The URL can be used to link to this page

HEX Agenda 12/10/2020AGENDA THE COLLIER COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER WILL HOLD A HEARING AT 9:00 AM ON THURSDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2020 IN CONFERENCE ROOMS 609/610 AT THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT/PLANNING & REGULATION BUILDING, 2800 N. HORSESHOE DRIVE, NAPLES, FLORIDA AS PART OF AN ONGOING INITIATIVE TO PROMOTE SOCIAL DISTANCING DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC, THE PUBLIC WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENTS REMOTELY, AS WELL AS IN PERSON, DURING THIS PROCEEDING. INDIVIDUALS WHO WOULD LIKE TO PARTICIPATE REMOTELY, SHOULD REGISTER AT: https://bit.ly/Dec10HEXSpeakerRegistration ANY TIME AFTER THE AGENDA IS POSTED ON THE COUNTY WEBSITE WHICH IS 6 DAYS BEFORE THE MEETING OR THROUGH THE LINK: http://colliercountyfl.iqm2.com/Citizens/default.aspx INDIVIDUALS WHO REGISTER WILL RECEIVE AN EMAIL IN ADVANCE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING DETAILING HOW THEY CAN PARTICIPATE REMOTELY IN THIS MEETING. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE MEETING, CALL THOMAS CLARKE AT (239) 252-2526 OR EMAIL TO: Thomas.Clarke@CollierCountyFL.gov. INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES UNLESS OTHERWISE WAIVED BY THE HEARING EXAMINER.PERSONS WISHING TO HAVE WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC MATERIALS INCLUDED IN THE HEARING REPORT PACKETS MUST HAVE THAT MATERIAL SUBMITTED TO COUNTY STAFF 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING. ALL MATERIALS USED DURING PRESENTATION AT THE HEARING WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF THE RECORD. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. DECISIONS OF THE HEARING EXAMINER ARE FINAL UNLESS APPEALED TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. HEARING PROCEDURES WILL PROVIDE FOR PRESENTATION BY THE APPLICANT, PRESENTATION BY STAFF, PUBLIC COMMENT AND APPLICANT REBUTTAL. THE HEARING EXAMINER WILL RENDER A DECISION WITHIN 30 DAYS. PERSONS WISHING TO RECEIVE A COPY OF THE DECISION BY MAIL MAY SUPPLY COUNTY STAFF WITH THEIR NAME, ADDRESS, AND A STAMPED, SELF-ADDRESSED ENVELOPE FOR THAT PURPOSE. PERSONS WISHING TO RECEIVE AN ELECTRONIC COPY OF THE DECISION MAY SUPPLY THEIR EMAIL ADDRESS. 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. REVIEW OF AGENDA 3. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. *** This item has been continued from the October 22, 2020 HEX Meeting to the December 10, 2020 HEX Meeting.*** PETITION NO. PDI-PL20190000959 – St. George Group, Corp. requests an insubstantial change to Ordinance Number 05-53, the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD, to modify Condition 2.12.B and the PUD master plan to require the wall along Tract B only, to modify Condition 2.14.A.3 to require interconnection of the internal sidewalk concurrent with the road interconnection from Tract B to Tract A consistent with LDC Section 6.06.02.B, and revisions to PUD Monitoring, Environmental and Housing conditions so that current Land Development Code standards and policies apply, for Tract B of the PUD property consisting of 6.7 ± acres, located on the east side of Santa Barbara Blvd, approximately 2,300 feet south of Radio Road, in Section 4, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [Co] Commissioner District 3 B. *** This item has been continued from the November 12, 2020 HEX Meeting to the December 10, 2020 HEX Meeting .*** PETITION NO. VA-PL20190002701 – CitySwitch II-A, LLC request two variances from LDC Section 5.05.09(G)(7)(b), to reduce the eastern boundary setback of 125 feet to 60.5 feet and from the western boundary setback of 125 feet to 82.2 feet for a proposed 250 foot communications tower on a parcel in the east ½ of the northwest ¼ of the southwest ¼ of the northeast ¼ of the northwest ¼ of Section 15, Township 49 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Timothy Finn, Principal Planner] Commissioner District 5 C. PETITION NO. PDI-PL20200001210 - Request for an insubstantial change to Ordinance No. 18-51, the Russell Square Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD), updating existing deviation language to reflect a street name change and adding a deviation from LDC Sections 5.06.02.B.1.a and 5.06.02.B.6 to allow the wall height for the residential signs located on Seychelles Avenue at the project entrance to be a maximum height of 11.6 feet, as measured from the lowest centerline grade of the nearest public or private right-of-way or easement to the uppermost portion of the sign structure. The RPUD consists of 32.9± acres located on the east side of Santa Barbara Boulevard approximately ¼ mile south of Davis Boulevard in Section 9, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: John Kelly, Senior Planner] Commissioner District 3 D. PETITION NO. PDI-PL20200000869 - Request for an insubstantial change to Ordinance No. 01-07, the Ragge PUD, a Planned Unit Development (PUD), by adding Section V to provide for a list of Deviations from the Land Development Code, by adding Section 5.1.A to allow for a deviation from LDC Section 5.06.04.G.2.a which limits specified off-premise directional signs to 12 square feet in area to instead allow an off-premise sign for Lot 2 to be placed on the existing ground sign for Lot 1 for which the off-premise portion of the existing sign shall be no more than 27 square feet in total area and by adding Exhibit “D” Sign Location depicting the Section 5.1.A deviation. The subject PUD consists of 4.50± acres located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Pine Ridge Road and Kramer Drive/Whippoorwill Lane, approximately ½ mile west of Interstate 75, in Section 7, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: John Kelly, Senior Planner] Commissioner District 2 4. OTHER BUSINESS 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS 6. ADJOURN Collier County Hearing Examiner Page 1 Printed 12/3/2020 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Hearing Examiner AGENDA Growth Management Department Conference Rooms 609/610 2800 Horseshoe Drive North Naples, FL 34104 December 10, 2020 9: 00 AM Andrew W. J. Dickman, Esq., AICP Hearing Examiner Note: Individual speakers will be limited to 5 minutes unless otherwise waived by the Hearing Examiner. Persons Wishing to have written or graphic materials included in the hearing report packets must have that material submitted to County staff at Alexandra.Casanova@colliercountyfl.gov 10 days prior to the Hearing. All materials used during presentation at the hearing will become a permanent part of the record. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the Hearing Examiner will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto, and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Decisions of the Hearing Examiner are final unless appealed to the Board of County Commissioners. Hearing Procedures will provide for presentation by the Applicant, presentation by staff, public comment and applicant rebuttal. The Hearing Examiner will render a decision within 30 days. Persons wishing to receive a copy of the decision by mail may supply County staff with their name, address, and a stamped, self-addressed envelope for that purpose. Persons wishing to receive an electronic copy of the decision may supply their email address. December 2020 Collier County Hearing Examiner Page 2 Printed 12/3/2020 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Review of Agenda 3. Advertised Public Hearing A. *** This item has been continued from the October 22, 2020 HEX Meeting to the December 10, 2020 HEX Meeting .*** PETITION NO. PDI-PL20190000959 – St. George Group, Corp. requests an insubstantial change to Ordinance Number 05-53, the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD, to modify Condition 2.12.B and the PUD master plan to require the wall along Tract B only, to modify Condition 2.14.A.3 to require interconnection of the internal sidewalk concurrent with the road interconnection from Tract B to Tract A consistent with LDC Section 6.06.02.B, and revisions to PUD Monitoring, Environmental and Housing conditions so that current Land Development Code standards and policies apply, for Tract B of the PUD property consisting of 6.7 ± acres, located on the east side of Santa Barbara Blvd, approximately 2,300 feet south of Radio Road, in Section 4, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. Commissioner District 3 B. *** This item has been continued from the November 12, 2020 HEX Meeting to the December 10, 2020 HEX Meeting .*** PETITION NO. VA-PL20190002701 – CitySwitch II-A, LLC request two variances from LDC Section 5.05.09(G)(7)(b), to reduce the eastern boundary setback of 125 feet to 60.5 feet and from the western boundary setback of 125 feet to 82.2 feet for a proposed 250 foot communications tower on a parcel in the east ½ of the northwest ¼ of the southwest ¼ of the northeast ¼ of the northwest ¼ of Section 15, Township 49 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Timothy Finn, Principal Planner] Commissioner District 5 C. PETITION NO. PDI-PL20200001210 -Request for an insubstantial change to Ordinance No. 18-51, the Russell Square Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD), updating existing deviation language to reflect a street name change and adding a deviation from LDC Sections 5.06.02.B.1.a and 5.06.02.B.6 to allow the wall height for the residential signs located on Seychelles Avenue at the project entrance to be a maximum height of 11.6 feet, as measured from the lowest centerline grade of the nearest public or private right-of-way or easement to the uppermost portion of the sign structure. The RPUD consists of 32.9± acres located on the east side of Santa Barbara Boulevard approximately ¼ mile south of Davis Boulevard in Section 9, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: John Kelly, Senior Planner] Commissioner District 3 D. PETITION NO. PDI-PL20200000869 -- Request for an insubstantial change to Ordinance No. 01-07, the Ragge PUD, a Planned Unit Development (PUD), by adding Section V to provide for a list of Deviations from the Land Development Code, by adding Section 5.1.A to allow for a deviation from LDC Section 5.06.04.G.2.a which limits specified off-premise directional signs to 12 square feet in area to instead allow an off-premise sign for Lot 2 to be placed on the existing ground sign for Lot 1 for which the off-premise portion of the existing sign shall be no more than 27 square feet in total area and by adding Exhibit “D” Sign Location depicting the Section 5.1.A deviation. The subject PUD consists of 4.50± acres located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Pine Ridge Road and Kramer Drive/Whippoorwill Lane, approximately ½ mile west of Interstate 75, in Section 7, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: John Kelly, Senior Planner] Commissioner District 2 December 2020 Collier County Hearing Examiner Page 3 Printed 12/3/2020 4. Other Business 5. Public Comments 6. Adjourn 12/10/2020 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Hearing Examiner Item Number: 3.A Item Summary: *** This item has been continued from the October 22, 2020 HEX Meeting to the December 10, 2020 HEX Meeting .*** PETITION NO. PDI-PL20190000959 – St. George Group, Corp. requests an insubstantial change to Ordinance Number 05-53, the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD, to modify Condition 2.12.B and the PUD master plan to require the wall along Tract B only, to modify Condition 2.14.A.3 to require interconnection of the internal sidewalk concurrent with the road interconnection from Tract B to Tract A consistent with LDC Section 6.06.02.B, and revisions to PUD Monitoring, Environmental and Housing conditions so that current Land Development Code standards and policies apply, for Tract B of the PUD property consisting of 6.7 ± acres, located on the east side of Santa Barbara Blvd, approximately 2,300 feet south of Radio Road, in Section 4, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. Commissioner District 3 Meeting Date: 12/10/2020 Prepared by: Title: – Zoning Name: Tim Finn 10/28/2020 2:07 PM Submitted by: Title: Manager - Planning – Zoning Name: Ray Bellows 10/28/2020 2:07 PM Approved By: Review: Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Tim Finn Review Item Skipped 10/22/2020 11:22 AM Hearing Examiner (GMD Approvers) Tim Finn Review Item Skipped 10/22/2020 11:22 AM Zoning Tim Finn Review Item Skipped 10/22/2020 11:22 AM Zoning Tim Finn Review Item Skipped 10/22/2020 11:22 AM Hearing Examiner Andrew Dickman Meeting Pending 12/10/2020 9:00 AM 3.A Packet Pg. 4 PDI-PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings RPUD Revised: October 8, 2020 Page 1 of 10 STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER FROM: ZONING DIVISION – ZONING SERVICES SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: OCTOBER 22, 2020 SUBJECT: PDI-PL20190000959; SANTA BARBARA LANDINGS RPUD PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: Owner: Agent: Armando Bucelo, Jr St. George Group, Corp. Laura DeJohn, AICP Johnson Engineering, Inc. 6303 Blue Lagoon Dr. #390 Miami, FL 33126 2350 Stanford Court Naples, FL 34112 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests that the Hearing Examiner approve an insubstantial change to Ordinance Number 05-53, the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD, to modify Condition 2.12.B and the PUD master plan to require the wall along Tract B only, to modify Condition 2.14.A.3 to require interconnection of the internal sidewalk concurrent with the road interconnection from Tract B to Tract A consistent with LDC Section 6.06.02.B, and revisions to PUD Monitoring, Environmental and Housing conditions so that current Land Development Code standards and policies apply, for Tract B of the PUD property. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property consists of 6.7 ± acres, located on the east side of Santa Barbara Blvd, approximately 2,300 feet south of Radio Road, in Section 4, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (see location map on page 5) 3.A.a Packet Pg. 5 Attachment: Staff Report - Santa Barbara Landings PDI (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) PDI-PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings RPUD Revised: October 8, 2020 Page 2 of 10 PURPOSE AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: In 2005, the 41.6-acre property was rezoned from Residential Multi Family-6 (RMF-6) Zoning District to Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) pursuant to Ordinance 05-53 to add 43 mixed residential dwelling units to the 248 existing dwelling units for a total of 291 dwelling units. Per the October 31, 2019 PUD Monitoring Report, a total of 248 dwelling units have been constructed in the RPUD. The ±41.6‐acre RPUD is comprised of two development tracts. At the time of original rezoning from RFM‐ 6 to PUD, the northerly ±35.3‐acre tract (Tract A) was developed with 248 multifamily dwelling units, which is now a condominium community known as Granada Lakes Villas. The southerly +6.3 acres designated as Tract B was approved for a maximum of 43 mixed residential dwelling units. Tract B remains undeveloped and is not part of the condominium and is independent from that condominium association. The petitioner for the original rezoning remains the owner of Tract B and is requesting an Insubstantial Change (PDI) to the RPUD. The proposed changes are to clarify the conditions applicable to the Tract B development site by eliminating outdated requirements or modifying to clarify applicability of the conditions to the respective Tract. Changes are numbered #1 through #4, addressing conditions related to a #1‐wall, #2‐ sidewalk, #3‐environmental, and #4‐housing, as described below: CHANGE #1: Landscape Buffers, Berms, Fences and Walls Condition 2.12.B requires that the eight (8') foot high precast wall shown on the conceptual master plan shall be constructed concurrent with development of the residential units in Tract B. The PUD master plan shows the wall extending for the full length of Tract A and Tract B along the eastern PUD boundary. This full-length totals approximately 2,757 feet (just over half a mile). A change is proposed to Condition 2.12.B and the PUD master plan to require the wall along the eastern boundary of Tract B only. CHANGE #2: Sidewalks, bike lanes and bike paths Condition 2.14.A.3 requires that an internal sidewalk connection from the southernmost development tract (Tract B) to the existing pool/club area shall be provided at the time of construction within Tract B. Condition 2.14.A.3 is proposed to be modified to require interconnection of the internal sidewalk concurrent with the road interconnection from Tract B to Tract A, consistent with LDC Section 6.06.02.B. The construction of a sidewalk connecting new residents of Tract B to the common area and amenities of a separate condominium association in Tract A does not appropriately relate to the development of residential units in Tract B. It is not feasible for the developer of Tract B to construct in common areas of Granada Lakes Villas, which has a separate condominium association. The minimum standard for a 6‐foot wide sidewalk is identified in PUD Section 2.14.A.2. The interconnection of the internal sidewalks as proposed is consistent with County standards to provide linkages to serve pedestrian needs between development areas. 3.A.a Packet Pg. 6 Attachment: Staff Report - Santa Barbara Landings PDI (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) PDI-PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings RPUD Revised: October 8, 2020 Page 3 of 10 CHANGE #3: Environmental Conditions in 5.10.A, C D, E, F, G, H and I refer to requirements for: exotic vegetation management plan, conservation easement dedication, habitat management plan, preserve management plan, and that a replanting plan for the re‐created preserve areas shall be provided at the time of next development order submittal. The source of the original conditions is the County Land Development Code. These conditions are proposed to be stricken from the PUD Document because they are redundant with the applicable standards of the LDC. No change is proposed to the required preserve areas or associated easement dedication, or requirements for management plan or re‐created preserves. CHANGE #4: Housing Conditions – the following changes are proposed: • 5.11.A Contribution. The developer or successors and assigns shall pay the sum of $1,000.00 to Collier County from the closing of each of the dwelling units constructed within Tract “B" of the RPUD. The payment shall be made within seven (7) days of the closing of the residential unit. Condition 5.11.A is proposed to be removed. Removal of this contribution commitment qualifies as a minor text change per LDC Section 10.02.13.E.3.c. Because the petitioner requests additional proposed changes to the RPUD, this change is proposed as part of an insubstantial change (PDI) request. • 5.11.B Primary residence. The developer or successors and assigns shall require a minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the dwelling units developed within the RPUD to be initially sold to individuals or families that use the dwelling unit as their primary residence. The deed to the initial purchaser shall include a restriction that the initial purchaser shall use the unit as their primary residence. Condition 5.11.B is proposed to be amended to reflect the condition applies to Tract B. Property Appraiser records and primary residency records are not available to determine whether 50% of the dwelling units within the RPUD sold to primary residents. This condition is proposed to be clarified to reflect that the condition applies to Tract B, the only developable tract. • 5.11.C Maximum price point. The developer or successors and assigns agrees to make available for sale a minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the dwelling units at a sales price less than $240,000. Condition 5.11.C is proposed to be removed. 3.A.a Packet Pg. 7 Attachment: Staff Report - Santa Barbara Landings PDI (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) PDI-PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings RPUD Revised: October 8, 2020 Page 4 of 10 Property Appraiser records document that this condition has been met for the RPUD. Attachment I – Backup Materials (Narrative of Request, Justification & GMP Consistency, Attachment A Table) lists all initial transactions that occurred when Granada Lakes Villas condominiumized, demonstrating 151 units sold at a sales price less than $240,000, which satisfies the minimum 50% of the total allowable 291 units within the RPUD. Thus, sales price affordability goals have been met by this project, and it is appropriate to remove Condition 5.11.C. • 5.11.D Employment in Collier County with income requirement. The developer or successors and assigns agrees to sell a minimum of ten percent (10%) of the total number of dwelling units constructed within the RPUD to persons employed in Collier County and earning a family income ranging between 100% and 125% of the County's median income. Condition 5.11.D is proposed to be amended to reflect the condition applies to Tract B and is to serve households earning 140% or less of the County’s median income. This RPUD is subject to standard density calculated according to the base density and residential density band in proximity to an Activity Center. There is no affordable housing density bonus associated with this RPUD. Employment records and income level records are not available to determine whether purchasers of 10% of the total number of dwelling units within the RPUD have met the employment status and income levels referenced in Condition 5.11.D. This condition is proposed to be clarified to reflect applicability to Tract B, the only developable tract, and that the target income level is households earning 140% or less of the County’s median income. This update to the income level was identified by Cormac Giblin in reference to current County housing policies. The proposed updates maintain the objective to provide new housing options that are affordable to the workforce within Collier County. Intentionally blank 3.A.a Packet Pg. 8 Attachment: Staff Report - Santa Barbara Landings PDI (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) PDI-PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings RPUD Revised: October 8, 2020 Page 5 of 10 3.A.aPacket Pg. 9Attachment: Staff Report - Santa Barbara Landings PDI (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings PDI-PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings RPUD Revised: October 8, 2020 Page 6 of 10 SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: This section of the staff report identifies the land uses and zoning classifications for properties surrounding the boundaries of Tract B within the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD: North: Multi-family residences (Santa Barbara Landings RPUD); maximum density: 7DU/A East: Single and multifamily residential, (Plantation PUD); maximum density: 4.99DU/A South: Calusa Park Elementary School and undeveloped acreage, zoned Bembridge EMS Complex PUD; maximum density: 6DU/A West: Santa Barbara RD, then developed with golf course and multi-family, zoned Berkshire Lakes PUD; maximum density: 3.96DU/A Source: Johnson Engineering, Inc. 3.A.a Packet Pg. 10 Attachment: Staff Report - Santa Barbara Landings PDI (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) PDI-PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings RPUD Revised: October 8, 2020 Page 7 of 10 STAFF ANALYSIS: Comprehensive Planning: Because this application is not adding uses or increasing the intensity of the previously approved uses in the Santa Barbara RPUD, it is consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. See Attachment D for the complete report from Comprehensive Planning staff. Conservation and Coastal Management Element: Environmental review staff has found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME). No revisions to the environmental portions of the PUD petition are being made. The proposal is consistent with the CCME. Stormwater Review: Stormwater Management staff has evaluated the proposed changes to the PUD documents and found no issues with consistency. Landscaping Review: The buffers labeled on the updated Master Plan are consistent with the LDC and with section 2.12 C and 2.14 B of the original PUD. Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed this petition. The existing preserve areas will not be impacted by the proposed petition. This project does not require Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project did not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff reviewed the application and found this project consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). There is no increase in the number of residential dwelling units/traffic generation, no changes to the master plan including point(s) of access or circulation, and no changes to the developer commitments beyond those related to Tract B; therefore there are no transportation planning impacts related to this request. Sections 10.02.13.E.1 and 10.02.13.E.2 of the Land Development Code set forth the criteria by which insubstantial amendments to a PUD Master Plan and/or minor text changes to a PUD document are to be reviewed before they can be approved. The criteria and a response to each have been listed as follows: 10.02.13.E.1 a. Is there a proposed change in the boundary of the Planned Unit Development (PUD)? No, there is no proposed change in the boundary of the PUD. b. Is there a proposed increase in the total number of dwelling units or intensity of land use or height of buildings within the development? 3.A.a Packet Pg. 11 Attachment: Staff Report - Santa Barbara Landings PDI (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) PDI-PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings RPUD Revised: October 8, 2020 Page 8 of 10 No, there is no proposed increase in the number of dwelling units or intensity of land use or height of buildings within the development. c. Is there a proposed decrease in preservation, conservation, recreation, or open space areas within the development in excess of five (5) percent of the total acreage previously designated as such, or five (5) acres in area? No, there is no proposed decrease in preservation, conservation, recreation, or open space areas within the development as designated on the approved Master Plan. d. Is there a proposed increase in the size of areas used for non-residential uses, to include institutional, commercial and industrial land uses (excluding preservation, conservation or open space), or a proposed relocation of nonresidential land uses? The land uses within the RPUD are limited to residential and preserve uses. The RPUD does not contain nonresidential uses (institutional, commercial or industrial) land uses, therefore, no change or relocation of nonresidential land uses is proposed. e. Is there a substantial increase in the impacts of the development which may include, but are not limited to increases in traffic generation; changes in traffic circulation; or impacts on other public facilities? No, there are no additional impacts resulting from this amendment. As noted above the there is no increase in the number of residential dwelling units/traffic generation, no changes to the master plan including point(s) of access or circulation, and no changes to the developer commitments beyond those related to Tract B; therefore there are no transportation planning impacts related to this request. f. Will the change result in land use activities that generate a higher level of vehicular traffic based upon the Trip Generation Manual published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers? No, there are no additional impacts resulting from this amendment. As noted above the there is no increase in the number of residential dwelling units/traffic generation, no changes to the master plan including point(s) of access or circulation, and no changes to the developer commitments beyond those related to Tract B; therefore there are no transportation planning impacts related to this request. g. Will the change result in a requirement for increased stormwater retention, or otherwise increase stormwater discharge? Staff anticipates the proposed changes will not impact or increase stormwater retention or increase stormwater discharge beyond the permittable limits of the site development. h. Will the proposed change bring about a relationship to an abutting land use that would be incompatible with an adjacent land use? 3.A.a Packet Pg. 12 Attachment: Staff Report - Santa Barbara Landings PDI (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) PDI-PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings RPUD Revised: October 8, 2020 Page 9 of 10 No, there will be no incompatible relationships with abutting land uses. i. Are there any modifications to the PUD Master Plan or PUD Document or amendment to a PUD ordinance which is inconsistent with the Future Land Use Element or other elements of the Growth Management Plan or which modification would increase the density of intensity of the permitted land uses? No, Staff from Comprehensive Planning staff determined the proposed changes to the PUD Document would be consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. Both environmental and Transportation Planning staff reviewed this petition, and no changes to the PUD Document are proposed that would be deemed inconsistent with the CCME or the Transportation Element of the GMP. This petition does not propose any increase in density or intensity of the permitted land uses. j. The proposed change is to a PUD District designated as a Development of Regional Impact (DRI) and approved pursuant to Chapter 380.06, Florida Statues, where such change requires a determination and public hearing by Collier County pursuant to Sec. 380.06 (19), F.S. Any change that meets the criterion of Sec. 380.06 (19)(e)2., F.S., and any changes to a DRI/PUD Master Plan that clearly do not create a substantial deviation shall be reviewed and approved by Collier County under Section 10.02.13 of the LDC. The project is not a DRI. k. Are there any modifications to the PUD Master Plan or PUD Document or amendment to a PUD ordinance which impact(s) any consideration deemed to be a substantial modification as described under Section(s) 10.02.13 E.? Based upon the analysis provide above, the proposed change is not deemed to be substantial. Section 10.02.13.E.2 Does this petition change the analysis of the findings and criteria used for the original application? No, the proposed changes do not affect the original analysis and findings of the original PUD application in Petition PUDZ-2003-AR-4493. An excerpt from the staff report prepared for that petition is attached as Attachment E that contains the PUD Findings of Fact from Petition PUDZ-2003-AR-4493. STAFF RESPONSE: March 17, 2020 – Letter of Concern Staff had corresponded with the president of the Granada Lakes Village Condominium Association/Santa Barbara Landings Property Owners Association with issues concerning this 3.A.a Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: Staff Report - Santa Barbara Landings PDI (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) PDI-PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings RPUD Revised: October 8, 2020 Page 10 of 10 petition pertaining to Tract A The twelve points are listed in this letter with staff’s response. (See Attachment F – March 17, 2020 Letter of Concern with Staffs response). DEVIATION DISCUSSION: No deviations are being requested as part of this application. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The applicant conducted a NIM on January 30, 2020 at Collier Area Transit, 8300 Radio Rd. Naples, Florida. The meeting commenced at 5:30 p.m. and ended at approximately 6:30 p.m. Laura DeJohn of Johnson Engineering introduced the team and county staff. Laura gave a presentation and background of the petition. She explained that the property is for sale and interested developers have identified zoning conditions to make the project feasible. Laura explained each modification within the PDI petition and then opened the meeting for public attendees. The issues discussed with the public were building height, road connection, drainage, Tract B amenities, affordable housing changes, Tract B ownership, and the concentration of low - income people into one area. The NIM summary, sign in sheet, and NIM materials are included in Attachment I. EAC REVIEW: This project does not require Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project did not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2 -1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Hearing Examiner approve Petition PDI- PL20190000959. Attachments: A) Santa Barbara Landings PUD document - strike underline B) Santa Barbara Landings PUD document - clean version C) Master Plan Revisions D) FLUE Consistency Review dated 7-23-20 E) Findings of Fact - PUDZ-03-AR-4493 F) March 17, 2020 Letter of Concern with Staff Response G) Other Concern Correspondences H) HEX Hybrid Meeting Waiver I) Application/Backup Materials J) Hearing Property Sign 3.A.a Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: Staff Report - Santa Barbara Landings PDI (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) SANTA BARBARA LANDINGS RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 41.6± Acres Located in Section 04, Township 50 S, Range 26 E Collier County, Florida PREPARED FOR: Santa Barbara Garden Villas, LLC 1401 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Suite 401 Coral Gables, Florida 33134 And St. George Group, Corporation 1401 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Suite 40I Coral Gables, Florida 33134 6303 Blue Lagoon Drive Suite 390 Miami, FL 33126 PREPARED BY: Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, Florida 34103 And D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Q. Grady Minor & Associates 3800 Via del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Insubstantial Change for St. George Group, Corp by: Johnson Engineering, Inc. 2350 Stanford Court Naples, FL 34112 DATE FILED DATE APPROVED BY CPCC DATE APPROVED BY BCC 10-11-2005 ORDINANCE NUMBER 2005-53 INSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE: _____________ EXHIBIT "A" 3.A.b Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE LIST OF EXHIBITS AND TABLE i STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE ii SECTION I LEGAL DESCRIPTION, PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION I-1 SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS II-1 SECTION III RESIDENTIAL "R" DEVELOPMENT AREA III-1 SECTION IV PRESERVE "P" AREA IV-1 SECTION V DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS V-1 3.A.b Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) LIST OF EXHIBITS AND TABLES EXHIBIT A CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN EXHIBIT B SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN EXHIBIT C LOCATION MAP EXHIBIT D BOUNDARY SURVEY TABLE I DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS III-3 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline i 3.A.b Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE Santa Barbara Garden Villas, LLC and St. George Group, Corporation intends to create a This Residential Planned Unit Development is on approximately 41.6± acres of land located in Section 04., Township 50 S, Range 26 E, Collier County, Florida. Approximately 6.3 acres of the property is encumbered with a 100' wide roadway easement for Santa Barbara Boulevard, making the net site approximately 35.3 acres. The name of the Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) shall be Santa Barbara Landings RPUD. The development of the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD will be in compliance with the planning goals and objectives of Collier County as established in the Growth Management Plan. The development will be consistent with the policies of the land development regulations adopted under the Growth Management Plan and applicable regulations for the following reasons: 1. The subject property is located within the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Sub-District, as identified on the Future Land Use Map. 2. The density provided for in the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD complies with the Density Rating System contained in the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. The subject property is located within the residential density band, which extends from the Mixed-use activity center located at the intersection of Santa Barbara Boulevard and Davis Boulevard. The density permissible is 4 dwelling units per acre. Up to 3 dwelling units per acre may be added within the density band, bringing the permissible base density to 7 dwelling units per acre. Base density Density band Maximum permitted density Requested density 4.0 du/acre + 3.0du/acre = 7.0 du/acre 7.0 du/acre (291 units) At the time of the rezoning application, 248 multiple-family dwellings exist on the site. The subject rezoning will add a maximum of 43 additional dwelling units for a maximum total of 291 dwelling units. All property within the RPUD boundary shall be utilized in calculating the project density. 3. The project development is compatible and complementary to existing and future surrounding land uses as required in Policy 5.4 of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE). 4. Improvements are planned to be in compliance with the applicable land development regulations as required in Objective 3 of the FLUE, except as may be modified in this RPUD document 5. All final local development orders for this project are subject to the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance as required in Objective 2 of the FLUE. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline ii 3.A.b Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 6. The design of Santa Barbara Landings RPUD protects the function of the existing drainage features and natural groundwater aquifer recharge areas as required in Objective 1.5 of the Drainage Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element. 7. This project shall be subject to applicable Sections of the LDC at the time of development order approval, except as otherwise provided herein. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline iii 3.A.b Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) SECTION I LEGAL DESCRIPTION, PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION 1.1 PURPOSE Section I sets forth the location and ownership of the property, and describes the existing conditions of the property proposed to be developed under the project name Santa Barbara Landings RPUD. 1.2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION The subject property being 41.6 acres more or less, is described as: The west half (W. ½) of the west half (W. ½) of the northwest quarter (N.W. ¼) of Section 4, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, all being situated in Collier County, Florida, less the north 50 feet thereof. SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. 1.3 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP The property is currently owned by: TRACT A: unit owners of the Santa Barbara Garden Villas, LLC Landings Property Owner’s Association Inc. and Granada Lakes Villas Condominium Association Inc., whose address is 145 Santa Clara Drive, Naples, FL 34104, and TRACT B: St. George Group, Corporation, whose address is: 1401 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Suite 401 Coral Gables, Florida 33134 6303 Blue Lagoon Drive Suite 390, Miami, FL 33126 1.4 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY A. The project is located in Section 04, Township 50, Range 26 and is generally bordered on the north by Radio Road, on the east by Plantation PUD; on the south by Bembridge PUD on the west by Santa Barbara Boulevard. B. The zoning classification of the subject property at the time of RPUD application is RMF-6. C. According to FEMA/FIRM Map Panel Number 120067 415 D, dated June 3, 1986, the property is located within Zone X. D. Soils on the site generally include Hallandale fine sand and Boca, Rivera, Limestone Substratum and Copeland fine sand depressional. E. Existing vegetation on the site consists of melaleuca, Brazilian Pepper, palmetto prairie, pine flatwoood, cypress, Cabbage Palm and disturbed lands. Wetland areas have been heavily impacted by melaleuca. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline I-1 3.A.b Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) F. According to the Collier County Drainage Atlas, the site is located in the Lely Canal Basin. The conceptual water management plan is depicted in the Surface Water Management Report, which accompanied the rezone application submittal. 1.5 SHORT TITLE This Ordinance is known and cited as the "Santa Barbara Landings Residential Planned Unit Development Ordinance." 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline I-2 3.A.b Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS 2.1 PURPOSE Section II delineates and generally describes the plan of development and identifies relationships to applicable County ordinances, policies, and procedures. 2.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT A. Santa Barbara Landings RPUD is a mixed-use residential project and will consist of two development parcels and multiple preservation areas. Categories of land uses include those for residential and preserve areas. The Residential areas are designed to accommodate single-family attached, duplex and multiple family dwellings. The overall project density is 7 dwelling units per acre and the maximum units permitted in the RPUD shall be 291 units. B. Exhibit "A" depicts the RPUD Master Plan. The RPUD Master Plan includes a table that summarizes land use acreage. The location, size and configuration of individual tracts shall be determined at the time of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Plat approval. 2.3 COMPLIANCE WITH COUNTY ORDINANCES A. Regulations for development of Santa Barbara Landings RPUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this document, Planned Unit Development District and other applicable sections and parts of the Collier County Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan in effect at the time of issuance of any development order to which said regulations relate which authorize the construction of improvements. Where these regulations fail to provide developmental standards then the provisions of the most similar district in the Land Development Code shall apply. B. Unless otherwise noted, the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set forth in the Land Development Code in effect at the time of building permit application. C. Unless modified, waived or excepted from this RPUD Document or associated exhibits, the provisions of other sections of the land development codes, where applicable, remain in full force and effect with respect to the development of the land that comprises this RPUD. D. Development permitted by the approval of this petition will be subject to a concurrency review under the provisions of Chapter 6, Adequate Public Facilities, of the Land Development Code. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline II- 1 3.A.b Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 2.4 LAND USES Land uses are generally depicted on the RPUD Master Plan, Exhibit A. The specific location and size of individual tracts and the assignment of square footage or units shall be determined by the developer at the time of site development plan approval, preliminary subdivision plat approval, or final subdivision plat approval subject to the provisions of Chapter 10 of the Collier County LDC. 2.5 USE OF RIGHTS-OF-WAY The Developer may utilize land within the rights-of-way within the RPUD for landscaping, decorative entranceways, and unified signage. This utilization is subject to review and administrative approval during the development review process by the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator for engineering and safety considerations. 2.6 MODEL HOMES SALES OFFICE AND CONSTRUCTION OFFICE A. Construction offices and other uses and structures related to the promotion and sale of real estate such as, but not limited to, pavilions, parking areas, and signs, shall be permitted principal uses throughout the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD. These uses shall be subject to the requirements of Chapter 5 and Chapter IO of the LDC. B. Model Homes may be permitted in multi-family and townhome buildings may be utilized for wet or dry models, subject to the time frames specified in Chapter 5 of the LDC. 2.7 CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS TO RPUD DOCUMENT OR RPUD MASTER PLAN Changes and amendments may be made to this RPUD Ordinance or RPUD Master Plan as provided in Chapter 10 of the LDC. Minor changes and refinements as described herein may be made by the Developer in connection with any type of development or permit application required by LDC. 2.8 OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS A minimum of 30% of the project (12.48± acres) shall be devoted to usable open space. 2.9 NATIVE VEGETATION RETENTION REQUIREMENTS A minimum of three (3) acres of native vegetation shall be maintained on the subject site through a combination of preservation of existing native vegetation and revegetation of native vegetation. The areas of retained native vegetation and replanted native vegetation are shown as Preserve areas on the Conceptual Master Plan, Exhibit A. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline II-2 3.A.b Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 2.10 COMMON AREA MAINTENANCE One or more Property Owner's Association (POA) will provide common area maintenance. The POA, as applicable, shall be responsible for the operation, maintenance, and management of the surface water and stormwater management systems and preserves serving Santa Barbara Landings RPUD, in accordance with any applicable permits from the South Florida Water Management District. 2.11 DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS A. The Collier County Planned Unit Development District is intended to encourage ingenuity, innovation and imagination in the planning, design and development or redevelopment of relatively large tracts of land under unified ownership as set forth in Chapter 2 of the LDC. I. Individual Projects a) Site Planning: Each distinct project within the RPUD will provide an aesthetically appealing, identifiable path of entry for pedestrians and vehicles. The orientation of buildings and structures will be sensitive to adjacent land uses and the surrounding community. b) Landscaping: Where applicable, plantings along public rights-of way will be complimentary to streetscape landscaping. 2.12 LANDSCAPE BUFFERS, BERMS, FENCES AND WALLS A. Landscape buffers, berms, fences and walls are generally permitted as a principal use throughout the RPUD, excluding preserves. B. The maximum fence, wall or berm height internal to the RPUD shall be eight (8) feet, not including those portions of walls incorporated into project identification signs. The maximum fence height shall be measured relative to the greater of the crown of the adjacent roadway or the adjacent minimum finished floor, as applicable. The eight (8') foot high precast wall shown on the conceptual master plan shall be constructed along the eastern boundary of Tract B concurrent with development of the residential units in tract B. C. Perimeter Buffers abutting rights-of-way shall be permitted to deviate from the required 20' wide Type D buffer, to permit a Type D buffer an average of 20' in width, with no part of the buffer being less than 15' in width. The minimum area for the combined buffers along Radio Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard shall be 66,129 square feet (1.52± acres). 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline II-3 3.A.b Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 2.13 SIGNAGE A. GENERAL Signage shall be consistent with Section 5.06 of the LDC. 2.14 SUBSTITUTIONS TO SUBDIVISION DESIGN STANDARDS / DEVIATIONS 1. The Developer reserves the right to request substitutions to subdivision improvement and utility design standards in accordance with Chapter 10 of the LDC. A. Chapter 6, Sidewalks, bike lanes and bike paths 1. Existing site constraints prohibit retrofitting of the site with sidewalks meeting standards in Chapter 6 of the LDC. 2. A six (6) foot wide sidewalk shall be provided on only one (1) side of the internal local or private roadway exceeding one thousand (1,000) feet in length serving the project's additional 43 unit component. 3. An internal sidewalk connection from the southernmost development tract (Tract B) to the existing pool/club area shall be provided at the time of construction within Tract B. The developer of Tract B shall construct a sidewalk interconnection concurrently with the road interconnection from Tract B to Tract A. The developer of Tract B shall coordinate with the School District of Collier County to construct a sidewalk interconnection from Tract B to the adjacent school property at time of Tract B development permitting. 4. The developer shall make payment-in-lieu of construction of the sidewalk within Santa Barbara Boulevard, due to its programmed improvement in the five-year work program. B. Section 4.06.00, Landscaping, buffering and vegetation retention 1. Perimeter Buffers abutting rights-of-way shall be permitted to deviate from the required 20' wide Type D buffer, to permit a Type D buffer an average of 20' in width, with no part of the buffer being less than 15' in width. The minimum area for the combined buffers along Radio Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard shall be 66,129 square feet (1.52± acres). C. Construction Standards Manual, Streets and access improvements 1. Construction Standards Manual, Street Right-of-Way Width Street right-of-way width: The minimum right-of-way width to be utilized for local streets and cul-de-sacs shall be forty (40) feet. Drive aisles serving multi-family tracts shall not be required to meet this standard. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline II-4 3.A.b Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 2. Construction Standards Manual, Dead-end Streets Cul-de-sacs may exceed a length of one thousand (1,000) feet. 3. Construction Standards Manual, Intersection Radii Intersection radii: Street intersections shall be provided with a minimum of a twenty five (25) foot radius (face of curb) for all internal project streets and a thirty-five (35) foot radius for intersections at project entrances. 2.15 GENERAL PERMITTED USES A. Certain uses shall be considered general permitted uses throughout the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD except in the Preserve Areas. General permitted uses are those uses that generally serve the entire RPUD or distinct projects there within. B. General Permitted Uses: 1. Essential services as set forth under Chapter 2 of the LDC. 2. Water management facilities and related structures. 3. Lakes including lakes with bulkheads or other architectural or structural bank treatments. 4. Guardhouses, gatehouses, and access control structures. 5. Temporary construction, sales, and administrative offices for the Developer and Developer's authorized contractors and consultants, including necessary access ways, parking areas and related uses. 6. Landscape features including, but not limited to, landscape buffers, berms, fences and walls subject to the standards set forth in Section 2.12 of this document. 7. Signage. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline II-5 3.A.b Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) SECTION III RESIDENTIAL "R" DEVELOPMENT AREAS 3.1 PURPOSE Section III establishes permitted uses and development regulations for areas within the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD that are designated Residential "R" on the RPUD Master Plan. 3.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION A. Areas designated as "R" on the RPUD Master Plan are designed to accommodate multiple family residential types, recreational uses, essential services, and customary accessory uses. Acreage is based on a conceptual design. Actual acreage of the development and preserve areas shall be established at the time of Site Development Plan or Preliminary Subdivision Plat approvals in accordance with the Collier County Land Development Code. Areas designated as "R" accommodate internal roadways, open space, parks and amenity areas, lakes and water management facilities, and other similar facilities that are accessory or customary to residential development. B. Areas designated as "R" are intended to provide a maximum of 291 dwelling units. 3.3 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES A. Principal Uses and Structures 1. Single-family attached and detached. 2. Duplex and two-family. 3. Multiple-family. 4. Townhomes B. Accessory Uses and Structures 1. Common indoor and outdoor recreational facilities. 2. Sales and leasing facilities. 3. Clubhouse, meeting rooms. 4. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to uses permitted in this area. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline III-1 3.A.b Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Table I sets forth the development standards for land uses within the "R" Residential District. B. Required Parking: Parking within the residential area shall be provided based on the following standards: 1. Recreation Facilities - 2 per court, 1 per 600 square feet of building area, 1 per 200 square feet of pool water area. No additional parking shall be required for outdoor playground facilities. Up to 10 parking spaces per recreational facility may be directly loaded off a private roadway serving the recreational area. 2. Temporary Model Sales Facility - minimum 6 parking spaces per building. Parking for models or temporary sales facilities shall be permitted to back directly onto private roadways serving the units. C. Standards for parking, landscaping, signs and other land uses where such standards are not specified herein or within the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD, shall be in accordance with the Land Development Code in effect at the time of Site Development Plan approval. Unless otherwise indicated, required yards, heights, and floor area standards apply to principal structures. D. Development standards for uses not specifically set forth in Table I shall be established during the Site Development Plan Approval as set forth in Chapter 4 of the Land Development Code in accordance with those standards of the zoning district which is most similar to the proposed use. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline III-2 3.A.b Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) TABLE I SANTA BARBARA LANDINGS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR "R" RESIDENTIAL AREAS Permitted Uses and Standards Single Family Detached Zero Lot Line Duplex, Single Family Attached and Townhouse5 Multi-Family Dwellings 5 Minimum Lot Area 5,000 SF 4,000 SF NA NA Minimum Lot Width 50' 40' NA NA Minimum Lot Depth 100' 100' NA NA Front Yard Setback1 20'/23' 20'/23 20'/23' 20'/23' Side Yard Setback 6' 0' or 6' 0' or6' 15' Rear Yard Setback2 15' 15' 15' 15' Santa Barbara Blvd. R-O-W Setback 20' 20' 20' 20' Rear Yard Accessory Setback2 10' 10' 10' 10' Preserve Setback3 Accessory Principal 10' 25' 10' 25' 10' 25' 10' 25' Maximum Zoned Building Height 2 Stories or 30' 2 Stories or 30' 2 Stories or 30' 2 Stories or 30' Distance Between4 Detached Principal Structures 12' 12' 12' 15' Floor Area Min. (SF) 750 SF 750 SF 750 SF 750 SF All distances are in feet unless otherwise noted. 1 Front yards shall be measured as follows: A. If the parcel is served by a public right-of-way, setback is measured from the adjacent right-of-way line. B. If the parcel is served by a private road or access easement, setback is measured from the back of curb (if curbed) or edge of pavement (if not curbed). For multiple family buildings served by an unplatted driveway, no setback shall be required; however, adequate stacking shall be provided to accommodate vehicular parking. For tract B, front entry garage setback shall be a minimum of 23' from private row or back edge of sidewalk. C. For structures with side or rear entry garages, the minimum front yard may be reduced to 12'. 2Rear yards for principal and accessory structures on lots and tracts which abut lake, or open space (non-preserve) may be reduced to O' feet; however, a reduced building setback shall not reduce the width of any required landscape buffer, as may be applicable. 3 For purposes of this Section, accessory structures shall include but not be limited to attached screen enclosures and roofed lanais. 4 A minimum building separation of twelve (12) feet between detached structures. Detached garages may be separated by a minimum of ten (10) feet. 5Attached single-family and multi-family structures within Tract B shall not exceed 4 dwelling units per structure. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline III-3 3.A.b Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) SECTION IV PRESERVE "P" AREAS 4.1 PURPOSE Section IV establishes permitted uses and development regulations for areas within Santa Barbara Landings RPUD that are designated as Preserve "P" on the RPUD Master Plan. 4.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION Areas designated as "P" on the RPUD Master Plan are designed to accommodate natural systems existing or created as preserves and limited water management uses and functions. 4.3 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES A. No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land or water used, in whole or in part, subject to review and approval by local, state & federal agencies as required, for other than the following: B. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures 1. Boardwalks and nature trails (excluding impervious paved trails). 2. Water management facilities. 3. Any other preserve and related use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and which the Board of Zoning Appeals determines to be compatible in the Preserve Area. 4.4 PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS A. Building setbacks shall be 20 feet from the RPUD boundary for any permitted structure. B. Maximum zoned height for any structure shall be 20'. 4.5 PRESERVE AREA ADJUSTMENTS The proposed preserve areas depicted on the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD Master Plan are intended to meet the native vegetation requirements of the Collier County Growth Management Plan and the Collier County LDC. Adjustments may be made to the location of the preservation areas at the time of preliminary plat or site development plan approval based on jurisdictional agency permit requirements. Approximately 6 acres of native vegetation exists on-site at the time of rezoning application. Through retention of existing native vegetation and revegetation of open 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline IV-1 3.A.b Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) spaces on-site, the developer shall provide a minimum of 3 acres of on-site native vegetation, which shall consist of a minimum of 1.5 acres of retained vegetation and 1.5 acres of replanted and enhanced native vegetation. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline IV-2 3.A.b Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) SECTION V DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS 5.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the commitments for the development of this project. 5.2 GENERAL All facilities shall be constructed in strict accordance with Final Site Development Plans, Final Subdivision Plans and all applicable State and local laws, codes, and regulations applicable to this RPUD, in effect at the time of Final Plat, Final Site Development Plan approval or building permit application as the case may be. Except where specifically noted or stated otherwise, the standards and specifications of the official County Land Development Code shall apply to this project even if the land within the RPUD is not to be platted. The developer, his successor and assigns, shall be responsible for the commitments outlined in this document. These developer commitments will be enforced through provisions agreed to be included in the declaration of covenants and restrictions or similar recorded instrument. Such provisions must be enforceable by lot owners against the developer, it successors and assigns, regardless of turnover or not to any property or homeowners' association. The developer, his successor or assignee, shall follow the RPUD Master Plan and the regulations of this RPUD as adopted and any other conditions or modifications as may be agreed to in the rezoning of the property. In addition, any successor in title or assignee is subject to the commitments within this Agreement. 5.3 RPUD MASTER PLAN A. Exhibit "A", RPUD Master Plan illustrates the proposed development and is conceptual in nature. Proposed area, lot or land use boundaries or special land use boundaries shall not be construed to be final and may be varied at any subsequent approval phase such as Final Platting or Site Development Plan approval. Subject to the provisions of Chapter 10 of the LDC, amendments may be made from time to time. 5.4 SCHEDULE OF DEVELOPMENT/PUD MONITORING REPORT A. The landowners shall proceed and be governed according to the time limits pursuant to Chapter 10 of the LDC. B. Monitoring Report: An annual monitoring report shall be submitted pursuant to Chapter 10 of the LDC. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline V-1 3.A.b Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) A. One entity (hereinafter the Managing Entity) shall be responsible for PUD monitoring until close-out of the PUD, and this entity shall also be responsible for satisfying all PUD commitments until close-out of the PUD. At the time of this PUD Insubstantial Change approval dated__________2020, the Managing Entity for Tract B is St. George Group, Corp. Should the Managing Entity desire to transfer the monitoring and commitments to a successor entity, then it must provide a copy of a legally binding document that needs to be approved for legal sufficiency by the County Attorney. After such approval, the Managing Entity will be released of its obligations upon written approval of the transfer by County staff, and the successor entity shall become the Managing Entity. As Owner and Developer sell off tracts, the Managing Entity shall provide written notice to County that includes acknowledgement of the commitments required by the PUD by the new owner and the new owner’s agreement to comply with the Commitments through the Managing Entity, but the Managing Entity shall not be relieved of its responsibility under this Section. When the PUD is closed-out, then the Managing Entity is no longer responsible for the monitoring and fulfillment of PUD commitments. 5.5 ENGINEERING A. This project shall be required to meet all County Ordinances in effect at the time final construction documents are submitted for development approval. B. Design and construction of all improvements shall be subject to compliance with appropriate provisions of the LDC. 5.6 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT In accordance with the Rules of the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), this project shall be designed for a storm event of 3-day duration and 25-year return frequency. A. The project will be permitted with the South Florida Water Management District and copies of the applicable permits will be provided to Collier County prior to issuance of applicable County permits. B. Existing lakes already constructed as of the effective date of this regulation shall be allowed to continue to exist in accordance with the cross sections shown on Surface Water Management Plan, Exhibit "B". Any new lakes must meet the requirements of the then current LDC. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline V-2 3.A.b Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 5.7 UTILITIES A. Water distribution, sewage collection and transmission and interim water and/or sewage treatment facilities to serve the project are to be designed, constructed, conveyed, owned and maintained in accordance with Collier County Ordinance No. 97-17, as amended, and other applicable County rules and regulations. B. All necessary easements, dedications, or other instruments shall be granted to insure the continued operation and maintenance of all service utilities in compliance with applicable regulations in effect at the time approvals are requested. C. Water and wastewater systems shall be constructed in accordance with State of Florida Laws and Collier County's Codes and Ordinances. D. All construction plans, technical specifications and hydraulic design reports are to be reviewed and approved in writing by the Engineering Services Department of the Community Development and Environmental Services Division prior to commencement of construction E. Upon completion of construction, all water and wastewater systems within the project shall be tested and must meet minimum County standards and requirements. The system(s), or a portion thereof, that is found to meet the requirements set forth in item #5 below, may then be conveyed to the County for ownership and maintenance. F. If County's utility system does not have access readily available to serve a project within the County's service area, extensions to the County infrastructure may be required. All required extensions shall be the sole responsibility of the Developer, fiscally and otherwise (time and schedule), unless such extension has been previously defined in the County Water and/or Wastewater Master Plan. In such case, the developer may negotiate an upsizing agreement with the County. If it is determined by the County that neither of these two options are feasible, in interim system may be considered. G. Items on the following list shall be conveyed to the County for ownership and maintenance upon approval from the Board of County Commissioners if they are located within a County right-of-way or County Utility Easement (CUE), are in compliance with the latest revision of the Collier County Utilities Standards and Procedures Ordinance, and are connected to the County Water, Wastewater or Reclaimed Systems: 1. Potable water lines 6" or larger, including water meters and backflow devices that are not on fire lines. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline V-3 3.A.b Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 2. Gravity wastewater lines 8" or larger. 3. Wastewater lift stations that are located within a CUE. 4. Force mains 4" or larger. 5. CUE's that are determined to be necessary to access and maintain utility systems and structures. 6. Non-potable irrigation water lines 6" or larger, including the water meter and backflow devices. For potable and reclaimed water distribution systems that will not be conveyed to the County, a master meter shall be required. Such systems shall be owned and maintained by the applicant, his successor or assigns, from the customer side of the master meter and backflow device or the check valve at the property line or County Utility Easement limit. School and park developments are included in the list of types of developments whose internal systems the applicant or assigns shall be responsible to own and maintain. H. Private lift stations shall conform to the same specifications that apply to public lift stations, unless a Deviation from the Ordinance has been granted in advance and writing by the County Wastewater. The lift station Control Package shall include an operable Telemetry Control System, as specified by County Standards. I. The developer will pay all impact fees in accordance with the latest revision of the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, Code of Laws Section 74.303(d). J. PUD's and DRI's shall have only one master pump station. K. Lift station easement areas shall be designed to 30 feet by 30 feet, or twice the wetwell depth by twice the wetwell depth, whichever is larger. L. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 90-30, as amended, Code of Laws Chapter 118, solid waste disposal shall be required in the form of bulk containers service (garbage dumpsters and/or compactors) for all commercial and industrial establishments, unless authorization for alternative means of disposal is approved by the Public Utilities Division. Bulk container service shall be required to all multi-family projects not receiving curbside pickup. Solid waste disposal shall be required in the form of curbside pickup for all units on the annual Mandatory Trash Collection and Disposal Special Assessment Roll's. All individual units within a deed-restricted area must have an enclosed location other than the residential structure, such as a carport or garage for the storage of individual solid waste containers, or as otherwise permitted in Section 5.03.04 of the LDC. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline V-4 3.A.b Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) M. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 90-30, as amended, Code of Laws Chapter 118, all provisions and facilities for solid waste collection and disposal shall conform to all portions of Section 5.03.04 (Solid Waste Collection and Disposal) of the latest edition of the LDC. 5.8 TRAFFIC The development of this RPUD Master Plan shall be subject to and governed by the following conditions: A. All traffic control devices, signs, pavement markings and design criteria shall be in accordance with Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards (MUMS), current edition, FDOT Design Standards, current edition, and the Manual On Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), current edition. All other improvements shall be consistent with and as required by the Collier county Land Development code (LDC). B. Arterial level street lighting shall be provided at all access points. Access lighting must be in place prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy (CO). C. Site-related improvements necessary for safe ingress and egress to this project, as determined by Collier County, shall not be eligible for impact fee credits. All required improvements shall be in place and available to the public prior to the issuance of the first CO. D. Road impact fees shall be paid in accordance with Collier County Ordinance 01- 13, as amended, Code of Laws Chapter 74 and Chapter 6 and Chapter 10 of the LDC, as it may be amended. E. All work within Collier County rights-of-way or public easements shall require a Right-of-way Permit. F. All proposed median opening locations shall be in accordance with the Collier County Access Management Policy (Resolution 01-247), as it may be amended, and the LDC, as it may be amended. Collier County reserves the right to modify or close any median opening existing at the time of approval of this RPUD which is found to be adverse to the health, safety and welfare of the public. Any such modifications shall be based on, but are not limited to, safety, operational circulation, and roadway capacity. G. Nothing in any development order shall vest a right of access in excess of a right in/right out condition at any access point. Neither will the existence of a point of ingress, a point of egress or a median opening, nor the lack thereof, shall be the basis for any future cause of action for damages against the County by the developer, its successor in title, or assignee. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline V-5 3.A.b Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) H. All internal roads, driveways, alleys, pathways, sidewalks and interconnections to adjacent developments shall be operated and maintained by an entity created by the developer and Collier Country shall have no responsibility for maintenance of any such facilities. I. If any required turn lane improvement requires the use of existing County right- of-way or easement, compensating right-of-way, shall be provided without cost to Collier County as a consequence of such improvement. J. If, in the sole opinion of Collier County, a traffic signal, or other traffic control device, sign or pavement marking improvement within a public right-of-way or easement is determined to be necessary, the cost of such improvement shall be borne by the developer and shall be paid to Collier County before the issuance of the first CO. K. Upon written request by Collier County the property owner shall dedicate, to Collier County without compensation, an area of approximately 721± square feet for road right-of-way purposes, as depicted on the RPUD Conceptual Master Plan. L. A temporary construction access for all site work and vertical construction on Tract B shall be located along Santa Barbara Boulevard, as shown on the PUD Master Plan and subject to issuance of the appropriate right-of-way permit. Temporary construction access shall be limited to one year from issuance of development permit (PPL or SDP). To limit the access to construction activities only, signage is required to indicate Construction Only, and barricades are required to block access during non-working hours. Prior to final approval by the County, the temporary access shall be totally removed, and right-of-way shall be restored. 5.9 PLANNING Pursuant to Chapter 2 of the LDC, if during the course of site clearing, excavation or other construction activity a historic or archaeological artifact is found, all development within the minimum area necessary to protect the discovery shall be immediately stopped and the Collier County Code Enforcement Department contacted. 5.10 ENVIRONMENTAL A. An exotic vegetation removal, monitoring, and maintenance (exotic-free) plan for the site, shall be submitted to Environmental Services Staff for review and approval prior to Final Site Development Plan/Construction Plan approval for all parcels included on that project. All category 1 invasive exotic plants as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Council shall be removed in Preserve areas, and annual removal (in perpetuity) shall be the responsibility of the property owner. A.B. A minimum of (3.0 acres) of the on-site native vegetation shall be retained or revegetated, consistent with Chapter 3 of the LDC as conceptually shown as preserve areas on the Exhibit "A", Conceptual RPUD Master Plan. C. Setbacks from preserves shall be as required in the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD, Table I. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline V-6 3.A.b Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) D. All preserve areas shall be designated as conservation/preservation tracts or easements on all construction plans and shall be so dedicated on all plats or recorded as an easement for site plans pursuant to Section 704.06 of the Florida Statutes, for plats and be dedicated to the project's homeowners' association or like entity for ownership and maintenance responsibility, and to Collier County with no responsibility for maintenance. All documentation necessary to record conservation easements over the preserve areas shall be provided prior to the next SDP approval for this RPUD. E. This RPUD shall comply with the guidelines of the USFWS and FFWCC for impacts to protected species. A habitat management plan for those species shall be submitted to environmental review staff for review and approval prior to site plan approval. F. This RPUD shall be in compliance with the Growth Management Plan, and LDC, except as may be modified herein, at the time of final development order approval. G. A Preserve Management Plan shall be provided to environmental staff for approval prior to site/construction plan approval identifying methods to address treatment of invasive exotic species, fire management and maintenance. A SFWMD jurisdictional determination shall be shown on the site development plan. H. All approved agency permits shall be submitted prior to final site plan/construction plan approval. I. A replanting plan for the re-created preserve areas shall be provided at the time of next development order submittal. Perimeter berms shall be located outside of all upland/wetland preserves. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline V-7 3.A.b Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 5.11 HOUSING A. The developer or successors and assigns shall pay the sum of $1,000.00 to Collier County from the closing of each of the dwelling units constructed within Tract "B" of the RPUD. The payment shall be made within seven (7) days of the closing of the residential unit. AB. The developer or successors and assigns shall require a minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the dwelling units developed within Tract B of the RPUD to be initially sold to individuals or families that use the dwelling unit as their primary residence. The deed to the initial purchaser shall include a restriction that the initial purchaser shall use the unit as their primary residence. C. The developer or successors and assigns agrees to make available for sale a minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the dwelling units at a sales price less than $240,000.00. BD. The developer or successors and assigns agrees to sell a minimum of ten percent (10%) of the total number of dwelling units constructed within Tract B of the RPUD to persons employed in Collier County and earning a family income ranging between 100% and 125 that is up to 140% of the County's median income. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline V-8 3.A.b Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: Attachment A - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Strike Underline (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) SANTA BARBARA LANDINGS RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 41.6± Acres Located in Section 04, Township 50 S, Range 26 E Collier County, Florida PREPARED FOR: Santa Barbara Garden Villas, LLC 1401 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Suite 401 Coral Gables, Florida 33134 And St. George Group, Corporation 6303 Blue Lagoon Drive Suite 390 Miami, FL 33126 PREPARED BY: Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, Florida 34103 And D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Q. Grady Minor & Associates 3800 Via del Rey Bonita Springs, Fl 34134 Insubstantial Change for St. George Group, Corp by: Johnson Engineering, Inc. 2350 Stanford Court Naples, FL 34112 DATE FILED DATE APPROVED BY CPCC DATE APPROVED BY BCC 10-11-2005 ORDINANCE NUMBER 2005-53 INSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE: ___________ EXHIBIT "A" 3.A.c Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE LIST OF EXHIBITS AND TABLE i STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE ii SECTION I LEGAL DESCRIPTION, PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION I-1 SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS II-1 SECTION III RESIDENTIAL "R" DEVELOPMENT AREA III-1 SECTION IV PRESERVE "P" AREA IV-1 SECTION V DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS V-1 3.A.c Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) LIST OF EXHIBITS AND TABLES EXHIBIT A CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN EXHIBIT B SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN EXHIBIT C LOCATION MAP EXHIBIT D BOUNDARY SURVEY TABLE I DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS III-3 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Clean i 3.A.c Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE This Residential Planned Unit Development is on approximately 41.6± acres of land located in Section 04, Township 50 S, Range 26 E, Collier County, Florida. Approximately 6.3 acres of the property is encumbered with a 100' wide roadway easement for Santa Barbara Boulevard, making the net site approximately 35.3 acres. The name of the Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) shall be Santa Barbara Landings RPUD. The development of the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD will be in compliance with the planning goals and objectives of Collier County as established in the Growth Management Plan. The development will be consistent with the policies of the land development regulations adopted under the Growth Management Plan and applicable regulations for the following reasons: 1. The subject property is located within the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Sub-District, as identified on the Future Land Use Map. 2. The density provided for in the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD complies with the Density Rating System contained in the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. The subject property is located within the residential density band, which extends from the Mixed-use activity center located at the intersection of Santa Barbara Boulevard and Davis Boulevard. The density permissible is 4 dwelling units per acre. Up to 3 dwelling units per acre may be added within the density band, bringing the permissible base density to 7 dwelling units per acre. Base density Density band Maximum permitted density Requested density 4.0 du/acre + 3.0du/acre = 7.0 du/acre 7.0 du/acre (291 units) At the time of the rezoning application, 248 multiple-family dwellings exist on the site. The subject rezoning will add a maximum of 43 additional dwelling units for a maximum total of 291 dwelling units. All property within the RPUD boundary shall be utilized in calculating the project density. 3. The project development is compatible and complementary to existing and future surrounding land uses as required in Policy 5.4 of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE). 4. Improvements are planned to be in compliance with the applicable land development regulations as required in Objective 3 of the FLUE, except as may be modified in this RPUD document 5. All final local development orders for this project are subject to the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance as required in Objective 2 of the FLUE. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Clean ii 3.A.c Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 6. The design of Santa Barbara Landings RPUD protects the function of the existing drainage features and natural groundwater aquifer recharge areas as required in Objective 1.5 of the Drainage Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element. 7. This project shall be subject to applicable Sections of the LDC at the time of development order approval, except as otherwise provided herein. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Clean iii 3.A.c Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) SECTION I LEGAL DESCRIPTION, PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION 1.1 PURPOSE Section I sets forth the location and ownership of the property, and describes the existing conditions of the property proposed to be developed under the project name Santa Barbara Landings RPUD. 1.2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION The subject property being 41.6 acres more or less, is described as: The west half (W. ½) of the west half (W. ½) of the northwest quarter (N.W. ¼) of Section 4, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, all being situated in Collier County, Florida, less the north 50 feet thereof. SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. 1.3 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP The property is currently owned by: TRACT A: unit owners of the Santa Barbara Landings Property Owner’s Association Inc. and Granada Lakes Villas Condominium Association Inc., whose address is 145 Santa Clara Drive, Naples, FL 34104, and TRACT B: St. George Group, Corp, whose address is: 6303 Blue Lagoon Drive Suite 390, Miami, FL 33126 1.4 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY A. The project is located in Section 04, Township 50, Range 26 and is generally bordered on the north by Radio Road, on the east by Plantation PUD; on the south by Bembridge PUD on the west by Santa Barbara Boulevard. B. The zoning classification of the subject property at the time of RPUD application is RMF-6. C. According to FEMA/FIRM Map Panel Number 120067 415 D, dated June 3, 1986, the property is located within Zone X. D. Soils on the site generally include Hallandale fine sand and Boca, Rivera, Limestone Substratum and Copeland fine sand depressional. E. Existing vegetation on the site consists of melaleuca, Brazilian Pepper, palmetto prairie, pine flatwoood, cypress, Cabbage Palm and disturbed lands. Wetland areas have been heavily impacted by melaleuca. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Clean I-1 3.A.c Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) F. According to the Collier County Drainage Atlas, the site is located in the Lely Canal Basin. The conceptual water management plan is depicted in the Surface Water Management Report, which accompanied the rezone application submittal. 1.5 SHORT TITLE This Ordinance is known and cited as the "Santa Barbara Landings Residential Planned Unit Development Ordinance." 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Clean I-2 3.A.c Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS 2.1 PURPOSE Section II delineates and generally describes the plan of development and identifies relationships to applicable County ordinances, policies, and procedures. 2.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT A. Santa Barbara Landings RPUD is a mixed-use residential project and will consist of two development parcels and multiple preservation areas. Categories of land uses include those for residential and preserve areas. The Residential areas are designed to accommodate single-family attached, duplex and multiple family dwellings. The overall project density is 7 dwelling units per acre and the maximum units permitted in the RPUD shall be 291 units. B. Exhibit "A" depicts the RPUD Master Plan. The RPUD Master Plan includes a table that summarizes land use acreage. The location, size and configuration of individual tracts shall be determined at the time of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Plat approval. 2.3 COMPLIANCE WITH COUNTY ORDINANCES A. Regulations for development of Santa Barbara Landings RPUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this document, Planned Unit Development District and other applicable sections and parts of the Collier County Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan in effect at the time of issuance of any development order to which said regulations relate which authorize the construction of improvements. Where these regulations fail to provide developmental standards then the provisions of the most similar district in the Land Development Code shall apply. B. Unless otherwise noted, the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set forth in the Land Development Code in effect at the time of building permit application. C. Unless modified, waived or excepted from this RPUD Document or associated exhibits, the provisions of other sections of the land development codes, where applicable, remain in full force and effect with respect to the development of the land that comprises this RPUD. D. Development permitted by the approval of this petition will be subject to a concurrency review under the provisions of Chapter 6, Adequate Public Facilities, of the Land Development Code. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Clean II- 1 3.A.c Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 2.4 LAND USES Land uses are generally depicted on the RPUD Master Plan, Exhibit A. The specific location and size of individual tracts and the assignment of square footage or units shall be determined by the developer at the time of site development plan approval, preliminary subdivision plat approval, or final subdivision plat approval subject to the provisions of Chapter 10 of the Collier County LDC. 2.5 USE OF RIGHTS-OF-WAY The Developer may utilize land within the rights-of-way within the RPUD for landscaping, decorative entranceways, and unified signage. This utilization is subject to review and administrative approval during the development review process by the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator for engineering and safety considerations. 2.6 MODEL HOMES SALES OFFICE AND CONSTRUCTION OFFICE A. Construction offices and other uses and structures related to the promotion and sale of real estate such as, but not limited to, pavilions, parking areas, and signs, shall be permitted principal uses throughout the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD. These uses shall be subject to the requirements of Chapter 5 and Chapter IO of the LDC. B. Model Homes may be permitted in multi-family and townhome buildings may be utilized for wet or dry models, subject to the time frames specified in Chapter 5 of the LDC. 2.7 CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS TO RPUD DOCUMENT OR RPUD MASTER PLAN Changes and amendments may be made to this RPUD Ordinance or RPUD Master Plan as provided in Chapter 10 of the LDC. Minor changes and refinements as described herein may be made by the Developer in connection with any type of development or permit application required by LDC. 2.8 OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS A minimum of 30% of the project (12.48± acres) shall be devoted to usable open space. 2.9 NATIVE VEGETATION RETENTION REQUIREMENTS A minimum of three (3) acres of native vegetation shall be maintained on the subject site through a combination of preservation of existing native vegetation and revegetation of native vegetation. The areas of retained native vegetation and replanted native vegetation are shown as Preserve areas on the Conceptual Master Plan, Exhibit A. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Clean II-2 3.A.c Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 2.10 COMMON AREA MAINTENANCE One or more Property Owner's Association (POA) will provide common area maintenance. The POA, as applicable, shall be responsible for the operation, maintenance, and management of the surface water and stormwater management systems and preserves serving Santa Barbara Landings RPUD, in accordance with any applicable permits from the South Florida Water Management District. 2.11 DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS A. The Collier County Planned Unit Development District is intended to encourage ingenuity, innovation and imagination in the planning, design and development or redevelopment of relatively large tracts of land under unified ownership as set forth in Chapter 2 of the LDC. I. Individual Projects a) Site Planning: Each distinct project within the RPUD will provide an aesthetically appealing, identifiable path of entry for pedestrians and vehicles. The orientation of buildings and structures will be sensitive to adjacent land uses and the surrounding community. b) Landscaping: Where applicable, plantings along public rights-of way will be complimentary to streetscape landscaping. 2.12 LANDSCAPE BUFFERS, BERMS, FENCES AND WALLS A. Landscape buffers, berms, fences and walls are generally permitted as a principal use throughout the RPUD, excluding preserves. B. The maximum fence, wall or berm height internal to the RPUD shall be eight (8) feet, not including those portions of walls incorporated into project identification signs. The maximum fence height shall be measured relative to the greater of the crown of the adjacent roadway or the adjacent minimum finished floor, as applicable. The eight (8') foot high precast wall shown on the conceptual master plan shall be constructed along the eastern boundary of Tract B concurrent with development of the residential units in tract B. C. Perimeter Buffers abutting rights-of-way shall be permitted to deviate from the required 20' wide Type D buffer, to permit a Type D buffer an average of 20' in width, with no part of the buffer being less than 15' in width. The minimum area for the combined buffers along Radio Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard shall be 66,129 square feet (1.52± acres). 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Clean II-3 3.A.c Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 2.13 SIGNAGE A. GENERAL Signage shall be consistent with Section 5.06 of the LDC. 2.14 SUBSTITUTIONS TO SUBDIVISION DESIGN STANDARDS / DEVIATIONS 1. The Developer reserves the right to request substitutions to subdivision improvement and utility design standards in accordance with Chapter 10 of the LDC. A. Chapter 6, Sidewalks, bike lanes and bike paths 1. Existing site constraints prohibit retrofitting of the site with sidewalks meeting standards in Chapter 6 of the LDC. 2. A six (6) foot wide sidewalk shall be provided on only one (1) side of the internal local or private roadway exceeding one thousand (1,000) feet in length serving the project's additional 43 unit component. 3. The developer of Tract B shall construct a sidewalk interconnection concurrently with the road interconnection from Tract B to Tract A. The developer of Tract B shall coordinate with the School District of Collier County to construct a sidewalk interconnection from Tract B to the adjacent school property at time of Tract B development permitting. 4. The developer shall make payment-in-lieu of construction of the sidewalk within Santa Barbara Boulevard, due to its programmed improvement in the five-year work program. B. Section 4.06.00, Landscaping, buffering and vegetation retention 1. Perimeter Buffers abutting rights-of-way shall be permitted to deviate from the required 20' wide Type D buffer, to permit a Type D buffer an average of 20' in width, with no part of the buffer being less than 15' in width. The minimum area for the combined buffers along Radio Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard shall be 66,129 square feet (1.52± acres). C. Construction Standards Manual, Streets and access improvements 1. Construction Standards Manual, Street Right-of-Way Width Street right-of-way width: The minimum right-of-way width to be utilized for local streets and cul-de-sacs shall be forty (40) feet. Drive aisles serving multi-family tracts shall not be required to meet this standard. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Clean II-4 3.A.c Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 2. Construction Standards Manual, Dead-end Streets Cul-de-sacs may exceed a length of one thousand (1,000) feet. 3. Construction Standards Manual, Intersection Radii Intersection radii: Street intersections shall be provided with a minimum of a twenty five (25) foot radius (face of curb) for all internal project streets and a thirty-five (35) foot radius for intersections at project entrances. 2.15 GENERAL PERMITTED USES A. Certain uses shall be considered general permitted uses throughout the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD except in the Preserve Areas. General permitted uses are those uses that generally serve the entire RPUD or distinct projects there within. B. General Permitted Uses: 1. Essential services as set forth under Chapter 2 of the LDC. 2. Water management facilities and related structures. 3. Lakes including lakes with bulkheads or other architectural or structural bank treatments. 4. Guardhouses, gatehouses, and access control structures. 5. Temporary construction, sales, and administrative offices for the Developer and Developer's authorized contractors and consultants, including necessary access ways, parking areas and related uses. 6. Landscape features including, but not limited to, landscape buffers, berms, fences and walls subject to the standards set forth in Section 2.12 of this document. 7. Signage. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Clean II-5 3.A.c Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) SECTION III RESIDENTIAL "R" DEVELOPMENT AREAS 3.1 PURPOSE Section III establishes permitted uses and development regulations for areas within the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD that are designated Residential "R" on the RPUD Master Plan. 3.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION A. Areas designated as "R" on the RPUD Master Plan are designed to accommodate multiple family residential types, recreational uses, essential services, and customary accessory uses. Acreage is based on a conceptual design. Actual acreage of the development and preserve areas shall be established at the time of Site Development Plan or Preliminary Subdivision Plat approvals in accordance with the Collier County Land Development Code. Areas designated as "R" accommodate internal roadways, open space, parks and amenity areas, lakes and water management facilities, and other similar facilities that are accessory or customary to residential development. B. Areas designated as "R" are intended to provide a maximum of 291 dwelling units. 3.3 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES A. Principal Uses and Structures 1. Single-family attached and detached. 2. Duplex and two-family. 3. Multiple-family. 4. Townhomes B. Accessory Uses and Structures 1. Common indoor and outdoor recreational facilities. 2. Sales and leasing facilities. 3. Clubhouse, meeting rooms. 4. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to uses permitted in this area. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Clean III-1 3.A.c Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Table I sets forth the development standards for land uses within the "R" Residential District. B. Required Parking: Parking within the residential area shall be provided based on the following standards: 1. Recreation Facilities - 2 per court, 1 per 600 square feet of building area, 1 per 200 square feet of pool water area. No additional parking shall be required for outdoor playground facilities. Up to 10 parking spaces per recreational facility may be directly loaded off a private roadway serving the recreational area. 2. Temporary Model Sales Facility - minimum 6 parking spaces per building. Parking for models or temporary sales facilities shall be permitted to back directly onto private roadways serving the units. C. Standards for parking, landscaping, signs and other land uses where such standards are not specified herein or within the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD, shall be in accordance with the Land Development Code in effect at the time of Site Development Plan approval. Unless otherwise indicated, required yards, heights, and floor area standards apply to principal structures. D. Development standards for uses not specifically set forth in Table I shall be established during the Site Development Plan Approval as set forth in Chapter 4 of the Land Development Code in accordance with those standards of the zoning district which is most similar to the proposed use. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Clean III-2 3.A.c Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) TABLE I SANTA BARBARA LANDINGS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR "R" RESIDENTIAL AREAS Permitted Uses and Standards Single Family Detached Zero Lot Line Duplex, Single Family Attached and Townhouse5 Multi-Family Dwellings 5 Minimum Lot Area 5,000 SF 4,000 SF NA NA Minimum Lot Width 50' 40' NA NA Minimum Lot Depth 100' 100' NA NA Front Yard Setback1 20'/23' 20'/23 20'/23' 20'/23' Side Yard Setback 6' 0' or 6' 0' or6' 15' Rear Yard Setback2 15' 15' 15' 15' Santa Barbara Blvd. R-O-W Setback 20' 20' 20' 20' Rear Yard Accessory Setback2 10' 10' 10' 10' Preserve Setback3 Accessory Principal 10' 25' 10' 25' 10' 25' 10' 25' Maximum Zoned Building Height 2 Stories or 30' 2 Stories or 30' 2 Stories or 30' 2 Stories or 30' Distance Between4 Detached Principal Structures 12' 12' 12' 15' Floor Area Min. (SF) 750 SF 750 SF 750 SF 750 SF All distances are in feet unless otherwise noted. 1 Front yards shall be measured as follows: A. If the parcel is served by a public right-of-way, setback is measured from the adjacent right-of-way line. B. If the parcel is served by a private road or access easement, setback is measured from the back of curb (if curbed) or edge of pavement (if not curbed). For multiple family buildings served by an unplatted driveway, no setback shall be required; however, adequate stacking shall be provided to accommodate vehicular parking. For tract B, front entry garage setback shall be a minimum of 23' from private row or back edge of sidewalk. C. For structures with side or rear entry garages, the minimum front yard may be reduced to 12'. 2Rear yards for principal and accessory structures on lots and tracts which abut lake, or open space (non-preserve) may be reduced to O' feet; however, a reduced building setback shall not reduce the width of any required landscape buffer, as may be applicable. 3 For purposes of this Section, accessory structures shall include but not be limited to attached screen enclosures and roofed lanais. 4 A minimum building separation of twelve (12) feet between detached structures. Detached garages may be separated by a minimum of ten (10) feet. 5Attached single-family and multi-family structures within Tract B shall not exceed 4 dwelling units per structure. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Clean III-3 3.A.c Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) SECTION IV PRESERVE "P" AREAS 4.1 PURPOSE Section IV establishes permitted uses and development regulations for areas within Santa Barbara Landings RPUD that are designated as Preserve "P" on the RPUD Master Plan. 4.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION Areas designated as "P" on the RPUD Master Plan are designed to accommodate natural systems existing or created as preserves and limited water management uses and functions. 4.3 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES A. No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land or water used, in whole or in part, subject to review and approval by local, state & federal agencies as required, for other than the following: B. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures 1. Boardwalks and nature trails (excluding impervious paved trails). 2. Water management facilities. 3. Any other preserve and related use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and which the Board of Zoning Appeals determines to be compatible in the Preserve Area. 4.4 PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS A. Building setbacks shall be 20 feet from the RPUD boundary for any permitted structure. B. Maximum zoned height for any structure shall be 20'. 4.5 PRESERVE AREA ADJUSTMENTS The proposed preserve areas depicted on the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD Master Plan are intended to meet the native vegetation requirements of the Collier County Growth Management Plan and the Collier County LDC. Adjustments may be made to the location of the preservation areas at the time of preliminary plat or site development plan approval based on jurisdictional agency permit requirements. Approximately 6 acres of native vegetation exists on-site at the time of rezoning application. Through retention of existing native vegetation and revegetation of open 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Clean IV-1 3.A.c Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) spaces on-site, the developer shall provide a minimum of 3 acres of on-site native vegetation, which shall consist of a minimum of 1.5 acres of retained vegetation and 1.5 acres of replanted and enhanced native vegetation. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Clean IV-2 3.A.c Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) SECTION V DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS 5.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the commitments for the development of this project. 5.2 GENERAL All facilities shall be constructed in strict accordance with Final Site Development Plans, Final Subdivision Plans and all applicable State and local laws, codes, and regulations applicable to this RPUD, in effect at the time of Final Plat, Final Site Development Plan approval or building permit application as the case may be. Except where specifically noted or stated otherwise, the standards and specifications of the official County Land Development Code shall apply to this project even if the land within the RPUD is not to be platted. The developer, his successor and assigns, shall be responsible for the commitments outlined in this document. These developer commitments will be enforced through provisions agreed to be included in the declaration of covenants and restrictions or similar recorded instrument. Such provisions must be enforceable by lot owners against the developer, it successors and assigns, regardless of turnover or not to any property or homeowners' association. The developer, his successor or assignee, shall follow the RPUD Master Plan and the regulations of this RPUD as adopted and any other conditions or modifications as may be agreed to in the rezoning of the property. In addition, any successor in title or assignee is subject to the commitments within this Agreement. 5.3 RPUD MASTER PLAN A. Exhibit "A", RPUD Master Plan illustrates the proposed development and is conceptual in nature. Proposed area, lot or land use boundaries or special land use boundaries shall not be construed to be final and may be varied at any subsequent approval phase such as Final Platting or Site Development Plan approval. Subject to the provisions of Chapter 10 of the LDC, amendments may be made from time to time. 5.4 PUD MONITORING 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Clean V-1 3.A.c Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) A. One entity (hereinafter the Managing Entity) shall be responsible for PUD monitoring until close-out of the PUD, and this entity shall also be responsible for satisfying all PUD commitments until close-out of the PUD. At the time of this PUD Insubstantial Change approval dated__________2020, the Managing Entity for Tract B is St. George Group, Corp. Should the Managing Entity desire to transfer the monitoring and commitments to a successor entity, then it must provide a copy of a legally binding document that needs to be approved for legal sufficiency by the County Attorney. After such approval, the Managing Entity will be released of its obligations upon written approval of the transfer by County staff, and the successor entity shall become the Managing Entity. As Owner and Developer sell off tracts, the Managing Entity shall provide written notice to County that includes acknowledgement of the commitments required by the PUD by the new owner and the new owner’s agreement to comply with the Commitments through the Managing Entity, but the Managing Entity shall not be relieved of its responsibility under this Section. When the PUD is closed-out, then the Managing Entity is no longer responsible for the monitoring and fulfillment of PUD commitments. 5.5 ENGINEERING A. This project shall be required to meet all County Ordinances in effect at the time final construction documents are submitted for development approval. B. Design and construction of all improvements shall be subject to compliance with appropriate provisions of the LDC. 5.6 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT In accordance with the Rules of the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), this project shall be designed for a storm event of 3-day duration and 25-year return frequency. A. The project will be permitted with the South Florida Water Management District and copies of the applicable permits will be provided to Collier County prior to issuance of applicable County permits. B. Existing lakes already constructed as of the effective date of this regulation shall be allowed to continue to exist in accordance with the cross sections shown on Surface Water Management Plan, Exhibit "B". Any new lakes must meet the requirements of the then current LDC. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Clean V-2 3.A.c Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 5.7 UTILITIES A. Water distribution, sewage collection and transmission and interim water and/or sewage treatment facilities to serve the project are to be designed, constructed, conveyed, owned and maintained in accordance with Collier County Ordinance No. 97-17, as amended, and other applicable County rules and regulations. B. All necessary easements, dedications, or other instruments shall be granted to insure the continued operation and maintenance of all service utilities in compliance with applicable regulations in effect at the time approvals are requested. C. Water and wastewater systems shall be constructed in accordance with State of Florida Laws and Collier County's Codes and Ordinances. D. All construction plans, technical specifications and hydraulic design reports are to be reviewed and approved in writing by the Engineering Services Department of the Community Development and Environmental Services Division prior to commencement of construction E. Upon completion of construction, all water and wastewater systems within the project shall be tested and must meet minimum County standards and requirements. The system(s), or a portion thereof, that is found to meet the requirements set forth in item #5 below, may then be conveyed to the County for ownership and maintenance. F. If County's utility system does not have access readily available to serve a project within the County's service area, extensions to the County infrastructure may be required. All required extensions shall be the sole responsibility of the Developer, fiscally and otherwise (time and schedule), unless such extension has been previously defined in the County Water and/or Wastewater Master Plan. In such case, the developer may negotiate an upsizing agreement with the County. If it is determined by the County that neither of these two options are feasible, in interim system may be considered. G. Items on the following list shall be conveyed to the County for ownership and maintenance upon approval from the Board of County Commissioners if they are located within a County right-of-way or County Utility Easement (CUE), are in compliance with the latest revision of the Collier County Utilities Standards and Procedures Ordinance, and are connected to the County Water, Wastewater or Reclaimed Systems: 1. Potable water lines 6" or larger, including water meters and backflow devices that are not on fire lines. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Clean V-3 3.A.c Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 2. Gravity wastewater lines 8" or larger. 3. Wastewater lift stations that are located within a CUE. 4. Force mains 4" or larger. 5. CUE's that are determined to be necessary to access and maintain utility systems and structures. 6. Non-potable irrigation water lines 6" or larger, including the water meter and backflow devices. For potable and reclaimed water distribution systems that will not be conveyed to the County, a master meter shall be required. Such systems shall be owned and maintained by the applicant, his successor or assigns, from the customer side of the master meter and backflow device or the check valve at the property line or County Utility Easement limit. School and park developments are included in the list of types of developments whose internal systems the applicant or assigns shall be responsible to own and maintain. H. Private lift stations shall conform to the same specifications that apply to public lift stations, unless a Deviation from the Ordinance has been granted in advance and writing by the County Wastewater. The lift station Control Package shall include an operable Telemetry Control System, as specified by County Standards. I. The developer will pay all impact fees in accordance with the latest revision of the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, Code of Laws Section 74.303(d). J. PUD's and DRI's shall have only one master pump station. K. Lift station easement areas shall be designed to 30 feet by 30 feet, or twice the wetwell depth by twice the wetwell depth, whichever is larger. L. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 90-30, as amended, Code of Laws Chapter 118, solid waste disposal shall be required in the form of bulk containers service (garbage dumpsters and/or compactors) for all commercial and industrial establishments, unless authorization for alternative means of disposal is approved by the Public Utilities Division. Bulk container service shall be required to all multi-family projects not receiving curbside pickup. Solid waste disposal shall be required in the form of curbside pickup for all units on the annual Mandatory Trash Collection and Disposal Special Assessment Roll's. All individual units within a deed-restricted area must have an enclosed location other than the residential structure, such as a carport or garage for the storage of individual solid waste containers, or as otherwise permitted in Section 5.03.04 of the LDC. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Clean V-4 3.A.c Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) M. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 90-30, as amended, Code of Laws Chapter 118, all provisions and facilities for solid waste collection and disposal shall conform to all portions of Section 5.03.04 (Solid Waste Collection and Disposal) of the latest edition of the LDC. 5.8 TRAFFIC The development of this RPUD Master Plan shall be subject to and governed by the following conditions: A. All traffic control devices, signs, pavement markings and design criteria shall be in accordance with Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards (MUMS), current edition, FDOT Design Standards, current edition, and the Manual On Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), current edition. All other improvements shall be consistent with and as required by the Collier county Land Development code (LDC). B. Arterial level street lighting shall be provided at all access points. Access lighting must be in place prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy (CO). C. Site-related improvements necessary for safe ingress and egress to this project, as determined by Collier County, shall not be eligible for impact fee credits. All required improvements shall be in place and available to the public prior to the issuance of the first CO. D. Road impact fees shall be paid in accordance with Collier County Ordinance 01- 13, as amended, Code of Laws Chapter 74 and Chapter 6 and Chapter 10 of the LDC, as it may be amended. E. All work within Collier County rights-of-way or public easements shall require a Right-of-way Permit. F. All proposed median opening locations shall be in accordance with the Collier County Access Management Policy (Resolution 01-247), as it may be amended, and the LDC, as it may be amended. Collier County reserves the right to modify or close any median opening existing at the time of approval of this RPUD which is found to be adverse to the health, safety and welfare of the public. Any such modifications shall be based on, but are not limited to, safety, operational circulation, and roadway capacity. G. Nothing in any development order shall vest a right of access in excess of a right in/right out condition at any access point. Neither will the existence of a point of ingress, a point of egress or a median opening, nor the lack thereof, shall be the basis for any future cause of action for damages against the County by the developer, its successor in title, or assignee. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Clean V-5 3.A.c Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) H. All internal roads, driveways, alleys, pathways, sidewalks and interconnections to adjacent developments shall be operated and maintained by an entity created by the developer and Collier Country shall have no responsibility for maintenance of any such facilities. I. If any required turn lane improvement requires the use of existing County right- of-way or easement, compensating right-of-way, shall be provided without cost to Collier County as a consequence of such improvement. J. If, in the sole opinion of Collier County, a traffic signal, or other traffic control device, sign or pavement marking improvement within a public right-of-way or easement is determined to be necessary, the cost of such improvement shall be borne by the developer and shall be paid to Collier County before the issuance of the first CO. K. Upon written request by Collier County the property owner shall dedicate, to Collier County without compensation, an area of approximately 721± square feet for road right-of-way purposes, as depicted on the RPUD Conceptual Master Plan. L. A temporary construction access for all site work and vertical construction on Tract B shall be located along Santa Barbara Boulevard, as shown on the PUD Master Plan and subject to issuance of the appropriate right-of-way permit. Temporary construction access shall be limited to one year from issuance of development permit (PPL or SDP). To limit the access to construction activities only, signage is required to indicate Construction Only, and barricades are required to block access during non-working hours. Prior to final approval by the County, the temporary access shall be totally removed, and right-of-way shall be restored. 5.9 PLANNING Pursuant to Chapter 2 of the LDC, if during the course of site clearing, excavation or other construction activity a historic or archaeological artifact is found, all development within the minimum area necessary to protect the discovery shall be immediately stopped and the Collier County Code Enforcement Department contacted. 5.10 ENVIRONMENTAL A. A minimum of (3.0 acres) of the on-site native vegetation shall be retained or revegetated, consistent with Chapter 3 of the LDC as conceptually shown as preserve areas on the Exhibit "A", Conceptual RPUD Master Plan. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Clean V-6 3.A.c Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 5.11 HOUSING A. The developer or successors and assigns shall require a minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the dwelling units developed within Tract B of the RPUD to be initially sold to individuals or families that use the dwelling unit as their primary residence. The deed to the initial purchaser shall include a restriction that the initial purchaser shall use the unit as their primary residence. B. The developer or successors and assigns agrees to sell a minimum of ten percent (10%) of the total number of dwelling units constructed within Tract B of the RPUD to persons employed in Collier County and earning a family income that is up to 140% of the County's median income. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Clean V-8 3.A.c Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: Attachment B - Santa Barbara Landings PUD Document - Clean version (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) INSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE 2/27/20 8' PRE CAST WALL (TRACT B)SANTA CLARA DRIVEROAD & SIDEWALK INTERCONNECTIONROAD & SIDEWALK INTERCONNECTIONINSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE 5/6/20Calusa Park School sidewalk interconnectionTEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ACCESS WITH RIGHT TURN LANETract B connection to School and construction access labelsSIDEWALK INTERCONNECTION - Final design to be coordinated with School District and Calusa Park Elementary AVERAGE AVERAGEERAGAVERAGEVERAG20' 0'0(i(min. (i15') TYPETYDINSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE 9/23/20Correction to buffer label per PUD3.A.dPacket Pg. 64Attachment: Attachment C - Master Plan Revisions - Santa Barbara Landings (14009 : PL20190000959 Tract B connection to School and construction access labelsINSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE 2/27/208' PRE CAST WALL (TRACT B) SANTA CLARA DRIVETEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ACCESS WITH RIGHT TURN LANEROAD & SIDEWALK INTERCONNECTIONROAD & SIDEWALK INTERCONNECTIONSIDEWALK INTERCONNECTION - Final design to be coordinated with School District and Calusa Park Elementary INSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE 5/6/20Calusa Park School sidewalk interconnectionAVERAGE AVERAGEAVERAGAVERAVERA20' 0'''((ii(min. 15')5'TTYPEDINSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE 9/23/20Correction to buffer label per PUD3.A.dPacket Pg. 65Attachment: Attachment C - Master Plan Revisions - Santa Barbara Landings (14009 : PL20190000959 ‒ 1 ‒ PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings Residential PUD Growth Management Department Zoning Division C O N S I S T E N C Y R E V I E W M E M O R A N D U M To: Laura DeJohn, AICP, Principal Planner, VEN, Zoning Services Section Timothy Finn, AICP, Principal Planner, Zoning Services Section From: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section Date: July 23, 2020 Subject: Future Land Use Element Consistency Review of Proposed Insubstantial Change (PDI) of a Planned Unit Development PETITION NUMBER: PL20190000959 [REV: 4] PETITION NAME: Santa Barbara Landings Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) PDI REQUEST: This petition requests an Insubstantial Change (PDI) to the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD to allow a number of minor changes to the PUD, including those pertaining to wall construction along the eastern boundary of the PUD, to sidewalk connection between [now, separately-owned] tracts A & B, to certain housing commitments, a temporary construction entrance from Santa Barbara, and so forth. Submittal 3 included several citizen letters concerning this project. Submittal 4 revised Section 5.10 of the PUD by removing most sections under 5.10 Environmental. LOCATION: The subject site, consisting of ±41.61 acres, is located on the south side of Radio Road, east side of Santa Barbara Boulevard, in Section 4, Township 50 South, Range 26 East. COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMENTS: The Future Land Use Map shows the subject site designated as Urban, Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict and within the residential density band for Mixed Use Activity Center #6. The subject site is zoned Santa Barbara Landings RPUD. This PDI application proposes no changes to the approved type or number of dwelling units uses, or density. No changes are proposed to the configuration of residential buildings per the approved Master Plan. Since the RPUD was initially approved, the acreage has been partially developed – with the developed portion now in Tract A and the undeveloped portion in Tract B ‒ and now under two separate ownerships. The PDI proposes changes to PUD conditions to apply at the time of permitting for each tract. Select FLUE Policies are given below, followed with [bracketed staff analysis]. FLUE Policy 5.6 “New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code (Ordinance 04-41, adopted June 22, 2004 and effective October 18, 2004, as amended).” [It is the responsibility of the Zoning and Land Development Review staff, as part of their review of the petition in its entirety, to perform the compatibility analysis.] 3.A.e Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: Attachment D - FLUE Consistency Review (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) ‒ 2 ‒ PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings Residential PUD Objective 7: Promote smart growth policies, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and adhere to the existing development character of Collier County, where applicable, and as follows: Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. [The Santa Barbara Landings Master Plan depicts a subject property that fronts Radio Road and Santa Barbara Blvd., an arterial and collector road, respectively, per the Transportation Element. The Master Plan depicts connection to Radio Road as its existing main point of entry, and a second connection to Santa Barbara Blvd.] Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals . [The Santa Barbara Landings Master Plan depicts internal accesses (some on loop drives) to all residential buildings. This includes completing the connection between the developed Tract A and the undeveloped Tract B.] Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and/or interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. The interconnection of local streets between developments is also addressed in Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element. [The existing PUD provides no interconnection with the adjoining parcel to the east (which is fully developed) or to the south (which is the access road to a public school). The insubstantial changes proposed by this PDI do not affect this configuration and staff finds it not feasible to provide such interconnections.] Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. [With respect to how this development responds to the County’s plans in providing a walkable community generally, submittal document, GMP Consistency Narrative, propose sidewalk connections between the 2 tracts of the PUD be maintained, but now, to be constructed concurrent with the roadway connection between the 2 tracts – so the PUD remains consistent with this Smart Growth policy. With respect to the other characteristics covered by this policy, the insubstantial changes proposed do not affect the densities, common open spaces, civic facilities, or range of housing prices and types – and no further review is needed.] CONCLUSION: Based upon the above analysis, this proposed PDI may be deemed consistent with the FLUE. PETITION ON CITYVIEW cc: Ray Bellows, Zoning Manager, Zoning Services Section Anita Jenkins, AICP, Community Planning Manager Santa Barbara Landings PDI PL20190000959 R4.docx 3.A.e Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: Attachment D - FLUE Consistency Review (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) REZOIIE FINDINGS PETMON PT]DZJI3-AR-4493 Agonda lt6m No. BB Octobor 1 1, 2005 Page 15 of 83 scction 10.03.05 of thc collicr county Land Dwelopmc,nt c,odc rcquires that the rcport and rtcommeadations of the Plaruring Commission to the Board of County C.ouunissioncrs shiU show that ttre Planning Commission has studied and considered the proposed change in rclation to the following, wherc ryplicable: 1. Wbether ttre proposed change will be conelstent wlth the goals, obJectlver & policies of the Future Land Use Map and the elemente of the Growth Management Plan. The subject property is locarcd within the Activity Center # 6 Rcsidential Density Band. The density pemitted within the Santa Barbara Landings PUD is consistcnt with thc FLUE as currelrtly provided in the Growth Managemcnt Plau by Policy 2.5, 6.1, and the Density Rating System. Thereiorc, this petition is Consistcot by Policy. 2. The exisdng land uce pattern; The Property to the north and west is zoned Berkshire Lakes PUD and developed as commercial, aud single-family and multiple-family residential. The property !o the east is zoned Plantation PUD and developed with single-family and multiple-family rcsidcntial. The property to thc south is zoned Bembridge PUD and is developed with a public elernantary school. 3, The posslble creation ofan isolrted dlstrlct rnrelated to adJacent and Derrby dlstrlcts, The Santa Barbara Landings PUD parcel is of suflicient size that it will not result in an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby disticts. It is also cotrsistcnt with expected land uses by virtue of its consistency with the FLUE of the GMP. 4, Whether existing dlstrlct bounderles sre lloglcally drawn ln reladon to eristing condltions on the property proposed for change. The Santa Barbara Landings PUD is of sufficient size that it will not result in atr isolated disbict uuelated to adjacest and nearby districts. It is also consistcnt with expccted land uses by virtue of is consistency with the FLUE. EXHIBIT "A' 5, Whetber changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proPosed ametrdment Eecessary. PLIDZ-2003-AR*4493 SANTA BARBATA LANDINGS PIJD ccPc MTG. 3/3i0510 of 15 3.A.f Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: Attachment E - Findings of Fact (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) ^'t"t'[?Ti?rB? The subject propcrty is locatcd within the Activity Cerlter #6 Residential Densiff&l0of?Be Density Raing Systcm of thc GMP discrctionsdly provides for a "Density Bonus', for properties within this area if the petition is compatible to the sunounding propertics and meets spccific criteria listed in thc GMP. The subject property meet criteria #2 Proximity to Mixed Usc Activity Center, #4 Residential- hfill, #5 Roadway Access, and #7 Transportation Concurrc,lrcy Managerne,nt Area GCMA). 6, Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood, The proposed change will not adversely influeoce living conditions within the neighboring properties due to the project's consistency with the GMP aod compatibility with neighboring properties. The pmposed dwelling udts will consist of ten four-family dwelling units and one three-family dwelling unit, and be of similar construction and dcsign as the existing buildings on the subject property. The proposed rezone will have no significant impact on any adopted level of service standard, 7, Whether the propmed chauge will create or exccslyely increase trafrlc congecdon or create types of traffic deemed incompatible wlth surroundlng land uses, because of peak volumes or proJected types of vehicular tnftic, including acdvlty durhg construction phases of the dcvclopment or otherwlse affect public safety. Evaluation of this project took into account the requtement for consistency with Policy 5.1 ofthe Transportation Element and Policy 6.1 of the Future Land Use Elsment of the GMP and was found consistent. The proposed change will result in an overall 430 in daily trips within the Santa Barbara Landings PUD. E. Whether the proposed chauge will crerte a dreinage problem. The Land Development Code specifically provides the developmant standards that are desigred to reduce the risk of flooding on nearby properties. New development in and of itself is uot supposed to ilcrease flooding potential on adjacent property over and above what would occur without development. In summary, every project approved in Collier County involving tlre utilization of land for some land use activity is scrutinized and required to mitigate all sub-surface drainage generated by dcvelopmental activities as a condition of approval. This project was reviewed for drainage relatiouships and design and construction plans are required to meet County standards as a condition of approval. 9, Whether the proposed chsEge will seriously reduce llght and alr to edjacetrt arers. All projects in Collier County are subject to the development standards that are unique to the zoning district in which it is located. These developmant standards and others apply generally and equally to all zonrng districts (i.e. open space requiremcnt, corridor management provisions, etc.) were designed to ensurc that light penctration and circulation of air does not adversely affect adjacent areas. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including mning, however zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since valuc dctermination by law is driven by market value. The mere fact that a property is given a new zoning designation or amsndmert may or may not affect value, However, PUDZ-2003-AR-4493 SAI{TA BAIBAILA LANDINGS PlrD l1 of 15 CCPC MTG. 3i3l05 10. Whether tlle proposed change will adversely effect property values in the adjacent area. 3.A.f Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: Attachment E - Findings of Fact (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 1l' whetber the proposed change wlll be a deterrcnt to the lmprovemeDt or developmeDt of edjecent property ln accordence wlth exisdng reguletlonr. The undevelopcd pro,pcrties nearby the proposcd PUD should not be affected by the requested ameDdment in that the project provides a landscape buffer, provides an area dedicated for conscrvatior/prcserrzes, and is consistent with the approvcd zoned projects in the area. 12. whether tle propored chuge wlll conrdtute r grant of rpeclsl prMtcge to ao lndlvlduet owler as contrriting with the publlc welfere. Agenda ttom No. gB staff_is of the opinirca that this petition will not adverscly affect property "rlr", b*;"H+r|ig, consistcncy with the Gmwth Management Plan. The proposed rezone to PUD complies with the Gro*th Management Plan, which is a public policy statemerlt supporting zoning actions when they arc consistent with said plans. In light of this fact the proposed PLID does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consisteocy with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare lelationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public intcrcst, t3. whether there are substaDtlsl reeeons why the property cannot be used ln accordance with existing zonlng. The subject propcrty has been dcveloped with 248 multiple-family residential dwelling,,"its within thc regulations of the Residcntial Multiple-family-6 (RMF-6) zoning district. The petition proposes to utilize the "Density Bonus" criteria of the Density Rating System ofthe GMP for al additional 43 residantial dwelling units. 14. Whether the change suggected ls out of scale wlth the needs of the ueigbborhood or tbe County, The proposed PUD is dcsigned in a maaner that is compatible with suuounding and approved rcsidential pmperty in size and scale. It is also consistent with the FLUE of the Growth Management P|an. 15. Wbether ie it imposcible to fnd other rdequ.te slter ln the County for tle propored use in dlsdctr rlready permiftitrg such use, There are many sites which are zoned !o accommodate the proposed devclopment. This is not the determining factor whcn evaluating the appropriateness ofa rezoning decision. The determinants of zoning are consistcncy with all elements of the GMP, compatibility, adequacy of infrastructurc and to some extent the timing of the action and all of the above criteria. 15. The phyrical characterlstlc! of the property and the degree of rlte alteratlon, whlcb would be requlred to make the property uscble for any of the range of potentlal ures under the propoeed, zonlng clasrlf cadon. Preservation reas have been idcntified on the Conceptual Master Plan. Additionally, the owner has agreed to revegetate portions ofthc property to enhance native vegetation PUDA2003-AR-4493 SANTA BARBARA T,^ANDINGS PI]D 12 of l5 ccPc MTG. 3i3l05 3.A.f Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: Attachment E - Findings of Fact (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) ^'&tsJ:?Ti?,"!17. The lEprct of development on the avellabillty of edequate publlc factlitieshll ttF,flSs conslstent with the levels of servlce adopted in the Collier county Growt[ Management plan and as deflned and lmplemented through the Colller Coutrty Adequate Public Faclllties Ordinancg as amended. A multi-disciplined team responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP has reviewed this Petition and they have found it consistent with the GMP. The conditions of approval have bcen incorporatcd into the ?UD document. Staff reviews for adequacy of public services and levels of service determined that rcquired infrastucturc mects with GMP established relationships. FINDINGS FOR PUD PUDZo&AR- 4493 Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County Land Development Code requires the Plaming Commission to make a finding as to the PUD Master Plans' compliance with the following criteria: PUDZ-2003-AR-4493 SA}ITA BAIBAI!{ LANDINGS PI.'D 13 of l5 CCPC MTG. 3/3/05 3.A.f Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: Attachment E - Findings of Fact (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Agenda ftem No. BB l. The suttablllty of &e rrer for the type rnd prttern of devetopment Orrp?:H;l"Ufdil to physical cbarecterlsdcs of t[e lend, rurroundlng erelr, trafflc and accelr, dralnlge, sewer, water, and other utilldes. Jurisdictional rwiews by County stalf supporl the manner and pattc,n of develop,ment proposed for the subject propefty. Development conditions contained in the santa Barbara Landings puD document give assurance that all ir:fastructures will be developed consistent with County rcguldions. Any inadequacies that require supplementing the PUD document will bc rccommended to the Planning Commission and the BCC as conditions of approval by staff. Reconrmended mitigation measurcs will assurc compliance with Level of Service relationships as presctibed by the GMp. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unllied control end suiteblllty of any propoced rgreeEen&, coatract, or other instrum€nts, or for gmendments ln tbore proposed, particularly as they may relrte to arratrgeEents or provfuions to be made for the continuing operatlon end malntenance ofsuch areas and facllities thst are Dot to be provided or malntalned Et public expense, Documents submitted with the Santa Barbara Landings PUD applicatioo providc evideoce of unified control. The PUD docuoent makes appropriatc provisions for continuing operation and maintcnance of common areas. 3. Conformlty of the propoced Planned Unlt Devetopment wlth the goah, obJecdver and pollcler of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). The subject petition has becn found consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the GI\4P. The Satrta Bartara Landings PUD proposes an additional 43 rcsidential dwclling units, for a maximum of 291 residential dwclling units that are consisteot with the CMp (See Staffreport). 4. The lnternel and erternal compatlblllty of propored useq whlch condltlonc may include reetrlctions ou location of improvements, restrictlons on deslgn, and buffering end ecreenlng requlrements. The adoptcd PUD, including all the attendant buffering, land use locational criteria, aod other cornPatibility development requircrneots reasonably assure the project wilt be constructed with intemal and external compatibility ad&essed. EXIfIBIT "B" 5, The adequacy of usable open sprce areas ln edstence rnd as proposed to serve the development. As provided in Section IV - Preserve "P" Areas and Subsection 5.10 - Environmental of the PUD Document, the amount of open space set aside by this projcct is consistent with the provisions of the Land Development Code. PUDZ-2003-AR4493 SANTA BARBARA LANDINGS PUD 14 of l5 ccPc MTG. 3/3/05 3.A.f Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: Attachment E - Findings of Fact (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) e?ill8J5Ti?aB? 6. The timing or soquetroe of development for the purpose of aecuring thehlfd0ntFlf available improvements and facllldes, both publlc and prlvate. The proposed Santa Ba6ara Lan.lings PUD will not adversely impact the timing or sequence of development that is currently allowcd in the area. Furtlermorc, the adopted coocurrency requireruents ensure that further LOS degradation is not allowed or the LOS deficiency is corrected. 7. The abllity of the subject property end of surroundlng arees to accommodate erpension. Ability, as applied in this context, implies supporting inhastruchre such as wastewater disposal systerrl potable water supplies, characteristics of the property rclativc to hazards, and capacity of roads, is supportive of conditions emanating from u$an developmant. 8. Conformity with PUD reguledons, or as to decireble modificetions of such regulafionr in tbe particular case, besed on determinrtion thrt such modlficedons ere jusdfied as mecting publlc purposes to a degree at least equlvelent to literal appllcatlon ofsuch regulations. PIJDZ-2003-AR-4493 SANTA BARBARA LANDINCS PUD 15 of l5 ccPc MTG. 3/3/05 Staff analysis indicates that the Santa Barbara Landings PUD conforms to the Pt-iD regulations. 3.A.f Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: Attachment E - Findings of Fact (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) GRANADA LAKES VILLAS CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. AND SANTA BARBARA LANDINGS PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. Mr. Timothy Finn, AICP Collier County Growth Management 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 RE: PDI-PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings RPUD Submittal #2 Dear Tim. Thanks for your time today and I have left messages for Ms. Cook and Mr. Brown. After our discussion I went back and rc-read the entire revised Proposcd RPUD document and have several issues and questions and or clarifications needed. Generally, most of the issues dcal with the integration of the existing Tracr A (Granada Lakes Villas Condos) and Tract B (new proposed development) developmenr standards and requirements. We have previously met with Ms. DeJohn rcgarding their proposed changes to the RPUD document, but I have jusr received a copy of the proposed revisions and they do not fully represent our discussions. As you are aware. Granada Lakes Villas is the result ofa condo conversion completcd by Armando Bucelo / St. George, etal in 2005 through 2008 when he originally purchased the Santa Barbara Landings Apanments in 2004/2005. He subsequently sepamted the property into Tracts A and B and applied for a zoning change to RPUD to add the 43 units in Tract B (the original preserves). He then completed the condo conversion of the spartmenB and sold the condo units. However, the recession started and he was not able to complete the development of Tract B. Subscquently. by 2013 he no longer had any interest in either Cranada Lakes Villas Condominium Association or Santa Barbara Landings Property Owners Association. At this point Mr. Bucelo / St. George. etal cannot bind either Association for any changes to Tract A pur$"lant to the dcaclofncnt plans. Further, upon the condo conversion the only rights that Bucelo / St. George pur in the Condominium documents was for access to Tract B through Santa Clara Drive wilhout any other dcvelopmenl commitments. etc. As I understand. the RPUD document ulilizcs the entirc 4l.6acre propeny and consistendy spplies rhc RPUD development standards to the whole site. However, it does not take inlo account that Tract A is existing and the development standards upon which it was built on are not th€ same as rhe currenr srandards and Tract A should not be held to the current standards. This is clearly stated in the Statement of Compliance in paragraph 7. Paragraph 7 should only rcference Tract B. This same comment will apply through out rhe entire PUD document. I am also confused why as owners of Tract A as listed in Section 1.3 why we have not becn involved by the County in this RPUD change. St. George / Armando Bucelo. etal do not have any rights to Tract A and cannot agee to any development standards for Tract A .t.5 SANTA GLARA DR IIIAPLES, FL 34104 (239} 206.2678 March 17. 2020 3.A.g Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: Attachment F - March 17, 2020 Letter of Concern with Staff Response (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) within specific sections under the rcvised RPUD document, I have lisred addirional specific commenls. 2.3 compliance - Should reference Tract B only. Tract A remains pursuanr to lhe original SDp. 2.9 Netive vegetrtion - Master Plan shows new Prcserves in Tract A. These preserves were not part ofthe original approval ofthe SDP, which showed rract B as the prescrves. The Associations will not provide any preserves in Tract A. 2.10 Common Arer Meintcnrnce - Sanra Barbara Landings propcrty owners Association onl1, provides for common maintenance within Tract A and rract B should provide their own. Further fie Tracl B stormwater system needs to incorporate Tract A's stormwaier pursuant to the exisling system. 2.12c Lrndscepe Bulfers - This should pertain only to Tract B and rract A is pursuant to rhe existing SDP. 2.14A2&3 Substitutions - How do these 2 comments affect Tract A. Should apply to Tract B only. 2'l4B scction 4.06.fl) - should refcrence Tract B only. Tract A remains pursuant to the original SDP. 2.14C construction strndrrds - Should rcference Tract B only. Tract A remains pursuant to the original SDP. 3.4 Development stsnderds - Should refercnce Tract B only. Tract A remains pursuanr to the original SDP. Trble I Developmenl strndcrds - Should reference Tract B only. Tract A rcmains pursuant to the original SDP. 4,5 Prtcene Arer - Tract A does not have any pres€rves. original spD provided preserves:rs Tract B. Any preserves in Tract A should be eliminated from this provision and the Master plan. Section 5 DevelopmeDt commitments - Should reference Tract B only and does not affect Tract A in its entirety, including any specific commitment which impacts or references anylhing in Tracr A, Further within the scope ofthe transportation issues. we need to have a written agreement with the developer regarding the usage of the entrance road for Tract B access including cost sharing for the road and gate maintenance and any other impacts. one possible impact will be trash issues since Tract A has a dumpster location at the southem culde-sac where the Tract B's esst access will be located. we arc nor interested in the Tracl B residents utilizing our dumpsters and need protections accordingly. As an additional note, Bucelo i St. George installed the entrance gate systcm wilh thc convasion and was wcll aware of is cost and maintcnancc issues whan he completed the RPUD Revision in 2005. Please rcview our comments and we will be happy to meet with the various planners to discuss in further details our concems. Frank Cooper, President Granada Lakes Villas Condominium Association, Inc. Santa Barbara Landings Property Owners Association, Inc. Direct Contact - Tele (239) 250- I 300 Email - FCProperties@comcast.net Heather Keel, CAM, Cambridge Management of SWF[. Laura DeJohn, AICP, Johnson Engineering, Inc. 'V 3.A.g Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: Attachment F - March 17, 2020 Letter of Concern with Staff Response (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) STAFF RESPONSE: March 17,202O - Letter of Concern Staffhad corresponded with the president ofthe Granada Lakes Village Condominium Association/Santa Barbara Landings Property Owners Association with issues conceming this petition pertaining to Tract A The following points are listed below from this letter with staffs response: Point 1 "2.3 Compliance - Should reference Tract B only. Tract A remoins pursuant to the original SDP." Statf Response: There are no proposed changes to this section ofthe PUD through this petition. Point 2 "2.9 Native Vegelation - Master Plan shows new Preserves in Tract A. These preserves were not part of the original approval of the SDP, which showed Tract B as the preseryes. The Associatiow will not provide any preserves in Tract A. " StaffResponse: The Santa Barbara Landings PUD, which was codified under Ordinance 05-53, identified two preserve locations within Tract A and two preserves within Tract B. The approved Master Plan identified the preserves in Tract A as recreated preserves. In order for development in Tract B to occur, the preserves must meet the standards set forth in LDC section 3.05.07, including the created preserve standards for the preserves in Tract A. Additionally, these areas will have to be put into preservation and dedicated to Collier County through a Conservation Easement or plat. No changes to the preserve locations or acreages was requested through this PDI apptication. Changes to the locations ofthe preserves must be done through a PUD Amendment. Point 3 "2.10 Common Area Mainlenance - Santa Barbara Landings Property Owners Association only provides for common maintenance within Tract A and Tract B should provide their own. Further the Tract B stormwdter system needs to incorporate Tract A's stormwater pursuant to the existing system. " Slaff Response: The stormwater design for Track A and B are linked together and share an outfall into the Santa Barbara Boulevard roadside swale from an existing control structure located in track B. The site development stormwater design for Track B will have to include intemal and extemal routing flows, easements and other existing design criteria from Track A; pursuant to the existing shared stormwater system. Point 4 "2.12c Landscape Bufferc - This should pertain only to Tract B and rract A is pursuant to the existing SDP. " Staff Response: Section 2.12 C was included in the original PUD and is not proposed to be changed as part ofthis PUDA. Point 5 "2-14A2&3 substitations - How do these 2 comments affect Tract A. should apply to Tract B 3.A.g Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: Attachment F - March 17, 2020 Letter of Concern with Staff Response (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) only. " StaffResponse: The only change proposed is to require a sidewalk connection between Tract A and Track B; and provide a sidewalk connection from Tract B to the adjacent elementary school to the south as requested by the Collier County School Board. Point 6 "2.148 Section 4,06.00 - Should reference Tract B only. Tract A remains pursuant to the original SDP.'' Staff Response: Section 2.14 B was included in the original PUD and is not proposed to be changed as part of this PUDA. Staff Response: No, there are no proposed changes to this section of the PUD Point 8 "j.4 Developmenl Standards - Should reference Tract B only. Tract A remains pursuant to the original SDP. " Staff Response: There are no proposed changes to this section ofthe PUD through this petition. Point 9 "Table I Developmenl Slandards - Should reference Tract B only. Tract A remains pursuant to the original SDP. " Staff Response: There are no proposed changes to this section of the PUD through this petition. Point l0 "4-5 Preseme Area - Tract A does not have any preserves. Original SPD provided preserves as Tract B. Any preserves in Tract A should be eliminated from this provision and the Master Plan." Staff Response: The Santa Barbara Landings PUD, which was codified under Ordinance 05-53, identified two preserve locations within Tract A and two preserves within Tract B. The approved Master Plan identified the preserves in Tract A as recreated preserves. In order for development in Tract B to occur, the preserves must meet the standards set forth in LDC section 3.05.07, including the created preserve standards for the preserves in Tract A. Additionally, these areas will have to be put into preservation and dedicated to Collier County through a Conservation Easement or plat. No changes to the preserve locations or acreages was requested through this PDI application. Changes to the locations of the preserves must be done through a PUD Amendment. Point 1l "section 5 Development commitments - should reference Tract B only and does not affect Tract Point 7 "2.14C Construction Slandards - Should reference Tract B only. Tract A remains pursuant to the original SDP. " 3.A.g Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: Attachment F - March 17, 2020 Letter of Concern with Staff Response (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) A in its entirety, including any specific commitment which impacts or references anything in Tract A." Staff Response: The proposed changes to the PUD are limited to Tract B. Point 12 "Further within the scope of the transportation issues, we need to have a written agreement with the detteloper regarding the usage ofthe entrance road for Tract B access including cost sharingfor the road and gate maintenance and any other impacts. One possible impact will be trash issues since Tract A has a dumpster location at the southern cul-de-sac where the Tract B's east access will be located. We are not interested in the Tract B restdents utilizing our dumpsters and need protections accordingly. As an additional note, Bucelo / St. George installed the entrance gdte system with the conversion and was well aware of its cost and maintenance issues when he completed the RPUD Revision in 2005." Staff Response: The issue of intemal access maintenance is the responsibility of the PUD owners and developer. Section 5.8.H. of the PUD Document clearly outlines the operations and maintenance responsibilities. 3.A.g Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: Attachment F - March 17, 2020 Letter of Concern with Staff Response (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) GRANADA LAKES VILLAS CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. May 21,2020 Mr. Timothy Finn, AICP Collier County Growth Management 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples. FL 34104 RE: PDI-PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings RPUD Submiftal #3 Heather Keel, CAM, Cambridge Management of SWFL Laura DeJohn, AICP, Johnson Engineering, Inc. Dear Tim, You have received Submittal #3 from Johnson Engineering regarding the subjea property. I want to restate in plain English regardless ofthe comments made in Submittal #3 rhar the entireproperty (Tracts A&B) is not under unified control and we do not support the proposed revisions to thi RPUD. we will though consider the changes the applicant has requested, provided the applicant makes all the changes we requested, including but not limited to the del;tion of any preserves within Tract A we will be happy ro meet with the various planners to discuss in further details our concems. Sincerely, cc vis email: 145 SANTA CLARA DR NAPLES, FL 3410/t (239) 206'2678 AND SANTA BARBARA LANDINGS PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC|ATION, tNC. Franl Cooper, President Granada Lakes Villas Condominium Association, lnc. Santa Barbara Landings Property Owners Association, lnc. Direct Contact - Tele (239) 250-1300 Email - FCProperties@comcast.net 3.A.h Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: Attachment G - Other Concern Correspondence (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) we have received your consent Request for the Sanla Barbara Landings lnsubstantial change. Regardless of the process, we can only support your request upon the inclusion ofall the items previously conveyed to you and rim Finn, collier county Growth Management in a letter dated March 17, 2020, of which a copy is attached. Please revise your request accordingly and resubmit. Sincerely, GRANADA LAKES VILLAS CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. May 12.2020 Laura DeJohn. AICP Johnson Engineering 2350 Stanford Court Naples, FL 34112 RE: Santa Barbara Landings PDI Dear Laun, Frank Cooper, President Granada Lakes Villas Condominium Association, Inc. Santa Barbara Landings Property Owners Association, Inc. Attachment: Letter Dated 3i 17i20 145 SAi{TA CLARA DR I{APLES, FL 3410a (239) 206-2678 3.A.h Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: Attachment G - Other Concern Correspondence (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Laura S. DeJohn From: S.nt To: Cc: fcproperties@comcast.net Wednesday. May 05, 2020 1:21 PM Laura S. De.,ohn heatherk@cambridgeswfl.com; rick@nosnownaples.com RE: Construction access drive for Tract g - Santa Barbara Landings pUO That is correct. The Association and unit owners object to the construction traffic using Santa Clara Dr due to residents, including children walking or biking ontheroad. We have requested the County allow the developers to install a temporary construction access point on Santa Barbara directly to Tract B. lf you need further clarification or correspondence please let me know. Sincerely, Frank W. Cooper, President Granada Lakes Villas Condominium Association, lnc. Santa Barbara Landings Property Owners Association, lnc. From: Laura S. OeJohn <L(S@johnsoneng.com> Sent Wednesday, May 6,2020 1:11 PM To: f cproperties@comcast. net Cc: heatherk@cambridgeswfl.com; rick@nosnownaples.com Subject: Construction access drive for Tract B - Santa Barbara Landings pUD Frank, Heather, I understood from the discussions at your December 19, 2019 Board Meeting that residents obiected to construction vehicles using Santa Clara Drive when Tract I of the PUD eventually develops. To address this concern raised at that Board meetin& we have requested that Collier County allow a temporary construction access directly from Santa Barbara Blvd into Tract B for use at time of construction, so construction vehicles would not travel through the existing neiBhborhood. Collier County has asked for written feedback on this topic to document that the HOA obiects to construction vehicles using the existing internal Santa Clara Drive. Ca n you send meeting minutes that capture this, or iust send an email confirming this? That should suffice to address the County's request on this matter. Thank you, Laura Subject: Laura DeJohn, AICP Laura, FC Properties, lnc. 4158 Lorraine Avenue Naples, Fl" 34104 Office (239) 643-s053 Fax (239) 543-5137 cell (239) 2s0-1300 1 3.A.h Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: Attachment G - Other Concern Correspondence (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Director ot Planniog & tandscape Architecture ,oHt{sot{ E]{ctr{EERt G, tt{c. C€ll: (239) 229-1726 lderohn@iohnsonent.com 2 3.A.h Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: Attachment G - Other Concern Correspondence (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) JOHNSQN srr(r 19a 5 ENGINEERING lO: Frank Coopcr F'ROM: kura DcJohn, AICP DATE: Mav 8.2020 RE, Saola Barbara Landings PDI TrEct A conscut form for signalurr Frank. As we discussed by phone, writter consert by the HOA of Tract A of the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD has been requested by the County in their review of the request to rernove the requircrnent for a wall within Tracl A. You have indicated in general there is no objecrion to the rEquesl to remove the requir€rnent for 8 wall within Tracl A, but you Ere concemed about imposition ofany oth€r requir€inents on Tracl A. The lnsubstantial change request to the santa Barbara Landings pDl is not intended to require changes to the existing developed conditions in Tract A, so we have attempt€d to address your concem by ststing this as part of the requested conscnt. Please s€e attachod and retum with your signature (email is fine) ifyou concur. If you'd like to discuss, please feel froe to contact me. Thank you, Laura 12391229-1726 2350 Stanford Coun . Nsplcs, floridE 14l I 2 (239) 4la-0333 . Fax (239) 434-9320 cc: Rick Parlante 3.A.h Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: Attachment G - Other Concern Correspondence (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) SANTA BARBARA LANDIT{65 RPUO INSUBSTANTIAT CHANGE PETITION PI.'2019@@959 CONSENT Two Tr.ct compdrc thc S.ntr B.rb.r. f.ndlrya RPUD: Tr.st A .rd Tr.Gt B. Tr'ct A of lhe santa Berbara Landints RPUD is built-out rrith the existint developm.nt of Granada lalesvillas condominiums. owners within Tr.cr A are represented by the 5ANTA BARBARA LANDTNG5 PRoPERTY owNER's AssN rNc (address: 145 sanra crara Drive, Napres, Fr,34104) and GRAI{ADA r_AKEs vll"[As coNDoMlNruM AssocrATroN. rNc. (.ddress: r45 santa crara Drive, Napres, Fr.3rtro4]. St. Georae Gtouo. Coro is the owner of Tract B. 5t. Geone croup. coro fired for an rnsubsrantiar change to the santa Barbara Landints Rpuo, idenrified by Collier County as Petition numb€r pL2OI9OOOO959. On behalf of Tnct A, SANTA BARBAM LANoINGS PRoPERW owNER.s ASSN INc and GRANADA I.A(EsvlttAS cO mMlNlUM ASSoclATloN. lNc. cons€nt lo th€ petition requestint tnsubstantial char6e to thesanta Brrbara Landints Rpuo identifu by colier county petition numbcr puo19omo9s9, incruding thepropos€d removal of a condition requiring a wafl aront the Tract A ea$ern boundary, subiect to thefollowing: l The lnsubstantial change petirbn requested by the owner of Tract B recognizes that Trect A is fuly developed and built-out. 2. The lnsubstantiar change p€tition requested by tt'" oryner of rract B wil incrude rantuate in thc puD as pan of the lnsubstantial Change request: Date Tr.ct A: SANTA BAREARA TANDINGS PROPERTY OWNER'S AsSN INC GRANADA I.AKT5 VIttAS CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, II{C. At tim" of rnrrbrranti"l ch"r"" p"tition puo19(xxp959 Tr".t A i, frll" d"r"loo.d. Th" Itlcl-Ajgyghpment shall be allowed to continue a( it e.ists at time of aonroval of Inrrbrt"ntirl chrn"" P"tition pu019(xx)0959 "nd..id "ooror"r ,"orir", no "h"..tion.or chanees to existinr develooment within Tract A. Frank Cooper President, SANTA BARBAM LANDTNGS pROPERTy OWNER,S ASSN tNC President, GRANAOA LAKES VILLAS CONOOMTNTUM ASSOCtATtON, tNC Name Title: 3.A.h Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: Attachment G - Other Concern Correspondence (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Laura S. DeJohn Subject FW: Temporary Construction Access (Santa garbara) From: Sawye rMichael <Michael.Sawver@ colliercountvfl.Pov> S€nt: Tuesday, December 03, 2019 3:55 pM To: Jared R. Brown <i!htQjqb!!9!C!&gg!t> Subrect: RE: Temporary Construction Access (Santa Barbara) Jared, I remember the project. lf the temporary access came up during the zoning-PUD petition then likely we'd simply have add a developer commitment retardin8 the construction access similar to other PUD's, location, timing, restoration, etc. Other than Soing back for an lnsubstantial PUD change you really need to work this out this Matt McLean's group. While we used to address these construction access concerns with ROW permits including time limitations, etc; I don,t know the latest thinking-practice. I know I was copied on an email a few weeks ago for this issue...sorry you haven't gotten a resolution. Miehael Sawyer Principal Planner Gro*th Management Departnent Transponadon Planning 2685 South Horseshoe Drive, Suite 103 Naples, Florida 34104 239-252-2926 michael.sawver(a,colliercounwtl.sor From: Jared R. Brown <irb/a hnsonen .com> Sent: Tuesday, December 3, 20Lg 2:44 pM To: Sawye rMichael <Michae l.Sawver@colli ercountvfl.sov> Cc: Laura S. Dejohn <LKS@ iohnsone -com> Sublect: Temporary Construction Access (Santa Barbara) EXTERNAtEMAIL This email is from an externalsource. conflrm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution whenopenint attachments or cllcking link. Good Oay, Mike. We have been bounced around a little bit on this question and I need to get a clear ansrryer. lf it isn,t you, can you pleasepoint me to the correct person to talk with. To recap the situation: There is an undeveloped parcel (see below) at the corner of Santa Barbara and the calusa park Elementary School. The owner wants confirmation that they will be allowed a temporary construction access off of Santa Barbara in order to avoid running all the heavy construction traffic through the residential neithborhood (cranada Lakes) to the north. Cecilia has pointed out that the spacing between the proposed temp access andlhe Calusa park 1 3.A.h Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: Attachment G - Other Concern Correspondence (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) entry does not meet the Access Management Policy and that the PUD does not show an access at that location However, I don't believe either of those apply to a temporary condition. Please confirm or set me straight. Thanks -Jared arcel ,ared R. Brown, P,E,, LIED Ap Projed Manager JOHt{SO Et{ctNEERtr{G, tNC. 2350 Stanford Court Naples, Florida 34112 Phone:239.280.4321 mer 2 lr , \ ,-.(i I I ',itI a ! I Id . ,. \t t r'. aa r] I I I ll l+ 1: a .-\ .t a t / \ \t q -r' R I I , ( \"( \a )I I I i :t 3.A.h Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: Attachment G - Other Concern Correspondence (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) x 3.A.i Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: Attachment H - HEX Hybrid Meeting Waiver (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) SANTA BARBARA LANDINGS RPUD (PL20190000959) Application and Supporting Documents October 22, 2020 HEX Hearing Post Office Box 1550 2122 Johnson Street Fort Myers, Florida 33902-1550 (239) 334-0046 E B 642 3.A.j Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) INSUBSTANTIAL CHANGES TO PUD AND MASTER PLAN 3.A.j Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) SANTA BARBARA LANDINGS RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 41.6± Acres Located in Section 04, Township 50 S, Range 26 E Collier County, Florida PREPARED FOR: Santa Barbara Garden Villas, LLC 1401 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Suite 401 Coral Gables, Florida 33134 And St. George Group, Corporation 1401 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Suite 40I Coral Gables, Florida 33134 6303 Blue Lagoon Drive Suite 390 Miami, FL 33126 PREPARED BY: Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, Florida 34103 And D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Q. Grady Minor & Associates 3800 Via del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Insubstantial Change for St. George Group, Corp by: Johnson Engineering, Inc. 2350 Stanford Court Naples, FL 34112 DATE FILED DATE APPROVED BY CPCC DATE APPROVED BY BCC 10-11-2005 ORDINANCE NUMBER 2005-53 INSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE: _____________ EXHIBIT "A" 3.A.j Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE LIST OF EXHIBITS AND TABLE i STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE ii SECTION I LEGAL DESCRIPTION, PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION I-1 SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS II-1 SECTION III RESIDENTIAL "R" DEVELOPMENT AREA III-1 SECTION IV PRESERVE "P" AREA IV-1 SECTION V DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS V-1 3.A.j Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) LIST OF EXHIBITS AND TABLES EXHIBIT A CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN EXHIBIT B SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN EXHIBIT C LOCATION MAP EXHIBIT D BOUNDARY SURVEY TABLE I DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS III-3 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline i 3.A.j Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE Santa Barbara Garden Villas, LLC and St. George Group, Corporation intends to create a This Residential Planned Unit Development is on approximately 41.6± acres of land located in Section 04., Township 50 S, Range 26 E, Collier County, Florida. Approximately 6.3 acres of the property is encumbered with a 100' wide roadway easement for Santa Barbara Boulevard, making the net site approximately 35.3 acres. The name of the Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) shall be Santa Barbara Landings RPUD. The development of the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD will be in compliance with the planning goals and objectives of Collier County as established in the Growth Management Plan. The development will be consistent with the policies of the land development regulations adopted under the Growth Management Plan and applicable regulations for the following reasons: 1. The subject property is located within the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Sub-District, as identified on the Future Land Use Map. 2. The density provided for in the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD complies with the Density Rating System contained in the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. The subject property is located within the residential density band, which extends from the Mixed-use activity center located at the intersection of Santa Barbara Boulevard and Davis Boulevard. The density permissible is 4 dwelling units per acre. Up to 3 dwelling units per acre may be added within the density band, bringing the permissible base density to 7 dwelling units per acre. Base density Density band Maximum permitted density Requested density 4.0 du/acre + 3.0du/acre = 7.0 du/acre 7.0 du/acre (291 units) At the time of the rezoning application, 248 multiple-family dwellings exist on the site. The subject rezoning will add a maximum of 43 additional dwelling units for a maximum total of 291 dwelling units. All property within the RPUD boundary shall be utilized in calculating the project density. 3. The project development is compatible and complementary to existing and future surrounding land uses as required in Policy 5.4 of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE). 4. Improvements are planned to be in compliance with the applicable land development regulations as required in Objective 3 of the FLUE, except as may be modified in this RPUD document 5. All final local development orders for this project are subject to the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance as required in Objective 2 of the FLUE. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline ii 3.A.j Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 6. The design of Santa Barbara Landings RPUD protects the function of the existing drainage features and natural groundwater aquifer recharge areas as required in Objective 1.5 of the Drainage Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element. 7. This project shall be subject to applicable Sections of the LDC at the time of development order approval, except as otherwise provided herein. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline iii 3.A.j Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) SECTION I LEGAL DESCRIPTION, PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION 1.1 PURPOSE Section I sets forth the location and ownership of the property, and describes the existing conditions of the property proposed to be developed under the project name Santa Barbara Landings RPUD. 1.2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION The subject property being 41.6 acres more or less, is described as: The west half (W. ½) of the west half (W. ½) of the northwest quarter (N.W. ¼) of Section 4, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, all being situated in Collier County, Florida, less the north 50 feet thereof. SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. 1.3 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP The property is currently owned by: TRACT A: unit owners of the Santa Barbara Garden Villas, LLC Landings Property Owner’s Association Inc. and Granada Lakes Villas Condominium Association Inc., whose address is 145 Santa Clara Drive, Naples, FL 34104, and TRACT B: St. George Group, Corporation, whose address is: 1401 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Suite 401 Coral Gables, Florida 33134 6303 Blue Lagoon Drive Suite 390, Miami, FL 33126 1.4 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY A. The project is located in Section 04, Township 50, Range 26 and is generally bordered on the north by Radio Road, on the east by Plantation PUD; on the south by Bembridge PUD on the west by Santa Barbara Boulevard. B. The zoning classification of the subject property at the time of RPUD application is RMF-6. C. According to FEMA/FIRM Map Panel Number 120067 415 D, dated June 3, 1986, the property is located within Zone X. D. Soils on the site generally include Hallandale fine sand and Boca, Rivera, Limestone Substratum and Copeland fine sand depressional. E. Existing vegetation on the site consists of melaleuca, Brazilian Pepper, palmetto prairie, pine flatwoood, cypress, Cabbage Palm and disturbed lands. Wetland areas have been heavily impacted by melaleuca. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline I-1 3.A.j Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) F. According to the Collier County Drainage Atlas, the site is located in the Lely Canal Basin. The conceptual water management plan is depicted in the Surface Water Management Report, which accompanied the rezone application submittal. 1.5 SHORT TITLE This Ordinance is known and cited as the "Santa Barbara Landings Residential Planned Unit Development Ordinance." 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline I-2 3.A.j Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS 2.1 PURPOSE Section II delineates and generally describes the plan of development and identifies relationships to applicable County ordinances, policies, and procedures. 2.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT A. Santa Barbara Landings RPUD is a mixed-use residential project and will consist of two development parcels and multiple preservation areas. Categories of land uses include those for residential and preserve areas. The Residential areas are designed to accommodate single-family attached, duplex and multiple family dwellings. The overall project density is 7 dwelling units per acre and the maximum units permitted in the RPUD shall be 291 units. B. Exhibit "A" depicts the RPUD Master Plan. The RPUD Master Plan includes a table that summarizes land use acreage. The location, size and configuration of individual tracts shall be determined at the time of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Plat approval. 2.3 COMPLIANCE WITH COUNTY ORDINANCES A. Regulations for development of Santa Barbara Landings RPUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this document, Planned Unit Development District and other applicable sections and parts of the Collier County Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan in effect at the time of issuance of any development order to which said regulations relate which authorize the construction of improvements. Where these regulations fail to provide developmental standards then the provisions of the most similar district in the Land Development Code shall apply. B. Unless otherwise noted, the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set forth in the Land Development Code in effect at the time of building permit application. C. Unless modified, waived or excepted from this RPUD Document or associated exhibits, the provisions of other sections of the land development codes, where applicable, remain in full force and effect with respect to the development of the land that comprises this RPUD. D. Development permitted by the approval of this petition will be subject to a concurrency review under the provisions of Chapter 6, Adequate Public Facilities, of the Land Development Code. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline II- 1 3.A.j Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 2.4 LAND USES Land uses are generally depicted on the RPUD Master Plan, Exhibit A. The specific location and size of individual tracts and the assignment of square footage or units shall be determined by the developer at the time of site development plan approval, preliminary subdivision plat approval, or final subdivision plat approval subject to the provisions of Chapter 10 of the Collier County LDC. 2.5 USE OF RIGHTS-OF-WAY The Developer may utilize land within the rights-of-way within the RPUD for landscaping, decorative entranceways, and unified signage. This utilization is subject to review and administrative approval during the development review process by the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator for engineering and safety considerations. 2.6 MODEL HOMES SALES OFFICE AND CONSTRUCTION OFFICE A. Construction offices and other uses and structures related to the promotion and sale of real estate such as, but not limited to, pavilions, parking areas, and signs, shall be permitted principal uses throughout the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD. These uses shall be subject to the requirements of Chapter 5 and Chapter IO of the LDC. B. Model Homes may be permitted in multi-family and townhome buildings may be utilized for wet or dry models, subject to the time frames specified in Chapter 5 of the LDC. 2.7 CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS TO RPUD DOCUMENT OR RPUD MASTER PLAN Changes and amendments may be made to this RPUD Ordinance or RPUD Master Plan as provided in Chapter 10 of the LDC. Minor changes and refinements as described herein may be made by the Developer in connection with any type of development or permit application required by LDC. 2.8 OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS A minimum of 30% of the project (12.48± acres) shall be devoted to usable open space. 2.9 NATIVE VEGETATION RETENTION REQUIREMENTS A minimum of three (3) acres of native vegetation shall be maintained on the subject site through a combination of preservation of existing native vegetation and revegetation of native vegetation. The areas of retained native vegetation and replanted native vegetation are shown as Preserve areas on the Conceptual Master Plan, Exhibit A. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline II-2 3.A.j Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 2.10 COMMON AREA MAINTENANCE One or more Property Owner's Association (POA) will provide common area maintenance. The POA, as applicable, shall be responsible for the operation, maintenance, and management of the surface water and stormwater management systems and preserves serving Santa Barbara Landings RPUD, in accordance with any applicable permits from the South Florida Water Management District. 2.11 DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS A. The Collier County Planned Unit Development District is intended to encourage ingenuity, innovation and imagination in the planning, design and development or redevelopment of relatively large tracts of land under unified ownership as set forth in Chapter 2 of the LDC. I. Individual Projects a) Site Planning: Each distinct project within the RPUD will provide an aesthetically appealing, identifiable path of entry for pedestrians and vehicles. The orientation of buildings and structures will be sensitive to adjacent land uses and the surrounding community. b) Landscaping: Where applicable, plantings along public rights-of way will be complimentary to streetscape landscaping. 2.12 LANDSCAPE BUFFERS, BERMS, FENCES AND WALLS A. Landscape buffers, berms, fences and walls are generally permitted as a principal use throughout the RPUD, excluding preserves. B. The maximum fence, wall or berm height internal to the RPUD shall be eight (8) feet, not including those portions of walls incorporated into project identification signs. The maximum fence height shall be measured relative to the greater of the crown of the adjacent roadway or the adjacent minimum finished floor, as applicable. The eight (8') foot high precast wall shown on the conceptual master plan shall be constructed along the eastern boundary of Tract B concurrent with development of the residential units in tract B. C. Perimeter Buffers abutting rights-of-way shall be permitted to deviate from the required 20' wide Type D buffer, to permit a Type D buffer an average of 20' in width, with no part of the buffer being less than 15' in width. The minimum area for the combined buffers along Radio Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard shall be 66,129 square feet (1.52± acres). 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline II-3 3.A.j Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 2.13 SIGNAGE A. GENERAL Signage shall be consistent with Section 5.06 of the LDC. 2.14 SUBSTITUTIONS TO SUBDIVISION DESIGN STANDARDS / DEVIATIONS 1. The Developer reserves the right to request substitutions to subdivision improvement and utility design standards in accordance with Chapter 10 of the LDC. A. Chapter 6, Sidewalks, bike lanes and bike paths 1. Existing site constraints prohibit retrofitting of the site with sidewalks meeting standards in Chapter 6 of the LDC. 2. A six (6) foot wide sidewalk shall be provided on only one (1) side of the internal local or private roadway exceeding one thousand (1,000) feet in length serving the project's additional 43 unit component. 3. An internal sidewalk connection from the southernmost development tract (Tract B) to the existing pool/club area shall be provided at the time of construction within Tract B. The developer of Tract B shall construct a sidewalk interconnection concurrently with the road interconnection from Tract B to Tract A. The developer of Tract B shall coordinate with the School District of Collier County to construct a sidewalk interconnection from Tract B to the adjacent school property at time of Tract B development permitting. 4. The developer shall make payment-in-lieu of construction of the sidewalk within Santa Barbara Boulevard, due to its programmed improvement in the five-year work program. B. Section 4.06.00, Landscaping, buffering and vegetation retention 1. Perimeter Buffers abutting rights-of-way shall be permitted to deviate from the required 20' wide Type D buffer, to permit a Type D buffer an average of 20' in width, with no part of the buffer being less than 15' in width. The minimum area for the combined buffers along Radio Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard shall be 66,129 square feet (1.52± acres). C. Construction Standards Manual, Streets and access improvements 1. Construction Standards Manual, Street Right-of-Way Width Street right-of-way width: The minimum right-of-way width to be utilized for local streets and cul-de-sacs shall be forty (40) feet. Drive aisles serving multi-family tracts shall not be required to meet this standard. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline II-4 3.A.j Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 2. Construction Standards Manual, Dead-end Streets Cul-de-sacs may exceed a length of one thousand (1,000) feet. 3. Construction Standards Manual, Intersection Radii Intersection radii: Street intersections shall be provided with a minimum of a twenty five (25) foot radius (face of curb) for all internal project streets and a thirty-five (35) foot radius for intersections at project entrances. 2.15 GENERAL PERMITTED USES A. Certain uses shall be considered general permitted uses throughout the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD except in the Preserve Areas. General permitted uses are those uses that generally serve the entire RPUD or distinct projects there within. B. General Permitted Uses: 1. Essential services as set forth under Chapter 2 of the LDC. 2. Water management facilities and related structures. 3. Lakes including lakes with bulkheads or other architectural or structural bank treatments. 4. Guardhouses, gatehouses, and access control structures. 5. Temporary construction, sales, and administrative offices for the Developer and Developer's authorized contractors and consultants, including necessary access ways, parking areas and related uses. 6. Landscape features including, but not limited to, landscape buffers, berms, fences and walls subject to the standards set forth in Section 2.12 of this document. 7. Signage. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline II-5 3.A.j Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) SECTION III RESIDENTIAL "R" DEVELOPMENT AREAS 3.1 PURPOSE Section III establishes permitted uses and development regulations for areas within the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD that are designated Residential "R" on the RPUD Master Plan. 3.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION A. Areas designated as "R" on the RPUD Master Plan are designed to accommodate multiple family residential types, recreational uses, essential services, and customary accessory uses. Acreage is based on a conceptual design. Actual acreage of the development and preserve areas shall be established at the time of Site Development Plan or Preliminary Subdivision Plat approvals in accordance with the Collier County Land Development Code. Areas designated as "R" accommodate internal roadways, open space, parks and amenity areas, lakes and water management facilities, and other similar facilities that are accessory or customary to residential development. B. Areas designated as "R" are intended to provide a maximum of 291 dwelling units. 3.3 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES A. Principal Uses and Structures 1. Single-family attached and detached. 2. Duplex and two-family. 3. Multiple-family. 4. Townhomes B. Accessory Uses and Structures 1. Common indoor and outdoor recreational facilities. 2. Sales and leasing facilities. 3. Clubhouse, meeting rooms. 4. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to uses permitted in this area. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline III-1 3.A.j Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Table I sets forth the development standards for land uses within the "R" Residential District. B. Required Parking: Parking within the residential area shall be provided based on the following standards: 1. Recreation Facilities - 2 per court, 1 per 600 square feet of building area, 1 per 200 square feet of pool water area. No additional parking shall be required for outdoor playground facilities. Up to 10 parking spaces per recreational facility may be directly loaded off a private roadway serving the recreational area. 2. Temporary Model Sales Facility - minimum 6 parking spaces per building. Parking for models or temporary sales facilities shall be permitted to back directly onto private roadways serving the units. C. Standards for parking, landscaping, signs and other land uses where such standards are not specified herein or within the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD, shall be in accordance with the Land Development Code in effect at the time of Site Development Plan approval. Unless otherwise indicated, required yards, heights, and floor area standards apply to principal structures. D. Development standards for uses not specifically set forth in Table I shall be established during the Site Development Plan Approval as set forth in Chapter 4 of the Land Development Code in accordance with those standards of the zoning district which is most similar to the proposed use. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline III-2 3.A.j Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) TABLE I SANTA BARBARA LANDINGS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR "R" RESIDENTIAL AREAS Permitted Uses and Standards Single Family Detached Zero Lot Line Duplex, Single Family Attached and Townhouse5 Multi-Family Dwellings 5 Minimum Lot Area 5,000 SF 4,000 SF NA NA Minimum Lot Width 50' 40' NA NA Minimum Lot Depth 100' 100' NA NA Front Yard Setback1 20'/23' 20'/23 20'/23' 20'/23' Side Yard Setback 6' 0' or 6' 0' or6' 15' Rear Yard Setback2 15' 15' 15' 15' Santa Barbara Blvd. R-O-W Setback 20' 20' 20' 20' Rear Yard Accessory Setback2 10' 10' 10' 10' Preserve Setback3 Accessory Principal 10' 25' 10' 25' 10' 25' 10' 25' Maximum Zoned Building Height 2 Stories or 30' 2 Stories or 30' 2 Stories or 30' 2 Stories or 30' Distance Between4 Detached Principal Structures 12' 12' 12' 15' Floor Area Min. (SF) 750 SF 750 SF 750 SF 750 SF All distances are in feet unless otherwise noted. 1 Front yards shall be measured as follows: A. If the parcel is served by a public right-of-way, setback is measured from the adjacent right-of-way line. B. If the parcel is served by a private road or access easement, setback is measured from the back of curb (if curbed) or edge of pavement (if not curbed). For multiple family buildings served by an unplatted driveway, no setback shall be required; however, adequate stacking shall be provided to accommodate vehicular parking. For tract B, front entry garage setback shall be a minimum of 23' from private row or back edge of sidewalk. C. For structures with side or rear entry garages, the minimum front yard may be reduced to 12'. 2Rear yards for principal and accessory structures on lots and tracts which abut lake, or open space (non-preserve) may be reduced to O' feet; however, a reduced building setback shall not reduce the width of any required landscape buffer, as may be applicable. 3 For purposes of this Section, accessory structures shall include but not be limited to attached screen enclosures and roofed lanais. 4 A minimum building separation of twelve (12) feet between detached structures. Detached garages may be separated by a minimum of ten (10) feet. 5Attached single-family and multi-family structures within Tract B shall not exceed 4 dwelling units per structure. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline III-3 3.A.j Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) SECTION IV PRESERVE "P" AREAS 4.1 PURPOSE Section IV establishes permitted uses and development regulations for areas within Santa Barbara Landings RPUD that are designated as Preserve "P" on the RPUD Master Plan. 4.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION Areas designated as "P" on the RPUD Master Plan are designed to accommodate natural systems existing or created as preserves and limited water management uses and functions. 4.3 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES A. No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land or water used, in whole or in part, subject to review and approval by local, state & federal agencies as required, for other than the following: B. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures 1. Boardwalks and nature trails (excluding impervious paved trails). 2. Water management facilities. 3. Any other preserve and related use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and which the Board of Zoning Appeals determines to be compatible in the Preserve Area. 4.4 PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS A. Building setbacks shall be 20 feet from the RPUD boundary for any permitted structure. B. Maximum zoned height for any structure shall be 20'. 4.5 PRESERVE AREA ADJUSTMENTS The proposed preserve areas depicted on the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD Master Plan are intended to meet the native vegetation requirements of the Collier County Growth Management Plan and the Collier County LDC. Adjustments may be made to the location of the preservation areas at the time of preliminary plat or site development plan approval based on jurisdictional agency permit requirements. Approximately 6 acres of native vegetation exists on-site at the time of rezoning application. Through retention of existing native vegetation and revegetation of open 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline IV-1 3.A.j Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) spaces on-site, the developer shall provide a minimum of 3 acres of on-site native vegetation, which shall consist of a minimum of 1.5 acres of retained vegetation and 1.5 acres of replanted and enhanced native vegetation. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline IV-2 3.A.j Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) SECTION V DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS 5.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the commitments for the development of this project. 5.2 GENERAL All facilities shall be constructed in strict accordance with Final Site Development Plans, Final Subdivision Plans and all applicable State and local laws, codes, and regulations applicable to this RPUD, in effect at the time of Final Plat, Final Site Development Plan approval or building permit application as the case may be. Except where specifically noted or stated otherwise, the standards and specifications of the official County Land Development Code shall apply to this project even if the land within the RPUD is not to be platted. The developer, his successor and assigns, shall be responsible for the commitments outlined in this document. These developer commitments will be enforced through provisions agreed to be included in the declaration of covenants and restrictions or similar recorded instrument. Such provisions must be enforceable by lot owners against the developer, it successors and assigns, regardless of turnover or not to any property or homeowners' association. The developer, his successor or assignee, shall follow the RPUD Master Plan and the regulations of this RPUD as adopted and any other conditions or modifications as may be agreed to in the rezoning of the property. In addition, any successor in title or assignee is subject to the commitments within this Agreement. 5.3 RPUD MASTER PLAN A. Exhibit "A", RPUD Master Plan illustrates the proposed development and is conceptual in nature. Proposed area, lot or land use boundaries or special land use boundaries shall not be construed to be final and may be varied at any subsequent approval phase such as Final Platting or Site Development Plan approval. Subject to the provisions of Chapter 10 of the LDC, amendments may be made from time to time. 5.4 SCHEDULE OF DEVELOPMENT/PUD MONITORING REPORT A. The landowners shall proceed and be governed according to the time limits pursuant to Chapter 10 of the LDC. B. Monitoring Report: An annual monitoring report shall be submitted pursuant to Chapter 10 of the LDC. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline V-1 3.A.j Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) A. One entity (hereinafter the Managing Entity) shall be responsible for PUD monitoring until close-out of the PUD, and this entity shall also be responsible for satisfying all PUD commitments until close-out of the PUD. At the time of this PUD Insubstantial Change approval dated__________2020, the Managing Entity for Tract B is St. George Group, Corp. Should the Managing Entity desire to transfer the monitoring and commitments to a successor entity, then it must provide a copy of a legally binding document that needs to be approved for legal sufficiency by the County Attorney. After such approval, the Managing Entity will be released of its obligations upon written approval of the transfer by County staff, and the successor entity shall become the Managing Entity. As Owner and Developer sell off tracts, the Managing Entity shall provide written notice to County that includes acknowledgement of the commitments required by the PUD by the new owner and the new owner’s agreement to comply with the Commitments through the Managing Entity, but the Managing Entity shall not be relieved of its responsibility under this Section. When the PUD is closed-out, then the Managing Entity is no longer responsible for the monitoring and fulfillment of PUD commitments. 5.5 ENGINEERING A. This project shall be required to meet all County Ordinances in effect at the time final construction documents are submitted for development approval. B. Design and construction of all improvements shall be subject to compliance with appropriate provisions of the LDC. 5.6 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT In accordance with the Rules of the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), this project shall be designed for a storm event of 3-day duration and 25-year return frequency. A. The project will be permitted with the South Florida Water Management District and copies of the applicable permits will be provided to Collier County prior to issuance of applicable County permits. B. Existing lakes already constructed as of the effective date of this regulation shall be allowed to continue to exist in accordance with the cross sections shown on Surface Water Management Plan, Exhibit "B". Any new lakes must meet the requirements of the then current LDC. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline V-2 3.A.j Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 5.7 UTILITIES A. Water distribution, sewage collection and transmission and interim water and/or sewage treatment facilities to serve the project are to be designed, constructed, conveyed, owned and maintained in accordance with Collier County Ordinance No. 97-17, as amended, and other applicable County rules and regulations. B. All necessary easements, dedications, or other instruments shall be granted to insure the continued operation and maintenance of all service utilities in compliance with applicable regulations in effect at the time approvals are requested. C. Water and wastewater systems shall be constructed in accordance with State of Florida Laws and Collier County's Codes and Ordinances. D. All construction plans, technical specifications and hydraulic design reports are to be reviewed and approved in writing by the Engineering Services Department of the Community Development and Environmental Services Division prior to commencement of construction E. Upon completion of construction, all water and wastewater systems within the project shall be tested and must meet minimum County standards and requirements. The system(s), or a portion thereof, that is found to meet the requirements set forth in item #5 below, may then be conveyed to the County for ownership and maintenance. F. If County's utility system does not have access readily available to serve a project within the County's service area, extensions to the County infrastructure may be required. All required extensions shall be the sole responsibility of the Developer, fiscally and otherwise (time and schedule), unless such extension has been previously defined in the County Water and/or Wastewater Master Plan. In such case, the developer may negotiate an upsizing agreement with the County. If it is determined by the County that neither of these two options are feasible, in interim system may be considered. G. Items on the following list shall be conveyed to the County for ownership and maintenance upon approval from the Board of County Commissioners if they are located within a County right-of-way or County Utility Easement (CUE), are in compliance with the latest revision of the Collier County Utilities Standards and Procedures Ordinance, and are connected to the County Water, Wastewater or Reclaimed Systems: 1. Potable water lines 6" or larger, including water meters and backflow devices that are not on fire lines. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline V-3 3.A.j Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 2. Gravity wastewater lines 8" or larger. 3. Wastewater lift stations that are located within a CUE. 4. Force mains 4" or larger. 5. CUE's that are determined to be necessary to access and maintain utility systems and structures. 6. Non-potable irrigation water lines 6" or larger, including the water meter and backflow devices. For potable and reclaimed water distribution systems that will not be conveyed to the County, a master meter shall be required. Such systems shall be owned and maintained by the applicant, his successor or assigns, from the customer side of the master meter and backflow device or the check valve at the property line or County Utility Easement limit. School and park developments are included in the list of types of developments whose internal systems the applicant or assigns shall be responsible to own and maintain. H. Private lift stations shall conform to the same specifications that apply to public lift stations, unless a Deviation from the Ordinance has been granted in advance and writing by the County Wastewater. The lift station Control Package shall include an operable Telemetry Control System, as specified by County Standards. I. The developer will pay all impact fees in accordance with the latest revision of the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, Code of Laws Section 74.303(d). J. PUD's and DRI's shall have only one master pump station. K. Lift station easement areas shall be designed to 30 feet by 30 feet, or twice the wetwell depth by twice the wetwell depth, whichever is larger. L. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 90-30, as amended, Code of Laws Chapter 118, solid waste disposal shall be required in the form of bulk containers service (garbage dumpsters and/or compactors) for all commercial and industrial establishments, unless authorization for alternative means of disposal is approved by the Public Utilities Division. Bulk container service shall be required to all multi-family projects not receiving curbside pickup. Solid waste disposal shall be required in the form of curbside pickup for all units on the annual Mandatory Trash Collection and Disposal Special Assessment Roll's. All individual units within a deed-restricted area must have an enclosed location other than the residential structure, such as a carport or garage for the storage of individual solid waste containers, or as otherwise permitted in Section 5.03.04 of the LDC. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline V-4 3.A.j Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) M. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 90-30, as amended, Code of Laws Chapter 118, all provisions and facilities for solid waste collection and disposal shall conform to all portions of Section 5.03.04 (Solid Waste Collection and Disposal) of the latest edition of the LDC. 5.8 TRAFFIC The development of this RPUD Master Plan shall be subject to and governed by the following conditions: A. All traffic control devices, signs, pavement markings and design criteria shall be in accordance with Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards (MUMS), current edition, FDOT Design Standards, current edition, and the Manual On Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), current edition. All other improvements shall be consistent with and as required by the Collier county Land Development code (LDC). B. Arterial level street lighting shall be provided at all access points. Access lighting must be in place prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy (CO). C. Site-related improvements necessary for safe ingress and egress to this project, as determined by Collier County, shall not be eligible for impact fee credits. All required improvements shall be in place and available to the public prior to the issuance of the first CO. D. Road impact fees shall be paid in accordance with Collier County Ordinance 01- 13, as amended, Code of Laws Chapter 74 and Chapter 6 and Chapter 10 of the LDC, as it may be amended. E. All work within Collier County rights-of-way or public easements shall require a Right-of-way Permit. F. All proposed median opening locations shall be in accordance with the Collier County Access Management Policy (Resolution 01-247), as it may be amended, and the LDC, as it may be amended. Collier County reserves the right to modify or close any median opening existing at the time of approval of this RPUD which is found to be adverse to the health, safety and welfare of the public. Any such modifications shall be based on, but are not limited to, safety, operational circulation, and roadway capacity. G. Nothing in any development order shall vest a right of access in excess of a right in/right out condition at any access point. Neither will the existence of a point of ingress, a point of egress or a median opening, nor the lack thereof, shall be the basis for any future cause of action for damages against the County by the developer, its successor in title, or assignee. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline V-5 3.A.j Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) H. All internal roads, driveways, alleys, pathways, sidewalks and interconnections to adjacent developments shall be operated and maintained by an entity created by the developer and Collier Country shall have no responsibility for maintenance of any such facilities. I. If any required turn lane improvement requires the use of existing County right- of-way or easement, compensating right-of-way, shall be provided without cost to Collier County as a consequence of such improvement. J. If, in the sole opinion of Collier County, a traffic signal, or other traffic control device, sign or pavement marking improvement within a public right-of-way or easement is determined to be necessary, the cost of such improvement shall be borne by the developer and shall be paid to Collier County before the issuance of the first CO. K. Upon written request by Collier County the property owner shall dedicate, to Collier County without compensation, an area of approximately 721± square feet for road right-of-way purposes, as depicted on the RPUD Conceptual Master Plan. L. A temporary construction access for all site work and vertical construction on Tract B shall be located along Santa Barbara Boulevard, as shown on the PUD Master Plan and subject to issuance of the appropriate right-of-way permit. Temporary construction access shall be limited to one year from issuance of development permit (PPL or SDP). To limit the access to construction activities only, signage is required to indicate Construction Only, and barricades are required to block access during non-working hours. Prior to final approval by the County, the temporary access shall be totally removed, and right-of-way shall be restored. 5.9 PLANNING Pursuant to Chapter 2 of the LDC, if during the course of site clearing, excavation or other construction activity a historic or archaeological artifact is found, all development within the minimum area necessary to protect the discovery shall be immediately stopped and the Collier County Code Enforcement Department contacted. 5.10 ENVIRONMENTAL A. An exotic vegetation removal, monitoring, and maintenance (exotic-free) plan for the site, shall be submitted to Environmental Services Staff for review and approval prior to Final Site Development Plan/Construction Plan approval for all parcels included on that project. All category 1 invasive exotic plants as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Council shall be removed in Preserve areas, and annual removal (in perpetuity) shall be the responsibility of the property owner. A.B. A minimum of (3.0 acres) of the on-site native vegetation shall be retained or revegetated, consistent with Chapter 3 of the LDC as conceptually shown as preserve areas on the Exhibit "A", Conceptual RPUD Master Plan. C. Setbacks from preserves shall be as required in the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD, Table I. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline V-6 3.A.j Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) D. All preserve areas shall be designated as conservation/preservation tracts or easements on all construction plans and shall be so dedicated on all plats or recorded as an easement for site plans pursuant to Section 704.06 of the Florida Statutes, for plats and be dedicated to the project's homeowners' association or like entity for ownership and maintenance responsibility, and to Collier County with no responsibility for maintenance. All documentation necessary to record conservation easements over the preserve areas shall be provided prior to the next SDP approval for this RPUD. E. This RPUD shall comply with the guidelines of the USFWS and FFWCC for impacts to protected species. A habitat management plan for those species shall be submitted to environmental review staff for review and approval prior to site plan approval. F. This RPUD shall be in compliance with the Growth Management Plan, and LDC, except as may be modified herein, at the time of final development order approval. G. A Preserve Management Plan shall be provided to environmental staff for approval prior to site/construction plan approval identifying methods to address treatment of invasive exotic species, fire management and maintenance. A SFWMD jurisdictional determination shall be shown on the site development plan. H. All approved agency permits shall be submitted prior to final site plan/construction plan approval. I. A replanting plan for the re-created preserve areas shall be provided at the time of next development order submittal. Perimeter berms shall be located outside of all upland/wetland preserves. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline V-7 3.A.j Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 5.11 HOUSING A. The developer or successors and assigns shall pay the sum of $1,000.00 to Collier County from the closing of each of the dwelling units constructed within Tract "B" of the RPUD. The payment shall be made within seven (7) days of the closing of the residential unit. AB. The developer or successors and assigns shall require a minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the dwelling units developed within Tract B of the RPUD to be initially sold to individuals or families that use the dwelling unit as their primary residence. The deed to the initial purchaser shall include a restriction that the initial purchaser shall use the unit as their primary residence. C. The developer or successors and assigns agrees to make available for sale a minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the dwelling units at a sales price less than $240,000.00. BD. The developer or successors and assigns agrees to sell a minimum of ten percent (10%) of the total number of dwelling units constructed within Tract B of the RPUD to persons employed in Collier County and earning a family income ranging between 100% and 125 that is up to 140% of the County's median income. 6/23/20 PDI-PL20190000959 – Strike/Underline V-8 3.A.j Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) INSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE 2/27/20 8' PRE CAST WALL (TRACT B)SANTA CLARA DRIVEROAD & SIDEWALK INTERCONNECTIONROAD & SIDEWALK INTERCONNECTIONINSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE 5/6/20Calusa Park School sidewalk interconnectionTEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ACCESS WITH RIGHT TURN LANETract B connection to School and construction access labelsSIDEWALK INTERCONNECTION - Final design to be coordinated with School District and Calusa Park Elementary AVERAGE AVERAGEERAGAVERAGEVERAG20' 0'0(i(min. (i15') TYPETYDINSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE 9/23/20Correction to buffer label per PUD3.A.jPacket Pg. 115Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Tract B connection to School and construction access labelsINSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE 2/27/208' PRE CAST WALL (TRACT B) SANTA CLARA DRIVETEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ACCESS WITH RIGHT TURN LANEROAD & SIDEWALK INTERCONNECTIONROAD & SIDEWALK INTERCONNECTIONSIDEWALK INTERCONNECTION - Final design to be coordinated with School District and Calusa Park Elementary INSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE 5/6/20Calusa Park School sidewalk interconnectionAVERAGE AVERAGEAVERAGAVERAVERA20' 0'''((ii(min. 15')5'TTYPEDINSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE 9/23/20Correction to buffer label per PUD3.A.jPacket Pg. 116Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara COVER LETTER 3.A.j Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 2350 Stanford Court ■Naples, Florida 34112 (239) 434-0333 ■ Fax (239) 434-9320 SINCE 1946 July 1, 2019 Mr. Tim Finn, Principal Planner c/o Intake Team Zoning Services Section 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 RE: PL20190000959 - Insubstantial Change to a PUD (PDI) Santa Barbara Landings RPUD Ordinance 05-53, Collier County Dear Mr. Finn, Enclosed is a petition for Insubstantial Change (PDI) to the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD. The RPUD is comprised of two Tracts: Tract A is built out and Tract B remains developable. This PDI request is for changes that clarify that each tract of the RPUD is subject to the conditions applicable to each tract. At the April 29, 2019 Pre-Application Meeting for this project, Heidi Ashton Cicko suggested further discussion with Housing staff, because proposed changes related to housing policy could potentially elevate the petition to a PUD Amendment application. In a meeting with Cormac Giblin and Hilary Halford on May 23, 2019, these refinements to the requested changes to housing conditions were determined:  The proposed change to remove the $1,000 payment condition is allowable as a minor change per the LDC.  A change is proposed to clarify that the 50% primary resident condition applies to units to be developed in Tract B, the only developable tract.  Property Appraiser records are provided to demonstrate that over 50% of the total allowable 291 units in the RPUD have sold below $240,000. We propose to remove this condition because it has been satisfied.  A change is proposed to the condition for sale of 10% of units to be constructed in Tract B, the only developable tract, to owners employed in Collier County. We propose adjustment to the referenced income level as 140% or less of median income, which Housing staff advised is consistent with Board income level policies for workforce housing. The proposed changes to housing conditions are refined to be minor or insubstantial according to LDC provisions and according to Property Appraiser records demonstrating that one condition has been met. This request also includes proposed insubstantial changes to conditions related to a wall, sidewalk, and environmental requirements to generally clarify that each tract of the RPUD is subject to the conditions applicable to each tract. The enclosed petition package provides detail and justification for these changes as Insubstantial Changes to a PUD (PDI). We appreciate your consideration of this request. If you have any comments or questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, JOHNSON ENGINEERING, INC. Laura DeJohn, AICP Principal Planner 3.A.j Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) APPLICATION 3.A.j Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Revised 3/27/2018 Page 1 of 4 INSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE TO A PUD (PDI) LDC subsection 10.02.13 E & Code of Laws section 2-83 – 2-90 Ch. 3 G.3 of the Administrative Code Pursuant to LDC subsection 10.02.13 E.2, a PUD insubstantial change includes any change that is not considered a substantial or a minor change. A PUD insubstantial change to an approved PUD ordinance shall be based upon an evaluation of LDC subsection 10.02.13 E.1 and shall require the review and approval of the Hearing Examiner. The Hearing Examiner’s approval shall be based on the findings and criteria used for the original application . PETITION NO PROJECT NAME DATE PROCESSED APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION Name of Property Owner(s): ______________________________________________________ Name of Applicant if different than owner: __________________________________________ Address: __________________________City: _____________ State: _______ ZIP: __________ Telephone: ____________________ Cell: ____________________ Fax: ___________________ E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________ Name of Agent: ________________________________________________________________ Firm: _________________________________________________________________________ Address: ______________________City: _______________ State: _________ ZIP: __________ Telephone: _____________________ Cell: _____________________ Fax: _________________ E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________ DETAIL OF REQUEST On a separate sheet, attached to the application, describe the insubstantial change request. Identify how the request does not meet the PUD substantial change criteria established in LDC subsection 10.02.13 E.1. To be completed by staff 3.A.j Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Revised 3/27/2018 Page 2 of 4 PROPERTY INFORMATION PUD NAME: _______________________ ORDINANCE NUMBER: ________________________ FOLIO NUMBER(S): _____________________________________________________________ Provide a legal (if PUD is recorded) or graphic description of area of amendment (this may be graphically illustrated on Amended PUD Master Plan). If applying for a portion of the PUD, provide a legal description for subject portion. Attach on a separate sheet, a written description of the map or text change. Does amendment comply with the Growth Management Plan? Yes No If no, please explain: _______________________________________________________ Has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? Yes No If yes, in whose name? _____________________________________________________ Has any portion of the PUD been SOLD and/or DEVELOPED? Are any changes proposed for the area sold and/or developed? Yes No If yes, please describe on an attached separate sheet. 3.A.j Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Revised 3/27/2018 Page 3 of 4 Pre-Application Meeting and Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for: PUD Insubstantial Change Chapter 3 G.3 of the Administrative Code The following Submittal Requirement checklist is to be utilized during the Pre -Application Meeting and at time of application submittal. At final submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with the application packet. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below, with cover sheets attached to each section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. REQUIREMENTS FOR REVIEW # OF COPIES REQUIRED NOT REQUIRED Completed Application (download current form from County website) 1 Pre-Application Meeting notes 1 Project Narrative, including a detailed description of proposed changes and why amendment is necessary 1 Detail of request 1 Current Master Plan & 1 Reduced Copy 1 Revised Master Plan & 1 Reduced Copy 1 Revised Text and any exhibits PUD document with changes crossed through & underlined PUD document as revised with amended Title Page with Ordinance # Warranty Deed Legal Description 1 Boundary survey, if boundary of original PUD is amended If PUD is platted, include plat book pages List identifying Owner & all parties of corporation 1 Affidavit of Authorization, signed & notarized 1 Completed Addressing Checklist 1 Property Ownership Disclosure Form 1 Copy of 8 ½ in. x 11 in. graphic location map of site 1 Electronic copy of all documents and plans *Please advise: The Office of the Hearing Examiner requires all materials to be submitted electronically in PDF format. *If located in Immokalee or seeking affordable housing, include an additional set of each submittal requirement. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS: •Following the completion of the review process by County Review staff, the applicant shall submit all materials electronically to the designated project manager. •Please contact the project manager to confirm the number of additional copies required. Included in PUD document N/A N/A 3.A.j Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Revised 3/27/2018 Page 4 of 4 PLANNERS – INDICATE IF THE PETITION NEEDS TO BE ROUTED TO THE FOLLOWING REVIEWERS: School District (Residential Components): Amy Lockheart Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment: Executive Director Utilities Engineering: Eric Fey Parks and Recreation: Barry Williams and David Berra Emergency Management: Dan Summers Naples Airport Authority: Conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Johnson Other: City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director Other: FEE REQUIREMENTS  PUD Amendment Insubstantial (PDI): $1,500.00  Pre-Application Meeting: $500.00  Estimated Legal Advertising fee for the Office of the Hearing Examiner: $1,125.00 Same fee applies if the petition is referred to the Collier County Planning Commission, where the CCPC serves as the deciding authority instead of the HEX. Fire Code Plans Review Fees are collected at the time of application submission and those fees are set forth by the Authority having jurisdiction. The Land Development Code requires Neighborhood Notification mailers for Applications headed to hearing, and this fee is collected prior to hearing. As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. All checks payable to: Board of County Commissioners. The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to: Growth Management Department Planning and Regulation ATTN: Business Center 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 ____________________________________________ ____________ Agent/Owner Signature Date ____________________________________________ Applicant/Owner Name (please print) x x x 3.A.j Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) LEGAL DESCRIPTION 3.A.j Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) PROPERTY OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE 3.A.j Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliergov.net 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239)2S2-2400 FAX: (239) 2S2-6358 PROPERTY OWNEHSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM This is a required form with all land use petitions, except for Appeals and Zoning Verification Letters. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of app lication, 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. Please complete the following, use additional sheets if necessary. 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: Name and Address % of Ownership 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 % of Ownership St. George Group, Corp 6303 Blue Lagoon Drive, Suite 390, Miami, FL 33126 LIST OFFICERS & STOCKHOLDERS identify% A'fJ..hR�c.fo 3. R\1c0Jo \'l. lo<>,o 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 % of Ownership Created 9/28/2017 Page 1 of 3 3.A.j Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Armando J. Bucelo, Jr. 3.A.j Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Department of State /Division of Corporations /Search Records /Detail By Document Number / DIVISION OF CORPORATIONSFlorida Department of State Page 1 of 2Detail by Entity Name 2/18/2020http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=Entity... 3.A.j Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Document Number FEI/EIN Number Date Filed State Status Detail by Entity Name Florida Profit Corporation ST. GEORGE GROUP, CORP Filing Information P20000013232 NONE 02/06/2020 FL ACTIVE Principal Address 6303 BLUE LAGOON DRIVE SUITE 390 MIAMI, FL 33126 UN Mailing Address 6303 BLUE LAGOON DRIVE SUITE 390 MIAMI, FL 33126 UN Registered Agent Name & Address BUCELO, ARMANDO J, JR 6303 BLUE LAGOON DRIVE SUITE 390 MIAMI, FL 33126 Officer/Director Detail Name & Address Title P BUCELO, ARMANDO J, JR 6303 BLUE LAGOON DRIVE MIAMI, FL 33126 UN Annual Reports No Annual Reports Filed Document Images 02/06/2020 -- Domestic Profit View image in PDF format Florida Department of State, Division of Corporations Page 2 of 2Detail by Entity Name 2/18/2020http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=Entity... 3.A.j Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) $ 0 $ 716,350 $ 0 $ 716,350 $ 369,624 $ 346,726 $ 716,350 $ 346,726 Collier County Property AppraiserProperty Summary Parcel No 00400246503 Site Address *Disclaimer Site City Site Zone *Note Name / Address ST GEORGE GROUP CORP 3310 GRANADA BLVD City CORAL GABLES State FL Zip 33134 Map No.Strap No.Section Township Range Acres *Estimated 5B04 000100 033 5B04 4 50 26 6.74 Legal 4 50 26 THAT PORTION OF THE W1/2 OF THE W1/2 OF THE NW1/4 AS DESC IN OR 3920 PG 1399 Millage Area 301 Millage Rates *Calculations Sub./Condo 100 - ACREAGE HEADER School Other Total Use Code 0 - VACANT RESIDENTIAL 5.083 6.4933 11.5763 Latest Sales History (Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality) Date Book-Page Amount 11/01/05 3920-1399 2019 Certified Tax Roll (Subject to Change) Land Value (+) Improved Value (=) Market Value (-) 10% Cap (=) Assessed Value (=) School Taxable Value (=) Taxable Value If all Values shown above equal 0 this parcel was created after the Final Tax Roll Page 1 of 1 2/18/2020http://www.collierappraiser.com/main_search/recorddetail.html?sid=497468706&Map=No&FolioNum=004... 3.A.j Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION 3.A.j Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION FOR PETITION NUMBERS(S) _______________________ _ (print name), as .{\•e�\&e(\,� (title, if I, ArmandoBucelo applicable) of sT. GEORGE GROUP . CORP . (company, If applicable), swear or affirm under oath, that I am the (choose one) owner[ZJ applicant[Z]contract purchaserOand that: *Notes: 1.I have full authority to secure the approval(s) requested and to impose covenants and restrictions on the referenced property as a result of any action approved by the County in accordance with this application and the Land Development Code; 2.All answers to the questions in this application and any sketches, data or other supplementary matter attached hereto and made a part of this application are honest and true; 3.I have authorized the staff of Collier County to enter upon the property during normal working hours for the purpose of investigating and evaluating the request made through this application; and that 4.The property will be transferred, conveyed, sold or subdivided subject to the conditions and restrictions imposed by the approved action. 5.We/I authorize Laura DeJohn (Johnson Engineering, Inc.) in any matters regarding this petition including 1 through 2 above. to act as our/my representative •If the applicant is a corporation, then it is usually executed by the corp. pres. or v. pres. •If the applicant is a Limited Liability Company (L.L.C.) or Limited Company (LC.), then the documents should typically be signed by the Company's "Managing Member." •If the applicant is a partnership, then typically a partner can sign on behalf of the partnership. •If the applicant is a limited partnership, then the general partner must sign and be identified as the "general partner" of the named partnership. •If the applicant is a trust, then they must include the trustee's name and the words "as trustee". •In each instance, first determine the applicant's status, e.g., individual, corporate, trust, partnership, and then use the appropriate format for that ownership. STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instrument was sworn to (or affirmed) and subscribed fore me on 6/ d)L/ /I 9 (date) byJurtQ, .;2.0I 'P ( A je bAnJ¢ "3. Ev co,la. �-) (name of p rson providi[goath ffirmation), as > f .., I who is personally known to me who has produce1 (type of identification) as identification. ,.(j STAMP/SEAL Sig ature of Notary Public CP\08-COA-00115\155 REV 3/24/14 3.A.j Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) WARRANTY DEED 3.A.j Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) NARRATIVE OF REQUEST, JUSTIFICATION & GMP CONSISTENCY 3.A.j Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 2350 Stanford Court ■Naples, Florida 34112 (239) 434-0333 ■ Fax (239) 434-9320 SINCE 1946 Santa Barbara Landings RPUD Insubstantial Change to a PUD (PDI) PL20190000959 Narrative & Detail of Insubstantial Change Request This petition is for an Insubstantial Change (PDI) to the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD originally adopted by Ordinance 05‐53. The RPUD is located on the east side of Santa Barbara Boulevard, south of Radio Road and north of Davis Boulevard in Section 4, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. The ±41.6‐acre RPUD is comprised of two development tracts. At the time of original rezoning from RFM‐ 6 to PUD, the northerly ±35.3‐acre tract was developed with 248 multifamily dwelling units, which is now a condominium community known as Granada Lakes Villas. The southerly +6.3 acres designated as Tract B was approved for a maximum of 43 mixed residential dwelling units. Tract B remains undeveloped and is not part of the condominium and is independent from that condominium association. The petitioner for the original rezoning remains the owner of Tract B, and is requesting an Insubstantial Change (PDI) to the RPUD. The proposed changes are to clarify the conditions applicable to the Tract B development site by eliminating outdated requirements or modifying to clarify applicability of the conditions to the respective Tract. Changes are numbered #1 through #4, addressing conditions related to a #1‐wall, #2‐sidewalk, #3‐ environmental, and #4‐housing, as described below: CHANGE #1: Landscape Buffers, Berms, Fences and Walls Condition 2.12.B requires that the eight (8') foot high precast wall shown on the conceptual master plan shall be constructed concurrent with development of the residential units in Tract B. The PUD master plan shows the wall extending for the full length of Tract A and Tract B along the eastern PUD boundary. This full length totals approximately 2,757 feet (just over half a mile). A change is proposed to Condition 2.12.B and the PUD master plan to require the wall along the eastern boundary of Tract B only. The table below summarizes the existing conditions, buffer standards, and proposed change: 3.A.j Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Narrative & Detail of Request PL20190000959 – Santa Barbara Landings RPUD PDI Page 2 Zoning / Use Adjacent Zoning / Use LDC §4.06.02 buffer requirement RPUD buffer requirement Proposed buffer Tract B eastern boundary (480 linear feet) RPUD Proposed multifamily (43 units) PUD Existing single family (3 homesites) 15’ wide Type B 15’ wide Type B with 8’ pre cast wall and Preserve area per Master Plan Same Tract A eastern boundary (2,277 linear feet) RPUD Existing multifamily: Granada Lakes Villas condominiums PUD Existing multifamily: Villas of Capri apartments & Furse Lakes condominiums 10’ wide Type A (trees spaced 30’ on center) 15’ wide Type B with 8’ pre cast wall 15’ wide Type B The Granada Lakes Villas community has occupied Tract A adjacent to the multifamily neighborhoods to the east (Villas of Capri Apartments and Furse Lakes condominiums) since prior to adoption of this condition in 2005. The communities have continued to exist without a wall separating them from one another for fourteen years. Requiring a wall along the Tract A boundary at the time of Tract B development constitutes a requirement for an approximately 2,277‐foot long wall on common areas of Granada Lakes Villas, which has a separate condominium association independent of Tract B. The following considerations support that removing the condition for a wall along the Tract A eastern boundary has no detrimental effect on the existing communities and compatibility will continue to be provided for the existing communities:  The existing communities along both sides of the Tract A eastern boundary are compatible multifamily neighborhoods. Tract A is built out with 248 multifamily units. Plantation PUD to the east is a closed‐out PUD and is built‐out with 331 multifamily units.  The existing conditions along both sides of the Tract A eastern boundary line exceed the standard code requirement for a 10’ wide Type A buffer between adjoining multifamily developments. Tract A‐Granada Lakes Villas is subject to a 15’ wide Type B buffer per the Master Plan. Tract A has at least 30 feet of landscaped area and open space along most of eastern boundary, with some greater degrees of buffering provided by lakes and additional green space. To the east within the adjoining Plantation PUD, landscaped areas and open space along the roadways of Tara Circle and Plantation Circle provide additional buffering along the shared boundary.  Given the adjoining communities are built‐out, and with the existing features of the roadways and open space along the shared boundary, there is no potential for new incompatibilities to arise because no residential homesites could be added on either side of the Tract A eastern boundary. 3.A.j Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Narrative & Detail of Request PL20190000959 – Santa Barbara Landings RPUD PDI Page 3 The potential development on Tract B per the RPUD approved Master Plan does not result in any change to the existing Tract A‐Granada Lakes Villas site conditions. The requirement for a wall along the Tract A boundary to separate the existing multifamily communities does not appropriately relate to the development of residential units in Tract B, and it is not feasible for the developer of Tract B to construct on the property of a third party. The existing buffered condition along the Tract A eastern boundary provides adequate buffering along the boundary of the community, exceeding the code standard of a 10’ wide Type A buffer. The request to remove the wall requirement along the Tract A eastern boundary has no detrimental effect on the existing communities, and compatibility will continue to be provided for the existing communities. The proposed change to the language and Master Plan clarifies the condition to indicate that a wall is to be constructed along the Tract B eastern boundary at time of Tract B development. CHANGE #2: Sidewalks, bike lanes and bike paths Condition 2.14.A.3 requires that an internal sidewalk connection from the southernmost development tract (Tract B) to the existing pool/club area shall be provided at the time of construction within Tract B. Condition 2.14.A.3 is proposed to be modified to require interconnection of the internal sidewalk concurrent with the road interconnection from Tract B to Tract A, consistent with LDC Section 6.06.02.B. The construction of a sidewalk connecting new residents of Tract B to the common area and amenities of a separate condominium association in Tract A does not appropriately relate to the development of residential units in Tract B. It is not feasible for the developer of Tract B to construct in common areas of Granada Lakes Villas, which has a separate condominium association. The minimum standard for a 6‐foot wide sidewalk is identified in PUD Section 2.14.A.2. The interconnection of the internal sidewalks as proposed is consistent with County standards to provide linkages to serve pedestrian needs between development areas. CHANGE #3: Environmental Conditions in 5.10.A, D, E, G and I refer to requirements for: exotic vegetation management plan, conservation easement dedication, habitat management plan, preserve management plan, and that a replanting plan for the re‐created preserve areas shall be provided at the time of next development order submittal. The petitioner proposes to clarify that the requirements are applicable to each tract. No change is proposed to the required preserve areas or associated easement dedication, or requirements for management plan or re‐created preserves. The proposed changes are to clarify that the developer of Tract B is not responsible for conditions applicable to Tract A, because it is not feasible for the developer of Tract B to commit to management plans, easements, or replanting for common areas of Granada Lakes Villas. Wording is added so that the conditions apply to each tract at the time of permitting for each tract. 3.A.j Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Narrative & Detail of Request PL20190000959 – Santa Barbara Landings RPUD PDI Page 4 CHANGE #4: Housing Conditions – the following changes are proposed:  5.11.A Contribution. The developer or successors and assigns shall pay the sum of $1,000.00 to Collier County from the closing of each of the dwelling units constructed within Tract “B" of the RPUD. The payment shall be made within seven (7) days of the closing of the residential unit. Condition 5.11.A is proposed to be removed. Removal of this contribution commitment qualifies as a minor text change per LDC Section 10.02.13.E.3.c. Because the petitioner requests additional proposed changes to the RPUD, this change is proposed as part of an insubstantial change (PDI) request.  5.11.B Primary residence. The developer or successors and assigns shall require a minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the dwelling units developed within the RPUD to be initially sold to individuals or families that use the dwelling unit as their primary residence. The deed to the initial purchaser shall include a restriction that the initial purchaser shall use the unit as their primary residence. Condition 5.11.B is proposed to be amended to reflect the condition applies to Tract B. Property Appraiser records and primary residency records are not available to determine whether 50% of the dwelling units within the RPUD sold to primary residents. This condition is proposed to be clarified to reflect that the condition applies to Tract B, the only developable tract.  5.11.C Maximum price point. The developer or successors and assigns agrees to make available for sale a minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the dwelling units at a sales price less than $240,000. Condition 5.11.C is proposed to be removed. Property Appraiser records document that this condition has been met for the RPUD. Attachment A lists all initial transactions that occurred when Granada Lakes Villas condominiumized, demonstrating 151 units sold at a sales price less than $240,000, which satisfies the minimum 50% of the total allowable 291 units within the RPUD. Thus, sales price affordability goals have been met by this project, and it is appropriate to remove Condition 5.11.C.  5.11.D Employment in Collier County with income requirement. The developer or successors and assigns agrees to sell a minimum of ten percent (10%) of the total number of dwelling units constructed within the RPUD to persons employed in Collier County and earning a family income ranging between 100% and 125% of the County's median income. Condition 5.11.D is proposed to be amended to reflect the condition applies to Tract B and is to serve households earning 140% or less of the County’s median income. This RPUD is subject to standard density calculated according to the base density and residential density band in proximity to an Activity Center. There is no affordable housing density bonus associated with this RPUD. Employment records and income level records are not available to 3.A.j Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Narrative & Detail of Request PL20190000959 – Santa Barbara Landings RPUD PDI Page 5 determine whether purchasers of 10% of the total number of dwelling units within the RPUD have met the employment status and income levels referenced in Condition 5.11.D. This condition is proposed to be clarified to reflect applicability to Tract B, the only developable tract, and that the target income level is households earning 140% or less of the County’s median income. This update to the income level was identified by Cormac Giblin in reference to current County housing policies. The proposed updates maintain the objective to provide new housing options that are affordable to the workforce within Collier County. 3.A.j Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Granada Lakes Villas Purchase Price Data from Collier County Property Appraiser Parcel ID Street Number Street Name Initial Purchase Date (yyyymmdd) Initial Sale Amount ($) Original Sale Under $240,000 46573000009 100 SANTA CLARA 20060410 216,900$ 1 46573000025 100 SANTA CLARA 20060825 257,900$ 0 46573000041 100 SANTA CLARA 20060921 257,900$ 0 46573000067 100 SANTA CLARA 20070426 247,000$ 0 46573000083 100 SANTA CLARA 20061109 250,000$ 0 46573000106 100 SANTA CLARA 20060410 247,800$ 0 46573000122 100 SANTA CLARA 20060310 221,900$ 1 46573000148 100 SANTA CLARA 20060327 216,900$ 1 46573000164 100 SANTA CLARA 20060308 255,900$ 0 46573000180 100 SANTA CLARA 20060327 237,900$ 1 46573000203 100 SANTA CLARA 20060310 234,900$ 1 46573000229 100 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573000245 100 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573000261 100 SANTA CLARA 20060421 234,900$ 1 46573000287 100 SANTA CLARA 20061024 228,900$ 1 46573000300 100 SANTA CLARA 20060606 254,900$ 0 46573000326 108 SANTA CLARA 20060526 214,900$ 1 46573000342 108 SANTA CLARA 20060526 232,900$ 1 46573000368 108 SANTA CLARA 20060308 219,900$ 1 46573000384 108 SANTA CLARA 20060526 249,200$ 0 46573000407 108 SANTA CLARA 20060209 210,900$ 1 46573000423 108 SANTA CLARA 20061226 252,000$ 0 46573000449 108 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573000465 108 SANTA CLARA 20060310 213,900$ 1 46573000481 108 SANTA CLARA 20061109 250,000$ 0 46573000504 108 SANTA CLARA 20061009 239,900$ 1 46573000520 108 SANTA CLARA 20060327 277,900$ 1 46573000546 108 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573000562 108 SANTA CLARA 20061218 248,900$ 0 46573000588 108 SANTA CLARA 20061222 264,300$ 0 46573000601 108 SANTA CLARA 20060410 257,900$ 0 46573000627 108 SANTA CLARA 20060308 207,900$ 1 46573000643 116 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573000669 116 SANTA CLARA 20060502 185,900$ 1 46573000685 116 SANTA CLARA 20060410 161,900$ 1 46573000708 116 SANTA CLARA 20060616 160,900$ 1 46573000724 116 SANTA CLARA 20060421 161,900$ 1 46573000740 116 SANTA CLARA 20060421 171,900$ 1 46573000766 116 SANTA CLARA 20060421 185,900$ 1 46573000782 116 SANTA CLARA 20060421 181,900$ 1 46573000805 116 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573000821 116 SANTA CLARA 20071228 Santa Barbara Landings RPUD PDI ‐ PL20190000959 33 = no dollar amount was indicated for the initial sale in Property Appraiser records Page 1 ATTACHMENT A 3.A.j Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Granada Lakes Villas Purchase Price Data from Collier County Property Appraiser Parcel ID Street Number Street Name Initial Purchase Date (yyyymmdd) Initial Sale Amount ($) Original Sale Under $240,000 46573000847 116 SANTA CLARA 20060310 197,900$ 1 46573000863 116 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573000889 116 SANTA CLARA 20060410 185,900$ 1 46573000902 116 SANTA CLARA 20060510 196,900$ 1 46573000928 116 SANTA CLARA 20060222 199,900$ 1 46573000944 116 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573000960 124 SANTA CLARA 20060705 153,900$ 1 46573000986 124 SANTA CLARA 20060705 172,900$ 1 46573001008 124 SANTA CLARA 20060209 160,900$ 1 46573001024 124 SANTA CLARA 20060327 159,900$ 1 46573001040 124 SANTA CLARA 20070620 180,900$ 1 46573001066 124 SANTA CLARA 20060209 170,900$ 1 46573001082 124 SANTA CLARA 20060308 173,900$ 1 46573001105 124 SANTA CLARA 20060526 153,400$ 1 46573001121 124 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573001147 124 SANTA CLARA 20061218 200,000$ 1 46573001163 124 SANTA CLARA 20080912 157,000$ 1 46573001189 124 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573001202 124 SANTA CLARA 20011228 46573001228 124 SANTA CLARA 20060616 161,900$ 1 46573001244 124 SANTA CLARA 20060616 162,900$ 1 46573001260 124 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573001286 132 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573001309 132 SANTA CLARA 20060410 228,900$ 1 46573001325 132 SANTA CLARA 20060310 218,900$ 1 46573001341 132 SANTA CLARA 20060526 219,900$ 1 46573001367 132 SANTA CLARA 20060316 237,900$ 1 46573001383 132 SANTA CLARA 20060209 218,900$ 1 46573001406 132 SANTA CLARA 20080822 215,000$ 1 46573001422 132 SANTA CLARA 20070613 266,900$ 0 46573001448 132 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573001464 132 SANTA CLARA 20060606 248,300$ 0 46573001480 132 SANTA CLARA 20060502 234,900$ 1 46573001503 132 SANTA CLARA 20060316 245,200$ 0 46573001529 132 SANTA CLARA 20060526 241,900$ 0 46573001545 132 SANTA CLARA 20060327 234,900$ 1 46573001561 132 SANTA CLARA 20060222 236,900$ 1 46573001587 132 SANTA CLARA 20060510 244,900$ 0 46573001600 142 SANTA CLARA 20060327 162,900$ 1 46573001626 142 SANTA CLARA 20060421 163,900$ 1 46573001642 142 SANTA CLARA 20060308 170,900$ 1 46573001668 142 SANTA CLARA 20071228 Santa Barbara Landings RPUD PDI ‐ PL20190000959 33 = no dollar amount was indicated for the initial sale in Property Appraiser records Page 2 3.A.j Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Granada Lakes Villas Purchase Price Data from Collier County Property Appraiser Parcel ID Street Number Street Name Initial Purchase Date (yyyymmdd) Initial Sale Amount ($) Original Sale Under $240,000 46573001684 142 SANTA CLARA 20060223 159,900$ 1 46573001707 142 SANTA CLARA 20060308 164,900$ 1 46573001723 142 SANTA CLARA 20060502 168,900$ 1 46573001749 142 SANTA CLARA 20060223 153,900$ 1 46573001765 142 SANTA CLARA 20060421 176,900$ 1 46573001781 142 SANTA CLARA 20060308 188,900$ 1 46573001804 142 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573001820 142 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573001846 142 SANTA CLARA 20060209 174,900$ 1 46573001862 142 SANTA CLARA 20060925 195,600$ 1 46573001888 142 SANTA CLARA 20060705 187,900$ 1 46573001901 142 SANTA CLARA 20060502 181,500$ 1 46573001927 150 SANTA CLARA 20060510 174,000$ 1 46573001943 150 SANTA CLARA 20070328 180,100$ 1 46573001969 150 SANTA CLARA 20060327 170,900$ 1 46573001985 150 SANTA CLARA 20060705 170,900$ 1 46573002007 150 SANTA CLARA 20060223 161,900$ 1 46573002023 150 SANTA CLARA 20060209 171,900$ 1 46573002049 150 SANTA CLARA 20060308 173,900$ 1 46573002065 150 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573002081 150 SANTA CLARA 20060316 189,900$ 1 46573002104 150 SANTA CLARA 200712228 46573002120 150 SANTA CLARA 20171228 46573002146 150 SANTA CLARA 20060316 186,900$ 1 46573002162 150 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573002188 150 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573002201 150 SANTA CLARA 20070205 203,500$ 1 46573002227 150 SANTA CLARA 20060526 189,900$ 1 46573002243 153 SANTA CLARA 20060308 162,900$ 1 46573002269 153 SANTA CLARA 20060410 150,700$ 1 46573002285 153 SANTA CLARA 20060327 160,900$ 1 46573002308 153 SANTA CLARA 20060222 159,900$ 1 46573002324 153 SANTA CLARA 20060310 159,900$ 1 46573002340 153 SANTA CLARA 20060410 178,100$ 1 46573002366 153 SANTA CLARA 20060327 164,900$ 1 46573002382 153 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573002405 153 SANTA CLARA 20060502 182,900$ 1 46573002421 153 SANTA CLARA 20060616 193,900$ 1 46573002447 153 SANTA CLARA 20060421 181,900$ 1 46573002463 153 SANTA CLARA 20060421 171,900$ 1 46573002489 153 SANTA CLARA 20060616 174,900$ 1 46573002502 153 SANTA CLARA 20060421 190,900$ 1 Santa Barbara Landings RPUD PDI ‐ PL20190000959 33 = no dollar amount was indicated for the initial sale in Property Appraiser records Page 3 3.A.j Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Granada Lakes Villas Purchase Price Data from Collier County Property Appraiser Parcel ID Street Number Street Name Initial Purchase Date (yyyymmdd) Initial Sale Amount ($) Original Sale Under $240,000 46573002528 153 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573002544 153 SANTA CLARA 20060616 177,900$ 1 46573002560 161 SANTA CLARA 20060327 223,900$ 1 46573002586 161 SANTA CLARA 20060410 221,900$ 1 46573002609 161 SANTA CLARA 20060327 254,900$ 0 46573002625 161 SANTA CLARA 20061102 250,000$ 0 46573002641 161 SANTA CLARA 20060705 227,900$ 1 46573002667 161 SANTA CLARA 20060421 219,900$ 1 46573002683 161 SANTA CLARA 20060327 209,900$ 1 46573002706 161 SANTA CLARA 20060503 216,900$ 1 46573002722 161 SANTA CLARA 20060209 265,900$ 0 46573002748 161 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573002764 161 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573002780 161 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573002803 161 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573002829 161 SANTA CLARA 20061207 246,000$ 0 46573002845 161 SANTA CLARA 20060705 281,900$ 0 46573002861 161 SANTA CLARA 20070315 259,900$ 0 46573002887 169 SANTA CLARA 20060308 244,900$ 0 46573002900 169 SANTA CLARA 20060502 254,900$ 0 46573002926 169 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573002942 169 SANTA CLARA 20060606 211,900$ 1 46573002968 169 SANTA CLARA 20060327 240,900$ 0 46573002984 169 SANTA CLARA 20061009 252,900$ 0 46573003006 169 SANTA CLARA 20060510 222,900$ 1 46573003022 169 SANTA CLARA 20070205 224,900$ 1 46573003048 169 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573003064 169 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573003080 169 SANTA CLARA 20060421 243,900$ 0 46573003103 169 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573003129 169 SANTA CLARA 20060606 235,900$ 1 46573003145 169 SANTA CLARA 20060526 243,900$ 0 46573003161 169 SANTA CLARA 20080912 215,000$ 1 46573003187 169 SANTA CLARA 20061109 248,900$ 0 46573003200 177 SANTA CLARA 20060502 164,900$ 1 46573003226 177 SANTA CLARA 20061009 201,900$ 1 46573003242 177 SANTA CLARA 20060222 182,900$ 1 46573003268 177 SANTA CLARA 20060222 171,900$ 1 46573003284 177 SANTA CLARA 20060316 165,900$ 1 46573003307 177 SANTA CLARA 20060421 169,900$ 1 46573003323 177 SANTA CLARA 20061009 182,900$ 1 46573003349 177 SANTA CLARA 20060310 164,900$ 1 Santa Barbara Landings RPUD PDI ‐ PL20190000959 33 = no dollar amount was indicated for the initial sale in Property Appraiser records Page 4 3.A.j Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Granada Lakes Villas Purchase Price Data from Collier County Property Appraiser Parcel ID Street Number Street Name Initial Purchase Date (yyyymmdd) Initial Sale Amount ($) Original Sale Under $240,000 46573003365 177 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573003381 177 SANTA CLARA 20060510 200,900$ 1 46573003404 177 SANTA CLARA 20060310 197,900$ 1 46573003420 177 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573003446 177 SANTA CLARA 20060222 175,900$ 1 46573003462 177 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573003488 177 SANTA CLARA 20061109 190,000$ 1 46573003501 177 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573003527 185 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573003543 185 SANTA CLARA 20060502 149,300$ 1 46573003569 185 SANTA CLARA 20060308 170,900$ 1 46573003585 185 SANTA CLARA 20060616 163,000$ 1 46573003608 185 SANTA CLARA 20060616 150,900$ 1 46573003624 185 SANTA CLARA 20060308 170,900$ 1 46573003640 185 SANTA CLARA 20060308 173,900$ 1 46573003666 185 SANTA CLARA 20060222 162,900$ 1 46573003682 185 SANTA CLARA 20060421 181,900$ 1 46573003705 185 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573003721 185 SANTA CLARA 20060705 195,600$ 1 46573003747 185 SANTA CLARA 20060308 170,900$ 1 46573003763 185 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573003789 185 SANTA CLARA 20060421 195,900$ 1 46573003802 185 SANTA CLARA 20060526 197,800$ 1 46573003828 185 SANTA CLARA 20070315 179,900$ 1 46573003844 190 SANTA CLARA 20060606 212,900$ 1 46573003860 190 SANTA CLARA 20060921 252,000$ 0 46573003886 190 SANTA CLARA 20061024 234,900$ 1 46573003909 190 SANTA CLARA 20061207 245,000$ 0 46573003925 190 SANTA CLARA 20060526 220,900$ 1 46573003941 190 SANTA CLARA 20060526 237,100$ 1 46573003967 190 SANTA CLARA 20070919 269,900$ 0 46573003983 190 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573004005 193 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573004021 193 SANTA CLARA 20060316 174,900$ 1 46573004047 193 SANTA CLARA 20060222 188,900$ 1 46573004063 193 SANTA CLARA 20060616 164,900$ 1 46573004089 193 SANTA CLARA 20060317 160,900$ 1 46573004102 193 SANTA CLARA 20060317 170,900$ 1 46573004128 193 SANTA CLARA 20060327 164,900$ 1 46573004144 193 SANTA CLARA 20060327 174,900$ 1 46573004160 193 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573004186 193 SANTA CLARA 20060502 198,900$ 1 Santa Barbara Landings RPUD PDI ‐ PL20190000959 33 = no dollar amount was indicated for the initial sale in Property Appraiser records Page 5 3.A.j Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Granada Lakes Villas Purchase Price Data from Collier County Property Appraiser Parcel ID Street Number Street Name Initial Purchase Date (yyyymmdd) Initial Sale Amount ($) Original Sale Under $240,000 46573004209 193 SANTA CLARA 20080912 167,000$ 1 46573004225 193 SANTA CLARA 20060327 196,900$ 1 46573004241 193 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573004267 193 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573004283 193 SANTA CLARA 20060502 198,900$ 1 46573004306 193 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573004322 194 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573004348 194 SANTA CLARA 20061116 186,900$ 1 46573004364 194 SANTA CLARA 20061102 194,200$ 1 46573004380 194 SANTA CLARA 20060510 171,900$ 1 46573004403 194 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573004429 194 SANTA CLARA 20061218 197,000$ 1 46573004445 194 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573004461 194 SANTA CLARA 20060606 162,900$ 1 46573004487 194 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573004500 194 SANTA CLARA 20060222 191,700$ 1 46573004526 194 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573004542 194 SANTA CLARA 20080912 157,000$ 1 46573004568 194 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573004584 194 SANTA CLARA 20061116 189,900$ 1 46573004607 194 SANTA CLARA 20061220 189,900$ 1 46573004623 194 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573004649 201 SANTA CLARA 20060310 214,900$ 1 46573004665 201 SANTA CLARA 20060317 198,900$ 1 46573004681 201 SANTA CLARA 20070306 260,000$ 0 46573004704 201 SANTA CLARA 20060510 211,900$ 1 46573004720 201 SANTA CLARA 20060209 210,900$ 1 46573004746 201 SANTA CLARA 20060720 260,500$ 0 46573004762 201 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573004788 201 SANTA CLARA 20060222 243,900$ 0 46573004801 201 SANTA CLARA 20060807 209,900$ 1 46573004827 201 SANTA CLARA 20060606 257,900$ 0 46573004843 201 SANTA CLARA 20061218 266,000$ 0 46573004869 201 SANTA CLARA 20071228 46573004885 201 SANTA CLARA 20060308 265,900$ 0 46573004908 201 SANTA CLARA 20060222 243,900$ 0 46573004924 201 SANTA CLARA 20070306 260,000$ 0 46573004940 201 SANTA CLARA 20061218 253,300$ 0 151 51.89% Total Sales Under $240,000 151 / 291 total allowable units: Santa Barbara Landings RPUD PDI ‐ PL20190000959 33 = no dollar amount was indicated for the initial sale in Property Appraiser records Page 6 3.A.j Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Justification for the Insubstantial Change PL20190000959 – Santa Barbara Landings RPUD PDI Page 1 Santa Barbara Landings RPUD Insubstantial Change to a PUD (PDI) PL20190000959 Justification for the Insubstantial Change The proposed changes are not substantial changes to the RPUD. Land Development Code Section 10.02.13.E.2 states “an insubstantial change includes any change that is not considered a substantial or minor change. An insubstantial change to an approved PUD Ordinance shall be based upon an evaluation of LDC subsection 10.02.13.E.1,” which is stated below with corresponding explanations that demonstrate the proposed changes are not substantial. LDC Section 10.02.13.E.1. Substantial changes. Any substantial change(s) to an approved PUD Ordinance shall require the review and recommendation of the Planning Commission and approval by the Board of County Commissioners as a PUD amendment prior to implementation. Applicants shall be required to submit and process a new application complete with pertinent supporting data, as set forth in the Administrative Code. For the purpose of this section, a substantial change shall be deemed to exist where: a. A proposed change in the boundary of the PUD; There is no proposed change to the PUD boundary. b. A proposed increase in the total number of dwelling units or intensity of land use or height of buildings within the development; There is no proposed change to the number of dwelling units, uses or building heights. The maximum units allowed will remain 248 units on Tract A (existing Granada Lakes Villas) and a maximum of 43 mixed residential dwelling units on Tract B for a total of 291 dwelling units. c. A proposed decrease in preservation, conservation, recreation or open space areas within the development not to exceed 5 percent of the total acreage previously designated as such, or 5 acres in area; The acreages and areas dedicated to preservation, recreation and open space within the RPUD are not proposed to change. d. A proposed increase in the size of areas used for nonresidential uses, to include institutional, commercial and industrial land uses (excluding preservation, 3.A.j Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Justification for the Insubstantial Change PL20190000959 – Santa Barbara Landings RPUD PDI Page 2 conservation or open spaces), or a proposed relocation of nonresidential land uses; The land uses within the RPUD are limited to residential and preserve uses. The RPUD does not contain nonresidential uses (institutional, commercial or industrial) land uses, therefore, no change or relocation of nonresidential land uses is proposed. e. A substantial increase in the impacts of the development which may include, but are not limited to, increases in traffic generation; changes in traffic circulation; or impacts on other public facilities; No change is proposed to development parameters, therefore, this request does not result in any increase in impacts from the RPUD. f. A change that will result in land use activities that generate a higher level of vehicular traffic based upon the Trip Generation Manual published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers; No change is proposed to development parameters, therefore, this request does not result in any increased vehicular traffic. g. A change that will result in a requirement for increased stormwater retention, or will otherwise increase stormwater discharges; The requested changes do not result in a requirement for increased stormwater retention. h. A change that will bring about a relationship to an abutting land use that would be incompatible with an adjacent land use; The proposed changes will not have an adverse impact on adjacent land uses or lead to incompatible conditions. The Tract A‐Granada Lakes Villas neighborhood existed adjacent to the multifamily neighborhoods to the east (Villas of Capri Apartments and Furse Lakes condominiums) prior to adoption of the condition imposing the requirement for a wall between the two communities in 2005. The existing communities along both sides of the Tract A boundary are compatible multifamily neighborhoods. Tract A is built out with 248 multifamily units. Plantation PUD is a closed out PUD and is built out with 331 multifamily units. These communities have continued to exist without a wall separating them for the past fourteen years since adoption of the condition for a wall along the Tract A eastern boundary. The RPUD requires a 15‐foot wide buffer, and 3.A.j Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Justification for the Insubstantial Change PL20190000959 – Santa Barbara Landings RPUD PDI Page 3 most of the Granada Lakes Villas project exceeds the requirement with at least 30 feet of landscaped area and open space along most of eastern boundary, with some greater degrees of buffering provided by lakes and additional green space. The adjoining communities are built‐out, and with the existing features of the roadways and buffering along the shared boundary, there is no potential for new incompatibilities to arise because no residential homesites could be added along the Tract A eastern boundary. No change is proposed to PUD conditions for the eastern boundary of Tract B. i. Any modification to the PUD master plan or PUD document or amendment to a PUD ordinance which is inconsistent with the Future Land Use Element or other element of the Growth Management Plan or which modification would increase the density or intensity of the permitted land uses; The proposed change to the PUD is not inconsistent with the LDC or Growth Management Plan (GMP) and will not increase density or intensity. See the GMP Consistency Narrative provided with this petition. j. The proposed change is to a PUD district designated as a development of regional impact (DRI) and approved pursuant to F.S. § 380.06, where such change requires a determination and public hearing by Collier County pursuant to F.S. § 380.06(19). Any change that meets the criterion of F.S. § 380.06(19)(e)2, and any changes to a DRI/PUD master plan that clearly do not create a substantial deviation shall be reviewed and approved by Collier County under this LDC section 10.02.13; or Not applicable. This project is not within a Development of Regional Impact. k. Any modification in the PUD master plan or PUD document or amendment to a PUD ordinance which impact(s) any consideration deemed to be a substantial modification as described under this LDC section 10.02.13. As described in the justifications above, the proposed changes do not constitute “Substantial Changes” per LDC section 10.02.13. 3.A.j Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) GMP Consistency Narrative PL20190000959 – Santa Barbara Landings RPUD PDI Page 1 Santa Barbara Landings RPUD Insubstantial Change to a PUD (PDI) PL20190000959 GMP Consistency Narrative FLU Element I.A.1. Urban Residential Subdistrict The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide for higher densities in an area with fewer natural resource constraints and where existing and planned public facilities are concentrated. This Subdistrict comprises approximately 93,000 acres and 80% of the Urban Mixed Use District. Maximum eligible residential density shall be determined through the Density Rating System but shall not exceed 16 dwelling units per acre except in accordance with the Transfer of Development Rights Section of the Land Development Code. The density provided for in the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD (adopted by Ordinance 05‐53) complies with the Density Rating System contained in the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. No changes are proposed to the approved type or number of dwelling units, uses, or density. FLU Element I.B.2.b. Proximity to Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center If the project is within one mile of a Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center and located within a residential density band, 3 residential units per gross acre may be added. The density band around a Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center shall be measured by the radial distance from the center of the intersection around which the Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center is situated. If 50% or more of a project is within the density band, the additional density applies to the gross acreage of the entire project. Density bands are designated on the Future Land Use Map and shall not apply within the Estates Designation or for properties within the Coastal High Hazard Area. No changes are proposed to the approved type or number of dwelling units, uses, or density. No changes are proposed to the layout or arrangement of units per the approved RPUD Master Plan. The Santa Barbara Landings RPUD is located within the residential density band which extends from the Mixed‐use Activity Center #6 located at the intersection of Santa Barbara Boulevard and Davis Boulevard. The density rating system provides for a base density of 4 dwelling units per acre. Up to 3 dwelling units per acre may be added within the density band, bringing the permissible base density to 7 dwelling units per acre. Ordinance 05‐53 approving the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD indicates the approved density is 7 units per acre consistent with this provision of the GMP. 3.A.j Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) GMP Consistency Narrative PL20190000959 – Santa Barbara Landings RPUD PDI Page 2 The total acreage of the RPUD is 41.6 acres. At a density of 7 dwellings per acre, this equates to 291 allowable units. Tract A is approximately 35.3 acres and is built‐out with 248 multiple family dwellings. Tract B is approximately 6.3 acres, and a maximum of 43 dwellings are allowed per the RPUD. The total number of dwellings within Tract A + Tract B is 248 + 43 = 291, consistent with the permissible density of 7 dwellings per acre per the GMP. FLUE Objective 5 Implement land use policies that promote sound planning, protect environmentally sensitive lands and habitat for listed species while protecting private property rights, ensure compatibility of land uses and further the implementation of the Future Land Use Element. Sound planning has been provided through the approval process for Santa Barbara Landings RPUD Ordinance 05‐53. No changes are proposed to the approved type or number of dwelling units, uses, or density. No changes are proposed to the layout or arrangement of units per the approved RPUD Master Plan. Protection of environmentally sensitive lands and habitat for listed species and protection of private property rights were also addressed through that approval process. No change is proposed to the required preserve areas or associated easement dedication, or requirements for management plan or re‐created preserves. The proposed changes under RPUD Condition 5.10 are to add wording so that the conditions apply to each tract at the time of permitting for each tract. Compatibility of land uses is ensured through the proposed changes. No changes are proposed to the approved type or number of dwelling units, uses, or density. No changes are proposed to the layout or arrangement of units per the approved RPUD Master Plan. No changes are proposed to the RPUD landscape buffer types. No changes are proposed to the condition for a wall to be constructed along the Tract B eastern property line at time of Tract B development, where the multifamily tract will abut three existing single family homesites. The removal of the condition for a wall along the Tract A eastern property line will not change compatibility for the existing communities along both sides of the Tract A eastern boundary, which are compatible multifamily neighborhoods. Tract A is built out with 248 multifamily units. Plantation PUD to the east is a closed‐out PUD and is built‐out with 331 multifamily units. The existing conditions along both sides of the Tract A eastern boundary line exceed the standard code requirement for a 10’ wide Type A buffer between adjoining multifamily developments. Tract A‐Granada Lakes Villas is subject to a 15’ wide Type B buffer per the Master Plan. Tract A has at least 30 feet of landscaped area and open space area along most of eastern boundary, with some greater degrees of buffering provided by lakes and additional green space. To the east within the 3.A.j Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) GMP Consistency Narrative PL20190000959 – Santa Barbara Landings RPUD PDI Page 3 adjoining Plantation PUD, landscaped areas and open space along the roadways of Tara Circle and Plantation Circle provide additional buffering along the shared boundary. The adjoining communities are built‐out, and with the existing features of the roadways and open space along the shared boundary, there is no potential for new incompatibilities to arise because no residential homesites could be added on either side of the Tract A eastern boundary. FLUE Policy 5.3 All rezonings must be consistent with this Growth Management Plan. For properties that are zoned inconsistent with the Future Land Use Designation Description Section but have nonetheless been determined to be consistent with the Future Land Use Element, as provided for in Policies 5.9 through 5.13, the following provisions apply: a. For such commercially‐zoned properties… Not applicable. b. For such industrially‐zoned properties… Not applicable. c. For such residentially‐zoned properties, zoning changes will be allowed provided the authorized number of dwelling units in the new zoning district does not exceed that authorized by the existing zoning district, and provided the overall intensity of development allowed by the new zoning district does not exceed that allowed by the existing zoning district, except as provided for in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. No changes are proposed to the approved type or number of dwelling units, uses, or density. No changes are proposed to the layout or arrangement of units per the approved RPUD Master Plan. d. For property deemed to be consistent with this Element pursuant to one or more of policies 5.9 through 5.13, said property may be combined and developed with other property, whether such other property is deemed consistent via those same policies or is deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Designation Description Section. For residential and mixed use developments only, the accumulated density between these properties may be distributed throughout the project, as provided for in the Density Rating System or the Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, as applicable. The Santa Barbara Landings RPUD (Ordinance 05‐53) is consistent with the Future Land Use Designation Description Section and the Density Rating System as approved. No changes are proposed to the approved type or number of dwelling units, uses, or density. No changes are proposed to the layout or arrangement of units per the approved RPUD Master Plan. 3.A.j Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) GMP Consistency Narrative PL20190000959 – Santa Barbara Landings RPUD PDI Page 4 e. Overall intensity of development shall be determined based upon a comparison of public facility impacts as allowed by the existing zoning district and the proposed zoning district. No changes are proposed to the approved type or number of dwelling units, uses, or density. No changes are proposed to the layout or arrangement of units per the approved RPUD Master Plan. The intensity level as approved in Ordinance 05‐53 is not proposed to change. FLUE Policy 5.6 New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code (Ordinance 04‐41, adopted June 22, 2004 and effective October 18, 2004, as amended). The surrounding land uses to the north, east and west are predominately multifamily and single‐family residential uses. The CFPUD/RPUD to the south contains three tracts designated for Calusa Park Elementary School, an Emergency Management Services (EMS) station #19, a maximum of 31 residential units calculated at a density of 6 units per acre, and a lake area. Compatibility of land uses is ensured through the proposed changes. No changes are proposed to the approved type or number of dwelling units, uses, or density. No changes are proposed to the layout or arrangement of units per the approved RPUD Master Plan. No changes are proposed to the RPUD landscape buffer types. No changes are proposed to the condition for a wall to be constructed along the Tract B eastern property line at time of Tract B development. The removal of the condition for a wall along the Tract A eastern property line will not change compatibility for the existing communities along both sides of the Tract A eastern boundary, which are compatible multifamily neighborhoods. Tract A is built out with 248 multifamily units. Plantation PUD to the east is a closed‐out PUD and is built‐out with 331 multifamily units. The existing conditions along both sides of the Tract A eastern boundary line exceed the standard code requirement for a 10’ wide Type A buffer between adjoining multifamily developments. Tract A‐Granada Lakes Villas is subject to a 15’ wide Type B buffer per the Master Plan. Tract A has at least 30 feet of landscaped area and open space along most of eastern boundary, with some greater degrees of buffering provided by lakes and additional green space. To the east within the adjoining Plantation PUD, landscaped areas and open space along the roadways of Tara Circle and Plantation Circle provide additional buffering along the shared boundary. The adjoining communities are built‐out, and with the existing features of the roadways and buffering along the shared boundary, there is no potential for new incompatibilities to arise because no residential homesites could be added on either side of the Tract A eastern boundary. 3.A.j Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) GMP Consistency Narrative PL20190000959 – Santa Barbara Landings RPUD PDI Page 5 FLUE OBJECTIVE 7 Promote smart growth policies, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and adhere to the existing development character of the Collier County, where applicable, and as follows: FLUE Policy 7.1 The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. No change is proposed to the approved and existing connections with fronting roadways. Access is provided by the existing access points where Santa Clara Drive connects with Radio Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. Internal to the RPUD, the RPUD Master Plan depicts that Tract B interconnects with Tract A via extensions of the internal accessways. FLUE Policy 7.2 The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. As stated above, internal accesses or loop roads are incorporated in the approved RPUD Master Plan. Tract B interconnects with Tract A via extensions of the internal accessways. No change is proposed to the access system as approved. Condition 2.14.A.3 of the RPUD is proposed to be modified to require interconnection of the internal sidewalk concurrent with the road interconnection from Tract B to Tract A, consistent with LDC Section 6.06.02.B. FLUE Policy 7.3 All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and/or interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. The interconnection of local streets between developments is also addressed in Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element. As stated above, internal accesses or loop roads are incorporated in the approved RPUD Master Plan. Tract B interconnects with Tract A via extensions of the internal accessways. No change is proposed to the access system as approved. Condition 2.14.A.3 of the RPUD is proposed to be modified to require interconnection of the internal sidewalk concurrent with the road interconnection from Tract B to Tract A, consistent with LDC Section 6.06.02.B. 3.A.j Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) GMP Consistency Narrative PL20190000959 – Santa Barbara Landings RPUD PDI Page 6 Policy 7.4 The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. As stated above, Tract B interconnects with Tract A via extensions of the internal accessways. No change is proposed to the access system. The minimum standard for a 6‐foot wide sidewalk is identified in PUD Section 2.14.A.2. The interconnection of the internal sidewalks as proposed is consistent with County standards to provide linkages to serve pedestrian needs between development areas. Condition 2.14.A.3 of the RPUD is proposed to be modified to require interconnection of the internal sidewalk concurrent with the road interconnection from Tract B to Tract A, consistent with LDC Section 6.06.02.B. HOUSING ELEMENT The County seeks to have an adequate supply of decent, safe, sanitary, and affordable housing for all residents of Collier County. A common method for encouraging development of new affordable housing units in the County is through the incentive of the Bonus Density program, which rewards developers of housing that serves low, moderate, or workforce income residents with additional density. Santa Barbara Landings RPUD did not receive bonus density and is not part of the Bonus Density program. Four conditions related to housing affordability were adopted at the time of the RPUD approval (Ordinance 05‐53). Insubstantial changes are proposed to three of the conditions as described below. The first condition 5.11.A requires payment of a $1,000 contribution to Collier County for each unit within Tract B of the RPUD. Removal of this contribution commitment qualifies as a minor text change per LDC Section 10.02.13.E.3.c. Because the petitioner requests additional proposed changes to the RPUD, this change is proposed as part of an insubstantial change (PDI) request. Property Appraiser records and primary residency records are not available to determine whether 50% of the dwelling units within the RPUD sold to primary residents as referenced in Condition 5.11.B. This condition is proposed to be clarified to reflect that the condition applies to Tract B, the only developable tract. Property Appraiser records are provided with this petition indicating the initial sales prices for 151 units within Granada Lakes Villas were less than $240,000. This satisfies Condition 5.11.C that requires over 50% of the total allowable 291 dwelling units within the RPUD to sell for less than $240,000, because 51% of total allowable units have qualified. Thus, sales price affordability goals have been met by this project, and it is appropriate to remove Condition 5.11.C. Employment records and income level records are not available to determine whether purchasers of 10% of the total number of dwelling units within the RPUD have met the employment status and 3.A.j Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) GMP Consistency Narrative PL20190000959 – Santa Barbara Landings RPUD PDI Page 7 income levels referenced in Condition 5.11.D. This condition is proposed to be clarified to reflect that the condition applies to Tract B, the only developable tract, and that the target income level is households earning 140% or less of the County’s median income. This update to the income level was identified by Cormac Giblin in reference to current County housing policies. The proposed updates maintain the objective to provide new housing options that are affordable to the workforce within Collier County. 3.A.j Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) NIM DOCUMENTATION (affidavit of compliance, summary, sign in sheets) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 2350 Stanford Court ■Naples, Florida 34112 (239) 334-0046 ■ Fax (239) 334-3661 SINCE 1946 January 15, 2020 Dear Property Owner: Please be advised that a formal application has been submitted to Collier County seeking approval of an Insubstantial Change to a PUD (PDI) for the following described property: Tract B of the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD +6.3 acres located on the east side of Santa Barbara Blvd., approximately one half‐mile south of Radio Road The petitioner is asking the County to approve proposed insubstantial changes to the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD zoning approval including: (1) requiring a wall along the eastern boundary of Tract B only; (2)requiring interconnection of the internal sidewalk at time of road interconnection; (3) clarifying that environmental conditions are applicable to each tract; and (4) adjusting affordable housing conditions by removing a payment to Collier County of $1,000 per unit, clarifying that the primary residence condition applies to Tract B, removing the maximum sales price threshold as this condition has been satisfied, and clarifying that 10% of units within Tract B must be sold to persons employed in Collier County earning 140% or less of the County’s median income. In compliance with the Land Development Code requirements, a Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held to provide you an opportunity to become fully aware of and provide your input on the proposed Insubstantial Change to a PUD application. The Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held on Thursday, January 30 at 5:30 p.m. at Collier Area Transit located at 8300 Radio Road, Naples, FL 34104. At this meeting the petitioner will make every effort to illustrate the intended activity associated with this Insubstantial change to a PUD application and to answer any questions. Should you have questions prior to the meeting, please contact me. Sincerely, Laura DeJohn, AICP Principal Planner JOHNSON ENGINEERING, INC. Telephone: (239) 334‐0046 Email: ldejohn@johnsoneng.com 3.A.j Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 16A z TUESDAY, JANUARY 14, 2020 z NAPLES DAILY NEWS + AintotheFuture2020Look TITLE SPONSOR PLAT INUM SPONSOR GOLD SPONSOR SILVER SPONSOR RandyThibaut ALC Home Sales/Land DevelopmentExpert Stan Stouder CCIM Commercial Real Estate Expert DennyGrimes ABR, CRS,GRI, MBA,CDPE Residential Real Estate Expert PRESENTERS Tu esday Feb.25,2020 $50 $600 $750tickets RESERVED TA BLES RESERVED TA BLES * STADIUM SEAT S•*Addonopen bar &food from 4:30-5:30 for$45 PREMIUM PLACEMENT TA BLE OF 8 PREMIUM PLACEMENT TA BLE OF 10 4:30- 6:00PM 6:00- 7:30PM Networking Presentations MarketWatchSWFL.com Buy Yo ur Tickets Now NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING The public is invited to attend a neighborhood meeting held by St. George Group GRD Corp.represented by Laura DeJohn, AICP of Jo hnson Engineering, Inc. on: Thursday,Ja nuary 30, 2020 at 5:30 p.m. at Collier Area Transit 8300 Radio Rd, Naples, FL 34104 Subject Property:Tr act B of the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD is approximately +6.3 acres located on the east side of Santa Barbara Blvd.,approx imately one half- mile south of Radio Ro ad, in Section 04,To wnship 50 South,Ra nge 26 East, Collier County, Florida. PETITION NO. PDI-PL20190000959 – St. George Group GRD Corp.requests an InsubstantialChangetoaPUD(PDI)toclarifytheconditions applicabletothe Tr act B development site by eliminating outdated requirements and modifying to clarify applicability of the conditions to Tr act B.Changes proposed include: (1)requiring a wall al ong the eastern boundary of Tr act B only; (2)requiring interconnection of the internal sidewalk at time of road interconnection; (3) clarifying that environmental conditions are applicable to each tract; and (4) adjusting affordable housing conditions by removing a payment to Collier County of $1,000 per unit, clarifying that the primary residence condition applies to Tr act B,removing the maximum sales price threshold as this condition has been satisfied, and clarifying that 10% of units within Tr act B must be sold to persons employed in Collier County earning 140% or less of the County’s median income. WE VA LU E YO UR INPUT Business owners, property owners,residents, and visitors are welcome to attend the presentation and discuss the project with the owner and Collier County staff. If yo u are unable to attend this meeting,but have questions or comments, they can be directed by mail, phone, fax or e-mail by March 2, 2020 to: Laura DeJohn, AICP Jo hnson Engineering, Inc. 2350 Stanford County Naples, Florida 34112 Phone: (239) 334-0046 ldejohn@johnsoneng.com Lava and ash spewed from the Taal volcano in the Philippines Monday as thousands of residents fled the region along roads choked by cars amid omi- nous darkness, thunder and lightning. The Philippine Institute of Volcanol- ogy and Seismology warned that a “hazardous explosive eruption” was possible within hours to days. President Rodrigo Duterte ordered families in nearby communities to move to safer ground, a process made difficult by poor visibility and, for many, a lack of transportation. Hun- dreds of thousands of people may ulti- mately flee the region, officials said. “Taal Volcano entered a period of in- tense unrest,” the volcano institute said in a statement. Philippine Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana warned that the “worst- case scenario” for Taal would resemble the 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo, 90 miles to the north, that killed 800 peo- ple and rendered 200,000 homeless. “Remember Pinatubo – the entire mountain collapsed during the erup- tion,” Lorenzana said. “That’s what we are fearing, that the eruption would cause the entire island to rise and scat- ter debris on the nearby areas.” Taal started spewing ash, steam and even smaller rocks nearly 10 miles into the air Sunday. The debris forced the airport in Manila, 65 miles away, to shut down for several hours. More than 500 flights were canceled, and authorities warned that the airport could again be closed if conditions worsen. Tracy Gregg, an associate professor of geology at the University at Buffalo, said that nearby Lake Taal is actually a volcanic crater formed from at least four “cataclysmic” eruptions more than 500,000 years ago. Taal Island, essen- tially the volcano, was formed from subsequent, smaller eruptions. “The truth is that we have no good precedent for how such a large volcano gears up into a cataclysmic eruption,” Gregg told USA TODAY. “We know that such eruptions occur ... but we don’t know what specific advance signs such a gigantic eruption would give us be- cause we’ve never witnessed one.” She said that could be what Taal is revving up for, but added it could sim- ply be venting some extra pressure. Contributing: The Associated Press Residents watch Taal volcano spew ash from a look out in Talisay, Batangas province, southern Philippines on Monday.GERRARD CARREON/AP 30,000 flee eruptionof Philippine volcano John Bacon USA TODAY 3.A.j Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.j Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Page 1 Santa Barbara Landings RPUD PUD Insubstantial Change PDI‐PL20190000959 Neighborhood Information Meeting Summary Date: Thursday, January 30, 2020 Time: 5:30 pm Location: Collier Area Transit, 8300 Radio Rd, Naples, FL 34104 Attendees: Laura DeJohn and Amanda Martin of Johnson Engineering, Inc. Ray Bellows, Collier County See attached sign‐in sheets for public attendees. Meeting Summary: The meeting started at approximately 5:30 p.m. Attendees were documented on sign‐in sheets, attached. Laura DeJohn introduced herself and Ray Bellows, the Collier County Zoning Manager, and noted that the meeting was being recorded. She explained the County requirement for a Neighborhood Informational Meeting (NIM) for the PUD Insubstantial Change application. She gave background on the location of the Santa Barbara Landings RPUD and the 2005 RPUD approval. Two exhibits were displayed: an aerial with the PUD and tract boundaries, and the PUD Master Concept Plan. The ±41.6‐acre RPUD is comprised of two development tracts: one is now a condominium community known as Granada Lakes Villas, and the second Tract B is +6.3 acres approved for a maximum of 43 multifamily dwelling units. Tract B remains undeveloped. She explained the applicant has the property for sale, and interested developers have identified zoning conditions that make the project infeasible. The Insubstantial Change request is intended to address these four conditions: (1) adjust the requirement for a wall along the entire eastern PUD boundary to be only along the eastern boundary of Tract B; (2) adjust the requirement for an internal sidewalk from Tract B to the Granada Lakes Clubhouse and pool to be only a sidewalk interconnect at time of road interconnection; (3) clarify that environmental conditions are applicable to each tract; and (4) adjust affordable housing conditions by removing a payment to Collier County of $1,000 per unit, remove the $240,000 maximum sales price for half of all units because this condition has been satisfied, and clarify that the 10% of units for people employed in Collier County earning 140% or less of the County’s median income applies to Tract B only, which is 4 or 5 units. Questions and comments from attendees included:  What will the buildings look like and how tall will they be? Reply: The PUD stipulates a maximum of 4 units per structure, and a maximum of 2 stories, 30 feet.  Frank Cooper of Granada Lakes Owners Association described that the existing condos were built in 1987 and apartments, which converted to condos in 2005. The applicant originally sought increased density in 2005 and was granted the additional 43 units on Tract B, which was originally a preserve area. There have been various lawsuits between the HOA and owner.  Where is the road connection? Reply: The driveway for Tract B connects to Santa Clara Drive. There is no connection to Plantation and no new connection to Radio Road. 3.A.j Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Page 2  Concerns about drainage Reply: Engineering drawings that address drainage are completed at the time of development. The capacity of the stormwater system, water quality levels and flow rates are subject to review and approval by the County and South Florida Water Management District.  Are you trying to rezone the property to make it easier to develop? Reply: The owner is requesting relief from some, not all, of the commitments in the PUD.  Will Tract B have their own amenities? Reply: Yes, Tract B will have its own amenities.  The Granada Lakes Villas dumpsters attract buzzards and are unsightly. Can the wall extend to block view from the northernmost Plantation single family home to the dumpster area? Reply: Conditions of the dumpster area is a Granada Lakes HOA management issue. Development of Tract B will change the dumpster location from a dead‐end condition to a driveway connection point, and the increase in use and visibility of that area.  Who approves these requested changes? Reply: Comments from this NIM are documented, and the application moves through the County staff review process. Staff makes recommendations to the Hearing Examiner (or Planning Commission if the Hearing Examiner is not seated) at a public hearing, where the decision is made on the application.  Can you clarify the affordable housing changes, specifically the removal of the $1,000 per unit contribution? Reply: Mr. Bellows explained that contributions to the County’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund have been rolled back because the Trust Fund was never functional. Developers who did contribute have been refunded their payments. The County has an administrative process for removing the $1,000 per unit contribution commitment. Because other changes are being requested, this change is incorporated in the PDI request.  Who owns Tract B? Reply: A corporate entity owns Tract B and the entity is owned by Armando Bucelo.  Is Habitat for Humanity a potential buyer? Has Tract B been sold? Reply: Tract B is for sale and anyone can purchase it. It has not been sold.  Concern about concentrating low income, poor people in the area. Reply: The condition for 10% of units to house people employed in Collier County earning 140% or less of the County’s median income equates to 4 or 5 units on Tract B. This income level is roughly in the range of $80,000. The meeting concluded at approximately 6:30. 3.A.j Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.jPacket Pg. 186Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara 3.A.jPacket Pg. 187Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara TRAFFIC MEMO 3.A.j Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 2350 Stanford Court  Naples, FL 34112 (239) 434-0333  Fax (239) 334-3661 9/53. June 11, 2019 Mr. Michael Sawyer Principal Planner Collier County Growth Management Department Transportation Planning 2685 South Horseshoe Drive, Suite 103 Naples, FL 34104 Re: Santa Barbara Landings RPUD PL20190000959 - Insubstantial Change (PDI) Dear Mr. Sawyer: There is no proposed change to the number of dwelling units, uses or access. The maximum units allowed will remain 248 units on Tract A (existing Granada Lakes Villas) and a maximum of 43 mixed residential dwelling units on Tract B for a total of 291 dwelling units. No change is proposed to development parameters; therefore, this request does not result in any increase in traffic generation or changes in traffic circulation. If you have any questions regarding the above, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, JOHNSON ENGINEERING, INC. Joshua Hildebrand, P.E., PTOE Transportation Project Manager JJH:jlc:20192056-000 SINCE 1946 3.A.j Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: Attachment I - Application-Backup Materials (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) Laura DeJohn 3.A.k Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: Attachment J - Hearing Property Sign (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 3.A.k Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: Attachment J - Hearing Property Sign (14009 : PL20190000959 Santa Barbara Landings (PDI)) 12/10/2020 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Hearing Examiner Item Number: 3.B Item Summary: *** This item has been continued from the November 12, 2020 HEX Meeting to the December 10, 2020 HEX Meeting .*** PETITION NO. VA-PL20190002701 – CitySwitch II-A, LLC request two variances from LDC Section 5.05.09(G)(7)(b), to reduce the eastern boundary setback of 125 feet to 60.5 feet and from the western boundary setback of 125 feet to 82.2 feet for a proposed 250 foot communications tower on a parcel in the east ½ of the nort hwest ¼ of the southwest ¼ of the northeast ¼ of the northwest ¼ of Section 15, Township 49 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Timothy Finn, Principal Planner] Commissioner District 5 Meeting Date: 12/10/2020 Prepared by: Title: – Zoning Name: Tim Finn 11/30/2020 11:33 AM Submitted by: Title: Manager - Planning – Zoning Name: Ray Bellows 11/30/2020 11:33 AM Approved By: Review: Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Rose Burke Review Item Completed 11/30/2020 4:53 PM Hearing Examiner (GMD Approvers) Diane Lynch Review Item Completed 12/01/2020 8:42 AM Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Completed 12/01/2020 9:42 AM Zoning Anita Jenkins Review Item Completed 12/01/2020 2:51 PM Hearing Examiner Andrew Dickman Meeting Pending 12/10/2020 9:00 AM 3.B Packet Pg. 192 VA-PL20190002701 (Kapok St Cell Tower) Revised: November 3, 2020 Page 1 of 6 STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT ZONING DIVISION- ZONING SERVICES SECTION HEARING DATE: NOVEMBER 12, 2020 SUBJECT: PETITION VA-PL20190002701 (KAPOK ST CELL TOWER) _____________________________________________________________________________ PROPERTY OWNER/CONTRACT PURCHASER/AGENT: Owner: Applicant/Contract Purchaser: Johannes Steffens CitySwitch II-A, LLC 542 Ethel Ave SE 1900 Century Place, Suite 320 Grand Rapids, MI 49506 Atlanta, GA 30345 Agents: Kendal Lotze Jim Alderman Jeff Wright Ignite Wireless J&J Wireless Consultants LLC Henderson, Franklin, 102 Mary Alice Park Rd. 6122 7th Ave W Starners & Holt, P.A. Cumming, GA 30040 Bradenton, FL 34209 8889 Pelican Bay Blvd, Suite 400 Naples, FL 34108 REQUESTED ACTION: To have the Collier County Hearing Examiner (HEX) consider an application for two variances from the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) Section 5.05.09(G)(7)(b), to reduce the eastern boundary setback of 125 feet to 60.5 feet and from the western boundary setback of 125 feet to 82.2 feet for a proposed 250 foot communications tower. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located on a parcel in the east ½ of the northwest ¼ of the southwest ¼ of the northeast ¼ of the northwest ¼ of Section 15, Township 49 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. (See location map on page 2). 3.B.a Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: Staff Report - Kapok St Cell Tower (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) VA-PL20190002701 (Kapok St Cell Tower) Revised: November 3, 2020 Page 2 of 6 3.B.aPacket Pg. 194Attachment: Staff Report - Kapok St Cell Tower (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) VA-PL20190002701 (Kapok St Cell Tower) Revised: November 3, 2020 Page 3 of 6 PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Per LDC 5.05.09(G)(7)(b), which provides (in part) that communications towers “shall be separated . . . from all other surrounding property boundaries by a distance not less than one-half (1/2) the height of the tower and its antennas, or the tower's certified collapse area, whichever distance is greater.” Because the proposed tower is 250’ tall, the separation requirement would be 125’ (a greater distance than the tower’s certified collapse area). The petitioner is requesting a reduction from the eastern and western boundary setbacks to situate a proposed communication tower. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: This section of the staff report identifies the land uses and zoning classifications for properties surrounding boundaries of the subject property: North: Developed agricultural, with a current zoning designation of Agricultural zoning designation with the Rural Fringe Mixed Use receiving and North Bell Meade Overlay districts East: Developed agricultural, with a current zoning designation of Agricultural zoning designation with the Rural Fringe Mixed Use receiving and North Bell Meade Overlay districts South: Undeveloped land, with a current zoning designation of Agricultural zoning designation with the Rural Fringe Mixed Use receiving and North Bell Meade Overlay districts West: Undeveloped land, with a current zoning designation of Agricultural zoning designation with the Rural Fringe Mixed Use receiving and North Bell Meade Overlay districts Collier County Property Appraiser 3.B.a Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: Staff Report - Kapok St Cell Tower (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) VA-PL20190002701 (Kapok St Cell Tower) Revised: November 3, 2020 Page 4 of 6 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: The subject property is located within the Agriculture Rural Fringe Receiving lands of the County’s Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. The GMP does not address individual Variance requests but deals with the larger issue of the actual use. As previously noted, the petitioner seeks variances requesting a reduction from the eastern and western boundary setbacks to situate a proposed communication tower. The subject use is consistent with the FLUM of the GMP. The requested variance does not have any impact on this property's consistency with the County's GMP. STAFF ANALYSIS: The request are variances from LDC 5.05.09(G)(7)(b), which provides (in part) that communications towers “shall be separated . . . from all other surrounding property boundaries by a distance not less than one-half (1/2) the height of the tower and its antennas, or the tower's certified collapse area, whichever distance is greater.” Because the proposed tower is 250’ tall, the separation requirement would be 125’ (a greater distance than the tower’s certified collapse area). (See Attachment A – Kapok St Certified Fall Radius Letter) As indicated on the site drawing included with this submittal, the proposed communications tower meets this 125’ distance separation requirement with respect to the northern and southern property boundaries. Additionally, the proposed tower is separated from surrounding property boundaries in all directions by a distance that far exceeds its certified collapse area (i.e., it meets the lesser of the two distance measurements provided in the LDC, in all directions). However, because the proposed tower does not meet the greater of the two LDC distance measurements with respect to eastern and western boundaries, a variance is necessary. More specifically the petitioner is seeking two variances from the required 125’ separation requirement, to allow (1) for the eastern boundary, a separation of 60.5; and (2) for the western boundary, a separation of 82.2. (See Attachment B – Zoning Drawings, Sheet C-1 - Overall Site Plan) The LDC does allow for essential services which includes communication towers (LDC 2.03.08.A.2.a.3.x). Per LDC Section 1.08.02, an essential service requires that government entities such as police, fire, EMS, etc. have use of the tower for their designated needs. The communications tower will be utilizing the First Responder Network Authority (FirstNet) which is a nationwide wireless network broadband network that will be dedicated to first responders for use in disasters, emergencies and daily public safety work. (See Attachment C – FirstNet Info) Furthermore, it should be noted that the proposed tower does not require a conditional use but is subject to this variance. (See Attachment D – Zoning Verification Letter dated 3-17-20) Moreover, staff has been receiving opposition letters regarding the close proximity of another tower to be located at 550 Frangipani Avenue approximately 2065 feet east of the Kapok St site. (See Attachment F – Opposition Letters) This 185-foot communications tower has not been built and is currently under SDP review (PL20200000886). The residents feel that these two communications towers will create deleterious effects upon their community. Currently, the LDC does not have any distance separation provisions to guide staff as to how far apart one communication tower can be from another tower. As such, staff will be amending the LDC to address communication tower distance separation requirements in the near future. It should be noted, that the applicant has stated that in regard to shared tower use, that there are not any towers that would provide necessary and adequate capacity and geographic coverage area to achieve their 3.B.a Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: Staff Report - Kapok St Cell Tower (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) VA-PL20190002701 (Kapok St Cell Tower) Revised: November 3, 2020 Page 5 of 6 emergency services objectives, and sharing another tower would not be a feasible option. (See Attachment G – Shared Tower Use Response) The decision to grant a variance is based on the criteria in LDC Section 9.04.03. A. through H. (in bold font below). Staff has analyzed this petition relative to these provisions and offers the following responses: a. Are there special conditions and circumstances existing, which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land, structure or building involved? Yes, the property is rectangular, and the proposed structure is unique (a 250’ tall essential services communications tower) with a required 125 ft separation requirement from all property boundaries. The proposed tower meets the separation requirement with respect to the northern (181.9 ft separation) and southern (152.8 ft separation) boundaries. However, the eastern (60.5 ft separation) and western (82.2 ft separation) boundaries do not meet the 125 ft separation requirement as the rectangular shape of the parcel are significantly narrowed on the eastern and western parcel boundaries thus preventing the applicant from complying with the 125 ft requirement. b. Are there special conditions and circumstances, which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property, which are the subject of the Variance request? Yes, while the property is large enough to safely accommodate the proposed communications tower, its rectangular shape makes it necessary to obtain variances to meet LDC separation requirements for the eastern and western boundaries c. Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties for the applicant? Yes, because of the rectangular shape of this lot this would bestow an undue hardship on the owner preventing construction of a 250-communication tower as presented in the overall site plan. Moreover, there is a need for important essential services communications for this area. d. Will the Variance, if granted, be the minimum Variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety and welfare? Yes, the Variance proposed would be the minimum Variance to allow the reduction of the eastern boundary setback of 125 feet to 60.5 feet and from the western boundary setback of 125 feet to 82.2 feet for a proposed 250-foot communications tower. Approval of the Variance would not have a negative impact on standards of health, safety, and welfare of the abutting parcels. e. Will granting the Variance confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district? 3.B.a Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: Staff Report - Kapok St Cell Tower (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) VA-PL20190002701 (Kapok St Cell Tower) Revised: November 3, 2020 Page 6 of 6 Yes, by definition, a Variance bestows some dimensional relief from the zoning regulations specific to a site. LDC Section 9.04.02 provides relief through the Variance process for any dimensional development standard, such as the requested eastern and western boundary setback decrease. As such, other properties facing a similar hardship would be entitled to make a similar request and would be conferred equal consideration on a case by case basis. f. Will granting the Variance be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this Land Development Code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare? The granting of the variance will be in harmony with the intent and purpose of the LDC and will not be injurious to the neighborhood, or other detrimental to the public welfare. g. Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf courses, etc.? The applicant states, “Essential public services communications towers are critically important in this fairly remote area of the County. Population in this area is less dense than urban areas, and communications at this location can be challenging in storm and other emergency events.” Staff concurs with this statement and further notes that currently there is not any existing residences to the east and west of the subject property and is not within the 125-foot separation requirement. h. Will granting the Variance be consistent with the GMP? Approval of this Variance will not affect or change the requirements of the GMP. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: This project does not require Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project did not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2 -1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Hearing Examiner (HEX) approve Petition VA- PL20190002701, Kapok St Cell Tower Variance for two variances from LDC Section 5.05.09(G)(7)(b), to reduce the eastern boundary setback of 125 feet to 60.5 feet and from the western boundary setback of 125 feet to 82.2 feet for a proposed 250 foot communications tower. Attachments: A) Kapok St Certified Fall Radius Letter B) Zoning Drawings – Revised 08/05/2020 C) FirstNet Information D) Zoning Verification Letter dated 3-17-20 E) Application/Backup Materials F) Opposition Letters G) Shared Tower Use Response 3.B.a Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: Staff Report - Kapok St Cell Tower (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 5 a bre lndustries Towers and Poles November 18, 2019 Tim Cook CitySwitch 1900 Century Place NE, Suite 320 Atlanta, GA 30345 RE: Proposed 250' Sabre Self-Supporting Tower for Kapok Street, FL Dear Mr. Cook, Upon receipt of order, we propose to design a tower for the above referenced project for an ASCE 7- 16 Ultimate Wind Speed of 160 mph, Structure Class ll, Exposure C, Topographic Category 1 in accordance with the Telecommunications lndustry Association Standard ANSI/TlA-222-G, i'structural Standard for Antenna Supporting Structures and Antennas". When designed according to this standard, the wind pressures and steel strength capacities include several safety factors, resulting in an overall minimum safety factor of 25%. Therefore, it is highly unlikely that the tower will fail structurally in a wind event where the design wind speed is exceeded within the range of the built-in safety ractors. Should the wind speed increase beyond lhe capacity of the built-in safety factors, to the point of lailure of one or more structural elements, the most likely location of the failure would be within one or more of the tower members in the upper portion. This would result in a buckling failure mode, where the loaded member would bend beyond its elastic limit (beyond the point where the member would return to its original shape upon removal of the wind load). Therefore, it is likely that the overall effect of such an extreme wind event would be localized buckling of a tower section. Assuming that the wind pressure profile is similar to that used to design the towei, the tower is most likely to buckle at the location of the highest combined stress ratio in the upper portion of the tower. This would result in the portion of the tower above the failure location "folding over" onto the portion of the tower below the failure location. Please note that this letter only applies to the above reterenced tower designed and manufactured by Sabre Towers & Poles. ln the unlikely event of total separation, this would result in collapse within a 100' x 100' compound. Sincerely, Robert E. Beacom, P.E., S.E. Engineering Supervisor (,.r l.1 * grArE of Sabre Towers and Poles . 7101 Southbridge Drive . P.0. Box 658 . Sioux City, IA 51102-0658 P: 772-258-6690 F: 772-279-08L4 W: www.SabreTowersandPoles.com 3.B.b Packet Pg. 199 Attachment: Attachment A - Kapok St Certfied Fall Radius Letter (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Digitally signed by Dennis Abel Date: 2020.08.05 08:27:46 -04'00' 3.B.c Packet Pg. 200 Attachment: Attachment B - Zoning Drawings (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) KAPOK STREET 12906066 NW 1/4, SEC. 15, T-49-S, R-27-E COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA RAWLAND TOWER SURVEYPROJECT NO. 19-1586 SMW Engineering Group, Inc.FDH-NC158 Business Center DriveBirmingham, Alabama 35244Ph: 205-252-6985www.smweng.com3.B.c Packet Pg. 201 Attachment: Attachment B - Zoning Drawings (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) NW 1/4, SEC. 15, T-49-S, R-27-E COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA RAWLAND TOWER SURVEYPROJECT NO. 19-1586 SMW Engineering Group, Inc.SECTION OVERVIEW NOT TO SCALE FDH-NC158 Business Center DriveBirmingham, Alabama 35244Ph: 205-252-6985www.smweng.comKAPOK STREET 12906066 3.B.c Packet Pg. 202 Attachment: Attachment B - Zoning Drawings (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) NW 1/4, SEC. 15, T-49-S, R-27-E COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA RAWLAND TOWER SURVEYPROJECT NO. 19-1586 SMW Engineering Group, Inc.PARENT TRACT OVERVIEW NOT TO SCALE FDH-NC158 Business Center DriveBirmingham, Alabama 35244Ph: 205-252-6985www.smweng.com’’ KAPOK STREET 12906066 3.B.c Packet Pg. 203 Attachment: Attachment B - Zoning Drawings (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Digitally signed by Dennis Abel Date: 2020.08.05 08:28:09 -04'00' 3.B.c Packet Pg. 204 Attachment: Attachment B - Zoning Drawings (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Digitally signed by Dennis Abel Date: 2020.08.05 08:28:21 -04'00' 3.B.c Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: Attachment B - Zoning Drawings (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Digitally signed by Dennis Abel Date: 2020.08.05 08:28:34 -04'00' 3.B.c Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: Attachment B - Zoning Drawings (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Digitally signed by Dennis Abel Date: 2020.08.05 08:28:50 -04'00' 3.B.c Packet Pg. 207 Attachment: Attachment B - Zoning Drawings (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Digitally signed by Dennis Abel Date: 2020.08.05 08:29:07 -04'00' 3.B.c Packet Pg. 208 Attachment: Attachment B - Zoning Drawings (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Transforming public safety communications The First Responder Network Authority (FirstNet) has entered into a public-private partnership with AT&T to build the first nationwide wireless broadband network dedicated to first responders for use in disasters, emergencies and daily public safety work. FirstNet provides initial funding, 20 MHz of spectrum and deep public safety expertise to the partnership. AT&T brings a proven track record and strong commitment to public safety, as well as the commercial expertise and nationwide resources to deploy, maintain and operate the network. This 25-year partnership offers the best overall value to America and its public safety responders – both from an investment perspective and in terms of the lifesaving technology it will put in the hands of law enforcement, fire and emergency medical personnel in communities across the nation. FirstNet will serve... FIRST RESPONDERS COMMUNITIES THE NATION IN fire, police, EMS counties, cities, tribal, rural ACROSS 50 states, territories & DC Technology first responders need to save lives, protect communities MODERNIZED PRIORITIZED SPECIALIZED innovative app & device ecosystem network improvements & upgrades commercially proven cybersecurity solutions emergency communications receive highest priority rapid buildout with public safety input nationwide public safety solutions leveraging existing infrastructure robust coverage where public safety needs it connectivity for advanced mobile data highly available customer care Learn more at FirstNet.gov/mediakit 5 3.B.d Packet Pg. 209 Attachment: Attachment C - FirstNet Info (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) info@firstnet.gov | www.firstnet.gov | 571-665-6100 TOP10 ASKED QUESTIONS FREQUENTLY 1. What is the First Responder Network Authority? The First Responder Network Authority is the independent authority established by Congress to deliver a nationwide broadband network dedicated to public safety. The Network is strengthening public safety users’ communications capabilities, enabling them to respond more quickly and effectively to accidents, disasters, and emergencies. The First Responder Network Authority is led by a Board of leaders and executives from the public safety community; federal, state, and local governments; and the technology, finance, and wireless sectors. It has a staff of about 200 employees with expertise in public safety, telecommunications, customer service, technology, procurement, and other areas needed to develop the Network. It is headquartered in Reston, VA, and has a technology center and lab in Boulder, CO. 2. What led to the creation of the First Responder Network Authority? The 9/11 terrorist attacks brought to the forefront the many communications challenges that first responders face during emergencies and disasters. These issues were captured in the 9/11 Commission Report, which identified gaps in emergency communications and recommended a nationwide network for law enforcement, fire, and emergency medical personnel communications. The public safety community united to fulfill the 9/11 Commission’s recommendation. Public safety organizations and associations advocated before Congress for a dedicated, reliable wireless network for first responders. Their advocacy efforts led to the passage of legislation in 2012 to create the agency to deploy the Network in all U.S. states and territories, including rural communities and tribal nations. 3. How has public safety been involved in the vision for the FirstNet network? Public safety officials have worked closely with the First Responder Network Authority since its inception in 2012 to ensure the Network meets first responders’ needs – today and in the future. The agency’s outreach and consultation efforts have connected the organization to more than 1.8 million first responders and state public safety and technology executives across the country. Specifically, the First Responder Network Authority has consulted extensively with state single points of contact (SPOCs) in each of the 50 U.S. states, 5 territories, and the District of Columbia, as well as local/municipal, tribal and federal public safety leaders. It also coordinates with public safety through the Public Safety Advisory Committee (PSAC), which provides guidance and subject matter expertise from a first responder perspective. Public safety leaders at the national, state and local levels continue to advocate for and support deployment of the Network. 4. How was AT&T selected to build, operate, and maintain the FirstNet network? The First Responder Network Authority and the Department of Interior made the 25-year award based on the determination of the overall best value solution for FirstNet and public safety. The buildup to the award included a fair, competitive procurement process that began in January 2016 with release of the Network RFP. The procurement process followed the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and encouraged offerors to provide innovative solutions that could meet or exceed the needs of public safety. The procurement was open to all entities, whether traditional wireless companies or new entrants, provided their proposal could meet the RFP’s statement of objectives. AT&T was selected on a best-value award that considered financial sustainability and was based on more than just a technically acceptable solution at the lowest cost. The evaluation of proposals assessed the offerors’ ability to submit a cost-effective and innovative model, and to meet or exceed the 16 objectives and evaluation factors outlined in the FirstNet RFP. 5. Why is the Network being built and operated through a public-private partnership? The First Responder Network Authority and AT&T are modernizing and improving public safety communications by leveraging private sector resources, infrastructure, and cost-saving synergies to deploy and operate the Network. This public-private model also helps keep costs down for American taxpayers. To do this, Congress used the sale of communications airwaves (or spectrum) to fund FirstNet’s initial operations and help start network deployment; the $7 billion FirstNet received in initial funding came from FCC spectrum auction revenue, not taxpayer funds. If the federal government were to build, maintain and operate this Network, the estimated cost would be tens of billions of dollars over 25 years. The Government Accountability Office has estimated it could cost up to $47 billion over 10 years to construct and operate the Network. With this partnership approach, the First Responder Network Authority and AT&T do not need any additional federal funding to build and operate the Network – it is a fully funded, self-sustaining Network. In return, America’s first responders get services far above and beyond what they have today over a first-class broadband network dedicated to their communications needs. 3.B.d Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: Attachment C - FirstNet Info (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) info@firstnet.gov | www.firstnet.gov | 571-665-6100 6. What are the key terms this public-private partnership? Congress intended for the Network to be built and operated as a public-private partnership that brings together the best of the private sector, including commercial best practices, infrastructure, and resources – with the First Responder Network Authority’s public safety expertise. This approach will lead to a fully-funded, self-sustaining Network that will serve public safety for years to come. This business model is built upon the efficient use of resources, infrastructure, cost-saving synergies, and incentives, including: • 20 MHz of federally owned spectrum and $6.5 billion in initial funding to the partnership; in return AT&T will deploy and operate a nation- wide high-speed broadband network for public safety over 25 years. • AT&T will invest about $40 billion over the life of the contract to build, operate, deploy, and maintain the Network, and together with the First Responder Network Authority will help ensure the Network evolves with the needs of public safety. • AT&T can use FirstNet’s spectrum when it is not being used by public safety for other, commercial purposes. The company will prioritize first responders over any other commercial users. • First Responder Network Authority will oversee the contract to ensure it delivers innovation, technology and customer care to public safety through various mechanisms, including subscriber adoption targets, milestone buildouts, disincentive fees and other mechanisms outlined in the contract. 7. What will the FirstNet Network provide first responders that they don’t have today? Today, in emergencies and at large events, heavy public use can lead to wireless communications networks becoming overloaded and inaccessible. In those instances, public safety users are treated the same as any other commercial or enterprise user, and communications can be limited due to congestion and capacity issues. With the FirstNet Network, public safety will get a dedicated “fast lane” that provides highly secure communications every day and for every emergency. It will deliver specialized features to public safety that are not available on wireless networks today – such as priority access; preemption; more network capacity; and a resilient, hardened connection. The Network will deliver more than just a public-safety-dedicated wireless connection – it is also creating devices and apps ecosystems that will connect first responders to innovative, life-saving technologies. 8. How will the Network benefit first responders and help them do their jobs better? FirstNet will improve communications, response times and outcomes for first responders from coast-to-coast, in rural and urban areas, inland and on boarders – leading to safer, and more secure communities. The Network will provide first responders with innovation and robust capacity so they can take advantage of advanced technologies, tools and services during emergencies, such as: • Applications that allow first responders to reliably share videos, text messages, photos and other information during incidents in near real-time; • Advanced capabilities, like camera-equipped connected drones and robots, to deliver images of wildfires, floods or other events; • Improved location services to help with mapping capabilities during rescue and recovery operations; and • Wearables that could relay biometric data of a patient to the hospital or alert when a fire fighter is in distress. Network technology will also be tested and validated through the FirstNet Innovation and Test Lab, located in Boulder, CO, so first responders will have the proven tools they need in disasters and emergencies. 9. What’s happening with FirstNet now? All 50 states, five U.S. territories and Washington, D.C., have “opted in,” to FirstNet, meaning each has accepted its individual State Plan detailing how the network will be deployed in their state/territory. The First Responder Network Authority’s public-private partnership with AT&T provides first responders with immediate access to mission-critical capabilities over the FirstNet network. This includes priority and preemption features that give first responders their own “fast lane” on the public safety network to communicate and share information during emergencies, large events, or other situations when commercial networks could become congested. FirstNet is the only broadband network to provide ruthless preemption for public safety. Key FirstNet activities include: Expanding the Network and Building Out Band 14: The First Responder Network Authority has issued work orders to deploy the RANs. This gave AT&T the green light to expand FirstNet’s footprint and deploy Band 14 capacity and coverage throughout the nation, providing first responders with the bandwidth and mission critical connections they need to communicate, share information, and use innovative technologies every day and in every emergency. Driving public safety innovation: FirstNet is also unlocking a new technology marketplace for public safety, enabling first responders to benefit from advancements in innovation. The FirstNet App Catalog store will be filling up with FirstNet-approved mobile apps that are optimized for public safety use over the Network. Securing emergency communications: FirstNet’s first-of-its-kind core infrastructure will give first responders the dedicated, highly secure, non-commercial network they deserve. The FirstNet Core, delivered in March 2018, provides full encryption of public safety data over FirstNet and end-to-end cyber security. FirstNet subscribers also have access to a dedicated Security Operations Center, offering 24/7/365 support. Engaging with public safety: The First Responder Network Authority will continue to engage with public safety in the states, territories, federal agencies, and tribal nations to ensure the network meets their needs and incorporate their feedback in the design of future FirstNet products and services. 10. How can I learn more? Stay up-to-date on the First Responder Network Authority activities and the building and deployment of FirstNet at www.firstnet.gov. Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. 3.B.d Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: Attachment C - FirstNet Info (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.e Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: Attachment D - Zoning Verification Letter - 3-17-20 (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.e Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: Attachment D - Zoning Verification Letter - 3-17-20 (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.e Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: Attachment D - Zoning Verification Letter - 3-17-20 (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.e Packet Pg. 215 Attachment: Attachment D - Zoning Verification Letter - 3-17-20 (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.ePacket Pg. 216Attachment: Attachment D - Zoning Verification Letter - 3-17-20 (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell 3.B.ePacket Pg. 217Attachment: Attachment D - Zoning Verification Letter - 3-17-20 (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell 3.B.e Packet Pg. 218 Attachment: Attachment D - Zoning Verification Letter - 3-17-20 (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.e Packet Pg. 219 Attachment: Attachment D - Zoning Verification Letter - 3-17-20 (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.e Packet Pg. 220 Attachment: Attachment D - Zoning Verification Letter - 3-17-20 (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.e Packet Pg. 221 Attachment: Attachment D - Zoning Verification Letter - 3-17-20 (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.e Packet Pg. 222 Attachment: Attachment D - Zoning Verification Letter - 3-17-20 (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.e Packet Pg. 223 Attachment: Attachment D - Zoning Verification Letter - 3-17-20 (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.e Packet Pg. 224 Attachment: Attachment D - Zoning Verification Letter - 3-17-20 (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.e Packet Pg. 225 Attachment: Attachment D - Zoning Verification Letter - 3-17-20 (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.e Packet Pg. 226 Attachment: Attachment D - Zoning Verification Letter - 3-17-20 (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.e Packet Pg. 227 Attachment: Attachment D - Zoning Verification Letter - 3-17-20 (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.e Packet Pg. 228 Attachment: Attachment D - Zoning Verification Letter - 3-17-20 (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.e Packet Pg. 229 Attachment: Attachment D - Zoning Verification Letter - 3-17-20 (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.e Packet Pg. 230 Attachment: Attachment D - Zoning Verification Letter - 3-17-20 (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Johannes Steffens CitySwitch//Ͳ͕ LLC 1900 Century Place, Suite 320 Atlanta GA 30345 (404) 857-0858 (414) 403-4927 kevin.saso@cityswitch.com Kendal Lotze Ignite Wireless 102 Mary Alice Park Rd Cumming GA 30040 (407) 239-0846 (Preferred) (770) 862-8089 Kendal@ignitewireless.com ZĞǀŝƐĞĚĂƚĞ͗ϴ͘18͘ϮϬϮϬ :Θ:tŝƌĞůĞƐƐŽŶƐƵůƚĂŶƚƐ>> :ŝŵůĚĞƌŵĂŶ ϲϭϮϮϳƚŚǀĞt ;ϵϱϰͿ ϯϬϯͲϯϭϳϬ ũũǁŝƌĞůĞƐƐĐŽŶƐƵůƚΛǇĂŚŽŽ͘ĐŽŵ &>ϯϰϮϬϵƌĂĚĞŶƚŽŶ Jeff Wright Henderson, Franklin, Starners & Holt, P.A. 8889 Pelican Bay Boulevard, Suite 400 Naples FL 34108 (239) 344-1371 (239)344-1508 jeff.wright@henlaw.com 3.B.f Packet Pg. 231 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 232 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 0 $0!0 "000 ///%+))(&,'+.*&-0 000!0 00 0 0#0 0 + " #'-'-""*!-"%--%&'%-&&"'"!&-''-"(--'-,-'&-#''"!- %")-'"!-&'&--!&&%,- !"% '"!-!--"(!-"!-'- "%-"- "(!',- " &&"!%&-*&'-'-''$ ***"%")!'!+&$+$ - #+%+%#%)$&+''% ( %$+ '#%#/ ' +!*+'!/$""+#*./,/ ))$*$#/ " $+&''+/ (#&#/-#+/ (*+%!)/ ((+ //+ / #+%+%#%)$&+''% ( %$+ - ! +$++&''++ (*++ ((+++++ #+%+%#%)$&+''% ( %$+ - ! +$++&''++ (*++ ((+++++ #+%+%#%)$&+''% ( %$+ - ! +$++&''++ (*++ ((+++++ #+%+%#%)$&+''% ( %$+ - ! +$++&''++ (*++ ((+++ + + + (55-*,.5-".5.."5.)5."5**&#.#)(5*&-5*,)0#5."5 )&&)1#(!5 5.#&52*&(.#)(5) 5."5,+/-.5#(&/#(!51".5-.,/./,-5,52#-.#(!5(51".5#-5*,)*)-5." ')/(.5) 5 (,)"'(.5 *,)*)-5/-#(!5(/',-5 #5 ,/5 ,)(.5-.%5 ,)'5 5 .5.)5 5 . 1"(5 *,)*,.35)1(,5 */,"-5 *,)*,.35 1"(5 2#-.#(!5 *,#(#*&5-.,/./,5 1-5/#&.5 #(&/ /#&#(!5*,'#.5(/',-5# 5*)--#&51"35(,)"'(.5#-5(--,35")152#-.#(!5(,)"'(. '5.)55. ),5*,)$.-5/."),#45/(,55.#)(5 5*,)0#55.#&5-,#*.#)(5) 5-#.5&.,.#)(- #(&/#(!5(35,!#(!5(5 #&&#(! /,-/(.5.)5 5-.#)(5 5 -. 5-"&&55!/#5#(5."#,5,)''(.#)(5.)5."5 ,#(! 2'#(,5(5 ."5,#(!5 2'#(,5-"&&55!/#5#(5."5.,'#(.#)(5.)5**,)05),5(35 0,#(5*.#.#)(535."5,#.,#5"5&#-.5&)15&-5,--5."5 )&&)1#(!5,#.,# ,5.",5-*#&5 )(#.#)(-5(5#,/'-.(-5 2#-.#(!5 1"#"5,5*/&#,5.)5."5&).#)(5-#4 (5",.,#-.#-5) 5."5&(5-.,/./,5),5/#&#(!5#(0)&0 //$// 3.B.f Packet Pg. 233 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 234 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 4/27/2018 Page 5 of 6 Pre-Application Meeting and Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for: Variance Chapter 3 J. of the Administrative Code The following Submittal Requirement Checklist is to be utilized during the Pre-Application Meeting and at time of application submittal. At time of submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with the application packet. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below with cover sheets attached to each section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. REQUIREMENTS FOR REVIEW # OF COPIES REQUIRED NOT REQUIRED Completed Application (download current form from County website) Pre-Application Meeting Notes 1 Project Narrative Completed Addressing Checklist 1 Property Ownership Disclosure Form 1 Conceptual Site Plan 24” x 36” and one 8 ½ ” x 11” copy Survey of property showing the encroachment (measured in feet) 2 Affidavit of Authorization, signed and notarized 2 Deeds/Legal’s 3 Location map 1 Current aerial photographs (available from Property Appraiser) with project boundary and, if vegetated, FLUCFCS Codes with legend included on aerial 5 Historical Survey or waiver request 1 Environmental Data Requirements or exemption justification 3 Once the first set of review comments are posted, provide the assigned planner the Property Owner Advisory Letter and Certification 1 Electronic copy of all documents and plans *Please advise: The Office of the Hearing Examiner requires all materials to be submitted electronically in PDF format. 1 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS: x Following the completion of the review process by County review staff, the applicant shall submit all materials electronically to the designated project manager. x Please contact the project manager to confirm the number of additional copies required. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 235 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 4/27/2018 Page 6 of 6 Planners: Indicate if the petition needs to be routed to the following reviewers: Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment: Executive Director Historical Review City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director Immokalee Water/Sewer District Conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Ryan Parks and Recreation: David Berra Emergency Management: Dan Summers; and/or EMS: Artie Bay School District (Residential Components): Amy Lockheart Other: FEE REQUIREMENTS Pre-Application Meeting: $500.00 Variance Petition: o Residential- $2,000.00 o Non-Residential- $5,000.00 o 5th and Subsequent Review- 20% of original fee Estimated Legal Advertising Fee for the Office of the Hearing Examiner: $1,125.00 After The Fact Zoning/Land Use Petitions: 2x the normal petition fee Listed Species Survey (if EIS is not required): $1,000.00 Fire Code Plans Review Fees are collected at the time of application submission and those fees are set forth by the Authority having jurisdiction. The Land Development Code requires Neighborhood Notification mailers for Applications headed to hearing, and this fee is collected prior to hearing. As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. All checks payable to: Board of County Commissioners. The completed application, all required submittal materials, and the permit fee shall be submitted to: Growth Management Department Zoning Division ATTN: Business Center 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 __________________________________ ____________________ Applicant Signature Date __________________________________ Printed Name x ✔ Kendal Lotze 4/10/2020 3.B.f Packet Pg. 236 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 237 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 11/14/2013 X 30 Years 3.B.f Packet Pg. 238 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Kendal Lotze 4/10/2020 3.B.f Packet Pg. 239 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) K>>/ZKhEdz'KsZEDEd 'ZKtd,DE'DEd/s/^/KE ǁǁǁ͘ĐŽůůŝĞƌŐŽǀ͘ŶĞƚ ϮϴϬϬEKZd,,KZ^^,KZ/s EW>^͕&>KZ/ϯϰϭϬϰ ;ϮϯϵͿϮϱϮͲϮϰϬϬ&y ;ϮϯϵͿϮϱϮͲϱϳϮϰ ADDRESSING CHECKLIST 3OHDVH FRPSOHWH WKH IROORZLQJ DQG HPDLO WR*0'B$GGUHVVLQJ#FROOLHUJRYQHW RU ID[ WR WKH 2SHUDWLRQV 'HSDUWPHQWDWRUVXEPLWLQSHUVRQWRWKH$GGUHVVLQJ'HSDUWPHQWDWWKHDERYHDGGUHVV)RUPPXVW EHVLJQHGE\$GGUHVVLQJSHUVRQQHOSULRUWRSUHDSSOLFDWLRQPHHWLQJplease allow 3 days for processing. 1RW DOO LWHPV ZLOO DSSO\ WR HYHU\ SURMHFW ,WHPV LQbold type DUH UHTXLUHGFOLIO NUMBERS MUST BE PROVIDED.)RUPV ROGHU WKDQ PRQWKV ZLOO UHTXLUH DGGLWLRQDO UHYLHZ DQG DSSURYDO E\ WKH $GGUHVVLQJ 'HSDUWPHQW PETITION TYPE (Indicate type below, complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition type) %/%ODVWLQJ3HUPLW %'%RDW'RFN([WHQVLRQ &DUQLYDO&LUFXV3HUPLW &8&RQGLWLRQDO8VH (;3([FDYDWLRQ3HUPLW )3)LQDO3ODW //$/RW/LQH$GMXVWPHQW 31&3URMHFW1DPH&KDQJH 33/3ODQV 3ODW5HYLHZ 3633UHOLPLQDU\6XEGLYLVLRQ3ODW 38'5H]RQH 5=6WDQGDUG5H]RQH 6'36LWH'HYHORSPHQW3ODQ 6'3$6'3$PHQGPHQW 6'3,,QVXEVWDQWLDO&KDQJHWR6'3 6,36LWH,PSURYHPHQW3ODQ 6,3,,QVXEVWDQWLDO&KDQJHWR6,3 6156WUHHW1DPH&KDQJH 61&6WUHHW1DPH&KDQJH±8QSODWWHG 7'57UDQVIHURI'HYHORSPHQW5LJKWV 9$9DULDQFH 9539HJHWDWLRQ5HPRYDO3HUPLW 956)39HJHWDWLRQ5HPRYDO 6LWH)LOO3HUPLW 27+(5 LEGAL DESCRIPTION RIVXEMHFWSURSHUW\RUSURSHUWLHV(copy of lengthy description may be attached) FOLIO (Property ID) NUMBER(s)RIDERYH(attach to, or associate with, legal description if more than one) 675((7$''5(66RU$''5(66(6(as applicable, if already assigned) 352326('675((71$0(6(if applicable) 6,7('(9(/230(173/$1180%(5(for existing projects/sites only) 1 6859(<FRS\QHHGHGRQO\IRUXQSODWWHGSURSHUWLHV LOCATION MAP PXVWEHDWWDFKHGVKRZLQJH[DFWORFDWLRQRISURMHFWVLWHLQUHODWLRQWRQHDUHVWSXEOLFURDGULJKW RIZD\ 352326('352-(&71$0((if applicable) 6'3RU$5RU3/ X PL20190002701 Parcel ID Number: 00307840002 The E1/2 of the NW1/4 of the SW1/4 of the NE1/4 of the NW1/4 of Section 15, Township 49 S, Range 27 E. in Collier County, Florida. Kapok Street/FLC009 Parcels 19 & 20 3.B.f Packet Pg. 240 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) K>>/ZKhEdz'KsZEDEd 'ZKtd,DE'DEd/s/^/KE ǁǁǁ͘ĐŽůůŝĞƌŐŽǀ͘ŶĞƚ ϮϴϬϬEKZd,,KZ^^,KZ/s EW>^͕&>KZ/ϯϰϭϬϰ ;ϮϯϵͿϮϱϮͲϮϰϬϬ&y ;ϮϯϵͿϮϱϮͲϱϳϮϰ 3OHDVH5HWXUQ$SSURYHG&KHFNOLVW%\(PDLO3HUVRQDOO\SLFNHGXS ASSOLFDQW1DPH 6LJQDWXUHRQ$GGUHVVLQJ&KHFNOLVWGRHVQRWFRQVWLWXWH3URMHFWDQGRU6WUHHW1DPH DSSURYDODQGLVVXEMHFWWRIXUWKHUUHYLHZE\WKH2SHUDWLRQV'HSDUWPHQW FOR STAFF USE ONLY Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number )ROLR1XPEHU )ROLR1XPEHU Approved by: Date: Updated by: Date: IF OLDER THAN 6 MONTHS, FORM MUST BE UPDATED OR NEW FORM SUBMITTED 2 )D[ (PDLO/)D[3KRQH 3URMHFWRUGHYHORSPHQWQDPHVSURSRVHGIRURUDOUHDG\DSSHDULQJLQFRQGRPLQLXPGRFXPHQWVLIDSSOLFDWLRQ LQGLFDWHZKHWKHUSURSRVHGRUH[LVWLQJ X CitySwitch II, LLC 770-862-8089 kendal@ignitewireless.com N/A 00307880004 00307840002 6/11/2020 3.B.f Packet Pg. 241 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) PL20190002701 00307840002 Revised Date: 8.4.2020 3.B.f Packet Pg. 242 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 243 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Collier County, FL Zoning Division 2800 North Horseshoe Dr Naples, FL 34104 Re: Variance Application for Wireless Telecommunications Tower CitySwitch II, LLC Kapok St./FLC009 To Whom It May Concern, We are hereby applying for a Setback Variance of the required half of the tower height setback (125ft) as required by LDC 2.03.08.A.2.a.3.x. of the Collier County Zoning Regulations in order to construct and maintain a Wireless Telecommunications Tower on the property located at Kapok Street, Naples, FL 34117. We are proud to say that the proposed structure will be utilized by AT&T to support the deployment of FirstNet. If unfamiliar, in 2017 the Department of Commerce and First Responder Network Authority (FirstNet) signed a 25-year contract with AT&T to build the first nationwide wireless network for America’s First Responders. The FirstNet network is planned to cover all 50 states, five U.S. territories and the District of Columbia, including rural communities and tribal lands. In 2018, CitySwitch was honored to execute an agreement with AT&T to assist in building the infrastructure needed for the deployment of FirstNet as well as their existing wireless network needs. Additional information on FirstNet can be found online at https://firstnet.gov/ . Should you have any questions regarding the application and/or supporting documents provided, please feel free to contact Jim Alderman at 954-303-3170 or email at jjwirelessconsult@yahoo.com . 3.B.f Packet Pg. 244 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Transforming public safety communications The First Responder Network Authority (FirstNet) has entered into a public-private partnership with AT&T to build the first nationwide wireless broadband network dedicated to first responders for use in disasters, emergencies and daily public safety work. FirstNet provides initial funding, 20 MHz of spectrum and deep public safety expertise to the partnership. AT&T brings a proven track record and strong commitment to public safety, as well as the commercial expertise and nationwide resources to deploy, maintain and operate the network. This 25-year partnership offers the best overall value to America and its public safety responders – both from an investment perspective and in terms of the lifesaving technology it will put in the hands of law enforcement, fire and emergency medical personnel in communities across the nation. FirstNet will serve... FIRST RESPONDERS COMMUNITIES THE NATION IN fire, police, EMS counties, cities, tribal, rural ACROSS 50 states, territories & DC Technology first responders need to save lives, protect communities MODERNIZED PRIORITIZED SPECIALIZED innovative app & device ecosystem network improvements & upgrades commercially proven cybersecurity solutions emergency communications receive highest priority rapid buildout with public safety input nationwide public safety solutions leveraging existing infrastructure robust coverage where public safety needs it connectivity for advanced mobile data highly available customer care Learn more at FirstNet.gov/mediakit 5 3.B.f Packet Pg. 245 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) info@firstnet.gov | www.firstnet.gov | 571-665-6100 TOP10 ASKED QUESTIONS FREQUENTLY 1. What is the First Responder Network Authority? The First Responder Network Authority is the independent authority established by Congress to deliver a nationwide broadband network dedicated to public safety. The Network is strengthening public safety users’ communications capabilities, enabling them to respond more quickly and effectively to accidents, disasters, and emergencies. The First Responder Network Authority is led by a Board of leaders and executives from the public safety community; federal, state, and local governments; and the technology, finance, and wireless sectors. It has a staff of about 200 employees with expertise in public safety, telecommunications, customer service, technology, procurement, and other areas needed to develop the Network. It is headquartered in Reston, VA, and has a technology center and lab in Boulder, CO. 2. What led to the creation of the First Responder Network Authority? The 9/11 terrorist attacks brought to the forefront the many communications challenges that first responders face during emergencies and disasters. These issues were captured in the 9/11 Commission Report, which identified gaps in emergency communications and recommended a nationwide network for law enforcement, fire, and emergency medical personnel communications. The public safety community united to fulfill the 9/11 Commission’s recommendation. Public safety organizations and associations advocated before Congress for a dedicated, reliable wireless network for first responders. Their advocacy efforts led to the passage of legislation in 2012 to create the agency to deploy the Network in all U.S. states and territories, including rural communities and tribal nations. 3. How has public safety been involved in the vision for the FirstNet network? Public safety officials have worked closely with the First Responder Network Authority since its inception in 2012 to ensure the Network meets first responders’ needs – today and in the future. The agency’s outreach and consultation efforts have connected the organization to more than 1.8 million first responders and state public safety and technology executives across the country. Specifically, the First Responder Network Authority has consulted extensively with state single points of contact (SPOCs) in each of the 50 U.S. states, 5 territories, and the District of Columbia, as well as local/municipal, tribal and federal public safety leaders. It also coordinates with public safety through the Public Safety Advisory Committee (PSAC), which provides guidance and subject matter expertise from a first responder perspective. Public safety leaders at the national, state and local levels continue to advocate for and support deployment of the Network. 4. How was AT&T selected to build, operate, and maintain the FirstNet network? The First Responder Network Authority and the Department of Interior made the 25-year award based on the determination of the overall best value solution for FirstNet and public safety. The buildup to the award included a fair, competitive procurement process that began in January 2016 with release of the Network RFP. The procurement process followed the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and encouraged offerors to provide innovative solutions that could meet or exceed the needs of public safety. The procurement was open to all entities, whether traditional wireless companies or new entrants, provided their proposal could meet the RFP’s statement of objectives. AT&T was selected on a best-value award that considered financial sustainability and was based on more than just a technically acceptable solution at the lowest cost. The evaluation of proposals assessed the offerors’ ability to submit a cost-effective and innovative model, and to meet or exceed the 16 objectives and evaluation factors outlined in the FirstNet RFP. 5. Why is the Network being built and operated through a public-private partnership? The First Responder Network Authority and AT&T are modernizing and improving public safety communications by leveraging private sector resources, infrastructure, and cost-saving synergies to deploy and operate the Network. This public-private model also helps keep costs down for American taxpayers. To do this, Congress used the sale of communications airwaves (or spectrum) to fund FirstNet’s initial operations and help start network deployment; the $7 billion FirstNet received in initial funding came from FCC spectrum auction revenue, not taxpayer funds. If the federal government were to build, maintain and operate this Network, the estimated cost would be tens of billions of dollars over 25 years. The Government Accountability Office has estimated it could cost up to $47 billion over 10 years to construct and operate the Network. With this partnership approach, the First Responder Network Authority and AT&T do not need any additional federal funding to build and operate the Network – it is a fully funded, self-sustaining Network. In return, America’s first responders get services far above and beyond what they have today over a first-class broadband network dedicated to their communications needs. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 246 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) info@firstnet.gov | www.firstnet.gov | 571-665-6100 6. What are the key terms this public-private partnership? Congress intended for the Network to be built and operated as a public-private partnership that brings together the best of the private sector, including commercial best practices, infrastructure, and resources – with the First Responder Network Authority’s public safety expertise. This approach will lead to a fully-funded, self-sustaining Network that will serve public safety for years to come. This business model is built upon the efficient use of resources, infrastructure, cost-saving synergies, and incentives, including: • 20 MHz of federally owned spectrum and $6.5 billion in initial funding to the partnership; in return AT&T will deploy and operate a nation- wide high-speed broadband network for public safety over 25 years. • AT&T will invest about $40 billion over the life of the contract to build, operate, deploy, and maintain the Network, and together with the First Responder Network Authority will help ensure the Network evolves with the needs of public safety. • AT&T can use FirstNet’s spectrum when it is not being used by public safety for other, commercial purposes. The company will prioritize first responders over any other commercial users. • First Responder Network Authority will oversee the contract to ensure it delivers innovation, technology and customer care to public safety through various mechanisms, including subscriber adoption targets, milestone buildouts, disincentive fees and other mechanisms outlined in the contract. 7. What will the FirstNet Network provide first responders that they don’t have today? Today, in emergencies and at large events, heavy public use can lead to wireless communications networks becoming overloaded and inaccessible. In those instances, public safety users are treated the same as any other commercial or enterprise user, and communications can be limited due to congestion and capacity issues. With the FirstNet Network, public safety will get a dedicated “fast lane” that provides highly secure communications every day and for every emergency. It will deliver specialized features to public safety that are not available on wireless networks today – such as priority access; preemption; more network capacity; and a resilient, hardened connection. The Network will deliver more than just a public-safety-dedicated wireless connection – it is also creating devices and apps ecosystems that will connect first responders to innovative, life-saving technologies. 8. How will the Network benefit first responders and help them do their jobs better? FirstNet will improve communications, response times and outcomes for first responders from coast-to-coast, in rural and urban areas, inland and on boarders – leading to safer, and more secure communities. The Network will provide first responders with innovation and robust capacity so they can take advantage of advanced technologies, tools and services during emergencies, such as: • Applications that allow first responders to reliably share videos, text messages, photos and other information during incidents in near real-time; • Advanced capabilities, like camera-equipped connected drones and robots, to deliver images of wildfires, floods or other events; • Improved location services to help with mapping capabilities during rescue and recovery operations; and • Wearables that could relay biometric data of a patient to the hospital or alert when a fire fighter is in distress. Network technology will also be tested and validated through the FirstNet Innovation and Test Lab, located in Boulder, CO, so first responders will have the proven tools they need in disasters and emergencies. 9. What’s happening with FirstNet now? All 50 states, five U.S. territories and Washington, D.C., have “opted in,” to FirstNet, meaning each has accepted its individual State Plan detailing how the network will be deployed in their state/territory. The First Responder Network Authority’s public-private partnership with AT&T provides first responders with immediate access to mission-critical capabilities over the FirstNet network. This includes priority and preemption features that give first responders their own “fast lane” on the public safety network to communicate and share information during emergencies, large events, or other situations when commercial networks could become congested. FirstNet is the only broadband network to provide ruthless preemption for public safety. Key FirstNet activities include: Expanding the Network and Building Out Band 14: The First Responder Network Authority has issued work orders to deploy the RANs. This gave AT&T the green light to expand FirstNet’s footprint and deploy Band 14 capacity and coverage throughout the nation, providing first responders with the bandwidth and mission critical connections they need to communicate, share information, and use innovative technologies every day and in every emergency. Driving public safety innovation: FirstNet is also unlocking a new technology marketplace for public safety, enabling first responders to benefit from advancements in innovation. The FirstNet App Catalog store will be filling up with FirstNet-approved mobile apps that are optimized for public safety use over the Network. Securing emergency communications: FirstNet’s first-of-its-kind core infrastructure will give first responders the dedicated, highly secure, non-commercial network they deserve. The FirstNet Core, delivered in March 2018, provides full encryption of public safety data over FirstNet and end-to-end cyber security. FirstNet subscribers also have access to a dedicated Security Operations Center, offering 24/7/365 support. Engaging with public safety: The First Responder Network Authority will continue to engage with public safety in the states, territories, federal agencies, and tribal nations to ensure the network meets their needs and incorporate their feedback in the design of future FirstNet products and services. 10. How can I learn more? Stay up-to-date on the First Responder Network Authority activities and the building and deployment of FirstNet at www.firstnet.gov. Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 247 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) VARIANCE PETITION APPLICATION (PL20190002701) KAPOK STREET, NAPLES, FL 34117 Parcel ID# 00307840002 PROJECT NARRATIVE & SEPARATE SHEET RESPONSES 1. A DETAILED EXPLANATION OF THE REQUEST INCLUDING WHAT STRUCTURES ARE EXISTING AND WHAT IS PROPOSED; THE AMOUNT OF ENCROACHMENT PROPOSED USING NUMBERS, I.E. REDUCE FRONT SETBACK FROM 25 FT. TO 18 FT.; WHEN PROPERTY OWNER PURCHASED PROPERTY; WHEN EXISTING PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE WAS BUILT (INCLUDE BUILDING PERMIT NUMBER(S) IF POSSIBLE); WHY ENCROACHMENT IS NECESSARY; HOW EXISTING ENCROACHMENT CAME TO BE; ETC. Applicant is proposing to build a 250’ tall, essential services and other shared services communications tower on the subject property (“Property”). The Property (Parcel ID #00307840002) is located within the “agricultural” zoning designation, within RFMUD receiving and North Bell Meade Overlay Districts. The Property is vacant and unimproved. For reference, see the Zoning Verification Letters dated Sept. 18, 2019 and March 17, 2020, which are included with this submittal. Applicant is requesting a variance from LDC Section 5.05.09.G.7, which provides (in part) that communications towers “shall be separated . . . from all other surrounding property boundaries by a distance not less than one-half (1/2) the height of the tower and its antennas, or the tower's certified collapse area, whichever distance is greater.” (Emphasis added.) Because the proposed tower is 250’ tall, the separation requirement would be 125’ (a greater distance than the tower’s certified collapse area). As indicated on the site drawing included with this submittal, the proposed communications tower meets this 125’ distance separation requirement with respect to the northern and southern Property boundaries. Additionally, the proposed tower is separated from surrounding property boundaries in all directions by a distance that far exceeds its certified collapse area (i.e., it meets the lesser of the two distance measurements provided in the LDC, in all directions). However, because the proposed tower does not meet the greater of the two LDC distance measurements with respect to eastern and western boundaries, a variance is necessary. More specifically, Applicant is seeking a variance from the required 125’ separation requirement, to allow (1) for the eastern boundary, a separation of 60’ (65’ less than required); and (2) for the western boundary, a separation of 82’ (43’ less than required). If measured based on the tower’s certified collapse area, the proposed tower exceeds applicable separation requirements: the western boundary is approximately 46’ beyond the tower’s certified collapse area; the eastern boundary is approximately 24.7’ feet beyond the tower’s certified collapse area. 2. For projects authorized under LDC Section 9.04.02, provide a detailed description of site alterations, including any dredging and filling. Not applicable – site is unimproved, and there is no known or proposed dredging/filling. 3. Pursuant to LDC section 9.04.00, staff shall be guided in their recommendation to the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner shall be guided in the determination to approve or deny a variance petition by the criteria (a-h) listed below. Please address the following criteria: 3.B.f Packet Pg. 248 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) a) Are there special conditions and circumstances existing which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land, structure, or building involved? Yes. The circumstances particular to the location and the structure are unique. The Property is rectangular, and the proposed structure is unique (a 250’ tall essential services communications tower). The proposed tower meets the separation requirement with respect to the northern and southern boundaries. The eastern and western boundaries meet the LDC’s “certified collapse area” measurement, and the nearest structures are approximately 250’ away from the Property’s perimeter. The certified collapse area is an alternative measurement provided in the LDC to ensure safety of nearby property and structures. This unique set of circumstances is peculiar to this Property and proposed structure. Additionally, the County’s code was written in 2005, and recent technological advances have made it possible to design communications towers that can withstand hurricane force winds. In the “highly unlikely” event of a structural failure, the proposed tower will be designed and built to buckle and fall within a 100’ x 100’ compound (see Nov. 18, 2019 Certified Collapse Area letter included with this submittal). b) Are there special conditions and circumstances which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property which is the subject of the variance request. Yes. While the Property is large enough to safely accommodate the proposed communications tower, its rectangular shape makes it necessary to obtain a variance to meet LDC separation requirements for the eastern and western boundaries. c) Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties on the applicant. Yes. The proposed tower is a permitted use at this location that will accommodate critically important essential services communications. Applicant has demonstrated, through an engineer’s certification, that the proposed structure is designed to meet the underlying purpose of the separation requirement (i.e., distance and safety with respect to neighboring properties). Without the variance, to enjoy the permitted use, the applicant would be required to substantially decrease the tower’s height and effectiveness for essential services communications. It would be an unnecessary and undue hardship to interpret the zoning code literally under these circumstances – particularly when the proposed tower meets one of two measurements specifically articulated in the LDC to ensure safety and protection of neighboring properties (i.e., the tower’s certified collapse area). d) Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety or welfare. Yes. Applicant is proposing the minimum variance necessary to make reasonable use of the land and proposed structure. e) Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district. No. The Applicant is not requesting and special privilege, and granting the requested variance will not give Applicant any special privilege that is denied to other property in this zoning district. Communications towers of this height are a permitted use in this zoning district, and the tower is designed to withstand 3.B.f Packet Pg. 249 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) hurricane force winds, and to buckle within a 100’ x 100’ collapse area, in the highly unlikely event of a total structural failure. f) Will granting the variance be in harmony with the intent and purpose of this zoning code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Yes. The location and nature of the proposed variance meets the intent and purpose of the LDC separation requirement at issue: i.e., the safety of neighboring property and structures. The tower will not be injurious or detrimental to the neighborhood or to the public, and in the unlikely event of structural failure, the tower is designed to fall within a 100’ x 100’ certified collapse area. The outside perimeter of the certified collapse area is located a considerable distance from neighboring land boundaries (46.0’ to the western boundary; 24.7’ to the eastern boundary), and several hundred feet from any neighboring structure. The tower will provide a benefit to the public, and is designed to prevent any detrimental impacts. g) Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf course, etc. Essential public services communications towers are critically important in this fairly remote area of the County. Population in this area is less dense than urban areas, and communications at this location can be challenging in storm and other emergency events. h) Will granting the variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan? Yes. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 250 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Aug 18, 2020 Collier County, FL Zoning Division 2800 North Horseshoe Dr Naples, FL 34104 RE: Review Comment Letter RV2 Cover Letter: Variance -PL20190002701; Kapok St Cell Tower To whom it may concern, Please see the below Review Comment Letter dated July 30, 2020. Based on the recommendation from Timothy Finn, I will provide an answer to each comment in the Review Comment Letter detailing our response and answer to the requested changes that goes along with the additional documentation being provided. My comments will be in red so that they will be easy to distinguish from the comments from the reviewers. July 30, 2020 Kendal Lotze Ignite Wireless 102 Mary Alice Park Rd Cumming, GA 30040 RE: Variance -PL20190002701; Kapok St Cell Tower Dear Mr. Lotze: The following comments regarding the above referenced project that was submitted on 7-1-20, are being provided as requested. Please be aware that this is not a comprehensive list and is only being provided as a courtesy. All reviews must be completed prior to resubmittal. Rejected Review: Zoning Review; Reviewed By: Timothy Finn 1. REV 2: The parcel number that is illustrated is 00308760002, which is incorrect. Please revise the parcel to 00307840002. This has been corrected on the document named ( Kapok_Owner Affidavit of Authorization_Updated_8.4.2020 ) . REV 1: Affidavit of Authorization - Provide the petition number (PL20190002701) and revise the parcel number to 00307840002. Please delete references of Kendal Lotze/Ignite Wireless as this affidavit of authorization only authorizes the property owner (Johannes Steffens) to give consent to the contract purchaser (CitySwitch II, LLC) to act on the property owners behalf. This has been corrected on the document named ( Kapok_Owner Affidavit of Authorization_Updated_8.4.2020 ). 2. The Zoning Drawings (Sheet C-1) setbacks do not match the Project Narrative setback numbers. In the Project Narrative & Separate Sheet responses document, in Section 1 it is explained that the applicant is seeking a variance from the required 125’ separation requirement, to allow (1) for the eastern boundary, a separation of 60’ (65’ less than required); and (2) for the western boundary, a separation of 82’ (43’ less than required). However, in the Zoning Drawings, Sheet Number C-1, the western setback is illustrated at 96'-2" and the eastern setback is 3.B.f Packet Pg. 251 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) illustrated at 74'-5". Please revise these setback numbers for both documents to be consistent with each other. This has been corrected on the drawings named ( Kapok Street - FLC009 - Zoning - Rev 2 - 8_5_20 ) and it now correctly matches the Project Narrative & Separate Sheet response document. 3. Pursuant to LDC 5.05.09(D)(E) and (F) for shared tower use, please demonstrate that either you can or can not work an arrangement for a shared tower use? Please see the Collier County Communication Towers Map as Towers 1 and 18 are in proximity to the Kapok St Cell Tower property. Moreover, there is a Site Development Plan (SDP) application (PL20200000886) for a proposed cell tower to be located at 550 Frangipani Avenue located approximately 2065 feet to the east of the Kapok St Cell Tower property. Please explain why you can't share this tower? This has been addressed in the supplemental attached document named ( Kapok_RESPONSE TO STAFF COMMENT_8.4.2020 ). Rejected Review: County Attorney Review; Reviewed By: Sally Ashkar 1. Your application states that the applicant is CitySwitch II, LLC, while the affidavits of authorization state that the applicant is CitySwitch II-A LLC. Which is correct? They both appear to be active companies. Please reconcile and update the affidavits or application. CitySwitch II-A, LLC is the correct applicant company and this has been corrected on the application named ( Kapok_Variance Application_Revised_8.18.2020 ). 2. What role does J&J Wireless Consultants have in this application? If they are an additional agent, they should be listed on the application in addition to Ignite. J&J Wireless Consultants, Ignite Wireless, Inc. and Jeff Wright are all agents of CitySwitch II-A, LLC. This has been corrected and added onto the application named ( Kapok_Variance Application_Revised_8.18.2020 ) and affidavit of authorization named ( Kapok_Affidavit of Authorization_New_8.18.2020 ) . 3. Please show the measurements in your cover letter for the proposed separation for the eastern and western boundary on your site plan. There appears to be some inconsistency between the two documents. The separation measurements should be accurately shown on the site plan. This has been corrected on the drawings named ( Kapok Street - FLC009 - Zoning - Rev 2 - 8_5_20 ) and it now correctly matches the Project Narrative & Separate Sheet response document. 4. Is City Switch leasing the property from Johannes Steffens or is it a contract purchaser? Please provide evidence of legal use of the property. CitySwitch II-A, LLC is leasing the property from Johannes Steffens. A redacted copy of the lease agreement is provided and named ( Kapok Street_Redacted Lease ). GENERAL COMMENTS: [Timothy Finn] 1. Additional comments or stipulations may be forthcoming once a sufficient application has been submitted for review. This correspondence should not be construed as a position of support or non-support for any issues within the petition. Staff will analyze the petition and the recommendation will be contained in the staff report prepared for the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) or Hearing Examiner (Hex). Acknowledged. 2. Please be advised that pursuant to the LDC, an application can be considered closed if there has been no activity on the application for a period of six (6) months. That six months period will be calculated from the date of this letter. Acknowledged. 3. Please ensure that all members of your review team that may testify before the Hex/CCPC and the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) are registered as lobbyists 3.B.f Packet Pg. 252 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) with the county pursuant to the regulations regarding that issue. Acknowledged. 4. When addressing review comments, please provide a cover letter outlining your response to each comment. Include a response to all comments. Acknowledged, all comments have been addressed. 5. Please put revised dates on all exhibits and in the title block of the Site Plan. The PUD document should include a footer that reflects the project name, petition number, date and page X of Y for the entire document. Documents without this information will be rejected. Acknowledged, all revised documents and drawings have dates. 6. A partial resubmittal cannot be accepted; please do not resubmit until you can respond to ALL review comments. Acknowledged. 7. Note the adopted fee schedule requires payment of additional fees for petitions that require more than four resubmittals; please contact the appropriate staff and resolve issues to avoid this fee. Acknowledged. Timothy Finn, AICP Principal Planner Cc: Kendal Lotze, Ignite Wireless, Sally Ashkar 3.B.f Packet Pg. 253 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) VARIANCE PETITIION APPLICATION (PL20190002701) KAPOK STREET, NAPLES, FL 34117 PARCEL ID# 00307840002 RESPONSE TO STAFF COMMENT: TIMOTHY FINN #3 Staff comment: Pursuant to LDC 5.05.09(D)(E) and (F) for shared tower use, please demonstrate that either you can or can not work an arrangement for a shared tower use? Please see the Collier County Communication Towers Map as Towers 1 and 18 are in proximity to the Kapok St Cell Tower property. Moreover, there is an Site Development Plan (SDP) application (PL20200000886) for a proposed cell tower to be located at 550 Frangipani Avenue located approximately 2065 feet to the east of the Kapok St Cell Tower property. Please explain why you can't share this tower? Response: While we would consider any offer for another entity/provider to share the proposed tower on Kapok St., we are not aware of any other towers that would provide necessary and adequate capacity and geographic coverage area to achieve our objectives, and sharing another tower at another location is not a feasible option. To our knowledge, there is no applicable separation requirement with respect to a tower at the Kapok St. location relative to other towers in the vicinity. As to the SDP application (PL20200000886) referenced in the staff comment, which relates to a proposed 185’ tower over 2,000 feet away from the proposed Kapok St. tower, that application was submitted on 7/27/2020, according to the County’s website. The proposed Kapok St. tower is 250’, over 1/3 higher than the tower if the application referenced by staff. While the application for PL20200000886 was submitted on July 27, 2020, in the case of the Kapok St. Tower, a preapplication meeting was first held November 12, 2019. As a result of that meeting, applicant prepared a variance application, and a second pre‐application meeting was held on December 4, 2019 for the variance. At the December 4, 2019 pre‐application meeting, applicant was advised (in error) that the tower use was not allowed by right, and that a conditional use would be required. Following a subsequent application for zoning interpretation, on March 17, 2020, staff formally determined the use was a permitted use at this location, and that a conditional use was not required, but reiterated that a variance would be necessary. Applicant has since filed the variance application that is presently under review. Applicant first formally requested approval requirements for the tower in August 2019 (see ZLTR‐PL20190001999), and has been diligently pursuing approval of the tower since then. Applicant has engaged in sincere, costly, and diligent efforts over the past 11 months. This has included two pre‐application meetings, two ZVL’s, and uncertainty created by erroneous “conditional use” instruction. Given Applicant’s significant efforts, the lack of any codified tower separation requirement, the lack of any record of any tower application being filed until 7/27/2020, and the significant investment incurred to date, it is appropriate for Applicant to move forward with its plans at this location, which have been a matter of public record for almost a year. Concurrent with these efforts, Applicant notified the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) of its plans, and the FAA issued a formal “Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation” on October 23, 2019 for the proposed Kapok St. tower. FAA notification is the industry standard for putting other would‐be tower owners on notice that there is a tower application pending. The tower application referenced by staff (PL20200000886) has not, to our knowledge, registered with or received any such determination from the FAA. Date: 8.4.20203.B.f Packet Pg. 254 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 255 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 256 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 257 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 258 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Digitally signed by Dennis Abel Date: 2020.08.05 08:27:46 -04'00' 3.B.f Packet Pg. 259 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) KAPOK STREET 12906066 NW 1/4, SEC. 15, T-49-S, R-27-E COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA RAWLAND TOWER SURVEYPROJECT NO.19-1586 SMW Engineering Group, Inc.FDH-NC158 Business Center DriveBirmingham, Alabama 35244Ph: 205-252-6985www.smweng.com3.B.f Packet Pg. 260 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) NW 1/4, SEC. 15, T-49-S, R-27-E COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA RAWLAND TOWER SURVEYPROJECT NO.19-1586 SMW Engineering Group, Inc.SECTION OVERVIEW NOT TO SCALE FDH-NC158 Business Center DriveBirmingham, Alabama 35244Ph: 205-252-6985www.smweng.comKAPOK STREET 12906066 3.B.f Packet Pg. 261 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) NW 1/4, SEC. 15, T-49-S, R-27-E COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA RAWLAND TOWER SURVEYPROJECT NO.19-1586 SMW Engineering Group, Inc.PARENT TRACT OVERVIEW NOT TO SCALE FDH-NC158 Business Center DriveBirmingham, Alabama 35244Ph: 205-252-6985www.smweng.com’’ KAPOK STREET 12906066 3.B.f Packet Pg. 262 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Digitally signed by Dennis Abel Date: 2020.08.05 08:28:09 -04'00' 3.B.f Packet Pg. 263 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Digitally signed by Dennis Abel Date: 2020.08.05 08:28:21 -04'00' 3.B.f Packet Pg. 264 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Digitally signed by Dennis Abel Date: 2020.08.05 08:28:34 -04'00' 3.B.f Packet Pg. 265 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Digitally signed by Dennis Abel Date: 2020.08.05 08:28:50 -04'00' 3.B.f Packet Pg. 266 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Digitally signed by Dennis Abel Date: 2020.08.05 08:29:07 -04'00' 3.B.f Packet Pg. 267 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) KAPOK STREET12906066NW 1/4, SEC. 15, T-49-S, R-27-ECOLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDARAWLAND TOWER SURVEY PROJECT NO.19-1586SMW Engineering Group, Inc. FDH-NC158 Business Center Drive Birmingham, Alabama 35244 Ph: 205-252-6985www.smweng.com 3.B.fPacket Pg. 268Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) NW 1/4, SEC. 15, T-49-S, R-27-ECOLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDARAWLAND TOWER SURVEY PROJECT NO.19-1586SMW Engineering Group, Inc.SECTION OVERVIEWNOT TO SCALEFDH-NC158 Business Center Drive Birmingham, Alabama 35244 Ph: 205-252-6985www.smweng.comKAPOK STREET129060663.B.fPacket Pg. 269Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) NW 1/4, SEC. 15, T-49-S, R-27-ECOLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDARAWLAND TOWER SURVEY PROJECT NO.19-1586SMW Engineering Group, Inc.PARENT TRACT OVERVIEWNOT TO SCALEFDH-NC158 Business Center Drive Birmingham, Alabama 35244 Ph: 205-252-6985www.smweng.com ’’KAPOK STREET129060663.B.fPacket Pg. 270Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) June 22, 2020 BROWER ENTERPRISES LLC 5090 Tamarind Ridge Dr Naples, FL 34119 Dear Property Owner: Please be advised that the sender has made a formal application to Collier C ounty for a variance from the requirements of the zoning regulations as they apply to the following described property: [Description: Parcel Number: 00307840002. The E1/2 of the NW1/4 of the SW1/4 of the NE1/4 of the NW1/4 of Section 15, Township 49 S, Range 27 E. in Collier County, Florida. ] It is our intent to ask the County to allow us to receive a variance for the setback distance required for the proposed communication tower on the aforementioned property. Additionally, the proposed tower is separated from surrounding property boundaries in all directions by a distance that far exceeds its certified collapse ar ea (i.e., it meets the lesser of the two distance measurements provided in the LDC, in all directions). However, because the proposed tower does not meet the greater of the two LDC distance measurements with respect to eastern and western boundaries, a variance is necessary. In order to provide you an opportunity to become fully aware of our intention, we will be contacting you directly within the next few days or you may choose to telephone the sender for further information. In any event, please be advi sed that we are interested in assuring you that our request should not adversely affect your property interest. Sincerely, Kendal Lotze, (770) 862-8089 102 Mary Alice Park Rd, Suite 505 Cumming, GA 30040 kendal@ignitewireless.com 3.B.f Packet Pg. 271 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) June 22, 2020 Richard J Smith 380 Frangipani Ave Naples, FL 34117 Dear Property Owner: Please be advised that the sender has made a formal application to Collier C ounty for a variance from the requirements of the zoning regulations as they apply to the following described property: [Description: Parcel Number: 00307840002. The E1/2 of the NW1/4 of the SW1/4 of the NE1/4 of the NW1/4 of Section 15, Township 49 S, Range 27 E. in Collier County, Florida. ] It is our intent to ask the County to allow us to receive a variance for the setback distance required for the proposed communication tower on the aforementioned property. Additionally, the proposed tower is separated from surrounding property boundaries in all directions by a distance that far exceeds its certified collapse ar ea (i.e., it meets the lesser of the two distance measurements provided in the LDC, in all directions). However, because the proposed tower does not meet the greater of the two LDC distance measurements with respect to eastern and western boundaries, a variance is necessary. In order to provide you an opportunity to become fully aware of our intention, we will be contacting you directly within the next few days or you may choose to telephone the sender for further information. In any event, please be advi sed that we are interested in assuring you that our request should not adversely affect your property interest. Sincerely, Kendal Lotze, (770) 862-8089 102 Mary Alice Park Rd, Suite 505 Cumming, GA 30040 kendal@ignitewireless.com 3.B.f Packet Pg. 272 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) June 22, 2020 Johannes Steffens 542 Ethel Ave SE Grand Rapids, MI 49506 Dear Property Owner: Please be advised that the sender has made a formal application to Collier C ounty for a variance from the requirements of the zoning regulations as they apply to the following described property: [Description: Parcel Number: 00307840002. The E1/2 of the NW1/4 of the SW1/4 of the NE1/4 of the NW1/4 of Section 15, Township 49 S, Range 27 E. in Collier County, Florida. ] It is our intent to ask the County to allow us to receive a variance for the setback distance required for the proposed communication tower on the aforementioned property. Additionally, the proposed tower is separated from surrounding property boundaries in all directions by a distance that far exceeds its certified collapse ar ea (i.e., it meets the lesser of the two distance measurements provided in the LDC, in all directions). However, because the proposed tower does not meet the greater of the two LDC distance measurements with respect to eastern and western boundaries, a variance is necessary. In order to provide you an opportunity to become fully aware of our intention, we will be contacting you directly within the next few days or you may choose to telephone the sender for further information. In any event, please be advi sed that we are interested in assuring you that our request should not adversely affect your property interest. Sincerely, Kendal Lotze, (770) 862-8089 102 Mary Alice Park Rd, Suite 505 Cumming, GA 30040 kendal@ignitewireless.com 3.B.f Packet Pg. 273 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) June 22, 2020 ESTES FAM TRUST 18757 Aspesi Dr Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Property Owner: Please be advised that the sender has made a formal application to Collier C ounty for a variance from the requirements of the zoning regulations as they apply to the following described property: [Description: Parcel Number: 00307840002. The E1/2 of the NW1/4 of the SW1/4 of the NE1/4 of the NW1/4 of Section 15, Township 49 S, Range 27 E. in Collier County, Florida. ] It is our intent to ask the County to allow us to receive a variance for the setback distance required for the proposed communication tower on the aforementioned property. Additionally, the proposed tower is separated from surrounding property boundaries in all directions by a distance that far exceeds its certified collapse ar ea (i.e., it meets the lesser of the two distance measurements provided in the LDC, in all directions). However, because the proposed tower does not meet the greater of the two LDC distance measurements with respect to eastern and western boundaries, a variance is necessary. In order to provide you an opportunity to become fully aware of our intention, we will be contacting you directly within the next few days or you may choose to telephone the sender for further information. In any event, please be advi sed that we are interested in assuring you that our request should not adversely affect your property interest. Sincerely, Kendal Lotze, (770) 862-8089 102 Mary Alice Park Rd, Suite 505 Cumming, GA 30040 kendal@ignitewireless.com 3.B.f Packet Pg. 274 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 276 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.fPacket Pg. 278Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.fPacket Pg. 279Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.fPacket Pg. 280Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.fPacket Pg. 281Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.fPacket Pg. 282Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.fPacket Pg. 283Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.fPacket Pg. 284Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 285 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 286 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 287 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 288 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 289 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 290 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) RESCOM Environmental Corp. • P.O. Box 361 • Petoskey, MI 49770 Phone: (231) 409-2563 • Fax: (231) 487-0726 www.rescom.org January 2, 2020 Colleen Carroll Ignite Wireless, Inc 102 Mary Alice Park Road, Suite 505 Cumming, GA 30040 RE: FCC NEPA Summary Report for: Kapok Kapok St. & Frangipani Ave. Naples, Collier County, FL 34117 TCNS ID: 189171 Dear Ms. Carroll, RESCOM Environmental Corp has completed a NEPA Summary Report for the above referenced property. Based on the information presented in this report, the proposed project will have no adverse effect upon any of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Special Interest Items referenced in 47 CFR Subpart 1, Chapter 1, Sections 1.1301-1.1319. FEMA Flood Hazard mapping shows that the area is in a floodplain. All essential equipment must be installed at an elevation of 14 feet amsl in order to proceed without an additional Environmental Assessment. Thank you for the opportunity to provide this service and we look forward to working with you in the future. If you have any questions or comments, please call our office at (231) 409-2563. Sincerely, RESCOM Environmental Corp Andrew Smith Project Manager andrew.smith@rescom.org RESCOM File 19080047 3.B.f Packet Pg. 291 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) TABLE OF CONTENTS Ignite Wireless, Inc FCC NEPA Summary Report Kapok NEPA Summary Checklist ............................................................................................... 1 Project Overview ............................................................................................................. 2 Regulatory Summary ....................................................................................................... 2 Area of Potential Effects .................................................................................................. 2 Historic Research ............................................................................................................ 2 Site Reconnaissance ....................................................................................................... 2 SHPO Consultation ......................................................................................................... 2 Tribal Consultation .......................................................................................................... 3 Wilderness Areas & Wildlife Preserves............................................................................ 3 Threatened & Endangered Species & Critical Habitats .................................................... 3 Designated Floodplains ................................................................................................... 3 Changes to Subsurface Features .................................................................................... 3 Conclusions .................................................................................................................... 4 Attachments A: SHPO Consultation ..................................................................................................... 5 SHPO Response ................................................................................................. 6 SHPO Submission ............................................................................................. 10 Form 620 ........................................................................................................... 12 Archaeology Report ........................................................................................... 40 Public Notice Affidavit ........................................................................................ 71 B: Tribal Consultation .................................................................................................... 72 Tribal Consultation Spreadsheet ........................................................................ 73 Final Responses ................................................................................................ 74 Notice of Organizations ..................................................................................... 94 C: Informal Biological Assessment & Maps ................................................................... 98 Informal Biological Assessment ......................................................................... 99 FEMA Flood Map ............................................................................................. 120 US Federal Lands Map ................................................................................... 121 National Scenic and Historic Trails Map .......................................................... 122 Wilderness Area Map ...................................................................................... 123 US Fish and Wildlife Service Critical Habitat Map ............................................ 124 US Fish and Wildlife Refuge/Reserves Map .................................................... 125 US National Scenic Riverway Map .................................................................. 126 Native American Reservation Map ................................................................... 127 3.B.f Packet Pg. 292 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) NEPA/NHPA SCREENING CHECKLIST Ignite Wireless, Inc FCC NEPA Summary Report Kapok Project Type: ☒ New Antenna Facility ☐ Modification of Existing Facility Site Type: ☒ FCC Tower Structure ☐ Utility Structure ☐ Other Non-Tower Structure Site ID: Kapok Location: Kapok St. & Frangipani Ave. Naples, Collier County, FL 34117 Will the facility be located in an officially designated wilderness area, per 47 CFR §1.1307(a)(1)? Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A ☐ Consulting Agency To Contact: NPS, USFWS & BLM Comments: See attached documentation Will the facility be located in a designated wilderness preserve, per 47 CFR §1.1307(a)(2)? Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A ☐ Consulting Agency To Contact: NPS, USFS & BLM Comments: See attached documentation Will the facility affect listed or proposed threatened or endangered species or designated critical habitats; or jeopardize the continued existence of any proposed endangered or threatened species or likely to result in the destruction or adverse modification of proposed critical habitats, as determined by the Secretary of the Interior pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, per 47 CFR §1.1307(a)(3)? Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A ☐ Consulting Agency To Contact: USFWS & State Equivalent Comments: See attached documentation Will the facility affect districts, sites, buildings, structures, or objects significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, or culture, that are listed, or are eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, per 47 CFR §1.1307(a)(4)? Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A ☐ Consulting Agency To Contact: SHPO, THPO & NHOs Comments: See attached documentation Will the facility affect Indian religious sites, per 47 CFR §1.1307(a)(5)? Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A ☐ Consulting Agency To Contact: THPO, NHOs & Bureau of Indian Affairs Comments: See attached documentation Will the facility be located in a floodplain, per 47 CFR §1.1307(a)(6)? Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A ☐ Consulting Agency To Contact: FEMA Comments: See attached documentation Will the facility involve a significant change in surface features, per 47 CFR §1.1307(a)(7)? Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A ☐ Consulting Agency To Contact: US Army Corps of Engineers Comments: See attached documentation Will the facility be equipped with high intensity white lights in a residential neighborhood, per 47 CFR §1.1307(a)(8)? Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A ☐ Consulting Agency To Contact: Not Applicable Comments: This category was not reviewed by RESCOM Environmental Corporation Facilities that may result in human exposure to radiofrequency radiation in excess of the applicable safety standards specified in 47 CFR §1.1307 (b). Yes ☐ No ☒ N/A ☐ Consulting Agency To Contact: Not Applicable Comments: This category was not reviewed by RESCOM Environmental Corporation Preparer certifies that to the best of their knowledge the above information is accurate Prepared By: Company: RESCOM Environmental (Print name): Andrew Smith Date: January 2, 2020 3.B.f Packet Pg. 293 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) NEPA SUMMARY REVIEW Ignite Wireless, Inc FCC NEPA Summary Report Kapok PROJECT OVERVIEW: RESCOM Environmental completed a NEPA Summary for the above referenced project to determine potential affects to Special Interest Items 1-9 listed in 47 CFR Subpart 1, Chapter 1, Section 1.1307(a). This NEPA Impact Assessment was performed in consideration of 47 CFR Subpart 1, Chapter 1, Sections 1.1301-1.1319 and the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement for the Collocation of Wireless Antennas (NPAC). CitySwitch proposes the construction of a 250’ self-supporting lattice style telecommunications tower within a 100’ x 100’ lease area. REGULATORY SUMMARY: Based on CFR 36, Part 800, Subpart B of the National Historic Preservation Act and the FCC’s NPA, new construction projects are required to be submitted for Section 106 Review to State Historic Preservation Offices and interested Tribal Groups. Additionally, based on 47 CFR Subpart 1, Chapter 1, Section 1.1306 (Note 1), construction of new telecommunications facilities requires a review of impacts to the following Special Interest Items: wilderness areas, wildlife preserves, threatened and endangered species, designated floodplains, and changes to surface features. AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS: Based on the height of the tower and procedures outlined by the NPA, the Area of Potential Effects (APE) for indirect visual effects is a 0.75-mile radius from the tower center. The Visual APE is largely buffered by residential development, mature trees and agricultural development. The APE for direct effects is limited to the subject property and leased areas. HISTORIC RESEARCH: State Historic Preservation Office records were reviewed to determine if any listed or eligible historic resources exist within the APE. Additionally, RESCOM reviewed the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) online database and Google Earth layer to determine if any listed historic resources exist within the APE. RESCOM identified no historic resources within the project APEs that required SHPO evaluation. Historic resource information and photographs are included within the SHPO submission in Attachment A. SITE RECONNAISSANCE: RESCOM Environmental completed a site visit to photograph the subject property, adjacent properties, and any present historic resources within the indirect visual APE. An archaeological survey was conducted as ground disturbing activities are associated with the proposed project and archaeological clearance was recommended (See Attachment A). SHPO CONSULTATION: RESCOM consulted with the Florida State Historic Preservation Office’s (SHPO) to conduct a Section 106 Review for the proposed project. RESCOM provided a cultural resources evaluation report for Section 106 Review to the SHPO on October 24, 2019, requesting concurrence of the “no historic properties” determination. RESCOM received a response from the SHPO on November 22, 2019 indicating concurrence of the determination of “no historic properties.” The SHPO consultation process allows additional consulting parties to comment on impacts to historic resources from federal undertakings. RESCOM consulted with the appropriate jurisdiction officials as well as a local historic preservation entity to seek comment on effects from the undertaking. Letters were mailed to these groups on October 9, 2019, outlining the proposed project and inviting them to comment on the potential for the proposed project to effect historic resources. RESCOM contacted the Naples Daily News and posted a “Public Participation” ad in the paper on September 14, 2019. The proposed project was described in detail and “questions, comments, and correspondence” were solicited from the public regarding potential effect to historic properties. RESCOM did not receive any response from the public concerning historic properties for this project. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 294 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) NEPA SUMMARY REVIEW Ignite Wireless, Inc FCC NEPA Summary Report Kapok Per the NPA, the applicant must allow a period of 30 days for the public and all consulting parties to provide comment on the proposed project. All requirements with respect to SHPO consultation are complete. See Attachment A for full SHPO details. TRIBAL CONSULTATION: RESCOM utilized the Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS) maintained by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to identify any tribal entities with interest in the area of the proposed project. The FCC responded, assigning the project with TCNS number 189171. All tribal groups have either responded indicating no concern with the proposed project, provided an exclusion via TCNS, or been closed out by the FCC. Therefore, all requirements with respect to THPO consultation are complete. All Tribal consultation documentation is in Attachment B. All Tribes do request immediate notification should human remains or objects under NAGPRA become uncovered during construction. WILDERNESS AREAS & WILDLIFE PRESERVES: RESCOM reviewed maps published by the National Forest Service, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and Wilderness.net, and found no Wildlife Preserves, Wilderness Areas, National Grasslands, National Forests, or National Scenic Trails are located at or near the subject property. Additionally, no Wildlife Preserves, Wilderness Areas, National Grasslands, National Forests, or National Scenic Tra ils were noted during the site visit (See Attachment C). THREATENED & ENDANGERED SPECIES & CRITICAL HABITATS: An informal biological assessment was conducted at the subject property to determine if habitats necessary to support listed species or critical habitats exist at the subject property and in the immediate vicinity. The informal biological assessment is based on visual observations of on-site conditions and general habitats as compared to data acquired from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Based on information obtained from the USFWS, habitats necessary to support federally listed threatened and endangered species do not occur at or in the vicinity of the subject property. Therefore, the proposed project could affect any listed threatened or endangered species. In addition, there are no designated critical habitats at or in the vicinity of the subject property (See Attachment C). DESIGNATED FLOODPLAINS: RESCOM reviewed flood insurance maps published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The subject property is within the boundary of a designated floodplain, however, project plans are being developed to ensure all essential equipment will be higher than 14 feet—1 foot above the mapped flood stage of between 12 and 13 feet (See Attachment C). CHANGES TO SURFACE FEATURES: RESCOM reviewed a digitized National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map compiled with data maintained by the USFWS. Based on a review of the NWI map, the proposed project will not fall within a designated wetland. Furthermore, the scope of project does not call for wetland fill, water diversion, or deforestation. Therefore, the proposed project will not cause a significant change in surface features (See Attachment C). 3.B.f Packet Pg. 295 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) NEPA SUMMARY REVIEW Ignite Wireless, Inc FCC NEPA Summary Report Kapok CONCLUSIONS: Based on information provided by the applicant, information acquired by RESCOM Environmental, and the outcome of the SHPO, THPO, and Public consultation processes, RESCOM has determined the proposed project will not adversely affect any of the Special Interest Items 1-9 listed in 47 CFR Subpart 1, Chapter 1, Sections 1.1301-1.1319 and the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement for the Collocation of Wireless Antennas (NPAC). All essential equipment must be installed at an elevation of 14 feet amsl in order to proceed without an additional Environmental Assessment. January 2, 2020 Andrew Smith - Project Manager Date Attachments: A. NEPA Regulatory Checklist B. State Historic Preservation Office Consultations C. Native American Tribal Consultations D. Informal Biological Assessment & Maps 3.B.f Packet Pg. 296 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) ATTACHMENT A – SHPO CONSULTATION Ignite Wireless, Inc FCC NEPA Summary Report Kapok Lead SHPO: Florida State Historic Preservation Office Secondary SHPO (If Applicable): N/A Date of Submission: October 24, 2019 FCC E-106 File Number: 0008846179 RESCOM’s Findings: ☒ No Historic Properties in APE ☐ No Effect to Historic Properties in APE ☐ No Adverse Effect to Historic Properties in APE Date of Response: November 22, 2019 SHPO’S Findings: ☒ No Historic Properties in APE ☐ No Effect to Historic Properties in APE ☐ No Adverse Effect to Historic Properties in APE ☐ Adverse Effect to Historic Properties in APE ☐ Conditional No Adverse Effect: ☐ Other: 3.B.f Packet Pg. 297 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 1 jill.mcdevitt@rescom.org From:Hall, Kristen D. <Kristen.Hall@dos.myflorida.com> Sent:Friday, November 22, 2019 4:13 PM To:jill.mcdevitt@rescom.org Subject:SHPO Review Comments for Kapok TCNS# 189171 SUBJECT: SHPO Section 106 Cell Tower Review DATE: November 22, 2019 DHR Project File No.: 2019-7264 Project Name: Kapok Telecommunications Structure: Cell Tower Site Address: Kapok Street, Naples, Collier County, Florida RESCOM Environmental Corp for CitySwitch Hello, Thank you for submitting the above-referenced project for our review in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the FCC Nationwide Programmatic Agreement. Based on the information provided, our office concurs with the finding of no historic properties in the area of potential direct and visual effects. We have also filed our comments on the FCC 106-E-file system. This email constitutes our official comments for this undertaking. We request that the following special condition regarding inadvertent discoveries be followed: • If prehistoric or historic artifacts, such as pottery or ceramics, projectile points, dugout canoes, metal implements, historic building materials, or any other physical remains that could be associated with Native American, early European, or American settlement are encountered at any time within the project site area, the permitted project shall cease all activities involving subsurface disturbance in the vicinity of the discovery. The applicant shall contact the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources, Compliance Review Section at (850)-245-6333. Project activities shall not resume without verbal and/or written authorization. In the event that unmarked human remains are encountered during permitted activities, all work shall stop immediately and the proper authorities shall be notified in accordance with Section 872.05, Florida Statutes. Our office asks for digital copies of the survey report, Survey Log, and map of the project area, saved as separate PDFs. These may be submitted to our office via email or mail. We ask that future survey report submissions include procedure s to deal with unexpected discoveries (including the discovery of human remains in accordance with Chapter 872.05, Florida Statutes). Please contact me if you have any questions. Best, Kristen Kristen Hall 3.B.f Packet Pg. 298 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 2 Historic Sites Specialist | Bureau of Historic Preservation | Division of Historical Resources | Florida Department of State | 500 South Bronough Street | Tallahassee, Florida 32399 | 850.245.6342 | 1.800.847.7278 | Fax: 850.245.6439 |Kristen.Hall@DOS.MyFlorida.Com | dos.myflorida.com/historical 3.B.f Packet Pg. 299 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 10/30/2019 Section 106 New Filing Submitted- Email ID #4030124 https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/16.7.1-RC/popup.php?wsid=db15eb292fd04ba2bbc02f1f9111308a-2785d1634f717d8d96ae33250b47a3…1/1 Section 106 New Filing Submitted- Email ID #4030124 From:towernotifyinfo@fcc.gov Sent:Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 11:45 am To:section106@rescom.org The following new Section 106 filing has been submitted: File Number: 0008846179 TCNS Number: 189171 Purpose: New Tower Submission Packet Notification Date: 7AM EST 10/24/2019 Applicant: CitySwitch, LLC Consultant: RESCOM Environmental Corp Positive Train Control Filing Subject to Expedited Treatment Under Program Comment: No Site Name: Kapok Site Address: Kapok St & Frangipani Ave Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on a new lattice telecommunications tower, within a 100' x 100' lease area. Proposed project will include ground disturbance. Site Coordinates: 26-12-36.9 N, 81-36-0.7 W City: Naples County: COLLIER State:FL Lead SHPO/THPO: Florida Division of Historical Resources Consultant Contact Information: Name: RESCOM Environmental Corp Title: Architectural Historian PO Box: 361 Address: City: Petoskey State: MI Zip: 49770 Phone: 260-385-6999 Fax: Email: section106@rescom.org NOTICE OF FRAUDULENT USE OF SYSTEM, ABUSE OF PASSWORD AND RELATED MISUSE Use of the Section 106 system is intended to facilitate consultation under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and may contain information that is confidential, privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure under applicable laws. Any person having access to Section 106 information shall use it only for its intended purpose. Appropriate action will be taken with respect to any misuse of the system. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 300 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) PCut on dotted line. Instructions Click-N-Ship® Label Record Electronic Rate Approved #038555749Thank you for shipping with the United States Postal Service! Check the status of your shipment on the USPS Tracking® page at usps.comSHIPTO:1. Each Click-N-Ship® label is unique. Labels are to be used as printed and used only once. DO NOT PHOTO COPY OR ALTER LABEL. 2. Place your label so it does not wrap around the edge of the package. 3. Adhere your label to the package. A self-adhesive label is recommended. If tape or glue is used, DO NOT TAPE OVER BARCODE. Be sure all edges are secure. 4. To mail your package with PC Postage®, you may schedule a Package Pickup online, hand to your letter carrier, take to a Post Office™, or drop in a USPS collection box. 5. Mail your package on the "Ship Date" you selected when creating this label. Priority Mail® Postage: From: To: Print Date:Ship Date:Click-N-Ship® Trans. #: Expected Delivery Date:usps.comUS POSTAGE* Retail Pricing Priority Mail rates apply. There is no fee for USPS Tracking® service on Priority Mail service with use of this electronic rate shipping label. Refunds for unused postage paid labels can be requested online 30 days from the print date. Carrier -- Leave if No ResponseUSPS TRACKING #$7.35500 S BRONOUGH ST # 4DR. TIMOTHY PARSONS9405 5036 9930 0147 0486 81ANDREW SMITH RESCOM PO BOX 5516 FORT WAYNE IN 46895-5516 9405 5036 9930 0147 0486 81 0073 5000 0053 2399PRIORITY MAIL 3-DAY™C0009405 5036 9930 0147 0486 81Mailed from 46895Total:475479934Expected Delivery Date: 10/28/190023TALLAHASSEE FL 32399-0250STATE HIST PRES OFF, ATTN: REVIEW ANDCOMPLIANCE062S000000031010/24/2019USPS TRACKING # : 10/24/2019ANDREW SMITHRESCOMPO BOX 5516FORT WAYNE IN 46895-5516Flat Rate Env10/24/2019 DR. TIMOTHY PARSONS STATE HIST PRES OFF, ATTN: REVIEW AND COMPLIANCE 500 S BRONOUGH ST # 4 TALLAHASSEE FL 32399-0250 $7.35 $7.35 10/28/2019 3.B.f Packet Pg. 301 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) RESCOM Environmental Corp. • P.O. Box 361 • Petoskey, MI 49770 Phone: (231) 409-2563 • Fax: (231) 487-0726 www.rescom.org October 23, 2019 Mr. Timothy Parsons, Ph.D., SHPO Director Division of Historical Resources 500 South Bronough St. R.A. Gray Building, Room 305 Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 Re: Request for Section 106 Review: Kapok Kapok St. & Frangipani Ave. Naples, FL 34117 TCNS#: 189171 Dear Dr. Parsons, RESCOM Environmental Corp is requesting a Section 106 Review for the above referenced project. Enclosed is an FCC Form 620 with attachments summarizing RESCOM’s findings. Based upon the observations documented within Form 620, it is RESCOM’s opinion that the proposed project will not affect any historic properties within the APE. A conclusion of “no historic properties” is recommended and we respectfully request your concurrence. Should you require further information, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (260) 385-6999. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Sincerely, RESCOM Environmental Corp Jill McDevitt Architectural Historian jill.mcdevitt@rescom.org Enclosures cc: RESCOM file 19080047 3.B.f Packet Pg. 302 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) SECTION 106 CONSULTATION Applicant: CitySwitch Project Name/Number: Kapok QUICK REFERENCE Form 620 ................................................................................................................. 1 Information Regarding: Resumes ................................................................................................................. 10 Additional Site Information ....................................................................................... 10 Tribal Consultation .................................................................................................. 11 Local Government Consultation .............................................................................. 11 Public Involvement .................................................................................................. 12 Additional Consulting Parties ................................................................................... 12 Determination of Indirect and Direct APEs .............................................................. 13 Historic Resources in the Indirect Visual APE ......................................................... 14 Historic Resources in the Direct APE ...................................................................... 14 Photographs ............................................................................................................ 15 Maps ....................................................................................................................... 15 Determination of Findings ........................................................................................ 15 Supporting Documentation: Project Drawings ..................................................................................................... 17 Topographic Map .................................................................................................... 18 National Register of Historic Places Google Earth Map ........................................... 19 Florida SHPO Map .................................................................................................. 20 Subject Property Photographs ................................................................................. 21 Local Government Consultation .............................................................................. 27 Additional Consulting Parties Documentation .......................................................... 28 Archaeology Report ................................................................................................. 29 Tribal Consultation Documentation ........................................................................... 50 Resumes – Jill McDevitt and Andrew Smith ............................................................. 57 RESUMES 3.B.f Packet Pg. 303 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 304 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 305 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 306 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 307 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 308 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 6 3.B.f Packet Pg. 309 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 7 3.B.f Packet Pg. 310 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 8 3.B.f Packet Pg. 311 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 9 3.B.f Packet Pg. 312 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) SECTION 106 CONSULTATION Applicant: CitySwitch Project Name/Number: Kapok RESUMES See Attachments for the resumes. ADDITIONAL SITE INFORMATION See Attachments for project drawings. Project Name Kapok Project Address Kapok St & Frangipani Ave, Naples, Collier County, FL 34117 Topographic Map Belle Meade NE, USGS 7.5 Minute Topographical Map. Project Coordinates Latitude: N 26° 12’ 36.9”; Longitude: W 81° 36’ 00.7” UTM Coordinates: Zone: 17, Easting: 440041, Northing: 2899107 Project Description Proposed construction of a 250’ self-supporting lattice style telecommunications tower within a 100’ x 100’ lease area. Access Road Description Access via proposed driveway off of Kapok St. Utility Lines Description Route to nearest power/telco on site. Additional Construction Plans / Impacts None. Impact Statement Minor ground disturbance to install footings and access drive. Present Land Use Existing grass and tree covered parcel. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 313 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) SECTION 106 CONSULTATION Applicant: CitySwitch Project Name/Number: Kapok TRIBAL AND NHO INVOLVEMENT See Attachments for supporting documentation related to Tribal Consultation. RESCOM utilized the Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS) maintained by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to identify any tribal entities with interest in the area of the proposed project. The FCC responded via e-mail on September 6, 2019, indicating the following six tribal groups were forwarded information regarding the location of the proposed project: • Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma • Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida • Muscogee Creek Nation • Seminole Nation of Oklahoma • Thlopthlocco Tribal Town • Seminole Tribe of Florida The FCC assigned this project with TCNS ID: 189171. To date, RESCOM has not received a response from any of the above-mentioned Tribes. RESCOM will refer non-responding tribes to the FCC for final government-to-government consultation. All tribes do request immediate notification should human remains or objects under NAGPRA become uncovered during construction. LOCAL GOVERNMENT See Attachments for supporting documentation related to Local Government Consultation. RESCOM identified Mr. Timothy Finn, Planner for the Collier County Historical Archaeological Preservation Board, as the Certified Local Government contact with jurisdiction in the area of the proposed project. A letter was sent via regular mail on October 9, 2019, outlining the proposed project and inviting comments on the potential for the proposed project to affect sites or structures of historic significance. To date, RESCOM has not received a response from this contact regarding the proposed project. Any future responses will be forwarded to the Florida SHPO. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 314 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) SECTION 106 CONSULTATION Applicant: CitySwitch Project Name/Number: Kapok PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT See Attachments for supporting documentation related to Public Involvement RESCOM contacted the Naples Daily News and placed a public participation legal notice in the paper on September 14, 2019. The public notice read as follows: Notice of Initiation of the Section 106 Process: Public Participation CitySwitch proposes the construction of a lattice style telecommunications tower within a 100’ x 100’ lease area at Kapok St & Frangipani Ave, Naples, Collier County, FL. Members of the public interested in submitting comments on the possible effects on historic properties included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places may send their comments to Andrew Smith, RESCOM Environmental Corp., PO Box 361 Petoskey, MI 49770 or call 260- 385-6999. To date, RESCOM has not received a response from a member of the public regarding the proposed project. Any future responses from members of the public will be forwarded to the Florida SHPO. ADDITIONAL CONSULTING PARTIES See Attachments for supporting documentation related to Additional Consulting Parties. RESCOM identified Ms. Elaine Reed, President & CEO of Naples Historical Society, as an additional consulting party with interest in the area of the proposed project. A letter was sent to this contact via regular mail on October 9, 2019, outlining the proposed project and inviting this contact to comment on the potential for the proposed project to affect sites or structures of historic significance. To date, RESCOM has not received a response from this contact regarding the proposed project. Any future responses will be forwarded to the Florida SHPO. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 315 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) SECTION 106 CONSULTATION Applicant: CitySwitch Project Name/Number: Kapok DETERMINATION OF AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS (APE) APE for DIRECT EFFECTS The DIRECT area of potential effect is defined by the FCC’s Nationwide Programmatic Agreement as being “limited to the area of potential ground disturbance and any property, or any portion thereof that will be physically altered or destroyed by the Undertaking.” Potential Ground Disturbance or Physical Alteration Lease Area Access Easement Utility Easement Misc. Proposed construction of a 250’ self-supporting lattice style telecommunications tower within a 100’ x 100’ lease area. Utilize access via proposed drive off of Kapok St. Utilize existing power and telco sources. None. Based on the project’s scope of work, the APE for Direct Effects is limited to the tower area. An archaeological survey was conducted because ground disturbance will occur. APE for INDIRECT EFFECTS The INDIRECT area of potential effects is defined by the FCC’s Nationwide Programmatic Agreement (NPA) as “the geographic area in which the Undertaking has the potential to introduce visual elements that diminish or alter the setting, including the landscape, where the setting is a character-defining feature of a Historic Property that makes it eligible for listing on the National Register.” Based on the FCC’s NPA, the indirect APE for projects involving telecommunications towers between 200’ and 400’ should be a 0.75-mile radius. Area of Potential Introduction to Visual Elements Direction Distance Geographic Area North 0.75 mile Buffered by residential development and mature trees. East 0.75 mile Buffered by mature trees and agricultural development. South 0.75 mile Buffered by mature trees. West 0.75 mile Buffered by mature trees. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 316 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) SECTION 106 CONSULTATION Applicant: CitySwitch Project Name/Number: Kapok HISTORIC PROPERTIES IDENTIFIED IN THE APE FOR VISUAL EFFECTS See Attachments for supporting documentation related to Historic Resources in the Indirect Visual APE RESCOM consulted the following resources to determine if historic properties exist within the indirect Visual APE which match the categories of historic properties which should be assessed for potential impacts. The categories for consideration are defined by the FCC’s Nationwide Programmatic Agreement as properties which are either: currently listed on, determined eligible for listing on, or certified by the SHPO/THPO as in the process of being nominated for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. AGENCY RESOURCE RESULTS NRHP Online Database – NPS Focus http://nrhp.focus.nps.gov/ None in APE NRHP Google Earth Layer http://nrhp.focus.nps.gov/natreg/docs/Download.html None in APE Florida SHPO Florida Master Site File Search Results Dated August 29, 2019 None in APE Based on the review of the above resources, there are no historic resources located in the APE for Visual Effects that match the categories for requiring assessment of potential impacts. HISTORIC PROPERTIES IDENTIFIED IN THE APE FOR DIRECT EFFECTS See Attachments for supporting documentation related to Historic Resources in the Direct APE. RESCOM consulted the following resources to determine if historic properties exist within the Direct APE which match the categories of historic properties which should be assessed for potential impacts. The categories for consideration are defined by the FCC’s Nationwide Programmatic Agreement as properties which are either: currently listed on, determined eligible for listing on, or certified by the SHPO/THPO as in the process of being nominated for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. AGENCY RESOURCE RESULTS NRHP Online Database – NPS Focus http://nrhp.focus.nps.gov/ None in APE NRHP Google Earth Layer http://nrhp.focus.nps.gov/natreg/docs/Download.html None in APE Florida SHPO Florida Master Site File Search Results Dated August 29, 2019 None in APE Based on RESCOM’s review of the above resources, there are no historic resources located in the APE for Direct Effects which match the categories for requiring assessment of potential impacts. An archaeological survey was conducted because ground disturbance will occur. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 317 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) SECTION 106 CONSULTATION Applicant: CitySwitch Project Name/Number: Kapok PHOTOGRAPHS See Attachments for Photographs. MAPS See Attachments for Maps. DETERMINATION OF FINDINGS Based on the review of SHPO and National Register databases and field reconnaissance performed, there are no historic resources located within the indirect Visual APE. Therefore, the proposed project has no historic properties located within the indirect Visual APE. Based on the review of SHPO and National Register databases and field reconnaissance performed, there are no historic or archaeological resources located within the Direct APE. Therefore, the proposed project has no historic properties located within the Direct APE. Based on the information provided in this report and the attached supporting documentation, RESCOM respectfully requests the Florida SHPO concur with our findings of “no historic properties” in the APE. October 23, 2019 Jill McDevitt – Architectural Historian Date 3.B.f Packet Pg. 318 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) SECTION 106 CONSULTATION Applicant: CitySwitch Project Name/Number: Kapok SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION 3.B.f Packet Pg. 319 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 320 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Copyright (C) 2000, Maptech, Inc. Name: BELLE MEADE NE Date: 8/29/2019 Scale: 1 inch equals 2000 feet 5° W 3.B.f Packet Pg. 321 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) NRHP Map 3.B.f Packet Pg. 322 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 0047 Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community 3.B.f Packet Pg. 323 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOGRAPHS KAPOK Photograph 1 – Subject property, facing north. Photograph 2 – Subject property, facing east. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 324 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOGRAPHS KAPOK Photograph 3 – Subject property, facing south. Photograph 4 – Subject property, facing west. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 325 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOGRAPHS KAPOK Photograph 5 – Adjacent property, facing north. Photograph 6 – Adjacent property, facing northeast. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 326 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOGRAPHS KAPOK Photograph 7 – Adjacent property, facing east. Photograph 8 – Adjacent property, facing southeast. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 327 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOGRAPHS KAPOK Photograph 9 – Adjacent property, facing south. Photograph 10 – Adjacent property, facing southwest. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 328 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOGRAPHS KAPOK Photograph 11 – Adjacent property, facing west. Photograph 12 – Adjacent property, facing northwest. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 329 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) RESCOM Environmental Corp. • P.O. Box 361 • Petoskey, MI 49770 Phone: (260) 385-6999 • Fax: (231) 487-0726 www.rescom.org October 9, 2019 Mr. Timothy Finn Planner Historic Archaeological Preservation Boa 2800 North Horseshoe Drive North Naples, FL 34104 RE: Section 106 Invitation per the National Historic Preservation Act and the National Environmental Policy Act to the Certified Local Government: Kapok Kapok St. & Frangipani Ave. Naples, FL 34117 Dear Mr. Finn, CitySwitch is proposing a telecommunications project at the above address. Please consider this correspondence an invitation to comment on the possible effects the proposed project may have on sites or structures of historic significance. This correspondence is not an attempt to satisfy the local zoning requirements. Enclosed for your review is a copy of a USGS 7.5-Minute topographic map, property photographs, site sketch and a table of information regarding the proposed project. As part of our research, RESCOM will submit the proposed project for Section 106 review per the National Historic Preservation Act and the National Environmental Policy Act to the State Historic Preservation Office. In addition, a public notification was placed in the local newspaper to solicit “questions, comments, and correspondences” from the public regarding the proposed project. Should you require further information, please do not hesitate to contact our office or contact me directly at (260) 385-6999. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Sincerely, RESCOM Environmental Corp Jamie Cochran-Smith Archaeologist/Historian jamie.cochran-smith@rescom.org Enclosure cc: RESCOM file 19080047 3.B.f Packet Pg. 330 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) RESCOM Environmental Corp. • P.O. Box 361 • Petoskey, MI 49770 Phone: (260) 385-6999 • Fax: (231) 487-0726 www.rescom.org October 9, 2019 Ms. Elaine Reed, President & CEO Naples Historical Society P.O. Box 201 Naples, FL 34106 RE: Section 106 Invitation per the National Historic Preservation Act and the National Environmental Policy Act to the Local Historical Society: Kapok Kapok St. & Frangipani Ave. Naples, FL 34117 Dear Ms. Reed, CitySwitch is proposing a telecommunications project at the above address. Please consider this correspondence an invitation to comment on the possible effects the proposed project may have on sites or structures of historic significance. This correspondence is not an attempt to satisfy the local zoning requirements. Enclosed for your review is a copy of a USGS 7.5-Minute topographic map, property photographs, site sketch and a table of information regarding the proposed project. As part of our research, RESCOM will submit the proposed project for Section 106 review per the National Historic Preservation Act and the National Environmental Policy Act to the State Historic Preservation Office. In addition, a public notification was placed in the local newspaper to solicit “questions, comments, and correspondences” from the public regarding the proposed project. Should you require further information, please do not hesitate to contact our office or contact me directly at (260) 385-6999. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Sincerely, RESCOM Environmental Corp Jamie Cochran-Smith Archaeologist/Historian jamie.cochran-smith@rescom.org Enclosure cc: RESCOM file 19080047 3.B.f Packet Pg. 331 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) RESCOM Environmental Corp. • PO Box 361 • Petoskey, MI 49770 Phone: (231) 409-2563 • Fax: (231) 487-0726 www.rescom.org ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORDS CHECK & PHASE IA ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE FOR THE PROPOSED KAPOK TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER SITE IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. October 3, 2019 PREPARED FOR: Ignite Wireless, Inc. 102 Mary Alice Park Road. STE 505 Cumming, GA 30040 PREPARED BY: Eric Sanchez RESCOM Environmental Corp. P.O. Box 361 Petoskey, Michigan 49770 (231) 409-2563 RESCOM ID: 19080047 __________________________________ Andrew M. Smith, M.A. Principal Investigator 3.B.f Packet Pg. 332 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 1 INTRODUCTION In response to a request from Ignite Wireless, Inc., RESCOM Environmental Corp., has completed a Phase Ia archaeological reconnaissance and records check for a proposed telecommunications tower site in Collier County, Florida (Figure 1). The project is located approximately 12-miles northeast of Naples, Florida at 26°12'36.9"N 81°36'00.7"W in the NE ¼ of the NW ¼ of Section 15, Township 49 S, Range 27 E, as seen on the as seen on the USGS 7.5' Belle Meade NE, FL, topographical quadrangle (Figure 2). The project area consists of a wooded and natural grass covered location and measures 100-ft by 100-ft for a proposed telecommunications tower site with a 351-ft by 30-ft access road to the north; approximately 0.50-acre in total (Figure 3). RESCOM conducted an archaeological records check via the Florida Master Site File and no archaeological sites overlapping the project area. Fieldwork was conducted on September 25, 2019 by Jamie Cochran-Smith M.A., Ball State University 2011 and Andrew Smith M.A., Ball State University 2010, Principal Investigator and Secretary of Interior qualified professional archaeologist, and required 4 hours of fieldwork. This report details the results of the records check and Phase Ia field reconnaissance and presents the conclusions and recommendations of RESCOM concerning any additional archaeological investigations. Figure 1. Location of Collier County within Florida. - Collier County 3.B.f Packet Pg. 333 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 2 Figure 2. Location of the project area on the 7.5’ USGS Belle Meade NE, FL, topographic quadrangle. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 334 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3 Figure 3. Aerial photograph showing the project area and proposed work. NATURAL SETTING The project area is located in the southwest portion of the state and lies within the Floridian Section of the Coastal Plain province of the Atlantic Plain Physiographic Region (United States Geological Survey 2008). The landscape in this portion of the state also referred to as the Big Cypress region is primarily flat with elevation ranging from 5- ft to 30-ft. soils are typically poorly drained overlaying limestone, sandstones, and marls. Vegetation in the area consists of open scrub cypress, prairie grassland, pine flatwoods, and wetlands (Brooks 1981, Griffith et al 1997). Soil within the project area consist of Riviera fine sand, limestone substratum, 0 to 2 percent slopes (Web Soil Survey; accessed September 17, 2019). The Riviera Series consists of very deep, poorly drained, very slowly permeable soils formed in stratified sandy and loamy marine sediments. Riviera fine sands are generally located on broad, low flats, flatwoods and in depressions in Southern Florida Lowlands (USDA 2014). Prior to Euroamerican settlement the area was primarily covered in prairies and flatwoods, and though portions remain that way, particularly within the Big Cypress National Preserve, large areas have been cleared for development. Many aquatic as well as mammalian species would have been available throughout the prehistoric period. These species would have been representative of the mixed regional fauna and could have included any of the following: black bear, eastern cottontail, woodchuck, gray squirrel, fox squirrel, southern flying squirrel, beaver, raccoon, white-tailed deer, coyote, dog, grey fox, red fox, turkey, salamander, soft shelled turtle, common musk turtle, elegant slider turtle, garter snake, blue catfish, flathead, and several mussel species (Howell 1915). N Project Area 3.B.f Packet Pg. 335 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 4 Given the environmental conditions of the project area and surrounding region, there is the potential for the project area to contain previously unrecognized archaeological sites. The following sections describe previous research conducted in and near the project area and provide a general background of regional prehistory. CULTURAL HISTORY Florida’s history is long and complex, extending back at least 10,500 years and possibly further. Among the many people who have shaped its past are historic tribes as well as groups with and without historic tribal connections, including prehistoric groups, European explorers and settlers, and others. Florida’s prehistory conforms well to what is generally known about the prehistory of much of the southeastern US with major cultural stages that include Paleo-Indian, Archaic, Woodland, Mississippian, Protohistoric, and Historic periods. For the purposes of this report, chronological sequences have been adapted from Bense (1994). Paleoindian Period (~30,000-11,500 BP) The Paleoindian period represents the earliest known occupation of North America by Native Americans. Paleoindian groups rapidly dispersed across a wide range of environments (Surovell 2000). These populations settled a dynamic landscape undergoing rapid climatic and environmental changes, which led to the retreat of the continental ice sheets northwards and increasing summer isolation (Haynes 1982; Shane 1994). It is generally thought that early Paleoindian groups were highly mobile, widely scattered, lightly equipped opportunists that lived in small, egalitarian bands (Drago 1976: 9; Fitting 1975: 38; Mason 1981: 82; Wright 1995: 50). They moved on a seasonal basis to more fully exploit a wide range of animal and plant resources while also in pursuit of large herd animals. Although subject to increasing scrutiny, the Clovis period is regarded by most archaeologists as the earliest, or at least one of the earliest, known occupation(s) of the North American continent by Native Americans. The original Clovis hypothesis posited that groups of hunter-gatherers followed the Bering Land Bridge into North America roughly 11,500-12,000 years ago and rapidly dispersed across the mid-continent. Their degree or magnitude of mobility is shown by the fact that fluted points (Clovis, Folsom, and others) have been discovered hundreds of kilometers from where the raw materials were procured and where they were supposedly manufactured (Tankersley 1990, 1994; Tankersley et al. 1990). One of the key problems with the Clovis hypothesis, however, stems from a dearth of evidence for Clovis occupation in those same regions where researchers would expect to see evidence of Clovis culture arise first and more fully (Dillehay 2000; Dixon 1999). This has led most archaeologists to consider other modes of mobility and regard the peopling of North America as complex and multidirectional. Even so, most arguments against pre-Clovis occupation place into question the reliability and consistency of radiometric dates, note the lack of a clear, widespread pre-Clovis stratigraphy and related material culture, and the cite the lack of corroborating data from other, interdisciplinary 3.B.f Packet Pg. 336 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 5 studies (Hofman 1989: 26). Currently, there is no evidence for possible pre-Clovis occupations in Florida. Clovis Complexes/Early Paleoindian (ca. 11,500-11,000 BP) Paleoindian settlement-subsistence strategies responded to environmental changes that characterize the Late Pleistocene. Although Paleoindian settlement patterns are poorly understood, Tankersley (1994:11) argues that such patterns shifted from landforms with relatively low relief and open habitats to landforms characterized by more rugged terrain and closed habitats. He has proposed an Early Paleoindian specialized hunter settlement model based on the recognition of big game-related and lithic procurement-related activities. Specifically, Early Paleoindian sites appear restricted to areas that attracted and concentrated large migrating herd mammals, which included shallow river crossings, kettle lakes, saline springs, marshes, sinkhole ponds, and sandy terraces of major streams that created open vegetation patches. Also, they may be concentrated along overlooks (e.g., crests of moraines) of riverine (aquatic and wetland) habitats and in proximity to lithic outcrops (i.e., in the glaciated regions, lithic resources occur primarily in various unconsolidated secondary deposits). It is generally thought that Early Paleoindian groups were highly mobile (nomadic), widely scattered, lightly equipped opportunists that lived in small egalitarian bands (Dragoo 1976:9; Fitting 1975:38; Mason 1981:82; Wright 1995:50). They moved on a seasonal basis to more fully exploit a wide range of animal and plant resources while also in pursuit of large herd animals like mammoth and bison (Fagan 1991: 77; O’Brien and Wood 1998: 34-35, 39). Their degree or magnitude of mobility is shown by the fact that fluted projectile points (Clovis, Folsom, Dalton, and others) have been discovered hundreds of kilometers from where the raw chert materials were procured and where they were supposedly manufactured (Tankersley 1990, 1994; Tankersley et al. 1990). In Florida, the majority of Paleoindian points have been recovered along eroded deposits with little or no provenience data available (White 2002: 12). The specialized hunting of large migratory herbivore prey required a small, efficient toolkit consisting of bifacial and flake knives, a variety of scrapers, gravers, burin-like tools including wedges, spoke-shaves, drills, hammerstones, billets (made of antler, bone, ivory, or wood), blades struck from specially prepared polyhedral chert cores, and fluted projectile points that could easily penetrate thick, tough animal hides (Mason 1981:86; Tankersley 1990:9, 1994:96). During the time period of 11,000-10,000 BP, the eastern U.S. experienced a climatic shift from frigid, boreal-like forests to warmer, deciduous forests. This gradual shift to a warmer, wetter climate coincides with evidence of the earliest occupation of the Piedmont Plateau in Florida, particularly near the Fall Line, though full occupation does not arise until the Late Paleoindian period. Subsistence patterns remained focused on large mammals during the Late to Middle Paleoindian transition, which is clearly reflected by the continued persistence of utilitarian chipped stone tool technologies. Paleoindian components and sites in Florida are far more common than in other portions of the American southeast. Some of the most notable sites in Florida from the Middle to Late Paleoindian or Paleo-Archaic transitional periods in Florida include the Page-Ladson site in northwestern Florida (Dunbar 2014), the Vero Man site near Vero 3.B.f Packet Pg. 337 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 6 Beach (Viegas 2011), the Devil’s Den site near Williston, the Melbourne site along Crane Creek, and the Warm Mineral Springs site near North Port (Purdy 2008), among others. No large kill sites have been identified in the state, though some isolated point finds may be interpreted as individual kill sites (Anderson et al. 1996: 61). Middle Paleoindian (ca. 11,000-10,500 BP) During the Middle Paleoindian period, the people inhabiting Florida began to settle in, particularly in places where food was abundant. Our understanding of these later Paleo- Indian cultures is, unfortunately, largely incomplete. A shift toward smaller, fluted points and unfluted lanceolates is evident from sites throughout the southeast, which likely indicates a shift in subsistence patterns as large game animals became increasingly scarce and people began to rely on smaller game. Paleoindian social structure appeared to be uniformly egalitarian. There is no evidence of social stratification found in the few burials that date to this period in the southeast. Ritual or ceremonial evidence from this period is even more scant and therefor difficult to interpret. Late Paleoindian (10,500-10,000 BP) The Late Paleoindian period is characterized by very gradual cultural change coinciding with the terminal period of the Pleistocene and the transition to a warmer, wetter Holocene climate and the start of the Archaic period around 8,000 BP. Earlier Clovis points were gradually displaced by the Beaver Lake, Mariana, and Cumberland points, and Hardaway lanceolates in Florida and denote the Paleoindian-Archaic transition. This change probably also reflects a shift in subsistence from mammoth and other mega-fauna, which at that point were nearly extinct, to hunting deer, and other mid-sized mammals exclusively. Dalton points also appear during the Late Paleoindian period, but their distribution, while exhibiting some variation regionally, encompasses nearly the entirety of the eastern half of the United States. Environmental changes more in-line with modern conditions seem to have brought about changes in mobility. Occupations during this late period are characterized by small, short-term camps and “disposable” or “expedient” tool kits, generally fashioned out of broken points and reflect systems increasingly adapted to foraging (Binford 1980). The location and exploitation of lithic and other natural resources likely played an important role in Paleoindian people’s decisions about where to establish occupations and mobility between these sites. An increasing reliance on local resources established a pattern of seasonal use and mobility that is clearly reflected in the Archaic period. Early Archaic Period (10,000-8000 BP) The Archaic period in Florida marks a subtle but increasingly obvious departure from the past and is largely associated with increasing sedentism, population size, and social complexity. It is also characterized by new and diverse lithic technologies and subsistence practices. Point types like Taylor, Bolen, Eva, Hardin and Palmer come into production, indicating new approaches to fastening and using these tools and weapons as evidenced by their notching. The introduction of the atlatl and dart certainly indicate 3.B.f Packet Pg. 338 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 7 changes in hunting methods and prey. With the extinction of mega-fauna, smaller game like deer, birds, fish, turtles, and squirrels become dietary staples during the Early Archaic period, necessitating these smaller projectile points and darts. There is also a marked increase in the number of plant food processing during this period, as well as the additional exploitation of coastal resources. O’Steen’s research (1983: 68-69, 99) demonstrates that Early Archaic site density near the Ocmulgee river was highest in areas of greatest resource density and diversity, further promoting the link between populations and resources. Social changes followed on the heels of these wide-ranging climatic changes and new resource procurement strategies. The size and membership of groups may have fluctuated significantly during this period of intense ecological change, depending on seasonality and other factors. Bands of hunters-gatherers lived throughout Florida, following resources as they became available or were used up. The Russell Cave site in northern Alabama is an example of such an Archaic period, seasonally occupied campsite (White 2002: 26-28). The stabilization of the climate made for optimal conditions for the expansion of coastal ecosystems, which led to increased exploitation (and reliance upon) these resources. As Anderson and Hanson (1988) have noted, large drainage systems may have served subsistence/resource needs, while social interaction (ceremonial, formal and informal exchange, mating, etc.) may have operated along and across watershed boundaries. These findings paint a picture of incredible human (and non-human) interaction on a dynamic landscape. Middle Archaic Period (8000-5000 BP) The Middle Archaic coincides with the apogee of the Altithermal, or Climactic Optimum, which brought severe drought to most of the Central US and led to warmer, drier conditions in the Southeast. Forests in Florida shifted toward pine and away from oak and hickory, with those latter varieties receding farther north into the Piedmont Plateau area. Native Americans in Florida started producing stemmed points, including Morrow Mountain, Guilford, Benton, Putnam, Smith, and Stone square-stemmed points (White 2002: 28). Flake tools are common, as are ground stone tools (probably for plant processing). It appears, based primarily on lithic evidence, that Middle Archaic people became more settled than their Early Archaic predecessors, perhaps a result of reduced territorial movement. Stone tools become increasingly made from local materials, suggesting a preference for nearby resources. Likewise, subsistence strategies tended to favor hunting, gathering, and foraging of local resources. Despite the increase in sedentism during this period, there are no known evidence for long-term habitation in Florida during the Middle Archaic. Late Archaic Period (5000-3000 BP) The extreme conditions of the Altithermal began to diminish around 3500 BP, leading to widespread and often significant developments throughout the Southeastern US. As wildlife population became more robust within the previously parched landscape, groups adopted broad-spectrum hunting, gathering, and collecting. Around the same time, the character of prehistoric communities in the eastern US begin to change. Populations 3.B.f Packet Pg. 339 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 8 become larger and trading became increasingly prevalent, notably in conjunction with the rise of Poverty Point in northeast Louisiana. Groups in the Southeastern US would seem to have started becoming even more seasonally sedentary as evidenced by a more intensive use of local, seasonal resources and the extensive reuse of earth ovens and cooking pits (Wyckoff and Brooks 1983: 15) even as riverine trade and a taste for exotic goods, perhaps facilitated by trade with Poverty Point peoples, was growing. Subsistence practices largely continued as they had from the Middle Archaic, with diversified medium and small game hunting as well as reliance on riverine and coastal resources and plant foods, squash, beans, and nuts. The decline of Poverty Point (~ 3100 BP) was probably felt in Florida, especially in the western part of the state, in the form of diminished trade, as exchange networks that had been built up throughout the eastern US diminished with the site’s abandonment. Artifacts associated with this period include large stone knives, darts, spear points with stemmed hafts, soapstone bowls and cooking slabs, atlatl weights, metates, and stone drills. Stemmed points (Stanley, Morrow Mountain, Guilford, Savannah River) replaced notched varieties, and cultural patterns between the Piedmont region and the Coastal Plain began to diverge. Late Archaic assemblages in Florida include Horr’s Island at the southern-most tip, Norwood along the Gulf Coast, and Mount-Taylor-Orange along the Atlantic Coast. The earliest evidence for long-term habitation appears during this period as well, in the form of oval-pit houses and larger wattle and daub structures. The dead were cremated and/or buried, though, as in previous periods, there is no indication of social stratification or status evidenced through burials. Shell rings (or shell middens) were a novel development among people living on coastal settlements during the Late Archaic, which were built up over the span of generations. These rings are usually formed from deposits of shell, bone, soil, and artifacts, which, in some instances, were over ten feet thick. While there is much debate over what these rings represent, there is at least moderate consensus among archaeologists that they were, minimally, places of daily habitation (Thompson and Andrus 2011: 315; Thompson and Turch 2009: 268). Another novel development in Florida is the production and/or exchange of pottery (Anderson 1995: 160). Pottery from this area is the oldest known example of prehistoric pottery in the United States. Early Woodland (3000-2000 BP) The Woodland period is generally associated with the fluorescence of pottery, agriculture, and social stratification. Early Woodland peoples in Florida appear to have continued with life as they had in the Late Archaic. House patterns remained circular, generally arranged around a plaza. Subsistence was still largely based on small to medium-sized game and foraging/gathering, though evidence for early horticulture dates to this period. Some traditions were modified, such as ceramic bowls that were made with new tempers and occasionally decorated with fabric impressions or grooved patterns and designs. Projectile points like Big Sandy, Bolen, Neuberger, Wade, and Stanley types replace older Late Archaic types. Other facets of cultural life in the Woodland period appear to be completely new. Most notably, burials appear to have been accompanied by greater ceremonialism and, increasingly, the period witnesses the development of clearly elite burials accompanied by ceramics and other goods. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 340 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 9 Shell ring sites, which flourished during the Late Archaic, were abandoned in the Early Woodland, likely due to rise in sea level and flooding events. In the eastern US, the Woodland period is associated with the rise of the Hopewell Interaction Sphere. The Hopewell phenomenon is known from data collected primarily from the lower Illinois River valley and the Scioto and central Ohio River valleys of southern Ohio. The trends of the preceding time periods continue with increasing sedentism, population growth, horticultural intensification, and investment in mortuary ceremonialism involving stone- lined mound construction and a diverse assemblage of exotic ceremonial artifacts (Brose and Greber 1979). The Hopewell Interaction Sphere was vast, stretching from what is modern day Ontario, Canada to the Gulf Coast of Texas. To the West, Hopewell reached as far as eastern Kansas. Evidence of Hopewell influence is fairly abundant in Northern Florida. A more significant influence in the southern part of the state is the Pre-Glades culture. The Gulf Deptford phase along the Gulf Coast of Florida dates to the Early Woodland. Older yet is the Norwood phase along the same region as the Gulf Deptford. The St John’s Phase was located along the Atlantic Coast. Middle Woodland (2000-1600 BP) The Glades culture was the dominant cultural presence throughout southern Florida. Glades culture is a continuation of earlier Pre-Glade cultures, and its material culture is characterized pottery tempered with sand, grit, and grog and designed made using cords, fabric, and brushing (Bense 1994: 137-140). Lithics within the Carolinas and Tennessee show a shift from small, square-stemmed stone points to triangular, concave base points. Lithics within Florida remained stemmed triangular-blade points along with the Flint Creek types Mound building (including burial mounds) is also common to Swift Creek and other peoples in Florida and throughout the Southeast, much more so in Middle-Late Woodland and later Mississippian periods than in previous Archaic sub-periods (Dumas 2015). Other parts of the state exhibit different cultural spheres. Swift Creek culture dominated in northern-most Florida. In the Atlantic coastal region, the Middle Woodland is synonymous with St. Johns Ia culture, while Manasota culture characterized the Gulf Coast. Santa Rosa Swift Creek Culture could be found in the far western portion of the state. In each of these areas, Hopewell culture influenced both the structure of local communities, their burial practices, and even their investments in horticulture. Hopewell influence was pervasive and lasted well into the Late Woodland period. Late Woodland (1600-1200 BP) Populations (and settlements) grow significantly during the Late Woodland period and bow and arrow technology gains dominance over earlier atlatl technology—though it does not completely displace it until well into the Late Woodland. A number of cultural complexes arise in Florida at this time, including Glades in the southern part of the state, St John’s II along the Atlantic Coast, and Weeden Island along the Gulf Coast and into the eastern portion of the state (Bense 1994: 162-181). 3.B.f Packet Pg. 341 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 10 Projectile points from this period reflect the transition to bow-and-arrow and are correspondingly thinner and smaller. Common point types include Broward stemmed and expanding stemmed types, Cooley contracting stem, Duval sub-types, Florida Copena Triangular types, and Yadkin and Leon types. A growing reliance on domesticated plant foods and horticulture does not displace hunting and fishing for food, but it does set the stage for Early Mississippian agriculture and a new social order that develops with and from it. Late Prehistoric/Mississippian Period (1200-400 BP) In the Eastern US, this period is described broadly as the Mississippian, and certain developments in Florida reflect local manifestations of Mississippian influence as well as resistance to that influence. The Mississippian Period is distinguished by the rise of chiefdom-level social organization in the mid-continent. These “emergent” Mississippian polities tended toward a highly integrated site-size hierarchy and ranked societies integrated into a complex socio-religious order and trade/surplus networks fueled by farming and surplus (Pauketat 2009). This period witnessed the revitalization and extension of vast trade networks of “exotic” goods vis-à-vis Cahokia, the largest and most influential of the Mississippian polities. Trade and migration extended to and from Oneota populations to the north and South and West into Caddo territories; Southeast into Gulf Coast Plaquemine, and Appalachian lands and East into Fort Ancient communities- a vast area known as the Southeastern Ceremonial Complex. Lithic production became increasingly specialized, crafted for optimum effect in hunting and warfare as evidenced by a vast range of small, triangular notched points and Ramey knives. To some extent, activities in Florida can be understood as local adaptations and change within a wider context of influence form the Cahokia polity. Early Mississippian cultural phases in the state include St John’s III culture along the Atlantic coast, Glades culture in far south Florida, Late Caloosa-Hatchee along the southern portion of the Gulf Coast, Safety Harbor along the remainder of the Gulf Coast, Cades Pond in central Florida, and Fort Walton in the eastern-most portion of the state. The earliest signs of a chiefdom in Florida are found on the Atlantic coast around 1150-1200 A.D, evidenced by small settlements with plazas and platform and burial mounds. Palisades and ditches are also found at sites in Florida’s interior, reflecting the need for security during a time of heightened warfare and competition for political dominance. Extensive trade networks brought exotic materials to Florida, and artistic traditions seemed to develop to a previously unknown level throughout the Mississippian world as a result. Projectile points, including ceremonial points that were highly decorative or made of exotic or delicate material, are found throughout the Eastern US, as are elaborately carved gorgets, pottery, pipes, and beads. Some objects, like beads, celts, and ornaments were fashioned from raw copper acquired through mining or trade. These items frequently served ritual or ceremonial purposes, and Native peoples throughout the Southeast frequently interred these goods in elite burials. Taken together, archaeologists regard these items and social developments of evidence of the Southeastern Ceremonial Complex (King 2018). Diagnostic projectile points for this period include Fort Ancient triangular blades and points, Jackson side-notched points, Madison and Mississippi triangular points, and Mouse Creek points. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 342 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 11 Locally, the Middle Mississippian phases are represented in Florida by the St John’s IIb Culture along the Atlantic Coast, Glades III culture in the far south, Caloosa-Hatchee III culture along the southern portion of the Gulf Coast, Late Safety Harbor culture along the remainder of the Gulf Coast, Alachua culture in the central portion of the state, and Fort Walton culture in the far western portion of the state. Late Mississippian cultural complexes include the St, John’s IIb culture along the Atlantic Coast, the Glades III culture in the far south, the Caloosa-Hatchee IV culture along the southern portion of the gulf coast, the Late Safety Harbor culture along the remainder of the Gulf Coast, the Lamar culture in the north of the state, and the Fort Walton culture in the far eastern portion of the state. Protohistoric Period (1513 A.D. – 1670 A.D.) By A.D. 1400, Cahokia and other Mississippian centers in the Eastern US began to falter. Overpopulation and internal political strife and instability coincided with soil erosion and depletion of nutrients in the soil from over-farming. The complex trade networks that had been developed were abandoned, and the power of elites increasingly depended on limited commodities rather than surplus. Evidence from burials in this period suggests chronic, deadly warfare in much of the eastern US. A combination of ecological pressures and upheavals within the alliance that linked them appears to have doomed Cahokia and other Mississippian centers. The vacuum created by Cahokia’s downfall presented new opportunities for some communities, and new centers rise up in Montreal, Fort Orange/Albany, Charleston, and elsewhere, permanently altering the patterns of exchange in eastern North America. The riverine trade system that had developed in the interior continent during the Mississippian gave way to one where goods arrived from and were directed to the Atlantic coast and, with the arrival of the first European explorers, Europe (Salisbury 1996: 449). Eventually, the Middle Mississippian economy turned away from maize surplus and toward trade in slaves, hides, beads, and, with the arrival of the very first Europeans, guns. (Beck 2013). When the first Europeans reached North America1, the continent's demographic and political map was in a state of profound flux, owed in no small part to the decline of Mississippian chiefdoms (Salisbury 1996: 449). The accounts of early Spanish chroniclers paint a picture of a mound building culture on the wane. Scarce accounts from the Ponce de Leon expedition describe pockets of plenty, communities surviving, even flourishing, against a larger background of warfare and illness (some of it brought on by Europeans), and food scarcity. Historic Period (1670-Present) European colonizers brought with them numerous tactical advantages, most notably guns and epidemic diseases (and their own immunity to them), that utterly devastated Indian 1 The earliest chronicles of Europeans in Florida come from the Juan Ponce de Leon expedition, which first reached the shores of present-day east Florida on April 3, 1513. The Ponce de Leon expedition had a profound and largely negative effect on Native communities in the southeast, and effect that would grow only worse with the arrival of European settlers. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 343 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 12 communities. They also brought ideological, economic, political, and military systems organized, in part, for the possession of Indian lands and the subordination of Indian peoples. By the mid-eighteenth century, the rapid expansion of English colonies (and imposition of British colonial laws) had replaced older traditions of exchange and alliance linking natives and colonizers nearly everywhere east of the Appalachians, driving many Indians West and forcing them into a scattering of politically powerless enclaves (Salisbury 1996: 458). The years leading up to and following the Revolutionary War were tumultuous for Native Americans, whose tribal leaders had, through a series of treaties and intertribal negotiations and conflict, largely (though not entirely) pledged neutrality during the war. Nevertheless, one of the first acts of the newly established Congress, was the creation of three departments of Indian Affairs. These departments were created to deal with what was already arising as the “Indian problem” in the purview of the newly established government of the United States of America, which included real and perceived interference with Colonial commerce, culture, and plans for westward expansion. The establishment of Arkansas Territory in 1819 included most of present-day Oklahoma until the Arkansas border was established in 1824 and then again in 1828 following objections from Choctaws and Cherokees. From 1824 onward, Native Americans were subject to the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, newly established as a division of the War Department. That same year, the Sac and Fox Nation and the Ioway Nations of Indians ceded their traditional lands in Missouri (7 Stat., 229. Proclamation, Jan. 18,1825: 207; 7 Stat 231. Proclamation Jan. 18, 1825). In the southern US, tribes had been nearly decimated by war with the federal government and with other tribes, leading tribes like the Creek, Choctaw, Chickasaw, and others to give up their lands in surrender hoping to keep at least a portion of it. The Indian Intercourse Act of 1834 established the legal boundaries of “Indian Country,” (and eventually “Indian Territory”), which included modern-day Oklahoma, Arkansas, Kansas, Nebraska, and part of Iowa. The reservation ideology and subsequent system of land tenure and allotment and economic exploitation had developed over time, the wheels of which had been in motion since as early as 1790. Violence against Native peoples continued, politically (at both the federal and state levels), economically, and interpersonally, as pressure mounted to push Native peoples off dwindling Native lands. The response of Native peoples varied, some seeking peaceful relations with Europeans, others looking to leverage the instability fomented by European tactics, while others retaliated. Indian removal to the west had been part of American policy since the Articles of Confederation, but the 1830 Indian Removal Act marked a change from voluntary relocation, the Jeffersonian Ideal earlier in the century, into one of forced removal, or the Jacksonian Ideal (Chapman 1965, Washburn 1975). The Five Civilized Tribes purchased new lands in present-day Oklahoma, but some relocated farther north. All remaining Native peoples were forcefully removed that same year and relocated to reservations under the 1830 Act. The forced relocation of Native Americans to Indian Territory, marked by resistance, setbacks, dislocation, and incredible suffering and death, took decades to accomplish. The path of removal, which brought Native peoples from the eastern and southeastern US to Indian Territory, is known as The Trail of Tears (1830-~1850) (Foreman 1934; Bailey 1972). The conditions, consequences, and routes of removal to (or establishment within) Indian Territory and the 3.B.f Packet Pg. 344 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 13 ceding of lands varied greatly from tribe to tribe. In Florida, this forced removal was largely marked by the three Seminole Wars, occurring from approximately 1817-1818, 1835-1842, and 1855-1858 resulting in great numbers of deaths and forced relocation of the Seminole people. It is estimated that only a few hundred Seminoles remained after these conflicts in the Everglades. The last, and one of the most devastating, forced removals east of the Mississippi was of the Cherokee in 1838, and an estimated 2000- 6000 Cherokee died on the forced march to Oklahoma (Thornton 1991). Florida’s role in the Civil War was less substantial than some other states, though there were some major effects. There were many smaller skirmishes that took place in Florida and only one large battle known as the Battle of Olustee. More significant was the contribution of goods, particularly food for confederate troops that came from Florida. This led to a blockade of the state and occupation of several Florida ports by Union troops to effectively stifle their ability to serve the confederate army. PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS An archaeological records check was conducted via the Florida Master Site File on August 30, 2019 determined there are no previously recorded archaeological sites overlapping the project area or within a mile. Additionally, there are no historic structures or resources listed in the National Register of Historic Places or the Florida Master Site File database within the project area. METHODS Fieldwork was conducted on September 25, 2019 and recovered no artifacts. The project area at the time of the reconnaissance consisted of a wooded and natural grass covered location with no surface visibility (Figure 4). A pedestrian survey at 2-meter intervals was conducted throughout the entire project area in order to identify any cultural materials or possible prior disturbance. A shovel testing methodology was employed through the entire project area due to limited surface visibility. A total of twelve shovel tests were conducted in accordance with certain SHPO and Tribal methodologies (Figure 5). Shovel test intervals were determined based on the standards outlined by the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Archeological Documentation. Shovel tests measured at least 35-cm by 35-cm and were excavated well into obvious subsoil. Soils from shovel tests were screened through ¼-inch mesh and exposed soil profiles were visually examined for cultural materials and/or evidence of buried cultural horizons. Shovel tests were backfilled upon completion. RESULTS No cultural materials or features were identified during the pedestrian survey or shovel testing. Soil encountered within the project area were consistent with the Riviera Series, a representative soil profile encountered consisted of an A Horizon of dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) sand very friable with moderate roots (0-14cmbs) over a subsoil of very pale brown (10YR 8/2) sand (Figure 6). 3.B.f Packet Pg. 345 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 14 Figure 4. Photograph showing proposed tower location; note limited of surface visibility. Figure 5. Project area with shovel test locations. N Project Area Shovel Test 3.B.f Packet Pg. 346 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 15 Figure 6. Photograph showing representative soil profile encountered in the project area. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS In response to a request from Ignite Wireless, Inc., RESCOM Environmental Corp., has completed a Phase Ia archaeological reconnaissance and records check for a proposed telecommunications tower site in Collier County, Florida. The project is located approximately 12-miles northeast of Naples, Florida at 26°12'36.9"N 81°36'00.7"W in the NE ¼ of the NW ¼ of Section 15, Township 49 S, Range 27 E, as seen on the as seen on the USGS 7.5' Belle Meade NE, FL, topographical quadrangle. The project area consists of a wooded and natural grass covered location and measures 100-ft by 100-ft for a proposed telecommunications tower site with a 351-ft by 30-ft access road to the north; approximately 0.50-acre in total. No cultural resources were discovered during the current survey. It is our recommendation that there are no archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places within the project area and we recommend archaeological clearance. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 347 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 16 REFERENCES CITED Anderson, D.G. 1995 Recent Advances in Paleoindian and Archaic Period Research in the Southeastern United States. Archaeology of Eastern North America, Vol. 23: 145-176. Anderson, D.G. and G.T. Hanson 1988 Early Archaic Settlement in the Southeastern United States: A Case Study from the Savannah River Valley. American Antiquity, Vol. 53(2): 262-286. Anderson, D.G. J. Ledbetter, L. O’Steen, D. Elliott, D. Blanton, G. Hanson, and F. Snow 1996 Paleoindian and Early Archaic in the Lower Southeast: A View from Georgia. In The Paleoindian and Early Archaic Southeast, edited by D. G. Anderson and K. Sassaman. The University of Alabama Press; Tuscaloosa. Pp. 55-70. Anderson, D.G., J. Ledbetter, L. O’Steen, D. Elliott, and D. Blanton 1987 Recent Paleoindian Research in Georgia. In Current Research in the Pleistocene: Lithic Studies, Vol. 4.: 47-50. Bailey, M.T. 1972 Reconstruction in Indian Territory: A Story of Avarice, Discrimination, and Opportunism. Kennikat Press: Port Washington, NY. Beck, R. 2013 Chiefdoms, Collapse, and Coalescence in the Early American South. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. Bense, A. Judith 1994 Archaeology of the Southeastern United States: Paleoindian to World War I. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Binford, R. Lewis 1980 Willow Smoke and Dogs' Tails: Hunter-Gatherer Settlement Systems and Archaeological Site Formation. American Antiquity. Vol. 45, No. 1 (Jan., 1980). Cambridge University Press. Brawner, T. 2014 An Overview of the Kolomoki Mound Site, Early County, Georgia. Central States Archaeological Journal, 61(1): 32-37. Brooks, H.K. 1981 Physiographic Divisions of Florida (map). Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida. Brose, D.S. and N. Greber, Eds. 1979 Hopewell Archaeology. Kent State University Press: Kent, OH. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 348 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 17 Chapman, B.B. 1965 The Otoes and Missourias: A Study in Indian Removal and the Legal Aftermath. Times Journal Publishing: Oklahoma City. Dillehay, T. 2000 The Settlement of the Americas: A New Prehistory. Basic Books: New York. Dragoo, D. 1976 Some Aspects of Eastern North American Prehistory: A Review. American Antiquity 41: 3-27. Dixon, J. E. 1999 Bones, Boats & Bison: Archaeology and the First Colonization of Western North America. The University of New Mexico Press: Albuquerque. Dumas, A. 2015 Woodland Period. The Encyclopedia of Alabama, Alabama Humanities Foundation. Electronic resource. http://www.encyclopediaofalabama.org/article/h-1166, accessed November 24, 2017. Dunbar, James S. 2014 The pre-Clovis occupation of Florida: The Page-Ladson and Wakulla Springs Lodge Data. Southeastern PaleoAmerican Survey - Clovis in the Southeast. Fagan, Brian M. 1991 Ancient North Americans: The Archaeology of a Continent. 3rd edition. Thames and Hudson, London, England. Fitting, J.E. 1975 The Archaeology of Michigan: A Guide to the Prehistory of the Great Lakes Region. Cranbrook Institute of Science: Bloomsfield Hills. Foreman, G. 1934 The Five Civilized Tribes. University of Oklahoma Press: Norman. Griffith E.G., Daniel C. E., Christine H.A., James O.M. 1997 Lake Regions of Florida. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Haynes, C.V. 1982 West Clovis Progenitors in Beringia? In Paleoecology of Beringia, edited by D.M. Hopkins, et al. Academic Press: New York. Pp. 383-398. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 349 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 18 Hofman, J.L. 1989 Prehistoric Culture History: Hunters and Gatherers in the Southern Great Plains. In From Clovis to Comanchero: Archaeological Overview of the Southern Great Plains. Arkansas Archaeological Survey: Fayetteville. Pp. 25-60. Kelly, A.R. 1938 A Preliminary Report on Archaeological Explorations at Macon, Georgia. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin. 119: 1-69. Kelly, M.W. 1995 A Phase I Archaeological Investigation of the East Fork Shoal Creek Sewer Interceptor Project, Clay County, Missouri. George Butler Associates, Inc. Lenexa, Kansas. King, A. 2018 “Mississippian Period: Overview.” New Georgia Encyclopedia. Electronic resource. https://www.Georgiaencyclopedia.org/articles/history- archaeology/mississippian-period-overview, accessed May 25, 2018. Mason, R.J. 1981 Great Lakes Archaeology. Academic Press: New York. O’Brien, M.J. and W. R. Wood 1998 The Prehistory of Missouri. University of Missouri Press: Columbia. O’Steen, L.D. 1983 Early Archaic Settlement Patterns in the Wallace Reservoir: An Inner Piedmont Perspective. Master’s Thesis, Department of Anthropology, university of Georgia: Athens. Pauketat, T. 2009 Cahokia: Ancient America’s Greatest City on the Mississippi. Penguin: New York. Pluckhahn, T.J. 2018 Woodland Period Overview. New Georgia Encyclopedia. Electronic resource. https://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/articles/history-archaeology/woodland- period-overview, accessed May 25, 2018. Purdy, Barbara A. 2008 Florida's People During the Last Ice Age. Gainesville, Florida: University Press of Florida. Salisbury, N. 1996 The Indians’ Old World: Native Americans and the Coming of Europeans. The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series, Vol. 53(3): 435-458. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 350 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 19 Shane, L.C.K. 1994 Intensity and Rate of Vegetation and Climatic Change in the Ohio Region between 14,000 and 9,000 14C YBP. In The First Discovery of America, edited by W.S. Dancev. The Ohio Archaeological Council: Columbus. Pp. 7-21. Smith, M.T. 2004 Understanding the Protohistoric Period in the Southeast. Revista de Arqeologia Americana, No. 23, Arqueologia Historica: Pp. 215-229. Smithers, G.D. 2015 The Cherokee Diaspora: An Indigenous History of Migration, Resettlement, and Identity. Yale University Press: New Haven. Surovell, T.A. 2000 Early Paleoindian Women, Children, Mobility, and Fertility. American Antiquity 65: 493-508. Tankersley, K.B. 1990 Late Pleistocene Lithic Exploitation in the Midwest and Midsouth: Indiana, Ohio, and Kentucky. In Early Paleoindian Economies of Eastern North America, edited by K.B. Tankersley and B. L. Isaac. Research in Economic Anthropology Supplement 5. JAI Press: Greenwich, CN. Pp. 259-299. 1994 Was Clovis a Colonizing Population in Eastern North America? In The First Discovery of America: Archaeological Evidence of the Early Inhabitants of the Ohio Area, edited by W. S. Dancey. The Ohio Archaeological Council: Columbus. Pp. 95-116. Tankersley, K.B., E.E. Smith, and D.R. Cochran 1990 Early Paleoindian Land Use, Mobility, and Lithic Exploitation Patterns: An Updated Distribution of Fluted Points in Indiana. North American Archaeologist 11: 301-319. Thompson, V., and F. Andrus 2011 Evaluating Mobility, Monumentality, and Feasting at the Island Shell Ring Complex. American Antiquity, Vol. 76(2): 315-343. Thompson, V. and J. Turck 2009 Adaptive Cycles of Coastal Hunter-Gatherers. American Antiquity, Vol. 74 (2): 255-278. Thornton, R. 2007 Ancient Roots I: The Indigenous People and the Architecture of the Southern Highlands. Lulu Publishing. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 351 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 20 1991 The Demography of the Trail of Tears Period: A New Estimate of Cherokee Population Loss. In Cherokee Removal: Before and After, edited by W. L. Anderson. University of Florida Press: Athens. Pp. 75-93. United States Geological Survey 2008 A Tapestry of Time and Terrain. Geological Investigations Series, I-2781. Reston, Virginia. United States Department of the Interior. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) 2014 Riviera Series Soils https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/OSD_Docs/R/RIVIERA.html 2019 Web Soil Survey https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx, accessed September 17, 2019. Viegas, Jennifer. 2011 Earliest Mammoth Art: Mammoth on Mammoth. Discover News. Washburn, W.E. 1975 The Indian in America. Harper & Row: New York. White, Max E. 20002 The Archaeology and History of the Native Georgia Tribes. University Press of Florida: Gainesville. Wright, J.V. 1995 A History of the Native People of Canada: Volume I (10,000-1000 B.C.). Mercury Series, Archaeological Survey of Canada Paper No. 152, Quebec. Wyckoff, D.G. and R. Bartlett 1995 Living on the Edge: Late Pleistocene-Early Holocene Cultural Interaction along the Southeastern Woodland Plains Border. In Native American Interactions, edited by Michael S. Nassaney and K.E. Sassaman. University of Tennessee Press: Knoxville. Pp. 340-361. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 352 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 9/6/2019 Proposed Tower Structure Info - Email ID #6403526 https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/16.6.0-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-d51ac2341b49c4353b5a94792edcb…1/1 Proposed Tower Structure Info - Email ID #6403526 From:towernotifyinfo@fcc.gov Sent:Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 1:20 pm To:tcns@rescom.org Dear Andrew Smith, Thank you for submitting a notification regarding your proposed construction via the Tower Construction Notification System. Note that the system has assigned a unique Notification ID number for this proposed construction. You will need to reference this Notification ID number when you update your project's Status with us. Below are the details you provided for the construction you have proposed: Notification Received: 09/03/2019 Notification ID: 189171 Tower Owner Individual or Entity Name: CitySwitch Consultant Name: Andrew Smith P.O. Box: 5516 City: Fort Wayne State: INDIANA Zip Code: 46895 Phone: 260-385-6999 Email: tcns@rescom.org Structure Type: LTOWER - Lattice Tower Latitude: 26 deg 12 min 36.9 sec N Longitude: 81 deg 36 min .7 sec W Location Description: Kapok St & Frangipani Ave City: Naples State: FLORIDA County: COLLIER Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on a new lattice telecommunications tower, within a 100' x 100' lease area. Proposed project will include ground disturbance. Ground Elevation: 5.8 meters Support Structure: 76.2 meters above ground level Overall Structure: 76.2 meters above ground level Overall Height AMSL: 82 meters above mean sea level 3.B.f Packet Pg. 353 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 9/6/2019 NOTICE OF ORGANIZATION(S) WHICH WERE SENT PROPOSED TOWERCONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION INFORMATION - Email I… https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/16.6.0-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-fc4962e1d5b6b397da8f9716b7e46…1/3 NOTICE OF ORGANIZATION(S) WHICH WERE SENT PROPOSED TOWERCONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION INFORMATION - Email ID #6404659 From:towernotifyinfo@fcc.gov Sent:Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 3:02 am To:tcns@rescom.org Cc:tcnsweekly@fcc.gov Dear Applicant: Thank you for using the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS). The purpose of this electronic mail message is to inform you that the following authorized persons were sent the notification that you provided through TCNS, which relates to your proposed antenna structure. The information was forwarded by the FCC to authorized TCNS users by electronic mail and/or regular mail (letter). We note that the review period for all parties begins upon receipt of the Submission Packet pursuant to Section VII.A of the NPA and notifications that do not provide this serve as information only. Persons who have received the notification that you provided include leaders or their designees of federally-recognized American Indian Tribes, including Alaska Native Villages (collectively "Tribal Nations"), Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs), and State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPOs). For your convenience in identifying the referenced Tribal Nations and NHOs and in making further contacts, the City and State of the Seat of Government for each Tribal Nation and NHO, as well as the designated contact person, is included in the listing below. We note that Tribal Nations may have Section 106 cultural interests in ancestral homelands or other locations that are far removed from their current Seat of Government. Pursuant to the Commission's rules as set forth in the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement for Review of Effects on Historic Properties for Certain Undertakings Approved by the Federal Communications Commission (NPA), all Tribal Nations and NHOs listed below must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to respond to this notification, consistent with the procedures set forth below, unless the proposed construction falls within an exclusion designated by the Tribal Nation or NHO. (NPA, Section IV.F.4). The notification that you provided was forwarded to the following Tribal Nations and NHOs. A Tribal Nation or NHO may not respond until a full Submission Packet is provided. If, upon receipt, the Tribal Nation or NHO does not respond within a reasonable time, you should make a reasonable effort at follow-up contact, unless the Tribal Nation or NHO has agreed to different procedures (NPA, Section IV.F.5). In the event a Tribal Nation or NHO does not respond to a follow-up inquiry, or if a substantive or procedural disagreement arises between you and a Tribal Nation or NHO, you must seek guidance from the Commission (NPA, Section IV.G). These procedures are further set forth in the FCC's Second Report and Order released on March 30, 2018 (FCC 18-30). 1. NAGPRA & Section 106 Representative Fred Dayhoff - Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida - Tamiami Station (PO Box: 440021) Miami, FL - hopel@miccosukeetribe.com - 239-695-4360 - regular mail If the applicant/tower builder receives no response from the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida within 30 days after notification through TCNS, the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida has no interest in participating in pre-construction review for the proposed site. The Applicant/tower builder, however, must immediately notify the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida in the event archaeological properties or human remains are discovered during construction, consistent with Section IX of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement and applicable law. 2. Compliance Review Supervisor THPO Compliance - Seminole Tribe of Florida - 30290 Josie Billie Hwy PMB 1004 Clewiston, FL - THPOcompliance@semtribe.com - 863-983-6549 (ext: 12245) - electronic mail 3. Historic Preservation Officer Theodore Isham - Seminole Nation of Oklahoma - (PO Box: 1498) Wewoka, OK - tcns-sno@sno-nsn.gov - 405-234-5218 - electronic mail Exclusions: Please send all inquiries to email address: tcns-sno@sno-nsn.gov 3.B.f Packet Pg. 354 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 9/6/2019 NOTICE OF ORGANIZATION(S) WHICH WERE SENT PROPOSED TOWERCONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION INFORMATION - Email I… https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/16.6.0-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-fc4962e1d5b6b397da8f9716b7e46…2/3 If the applicant/tower builder receives no response from the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma within 30 days after notification through TCNS, the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma has no interest in participating in pre-construction review for the proposed site. The Applicant/tower builder, however, must immediately notify the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma in the event archaeological properties or human remains are discovered during construction, consistent with Section IX of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement and applicable law. 4. TCNS Coordinator Anne Edwards-Martel Ms - Muscogee (Creek) Nation - Highway 75 & Loop 56 (PO Box: 580) Okmulgee, OK - mcntcns@mcn-nsn.gov; section106@mcn-nsn.gov - 918-732-7639 - regular mail 5. Cell Tower Coordinator Kelly Nelson - Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma - 70500 East 128 Road Wyandotte, OK - celltower@estoo.net - 918-666-2435 (ext: 1861) - regular mail Exclusions: DO NOT EMAIL DOCUMENTATION; it will be deleted without being opened. Submit one printed color copy by US postal mail or other parcel carrier of all documentation to: Eastern Shawnee Tribe Attn: Cell Tower Program 70500 E. 128 Rd. Wyandotte, OK 74370 Provide a 1-page cover letter with the following information: a. TCNS Number b. Company Name c. Project Name, City, County, State d. Project type e. Project coordinates f. Contact information The Eastern Shawnee Procedures document is available and highly recommended for guidance; send an email to celltower@estoo.net requesting our most current copy. 6. Mekko Ryan Morrow - Thlopthlocco Tribal Town - P.O. Box 188 Okemah, OK - thpo@tttown.org - 000-000-0000 - electronic mail Exclusions: Thlopthlocco Tribal Town requests that all initial review materials required by applicable law be submitted by email directly to thpo@tttown.org. In addition, in the event archeological or cultural materials or human remains are discovered at any time during this undertaking, please notify Thlopthlocco Tribal Town immediately. The notification that you provided was also forwarded to the following SHPOs in the State in which you propose to construct and neighboring States. The information was provided to these SHPOs as a courtesy for their information and planning. You need make no effort at this time to follow up with any SHPO that does not respond to this notification. Prior to construction, you must provide the SHPO of the State in which you propose to construct (or the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, if the project will be located on certain Tribal lands), with a Submission Packet pursuant to Section VII.A of the NPA unless the project is excluded from SHPO review under Section III D or E of the NPA. 7. SHPO Lee Warner - Alabama Historical Commission - 468 South Perry Street Montgomery, AL - lwarner@mail.preserveala.org - 334-242-3184 - electronic mail 8. Deputy SHPO Elizabeth Ann Brown - Alabama Historical Commission - 468 South Perry 3.B.f Packet Pg. 355 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 9/6/2019 NOTICE OF ORGANIZATION(S) WHICH WERE SENT PROPOSED TOWERCONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION INFORMATION - Email I… https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/16.6.0-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-fc4962e1d5b6b397da8f9716b7e46…3/3 Street Montgomery, AL - ebrown@mail.preserveala.org - 334-242-3185 - electronic mail 9. Deputy SHPO Compliance Review Laura A Kammerer - Div of Historical Resources, Dept of State - 500 S. Bronough St. Tallahassee, FL - lkammerer@dos.state.fl.us - 850-245-6333 - electronic mail 10. Historic Preservationist Robin Jackson - Florida Division of Historical Resources - 500 S. Bronough Street Tallahasse, FL - Robin.Jackson@DOS.myflorida.com - 850-245-6333 - electronic mail TCNS automatically forwards all notifications to all Tribal Nations and SHPOs that have an expressed interest in the geographic area of a proposal. However, if a proposal for PTC wayside poles falls within a designated exclusion, you need not expect any response and need not pursue any additional process with that Tribal Nation or SHPO. In addition, a particular Tribal Nation or SHPO may also set forth policies or procedures within its details box that exclude from review certain facilities (for example, a statement that it does not review collocations with no ground disturbance; or that indicates that no response within 30 days indicates no interest in participating in pre-construction review). Please be advised that the FCC cannot guarantee that the contact(s) listed above have opened and reviewed an electronic or regular mail notification. If you learn that any of the above contact information is no longer valid, please contact the FCC by emailing tcnshelp@fcc.gov. The following information relating to the proposed tower was forwarded to the person(s) listed above: Notification Received: 09/03/2019 Notification ID: 189171 Excluded from SHPO Review: No Tower Owner Individual or Entity Name: CitySwitch Consultant Name: Andrew Smith P.O. Box: 5516 City: Fort Wayne State: INDIANA Zip Code: 46895 Phone: 260-385-6999 Email: tcns@rescom.org Structure Type: LTOWER - Lattice Tower Latitude: 26 deg 12 min 36.9 sec N Longitude: 81 deg 36 min 0.7 sec W Location Description: Kapok St & Frangipani Ave City: Naples State: FLORIDA County: COLLIER Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on a new lattice telecommunications tower, within a 100' x 100' lease area. Proposed project will include ground disturbance. Ground Elevation: 5.8 meters Support Structure: 76.2 meters above ground level Overall Structure: 76.2 meters above ground level Overall Height AMSL: 82.0 meters above mean sea level If you have any questions or comments regarding this notice, please contact the FCC using the electronic Help Request form located on the FCC's website at: https://www.fcc.gov/wireless/available-support-services You may also call the FCC Support Center at (877) 480-3201 (TTY 717-338-2824). Hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday (except Federal holidays). To provide quality service and ensure security, all telephone calls are recorded. Thank you, Federal Communications Commission 3.B.f Packet Pg. 356 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 9/6/2019 Reply to Proposed Tower Structure (Notification ID: 189171) - EmailID #6407713 https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/16.6.0-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-a3bf6130902c92f5de1d5e1fbef3bb…1/2 Reply to Proposed Tower Structure (Notification ID: 189171) - EmailID #6407713 From:towernotifyinfo@fcc.gov Sent:Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 4:09 pm To:tcns@rescom.org Dear Andrew Smith, Thank you for using the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS). The purpose of this email is to inform you that an authorized user of the TCNS has replied to a proposed tower construction notification that you had submitted through the TCNS. The following message has been sent to you from Cell Tower Coordinator Kelly Nelson of the Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma in reference to Notification ID #189171: The Cultural Preservation Office of the Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma requires the following information regarding all proposed FCC projects. DO NOT EMAIL DOCUMENTATION; IT WILL BE DELETED WITHOUT BEING OPENED. Submit by US postal mail or other parcel carrier all the following information for all telecommunication projects to: Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma Attn: Kelly Nelson 70500 E. 128 Rd. Wyandotte, OK 74370 1. Provide a 1-page cover letter with the following information: a. TCNS Number b. Company Name c. Project Name, City, County, State d. Project type e. Project coordinates f. Total area surveyed in acres g. Contact information. 2. Professional cultural/archaeological resource survey report. 3. Aerial and/or USGS topographic maps showing general project location (small scale). 4. Aerial, color USGS topographic, or planimetric maps showing project area (large scale). 5. Project site plan map depicting labeled shovel test locations. 6. Shovel Test Log. 7. Site photographs. We request the opportunity to review and comment on scopes of work for projects whose purpose is to evaluate or mitigate archaeological sites discovered during a telecom project survey, and we also request to review the final reports for those projects. NOTE: The 30 day review period begins when we, The Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma, receive ALL required documentation for the TCNS submittal, not when it is sent out. We suggest sending TCNS submissions with a tracking number to reference and confirm when we receive it in our office. The Eastern Shawnee Procedures document is recommended for guidance, send an email to Kelly Nelson at: celltower@estoo.net to request the most current copy. For your convenience, the information you submitted for this notification is detailed below. Notification Received: 09/03/2019 Notification ID: 189171 Tower Owner Individual or Entity Name: CitySwitch 3.B.f Packet Pg. 357 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 9/6/2019 Reply to Proposed Tower Structure (Notification ID: 189171) - EmailID #6407713 https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/16.6.0-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-a3bf6130902c92f5de1d5e1fbef3bb…2/2 Consultant Name: Andrew Smith P.O. Box: 5516 City: Fort Wayne State: INDIANA Zip Code: 46895 Phone: 260-385-6999 Email: tcns@rescom.org Structure Type: LTOWER - Lattice Tower Latitude: 26 deg 12 min 36.9 sec N Longitude: 81 deg 36 min 0.7 sec W Location Description: Kapok St & Frangipani Ave City: Naples State: FLORIDA County: COLLIER Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on a new lattice telecommunications tower, within a 100' x 100' lease area. Proposed project will include ground disturbance. Ground Elevation: 5.8 meters Support Structure: 76.2 meters above ground level Overall Structure: 76.2 meters above ground level Overall Height AMSL: 82.0 meters above mean sea level 3.B.f Packet Pg. 358 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Reply to Proposed Tower Structure (Notification ID: 189171) - EmailID #6433723 From:towernotifyinfo@fcc.gov Sent:Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 9:33 am To:tcns@rescom.org Cc:tcns.fccarchive@fcc.gov, THPOcompliance@semtribe.com Dear Andrew Smith, Thank you for using the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS). The purpose of this email is to inform you that an authorized user of the TCNS has replied to a proposed tower construction notification that you had submitted through the TCNS. The following message has been sent to you from Compliance Review Supervisor THPO Compliance of the Seminole Tribe of Florida in reference to Notification ID #189171: We have no interest in this site. However, if the Applicant discovers archaeological remains or resources during construction, the Applicant should immediately stop construction and notify the appropriate Federal Agency and the Tribe. For your convenience, the information you submitted for this notification is detailed below. Notification Received: 09/03/2019 Notification ID: 189171 Tower Owner Individual or Entity Name: CitySwitch Consultant Name: Andrew Smith P.O. Box: 5516 City: Fort Wayne State: INDIANA Zip Code: 46895 Phone: 260-385-6999 Email: tcns@rescom.org Structure Type: LTOWER - Lattice Tower Latitude: 26 deg 12 min 36.9 sec N Longitude: 81 deg 36 min 0.7 sec W Location Description: Kapok St & Frangipani Ave City: Naples State: FLORIDA County: COLLIER Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on a new lattice telecommunications tower, within a 100' x 100' lease area. Proposed project will include ground disturbance. Ground Elevation: 5.8 meters Support Structure: 76.2 meters above ground level Overall Structure: 76.2 meters above ground level Overall Height AMSL: 82.0 meters above mean sea level 3.B.f Packet Pg. 359 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) RESCOM Environmental Corp. • P.O. Box 361 • Petoskey, MI 49770 Phone: (260) 385-6999 • Fax: (231) 487-0726 www.rescom.org Jill McDevitt, MSHP Curriculum Vitae jill.mcdevitt@rescom.org Education M.S. in Historic Preservation, Ball State University, May 2013 Creative Project Title: Façade Rehabilitation and Improvement Grant Program for Albion, Indiana; Susan Lankford, advisor B.A. in History (minor in Mathematics), Saint Joseph’s College, December 2010 Professional Qualifications • Multiple years of historic resource research for National Register of Historic Places nominations and Determinations of Eligibility. • Experience in grant writing and management for a non-profit organization. • Proficient in Microsoft Office Suite, Adobe CS and AutoCAD. • Fully aware of cultural resources management laws and their applications. Selected Employment RESCOM Environmental Corp July 2018-present Project Manager-Cultural Resources Supervisor: Jamie Cochran-Smith, 260-385-6998 Conduct reviews of historic resources and prepare Section 106 reports for projects in multiple states. Evaluate historic properties for eligibility on the National Register of Historic Places as part of Section 106 Reviews. Coordination with SHPO and clients for review completion. Prepare Determination of Eligibility documentation for historic properties in Washington, Montana, Ohio and Colorado. ARCH, Inc. October 2016-March 2018 Executive Director Managed historic preservation nonprofit advocacy organization. Supervised staff, prepared annual operating and project budgets, conducted public outreach and oversaw grant writing, fundraising and event planning. Managed a historic rehabilitation construction project. Participated as Consulting Party in Section 106 Reviews, including consultation on resource identification and mitigation. ARCH, Inc. May 2013-October 2016 Historic Preservation Specialist Supervisor: Michael Galbraith, 260-469-3476 Conducted architectural field survey for Allen County Historic Sites and Structures Inventory including historic resource identification, documentation and assessment of National Register eligibility, researched and wrote National Register Nominations, a Historic Structure Report, and Historic Tax Credit Applications, Part I and II. Participated as Consulting Party in Section 106 Reviews, including consultation on resource identification and mitigation. List of Professional Publications available upon request 3.B.f Packet Pg. 360 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) RESCOM Environmental Corp.  P.O. Box 361 Petoskey, MI 49770 Phone: (231) 409-2563 Fax: (231) 407-0726 www.rescom.org CURRICULUM VITAE ANDREW M. SMITH M.A. EDUCATION: Bachelor of Arts: Anthropology, Indiana University Fort Wayne, Indiana December 2005 Master of Arts: Anthropology, Ball State University Muncie, Indiana July 2010 PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS:  Multiple years of experience in budgeting, planning and carrying out Section 106 compliance work.  Extensive experience managing staff for grant and contracted archaeological investigations  Coordination with lead agencies, SHPO’s, THPO’s and interested parties  Proficient in Microsoft suite of programs, Adobe CS, as well as Golden Surfer, ESRI ArcGIS 10.1.  Established history of completing complex projects.  Fully aware of cultural resources management laws and their applications. ARCHAEOLOGY AND RELATED EXPERIENCE: NEPA-Cultural Resource Project Manager at RESCOM. July 2014 to Present Supervisor: Joe Lee 231-947-4454 Completion and management of Phase I and Phase II Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs) and National Environmental Policy Act Assessments (NEPAs) for FCC projects. Site Files Manager at Louisiana Division of Archaeology. February 2014 to July 2014 Supervisor: Rachel Watson 225-342-8165 Review of site submissions and maintenance of archaeological site data for the State of Louisiana in both print and digital format. Use of ArcGIS platform to spatially represent archaeological data and datasets within the State of Louisiana. Interim Director at IPFW Archaeological Survey. June 2009 to Present Supervisor: Richard Sutter 260-481-6676 Experience from Phase Ia surveys to Phase III mitigations. Use and supervision of those using surveying equipment, GPS, aerial and topographic maps, digital cameras, as well as resistivity and magnetometer/gradiometer equipment. Management of up to 15 personnel and overseeing all paperwork and documentation. Extensive laboratory experience and report writing. Direct consultation with the state historic preservation officers, as well as INDOT and NAGPRA representatives. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 361 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) RESCOM Environmental Corp.  P.O. Box 361 Petoskey, MI 49770 Phone: (231) 409-2563 Fax: (231) 407-0726 www.rescom.org Staff Archaeologist at Ball State Applied Archaeology Laboratories (formerly Archaeological Resources Management Services). July 2006 to June 2009 Supervisor: Beth McCord 765-285-1834 Conducted field work and supervised personnel in the field and in the lab. Wrote technical reports. Participated in grant applications. Conducted research, fieldwork, labwork, and writing for grant compliance. Archaeological Technician at CDimensions. January 2012 Supervisor: Eben Cooper 972-881-5577 Worked two weeks during vacation from my permanent job to gain Forest Service archaeological experience. Phase I survey, including shovel testing and walkover and site recording in accordance with USDA NFS standards. LIST OF PUBLICATIONS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST 3.B.f Packet Pg. 362 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 363 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) ATTACHMENT B – TRIBAL CONSULTATION Ignite Wireless, Inc FCC NEPA Summary Report Kapok 3.B.f Packet Pg. 364 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) TCNS #Site Name NOO Date Number of Tribes 189171 Kapok 9/6/2019 6 Tribe TCNS Response Second Contact Letter Date Referral Date 15 Day Closeout Letter Date Final Response Date Completion Date Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma Requests additional information by mail 10/25/2019 12/16/2019 12/19/2019 1/2/2020 1/2/2020 Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida No interest if no response in 30 days NA NA NA NA 10/6/2019 Muscogee Creek Nation Requests additional information by mail 10/25/2019 12/3/2019 12/5/2019 NA 12/20/2019 Seminole Nation of Oklahoma Requests additional information electronically 10/25/2019 12/3/2019 12/5/2019 NA 12/20/2019 Seminole Tribe of Florida No interest if no response in 30 days NA NA NA 10/2/2019 10/2/2019 Thlopthlocco Tribal Town Requests additional information electronically 10/25/2019 12/3/2019 12/5/2019 NA 12/20/2019 3.B.f Packet Pg. 365 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) andrew.smith@rescom.org From:Tiffany White <TWhite@estoo.net> Sent:Thursday, January 2, 2020 1:54 PM To:andrew.smith@rescom.org Subject:189171 Tiffany M White TCNS/106 Intake Clerk Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma 918.666.2435 x 1862 IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail message is intended to be received only by persons entitled to receive the confidential information it may contain. E ESTOO.net may contain informatio n that is confidential and legally privileged. Please do not read, copy, forward, or store this message unless you are an int If you have received this message in error, please forward it to the sender and delete it completely from yo ur computer system. [M704NQ] 3.B.f Packet Pg. 366 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Reply to Proposed Tower Structure (Notification ID: 189171) - EmailID #6433723 From:towernotifyinfo@fcc.gov Sent:Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 9:33 am To:tcns@rescom.org Cc:tcns.fccarchive@fcc.gov, THPOcompliance@semtribe.com Dear Andrew Smith, Thank you for using the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS). The purpose of this email is to inform you that an authorized user of the TCNS has replied to a proposed tower construction notification that you had submitted through the TCNS. The following message has been sent to you from Compliance Review Supervisor THPO Compliance of the Seminole Tribe of Florida in reference to Notification ID #189171: We have no interest in this site. However, if the Applicant discovers archaeological remains or resources during construction, the Applicant should immediately stop construction and notify the appropriate Federal Agency and the Tribe. For your convenience, the information you submitted for this notification is detailed below. Notification Received: 09/03/2019 Notification ID: 189171 Tower Owner Individual or Entity Name: CitySwitch Consultant Name: Andrew Smith P.O. Box: 5516 City: Fort Wayne State: INDIANA Zip Code: 46895 Phone: 260-385-6999 Email: tcns@rescom.org Structure Type: LTOWER - Lattice Tower Latitude: 26 deg 12 min 36.9 sec N Longitude: 81 deg 36 min 0.7 sec W Location Description: Kapok St & Frangipani Ave City: Naples State: FLORIDA County: COLLIER Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on a new lattice telecommunications tower, within a 100' x 100' lease area. Proposed project will include ground disturbance. Ground Elevation: 5.8 meters Support Structure: 76.2 meters above ground level Overall Structure: 76.2 meters above ground level Overall Height AMSL: 82.0 meters above mean sea level 3.B.f Packet Pg. 367 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 12/20/2019 Proposed Construction of Communications Facilities Notification ofFinal Contacts - Email ID #25566 https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/17.2.2-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-619167101dee44f39f3f9381259b05…1/5 Proposed Construction of Communications Facilities Notification ofFinal Contacts - Email ID #25566 From:towernotifyinfo@fcc.gov Sent:Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 9:02 am To:tcns@rescom.org Cc:tcnsweekly@fcc.gov T-Mobile Andrew Smith P.O. Box: 5516 Fort Wayne, IN 46895 Dear Applicant: This letter addresses the proposed communications facilities listed below that you have referred to the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) for purposes of contacting federally recognized Indian Tribes, including Alaska Native Villages (collectively Indian Tribes), and Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs), as specified by Section IV.G of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement (NPA). Consistent with the procedures outlined in the Commission's Wireless Infrastructure Second Report and Order (1), we have contacted the Indian Tribes or NHOs identified in the attached Table for the projects listed in the attached Table. You referred these projects to us between 12/12/2019 and 12/19/2019. Our contact with these Tribal Nations or NHOs was sent on 12/19/2019. Thus, as described in the Wireless Infrastructure Second Report and Order (2), if you or Commission staff do not receive a statement of interest regarding a particular project from any Tribe or NHO within 15 calendar days of 12/19/2019, your obligations under Section IV of the NPA with respect to these Tribal Nations or NHOs are complete. If a Tribal Nation or NHO responds that it has concerns about a historic property of traditional religious and cultural significance that may be affected by the proposed construction within the 15 calendar day period, the Applicant must involve it in the review as set forth in the NPA, and may not begin construction until the process set forth in the NPA is completed. You are reminded that Section IX of the NPA imposes independent obligations on an Applicant when a previously unidentified site that may be a historic property, including an archeological property, is discovered during construction or after the completion of review. In such instances, the Applicant must cease construction and promptly notify, among others, any potentially affected Tribal Nation or NHO. A Tribal Nation's or NHO's failure to express interest in participating in pre-construction review of an undertaking does not necessarily mean it is not interested in archeological properties or human remains that may inadvertently be discovered during construction. Hence, an Applicant is still required to notify any potentially affected Tribal Nation or NHO of any such finds pursuant to Section IX or other applicable law. Sincerely, Jill Springer Federal Preservation Officer Federal Communications Commission jill.springer@fcc.gov _______________________________________ 1) See Accelerating Wireless Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Deployment, Second Report and Order, FCC 18-30 (Mar. 30, 2018) (Wireless Infrastructure Second Report and Order). 2) See id. at paras. 111-112. LIST OF PROPOSED COMMUNICATIONS TOWERS TCNS# 189955 Referred Date: 12/18/2019 Location: Teft Rd, Spring Arbor, MI Detailed Description of Project: Proposed extension of lattice tower. Tribe Name: Crow Creek Sioux Tribe Tribe Name: Lac Vieux Desert Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians TCNS# 189954 Referred Date: 12/18/2019 Location: 26 Mile Rd, Macomb, MI Detailed Description of Project: Upgrage of antennas on an existing transmission tower. Tribe Name: Lac Vieux Desert Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians 3.B.f Packet Pg. 368 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 12/20/2019 Proposed Construction of Communications Facilities Notification ofFinal Contacts - Email ID #25566 https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/17.2.2-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-619167101dee44f39f3f9381259b05…2/5 TCNS# 189510 Referred Date: 12/17/2019 Location: CR3110, Clarksville, TX Detailed Description of Project: Proposed construction of a lattice style telecommunications tower with antennas within a 50'x50' lease area. Project will include ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Absentee-Shawnee Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Alabama Quassarte Tribal Town Tribe Name: Apache Tribe of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Caddo Nation of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Coushatta Indian Tribe Tribe Name: Eastern Shoshone Tribe Tribe Name: Jena Band of Choctaw Indians Tribe Name: Kialegee Tribal Town Tribe Name: Kiowa Indian Tribe THPO Tribe Name: Mescalero Apache Tribe Tribe Name: Thlopthlocco Tribal Town Tribe Name: Tonkawa Tribe Tribe Name: United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma Tribe Name: Wichita and Affiliated Tribes TCNS# 189517 Referred Date: 12/17/2019 Location: FM 1249E, Kilgore, TX Detailed Description of Project: Proposed construction of a monopole style telecommunications tower with antennas within a 50'x50' lease area. Project will include ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Absentee-Shawnee Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Alabama Quassarte Tribal Town Tribe Name: Apache Tribe of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Caddo Nation of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Coushatta Indian Tribe Tribe Name: Eastern Shoshone Tribe Tribe Name: Jena Band of Choctaw Indians Tribe Name: Kiowa Indian Tribe THPO Tribe Name: Mescalero Apache Tribe Tribe Name: Thlopthlocco Tribal Town Tribe Name: Tonkawa Tribe Tribe Name: United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma Tribe Name: Wichita and Affiliated Tribes TCNS# 189955 Referred Date: 12/17/2019 Location: Teft Rd, Spring Arbor, MI Detailed Description of Project: Proposed extension of lattice tower. Tribe Name: Citizen Potawatomi Nation Tribe Name: Fort Belknap Indian Community Tribe Name: Hannahville Indian Community Tribe Name: Ho-Chunk Nation Tribe Name: Huron Potawatomi Tribe Name: Keweenaw Bay Indian Community Tribe Name: Ponca Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians of Wisconsin Tribe Name: Wyandotte Nation TCNS# 189512 Referred Date: 12/17/2019 Location: FM 1252 & CR370, Winona, TX Detailed Description of Project: Proposed construction of a lattice style telecommunications tower with antennas within a 50'x50' lease area. Project will include ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Alabama Quassarte Tribal Town Tribe Name: Apache Tribe of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Caddo Nation of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Coushatta Indian Tribe Tribe Name: Eastern Shoshone Tribe Tribe Name: Jena Band of Choctaw Indians Tribe Name: Kiowa Indian Tribe THPO Tribe Name: Mescalero Apache Tribe Tribe Name: Thlopthlocco Tribal Town Tribe Name: Tonkawa Tribe Tribe Name: United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma Tribe Name: Wichita and Affiliated Tribes 3.B.f Packet Pg. 369 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 12/20/2019 Proposed Construction of Communications Facilities Notification ofFinal Contacts - Email ID #25566 https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/17.2.2-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-619167101dee44f39f3f9381259b05…3/5 TCNS# 189954 Referred Date: 12/17/2019 Location: 26 Mile Rd, Macomb, MI Detailed Description of Project: Upgrage of antennas on an existing transmission tower. Tribe Name: Citizen Potawatomi Nation Tribe Name: Fort Belknap Indian Community Tribe Name: Hannahville Indian Community Tribe Name: Ho-Chunk Nation Tribe Name: Huron Potawatomi Tribe Name: Keweenaw Bay Indian Community Tribe Name: Otoe-Missouria Tribe of Indians Tribe Name: Ponca Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians of Wisconsin Tribe Name: Seneca-Cayuga Nation Tribe Name: Wyandotte Nation TCNS# 189480 Referred Date: 12/16/2019 Location: N Clybourn Ave, Chicago, IL Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on an existing building. Tribe Name: Absentee-Shawnee Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe Tribe Name: Fort Belknap Indian Community Tribe Name: Ho-Chunk Nation Tribe Name: Iowa Tribe of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Kaw Nation Tribe Name: Keweenaw Bay Indian Community Tribe Name: Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin Tribe Name: Otoe-Missouria Tribe of Indians Tribe Name: Ottawa Tribe of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Peoria Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Ponca Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians of Wisconsin Tribe Name: Sac and Fox Nation Tribe Name: Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri Tribe Name: Santee Sioux Nation Tribe Name: Shawnee Tribe Tribe Name: Wyandotte Nation TCNS# 189506 Referred Date: 12/16/2019 Location: US-82, Seymour, TX Detailed Description of Project: Proposed construction of a lattice style telecommunications tower with antennas within a 50'x50' lease area. Project will include ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Apache Tribe of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Comanche Nation Tribe Name: Eastern Shoshone Tribe Tribe Name: Kialegee Tribal Town Tribe Name: Kiowa Indian Tribe THPO Tribe Name: Mescalero Apache Tribe Tribe Name: Tonkawa Tribe Tribe Name: Wichita and Affiliated Tribes TCNS# 189507 Referred Date: 12/16/2019 Location: CR 1346, Tyler, TX Detailed Description of Project: Proposed construction of a monopole style telecommunications tower with antennas within a 50'x50' lease area. Project will include ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Alabama Quassarte Tribal Town Tribe Name: Apache Tribe of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Caddo Nation of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Coushatta Indian Tribe Tribe Name: Eastern Shoshone Tribe Tribe Name: Jena Band of Choctaw Indians Tribe Name: Kiowa Indian Tribe THPO Tribe Name: Mescalero Apache Tribe Tribe Name: Muscogee (Creek) Nation Tribe Name: Thlopthlocco Tribal Town Tribe Name: Tonkawa Tribe Tribe Name: United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma Tribe Name: Wichita and Affiliated Tribes TCNS# 189512 Referred Date: 12/19/2019 Location: FM 1252 & CR370, Winona, TX Detailed Description of Project: Proposed construction of a lattice style telecommunications 3.B.f Packet Pg. 370 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 12/20/2019 Proposed Construction of Communications Facilities Notification ofFinal Contacts - Email ID #25566 https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/17.2.2-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-619167101dee44f39f3f9381259b05…4/5 tower with antennas within a 50'x50' lease area. Project will include ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Muscogee (Creek) Nation TCNS# 189510 Referred Date: 12/19/2019 Location: CR3110, Clarksville, TX Detailed Description of Project: Proposed construction of a lattice style telecommunications tower with antennas within a 50'x50' lease area. Project will include ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Muscogee (Creek) Nation TCNS# 189517 Referred Date: 12/19/2019 Location: FM 1249E, Kilgore, TX Detailed Description of Project: Proposed construction of a monopole style telecommunications tower with antennas within a 50'x50' lease area. Project will include ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Muscogee (Creek) Nation TCNS# 189517 Referred Date: 12/19/2019 Location: FM 1249E, Kilgore, TX Detailed Description of Project: Proposed construction of a monopole style telecommunications tower with antennas within a 50'x50' lease area. Project will include ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Muscogee (Creek) Nation TCNS# 189171 Referred Date: 12/18/2019 Location: Kapok St & Frangipani Ave, Naples, FL Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on a new lattice telecommunications tower, within a 100' x 100' lease area. Proposed project will include ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma TCNS# 189510 Referred Date: 12/18/2019 Location: CR3110, Clarksville, TX Detailed Description of Project: Proposed construction of a lattice style telecommunications tower with antennas within a 50'x50' lease area. Project will include ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Northwestern Band of Shoshone Nation TCNS# 189480 Referred Date: 12/18/2019 Location: N Clybourn Ave, Chicago, IL Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on an existing building. Tribe Name: Omaha Tribe of Nebraska Tribe Name: Lac Vieux Desert Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians Tribe Name: Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Crow Creek Sioux Tribe TCNS# 189506 Referred Date: 12/18/2019 Location: US-82, Seymour, TX Detailed Description of Project: Proposed construction of a lattice style telecommunications tower with antennas within a 50'x50' lease area. Project will include ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Northwestern Band of Shoshone Nation TCNS# 189512 Referred Date: 12/18/2019 Location: FM 1252 & CR370, Winona, TX Detailed Description of Project: Proposed construction of a lattice style telecommunications tower with antennas within a 50'x50' lease area. Project will include ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Northwestern Band of Shoshone Nation TCNS# 189507 Referred Date: 12/18/2019 Location: CR 1346, Tyler, TX Detailed Description of Project: Proposed construction of a monopole style telecommunications tower with antennas within a 50'x50' lease area. Project will include ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Northwestern Band of Shoshone Nation TCNS# 189954 Referred Date: 12/18/2019 Location: 26 Mile Rd, Macomb, MI Detailed Description of Project: Upgrage of antennas on an existing transmission tower. Tribe Name: Ottawa Tribe of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Shawnee Tribe TCNS# 189955 Referred Date: 12/18/2019 Location: Teft Rd, Spring Arbor, MI Detailed Description of Project: Proposed extension of lattice tower. Tribe Name: Ottawa Tribe of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Shawnee Tribe 3.B.f Packet Pg. 371 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 12/20/2019 Proposed Construction of Communications Facilities Notification ofFinal Contacts - Email ID #25566 https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/17.2.2-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-619167101dee44f39f3f9381259b05…5/5 LEGEND: * - Notification numbers are assigned by the Commission staff for sites where initial contact was not made through TCNS. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 372 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 12/5/2019 Proposed Construction of Communications Facilities Notification ofFinal Contacts - Email ID #25465 https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/17.1.1-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-7addc00b3f0848bcab8bfb4f8ed53a…1/3 Proposed Construction of Communications Facilities Notification ofFinal Contacts - Email ID #25465 From:towernotifyinfo@fcc.gov Sent:Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 9:01 am To:tcns@rescom.org Cc:tcnsweekly@fcc.gov CitySwitch Andrew Smith P.O. Box: 5516 Fort Wayne, IN 46895 Dear Applicant: This letter addresses the proposed communications facilities listed below that you have referred to the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) for purposes of contacting federally recognized Indian Tribes, including Alaska Native Villages (collectively Indian Tribes), and Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs), as specified by Section IV.G of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement (NPA). Consistent with the procedures outlined in the Commission's Wireless Infrastructure Second Report and Order (1), we have contacted the Indian Tribes or NHOs identified in the attached Table for the projects listed in the attached Table. You referred these projects to us between 11/28/2019 and 12/05/2019. Our contact with these Tribal Nations or NHOs was sent on 12/05/2019. Thus, as described in the Wireless Infrastructure Second Report and Order (2), if you or Commission staff do not receive a statement of interest regarding a particular project from any Tribe or NHO within 15 calendar days of 12/05/2019, your obligations under Section IV of the NPA with respect to these Tribal Nations or NHOs are complete. If a Tribal Nation or NHO responds that it has concerns about a historic property of traditional religious and cultural significance that may be affected by the proposed construction within the 15 calendar day period, the Applicant must involve it in the review as set forth in the NPA, and may not begin construction until the process set forth in the NPA is completed. You are reminded that Section IX of the NPA imposes independent obligations on an Applicant when a previously unidentified site that may be a historic property, including an archeological property, is discovered during construction or after the completion of review. In such instances, the Applicant must cease construction and promptly notify, among others, any potentially affected Tribal Nation or NHO. A Tribal Nation's or NHO's failure to express interest in participating in pre-construction review of an undertaking does not necessarily mean it is not interested in archeological properties or human remains that may inadvertently be discovered during construction. Hence, an Applicant is still required to notify any potentially affected Tribal Nation or NHO of any such finds pursuant to Section IX or other applicable law. Sincerely, Jill Springer Federal Preservation Officer Federal Communications Commission jill.springer@fcc.gov _______________________________________ 1) See Accelerating Wireless Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Deployment, Second Report and Order, FCC 18-30 (Mar. 30, 2018) (Wireless Infrastructure Second Report and Order). 2) See id. at paras. 111-112. LIST OF PROPOSED COMMUNICATIONS TOWERS TCNS# 187849 Referred Date: 12/04/2019 Location: Filer Ave E, Twin Falls, ID Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on an existing monopole. Tribe Name: Northwestern Band of Shoshone Nation Tribe Name: Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians TCNS# 189170 Referred Date: 12/04/2019 Location: NW 312th St, Okeechobee, FL Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on a new lattice telecommunications tower, within a 100' x 100' lease area. Proposed project will include ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma TCNS# 189172 Referred Date: 12/04/2019 Location: Smith Creek Rd & NF-13, Sopchoppy, FL 3.B.f Packet Pg. 373 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 12/5/2019 Proposed Construction of Communications Facilities Notification ofFinal Contacts - Email ID #25465 https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/17.1.1-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-7addc00b3f0848bcab8bfb4f8ed53a…2/3 Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on a new lattice telecommunications tower, within a 100' x 100' lease area. Proposed project will include ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Seminole Nation of Oklahoma TCNS# 189101 Referred Date: 12/04/2019 Location: King St, Alexandria, VA Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on an existing building. Tribe Name: Crow Creek Sioux Tribe Tribe Name: Prairie Island Indian Community TCNS# 189171 Referred Date: 12/04/2019 Location: Kapok St & Frangipani Ave, Naples, FL Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on a new lattice telecommunications tower, within a 100' x 100' lease area. Proposed project will include ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Seminole Nation of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Muscogee (Creek) Nation TCNS# 187850 Referred Date: 12/04/2019 Location: Pole Line Rd E, Twin Falls, ID Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on an existing monopole. Tribe Name: Northwestern Band of Shoshone Nation Tribe Name: Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians TCNS# 189173 Referred Date: 12/04/2019 Location: S Spring Garden Ave & W Volusia Ave, DeLand, FL Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on a new lattice telecommunications tower, within an 80' x 120' lease area. Proposed project will include ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Seminole Nation of Oklahoma TCNS# 187849 Referred Date: 12/03/2019 Location: Filer Ave E, Twin Falls, ID Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on an existing monopole. Tribe Name: Shoshone-Paiute Tribes Tribe Name: Eastern Shoshone Tribe Tribe Name: Shoshone-Bannock Tribes Heritage Tribal Office (HeTO) Tribe Name: Kiowa Indian Tribe THPO TCNS# 187850 Referred Date: 12/03/2019 Location: Pole Line Rd E, Twin Falls, ID Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on an existing monopole. Tribe Name: Shoshone-Paiute Tribes Tribe Name: Eastern Shoshone Tribe Tribe Name: Shoshone-Bannock Tribes Heritage Tribal Office (HeTO) Tribe Name: Kiowa Indian Tribe THPO TCNS# 189099 Referred Date: 12/03/2019 Location: Ackerman Ave, Clifton, NJ Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on an existing smokestack. Tribe Name: Delaware Nation Tribe Name: Keweenaw Bay Indian Community Tribe Name: Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians of Wisconsin Tribe Name: Wyandotte Nation Tribe Name: Shawnee Tribe TCNS# 189172 Referred Date: 12/03/2019 Location: Smith Creek Rd & NF-13, Sopchoppy, FL Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on a new lattice telecommunications tower, within a 100' x 100' lease area. Proposed project will include ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas Tribe Name: Coushatta Indian Tribe Tribe Name: Kialegee Tribal Town Tribe Name: Muscogee (Creek) Nation TCNS# 189173 Referred Date: 12/03/2019 Location: S Spring Garden Ave & W Volusia Ave, DeLand, FL Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on a new lattice telecommunications tower, within an 80' x 120' lease area. Proposed project will include ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Coushatta Indian Tribe Tribe Name: Muscogee (Creek) Nation Tribe Name: Thlopthlocco Tribal Town TCNS# 189101 Referred Date: 12/03/2019 Location: King St, Alexandria, VA 3.B.f Packet Pg. 374 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 12/5/2019 Proposed Construction of Communications Facilities Notification ofFinal Contacts - Email ID #25465 https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/17.1.1-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-7addc00b3f0848bcab8bfb4f8ed53a…3/3 Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on an existing building. Tribe Name: Delaware Nation Tribe Name: Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe Tribe Name: Cultural Heritage Partners Tribe Name: Monacan Nation Tribe Name: Chickahominy Indian Tribe Tribe Name: The Upper Mattaponi Indian Tribe Tribe Name: Nansemond Indian Tribe Tribe Name: Cherokee Nation Tribe Name: Shawnee Tribe TCNS# 189171 Referred Date: 12/03/2019 Location: Kapok St & Frangipani Ave, Naples, FL Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on a new lattice telecommunications tower, within a 100' x 100' lease area. Proposed project will include ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Muscogee (Creek) Nation Tribe Name: Thlopthlocco Tribal Town LEGEND: * - Notification numbers are assigned by the Commission staff for sites where initial contact was not made through TCNS. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 375 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 12/17/2019 Confirmation of Manual Referral of a TCNS Notification https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/17.2.0-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-984554a8503243babf330ed08719a…1/1 Confirmation of Manual Referral of a TCNS Notification From:TCNS Help <TCNSHelp@fcc.gov> Sent:Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 10:46 am To:tcns@rescom.org 189171 Eastern Shawnee Tribe OK.pdf (166.4 KB) Your manual referral of a proposed tower structure notification has been successfully submitted. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will be processing this referral for purposes of contacting federally recognized Indian Tribes, including Alaska Native Villages, and Native Hawaiian Organizations as specified by Section IV.G of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement and the Wireless Infrastructure Second Report and Order dated March 30, 2018. You will receive a Proposed Construction of Communications Facilities Notification of Final Contacts when the FCC has completed processing this referral. Below are the details you submitted. Manual Referral System ID Number: TCNS7566 Referrer Name: Referrer Email: tcns@rescom.org Notification ID: 189171 SHPO Excluded: E-106 File Number: 0008846179 Project Location: Kapok St & Frangipani Ave, Naples, FL, Collier Co. Date Documentation Sent: 2019-10-25 10:43:05 EDT Method Documentation Sent: Hard copy/physical delivery – refer after 36 days Additional Comments: Tribes Who Have Not Responded: Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma Unsubscribe | Notification Preferences 3.B.f Packet Pg. 376 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 12/4/2019 Confirmation of Manual Referral of a TCNS Notification https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/17.1.1-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-8b3c70f2f88043269897a7fe2a1630…1/1 Confirmation of Manual Referral of a TCNS Notification From:TCNS Help <TCNSHelp@fcc.gov> Sent:Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 3:11 pm To:tcns@rescom.org 189171 Seminole Nation OK.pdf (126.1 KB) Your manual referral of a proposed tower structure notification has been successfully submitted. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will be processing this referral for purposes of contacting federally recognized Indian Tribes, including Alaska Native Villages, and Native Hawaiian Organizations as specified by Section IV.G of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement and the Wireless Infrastructure Second Report and Order dated March 30, 2018. You will receive a Proposed Construction of Communications Facilities Notification of Final Contacts when the FCC has completed processing this referral. Below are the details you submitted. Manual Referral System ID Number: TCNS7199 Referrer Name: Referrer Email: tcns@rescom.org Notification ID: 189171 SHPO Excluded: E-106 File Number: 0008846179 Project Location: Naples, FL Date Documentation Sent: 2019-10-24 15:10:17 EDT Method Documentation Sent: ONLY electronic delivery – refer after 31 days Additional Comments: Tribes Who Have Not Responded: Seminole Nation of Oklahoma Unsubscribe | Notification Preferences 3.B.f Packet Pg. 377 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 12/4/2019 Confirmation of Manual Referral of a TCNS Notification https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/17.1.1-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-8b3c70f2f88043269897a7fe2a1630…1/1 Confirmation of Manual Referral of a TCNS Notification From:TCNS Help <TCNSHelp@fcc.gov> Sent:Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 3:12 pm To:tcns@rescom.org 189171 Tribal Letters.pdf (196.6 KB) Your manual referral of a proposed tower structure notification has been successfully submitted. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will be processing this referral for purposes of contacting federally recognized Indian Tribes, including Alaska Native Villages, and Native Hawaiian Organizations as specified by Section IV.G of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement and the Wireless Infrastructure Second Report and Order dated March 30, 2018. You will receive a Proposed Construction of Communications Facilities Notification of Final Contacts when the FCC has completed processing this referral. Below are the details you submitted. Manual Referral System ID Number: TCNS7200 Referrer Name: Referrer Email: tcns@rescom.org Notification ID: 189171 SHPO Excluded: E-106 File Number: 0008846179 Project Location: Naples, FL Date Documentation Sent: 2019-10-24 15:11:20 EDT Method Documentation Sent: Hard copy/physical delivery – refer after 36 days Additional Comments: Tribes Who Have Not Responded: Muscogee (Creek) Nation Unsubscribe | Notification Preferences 3.B.f Packet Pg. 378 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 12/4/2019 Confirmation - Referral of a Proposed Tower ConstructionNotification - Email ID #6530357 https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/17.1.1-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-8b3c70f2f88043269897a7fe2a1630…1/1 Confirmation - Referral of a Proposed Tower ConstructionNotification - Email ID #6530357 From:towernotifyinfo@fcc.gov Sent:Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 2:22 pm To:tcns@rescom.org Dear Andrew Smith, Your referral of a proposed tower structure notification has been successfully submitted via the Tower Construction Notification System. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will be processing this referral for purposes of contacting federally recognized Indian Tribes, including Alaska Native Villages, and Native Hawaiian Organizations as specified by Section IV.G of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement and the Wireless Infrastructure Second Report and Order dated March 30, 2018. You will receive a Proposed Construction of Communications Facilities Notification of Final Contacts when the FCC has completed processing this referral. Below are the details you provided in the referral of the tower you have proposed to construct: Notification Received: 09/03/2019 Notification Referred: 12/03/2019 Notification ID: 189171 Tower Owner Individual or Entity Name: CitySwitch Consultant Name: Andrew Smith P.O. Box: 5516 City: Fort Wayne State: INDIANA Zip Code: 46895 Phone: 260-385-6999 Email: tcns@rescom.org Structure Type: LTOWER - Lattice Tower Latitude: 26 deg 12 min 36.9 sec N Longitude: 81 deg 36 min 0.7 sec W Location Description: Kapok St & Frangipani Ave City: Naples State: FLORIDA County: COLLIER Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on a new lattice telecommunications tower, within a 100' x 100' lease area. Proposed project will include ground disturbance. Ground Elevation: 5.8 meters Support Structure: 76.2 meters above ground level Overall Structure: 76.2 meters above ground level Overall Height AMSL: 82.0 meters above mean sea level Entities Who Have Not Responded: Muscogee (Creek) Nation Contact Date: 09/05/2019 Thlopthlocco Tribal Town Contact Date: 09/05/2019 **Note that the FCC will assign a unique Notification ID number for a site where the initial contact was not made through TCNS. You will need to reference this Notification ID number when you update your project's Status with us. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 379 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) RESCOM Environmental Corp. • P.O. Box 5516 • Fort Wayne, IN 46895 Phone: (260) 385-6999 • Fax: (231) 487-0726 www.rescom.org October 25, 2019 Mr. Travis Patton, TCNS Coordinator Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma Cultural Preservation Department 70500 E 128th Rd Wyandotte, OK 74370 RE: INVITATION TO COMMENT UNDER SECTION 106 TCNS ID: 189171 Kapok Kapok St & Frangipani Ave Naples, Collier County, FL 34117 Dear Mr. Patton, RESCOM Environmental Corp (RESCOM) was retained by Ignite Wireless to complete Section 106 Compliance as delegated by the FCC and outlined in 36 CFR Part 800 for the above referenced project. Ignite Wireless proposes the construction of a 250’ self-supporting lattice style telecommunications tower with an access drive at the above referenced location. In accordance with Ignite Wireless earlier communications via the FCC Tower Construction Notification System, Ignite Wireless and RESCOM respect the sovereign status of your Tribe and are writing to outline the project. Enclosed for your review are maps and project drawings regarding the proposed project. An archaeological survey was conducted and did not discover any archaeological sites or materials; results and recommendations are detailed in the attached report. Except to the extent that we have agreed otherwise, the ‘Voluntary Best Practices for Expediting the Process of Communications Tower and Antenna Siting Review’ provides that your Tribe should evaluate this submission and respond in writing with an opinion of interest or no interest. If you do not believe that all of the agreed upon materials have been enclosed, or if you have any other questions, please contact our office immediately so that we can reach a satisfactory resolution as soon as possible. We appreciate your assistance in this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, RESCOM Environmental Corporation Andrew Smith, Project Manager 260-385-6999 tcns@rescom.org RESCOM 19080047 3.B.f Packet Pg. 380 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) RESCOM Environmental Corp. • P.O. Box 5516 • Fort Wayne, IN 46895 Phone: (260) 385-6999 • Fax: (231) 487-0726 www.rescom.org October 25, 2019 Ms. Anne Edwards-Martel, TCNS Coordinator Muscogee Creek Nation Cultural Preservation Dept., P.O. Box 580 Okmulgee, OK 74447 RE: INVITATION TO COMMENT UNDER SECTION 106 TCNS ID: 189171 Kapok Kapok St & Frangipani Ave Naples, Collier County, FL 34117 Dear Ms. Edwards-Martel, RESCOM Environmental Corp (RESCOM) was retained by Ignite Wireless to complete Section 106 Compliance as delegated by the FCC and outlined in 36 CFR Part 800 for the above referenced project. Ignite Wireless proposes the construction of a 250’ self-supporting lattice style telecommunications tower with an access drive at the above referenced location. In accordance with Ignite Wireless earlier communications via the FCC Tower Construction Notification System, Ignite Wireless and RESCOM respect the sovereign status of your Tribe and are writing to outline the project. Enclosed for your review are maps and project drawings regarding the proposed project. An archaeological survey was conducted and did not discover any archaeological sites or materials; results and recommendations are detailed in the attached report. Except to the extent that we have agreed otherwise, the ‘Voluntary Best Practices for Expediting the Process of Communications Tower and Antenna Siting Review’ provides that your Tribe should evaluate this submission and respond in writing with an opinion of interest or no interest. If you do not believe that all of the agreed upon materials have been enclosed, or if you have any other questions, please contact our office immediately so that we can reach a satisfactory resolution as soon as possible. We appreciate your assistance in this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, RESCOM Environmental Corporation Andrew Smith, Project Manager 260-385-6999 tcns@rescom.org RESCOM 19080047 3.B.f Packet Pg. 381 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) RESCOM Environmental Corp. • P.O. Box 5516 • Fort Wayne, IN 46895 Phone: (260) 385-6999 • Fax: (231) 487-0726 www.rescom.org October 25, 2019 Mr. Theodore Isham, Historic Preservation Officer Seminole Nation of Oklahoma P.O. Box 1498 Wewoka, OK 74884 RE: INVITATION TO COMMENT UNDER SECTION 106 TCNS ID: 189171 Kapok Kapok St & Frangipani Ave Naples, Collier County, FL 34117 Dear Mr. Isham, RESCOM Environmental Corp (RESCOM) was retained by Ignite Wireless to complete Section 106 Compliance as delegated by the FCC and outlined in 36 CFR Part 800 for the above referenced project. Ignite Wireless proposes the construction of a 250’ self-supporting lattice style telecommunications tower with an access drive at the above referenced location. In accordance with Ignite Wireless earlier communications via the FCC Tower Construction Notification System, Ignite Wireless and RESCOM respect the sovereign status of your Tribe and are writing to outline the project. Enclosed for your review are maps and project drawings regarding the proposed project. An archaeological survey was conducted and did not discover any archaeological sites or materials; results and recommendations are detailed in the attached report. Except to the extent that we have agreed otherwise, the ‘Voluntary Best Practices for Expediting the Process of Communications Tower and Antenna Siting Review’ provides that your Tribe should evaluate this submission and respond in writing with an opinion of interest or no interest. If you do not believe that all of the agreed upon materials have been enclosed, or if you have any other questions, please contact our office immediately so that we can reach a satisfactory resolution as soon as possible. We appreciate your assistance in this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, RESCOM Environmental Corporation Andrew Smith, Project Manager 260-385-6999 tcns@rescom.org RESCOM 19080047 3.B.f Packet Pg. 382 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) RESCOM Environmental Corp. • P.O. Box 5516 • Fort Wayne, IN 46895 Phone: (260) 385-6999 • Fax: (231) 487-0726 www.rescom.org October 25, 2019 Mr. Mekko Ryan Morrow, Thlopthlocco Tribal Town Thlopthloccotribaltowntowers@gmail.com; CC: Thpo@tttown.org P.O. Box 188 Okemah, OK 74859 RE: INVITATION TO COMMENT UNDER SECTION 106 TCNS ID: 189171 Kapok Kapok St & Frangipani Ave Naples, Collier County, FL 34117 Dear Mr. Morrow, RESCOM Environmental Corp (RESCOM) was retained by Ignite Wireless to complete Section 106 Compliance as delegated by the FCC and outlined in 36 CFR Part 800 for the above referenced project. Ignite Wireless proposes the construction of a 250’ self-supporting lattice style telecommunications tower with an access drive at the above referenced location. In accordance with Ignite Wireless earlier communications via the FCC Tower Construction Notification System, Ignite Wireless and RESCOM respect the sovereign status of your Tribe and are writing to outline the project. Enclosed for your review are maps and project drawings regarding the proposed project. An archaeological survey was conducted and did not discover any archaeological sites or materials; results and recommendations are detailed in the attached report. Except to the extent that we have agreed otherwise, the ‘Voluntary Best Practices for Expediting the Process of Communications Tower and Antenna Siting Review’ provides that your Tribe should evaluate this submission and respond in writing with an opinion of interest or no interest. If you do not believe that all of the agreed upon materials have been enclosed, or if you have any other questions, please contact our office immediately so that we can reach a satisfactory resolution as soon as possible. We appreciate your assistance in this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, RESCOM Environmental Corporation Andrew Smith, Project Manager 260-385-6999 tcns@rescom.org RESCOM 19080047 3.B.f Packet Pg. 383 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 9/6/2019 Reply to Proposed Tower Structure (Notification ID: 189171) - EmailID #6407713 https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/16.6.0-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-a3bf6130902c92f5de1d5e1fbef3bb…1/2 Reply to Proposed Tower Structure (Notification ID: 189171) - EmailID #6407713 From:towernotifyinfo@fcc.gov Sent:Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 4:09 pm To:tcns@rescom.org Dear Andrew Smith, Thank you for using the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS). The purpose of this email is to inform you that an authorized user of the TCNS has replied to a proposed tower construction notification that you had submitted through the TCNS. The following message has been sent to you from Cell Tower Coordinator Kelly Nelson of the Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma in reference to Notification ID #189171: The Cultural Preservation Office of the Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma requires the following information regarding all proposed FCC projects. DO NOT EMAIL DOCUMENTATION; IT WILL BE DELETED WITHOUT BEING OPENED. Submit by US postal mail or other parcel carrier all the following information for all telecommunication projects to: Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma Attn: Kelly Nelson 70500 E. 128 Rd. Wyandotte, OK 74370 1. Provide a 1-page cover letter with the following information: a. TCNS Number b. Company Name c. Project Name, City, County, State d. Project type e. Project coordinates f. Total area surveyed in acres g. Contact information. 2. Professional cultural/archaeological resource survey report. 3. Aerial and/or USGS topographic maps showing general project location (small scale). 4. Aerial, color USGS topographic, or planimetric maps showing project area (large scale). 5. Project site plan map depicting labeled shovel test locations. 6. Shovel Test Log. 7. Site photographs. We request the opportunity to review and comment on scopes of work for projects whose purpose is to evaluate or mitigate archaeological sites discovered during a telecom project survey, and we also request to review the final reports for those projects. NOTE: The 30 day review period begins when we, The Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma, receive ALL required documentation for the TCNS submittal, not when it is sent out. We suggest sending TCNS submissions with a tracking number to reference and confirm when we receive it in our office. The Eastern Shawnee Procedures document is recommended for guidance, send an email to Kelly Nelson at: celltower@estoo.net to request the most current copy. For your convenience, the information you submitted for this notification is detailed below. Notification Received: 09/03/2019 Notification ID: 189171 Tower Owner Individual or Entity Name: CitySwitch 3.B.f Packet Pg. 384 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 9/6/2019 Reply to Proposed Tower Structure (Notification ID: 189171) - EmailID #6407713 https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/16.6.0-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-a3bf6130902c92f5de1d5e1fbef3bb…2/2 Consultant Name: Andrew Smith P.O. Box: 5516 City: Fort Wayne State: INDIANA Zip Code: 46895 Phone: 260-385-6999 Email: tcns@rescom.org Structure Type: LTOWER - Lattice Tower Latitude: 26 deg 12 min 36.9 sec N Longitude: 81 deg 36 min 0.7 sec W Location Description: Kapok St & Frangipani Ave City: Naples State: FLORIDA County: COLLIER Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on a new lattice telecommunications tower, within a 100' x 100' lease area. Proposed project will include ground disturbance. Ground Elevation: 5.8 meters Support Structure: 76.2 meters above ground level Overall Structure: 76.2 meters above ground level Overall Height AMSL: 82.0 meters above mean sea level 3.B.f Packet Pg. 385 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 9/6/2019 NOTICE OF ORGANIZATION(S) WHICH WERE SENT PROPOSED TOWERCONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION INFORMATION - Email I… https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/16.6.0-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-fc4962e1d5b6b397da8f9716b7e46…1/3 NOTICE OF ORGANIZATION(S) WHICH WERE SENT PROPOSED TOWERCONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION INFORMATION - Email ID #6404659 From:towernotifyinfo@fcc.gov Sent:Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 3:02 am To:tcns@rescom.org Cc:tcnsweekly@fcc.gov Dear Applicant: Thank you for using the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS). The purpose of this electronic mail message is to inform you that the following authorized persons were sent the notification that you provided through TCNS, which relates to your proposed antenna structure. The information was forwarded by the FCC to authorized TCNS users by electronic mail and/or regular mail (letter). We note that the review period for all parties begins upon receipt of the Submission Packet pursuant to Section VII.A of the NPA and notifications that do not provide this serve as information only. Persons who have received the notification that you provided include leaders or their designees of federally-recognized American Indian Tribes, including Alaska Native Villages (collectively "Tribal Nations"), Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs), and State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPOs). For your convenience in identifying the referenced Tribal Nations and NHOs and in making further contacts, the City and State of the Seat of Government for each Tribal Nation and NHO, as well as the designated contact person, is included in the listing below. We note that Tribal Nations may have Section 106 cultural interests in ancestral homelands or other locations that are far removed from their current Seat of Government. Pursuant to the Commission's rules as set forth in the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement for Review of Effects on Historic Properties for Certain Undertakings Approved by the Federal Communications Commission (NPA), all Tribal Nations and NHOs listed below must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to respond to this notification, consistent with the procedures set forth below, unless the proposed construction falls within an exclusion designated by the Tribal Nation or NHO. (NPA, Section IV.F.4). The notification that you provided was forwarded to the following Tribal Nations and NHOs. A Tribal Nation or NHO may not respond until a full Submission Packet is provided. If, upon receipt, the Tribal Nation or NHO does not respond within a reasonable time, you should make a reasonable effort at follow-up contact, unless the Tribal Nation or NHO has agreed to different procedures (NPA, Section IV.F.5). In the event a Tribal Nation or NHO does not respond to a follow-up inquiry, or if a substantive or procedural disagreement arises between you and a Tribal Nation or NHO, you must seek guidance from the Commission (NPA, Section IV.G). These procedures are further set forth in the FCC's Second Report and Order released on March 30, 2018 (FCC 18-30). 1. NAGPRA & Section 106 Representative Fred Dayhoff - Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida - Tamiami Station (PO Box: 440021) Miami, FL - hopel@miccosukeetribe.com - 239-695-4360 - regular mail If the applicant/tower builder receives no response from the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida within 30 days after notification through TCNS, the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida has no interest in participating in pre-construction review for the proposed site. The Applicant/tower builder, however, must immediately notify the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida in the event archaeological properties or human remains are discovered during construction, consistent with Section IX of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement and applicable law. 2. Compliance Review Supervisor THPO Compliance - Seminole Tribe of Florida - 30290 Josie Billie Hwy PMB 1004 Clewiston, FL - THPOcompliance@semtribe.com - 863-983-6549 (ext: 12245) - electronic mail 3. Historic Preservation Officer Theodore Isham - Seminole Nation of Oklahoma - (PO Box: 1498) Wewoka, OK - tcns-sno@sno-nsn.gov - 405-234-5218 - electronic mail Exclusions: Please send all inquiries to email address: tcns-sno@sno-nsn.gov 3.B.f Packet Pg. 386 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 9/6/2019 NOTICE OF ORGANIZATION(S) WHICH WERE SENT PROPOSED TOWERCONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION INFORMATION - Email I… https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/16.6.0-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-fc4962e1d5b6b397da8f9716b7e46…2/3 If the applicant/tower builder receives no response from the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma within 30 days after notification through TCNS, the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma has no interest in participating in pre-construction review for the proposed site. The Applicant/tower builder, however, must immediately notify the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma in the event archaeological properties or human remains are discovered during construction, consistent with Section IX of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement and applicable law. 4. TCNS Coordinator Anne Edwards-Martel Ms - Muscogee (Creek) Nation - Highway 75 & Loop 56 (PO Box: 580) Okmulgee, OK - mcntcns@mcn-nsn.gov; section106@mcn-nsn.gov - 918-732-7639 - regular mail 5. Cell Tower Coordinator Kelly Nelson - Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma - 70500 East 128 Road Wyandotte, OK - celltower@estoo.net - 918-666-2435 (ext: 1861) - regular mail Exclusions: DO NOT EMAIL DOCUMENTATION; it will be deleted without being opened. Submit one printed color copy by US postal mail or other parcel carrier of all documentation to: Eastern Shawnee Tribe Attn: Cell Tower Program 70500 E. 128 Rd. Wyandotte, OK 74370 Provide a 1-page cover letter with the following information: a. TCNS Number b. Company Name c. Project Name, City, County, State d. Project type e. Project coordinates f. Contact information The Eastern Shawnee Procedures document is available and highly recommended for guidance; send an email to celltower@estoo.net requesting our most current copy. 6. Mekko Ryan Morrow - Thlopthlocco Tribal Town - P.O. Box 188 Okemah, OK - thpo@tttown.org - 000-000-0000 - electronic mail Exclusions: Thlopthlocco Tribal Town requests that all initial review materials required by applicable law be submitted by email directly to thpo@tttown.org. In addition, in the event archeological or cultural materials or human remains are discovered at any time during this undertaking, please notify Thlopthlocco Tribal Town immediately. The notification that you provided was also forwarded to the following SHPOs in the State in which you propose to construct and neighboring States. The information was provided to these SHPOs as a courtesy for their information and planning. You need make no effort at this time to follow up with any SHPO that does not respond to this notification. Prior to construction, you must provide the SHPO of the State in which you propose to construct (or the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, if the project will be located on certain Tribal lands), with a Submission Packet pursuant to Section VII.A of the NPA unless the project is excluded from SHPO review under Section III D or E of the NPA. 7. SHPO Lee Warner - Alabama Historical Commission - 468 South Perry Street Montgomery, AL - lwarner@mail.preserveala.org - 334-242-3184 - electronic mail 8. Deputy SHPO Elizabeth Ann Brown - Alabama Historical Commission - 468 South Perry 3.B.f Packet Pg. 387 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 9/6/2019 NOTICE OF ORGANIZATION(S) WHICH WERE SENT PROPOSED TOWERCONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION INFORMATION - Email I… https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/16.6.0-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-fc4962e1d5b6b397da8f9716b7e46…3/3 Street Montgomery, AL - ebrown@mail.preserveala.org - 334-242-3185 - electronic mail 9. Deputy SHPO Compliance Review Laura A Kammerer - Div of Historical Resources, Dept of State - 500 S. Bronough St. Tallahassee, FL - lkammerer@dos.state.fl.us - 850-245-6333 - electronic mail 10. Historic Preservationist Robin Jackson - Florida Division of Historical Resources - 500 S. Bronough Street Tallahasse, FL - Robin.Jackson@DOS.myflorida.com - 850-245-6333 - electronic mail TCNS automatically forwards all notifications to all Tribal Nations and SHPOs that have an expressed interest in the geographic area of a proposal. However, if a proposal for PTC wayside poles falls within a designated exclusion, you need not expect any response and need not pursue any additional process with that Tribal Nation or SHPO. In addition, a particular Tribal Nation or SHPO may also set forth policies or procedures within its details box that exclude from review certain facilities (for example, a statement that it does not review collocations with no ground disturbance; or that indicates that no response within 30 days indicates no interest in participating in pre-construction review). Please be advised that the FCC cannot guarantee that the contact(s) listed above have opened and reviewed an electronic or regular mail notification. If you learn that any of the above contact information is no longer valid, please contact the FCC by emailing tcnshelp@fcc.gov. The following information relating to the proposed tower was forwarded to the person(s) listed above: Notification Received: 09/03/2019 Notification ID: 189171 Excluded from SHPO Review: No Tower Owner Individual or Entity Name: CitySwitch Consultant Name: Andrew Smith P.O. Box: 5516 City: Fort Wayne State: INDIANA Zip Code: 46895 Phone: 260-385-6999 Email: tcns@rescom.org Structure Type: LTOWER - Lattice Tower Latitude: 26 deg 12 min 36.9 sec N Longitude: 81 deg 36 min 0.7 sec W Location Description: Kapok St & Frangipani Ave City: Naples State: FLORIDA County: COLLIER Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on a new lattice telecommunications tower, within a 100' x 100' lease area. Proposed project will include ground disturbance. Ground Elevation: 5.8 meters Support Structure: 76.2 meters above ground level Overall Structure: 76.2 meters above ground level Overall Height AMSL: 82.0 meters above mean sea level If you have any questions or comments regarding this notice, please contact the FCC using the electronic Help Request form located on the FCC's website at: https://www.fcc.gov/wireless/available-support-services You may also call the FCC Support Center at (877) 480-3201 (TTY 717-338-2824). Hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday (except Federal holidays). To provide quality service and ensure security, all telephone calls are recorded. Thank you, Federal Communications Commission 3.B.f Packet Pg. 388 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 9/6/2019 Proposed Tower Structure Info - Email ID #6403526 https://apps.rackspace.com/versions/webmail/16.6.0-RC/popup.php?wsid=30dcad722f6341b5a4a8bd5d486fe1a3-d51ac2341b49c4353b5a94792edcb…1/1 Proposed Tower Structure Info - Email ID #6403526 From:towernotifyinfo@fcc.gov Sent:Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 1:20 pm To:tcns@rescom.org Dear Andrew Smith, Thank you for submitting a notification regarding your proposed construction via the Tower Construction Notification System. Note that the system has assigned a unique Notification ID number for this proposed construction. You will need to reference this Notification ID number when you update your project's Status with us. Below are the details you provided for the construction you have proposed: Notification Received: 09/03/2019 Notification ID: 189171 Tower Owner Individual or Entity Name: CitySwitch Consultant Name: Andrew Smith P.O. Box: 5516 City: Fort Wayne State: INDIANA Zip Code: 46895 Phone: 260-385-6999 Email: tcns@rescom.org Structure Type: LTOWER - Lattice Tower Latitude: 26 deg 12 min 36.9 sec N Longitude: 81 deg 36 min .7 sec W Location Description: Kapok St & Frangipani Ave City: Naples State: FLORIDA County: COLLIER Detailed Description of Project: Collocation of antennas on a new lattice telecommunications tower, within a 100' x 100' lease area. Proposed project will include ground disturbance. Ground Elevation: 5.8 meters Support Structure: 76.2 meters above ground level Overall Structure: 76.2 meters above ground level Overall Height AMSL: 82 meters above mean sea level 3.B.f Packet Pg. 389 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) ATTACHMENT C – INFORMAL BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT & MAPS Ignite Wireless, Inc FCC NEPA Summary Report Kapok 3.B.f Packet Pg. 390 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) RESCOM Environmental Corp. • P.O. Box 361 • Petoskey, MI 49770 Phone: (231) 409-2563 • Fax: (231) 487-0726 www.rescom.org September 13, 2019 Colleen Carroll Ignite Wireless, Inc 102 Mary Alice Park Road, Suite 505 Cumming, GA 30040 RE: Informal Biological Assessment for the proposed construction of a telecommunications tower facility: Kapok Tower Kapok St & Frangipani Ave Naples, Collier County, FL 34117 Dear Ms. Carroll, RESCOM Environmental Corp has completed an Informal Biological Assessment (IBA) in conjunction with a NEPA assessment for the above referenced property. The purpose of this IBA is to address potential affects to threatened and endangered species and critical habitats as referenced in 47 CFR 1.1307 (a) 3. Additionally, this IBA addresses potential affects to migratory birds as referenced in the Note to 47 CFR 1.1307 (d). Based on the information presented in this report, the proposed project is not likely to impact threatened and endangered species as contained in 50 CFR 17.11, 17.22, 222.23(a), 227.4, critical habitats as contained in 50 CFR 17.95, 17.96, and part 226, or migratory birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Thank you for the opportunity to provide this service and we look forward to working with you in the future. If you have any questions or comments, please call our office at (231) 409-2563. Sincerely, RESCOM Environmental Corp Andrew Smith Project Manager andrew.smith@rescom.org RESCOM File 19080047 3.B.f Packet Pg. 391 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) INFORMAL BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT Ignite Wireless Informal Biological Report Kapok Tower Site Name: Kapok Tower Site Number: Site Location: Kapok St & Frangipani Ave, Naples, Collier County, FL 34117 Project Type: Proposed construction of a 250’ self-supporting lattice style telecommunications tower Unless stated otherwise, for the purpose of this report RESCOM Environmental Corp assessed the direct project area and a 30’ buffer in all directions from the boundary of all proposed lease areas. REGULATORY STATEMENT: This Informal Biological Assessment (IBA) is being performed in conjunction with a NEPA assessment as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) referenced in 47 CFR Subpart 1, Chapter 1, Sections 1.130-1.1319. This IBA addresses potential affects to threatened and endangered species and critical habitats as referenced in 47 CFR 1.1307 (a) 3. Additionally, this IBA addresses potential affects to migratory birds as referenced in the Note to 47 CFR 1.1307 (d). For the purposes of this report, RESCOM assessed threatened and endangered species as contained in 50 CFR 17.11, 17.22, 222.23(a), 227.4, critical habitats as contained in 50 CFR 17.95, 17.96, and part 226, and migratory birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. PROJECT OVERVIEW: CitySwitch proposes the construction of a 250’ self-supporting lattice style telecommunications tower within a 100’ x 100’ lease area. A proposed driveway off Kapok Street will be utilized for access. The proposed project will route utilities to the nearest power and telco sources. Potential ground disturbance and habitat impact will be limited to the proposed 100’ x 100’ lease area, access easement, and utility easement. LOCAL HABITAT: RESCOM conducted a field reconnaissance of the proposed project area and determined the habitat at the subject property consists of a grass lot and dirt road. Habitats at the adjacent properties include scattered trees, grass lots, and bushes in all directions. CRITICAL HABITAT, WILDLIFE REFUGES, AND WETLANDS: RESCOM utilized the USFWS Information, Planning, and Conservation (IPaC) decision support system to determine if there are any critical habitats or National Wildlife Refuges within or near the proposed project area. Based on the IPaC results, there are no critical habitats or National Wildlife Refuges at or near the proposed project area. Based on a review of the digitized National Wetlands Inventory maintained by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the subject property is not within the boundary of a designated wetland. Additionally, no wetland indicators such as wetland vegetation or standing water were noted at the time of the field inspection. According to the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey, underlying soils consist of Riviera soils. Riviera series are not listed as hydric soils by the United States Department of Agriculture. The nearest body of water, a river, is 3.B.f Packet Pg. 392 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Ignite Wireless Informal Biological Report Kapok Tower approximately 900 feet north of the subject property. Based on all of these factors there are no wetland areas at or near the subject property. THREATENED & ENDANGERED SPECIES: RESCOM utilized IPaC to determine if any listed or potentially listed Threatened & Endangered species exist within or within 30’ of the proposed project area. RESCOM then reviewed various field guides and reference books to determine what habitats are necessary to support the listed or potentially listed species of the area. Necessary habitats were compared to the habitat found at and near the subject property. Based on this comparison, none of the listed or potentially listed Threatened & Endangered species identified by the USFWS are likely to be found at the subject property, or within a 30’ buffer zone surrounding all proposed lease areas. A complete list of these species, their required habitat, and the potential project impact is as follows: Species Status* Required Habitat Potential Impact Reasoning American Alligator Alligator mississippiensis LT Prefer fresh water marsh, may occassionally be within brackish waters. Nests within swamps and marshes. No Effect No Suitable Habitat American Crocodile Crocodylus acutus LT Coastal habitat, living in brackish and saltwater areas in mangrove swamps. No Effect No Suitable Habitat Audubon's Crested Caracara Polyborus plancus audubonii LT Occurs in dry or wet prairie areas with scattered cabbage palms (Sabal palmetto). May also be found in lightly wooded areas. May use improved or semi- improved pasture with the presence of seasonal wetlands. No Effect No Suitable Habitat Bartram's Hairstreak Butterfly Strymon acis bartrami LE Habitat includes pine rockland. Caterpillars feed only on pineland croton, an understory plant in pine rockland habitat. No Effect No Suitable Habitat Cape Sable Seaside Sparrow Ammodramus maritimus mirabilis LE Preferred nesting habitat is a mixed marl prairie community which often includes muhly grass (Muhlenbergia filipes) and moderately dense clumped grasses, with open space permitting ground movements by the sparrow. No Effect No Suitable Habitat Eastern Indigo Snake Drymarchon corais couperi LT Pine flatwoods, scrubby flatwoods, high pine, dry prairie, tropical hardwood hammocks, edges of freshwater marshes, coastal dunes, and human-altered habitats. Require a mix of habitats for full annual cycle. No Effect No Suitable Habitat 3.B.f Packet Pg. 393 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Ignite Wireless Informal Biological Report Kapok Tower Species Status* Required Habitat Potential Impact Reasoning Everglade Snail Kite Rostrhamus sociabilis plumbeus LE Consists of freshwater marshes and the shallow vegetated edges of lakes where apple snails can be found, characterized as palustrine- emergent, long-hydroperiod wetlands often in organic peat substrate overlying oolitic limestone or sand or directly on limestone or marl. No Effect No Suitable Habitat Florida Bonneted Bat Eumops floridanus LE This bat occurs in urban, suburban, and forested areas; it roosts in buildings (e.g., in attics, rock or brick chimneys of fireplaces, and especially under Spanish roof tiles, often in buildings dating from about 1920- 1930), sometimes in tree hollows (including those made by woodpeckers), occasionally in foliage of palm trees (e.g., shafts of Royal Palm leaves); also has been found under rocks, in fissures in limestone outcrops, and near excavations (Layne 1978, Timm and Genoways 2004). No Effect No Suitable Habitat Florida Grasshopper Sparrow Ammodramus savannarum floridanus LE The Florida grasshopper sparrow requires large treeless grasslands dominated by bunch grasses, low shrubs, and saw palmetto with enough interspersed bare ground for this ground-dwelling sparrow to forage effectively. This habitat is dependent on frequent burning, and the sparrows prefer prairies which have been burned within the previous two years. The prairie was historically maintained by frequent wildfires which were ignited by lightning, or prescribed fires set by cattle ranchers. No Effect No Suitable Habitat Florida Leafwing Butterfly Anaea troglodyta floridalis LE Habitat includes pine rockland. Caterpillars feed only on pineland croton, an understory plant in pine rockland habitat. No Effect No Suitable Habitat Florida Panther Puma (=Felis) concolor coryi LE Diverse habitat including wetlands, swamps, upland forests, and stands of saw palmetto. No Effect No Suitable Habitat 3.B.f Packet Pg. 394 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Ignite Wireless Informal Biological Report Kapok Tower Species Status* Required Habitat Potential Impact Reasoning Florida Prairie- clover Dalea carthagenensis floridana LE Pine rocklands, edges of rockland hammocks, coastal uplands, marl prairie. No Effect No Suitable Habitat Florida Scrub-jay Aphelocoma coerulescens LT The Florida scrub-jay is the only species of bird that is unique to Florida. Scrub-jays inhabit sand pine and xeric oak scrub, and scrubby flatwoods, which occur in some of the highest and driest areas of Florida – ancient sandy ridges that run down the middle of the state, old sand dunes along the coasts, and sandy deposits along rivers in the interior of the state. No Effect No Suitable Habitat Garber's Spurge Chamaesyce garberi LT Sandy soils over limestone in pine rocklands, hammock edges, coastal rock barrens, grass prairies, salt flats, beach ridges, and swales. No Effect No Suitable Habitat Ivory-billed Woodpecker Campephilus principalis LE Found in mature bottomland forest and cypress swamps with large hardwoods. No Effect No Suitable Habitat Kirtland’s Warbler Dendroica kirtlandii LE Occurs in young jack pine stands. No Effect No Suitable Habitat Loggerhead Sea Turtle Caretta caretta LT Loggerheads nest on ocean beaches, generally preferring high energy, relatively narrow, steeply sloped, coarse-grained beaches. Take up residence in areas often characterized by accumulations of floating material. No Effect No Suitable Habitat Miami Blue Butterfly Cyclargus (=Hemiargus) thomasi bethunebakeri LE Habitat includes tropical hardwood hammocks and associated margins. Caterpillars hatch and feed exclusively on gray nicker bean. No Effect No Suitable Habitat Piping Plover Charadrius melodus LT Suitable breeding habitats include wide beaches with highly clumped vegetation such as around small alkaline lakes and reservoir beaches. No Effect No Suitable Habitat 3.B.f Packet Pg. 395 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Ignite Wireless Informal Biological Report Kapok Tower Species Status* Required Habitat Potential Impact Reasoning Puma (=mountain Lion) Puma (=Felis) concolor (all subsp. except coryi) LT Diverse habitat including wetlands, swamps, upland forests, and stands of saw palmetto. No Effect No Suitable Habitat Red Knot Calidris canutus rufa LT Breeds on the tundra; during migration and in the winter it can be found on tidal flats, rocky shores, and beaches. No Effect No Suitable Habitat Red-cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis LE This endangered species is a habitat specialist that is strongly tied to old-growth pine forests that burn frequently, leaving the understory mostly clear of younger pines and hardwoods. They were once common in vast tracts of longleaf pine; now they also occur in loblolly, slash, and some other pine stands in the southeastern pine flatwoods. No Effect No Suitable Habitat Wood Stork Mycteria americana LT Prefers freshwater and estaurine wetlands, primarily nesting in cypress or mangrove swamps. Feed in freshwater marshes, narrow tidal creeks, or flooded tidal pools. No Effect No Suitable Habitat *LE: Listed Endangered; LT: Listed Threatened; PE: Proposed Endangered; PT: Proposed Threatened MIGRATORY BIRDS: Based on the results of a field reconnaissance and review of available maps maintained by the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and USFWS, the proposed project area is not located in a waterway, wildlife refuge, national wilderness area, grassland, forest area, ridge-line, coastline or area commonly known to have high incidences of fog or low clouds, where migratory birds may be found. The proposed project area is located in a primary flyway. While the probability that migratory birds will be found within the project area is minimal, the presence of migratory birds cannot be ruled out. The IPaC results suggest multiple migratory bird species may be located within the county of the project area. The USFWS has established “Service Guidance on the Siting, Construction, Operation and Decommissioning of Communication Towers” to reduce potential impact to migratory birds. These guidelines suggest, if collocating on an existing tower or non-tower structure is not possible, that proposed towers be constructed 199’ or less in overall height, without the use of guy wires, and in a facility with a minimum possible footprint. Additionally, the USFWS suggests towers be unlit or lit with only white or red strobe lights. All necessary guy wires should have daytime visual markers on the wires. Lastly, towers should be designed to encourage future collocations. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 396 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Ignite Wireless Informal Biological Report Kapok Tower While the proposed tower will have an overall height of 250’, according to the current available studies, such as the Michigan State Police Tower Study, towers above 500’ appear to have more of an effect on migratory birds than towers that are shorter than 500’. Based on the construction drawings provided by CitySwitch, we have concluded that steps have been taken to adhere to the USFWS tower siting guidelines including constructing with a minimum facility footprint, and to accommodate future collocations. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the information presented in this report, habitats necessary to support listed and potentially listed Threatened & Endangered species and Critical Habitats do not exist at the subject property or in the vicinity. Therefore, the proposed project is not likely to impact Threatened & Endangered species as contained in 50 CFR 17.11, 17.22, 222.23(a), 227.4, critical habitats as contained in 50 CFR 17.95, 17.96, and part 226, or migratory birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Joe Lee / Biologist Andrew Smith / Report Preparer RESCOM Environmental Corp. RESCOM Environmental Corp. RESCOM File 19080047 3.B.f Packet Pg. 397 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Ignite Wireless Informal Biological Report Kapok Tower SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Information, Planning, and Conservation (IPaC) Results U.S. Fish & Wildlife service National Wetlands Inventory Natural Resource Conservation Service Web Soil Survey North American Flyway Map 3.B.f Packet Pg. 398 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE South Florida Ecological Services Field Office 1339 20th Street Vero Beach, FL 32960-3559 Phone: (772) 562-3909 Fax: (772) 562-4288 http://fws.gov/verobeach In Reply Refer To: Consultation Code: 04EF2000-2019-SLI-1080 Event Code: 04EF2000-2019-E-03329 Project Name: Kapok Subject:List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project To Whom It May Concern: The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list. The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or designated critical habitat. August 30, 2019 3.B.f Packet Pg. 399 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 08/30/2019 Event Code: 04EF2000-2019-E-03329 2 A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2) (c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12. If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation, that listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service recommends that candidate species, proposed species and proposed critical habitat be addressed within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook" at: http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/TOC-GLOS.PDF Please be aware that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.), and projects affecting these species may require development of an eagle conservation plan (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/ eagle_guidance.html). Additionally, wind energy projects should follow the wind energy guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/) for minimizing impacts to migratory birds and bats. Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications towers (e.g., cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) can be found at: http:// www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm; http:// www.towerkill.com; and http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/ comtow.html. We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit to our office. Attachment(s): ▪Official Species List 3.B.f Packet Pg. 400 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 08/30/2019 Event Code: 04EF2000-2019-E-03329 1 Official Species List This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed action". This species list is provided by: South Florida Ecological Services Field Office 1339 20th Street Vero Beach, FL 32960-3559 (772) 562-3909 3.B.f Packet Pg. 401 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 08/30/2019 Event Code: 04EF2000-2019-E-03329 2 Project Summary Consultation Code:04EF2000-2019-SLI-1080 Event Code:04EF2000-2019-E-03329 Project Name:Kapok Project Type:COMMUNICATIONS TOWER Project Description:New 250 ft Tower Project Location: Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:// www.google.com/maps/place/26.21031128211728N81.60018047018193W Counties:Collier, FL 3.B.f Packet Pg. 402 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 08/30/2019 Event Code: 04EF2000-2019-E-03329 3 Endangered Species Act Species There is a total of 25 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list. Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species. IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries , as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the Department of Commerce. See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions. 1.NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce. Mammals NAME STATUS Florida Bonneted Bat Eumops floridanus No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8630 Endangered Florida Panther Puma (=Felis) concolor coryi No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1763 Habitat assessment guidelines: https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/guideline/assessment/population/8/office/41420.pdf Endangered Puma (=mountain Lion) Puma (=Felis) concolor (all subsp. except coryi) Population: FL No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6049 Similarity of Appearance (Threatened) West Indian Manatee Trichechus manatus There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. This species is also protected by the Marine Mammal Protection Act, and may have additional consultation requirements. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4469 Threatened 1 3.B.f Packet Pg. 403 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 08/30/2019 Event Code: 04EF2000-2019-E-03329 4 Birds NAME STATUS Audubon's Crested Caracara Polyborus plancus audubonii Population: FL pop. No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8250 Threatened Cape Sable Seaside Sparrow Ammodramus maritimus mirabilis There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6584 Endangered Everglade Snail Kite Rostrhamus sociabilis plumbeus There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7713 Species survey guidelines: https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/guideline/survey/population/1221/office/41420.pdf Endangered Florida Grasshopper Sparrow Ammodramus savannarum floridanus No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/32 Endangered Florida Scrub-jay Aphelocoma coerulescens No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6174 Threatened Ivory-billed Woodpecker Campephilus principalis No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8230 Endangered Kirtland's Warbler Setophaga kirtlandii (= Dendr oica kirtlandii) No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8078 Endangered Piping Plover Charadrius melodus Population: [Atlantic Coast and Northern Great Plains populations] - Wherever found, except those areas where listed as endangered. There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6039 Threatened Red Knot Calidris canutus rufa No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1864 Threatened Red-cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7614 Endangered Wood Stork Mycteria americana Threatened 3.B.f Packet Pg. 404 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 08/30/2019 Event Code: 04EF2000-2019-E-03329 5 NAME STATUS Population: AL, FL, GA, MS, NC, SC No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8477 Habitat assessment guidelines: https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/guideline/assessment/population/124/office/41420.pdf Reptiles NAME STATUS American Alligator Alligator mississippiensis No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/776 Similarity of Appearance (Threatened) American Crocodile Crocodylus acutus Population: U.S.A. (FL) There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6604 Threatened Eastern Indigo Snake Drymarchon corais couperi No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/646 Threatened Loggerhead Sea Turtle Caretta caretta Population: Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1110 Threatened Fishes NAME STATUS Atlantic Sturgeon (gulf Subspecies) Acipenser oxyrinchus (=oxyrhynchus) desotoi There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/651 Threatened 3.B.f Packet Pg. 405 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 08/30/2019 Event Code: 04EF2000-2019-E-03329 6 Insects NAME STATUS Bartram's Hairstreak Butterfly Strymon acis bartrami There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4837 Endangered Florida Leafwing Butterfly Anaea troglodyta floridalis There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6652 Endangered Miami Blue Butterfly Cyclargus (=Hemiargus) thomasi bethunebakeri No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3797 Endangered Flowering Plants NAME STATUS Florida Prairie-clover Dalea carthagenensis floridana No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2300 Endangered Garber's Spurge Chamaesyce garberi No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8229 Threatened Critical habitats THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S JURISDICTION. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 406 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Wetland 19080047 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, wetlands_team@fws.gov Wetlands Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Emergent Wetland Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Freshwater Pond Lake Other Riverine August 30, 2019 0 0.1 0.20.05 mi 0 0.15 0.30.075 km 1:7,218 This page was produced by the NWI mapper National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 407 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Soil Map—Collier County Area, Florida Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 9/13/2019 Page 1 of 32898600289870028988002898900289900028991002899200289930028994002899500289960028986002898700289880028989002899000289910028992002899300289940028995002899600439300439400439500439600439700439800439900440000440100440200440300440400440500440600440700440800 439300 439400 439500 439600 439700 439800 439900 440000 440100 440200 440300 440400 440500 440600 440700 440800 26° 12' 53'' N 81° 36' 29'' W26° 12' 53'' N81° 35' 31'' W26° 12' 19'' N 81° 36' 29'' W26° 12' 19'' N 81° 35' 31'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 17N WGS84 0 350 700 1400 2100Feet 0 100 200 400 600Meters Map Scale: 1:7,400 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 408 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Collier County Area, Florida Survey Area Data: Version 11, Sep 18, 2018 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Feb 6, 2015—Feb 12, 2015 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Soil Map—Collier County Area, Florida Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 9/13/2019 Page 2 of 3 3.B.f Packet Pg. 409 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 14 Pineda fine sand, limestone substratum, 0 to 2 percent slopes 13.3 6.6% 16 Oldsmar fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes 13.8 6.8% 18 Riviera fine sand, limestone substratum, 0 to 2 percent slopes 150.2 74.2% 21 Boca fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes 17.3 8.6% 99 Water 7.8 3.9% Totals for Area of Interest 202.4 100.0% Soil Map—Collier County Area, Florida Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 9/13/2019 Page 3 of 3 3.B.f Packet Pg. 410 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 411 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) USGS The National Map: Orthoimagery. Data refreshed April, 2019. National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000250 Feet Ü81°36'19.38"W 26°12'53.08"N 81°35'41.92"W 26°12'20.80"N SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT SPECIAL FLOODHAZARD AREAS Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE)Zone A, V, A99With BFE or Depth Zone AE, AO, AH, VE, AR Regulatory Floodway 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard, Areasof 1% annual chance flood with averagedepth less than one foot or with drainageareas of less than one square mile Zone X Future Conditions 1% AnnualChance Flood Hazard Zone XArea with Reduced Flood Risk due toLevee. See Notes.Zone X Area with Flood Risk due to Levee Zone D NO SCREEN Area of Minimal Flood Hazard Zone X Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard Zone D Channel, Culvert, or Storm SewerLevee, Dike, or Floodwall Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance17.5 Water Surface ElevationCoastal Transect Coastal Transect BaselineProfile BaselineHydrographic Feature Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE) Effective LOMRs Limit of StudyJurisdiction Boundary Digital Data Available No Digital Data Available Unmapped This map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of digital flood maps if it is not void as described below. The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemap accuracy standards The flood hazard information is derived directly from theauthoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA. This mapwas exported on 8/30/2019 at 10:14:15 AM and does notreflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date andtime. The NFHL and effective information may change orbecome superseded by new data over time. This map image is void if the one or more of the following mapelements do not appear: basemap imagery, flood zone labels,legend, scale bar, map creation date, community identifiers,FIRM panel number, and FIRM effective date. Map images forunmapped and unmodernized areas cannot be used forregulatory purposes. Legend OTHER AREAS OFFLOOD HAZARD OTHER AREAS GENERALSTRUCTURES OTHERFEATURES MAP PANELS 8 1:6,000 B 20.2 The pin displayed on the map is an approximate point selected by the user and does not represent an authoritative property location. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 412 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 8/30/2019 ArcGIS - USA Federal Lands https://www.arcgis.com/home/webmap/print.html 1/1 University of South Florida, County of Collier, FDEP, BuildingFootprintUSA, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P, METI/NASA, USGS, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA | nationamap.gov | University of South Florida, County of Collier, FDEP, BuildingFootprintUSA, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P, METI/NASA, USGS, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA USA Federal Lands This web map presents the federal and tribal land areas of the United States USA Federal Lands NationalMapFederalLands Forest Service Department of Defense Bureau of Land Management US Fish and Wildlife Service National Park Service Bureau of Indian Affairs Bureau of Reclamation Other Agencies World Hillshade World Hillshade 400ft 3.B.f Packet Pg. 413 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 414 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Wilderness Map Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, 10/17/2019, 2:38:06 PM 0 0.07 0.130.03 mi 0 0.1 0.20.05 km 1:4,514 Web AppBuilder for ArcGIS County of Collier, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P, USGS, EPA, USDA | Wilderness Institute, College of Forestry and Conservation, University of Montana, Missoula, MT 59812 | 3.B.f Packet Pg. 415 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) k e b e e 4ABAHAMAS SCALE 1:7,500,000 200 300 400 MILES 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 KILOMETERS o o oAlbers equal area projection, standard parallels 29 30'N and 45 30'N, central meridian 96 W Produced in the Division of Realty, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Desecheo Base Map Source: U.S. Geological Survey January 3, 2018 3.B.f Packet Pg. 416 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials 10/17/2019 Critical Habitat for Threatened & Endangered Species [USFWS] https://fws.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/print.html 1/1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service | County of Collier, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P, Intermap, USGS, METI/NASA, EPA, USDA Critical Habitat for Threatened & Endangered Species [USFWS] A specific geographic area(s) that contains features essential for the conservation of a threatened or endangered species and that may require special management and protection. Final Linear Features Final Polygon Features Proposed Linear Features Proposed Polygon Features 600ft 3.B.f Packet Pg. 417 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 418 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials J a c k s o n v i l l e M o b i le DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Wichita and Affiliated Tribes (Wichita, Keechi, Waco & Tawakonie), Oklahoma 3.B.f Packet Pg. 419 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Revised Date: 8.4.2020 PL20190002701 3.B.f Packet Pg. 420 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 421 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 422 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 423 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 424 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 425 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 426 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 427 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 428 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 429 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 430 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 431 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 432 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 433 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 434 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 435 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.fPacket Pg. 436Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.fPacket Pg. 437Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.fPacket Pg. 438Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 439 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 440 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 441 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 442 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 443 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.fPacket Pg. 444Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.fPacket Pg. 445Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.fPacket Pg. 446Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 447 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 448 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 449 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 450 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.fPacket Pg. 451Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.fPacket Pg. 452Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 453 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 454 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 455 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 456 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 457 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 458 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 459 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 460 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 461 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 462 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 463 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 464 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 465 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 466 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 467 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 468 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 469 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.fPacket Pg. 470Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 471 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 472 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 473 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 474 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 475 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 476 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 477 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 478 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 479 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 480 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 481 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 482 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 483 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 484 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 485 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 486 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 487 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 488 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 489 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 490 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 491 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 492 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 493 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 494 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 495 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 496 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 497 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 498 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 499 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 500 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 501 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 502 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 503 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 504 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 505 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 506 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 507 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 508 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 509 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 510 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 511 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 512 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 513 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 514 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 515 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 516 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 517 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 518 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Collier County Growth Management Division 2800 Horseshoe Drive N. Naples, FL 34104 239-252-2400 RECEIPT OF PAYMENT Receipt Number:2020727765 Transaction Number:2020-033013 Date Paid:04/14/2020 Amount Due:$5,625.00 Payment Details: Payment Method Amount Paid Check Number Credit Card $5,625.00 PL20190002701 Amount Paid:$5,625.00 Change / Overage:$0.00 Contact:Ignite Wireless - Kyle Lotze 102 Mary Alice Park Rd Cumming, GA 30040 FEE DETAILS: Fee Description Reference Number Original Fee Amount Paid GL Account Legal Advertising Fee PL20190002701 $1,125.00 $1,125.00 131-138326-341950 Credit PL20190002701 $5,000.00 $500.00 131-138326-341280 GL Transfer PL20190002701 $5,000.00 $500.00 131-138326-341276 Variance (non-residential)PL20190002701 $5,000.00 $4,500.00 131-138326-341280 Cashier Name:ThomasThompson Batch Number:9115 Entered By: RenaldPaul 3.B.f Packet Pg. 519 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Collier County Growth Management Division 2800 Horseshoe Drive N. Naples, FL 34104 239-252-2400 RECEIPT OF PAYMENT Receipt Number:2019685544 Transaction Number:2019-108818 Date Paid:11/26/2019 Amount Due:$500.00 Payment Details: Payment Method Amount Paid Check Number Credit Card $500.00 15695059-C1465 1667 Amount Paid:$500.00 Change / Overage:$0.00 Contact:Ignite Wireless - Kyle Lotze 102 Mary Alice Park Rd Cumming, GA 30040 FEE DETAILS: Fee Description Reference Number Original Fee Amount Paid GL Account Pre-application Meeting PL20190002701 $500.00 $500.00 131-138326-341276 Cashier Name:AlinaHarris Batch Number:8772 Entered By: JohnMartin 3.B.f Packet Pg. 520 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 521 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 522 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 523 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 524 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 525 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 526 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Applicant/Agent may also send site plans or conceptual plans for review in advance if desired. PL20190002701 – Kapok St SLC009 AT&T Firstnet Cell Tower (VA) - PRE-APP INFORMATION Assigned Ops Staff: Ellen Murray Camden Smith, (Ops Staff) • Name and Number of who submitted pre-app request Jim Alderman / 954-303-3170 / jjwirelessconsult@yahoo.com • Agent to list for PL# City Switch / Jim Alderman • Owner of property (all owners for all parcels)  JOHANNES STEFFENS (Parcel: 00307840002) • Confirm Purpose of Pre-App: (Rezone, etc.) Pre-Application for Variance • Please list the details of the project including density, proposed or considered uses for the project, size of commercial vs. residential, number of homes/units/offices/docks (any that apply): The project is for a 250’ self-support tower within a parcel (00307840002) located east of Kapok St. This parcel has the agricultural zoning designation with the Rural Fringe Mixed Use and North Bell Meade Overlay districts. The proposed tower will be located within a 75’x75’ compound centered within a 100’x100’ lease area. The parcel is approximately 170’ wide and the center of the tower is being proposed 74’ from the eastern property line. • Details about Project (choose type that applies): Variance – We are seeking a variance from the ½ tower height setback requirement. The code states that a tower should be setback the greater of ½ the tower height or the collapse radius. Please note, we have a certified letter stating that, in the unlikely event of total separation, the proposed tower would result in collapse within a the 100’x100’ lease area. REQUIRED Supplemental Information provided by: Name Kyle Lotze Title Project manager Email klotze@ignitewireless.com Phone 470-239-0846 Created April 5, 2017 Location: K:\CDES Planning Services\Current\Zoning Staff Information STAFF FORM FOR SUPPLEMENTAL PRE-APPLICATION MEETING INFORMATION 3.B.f Packet Pg. 527 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Collier County, FL Zoning Division 2800 North Horseshoe Dr Naples, FL 34104 Re: Variance Application for Wireless Telecommunications Tower CitySwitch II, LLC Kapok St./FLC009 To Whom It May Concern, We are hereby applying for a Setback Variance of the required half of the tower height setback (125ft) as required by LDC 2.03.08.A.2.a.3.x. of the Collier County Zoning Regulations in order to construct and maintain a Wireless Telecommunications Tower on the property located at Kapok Street, Naples, FL 34117. We are proud to say that the proposed structure will be utilized by AT&T to support the deployment of FirstNet. If unfamiliar, in 2017 the Department of Commerce and First Responder Network Authority (FirstNet) signed a 25-year contract with AT&T to build the first nationwide wireless network for America’s First Responders. The FirstNet network is planned to cover all 50 states, five U.S. territories and the District of Columbia, including rural communities and tribal lands. In 2018, CitySwitch was honored to execute an agreement with AT&T to assist in building the infrastructure needed for the deployment of FirstNet as well as their existing wireless network needs. Additional information on FirstNet can be found online at https://firstnet.gov/ . Should you have any questions regarding the application and/or supporting documents provided, please feel free to contact Jim Alderman at 954-303-3170 or email at jjwirelessconsult@yahoo.com . 3.B.f Packet Pg. 528 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Transforming public safety communications The First Responder Network Authority (FirstNet) has entered into a public-private partnership with AT&T to build the first nationwide wireless broadband network dedicated to first responders for use in disasters, emergencies and daily public safety work. FirstNet provides initial funding, 20 MHz of spectrum and deep public safety expertise to the partnership. AT&T brings a proven track record and strong commitment to public safety, as well as the commercial expertise and nationwide resources to deploy, maintain and operate the network. This 25-year partnership offers the best overall value to America and its public safety responders – both from an investment perspective and in terms of the lifesaving technology it will put in the hands of law enforcement, fire and emergency medical personnel in communities across the nation. FirstNet will serve... FIRST RESPONDERS COMMUNITIES THE NATION IN fire, police, EMS counties, cities, tribal, rural ACROSS 50 states, territories & DC Technology first responders need to save lives, protect communities MODERNIZED PRIORITIZED SPECIALIZED innovative app & device ecosystem network improvements & upgrades commercially proven cybersecurity solutions emergency communications receive highest priority rapid buildout with public safety input nationwide public safety solutions leveraging existing infrastructure robust coverage where public safety needs it connectivity for advanced mobile data highly available customer care Learn more at FirstNet.gov/mediakit 5 3.B.f Packet Pg. 529 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) info@firstnet.gov | www.firstnet.gov | 571-665-6100 TOP10 ASKED QUESTIONS FREQUENTLY 1. What is the First Responder Network Authority? The First Responder Network Authority is the independent authority established by Congress to deliver a nationwide broadband network dedicated to public safety. The Network is strengthening public safety users’ communications capabilities, enabling them to respond more quickly and effectively to accidents, disasters, and emergencies. The First Responder Network Authority is led by a Board of leaders and executives from the public safety community; federal, state, and local governments; and the technology, finance, and wireless sectors. It has a staff of about 200 employees with expertise in public safety, telecommunications, customer service, technology, procurement, and other areas needed to develop the Network. It is headquartered in Reston, VA, and has a technology center and lab in Boulder, CO. 2. What led to the creation of the First Responder Network Authority? The 9/11 terrorist attacks brought to the forefront the many communications challenges that first responders face during emergencies and disasters. These issues were captured in the 9/11 Commission Report, which identified gaps in emergency communications and recommended a nationwide network for law enforcement, fire, and emergency medical personnel communications. The public safety community united to fulfill the 9/11 Commission’s recommendation. Public safety organizations and associations advocated before Congress for a dedicated, reliable wireless network for first responders. Their advocacy efforts led to the passage of legislation in 2012 to create the agency to deploy the Network in all U.S. states and territories, including rural communities and tribal nations. 3. How has public safety been involved in the vision for the FirstNet network? Public safety officials have worked closely with the First Responder Network Authority since its inception in 2012 to ensure the Network meets first responders’ needs – today and in the future. The agency’s outreach and consultation efforts have connected the organization to more than 1.8 million first responders and state public safety and technology executives across the country. Specifically, the First Responder Network Authority has consulted extensively with state single points of contact (SPOCs) in each of the 50 U.S. states, 5 territories, and the District of Columbia, as well as local/municipal, tribal and federal public safety leaders. It also coordinates with public safety through the Public Safety Advisory Committee (PSAC), which provides guidance and subject matter expertise from a first responder perspective. Public safety leaders at the national, state and local levels continue to advocate for and support deployment of the Network. 4. How was AT&T selected to build, operate, and maintain the FirstNet network? The First Responder Network Authority and the Department of Interior made the 25-year award based on the determination of the overall best value solution for FirstNet and public safety. The buildup to the award included a fair, competitive procurement process that began in January 2016 with release of the Network RFP. The procurement process followed the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and encouraged offerors to provide innovative solutions that could meet or exceed the needs of public safety. The procurement was open to all entities, whether traditional wireless companies or new entrants, provided their proposal could meet the RFP’s statement of objectives. AT&T was selected on a best-value award that considered financial sustainability and was based on more than just a technically acceptable solution at the lowest cost. The evaluation of proposals assessed the offerors’ ability to submit a cost-effective and innovative model, and to meet or exceed the 16 objectives and evaluation factors outlined in the FirstNet RFP. 5. Why is the Network being built and operated through a public-private partnership? The First Responder Network Authority and AT&T are modernizing and improving public safety communications by leveraging private sector resources, infrastructure, and cost-saving synergies to deploy and operate the Network. This public-private model also helps keep costs down for American taxpayers. To do this, Congress used the sale of communications airwaves (or spectrum) to fund FirstNet’s initial operations and help start network deployment; the $7 billion FirstNet received in initial funding came from FCC spectrum auction revenue, not taxpayer funds. If the federal government were to build, maintain and operate this Network, the estimated cost would be tens of billions of dollars over 25 years. The Government Accountability Office has estimated it could cost up to $47 billion over 10 years to construct and operate the Network. With this partnership approach, the First Responder Network Authority and AT&T do not need any additional federal funding to build and operate the Network – it is a fully funded, self-sustaining Network. In return, America’s first responders get services far above and beyond what they have today over a first-class broadband network dedicated to their communications needs. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 530 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) info@firstnet.gov | www.firstnet.gov | 571-665-6100 6. What are the key terms this public-private partnership? Congress intended for the Network to be built and operated as a public-private partnership that brings together the best of the private sector, including commercial best practices, infrastructure, and resources – with the First Responder Network Authority’s public safety expertise. This approach will lead to a fully-funded, self-sustaining Network that will serve public safety for years to come. This business model is built upon the efficient use of resources, infrastructure, cost-saving synergies, and incentives, including: • 20 MHz of federally owned spectrum and $6.5 billion in initial funding to the partnership; in return AT&T will deploy and operate a nation- wide high-speed broadband network for public safety over 25 years. • AT&T will invest about $40 billion over the life of the contract to build, operate, deploy, and maintain the Network, and together with the First Responder Network Authority will help ensure the Network evolves with the needs of public safety. • AT&T can use FirstNet’s spectrum when it is not being used by public safety for other, commercial purposes. The company will prioritize first responders over any other commercial users. • First Responder Network Authority will oversee the contract to ensure it delivers innovation, technology and customer care to public safety through various mechanisms, including subscriber adoption targets, milestone buildouts, disincentive fees and other mechanisms outlined in the contract. 7. What will the FirstNet Network provide first responders that they don’t have today? Today, in emergencies and at large events, heavy public use can lead to wireless communications networks becoming overloaded and inaccessible. In those instances, public safety users are treated the same as any other commercial or enterprise user, and communications can be limited due to congestion and capacity issues. With the FirstNet Network, public safety will get a dedicated “fast lane” that provides highly secure communications every day and for every emergency. It will deliver specialized features to public safety that are not available on wireless networks today – such as priority access; preemption; more network capacity; and a resilient, hardened connection. The Network will deliver more than just a public-safety-dedicated wireless connection – it is also creating devices and apps ecosystems that will connect first responders to innovative, life-saving technologies. 8. How will the Network benefit first responders and help them do their jobs better? FirstNet will improve communications, response times and outcomes for first responders from coast-to-coast, in rural and urban areas, inland and on boarders – leading to safer, and more secure communities. The Network will provide first responders with innovation and robust capacity so they can take advantage of advanced technologies, tools and services during emergencies, such as: • Applications that allow first responders to reliably share videos, text messages, photos and other information during incidents in near real-time; • Advanced capabilities, like camera-equipped connected drones and robots, to deliver images of wildfires, floods or other events; • Improved location services to help with mapping capabilities during rescue and recovery operations; and • Wearables that could relay biometric data of a patient to the hospital or alert when a fire fighter is in distress. Network technology will also be tested and validated through the FirstNet Innovation and Test Lab, located in Boulder, CO, so first responders will have the proven tools they need in disasters and emergencies. 9. What’s happening with FirstNet now? All 50 states, five U.S. territories and Washington, D.C., have “opted in,” to FirstNet, meaning each has accepted its individual State Plan detailing how the network will be deployed in their state/territory. The First Responder Network Authority’s public-private partnership with AT&T provides first responders with immediate access to mission-critical capabilities over the FirstNet network. This includes priority and preemption features that give first responders their own “fast lane” on the public safety network to communicate and share information during emergencies, large events, or other situations when commercial networks could become congested. FirstNet is the only broadband network to provide ruthless preemption for public safety. Key FirstNet activities include: Expanding the Network and Building Out Band 14: The First Responder Network Authority has issued work orders to deploy the RANs. This gave AT&T the green light to expand FirstNet’s footprint and deploy Band 14 capacity and coverage throughout the nation, providing first responders with the bandwidth and mission critical connections they need to communicate, share information, and use innovative technologies every day and in every emergency. Driving public safety innovation: FirstNet is also unlocking a new technology marketplace for public safety, enabling first responders to benefit from advancements in innovation. The FirstNet App Catalog store will be filling up with FirstNet-approved mobile apps that are optimized for public safety use over the Network. Securing emergency communications: FirstNet’s first-of-its-kind core infrastructure will give first responders the dedicated, highly secure, non-commercial network they deserve. The FirstNet Core, delivered in March 2018, provides full encryption of public safety data over FirstNet and end-to-end cyber security. FirstNet subscribers also have access to a dedicated Security Operations Center, offering 24/7/365 support. Engaging with public safety: The First Responder Network Authority will continue to engage with public safety in the states, territories, federal agencies, and tribal nations to ensure the network meets their needs and incorporate their feedback in the design of future FirstNet products and services. 10. How can I learn more? Stay up-to-date on the First Responder Network Authority activities and the building and deployment of FirstNet at www.firstnet.gov. Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 531 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 532 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) KAPOK STREET12906066NW 1/4, SEC. 15, T-49-S, R-27-ECOLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDARAWLAND TOWER SURVEY PROJECT NO.19-1586SMW Engineering Group, Inc. FDH-NC158 Business Center Drive Birmingham, Alabama 35244 Ph: 205-252-6985www.smweng.com 3.B.fPacket Pg. 533Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) NW 1/4, SEC. 15, T-49-S, R-27-ECOLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDARAWLAND TOWER SURVEY PROJECT NO.19-1586SMW Engineering Group, Inc.SECTION OVERVIEWNOT TO SCALEFDH-NC158 Business Center Drive Birmingham, Alabama 35244 Ph: 205-252-6985www.smweng.comKAPOK STREET129060663.B.fPacket Pg. 534Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) NW 1/4, SEC. 15, T-49-S, R-27-ECOLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDARAWLAND TOWER SURVEY PROJECT NO.19-1586SMW Engineering Group, Inc.PARENT TRACT OVERVIEWNOT TO SCALEFDH-NC158 Business Center Drive Birmingham, Alabama 35244 Ph: 205-252-6985www.smweng.com ’’KAPOK STREET129060663.B.fPacket Pg. 535Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 536 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 537 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 538 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 539 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 540 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 541 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 542 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 543 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 544 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 545 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 546 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 547 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 548 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 549 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 550 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 551 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 552 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 553 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 554 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 555 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 556 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 557 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 558 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 559 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 560 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 561 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 562 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 563 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 564 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 565 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 566 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 567 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 568 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 569 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 570 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 571 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 572 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 2.03.01 - Agricultural Districts. A. Rural Agricultural District (A). The purpose and intent of the rural agricultural district (A) is to provide lands for agricultural, pastoral, and rural land uses by accommodating traditional agricultural, agricultural related activities and facilities, support facilities related to agricultural needs, and conservation uses. Uses that are generally considered compatible to agricultural uses that would not endanger or damage the agricultural, environmental, potable water, or wildlife resources of the County, are permissible as conditional uses in the A district. The A district corresponds to and implements the Agricultural/Rural land use designation on the future land use map of the Collier County GMP, and in some instances, may occur in the designated urban area. The maximum density permissible in the rural agricultural district within the urban mixed use district shall be guided, in part, by the density rating system contained in the future land use element of the GMP. The maximum density permissible or permitted in A district shall not exceed the density permissible under the density rating system. The maximum density permissible in the A district within the agricultural/rural district of the future land use element of the Collier County GMP shall be consistent with and not exceed the density permissible or permitted under the agricultural/rural district of the future land use element. 1. The following subsections identify the uses that are permissible by right and the uses that are allowable as accessory or conditional uses in the rural agricultural district (A). a. Permitted uses. 1. Single-family dwelling . 2. Agricultural activities, including, but not limited to: Crop raising; horticulture; fruit and nut production; forestry; groves; nurseries; ranching; beekeeping; poultry and egg production; milk production; livestock raising, and aquaculture for native species subject to Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission permits. i. The following permitted uses shall only be allowed on parcels 20 acres in size or greater: a) dairying; b) ranching; c) poultry and egg production; d) milk production; e) livestock raising; and f) animal breeding, raising, training, stabling or kenneling . ii. On parcels less than 20 acres in size, individual property owners are not precluded from the keeping of the following for personal use and not in association with a commercial agricultural activity provided there are no open feed lots: a) Fowl or poultry, not to exceed 25 in total number; and b) Horses and livestock (except for hogs) not to exceed two such animals for each acre. i. Notwithstanding the above, hog(s) may be kept for a 16 week period in preparation for showing and sale at the annual Collier County Fair and/or the Immokalee Livestock show. The following standards shall apply: a) One hog per child enrolled in a 4-H Youth Development Program, Collier County Fair Program or similar program is permitted. In no case shall there be more than 2 hogs per acre. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 573 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) b) Premises shall be fenced and maintained in a clean, healthful, and sanitary condition. c) Premises or roofed structure used for the sheltering, feeding, or confinement of such animals shall be setback a minimum of 30 feet from lot lines and a minimum of 100 feet from any dwelling unit on an adjacent parcel of land. d) Hog(s) shall not be returned to the property once removed for showing and/or sale. 3. Wholesale reptile breeding and raising (non-venomous), subject to the following standards: i. Minimum 20 acre parcel size; ii. Any roofed structure used for the shelter and/or feeding of such reptiles shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from any lot line . 4. Wildlife management, plant and wildlife conservancies, wildlife refuges and sanctuaries. 5. Conservation uses. 6. Oil and gas exploration subject to state drilling permits and Collier County site development plan review procedures. 7. Family care facilities , subject to section 5.05.04. 8. Communications towers up to specified height, subject to section 5.05.09. 9. Essential services , as set forth in section 2.01.03. 10. Schools, public, including " Educational plants ." b. Accessory uses. 1. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to the uses permitted as of right in the A district. 2. Farm labor housing, subject to section 5.05.03. 3. Retail sale of fresh, unprocessed agricultural products , grown primarily on the property and subject to a review of traffic circulation, parking, and safety concerns pursuant to the submission of a site improvement plan as provided for in section 10.02.03. 4. Packinghouse or similar agricultural processing of farm products produced on the property subject to the following restrictions: i. Agricultural packing, processing or similar facilities shall be located on a major or minor arterial street , or shall have access to an arterial street by a public street that does not abut properties zoned RSF-1 thru RSF-6, RMF-6, RMF-12, RMF-16, RT, VR, MH, TTRVC and PUD or are residentially used. ii. A buffer yard of not less than 150 feet in width shall be provided along each boundary of the site which abuts any residentially zoned or used property, and shall contain an Alternative B type buffer as defined within section 4.06.00. Such buffer and buffer yard shall be in lieu of front, side, or rear yards on that portion of the lot which abuts those districts and uses identified in subsection 2.03.01 A.1.b. 4. i. above. iii. The facility shall emit no noxious, toxic, or corrosive dust, dirt, fumes, vapors, or gases which can cause damage to human health, to animals or vegetation, or to other forms of property beyond the lot line of the use creating the emission. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 574 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) iv. A site development plan shall be provided in accordance with section 10.02.03. 5. Excavation and related processing and production subject to the following criteria: i. The activity is clearly incidental to the agricultural development of the property. ii. The affected area is within a surface water management system for agricultural use as permitted by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). iii. The amount of excavated material removed from the site cannot exceed 4,000 cubic yards. Amounts in excess of 4,000 cubic yards shall require conditional use approval for earthmining, pursuant to the procedures and conditions set forth in LDC section 10.08.00 and the Administrative Code. 6. Guesthouses, subject to section 5.03.03. 7. Private boathouses and docks on lake, canal or waterway lots, subject to section 5.03.06. 8. Use of a mobile home as a temporary residence while a permanent single-family dwelling is being constructed, subject to the following: i. Receipt of a temporary use permit from the Development Services Director, pursuant to section 5.04.04, that allows for use of a mobile home while a permanent single-family dwelling is being built; ii. Assurance that the temporary use permit for the mobile home will expire at the same time of the building permit for the single-family dwelling, or upon the completion of the single-family dwelling, whichever comes first; iii. Proof that prior to the issuance of a final certificate of occupancy for the single- family dwelling, the mobile home is removed from the premises; and iv. The mobile home must be removed at the termination of the permitted period. 9. Use of a mobile home as a residence in conjunction with bona fide agricultural activities subject to the following: i. The applicant shall submit a completed application to the site development review director, or his designee, for approval of a temporary use permit to utilize a mobile home as a residence in conjunction with a bona fide commercial agricultural activity as described in subsection 2.03.01 A.1.2. Included with this application shall be a conceptual plot plan of the subject property depicting the location of the proposed mobile home ; the distance of the proposed mobile home to all property lines and existing or proposed structures ; and, the location, acreage breakdown, type and any intended phasing plan for the bona fide agricultural activity. ii. The receipt of any and all local, state, and federal permits required for the agricultural use and/or to place the mobile home on the subject site including, but not limited to, an agricultural clearing permit, building permit(s), ST permits, and the like. iii. The use of the mobile home shall be permitted on a temporary basis only, not to exceed the duration of the bona fide commercial agricultural activity for which the mobile home is an accessory use . The initial temporary use permit may be issued for a maximum of three years, and may, upon submission of a written request accompanied by the applicable fee, be renewed annually thereafter provided that there is continuing operation of the bona fide commercial agricultural activities. iv. The applicant utilizing, for the bona fide commercial agricultural activity, a tract of land a minimum of five acres in size. Any property lying within public road rights- of-way shall not be included in the minimum acreage calculations. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 575 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) v. A mobile home , for which a temporary use permit in conjunction with a bona fide commercial agricultural activity is requested, shall not be located closer than 100 feet from any county highway right-of-way line, 200 feet from any state highway right-of-way , or 500 feet from any federal highway right-of-way line. 10. Recreational facilities that serve as an integral part of a residential development and have been designated, reviewed and approved on a site development plan or subdivision master plan for that development . Recreational facilities may include but are not limited to golf course, clubhouse, community center building and tennis facilities, parks , playgrounds and playfields. c. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the rural agricultural district (A), subject to the standards and procedures established in LDC section 10.08.00 and the Administrative Code. 1. Extraction or earthmining, and related processing and production not incidental to the agricultural development of the property. NOTE: "Extraction related processing and production" is not related to "Oil extraction and related processing" as defined in this Code. 2. Sawmills. 3. Zoo, aquarium, aviary, botanical garden, or other similar uses. 4. Hunting cabins. 5. Aquaculture for nonnative or exotic species, subject to Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission permits. 6. Wholesale reptile breeding or raising (venomous) subject to the following standards; i. Minimum 20 acre parcel size. ii. Any roofed structure used for the shelter and/or feeding of such reptiles shall be located at a minimum of 100 feet away from any lot line . 7. Churches . 8. Private landing strips for general aviation, subject to any relevant state and federal regulations. 9. Cemeteries. 10. Schools, private. 11. Child care centers and adult day care centers . 12. Collection and transfer sites for resource recovery. 13. Communication towers above specified height, subject to section 5.05.09. 14. Social and fraternal organizations. 15. Veterinary clinic. 16. Group care facilities (category I and II); care units ; nursing homes; assisted living facilities pursuant to § 400.402 F.S. and ch. 58A-5 F.A.C.; and continuing care retirement communities pursuant to § 651 F.S. and ch. 4-193 F.A.C., all subject to section 5.05.04 when located within the Urban Designated Area on the Future Land Use Map to the Collier County Growth Management Plan. 17. Golf courses and/or golf driving ranges. 18. Oil and gas field development and production subject to state field development permits. 19. Sports instructional schools and camps. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 576 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 20. Sporting and recreational camps. 21. Retail plant nurseries subject to the following conditions: i. Retail sales shall be limited primarily to the sale of plants, decorative products such as mulch or stone, fertilizers, pesticides, and other products and tools accessory to or required for the planting or maintenance of said plants. ii. Additionally, the sale of fresh produce is permissible at retail plant nurseries as an incidental use of the property as a retail plant nursery. iii. The sale of large power equipment such as lawn mowers, tractors, and the like shall not be permitted in association with a retail plant nursery in the rural agricultural district. 22. Asphaltic and concrete batch making plants subject to the following conditions: i. Asphaltic or concrete batch making plants may be permitted within the area designated agricultural on the future land use map of the future land use element of the growth management plan. ii. The minimum site area shall not be less than ten acres. iii. Principal access shall be from a street designated collector or higher classification. iv. Raw materials storage, plant location and general operations around the plant shall not be located or conducted within 100 feet of any exterior boundary. v. The height of raw material storage facilities shall not exceed a height of fifty (50) feet. vi. Hours of operation shall be limited to two (2) hours before sunrise to sunset. vii. The minimum setback from the principal road frontage shall be 150 feet for operational facilities and seventy-five (75) feet for supporting administrative offices and associated parking. viii. An earthen berm achieving a vertical height of eight feet or equivalent vegetative screen with eighty (80) percent opacity one (1) year after issuance of certificate of occupancy shall be constructed or created around the entire perimeter of the property. ix. The plant should not be located within the Greenline Area of Concern for the Florida State Park System as established by the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP): within the Area of Critical State Concern as depicted on the Future Land Use Map GMP; within 1,000 feet of a natural reservation ; or within any County, State or federal jurisdictional wetland area. 23. Cultural, ecological, or recreational facilities that provide opportunities for educational experience, eco-tourism or agri-tourism and their related modes of transporting participants, viewers or patrons where applicable, subject to all applicable federal, state and local permits. Tour operations, such as, but not limited to airboats, swamp buggies, horses and similar modes of transportation, shall be subject to the following criteria: i. Permits or letters of exemption from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, and the South Florida Water Management District shall be presented to the planning services director prior to site development plan approval. ii. The petitioner shall post the property along the entire property line with no trespassing signs approximately every 300 yards. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 577 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) iii. The petitioner shall utilize only trails identified and approved on the site development plan . Any existing trails shall be utilized before the establishment of new trails. iv. Motor vehicles shall be equipped with engines which include spark arrestors and mufflers designed to reduce noise. v. The maximum size of any vehicle, the number of vehicles, and the passenger capacity of any vehicle shall be determined by the board of zoning appeals during the conditional use process. vi. Motor vehicles shall be permitted to operate during daylight hours which means, one hour after sunrise to one hour before sunset. vii. Molestation of wildlife, including feeding, shall be prohibited. viii. Vehicles shall comply with state and United States Coast Guard regulations, if applicable. ix. The board of zoning appeals shall review such a conditional use for tour operations, annually. If during the review, at an advertised public hearing, it is determined by the board of zoning appeals that the tour operation is detrimental to the environment, and no adequate corrective action has been taken by the petitioner, the board of zoning appeals may rescind the conditional use . 24. Agricultural activities on parcels less than 20 acres in size: i. animal breeding, raising, training, stabling, or kenneling. ii. dairying; iii. livestock raising; iv. milk production; v. poultry and egg production; and vi. ranching. 25. The commercial production, raising or breeding of exotic animals, other than animals typically used for agricultural purposes or production, subject to the following standards: i. Minimum 20 acre parcel size. ii. Any roofed structure used for the shelter and/or feeding of such animals shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from any lot line . 26. Essential services , as set forth in subsection 2.01.03 G. 27. Model homes and model sales centers, subject to compliance with all other LDC requirements, to include but not limited to section 5.04.04. 28. Ancillary plants . d. Prohibited uses. 1. Owning, maintaining or operating any facility or part thereof for the following purposes is prohibited: a) Fighting or baiting any animal by the owner of such facility or any other person or entity. b) Raising any animal or animals intended to be ultimately used or used for fighting or baiting purposes. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 578 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) c) For purposes of this subsection, the term baiting is defined as set forth in § 828.122(2)(a), F.S., as it may be amended from time to time. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 579 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 2.03.08 - Rural Fringe Zoning Districts A. Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District (RFMU District). 1. Purpose and scope. The purpose and intent of the RFMU District is to provide a transition between the Urban and Estates Designated lands and between the Urban and Agricultural/Rural and Conservation designated lands farther to the east. The RFMU District employs a balanced approach, including both regulations and incentives, to protect natural resources and private property rights, providing for large areas of open space, and allowing, in designated areas, appropriate types, density and intensity of development. The RFMU District allows for a mixture of urban and rural levels of service, including limited extension of central water and sewer, schools, recreational facilities, commercial uses, and essential services deemed necessary to serve the residents of the RFMU District. The innovative planning and development techniques which are required and/or encouraged within the RFMU District were developed to preserve existing natural resources, including habitat for listed species, to retain a rural, pastoral, or park-like appearance from the major public rights-of-way, and to protect private property rights. a. Establishment of RFMU Zoning Overlay District. In order to implement the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) designation in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP, the RFMU District shall be designated as "RFMUO" on the Official Zoning Atlas and is hereby established. The RFMU District replaces the underlying zoning district where that underlying zoning district is A, Rural Agricultural, except where development standards are omitted in the RFMU District. The County-wide Future Land Use Map is located in the Future Land Use Element of the GMP or can be obtained from the Growth Management Department, located at 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104. The lands included in the RFMU District and to which LDC section 2.03.08 apply are depicted by the following map: 3.B.f Packet Pg. 580 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) b. Exemptions. The requirements, limitations and allowances of this section shall not apply to, affect or limit the continuation of existing uses. Existing uses shall include: those uses for which all required permits were issued prior to June 19, 2002; or, projects for which a Conditional use has been approved by the County prior to June 19, 2002; or, projects for which a Rezone petition has been approved by the County prior to June 19, 2002 - inclusive of all lands not zoned A, Rural Agricultural; or, land use petitions for which a completed application has been submitted prior to June 19, 2002. The continuation of existing uses shall include on-site expansions of those uses if such expansions are 3.B.f Packet Pg. 581 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) consistent with or clearly ancillary to the existing uses. Hereafter, such previously approved developments shall be deemed to be consistent with the Plan's Goals, Objectives and Policies for the RFMUD , and they may be built out in accordance with their previously approved plans. Changes to these previous approvals shall also be deemed consistent with the Plan's Goals, Policies and Objectives for the RFMUD as long as they do not result in an increase in development density or intensity. c. Ordinance superceded. Ordinance Number 98-17 is hereby expressly superceded. Any development in the area formerly subject to that ordinance shall henceforth conform to the provisions of this Section and all other provisions of this Code that are applicable to development within the RFMU district . 2. RFMU receiving lands. RFMU receiving lands are those lands within the RFMU district that have been identified as being most appropriate for development and to which residential development units may be transferred from RFMU sending lands . Based on the evaluation of available data, RFMU receiving lands have a lesser degree of environmental or listed species habitat value than RFMU sending lands and generally have been disturbed through development or previous or existing agricultural operations. Various incentives are employed to direct development into RFMU receiving lands and away from RFMU sending lands , thereby maximizing native vegetation and habitat preservation and restoration. Such incentives include, but are not limited to: the TDR process; clustered development ; density bonus incentives; and, provisions for central sewer and water. Within RFMU receiving lands , the following standards shall apply, except as noted in subsection 2.03.08 A.1. above, or as more specifically provided in an applicable PUD. a. Outside rural villages . (1) NBMO Exemption. Except as specifically provided herein NBMO Receiving Lands are only subject to the provisions of section 2.03.08 C. (2) Maximum Density . (a) Base density . The base residential density allowable within RFMU receiving lands , exclusive of the applicable density blending provisions set forth in section 2.05.02, is 1 unit per 5 gross acres (0.2 dwelling units per acre) or, for those legal nonconforming lots or parcels in existence as of June 22, 1999, 1 unit per lot or parcel . (b) Additional density i. Additional Density Allowed Through the TDR Process. Outside of rural villages , the maximum density achievable in RFMU Receiving Lands through TDR credits and TDR Bonus Credits is 1 dwelling unit per acre. a) Clustering Required. Where the transfer of development rights is employed to increase residential density within RFMU receiving lands , such residential development shall be clustered in accordance with the following provisions: i) Central water and sewer shall be extended to the project. Where County sewer or water services may not be available concurrent with development in RFMU receiving lands , interim private water and sewer facilities may be approved. ii) The maximum lot size allowable for a single-family detached dwelling unit is 1 acre. iii) The clustered development shall be located on the site so as to provide to the greatest degree practicable: protection for listed species habitat; preservation of the highest quality native vegetation ; connectivity to adjacent natural reservations or 3.B.f Packet Pg. 582 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) preservation areas on adjacent developments; and, creation, maintenance or enhancement of wildlife corridors. b) Minimum Project Size. The minimum project size required in order to receive transferred dwelling units is 40 contiguous acres. c) Emergency Preparedness. In order to reduce the likelihood of threat to life and property from a tropical storm or hurricane event any development approved under the provisions of this section shall demonstrate that adequate emergency preparedness and disaster prevention measures have been taken by, at a minimum: i) Designing community facilities, schools, or other public buildings to serve as storm shelters if located outside of areas that may experience inundation during a Category 1 or worse storm event. While the need to utilize such shelters will be determined on a case-by-case basis, areas which are susceptible to inundation during such storm events are identified on the Sea, Lake, and Overland Surge from Hurricane (SLOSH) Map for Collier County. ii) Evaluating impacts on evacuation routes, if any, and working with the Collier County Emergency Management staff to develop an Emergency Preparedness Plan to include provisions for storm shelter space, a plan for emergency evacuation, and other provisions that may be deemed appropriate and necessary to mitigate against a potential disaster. iii) Working with the Florida Division of Forestry, Collier County Emergency Management staff, and the managers of any adjacent or nearby public lands, to develop a Wildfire Prevention and Mitigation Plan that will reduce the likelihood of threat to life and property from wildfires. This plan shall address, at a minimum: project structural design; the use of materials and location of structures so as to reduce wildfire threat; firebreaks and buffers ; water features; and, the rationale for prescribed burning on adjacent or nearby lands. ii. Additional density Allowed Through Other Density Bonuses. Once a density of one (1) unit per acre is achieved through the use of TDR credits and TDR Bonus credits , additional density may be achieved as follows: a) A density bonus of 0.1 unit per acre shall be allowed for the preservation of additional native vegetation as set forth in Section 3.05.07 E. 1. of the Code. b) A density bonus of 0.1 units per acre shall be allowed for projects that incorporate those additional wetlands mitigation measures set forth in Section 3.05.07 F. 4. b. of the Code. (3) Allowable Uses. (a) Uses Permitted as of Right. The following uses are permitted as of right, or as uses accessory to permitted uses: i. Agricultural activities, including, but not limited to: Crop raising; horticulture; fruit and nut production; forestry; groves; nurseries; ranching; beekeeping; poultry and egg production; milk production; livestock raising, and aquaculture for native species subject to the State of Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission permits. Owning, maintaining or operating any facility or part thereof for the following purposes is prohibited: 3.B.f Packet Pg. 583 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) a) Fighting or baiting any animal by the owner of such facility or any other person or entity. b) Raising any animal or animals intended to be ultimately used or used for fighting or baiting purposes. c) For purposes of this subsection, the term baiting is defined as set forth in § 828.122(2)(a), F.S., as it may be amended from time to time. ii. Single-family residential dwelling units , including mobile homes where a mobile home Zoning Overlay exists. iii. Multi-family residential structures , if clustering is employed. iv. Rural villages , subject to the provisions set forth under section 2.03.08 A.2.b. below. v. Dormitories, duplexes and other types of staff housing, as may be incidental to, and in support of, conservation uses . vi. Family Care Facilities: 1 unit per 5 acres and subject to section 5.05.04 of this Code. vii. Staff housing as may be incidental to, and in support of, safety service facilities and essential services . viii. Farm labor housing limited to 10 acres in any single location: a) Single family/ duplex / mobile home : 11 dwelling units per acre; and b) Multifamily/dormitory: 22 dwelling units /beds per acre. ix. Sporting and Recreational camps not to exceed 1 cabin/lodging unit per 5 gross acres. x. Those essential services identified as permitted uses in section 2.01.03 (A) and in accordance with the provisions, conditions and limitations set forth therein. xi. Golf courses or driving ranges, subject to the following standards: a) The minimum density shall be as follows: i) For golf course projects: one (1) dwelling unit per five (5) gross acres. ii) For golf course projects not utilizing density blending Provisions set forth in the Density Rating System of the FLUE, including free standing golf courses: one TDR credit or TDR Bonus credit shall be required per five (5) gross acres for the land area utilized as part of the golf course, including the clubhouse area, rough, fairways, greens, and lakes, but excluding any area dedicated as conservation, which is non-irrigated and retained in a natural state. A TDR credit or TDR Bonus credit used to entitle golf course acreage may not also be used to entitle a residential dwelling unit . b) Golf courses shall be designed, constructed, and managed in accordance with the Best Management Practices of Audubon International's Gold Signature Program. The project shall demonstrate that the Principles for Resource Management required by the Gold Signature Program (Site Specific Assessment, Habitat Sensitivity, Native and Naturalized Plants and Natural Landscaping, Water Conservation, Waste Management. Energy Conservation & Renewable 3.B.f Packet Pg. 584 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Energy Sources, Transportation, Greenspace and Corridors, Agriculture, and BUILDING Design) have been incorporated into the golf course's design and operational procedures. c) In order to prevent the contamination of soil, surface water and ground water by the materials stored and handled by golf course maintenance operations, golf courses shall comply with the Best Management Practices for Golf Course Maintenance Departments, prepared by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, May 1995. d) To protect ground and surface water quality from fertilizer and pesticide usage, golf courses shall demonstrate the following management practices: i) The use of slow release nitrogen sources; ii) The use of soil and plant tissue analysis to adjust timing and amount of fertilization applications; iii) The use of an integrated pest management program using both biological and chemical agents to control various pests; iv) The coordination of pesticide applications with the timing and application of irrigation water; and v) The use of the procedure contained in IFAS Circular 1011, Managing Pesticides for Golf Course Maintenance and Water Quality Protection, May 1991 (revised 1995) to select pesticides that will have a minimum adverse impact on water quality. e) To ensure water conservation, golf courses shall incorporate the following in their design and operation: i) Irrigation systems shall be designed to use weather station information and moisture-sensing systems to determine the optimum amount of irrigation water needed considering soil moisture and evapotranspiration rates. ii) Golf courses shall utilize treated effluent reuse water consistent with Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element Objective 1.4 and its policies to the extent that a sufficient amount of such water is available and the piping or other conveyance necessary for delivery of such water exists at a location abutting the golf course property boundary or within 50 feet of such boundary and accessible via existing rights of way or easements ; iii) Native plants shall be used exclusively except for special purpose areas such as golf greens, fairways, and building sites. Within these excepted areas, landscaping plans shall require that at least 75% of the trees and 50% of the shrubs be freeze-tolerant native Floridian species. At least 75% of the required native trees and shrubs shall also be drought tolerant species. f) Stormwater management ponds shall be designed to mimic the functions of natural systems: by establishing shorelines that are sinuous in configuration in order to provide increased length and diversity of the littoral zone. A Littoral shelf shall be established to provide a feeding area for water dependent avian species. The combined length of vertical and rip-rapped walls shall be limited to 25% of the shoreline . Credits to the site preservation area requirements, on an acre- to- acre basis, shall be given for littoral shelves that exceed these littoral shelf area requirements. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 585 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) g) Site preservation and native vegetation retention requirements shall be those set forth in section 4.06.00 of this Code. xii. Public educational plants and ancillary plants. xiii. Oil and gas exploration, subject to applicable state and federal drilling permits and Collier County non-environmental site development plan review procedures. Directional-drilling and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized in order to minimize impacts to native habitats, where determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit in compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., as those rules existed on Oct. 3, 2005 [ the effective date of this provision ], regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed, as defined in Rule 62C-30.001(2), F.A.C. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the applicant shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42, F.S., to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62C- 30.005(2)(a)(1) through (12), F.A.C. xiv. Park, open space, and recreational uses. xv. Private schools. (b) Accessory uses . i. Accessory uses as set forth in section 2.03.01 of this Code. ii. Accessory uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to uses permitted as of right in the RFMU district . iii. Recreational facilities that serve as an integral part of a residential development and have been designated, reviewed, and approved on a site development plan or preliminary subdivision plat for that development. Recreational facilities may include, but are not limited to clubhouse, community center building , tennis facilities, playgrounds and playfields. (c) Conditional uses . The following uses are permissible as conditional uses subject to the standards and procedures established in section 10.08.00. i. Oil and gas field development and production, subject to state field development permits and Collier County non-environmental site development plan review procedures. Directional-drilling and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized in order to minimize impacts to native habitats, where determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit in compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed, as defined in Rule 62C-30.001(2), F.A.C. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress 3.B.f Packet Pg. 586 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Watershed, the applicant shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42, F.S., to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62-30.005(2)(a)(1) through (12), F.A.C. ii. Group care facilities and other care housing facilities, other than family care facilities, subject to a maximum floor area ratio of 0.45. iii. Zoos, aquariums, and botanical gardens, and similar uses. iv. Facilities for the collection, transfer, processing, and reduction of solid waste . v. Community facilities, such as, places of worship, childcare facilities, cemeteries, and social and fraternal organizations. vi. Travel trailer recreation vehicle parks, subject to the following criteria: a) the site is adjacent to an existing travel trailer recreational vehicle site; and b) the site is no greater than 100% of the size of the existing adjacent park site. vii. Those essential services identified in sections 2.01.03 (G)(1) and (G)(3). viii. In RFMU receiving lands other than those within the NBMO, asphalt and concrete batch-making plants. ix. In RFMU receiving lands other than those within the NBMO, earth mining and extraction. (4) Design Standards. (a) Development Not Utilizing clustering : i. Minimum lot area: 5 Acres. ii. Minimum lot width: 165 Feet. iii. Minimum yard requirements: a) Front yard : 50 feet b) Side yard : 30 feet c) Rear yard : 50 feet d) Nonconforming lots in existence as of June 22, 1999: i) Front yard : 40 feet. ii) Side yard : 10 percent of lot width, not to exceed 20 feet on each side. iii) Rear yard : 50 feet. (b) Clustered development : i. Lot areas and widths: a) single-family i) Minimum lot area: 4,500 square feet. ii) Maximum lot area: One Acre. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 587 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) iii) Minimum lot width: Interior lots 40 feet. iv. Maximum lot width: 150 feet. b) multi-family i) Minimum lot area: One Acre. ii) Maximum lot area: None. iii) Minimum lot width: 150 feet. iv) Maximum lot width: None. ii. Minimum yard requirements a) single-family. Each single-family lot or parcel minimum yard requirement shall be established within an approved PUD, or shall comply with the following standards: i) Front: 20 feet (Note front yard Set back may be reduced to 10 feet where parking for the unit is accessed via a rear ally. ii) Side: 6 feet iii) Rear: 15 feet iv) Accessory: Per section 4.02.01. b) multi-family. For each multi-family lot or parcel minimum yard shall be established within an approved PUD, or shall comply with the following standards: i) Setback from Arterial or Collector roadway(s): no multi-family dwelling may be located closer than 200 feet to a roadway classified or defined as an arterial roadway or 100 feet from any roadway classified or defined as a collector roadway. ii) Front: 30 feet. iii) Rear: 30 feet. iv) Side yard /separation between any multi-family building s: One- half of the building height or 15 feet, whichever is greater. v) Accessory: Per section 4.02.01. iii. Height limitations a) Principal structures i) Single Family: 35 feet. ii) Multi-family: Five Stories not to exceed 60 feet. iii) Other structures : 35 feet except for golf course/community clubhouses, which may be 50 feet in height. b) Accessory structures . 20 feet, except for screen enclosures, which may be the same height as the principal structure . iv. Minimum floor space a) Single Family: 800 square feet b) Multi-family: i) Efficiency: 450 Square feet ii) One Bedroom: 600 square feet 3.B.f Packet Pg. 588 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) iii) Two or More Bedrooms: 800 square feet (c) Parking. As required in Chapter 4 of this Code. (d) Landscaping. As required in Chapter 4 of this Code. (e) Signs . As required in section 5.06.00 of this Code. (5) Native vegetation Retention. As required in section 4.06.00 of this Code. (6) Usable open space . (a) Projects of 40 or more acres in size shall provide a minimum of 70% usable open space . (b) Usable open space includes active or passive recreation areas such as parks, playgrounds, golf courses, waterways, lakes, nature trails, and other similar open spaces . Usable open space shall also include areas set aside for conservation or preservation of native vegetation and landscape areas. (c) Open water beyond the perimeter of the site, street right-of-way , except where dedicated or donated for public uses, driveways , off- street parking and loading areas, shall not be counted towards required usable open space . b. Rural villages . Rural villages , including rural villages within the NBMO, may be approved within the boundaries of RFMU receiving lands , subject to the following: (1) Allowable Uses: (a) All permitted uses identified in section 2.03.08A.2.a.(3)(a), when specifically identified in, and approved as part of, a RURAL VILLAGE PUD. (b) CONDITIONAL USES 1 through 5, and 7 identified in section 2.03.08A.2.a.(3)(c), when specifically identified in, and approved as part of a RURAL VILLAGE PUD. (c) All permitted and accessory uses listed in the C-4 General Commercial District, section 2.03.02 (E), subject to the design guidelines and development standards set forth in this Section. (d) Research and Technology Parks, with a minimum size of 19 acres and a maximum size of 4% of the total rural village acreage, subject to the design guidelines and development standards set forth herein, the applicable standards contained in section 2.03.06 C.7. Research and technology park planned unit development district guidelines and development standards, and further subject to the following: i. Research and Technology Parks shall be permitted to include up to 20% of the total acreage for non-target industry uses of the type identified in paragraph (3) below; and, up to 20% of the total acreage for workforce housing , except as provided in paragraph (7) below. At a minimum, 60% of the total park acreage must be devoted to target industry uses identified in paragraph (2) below. The specific percentage and mix of each category of use shall be determined at the time of rural village PUD rezoning. ii. The target industries identified by the Economic development Council of Collier County are aviation/aerospace industry, health technology industry and information technology industry, and include the following uses: software development and programming; internet technologies and electronic commerce; multimedia activities and CD-ROM development ; data and information processing; call center and customer support activities; professional services that are export based such as laboratory research or testing activities; light manufacturing in the high tech target sectors of aviation/aerospace and health and information technologies; office uses in 3.B.f Packet Pg. 589 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) connection with on-site research; development testing and related manufacturing; general administrative offices of a research and development firm; educational, scientific and research organizations; production facilities and operations. iii. Non-target industry uses may include hotels at a density consistent with the provisions in section 2.03.02 and those uses in the C-1 through C-3 Zoning Districts that provide support services to the target industries such as general office, banks, fitness centers, personal and professional services, medical, financial and convenience sales and services, computer related businesses and services, employee training, technical conferencing, day care centers, restaurants and corporate and government offices. iv. The rural village PUD shall include standards for the development of individual building parcels within the park and general standards shall be adopted for pedestrian and vehicular interconnections, buffering , landscaping, open spaces , signage, lighting, screening of outdoor storage, parking and access management, all to be consistent with and compatible to the other uses within the village. v. The Research and Technology Park must be adjacent to, and have direct access via an existing or developer constructed local road to an arterial or collector roadway. The portion of the local roadway intended to provide access to the Research and Technology Park shall not be within a residential neighborhood and does not service a predominately residential area. vi. The Research and Technology Park shall be compatible with surrounding land uses. Accordingly, it shall be separated from any residentially zoned or designated land within the rural village by a minimum Type "C" landscape buffer , as set forth in section 4.06.00 of this Code. vii. Whenever workforce housing is provided, it shall be fully integrated with other compatible uses in the park through mixed-use buildings and/or through pedestrian and vehicular interconnections. viii. Building permits for non-target industry uses identified in paragraph (3) above shall not be issued prior to issuance of the first building permit for a target industry use. (e) Any other use deemed by the Board of County Commissioner to be appropriate and compatible within a rural village . (2) Mix of Neighborhood Types. Rural villages shall be comprised of several neighborhoods designed in a compact nature such that a majority of residential development is within one-quarter mile of a neighborhood center . neighborhood centers may include small-scale service retail and office uses, and shall include a public park, square, or green. Village centers shall be designed to serve the retail, office, civic, government uses and service needs of the residents of the rural village . The village center shall be the primary location for commercial uses. rural villages shall be surrounded by a green belt in order to protect the character of the rural landscape and to provide separation between rural villages and the low density rural development , agricultural uses , and conservation lands that may surround the rural village . Rural villages shall be designed to include the following: a mixture of residential housing types; institutional and/or commercial uses; and recreational uses, all of which shall be sufficient to serve the residents of the rural village and the surrounding lands. In addition, except as specifically provided otherwise for rural villages within the NBMO, the following criteria and conditions shall apply to all rural villages . 3.B.f Packet Pg. 590 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) (a) Allocation of Land Uses. Specific allocations for land uses including residential, commercial and other non-residential uses within rural villages , shall include, but are not limited to: i. A mixture of housing types, including attached and/or detached single family, as well as multi-family shall be provided within a rural village . A minimum of 0.2 units per acre in a rural village shall be affordable housing , of which at least 0.1 units per acre shall be workforce housing . The rural village shall be designed so as to disperse the Affordable and workforce housing units throughout the Village rather than concentrate them in a single location. ii. A mixture of recreational uses, including parks and village greens. iii. Civic, community, and other institutional uses. iv. A mixture of lot sizes, with a design that includes more compact development and attached dwelling units within neighborhood centers and the village center , and reduced net densities and increasingly larger lot sizes for detached residential dwellings generally occurring as development extends outward from the village center . v. A mixture of retail, office, and services uses. vi. If requested by the Collier County School Board during the PUD and/or DRI review process, school sites shall be provided and shall be located to serve a maximum number of residential dwelling units within walking distance to the schools, subject to the following criteria: a) Schools shall be located within or adjacent to the village center ; b) A credit toward any applicable school impacts fees shall be provided based upon an independent evaluation/appraisal of the value of the land and/or improvements provided by the developer; and c) Schools shall be located in order to minimize busing of students and to co-locate schools with public facilities and civic structures such as parks, libraries, community centers, public squares, greens and civic areas. vii. Within the NBM Overlay, elementary schools shall be accessed by local streets , pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and shall be allowed in and adjacent to the rural village center , provided such local streets provide adequate access as needed by the School Board. (b) Acreage Limitations. i. Rural villages shall be a minimum of 300 acres and a maximum of 1,500 acres, exclusive of the required green belt, with exception that the maximum size of a rural village within those RFMU receiving lands south of the Belle Meade NRPA shall not exceed 2,500 acres. ii. Neighborhood center - 0.5% of the total rural village acreage, not to exceed 10 acres, within each neighborhood center . iii. Neighborhood center Commercial - Not to exceed 40% of the neighborhood center acreage and 8,500 square feet of gross leasable floor area per acre. iv. Village center - Not to exceed 10% of the total rural village acreage. v. Village center commercial - Not to exceed 30% of the village center acreage and 10,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area per acre. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 591 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) vi. Research and Technology Parks limited to a minimum size of 19 acres and a maximum size of 4% of the total rural village acreage. vii. Civic Uses and Public Parks - Minimum of 10% of the total rural village acreage. (3) Density . A rural village shall have a minimum density of 2.0 units per gross acre and a maximum density of 3.0 units per gross acre, except that the minimum density within a NBMO rural village shall be 1.5 units per gross acre. Those densities shall be achieved as follows: (a) Base density . A base density of 0.2 dwelling units per acre (1.0 dwelling units per five acres) for lands within the rural village , and the land area designated as a greenbelt surrounding the rural village , is granted by right for allocation within the designated rural village . (b) Minimum density . The minimum gross density in a rural village is 2.0 units per acre outside of the NBMO and 1.5 units per acre within the NBMO. i. For each TDR credit used to achieve the minimum required density in a rural village , one Rural Village Bonus Credit shall be granted. Rural Village Bonus Credits may only be utilized in rural villages and shall not be available for use once the minimum required density is achieved. ii. The minimum density shall be achieved through any combination of TDR Credits , Rural Village Bonus Credits , and TDR Bonus Credits . (c) Maximum density . The maximum gross density allowed in a rural village is 3.0 units per acre. The maximum density shall be achieved through any of the following, either in combination or individually: i. TDR credits ; ii. TDR Bonus Credits ; iii. An additional density bonus 0.3 units per acre for the additional preservation of native vegetation as set forth in Chapter 4; iv. An additional density bonus of 0.3 units per acre for additional wetlands mitigation as set forth in Chapter 4; and/or v. An additional density bonus of 0.5 units per acre for each Affordable or workforce housing unit. (4) Other Design Standards (a) Transportation System Design. i. The rural village shall be designed with a formal street layout, using primarily a grid design and incorporating village greens, squares and civic uses as focal points. ii. Each rural village shall be served by a primary road system that is accessible by the public. Neighborhood Circulator, Local Residential Access and Residential Loop roads may be gated. The primary roads within the rural village shall consist of Rural Major Collectors at a minimum and be designed to meet County standards and shall be dedicated to the public. iii. A rural village shall not be split by an arterial roadway. iv. Interconnection between the rural village and adjacent development s shall be required. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 592 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) v. Neighborhoods, neighborhood centers , and the village center shall be connected through local and collector streets and shall incorporate traffic calming techniques as may be appropriate to discourage high-speed traffic. vi. Public transit and school bus stops shall be co-located, where practicable. vii. Pedestrian paths and bikeways shall be designed so as to provide access and interconnectivity. (b) Location Restrictions and Standards. i. In locating both schools and housing units within the rural village , consideration shall be given to minimizing busing needs within the community. ii. A rural village shall not be located any closer than 3.0 miles from another rural village . iii. No more than one rural village may be located in each of the distinct RFMU district Receiving Areas depicted on the FLUM and on the Official Collier County Zoning Atlas maps. iv. A rural village shall have direct access to a roadway classified by Collier County as an arterial or collector roadway. Alternatively, access to the rural village may be via a new collector roadway directly accessing an existing arterial, the cost of which shall be borne entirely by the developer. v. A rural village shall be located where other public infrastructure, such as potable water and sewer facilities, already exist or are planned. (c) Size Limitations. rural villages shall be a minimum of 300 acres and a maximum of 1,500 acres, except within RFMU receiving lands south of the Belle Meade NRPA where the maximum size may not exceed 2,500 acres. This required rural village size is exclusive of the required greenbelt area set forth in section 2.03.08 (A)(2)(b)(6). (d) Additional Village Design Criteria: Rural villages shall be designed in accordance with the following provisions: i. Rural villages shall be developed in a progressive urban to rural continuum with the greatest density , intensity and diversity occurring within the village center , to the least density , intensity and diversity occurring within the edge of the neighborhoods approaching the greenbelt . ii. Rural villages may include "special districts" in addition to the village center , neighborhood center and Neighborhoods, to accommodate uses that may require use specific design standards not otherwise provided for herein. Such Special Districts, their proposed uses, and applicable design standards shall be identified as part of the rural village PUD rezone process. iii. The rural village PUD Master Plan shall designate the location of the village center and each neighborhood, neighborhood center and as may be applicable, Special Districts. Rural villages shall include a village center and a minimum of two distinct neighborhoods, with defined neighborhood centers . iv. A mixture of allowable uses is encouraged to occur within buildings in the village center and neighborhood centers . v. Transient lodging is permitted at up to 26 guest units per acre calculated on the acreage of the parcel occupied by the transient lodging and its ancillary facilities, if such parcel includes multiple uses. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 593 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) vi. Building heights may vary within the village center and neighborhood centers , but shall not exceed 5 stories not exceeding 65 feet with the village center , or 4 stories no exceeding 55 feet within the neighborhood center , and 3 stories not to exceed 40 feet within 200 feet of the greenbelt . The height exclusions set forth in section 4.02.01 of this Code apply within a rural village . The height exclusion set forth in section 4.02.01 applies in the village center only, except that: a) section 4.02.01 requiring 300 square feet of green spaces for each parking space for which the height waiver is granted shall not apply; however, b) For each parking space for which the height waiver is granted, an equal amount of square footage of open space shall be provided in excess of the minimum set forth in section 2.03.08(A)(2)(b)(7). vii. The minimum lot area shall be 1,000 SF; however, within neighborhoods, especially approaching the edge of the Village and the surrounding green belt, less compact larger lot residential development may occur. viii. Within the village center and neighborhood centers , individual block perimeters shall not exceed 2,500 linear feet. ix. Within the village center and neighborhood centers required yards shall be as follows: a) Front setbacks - 0 to 10 feet from the right-of-way line b) Side setbacks - 0 feet c) Rear setbacks - 0 feet x. Within neighborhoods outside of a Neighborhood or village center required yards may vary but shall be designed so as to provide for adequate light, opens space ad movement of air, and shall consider the design objective of the urban to rural continuum with the greatest density , intensity and diversity occurring within the village center , to the least density , intensity and diversity occurring within the edge of the neighborhoods approaching the greenbelt . xi. Within the village center and neighborhood centers overhead encroachments such as awnings, balconies, arcades and the like, must maintain a clear distance of 9 feet above the sidewalk and 15 feet above the street . xii. Seating for outdoor dining shall be permitted to encroach the public sidewalks and shall leave a minimum 6-foot clear pedestrian way between the outdoor dining and the streetscape planting area. xiii. Civic or Institutional Buildings shall be subject to the specific standards of this subsection that regulate building height, building placement, building use, parking, and signage except as deviations are deemed appropriate by the Collier County planning staff with respect to the creation of focal points, vistas, and significant community landmarks. Specific design standards shall be provided in the rural village PUD document. xiv. Architectural Standards: Buildings within the village center shall be made compatible through similar massing, volume, frontage , scale and architectural features. The PUD document shall adhere to the provisions of section 5.05.08 of this Code; however, deviations may be requested where such deviations are shown to further these rural village design standards. xv. Required vehicular parking and loading amounts and design criteria: 3.B.f Packet Pg. 594 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) a) The amount of required parking shall be demonstrated through a shared parking analysis submitted application as part of the rural village PUD. Parking shall be determined utilizing the modal splits and parking demands for various uses recognized by the ITE, ULI or other sources or studies. The analysis shall demonstrate the number of parking spaces available to more than one use or function, recognizing the required parking will vary depending on the multiple functions or uses in close proximity which are unlikely to require the spaces at the same time. b) On-site parking areas shall be organized into a series of small bays delineated by landscape islands of varied sized. A maximum spacing between landscape islands shall be 10 spaces. Landscape islands and tree diamonds shall have a minimum of one canopy tree. c) Parking lots shall be accessed from alleys , service lanes or secondary streets . d) Any or all of the above parking requirements may be further reduced if a shared parking plan is submitted as part of a rural village PUD or subsequent site development plan application. The shared parking plan shall demonstrate that the reduced parking is warranted as a result of the following: shared building and/or block use(s) where parking demands for certain uses are low when other demands are higher; a concentration of residential dwelling units located within 600 feet of non-residential uses; the existence of transit for use by residents and visitors. xvi. Landscaping minimums within the village center or within neighborhood centers shall be met by: a) Providing landscaping within parking lots as described, and by providing a streetscape area between the sidewalk and curb at a minimum of 5 Ft. in width; b) Planting street trees every 40 Ft. O.C. The street tree pattern may be interrupted by architectural elements such as arcades and columns. c) Plantings areas, raised planters, or planter boxes in the front of and adjacent to the buildings, where such planting areas do not interfere with pedestrian access and mobility. d) Providing for additional pubic use landscape areas at intervals within the streetscape, on identified parcels with block s, or as part of public greens, squares, parks or civic uses. xvii. Signs : The PUD document shall adhere to the provisions of section 5.06.00 of this Code; however, deviations may be requested where such deviations are shown to further these rural village design standards by providing for pedestrian scale signage standards with neighborhood centers or the village center . (5) Native vegetation . Native vegetation shall be preserved as set forth in section 4.06.04. (6) Greenbelt . Except within the NBMO rural village , a greenbelt averaging a minimum of 300 feet in width, but not less than 200 feet in width at any location, shall be required at the perimeter of the rural village . The greenbelt is required to ensure a permanently undeveloped edge surrounding the rural village , thereby discouraging sprawl. Greenbelts shall conform to the following: (a) Greenbelts may only be designated on RFMU receiving lands . 3.B.f Packet Pg. 595 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) (b) The allowable residential density shall be shifted from the designated greenbelt to the rural village . (c) The greenbelt may be concentrated to a greater degree in areas where it is necessary to protect listed species habitat, including wetlands and uplands, provide for a buffer from adjacent natural reservations , or provide for wellfield or aquifer protection. However, at no location shall the greenbelt be less than 300 feet in width. (d) Golf courses and existing agriculture operations are permitted within the greenbelt , subject to the vegetation retention standards set forth in section 4.06.04. However, golf course turf areas shall only be located within 100 feet of the greenbelt boundaries (interior and exterior boundary); further, these turf areas shall only be located in previously cleared or disturbed areas. (7) Open space : Within the rural village , a minimum of 40% of open space shall be provided, inclusive of the greenbelt . (8) Process for Approval of a rural village . Applications for approval shall be submitted in the form of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) rezone utilizing the standard form(s) developed by Collier County, and subject to the Fees established for a PUD rezone application. Where applicable, the rural village PUD application will be submitted in conjunction with a development of Regional Impact (DRI) application as provided for in Chapter 380 of Florida Statutes, or in conjunction with any other Florida provisions of law that may supercede the DRI process. The applicant shall notify the owner(s) of subsurface mineral rights to the property within the boundaries of the proposed rural village prior to approval of the PUD. The Application for rural village PUD approval shall demonstrate general compliance with the provisions of section 2.03.06 and shall include the following additional submittal requirements: (a) EIS. An environmental impact statement for the rural village and surrounding greenbelt area shall be submitted an accordance with the requirements of Chapter 10 of this Code. (b) Demonstration of Fiscal Neutrality. An analysis that demonstrates that the rural village will be fiscally neutral to county taxpayers outside of the rural village . This analysis shall evaluate the demand and impacts on levels of service for public facilities and the cost of such facilities and services necessary to serve the rural village . In addition, this evaluation shall identify projected revenue sources for services and any capital improvements that may be necessary to support the rural village . In conclusion, this analysis shall indicate what provisions and/or commitments will be to ensure that the provision of necessary facilities and services will be fiscally neutral to County taxpayers outside of the rural village . At a minimum, the analysis shall consider the following: i. Stormwater/ drainage facilities ; ii. Potable water provisions and facilities; iii. Reuse or "Grey" water provisions for irrigation; iv. Central sewer provisions and facilities; v. Law enforcement facilities; vi. School facilities; vii. Roads, transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities and pathways ; a) Solid waste facilities. b) Development phasing and funding mechanisms to address any impacts to level of service in accordance with the county's adopted 3.B.f Packet Pg. 596 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) concurrency management program to ensure that there will be no degradation to the adopted level of service for public facilities and infrastructure identified in (1) through (7) above. 3. Neutral lands. Neutral lands have been identified for limited semi-rural residential development . Available data indicates that neutral lands have a higher ratio of native vegetation , and thus higher habitat values, than lands designated as RFMU receiving lands , but these values do not approach those of RFMU sending lands . Therefore, these lands are appropriate for limited development , if such development is directed away from existing native vegetation and habitat. Within neutral lands , the following standards shall apply: a. Allowable uses. The following uses are permitted as of right: (1) Uses Permitted as of Right. (a) Agricultural activities, including, but not limited to: Crop raising, horticulture, fruit and nut production, forestry, groves, nurseries, ranching, beekeeping, poultry and egg production, milk production, livestock raising, and aquaculture for native species subject to the State of Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. Owning, maintaining or operating any facility or part thereof for the following purposes is prohibited: i. Fighting or baiting any animal by the owner of such facility or any other person or entity. ii. Raising any animal or animals intended to be ultimately used or used for fighting or baiting purposes. iii. For purposes of this subsection, the term baiting is defined as set forth in § 828.122(2)(a), F.S., as it may be amended from time to time. (b) Single-family residential dwelling units , including mobile homes where a mobile home Zoning Overlay exists. (c) Dormitories, duplexes and other types of staff housing, as may be incidental to, and in support of, conservation uses . (d) Group housing uses subject to the following density /intensity limitations: (e) Family Care Facilities: 1 unit per 5 acres; (f) Group Care Facilities and other Care Housing Facilities: Maximum floor area ratio (FAR) not to exceed 0.45. (g) Staff housing as may be incidental to, and in support of, safety service facilities and essential services . (h) Farm labor housing limited to 10 acres in any single location: i. Single family/ duplex / mobile home : 11 dwelling units per acre; ii. Multifamily/dormitory: 22 dwelling units /beds per acre. (i) Sporting and Recreational camps, not to exceed 1 cabin/lodging unit per 5 gross acres. (j) Those essential services identified in section 2.01.03 (A). (k) Golf courses or driving ranges, subject to the following standards: i. Golf courses shall be designed, constructed, and managed in accordance with the best management practices of Audubon International's Gold Signature Program. The project shall demonstrate that the Principles for Resource Management required by the Gold Signature Program (Site Specific Assessment, Habitat Sensitivity, Native and Naturalized Plants and 3.B.f Packet Pg. 597 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Natural Landscaping, Water Conservation, Waste Management, Energy Conservation & Renewable Energy Sources, Transportation, Greenspace and Corridors, Agriculture, and Building Design) have been incorporated into the golf course's design and operational procedures. ii. In order to prevent the contamination of soil, surface water and ground water by the materials stored and handled by golf course maintenance operations, golf courses shall comply with the Best Management Practices for Golf Course Maintenance Departments, prepared by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, May 1995. iii. To protect ground and surface water quality from fertilizer and pesticide usage, golf courses shall demonstrate the following management practices: a) The use of slow release nitrogen sources; b) The use of soil and plant tissue analysis to adjust timing and amount of fertilization applications; c) The use of an integrated pest management program using both biological and chemical agents to control various pests; d) The coordination of pesticide applications with the timing and application of irrigation water; e) The use of the procedure contained in IFAS Circular 1011, Managing Pesticides for Golf Course Maintenance and Water Quality Protection, May 1991 (revised 1995) to select pesticides that will have a minimum adverse impact on water quality. iv. To ensure water conservation, golf courses shall incorporate the following in their design and operation: a) Irrigation systems shall be designed to use weather station information and moisture-sensing systems to determine the optimum amount of irrigation water needed considering soil moisture and evapotranspiration rates. b) As available, golf courses shall utilize treated effluent reuse water consistent with Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element Objective 1.4 and its policies. c) Native plants shall be used exclusively except for special purpose areas such as golf greens, fairways, and building sites. Within these excepted areas, landscaping plans shall require that at least 75% of the trees and 50% of the shrubs be freeze-tolerant native Floridian species. At least 75% of the required native trees and shrubs shall also be drought tolerant species. v. Stormwater management ponds shall be designed to mimic the functions of natural systems: by establishing shorelines that are sinuous in configuration in order to provide increased length and diversity of the littoral zone. A Littoral shelf shall be established to provide a feeding area for water dependent avian species. The combined length of vertical and rip-rapped walls shall be limited to 25% of the shoreline . Credits to the site preservation area requirements, on an acre- to- acre basis, shall be given for littoral shelves that exceed these littoral shelf area requirements. vi. Site preservation and native vegetation retention requirements shall be the same as those set forth in the RFMU district criteria. Site preservation areas are intended to provide habitat functions and shall meet minimum 3.B.f Packet Pg. 598 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) dimensions as set forth in the LDC. These standards shall be established within one year. (l) Public educational plants and ancillary plants. (m) Oil and gas exploration , subject to applicable state and federal drilling permits and Collier County non-environmental site development plan review procedures. Directional-drilling and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized in order to minimize impacts to native habitats, where determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit in compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., as those rules existed on Oct. 3, 2005 [ effective date of this provision ] regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed, as defined in Rule 62C-30.001(2), F.A.C. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the applicant shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42, F.S., to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62C-30.005(2)(a)(1) through (12), F.A.C. n. Park, open space, and recreational uses. o. Private schools. (2) Accessory uses . The following uses are permitted as accessory to uses permitted as of right or to approved conditional uses : (a) Accessory uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to uses permitted as of right in section 2.03.08(A)(3)(a)(1) above. (b) Recreational facilities that serve as an integral part of a residential development and have been designated, reviewed, and approved on a site development plan or preliminary subdivision plat for that development. Recreational facilities may include, but are not limited to clubhouse, community center building , tennis facilities, playgrounds and playfields. (3) Conditional uses . The following uses are permissible as conditional uses subject to the standards and procedures established in section 10.08.00. (a) Zoo, aquarium, botanical garden, or other similar uses. (b) Community facilities, such as, places of worship, childcare facilities, cemeteries, social and fraternal organizations. (c) Sports instructional schools and camps. (d) Multi-family residential structures, subject to the following development standards: (i) Building height limitation: 2 stories (ii) Buffer: 10 foot wide landscape buffer with trees spaced no more than 30 feet on center; (iii) Setbacks: 50% of the height of the building, but not less than 15 feet. (e) Those essential services identified in sections 2.01.03 (G)(1) and (G)(3). 3.B.f Packet Pg. 599 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) (f) Oil and gas field development and production, subject to applicable state and federal field development permits and Collier County non-environmental site development plan review procedures. Directional-drilling and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized in order to minimize impacts to native habitats, where determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit in compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., as those rules existed on January 14, 2005, regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed, as defined in Rule 62C-30.001(2), F.A.C. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the applicant shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42, F.S., to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62C-30.005(2)(a)(1) through (12), F.A.C. (g) Earth mining and extraction and related processing. (h) Facilities for the collection, transfer, processing, and reduction of solid waste. (i) Those essential services identified in sections 2.01.03 (G)(1) and (G)(3). (j) Oil and gas field development and production, subject to state field development permits and Collier County non-environmental site development plan review procedures. Directional-drilling and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized in order to minimize impacts to native habitats, where determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit in compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed, as defined in Rule 62C-30.001(2), F.A.C. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the applicant shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42, F.S., to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62-30.005(2)(a)(1) through (12), F.A.C. (k) Earth mining and extraction and related processing. b. Density. (1) Maximum gross density . The maximum gross density in neutral lands shall not exceed one dwelling unit per five gross acres (0.2 dwelling units per acre), except that the maximum gross density for those legal nonconforming lots or parcels in existence as of June 22, 1999, shall be one dwelling unit per lot or parcel . (2) Residential clustering . Clustering of residential development is allowed and encouraged. Where clustered development is employed, it shall be in accordance with the following provisions: 3.B.f Packet Pg. 600 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) (a) If within the boundaries of the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District, as delineated on the Urban-Rural Fringe Transition Zone Overlay Map in the Future Land Use Element of the GMP, and consistent with the provisions of the Potable Water and Sanitary Sewer Sub-elements of this Plan, central water and sewer shall be extended to the project. Where County sewer or water services may not be available concurrent with development in neutral lands, interim private water and sewer facilities may be approved. (b) The clustered development shall be located on the site so as to provide to the greatest degree practicable: i. protection for listed species habitat; ii. preservation of the highest quality native vegetation iii. connectivity to adjacent natural reservations or preservation areas on adjacent development; ..... b§ and iv. creation, maintenance or enhancement of wildlife corridors. (c) The minimum project size shall be at least 40 acres. c. Dimensional and design standards. Dimensional and Design Standards set forth in section 4.02.01 of this Code shall apply to all development in neutral lands , except for development utilizing the residential clustering provisions in section 2.03.08 (A)(3)(b)(2) above. In the case of such clustered development , the following dimensional standards shall apply to all permitted housing structure types, accessory, and conditional uses : (1) Development that is Not Clustered: (a) Minimum lot area: 5 Acres. (b) Minimum lot width: 165 Feet. (c) Minimum yard Requirements: i. Front yard : 50 feet. ii. Side yard : 30 feet. iii. Rear yard : 50 feet. iv. Nonconforming lots in existence as of June 22, 1999: a) Front yard : 40 feet. b) Side yard : 10 percent of lot width, not to exceed 20 feet on each side. c) Rear yard : 50 feet. (2) Development that is Clustered. (a) Minimum lot area: 4,500 square feet. (b) Maximum lot area: One Acre. (c) Minimum lot width: Interior lots 40 feet. (d) Maximum lot width: 150 feet. (3) Height Limitations. (a) Principal: 35 feet. (b) Accessory: 20 feet, except for screen enclosures, which may be the same height as the principal structure . (c) Golf course/community clubhouses: 50 feet. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 601 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) (4) Floor area . The minimum floor area for each dwelling unit shall be 800 square feet. (5) Parking. As required in Chapter 4. (6) Landscaping. As required in Chapter 4. (7) Signs : As required in section 5.06.00. d. Native vegetation retention. Native vegetation shall be preserved as set forth in Chapter 4. e. Usable open space . (1) Projects of 40 acres or more in size shall provide a minimum of 70% usable open space . (2) Usable open space includes active or passive recreation areas such as parks, playgrounds, golf courses, waterways, lakes, nature trails, and other similar open spaces . Usable open space shall also include areas set aside for conservation or preservation of native vegetation and landscape areas. (3) Open water beyond the perimeter of the site, street right-of-way , except where dedicated or donated for public uses, driveways , off- street parking and loading areas, shall not be counted towards required usable open space . 4. RFMU sending lands. RFMU sending lands are those lands that have the highest degree of environmental value and sensitivity and generally include significant wetlands , uplands, and habitat for listed species. RFMU sending lands are the principal target for preservation and conservation. Density may be transferred from RFMU sending lands as provided in LDC section 2.03.07 D.4.c. All NRPAs within the RFMU district are also RFMU sending lands . With the exception of specific provisions applicable only to NBMO neutral lands , the following standards shall apply within all RFMU sending lands : a. Allowable uses where TDR credits have not been severed. (1) Uses Permitted as of Right: (a) Agricultural uses consistent with Sections 163.3162 and 823.14(6) Florida Statutes (Florida Right to Farm Act). (b) Detached single-family dwelling units , including mobile homes where the mobile home Zoning Overlay exists, (c) Habitat preservation and conservation uses . (d) Passive parks and other passive recreational uses. (e) Sporting and Recreational camps, within which the lodging component shall not exceed 1 unit per 5 gross acres. (f) Those essential services identified in section 2.01.03(B). (g) Oil and gas exploration , subject to applicable state and federal drilling permits and Collier County non-environmental site development plan review procedures. Directional-drilling and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized in order to minimize impacts to native habitats, where determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit in compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., as such rules existed on Oct. 3, 2005 [ the effective date of this provision ], regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed, as defined in Rule 62C-30.001(2), F.A.C. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits 3.B.f Packet Pg. 602 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the applicant shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42, F.S., to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62C-30.005(2)(a)(1) through (12), F.A.C. (2) Accessory uses . Accessory uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to uses permitted as of right in LDC section 2.03.08 A.4.a.1 above. (3) Conditional uses . (a) Those essential services identified in LDC section 2.01.03 G.2 and 4. (b) Public facilities, including solid waste and resource recovery facilities, and public vehicle and equipment storage and repair facilities, shall be permitted within Section 25, Township 49S, Range 26E, on lands adjacent to the existing County landfill. This shall not be interpreted to allow for the expansion of the landfill into Section 25 for the purpose of solid waste disposal. (c) Oil and gas field development and production, subject to applicable state and federal field development permits and Collier County non-environmental site development plan review procedures. Directional-drilling and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized in order to minimize impacts to native habitats, where determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit in compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., as those rules existed on Oct. 3, 2005 [ the effective date of this provision ], regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed, as defined in Rule 62C- 30.001(2), F.A.C. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the applicant shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42, F.S., to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62C- 30.005(2)(a)(1) through (12), F.A.C. (d) Commercial uses accessory to permitted uses 1.a, 1.c. and 1.d above, such as retail sales of produce accessory to farming, or a restaurant accessory to a park or preserve, so long as restrictions or limitations are imposed to insure the commercial use functions as an accessory, subordinate use. b. Uses allowed where TDR credits have been severed. (1) Uses Permitted as of Right: (a) Agricultural uses consistent with Sections 163.3162 and 823.14(6) Florida Statutes (Florida Right to Farm Act), including water management facilities, to the extent and intensity that such operations exist at the date of any transfer of development rights. (b) Cattle grazing on unimproved pasture where no clearing is required; 3.B.f Packet Pg. 603 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) (c) Detached single-family dwelling units , including mobile homes where the mobile home Zoning Overlay exists, at a maximum density of one dwelling unit per 40 acres. In order to retain these development rights after any transfer, up to one dwelling must be retained (not transferred) per 40 acres. (d) One detached dwelling unit, including mobile homes where the mobile home zoning overlay exists, per lot or parcel in existence as of June 22, 1999, that is less than 40 acres. In order to retain these development rights after any transfer, up to one dwelling must be retained (not transferred) per each lot or parcel . For the purposes of this provision, a lot or parcel shall be deemed to have been in existence as of June 22, 1999, upon a showing of any of the following: i. the lot or parcel is part of a subdivision that was recorded in the public records of the County on or before June 22, 1999; ii. a description of the lot or parcel , by metes and bounds or other specific legal description, was recorded in the public records of the County on or before June 22, 1999; or iii. an agreement for deed for the lot or parcel , which includes description of the lot or parcel by limited fixed boundary, was executed on or before June 22, 1999. (e) Habitat preservation and conservation uses . (f) Passive parks and passive recreational uses. (g) Those essential services identified in section 2.01.03 B. (h) Oil and gas exploration , subject to applicable state and federal drilling permits and Collier County non-environmental site development plan review procedures. Directional-drilling and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized in order to minimize impacts to native habitats, where determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit in compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., as those rules existed on Oct. 3, 2005 [ the effective date of this provision ], regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed, as defined in Rule 62C-30.001(2), F.A.C. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the applicant shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42, F.S., to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62C-30.005(2)(a)(1) through (12), F.A.C. (i) Mitigation in conjunction with any County, state, or federal permitting. (2) Conditional uses: (a) Those essential uses identified in LDC section 2.01.03 G.2 and 4. (b) Oil and gas field development and production, subject to applicable state and federal field development permits and Collier County non-environmental site development plan review procedures. Directional-drilling and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized in order to minimize impacts to native habitats, where determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed 3.B.f Packet Pg. 604 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) satisfied upon issuance of a state permit in compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., as those rules existed on Oct. 3, 2005 [ the effective date of this provision ], regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed, as defined in Rule 62C- 30.001(2), F.A.C. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the applicant shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42, F.S., to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62C- 30.005(2)(a)(1) through (12), F.A.C. (c) Conditional use approval criteria: In addition to the criteria set forth in section 10.08.00 of this Code, the following additional criteria shall apply to the approval of conditional uses within RFMU sending lands : i. The applicant shall submit a plan for development that demonstrates that wetlands , listed species and their habitat are adequately protected as specified in Chapters 3, 4 and 10. ii. Conditions may be imposed, as deemed appropriate, to limit the size, location, and access to the conditional use. c. Density . (1) 1.0 dwelling units per 40 gross acres; or (2) 1.0 dwelling unit per nonconforming lot or parcel in existence as of June 22, 1999. For the purpose of this provision, a lot or parcel which is deemed to have been in existence on or before June 22, 1999 is: (a) A lot or parcel which is part of a subdivision recorded in the public records of Collier County, Florida; (b) A lot or parcel which has limited fixed boundaries, described by metes and bounds or other specific legal description, the description of which has been recorded in the public records of Collier County Florida on or before June 22, 1999; or (c) A lot or parcel which has limited fixed boundaries and for which an agreement for deed was executed prior to June 22, 1999. d. Native vegetation retention. As required in Chapter 4. e. Other dimensional design standards. Dimensional standards set forth in section 4.02.01 of this Code shall apply to all development in Sending designated lands of the RFMU district , except as follows: (1) Lot Area and Width. (a) Minimum lot Area: 40 acres. (b) Minimum lot Width: 300 Feet. (2) Parking. As required in Chapter 4. (3) Landscaping. As required in Chapter 4. (4) Signs . As required in section 5.06.00. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 605 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 5. Specific vegetation standards for the RFMU district . For these specific standards, please refer to section 3.05.07 C. through 3.05.07 E. of this Code. B. Natural resource protection area overlay district (NRPA). 1. Purpose and intent. The purpose and intent of the Natural Resource Protection Area Overlay District (NRPA) is to: protect endangered or potentially endangered species by directing incompatible land uses away from their habitats; to identify large, connected, intact, and relatively unfragmented habitats, which may be important for these listed species; and to support State and Federal agencies' efforts to protect endangered or potentially endangered species and their habitats. NRPAs may include major wetland systems and regional flow-ways. These lands generally should be the focus of any federal, state, County, or private acquisition efforts. Accordingly, allowable land uses, vegetation preservation standards, development standards, and listed species protection criteria within NRPAs set forth herein are more restrictive than would otherwise be permitted in the underlying zoning district and shall to be applicable in addition to any standards that apply tin the underlying zoning district. a. NRPA overlay areas. NRPAs are located in the following areas: (1) Clam Bay Conservation Area (within Pelican Bay Planned Unit development ); (2) CREW (Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed); (3) North Belle Meade; (4) South Belle Meade; (5) South Golden Gate Estates. The NRPA lands within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District to which the Section 2.03.08 C. regulations apply (i.e. - numbers 3 and 4 above) are depicted by the 3.B.f Packet Pg. 606 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) b. NRPAS designated as RFMU sending lands within the RFMU district . NRPAs located in the RFMU district are identified as RFMU sending lands and are further subject to the provisions, conditions and standards set forth in section 2.03.08 (A)(4). Private property owners within these NRPAs may transfer residential development rights from these important environmentally sensitive lands to other identified "receiving" lands pursuant to eth specific provisions set forth in section 2.01.03 of this Code. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 607 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) c. Development standards. Development within a NRPA shall adhere to the following standards: (1) Vegetation Retention and Site Preservation - Native vegetation retention shall be as required in Chapter 4. (2) Permitted and conditional uses for all lands within a NRPA that are zoned CON and for those lands within any NRPA that are publicly owned shall be as set forth in sections 2.03.05 (B)(1)(a), (b) and (c), respectively. (3) For privately owned lands within a NRPA within the RFMU district , permitted and conditional uses shall be those as set forth in the RFMU district Sending Lands (section 2.03.08 A.4.). (4) For privately owned lands within a NRPA and designated Estates, permitted and conditional uses shall be those as set forth in the Estates Designation within the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. As these privately owned Estates Designated lands are acquired for conservation purposes, the Comprehensive Plan and will be amended to change the Designation to Conservation and the property will be rezoned to the CON district . (5) There are approximately 15 sections of privately owned land within a NRPA that are not designated Sending and are not located within the RFMU district . Eight (8) of these sections, known as the "hole-in-the-doughnut," are located within the South Golden Gate Estates NRPA and surrounded by platted Estates lots , almost all of which have been acquired by the State under the Florida Forever program as part of the Picayune Strand State Forest. The remaining seven (7) sections are within an approved mitigation bank located north and west of Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary. As these privately owned Agricultural/Rural Designated lands are acquired for conservation purposes, the Plan will be amended to change the Designation to CON district . Until such time as the designation on these lands is change to CON district , permitted and conditional uses for these privately owned lands shall be those set forth in underlying zoning district. C. North Belle Meade Overlay District (NBMO). 1. Purpose and intent. The North Belle Meade Overlay (NBMO) is unique to the RFMU district because it is surrounded by areas that are vested for development on three sides. Because this area is largely undeveloped and includes substantial vegetated areas, the NBMO can and does provide valuable habitat for wildlife, including endangered species. The NBMO is intended to achieve a balance of both preservation and opportunities for future development that takes into account resource protection and the relationship between this area and the Estates developing around the NBMO. 2. General location. The NBMO District is surrounded by Golden Gate Estates to the north, east, and west and I-75 to the south. This NBMO comprises some 24 sections of land (approximately 15,550 acres) located entirely within the RFMU District (LDC section 2.03.08 A.). The boundaries of the NBMO District are outlined in Illustration 2.03.08 C.2.a below and on the North Belle Meade Overlay Map in the Future Land Use Element of the GMP. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 608 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Illustration 2.03.08 C.2.a 3. Applicability: a. NBMO receiving lands. Permitted, conditional, and accessory uses within NBMO Receiving Lands shall be as set forth in LDC section 2.03.08 A.2, except as provided in LDC section 2.03.08 C.5.a. All other provisions of this Code that implement the Future 3.B.f Packet Pg. 609 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Land Use Element, Conservation and Coastal Management Element, or Public Facilities Element, including but not limited to Chapters 3, 4 and 10, shall only be applicable to development in NBMO Receiving Lands to the extent specifically stated in this section. However, all development within NBMO Receiving Lands shall comply with all non- environmental review procedures for site development plans and platting as set forth in this Code. b. NBMO neutral lands . Except as otherwise specifically provided in LDC section 2.03.08 C.4. and LDC section 2.03.08 C.5.b., all development within NBMO neutral lands shall be consistent with LDC section 2.03.08 A.3. c. NBMO sending lands. Except as otherwise specifically provided in LDC section 2.03.08 C.4., all development with NBMO Sending Lands shall be consistent with LDC section 2.03.08 A.4. 4. General planning and design considerations: a. Transportation. As a condition for the approval of the residential component of any subdivision plat, site development plan, PUD, or DRI within Sections 21, 28, or 27 of the NBMO, the following transportation related improvements and planning and design elements shall be addressed and provision made for their completion. (1) An extension of Wilson Boulevard shall be provided, including ROW dedication and construction to County collector road standards, through Section 33, Range 27 East, extending to the south to Interstate 75 via an interchange or service road for residential development should it commence in Sections 21, 28 and 27. The portion of Wilson Boulevard that traverses through NBMO Sending Lands shall be designed with aquatic species crossings and small terrestrial animal crossings. (2) As an alternative to (1) above, a haul road along an extension of Wilson Boulevard shall be improved to standards sufficient, in the opinion of County transportation staff, to safely serve earth-mining activities with a connection through Sections 32 and 31 to Landfill Road. (3) Lands required for the extension of Wilson Boulevard will be dedicated to Collier County at the time of rezoning. The right-of-way shall be of a sufficient size to accommodate collector road requirements. (4) All new roads and road improvements, other than the Wilson Boulevard extension and the haul road referenced in 2 above, shall: (a) be routed so as to avoid traversing publicly owned natural preserves, publicly owned parks, publicly owned recreation areas, areas identified as environmentally sensitive wildlife habitat, wildlife corridors, and greenways unless there is no feasible and prudent alternative; and (b) be designed with aquatic species crossings, small terrestrial animal crossings, and large terrestrial animal crossings pursuant to Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission criteria. b. Buffering . The western ¼ of Sections 22 and 27 shall be buffered from the NBMO NRPA to the east by a buffer preservation that includes all of the eastern ½ of the western ¼ of Sections 22 and 27. This buffer shall consist of lake excavation areas between the Wilson Boulevard extension road right-of-way and the NRPA. c. Greenway. A Greenway that follows natural flowways , as contemplated in the Community Character Plan prepared by Dover Kohl, shall be created within NBMO Sending Lands. As a condition to the creation of TDR credits from NBMO Sending Lands that constitute natural flowways , such lands shall be dedicated to a public or private entity for use as part of the Greenway. 5. Additional specific area provisions. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 610 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) a. Receiving lands. (1) Density . (a) The base density in RFMU receiving lands , outside of a rural village is one dwelling unit per five (5) gross acres. (b) This density may be increased, through TDR credits and TDR Bonus Credits , up to a maximum of 1 dwelling unit per gross acre. (c) Once a density of 1 dwelling unit per gross acre is achieved through TDR credits and TDR Bonus Credits , additional density may be achieved as follows: i. 0.1 dwelling unit per acre for each acre of native vegetation preserved on- site; ii. 0.1 dwelling unit per acre for each acre of wetlands having a functionality value, as assessed using the South Florida Water Management District's Unified Wetlands Mitigation Assessment Method, of 0.65 or greater that are preserved on-site; and/or iii. 0.1 dwelling unit per acre for each acre of NBMO Sending Land that is within either a NRPA or a buffer area adjoining a NRPA that is dedicated to a public or private entity for conservation use. (2) The earth mining operation and asphalt plant uses that currently exist within NBMO Receiving Lands may continue and may expand as follows: (a) Until June 19, 2005, or such other date as the GMP is amended to provide, such uses may expand only into the western half of Section 21 and shall not generate truck traffic beyond average historic levels. (b) Such mining operations and an asphalt plant may expand on Sections 21 and 28 and the western quarters of 22 and 27 as a permitted use if either of the following occurs by June 19, 2005, or such other date as the GMP is amended to provide: i. an alignment has been selected, funding has been determined, and an accelerated construction schedule established by the BCC and the mine operator, for an east-west connector roadway between County Road 951 and the Wilson Boulevard extension; or ii. the mine operator commits to construct a private haul road by June 19, 2007, or such other date as the GMP is amended to provide, without the use of any public funds. (c) If the conditions for expansion set forth in b above are not satisfied, any mining operations or asphalt plant in these areas, other than continued operations on the western half of Section 21 at historic levels, shall be permitted only as a conditional use. (3) A greenbelt is not required for any development in NBMO Receiving Lands, whether inside or outside of a rural village . However, any greenbelt that is provided in a NBMO rural village shall be included in the calculation of open space. (4) NBMO rural village. A NBMO rural village shall adhere to the provisions for rural village set forth in LDC section 2.03.08 A.2.b., except as follows: (a) Density. An NBMO rural village shall have a minimum gross density of 1.5 dwelling units per acre and a maximum gross density of three (3) dwelling units per acre. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 611 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) i. The minimum required density shall be achieved through TDR credits, TDR Bonus Credits, and Rural Village Bonus credits, as provided in LDC section 2.03.08 A.2.b.(3)(c). ii. Once the minimum required density is achieved, additional density may be achieved, up to the maximum of three (3) dwelling units per gross acre through any one or combination of the following: a) TDR credits ; b) TDR Bonus Credits; c) 0.3 dwelling unit per acre for each acre of native vegetation preserved on-site; d) 0.3 dwelling unit per acre for each acre of wetlands having a functionality value, as assessed using the South Florida Water Management District's Unified wetlands Mitigation Assessment Method, of 0.65 or greater that are preserved on-site; and/or e) 0.3 dwelling unit per acre for each acre of NBMO Sending Land that is within either a NRPA or a buffer area adjoining a NRPA that is dedicated to a public or private entity for conservation use. (b) Sidewalks shall be required on both sides of the streets . (c) Interconnected bike lanes shall be provided on all collector and arterial roadways. (d) Schools shall be located within a NBMO rural village whenever possible, in order to minimize bussing of students. Furthermore, whenever possible, schools shall be co-located with other public facilities and civic structures , such as parks, libraries, community centers, public squares, greens, and civic areas. (e) Elementary schools shall be accessible by local streets and pedestrian and bicycle facilities and shall be located in or adjacent to the rural village center , provided that local streets provide access adequate to meets the needs of the School Board. b. Neutral lands. Neutral lands shall be governed by the standards set forth in LDC section 2.03.08 A.3. In addition to standards in LDC section 2.03.08 A.3., neutral lands located in Section 24, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, shall be governed by the North Belle Meade Overlay in the Future Land Use Element of the GMP. Where there is a conflict between provisions, the GMP overlay provisions shall apply. (Ord. No. 04-72, § 3.F; Ord. No. 05-27, § 3.E; Ord. No. 05-49, § 3.B; Ord. No. 07-67, § 3.E; Ord. No. 08-08, § 3.C; Ord. No. 12-38, § 3.C; Ord. No. 16-27, § 3.G; Ord. No. 18-18, § 3.E; Ord. No. 19-08, § 3.B) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 612 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 2.03.07 - Overlay Zoning Districts D. Special Treatment Overlay (ST). 1. Within the County there are certain areas, which because of their unique assemblages of flora and/or fauna, their aesthetic appeal, historical or archaeological significance, rarity in the County, or their contribution to their own and adjacent ecosystems, make them worthy of special regulations. Such regulations are directed toward the conservation, protection, and preservation of ecological and recreational values for the greatest benefit to the people of the County. Such areas include, but are not necessarily limited to, mangrove and freshwater swamps, barrier islands, hardwood hammocks, xeric scrubs, coastal beaches , estuaries, cypress domes, natural drainage ways, aquifer recharge areas, and lands and structures of historical and archaeological significance. The purpose of the "ST" district is to assure the preservation and maintenance of these environmental and cultural resources and to encourage the preservation of the intricate ecological relationships within the systems, and at the same time, permit those types of development which will hold changes to levels determined acceptable by the BCC after public hearing. 2. An overlay zoning district classification to be known as the ST special treatment overlay district, and to be designated on the Official Zoning Atlas by the symbol "ST" together with the symbol of the basic zoning district which it overlays, is hereby established. This overlay district classification will be used for those lands of environmental sensitivity and historical and archaeological significance where the essential ecological or cultural value of the land is not adequately protected under the basic zoning district regulations established by this LDC. The placement or removal of this the ST district shall be governed by the procedure for amending the LDC and this Official Zoning Atlas as prescribed in Chapter 10. All land within the ST overlay district shall be designated as environmentally sensitive. 3. For purposes of identifying land from which the residential development rights have been transferred, such lands shall be designated on the Official Zoning Atlas by affixing the letter "P" for preservation to the symbol "ST," thusly "P-ST." Such designation shall be placed on the land after the BCC has accepted the deed and/or guarantee to said property. 4. Transfer of Development Rights (TDR). a. Purpose, Intent and Applicability. i. Purpose. The primary purpose of the TDR process is to establish an equitable method of protecting and conserving lands determined to have significant environmental value, including large connected wetland systems and significant areas of habitat for listed species; and To provide a viable mechanism for property owners of such environmentally valuable lands to recoup lost value and development potential which may be associated with the application of environmental preservations standards to such lands. ii. Intent . These TDR provisions are intended to accomplish the above stated purpose through an economically viable process of transferring development rights from less suitable non-RFMU sending areas and RFMU sending lands to more suitable non- RFMU receiving areas and RFMU receiving lands . iii. Applicability . These TDR provisions shall be applicable to those areas specifically identified in (b), (c) and (d) below. These TDR provisions shall not be applicable to the any transfer of development rights within the RLSA District. b. Transfer of development rights from urban areas to urban areas. An owner of land located within areas designated as urban on the Future Land Use Map, including agriculturally zoned properties, which may or may not be identified with the ST overlay, may elect to transfer some or all of the residential development rights from one parcel of land to another parcel , as an alternative to the development of the sending lands. The lands to 3.B.f Packet Pg. 613 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) which the development rights are to be transferred shall be referred to as receiving lands and those lands from which development rights are transferred shall be referred to as sending lands, as provided herein and shall be located within the urban designated areas of the county. i. The development rights shall be considered as interests in real property and be transferred in portions or as a total as provided in this section. Once used, the residential development rights shall not be used again and the residential development rights of the subject lands providing them shall be considered severed forever. ii. The transfer of development rights to be used shall be subject to all of the requirements of the basic zoning district to which they are transferred unless specifically approved otherwise as provided by law. iii. The minimum area of land eligible for the transfer of development rights shall be equal to the minimum lot size for the sending zone. For the purposes of this section, legal non-conforming lots of record may be eligible to transfer density , with the minimum area of the receiving land equal to the area of the legal non-conforming lot of record , excluding submerged land. iv. Upon the approval of the transfer of residential development rights by a super majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners, the property owner of the sending land shall dedicate in fee simple the land to the county or a state or federal agency; however, the lands may be dedicated in fee simple to a private, not-for-profit conservation or environmental organization in accordance with F.S. § 704.06, as amended, with the approval of the Board of County Commissioners. v. The maximum number of residential units which may be requested for transfer shall be compiled on the basis of the permitted density pursuant to the underlying zoning category of the sending land. vi. Maximum number of residential units which eligible lands may receive. a) Lands in all residential zoning districts and residential components of planned unit development zoning districts are eligible to receive residential development units provided that the maximum number of residential units which may be transferred to the receiving land does not exceed ten percent of the maximum number of residential units permitted under the receiving property's basic zoning district. For the purpose of determining the number of residential units which a parcel of land is capable of receiving, the following formulas shall apply: i) RSF-1 through RSF-5 districts, up to and including five units per acre: Units per base density × 10% = .1 to .5 units per acre ii) RMF-6 district, up to and including six units per acre: 6 units × 10% = 0.6 units per acre iii) RMF-12 district, seven to and including 12 units per acre: 12 units × 10% = 1.20 units per acre iv) RMF-16 district: 16 units × 5% = 0.80 units per acre v) RT district: 16 units × 5% = 0.80 units per acre vi) PUD district: 3.B.f Packet Pg. 614 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Residential tract units × 5% = permitted units per acre b) For the purpose of calculating the final fractional residential unit of the total number of residential units eligible for transfer to an eligible parcel of land, the following shall apply: Any fractional residential unit shall be converted upward if one-half or more of a whole unit, or downward if less than one-half of a whole unit, to the nearest whole unit value. vii. Procedure for obtaining transfer of residential development rights. Any owner of eligible land may apply for a transfer of development rights either separately or concurrently with rezoning, zoning ordinance amendments, preliminary subdivision plat or development plan. Prior to the approval of any transfer of development rights or the issuance of any building permits in connection with the use of any transfer of development rights, the petitioner shall submit the following information and data, as applicable to the petition, to the development services director for his review and subsequent action by the Board of County Commissioners a) Name and address of property owner of sending land. b) Name and address of property owner of receiving land. c) Legal description of sending land from which transfer of residential development rights is petitioned. d) Survey of sending land from which transfer of residential development rights is requested. e) Legal description of receiving land which receives the transfer of residential development rights. f) Survey of the land which receives the transfer of residential development rights. g) Three copies of an executed deed of transfer of ownership of the sending property to the county or a state or federal agency; however, the lands may be dedicated in fee simple to a private, not-for-profit conservation or environmental organization in accordance with F.S. § 704.06, as amended, with the approval of the Board of County Commissioners in a form approved by the county attorney. h) The owner of the sending land shall provide a guarantee, agreeable to and approved by ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners, that the sending land will be utilized only for the purposes of increasing public recreational and/or educational opportunities, creation of linkages between public or private open space , protection of critical habitat/ecosystems, or other public purpose as specified in the ordinance of adoption. Such a guarantee shall be recorded with the clerk of the circuit court of Collier County, Florida as a recorded restriction of the use of such land and shall be binding upon all present and subsequent owners, heirs, or assigns of such property. Such restrictions may not be amended, deleted, or otherwise altered, except by a majority vote of the BCC. viii. Time limitations on Board of County Commissioners' approval of transfer of residential development rights or authorization to proceed with the processing of a building construction permit. The Board of County Commissioners' approval of a transfer of residential development rights or the County Manager or his designee authorization to proceed with the processing of a building or construction permit shall be valid so long as such approval is permitted by law. The failure to act on the part of the petitioner to exercise the transfer of residential development rights or obtain and exercise an authorized building or construction permit within the time period provided by law shall automatically terminate such approval and the county shall be held harmless for any damages arising out of the petitioner's failure to act. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 615 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) ix. Sequential use of residential units approved for transfer by the Board of County Commissioners. Upon the issuance of any permit for the construction of residential unit(s) upon the receiving land, the first residential units built thereon shall be considered to be the residential units approved for transfer by the Board of County Commissioners, and the succeeding residential units constructed shall be considered the residential units permitted under the basic zoning district regulations. c. TDR credits from RFMU sending lands : General Provisions i. Creation of TDR credits . a) TDR credits are generated from RFMU sending lands at a rate of 1 TDR credit per 5 acres of RFMU Sending Land or, for those legal non-conforming lots or parcels of less than 5 acres that were in existence as of June 22, 1999, at a rate of 1 TDR credit per legal non-conforming lot or parcel . b) For lots and parcels 5 acres or larger, the number of TDR credits generated shall be calculated using the following formula: # of acres x 0.2 = # of TDR credits generated. Where the number of TDR credits thus calculated is a fractional number, the number of TDR credits created shall be rounded to the nearest 1/100th. ii. Creation of TDR Bonus credits . TDR Bonus credits shall only be generated from RFMU sending land property from which TDR credits have been severed. The three types TDR Bonus credits are as follows: a) Environmental Restoration and Maintenance Bonus credits . Environmental Restoration and Maintenance Bonus credits are generated at a rate of 1 credit for each TDR credit severed from that RFMU sending land for which a Restoration and Management Plan (RMP) has been accepted by the County. In order to be accepted, a RMP shall satisfy the following: 1) The RMP shall include a listed species management plan. 2) The RMP shall comply with the criteria set forth in 3.05.08.A, and B. 3) The RMP shall provide financial assurance, in the form of a letter of credit or similar financial security, establishing that the RMP shall remain in place and be performed, until the earlier of the following occurs: a. Viable and sustainable ecological and hydrological functionality has been achieved on the property as measured by the success criteria set forth in the RMP. b. The property is conveyed to a County, state, or federal agency as provided in b) below. 4) The RMP shall provide for the exotic vegetation removal and maintenance to be performed by an environmental contractor acceptable to the County. b) Conveyance Bonus credits . Conveyance Bonus credits are generated at a rate of 1 credit for each TDR credit severed from that RFMU sending land that is conveyed in fee simple to a federal, state, or local government agency as a gift. Conveyance Bonus credits shall only be generated from those RFMU sending land properties on which an RMP has been accepted as provided in a) above. c) Early Entry Bonus credits . Early Entry Bonus credits shall be generated at a rate of 1 additional credit for each TDR credit that is severed from RFMU sending land for the period from March 5, 2004, until March 27, 2012. Early Entry Bonus credits shall cease to be generated after the termination of this 3.B.f Packet Pg. 616 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) early entry bonus period. However, Early Entry Bonus credits may continue to be used to increase density in RFMU and non- RFMU Receiving Lands after the termination of the Early Entry Bonus period. iii. Calculation of TDR Bonus credits . a) Environmental Restoration and Maintenance Bonus credits are calculated as follows: # TDR credits generated from property × % property subject to an approved RMP b) Conveyance Bonus credits are calculated as follows: # TDR credits generated from property × % property subject to an approved RMP and conveyed as provided in ii.b) above. c) Early Entry Bonus credits are calculated as follows: # TDR credits generated within Early Entry period × 1. iv. Receipt of TDR credits or TDR Bonus credits from RFMU sending lands . TDR credits or TDR Bonus credits from RFMU sending lands may be redeemed into Urban Areas, the Urban Residential Fringe, and RFMU receiving lands , as provided in subsections 2.03.07 4.d. and e. below. v. Prohibition on redemption of fractional TDR credits and TDR Bonus credits . While fractional TDR credits and TDR Bonus credits may be created, as provided in (ii) above, TDR credits and TDR Bonus credits may only be redeemed in increments of whole, not fractional, dwelling units. Consequently, fractional TDR credits and fractional TDR Bonus credits must be aggregated to form whole units, before they can be utilized to increase density in either non-RFMU Receiving Areas or RFMU Receiving lands . vi. Prohibition on severance of development rights. a) Neither TDR credits nor TDR Early Entry Bonus credits shall be generated from RFMU sending lands where a conservation easement or other similar development restriction prohibits the residential development of such property, with the exception of those TDR Early Entry Bonus credits associated with TDR credits severed from March 5, 2004, until [the effective date of this provision]. Environmental Restoration and Maintenance Bonus credits and Conveyance Bonus credits may only be generated from those RFMU sending lands where a conservation easement or other similar development restriction on development was imposed in conjunction with the severance of TDR credits . b) Neither TDR credits nor any TDR Bonus credits shall be generated from RFMU sending lands that were cleared for agricultural operations after June 19, 2002, for a period of twenty-five (25) years after such clearing occurs. d. Redemption of TDRs into non- RFMU receiving areas . i. Redemption into urban areas. a) Maximum density increase. In order to encourage residential in-fill in urban areas of existing development outside of the Coastal High Hazard Area, a maximum of 3 residential dwelling units per gross acre may be requested through a rezone petition for projects qualifying under this residential infill provisions of the Future Land Use Element density Rating System, subject to the applicable provisions of Chapters 2 and 9 of this Code, and the following conditions: 3.B.f Packet Pg. 617 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) i) The project is 20 acres or less in size; ii) At time of development , the project will be served by central public water and sewer; iii) The property in question has no common site development plan in common with adjacent property; iv) There is no common ownership with any adjacent parcels ; and v) The parcel in question was not created to take advantage of the in-fill residential density bonus and was created prior to the adoption of this provision in the Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989. vi) Of the maximum 3 additional units, one (1) dwelling unit per acre shall be derived from RFMU sending lands and redeemed at Site Plan or prior to Plat recordation. b) Developments which meet the residential infill conditions i) through v) above may increase the base density administratively through a Site Development Plan or Plat approval by a maximum of one dwelling unit per acre by redeeming additional density derived from RFMU district Sending Lands. ii. Redemptions into the Urban Residential Fringe shall be permitted exclusively through the use of TDR credits and TDR Bonus credits derived from RFMU sending lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary to increase density by a maximum of 1.0 dwelling units per acre, allowing for a density increase from the existing allowable base density of 1.5 dwelling units per acre to a maximum of 2.5 dwelling units per gross acre. e. Redemption into RFMU receiving lands . i. Maximum density on RFMU receiving lands when TDR credits are redeemed. a) The base residential density allowable shall be as provided in sections 2.03.08 A.2.a.(2)(a) and 2.03.08 A.2.b.(3)(a). b) The density achievable through the redemption of TDR credits and TDR Bonus credits into RFMU receiving lands shall be as provided for in section 2.03.08 A.2.a.(2)(b)(i) outside of rural villages and sections 2.03.08 A.2.b.(3)(b) and 2.03.08 A.2.b.(3)(c)(i) inside of rural villages. ii. Remainder uses after TDR credits are severed from RFMU sending lands. Where development rights have been severed from RFMU district Sending Lands, such lands may be retained in private ownership and may be used as set forth in section 2.03.08 A.4.b. f. Procedures applicable to the severance and redemption of TDR credits and the generation of TDR Bonus credits from RFMU sending lands . i. General. Those developments that utilize such TDR credits or TDR Bonus credits are subject to all applicable permitting and approval requirements of this Code, including but not limited to those applicable to site development plans, plat approvals, PUDs, and DRIs. a) The severance of TDR credits and the generation of Early Entry Bonus credits from RFMU sending lands does not require further approval of the County if the County determines that information demonstrating compliance with all of the criteria set forth in ii.a) below has been submitted. However, those developments that utilize such TDR credits and Early Entry Bonus credits are subject to all applicable permitting and approval requirements of this Code, including but not limited to those applicable to site development plans , plat approvals, PUDs, and DRIs. 3.B.f Packet Pg. 618 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) b) The generation of Environmental Restoration and Maintenance Bonus credits and Conveyance Bonus credits requires acceptance by the County of a RMP. ii. In order to facilitate the County's monitoring and regulation of the TDR Program, the County shall serve as the central registry for all TDR severances, transfers (sales) and redemptions , as well as maintain a public listing of TDR credits available for sale along with a listing of purchasers seeking TDR credits . No TDR credit generated from RFMU sending lands may be utilized to increase density in any area unless the following procedures are complied with in full. a) TDR credits shall not be used to increase density in either non-RFMU Receiving Areas or RFMU receiving lands until severed from RFMU sending lands . TDR credits shall be deemed to be severed from RFMU sending lands at such time as a TDR credit Certificate is obtained from the County. TDR credit Certificates shall be issued only by the County and upon submission of the following: i) a legal description of the property from which the RFMU TDR credits originated, including the total acreage; ii) a title opinion establishing that, prior to the severance of the TDR credits from RFMU sending lands , such sending lands were not subject to a conservation restriction or any other development restriction that prohibited residential development ; iii) an affidavit, signed by the owner, stating that the property was not subject to a conservation restriction or any other development restriction that prohibited residential development during the period between the effective date of the title opinion and conservation easement recordation; iv) an executed Limitation of Development Rights Agreement, prepared in accord with the form provided by the County, that limits the allowable uses on the property after the severance of TDR credits as set forth in section 2.03.08 A.4.b.; and v) a statement identifying the price, or value of other remuneration, paid to the owner of the RFMU sending lands from which the TDR credits were generated and that the value of any such remuneration is at least $25,000 per TDR credit , unless such owner retains ownership of the TDR credits after they are severed, unless the RFMU or non- RFMU receiving lands on which the TDR credits will be redeemed and the RFMU sending lands from which the TDR credits were generated are owned by the same persons or entities or affiliated persons or entities; and vi) a statement attesting that the TDR credits are not being severed from RFMU sending lands in violation of subsection 2.03.07 D.4.c.vi.b) of the Code. vii) documented evidence that, if the property from which TDRs are being severed is subject to a mortgage, lien, or any other security interest; the mortgagee, lien holder, or holder of the security interest has consented to the recordation of the Limitation of Development Rights Agreement required for TDR severance; transfer (sale) of TDR credit ; and redemption of TDR credit . b) TDR Bonus credits shall not be used to increase density in either non-RFMU receiving areas or RFMU receiving lands until a TDR credit certificate reflecting the TDR Bonus credits is obtained from the County and recorded. 1) Early Entry Bonus credits . All TDR credit certificates issued by the County for the period from the effective date of this provision until March 27, 2015, 3.B.f Packet Pg. 619 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) unless further extended by resolution by the Board of County Commissioners, shall include one Early Entry Bonus credit or fractional Early Entry Bonus credit for each TDR credit or fractional TDR credit reflected on the TDR credit certificate. Where TDR credits were severed from March 5, 2004, until the effective date of this provision, the County shall, upon receipt of a copy of the TDR credit certificate reflecting those previously severed TDR credits , issue a TDR credit certificate entitling Early Entry Bonus credits equal in number to the previously severed TDR credits . 2) Environmental Restoration and Maintenance Bonus credit . A TDR certificate reflecting Environmental Restoration and Maintenance Bonus credits shall not be issued until the County has accepted a RMP for the sending lands from which the Environmental Restoration and Maintenance Bonus credit is being generated. Any sending lands from which TDR credits have been severed may also be used for mitigation programs and associated mitigation activities and uses in conjunction with any county, state or federal permitting. Where the Environmental Restoration and Maintenance Credit is applied for sending lands that are also being used (title or easement) for mitigation for permits or approvals from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, or the South Florida Water Management District, the County shall accept as the RMP for the sending mitigation lands, the restoration and/or maintenance requirements of permits issued by any of the foregoing governmental agencies for said lands. 3) Conveyance Bonus credit. A TDR certificate reflecting Conveyance Bonus credits shall not be issued until the County has accepted a RMP for the Sending Lands from which the Conveyance Bonus credit is being generated and such sending lands have been conveyed, in fee simple, to a County, state, or federal government agency. c) A PUD or DRI utilizing TDR credits or TDR Bonus credits may be conditionally approved, but no subsequent application for site development plan or subdivision plat within the PUD or DRI shall be approved, until the developer submits the following: i) documentation that the developer has acquired all TDR credits and TDR Bonus credits needed for that phase of the development that is the subject of the site development plan or subdivision plat. d) The developer shall provide documentation of the acquisition of full ownership and control of all TDR credits and TDR Bonus credits needed for the development prior to the approval of any site development plan, subdivision plat, or other final local development order, other than a PUD or DRI. e) Each TDR credit shall have an individual and distinct tracking number, which shall be identified on the TDR certificate that reflects the TDR credit . The County TDR Activity Log shall maintain an ongoing database that categorizes all TDR credits relative to severance, transfer (sale) and redemption activity. f) Each TDR Bonus credit shall have an individual and distinct tracking number, which shall be identified on the TDR certificate and which shall identify the specific TDR credit associated with the TDR Bonus credit . The County TDR Registry shall maintain a record of all TDR Bonus credits , to include a designation of those that have been expended. g) The County bears no responsibility to provide notice to any person or entity holding a lien or other security interest in Sending Lands that TDR credits have 3.B.f Packet Pg. 620 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) been severed from the property or that an application for such severance has been filed. g. Proportional utilization of TDR credits and TDR Bonus credits . Upon the issuance of approval of a site development plan or subdivision plat that is part of a PUD or DRI, TDR credits and TDR Bonus credits shall be redeemed at a rate proportional to percentage of the PUD or DRI's approved gross density that is derived through TDR credits and TDR Bonus credits . All PUDs and DRIs utilizing TDR credits and TDR Bonus credits shall require that the rate of TDR credit and TDR Bonus credits consumption be reported through the monitoring provisions of section 10.02.12 and subsection 10.02.07.C.1.b of this Code. 5. In accordance with § 380.05, F.S. and chapter 73-131 Laws of Florida, the administrative commission instituted regulations for the Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern "ACSC". The purpose of these regulations is to conserve and protect the natural, environmental, and economic resources of the Big Cypress area. Furthermore, these regulations are to provide a land and water management system that will preserve water quality, provide for the optimum utilization of the limited water resources of the area, facilitate orderly and well-planned development , and protect the health, safety and welfare of residents of the state. The Florida Administrative Code establishes criteria for site alteration, drainage, transportation facilities and structure installation. These regulations are implemented through the land development regulations as set forth in section 4.02.14. An overlay zoning classification to be known as Area of Critical State Concern/Special Treatment Overlay shall be designated on the Official Zoning Atlas with symbol ACSC-ST. § 3.D; Ord. No. 19-09, § 3) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 621 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.06.00 - GROUNDWATER PROTECTION 3.06.01 - Purpose and Intent A. The purpose of this section is to establish standards, regulations, and procedures for the review and approval of existing and proposed development within mapped wellfield protection zones in the unincorporated area and the incorporated areas of the County. The standards and regulations of this section shall be implemented to protect existing and future wellfields, protect natural aquifer system recharge areas, protect Countywide groundwater resources, and to protect the public health and resources through regulation and establishment of standards for development involving the use, storage, generation, handling, and disposal of quantities of hazardous products and hazardous waste in excess of identified quantities, disposal of sewage and effluent, stormwater management, earthmining, petroleum exploration, solid waste , and other related aspects of land use and development . B. It is the intent of the BCC that this section implement and be consistent with the Collier County GMP. Implementation will provide for the long-term protection of the County's groundwater resource, and through the management of those land uses and developments within wellfield management special treatment overlay zones and Countywide groundwater protection zones, ensure short-term protection. This section is intended to be consistent with principles of property rights, as balanced with the health, safety, and welfare of the general public. C. In order to protect the County's potable groundwater resources, this section establishes Countywide groundwater protection standards, implemented through a Countywide groundwater protection zone, and a series of wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zones around identified public water supply wellfields. These special treatment overlay zones and groundwater protection zone form the basis of land use management prohibitions and regulations to reduce or eliminate the potential for groundwater contamination from specified land uses and activities. 3.06.02 - Protected Public Water Supply Wellfields A. The public water supply wellfields, identified in section 3.06.06 and permitted by the SFWMD for potable water to withdraw a minimum of 100,000 average gallons per day (GPD), are identified as protected wellfields, around which specific land use and activity (regulated development ) shall be regulated under this section. B. There are hereby created wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zones around each existing public water supply wellfield permitted by the SFWMD, to withdraw a minimum of 100,000 average gallons per day or more. These wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zones are generally depicted on wellfield protection zone maps and are made a part hereof as Illustration 3.06.02 A. Wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zones shall be supplemental to existing and future zoning and land use regulations, and shall not be deemed to permit or authorize any use or activity not otherwise permitted in the underlying zoning district or allowable in the underlying future land use designation. 3.06.03 - Description and Basis of Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zones Wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zones are derived from the three-dimensional computer-modeled analysis of groundwater flow and solute transport in the County's freshwater aquifer system, as prepared and presented in a study commissioned by the County and known as the "Three- Dimensional Simulation of Wellfield Protection Areas in Collier County, Florida" (Voorhees and Mades, 1989) (the three-dimensional wellfield study). A. Wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zone W-1 (zone W-1). The land area between an identified wellfield and the five (5) percent groundwater capture zone, approximating the one (1) year wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zone boundary, as shown on the wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zone map, Illustration 3.06.02 A, which area shall be protected from the discharge or accidental release of 3.B.f Packet Pg. 622 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) contaminants from a sanitary hazard or other contaminant source, including the discharge or accidental release of hazardous products and hazardous wastes . B. Wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zone W-2 (zone W-2). The land area between zone W-1 and the ten (10) percent groundwater capture zone, approximating the two (2) year wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zone boundary, as shown on the wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zone map, Illustration 3.06.02 A, which area shall be protected from the discharge or accidental release of contaminants, including from a sanitary hazard or other contaminant source and the discharge or accidental release of hazardous products and hazardous wastes . C. Wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zone W-3 (zone W-3). The land area between zone W-2 and the twenty-five (25) percent groundwater capture zone, approximating the five (5) year wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zone boundary, as shown on the wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zone map, Illustration 3.06.02 A, which area may be protected from the discharge or accidental release of specific contaminants, including the discharge or accidental release of hazardous products and hazardous wastes . D. Wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zone W-4 (zone W-4). The land area between zone W-3 and the 100 percent groundwater capture zone for the twenty (20) year planning limit, which is the twenty (20) year wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zone boundary, as shown on the wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zone map, Illustration 3.06.02 A, which area may be protected from the discharge or accidental release of specific contaminants, including the discharge or accidental release of hazardous products and hazardous wastes . 3.06.04 - Groundwater Protection A. There are hereby created groundwater protection special treatment overlay zones, as generally depicted on the wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zone maps, Illustration 3.06.02 A. These groundwater protection special treatment overlay zones reflect wellfield risk management zones W-1, W-2, W-3, and W-4; areas of high natural aquifer recharge in the County (ST-NAR), and the natural recharge areas of the County that require minimum groundwater protection and within which future public water supply wells may be located (GWP). B. Wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zones, high natural aquifer recharge special treatment zones (ST-NAR), and groundwater protection special treatment overlay zones shall be supplemental to existing and future zoning and land use regulations, and shall not be deemed to permit or authorize any use or activity not otherwise permitted in the underlying zoning district or allowable in the underlying future land use designation. C. The high natural aquifer recharge special overlay zones (ST-NAR) and the groundwater protection zones (GWP) are based upon: 1. Those portions of the County identified as areas of high natural aquifer recharge to the surficial and intermediate aquifer systems (ST-NAR). 2. The susceptibility of the surficial and intermediate aquifer systems in the County to contamination resulting from surficial activities and the need for protection of the groundwater resource as a future public water supply (GWP). D. High natural aquifer recharge areas (ST-NAR). These areas have not yet been defined. The prohibitions and regulations for this special treatment overlay zone shall be based upon the determination and designation of those portions of the County that naturally function as high natural recharge areas to the surficial and intermediate aquifer systems. Upon identification of ST-NAR areas, pursuant to these regulations, shall be amended to include the ST-NAR special treatment overlay zone where appropriate. E. Groundwater protection area (GWP). All of the County provides natural aquifer recharge to the water table aquifer , and the potential for natural aquifer recharge to the unconfined or semi- 3.B.f Packet Pg. 623 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) confined portions of the Lower Tamiami and Sandstone aquifers . Natural aquifer recharge from the water table aquifer constitutes approximately eighty (80) percent of the recharge to the Lower Tamiami aquifer on a regional basis. That area of the County, excluding W-1, W-2, W-3, W-4, and ST-NAR, shall be provided with a minimum level of groundwater protection and shall be designated as GWP. 3.06.05 - Annual Review of Zones The wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zone maps, Illustration 3.06.02 A, shall be reviewed by the BCC on an annual basis, or more often as may be determined by the County Manager or designee in his discretion upon the occurrence of: A. Changes in technical knowledge concerning the understanding of groundwater hydraulics, as applied to the hydrogeology of applicable aquifer systems in the County. B. Changes in the permitted withdrawals from the identified wellfield(s). C. Reconfiguration of identified wellfields. D. The designation of new wellfield(s) as protected under this section. E. Availability of any other technical or scientific information relative to the aquifer systems in the County. 3.06.06 - Regulated Wellfields The following wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zones, as defined in section 3.06.03, and criteria specified herein shall be applied to the following wellfields: A. City of Naples East Golden Gate Well Field. B. City of Naples Coastal Ridge Well Field. C. Collier County Utilities Golden Gate Well Field. D. Everglades City Well Field. E. Florida Governmental Utility Authority Golden Gate City Well Field. F. Orange Tree Well Field. G. Immokalee Well Field. H. Ave Maria Utility Company Well Field. I. Port of the Islands Well Field. COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES GOLDEN GATE WELL FIELD 3.B.f Packet Pg. 624 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Illustration 3.06.06 C. For more detailed information, refer to the Collier County Zoning Map at http://www.colliergov.net/Index.aspx?page=992 3.B.f Packet Pg. 625 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 626 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 627 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 628 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 629 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 630 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 631 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 632 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 633 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 634 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 635 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 636 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 637 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 638 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 639 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 640 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 641 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 642 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 643 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 644 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 645 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) State of Florida Department of State I certify from the records of this office that IGNITE WIRELESS, INC. is a Georgia corporation authorized to transact business in the State of Florida, qualified on June 30, 2020. The document number of this corporation is F20000003016. I further certify that said corporation has paid all fees due this office through December 31, 2020 and that its status is active. I further certify that said corporation has not filed a Certificate of Withdrawal. Given under my hand and the Great Seal of the State of Florida at Tallahassee, the Capital, this the Fourteenth day of July, 2020 Tracking Number: 2808137266CU To authenticate this certificate,visit the following site,enter this number, and then follow the instructions displayed. https://services.sunbiz.org/Filings/CertificateOfStatus/CertificateAuthentication 3.B.f Packet Pg. 646 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 647 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 648 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 649 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.f Packet Pg. 650 Attachment: Attachment E- Application-Backup Materials (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Timothy.fi nn@col I iercountyfl .gov Subject: Oppositional Letter to variance application PL20l 90002701 Dear Mr. Finn and others to whom it may concem: My family and I submit this letter in opposition to the above numbered application for permitting, including the seeking of a variance. The above application would seek to allow construction of a very tall Communication Tower on a very small parcel ofland by substituting for certain setback requirememts. The parcel is located immediately nexi to and is contiguous to land on which my family and I reside in a "Dome" we call "Dome of the Glades" and which I would describe, perhaps too poetically, as follows: The Dome ofthe Glades is a gorgeous geodesic dome residence designed by architect Buckminster Fuller. It is located less than fourteen miles, as the crow flies, from the beautiful white sand beaches of the Gulf of Mexico.The land was purchased 50 years ago by the current owners and is in a protected area which has remained pristine. Until the 21" century the Dome was so remotely located, few people even kner,l of its existence. About two decades ago, Collier county adopted and still retains what has been touted as an "innovative" program meant to protect wetlands,wildlife and habitat from unrestrained growth. The Rural Fringe Mixed Use District limited the real estate ownership rights for personi holding land in either the designated "sending" or "receiving" areas, which include the small parcel now seeking a variance. The program ivwas designed to "direct growth potential to appropriate locations." The county, assured land holders that this plan was not inverse condemnation since the "taking" ofthese real property rights would be paid for, as to the "sending" areas, by allowing development credits to be sold to those in the "receiving" area. As to the "receiving" area, limitations on density and other restrictions would remain in place but could be removed by pwchasing development ,'credits" from sending areas. Allowing the construction of a huge Communication Tower in the very center of areas which have reliantly remained pristine, is totally contrary to the plan Collier County assured citizens they could depend on. To illustrate, when Ave Maria was initiated, also several decades ago, a plan which is, in part, almost word for word the same plan as the Rural Fringe plan here, also had receiving areas which invited development ofthoughtful and desirable villages. The building ofa huge communications Tower in what is now the center of Ave Maria would certainly never have been allowed. Our community, which we and our neighbors refer to as North Belle Meade has evolved very slowly but "naturally" until now. It's beauty and "old Florida" character display potential for becoming a cultural center to exhibit how humankind can (and perhaps must) respect and leam to live with nature rather than to control it. Other factors in opposition include: L Failure ofproper notification. A letter from Ignite Wireless stated that someone would be contacting me "directly within the next few days...." about a variance which would "not adversely affect [my] property interest". The letter which was dated June 22, 2020 was not postmarked until July 01, 2020 and, with delivery time, was already way past the "nexr few days". ln fact no one has contacted me directly. My neighbor, who's property is contiguous to mine, first informed me. 2. As to my above mentioned neighbor, another tower located within, roughly, 118 mile of the instant tower, has been applied-for. That tower would sit directly north of this neighbor's residence in full view of his superbly manicured home and show horse farm. We both oppose both towers. 3. Construction and operation ofthe instant tower would inliinge on a legally established 3.B.g Packet Pg. 651 Attachment: Attachment F - Opposition Letters (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) prescriptive easement ofuse for cattle exchange connecting my property to that of Mr. Stahlman whose land lies immediately west of the proposed tower location. This easement, while not recorded, is visible and meets the legally required time frame.4. An existing tower, taller than the proposed tower, is within 3 miles. There may also be other existing towers which the undersigned has yet to leam about.5. The proposed tower property owner is not seeking this variance. A lessee whose lease is presumably contingent on being able to build this tower is thus not adversely affected by a failure to succeed in doing so. There are many tracts of land in the general area, but away from established neighborhoods, which are potentially available. Indeed collier County may itself ou,n such property and, ifso, may be legally obligated to offer it for a Tower purpose pusuant to code. 6. There exists a bam within reach of this tower should it fail. The bam is packed with antique farming equipment, some of which may not be replaceable. We anticipate, within the near future, that this machinery will play an essential role in the devolopment ofAgritourism on the property pursuant to F.S. 570.85. A huge Communication Tower next to the bam destroys the farm-like environment and, should humans be in the barn they may well be injured or killed. The above described objections are not necessarily all inclusive. Thank you very much. Please acknowledge receipt. J. Richard Smith, Trustee, 380 Frangipani Ave, Naples Fl 34117 3.B.g Packet Pg. 652 Attachment: Attachment F - Opposition Letters (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) FinnTimoth From: SGnt To: Subjcct: Richard Smith < seasmithzl42002@gmail.com > Monday, August 24, 2020 8:47 AM FinnTimothy P1201 90002701 Oppositional letter ExrER N AL EMAIL: This emall is from an extcrnalsource. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or cllcklng llnks. Dear Mr. Finn; ln addition to items discussed in a previous oppositional letter dated August 16, 2020, in the above matter, I draw your attention to the following items of opposition: 7. There are numerous miSrating birds which pass overhead, where we and the proposed tower are located. A 225 ft tower will most likely interfere with their passage. Other birds, fauna and species may well also be adversely impacted. 8.lt is Senerally accepted that new 5G technology will soon be available. As to 5G towers, it is said that " While most current cell towers are large, freestanding behemoths, the cell towers of the future are smaller devices which companies aim to mount onto lampposts, rooftops, traffic lights and other appropriate spots...". (see www.the whizcells.com). Communication tor rers, such as the one proposed above, will very soon be obsolete, serving no necessary function but remaining as a blight on the North Belle Meade community. 9. The proposed tower would constitute an infringement or invasion of a right to privacy recognized, by the U.5. Supreme Court and also available pursuant to Amendment 9 of the U.S. Constitution. lt is very easy to also envision a violation of our ri8ht of protection from unlawful searches. My property is immediately (literally within 15-20 feet) next to the proposed tower. lmagine, if you will, going out of your door every day or night not knowing what camera or other device could be available to this tower for police surveillance. lt is, afterall, said to be built, in part, for police use. 10. The proposed Tower, by its very nature, will be an unsi8htly disturbance for the entire neighborhood and, by using this site, nothinS is being done to avoid "adverse visual impact... through careful siting." as called for by the code. (5.05'09A). There is within the same general area vacant property, for example, owned by the Collier county School District, as well as other Collier County owned land which would meet the code's requirement that use of government owned property must be considered, where available. 11. Mosquito control low flying planes frequently fly east-west along the southern edge of Golden Gate Estates, precisely where this tower would be located. Thus, it creates a hazard and would interfere in such needed routes. Once built, this entire area will lack adequate needed mosquito control. 12. As previously stated, the area in question is designated "rural fringe", an overlay whose purpose is protection for land of "critical concern". lf protection of a NRPA, within close reach, can be ignored in "receiving lands", such receiving lands here, lack the lgM required to even be part of the designated "rural fringe". That result clearly threatens the 1gA! status of a "rural fringe" not only in North Belle Meade but elsewhere in the county. (see Koon2 v. St John's River Manacemen t District 133 5. Ct. 2585.570 U5 595,Supreme Court , 2013.) 13.The proposed tower fails to meet requirements of code 5.05.09G(7)(b) which provides, in part, that the tower must be at a distance of at least yI of its height, or 112.5 feet (assuming no antennas)from the boundary of my property. 14. The proposed tower would be required to have white strobing lights at alltimes, every single night, without let-up. Being so close to such constant invasion of peace and serenity is a severe burden. lt destroys the very reason my family and I purchased this property some 50 years a8o. lt also results in interference with other wildlife habitat. I 3.B.g Packet Pg. 653 Attachment: Attachment F - Opposition Letters (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) From: Luisa Soler <lsoler999@ gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2020 4:18 PM To: CastroGa briela <Ga briela.Castro@ colliercountvfl.sov> Subject: Cell Tower EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Hello Gabri, Ref:PL:20200000885 and PL:20190002701 As a real estate professional I am really surprised that Collier County is considering permitting a cell tower in the receiving area. The value of land and property will go down because of the ugly tower. What about our health hazards? We, as the land owner, will be stuck in here. These towers will cause hardship on all of us not able to sell and extremely high risk of radiation. Park next to one tower and listen to the sound of death. Proposed tower will be less than 550 ft to my bed. ls fanny 550 FrangipaniAve property owners do not reside at this address, that is kind of ridiculous. We have real people living here. I am requesting from you and county officials to deny permit for these towers, on the grounds that they causing hardship and harm to residents. Sincerely, [UISA SOTER 1160 Sugarberry ST Naples, FL 34117 3.B.g Packet Pg. 654 Attachment: Attachment F - Opposition Letters (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) From: Sent: To: Subject: Richard Smith < seasmith442002@gmail.com> Thursday, September 10, 20?0 2:M PM VelascoJessica Re: Variance lnformation for P120190002701 - Kapok St SLC009 AT&T FirstNet Cell Tower (VA) EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Variance lnformation for PL20190002701- Kapok St Thank you, Ms. Velasco for the prompt response. ln reviewing the variance application I see numerous legal barriers to the application. Without listing all of them at this time, I do request that this message be considered as opposition to the variance application. Two issues, in opposition raise immediate barriers, but several others will be forthcoming if necessary: 1. The hardship does not arise from the land, but rather from the proposed project. 2. Any hardship was "self imposed". The owner and/or lessee are not permitted to propose a project which violates code at the time of purchase or lease, and then claim hardship because of the project they desire to create.The hardship must run with the land, not the project. Please also consider this message as my request to be notified promptly should any meeting or discussion concerning this application be scheduled or when my input could be beneficial for your consideration as to my opposition. Thank you kindly, J. Richard Smith Good morning Mr. Smith, Per our conversation, I am attaching the project narrative and additional information on this project. I am including the link to our public portal where you can see all of the documents that has been subm itted for this project. please keep in mind that this project is still in review and it requires a hearing, before it being approved. Client Portal: httos://cvoortal.collierc ountvfl.sov/CitvViewWeb/ 1. U nder Planning Department a. Status and fees Enter Captcha ii. EnterP120190002701 1. Under documents and images a. You will be able to see everything that the applicant has submitted to date 1 VelascoJessica On Thu,5ep 10, 2020 at 11:56 AM VelascoJessica <Jessica.Velasco@colliercountvfl.sov> wrote: 3.B.g Packet Pg. 655 Attachment: Attachment F - Opposition Letters (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Jessica.velasco@colliercountvfl.gov Respectfully, r/ecciaa l/o/acoo Client Services, Project Coordinator Operations and Regulatory Management Division "We're committed to your successl" 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Telephone (239) 252-2584 Visit our website at: www.colliercountvfl.sov NOIE: Emoll Addt.tt Hos Ctongcd 2800 Norlh Horieshoe Drlve, Noples Florldo 34104 Clienr Servlces: 23t.252. t036 Phone: 23t.252.2584 How are we doinB? The Operations & Regulatory Management Division wants to hear from you! 2 3.B.g Packet Pg. 656 Attachment: Attachment F - Opposition Letters (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) Please take our online SURVEY We oppreciote your feedbock! Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. lf you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. lnslead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 3 3.B.g Packet Pg. 657 Attachment: Attachment F - Opposition Letters (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) FinnTimot From: Sent: To: Subject: CastroGabriela Wednesday, September 9, 2020 9:31 AM FinnTimothy FW: Cell Tower Hey Tim, I received this email regarding these two projects I will go ahead and add it to both projects just wanted to send it to you as you are the planner for the variance. Thanks ! Respectfully, Gabriela Castro, AICP Senior Planner C,Rfr,County Developmen, Review Divilion Exceeding Expecrolio ns, Eyery Dqy! NOIE: Emqll Addrerr Hor Chonged 2E00 Norlh Horrerhoe Drlve, Noples Florldo 34104 Phone: 239-252-240E How are we doing? Please CLTCK HERE to fill out a Customer Survey We appreciate your Feedback! From: Luisa Soler <lsoler999@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2020 4:18 PM To: CastroGabriela <Gabriela.Castro@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Cell Tower EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Hello Gabri, Ref:PL:20200000885 and PL:20190002701 As a real estate professional I am really surprised that Collier County is considering permitting a cell tower in the receiving area. The value of land and property wlll go down because of the ugly tower. What about our health hazards? We, as the land owner, will be stuck in here. These towers will cause hardship on all of us not able to sell and extremely high risk of radiation. Park next to one tower and listen to the sound of death. Proposed tower will be less than 550 ft to my bed. ls fanny 550 Frangipani Ave property owners do not reside at this address, that is kind of ridiculous. We have 1 3.B.g Packet Pg. 658 Attachment: Attachment F - Opposition Letters (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) real people living here. I am requesting from you and county officials to deny permit for these towers, on the grounds that they causing hardship and harm to residents. Sincerely, LUISA SOTER U5O Sugarberry ST Naples, Ft !i4117 Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. lf you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. lnstead, contact this office by telephone or in wriling. 2 3.B.g Packet Pg. 659 Attachment: Attachment F - Opposition Letters (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) F naucrpANr Ac Conauunrry Ctvrc AssocnrroN, rNC. 5I2 FRANGIPANI AVENUE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34rr7 Collier County Growth Management 2800 Horseshoe Dr. N Naples, FL34104 October 21,2020 Dear Collier County Growth Management, The Frangipani Ag Community Civic Association serves residents and properry owners in an area of three square miles in North Belle Meade. At our board meeting on October 14,2020 our agenda included the issue of two proposed cell towers. They are identified as follows: Kapok St. PL20190002701 seeking a variance, and Frangipani St. PL20200000886 seeking an SDP. There was an extensive discussion. The members expressed many concerns, the main ones being: l. The Kapok St. tower application variance is being requested by a lessee, not the land owner. There are plenty of other uses for this lot in addition to the potential to sell the lot. We do not believe there is undue hardship in this situation, therefore we do not believe a variance should be granted. 2. This is one of the last beautiful natural residential areas of Collier County. Having one or both of these towers will be a detriment to the county's protected area. 3. The towers are proposed in RFMUD Receiving zoning. We believe these towers will inhibit the plan of the RFMUD. 4. There are other towers within 6 miles of these sites that should be explored for the possibility of co-locating before these towers are built. These existing towers have access points already established, and should be utilized to their maximum capacity before additional towers should be permitted. 5. Residents are concerned with the constant flashing waming lights illuminating the surrounding area, disturbing the rural character of the neighborhood as originally protected and planned by Collier County. Every resident of our North Belle Meade community places an extremely high value on privacy. 6. We propose other commercial areas for the towers, with an already complete and very capable infrastructure, as well as much easier access and security, such as: Wilson Blvd. & Golden Gate Blvd., and Everglades BIvd. & Golden Gate Blvd. These locations would better serve the community as a whole with upgraded service provided for many more outlying and congested residents. We request this letter be added to both project records and recorded as our opposition to the construction of both towers. Sincerely, Mitchell Penner President, Frangipani Ag Community Civic Association FACCA34I l7@gmail.com 3.B.g Packet Pg. 660 Attachment: Attachment F - Opposition Letters (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) FinnTimothy From: Sent: To: Subject: Richard Smith < seasmith442002@gmail.com > Tuesday, October 27, 2020 12:31 PM FinnTimothy; doug@tllfirm.com; Melanie Penner Re: Kapok Letter EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:47 AM FinnTimothy <Timothv. Fin n @colliercou ntvfl.sov> wrote: Timothy Finn, AICP Principol Plonner te'r C-ournty Zoning Division NOIE: New EmoilAddress os of 1210912017 Timothy.Finn@co lliercounlvf l.oov 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Noples Florido 34104 ?hone:239.252.4312 Tell us how we ore doing by toking our Zoning Division SuNey ot htto://bit.lvlcollierzonins 1 Following our phone conversation, you forwarded to me the attached "property owner letter" . I had been inquiring concerning details of the HEX meeting and you mentioned that this letter should have been sent to me on October 23, 2020. Perhaps it was, but as I mentioned to you, no such letter has yet been received. The time restrictions mentioned in the letter: only 5 minutes to speak and no documents unless submitted 10 days prior, are very restrictive. This matter is of grave concern, not only to me, but to our entire neighborhood. I would request a loosening of these restrictions. Thank you very much, J.Richard Smith 3.B.g Packet Pg. 661 Attachment: Attachment F - Opposition Letters (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) FinnTimothy From: Sent: To: Subject: mikebfishy@aol.com Wednesday, October 28, 2020 9:22 PM FinnTimothy ISUSPICIOUS MESSAGEI The sender may trick victims into passing bad checks on their behalf.kapok tower / frangipani EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. EXTERNAL EM,AIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Tim, my name is Mike Brower . I am the owner of 320 Frangipani ave. I purchased the property several years ago and have an agricultural palm tree farm there now. The proposed tower will severally diminish the value of my property. I own the access entry to lhe easement that would give the tower owners access . First I find it strange that the county owned property nearby where the wells are placed would not be available for such commercial use . I purchased the property in anticipation of a development opportunity eventually in the last receivable land for such development. My property would not be a desirable placed to be used for a residence if it is allowed to go in. I believe lwould be damaged by such invasion of a severely large metallic structure. And lalso believe there is evidence that the tower and its transmission are safe and should therefore not be allowed in a residential area so close lo human dwellings . I am apposed to the variance use of the nearby property. Sincerely, Mike Brower / Brower enterprises llc. 1 3.B.g Packet Pg. 662 Attachment: Attachment F - Opposition Letters (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) VARIANCE PETITIION APPLICATION (PL20190002701) KAPOK STREET, NAPLES, FL 34117 PARCEL ID# 00307840002 RESPONSE TO STAFF COMMENT: TIMOTHY FINN #3 Staff comment: Pursuant to LDC 5.05.09(D)(E) and (F) for shared tower use, please demonstrate that either you can or can not work an arrangement for a shared tower use? Please see the Collier County Communication Towers Map as Towers 1 and 18 are in proximity to the Kapok St Cell Tower property. Moreover, there is an Site Development Plan (SDP) application (PL20200000886) for a proposed cell tower to be located at 550 Frangipani Avenue located approximately 2065 feet to the east of the Kapok St Cell Tower property. Please explain why you can't share this tower? Response: While we would consider any offer for another entity/provider to share the proposed tower on Kapok St., we are not aware of any other towers that would provide necessary and adequate capacity and geographic coverage area to achieve our objectives, and sharing another tower at another location is not a feasible option. To our knowledge, there is no applicable separation requirement with respect to a tower at the Kapok St. location relative to other towers in the vicinity. As to the SDP application (PL20200000886) referenced in the staff comment, which relates to a proposed 185’ tower over 2,000 feet away from the proposed Kapok St. tower, that application was submitted on 7/27/2020, according to the County’s website. The proposed Kapok St. tower is 250’, over 1/3 higher than the tower if the application referenced by staff. While the application for PL20200000886 was submitted on July 27, 2020, in the case of the Kapok St. Tower, a preapplication meeting was first held November 12, 2019. As a result of that meeting, applicant prepared a variance application, and a second pre‐application meeting was held on December 4, 2019 for the variance. At the December 4, 2019 pre‐application meeting, applicant was advised (in error) that the tower use was not allowed by right, and that a conditional use would be required. Following a subsequent application for zoning interpretation, on March 17, 2020, staff formally determined the use was a permitted use at this location, and that a conditional use was not required, but reiterated that a variance would be necessary. Applicant has since filed the variance application that is presently under review. Applicant first formally requested approval requirements for the tower in August 2019 (see ZLTR‐PL20190001999), and has been diligently pursuing approval of the tower since then. Applicant has engaged in sincere, costly, and diligent efforts over the past 11 months. This has included two pre‐application meetings, two ZVL’s, and uncertainty created by erroneous “conditional use” instruction. Given Applicant’s significant efforts, the lack of any codified tower separation requirement, the lack of any record of any tower application being filed until 7/27/2020, and the significant investment incurred to date, it is appropriate for Applicant to move forward with its plans at this location, which have been a matter of public record for almost a year. Concurrent with these efforts, Applicant notified the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) of its plans, and the FAA issued a formal “Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation” on October 23, 2019 for the proposed Kapok St. tower. FAA notification is the industry standard for putting other would‐be tower owners on notice that there is a tower application pending. The tower application referenced by staff (PL20200000886) has not, to our knowledge, registered with or received any such determination from the FAA. Date: 8.4.20203.B.h Packet Pg. 663 Attachment: Attachment G - Shared Tower Use Response (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) st(;\ lros'il\(; t\s rRt ( Tl0\s (C'I.l,'\PTER {I. COLLIER ('OL'\T\' AD\II\IST'R.\I-I\ E ('0DE FOR I..A\D DE\'ELOP\IENT) A zonins signls; nrust be posled b1 the petitioner or lhe petitioner's isent on the parcel tirr a mininturrr ol'tifteen ( l 5) calendar dals in aclrance of thc lirst puhlic hearing and said sign(s) nrust hc rnairrtained b-r tlrc petitiorreror tltc petitioner's agcnt throuch thc Board ol'('()urlL) ('r)tllnlissioners llearins. Belorv are Seneral guidclines for signs. ht-,rvever these guidclirres should not bc construed to supcrscde an) rL'quirerncrtt of thc l-D('. Jrc'r specitic sign rctluirolents. plcasc rcter to the .\dnrinistratir,e Code. ('hapter 8 E. l. I'hc'sign(s) rrrust be r'rected in full lierv of the public. rrot nrore than tirc 1-i) t'ec.t t'ronr thc nearl,st strecr right-ot:way or easenlertl. :. l'he sign(s)ntust he securell'atliriecl b_r'nails. staplE-s. rrr other rneans to a rvood linrrre r'l'lo a s'ood panel and thc.n fasts'ned securel) to a 1x)sl trr other struclurc. The sign nla-\ uot he afll.red to a trce or other lbliage. i. The petitioner or lhe petitioner's agenl must maintain the sign(s) in place. and readable condition until the requested action has been heard and a tlnal decision rendered. lf the sirrn(s) is destro_rr'd. losr. or rendcred unreadable. the petitioner or the petitioner's agent trrust replace the sign(s \O'I't'-: .\FT'Ell I'1lL Sl(;\ ll\S BEt.\ POSfI.]l).'tlllS \I.FlD,\\l-l'O['I,OSTINC NO't-!('E Sll0lrl.D BE R[r"l R\[D \O 1..\'t'[.R Tlt\\'I'r.\ (ilt) \\'oRKt\(; t),r\s Br]],'oRt. 1-l$. l.tRs'I'HE.\Rt\(; D,\l'u t'o t-iltl ,\sst(;\ [_D Pt..\\ \ DR. -{TITID.\\'II OT POSTINC NOIICI: S'[.\'f t: OF (iEC)R( ;l .\ (.()T \TY OF I.ORS\'TH B tJtTC)RI, I'I]F. L \ DHRSICNI., t),.\I. TI IOR II'\ . PERSoNAI-L Y APPE.{REI')KENDr\t. L.OTZE \\'llo o\ o,\Tl I s.\\'s Tl IAT IlI sl IIl I I\s PosT[D PRopt.R \OTtCl- AS RI-Qt]tRt:D l]y SU("ilo\ 10.0-1.00 ()[ ll lI:('oL.t-ll,R ( ot N rY L.\\D DEYb.l_oP\lEN',l ('oDr. oN -rHF P.\R('F.t_ ('O\ l-.RLD t\ l'[t lTt()N Nt !\.ltit.R\ ..\-P1.:0 I ()(x)0170 I fu.L 4 d-'-P>r-102 \lary.,\lice l)ark Rd. Suitc 505 SI(i\ \T'I'RE OF .\PPI-IC'\\T oR:\CE\'I' l..ertdal Lrrtzc \..\\ll: ( lYPt.l) OR PRI\ l tjD) s lA l!: ()lj FL-()l{lDA ('ot \ r\'oF (-( )t.l_tER sl REEToR P.0. BO\ Cunrnting. CA 30040 l-lrc ti ng irtstrunrent \r'es s$l)rn ln anri subs..ribed belbrre mc tlri\Itr rlar b,r Iol0. nv knr or rvhr.r produccd_ as idenrification rnd uhtr did Jid n()t tukc an oath ( ll\.S1.\l't:./lP \'lr Contmission Lxpircs: (Stamp rrith :crial lrurrrtrer) ."*$i,uf% -: ,' ExPlREs " --- = iCNORGIA: = 'ar,rttfNRev 3/4/2015 S ,rt'\tttun [)uhlic 3.B.i Packet Pg. 664 Attachment: Attachment H - Property Hearing Signs (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) srl PUBLIC HEANIilG ilOTICE KAPOK ST. VAHIANCE PETlil0N N0. VA-P1201900 02701 , HEX: N0VEMBER 12, 2020 r 9:00 A.M. COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MAilAGEMEIIIT DEPARTMEilT 28OO HORSESHOE DBIVE NOHTH R00lul 609-6t0, NAPLES, FL, 34104 TIM0THY FlNtll: 239-252'4312 . h- ,{_ T t,t I \t'i \l'at \,/ 1}_ tr+ :: 'a\t 'l \l I I J t, \) ,.\t ,tt I I I \\I /=: I ,,, t\ ) I ,l \ 1) i rl \ \ Itrl ,l 1' i,, I t\ ,\{I +t I l. \\ \,\'/ I !.'+ I I n ,1 tf 3.B.i Packet Pg. 665 Attachment: Attachment H - Property Hearing Signs (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 3.B.j Packet Pg. 666 Attachment: Attachment I - Hybrid Hearing Waiver (14235 : PL20190002701 Kapok St. Cell Tower) 12/10/2020 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Hearing Examiner Item Number: 3.C Item Summary: PETITION NO. PDI-PL20200001210 -Request for an insubstantial change to Ordinance No. 18-51, the Russell Square Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD), updating existing deviation language to reflect a street name change and adding a deviation from LDC Sections 5.06.02.B.1.a and 5.06.02.B.6 to allow the wall height for the residential signs located on Seychelles Avenue at the project entrance to be a maximum height of 11.6 fe et, as measured from the lowest centerline grade of the nearest public or private right-of-way or easement to the uppermost portion of the sign structure. The RPUD consists of 32.9± acres located on the east side of Santa Barbara Boulevard approximately ¼ mile south of Davis Boulevard in Section 9, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: John Kelly, Senior Planner] Commissioner District 3 Meeting Date: 12/10/2020 Prepared by: Title: Planner – Zoning Name: John Kelly 11/23/2020 3:53 PM Submitted by: Title: Manager - Planning – Zoning Name: Ray Bellows 11/23/2020 3:53 PM Approved By: Review: Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Rose Burke Review Item Completed 11/24/2020 2:42 PM Hearing Examiner (GMD Approvers) Diane Lynch Review Item Completed 11/25/2020 3:17 PM Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Completed 11/30/2020 4:00 PM Zoning Anita Jenkins Review Item Completed 12/01/2020 2:54 PM Hearing Examiner Andrew Dickman Meeting Pending 12/10/2020 9:00 AM 3.C Packet Pg. 667 PDI-PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD Page 1 of 8 November 30, 2020 STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER FROM: ZONING DIVISION – ZONING SERVICES SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: DECEMBER 10, 2020 SUBJECT: PDI-PL20200001210; RUSSELL SQUARE RPUD OWNER/APPLICANT: AGENT: Neal Communities on the Braden River LLC D. Wayne Arnold, AICP 5800 Lakewood Ranch Blvd N. Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. Sarasota, FL 34240 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests that the Hearing Examiner approve an insubstantial change to Ordinance No. 18-51, the Russell Square Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD), updating existing deviation language to reflect a street name change and adding a deviation from LDC Sections 5.06.02.B.1.a and 5.06.02.B.6 to allow the wall height for the residential signs located on Seychelles Avenue at the project entrance to be a maximum height of 11.6 feet, as measured from the lowest centerline grade of the nearest public or private right-of-way or easement to the uppermost portion of the sign structure. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property consists of 32.9± acres located on the east side of Santa Barbara Boulevard approximately ¼ mile south of Davis Boulevard in Section 9, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (see location map on following page) PURPOSE AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: This petitioner is proposing a deviation from LDC Sections 5.06.02.B.1.a and 5.06.02.B.6, “Development Standards for Signs within Residential Districts,” to allow the project entry wall signs to be located on a wall that was constructed on top of the project perimeter berm. The height of the wall was previously approved as Deviation #3; see Exhibit E of the RPUD document. 3.C.a Packet Pg. 668 Attachment: Russell Square RPUD Staff Report Accela Corr-1 113020 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PDI-PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD Page 2 of 8 November 30, 2020 3.C.aPacket Pg. 669Attachment: Russell Square RPUD Staff Report Accela Corr-1 113020 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell PDI-PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD Page 3 of 8 November 30, 2020 SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: This section of the staff report identifies the land uses and zoning classifications for properties surrounding the boundaries of the subject property: North: Residential, other than single-family, within the Taormina Reserve MPUD East: Wetlands Preserve area located within the Taormina Reserve MPUD and single-family residences located within a Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district South: Seychelles Avenue (Right-of-Way) followed by single-family residences within a Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district West: Santa Barbara Boulevard (Right-of-Way) then multi-family residential within the Falling Waters PUD to the North and unimproved Estates (E) zoned property to the South. 3.C.a Packet Pg. 670 Attachment: Russell Square RPUD Staff Report Accela Corr-1 113020 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PDI-PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD Page 4 of 8 November 30, 2020 STAFF ANALYSIS: Comprehensive Planning: The 32.9-acre subject site is identified as Urban Designation, Urban Mixed-Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict, and it’s within a Residential Density Band (Mixed-Use Activity Center #6) on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Because this application is not adding uses or increasing the density or intensity of the previously approved uses in the Eagle Creek PUD, it is consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental review staff has found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME). No revisions to the environmental portions of the PUD petition are being proposed. Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed this petition. The existing preserve areas will not be impacted by the proposed petition. This project does not require Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project did not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. Environmental Services staff recommend approval of the proposed petition. Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff has evaluated the proposed changes to the PUD Document and found no issue with consistency. CONCURRENT LAND USE APPLICATIONS: There are no concurrent land use applications under review at the present time. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT INSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE CRITERIA: Sections 10.02.13.E.1 and 10.02.13.E.2 of the Land Development Code set forth the criteria by which insubstantial changes to a PUD Document are to be reviewed before they can be approved. The criteria and a response to each have been listed as follows: LDC Section 10.02.13.E.1 Criteria: a. Is there a proposed change in the boundary of the Planned Unit Development (PUD)? No, there is no proposed change in the boundary of the PUD. b. Is there a proposed increase in the total number of dwelling units or intensity of land use or height of buildings within the development? No, there is no proposed increase in the number of dwelling units or intensity of land use or height of buildings within the development. c. Is there a proposed decrease in preservation, conservation, recreation, or open space areas within the development in excess of five (5) percent of the total acreage previously designated as such, or five (5) acres in area? 3.C.a Packet Pg. 671 Attachment: Russell Square RPUD Staff Report Accela Corr-1 113020 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PDI-PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD Page 5 of 8 November 30, 2020 No, there is no proposed decrease in preservation, conservation, recreation, or open space areas within the development as designated on the approved Master Plan. d. Is there a proposed increase in the size of areas used for non-residential uses, to include institutional, commercial and industrial land uses (excluding preservation, conservation or open space), or a proposed relocation of nonresidential land uses? No, there is no increase to the size of areas used for non-residential uses and no relocation of non-residential uses proposed. e. Is there a substantial increase in the impacts of the development which may include, but are not limited to increases in traffic generation; changes in traffic circulation; or impacts on other public facilities? No, there are no substantial impacts resulting from this amendment. The RPUD currently contains a vehicular trip cap which is not proposed to be changed. f. Will the change result in land use activities that generate a higher level of vehicular traffic based upon the Trip Generation Manual published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers? No additional dwelling units are proposed; therefore, the proposed amendment would not result in land use activities that generate higher levels of vehicular traffic based upon the Trip Generation Manual published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. g. Will the change result in a requirement for increased stormwater retention, or otherwise increase stormwater discharge? No, adequate area exists on site for stormwater retention and no change to the approved discharge rate is proposed; therefore, the proposed change will not impact or increase stormwater retention or increase stormwater discharge. h. Will the proposed change bring about a relationship to an abutting land use that would be incompatible with an adjacent land use? No. There will be no incompatible relationships with abutting land uses. i. Are there any modifications to the PUD Master Plan or PUD Document or amendment to a PUD ordinance which is inconsistent with the Future Land Use Element or other elements of the Growth Management Plan or which modification would increase th e density of intensity of the permitted land uses? No. Staff from Comprehensive Planning staff determined the proposed changes to the PUD Document would be consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. Both environmental and Transportation Planning staff reviewed this petition, and no changes to the PUD Document are proposed that would be deemed inconsistent with the CCME or the Transportation 3.C.a Packet Pg. 672 Attachment: Russell Square RPUD Staff Report Accela Corr-1 113020 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PDI-PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD Page 6 of 8 November 30, 2020 Element of the GMP. This petition does not propose any increase in density or intensity of the permitted land uses. j. The proposed change is to a PUD District designated as a Development of Regional Impact (DRI) and approved pursuant to Chapter 380.06, Florida Statues, where such change requires a determination and public hearing by Collier County pursuant to Sec. 380.06 (19), F.S. Any change that meets the criterion of Sec. 380.06 (19)(e)2., F.S., and any changes to a DRI/PUD Master Plan that clearly do not create a substantial deviation shall be reviewed and approved by Collier County under Section 10.02.13 of the LDC. This project is not a DRI. k. Are there any modifications to the PUD Master Plan or PUD Document or amendment to a PUD ordinance which impact(s) any consideration deemed to be a substantial modification as described under Section(s) 10.02.13 E.? Based upon the analysis provided above, the proposed change is not deemed to be substantial. LDC Section 10.02.13.E.2 Criteria: Does this petition change the analysis of the findings and criteria used for the original application? (PUD and Rezone Findings are attached to this Staff Report as Attachment B.) No, the proposed change does not affect the original analysis and findings for the original application. DEVIATION DISCUSSION: The petitioner is seeking relief from two requirements of the LDC by means of proposing a single deviation. Said LDC deviation is to be inserted into and will serve to amend Exhibit E of the existing RPUD document. The petitioner’s justification and staff analysis/recommendation are outlined below. Proposed Deviation #10 Deviation 10 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.1.a and 5.06.02.B.6. “development Standards for Signs within Residential Districts” which requires residential entrance signs shall meet the following standards: a. Maximum allowable height. All signs within residential zoning districts, and as applicable to designated residential portions of PUD zoned properties, are limited to a maximum height of 8 feet, or as otherwise provided within the LDC. Height shall be measured from the lowest centerline grade of the nearest public 3.C.a Packet Pg. 673 Attachment: Russell Square RPUD Staff Report Accela Corr-1 113020 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PDI-PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD Page 7 of 8 November 30, 2020 or private right-of-way or easement to the uppermost portion of the sign structure b. On-premises signs within residential districts. Two ground signs with a maximum height of 8 feet or wall, residential entrance or gate signs with a maximum height of 8 feet may be located at each entrance to a multi-family or single-family development. This deviation will instead allow the wall height for the residential signs located on Seychelles Avenue at the project entrance to be a maximum height of 11.6 feet, as measured from the lowest centerline grade of the nearest public or private right -of-way or easement to the uppermost portion of the sign structure. Petitioner’s Justification: The South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) permit for the overall project required a perimeter berm. Collier County previously approved Deviation #3, which authorized construction of an 8-foot-tall wall to be constructed on top of the undulating berm. The sign which consists of letters protruding from the wall make this a wall sign. The LDC measures a residential entrance sign to the highest point of a wall from the nearest centerline road elevation. The road elevation in the vicinity of the wall is 9.12 feet NAVD. The top of the wall is 20.76 feet NAVD, making the height of the wall/sign 11.6 feet and exceeding the maximum overall sign height of 8 feet. The approval of the deviation will permit the sign to remain as constructed on the wall/berm as anticipated in conjunction with Deviation #3. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning staff recommends approval, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that “the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community” and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is “justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.” NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The NIM was held on October 5, 2020 at Shepherd of the Glades Lutheran Church, Fellowship Hall, at 6020 Rattlesnake Hammock Road, Naples, Florida, 34112; an option to attend remotely was provided. Attending was one interested party, County staff, and the applicant’s team. Questions were taken at the conclusion of the presentation and it was determined that the construction is complete, the residential entry signs had already been erected with a building permit having been obtained; however, upon inspection by the County it was determined the letters and/or the signage were too high. (See Attachment C) RECOMMENDATION: 3.C.a Packet Pg. 674 Attachment: Russell Square RPUD Staff Report Accela Corr-1 113020 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PDI-PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD Page 8 of 8 November 30, 2020 Staff recommends that the Collier County Hearing Examiner approve Petition PDI- PL20200001210 with the stipulation that the contents of Attachment “A” be included in the HEX Decision. Attachments: A) Revised Exhibit E for Russell Square RPUD – List of Deviations and Master Plan B) Original Russell Square RPUD Staff Report with PUD and Rezone Findings C) Applicant’s Backup – Application, Justification, NIM and Posting Information 3.C.a Packet Pg. 675 Attachment: Russell Square RPUD Staff Report Accela Corr-1 113020 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Russell Square RPUD, PL20200001210 Page 1 of 2 11/19/2020 EXHIBIT E FOR RUSSELL SQUARE RPUD LIST OF DEVIATIONS 1. Deviation 1 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.04.06.A.3.e, which allows temporary signs on residentially zoned properties up to 4 square feet in area or 3 feet in height, to allow a temporary banner sign up to a maximum of 32 square feet in area and 8 feet in height. The temporary banner sign shall be limited to a maximum of 90 days during season defined as November 1 to April 30 per calendar year. This Deviation will remain valid until 90% of the units are sold or until December 31, 2024, whichever comes first. At such time, the Deviation will be void. 2. Deviation 2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.5.a, which requires on-premises directional signs to be setback a minimum of 10’ from edge of roadway, paved surface or back of curb, to allow a setback of 5’ from edge of roadway, paved surface or back of curb. This deviation excludes public roads. 3. Deviation 3 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.C.1.a and 5.03.02.C, Fences and Walls, Excluding Sound Walls, which requires fences or walls in a residential PUD to be 6 feet or less in height, to permit an 8-foot high wall on top of berm along Cope LaneSeychelles Avenue right-of- way and 12 foot high wall on top of the required water management berm along the Santa Barbara boulevard right-of-way. 4. Deviation 4 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.6 (a) and 5.06.02.B.6 (b), On-premises Sign Within Residential Districts, which permits two ground signs at a maximum height of 8 feet with a sign face area not to exceed 64 square feet and a minimum setback from all property lines and road right-of-way of 10 feet, to permit two signs, not at the project entrance, of up to 80 square feet (per sign face) to be located along the Santa Barbara Boulevard frontage of the property on the project’s wall and to exceed the maximum sign height of 8 feet for a maximum of 12 feet in height measured from the adjacent roadway centerline elevation with a minimum setback of zero feet from the property line. This Deviation is conditioned upon owner’s relocation of the wall and sign at its own expense, in the event it conflicts with a County road expansion or project. 5. Deviation 5 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.02.A.2, Sidewalks, Bike Lane and Pathway Requirements, which requires dual sidewalks on local roads internal to the site, to allow a sidewalk on one side of the roadway where the property is permitted with single loaded home sites. Appropriate crosswalks shall be provided at crossing locations. 6. Deviation 6 seeks relief from LDC Section 3.05.07.A.5, Preservation Standards, which requires preservation areas shall be interconnected within the site and to adjoining off-site preservation areas or wildlife corridors, to allow the onsite preserves to be non-contiguous. 7. Deviation 7 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.05.08.B.2.a.i and 5.05.08.B.2.c.i, Architectural and Site Design Standards, which requires where a proposed project site located within 150 to 300 feet of an arterial or collector road , including all rights-of-way , shall be required to comply with LDC sections 5.05.08 D.4., D.10., D.13., D.15., E, and F. Compliance shall be limited to the building 3.C.b Packet Pg. 676 Attachment: Attachment A - Revised Exhibit E (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Russell Square RPUD, PL20200001210 Page 2 of 2 11/19/2020 façades facing the arterial or collector road to allow the buildings behind a wall to not be subject to this LDC requirement. 8. Deviation 8 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04.G, Parking Space Requirements, which requires where small-scale recreation facilities are accessory to a single-family or multifamily project and intended only for the residents of that project, exclusive of golf courses/clubhouses, the recreation facilities may be computed at 50 percent of normal requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are not within 300 feet of the recreation facilities and at 25 percent of normal requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are within 300 feet of the recreation facilities, to allow the parking space for the recreation facilities to be computed at 25 percent where the majority of dwelling units are within 500 feet of the recreation facilities. 9. Deviation 9 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.06.02, Table 2.4, Buffer Requirements, which requires a 15’ wide type “B” landscape buffer to allow no buffer in the areas adjacent to the Taormina Reserve PUD preserve area as depicted on the Master Plan. 10. Deviation 10 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.1.a and 5.06.02.B.6, “Development Standards for Signs within Residential Districts” which requires residential entrance signs shall meet the following standards: a. Maximum allowable height. All signs within residential zoning districts, and as applicable to designated residential portions of PUD zoned properties, are limited to a maximum height of 8 feet, or as otherwise provided within the LDC. Height shall be measured from the lowest centerline grade of the nearest public or private right-of- way or easement to the uppermost portion of the sign structure. b. On-premises signs within residential districts. Two ground signs with a maximum height of 8 feet or wall, residential entrance or gate signs with a maximum height of 8 feet may be located at each entrance to a multi-family or single-family development. This deviation will instead allow the wall height for the residential signs located on Seychelles Avenue at the project entrance to be a maximum height of 11.6 feet, as measured from the lowest centerline grade of the nearest public or private right-of-way or easement to the uppermost portion of the sign structure. Sign Deviation Exhibit N.T.S. 3.C.b Packet Pg. 677 Attachment: Attachment A - Revised Exhibit E (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 1 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING DIVISION – ZONING SERVICES SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 6, 2018 SUBJECT: PUDZ-PL20170004414 RUSSELL SQUARE ______________________________________________________________________________ PROPERTY OWNERS/APPLICANT/AGENT: Applicant/Contract Purchaser: Agent: Neal Communities of Southwest FL, LLC James Schier, Vice President 5800 Lakewood Branch Boulevard N. Sarasota, FL 34240 Owners: Cross and Thompson LLC, John D. Bruce, Kathleen M. Tetrault Revocable Trust and Robert L. Tetrault Revocable Trust. Please, see Property Ownership Disclosure Form for more details. D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. 4001 Tamiami Trail N. Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant is requesting that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an application to rezone the property from the Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district with a portion of the property in a special treament (ST) Overlay to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district for a residential housing project known as Russell Square RPUD. The property is comprised of seven parcels under a contract purchase agreement. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property consists of 32.89 acres and is located east of Santa Barbara Road and south of the intersection of Santa Barbara and Davis Boulevard in Section 9, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County (see location map, page 2). The proposed Master Plan is included as Attachment B. 3.C.c Packet Pg. 678 Attachment: Attachment B - Staff Report for Ord 18-51 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 2 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 3.C.cPacket Pg. 679Attachment: Attachment B - Staff Report for Ord 18-51 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 3 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The petitioner is requesting a rezoning from Rural Agricultural to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) for the purpose of constructing 230 multiple-family residential units. The rezoning proposal is to assemble parcels under separate ownership on 32.9 acres of land and establish a new PUD named Russell Square. The roadway layout, preserve areas, water management areas, amenity and residential areas, required buffers, and requested deviations are detailed on the proposed Master Plan. The general pattern and style of the proposed housing development will be very similar to the multiple-family product developed at the Avalon of Naples PUD, which is also being developed by Neal Communities LLC. The applicant has proposed Development Standards and Developer Commitments. The applicant is requesting several deviations. Specific details for these requests are in the Deviation Discussion Section of this report. The base density permitted is four dwelling units per acre (DU/A), and the project is located within a Residential Density Band. The applicant is seeking three additional dwelling units per acre increasing the total DU/A to seven. The total number of dwelling units proposed is 230 units. The density bonus calculation review is detailed in the GMP Consistency Review of this report. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: Vacant, zoned MPUD Taorimina Reserve 5.79 DU/A, A Rural Agricultural South: Vacant, zoned A Rural Agricultural East: Vacant, single-family houses, zoned A Agricultural, PUD Naples Heritage Golf 1.43 DU/A West: Multiple-family residential, zoned PUD Falling Waters 5.07 DU/A 3.C.c Packet Pg. 680 Attachment: Attachment B - Staff Report for Ord 18-51 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 4 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 Aerial Map (County Property Appraiser) GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject site is identified as Urban Designation, Urban Mixed-Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict, and it’s within a Residential Density Band (Mixed-Use Activity Center #6) on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the GMP. Policy 5.3 in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) states, in part, “All rezonings must be consistent with this Growth Management Plan.” Staff reviewed the proposed land use for consistency with the FLUE. The FLUE states, “Urban designated areas will accommodate… (a) Residential uses including single family, multi-family, duplex, and mobile home. The maximum densities allowed are identified in the Districts, Subdistricts, and Overlays…” A base density of residential dwelling units per gross acre may be allowed in the Urban Designated Area, though this is not an entitlement. This base level of density may be adjusted as determined through the Density Rating System depending upon the location and characteristics of the project. As stated in the Future Land Use Element, “The purpose of the Urban Residential Subdistrict is to provide for higher densities in an area with fewer natural resource constraints and where existing and planned public facilities are concentrated. 3.C.c Packet Pg. 681 Attachment: Attachment B - Staff Report for Ord 18-51 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 5 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 The Density Rating System states, “(b). Proximity to Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center: If the project is within one mile of a Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center and located within a residential density band, three residential units per gross acre may be added. The density band around a Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center shall be measured by the radial distance from the center of the intersection around which the Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center is situated. If 50% or more of a project is within the density band, the additional density applies to the gross acreage of the entire project. Density bands are designated on the Future Land Use Map.” Because this project site is located within one mile of Activity Center #6 at the intersection of Davis Blvd. (SR84), and Santa Barbara Blvd., it is eligible for the Residential Density Band Bonus. The FLUE also states, “The final determination of permitted density via implementation of this Density Rating System is made by the Board of County Commissioners through an advertised public hearing process (rezone or Stewardship Receiving Area designation).” This project is eligible for a base density of four residential DU/A and is eligible for a density bonus of three additional dwelling units per acre for being located within the Residential Density Band for Activity Center #6 – for a total eligibility of seven DU/A (4 DU/A base + 3 DU/A density band bonus = 7 DU/A). The maximum number of dwelling units allowable is 230 dwelling units (32.9 acres * 7 DU/A = 230.3 dwelling units rounded to 230.) The petitioner’s request for 230 dwelling units is consistent with the FLUE. The Consistency Review is included as Attachment C. Based upon analysis by the Comprehensive Planning Division, the proposed PUD rezone may be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. Transportation Element: In evaluating this project, staff reviewed the applicant’s Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP using the 2017 Annual Update and Inventory Reports (AUIR). Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states, “The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application has significant impacts if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occur: a. For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and 3.C.c Packet Pg. 682 Attachment: Attachment B - Staff Report for Ord 18-51 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 6 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 c. For all other links the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it is equal to or exceeds 3% of the adopted LOS standard service volume. Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the project’s significant impacts on all roadways.” The proposed Residential PUD request on the subject property was reviewed based on the applicable 2017 AUIR Inventory Report. The TIS submitted in the application indicates that the existing PUD generates approximately 1,172 PM peak hour two-way trips and 894 PM peak two- way Net trips (Net trips include pass-by traffic). The proposed development will impact the following roadway segments: Roadway Link 2017 AUIR Existing LOS Current Peak Hour Peak Direction Service Volume/Peak Direction 2017 AUIR Remaining Capacity Santa Barbara Boulevard Davis Boulevard to Rattlesnake Hammock Road B 3,100/South 2,098 Santa Barbara Boulevard Davis Boulevard to Radio Road B 3,100/North 1,537 Davis Boulevard Santa Barbara Boulevard to County Barn Road C 2,200/East 1,584 Davis Boulevard Santa Barbara to Radio Road B 2,900/East 2,037 Based on the 2017 AUIR, the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate the projected trips for the proposed PUD within the 5-year planning period. Transportation Planning Staff is recommending approval of the petition with the following condition: The Master Plan shall be revised to show an interconnection north to the Taormina Reserve PUD. A developer commitment will be added to the PUD Document that requires the interconnection to be included as part of the first SDP or Plat or ROW permit approval and constructed before the first CO of any residential units. Staff is basing this condition of approval on the following: 3.C.c Packet Pg. 683 Attachment: Attachment B - Staff Report for Ord 18-51 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 7 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 Transportation Element Policy 9.3, which states: “The County shall require, wherever feasible, the interconnection of local streets between developments to facilitate convenient movement throughout the road network. The LDC shall identify the circumstances and conditions that would require the interconnection of neighboring developments and shall also develop standards and criteria for the safe interconnection of such local streets.” LDC 4.07.02.J.4 4. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed to encourage smooth traffic flow and minimize hazards to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Merging and turn lanes and/or traffic dividers shall be required where existing or anticipated heavy traffic flows indicate need. The interconnection of collector and local streets within the PUD to adjacent lands or developments shall be required except where determined by the County Manager or designee that an interconnection is not feasible or warranted due to existing development patterns, transportation network needs, or the like. Interconnection of local streets shall be designed to discourage through traffic, and not adversely impact local streets in the neighboring residential areas. Where streets within the district intersect adjoining streets, visibility triangle shall be maintained. At issue with this zoning request is the northern extension of Sunset Boulevard providing interconnection to the Taormina Reserve PUD which contains a developer commitment to provide interconnection of S unset Boulevard. In making this determination staff finds, consistent with LDC 4.07.02.J.4, that the required interconnection is an extension of a local roadway and neighborhood network to adjacent land and developments. Staff further finds that the interconnection is feasible. The interconnection is not likely to adversely impact the local streets, because it is a new extension and continuation of an existing roadway to the future mixed-use development at Taormina Reserve. TRANSPORTATION STAFF CONDITION OF APPROVAL: The Master Plan shall be revised to show an interconnection north to the Taormina Reserve PUD. A developer commitment will be added to the PUD Document that requires the interconnection to be included as part of the first SDP or Plat or ROW permit approval and constructed before the first CO of any residential units. 3.C.c Packet Pg. 684 Attachment: Attachment B - Staff Report for Ord 18-51 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 8 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental review staff has found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME). The project site consists of 13.88 acres of native vegetation and tree preservation requirement of hundred ten (110) trees. A minimum of 3.47 (25%) acres of the existing native vegetation shall be placed under preservation and dedicated to Collier County. STAFF ANALYSIS: Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition, including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5, Planning Commission Recommendation (referred to as the “PUD Findings”), and Section 10.02.08.F, Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report (referred to as “Rezone Findings”), which establish the legal basis to support the CCPC’s recommendation. Drainage: The proposed PUD rezone request is not anticipated to create drainage problems in the area. Stormwater best management practices, treatment, and storage will be addressed through the environmental resource permitting process with the South Florida Water Management District. County staff will also evaluate the project’s stormwater management system, calculations, and design criteria at the time of site development plan (SDP) and/or platting (PPL). Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed the RPUD petition to address environmental concerns. The PUD Master Plan provides a 3.47-acre preserve, which meets the minimum 25% native preservation requirement in accordance with LDC section 3.05.07.A.1. In addition to the 3.47-acre preserve, 28 native trees (25% of the existing 110 trees) will be required. The four parcels located adjacent to Santa Barbara Boulevard have been partially cleared and historically used as pasture land. LDC section 3.05.07.A.2 requires tree preservation of existing trees on land where the understory has been removed and maintained as lawn or pasture. The trees will be located in areas in accordance with LDC section 3.05.07.A.2. as follows: This planted open space shall be in addition to the area used to satisfy the minimum landscape requirements pursuant to 4.06.00. In lieu of using actual canopy coverage, the following average diameter for tree canopies may be used to calculate canopy coverage of existing trees: slash pine 40 feet, cypress 25 feet, live oak 60 feet, and cabbage palm 10 feet. Open space areas not normally planted with trees, such as stormwater retention areas or lake banks not planted to meet the LSPA requirement, may be used to satisfy this requirement. Trees planted to satisfy this requirement shall be set back a minimum of 30 feet from principal structures and impervious parking areas. No listed animal species were observed on the property. Transportation Review: Transportation Planning staff reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC and recommends Approval of this PUD request with the recommended transportation planning condition. Landscape Review: The landscape buffers depicted on the Master Plan are consistent with the LDC requirements. The petitioner is seeking a deviation, Deviation #9, to allow for no buffers where the preserve and water management area abut Taormina Reserve’s existing preserve areas, as depicted on the Master Plan, Exhibit C. See Deviation Discussion Section. 3.C.c Packet Pg. 685 Attachment: Attachment B - Staff Report for Ord 18-51 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 9 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 School District: At this time, the School District has not provided a review. However, they may provide a review at a later date for concurrency and to ensure there is capacity within the concurrency service area. Utilities Review: The project lies within the potable water and the south wastewater service areas of the Collier County Water-Sewer District. Water and wastewater services are not readily available but will be extended to the project from existing infrastructure along Whitaker Road and possibly Falling Waters Blvd. System capacity must be confirmed at the time of development permit (SDP or PPL) review, and a commitment to provide service will be established upon permit approval. Zoning Services Review: Zoning Division staff has evaluated the proposed uses related to their intensity and reviewed the proposed development standards for the project. The Zoning Division also evaluated the location project and the potential traffic generation. The proposed multiple-family residential project is located south of Davis Boulevard and north of Rattlesnake Hammock Road in an area that is still largely zoned Estates. The applicant, Neal Communities intends to assemble several Estates zoned lots for their project. However, there has been additional higher density residential development along this portion of Santa Barbara. Falling Waters PUD is across the street to the west with 5.07 DU/A and the proposed Russell Square PUD rezone is intended to be a similar density project. The proposed site is currently vacant and wooded with several single-family homes on Estates lots. There are two nearby neighborhoods developed as PUD, which are Taorimina Reserve, Naples Heritage Golf. Both adjacent PUD’s are developed with lower density. The Taorimina Reserve PUD was approved at 5.79 DU/A and the Naples Heritage Golf PUD was developed at 1.43 DU/A. The intensity of the development appears to be reasonable and has been found consistent with the GMP. With respect to Development Standards, the proposed standards are appropriate based on the multiple-family residential use. The Development Standards are included in the backup material. PUD FINDINGS: LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5 states that “In support of its recommendation, the CCPC shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan’s compliance with the following criteria in addition to the findings in LDC Section 10.02.08”: (Zoning Division staff responses in non-bold) 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. Zoning Division staff has reviewed the proposed rezoning request and has concluded the uses and property development regulations are compatible with the development approved in the area. The Public Utilities Division further states water and wastewater services are not readily available but will be extended to the project from existing infrastructure along 3.C.c Packet Pg. 686 Attachment: Attachment B - Staff Report for Ord 18-51 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 10 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 Whitaker Road and possibly Falling Waters Blvd. There is adequate water and wastewater treatment capacity to serve the proposed PUD. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contracts, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Documents submitted with the application were reviewed by the County Attorney’s Office and demonstrate unified control. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Comprehensive Planning staff has reviewed the petition and analyzed it for consistency with goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP. They have found the proposed amendment to be consistent with the GMP. 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on the location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. Landscape Division staff is of the opinion that the proposed project will be compatible with the surrounding area. The Master Plan proposes the appropriate perimeter landscape buffers. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. There is no deviation from the required usable open space as submitted. Compliance with approved standards would be demonstrated at the time of SDP. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of ensuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. Compliance with all other applicable concurrency management regulations is required, including but not limited to plat plans or site development plans. The Transportation Division further states the roadway infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project, as noted in the consistency review, however for consistency with the GMP Transportation Element, Staff is providing the condition of approval noted. The Public Utilities Division further states Collier County has sufficient treatment capacity for water and wastewater service to the project. Finally, the project’s development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals are sought, including but not limited to any plats and or site development plans. 3.C.c Packet Pg. 687 Attachment: Attachment B - Staff Report for Ord 18-51 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 11 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. For the proposed multi-family residential use, there is adequate supporting infrastructure to accommodate this project, including Collier County Water-Sewer District potable water and wastewater mains. Adequate public facility requirements will be addressed when future development approvals are sought. The Public Utilities Division further states that the area has adequate supporting infrastructure, including Collier County Water-Sewer District potable water mains, to accommodate this project. The scope of any system improvements will be determined at the time of SDP or PPL permit review. 8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on a determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to the literal application of such regulations. Nine deviations are proposed in the request to rezone to RPUD. Please see the Deviation Discussion Section of the report. REZONE FINDINGS: LDC Subsection 10.02.08 F. states, “When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the Planning Commission to the Board of County Commissioners…shall show that the Planning Commission has studied and considered the 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: (Zoning Division staff responses in non-bold): 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and the elements of the GMP. Comprehensive Planning staff has determined the petition is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the FLUM and other elements of the GMP. 2. The existing land use pattern. The existing land use pattern related to surrounding properties is described in the Surrounding Land Use and Zoning section of this report. The proposed multiple-family residential uses will not likely change the existing land use patterns in the area. Both Naples Heritage Golf and Taorimina PUD’s are developed with a single-family residential pattern. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The property is zoned Rural Agricultural with some RPUD residential uses near the property. The application is to rezone to RPUD, which would not create an isolated district. 3.C.c Packet Pg. 688 Attachment: Attachment B - Staff Report for Ord 18-51 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 12 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. The existing district boundaries are logically drawn. The proposed RPUD boundaries are logical and appropriate. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezoning necessary. The proposed change is not specifically necessary. However, the applicant believes the rezoning is necessary to accommodate the construction of multiple-family residential units in Collier County. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The proposed change is not likely to adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The existing neighborhood is lower density residential and the proposal is additional residential dwellings that are multiple-family. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. The roadway infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project, as noted in the Transportation Element consistency review, however for consistency with the GMP, Transportation Staff is providing the condition of approval noted. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. It is not anticipated that the rezone request to RPUD will create drainage problems in the area. Stormwater best management practices, treatment, and storage for this project will be addressed through Environmental Resource Permitting (ERP) with the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). County environmental staff will evaluate the stormwater management system and design criteria at the time of SDP or PPL. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. The proposed rezone to RPUD is not likely to reduce light or air to adjacent areas. 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent areas. Property value is affected by many factors. It is driven by market conditions and is generally a subjective determination. Zoning alone is not likely to adversely affect the property values. Generally, market conditions will prevail. 3.C.c Packet Pg. 689 Attachment: Attachment B - Staff Report for Ord 18-51 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 13 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. Most of the adjacent property is already developed as residential use. The approval of the rezone request from A to RPUD is not likely to deter development activity of surrounding property. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare. If the proposed rezone to RPUD complies with the GMP and is found consistent, then it is consistent with public policy and the change does not result in the granting of a special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is determined to be consistent with public welfare. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. The subject property can be used in accordance with existing zoning, however, it is near other residentially developed property, and the applicant intends to utilize the density band bonus. Additionally, the applicant cannot use the property as they have proposed without rezoning to RPUD and getting approval. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County. The Zoning Division staff determination is the proposed uses are not out of scale with the needs of the community. 15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. The application was reviewed and found compliant with the GMP and the LDC. The Zoning Division staff does not review other sites related to a specific petition. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. Any development anticipated by the proposed rezone request to RPUD would require significant site alteration. The site is vacant and wooded with lower density single-family uses. Both razing and land balancing would be required prior to any development activity at the site. The development standards would be applied during the SDP and plat process. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County 3.C.c Packet Pg. 690 Attachment: Attachment B - Staff Report for Ord 18-51 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 14 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended. The project must comply with the criteria set forth in LDC Section 6.02.00 regarding Adequate Public Facilities (APF) and must be consistent with applicable goals and objectives of the GMP related to adequate public facilities. This petition has been reviewed by Comprehensive Planning staff for consistency with the GMP as part of the amendment process, and they find it to be consistent. The concurrency review for APF is determined at the time of SDP review. The Public Utilities Division further states the activity proposed by this proposed rezoning will have no adverse impact on public utilities facility adequacy. 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. DEVIATION DISCUSSION: The petitioner is seeking nine deviations from the requirements of the LDC. The petitioner’s rationale and staff analysis/recommendation is outlined below. Deviation #1 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.04.06.A.3.e, which allows temporary signs on residentially zoned properties up to 4 square feet in area or 3 feet in height, to allow a temporary banner sign up to a maximum of 32 square feet in area and 8 feet in height. The temporary banner sign shall be limited to a maximum of 90 days during season defined as November 1 to April 30 per calendar year. This Deviation will remain valid until 90% of the units are sold or until De cember 31, 2024, whichever comes first. At such time, the Deviation will be void. Petitioner’s Justification: The proposed deviation will allow for a banner sign located on the proposed wall along Santa Barbara Boulevard in order to advertise new homes available within the community. The 4 square foot banner sign permitted by the LDC provides minimal visibility an d likely will be difficult to read by motorists traveling along Santa Barbara Boulevard, a 45 mph 6-lane roadway. Additionally, the applicant is requesting that the banner be allowed for up to 90 days per calendar year to allow display throughout the peak winter season for home sales. Due to the property’s location on a busy road and high travel speeds along the roadway. The Applicant is seeking an increase to the allowable banner size to ensure visibility of this new community. The requested banner size is in accordance with deviations approved for similar residential projects throughout the County. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: The deviation is reasonable and justifiable as the applicant has proposed an end date of December 2024 for the proposed deviation. Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.5.a, which requires on -premises directional signs to be setback a minimum of 10’ from edge of roadway paved surface or back of curb, to allow a setback of 5’ from edge of roadway paved surface or back of curb. This deviation excludes public roads. Petitioner’s Justification: This deviation will provide locational flexibility for directional signage internal to the RPUD. A unified design theme will be utilized for all signage throughout the community, thereby ensuri ng a cohesive appearance and increased aesthetic appeal. All directional signage will meet the Clear Sight Distance 3.C.c Packet Pg. 691 Attachment: Attachment B - Staff Report for Ord 18-51 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 15 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 requirements in accordance with LDC Section 60.06.05. Furthermore, this deviation is typical of many of the master-planned developments throughout Collier County. All roads and drives will be privately owned and maintained. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: The deviation is reasonable and justifiable as the signs will meet applicable LDC standards and the roads are private. Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.C.1.a and 5.03.02.C, Fences and Walls, Excluding Sound Walls, which requires fences or walls in a residential PUD to be 6 feet or less in height, to permit an 8-foot high wall on top of berm along Cope Lane right-of-way and 12 foot high wall on top of the required water management berm along the Santa Barbara Boulevard right-of-way. Petitioner’s Justification: The additional wall height is necessary to provide a buffer from the adjacent 6-lane traffic noise, and the ground must be altered to meet water management criteria. The wall height is consistent with the wall height constructed for Falling Waters west of Santa Barbara Boulevard due to noise concerns associated with the 6-laning of Santa Barbara Boulevard. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: The deviation is reasonable and justifiable. Deviation #4 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.6 (a) and 5.06.02.B.6 (b), On-premises Sign Within Residential Districts, which permits two ground signs at a maximum height of 8 feet with a sign face area not to exceed 64 square feet and a minimum setback from all property lines and road right-of-way of 10 feet, to permit two signs, not at the project entrance, of up to 80 square feet (per sign face) to be located along the Santa Barbara Boulevard frontage of the property on the project’s wall and to exceed the maximum sign height of 8 feet for a maximum of 12 feet in height measured from the adjacent roadway centerline elevation with a minimum setback of zero feet from the property line. This Deviation is conditioned upon owner’s relocation of the wall and sign at its own expense, in the event it conflicts with a county road expansion or project. Petitioner’s Justification: The project access will be located on Cope Lane and not Santa Barbara Boulevard. Cope Lane is not a through street and project signage is not visible at the project entrance for motorists traveling on Santa Barbara Boulevard, the arterial roadway located along the project’s western boundary. Providing signage on Santa Barbara Boulevard will meet the intent of the Collier County Sign Code by lessening hazards to pedestrians and motorists by providing project identification signs in a visible location along the project’s frontage to aid residents and guests in identifying the project. Santa Barbara Boulevard is a 6-lane arterial roadway with high travel speeds. Having the additional signage square footage is essential for visibility and readability for motorists. The height of the signage will be consistent with the proposed wall height on which it is proposed to be located. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: The deviation is reasonable and justifiable based on the 6- lane arterial roadway. Deviation #5 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.02.A.2, Sidewalks, Bike Lane and Pathway Requirements, which requires dual sidewalks on local roads internal to the site, to allow a sidewalk on one side of the roadway where the property is permitted with single loaded home sites. Appropriate crosswalks shall be provided at crossing locations. 3.C.c Packet Pg. 692 Attachment: Attachment B - Staff Report for Ord 18-51 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 16 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 Petitioner’s Justification: A portion of the PUD will be developed with homes located on only one side of the internal street. This internal street segment is approximately 255 feet in length. No residents would have direct access to a sidewalk in this location; therefore, eliminating the need for a sidewalk in this location of the PUD. Appropriate crossroads will be provided to provide safe street crosswalks at each street crossing. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: The deviation is reasonable and justifiable based on a single loaded street. Deviation #6 seeks relief from LDC Section 3.05.07.A.5, Preservation Standards, which requires preservation areas shall be interconnected within the site and to adjoining off-site preservation areas or wildlife corridors, to allow the onsite preserves to be non-contiguous. Petitioner’s Justification: The proposed project site is composed of several parcels, which have been previously impacted by residential and agricultural uses. The highest quality remaining native habitats are not contiguous on the project site and are actually located at opposite sides of the site. One area is a small wetland on the western boundary of the site that was left in place during the construction of Santa Barbara Blvd, and the other proposed preserve area is a wetland on the east side of the site that will r emain contiguous with the platted preserves adjacent to the property. Both of these wetland areas are jurisdictional to the Corps of Engineers and are being preserved to meet the avoidance and minimization criteria of the Corps and the SFWMD. Both areas me et the hierarchal criteria of the Collier County LDC 3.05.07.A.4 and will provide greater assurances of viable habitat areas as opposed to trying to restore agricultural pasture or residential areas around the wetland to meet the County required acreage. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: The deviation is reasonable and justifiable based on the quality of remaining native habitats. Deviation #7 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.05.08.B.2.a.i and 5.05.08.B.2.c.i, Architectural and Site Design Standards, which requires where a proposed project site located within 150 to 300 feet of an arterial or collector road, including all rights-of-way, shall be required to comply with LDC sections 5.05.08 D.4., D.10., D.13., D.15., E, and F. Compliance shall be limited to the building façades facing the arterial or collector road to allow the buildings behind a wall to not be subject to this LDC requirement. Petitioner’s Justification: This Section of the LDC would be applicable to a building located in the amenity area of the project. It is the intent of the developer to install solid walls on their Santa Barbara Boulevard and Cope Lane property boundaries. The wall along Santa Barbara Boulevard will be 12 feet in height, making th e amenity building largely impossible for the public to see. Requiring additional architectural embellishments for the amenity building is unnecessary. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: The deviation appears reasonable, but the deviation request presumes that the 230 families within the proposed Russell Square PUD would not benefit from 3.C.c Packet Pg. 693 Attachment: Attachment B - Staff Report for Ord 18-51 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 17 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 architectural embellishments required in the LDC. The amenity area of the proposed PUD may be the best location for architectural embellishments for the future residents of the neighborhood. Deviation #8 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04.G, Parking Space Requirements, which requires where small-scale recreation facilities are accessory to a single-family or multifamily project and intended only for the residents of that project, exclusive of golf courses/clubhouses, the recreation facilities may be computed at 50 percent of normal requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are not within 300 feet of the recreation facilities and at 25 percent of normal requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are within 300 feet of the recreation facilities, to allow the parking space for the recreation facilities to be computed at 25 percent where the majority of dwelling units are within 500 feet of the recreation facilities. Petitioner’s Justification: The project will have sidewalks throughout allowing residents the ability to walk to the project amenity area. Parking on-site will be provided. It has been this developer’s experience that the proposed reduction in required parking provides ample on-site parking for residents and guests and that the LDC requirement results in excess parking for the on-site amenity area. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: The deviation appears reasonable, but the deviation request presumes there will be ample parking for the amenity area. Deviation #9 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.06.02, Table 2.4, Buffer Requirements, which requires a 15’ wide type “B” landscape buffer to allow no buffer in the areas adjacent to the Taormina Reserve PUD preserve area as depicted on the Master Plan. Petitioner’s Justification: This deviation is justified due to the location of the proposed Russell Square preserve area and its adjacency to the preserve areas located within the Taormina Reserve PUD. Providing a landscape buffer either between the preserve areas, or adjacent to the preserve on the Russell Square property provides no benefit to either PUD. the nearest single-family development tract in Taormina Reserve is over 800 feet away with preserve areas located between the Russell Square multi-family tract and the single-family tract in Taormina Reserve. Please see attached exhibit identifying the distances between the Russell Square RPUD and Taormina Reserve development tracts. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: The deviation is reasonable and justifiable. The Landscape Division further states that given the extent of the preserve in the abutting PUD, staff supports this deviation. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The applicant conducted a NIM on May 10, 2018, 5:30 PM, at the Shepard of the Glades Lutheran Church 6020 Rattlesnake Hammock Road Naples, FL. For further information, please see the NIM Summary information in the backup material. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: This project does require Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project did meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier 3.C.c Packet Pg. 694 Attachment: Attachment B - Staff Report for Ord 18-51 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 18 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. Specifically, a deviation is being requested to allow the preserves to be non-contiguous as shown in the Master Plan. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney’s Office reviewed this staff report on August 28, 2018. RECOMMENDATION: Zoning Division staff recommends the CCPC forward petition PUDZ-PL20170004414 Russell Square to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval with the following condition: 1. The Master Plan shall be revised to show an interconnection north to the Taormina Reserve PUD. A developer commitment will be added to the PUD Document that requires the interconnection to be included as part of the first SDP or Plat or ROW permit approval and constructed before the first CO of any residential units. Attachments: A) Proposed RPUD Ordinance, Russell Square B) Proposed Master Plan, Russell Square C) FLUE Consistency Review 3.C.c Packet Pg. 695 Attachment: Attachment B - Staff Report for Ord 18-51 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134  239-947-1144  engineering@gradyminor.com  www.gradyminor.com Russell Square RPUD (PL20200001210) Application and Supporting Documents December 10, 2020 HEX Hearing 3.C.d Packet Pg. 696 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. Ph. 239-947-1144 Fax. 239-947-0375 3800 Via Del Rey EB 0005151 LB 0005151 LC 26000266 Bonita Springs, FL 34134 www.gradyminor.com July 15, 2020 Mr. John Kelly, AICP Collier County Growth Management Division/ Planning and Regulation Land Development Services Department Comprehensive Planning Section 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 RE: Russell Square RPUD Insubstantial Change– PL20200001210, Submittal 1 Dear Mr. Kelly: On behalf of our client, Neal Communities on the Braden River, LLC, we are submitting an application for an Insubstantial Change to a PUD (PDI) for the above referenced project. The applicant is proposing a deviation from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.1.a and 5.06.02.B.6. Exhibit E has been revised to include the proposed deviation and Exhibit C has been revised to note the additional deviation on the plan. Documents filed with submittal 1 include the following: 1. Cover Letter 2. Application 3. Pre-Application Meeting Notes Waiver 4. Project Narrative and Detail of Request 5. Ordinance 2018-51 6. Current Exhibit C Master Plan (Ord 18-51) 7. Revised Exhibit C Master Plan 2020 8. Revised Exhibit E Deviations 9. Warranty Deed 10. Affidavit of Authorization 11. Addressing Checklist 12. Property Ownership Disclosure 13. Location Map 14. Deviation Justification Please contact me if you have any questions. 3.C.d Packet Pg. 697 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) Mr. John Kelly, AICP RE: Russell Square RPUD Insubstantial Change– PL20200001210, Submittal 1 July 15, 2020 Page 2 of 2 Sincerely, D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Enclosures Cc: Neal Communities GradyMinor File (NCRSPDI-20) 3.C.d Packet Pg. 698 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Revised 3/27/2018 Page 1 of 4 INSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE TO A PUD (PDI) LDC subsection 10.02.13 E & Code of Laws section 2-83 – 2-90 Ch. 3 G.3 of the Administrative Code Pursuant to LDC subsection 10.02.13 E.2, a PUD insubstantial change includes any change that is not considered a substantial or a minor change. A PUD insubstantial change to an approved PUD ordinance shall be based upon an evaluation of LDC subsection 10.02.13 E.1 and shall require the review and approval of the Hearing Examiner. The Hearing Examiner’s approval shall be based on the findings and criteria used for the original application. PETITION NO PROJECT NAME DATE PROCESSED APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION Name of Property Owner(s): ______________________________________________________ Name of Applicant if different than owner: __________________________________________ Address: __________________________City: _____________ State: _______ ZIP: __________ Telephone: ____________________ Cell: ____________________ Fax: ___________________ E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________ Name of Agent: ________________________________________________________________ Firm: _________________________________________________________________________ Address: ______________________City: _______________ State: _________ ZIP: __________ Telephone: _____________________ Cell: _____________________ Fax: _________________ E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________ DETAIL OF REQUEST On a separate sheet, attached to the application, describe the insubstantial change request. Identify how the request does not meet the PUD substantial change criteria established in LDC subsection 10.02.13 E.1. To be completed by staff Neal Communities on the Braden River LLC 5800 Lakewood Ranch Blvd N.Sarasota FL 34240 239-221-0446 danc@nealcommunities.com D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs FL 34134 239-947-1144 warnold@gradyminor.com 3.C.d Packet Pg. 699 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Revised 3/27/2018 Page 2 of 4 PROPERTY INFORMATION PUD NAME: _______________________ ORDINANCE NUMBER: ________________________ FOLIO NUMBER(S): _____________________________________________________________ Provide a legal (if PUD is recorded) or graphic description of area of amendment (this may be graphically illustrated on Amended PUD Master Plan). If applying for a portion of the PUD, provide a legal description for subject portion. Attach on a separate sheet, a written description of the map or text change. Does amendment comply with the Growth Management Plan? Yes No If no, please explain: _______________________________________________________ Has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? Yes No If yes, in whose name? _____________________________________________________ Has any portion of the PUD been SOLD and/or DEVELOPED? Are any changes proposed for the area sold and/or developed? Yes No If yes, please describe on an attached separate sheet. NO Russell Square RPUD 2018-51 73270001507 ■ 3.C.d Packet Pg. 700 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Revised 3/27/2018 Page 3 of 4 Pre-Application Meeting and Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for: PUD Insubstantial Change Chapter 3 G.3 of the Administrative Code The following Submittal Requirement checklist is to be utilized during the Pre-Application Meeting and at time of application submittal. At final submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with the application packet. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below, with cover sheets attached to each section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. REQUIREMENTS FOR REVIEW # OF COPIES REQUIRED NOT REQUIRED Completed Application (download current form from County website) 1 Pre-Application Meeting notes 1 Project Narrative, including a detailed description of proposed changes and why amendment is necessary 1 Detail of request 1 Current Master Plan & 1 Reduced Copy 1 Revised Master Plan & 1 Reduced Copy 1 Revised Text and any exhibits PUD document with changes crossed through & underlined PUD document as revised with amended Title Page with Ordinance # Warranty Deed Legal Description 1 Boundary survey, if boundary of original PUD is amended If PUD is platted, include plat book pages List identifying Owner & all parties of corporation 1 Affidavit of Authorization, signed & notarized 1 Completed Addressing Checklist 1 Property Ownership Disclosure Form 1 Copy of 8 ½ in. x 11 in. graphic location map of site 1 Electronic copy of all documents and plans *Please advise: The Office of the Hearing Examiner requires all materials to be submitted electronically in PDF format. *If located in Immokalee or seeking affordable housing, include an additional set of each submittal requirement. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS: x Following the completion of the review process by County Review staff, the applicant shall submit all materials electronically to the designated project manager. x Please contact the project manager to confirm the number of additional copies required. ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ 3.C.d Packet Pg. 701 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Revised 3/27/2018 Page 4 of 4 PLANNERS – INDICATE IF THE PETITION NEEDS TO BE ROUTED TO THE FOLLOWING REVIEWERS: School District (Residential Components): Amy Lockheart Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment: Executive Director Utilities Engineering: Eric Fey Parks and Recreation: Barry Williams and David Berra Emergency Management: Dan Summers Naples Airport Authority: Conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Johnson Other: City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director Other: FEE REQUIREMENTS PUD Amendment Insubstantial (PDI): $1,500.00 Pre-Application Meeting: $500.00 Estimated Legal Advertising fee for the Office of the Hearing Examiner: $1,125.00 Same fee applies if the petition is referred to the Collier County Planning Commission, where the CCPC serves as the deciding authority instead of the HEX. Fire Code Plans Review Fees are collected at the time of application submission and those fees are set forth by the Authority having jurisdiction. The Land Development Code requires Neighborhood Notification mailers for Applications headed to hearing, and this fee is collected prior to hearing. As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. All checks payable to: Board of County Commissioners. The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to: Growth Management Department Planning and Regulation ATTN: Business Center 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 ____________________________________________ ____________ Agent/Owner Signature Date ____________________________________________ Applicant/Owner Name (please print) 2800 North Naple D. Wayne Arnold, AICP July 13, 2020 3.C.d Packet Pg. 702 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) From:BellowsRay To:Wayne Arnold; Sharon Umpenhour Cc:VelascoJessica Subject:RE: PDI Pre-app waiver for Seychelles Sign Permit PRSG20190519943 Date:Wednesday, July 01, 2020 10:21:33 AM Attachments:image002.png image010.png image011.png oledata.mso Hi Wayne, Your request for a waiver of the pre-application meeting has been approved. John Kelly will be the assigned planner for this PDI application. Ray Raymond V. Bellows, Zoning Manager Zoning Division - Zoning Services Section Growth Management Department Telephone: 239.252.2463; Fax: 239.252.6350 Exceeding expectations, every day! Tell us how we are doing by taking our Zoning Division Survey at https://goo.gl/eXjvqT. From: Wayne Arnold <WArnold@gradyminor.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2020 3:01 PM To: BellowsRay <Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: Sharon Umpenhour <SUmpenhour@gradyminor.com>; CompagnoneDiana <Diana.Compagnone@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: PDI Pre-app waiver for Seychelles Sign Permit PRSG20190519943 EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Ray, Sharon and I had a conference call with Diana Compagnone and Jennifer Breining last week. We agreed that we need to prepare a PDI to include a new deviation to permit the wall sign to exceed 8’ in height, as it is affixed to the wall that was permitted by an approved deviation to be 8’ high on top of the perimeter berm. I really don’t think I need a pre-application meeting to address this single deviation. Can you please waive the pre-application meeting for this PDI application? Thank you, Wayne From: BreiningJennifer <Jennifer.Breining@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Monday, June 08, 2020 2:21 PM To: Dan Ciesielski <danc@nealcommunities.com> Cc: Sara Rieke <Sara@lykins-signtek.com> Subject: [EXT] RE: Seychelles Permit PRSG20190519943 Good afternoon Dan, I spoke to Diana and there was a correction letter that went out regarding the sign height for both the Building permit and the Sign permit. The corrected plans for both permits show the height is not measured from the grade adjacent to the sign but from the sidewalk. Please see the attached approved plan. The height of the sign is measured to the top of the sign structure. Per our field measurement the sign is 8’ 7” tall measured from the grade adjacent to the sign and as you can see in the pictures below there is a few feet +/- from the sidewalk to the base of the sign. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. 3.C.d Packet Pg. 703 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) Regards, Jennifer Breining Growth Management Department Sign Plans Reviewer 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Phone: (239) 252-5573 Fax: (239) 252-6927 Visit our Website at: WWW.COLLIERGOV.NET How are we doing? The Operations & Regulatory Management Division wants to hear from you! 3.C.d Packet Pg. 704 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) Please take our online SURVEY. We appreciate your feedback! From: Dan Ciesielski <danc@nealcommunities.com> Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 9:57 AM To: BreiningJennifer <Jennifer.Breining@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: Sara Rieke <Sara@lykins-signtek.com> Subject: Seychelles Permit PRSG20190519943 EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Jennifer see attached. The height of the wall and sign fence were agreed to with Diana Campagnone when we were permitting this. The wall height was considered a continuation of the perimeter wall which was approved at 8’ tall sitting on top of the perimeter berm. The total height was not to be measured from adjacent road grade. I have attached a cross section from the SDP plans showing the wall section with elevations. The top of the sign face is shown at elevation 5’ 4” above adjacent ground which would put it at approximately 7’ above the adjacent road grade. I hope this clarifies the height question and you are now able to sign off on this permit. Let me know of any further questions and we will get answers to you. Thanks for your help. Dan Ciesielski Neal Communities 239-233-4002 Dan Ciesielski Land Development Manager South Region 239-221-0446 Ofc 239-233-4002 Cell 239-405-7891 Fax 28100 Bonita Grande Dr, Suite 106 Bonita Springs, FL 34135 danc@nealcommunities.com NealCommunities.com CBC 1256375 Confidentiality Notice - This message is being sent by or on behalf of Neal Communities. It is intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. This communication may contain information that is proprietary, privileged or confidential or otherwise legally exempt from disclosure. If you are not the named addressee, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete all copies of this message. 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. 3.C.d Packet Pg. 705 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) July 14, 2020 Page 1 of 3 NCRSPDI-20 Project Narrative.docx Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134  239-947-1144  engineering@gradyminor.com  www.gradyminor.com Russell Square RPUD (PL20200001210) Project Narrative and Detail of Request PROJECT NARRATIVE The Russell Square RPUD was approved in 2018 as Ordinance 2018-51. The PUD is approved for 230 multi-family dwelling units. The applicant is proposing a deviation from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.1.a and 5.06.02.B.6., “Development Standards for Signs within Residential Districts”. The deviation will allow the project entry wall sign to be located on a wall that is on top of the project perimeter berm. The height of the wall was approved as part of the original PUD. Exhibit E has been revised to include the proposed deviation and Exhibit C has been revised to note the deviation location on the Master Plan. DETAIL OF REQUEST On a separate sheet, attached to the application, describe the insubstantial change request. Identify how the request does not meet the PUD substantial change criteria established in LDC subsection 10.02.13 E.1. Insubstantial Change Criteria LDC Subsection 10.02.13 E.1 E. Changes and amendments. There are three types of changes to a PUD Ordinance: Substantial, Insubstantial, and Minor. Language changes to a previously approved PUD document shall require the same procedure as for amending the official zoning atlas, except for the removal of a commitment for payment towards affordable housing which is considered to be a minor change as described in Section 10.02.13 E.3.c. 1. Substantial changes. Any substantial change(s) to an approved PUD Ordinance shall require the review and recommendation of the Planning Commission and approval by the Board of County Commissioners as a PUD amendment prior to implementation. Applicants shall be required to submit and process a new application complete with pertinent supporting data, as set forth in sections 10.02.13 A and B. For the purpose of this section, a substantial change shall be deemed to exist where: a. There is a proposed change in the boundary of the PUD; or No b. There is a proposed increase in the total number of dwelling units or intensity of land use or height of buildings within the development; 3.C.d Packet Pg. 706 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) Page 2 of 3 No c. There is a proposed decrease in preservation, conservation, recreation or open space areas within the development not to exceed 5 percent of the total acreage previously designated as such, or 5 acres in area; No net change in preserve, recreation or open space results from this amendment. d. There is a proposed increase in the size of areas used for nonresidential uses, to include institutional, commercial and industrial land uses (excluding preservation, conservation or open spaces), or a proposed relocation of nonresidential land uses; No increase in non-residential uses or areas for non-residential uses are proposed. e. There is a substantial increase in the impacts of the development which may include, but are not limited to, increases in traffic generation; changes in traffic circulation; or impacts on other public facilities; No additional traffic or public facility impacts will result from the request regarding the proposed revisions. The PUD currently contains a vehicular trip cap, which is not proposed to be changed. f. The change will result in land use activities that generate a higher level of vehicular traffic based upon the Trip Generation Manual published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers; No additional dwelling units are proposed; therefore, there are no additional traffic impacts. g. The change will result in a requirement for increased stormwater retention, or will otherwise increase stormwater discharges; Adequate area exists on-site for stormwater retention, and no change to the approved discharge rate is proposed. No additional stormwater retention areas will be required. h. The change will bring about a relationship to an abutting land use that would be incompatible with an adjacent land use; The change will not be incompatible. i. Any modification to the PUD master plan or PUD document or amendment to a PUD ordinance which is inconsistent with the future land use element or other element of 3.C.d Packet Pg. 707 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) Page 3 of 3 the growth management plan or which modification would increase the density or intensity of the permitted land uses; The PUD and proposed changes are consistent with the Collier County Growth Management Plan. j. The proposed change is to a PUD district designated as a development of regional impact (DRI) and approved pursuant to F.S. § 380.06, where such change requires a determination and public hearing by Collier County pursuant to F.S. § 380.06(19). Any change that meets the criterion of F.S. § 380.06(19)(e)2, and any changes to a DRI/PUD master plan that clearly do not create a substantial deviation shall be reviewed and approved by Collier County under this section 10.02.13 of this Code; or This project is not a DRI. k. Any modification in the PUD master plan or PUD document or amendment to a PUD ordinance which impact(s) any consideration deemed to be a substantial modification as described under this section 10.02.13 The proposed changes do not meet the standards for a substantial modification and creates no external impacts. 3.C.d Packet Pg. 708 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) ORDINANCE NO. 18- 51 AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A RURAL AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT WITH A PORTION OF THE REAL PROPERTY IN A ST OVERLAY (SPECIAL TREATMENT) TO A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT RPUD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS RUSSELL SQUARE RPUD TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO 230 MULTI- FAMILY DWELLING UNITS ON PROPERTY LOCATED EAST OF SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD AND APPROXIMATELY 1/4 MILE SOUTH OF DAVIS BOULEVARD IN SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 32.9+/- ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PUDZ- PL20170004414] WHEREAS, D. Wayne Arnold, AICP of Q. Grady Minor & Associates, Inc. and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. representing developer, Neal Communities of Southwest Florida, LLC, petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described property. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: SECTION ONE: The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Section 9, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida is changed from a Rural Agricultural A) zoning district with a portion of the real property in a ST overlay to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district for a 32.9+/- acre project to be known as the Russell Square RPUD to allow up to 230 multi-family dwelling units in accordance with the RPUD Documents, attached hereto as Exhibits "A" through "F" and incorporated herein by reference. 18-CPS-01762/1431239/1j 133 Russell Square PUDZ-PL20170004414 8/24/18 1 of 2 q9 3.C.d Packet Pg. 709 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) The appropriate zoning atlas map or maps as described in Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, is/are hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO: This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by supe-majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this ,r_ , day of Oc+o k r 2018. ATTEST: BOARD OF C! TY COMMISSIONERS CRYST LK KINZEL, CLERK COLLIER '• • , FLO• i; By: ei r By; Al Deputy,C1 k ANDY SOLIS, Chairman Attest as to Chairman's, signature cn'y.` App oved as to form and legality: G4 /1/7\._A A' eidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A–Permitted Uses Exhibit B –Development Standards Exhibit C –Master Plan Exhibit D–Legal Description Exhibit E–List of Deviations Exhibit F–Developer Commitments This ordinance filed with the Secretary of Satw's Office the S*4`doy of Oc 4ol2Yh, 0 and acknow`edgement of that filing received this d day ofA `, r c 18-CPS-01762/1431239/1]133 By Deputy CI " s Russell Square PUDZ-PL2017000441477 8/24/18 2 of 2 0 3.C.d Packet Pg. 710 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) EXHIBIT A FOR RUSSELL SQUARE RPUD Regulations for development of the Russell Square RPUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this RPUD Document and applicable sections of the LDC and Growth Management Plan (GMP) in effect at the time of issuance of any development order to which said regulations relate. Where this RPUD Ordinance does not provide development standards, then the provisions of the specific sections of the LDC that are otherwise applicable shall apply. PERMITTED USES: A maximum of 230 multi-family residential dwelling unit types shall be permitted within the RPUD. No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: RESIDENTIAL A. Principal Uses: 1. Multi-family dwelling units B. Accessory Uses: 1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the principal uses permitted in this RPUD, including but not limited to garages, carports, swimming pools, spas, screen enclosures and utility buildings. 2. Model homes and model home centers including sales trailers and offices for project administration, construction, sales and marketing. 3. Any other accessory use,which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and consistent with the permitted accessory uses of this PUD as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals or the Hearing Examiner. AMENITY AREA A. Principal Uses: 1. Clubhouse with cafes, snack bars and similar uses intended to serve residents and guests. 2. Community administrative and recreation facilities. Outdoor/indoor recreation facilities, such as a community swimming pool, tennis/pickle ball courts and basketball courts,fitness/spa, parks, playgrounds, pedestrian/bikeways, dog parks and passive and/or active water features intended to serve residents and guests. Russell Square RPUD, PL20170004414 Page 1 of 12 08/20/2018 10 3.C.d Packet Pg. 711 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3. Open space uses and structures such as, but not limited to, boardwalks, nature trails, bikeways, landscape nurseries,gazebos, boat and canoe docks,fishing piers, picnic areas, fitness trails and shelters to serve residents and their guests. B. Accessory Uses: 1. Model homes and model home centers including sales trailers and offices for project administration, construction, sales and marketing. 2. Any other accessory use,which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and consistent with the permitted accessory uses of this PUD as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals or Hearing Examiner. PRESERVE A. Allowable Uses: 1. Nature trails and boardwalks that do not reduce the amount of required preserve area to be retained. 2. Preservation. 3. Passive uses, as per LDC requirements. 4. Water management as allowed by the LDC. 5. Uses subject to LDC section Allowable uses within County required preserves. B. Any other use, which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and consistent with the permitted accessory uses of this PUD as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals or the Hearing Examiner. Russell Square RPUD,PL20170004414 Page 2 of 12 08/20/2018 L, 3.C.d Packet Pg. 712 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) EXHIBIT B FOR RUSSELL SQUARE RPUD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Exhibit B sets forth the development standards for land uses within the Russell Square RPUD Subdistrict. Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of approval of the SDP or subdivision plat. 1. Guardhouses, gatehouses, access control structures, clock towers, fences, walls, columns, decorative hardscaping or architectural embellishments associated with the project's entrance features are permitted within the "R" and "A" designated areas abutting the project's entrance, or within the private roadway as depicted on the PUD Master Plan, and shall have no required setbacks; however, such structures cannot be located where they create vehicular stacking or sight distance issues for motorists and pedestrians, and cannot exceed 35 feet in zoned height and 40 feet in actual height. Russell Square RPUD, PL20170004414 Page 3 of 12 08/20/2018 5 t. 3.C.d Packet Pg. 713 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) EXHIBIT B FOR RUSSELL SQUARE RPUD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS STANDARDS MULTI-FAMILY AMENITY AREA PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE Minimum Floor Area(per unit) 1,000 S.F.N/A Minimum Lot Area N/A 10,000 Minimum Lot Width N/A N/A Minimum Lot Depth N/A N/A Maximum Height 35 feet 35 feet Zoned 45 feet 45 feet Actual SETBACKS Minimum Front Yard 15 feet(1) 15 feet Minimum Side Yard 10 feet 10 feet Minimum Rear Yard (2) 10 feet from Perimeter Buffer or 0 feet 10 feet from Perimeter Buffer or 0 feet from LMT from LMT Minimum Preserve 25 feet 25 feet Minimum Distance Between Principal 20 feet 10 feet Structures ACCESSORY STRUCTURE Maximum Height Zoned 35 feet 35 feet Actual 40 feet 40 feet SETBACKS Minimum Front Yard SPS SPS Minimum Side Yard SPS SPS Minimum Rear Yard 0 feet from Perimeter Buffer or LMT 0 feet from Perimeter Buffer or LMT Minimum Preserve 10 feet 10 feet SPS—Same as Principal Structure LBT—Landscape Buffer Tract LMT—Lake Maintenance Tract 1) Front setback is measured from back of curb,or edge of pavement if not curbed,for private roads. The minimum 15-foot front setback may be reduced to 10 feet where the unit has a recessed or side-entry garage. Front-loading garages shall be setback a minimum of 23 feet from the edge of sidewalk for private roads. 2) No structures may be located within the county drainage easement shown on the master plan. Note:Nothing in this RPUD document shall be deemed to approve a deviation from the LDC unless it is expressly stated in a list of deviations. Russell Square RPUD, PL20170004414 Page 4 of 12 08/20/2018 3.C.d Packet Pg. 714 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) TAORMINA RESERVE MPUD COMMERCIAL 15'WIDE TYPE B' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 111 //' immAogoo200 1 '' ' 7\ 7' I W I ,, SCALE: 1" = 200' N , I I WHEN PLOTTED @ 8.5'X 11" I , TAORMINA RESERVE MPUD I v R I PRESERVE v IQI PUD BOUNDARYs V El NO BUFFER20'WIDE 1 I ERREQUIRED H 1, , TYPE'D'I R ZO pLANDSCAPEI IBUFFERWATER I I MANAGEMEN PRESERVE . WATER ImI m 70Ih#6.0I,tM m m cn I7 7 7 I 6 11O Q I I ti' .,., m f / i I m m I I o c15'WIDE TYPE'B' C 2 3 R LANDSCAPE BUFFER I QE i TT.TR R i IFFRE$E2a/E j I H I- !MANAGEMENT I I 12 R L. I I Ani I i PROJECT 9W I PROJECT ENTRANCE R 15 WIDETYPE'B' ENTRANCE SIGNmpgk LANDSCAPE I aI r l-20'WIDE TYPE'D'LANDSCAPE BUFFER l' ZONED: A a RESIDENTIAL Ei Ei ZONED: A COUNTY WATER MANAGEMENT AREA DEVIATION I A = AMENITY AREA R = RESIDENTIAL AREA RUSSELL SQUARE RPUD SCALE. xoo'ee.sx Ig El GradyMinor LrydMInSAndAtaAlerMPgY REVISED JOB CODE BCSBVE Ruolle Sprlege,Flurlln 31131 00U/17/2018 DATC: EXHIBIT C eF e rola Civil Engineers • Land Surveyors . Planners . Landscape ArchitectsnL6 sour: Cert.of AUN.EB 0055151 Cerl,or Autn.LB 0005151 Busmesa Le 20000200 MASTER PLAN rcalEFE ower a W.GIM-V3 Bonita Springs:239 947 1144 no 0'.01911VMi000'.even Fort Myers:239 690 4380 SHEET 1 OF' 2 . _ c9p 3.C.d Packet Pg. 715 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) SITE SUMMARY TOTAL SITE AREA: 32.9± ACRE MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS: 230 (7 DU/AC X 32.9 ACRES) PRESERVE: REQUIRED: 3.47± ACRES (13.88± ACRES NATIVE VEGETATION X 0.25) PROVIDED: 3.47± ACRES NATIVE TREES: REQUIRED: 28 (110 EXISTING TREES X 0.25) PROVIDED: 25 PINES + 3 PALMS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTION 3.05.07 OPEN SPACE: REQUIRED: 19.74± ACRES (32.9± ACRES X .60) PROVIDED: 19.74± ACRES NOTES 1. THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND IS SUBJECT TO MODIFICATION DUE TO AGENCY PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS. 2. PRESERVES MAY BE USED TO SATISFY THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS AFTER EXOTIC VEGETATION REMOVAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTIONS 4.06.02 AND 4.06.05.E.1. SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS WITH NATIVE PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTION 3.05.07. IN ORDER TO PROVIDE THE REQUIRED TYPE B BUFFER, A MINIMUM 6-FOOT-WIDE LANDSCAPE BUFFER EASEMENT LOCATED OUTSIDE OF THE PRESERVE WILL BE CONVEYED BY OWNER TO A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION OR CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION AT TIME OF SDP OR PLAT APPROVAL. OWNER WILL PLANT ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPE MATERIAL IN THE BUFFER EASEMENT TO ACHIEVE THE OPACITY ! REQUIREMENT NO LATER THAN ONE YEAR FROM THE ISSUANCE OF THE FIRST RESIDENTIAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. RUSSELL SQUARE RPUD SCALE q.Grady mor rd n,;oduiex,r. .la roe cone GradyMinor uuavm uei aey REVISED eel P.,nFt Sp inks,Pluridu 31131 08/20/2018 onceEEXHIBITC oie ` Civil Engineers Land Surveyors • Planners • Landscape Architects rac enuc, Gen,.of nucli.EB 8005151 cert of AUN.LB(1005151 Business LC 26000266 MASTER PLAN NOTES Iln01101 Syringe.23n.f147.1 l4a n u iv.l;r.r/n IOinni.nnm FOM Nyeis;239.600.1380 SHEET 2 OF 2 ` / 3.C.d Packet Pg. 716 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) EXHIBIT D FOR RUSSELL SQUARE RPUD LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL A: THE SOUTH ONE-HALF(1/2)OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE QUARTER(1/4)OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER (1/4) OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RESERVING THEREFROM THE EAST THIRTY (30) FEET FOR ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY PURPOSES ONLY. PARCEL B: THE NORTH ONE-HALF (1/2) OF THE NORTHWEST ONE QUARTER (1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER (1/4) OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RESERVING THEREFROM THE EAST THIRTY (30) FEET FOR ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY PURPOSES ONLY;ALSO KNOWN AS TRACT 40 OF UNRECORDED PLAT. PARCEL C: THE SOUTH ONE-HALF (1/2) OF THE NORTHWEST ONE QUARTER (1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER (1/4) OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, LESS 30 FEET FOR EASEMENT ON THE SOUTH LINE AND 30 FEET FOR EASEMENT ON THE EAST LINE FOR ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY PURPOSES ONLY. ALSO KNOWN AS TRACT 39, ENCHANTED ACRES, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL D: THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RESERVING THEREFROM THE EAST 30 FEET FOR ROAD RIGHT OF WAY;ALSO DESCRIBED AS TRACT 42, ENCHANTED ACRES. AND ALSO LESS THAT PORTION OF SAID PARCELS A, B, C AND D, TAKEN BY EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDING BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AND C&T PROPERTIES UNLIMITED AS EVIDENCED BY ORDER OF TAKING RECORDED MARCH 10, 2008 IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4337, PAGE 541, CASE NUMBER 07-4923-CA REFERENCED TO AS PARCEL 126FEE AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS: A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE SOUTHWEST AND NORTHWEST QUARTERS OF SECTION 9,TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 9; THENCE SOUTH 00°50'29" EAST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 9 A DISTANCE OF 653.41 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF COPE LANE; THENCE SOUTH 89°57'32" EAST ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE,A DISTANCE OF 38.83 FEET;THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE NORTH 07°21'18" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 207.06 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE CONCAVE WESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 3,100.00 FEET; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 08°20'02"AN ARC DISTANCE OF 450.91 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 9;THENCE NORTH 00°58'38"WEST,A DISTANCE OF 685.18 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTHERLY LINE OF A PARCEL OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN O.R. 3283, PAGE 524, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE SOUTH 89°39'02" WEST ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 100.01 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 9; THENCE SOUTH 00°58'38" EAST ALONG SAID WEST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 686.37 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL HEREIN DESCRIBED. Russell Square RPUD, PL20170004414 Page 7 of 12 08/20/2018 Ct p 3.C.d Packet Pg. 717 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) PARCEL E: THE SOUTH ONE-HALF (S 1/2) OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER (NE 1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER NW 1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER (SW 1/4) OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LESS THE WEST THIRTY (30') FEET THEREOF, TO BE USED FOR ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY PURPOSES ONLY(TRACT 50 OF UNRECORDED PLAT) PARCEL F: THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. LESS ROAD EASEMENTS ON THE WEST SIDE OF 30-FOOT PARCEL ALSO KNOWN AS TRACT 49 ENCHANTED ACRES. PARCEL G: SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 9,TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND ALSO KNOWN AS LOT 48 OF ENCHANTING ACRES. PARCEL H: 1) THE EAST 30 FEET OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 9,TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; 2) THE EAST 30 FEET OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 9,TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; 3) THE EAST 30 FEET OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; LESS THE SOUTH 30 FEET THEREOF CONVEYED TO COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY DEEDS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 1091, PAGES 1110 AND 1119, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; 4) THE EAST 30 FEET OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 9,TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; 5) THE WEST 30 FEET OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 9,TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;AND 6) THE WEST 30 FEET OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 9,TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. CONTAINING 32.89 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. Russell Square RPUD, PL20170004414 Page 8 of 12 08/20/2018 3.C.d Packet Pg. 718 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) EXHIBIT E FOR RUSSELL SQUARE RPUD LIST OF DEVIATIONS 1. Deviation 1 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.04.06.A.3.e, which allows temporary signs on residentially zoned properties up to 4 square feet in area or 3 feet in height,to allow a temporary banner sign up to a maximum of 32 square feet in area and 8 feet in height.The temporary banner sign shall be limited to a maximum of 90 days during season defined as November 1 to April 30 per calendar year. This Deviation will remain valid until 90% of the units are sold or until December 31, 2024, whichever comes first. At such time, the Deviation will be void. 2. Deviation 2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.6.5.a, which requires on-premises directional signs to be setback a minimum of 10' from edge of roadway, paved surface or back of curb, to allow a setback of 5' from edge of roadway, paved surface or back of curb. This deviation excludes public roads. 3. Deviation 3 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.C.1.a and 5.03.02.C, Fences and Walls, Excluding Sound Walls, which requires fences or walls in a residential PUD to be 6 feet or less in height, to permit an 8-foot high wall on top of berm along Cope Lane right-of-way and 12 foot high wall on top of the required water management berm along the Santa Barbara boulevard right-of-way. 4. Deviation 4 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.6.6 (a) and 5.06.02.6.6 (b), On-premises Sign Within Residential Districts, which permits two ground signs at a maximum height of 8 feet with a sign face area not to exceed 64 square feet and a minimum setback from all property lines and road right-of-way of 10 feet, to permit two signs, not at the project entrance, of up to 80 square feet (per sign face) to be located along the Santa Barbara Boulevard frontage of the property on the project's wall and to exceed the maximum sign height of 8 feet for a maximum of 12 feet in height measured from the adjacent roadway centerline elevation with a minimum setback of zero feet from the property line. This Deviation is conditioned upon owner's relocation of the wall and sign at its own expense, in the event it conflicts with a County road expansion or project. 5.Deviation 5 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.02.A.2, Sidewalks, Bike Lane and Pathway Requirements, which requires dual sidewalks on local roads internal to the site, to allow a sidewalk on one side of the roadway where the property is permitted with single loaded home sites. Appropriate crosswalks shall be provided at crossing locations. 6. Deviation 6 seeks relief from LDC Section 3.05.07.A.5, Preservation Standards, which requires preservation areas shall be interconnected within the site and to adjoining off-site preservation areas or wildlife corridors, to allow the onsite preserves to be non-contiguous. 7.Deviation 7 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.05.08.6.2.a.i and 5.05.08.6.2.c.i, Architectural and Site Design Standards, which requires where a proposed project site located within 150 to 300 feet of an arterial or collector road , including all rights-of-way, shall be required to comply with LDC sections 5.05.08 D.4., D.10., D.13., D.15., E, and F. Compliance shall be limited to the building Russell Square RPUD, PL20170004414 Page 9 of 12 08/20/2018 3.C.d Packet Pg. 719 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) facades facing the arterial or collector road to allow the buildings behind a wall to not be subject to this LDC requirement. 8.Deviation 8 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04.G, Parking Space Requirements, which requires where small-scale recreation facilities are accessory to a single-family or multifamily project and intended only for the residents of that project, exclusive of golf courses/clubhouses, the recreation facilities may be computed at 50 percent of normal requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are not within 300 feet of the recreation facilities and at 25 percent of normal requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are within 300 feet of the recreation facilities, to allow the parking space for the recreation facilities to be computed at 25 percent where the majority of dwelling units are within 500 feet of the recreation facilities. 9.Deviation 9 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.06.02,Table 2.4, Buffer Requirements,which requires a 15' wide type "B" landscape buffer to allow no buffer in the areas adjacent to the Taormina Reserve PUD preserve area as depicted on the Master Plan. Russell Square RPUD, PL20170004414 Page 10 of 12 08/20/2018 CAO) 3.C.d Packet Pg. 720 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) EXHIBIT F FOR RUSSELL SQUARE RPUD LIST OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS 1. PUD MONITORING One entity(hereinafter the Managing Entity) shall be responsible for PUD monitoring until close- out of the PUD, and this entity shall also be responsible for satisfying all PUD commitments until close-out of the PUD. At the time of this PUD approval, the Managing Entity is Neal Communities of Southwest Florida, LLC, 5800 Lakewood Ranch Blvd. N., Sarasota, FL 34240. Should the Managing Entity desire to transfer the monitoring and commitments to a successor entity, then it must provide a copy of a legally binding document that needs to be approved for legal sufficiency by the County Attorney. After such approval, the Managing Entity will be released of its obligations upon written approval of the transfer by County staff, and the successor entity shall become the Managing Entity. As Owner and Developer sell off tracts, the Managing Entity shall provide written notice to County that includes an acknowledgement of the commitments required by the PUD by the new owner and the new owner's agreement to comply with the Commitments through the Managing Entity, but the Managing Entity shall not be relieved of its responsibility under this Section. When the PUD is closed-out, then the Managing Entity is no longer responsible for the monitoring and fulfillment of PUD commitments. 2. MISCELLANEOUS a. Issuance of a development permit by a county does not in any way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create any liability on the part of the county for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law. b. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the development 3. ENVIRONMENTAL a. The RPUD shall be required to preserve 25% of native vegetation. 13.88± acres of native vegetation exists on-site requiring a minimum preservation of 3.47±acres (13.88 x.25 = 3.47) of native vegetation to be retained. b. In addition to item 3.a. above, the RPUD shall be required to preserve 25% of native trees, which have grown up in the pasture and central single-family residential area. 110 trees (101 slash pine >8" dbh and 9 cabbage palm >8' clear trunk) exist in densities greater than 8 trees/acre requiring a minimum preservation of 28 trees (110 x .25 = 27.50). Developer shall be permitted to replace these trees and the replacement trees will be placed into areas allowing for 40-foot diameter canopy for the pines and 10-foot diameter canopy for the palms in accordance with LDC Section 3.05.07. Russell Square RPUD, PL20170004414 Page 11 of 12 08/20/2018 3.C.d Packet Pg. 721 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 4. TRANSPORTATION a. The PUD shall be limited to a maximum of 124 p.m. peak hour two-way trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat approval. b. Prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for residential dwelling units, the developer or successor shall extend Cope Lane east to the intersection with Sunset Boulevard. This roadway extension shall be constructed to County standards with sidewalks on both sides of the street. c. Owner or its successors shall pay its proportionate fair share for a traffic signal at the intersection of Cope Lane and Santa Barbara Boulevard, if warranted and constructed. 5. LANDSCAPING a. In order to avoid conflicts with utilities and sidewalks, the required canopy tree for an individual lot shall be one from the following list: Wax Myrtle Green Buttonwood Satin Leaf Simpson Stopper (Myrcianthes fragrans) 2:1 Dahoon Holly 2:1 or any other small native tree approved by the County's Landscape Architect. Where it can be demonstrated that another tree species can be planted without conflict, staff may approve this alternative species. b. Preserves may be used to satisfy the landscape buffer requirements after exotic vegetation removal in accordance with LDC sections 4.06.02 and 4.06.05.E.1. Supplemental plantings with native plant materials shall be in accordance with LDC section 3.05.07. In order to provide the required Type B buffer, a minimum 6-foot-wide landscape buffer easement located outside of the preserve will be conveyed by owner to a homeowner's association or condominium association at time of SDP or plat approval. Owner will plant additional landscape material in the buffer easement to achieve the opacity requirement no later than one year from the issuance of the first residential certificate of occupancy. 6. UTILITIES The owner will construct a Collier County 8" water main through the PUD property and connect to one existing offsite County water main. If water service is connected to Collier County on the north end of the property then a south connection will be stubbed for Collier County future use. If water service is connected to Collier County on the south end of the property then a north connection will be stubbed for Collier County future use. Russell Square RPUD, PL20170004414 Page 12 of 12 08/20/2018 l ,Y fay 3.C.d Packet Pg. 722 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) t,. -1-Li,..WV b WE Tim FLORIDA DEPARTMENT Of STATE RICK SCOTT KEN DETZNER Governor Secretary of State October 25, 2018 Ms. Crystal K. Kinzel, Clerk Collier County Post Office Box 413044 Naples, Florida 34101-3044 Attention: Martha S. Vergara Dear Ms. Kinzel: Pursuant to the provisions of Section 125.66, Florida Statutes, this will acknowledge receipt of your electronic copy of Collier County Ordinance No. 18-51, which was filed in this office on October 25, 2018. Sincerely, Ernest L. Reddick Program Administrator ELR/1b R. A. Gray Building • 500 South Bronough Street • Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 Telephone: (850) 245-6270 www.dos.state.fl.us 3.C.d Packet Pg. 723 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) TAORMINA RESERVE MPUD COMMERCIAL 15'WIDE TYPE B' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 111 //' immAogoo200 1 '' ' 7\ 7' I W I ,, SCALE: 1" = 200' N , I I WHEN PLOTTED @ 8.5'X 11" I , TAORMINA RESERVE MPUD I v R I PRESERVE v IQI PUD BOUNDARYs V El NO BUFFER20'WIDE 1 I ERREQUIRED H 1, , TYPE'D'I R ZO pLANDSCAPEI IBUFFERWATER I I MANAGEMEN PRESERVE . WATER ImI m 70Ih#6.0I,tM m m cn I7 7 7 I 6 11O Q I I ti' .,., m f / i I m m I I o c15'WIDE TYPE'B' C 2 3 R LANDSCAPE BUFFER I QE i TT.TR R i IFFRE$E2a/E j I H I- !MANAGEMENT I I 12 R L. I I Ani I i PROJECT 9W I PROJECT ENTRANCE R 15 WIDETYPE'B' ENTRANCE SIGNmpgk LANDSCAPE I aI r l-20'WIDE TYPE'D'LANDSCAPE BUFFER l' ZONED: A a RESIDENTIAL Ei Ei ZONED: A COUNTY WATER MANAGEMENT AREA DEVIATION I A = AMENITY AREA R = RESIDENTIAL AREA RUSSELL SQUARE RPUD SCALE. xoo'ee.sx Ig El GradyMinor LrydMInSAndAtaAlerMPgY REVISED JOB CODE BCSBVE Ruolle Sprlege,Flurlln 31131 00U/17/2018 DATC: EXHIBIT C eF e rola Civil Engineers • Land Surveyors . Planners . Landscape ArchitectsnL6 sour: Cert.of AUN.EB 0055151 Cerl,or Autn.LB 0005151 Busmesa Le 20000200 MASTER PLAN rcalEFE ower a W.GIM-V3 Bonita Springs:239 947 1144 no 0'.01911VMi000'.even Fort Myers:239 690 4380 SHEET 1 OF' 2 . _ c9p 3.C.d Packet Pg. 724 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) SITE SUMMARY TOTAL SITE AREA: 32.9± ACRE MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS: 230 (7 DU/AC X 32.9 ACRES) PRESERVE: REQUIRED: 3.47± ACRES (13.88± ACRES NATIVE VEGETATION X 0.25) PROVIDED: 3.47± ACRES NATIVE TREES: REQUIRED: 28 (110 EXISTING TREES X 0.25) PROVIDED: 25 PINES + 3 PALMS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTION 3.05.07 OPEN SPACE: REQUIRED: 19.74± ACRES (32.9± ACRES X .60) PROVIDED: 19.74± ACRES NOTES 1. THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND IS SUBJECT TO MODIFICATION DUE TO AGENCY PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS. 2. PRESERVES MAY BE USED TO SATISFY THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS AFTER EXOTIC VEGETATION REMOVAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTIONS 4.06.02 AND 4.06.05.E.1. SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS WITH NATIVE PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTION 3.05.07. IN ORDER TO PROVIDE THE REQUIRED TYPE B BUFFER, A MINIMUM 6-FOOT-WIDE LANDSCAPE BUFFER EASEMENT LOCATED OUTSIDE OF THE PRESERVE WILL BE CONVEYED BY OWNER TO A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION OR CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION AT TIME OF SDP OR PLAT APPROVAL. OWNER WILL PLANT ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPE MATERIAL IN THE BUFFER EASEMENT TO ACHIEVE THE OPACITY ! REQUIREMENT NO LATER THAN ONE YEAR FROM THE ISSUANCE OF THE FIRST RESIDENTIAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. RUSSELL SQUARE RPUD SCALE q.Grady mor rd n,;oduiex,r. .la roe cone GradyMinor uuavm uei aey REVISED eel P.,nFt Sp inks,Pluridu 31131 08/20/2018 onceEEXHIBITC oie ` Civil Engineers Land Surveyors • Planners • Landscape Architects rac enuc, Gen,.of nucli.EB 8005151 cert of AUN.LB(1005151 Business LC 26000266 MASTER PLAN NOTES Iln01101 Syringe.23n.f147.1 l4a n u iv.l;r.r/n IOinni.nnm FOM Nyeis;239.600.1380 SHEET 2 OF 2 ` / 3.C.d Packet Pg. 725 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD(NORTHBOUND)15' WIDE TYPE 'B' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 20' WIDE TYPE 'D' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 15' WIDE TYPE 'B' LANDSCAPE BUFFER WATER MANAGEMENT R 1 WATER MANAGEMENT WATER MANAGEMENT PRESERVE 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 334 4 5 3 R R R R R R PUD BOUNDARY 6 PRESERVE 6 7A 8 15' WIDE TYPE 'B' LANDSCAPE BUFFER PROJECT ENTRANCE SIGN PROJECT ENTRANCE SIGN 20' WIDE TYPE 'D' LANDSCAPE BUFFER NO BUFFER REQUIREDNO BUFFER REQUIRED 9 9 9 10 10 0 200'100' SCALE: 1" = 200' GradyMinor Civil Engineers ●Land Surveyors ●Planners ●Landscape Architects Cert. of Auth. EB 0005151 Cert. of Auth. LB 0005151 Business LC 26000266 Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 Bonita Springs: 239.947.1144 ZZZ.GradyMinor.coP Fort Myers: 239.690.4380 WHEN PLOTTED @ 8.5" X 11" TAORMINA RESERVE MPUD PRESERVE TAORMINA RESERVE MPUD COMMERCIAL TAORMINA RESERVE MPUDPRESERVEZONED: ARESIDENTIALZONED: A RESIDENTIAL ZONED: A COUNTY WATER MANAGEMENT AREA # = DEVIATION A = AMENITY AREA R = RESIDENTIAL AREA 3.C.d Packet Pg. 726 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) GradyMinor Civil Engineers ●Land Surveyors ●Planners ●Landscape Architects Cert. of Auth. EB 0005151 Cert. of Auth. LB 0005151 Business LC 26000266 Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 Bonita Springs: 239.947.1144 www.GradyMinor.com Fort Myers: 239.690.4380 NOTES 1.THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND IS SUBJECT TO MODIFICATION DUE TO AGENCY PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS. 2.PRESERVES MAY BE USED TO SATISFY THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS AFTER EXOTIC VEGETATION REMOVAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTIONS 4.06.02 AND 4.06.05.E.1. SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS WITH NATIVE PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTION 3.05.07. IN ORDER TO PROVIDE THE REQUIRED TYPE B BUFFER, A MINIMUM 6-FOOT-WIDE LANDSCAPE BUFFER EASEMENT LOCATED OUTSIDE OF THE PRESERVE WILL BE CONVEYED BY OWNER TO A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION OR CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION AT TIME OF SDP OR PLAT APPROVAL. OWNER WILL PLANT ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPE MATERIAL IN THE BUFFER EASEMENT TO ACHIEVE THE OPACITY REQUIREMENT NO LATER THAN ONE YEAR FROM THE ISSUANCE OF THE FIRST RESIDENTIAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. SITE SUMMARY TOTAL SITE AREA: 32.9± ACRE MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS:230 (7 DU/AC X 32.9 ACRES) PRESERVE: REQUIRED:3.47± ACRES (13.88± ACRES NATIVE VEGETATION X 0.25) PROVIDED:3.47± ACRES NATIVE TREES: REQUIRED:28 (110 EXISTING TREES X 0.25) PROVIDED:25 PINES + 3 PALMS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTION 3.05.07 OPEN SPACE: REQUIRED:19.74± ACRES (32.9± ACRES X .60) PROVIDED:19.74± ACRES 3.C.d Packet Pg. 727 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Russell Square RPUD, PL20200001210 Page 1 of 2 11/19/2020 EXHIBIT E FOR RUSSELL SQUARE RPUD LIST OF DEVIATIONS 1. Deviation 1 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.04.06.A.3.e, which allows temporary signs on residentially zoned properties up to 4 square feet in area or 3 feet in height, to allow a temporary banner sign up to a maximum of 32 square feet in area and 8 feet in height. The temporary banner sign shall be limited to a maximum of 90 days during season defined as November 1 to April 30 per calendar year. This Deviation will remain valid until 90% of the units are sold or until December 31, 2024, whichever comes first. At such time, the Deviation will be void. 2. Deviation 2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.5.a, which requires on-premises directional signs to be setback a minimum of 10’ from edge of roadway, paved surface or back of curb, to allow a setback of 5’ from edge of roadway, paved surface or back of curb. This deviation excludes public roads. 3. Deviation 3 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.C.1.a and 5.03.02.C, Fences and Walls, Excluding Sound Walls, which requires fences or walls in a residential PUD to be 6 feet or less in height, to permit an 8-foot high wall on top of berm along Cope LaneSeychelles Avenue right-of- way and 12 foot high wall on top of the required water management berm along the Santa Barbara boulevard right-of-way. 4. Deviation 4 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.6 (a) and 5.06.02.B.6 (b), On-premises Sign Within Residential Districts, which permits two ground signs at a maximum height of 8 feet with a sign face area not to exceed 64 square feet and a minimum setback from all property lines and road right-of-way of 10 feet, to permit two signs, not at the project entrance, of up to 80 square feet (per sign face) to be located along the Santa Barbara Boulevard frontage of the property on the project’s wall and to exceed the maximum sign height of 8 feet for a maximum of 12 feet in height measured from the adjacent roadway centerline elevation with a minimum setback of zero feet from the property line. This Deviation is conditioned upon owner’s relocation of the wall and sign at its own expense, in the event it conflicts with a County road expansion or project. 5. Deviation 5 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.02.A.2, Sidewalks, Bike Lane and Pathway Requirements, which requires dual sidewalks on local roads internal to the site, to allow a sidewalk on one side of the roadway where the property is permitted with single loaded home sites. Appropriate crosswalks shall be provided at crossing locations. 6. Deviation 6 seeks relief from LDC Section 3.05.07.A.5, Preservation Standards, which requires preservation areas shall be interconnected within the site and to adjoining off-site preservation areas or wildlife corridors, to allow the onsite preserves to be non-contiguous. 7. Deviation 7 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.05.08.B.2.a.i and 5.05.08.B.2.c.i, Architectural and Site Design Standards, which requires where a proposed project site located within 150 to 300 feet of an arterial or collector road , including all rights-of-way , shall be required to comply with LDC sections 5.05.08 D.4., D.10., D.13., D.15., E, and F. Compliance shall be limited to the building 3.C.d Packet Pg. 728 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Russell Square RPUD, PL20200001210 Page 2 of 2 11/19/2020 façades facing the arterial or collector road to allow the buildings behind a wall to not be subject to this LDC requirement. 8. Deviation 8 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04.G, Parking Space Requirements, which requires where small-scale recreation facilities are accessory to a single-family or multifamily project and intended only for the residents of that project, exclusive of golf courses/clubhouses, the recreation facilities may be computed at 50 percent of normal requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are not within 300 feet of the recreation facilities and at 25 percent of normal requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are within 300 feet of the recreation facilities, to allow the parking space for the recreation facilities to be computed at 25 percent where the majority of dwelling units are within 500 feet of the recreation facilities. 9. Deviation 9 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.06.02, Table 2.4, Buffer Requirements, which requires a 15’ wide type “B” landscape buffer to allow no buffer in the areas adjacent to the Taormina Reserve PUD preserve area as depicted on the Master Plan. 10. Deviation 10 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.1.a and 5.06.02.B.6, “Development Standards for Signs within Residential Districts” which requires residential entrance signs shall meet the following standards: a. Maximum allowable height. All signs within residential zoning districts, and as applicable to designated residential portions of PUD zoned properties, are limited to a maximum height of 8 feet, or as otherwise provided within the LDC. Height shall be measured from the lowest centerline grade of the nearest public or private right-of- way or easement to the uppermost portion of the sign structure. b. On-premises signs within residential districts. Two ground signs with a maximum height of 8 feet or wall, residential entrance or gate signs with a maximum height of 8 feet may be located at each entrance to a multi-family or single-family development. This deviation will instead allow the wall height for the residential signs located on Seychelles Avenue at the project entrance to be a maximum height of 11.6 feet, as measured from the lowest centerline grade of the nearest public or private right-of-way or easement to the uppermost portion of the sign structure. Sign Deviation Exhibit N.T.S. 3.C.d Packet Pg. 729 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.d Packet Pg. 730 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.d Packet Pg. 731 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.d Packet Pg. 732 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.d Packet Pg. 733 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.d Packet Pg. 734 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.d Packet Pg. 735 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.d Packet Pg. 736 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.d Packet Pg. 737 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.d Packet Pg. 738 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.d Packet Pg. 739 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.d Packet Pg. 740 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.d Packet Pg. 741 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.d Packet Pg. 742 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.d Packet Pg. 743 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.d Packet Pg. 744 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.d Packet Pg. 745 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.dPacket Pg. 746Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliergov.net 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-5724 ADDRESSING CHECKLIST Please complete the following and email to GMD_Addressing@colliergov.net or fax to the Operations Division at 239-252-5724 or submit in person to the Addressing Section at the above address. Form must be signed by Addressing personnel prior to pre-application meeting, please allow 3 days for processing. Not all items will apply to every project. Items in bold type are required. FOLIO NUMBERS MUST BE PROVIDED. Forms older than 6 months will require additional review and approval by the Addressing Section. PETITION TYPE (Indicate type below, complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition type) BL (Blasting Permit) BD (Boat Dock Extension) Carnival/Circus Permit CU (Conditional Use) EXP (Excavation Permit) FP (Final Plat LLA (Lot Line Adjustment) PNC (Project Name Change) PPL (Plans & Plat Review) PSP (Preliminary Subdivision Plat) PUD Rezone RZ (Standard Rezone) SDP (Site Development Plan) SDPA (SDP Amendment) SDPI (Insubstantial Change to SDP) SIP (Site Im provement Plan) SIPI (Insubstantial Change to SIP) SNR (Street Name Change) SNC (Street Name Change – Unplatted) TDR (Transfer of Development Rights) VA (Variance) VRP (Vegetation Removal Permit) VRSFP (Vegetation Removal & Site Fill Permit) OTHER LEGAL DESCRIPT ION of subject property or properties (copy of lengthy description may be attached) FOLIO (Property ID) NUMBER(s) of above (attach to, or associate with, legal description if more than one) STREET ADDRESS or ADDRESSES (as applicable, if already assigned) PROPOSED STREET NAMES (if applicable) SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NUMBER (for existing projects/sites only) LOCATION MAP must be attached showing exact location of project/site in relation to nearest public road right- of-way PROPOSED PROJECT NAME (if applicable) SDP - or AR or PL # SURVEY (copy - needed only for unplatted properties) CURRENT PROJECT NAME (if applicable) Rev. 6/9/2017 Page 1 of 2 3.C.d Packet Pg. 747 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliergov.net 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-5724 Please Return Approved Checklist By: Email Personally picked up Applicant Name: Signature on Addressing Checklist does not constitute Project and/or Street Name approval and is subject to further review by the Operations Division. FOR STAFF USE ONLY Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Approved by: Date: Updated by: Date: IF OLDER THAN 6 MONTHS, FORM MUST BE UPDATED OR NEW FORM SUBMITTED Fax Email/Fax:Phone: Project or development names proposed for, or already appearing in, condominium documents (if application; indicate whether proposed or existing) Rev. 6/9/2017 Page 2 of 2 3.C.d Packet Pg. 748 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.d Packet Pg. 749 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.d Packet Pg. 750 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Created 9/28/2017 Page 1 of 3 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM This is a required form with all land use petitions, except for Appeals and Zoning Verification Letters. 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. Please complete the following, use additional sheets if necessary. 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: Name and Address % of Ownership 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 % of Ownership 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 % of Ownership N.A. Neal Communities on The Braden River, LLC 100 See attached LLC Annual Report N.A. 3.C.d Packet Pg. 751 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Created 9/28/2017 Page 2 of 3 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 % of Ownership 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, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners: Name and Address % of Ownership 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 _______________ Leased: Term of lease ____________ years /months If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following: N.A. 100 N.A. N.A. October 2018 3.C.d Packet Pg. 752 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Created 9/28/2017 Page 3 of 3 Date of option: _________________________ Date option terminates: __________________, or Anticipated closing date: ________________ AFFIRM PROPERTY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION Any petition required to have Property Ownership Disclosure, will not be accepted without this form. Requirements for petition types are located on the associated application form. Any change in ownership whether individually or with a Trustee, Company or other interest-holding party, must be disclosed to Collier County immediately if such change occurs prior to the petition’s final public hearing. As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to: Growth Management Department ATTN: Business Center 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 ____________________________________________ ____________ Agent/Owner Signature Date ____________________________________________ Agent/Owner Name (please print) 2800 North Ho Naples, FL ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Agent/Owner Signaturururururrururuurrrurrrrururuuruurrrruuurre D. Wayne Arnold, AICP June 30, 2020 3.C.d Packet Pg. 753 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 5800 LAKEWOOD RANCH BLVD. SARASOTA, FL 34240 Current Principal Place of Business: Current Mailing Address: 5800 LAKEWOOD RANCH BLVD. SARASOTA, FL 34240 US Entity Name:NEAL COMMUNITIES ON THE BRADEN RIVER, LLC DOCUMENT# L09000120730 FEI Number: 27-1576714 Certificate of Status Desired: Name and Address of Current Registered Agent: SCHIER, JAMES R 5800 LAKEWOOD RANCH BLVD. SARASOTA, FL 34240 US The above named entity submits this statement for the purpose of changing its registered office or registered agent, or both, in the State of Florida. SIGNATURE: Electronic Signature of Registered Agent Date Authorized Person(s) Detail : I hereby certify that the information indicated on this report or supplemental report is true and accurate and that my electronic signature shall have the same legal effect as if made under oath; that I am a managing member or manager of the limited liability company or the receiver or trustee empowered to execute this report as required by Chapter 605, Florida Statutes; and that my name appears above, or on an attachment with all other like empowered. SIGNATURE: Electronic Signature of Signing Authorized Person(s) Detail Date FILED Apr 03, 2020 Secretary of State 7012611201CC JAMES R SCHIER MGR 04/03/2020 2020 FLORIDA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ANNUAL REPORT No Title VPT Name SCHIER, JAMES R Address 5800 LAKEWOOD RANCH BLVD. City-State-Zip: SARASOTA FL 34240 Title S Name HEIM, PRISCILLA G Address 5800 LAKEWOOD RANCH BLVD. City-State-Zip: SARASOTA FL 34240 Title VP Name OAK, TIM Address 5800 LAKEWOOD RANCH BLVD. City-State-Zip: SARASOTA FL 34240 Title P Name STOREY, MICHAEL Address 5800 LAKEWOOD RANCH BLVD. City-State-Zip: SARASOTA FL 34240 Title MGR Name NCDG MANAGEMENT, LLC Address 5800 LAKEWOOD RANCH BLVD. City-State-Zip: SARASOTA FL 34240 3.C.d Packet Pg. 754 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) Falling Waters BLVD Seychelles DRFiranoDRCascades DR WildwoodLakesBLVDSunset BLVDSanta Barbara BLVDDavis BLVD PiemonteWAYCope LN Ca mpa nia WAY Sandy LNHiddenLake DRMar tino CIR Seychelles CIR Russell Square RPUD Location Map SUBJECT PROPERTY . 575 0 575287.5 Feet 3.C.d Packet Pg. 755 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) Russell Square RPUD (PL20200001210) Deviation Justification September 29, 2020 Page 1 of 1 NCRSPDI-20 Deviation Justification-r2.docx Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134  239-947-1144  engineering@gradyminor.com  www.gradyminor.com 1. Deviation 1 through 9 were previously approved by Ordinance 2018-51. No changes are being requested to those deviations. 2. Deviation 10 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.1.a and 5.06.02.B.6, “Development Standards for Signs within Residential Districts” which requires residential entrance signs shall meet the following standards: a. Maximum allowable height. All signs within residential zoning districts, and as applicable to designated residential portions of PUD zoned properties, are limited to a maximum height of 8 feet, or as otherwise provided within the LDC. Height shall be measured from the lowest centerline grade of the nearest public or private right-of-way or easement to the uppermost portion of the sign structure. b. On-premises signs within residential districts. Two ground signs with a maximum height of 8 feet or wall, residential entrance or gate signs with a maximum height of 8 feet may be located at each entrance to a multi-family or single-family development. This deviation will instead allow the wall height for the residential signs located on Seychelles Avenue at the project entrance to be a maximum height of 11.6 feet, as measured from the lowest centerline grade of the nearest public or private right-of-way or easement to the uppermost portion of the sign structure. Justification: The SFWMD permit for the overall project required a perimeter berm. Collier County previously approved Deviation #3, which authorized construction of an 8-foot-tall wall to be constructed on top of the undulating berm. The sign which consists of letters protruding from the wall making this a wall sign. The LDC measures a residential entrance sign to the highest point of a wall from the nearest centerline road elevation. The road elevation in the vicinity of the wall is 9.12 feet NAVD. The top of the wall is 20.76 feet NAVD, making the height of the wall/sign 11.6 feet and exceeding the maximum overall sign height of 8 feet. The approval of the deviation will permit the sign to remain as constructed on the wall/berm as anticipated in conjunction with Deviation #3. 3.C.d Packet Pg. 756 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.d Packet Pg. 757 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. Ph. 239-947-1144 Fax. 239-947-0375 3800 Via Del Rey EB 0005151 LB 0005151 LC 26000266 Bonita Springs, FL 34134 www.gradyminor.com Project Location Map NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING Petition PL20200001210, Russell Square Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Insubstantial Change (PDI) A Neighborhood Information Meeting hosted by D. Wayne Arnold, AICP, of Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A., representing Neal Communities on the Braden River, LLC (Applicant) will be held on Monday, October 5, 2020, 5:30 pm at Shepherd of the Glades Lutheran Church, Fellowship Hall, 6020 Rattlesnake Hammock Rd, Naples, FL 34112 (attendees are required to wear masks). Individuals who would like to participate remotely, should contact Sharon Umpenhour by 5:00 pm, October 4, 2020 at 239-947-1144 or sumpenhour@gradyminor.com. Project information is posted online at www.gradyminor.com/planning. Neal Communities on the Braden River LLC submitted a formal application to Collier County, seeking approval of an Insubstantial Change to a Planned Unit Development. The PDI proposes a deviation from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.1.a and 5.06.02.B.6., “Development Standards for Signs within Residential Districts”. The deviation will allow the project entry wall sign on Seychelles Avenue to be located on a wall that is on top of the project perimeter berm. Exhibit E, List of Deviations, has been revised to include the proposed deviation and Exhibit C, Master Plan, has been revised to note the deviation location on the Master Plan. The subject property (Russell Square RPUD) is comprised of 32.9+/- acres, located on the east side of Santa Barbara Boulevard at the intersection of Seychelles Avenue in Section 9, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. If you are unable to attend the meeting or have questions or comments, please contact Sharon Umpenhour at Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A., 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, Florida 34134, sumpenhour@gradyminor.com, phone 239-947-1144, fax 239-947-0375. Project information is posted online at www.gradyminor.com/planning. The Neighborhood Information Meeting is for informational purposes only, it is not a public hearing. 3.C.d Packet Pg. 758 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 1NAME1 NAME2NAME3NAME4NAME5NAME6ADDRESSTYPE7401 ALABAMA LLC 1120 INTAGLIATA DRIVEARNOLD, MO 63010 UABRAHAM, JEFFERY J KELLY L ABRAHAM 2375 HIDDEN LAKE DR #4NAPLES, FL 34112 UADAMS, ROBERT E & S NANCY 308 KATTELVILLE RDBINGHAMTON, NY 13901-5605 UALBANESE, NANCY A 210 E BROADWAY APT 6LLONG BEACH, NY 11561 UALBERTSSON, SUSANNE K C 1994 E CROWN POINTE BLVDNAPLES, FL 34112 UALFONSI, SAMUEL P & DELIA P 104 E MEMPHIS AVEWILDWOOD CREST, NJ 08260 UALLBERRY, A JOAN 22185 HERON CVELKHART, IN 46516-6517 UANDERSON, JAMES J DORREEN JACQUES 1324 DONNY MARTEL WAYTEWKSBURY, MA 01876 UASCHE TR, CLARENCE W CONSTANCE S ASCHE TR 1900 RUSH LAKE TRL #124NEW BRIGHTON, MN 55112-1518 UAVRIGIAN, MASON CYNTHIA D DOYLE-AVRIGIAN 1165 PINETOWN RDFORT WASHINGTON, PA 19034-1701 UBACHUSZ, ROBERT S & CAROLYN K 8677 KNOX RDCLARKSTON, MI 48348-1725 UBALIO TR, ANNE JOHN P BALIO TR EST 2415 HIDDEN LAKE DR APT 9NAPLES, FL 34112-2777 UBARATTA, ROSE & EDMOND PO BOX 8745NAPLES, FL 34101 UBARRANCO, DENISE 2355 HIDDEN LAKE DR #5NAPLES, FL 34112-7590 UBASS MIYARA FLORIDA TRUST 2415 HIDDEN LAKE DR #1NAPLES, FL 34112-2777 UBATES, THOMAS A & LESLIE A 143 SOOY PLACE ROADTABERNACLE, NJ 08088 UBECCACCIO, DANIEL M DEBORAH J BECCACCIO 6903 MARY JOY CTCLEVES, OH 45002 UBECKER, HOWARD & CAROL 2335 HIDDEN LAKE DR #1NAPLES, FL 34112 UBELL REV Q/S TRUST 1542 E GREENBRIDGE RDOZARK, MO 65721-7668 UBENCIN, EDWARD S & KAREN A 463 DUNBAR LNHIGHLAND HEIGHTS, OH 44143 UBERLINGHIERI FLORIDA INVSTMNT PROPERTIES LLC 5937 ASHFORD LNNAPLES, FL 34110 UBIANCO, JOHN J & ANTOINETTE 5 TINA LNMOUNT SINAI, NY 11766-3015 UBLUM, JOHN & BARBARA 8622 ERICE CTNAPLES, FL 34114 UBOSAK, ROBERT B & SUSAN M 2335 HIDDEN LAKE DR APT 6NAPLES, FL 34112-8741 UBOYLE, TIMOTHY & JEAN DENISE 2274 HIDDEN LAKE DR APT 9NAPLES, FL 34112-2757 UBRADSHAW, ANNE 2335 HIDDEN LAKE DR APT 8NAPLES, FL 34112-8745 UBRODEUR, VINCENT R & IRENE J 17 GILBERT STWARWICK, RI 02886-4403 UBUHL FAMILY TRUST 56 ENDICOTT STREETEAST WEYMOUTH, MA 02189 UBURNS, VICTOR E & MARY D 2355 HIDDEN LAKE DRIVE #4204NAPLES, FL 34112 UCAFARELL, FRANCES E 26 WHITE OAK LNFAIRPORT, NY 14450-2828 UCALVERT, ROSELLA M 2396 HIDDEN LAKE DR #5NAPLES, FL 34112 UCARLIN ET AL, CLAUDETTE 2396 HIDDEN LAKE DR # 910NAPLES, FL 34112-2765 UCARTER, DANIEL M & CONSTANCE P 2846 FIELDBROOK AVEWAUCONDA, IL 60084 UCASASSA, CHARLES M & NOREEN O 16 TINKERS LEDGE RDDUXBURY, MA 02332-4302 UCHASSE, RICHARD N & LINNEA C 2497 SANDY LNNAPLES, FL 34112-2721 UCHETKOWSKI, JANE DOROTHY KATHLEEN FRANCES ASLIN 2375 HIDDEN LAKE DR APT 3NAPLES, FL 34112-7740 UCHILMERAN, ALLEN H 1813 PRELUDE DRIVEVIENNA, VA 22182 UCLAUPEIN, GEORGE J & MARJORIE 2329 HIDDEN LAKE DR APT 10NAPLES, FL 34112-8714 UCOLLIER CNTY C/O REAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 3335 TAMIAMI TR E, STE 101NAPLES, FL 34112 UCOMPORT, RICHARD B & MARY P 124 BROADSTONE DRMARS, PA 16046-5202 UCONTI, MICHAEL & LOIS M 44 PARK LANE #422PARK RIDGE, IL 60068 UCORBY, MICHAEL JOSEPH 65 FAIRVIEW DRIVELEICESTER, MA 01524 UCOX, CLYDE T & MARY B TIMOTHY M=& CAROL C EISENHUT 8231 POTOMAC LNNAPLES, FL 34104-6547 UCRISPELL TR, NILES & JUDITH A JUDITH A CRISPELL TRUST 2348 HIDDEN LAKE DR #2NAPLES, FL 34112-2763 UCUNNINGHAM, HARRY V PO BOX 1062NAGS HEAD, NC 27959 UDELVECCHIO, EMILIO & ROSE 306 PROCTOR AVENUEREVERE, MA 02151-4925 UDEMOTS, SCOTT & JODI 8111 W CHESTNUT STWAUWATOSA, WI 53213 UDENOTO, THOMAS A & MARTI A 248 RHINECLIFF DRIVEROCHESTER, NY 14618 UDEPAOLIS II, RENATO A CELIA M DEPAOLIS 3503 MARION WAYANACORTES, WA 98221 UDERBY, WILLIAM E & NANNE M 2329 HIDDEN LAKE DR APT 2NAPLES, FL 34112-8713 UDIELENHEIN JR, JULIUS F GERALDINE ANN DIELENHEIN 2375 HIDDEN LAKE DR #1NAPLES, FL 34112-7740 UDIMAGGIO, MAXINE L 1916 MATTIS STHELLERTOWN, PA 18055-2813 UDUDEK, SUSAN T 5800 NASH DRIVEPIPERSVILLE, PA 18947 UDURGIN, CARL CLYDE DOROTHEA MIRA DURGIN 17 CANDLEWOOD DRIVEDANBURY, CT 06811 UDWYER, VERONICA K 2375 HIDDEN LAKE DR #7NAPLES, FL 34112 UDYKSTRA LIVING TRUST 2329 HIDDEN LAKE DRIVE #3901NAPLES, FL 34112 UEDWARD D SCHMIDT JR & KATHLEEN H SCHMIDT JOINT REV LIV TRUST 41526 CLAIRPOINTE STHARRISON TWP, MI 48045 UEDWARD R CHEVALIER TRUST 2375 HIDDEN LAKE DR #10NAPLES, FL 34112-7742 UERICA M YOUNG DEC TRUST 2396 HIDDEN LAKE DR #904NAPLES, FL 34112 UMailing List PL20200001210.xlsx3.C.dPacket Pg. 759Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 2ESPOSITO, RICHARD & ROSEANN 333 COLERIDGE STREETLEVITTOWN, NY 11708 UEVANCHO, BRUCE R & LYNN H 445 CHAMBERS LANEWEST CHESTER, PA 19382 UFABIANOVA, LUDMILA 102 WINDING RIDGE RDWHITE PLAINS, NY 10603-2852 UFALLING WATERS MASTER ASSOC INC CAMBRIDGE PROPERTY MGMT 9001 HIGHLAND WOODS BLVD, SUITE 7 BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34135 UFARGANO, JOSEPH V 90 ROLLING MEADOW DRHOLLISTON, MA 01746-2630 UFARRELL, MICHAEL LORI COFFEY 2395 HIDDEN LAKE DR #1NAPLES, FL 34112-2700 UFASOLO, PIETRINA P 2372 HIDDEN LAKE DR APT 9NAPLES, FL 34112-2762 UFENIELLO, MARK A SHARON A FENIELLO 86 APPLEBY AVESOUTH RIVER, NJ 08882 UFIELDS, DONALD E & JEANNE 540 OAKHURST AVEHAZARD, KY 41701-1764 UFIRMIN, MARY A ROBERT W FIRMIN JR PO BOX 152EAST LYME, CT 06333 UFOLGER, MARIA & THOMAS 4 PIGALLE STREETTOMS RIVER, NJ 08757 UFORD, JOHN 3 MATTHEW DRFRANKLIN, MA 02038-1281 UFRANCO, THOMAS C 127 DRUM HILL RDWILTON, CT 06897 UGAUTHIER, CHARLES S & JERI D 2329 HIDDEN LAKE DRNAPLES, FL 34112 UGEORGOPULOS, PETER & REBECCA 1027 MADISON STREETLOCKPORT, IL 60441 UGIERSCH, DIANE 2345 HIDDEN LAKE DR #4102NAPLES, FL 34112 UGILLES, WOLFGANG %GERMAN SERVICES 3960 RADIO RD #208NAPLES, FL 34104 UGIRARD STRAUS REVOCABLE TRUST 438 CANAL WAY WBETHANY BEACH, DE 19930-9008 UGLUSZEWSKI, JOYCE MICHAEL MERTZ 2372 HIDDEN LAKE DR #4NAPLES, FL 34112 UGODERT, BRENDA L & JACK M 13113 TREVETT ROADSPRINGVILLE, FL 14141 UGROSSO, LUCILLE 2300 HIDDEN LAKE DR #1NAPLES, FL 34112 UHAGENMILLER, EDWARD MARY ELLEN HAGENMILLER 240 CLEVELAND DRIVECENTERPORT, NY 11721 UHANCOCK, JOHN & ANTANINA C 14738 E WAGNER RDBUCHANAN, MI 49107-9303 UHANNIGAN, LILLIAN LILLIAN A HANNIGAN TR UST 2250 HIDDEN LAKE DR APT 1NAPLES, FL 34112-2759 UHAPPY SIX LLC, THE 3370 OBCO CTDAYTON, OH 45414 UHARPER, CARL E & NANCY 52 OVERHILL RDWARREN, RI 02885-2904 UHARRIS, BETTY MIKALSEN 954 CIDER HILL RDWARREN, VT 05673 UHEIER, THOMAS & BETTINA WERNER & ANDREA KERL 2420 HIDDEN LAKE DR APT 3NAPLES, FL 34112-2758 UHEINLE, ROBERT G 2329 HIDDEN LAKE DR #7NAPLES, FL 34112 UHICKEY, ALICE M PO BOX 118 1 KINGS ROW DRIVEEAST DENNIS, MA 02641 UHIGHLAND PROP OF LEE & COLLIER 6980 SANDALWOOD LNNAPLES, FL 34109-514 UHOLLEIN, DAVID A & MARIE N 101 OLD DUNDEE RDBARRINGTON, IL 60010-5117 UJACKSON, MARK C 149 NORTH ELDORADO DRIVEKANKAKEE, IL 60901 UJAMES, JEAN 2348 HIDDEN LAKE DR APT 3NAPLES, FL 34112-2763 UJASPER, VICTORIA M & THOMAS W 1949 DEERFIELD DRSAUKVILLE, WI 53080-1207 UJAWORSKY, WALTER & GAIL M 2405 HIDDEN LAKE DR #1NAPLES, FL 34112-2704 UJUNE M POPKE TRUST 2396 HIDDEN LAKE DR #1NAPLES, FL 34112 UJUST DUCKY REV LIV TRUST 2775 SUNSET BLVDNAPLES, FL 34112-2713 UKAIMALA LAND TRUST 2375 HIDDEN LAKE DR #5NAPLES, FL 34112 UKASANIC, DONALD G KIMBERLY ANN KASANIC 22045 RIVER RIDGE TRAILFARMINGTON, MI 48335 UKELSON, ETHEL T 2396 HIDDEN LAKE DR #7NAPLES, FL 34112 UKENDRICK, DANIEL A 2385 HIDDEN LAKE DRIVE #6NAPLES, FL 34112 UKERN, ROSEMARY D 540 GRANDERVIEW DRIVE #7MILFORD, MI 48381 UKLUESNER, CHARLES P & MARY M 85 AFTON LNLONDON, KY 40741 UKUEHNE, DAVID M & MELISSA A PO BOX 3744EDGARTOWN, MA 02539 ULAWRENCE A JACHEC LIV TRUST JACHEC LIVING TRUST MARY BETH JACHEC JAMES A JACHEC 30 SUMAC LANE SCHAUMBURG, IL 60193-1662 ULEAVITT, CHARLOTTE G 2415 HIDDEN LAKE DR # 4807NAPLES, FL 34112-2777 ULEMOS, JEAN 176 BIMINI CAY CIRVERO BEACH, FL 32966-7110 ULENNON, THOMAS D & SANDRA 2329 HIDDEN LAKE DRNAPLES, FL 34112-8712 ULIOTTA, GRACE 2345 HIDDEN LAKE DR APT 8NAPLES, FL 34112-7594 ULJUNGLOEF, RICKARD H E THERESE MARIE LJUNGLOEF C/O ANNEMARIE GIANNINI 1994 E CROWN POINTE BLVD NAPLES, FL 34112 ULOBOSCO, ROBERT A EVELYN LOBOSCO 1770 OLD WILMOT ROADSCARSDALE, NY 10583-6162 ULOMBARD FAMILY TRUST 60 MERRIMAC ST UNIT 903AMESBURY, MA 01913-4024 ULUCAS TR, RONALD & PATRICIA A R A & P A LUCAS REV TRUST 2019 BROUGHAM LNMOUNT PLEASANT, WI 53406-2389 ULYMAN, JOHN E JOHN J MURPHY JR 40 CLARENDON AVE UNIT 1CAMBRIDGE, MA 02140-1116 UM J & B E JUNTUNEN LIV TRUST 2329 HIDDEN LAKE DR #5NAPLES, FL 34112-8713 UMACGREGOR JOINT LIVING TRUST 6271 EDGEBROOK LANE EASTINDIAN HEAD PARK, IL 60525-6993 UMANGINO, ROBERT & HEIDI 1055 TRAILMORE DRROSWELL, GA 30076 UMANNING, JAMES W 2448 HIDDEN LAKE DRIVE #1108NAPLES, FL 34112 UMANOS, JAMES & MARGUERITE 2365 HIDDEN LAKE DR #4308NAPLES, FL 34112 UMailing List PL20200001210.xlsx3.C.dPacket Pg. 760Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3MARCIANO, NICHOLAS J DARLENE MAMOLA 1859 IVORY CANE PTNAPLES, FL 34119-3384 UMBELL PROPERTIES LLC 1542 EAST GREENBRIDGEOZARK, MO 65721 UMCGRATH, PAUL M & KAREN M 30 COVE ROADFORESTDALE, MA 02644 UMCGUINN, JOHN M & CAROL 15 STONEGATE RDLA GRANGE PK, IL 60526-1044 UMCNARY, VICTOR A & JUDITH A 110 SHERWOOD DRIVEMETHUEN, MA 01844 UMENDELSOHN, RALPH J & SUSAN E 302 SIERRA COURTGLEN CARBON, IL 62034 UMESKELL FAMILY TRUST 92 BEACAN ST #41BOSTON, MA 02108 UMOSCHELLA, ANTHONY 57 MARGARET DRBRAINTREE, MA 02184-6603 UNEAL COMMUNITIES ON THE BRADEN RIVER LLC 5800 LAKEWOOD RANCH BLVD NSARASOTA, FL 34240 UNICHOLAS R VIVIANI REV TRUST 705 BIRSTALL DRIVECARY, NC 27519 UO'BRIEN, MARK D & MARY LOUISE 2250 HIDDEN LAKE DR APT 3NAPLES, FL 34112-2759 UONANIAN, SCOTT & KELLY PO BOX 1034ONSET, MA 02558 UOTT, PETER 2420 HIDDEN LAKE DR #5NAPLES, FL 34112-2758 UOZIPKO, RITA K 33 TOLEWOOD DRIVEPENFIELD, NY 14526 UPALAMIDIS, COSMOS C CATHERINE A PALAMIDIS 2355 HIDDEN LAKE DR #1NAPLES, FL 34112 UPARKER, MARVIN T & MICHELLE D 3850 SCENIC RIDGE #337TRAVERSE CITY, MI 49684-9777 UPAWLOWSKI, KENNETH MARGUERITE PAWLOWSKI 16 FORESTER STLONG BEACH, NY 11561-2415 UPAWLOWSKI, MARK KENNETH PAWLOWSKI 120 REGENT DRLIDO BEACH, NY 11561 UPAYNE, BLAIR M & DENISE M 2395 HIDDEN LAKE DRIVE UNIT 4NAPLES, FL 34112 UPETRUS, RICHARD A 4173 REGENTS PARKHAMBURG, NY 14075-1361 UPEYTON, MARY CATHERINE HARKINS 2329 HIDDEN LAKE DR #3NAPLES, FL 34112 UPONTBRIAND, RAYMOND P & JANICE 2355 HIDDEN LAKE DR APT 3NAPLES, FL 34112-7589 UPOZO, LEOCADIO 2773 SANDY LNNAPLES, FL 34112-2719 UPROVENCE, DANIEL J & LOUISE 160 MOHAWK DRCRANFORD, NJ 07016 UPULIAFICO, JAMES D & ARMIDA J 2395 HIDDEN LAKE DR #4608NAPLES, FL 34112 URANDALL J BALLOU TRUST 2501 SANDY LNNAPLES, FL 34112-2721 URICHARD J FORMANI & CLAUDIA A FORMANI REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 4111 ERHART ROADMEDINA, OH 44256-8975 URICHARDSON, BARBARA L 2274 HIDDEN LAKES DRIVE #5NAPLES, FL 34102 URICHTER, J HANS PO BOX 159EAST PETERSBURG, PA 17520-159 URIFFLE, DARROL R & MARTHA A 5950 COPE LNNAPLES, FL 34112-2730 URILEY, SHIRLEY M 5966 COPE LNNAPLES, FL 34112-2730 UROBERT HILL 2014 IRREV TRUST SHIRLEY HILL 2014 IRREV TRUST PO BOX 1227JAMESPORT, NY 11947 UROTH, MICHAEL S & KAREN M 2345 HIDDEN LAKE DR #4110NAPLES, FL 34112 URUNNION, WILLIAM R & CAROL A 2335 HIDDEN LAKE DR APT 7NAPLES, FL 34112-8745 URYKIEL, BONNIE PAUL G NOVAK 26 LAKE METONGA TRLGRANT PARK, IL 60940 USAUNDERS, CONNIE 2274 HIDDEN LAKE DR APT 6NAPLES, FL 34112-2757 USCALA, SABATINO & NANCY 8 BROOKVALE LNLAKE GROVE, NY 11755-2709 USCHIENKE, JANICE 2415 HIDDEN LAKE DR #5NAPLES, FL 34112 USCHULTZ, RONALD DENNIS SCHULTZ DEBBIE COX 5471 HILLTOP AVE LAKE ELMO, MN 55042 USCHWAMMLE, KURT 2250 HIDDEN LAKE DR #2NAPLES, FL 34112 USEARFOSS, KENNETH R & JOICE 356 SYCAMORE LNPERRYSBURG, OH 43551-1638 USEARS JR, HUBERT I 204 CROFT SQUAREPURCELLVILLE, VA 20132 USHEA, PHILIP J & KAREN R 14 ENDICOTT STREETSPRINGFIELD, MA 01118 USHEPPARD, WAYNE J & HAZEL A 2329 HIDDEN LAKE DRIVE #3904NAPLES, FL 34112 USHETLAR, DAVID J & R RENEE NORANN R KLIEWE 2396 HIDDEN LAKE DR #906NAPLES, FL 34112 USHIRLEY J NEYLON REV LIV TRUST 20480 DORSET LNBROOKFIELD, WI 53045-1735 USHURTLEFF, RAY & MAUREEN A PO BOX 921SOUTH WELLFLEET, MA 02663-921 USIMONE, DON D & MARGARET F 10 PACIO COURTROSELAND, NJ 07068 USKOMAL, PAUL THAO LUC 1304 HARBOR ROADANNAPOLIS, MD 21403 UST DENIS, DIANA & THOMAS F II 2335 HIDDEN LAKE DR #4003NAPLES, FL 34112 USTANLEY, CARL ROGER & DEBRA L 14915 N 8TH AVEEFFINGHAM, IL 62401-6219 USTEVENS, LINDA M 1301 BASSWOOD CIRCLENORTH ANDOVER, MA 01845 USYD LAND TRUST 6609 WILLOW PARK DR 2ND FLOORNAPLES, FL 34109 UTHEIN, MADONNA R 27457 HIDDEN COVE RDCOLD SPRING, MN 56320-1070 UTHOMPSON, MICHAEL & MARIE PO BOX 185GOODLAND, FL 34140-185 UTOMLIN, BRIAN A 2750 SUNSET BLVDNAPLES, FL 34112 UTREMONTE, ROBERT & JILL 6 LLOYD RDNORWALK, CT 06850-1908 UURBE CAPTA PROPERTIES LLC 260 MADISON AVE, 15TH FLRNEW YORK, NY 10016 UVALE, THOMAS H 3601 STATE ROUTE 159FREEBURG, IL 62243-2005 UVAN SOEST, MARCO JILL MITROSKY VAN SOEST 2329 HIDDEN LAKE DR #6NAPLES, FL 34112 UMailing List PL20200001210.xlsx3.C.dPacket Pg. 761Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 4VANCINI FAMILY TRUST 25 ELMWOOD STREETSOMERVILLE, MA 02144 UWADE, ROBERT J & MARY ELLEN 278 PALMER STQUINCY, MA 02169-3906 UWILLIAM C MCCARTHY IRREV TRUST 5291 CHESTNUT RIDGE RD APT AORCHARD PARK, NY 14127-3259 UWILLISTON SHAWMUT TRUST 16 TINKERS LEDGE ROADDUXBURY, MA 02332 UWINEBRENNER, DARIN R & LISA G 425 SOUTH HUBBARDS LANE APT 25LOUISVILLE, KY 40207 UZALECKI, ROSE M 2324 HIDDEN LAKE DR APT 7NAPLES, FL 34112-2766 UZSOFKA TR, LAJOS JANET ZSOFKA TR PETER & JOSEPH ZSOFKA TRUST JANET ZSOFKA REVOCABLE TRUST 31 PROFILE DR MERRIMACK, NH 03054-3042 UBYRNE, MICHAEL N SYLVIE LATULIPPE 2016 CHERINGTON CRESCENTOTTAWA K4A 4Z8 CANADA FCHOW, SUSAN STEFANO SCOPACASA 18 BLUE HERON DRORANGEVILLE L9W 5K5 CANADA FCOLLARD, VALERIE & GILLES 174 RUE DEBUSSYSIX FOURS LES PLAGES 83140 FRANCE FEVES, CYNTHIA M & RICHARD VICTORIA EVES 31 LAKESHORE RDBEACONSFIELD H9W 4H5 CANADA FHAINES, COLETTA HILKA KEITH IAN HAINES 83 MILL STREETAJAX L1S 6K3 CANADA FHIDDEN LAKE TRUST 358 LITTLE AVE #10BARRIE L4N 2Z6 CANADA FHOGAN, NEIL DEBORAH KEZBER 223 LOXLEY AVEBEACONSFIELD H9W 1K9 CANADA FHORAK, CHRISTINA 54 JOHNSON STTHORNHILL L3T 2N CANADA FKUPHAL, MICHAEL PETER JUERGEN LINDENSTEIG 9SCHILDOW 16552 GERMANY FMCLAUGHLIN, KATRINA 30 DALHOUSIE AVEST CATHARINES L2N 4W4 CANADA FMCWILLIAM, JAMES KATHRYN RYAN MCWILLIAM 27 BAYVIEW DRIVEST CATHERINES L2N 4Y3 CANADA FMORGAN, WAYNE M & ELIZABETH L 2646 BAY ROADL'ORGINAL KOB 1KO CANADA FMORRIS, GAYNOR H MAXINE A MACGUIRE 572 CATTAIL COURTPICKERING L1V 6A3 CANADA FRUNSTEDLER, ROBIN P & CAROL A MARK P RUNSTEDLER 22 PLAYER PLSTOUFFVILLE L4A 1M1 CANADA FSCHEEL, FRANKO ROGER & DORIS MEISSNER STR 13FALKENSEE D-14612 GERMANY FMailing List PL20200001210.xlsx3.C.dPacket Pg. 762Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) ND-GCI0493044-01 NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING Petition PL20200001210,Russell Square Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD)Insubstantial Change (PDI) A Neighborhood Information Meeting hosted by D.Wa yne Arnold,AICP,of Q.Grady Minor and Associates,P.A.,representing Neal Communities on the Braden River,LLC (Applicant)will be held on Monday,October 5,2020,5:30 pm at Shepherd of the Glades Lutheran Church,Fellowship Hall,6020 Rattlesnake Hammock Rd,Naples,FL 34113 (attendees are required to wear masks).Individuals who would like to participate remotely,should contact Sharon Umpenhour by 5:00 pm,October 4,2020 at 239-947-1144 or sumpenhour@gradyminor.com.Project information is posted online at www. gradyminor.com/planning. Neal Communities on the Braden River LLC submitted a formal application to Collier County,seeking approval of an Insubstantial Change to a Planned Unit Development.The PDI proposes a deviation from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.1.a and 5.06.02.B.6.,“Development Standards for Signs within Residential Districts”.The deviation will allow the project entry wall sign on Seychelles Avenue to be located on a wall that is on top of the project perimeter berm. Exhibit E,List of Deviations,has been revised to include the proposed deviation and Exhibit C,Master Plan,has been revised to note the deviation location on the Master Plan. The subject property (Russell Square RPUD)is comprised of 32.9+/-acres, located on the east side of Santa Barbara Boulevard at the intersection of Seychelles Avenue in Section 9,To wnship 50 South,Range 26 East,Collier County,Florida. If you are unable to attend the meeting or have questions or comments, please contact Sharon Umpenhour at Q.Grady Minor and Associates, P.A.,3800 Via Del Rey,Bonita Springs,Florida 34134,sumpenhour@ gradyminor.com,phone 239-947-1144,fax 239-947-0375.Project information is posted online at www.gradyminor.com/planning.The Neighborhood Information Meeting is for informational purposes only,it is not a public hearing. 3.C.d Packet Pg. 763 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square 3.C.d Packet Pg. 764 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) Russell Square RPUD PDI, PL20200001210 October 5, 2020 Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) 3.C.d Packet Pg. 765 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : •Neal Communities on the Braden River LLC –Applicant •Dan Ciesielski, Land Development Manager, South Region –Neal Communities •D. Wayne Arnold, AICP, Professional Planner –Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 2 Project Team 3.C.d Packet Pg. 766 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : Folio Number:73270001507 Address:2690 Seychelles Avenue Zoning:Russell Square RPUD Project Acreage:32.9+/-acres Ordinance Number:2015-51 Proposed Request: The applicant is requesting a a deviation from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.1.a and 5.06.02.B.6.,“Development Standards for Signs within Residential Districts”.The deviation will allow the project entry wall sign on Seychelles Avenue to be located on a wall that is on top of the project perimeter berm.Exhibit E,List of Deviations,has been revised to include the proposed deviation and Exhibit C,Master Plan,has been revised to note the deviation location on the Master Plan. 3 Project Information 3.C.d Packet Pg. 767 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : 4 Location Map 3.C.d Packet Pg. 768 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : 5 Proposed Sign Deviation 3.C.d Packet Pg. 769 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : 6 Revised Exhibit C, Master Plan Location of proposed sign deviation 3.C.d Packet Pg. 770 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : 7 Conceptual Sign Exhibit 3.C.d Packet Pg. 771 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : 8 Conclusion Documents and information can be found online: •Gradyminor.com/Planning •Collier County GMD Public Portal: cvportal.colliergov.net/cityviewweb Next Steps •Hearing sign(s) posted on property advertising Hearing Examiner (HEX) date. Contact: •Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A.:Sharon Umpenhour sumpenhour@gradyminor.com or 239.947.1144 extension 1249 •Collier County:John Kelly, Principal Planner John.Kelly@colliercountyfl.gov or 239.252.5719 3.C.d Packet Pg. 772 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : Russell Square RPUD (PL20200001210) 10-05-2020 NIM Page 1 of 4 Wayne: Okay. Well, good evening. It’s about 5:40 and we’re gonna start on our – Shirley: What’s your name? Wayne: – neighborhood information meeting. I’m Wayne Arnold with Grady Minor. And recording the meeting is Sharon Umpenhour. And Dan Ciesielski with Neal Communities is here in the audience, as well as Ray Bellows from Collier County. Wayne: And John Kelly from Collier County. Wayne: So – Wayne: – the Russell Square project, it’s now known as Seychelles. Uh, the signage is out there that Neal Communities is under construction. And here’s an aerial photograph showing you the site under construction. And we’re here for a fairly simple change for the entrance sign that’s on Seychelles and it’s going to allow them to have the word Seychelles. Shirley: Seychelles? Wayne: Seychelles. Yeah. Shirley: It’s spelled wrong. Wayne: That’s how it’s spelled. Dan: It is. Shirley: S-A-Y, isn’t it? Wayne: No. It’s S-E-Y. But this is a conceptual sign exhibit. And it’s a technicality to code. We asked for a deviation to have a taller wall on top of a berm, but because they want to attach their sign on the wall, the sign technically needs a deviation so it can be as tall as the wall. So, we had asked for that. It’s going to allow – whoops. Excuse me. I have the other exhibit. Is it somewhere in there? Sharon: It’s on the... Wayne: We have a prettier picture than that. That’s... Shirley: You have it where you wanna put it? 3.C.d Packet Pg. 773 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) Russell Square RPUD (PL20200001210) 10-05-2020 NIM Page 2 of 4 Wayne: Yes. Shirley: Okay. Dan: Uh, no, it’s already in. Wayne: Yeah. It’s in. And the county approved the plans for it. And then they realized that there’s a technicality in the code because it’s attached to the wall. It was too tall. The sign height was limited to what? Like eight feet or something. And now because it’s on the wall it’s taller. We asked for the deviation. And the process to do it is through the unsubstantial change process to plan and development. So, that’s a photograph that Dan or somebody is in his office – Dan: I took it. Wayne: – took of the sign. Wayne: So, you can see it’s a nice-looking sign. But because it’s on top of the little berm that they built, uh, we’re technically asking for this slight deviation. So, that’s... Ray: So, the sign... Wayne: What’s that, Ray? Ray: The sign from that position was constructed – Ray: – but then when they inspect – well, inspected it, suddenly they said, “Oh, you’re on a berm?” Wayne: Right. Ray: Okay. Wayne: That’s about how it happened. Yes. Dan: And, uh, the wall is an eight-foot wall on top of a berm. Ray: Right. Dan: The sign is allowed to be eight-foot tall measured from the road. Wayne: Right. 3.C.d Packet Pg. 774 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) Russell Square RPUD (PL20200001210) 10-05-2020 NIM Page 3 of 4 Dan: And that’s where it got caught? Wayne: Right. Dan: But, uh – but nothing is bigger than it needs to be, it’s just where you measure it from? Wayne: Yeah. It’s just the point of measurement – Dan: Okay. Wayne: – that was an issue. So, anyways that’s – Dan: It looks nice though. Wayne: – that’s why you’re here. It looks nice. It’s attractive. And so – Wayne: – I don’t know if you have any questions about it, but that’s the only modification we’re making to the PD. You’ve seen it under construction and... Shirley: Is – that’s what’s there now? Wayne: Right. Shirley: What’s going to be there now? Wayne: That is going to be there. Dan: Nothing. Nothing more. Wayne: That’s the sign at the entrance on Seychelles. Dan: We can’t get [inaudible – crosstalk] [00:02:48] finalized, the final inspection. Wayne: Yeah. Shirley: Well, if that is there now – Wayne: Yes. Shirley: – you’ve already raised it? Dan: Yeah. It’s already in and done. 3.C.d Packet Pg. 775 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) Russell Square RPUD (PL20200001210) 10-05-2020 NIM Page 4 of 4 Wayne: Yes. Dan: But we can’t get a final inspection – Dan: – because the county – Dan: – said, “Hey, your letters – or the sign is too high.” And so, the only way to get our final inspection was to get a zoning amendment to allow the letters to stay. Then we would finalize this. Wayne: It’s – it’s a... Dan: Yeah. We’re not changing anything that’s already there. Wayne: Yeah. Nothing else related to the construction the project is changing. Dan: Nothing else done. Yeah. It really is a formality – technicality, but it has to be done that way. Wayne: Any other questions? Shirley: No. Dan: It is spelled correctly. Wayne: Going once. Twice. Wayne: Are we done? We’re adjourned? Shirley: I’m done. Wayne: Thank you. [End of Audio] Duration: 4 minutes 3.C.d Packet Pg. 776 Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.dPacket Pg. 777Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.dPacket Pg. 778Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 3.C.dPacket Pg. 779Attachment: Attachment C - PL20200001210 Dec 10 2020 HEX Backup Rev1 (14292 : PL20200001210 3.C.ePacket Pg. 780Attachment: 16 HEX Hybrid Meeting Waiver Executed (14292 : PL20200001210 Russell Square RPUD PDI) 12/10/2020 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Hearing Examiner Item Number: 3.D Item Summary: PETITION NO. PDI-PL20200000869 -- Request for an insubstantial change to Ordinance No. 01-07, the Ragge PUD, a Planned Unit Development (PUD), by adding Section V to provide for a list of Deviations from the Land Development Code, by adding Section 5.1.A to allow for a deviation from LDC Section 5.06.04.G.2.a which limits specified off-premise directional signs to 12 square feet in area to instead allow an off-premise sign for Lot 2 to be placed on the existing ground sign for Lot 1 for which the off-premise portion of the existing sign shall be no more than 27 square feet in total area and by adding Exhibit “D” Sign Location depicting the Section 5.1.A deviation. The subject PUD consists of 4.50± acres located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Pine Ridge Road and Kramer Drive/Whippoorwill Lane, approximately ½ mile west of Interstate 75, in Section 7, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: John Kelly, Senior Planner] Commissioner District 2 Meeting Date: 12/10/2020 Prepared by: Title: Planner – Zoning Name: John Kelly 11/23/2020 3:57 PM Submitted by: Title: Manager - Planning – Zoning Name: Ray Bellows 11/23/2020 3:57 PM Approved By: Review: Hearing Examiner (GMD Approvers) Diane Lynch Review Item Completed 11/25/2020 3:06 PM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Rose Burke Review Item Completed 11/25/2020 3:11 PM Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Completed 11/30/2020 3:59 PM Zoning Anita Jenkins Review Item Completed 12/01/2020 2:52 PM Hearing Examiner Andrew Dickman Meeting Pending 12/10/2020 9:00 AM 3.D Packet Pg. 781 PDI-PL20200000869 Ragge PUD Page 1 of 13 November 30, 2020 STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER FROM: ZONING DIVISION – ZONING SERVICES SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: DECEMBER 10, 2020 SUBJECT: PDI-PL20200000869; RAGGE PUD OWNERS/APPLICANTS: AGENT: Suncoast Credit Union Justin Ebrite 6801 Hillsborough Ave. Phoenix Associates of Florida, Inc. Tampa, FL 33610 13180 Livingston Rd. Naples, FL 34109 and 99Naples LLC 3495 Coolidge Rd. East Lansing, MI 48823 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests that the Hearing Examiner approve an insubstantial change to Ordinance No. 01-07, the Ragge Planned Unit Development (PUD), by adding Section V to provide for a list of Deviations from the Land Development Code, by adding Section 5.1.A to allow for a deviation from LDC Section 5.06.04.G.2.a limiting off-premise directional signs to 12 square feet in area to instead allow an off-premise sign for Lot 2 to be placed on the existing ground sign for Lot 1, with Lot 2’s off-premise sign being no more than 27 square feet in total area, and by adding Exhibit “D” Sign Location depicting the Section 5.1.A deviation. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject PUD consists of 4.5± acres located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Pine Ridge Road and Kramer Drive/Whippoorwill Lane, approximately ½ mile west of Interstate 75, in Section 7, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (see location map on following page) 3.D.a Packet Pg. 782 Attachment: Ragge PUD Staff Report Accela Corr-1 11302020 (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) PDI-PL20200000869 Ragge PUD Page 2 of 13 November 30, 2020 3.D.aPacket Pg. 783Attachment: Ragge PUD Staff Report Accela Corr-1 11302020 (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) PDI-PL20200000869 Ragge PUD Page 3 of 13 November 30, 2020 PURPOSE AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The subject PUD comprises two parcels which have been fully developed containing a Suncoast Credit Union Bank on Lot 1 and a Home 2 Suites Hotel on Lot 2. Currently, there is an existing ground sign at the entry of the PUD. The sign was constructed by the bank with the capability and intent of incorporating a second business identity; however, the current sign code and PUD ordinance limits the size of off-premise signs to 12 square feet in area. An agreement between the owners of the bank and hotel has been established to allow for the sharing of the sign and provides for maintenance through the PUD association (Tract “60” Center Association, Inc). The petitioners are proposing a deviation from LDC Section 5.06.04.G.2.a, off-premise directional signs, to increase the size of the Lot 2’s off-premise sign to no more than 27 square feet; said sign will be incorporated into the existing ground sign on Lot 1. This deviation is for sign area only and not location. A letter of no objection was received from Tract “60” Center Association, Inc.; see Attachment B. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: This section of the staff report identifies the land uses and zoning classifications for properties surrounding the boundaries of the subject property: North: Livingston Woods Lane (Right-of-Way), then single-family residential located within the Estates (E) zoning district East: Self-storage Facility and Convenience Store with Fuel pumps (Race-Trac) located within the Angileri PUD South: Pine Ridge Road (Right-of-Way) then a full-service automobile dealership (Naples Nissan) located within the Pine View CPUD West: Was a full-service motorcycle dealership now a service animal training facility located within the Naples Gateway PUD --- Remainder of page intentionally left blank -- 3.D.a Packet Pg. 784 Attachment: Ragge PUD Staff Report Accela Corr-1 11302020 (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) PDI-PL20200000869 Ragge PUD Page 4 of 13 November 30, 2020 Collier County GIS 3.D.a Packet Pg. 785 Attachment: Ragge PUD Staff Report Accela Corr-1 11302020 (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) PDI-PL20200000869 Ragge PUD Page 5 of 13 November 30, 2020 STAFF ANALYSIS: Comprehensive Planning: This project is consistent with the Growth Management Plan. The project site is designated Urban Golden Gate Estates Sub-element within the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and is within the Interchange Activity Center #10 shown on the Urban Golden Gate Estates Future Land Use Map. Parcels within this Activity Center are subject to the County -wide FLUE and not this Master Plan. The Growth Management Plan does not address the issue of signage deviations. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental review staff has found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME). No revisions to the environmental portions of the PUD petition are being proposed. The proposal is consistent with the CCME. Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed this petition. The existing preserve areas will not be impacted by the proposed petition. This project does not require Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project did not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff has evaluated the proposed changes to the PUD Document and found no issue with consistency. CONCURRENT LAND USE APPLICATIONS: There are no concurrent land use applications under review at the present time. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT INSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE CRITERIA: Sections 10.02.13.E.1 and 10.02.13.E.2 of the Land Development Code set forth the criteria by which insubstantial changes to a PUD Document are to be reviewed before they can be approved. The criteria and a response to each have been listed as follows: LDC Section 10.02.13.E.1 Criteria: a. Is there a proposed change in the boundary of the Planned Unit Development (PUD)? No, there is no proposed change in the boundary of the PUD. b. Is there a proposed increase in the total number of dwelling units or intensity of land use or height of buildings within the development? No, there is no proposed increase in the number of dwelling units or intensity of land use or height of buildings within the development. 3.D.a Packet Pg. 786 Attachment: Ragge PUD Staff Report Accela Corr-1 11302020 (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) PDI-PL20200000869 Ragge PUD Page 6 of 13 November 30, 2020 c. Is there a proposed decrease in preservation, conservation, recreation, or open space areas within the development in excess of five (5) percent of the total acreage previously designated as such, or five (5) acres in area? No, there is no proposed decrease in preservation, conservation, recreation, or open space areas within the development as designated on the approved Master Plan. d. Is there a proposed increase in the size of areas used for non-residential uses, to include institutional, commercial and industrial land uses (excluding preservation, conservation or open space), or a proposed relocation of nonresidential land uses? No, there is no increase to the size of areas used for non-residential uses and no relocation of non-residential uses proposed. e. Is there a substantial increase in the impacts of the development which may include, but are not limited to increases in traffic generation; changes in traffic circulation; or impacts on other public facilities? No, there are no substantial impacts resulting from this amendment. The RPUD currently contains a vehicular trip cap which is not proposed to be changed. f. Will the change result in land use activities that generate a higher level of vehicular traffic based upon the Trip Generation Manual published by the I nstitute of Transportation Engineers? No additional dwelling units are proposed; therefore, the proposed amendment would not result in land use activities that generate higher levels of vehicular traffic based upon the Trip Generation Manual published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. g. Will the change result in a requirement for increased stormwater retention, or otherwise increase stormwater discharge? No, adequate area exists on site for stormwater retention and no change to the approved discharge rate is proposed; therefore, the proposed change will not impact or increase stormwater retention or increase stormwater discharge. h. Will the proposed change bring about a relationship to an abutting land use that would be incompatible with an adjacent land use? No. There will be no incompatible relationships with abutting land uses. i. Are there any modifications to the PUD Master Plan or PUD Document or amendment to a PUD ordinance which is inconsistent with the Future Land Use Element or other elements of the Growth Management Plan or which modification would increase the density of intensity of the permitted land uses? 3.D.a Packet Pg. 787 Attachment: Ragge PUD Staff Report Accela Corr-1 11302020 (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) PDI-PL20200000869 Ragge PUD Page 7 of 13 November 30, 2020 No. Staff from Comprehensive Planning staff determined the proposed changes to the PUD Document would be consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. Both environmental and Transportation Planning staff reviewed this petition, and no changes to the PUD Document are proposed that would be deemed inconsistent with the CCME or the Transportation Element of the GMP. This petition does not propose any increase in density or intensity of the permitted land uses. j. The proposed change is to a PUD District designated as a Development of Regional Impact (DRI) and approved pursuant to Chapter 380.06, Florida Statues, where such change requires a determination and public hearing by Collier County pursuant to Sec. 380.06 (19), F.S. Any change that meets the criterion of Sec. 380.06 (19)(e)2., F.S., and any changes to a DRI/PUD Master Plan that clearly do not create a substantial deviation shall be reviewed and approved by Collier County under Section 10.02.13 of the LDC. This project is not a DRI. k. Are there any modifications to the PUD Master Plan or PUD Document or amendment to a PUD ordinance which impact(s) any consideration deemed to be a substantial modification as described under Section(s) 10.02.13 E.? Based upon the analysis provided above, the proposed change is not deemed to be substantial. LDC Section 10.02.13.E.2 Criteria: Does this petition change the analysis of the findings and criteria used for the original application? (PUD and Rezone Findings are attached to this Staff Report as Attachment B.) No, the proposed change does not affect the original analysis and findings for the original application. PUD Findings: LDC Subsection 10.02.13.B.5 requires an analysis of the following criteria: LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5 states that, “In support of its recommendation, the CCPC shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan’s compliance with the following criteria in addition to the findings in LDC Section 10.02.08.” The original PUD Findings are listed below or are summarized. 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. Staff has reviewed the proposed insubstantial change and believes the proposed uses and property development regulations are compatible with the development approved in the area. The PUD is built-out and the proposed change should not 3.D.a Packet Pg. 788 Attachment: Ragge PUD Staff Report Accela Corr-1 11302020 (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) PDI-PL20200000869 Ragge PUD Page 8 of 13 November 30, 2020 adversely affect living conditions in the area. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contracts, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Documents submitted with the application, which were reviewed by the County Attorney’s Office, demonstrate unified control of the property. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). County staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis of conformity with the relevant goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP within the GMP Consistency portion of this staff report. 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. As described in the Staff Analysis section of this staff report, the proposed changes to the PUD do not affect the landscaping standards of the PUD. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The usable open space areas are not changing; therefore, no deviation from required usable open space is being requested. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of ensuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. The roadway infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project at this time. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. The area has adequate supporting infrastructure such as road capacity, wastewater disposal system, and potable water supplied to accommodate this project. 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. 3.D.a Packet Pg. 789 Attachment: Ragge PUD Staff Report Accela Corr-1 11302020 (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) PDI-PL20200000869 Ragge PUD Page 9 of 13 November 30, 2020 The petitioner is seeking one deviation to allow design flexibility in compliance with the purpose and intent of the Planned Unit Development Districts (LDC Section 2.03.06.A). Staff has provided an analysis of the deviation and is recommending approval. Rezone Findings: LDC Subsection 10.02.08.F states, “When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners…shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the following when applicable”: 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the GMP. Comprehensive Planning staff determined the subject petition is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the (FLUM) and other elements of the GMP. 2. The existing land use pattern. The existing land use pattern (of the abutting properties) is described in the Surrounding Land Use and Zoning section of this staff report. The proposed use would not change the existing land use patterns of the surrounding properties. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The property is currently zoned PUD and would remain as such. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. This petition does not propose any change to the boundaries of the PUD. The Master Plan would be updated by relabeling the subject property. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezoning necessary. The proposed change is not necessary; however, it is being requested in compliance with the LDC provisions to seek such changes because the petitioner wishes to include the proposed uses and development standards that are specific to the subject parcel. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. 3.D.a Packet Pg. 790 Attachment: Ragge PUD Staff Report Accela Corr-1 11302020 (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) PDI-PL20200000869 Ragge PUD Page 10 of 13 November 30, 2020 The proposed PUD Amendment is not anticipated to adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. The roadway infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project, as noted in the Transportation Element consistency review. Operational impact s will be addressed at time of first development order (SDP or Plat), at which time, a new TIS will be required to demonstrate turning movements for all site access points. Finally, the project’s development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals, including but not limited to any plats and or site development plans, are sought. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The proposed PUDA request is not anticipated to create drainage problems in the area, provided stormwater best management practices, treatment, and storage on this project will be addressed through Environmental Resource Permitting (ERP) with the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). County staff will evaluate the project’s stormwater management system, calculations, and design criteria at time of SDP and/or PPL. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. It is not anticipated the changes proposed to this PUD Amendment would seriously reduce light or air to the adjacent areas. 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent areas. This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results, which may be internal or external to the subject property. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning; however, zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since value determination is driven by market value. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. The subject property is currently vacant, and staff does not anticipate this amendment serving as a deterrent to its improvement. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare. 3.D.a Packet Pg. 791 Attachment: Ragge PUD Staff Report Accela Corr-1 11302020 (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) PDI-PL20200000869 Ragge PUD Page 11 of 13 November 30, 2020 If the proposed development complies with the GMP through the proposed amendment, then that constitutes a public policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are consistent with said Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed change does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. The subject property can be used in accordance with existing zoning; however, the proposed uses cannot be achieved without amending the PUD. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County. It is staff’s opinion that the proposed uses, associated development standards, and developer commitments will ensure that the project is not out of scale with the needs of the community. 15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. The petition was reviewed for compliance with the GMP and the LDC, and staff does not specifically review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. Any development anticipated by the PUD Document would require considerable site alteration, and this project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the SDP and/or platting processes, and again later as part of the building permit process. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended. The project will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in LDC Section 6.02.00 regarding Adequate Public Facilities (APF), and the project will need to be consistent with all applicable goals and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities, except as may be exempt by federal regulations. This petition has been reviewed by County staff responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the amendment process and those staff persons have concluded that no Level of Service will be adversely impacted with the commitments contained in the 3.D.a Packet Pg. 792 Attachment: Ragge PUD Staff Report Accela Corr-1 11302020 (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) PDI-PL20200000869 Ragge PUD Page 12 of 13 November 30, 2020 PUD Document. The concurrency review for APF is determined at the time of SDP review. The activity proposed by this amendment will have no impact on public facility adequacy in regard to utilities. 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. DEVIATION DISCUSSION: The petitioner is seeking one deviation from the requirements of the LDC. Said LDC deviation is to be inserted into the PUD document to create Section V, List of Deviations, as demonstrated within Attachment A. The petitioner’s justification and staff analysis/recommendation are outlined below. Proposed Deviation 5.1.A This deviation seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.04.G.2.a which limits specified off- premise directional signs to 12 square feet in area to instead allow an off-premise sign for Lot 2 to be placed on the existing ground sign for Lot 1. The off-premise portion of the existing sign shall be no more than 27 square feet in total area. See Exhibit “D”. Petitioner’s Justification: Approval of the requested deviation will allow use of the existing sign structure for both buildings located within the PUD. The hotel is located 300 feet north of the main corridor and entry location to the PUD. The hotel and wall-mounted sign are not visible from the primary approach to the hotel until you are at or have passed the entry from Pine Ridge Road. The approval of this change will allow hotel commuters and visitors a safe advanced notification of their turn and location of the hotel. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning staff recommends approval, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that “the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community” and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is “justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.” NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): Pursuant to LDC Section 10.03.06.H.2.a a NIM is required for PDI projects except “upon written request by the applicant, the Hearing Examiner has the discretion to waive the NIM after the first set of staff review comments have been issued.” Such a written request was presented and acted upon by the Hearing Examiner which resulted in the granting of a conditional NIM waiver. RECOMMENDATION: 3.D.a Packet Pg. 793 Attachment: Ragge PUD Staff Report Accela Corr-1 11302020 (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) PDI-PL20200000869 Ragge PUD Page 13 of 13 November 30, 2020 Staff recommends that the Collier County Hearing Examiner approve Petition PDI- PL20200000869 with the stipulation that the contents of Attachment “A” be included in the HEX Decision. Attachments: A) Proposed PUD Deviation (Section 5.1.A) with Exhibit “D” B) Applicant’s Backup – Application, Justification, NIM and Posting Information 3.D.a Packet Pg. 794 Attachment: Ragge PUD Staff Report Accela Corr-1 11302020 (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) PDI REVISION FILED JUNE 4, 2020 3.D.b Packet Pg. 795 Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed PUD Deviation (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.b Packet Pg. 796 Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed PUD Deviation (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) Words underlined are added; words stuck through are deleted RAGGE PDI PL2020000869 REVISED 08/20/20 THE PUD DOCUMENT ATTACHED TO ORDINANCE NO. 01- 07, IS AMENDED TO INLCUDE SECTION I, HEREBY AMENDED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION V LIST OF DEVIATIONS ********** 5.1 THE FOLLOWING DEVIATIONS FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ARE APPROVED FOR THE RAGGE PUD *********** A. Deviation A seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.04 G #2A, Development Standards for Signs in Nonresidential Districts, which requires that signs shall not be more than 12 square feet in area, to instead allow a sign to not be more than 28 square feet total area per corporate logo for each lot within the PUD. 16 A. This deviation seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.04.G.2.a which limits specified off-premise directional signs to 12 square feet in area to instead allow an off-premise sign for Lot 2 to be placed on the existing ground sign for Lot 1. The off-premise portion of the existing sign shall be no more than 27 square feet in total area. SEE EXHIBIT "D" 3.D.b Packet Pg. 797 Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed PUD Deviation (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) LOT 1 RAGGE PUE LOT 2 RAGGE PUD EX. COMMERCIAL STORAGE PINE RIDGE ROAD (PUBLIC) EX 120' R.O.W. EX. SUNCOAST CREDIT UNION (BANK)EX. COMMERICAL BUILDINGEX. INGRESS / EGRESS LOT 1 WESTBOUND LANES EASTBOUND LANES KRAMER DR.50' ROW (PRIVATE)EX. HOME 2 SUITES NAPLES ( HOTEL) EX. GAS STATION 248.7'EX. INGRESS / EGRESS LOT 1 EX. INGRESS / EGRESS LOT 2 DEVIATION REQUEST TO EX. PUD MONUMENT SIGN (FACES EAST) EX. GAS STATION MONUMENT GATEWAY LANE 50' ROW (PRIVATE)54.4'88.4' EXHIBIT "D" SIGN LOCATION3685 KRAMER DR & 3655 PINE RIDGE RD NAPLES, FLORIDA 34109 COLLIER COUNTY TJE RAGGE PUD N D A T E SHEET TITLE C O M P L E T E D B Y : PROJECT DISCRIPTIONphoenix florida 13180 LIVINGSTON ROAD | SUITE 204 | NAPLES, FLORIDA 34109 PH (239) 596-9111 | FX (239) 596-2637 | WWW.PHOENIX-ASSOCIATES.COM PHOENIX ASSOCIATES OF FLORIDA, INC. HEREBY RESERVES ITS COMMON LAW COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTS IN THESE PLANS, DESIGNS, ARRANGEMENTS AND IDEAS. THESE IDEAS, PLANS AND DESIGNS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM PHOENIX ASSOCIATES OF FLORIDA, INC. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS ON THESE DRAWINGS HAVE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALE DIMENSIONS. CONTRACTORS SHALL VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF THE JOB. PHOENIX ASSOCIATES OF FLORIDA, INC. SHALL BE NOTIFIED IN WRITING OF ANY VARIATIONS OR DISCREPANCIES FROM THE DIMENSIONS, CONDITIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS SHOWN BY THESE DRAWINGS. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, MOST RECENT ADOPTED EDITION. a s s o c i a t e s o f 7/24/2020 SHEET NUMBER OF1 2 1" = 100' 3.D.b Packet Pg. 798 Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed PUD Deviation (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) File Name: Prepared By:Date: Eng: Customer: Location: HOME 2 SUITES 193065 - R1 - NAPLES, FL – Note: Color output may not be exact when viewing or printing this drawing. All colors used are PMS or the closest CMYK equivalent. If these colors are incorrect, please provide the correct PMS match and a revision to this drawing will be made.700 21st Street Southwest PO Box 210 Watertown, SD 57201-0210 1 .800.843.9888 • www.personasigns.com DISTRIBUTED BY SIGN UP COMPANY NAPLES, FL NOTE: Elevation drawings are for customer approval only, drawings are not to be used as any installation guide, all dimensions must be verified before installation. 21AUG19 SC CUSTOMER APPROVAL Date APPROVAL BOX - PLEASE INITIAL SHARED MONUMENT2 EXISTING 2’ 7-1/2” X 10’ 0-1/2” PROPOSED GRAPHIC DETAIL SCALE: 1/2” = 1’-0” 32.74428274428274 2’-7 1/2”10’-0 1/2” 3.D.b Packet Pg. 799 Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed PUD Deviation (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Revised 3/27/2018 Page 1 of 4 INSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE TO A PUD (PDI) LDC subsection 10.02.13 E & Code of Laws section 2-83 – 2-90 Ch. 3 G.3 of the Administrative Code Pursuant to LDC subsection 10.02.13 E.2, a PUD insubstantial change includes any change that is not considered a substantial or a minor change. A PUD insubstantial change to an approved PUD ordinance shall be based upon an evaluation of LDC subsection 10.02.13 E.1 and shall require the review and approval of the Hearing Examiner. The Hearing Examiner’s approval shall be based on the findings and criteria used for the original application . PETITION NO PROJECT NAME DATE PROCESSED APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION Name of Property Owner(s): ______________________________________________________ Name of Applicant if different than owner: __________________________________________ Address: __________________________City: _____________ State: _______ ZIP: __________ Telephone: ____________________ Cell: ____________________ Fax: ___________________ E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________ Name of Agent: ________________________________________________________________ Firm: _________________________________________________________________________ Address: ______________________City: _______________ State: _________ ZIP: __________ Telephone: _____________________ Cell: _____________________ Fax: _________________ E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________ DETAIL OF REQUEST On a separate sheet, attached to the application, describe the insubstantial change request. Identify how the request does not meet the PUD substantial change criteria established in LDC subsection 10.02.13 E.1. To be completed by staff 3.D.c Packet Pg. 800 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Revised 3/27/2018 Page 1 of 4 INSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE TO A PUD (PDI) LDC subsection 10.02.13 E & Code of Laws section 2-83 – 2-90 Ch. 3 G.3 of the Administrative Code Pursuant to LDC subsection 10.02.13 E.2, a PUD insubstantial change includes any change that is not considered a substantial or a minor change. A PUD insubstantial change to an approved PUD ordinance shall be based upon an evaluation of LDC subsection 10.02.13 E.1 and shall require the review and approval of the Hearing Examiner. The Hearing Examiner’s approval shall be based on the findings and criteria used for the original application . PETITION NO PROJECT NAME DATE PROCESSED APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION Name of Property Owner(s): ______________________________________________________ Name of Applicant if different than owner: __________________________________________ Address: __________________________City: _____________ State: _______ ZIP: __________ Telephone: ____________________ Cell: ____________________ Fax: ___________________ E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________ Name of Agent: ________________________________________________________________ Firm: _________________________________________________________________________ Address: ______________________City: _______________ State: _________ ZIP: __________ Telephone: _____________________ Cell: _____________________ Fax: _________________ E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________ DETAIL OF REQUEST On a separate sheet, attached to the application, describe the insubstantial change request. Identify how the request does not meet the PUD substantial change criteria established in LDC subsection 10.02.13 E.1. To be completed by staff 3.D.c Packet Pg. 801 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Revised 3/27/2018 Page 2 of 4 PROPERTY INFORMATION PUD NAME: _______________________ ORDINANCE NUMBER: ________________________ FOLIO NUMBER(S): _____________________________________________________________ Provide a legal (if PUD is recorded) or graphic description of area of amendment (this may be graphically illustrated on Amended PUD Master Plan). If applying for a portion of the PUD, provide a legal description for subject portion. Attach on a separate sheet, a written description of the map or text change. Does amendment comply with the Growth Management Plan? Yes No If no, please explain: _______________________________________________________ Has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? Yes No If yes, in whose name? _____________________________________________________ Has any portion of the PUD been SOLD and/or DEVELOPED? Are any changes proposed for the area sold and/or developed? Yes No If yes, please describe on an attached separate sheet. 3.D.c Packet Pg. 802 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Revised 3/27/2018 Page 3 of 4 Pre-Application Meeting and Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for: PUD Insubstantial Change Chapter 3 G.3 of the Administrative Code The following Submittal Requirement checklist is to be utilized during the Pre -Application Meeting and at time of application submittal. At final submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with the application packet. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below, with cover sheets attached to each section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. REQUIREMENTS FOR REVIEW # OF COPIES REQUIRED NOT REQUIRED Completed Application (download current form from County website) 1 Pre-Application Meeting notes 1 Project Narrative, including a detailed description of proposed changes and why amendment is necessary 1 Detail of request 1 Current Master Plan & 1 Reduced Copy 1 Revised Master Plan & 1 Reduced Copy 1 Revised Text and any exhibits PUD document with changes crossed through & underlined PUD document as revised with amended Title Page with Ordinance # Warranty Deed Legal Description 1 Boundary survey, if boundary of original PUD is amended If PUD is platted, include plat book pages List identifying Owner & all parties of corporation 1 Affidavit of Authorization, signed & notarized 1 Completed Addressing Checklist 1 Property Ownership Disclosure Form 1 Copy of 8 ½ in. x 11 in. graphic location map of site 1 Electronic copy of all documents and plans *Please advise: The Office of the Hearing Examiner requires all materials to be submitted electronically in PDF format. *If located in Immokalee or seeking affordable housing, include an additional set of each submittal requirement. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS: • Following the completion of the review process by County Review staff, the applicant shall submit all materials electronically to the designated project manager. • Please contact the project manager to confirm the number of additional copies required. 3.D.c Packet Pg. 803 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Revised 3/27/2018 Page 4 of 4 PLANNERS – INDICATE IF THE PETITION NEEDS TO BE ROUTED TO THE FOLLOWING REVIEWERS: School District (Residential Components): Amy Lockheart Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment: Executive Director Utilities Engineering: Eric Fey Parks and Recreation: Barry Williams and David Berra Emergency Management: Dan Summers Naples Airport Authority: Conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Johnson Other: City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director Other: FEE REQUIREMENTS  PUD Amendment Insubstantial (PDI): $1,500.00  Pre-Application Meeting: $500.00  Estimated Legal Advertising fee for the Office of the Hearing Examiner: $1,125.00 Same fee applies if the petition is referred to the Collier County Planning Commission, where the CCPC serves as the deciding authority instead of the HEX. Fire Code Plans Review Fees are collected at the time of application submission and those fees are set forth by the Authority having jurisdiction. The Land Development Code requires Neighborhood Notification mailers for Applications headed to hearing, and this fee is collected prior to hearing. As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. All checks payable to: Board of County Commissioners. The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to: Growth Management Department Planning and Regulation ATTN: Business Center 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 ____________________________________________ ____________ Agent/Owner Signature Date ____________________________________________ Applicant/Owner Name (please print) X X X PAID PREVIOUS 3.D.c Packet Pg. 804 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) ASSOCIATES OF FLORIDA INC. Design Build General Contractor CGC# 034149 | AA26003191 | CA7607 WWW.PHOENIX-ASSOCIATES.COM CORPORATE OFFICES 13180 LIVINGSTON ROAD – SUITE 204 – NAPLES, FLORIDA 34109 P 239.596.9111 F 239.596.2637 September 28, 2020 Collier County Development Review 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 To: Intake Planner From: Justin Ebrite/ Phoenix-Associates of Florida Subject: RAGGE PUD ORD 01-07 –Insubstantial change to PUD (PDI) (3rd Submittal) PL#20200000869 Dear Intake Team, This Cover letter is to detail and request approval for Insubstantial Change to a PUD (PDI) for RAGGE PUD. This represents the 3rd Submittal for this this review process and acts a response to county insufficiency letter dated September 22, 2020. The responses to those comments can be found included with this submittal. Project Narrative The PUD is located half mile west of the Interstate 75 along the north side of Pine Ridge Road. Section 7, Township 50S Range 26 in Collier County (Naples) Florida. The PUD contains 2 parcels which have been fully developed and contain a Suncoast Credit Union Bank on lot 1 and Home 2 Suites Hotel on lot 2. Currently there is an existing monument sign at entry of the PUD, which is located at the corner of the main corridor of Pine Ridge Road and Whippoorwill Lane. The sign was constructed by the bank with the capability for a 2nd business logo. An agreement is established between the two owners of the bank and hotel which will allow sharing a single sign, which will be maintained through the PUD association (The Tract 60 Center Association LLC). Although current signing code and PUD ordinance would not allow this as currently constructed. Request The purpose of this request is to amend Ordinance 01-07, section 3.4.K. to allow for a deviation from Ordinance 04-41, as amended in section 5.06.04 G #2A of the Collier Land Development Code. Current code only allows for signs up to 12 square feet. The current deviation request is to allow a sign up with up to 27 SF total area for each corporate logo within the PUD. Justification(s) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 805 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) ASSOCIATES OF FLORIDA INC. Design Build General Contractor CGC# 034149 | AA26003191 | CA7607 WWW.PHOENIX-ASSOCIATES.COM CORPORATE OFFICES 13180 LIVINGSTON ROAD – SUITE 204 – NAPLES, FLORIDA 34109 P 239.596.9111 F 239.596.2637 1. Approval would allow use of the existing and approved sign for both buildings. 2. The hotel is located 300’ north of the main corridor and entry location to the PUD. The hotel and wall mounted sign are not visible from the primary approach to the hotel until you are at or have passed the entry from Pine Ridge Road. The approval of this change will allow hotel commuters and visitors a safe advanced notification of their turn and location of the hotel. Detail of Request The purpose of this request is to amend Ordinance 01-07, section 3.4.K. to allow for a deviation from Ordinance 04-41, as amended in section 5.06.04 G #2A of the Collier Land Development Code. Current code which limits off-premise directional signs to 12 square feet in area. The current deviation request allows off premise sign for Lot 2 to be placed on existing sign for Lot 1 if it is not more than 27 square feet total area. The change requested does not create any change in the size of building, sign, land use, compatibility. The request will only allow the existing sign as currently constructed to be used for both lots/ businesses (Lots 1 & 2) as designed. This request does not meet any requirement for substantial change as outlined in in LDC subsection 10.02.13. E.1. Therefore, this project should be reviewed as an insubstantial change to PUD (PDI) If you have any questions or comments regarding this application, please Contact me at phone number (239) 596-9111 at extension 218 or by email JEbrite@phoenix-associates.com Sincerely Thomas “Justin” Ebrite Design Engineer Phoenix-Associates of Florida INC 3.D.c Packet Pg. 806 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 807 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION www.colliergov.net 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-5724 ADDRESSING CHECKLIST Please complete the following and email to GMD_Addressing@colliergov.net or fax to the Operations Department at 239-252-5724 or submit in person to the Addressing Department at the above address. Form must be signed by Addressing personnel prior to pre-application meeting, please allow 3 days for processing. Not all items will apply to every project. Items in bold type are required. FOLIO NUMBERS MUST BE PROVIDED. F orms older than 6 months will require additional review and approval by the Addressing Department. PETITION TYPE (Indicate type below, complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition type) BL (Blasting Permit) BD (Boat Dock Extension) Carnival/Circus Permit CU (Conditional Use) EXP (Excavation Permit) FP (Final Plat LLA (Lot Line Adjustment) PNC (Project Name Change) PPL (Plans & Plat Review) PSP (Preliminary Subdivision Plat) PUD Rezone RZ (Standard Rezone) SDP (Site Development Plan) SDPA (SDP Amendment) SDPI (Insubstantial Change to SDP) SIP (Site Im provement Plan) SIPI (Insubstantial Change to SIP) SNR (Street Name Change) SNC (Street Name Change – Unplatted) T DR (Transfer of Development Rights) VA (Variance) VRP (Vegetation Removal Permit) VRSFP (Vegetation Removal & Site Fill Permit) OTHER LEGAL DESCRIPTION of subject property or properties (copy of lengthy description may be attached) FOLIO (Property ID) NUMBER(s) of above (attach to, or associate with, legal description if more than one) STREET ADDRESS or ADDRESSES (as applicable, if already assigned) PROPOSED STREET NAMES (if applicable) SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NUMBER (for existing projects/sites only) 1 SURVEY (copy - needed only for unplatted properties) LOCATION MAP must be attached showing exact location of project/site in relation to nearest public road right- of-way PROPOSED PROJECT NAME (if applicable) SDP - or AR or PL # SDPA 2006-AR-10443 3.D.c Packet Pg. 808 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION www.colliergov.net 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-5724 Please Return Approved Checklist By: Email Personally picked up Applicant Name: Signature on Addressing Checklist does not constitute Project and/or Street Name approval and is subject to further review by the Operations Department. FOR STAFF USE ONLY Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Approved by: Date: Updated by: Date: IF OLDER THAN 6 MONTHS, FORM MUST BE UPDATED OR NEW FORM SUBMITTED 2 Fax Email/Fax:Phone: Project or development names proposed for, or already appearing in, condominium documents (if application; indicate whether proposed or existing) 7000006040 , 77000006024 05/12/2020 3.D.c Packet Pg. 809 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) PUD LOT 2 LOT 1 3.D.c Packet Pg. 810 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 811 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 812 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 813 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 814 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 815 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 816 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Created 9/28/2017 Page 1 of 3 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM This is a required form with all land use petitions, except for Appeals and Zoning Verification Letters. 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. Please complete the following, use additional sheets if necessary. 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: Name and Address % of Ownership 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 % of Ownership 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 % of Ownership 3.D.c Packet Pg. 817 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Created 9/28/2017 Page 2 of 3 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 % of Ownership 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, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners: Name and Address % of Ownership 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 _______________ Leased: Term of lease ____________ years /months If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following: Terry L. Hall - CFO <10% Jim Matuszak - CEO <10% Joe Romkema - Secretary <10% 3.D.c Packet Pg. 818 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Created 9/28/2017 Page 3 of 3 Date of option: _________________________ Date option terminates: __________________, or Anticipated closing date: ________________ AFFIRM PROPERTY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION Any petition required to have Property Ownership Disclosure, will not be accepted without this form. Requirements for petition types are located on the associated application form. Any change in ownership whether individually or with a Trustee, Company or other interest-holding party, must be disclosed to Collier County immediately if such change occurs prior to the petition’s final public hearing. As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to: Growth Management Department ATTN: Business Center 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 ____________________________________________ ____________ Agent/Owner Signature Date ____________________________________________ Agent/Owner Name (please print) ___________________________________________________________ gent/Ownenenennenenenenr Signature Terry L Hall 9/25/2020 3.D.c Packet Pg. 819 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 820Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 821Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 822Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) PDI REVISION FILED JUNE 4, 2020 3.D.c Packet Pg. 823 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 824 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) Words underlined are added; words stuck through are deleted RAGGE PDI PL2020000869 REVISED 08/20/20 THE PUD DOCUMENT ATTACHED TO ORDINANCE NO. 01- 07, IS AMENDED TO INLCUDE SECTION I, HEREBY AMENDED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION V LIST OF DEVIATIONS ********** 5.1 THE FOLLOWING DEVIATIONS FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ARE APPROVED FOR THE RAGGE PUD *********** A. Deviation A seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.04 G #2A, Development Standards for Signs in Nonresidential Districts, which requires that signs shall not be more than 12 square feet in area, to instead allow a sign to not be more than 28 square feet total area per corporate logo for each lot within the PUD. 16 A. This deviation seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.04.G.2.a which limits specified off-premise directional signs to 12 square feet in area to instead allow an off-premise sign for Lot 2 to be placed on the existing ground sign for Lot 1. The off-premise portion of the existing sign shall be no more than 27 square feet in total area. SEE EXHIBIT "D" 3.D.c Packet Pg. 825 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) LOT 1 RAGGE PUE LOT 2 RAGGE PUD EX. COMMERCIAL STORAGE PINE RIDGE ROAD (PUBLIC) EX 120' R.O.W. EX. SUNCOAST CREDIT UNION (BANK)EX. COMMERICAL BUILDINGEX. INGRESS / EGRESS LOT 1 WESTBOUND LANES EASTBOUND LANES KRAMER DR.50' ROW (PRIVATE)EX. HOME 2 SUITES NAPLES ( HOTEL) EX. GAS STATION 248.7'EX. INGRESS / EGRESS LOT 1 EX. INGRESS / EGRESS LOT 2 DEVIATION REQUEST TO EX. PUD MONUMENT SIGN (FACES EAST) EX. GAS STATION MONUMENT GATEWAY LANE 50' ROW (PRIVATE)54.4'88.4' EXHIBIT "D" SIGN LOCATION3685 KRAMER DR & 3655 PINE RIDGE RD NAPLES, FLORIDA 34109 COLLIER COUNTY TJE RAGGE PUD N D A T E SHEET TITLE C O M P L E T E D B Y : PROJECT DISCRIPTIONphoenix florida 13180 LIVINGSTON ROAD | SUITE 204 | NAPLES, FLORIDA 34109 PH (239) 596-9111 | FX (239) 596-2637 | WWW.PHOENIX-ASSOCIATES.COM PHOENIX ASSOCIATES OF FLORIDA, INC. HEREBY RESERVES ITS COMMON LAW COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTS IN THESE PLANS, DESIGNS, ARRANGEMENTS AND IDEAS. THESE IDEAS, PLANS AND DESIGNS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM PHOENIX ASSOCIATES OF FLORIDA, INC. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS ON THESE DRAWINGS HAVE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALE DIMENSIONS. CONTRACTORS SHALL VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF THE JOB. PHOENIX ASSOCIATES OF FLORIDA, INC. SHALL BE NOTIFIED IN WRITING OF ANY VARIATIONS OR DISCREPANCIES FROM THE DIMENSIONS, CONDITIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS SHOWN BY THESE DRAWINGS. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE, MOST RECENT ADOPTED EDITION. a s s o c i a t e s o f 7/24/2020 SHEET NUMBER OF1 2 1" = 100' 3.D.c Packet Pg. 826 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) File Name: Prepared By:Date: Eng: Customer: Location: HOME 2 SUITES 193065 - R1 - NAPLES, FL – Note: Color output may not be exact when viewing or printing this drawing. All colors used are PMS or the closest CMYK equivalent. If these colors are incorrect, please provide the correct PMS match and a revision to this drawing will be made.700 21st Street Southwest PO Box 210 Watertown, SD 57201-0210 1 .800.843.9888 • www.personasigns.com DISTRIBUTED BY SIGN UP COMPANY NAPLES, FL NOTE: Elevation drawings are for customer approval only, drawings are not to be used as any installation guide, all dimensions must be verified before installation. 21AUG19 SC CUSTOMER APPROVAL Date APPROVAL BOX - PLEASE INITIAL SHARED MONUMENT2 EXISTING 2’ 7-1/2” X 10’ 0-1/2” PROPOSED GRAPHIC DETAIL SCALE: 1/2” = 1’-0” 32.74428274428274 2’-7 1/2”10’-0 1/2” 3.D.c Packet Pg. 827 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) State of Florida Department of State I certify from the records of this office that TRACT "60"CENTER ASSOCIATION,INC.is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Florida,filed on January 20,2016. The document number of this corporation is N16000000840. I further certify that said corporation has paid all fees due this office through December 31,2019,that its most recent annual report/uniform business report was filed on October 29,2019,and that its status is active. I further certify that said corporation has not filed Articles of Dissolution. Given under my hand and the Great Seal of the State of Florida at Tallahassee,the Capital,this the Twenty-ninth day of October, 2019 Tracking Number:0456635737CR To authenticate this certificate,visit the following site,enter this number,and then follow the instructions displayed. https://services.sunbiz.org/Filings/CertificateOfStatus/CertificateAuthentication 3.D.c Packet Pg. 828 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 829Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 830Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 831Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 832Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 833Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 834Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 835Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 836Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 837Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 838Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 839Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 840Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 841Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 842Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 843Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 844Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 845Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 846Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 847Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 848Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 849Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 850Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 851Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 852Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 853Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 854 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 855Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 856Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) ASSOCIATES OF FLORIDA INC. Design Build General Contractor CGC# 034149 | AA26003191 | CA7607 WWW.PHOENIX-ASSOCIATES.COM CORPORATE OFFICES 13180 LIVINGSTON ROAD – SUITE 204 – NAPLES, FLORIDA 34109 P 239.596.9111 F 239.596.2637 September 22, 2020 Collier County Development Review 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 To: The Hearing Examiner - Andrew Dickman From: Justin Ebrite/ Phoenix-Associates of Florida Subject: NIM Waiver for Insubstantial change (PDI) RAGGE PUD PL#20200000869 Dear Mr. Dickman, The purpose of this letter is to provide information and to request to waive the public notice of information (NIM) meeting for the Insubstantial Change to a PUD (PDI) for the RAGGE PUD. The PDI is currently under review with expected staff approval within days. The PDI change requested does not create any change or modification to the building, site, sign, land use, or compatibility. The request will only allow the existing sign as currently constructed to be used for the two businesses within the PUD. There is no impact to the public and therefore we request the NIM requirement be waived. Please find attached to this letter the letter narrative / background information, sign exhibit and location exhibit for your review. If you have any question or need additional information for your decision, please contact me at the information below. Thank you for your time and consideration. Justin Ebrite Design Engineer PHOENIX ASSOCIATES OF FLORIDA, INC. 13180 Livingston Road - Suite 204 Naples, FL 34109 P (239) 596-9111 Ext. 218 F (239) 596-2637 jebrite@phoenix-associates.com 3.D.c Packet Pg. 857 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 1 Justin Ebrite From:Justin Ebrite Sent:Monday, September 28, 2020 3:33 PM To:Andrew Dickman Cc:BellowsRay; KellyJohn; CasanovaAlexandra; ClarkeThomas; FrantzJeremy; Heather Subject:RE: PDI-PL20200000869 - Ragge PUD - Request for NIM Waiver/GRANTED Andrew , The condition of approval is understood, thank your for your time and granting of the waiver. Justin Ebrite Design Engineer PHOENIX ASSOCIATES OF FLORIDA, INC. 13180 Livingston Road - Suite 204 Naples, FL 34109 P (239) 596-9111 Ext. 218 F (239) 596-2637 jebrite@phoenix-associates.com From: Andrew Dickman <andrew@dickmanlawfirm.org> Sent: Monday, September 28, 2020 2:48 PM To: Justin Ebrite <JEbrite@phoenix-associates.com> Cc: BellowsRay <Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov>; KellyJohn <John.Kelly@colliercountyfl.gov>; CasanovaAlexandra <Alexandra.Casanova@colliercountyfl.gov>; ClarkeThomas <Thomas.Clarke@colliercountyfl.gov>; FrantzJeremy <Jeremy.Frantz@colliercountyfl.gov>; Heather <heather@dickmanlawfirm.org> Subject: RE: PDI-PL20200000869 - Ragge PUD - Request for NIM Waiver/GRANTED Dear Mr. Ebrite: You have requested a waiver of the neighborhood information meeting (NIM) in connection with the above referenced application. Pursuant to Sec. 10.03.06(H)(2)(a) of the Collier County land development code, a NIM is required for your application except “upon written request by the applicant, the Hearing Examiner has the discretion to waive the NIM after the first set of staff review comments have been issued.” I have reviewed your request and I have been informed by county staff that the first set of staff review comments have been issued. If this is not correct, please let me know immediately. Based on the above information, your NIM waiver request is GRANTED, with one condition. If any opposition to your application occurs between the granting of this waiver and the public hearing, I reserve the right to reschedule the hearing and require the holding of a NIM. Sincerely, 3.D.c Packet Pg. 858 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 2 Andrew _____________________ Andrew Dickman, Esq., AICP Collier County Hearing Examiner (239) 434-0840 https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/your-government/divisions-f-r/hearing-examiner All government correspondence is subject to the public records law. From: KellyJohn <John.Kelly@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 4:33 PM To: Andrew Dickman <andrew@dickmanlawfirm.org> Cc: BellowsRay <Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov>; CasanovaAlexandra <Alexandra.Casanova@colliercountyfl.gov>; ClarkeThomas <Thomas.Clarke@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: PDI-PL20200000869 - Ragge PUD - Request for NIM Waiver Good afternoon Mr. Dickman, Staff has received the attached Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) Waiver Request from the agent for the project referenced above. Please note that this petition remains in the review process; however, is nearing completion. The latest review was performed today and the requested corrections are rather minor. To briefly explain the project; the Ragge PUD comprises two parcels, one of which has frontage on Pine Ridge Road – the second lot is behind the first and is not visible from the roadway. The lot fronting Pine Ridge Road has an existing monument sign that will not change as it was designed to accommodate a second sign panel. The Petitioner desires to allow for an off-premise sign to be incorporated into the existing sign to promote the business occupying the lot with minimal visibility from Pine Ridge Road..Please feel free to contact me in the event you have questions not addressed by the applicant. Thank you kindly… Respectfully, John Kelly Senior Planner Zoning Division – Zoning Services Section 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples Florida 34104 Phone: 239.252.5719 Fax: 239.252.6363 NOTE: Email Address Has Changed Email: John.Kelly@colliercountyfl.gov Tell us how we are doing by taking our Zoning Division Survey at http://bit.ly/CollierZoning Growth Management Department 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. 3.D.c Packet Pg. 859 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 860 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : 3.D.c Packet Pg. 861 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : 3.D.cPacket Pg. 862Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 863Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 864Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 865Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 866Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 867Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 3.D.cPacket Pg. 868Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 869Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 870Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 871Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 872Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 873Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 874Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 875Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 876 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 877 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 878 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 879 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 880 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 881 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 882 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 883 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 884Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 885Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 886Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 887Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 888Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 889 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 890 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 891 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 892 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 893 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 894 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 895 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 896 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 897 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 898 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 899 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.c Packet Pg. 900 Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 901Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.cPacket Pg. 902Attachment: Attachment B - Ragge PUD Backup Package (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) 3.D.dPacket Pg. 903Attachment: HEX Hybrid Meeting Waiver Suncoast (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI)) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliercountyfl.gov (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Hybrid Virtual Quasi-Judicial Public Hearing Waiver Emergency/Executive Order 2020-04 Hearing of the Collier County Hearing Examiner For Petition Number(s): _________________________________________________________________ Regarding the above subject petition number(s), ________________________________ (Name of Applicant) elects to proceed during the declared emergency with hybrid virtual public hearing of the Collier County Hearing Examiner, and waives the right to contest any procedural irregularity due to the hybrid virtual nature of the public hearing. Name: _________________________________ Date: ___________________________ Signature: ______________________________ Applicant* Legal Counsel to Applicant * This form must be signed by either the Applicant (if the applicant is a corporate entity, this must be an officer of the corporate entity) or the legal counsel to the Applicant. :_______________________________________________ PL20200000869 99 Naples LLC Terry L. Hall 11/17/2020 ✔ 3.D.e Packet Pg. 904 Attachment: HEX Hybrid Meeting Waiver Hotel - signed (14294 : PL20200000869 Ragge PUD (PDI))