HEX Final Decision #2026-02 INSTR 6777399 OR 6547 PG 2748
RECORDED 1/23/2026 2:01 PM PAGES 9
CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER
COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA
REC$78.00
HEX NO. 2026-02
HEARING EXAMINER DECISION
DATE OF HEARING.
January 8, 2026
PETITION.
Petition No. PDI-PL20250010077 — Intersection of County Barn and Whitaker Roads-
Juniper Townhomes Owner, LLC requests an insubstantial change to the Crews Road
RPUD,Ordinance 22-03 for the modification of a Public Utilities Development Commitment
reducing the minimum size of the water main from 8 inches to 6 inches. The property is
located northeast of the intersection of County Barn and Whitaker Roads, in Section 8,
Township 50 South,Range 26 East,Collier County,Florida.
GENERAL PURPOSE FOR THE PETITION.
The petitioner requests an insubstantial change(PDI)to the Crews Road RPUD,Ordinance 22-03, .
for the modification of a Public Utilities Development Commitment, reducing the minimum size
of the water main from 8 inches to 6 inches.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
Approval with conditions.
FINDINGS.
1. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction over this Petitioner pursuant to Sec. 2-87 of the Collier
County Code of Ordinances, Sec. 8.10.00 of the Land Development Code, and Chapter 9 of
the County Administrative Code.
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 Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) was advertised and held on Tuesday,
December 16, 2025, at 5:00 pm at the Shepherd of the Glades Church located at 6020
Rattlesnake Hammock Road, Naples, FL 34112. No members of the public were present or
participating remotely,and therefore no recording or transcript was available.
5. The public hearing was conducted in the following manner: the County Staff presented the
Petition followed by the Petitioner and/or Petitioner's representative,public comment and then
Page 1 of 5
rebuttal by the Petitioner and/or Petitioner's representative. There were no objections at the
public hearing.
6. 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
acting in the capacity of the Planning Commission shall make findings as to the original
application with the criteria in Land Development Code Sections 10.02.13.E.1. and
10.02.13.E.2.
LDC 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 no, there is no
proposed change in the boundary of the PUD.
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 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. 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 no, 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 to the size of areas used for non-residential uses and no relocation of non-
residential areas.
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 no, there are no
substantial impacts resulting from this amendment.
1 The Hearing Examiner's findings are italicized.
Page 2 of 5
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 no, there are no
substantial impacts resulting from this amendment.
7. Will the change result in a requirement for increased stormwater retention, or otherwise
increase stormwater discharge?
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that no, the proposed
changes 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 no, 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 no, County staff
determined the proposed changes to the PUD Document would be consistent with the
FLUE of the GMP. Both environmental and transportation planning staff have reviewed
this petition, and no changes to the PUD Document are proposed that would be deemed
inconsistent with the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) or the
Transportation Element of the GMP. This petition does not propose any increase in density
or intensity of the permitted land uses.
LDC Sec. 10.02.13.E.2 Criterion:
Insubstantial change determination. 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 proposed
change does not affect the original analysis and findings for the most recent zoning action
in Petition PUDZ-PL20210000101.
Comprehensive Planning:
Page 3 of 5
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that because this application
is not adding uses or increasing the intensity of the previously approved roved uses in the Crews Road
RPUD, it is consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP.
Environmental Review:
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that Environmental staff have
evaluated the proposed changes to the PUD documents and found no issue with consistency.
Public Utilities:
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that Public Utilities staff have
evaluated the proposed changes to the PUD documents and found no issue with consistency.
DEVIATION DISCUSSION.
The petitioner is not seeking any deviations aspart 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 the Petition.
DECISION.
The Hearing Examiner hereby APPROVES Petition No. PDI-PL20250010077, filed by the agent
Michael Pappas, P.E., of RWA, Inc., representing the owner Juniper Townhomes Owner, LLC,
with respect to the subject property located northeast of the intersection of County Barn and
Whitaker Roads, in Section 8,Township 50 South,Range 26 East, Collier County,Florida,for the
following:
• An insubstantial change (PDI) to the Crews Road RPUD, Ordinance 22-03, for the
modification of a Public Utilities Development Commitment, reducing the minimum size
of the water main from 8 inches to 6 inches.
Said changes are fiilly described in the Revised Public Utilities Development Commitment
attached as Exhibit "A" and the Zoning Map attached as Exhibit `B", and are subject to the
condition(s) set forth below.
ATTACHMENTS.
Exhibit A—Revised Public Utilities Development Commitment
Exhibit B —Zoning Map
Page 4 of 5
LEGAL DESCRIPTION.
The property is located northeast of the intersection of County Barn and Whitaker Roads, in
Section 8, Township 50 South,Range 26 East, Collier County,Florida.
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.
/Pd 92--1-------
January 22, 2026
Date Andrew Dickman, Esq., AICP
Hearing Examiner
Page 5 of 5
EXHIBIT "A"
spacing standards of a Type 'B' Buffer. Size and number of such plantings will be determined at time of
SDP or Plat.
ENVIRONMENTAL:
A. The project has 9.08+/- acres of existing native vegetation (not inclusive of the Crews Road
Easement). A minimum of 15 percent of the existing calculated native vegetation on-site shall be
retained.The minimum required native vegetation for the RPUD is 1.36+/-acres.
B. A management plan for the Florida Black Bear shall be submitted for review and approval at the
time of plat or SDP for the project,whichever is applicable.
C. The 1.62 acre portion of the preserve that will serve as floodplain compensation will be restored
per LDC Section 3.05.07.H.
D. The preserve will be used to satisfy environmental permitting associated with floodplain
compensation. Any portion of the preserve area impacted to address floodplain compensation will
be created and restored as allowed by either the LDC, County Ordinances, or adopted preserve
management plan.
PUBLIC UTILITIES:
In accordance with Subsection 2.2.2 of the Design Criteria (Section 1 of the Utilities Standards Manual),
the developer will extend a water main through the PUD and provide a stub-out at the northeastern
corner of the PUD for future development along Crews Road and for future looping of the
water distribution system.The water main will be a minimum size of 8 6 inches and will be located in
County Utility Easement dedicated to the Collier County Water-Sewer District (District) by the owner.
The CUE will be shown on any final subdivision plat and will be conveyed in accordance with the
Collier County Utilities Standards and Procedures Ordinance (04-31, as amended) at no cost to the
County or District, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances,prior to or concurrent with final
acceptance of utilities.The developer will provide an in-line gate valve immediately downstream of the
last water service connection to allow for isolation of the water main stub-out and eliminating the need
for an automatic flushing device at the dead end.
Page 11 of 12
Crews Road RPUD December 17,2021
PL20210000101
EXHIBIT // //
•
LJ \_,I 4140,j 't lig'
j
e rhip --! 4COPE RESERVEL-- �� RPUD
1ta, I
l SITE
I —1 ,���((,‘1�1 LOCATION .
ke �_t` , E FALLING
ill , WATERS
� c• x PUD
_. _ _(opt \ .$1 - L. P
t1 ilmar L\ PROJECT _ _ict: ._ ,, ,, ,,. , c►ss ,6
`I LOCATION E
i. L. Wiper 11 t1 CREWS
e
RPUD ROAD RPUD
U _erns RUB _ �.
j N lu . E
Prisms r
I �117iitaker RI
Cynthia IN r '. -
¢ .andsila X
e/ .J ._ - Jasper IBLVI) --- --
tt.1 4, 1 --1x i o,at.�o - — �VIF 6
a t. S6 J �
1, .
A- , _ L.- - =--Wh toltee-N6----
ov - Leoirorr OSeye CT ,�U. I 1 r I I
Location Map Zoning Map
Petition Number: PL20250010077
PDI-PL20250010077, Crews Road RPUD Last revised: 12/17/25 Page 2 of 6
Hearing Examiner(HEX)Date: 1/8/26