Loading...
Agenda 06/10/2008 Item # 8A Agenda Item No. 8A June 10, 2008 Page 1 of 38 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PUDA-2007-AR-11734, KRG 951 and 41, LLC, represented by Q. Grady Minor, is requesting a Planned Unit Development (PUD) amendment to the Artesa Pointe PUD to remove a +/- 0.88 acre parcel of land and add it to the proposed Tamiami Crossing Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) abutting its northern boundary. The 0.88-acre subject property is located approximately 1/4 of a mile south of the intersection of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and the Tamiami Trail (US 41), in Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East of Collier County, Florida COMPANION ITEMS: PUDZ-2006-AR-I0875 AND CPSS-06-01 OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) consider an amendment to the Artesa Pointe Planned Unit Development (PUD) to remove a +/- 0.88 acre parcel of land and add it to the proposed Tamiami Crossing Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) abutting its northern boundary; and to make certain that the project is in hannony with the applicable County codes and regulations to maintain the community's interests. (The Tamiami Crossing CPUD application is companion item PUDZ-2006-AR-10875; and the companion Small Scale Comprehensive Planning Amendment is CPSS-06-01.) CONSIDERATIONS: The applicant proposes to amend the Artesa Pointe PUD, approved on September 23, 2003, to remove 0.88 acres from its extreme northwestern comer, as depicted on the Conceptual Master Plan contained in the staff report. This 0.88 acres, permitted for commercial uses on the approved Master Plan, is to be added to the proposed Tamiami Crossing CPUD to provide additional parking capacity. The subject amendment would only require minor revisions to the approved Artesa Pointe PUD document and Master Plan to reflect the deletion of this acreage from the PUD' s northwestern boundary, therefore no other changes to either document are proposed. All changes to the PUD document are shown in strike-through and underline format in the proposed ordinance attached to this report. FISCAL IMPACT: The rezoning action, in and of itself, will have no fiscal impact on Collier County. There is no guarantee that the project, at build out, will maximize its authorized level of development, however, if the CPUD is approved, a portion of the existing land will be developed and the new development will result in an impact on Collier County public facilities. ~.~-,., The County collects all applicable impact fees before the issuance of building permits to help offset the impacts of each new development on its public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects identified in the Growth Management Plan's (GMP) Capital Improvement Element (CIE) as needed to maintain adopted Levels of Service (LOS) for public facilities. Additionally, in order to meet the requirements of Section] 0.02.07(C) of the Land Development Code, fifty Page 1 of 5 Agenda Item No. 8A June 10, 2008 Page 2 of 38 percent of the estimated Transportation Impact Fees associated with the project are required to be paid simultaneously with the approval of each final local development order. Other fees collected before the issuance of a building permit include building permit review fees and utility fees associated with connecting to the County's water and sewer system. Please note that the inclusion of impact fees and taxes collected are for informational purposes only; they are not included in the criteria used by Staff and the Planning Commission to analyze this petition. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) IMPACT: Artesa Pointe PUD presently comprises all of the Henderson Creek Mixed Use Subdistrict on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The primary intent of this subdistrict is to provide for a mixture of regional commercial uses and residential development to serve the South Naples, Royal Fakapalm and Marco Island areas. The subject 0.88 acres is within a commercial component of the Artesa Pointe PUD, and its annexation into the proposed Tamiami Crossing CPUD would he compatible with respect to its current land use. However, as the Henderson Creek Subdistrict is limited to a maximum of325,000 square feet of commercial uses, if the 0.88 acres were removed from the PUD, it would still remain within the Henderson Creek Subdistrict and, therefore, no commercial development would be eligible on it. Conclusion: The proposed PUD amendment has no impact on consistency as it relates to the GMP, as all uses associated with the subject parcel will remain consistent with the aforementioned designation. The subject PUD amendment may, therefore, be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPACT: Approval of this CPUD would have no affordable housing impact. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: Environmental Services staff has reviewed this petition and determined that there are no environmental issues associated with it. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: This petition was not heard by the EAC. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPe) heard this petition at their March 20, 2008 meeting, and voted 8-0 to forward this petition to the BCC with a recommendation of approval. /c_. Although this item received a unanimous recommendation and staff has not received any letters of objection to the project from the community, it is being placed on the regular agenda due to the fact that it and its companion item's approval are contingent upon each other. Page 2 of 5 Agenda Item No. SA June 10, 2008 Page 3 of 38 LEGAL CONSIDERA nONS: This is an amendment to the existing Artesia Pointe PUD (Ordinance No. 03-46) which proposes to amend the Statement of Compliance, Legal Description and Master Plan in order to reflect a 0.88-acre reduction of land in the PUD. This proposed amendment is quasi-judicial in nature. As such the burden falls upon the applicant for the amendment to prove that the proposal is consistent with all of the criteria set forth below. The burden then shifts to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), should it consider denial, that such denial is not arbitrary, discriminatory or unreasonable. This would be accomplished by finding that the amendment does not meet one or more of the listed criteria. Criteria for PUD Rezones Ask yourself the following questions. TIze answers assist you in making a determination for approval or not. L Consider: The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. 2. Is there an adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of agreements, contract, or other instruments or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenancc of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense? Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the County Attorney. 3. Consider: Conformity ofthe proposed PUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Managemcnt Plan. 4. Consider: 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. 5. Is there an adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development? 6. Consider: The timing or sequence of development (as proposed) for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. 7. Consider: The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. 8. Consider; Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are Page 3 of 5 Agenda Item No. 8A June 10, 2008 Page 4 of 38 justified as meeting public pmposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. 9, Will the proposed change be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and future land use map and the elements of the growth management plan? 10. Will the proposed PUD Rezone be appropriate considering the existing land use pattern? II. Would the requested PUD Rezone result in the possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts? 12. Consider: Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. 13. Consider; Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. ] 4. Will the proposed change adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood? 15. Will the proposed change create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or other\1ise affect public safely? 16. Will the proposed change create a drainage problem? 17. Will the proposed change seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas? 18. Will the proposed change adversely affect property values in the adjacent area? 19. Will the proposed change be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with cxisting regulations? 20. Consider: Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. 21. Are there substantial reasons why the property cannot ("reasonably") be used In accordance with existing zoning? (a "core" question...) 22. Is the change suggested out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county? 23. Consider; Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. Page 4 of 5 Agenda Item No. 8A June 10, 2008 Page 5 of 38 24. Consider: The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any ofthe range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. 25. Consider: The impact of development resulting from the proposed PUD rezone on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County growth management plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch.106, article II], as amended. 26. Are there other factors, standards, or criteria relating to the PUD rezone request that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and wel fare? The BCC must base its decision upon the competent, substantial evidence presented by the written materials supplied to it, including but not limited to the Statf Report, Executive Summary, maps, studies, letters from interested persons and the oral testimony presented at the Board of County Commissioners hearing as these materials relate to these criteria. MMSS RECOMMENDATION: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve PUDA-2007-AR-l 1734. PREPARED BY: John-David Moss, A1CP, Principal Planner Department of Zoning & Land Development Review ~ Page 5 of 5 Item Number: Item Summary: Meeting Date: Page 1 of2 Agenda Item No. 8A June 10, 2008 Page 6 of 38 COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 8A At the petttioner's request. this Item is continued to the July 22,2008 BCC meeting, This item must be heard BEFORE item PUDZ-2006-AR-10875 and requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. PUDA-2007-AR- 11734 KRG 951 and 41, LLC. represented by D. Wayne Arnold. AICP, of Q Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire, of Goodlette, Coleman, and Johnson, P.A., is requesting an amendment to the Artesa Pointe PUD to remove a +/- 0.88 acre parcel of land and add it to the proposed Tamiaml Crossing CPUD abutting its northern boundary. The subject property is located approximately 1/4 of a mile south of the intersection of Collier Boulevard and US 41, in Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East of Collier County, FlOrida (Companion item to PUDZ-2006-AR.10875) 6/10/2008 90000 AM Prepared By John-David Moss Community Development & Environmental Services Senior Planner Date Zoning & Land Development 5/15/20089:35:14 AM Approved By Judy Puig Community Development & Environmental Services Operations Analyst Community Development & Environmental Services Admin. Date Approved By 5115/2006 12:01 PM Susan Murray, AICP Community Development & Environmental Services Zoning & Land Development Director Date Zoning & Land Development Review 5126120068:57 AM Approved By Ray Bellows Community Development & Environmental Services Chief Planner Date Zoning & Land Development Review 5/28/200810:54 AM Approved By Joseph K. Schmitt Community Development & Environmental Services Community Development & Environmental Services Adminstrator Date Community Development & Environmental Services Admin. 5/28/20087:52 PM Approved By /""', County Attorney Marjorie M. Student~Stirling Assistant County Attorney 5/29/20082:12 PM Date County Attorney Office Approved By OMS Coordinator OMS Coordinator Date file://C:\AgendaTest\Export\l 09-June%20 1 0,%202008\08.%20ADVER T1SED%20PUBLlC... 6/4/2008 Page 20f2 Agenda Item No. 8A June 10. 2008 Page 7 of 38 County Manager's Office Office of Management & Budget 5/30/20088:39 AM Approved By Mark Isackson Budget Analyst Date County Manager's Office Office of Management & Budget 5/30/20088:55 AM Approved By James V. Mudd County Manager Date Board of County Commissioners County Manager's Office 6/2/20086:07 PM fi le://C:IAgenda TestlExportl I 09-June%20 10,%202008108. %20AD VER Tl SED%20PU BLI C... 6/4/2008 AGEN.li.g\!rl'il'EldlfMilo. 8A June 10, 2008 Page 8 of 38 Co~'Y County -. '-~ STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES HEARING DATE: MARCH 20, 2008 SUBJECT: PETITION NO: PUDA-2007-AR-II734, ARTESA POINTE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) COMPANION ITEMS: PUDZ-2006-AR-l0875 AND CPSS-06-01 APPLICANT: KRG 951 AND 41, LLC 30 S. Meridian Street, Suite 1100 Indianapolis, IN 46204 AGENTS: Mr. Wayne Arnold, AICP Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire, Goodlette, Coleman, and Johnson, P.A. 4001 Tamiami Trail, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 REOUESTED ACTION: The petitioner is requesting an amendment to the Altesa Pointe Planned Unit Development (PUD) to remove a +/- 0.88 acre parcel of land and add it to the proposed Tamiami Crossing Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) abutting its northern boundary. (The Tamiami Crossing CPUD application is companion item PUDZ-2006-AR-J 0875; and the companion Small Scale Comprehensive Planning Ammendment is CPSS-06-0L) GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The :i82-acre subject property is located approximately 1/4 of a mile south of the intersection of ( Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and the Tan1iami Trail (US 41), in Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East of Collier County, Florida (see the location map on following page). Artesa Polnte PUDA-2007-AR-11734 March 20. 2008 CCPC Page 1 of 5 -<coco COD"" D_ ON 0 ZOO) E~ m mmOl ~C~ m" -0"" C m Ol -< ~~ ~" " " " " " / " / ,,~ 'I II I .1 a.. <C :2: (!) z z o N i I ~I l i I i I i IhtWU ~ s ? u ... ., ... ~ - '" <( , t- O 0 '" , <( '" ::> .. " Z 0 , ~ >= W .. a.. <C 2: z 0 - I- 0 <C () 0 ...J " _m~ /"E- . ,I · i ~ i ! . ,,'" wQ ~!< 00 ~g a ! l 'I;! I ! " . -..,-.-......,....".....-.-.."""'" II> 1- II IiI 9 _ j 1 <(0::>0::> .~~ " 0 -0 .;,~ E~ " ""0> :::::c:co ro"D- ,,'" c " 0> <( i ..... ''7"~~ ~'."-,,, ?,--, . ':<J. . . . . . ,.......... ' ...-.,~., I '~r8. .. ,... "'.. Ii'.ii?~.{f,..t.'...,.....~...,.....''''' '.10 q. ..... t' ,','. I . ,'. , ....... ,(.;:p.~"'" '" ',',. , , . ....... '~....,','.....,',...,.'...'...'..,.,\: /"/ ~'.', .....,'..... ...."'.'..6'i " .. .... ..., y/ .. .... . . . . ',', . '~i ' .... , . ',' I"" . .....5 I .I . ...... , . ',',' I . .@' i ',',',',', ',',',',0'.:, " . . '. I . 'e:: ' . ., .. 'f"' .'......,.',',1:::: . ',', , ',ijl .,'.' '~~ . . ,f . . i ',' ! , , " " !i Ii II i: ,. I: Ii w ',~ ~ " <.> " on q ~g !i :5~ p ~ffi '1: ~~ , ",=> --. 1. ~--ro W -J!-..J '9 " . '"-' I! "'is, i: ~.,.,+~ m Ii '00 II . Ii W II ~ I: " " ,. i! " I' " ! I' " ~ ~ < " on ,,~ Zw :5~ ,.. "", ~~ I' 'o~ >> ......m ,: "-,,;, .f; ,y' , , ,( ,r ' ,t. ' . 'r'.'.. . .. :r:::::: :~ ~. . . . ~' . . . I',',',', :..'.',. ') :~ -: -:. >) 00 I.... wZo J.. I . ') (5< 5 1\;':-:-. ~~~ '~-::::::: tllw~ I.... 0....2 ,. I , I--~{s I.,.. ~2:i r<';':-: ~ ~" ~'.'.'.'. ~ w '1 {.." 1-1- "" 5~g . , <~~ [I] i~8 o~C~ ~.. ". " " " --------~ ...~ . . . , . , , , , , , I I""":':'.'~ ';.>:-.'-:';-:~ . . , , " ...., . , . " ..,., . , , ',','. . , . ','. (..,' ,'j.U.....;....:,., ~ w " ~ in ; ;-- ----- -- o =- r- c t ~ ~ ~ "' [l '" ~ " '" ;;j ~ '" "' z < ~ n '" "' ~ on < ~ ~ < => ~ n "' " z " o ~i. 1 i=!!!1 \ :::~H l u~ , ~i' l e "2h! 11 :gi6 ~ ~ o~ \ pi '" I' ~ ~!h ! ~!i' ; ~~ 06 . J @i~; ~ Agenda Item No. 8A June 10, 2008 Page 11 of 38 PURPOSEIDESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The purpose of this petition is to amend the A11esa Pointe PUD, approved on September 23, 2003, to remove 0.88 acres from its extreme northwestern corner, as depicted on the Conceptual Master Plan on the preceding page. This 0.88 acres, pelmitted for commercial uses on the approved Master Plan, is to be added to the proposed Tamiami Crossing CPUD to provide additional parking capacity. As the subject amendment would only require minor revisions to the approved Artesa Pointe PUD document and Master Plan to reflect the deletion of this acreage from the PUD's n0l1hwestern boundary, no other changes to dther document are proposed. All changes to the PUD document are shown in strike-through and underline format in the proposed ordinance attached to this 1'ep011. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Sout~: West: Vacant land (proposed for the Tamiami Crossing CPUD), zoned C-4 (General Commercial) Vacant land (proposed for the Tamiami Crossing CPUD), zoned A; US 41 then vacant land, zoned A (Rural Agricultural) Holiday Manor mobile home park, zoned MH (Mobile Home) Collier Boulevard; then golf course, zoned Eagle Creek PUD North: East; AERIAL VIEW Artesa Pointe PUDA-2007-AR-1 1734 March 20. 2008 CCPC Page 2 of 5 Agenda Item No. 8A June 10. 2008 Page 12 of 38 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Artesa Pointe PUD presently comprises all of the Henderson Creek Mixed Use Subdistrict on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The primary intent of this subdistrict is to provide for a mixture of regional commercial uses and residential development to serve the South Naples, Royal Fakapalm and Marco Island areas. The subject 0.88 acres is within a commercial component of the Artesa Pointe PUD, and its annexation into the proposed Tamiami Crossing CPUD would be compatible with respect to its current land use. However, as the Henderson Creek Subdistrict is limited to a maximum of 325,000 square feet of commercial uses, if the 0.88 acres were removed from the PUD, it would stilI remain within the Henderson Creek Subdistrict and, therefore, no commercial development would be eligible on it. Conclusion: The proposed PUD amendment has no impact on consistency as it relates to the GMP, as all uses associated with the subject parcel will remain consistent with the aforementioned designation. The subject PUD amendment may, therefore, be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. ANALYSIS: Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and the LDC criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in Sections 10.02.13.B.5. at1d 10.03.05.H, which establish factual bases to support a recommendation. The Collier County Plmming 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 SUPPOlt their action on the rezoning request. These evaluations are completed as separate documents, and have been attaehed to the staff report as Exhibits A and B. In addition to these documents, staff offers the following analysis: Environmental Review: Environmental Services staff has reviewed this petition and detelmined that there are no environmental issues associated with it. Transportation Planning Review: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed this project, and there are no outstanding transportation issues. Utilities Review: This project is located within the Collier County Water and Sewer District. The proposed amendment does not impact the utilities provision, which is the same as for the cxisting PUD. Emergency Management Review: The Artesa Pointe PUD is located in a Category I HUD'icmle Surge Zone which requires evacuation during some hunicane cvents. Becausc this is a commercial PUDA, the Emergency Management Department has no issues with the approval of this petition. Zoning Review: As noted in the preceding GMP Consistency review, the subject parcel is located in the Hcnderson Creek Mixed Use Subdistrict, which permits a maximunl commercial gross Door "~ area of 325,000 square feet. As the boundm'ies of the Artesa Pointe PUD are coterminous with this subdistrict, and the PUD has already been approved for 325,000 square feet of commercial uses, Artesa Pointe PUDA-2007.AR-11734 March 20, 2008 cepe Page 3 of 5 Agenda Item No. 8A June 10, 2008 Page 13 of 38 the subject 0.88 acres would not be eligible for any of the commercial development proposed with the companion Tamiami Crossing CPUD. Instead, this acreage would only be petmitted to be used for parking, as shown on the Tamiami Crossing Master Plan by Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A., dated July 2006, as reviscd through October 2007, submitted with companion PUDZ-AR- 2006-10875, and included as Exhibit C of this report. As the subject parcel is adjacent to areas proposed for parking and preservation, no compatibility issues are anticipated. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): (Synopsis provided by Linda Bedtelyon, Community Planning Coordinator) The applicant duly noticed and held the NIM for Artesa Pointe (PUDA-2007-AR-11734), Tamiami Crossing (PUDZ-2006-AR-10875), and the associated Comprehensive Planning Amendment (CPSS-06-1) as companion items on September 26, 2007, at Manatee Elementary School. Approximately 70 people attended, some of whom identified themselves as residents of Eagle Creek. Also present were County staff, County Conunissioner Donna Fiala, Planning Commissioner Bob Murray, the applicant and his agents. Most of the questions posed by attendees focused on traffic impacts and the County Transportation Divisions' plans for area road improvements. The applicant told the audience that a signal on US- 41 between the site and one quarter mile from tbe Habitat for Humanity project would be sought, with an alternate location futther cast, subject to approval of the Florida Depar1ment of Transportation (FDOT). The applicant's tcam stated that there were plans for access points on CR 951 and US 41, and two interconnection points with Artesa Pointe PUD. Attendees were interested in finding out if there was a big box retailer like Super-Target proposed. Eric Strickland of Kite Development responded that a box retail or grocery store was proposed, and that his firm is indeed a Target developer. I-Ie also stated that the project's projected opening was for late 2008. The agent added that the proposed zoning was primarily for C-4 (General Commercial) uses, and that a garden center was also a potential end-user. A commitment was made by members of the applicant's team that there would be no tattoo parlor. The Developer's agent, Richard Yovanovich, stated that the applicant's team was willing to speak with any Homeowners' Associations that were interested in meeting with them. He also told the group that these items would not be on the summary agenda if there were any objections from the neighbors (since attendees felt that the Wal-Mart in Artesa Pointc had been approved without adequate notification ofthe public hearing date). Mr. Yovanovich then advised the audience to file any objections to 111e proposals with the County's Planning staff. The NIM officially ended at approximately 6:30 p.m. TranspOltation PI aIming Director Nick Casalanguida said he and the applicant's team would remain after the meeting to discllss developer contribution agreements and improvements of the Collier Boulevard/US-4l intersection. RECOMMEND A nON: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PUDA-2007-AR-11734 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approvaL Artesa Pointe PUDA.2007-AR-11734 March 20, 200B CCPC Page 4 of 5 Agenda Item No. 8A June 10, 2008 Page 14 of 38 PREPARED BY: J-~ J-~ / 0 (; ATB JO -DAVID SS, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REVIEWED BY: ~,'Jn.~-~ MARl M. STUD NT-STIRLINd ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY 2-Z8-08 DATE 1J?-'l[ro RA YM D , BELLOWS, MANAGER I ATE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ~ Lfi;. ~,r~ ~/0(9/c7J> -'" USAN M. ISTENES, AICP, DIRECTOR DATE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVED BY: ~/~, . H K. SCHMI , ADMINISTRATOR UNITY DEVELOPMENT & IRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION Tentatively scheduled for the May 27, 2008 Board of County Commissioners Meeting. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN DATE Exhibits; A. Rezone Findings B. PUD Findings C. Tamiami Crossing CPUD Master Plan r- Artesa Points PUDA-2007 -AR-11734 March 20, 2008 CCPC Page 5 of 5 EXHIBIT A Agenda Item No. 8A June 10. 2008 Page 15 of 38 REZONE FINDINGS PETITION PUDA-2006-AR-1l734 Artcsa Pointe PUD Chapter 10.03.05.G of the Collier County Land Development Code requires that the report and recommendations of the Planning Commission to the Board of County Commissioners shall show that the Planning Commission has studied and considered the proposed change in relation to the following, where applicable: 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, & policies of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan. Findings: Page three of the staff report explains how this petition is consistent with the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and the Growth Management Plan (GMP). As stated, the subject property is designated Henderson Creek Mixed Use Subdistrict, and the primary intent of the subdistrict is to provide for a mixture of regional commercial uses and residential development to serve the South Naples, Royal Fakapalm and Marco lsland areas. As the Henderson Creek Subdistrict is limited to a maximum of 325,000 square feet of commercial, which is already built, the 0.88 aercs would not be eligible for development on it. No development is proposed for thc site; therefore, the project is consistent with the GMP. 2. The existing land use pattcrn; Findin~s: The subject site is bordered by the C-4 zoning district to the north and west and by the Artesa Pointe pun, which permits commercial uses consistent with the C-l through c-s zoning districts, to the east and south. None of the abutting parcels have been cleared. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts; Findinl.(s: Becausc thc 0.88 acres of the proposed PUD amendment is part of an existing mixed-use PUD, it would not create un isolated district. As noted above, the subject site is alrcady snrrounded by propcrty with similar land uses. For these reasons, the amendmcnt request would not create an isolated district rclative to the adjacent ones. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the proper!}' proposed for change. Findings: The existing boundaries of the subject 0.88 acres are not irregularly drawn; however, the PUD into which it is proposed for inclusion is indeed irregular in relation to the majority of parcels in the County, which are typically rectangular. The subject property was created by the developcr's assemblage of available parccls in the area, which resulted in a rather unusual shape for the proposed PUD. The locution map on page two of the stafT report highlights the boundary of the subject parceL Page I 01'3 EXHIBIT A Agenda Item No. 8A June 10. 2008 Page 16 of 38 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. Findings: The proposed PUDA is not obligatory at this location. However, the request is reasonable because the propeliy would remain part of the Henderson Creek Mixed Use Subdistrict and, therefore, unavailable for any further commercial development other than parking. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood; Findings: The removal of 0.88 acres from Artesa Pointe will not adversely affect the living conditions in the neighborhood. Furthermore, the proposed use for the property would be similar to that already approved for the Artesa Pointe PUD. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or exccssively increase traffic congestion or crcate types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety, Findings; The exclusion of 0.88 acres from the Artesa Pointe will have any impact on traffic. 8. Whethel' the proposed change will create a drainage problem; Findings: The proposed change should not create drainage or surface water problems, as the existing water management system is designed to prevent drainage problems on the site. Additionally, the LDC and GMP have regulations in place to ensure review for adequate drainage on the proposed Tamiami Crossing CPUD. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas; Findings; The proposed change will not have an adverse impact on adjacent properties in terms of light and air. 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely atTeet pl'operty values in the adjacent area; Findings: This is a subjecti ve determination based upon anticipated results which may be internal or external to the subject property. Propelty valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning; however zoning by itself mayor may not affect values, since value determination is driven by the market. There is no guarantee that the project will be marketed in a manner comparable to the surrounding developments. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations; ~. Page 2 on EXHIBIT A Agenda Item No. 8A June 10, 2008 Page 17 of 38 Findings: The adjacent propetiies allow similar uses. Therefore, the proposal would not be a deterrent to the improvement of adjacent properties. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare; Findings: As stated, the proposed amendment complie, with the Henderson Creek Mixcd Use Subdistrict designation of the GMP. Furthermore, land use applications are subject to a public hearing process to insure that they do not constitute a grant of special privileges 0\' are inconsistent with other prope1iies in the vicinity in which they are situated. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning; Findings: There are no substantial reasons why the propcrty could not be used in accordance with existing zoning. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County; Findings: The proposed amendment conforms to the goals and objectives of the GMP and is compatible with thc surronnding property. 15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. Findings: Thcrc arc many sitcs that are already zoned to accommodate the proposed development; however this is 110t the determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness of a rezoning deci,ion. The proposed PUOA was reviewed and deemed compliant with the GMP and the LOC, as was the Tamiami Crossing CPUO proposed in conjunction with this petition. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and thc degree of site alteration, which would be required to makc the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. Findings: Any development would require some site alteration and the subject site will have to cleared to execute the proposed parking lot 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of seJ"Vice adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended. Findings; TIle proposed pun petition will have no impact on public facilities 01' services. Page 3 of3 EXHIBIT B Agenda Item No. 8A June 10. 2008 Page 18 of 38 FINDINGS FOR PUD PETITION PUDA-2006-AR-1l734 Artesa Pointe PUD Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County Land Development Code requires the Planning Commission to make a finding as to the PUD Mastel' Plans' compliance with the following criteria: 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. 2. Findings: The project is located within the Henderson Creek Mixed Use Subdistrict on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The primary intent of this subdistrict is to provide for a mixture of regional commercial uses and residential development to serve the South Naples, Royal Fakapalm and Marco Island areas. The PUDA will not affect surrounding areas, traffic and access, rlrainage, sewer, water or other utilities. However, it should be noted that the development of the companion Tamiami Crossing CPUD will have to be in accordance with all applicable sections of the Land Development Code (LDC) and Orowth Management Plan (OMP) at the time of issuance of any development order. 3. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those PI'oposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public cxpensc. Findings: Evidence of unified control was provided with the application. All alTangements for the continuing operation and maintenance of the Artesa Pointe pun were made at the time of the original rezone and will not be affected by this PUDA. 4. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP), Findings: The project as proposed is consistent with the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) which designates the subject propeliy as Henderson Creek Mixed Use Subdistrict. The subject petition has been found consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the OMP, as explained on page three of the staff report. 5. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, t-estrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. ~ Findings: Section 4.07.02 of the LDC has specific development requirements for POO districts to insure that they are compatible with established or planned uses of the surrounding neighborhoods. As noted in the staff repoti, the subject parcel is located in the Henderson Creek Mixed Use Subdistrict, which permits a maximum commercial gross Page I 0[2 EXHIBIT B Agenda Item No. 8A June 10.2008 Page 19 of 38 floor area of 325,000 square feet. As the boundaries of the Artesa Pointe PUD are cotem1inous with this subdistrict, and thc PUD has already been approved for 325,000 square feet of commcrcial uses, the subject o.gg acres would not be eligible for any further commercial development. Instead, this acreage would only be limited to parking arca, which would be compatible with the sUITounding uses. 6. The adequacy of usable opcn space areas iu existence and as proposed to serve the development. Findings; The minimum 30 percent open space requirement of the LDC, described in section 2.14 ohhe PUD document, would still be met if this amendment were approved. 7. The timing or sequence of development for thc pur'pose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. Findings: No capacity issues would be created by the approval of this petition. 8, The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. Findings: As previously stated, no [Uliher expansion is pelmitted on thc Artcsa Pointe PUD. 9. Conformity with PUD rcgulations, 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 rcgulations. Findings; Staff has reviewcd this petition and found it to be consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and all the elements of the OMP. Approval of the subject PUDA will not have any impact 011 the existing Artesa Pointe PUD. Page 2 01'2 i!1 ~i I ~;.m lll"m; ~<~- I ~~~ J e I I ~ I - =- _. !.J '=" <:> _. ~ .... ~ rl 1l ~ 8 , Agenda Item N Ju 0.8A ne 10, 2008 Page 20 of 38 I la; I; I:; ~ i = i ~ u ~ 131 ~ i!nll;: ~ ~ ~ II;!~ m .~~.~ ~H !l~ ~i: II ~i ~ ~6! ~l ~. a I~a!; "I ' ... .!: ~I ~5 ~ ~ ; i&i E la i; ~ \l ~ m "-- ~ ,I'~ -- :J..d -- v\.- --- ~~ --- " __ ~;r ~I ~~ i -- t l ----. - Q "" c:J--. II Ii i ! .' .., ". " Agenda Item No. 8A June 10, 2008 Page 21 of 38 ORDINANCE NO. 08- AN ORDINANCE OF THE 80ARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 03-46, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE ARTESA POINTE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD), BY AMENDING THE STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE AND SECTION 1.2, ENTITLED "LEGAL DESCIUPTION IN ORDER TO REMOVE A 0.88 +1- PARCEL OF LAND FROM THIS PUD, AND REPLACING EXHIBIT "A," THE PUD MASTER PLAN, WITH A NEW EXHIBIT "A," PUD MASTER PLAN; AND ]'ROVIDlNG AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, on September 23, 2003, the Board of County Commissioners approved Ordinance Ntunber 03-46, which established the Artosa Point Planned Unit Development Zoning District; and WHEREAS, on March 23, 2004, the noard of County Conunissioners approved Ordinance Number 04-17 amending Ordinance Number 03-46 in order to conecl ~crivener's errors; and WHEREAS, Wayne Arnold, AICP, of Q, Grady Minor and Associates, P.A., and Richard D. Yovanovieh, Esq., of Goodlette, Coleman and Johnson, P.A., representing KRG 951 & 41, LLC, petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to amend Ordinanc~ Numher 03-46, as amended, for the Artesa Point Planned Unit Development. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSJONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: AMENDMENTS TO STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE The introductory paragraph of the Statement of Compliance of Ordinance Number 03-46, as mnended, (Artesa Pointe Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended to read as f{)lIows: The purpose of this Section is to express the intent of Gateway Shoppes. LLC, hereinafter I'efen.ed to as lhe Development, to create a Planned Unit Development (PUD) on &2- .81.+/- acres of land located in Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. The namc of this Planned Unit Development shall be Artesa Poiutc. The development of Artesa Pointc will be in compliance with the planning goals and ohjectives of Collier County as St.:t forth ill the Growth Management Plan. The development will be consistent with the grO\>Jth policies and land development regulations adopted pursuant to the Growth Management Plan, Future Land Use Element und other applicable regulations for the following reasons: SECTION TWO: AMENDMENTS TO LEGAL DESCRlPTION OF THE PROJECT Section 1.2 entitled "Legal Description" of Ordinance Number 03-46, as amended, (Arlcsa Pointe Planned Unit Development), is hereby amended to rcad as follows: Page] of3 Words underlined are additions; words sffilGk-til-ffil:lgfl are deletions. " Agenda Item No. 8A June 10, 2008 Page 22 of 38 1.2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION .\ ~lHeel eflaRtHeeal.68. iF! geiil:i.e~',I\'ash~ 51 Sautlr,-&aBge 26 Bast, CoHief GttI:l~9ficJn..beiflgl 8reJ3aF1iieulllfly-ileaeR~ Gmumenee-flt ihe liB:!l( flliMler e.BtMF--af-Secti01l-~~\(El5hi.f3 S~ SatHh;-Ratlge 26 BEl5li Gallier CS1tBt)" fle1idat--lfl6flse-Rm-OO\;lI:h-Q~~eng tl:le east liRe sf Lite semh~eHJf..5ftid-8eal:ie8 3, feJ'-iHiisHmee efl,36~.;2 feet te apeffit-e~utheAy fi.gHHH-way-line-ef-tJ.S. il (8tate Rea8-9G) (:!G9 fEet Rghl-6f-wn~lheflee"'-fluHlOrtb ~s!;-alall:g saSe s6'lilhefl) fight ~ 1i:B~, fer a 8i~mtee-&?9".32 feel te II !laml an IRB '('e5~e-eHHOO--.fool-wiEie-6faffiage--e656ffi6Bt-it-~eia! ReeeJ'Gs-Be~ges 127 ffll:lgh 1~9, sf the-Jltihlj~rd~er-Geti~ AAf'i8ftrtfte-srl.me-beill~affi.t.-a~~8Be~'l!~~es~ sai~~e;-f&F-O--(ijgtat'tef!-ef a9J.le feef te IRe hegmning-ef-a.-t6agealia1 eirsl:l.lllf 1ffif'r"e--OOflellYe-fl&lth.. esterl)'; thanes mil sall'.W"e9l:eRy-&le~esler~y-lit\e-aad-the-afe ~~e--fi.:ljt!;-}uwing--.a--FadiU5-{)f2,;!:'~.9] feet; t1ll'e~.) II. eSFllfal-angIe--ef Q904J'1R"; swhleUBea e:, a ehar-d-&~eet at a beMttlg-ekadtJl ~3ogg'gB" '''e9~ tlf&.!engtl. sf 175.18 fe~e eRB afsaifl-.-mlFYe;-the-sfllfte-beieg-e-fleiIiHlIt-lhe-ooFtMine-Qf the sel:l.lli half sf llis sSl:Ith halCer saie SeGlia~~6fth-89~W!-wes~ said-TleFUHine-fur~of2,833.12 feat te~t-en the easlerl) fighHf-way-lffie-ef fflIe e.f ClI:fIri RasEl (Sln~e Read <:51) (Fighl-t}f .:ay \ aries); !heRee ruIl Il6Jth tn"22'QJ" ens~ aloog-saie ea$!tll"{Y liAe,feF--a--Elisroaee-ef 1,2S1.8] fSel:j tl-.eRse, Ie..T.ing saie Fi~f-W6Y li.Jl6;fUtHfte.-felkwr<iog-f&tif (1) OOIifSes alGa;; ilia lilies aha! J;lrB~SFtj aeseFibe6--ffi..Gffieial 1'.BBEIT.as Bee~t Pag99 IJ77 ana 137& fleFlh ~goQg'gg~ast-f0f-ft--6i9tB:flee sf 100:09 feet; 1:l:1BR8e Fijll nelth Q.2028'QZ" east f8f-&-6iGtaR~~Aft ~~.. e.Mi fer II .:HekIRee Bf IGJSI feel; tR~1Hl9U1h 8~o55'j;" e:lSf-4eJ'wG-li~ e~&-feet-te+jl9H14l~istMl8B sf 1UQ.'\O filet sel1tAer.Jy--ef-MJ.-pMilllel-lNitn4s af<lrel!l6l1lielle&--ooulherly B~t ef'''aylffie eflJ.S. 1] (Slate--Re00--9~G-foo!-R-gRt-ffi. all; (hanes run 98l:ltI-. 510~9'J6" e8.!rt-€e~89 sf l,H1.1~ feet; thf:!lIIHl IUtHlitrth )5")$"11" 6/ist-fel'--lt--6P.itMee-ef 1GG,99 fee~aillt eR!he !Uitl-ooutllerlj' right efw~ line sf U.S. 1] i I:he.l,e~ ftllt-5tftllfl 51"29'16" ~traleng-sI!W-Ht)e, faf a distW'l8ll e: 6-??-:oo feet----le;---te-poin--t----ef.begHllw.g, eel:tail:-ling ~l.gg() aeres;-ffl6r-e-ef-i.eslr. A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN SECTION 3 TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH RANGE 25 EAST COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA. BE!NG MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 3 TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH. RANGE 26 EAST COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA- THENCE RUN SOUTH OOe41'50' WEST 6!..QNG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 3 FOR A DISTANCE OF 136U2 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-Of-WAY LINE OF U.S. 41 (STATE ROAD 901 (200 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY'. THENCE RUN NORTK 54.20"6" WEST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-Of.WAY LINE fOR A DISlANCE OF 966.32 FEET 19 A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE: OF A nXl FOOT WJDE DRA.INAGE EASEMENT AS RECORDED tN...QEEl.QJAL...Bf;:c.QRQ.:i.J;lQQILI~._AI._t:~~E!i.121_J...t!E/.OUGH i29 OF lHE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA' THE SAME BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING. THENCE RUN SOUTH 20"16'12" WEST ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 203.10 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CIRCULAR CUR~ CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY. THENCE RUN SOUTHWESTERl. Y ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE AND THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO "[HI::: HiGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 2 199.93 FEET. THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09'43'4B'" SUBTENDED BY A CHORD OF 47491 FFFT AT A BEARING OF SmITH 25.01\'08" WEST FOR AN ARC LENGTH OF 475.48 FEET TO THE ENP. OF SNP. CURVE' THE SAME BEING A POINT DN THE NDRTtU,.INI;_Of.TIjE;.~Q.I1Iti HALF OF THE SOUTH HAl F OF SAID S"'CTtON 3' THENCE RUN NOR.TH Bge26'59" WEST tlLONG SAID NORTH LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 2833.22 FEET TO b POINT ON THE EASTERLY R1GHT-OF.WAY LINE OF ISLE OF CAPRI ROAD {STATE ROAD 951) IRIGHT-OF- WAY VARIE:Sl' THENCE RUN NORTH 02~28'03n EAST AlONG SAID EASTERLY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 1284.83 FEET. THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF.WAY LINE RUN THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES ALONG THE LINES Of THe PROPERTY DESCB!BED~ OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 2529 AT PAGES 1377 AND 1378 NOR7H 90'00'00" EAST FOR A OISTANCE OF 10009 FEET' THENCE RUN NORTH 02"28'03" E8~T FOR A DISTANCE OF 100.09 FEET TO THE:: NORTHERLY MOST WESTERl Y CORNER OF TRACT HC' OF TRAIL RIDGE AS DESCRIBED IN PLAT BOOK 44 AT PAGES 71 THRU n OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS O~ COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA' TH~J~QEBUN SOUTH as-55'5t" EAST. ALONG THE NORTH UNE OF SAJD TRACT "C" FOR A DISTANCE OF 196.99 FEET' THENCE RI,/N NORTH OO.04'03~ EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 20::1.05 FEET- THENCE RUN SOUTH 89.55'57" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 8B3.32. FEET TO A POINT THAT IS A DISTANCE OF 400.00 FEET SOUTHERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE AFORI;IylENT10NED SOvrHEl1tY RIGHT-OF-WAY IINF OF U S_ 4' (STATE ROAD 901/200 FOOT RIGHT-OF~WAYl" THENCE RUN SOutH -54"20'16" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 1 654.49 FEET. THENCE R!-i,1i1iQ.BII:1 3!ia~IO'44. EAST FOR A DJq:I-~OF 400.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SAID SDL'THERl Y RIGHT-Of-WAY LINE OF.U S 4i' THENCE RUN SOllTH 54.20'16" EAST ALONG SI\ID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-Of-WAY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 600.0~U::J:;ET TO THE POINT Or BEGINNING CONTAINING 8i,010 ACRES MORE OR LESS - Page 2 of3 Words underlined arc additions; words stmel: threugh are deletions. ~~---- , I"" Agenda Item No. SA June 10.2008 Page 23 of 38 SECTION THREE: AMENDMENTS TO MASTER PLAN Exhibit A, the PUD Master Plan, of Ordinance Number 03-46, as amended, (Artesa Pointe Plmmed Unit Development) is hereby replaced with a new Exhibit C<A," PUD Master Plan. SECTION FOliE,: EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DlIL Y ADOPTED hy super-majority vote of ule Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, florida, this "____ dHY of ,2008. AITEST: DWIGHT E. IJROCK, CLERK BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: , Deputy Clerk By:_.__.. TOM HENNING, CHAIRMAN Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: r!r ~"l<'~Marjorie M. Student~Stirling Assistant County Attomey Page 3 ofJ Words underlined are additions; words struel: tllf81:lE;R are deletions. '."- ... "- ~ ~ ~ ~ n. <1:0000 "",0(") O~ ~ 0 -" ON E~ '" '"'"", =:::Cro ",::l0- ,,-' c '" '" <1: 5~ w- oe; ~It "C> ~m -""",,^Q ......,............._1>'10I"......""" ,., ..-. . I. . !. li;lq w "- '" U if> o~ Zw <Om ~'" w ~~ ~ o=> ;/ ....lD ;/ ""~ ,;,;...,~ /. , :::: : :::~~~ ,f :<<<.-:'>>~ ~ r.'r.,~ " ,.......'...'..~ '.~__ ,.. ., ...... ....0J A":':' :-:';':'~0'~~"~' -'-'_ r.'.'.') . (~::::::: :1 ,',',',' ( . . . . ;. . . "j ~~o i~:::::::) e;< => i...., I, ) ::io ~ I,." ~ii'~ :!:::::::j lM~~ .,.'...'. l? 55 I"....'. irlD.3; ..,.... ~~~ i>:-:<: ~ "- 0 ~,"'. D<" i~l. I, Ii I: :, ii " I' i: Ii ~ II u l: :g..-, Ii ~~ !: ~~ ~ !i _ ~ " I! Lf}co " ..-, II ,.... "" ~ i!-.-...J ~"" "'l: C> " m 10 --) ~ !: ~ Ii I, ~ W I. -~ ~I! -- -===TT1 ", ~ . w "- < L> if> 0- Zw :s~ w 0"- ;:~ I a=> - --i ri"o ~~~)lgIa_h~~l_l! ~ =--::::, .~ ------- - ------- -'--- z < ~ "- "- w " v. < , '. ... ~ OJ ~ ~ " ~ < i' 10 L> Z o L> "'I ! .. ; . . ~!!I ; ~ " ~ u Sl'!' d ~ ~A ; f.i '<j..! . eG ~ it ~ o. ~ J PI is." "I . ><.1, ; ~i!r 1 (,51:1 1 66 ~ ; ~ f ~ u I \, . I ! @i~; COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW jNWW.COLLlERGOV.NET (i) Agenda Item No. 8A June 10, 2008 2800 NORTH HORSESHOIf!ml\le of 38 NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 403-2400 FAX (239) 643-6968 PETITION NO (AR) PROJECT NAME PROJECT NUMBER DATE PROCESSED ASSIGNED PLANNER PUDA-2007-AR-1I734 REV: I Project: 20020tOOl9 Date: 5/11 /07 DU E: 6/11107 NAME 011 APPLICANT (S) KRG 951 AND 41. LLC ADDRESS)O sounl MERIDIAN STREET. SUITE 1100 CITY INDIANAPOLIS STATE IN ZIP 46204-3565 TELEPHONE # 317-809-6960 CELL # FAX # 317-577-5605 E-MAIL ADDRESS: ESTRICKLANDCiilKlTEREALTY,COM NAME OF AGENT D. WAYNE ARNOLD. AlCP - o. GRAPY MINOR AND ASSOCIATES. PA ADDRESS 3800 VIA DEL RE.Y___CITY BONITA SPRINGS STATEI<'LORIDA ZIP 34134 TELEPHONE # 239-947-Il44 CELL # E-MAIL ADDRESS:WARNOLDCiilGRADYMINOR.COM FAX 11239-947-0375 NAME OF AGENT RICHARD D. YOY ANOYICH. ESQ. - GOODLETTE, COI<~M8.!'!.At-ID JOI-INSON. PA ADDRESS 4001 TAMIAMI TRAil,. SUITE 300 CITY NAPLES STATE FLORIDA ZIP 34103 TELEPHONE # 239-435-3535 CELL # FAX # 239-435-!218 E-MAIL ADDRESS: RYOVANOVTCHCiilGCJLAW.COM BE AWARE THAT COLLIER COUNTY HAS LOBBYIST REGULATIONS. GUIDE YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY AND ENSURE THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE REGULATIONS. Application For Public Hearing FOlIJUD Rezone 1/\8/0'/ Complete the following for all Association(s) affiliated with this petition_ Provide additional sheets if necessary. NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: ___"._n".__ MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP NAME OF MASTER ASSOCIATION: MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP NAME OF CIVIC ASSOCIATION; MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 1- a. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary). Name and Address Percentage of Ownership Not Applicable r- Applic.,tiOll For Public l-lcming For PUD Rezone 1/18/07 Agenda Item No. 8A June 10, 2008 Page 27 of 38 b. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership KRG 951 and 41. LLC 30 South Meridian Street. Suite 1100 Indianapolis, IN 46204-3565 100% c. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership Not ADPlicable d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership Not ADolicable Applic:'ltion For Public Heuring f"or PUO Rezone II] 8/07 Agenda Item No. 8A June 10, 2008 Page 28 of 38 e. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, 5tockholders, beneficiaries, or partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership Not Applicable Date of Contract: f, If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust. Name and Address g. Date subject property acquired IZ1 2007 1ea5ee--g Term of lease _ __yrs.jmos. If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following: - , Date of option: Date option terminates: , or Anticipated closing date h. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. Apl)lication For Public HCllring For PUD Ruone J/18/07 Agenda Item No. 8A June 10. 2008 Dctailed Ic!!al description of thc propcrty covercd bv the apulication: (If space is inadeq uate, 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 -2-/ 51 S / 26E Lot: Block; Subdivision: Plat Book Page #; Property I.D. #: Metes & Bounds Description: A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRiBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE RUN SOUTH 00'41'50" WEST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 3, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,361.72 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY liNE OF U.S. 41 (STATE ROAD 90) (200 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY); THENCE RUN NORTH 54'20'16" WEST, ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 966.32 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF A 100 FOOT WIDE DRAINAGE EASEMENT AS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 76 AT PAGES 127 THROUGH 129, OF THE PUBliC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THE SAME BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE RUN SOUTH 20"16'12" WEST, ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 203.10 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY; THENCE RUN SOUTHW ESTERLY ALONG SAID WESTERLY liNE AND THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2,799.93 FEET; THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09"43'48"; SUBTENDED BY A CHORD OF 474.91 FEET AT A BEARING OF SOUTH 25"08'06" WEST, FOR AN ARC LENGTH OF 47548 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THE SAME BEING A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF SAID SECTION 3; THENCE RUN NORTH 89"26'59" WEST. ALONG SAID NORTH LINE FOR, A DISTANCE OF 2,833.22 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY liNE OF ISLE OF CAPRI ROAD (STATE ROAD 951) (RIGHT-OF- WAY VARIES); THENCE RUN NORTH 02"28'03" EAST, ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,284.83 FEET; THENCE, LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, RUN THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES ALONG THE LINES OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 2529 AT PAGES 1377 AND 1378 NORTH 90'00'00" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 100.09 FEET; THENCE RUN NORTH 02"28'03" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 100.09 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF TRACT "C" OF TRAIL RIDGE, AS DESCRIBED IN PLAT BOOK 44 AT PAGES 71 THRU 77 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE RUN SOUTH 89"55'57" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT "C", FOR A DISTANCE OF 196.99 FEET; THENCE RUN NORTH 00"04'03" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 200.05 FEET; THENCE RUN SOUTH 89'55'57" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 683.32' FEET TO A POINT THAT IS A DISTANCE OF 400.00 FEET SOUTHERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE AFOREMENTIONED SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF- WAY LINE OF U.S. 41 (STATE ROAD 90) (200 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY); THENCE RUN SOUTH 54"20'16" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,654.49 FEET; THENCE RUN NORTH 35'39'44" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 400.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF U.S. 41; THENCE RUN SOUTH 54'20'16" EAST, ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT -OF-W A Y LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 600.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 81.010 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. Sizc of propertv: ft. X _____.___ft. = Total Sq. Ft. Acres 81 :t Addrcss/!!cncrallocatioll of subicct property: Subiect property io located approximately 1/4 mile south of the Intersection of Collier Boulevard and U.S. 41. Application For Puhlic Heating For PUD Rezone] /18/07 Agenda Item No. 8A PUD District (LDC 2.03.06): ~ Residential D Community Facilities June 10, 2008 Page 30 of 38 ~ Commercial D Industrial :lI~~~iI_l1;:~.$l~iy~~ij~~lim:i~~.;~IDI_fIU;l~::'.:~.; ~r_*'~l!fi*~~14i'~~~_~rf~~'_~1~\~1~11 Zoning Land use Vacant (proposed Tamiami Crossino CPUD) Residential Mobile Homes (Holidav Manor Coop) Undeveloped. Residential Mobile Homes, Windino (vpress DRI Eaole Creek PU.RL Residential N A. (-2 & C-4 S MH E A, MH & PUD W PUD 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 ~/ 51S / 26E Lot: Block: Subdivision: Plat Book Page #: Property I.D. #: 00726724301 & 00725841007 Metes & Bounds Description: See attached Deeds r'"' Appliculion For Public Hearing For PUD Rcmnc tlI8/07 This application is requesting a rezone from the PUD zoning district(s) to the CPUD zoning district(s). Present Use of the Property: Waf-Mart retail store, Habitat for Humanitv home sites and partiallv undeveloped proposed commercial. retail. Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property: The lecal description and Master Plan are to be revised to demonstrate the removal of the 0,88+ acre parcel from the PUD. Original PUD Name; Artesa Pointe PUD Ordinance No.: 03-46 lIIIt.. : "iE-_.n.'l>J=,,",,"':-~ . - ~.<;'- ,- . ~" ,".- -... - .. ..... ". .' """,","" _ ._. ',,<1 . . ."'u~,_~!~~:.:~~-~,,' - -'~~:.' -',"~~~"-. Ii" ',.. :,'.' ',..: _.:.'.,,".. ._."", Pursuant to Section 1 0.02.13 of the Collier County Land Development Code, staff's analysis and recommendation to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission's recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners shall be based upon consideration of the applicable criteria noted below. Provide a narrative statement describing the rezone request with specific reference to the criteria noted below. Include any backup materials and documentation in support of the request. PUD Rezone Considerations (LDC Section 10,02.13.B) 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to phYSical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. The proposed PUD amendment proposes to remove a small (0.88:+:: acre) parcel from the Artesa POlnte PUD and incorporate It into the proposed Tamiami Crossings CPUD. The subject property is already zoned PUD and was intended for commercial use. The surrounding area remains suitable for continued commercial development. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the county attorney. The documents provided demonstrate unified control of the subject property and proposed Tamiami Crossing CPUD. 3. Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the growth management plan. The proposed amendment has no impact on consistency with the growth management plan, and the property's use will remain consistent with the Henderson Creek Mixed Use Su bdistrict. Application For Public Hcal'illg For PVD Rezone 1//8/07 Agenda Item No. 8A June 10, 2008 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions _ tn'dUi!Ie restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. No compatibility relationships change from the proposed amendment. The proposed amendment simply moves the property into the adjacent PUD. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The Artesa Pointe PUD will continue to meet Its open space requirements and the proposed Tamlami Crossings CPUD will provide30% of its acreage as usable open space. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. Public facilities will be available at the time of construction as required by the County's concurrency management system. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. The subject 0.88:!: acre parcel is presently within a commercial component of a PUD and its inclusion into the Tamiami Crossings CPUD will provide for unified control within each respective PUD. No expansion beyond what has been proposed is anticipated. 8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications of justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. The subject property will comply with the PUD regulations established for the proposed Tamiami Crossing CPUD which are appropriate and consistent with that for commercial development. Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded from enforCing deed restrictions, however, many communities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact the civic or property owners association in the area for which this use is being requested In order to ascertain whether or not the request is affected by existing deed restrictions. Previous land use oetitions on the subiect orooertv: To your knowledge, has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? 0 Yes 0 No If 50, what was the nature of that hearing? r- ApplicOItioll For Public Hc.'lring For rUD Rezone lIl&/Q7 NOTICE: This application will be considered "open" when the determination of "sufficiency" has been made and the application is assigned a petition processing number. The application will be considered "closed" when the petitioner withdraws the application through written notice or ceases to supply necessary information to continue processina or otherwise active Iv pursue the rezonina for a period of six (6) months. An application deemed "closed" will not receive further processing and an application "closed" through inactivity shall be deemed withdrawn. An application deemed "closed" may be re- opened by submitting a new application, repayment of all application fees and granting of a determination of "sufficiency". Further review of the project will be subject to the then current code. (LDC Section 10.03.05.Q.) Agenda Item No. SA June 10 2008 a~~ "" u, uu II Application For Public I-learillg For pun Rezone 1/181fJ7 ----- THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION PACKETIN THE EXACT ORDER LISTED BELOW W /COVER SHEETS ATTACHED TO EACH SECTION NOTE; INCOMPELTE SUBMITTALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and digital/electronic copy of EIS or exem tion 'ustification Historical Surveyor waiver request Utility Provisions Statement w/sketches Architectural rendering of proposed structures Survey, signed & sealed Traffic Impact Statement (TiS) or waiver Recent Aerial Photograph (with habitat areas defined) min scaled 1 "=400' Electronic copy of all documents in Word format and pians (CD Rom or Diskette) Letter of No Objection from the U.S. Postai Service !LJ.QgJ,ted in RFMU (Rural Frinae Mixed Use) ReceivinCl Land Areas Applicant must contact Mr. Gerry J. Lacavera. State of Florida Division of Forestry @ 239--690-3500 for information regarding "Wildflre Mitigation & Prevention Plan", LDe Sectl 2.03.08.A.2.a.(b)l.c. 1 Additional set If located in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelo ment Area Co ies of detailed descri tlon of wh amendment is necessar Completed Application with list of Permitted Uses; Development Standards Table; List of proposed deviations from the LDC (if any); List of Develo er Commitments (download from website for current form Pre-a Ilcation meetln notes PUD Conce tual Master Plan 24" x 36" and One 8]1," x 11" co Revised PUD Conce tual Master plan 24" x 36"and One 8 W x 11" co Original PUD document/ordinance and Master Plan 24" x 36" - ONLY IF AMENDING THE PUD Revised PUD a Iication with chan es crossed thru & underlined Revised PUD application w/amended Title page w/ord #'s, lDC 10.02.13.A.2 Deeds/Legal's & Survey (If boundary of orlginai PUD is amended) List identifying Owner & all parties of corporation Owner/Affidavit signed & notarized Covenant of Unified Control Completed Addressing checklist ~",,"'W-'""""'>ii>' ~'.mF'!"P."rf' ~,,,.-...,=.- ,~. =~"'" -~=.''''''''~',,"' .., ". '<'''''''~:!D1 ~~t-!?'.!1t~-'J.i-i-m!:!~~~~~~~~=J;oC~_ _,;..:-:'.~"":-~~ ~: ~~'~"'~!;?;.:E~ _,_ :-,.~3=31i r- __6L01_~J.__ Date Application For Public Hearing For pun Rezone 1/18/07 #OF COPIES REQUIRED NOT REQUIRED 24 X 24 X 24 X 24 X 24 X 24 X 24 X 24 X 2 X 2 X 2 X 2 X 2 X 4 X 4 4 4 4 7 5 1 X X X X X X X X ......1.. '. Agenda Item No. SA June 10. 209S Page 35 of 3S ORDINANCE NO. OR-_ AN ORDINANCE Of THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCe: NUMBER 03-46, WHICH ESTABLISHED TIlE ARTESA POINTS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD), BY AMENDING THE STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCe: AND SECTION 1.2, ENTITLED "LEGAL DESCRIPTION IN ORDER TO REMOVE A 0.88 +/- PARCEL OF LAND FROM THIS PUD, AND REPLACING EXHIBIT "A," THe: PUD MASTER PLAN, WITH A NEW EXHIBIT "A," PUD MASTER PLAN; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, on September 23, 2003, the Board of Co.mty Commissioner. approved OrdillOllCC NlJIllber 03-46, which c,tablished the Artcsa Point Pl,nnod Unit Development Zoning District; alld WHeREAS, on March 23, 2004~ the Board of COUllty Conuulssionel's approved Ordinance. Number 04~17 Amending Ordinance N\lmber 03-46 in ordcr to con'ect ~crjvener'8 errol's; and WHEREAS~ Wayne Amoldj AICP, of Q, Grady Minor and Associates, P.A.. and Riohard D, Yovnnovich, Esq., of Goodletle, Coleman and John",", P.A., representillg KRG 951 & 41, LLC. petitioned the Board Qf County .CommissiollCl'8 to amend Orditumce Number 03a46, !l8 D.mended, for the Artesa Point Planned Unit D~vc1opmcnt. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINF.D IW TIm BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: AMENDMENTS TO STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE "Ine introductory paragraph of the Statement of Compliance of Ordinance Numb1M' 0'3-46, as amended, (Artesn Pointe Pimmed Unit Developmel\t) is hereby wnended to 1'end as follows: The purpose of this Scclion is to express the intent of Gateway Shoppas, LLC. hereinafter refenw to as the Development, to create a Pllllmed Unit Developm~nt (PUD) onS;! ftl+l- acres of land located ill Section 3, Township 51 SDnth, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. The name oUhi. Planlled Unit Development shall be Art.eaa Poh\te. Tho development of Artesa Painte will be in complianoe with the planning goals and objectives of Colliel' County as set forth in the Growth Management Plan. The development will be consistent with the growth policies nnd lW\d development regulations adopted pursuant to the Growth Management Plan, Future Land Use Element and other appllcablrJ regulations for the following reasorul: SECTION TWO: AMENDMENTS TO LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT Section 1,2 entitled "Legal De.scription" of Ordinllnce Number 03-46, !\9 ronended, (Artesa Pointe Plamled Uolt Development), is hereby llmended to read as follows: Pago I 00 Words wlderlined are ndditions; words 5'truok-4firougH are delotions, " \ ~ 1.2 LEGAL DESCRlI'1'ION '~1'IIiB81~(JllEld-l9GQl~a~~1I~lller ~lll\tyrPlO:l'icliHtetng.tMra JllIl'lieullWl)',tfl&Wi~Yowm CobU1lMeCHlt--lh~Ulll'teF-9am.er-ei=-See4ktn 3, Tal{.'Il&Wp-4t-86'dlll,Rmlge-~ Gemf:tl'-G&l:IB~fidaj-lflena&--Rll1-6el:l.lh 0001] "~el\g--th~e-&t-th8 oomhOO&HJtlflAw-eHii6 SBe~el1 ], fe14l4~~61,:';.l feet t91\ paint EIII. ilie .!i911fil.efly rigllk>f.way-li'....f II.S. ~l (&"''''-ll-PO) (;!OQ fe" rigll~hoa"""lH,"nh S~~lOO~I~gbHf\"Ilj' liD~, fotadisl~"J12 feat taa j;)Elint en the '1'6!l~HHOO-feet-wkle-4MiRa~.men\+fee6rdet1-m-omela\ ~,lt-'IHl-I'og.. 127 UI"'ogfl1~&-P.'!iHltooro~0l'-G01lllll'J PloridnrtnHa.mo-be",g.il1~9mt-&J:.b~lon.run-Sau~~esl:,.-aI00B IlQtEJ...w<<Kofl)'-liner&F-&-di&tanee-9f 300.l(} reel te-the-hogitlni~M&eMia~M ~nWlt-tun'tl~\.l5SWr~)'; ther,oe tuft Ge\ltlv::e9te~eng-said-weslel'lt"li~I'9 .14oJcHla.....o-lltHiill',.l1"'illjtil-f<ldlus .r ;!,)!I9m WoIt-<I"ogfl , ".'_81....r Q9.1]'1R"1 sullte.1uleEl B~' ll. shefd..GJ:.47W.l-feel-et B 'b9l:ioge~~&lI';I'erM ollf&-1~~eHG-tbe-end-ot&GiikufVOl-lh6-Bllm&-helng-o-JlOblt-oJHM..neRlHinG~ the-oou!lHIGJHf4e..tetMh-flalf af said Somie~6lth 8~~~'a9" '"16G1..-akm: B"iEl"IUIFtMin&-f~afIGlHJr::t.gla,~2 feet 19 e Jlew.H1f1 the eII&tllt(.y fitllt of \",ay liRe of 1al~~(SIRleRe~l-ef'/iWl.afleu3; Ib!llec.ll:lI!.B6.F1h~~JR'OrrellM; nlong-r.aI~&fly--l-iRerf6H-4ietaRee--of 11::!81.KJ feel; llIenoe,.let\vlng sBlcl Flghll'lf-way 1,_tHllHeaOW.,g-4'en, (1) ..UfO.. cleftg4h04l... cflil. ~rop"'Y'd_be<l-ill.0lfl<li~ l*oord9-Boo~~g&&-W7-Ql\rl~Im--tt9I4h 99091}'oo" allllt-foP-tHJI~f400r09 feelj ~lellee roll ooAl\ Q2~::!g'g3" oas+-f6l'-D--tii&taflee of 1J~.li&-~~n-nertft ~6!:-eoo~eHHijllteneo.er 1€3S1 f8etllheooe-mlHl&Ulh-~S!S1~!.~r;rdi9laHee a~&-feel-w.""-pflt"l--tl\tiH!H..fti!lllH\ee nf 10g.{)g fellt Gamil6~~ol-wtIh-lItfJ IlforemSHliol\etHouUlorly FiglJt Elf"'&)' UFO ee 11 i: 1] (Ele~O)~aet-flgl~ '.va));II.et\ee.LltlT-Ml1;l~~l'--.!l-6ia~A-neAh 360:W1~" eas!-f6'f-{l.-f!i&t.nnae-af 1GQ.(IQ €ee~eit\~id-litlutMFty-pgM.of-way line ef U.S. 1) II.hem:r~ RlIHtl\Lth ~ 1"';W'lli" eaa~J ,lees lI!1id-liner-feHHlWitMe0-a+-600,00 _'1"'InH>~b'lllnnlng.....~_.....;J"" A PARCEL OF lAND LOCATED IN S.e.QTION 3 TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH. RA!lJC1E' 28 EAST COLUER COUNTY RORIDk BEING MORE PARTICUI.ARL'Y oeSCRIBED AS ~OLlOWS: COMMENCE AT THE EAST QUARTER CORNSR OF seCTION 3 TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH. RANGE 28 eAST COlUER COUNTY FLORIDA. THENce RUN SOUT'" 0!}"41'50' WEST, ALONG lHE EAST UNE OF THF; SOUTH~GT QUARTER OF SAID SECTION.1....fQB....A .o.JSIANCF OF 1 38112 FE!;T TO A POlt-IT ON THE SOUTHERLY RI(3HT.OJo'.WAY L1N~ Of U.S 41 (STATE ROAD gO\ mo FOOT RIGHT-DF-WAYI: THENCE! RUN NORlH 54'2[)'1B- WEST AlQ}!~1D SOUTHERl V RIGHT -OF.WAY L1""E FOR A OISTANCE OF 960.32 FEET TO A POINT ~N T'M1l*~ L~e OF A ~oo '%OT ~Jl)...IlllA'NAGe EASeM~tf! A& RECORDED I or- C b BOOK 7 AT AG. 121JHROllGH 120- OF THE PUBLIC RECOMB OF COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA' THE SAME BBNG THE POINT OF ~sc;.~~~~G ~~H::';~ ~~~~gT~H~O'~~~~~~T ~~~~~~WN~l~~T~~~'U:~~'d'SR~~ CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY- THENCE RUN SOIJTI-M'ESTERL Y ALONG SAJD WF.FiTF.R1 Y lINE ANO TIlE ARC OF SAIO CUr:tVE 1'0 THE RIGHT HAVIHG A AADI(jS OF 2 7f.l9 ~3 FBI!T: THROUGH A CFtYTRAI AN(;1 F OF 69'43'48~: SUBfENOED BY A CHORQ..9f',!l1U1...fffI ^1A.B~RINll OF ROUl'H 25"OO'[W vre.S.l.EOBAN ARC L ENGTH O~ A75.4e fEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE' THE F;AMF. BEING A POINT ON THE NORTH liNE UF TH~ SOU1H HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF SAID S!:CIION 3' THENCE nUN NOnTH 8I:l"26'6{l' WEST A.lONG SAID NORTH LINE FOR A OIATANr:F or. :? 1\33 22 FEeT TO A POINT ON THE ,f:ASTE:RL V I{IOHT_OF.WAV L~LE OF CAPRI ROAD (STATE ROAD 051\ fRlGHT-OF- WAY VARI!:.SI: THENCE RUN NORTH 02'28'03- EAST AtoNG SAID EASTERLY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 12M lIS FEET' THeNCI'! I EAVlNG SAID RIGHT.OF.WAY LINe RIM THE Fot lOWING lWO l21 COURSES ALONG THe LINES OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN Q~FICIAL RECORDS BOOK '529 AT PAGES 1377 AND 1378 NORTH {tQ~Q1l:'OO" EMT FOR A DISTANCE OF 10009 FEET: THE~..NORTH 02-2-6'03" EAST ~OR A [)ISTANCE OF 10B 09 FEET 10 lHf. NORTHERLY MOST WESTERl Y CORNER OF TRACT "0" OF TW\IL RIDGE AS nFM:RlBeO IN PLAT BOOK 44 AT PAGES 71 THRU 11 OF THF. PUBLIC RECORDS O~ COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA' THENCE RUN SOUTH IW!i5'5T" EAst ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAJD 'tRACt "C' FOR A DISTANCE' Of 1913.99 FEET' THENCE RlJN tlQBIIiJ)O"04'03" MST FOR A DI8T ANCI;" OF 200 05 1=F=fiT' THENCE RUN SOUTH ag"5!i.'67" EAST FOR A D!\iTANCe OF 3833'7.' J;HiT TO A POINT THAT IS A DISTANCE OF 400 00 FI::f::f SOUTHERLY OF AND PARAI Lt:1 W~TH THE; AFOREMENTIONE:D SOl/THP-RLV RIGHT.or.WAY Ut-le: OF U.S 41 (STATE ROAD 901 {?OO FOOT RIGIff.OF--WAY\' THE~C~ BUN SOUTH 6,'20'16" EAST FOR A D!flTANCf: Of" 1 654..10 fEET' THFNCF. RUN NORTH JS'JtI'4.- EAST FOR A OISTANCE OF 400.00 t:E:ET 10 A MINT ON Tfo/I; SAID SOlrrHF.RI V RII3f-IT.OF-WAY liNE OF U.S. 41: THENCr: RUN SOIITH 84"'20'10. EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH!;RlY RlGHf-OF..wAY LINE. FORl:LQlS.TANQ~...QE.....BQQ.OO FEET 10 THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAfNING~81.010 ACRES. MORe: O~ ('- Page20f3 Words underlined a.ro addidonsj WOI'ds struel: threugh are deletions. Agenda Item No. SA June 10. 2008 Page 36 of 38 I'''. , Agenda Item No. SA June 10, 200S Page 37 of 3S SECTION THREE: AMENDMENTS TO MASTER PLAN Exhibit A, the PUD M.ster Pia", of Ordinance Number 03-46, as ",nellded, (Arlesa Polnte Planned Unit Developmont) is hereby replnced with a D:CW Exhibit U A. n pun Mastel' Plan. SECTION FOUR: EFFECT1Vll DATE This Onlinence shall become effective upon filing with the Department of Stare. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by '"pel~mnjority vote of the Board of COllnty CommiS5ioncI1I ofeolliel' County, Florida. this _ day of ,2008. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLOIUDA , Deputy Clerk By: TOM HENNING, CHAIRMAN ny: Approved as to form. and legal sufficiency: tIY /if\"I'f'lMarjOrie M. Student-Stirling Assistant County Attorney Page J of3 Wm'ds underlined are additions; WOl'ds struBle threuglt ore deletious. <{OOOO ~o'" 0_ ,"0 '00 0", E;~ lD 2~0) --'" "':OD- D" c <D OJ <{ , ~', ........ I i I i I i I I i I I ~ ! ~~ , w : ~ffi i . ~ I ~'" ~ U '" v I .....~IY. , " , '".. i , , i I i I i I j I , '. " "'.. " " ',. ...'...., '" '. ............. ..........,. .......... i , 4'; .If,' ,r.' , 4",',', . " " . . . . . I . , I . , ',',',' '? " . . I I I t . . . . .. . . i'"",,~ . '" I. . . . 1 ... l . . . . I I . . . . " . ~ . I ' . . . I , I' ,'.',', . . . . I ,., I I' . . I I . . I. . . . , . , . , . . . . . . . .. . . I I . . . . . . , . . , , o n r-=--. t iQQ 1..:.._-.--.-;::: :::::;::.;:::::._;: in w ~ '" o " 10 w .. I~ ~ hI I ~~ rfi ~-_nll j -.. .::::::.:......::::::::;-:,..:,.:.:..;:::-.l.-_ c:.. - v._. " I I ~ I' II ~ " S g .. ~ ~ <l i:! " .., ~ 0- ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~I I IIU! ~';ldl ~I ~ .I ~r Ie ~ill ! ." ! 0" . . I I I @i~ I