HEX Final Decision 2021-60 HEX NO. 2021-60
HEARING EXAMINER DECISION
DATE OF HEARING.
November 12,2021
PETITION.
PETITION NO. PDI - PL20210001887 Sonoma Oaks MPUD - Request for an insubstantial
change to Ordinance No. 10-48, the Sonoma Oaks Mixed Use Planned Unit Development
(MPUD), by amending Exhibit B-1, the Residential Development Standards, for Single-
Family (attached and detached) as follows: 1. Delete reference to "Per Unit" within the
minimum lot area standard; 2. Reduce the minimum lot width from 35 feet to 24 feet; and 3.
Reduce the minimum rear yard setback from 15 feet to 10 feet. The subject PUD is 37.5±
acres located on the west side of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) between Wolfe Road and Loop
Road, in Section 34, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
GENERAL PURPOSE FOR THE PETITION.
The insubstantial change request is made to amend the Sonoma Oaks Mixed-Use Planned Unit
Development (MPUD) residential development standards for single-family. This PDI petition is
to modify the following elements of the Sonoma Oaks MPUD:
1. Amend Exhibit B-1 in the PUD Document deleting reference to "PER UNIT" as is
irrelevant; the development standards are per lot.
2. Amend Exhibit B-I in the PUD Document changing the Minimum Lot Width for
Single-Family from 35 feet to 24 feet for single family attached dwelling units.
3. Amend Exhibit B-1 in the PUD Document changing the Minimum Rear Setback for
Single Family from 15 feet to 10 feet for single family attached dwelling units.
4. Add footnote 6 specifying that the minimum dimension shall only apply to single
family attached dwelling units.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
Approval with conditions.
FINDINGS.
1. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction over this Petitioner pursuant to Sec. 2-87 of the Collier
County of Ordinances, Sec. 8.10.00 of the Land Development Code, and Chapter 9 of the
County Administrative Code.
INS T R 6174250 OR 6056 PG 1119
Page 1 of 6 RECORDED 12/14/2021 10:43 AM PAGES 11
CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER
COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA
REC$95.00
2. The public hearing for this Petition was properly noticed and conducted in accordance with all
County and state requirements.
3. The public hearing was conducted electronically and in-person in accordance with
Emergency/Executive Order 2020-04.
4. The Petitioner and/or Petitioner's representative executed the Hybrid Virtual Quasi-Judicial
Public Hearing Waiver related to conducting the public hearing electronically and in-person.
5. The applicant conducted a duly noticed and advertised NIM on October 26,2021,at the Naples
Church located at 10910 Immokalee Road,the meeting was simultaneously presented on Zoom
to allow for remote audience participation.The meeting,hosted by Kenrick Gallander of RWA,
Inc, commenced at 5:30 P.M. A brief overview of the development was provided which led to
explanation of the purpose of the subject petition request. It was explained that the subject
petition is limited to decreasing the minimum lot width for single-family attached dwelling
types from 35 feet to 24 feet, decreasing the minimum rear yard setback from 15 feet to 10 feet
for the same, and to remove the "per unit" reference within the Minimum Lot Area Standard.
Following the presentation,the floor was opened to questions from the audience.A broad range
of questions concerning the development were asked and responded to. As for those pertaining
to the subject petition, participants were assured the allowable uses and density were not
changing. The meeting concluded at 6:05 P.M.
6. There are two land use petitions associated with this Petition presently under review by Collier
County. A Site Development Plan, SDP-PL20200001957, is being reviewed for a
rehabilitation hospital to be located within the component of the MPUD and a Plans and Plat
review, PPL-PL20190002811, is being reviewed to develop the residential component of the
MPUD.
7. The County Staff presented the Petition followed by the Petitioner and/or Petitioner's
representative, public comment and then rebuttal by the Petitioner and/or Petitioner's
representative. There were two citizens that spoke at the meeting voicing possible concerns
regarding the Petition.
8. The County's Land Development Code Sections 10.02.13.E.1 and 10.02.13.E.2 lists the
criteria for an insubstantial change to an approved PUD Ordinance. The Hearing Examiner
having the authority of the Planning Commission may approve a request for an insubstantial
change to an approved PUD ordinance upon review and evaluation of the criteria in the Collier
County Land Development Code.'
Section 10.02.13.E.1 Criteria:
1. Is there a proposed change in the boundary of the Planned Unit Development(PUD)?
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that there is no
proposed change in the boundary of the PUD.
1 The Hearing Examiner's findings are italicized.
Page 2 of 6
2. Is there a proposed increase in the total number of dwelling units or intensity of land use
or height of buildings within the development?
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that there is no
proposed increase in the number of dwelling units or intensity of land use, or height of
buildings within the development.
3. 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?
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that there is no
proposed decrease in preservation, conservation, recreation, or open space areas within
the development as designated on the approved Master Plan.
4. 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 record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that there would be no
increase areas or relocate areas for nonresidential land uses. The changes to the Mixed-
Use Development standards does not increase or relocate areas designated as Mixed-Use
on the Master Concept Plan and does not increase the amount of non-residential intensity
permitted in the PUD.
5. 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?
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that there are no
substantial impacts resulting from this amendment.
6. 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?
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the request does
not change land use activities and does not generate a higher level of vehicular trips.
7. Will the change result in a requirement for increased stormwater retention, or otherwise
increase stormwater discharge?
Page 3 of 6
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the proposed
change will not impact or increase stormwater retention or increase stormwater
discharge.
8. Will the proposed change bring about a relationship to an abutting land use that would be
incompatible with an adjacent land use?
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that there will be no
incompatible relationships with abutting land uses.
9. 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?
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that this modification
is in compliance with the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan.
10. 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 record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that he Sonoma Oaks
MPUD is not a DRI, therefore this criterion is not applicable.
11. 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.?
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that based upon the
analysis provide above, the proposed change is not deemed to be substantial.
Section 10.02.13.E.2 Criteria:
1. Does this petition change the analysis of the findings and criteria used for the original
application?
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the change
proposed does not affect the original analysis, rezone, and PUD findings.
Page 4 of 6
Deviation:
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that there are no deviations
being requested as part of this application.
ANALYSIS.
Based on a review of the record including the Petition, application, exhibits, the County's staff
report, and hearing comments and testimony from the Petitioner and/or the Petitioner's
representative(s), County staff and any given by the public,the Hearing Examiner finds that there
is enough competent, substantial evidence as applied to the criteria set forth in Sections
10.02.13.E.1 and 10.02.13.E.2 of the Land Development Code to approve Petition.
DECISION.
The Hearing Examiner hereby APPROVES Petition Number PDI-PL20210001887, filed by
Kenrick S. Gallander,AICP of RWA, Inc. representing the applicant,Pulte Home Company,LLC
and the property owner, We Have Arrived, LLC with respect to the property in the Sonoma Oaks
Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD), Ordinance Number 10-48, as amended, and
described as the property consisting of 37.5± acres located at the west side of Collier Boulevard
(CR 951)between Wolfe Road and Loop Road, in Section 34,Township 48 South,Range 26 East,
Collier County, Florida, for the following:
• An insubstantial change to Ordinance No. 10-48, the Sonoma Oaks Mixed-Use Planned
Unit Development (MPUD), by amending Exhibit B-1, the Residential Development
Standards, for Single-Family as follows: 1. Delete reference to "Per Unit" within the
minimum lot area standard; 2. Reduce the minimum lot width from 35 feet to 24 feet for
single family attached dwelling units; 3. Reduce the minimum rear yard setback from 15
feet to 10 feet for single family attached dwelling units, and 4. Add footnote 6 specifying
that said changes apply only to single family attached dwelling units.
Said changes are fully described in the Site Plan and PUD Amendment attached as Exhibit "A"
and are subject to the condition(s) set forth below.
ATTACHMENTS.
Exhibit A—Site Plan and PUD Amendment
LEGAL DESCRIPTION.
See Ordinance No. 10-48, as amended, and described as 37.5± acres located at the west side of
Collier Boulevard (CR 951) between Wolfe Road and Loop Road, in Section 34, Township 48
South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida
Page 5 of 6
CONDITIONS.
All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the
development.
DISCLAIMER.
Pursuant to Section 125.022(5)F.S., 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.
APPEALS.
This decision becomes effective on the date it is rendered. An appeal of this decision shall be done
in accordance with applicable ordinances, codes and law.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AND EXHIBITS: SEE CLERK OF COURT, MINUTES
AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT. DECISIONS OF THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR
VARIANCES, CONDITIONAL USES, AND BOAT DOCK EXTENSIONS SHALL BE
NOTED ON THE ZONING MAP FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES.
December 10,2021
Date Andrew Dickman, Esq., AICP
Hearing Examiner
Page 6 of 6
EXHIBIT "A"
EXHIBIT B-1
RESIDENTIAL"R"SUBDISTRICT
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
DEVELOPMENT SINGLE MULTI-FAMILY CLUBHOUSE/ ILF/ALF/CCRC/
STANDARDS FAMILY RECREATION SKILLED
(ATTACHED BUILDINGS NURSING
AND UNITS°
DETACHED)
PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES
MINIMUM LOT 2,250 S.F. 10,000 S.F. 10,000 S.F. N/A
AREA R-1441
MINIMUM LOT 35 FEET 100 FEET N/A N/A
WIDTH 24 FEET6
MINIMUM 1,000 S.F. 1,000 S.F./D.U. N/A N/A
FLOOR AREA
MIN FRONT 15 FEET 15 FEET 15 FEET 15 FEET
YARDS
MIN SIDE YARD 5 FEETS 15 FEET 15 FEET 15 FEET
MIN REAR 15 FEET 20 FEET 20 FEET 20 FEET
YARD 10 FEET6
MIN PRESERVE 25 FEET 25 FEET 25 FEET 25 FEET
SETBACK
MIN DISTANCE 10 FEET %THE ZONED %THE ZONED Y2THE ZONED
BETWEEN BUILDING BUIILDING BUILDING
STRUCTURES HEIGHT OF HEIGHT, NOT HEIGHT OF THE
THE TALLEST LESS THAN 30 TALLEST
BUILDING FEET BUILDING
MAX BUILDING NTE 35 45 FEET ZH or NTE 45 FEET NTE 61 FEET
HEIGHT FEET ZH or 55 FEET AH2 ZH or55 FEET ZH or 69 FEET
45 FEET AH AH AH2
MAXIMUM N/A N/A N/A 0.6
FLOOR AREA
RATIO
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES'
FRONT' 10 FEET 10 FEET 20 FEET 10 FEET
SIDE 5 FEET' 5 FEET Y2BH SFEET
REAR 5 FEET 5FEET 10 FEET 5 FEET
PRESERVE 10 FEET 10 FEET 10 FEET 10 FEET
SETBACK
DISTANCE 6/0 FEET 6 FEET 10 FEET 6 FEET
BETWEEN
PRINCIPAL
STRUCTURE
MAX BUILDING NTE 35 45 FEET ZH or NTE 45 FEET NTE 61 FEET ZH
HEIGHT FEET ZH or 55 FEET AH2 ZH or 55 FEET or 69 FEET AH,
45 FEET AH, AH,whichever whichever is Iess2
whichever is is less
less
Revised October 2,2010 October 6, 2021 Page 81 of 45 2
Sonoma Oaks MPUD
EXHIBIT "A"
EXHIBIT B-1
RESIDENTIAL"R"SUBDISTRICT
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
NTE = Not To Exceed
BH=Building Height
ZH=Zoned Height
AH=Actual Height
Notes:
1. Setback from lake easements for all accessory uses and structures shall be zero feet(0')or
greater.
2. No buildings greater than fifty-one feet(51')in height(zoned)shall be permitted within two
hundred feet(200')of the western property line.All buildings within one hundred feet(100')
of the western property line shall not be oriented parallel to the western property line.
3. Front yards shall be measured as follows: If the parcel is served by a public right-of-way,
setback is measured from the adjacent right-of-way line. If the parcel is served by a private
road, setback is measured from the back of curb (if curbed) or edge of pavement (if not
curbed).
4. If ILF,ALF, CCRC, skilled nursing or similar facilities are located in the Residential District
in an area adjacent to the Preserve, the Preserve acreage shall be allocated to the FAR
even if it is platted in a separate tract.
5. Minimum side yard setback for principal and accessory structures may be reduced as long
as the minimum distance between principal structures is a minimum of ten feet(10').
6. Minimum dimension shall only apply to single family attached dwelling units.
GENERAL: Except as provided for herein,all criteria set forth above shall be understood to be in relation to
individual parcel or lot boundary lines, or between structures. Condominium, and/or homeowners'
association boundaries shall not be utilized for determining development standards.
Revised October 2 2010 October 6, 2021 Page 81 of 48.2
Sonoma Oaks MPUD
I
WOLFE ROAD POC
SO2'16'18"E PUBLIC RCHT OF WAY NE CORNER, SE 1/4
�30.03'— — 49.4IDTH WVA NORTH LINE SE i) —SECTION 34
N89'49'46`W 1321.20' (BEARING BASIS)
S89'49'46"E I PARCEL 1338 I
326.80' S80'14'ig E j 300.10' I OR 3902, PGS 2677-2679
S8 281.76'
81.7 '
POB AL=40.34'
OR 5273, R=25.00'
4111011111
PCS 2488-2490 A=92'27'09"
CB=S43'58'12'W
CH=36.10. I
fV
pn
O
10
N
N
clift'
1
EAST LINE BLACK it oe N 3
BEAR RIDGE a O'4 N
vQQ 0 50 100 200 O
W_
xN I ODd.2>
°' I 1"=200' m -x
ESV"r
o_
L7v) �0-;
0 0 0 U j
re 0. p V O.V—mg
i° CONTA NING 1,021,139 SF OR AL=101.96'
IC c -. 23.44 ACRES, MORE OR ESS R=100.00'
d 5 —Z 8=58'25'O8"
c m CB=N26'57'03"E
�"`lx CH=97.60'
Sg6�QS
.P
c
.t AL=90.37'
$ R=120.00'
a v A=43'08'55"
CB=S34'35'16"W
co
R NCH-88.25'
2 A
u Oi
V
A g AL=124.98'
N ;.7 R=475.00'
A=15'04'32-
502'03'44'E H CB=S5'28'32'W
;,f 17.94' CH=124.62'
1.1 NORTH LINE MISSION
AL=38.64'
^ HILLS SHOPPING CENTER
R — —
=25.00'
0 C=68'33'23" PROPOSED
I
CB=S45'33'05"E EASEMENT
CH=34.91' (0.60 ACRES)
" 654.66'
g N89'49'45"W
0 MISSION HILLS SHOPPING CENTER I
w PB 41, PGS 26-29
m'
0
N
Y LEGEND
/ AL = ARC LENGTH
; CH = CHORD LENGTH
CB = CHORD BEARING
INST = INSTRUMENT NUMBER
o NOTES: PG = PAGE IAL RECORDS BOOK
0 1. THIS SKETCH IS NOT A SURVEY. POC = POINT OF COMMENCEMENT
2. BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON THE STATE PLANE P08 = POINT OF BEGINNING
S COORDINATE SYSTEM FLORIDA ZONE EAST (NAD 83/2011) WHERE R - RADIUS
Y THE NORTH LINE OF THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 48 SF = SQUARE FEET
2 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, BEARS S89'49'46"W. e = DELTA ANGLE
PARCEL 1 6610 Willow Park Drive,Suile 200
SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION Naples,Florida salon
Phone:(239)597-0575
SECTION,34,TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,RANGE 26 EAST, FAX: (239)697-0578
LB No.: 952
COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA ENGINEERING
JOB NUMBER REVISION SECTION TOWNSHIP RANGE SCAL.;" ATE DRAWN BY FILE NAME SHEET
180146.00.04 I 00 34 48 S 26 E 1"=200' 10/27/20 NJM 02 SD P1 I 2 OF 2
immilim
i rJ� e''+r �Y. s�., I , Abaco WAY Hs.,gf. LOOP ,,
/I\ , . , . . • * . • wriiimi -A' i ) l' .'''''' • ' •
x.i is4_,� t `
V.
,,+ � , M7 SUBJECT '� ,�r- y,I l """'`H - 11110 ,' �-"�"—`,
Nik
t ,. , PROPERTY ice"'= f t, -�� ' �+� ,rc`` t�
�,..` , •' - . .t„ _. IS i..S.� 'alp ,
I.
� �$44.i ` 3ltt) 1. � 7� -(+ e� .;t t{ _'ra;, - �'^^ i" i T. •i• ,_� 1.. . 77 • 141511
ie.. 7 , . y 4dis�I,1'at/ V ' ,•;( 't }i' 1 I :.i`_, , ji •
. ,, , -
,-.. . .. . ..,,-....... ..........t.
.4 ,
s Y gy yy +mayy...«.III
1 YY Redpu.IMer WAY I. Jy M .1 `Q 'd..• •,! ! �� ') t tr. Tf' •Ff• . i i7�
p t f I ti. U,!it
4'. eM it=T*'!.RI.. A. ' At f ;• - ` I )`,.JI�Y - Tuscany/4..1 CV S
lllL -1_! , ll�r� -{ �F RI .1r(, 1 � y^n .1.1,/ J, . 44-I.
' :;� rAM3011110 oti re-;-r.nits J � 1'a s 1.!i
; '�` _-' • -+lam f. r�,a,yPem�.rR�
1..ko..1ci s 1i,1 Iv..� . '' S�� ! 1 �I�'IK'J s
i .:r r/.'. ` ps a-i•.71,1 ,t'i Mneme Hdb OR ` r Sir.�• IrOr' i
41 KAI
7.i'M.,.m••",.'1-'.4,..'.',
F rl—i-:k t.."." .,7-..
t+ oit-,-.;t1--,l:.W.ii1.,,i4.-';.•.-:„;:'...-1'':..'';:"..
., e6
-...i, ...
r*...-..-...---.....,t:.1.'.e.7.,' '• r ,'z27i.i-i7..-ka
1 `
..,.
..,,.2C u,b c*1 W ic A s..Y.`,.!;-.A.r.t.,t-.o.-:-A. ,;ir-r,.-.-,in.Y..
_ ...
•I, ` ..vim; 4 t ... ,..,.:,.