Agenda 04/12/2011 Item # 7A
Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
April 12, 2011
CONTINUE ITEM 7A TO THE APRIL 26" 2011 BCC
MEETING: THIS ITEM REQUIRES EX PARTE
DISCLOSURE BE PROVIDED BY COMMISSION
MEMBERS. SHOULD A HEARING BE HELD ON THIS
ITEM, ALL PARTICIPANTS ARE REQUIRED TO BE
SWORN IN. DOA-PL2010-1052: OLDE CYPRESS
DEVELOPMENT, LTD &VITA PIMA, LLC,
REPRESENTED BY CHRIS MITCHELL OF WALDROP
ENGINEERING, P.A. AND RICHARD YOV ANOVICH OF
COLEMAN, YOV ANOVICH & KOESTER, P.A., REQUEST
A CHANGE TO THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED OLDE
CYPRESS DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT DRI,
IN ACCORDANCE WITH FLORIDA STATUTES,
SUBSECTION 380.06(19). PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS
WILL ADD 63.9 ACRES INTO THE DRI BOUNDARY,
AMEND MAP H, AND REMOVE THE 3.9 ACRE PARK
REQUIREMENT TO INCORPORATE THIS CHANGE.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CONSISTING OF 602:f:
ACRES IS LOCATED IN SECTIONS 21 AND 22, RANGE
48 SOUTH, TOWNSHIP 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA. (COMPANION TO PUDZ-PL2010-1054 AND
PUDA-PL2010-388) (COMMISSIONER HENNING'S
REQUEST)
Continue Item SA to April 26, 2011 BCC Meetinl?:: This item requires ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. PUDZ-PL2010-1054: Vita
Pima, LLC, represented by Christopher R. Mitchell, P.E. of Waldrop Engineering, P.A., and Richard D. Yovanovich of
Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., request a Rezone from the Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning
district with a Special Treatment (ST) Overlay for a project that is known as the HD Development RPUD, and the
Agricultural (A) zoning district, to the RPUD zoning district to allow development of a maximum of 125 single-family
residential units and 33 multi-family units and associated accessory uses. The 65.29:f: acre subject property is located along
the north side of Immokalee Road (CR 846) approximately 330 feet east of Olde Cypress Boulevard in Section 21,
Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, FL (Companion DOA-PL2010-1052 and PUDA-PL2010-388)
(Commissioner Henning's request)
Continue Item 8B to April 26. 2011 BCC Meetinl?:: This item requires ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. PUDA-PL2010-388, Olde
Cypress Development, LTD, represented by Chris Mitchell of Waldrop Engineering, P.A. and Richard D. Yovanovich,
Esquire of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., request a PUD Amendment for the Olde Cypress PUD. The PUD
Amendment request is to reduce the project density from 1,100 dwelling units to 942 dwelling units and remove the
requirements of trails and a park (3.9 acres minimum) in the Olde Cypress PUD/DRI. Subject property is located in the
OIde Cypress subdivision, Sections 21 & 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, FL. (Companion: DOA-
PL2010-1052, OIde Cypress DRI & PUDZ-PL2010-1054, HD Development RPUD) (Commissioner Henning's request)
Withdraw Item lOG: Recommendation to approve a form Easement Agreement for use between Collier County and the
Beachfront Property Owners requiring the Property Owners to provide public beach access in exchange for publicly
funded major beach renourishment, vegetation planting and dune restoration to the subject property. (Stafrs request)
Move Item 16A13 to Item 10J: Recommendation to enter into a contract for services for AIM Engineering to
complete a feasibility study with conceptual plans for pedestrian or bicycle facilities at the 1-75 Immokalee
Rd. Interchange in the amount up to $315,000 (FDOT Project #416237-1-38-01). (Commissioner Henning's request)
Continue Item 16C2 to April 26. 2011 BCC Meetini!:: Recommendation to approve a Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
contract, agreement #11HM-3E-09-21-01-026, with the State of Florida, Division of Emergency Management, in the
amount of $240,000, to apply towards costs associated with the installation of 1,430 linear feet of six-inch High Density
Polyethylene leachate pipe at Collier County's Landfill and authorize corresponding budget amendments. (Stafrs request)
Move Item 16D9 to Item 101 (to be heard immediatelv followinl?: Item 10E): Recommendation to approve and authorize
the Chairman to sign a Settlement Agreement & Mutual Release with Johnson Engineering for the total value of $134,000
to resolve any and all claims and issues associated with the Goodland Boat Park and approve and authorize the Chairman
to sign award of Contract 09-5262-S to Johnson Engineering for Engineering Services for Collier County. (Stafrs request)
Move Item 16G4 to Item 13A: and has been requested to be heard at 11:30 a.m.: Recommendation to authorize the
County Attorney to take all necessary action, including filing a lawsuit, to evict Gregory Shepard from his present location
at the Immokalee Regional Airport, and pursue any holdover rent, damages, and costs that may be due and owing to the
Airport Authority. (Commissioner Coletta's request)
Move Item 16H4 to Item 9H: Commissioner Henning requests Board approval for reimbursement regarding attendance at
a function serving a Valid Public Purpose. Attended the Chabad of Naples Annual Benefit Evening and Gala April 1 0,
2011 at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Naples, FL, $150 to be paid from Commissioner Henning's travel budget.
(Commissioner Henning's request)
Continue Item 16K3 to April 26, 2011 BCC Meetinl?:: Recommendation to authorize the County Attorney to file a lawsuit
on behalf of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners, against SURETY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, in the
Circuit Court ofthe Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida, to recover damages incurred by the
County, as a result of contracted work, for the repair to the Pollution Control Laboratory in Building "H", 3rd Floor, in the
amount of $99,492.99, plus costs of litigation, including reasonable attorneys fees. (County Attorney Stafrs request)
Note:
Item 16A7: Section III, page 4 of the Addendum shall be revised to state, in part: "... unless either party provides the
other with at least sixty (60) days notice of non-renewal" rather than one hundred and eighty (180) days. (This change is
for consistency with the original agreement and to promote ease in tracking by staff.) (Stafrs request)
Time Certain Items:
Item 9G to be heard at 11 :00 a.m.
Item 13A to be heard at 11 :30 a.m.
Item 8C to be heard at 1 :00 p.m.
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
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. DOA-PL201O-1052: OIde Cypress
Development, LTD and Vita Pima, LLC, represented by Chris Mitchell of Waldrop Engineering,
P.A. and Richard D. Yovanovich of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., is requesting a change
to the previously approved Olde Cypress Development of Regional Impact DRl, in accordance with
Florida Statutes, Subsection 380.06(19). The proposed modifications will add 63.9 acres into the
DRl boundary, amend Map H, and rcmove the 3.9 acre park requirement to incorporate this
change. The subject property consisting of 60U acres is located in Sections 21 and 22, Range 48
South, Township 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Companion to PUDZ-PL2010-1054 and PUDA-
PL201O-388)
OBJECTIVE:
To have the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) review staffs findings and
recommendations along with the rccommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission
(CCPC) regarding the above rcferenced petition and render a decision regarding this DRI
amendment petition; and ensure the project is in hamlony with all the applicable codes and
regulations in order to ensure that the community's interests are maintained.
CONSIDERATIONS:
This DR! Resolution proposes to amend the Development of Regional Impact (DRI)
Development Order (DO). in accordance with Florida Statutes. Subsection 380.06(19). The
proposed modifications will add 63.9 acres into the DRI boundary, amend Map H. and proposes
to remove the 3.9-acre park requirement.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of building permits to help offset the
impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund
projects identified in the Capital Improvement Element of the GrO\vth Management Plan as
needed to maintain adopted Level of Serviee (LOS) for public facilities. Additionally, in order
to meet the requirements of coneurrency management, the developer of every local development
order approved by Collier County is required to pay a portion of the estimated Transportation
Impact Fees associated with the projeet in accordanee with Chapter 74 of the Collier County
Code of Laws and Ordinances. Other fecs collected prior to issuance of a building permit include
building permit review fees. Finally, additional revenue is generated by application of ad
valorem tax rates, and that revenue is directly relatcd to the value of the improvements. Please
note that impact fees and taxes collected were not included in the eriteria used by staff and the
Planning Commission to analyze this petition.
-
Packet Page -73-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) IMPACT:
Comprehensive Planning Staff was not required to review this petition because the proposed
action does not affect this project's original consistency determination as carried forward in the
SRAA companion petition.
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION:
The CCPC heard this petition on February 17, 2011 and continued the petition hearing to March
17,2011, and by a vote of 8 to 0, with Commissioner Ebert abstaining, recommended forwarding
this petition to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) with a recommcndation of approval.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS:
This item has been rcviewed by the County Attorncy's Officc and is legally sufficient. This item
requires a minimum of four affinnative votes-STW.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the requcst for DOA-
PL2010-1052, Olde Cypress DRl, subject to the attached DRI Development Order Amendment
and Rcsolution.
PREPARED BY:
Kay Deselem, AlCP, Principal Planner, Zoning Scrvices Section, Land Development Services
Department, Growth Management Division, Planning and Regulation
Attachments: I) Staff Rcports
2) Application
3) Back-up information
4) Resolution
Packet Page -74-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Item Number: 7.A.
Item Summary: 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.
DOA-PL2010-1052: Olde Cypress Development, LTD and Vita Pima, LLC, represented by Chris
Mitchell of Waldrop Engineering, P.A. and Richard D. Yovanovich of Coleman, Yovanovich &
Koester, P.A., is requesting a change to the previously approved Olde Cypress Development of
Regional Impact DRI, in accordance with Florida Statutes, Subsection 380.06(19). The proposed
modifications will add 63.9 acres into the DRI boundary, amend Map H, and remove the 3.9
acre park requirement to incorporate this change. The subject property consisting of 602:t
acres is located in Sections 21 and 22, Range 48 South, Township 26 East, Collier County,
Florida. (Companion to PUDZ-PL2010-1054 and PUDA-PL2010-388)
Meeting Date: 4/12/2011
Prepared By
Name: DeselemKay
Title: Planner, Principal,Enginecring & Environmental Ser
3/4/20113:09:16 PM
Approved By
Name: PuigJudy
Title: Operations Analyst, CDES
Date: 3/2112011 1:16:48 PM
Name: LorenzWilliam
Title: Director - CDES Engineering Services, Comprehensive
Date: 3/22/2011 4:58:39 PM
Name: BellowsRay
Title: Manager - Planning, Comprehensive Planning
Date: 3/22/2011 6:26:54 PM
Name: FederNonnan
Title: Administrator - Growth Management Div,Transportati
Date: 3/23/2011 10:42:42 AM
Packet Page -75-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Name: WilliamsSteven
Title: Assistant County Attorney,County Attorney
Date: 3/23/2011 3: 19:53 PM
Name: MarcellaJeanne
Title: Executive Secretary, Transportation Planning
Date: 3/24/2011 9:21 :03 AM
Name: KlatzkowJeff
Title: County Attorney,
Date: 3/28/2011 12:04:03 PM
Name: IsacksonMark
Title: Director-Corp Financial and Mgmt Svs.CMO
Date: 4/4/2011 I] :52:00 AM
Name: OchsLeo
Title: County Manager
Date: 4/4/20 II 1:4 J :26 PM
Packet Page -76-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
C-o~-y C-o-un.t::y
- --
DRI REVIEW MEMORANDUM
To: Kay Deselem, AIcp, Principal Planner, Zoning Services Section
From: Corby Scl1rnidt, AIcp, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section
Date: July 20, 2010
Subject: Olde C!pe>5 Oeudoprrrnt if Rqjoml 11'I1fX1d (ORr) Reliew
PETITION NUMBER: DRI-PU010-1052
PETITION NAME: The Olde Cypress Residential Planned Unit Developrrent (RPOO), as a
Developrrent of Regional Impact (DRI)
REQUEST: The aIde Cypress RPOO Developmmt of Regional Impact (ORI) proposes to add
approximately 65.3 acres of land to the existing 538.1-acre project, in accordance with the provisions of
Florida State Statutes and the Collier C01ffityGrowth Managemt Plan (GMF). No changes are
proposed that \\Quld affect the totalmnnber of approved residential units, phasing connnencemt or
build-out dates.
The new acreage will be part of the companion Vita Tuscana POO, '\\hile the existing acreage remains in
the aIde Cypress POO.
LOCATION: The proposed, larger Developmt of Regional Impact (ORI) contains approximately
603.4 acres and is located on the north side of Imrnokalee Road (CR 846), east of its intersection with
aIde Cypress Boulevard. The property lies within the Urban Estates Planning Comrmmity in Sections 21
and 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, in Collier County.
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMENTS: The 65.3-acre subject property to be added to the
aIde Cypress DRI has the future land use designations of Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential
Subdistrict as depicted in the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Future Land Use Elemt (FLUE).
Approximately 46.6 acres of the subject site is derived from the former HD Developmt PUD (now Vita
Tuscana) with approval for 104 residential units. This portion is presently an undeveloped Residential
Planned Unit Developrrent (RPUD).
Another 18.7 acres presently outside either existing PUD \\Quld be incorporated in to the aIde Cypress
DRI. This portion is presently undeveloped Rural/Agriculture District land
-1-
aide Cpre>5 OR!
Packet Page -77-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Total Land Area of 603.4 acres
Developed Land Area of 227.4 acres:
.
"R", Residential Use Tracts of 184.2 acres -single-family residences and multi-family
residences, up to 1,100 du; apportioned to 491 SF (45%) and 609 MF (55%); an overall density
of 2.4 dv\elling units per acre.
o
"C", Commercial Uses Tract of 12.5 acres - 165,000 sq. ft. commercial space;
"ROW", Public Right-of-Way Tracts of 30.7 acres - [E xtendingalde C!pe>5 Boulemrd,
I'vrtlmnrd from 111'II1Tkakr Rood]
.
.
Undeveloped Land Area of 376 acres:
.
"P", Preserve Uses Tracts totaling 194.5 acres.
GC , Golf Course, lakes, driving range and clubhouse tracts totaling 181.5 acres.
.
The table below illustrates the acreage figures, dv\elling unit cOlmts and residential densities involved in
each part of the project:
TtlACs TII DUs Ttl Com'l ACs non-Com'; AC Gross Res'l Densitv
Existing DRI 538.1 1,100 12.5 525.6 2.09 DUlAC
Proposed DRI 603.4 1,100 12.5 590.9 1.86 DUlAC
Olde Cypress PUD 538.1 942 12.5 525.6 1.79 DUlAC
Vita Tuscana PUD 65.3 158 0.0 65.3 2.41 DUlAC
Even with the acreage increa<;e, no additional residential units are proposed for the larger DRI.
Based upon the above analysis, Comprehensive Planning staff has determined the Olde Cypress
DRI amendment can be found consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the Growth
Management Plan, subject to the Olde Cypress PUD reducing its total approved dwelling units
from 1,100 to 942, as shown in the table above.
aN CITY VIEW
cc: William Lorenz, PE Director, Land Development Services Department
Ray BelloV\s, Planning Manager, Zoning Services Section
Mike Bosi, AI CP, Comprehensive Planning Manager, Comprehensive Plaming Section
David V\€eks, AIcp, Growth Management Manager, Comprehensive Planning Section
Tony Russo, Jr., Senior Administrative Assistant, Public Utilities Planning & Project Management
Dept.
Chris 0' Area, Environmtal Specialist, Stormwater & Envjronmtal Planning Section
Mike Greene, Manager, Transportation Planning Section
FLUE File
1:\Cityview Documents21Comprhensive Planning Dept Leffers'.olde Cypress DRI-PUOIDOA-PL201 0-1 052 Olde Cypress DRI.docx
-2-
aIde c.;rrm; OR!
Packet Page -78-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Olde cypress DR! / PUD Unit Summary
Last Updated: 3/15/2010
Subdivision ~ Total Lots Built to Date %
Strada Bella SF 18 17 94%
Santorini SF 55 55 100%
T erramar SF 55 55 100%
Egret Cove SF 18 18 100%
Ibis Landing SF 55 55 100%
Santa Rosa SF 27 27 100%
Biscayne Place SF 8 8 100%
W oodsedge SF 130 125 96%
Total SF Units 366 360 98%
Subdivision ~ Total Units Built to Date %
Fairway Preserve MF 264 264 100%
Amberton MF 312 132 42%
Total MF Units 576 396 69%
Packet Page -79-
Olde Cypress DRI
Total Proposed Units
Total Units Built to Date
1100 756
Olde Cypress PUD
MF Units
SF Units
Unallocated
Total Units
Existing
576
366
158
1100
HD Development RPUD
SF Units
Total Units
Existing
71
71
Total DRI Units
Olde Cypress PUD
Vita Tuscana PUD
Total Units
Existing
1100
o
1100
Packet Page -80-
Proposed
125
125
Proposed
942
125
1067
%
69%
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Oide (ypress DR! Transportation Summary
Existing Unit Mix
PM Peak Total
~ Units Hour Trips Trips
SF 296 1.0 296
MF 804 0.5 402
Total 1100 698
Proposed Unit Mix
PM Peak Total
~ Units Hour Trips Trips
SF 491 1.0 491
MF 576 0.5 288
Total 1067 779
10.40%1
% Change in Total Trips
Packet Page -81-
\
Co~r County
- ~ --
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
WWW.COLLlERGOV.NET
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR
o DRI Application for Development Approval (DRI)
[gJ DRI Notice of Proposed Change (DOA)
PROJECT NUMBER
PROJECT NAME
DATE PROCESSED
[
DOA-Pl2010-1052 REV:1
OLOE CYPRESS DRI
DATE: 6/11/10
Due: 7/2/10
J
APPLICANT INFORMATION.
APPLlCANT(S) OLDE CYPRESS DEVELOPMENT. L TO AND VITA PIMA. LLC
FIRM
ADDRESS 2647 PROFESSIONAL CIRCLE CITY NAPLES STATE FL ZIP 34119
TELEPHONE # 239-592-7344 CELL # 239-280-6504 FAX # 239-592-7541
E-MAIL ADDRESS:KGELDER@STOCKDEVELOPMENT.COM
Is the applicant the owner of the subject property? ~ Yes D No
Please provide the following information on separate sheets.
D (a) If applicant is a land trust, so indicate and name beneficiaries.
D (b) If applicant is corporation other than a public corporation, so indicate and name officers
and major stockholders.
~ (c) If applicant is a partnership, limited partnership or other business entity, so indicate and
name principals.
D (d) If applicant if an owner, indicate exactly as recorded, and list all other owners, if any.
D (e) If applicant if a lessee, attach copy of lease, and indicate actual owners if not indicated on
the lease.
D (f) If applicant is a contract purchaser, attach copy of contract, and indicate actual owner(s)
name and address.
Packet Page -82-
<(
t'-
E
Q)
......
..-
..-
o
N
--
N
..-
--
'<t
Co1mr County
- ~ -
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
WWW.COLLlERGOV.NET
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358
AGENT INFORMATION.
NAME OF AGENT CHRIS MITCHELL
FIRM WALDROP ENGINEERING, P.A
ADDRESS 28100 BONITA GRANDE DRIVE CITY BONITA SPRINGS STATE FL ZIP 34135
TELEPHONE # 239-405-7777 CELL # 239-682-2248 FAX # 239-405-7899
E-MAIL ADDRESS:CHRISM@WALDROPENGINEERING.COM
BE AWARE THAT COLLIER COUNTY HAS LOBBYIST REGULATIONS. GUIDE
YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY AND ENSURE THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH
THESE REGULATIONS.
. PROPERTY INFORMATION
Detailed leoal description of the propertv covered bv the application: (If space is inadequate, attach
on separate page.) If request involves change to more than one zoning district, include separate legal
description for property involved in each district. Applicant shall submit four (4) copies of a recent
survey (completed within the last six months, maximum 1" to 400' scale) if required to do so at the pre-
application meeting. NOTE: The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If
questions arise concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed survey may be
required.
Section/Township/Range 21 & 22148S/26E
Lot: Block: Subdivision: aLOE CYPRESS
Plat Book _ Page #: _ Property I.D.#: See Attached
Metes & Bounds Description: See Attached {"O~, f)f/ I' ~
Size of property: _ ft. X _ ft. = Total Sq. Ft. _ Acres ~ .
Address/qenerallocation of subiect property: Immokalee Road & aide Cypress Boulevard
Does the owner of the subject property own property contiguous to the subject property? If so,
give complete legal description of entire contiguous property. (If space is inadequate, attach on
separate page).
Section/Township/Range .f.1/48 S/26 E
Lot: _ Block: Subdivision: _
Plat Book _ Page #: _ Property 1.0.#: See Attached
Metes & Bounds Description: See attached.
Co~r County
- ~ --
4/12/2011/tem 7.A.
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
WWW.COLLlERGOV.NET
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358
DETAIL OF REQUEST
Does the proposed action comply with the Collier County Growth Management Plan? [8J Yes 0 No
If no, provide a written explanation.
Has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? 0 Yes [8J No
provide a written explanation of the hearing.
If so, please
If this is a NOPC application, has any portion of the DRI been
DEVELOPED? If so, please provide a written explanation.
If this is a NOpe application please provide a list of all previous actions on the subject site, beginning
with the original DRIfPUD approval and including all subsequent amendments. Include hearing
number, hearing dates and a summary of the approved action.
!ZJ SOLD and/or
[8J
Section 10.03.05.B.3 of the Land Development Code requires an applicant to remove
their public hearing advertising sign (s) after final action is taken by the Board of County
Commissioners. Based on the Board's final action on this item, please remove all public
hearing advertising sign (s) immediately
RECORDING OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS.
Within 30 days of adoption of the Ordinance, the owner or developer (specify name) at its expense shali record in
the Public Records of Collier County a Memorandum of Understanding of Developer Commitments or Notice of
Developer Commitments that contains the legal description of the property that is the subiect of the land use
petition and contains each and every commitment of the owner or developer specified in the Ordinance. The
Memorandum or Notice shall be in form acceptable to the County and sholl comply with the recording requirements
of Chapter 695, FS. A recorded copy of the Memorandum or Notice sholl be provided to the Collier County
Planned Unit Development Monitoring stoff within 15 days of recording of said Memorandum or Notice.
Packet Page -84-
Co.County ..
_. :l~ _- ". _..__
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
. . NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358
COLLI!:R COUNTY GOVERNMENT .
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
WWW.COLLIERGOV.NET
AFFIDAVIT
<(
I'- Well, VITA PIMA. LLC being first duly sworn, depose and say that well am/are the owners of
E . . the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing; that all
2 . 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
C; application, are honest and trueto 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 tIlis form, whether computer generated or Colinty printed shalf. 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 WALDORP ENGINEERING. P.A.and COLEMAN,
YOVANOVICH & KOESTER. PA to actasourfmy representative in any matters regarding this
Petition. . .. . .
Signature of Property Owner
BRIAN STOCK. MANAGER
Typed or Printed Name of Owner
Typed or Printed Name of Owher
-:;
. of
The . foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me
dUhf _ .., 20#1L.:..by . ~i1YlJfo~
... personaHy known to me or has produced
this. .
day
who
as identification.
is
,
~
DOA-PLlOIO-IOS2. REV:1
aLOE CYPRESS ORl
DATE: 6/11/10
Due: 7/2{10
(Print, Ty e or Stamp Commissioned.
. . -..;~i~- . ANGELA tB6-V~E~N
.. t;~~} MY COM.MISSION # Db8779S".3
'~1f;,'~'" EXPIRES ApollO, 2013
State ~t:f3 !'~rtdaNoWfYSefvlce.com
. . .. . - . . . ! -
County of Collier. .
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
eollrCountY
"- :~ --
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT.OF~ONING a. LAND.DEVELOF'MENT REVIEW
WWWcCOLLlERGOV.NET
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358
AFFIDAVIT
Wefl, OLOE CYPRESS DEVELOPMENT, L TO being first duly sworn, depose and say that we/I
am/are the owners of the property. described herein and which is the subject matter of the
proposed hearing; that. all the answers to the questions in this. application, including the
disclosure of interest infolTT1ation,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. Weflunderstand tha!the information requested on this application mustbe complete
and accurate and that the content of this form, whether computer generated or County printed
shall no! 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 WALDORP ENGINEERING. P.A.and COLEMAN.
YOVANOVICH & KOESTER. PA to actas ourfmy representative in any matters regarding this
Petition. .. ..
Signature of Property Owner
BRIAN STOCK. MANAGER
Typed or Printed Name of Owner
Typed or Printed Name of Owner
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me
CJuJtL .. , 201~, by ~dJ1. ,~fo(lb
personally known to me or has produced
this
'f-
day of
who is
~
Packet Page -86-
as identification.
. ~j~~~:~~ANGELALBOWEN
,.:&., MY COMMISSION # DD877953
St .t. f Fl. 'd I ;-~",,,,...if! EXPIRES APnI1.0. 2013
a e 0 on. a "'H,",'"
. (4Q7)~9P-O':,:'; FIDlidaNo!myServlce.com
County of Collie, .
DOA_Pl2010-1052 REV:!
OlOE CYPRESS DRI
DATE: 6/11/10
Due: 7/2/10
<{
I'-
E
Q)
.....
~.
~
o
N.
--
N
~
--
<;t
...,-.,... ......
. .
CO~ . rCoMnty
~ :~--.'
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT .
PEPT.OFZONING l!. LANDDEVELOl='MENT REVIEW
WWW.COLLlERGOV.NET
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE .
. NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358
AFFIDAVIT
Weill, OLOE CYPRESS DEVELOPMENT. L TD being first duly sworn, depose and say that well
am/are the owners of the property described herein and which. is the s. ubject matter of the
. ' ..
proposed hearing; that all the answers to the questions in this application, including the
disclosure of interest infolTi1ation,all sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached.
to and made apart of this application, are honest and true to the best of our knowledge and
bel.i.etWe/..lunderstand that the information requested on this application must be com. p.Jete
.. ---, ...-- ". - . ". --. " ..-- . ".
and accurate and that the content ofthis fonn, whether computer generated or County printed
shall not be altered. Public hearings will not be advertised until this application is deemed
cornplete, and all required infonnation has been submitted.. .
As property oWner We/I further authorize WALDORP ENGINEERING. P.A.and COLEMAN.
YOV ANOVICH & KOESTER. P.A. to act as our/my representative in any matters regarding this
Petition. .. . .. .
Signature of Property Owner
BRIAN STOCK. MANAGER
Typed or Printed Name of Owner
Typed or Printed Name of Owner
The, . foregoing instrument was ac:knowledgedbeforerne
dA J1L . .. .. ,20~L.. by 7JV/a.n 8fo<?.kJ
personally known to me or has produced ·
. .,,....;--
this 1- . day of
who. is
--------
as identification.
.4:i!'K~o . ANGELA l BOI.'IIEN .
~~~.:;;l MY CQMI~ISSION # 00877953
~'~?t;rJ"~~~' . EXPfRES, April 10, 2Q1~
State of M?J~.{l1 !;.3 FloridaNOlllrySarvlce.com. .
County of Collier.
DOA-Pl2010-1052 REV:!
OLOE CYPRESS DRI
DATE: 6/11/10
Due: 7/2/10
eill
, or Stamp Commissioned
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
WALDROP ENGINEERING
CML ENGINEERING & lAND DEl/ELOPMENT CONSULTANTS
June 8, 2010
Kay Deselem, AICP, Principal Planner
Zoning & Land Development Review Department
Community Development & Environmental Services
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, Florida 34104
DOA-Pl2010-105Z REV:!
OLOE CYPRESS DR!
OAT" 6/11/10
Due: 7/Z/10
Subject:
Olde Cypress DR!
DR! Notice of Proposed Change (DOA) Permit Application
Dear Ms. Deselem:
Enclosed for your review is the Application for Public Hearing for aIde Cypress DR!, 538+/- acre project located
at the northeast intersection of the aIde Cypress BoulevardlImmokalee Road intersection in Naples, Florida.
The purpose of the NOPC Application is to add approximately 65.3 acres to the DR!. The 65.3 acres is
comprised of 46.6 acres from the RPUD Zoning District and 18.7 acres from the Agriculture Zoning District
(submitted to Collier County for a PUDA rezone known as Vita Tuscana). The Vita Tuscana property is adjacent
to the aIde Cypress PUD/DR! and is located in Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 26 East. The property is
also designated within the Urban Residential Subdistrict per the Collier County Future Land Use Map.
BACKGROUND:
Vita Tuscana RPUD, formerly know as HD Development RPUD, consists of 46.6 acres between aIde Cypress
DRllPUD and Imrnakolee Road. There is approximately 18.7 acres of land between aIde Cypress DRllPUD and
Vita Tuscana that is currently zoned Agricultural and is not included in either PUD. Vita Pima, LLC purchased
this property in February of2010. Principals within Vita Pima, LLC have an ownership interest exceeding 25%
in aIde Cypress Development, Ltd which is the developer of aIde Cypress DR!. Therefore. under the
aggregation rule they are required to include this new land in the DR!. This application seeks to incorporate this
property into the Olde Cypress DR!.
THE REQUEST:
Specifically, the request is to aggregate into the aIde Cypress DR! up to 125 single-family residential units and
33 multi-family units, and associated accessory uses, within the Vita Tuscana RPUD boundary. The overall unit
allocation for aIde Cypress DRI will remain at 1, I 00 units. The aggregation will not add density or units to the
DR!. The water and sewer for this project will be provided by Collier County Public Utilities through existing
infrastructure serving aIde Cypress and/or Imrnokalee Road.
TRANSPORTATION:
Vita Tuscana RPUD will be accessed from Treeline Drive. Per discussion with Collier County Transportation
Staff, Imrnokalee Road improvements (specifically the interstate interchange) are deemed complete and the
roadway is functional as a six lane roadway. There are no expected impacts from the development of Vita
Tuscana RPUD as this RPUD is being incorporated into the aIde Cypress DR!. The overall DR! units will not be
J:\!95-CH Vita Tuscana\Word\PUDAs & DRI NOPC\O!d~ Cypress DRr\Olde Cypress NOrC Cover Letter.doc
Packet Page -88-
.::(
r--
E
Q)
.....
..-
..-
o
N
--
N
..-
--
'<t
increased. Rather they will be re-allocated to reflect current and build-out conditions for the DRI to include aIde
Cypress and Vita Tuscana. The only analysis required is the conversion of trips to reflect the additional single
family homes versus the estimated number provided in the original TIS. The calculation is attached and reflects
the trip generation assumptions provided in the pre-application meeting with the Southwest Florida Regional
Planning Council.
CONCLUSION:
In summary, we trust the proposed aggregation will be found consistent with the LDC and GMP. Per the Pre-
Application Meeting Notes/Minutes, the following items are enclosed for your review:
I. A check (#1508) in the amount of $8,725 for the DRI Notice of Proposed Change Application Fees;
2. Twelve (12) copies of the submittal cover letter detailing why the amendment is necessary;
3. Twelve (12) copies of the completed DRl Notice of Proposed Change Application;
4. Twelve (12) copies of the Pre-Application Meeting NoteslMinutes;
5. Twelve (12) copies of the DRl Conceptual Site Plan (24"x36" and one 8 'I," x II" 'copy);
6. One (1) copy of the DRI Conceptual Site Plan on CDROM in JPG format;
7. Twelve (12) copies of the completed State NOPC Form;
8. Two (2) copies of the legal description;
9. Two (2) copies of the List of Owners of Corporation;
10. Two (2) copies of the Owner Affidavit signed & notarized;
II. Two (2) copies of the approved Addressing Checklist dated 03/08/10;
12. Two (2) copies ofthe Notices sent to DCA and RPC;
13. Four (4) copies of the Boundary Survey (signed and sealed);
14. Three (3) copies of the revised Traffic Impact Statement (TIS);
15. Two (2) copies of an email stating no methodology meeting required for the TIS;
16. One (I) copy of the TIS on CDROM;
17. Five (5) copies of the Aerial taken within previous 12 months (min. scaled I" = 200') showing FLUCCS
Codes, Legend and Project boundary;
18. Two (2) copies of an email detailing the fee calculation as determined by Collier County;
19. Two (2) copies of all other DRI ADA and Sufficiency responses on CDROM;
20. Two (2) copies of the entire submittal documents on CDROM.
Should you require additional information or have any questions, please feel free to contact my office.
Very truly yours,
WALDROP ENGINEERING, P.A.
hristopher R. Mitchell, P .E.
Director of Engineering
Enclosures
cc: Keith Gelder, Stock Development, w/enclosures
Richard Y ovanovich, Coleman, Y ovanovich & Koester, w/enclosures
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
WALDROP ENGINEERING
CIVIL ENGINEERING & lAND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANIS
October 29, 20]0
Kay Deselem, AlCP, Principal Planner
Zoning & Land Development Review Department
Community Development & Environmental Services
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, Florida 34104
DOA-P12010-1052 REV3
OLOE CYPRESS ORI
DATE: 11/2/10
DUE: 11/24/10
Subject:
Olde Cypress DR!
DR! Notice of Proposed Change (DOA) Permit Application
Cover Letter Update
Dear Ms. Deselem:
Enclosed for your review is the Application for Public Hearing for aIde Cypress DRI, 538+/- acre project located
at the northeast intersection of the aIde Cypress BoulevardlImmokalee Road intersection in Naples, Florida.
The purpose of the NOPC Application is to add approximately 63.9 acres to the DRI. The 63.9 acres is
comprised of 45.2 acres from the RPUD Zoning District and 18.7 acres from the Agriculture Zoning District
(submitted to Collier County for a PUDA rezone known as HD Development RPUD). The HD Development
property is adjacent to the aIde Cypress PUDfDRl and is located in Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 26
East. The propeliy is also designated within the Urban Residentiai Subdistrict per the Collier County Future Land
Use Map.
BACKGROUND:
HD Development RPUD, consists of 46.6 acres between aIde Cypress DRIlPUD and Immakolee Road. There is
approximately 18.7 acres ofland between Olde Cypress DRIlPUD and HD Development RPUD that is currently
zoned Agricultural and is not included in either PUD. Vita Pima, LLC purchased this property in February of
2010. Principals within Vita Pima, LLC have an ownership interest exceeding 25% in Olde Cypress
Development, Ltd which is the developer of aIde Cypress DRl. Therefore, under the aggregation rule they are
required to include this new land in the DR!. This application seeks to incorporate this property into the aIde
Cypress DRl. There is a portion of the HD Development RPUD that is not owned by Vita Pima, LLC and that
1.4 acres will not be incorporated into the Olde Cypress DR!.
THE REQUEST:
Specifically, the request is to aggregate into the aIde Cypress DRl up to 125 single-family residential and
associated accessory uses, within the HD Development RPUD boundary. The overall unit allocation for aIde
Cypress DRl will remain at 1,100 units. The aggregation will not add density or units to the DRl. The water and
sewer for this project will be provided by Collier County Public Utilities through existing infrastructure serving
aide Cypress and/or Immokalee Road.
J:\195_01 Vits. TUSCaJ'llL\Word\PUDAs& DRl NOPc\Olde Cypress NOPC\Jrd :mbmittal\Updated Olde CyPress Nope Cover Lelw.do~
Packet Page -90-
<C
l"-
E
Q)
~
..-
..-
o
N
--
N
..-
--
v
TRANSPORTATION:
HD Development RPUD will be accessed from Treeline Drive. Per discussion with Collier County
Transportation Staff, Immokalee Road improvements (specifically the interstate interchange) are deemed
complete and the roadway is functional as a six lane roadway. There are no expected impacts from the
development of HD Development RPUD as this RPUD is being incorporated into the Olde Cypress DR!. The
overall DRI units will not be increased. Rather they will be re-allocated to reflect current and build-out
conditions for the DRI to include Olde Cypress and HD Development. The only analysis required is the
eonversion of trips to reflect the additional single family homes versus the estimated numher provided in the
original TIS. The calculation is attached and reflects the trip generation assumptions provided in the pre-
application meeting with the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council.
CONCLUSION:
NOTE THESE ITEMS WERE SUBMITTED IN JUNE OF 2010 WITH THE ORIGINAL SUBMITTAL. ANY
UPDATED ITEMS ARE LISTED IN THE RE-SUBMITTAL LETTER FOR TillS APPLICATION.
In summary, we trust the proposed aggregation will be found consistent with the LDC and GMP. Per the Pre-
Applieation Meeting NoteslMinutes, the following items are enclosed for your review:
1. A check (#1508) in the amount of $8,725 for the DRINotice of Proposed Change Application Fees;
2. Twelve (12) copies of the submittal eover letter detailing why the amendment is necessary;
3. Twelve (12) copies of the completed DR! Notice of Proposed Change Application;
4. Twelve (12) copies of the Pre-Application Meeting NoteslMinutes;
5. Twelve (12) copies of the DR! Conceptual Site Plan (24"x36" and one 8 y," x II" 'copy);
6. One (I) copy of the DRI Conceptual Site Plan on CDROM in JPG format;
7. Twelve (12) copies of the completed State NOPC Form;
8. Two (2) copies of the legal description;
9. Two (2) copies of the List of Owners of Corporation;
10. Two (2) copies of the Owner Affidavit signed & notarized;
11. Two (2) copies of the approved Addressing Checklist dated 03/08/10;
J 2. Two (2) copies of the Notices sent to DCA and RPC;
13. Four (4) copies of the Boundary Survey (signed and sealed);
J4. Three (3) copies of the revised Traffic Impact Statement (TIS);
15. Two (2) copies of an email stating no methodology meeting required for the TIS;
16. One (1) copy of the TIS on CDROM;
17. Five (5) copies of the Aerial taken within previous 12 months (min. scaled I" = 200') showing FLUCCS
Codes, Legend and Project boundary;
18. Two (2) copies of an email detailing the fee calculation as determined by Collier County;
19. Two (2) copies of all other DR! ADA and Sufficiency responses on CDROM;
20. Two (2) copies of the entire submittal documents on CDROM.
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Should you require additional information or have any questions, please feel free to contact my office.
Very truly yours,
WALDROP ENGINEERING, P.A.
hristopher R. Mitchell, P .E.
Director of Engineering
Enclosures
ec: Keith Gelder, Stock Development, w/enclosures
Richard Y ovanovich, Coleman, Y ovanovieh & Koester, w/enclosures
Packet Page -92-
<(
l"-
E
<D
.....
...-
...-
o
N
--
N
...-
--
'<t
www.sunbiz.org - Department of State
Page I of2
Home
Contact Us
E-Filing Services
Document Searches
Forms
Help
Previous on List Next on List Return To List
Entity Name Search'
I Submit I
Events No Name History
.,.~_,.__~~__,~.~",",""'____'~"'__"'~'~u~W~._,,_,,,,~_.M_.~~_._.__"...,....=__"~~__.",.~"c.._._..-,.~w_"......"..".""_'''''''~"__,~.__...,
Detail by Entity Name
Florida Limited Partnership
OLDE CYPRESS DEVELOPMENT, L TO.
Filing Information
Document Number A98000002058
FEI/EIN Number 650867395
Date Filed 09/0211998
State FL
Status ACTIVE
Last Event AMENDMENT
Event Date Filed 02120/2003
Eyent Effective Date NONE
Principal Address
2647 PROFESSIONAL CiRCLE
SUITE 1201
NAPLES FL 34119-8091
Changed 04/1912008
Mailing Address
2647 PROFESSIONAL CIRCLE
SUITE 1201
NAPLES FL 34119-8091
Changed 04/19/2008
Registered Agent Name & Address
GOODLETTE COLEMAN JOHNSON ET AL
4001 TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH
SUITE 300
NAPLES FL 34103 US
Name Changed: 04/19/2008
Address Changed: 06/0212006
General Partner Detail
Name & Address
Document Number L01000011007
STOCK DEVELOPMENT, LLC
2647 PROFESSIONAL CIRCLE, SUITE 1201
NAPLES FL 34119
Annual Reports
OOA._PU010-1052 REV:!
aLOE CYPRESS DRI
DATE: 6{11/10
Due; 7/2/10
-.-.........'T'............. n'
.. I"\n^^^A^"'^ t!' /1 ..., 1"1 A 1"
www.sunbiz.org - Department of State
4/12/2011/tem 7.A.
Report Year Filed Date
2008 04/1912008
2009 0412312009
2010 0412012010
Document Images
0412012010 ANNUAL REPORT [ View image in PDF fomnat ]
~12312009-=-AJ'iblUAL REPORT L View image in PDF fomnat )
04/1912008 ANNUAL REPORT [ View image in PDF fomnat ]
0413012007 - Ar:,INUAI.BJ~EORT I View image in PDF fomnat I
0610212006 - ANNUAL REPORT [ View image in PDF fomnat J
0710212005 ANNUAL REPORT [ View image in PDF format )
Q6117IZQ04-,ANNUAULEPQBI [ View image in PDF format ]
05108/2003 -- ANNUAL REPORT I View image in PDF format ]
ml2012003 - Amendmenj I View image in PDFformat ]
0412312002 - ANNUAL REPORT [ View image in PDF fomnat ]
05130/2001 Merger [ View image in PDF format ]
Q4121a001 - ANNUAL REPORT I View image in PDF format ]
05/22/2000 - ANNUAL REPORT I View image in PDF fomnat ]
09/18/1998 ANNUAL REPQRT I View image in PDF format ]
09102/1998 - Domestic LP I View image in PDF fomna! ]
Note: This is not official record. See documents if question Dr confJjct.!
Previous on List Next on List Return To List ---.."...-..----..---.---..--
i Entity Name Search i
L__.....__.________.________...___..._I
Events No Name History I Submit I
r..-
I Home I Contact us I Document Searches I E-Filing Services I Forms r Help!
Copyright and Privacy Policies
Copyright @ 2007 State of Florida, Department of State.
Packet Page -94-
htto:llwww.sunbiz.org/scriots/cordet.exe?acUOn=Utlt.lLilI:ma doc nllmher=A9ROOOOO?O ~f1 ")[)1 n
<C
I'-
E
<i)
......
.,-
.,-
o
N
--
N
.,-
--
'<t
www.sunbiz.org - Department of State
Page 1 of2
Home
Contact Us
E.Filing Services
Forms
Help
Document Searches
Previous on List
Next on List Return To List
,Entity Name Search:
I Submit I
Events
No Name History
~"_~,~"___~""_",,,,"_,,,~,_,,,_,,_,,,,,,,,,,_,,,_,~______'_"._""""",,,""n,w'~",.,.~>_,...__,.....""...~,.~_~~,.~~___~_~....-.~,.,,~,...,,~~.~,_~_.--__,_
Detail by Entity Name
Florida Limited Liability Company
STOCK DEVELOPMENT, LLC
Filing Information
Document Number L01000011007
FEIIEIN Number 593740488
Date Filed 07/09/2001
State FL
Status ACTIVE
Last Event AMENDED AND RESTATED ARTICLES
Event Date Filed 10/27/2004
Event Effective Date NONE
Principal Address
2647 PROFESSIONAL CIRCLE
SUITE 1201
NAPLES FL 34119
Changed 01/15/2006
Mailing Address
2647 PROFESSIONAL CIRCLE
SUITE 1201
NAPLES FL 34119
Changed 01115/2006
Registered Agent Name & Address
GOODLETTE COLEMAN JOHNSON YOVANOVICH ET AL
4001 TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH
SUITE 300
NAPLES FL 34103 US
Name Changed: 01/15/2006
Address Changed: 04/19/2006
Manager/Member Detail
Name & Address
Title MGR
STOCK. BRIAN K
2647 PROFESSIONAL CIRCLE, SUITE 1201
NAPLES FL 34119
Title VP
1.u II
~1_:_ ~___/~_ _~__.L_L_ ...1_",- _ __()__....!____~T"'T'T':'TT o_~___
~f1"1 '''''''()1f\
~--
____.l____T f\1f\f\f\f\11r.
www.sunbiz.org - Department of State
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
IMIG, BOB
2647 PROFESSIONAL CIRCLE, SUITE 1201
NAPLES FL 34119
TilleVP
KOCSES, CHAD
2647 PROFESSIONAL CIRCLE, SUITE 1201
NAPLES FL 34119
Annual Reports
Report Year Filed Date
2008 04/30/2008
2009 04/23/2009
2010 04/20/2010
Document Images
04/20/2010 - ANNUAL REPORT [ View image in PDF fomnal )
04/23/2009 - ANNUAL REPORT I View image in PDF fomnal I
Jl4/30/2008 - ANNUAL REPORT l View image in PDF fomnal I
PiL1S/2008 - ANNI.[6-L REPOBI [ View image in PDF fomnal I
04/30/2007 - ANNUAL REPORT [ View image in PDF fotmat I
04/1912006 - ANNUAL REPORT [ View image in PDF fomnat I
Q,l/29/200S - ANNUAL REPORT r View image in PDF fomnat I
10/2612004 - Amended and Restated Article.;; [ View image in PDF formal I
04/30/2004 - ANNUAL RI;:PQRT r View image in PDF fomnal I
04/21/2003 -ANNUAL REPORT [ View image in PDF fomnat I
12/19/2002 - ANNUAL REPORT [ View image in PDF fomnal I
Q4/2212002 - "'-IWUAbBEPORT [ View image in PDF fomnal I
07/09/2001 - Florida Umited Uabilites [ View image in PDF fomnat I
~ote: This is not official record. See documents if question or conflicu
'..~'_."-...-,_. ---_.,..~ ,_..", -~'~""~-~-"~"'-'-'.',.~...~,--"~- _.D__..OO_ '-- ""-.....- "'-.,,-,,_..,,,"._,...,,-~~.- __._._..,_,_...'.~'~k.'" -.. ~'-"~....._"'-~~" . ..~.,,". -,... _"_'_~."'~a".,., ~.",...,..,,,.,~,. ",_,,_
Previous on List Next on List Return To List -----.....----,-.-....--
En!ity.lIl"me Searc~ i
Events No Name History [ Submit I
."=---~.'._- "".',-~.'-~' .~'''- ,- ..~-'" ..... .~.."_M..~_.,"., .~_..~.~., ,'-, '..- ~'. .-,-',-.". .-..._-~_.~,. '." "".~~.".~."."'-_. "~"'.~' ~.","~' ._"~_....,..."..._----~--,~ ..,..........,
i Home I Contact us I Document Searches I E~Filing Services I forms I Help I
Copyright and Privacy Policies
Copyright @ 2007 State of Florida, Department of State.
Packet Page .96-
http://www.sunbiz.org/scripts/cordet.exe?aCtlOn=Ubll:.lL6Cma doc nllrnh~r=T.01 000011 0
~/nn()1()
<(
t--
E
Q)
==
..-
..-
o
N
--
N
..-
--
';!"
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
STA TE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
DIVISION OF COMMUNITY PLANNING
BUREAU OF LOCAL PLANNING
2555 Shumard Oak Blvd.
TalJahassee, FI01;da 32399
850/488-4925
NOTIFICATION OF A PROPOSED CHA,,,,GE TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED
DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT (DR!)
SUBSECTION 380.06(19), FLORIDA STATUTES
Subsection 380.06(19), Florida Statutes, requires that submittal of a proposed change to a previously
approved DRI be made to the local government, the regional planning agency, and the state land
planning agency according to this tom1.
1. I, Brian Stoek, the undersigned owner/authorized representative of Olde Cypress
Development, LTD & Vita Pima, LLC, hereby give notice of a proposed change to a (developer)
previously approved Development of Regional Impact in accordanee with Subsection 380.06(19),
Florida Statutes. In support thereof, I submit the folJowing infonnation concerning the Olde Cypress
DRI (f/k/a The Woodlands DRI) development, which (original & CUlTent project names) infonnation is
true and conect to the best of my knowledge. I have submitted today, under separate cover, copies of
this completed notifieation to Collier County, (local govemment) to the Southwest Florida Regional
Planning Council, and to the Bureau of Local Planning, Department of Community Affairs.
017/10
. I
Date
Si6'11atur .
DOA-PUOIO-I052 REV:l
OLOE CYPRESS DRI
DATE: 6/11/10
Due: 7/2/10
Packet Page -98-
2. Applicant (name, address, phone).
Olde Cypress Development, LTD
2647 Professional Circle, Suite 1201
Naples, Fl34119
Contact: Keith Gelder
(239) 592-7344
3. Authorized Agent (name, address, phone).
Olde Cypress DRI
DOA-PL201 0-1 052
submittted: 1-12-11
(this page only)
Waldrop Engineering, PA.
~ 28100 Bonita Grande Drive
I'- Bonita Springs, Fl34135
E Contact: Chris Mitchell
2 (239) 405-7777
..-
c; 4. Location (City, County, TownshiplRange/Section) of approved DRl and proposed change.
N
--
~ Olde Cypress Dri (FIKIA The Woodlands Dri)
~ Naples, Fl34103
Section 21 & 22/ Township 48s / Range 26e
5. Provide a complete description of the proposed change. Include any proposed changes to the plan of
development, phasing, additional lands, commencement date, build-out date, development order
conditions and requirements, or to the representations contained in either the development order or the
Application for Development Approval.
Indicate such ehanges on the project master site plan, supplementing with other detailed maps, as
appropriate. Additional information may be requested by the Department or any reviewing agency to
clarify the nature of the change or the resulting impacts.
No changes are proposed to the phasing, commencement, or build-out dates. The developer proposes
to add 63.88 acres to the existing DR1 with no change in total number of approved units. The
additional acreage is planned for residential development.
6. Complete the attached Substantial Deviation Determination Chart for all land use types approved in
the development. If no change is proposed or has occurred, indicate no change.
Please See Attached
7. List all the dates and resolution numbers (or other appropriate identification numbers) of all
modifications or amendments to the originally approved DRl development order that have been adopted
by the local government, and provide a brief description of the previous changes (i.e., any information
not already addressed in the Substantial Deviation Determination Chart). Has there been a change in
local government jurisdiction for any portion of the development since the last approval or development
order was issued? If so, has the annexing local government adopted a new DRl development order for
the project?
There have been five (5) development order amendments adopted by Collier County since the original
"The Woodlands DRU' development order (Ord. 86-1) was issued on November 6,1986. The
following is a description of the five (5) do amendments:
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
(1) Resolution (87-96) adopted April 28, 1987, amended section b(5)(a)(7) and (8), transportation,
to clarify responsibilities of Collier County and the developer; amended section b(5)(b)(4),
transportation conditions, clarifying and redejining criteria by which a substantial deviation
shall be determined;
(2) Resolution (87-207) adopted September 15, 1987, amending section a(4),jinding offact, to
state a maximum square footage of permitted commercial retail development and to increase
the total acreage of preservation areas and to set forth a revised land use schedule that did not
increase the total amount of acreage or dwelling units previously approved.
The two (2) development order amendments described above were adopted by Collier County
to resolve appeals of the of the original Woodland's DRI develompent order to the Florida
Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission take by the Florida Department of Community
Affairs and the Southwest Florida Regional Planning CounciL The Woodland's DRI
development order became effective on November 7, 1990, the date on which the Florida Land
and Water Adjudicatory Comission issued itsjinal order of dismissal of the appeaL
(3) Resolution (94-774) adopted November 1. 1994, extended the woodland's DRI commencement
date and the buildoutltermination date by four (4) years, eleven months (11) or until October
7, 2000 and October 7, 2015, respectively.
Collier County remains the local government with jurisdiction over all portions of the Olde
Cypress DRI.
(4) On October 22, 1996, the BCC amended the development order with resolution (96-482) to
reduce the number of dwelling units from 1,460 to 1,100 dwelling units and a reduction of the
commercial use from 200,000 sf to 165,000 sf and miscellaneous changes to the plan resulting
solely from permitting requirements of the South Florida Water Alanagement. Also, the right-
of-way reservation on the east side of the Woodlands was eliminated. Miscellaneous changes
were also made to drainage/water quality, transportation, vegetation and wildlife, wetlands,
consistency with the comprehensive plan and jire by the deletion thereof.
(5) In December 1999, Resolution (99-472) 28.69 acres were added to the eastern edge of Olde
Cypress in Section 22. Lands to be added included a 2.1 acre archaelogical preserve area.
Standards were also incorporated in the development order to provide protection for
archaelogical resources. The gross density was also reduced from 2.2 to 2.1 dwelling units per
acre. Minor adjustments inland use tabulations, along with other miscellaneous changes were
made to the development order to accommodate the notice of change.
(6) Resolution (2000-I55) adopted May 23,2000 added 9.3 acres to accommodate the addition of
the golf course driving range. The request also included a modifICation of the golf course/open
space acreage from 161. 7 to 168.3 acres, including lakes. The residential acreage was
modifiedfrom 152.5 acres to 155.2 acres. No changes to the number of dwelling units,
commercial floor area, phasing schedule, commencement date, or build-out date was
requested.
Packet Page -100-
-<
r--
E
Q)
.....
..-
..-
o
N
--
N
..-
--
'<t
8. Describe any lands purchased or optioned within 1/4 mile of the original DR! site subsequent to the
original approval or issuance of the DR! development order. Identify such land., its size, intended use,
and adjacent non-project land uses within llz mile on a project master site plan or other map.
Vita Pima, LLC recently purchased 65.29 acres directly adjacent (south) of the Olde Cypress DRI.
The easterly 46.64 acre parcel is an existing MUD (HD Development Ordinance #05-65). The
westerly 18.65 acres is currently zoned agriculturaL Vita Pima, LLC has filed a concurrent PUD
Amendment application with Collier County to rezone the entire 65.29 acres to MUD.
9. Indicate if the proposed change is less than 40% (cumulatively with other previous changes) of any of
the criteria listed in Paragraph 380.06(19)(b), Florida Statutes.
The proposed change is less than 40% of any of the criteria listed in 380(19)(b), F.S.
Do you believe this notification of change proposes a change which meets the criteria of Subparagraph
380.06(l9)(e)2., F.S.
YES
NO
x
10. Does the proposed change result in a change to the buildout date or any phasing date of the proj ect?
If so, indicate the proposed new buildout or phasing dates.
No changes to buildout dates or phasing are proposed.
II. Will the proposed change require an amendment to the local government comprehensive plan?
The proposed change will not require any comprehensive plan changes.
Provide the following for incorporation into such an amended development order, pursuant to
Subsections 380.06 (15), F.S., and 9J-2.025, Florida Administrative Code:
12. An updated master site plan or other map ofthe development portraying and distinguishing the
proposed changes to the previously approved DR! or development order conditions.
Attached.
13. Pursuant to Subsection 380.06(l9)(f), F.S., include the precise language that is being proposed to be
deleted or added as an amendment to the development order. This language should address and quantify:
a. All proposed specific changes to the nature, phasing, and build-out date of the development; to
development order conditions and requirements; to commitments and representations in the
Application for Development Approval; to the acreage attributable to each described proposed
change ofland use, open space, areas for preservation, green belts; to structures or to other
improvements including locations, square footage, number of units; and other major
characteristics or components of the proposed change;
See attached Proposed Master Plan, Map H and Proposed changes to the Collier County
Development Order.
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
b. An updated legal description of the property, if any project acreage islhas been added or
deleted to the previously approved plan of development;
See attached legal description of the property to be attached to the Development Order.
c. A proposed amended development order deadline for commencing physical development of
the proposed changes, if applicable;
No change.
d. A proposed amended development order termination date that reasonably reflects the time
required to complete the development;
No change.
e. A proposed amended development order date until which the local government agrees that the
changes to the DRI shall not be subject to down-zoning, unit density reduction, or intensity
reduction, if applicable; and
No change.
f. Proposed amended development order speeifications for the annual report, including the date
of submission, contents, and parties to whom the report is submitted as specified in Subsection
9J-2.025 (7), FAC.
No change.
Packet Page -102-
<:t;
I'--
E
OJ
......
~
~
o
N
--
N
~
--
'<t
~
<
==
U
~Z
'"'0
Z....
<"'"
<
==Z
~~
oo~
0"",
='-~
O~
~Z
='-0
r......
O~
~....
U>
....~
""'~
~~
....."'"
~Z
<
"'"
00
~
;;;l
00
"
o 'oj
CICI
~ o-<l
o ~,
'> p
~ '"
p...'""
U
~
p::
"
.9
Of;
'p
o
~
~
p...
"1:l
"
~
o
p...
o
'-<
p...
r;-
~
"
~
'"
U
"
gf
'"
'""
u
"
~
;:J
"1:l
~
H
"-<
o
"
~
~
'"
o
,
o
o
o
~
"ti
'-<
o
o
o
-.
-
o
o
-.
-
~
'13
"
Of;
Jj
~
"-<
o
:+I:
"
'p
"
"
:3l
~
"
~
"'~
0,'"
- ~
~
'"'''''
0, 0
N 00
_ 0,
0, 0
""'"'
.~
gf
:=l
" '" '"
,g]]
~~~
o , ,
OJ ~ '.0
p... Of;.",
'" " "
f-<Vl~
o
o
~
N
o
N
vi
'"
-
o
N
'"
00
-
~
~
.s
"-<
o
:+I:
0.)
Of;
'"
.~
-d H
Of; "
" ~.
'EI '5
~ ~
" ;J
"~ ~
ru" a:i
~~
tl 0
-<:~
~
"
gf
'"
'""
u
"
"
o
'p
'"
u
..8
.oJ
v.;
~
0..
B
"
Ll
:.a
"
?-
"
E
"
~
:+I:
o
N
n
-
o
'"
00
'"'
-
o
'"
-
00
-
~
"
o
'p
'EI
"
o
U
o
Q
"
bJj
'"
"
"
u
<:
"1:l
~'-;;'
'" "
"1:l u
B ~
is CJ
" ~
bJj ~
" "
" ?- 0
u .......... ........
'" '" i::
0.. B "
if) '" "
" " .,.
15,:=; i:
0$8
~
"
Of;
~
'""
u
"
"
o
"p
'"
u
.s
"
~
en
"
u
'"
0..
~
"
"
0..
o
"-<
o
u
!:2::
f-<
~
"
o
'p
'EI
"
o
u
Q
CI
~
"
o
'p
is
"
"
~
"
&
"
"
<:
CI
<:
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Olde (ypress DRI / PUD Unit Summary
Last Updated: 3/15/2010
Subdivision ~ Total Lots Built to Date %
Strada Bella SF 18 17 94%
Santorini SF 55 55 100%
Terramar SF 55 55 100%
Egret Cove SF 18 18 100%
Ibis Landing SF 55 55 100%
Santa Rosa SF 27 27 100%
Biscayne Place SF 8 8 100%
W oodsedge SF 130 125 96%
Total SF Units 366 360 98%
Subdivision ~ Total Units Built to Date %
Fairway Preserve .MF 264 264 100%
Amberton MF 312 132 42%
Total MF Units 576 396 69%
Packet Page -104-
Olde Cypress DRI
DOA-PL201 0-1 052
email submittal 12/6/1 0
Olde Cypress DR!
Total Proposed Units
Total Units Built to Date
1100 756
%
69%
Olde Cypress PUD Existing
MF Units 576
<C SF Units 366
r-- Unallocated 158
E Total Units 1100
Q)
:!::
...-
...-
0
N HD Development RPUD
-- Existing Proposed
N
...-
-- SF Units 71 125
'<t
Total Units 71 125
Total DRI Units
OIde Cypress PUD
Vita Tuscana PUD
Total Units
Existine-
1100
o
1100
Proposed
942
125
1067
Olde Cypress DRI
DOA-PL201 0-1 052
email submittal 12/6/1 0
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Oide (ypress DRI Transportation Summary
Olde Cypress DRI
DOA-PL201 0-1 052
Packet Page -106- email submittal 12/6/10
<C
I'-
E
Q)
......
.,-
.,-
o
N
--
N
.,-
--
V
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
HD Development RPUD
Big Cypress Fox Squirrel Management Plan
The Big Cypress fox squirrel (Sciurus niger avicennia) is a large tree squirrel that nests
in pine, cypress, and melaleuca trees in southwest Florida. Forested areas with
relatively open shrub and ground cover stratum are preferred habitat. No Big Cypress
fox squirrel nests have been observed on the 18.7:1: acres of undeveloped land in the
western portion of the HD Development RPUD. Potential Big Cypress fox squirrel nests
have been previously reported in the general vicinity of the HD Development RPUD.
Prior to clearing the 18.7:1: acres of undeveloped land, a qualified biologist will survey
the construction limits for the presence of Big Cypress fox squirrels or their nests. Any
potential nests will be monitored to determine if they are currently being utilized by Big
Cypress fox squirrels. Nests found to be utilized by a Big Cypress fox squirrel will be
temporarily protected from clearing by a 125-foot-radius undisturbed buffer until any
juvenile squirrels have vacated the nest(s). These nests will be removed, outside of the
nesting season, once the absence of young fox squirrels within the nests is confirmed
by a qualified biologist. The nesting season is February 1st to May 30th. Any required
authorization from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) will be
obtained prior to removing the nest tree(s).
The HD Development RPUD has already implemented a management plan for the 16.2:1:
acre on-site and 20.0:1: acre off-site preserves which includes enhancement of potential
Big Cypress fox squirrel habitat. This consists of the treatment of exotics from 34.9:1:
acres of wetlands and 1.3:1: acres of uplands. The enhancement of these lands has
significantly increased their value as potential Big Cypress fox squirrel habitat.
DOA-Pl2D10-10S2 REV:3
OLDE CYPRESS DRI
DATE: 11/2/10
DUE: 11/24/10
W:\STOCK-5\BCFS Mang Plan HDDocx
Packet Page -108-
<:{
l"-
E
a>
......
.,-
.,-
o
N
--
N
.,-
--
'<t
Rhodes & Rhodes Land Surveying, Ine.
28100 Bonita Grande Drive, Snit. 107, Bonita Springs, Florida 34135
Phone (239) 405-8166 Fax (239) 405-8163
DESCRIPTION OF A PARCEL OF LAND
LYING IN
SECTIONS 21 & 22, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
A PORTION OF SECTIONS 21 AND 22, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE
26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA: THENCE RUN N.00059'51 "W. ALONG THE WEST LINE
OF SAID SECTION 21, A DISTANCE OF 100.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE
PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE CONTINUE N.00059'51 "W. ALONG THE
WEST LINE OF SECTION 21 A DISTANCE OF 2560.1 7 FEET TO THE WEST ONE-QUARTER
CORNER OF SAID SECTION 21; THENCE RUN N.01000'08"W., ALONG THE WEST LINE OF
SAID SECTION 21, FOR A DISTANCE OF 2659.99 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF
SAID SECTION 21; THENCE RUN N.89004'49"E., ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION
21 A DISTANCE OF 2645.04 FEET TO THE NORTII ONE-QUARTER CORNER OF SAID
SECTION 21; THENCE RUN N.89004'26"E., ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 21,
FOR A DISTANCE OF 2644.36 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 21;
THENCE RUN S.00055'09"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 21, FOR A DISTANCE
OF 2663.26 FEET TO THE EAST ONE-QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 21; THENCE RUN
S.00055'37"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 21, FORA DISTANCE OF 666.00
FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF AMBERTON, A CONDOMINTIJM, ACCORDING TO
THE DECLARATION OF CONDOMINIUM RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4278 AT
PAGE 3396 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE RUN
N.89006'04"E., ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID CONDOMINIUM FOR A DISTANCE OF
656.66 FEET; THENCE RUN S.OI 001'19"E. FORA DISTANCE OF I 898.09 FEET TO THE NORTH
RlGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF THE COCOHATCHEE CANAL (100 FEETWIDE)AS RECORDED IN
DEED BOOK 43, PAGE 251 OF SAID PUBLIC RECORDS; THENCE RUN S.89009'07"W., ALONG
SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 659.81 FEET TO THE EAST LINE
OF SAID SECTION 21; THENCE RUN S.89009'28"W., ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY,
FOR A DISTANCE OF 660.31 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF FAIRWAY PRESERVE
AT OLDE CYPRESS, A CONDOMINIUM, ACCORDING TO THE DECLARA TlON OF
CONDOMINIUM RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 3866 AT PAGE 4006 OF SAID
PUBLIC RECORDS AND TO THE EAST LINE OF A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN
OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4079 AT PAGE 1265 OF SAID PUBLIC RECORDS; THENCE RUN
N.Oo056'04"W., ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID CONDOMINIUM AND EAST LINE OF SAID
PARCEL, FORA DISTANCE OF 1231.49 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID
PARCEL; THENCE RUN S.89008'07"W., ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL AND THE
NORTH LINE OF A PARCEL DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4079 AT PAGE 1259
OF SAID PUBLIC RECORDS, FORA DISTANCE OF 660.47 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST
CORNER OF THE PARCEL DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4079 AT PAGE 1259 OF
SAID PUBLIC RECORDS; THENCE RUN S.00056'31 "E., ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID
PARCEL, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1231.23 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID
PARCEL AND TO THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF THE AFORESAID COCOHATCHEE
CANAL; THENCE RUN S.89009'28"W., ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, FORA
DISTANCE OF 990.47 FEET TO THE EAST Lil'm A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN
SHEET 1 OF 2
DOA~PL2010-10S2 REV:3
aLOE CYPRESS DRI
DATE: 11/2/10
DUE: 11/24/10
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Rhodes & Rhodes Land Surveying, Ine.
28100 Bonita GTande Drive, Suite 107, Bonita Springs, Florida 34135
Phone (239) 405-8166 Fax (239) 405-8163
OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 3579 AT PAGE 3894 OF SAID PUBLIC RECORDS; THENCE
N.00057'12''W., ALONG SAID EAST LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 224.51 FEET TO THE
NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID
PARCEL THE FOLLOWING TIllRTEEN (13) COURSES: (1) THENCE S.65023'20"W., FOR A
DISTANCE OF 43.57 FEET; (2) THENCE S.78026'13"W., FORA DISTANCE OF 61.22 FEET; (3)
THENCE S.80'04'25"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 45.57 FEET; (4) THENCE S.84'27'31 "W., FOR A
DISTANCE OF 31.15 FEET; (5) THENCE S.80'09'47"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 30.89 FEET; (6)
THENCE S.58'48'23"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 24.42 FEET; (7) THENCE S.54'27'05"W., FOR A
DISTANCE OF 36.02 FEET; (8) THENCE S.40025'12''W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 33. ] I FEET; (9)
THENCE S.47'57'45"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 62.74 FEET; (10) THENCE S.50021'05''W., FORA
DISTANCE OF 49.97 FEET; (11) THENCE S.68022'05"W., FORA DISTANCE OF 37.47 FEET; (12)
TIffiNCE S.420]8'38"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 39.61 FEET; (13) THENCE S.56049'27"W., FOR A
DISTANCE OF 15.80 FEET TO THE AFORESAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF A 100
FEET WIDE DRAINAGE CANAL; THENCE RUN S.89008'23"W., ALONG SAID NORTH RlGHT.
OF- WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 2528.93 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
LESS THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCEL:
DA VINCI ESTATES AT OLDE CYPRESS, A SUBDIVISION RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 35 AT
PAGES 33 THROUGH 37, INCLUSIVE, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, AND ALSO BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
A PORTION OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, BEING MORE P ARTICULARL Y DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE
26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA: THENCE RUN N.00059'51 "W. ALONG THE WEST LINE
OF SAID SECTION 21, FORA DISTANCE OF 100.00 FEET POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE
PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE CONTINUE N.00059'51 "W. ALONG THE
WEST LINE OF SECTION 21, FORA DISTANCE OF 2560.17 FEET TO THE WEST ONE-
QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 21; THENCE RUN N.89006'45"E., ALONG THE SOUTH
LII\1E OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 21, FORA DISTANCE OF
660.99 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGIl'.TNING OF THE PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED;
THENCE RUN N.O I 000'01 "W., ALONG THE \VEST LINE OF SAID DA VINCI SUBDIVISION, FOR
A DISTANCE OF 1330.06 FEET; THENCE RUN N.89005'40"E., ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF
SAID DA VINCI SUBDIVISION, FOR A DISTANCE OF ]32] .51 FEET; THENCE RUN
S.00058'40"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID DA VINICI SUBDIVISION, FOR A DISTANCE
OF 1330.47 FEET; THENCE RUN S.89006'45"W., ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID DA VINCI
SUBDIVISION, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1320.99 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PARCEL AS DESCRIBED CONTAINS 602.04 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
SHEET 2 OF 2
Packet Page -110-
<i
r--
E
OJ
.......
..-
..-
o
N
--
N
..-
--
'<t
OLDE CYPRESS DR!
HD DEVELOPMENT
FOLIO NUMBERS
Property Folio Numbers:
00186000005
00186760002
00185880006
00186560008
00186600007
00186760109
00186520006
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
DOA-PL2010-10S2 REV:3
OlDE CYPRESS DRI
DATE: 11/2/10
DUE: 11/24/10
J:\195-01 Vita Tuscana\Word\PUDAs & DRI NOPC\Olde CyPress NOrGard submittaI\OJde Cypress DRl HD Development Folio Numbers.doc
Packet Page -112-
<(
r--
E
Q)
::::
OLDE CYPRESS DR! FOLIO NUMBERS
Folio # Street # Street Name
21990005929 8116 DREAM CATCHER C1R
21990005945 8116 DREAM CATCHER ClR
21990005961 8116 DREAM CATCHER ClR
21990005987 8116 DREAM CATCHER ClR
21990006009 8116 DREAM CATCHER ClR
21990006025 8116 DREAM CATCHER C1R
21990006041 8116 DREAM CATCHER ClR
21990003620 8117 DREAM CATCHER ClR
21990003646 8117 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990003662 8117 DREAM CATCHER ClR
21990003688 8117 DREAM CATCHER C1R
21990003701 8117 DREAM CATCHER ClR
21990003727 8117 DREAM CATCHER C1R
21990003743 8117 DREAM CATCHER ClR
21990003769 8117 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990006067 8120 DREAM CATCHER ClR
21990006083 8120 DREAM CATCHER ClR
21990006106 8120 DREAM CATCHER C1R
21990006122 8120 DREAM CATCHER ClR
21990006148 8120 DREAM CATCHER ClR
21990006164 8120 DREAM CATCHER C1R
21990006180 8120 DREAM CATCHERClR
21990006203 8120 DREAM CATCHER ClR
21990006229 8120 DREAM CATCHER ClR
21990006245 8120 DREAM CATCHER C1R
68391446108 7740 PRESERVE LN
68391446205 7755 PRESERVE LN
68391446166 7770 PRESERVE LN
68391446085 7774 PRESERVE LN
68391446182 7775 PRESERVE LN
68391446027 No Site Address
'<"""
'<"""
o
N
--
N
'<"""
--
"'"
OLDE CYPRESS DR! FOLIO NUMBERS
Folio # Street # Street Name
2]990005107 8094 DREAM CATCHER CIR
2]990005]23 8094 DREAM CATCHER CIR
2]990005149 8094 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990005165 8094 DREAM CATCHER CIR
2]990005181 8094 DREAM CATCHER CIR
2]990005204 8094 DREAM CATCHER CIR
2]990005220 8094 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990005246 8094 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990005262 8098 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990005288 8098 DREAM CATCHER CIR
2]990005301 8098 DREAM CATCHER CIR
2]990005327 8098 DREAM CATCHER CIR
2]990005343 8098 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990005369 8098 DREAM CATCHER CIR
2]990005385 8102 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990005408 8102 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990005424 8102 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990005440 8102 DREAM CATCHER CIR
2]990005466 8102 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990005482 8]02 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990005505 8102 DREAM CATCHER CIR
2199000552] 8102 DREAM CATCHER CIR
2]990005547 8106 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990005563 8106 DREAM CATCHER CIR
2]990005589 8106 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990005602 8106 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990005628 8]06 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990005644 8106 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990005660 8106 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990005686 8106 DREAM CATCHER CIR
2]990005709 8106 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990005725 8]06 DREAM CATCHER CIR
2]990005741 8] 10 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990005767 81 ]0 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990005783 8110 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990005806 8110 DREAM CATCHER CIR
2]990005822 8110 DREAM CATCHER CIR
2]990005848 8110 DREAM CATCHER C1R
21990005864 8] 10 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990005880 8110 DREAM CATCHER CIR
2]990003785 8] 13 DREAM CATCHER CIR
2]990003808 8113 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990003824 8113 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990003840 8113 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990003866 8113 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990003882 8113 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990003905 8113 DREAM CA TCHER CIR
2199000392] 8] 13 DREAM CATCHER CIR
2]990005903 8116 DREAM CATCHER CIR
Packet Page -114-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
<t;
l"-
E
<1>
......
OLDE CYPRESS DR! FOLIO NUMBERS
Folio # Street # Street Name
21990003604 8076 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004506 8079 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004522 8079 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004564 8079 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004580 8079 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004603 8079 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990004629 8079 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990004645 8079 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990004548 8079 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004467 8083 DREAM CA TCHER CIR
21990004483 8083 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004302 8083 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004328 8083 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004344 8083 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004360 8083 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004386 8083 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004409 8083 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990004425 8083 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990004441 8083 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004881 8086 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004904 8086 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004920 8086 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004946 8086 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990004962 8086 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004865 8086 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004140 8087 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004166 8087 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004182 8087 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004205 8087 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004221 8087 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004247 8087 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990004263 8087 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004289 8087 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004988 8090 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990005000 8090 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990005026 8090 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990005042 8090 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990005068 8090 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990005084 8090 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990003947 8093 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990003963 8093 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990003989 8093 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004001 8093 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004027 8093 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004043 8093 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004069 8093 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004085 8093 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004108 8093 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990004124 8093 DREAM CATCHER crR
.-
.-
o
~
N
.-
--
V
OLDE CYPRESS DR! FOLIO NUMBERS
Folio # Street # Street Name
32382104867 7985 PRESERVE CIR
32382105060 7985 PRESERVE crR
32382]04980 7985 PRESERVE CIR
32382104825 7985 PRESERVE crR
32382105125 7985 PRESERVE crR
32382105044 7985 PRESERVE CIR
32382105002 7985 PRESERVE CIR
32382105028 7985 PRESERVE crR
32382105141 7985 PRESERVE CIR
32382105086 7985 PRESERVE CIR
32382105109 7985 PRESERVE crR
32382105206 7985 PRESERVE crR
32382105264 7985 PRESERVE CIR
32382]04883 7985 PRESERVE crR
32382104906 7985 PRESERVE CIR
32382104922 7985 PRESERVE CIR
32382105248 7985 PRESERVE CIR
32382]04964 7985 PRESERVE CIR
32382105222 7985 PRESERVE crR
32382104948 7985 PRESERVE CIR
32382105167 7985 PRESERVE CIR
32382]04841 7985 PRESERVE crR
21990003264 8070 DREAM CA TellER CIR
2]990003280 8070 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990003303 8070 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990003329 8070 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990003345 8070 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990003361 8070 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990003387 8070 DREAM CATCHER C1R
21990003400 8070 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004661 8071 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990004687 807] DREAM CATCHER crR
21990004700 807] DREAM CATCHER crR
21990004726 8071 DREAM CA TCHER crR
21990004742 8071 DREAM CATCHER C1R
21990004768 8071 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990004784 8071 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990004807 8071 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990004823 807] DREAM CATCHER crR
21990004849 8071 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990003426 8076 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990003442 8076 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990003468 8076 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990003484 8076 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990003507 8076 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990003523 8076 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990003549 8076 DREAM CATCHER crR
21990003565 8076 DREAM CATCHER CIR
21990003581 8076 DREAM CATCHER CIR
Packet Page -116-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
<(
t--
E
Q)
......
OLDE CYPRESS DR! FOLIO NUMBERS
Folio # Street # Street Name
32382103282 7965 PRESERVE CIR
32382103321 7965 PRESERVE ClR
32382103266 7965 PRESERVE CIR
32382103020 7965 PRESERVE ClR
32382102908 7965 PRESERVE crR
32382102924 7965 PRESERVE CIR
32382103169 7965 PRESERVE ClR
32382103062 7965 PRESERVE CIR
32382103240 7965 PRESERVE CIR
32382103305 7965 PRESERVE CIR
32382102982 7965 PRESERVE CIR
32382103004 7965 PRESERVE CIR
32382103101 7965 PRESERVE ClR
32382103224 7965 PRESERVE ClR
32382102940 7965 PRESERVE ClR
32382103046 7965 PRESERVE CIR
32382103185 7965 PRESERVE CIR
32382103363 7965 PRESERVE ClR
32382103143 7965 PRESERVE ClR
32382103127 7965 PRESERVE CIR
32382103347 7965 PRESERVE ClR
32382102966 7965 PRESERVE ClR
32382103088 7965 PRESERVE CIR
32382104346 7975 PRESERVE ClR
32382104566 7975 PRESERVE ClR
32382104401 7975 PRESERVE crR
32382104540 7975 PRESERVE ClR
32382104728 7975 PRESERVE ClR
32382104469 7975 PRESERVE crR
32382104744 7975 PRESERVE CIR
32382]04443 7975 PRESERVE ClR
32382104362 7975 PRESERVE crR
32382104689 7975 PRESERVE crR
32382104508 7975 PRESERVE CIR
32382104786 7975 PRESERVE ClR
3238?104809 7975 PRESERVE CIR
32382104647 7975 PRESERVE ClR
32382104663 7975 PRESERVE ClR
32382104427 7975 PRESERVE crR
32382104760 7975 PRESERVE CIR
32382]04524 7975 PRESERVE CIR
32382104605 7975 PRESERVE ClR
32382104621 7975 PRESERVE crR
32382104702 7975 PRESERVE crR
32382104582 7975 PRESERVE crR
32382104388 7975 PRESERVE crR
32382104485 7975 PRESERVE CIR
32382105183 7985 PRESERVE C1R
32382105280 7985 PRESERVE CIR
..-
..-
o
N
--
N
..-
--
~
OLDE CYPRESS DR! FOLIO NUMBERS
Folio # Street # Street Name
32382103486 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103826 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103389 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103800 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103444 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103680 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103509 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103541 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103729 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103745 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103606 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103622 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103460 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103402 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103583 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103842 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103525 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103664 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103648 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103761 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103787 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103703 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103567 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382103428 7950 PRESERVE CIR
32382102704 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102500 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102746 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102568 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102827 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102487 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102429 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102526 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102542 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102843 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102869 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102623 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102801 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102885 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102607 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102445 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102788 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102681 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102665 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102762 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102584 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102461 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102649 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382102720 7960 PRESERVE CIR
32382103208 7965 PRESERVE CIR
Packet Page -118-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
<(
I'-
E
Q)
......
OLDE CYPRESS DRI FOLIO NUMBERS
Folio # Street # Street Name
32382101624 7935 PRESERVE CIR
32382104249 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382]04281 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382104087 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382104168 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382104320 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382104142 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382103884 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382104265 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382104184 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382103868 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382104029 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382104045 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382103981 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382104003 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382103923 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382103949 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382]04100 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382104207 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382103965 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382104126 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382104223 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382103907 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382104304 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382104061 7940 PRESERVE CIR
32382102089 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382]02047 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382102283 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382102144 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382102021 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382102348 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382102225 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382102186 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382102160 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382102403 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382102241 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382102267 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382102380 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382102005 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382101983 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382102364 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382102322 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382101941 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382102063 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382102102 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382102209 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382102128 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382102306 7945 PRESERVE CIR
32382101967 7945 PRESERVE CIR
...--
...--
o
N
--
N
...--
--
V
OLDE CYPRESS DRI FOLIO NUMBERS
Folio # Street # Street Name
32382100609 7915 PRESERVE crR
32382100900 7915 PRESERVE CIR
32382101420 7925 PRESERVE CIR
32382101307 7925 PRESERVE crR
32382101080 7925 PRESERVE CIR
32382101187 7925 PRESERVE crR
32382101064 7925 PRESERVE crR
32382101404 7925 PRESERVE crR
32382101145 7925 PRESERVE crR
32382101226 7925 PRESERVE CIR
32382101284 7925 PRESERVE CIR
32382101446 7925 PRESERVE CIR
32382101323 7925 PRESERVE CIR
32382101103 7925 PRESERVE CIR
3238210]048 7925 PRESERVE CIR
32382100984 7925 PRESERVE CIR
32382101 ]29 7925 PRESERVE CIR
32382101242 7925 PRESERVE crR
32382101381 7925 PRESERVE crR
32382101268 7925 PRESERVE crR
32382101365 7925 PRESERVE CIR
3238210] 161 7925 PRESERVE crR
32382101200 7925 PRESERVE crR
32382101349 7925 PRESERVE crR
32382101022 7925 PRESERVE crR
32382101006 7925 PRESERVE CIR
32382101608 7935 PRESERVE crR
32382101569 7935 PRESERVE CIR
32382101828 7935 PRESERVE CIR
32382]01585 7935 PRESERVE CIR
32382101763 7935 PRESERVE crR
32382101501 7935 PRESERVE crR
32382101747 7935 PRESERVE crR
32382101543 7935 PRESERVE crR
32382101488 7935 PRESERVE crR
32382101705 7935 PRESERVE CIR
32382101721 7935 PRESERVE crR
32382101844 7935 PRESERVE crR
32382101909 7935 PRESERVE CIR
32382101462 7935 PRESERVE crR
32382101666 7935 PRESERVE crR
32382101527 7935 PRESERVE crR
32382101789 7935 PRESERVE crR
32382101640 7935 PRESERVE crR
32382101886 7935 PRESERVE crR
32382101802 7935 PRESERVE CIR
32382101925 7935 PRESERVE crR
32382101682 7935 PRESERVE crR
32382101860 7935 PRESERVE crR
Packet Page -120-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
<:t;
t--
E
Q)
-
OLDE CYPRESS DR! FOLIO NUMBERS
Folio # Street # Street Name
29734001084 3029 RENAISSANCE cr
29734001149 3030 RENAISSANCE cr
29734001107 3033 RENAISSANCE cr
29734001123 3034 RENAISSANCE cr
32382100188 7905 PRESERVE ClR
32382100382 7905 PRESERVE ClR
32382100201 7905 PRESERVE ClR
32382100269 7905 PRESERVE CIR
32382100463 7905 PRESERVE ClR
32382100366 7905 PRESERVE CIR
32382100340 7905 PRESERVE ClR
32382100324 7905 PRESERVE ClR
32382100146 7905 PRESERVE ClR
32382100049 7905 PRESERVE ClR
32382100489 7905 PRESERVE ClR
32382100447 7905 PRESERVE ClR
32382100120 7905 PRESERVE ClR
32382100405 7905 PRESERVE ClR
32382100285 7905 PRESERVE ClR
32382100081 7905 PRESERVE ClR
32382100023 7905 PRESERVE ClR
32382100227 7905 PRESERVE ClR
32382100065 7905 PRESERVE ClR
32382100243 7905 PRESERVE ClR
32382100162 7905 PRESERVE ClR
32382100308 7905 PRESERVE ClR
32382100421 7905 PRESERVE ClR
32382100104 7905 PRESERVE ClR
32382100887 7915 PRESERVE ClR
32382100829 7915 PRESERVE ClR
32382100764 7915 PRESERVE ClR
32382100560 7915 PRESERVE ClR
32382100942 7915 PRESERVE ClR
32382100706 7915 PRESERVE ClR
32382100641 7915 PRESERVE ClR
32382100803 7915 PRESERVE ClR
32382100722 7915 PRESERVE ClR
32382100780 7915 PRESERVE CIR
32382100845 7915 PRESERVE CIR
32382100502 7915 PRESERVE ClR
32382100528 7915 PRESERVE ClR
32382100926 7915 PRESERVE ClR
32382100861 7915 PRESERVE ClR
32382100667 7915 PRESERVE ClR
32382100544 7915 PRESERVE ClR
32382100586 7915 PRESERVE ClR
32382100683 7915 PRESERVE CIR
32382100625 7915 PRESERVE ClR
32382100968 7915 PRESERVE CIR
.-
.-
o
N
--
N
.-
--
'<t
OLDE CYPRESS DRl FOLIO NUMBERS
Folio # Street # Street Name
29734000409 2921 LEONARDO AVE
29734000425 2930 FLORENTINE CT
29734000441 2934 FLORENTINE CT
29734000483 2935 FLORENTINE CT
29734000467 2938 FLORENTINE CT
29734000548 2939 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000522 2940 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000564 2943 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000506 2944 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000580 2947 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000603 2951 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000247 2953 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000629 2955 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000645 2959 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000661 2963 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000687 2967 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000700 2971 MONA LISA BLVD
29734001424 2974 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000726 2975 MONA LISA BLVD
29734001408 2978 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000742 2979 MONA LISA BLVD
29734001385 2982 MONA LISA BLVD
29734001369 2986 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000768 2987 MONA LISA BLVD
29734001343 2990 MONA LISA BLVD
29734001327 2994 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000784 2995 MONA LISA BLVD
29734001301 2998 MONA LISA BLVD
29734001288 3002 MONA LISA BLVD
29734001262 3006 MONA LISA BLVD
29734001246 3010 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000807 3011 MONA LISA BLVD
29734001220 3014 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000823 3015 MONA LISA BLVD
29734001204 3018 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000849 3019 MONA LISA BLVD
29734001181 3022 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000865 3023 MONA LISA BLVD
29734001165 3026 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000881 3027 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000904 3031 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000920 3035 MONA LISA BLVD
29734001068 3036 MONA LISA BLVD
29734001042 3040 MONA LISA BLVD
29734001026 3044 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000946 3045 MONA LISA BLVD
29734001000 3048 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000962 3049 MONA LISA BLVD
29734000988 3052 MONA LISA BLVD
Packet Page -122-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
<(
r--
E
(()
+"
OLDE CYPRESS DRI FOLIO NUMBERS
Folio # Street # Street Name
76713001100 3060 TERRAMAR DR
76713000127 3063 TERRAMAR DR
76713001087 3064 TERRAMAR DR
76713000143 3067 TERRAMAR DR
76713001061 3068 TERRAMARDR
76713000169 3071 TERRAMARDR
76713001045 3072 TERRAMAR DR
76713000185 3075 TERRAMAR DR
76713001029 3076 TERRAMAR DR
76713001003 3080 TERRAMAR DR
76713000981 3084 TERRAMAR DR
76713000208 3085 TERRAMAR DR
76713000965 3088 TERRAMARDR
76713000224 3089 TERRAMAR DR
76713000949 3092 TERRAMARDR
76713000240 3093 TERRAMAR DR
76713000266 3097 TERRAMAR DR
76713000282 3101 TERRAMARDR
76713000305 3105 TERRAMAR DR
76713000680 3108 TERRAMAR DR
76713000321 3109 TERRAMAR DR
76713000664 3112 TERRAMAR DR
76713000347 3113 TERRAMAR DR
76713000648 3116 TERRAMAR DR
76713000363 3117 TERRAMAR DR
76713000389 3121 TERRAMAR DR
76713000622 3124 TERRAMAR DR
76713000402 3125 TERRAMARDR
76713000606 3128 TERRAMAR DR
76713000428 3129 TERRAMAR DR
76713000583 3132 TERRAMAR DR
76713000444 3133 TERRAMAR DR
76713000567 3136 TERRAMAR DR
76713000460 3137 TERRAMARDR
76713000541 3140 TERRAMAR DR
76713000486 3141 TERRAMAR DR
76713000525 3144 TERRAMAR DR
76713000509 3145 TERRAMAR DR
29734000302 2901 LEONARDO AVE
29734001505 2902 LEONARDO AVE
29734000166 2903 LEONARDO AVE
29734000328 2905 LEONARDO AVE
29734001482 2906 LEONARDO AVE
29734000344 2909 LEONARDO AVE
29734001466 2910 LEONARDO AVE
29734000027 2911 LEONARDO A VB
29734000360 2913 LEONARDO AVE
29734000386 29J7 LEONARDO A VB
29734001440 2920 LEONARDO AVE
..--
..--
o
N
--
N
..--
--
"<t
OLDE CYPRESS DR! FOLIO NUMBERS
Folio # Street # Street Name
72590004683 3075 SANTORINI CT
72590005705 3078 SANTORINI CT
72590004706 3079 SANTORINI CT
72590005682 3082 SANTORINI CT
72590004722 3083 SANTORINI CT
72590005666 3086 SANTORINI CT
72590004748 3087 SANTORINI CT
72590005640 3090 SANTORINI CT
72590004764 3091 SANTORINI CT
72590005624 3094 SANTORINI CT
72590004780 3095 SANTORlNl CT
72590005608 3098 SANTORlNI CT
72590004803 3099 SANTORINI CT
72590005585 3102 SANTORlNI CT
74977000101 3064 STRADA BELLA CT
74977000127 3068 STRADA BELLA CT
74977000444 3071 STRADA BELLA CT
74977000143 3072 STRADA BELLA CT
74977000169 3076 STRADA BELLA CT
74977000185 3080 STRADA BELLA CT
74977000208 3084 STRADA BELLA CT
74977000224 3088 STRADA BELLA CT
74977000240 3092 STRADA BELLA CT
74977000266 3096 STRADA BELLA CT
74977000282 3100 STRADA BELLA CT
74977000305 3104 STRADA BELLA CT
74977000321 3108 STRADA BELLA CT
74977000347 3112 STRADA BELLA CT
74977000363 3116 STRADA BELLA CT
74977000389 3120 STRADA BELLA CT
74977000402 3124 STRADA BELLA CT
74977000428 3128 STRADA BELLA CT
76713000703 3107 TERRAMAR CT
76713000923 3110 TERRAMAR CT
76713000729 311 1 TERRAMAR CT
76713000907 3114 TERRAMAR CT
76713000745 3115 TERRAMAR CT
76713000884 3118 TERRAMAR CT
76713000761 3119 TERRAMAR CT
767]3000868 3122 TERRAMAR CT
76713000787 3123 TERRAMAR CT
76713000842 3126 TERRAMAR CT
76713000800 3]27 TERRAMAR CT
76713000826 3130 TERRAMAR CT
76713001142 3050 TERRAMAR DR
76713000062 305] TERRAMARDR
76713001126 3054 TERRAMAR DR
76713000088 3055 TERRAMAR DR
76713000101 3059 TERRAMAR DR
Packet Page -124-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
<t;
l"'-
E
<D
::::
OLDE CYPRESS DR! FOLIO NUMBERS
Folio # Street # Street Name
64625005303 2898 LONE PINE LN
64625005824 2901 LONE PINE LN
64625005329 2902 LONE PINE LN
64625005808 2905 LONE PINE LN
64625005345 2908 LONE PINE LN
64625005785 2909 LONE PINE LN
64625005769 2913 LONE PINE LN
64625005743 2917 LONE PINE LN
64625005361 . 2918 LONE PINE LN
64625005727 2921 LONE PINE LN
64625005701 2925 LONE PINE LN
64625005387 2928 LONE PINE LN
64625005688 2929 LONE PINE LN
64625005662 2933 LONE PINE LN
64625005400 2936 LONE PINE LN
64625005646 2937 LONE PINE LN
64625005426 2940 LONE PINE LN
64625005620 2941 LONE PINE LN
64625005442 2944 LONE PINE LN
64625005604 2945 LONE PINE LN
64625005468 2948 LONE PINE LN
64625005581 2949 LONE PINE LN
64625005484 2952 LONE PINE LN
64625005507 2956 LONE PINE LN
64625005523 2960 LONE PINE LN
64625005549 2964 LONE PINE LN
64625005565 2968 LONE PINE LN
64626000381 3021 OLDE COVE WAY
64626000048 3024 OLDE COVE WAY
64626000365 3025 OLDE COVE WAY
64626000064 3028 OLDE COVE WAY
64626000349 3029 OLDE COVE WAY
64626000080 3032 OLDE COVE WAY
64626000323 3033 OLDE COVE WAY
64626000103 3036 OLDE COVE WAY
64626000307 3037 OLDE COVE WAY
64626000129 3040 OLDE COVE WAY
64626000284 3041 OLDE COVE WAY
64626000145 3044 OLDE COVE WAY
64626000268 3045 OLDE COVE WAY
64626000161 3048 OLDE COVE WAY
64626000242 3049 OLDE COVE WAY
64626000187 3052 OLDE COVE WAY
64626000226 3053 OLDE COVE WAY
64626000200 3057 OLDE COVE WAY
72590004641 3067 SANTORINI CT
72590005747 3070 SANTORIN1 CT
72590004667 3071 SANTORINI CT
72590005721 3074 SANTORINI CT
...-
...-
o
N
--
N
...-
--
'<t
OLDE CYPRESS DR! FOLIO NUMBERS
Folio # Street # Street Name
64625001 103 2758 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001585 2761 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001129 2762 OLDE CYPRESS DR
6462500] 145 2766 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001608 2767 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001161 2770 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001624 2773 OLDE CYPRESS DR
6462500 II 87 2774 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001640 2777 OLDECYPRESSDR
6462500]200 2778 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001666 2781 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001226 2782 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001682 2785 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001242 2786 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001705 2789 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001268 2790 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001721 2793 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001284 2794 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001747 2797 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001307 2798 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001763 2801 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625006124 2839 LONE PINE LN
64625005044 2840 LONE PINE LN
64625006108 2843 LONE PINE LN
64625006085 2847 LONE PINE LN
64625005060 2850 LONE PINE LN
64625006069 285] LONE PINE LN
64625005086 2854 LONE PINE LN
64625006043 2855 LONE PINE LN
64625005109 2858 LONE PINE LN
64625006027 2859 LONE PINE LN
64625005125 2862 LONE PINE LN
64625006001 2863 LONE PINE LN
64625005141 2866 LONE PINE LN
64625005989 2867 LONE PINE LN
64625005167 2870 LONE PINE LN
64625005963 2873 LONE PINE LN
64625005183 2874 LONE PINE LN
64625005947 2877 LONE PINE LN
64625005206 2878 LONE PINE LN
64625005921 2881 LONE PINE LN
64625005222 2882 LONE PINE LN
64625005905 2885 LONE PINE LN
64625005248 2886 LONE PINE LN
64625005882 2889 LONE PINE LN
64625005264 2890 LONE PINE LN
64625005866 2893 LONE PINE LN
64625005280 2894 LONE PINE LN
64625005840 2897 LONE PINE LN
Packet Page -126-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
<C
/'-
E
Q)
......
OLDE CYPRESS DR! FOLIO NUMBERS
Folio # Street # Street Name
72590000360 7352 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000289 7355 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000386 7356 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000263 7359 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000409 7360 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000247 7363 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000425 7364 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000221 7367 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000441 7368 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000205 7371 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000467 7372 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000182 7375 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000483 7376 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000166 7379 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000140 7383 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000506 7384 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000124 7387 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000522 7388 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000108 7391 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000548 7394 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000085 7395 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000564 7398 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000069 7399 MONTEVERDE WAY
64626001128 2701 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64626001 ] 44 2705 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625000845 2706 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64626001160 2709 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625000861 2710 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625000887 2714 OLDE CYPRESS DR
72590000043 2717 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625000900 2718 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001789 2719 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001420 2721 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625000926 2722 OLDE CYPRESS DR
6462500]446 2725 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625000942 2726 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625000968 2730 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001462 2731 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64675000984 2734 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001488 2737 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001006 2738 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001022 2742 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001501 2743 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001048 2746 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001527 2747 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001064 2750 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001543 2753 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001080 2754 OLDE CYPRESS DR
64625001569 2757 OLDE CYPRESS DR
"<"""'
"<"""'
o
N
--
N
"<"""'
--
V
OLDE CYPRESS DR! FOLIO NUMBERS
Folio # Street # Street Name
64625003321 75]2 TREELINE DR
64625003347 75]6 TREELINE DR
64625003703 75]9 TREELINE DR
64625003363 7520 TREELINE DR
64625003680 7523 TREELINE DR
64625003389 7524 TREELINE DR
64625003664 7527 TREELINE DR
64625003402 7528 TREELINE DR
64625003648 7531 TREELINE DR
64625003428 7532 TREELINE DR
64625003622 7535 TREELINE DR
64625003444 7536 TREELINE DR
64625003606 7539 TREELINE DR
64625003460 7540 TREELINE DR
64625003583 7543 TREELINE DR
64625003486 7544 TREELINE DR
64625003567 7547 TREELINE DR
64625003509 7548 TREELINE DR
64625003541 7551 TREELINE DR
64625003525 7555 TREELINE DR
64625003923 2802 WILD ORCHID CT
6462500440] 2803 WILD ORCHID CT
64625003949 2806 WILD ORCHID CT
64625004388 2807 WILD ORCHID CT
64625003965 2810 WILD ORCHID CT
64625004362 2811 WILD ORCHID CT
64625003981 2814 WILD ORCHID CT
64625004346 28]5 WILD ORCHID CT
64625004003 28]8 WILD ORCHID CT
64625004320 28]9 WILD ORCHID CT
64625004304 2823 WILD ORCHID CT
64625004029 2824 WILD ORCHID CT
64625004281 2827 WILD ORCHID CT
64625004045 2828 WILD ORCHID CT
64625004265 283] WILD ORCHID CT
64625004061 2832 WILD ORCHID CT
64625004249 2835 WILD ORCHID CT
64625004087 2836 WILD ORCHID CT
64625004223 2839 WILD ORCHID CT
64625004100 2840 WILD ORCHID CT
64625004207 2843 WILD ORCHID CT
64625004]26 2844 WILD ORCHID CT
64625004184 2847 WILD ORCHID CT
64625004142 2848 WILD ORCHID CT
64625004168 2852 WILD ORCHID CT
64625000023 2864 WILD ORCHID CT
72590000328 7347 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000344 7348 MONTEVERDE WAY
72590000302 735] MONTEVERDE WAY
Packet Page -128-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
<t;
r--
E
(()
.....
OLDE CYPRESS DR! FOLIO NUMBERS
Folio # Street # Street Name
64625000188 7199 TREELINE DR
64625000382 7200 TREELINE DR
6462600] 02] 7401 TREELINE DR
64625000421 7402 TREELINE DR
6462600]047 7405 TREELINE DR
64625000447 7408 TREELINE DR
64626001063 7409 TREELINE DR
64626001089 7413 TREELINE DR
64625000463 74]4 TREELINE DR
64626001102 7417 TREELINE DR
64625000489 7420 TREELINE DR
64625000502 7424 TREELINE DR
64625000528 7428 TREELINE DR
64625000829 7429 TREELINE DR
64625000544 7432 TREELINE DR
64625000803 7433 TREELINE DR
64625000560 7436 TREELINE DR
64625000780 7437 TREELINE DR
64625000586 7440 TREELINE DR
64625000764 744] TREELINE DR
64625000609 7444 TREELINE DR
64625000748 7445 TREELINE DR
64625000625 7448 TREELINE DR
64625000722 7449 TREELINE DR
6462500064 ] 7452 TREELINE DR
64625000706 7453 TREELINE DR
64625003046 7456 TREELINE DR
64625003062 7460 TREELINE DR
64625003088 7464 TREELINE DR
64625003907 7465 TREELINE DR
64625003] 0 1 7468 TREELINE DR
64625003884 7469 TREELINE DR
64625003 ]27 7472 TREELINE DR
64625003868 7475 TREELINE DR
64625003143 7476 TREELINE DR
64625003169 7480 TREELINE DR
64625003185 7484 TREELINE DR
64625003842 7485 TREELINE DR
64625003208 7488 TREELINE DR
64625003826 749] TREELINE DR
64625003224 7492 TREELINE DR
64625003800 7495 TREELINE DR
64625003240 7496 TREELINE DR
64625003787 7499 TREELINE DR
64625003266 7500 TREELINE DR
64625003761 7503 TREELINE DR
64625003282 7504 TREELINE DR
64625003745 7507 TREELINE DR
64625003305 7508 TREELINE DR
64625003729 7511 TREELINE DR
.,....
.,....
o
N
--
N
.,....
--
""
DOA-PL2010-1052 REV:3
OLDE CYPRESS DRI
DATE: 11/2/10
DUE: 11/24/10
INSTR 4476425 OR 4606 PG 1045 RECOROED 9/20/2010 11:09 AM PAGES 9
DWIGHT E. BROCK, COLLIER COUNTY CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT
DOC@.70 $0.70 REC $78.00
CONS $0.00
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
DOA-PL2010-10S2 REV:3
OLDE CYPRESS DRI
DATE: 11/2/10
DUE: 11/24/10
SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT
Retum recorded document to:
South Florida Water Management District
3301 Gun Club Road, MSC 4210
West Palm Beach, FL 33406
THIS
EASEMENT
is given
2010
this
, by
("Grantor")
is
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, the Grantor is the owner of certain lands situated in
('olliu County, Florida, and more specifically
described in Exhibit "A" attachec hereto and incorporated herein ("Property"); and
WHEREAS, the Grantor desires to construct
Vi-l-r. ~:SCQ.I"\Q ("Project") at a site in
~o\\i!...... County, which is subject to the regulatory
jurisdiction of South Florida Water Management District ("District"); and
WHEREAS, District Permit No. -1-\ - 0'2- 14 b - V ("Penni!")
authorizes certain activities which affect waters in or of the State of Florida; and
~~
Fonn 1190 (0112007)
Deed of Conservation Easement - Standard
Page 1 of 8
Packet Page -130-
OR 4606 PG 1046
WHEREAS, this Permit requires that the Grantor preserve, enhance, restore and/or
mitigate wetlands and/or uplands under the District's jurisdiction; and
<(
r--
E
Q)
.....
WHEREAS, the Grantor, in consideration of the consent granted by the Permit, is
agreeable to granting and securing to the Grantee a perpetual Conservation Easement
as defined in Section 704.06, Florida Statutes, over the area described on Exhibit "S"
("Conservation Easement").
..-
..-
o
N
-...
N
..-
-...
""
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the issuance of the Permit to construct
and operate the permitted activity, and as an inducement to Grantee in issuing the
Permit, together with other good and valuable consideration, the adequacy and receipt
of which are hereby acknowledged, Grantor hereby grants, creates, and establishes a
perpetual Conservation Easement for and in favor of the Grantee upon the property
described on Exhibit "S" which shall run with the land and be binding upon the Grantor,
and shall remain in full force and effect forever.
2. Purpose. I is
water areas in their natu
condition and to retain s
wetland and/or upland ar
a. To enter upon the Property at reasonable times with any necessary
equipment or vehicles to enforce the rights herein granted in a manner that will not
unreasonably interfere with the use and quiet enjoyment of the Property by Grantor at the
time of such entry; and
b. To enjoin any activity on or use of the Property that is inconsistent
with this Conservation Easement and to enforce the restoration of such areas or
features of the Conservation Easement that may be damaged by any inconsistent
activity or use.
3. Prohibited Uses. Except for restoration, creation, enhancement,
maintenance and monitoring activities, or surface water management improvements, or
other activities described herein that are permitted or required by the Permit, the
following activities are prohibited in or on the Conservation Easement:
~d..~
Form 1190 (01/2007)
Deed of Conservation Easement ~ Standard
Page 2 of8
OR 4606 PG 1047
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
a. Construction or placing of buildings, roads, signs, billboards or
other advertising, utilities, or other structures on or above the ground;
b. Dumping or placing of soil or other substance or material as landfill,
or dumping or placing of trash, waste, or unsightly or offensive materials;
c. Removal or destruction of trees, shrubs, or other vegetation, except
for the removal of exotic or nuisance vegetation in accordance with a District approved
maintenance plan;
d. Excavation, dredging, or removal of loam, peat, gravel, soil, rock, or
other material substance in such manner as to affect the surface;
e. Surface use except for purposes that permit the land or water area to
remain in its natural or enhanced condition:
f. flood control, water conservation,
erosion control, soil conservati ~~t preservation including, but not
limited to, ditching, diking ai g; ~ ~ \
g. Aoto 1'"1'" Mmftit "'" m ""oed rete,,,,, oflo"" ~
water areas; I mr7'\\ ~;7
h. Acts ~ (~~ e etr~l<: the preservation of the
structural integrity or p ~I. appearance 0'. S itei 0 ~ operties having historical,
archaeological, or cultural s' . nee. ~~. 0
T 'YO
4. Grantor's Rese . ts. Gran es all rights as owner of the
Property, including the right to . @ll[. s Property that are not prohibited
herein and which are not inconsisten . rict rule, criteria, permit and the intent
and purposes of this Conservation Easement.
5. No Dedication. No right of access by the general public to any portion of
the Property is conveyed by this Conservation Easement.
6. Grantee's Liabilitv. Grantee shall not be responsible for any costs or
liabilities related to the operation, upkeep or maintenance of the Property.
7. Properlv Taxes. Grantor shall keep the payment of taxes and
assessments on the Easement Parcel current and shall not allow any lien on the
Easement Parcel superior to this Easement. In the event Grantor fails to extinguish or
obtain a subordination of such lien, in addition to any other remedy, the Grantee may,
but shall not be obligated to, elect to pay the lien on behalf of the Grantor and Grantor
shall reimburse Grantee for the amount paid by the Grantee, together with Grantee's
reasonable attorney's fees and costs, with interest at the maximum rate allowed by law,
no later than thirty days after such payment. In the event the Grantor does not 50
reimburse the Grantee, the debt owed to Grantee shall constitute a lien against the
Easement Parcel which shall automatically relate back to the recording date of this
~d...'l.~
Form 1190 (0112007)
Deed of Conservation Easement - Standard
Page 3 of B
Packet Page -132-
OR 4606 PG 1048
<C
I'-
E
OJ
+-'
Easement. Grantee may foreclose this lien on the Easement Parcel in the manner
provided for mortgages on real property.
8. Enforcement. Enforcement of the terms, provisions and restrictions of this
Conservation Easement shall be at the reasonable discretion of Grantee, and any
forbearance on behalf of Grantee to exercise its rights hereunder in the event of any
breach hereof by Grantor, shall not be deemed or construed to be a waiver of Grantee's
rights hereunder.
.,....
.,....
o
N
--
N
.,....
--
><:t
9. Assiqnment. Grantee will hold this Conservation Easement exclusively for
conservation purposes. Grantee will not assign its rights and obligations under this
Conservation Easement except to another organization or entity qualified to hold such
interests under the applicable state laws.
10. Severabilitv. If any provision
r Val or other communications
pr y given if sent by United
o the appropriate party or
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD unto Grantee forever. The covenants, terms, conditions,
restrictions and purposes imposed with this Conservation Easement shall be binding upon
Grantor, and shall continue as a servitude running in perpetuity with the Property.
Grantor hereby covenants with said Grantee that Grantor is lawfully seized of said
Property in fee simple; that the Conservation Easement is free and clear of all
encumbrances that are inconsistent with the terms of this Conservation Easement; and all
mortgages and liens on the Conservation Easement area, if any, have been subordinated
to this Conservation Easement; and that Grantor has good right and lawful authority to
convey this Conservation Easement; and that it hereby fully warrants and defends the title
to the Conservation Easement hereby conveyed against the lawful claims of all persons
whomsoever.
_~CL~
Form 1190 (01/2007)
Deed of ConselV3tion Easement ~ Standard
Page 4 of 8
OR 4606 PG 1049
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
IN
Vr'iA VCMA. I LLC
WITNESS
WHEREOF,
(Grantor) has hereunto set its authorized hand this
~pte,.,\\?ev- ,20 Ie
V r: iA J>J:M ~ I lLc
a Florida corpor~tion j~
By: ;};:17BJ/
Name: -=BY' ~'Cl.v'1 S+-ccl
MG..t'\c:.je(
Ni"h
day of
(Signature)
(Print)
Title:
Signed, sealed and delivered i
By:
c.
Name:
not
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF
20
subscribed to the foregoing if!strument, as the
(title), of Lt w t..C- (corporation),
a Florida corporation, and acknowledged that he/she executed the same on behalf of
said corporation and the he/she was duly authorized to do so. ..l:Ie/She is p"rsnn"lIy
known tn mp or has produced a (state)
driver's license as identification.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and official seal.
NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF FLORIDA
~"'~~~"~~"
;t'O' (~,
JUDITH M. SEALE
My Commission Expires:
(Print)
~ )cXt/d/J 1ft--.
/ /
.,
~. . :'~ My Ccmm. Expires Sep 28, 2012
':{-;', rJ':,fJ",/ Commission # 00 819893
'..~o..\"., n.
Name:
- -
~~
Form 1190 (0112007)
Deed of Conservation Easement - Standard
Page50fB
Packet Page -134-
OR 4606 PG 1050
RHODES &- RHODES LAND SURVEYING, mQ
JOHN SO'YIT JlIIODFS, p.s. Jlt TUO.lIAS E JlIIODFS, P.B. Jlt
PITONE(l!J9)1IJ5.8I66 FAX(W9)1IJ5.8I63
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
<x;
f'-.
E
(j)
-
Being a portion of Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, being more
particularly described as follows:
BEGINNING at the northeast comer of the west If2 of the west 1f2 of the southwest 1f4 of the southeast
1/4 of Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida; thence South 00057'12"
East, along the east line of said fraction and along the west line of Olde Cypress, Unit One, according to
the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 32, Pages 1 through 11 (inclusive) of the public records of said
Collier County, Florida, a distance of 1,006.32 feet to a point on the bounclaJ:y of those certain lands as
descn"bed and recorded in Official Records Book 2579, Page3894 of the public records of said Collier
County; thence run the following Thirteen (13) courses along last said lands; Course NO.1: South
65023'20" West, 43.57 feet; Course No.2: South 78026'13" West, 61.22 feet; Course No. 'I: South
80.04'25" West, 45.57 feet; Course NO.4: South 84027'31" West, 31.15 feet; Course No. ~: South
80.09'47" West, 30.89 feet; Course No.6: So .48'23" West, 24.42 feet; Course NO.7: South
54027'05" West, 36.02 feet; urse No Ij~:hG~'" West, 33.11 feet; Course No. Q: South
47057'45" West, 62,74 feet; Course est, 49.97 feet; Course No. 11: South
68022'05" West, 37.47 feet; Cours .-12: South 42018 39.61 feet; Course No. 1'1: South
56049'27" West, 15.80 feet to a~o" t ottthe northerly right-of- . y e of a 100 feet wide drainage canal
as descn"bed in Deed Book 43, agel2~~ IJlt~e-tepords d Collier County, Florida; thence
South 89008'23" West, along 'd ;{Ol ly' f-wav'Une a' ce of 821.78 feet; thence North
12039'35" East, a distance of o. jj a:~- en 'al curve; thence northeasterly,
108.22 feet along the arc of a . v rly, having a rawus of 295.00 feet,
through a eentral angle of 2100 1P;; by. 0 ~ 'chbearsNorth52026'33"East,
107.61 feet to a point of com curvature; thene nortl;le , 131.08 feet along the arc of a
circular curve, concave north \, having a raw f 259'. feet, through a central angle of
30002'30" and being subtended b ord which bears . '45" East, 129.59 feet to a point on
a non-tangential curve; thence no rly, 367.61 feet e arc of a circular curve, concave
southeasterly, having a rawus of 970. gle of 21042'51" and being subtended
by a chord which bears North 56057'16 jps;!i ence North 85047'15" East, a distance of
62,16 feet; thence North 71017'44" East, a e of 142.80 feet; thenee North 51'15'32" East, a
distance of 49.44 feet to a point of curvature; thence northerly, 79.61 feet along the arc of a circular
curve, concave westerly, having a rawus of 63.00 feet, through a central angle of 72023'58" and being
subtended by a chord which bears North 21003'33" East, 74.42 feet; thence North 00036'32" West, a
distance of 15.03 feet; thence North 03053'23" East, a distance of 76.28 feet; thence North 31035'01"
East, a distance of 76.60 feet; thence North 51017'22" East, a distance of 55.95 feet; thence North
42.41'44" East, a distance of 60.14 feet; thence North 21003'52" East, a distance of 71.34 feet; thence
North 41026'05" East, a distance of 83.23 feet; thence North 41023'09" East, a distanee of 31.19 feet;
thence North 52017'26" East, a distance of 60.53 feet; thence North 58050'57" East, a distance of 33.67
feet; thence North 00052'19" West, a distance of 227.83 feet to a point on the southerly line of aforesaid
Olde Cypress, Unit One; thence North 89.08'07" East, along said southerly line, a distance of 211.31 feet
to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
.,-
.,-
o
N
---
N
.,-
---
~
Containing 707,295 square feet or 16.237 acres, more or less.
Subject to easements, reservations and restrictions of record.
Bearings are based on the southerly line of OIde Cypress, Unit One as being North 89007'34" East (per
plat).
X:\CON5T\ Vita Tuscana \2010-848-1LGL.doc
Page 1 of2
eJ~
<
~~
""
~~
5_ 0."? If E=l~
""
" 517 ~"
.-
'.
::r~
-
.~
.' "
u.
r~ s.~
loJ~
~
~ ~
,
E ~
~ ...
~
~ l:;-
----J-- ~ ~~
<:I,
"'~
~ \1
" it
s.~ ~
1Io~ <>
.
OR 4606 PG 1051
w
~
.
<
:~;""
S~~
!t;!:it:: ltltilo
........ .....
. ~. s:>~~. ....;, , .
"'ti"'j;;IIi:'!;o~. :"I
..~~~...~ ..:;:..... "'...
Ioi............:t:t:t~<l::t:<l:::t
....... .
- . "
$;I, ~. E ...
.T ~; ~. .
~:t<l:<l:):
..." ~~~~""~~~;~~:'" ~;;.
~~.."''';.. ~~~..~":~",t::
o.~;'"
-"
-0
~~~~~~~~~~~SS3~~~~~~~5~S5~~~
ls~~...~
~r.::.~~""
"'-- "
~til::1l::~i1
~~a~~
/
~ I
~~:1
",'
"'~~
~ .
.
"
~'k.
~"
~'"
~~
'"
"
~~
;;~
~
..
"
N 00'52"19' W
227.83'
~
~
~ ..
"'&,l i:
, Vi ~
..-/:-!; lO,~ 1U1 e
~ ~'~>':;~'C~':I,
~~1.,!!' ,'/_" .Jf:E: ",
o,'~.... .-: .:10 ~o
:'( ::J! 'J',
~ '" ..~. .r;r- /.~r'f
:t ::t:. ~ d,:',
. :"~, ..:.:.::~.~- '~:;B I;Z;
~..~ ~...;l.i..<')',~\:'S.'
ti a; K' - ~"l"",~ ,.~".
-- 'l";}"':ll1.o 'e:-"
'j~"~, . II,,; 8'
~~ .., ~ .U)
"'~..~...... ~
~ Q
D:: ,...
3:!:$i.~. ~
~ ~~ 0
..~~ =:
u
....
'"
:.:
'"
-0:..;;; I-
Cll I 0 l,l
~ 0;; ~~ ~
U ~N ~ ....
"S
o "
N 0
N
o
~ ...
vll. 4>_ 0
.....1Il 0 CJI
OUl U 0
~ . u
<j
tt}~"
:g~~
0"'"
"''''",
"'~...
~~L..I
1:3'-1~
%~~
~3-r
~
,
~
o
o~
~w
00
w.
"u
~o
"~
w.
U
~i:;t)D~
a
!9&:
0'
~~
:""
0;'<
~~~
~~
-:,
~
e~'"
~g~~
:tdll::\.S
'0<
"'-
,
~
~
~ 'e
<; ~
~ - ~
t~~
t.:i~
~<l. ".
G~-
~g~bl
_0,
~ ~
~ ~
~ ,
~ ~
~
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
.. ~ uC\J cb
= .
6 '0 ~'f
- . .
0""2 "...
N '" _1::1
~
.... ;::
E,1l'l""l
....~IO
".-
~-""l,?
~~~
-".
"'''",
~ii""l
~tJt'oj
~~IO
-,,-'"
1'<"'''
t:J~J,
2~~
~Q1~
'"
o.
<,
o'
~o
w.
!oj 0
~~
g.
:!~
~ ~
~ < w
'" ~I~ 5 '"
~5~ l< ~
~ "'i:l;~!<~ ~
'll!iai:1~'e'" ~
" ~~~~~~eQ
"',!i<>.~<i"-::'S
1,1 _"1
l!:l':il ~,,;:sa:;
"'''-''- ",,,-,,0
'"
Packet Page -136-
OR 4606 PG 1052
<C
I'-
E
Q)
+"
~
~
~
~~
~U
,,~
\I
if
;:;
\5
--J- ~ ~
..-
..-
o
N
--
N
..-
--
'<t
1------
-
-
,
,
~~
, ~
I Vj
I
<:>
~
'"
"
~
;,;
<:
~
n
~ r--..
~ _ ~ _.10 6.
.~ "Ifl";"':::!; ~
'Q: '.:. .r:......;:,..~
~;':/;~.~>..:~(~~l:(U .'
lJj'I\~'. W
"Cf":;,.,..- :!!j- ~ 8
_.CS ;: .-.0.?J}:'tt;
.~ ,.. ,~ . Cl:
"J~ '.~ :.r.'!r.- ~ I .
'CS ':,'/'~:.'1-1 . b' z.
yj. ~."._ f.... : . U)O
. ~'ft "':j;.:.'?f.Jll <!J '.:E=;:
"- II ,~'~. -....z -.'Pot
. 1:5 '\ n' "0",I ._
's.. '". . ~ .l:r:
,~ . ',t.:l
,.:=<:: tr.J
"'" "'
~ '"
t; '"
jg ~
i:J
"
I...~
~g
~"
1;:;;
"'I
~~
i!;~
",
~~.t
- ,
...~
t::;,
,,~
i!:"
iS~
"'0.
'"~
i!:~
~ ~e ~
l::::..... rs
~ ,,-- ~
~ ::;~ :::;j
G1 lI')C5~ l:5
c::. ~r:::C5
C ~ ~~ e
~ ~~~. ~
l<.s~5 ~
Ot.;:
;"1"-
j:.
"
m
1
,
I
,
_____+n_n____n~
,
:-t .....:zi-i" I
'S-~':S~-~ I
t..j =' :t:t:'l
(~'I~~ I
~
'"
Vi
:;
"
'"
I
1 I I I
L _ _ _ _ _ -..L _ _ _ _ _ -L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.-J
o b
N ::
It..
-
E- n;
c;1J. t:>_ 0
_1Ol 0 C'>
o 0 0
~ . 0
~
z
~
>
~
o
ag
~~
00
~~
l'u
FO
"~
w~
u
"
U)~"
~t.S~
0'<'"
"'50..
"~...
~~\..I
V"" Vi
'" "
8~~
~:5:::J
,
o
.
..0
,
o
.-
_0
"
" ;;:
0",,.,
'~l.O
~~~
~~:g
,,~
"0
Q~~
~...~
"'"
<><>
~~<.o
-"'"
i\l);iO
tIl~.h
2~~
~O:l~
'"
."....... OR 4606 PG 1053 ...".".
--J- ~ ~
~
~\....il.u:"l-
~~iS~rt
...~~...~
... ClI)-...I
lI)ir~i':ii'5
~a'S~~
~lI)~l!5V)
Qto9::::<=:~
V}'Q-CI.&J
~9.. <:~~
,,~~'-"'
\!..~ Q~
c:j:l::l.:"l-:'{
~9<::~r:t:
::\-"'-.
- '"","'2:
.....:::~lI)~
~~~~s:
2: Gt.:::J1l:l
~~~~:
"'''"'~
~ ~C5iS2:~
>;:: >::':~<..Jl;..-'f:
~ LL ':-!l:::c:q~ .
1:5 ~h. ~~ ~
1rJ tI] -...I"~S;
Lj ~~i'5--~
c::. _ ~u...<:,..
).. ...l'::: VlC)....
~ lJ}l!5t;~E;)..' t;
~ ~::<=:~2:l:ii~ ~
~ ~~~~~8 ~
~ ~..
(;) 111 g,
~ OJ
Cl:; ".,::'i''''
",--', ~
Ci 0.,:,,,-. l'
lIr'" .' ..;l L';)Ui
'fi ;' ~
>;::: .:JQ 3.L\'~
"~: ()" a:: ,
% 1S: .I..r;- -<t:-
',V}.'_ '.~.)__ 0 Z
r~~\'.'l"_ ti 2
. "~ .....'I.:li.,;.'. 'f-<
~I ~'r. .......z ')!l..
S. \\, .~ IIn:;~:r. '-'
~ 'l~, '!S et:=.
" . - U
'< en
" "'
is '"
"
'" '"
I!o Z
::; ...
<' :I:
~ u
~ ~
~ ,~
" en
CS
~
~
m
1-----
I ~~~
I l....~~-:;{
I ~C)G~(,j
~~"L.j'"
'S..._~~
.Ljl.tj
::<=:~Vi
,
I
f-2
[;]
(fj
-
-
:;
"
"
~
il
'"
~b
luil
~~
;'<; "
Gl"....
Ii
it
!l2
<3
:;
"
OJ
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
co :=
...,. .,...,. h_
e:: Gl '*'1 !; u' _
~ u l:l~ ....l !I!, =: Gl 0
e Q 00 ~p. 0 0 u_
-n ~~ 5: "- N '"
~
~
>
.
o
ag
"~
00
~.
Ou
~o
~~
~~
u
~
W
l<J~~ Vi
"~,,
l;.l;..~1{
~GC::i~tj
.....'Z",w'"
'-:,-... <:: '" r I
-~~~-~+-----------~
I I
, ,
I I
,
,
Packet Page -138-
I
, ,
L_ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ -L_ _ _ _ ____ ___-1
'"
I
L_
~
4j
:;<
~
N ;,
~
~
-~ n'
vp. Gl_ 0
_w 0' 0>
om U 0
U . U
u
tI}~'"
l.u .~
8~lQ
"'''",
"'!1~
..",'"
lr):::'b:
'u"'''
8~~
~:s:::;
,
~
.
..~
,
o
.-
=0
~
" <::
"''''..,
':210
.-
~:~l""l ?
(i:"tfl1
C~~
"''''
~~~
., ~
"''"
"'<.>
~~IO
~e;~
'" "
ctl~~
2~~
""'",
~ ..,
'"
.:{
t-
E
Q)
......
..-
..-
o
N
--
N
..-
--
V
l!~-l!~-'1~ 1,::;1 FBOI'1-
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
ADDJ'(ESSING DEPARTMENT
~.COLlEROO~NET
2800 NORTH HORseSHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(23g) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252.5724
T-1l 4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
1(t2i;ZI/N'-~ C<J7JY
\
. ~ Qaunty
- --
. '.' .,'.... ....'.' .:....:...., ...',."'I".DDR' E.'S.SJN..G".C..H......... ..,' " ""',.:... .. . '...."...: ,.....
;' '.. ..t...., . :.' .,", .""':':,,',;," . ,,~. ...,.,K.I:I.....T,I,",. "".,'. .'" ~',': ".',,';:'.
" " '... .... .".": .."'" ..':., ,.... "t. .,',t. " . "..:' .'.'...." .... """" . ......" ," "0
Please complele the fOllowing and fsx to the Addressin" Department at 239-252-5724 or submit in person to the
Addressing Department at the above address. Form must be sianed bY Addressina oersonnel orior to llre.
allolication ~etlncl. Dlease .IIDW a davl: far DI'OIHl....i!.1g.
Not an Items will apply to every project Items in bold type are required. FOLIO NUMBERS MUST BE
PROVIDED. Forms older than 6 months will require acIc1ftional review ancl epaRlval by tha Addressing
Department
PETITION TYPE (Indic8l9 type below, complete s separate Aaaressing CneekJist for eaon Petitj()h type)
o BL (Blasting Permit) 0 SOP (Site Oeveloament Plan)
B BO (Boat DOck Extension) 0 $DPA (SOP Amendm!!nt)
CamlvaVCircus Permit B SOI'l (Insubstantial Change to SOP)
o eu (Conditional Use) SIP (Site Improvement Plan)
o EXP (ExcavatJon Permit) 0 SIl'l (Insubstantial Change to SIP)
o FP (Final Plat D SNR (Street Name Change) .
o lI.A (Lot Une Adjustment) 0 SNC (Street Name Change - Unplatted)
o PNC (Project Name Change) 0 TOR (Transfer of Development Righls)
o PPL (Plans & Pial Review) 0 VA (Variance)
o PSP (PrelIminary Subdivision Plat) 0 VRP (Vegetation Removal Permit)
o PUD Rezone 0 VRSFP (Vegetalion Removal & Site Fill Permit)
o RZ (Stanclan:l Rezone) 181 OTHER DRI NotiCQ of I'roDosed Chanoe
LEGAL DESCRIPTION of subject pRlperty or properties (r;opy of lengthy description may be attached)
214826 OLOE CYPRESS UNIT ONE <t (J.. f>a-<4-\;"N "" -z.. '- -4<6 - Z. b
FOLIO (Property 10) NUMBER/s) of above (attar::/> to, or assoeitJ!8 with, legal description If more than one)
64625000188
STREET ADDRESS or ADOF~ESSES (as applicable, if already assigned)
· tOCA nON MAP must be attaohed showing exactloc;:alion elf proJecllllite in relation to nearest autllle roacl right-
of-way
. SURVEY (copy - needed only for unplatted pRlperties)
PROPOSED P~OJECT NAME; (if app/ir:eblej
OLOE CYPR.ESS
-PRQ~OSED STFlEET-NAMES-(lf8P,olicabJej
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NUMBER (for existing proJer:tslsites only)
SDP orAFl # PL2010-399
DOA-Pl201D~1052 REV:!
OLOE CYPRESS DRl
DATE: 6/11/10
Due: 7/Z/10
Packet Page -140-
~
I'-
E
Q)
-
..-
..-
o
~
N
..-
--
'<t
~~-W~-' l~ .t:~l rHO~-
T-113 P009/010 F-320
eolll.,. CoKHty
-~- --
COLUER COUNTY GOVERNMeNT
ADDRESSING DEPARTMENT
WWW.COLLIERGOV.NET
2800 NORTH HORSeSHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(2391 :2$2.2400 FAX (239) 252-5724
Pl"Qject or development names proposed for. or already appearing in. oondominium documents (if application;
indicate whether prOpoeed or eXi&ting)
EXISTING
Please Check One: t8l Checklist is to be Faxed back
o Pernanally Picked Up
APPLICANT NAME: CHRIS MITCHEL!.
PHONE -!lOS-7m FAX 405.7899
Signature on Addressing Checklist does not constitute Project and/or Street Name approval
and is subject to further review by the Addressing Department.
FOR STAFF USE ONLY
FLN Number (Primary) ~ IC- Q..,\-t0-c.....h e...d ~~ t i 0 l--..i LLl'Y\.. b.Q.( S
Folia Number
Fallo Number
Folio Number
APProved by: >>. ~ ~
Updated by:
(YL.~ a....,.....
Date:
'3-\~-ID
Date:
IF OLDER THAN 6 MONTHS, FORM MUST BE
UPDATED OR NEW FORM SUBMITTED
, I,',
,...!' ':
,,'. ,,': .,;'t
, ::""'!::/':'-":",:'-
. ..'" ."
Co 4(.,. z.5 0000 c-.3,
G.4(P"Z-S 000\ '2...3
"..
..., cP_L\ (,,2.. S 0 0 C t 'is i:
Co 4-(0 'Z- 5 000 "2-.5 C",
Co l.\. L:. -z.. S 0 0 0 '2- 'i) 5
~ y.c.;.-z...S 0003-0'8
G 4 Co '- :s (.) () 0 3. 'Z..Lj-
G.4(.,"Z.S 0 co 5.40
(p 4to G.- S 000 sCoc:,
Cc,4(O'l-5 QOO 3/9
(p t...\-{" '- c;...o 0 D '3 % 2.-
Ca '4 c.c "Z- 5 0 00 4-0 S
C, C4- to -z..S u () \ <1 q 3>
Co Ck- 1.0 'Z- S-.D 0 "3 c"'Z<::l
(P 4 (o?...S 00 s.o'Z--~
C,4Co-z...;lP 0000"2.-"2.-
- I z..s 9 000007...'7
"1".;,~C>DO L\-$'8tC
I '"Z...$~ 000 4ec.oCf
Sq 00 c.) L.\-Co z.S
~~s.'1 () 00 L\-t..l\-\
~-f 4-'1-'1 '4 0-0--0 G "6-0
-, u..q -rr 0000 4 c.."
-, ~~ -Cl OOOD (0 z..
lUrq ,I C()l~0 <6CS'
-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
~'63'1. I 44- Co f 0 S
Co "3 3'1 \ 4-4- Co I <a C"
Co 9:. S ~ \ t.\:4- c.. 1 <&' z..
(..<=6'3>91.44CoZ-05
G<:63>~ 14-4 ~O"Z.7
G:> "6~.q \ L\- 1..\ ~ 04:.3
(.,'33.9 \ t..\..4 Coo"''1
Co~s.~ \ t-.\4 Coo~
-
_09 17f(" -z... 0 000 9
Packet Page -142-
-"""
74977000101-
74977000127
74977000444
74977000143.
74977000169
74977000185.
74977000208-
74977000224_
74977000240
::l- 74977000266-
:j 74977000282"-
j 74977000305 -
0 74977000321..- .
O. 74977000347"
74977000363' '
74977000389.
74977000402 .
. 74977000428 -
72590005747 - _
72590004667.1-
72590005721 .
72590004683 -
72590005705.
. 72590004706 -
72590005682 -
72590004722 -
72590005666 '
7259000474S.
72590005640 .
72590004764 .
72590005624-
72590004780
72590005608
72590004803.
72590005585.
725llOOO4829 ...
72590005569
7259~
72590005543 .
72590004861-
72590005527
72590004887.
. 72590005501- .
72590004900
72590005488
72590004926
72590005462
72590004942
72590005446.
-<
t--
E
<D
=:0
"'--r-
...--,
Or-
~}.
...---
--
"'"
72590004968 .
72590005420
72590004984
7259000544<1
7259000S006.
7259OOOS381.
72590005365 .
72590005349 -
7259000Sm
72590005022
7259000S307
72S90005284-
72590005268
72S9000S242
72590005226
7259000S200 .
72590005187
7259000S161.; .
7259000S145
72590005129
72590005103 ..
72590005080. .
72590005064
72590005048
76713000703
76713000923.
76713000729-
76713000907 I-
7671300074S-
76713000884
76713000761-
76713000868
76713000787'
76713000B42
76713000800
76713000826 .
76713001142
76713000062-
76713001126
76713000088
76713000101 .
76713001100
76713000127
7671JOO1087.
76713000143~
76713001061
76713000169-
76713001045. .
76713000185 _
76713001029. '
7671:3001003
76713000981 '
76:r[30oo208.
76713O~
7671300
767[3000949,
76713000240.
76713000266- -
76713000282-
76.713000305,'
7671'30006Bll- .
7671,3000321-
76713000664'
76713000347-
76713000648'- .
76713000363-
76713000389 .
76113000622
76713000402.
76713000606.
76713000428' .
76713000583 -
76713000444-
767.13000567 .
767.13000#0
76713000541
767-13000486'
7671-3000525-
767.13000509 -
64626001128 '
6%26001144
64625000845"
6%26001160.
64625000861-
64625000887.
72'590000043
64625000900 .
64625001789, -
64625001420
6%25ClOO926-
64625001446
6462S000!l42...
64625000968.
64625001462
64625000984-
64625001488- .
6462S001006.
64625001022
64625001501.
64625001048 .
64625001527
64625001064-
64625001543.
64625001080-
64625001569
64625001103'
64625001585,
64625001129.
64625001145.-
64625001608.
64625001161.
64Q5oo1624
64625001187 -
64625001640 "
64625001200.
64625001666
64625001226- ..
64625001682 .
6462.5001242.
646250DI705.
64625001268 -
64625001721- .
64625001284-
64625001747..
64625001307..-
64625001763 .
64626000381
64626000048.
64626000365 -
64626000064.
64621iOO0349.
64626000080 .
64626000323 .I.
64626000103
64626000307 -
64626000129_ .-
64626000284-
64626000145.
64626000268.
64626000161~
64626000242
64626000187 .
. 64626000226
64626000200.
64625006124,
646.25005044,.
645.25006108 -
64625006085 I-
64625005060
6462S006069
6462S005086
64625006043
64625005109.
646250a6027
64625005125'
64625006001 .
64625005141.
64625005989
64625005167~
64625005965
646250051~
64625005947.
64625005206.-
646ZS005921. .
64625005222.
64625005905 -
64625oo5Wl.
6462S005882
6462S005.264-
64&5005866 ..
64625005280_ ..
6462S005840~
64625005303-
64625005824
64625005329-
64625005808 .
64625005345-
6462S005785-
6462S005769.
64625005743
646250055111-
6462S005727.
64625005701 .
64625005387,
64625005688
64625005662
64625005400. .
64625005646.
_ 6462500Sol26~
64625005620 .
64625005442 .
64625005604.
64625005468-
64625005581
64625005484 ..
64625005507 r
t
.'
.!
64625005523
64625005549
64625005565
64625003923
64625004401
64625003949
64625004388
64625003965
64625004362
64625003981
64625004346
64625004003
64625004320
64625004304
64625004029
64625004281
64625004045
64625004265
64625004061
64625004249
64625004087
64625004223
64625004100
64625004207
64625004126
64625004184
64625004142
64625004168
50032440002
50032400000
50032480004
50032520003
50032360001
50032320009
50032560005
50032280000
50032240008
72590000328
72590000344
72590000302
72590000360
72590000289
72590000386
72590000263
72590000409
72590000247
72590000425
72590000221
72590000441
72590000205
72590000467
72590000182
72590000483
72590000166
72590000140
72590000506
72590000124
72590000522
72590000108
72590000548
7259??oo085
72590000564
7259??oo069
64626001021
64625000421
64626001047
64625000447
64626001063
64626001089
64625000463
64626001102
64625000489
64625000502
64625000528
64625000829
64625000544
64625000803
64625000560
64625000780
64625000586
64625000764
64625000609
64625000748
64625000625
64625000722
64625000641
64625000706
64625003046
64625003062
-64625003088
64625003907
64625003101
64625003884
64625003127
64625003868
64625003143
64625003169
64625003185
64625003842
64625003208
64625003826
64625003224
64625003800
64625003240
64625003787
64625003266
64625003761
64625003282
64625003745
64625003305
64625003729
64625003321
64625003347
64625003703
64625003363
64625003680
64625003389
64625003664
64625003402
64625003648
64625003428
64625003622
64625003444
64625003606
64625003460
64625003583
64625003486
64625003567
64625003509
64625003541
64625003525
68391446108
68391446205
68391446166
68391446182
32382100188
32382100382
32382100201
il2il82100269
32382100463
32382100366
32382100227
32382100340
32382100146
32382100324
32382100049
32382100489
Packet Page -144-
32382100447
32382100120
32382100405
32382100285
32382100081
32382100023
32382100065
32382100243
32382100162
32382100308
32382100421
32382100104
32382100887
32382100829
32382100560
32382100764
32382100942
32382100706
32382100625
32382100641
32382100803
32382100722
32382100780
32382100502
32382100845
32382100926
32382100861
32382100667
32382100544
32382100528
32382100586
32382100683
32382100968
32382100609
32382100900
32382101284
32382101420
32382101307
32382101080
32382101187
32382100984
32382101064
32382101022
32382101404
32382101145
32382101226
32382101446
32382101323
32382101048
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
32382101103
32382101129
32382101242
32382101381
32382101268
32382101161
32382101200
32382101349
32382101365
32382101006
32382101608
32382101828
32382101585
32382101462
32382101763
32382101501
32382101747
32382101543
32382101909
32382101488
32382101705
32382101569
32382101721
32382101844
32382101666
32382101527
32382101789
32382101640
32382101886
32382101802
32382101925
32382101682
32382101860
32382101624
32382104281
32382104168
32382104320
32382104142
32382103868
32382104184
32382104265
32382104045
32382104029
32382103981
32382104003
32382103923
32382103949
32382104100
32382104249
<{
l"-
E
(])
-
32382104207
32382103965
- 32382104126
32382104223
32382103907
32382104304
32382104061
32382104087
32382103884
32382102047
32382102283
32382101983
32382102144
32382102021
32382102348
32382102322
32382102089
32382102225
32382102186
32382102160
32382102063
32382102403
32382102241
32382102267
32382102102
32382102005
32382102364
32382102380
32382101941
32382102209
32382103787
32382103648
32382103826
32382103703
32382103509
32382103428
32382103460
32382102500
32382102746
32382102568
32382102827
32382102623
32382102487
32382102429
32382102526
32382102542
32382102869
32382102445
32382102801
..-
..-
o
~
N
..-
--
":t
32382102885
32382102607
32382102788
32382102681
32382102704
32382102665
32382102843
32382102762
32382102584
32382102461
32382102649
32382102720
32382103208
32382103282
32382103004
32382103321
32382103266
32382103046
32382103020
32382102908
32382102924
32382103101
32382103062
32382103240
32382103305
32382103224
32382102940
32382103169
32382103185
32382102982
32382103363
32382103143
32382103127
32382103347
32382102966
32382103088
32382104346
32382104401
32382104540
32382104728
32382104566
32382104689
32382104744
32382104663
32382104443
32382104362
32382104508
32382104786
32382104809
32382104647
32382104427
32382104760
32382104524
32382104621
32382104469
32382104605
32382104702
32382104582
32382104388
32382104485
32382105183
32382105280
32382104867
32382104906
32382105028
32382105060
32382104980
32382104825
32382105125
32382105044
32382105002
32382104883
32382105141
32382105086
32382105206
32382105109
32382104922
32382105248
32382104964
32382105222
32382104948
32382105264
32382105167
32382104841
21990000144
21990000160
21990000186
21990000209
21990000225
21990000241
21990000267
21990000283
21990001949
21990001965
21990001981
21990002003
21990002029
21990002045
21990002061
21990002087
21990002100
21990002126
21990000021
21990000047
21990000063
21990000089
21990000102
21990000128
21990001787
21990001800
21990001826
21990001842
21990001868
21990001884
21990001907
21990001923
21990002142
21990002168
21990002184
21990002207
21990002223
21990002249
21990001622
21990001648
21990001664
21990001680
21990001703
21990001729
21990001745
21990001761
21990002265
21990002281
21990002304
21990002320
21990002346
21990002362
21990002388
21990002401
21990001460
21990001486
21990001509
21990001525
21990001541
21990001567
21990001583
21990001606
21990002427
21990002443
21990002469
21990002485
21990002508
21990002524
21990001347
21990001363
21990001389
21990001402
21990001428
21990001444
21990001224
21990001240
21990001266
21990001282
21990001305
21990001321
21990002540
21990002566
21990002582
21990002605
21990002621
21990002647
21990001062
21990001088
21990001101
21990001127
21990001143
21990001169
21990001185
21990001208
21990000940
21990000966
21990000982
21990001004
21990001020
21990001046
21990002663
21990002689
21990002702
21990002728
21990002744
21990002760
21990002786
21990002809
21990002825
21990002841
21990000788
21990000801
21990000827
21990000843
21990000869
21990000885
21990000908
21990000924
21990000623
21990000649
21990000665
21990000681
21990000704
21990000720
21990000746
21990000762
21990002867
21990002883
21990002906
21990002922
21990002948
21990002964
21990002980
21990003002
21990003028
21990003044
21990000461
21990000487
21990000500
21990000526
21990000542
21990000568
21990000584
21990000607
21990003060
21990003086
21990003109
21990003125
21990003141
21990003167
21990003183
21990003206
21990003222
21990003248
21990000306
21990000322
21990000348
21990000364
21990000380
21990000403 I
21990000429
I 21990000445 I
21990003264
21990003280
21990003303
219900D3329
21990003345
21990003361
21990003387
21990003400
21990003426
21990003442
21990003468
21990003484
21990003507
21990003523
21990003549
2199D003565
21990003581
2199D003604
21990003620
21990003646
21990003662
21990003688
21990003701
21990003727
21990003743
21990003769
21990003785
21990003808
21990003824
21990003840
2199D003866
21990003882
21990003905
21990003921
21990003947
21990003963
21990003989
21990004001
21990004027
21990004043
21990004069
21990004085
21990004108
21990004124
21990004140
21990004166
21990004182
21990004205
21990004221
21990004247
21990004263
2199DOD4289
21990004302
21990004328
219900D4344
21990D04360
21990004386
21990004409
21990004425
21990004441
21990004467
2199D004483
21990004506
21990004522
21990004548
21990004564
21990004580
21990004603
21990004629
21990004645
219900D4661
21990004687
21990004700
21990004726
21990004742
21990004768
21990004784
21990004807
21990004823
21990004849
21990004865
21990004881
21990004904
21990004920
21990004946
21990004962
21990004988
21990005000
21990005026
21990005042
21990005068
21990005084
Packet Page -146-
21990005107
21990005123
21990005149
21990005165
21990005181
21990005204
21990005220
2199D005246
2199D005262
2199D005288
21990005301
21990005327
2199D005343
21990005369
2199D005385
21990005408
21990005424
21990D05440
2199D005466
21990005482
21990005505
21990005521
21990005547
21990005563
21990005589
21990005602
21990005628
21990005644
21990005660
21990005686
21990005709
21990005725
21990005741
21990005767
21990005783
21990005806
21990005822
21990005848
219900D5864
21990005880
21990005903
21990005929
21990005945
21990005961
21990005987
21990006009
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
21990006025
21990006041
2199D006067
21990006D83
2199DOD61D6
21990006122
21990006148
21990006164
21990006180
21990DD6203
21990006229
21990006245
~
<(
r-
E
(I)
-
~
~
o
~
N
~
-
V
~
~
/
/
I'
4;!12/2011 Item 7.A.
" . , '. - ,-J!!... _ ._ __"
.-CO~u.ntY..~~~..~ ., ~-
- ~ --
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
WWW.COLLlERGOV.NET
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 643-6968
."'_;~"~'TH_~ ,"_,0,': '.'-~-. ""'......., -':. _., """.,' 0- "C'.:
!<:';':;;:,' '~.' ',c." -,''-"'T.'" -' .
...G:EV~OPMENT"6F REGIONA~ IMpAct"
. . PRE~APPllCAT'ION MEETING NOTES
''''---~:'''::>:-'-',P:'';_'{'__c-'">'-::~' -: , ; ,.;: ,-;" ',",
Date:~ Time: 8 '.30
PROJECT NAME: 0 lcl.e.... c. t~(l'q;
Applicant Name:
Owner Name:
Owner Address:
Firm:.:R I ch Y
D~
PL#
Phone:
Phone:
City:
ZIP:
If an amendment, State Development Order Number:
DR' name 0 {dt.. LJ-{)(e<;4 Local Resolution Number: qq -17:l.
Assigned Planner +<n l~S C2 {PAlY\
Meeting AlteJjdees: (attach Sign 'In Sheet)
Meeting Notes
~c1J \ ~l~ ~ ~ Q (j {(?5 - ~ H.l:L.ro.r:>
ffi) PUl> tft? 4b. bl.( o.c..
~ -::. \~..t o..c-
DOA-PL2010.105Z REV:l
OLOE CYPRESS DRl
OA TE, 6/11/10
Due; 7/2/10
) -1-
G:ICurrentIPre-Application Forms 2009lPre-app Forms - July 20091DRI - DOA Development Regional Impact
Pre-application july09.doc
Packet Page -148-
.
- -~ .,. "CoKnt}
~ .......-~ -
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
WWW.COLLlERGOV.NET
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 643-6968
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS (refer to application far additional requirements)
~'r'r~?~?".F,i:j~?cq)"!7r~:,;,,\,,;c.'.""';r"f'r""ry'li!~VE~9.1'fy\~N~~L~~~PNAt..IMPACr
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST
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.
. 'l' ,';'" ~
<(
I'-
E
Q)
......
""c.,....,;
'.,.,'<@J",',.
. .iItElf~JR:i:b
:;',::::':" ~<-...:.:;}-,--~-:, -
'_,' :~.' .:"0""
- .";,
';', .
;: Additional set if located in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle
o Redevelopment Area within V:z mile to City of Naples
~ Completed Collier County Public Hearing Application
~ Pre-application meeting notes
~ Site plan 24" x 36" and One 8 \12" x 11" copy, and one jpg copy (from DRI
Development Order)
Completed State NOPC Form with 011 attachments (if amendment)
Com leted State ADA Form with all attachments (if or! inal DRI
Completed State Abandonment Form with all attachments (if abandonment)
_l~gal Description
[ identifying Owner & all parties of corporation
Owner Agent Affidavit signed & sealed
Completed Addressing checklist
Copies of Notices sent to DCA and RPC
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and digital/electronic copy of EIS or
exemption Justification
Surve signed & sealed
Traffic 1m act Statement (TIS) or waive
Copy of Traffic Impoct Statement (TIS) on CORaM
Aerial photographs (taken within the previous 12 months min. scaled
1"=200'), showing FLUCCS Codes, Legend, and roject boundary
Electronic copy of all documents in Word format (CD-ROM or Diskette) 1
Project Narrative 24
Copy of submittal package must be forwarded to Robin Singer, Planning Director, City of Naples
v
v-"
V"""
Fhxf-
PUDA
t~
01'\
nr:a:: AOA t ~I( SU-fi'O/lflCll (e-<;p~SeS
C () OY h "'('~ COf',j .J
~
~
'R(ulUL\-t~ 1V\
, '
........utU'rQJ. ~i'lbY'
coy,e. S nol--~. A.JJ.ltte-Y\ol
\-.oCcRC
co,,~~<; ~...l\ ~
- 2-
G:\Current\Pre-Application Forms 2009\Pre-app Forms - July 2009\DRI - DOA Development Regional Impact
Pre-application july09.doc
. .
.--"~~~,~~~=.~__~_."___~ un__
ColLrer County
- "'-~.... --
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
~. --.--------,-----"----.-
.. -.-. ---- ..- -'--'-~,--,_.--- --"'--=-- -...- ----==.'-------
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
WWW.COLLlERGOV.NET
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 643-6968
FEES:
Application Fee:
D
D
D
$10,000 DRI Review {in addition to cost of Rezone} pus $25.00 acre (or fraction thereof).
$2,250.00 Comprehensive Plan Consistency Review (opplies to DRI only)
$6,000 DRIjDOA Amendment Development Order plus $25.00 acre (or fraction thereof) the acreage charge does not
apply for amendments which only change the build.out date of the DO for a time period of less than five year~.
~
~
~
~
D
D
$150.00 Fire Review Fee
($500.00) Pre-applicotion credit (Applications submitted 9 months or more alter the date of the last pre-app meeting
shall not be credited towards application fees and a new pre-application meeting will be required.
$925.00 legal Advertising Fee for cepe meeting (to be reconciled upon receipt of Invoice from Naples News).
$500.00 Legol Advertising Fee for BCC meeting
$2,500.00 Environmental Impact Statement review fee
Property Owner Notification fees. Property Owner Notifications $1.50 NonMcertiFied; $3.00 Certified return receipt mail
( to be paid after receipt of invoice from Dept. of Zoning & Development Review)
~sportatjon Fees, if required: (submit separate ch ck Transportatior Fe~s) _ f.\- t-C?L.. W4\ \,f~
a $500.00 Methodology Review Fee, f re uire ~ S,4-
D $750.00 Mi..r !:Idcl, R~,I",w r~~, II reqUired grv {f
o $1,500.00 MMi....r Sf.l;feJ, Rt:vi~w ft!'t::, If ft::4L1lreO /Jf*'
- 3-
G:ICurrentIPre-Application Forms 2009lPre-app Forms - July 20091DRI - DOA Development Regional Impact
Pre-application july09.doc Packet Page -150-
<C
I'-
E
Q)
......
..-
..-
o
N
--
N
..-
--
V
. ,
-- -----.--.------ ---- '.'-..._,."'''''~--' -------------_._-----.------- -- ---"'::..._-_......=_--"~~----:..-_---- ~--
NOTES
""fOl>. :-PC>-\. 'cpte,.v.v I"/~ - 5'<.3~(1 A 'TA3L.1E:-
D.u~I64-'TlrV~ 1tl-6 A-1:nvs.T rfb<)/ S/ft'F'T i..u Urv(T~
e;;AC..I-\' 'S6-V~ft1b.vr IVVcrt--veD -i-It,;~ ~1-#w(^,,'"/{./6 T ~
~$ ~oc """"~ w ('(If- u,t1..I"~s,..~ +eoM HFR.- -b SFt.....
l,vcL.VDJo uD ,To-1)w7't. r1e>AI{1'O'/lJ.....,'Ke:pl7-f2;T.
I
~\)R.F'S'S\'l\ ('-0.. '. 't-.\. ! tt:\ - l~ "-\~lo.,) ?\?n\GCr ~()~ Il=\t',~~
~(,pEAG~ l.9...:)\LLN.~D ~"\'-\ (P...~~(")~ 1:-\.f\\JV\.E
Z'0J;~~b l/7J:ce tl6~:$
3D &... . ~() ,ff~Jt1Jl4ht~~rv
. .
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
-'-"""_._,_._.,----'-._,.~'_'~"'=____.oc_=__,=::...:o~_,__=_.c~ "--- _---=----_= _"", "-------=-_
'.__.,----=--'---,..----'-'-::.~-"-
COLLIER COUNTY ZONING DEPARTMENT
REQUEST FOR MEETINGS
REASON FOR MEETING (check one)
o Pre-Application Meeting
o Telephone Consultation for SDP, SIP Insubstantial Changes
o Telephone Consultation for ICP Insubstantial Change
o One-On-One Sufficiency Review Meeting
*indicates required field
YOUR CONTACT INFORMATION
NAME:' CHRIS MITCHEll REPRESENTING:" WALDROP ENGINEERING
PHONE: 239-405-7777 EMAIL: CHRISMI1UWAlDROPENGINEERING.COM
TYPE OF APPLICATION:' DRI
PROPERTY INFORMATION
FOLIO NUMBER:' 64625000188
ZONING OR PUD NAME (you must supply original PUD name):" OlDE CYPRESS DRI
STREET ADDRESS OR LOCATION:'
SDP/SIP# (required for Insubstantial change): _
CITY: NAPLES ZIP: FL
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED WORK:'
NOTICE OF PROPOSED CHANGE - ADD VITA TUSCANA ACREAGE AND DENSITY INTO
THE OLOE CYPRESS DRI
Additional Information
For Pre-Application Meeting, please bring the following items:
. Signed and Verified Addressing checklist (allow 3 days for processing)
. $500 Pre-Application Meeting Fee
. $75 Fire Review Pre-App Fee
For Application Submittal Review:
. Submittal Checklist must be attached to the application package
. All items in the package must be submitted in the exact order of the checklist
. Coyer page must be attached to each group of items
We will contact you with the scheduled time and person you will be meeting with.
Packet Page -152-
~
r--
E
Q)
......
.-
.-
o
N~
~.!~.
;;a:~,.:_,. ~
d) f'"I'
~~ ~
! I
'-~ .ttJ
d ~
141
., ~,
.~ ~
~ ~
~ DS
f
\V
.'
~
:=
Ill.
-;;: .
III
a:::
-
r::
III
E
Q.
o
Gi
>
III
o
"tl
r::
a
....
O/l
Ol
r::
"c
o
N
...
o
v
<:
C
r::
"'
"'
III
~
"tl
"'C
<(
c
:E
I
W
""
co
""
N
I
C")
:E
<(
Z
l-
V
W
...,
o
c::
a.
-
III
<:
>
o
~
'Z
~
~
-"3-
tn.
tn.
w.
~;
0"
o
<(
....
~
~
w
a:::
w
cD
:E
::l
Z
w
Z
o
:c
Cl,;
N
~ \" \tJ~
It.> f'- ~ ~
'I f''V]0
^'J N r- , j
PJ t _" I t..., 0
\ Y, "1 P?
G~I"'(
\)
O\J'
o-r.,J
m~
\ I
f"\J
~~
<;C
\'-
"
'"
.{-
,,~
~~
:>J........
---
c:o.D
.;
r
k
..J
"
fo,o
a..
w
o
.......
z
O;E
-a:::
~-
>.'u..
o ~.
o
>-
.....,
Z
:::i
o
u
j
o
''V
-:s
w
:E
<(
z
.
. ,
".
e
'"
~
'"
:>
~
N"
o
~
0:>
U
..,
"
'S:
~
o
o
'<
CD
o
~
.J::
o
'"
'a
c
::>
Cl
>.
o
c
'"
Z
,
f--
W
W
I
(f)
~
z
Q
(f)
'"
c
'"
E
::>
o
o
o
<Ii
:v
c
..,
52
u.:
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
AGENDA ITEM 9-A
~::~~.~
ColCfer County
~;,:"+.,~"::lI;"'C~~,,;.,,,,~,>"_"~~"'.u;;."-'~;'~:'Ic,'~lc,^'~<>."'."""~~-"T,:.~",-~
ST AF'F REPORT
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM:
DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION. PLANNING AND REGULATION
HEARING DATE: FEBRUARY 17,201]
SUBJECT:
PETITION PUDA-PUOI0-388, OLDE CYPRESS PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (PUD)
COMPANION ITEMS: DOA-PUOlO-I052, OLDE CYPRESS DRI AND
PUDZ-PLl054, HD DEVELOPMENT RPUD
APPLICANT:
AGENT:
Olde Cypress Development, Ltd.
2746 Professional Circle. Suite 120 I
Naples,FL 34119
Waldrop Engineering, P.A.
Mr. Chris R. Mitchell, PE
28100 Bonita Grande Drive
Bonita Springs, FL 34 I35
Goodletle, Coleman and Johnson. P.i\..
Mr. Richard D. Yovanovich
4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300
Naples, FL 34103
REQUESTED ACTION:
The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an
amendment to the Olde Cypress PUD to reduce the project density from 1100 dwelling units to
942 dwelling units and remove the requirements of trails and a 3.9 acre park within the Olde
Cypress PUD.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The existing Olde Cypress PUD and Olde Cypress DRI contain approximately 538.1 acres. The
proposed Development of Regional Impact (DR!) will contain approximately 602 acres with the
inclusion of the HD Development/Vita Tuscana PUD and is located on the north side of
Immokalee Road (CR 846), east of its intersection with Olde Cypress Boulevard. The property
lies within the Urban Estates Planning Community in Sections 21 and 22, Township 48 South,
Range 26 East, in Collier County. (See the location map and current PUD Master Plan on
following page.)
Olde Cypress PUD, PUDA-PL2010-388
February 4, 2011
Page 1 of 14
Packet Page -154-
z
0 0
"' ~
< >-
> "' ()
0 ,
~
~, ~
,~ ~
1----1
!
i 'd I
1 "0 1
i___J
~
.n,"", OllD~ / ~_
o
<;,. ,HV1S~'llNI
"
,
1--
~
;~ "'
"'
"
.
~~
~
~~
~
"
>-2
00
"' -
-,~
00
~O
"-~
I
i
">IV,,,""
01'
~ ~
0>-
C
~
o
o
[~m
~ '"
~ -
H"l
Id
"'
,
l!
"
"
~:
~ ~- ~
I
g
~ii ."
"''"
NOjWUNf'H
en", AW...,,,,,,,. .no" I "OOOM '''"d.<~
Il!i f,l
iLL'hl
I' - (ntO~ _NOlS""""' I
"-3.1V.S~31"
I.--
r
. -~~
::~
;;;
".
~~[
,
... ~ ~
~:;; 12.
~5
/.
~""",,,
Packet Page -155-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
~~
~, ;J ~
~ * i
~J ~
,- ~ ~
0...
<(
::2:
C)
z
z
o
N
00
00
'"
o
o
N
-'
[L
e
'"
o
:::J
[L
'"
z
o
>-
>-
LU
[L
C'~~>-~;"'~~;~~' I
I i~ I
.. luL
: ITI I
~p
!i I
r 1..~~~~~~";'L~...l...,..,~.
t
g
0...
<(
::2:
~;S
.
z
o
I-
<(
U
o
--l
g
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
n
,
n
D ro
a
~ 0 .
~ " D
. C ~
. . ~ .
~ ~ ~ rn
" 0 "
~ ~ .. I
~~~ .0
~ ~~~ 'I
~~~f W~~
~ ~ .. :n'
. ~:~~ g~iO . l~~
I " ~ g~l'.jg ..~ ~~ i;~
~ . ..~ !!l
~ ~ll;'e~-{ c. .
.1 .. '.
~ ....01 ... ~:c~~
, ~~~~~ ~~
Z --.. j . !I i~~ti
. ,...">U'I
. , .. ~~
. . ~~~~: .
! , ~ I . i~:~ .". ~
I' ~ ~ "- "'~.. "'u....~ ... .
, oo:gl! .. ~i5l .
. ! ! ~"~ge ~~~~ ,'. .
~ ... . Z
. ~ ~ ~~~~: ~~~a: ~~~ ~ <
~ :!i~3l~ ~~c~ < ..J
..0 ... <0.
~ ---.; I 1-'"
. (:J _w
",I-
'" -0)
:r<
1;):;
c
=>
a.
3.1t' ,. 1 ; /I " H S ~ H " 1
o
~: =,'
Die ::
~~
o! :
g"1 -
:! 1
.~
h
'0
~m ~
~ ,
wo
0:"
.
,
01 Q~
o! "
i"
~ ~ ~ f'
~"- ",.d~
!'Ii;€j~
." .
~ ~ .
~gJ
Q~
...:lp..
of:)
"'''''suer -'" P."D", "'0i':;00\ - ",no 'LO "or """,,,", ...,. !>M.-"'l"'''.~-oandOg9G\.''<I\O"",, S->I\hIo\ogQaoG'\9oo'\'~
'.!
Packet Page -156-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
PURPOSEIDESCRlPTION OF PROJECT:
The petitioner proposes to amend Ordinance Number 2000-37, the Olde Cypress PUD, to reduce
1100 dwelling units to 942 dwelling units and remove the requirements of trails and a 3.9 acre park
within the Olde Cypress PUD.
The removal of the 158 dwelling units from the Olde Cypress PUD will allow the proposed 158
unit HD Development RPUD (Residential Planned Unit Development), to be added to the Olde
Cypress DR!. The property within HD Development RPUD will be added to the Olde Cypress
DRI (Development of Regional Impact). The intensity density in Olde Cypress DRI will remain at
1100 dwelling units and the intensity of the DRI will not increase.
During the original zoning application review and permitting, PUD Section 4.05.6 required a 3.9
acre park located within the PUDIDRI Boundary. According to the DRI and PUD Master Plans
that were submitted with the application, the 3.9 acre park was proposed to be in two parcels
located in the northeast comer of the Master Plan. The park location was approved in the original
Olde Cypress PUD Ordinance No. 86-75. The PUD was later revised in 1996 as a result of
environmental permitting with governmental agencies. During the 1996 POD amendment, the
park use, nature trails, jogging trails, and bicycle trail uses along the eastern boundary of the
PUD/DRI were excluded and residential development, including the required park acreage, were
removed from the PUD and DRI Master Plans to reduce impacts to the environmentally sensitive
area. The area along the eastern boundary was revised in the master plan to be wetland/preserve.
However, the language in Section 4.05.6 of the PUD was never revised to remove the requirement
of the park. This application will revise Section 4.05.6 of the PUD to remove the park
requirement. The application also revises Section 3.02 of the PUD to make it consistent with the
intent of the original revisions to the PUD.
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North: Terafina PUD.
East: Agricultural (A) zoning
South: Immokalee Road and then Estates (E) zoning, Agricultural (A) zoning, and H.D.
Development RPUD.
West: Olde Cypress Boulevard then Longshore Lake PUD.
Olde Cypress PUD, PUDA-PL2010-388
February 4,2011
Page 4 of 14
Packet Page -157-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
, i:~ '. wl';~i;"'" 'It"'" . !
iU~ .Ilv ':;'. ~ ,~~-;
... ,."",- i" .....-v...
.' ,...,~ ' '~'''''-:r'... ',' : t:~"""''''''''''''iI
'.:':~ ".' . :.:: "::':>,.,':-,~' :i:'" ~'~~~j:t~
AERIAL PHOTO
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY:
Future Land Use Element: The subject property is designated Urban (Urban Mixed Use District,
Urban Residential Subdistrict) on the Futme Land Use Map in the Growth Management Plan. The
existing RPUD, approved in 2000 (Ordinance No. 2000-37) included a provision for a park area
on approximately 3.9 acres. This area is t,) be removed from park uses and returned to residential
uses.
This amendment will not affect the total number of approved acres for commercial land uses
(12.5), of residential units (I, 1(0), or of density (2,09 du/ac). The table below illustrates the
acreage figures, dwelling unit counts and residential densities involved in each part of the project:
TlI ACs Ttl DUs Ttl Com'l ACs non-Com'l AC Gross Res'l
Densitv
Existing DRI 538.1 1,100 12.5 525.6 2.09 DUlAC
Olde Cypress PUD, PUDA-PL2010-388
February 4, 2011
Page 5 of 14
Packet Page -158-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Proposed DRI
602.0
1,100
12.5
590.9
1.86 DUlAC
Olde Cypress PUD
Vita Tuscana PUD
538.1
65.3
942
158
12.5
0.0
525.6
65.3
1.79 DUlAC
2.41 DUlAC
The acreage increase is reflected in the Olde Cypress DRI, not in the Olde Cypress PUD.
Although no additional residential units are proposed for the larger DRI, the total dwelling unit
count in the Olde Cypress PUD is reduced. This smaller number should appear in Olde Cypress
PUD documents.
An approximately four-acre park area and its connecting nature trails are requested for
removal, while the more than 176 acres of passive recreational areas, and bicycle paths and
sidewalks remain part of the development. No issues present themselves with Objective 7 or its
subsequent Policies.
Conservation and Coastal Management Element: Environmental staff has evaluated the
proposed changes to the PUD documents. The petition is consistent with the applicable provisions
of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) of the GMP.
GMP Conclusion: Based upon the above analysis, Comprehensive Planning staff finds the
proposed rezone consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE).
ANALYSIS:
Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and the criteria upon which a
favorable determination must be based. These criteria are specifically noted in Sections 10.02. I 3
and 1O.02.13.B.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code and required Staff evaluation and
comment. The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) uses these same criteria as the basis
for their recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), who in turn use the
criteria to support their action on the rezoning requcst.
Environmental Review: Environmental Services staff has reviewed the petition to address any
environmental concerns. The proposed changes do not affect any of the environmental
requirements of the GMP or LDC. A hearing was not required before the Environmental Advisory
Commission (EAC) per Collier County Code of Ordinances Part One, Chapter 2, Article VIIl.
Division 23. - Environmental Advisory Council.
Transportation Review: Transportation Department Staff has reviewed this petition and the has
determined that the proposed amendment will not have any transportation impact.
Utility Review: The Utilities Department Staff has reviewed the petition and has no objection.
The project is subject to the conditions associated with a Water and Sewer A vailability Letter from
the Collier County Utilities Division. The project is subject to the conditions associated with a
Solid Waste A vailabi]ity Letter from the Collier County Solid Waste Department.
Olde Cypress PUD, PUDA-PL2010-388
February 4, 2011
Page 6 of 14
Packet Page -159-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Parks and Recreation Review: The Parks and Recreation Department Staff has reviewed the
petition. There are several things to consider regarding this park. The commitment language is
very vague. Originally. the park was shDwn on the Master Plan as two separate areas, one of
which did not appear to have access~it was isolated in a project comer surrounded by preserve
areas.
Zoninl! and Land Development Review: Staff has reviewed the proposed change and has no
objection. The proposed reduction from the maximum number of dwelling units by 158 dwelling
units will allow the HD Development to he added to the aIde Cypress DR! so as not to increase
the intensity of the DR!.
While the 3.9 acre park was a commitment made by the original applicant when the property was
first rezoned to a PUD, there is currently no code provision or regulation that would require a park
at this location. However. several residents within aIde Cypress have indicated that they would
like to have the park provided within the Clde Cypress community.
Therc are several things to considcr regarding this park. The commitment language is vcry vague.
Originally, the park was shown on the Master Plan of Ordinance Number 86-75 as two separate
areas, one of which did not appear to have access~it was isolated in a project comer surrounded
bypreserve areas, as shown in thc illustration below (highlighted for clarity):
_.----------------------------
,
---~-~
~~r"
: ~:-.~J:;~,
':;e:~_. --
'~"i ",,"' ~ <ii
~
"' ~ ~,~ \
."tH"..},
/.:~:
. ,
i#,~
,~-;;:.
;~.
~\
:1-"'
:'t,~1
~":'
;~~ Hl,' .'u., I
,:~~ ~ h: if~\'
e c, ,c.:..
_ C'.._ ~,~.
I':~'
,5,
W'
l.:J' -:!i~;-',
,
\(;_'{;,l._
',.::.l.,
~:t::'
",,:
'-~ :_L' ,:i')"
',,,~ ~-<,
,..-, W'
" ~',"i.J;r ~_-',l.
!t_~ ~~:,.
'. . <<="--:.-::.>-
,it~:;..'
't:~ .
/
'L,.,.~.
!'R;;.;,f;';;'>tJ.7!1";fIf
'#'1
'lOb
~
'. t+'"
"",,"
~1
.
I_~,.-
1
f.1'
~
.'!
, I
~9
:"',: I
/;;......1'
, , .
. J ' i' lOr
;~,'1'.'
7,' ,.~'I
\~;\
, ,
,'_....."".:~..~-.._ ..:i"...-".:----.--~......._._...... '-. r: ~ I
- ", ~'T< -::"J'f __ _ _________________i;:::._~...::"!':'~__.____,~:__._._.
,
, ~ _:~ C t.;
Olde Cypress PUD, PUDA.PL201O.388
February 4, 2011
Page 7 of 14
Packet Page -160-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
The commitment does not state when the park is to be built, who is to maintain the park, or what
amenities it is to contain. Must there be two parks in the increments shown, or is there discretion
as to how the 3.9-acre park commitment is to be fulfilled? Is it to be publicly (county) maintained
or was it the intent for the developer or subsequent homeowners' associations to maintain it?
Collier County adopted a Park Impact in Ordinance number 88-96, which became effective on
December 22, 1988. This ordinance addresses the needs for regional and community parks. The
county has not adoptcd any regulations that require developers to provide a neighborhood park.
Regional and community parks are sited and controlled by the county; the County does not
generally get involved in the siting or design of neighborhood parks, nor does the county maintain
them. Whether a park is designated a regional or a community park is determined by the draw of
the attraction. A park can be smaller, but !lave an attraction that draws persons from a larger area,
thus it can be a regional parle. This 3.9-acre park would most likely not contain any attractor
element such that it would make it function as a community or regional park.
Currently Olde Cypress has developed as a golf course community with a golf driving range,
tennis courts, a swimming pool, and fitness facilities. Therefore, the community appears to offer
recreational opportunities as currently developed. However. whether the existing facilities meet
the needs of the community is not for staff to ascertain. At the Neighborhood Information Meeting
(NIM) held for the companion PUD amendments, there was no clear consensus from the attendees
as to whether or not the park use should be eliminated. There was opposition voiced to the park's
removal, while other attendees voiced support for the park's removal; other attendees did not offer
an opinion. Since only approximately 100 persons attended the NIM, not all property owners
attended_ Staff has received and continues to receiye correspondence, some of which is supportive
of the park's removal and some of which is opposed to the park's removal. (Copies of
correspondence received as of February 3, 2011 have been provided in the CCPC packets.) It
appears that the park issue may be something best resolved by the property owners within Olde
Cypress.
If the commitment for the 3.9-acre park is removed from the PUD, the development
(Homeowner/Property Owners' Associations or the Developer) could still provide neighborhood
park(s), as that term is defined in the LDC since a park is also an allowable principal use within the
Olde Cypress PUD document. Ordinance Number 00-37 Section 7.04.A.4.
In the alternative, should the CCPC and the BCe determine that the park commitment should
remain, staff recommends that clarification be provided to indicate that the park is indeed a
neighborhood park, where the park is to be located; when it is to completed; what facilities it is to
provide; who it is to serve-the public or only residents of this project (and all residents or just
those within the gated community if that is where the park is located); who is to constmct it; and
who is to maintain it. Altbough not normally necessary for a neighborhood park, these
clarifications are necessary if the commitment stays in the PUD, so staff has something measurable
to ensure PUD commitments bave been met.
REZONE FINDINGS:
LDC Subsection 10.03.05.1. states, "When pertaullng to the rezoning of land, the report and
recommendations to the planning conunission to the Board of County Commissioners... shall show
Olde Cypress PUD, PUDA-PL2010-388
February 4, 2011
Page 8 of 14
Packet Page -161-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
that the planning comrmSSlOn has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the
following when applicable." Additionally, Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County LDC requires
the Planning Commission to make findings as to the PUD Master Plans' compliance with the
additional criteria as also noted below: Rezone findings are designated as RZ and PUD findings
are designated as PUD. (Staff's responses to these criteria are provided in non-bold font):
1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and futnre
land use map and the elements of the GMP.
The Comprehensive Planning Department has indicated that the proposed PUD amendment is
consistent with all applicable elements of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth
Management Plan (GMP).
2. The existing land use pattern.
This amendment will not affect the cxistiag land use pallem. The existing land use pallem will
remain the same.
3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts.
Not applicahle. The districts are existing and established.
4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the
property proposed for change.
Not applicable. The districts are existing and established.
5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment
necessary.
As previously descrihed, this amendment will reduce the project density by 158 units from 1100
dwelling units to 942 dwelling units. The amendment is also necessary to eliminate the
inconsistency between the PUD Master Plan and the PUD document.
6. Whether the proposed change will adversely intluence living conditions in the
neighborhood.
The amendment will reduce the project density from 1100 dwelling units to 942 dwelling units and
remove the requirements of trails and a 3.9 acre park within the Olde Cypress PUD. Staff is of the
opinion that the proposed change will not adversely impact the living conditions in the
neighborhood. However, several residents haye expressed a desire to have the park provided
within the Oldc Cypress community.
7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or
create types of traflic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak
volumes or projeeted types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases
of the development, or otherwise affect public safety.
The proposed amendment will not adversely impact traffic circulation.
Olde Cypress PUD, PUDA-PL2010-388
February 4, 2011
Page 9 of 14
Packet Page -162-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem.
The proposed amendment will not affect drainage.
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas.
Not applicable. No changes to the development standards are proposed. When meeting the
standards, light and air will not be reduced to adjacent properties.
10. Whether the proposed change would adversely affect property values in the adjacent
area.
Staff is of the opinion this PUD amendment will not adversely impact property values.
11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of
adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations.
The adjacent properties as well as existing properties will continue to be developed in accordance
with the existing regulations.
12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual
owner as contrasted with the public welfare.
The proposed amendment to remove the required 3.9 acre park may be seen by some as a grant of
special privilege to the developer. However, consistency with the FLUE is determined to be a
public welfare relationship because actions consistent with FLUE are in the public interest. This
PUDA has been found consistent with the FLUE.
13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance
with existing zoning.
The applicant alleges that the PUD has been developed and there is no space left to build a 3.9 acre
park. Furthermore, the petitioner proposes to eliminate 158 dwelling units from the Olde Cypress
POO to allow the HD Development PUD to be added to the Olde Cypress DRI without increasing
the intensity of the DIU. (See Companion items DOA-PL201O-1052, Olde Cypress DRI and
PUDZ-PLl054, HD Development RPUD.)
14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the
eounty.
Considering the recreational opportunities available to the residents, 169 acre golf course and
country club, a golf driving range, a fitness center, a community swimming pool, and 4 tennis
courts provide ample recreational opportunities, Staff is of the opinion that the proposed PUD
amendment is not out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood.
Olde Cypress PUD, PUDA-PL2010-388
February 4,2011
Page 10 of 14
Packet Page -163-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in
districts already permitting sueh use.
There may be other sites in the County that could accommodate the uses proposed; however, this
is not the determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness of a PUD amendment. The
petition was reviewed on its own melit for compliance with the GMP and the LDC; and staff does
not review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition.
16. The physical eharacteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would
be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the
proposed zoning classification.
Any development anticipated by the PUD document would require site alteration and will undergo
evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the building
permit process,
17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services
consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County GMP and as defined and
implemented through the Collier County adequate public facilities ordinance.
The development will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in the LDC regarding Adequate
Public Facilities for and the project. It must be consistent with all applicable goals and objectives
of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities. This petition has been reviewed by county staff
that is responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the rezoning process, and that
staff has concluded that no Level of Service will be adversely impacted.
18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners shall
deem important in the protection of the public health, safety and welfare.
To be determined by the BCC during its advertised public hearing.
PUD FINDINGS:
LDC Subsection 10.02.13.B.5 states that, "In support of its recommendation, the Planning
Commission shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the following
criteria: "
1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to
physical eharacteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer,
water, and other utilities.
As previonsly stated, the subject PUD is nearly developed. The reduction of residential dwelling
units should not have a negative impact upon any physical characteristics of the land, the
surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities within the Olde
Cypress PUD. Furthermore, this project, jf developed, will be required to comply with all county
regulations regarding drainage, sewer, water and other utilities pursuant to Section 6.02.00
Adequate Public Facilities of the LDC.
Oide Cypress PUD, PUDA-PL2010-388
February 4,2011
Page 11 of 14
Packet Page -164-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements,
eon tract, or other instruments, or for amendments in tbose proposed, particularly as they
may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and
maintenance of sucb areas and facilities tbat are not to be provided or maintained at public
expense.
Documents submitted with the application provided satisfactory evidence of unified control. The
PUD document and the general LDC development regulations make appropriate provisions for the
continuing operation and maintenance of common areas.
3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives and
policies of the GMP.
County staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis of the relevant goals, objectives
and policies of the GMP within the GMP discussion of this staff report. Based on that analysis,
staff is of the opinion that this petition can be found consistent with the overall GMP.
4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include
restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening
requirements.
The currently approved development, landscaping and buffering standards were determined to be
compatible with the adjacent uses and with the use mixture within the project itself when the PUD
was approved. Staff believes that this amendment will not change the project's internal or external
compatibility.
5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development.
The existing open space set aside for this project exceeds the minimum requirement of the LDC.
6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of
available improvements and facilities, both public and private.
This PUD is over 25 years old and is mostly developed. The project development must be in
compliance with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development
approvals are sought.
7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion.
This PUD is nearly built out and cannot accommodate expansion.
8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in
the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting
public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.
Oide Cypress PUD, PUDA-PL201O-388
February 4.2011
Page 12 of 14
Packet Page -165-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
As mentioned earlier, this PUD is existing and the reduction of residential units will conform with
existing PUD regulations.
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM):
The applicant duly noticed and held the required meeting on October 18, 201 0 at 5 :30 p.m. at the
Olde Cypress Clubhouse, 7165 Treeline Drive. Naples, Florida. Approximately 100 people and
the applicant, agent and County Staff attended the meeting. No commitments were made at this
meeting. For further information, please refer to Attachment C: NIM Minutes.
To date, approximately four letters of objection have been received. One letter of support has been
received from the Olde Cypress Master Property Association.
COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW:
The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report for Petition PUDA-2009-742, revised on
February 1,201 I. -STW
RECOMMENDATION:
Zoning and Land Development Rcview staff recommends that the Collicr County Planning
Commission forward Petition PUDA-PL2.010-388 to the Board of County Commissioners with a
recommendation of approval of this amendment.
However, should the CCPC decide to recommend that the 3.9-acre park commitment be retained, the
following issues need to be addressed:
1. When the park is to be built----commenced and completed; and
2. Whether it is to be a public or private park; and
3. Whether it is to be an active or a passive park; and
4. What facilities will be provided:
5. Who is to maintain the park; and
6. Where will the park be provided on site; and
7. Must there be two parks in the increments shown, or is there discretion as to how the 3.9-
acre park commitment is to be fulfilled; and
8. If the increment issue is discretionary, who is to decide and when is the decision made.
Olde Cypress PUD, PUDA-PL2010-388
February 4,2011
Page 13 of 14
Packet Page -166-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
~PAREDBY;
\ nvl. t2 (oj 1-DVE
DATE )
REVIEWED BY:
/
~ I ../ ~r i....
~m1~J ~ 'oj / ~~;J/I
RA YM<6ND V. BELLOWS, tONING MANAGER
DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION
j-
DATE
\N..... t
/-1 t)). ,__....~ J
~ LIAM D. LOR-ENZ JR./P.E., DIRECTOR
:P ARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
vROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION
o:L-c( - 'Leil
DATE
APPROVED BY;
Z -1J 1/
NICK CASALANGUJ):J;t\, PUTY ADMINISTRATOR
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION
DATE
0\ji
L
~
3- (1 - II
DATE
. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN
\
Tentatively scheduled for the March 22, 2011 Board of County Commissioners Meeting
Attachments:
Attachment A: Original Master Plan
Attachment B: Ordinance
~lchment C: NIM Minutes
Olde Cypress PUD, PUDA-PL201O-388
January 26,2011
Page 140f 14
Packet Page -167-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
THE OLDE CYPRESS (formally Woodlands) DR!
DR! #03-8485-53
NOTICE OF PROPOSED CHANGE
r"
Background
The DR! is located east of Interstate 75, and north of lmmokalee Road (CR 846), in northern
Collier County. Attachment I shows the project location. The Collier County Board of County
Commissioners on November 6, 1986 approved the Woodlands Development of Regional
Impact (DRI). The development order was appealed by both the Southwest Florida Regional
Planning Council (SWFRPC) and the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA). During
1987, the Board of County Commissioners approved two amendments to the D.O., in order to
address the two agencies' appeal issues. The project is currently approved for 1,100 residential
units and 165,000 square feet of retail and office space, all on approximately 500 acres. The
development is approved for five phases, ending in 2015. According to the 2010 Annual
Monitoring Report to date, 360 single-family & 396 multi-family units have been constructed,
the golf course is complete and the 165,000 SF of commercial is built out.
Previous Changes
There have been six previous changes to The Olde Cypress/Woodlands DR!.
On April 28, 1987, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners approved Resolution No. ~
87 -96, which amended the development order's transportation conditions, based on the appeal of
the development order by the SWFRPC (see above).
On September 15, 1987 Resolution (87-207) was adopted, amending section a(4), finding of fact,
to state a maximum square footage of permitted commercial retail development and to increase
the total acreage of preservation areas and to set forth a revised land use schedule that did not
increase the total amount of acreage or dwelling units previously approved.
The two (2) development order amendments described above were adopted by Collier County to
resolve appeals of the of the original Woodland's DRI development order to the Florida Land and
Water Adjudicatory Commission take by the Florida Department of Community Affairs and the
Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council. The Woodland's DR! development order became
effective on November 7, 1990, the date on which the Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory
Commission issued its fmal order of dismissal of the appeal.
On November 1, 1994, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners approved Resolution
No. 94-774, which extended the project's commencement and buildout/D.O. termination dates by
four years and eleven months, to the currently approved commencement date of October 7, 2000,
and the buildoutltermination date of October 7,2015.
On October 22, 1996, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners approved Resolution
96-482, which reduced the approved number of residential units from 1,460 to 1,100, and ~
reduced commercial use from 200,000 square feet to 165,000 square feet and miscellaneous
Packet Page -168-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
~ changes to the plan resulting from permitting requirements of the South Florida Water
Management. Also, the amendment removed a reserved road right-of-way from the east
boundary of the DR!. The applicant was allowed to adjust the project's approved uses to
incorporate the former right-of-way acreage. Miscellaneous changes were also made to
drainage/water quality, transportation, vegetation and wildlife, wetlands, consistency with the
comprehensive plan and fire by the deletion thereof.
On May 18, 1999, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners approved changes to the
Planned Unit Development Document for The Woodlands, to incorporate revisions to the
project's development standards, and to allow mini-storage as a use within the commercial area.
The development order was not amended.
In December 1999, Resolution (99-472) 28.69 acres was added to the eastern edge of Olde
Cypress in Section 22; Lands to be added included a 2.1 acre archaeological preserve area.
Standards were also incorporated in the development order to provide protection for
archaeological resources. The gross density was also reduced from 2.2 to 2.1 dwelling units per
acre. Minor adjustments in land use tabulations, along with other miscellaneous changes were
made to the development order to accommodate the notice of change.
~
On May 23, 2000, Resolution (2000-155) was adopted to add 9.3 acres to accommodate the
addition of the golf course driving range. The request also included a modification of the golf
course/open space acreage from 161.7 to 168.3 acres, including lakes. The residential acreage
was modified from 152.5 acres to 155.2 acres. No changes to the number of dwelling units,
commercial floor area, phasing schedule, commencement date, or build-out date was requested.
Attachment II shows the existing Master Development Plan for the Olde Cypress DR!.
Proposed Changes
On June 28, 2010 a Notice of Proposed Change (NOPC) was submitted to aggregate into the
Olde Cypress DR! up to 125 single-family residential units and 33 multi-family units, and
associated accessory uses, within the Vita Tuscana RPUD boundary. The developer proposes to
add 63.88 acres to the existing DRI with no change in the total 1,100 number of approved units.
The aggregation will not add density or units to the DR!. The water and sewer for this project
will be provided by Collier County Public Utilities through existing infrastructure serving Olde
Cypress and/or Immokalee Road. No changes are proposed to the phasing, commencement, or
build-out dates. The additional acreage is planned for residential development. Attachment III
shows the Proposed Master Development Plan Map with the additional land area and
development plan.
Regional Staff Analysis
~
The proposed changes are presumed to be a substantial deviation under Sub-chapter 380.06(19),
Florida Statutes. This presumption relates to the addition of land area to the DR!. The addition
of land area to an approved DR! is covered under Subparagraph 380.06(19)(e)3., Florida
Statutes, which reads as follows:
Packet Page -169-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
~
"Except for the change authorized by sub-paragraph 2.f., any addition of land not
previously reviewed or any change not specified in paragraph (b) or paragraph ( c) shall
be presumed to create a substantial deviation. This presumption may be rebutted by clear
and convincing evidence. "
The NOPC application attempted to rebut the presumption of a substantial deviation by
providing a trip generation analysis, aerial vegetation map, some conservation easement
information and requested Big Cypress Fox Squirrel information.
Character, Magnitude, Location
The Character of the DR!, as a residential development with some commercial uses, will not
change. The magnitude and location of the DR! will change somewhat due to the additional
acreage.
Regional Goals, Resources Or Facilities
In reviewing the potential impacts of the proposed changes, Regional staff looked at two possible
regional impacts from the changes. These were Transportation, and Vegetation & Wildlife. Also,
a local issue dealing with a 3.9 acres park should be addressed by the county.
Transportation Impacts
~
A new trip generation calculation was provided, which indicated that a 10.4 percent increase in
traffic may occur. This increase is proposed because the amount of single family units increased
by 125 units compared to increasing the multi family by 33 units. There is no increase in the total
approved 1,100 units. The 10.4 percent increase is less than the automatic substantial deviation
trigger in Chapter 380.06(19)(b)15 stating:
"A 15 percent increase in the number of external vehicle trips generated by the
development above that which was projected during the original development of regional
impact review."
Having rebutted trip increases proposed by the changes, no additional transportation impacts
were identified for the proposed changes.
Vegetation & Wildlife
The additional land area to be added was partly cleared (see Attachment IV) already and has
received an Environmental Resource Permit, which set aside a Deed of Conservation Easement
for 16.24 acres of jurisdictional wetlands. The remaining acreage (47.64) of the total 63.9 acres
to be added will be developed as residential. A review of the NOPC indicates that copies of the
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) approved Big Cypress fox squirrel
management plan and overall preserve management plan including a method of clearly ~
identifying the preserve boundary must be incorporated into the development order amendment.
Packet Page -170-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
".-...., Assuming these conditions are included within the development order amendment language the
proposed changes will not have significant vegetation and wildlife impacts.
Local 3.9 acre Park Issue
A 3.9 acre park was part of the original DR!, PUD applications and Master Development Plan
Map. Even specific language in the county's PUD exists to the affect of providing a 3.9 acre
park. The local park issue should be addressed in this development order amendment to clear up
the issue as to whether there will be a 3.9 acre park as required and shown on the original master
development plan. We believe the condition is still a requirement of the development even if it
was removed from the original master development plan during the 1996 amendment.
Multijurisdictional Issues
No multijurisdictional issues will result from the proposed changes.
Need For Reassessment of The DRI
There does not appear to be a need to reassess the DRI as a result of the proposed changes.
Acceptance of Proposed D.O. Language
,~
Regional staff recommends acceptance of the proposed development order amendment language
with the exception of the following conditions.
Copies of the FWC approved Big Cypress fox squirrel management plan and an overall
preserve management plan including a method of clearly identifying the preserve
boundary must be incorporated into the development order amendment.
The local park issue should be addressed in the development order amendment to clear up
the issue as to whether there will be a 3.9 acre park as required and shown on the original
master development plan.
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: 1.
If the two conditions are
incorporated in the proposed
development order language above
staff will notify Collier County, the
Florida Department of Community
Affairs (DCA) and the applicant that
the proposed changes do not appear
to create additional regional impacts
and that Council participation at the
local public hearing is not necessary,
unless requested by the County for
technical assistance purposes.
~
Packet Page -171-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
2. Request that Collier County provide
a copy of any development order
amendment related to the proposed
changes to the SWFRPC in order to
ensure that the amendment is
consistent with the Notice of
Proposed Change.
~
~
~
Packet Page -172-
,
t
RESOLUTION NO. 96 - 482
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
".-....,
DEVELoPMENT ORDER. NO. 96 - 2
A RESOLUTION AMENDING DEVELOPMENT ORDER 86-1, AS PRB\TIOOSLY
AMENDED, FOR THE WOODLANDS DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT (II DRI II) :
BY PROVIDING FOR I AMENDMENTS TO FINDINGS OF FACT SEC'l'ION 1
AMENDMENTs TO SECTION 1, DRAINAGE/WATER QUALITY 1 AMENDMENTs TO
SBCTION 4, HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL, A.MENDMJmTs TO SECTION 5,
TRANSPORTATION, AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 6, VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE;
AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 7, WETLANDS, AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 8,
CONSISTENCY WITH THE LOCAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AMENDMENTs TO
SECTION 10, FIRE, BY THE DELETION THEREOF, ,EFFECT OF PREVIOUSLY
ISSUED DEVELOPMENT ORDER, TRANSMITTAL TO DCA AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAs, on August 8, 1996, the Developer, Immokalee Road
Partnership, filed an application for proposed changes to The
Woodlands DRI Development Order, as amended, and to modify the
....\
-,
, .
.
approved Woodlands Master Plan, (Map H), which, as approved, is
attached hereto as Exhibit ."A"; and
WHEREAS, Immokalee Road Partnership and Greg Cabiness have
obtained all necessary approvals and conditional approvals from the
various Collier County agencies, departments, and boards required
as a condition to Planned Unit Development (POD) zoning and DRI
approval; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County COmmissioners as the governing
body of the unincorporated area of Collier County having Jv
jUriSdiction pursuant to Chapter 380.06 is authorized and empowered
to consider Applications for Development Approval (ADA) for
Developments of Regional Impact, and
WHEREAS, the public notice requirements of Chapter 380.06 and
the Collier County Land Development Code have been satisfied; and
WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission has reviewed
and considered the report and reoommendation of the Southwest
Flori~ Regional Planning Council (SWFRPC) and held a public
hearing on the ADA and on the Application for Public Hearing for
POD Zoning on October 3, 1996; and
WHEREAs, The Woodlands ADA is also part of an overall rezoning
application by the developer; and the issuance of a development
order pursuant to Chapter 380'.06, Florida Statutes, does not
constitute a waiver of any powers or rights regarding the issuance
of other development permits by the County or State; and
,--.
. ~..;
. "
: '.:.~
.", ".
. - ... ~
. ...f
.,
",
.' .
'.~ .. ~
~
- 1 -
Words underlined are additions, wrds eliwelE tshl'_gk are deletions.
'Packet Page -173-
I.",
I
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
WHEREAs, the Board of County Commissioners previous.Ly approved
and issued Resolutions 87-96, 87-207 and 94-774, which amended The
Woodlands DRr Development Order (86-1), as stated herein below; 'and
~
WHEREAs, on
1996, tbe Board of County
Commissioners, at an open public hearing held in accordance with
Section 380.06, Florida Statutes (1995) considered the proPOsed
changes to The WOodlands DRI, inClUding the Master Plan attached
hereto as Exhibit .A., submitted by the IDIIDOkalee Road Partnership;
the report and recommendations of the Southwest Florida Regional
Planning Council; the certified reCord of the documentary and oral
evidence presented to the Collier County Planning Commission; the
report and recommendations of the Collier County Planning
COmmission; and the comments Upon the record before this Board of
County Commissioners at said meeting, the Board hereby makes the
following Findings of Fact, ConClusions of Law, and issues this
amended Development Order, inclUding those changes' ProPosed by the
Developer, as follows:
A.
2.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The QriainaJ" applicant in 19U submitted to the County an
ADA and SUfficiency resPOnses known as ~eomposite Exhibit
A, Mtti whiC!h a~ by reference made a part hereof, to the
extent that they are not inconsistent with the terms and
conditions of this Order. as amended,.
The m.ia~al ADA and ~Illo application for D~: ~a
.to The WoodlandA Develonment Orri""r and Maste_ ___n __ 4:e
~
r
IV
3.
in accordance with Section 380.0~, Florida Statutes.
The real property which is the subj ect of the ADA and ot
the n:r::onosed cMnaes to Th@ WOodlandtt is legally
.,
. '~
?I
ge7el~meaa aee~efte !e~ ~a weeeaaBd~ att~ched hereto
described as set forth in Exhibit B ~f ehe Plansed 9fti~
"-: .~ .
. ;J..
. ..
4.
C4ld by reference made a part hereof.
The applicant propOses the development of Dshe Woodlands
i...:
,
. .01i'
: "
terms and conditions of this Develonment: Order O.FEl!1'laaeo
Plansei SR!, Bevele,maa~, pursuant to the ADA. and th.
. ;'
. .
~
- 2 -
Words ].lJ1derlined are addi tion.1 words Sl;Wali ~_e~!J& are deletions.
Packet Page -174-
&. '
'4
t
~, as the same may be amended.
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
The development
,~
consists of 500.11 acres which includes a maximum of
165.00q .99,999 square feet of Commercial retail 011 a
maximum of J..a....5. * acres, an 18 hele gelt eeese ea
appl!'eJEimaliely 11 i aeS'e., residential development of .J...c.1Q.g,
~ dwelling units on approximately ~ ~ acres,
6Rfi approximately llU :4& acres of preservation area~
an la-hole aol! cours~.
and annro~imatelv 157.8 acres of lakes. onen snace. a~g
attached hereto aDQ --H" sf sai.~ eriiaal'lee S~ 75,
general plan of development is depicted on Exhibit ~
€Hftetaisa fs!! \."'&tsel' Rl&na!Jetlleat! aeeeRHeR Pliq!sse:. The
t 7.5 ae!!'e. sf \dliah wUl
~
inc~rporated herein by reference, although the acreages
referenced therein and stated herein may vary somewhat to
acconunodate site conditions, topography and environmental
permitting requirements.
S. A comprehensive review of the impact generated by the
development has been conducted by the appropriate County
departments and agencies and by the SWFRPC.
6.
. .
The Development is consistent wi th the report and
recommendations of the SWFRPC submitted pursuant to
Subsection 380.06(11), Florida Statutes.
The development is consistent with tbe land developmeJ:1t
regulations of Collier County.
The development will not unreasonably interfere with the
achievement of the objectives of the adopted State Land
Development Plan applicable to the area.
The development is not in an area designated an Area of
Critical State Conce:t+l pursuant to the provisions ot
Section 380.05, Florida Statutei, as amended.
B. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1(.
'. .
7.
8.
9.
.... ~ ':': .-
..... .:
. .<.~
.:.~ '1 J
. ..J
': .j
. , . .-..~
:<~7~
:...:.:.~
-~':A
.' .'
NOW, 'l'HEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County" Florida, in pub1:l.c' lIJeeting, duly
constituted and assembled October 22, 1996, that the Development of
,.... ...:
~
- 3 -
Words underlines are additions, Worda "well .. ellp are deletions.
Packet Page -175-
/, "I
f
1 Regional I_ct Application for Development Approval a. 4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
purSUant to the Notice of Proposed Change Submitted by the
Immokalee Road Partnership is hereby ordered approved subject to
the following Conditions in response to the Southwest Florida
Regional Planning Council' s reco~tions and the commitments
specified in the ADA and NOPe which are hereby' adopted as
Conditions of approval of this Development Order, ,so long as they
are consistent with the terms and conditions of this Development
Order, as amended:
~
1. DRAINAGE/WATER QUALITY I The applioant has P!!'~l!u!led
receiveQ a ~oncentua~ surface water management
Dermit from the South Florida Water ManaaeDlellt.
District. attached hereto as Exhibit "C". eyseem
t:hat i.s eeReept!ual ill Raea!!'. 815 skis time. A
entetal seRll>SReft6 - sf sMa aa'r:eleplIlellt! ':-ill SEI b
eke date~ftae!ea af t!he diseaa~elevat!!afts fe~
"lie SeaeE'sl st!l'l:lSeHZ'es lHla EM ~!!'ess slsu!Jft
1t
eress!ftg eell7eyaBees.
The aplllie8ftt! P~eses ee
~histsl!'!eft &yd~epe!!'iaa af this site
t!lll'!!'eJ'e asallsssisly !!'eseere !se sallie ae!f!!'ae, Efte
~
sf se1B, a~..ersely !ftfl~eReefi sy MaR's 88ei7!6!es.
Meftieerift!J aet!!"~t!es a!!'e seill 8a geiBg vie.La the
steel aBly whea ehese seses al!'e selRpleeea eaR eke
pPepel!' SErl:le~~es (ana eleva~!eas) se implemaatcd
illts aac fiaal slH'faee llaeer llIanagelBeRe aesi!J!i.
Tae~eEe~e, mere aetailea infe~15!aft l~ll Beea t5
he Ilnv"-iael! l:eel:l!JA the aa-."eleplReRt reTJ'!sl, preesss
te aSS~e Ehat ERe eaaeepEs are adRapea 15s ana E8&e
EuilY.UeQl aEi-....erse reg"1enal iRlJil&st 'till !let eee\iZ'..
Fl:l!'ther !ftfe~15!eR is fteeessa~y ill e!!'ser te
p~vide a ~ll &Rely.!. sf impaeta.
Conditions:
a. The surface water management system shall
implement the design standards and water
a:fee!!' yeara
- 4 -
~
Words UDderUneq are additions, WOrds II~_~( WtIt8ll.p. are deletions.
Packet Page -176-
1
~
~r
--...
~
quality ubest management practicesn c 4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
in the application for Development Approval,
response to Question 22 Drainage.
An ongoing monitoring maintenance and sampling
program shall be designed by the Petitioner
subject to review and apProval' by Nat::wraJ:.
Resewtrses lfana!Jelleftl gepar8m.eae (Iwm) , ~
DeveloDment Services DenArtmant (DSf2l.. Bud the
Florida Department of Environmental Regl:lla~!SB
Protection to determine concentrations of
potential pollutants in the parcel's lakes,
preserves, and groundwater. The details of
the monitoring progr.m shall be mutually
agreed upon between the Petitioner, the HRM9
Deve1 ODment Services DeDartment, and the
Florida Department of EnVironmental Re!f\ilaU.sB
Protectioq at a date prior to the commencement
of site development. Details of the
monitoring program are hereby incorporated by
reference into this Development Order. The
monitoring program shall include:
1. Surface water in lakes, cypress
preserves, and other retention areas;
2. Groundwater monitoring of selected
locations;
3. Lake sediment monitoring;
4 . A sampling frequency adequate to allow
assessment of pollution;
S. If any violation of the State water
quality standards are attributable to the
development, the causation will be
modified or stOPped (if deemed necessary
to ~ the DevaloDment Service~
DeDartmant) and' remedial action taken
b.
- 5 -
Words !.1nQerl~ are additionsl words lIaNell I;MSllloft are deletions.
Packet Page -177-
.,
and,
Upon
the
request
of
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Ii _ __
intensive monitoring will occur. Lastly,
if dUring this monitoring program a
wellfield p::r:otection ordinance is adopted
by Collier County, ~ Woodlands shall
be subject to the more stringent of the
two programs.
c. Storage of any substance identified in the EPA
Toxic Substances Cont::r:ol Account List (Chapter
40, CPR 261, aleo adopted by the State as FAC
17-30) must be in the facility and the
location subject to the approval of HRM9 thA
DevelODmAnt: Services De.Dartment, more
~
DevelQDment Services De~artmen~ and Water
Management Department upon consideration of
the recommendations of the Water Quality and
Pollution
Control
Department
Director.
"..
Storage of such materials in aboveground and
underground tanks shall conform to the minimum
requirements provided in P.A.C. 17-61. A
Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure
Plan for all above storage and underground
tanks shall be approved by the. Water
Management Director and HRfm .the Devalooment.
~
Services Decartment DirectQ6:; conSidering
recommendations from the Environmental Science
and Pollution Control Department Director. In
addition, all golf course maintenance related
chemicals (i.e., pesticides, insecticides,
herbiCides) shall be stored in an on-site
facility that is located and/or constructed to
prohibit accidental contamination to the
proposed proj ect wellfield in the northeast
portion of the site and any POtential future
- 6 -
~
Words l.IJ1derl~ld are additi0Il8; worcls 81;1'1I811 ~a\t!l'h are deletions.
Packet Page -178-
...,
regional wellfield within the
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Cor __ ..__..
".-....,
aquifer system.
d. The applicant shall coordinate with the
Florida Department of Environmental Regulation
and Collier County in the off-site storage of
any hazardous waste, as defined in the Collier
. CoUnty Hazardous Waste Assessment, that may be
generated by any business located in the
Commercial portion of The Woodlands DRr sIte.
This may be accomplished through the use of
restrictive COVenants or some other type of
deed stipulation deemed appropriate by Florida
Department of EnVironmental Re!f1tlaU9Jl
ProtectiQD.
e.
The Development Order shall provide that prior
to project construction, the developer will
provide the information and off-site
mitiqation specified within the South Florida
Water Management District (SFWMD) ~Mpae~
'"
.~
AsaeSSllleelo I!'epert! toe lake SF5@IB, SWPm's ana
GellisI!' SeUftty fer review &fia Eaat a
BFWMD and Collier Countx shall Be el91!a!1'lea
Ceaeepl:llal Surface Water Management permit m
fPeIll 1!l1e SMm. QalHe:!' ee1:H1l:y:l s I!'e.."iew saal!
se eeaawel!ea aeee!'Eii~ Ee Eke previs1eftS af
€aap1!el!' 389.9'(19), Flel!'i5a Seatll1!es if
re~estea hy Fla.iEia Bepal!'lalllent af Semmwnit.y
Af~airs (Ba~), swPRPS SlasE!, aaEi apPI!'8p:riaec
€Ollftty Departlllea6s.
f. This nroiect shall comnlv with Colliex:
the same mav be annlicable. SheaIs Sellier
Countv's Hellfield Protection Ordinanc:e. aQ
C01:lat!y Eieeise t:aat a 1'le" E!a1:lnt~l uiae e1.'
re!Jieaal uellUelli is te he leeat;:eEi ~H.taill. tahe
~
- 7 -
Words under1!n~ are additions, words S15l!'U.ell BM811fh are deletions.
Packet Page -179-
~,
",
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Ceral Reef A~ife~ sys~em, 'aeft ~ae W6-__~lae
Prejeek 8_11 199 sttisjeel:: l!e IBfts \188 eBfi8reler
.elf e8~e rest:!!'i.eU~SRs Bfts eraiRSftees
~
11l1JllSIIlel'lh. ay Sell is!!' Sa_liy 'elr I!ae alrea
wide P~.eeI!18a ef eA4s wellf!eldT
g. The applicant shall COOrdinate with the owners
of the southern adj acent outparcels and the
South Florida Water Management District to
ensure the integrity of the preserved cypress
flowway.
All subsequent surface water
h.
management permits for these two outparcels
shall reflect this coordinated effort.
Detailed sUe
-dRage 1'1&11:8 shall
b&
8~mieeed fie efte OB~ey BRgiaeel!' ESI!' rBv1eWT
Ne eeftet~ee!Bft pe~!es shall 1ge 1sseed enless
and
lIfte!l
aPI'!:'e".'al
pil!'BI'Bses
SE
eae
eenee~etieft 1ft aeeBiI!'aasas wiEa eftS Bu19mtl!ees
plans is !fI!'8lleea BY the Walser tleagemeal!
M'I'.'4.SBE}- Beail!'s efts 'he SeHney SBA":iBeer...
~,
Construction Plana haVE! heen reviewed anc;2
a"''''''''''d bv t1/ll $OJ.ltb ~~o~~ ....te:: ~
Pi.t~i.~t feu:: the 15ItOJ:: ..."._ _to ;;:
site. All construction shall conform to t
.aDD~ved DIans. as the same ~v be amendeg
from time to time...
i.
Construction
of
management
all
water
facilities shall be subject to compliance with
the appropriate provisions of the CoUier
County Subdivision Regulations.
j. An Excavation Permit will be required for the
proposed lakes in accordance with GaUlLe!!'
€eltn fay Srs1a&ftee !le. B 9 2~, as amessed s,.
e!'dbaaee S3 3 I aftS as IRsy aa BftleBaea .b the
f'\:le1:l!lte. Division 3.5 of the Collier Count~
~
- 8 -
Words und"~1ineli are addit:l.onal Words 1ll\I!'\l.&II II_all" are deletions.
Packet Page -180-
"
Land Develcmrnent Code;
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
"-.,,
)[, Slle\tlli - alihi._tle hp.l :eae)E t:Ip el'l.U,1!~." fer
!:he PlttRpeli S~!!'faee Wltt!a!! Juagelleft'" Syseetll lae
!!'e~!!!'eli By aay SERe!!' ~e!!eB&l e!!' s!!at!e
a!eft~., Eae Bevel.,es will ee ~espeBsi81e fer
,!!'e~'diB! all sae fteee..a~ .e8Yllel'l.&S 1!e
es...l!e1\ a ,elPJ'etulal '1'81"', Bill.Hes i.1It
.l!!Ie!!'s1 af i.fte S)"8t!8M, MI._ _ IUellt81J .a,.f.aal
f~. fe!!' La!!!Lal a~Bi..!!'a.ieB and epe!!'a~i..,
e!Epetlsee, all l5e "ae eaUsfaeU8B af EM
Ce\Hl6y BBgiaee!!' 8ft. Greuel' Ateesey.
."
~~ Construction activities on this project shall
be coordinated with construction contracts to
implement improvements to the Cocohatchee
Canal (CR 846 Borrow Canal) by the developer
in accordance with the recommendation of the
:1.981 Gee and Jenson Hydrologic Report NO.
2420, prepared for the Big cypress Basin
Board. Said canal improvements shall be
limited to the canal reach along section 21,
Township 48 South, Range 26 East and two (2)
designated farm crossings in Section 20 unless
previously completed by other parties.
Rh-l... When required by the County, the developer
agrees to contribute his fair share on a pro-
.rata tributary area/run-off volume basis to
implement the canal improvements to serve the
remainder of the Cocohatchee Canal watershed.
2. BNERGY: The proposed project would be an all
electric development and would increase the energy
demands of the Region. The applicant has committed
in the ADA to provide a variety of energy
conservation measures to reduce the impact of that
increased energy demand.
~
- 9 -
~
Words underlinl!lll are additions, words .15~~1 toel!e\l!k are deletions.
Packet Page -181-
...,
~
g.
h.
i.
j.
d.
Cond! eions :
a. Provision of a bioycle-pedestrian system to be
plaoed along arterial and colleotor roads
wi thin the proj eot . This system is to be
consistent . with applicable oounty
requirements.
Provision of bicyole racks or storage
facili ties in reoreational ~ commercial and
multi-family residential areas.
Cooperation in the locating of bus stops,
shelters, and other passenger and system
acoommodatians for a transit system to serve
the project area.
Ose of energy-efficient features in window
design (e. g., tinting and exterior shading).
Ose of operable windows and.oeiling fans.
Installation of energy-efficient appliances
and equipment.
Prohibition of deed restrictions or covenants
that would prevent or unnecessarily hamper
energy conservation efforts (e.g., building
orientation and solar water heating systems).
Reduced coverage by asphalt, conorete, rock,
and similar substances in streets, parking
lots, and other areas to reduce looal air
temperatures and reflected light and heat.
Installation of energy-efficient lighting for
streets, parking areas, and other interior and
exterior public areas.
Use of water closets with a maximum flush of
3.5 gallons and shower heads and faucets with
a maximum flow rate of 3.0 gallons per minute
(at 60 pounds of pressure per square inch) as
speoified in the Water Conservation Act,
,-.....,
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
~
b.
c.
e.
f.
- 10 -
,-.....,
Words I.Ulderline~ are IldditiODaI words Blinllll li.".\lfl!. are deletiOl18.
Packet Page -182-
'1
Chapter 553.14, Florida Statutes.
4/12/2011 Item 7.A,
~
p.
k. Selection of native plants, trees, and other
vegetation and landscape design features that
reduce requirements for water, fertilizer,
maintenance, ~d other needs.
1. Planting of native shade trees to provide
reasonable shade for all recreation areas,
streets and parking areas.
m. . Placement of trees to provide needed shade in
the warmer months while not overly reducing
the benefits of sunlight in the cooler lDonths.
n. Planting of native shade trees for each
. residential unit if native shade trees do not
exist for each residential unit.
o. Orientation of structures, as possible, to
reduce solar heat gain by walls and to utilize
the natural cooling effects of the wind.
Provision for structural shading (e.g.,
trellises, awnings, and roof ovez:-hangs)
wherever practical when natural Shading cannot
be used effectively.
Inclusion of porCh/patio areas in residential
".-....,
~
q.
units.
r. Consideration by the project architectural
review committee (s) of energy conservation
measures (both those noted here and others) to
assist builders and tenants in their efforts
to achieve greater energy effiCiency in the
development.
:; . FLOODPLAIN/HURRICANE 'EVACUATION: The Woodlands DRI
location has a natural elevation of twelve to
fourteen feet above mean. sea level and is well
beyond the expected flooding areas of hurricanes in
categories one through three. However, the project
- 11 -
~
Wora underlinet1, are additions, words .''IN.11 t;HaltSh are cleletions.
Packet Page -183-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
area is on a major evacuation route for the county
and one mile east of an 1-75 interchange Offering
excellent access to and from major evacuation ~,
routes. The potential for on-site public!cOIIlInOn
areas to be used as public hurricane shelters would
provide a use of regional benefit.
Condition:
a. The applicant shall meet with Collier County
Disaster Preparedness Officials to identify
those public areas that may be used for
shelters in the commercial portions and/or
golf course clubhouse of the project as storm
shelter and/or staging areas.
4. HISTOR.ICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL: No historical or
archaeological sites are. known to exist on e.Ihe
Woodlands DRI site, however, a regionally
significant burial site is located immediately east
of the site.. _Ii eke prejeee area has as":e3E' 8e8ft
s-~eeeed tae a l!I)"slseRlaUe pretesBlenal sle'Ve}-.
Basell eft liaea El!'slRen-."!lil!'ellllletltaally s!lI:ila!E' Haas is.
#0
~
C-ellier SS1:Iftlsy, b is liledy eaae siees \rill Jse
fe1:lRlI \H.t!ai.a tofte ,re; eet!. 'lifts Bepar1!tlleae sf Seaks,
1)1 visi,8ll ef Meh4. vas,
Hisee~' aed Reee~a8
MEmageme.at J.u eJe1!ressea similar eeRee!!'ftS. A surve~
State.
of the site. reviewed by the Florida Denartment;: o{
Division
of
Historica.l
Resourc~g .
only
encountered no cultural resouroes on site. The
Detentia!
area
which
may
contain
'archaeoloaical resources is, a amall area of cvnress
located within ~he wetland Dreaervation area.
- '1'heae rel!lOUraf!!iS, _Y ,oricur 'within an area of deep
muck denoait:.. . No' ilnD.cta are p~DOII.d for thU
.GU...
Condi tion. :
- 12 -
~
Words underlineq are additiona; words sta.'ll.1i ""81il,A are deletions.
Packet Page -184-
~"l
l
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
a. 11. sy-ate:.maUe }J!'efesaienal Slln"ey SM.......~
ea~~ied et:l~ ,fit.MIi all areas teatS.fiee. aa
liJf.el~l ~8 eSlitalli aiet.e1!'ieal/arsaaeele!tieal
~
8i~es ~~is~ ~s eemmeaeemeat sf eeftB5~et.iea.
Ge~ies af toke B~-e~,. Bhall Be BeRt te tlhe
Stlat.e Bi7iB1se ei ~eatves, Eke Gellier GeHnty
NRU9 aaa SWPRPc. Bsta eke e\:lF\.'~' lIlet!asd. ailS
the l!'epert shall Be l!'e7iMtea aRa app~e7ea BY
Eke St.ate Si ":;leisR sf keai-..es ana Sellier
I<!sWit.y
NSEllJ!'al
ReaS1:lre6!!1
lIas8gelll81'lt
DepSFt.Meftt., ana this shall Be delie p~!el!' tie
aliY lafta elearias SF ~ellftd aiBt.~~!ftg
ae~!vitaies.
TAe pel!'eeM.El
Ell!'
a!JeBey
perfeAliftg 'eae stl!"l.-ey shall se aPP!!'evea ~. t.ke
S5ate St-.-Leise sf A!teki-..ee ana Isae Natal:l!!'al
Resel:H!'ees
Itafiagellletlt
De~ar1!IReBt .
All
l!'eeemmeftaa'e!eae sy 'eke ae~;e eEfiees saall se
iJll.ea~e1<aEea
illEe
a
Ile Jel e~lIIenE
Grer
Maa_aRt felleuilig EaS p!!'eeeal:lree estaaeli.skea
~
iB GaapEe!' 389.9~, F. G.
L If during the course of si te clearing,
Ii>
excavation,
or
other
constructional
activities, an archaeological or historical
site,
artifact,
or other indicator is
discovered, all development at that location
shall be immediately stopped and the State
Division of Archives and HaI!l:H!'6.l Reseu!I!'see
Maftagemeat Development Services Department
notified. Development will be suspended for a
sufficient length of time to enable the
NaI!1:iJ!'al Reesll.iE'Eles Uafia!fSm8B:t DeveloDment
Services Department or a .designated consultant
to assess the find and determine the proper
,course
of
action
in
regard
to
its
~
- 13 -
Words underlined are additiona, words S"~IISIE lilu'Il\l!J8 are deletions.
Packet Page -185-
~,~
!
salvageability.
The Nals'l:l!:al R-es 4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Managemea& Develooment Service~ Department
will respond to any such notification in a
timely and efficient manner so as to provide
~
only
a
minimal
interruption
to
any
constructional activities.
Evaluation of a historical/archaeological site
shall include but not be limited to its
determination as a site of regional or local
significance,
impact
minimization
by
incorporating the site into preservation or
green space areas, or other mi tigation
actions.
b. The St.ate Department of Archives and the
County NmS Deyelo'Oment Services DeDartment
shall be provided access to the project for
monitoring purposes any time during the life
of the project.
5. TRANSPORTATION
a.
GENERAL :
The Woodlands DRI has direct access to Immokalee
~
~
Road (CR 846).... !!lfta ,,'ill har.'s eliras1;. sasase as 1;.:fte
P~~8eea a~eriBl ~eaEi ea _he aas~e~ seHR&a~ e~
tae Weealaasa seftftes~ift! ea~rell ReBa Ee sa Big.
(1) The ~~plicant. its successors or assione
shall be fully resDonsible for site-
related
roadway
and
intersection
inrorQVements
reauired
within
Th~
Woodlands DRI.
The ADDlicant shall be
reauired to DaV its DroDortionate share
of the cost for any intersectiQn
imnrovements ':liqcludina. but not limite'"
.to.
sianalizlUon.
turn l!!l.nRs.
and
additional s;!.de street or driveway
- 14 -
Words underlined are additions, words "'''''"h tdw8I1,a are deletions.
~
Packet Page -186-
~'4
!
",
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
throuah lanes) found to be neceS&arv ~
Collier County for the nro1ect's access
intersections onto Immokalee Road.
".-....,
ill For
purposes
of
this
section,
"significant impact- is def~ned as when
the project
traffic on
any road
segment/intersection equals or exceeds 5t
fe!!' Ella l.e"'.'el ef Sepviee -e" fe!!' I!!laid
!!'eali\i'ay Se!'fteM/iRt!e!!'seeE!ea ea an lUlfW.al
ave~ge dally eeaaiEiea. of LOS D. neak-
hour.
Deak-season canacity of
the
roadwaY/intersection.
-fa1- ill
The
Woodlands
development
is
predicted to have a "significant
impact H on the following roadway
~,
segments:
Lee County:
Bonita Beach/Ga~ell'Road;
- 1-75 to CR 887
~,
Collier County:
CR 951
- Immokalee Road to EasE GellieR Saee
Belll8".'ard Vanderbilt Beach Roa~
- Vanderbilt Beach Road to I?i.1'l6 Ridge Read
Golden Gate Boulevard
Irmnokalee Road:
Geed1eE~e Read 58 V.S. 41
- Goodlette Road to Airport Road
- Airport Road to Livingston Road
extension
Livingston Road extension to I-75
- 1-75 to Oaks Boulevard
- Oaks Boulevard to Woodlands main access
road entrance
- Woodlands main access road and CR-9S1
-ta+ ill
The following intersections are
- 15 -
~
Words underlined are additions; words etl!lIlsli lIhl!'.....gk are deletiOlUl.
Packet Page -187-
"',
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
predicted to be "signifi(.cu.......y
impacted n by ,Iehe Woodlands proj ect :
Imrnokalee Road at Airport Road
1mmokalee Road at Livingston Road
extension
Imrnokalee Road at 1-75
Immokalee Road at Oaks Boulevard
1mmokalee Road at Logan Boulevard
extension
~
Immokalee Road at J?a:rJElaalis SSlieS. aeeese
i!'eH Pro'iect Ent.rance
Immokalee Road at OR 951
OR 951 at West Celaea Saee Belileva:ra
Vanderbil t Beach Roaq
Immokalee Road at Goodlette Road
M!!'pere Reaa at: '''-&!uie!!'hUt Beaah Reaa
Ai~e~ts Reali at FiBe Riege Reali
rifts niage Reali at sa 951
i-4+ ill
The Woodlands actual impact on the
road segments and intersections
'It
specified in (~~) and (~~) hereof
and the service level of each of the
.~
above referenced road segments and
intersections shall be empirically
determined by the County using the
moni toring reports required by
CONDITION -H+ 5 .b. (5) .
-f5+. ill
The County has adopted a Road Impact
Fee Ordinance, O!l!'EitaStaee He. 8~ gr:;
and the: developer I or its successors
in interest, shall pay the "impact
fees" specified by said ordinance
for
all
development
in ,I-t:he
Woodlands.
These impact fees I
together wi th that portion of
gasoline taxes and ad valorem taxes
- 16 -
Words underlined are additions; words sthli!lli IdllE'Sv.p are deletions.
~
Packet Page -188-
"'., 4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
generated from the project aL~ .~~
inhabi.tants and programmed for road
improvements, e8lJet!.aer wi eft Eae
~
aea.ieaUeft ef !!'i,h.E sf way 8,eeiiEiea
as Ol>>m1T19N (:3) and comnliance with
the
conditions
contained
in
Paraaraph S.b., shall mitigate the
transportation impacts reasonably
attributable to :l-s-he Woodlands
~J2l.
development.
An analysis of the County's proposed
schedule for improvements to the
roadway segments and intersections
significantly impacted by l:-s-he
Woodlands indicates that the local
government will be able to provide
the transportation facilities at the
~t
approved
level
of
service
~
"consistently" with the development
schedule for The Woodlands as set
forth in the POD document, with the
potential exceptions of that section
of County Road 846 from 1-75 to CR
951~ afta esaE section of Bonita
Beach/Oaa'e11 Road located in Lee
County has already been imt)roved by
Lee County to four lanes divided.
(1) By adopting this development
order Collier County is making
no
commitment
to
improve
Carrell Road or any other road
in
Lee
County,
however,
CONDITION
(4)
shall
be
applicable.
- 17 -
~
Words underlined are additions; words S&l!'llsll '6h:IrEN"R are deletions.
Packet Page -189-
"",
(H) By adopting this
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Devell..o~u.",....
Order, Collier County has
determined
thiilt
if
the
developer
~
complies
with
CONDITION , ~, it will have
made adequate provision for its
impacts on the roadway segment
of CR 846 between I-75 and CR
951.
-f* .w..
Collier County , has estimated the
time frame in which eac:h of the road
~,
segments/intersections significantly
, impacted by this development shall
need improvement to maintain the
requisite level of service adopted
by the County, as the same may be
amended from time to time, and has
ascertained that it can provide the
transportation facilities consistent
with the development schedule of The
Woodlands, ..L.-..J1However , the County
makes no guarantee to the developer
~
that
said
roadway
segments/
intersections shall not fall below
the requisite level of service in
spite of this commitment of the
County to provide said facilities
consistent with the Development
Schedule.
~ill
By accepting this Development Order,
developer understands and agrees
that, although the proposed schedule
of the County for improving the
roadway segments/intersections
Words underlined are addJ.tiOJ18I words lIeNel1 aM...,. are deletions.
- 18 - ~
Packet Page -190-
"',
significantly
impacted
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
b} -.me
Woodlands would indicate that it
will have the ability to keep the
~
necessary
transportation
improvements at the'requisite level
of service consistent with the
development
schedule
of
The
Woodlands, the County is not
gUaranteeing the same to the
developer and developer understands
and agrees the County shall not be
liable
to
developer
for
its
inability to have said facilities
available consistent with the
development schedule of The
Woodlands .
b. CONDITIONS:
~r
-f.i+ Tae aPJ!lieae1a shall slHlmie an 8.lm1:lal
meaite~iftg ~e~t te tae SelIier Se~y
~
Bft!Jiftserillg :Elel'arEIllaM., Sellier Se1:lftty
MPO, FSGT, aaa Eae Seutftwest Fler1aa
RegieIlEll l?lanaiRg SS1:lfteil ~er ~er.'iel1. TaD
first
Illefti~eri!l!'
!!'ellert
shall
Bel
saemalsEes at the time af the issHanee ef
the first Se:f'15ii,fieata ef Oes1:lpal'le~f ier
Be.. elepRlefM: at ':FAa WeealaBBs . Re!,erts
shall Ise sellllUes 8ftn1:laUy Eae!!'eaft!er
1:lffi:il &1:iilEis1:1t af the !,raj eels. '!'fie
r~e!f:es, at a lIliBilll1:1l'll, sMll esfttaifl.
t!!'a.ffie eeWlEe tah:el'l a15 tahe assess !,eil'lte
te tae site es tilftlil'lg lftEl'.~etIlCfteB te aaea
of tae iata!f:seet!el'ls listes 1ft a(2)
aee7e.
(2) Tfie E1e"'..els~el' shall aeEtieate rigaE eE lfa~l
- 19 -
~
Nords underlined are additions; words sewell tiws,.,& are deletions.
Packet Page -191-
~t
,
.....,
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
als~ Eke eaete.H1 SS1:tl'uie.1'y af Efte JlFejeet
te se aU,lhea ae ~a!!'t: eE lahe Sel:H!t!y' e
f1.lEliil!'e
area!!'i.l fte~_e~E sysl!em. The
~
aevoelepeil!' shall aeri!l.eatae eBsagk !!'i.!Jkti sf
way se eka1; tase ae1::HlEY 114.11 _."e 129 feel!
sf il!'i!!Jst ef \ley E!!'sHl Semttay Reaa e U; to
the fts!!'t5ke!!'B 1'1!'e::j eeE ee1::Hl_~, toald.B!
iRee asasa.ael!'aeiea ehe MEissift!J J e fee~
eaeemaaE S!I. taae ':eSE hertieil!' sE SeaEisft 22
fsr I!lf'I'JrenimBl:ely eile first! eBe Balf mUe
eft Efte seliEhe~lj' l's.eiea af Bestaien 22.
(3 ) AI ESeliga
!.Illpaeta
fee
1'1l?Rl8fteS
are
!eBe~ally il!'eeervea fe~ selleseisa BE toAe
time af saildiag !,e~it, aS7eleper Bhall
pay illlpaeta fees Eer Efte ~esitieftEial liBies
PJ!'S:; eated toe he eeftSErlfBl!eti la tskia tsBe
BelEE eea )"ear pe~isd (llsil'l!" the. PUEl
l'ftas!ag plan) if tske iells~ift! easara.
€i)
Ehat: paRlea eE SR 1lI~ lse1!\leeB I 7$.
anti SR S~l ~[eeeds ~evel ef Ser~iee
~
"C"
eft
a..re!l!'a!!Je
BBftllal
daily
eeediHsa, sti
(ii) The Wsealaftas traifie, at that! EiHle,
eeaseitHtes st SF mere oE ERe
traEE!.e ea saiti reaauay Bcgmeat:, afta
(!ii) sfte Oel:Ui1!y is pJreparea 1:s Sfteer iate
a eeat~aet! Eer !sar laai~ sf said
reaa\.i'ElY BO!Jflleatl.
(1)
(1)
If Le'l."el sE Se!!'\.ise "g- eB aft
average ~al daily eeftaitsieB fer
aay
Jtes-!saal
Feaa\:ay
ae!!Jmeftt/ift1!e~seekiea
iaeeUUeli
he!!: eis is enseeaeti aRa prs~ eet.
t:raffie
eaia
81'1
%eaa\.ayo
- 20 -
~
Words underlined are additions; words B~.lI.ell ll-l!nlt'A are deletions.
Packet Page -192-
j
I" "l
segmest/iaterseetiea
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
eEJUals eE'
elEseeas S \' fJf ~A8 1..8....e1 ei Ser..iee
HC'"
een-iee
~elu1Re
( 1:1til!lIiltlJ
~
g8aerali.ea s8r-.-ie8 ...-ellHftes
as
8Sea! ishea Boy NJG'I'}, ana
(a) t.ae
reaaway
!.mpl!'eyemeRto
se.eeear)' 8e ret)\IR ts Le>'Jel af
Se!'Vlee
hOI'
er
settoer
eeBditis1'I., is Bet. l'!!'egralllRl8a, e1'l.
Efte &I'plieaele UPS eJ!' Cellier
Oe\iftty
fLe
~{ear
~l!'affie
i Illp J!' eo.- e illeR to
p1aa
with
iae1'l.Eifiea EaftEi~g, al!'
(19) if Sl:iSft pregJ!'&Rlftled i:mprevBmBm
is aeleted EreRl said ii...-e year
Eraifie i~re7eRleaa 111&6, ar
(e) if fi?e years pBSS wie&e1:1E Ehe
~l
BEart. af eease~Btieft af said
ilft}'re....eRleftE I elE'
~
(d) t.ae level af sBPV!l.ee aa aay
s a i a
reaauay
se!!fRloftt.,'ia-tersestiea
elEeeee
le..-el af serviss "e" eft lHl.
anBHal s7e~ge as!!} esadit.!SB
I'r!.el!' ee the eeMlElNetois1'l. af
8!U~ l'l!'ag:r:alllRlBd i:tIl}'rS"..sm81'1.E I
8hBft a s\:I19sEaaUal ae"."iaeie1'l
aaal! 1ge
eeeRlSa
ES
b&"Je
eee\:l~ea.
The de~~leper M~' eeatis1:1e
eeyele!!,MeBt
EiariB! saia
fll:1.!u,elHl.tial
aeviatiea SRI
re-.rie"
UBti!
aft
eeaaca
ae-,relel'lfteBt s~lier is iesl:1.oa,
- 21 -
~
Words underlined are additions I words se_a11 tilYr81!!,h are deletions.
Packet Page -193-
~,
,
~J:'e'.~iElee
ekat
eke
amer 4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
a~~lepme&e eFae~ is i88~ee
wieltiB sin (~) 1IllEIft~ af ~ke
dalse sf
sHe1iaeeial
fte~iEle
EM'!
a
~
ac-..-ia1aisll
Bas
eeeurrell.
P1H!'Ehe~ ele..'elepR\eft~
a~fteFi.ed afta
'Will l!te
eaeei.ieaea l!ty ESe iiaal
aRleftaee tievelepmsM eFaer.
{ii) If Level eE QSr\-iee de. ea an
~:e~age BftftBal daily eafts!1iiea iaF
aay
regieasl
reaa.\la)"
se~eftt/iBte~seeEieft ideatified
Bereia is elEee-eass. liftS !lre;ee'!
Eraffie
ell
sail!
rea8.\Iay
'!of
eegmeat/iB1ieFseetieft e~als er
=Eeseas 19\ af Ese Level sf Servise
"0" -.....elame (llE!l!e!!,!, geae!!'alieee
ee:l!"'\ iee ~"slli1lle as ese.ulishea sy
J11DO'i') I aas
(8) t.ke rsalbiay
~
i Ill!' r e-,{ eme B t
aee8saary EEl re1!1:1!!'fl te 1e-.-81 af
Be~iEle C SF setter e8fteli1i!ElB
is RSS !lre~l!!tMIIles s:a tae
applisele tWO sr
Ceunty ehxe!! year
Gel lie:!!
1sraffie
im~Fs7emeRt plaR
ideatieiee faRalR!1 ,er
wiEa
(s) if SliSS ,regl!'a\flft\ee iIll!'Fe....elReBes
dalseel! {Fsm eaie'e:h1!tss yeM"
tl!'afiie impFe~SlReftt plaB, er
(8) if Bees years pass lI'ies.e'li'E eBe
Sea!!E Elf eSftstFUse!sB af saia
illlPrevelllsat, el!'
- 22 -
Words UDr'lf'lrlineci are additions; words eli_ell aeeligR are deletions.
~
Packet Page -194-
i
I,
~
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
lei) the le....el af serdee ea _..~
s aid
read\ray
eegmeaa/iftEe~See~ieB
eueeells
~
Le-. c.l sf SerJ'iee RD-. ell &B
8ftftHal average daily eSfta!eiea
prier ~e I!ae esas&!!'1:lstisa ef
eke p!'El!!'illllRl.ed
iMp!l!'s'."emeak I
I!hee a ses'eaB&ial Eie...illtsisR
shall
I:le
seelllea
I!e
aa"..'s
OaS1:lil!'iI!'ea.
The ee.eleper may e~iatie
de".'elepmeliE
Bria! saia
sestaMial
!le-,ri,akiea SR.I
:r:e....iew
1:lftI! i.l
aB
aBleaes
Eievele)!llReat el!'ae!l!' is issueEi,
previeiee
tlhak
eae
aRIeftaeS
de7elepllleBt erae. is issaea
'lid t.hia sin (Ii>) 1'IleBI!ks sf Ehe
~r
aaee
ef
R8\51eo
eaat!
a
,..-.."
SWlS6aftEial
ae-.-iatiea
has
oeew!':r:ea. Ptlftaer ae.....elepI'fte11E
,,-ill
se
B1:leke:r:iBea
aaa
eSBEi!tioftea
I:ly
tae
fiaal
ameBaea aevelepmeBe eraer.
J1l Based on the transDortation assessment of
sianificant Dro;ect imcacts. construction
of
the
following
t rans.port at ion
i~rovements or acceotable substitutes or
alternatives shall be needed coincident
with, develooment or'The Woodlands DRI,
if adopted level of service conditions
are to be maintained, throuah -proiect
buildout
on
sic;mificantlv
imoaeted
reaional road secnnents and intersections:
- 23 -
~
Words underlined are additions I words slnPlu.1f Idwell's. are deleticms.
Packet Page -195-
"""
lmmokalee Roqg
C.R. 951 to Ai:!:nnrt Ro<iS
Airnort Road to Goodlette_
Frank Ro~
The Woodlands to 1-72
C.R. 95J..
.Irnmokalee Road to ~lden
Gate Boulevar
.Immokalee Road to Boni~a.
Beach Roa4
Livinneton ROlllQ
Immokalee Road t~ Vrder-
bilt Beach oa
Bonita Beach Roaq
1-75 to C.R. 8&2
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
.Four Lan~li!
Pour Lanet!
~
Six Lan..,
Four Lan~
'l'wo Lanel
(or alter_
native il!J-
.Drovement L
Two Lan~s
on the
~ The q~Dlicant shall mitiaate its imnactl
Four or SiX
~
reaional
and local
sectionS identified herein as follows~
roadway
'J!
ill The Ancliqant shall make the sit~
sul:!Daraarach 5. a. (1) hereof.
related imnrove~nts snecified i.n
~
1.1ti The
Annliaant:
shall
DrODortionate share of intersectiqn
Dav
itli
imnrOVfllments at its access coints t;.Q
suhDar~aranh 5. a. (1) hereof.
Immokalee Road as snecified in
CHi} The ADDlicant shall be sub"iect to
imoact: feesL
all lawTullv adQcted tranSDortatiqn
.l.1JU. The Annlicant shall be sub"iect t,2
lU The
the County as set forth hereilt..
the Concurrencv Manaaement BYAtem <;!f
reaional
roadw:av
seamll!nts
intersections on which this Droiect wil~
aqg
bAYe sianificant imcacts are wholly
- 24 -
WO:J;'ds lmderl~ are additions; words .SNell! ~HStl.. al:'e deletiolUJ.
Packet Page -196-
~
"'1
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
within the iurisdiction of Collier County
'Jr
for ournases of concurrency manaaementL
The County has made the deciBion to DIan
for and manaae the imoacts of this Di,I
throuah its duly adonted comnr"'''enAiy~
Dlan. The County has conBiderAd th~
reaional roadway seatnAnts and reaionaJ..
roadway intersections set forth i~
subnaraarat'lh 5. a. (3) and (4) hereof. ang
has determined to remlire the Droi eet t:Q
be subiect to and to cOlllDlv with t~
Concurrency Manaa~ment System (CMS) 0'
Collier County as adocted in its Gro~b
Manaaement Plan and imolemented by the
Adeouate Public Facilities Or-d.inanc~.
LAPF) Qrdinance No. 93-82. a cony ot
which is attached hereto as Exhibit "D-.
due
C!~nBideration
of
t~'
~
After
that
alternatives. the Countv has determined
to
reouire
cOlllDliance
with
~
~oncurrenC!V as mandated bv the CN{S. in
Addition to the other mitiaations
reouired in thiB Section 5 hereof. is t~
&onroD'!:."iate way
to
aOCOnImodate
th~
imoacts of this Droiect and to &BSure
that t ranSDort at ion facilities ar~
Drovided concurrently with the
traneDQrtation i~acts of this Droiect~
lil The Adeauate Public Facilities Ordinan~
JAPFI reauires the Community DeveloDmen~
and Environmental Services Arlministratqr
to Comnlete an Annual OQdate anq
.Inventory ReDort (AUIR) bv Auaust 1st Of
each Year on roads and nubIic facilitie~
".-....,
~ 25 -
Words underlined are additionsl words .". -elE lIaall-' are deletions.
Packet Page -197-
,
",
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
The aDDl icant
based on the adooted level of servi ce .
sha 11
Drovide
within
Florida Df=lDartment of Coftmn,nitv Affairs
Florida Reaional Plannina CoQnLllei and ~
5 . a. (3). and 5 . a. (4) to the Southwest:
facilities set forth in suhnaraar~Dh
year a CODY of said AUIR on the rl!!aional
fifteen (15) days of DUhlication each
~
(DCA)....
ill The Board of County Commissioners iliil
. at an unaccented LOS and is not Bchedulec;i
service (LOS) or is Drniected to onerat~
ooeratina at an unacceDtahle level of
road seament or intersection which i~
Sianificant Influence (ASI) ar01~nd any
reauired bv the ~PF to establish Areas of
for
illlI)rovement
in
the
CanitaJ.,
l'
Inmrovemen t
Element
(eIE)
of
t~
to the APF.
with the imoacts of develooment Dursuant
whieh would Drovide facilities conCUZ'rA!\t
Comnrehensive Plan in a manner and time
~
exceDtions
boundaries of an ASI are. with a fe~
Proiects within th~
not
relevant
hereto.
Drohibited
from
obtainina
furthex:
remainina c~Dacitv. if any. of these roaq
that would allow imnactB to exceed thQ
Certificates of Puhlic Facilitv Adeaua~
deficient
seaments or additional imnacts to th~
or
DOtentially
deficient
facility.
Thf'! aDDlicant shall notify
hearina to detf'!rmine the boundaries of
davs after receiDt of notice of a DUbliQ
SWFRPC and DCA within five (5) workinsr
- 26 -
~
Words underl~ are additioD8; words Btsnels ---"'!JA are deletions.
Packet Page -198-
i
"
.,
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
".-....,
any AS! that includes any transcortation
facilities listed in this Sectio~
ill If any of the road seaments identified in
this Section 5 become deficient. the
County shall establish an Area of
Sianificant Influence (ASI I around such
secmtent nursuant to criteria set forth in
the APF.
ill In add! tion to the Drovisions of the
Collier Countv APF Ordinance:
ill The Woodll'l1'1ds DR! is sub1 ect to the
snecified
rQauirements
of
th~
Adeauate Public Facilities Ordinance
No. 93-82 as that Ordinance existed
on the effective date hereof. Aqy
~l
amendment to the transcortation
cortions of that Ordinance by
Collier Count v shall not b~
effecti ve or aDnlied to the
~
Woodlands DR! unless and until this
DeveloDment Order is qmended to
incorcorate and render aCDlicabl~
such chanaes or amendments to the
APF Ordinance.
Jill In the event that Collier County-
deeianates an ASI ~round a deficient
road seament that is Dredicted to be
substantiallY
imcacted
bv
Th~
Woodlands Proiect. and the AS! doeCi
not include the Woodlands DRI. then
the aDolicant shall be required tQ
file a Notice of Chanoe of thiE$,
Development
Order with Colli~r
County.
the
Southwest
Floriqiil
~
- 27 -
Words un~rlined are .dditions; words a1ihalE liU8"!'A are deletlona.
Packet Page -199-
I
1'\,
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Florida Statutes.
pursuant to Subsection 380.01> (.19) I..
DeDartment of Cornm""'itv A:efairs.l..
Reaional Plannino Council. and t~e
~
J.1JJ1. 7he l!ltmlicant shall file a Notice o.f.
.chanoe within sixty (60) days from
analYsis
Notice of Chanoe. a rnJrr_nt traff~c
The atmlicant ahall file with th&
tlutt excludes the Woodl ands DR! 1
for such a deficient road se~nt.
the date the Cntln~y creates an AS!
and
other
informatiol1
other iustification of the Countv'Q
UDon the DB.1':T-inent road seament. at:
is not havina a substantial imDsct
atteUlJ:')tino to establiElh that the DIU,
."
exclusion of the DR! from th~ AS!.
If an ASI is established for a~
of Public Facilities Adeauacv until!..
be issued any furthe!r Certificate.,lf
DRI. the DR:! sha.ll not sopl v for o~
that d~s not inclUde the WoorUanda
Section 5 of this DP.veloDmP-nt Order
deficient road Seatnent listed :i.n
~
(1) the NotiCe! of Chanae decision ill
made bv Collier County. if neither
DCA nor S~~C narticioates in th~
Chanae
DubHe hearina on this Notice qf
DUrsuant.
to
SubAection
Florida Land ~d Water Adiudicatory
any anneal of such decision to tqe
County. as oroDosed: or (2) until
the chanae is adoDted bv Col1i~r
380.06(19) tf). Florida Statutes anQ
- 28 -
~
Words underlincg are additions; Words slal'v.el[ ~a__,. are deletiona.
Packet Page -200-
;
'''',
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
~
Commission is resolved.
..!.m For DUr'l?oses of thi.s Deve1 ooment
Order. the DRI shall be deemed to
have a sianificant imoact ~Don a
defioient
road seament
if its
traffic impacts exceed five gereent
(5%) of
LOS D. Deak hour-Dealt
Season. canacitv of the road~.
m The
Countv
shall
nrovide
the
requisite nubIic notice and hold a
nubIle hearina on the Notice of
Chanae as eXDeditiousl v as DOssible.
Followina a nubIle hearina. Collier
Count v
shall
amend
the
QRI
Develooment Order to. record its
determination whether or not the DR:{
is havina a substantial imoaot UDon
1,
the defioient
road seament or
~
otherwise shOuld not be included
within an AS! for the deficient roaq
seament.
In makina this deter-
mination. the Count v shall include
the imcacts resultina from all
develoD1Il@nt to occur DllrSuant to the
Certificates of Public Facility
Adequacv Dreviouslv issued to the
DR!.
The
amend.mtrl!nt
to
this
Deve10Dment Order is anneal able
nursuant to Subsection 380.06(19)
and
Section
380.07.
Florida
Statutes.
J.yjl If
neither
DCA
nor
SWFRPC
Dartici'Date in the nublie hearina on
the Notice of Chancre nursuant tq
~
- 29 -
WO.rds underlined are additions I words S51Nll\]( l!B."8~!JB are cieletiocs.
Packet Page -201-
j
~1
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Subsection 380.06 (19) (f). Florid2!
Statutes iitnd the chanae is adQoted
by Collier Count v as orooosed. the
~
DRI ~v be issued Certificates o~
Public Facilitv Adeauacv following
the
County'S
Devel~nt
Ordl!!!r
dl!!!Cision.
If either DCA or SWFRPC
osrticiDates in the nubllc hearina.
the aoolicant shall not aooI v for ot:
be issued Certificates of Publi~
Facilitv Adeauacv until the deadline
for any iito~al of the Collier County
decision has exnired DUrsuant tQ
Section 380.07. Florida Statutes and
no aDDeal has been filed.
~ Collier County and the anDlicant may
.consider
other
ontiona
to
nrovide
'!t
adeouate
commitments
for
needed
inmroyements to transnortation faqilitie~
~
set forth in paraaranh 5 .b. (2) orovideq
that said ootions meet the following:
.criteria:
l.U. the transoortatlon lmoacts to th~
roads and intersections outlineq
herein shall be addressed consistent
with
SWFRPC 0011c1es and said
ootions or mitiaative measures shall
.be adopted in accordance with
Sections 163.3220-163.3243. Florida
Statutes.
which authorize local
aoyernment deyeloDment aareements or
as authorized by Rule 9J -2.0255.
Florida
Administrative
Code.
(TransDortation Policv Rule)
- 30 -
~
Words :und.erli~1l are aciditions; wordll l!IaweJf t;Jw.....k are deletions.
Packet Page -202-
I
"
1
",
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
l1i.L Anv such ootion would b!! imnlemented
only
after
NntiC!e
a
of
('!hJ:lnae
Drocedure SA outlin@d AMV_.
121 The 8Dclicant
itA Successors or aBAione
shall submit an annual traffic monitoring
r~Dort
to
the
followina
entiti~s:
Collier County.
Florida. Dt!nartment of
Tr.a:nsnnrtation (FOOT I . Florida Denartment
of CORmJnitv Affairs
(FDC'A) .
and th@
Southwest
Florida
Reaiono;tl
PIAnnina
Counc::il
ISWFR~) .
The
first tra.ff.ic
monitorina Tenort will be submitted onp-
vear after the date of the :i Ballance of
the
first
huildina
Dermit.
for
a
residential buildina within thp Woodlands
DR!.
R~Dorts must he l!Juhmitted annually
tharp-after until buildout. of the nroiect 1
The annual traffic monitorina ~Dort will
contain t.he followina information.
ill. AM and PM Desk hour turnina mnvement
Count.s at all 8t te access Dointe
onto ImmokAlee Road and a comnarison
of
the
Pro;ect'e
meAsnrp-d
trin
aeneration to the Pro;ect'a t.r~D
aeneration assumed in the oriainal
DR! analysis.
.iJJJ.. A 8ummarv of th@ status of road
imornvementa assumed to hA commi tted
in the ADA. includina the fo)lowina:
- 31 -
Words und~rlinl!lld are additions; words B"WIi J 'lb..l_~ an deletions.
Packet Page -203-
,
'..,
1
llilsl;!
Pine RidOl~ Ro~
Aircort-Pullina Road
Golden Gate Boulevard
C.R. 951
Livinaaton Road (Nnrthl
Imrnokalee Road
Goodlet.tt'!! R.o.l!lld
Santa Barhara Boule~rd
/Laaan Bou]~va
':r
-f51- ..ll.Ol.
Se:ament
1-75 to C.R. 951
Golden GAte Blvd. tQ
C.R. 846
I-75 to C.R. 951
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Tvoe Qt
IlIIDrovfl!tnf::m t
~ - lane.
4 - la.n~
2: - l~Yle
4 - lane
4 - la"e
4 - lan~
4 - Jane
4 - lan~
The above-t:ntffic monitor:fna rADort.
~pe;aet aae Re~
in comhina~ion with the Annua1
- 32 -
Packet Page -204-
UDdate ann Invpntorv R~nort. (AUIR)
referenced in Cond:it.ion 5.B. (4).
above. renrAeenta thp annUaJ t.raffic
Woodla.nd' B DR!.
monitorina recruirements
for the
The developer shall provide a fair
toward
the
Golden GA~e Parkway to
East Golden Gat;:
Boulevard
C. R 846 to LA~ Connty
~
U.S. 41 to I-75
Pine Ridae Road to
C.R. 846
Green CanMl to Pine
Ridae Road
share
contribution
capital costs of a traffic signal at
any proj ect entrance on Irnmokalee
County Engineer.
&lsll;! when deemed warranted by the
shall
be
owned,
maintained by Collier County.
The signallJU
operated
and
(';) If fSl;l!J:: laPli.sj" sf 8R 8t( in f.l6ft1: sf ~k~
esmmeftsea ~F!eF Be
ae.~l~~meEt sf Bemme~eial B! reaiaeaeial
units 1.iti!iL eRe prejeee, tike 9e..elepel
Beall ~~s7iaa an eaa~~e~fta lafe eHrn
6te!:a!e. laft_ and WeSaBBttRa. aeeelerat;.iali
Words ~r1inl!!d are adcUt1ona; words "-'f'1ielh t11N. Blish are deletions.
I
'.
1
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
"rei ess BR!.!:'RRse.
tae llBit!s \.a!eh t "slil. ee I:I.si!l! BftaE
CeEtLfi.ea1:!lB af gSeu,afl~- ~e issaaa fer
lane ae sash ~rejae~ aHt~ftee Befele any
~lUl
The developer shall provide arterial
level atreet lighting at each project
entrance. The operating and maintenance
costs of these units shall be assumed by
Collier County.
The applicant assigned a significant
number of Woodlands trips to the proposed
parklands South Access Road from the
~ ...lUl..
Parklands boundary southward, in Phase IV
renlaced hv an f"I!xtension of C.R. 951
lo~ated to thl!!. eaRt: and north of
Imrookalee Road. This relocat.ian is
~,
consistent: with tnl!!!! County' 8 2020
parklanda South Acce'Re ROAd. is nnw being
(ending 2004) of the Woodlands. ~
Financi all v F@aeibJe Plan. A sixtv foot:
(60') road riaht-of_wav 11; DOW bp-ing
Woodlands frQrn Immaka] ee Rnad to tbe
nrnvided on thP- wP-st bnundarv of The
north Droner-tv line.
...lUl.. The applicant also assigned a significant
for th~ PBrkJands South Access Road.
TheRe BUb&titute
DrOnoseej
number of Woodlands trips to the !!'!!'8!!esal
Livingston
Road
Extengion
between Immokalee Road and Vanderbilt
Beach Road during Phase V (ending 2007) .
If ~ tha road segment........... .u. not
constructed by the specified Phase, the
project shall undergo a determination as
to whether a substantial deviation has
- 33 -
Word1l undl'!rl~lll!ld are additions," word.s st!ll'b.eh ~hlllN!,A are d.eletions.
Packet Page -205-
~I
i
....,
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
occurred.
An amended development order
shall be rendered after any substantial
deviation determination, whether found to
be a substantial deviation or not.
6. VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE: The applicant has identified
the potential for certain species to exist in
preservation areas on the site.
The primary issue of
regional concern is project impacts to 15 species of
birds, 2 species of reptiles and 2 species of mammals
which are endangered, threatened, or are species of
special concern that may grow, feed, nest and breed on
The WOOdlands Site.
Conditions:
a. The applicant commits to deed restrictions, upland
buffer areas, and cypress preservation areas to
protect the endangered. threatened or special
concern species.
b.
A survey for any eagle and woodstork nesting
activities shall bs conducted prior to commencement
of development.
Copies shall be sent to Collier
County NHM& Devl!!!:lonrnent Services DP-cl!t.rtment, the
SWFRPC and Florida Game and Fresh water Fish
Commission.
c. All exotic plants, as defined in the Collier County
Code, shall be removed during each Phase of
construction from development areas. open space
areas,
and preserve areas.
FOllowing site
development " maintenance program shall be
impletnented to prevent reinvasion of the site by
such exotic species.
This plan, which will
describe
control
t:echniques
and
inspection
intervals, shall be filed with and approved by the
N&t.~al ReS8lHE!as t1aaagemeat Develonment Services
Department.
- 34 -
Words un~""lint!td are additions; Words l!I~1!'tll!l)i 11 . !I)~ are deletions.
Packet Page -206-
1,
"1
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
d. Once specific site clsarin51 plans are submitted,
boundaries of areas proposed for development shall
be set and fla5l5lsd in the field by the petitioner,
subject to approval by NaH9 the ~veloDment
Senrices DeDartment. Boundaries of areas proposed
for preservation shall be set and fla5l5led in the
field by the petitioner, subject to approval by
KRM9 th@ ~~lnbm@n~ ServiceB DAna~m9nt.
Precautions by work crew supervisors working close
to planned preserve areas shall be encouraged in
order to minimize wildlife and preservation areas
disturbances.
The petitioner has received carmita from the U.S
Armv COrDS of Enaineers and th@ South Florida Water
Manaaement Distriot which D~rmitB WAT.~ aiven a~t~r
consideration of th@ comments of the eRall sattsf}
ell s~a~e (Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission.j.. and ..!le..sl .tlul United States Fish
e.
and Wildlife Service)
8~!~Hlaeiefis eeftee~BiB!
p~e~!e~ea plaa~ aHa &Rimal 9~eeiea.
f. A site clearin51 plan shall be Submitted to the
lla'etllral Re.S81:l!lSes rfaftsg'aRlI!BE B~aPEmeJIt DevAlonm.nt
Services D8Dartme~t for review and approval prior
to any substantial work on the site. This plan may
be submitted in phases to coincide with the
development schedule. The site clearing plan shall
clearly depict how the final site layout
incorporates retained native ve5letation to the
maximum extent possible and how roads, buildings,
lakes, parking lots, and other facilities have been
oriented to accommodate this goal.
g. Native species shall be utilized, where available
to the maximum extent Possible in the site
landscaping design. A landscapin51 plan will be
- 35 -
Words undfl!rlined are a4d.it:l..c~; worela 1I''elllUh 'dU!l_!'il arll cieletione.
Packet Page -207-
/
",
l'
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
submitted to the N'aE1:u!'sl ReeBliJ!'S&S rtanS!!!.__.._
Bepa~t!menE ana tHe gSRlmtHii~y B~ele'tReM Qi~:ieie!!
Develonment Services D~Dartment for ~ ita
review and approval.
This plan will depict the
incorporation of naeive species and eheir mix with
other species,
if any.
The goal of site
landscaping shall be the re-creaeion of native
vegetation and habitat characteristios lost on the
site during construction or due to past activities.
7. WETLANDS: The Woodlands site contains a eotal of 358
acres of wetlands which accounts for 72% of the total
site.
Most of the cypress and a major portion of the
transitional weelands are part of a major slough system
which traverses the eastern portion of the site. As a
result of pumped discharges associated with the
agricultural operations located both west and north of
the project siee, along with drainage improvements such
as the canal located immediately south of the project
site adjacent to Immokalee (CR 846) Road, the overall
site has experienced an altered hydroperiod. Presently
the exotic melaleuca is diffused throughout the site, but
no specific locations or acreages of impacted areas have
yet been delineated.
The applicant est!im&~ee thae ~, Ee 119.b ae~ea er
3H ef 1!he commits that wetlands will be impacted by
roads, golf cart cras sings I lakes and gol f course onl v to
imclement the aDcroved Master Plan. attached hereto as
Exhibit lIA". and only as authorized bv the nermit issued
bv the Routh Florida Water Manacement DiRtrict. attached
hereto and marked Exhibit "e". As mitigation for wetland
impacts, the applicant has committed to a series of
mitigation measures such as wetland and upland buffer
zone preserve areas, upland preserve areas, lake littoral
and limnetic zone creation, exotic invaded wetland
- 36 -
Words underlined are additions i words .'u~,uh 'illnij.3k are d.eletions.
Packet Page -208-
,
....,
."
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
restoration and hydroperiod restoration. and off-ute
mitiaation. 8B more aDecifical1v stated in Exhibit IIC".
Conditions~
...,. .The applicant commits to wetland preservation,
wetland mitigation and water management design
presented within ~ke 1lI:9A ails &lif~isial\!lY aeStIRleBBS
wki.ek He ifl.ee~eE'a1:.ed. Exhibit lie" And 8.e denicted
in exhibit "A" as conditions of approval.
e. P~ie~ ~e SHe i~lemeRsaeieft ef aaaR paase sf ~ae
eta. ele!ltflaB~, Rl/3!! e lieaai.les iftESrmal!isR eaall h~
EHI~:Rl.ie5ea
tke
Fle!!iia
-..
Bel'Et.!I!~lfteft:t
af
BIl.!rSlIR'leBeal
R8!f1J.la1d.SR,
SPUI'iB,
.s:wP'RPS,
ana
Glell!.eE' ge1:!l'l'e) Nmm feE" ze...-is\I, '..kiek p~e9ri.pjes Efte
felleu9:l"J.! iftE8.1!l1l&en.an..
1. Eeele!isal ae.alt!k SSI!!!! 'eien aRB.. EtiIlet!,Lefl SE
eaek ..e.tlaas 'ee ee. imp.aeesi.
2. ]i. RLe!!!e pFeeiaa !.aeRtifieseieR ei .ffiiek \J'e151aRs
Ba'e.all "i.ll se aeJ!!l'ereyea, ea.8.a ef!. 1:.he He ,.e
Sl:U! . e~ aRB Efta &l'lilieaeieB sf eke !,FeI'8Se.a
-r.:etlaRB J: e/!Je1::l.fe!e. ml!lB&!6meRt piialiRes.
.3. IIis'e.e!E"!.e "'aBe!!' 1e. ale -e.s Jas m&.!.B5aineei -r..~i1!.kili
uetlafta l!~aElePL~es ~e sePTa as a aeS!!B aRa
!P!"rie..: !J':iirie..
t.. Uere. ae.1!a!lea iafe!AMlEl.eR Sf! hEn. 'eke ..a~e.r
IRMla!Jellle.f\~ Sj BE-81ft ,,,ill mai.R1:ain his1!e~ie l.aeer
Ie.ala
\:itkift
e.aek
1.81:18.1\5
J!l3!8Se!!.e.
(Plaeemeat.
aM
aeei.!fl
ef
taB
ae1jtist.els.
atI'listure.e, e!f1:lilliee.!! Bl16.1es and etil.sF!.8.)
S. 1':0. maia:e.el'lEtflee plan 1:.e maiM.aiB 1!ke e .-erall
eeels!Jieal
i!l!!~e!,E'i~l
ef
\1e.elaftB.
13Ye.ser.s
areas.
~.
aRRlial
l\5
fFsm
re.!ler~
t.l\4
IlsRlee\J1!U!!" I E!I
.'laeeelatieR tis E'e.!H.laldy 1!Le!liS8F ee1Rl91!anee
\:i'CR
tieeel
~es~F.iaEie.R8
fer
F8sidell1:.ial
- 37 -
Words undl!rHned are additions; words abH.Bli tr;1I1f8.1i~ are deletions.
Packet Page -209-
~I
,
'.."
,
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
setsaelrB ana. :p!!'eS!.F ."l11:i.sa.
e. THe eelli.al: ee"tlSe} Fe7'ieu shall ]sa !I!flft8Eaa
aeae:!!'liift! t:$ etH;.eEMleial sS7i.aeieB l!ietal."1l.i.nat!!slt
p~e.tsi6as af Ga~~e~ 3BS.g~f PlsE!4a Staeuaea.
8 . CONSISTli:Ncr WITH TIlE LOCAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, The
subject property is designated as Urban on the Future
Land Use Map and meets ~ke Ile~e.l!sa~ ra'eiBg Jle!lll!.s fer
1!he ~J:aJ!esea Eieftsie} af 2.92 l:lfttee JIB!!' !!!_l!IS aere.
satisfieR the reauir~menta of Policv 5.1 of the Collier
County qrowt:h Manaaement P]an Future Land URe Element. In
addition, the project meets the criteria for the proposed
land Uses. Therefore, the development complies with the
Comprehensive Plan.
9. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS: In "The Woodlands' ADA, numerous
commitments were made by the applicant to mitigate
project impacts. Many, but not all of these commitments
are listed in this Development Order.
Additionally, the ADA provided a Phasing Schedule
that provided the timing basis for this review. If this
phasing schedule is significantly altered by the
applicant then many of the basic assumptions of this
approval could be substantially changed, potentially
raising additional Regional issues and/or impacts.
Conditions:
a. All commitment and impact mitigating actions
provided by the applicant within the Application
for
Development Approval
(and
supplementary
documents) that are not in conflict with specific
conditions for project approval outlined above are
officially adopted as conditions for approval.
b. The developer shall submit an annual report on the
development of regional impact to Collier County,
the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council,
the Department of Community Affairs and all
- 38 -
Words underlined are additionsj words .a~~!. ikLL~Jk are deletion..
Packet Page -210-
,
.'.
,
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
affected permit agencies as required in Subsection
380.06(18), Florida Statutes.
c. The development Phasing Schedule presented within
the ADA, and as adjusted to date of development
order
approval
and/or
permit
approval
is
incorporated as a condition of approval. If
Development
Order
conditions
and
Applicant
Commitments incorporated within the Development
Order to mitigate regional impacts, are not carried
out as indicated to the extent or in accord with
the
timing
schedules
specified within
the
Development Order and this phasing schedule, then
this shall be deemed to be a substantial deviation
for the affected regional issue.
19. prIm,
a. P:Fi.er Ee ~he .lIJS1:l&fiee Bf any lnd.ldi.B.!" ~~!6L.!'!s, a
fit's se.a'!l.sl'l ser. i1'l! eais Jll!rej eee RlHat sa e~eFas.iR!
~,
,..iekil'! it e (&) miles sf ~h~ I'l:sj set.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Board of County Commissionera of
Collier County, that:
1. All commitments and impact mitigating actions provided by
the applicant in the Application for Development Approval
with supplemental documents and the Application for
Public Hearing for rezoning with supplemental documents
that are not in conflict with conditions or stipulations
specifically enumerated above are hereby adopted to this
Development Order by reference.
2. The Community Development Administrator shall be the
local official responsible for assuring oompliance with
the Development Order.
3. This Development Order shall remain in effect until
October 7, 2015, the estimated duration of the project.
However, in the event that significant physical
development has not commenced within Collier County by
- 39 -
Worcle undl!lrlinl!!d are add.itions; worda s\.Il_8h 'eknl:l!k are deletions.
Packet Page -211-
i
"",
~1
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
October 7, 2000, development approval will terminate ~.y
this development order shall no longer be effective. For
purpose. of this requirement "significant physical
developmentN does not include roads, drainage or
landsoaping but does include construction of buildings
for installation of utilities and facilities such as
sewer and water lines. This time period may be extended
by the Board of County Commissioners upon request by the
Developer in the event that uncontrollable circumstances
delay the commencement of development.
4. The applicant or their successor(s) in title to the
subject property shall submit a report annually,
commencing one year from the effective date of this
development order, to the Board of County Commissioners
of Collier County, the Southwest Florida RegiQnal
Planning Council, and the Department of Community
Affairs.
This report will contain the information
required in Section 9B-16.25, Florida Administrative
Code.
Failure to submit the annual report shall be
governed by Subsection 380.06(16), Florida Statutes.
5. Subsequent requests for development permits shall not
require further review pursuant to Section 380.06,
Florida Statutes, unless it is found by the Board of
County Commissioners of Collier County, after due notice
and hearing, that one or more of the following is
presentj
a. A substantial deviation as defined in Subsection
380.06(19), Florida Statutes (1996), from the terms
or conditions of this development order, or other
changes to the approved development plans which
create a reasonable likelihood of adverse regional
impacts or other regional impacts which were not
evaluated in the review by the Southwest Florida
Regional Planning Council; or
- 40 -
Word" underlinl!!ld are additions, words e.. lull tia..Ij.!1l are deletions.
Packet Page -212-
i
...,
~
b.
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
An expiration of the period of effectiveness
this development order as provided herein.
Upon a finding that either of the above is present, the
Board of County Commissioners of Collier County may order
a termination of all development activity until such time
as a new DRI Application for Development Approval has
been submitted, reviewed and approved in accordance with
Section 380.06, Florida Statutes.
6 . The approval granted by this Development Order is
limited. Such approval shall not be construed to obviate
the duty of the applicant to comply with all other
applicable local, state or federal permitting procedures.
7. The definitions contained in Chapter 380.06, Florida
Statutes,
shall
the
and
interpretation
control
construction of-any terms of this .Development Order.
S. This Order shall be binding upon the Developer, assignees
or successors in interest.
9.
It is understood that any reference herein to any
governmental agency shall be construed to mean any future
instrumentality which may be created or designated or
successor in interest to, or which otherwise possesses
any of the powers and duties of any referenced
governmental agency in existence on the effective date of
this Order.
~o. In the event that any portion or section of this Order is
determined to be invalid, illegal, or unconstitutional by
a court or agency of competent jurisdiction, such
decision shall in no manner effect the remaining portions
of this Order which shall remain in full force and
effect.
11. This Fe8Bl't:l~ie!l amended Develonment Order shall become
effective as provided by law.
~2. . Certified copies of this Order are to be sent immediately
to the Department of Community Affairs, and the Southwest
- 4~ -
Words und...rlined are ad.cHtionsl WOrdB .e'e.I!'llSJl EM. Ill" are de.let.ions.
Packet Page -213-
j
"',
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Florida Regional Planning Council.
li.:.. Excect as amended herebY. DevelQt:lI'D.ent Order 86-1. as
amended. shall remain in full foroe and effect. bindina
in a~oordance with its terms on all Dartiee thereto.
DULY PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 4<i!.... day of O,,-rJ..) ,199~
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the
minutes of this Board.
Conuniseioner
Matthews
offered the foregoing
Resolution and moved for its adoption, seconded by Commissioner
Hanc:oc::k
and upon roll call, the vote was:
NAYS:
Commissioner Matthew5" Commissioner Bancock" Commisaioner
Constantine~ Commissioner MaclKle and commissioner Norris
AYES:
ABSENT AND NOT VOTING:
ABSTENTION:
'{:; Done. this .)..:2.-
Jf:!f+;';i)':,\"
. f.':'
:;,:,-
;?3\:~.Of\:{ ',', ,.'; ,~,:'
II-/:.,/ '1:;'.- /0 f ,,\.,.,
'. '. . "'., "".; ,,~.:~.'
day of (7~--.J
, 1996.
Board of County Commissioners
Collier County, Florida
APPROVED AS T9 FORM
AND ,LEGAL SUFFICIENCY
; ,
Sllllll of FLORIDA
CooJIb' of COWER
3-lfOODLAJilt)\OO,CLK
Octobu 10. lU6
"?1lf/r;f,l'~. fl'). ;7~J~~__/~
MarJ 1e M. Student
ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY
- 42 -
worli8 underlin.ed. are &dditionSi words .nl!1:ll!lh ~h.n1:l1k are deletions.
Packet Page -214-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
DeselemKay
From:
.... Sent:
To:
Su bject:
StrainMark
Saturday, March 12,2011 6:25 PM
DeselemKay
FW: Olde Cypress
Please forward as you have the others.
thanks
Mark
From: Anne Kandilis [ashec0e@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 1e, 2011 8:12 PM
To: StrainMark
Subject: aIde Cypress
Dear Mark: We are residents of aIde Cypress and would like you to know that we are in favor
of the PUD changes and support what Stock Development is trying to do for aIde Cypress.
There is a small group of individuals that are fighting the changes but we want you to know
that they do not represent us, as residents of Olde Cypress. Thank you for considering our
view.
Sincerely,
--Anne & Charles Kandilis
;088 Strada Bella Court
Naples, FL 34119
Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail
address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this
entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing.
Packet Page -215-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
email from Mark Strain from McKenna 3-2-11.txt
From: StrainMark
Sent: wednesday, March 02, 2011 1:20 PM
TO: DeselemKay
subj ect: FW: 01 de cypress
Another your files.
Mark
From: Larry MCKinney [lrmck@msn.com]
Sent: wednesday, March 02, 2011 12:36 PM
To: StrainMark; MurrayRobert; HomiakKaren; ReedcaronDonna; schifferBrad;
AhernMelissa; ]odiebert@comcast.net; pmidney@collier.org; bmk@bmkre.com
subject: olde Cypress
To the members of the Collier county planning Commission
Ladies and Gentlemen;
My wife and I purchased a lot in olde Cypress in September 2000 and moved in
to the home we had built in september 2001. Our primary reasons for choosing
this development were the quality of the golf course design and proposed
practice area, the relative low density of the physical layout, and the
quality of the model homes that were to be representative of the community. we
have enjoyed all of these amenities, as well as activities at the club for
nearly ten years.
It is now apparent that there are a minority of residents in our community
that have indicated that we deserve a "park and nature trails" and that they
have represented limited concerns regarding any infringement on the golf
course or the golf practice range. our current golf members have paid a
significant amount to play and enjoy our golf facilities as they are today and
I encourage that this be an important factor in your consideration. I am
opposed to any such requirement and support Stock Development's proposal to
delete the "park and nature trails" language from the documents. By the lack
of interest shown in the most recent community poll, an overwhelming majority
of olde cypress residents have bought homes here without any expectation or
consideration or interest in having a park, but reside here to enjoy the
beautiful clubhouse, the safety of the community and the other amenities we
have.
AS it was disclosed in your February 17 meeting, an established park in olde
Cypress must accommodate the residents from both of the multi-family complexes
located in our PUD, named Amberton and Fairway preserve. My understanding of
that situation means that depending on where the "park" would be located, all
of the residents of these two complexes that do not reside in our gated
community would have access to a designated park located inside our gate. I am
sug~esting that this alone would change the entire concept and quality of
livlng in olde Cypress, devalue our homes and our club and, therefore, should
not be considered or encouraged by your commission.
The other subject I will discuss is about your February 17 conversation
regarding construction traffic concerns for the new "vita" property. AS I was
one of the early residents in olde Cypress, I have seen and heard evidence of
400 homes being constructed during my tenure. please understand that all of
this traffic came through our current main gate area and traveled to ALL
sections of our development. Although there may have been some occasions where
residents had to wait for a truck to move, I never remember being delayed
entering or leaving the property. In your meeting, there were suggestions that
the construction traffic for the new section be diverted before the gatehouse
across a section of the practice range. I am suggesting you consider that if
400 homes can be built going through our main (and only) gate area, the new
page 1
Packet Page -216-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
email from Mark Strain from McKenna 3-Z-11.txt
section can be developed and 120 homes built using 50 yards of the Treeline
Drive entrance road inside our gate. This traffic pattern would not infringe
on any current olde Cypress homes, nor the golf course facilities.
Thank you for your consideration.
Larry R. MCKinney
7536 Treeline Drive
Naples, FL 34119
lrmck@msn.com<mailto:lrmck@msn.com>
under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want
your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not
send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by
telephone or in writing.
page 2
Packet Page -217-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Mark Strain
Collier County Planning Commission
E-mail MarkStrain(alcolliergov.net
Re: Olde Cypress Zoning Change application
Dear Mr. Strain:
I am a resident of Olde Cypress and understand your commission is in the process of reviewing the issue
of a park in our development. The issue being there was a park on the original PUD and it was never
incorporated in the development. Stock Development has purchased the remaining available land and
wants to build additional homes on said property. They Stock want the park removed from the PUD and
the issue settled.
I do not think a park is a necessity in our community; we have a very limited number of families with
children living in Olde Cypress. As I understand it, if a park were required we would have to allow access
into to Olde Cypress to other communities with the addition of walking paths or some form of other
entry other than our entry gate. I believe by allowing other entrance into our community we make it
impossible to manage who enters unless we add additional guards at any added entry points. I do not
believe there are many home owners that would be in favor opening our community by allowing access.
I am not a resident who gets involved in all of the drama in our community, but I feel this issue on the
park requires my opinion be known.
A park is not required in Olde Cypress.
Regards,
Dean Blaser
Packet Page -218-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
From: StrainMark
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 7:37 PM
To: DeselemKay
subject: FW: olde Cypress zoning change
Here is another.
email from Hiotis 2-21-11.txt
Mark
From: chris Hiotis [hiotiselgreco@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 9:06 PM
To: StrainMark
subject: olde Cypress zoning change
Mr. Strai n:
My wife and I have been residents of olde Cypress for approximately five
years. we both feel that, under the present circumstances, both the park and
the walking trails will not benefit residents of olde Cypress. we, as well as
most of our fellow residents and friends at OC, urge you to allow the changes
as requested by the stock Development Group.
Christ and Marilyn Hiotis
2819 wild orchid Ct.
Naples, Fl. 34119
under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want
your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not
send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by
telephone or in writing.
Page 1
Packet Page -219-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
email from steve Smith 2-22-11.txt
From: StrainMark
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 7:42 PM
To: DeselemKay
subject: FW: olde Cypress PUD changes currently before the collier county
plan,!in!)
CommlSSlon
Another for distribution.
Mark
From: Steve Smith [SSmith@lesmith.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 5:02 PM
TO: StrainMark
Cc: Damian & cheryl Thomas (damian.thoma@gmail.com)
subject: olde Cypress PUD changes currently before the collier County planning
commission
Mr. Strain: My name is Steve smith. I have lived at 3072 Strada Bella in
olde Cypress since 2005. I am aware of both emails by Mr. slaught and Mr.
Duncan. I want to assure you that I concur with Mr. Duncan's comments 100%.
I was never told that a park or walking trails would be made available when we
purchased our property in olde Cypress back in 2004. I am totally against
these two items and would ask the planning commission to allow the PUD changes
for vita Tuscana. Stock Development has been a very good owner for The club @
olde Cypress and has followed through with commitments made in the past. I
see no reason to think that he would not continue his business integrity now.
The financial viability of olde cypress relies on increasing the number of our
dues paying golf members. vita Tuscana is the last chance we have to add
significant membership numbers on property adjacent to olde Cypress and set
the stage for a continuing successful golf club. Mr. slaught and a small
number of others are pursuing, in my opinion, another agenda. That would be
to force Mr. Stock to offer other types of compensation in lieu of the park
and walking trails. Mr. Stock has already offered substantial improvements
and upgrades to olde Cypress. These will, of course, help him to sell homes
in vita Tuscana, but it will also have a lasting benefit for current residents
of olde Cypress. I am totally in favor of changing the PUD and allowing
Stock Development to develop vita Tuscana. Thank you for your time and
consideration. Steve Smith
under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want
your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not
send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by
telephone or in writing.
page 1
Packet Page -220-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
email from Catalano 2-21-11.txt
From: StrainMark
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 7:40 PM
TO: DeselemKay
Subject: FW: The park and olde Cypress
Another for distribution.
Mark
From: catalanosusan@aol.com [catalanosusan@aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 3:50 PM
To: StrainMark
subject: The Park and olde Cypress
Mr. strain,
we would like to add our 2 cents to the ongoing debate about a potential park
in olde Cypress. We are AGAINST such park and are pleased with the plans the
stock corporation has for improving our community with the additions to the
workout center, etc. We are embarrassed by the haranguing of our neighbors and
would like to see this issue put to rest once and for all.
Thank you,
John and Susan Catalano
2790 olde Cypress Drive
Naples FL 34119
239-592-1700
under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want
your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not
send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by
telephone or in writing.
page 1
Packet Page -221-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
email from Dennis Deluca to Mark strain 2-21-11.txt
From: StrainMark
Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 2:09 PM
To: dennispdeluca@aol.com
Cc: DeselemKay
Subject: FW: FW: letter to M. Strain re olde Cypress PUD
Attachments: Mark Strain OCMPOA 2-28.doc
Thank you and by copy of this email to staff I ask that they also distribute
this email to the other members of the CCPC.
Mark
From: dennispdeluca [dennispdeluca@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 11:33 AM
To: StrainMark
cc: aadeluca@comcast.net; ssmith@lesmith.com; Cosmo Trapani;
ssmith@lesmith.com; venhg@embarqmail.com; Damianthoma@gmail.com
subject: Fwd: FW: letter to M. Strain re olde Cypress PUD
Mr. strain,
I am a resident of olde Cypress living at 2847 Lone pine Lane. I am in receipt
of Mr. slaught's and Mr. Duncan's letters to you. I am in full agreement with
Mr. Duncan and do not agree with Mr. slaught at all. I purchased my home in
February of 2001 and I can assure you that throughout that time Mr. Stock has
been a fair and generous owner of this development. I am vehemently opposed to
the construction of a park.
Dennis P Deluca
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Steve Smith" <ssmith@lesmith.com>
subject: FW: Letter to M. strain re olde Cypress PUD
Date: February 20, 2011 1:07:38 PM EST
TO: "murfmu rphy@verizon.net" <murfmurphy@veri zon. net>, "Cosmo and Irene
Trapani (c. trapani@comcast. net)" <c. trapani@comcast. net>, "Howard and Gai 1
venger" <venhg@embarqmail . com> , "c2a2ls@naples.net" <c2a2ls@naples.net>
;, "publisheroh@insight.rr.com" <publisheroh@insight.rr.com>, "Damian & cheryl
Thomas (damian.thoma@gmail.com)" <damian.thoma@gmail.com>, "Gordon and
Jennifer Johnson (johnsonj@mtco.com)" <johnsonj@mtco.com>, "Steve Smith"
<SSmith@lesmith.com>, "Nick Boccella" <boccnick@yahoo.com>, "jim taylor,"
<btaylore@swbell.net>, "Jim Hamilton" <cahami6@aol.com>, "dennis komatz,"
<cdkomatz@comcast.net>, "dennis deluca," <dennispdeluca@aol.com>, "jack
duncan," <duncanjt@yahoo.com>, "chris hiotis," <hiotiselgreco@gmail.com> ,
"jake lamotta," <jake1141@yahoo.com>, "joe raffaele,"
<joeraffaele@plantationproducts.com>, "mark adams," <mark.adams.d@gmail.com>,
"Ralph Edwards" <ralph_edwards@comcast.net>, "Burgo, Ray" <slburgo@yahoo.com>,
"tom sukay," <tomsukay@comcast.net>
cc: "Halpern, Bob" <bobhalpern@comcast.net>, "James walpole"
<jwwalpole@comcast.net>
Attachments: 1 Attachment, 27.0 KB
Gentlemen, sorry for not including the attachment containing Jack's email on
my first email. Here it is! Steve
From: John Duncan [duncanj68@gmail.com]
Sent: saturday, February 19, 2011 10:03 AM
TO: Markstrain@colliergov.net
Cc: Damian Thomas; to Paul Schultz; sdamanagement@comcast.net; Tom Tatro;
Steve Smith; lLiz Hines; Scott Hunter: halpern.bob@gmail.com;
venhg@embarqmail.co m; dickkernan@aol.com: Ken Lanigan; paffel, Kelly; Cos and
Irene Trapani; Robert Cosgrove; JOE RAFFAELE; JOE BARRY; Jack;
jackpalmer@comcast.net; Jeff Folkman; rlrotunda@comcast.net;
erisa41@hotmail.com; diana.reuling@gmail.com; Jake LaMotta; Andy D'Jamoos;
ckansy@gulfshoremortgage.com; henryf@acidevelopment.biz; gstwoelk@aol .com;
John & patty Malaspina; pignataror; boydteam@comcast.net; griders@comcast.net;
page 1
Packet Page -222-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
email from Dennis Deluca to Mark Strain 2-21-11.txt
chuckslaght@comcast.net
subject: letter to M. Strain re olde Cypress PUD
please see attached letter to M. Strain
under Florida law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want
your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not
send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by
telephone or in writing.
page 2
Packet Page -223-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
SukaY&As
~
9
Mark Strain
Collier County Planning Commission
E-mail MarkStrainialcolliergov.net
February 21,2011
Re: Olde Cypress Zoning Change application
Dear Mr. Strain:
Although not copied on the original distribution, I have received copies of letters prepared by
Mr. Duncan and Mr. Slaught. Although I clearly agree with the content ofMr. Duncan's letter, I
thought I would offer a different perspective. Mr. Slaught represents my interests in my
neighborhood association and I've know Mr. Duncan for many years.
I purchased my home in Olde Cypress in October 2007. During our search for a home, we spent
time with a realtor looking at many neighborhoods in North Naples. During our search, the
realtor did not mention that a park was part of the long tenn plans at Olde Cypress. As a result,
it did not factor into our final decision to buy a home at Olde Cypress. If we had known about
the park, it would not have altered our purchase price in any manner.
We are full time residents. During the last three years, we have become very comfortable with
the community. We have become friends with many other couples. We had never heard about a
park or anyone's interest in having one added to the community. Last fall, we attended a
meeting with Brian Stock regarding Vita Tuscano, the expanded health center and other plans for
the community. Prior to that meeting. we became aware of the need to change the PUD to
remove a park from the plan. We also became aware that this was an emotional issue that
seemed more tied to leveraging the park against Brian Stock than to the interest in a park.
We were pleasantly surprised at the Stock meeting that the community seemed very civil and
that the support for the park seemed to be isolated to the members of our neighborhood board.
The recent poll was filled with many flaws. I can't be sure that any side didn't influence the
results. However, only 207 of the 419 residents responded. The results were split in favor of
those who wanted the park and those who supported the change in the PUD. Common sense
would seem to indicate that anyone who was against the change in the PUD would be more
likely to vote than someone who supported the change or those who had no strong opinion. As a
result, I contend that the poll results actually do reflect that the Olde Cypress community does
strongly support the change to the PUD.
Tom Sukay
Packet Page -224-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
From: StrainMark
Sent: sunday, February 20, 2011 9:57 AM
To: Ralph Edwards
Cc: DeselemKay
Subject: RE: olde Cypress
Thank you for your comments and by copy of this to staff I will forward this
on to the others on the commission.
email from Ralph Edwards 2-18-11.txt
Mark
From: Ralph Edwards [ralph_edwards@comcast.netJ
Sent: Friday, February 18, 2011 4:12 PM
TO: StrainMark
subject: olde Cypress
Dear Mr. strain
I attended the meeting Thursday regarding the issues surrounding olde Cypress
and the new development, Vita Tuscana. TO say I learned a great deal about
the function of your group of commissioners would be an understatement. I
also learned a great deal about our residents. I have been a resident of olde
Cypress since 2000. My only concerns have been early with the problems
surrounding the Hardy family and now with the irrational attitude of some of
our residents. A minority of our residents have an anger issue which I am
embarrassed to see. Mr. stock and his group have been reasonable and
appreciated by my wife and I especially in this real estate/golf market. I
can't imagine how we could be better served as citizens of collier County with
another developer. Rumors and innuendo aside, no park is wanted or needed by
the residents especially if it is in close proximity to the golf course. If
that were to occur, our values will be adversely affected. I'm sure the
threat of litigation by one of our neighbors will not have any influence on
votes!
please allow the stock group an opportunity to complete our development in a
manner that will be profitable for him and in a manner that will enhance our
community without damaging our fine golf course.
sincerely,
Ralph H. Edwards, CIC
7484 Treeline Dr.
Naples, Fl.
Sent from my ipad
under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want
your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not
send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by
telephone or in writing.
page 1
Packet Page -225-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
DeselemKay
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Strain Mark
Sunday, February 20,2011 9:59 AM
duncanj68@gmail.com
DeselemKay
FW: Letter to M. Strain re Olde Cypress PUD
Mark Strain OCMPOA 2-28.doc
Thank you and by copy of this to staff I will ask that this be forwarded to the other
Commission members.
Mark
From: John Duncan [duncanj68@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, February 19, 2011 10:03 AM
To: StrainMark
Cc: Damian Thomas; to Paul Schultz; sdamanagement~comcast.net; Tom Tatro; Steve & Cathy
Smith; ILiz Hines; Scott Hunter; halpern.bob~gmail.com; venhg~embarQmail.com;
dickkernan~aol.com; Ken Lanigan; Paffel, Kelly; Cos and Irene Trapani; Robert Cosgrove; JOE
RAFFAELE; JOE BARRY; Jack; iackpalmer~comcast.net; Jeff Folkman; rlrotunda~comcast.net;
erisa41~hotmail.com; diana.reuling~gmail.com; Jake LaMotta; Andy D'Jamoos;
ckansy~gulfshoremortgage.com; henryf~acidevelopment.biz; gstwoelk~aol.com; John & Patty
Malaspina; pignataror; boydteam~comcast.net; griders~comcast.net; chuckslaght~comcast.net
Subject: Letter to M. Strain re Olde Cypress PUD
Please see attached letter to M. Strain
Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail
address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this
entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing.
2
Packet Page -226-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
From: StrainMark
Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2011 10:00 AM
TO: Ji 11 & Steve Ducatman
cc: DeselemKay
subject: RE: I am a resident in olde Cypress
Thank you and by copy of this to staff I will ask that your comments be
distributed to the other commissioners.
email message from Ducatman 2-20-11.txt
Mark
From: Jill & steve Ducatman [jsducatman@mac.com]
Sent: sunday, February 20, 2011 8:05 AM
TO: StrainMark
subject: I am a resident in Olde Cypress
My husband and I have lived in olde Cypress since 2004. We have more respect
for Brian Stock than we do for the irrational neighbors we have who seem to
think Mr. stock and his company owe them something. stock Development has
been more than reasonable in his work developin9 our community. We neither
want, nor do we need, any recompense for a clerlcal error. Nor do we want a
park. It is a very vocal minority of residents who continue to insist on
compensation for a park. we are embarassed by that vocal minority.
I am sorry that I missed the meeting of the CCPC. please understand that the
vast majority of the residents are equally embarassed by the vocal few who
have become obsessed over this issue and are demanding that approval not be
granted to stock Development over this idea that the company owes us
something. The majority of us respect the work stock Development has done,
and want them to continue developing our community.
Jill Ducatman
3137 Terramar Drive
olde Cypress
under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want
your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not
send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by
telephone or in writing.
page 1
Packet Page -227-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Mark Strain
Collier County Planning Commission
E-mail MarkStrain@colliergov.net
Re: Olde Cypress Zoning Change application
Letter from C. Slaught to Mark Strain 2/1 7/1 I
Dear Mr. Strain:
I am a resident ofOlde Cypress and am in possession ofa copy of Mr. Slaught's above
referenced letter to you of 2/1 7/1 1. Several of his comments do not reflect my
understanding of the role of the Master Association vs. that of the neighborhood
association representatives. Nor do his comments represent my experience with the
OCMPOA and its leadership.
The Olde Cypress Master is made op of several ELECTED individuals who have very
specific responsibilities dealing with those issues relevant to the community as a whole.
including representing the total communitv interests to the developer. countv agencies
etc. For the record, they do not collect golf dues but rather collect fees associated with
the maintenance of property under their control such as the roadways, common areas, and
security.
As a result of the way OC was originally developed, there are several neighborhoods
each with their own interest and responsibilities. These may include water rights for
irrigation, owner landscaping and maintenance. pond maintenance etc. Each has an
elected neighborhood association and these neighborhood associations collect fees from
their respective residents to cover costs specific to their neighborhood and collect the
OCMPOA fees as a convenience for the master. Each neighborhood also names an
individual (neighborhood representative) to liaise with the Master Board to insure
neighborhood interests are properly represented.
Relevant to the issue of the desirability of a park. each neighborhood representative was
asked to poll his residents on this question, and provide that information to the OCMPOA
to be in turn provided to your office prior to the hearing. In my neighborhood (DaVinci)
this was done without lobbying on the part of the individual doing the polling. However,
given the significant disparity in results between neighborhoods. it calls into question
whether this was done in this manner in all neighborhoods, or whether the well knovm
personal opinion of some of the neighborhood reps was in play either with selective
polling, or lobbying.
1 will not opine on the park issue other to say that I think it to be a "red herring" with the
real issue being that some of the early residents were promised a park by the developer
and given that it is impractical now to implement, want something in return for their
acquiescence. My bet is that nobody really wants a park per se.
Packet Page -228-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
My purpose here is just to correct Mr. Slaugh!' s letter to you, and to give one residents
approval of the activity of our Master Board. Mr. Slaught does not represent me or for
that matter" We all" in his opinion that the OCMPOA "frequently inflates", and
"oversteps" their roles or responsibilities. This is further evidenced by the large majority
vote received by the board in the most recent elections.
Very Truly Yours
Jack Duncan
Packet Page -229-
4/12/2011/tem 7.A.
Good Morning/Afternoon Commissioners, My name is Charles Slaght and I reside at
2918 Lone Pine Lane, Naples, Florida, 34119
I am going to read my statement as this is limited to a 5 minute presentation a written
copy of this presentation will be provided.
r am going to reach way back and frame the picture briefly... we've all heard,
"Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness which was originally penned as Life,
Liberty, and Property"
With this said I lead into my presentation with: If someone takes my property rights from
me, someday that someone or others may take your property!
Property Rights are extended to owners when they purchase lots within a development.
Yes there are deed restrictions and conveyances which limit or prescribe certain activities
within community and are regulated by by-laws and HOA Boards. Homes are built on
specific purchased lots but amenities many times are located elsewhere in a community
but you have certain rights conveyed like access to these amenities especially if they are
used to entice you to buy their lots and build in their community . We bought our property
outright, then just a vacant lot, in the oe development as we were enchanted by the many
advertised amenities, this then made us partial owners in current and future amenities,
and decided to build our dream home in Olde Cypress (yes we do pay dues to use and
upkeep these amenities).
Let me digress, a representative of Stock Development, Chris St Cyr, presented all the
Olde Cypress amenities and helped us tour the community handing us off to a builders
representative and at no time were we told that the promised park, nature trails, or
boardwalk would not be provided due to build-out or by a developer's failure to plan for
these amenities (on this tour two possible sites for a park were presented: end of Lone
Pine lane and Wild Orchid). Printed sales materials and the online website for Olde
Cypress also stated that there would be parks, nature trails, etc. within the community.
There are a number of documents that were passed into existence by different legal
county and state entities (CCPC, BCe they may have had different names but these
agencies function to protect the state, the county, the developer, and the eventual owner).
These are legal documents with specific requirements as dictated by the State of Florida
and Collier County (DRIIPUD/DO) which were signed and agreed to by all parties before
any clearing or construction ever began.
Developers submit documents (DRI's, PUD's and DO's) and want approval to develop
and of course they want to make money doing this as a part of their American dream to
make a reasonable profit on their monetary risk. County and state agencies ensure the
documents are legal, are reviewed by the COWlty Attorney, cover various legal
requirements, protect the citizens from harm, these documents represent a written picture
of what the developer wants to build, and are only passed once all legal criteria has been
Packet Page -230-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
satisfied. With this due diligence, due regard, and due care how can a developer later
rescind this agreement; I am a bit mystified (as wording within the PUDIDRIIDO states
this is even legally binding on successors)?
I have submitted many emails and letters with a vast number of issues to the CCPC and
the BCC and I trust you have read them all however let me provide some history and
distill some of the information please bear with me. Mention was made in these
documents as:
. Original documents were filed as "The Woodlands" development and were filed
by the Immokalee Road Partnership, Inc. (the principle parties)
. Providing bicycle-pedestrian system along all roads within the project [also]
provision for bike racks or storage facilities in recreational areas DO 86-1
. Providing parks, nature trails and Boardwalk, bicycle paths, passive recreational
uses of wetlands, and other facilities for recreation to be maintained by the HOA
was submitted in Ordinance 86-75
. Interestingly providing a polling place and adequate hurricane sheltering were
also stipulated in Ordinance 86-75
. Exhibit "H" of Ordinance 86-75 shows position of parks in northeast corner
. Resolution 87-96 modifies transportation issues
. Resolution 87-207 references acreages therein and increases preserve area (91-
149 acres) no modification to the rest of Ordinance 86-75
. Resolution 94-774 and DO # 94-4 "no changes to master plan" and new
commencement date of October 7, 2000
A Collier County Code Enforcement claim (CESD20100020925) was filed against the
developer on or about November 18, 2010. It was not until the date that the CCPC
hearing was announced via mail did I find out that my claim was closed (no letter, no
communication, nothing). I was sent an email by County Staff dated January 3rd from Mr.
Richard Y ovanoviclJ. Esq. where he had replied and stated that the OC PUD was not
being closed out and therefore the Notice of Violation must be rescinded and also later
stated that "The Master Association is supporting the proposed amendment" (I continue
to ask for documentation ofthis Master POA action and signed conveyance and to date
none has been supplied therefore you should request such signed docunlentation which
may also be an illegal uttering or conveyance by all mentioned parties). If! can not file a
claim for a Code Enforcement Violation then how can the developer ask for an
amendment dropping the park, nature trails, and bike paths: I'm puzzled?
In your packet you have numerous other email communications which I have sent to each
of you and I ask that you review these in your mind as there are many concerns that I and
others have regarding the purposed amendments and filings that affect the Olde Cypress
PUDIDRI/DO. I am also concerned with the 33 multiple family units requested in the
third action before you as this is surely does not fit our community PUD as single family
units and is not desired by the community.
Packet Page -231-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
While it may appear that the solution regarding a 3.9 acre (or whatever size is required)
park may seem insurmountable there are surely solutions which would be amenable to
the developer, the community, and the County (small pocket parks). The Nature
Trails/Boardwalks and bike paths are a more difficult barrier to broach but by our
working hand in hand there could be a solution found here as well. Bike racks are easily
placed at the fitness center and clubhouse and possible park sites so this is a simple
solution. Where there is a will there surely must be a way if the developer, the
community, and County agencies all work together to find amiable solutions that create a
win-win scenario providing these amenities for everyone.
I am a disabled veteran, I have served and sacrificed offering my life and my physical
wellbeing for each of you to have the rights I spoke of in the beginning (Life, Liberty,
and the Pursuit of Happiness - Property). I am not here for accolades or honor but I am
here to see justice prevail! While others within our community may want to give up their
rights to real property I do not, and the dissention of one in this case has to be upheld for
all. I ask that you protect me and others who need your support, disallow the
petition for amendment of the OC DRIJPUDIDO, and that you charge the developer
to work with the community and the County to meet all legal requirements of these
foundational documents and any others that have jurisdiction. Thank you!
Packet Page -232-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
February 11th, 2011
Kay Deselem, please let this document serve as an official aide Cypress Community response to your
phone call on Friday, February 4th 2011. During our conversation you shared that your Superior Nick
Casalanguida had specifically requested that I poll the aide Cypress community to determine if, based
on the pending PUD amendment before the commission (PUDA-PL2010-388J, do the residents want a
park or not. I shared with you at that time that the documents of the aide Cypress community do not
recognize voting on issues by individual homes (one house, one vote) except in the case of voting for
Directors of the Master Board. In other than voting for Directors for the Master Board, Neighborhood
Representatives represent the position of individual associations. Therefore a "poll" was conducted by
email and was not intended to be a "vote" as the aide Cypress Master Association documents require
any neighborhood vote to be cast by the Neighborhood Representative during a duly noticed meeting
for that purpose. Since the Master Association cannot audit the results of such a poll we cannot attest
to the accuracy or completeness of the results reported by each Neighborhood Representative. Nor, do
the results of the poll measure the homeowner's understanding of what elements constitute a "Park"-
bare land vs. improvements.
On Monday February 7" 2011, I received an email memo from you with a follow on email from Nick
Casalanguida as follows;
"Kay, please explain to Damian that it was my request to get a clear community desire and that simply
asking yes or no on the park does not define the issue. i would suggest that they hold an internal HOA
meeting and vet the subject and then report back their findings. This should include each sub HOA".
This was not done as the polling process had already begun and frankly speaking, holding an HOA
meeting to discuss this issue, in my view, was ill advised at this time.
The results of the email poll taken: only 207 of the 419 residents (49%) participated. The results are as
follows; 50.7% want a park, 45.4% do not want a park. 3.9% responded to a question that was not
asked.
Kay, based on Nick's February 7" email memo, I am not sure the approach taken satisfies his intended
purpose and therefore appear meaningless and of little value.
Respectfully,
Damian A. Thomas
On behalf of the aide Cypress BOD
Packet Page -233-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Gary R Lusher [garyrlusher@gmail.com)
Thursday, February 10, 20111:30 PM
fDamian Thomas'
Poll of Terramar at Olde Cypress Homeowners Regarding the Pending Olde
Cypress PUD Amendment
Good Afternoon Damian:
As requested I conducted a "poll" of homeowners in Terramar at Olde Cypress regarding whether or not
they "support" or "oppose" Stock Development being released from the requirements of a "park" as
described in the original Olde Cypress PUD. The poll was conducted by email and was not intended to
be a "vote" as the Olde Cypress Master Association documents require any neighborhood vote to be
cast by the Neighborhood Representative during a duly noticed meeting for that purpose.
The results of the poll are as follows:
Total Homeowners: 55
Total Homeowners responding: 22
Total Homeowners responding "Support" 9
Total Homeowners responding "Oppose" 12
Respectfully,
Gary Lusher
President and Neighborhood Representative
Terramar at Olde Cypress
Packet Page -234-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Subject:
Wcs5353@aol.com
Thursday, February 10, 2011 6:20 PM
aadeluca@comcast.net; glusher@comcast.net; SSmith@lesmith.com;
dickkernan@aol.com; wcs5353@aol.com;
ja mes.costello@morganstanley.com; sjensen l@comcast.net;
EvetsElec@aol.com; rlrotunda@comcast.net; tatrotm@hotmail.com;
jmfolkman@gmail.com; pjkien@aol.com;
sda management@comcast.net; murphybrianj@yahoo.com;
DeselemKay; CasalanguidaNick
Park or No Park
From:
Sent:
To:
Egret Cove polling result were as follows;
12 of 16 homes responded as follows:
10 for Park
2 For No Park
4 no response
Bill Snyder, ECHOA
Packet Page -235-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Dr. Albert Deluca [aadeluca@comcast.net)
Thursday, February 10, 2011 7:40 PM
'Damian Thomas'; 'Gary lusher'; 'Steve & Cathy Smith';
dickkernan@aol.com; wcs5353@aol.com; 'James Costello'; 'Susan
Jensen'; EvetsElec@aol.com; 'Brian Murphy'
r1rotunda@comcast.net; 'Tom Tatro'; 'Jeff Folkman'; 'Paul Schultz';
sdamanagement@comcast.net; DeselemKay; CasalanguidaNick
RE: Olde Cypress Homeowner Association Poll
Subject:
Damian,
As directed in your emails of Feb 4 and Feb. 5, 2011, the residents of the Olde Cypress Homeowners
Association were polled individually by email. The 185 residents were asked for their input on whether
or not Stock should be released from the requirement which now stands in the DRI and PUD for park
(green) space within the Olde Cypress Community. This is only a poll, not a vote ofthe Neighborhood.
The results are as follows:
In favor of keeping requirement of park space
.............43
Replied with need of compensation if there is to be removal of park requirement..........8
To release Stock from obligation for park space............................................................20
Non response ... ...... ............... ......................... ................................. ...114
Neighborhood total count........................
...................................185
Of the non responses there were at least 4 who submitted questions and concerns, but voiced no
opinion either way and therefore couid not be counted.
Adrienne
OCHOA
Packet Page -236-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Cc:
Brian J. Murphy [murphybrianj@yahoo.com]
Thursday, February 10, 2011 5:06 PM
'Damian Thomas'; aadeluca@comcast.net; 'Gary Lusher'; 'Steve &
Cathy Smith'; dickkernan@aol.com; wcs5353@aol.com; 'James
Costello'; 'Susan Jensen'; EvetsElec@aol.com
r1rotunda@comcast.net; 'Tom Tatro'; 'Jeff Folkman'; 'Paul Schultz';
sd ama nagement@comcast.net; mu rphybrianj@yahoo.com;
DeselemKay; CasalanguidaNick
Santa Rosa HOA Poll Results RE: Stock Development PUD
Amendment
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Santa Rosa Homeowners Association Residents have been polled individually by email on Kay
Deselem's, Collier County Growth Management Division, question as conveyed by Damian Thomas'
February 4 email. Formal documentation has been received from all eligible Santa Rosa(SR) respondents
(24 of 26 property owners) and are the basis for counting the results.
On the Question quoted of Kay Deselem on behalf of Collier County Growth Management Division: "Do
the residents of aide Cypress want a park or not?", Santa Rosa's polling results are as follows:
YES: 23 No: 1. Total Replies: 24 No Reply to the Polling Request: 2 Total Residents in Santa
Rosa Community are 26. Therefore 95.8% of Replies are In Favor; 88.5% of SR answered In Favor.
For your information (and perhaps future use), if the current PUD requirement of this provision prevails
in the upcoming decisions by the County's Planning Commission and the County Commissioners: That
decision by the County being to continue with the PUD language requiring that Stock Development
provide a park and trails. Santa Rosa Homeowners Association Residents were further polled on a
second Question. It was asked at the direction of the Officers of the Board of Directors of our SR HOA.
The second Question asked if Stock Development could not, for anv reason and/or for whatever reason.
meet a County upheld requirement for a park and trails. should aide Cvpress Community receive some
equitable or equivalent offsetfsl: compensation of some kind; tangible "considerations". services or the
like from Stock Development in settlement for this requirement?
On this second Question, which again is intended and offered to convey the opinions and sentiments of
Santa Rosa's residents, the results are: Yes: 23 No: Q 24 Residents replied to this.
On behalf of the Santa Rosa residents and the HOA, we look forward to receiving the totaled up results
for aide Cypress Community when they are sent to Collier County officials and agencies.
Respectfully,
Brian J Murphy
Neighborhood Representative
7372 Monteverde Way
From: Damian Thomas rmailto:damianthoma(ij)qmail.coml
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 5:58 PM
To: aadeluca(ij)comcast.net; Gary Lusher; Steve & Cathy Smith; Brian J. Murphy; dickkernan(ij)aol.com;
wcs5353(ij)aol.com
Packet Page -237-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Cc: rlrotunda(1i)comcast.net; Tom Tatro; Jeff Folkman; Paul Schultz; sdamanaoement(1i)comcast.net;
KavDeselem(1i)collieroov. net
Subject: Stock Development PUD Amendment
Fellow Residents of Olde Cypress, this afternoon I received a phone call from Kay Deselem,
Principal Planner for Collier County Growth Management Division of Planning & Regulation
Land Development Services. Consistent with the requested PUD Amendment for Olde
Cypress, (PUDA-PL2010-388) that is pending Collier County Planning Commission decision,
she has a specific request that requires your attention. The request is that you poll your
respective communities and ask the following question: "Do the residents ofOlde
Cypress want a park or not". I will then document the results of your poll and provide an official OIde
Cypress Community position response for inclusion into the package that will be given to the Planning Board during
the decision making process. I explained to Ms. Deselem the process for accumulating information through the
Neighborhood Representatives and promised to follow that process.
As you know the Collier County Planning Board meets on February 17th and the County process
can be deliberate so I am asking some urgency with your poll. Kindly send me your community
poll results no later than end of business Thursdav February 10th. Preferably the results
should be absolute, meaning the exact number that responded and the specific vote "Yes or
NO" , "PARK or NO PARK ". I will then officially document your responses in a letter and
send to Ms. Deselem and also post on our website. I assume this input will be one of the
variables that is taken into consideration when the Planning Commission renders their decision.
Thanks for your continued support.
Respectfully,
Damian A. Thomas
on behalf of the OCMPOA BOD
Packet Page -238-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
DeselemKay
From:
,- Sent:
fo:
Cc:
Subject:
Strain Mark
Tuesday, February 08, 2011 1 :56 PM
Chuck Slaght
DeselemKay; CasalanguidaNick; AshtonHeidi
RE: [Olde Cypress Master Property Owners Association Newsletter]: Memo to Residents
sharing need for vote on park
Importance:
High
I have read your comments and wish to clarify something...........THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING
COMMISSION DID NOT ASK FOR A POLLING OF YOUR COMMUNITY.
As chairman of the CCPC I am concerned that you would have this idea and ask that you PLEASE
correct this statement to anyone you may have made this too. Without a vote or meeting on
this subject BY THE CCPC it would have been impossible to have made such a request of your
community, regardless whether or not we even had the authority to do so to begin with.
i appreciate your assistance with this matter.
thank you,
Mark
From: Chuck Slaght [chuckslaght@comcast.net]
Sent: Monday, February a7, 2all S:a7 PM
To: StrainMark
,'. Subject: Fw: [Olde Cypress Master Property Owners Association Newsletter]: Memo to Residents
;haring need for vote on park
Dear Chairman Strain,
Here is a copy of the letter sent to resident-owners in the Olde Cypress Development for your
reference as I am not sure this has reached your desk.
Sincerely,
Chuck Slaght
----- Original Message -----
From: <Admin~OCMasterPOA.com>
To: <chuckslaght~comcast.net>
Sent: Saturday, February as, 2all a6:a3 PM
Subject: [Olde Cypress Master Property Owners Association Newsletter]: Memo to Residents
sharing need for vote on park
> Olde Cypress Master Property Owners Association Newsletter
>
>
> Fellow Residents of Olde Cypress,
-- >
As one of the variable elements of addressing the Olde Cypress PUD
> (PUDA-PL2ala-388) amendment, currently before the planning commission
Packet Page -239-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
> for a decision, we have been asked by the Collier County Planning
> Commission to poll the residents of Olde Cypress to determine who
> wants a park and who does not. We have therefore sent a memo to all
> Neighborhood Representatives asking them to poll the residents of
> their respective communities to find out Yes or No on the park. You
> should be hearing from your respective Neighborhood Representatives asking for your
preference.
> We have requested that the tabulated responses be absolute and should
> specifically state the number of responses and the specific Yes/No counts.
> We have requested the results be returned by February 10th. The
> results will be tabulated, posted on the Master website and also sent
> to the county to aid in their decision making planning process. The
> Planning Commission meets on February 17th.
>
> For ease in responding your respective Neighborhood Representatives
> e-mail addresses is as follows:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> When you receive the request from your Neighborhood Representative,
> the above addresses should assist with your responses.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Kindly do your part to keep Olde Cypress one of the most desirable
> communities in Naples.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://ocmasterpoa.com
>
> - Olde Cypress Master Property Owners Association Staff
>
>
>
>
>
> =========================================================
>
>
>
>
> http://OCMasterPOA.com/user.php?op=edituser
>
Da Vinci Dick Kearnan dickkernan@aol.com Santa Rosa Brian Murphy
murphybriani@yahoo.com Strada Bella Steve Smith SSmith@lesmith.com
Santorini Susan Jensen siensenl@comcast.net Terramar Gary Lusher
glusher@comcast.net Egret Cove Bill Snyder wcs5353~aol.com Olde
Cypress Adrienne Deluca aadeluca@comcast.net Biscayne Jim Costello
iames.costello@morganstanley.com
This email is being sent to all residents who are registered on the
Master Association website. If you know someone who is not
registered, suggest that they register to be kept informed of Master Association business.
You might always want to advise those not registered to expect a
request for vote from their Neighborhood Representative. Your vote is
important so be sure to get involved.
Respectfully,
Damian A. Thomas
On behalf of the
OCMPOA BOD
You are receiving this Newsletter because you selected to receive it
from your user page at Olde Cypress Master Property Owners Association.
You can unsubscribe from this service by clicking in the following URL:
2
Packet Page -240-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
> then select "No" from the option to Receive Newsletter by Email and
> save your changes, if you need more assistance please contact Olde
> Cypress Master Property Owners Association administrator.
Jnder Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail
address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this
entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing.
3
Packet Page -241-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
DeselemKay
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Reinhard Werthner [reinhardw5101@gmail.com]
Monday, February 07, 2011 2:53 PM
DeselemKay; Strain Mark
Old Cypress - Board of County Commissioners Meeting - PUDZ-PL2010-1054
Dear Ms. Kay Deselem and Mr. Mark Strain
I am writing to express our strong feelings toward the recommendations to the County Commissioners
regarding two petitions submitted by Stock Development about our community.
Our particular point of concern is that contained in each petition to develop the 63 acres in the area presently
identified as "Vita Tuscana," Stock Development is asking the county to remove its long standing written
obligation [I] to develop Nature Trails and a minimum of 3.9 acres of parks within aide Cypress.
Stock Development has not met their obligation and want the County Commissioners to relieve them of their
responsibility so that they do not have to develop a park and Nature Trails within the "Vita Tuscana" land
parcel.
We feel strongly that Stock Development is obligated to his contractual Park development commitments to
develop a minimum of3.9 acres of park (s) and Nature Trails within "Vita Tuscana" as they planned for the
community to become part of our Olde Cypress we love so much. The parks were mentioned during the Sales
pitch as we decided to make Olde Cypress our retirement home.......bait and switch!
Thanks for your understanding and support. This contractual commitment should not be waived as it will lower
its value of the total community and our life style.
Regards
Reinhard & Marie Werthner
Full time residence
7527 Treeline Drive
Naples, FI 34119
Packet Page -242-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
From: eagle21632@aol.com [mailto:eagle21632@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2011 2:00 PM
To: Glen Fulker
Subject: Re: Important Message from Your HOA Neighborhood Representative
I oppose Stock Development being released from his requirement to set
aside the 3.9 acres ofland for park or green space. This was
represented to me to be included as Common property when I purchased my
house in 2005. I would agree with taking any legal action which may be
necessary to enforce this stipulation.
Being a Builder and Developer all of my professional career, I cannot
fathom why any consideration would be entertained to release the
Developers from their obligations, at the expense of all Olde Cypress
residents in this matter..
George M. Alliegro
2778 Olde Cypress Drive
Packet Page -243-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
DeselemKay
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Pignataror@aol.com
Monday, February 07,2011 4:29 PM
DeselemKay; StralnMark
Pud proposals
As a resident of Olde Cypress I would like you and the planning commission to know I support the three Pud proposals
DOA-PL2010-1052, PUDA-PL2010-388 and PUDZ-PL2010-1054 which you will consideron February 17, 2011.
I believe the development of that parcel by Stock is In the best interest of the community especially considering an
alternative could have been condos or other uses. I also believe the park proposal which has a number of peopie
concerned would be a waste of space and not used by the community at large. It is unfortunate that wasn't enforced
during the original development in a more suitable location.
Having said that I do believe the planning commission should consider requiring Stock to put a wall along Imokalee rd as
part of his plan. A wall would be secure, a sound barrier, and when the landscape grows, esthetically pleasing. Virtually all
communities have them from high end ( gray oaks etc) to moderate (Island walk, village walk) the only glaring exception is
Longshore lakes and their wooden wall Is an eyesore and always falling down. This shouid become a mandate throughout
Collier to keep the character of our community intact
Thank you for all you efforts on our behalf
Richard Pignataro
7519 Treeline dr
Naples FL
Packet Page -244-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Ms. Kay Deselem, AICP
Ms. Nancy Gundlach, AICP
Principal Planners
Collier County Land Development Services
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34104
"'''''f)
t't:P
78
7480 Treeline Drive
Naples, FL 34119
February 4, 2011
Re: DOA-PL201O-1052
PUDZ-PL20 1 0-1 054
PUDA-PL2010-388
Dear Ms. Deselem and Ms. Gundlach,
Please let me take this opportunity to comment on this pending
proceeding. The issue has essentially been building for many years.
When my husband and I purchased a home in Olde Cypress, we were
drawn to the value for the money, the landscaping and the amenities.
While neither of us are golf members nor do we play tennis, we looked
forward to regularly using the fitness center (which we still do) and
walking on the walking trails. We expected our grandchildren would
play in the parks when they came to visit.
We quickly found out that the fitness center is woefully inadequate in
size - a situation which the developer has been promising to remedy for
five years. The walking trails do not exist. In the mid 2000's, security
guards in golf carts would order walkers off the golf course cart paths
citing insurance regulations.
Packet Page -245-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Ms. Kay Deselem, AICP
Ms. Nancy Gundlach, AICP
February 4,2011
Page two
The 3.9 acre park does not exist. The developer made three efforts to
rectify this omission. Initially, he proposed taking part of the driving
range to become a park. Predictably, a fire storm of protest from the
golfers rejected that idea. Secondly, he added a "park" within feet of
Immokalee Road and the Cocohatchee Slough around a pond. The trail
in it is typically on a 30 degree angle with several badly worn benches
added as afterthoughts. Where are the parks my impact fees bought?
Thirdly, and unconscionably, the developer is now requesting in these
three interlocking petitions - amongst other things - that the requirement
for a park be dropped because Olde Cypress is built out, county staff
missed the requirement for said park (that statement was made in a
public meeting in front of county employees!) and because there is no
more room for a park in Olde Cypress.
Sadly, in its analysis of the petitions, county staff seems to agree with
the petitioner. Elimination of the 3.9 acre park requirement would be a
huge miscarriage of justice and violation of county ordinances. It would
add severe injury to the insults that the homeowners ofOlde Cypress
have endured for at least five years at the hands ofthe developer.
Thank you very much for your time, consideration and your efforts at a
fair and considerate conclusion to this situation.
Very truly yours,
~'j. /) 1/
., ulJ..""f 0 17! L,', ~Lf/
fi \
Sally B. Muir, Homeowner
~
Packet Page -246-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
leeB31937@aol.com
Friday, February 04,2011 9:26 AM
DeselemKay
PUDA-Pl2010-388 OlDE CYPRESS
#2 PARK & TRAllS.jpg
To: Planning Commission
cIa Kay Deselem
Principal Planner
PUDA-PL2010-388 aLOE CYPRESS
The PUD requirement for a park and walking trails at aide Cypress has been a
contentious issue for several years. A park and trails were a part of the original plan for
the community. Member of the community were told by the marketing department of
Stock that this was one of the amenities they would receive. Furthermore, early sales
literature (see attachment) given to prospective residents stated that these amenities
would be provided.
Stock has wanted to remove this requirement for some time. Two years ago Stock tried
to force the community to accept removal of the requirement by threatening to place the
park in the driving range. At that meeting Stock representatives stated that there was
now no place to place the park except in the range. This attempt was viewed very
negatively and the community showed up in mass at a Stock meeting to voice
their opposition. Commissioner Henning attended the meeting and supported the
residents. Stock retreated and did nothing about the park and trails until now.
At this juncture, Stock has now acquired the adjoining property and wishes to add it
to aide Cypress. Their is now sufficient land to place the park and trails in the newly
acquired land. But Stock doesn't want to do it and is again trying to be relieved of this
obligation so that more homes can be built. It is an economic decision for Stock. If he
builds the park and trails, it will mean less acreage on which to build homes.
Furthermore, it sets a bad precedent for the county to allow developers to "change the
game rules" to the detriment of customers/residents just because it puts more money in
their pockets.
In my opinion Stock should not be relieved of this obligation unless the community as a
whole agrees.
Respectfully yours,
Leland Berry
7414 Treeline Drive
aide Cypress
Packet Page -247-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Frances Chinn [franceschinn@hotmail.com]
Friday, February 04, 201111:07 AM
DeselemKay
Olde Cypress
Dear Ms. Deselem:
We are residents of Olde Cypress and are writing this e-mail to get on record that we feel Stock
Development should meet its obligation of building a park and nature trails within our community.
Although Olde Cypress is a lovely community and we have lived here since 2001, it is lacking In
some ammenities. Having the park and nature trails were promised when we first purchased our
property, and we feel those commitments and obligations should be honored. The park and nature trails
can be included within the Vita Tuscana community, and we strongly urge the Planning Committee to
reject Stock Development's request to relieve them of this responsibility.
Thank you.
Fran and Dave Chinn
Packet Page -248-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
email from Bellows from
From: BellowsRay
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011
TO: GundlachNancy; DeselemKay
subject: FW: RE olde Cypress
Another comment for the file
-----original Message-----
From: StrainMark
Sent: wednesday, February 02, 2011 7:27 PM
To: BellowsRay
Subject: FW: RE olde Cypress PUD Hearing
strain from Thomas sipila 1-31-11.txt
7: 41 AM
PUD Hearing
please make sure this gets added to the cepe packet on the 17th, thanks,
Mark
From: Tom sipila [tsipila@comcast.net]
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 7:14 PM
To: StrainMark
Subject: RE olde Cypress PUD Hearing
Hello Mark,
As a long-standing resident of Olde cypress, I feel Stock Development should
honor the 3.9 acre park commitment along with the nature trails promised in
the original PUD. while Stock Development has been an honorable partner in
our development over the years, upholding this commitment would only confirm
the true underlying integrity of the organization.
Respectfully,
Thomas sipila
3128 Terramar Dr
Naples, FL 34119
under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want
your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not
send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by
telephone or in writing.
under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want
your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not
send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by
telephone or in writing.
Page 1
Packet Page -249-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
email from Bellows from Strain from chuck slaght 1-31-11.txt
From: Bel 1 owsRay
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 7:42 AM
TO: DeselemKay; GundlachNancy
Subject: FW: olde Cypress and vita pima PUD Issues for February 17, 2011
please add to the CCPC back-up for this item
-----original Message-----
From: strainMark
Sent: wednesday, February 02, 2011 7:26 PM
To: BellowsRay
Subject: FW: olde Cypress and vita pima PUD Issues for February 17, 2011
please make sure this gets added to our CCPC packet for the 17th, thanks,
Mark
From: Chuck slaght [chuckslaght@comcast.net]
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 7:25 PM
To: bmk@bmkre.com; AhernMelissa; HomiakKaren; strainMark; MurrayRobert;
jodiebert@comcast.net; schifferBrad; pmedney@collier.org; ReedcaronDonna
Subject: Re: olde Cypress and vita pima PUD Issues for February 17, 2011
Dear commissioners,
The CCPC is hearing a proposal by the stock Development Company to amend the
olde Cypress PUD to take out amenities that were promised in the original DRI
documentation on February 17th. I have included a letter, also my filing with
Collier County code Enforcement (as a violation), and an email between County
Code Enforcement Nick casalanguida and Counselor Richard yovanovich for your
review and reference (I was also disappointed in the handling of this as I
never received any notification that this case was closed and why: sad state
of affairs as I had to pull this information out of them and I was the
complainant) .
while stock Development's counsel Richard Yovanovich states the PUD is not
closed it is moving forward with another development which could easily handle
the inclusion of a park (vita Pima). So why then amend the PUD especially with
the additional acreage available?
I ask that when this comes before you that you "reject" the developers
amendments and demand compliance with the DRI and PUD documentation.
Commissioner Henning was at an olde Cypress community meetin~ where this was
discussed a couple of years back and has heard the community s true feelings
as have others please ask for their input. while we have an olde Cypress
Master property Owners Association (OCMPOA) it is apparent that it is not
acting in the best interests of the community or it's membership (they tried
to secretly make a deal with stock Development but were caught and withdrew
it). when stock Development ran the OCMPOA with an iron totalitarian fist they
could have just amended this without adversity, and we would have been caught
off guard, but they have now been called on the carpet about this and tried to
make an unsuitable area a park (actually was a lake and the back of a driving
range) ask about that move and why it was done. If they owed nothing to the
community why make the attempt to correct and provide an area with a walking
trail around a lake in 2008 or 2009777 I am sick of people not living up to
their word and agreements (especially if they can buy their way out) and we as
a country are now facing people who don't keep their promises, word, and lack
integrity: we can ill afford this.
I am sadly disappointed that it has come down to this but we as a County can
ill afford not demanding people provide as stated in the DRI/PUD documents to
the letter of the law and to binding agreements between the sWFWMD (DRI) and
page 1
Packet Page -250-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
email from Bellows from Strain from chuck slaght 1-31-11.txt
the County CPUD) or everyone will seek to slither out of their arrangements
with our citizens. If this was your community and you were promised a 3.9 acre
park and you tendered money to buy your home there what would be your
expectations? when people bring proposals before you do you not expect them to
follow their plan and documentation? I ask you to think in this manner when
looking at and applying the legal and binding rendering or recommendation to
the County commissioners that was also made many years ago by your
predecessors! I hope your commission will stand up and make developers aware
their word and promises are legally binding.
please place copies of this in your CCPC packages for the meeting February
17th regarding this issue.
Thank you for your service to our great county.
God Bless,
Charles c. slaght
2918 Lone pine Lane
Naples, Florida 34119
under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want
your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not
send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by
telephone or in writing.
under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want
your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not
send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by
telephone or in writing.
page 2
Packet Page -251-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Carol Rafaloff (carolraf@comcast.net]
Wednesday, February 02, 201112:35 PM
DeselemKay
Olde Cypress Development - Vita Tuscana
I am writing to advise that I am not in favor of eliminating the 3 plus acre park at Olde Cypress
which Stock is trying to have removed from the PUD. I believe there is enough property to have
Stock put the park in for the children that live in Oide Cypress. All Stock need do is allocate a few
lots near the golf course driving range instead of squeezing in a few more homes for their profit
line. The park was supposed to be built and there is no reason for it not to be other than greed.
Thank you for your consideration,
Residents of Oide Cypress
Carol and Howard Rafaloff
7359 Monteverde Way
Naples, FL 34119
Packet Page -252-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
~
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Alice MacDonough [aliciamacd@aol.com]
Wednesday, February 02, 20113:09 PM
DeselemKay; StrainMark
James Kress; Carole Raft Raft
aLOE CYPRESS PARENT
Ibg.jpg; rbg.jpg; bgJetter.jpg
I am a mother of 4 children living in the Olde Cypress community for the last 7 yrs.
We have been waiting many years for this "park" that was supposed to be built.
Therefore I am "NOT" in favor of eliminating the 3 plus acre park at Olde Cypress,
which Stock is trying to have removed from the PUD. I believe there is more than
enough property to build a small park
We love our community and the people who live here, but feel that the young ones
are being pushed to the side.
Stock has a written obligation to uphold...But would like for the county to excuse
them from it... Should greed really be the deciding factor In this?
Teach our children to let your "yes" mean "yes".
Thank you for your time,
-Alice MacDonough-
Resident of Olde Cypress
7496 Treeline dr
aliciamacd@aol.com
Packet Page -253-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Packet Page -254-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
email from Mark strain email from Alie MacDonough 2-2-11.txt
From: StrainMark
Sent: wednesday, February 02, 2011 7:28 PM
TO: DeselemKay
Subject: FW: OLDE CYPRESS PARENT
Attachments: top. jpg; photos. png; bottom. j pg; bg_pattern. j pg; 1 bg. j pg; rbg. j pg;
bg_letter.jpg
please make sure this gets added to our CCPC packet for the 17th. I did not
know you were the planner, I assume that since this was sent to you, you are.
I previously sent two more to Ray asking him to do the same, maybe you can
coordinate with him.
thanks,
Mark
From: Alice MacDonough [aliciamacd@aol.com]
Sent: wednesday, February 02, 2011 3:08 PM
TO: DeselemKay; StrainMark
Cc: James Kress; carole Raff Raff
subject: OLDE CYPRESS PARENT
[cid:D8DBOC39-3A1F-4190-8009-B904E1241A34/top.jpg]
I am a mother of 4 children living in the olde cy,press community for the last
7 yrs. We have been waiting many years for this 'park" that was supposed to be
built.
Therefore I am "NOT" in favor of eliminating the 3 plus acre park at olde
Cypress, which Stock is trying to have removed from the PUD. I believe there
is more than enough property to build a small park.
we love our community and the people who live here, but feel that the young
ones are being pushed to the side.
stock has a written obligation to uphold...But would like for the county to
excuse them from it... Should greed really be the deciding factor in this?
Teach our children to let your "yes" mean "yes".
Thank you for your time,
-Alice MacDonough-
Resident of olde Cypress
7496 Treeline dr
aliciamacd@aol.com<mailto:aliciamacd@aol.com>
[cid:D8DBOC39-3A1F-4190-8009-B904E1241A34/2/photos]
[cid:D8DBOC39-3A1F-4190-8009-B904E1241A34/bottom.jpg]
under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want
your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not
send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by
telephone or in writing.
page 1
Packet Page -255-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
email
From: StrainMark
Sent: wednesday, February 02, 2011 7:30 PM
To: DeselemKay
subject: FW: olde Cypress Staff Report
from Mark Strain w-chuck slaght email of 2-2-11.txt
Same as with the others to include in the packet.
thanks,
Mark
From: chuck slaght [chuckslaght@comcast.net]
Sent: wednesday, February 02, 2011 3:21 PM
To: MarcellaJeanne; Diane Ebert; HenningTom; StrainMark
Cc: casalanguidaNick; Adrienne Deluca
Subject: Re: olde Cypress Staff Report
Dear County staff,
It is disconcerting to see a "Staff Recommendation for Approval" at the bottom
of this report! I am disappointed that a body (our Collier County staff)
would be willing to give away an amenity that was promised. Now that Stock
Development has additional land as requested in the amended olde Cypress PUD
(for the Vita pima development) I believe there could be dedicated land for a
park. I see from recent newspaper stories and advertising that the lely Resort
has a new section added by Stock Development which states passive park areas
and even a dog park were recently added to the resort's amenities due to
resident requesting these amenities. Can you tell me why we/l have to fight
for what has already been legally stated within our olde Cypress DRl/PUD/DO
(original woodlands PUD) documents?
Why is it that County Staff would think that resident-owners in olde Cypress
would just give away a 3.9 acre park (we have to date lost nature trails,
bike stands, etc.)? why does County Staff side with the developer in this
case? I will review the DRl and PUD documents and see what other amenities
were promised and just pushed aside! Do you realize the true recreational
value of a 3.9 acre park to a community and especially kids (just figure the
simple land value and replacement costs)? Does County staff, CCPC
commissioners, and our County commissioners have kids or grandkids who if they
lived in olde cypress would have no open area to play (kick a ball around
even): the yards in the community are really small (please look at an actual
overhead of the community. we currently have kids playing in the streets which
I consider unsafe even with a 25 MPH limit.
I really do not care what a Board of five persons may say (which is illegal
anyways) about supporting the developer. They do not represent the community,
period! We do have a number of HOA's within the olde Cypress community which
actually represent homeowners not just communal property (limited roads, a
security gate, lakes, and some common landscape areas) and our homeowners and
HOA'S were never polled! I do want to see any document that states they
support Stock Development as this was not an issue properly voted upon by the
community (referred to by Mr. Yovanovich counsel to Stock)!
The Collier County long range strategic plans are sadly missing many green
space areas and recreational land and I know the county is trying to right
this oversight. I think that our OC PUD/DRl would be a great starting point to
begin the stand to make sure residents in Collier County have park land
dedicated to recreational usage. This was already planned so stand firm in the
langua~e and intent of the DRI/PUD/DO documents' I do not understand why Staff
is maklng the CCPC the escape ~oat here within the Staff Recommendation
section! What were your directlves when this was given to Staff for a
recommendation?
Page 1
Packet Page -256-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
email from Mark strain w-chuck slaght email of 2-2-11.txt
I believe that when county staff stands before the CCPC and the County
Commissioners and voices their recommendations that someone take a stand and
say there is definitely a need for parks in collier County and that this is
one area where they should stand firm and demand the developer provide all
that has been promised all along in the documents!
NO one informed the olde Cypress community of the RPC hearing on January 20,
2011. HOW does this happen when it concerns the entire community? while there
maybe stock Development team players within the community there are many
others who do not want to give away their property rights as promised.
A contract extended in Florida between a developer and a prospective buyer
where and when money is exchanged is a legal and binding contract. 50 how can
this be legal to just sponge a park and nature trails from the DRI and PUD
document? I am having trouble because if I did this to another entity I would
be brought into court and taken to task (I would pay dearly). Can you explain
the legality to me of this proposed amendment to the DRI the PUD and the
Development order (DO)?
I believe it is simply the case where the CCPC and County commissioners stand
fast and order stock Development to live up to their commitments and the olde
cypress PUD/DRI/DO document.
please give me the point of contact for the Southwest Florida Water Management
District (SWFWMD) so that I can forward my concerns to them as well, Thanks.
God Bless,
Charles C. slaght
----- original Message
From: MarcellaJeanne<mailto:JeanneMarcella@colliergov.net>
TO: chuckslaght@comcast.net<mailto:chuckslaght@comcast.net> Diane
Ebert<mailto:jodiebert@comcast.net>
cc: casalanguldaNick<mailto:Nickcasalanguida@colliergov.net>
Sent: wednesday, February 02, 2011 10:28 AM
subject: FW: olde Cypress Staff Report
Good Morning Charles and Diane.
Attached, please find a courtesy copy of the draft staff report for olde
Cypress DRI & PUD. AS interested stakeholders, I am providing you an early
copy for your review. should you wish to discuss with me further, please do
not hesitate to contact me.
charles, I look forward to our meeting Friday morning @ 10:30.
Diane, please stop by anytime.
Respectfully,
Nick casalanguida
under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want
your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not
send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone
or in writing.
Page 2
Packet Page -257-
Feb 02 11 10:00a
~,id"Ola8 Whiteley
2395966214
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
p.1
2963 Mona Lisa Boulevard
Naples
Olde Cypress
FL34119-773J
Collier County
Growth Management Division - Planning & Regulation
Land Development Services
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples
FL 34104
Tel (1) 239 - 596 6214
Email: whiteleys@comcast.net
February 1"'. 20 11
Ann: Nancy Gundlach and Kay Deselem
Dear Madam
Re: Petitions: PUDA-PL2010-388: DOA-PL2010-1052: PUDZ-PL2010-1054
Hearing: 8.30am February 17"',2011
Thank you for your letters dated January 28, 2(}1I regarding the Olde Cypress Development and Vita Pima
hearings. .
Regrettably we will be unable to attend the above hearings due to other commitments on that date. However,a5
full time residents and home owners at Olde Cypress we wish to place on record that we fully support all three
petitions and would hope that planning is granted SO that consrruction may begin soonest. We most cenainly do
not want or need a 3.9 acre park at Olde Cypress.
Yours faithfully
d24td1
~ ~/
Nicholas Whiteley
c0=~~
Dorothy Whiteley
Packet Page -258-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
suelwine [suelwine@stny.rr.com]
Tuesday, February 01,2011 9:20 AM
DeselemKay
Olde Cypress PUD/DRI
Dear Kay:
Ref: Existing Obligation for Development of 3.9 acres (minimum) of Parks and a Series of
Nature Trails
Ref: Collier County Planning Commission Meeting at 8:30 a.m. on Thursday, February
17,2011
As a resident of Olde Cypress for 8 years, I am very
disappointed that the 3.9 acre Park and Nature Trails project is being taken off the table. I am a
very avid biker and hiker and would love to take advantage of these wonderful trails. The
promise of a park and nature trail is one of the reasons I bought in this development. It is still
being advertised as one of the amenities if purchasing a home in this community.
We are not allowed to use the golf paths even after hours due to insurance, etc. The only place
we have is the streets within the development and outside the development.
I've also had family and friends visit that would love to roller blade, but the development
sidewalk and streets are not geared up for that type of activity.
I would appreciate your attention in reconsidering the reinstating of this Park and Nature Trail
for the use of Olde Cypress residents.
Thank you,
Sue Dunlap
Packet Page -259-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
email from Mark strain for pending Action on the olde Cypress from slaught 11-18-10.txt
From: StrainMark
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 5:39 PM
To: DeselemKay
subject: FW: pending Action on the olde Cypress PUD
Attachments: collier County Board of County commissioners Letter on PUD olde
Cypress
and vita Tuscana 101810.doc; olde Cypress PUD and collier county Code
Enforcement letter 111510.doc
Hi Kay. This just came in, I do not know
asked to have lt distributed to the CCPC.
would appreciate it,
thanks
when it is coming up, but the sender
If you could see that happens I
Mark
From: chuck slaght [chuckslaght@comcast.net]
Sent: Th~rsday, November 18, 2010 4:08 PM
TO: StralnMark
subject: Re: pending Action on the olde Cypress PUD
Dear Mark,
I am forwarding two documents that I have previously sent to different
agencies. The purpose of both letters and complaints was to make sure our olde
Cypress PUD/DRI plan and promises are legally pursued. Also our investment in
the olde Cypress PUD (our community) was predicated on the promise of a 3.9
acre park, jogging trails, bicycle trails, and nature walks. This was also
included in sales brochures and documents and promised by sales staff as well.
I think that an amendment to the olde Cypress PUD is ludicrous, malicious, and
illegal (you certainly wouldn't want this to happen in your community or any
other in our county). There are NO amenities in our community for children,
they have not followed the recommendations of the SWFRPC, nor their promise to
County commission or your commission either, and now they want relief due to
terrible planning and execution on their part stating they want to
administratively sponge this off the documents as if it was an error. when I
make a promise and sign a contract I am bound and I always live up to my word
and integrity why shouldn't the same standard be enforced on our developers in
Collier County? If not who will be next quoting the same verbiage and
precedence.
please let me know when this comes to your commission for action.
please recommend disapproval and share this with ALL your other commissioners.
sincerely,
charles C. slaght
2918 Lone pine Lane
Naples, Florida 34119
under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want
your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not
send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by
telephone or in writing.
Page 1
Packet Page -260-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
From: StrainMark
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 5:39 PM
To: Dese1emKay
Subject: FW: Pending Action on the Olde Cypress PUD
Attachments: Collier County Board of County Commissioners Letter on
PUD Olde Cypress
and Vita Tuscana 101810.doc; Olde Cypress PUD and Collier County Code
Enforcement letter ll1510.doc
Hi Kay. This just came in, I do not know when it is coming up, but the
sender
asked to have it distributed to the CCPC. If you could see that happens
I
would appreciate it,
thanks
Mark
From: Chuck Slaght [chuckslaght@comcast.netJ
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 4:08 PM
To: StrainMark
Subject: Re: Pending Action on the Olde Cypress PUD
Dear Mark,
I am forwarding two documents that I have previously sent to different
agencies. The purpose of both letters and complaints was to make sure our
Olde
Cypress PUD/DRI plan and promises are legally pursued. Also our
investment in
the Olde Cypress PUD (our community) was predicated on the promise of a
3.9
acre park , jogging trails, bicycle trails, and nature walks. This was
also
included in sales brochures and documents and promised by sales staff as
well.
I think that an amendment to the Olde Cypress PUD is ludicrous,
malicious, and
illegal (you certainly wouldn't want this to happen in your community or
any
other in our county). There are NO amenities in our community for
children,
they have not followed the recommendations of the SWFRPC, nor their
promise to
County Commission or your commission either, and now they want relief due
to
terrible planning and execution on their part stating they want to
administratively sponge this off the documents as if it was an error.
When I
make a promise and sign a contract J am bound and J always live up to my
word
Packet Page -261-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
and integrity why shouldn't the same standard be enforced on our
developers in
Collier County? If not who will be next quoting the same verbiage and
precedence.
Please let me know when this comes to your commission for action.
Please recommend disapproval and share this with ALL your other
commissioners.
SincerelYr
Charles C. Slaght
2918 Lone Pine Lane
Naples, Florida 34119
Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not
want
your e-mail address releasedinrespor.se to a public records request, do
not
send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by
telephone or in writing.
Packet Page -262-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Collier County Code Enforcement: Shirley Garcia
November 15,2010
Re: Olde Cypress PUD located at lmmokalee Boulevard and Olde Cypress/Treeline
Drive
This is a complaint regarding the Olde Cypress Planned Urban Development (OC PUD)
located at Immokalee Road and Olde Cypress/Treeline Drive, Naples 34119 and is filed
against Stock Development for failure to build legally documented and promised
resources/amenities for the OC PUD as required by the legal documentation presented
herein.
The first document is from the SWFRPC's official recommendations dated August 1986
page II-8. Section 1 Project Impact states that for every 1,000 residents there shall be a
2 acre requirement for a park and based on the 3,500 population estimate that equates to a
6.2 acre park requirement and only 3.9 acres were planned. Additionally the 3.9 acre park
was remotely located in the Northeast corner and isolated by wetlands. Table D- I shows
98.5 acres of Preservation Areas, Parks of3.9 acres, and Recreational Areas to be
determined! Section 2 Remedial Action states that a.) "The total park size needs to be
increased to Collier County standards. The parks should be more strategically located
throughout the project. The parks planned for the northeast corner require pedestrian
access, i.e. boardwalks through the preservation areas. All open space should have
general pedestrian access." b.) "Prior to any development or construction the applicant
should meet with Collier County Parks and Recreation Department to determine park
needs, locations and degree offacilities to be provided." Section 3 Applicant
Commitment states that a.) "A bike/jogging path will parallel major interior roads." b.)
"Open space/recreation areas will be owned and maintained by the homeowners
association."
The second document I am referring to is "The Woodlands" Master Development Plan
map titled "Exhibit H" this map shows dotted lines on all major roadways as indexed
under the "Master Development Plan" indexed as "Bike/Jogging Trail." Petitioner:
lmmokalee Road Partnership & Greg Cabiness; Project Engineers: Hole Montes &
Associates; Land Planner: Julian Bryan...
The third document is from the 2000-37 PUD Section IV pages one and two "Land Use
and Regulation." Special attention is drawn to section 4.01 "Purpose" and 4.05
"Recreational Facilities and Schedule" starting at sentence three. "The schedule for
development of these facilities relates to the absorption schedule of the project towards
build-out. I.) Clubhouse and Golf Course with 18 holes. tennis and related country club
facilities (125.14 acres); 2.) Swimming Pool; 3.) Bicycle Paths and Sidewalks; 4.)
Nature Trails; 5.) Passive recreational uses of wetlands and transitional areas
(preservation 176.2 acres minimum) and; 6.) Parks (3.9 acres minimum)." The bold
emphasis is on uncompleted commitments/requirements of the OC PUD and earlier
SWFRPC official recommendations.
Packet Page -263-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
The current developer, Stock Development, is seeking an amendment to the Olde Cypress
PUD and the original I believe it was "The Woodlands" development' Code enforcement
should become involved and make a determination as to violations of the original and
current PUD requirements, enforce code, and recommend denial of any amendment of
doclUllented recreational amenities for the OC PUD to the Collier County Planning
Advisory Board and Collier County Board of Commissioners of the amended Olde
Cypress PUD currently under consideration. Further I believe your agency should
demand that the developer meet the standards (letter of the law) of the "Land Use and
Regulation" agreement of the 2000-37 PUD, original mapping/platting (The Woodlands),
and the recommendations of the SWFRPC documented from August 1986 for "all"
recreational amenities as negotiated and promised to Collier County officials and all
owner-residents within Olde Cypress PUD (advertised and bought into this community
concept of a park, bike paths, and nature trails). Please forward this to the Collier County
Planning and Advisory Board and the Collier County Board of Commissioners.
Please assign a Code Enforcement Case number and email me this number so I can
follow the case. Thank you very much for all your hard work for the citizens of Collier
County.
Very Respectfully,
Charles C. Slaght
2918 Lone Pine Lane
Naples, Florida 34119
239-398-3739
chuckslaght@comcast.net
Packet Page -264-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
October 26, 2010
Mr. Barry Williams, CPRP
Director, Collier County Parks and Recreation Department
15000 Livingston Road
Naples. FL 34] 08
Dre:~n:~~
::J
Dear Mr. Willianls,
Initially, the Olde Cypress residents with whom 1 have been working on the issue
of the development of a park (s) within the Olde Cypress PUD/DRI were pleased that the
Collier County Parks und Recreation Department teak the position in its letter dated April
3,2008 to Mr. John-Davis Moss. AICP, Community Development Services that within
the Olde Cypress PUDIDRI there continues to be a requirement for the development of a
minimlU11 of 3.9 acres of parks. We were. however, disappointed that your office
detemlined in its letter to Mr. Moss that those park development requirements could be
satisfactorily met by the"". designation on. 9 acres of park on the east and west side of
the westerly entrance into the PUD."
I believe that the locations you refer to includes 2.1 acre lake/mortuary preserve
along the eastern edge of the development (identified as the Lake 14 area on the O]de
Cypress PUD Master Plan) and approximately 2 acres of the southern end of the existing
Golf Course Driving Range (a previously approved 9.3 acre parcel).
I know of no resident who would support the virtual destruction of our golf course
driving range to develop a 2 acre park within its southern boundaries. Furthermore, the
selection of the 2.1 acre lake/mortuary preserve to serve as a second 2 acre park location
is impractical and of questionable value to our residents.
An examination of the location shows that 80% of the acreage consists of an
elliptical pond with a single 6-8 ft. wide grass strip around it that was constructed with an
approximate 45 degree slope. 11s located is somewhat isolated being outside of the gated
area of the community (a potential security issue), across Olde Cypress Blvd. and
adjacent to Immokalee Road (road noise issues).
Access would be most inconvenient for the residents as there is no parking
available near the site, and those intending to walk from the community around the
lake/park would need to walk practically from the Olde Cypress front gatehouse on
Treeline Dr. turn south and walk down Olde Cypress Blvd. to Immoka]ee Road in order
to safely cross OIde Cypress Blvd. at the only designated cross walk to access the
lake/park area.
Packet Page -265-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Sir, there is simply nothing there except a pond and a perimeter path around it that
was not designed for walking. Under those circumstances. I seriously doubt if anyone
would use the site. and] cannot envision how it could be developed further.
Since your 2008 letter of recommendation, Stock Development has purchased
65.29 acres ofland within the Olde Cypress PUD/DR], formally designated as one of the
"Out Parcels" immediately east of the 9.3 acre golf course driving range. This parcel is
presently identified as "Vita Tuscana"' On June] 4,20] O. the developer submitted a
petition to the county (Kay Deselem has the action at Planning) for a PUD Rezone for
Vita Tuscana (fka HD Development) to build a maximum of ] 58 family units. ]
respectfully suggest that your office review again the possible location (s) for the park
and recommend that the developer would best serve the interests of the entire Olde
Cypress Community by adding the proposed development of a 3-4 acre park within the
Vita T uscana project area.
Sincerely.
\J?h'~ (j
(lames P. Kress
2893 Lone Pine Lane
Naples, FL 34] ] 9
(239) 566-74] 0
J. J
()-;~
cc: Mr. Steven T. Williams
Ms. Kay Deselem
Ms. Nancy Gundlach
2
Packet Page -266-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
From: Keith Gelder [kgelder@stockdevelopment.com]
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 10:42 AM
To: GundlachNancy; DeselemKay
Cc: 'Chris Mitchell'; Rich Yovanovich Iryovanovich@gcjlaw.coml
Subject: FW: [Olde Cypress Master Property Owners Association
Newsletter]: Board
Position on PUD's
Kay & Nancy,
Please see the correspondence below from the Olde Cypress Master Property
Owners Association in support of the Olde Cypress & Vita Tuscana PUD
Amendments. Thanks.
Keith Gelder
Stock Development
Development Manager
2647 Professional Circle, Suite 1201
Naples, FL 34119
(239) 449-5227 Office
(239) 280-6504 Mobile
(239) 592-7541 Fax
-----Original Message-----
From: Admin@OCMasterPOA.com [mailto:Admin@OCMasterPOA.comJ
Sent: Saturday, October 16, 2010 11:18 PM
To: Keith Gelder
Subject: [Olde Cypress Master Property Owners Association Newsletter]:
Board
Position on PUD's
Olde Cypress Master Property Owners Association Newsletter
Fellow Residents of Olde Cypress,
During the Q&A session following last Wednesday's Master Association
Board
meeting, a resident specifically asked if the Master Association Board
would
be taking a position on the two Planned Unit Development (PUD) amendment
applications currently submitted to Collier County seeking approval of
zoning
changes. The answer was "no" 1 the Master Board would not take a position
on
the PUD amendments but each individual board member, as a resident, could
represent their own position. In the two PUD's the petitioner is asking
the
County to approve the applications to allow development of Vita Tuscana.
Since that meeting, the Master Association Board Members have been
individually canvassed and the sense of the board is that the Master
Association Board will take a position to support the approval of the two
PUD
amendment applications.
Packet Page -267-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
In compliance with the Land Development code requirements, a Neighborhood
Information Meeting (NIM) will be held on Monday evening October 18th at
5:30
pm at the Olde Cypress clubhouse. This meeting is being held to provide
residents an opportunity to become fully aware of Stock Development's
development intentions and to give residents an opportunity to influence
the
form of development.
Respectfully,
Damian A. Thomas
On behalf of the OCMPOA BOD.
http://ocmasterpoa.com
- Olde Cypress Master Property Owners Association Staff
---------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------
You are receiving this Newsletter because you selected to receive it from
your
user page at Olde Cypress Master Property Owners Association.
You can unsubscribe from this service by clicking in the following URL:
http://OCMasterpOA.com/user.php?op=edituser
then select "No" from the option to Receive Newsletter by Email and save
your
changes, if you need more assistance please contact Olde Cypress Master
Property Owners Association administrator.
Packet Page -268-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
October 18, 2010 R
Nancy Gundlach and Kay Deselem
Growth Management Division
Department of Land Development Services
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, Florida, 34104
Subject:
Olde Cypress PUDIDRI
Existing Obligation for Development of 3.9 acres (minimum) of Parks
and a Series of Nature Trails (unspecified length)
Dear Planners:
In accordance with Paragraph 4.05.4 (Nature Trails) and 4.05.6 (Parks), SECTION IV,
OIde Cypress PUD/DRl, dated December 28, 1999, the subject obligations were
specifically established for the developer to undertake in the process of developing the
Olde Cypress community.
I ask that the Collier County Planners recommend to the County Commissioners that
Stock Development not be relieved of its responsibility to meet its obligations under
paragraphs 4.05.4 and 4.05.6 of the PUD/DRl.
My position on this matter is predicated on the following facts and observations.
a On June 8, 2010, Christopher R. Mitchell of Waldrop Engineering submitted a
request (referencing PUDA-PL2010-388) to Ms. Gundlach asking that she support his
request to the Commissioner on behalf of Stock development to revise the language of
paragraph 4.05.6 striking any referenced obligation for a "... park requirement." Mr.
Mitchell based his request on the following hypothesis:
"During the original zoning application review and permitting, Section
4.05.6 was included that requires 3.9 acres (minimum) of park located
within the PUDIDRl Boundary. The 3.9 acre park was proposed to be in
the northwest corner of the DRl per the PUD master plan submitted with
the application. During the review process, the land use along the eastern
boundary of the PUDIDRI was revised to exclude any and all
development, including the required park acreage, at the request of
Collier County stcif.f to reduce impacts to the environmentally sensitive
area. The area along the eastern boundary was revised in the master plan
to be wetland/preserve, yet the language in Section 4.05.6 was never
revised to exclude the requirement of the park"
Packet Page -269-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
b. I question the validity of the above request for relief for the following reasons:
I) The fact that the County staff purportedly directed the revision of the
northeast boundary of the Master Plan to exclude the introduction of
any park land in the wetland/preserve area in no way relieved the
developer of his responsibility to develop aminimurn of3.9 acres of
parks and the establishment of Nature Trails in other areas located
within area project's 538+ acres as the community was being
developed.
2) In paragraph 9.02 B, SECTION IX, General Development
Commitments, it states: "The design, criteria and lay-out illustrated in
the Master Plan and Development Plan shall be understood as flexible
so that the final design may comply with all applicable requirements
(my italics) and best utilize the existing natural resources."
3) Now that the development of the initial area project is completed and
the developer made no effort to meet his initial obligation by
developing park lands and Nature Trails in the remaining 500+ acres
(less the wetlands/preserve areas) as the community was being built
out, he asks that the County relieve him of the obligations because
they no longer existed once the initial parks locations were taken off of
the Master Plan diagram. Based on in the facts as outlined in sub-
paragraphs b. I) and 2) above, his conclusions about no longer having
an obligation to develop the park land and Nature Trails are without
merit.
4) If the developer believes, as he told those Olde Cypress residents
present at a recent public meeting held at Olde Cypress, that once the
parks were removed from the original Master Plan in the early
development stages of the project, he no longer had any obligation to
develop a park elsewhere within the community, then why did a
former Stock Development VP meet with a group of Olde Cypress
residents in the 2007/2008 Winter Season acknowledging that the park
had not been developed, and saying that the only place remaining
within the community that Stock Development can think of to
establish it was at the southern end ofthe existing Golf Driving
Range? I A suggested location, I might add that is outside of the gated
portion of our community, thereby open to public access, and located
right next to the traffic noise of Immokalee Road.
c. As the substantial majority of the Olde Cypress residents are golfers and
opposed the virtual elimination of a full size Golf Driving Range so that a 3.9 acre
park could be established at its southern end, and as no other practical location
1 Note that County Commissioner Tom Henning was present at this meeting held at the Olde Cypress Club
House.
2
Packet Page -270-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
currently exists within the original aide Cypress area project, I suggest that Stock
Development revise its recent petition: PUDZ-PL20 1 0-1 054 that requests a PUD
Rezone for Vita Tuscana (fka HD Development) to include the addition of a 3.9
acre park and a small Nature Trail complex within the additional 65.29 acres to be
developed within the overall expanded aide Cypress PUD/DRI.
I thank you for your consideration of this important issue.
Sincerely,
James P. Kress
2893 Lone Pine Lane
Naples FL 34119
(239) 877-1601
An aide Cypress resident
3
Packet Page -271-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
C:oHier Count) Board of C~Hlnt> Conl1nissioneL~,
Collier Count~, Planrting and Z:'onlng /1.dvisory Board
Collier Count\ UrbaJ, PI,mile,;,
October 18. 201(1
Re: PlJDZ-PL201H-lU
dnc
'[)!l,-PL2(i 1 O~3gS
I)car Honorable f'../iaGaiTI';.~' s and Sir" s.
ani
. "
'v"'-i'lunf. II'l.S
L~'" ':-"'- ~.'
J....ll__, ,-"C
\'Gj,~(:
")~'Ii".-':"~"",,,- ',~ +i_..._ f.....rl~.~rlrl~\ or;-."..j" +]"J"
'- 1..!~....Ll...,j,", l1...I <-:1:'" ~)a':-'':)......=-... ,1 ...luu.. '- :..-
al11"]'la''!",'ll~>11'.' 'lilr1 n'-'\'~,',-I".')n;"o/()'l;n(1 'l"~' ~1;~I"-' ()"O'.:o ('-'\""'l:-''''''~I;; 01 Tf) arid' t"!l' P \.'~lt", an
~ _ '. _. ~. _ __ . !~.._.... j I.,=- ,,-' ,..... ... ~ ," ,~"'_" '._ _. ~. .... d_U _
hnDC> 'i!{',l;V.:l,l .~C>"" t11'-' F'''-;'r)'- ~,-~ i-v'j-;i-, ;'"I"!l".",rf 11,.h';;n r;"""{-"!;)n11,""!1~ ,-'f-"1~100"
\..t-.... ~"'''' III ~..__ ,_ _,_~J. ". ..,~~j.:, u I'........ "".'~" <i.....'-.....t,' ,.....".~_..I'l,:::.'-..'.
~I"S. '\'d'- . "d-" .., } , '"'1(, I,. '- (-,'--',.,.0 "'-",-~1-"-.'~ ':")n-,'-;>1,-~'-'111D'1"
~'j~L l^,-tl.i if:' a .Uj(,:.,;" I;.. '. ,-_..:.,--',} ;"';; \~/~Ul.. \_~\V,c~.\. -\l.-..};J U LI
issue, I have no iSSU('5 \;ilth redu\:ing the projected density fron1 110010942
dvvel1ing units. ; GO take ;:J:'-~LiC ,Ih(: ~',lii":llinati\..Jn ()flraii~ and park (3.9
acres mininlU!111 hov-.t'\'e:', !t'\.l' espc'cia!l: th:: DRl Hnd the Pl...JD both
s':.at.eG tha: "U'ICTC nee{j; -~( n:.:: ~in:; ;.~ti;...:':rt:" would nc" d 3.9 acre park \\'Ith
.....CltU.~~P '!'Ji'j'-'llCi '-~":,;i,:\ 1 -, :;.:/" "n":'''r'<::;ta"lr. tl-a' 1 ;})
.<lu '.... '" ..~, = u~d._,. .\ ....i.,,,. d.JU......,.u I.... ,'.,....
(leSlhZns chanl1e BUT do
- -
not C_iii11inai~
. . 1
-::'I:.:TfF.:-:n:~;. '::-10ir:::.'.<" ~('i ,-our.~es. part-~~. ::'-"1::.
further understand there
"'"iF' ':>rl1p-nU..-c''"Ilo;'''t\.: 'r. Dl r-) U~;""'S"I'(Tn~ hU~ ~I"at t~;.;:::
'" _ LL 'v1i j, -.....1 " l',,; L '-. ::-,..., l' t ~ H' ...11.."
does not in~~lu(i(."
SeCdndl>. I,:.:! nit:' ~',.:;:,
r:.::LjL:lrC1Yit'rn" (Vr rcpre~ent ll1a;lDj" cnange~"
d~ i1C; :.; ;T\C ',:nli ~ :nt' pres~'.n\ i j (i '; has an)'Clile
prec]wied Ln'~ :aj~:;:, ~n.i !,'~:~L.,;:" l:^c,,;
(, ~.
~}L (a~EJ
1 ar;nc'~s-~
h(Hne~ \vere sOld \\'it!~
"~aLC r:aiun: U\J.l~> !1s1.ec as arrlen1tie~, ans this lS
the reas~)n nl,i!."j\
J'.: : n::Fn::. SiL:.'s aiK~ in the C)lck' Cypr;:3s
P;~,;T)/ UC\ielonlTlen::
thts; issue:
eJ..';~' ::n~,-__L u;~ :',a:'cTL;] anc ie~t ITl:: L;iC~"\- arlu:,.r~
E.~,'t'r thnug-;-,
:..:;.~ ~:::: '..:'.;~' " ....~
\yc:: n::-l ;,t;T:-"', (:~~.
:~_ \-'DreS? ~. Die2.E--:~
.' '.'
i:.. ~l~.":<: '-"
nnf.:lna; tlart>
Op;llC:1~
CJC'\'t,lor:e;" In::
>102i,_ .'
',I '~~ ; '.
..~, , , , '
inL
(')~']' .,r'" ~,,,,, "'~'t
.,. t-:-d;U!..I~.i"
:::_Cl'~',urn~1~~.s 1:c-;7" ~"7"~nci;)g: p21n-;:,,:::~., ,~\ -~,;
~nl::T::,c; inu' ;; !
':Lh..,
ii:.....
. ,'_I
<)unt-,'
;,_arnnl1;;:;jC\n::.~r:' suer:
':1:'"\ eiot.
!~ anC
TrOrr!
lh:::~ r~sidenLl(~:
(1'\,,,.:1;::1
~inc J.:Tl;:',j""l'~i':::: c.
<' c.~)ur2>::
I nCC:TIC rhal \A'ere
:: pari: and natun;,: trails ',11'2.::-'
!nciud~d 1;-; :)I-(l:]ll.rr~',:
\.' ;:-:i ~':.' ::; ;:,
, ."
",\;;:=;:-:'~;i'l'':':'. ZEIQ S3fe:;, O(KUn-l(;:;;ts
~):l:
'r' ! Fn::c ;',:':'1'":;:\ i:r;n~ ':~
"
, -.-, '
'--"...,,,; ."_.l_' ,----,,'..; ~', '.
:,,'i::>\'';': ~:;--'~l':::" ,.~ .11:"..
as 2.J'
, ,
Incucernen: "'-Cr DUO, 'A'it:"] ::'~'Y(::.j'.::';;i:"~iT~~"
~inG
i T]TIJ I,.
;,;i'~n:-
Packet Page -272-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
for anyone to try and back out of a legal agreement (both with Collier
County and resident-owners).
Recently Stock Development in an attempt to satisfY the requirements of the
PUD and the DRI document attempted to develop a park with a singular
walking trail at the entrance to the aIde Cypress community. This was
outside our gated community and thus fatally flawed (no parking,
dangerously located next to major canal, a lake actually served as the park
aspect when the driving range directly across the street was not acceptable to
the community or the golf members). While M.r. Brian Stock may say this
was done by a subordinate VP after a heated community meeting, where
resident-owners stated emphatically they wanted their park and nature trails,
it was therefore an attempt to rectifY Stock Development's requirement for a
park and nature trails, and validated through an action Stock's requirement
to have a park and nature trails as required in the PUDIDRI document and
agreement with County Commissioners.
One more factor there are NO a.rnenities for children in our community (1 am
told there are 50+/- children currently). I am not asking for a 3.9 acre park
with playground equipment all I want to see is a park with "green space" for
children to say kick a ball around or play catch as promised. All children
currently play in the street and this is a huge safety issue and we have
terrible drivers (you can ask)! Nature trails are a push unless they are
elevated walkways in our current preserve areas but a park should be
available for everyone. Finally, if you were promised something and you
paid good money for this with this and it was a selling point/promise
wouldn't you want this for your filmily (especialiy for the children) and we
aren't talking small a.l1l0unt but a major even lifetime investment?
I beiieve and I am hoping it is your dury and responsibility to follow the
letter of the law and reject the administrative amendment (PUDA-PL2010-
388) request a.'ld direct Stock Development to pro'./ide a park and walking
trails and/or enter binding mitigation with "all resident-owners" individually
to find an appropriate legal solution (not the aide Cypress Master Property
Owners Association as this is an issue rar too important for a five person OC
POA Master Board to determine a legal and responsible solution).
Next let me address PUDZ-PLJ 054 (\lITJi PHVlJJ \Fita TUSCfu"l& P'Li"':}UD) and
some concerns. I am genuinely concemed with Stock Development request
to rezone this land as I believe the current zoning is appropriate and allows
Packet Page -273-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
deveionment within their ,::ulTem communTlY design perimeters. lt is my
understanding ~hat Srock L)evelop:n~nl dCI'':~ no'L currently o\\'n the. area on
their representative \:~it3 T uscana RPLJ[) lrlap ,ii/here they are requesting the
33 nlult~-f3Ini!y cl\J\"clling..s to be located (1{) he obtained later:) but even if
tht'Y del O\lvTJ it. it is difficult to se~"' liOV/ this c0uld he incorporated into \:ita
Tus.::ana RPUD due 10 possible slc.ugh separation. i also have a problem
\vith the f~lCl that This i(PUD \\..iL neec ae.:.:ess onle our roadv~'av S\'SleITI
(Trr..>.""il'n,3 r')r.,.vc"~ ~\,hl ',n}..:;, r,n{i:],':;;". ':';,:'f)':l"'4!';:> D' jT') !'~'()'jn!n'::>~'~l.'"'! SIr"":::; le' tilL::. '-'>-<:'Is'
.,.....'-.,;.l__ '- "~".~.........'_...j'_; ",,'-,!__',L"-.,-, l..'''-__ .,-", "1o.._.I....{.dw.\,,.,.....1 ;....'-'u...
\;;,,'i~h '~{'>r'.:~:;.;: C',p''''r:'\t;. l)I];,' ,:n\';."~,",': ~.",I..!!.,..'.','.,' ~'(~ I" '~l~J~JPa'F. !a-'ldi"')'~I"oi--l'i ".i't"a' al.p
....., u........'-....., ......'-_'-~k.' '.. "::-'.... ..', .....,. '....... ,.,~. r '-' ,.. ~ . . .............-.,. V\ I. .....
i',liJf"U<:<':; ,.11'l(1 ,Qcrr~sc '.1,7'.:>,,(. -lJ':()"" ~'I'](" ,....-,.I.j!,'t~_i';:H....~j;1\' r!\"elJ.'l'Y)o-c: and. t.o' p 'RPi ,iT1. j'n
',.:::-....,...,_.... ....'~_".'~.u...,.-, ..,~'--,".."_uJ.......... '-'t-'-' ...' __,.......---',
DP11""":,r;;!'l ~V;.;l'li,lo ,,:\,,", '~,-,'S'\- !~,:)v= ') ",,~..\ '~,'::'I',';'< \-"I'th ,'"i.I'<),"'O<.-i,tl't'{~ 'ii~""'C'<:;:' "n, 1'1'1"" <:;; 1"1 p1,,_,
;:=..., -....- .. - '- ..-,-.~ "".' '-"'- '-".... .....'.......', .,... ......,...~,.:::-'-................;_,n__. ,. .........:::....
I'alllt'h' d\vp-t"ll.r..-r, (,{\";l,:'; 'r'1,..qa!~'4 ~K) ,.H 1
. " '-:___ It-.,,.. j 1..._. u-~", ,.(... l. l..
\Ve ~ertainj:- do have
!nSUTiYiOUnLdb~e issu::s f;)I" ;-nuh:-fai1-ii;-. aC~:'.CS:; L:J ClLlr COTllillU111t\ 8;-; VV:..~ are [:
single family ty~)e gated cOlnn1unity. ! r \\"~ are having issues vvith a park and
nature trai Is v\"ithln our pt ho\\ Gre \ve ;,:'oIn2 1-0 be able 10 control th~ \:T
f)-f)l ;~"', ,'1:; .,\:,,,1; ::1(' fho ~"~ '-Ylu11:_i~~'q,j;-,... 0\;IP1]-,'nc ',.(.'.sue.
\"" '."'_' .._, \ ...1). U-,J .. ... _' _ 1'- c., I.....'"'.". ,", '-'. .~ ._
f ,-\(> ry-.t Iii c. t'\ c;,~H" SOP1,:';'lnjpn: t11ct('''''J \^';~h .'\~C,j''TU'" arolnis""'~'~ rpo nea.....i?1P fhat
"- -- , '-." \..... '-. ~.~.... . ,.I -.,<'-.. .:;::-:. ......' " j...,.. '...t:-.... r ... .....' '-.. . 1 I t-' d C
'.In' '7',1 "-":,11, nn',' t1~nppr.'. ii', ~; rn..,.,,)r'J']',(J ]'o'rr,.u"p.;;:,~ i ~:; nl'1J.',',-f'a"mJ-1v rlV.lel'I]'ncrC''', a,;~
.l.,,,V',, --'. ,.....:_........, ...... ........'< 1 =:0' .......' '-.,....-_.,....: ~.L11.-l. ~.\ ,:=-.-, ~.fL
~'vPn1'l'a',h 'tl~'..r,,)n]""'..-:: ';' !";nr,1 rr'- 1hp rl',,'~~,;.C>;r.np":1('" ~"'.,.,a""j'''''d ky -'--,'t'li:> ('\'111"'"
'-, ..... t.! '..' ,,''-'-,"-,..1 ~~... "::,:,lJ. ".'. ~""" ......'.'-......~.,<o.---, (~......... ~'''__'. L'.. "'_'/ .~.
("on1D11ssion. f.JOv,' pair this l),'--lt.h the request l\) adrninistT'atj'veiy am~'nding
drlG
In~ ou~ :i)e
[(:-IC
! :'(Li~
'[Te'!T; ,~.)U;.
>'D:-e5:::.
and
3.; O' Lit:,:. I
;u:;: rJO~ r-
~: '~~-::~-
....1"
:'.J.-...
<".0 j ~
;')to,~s,,,-,. '-'(lrt"".~-:- 'nlc, '1;-'-.-""1'''' l~p,.
l 1...,...._... I..-- ,t d..." ,r... '.' '...... .Jd' "
'JUest!on~..
f thank \rOG iOT your tInlt.
\( .Jr se" .'lee. arl0
>.crur OedIC3"LlOn arn
rt{)DllU.:' \'-n~;
, see
\ :ili Cl!~". ':-
tC'Gl;~S~ 1':r denIals
hoth requ~~~~u-
:::'UL: \'.': ~ ,'le: ,,-
;"':""'
t, :.':-~: ~~~. ,:
:'j :,,i !~.
ane \':"\:1:- ;2.1';~ ':
""'(:c.'
I~. Slaunl
""(\ (\
,'."'.::.'
c..,..', >_
Pin~:
],.:.;.' '-,
Packet Page -274-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
DEVELOPMENT ORDER NO. 11-_
RESOLUTION NO. 11-_
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NUMBER 86-01,
FOR THE OLDE CYPRESS DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL
IMPACT BY PROVIDING FOR: SECTION ONE: AMENDING
THE FINDINGS OF FACT SECTION TO REFLECT AN
INCREASE IN THE OVERALL ACREAGE AND TO
INCREASE THE NUMBER OF SINGLE F AMIL Y AND
MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS AND AMENDING THE
MASTER PLAN, LEGAL DESCRIPTION TO ACCOUNT FOR
THE ADDED LAND AREA AND TO REMOVE THE PARK
REQUIREMENT; SECTION TWO: FINDINGS OF FACT;
SECTION THREE: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW; AND SECTION
FOUR: EFFECT OF PREVIOUSLY ISSUED DEVELOPMENT
ORDER, TRANSMITTAL TO DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida approved
Development Order 86-01 (the Development Order) on November 6, 1986, which approved a
Development of Regional Impact (DRI) now known as Olde Cypress formerly the Woodlands
Development Order; and
WHEREAS, subsequent to the approval of Development Order No. 86-01, the Board of
County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida approved several amendments to said
Development Order; and
WHEREAS, "OIde Cypress", represented by Chris Mitchell of Waldrop Engineering,
P.A. and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A, has filed its
application and Notice of Proposed Change (NOPC) to Development Order No. 86-01, as
amended, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "B"; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners, as the governing body of the
unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, with jurisdiction pursuant to Section 380.06,
Olde Cypress/DOA-PL2010-1052
Rev. 2114/11 lof6
Words slr~cl, through are deleted: words underlined are added.
Packet Page -275-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Florida Statutes, is authorized and empowered to consider proposed changes to the Olde Cypress
DRI Development Order No. 86-01, as amended; and
WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners passed Ordinance No.
on
, which had the effect of amending the PUD zoning district for the Olde
Cypress development previously approved in Ordinance No. 2000-37; and
WHEREAS, on
, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,
Florida, in accordance with Section 380.06, Florida Statutes, having considered "Olde Cypress"
application and Notice of Proposed Change to the Olde Cypress DRI Development Order No.
86-01, as amended, and record made at said hearing, and having considered the record of the
documentary and oral evidence presented to the Collier County Planning Commission, the report
and recommendation of Collier County Planning Staff and Advisory Boards, the report and
recommendations of the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (SWFRPC), the Board of
County Commissioners hereby approves the following Olde Cypress DRI Development Order
amendments.
NOW, THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that:
SECTION ONE: AMENDMENTS TO DEVELOPMENT ORDER AND MASTER PLAN
Paragraph 4 of the Findings of Fact Section of Development Order 86-01, as amended,
for the OIde Cypress DRI is hereby amended to read as follows:
The applicant proposes the development of Olde Cypress pursuant to the
ADA, and the tem1S and conditions of this Development Order, as the
same may be amended. The development consists of ~ 602 acres
which includes a maximum of 165,000 square feet of commercial retail
on a maximum of 12.5 acres. residential development of 1,100 dwelling
units on approximately ~ ] 84.2 acres, approximately 176.2 acres of
preservation area, and approximately ~ 18] .5 acres of lakes. open
aide Cypress/DOA-PL20 I 0- I 052
Rev.21l41!1 20f6
Words SIfIlBk IRr.~gR are deleled; words underlined are added.
Packet Page -276-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
space, an 18-hole golf course and 2.1 acres of lake/preservation area to
preserve archaeological resources. The general plan of development is
depicted on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by
reference, although the acreages referenced therein and stated herein may
vary somewhat to accommodate site conditions, topography and
environmental permitting requirements.
Paragraph 6 of the Findings of Fact Section of Development Order 96-2, as amended, for
the Olde Cypress DRl is hereby amended to read as follows:
6. VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE:
h. Prior to the issuance of anv local development order to allow
vertical construction for lands within the 63.9 acres being added in
this amendment. the developer. or his assigns. will submit and
receive approval of a Big Cypress Fox Sauirrel Management Plan
that includes an overall preserve management plan. Said plans must
clearly identify a method to identify the oreserve boundary. This
submittal shall be made concurrently to RPC. DCA. FWC and
Collier County.
Paragraph 9 of the Findings of Fact Section of Development Order 96-2, as amended, for
the Olde Cypress DRI is hereby amended to read as follows:
9. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS: In "The Woodlands" ADA, numerous
Commitments were made by the applicant to mitigate project impacts.
Many, but not all of these commitments, are listed in this Development
Order.
Additionally, the ADA provided a Phasing Schedule that provided
the timing basis for this reyiew. If this phasing schedule is significantly
altered by the applicant then many of the basic assumptions of this
approval could be substantially changed, potentially raising additional
Regional issues and/or impacts.
Conditions:
a. All commitment and impact mitigating actions provided by the
applicant within the Application for Development Approval (and
supplementary documents) that are not in conflict with specific
conditions for project approval outlined above are officially adopted
excePting any park reauirements, as conditions for approval.
aIde Cypress/DOA-PL20 I 0-1 052
Rev. 2/14/11 3of6
Words slruelc tArBligh are deleted; words underlined are added.
Packet Page -277-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
SECTION TWO: FINDINGS OF FACT
A. The real property, which is the subject of the proposal, is legally described as set
forth in Exhibit "B", attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof.
B. The application is in accordance with Section 380.06(19), Florida Statutes.
C. The applicant submitted to the County a Notice of Proposed Change to a
previously approved DR! known as Exhibit "C", and by reference made a part hereof.
D. The applicant proposes the development of aide Cypress on 602 acres of land for
residential/golf course and commercial development described in Development Order 86-01, as
amended.
E. A comprehensive review of the impact generated by the proposed changes to the
previously approved development has been conducted by the County's departments and the
SWFRPC.
F. The development is not in an area designated an Area of Critical State Concern
pursuant Section 380.05, Florida Statutes, as amended.
G. The proposed changes to the previously approved development are consistent
with the report and recommendations of the SWFRPC.
SECTION THREE: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
A. The proposed changes to the previously approved Development Order do not
constitute a substantial deviation pursuant to Section 380.06(19), Florida Statutes. The scope of
the development to be permitted pursuant to this Development Order Amendment includes
operations described in the Notice of Proposed Change to a previously approved DR!. Exhibit
"c" attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof.
Olde Cypress/DOA-PL2010-1052
Rev.2/14/I! 4of6
Words stTUsl, threuo;l: are deleted; words underlined are added.
Packet Page -278-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
B. The proposed changes to the previously approved Development Order fall within
the parameters for extensions of build out pursuant to Section 380.06(lS)(g), Florida Statutes.
C. The proposed changes to the previously approved development will not
unreasonably interfere with the achievement of the objectives of the adopted State Land
Development Plan applicable to the area.
D. The proposed changes to the previously approved development are consistent
with the Collier County Growth Management Plan and the Land Development Regulations
adopted pursuant thereto.
E. The proposed changes to the previously approved Development Order are
consistent with the State Comprehensive Plan.
F. The proposed changes do not constitute a substantial deviation pursuant to
Subsection 380.06(19), Florida Statutes.
SECTION FOUR: EFFECT OF PREVIOUSLY ISSUED DEVELOPMENT ORDERS,
TRANSMITTAL TO DCA AND EFFECTIVE DATE
1. Except as amended hereby, Development Order No. _, as amended, shall remain
in full force and effect, binding in accordance with its terms on all parties thereto. This amended
Development Order shall take precedence over any of the applicable provisions of previous
development orders which are in conflict therewith.
2. Copies of this Development Order (Resolution) shall be transmitted immediately upon
execution to the Department of Community Affairs, Bureau of Land and Water Management,
and the Southwest Florida Regional Plarming Council.
3. This Resolution shall take effect as provided by law.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the minutes of this
Board.
aIde CypressIDOA-PL2010-1052
Rev. 2/14/11 5 of 6
Words "!fuel, 1l-:8Ugll are deleted; words underlined are added.
Packet Page -279-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
This Resolution adopted this ~ day of
, 20 II, after motion,
second, and majority vote.
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
, Deputy Clerk
FRED W. COYLE, Chairman
Approved as to form
and legal sufficiency:
Steven T. Williams
Assistant County Attorney
$-(...)
1.1.1\
Attachments: Exhibit A - Map H
Exhibit B - Legal Description
Exhibit C - Notice of Proposed Change
CPII O-CPS-Ol 045\44
Olde CypressIDOA-PL201O-1 052
Rev. 2114/11 6of6
Words struek thrBHgll are deleted; words underlined are added.
Packet Page -280-
i I.'
J
"
Ii
I
i'
I
.'
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
lON(OStWRE l"'''~
!
~
\. ..
\:.;.;:: , ' .
I>.
<>li) I
,,' I ' . .
..,. ....
...'. "..
"... "..
. . , . . . . .
". '. ...
., '. ....
,,'" '" '...
..... ....
. . . . , . . .
..' .., ,.."
....,.. ....
.......
.., ,.....
..... ,. '.
.., ,.....
.
>0
"0
~"
...... '...."
........ '....
..... " "" ,.......
.. ,....
!@0[)
IJ ...
.. ....., ..." '"
'. .. ..."" .....
'" ". .......
. , . .. ,.....
. .....,.
...., ,...,." '"'
... ....."....,..
"'" ,-',. .., ,..
.........,..,. ,..
'. ....., ".., '. ,..
" ...............
,."" '.,.", '.
. ,.. "'"...
. . . , . . . . ,
. , , . . . . .
. . . , . . .
........
".. ,...,
.. ...." ....,. .
..,.. ......,.,
. . . . . , . , , . . . .
. ",. .,.",
,. '.. ..,.,.
..............
...., ,. ,......
, , . . . . . . .
~
I v. .~:;s- ~7Jrr-V/'--=J
I ' r-- "'---~,
i I@/ >) ;1 i ~
II I '~Iill\~, \.../,..~ )
I I' ...- L:J!___..J~ ~/
II
_Z~._
Q
. .
IIIIDI
n! !
o J.m .
~ ~J:~~ ~
" g~"
s: ?'~~~
~ ~~g~~
:;: ~ ~~
~ ~ o~
~ ~ r::lfi
; ~
~ :: f"
c
..
.
I!!UI'I
PPid
0'- 'I
"Ii h
I, -.
. i .
, ~
~:i!~'~~~~
ji' Jl' 11'"' lr' II" ~
~ a?l;~ g5W~
i ~~~ ~~~~
m",~ Cl~~ffi
~ ~i" ~o~~
~i ~~g~
~~ h~;;l
~~ .m
ffl~~
.~
~
~
~
"
~
~
>
!
~
~
~
i
~
.
e
~
..
!
!
.
>
~
,
.
o
~
!
'LA"."V'Sl<'>>o1
I.I~
,~ ENGI~E~RIN~
;~;~:i~~~~~7
---.-
-- -----
..... -----
----
-, ...-
OLDE CYPRESS DRI
CLIENT: VITA PIMA, LLC
DlU MASTER PLAN
EXHIBIT "H"
Packet Page -281-
--- -- ---... r-,
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Rhodes & Rhodes Land Surveying, !no.
28100 Bonita lh&Dd. Drive, Suite 107, Bonita Springs, Florida 34l81l
Phone (239) 405-8166 Fax (239) 400-8163
DESCRIPTION OF A PARCEL OF LAND
LYING IN
SECTIONS 21 & 22, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
A PORTION OF SECTIONS 21 AND 22, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE
26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA: THENCE RUN N.00.S9'SI "W. ALONG THE WEST LINE
OF SAID SECTION 21, A DISTANCE OF 100.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE
PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE CONTINUE N.00059'5 I "W. ALONG THE
WEST LINE OF SECTION 21 A DISTANCE OF 2560.17 FEET TO THE \VEST ONE.QUARTER
CORNER OF SAID SECTION 21; THENCE RUN N.OI000'08"W., ALONG THE WEST LINE OF
SAID SECTION 21, FOR A DISTANCE OF 2659.99 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF
SAID SECTION 21; THENCE RUN N .89004'49"E., ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION
21 A DISTANCE OF 2645.04 FEET TO THE NORTH ONE-QUARTER CORNER OF SAID
SECTION 21; THENCE RUN N.89004'26"E., ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 21,
FOR A DISTANCE OF 2644.36 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 21;
THENCE RUN S.00055'09"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 21, FOR A DISTANCE
OF 2663.26 FEET TO THE EAST ONE-QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 21; THENCE RUN
S.00055'37"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 21, FORA DISTANCE OF 666.00
FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF AMBERTON, A CONDOMINIUM, ACCORDING TO
THE DECLARATION OF CONDOMINIUM RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4278 AT
PAGE 3396 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE RUN
N.89006'04"E., ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID CONDOMINIUM FOR A DISTANCE OF
656.66 FEET; THENCE RUN S.0I001'19"E. FOR A DISTANCE OF 1898.09 FEET TO THE NORTH
RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF THE COCOHATCHEE CANAL (100 FEET WIDE)AS RECORDED IN
DEED BOOK 43, PAGE 251 OF SAID PUBLIC RECORDS; THENCE RUN S.89.09'07"W., ALONG
SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF.WA Y LINE, FORA DISTANCE OF 659.81 FEET TO THE EAST LINE
OF SAID SECTION 21; THENCE RUN S.89009'28"W., ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT.OF-WAY,
FOR A DISTANCE OF 660.31 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF F AIRWAY PRESERVE
AT OLOE CYPRESS, A CONDOMINIUM, ACCORDING TO THE DECLARATION OF
CONDOMINIUM RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 3866 AT PAGE 4006 OF SAID
PUBLIC RECORDS AND TO THE EAST LINE OF A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN
OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4079 AT PAGE 1265 OF SAID PUBLIC RECORDS; THENCE RUN
N.00.56'04"W., ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID CONDOMINIUM AND EAST LINE OF SAID
PARCEL, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1231.49 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID
PARCEL; THENCE RUN S.89008'07"W., ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL AND THE
NORTH LINE OF A PARCEL DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4079 AT PAGE 1259
OF SAID PUBLIC RECORDS, FOR A DISTANCE OF 660.47 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST
CORNER OF THE PARCEL DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4079 AT PAGE 1259 OF
SAID PUBLIC RECORDS; THENCE RUN S.00.56'31 "E., ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID
PARCEL, FORA DISTANCE OF 1231.23 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID
PARCEL AND TO THE NORTH RIGHT.OF - WAY LINE OF THE AFORESAID COCOHA TCHEE
CANAL; THENCE RUN S.89009'28"W., ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF.WA Y LINE, FOR A
DISTANCE OF 990.47 FEET TO THE EAST LINE A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN
SHEET I OF 2
~uLIL.!..L _
Packet Page -282-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Rhodes & Rhodes Land Surveying, Ine.
l!81oo Bon1t& Gr&Dde Drive, Suite 107, Bonita. Springs, FloridA 3fI1l5
Phone (289) 40&-8166 Fax (289) ~816S
OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 3579 AT PAGE 3894 OF SAID PUBLIC RECORDS; THENCE
N.00057'12''W., ALONG SAID EAST LINE, FORA DISTANCE OF 224.51 FEET TO THE
NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID
PARCEL THE FOLLOWING THIRTEEN (13) COURSES: (1) THENCE S.65023'20"W., FOR A
DISTANCE OF 43.57 FEET; (2) THENCE S.78026'13"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 61.22 FEET; (3)
THENCE S.80004'25''W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 45.57 FEET; (4) THENCE S.84027'3I "W., FOR A
orST ANCE OF 3].15 FEET; (5) THENCE S.80009'47"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 30.89 FEET; (6)
THENCE 8.58048'23 "W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 24.42 FEET; (7) THENCE S.S4027'OS"W., FOR A
DISTANCE OF 36.02 FEET; (8) THENCE S.4002S'12"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 33.11 FEET; (9)
THENCE S.47057'45"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 62.74 FEET; (10) THENCE S.50021 'OS"W., FOR A
DISTANCE OF 49.97 FEET; (11) THENCE S.68022'05"W., FORA DISTANCE OF 37.47 FEET; (12)
THENCE S.42018'38"W., FOR A DISTANCE OF 39.61 FEET; (13) THENCE S.56049'27"W., FOR A
DISTANCE OF 15.80 FEET TO THE AFORESAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF A 100
FEET WIDE DRAINAGE CANAL; THENCE RUN S.89008'23"W., ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT.
OF-WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 2528.93 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
LES8 THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCEL:
DA VINCI ESTATES AT OLOE CYPRESS, A SUBDIVISION RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 35 AT
PAGES 33 THROUGH 37, INCLUSIVE, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, AND ALSO BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
A PORTION OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE
26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA: THENCE RUN N.00059'51 "W. ALONG THE WEST LINE
OF SAID SECTlON21, FOR A DISTANCE OF 100.00 FEET POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE
PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE CONTINUE N.Ooo59'51 "W. ALONG THE
WEST LINE OF SECTION 21, FORA DISTANCE OF 2560.17 FEET TO THE WEST ONE-
QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 21; THENCE RUN N.89006'45"E., ALONG THE SOUTH
LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 21, FOR A DISTANCE OF
660.99 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED;
THENCE RUN N.O 1 000'0 I "W., ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID DA VINCI SUBDIVISION, FOR
A orSTANCE OF 1330.06 FEET; THENCE RUN N.89005'40"E., ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF
SAID DA VINCI SUBDIVISION, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1321.51 FEET; THENCE RUN
S.00058'40"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID DA VINICI SUBDIVISION, FOR A DISTANCE
OF 1330.47 FEET; THENCE RUN S.89006'45"W., ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID DA VINCI
SUBDIVISION, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1320.99 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PARCEL AS DESCRiBED CONTAINS 602.04 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
SHEET 2 OF 2
Packet Page -283-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
DIVISION OF COMMUNITY PLANNING
BUREAU OF LOCAL PLANNING
2555 Shumard Oak Blvd.
Tal1ahassee, Florida 32399
850/488-4925
NOTIFICATION OF A PROPOSED CHANGE TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED
DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT (DRI)
SUBSECTION 380.06(19), FLORIDA STATUTES
Subsection 380.06(19), Florida Statutes, requires that submittal of a proposed change to a previously
approved DRI be made to the local govemment, the regional planning agency, and the state land
planning agency according to this fon11.
I. I, Brian Stock, the undersigned owner/authorized representative of Olde Cypress
Development, LTD & Vita Pima, LLC, hereby give notice of a proposed change to a (developer)
previously approved Dcvelopment of Regional Impact in accordance with Subsection 380.06( 19),
Florida Statutes. In support thereof, I submit the fol1owing infonnation concerning the Olde Cypress
DRI (f/kJa The Woodlands DRl) dcvclopment, which (Oliginal & current project names) information is
true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I have submitted today, under separate cover, copies ot
this completed notification to Collier County, (local govemment) to the Southwest Florida Regional
Planning Council, and to the Bureau of Local Planning, Department of Community Affairs.
0(7/;0
.
Date
DOA~Pl2010'10S2 REV:!
aLOE CYPR!SS DRI
CATE: 6/11/10
Dup.: 7/2/10
Exhibit C
Packet Page -284-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
2. Applicant (name, address, phone).
Olde Cypress Development, LTD
2647 Professional Circle, Suite 1201
Naples, F134119
Contact: Keith Gelder
(239) 592-7344
3. Authorized Agent (name, address, phone).
Olde Cypress DRI
DOA-PL201 0-1 052
submlttted: 1-12-11
(this page only)
Waldrop Engineering, P.A.
28100 Bonita Grande Drive
Bonita Springs, Fl34135
Contact: Chris Mitchell
(239) 405-7777
4. Location (City, County, TownshiplRangelSection) of approved DRI and proposed change.
Olde Cypress Drl (F/KIA The Woodlands Dri)
Naples, Fl34103
Section 21 & 22/ Township 48s / Range 26e
5. Provide a complete description of the proposed change. Include any proposed changes to the plan of
development, phasing, additional lands, commencement date, build-out date, development order
conditions and requirements, or to the representations contained in either the development order or the
Application fot Development Approval.
Indicate such changes on the project master site plan, supplementing with other detailed maps, as
appropriate. Additional information may be requested by the Department or any reviewing agency to
clarify the nature of the change or the resulting impacts.
No changes are proposed to the phasing, commencement, or build.out dates. The developer proposes
to mid 63,88 acres to the existing DRI with no change in total number of approved units. The
additional acreage is planned for residential development.
6. Complete the attached Substantial Deviation Determination Chart for all land use types approved in
the development. If no change is proposed or has occurred, indicate no change.
Please See Attached
7. List all the dates and resolution numbers (or other appropriate identification numbers) of all
modifications or amendments to the originally approved DRI development order that have been adopted
by the local government, and provide a brief description of the previous changes (i.e., any information
not already addressed in the Substantial Deviation Determination Chart). Has there been a change in
local government jurisdiction for any portion of the development since the last approval or development
order was issued? If so, has the annexing local government adopted a new DR! development order for
the project?
There have beenfwe (5) development order amendments adopted by Collier County since the original
"The Woodlands DRU' development order (Ord. 86-1) was issued on November 6,1986. The
following is a description ofthefwe (5) do amendments:
Packet Page -285-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
(1) Resolution (87-96) adopted April 28, 1987, amended section b(5)(a)(7) and (8), transportation,
to clarify responsibilities of Collier County and the developer; amended section b(5)(b)(4),
transportation conditions, clarifying and redefining criteria by which a substantial deviation
shall be determined;
(2) Resolution (87-207) adopted September 15,1987, amending section a(4), finding offact, to
state a maximum square footage of permitted commercial retail development and to increase
the total acreage of preservation areas and to set forth a revised land use schedule that did not
increase the total amount of acreage or dweUlng units previously approved.
The two (2) development order amendments described above were adopted by CoUler County
to resolve appeals of the of the original Woodland's DR! develompent order to the Florida
Land and Water Adjudicatory Conmdssion take by the Florida DepartmLnt of Community
Affairs and the Southwest Florida Regional Planning CounciL The Woodland's DR!
development order becamL effective on November 7, 1990, the date on which the Florida Land
and Water Adjudicatory Comission issued its finai order of dismissal of the appeal.
(3) Resolution (94-774) adopted November 1, 1994, extended the woodland's DRJ commencement
date and the buildoutltermination date by four (4) years, eleven months (11) or until October
7, 2000 and October 7, 2015, respectively.
Collier County remains the local government with jurisdiction over all portions of the Oide
Cypress DR/.
(4) On October 22, 1996, the BCe amended the development order with resolution (96-482) to
reduce the number of dwelling unilsfrom 1,460 to 1,100 dwelling units and a reduction of the
commercial use from 200,000 sf to 165,000 sf and miscellaneous changes to the plan resulting
solely from permitting requirements of the South Florida Water Management. Also, the right-
of-way reservation on the east side of the Woodlands was eliminated. Mlscellaneoas changes
were also made to drainage/water quality, transportation, vegetation and wildlife, wetlands,
consistency with the comprehensive plan and fire by the deletion thereof.
(5) In December 1999, Resolution (99-472) 28.69 acres were added to the eastern edge ofOide
Cypress in Section 22. Lands to be added included a 2.1 acre archaelogical preserve area.
Standards were also incorporated in the development order to provide protection for
archaelogical resources. The gross densily was also reduced from 2.2 to 2.1 dwelling units per
acre. Minor adjustments in land use tabulations, along with other miscellaneous changes were
made to the development order to accommodate the notice of change.
(6) Resolution (2000-155) adopted May 23, 2000 added 9.3 acres to accommodate the addiiion of
the goif course driving range. The request also included a modifICation of the goif course/open
space acreage from J 61. 7 to J 68.3 acres, including lakes. The residential acreage was
modifiedfrom 152.5 acres to 155.2 acres. No changes to the number of dwelling units,
commerciolfloor area, phasing schedule, commencement date, or build-out date was
requested.
Packet Page -286-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
8. Describe any lands purchased or optioned within 1/4 mile of the original DR! site subsequent to the
original approval or issuance of the DRI development order. Identify such land, its size, intended use,
and adjacent non-project land uses within Y:. mile on a project master site plan or other map.
Vita Pima, LLC recently purchased 65.29 acres directly adjacent (south) of the Olde Cypress DRl.
The easterly 46.64 acre parcel is an ex.isting RPUD (HD Development Ordinance #05-65). The
westerly 18.65 acres is currently zoned agricultural. Vita Pima, LLC has flied a CJJncurrent PUD
Amendment application with Collier County to rezone the entire 65.29 acres to RPUD.
9. Indicate if the proposed change is less than 40% (cumulatively with other previous changes) of any of
the criteria listed in Paragraph 380.06(19)(b), Florida Statutes.
The proposed change Is less than 40% of any of the criteria listed in 380(19)(b), F.S.
Do you believe this notification of change proposes a change which meets the criteria of Subparagraph
380.06(19)(e)2., F's.
YES
NO
x
10. Does the proposed change result in a change to the buildout date or any phasing date of the project?
If so, indicate the proposed new buildout or phasing dates.
No changes to buildout dates or phasing are proposed.
II. Will the proposed change require an amendment to the local government comprehensive plan?
The proposed change will not require any comprehensive plan changes.
Provide the following for incorporation into such an amended development order, pursuant to
Subsections 380.06 (15), F.s., and 9J-2.025, Florida Administrative Code:
12. An updated master site plan or other map of the development portraying and distinguishing the
proposed changes to the previously approved DR! or development order conditions.
Attached.
13. Pursuant to Subsection 380.06(19)(1), F.S., include the precise language that is being proposed to be
deleted or added as an amendment to the development order. This language should address and quantify:
a. All proposed specific changes to the nature, phasing, and build-out date of the development; to
development order conditions and requirements; to commitments and representations in the
Application for Development Approval; to the acreage attributable to each described proposed
change of land use, open space, areas for preservation, green belts; to structures or to other
improvements including locations, square footage, mnnber of units; and other major
characteristics or components of the proposed change;
See attached Proposed Master Plan, Map H and Proposed changes to the Collier County
Development Order.
Packet Page -287-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
b. An updated legal description of the property, if any project acreage islhas been added or
deleted to the previously approved plan of development;
See attac1led legal description of the property to be attached to the Development Order.
c. A proposed amended development order deadline for commencing physical development of
the proposed changes, if applicable;
No change.
d. A proposed amended development order tennination date that reasonably reflects the time
required to complete the development;
No change.
e. A proposed amended development order date until which the local government agrees that the
changes to the DR! shall not be subject to down-zoning, unit density reduction, or intensity
reduction, if applicable; and
No change.
f. Proposed amended development order specifications for the annual report, including the date
of submission, contents, and parties to whom the report is submitted as specified in Subsection
91-2.025 (7), F.A.C.
No change.
Packet Page -288-
~
~
--
r-1Z
r;,:,o
~e
u~
S~
<f.lr-1
0...
IOooofo<
O~
=O:z
100000
r.1=
~~
....r-1
"'Q
~~
.......
~~
~
~
<f.l
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
'" G;- 8 0
" 0- N
o ~ '.';' ... 0- gi <<i
...
QQ 9 ~ ...
gl l
.~ " Ii
Q.,6 0
8 "" ..,. 1'l 0
.3 0- :i1l '"
.... N vi 00
Q., ... '" '"
.. ... ...
:~
0
~ 8 ... 0- i::l 0
~ 0 '"
.... '" ;t ...:
... co
"<l ... ...
"
&
g
D..
~
M ~ B 00
~ A. ~
W .S f ..
.~ " .~
!I bO" ~ \;i
e- g ~~P- ;@ 00. {i 00 A. '"
0 ~ ~ :.E <:: .. 8
e" f 1 " .g 01 ~ 5
~ :- 'i3 <:: .", 00
" ~]] .s. ~ 0 .. 0 'i3 ~
U .", ~ <:: .", <::
.. j 0 t " ""' 0
j "<l o ' ..... ] ~" u u 0 u ...
v (l) ".d ..9
'0 Q.;"'lib;s ""' " ~ &l 0 " d <:
0 tJ 0 tJ tJ ~ ~
~Jb: d u d
u :jt :jt <:<>:: v; 'It <: v;
"<l
~1i'
"<l U
" ]
" !<i
..
::l 110 ..
"" " ;g
<:: " :- 0
j ] !lE
""' 5 (/) "
0 <:: 2 .~
" ."
A. .lii " '
~ .:l 8'~g
Packet Page -289-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Olde Cypress DR! / PUD Unit Summary
Last Updated 3/15/2010
Subdivision ~ Total Lots Built to Dllte ?ti
Strada. Bella SF 18 17 94%
Santorini SF 55 55 100%
Terramar SF 55 55 100%
Egret Cove SF 18 18 100%
Ibis Landing SF 55 55 100%
Santa Rosa SF 27 27 100%
Biscayne Place SF 8 8 100%
Woodsedg-e SF 130 125 96%
Total SF Units 366 360 98%
Subdivision ~ Total Dnim Built to Date ?ti
Fairway Preserve MF 264 264 100%
Amberton MF 312 . 132 42%
Total MF Units 576 396 69%
Olde Cypress DRI
DOA-PL201 0.1 052
email submittal 12/6/1 0
Packet Page -290-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Olde C.ypress DRJ
Total Pro}losed Units
Total Units Built to Date %
1100 756 69%
Qlde C.y.press PUD
MF Units
SF Units
Unalloca.ted
Total Units
Rxisting
576
366
..158
1100
71
71
Proposed
125
125
BD Development RPUD
SF Units
Total Units
Existif,f
Total DR! Units
Oide Cypress PUD
Vita Tuscana PUD
Total Units
Existing
1100
o
1100
Propoaed
942
125
1067
Olde Cypress DRI
DOA-PL201 0-1 052
email submittal 12/6/1 0
Packet Page -291-
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
Olde Cypress DR! Transportation Summary
Existing Unit Mix
PM Peak Total
~ :unit> Hour Trips IIipa
SF 296 1.0 296
MF 804 0.5 402
Total 1100 698
Proposed Unit Mix
PM Peak Total
~ Units Hour Trips ::ui,p.a
SF 491 1.0 491
MF 576 0.5 288
Total 1067 779
I % Change in Total Trips 10.40%1
Packet Page -292-
Olde Cypress DRI
DOA-PL201 0-1 052
email submittal 12/6/1 0
4/12/2011 Item 7.A.
20D . Tuesday, March 22, 2011 · Naples Daily News
.
NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER DEVELOPMENTORDERIRESOLUTION
Notice I> hereby 9iven that on Tuesday, April 12. 2011, in the Boardroom, 3rd
Floor, Administration BUilding, Collier Count)' Government Center, 3299 East Ta-
miami Trail. Naples, Florida, the Board of Count)' Commissioners will consider the
enactmer.t of a Development Order Amendment The meeting will commence at
9:00 A.M. ThE' titif' of the proposed Development OrderlResolution is as follows:
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NUMBER 86-01, FOR THE OLDE CYPRESS
DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT BY PROVIDING FOR: SECTION ONE:' AMEND-
ING THE FINDINGS OF FACT SECTION TO REFLECT AN INCREASE IN THE OVERALL
ACREAGE AND TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF SINGLE FAMilY AND MULTI-FAMILY
DWELLING UNITS AND AMEND\NG THE MASTER PLAN LEGAL DESCRIPTION TO AC-
COUNT FOR THE ADDED LAND AREA AND TO REMo'VE THE PARK REQUIREMENT;
SECTION TWO: FINDINGS OF FACT; SECTION THREE: CONCLUSIONS O~ l:AW; AND
SECTJO~ FOUR: EFFECT OF PP.EVlOUSLY ISSUED DEVELOPMENT ORDER TRANS-
M1TIAL TO D::PARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND EFFECTIVE DATE. '
Capie::. ot the proposed Resolution are on fiie with the Clerk to the Board and are
available tor inspection. All imerested parties are invited to attend and be heard
NOTE: All penon> wishing to speak ,!n any agenda hem must register with the
County adminIstrator prior to presentation of the agenda Item to be addressed. In-
dlvldual speakers will be Itmited to 3 minutes on any item. The selection of an indi-
vidual to speak on behalf of an orqanlzatlon or group IS encouraged. If recognized
by the Chairman. a spokesperson for a group or organization may be allotted 10
minutes to speak on 311 item.
Per50m wishing to have writter. or graphIC materials indudedin the Board agenda
packets must $ubm:t said material a minimum of 3 weeks prior to the respectivE
Dubhe heanng. In any case, written matenals intended to bc considered b~' the
Board shall be submitted to tnfO aplJropnat€ County staff a minimum of seven days
pnor to tne publIC hearing, All materli~1 used in presentations before the Board will
becomp a permanent part of the record
Any' person who decides to appeal a decision of the Board will need a record of thti
proceedings pert3mmg thereto and thNetore, may need to ensure that a verbatim
record of the oroceedings is made, which record ~nclude$ the testimony and evi-
dence: upon which t.he appeal is based.
If yOLl are a person with Cl disability who needs any accommodation in orderto par-
tlcipatt in thiS proceedmg; you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the prOVIsion of
certain as~istan(e Pleas€' contact the Collier County facilities Management Depart-
ment. ioeated a~ 3.335 Tamiam: Trail East, Building W, Naples. Florida 34112, (239)
252.838(:, ASSIStf'C llstemng aeVic€5 TOI the hearing impaired are availabl!" in the
County Commission('l's' Office.
GOARD OF COUNTY COMM1SS\ON~RS
COLLIER COUNTY. RORIDA
FRED COYL~, CHJ:dRMAN
DWIGHT E_ BROCK, CLERK
By: Martha Vf'rgara, Deputy (lerk
(SEAL)
Mi'lrrh)) 7011
Nn1RCI.:r:!Gfi
Packet Page -293-