Loading...
Agenda 01/10/2014 WPELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISIO MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING & BENEF NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING pI�9L�OLC�� IIIUNIT V THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD WILL HOLD A WORKSHOP ON FRIDAY, JANUARY 10 AT 11:00 AM AT THE COMMONS, 6251 PELICAN BAY BOULEVARD, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34108. AGENDA 1. Review proposed project 2. Adjourn ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK ON AN AGENDA ITEM WILL RECEIVE UP TO ONE (1) MINUTE PER ITEM TO ADDRESS THE BOARD. THE BOARD WILL SOLICIT PUBLIC COMMENTS ON SUBJECTS NOT ON THIS AGENDA AND ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES. THE BOARD ENCOURAGES YOU TO SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS IN WRITING IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD IS MADE, WHICH INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS AN ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING YOU ARE ENTITLED TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION AT (239) 597 -1749 OR VISIT PELICANBAYSERVICESDIVISION. NET. 1/10/2014 I, r, y I, 11 11 11 I I II 11 I, II I, II p II I I � it Q II I I � II fy II I1 J II 7 II O I I m II II II II 11 Q II In II I I II it II Z II Q it U 11 u 11 - 11 U II 11 f it 11 1 11 i1 11 II II 11 II It 11 11 11 �� Il It It 11 11 ll p 11 i II 11 U 111 1 11 11 11 .-ollk ResnickLisa From: LustigL [Lustig) @embargmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2014 10:54 AM To: Resnick Lisa (PBSD); McCaughtryMary Subject: FW: Concept for tomorrow's Briefing. Your concurrence? Lisa /Mary: Following is a proposal that I've sent off to David Cook on how we could do a "joint brief /walking tour" tomorrow at the Commons. I've gotten the approval of the idea from our association president —also a rep to the CNC, and from the other CNC rep for Lucia. I'm still waiting for a response from David Cook. I just want you to see what we are talking about, and perhaps send to Neil, alerting him that this is just in a discussion phase. We may not get a lot of time later in the day to iron out last minute details. If (!) I get Dave's approval, I would then need to get Neil's approval of the mechanics. We aren't changing the agenda, just changing the format by which Dave & I would brief, and perhaps where you would disembark for the Commons tour. Sincerely, Diane Lustig My email to Dave follows: Dave, I forwarded this morning to you a long email this AM that proposed a joint brief -as -we -walk tour of the Commons tomorrow. I've gotten an approval /concurrence from Paul & Loomis'. I'd really like you to consider the idea and let me know. I think we can make it really a positive experience for all parties. Logistics would be easy. BUT! I'd like for you and & to ideally spend 20 -30 minutes doing a "dry-run" walk through of the Commons, AND we would need to notify Jim & PBSD. I THINK they could actually pull the trolley right into Hyde Park and park in the extra spaces we have set off from the buildings (we can tape them for tomorrow). Trolley could then pick people up at the Commons when done. While I am waiting for your answer, I'm going to send a cy of the idea to Mary Johnson. I know that Paul /Loomis' /myself would really like to see this go well. Diane Lustig (239- 593 -6448) From: LustigL [mailto:Lustigl @embargmaii.com] Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2014 8:17 AM To: David Cook (merlincdc @gmail.com) Subject: FW: Concept for tomorrow's Briefing. Your concurrence? Dave: I think I told you that I am scheduled to be tomorrow's "briefer." When you read the following note, you'll probably think I've been drinking WAY too much coffee. Please give it a good thorough read, tapping your "visionary" self. I think that TOGETHER we could really do something tomorrow that could have far reaching positive results for the Commons. I'll need your response pretty quickly. I'm out jogging until about 0930 (to beach and back —with coffee in between). Diane Lustig 593 -6448 From: LustigL [mailto:Lustiel @embargmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2014 8:06 AM To: Paul McDonald; Loomis, AI & Donna Cc: Lee Lustig Subject: Concept for tomorrow's Briefing. Your concurrence? Paul /Loomis Team: My brain has been working overtime since 3AM on how to use tomorrow's briefing to "our" best advantage. By "our," I mean CNC associations, Foundation, and PBSD! I've got an idea that I would like your "permissions" to "run with it." I'd like to call Dave and propose that he and I do a "jointly led" walking tour of the Commons, pointing out the key aspects as we walk. (There are about 15 people associated with PBSD and we can handle that number with voice projection. I am not concerned about any additional members of the public if they show.) As we walk, I want to point out the successes /agreements that we (Foundation /CNC) have had, and not just the points on which we disagree. I want to propose that we start the tour at Hyde Park (means the trolly comes to our entrance). I can point out that Paul has offered to discuss the Foundation's use of 5 -6 of our parking spots for their staff during the busiest periods. We can then, enter the Commons from Hyde Park, crossing —with great caution —where there will be a crosswalk (for which CNC had to lobby for years). We can then walk along the imaginary "lushly landscaped, park -like, lit pathway" that will skirt the parking lot, providing much more safety to pedestrians and pulling the pathway away from Lucia's fence (another achievement). En route, Dave can point out the dry retention areas by the tennis courts —which will be used to address drainage, and on which we need a commitment from Foundation that they will be lush in their Florida landscaping (I ACTUALLY think they are /can be beautiful.) We can point out the small cafe /terrace area at the tennis courts as typical /critical to creating and maintaining that "park -like" appearance and use of the Commons. As we traverse the parking lot, CNC can point out the sight lines and let them envision the loss of canopy and its impact on Lucia /Hyde Park /Maartens /Thomas. I can point out our position that there should be a "selective, phased —over years — replacement of trees." I can point out Lieber's comments re the natural shape of the trees does not mean they are diseased, but also how— Lieber's guidance -- the proposed Orlikoff replacement of trees can be significantly enhanced (requiring Foundation commitment of funds and tree care). As we near the back of the Commons, I'll point out the addition of the 15 places, showing the negative impact with the loss of the trees in that area, reminding them of the need to explore use of adjoining associations excess parking slots by Foundation staff. Finally, when we get back to the propose tram station /pathway, they will be able to see why the trees located where the proposed 15 parking spaces will be are so critical. We can point out the amount of traffic (100 % of all vehicles entering the north lot —to include trucks) that will have to go passed the tram station, and how that number remains the same REGARDLESS of where they put the tram station — unless they put in a cut through. Standing at that point, we can point out the beauty of the "jungle" and its role in providing canopy — especially to the upper floors of the adjoining high rises. We can point out some of the lovely trees that are going to be removed, but at the same time we can support David by concurring that some of the trees w/I the jungle are candidates for removal. (I KNOW —Dave and I have walked /sloshed that area together.) We can sniff - maybe -the dumpster, and envision it moved next to the Commons, and point out that Lucia is amenable to it staying put! We can point out how many people are biking /walking through the area, and experience the tranquility of the butterfly garden — vividly demonstrating how the Commons is and must CONTINUE to serve as a park — for all of Pelican Bay, and especially for the adjoining associations. It's parklike nature is critical to our property values, and quality of life. I can make the point that the Commons project can't just be "reconfiguration," but also "refurbishment." Dave — ideally Mary—and with Ronnie's great passion can endorse and embrace that concept ON THE SPOT. Finally we can walk over to the Commons building and point out the impact of moving the "commercial" aspects of the Commons /restaurants to that tarmac area, and the need to reconsider (trash by Commons) and also heavily landscape. ADDITIONAL BENEFIT OF THE TOUR: While walking the PBSD board through the "compound," I —and hopefully Dave — can point out how PBSD can /must be involved with us to come up with a great final result for the Commons. I want to tap into THEIR responsibilities, and draw them into the outcome of the project. For example: the Crosswalks, the canopy provided by the trees along the sidewalks and street medians (they have depleted ours over the years), the role that bike paths could /will have in reducing the number of cars needing to park at the Commons. John Chandler and I during the Holidays were AWE STRUCK by the number of bikes parked out on the berm at the beach boardwalk. There were three times as many bikes as slots at the bike rack! (The PBSD has been reviewing /researching bike lanes for YEARS, and is considering them once again.) WHAT I WON'T DO: Is to tackle any of the environmental issues, nor seek to assert any role that PBSD may have in the approval process of the Commons plan. Neil Dorrill, with Cathy Worley (Conservancy), as well as the environmental activists can make those determinations. What do I need from you: I'd like your concurrence on the "joint tour concept." I need that asap. As you know, I take very seriously the responsibility to represent the CNC and not just my views. I'd like you to point out additional "vista points" to make in the tour. IF (!) you all have the time, consider meeting me today — probably latter in the afternoon is better —to do a "dry run" of the walking tour, so I can capture your brilliant ideas. Meanwhile, I am going to send this note to Dave, to see if he would be at all amenable, advise him that I still don't have your concurrence, see if he could meet me (ideally "us ") today to coordinate our thoughts /points, encourage Mary to be there (her committee has the responsibility for "parks." FINALLY! Prior to stepping down as Chair, Walt had not contacted Dave for a meeting w/ CNC. We NEED to have that meeting, We have a lot of unanswered questions that may have very SIMPLE, POSITIVE answers from Dave. As I've said, I would like to see Mary there, and encourage Dave to have the "vice- chairs" there as well. Do I have your concurrence to at least bring this UP with David today and determine his availability? We could get a lot accomplished, and quickly. The earlier we meet, the more time it gives Dave to consider the proposed changes and get the committees on board. It is CRITICAL that we get the first round of meetings done BEFORE you leave Paul. You are all welcome to call me, if that is more convenient for you all. 593 -6448 (Will be back by about 0915.) I'm sending this off without proof- reading. I've gotta jog! Diane (I want tomorrow to be a positive, confidence and relationship building experience, that will result in our associations gaining the benefit.) AND 1f10 l is ' \ 4 b� -41 Ju `� f q A ? ''x4 �,-� � \`�. � •.\ �t . , � '"�� � "- r r �1 `tee o-.. f - ; `\r l - ra 3 v Y & \ .eras Kq •,ti 1 Fn ; [ $i� qyi ,: Main jI b `� & i'``` 7T r COMMONS PROJECT REPORTS BY ARBORIST JACK LIEBER #1 — WALKABOUT REPORT 10/23/13 #2 — WALKABOUT REPORT 11/25/13 5/13 Report #1 Original Message • from: J.Roland'Jack' Lieber To: lustigl@embargmail.com Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2013 8:27 AM Subject: RE: DRAFT--Jack Lieber Guidance—DRAFT Dkme>.. This is my review: • First and Foremost: Get the drainage right. If it is not done right, then"nothing works." The drainage needs to be accomplished underground--not via open ditch, rip rap, drainage. If it is done right, it will allow for extensive additional planting areas (in the spaces currently used for the ditches). All soil will need to be replaced in areas designated for new planting. Especially, if the area was used prior for hard surface parking and drainage. Otherwise, the newly planted trees and vegetation will encounter the same difficulties as the current plantings. • • • In the parking lot, save in place as many as the current mature trees(oaks) as possible. Keep a decent tree if it has a reasonable form and meets reasonable standards. • • Increase the number of canopy trees(oaks)to be added by bringing the spacing down from 40 feet (as in the current plan)to 25-30 feet. Use Sabal Palms to fill in the open spacing between the canopy trees/oaks. • T Before contracting for the engineering drawings have a surveyor locate and identify all trees on the existing parking lot plan and the proposed tram station and pathway and identify which trees would have to be removed. Identify those trees and plantings that should be saved from removal and "weave the tramway"around those trees. Some of the trees and/or palmettos appear to be over 100 years old and are incredible specimens. Cutting a swath through this area would result in a loss of significant natural vegetation. • • Look at moving the placement for the tram station up closer to the Commons. This would significantly diminish the swath that would have to be cut through the lush vegetation, to house the tram station and the tram pathway. • • Be aware that a significant amount of fill will have to be added into the area currently proposed for the tram station and pathway, in order to bring it up to the proper level and elevation. "Fill"typically has a lot of lime rock, etc., that is not good for the health and flourishing of any vegetation. • • Keep as your vision that the Commons is more than a parking lot. It is to be"park-like" in its appearance, its use and enjoyment by the residents. JRL modified 120213 II Lieber Guidance on Commons Reconfiguration Project,November 25,2013 Walkabout. Landscape architect Jack Lieber provided the following guidance to Hyde Park during his 75-minute"walkabout" the Commons. The purpose of his visit was to conduct a final review of the impact of the Pelican Bay Foundation Commons Reconfiguration project, as viewed from Hyde Park, now that all trees that would be removed had been. flagged Jack's initial"walkabout"was on October 15,2013. His points are: • Above all else,the drainage has to be done correctly and should be underground. Open rip rap drainage ditches within the parking lot are dangerous for all using the Commons facility." All trees within the parking lot would not necessarily have to be removed in order to correct the drainage issue. It appears the only reason trees are suggested for removal is to reconfigure the area for more parking spaces. • Regarding the Foundation's/arborist's comment that many of the trees within the parking lot were to be removed because they were malformed: The oak trees grow that way in nature. It's their natural growth,when not interfered with by human`expertise.' For years these oaks have not been cared for. An arborist could come in and do `detailing work' on the trees which will enhance the appearance and health and future growth of the oaks. These trees are not replaceable,in the short term,in terms of their present canopy. • Regarding the Foundation/arborist comment that many of the trees were sickly. The vast majority of the trees do not appear to be sickly,-but that is forthe arborist to comment on. • Regarding comments that the Foundation was trying to economize, landscape wise, when the Commons was constructed. The developer,at that time, deliberately left the native trees in place, and deliberately developed a parking lot around the existing trees with the intent of saving the existing landscape as much as possible. The goal was to preserve the natural beauty of the area, and use that natural beauty of the Commons site to their advantage. Pelican Bay is unique from all other Community developments in which they set up a preserve and did not fully develop the area. The Commons development was never supposed to intrude to the West into the existing native,natural vegetative land area. • Regardless of what the Foundation plans for the replacement of the trees they propose to remove from within the parking lot,it won't look like it is now for at least 20+years. It's going to be a unobstructed view,from the center of the Commons parking lot to Hyde Park. Hyde Park is going to have an unobstructed view of pavement with increased noise and sound levels. • Regarding the impact of the loss of trees within the parking lot on the adjoining St. Lucia: The addition of the new parking spaces,the loss of trees due to the new tram station and the new tram pathway through the existing native, natural vegetative land area will decimate this area. This will look like any commercial parking lot. Even if they spent big bucks on new trees,it still would not do the job as proposed. The best tree they would be able to add would be probably 20 feet high and with a 12 foot canopy. Present proposed drawings depicts a tree with a 40 foot canopy,which won't reach this size for close to 20 years. • Regarding the impact on property values and quality of life on the adjoining associations St Lucia&Hyde Park: A no brainer,it's going to significantly decrease the property values for St Lucia&Hyde Park. This will look like River Chase mall after its trees were removed last year, and where you can now see and hear everything. Something like strip mining. • Regarding the placement and size of the new tram station: The location and size of the tram station is in a very critical area in terms of the impact on the canopy,the existing native,natural vegetative land area;as well as the visual impact from the St Lucia Community. Newly planted trees will not hide the size of the new tram station. The location for the tram station might be consider to be pulled to the south of the proposed area,and reconsider its size. Economically, it would not be practical to move any existing native palms which occur within the presently proposed tram pathway.. 1---1 1 1 1; 1 ,i-4--_.2,11 L _.1 r , , ° at i \\ I 14 ti .0 I ' te r -, SAW _____\\A • .45 1, --:' . 4111;-: - i: 14111#4IV -' \ 1 11 A. 11.31'11 V ;� �; `-,\ kcv 1, 'tt vit, \-� b y ` Rre� -- ' - -- r to a V ' i Ct \ 11 • .4 fib' , y/ �''I ' -- _ ../ / , 111111 • 4,;,0, c� / silt, \I 1 1051 ��y i , ens / i 4W4, ... ' / 0+ •� `,; w i s w 'S `�`, -- --, - 1`\ L; 111 111 11 • ` `. AP ti alir \ ,; ' 11 111, N �� \\ \\\ it 'i1 IM \ 1 l{ �� �f \ \ 1 1 II %' _11%/ \\\ \\\ 111 11 111 11 P Al `/1 \ Il 1 \\-i.,,, \ fi) r ,�� O / ,, \\\ \� \f\ n I / \ t � \ 11� - �2..z ' \ t\\' 111\ i 11 r_ t 1 \\\, �\ 11 i11 , j0Al v $�j ;\ It 11 11 i \ \ 11 2 11 I Ilk iro it ` ` 11 I1 .1 jfi muslin - •%`\ \\ ,fI`1 '" y. \ 1 f 1 - ♦ ' N IS, eo*.v ;• 1 O I Ar, .',/ / ___y ' \ y - {I �D111MIM"____ T: ,. \ \1C-1 ` -s: \\ / 1 1 II 11 44 11 t 1 f I 11 yiT 1 j jl 11 I _ ------ 1 .�,f -_ ta - „ t A 1 ,,,,, ,, .i, ‘, , ..----------si Iii 1b IPS °� ,%//`\ !�� -_�it ''',N ./ ,___,,------i / *aF ii 01110111111111.1111111110 \\ \\\ L/y �/ // / / 1// 1 toiii 24” 111 otRAMW pY ilt N. Y 101111.00a aV3CiteGt*Ith' ta x. D a° e, I I 73 73 m I 1 IP o 3 -1 zmi 0 n) L el:I .. el. n - -it n 0 n < a' rt M ...• m 1.01 Ewe -Imilis in n) "we rim "I ‘20 mt n et tn 0.. cu "mt I- U 10 n 0 in ,. - - = Di CA =4 a" Hill 0 =. n) , A " . 0 s -n ..vrip * n . I-0. o --ti o = o . = C in -t -0, m CP g in in .= 0 0 CL, .. . .4. MIA• 3 -o i M Di •••‘ = 01* 2: r+ 0 = = CP acl M fill 0 Mil M di. n gli 141 m 3 m CD M = 0 tn Z et VI 3 a r+ el w 4.7 -in , 6 A El. et I*.- 0 GI 0 — n ail W al S. CL .•ih -I Ft -I —1 "0 712 n m . a) x-- co ..... AI .._1.. 0 (I) CD 01 0 = M 73C., (na Z ea ep in cro = ",,, M n 0.. = i M Cl. OP I • 0 -13 gO rele tri et et •it ri et 0 0 141) S. to co •% O r wso; G 4 rets G CD 0 Ili0 5 le •0 0 o 0) 0- It t t o) 1 w s ore o• II to S I .., (D ele: v'. S et as S i I 0 '240 co 2 cu Fil lii O. SIIO < CU cr a) -s• O M in m el -1M = O i i in —. rt 0 61 r. a CD as 3 = cD N n r n A DI A In .� a) CD O. CD rt sy O. V.