CCPC Minutes 09/05/2013 R September 5,2013
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Naples,Florida,September 5,2013
LET IT BE REMEMBERED,that the Collier County Planning Commission,in and for the County of
Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION in
Building"F"of the Government Complex,East Naples,Florida,with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN: Mark Strain
Paul Midney
Karen Homiak
Diane Ebert
Phillip Brougham
Mike Rosen
ABSENT: Barry Klein
Tom Eastman,School District
ALSO PRESENT:
Raymond V. Bellows,Planning Manager,Zoning
Heidi Ashton-Cicko,County Attorney's Office
Michael Sawyer,Project Manager
Page 1 of 53
AGENDA
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 9:00 A.M., TTJR8DA)/, SEPTEMBER 5, 2013,
IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM,ADMINISTRATION BUILDING,COUNTY
GOVERNMENT CENTER,THIRD FLOOR,l299TAK4L\&4!TRAIL EAST,NAPLES, FLORIDA:
NOTE: INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 &4D4D?£8 ON ANY ITEM.
INDIVIDUALS SELECTED T0 SPEAK 0NDERALF'UFAN ORGANIZATION DKGROUP
ARE EICOURAGED AND MAY BE ALLOTTED 10 MINUTES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM IF
SO RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIRMAN. PERSONS WISHING TO HAVE WRIYI'EN OR
GRAPHIC MATERIALS INCLUDED lN THE CCPC AGENDA PACKETS MUST SUBMIT
SAID MATERIAL A MINIMUM OF 10 DAYS PRIOR 7OTRE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC
HEARING. IN ANY CA8EWKlTTl�N MA�[E0/\L8 |��]'BuQED]08ECO��SlDEBEDBY
THE CCPC SHALL BE 'SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A
MINIMUM 0F SEVEN DAYS PRIOR T0 THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MA ftRIAL USED
[N PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CCPC WILL BECOME A PFRMANFNT PART OF THE
RECORD AND WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IF APPLICABLE.
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF TIlE CCPC WILL NEED A
RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO. AND THEREFORE MAY
NEED TO ENSURE THAT /\ VERBATIM RI CORD 0 1111- PROCI-I-DNGS IS MADE
WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE
APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. ROLL CALL BY SECRETARY
3. ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA
4. PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES
5. APPROVAL 0F MINUTES—July i8,l0i}and August l.20l3
6. BCC REPORT-RECAPS
7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT
8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
& PVB2-PL20110000762: Living Word Family Church My0Ix. Recommendation to consider an Ordinance of
the Board of County Commissioners of Collier Coun1y. Florida amending Ordinance Number 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 an Agricultural Zoning District
with a Mobile Home Overlay(A-MHO)to a Mixed Use Planned Unit Development(WILD)Zoning District for
the project to be known as the Living Word Family Church MPUD; to allow construction of religious
facilities with a maximum of2.400 seats,u500 seat amphitheater, a grade school for kindergarten through 12rh
grade with a maximum of 250 students, a child care center with up to 200 students,assisted living facilities and
continuing care retirement community uses for seniors at a .45 floor area ratio and independent living facilities
for seniors at a maximum of 200 units and ooc*osmy, retail and social service uses for property located in
Section 30, Township 48 South, Range 27 Eas t, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 35.0±/- acres; repealing
Ihe existing Conditional Use on the properly granted by Resolution Number 06-03, as amended by Resolution
Number 09'213; and by providing an effective date. [Coordinator: Nancy Oundluch, A}CP, KLA, Principal
Planner]
Page 1 of 2
NOTE: This item will be heard under 9A,then as consent
B. SV-PL20130000818: Del Mar Shopping Center, a Resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier
County, Florida granting a variance from Section 5.06.04.F.4 of the Land Development Code to increase the
number of signs on the building to allow an additional sign per unit up to a maximum of 35 total signs for the
entire Del Mar Shopping Center located on the north side of Davis Boulevard in Section 4, Township 50
South,Range 26 East,Collier County,Florida. [Coordinator:Mike Sawyer,Project Manager]
NOTE: This item will be heard under 9B,then as consent
C. CU-PL20110000719: A Resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida providing for
the establishment of a Conditional Use to allow therapeutic equestrian riding and stabling on property less than
20 acres in size within a Rural Agricultural zoning district pursuant to Subsections 2.03.01.A.1.c.19 and
2.03.01.A.1.c.24 of the Collier County Land Development Code. The subject property is located on the
southwest corner of Goodlette-Frank Road and Center Street in Section 10, Township 49 South, Range 25
East,Collier County,Florida. [Coordinator:Mike Sawyer,Project Manager]
9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. SV-PL20130000818: Del Mar Shopping Center, a Resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier
County, Florida granting a variance from Section 5.06.04.F.4 of the Land Development Code to increase the
number of signs on the building to allow an additional sign per unit up to a maximum of 35 total signs for the
entire Del Mar Shopping Center located on the north side of Davis Boulevard in Section 4, Township 50
South,Range 26 East,Collier County,Florida. [Coordinator:Mike Sawyer,Project Manager]
B. CU-PL20110000719: A Resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida providing for
the establishment of a Conditional Use to allow therapeutic equestrian riding and stabling on property less than
20 acres in size within a Rural Agricultural zoning district pursuant to Subsections 2.03.01.A.1.c.19 and
2.03.01.A.1.c.24 of the Collier County Land Development Code. The subject property is located on the
southwest corner of Goodlette-Frank Road and Center Street in Section 10, Township 49 South, Range 25
East,Collier County,Florida. [Coordinator:Mike Sawyer,Project Manager]
10. OLD BUSINESS
11. NEW BUSINESS
12. PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM
13. DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA
14. PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
15. ADJOURN
CCPC Agenda/Ray Bellows/jmp
Page 2 of 2
September 5,2013
PROCEEDINGS
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good morning,everyone.Welcome to the Thursday,September 5th
meeting of the Collier County Planning Commission.
If you'll all please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Will the secretary please do the roll call.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Mr.Eastman is absent.
Mr.Rosen?
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: Here.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Mr.Midney?
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Here.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Mr.Strain?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Here.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Ms.Homiak is here.
Ms.Ebert?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Here.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Mr.Klein is absent?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes. He couldn't be here today.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: And Mr. Brougham.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Here.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
Addenda to the agenda. Ray,are there any changes?
MR.BELLOWS: I have no changes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody from the Planning Commission?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No,okay.
Planning Commission absences. Our next meeting is two weeks from today,and we have the GMP
books that were provided to you. It will be the focus of that meeting. And then the following Friday we have
the AUIR meeting,just so you know. So our schedule for the rest of the month are those two meetings.
Does anybody know if they're not going to be here for either of those meetings?
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Friday.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The Friday one you won't be here for. Then one,two--we'll still have a
quorum. We'll make it work. Thank you,Paul.
Okay. Approval of minutes. We had two sets of minutes delivered electronically. The first one was
July 18,2013. Were there any changes or corrections needed to those? If not,is there a motion to approve?
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: I'll move to approve.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Second.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Made by Mr.Brougham,seconded by Ms.Homiak.
Discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor,signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 6-0.
The second one was the August 1,2013,meeting. Are there any changes,corrections?
Page 2 of 53
September 5,2013
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If not--okay. Motion to approve by Ms.Homiak. Seconded by?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I'll second.
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: Second.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: By Mike.
All those in favor,signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 6-0.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: What is that noise?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah,is that--
MR.BELLOWS: Somebody has a cell phone near a speaker?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. Anybody up here who's got a turned-on cell phone? Ah,Mike.
COMMISSIONER NOMIAK: The new guy.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: The junior member.
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: I apologize.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It's the new guy again.That's much quieter now.
BCC report,Ray? Well,you're not going to have one,are you?
MR.BELLOWS: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good. Chairman's report.One thing I'd like to note today is that we ran out
of speaker slips. There's been a reduction in paper quantity needed in this facility,so there wasn't enough
speaker slips out front. But don't worry,you'll still be able to speak. When we get into the speaker side of
this discussion today,I'll be asking the audience if anybody wants to speak,so just come up and use the
microphones,and state your name and address--well,just your name,actually,I think.
Ray,do we need address and everything?
MR.BELLOWS: It wouldn't hurt to put it on there.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So anyway,we'll still get--everybody that's here will be heard.
There's nothing to worry about.
***Other than that,we'll move into our consent-agenda items. The first item up is our consent for
Living World Family Church,PUDZ-PL20110000762.
Does anybody--Ray?
MR.BELLOWS: If the chairman would indulge,I have a question,along with the applicant,on a
clarification on some of the phraseology.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sure. Let's get it cleared up. That's what we're supposed to do now.
MR.HANCOCK: Good morning,Mr.Chairman,members of the Planning Commission. Tim
Hancock with Davidson Engineering.
I believe the document before you,the changes that were made are all correct and accurate. There
may be a potential inconsistency in interpretation.I wanted to try and clarify.
In the September 5th planning and zoning department memorandum that say part of your agenda
packet,under Item 2A it states,limit the use of the facility to Christmas and Easter,and a temporary use
permit shall be required for use during other times of the year.
You may recall this is the pavilion structure that we discussed. And if you look at the wording in the
PUD,which I believe is correct,it states that the pavilion outdoor--and this is on Page 2 of 14 of the
document, it says,use of the facility not related specifically to Christmas and Easter shall be subject to
temporary use permit conditions as required by the Land Development Code.
Page 3 of 53
September 5,2013
That language is intended to encompass that if an event should trigger a temporary use permit,then
one shall be required. If,however,the youth group wanted to have a picnic after a church service under the
pavilion,that would not trigger the temporary use permit and one would not,therefore,be required.
So I think there's--if you agree that that is the interpretation,then I would just point out that Item 2A
on the memo may not be worded correctly. And absent that,we have no other changes or clarifications we
wish to offer or request.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I don't think the Planning Commission intended to allow you to build a
building that you can only use two days a year. So I'm sure that the--that clarification can be added or
corrected.
Is that okay,Ray?
MR. BELLOWS: Yes,defmitely.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else have any issues?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: No,that was it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Is there a motion to recommend approval for the Living World
Family Church?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I make a motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Second.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Made by Commissioner--
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Ebert.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I was just thinking;she made it,not you. You're second.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Seconded.
CHAIRMAN S TRAIN: All in favor,signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 6-0.
***Okay. With that we'll move directly into our regular hearings. The first one up is a petition for a
sign variance. It's Petition SV-PL20130000818,Del Mar Shopping Center sign variance.
All those wishing to testify on behalf of this item,please rise and be sworn in by the court reporter.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Disclosures from the Planning Commission? I had a conversation with Mr.
Mulhere quite a while back on this one,and now I see it coming through.
Phil?
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Yes. I spoke with Bob Mulhere and exchanged emails with he
and Chris Shucart.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms.Homiak?
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I just exchanged email with Bob.
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: I exchanged emails with Bob Mulhere.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's it,okay.
Before you go into your presentation,it might help direct it if we know--are there any--just out of
curiosity,in reading this it seemed pretty straightforward. Does anybody have any concerns with it that Bob
needs to emphasize on in his presentation?
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: I don't have a concern,but--after our conversation,I'm totally
Page 4 of 53
September 5,2013
clear,but just to clear up any potential confusion on the size of the individual signs that are being requested
for each unit. We talked about it,and the wording in the Land Development Code is somewhat--or could be
somewhat vague as to building versus unit,so--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I just wanted to find--so Bob had some direction,we don't need to reinvent
the wheel on your entire presentation.
MR.MULHERE: Right. I'll be very brief. For the record, Bob Mulhere.
With me this morning is Christopher Shucart.And we're talking about the Del Mar Shopping Center,
which is on Davis Boulevard.
I just wanted to just show you very briefly.It is a little bit unique. As you can see here,as Davis
Boulevard comes around this corner,this is the subject parcel,or comes around this curve really.
And the center is designed with all of the parking and principal access to the units from the rear. As
you can see,it fronts right on Davis Boulevard. And that's probably good for a couple of reasons from a
design perspective. Number one,you don't have a lot of turning movements into the center right on the edge
of that curve coming around Davis. And also,it moves the actual building further away from the residential
properties behind it. So all of the access,principal access,is from the rear of the building.
The building was architecturally designed to basically have a double frontage,and it was designed to
accommodate the signs that we're requesting.
We only have one request relative to the staff recommendation. There was a condition related to
Pelican Larry's,just wall signs--a business is permitted a single wall sign unless it's a corner unit. If it's a
corner unit,it's permitted two wall signs fronting each of the streets.
And there is a unit Pelican Larry's occupies that is a corner unit,and it has two signs. And this staff
recommendation limits that unit to no additional sign even though we were asking for an additional wall sign
in the rear for all of the units.
So we don't really understand that,because it's permitted,the two signs that are on the corner,and
then wouldn't have a sign in the rear,which really doesn't achieve what the intent of this variance request is.
And so we'd like to also be able to have--well,we'd like to have a wall sign for each unit in the rear
of the building so the limitation would--instead of for 35 signs,total would be 36 signs and 17 additional
signs.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If you've got two end units and you want to add the ability to have a sign in
the rear for each end unit,wouldn't you mean 37,or why--
MR.MULHERE: Well,for some reason that restriction was only applied to one--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: One end unit.
MR.MULHERE: Right.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well,I'm sure that can be explained when we get to that point for
the staff. Is that your--
MR.MULHERE: But other than that,we're fine with all of the staff recommendations and
conditions,and we think this makes sense. There are very few circumstances like this.
The code actually promotes this kind of design in certain circumstances but doesn't really
accommodate it from a signage perspective. Something we could look at the next time we look at the sign
code.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Questions from the Planning Commission?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Bob,where is Unit 108?
MR.MULHERE: 108?
MR. SHUCART: It's in the middle of the courtyard.
MR.MULHERE: It's in the middle of the courtyard?
MR. SHUCART: Yeah. It's on the—
MR.MULHERE: Which building?
MR. SHUCART: First building.
MR.MULHERE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Why don't you repeat that for the record,since he's not on record.
Page 5 of 53
September 5,2013
Do you mind stating your name for the record,sir.
MR. MULHERE: We can show it right on here.
MR. SHUCART: Christopher Shucart,for the record. Unit 108 is currently right here.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Does that--do you guys consider that a corner unit?
MR. MULHERE: Yep.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So you can have three signs on that unit is what you're asking for?
MR. SHUCART: There won't be.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But I know you may say there won't be. All I'm trying to--the way we
write this,I've got to make sure it's written to accommodate. Those are butted up--those two buildings end
up having four corner units instead of just two.
MR.MULHERE: No,we would limit that to two,the two actual corners,which would be here and
here.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I'm glad we got that straightened out.
So 108 has got a sign currently facing the back that's illuminated.
MR.MULHERE: It does.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The staff recommendation is 108 currently has illuminated wall signs that
faces the parking lot,the existing wall signs are permitted to be retained until the signage is removed or
replaced or the current business moves or vacates the unit.
So what that's really intending is that you will remove the illuminated sign when the current business
leaves,but you're allowed to put a regular sign back up.
MR.MULHERE: Another wall sign,yes.
CHAIRMAN S[RAIN: Is that the way you understand and staffs acknowledging? Okay.That's the
only question I had left.
Thank you,Bob.
MR.MULHERE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any comments from staff?
MR.SAWYER: For the record,Mike Sawyer,project manager for the petition.
The only thing that--yeah,staff was proposing to allow one additional wall sign facing the parking
lot for that western unit. The intention--what we were indicating with that is that if the current business
were to ever move or no longer be in business,that any subsequent one would only be allowed the wall sign
towards the front and the back,just like all the other units.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. But we do have provisions in the code that apply to corner units
separately,correct?
MR. SAWYER: Correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So currently under the code,they could have two signs on that unit,one on
the end and one on the front?
MR.SAWYER: Correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And the request was to allow an additional sign in the back for each of the
units. So I'm just wondering,if we currently allow the sign on the ends and they came in for a variance to get
the unit--signs on the back for--I guess you could justify it as safety reasons to make sure people go to the
right units,what is the harm in leaving the ones on the ends as the code currently allows?
MR. SAWYER: Yeah. I think staffs concerned that the more signs that you've got--you know,
when you've got units with--on the corners that are already allowed two,that that really should be adequate.
You wind up having one that winds up having three signs. Staff gets concerned that we wind up having too
many signs at that point.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And then--but--
MR.SAWYER: And that the two signs should actually be adequate.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Did staff agree that the premise for this variance was justified,that the
additional signs in the back are something that's needed and justified in regards to directional and help people
find right units?
MR. SAWYER: Yes,definitely.
Page 6 of 53
September 5,2013
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,it's almost like you're saying the signs are needed and they're
justified,but if they put it there,they've got to take out the one that's allowed on the end,and I'm not sure
what the logic there--how that logic prevails,so--
MR. SAWYER: Again,it's just a concern by--on staffs--from staffs view that we wind up getting
more--a proliferation of signs. It's just the number of signs,you know,on a given unit. And some of these
units are fairly small.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Bill? I mean Phil.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: I sort of raised up when you said proliferate. You don't have
any more than three sides on corner units. So if you have a sign on the front and a sign on the side and a sign
on the rear,you can't have anymore,unless you put one on the roof.
MR.SAWYER: That would be interesting. I agree.
MR.MULHERE: If you look at the--I don't know how well you can see this picture,but that is the
unit that--and this--you know,you enter back here into the back parking lot. And you can see there's two
signs there.
You really won't be able to see that other sign. The only people that can see these signs are people
going and parking and walking into the center. You can't see it from the public right-of-way and so on and so
forth.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It there—Mike,is there a maximum,I don't know--I know the word
"volume"isn't right,but let's say square foot or square inch surface area that,collectively,all signs can meet?
See,if they had--if they have allowed 60 feet total square footage for all the signs that they put in that
business,is there some limitation,for example,that--
MR. SAWYER: There is a limitation as far as the size of the individual wall signs themselves.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right.
MR.SAWYER: I don't believe that there is a limitation on the total.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,okay.
MR.MULHERE: There only is de facto because it--since each wall sign can't exceed--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I don't think it was working.
MR.MULHERE: Since each wall sign can't exceed,I think it's 20 percent of the size of the face of
the wall.
MR.BELLOWS: Correct.
MR.MULHERE: And then there are some setbacks that also limit the size. But 20 percent of the
size of the wall for each unit is limited to 20 percent in aggregate for the total face of the building as well,sort
of get back into that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. But you're not going beyond the aggregate limit--
MR.MULHERE: No.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --if there was any imposed?
MR.MULHERE: No. In fact,the--just--I mean,the signs would--this is an existing sign on the
front of the building,and the signs in the rear would be very similar to that. If not—you know,there's
continuity in the signage,and there's continuity in the colors and the architectural design of the building,and
we'd want to keep that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Does anybody have any other questions of the applicant?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mike,is there any more you want to add as a staff report?
MR. SAWYER: Only that we're recommending approval of the request with the four stipulations.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Are there any members of the public that wish to speak on this item?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. From the perspective of the Planning Commission,does anybody
have any comments?
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Just to go back to that last discussion. This petition is for a
variance to have a sign on each of the units in the rear. And I would certainly recommend that we allow a
sign on each of those units in the rear,and on the two end units,that we allow a total of three signs,one in the
Page 7 of 53
September 5,2013
front,one on the side,and one in the rear.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And,Bob,are you requesting the end signs for both end corner
units,or just the one to the--I think it's the west?
MR.MULHERE: Well,there was no limitation in the staff report on that one,and so we--and in
the count that would have included a sign for that unit as well.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So the 36 signs gives you all the quantity of signs you need?
MR.MULHERE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else have any comments? I don't think--
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Yeah,the--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: The resolution has 38,a total of 38.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's--Heidi,did you--did your office write that resolution?
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Maximum of 38--
MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Yes,I did.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: --total signs.
MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Yeah,it should be 36.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So the resolution will need to be changed to acknowledge 36 signs
as long as the Planning Commission agrees with that.That would be a new stipulation. And we have to
change No.3 for a total of 36 instead of 35. We also had--what about the additional wall signs of 16;that
still will remain the same—
MR. MULHERE: Right.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --but the 36 would represent the act(sic)you could have to the end wall.
And then No.2,Unit 108,is it clear enough that you can replace that illuminated sign with a rear
sign? I think because you've got 16 as the total count for rear. That covers that,too?
MR.MULHERE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So we just need to change Recommendation No.3 if the Planning
Commission agrees with that.
So is there a motion subject to that stipulation?
MR.MULHERE: I just want to make sure,you said change the number to 35 in that condition,
right?
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Change to 36.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Change the number to 36.
MR.MULHERE: Thirty-six,and also the other--the second number goes up by one,too,doesn't it?
MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Seventeen.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: What's the second number?
MR.MULHERE: Seventeen.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. Well,no. Doesn't the--you're currently allowed the end wall signs,
right?
MR.MULHERE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And you're only asking for the rear wall sign. So what premise would there
be to take away their end wall signs if we didn't take them away at this meeting?
MR.MULHERE: I'm just counting a number--I'm just counting the number. If we're adding--if
we were limited to 35 because we weren't allowed a rear wall sign for the Pelican Larry's unit--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right.
MR.MULHERE: --and now we are--
MR. SHUCART: I think 17's good.
MR.MULHERE: That's what I was saying, 17.Maybe we were saying the same thing.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,sorry to split hairs.
MR.MULHERE: A total of 36--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But it says 17 additional wall signs--or 16 additional wall signs. You
already have a wall sign at Pelican Larry's on the end,correct? That's permitted,right,or not?
Page 8 of 53
September 5,2013
MR.MULHERE: Is there a wall sign in the back on Pelican Larry's?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You know,I thought you were arguing that you wanted--
MR.MULHERE: No. There's two signs,but they're on the corners. There's nothing in the back.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I understand that. And I may be miscommunicating. You have two signs
on Pelican Larry's right now,one on the end and one in the front.
MR.MULHERE: One on the front and one on the corner,yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Corner and--
MR.MULHERE: Visible from Davis,yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Correct. You want an additional sign on the back?
MR.MULHERE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The signs in the back,there are a total of 16 of them?
MR.MULHERE: Seventeen, 17 units.
MR. SHUCART: Sixteen minus the existing pizza one.
MR.MULHERE: A total of 17.
MR. SHUCART: A total of 17.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So you have 17 rear signs,because it says you need 16 additional
wall signs.
MR.MULHERE: That's because they weren't allowing us the one wall sign up at Pelican Larry's.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So you need 36 total wall signs and 17 additional wall signs?
MR.MULHERE: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Now I understand. Thank you.
So with that change to the numbers,does everybody--does anybody want to make a motion?
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: I'll make a motion to forward with approval of Petition
SV-PL201300000818 with the changes as we just discussed.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All those in favor,signify by saying.
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: Ave.
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye.
CHAIRMAN S'T'RAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 6-0.
MR.MULHERE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: ***Let's move to the consent agenda that mirrors this one. It's
SV-PL20130000818,Del Mar Shopping Center.
This is consent to acknowledge the changes we previously made,which is to change the
recommendation to 36 wall signs with one additional on Staff Note No.3,and that would be,then,to accept
the recommendations of staff. We're done with it. Anybody want to make that motion?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I'll make that motion.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: By Ms.Ebert. Seconded by?
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Second.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms.Homiak.
Discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor,signify by saying aye.
Page 9 of 53
September 5,2013
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 6-0.
Thank you.
***Okay. Next one up may not go that fast.It's CU-PL20110000719. It's the Naples Equestrian
Center conditional use request for the southwest corner of Goodlette-Frank Road and Center Street.All those
wishing to testify on behalf of this item,please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter.
Whether you have a speaker slip or not,if you're going to intend to speak,please stand up.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Disclosures on the part of the Planning Commission. We'll start
with you,Mike.
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: No. I've received, I think,about a hundred emails so far,and that's my
only communication.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Paul?
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: (Shakes head.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I have received probably well over a hundred,because there's a bunch in
my box that I haven't yet forwarded to Mike,who's been collecting them all for me,so 1 have seen all those
emails.
I also met with several people. Ms.Martino,Clay Brooker,Kim Minarich,and Wayne Arnold,and I
spoke with Richard Yovanovich on the phone. And I also spoke with Commissioner Henning.
Okay.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I just had emails. I had 100 emails that I read by midnight last night,
anyways. If there was more after that,I didn't read them.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes. I spoke with Wayne Arnold,I spoke with Clay Brooker,I also
spoke with staff on this,and read many emails.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Phil?
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Emails,and I visited--didn't go inside,but I did go up to the
site and drive all around the perimeter.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you.
And with that,Wayne,it's all yours to start.
MR.ARNOLD: Thank you. Good morning. I'm Wayne Arnold with Q.Grady Minor&
Associates,professional planner,and here representing the Naples Equestrian Challenge. With me today are,
obviously,many members of the Equestrian Challenge family,I'll call them,who are supporters and
volunteers. But also Kim Minarich,who is the executive director. Some of you may know Kim from her
prior involvement in many other community activities.
But Kim will be part of the presentation. Pm going to do some of the introductory remarks and then
have Kim come and talk to you a little bit about the history of the Equestrian Challenge,who they are,what
their mission is,and reaffirm why the new facilities are essential for them to keep performing the great things
they've been doing in Naples.
The property,as most of you know,it's kind of a landmark because of the red barn at the corner of
Center and Goodlette-Frank Road. I've outlined the two lots that are the subject of this petition.They exist on
what's known as Lot 21 in Pine Ridge right now at the corner of Center and Ridge and Goodlette,and that
facility has their existing barn,the riding arena that's covered,and their office space.
Lot 20,adjacent to them,is also owned by the Naples Equestrian Challenge and has been for many
years,and they have paddocks on that property as well as the original residential home that existed.They also
Page 10 of 53
September 5,2013
have some improved parking on that lot,and they have an unused century trail that was built for riders,but
because they didn't have a conditional use,they've been unable to use the century trail as part of their
programs.
And then Lot 19 is the southernmost lot,and it's under contract by the Naples Equestrian Challenge
to buy that,and that's where the bulk of the new improvements would be proposed,and those improvements
I'll get into a little bit later.
But I wanted to talk to you--I think most of you understand that Naples Equestrian Challenge is a
therapeutic riding program,and they try to assist people with a variety of disabilities through equine therapy
proven to be fairly successful,and Pm sure going to hear from several of the volunteers and participants that
can attest to that.
I want to talk a little bit about the history of the original conditional use. It was approved back in
2000. And I've gone back through some of the meeting minutes at the time,and I've talked to code
enforcement individuals,and I can't find any record where there's been an issue related to the existing
facilities that have been operated by the Naples Equestrian Challenge now for over a dozen years. So I think
they've proven that they've been a good neighbor in the Pine Ridge community,as well as,you know,
certainly a benefit to all of Naples.
The therapeutic riding programs that they operate assist children and adults,and those programs--
Kim discussed how they operate,but they operate with a participant and a number of volunteers who then
assist the riders in the various forms of therapy that they conduct.
And I think Kim,when she talks a little bit about the operations,I think you'll understand how low
intensity the use really is.
One of the things that we did early on--I know that the Martinos,who live immediately across the
street from the facility,had reached out,and they had communication with the Naples Equestrian Challenge
and facilitated meetings. And the site plan that we started with in this project evolved largely because of the
communications with the Martinos and some of the concerns that they rightfully raised,which were issues of
parking,lighting,noise,things that we typically deal with for a conditional use.
And,for instance,I'll show you the plan that we started with. And I highlighted--the center lot,
you'll see,has the existing residence and office outlined on it,but you'll also notice that it has a parking field
completely around it.
And the Martinos said,you know,that seems like a lot of parking. It seems like it could be
impactive. It's close to our house,you know. Do we have to have the traffic noise,et cetera.
And out of that discussion grew the idea that maybe the access didn't even need to be Ridge Drive.
Maybe the access to the parking and the facilities could be entirely off of Center Street where currently there's
a one-way drive that services the project.
So at that meeting,Kim Minarich committed to making the access point on Ridge an
emergency-only access to,one,eliminate that potential for the program traffic to enter onto Ridge Drive,but
out of that also grew the opportunity to reduce the parking field and add an additional small paddock,which
you now see on the plan today.
So on Lot 20,there were some pretty significant changes to commit to the emergency access only
and to remove a couple tiers of parking and replace it with a turnout for the horses.
So I think out of that--I mean,those are the typical things that we would deal with. In most zoning
cases,you deal with neighbor compatibility. In this case,they're the immediate neighbor. It made perfect
sense to us to continue to try to be the good neighbors that we think they've been and to make those changes.
It didn't impact the program. It made good sense. So we did it.
Out of that,we also talked a lot about operations and how they operate. And Kim took great time to
go do parking counts,and she took great time to write the material that's in your packet that helped,I think,
Mike Sawyer understand exactly what they were hoping to do with the new facilities and how they would be
operated.
And out of that grew--Mike has offered two conditions with his recommendation of approval to talk
about no amplified sound in the new facility that we're proposing on Lot 19. Makes all the sense in the
world. And part of the reason that the plan is oriented the way it is--well,I'll digress a little bit--is that they
Page 11 of 53
September 5,2013
used amplified sound in the large riding arena because they have--it's a large arena. They need an amplified
sound.
In this smaller riding pen that's proposed on Lot 19,it's partially enclosed but not a fully enclosed
riding pen. It will have partial sides on it,but it's small enough they don't need an audio system. So she
committed early on that we wouldn't need an amplified sound system.
And, in fact,it's moved from the existing arena so that they don't have competing noise and so that
they can operate normal speaking voices as opposed to having amplified sound to conduct the therapy that
they want to conduct in the small riding pen that's proposed.
So the site plan pushed that riding pen further away from the existing arena so that there was no need
for amplified sound in the new proposed riding pen.
And then also Kim had addressed how they currently function with the Naples Equestrian Challenge
and talked about hours of operation and some of the special events that they host and the training that they do
for the path volunteers and other volunteers so they learn how to handle the horses and deal with the various
disabilities that some of the patrons have.
And so she committed that hours of operation,as part that--and I think Mike took largely what Kim
had written and applied that as a condition for approval,which limits the general hours to 8 a.m.to 8 p.m.,
and then offers the opportunity for training for volunteers to nine,and then other special event activities
ceasing by 11 o'clock.
And I think they have maybe a couple of annual events,but one is their barn dance that they host
annually,and that,I think,has typically ceased around 11 o'clock,if I'm not mistaken.
So just to orient you,let me show you a color version of our plan,and I'll just walk you through that
quickly before I turn it over to Kim to talk to you about the program. Just a little bit easier to visualize with
the color.
So on the far left are the existing improvements. That includes the barn near Goodlette-Frank Road,
they have the large riding arena,and then their offices are the area closer to Ridge.
And then on Lot 20 that's labeled,you have other office space,small shed,the reduced parking,the
paddock,and the existing paddocks and riding trail that are there. They would be utilized as part of this
conditional use.
And then on Lot 19 furthest to the south,we have--it's really a six-stall barn meant to house four
horses,and then there's feed and tack space,and then there's a training room for the volunteers and classroom
space,and then the riding pen,which is,as Kim describes it,envisioned to be just a large gazebo with partial
side walls. And those would be used as part of the therapy and training program with a bridal trail around the
building and then,really,a service drive to deliver hay and essentials for the horses around that building.
That's our site plan. Again,I said it was driven to push the building farther away from the riding
arena where there's not the need for competing amplified sound and could be conducted quietly and continue
to be the good neighbor that we think they've been.
Maybe at this point I'll stop and let Kim kind of come and tell you a little bit more about what they
do,and then I'll wrap up talking a little bit more about buffers and land use compatibility and things like that.
MS.MINARICH: Good morning. For the record,Pin Kim Minarich,the executive director of
Naples Equestrian Challenge. I'm actually very pleased to be here before you today.
Naples Equestrian Challenge has quite a history. It started serving Collier County back in 1985--or
I'm sorry,back in 1995,and in 2000 it quickly became an accredited PATH organization.And PATH is our
sanctioning or accrediting organization. It stands for Professional Association of Therapeutic Horsemanship.
At that time,when they first started,a small group of very dedicated people,we served four
individuals with one little pony. We've grown quite a bit over these past 18 years,and we're now serving
over 432 participants. We have a herd of 10 horses in our big red barn.
And in 2007 we were able to build the large covered arena with a Wine Festival grant that we
received,and that really helped us grow the program. We could conduct programming year-round,more
hours of the day. If you can only imagine doing summer lessons out there in a paddock with no roof over our
head or fan. So it makes it a lot more comfortable.
Starting last year,we,NEC--therapeutic riding and equine therapy has grown tremendously,even
Page 12 of 53
September 5,2013
over the last five years. And just this last year NEC expanded its services beyond the historical therapeutic
riding.
We now offer equine-facilitated learning and equine-facilitated psychotherapy. And those programs
are a little bit different. They work with participants primarily on the ground with horses,some riding,but a
lot of the lessons are on the ground,and it's to teach self-awareness.It builds self-esteem. It helps build
boundaries.They learn with the horses. There are a lot of tactile sensory things that they do with grooming
horses,leading the horses.
Horses tend to mirror us,and so if we're aggressive,they get aggressive back,and it teaches us how
we affect how other people perceive us.
So these programs enabled us to reach out and collaborate with many other not-for-profits in Collier
County,which maximizes the donor dollars in this community. And we're able to pool our resources to do
this.
So last year we added programs for Pace Center for Girls,the Alzheimer's Support Group,
Parkinson's Association,as well as two programs for David Lawrence Center,one for their children's
program and the other for their Crossroads,which is their substance abuse program.
We also have a program with the Friends of Foster Children. All of these programs are just a
tremendous benefit to yet another segment of adults and children with special needs in Collier County.
And then the other amazing program that we were able to start this year in January is Operation
Strides. It's an equine-facilitated psychotherapy program for veterans that suffer with PTSD,traumatic brain
injury,and amputation.
That program is a fully-funded program by private donors for the next--well,now,next
year-and-a-half. So that is at no charge. We do that free of charge for our veterans.
Through this growth and collaboration,serving more people within Collier County,it has driven us
to the point that we're now operating at capacity under our covered arena. I literally can't add another half
hour worth of lesson time under our covered arena.
We can't schedule eight a.m.to 8 p.m.all classes in the arena because our horses can't work that
many hours every day. So in that schedule we have to allow for horse turnout time,exercise time,as well as
their lesson and handling time.
So what was exciting at the end of last year is that—and the beginning of this year,is that we had the
opportunity to purchase the lot to the south of us. That's a piece of property that NEC has looked at for
several years.
The owner of that property just really couldn't come to a price that we could afford.Luckily at this
point,when we went back to ask him about purchasing his property,we came to a very fair market price.
And after that--after that established letter of intent to purchase,I was able to apply for a CDBG grant,
which we were approved in May for that grant at the appraised value of that property,which is$520,000.
Further,we were very lucky in securing a bridge loan from a very generous and supportive donor of
that additional $130,000.
So we are--we're excited about adding these facilities. We're excited about serving more citizens
with special needs in Collier County. And it--and the other—this--we are just starting our fall session.
And for the very first time in our history,we have a wait list for our therapeutic riding program,which is
good and bad.We don't want to turn anyone away,but it does illustrate the need,and the growing need in our
community for these services.
So just to give you an idea of why we feel we need these facilities on the new lot,I want to walk
through what we would do with them. I think Wayne already addressed the barn. We would add four stalls
there. I don't perceive us to add four horses right away,but it provides us for that growth with our herd.
The more important thing is the riding arena,which is a round pen. It's a 75-foot-diameter round
pen,and it has a roof over it. And so my best description of that,if you're not familiar with those,it's a big,
huge covered--like a gazebo.
And in that riding facility,we would be able to conduct interactive vaulting,which is a type of
therapy--riding therapy for our participants that we cannot conduct in an arena shaped the way that we have
now. You really do need a round arena to do that. So that would be a service that we could add.
Page 13 of 53
September 5,2013
The other thing it allows us to do is run concurrent programming,thus being able to add more lesson
time. And because of the distance,again,we would not need a public address system or any miked sound in
that facility.
That facility could be used for a lot of the groundwork. It could be used for Operation Strides,for
more children programs like the foster--Friends of Foster Children that do a ground program and riding
program,we could have there while we have more therapeutic riding conducted in the large arena.
The meeting space that we're adding,the classroom space,we conduct trainings all year long. We
have a core group of volunteers,about 450,and we have orientations for volunteers held every month,
sometimes twice a month during season,with 30 or more volunteers that are new volunteers coming into our
organization. They have to go through an orientation. They have to then be trained as a side walker,and then
be trained as a groom and tacker,and then as a leader. So we're training volunteers constantly because it's
very important that they are educated as they work with our participants. So that would allows space to do
that.
And, further,we would be able to host PATH instructor trainings. We have not been able to do that
because we don't have the meeting space,and we could be a destination for PATH to--for other instructors
across the country that wish to get their certification. And this is a revenue builder for NEC. This--we
could--we would actually make money off of something like that,which would be great.
And the other thing that allows me to do--NEC to do is to embark on research projects. I would
love to partner with FGCU,University of Florida,and get funding to do research projects of therapeutic
riding,equine therapy,equine-assisted activities and therapies and the benefits of those.So just from a
professional standpoint for therapeutic riding,it just provides us with a great resource.
And I think--and then the paddock space,obviously,is very friendly,green space,and allows our
horses to graze up along Ridge Drive.
I don't know if you have any other questions.If not,I'll bring Wayne back up.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: When you finish your presentation with both of you guys,we may have
questions at that time. In fact,I know I've got some,so I'm sure there will be others.
MS.MINARICH: Okay.
MR.ARNOLD: Thanks. I'd just like to jump back in and say that,you know,we're here for a
conditional use approval. And you've heard many of them before,and I've handled a number myself. And
there are criteria in the code for conditional uses. And I think,generally,conditional uses are perceived to be
permitted with conditions.
And often you'll find that we're offering conditions. Staffs offered two of those conditions. The
original conditional use for NEC had four conditions,and I think it shows how we've matured,because they
didn't have hours of operation. They didn't have amplified sound requirements on that facility.
So I think--you know,obviously,knowing that we have neighbors,it telegraphs to us that we need
to be good neighbors. And these items,such as sound and noise,traffic,those are always the issues we're
dealing with on any compatibility finding.
And I think here,by restricting the access only to Center Street and limiting us to have no amplified
sound on the lot,those are two huge--huge things that have been done to make this and ensure that it's a
compatible land use in the neighborhood.
The traffic numbers,they're small by many numbers. And like I told the Pine Ridge residents when
we met with them,I don't live in your neighborhood,and I know that,you know,an additional 12 peak-hour
trips sounds like it could be a lot of trips,but it's truly an insignificant number when you look at how the
county deals with trips in many of the other projects that you deal with.
So--and Kim knows her numbers very well,because they keep track of every program participant,
the number of volunteers who are there. She has car counts. She has daily counts.She has to turn in much of
this information for the other grants that she receives from folks like the wine festival.
So we're comfortable with our numbers,and we think they're very accurate numbers. And I would
challenge anybody to find in the ITE manual where we fit neatly into any category to compare us to that,
because we don't. It's a very unique use.
Buffers were mentioned a number of times in our various meetings,and staff has indicated that on
Page 14 of 53
September 5,2013
Ridge Drive we would be required to put in a Type B buffer,which is a 15-foot-wide buffer with
hedge/berm/wall,or some combination thereof,with trees every 30 feet and certain spacing number; I won't
go into the details.
But that in itself is intended to,you know,shield headlights and things of that nature,to also ensure
the compatibility so people don't get glare from headlights after dark.
And in this particular case,we think the hedge works. You know,it's not one of your conditions,but
I think Kim would tell you her intent is,on the secured access that will be for emergency only,she intends to
put a solid gate there so that,again,it's an elimination of headlight intrusion potential.
So I think a number of things are in our favor that go along with this. And I think one of the others
things that--when we look at where we are and what we are,I think there's a really big misconception
among maybe a lot of the more recent residents of Pine Ridge,because Pine Ridge is a large subdivision and
was--was developed and platted in several phases,but most of the residents,I don't think,understand that
the commercial that they have,where 7-Eleven's located,or where you have,at the northern end of
Vanderbilt Beach Road,those are parts of their communities.
You have a commercial tier of lots,you have a residential tier that's the center lots,and where we're
located was designated and platted as agricultural lots. It's on their plat record from 1955,we're designated
always for agriculture. And I think when you look further into the covenants and restrictions that go along
with the land,I think it was a little bit of inaccurate information.
As I read the Pine Ridge Association's letter that was forwarded to me by email where they declined
to support the organization's plans to expand,it implied that we were somehow inconsistent with the deed
restrictions for Pine Ridge and that we were somehow inconsistent with the resolutions that they've passed
regarding land uses.
And I would only say to that--I've looked at the deed restrictions,and I think we meet every letter of
the deed restriction for the agricultural lot that we are.
And I think,secondly,when you look at this from the perspective of the resolution that they passed
that limited intrusion of nonresidential uses into their community,NEC came along after that resolution was
passed.
So the original conditional use for Naples Equestrian Challenge came along after they passed the
resolution sometime back in--I think it was 1985. I've got it somewhere in my file.
But I think it just goes to show that there are deed restrictions,there's zoning,and then we have a plat
of record. I think by right,when you read the restrictions that are in place,they're entitled to 16 horses per lot
on these agricultural lots. This is not a residential lot. It was never intended to be a residential lot.
And when you read them,you'll understand that Goodlette-Frank Road was the railroad. You know,
these were the backside of Pine Ridge subdivision.These lots were a large tier of agricultural lots to buffer
the residential lots from the railroad.
And you have to remember back when these were platted,you know,Pine Ridge was in the country.
I mean,this was in the country. If you were from Olde Naples,this was a drive to the country.
And I think you know,things have evolved,and we appreciate the fact that there are residences
across the street. They're zoned residential,and they're entitled to the residential use. But every one of those
homes,they should have the opportunity to read their deed restrictions. They would understand fully,we've
always been designated agriculture,we're entitled to have agricultural uses,and what we're doing is
consistent with that.
And I know that that doesn't deal with the compatibility issue,and that's why I think we've tried very
hard to deal with those issues that we can. You know,we can deal with issues where parking is located,how
lighting is dealt with on the site,how we put in buffers,you know,hours of operation. All those typical land
use compatibility issues we can deal with. But I think we're entitled to be the stabling and therapeutic riding
program that we are on this lot by deed and by plat.
And I know that we have a different zoning issue,but your issue for looking at the conditional use or
what conditions would make this the appropriate land use for the location.
And I think we're on the right track. Are there other conditions? I mean,you may hear from other
people who raise another point and want to offer other conditions,and speaking for Kim,I know that we're
Page 15 of 53
September 5,2013
amenable to anything that's reasonable to assure you that we want to be the continued compatible land use
that they've been now for over a dozen years.
So with that,I think I'll cease. And you've got a lot of speakers,it looks like,so I'll answer questions,
or however you want to handle it,Mr. Strain.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Just so the speakers know,before we get to the public speakers,we have a
presentation,which we've just had,we entertain questions from this board,then we go to staff presentation
and questions from this board of staff,and then we get into speakers. We take a break at 10:30,and we take
another one at noontime. The one at 10:30 is for 15 minutes. The one at noontime is for an hour.
And we will take those breaks more so for the court reporter and others who are trying to tape and
record this meeting than ourselves as well.
So with that in mind,let's ask any questions we have of Mr.Arnold.
Go ahead,Phil.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Yes,several.
How many paddocks do you have now,three? Am I correct in that?
MR.ARNOLD: I'll let Kim answer the question;you'll get the most accurate answer.
MS.MINARICH: Our current property?
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Correct.
MS.MINARICH: We have eight.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You need to make sure you're talking into the mike.
MS.MINARICH: I'm sorry. We have eight.They're not all the same size. We have small ones,
larger ones.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Are those all depicted on the site plan? Perhaps my count was a
little crazy.
MS.MINARICH: Well,it depends on--let me see here,because--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Paddock No.5 isn't depicted anywhere,by the way.
MS.MINARICH: Exactly,because Paddock 5 exists now behind the offices on Lot 20 that's now
parking on the current plan,on the revised plan.So that would be 5 and then we have 6,7 and 8.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Where I was going with that,Ms.Minarich,is trying to relate
the additional paddocks,at least as shown on the plan--could you—someone put that back up just so I have
it on the visualizer--with the number of additional horses and so forth and trying to get some idea of,based
on your intent to add four horses,does that drive automatically or by practice to the number of additional
paddocks that you're proposing here across the two lots?
MS.MINARICH: Yes. Well,I'm losing one with the parking,and so that--the one is replaced
there,and then the two additional would be to service the barn that we plan to build on Lot 19.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Okay.
MS.MINARICH: And,I mean,also,I would love more paddock space where I am now,so--
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Now,for a non-horseman,what use is a paddock? Is this where
you turn out the horses and they can wander around?
MS.MINARICH: We turn the horses out so that they can graze,so that they can socialize with each
other. And you have to watch how you turn horses out. Some can't go with others. It's,you know,very
much like one gets along with another one and doesn't--so we have to kind of figure out what the families
are.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Now,you mentioned several times,and it's in staff report,that
you're operating at or near capacity,and then either you or Wayne mentioned in your presentation capacity
has more to do with the hours that your horses can actually work,quote unquote.
MS.MINARICH: (Nods head.)
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: What is that?
MS.MINARICH: We have policies and procedures in place that,in a large part,are driven by
PATH,that our horses can't work over three consecutive hours,and I believe it's no more than so many hours.
I think it's eight hours a day. I don't know the daily.
What we have done is we actually work them much less than that. We don't take them to the
Page 16 of 53
September 5,2013
maximum. What we've done internally is that they can't work any more than 12 hours a week.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Okay. Now,on your website,your calendar shows no riding at
all on--scheduled on Fridays. Why is that?
MS.MINARICH: We have--we have a special program that comes in from New Beginnings
school that--they're there four times a year,their school year. They come Friday mornings. And then at--
Friday evenings we have the Friends of Foster Children that are there for about an hour and a half in the
evening 5:00 to 6:30.
And then during the day on Friday is where we try to schedule our evaluations. Anytime a new
participant applies to enter our program,they have to go through an evaluation so that we know where to
properly place them in our classes,so to speak.So we try to schedule those on Friday during that
non-teaching time.
And that's also exercise time. We have a whole group--and some of them are here today,a group of
exercise riders that are assigned to a horse,sometimes two,that exercise our horses three times a week. And
so that gives them arena time to do that.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: All of these are driven towards the capacity issue. I'm just
trying to--
MS.MINARICH: Yes.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: --to understand,because--and at first reading,without the
explanation,you see,well,there's a whole day,every Friday,that there's no activities going on.Well,come
on,put the horses out there.
MS.MINARICH: And there's also a break,I believe it's on Tuesday. We have some time in the
middle of the day that exercisers can come and exercise on that day,and then all day Sunday they have off as
well,that there's no activity in the arena,and that's for exercise time and rest time for the horses.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: A couple questions coining out of the correspondence that was
included in the NIM meetings and so forth,and then was mentioned here that you're committed,if this is
approved,to abandon,quote-unquote,the shell rock entrance off of Ridge and make that strictly an
emergency entrance with a gate.
MS.MINARICH: It is. It would be strictly emergency use only and would be blocked with a solid,
decorative wooden gate that would connect into the hedge of the berm,the landscaping on either side,which
they couldn't see--anyone from Ridge couldn't see down into the parking or have that headlight glare effect.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: If that's true, I would suggest--I would suggest that that be a
condition of approval if this goes forward for approval.
And there was also a mention in the correspondence attached to the petition to limit the parking
spaces to 45.
MS.MINARICH: I believe it's at 52.Fifty-two. We have 52 in the plan today.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Okay. And I would suggest that that might be a condition as
well.Now,your current operating hours are what?
MS.MINARICH: Eight to eight.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Eight to eight. And do you have amplified sound till eight--
you're permitted amplified sound in the existing arena till--
MS.MINARICH: Yes,we are.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Okay. Almost there.
MS.MINARICH: That's okay.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: How come there's no buffering planned on the south end of the
MS.MINARICH: We currently have--on the south-
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: It would be to the south of Lot 19.
MS.MINARICH: I'm not really sure. There would be fencing along--we would have to be
completely fenced on the perimeter,and then--yeah,I guess we haven't really planned any type of buffering
or landscaping,although we would. I mean,we would obviously put some sort of hedging and trees up along
there just to make it aesthetically pleasing from our end of the lot.
Page 17 of 53
September 5,2013
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: There is a single-family residence down there,right?
MS.MINARICH: There is.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: You might want to consider adding buffering of some--per the
LDC or something between that and the residence.
MS.MINARICH: We're required to do that,I understand.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: If it's required,we don't need it as a condition.
Okay. That's all I have.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else from Planning Commission?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh,you do,Diane. Then Mike.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Good morning,Kim.
MS. MINARICH: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: How many residents are in Pine Ridge Estates;do you know?
MS. MINARICH: I don't. How many owners? How many--
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Within all of the Pine Ridge Estates area.
MS. MINARICH: I don't know.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. That was a question that I had.
I noticed that traffic was brought up several times here. And being that you have already committed
to Center Street,I don't see where there would be a traffic problem in here because you're going less than half
a block. I don't think people will be riding throughout the neighborhood.
And if you are going to buffer the west side of this for the neighbors across the street,I don't find a
problem with it at all. Maybe we could enhance that buffer a little bit so it could become more opaque.
We have,like,a C buffer which,to me,would be wonderful,and make that maybe 20 feet wide
instead of 15,but those are things that,you know,we could work with.
The parking areas,how would you like--how are you anticipating it will be? Will this be asphalt?
Will this be grass?
MS.MINARICH: It's a shell. We have a shell surface on our current parking that will be
conditioned. No asphalt.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. And the manure. Where is that--
MS.MINARICH: Waste Management. We have a dumpster that it goes in,and Waste
Management comes to pick that up twice a week.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Oh,okay. So it--
MS.MINARICH: Removed from the property completely.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Twice a week? It's good fertilizer.
MS.MINARICH: We actually have people come to take buckets of it.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Very good. How many parking spaces did you originally want?
MS.MINARICH: Well,originally--yeah.
MR.ARNOLD: Can I answer that?
MS.MINARICH: Sure.
MR.ARNOLD: It's my fault. I'll take responsibility for the number of parking spaces shown on the
plan. As you know,and the county staff will,I think,affirm,that if we don't show it on our plan,we don't get
it. So some of the void of spaces I filled up,they made functional parking spaces,so the plan evolved to fill
up all the space,and it filled up as parking.
And then after meeting with the Martinos early on,I think they raised the concern of why that much
parking was necessary,and especially near Ridge,so the plan evolved to have it removed. So that was my
doing.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. The handicap,that will be asphalt?
MS.MINARICH: Concrete.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Concrete.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You've got to use the mike,Kim.
MS.MINARICH: The handicap spaces that are on the property now are concrete.
Page 18 of 53
September 5,2013
COMMISSIONER EBERT: That's fine. Okay. And the rest would be shell then.
MS.MINARICH: Yes.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. At this time,I have no other questions.
MS.MINARICH: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And the reason the mikes are used is because the court reporter,plus
the audio that goes over--it's permanent record;it has to be picked up,and it's hard to if you don't get close
to the mike. Mike's bad at that,too,but he's--
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: He's getting better.
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: I turned my phone off
A couple questions,and some of my colleagues have already answered them,so 1'll be kind of quick
on that.
The emergency access, I think you've answered that already. That's going to be kind of,you know,
closed,not for use,that's great.
MS.MINARICH: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: On the parking lot,the materials,I was going to ask that same
question.You say"shell." Do you mean shell rock?
MS.MINARICH: Well,I think it's a combination of lime screening and shell.
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: Okay.
MS.MINARICH: Because it creates a hard surface. And there's a base under that that they build
before they put that shell and lime screening on top.
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: Okay. And on the new round structure that's going to be built on Lot
No. 19,what type of roofing material is that?
MS.MINARICH: It can be built many ways,with a wooden roof or a metal room,and I would hope
that we could try to do a metal roof.
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: And I noticed in the staff report--and I have no issues with your
petition,but just some clarifications.
The metal roof—I saw your report. There was talk about glare. And I've been in the construction
business,and I'm aware of glare,especially from metal roofs. I would ask that if you do use a metal roof that
you be cautious as far as the coloring of it.
If you leave it the raw aluminum,then you're going to get glare that could possibility go across the
street and to your neighbors,or even on the other side,too.
MS.MINARICH: No. I wouldn't anticipate doing that. More of a matte finish,maybe green or
something that blends in with the landscaping.
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: Yeah,just as a caution,I would be sensitive towards that color so there
would be no glare.
MS.MINARICH: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: And am I--I was correct,I think,in reading--Wayne,this might be a
question for you and maybe staff. But it appears what you said before is correct,all of the lots along
Goodlette-Frank Road are ag zoned.
And,in fact,on the other side,the north side of Center Street,isn't that a paddock as well--a stable
area as well?
MR.ARNOLD: Yes,it is. It's a commercial stabling operation that offers stabling and riding.
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: I thought that's what I saw. I drove out there myself and took a look at
that.
MR.ARNOLD: That is a commercial operation of--for-profit stable,I should say.
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: Right. But it is a stable. As you go along,I saw there was another
farm-type facility kind of next to that,go to the north of that.
MR.ARNOLD: And I think,historically,you'll find that people talk about the old egg farm. You
know,people that have been around a long time,further south there was the egg farm,and that's no longer
there. But,yeah,historically this whole tier of lots was an agricultural use.
MR.ROSEN: And I think I repeat the comment from my colleague that the buffering along Center
Page 19 of 53
September 5,2013
(sic)Street,I would ask that you take a look at that very closely because of the sensitivity toward the
neighbor across the street,you know.
But other than that,I have no more questions or issues. Thank you.
MR.ARNOLD: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Just to clarify,the buffering,you mean along Ridge Street,not Center.
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: Yes,sir,that's correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else have any questions of the applicant at this time?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well,let me ask a few. What are the expected heights of the
buildings that you're going to be putting in on the property on the conditional use?
MR.ARNOLD: Mr. Strain,I don't think that they've gotten as far as having complete architectural
designs of the buildings. Single story is proposed,and the maximum height in agriculture right now is 35
feet,the same as the residences across the street.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So you're not expecting to exceed the 35-foot limitation currently in place?
MR.ARNOLD: Absolutely not.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You had mentioned participants,Kim,and I think you said 400 and
something. Currently,and from what I read,it's going to be 6-or 700 potentially in the future.
Can you explain the frequency of what a participant is in regards to the property? Because it's
different than if we expect to see 600 people hit there in any one day.
MS.MINARICH: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'd kind of like to know what that means.
MS.MINARICH: Our classes for therapeutic riding are four participants max every half hour when
we have a block of lessons,and then in our equine-facilitated learning or psychotherapy programs,it's a
maximum of eight.
So the way that we count participants,we don't count--we don't duplicate them. So if one of our
riders comes in in the January session and does an eight-week program with us of a half hour once a week
and then they come again in our spring session,eight-week,they're still one participant.We don't count them
again.
And some of our programs are collaborative programs that we do with the other not-for-profits,are
very transient meaning there might be four participants there this week,but only two return the next week,
and then we have two more,two new ones,so then those are two new additional participants.
So we can grow those numbers in a matter of a few weeks just because we have new people coming
in,and we count them as new.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So those people,though,are over a year's period. So you say per year
you're going to have up to 6-to 700 participants. So what--the accumulation on a daily basis is consistent
with the traffic impact analysis you provided--
MS.MINARICH: Exactly.
CHAIRMAN S TRAIN: --to John Podczerwinsky,our traffic guy?
MS.MINARICH: Absolutely,that's correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I'll need John to comment on that,because he did--they did
recommend staff approval of that,so I need to understand--make sure he understands the reasoning,the
numbers,and he's fine with it.
The horse load. I know you're allowed to do 16 per site. What's the maximum number of horses you
expect to have?
MS.MINARICH: As we have on the plan now, it would be 14.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So instead of 48,which I believe is what you could have,you're at 14. Do
you stable any of those like your competitor across the street? Or not your competitor,but your neighbor--
MS.MINARICH: Neighbor.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --across the street,yeah.
MS.MINARICH: Meaning--well,I believe there's 16 horses in that barn across the street.We have
10 in our barn currently.
Page 20 of 53
September 5,2013
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MS.MINARICH: Is that your question?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. Do you lease any of those out? Are they--
MS.MINARICH: Do we lease? No,absolutely not.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So if I had a horse and I wanted to board it there,I couldn't do that?
MS.MINARICH: No.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. One of the staff recommendations or staff restrictions is to limit the
amplified sound. And let me read the actual thing. It says the riding ring structure on Lot 19 will not have
amplified sound equipment or systems.Now,if you were to read this as a zoning person in the future and a
complaint came in about your amplified sound,if it was outside the riding ring structure on Lot 19,
theoretically it could be used then.
So don't you mean that you're not going to--from my discussion with you,is you aren't going to
have amplified sound anywhere on the conditional use property;is that correct?
MS.MINARICH: For Lot 19,and there's no--there's none on Lot 20 either.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Then there's no amplified sound to be used in this conditional use.
MS.MINARICH: No,that's correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's what I'm getting at.
MS.MINARICH: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So that notation by staff would need to change,because it's the
entire conditional use,not just the structure on Lot 19. So that would clarify that issue.
I notice--and it was more of a question probably of Wayne than you.
Wayne,at the neighborhood information meeting,which you kind of presented,I noticed in the staff
report,there wasn't--I'll read it. It says,one of the neighbors expressed their opposition to expansion onto
Lot 19 but wanted to clarify they do not oppose the existing facility and its programs or expanded programs
on the five-plus acres currently owned by NEC.
I didn't see a reason for their opposition.They just opposed it. Did you get any clarification or
zoning-related reasons at the NIM as to why that opposition was there?
MR.ARNOLD: Well,I think other than the issues we've addressed already with the parking.access,
not necessarily. I know there's other discussion. You've seen letters from the neighbors that discuss other
things,and they're here,and I'm sure you'll hear from them. It's probably more appropriate that they answer
the question than me.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm more worried about the NIM. The NIM is a required public hearing
that is held at the request of this panel and the Board of County Commissioners. At the NIM,did you have
any opposition stated for the record related to zoning matters in regard to this conditional use?
MR.ARNOLD: That's kind of a hard question to answer because,I think in fairness to them, I mean
--you know,whether we should be there or not or expand is not entirely a zoning issue. Could it be a zoning
issue? Yes,because it goes to land use compatibility,Mark,so I'm hesitant to say the answer's no.
I think the things that I normally would relate to--put it this way,toward a conditional use
zoning-related issue,things of noise buffering,parking,things of that nature,other than what I've already
addressed,I don't recall any others.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And the reason I'm trying to find out is I saw--I mean,I saw or read over a
hundred emails,except for the ones that came in last night,and many of them did not address zoning issues,
and I'm trying to get where the crux of the problem is.
And I did speak with some of the neighbors trying to figure out their concerns. From them I
understood more,but I really--the bulk of the emails were just opposed,and that doesn't tell me what they're
opposed to. If it's light,sound,noise,those things need to be on the table so we can see if they can be
addressed,and that's why the NIM was--is so important in those relationships,and I didn't see anything
specific in the NIM.
And I think that's all I've got. Yeah,that's it for now. I'll have more questions most definitely as we
go on.
John,if you don't mind addressing the parking--I mean,the parking--the traffic. I know you've
Page 21 of 53
September 5,2013
opined on it in the staff report,but I'd like to make sure,for the record today,that the amount of horses and
participants and the way the participants are coming and going was everything that you understood it to be
when you commented on the traffic issues.
MR.PODCZERWINSKY: Good morning,Commissioner,John Podczerwinsky,for the record,
transportation planning staff.
And to answer your concerns and questions,yeah,we did look at those numbers that were provided
to us. We felt that the numbers that they looked at were reasonable,and the extrapolation over the additional
square footage that they're proposing is also a reasonable estimate of what we expect to see there.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And was the applicant correct when they noted that there really isn't
anything comparable to this in the TIS manuals?
MR.PODCZERWINSKY: That's correct,yeah. We didn't find anything that was a reasonably
proximate answer.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And your source of data to,then,determine how to do the traffic was from
where?
MR. PODCZERWINSKY: From--the source of data was actually from the participants that they've
counted on and off of their site. And Wayne can correct me if I'm wrong,but I think there were two studies
done. This is the result of the second study that we asked for further clarification on.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And I guess,Wayne,it was pointed out to me that the information in
your supplied data to John,especially for Tuesday,was a much reduced quantity of traffic. Is there a
particular reason why Tuesday was the lighter day than any other day of the week?
MR.ARNOLD: Yeah. Kim Minarich prepared traffic counts based on the data,and part of what we
were looking at was the—really the p.m.peak hour numbers,and that may be reflective of why,because the
county looks at a p.m.peak hour figure,so that may have something to do with it.
But we did do--just so you know,the traffic study that we prepared was viewed two different ways.
And after further discussion with transportation staff,they asked us to also take a look at it based on how
much square footage was on the existing facility based on the number of horses and tried to extrapolate into a
figure that might accurately determine how many additional trips we're going to have with the new program.
And I think Kim's numbers originally were less than generated under that methodology only because
I think she understands how the riding pen was to be utilized,which is a little bit lower intensity because it
wouldn't have multiple riders at one time than the current riding arena.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And when you did your--I know you're in for a grant or you have a grant.
Does all the information on the traffic coincide with the information that--to the extent it would be required
in the grant in regards to traffic and the usage?
MS.MINARICH: It was not required in the grant.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I think that's--that's all I've got for now. Okay. Thank you.We're
going to have more,and you will have a rebuttal period after we finish with the public speakers.
MR.ARNOLD: I'm sure we'll have many further questions to answer. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
Staff report?
MR.SAWYER: Again,for the record,Mike Sawyer,project manager for the petition.
You do have the staff report dated 8/14/13.We are recommending approval of the petition with the
two conditions that we've listed,the first being amplified sound. We agree that having it for both Lot 19 and
20 makes sense--and the hours of operation.
I can answer any questions that you might have. We did get copied on a number of emails and notes,
likely most of them,the same ones that you-all received. I've got copies of those. I can give those to the
court reporter,if you'd like.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. I think we need a set of everything you have to date given to the
court reporter for the record,and then if anybody,the Planning Commission,I think we all received them.
They should be in your county in boxes. If not,you can ask or request or--there's a lot of this.
MR.SAWYER: I actually counted approximately 84.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well,I think I saw--I didn't get time--I was on the road,so I didn't
Page 22 of 53
September 5,2013
get time to forward them all to you,but there's more in my box.
MR. SAWYER: I noticed at least one more this morning that I didn't get to. I apologize.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'll be sending them off to you later today when I get back to the office.
Okay. Anybody have any questions of staff?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you,Mike.
MR.SAWYER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And we will--at this point we'll go into our public speakers. You'll all get
a chance to speak. I ask that you limit your speak--your discussion to five minutes.Obviously,that's not a
set rule. If there's new information you have to say and it takes longer,we'll try to work with you. But
everybody--everybody in this room,if you-all spoke,we'd be here for two days,not just one,even if it's for
a few minutes,so I ask you to be considerate of not being redundant,because it's more helpful if you tell us
new facts instead of regurgitating something someone else said.
If you agree with the previous speaker,it's certainly sufficient to say,"I agree with the previous
speaker,"and all that will be on record.
So with that,you can use either podium that's closest to you. When you get to the podium,state your
name and address for the record. And with that,then,Ray will be calling the first speakers.We'll use the
speakers that have that filled out slips first,and then we'll be going to anybody else that wants to speak after
that.
Go ahead. Mike, is it you?
MR. SAWYER: The first speaker that we have is Brian Dickerson.
MR.DICKERSON: Commission, Planning Commission,Brian Dickerson,6846 Trail Boulevard,
Naples,Florida.
I live in Pine Ridge. I'm a board member of Naples Equestrian Challenge. I was able to attend one
of the meetings that we had with the Pine Ridge residents. I can tell you I think there's probably a lot of
misconception/understanding of the Pine Ridge residents as far as what Naples Equestrian Challenge does.
Before I became involved in volunteering, I didn't understand and know exactly what they did.
I think people who have worked in the past as volunteers at NEC doesn't understand exactly what
we're doing right now.
It's difficult to actually convey in words. But I can tell you,when you actually see what happens to
children and the veterans from this,it's amazing. And when we talk about having a wait list of eight people
right now and you hear--and you're going to hear the--Pd cail it,using the numbers against us. Well,they
want to go to 400,now 600. They're not all there every day. They're not all there every week. That's our
yearly total.
So I'll give you an example. There's a family of 4 kids from the Foster Children. I couldn't even tell
you how horrific their life is at that point in time. But every Friday night,they got to come,and they got to
ride the horses. They got to see the horses. Those hour--that hour and a half was a tremendous asset to their
life. They wanted to come every week. It's an eight-week program.After that eight weeks,we have to let
other children come in.
So we're locked on what we're doing right now because we're ethical to our horses. We could kill
these horses and make them work as nonstop,but we can't do that to the horses,just like we're trying to help
the children.
And the key is,when you look at those numbers--so those four children right there were there for
eight weeks. Now,I can tell you,they still email me. I still take them out. I took them out last year to go get
their Christmas gifts because they don't have any. But that's what these kids get that they don't have
anywhere else.
Then you add that we've added the veterans.And what I'm really most perturbed about,about the
residents of Pine Ridge,my fellow neighbors,they don't know what they're talking about as far as what they
see,the benefits.
We have vets. I have a family of veterans.And you see these veterans and how they react with
horses,and you see fathers and sons who don't speak about Vietnam,don't speak about Iraq. And then they
Page 23 of 53
September 5,2013
get around the horse--I don't know what it is. I love horses,but there's a magic about them. And what that
magic does is allow family members to now talk where they never talked about stuff. Whatever therapy it is,
whatever the magic,it works.
When you look at these plots,we're already on 21 and 20. We've been there. Those paddocks for
the horses to walk give them the ability to breathe,exercise so they're not locked up in an apartment all the
time. That's why we need that space. That's why that extended barn has the trailer around it,to walk the
horses around it,and to give access to semis to bring the hay in and all of that.
This is what the land was built for. Right now and for the last,what, 10 years,it's had a delapatated
barn on it. It's a nuisance,if anything. This is going to help the area. But,most importantly,it's going to help
kids and families of Collier County.
So the many versus a few. And,unfortunately,I wish the Pine Ridge residents actually went there,
saw what we did,and saw how it impacts children and families,because that's what it's about. That's the
benefit of Collier County over a select few neighbors.
I'm sorry,it may be against what they want,but instead of looking at a delapatated barn and a vacant
lot with weeds,they're going to have a nice berm,and they're going to have a nice stable.
So I think it gives tremendous benefit not only to the charities of Collier County,the children and
family,but it outweighs any concern of aesthetics,because it's aesthetics,and it's going to be gorgeous.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
Next speaker,please.
MR. SAWYER: The next registered speaker would be William Swartz.
MR.SWARTZ: William Swartz,for the record.As a Naples Equestrian volunteer,chairman of our
land acquisition team trying to purchase Lot 20,and president-elect of NEC,I believe in our mission with
great passion. I don't--I just want to go ahead and just point out--get it the right way.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You know,we have a local attorney who does the same thing,so—
MR. SWARTZ: Our mission is to improve lives of our participants one stride at a time,and that's
what we have been bound to do.
As a leader both at NEC and in our Naples community,I realize that it's critical for us to grow,in
both horses and acres,to fulfill our goal of helping as many children,adults,and veterans with special needs
with our special therapy that we can.
We want to say to the Pine Ridge community we value the relationship that we've built and shared
over the past 18 years. We want our growth to be respectful of our neighbors,people whom we value greatly
for their volunteering,their dedication to our mission,and their donations to help us achieve our goals.
Both Caroline and Joseph Martino and Vincent and Elaine Wesnofske,who are our immediate
neighbors across the street on Ridge Road,are both in that category.
The opportunity that for growth that we have today is a miracle that we are working hard to bring to
fruition. I've promised in the past,and I continue to extend to our Pine Ridge neighbors my promise with
great integrity,to fulfill our dream in harmony with theirs.
I ask you,our county Planning Commission,to help us achieve this goal by granting us this special
use permit to our property.
As a veterinarian and also as a board director,I do want to clarify and emphasize the importance of
our paddocks or green space for our special horses. Our program,the PATH program,dictates the numbers
of hours per week that our horses need to have that grazing free time. And so it's important that we have
those additional paddocks.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
Next speaker,please.
MR. SAWYER: The next registered speaker will be Holly Shapiro.
MS. SHAPIRO: Good morning. My name is Holly Shapiro,and my address is 6531 Bottlebrush
Lane,Naples,Florida. And I'm actually speaking because--I apologize. I'm not a public speaker.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's okay.
Page 24 of 53
September 5,2013
MS.SHAPIRO: I'm nervous.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Just relax. We're fine.
MS.SHAPIRO: Okay. I'm getting emotional because my son is in the program. And my son has
been involved in the program since he was four years old--two years old. He's been in there for four years.
He suffers severely from autism,and he does not speak.
And this program--there's something majestic about this program. I actually volunteer as well.I've
been trained to walk beside the horse with my son,and I am--it gives me a time to actually connect with my
son. There's something about this where my son is very connected during this time,and I actually am able to
really be there with him.
And I don't know if you know anything about autism,but it's a terrible diagnosis. And there's other
families that I do know personally that are on the waiting list that are trying to get in.
So that's basically all I have to say. It is very,very beneficial,and I hope that they're able to approve
this.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
Next speaker?
MR. SAWYER: Mr.Chairman,that was our last registered speaker,but we did run out of slips.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. We're going to start with those that did not register because we ran
out of slips. And anybody that would like to speak,we'll just start with the beginning and--Heidi,did you
have something?
MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Well,there are a couple additional slips that were handed to me. I don't
know--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh,good,okay.
MS.ASHTON-CICKO: --if you want to do them now.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. Let's do the speaker slips first. We're going to break in about six
minutes,so we'll start with the two you have.
MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Okay. I can't--is it Caroline Martino?
MS.MARTINO: Good morning. My name is Caroline Martino,and I live at 179 Ridge Drive,
across the road from the proposed expansion. I am a board member of the Pine Ridge Civic Association,but
I'm speaking to you today as a resident,not on behalf of PRCA.
I'm here to ask you today to deny this request for conditional use expansion. I do not relish the
position I find myself in,I would not wish it on anyone,and this is not somewhere I ever thought to find
myself.
Pine Ridge is a unique community in Collier County. Established in 1954,we have history,charm,
character,and convenience. I'm a country girl and consider myself very lucky to live there.
My husband and I and my mother-in-law,who lives in our guesthouse,have been residents of Pine
Ridge for almost 13 years. All three of us have been supporters of Naples Equestrian Challenge. I served as
a volunteer president of NEC for some time and continued as a regular volunteer after that.
Over the past 15 years,my husband and I have donated time,service,items,and money to NEC,
continue to donate time and dollars today and hopefully far into the future. I would ask everyone to
remember that the issue at hand is not about whether NEC does good work or not.
We all agree NEC provides a valuable community service,just as hundreds of other Collier County
charities do. I understand NEC pulls at your heart strings. It does mine,too;however,please try to separate
the mission of the charity from the fact that they are a business.
All businesses either stagnate and die or grow and expand. NEC is a non-profit business and,
understandably,not content to start small and stay there forever. So NEC is behaving as it should.The issue
at hand is expansion. And where does it stop?
NEC was granted a conditional use permit for 206 Ridge Drive in the year 2000. The program was
held only on Saturday mornings for approximately 24 to 30 riders. We purchased our home in May 2001,
and by that time NEC also had two lessons after school on a Wednesday. That was the extent of the program.
Did we anticipate expansion to the numbers we see today,let alone what is being proposed for the
Page 25 of 53
September 5,2013
future? No.
No one is asking NEC to leave Pine Ridge. As previously stated on multiple occasions,I fully
support NEC's continued presence in Pine Ridge,re-optimizing the 5 acres they currently own,and acquiring
a conditional use permit for 194 Ridge Drive,which is their second owned lot.
So,with all the good work NEC does,why object to this plan for NEC to expand to a third lot in Pine
Ridge? Because this is my home. I have lived with NEC's slow but steady expansion over the years and this
sudden giant wave of program expansion over the last 18 months. For me,NEC's daily activities have
progressively encroached on the tranquility of our residential neighborhood.
Without leaving my garden,I hear the activity. Driving in and out of my neighborhood,I'm made
aware of the additional traffic. It's constantly there. And Center Street gets busier by the month.
A staff member may be on site for two to eight hours,depending on their responsibilities,a volunteer
for two to four hours,and a rider family is typically at NEC and gone within one hour. But for me,that just
means someone else is either here or on their way.
I am truly glad for NEC's success,but it has now reached a tipping point,and this expansion plan is
simply too much. I believe,as I'm sure you do,in everyone's right to enjoy a reasonable level of peace and
quiet in the residential neighborhood that they have chosen to call home.
In conclusion,I believe that denying the expansion plan before you today will not inhibit NEC from
continued growth and the ability to serve many more deserving individuals with special needs.
Thank you all for your time,for your thoughtful deliberations,and for all that you have done and
continue to do to make Collier County community such a wonderful place for us all to live.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Anybody have any questions?
Ms.Martino--
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --I'd like to ask you—go ahead. Diane first.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Ms.Martino,when you moved in,was NEC--did you know the
property that they were on was agricultural?
MS.MARTINO: Yes,I did. I was already volunteering with NEC at that point.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: So you knew it was agricultural. And you built your home across the
street--
MS.MARTINO: No.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: --after?
MS.MARTINO: We purchased and remodeled an existing home.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: You purchased and remodeled an existing home.
MS.MARTINO: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: So--where the residential starts. So you did know that when you
moved in.
Did you realize NEC could go along--if they wanted maybe six lots,did you know,agriculturally,
that as long as it was agricultural property,they could do that?
MS.MARTINO: I did know that NEC needed a conditional use permit just to operate on the one lot,
Lot 21 on the corner,206 Ridge Drive. That's what I know.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. But with the--with other agricultural,did you know that there
were allowed 16 horses per lot?
MS.MARTINO: Well,there was only a 10-stall barn on the property,so that didn't really come up.
We--when NEC purchased 194 Ridge Drive,there was a 16-stall barn there that was abandoned and was
knocked down.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. So you--okay. So you did know some of this ahead of time?
MS.MARTINO: Well,I know there are horses across the road because--you know,I wish I lived
on that side of the road,but we live on the side that isn't zoned agricultural,so we can't have horses on our lot.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. Is there something special that you would like them to do to be
good neighbors to you?
Page 26 of 53
September 5,2013
MS.MARTINO: Well,we have legal representation. I think Clay Brooker is going to cover points
for us,so--
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. Well wait to hear from him. We'll wait to hear from him,then.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I just had a follow-up question,and you and I discussed it a little bit
when we met. The idea that you have--that they could do their activities on two lots instead of three,
basically,you would accept them consolidating their plan down to two lots?
MS.MARTINO: Yes,absolutely,and support them in it. They own those two lots. I think they
have the right to use those two lots.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. But how does that cure your opposition? I mean,the reason I'm--
right now they have 400 and some odd people on one lot. If they had the two lots and you assume--anybody
would assume that if they can do 400 on one,they can do 400 on two--or 400 on the other.So that means a
total of 800.
So,theoretically,the uses or the intensity of the three lots could be consolidated down to two but it
still remains equal or greater than the intensity on the two lots,one of which is basically going to be used for
open space or paddocks which,from my discussion with you--and,by the way,I didn't know anything about
this stuff until she was kind enough to tell me some of the--what a paddock is and all that. That's like an
open space. It seems a pretty benign use.
Why is--why--how does that benefit you in a sense that is reduces your opposition to have the
intensity on those two lots when it's still across the street from you?
MS.MARTINO: Okay. Without wishing to put my nose in NEC's current business and their
expansion plans,I believe that needing paddock space for the horses that exist,whether they add more horses
or not,is going to limit the amount of expansion. It will limit the amount of growth on those two lots.
Eventually there will be a maximum capacity.
I think they could do more with a second lot,with the 194 Ridge Drive,and clearly they feel the
same way. But I don't think it needs to go to three lots,and I think having just on the two lots will contain
their growth in this location,not necessarily in Collier County,but in this location.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Because this is a zoning board. I'm trying to understand what is the
item that offends you from their presence on that third lot. I mean, is it noise? Is it sound? Is it visual? Is it
--what things? Because we try to address the things that are in opposition in regards to those things,and I
haven't got a good,clear picture yet on exactly what is offensive,if it can still be moved to the lot next door
and be just as intensive as it is if it was on three lots.
MS.MARTINO: Well,I don't think they could be as loud on two lots because,as they say,their
amplified sound in the arena would interfere with something else. But the noise,traffic,traffic on Center
Street,traffic in the neighborhood.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MS.MARTINO: Just the commercialization of,you know,allowing,essentially,another
commercial use for on additional lot on agricultural zoned land.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I'm not understanding quite everything that you're trying to relay,
and maybe that's my fault. But it's not appropriate right now for me to go into it deeper with you,but I
appreciate your comments and time,and thank you.I'll try to figure it out as time goes on.
Maybe when Clay discusses things,I can get a little clarification,because you guys have had more
time to talk than I have.
MS.MARTINO: And he just said what I said,and l'm nowhere near as good at expressing myself as
Clay. So in the break,we'll make sure that we've clarified.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Great.
MS.MARTINO: He can answer better for me than I could probably.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
Okay. With that,we'll take a 15-minute break and come back at 10:50.
(A brief recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. If everybody will please take their seats,we will resume the
Page 27 of 53
September 5,2013
meeting. And we left off with our public speakers during the break. We were provided with some more
registration slips,so we'll finish with those first,then we'll call speakers at random.
So,Ray,would you call the next speaker registered,please.
Or Mike;I'm sorry.
MR. SAWYER: The next registered speaker is Karl(sic)Christianson.
MR. CHRISTIANSON: Kyle.
MR. SAWYER: Kyle,sorry.
MR. CHRISTIANSON: You're subject to that wonderful handwriting.
Kyle Christianson, 10910 Orangewood Drive,Bonita Springs. For the record,I'm the president of
the NEC board. And I won't appeal to you on the emotional side. I think that's been well represented. I
would simply state the facts that we're here as a legal matter in some ways.Conditional use being,what do
we plan to do with the land that's going to be against a zoning,being this--an ag piece of land.
I would say,let's let common sense be common. If we're going to have two lots with a certain
amount of activity but yet now we're going to go to three spread out,let the program breathe,let the whole
program be,in itself,much less concentrated,I think you could make the argument that noise,the issue may
be even reduced. That's my simple point. If we look at it in a common sense manner,there's really no other
conclusion.
To think that we're going to expand into some Disneyland-style theme park just doesn't make sense
considering the other zoning and issues we'd have in the future. I mean,it isn't like having this three-lot
section,now we can go off and build like you've already talked about,beyond the scope of what's been
presented.
So I appreciate everyone's time,appreciate everyone's passion,and be open to any questions you
might have as one of the representatives of our group.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you,sir.
MR.CHRISTIANSON: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Next,Michael?
MR. SAWYER: The next registered speaker,Nancy,and I apologize. The last name looks like it's
Dauphinais.
MS.DAUPHINAIS: Dauphinais.
MR. SAWYER: I'm sorry.
MR.BELLOWS: That's why I wanted Mike to read them.
MR.SAWYER: Not doing too good.
MS.DAUPHINAIS: I'm Nancy Dauphinais. I'm the clinical supervisor of the Crossroads program
at the David Lawrence Center. My residential address is 5105 Taylor Drive in Ave Maria,and I work at
David Lawrence Center.
We are one of the beneficiaries of the expansion of programs. Both our adults and our children have
been coming,over the last year and a half,to participate at NEC programs,and wanted to mention that when
we come,we frequently come as a group,so we actually come in a van. So it's a single vehicle with up to six
or eight participants and a staff member that's accompanying a trained therapist that we provide to
accompany our clients through the program. So it's well supervised,and it's not single vehicles that are
coming.
We have been in partnership with NEC to help the community grow in life-changing welhiess using
innovative healthcare practices that are receiving national attention,bringing spotlight to this kind of
treatment throughout different publications,and it's really on the cutting edge. So it's really good publicity
for the community.
We have adults and children that are healing from these programs. And some of our adult
participants have immediately come back after completing their four sessions to become volunteers,and these
are Collier County residents who have been struggling with mental health and substance abuse issues who are
now becoming productive members of society,giving back through service.
Page 28 of 53
September 5,2013
And it's a collaboration that's helping to improve the safety and well-being of the community,and we
hope to see it continue. And we recognize that,without the redesign of the space,programs like ours would
not be able to participate at the Naples Equestrian Challenge,so I hope that you will consider that in your
decision. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
Next speaker,Mike.
MR.SAWYER: Next speaker,Jason Martino.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's--he's going to defer his time to Clay Brooker,who will be the last
speaker today.
MR. SAWYER: Kevin Kalb.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: He's going to defer his time to Clay Brooker as well. I'm reading--we've
got hand--sign language going back and forth here.
MR.SAWYER: I'm sensing all of these are deferring to Clay Brooker.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. If they are,that's fine. Then we'll just forestall that until we hear all
the other speakers first,and Clay has asked to go last,and I am fine with that,so I'll be fine with that.
Now,does anybody else have any hidden speaker slips that I don't know about? Heidi's ignoring me.
MS.ASHTON-CICKO: I'm sorry. I zoned out there for a moment.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Do you have any more speakers?
MS.ASHTON-CICKO: No,I do not have anymore.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then I'll--ask that we'll go back to where we were before.
Anybody wishing to speak,just raise your hand and start--we'll just--and either one of the mikes will be
fine. Does anybody else who has not already spoken wish to speak? Yes,sir. Come on up,identify yourself
and address,and we'll be glad to hear from you.
MR.MEROLA: My name is Jerry Merola,and I live on 50 Cajeput Drive in Pine Ridge.
And we--my Lucy and I,we were 42 years old when we moved into Pine Ridge,and we're
considerably older than that now. In fact,we're 71. So we've been there. We've been in Pine Ridge,and we
watched it--it was country. You're right,it was country when we moved in there.
And.actually,we weren't going to come up here. I wasn't going to get involved with this,but I got a
little kind of a note in the mail from the folks across the street. I think--it might not have been them. It was
from somebody.
And I started to think about it,and I started to realize that I needed to come up here and at least be a
part of this.
So here I am,and I--I had to write these down,because I don't remember nothing anymore.And I
can't--actually,I have to--
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Welcome to our world.
MR.MEROLA: I have to wear two pair of glasses to see it. So--you probably never saw nobody
wear two,but I have two.
Well,it's--the additional size of the facility means that there are going to be new additional
buildings. It's going to look--and if you drive in and out of there every day,there's a lot of people involved
in this that don't live there.
I mean, if you live in Pine Ridge,then it's your place;it's your home. I mean,I like everything about
Pine Ridge. I've always liked it.I like the way it looks. I like the way it smells.I like everything. I like the
trees.
Pine Ridge is a special place,and that's been said already many times. And I'm sure it is,but if you
drive in and out of there,the first thing you see is this big,ugly iron structure in the middle of it. And it
doesn't look anything like a house. I don't know what--I don't know what the description of agricultural
means,but I don't think that's what it means.
Agriculture is--you have livestock,you raise livestock,you have--you plant food. You raise crops.
To me,that's agricultural;I understand that.
This use,I don't know how you could call it agricultural. The people across the street have a horse
farm. They have horses on the farm. And,you know,it's said that--I've heard it said many times here that--
Page 29 of 53
September 5,2013
our neighbors by the NEC. Well,they're not our neighbors. They don't live there.The people across the
street on that horse farm live there. They're our neighbors. And I understand that. But I don't understand
why agricultural--the use being used in this sense.
Pine Ridgers like to walk. They like to be out on the street. They like to ride bicycles by.They like
to push their babies in carriages.There's kids moving in. There's young families moving into Pine Ridge
now,and these people want to raise their families in a residential neighborhood. And I could understand that.
I think that's--I think that's what it's meant to be. You know,I'm not going to live all that much
longer myself,so it doesn't matter to me. But these people moving in should have the ability to do that.
Also,it's been talked about traffic. Well,people don't--nobody's addressed the fact that we've
already got a shortcut problem through this section. They're shortcutting into Center and going over to 41.
They're shortcutting into Center and going out Ridge and out the other side.
And I used to be able to lay down in the street,and nobody would run over you,when we first
moved in there,but don't you try that now,because even down on—even down where I'm at on Cajeput--
because I'm outside a lot now,because I'm retired. I just retired last year. I'm outside a lot,and I noticed
there's a lot of cars going by,and they're not going--they're going out--they're shortcutting through or
they're going in through Cajeput and cutting across Weston,cutting up either Eugenia or north of the other
ones and cutting across Ridge and then cutting out center,or they're coming in the other side.
We already have a lot of traffic. We've got big rigs from--we've got these big rigs from the
landscape companies. And I know they're necessary because they're maintaining the property,but they're 8
feet wide,and they're everywhere.
And we've got school buses coming through there. We've got all the maintenance traffic,tree outfits,
and everybody else coming in and out of this little,skinny Center Street.
Now,I don't know,maybe you people don't know;you think Center's a big street. Center's not a big
street. Center's a little street,and it's got,like,big ditches on both sides.
Now,they're going to run all this traffic in and out of this one little--one little driveway right there;
it's going to cause a problem. It is a problem now. It's got to cause a hazard to--you know,somebody's
going to get hurt doing that.It's just congestion and more,and that's the words that I've heard here today.
Expansion,more,growth of something that isn't agriculture. It's something else altogether.
Now, I'm not against it. God knows I'm not against it. God knows it's a good cause. But you all
know the old saying,the roadway could be paved with good intentions,but that's not exactly what always has
to happen.
And let me see. Did I have anything else that I didn't bother to read off of this? I just want to ask
you--do the Pine Ridge residents have any real meaning? I mean,the people that live there,do we have any
real meaning in this whole thing?
I mean,I would think that it's us that has the real meaning here,the people who live there,the people
who voted for you,for God's sake. We live here. This is our county.
I think you need to help us,is what I think you need to do. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you,sir.
Next speaker? Anybody else wishing to speak on this matter? Yes,sir. Come on up.
MR.JONES: My name is Ed Jones, 6361 Pelican Bay Boulevard,Naples.
I'm a grandparent. And if you're a grandparent,I want you to come on a journey with me,and that
journey started seven years ago when my grandson Zachary was born in October.
Ten weeks later he suffered a catastrophic accident;half the right side of his brain was damaged,and
he was physically disabled.
Fifty-seven days in intensive care. Pediatric neurosurgeon said,let him die. My daughter said no,
he's coming home. And he did. He came home with the prognosis that he will be a living vegetable with a G
tube in his stomach for the rest of his life.
My daughter worked with physical therapists.He was able to swallow. He was able to start eating.
At the age of four,still unable to talk or walk,we found an organization,Naples Equestrian Challenge.
Didn't know anything about it. All we knew,it was a horse therapy program.
And I carried my grandson to the office. And one of the staff members said,well,we don't know if
Page 30 of 53
September 5,2013
we can help him,but you're free to try,so would you register him?
That was seven years ago. Today,because of NEC,because he went there--and he still goes once a
week for 30 minutes,riding a horse--he now walks on his own,he talks on his own,and his sentence
structure's up to 12 words in a sentence,which is totally remarkable.
A pediatric orthopod wanted to operate on him because the ball and the socket in his hip were not in
place. Because of riding on the horse and my daughter saying no more operations,that program has helped
Zachary,and Zachary now walks,talks,he laughs.
And now,to find out that some other people with children who--and maybe adults who cannot get
into the program because it is small,I think that what we need to do is approve the resolution to expand to
afford other parents,grandparents,children and adults,the opportunity to have therapy to grow and to be the
best that they can be,and that's what this program does. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. If there's anybody else that would like to speak?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Clay,it looks like you're up.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Oh,my goodness.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You said you needed more time. I didn't book the whole day.
MR.BROOKER: Good morning,Mr.Chairman,Planning Commissioners. My name is Clay
Brooker.I'm with the law firm of Cheffy Passidomo in downtown Naples.
Before I actually start my presentation,I need help perhaps from Heidi or perhaps from you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Do you want me to do your presentation for you?
MR.BROOKER: Am I the local attorney that can't do this?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No,it wasn't you.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: It's one of them,it looks like.
MR.BROOKER: I've heard of 16 horses per lot a few times. This is in the Land Development
Code.What am I missing? Is 16--does a private deed restriction override the Land Development Code or--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. I think when we were talking,the people that did mention 16,that's
what the deed restrictions do allow.
MR.BROOKER: Okay. But would you agree with me the Land Development Code would take
precedence,whatever it says?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes. The Land Development Code is not enforced by this board. I mean,I
shouldn't say--the Land Development Code is enforced. It's the deed restrictions that are enforced by this
board.
So you're saying that 30 horses could be allowed there instead of 48?
MR.BROOKER: On two-and-a-half acres times two.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,they have--
MR.BROOKER: They have two-and-a-half acres currently. Multiply that--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So they've got a total of five--seven and a half?
MR.BROOKER: Yeah,whatever the math is. I think they're over--with 10 they're over what the
Land Development Code permits today,as I understand the code.
CHAIRMAN S TRAIN: Except for the conditional use application that they currently have.
MR.BROOKER: I'm password protected. Work your magic,Ray. There's a password;sorry.
Does anyone know what the password is for this computer?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No,I do not.
MR.BROOKER: Someone came in earlier and gave it to me and uploaded my presentation onto the
computer,and now it's not--
COMMISSIONER EBERT: That was Kady.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Kady from across the hall.
MR.BROOKER: You know when the zoning director nor the comprehensive planning director can
get into the computer,this is a secure system.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. Well,we try to outdo NSA.
MR.BELLOWS: We made some modifications to the equipment,and they changed the password
Page 31 of 53
September 5,2013
on me.
MR.BROOKER: While I see the lady who gave me the password--she's coming. Ms.Ebert,you
had asked how many residents are in Pine Ridge. I'm told 517 residents in Pine Ridge.
And on that note,I heard 450 volunteers involved,630 participants proposed;we're now getting to
the point where these three lots,if this proposal is adopted,more than doubles the number of residents in Pine
Ridge.
I represent the Martinos,which is shown here.Their house is shown across the street from NEC. So
you see there,this is the existing Lot 21,the existing conditional use lot. This is Lot 20.They currently own
this lot. About 2.18 acres.And then this is the lot that is under contract for purchase,Lot 19.
My clients are the Martinos who live here across the street. I can also tell you that I have been given
authority by the Wesnofskes and the Calbs to speak on their behalves,and they've delegated time for me to
speak to you this morning.
I should also mention here,this house immediately abutting to the south is owned by Richard
Ramsden,R-a-m-s-d-e-n,and Nancy Madden,M-a-d-d-e-n. Based upon comments at a Pine Ridge Civic
Association meeting,I think it's fair to say--and someone can correct me if I'm wrong--that they oppose the
petition.
The Martinos,the Wesnofskes,and the Calbs oppose the petition. They live across the street.They
deal with this project on a daily basis. They see it. They hear it. They smell it. They live it. They
experience the traffic.
I should also mention--you've already heard the Martinos are donors both in terms of time and
money to NEC currently. I believe they sponsor a horse there. And the Wesnofskes,who live in this house,
have three grandchildren who are autistic.
So the issue here is not whether we oppose what NEC does. At the outset,please understand that all
three of these property owners do not oppose the admirable service that NEC provides.We've heard a lot of
touching stories but,unfortunately,that's not why we're here. I don't think anyone in this room if asked to
raise their hand to say they oppose the service that NEC provides would,in fact,raise their hand.
What we're here to discuss today--and I did not hear much. I heard a couple comments,heard a lot
of anecdotal stories,which were expected,but I did not hear much about the regulations that apply,and I did
not hear much about the zoning issues.
What we're here to discuss is simply whether this location is appropriate for the significant expansion
that's been proposed.
I believe when Wayne was up here giving his presentation he mentioned--he used the word that
they were--NEC is entitled to this use,and I don't believe that's a correct recitation of the law.
That did not come out as clear as I was hoping,but that is Land Development Code Section 10.08.00.
This is the conditional use section of the Land Development Code. And what it--the highlighted portions--
I'll just highlight or speak to the primary portions of it. A conditional use can be granted only if it's found by
each of you Planning Commissioners that this proposed use will not be,will not be,injurious to the
neighborhood or to adjoining properties. It doesn't say zoning districts. It says the properties next door.
This is the--a continuation of the same Land Development Code section. I highlight for you some
of the provisions I think are important. But you see there under D,findings,one,two,three,and four,this
code binds each of you to--each of you commissioners to consider these criteria to determine whether this
proposed use is appropriate for the location.
You'll see No. 1 is consistency with the code and the Growth Management Plan;No.2 is ingress and
egress issues;No.3 is the effect the conditional use would have on neighboring properties in relation to noise,
glare,economic,or odor effects;and No.4 is compatibility with the adjacent properties and other property in
the district.
As I just mentioned,one of the criteria is consistency with the Growth Management Plan. The
Growth Management Plan states that new development shall be compatible with and complementary to--
compatible and complementary to surrounding land uses.
So that is--those are the criteria by which each of you must judge this petition. And I ask each of
you today to fulfill your duty and apply this law faithfully and honestly without regard to the heart-touching
Page 32 of 53
September 5,2013
stories we've heard. That is not the issue before you today.
We've seen this a lot already. I won't spend a whole lot of time,but I did want to point out--this is
the proposed expansion. Wayne had a much prettier color copy. Went from--went from their existing 2.48
acres--they're in Lot 21. They're proposing to increase to 6.81 acres. That's a 174 percent increase in land
area.
From 20 approved parking spaces back in 2000 to 52 proposed parking spaces. That's 160 percent
more parking spaces.
From approximately 32 participants max back in 2000 when they were approved,to 632 proposed.
That's almost a 2,000 percent increase in the intensity being placed to this property.
Your job is to consider whether this proposed expansion is not injurious to the neighborhood,is
compatible with the neighborhood,and complementary to the people who live in the neighborhood,and
especially across the street.
Let's take a look at how we got there. I'm sorry,this orientation is upside-down compared to what
we've been looking at. Here is Goodlette-Frank Road on the bottom,Center Street goes up here on the
right-hand side,and then Ridge Drive is over here.
This is a conceptual--what they call a conceptual master plan that was attached to the conditional
use that was approved back in 2000 by Collier County.
If you'll notice,we show an area on this conceptual plan of an equestrian ring. I point that out
because it doesn't say arena. It says a ring. Then you have 20 spaces noted on a conceptual site plan. You
have access off of Center to those 20 spaces. You have a house with a driveway. And if you look at the
actual conditions imposed back in 2000,they're virtually nonexistent. I think one was removal of exotic
vegetation,but nothing really to speak of.There's no limitations on hours of operation. No buffering
requirements,no nothing.
But notwithstanding that,let's take a look at what the county thought it was approving. This is a
transcript of the Planning Commission meeting held back on February 3,2000,for their conditional use
approval.
You see there that Fred Reischl,who is now back with the county,but he was there at the time as
well,he basically states in this area that the primary access shall be Center Street. And he points out,because
that's the access that's actually connected to the parking lot.
And Commissioner Rautio starts asking about the traffic,so traffic was a concern even back then in
2000. And Commissioner Rautio points out the staff report saying that it's 50 to 100 average trips per week
day. And he(sic)says that that seems a little excessive to him,because they're looking that same day at
another proposal on 41,and it's only 50. So he questions how did they come up with 50 to 100.
And Mr.Reischl says,yeah,it does seem excessive,but we don't really have a model,what do they
call it,the standard trip generation manual. 1 mean,you've heard that before. They don't really have a good
idea or a good method on how to measure the traffic impacts to the neighborhood.
And a couple pages later in the transcript--this highlighted portion is from Mr.Don Pickworth who
was a legal representative of NEC back in 2000.And he explains that,well,let your traffic concerns be
allayed. We know what kind of traffic we have. And on a weekday,we get about 10 trips a day,and on
Saturdays when the programs operate,we get about 75.
So if you take a--you add that up,you're looking about,at that time, 125 trips per week is what was
represented by NEC would be their traffic impact to the neighborhood.
And then,finally,someone asked Ms.Blackwell,how many participants do you have?Right now we
have 23 riders. This is a quote.We've had as many as 34 at our maximum. So back then NEC represented to
the county that we're going to have about 125 trips per week and a maximum of 32 riders. That was how the
conditional use was approved.
And the planning commissioners at that time found that there would be no undue impact to the
neighborhood based upon those representations.
Now,let's watch what happens over time. This is 2005,five years after the conditional use was
approved,and you can see nothing really occurred in those five years. You still have an equestrian ring;
certainly no arena there. The parking lot even hasn't developed to a large degree. I do see up here some
Page 33 of 53
September 5,2013
people parking on the right-of-way.But that's what it looked like in 2005.
2008 the most noticeable difference is we now have the arena. So it was built--I thought I heard
2007 or something along those lines. So it was built in 2007,but now that's just a picture to show you what
the arena looked like or what the property looked like in 2008.
2010 --and this is what it kind of looks like today. I had a 2012 photo,but it looked almost identical
to this,so I cut that one out. But,I mean,the most noticeable aspect,the most noticeable difference here is
the parking lot;significant improvements and enlargement to the parking lot and,I will note,a two-way
access to Ridge has been developed.
So let me point out a few things. And the whole idea,the whole purpose of this is to show you what
impacts are currently existing today.
Go back to the slide. I want to show you the location of the arena. And you notice the arena extends
over Lot 21. And,remember,the conditional use was approved for Lot 21 only. So when they built the
arena,they ran into a problem.They wanted a bigger arena and spacing consideration.
So a cure to the problem was not to stay on Lot 21,which they were approved to do,but we'll just
expand the lot by a lot-line adjustment. So you added 40 feet of width right there for the arena,and I assume
they maintain that that's legal. I don't know if it's legal or not,but I would question whether this is an
appropriate use of their conditional use approval,or is it an inappropriate expansion?
Now, I'd like to refocus again back to the 2010 aerial. I'd like to refocus again on the access off of
Ridge.
Again--well,not again,but for the first time,here's the lot line. That access is not even on the lot
for which the conditional use was approved. That access exists today.
They were and are impacting the neighborhood beyond,far beyond what was ever considered by the
county back in 2000 when the conditional use was approved.
Remember,the primary access was supposed to be here off of Center. This is the two-way access off
of Ridge. They erected an entrance sign underneath their mailbox.
I should note that that entrance sign has now been removed,once this was pointed out to them,I
think. But this was their primary access. They were using this access off of Ridge. So the impacts to the
neighborhood were occurring at the time,are occurring today through traffic encroachments.
Finally,speaking of the traffic,take a look at what NEC predicts for this season in terms of trips.
This is in the packet that each of you planning commissioners received. That chicken scratch with the circles,
that's my handwriting. I added it all up,and it comes up to 599 trips per week. This is a far cry from the 125
per week that NEC represented to the county back in 2000.
I should mention that 125 trips per week,on Thursdays alone,NEC is predicting that they're going to
exceed that,and that holds true for other days. These are their numbers,not mine.
So I point these things out to you to demonstrate the impacts already being absorbed by the
neighborhood. And,by the way,these traffic numbers don't account for NEC's planned expansion.They
have predicted themselves over 200 more participants could be accommodated by the expansion they are
requesting today,for a total of 632 participants.
Based upon the same ratios,here you have--I'll take their estimate of traffic and their calculation of
432 participants. If you use that same math and those same ratios,632 participants equates to 877 trips per
week. I'm not a traffic engineer. That might be a wrong way of calculating it,but I'm using their numbers
and their math to come to that conclusion.
So what you have is that back in 2000,you have a very small--based upon what NEC represented,
very small impact to the neighborhood which has just blown up. And I--as I stand before you today,877
trips per week,or even the 600 trips per week,when you compare what the traffic would have been or would
be if these were single-family residences,or not this,it pales in comparison.
And, in my opinion,no way is 600 trips or 877 trips coming into Center Street compatible and
complimentary to the Pine Ridge single-family residential neighborhood.
NEC has simply outgrown this location. No one objects to what they're doing. Everyone applauds
them for the admirable services they provide.
I was touched when I heard all the stories. I have a daughter of my own. Heaven forbid I would
Page 34 of 53
September 5,2013
ever have to use NEC services,but thank God they're there. But to expand beyond what they're doing now
when the neighborhood is already impacted far beyond what the county even dreamt of back in 2000,this is
just not the right location.
What should be occurring here is expansion elsewhere. I heard Pace Center for Girls or David
Lawrence Center. Have satellite locations closer to your clientele,closer to your participants.That's where
the expansion should occur,not further encroachment into a single-family residential neighborhood.
For those reasons,the Martinos,the Wesnofskes,and the Calbs oppose this petition.And I think Mrs.
Martino said it most articulately;she does not relish taking that position in public for obvious reasons,nor do
I standing here today.
But we're looking at zoning. Mr.Chairman,you said we're a zoning board. This is--these are the
zoning issues. We're looking at traffic,we're looking at noise,we're looking at light,we're looking at glare,
we're looking at odor far beyond what was ever contemplated by the county when it determined 32
participants doesn't have an impact to the neighborhood that we're concerned about.
Having said that,we realize what we're up against. And through much deliberation and
consternation amongst the group,there comes a reality or a possibility that we're fighting the losing battle
here because it's a good cause,and no matter what the impacts are,we're going to lose this fight.
So because of that,we have drafted up a list of conditions. If,in fact,this commission is inclined to
recommend approval to the County Commission,we would ask that certain conditions be considered. And I
hesitate to show you the list because automatically it puts us in a posture of,well,we no longer oppose the
petition. Let it be clear,we oppose the petition for all the reasons I've already stated.
As an alternative,we have drafted a list,and I have copies for everyone if that helps.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It would help me,yes. Do you have an extra one for the court reporter?
MR.BROOKER: There should be plenty there,yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And Heidi.
MR.BROOKER: And I will run through these,not line by line.
CHAIRMAN S TRAIN: Can you--and I notice--I only got through a few of them. Some of them
are already anticipated by the site plan. So they're--and I suggest that if this project is approved with the site
plan,those requirements,some of them may already be met. So we'd like to check those off so we get down
to what the meat of the issue is.
MR.BROOKER: That's perfectly appropriate. I heard some comments before that they would still
like--for example, 52 parking spaces,they would still like a stipulation to that effect. We were asking for
45,a limit of 45 in here. That's just by way of example.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,you haven't heard my recommendation--my stipulations,if there are
any. And I've already got a list going,so--
MR.BROOKER: Fair enough.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --that may solve some issues.
MR.BROOKER: So just push me forward if I start talking too much. But Lot 19,we would like
just for--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm sorry to interrupt again--
MR.BROOKER: No,that's perfectly fine.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But,Wayne,when--your rebuttal,you'll need to address whatever ones are
left on the table at that time.
MR.ARNOLD: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So I'm sorry. Go ahead.
MR.BROOKER: That's perfectly fine.
Lot 19,this is the lot furthest to the south.We would ask that it be used only as paddocks for the
purpose of providing an appropriate buffer to the single-family residential lot directly abutting the south.
With No.2,ingress and egress,obviously,off of Center Street. Mr.Chairman,that's probably one
you were just referring to.
To add to that,we would want no ingress/egress access or driveways off of Ridge Drive at all. The
current plan shows a driveway off the house of Lot 21. We would want that sealed,except for the emergency
Page 35 of 53
September 5,2013
access they mentioned.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: As I spoke to you during our conversation,21 is not on the table today. It's
not a conditional use here for review.
MR. BROOKER: I make the request,and I will ask the petitioner to respond to it. If they want to be
good neighbors,I'm making the request.
No construction traffic of any kind permitted on Ridge. And we would like these conditions as--
ingress/egress conditions to be fully satisfied before any increase in the number--any further increase in the
number of participants and before any additional construction takes place,with an outside deadline of January
1,2014.
No rentals of any kind. And the reason we put this in there is the house on Lot 20 currently is being
rented out to businesses. I think they're charities. They may be nonprofits,nonprofit corporations under
Florida law. That's not permitted under the agricultural zoning district.
So we would want a stipulation so that you can't--and the reason why--that house has many cars
parked in it. It's just more traffic generation from time to time. We see cars parked there. I had pictures of it,
but I didn't bring them with me. But we would like no rentals of any kind.
With respect to the hours and days of operation,8 p.m.to 8 p.m.,we've already discussed that. I'll
allow the language to speak for itself.
Here's an additional one. No more than two special events per year. We understand that they have
their barn dash buggy or--barn dance,and there's a horse show that I think is,apparently,a big thing,and we
certainly wouldn't want to prevent them from holding that as well.
We do ask that if you are going to ask for temporary use permits for those special events,that copies
of the application be circulated to property owners 300 feet around in advance so they know what's coming
and can weigh in with any comments as they deem appropriate.
No further physical expansion;that's No.5.No further acquisition of any land contiguous or adjacent
to the property boundaries.
Limit the parking spaces to 45,and no future increase. No further increase in covered or uncovered
structures that exceed the square footage shown on the proposed site plan.
We would like the height limitations to remain limited as to Lot 21 as to what currently exists there
today. So if something is torn down and rebuilt,they have to build it to their--to the lot heights that--no
higher than the heights that are in existence today.
For Lots 19 and 20,we would ask an actual height limitation of 25 feet to minimize the visual impact
of the structures on the adjacent residential neighborhood.
We ask for a yard setback off of Ridge Drive of 70 feet. And that number is not arbitrary.That
number is exactly,as I calculate it--and I can be corrected. As I calculate it,that is the distance that the
existing house on Lot 20,which is now rented out, is from the property line. So I'm just asking that they
maintain that line as a perpetual setback off of Ridge.
Lighting shall be--and this is where I don't know the right terminology,but shielded so as not to
leak or pollute off their property boundaries.
No more than 14 horses on the entire proposed area. I think they're proposing four,so hopefully
that's not unreasonable.
And, obviously,no amplified sound on Lots 19 and 20;that's already recommended by staff.
The vegetation buffer is an important one for my folks. We would like a Type C vegetation buffer
along Ridge Drive and wrapped around the south border on Lot 19 to buffer the existing single-family
residence to the south.
Landscape buffers must be irrigated and maintained. And,again,a timing condition,that must be
installed and maintained and irrigated prior to any further increase or expansion.
Number 7,Mr.Chairman,this runs into the legal issue you've already brought up. We would like
these conditions to apply,as applicable,to the existing use as well. I realize that's not open. We are making
that recommendation or request of the petitioner because that operation on Lot 21 is unlimited. There's
nothing stopping them from expanding greatly and impacting the neighborhood even more than they've
already done.
Page 36 of 53
September 5,2013
So we make that request of the petitioner,and hopefully they will be good neighbors and agree to it.
With that,I'll try to answer any questions.I appreciate your time and your understanding of this very
delicate issue,and that's it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Are there any questions of Clay?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: What I would think--when we had met,I had asked at the time if you had
any stipulations or conditions that would help your position,to let me have them in advance so we could try
to further compromise. Dropping them here on us at 20 minutes before 12 at the hearing is a little difficult
time to do that.
I certainly would like the opportunity--I've sat with the applicant and yourself—and walk through
some of these to see what were viable,maybe,alternatives. That's not going to happen,I don't think,today.
But what I would suggest,if this board would not mind,is that we normally take lunch from 12 to 1.
This isn't going to be over in the limited amount of time we have left until noontime. And I have found from
past experience when we skip lunch because we think we're going to get through something,we never do.
So in that regard,I would suggest we take an early lunch to give us all time to digest what has gotten
in front of us and for the applicant to consider these as well and possibly talk with the--with Clay or
whoever else to see if any of these issues--to what extent they could be accommodated,if that is the way the
outcome may be.
So does that seem to meet with approval from this board?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Perfectly fine.
CHAIRMAN S IRAN: Okay. With that, it's now 20 minutes of 12. We will take a recess for one
hour for lunch and for the others to get together and come back at 20 of one and resume the meeting at that
time. Thank you.
(A luncheon recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay,everyone. Welcome back from our lunchtime. And we'll see what
kind of progress was made between the applicant and Clay,or whoever was involved. And,Wayne,I guess
since we're done with the public comment,we'll move into your rebuttal and discussion on the list that was
passed out to you.
MR.ARNOLD: Okay. I didn't really prepare any rebuttal comments. I think that,you know,we
obviously disagree with some of Mr.Brooker's comments regarding--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The speaker's not picking up.
MR.ARNOLD: Is it on now? It's on,good.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: There you go.
MR.ARNOLD: With regard to the compatibility and the land uses,we acknowledge that we have to
meet the criteria in the code,and we have to be compatible,and that's a function of use we believe that,given
the use that they've had over the years and despite the growth they've had,Pm not aware of any complaints
that have been offered to the county over many years.
And I think they've tried to foster a very good relationship with the residents of Pine Ridge.And,
certainly,they are our most immediate neighbors and--but keep in mind we also have other neighbors. We
have a horse stable on the other side of Center,we have a church that's growing across the street,the
methodist church school and their outdoor play areas. We're on Goodlette Road. That's a six-lane arterial
roadway.
So,I mean,we have other relationships other than residential,but I think it's fair to focus on the
compatibility side of dealing with that,and I think many of the conditions that they've offered attempt to
further that compatibility.
And I think,you know,the term"complementary" is used in the Comprehensive Plan.I don't know
exactly that that's ever been defined,but I believe that it will be complementary,and we will also be
compatible,as further conditioned by staff and as what we all may agree to as we go through the list of
conditions offered by the neighbors.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If it's okay with the panel,I'll just go ahead and start walking through the
documentation that was provided to us with the conditions and get your input on each one of them.Does that
Page 37 of 53
September 5,2013
work for you?
MR.ARNOLD: Sure. I'll get my glasses so I can read along with you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Now,first of all,P11 acknowledge to everyone that this is a
conditional use that applies to Lots 19 and 20;21 is an existing conditional use. And while there is some
hope that certain things may be changed on 21,I don't know how to accomplish that legally at this meeting,
not because we couldn't listen to it,but because,like everything that's recorded against property,you have to
have a document that someone can find to know it's against that property when they look up the property's
folio number or legal address.
Imposing conditions on an adjoining property as a result of activity on the property next door may
not be able to be accomplished by that methodology. So that even if we come to grips with some of these
issues that I would like to apply to 21,it still is going to be a challenge to figure out how to get that on record
in a manner that can be found easily and readily by staff and other review parties that would look at it.
So I'm not sure we can get there. And so I want to focus mostly on what the issues are for the 19 and
20 lots. And where you think there are some conditions you could offer up on 21,feel free to,and we'll
figure out to what extent they might apply,okay.
MR.ARNOLD: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So the first one is Lot 19 limitation to be only used as paddocks. And,
basically, it looks like you'd switch your plan around,take the 20 application,put it on 19,and 19 would go
on 20. I think that's what this seems to say. But is that something that's--you can work with?
MR.ARNOLD: Our response would be--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: What's the matter?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Can you put the plan back up,please?
MR.ARNOLD: Oh,sure. Do you want to see the color version,easier to look at?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes.
MR.ARNOLD: Well,our simple answer to No. 1 on the list was the Lot 19 limitation,and it is no.
It would be not financially in the Naples Equestrian Challenge's best interest to spend$600,000 plus buying
Lot 19 to only use it for the horse turnouts that would require them--could,functionally,they do that?
Probably. But I think the real answer is,is it necessary given some of the other conditions that can be applied
to,you know,certainly ensure that we're the good neighbor we think we want to be.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And I kind of expected,based on my conversations with you and
Kim,that this would be the outcome,because your grant is basically,I understand,based on—a lot of it on
the acquisition of Lot 19.
MR.ARNOLD: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Let's move on to some of the others that are more of a compatible nature.
Ingress and egress. All ingress and egress from Center Street with the exception of the emergency
access. Did you--I think that's something that's already incorporated into the document.
MR.ARNOLD: Well,it is,and I can--our only comment was on the--on Item B there,because it
included the reference to Lot 21.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right.
MR.ARNOLD: And we can live with the no access for Lots 19 and 20.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And is--the access you have on Lot 21 is for that house that's basically a
office now?
MR.ARNOLD: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: There's a parking lot adjacent to that that's accessed only by the avenue--
Center Street; is that correct?
MR.ARNOLD: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: How necessary,then,is that driveway? What kind of traffic is generated on
that driveway?
MR.ARNOLD: Well,I think for Lot 20,we're willing to forego the access issue.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. I'm talking about 21.
MR.ARNOLD: Oh,Lot 21.
Page 38 of 53
September 5,2013
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I know 21 is not up as a conditional use. I'm just asking you if it's an
easy one for you to accomplish as an--under an informal condition.
MR.ARNOLD: I'll have to defer to Kim. I don't,obviously,use the facility every day like she does.
MS.MINARICH: There's usually,like,one or two cars parked in that driveway. And the reason
that I'm hesitant to give up that driveway is that we have a garage that's accessed by that driveway,and we
use that garage for a lot of storage. And there would be really no accessway to get things in and out of there
without a driveway.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You couldn't come from the end of the parking lot and swing it over in a U
shape to connect into that--where the driveway is?
MS.MINARICH: We have a paddock there.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes,you do. Okay.
And the limitation to--you don't use it for any more than a couple cars that use that garage?
MS.MINARICH: That's correct,that's correct.It's not used for participant parking at all.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All the rest of the traffic goes through Lot 21 onto Center Street;is that
correct?
MS.MINARICH: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. If anybody from the Planning Commission has any comments as we
go along,just move forward.
No rentals. Are you renting anything out there? Go ahead.
MR.ARNOLD: Hang on one second. On Item D,it says until these conditions,2A through 2C are
satisfied,there's no increase in the number of participants. And I think our concern with that is,that's
something that we just really can't agree to,because the program evolves on Lot 21 with or without these
conditional uses that we're discussing today.
So to me,what we do on Lot 21,while it has a bearing on the neighborhood and what we do,it isn't
really--that kind of condition,I think,really hamstrings the Equestrian Challenge folks in a direction we
probably can't go. So that would be a no on all of those for us.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: What about on Lot 21,extending the buffer that would be along Ridge
Street that is going to be applied to Lots 19 and 20 across the front of the Ridge side entrance to 21,with the
exception of the driveway? Obviously,if you--
MR.ARNOLD: Well,we had a brief conversation with Mr.Brooker,and Kim and I participated in
that discussion. And I think that makes sense.The only caveat I would have is that there are--their fencing
and other improvements. I don't think she wants to commit to something on Lot 21 that requires her to
remove a fence to put in a landscape buffer.
I think we all agree that having a landscape buffer that's consistent between all three parcels that they
would own and operate makes a lot of sense visually,but I don't know that it couldn't be accomplished with
keeping the fence where it is.And Mike deals with the landscape code all the time.
I know we can have a fence in buffer. I guess it's a matter of how we,you know,meander the fence
and the buffer,or the buffer around the fence.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. But if you voluntarily accept to do that at this meeting with the
caveat that you'll work with staff for whatever flexibility needed as to keep the existing fence and things
intact,that might be a start. And I know that's voluntary,because it's not--that lot is not up for discussion
today.
But the fact that you put it on record,you may come back here some day for something or you may
need some avenue with the county,it would be nice to know that you're--any volunteering--any voluntary
obligation you've made,you try to stick with it,it would be very helpful.
So let's--we can keep that in the background for the rest of the discussion.
Phil?
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Mark,just a clarification.
On ingress/egress to Center Street,aren't you going to have to reconfigure that driveway then?As I
understood,it was a right-in.
MR.ARNOLD: On Center Street,yeah. It's technically not just a one-way,but it functions that way
Page 39 of 53
September 5,2013
because there's a cottage with a carport there,and it's difficult to navigate,and that cottage will have to come
down to implement the full access to Center,and they fully understand that.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: I just want to be sure.
MR.ARNOLD: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I have one question.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: The emergency,now that would be subject to the fire department
approval?So they would have to do this emergency according to the code of the fire department?
MR.ARNOLD: I'm assuming that they will,yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR.ARNOLD: Are we back to No.3,no rentals?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes. I'm not sure what your situation now with rentals are. So we heard
some testimony that you certainly--you currently have rentals,so I'm not sure how this evolved,so why
don't you help me.
MR.ARNOLD: Mr. Strain,I don't know all the history. And Ms.Martino probably can tell us,but I
believe this goes back to her era of being involved in the organization,that there was a rental agreement with
another nonprofit organization to utilize some of that space.
And I don't know anything about their function. I don't know what they do. But I think that--you
know,after talking to Kim,I think we can agree on the no-rental side of this,but--so Item A would come
out,but under B where it talks about the house on Lot 20 may be used only as an NEC office or,we were
thinking--or related charity office,because--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,I think the issue is rentals. I mean,it's titled under rentals. So if you
take out the rentals,whatever you use your own buildings for within your own organization shouldn't be
subject to further condition.
So I would think if you're willing to take out--acknowledge there's not going to be any rentals in
those facilities,I think that would work.
MR.ARNOLD: It will only be as an office,okay.
And then,you know,further,I know one of their issues has been parking,and certainly we can
accommodate any of the vehicles associated with that use on our internal parking lot that will be created.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I was one of the--I have a series of conditions I'll read to you when
we get to that point,some which will dovetail with these. But one of those under my list was to limit the
parking,as Commissioner Brougham had suggested,to 52 spaces. Does that work with you guys?
MR.ARNOLD: I think that's what we've shown on our plan. I can get another count--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It is.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: It is.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's why I'm trying to--
MR.ARNOLD: Okay.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mark,one quick question.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: As far as no rentals.Kim,did I hear you say that it's with Pace,
whatever,that you have a chance to have--rent that out?
MS.MINARICH: We currently--there are two charities that are using that home as offices.Charity
for Change,which is run by--
COMMISSIONER EBERT: What office?
MS.MINARICH: That 194,which is Lot 20--
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay.
MS.MINARICI-I: --the one in question. So that's being used by two different charities as their
office space,Second Chance Foundation and Charity for Change.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. But you said if you do this larger office,with the 3,000 square
Page 40 of 53
September 5,2013
feet,it is--
MS.MINARICH: It had no impact on that,no.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: That had no impact.
MS.MINARICH: No.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. I just want to make it clear. Thank you.
MS.MINARICH: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And the other part of the no rentals was 3C,it was limiting the number of
participants. You have submitted a conditional use that was based on a certain number of participants,and
you--the first one didn't have. But on Lots 19 and 20,we need to see if there's a level of participants that is
--we can state as a maximum so that if you need to go beyond that at any time you have to come back in as a
conditional use amendment,and what that would require is you to readdress the intensities that any additional
uses--participants would require.
MR.ARNOLD: Well,you want to go ahead and--that's going to be one of your conditions that
you're going to talk about.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Actually,it's 3C.
MR.ARNOLD: Oh,I see it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's why I brought it up,because you went back and brought up 2D to
me,so I'll bring up 3C to you. I missed one and you missed one,so--
MR.ARNOLD: And I think--what--
MS.MINARICH: Well,that's under--maybe I don't understand 3C. It says,until these conditions,
3A and B,are satisfied,there shall be no increase in the number of participants.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Let me clarify. I realize that 3A and B are not going to apply as
they're written here so,therefore,3C could not apply. But the gist of 3C is one that I already made a note of.
What's your maximum participant capacity that you're going to--that should be--that is going to be
requested under this conditional use? We might as well discuss it now since it was started to in 3C.
MS.MINARICH: But in 3C,is that referring to what's going on in Lot 21? Because it says,must be
satisfied by January 1 of 2014.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We are discussing Lots 19 and 20 here today. That's all we can--unless
you guys want to amend Lot 21,there's not much we can do with it.
MS.MINARICH: Okay. So on Lot 19 and 20,the limit,which is on our grant,would be 200 per
year.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MS.MINARICH: Two hundred participants per year.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So it would be 200 participants--
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Additional?
MS.MINARICH: Yes.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Two hundred additional to what you have now?
MS.MINARICH: That's correct,to what we would be operating on Lot 21,that we currently have
operations on Lot 21.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right,but you can use--the people on Lot 21 could spread across 19 and
20.But the whole program,based on the conditional use of Lot 19 and 20,will not increase more than 200?
MS.MINARICH: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Meaning 632.
MR.ARNOLD: Okay. Are we ready to move on to No.4,hours and days of operation? The
Monday through Saturday,eight to eight,we like staffs condition. It even goes a little further than this
condition does,because it talks in terms of the training and also the special event. So we would prefer to go
ahead and keep the hours that staff has offered.
On Sunday,1 don't think there's--I think we need to talk about that a little bit,because I think that
we can agree that participant programs could not--would not occur on Sunday for Lot 19,but there may
need to be some other incidental--or there's a training room there that may be the best day to get some of the
Page 41 of 53
September 5,2013
volunteers together,put them inside.
So I guess to the extent that they don't want to see a heavy program load extended to Sunday,I think
that's fine.
MS.MINARICH: There would be no participants.
MR.ARNOLD: It would be no participant programming on Sunday for Lot 19.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So even though your traffic count shows six participants on Sunday,
you are going to say you're not going to have any participants on Sunday?
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Lot 19.
MS.MINARICH: The traffic on Sunday is not participant traffic. It's staff and our volunteers that
come to exercise horses.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I thought I remember reading the column was filled out with
participants. But if it isn't,that's fine. So you're fine with that?
MS.MINARICH: On Sunday there are no participant numbers in those traffic counts.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So the hours of operation will be pursuant to the staff recommendation,but
there will be no participant programs on Sunday; is that correct?
MS.MINARICH: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Do we want to put only staff and volunteer in?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Pardon me?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Do we want to put only staff and volunteer on Sunday?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Actually,by saying no participant programs,that means there's no
participants there,and whoever else has to be there--we haven't got to isolate it whether it's a staff or
maintenance worker or something like that.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I think that's fine.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So I think"participants"kind of fills the bill.
MR.ARNOLD: With regard to the special event and the limitation on two,I mean,that's currently
what they do today,and I guess our simple answer is,no,we don't want to agree to two special events.
The code citation that they've referenced here is the temporary use permit section that applies to
anywhere in Collier County,whether it's Pine Ridge Civic Association or,you know,a Wal-mart store.I
mean,there are temporary permit standards that you apply for.
And I understand the intent of where they're trying to go,and that is,you know,do they want us to
have 14 special events a year or 22 special events or whatever. But the fact is,I mean,organizations do
evolve and change the way they do things.
But,again,I also keep in mind this is for Lots 19 and 20. So,you know,I think that still the answer
is not wanting to limit that to two.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,let me ask Mike something,or Ray. Under our special events
procedure,temporary use permits in the code,are we--do we have any limitation on how frequent they can
be?
MR. SAWYER: The limitation is that you've got 28 days total for the year. You can split those into
two 14-consecutive-day permits. So you can have two permits. You can have 28 permits. You can split
those up.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So without a limitation in the conditional use on the special events,
they could have 28 special events a year?
MR.SAWYER: Correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Because--now,the reason this is pertinent is we have had mostly churches
come in and ask for special events,and it's usually part of their criteria,but we limit those.And we don't
necessarily,all the time,limit them to what the code says.
So if you only have two a year now and you have them on the Lot 21,which is no restriction and it
doesn't have one going forward,but these two lots,is there some consideration you could provide for a
maximum number on just these Lots 19 and 20 for special events? That's what it boils down to. Do you need
28--do you need the option of up to 28 a year on those two lots?
MR.ARNOLD: I think Kim's comfortable with the number that it's for for Lots 19 and 20 for a
Page 42 of 53
September 5,2013
special event pursuant to Section 5.05--whatever that is--it's Section 5.04.05.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,we're--just whatever the LDC allows,that's the LDC section.
MR.ARNOLD: Right.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Number 5,no further physical expansion or limitations.
MR.ARNOLD: I talked to Clay briefly about that. I think the only concern is that in the future
there's probably going to be some demolition and rebuild activities,and the building that's currently used as
an office on Lot 20,for instance,it's--it was built as a house,and there may be a need to reconfigure the
shape of that. And,you know,does the wall grow slightly?I don't know. We don't have square footages
shown on our plan. I mean,they have a limitation of the 70 feet,which I think I can live with,based on my
survey number.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,let's back it up a little bit.
MR.ARNOLD: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No acquisition of any land contiguous or adjacent to the property
boundaries.I don't see that as a realistic option to restrict someone from buying property--
MR.ARNOLD: I had a big"no"next to that on my sheet.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. That part of it concerns me. But when you get to some of the others,
they're basic standards. Number B,as Phil and I--as I had articulated earlier,his suggestion at 52 parking
spaces would suffice for B. Under C,no further increase or covered structures. Again,I think your
conditional use provides what you can do there. If you go too far outside boundaries of the conditional use,
you're going to be—you can't. So you'd have to come back in for a CU,anything beyond what the
conditional use allows. And I think that restriction really covers C to the extent it needs to be.
There are some minor footprint changes that are allowed,but those are within the code.
MR.ARNOLD: That's where I was going with it.I mean,I think the conditional use plan is fairly
restrictive,and there is a little flexibility the staff would have. I can't pick up a riding pen and move it where
I've got an office. But if my riding pen shape needs to change to a slight oval,I don't think staffs going to go
crazy and tell me I can't do that under my conditional use approval.
So I think I just need to make sure I have some flexibility. I think the plan we have fairly reflects
where we want to go in the future.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But I think the fact you have a conditional use with a site plan is restrictive.
MR.ARNOLD: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And that would cover most of that. But the height,what height limitation
are you looking at for your--you've got two new buildings,basically a gazebo and a classroom and some
stables,of course. But what do you think your maximum need is for height?
MR.ARNOLD: Well,if you go to the bottom,they were saying the height limitation--I want to
forget Lot 21,because I don't want to commit to future rebuild and renovations there. But on 19 and 20,
those structures are designed to be single-story buildings,and I think we could live with the zoned height of
25 feet.
They use the term"actual,"and it concerns me a little bit because I don't have actual building plans
to--and I think as we've all debated,there's a zoned height/actual height in the code.And the zoned height's
going to be to the midpoint of my gazebo's roof or my riding pen roof,and I think that gives us plenty of
height to deal with,and then whatever the peak height is above that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: What does--and,Ray and Mike,do you remember what the zoned--the
zoned height is in Pine Ridge at this time,RSF-1?
MR.BELLOWS: Thirty-five feet.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So you're going to actually reduce--voluntarily--you're going to
reduce your zoned height to the number lower than the people across the street from you?
MR.ARNOLD: Yes. They asked us to,and we're willing to do it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I just want to make sure you can live with it and we don't get into
something down the road that,oh,my God,what a mistake we made,and we see you back in here,and all
kinds of problems.
Yard setback from Ridge Drive.
Page 43 of 53
September 5,2013
MR.ARNOLD: Well,they've asked for 70 feet,and I know that Clay and I have briefly discussed
that,and I'm not sure what measurement device he used. But I just want to make sure that my building's not
69 feet today. I think--I know it's--well,it's over 50. It looks to be close to 70. So I don't know that I'm
married to 70 only because I don't know that that's the actual number.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So you--
MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Is that for--excuse me.Is that for buildings or structures? Because I don't
know if a fence would qualify as a structure.
MR.ARNOLD: Well,I think that's part of the next thing I wanted to add is that that would apply to
principal structures and not--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I would agree,because right now I just discovered not too long ago there
was some building department definitions of a structure that are outrageous,so I wouldn't want you to get
caught up--or anybody in this county to get caught up in those.
So I think we'll look at principal structures.But the distance back,if you're not sure it's 70,what are
you sure of?
MR. ARNOLD: Well,I know I'm beyond 50. Why don't we just say consistent with the setback for
the existing structure on Lot 20,and so whatever it is,that would be what we could build to.Because it seems
like that must have been the intent of the comment,that--no structures closer than what we've got. So I
think that's fair.However you want to express that,Mr.Chairman.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. It's consistent with existing structures that would--the lighting.And
I had--one of the notes I had was that you had expressed to me you were going to use only--the lighting
that you're going to have there would be,for parking areas,generally,the bollard lighting,which would be 3
or 4 feet high,the other lighting would be under cover with the exception of needed security lighting. Is that
still the plan you're intending to go under?
MR.ARNOLD: Yes,sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So the lighting shielding,if it's under cover,it's already shielded. The
bollards don't go high enough to go above the hedge,and they're going to be, I assume,the standard bollards
you see in a parking lot. In Golden Gate Estates,we use them and are part of our criteria out there.
Okay. And as far as leaking outside the property boundaries,if it's under a cover,it will be shielded
so it won't be—it shouldn't diffuse to anywhere but the property it's aimed for, is that--
MR.ARNOLD: And I think this comment grew out of the comment about the height of the existing
covered riding arena. It's a tall structure. It's tall enough that those lights can spill out. This is the riding pen
that would be the subject of this issue.
And any parking lot lighting,Kim assures me they don't need parking lot light poles. We can live
with the lower-level lighting. So we're fine with that,Mr. Strain.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Mark?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes,sir.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: If you would,go back to 5E. Just to be sure here,it says yard
setback off Ridge Drive for all lots. That would be inclusive of 21.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. We're only working on 19 and 20 unless stated otherwise in the
discussion,so—
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: In other places it's specific as to lots for 19,20,21.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,the only thing that we've talked about that I can recall in what we
started on today is that they have voluntarily extended--agreed to extend the buffer along Parcel 21. But
other than that,everything we've discussed is strictly on 19 and 20.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: I just wanted to be sure they didn't voluntarily agree to a 70-foot
setback.
MR.ARNOLD: That wasn't my intent,but thank you for clarifying that. The comment on number
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: G.
MR.ARNOLD: --G,I had a big N over that for no,but it said no more than 14 horses on the seven
Page 44 of 53
September 5,2013
acres. And I think what we'd like to do is try to keep this to the Lot 19/20 discussion we've been having,that
we would have no more than six horses on Lot 19.
We're building a six-stall barn,and the immediate intent was four horses. But I think to give us a
little bit of flexibility,you know,adding and asking for six horses on Lot 16(sic),I think,then you're assured
of not getting the 16 horses that the deed may allow them to house.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And the no amplified sound,that's something we've already talked
about. Staffs recommendation was somewhat limited,so that's going to be expanded to all of 19 and 20.
MR.ARNOLD: Right. We're fine with that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Vegetation buffer. What's the differences from staff between C and B?
MR.ARNOLD: Five feet.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And how does that work?
MR.ARNOLD: Type B buffer is 15-foot-wide buffer that has a double row of trees,I believe,
spaced 25 or 35 feet on center. They're--basically B and C are the same. C requires a 25-foot-wide buffer.
B is 15 feet wide.
And we're fine with the 20-foot on Ridge. We do have a little bit of concern on the south side of Lot
19. I think their request is we carry the 20-foot-wide buffer along that,and I'm a little concerned that it
impacts part of the trail if I agree to that 15 feet. The standard code buffer we think would work for us on--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Because they're--it's in ag zoning and it's two lots similarly zoned,the
minimum required buffer between 18 and 19 would be a B buffer?
MR.SAWYER: Between ag lots,actually,it's an A buffer.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Which is even--so B is more--a little bit better than an A.
MR.SAWYER: Basically,yeah. The difference would be an A buffer's 10-foot wide,trees 30 feet
on center. That's it. A B buffer is similar except it's 15 feet wide,the trees are 15 feet apart,and you've got a
5-foot hedge. That's what we were originally--in the staff report,that's what we were recommending.
MR.ARNOLD: Could I just back up and clarify?Because I had Type B in my mind,because when
we were in one of our discussions,we talked about whether or not you were going to apply an A or B
because there was a home on Lot 18.
MR.SAWYER: Correct.
MR.ARNOLD: And so if I don't have to provide a 15-foot-wide buffer,maybe we do a--
supplement a Type A buffer,give us a little more flexibility.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think the discussion is leaning more towards,instead of a C,a B between
19 and 18,and a C up on Ridge Drive.
MR.ARNOLD: But I think,Mr. Strain,my comment is that staffs telling me that I don't have even
a B buffer requirement between two agricultural lots. Is there some enhancement of lot--of the Type A
buffer?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The only difference is that the conditional use,while it is an agricultural
zoning,produces a--that's why it's a conditional use. It produces a change in intensity that may not be as
compatible with an A buffer as it would be for B when you look at a residential home on Lot 18.
And I think,by the intention of your site plan,you had intended to put a B there,because you
showed B elsewhere. And the question came up today,do you intend to put a buffer there,and I thought the
response was a B buffer.
MR. SAWYER: If I might just--and I may have set everybody down a path we shouldn't have
gone.When you've got two agricultural parcels next to each other,it is an A buffer.
If you've got a residence on the ag lot,then you would--the buffers go by use or the zoning district.
So from a zoning district,it's an A buffer. From a use standpoint,it would be a B buffer.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So are you going to apply for a deviation?
MR.ARNOLD: No,sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then we just answered our question.
MR. SAWYER: I apologize for the confusion.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's okay.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: This is all vegetated here anyway so,what,are they going to rip it
Page 45 of 53
September 5,2013
out to plant?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: They'll have to put a buffer up on their property,depending on where that
vegetation lies.
MR.ARNOLD: Yeah. It's kind of a mess. I mean,the lots been--you know,the former house that
was there burned down many,many years ago,and it's--nobody's been going in and regularly mowing and
maintaining,so it's got some exotics.And it's got a mixture of things. We'll have to go in and clean it up
anyway just to make it part of the program,if you will,if this is successful.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. Then--are you going to then do a C type on Ridge Drive?
MR.ARNOLD: Correct.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay.
MR.ARNOLD: And that gives me the option of having a hedge,a wall,a berm,combination
thereof,just as the B buffer does. It's just a wider footprint.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: And more opaque,so within so many years it would--
MR.ARNOLD: Well,I think the code says something about 80 percent opaque with a one-year
planting for the Type B buffer. The same language doesn't carry over to Type C,for whatever reason,but it's
got to be an opaque hedge or wall or fence or berm combination.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And it does require maintenance in perpetuity,correct,in our LDC?
MR. SAWYER: Correct. Yeah,the code actually--I'm sorry,Mike Sawyer,again,for the record.
The difference is-- I'm sorry. You're correct,all required landscaping is required to be maintained in
perpetuity. The difference between a B buffer and a C buffer is that--it's correct it goes from a 15-foot-wide
dimension to a 20-foot-wide dimension,and there is a second row of trees.
So instead of just having a single row of trees,you actually have a double row of trees.Hedge is the
same.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you.
Okay. That take us,I think,to the end of the list. Before we run through this again,let me make
some notes,go over some issues that I picked up during the discussion that I would want as stipulations,
unless you have a reason they shouldn't be.
The emergency gate,I heard it was going to be a solid,decorative-material type gate. That could be
wood,plastic,whatever it is,but it's going to be--emergency gate will be solid,decorative material,and I
didn't see that in the conditional use,so we'll add that as a condition.
The--while you picked up the buffers--I'm going--I'm trying to figure out--I had some of these
notes that were on this list as well.
Oh,the metal roofing. The metal roofing--and this was Mike Rosen's discussion,and it was
accurate. Any metal roofing will be colored to avoid glare. So that means you can't have the plain,raw
metal,and you wouldn't use white as a color. It would be something you're intending to do to avoid glare,
and so that would be a stipulation.
MR.ARNOLD: So if metal roofing is used,it would need to be nonglare and colored material?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Correct.
MR.ARNOLD: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And it looks like--I had about--quite a few others. They're all picked up
by the list from the folks,so that's about it.
Clay?
MR.BROOKER: Thank you,Mr.Chairman.
Clay Brooker,for the record,again.
Just a few questions and comments as I listened to this.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,you know,this is his rebuttal,so don't go too far,okay.
MR.BROOKER: Okay. With respect to the--I know we're not talking about Lot 21 specifically,
but with respect to that driveway, I'm wondering if--since they are going to be reconfiguring the
entranceway--and I understand the garage situation--they're going to be reconfiguring,is there a way
simply that they would commit--I know this would be privately,informally,whatever the right description is
--to move the garage entrance on the other side;therefore,you don't need to use that driveway ever again?
Page 46 of 53
September 5,2013
Again,this is talking about an existing conditional use on Lot 21 that does not permit access onto
Ridge,and--or the primary access is supposed to be on Center. So that's what I would ask. That's my
comment with respect to that issue.
These timing issues that shown in 2D,3C,6B in terms of timing,when are you going to do this?
When are these conditions going to be forced to be satisfied? We've already heard that they don't have the
funding to do some of these things,and they're hoping to raise it in the next two years,but they don't even
know.
So at some point we need--that access off of Ridge needs to be cut off.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. But let's back up then. Let's take them one at a time. Wayne?
MR.ARNOLD: Yes,sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Or,actually,it's more to your statement. The previous CU on 21 did allow
that access off Ridge Drive.
MR.BROOKER: Correct. So I'm asking them privately,informally,to move that garage so it's
accessed from the--what they're going to have to do is revamp the entranceway off of Center so,in my
layman's opinion,moving a garage door from one side to the other side is not all that intrusive.
MR.ARNOLD: I don't know that much about the configuration of their entire office space,but I
don't believe the garage goes front to back of the building,so it's not a matter of cutting a hole in the back side
and,you know,closing up the garage door on the other.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Clay, I think you made your points. You'll have to--you want to
know that issue and the timing issue. We'll work on those two. And what else?
MR.BROOKER: The no rentals. I did not understand where we left no rentals.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'll read back the list to you shortly.
MR.BROOKER: Okay. My issue there is rentals is a zoning violation.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: They're not renting. That's what they said. They--
MR.BROOKER: They're not renting.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: They took the rentals off--I mean,because they accepted the"no rental"
provision.
MR.BROOKER: I was under the impression they had an open-ended lease in existence. That's off?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Clay,this is supposed to be the rebuttal by the applicants. So let's not push
it too far. I mean,you had your opportunity. I didn't limit you on time,so let's get to your points quickly. It's
not an argumentative period,okay.
MR.BROOKER: No participants on Sundays. We would,again,request that the Planning
Commission impose no activities on Sundays to give my--give the neighbors--no activities on Sundays to
give them a one-day break.
With respect to the special events,they're asking for four. That would give them a total of 32 special
events;28 on Lot 21 --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We're not dealing with 21,Clay.
MR.BROOKER: Well,then we would ask the Planning Commission to impose zero special events
on Lots 19 and 20.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Clay,again,this is his rebuttal. You had your time. I need to ask
you to wrap it up.
MR.BROOKER: Okay. We ask no more than four horses on Lots 19 and 20,which is consistent
with their representation that they're going to increase from 10 to 14. And that wraps up my comments.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you.
Wayne,the--I think we've addressed quite a few of the issues,but I--the point about the timing.
You've got--I know you're dependent on grants and things like that,but instead of imposing a time limit that
you have to meet regardless of your financial ability,we ought to look at imposing a time limit so that when
you get the funding that you have to start your construction or whatever you're going to do to get past the
acquisition of the lot,that the first thing you do before the construction--with the first construction is put the
buffers--those buffers in that are required around the property.
Do you have any problem with that?
Page 47 of 53
September 5,2013
MR. ARNOLD: No. I think that's fair and reasonable. I mean,I think that's--I've seen that similar
condition in other projects where,when we start to implement the vertical construction,we've got to make
sure our landscape buffer's in concurrently.
Are you actually writing these conditions down?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes.
MR. ARNOLD: I mean,I--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes.
MR. ARNOLD: I see you typing away. Pm assuming--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. I'm trying to convert this board over and others to electronic,and this
is my first meeting to try it,and it's working pretty well. So anyway. And,unfortunately,Apple's one of the
few operating systems that provides the flexibility that we need,so anyway.Go from there. An
advertisement against Microsoft.
MR.ARNOLD: Pm taking notes,but I'm assuming your fingertips are more accurate than my notes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,I don't type as good as I should. You don't want to read this. It's
gobbledygook.
Let's reverse--I mean,let's review where we're at,and then any final comments you have,Wayne,
we'll go from there.
I'll start with the ones that I have left in my list. The emergency gate will be a solid,decorative
material. Any metal roofing will be colored to avoid glare.
Then we'll go into the Pine Ridge conditions,some of which--some of the ones I had. You
voluntarily agree to extend the buffer along Parcel 21. There will be no rentals to outside entities.
And all the rest of these,unless I say Parcel 21,they apply to 19 and 20,because that's all we have
jurisdiction over here today.
So no rentals to outside entities. Lots 19 and 20 will not increase program to program more than 200
participants overall.
Staff hours will--use staff and no participant--I'm trying to reword this. No participant programs
on Sunday. I don't need to get into whether it's staff or not. Ifs just no participant programs on Sunday.
Limit special events to four per year. The heights for the lots are maximum 25 feet zoned.The Ridge
Drive setback will be consistent with the existing structures on 19 and--the furthermost structure on--what
is that structure?
MR.ARNOLD: Lot 20 is the one requested.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Lot 20.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: On Lot 20. Ridge Drive setback--well,that's what I just talked about,
okay. Let me make a note of Lot 20 on this one.
Outside lighting limits to be low-intensity bollards with no exterior lighting except where is
necessary for security and safety.
The maximum number of horses on Lots 19 and 20,in addition to what you have,regardless of 21,is
six horses.
MS.MINARICH: That was for 19,not 20.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Pm sorry.
MS.MINARICH: The six-horse limit for Lot 19.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,this is a conditional use for Lots 19 and 20,so we need to address the
conditional use.
MS.MINARICH: All right. Because we currently use Lot 21 for turnout for our herd of 10 horses
now. So I would--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,I would suggest what you do is use 19 and 20 for the total what
you've got on all the properties so you can continue using the turnouts,plus whatever new horses you put on
them.
MS.MINARICH: Or if we can stipulate stabling on the two properties to six.
MR.ARNOLD: Yeah,no more than six horses--
MS.MINARICH: No more than six.
Page 48 of 53
September 5,2013
MR.ARNOLD: --stabled on Lots 19 and 20.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. No more--the maximum number of stabled horses on Lot 19 and
20 will be six horses.
No amplified sound. Twenty-foot Type C buffer will be on Ridge Drive,and Type B buffer between
Lots 19 and 18,and those buffers will be installed with the first vertical construction on Lots 19 and 20.
And those are the only notes that I've taken.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Parking spots.
MR.ARNOLD: Parking.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh,yeah. I had that on mine. You're right. I didn't read it on the right one.
Maximum parking spaces will be 52.
Okay. Does that work from our discussions?Are you consistent,in agreement with those?
MR.ARNOLD: Oh,yeah. I appreciate you actually having those typed and written. That's very
helpful.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Again,if you can read my typing;that's another issue.
Okay. I think that gets us the conditions we talked about.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: The very last one,No.7,is a no;is that correct?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Correct. I mean,that's--Lot 21 is not the lot for discussion here today.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I just wanted to bring it up that that was one of their conditions,and--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The only issue that we have addressed on Lot 21 is the voluntarily
extension of the buffer along that line,which you guys have acknowledged here in the public meeting. I don't
think we have a lot of teeth to make you enforce it. But I think the fact you've brought it up here today would
be sufficient enough.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Will the hours of operation,the condition that the staff--it's going to
be that wording there for--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The staff conditions,yes.We'll use the staff wording for the hours of
operation. There was one caveat.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Four special events.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Four special events per year,correct.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: On Lot 19.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, 19 and 20. The hours of operation,we agreed to,would be what staff
recommended,right?
MR.ARNOLD: Correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mike,is there anything we've missed? I mean,we're going to have to do
consent today,so I need to make--want me to run this--I've got it all written down but,1 mean,as soon as
this meeting's over,when I get back to the office,I'll get it to you-all,but--
MR. SAWYER: Yeah. We'll need to get those conditions into the resolution,so--
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Did you do the zoned height?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes. The zoned height is 25 feet.
Does anybody have any questions or comments?I'll read it one more time to be clear. Does that
sound good? Because we are going to have to do consent today. We still don't have the luxury of
re-reviewing this.
MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Mr.Chair,could you read the lighting one again?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes. Outside lighting limits--outside limited to low-intensity bollards and
no exterior lighting except what is necessary for security and safety.
And I'll go through them one more time because,unfortunately,this is the only chance we're going to
have.
The applicant has voluntarily agreed to extend the buffer along Parcel 21. There will be--the one
fronting Ridge Drive.
There will be no rentals to outside entities.Lots 19 and 20 will not increase the program by over 200
participants overall. There will be no participant programs on Sundays. Limiting special events to four per
year.
Page 49 of 53
September 5,2013
The heights for Lots 20 and 19 will be 25 feet zoned. The Ridge Drive setback will be consistent
with the existing structure on Lot 20.
Outside lighting is limited to low-intensity bollards to no exterior lighting except what is necessary
for security and safety.
Maximum number of stabled horses on Lot 19 and 20 will be six.
There will be no amplified sound. The 20-foot Type C buffers on Pine Ridge will be on Pine Ridge
--on Ridge Drive and Type B buffers between 19 and 18 on the lot line.
The buffers to be installed will be first--will be installed first once--upon vertical construction
commences. The maximum parking spaces will be 52,and the hours of operation will be per the staff
recommendation.
Does that get everything that we've discussed?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mike,Ray,is that consistent with what you're at?
MR. SAWYER: It's consistent with my notes,yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Mr.Chair, I have one more question on the buffer on Lot 21 that they're
voluntarily agreeing to do.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That can't be part of our--it can't be part of our conditions,can it?
MS.ASHTON-CICKO: I guess you could indicate they voluntarily agreed to put in some buffer,
but that's kind of where my question goes,because I don't think,from what I've heard Mr.Arnold say,there
will be a Type C buffer. So I think he might put some plantings in,but I just want to make sure the
expectations are realistic—
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. But—
MS.ASHTON-CICKO: --of what they're committing to.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Because this is a conditional use for 19 and 20 and we have to write up the
stipulations in regards to the conditional use,now that we've more or less got some agreement to do
something with a buffer on Parcel 21,can we add that to our stipulated conditions for the recommendation of
approval of 19 and 20,or do we just have to leave it on record it was a voluntary condition provided here at
the meeting?
MS.ASHTON-CICKO: I'd prefer to leave it on record that it's a voluntary commitment.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I figured on that--where it was going to end up,so let's make that
voluntary condition clear.
MR.ARNOLD: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You're intending to do a Type C that will work around the existing features
on site for Parcel 21 as a volunteer offering to this process; is that a fair statement?
MR.ARNOLD: That is correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And,Mike,that means,basically,you'll work with him to get--or you,
whoever,will work with him as close as possible to get the Type C buffer that we're expecting,but it has to
work around the existing structures that are there;the fence,the mailbox,whatever else they've got sitting
there,so--
MR.ARNOLD: And just to be clear,we're talking about the Ridge Drive frontage of Lot 21.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Only Ridge Drive,yes.
MR.ARNOLD: Gotcha.
MR. SAWYER: Again,for the record,Mike Sawyer. As far as the actual Site Development Plan,
they'll be needing to come in for a Site Development Plan amendment on this simply because the access is
running through the adjacent existing lot.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right.
MR.SAWYER: And,because of that,basically we're going to wind up with a unified development
that's got two conditional uses on it. So the Site Development Plan itself is actually going to be tied into
itself.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So the site development process can reflect what the agreement was
Page 50 of 53
September 5,2013
here today for the voluntary correction or buffer added to that lot.
MR.SAWYER: Definitely.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's perfect. That will work good. That gets it in the system,and it's a
requirement to move forward what they've got to do.
MR. SAWYER: Correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And that--so when the SDP comes in with those site
improvements,based on the request to have the buffers installed first,then even on that lot,for those
improvements to connect to 19 and 20,you would need to get that buffer installed before you commence with
the construction to modify Lot 21 to accommodate Lots 19 and 20. It would all come in together as one
package.
MR. SAWYER: Correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well,that will actually work better. That will get the timing done
and everything else. Okay. Good. That's a much more solid way to do it. I like that. Okay.
Is there no other comments,questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. With this,Wayne,are you finished with your rebuttal?
MR.ARNOLD: I think so,Mr. Strain. I think I've said enough on the record and just,you know,
reaffirming that,as my professional planning opinion,we're certainly compatible with the neighborhood and
with the proposed plan and with the conditions as just read into the record.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. With that,we'll close the public hearing,and we will entertain a
motion.
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Mark?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes,sir.
Paul?
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: I would like to move that we vote to approve Resolution
CU-PL20110000719 subject to the conditions that you have written out for us.
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: Second.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion made by Paul,seconded by Mike.
Is there discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: In my summary of listing the conditions,which were 12,they--those did
include the previous ones--they were intended to include the previous ones that included the emergency gate
was going to be a solid,decorative material,any roofing--metal roofing to be colored to avoid glare. I'm
assuming the motion maker and the second agreed to all those stipulations.
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: All of them.
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: I do.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there any further discussion by anybody?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I have one comment to make,based on the conditions imposed at this
meeting and the efforts by the applicant to agree to some compatibility issues,I find this application
consistent with the Growth Management Plan. I find that I--adequate provisions have been provided for the
safe ingress and egress to the property.They have addressed the impacts to the noise,glare,and other--and
odor has been addressed.There has been no negative economic data provided.
Compatibility with the neighborhood provided by the buffers,the layout,and the restrictions
imposed create the compatibility needs required by the Land Development Code. The traffic has been
reduced off of Ridge Road due to its concentration at Center Street.
The acceptance by the primary neighbors to the intensity in their discussion of the existing facility
and the overall prospects of the new facility without any real zoning objections that haven't been addressed by
the mitigation offered today.
The noise is mitigated by the outdoor amplified sound,and the lighting was mitigated by
low-intensity bollards and parking arrangements and buffers.
Page 51 of 53
September 5,2013
That's my reasoning for recommending approval on this as well.
So,Paul?
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: I'd pretty much like to echo what you said. After listening carefully
to all the testimony,it seems to me that this is compatible with the residential neighborhood.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We'll call for the vote.
All those in favor of the motion with these stipulations,signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 6-0.
Thank you all for your time today. This moves on to the Board of County Commissioners next,so--
MR.ARNOLD: Are you having a consent hearing as well?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes. We're going to do that right now. I'm glad you reminded me,because
I would have pulled this up and said,oh,we're going to have a consent.
***Okay. This is the consent hearing for CU-PL2011000719,the Naples Equestrian Challenge at
the southwest corner of Goodlette-Frank Road.
The consent items have been read just previously. Is there anybody that has any concerns,issues,or
comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If not,is there a motion to approve on consent?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I'd motion to approve on consent.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms--Diane.
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: (Raises hand.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Seconded by Paul.
All those in favor,signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER ROSEN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 6-0.
Okay. Thank you all for attending.
MS.MINARICH: Thank you.
MR.ARNOLD: Thank you all very much.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That brings us to the last order of business,which there is no old business.I
see no new business listed.
Public comment. Looks like everybody's leaving.
Discussion of addenda? Well,that's kind of misplaced.
Planning Commissioners'comments. Anybody have anything?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Is there a motion to adjourn?
Page 52 of 53
September 5,2013
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Motion to adjourn.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Homiak.
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: (Raises hand.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Seconded by Paul.
Were out of here.
Thank you.
There being no further business for the good of the County,the meeting was adjourned by order of the
Chair at 1:39 p.m.
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
. `�
MARK STRAIN,CHAIRMAN
ATTEST
DWIGHT E. BROCK,CLERK
These minutes approved by the Board on j a p y I ,as presented "'or as corrected .
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF
GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICES,INC.,
BY TERRI LEWIS,COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC.
Page 53 of 53