Agenda 04/08/2014 Item # 9A I
Proposed Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
April 8,2014
Withdraw Item 9A: This item has been continued from the February
11, 2014 BCC meeting: Recommendation to consider approving the
Bayshore/Thomasson Drive Subdistrict small-scale amendment to
the Collier County Growth Management Plan [Companion to
Petition PUDZA-PL20120002357, agenda item 913] (Petitioner's
request)
Withdraw Item 9B: This item has been continued from the February 11,2014 BCC meeting: This item
requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members.Should a hearing be held on this item,
all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance of the Board of
County Commissioners of Collier County,Florida amending Ordinance Number 2005-63,as amended,the
Cirrus Pointe Residential Planned Unit Development(RPUD). [Companion to Petition
PL20120002382/CPSS-2013-1,agenda item 9A] (Petitioner's request)
Continue Item 16D7 Indefinitely: Recommendation to recognize a portion of Rock Road,from Immokalee
Road to Mingo Road within the Rock Road Municipal Service Taxing Unit(MSTU),which the County has
regularly maintained for more than the immediate past seven years,as having been dedicated and deeded to
the County as a public road,to approve a Resolution in support thereof and to authorize the Board's
Chairman and the Ex Officio Clerk to the Board to file a map with the Clerk of Court certifying ownership
has vested with the County; and authorize a short-term loan in an amount up to$130,000 to the Rock Road
MSTU for the purpose of paving of a portion of Rock Road,from Immokalee Road to Mingo Road and
approve all necessary budget amendments. (Commissioner Nance's request)
Note:
Item 11A: Section 14H of the Interlocal Agreement is revised to include the following additional language:
H. This Agreement is solely for the benefit of the Parties to this Agreement and no third party shall be
entitled to claim or enforce any rights under this Agreement. The parties may not assign this
agreement or any right or obligation of this agreement without the written consent of the other party,
except that in the event that the Ochopee Fire Control and Rescue District is merged or consolidated
into another Fire District, the County may assign the Agreement to the merged or consolidated Fire
District with advance notice to the Department.,
Item 16A16: Additional language has been added to the Developer Contribution Agreement regarding
Mockingbird Crossing which reads: Developer shall maintain the portion of Massey Road from Vanderbilt
Beach Road to the Development's entrance until the earlier of the completion of Tree Farm Road or three
years from the date of the issuance of the first building permit for the Development. Maintenance shall
include cutting the grass along the roadway. Developer shall place an overlay layer of asphalt on Massey
Road from Vanderbilt Beach Road to the Development entrance as part of its maintenance of Massey Road.
(Staffs request)
Time Certain Items:
Item 4B to be heard at 10:45 a.m.
Item 11C to be heard at 11:00 a.m.
4/16/2014 3:59 PM
4/8/2014 g.A.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recommendation to consider approving the Bayshore/Thomasson Drive Subdistrict small -scale
amendment to the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance 89 -05, as Amended, for
transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. (Adoption Hearing)
(PL20120002382 /CPSS- 2013 -1)
OBJECTIVE: For the Board of Count} Commissioners (BCC) to review the proposed small -
scale Growth Management Plan amendment and consider adoption and transmittal to the Florida
Department of Economic Opportunity.
CONSIDERATIONS: The subject petition is submitted as a small -scale comprehensive plan
amendment. As such, per Florida Statutes, the request is heard once only by the Collier County
Planning Commission (CCPC) and the BCC. If approved by the BCC, the petition is transmitted
to the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO).
Per Chapter 163.3187, Florida Statutes, there are limitations for this type of amendment, as
identified below, followed by staff comments in [brackets].
1. Parcel must be 10 acres or less in size [subject site is -9.92 acres].
2. The annual cumulative acreage for all small -scale development amendments adopted by
the local government does not exceed a maximum of 120 acres in a calendar year [There
have been no small- scale amendments adopted in calendar year 2014].
3. No text change to the goals, objectives and policies; only a site specific small -scale land
use change to the future land use map shall be permitted. However, a text change related
directly to, and adopted simultaneously with, a small -scale future land use map change
amendment shall be allowed. [The proposed text change is directly related to, and i.
proposec to be adopted simultaneous 111itk. c. stnal -scam 711turC lane use maz%
amendment; .
4. Site is not located within an Area o= Critical State Concern ;A(_-S,_—) [tire sire is no;
iocated within the .4 CSC/
This petition seeks to amend the Future Land Use Element (F: -,'JE) of the Collier Couni,° vro\�rtr
ManaQemen` Plan to establish tine Bayshore. /Thomasson Drive Subdistric: tc, allow ur to 101,
market rate resiaentiai multi- fainiiN units through the use of 7c dweliin= unit-- iron.: the - xisunL
densitN- bonus pool proviaea fog within the Ba17snore /"-_satewa_ 7,iangie keaeveiopment Overim
and 20 base density units.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: Based on the review of this petition, including the
supporting data and analysis, staff makes the following findings and conclusions.
• There are no infrastructure related concerns.
Packet Page -29-
4/8/2014 9.A.
• There are no adverse environmental impacts as a result of this petition.
• The petition would allow for a project of the same density as is presently approved on the site;
however, the project would shift from affordable housing to market rate housing and the
density above the base density would be achieved from the density bonus pool within the
Overlay.
• There are 388 density bonus pool units provided within the Overlay; all but approximately 10
remain available. These units are available for reallocation as an incentive for qualifying
redevelopment projects. The proposed project would reduce the density bonus pool by 79
units to about 300 units.
• The Affordable Housing Advisory Committee heard the applicant's presentation on this
project at their August 19, 2013 meeting, but took no formal action.
• The Community Redevelopment Agency (Bayshore /Gateway Triangle) Advisory Board heard
the applicant's presentation on this project at their June 4, 2013 meeting and voted 6 -1 to
support the project.
• The Interim Executive Director of the CRA (Bayshore /Gateway Triangle) provided an email
to Comprehensive Planning staff, dated September 12, 2013, in support of the petition.
• The proposed Subdistrict meets the Overlay criteria approved by the BCC in May of 2013, for
a residential -only project, except that the project exceeds the maximum density of 8 DU /A
and does not qualify as a redevelopment project.
FISCAL IMPACT: The cost to process, review and advertise this petition was borne by the
petitioner via application and advertisement fees. Therefore, there are no fiscal impacts to Collier
Countv as a result of the adoption of this amendment.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendmen, is
authorized by, and subject to the procedures established in, Chapter 16 -S. Part 11, Florida Statutes.
The Community Planning Act. and by Collier County Resolution No. I2 -234. as amended. The
Board should consider the following criteria in making its decision: (1) consistency with the
Comprehensive Plan, including analysis of impact on public infrastructure; (2) consistency with
the Land Development Code, including compatibility analysis: and. (3) review of data and
analysis to support the proposed amendment. This item is approved as to form and legaiin-. h
requires an affirmative vote of four for approval because this is an Adoption hearinL, of the GMF
amendment. [Ht'AC,
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Adoption of the proposed amendment by the BCC
for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity will commence the thirty -day
(30) challenge period for any affected person. Provided the small -scale development amendment
is not challenged, it shall become effective thirty-one days (3 1) after BCC adoption.
Packet Page -30-
4/8/2014 9.P..
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the BCC not adopt and transmit this small -scale GMP
amendment to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. This is based on BCC action
taken in May of 2013 in adopting the amendment (Ordinance No. 13 -42) to the
Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay that established a density bonus provision
for residential -only projects, including limiting residential density to 8 dwelling units per acre
(DU /A) and only for redevelopment projects (this project is requesting I l DU /A and is not a
redevelopment project).
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPCI RECOMMENDATION: The
CCPC heard this petition at their December 19, 2013 meeting. The CCPC voted 6 -0 to forward
the subject petition to the BCC with a recommendation to adopt and transmit to the Florida
Department of Economic Opportunity, subject to: (1) limiting the multi - family units to
townhouse and condominium units only: and. (2) requiring the 79 residential density bonus units
be null and void and returned to the density bonus pool unless a Site Development Plan has been
issued and remains active for the development by the 5t" year of approval of the PUD or the BCC
approves an extension of the residential density bonus units to a certain date.
Prepared by: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section,
Planning and Zoning Department, Growth Management Division/Planning and
Regulation
Attachments:
l) CCPC Adoption Staff Report
2) Ordinance and Exhibit "A"
3) Project application and documentation are available at:
b.np: / /«)-\AT\v.collieraov. net/ ftp! AQendaJan1414 /GrovAhML,mt /PI20120002 -82 CPSS-
201 3 -1 _GMPA.pdf
Packet Page -31-
4/8/2014 9.A.
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Item Number: 9.9.A.
Item Summary: Recommendation to consider approving the Bays hore /Thomasson Drive
Subdistrict small -scale amendment to the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance
89 -05, as Amended, for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity.
(Adoption Hearing) (PL20120002382/CPSS- 2013 -1) [Companion to Petition PUDZA-
PL20120002357]
Meeting Date: 2/11/2014
Prepared By
Name: MoscaMichele
Title: Planner, Principal, Comprehens i ve Planning
1/14/2014 1:34:25 PM
Approved By
Name: WeeksDavid
Title: Manager - Planning,Comprehensive Planning
Date: 1/15/2014 11:50:13 AM
Name: BosiMichae�
Title: Manager - Pianning.Comprehensive Planning
Date: l//1 6.2014 9:17:32 AM
Name: PuigJud�
Title: Operations Analyst, GMD P &R
Date: 1/1 7/2014 9:35:00 AM
Name: AshtonHeid
Titie: Section Chief/ __and 'use - Transportation. -ount, ,Ano,
Date: 1/27/2014 1:47:34 PN1
Name: MarcellaJeanne
Title: Executive Secretary,Transportation Planning
Date: 1/30/2014 3:13:32 PM
Name: KlatzkowJeff
Packet Page -32-
4/8/2014 9.A.
Title: County Attorney,
Date: 1/31/2014 1:58:24 PM
Name: FinnEd
Title: Management/Budget Analyst, Senior, Transportation Engineering & Construction Management
Date: 1 /31/2014 4:39:25 PM
Name: OchsLeo
Title: County Manager, County Managers Office
Date: 2/4/2014 10:13:25 AM
Packet Page -33-
4/8/2014 9.A.
Agenda Item 9B
STAFF REPORT
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION /PLANNING AND REGULATION,
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT, COMPREHENSIVE
PLANNING SECTION
HEARING DATE: December 19, 2013
RE: PETITION CPSS- 2013- 1/PL20120002382, SMALL SCALE GROWTH
MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (Companion to PUDZA-
PL20120002357)
[ADOPTION HEARING]
AGENT /APPLICANT /OWNERS
Agents: Wayne Arnold
Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A.
3800 Via Del Rey
Bonita Springs; FL 34134
Richard Yovanovich, Esq.
Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester, P.A.
4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300
Naples, FL 3410-
Appiicam.- Cirrus Pointe Partners. LLC
516 Commerce Drive
Apopka, FL 32703
Ownerc: Cirrus Pointe Partners. LLC
:716 Commerce Drive:
F- 3270;:,
1, G;=OGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject property, comprising +9.92 acres, is located within the Bays ho re/G ateway Triangle
Redevelopment Overlay at the northeast corner of the Bayshore Drive and Thomasson Drive, in
Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, located within the East Naples Planning
Community.
Packet Page -34-
4/8/2014 9.A.
Agenda Item 9B
11. REQUESTED ACTION:
The applicant seeks to amend the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) text, Future Land Use Map
and Future Land Use Map Series by:
1. Establishing the Bayshore/Thomasson Drive Subdistria ' on 9.92+ acres within the Urbarl
designation (Urban — Mixed Use District) and within the Bayshore/'_:)ateway Triangle
Redevelopment Overlay, and providing for the pr000se,, residential density anc' certain
development standards;
2. Amending Policy 1.1 to add the Bayshore/Thomasson Drive Subdistrict: anc
Revising tne Future Land Use Mari to dePict trie new Subdistric` an creating E nevi
Subdistrict Map as Part of the Future, Land Use I'ViaiD Series.
The proposed amended Subdistric'L tex', is as toliowz�
(Single underline ter.: is added. — as proposed by the petilione-, Sia-FiZ reoommenciec.
modifications to the text can be found at the end of this Staff Report and within the Ordinance
Exhibit A.)
I. URBAN DESIGNATION
A. URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT
17. Bayshore/Thomasson Drive Subdistrict [new text, page 46]
2
Packet Page -35-
4/8/2014 9.A.
Agenda Item 9B
This Subdistrict is applicable to the property located within the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle
Redevelopment Overlay in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Bayshore Drive and
Thomasson Drive, and comprised approximately 9.92 + /- acres. The intent of this Subdistrict is
to provide for the development of up to 108 market rate multi - family dwelling units on this infill
Property.
Development in this Subdistrict shall be approved through the PUD rezoning process Buildings
shall be limited to a maximum of 3- stories of living area over a single level of parking Based on
the density provisions in the Bays hore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay, the proiect
would qualify for 29 base dwelling units. The developer shall be permitted to utilize 79 dwelling
units from the existing pool of dwelling units established in the Bays hore /Gateway Triangle
Redevelopment Overlay in order to achieve the maximum 108 dwellinq units within this
Subdistrict.
Il. PURPOSE /DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
The petitioner is requesting to establish the Bays hore/Th om asson Subdistrict on 9.92+ acres to
allow up to 108 market rate, residential multi - family units through the use of 79 dwelling units
from the existing density pool provided for within the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle
Redevelopment Overlay and 29 base density units.
Ili. SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION:
Existinq Conditions:
The subject 9.92+ acres is undeveloped; zoned RPUD - BMUD -R2, Cirrus Pointe Residential
Planned Unit Development — Bayshore Mixed Use District — Residential 2 Subdistrict; and,
designated Urban — Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict, within the
Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay and the Coastal High Hazard Area.
Surrounding Land Uses:
North Residentia multi- family residences (Abaco Bay Condominium ); zoned PUD,
Pinebrook Lakes Planned Unit Development: and, designated Urban — Mixed Use
District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict. within the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle
Reaeveiopment Overlay and the Coastal High, Hazard Area.
South,. Across Thomasson Drive, Del's Convenience Store; zoned C- 5- BMUD -NC, Heavy
Commercia District, Bayshore Mixed Use District — Neighborhood Center
Subdistrict; anc. designated Urbar: — Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe
Subdistrict within the Bays n ore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay and the
'oastal Higl Hazard Area and, residential; multi- famiiy units. zonec RM=- 6 -BMUG-
RZ., Residential. Multi- famii\ (6 units /acre;, Bayshore Mixed Use Distric: Residentia',
Subdistrict, and, designated Urban — Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe
Subdistrict, within the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay and the
Coastal High Hazard Area.
West: Across Bayshore Drive, undeveloped acreage; zoned C- 3- BMUD -NC, Commercial
Intermediate District, Bayshore Mixed Use District — Neighborhood Center
Subdistrict; and, designated Urban — Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe
Subdistrict, within the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay and the
Coastal High Hazard Area.
Packet Page -36-
4/8/2014 9.A.
Agenda Item 9B
East: Across a utility easement, residential single - family units; zoned RMF- 6- BMUD -R2,
Residential Multi- family (6 units /acre), Bayshore Mixed Use District, Residential 2
Subdistrict; and, designated Urban — Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe
Subdistrict, within the Bays hore/Gatewa y Triangle Redevelopment Overlay and the
Coastal High Hazard Area.
IV. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS:
1) Background:
Development within the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA):
• Generally, Policy 12.2.5 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element defines
the Coastal High Hazard Area as the geographical area lying below the elevation of the
Category 1 storm surge line as presently defined in the 2011 Southwest Florida Regional
Planning Council's Hurricane Evacuation Study. (Refer to the attached Ordinance
Exhibit A Future Land Use Map for the general boundary.)
• Policy 12.1.2 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element provides that land
use plan amendments in the Category 1 hurricane vulnerability zone shall only be
considered if such increases in densities provide appropriate mitigation to reduce the
impacts of hurricane evacuation times.
Objective 3 and related Policies limit public expenditures in the CHHA for certain public
facilities needed to support new development permitted by the Future Land Use
Element.
The subject petition encompasses property within the CHHA, results in a redistribution of
previously authorized density within the Bays hore/G ateway Triangle Redevelopment
Overlay, and proposes development allowed by the Future Land Use Element.
Residential density permitted within the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict:
• Residential density is permitted at a base density of 4 dwelling units per acre (DU /A).
However, properties within this Subdistrict are also within the Coastal High Hazard Area
thus are subject to a reduction of 1 DU /A pursuant to the Density Rating System of the
Future Land Use Element (FLUE); this results in an adjusted base density of 3 DU /A.
Through the Affordable Housing Density Bonus (AHDB), un to an additional 8 DU /A
could be achieved for a maximum of 11 DU /A.
The subject property was initially rezoned by Ordinance Nc. 05 -63 to the Cirrus Pointe
RPUD, using the Affordable Housing Density Bonus (AHDB) provision, to allow a maximum
density of 10.89 DU /A for a total of 108 dwelling units (78 units via the AHDB of which 32
dwelling units are affordable;. Subsequently, the AHDB Agreement was amended by
Ordinance No. 08 -38 to increase the affordable units from 32 to 44 dwelling units while
maintaining the same dwelling unit totals of 108 and 78
Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overla!
• The Bays ho re/G ateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay of the FLUE was established
in 2000 (Ordinance No.2000 -87) to implement the Bays h ore/Gateway Triangle
Community Redevelopment Area Plan, a guide for the physical and economic
revitalization and enhancement of the community.
Packet Page -37-
4/8/2014 9.A.
Agenda Item 9B
The creation of the Overlay provided for 388 residential density bonus units from the
rezoning of the Botanical Gardens property. These bonus units could be reallocated
throughout the Overlay to increase density as an incentive for the development of mixed
use projects that met certain criteria.
Relevant to this petition, the Overlay was amended in 2013 (Ordinance No. 13 -42) to
also allow utilization of the density bonus pool for residential -only projects that: (1) have
a maximum density of 8 DU /A; (2) utilize no more than 97 density bonus pool units; (3)
are rezoned to PUD; (4) are a minimum of 3 acres; (5) constitute redevelopment of the
site; and, (6) consist of market rate units only.
The proposed Subdistrict is for property located within the Bays hore/G ateway Triangle
Redevelopment Overlay, and allows a residential -only project that meets the above stated
criteria except: the maximum density exceeds 8 DU /A and this is not a redevelopment site.
2) Environmental Impacts:
A Senior Environmental Specialist with the Collier County Surface Water and Environmental
Planning Section reviewed the environmental report and provided the following comments:
The environmental information provided for this amendment was the same as provided
with the original PUD and is typically more detailed than required for a GMP
amendment. No listed species have been documented on the project site and given the
location of the site, not likely to occur on the property. The Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission on -line bald eagle nest locator was checked by staff and no
bald eagle nests or nest protection zones are located on the subject property. Native
vegetation for retention for the site has been previously identified on the PUD master
plan.
The proposed GMP amendment will have no effect on the requirements of the
Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME), including that of retention of
native vegetation.
Historical and Archeological Impacts:
if The subject property is not located in an area of historical ant archaeologica!
probabability, as shown or, the County's Historical /Archaeologicai Probability maps. /-.
letter received on February 27. 2013 from the Florida Master Site File, indicates nc
previously recorded cultural resources on the project site. The project will be subject to
the requirement for accidental discovery of archaeological or historical sites as required
by Conservation and Coastal Management Element (COME) Policy 11.1.2,. The
provision is also included in Subsection 2.03.0- E of the Land Development Code
(LDC`..
3 Public Facilities impacts.
Transportation- The subject project proposes no greater intensity tnan what is currently
allowed by the Growth Management Plan. As such, the adjacent roadway network has
sufficient capacity to accommodate this project within the 5 -year planning period, and
the subject application can be deemed consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation
Element of the Growth Management Plan without mitigation.
• Water: The subject project will be served by the City of Naples potable water service
area. The anticipated demand for potable water for the project is 82,620 gallons per
day. The City of Naples does not object to the proposed GMPA.
Packet Page -38-
4/8/2014 9.A.
Agenda Item 9B
• Wastewater: The subject project will be served by the Collier County Sewer District. The
anticipated demand for wastewater for the project is estimated at 23,868 gallons per
day.
• Solid Waste: The service provider is Collier County Solid Waste Management. The
2012 AUIR identifies that the County has sufficient landfill capacity up to the year 2065
for the required lined cell capacity. The project construction time line is approximately
24 to 36 months.
• Drainage: Future development is expected to comply with the SFWMD and /or Collier
County rules and regulations that assure controlled accommodation of storm water
events by both on -site and off -site improvements.
• Park and Recreational Facilities: There will be no adverse impacts to park facilities from
the proposed development.
• Schools: There will be no adverse impacts to public school facilities from the proposed
development.
• EMS and Fire: The subject project is located within the East Naples Fire District. The
nearest fire station and EMS services are located approximately one -half mile from the
project site. The establishment of the Subdistrict with the proposed residential multi-
family units is anticipated to have minimal impacts on these safety services.
4) Justification and Compatibility:
Justification:
The applicant's justification is that this is an infill project, adequate infrastructure is
available, the project is within walking distance to area amenities and services, and, the
requested density is necessary for financial feasibility. This petition has the support of
the CRA staff and Advisory Board. However, the proposed Subdistrict is not consistent
with the amendments to the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay
adopted by the Board of County Commissioners earlier this year — it exceeds the
maximum density of 8 DU /A and is not a redevelopment project.
Compatibility:
To the east is single - family development, within the BMUD -R2 zoning overlay with a
height limitation of 35 feet; one -story structures are immediately to the east and further
to the east, across the local street, is a mixture of one and two -story structures. To the
south, across Thomasson Drive, is a one -story convenience store within the BMUD -NC
zoning overlay with a neight limitation of 56 feet; and, a mixture of undeveloped lots and.
one -story single family development, within the BMUD -R2 zoning overlay. To the west,
across Bayshore Drive, is undeveloped land within the BMUD -NC zoning overlay. To the
north is a two -story multi- family development, zoned PUD (Pinebrook Lakes) with an
allowed height of three stories. The proposed Subdistrict provides for three - stories over
parking: for all surrounding lands, the Future Land Use designation is silent to height
limits. Tnough the proposed Subdistrict allows higher profile structures than are allowed
or surrounding properties. Comprehensive Planning staff defers tc Zoning staff fc-
compatibility analysis as par of the rezoning process when the entire project is
evaluated (building heights, setbacks, buffering, building mass, building orientation, etc.).
VI. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) NOTES:
Refer to the NIM document immediately following this Staff Report.
Packet Page -39-
4/8/2014 9.A.
Agenda Item 9B
VII. FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS:
• There are no infrastructure related concerns.
• There are no adverse environmental impacts as a result of this petition.
• The petition would allow for a project of the same density as is presently approved on the site;
however, the project would shift from affordable housing to market rate housing and the density
above the base density would be achieved from the density bonus pool within the Overlay.
• There are 388 density bonus pool units provided within the Overlay; all but approximately 10
remain available. These units are available for reallocation as an incentive for qualifying
redevelopment projects. The proposed project would reduce the density bonus pool by 79 units
to about 300 units.
• The Affordable Housing Advisory Committee heard the applicant's presentation on this project
at their August 19, 2013 meeting, but took no formal action.
• The Community Redevelopment Agency (Bayshore /Gateway Triangle) Advisory Board heard
the applicant's presentation on this project at their June 4, 2013 meeting and voted 6 -1 to
support the project.
• The Interim Executive Director of the CRA (Bayshore /Gateway Triangle) provided an email to
Comprehensive Planning staff, dated September 12, 2013, in support of the petition.
• The proposed Subdistrict meets the Overlay criteria approved by the Board of County
Commissioners earlier this year, for a residential -only project, except that the project exceeds
the maximum density of 8 DU /A and does not qualify as a redevelopment project.
VIII. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS:
This Staff Report has been reviewed by the County Attorney's office.
IX. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission
forward Petition CPSS - 2013 -1 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation
not to approve for adoption and transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity.
This is based on the Board of County Commissioners action taken earlier this year in adopting
the amendment to the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay that established a
density bonus provision for residential -only projects. However, should the CCPC recommend
approval, staff recommends the following revisions for the purpose of clarity and proper format.
Woras in singie underline are added - as proposed by the petitioner; words in double underline
are added and words in double are deleted - as proposed r)y staff.
17. Bayshore/Thomasson Drive Subdistrict [new text, page 461
This Subdistrict is located within the Bayshore /Gatewav Triangle
Redevelopment Overlay �4 at the northeast s-Rdr;ant corner of the of Bayshore
Drive / &nd Thomasson Drive intersec ion. and comprises d approximately 9.92 acres. The
intent of this Subdistrict is tc provide for the development of up to 108 market rate,
awellina units on this
Deveiopment in tnis Subdistrict shall be consistent with paragraph 5 of the Bayshore /Gatewav
Triangle Redevelopment Overlay, except this undeveloped site does not constitute
redevelopment and the maximum density allowed shall be 10.9 dwelling units per acre for a
maximum of 108 dwelling units (achieved through the utilization of 79 dwelling units from the
existing density bonus pool established within the Bayshore /Gatewav Triangle Redevelopment
Overlay and 29 base dwelling units for which the site qualifies). a.",c pi 11D
Buildings shall be limited to a maximum of 3- stories of living area over a
single level of parking.
Packet Page -40-
4/8/2014 9.A.
Agenda Item 9B
Prepared By: � � Date: ? - r
- tch&6'R. M a, AICP, Principal Planner
ComprehePlanning Section, Planning and Zoning Department
i' f
i
Reviewed By: = r: ^���''... Date: �' Z
David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Plan Manager
Comprehensive Planning Section, Planning and Zoning Department
Reviewed By:
Michael Bosi, AICP, Director
Planning and Zoning Department
Date:
Approved By: Date:
Nick Casalanguida' ministrator
Growth Management Division
Petition Number: CPSS- 2013 -1
Staff Report for December 19, 2013 CPCC meeting
NOTE: This petition has been scheduled for the February 11, 2014 BCC meeting.
COLLIEF. COUNTY PANNING COMMISSION:
iUarE: P. Strain, 0i- i'AIRMAI \'
Packet Page -41-
4/8/2014 9.A.
Cirrus Pointe PUD
Petition PUDA- PL2012 -2357
and
Petition CP2013 -1
Neighborhood Information Meeting
March 25, 2013, 6:00 p.m.
Wayne Arnold, agent for the applicant opened the meeting at 6:10 p.m. and introduced
himself and Sharon Umpenhour with Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A., Richard
Yovanovich with Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester, P.A., representing the
owner /developer, Jim Fields representing the property owner /developer, Kay Deselem
and Michele Mosca representing Collier County Zoning and Growth Management
Departments. There were approximately twenty members from the public in attendance.
A sign -in sheet was provided.
Mr. Arnold began the information meeting explaining the project as it exists and then
proceeded to explain the proposed petition requests. He explained the project would
increase from 108 units to 144 units and that a new subdistrict in the Comprehensive Plan
had been filed to permit the 144 units on the property. He also indicated that the project
was to become a rental apartment community. An aerial exhibit and existing and
proposed Master Plans were displayed. Wayne showed the existing Master Plan and then
the proposed plan and explained that the footprints have been revised slightly. He
explained the building height had not increased but was now listed as 50 feet zoned and
60 feet actual rather than the previously approved 40 feet or 3 stories over parking and
the reduction in the southern landscape buffer request was due to the 60 foot right -of -way
width for Thomasson Drive. Wayne showed a color rendering of the buildinu elevation
and explained that the project name would be changing to Solstice RPUD.
Rich Yovanovich mentioned that the project would be 4 market rate rental community,
and that 44 units would be rented to residents meeting the GAP housing standards fo-
Collier County. He was asked to explain market rate rental and GAP housing and
proceeded to explain that the project, was not low income but geared towards peopie whc
could not afford high rent but didn't qualify for low income. GAP was the term used fo -
people having incomes between 80% and 1501/b of the median income.
Mi. Arnold concluded his presentation; and asked for comments o- questions irom ti.::
meeting attendees. Attendee-- asked several questions regardin_; the project whirr_
included areas such as project and building security. Jinn Fields indicated that the proiec
would have a gated entry and security fencing. He further explained that the parking
garage below each building would have a secure entrance for vehicles and that the
elevators and stairwells would also have secured entrance doors.
Page 1 of 4
Packet Page -42-
4/8/2014 9.A.
Other areas of questions related to project timing, landscape buffers, term of rental
length, and project building materials. Mr. Arnold, Mr. Yovanovich and Mr. Fields
addressed the attendee's questions.
Mr. Arnold reminded the audience that no hearing dates have been scheduled and offered
to provide any additional information if requested and to contact, Kay Deselem, Michele
Mosca, Sharon Umpenhour or himself if anyone had further questions. The meeting
was adjourned at approximately 7:05 p.m.
More specifically questions asked are as follows:
How many buildings are there?
A total of six buildings are proposed.
Will the affordable housing be in each building?
No, not specific to a building.
So could you please explain what is market rental and instead of doing affordable
you are doing GAP? But it's not affordable housing?
Rich Yovanovich explained the difference of the two and further explained how
GAP work and what the requirements are. He also explained the median income.
How big are the units?
The units are from 830sf to 1300sf
Is there a covenant that runs with it that says you could never rent it, you could
always rent it, no one will ever be able to buy it, you can buy it in the future, what's
the plan?
We do not have a commitment that prohibits from condo conversion.
Hoag many parking spaces assigned to each unit?
i or 2 depending on apartment size. Every unit will have a secured parkimg stall
below building.
NIVho is the owner who will be renting these?
Cirrus Point Partners.
Do you have a track record of owning other properties like this?
Yes. mostly assisted living.
Are there a maximum numbe- of occupants per unit or per square feet?
There is a County code requirement.
What would happen if you didn't add the additional units but kept it at 108, would
they be larger units, possibly more appealing?
The infrastructure cost determines the units and the bank wanted more units.
Page 2 of 4
Packet Page -43-
Is this going to be a gated community?
We are proposing a gated entry.
How do you define gated?
You will have to be a resident to enter. You will need a fob to enter the
unmanned gate.
How sturdy will the gate be because people would still get in?
Garages would be secured so only the resident could enter with a code.
Are there ground level entrances?
Secure stairwells on each end with stairs and elevators. No living units on ground floor.
Are you planning on installing peep holes in the doors?
Yes and there will be security cameras.
What sort of buffer between project to the north?
Most of the northern buffer is preserve and there will be an LDC required buffer
where there is no preserve.
How about lighting? Will there be lights behind the buildings?
There is not a need for excessive lighting except for security because there is a
preserve and no vehicle access behind the buildings.
You said the rent is 5900 to $1200 is that$ 900 for affordable units or will they be
lower than that?
Base rent is $900 a month and those would meet the GAP criteria.
Could you talk more about the income qualifications to be able to afford the 5900
unit what's that income level.
The median income was $72,000 fo- a famiiy of 4 that would oe $100.00( a vea-.
family of one would be $60,000 for a family of one would qualiiy for GAP housing.
They sign a lease for $900 a month and then you make up the difference because
you have the grant money?
There is no difference, there is no grant money, there has to be 44 occupants that
have to meet the GAP guidelines if not then after � vears the monev has to be Pain
back to the Count-Y.
NVill there be any restrictions so that people. don `t rent out bN- the mono: or weer, '
There will be restrictive covenants to prevent that. All leases will ne fo- '- mono:
minimum.
You said you are decreasing buffers?
Only on Thomasson Drive, because of the sidewalk that was built on the property.
Page 3 of 4
Packet Page -44-
4/8/2014 9.A.
4/8/2014 9.A.
If you found the market demanded a higher price point would you stay with the 108
instead of the 144 proposed?
With the cost to build it is more cost effective to build the 144 units.
Did I not read you could not get the financing from the bank unless you did the 144
units?
That is correct.
What's going to make your project different from other rental projects?
Will be an annual lease, income levels are not low it will be a quality rental
program. Each unit will have a secure entry and the community will be gated.
Will the quality of construction be better than Botanical Gardens?
This will be concrete block and precast concrete.
If everything goes as planned when will you be ready to construct and when will the
units be ready for rental?
Plan to start construction by end of the year and the units will be finished within
18 to 24 months. All infrastructure will be built at the same time.
Are the elevators going to require a card to go up?
Yes entry card will also be keyed to the elevator
Are you fencing all the way around?
Yes.
During construction will you be blasting?
No blasting.
Who is going to be your general contractor?
Working with Don Garrett right now
Do you have a management company- in mind?
Not at this time.
Will there be a gated entrance on Bayshore?
No, there is no access on Bayshore only Thomasson.
Will there be a pool?
Yes. there are plans for a community noo .
Is there going to be an updated website?
Yes, it will be updated.
Page 4 of 4
Packet Page -45-
4/8/2014 9.A
THE BAYSHO RE/ GATEWAY TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
4069 BAysxORE DRIVE, NAPLES, FL 34112 PHONE 239.643.1115 Fes 239..775.4456
BAYSHORE /GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY. REDEVELOPMENT LOCAL ADVISORY
BOARD MINUTES OF THE MAY 7, 2013 MEETING
The meeting of the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Advisory Board
was called to order by Mr. Steve Main at 6:00 p.m. at the CRA Office Meeting Room 4069
Bayshore Drive.
1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Board Members: Larry Ingram, Steve Main, Maurice
Gutierrez, Karen Beatty, Peter Dvorak, Chuck Gunther and Mike Sherman,
CRA Staff Present: Jean Jourdan, Interim Executive Director, Jean Jourdan, Ashley
Caserta, Project Manager, and Ekna Guevara, Operations Coordinator.
2. Adoption of Agenda: Mr. Main asked if there were any additions or corrections to the
published agenda. Hearing none, he asked for a motion to approve the agenda. Motion:
Larry Ingram. 2 "°: Mike Sherman. Approved 7 -0.
3. Adoption of Minutes: Mr. Main asked for a motion to approve the April 2, 2013 meeting
minutes. Motion: Maurice Gutierrez. 2 "d: Karen Beatty. Approved 7 -0.
4. Executive Director's Report:
a. CRA Project Updates.
1- CAPA 17 acre: Staff reported that on March 12, 2013 the BCC reviewed
CAPA's offer letter and CRA staff was directed not to proceed with obtaining
professional real estate services and work with CAPA on an offer. The purchase
requisition was approved by the Purchasing department and a Notice to
Proceed was provided on April 9th to obtain an appraisal for the property.
Completion to be on or before May 9th.
2- Growth Management Plan Amendment: Staff reported that the first
sufficiency review has been completed by Count\ staff and comments were
received on August 21, 201L. CRA staff responaed to the insufficiencies on
August 24t". The application was found sufficient by County staff and was
heard at the Planning Commission on Novembe- 1, 2012 Tne Planning
Commission voted unanimously to forward the amendment to the BCC witr a
recommendation to approve and transmit tc Tallahassee. On January 8, 2013
the BCC voted unanimously tc forward to amendment to Tallahassee for
transmittal, once approved by Tallahassee the amendment will ao back to the
Board for adoption (amendment permits mixed use north of Davis Boulevara
and the density bonus pool units to be utilized it PUDs_ No objections from
Tallahassee received 2(13; anc the nex: step is fo- aaontion. Marl: Strain o* tn=
Collier Oount\, pianninc Commissior requestec language changes tc the
amendmen: regarding the density bonus units being utilized witnin residentia
only PUDs to be limited to redevelopment and bring back May 2 which was
approved at that meeting.
3- Residential Lots: Closed on April 51h
4- Gateway Triangle Stormwater Improvements Construction Update:
Construction of the Tertiary Stormwater System Improvements in the residential
section of the Gateway Triangle began in late June. Staff is working with the
May 1, 2012 CRA -AB Minutes
Packet Page -46-
Page 1
4/8/2014 9.A.
consultants to address the corrections and repairs. Commissioner Fiala
suggested we invite Stormwater Management to do a presentation for us.
5- Mini Triangle RFP: On hold until further notice.
6- Andrew Drive (FP &L Lights): Staff conducted a site visit and identified
properties with existing power poles where lights may be suitable. Letters were
sent to surrey whether the property owners were in favor of having FP &L install
a light at their locations. Ms. Ekna Guevara will be assigned to this project.
7- Cirrus Point n /k/a/ Solstice: Mr. Jim & Attorney Rich Yovanovich attended
the December 4, 2012 CRA Advisory Board meeting. Mr. Fields requested the
CRA -AB support a Growth Management Plan Amendment that would permit his
development to seek up to 114 units from the density bonus pool to develop
14.4 residential units per acre. The CRA has A GMPA going to the BCC for
adoption on May 28th that limits residential development utilizing the bonus
density pool to a maximum of 8 units an acre and no project could receive more
than 97 units. Presently there is no means to acquire units from the density
bonus pool for residential only projects. Staff explained the details entailed with
the project.
Commissioner Fiala spoke regarding concerns she has for this project and how
it will impact our redevelopment area.
Maurice explained that the project was presented as high end housing.
Discussion among members led to conclude that they withdraw their support for
Cirrus Point pending more information regards the project. Motion by: Chuck
Gunther. 2 "d: Larry Ingram. Approved: 7 -0.
b. MSTU Project Updates:
1- Staff gave a brief report regarding the Bayview and Lunar Street projects.
Bayview will go forward but Lunar has unresolved issues which we are working
on.
5. Requests for Payments: None
New Business:
a. Welcome employee Ekna Guevara
b. CRA Loan Update: The Finance Department has successfully negotiated to
refinance the CRA's loan with Fifth Third Bank. The loan agreement is
scheduled for approval by the CRA Board on May 14tH
c. CRA Office Space: Staff conducted a study of available office space within the
redevelopment area and rental rates. Three office spaces were identified tha'
are visible from Bayshore Drive. A fourth office space was identified on
Shadowlawn Drive and is made up of two separate offices. One space could
accommodate CRA offices and the other could serve as the CRA's meeting
space. CAPA has expressed an interest in relocating with the CRA if there is
space. Staff also mentioned that per the MSTU board they agreed to pay up tc
$10,000 toward our move so long as we stay within Bayshore. Jim Torrev whc
is the owner o one of the possible rental spaces attended and added to sav that
he is willing to give us 3months free of rent. IV10tion to approve by Maurice
Gutierrez. 2nd Larry Ingram. Approved: 7 -0
d. Linda Drive (Presentation Paul Rosen): Mr. Paul Rosen owns lots on Linda
Drive and has requested to gain approval from the Advisory Board for the
provision of a gate at the entrance of Linda Drive that would open when any
vehicle approaches. There was a motion to support the concept. Motion: Peter
Dvorak. 2 "d: Maurice Gutierrez. Approved: 6 -1 (Larry Ingram dissenting).
e. Logo and Branding: Staff proposed the CRA adopt and utilize the MSTU's
slogan "Creativity in Bloom" and their logo for utilization by all our agencies (the
MSTU has authorized the CRA use of the same). Mike Sherman mentioned we
May 1, 2012 CRA -AB Minutes
Packet Page -47-
2
4/8/2014 9.A.
should hold a discussion forum and have a full marketing plan although the
direction we are going is right. Motion to work w /the other two agencies to agree
on a common logo and slogan and that we use the initial work done by the
MSTU. Motion by: Mike Sherman. 2 "d: Maurice Gutierrez. Approved: 7 -0.
f. Summer Break: Members discussed our summer schedule and agreed on the
following meeting dates: June 4, 2013 & September 10, 2013.
g. CRA Advisory Board Applicant - Interviews:
The Local CRA Advisory Board positions were advertised and there were five
(6) applications received.
1- Karen Beatty reapplied as a Bayshore Resident. Motion to reappoint Karen
Beatty. Motion by: Steve Main, 2 "d: Maurice Gutierrez. Approved: 7 -0.
2- Peter Dvorak reapplied as a Member At Large. Motion to reappoint Peter
Dvorak. Motion by: Steve Main. 2 "d: Maurice Gutierrez. Approved: 7 -0.
3- Chuck Gunther reapplied as a Gateway Resident. Motion to reappoint Chuck
Gunther. Motion by: Steve Main. 2 "d: Maurice Gutierrez. Approved: 7 -0.
4- Michael Corradi applied as a Davis Blvd Business Owner. Michael spoke on
his behalf and mentioned his desire to join the CRA. Motion to approve Michael
Corradi as a new member of the CRA made by: Karen Beatty. 2 "d: Steve Main.
Approve: 7 -0
5- John Flathers applied as an At -Large member but was not present to
introduce himself.
Shane Shadis applied as an At -Large member and spoke on behalf of himself
explaining his desire to be more involved in the community within the Bayshore
Area.
Members voted 5 for Shane Shadis and 2 votes for John Flathers. Motion to
recommend to the BCC the elected applicants made by: Maurice Gutierrez. 2 "d:
Karen Beatty. Approve: 7 -0.
Advisory Board General Communications
Citizen Comments. None.
9. Adio nment: N�,, Mai .adjourned the meeting.
Aporo ed-and forwarded by Steve Main, CRA -AB Chairman,
May 1, 2012 CRA -AB Minutes
Packet Page -48-
4/8/2014 9.A.
THE BAYSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
4069 BAYSHORE DRIVE, NAPLES, FL 34112 PHONE 239.643.1115 FAx 239.775.4456
BAYSHORE /GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT LOCAL ADVISORY
BOARD MINUTES OF THE JUNE 4, 2013 MEETING
The meeting of the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Advisory Board
was called to order by Steve Main 6:00 p.m. at the CRA Office Meeting Room 4069 Bayshore
Drive.
1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Board Members: Larry Ingram, Steve Main, Maurice
Gutierrez, Karen Beatty, Peter Dvorak, Chuck Gunther and Mike Sherman, Shane
Shadis, Michael Corradi (excused).
CRA Staff Present: Jean Jourdan, Interim Executive Director, Ashley Caserta, Project
Manager, and Ekna Guevara, Operations Coordinator.
2. Adoption of Agenda: Mr. Main asked if there were any additions or corrections to the
published agenda. Hearing none, he asked for a motion to approve the agenda. Motion
by: Peter Dvorak. Second: Maurice Gutierrez. Approved 7 -0.
3. Adoption of Minutes: Mr. Main asked for a motion to approve the May 7, 2013 meeting
minutes. Larry made a correction to item 6.d. should read "Approved 6 to 1 with Larry
dissenting ". A motion was made to adopt the minutes with changes. Motion by: Peter
Dvorak. Second: Chuck Gunther. Approved 7 -0.
4. Executive Director's Report:
a. CRA Proiect Updates.
1- CAPA 17 acre: Staff reported we have received the appraisal and has been
.submitted to CAPA for review. A representative of CAPA, Chick Heithaus, was
present and mentioned that CAPA may not have enough time to review the
100+ page appraisal before the last BCC meeting before the summer break.
2- Growth Management Plan Amendment: Staff reported that the GMPA was
approved by the BCC on May 28, 2013 and should go into effect in Jule
3- Residential Lots: Staff reported that the Deveiope- nas submitted plans fo-
the lots on Linda Drive lots and will begin construction June 15t". Also, the Van
Buren lots are planned to be constructed early next year.
4- Gateway Triangle Stormwater Improvements Construction Update: Staff
is working with consultants to address any repairs or corrections needec
5- Mini Triangle RFP: On hold until furthe- notice.
6- Andrew Drive (FP&L Lights): Ekna has been assigned to this project.
7- Cirrus Point n/k/a Solstice: Ms. Jourdan informed the CRA -AB that the item
would be discussed under new business.
June 4, 2013 CRA. -AB Minutes
Packet Page -49-
Page 1
4/8/2014 9.A..
8- CRA/MSTU Offices: The documents have been reviewed and approved by
the County Attorney's Office and is scheduled for the June 25, 2013 Board
meeting.
b. MSTU Project Updates:
1- Landscape Updates include a repair by Ground Zero who repaired an
irrigation line break and replaced the shrubs in front of La Pinata.
2- The Bayview and Lunar project is continuing their process.
3- Ashley will be a member of the selection committee for the Thomasson Drive
project which will last about 12 to 18 months.
4- On Danford Street volunteers continue to get the required responses.
5- There was a streetlight which was hit by car in front of La Pinata. This has
since been replaced.
6- Lights on Collee Court, Gordon Street and Peters Street are on their way.
5. Requests for Payments: Motion to pay bill made by: Karen Beatty. Second: Maurice
Gutierrez.
6. New Business:
a. Welcome New Advisory Board Members: Shane Shadis and Michael
Corradi.
Jim Fields (Question & Answer): Present was Richard Yovanovich who made
a presentation on the 10acre parcel off Thomasson /Bayshore. The project is
allowed 29 dwelling units. They are requesting the CRA support their request for
79 units from the density bonus pool which will be added to the project totaling
108 units. These units would range from 1,400 to 2,000 sq. ft. and sell for mid
$200,000 to mid $300,000. They also mentioned they will return the $320,000
which was granted to them for an Affordable Housing project which they no
longer will build. They will pay a portion from every unit sold until full payment is
received.
Motion to support the project & their request for the 79 units from the density
bonus pool. Motion by: Karen Beatty. Second: Steve Main. Approved 6 -1 with
Larry dissenting.
L. Grant Application (Fire Suppression Upgrades): Staff informed the CRA -AE
they had submitted the grant applicatior prior to the submittal deadline and
nopes to have a response within a few months:.
Community Garden: Staff presented the idea of a community garden in the
Bayshore Community. Motion to conduct all necessary steps and plans
gearing towards a community garden in the Bayshore CRf Motion by: Chuck
Gunthe .-. Second: Karen Beativ. Approved 7 -C.
c. Next Meeting: Seotemoe- 20':
Advisory Board General Communications. None.
8. Citizen Comments. None.
9. Adiournment: Mr. Main adjourned the meeting at 7:03.
Approved and forwarded by Steve Main, CRA -AB Chairman.
June 4, 2013 CRA -AB Minutes 2
Packet Page -50-
4/8/2014 9.A.
ORDINANCE NO. 14-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89 -05, AS
AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND
FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES OF THE GROWTH
MANAGEMENT PLAN TO ESTABLISH THE BAYSHORE/THOMASSON
DRIVE SUBDISTRICT TO ALLOW UP TO A MAXIMUM OF 108 MARKET
RATE, MULTI- FAMILY DWELLING UNITS THROUGH THE USE OF 79
DWELLING UNITS FROM THE EXISTING DENSITY POOL PROVIDED
FOR WITHIN THE BAYSHORE /GATEWAY TRIANGLE
REDEVELOPMENT OVERLAY FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF BAYSHORE DRIVE AND THOMASSON
DRIVE IN SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CONSISTING OF 9.92± ACRES; AND
FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED
AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC
OPPORTUNITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL20120002382/CPSS- 2013 -11
WHEREAS, Collier County., pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. sea., Florida Statutes. the
Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act,
was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and
WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier
County Growth Management Plan on .lanuary 10. 1989: . and
WHEREAS, the Community Planning Act of' 20,11 provides authority for loea_
govcr-nments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to
amend adopted comprehensive plans: ane
WHEREAS. Cirrus Pointe Partners LLC requested an amendment to the Future Land Lise
Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to establish thle Baysh ore/Thomas son Drive
Subdistrict: and
WHEREAS. pursuan- to Subsection l 6 3. 1 &7(l ;. FloridL. Stawi::, this amendment is
considered a Small Scale Amcndmcn.: ane
WHEREAS, the Subdistrict property is not locate: in an area of critical state concern or
an area of critical economic concern: and
Bayshore:'Thomasson Drive Subdistrict Small Scale GMPA
PL20120002382/CPSS- 2013 -1 —Rev, 1/13/14
Words underlined are added; words stnaek thratrgh have been deleted,
* * * indicates break in pages
Packet Page -51-
Page I of 3
4/8/2014 9.A.
WHEREAS,. the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) on December 19, 2013
considered the proposed amendments to the Grouch Management Plan and recommended
approval of said amendments to the Board of County Commissioners; and
WHEREAS. the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County did take action in the
manner prescribed by law and held public hearings concerning the proposed adoption of the
amendments to the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan on February 11,
201.. and
WHEREAS.. all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of lain have been
nlet.
NOW', THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA, that:
SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE GROWTH
MANAGEMENT PLAN
The Board of County Commissioners hereby adopts this small scale amendment to the
Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series in accordance with Section
163.3184. Florida Statutes. The text and map amendment is attached hereto as Exhibit `A" and
incorporated herein by reference.
SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY.
If anv phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court
of competent jurisdiction. such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent
provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remainim, portion.
5l �' I'IC?;, TI IRE I 1- 1�_'TTVE DATE.
The effective data of this pian amendment. if the amendment is not timely challenged,
snail ire 31 dav:, after the state land planning agenc, notifies the local <,o.,ernment� that the plan
am n_imcn'l pa age i ,,, complete. If 1,111ci v ehallenC7ed_ thin a:nendmen`, steal' become effective
o: to dwt tn- state land pianninL a <,enc,, or the Administration �_.ommissioi enters a final orde-
of ntcrminina tM adontec amenamen' to be in compiianc . ?vo dcveioPincm orders. deveiopmen-.
__ ianc. use_ aenenden- or, tnis amendment ma,, be issues o:- commence bei«rc° F ita_
nc�tnn� et'lectiy:. If t fin. orde-- of noncompiianc- is issued b,, the Administration.
Commission. thi amendment mat- nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a resolution
affirming its effective status. a copy of which resolution shall be sent to the state land planning,
agency.
13ayshore.7homasson Drive Subdistrict Small Scale GMPA Page 2 of 3
PL.2012.0002382 /CPSS -201 3 -1 —Rev, 1113/14
Words underlined are added; words spit -few have been deleted;
* * * indicates break in pages
Packet Page -52-
4/8/2014 9.A.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County. Florida this day of February, 2014.
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
Deputy Clerk
Approved as to form and Iegality:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
TOM HENNING, Chairman
ntW
I -leidi Ashton -Cicko
Managing Assistant County Attorney
Attachment: Exhibit A — Proposed Amended Text and Maps
Cl, . i ,- Cti'IP- 00" >72 I t
Bayshore /Thomasson Drive Subdistrict Small Scale GMPA Page 3 of 3
PL20120002382/CPSS- 2013 -1 —Rev. 1/13/14
Words underlined are added; words stfeek through have been deleted;
* * * indicates break in pages
Packet Page -53-
EXHIBIT A
FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT
Policy 1.1:
A. URBAN — MIXED USE DISTRICT
17. Bayshore/Thomasson Drive Subdistrict
t
1. URBAN DESIGNATION
A. Urban Mixed Use District
i
4/8/2014 9.A.
CPSS- 2013 -1
17. BayshorefThomasson Drive Subdistrict [new text, page 46]
This Subdistrict is located within the Bays ho re/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay at the
northeast corner of the Bayshore Drive/Thomasson Drive intersection, and comprises
approximately 9.92 acres. The intent of this Subdistrict is to provide for the development of up
to 108 market rate multi - family dwelling units. limited to townhouse and condominiums. No
rental apartments shall be permitted.
Development in this Subdistrict shall be consistent with paragraph 5 of the Bayshore /Gateway
Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. except 'this undeveloped site does not constitute
redevelopment and the maximum density allowed shall be 10.9 dwelling units per acre for a
maximum of 108 dwellinq units (achieved through the utilization of 79 dwelling units from the
existina density bonus pool established within the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment
Overlav and 29 base dwelling units for which the site qualifies;. However. the 79 residential
densitv bonus units shall be null and void and returned to the bonus density pool unless a Site
Development Plan nas been issued and remains active for the development by the 5" year o
approval of the PUD or the BCC approves an extension of the residential density tDonus units tc
a certain date. Buildings shall be limited to a maximum o` 3- siories of living area aver a single
level of parkinq.
Words underlined are added; words swdez4i are deleted.
Row of asterisks ( * * *) indicate a text break
Packet Page -54-
DRS��( BAYSHORE / THOAUSSON DRIVE
SUBDISTRICT
EXHIBIT A
4/8/2014 9.A.
PETITION CPSS- 9013 -�
J� THOMASSON DRIV= I THOMASSON DRIV-_
L8'ClCND
PREPARED 9Y: OS/00 YAPPM M=M
COMAUNTY DEMMQ" Nr AND ENNRM MENTAL SERNOES.WOMM I 7 1-1 El
FLF- UMS- 2013 -MOM DATE: 1D/=Z 0 IOOFT t200FT
Packet Page -55-
4/8/2014 9.A.
T 46 S T 47 S T U S 7 42 s T So s T 61 S T 62 8 63 s
7
.1h
1V K
H
LU
LIJ
DE30 rr
ft
tt
NLL¢
Packet Page -56-
4/8/2014 9.A.
N A P L E S D A I LY N E W S K Wednesday, Januar=y 22; 2014 K 23A
MU111 .1 gunk,]
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER ORDINANCE
Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners will hold a public hearing
on February 11, 2014 in the Board of County Commissioners chamber, Third Floor, Collier County Govern-
ment Center, 3299 E. Tamiami Trait, Naples, to consider the Adoption of the following County ORDINANCE,
for transmittal of the Adoption amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan. The meeting will
commence at 9:00 A.M.
The purpose of the hearing is to consider a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners to trans-
mit to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) the Adoption of a small -scale Growth Manage-
ment Plan amendment(s) to the Future Land Use Element, Future Land Use Map and Map Series, and to
consider a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners to adopt changes to the Cirrus Pointe
Planned Unit Development Ordinance- The ORDINANCE titles are as follows:
An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending -Ordinance
No. 89-05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan for the unincorporated area of
Collier County, Florida specifically amending the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map
and Map Series of the Growth Management Plan to establish the Bayshore/Thomasson Drive Sub-
district to allow up to a maximum of 108 market rate, multi - family dwelling units through the use of
79 dwelling units from the existing density pool provided for within the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle
Redevelopment Overlay for property located at the northeast comer of Beyshore Drive and Thomasson
Drive in Section 14, Township 50' South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida consisting of 9:921 acres;
and furthermore recommending transmittal of the adopted amendment to the Florida Department of
Economic Opportunity; providing for severability and providing for an effective date. [PL20120002382/
CPSS- 2013 -1]
AND
An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance
Number 2005 -83, as amended, the Cirrus Pointe Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) which
allows a maximum number of 108 residential dwelling units; by changing the name of the RPUD to
Solstice RPUD; by revising the Master Plan; by deleting Exhibit B, the Water Management/Utility Plan;
by deleting Exhibit C, the Location Map; by removing Statement of Compliance and Project Develop-
ment Requirements; by adding a parking deviation; and by deleting and terminating the Affordable
Housing Density Bonus Agreement. The subject property is located northeast of Bayshore Drive and
Thomasson Drive in Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida consisting
of 9.92 + /- acres; and by providing an effective date. (PUDZA- PL20120002357) [Companion to Petition
PL201200023821CPSS- 2013 -1]
All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Growth Management Plar.
Amendment will be made available for inspection at the Planning & Zoning Department, Comprehensive Plan-
ning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, FL., between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday
through Friday. Furthermore the materials will be made available for inspection at the Collier Countv Clerk's
Office, Fourth Floor, Suite #401, Collier County Government Center, East Naples, one week prior to the sched-
uled hearing. Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the Planning & Zoning Depar-
ment, Comprehensive Planning Section. Written comments filec with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior tc
February 11, 2014, will De read and considered at the public hearing.
If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing; he will need a record of that. proceeding,
and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record
includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based.
If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding,
you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County
Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite #101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356,
(239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are
available in the Board of County Commissioners Office.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS • COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
TOM HENNING - CHAIRMAN
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK -By: /s/Teresa Cannon -Deputy Clerk (SEAL)
No. 231150798 J huary 014
Packet Page -57-
73
=ES
PROJECT`
LOCATION �,. rFirxs
.nui ^'�i♦
1� wrr�t liaav \ \I9
\
n.iwwbiia
�Bpt.
� MC
All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Growth Management Plar.
Amendment will be made available for inspection at the Planning & Zoning Department, Comprehensive Plan-
ning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, FL., between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday
through Friday. Furthermore the materials will be made available for inspection at the Collier Countv Clerk's
Office, Fourth Floor, Suite #401, Collier County Government Center, East Naples, one week prior to the sched-
uled hearing. Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the Planning & Zoning Depar-
ment, Comprehensive Planning Section. Written comments filec with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior tc
February 11, 2014, will De read and considered at the public hearing.
If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing; he will need a record of that. proceeding,
and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record
includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based.
If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding,
you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County
Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite #101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356,
(239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are
available in the Board of County Commissioners Office.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS • COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
TOM HENNING - CHAIRMAN
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK -By: /s/Teresa Cannon -Deputy Clerk (SEAL)
No. 231150798 J huary 014
Packet Page -57-