to JO aS Our/m) represenuttive in
an) Matters regarding Otis petition including I through 2 above.
'Vales
• II the applicant is a corporation,then it is usually executed by the corp pro. or V pro
• if the applicant is a limited hit:bilis),Company(1..1,(*)or I suited C'ompuny ll-,C,I. then the documents shouhl
III
opically be signed by the Company's '%lantigmg Member."
• If the applicant is it partnership.then typically a!water can sign an behalf of tlw partnership
• If the applicant rs a limited pm sties then die general partner must srgn and he ukirtifirtl as the -general
partner"q/the name/partnership
• If the applicant rs a trust then they must inchule the trustee's WOW and the words "as trustee",
a in each instance,first determine the applicant's status, e.g., individual, cur trust partnei.ship estate.etc
and then use tint appropriate Ibrmat for that owttership.
under pen Kies of perjury,I declare that I have read the foregoing Affidavit of Authorization and that the facts
statelAn i are true.
, ((V
i„. „,.-7- t,,
,
Signature Date
STATE OF FL-ORTOA HA 55441141446
COUNTY OF GOIMERWo rtes.-Pr
'1 47
The foregoing instrument was sworn to (or affirmed) and subscr i4 1/
ibed before me on tr ,Li,/ (date) by
VtIl.k"tepitfrr (name of person providing oath or affirmation), as l'14/1A v Li-'p _ wno is
personally known to me or who has produced S141 L-e vr.11--ir (type of identification)as identification
__—...
A■211. 5,,u—)
i
STAM PfSEA L Signal re of isi,otary Public
"iciAAA fraritedLS , i i
JOANN E PARAOIS f,..1/41 cornm'A J:00 .1/.4,1J Wf 612-45
_twit-cox-ma'suss , ..0 Nolan/Public
, UM. AiwEALTH OF MASSACHUSETrS
•
2/6/2014 \j / My Commission Expires
., Page 4 of 5
Manch 13.2o2d ,
MA SOC Filing Number:201478179830 Date: 3/19/2014 2:02:00 PM
0
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Minimum Fur:S500.00
William Francis Galvin
1 - *
Secretary
ofh e C e en e n w eai hCorporation s Division
, On e Ash:u r tonllac , I7thfioor
jt.
Boston, MA 02108-1512
4.
i'tt v i,°t\ Telephone:(617) 727-9640
Certificate of Organization ,i
(General Laws, Chapter)
Federal Employer Identification Number: 001131289(must be 9 digits) f
1.The exact name of the limited liability company is: 6900 AIRPORT PULLING, LLC
2a.Location of its principal office:
No, and Street: 259 TURNPIKE ROAD,SUITE 100
City or Town: SOUTHBOROUGH State: MA Zip: 01772 Country: USA
2b.Street address of the office in the Commonwealth at which the records will be maintained:
No.and Street: 259 TURNPIKE ROAD,SUITE 100 '
• City or Town: SOUTHBOROUGH State: MA Zip: 01772 Country: USA
3.The general character of business,and if the limited liability company is organized to render professional
service,the service to be rendered:
IS TO ENGAGE IN THE INVESTMENT,OWNERSHIP AND DEVELOPMENT OF REAL ESTATE AN
D ANY INTEREST THEREIN ANYWHERE IN THE UNITED STATES, INCLUDING BUYING,ACQU
IRING.OWNING,LEASING,DEVELOPING,OPERATING, SELLING,.FINANCING. REFINANCIN
G,DISPOSING OF AND OTHERWISE DEALING WITH INTERESTS IN REAL ESTATE, DIRECTLY,
OR INDIRECTLY,_THROUGH JOINT VENTURES.PARTNERSHIPS OR OTHER ENTITIES,AND TO
ENGAGE IN ANY ACTIVITY DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY RELATED OR INCIDENTAL THERETO
AND TO ENGAGE IN ANY OTHER ACTIVITY IN WHICH A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ORG
ANIZED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS MAY LAWFULL
Y ENGAGE.
4.The latest date of dissolution, if specified:
5. Name and address of the Resident Agent:
Name: WILLIAM A.DEPIETRI
No.and Street: 259 TURNPIKE ROAD,SUITE 100
City or Town: SOUTHBOROUGH State: MA Zip: 01772 Country: USA
I, WILLIAM A. DEPIETRI resident agent of the above limited liability company,consent to my appointment
as the resident agent of the above limited liability company pursuant to G. L.Chapter 156C Section 12.
ID6. The name and business address of each manager, if any:
Title individual Name Address(no PO Box)
First,Middle,Last,Suffix Address,City or Town,State,Zip Code
MANAGER WILLIAM A DEPIETRI 259 TURNPIKE ROAD,SUITE 100
SOUTHBOROUGH.MA 01772 USA
7.The name and business address of the person(s)in addition to the manager(s),authorized to execute
411111
documents to be filed with the Corporations Division,and at least one person shall be named if there are no
managers.
Title Individual Name Address(no PO Box)
First,Middie,Last Suffix Address,City or Town,State,Zip Code
SOC SIGNATORY WILLIAM A DEPIETRI 259 TURNPIKE ROAD,SUITE 00
SOUTHBOROUGH,MA 01772 USA,
8.The name and business address of the person(s)authorized to execute,acknowledge, deliver and record
any recordable instrument purporting to affect an interest in real property:
Title Individual Name Address(no PD Box)
First,Middle,Last,Suffix Address,City or Town,State.Zip Code
REAL PROPERTY WILLIAM AL DEPIETRI 2s9 TURNPIKE ROAD,SUITE 100
SOUTHBOROUGH,MA 01772 USA
9.Additional matters:
SIGNED UNDER THE PENALTIES OF PERJURY,this 19 Day of March,2014,
WILLIAM A. DEP1ETRI
(The eertUicate must be signed by the person forming the LLC)
1111
2001-2014 Commonwealth of Massachusetts
All Rights Reserved
4110
MA SOC Filing Number: 201478179830 Date: 3/1912014 2:02:00 PM
411
THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
I hereby certify that,upon examination of this document,duly submitted to me, it appears
that the provisions of the General Laws relative to corporations have been complied with,
and I hereby approve said articles;and the filing fee having been paid, said articles are
deemed to have been tiled with me on:
March 19, 2014 02:02 PM
Arf
WILLIAM FRANCIS GALVIN
Secretary of the commonwealth
41111
Naples View RPUD—Insubstantiai Change
WARRANTY DEED
INSTR 4962964 OR 5022 PG 1805 RECORDED 4/2/2014 11:29 AM PAGES 2
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA
ooc@.70 S13,650,00 REC $16.50
CONS $1,950,000.00
le
151 I
This instrument prepared without review or
opinion of title by and after recording return hr
0
WI Kevin A.Denti,Esquire
KEVIN A.DENTI,P.A.
z r#1
2180 Irnmokalee Road-Suite#316
,0;„.. '•": 0.1 Naples,Florida 34110
Telephone: 230-260-8111..k 1 isu G %
I.,/ *J r•I
Documentary Stamp Tax.: S13,650.00
E.
t.,..- ,..1'.- ti, Parcel D.#: 00236120000
e --; ..tt File Number: Terra-1013-38
>4t "rre Z
.,.. <
tza l•-• Above Space far Clerk's Use Ordv
til izP
=
v WARRANTY DEED
_..----4-c------r,,,,
..-% THIS INDENTURE, ma.401 ±---day-atv#1, 2014, by and between NAPLES
...1 VIEW, LLC, a Florida limitedJAQ,Ity company, who'Se.*lit\office address is 23421 Walden
1,., ... , \
Center Drive,Suite 300,BonitialSppngrida 34134,the lrA,NTOR",and 6900 AIRPORT
-...,
,..
.410 PULLING, LLC, a Massacl,usetis liroite4 liMitityiriTpany„who‘se post office address is 259
Turnpike Road,Suite 100,S uth , .., aciktuu, ' A .. .,\theCGRANTEE".
,
WITNESSETH, th tA, *elsX16 ' and\ co si4eration of the sum of TEN
_, ,,-
\
(510.00) DOLLARS, and outer 61511 alp 'a ua e, onsi.,ratiok to said GRANTOR in hand
paid by said GRANTEE, the\nfc ipt whereof is her ac6r4edged, has granted,bargained,
and sold to the said GRANT And GRANTEE '
S 4,4/v*1-Assigns forever, the following
14
described real property situate,' Ond„being in Collier.Zoku*,Florida:
11"' .\ /
The North one-half(N 1/2) ,
o IL f(N 1/2) of the Southwest one
--4 .
_ .4.—Sat
quarter(SW 1/4)of the Southwest one-quarter(SW 114)of Section 1,Township 49
South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, excepting therefrom the West 100
feet thereof for State road right-of-way.
SUBJECT to restrictions and easements common to the subdivision, oil, gas, and
mineral rights of record,if any,and real estate taxes for 2014 and all subsequent years.
TOGETHER with all of the tenements, hereditaments, and appurtenances thereto
belonging or in anywise appertaining.
GRANTOR does hereby fully warrant the title to said land and will defend the same
against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, GRANTOR has hereunto set GRANTOR'S hand and seal
the day and year first above written,
II
1 *** OR 5022 PG 1806 ***
0
Signed,sealed,and delivered NAPLES VIEW,LLC a Flori,a - ited
in the presence of liability company
rAzoilecip ilidA, By: r
Witness#1 Walter S.Plagenbuck/ lvlanager
Prim Name Below:
ifTeOcA ore- then+i
Witness#2
Prim Name 13c1 w;
STATE OF FLORIDA 7- 86 R 6-45 .:
COUNTY OF 60 I L'e,,--
The foregoing instnMien(, *. . , owle.led for me this )1.42--day of
ALezeles , 2014 by Wal ./S,11i. b t.ye, as Manager o NAPLES VIEW, LLC, a
i
Florida limited liability company --1 . .r.13.13 , T... tO ttie or[ 1 who has produced
j
ide,,ti Ices n
- .,•- -/,,,, '--
s.. ..
WY PUBLIC
it ' t..1
tte 44% rArn 's tit" 068295 /%, 1
hi t,', 41 i;-fr4‘4erit:410.4i,......2017 , ,,,...',WPErD OR PRINTED NAME OF NOTARY
-ii: rill„:1>
Terra.1013-31i
'
41110
Naples View RPUD insubstantial Change
1110 P12014-0504
APPROVED
ADDRESSING CHECKLIST
11110
Cote'r County
•
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252-2400 FAX (239)252-5724
VVWW.COLLIERGOV.NET
ADDRESSING CHECKLIST
Please complete the following and fax to the Operations Department at 239-252-5724 or submit in person to the
Addressing Department at the above address Form must be signed by Addressing personnel prior to pre
-
applicator meeting,please allow 3 days for processing.
Not all items will apply to every project Items in bold type are required. FOLIO NUMBERS MUST BE
PROVIDED, Forms older than 6 months will require additional review and approval by the Addressing
Department.
PETITION TYPE (Indicate type below, complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition type)
BL(Blasting Permit) 0 SDP(Site Development Plan)
D BD(Boat Dock Extension) o SDPA(SDP Amendment)
0 Carnival/Circus Permit 0 SDPI (Insubstantial Change to SDP)
0 CU(Conditional Use)
Ei SIP(Site Improvement Plan)
0 EXP(Excavation Permit) 0 SIPI (Insubstantial Change to SIP)
0 FP(Final Plat 0 SNR(Street Name Change)
LI LLA(Lot Line Adjustment) LI SNC(Street Name Change—Unplatted)
LI PNC(Project Name Change) 0 TDR(Transfer of Development Rights)
PPL(Plans&Plat Review) 0 VA(Variance)
•
0
LI PSP (Preliminary Subdivision Plat) 0 VRP(Vegetation Removal Permit)
LI PUD Rezone VRSFP(Vegetation Removal&Site Fill Permit)
RZ(Standard Rezone) L3 OTHER POI !nsubstanial Change to PLJD
LEGAL DESCRIPTION of subject property or properties(copy of lengthy description may be attached)
Section 1, Township 49, Range 25 East Rk.„-,,91 -20
FOLIO(Property ID)NUMBER(s)of above(attach to, or associate with, legal description if more than one)
00236120000
STREET ADDRESS or ADDRESSES(as applicable, if already assigned)
.461144.4134R4ROR .
• LOCATION MAP must be attached showing exact location of project/site in relation to nearest public road right-
of-way
• SURVEY(copy -needed only for unplatted properties)
PROPOSED PROJECT NAME(if applicable)
Naples View
PROPOSED STREET NAMES(if applicable)
N/A
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NUMBER((or existing projects/sites only)
N/A
SDP - or AR or PL#
• Corner County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239)252-2400 FAX (239)252.5724
WVVW.COLLIERGOVNET
Project or development names proposed for,or already appearing in,condominium documents(if application;
indicate whether proposed or existing)
Naples View
Please Check One: 0 Checklist is tc be Faxed back 0 Personally Picked Up
APPLICANT NAME: Alexis Crespo, AICP alexiscwaldropengineering.com
PHONE(239) 405-7777
FAX
Signature on Addressing Checklist does not constitute Project and/or Street Name approval
410 and is subject to further review by the Operations Department.
FOR STAFF USE ONLY
FLN Number(Primary) ().d.23 /26600
Folio Number
Folio Number
Folio Number
Approved by Date: 41
Updated by: I// Date:
IF OLDER THAN 6 MONTHS, FORM MUST BE
UPDATED OR NEW FORM SUBMITTED
411/
Naples View RPUD—Insubstantial Change
P12014-0504
AERIAL LOCATION MAP
. .:Alia. 7.1 . tiff i 6
i ' 14 �,�,
7 „ e t%
1 . �-t ..
rLL.
, .
:........-"""'"
, r
I i *'I F
- I, ffig i -,,
f
r
40,101. 1. , bVis - /
01 1
A
i h
Ii141011r. .-.
tf...
...
,= > :I.fit iri- ~NA
L_
Naples View RPUD—Insubstantial Change
PL2014-0SO4
J USTIFI ATIOI S/
RATIONALE FOR DEVIATIONS
14 copies
I - AVALDROP ENGINEERING
W CIVIL ENGINEERING&LAND REVELOPVIEIVT CONSLILTANIS r: ,- , ::
JUSTIFICATIONS FOR REQUESTED DEVIATIONS FROM LDC
NAPLES VIEW RPUD
Deviation 1: Deviation from LDC Section 4.06.02.0 which requires a 15-foot wide Type "r buffer where
proposed residential uses abut existing commercial uses,to allow for a 10-foot wide Type "B" buffer where
the property abuts the commercial use to the north.(APPROVED PER ORD.12-22)
Deviation No 2: Deviation from LDC Section 5.0406.A.3,e which allows temporary signs on residentially
zoned properties up to 4 square feet in area or 3 feet in height,to allow a temporary sign or banner up to a
maximum of 32 square feet in area and a maximum of 8 feet in height, subiect to approval under temporary
sign permit procedures in the LDC.. The temporary sign or banner shall be limited to 28 days per calendar
year.(APPROVED PER ORD. 12-22)
Deviation No. 3: Deviation from LDC Section 6.06.01, which requires a minimum width of 60 feet for cul-
de-sac and local street rights-of-way, to allow for a minimum 45-foot right-of-way internal to the proposed
development. (APPROVED PER ORD.12-22)
41101 Deviation 4: Deviation from LDC Section 6.06.01J which prohibits dead-end streets,to allow the dead end
street shown on the RPUD Master Plan,(APPROVED PER ORD.12-22)
Deviation 5: Deviation from LDC Section 5.03.02.C.2, which permits a maximum wall height of six (6)
feet in residential zoning districts, to allow for a maximum height of eight (8) feet for a combination
wall and berm along the property lines.(APPROVED PER ORD. 12-22)
Deviation 6: Deviation from LDC Section 5.06.02.13.6, which permits two (2) ground signs per entrance to
the development, to allow one (1.)wall-mounted boundary marker sign not to exceed 16 square feet at the
southern property corner fronting along Airport Pulling Road, in addition to project entry signage.
Boundary marker signs are limited to the community name and logo.
Justification: The Applicant is seeking an additional boundary marker sign to increase the
community's visibility and better delineate the property from surrounding master-planned
communities. The additional sign will be integrated into the wall fronting on Airport Pulling
Road with a consistent architectural theme and character, and will the not negatively impact
viewsheds from surrounding roadways. The signage setbacks from rights-of-way will meet
LDC standards,thereby ensuring public, health,safety and welfare is protected.
Deviation 7: Deviation from LDC Section 5.06.02.8.6.b,which permits two(2)around or wall signs per entrance
to the development with a combined sign area of 64 square feet,to allow for two(2)ground or wall signs at the
project entrance with a combined sign area of 80 s.f.
11110
Naples View POI—M.2014-0504
Deviation Narrative
Page 1 of 2
II�01b.
I
Justification: The subject property front along an arterial roadway, which demonstrates
relatively high travel speeds. Additionally,the property has a significant street setback due to
the location of the Airport Road Canal along the property's frontage. Due to the setback and
the property's locational along this arterial roadway, the Applicant is seeking an increase to
allowable entry signage area to ensure visibility of the community. This deviation request is
similar to previous requests approved for master-planned communities within Collier County.
The required setback from rights-of-way for entry signs will meet WC standards, thereby
ensuring public,health,safety and welfare is protected.
410
Naples View PD1-P12434-O504
Deviation Narrative
Page 2 of 2
Naples View RPUD—Insubstantial Change
P12014-0504
SIGN POST AFFIDAVIT &
PHOTOS
I
SIGN POSTING INSTR 1 CTIONS
(Section 10,03.00,COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE(LDC)
A zoning sign(s)must be posted by the petitioner or the petitioner's agent on the parcel for a minimum of fifteen(15)calendar
days in advance of the first public hearing and said sign(s)must be maintained by the petitioner or the petitioner's agent through
the Board of County Commissioners Hearing. Below are general guidelines for signs. however these guidelines should not be
construed to supercede any requirement of the LDC. For specific sign requirements. please refer to Section 10.03.00 of the
LDC.
I. The sign(s) must be erected in full view of the public, not more than five(5) feet from the nearest street right-of-way or
easement.
2. The sign(s)must be securely affixed by nails,staples,or other means to a wood frame or to a wood panel and then fastened
securely to a post,or other structure. The sign may not be affixed to a tree or other foliage.
3. The petitioner or the petitioner's agent must maintain the sign(s)in place,and readable condition until the requested action
has been heard and a final decision rendered. If the sign(s)is destroyed,los:.or rendered unreadable,the petitioner or the
petitioner's agent must replace the sign(s
NOTE: AFTER THE SIGN HAS BEEN POSTED, THIS AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE SHOULD BE
RETURNED NO LATER THAN TEN (10) WORKING DAYS BEFORE THE FIRST HEARING DATE TO THE
ASSIGNED PLANNER.
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
BEFORE THE UNDERSIGNED AUTHORITY.PERSONALLY APPEARED 1 C,CG51)�
WHO ON OATH SAYS THAT HE/SHE HAS POSTED PROPER NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 10.03.00 OF THE
COLLIER CcuuNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ON THE PARCEL COVERED IN PETITION NUMBER
pp - ' acmt-1 OD DOS O
I
► i �' 1 O-D Rt,eNt its. C1 ± .
SIGNA $ ' 0 A' LICANT OR AGENT STREET OR P O.BOX
P SI S C%..ep 0
B _ .,
e" t L-
NAME(TYPED OR PRINTED) CITY.STATE ZIP
31413
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
The tare oing instrument was sworn to and subscribed before me this day of , 20K, by
personally known to me or who produced as identification
and who did/did not take an oath.
JACQUELYN LAR000UE r at of Notary Publrl
•,`1' � Notar o1 florrda
N MY Comm Pub Elic xpires Oct State 12.206 11, ` • I1 le Art.
t nmm ss on M EE 631330
Printed N me of: otary Public
My Co mission Expires:
• (Stamp with serial number)
F•1WebsiteWFFIDAVIT AND SIGN POSTING INSTRUCTIONS 5-2-05 doe
i •
M
I07ICC
e POOL K si_i#
•
ems.n ir
-
•
• • • _ •y�_ i
•
•
•