HEX Transcript 01/23/2014 January 23,2014 HEX Meeting
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
Naples,Florida
January 23,2014
LET IT BE REMEMBERED,that the Collier County Hearing Examiner, in and for the County of
Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION at 2800
North Horseshoe Drive,Room 609/610,Naples,Florida,with the following people present:
HEARING EXAMINER MARK STRAIN
Also Present: Heidi Ashton-Cicko,Managing Assistant County Attorney
Ray Bellows,Zoning Manager
Fred Reischl,Senior Planner
Michael Sawyer,Project Manger
Page 1 of 11
AGENDA
THE COLLIER COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER WILL HOLD A HEARING AT
9:00 AM ON JANUARY 23, 2014, IN CONFERENCE ROOM 610 AT THE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION BUILDING,2800 N. HORSESHOE DRIVE, NAPLES, FLORIDA.
INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES UNLESS OTHERWISE WAIVED BY THE HEARING
EXAMINER. PERSONS WISHING TO HAVE WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC MATERIALS INCLUDED IN THE HEARING
REPORT PACKETS MUST HAVE THAT MATERIAL SUBMITTED TO COUNTY STAFF 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE
HEARING. ALL MATERIALS USED DURING PRESENTATION AT THE HEARING WILL BECOME A PERMANENT
PART OF THE RECORD.
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER WILL NEED A RECORD OF
THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM
RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDNENCE
UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. DECISIONS OF THE HEARING EXAMINER ARE FINAL UNLESS
APPEALED TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.
HEARING PROCEEDURES WILL PROVIDE FOR PRESENTATION BY THE APPLICANT, PRESETATION BY STAFF,
PUBLIC COMMENT AND APPLICANT REBUTTAL. THE HEARING EXAMINER WILL RENDER A DECISION
WITHIN 30 DAYS. PERSONS WISHING TO RECEIVE A COPY OF THE DECISION BY MAIL MAY SUPPLY COUNTY
STAFF WITH THEIR NAME, ADDRESS, AND A STAMPED, SELF-ADDRESSED ENVELOPE FOR THAT PURPOSE.
PERSONS WISHING TO RECEIVE AN ELECTRONIC COPY OF THE DECISION MAY SUPPLY THEIR EMAIL
ADDRESS.
1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. REVIEW OF AGENDA
3. APPROVAL OF PRIOR MEETING MINUTES—December 12, 2013
4. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. PETITION NO. BD-PL20130002355 — Charles Bateman requests a waiver for a 20-foot boat dock
extension over the maximum 20 feet allowed by the Land Development Code for a total protrusion
of 40 feet to accommodate a docking facility for the benefit of Lot 76, Port of the Islands (the Cays)
Phase II Subdivision, also described as 186 Sunset Cay in Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Mike
Sawyer, Project Manager]
B. PETITION NO. VA-PL20130000745 — Banyan Woods Homeowner's Association, Inc. and Gary A.
Godley are requesting a variance from Section 5.03.02.0 of the Land Development Code to replace
two of the existing perimeter privacy walls with two new privacy walls up to ten feet in height within
the residential component of the Meadowbrook Planned Unit Development.The subject property is
located east of Airport Road and south of Pine Ridge Road in Section 13, Township 49 South, Range
25 East,Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Mike Sawyer, Project Manager]
C. PETITION NO. BDE-P120130001439 Romeo and Adriana Terezi request a waiver for a 30.9-foot
boat dock extension over the maximum 20 feet allowed by the Land Development Code for a total
protrusion of 50.9 feet to accommodate a 2-slip docking facility for the benefit of Lot 3, Bayfront
Gardens Subdivision, also described as 224 Barefoot Beach Boulevard, in Collier County, Florida.
[Coordinator: Fred Reischl,Sr. Planner]
D. PETITION NO. SV-P120130000387 - Lely Apartments, LLC requests a variance from Section
5.06.03.B of the Land Development Code to allow the replacement of an existing single use
monument sign with a shared use monument sign for property located at the southwest corner of
Collier Boulevard and Lely Cultural Parkway in the Lely Resort PUD in Section 22,Township 50 South,
Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Fred Reischl,Sr. Planner]
E. PETITION NO. PE-20130001408—K&B Commercial Rentals#5, LLC requests a parking exemption
under LDC Section 4.05.02.K.3.a(2)to allow off-site parking on a contiguous lot, Lot 6, Block 6, of the
Carson Subdivision, zoned Village Residential District with a Wellfield Special Treatment Overlay(VR-
ST/W-4) to serve a commercial building on Lot 1, Block 6, of the Carson Subdivision zoned General
Commercial District with a Main Street Overlay Subdistrict (C-4-MSOSD). The subject property is
also identified as 105 South 7th Street, Immokalee in Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Fred
Reischl,Sr. Planner]
5. OTHER BUSINESS
6. ADJOURN
January 23,2014 HEX Meeting
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay,I think that's got it turned on.
Welcome everybody to the January 23rd meeting of the Collier County Hearing Examiner's Office.
If you'll all please rise for Pledge of Allegiance.
(Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: I think the first decision we need to make today is to turn the heat
on outdoors. It was 38 degrees at my house this morning,and that is--that's too cold.
Some basic rules. Individual speakers will be limited to five minutes unless otherwise waived by the
Hearing Examiner.
Decisions of the Hearing Examiner are final,unless appealed to the Board of County Commissioners.
And the Hearing Examiner will render a decision within 30 days.
With that,is there any changes to the agenda from staff?
MR.BELLOWS: I have no changes.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay. Approval of the minutes of the prior meeting. Pve
reviewed them. They're fine to be--they're approved as written.
And one thing I'd like to make a note of today. This is a special meeting,and every meeting we've
had for a while now has been a first meeting of some kind. And today is the first one where we've had five
hearings in one day. And so it was more complicated to accomplish and set up than normal. And we owe
that ability to have done it so well today is to Gail Bonham who set the room up,set the meetings up,did the
advertising,got everything together. So thank you,Gail,good job.
(Applause.)
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: We'll go right into our first advertised public hearings.
The first one up is Petition No.BD-PL20130002355. It's the Charles Bateman 20-foot boat dock
extension.
All those wishing to testify on behalf of this item,please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter.
(All speakers were duly sworn.)
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay. And as far as disclosures,on my behalf I don't believe I
spoke to anybody on this one,unless it was in a pre-app much earlier,Chris. Was this one of the ones we had
a pre-app on?
MR.BATEMAN: No,we didn't do that.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay. And I know you haven't been to one of these hearings
before. I tend to read everything,so formal presentations are not necessary. However,you're more than
welcome to make one. And if you want to enter anything into the record--for the record,we will be--Exhibit
A will be the Notice of Advertisement and Exhibit B will be the staff report. So if you have anything else you
want to add,you're more than welcome to.
MR.BATEMAN: I don't have anything else to add. And there haven't been any changes since the
documentation was prepared and since you've read it. I guess if you have some questions,I'll answer those.
Otherwise,we'll stand on what we have submitted as what we plan to do.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay. And you have met five out of the five primary criteria,
and you've met five out of the six secondary,with the exception of the Manatee Protection Plan issue which is
not a requirement for a single dock,so I don't have any other questions.
I found nothing wrong with your application. And with that,you'll have a decision rendered within
30 days,Chris.
MR.BATEMAN: Okay,thank you.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Thank you for your time today.
Next item up is Petition No.VA-PL20130000745. It's the Banyan Woods Homeowners Association.
Gary Godley is requesting a variance for a wall.
And Jeff,you--
MR.NUNNER: Good morning.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: --you represent the applicants.
All those wishing to testify on behalf of this item,please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter.
(All speakers were duly sworn.)
Page 2 of 11
January 23,2014 HEX Meeting
THE COURT REPORTER: May I have your name,please.
MR.NUNNER: Jeff Nunner. N-U-N-N-E-R.
THE COURT REPORTER: Thank you.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay,and disclosures on my part. I think Jeff and I talked in
the hall a while back about this a little bit. And other than that I've had no--oh,and with staff of course,I
talked to Mike Sawyer about it. And with that, I have no other disclosures.
The exhibits will be--the Notice of Public Hearing will be Exhibit A and the staff report will be
Exhibit B.
Jeff,you're more than welcome to enter anything else into the record you want and say anything you'd
like to say at this point.
MR.NUNNER: I don't have anything else to enter into the record. I just want to thank Mike Sawyer
and his staff for his assistance in this item.
And we are in total agreement with the staff report. And if there's any questions,I can answer any
questions. Thank you.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Thank you. And Mike,I should have asked earlier on the other
one,but did you have anything you wanted to add as a staff member?
MR. SAWYER: Staff doesn't have anything to add in either item.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Any members of public wishing to speak on this item?
(No response.)
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay,Jeff,we're good. I'll have a decision written up within 30
days and sent to you.
MR.NUNNER: Thank you.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Thank you,sir.
Next item up is Petition BDE-PL20130001439. It's the Romeo and Adriana Terezi waiver of a--for
a boat dock extension of 30.9 feet.
All those wishing to testify on behalf of this item,please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter.
(All speakers were duly sworn.)
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Disclosers. On my part,I don't believe I've had discussions on
this one with anyone except maybe the pre-app. That was the one we had the pre-app on? There's been so
many so I'm not sure which ones apply to what,so--
MR.TURLEY: That's one of the ones we had a pre-app on. The next door neighbor,which kind of
influences the determination on this dock as well.
THE COURT REPORTER: Are you Mr.Turley?
MR.TURLEY: Oh,yeah,I'm David Turley,for the record.
My neighbor also wants to build a dock in the same configuration,which is going to exceed the
same--
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Could you get closer to the mic,David? Thank you.
MR.TURLEY: My neighbor,Mr.Barbaroza,purchased the house to the north at 222,and he wants
to reconfigure his dock to be perpendicular as well to the shoreline and extend it the same distance out. He has
same size vessels.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Yeah,we're not here for that--
MR.TURLEY: No,no. That's the only item that has changed since we had the pre-app.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay. As long as nothing's changed on this application,and I
don't believe anything has by what you've just said.
I have a couple of questions on this one.First of all,you've met four out of the five primary criteria.
The one you didn't meet was the depth. But that's just one of the five and I believe you'd still qualify.
And the secondary criteria,you've met five out of the six on the secondary. And again,criteria
number six isn't applicable because of the Manatee Protection Plan. I believe that's correct,right?
MR.TURLEY: That's correct.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: The mangroves that you're going to be up against,the reason that
you're pushed out into the water I assume is because the mangroves--you are going to get a mangrove
Page 3 of 11
January 23,2014 HEX Meeting
trimming permit?
MR.TURLEY: Yes,we have--I've secured that through the DEP through a letter.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Oh,you already have it?
MR.TURLEY: Yes,yes.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Good.
MR.TURLEY: They gave me their permission or their DEP permit.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay. You're asking for a 30.9 foot--I think it's 30.9 foot--
MR.TURLEY: Yes.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: --extension.And it was--our standard length is 20 feet.So you
want 50.9 is what I believe the overall length--
MR.TURLEY: Overall,yes,sir.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: --of your boat.
Okay,on your cross-section of your dock,it shows the overall length from top of bank to be 53.3 feet.
MR.TURLEY: That is where the walkway extends over the bank.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: But it measures--the document is measured from top of bank.
And I believe the most stringent of the measurement locations are what are supposed to be used. And for that
reason I'm concerned that the application might have--should have been for 53.3 feet instead of 50.9.
MR.TURLEY: My understanding of the protrusion is I was allowed 20 feet normal protrusion
allowed and then another 30.9 beyond the 20 feet.
If the cross-section shows it from the mean high water,the second notation down,50.9 total protrusion
and 53 feet--53.3 overall,that's from the top of the bank.
That's where the walkway is actually going to start back in--
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: No,I understand. Yeah,I've seen the plot plan and all the rest
of it. I understand exactly how you got to the 50.9. But I was trying--and I caught this last night. I was
reviewing the code and I thought we were supposed to measure from the most stringent point. And there were
several criteria,whether it's a seawall,whether it's a mean high water. And I believe top of bank was another
one. And I was just double checking with staff to see if that's true or not. And if it is,what dimension should
he be here asking for today?
MR.REISCHL: That's true. Because the measurement is to mean high water,and the most
restrictive would be top of bank.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay. So he should be asking for a 53.3 foot overall extension.
MR.REISCHL: Yes.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Then I have to ask the county attorney for clarification regarding
the advertising.
MS.ASHTON-CICKO: I think he'll need to readvertise.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay. And I apologize for bringing this up so late,both to the
staff member and to Mr.Turley. I didn't discover it'til last night when I was going over as a final check on
everything. Because I read this over the weekend and that part of it didn't--I didn't even make a note on it'til
last night.
So with that,Mr.Turley,what do you--can you reduce your length to 50.9 and still build your facility,
or do we need to readvertise and hold another hearing to get this cleared up?
MR.TURLEY: No,sir,1 think we're fine.The bank actually makes its turn there. I think we'll be
more than--50.9 will be fine.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: 50.9 will work?
MR.TURLEY: 50.9 will work.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay,is there any problems with staff on that?
MR.REISCHL: No.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay.
MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Will we get a revised map that's going to show it?
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Yeah,I'm going to need some clarification--
MR.TURLEY: Okay.
Page 4 of 11
January 23,2014 HEX Meeting
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: --for the record,because the official record will be the staff
report.
MR.TURLEY: Right.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: It's got to be corrected now to reflect the 50.9 as measured from
the top of bank.
MR.TURLEY: Okay.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Now,that will be stipulated in the decision form,but I won't be
sending that out until I get the corrected documents to accompany it.
MR.TURLEY: Okay. I don't have any problem with that.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay.
Anything else you wanted to add to the record?
MR.TURLEY: That's--
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: That's enough,huh?
MR.TURLEY: That's enough.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: I don't blame you.
MR.TURLEY: I noticed that you wanted--when I met with you before,you wanted the dock platted
from the platted mean high water,which was actually 44 feet. That was a discussion we had. But I didn't
know what the relevance was on that.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: I don't remember either offhand. I mean,we had a lot of
discussions,but I don't recall that.
But regardless,all I think you really need is to have a clarification on your documents that your overall
extension from the top of bank is going to be 50.9.
MR.TURLEY: Okay.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: And so you need to correct the pages in this document that don't
reflect that. It will be stipulated. So you won't be able to have more than that on your approval.
MR.TURLEY: All right,fine.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: But we would need to have the right documents entered. What
I'll do is I'll attach them to the back of the decision.
MR.TURLEY: Yeah,my documents to the surveyor and the engineer showed 50.9. And then
when he came back with a--I didn't really take that into consideration myself,that extra few feet up the bank.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay. How soon do you think you'll be getting those in?
MR.TURLEY: Probably this afternoon.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay. Well,once you get them,you need to send them to Fred.
MR.TURLEY: Okay.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: And once Fred reviews them,he's the planner,and he says
they're okay,he'll forward them to me. And then as long as they meet the intentions of what we're--the
conditions we're talking about here,then they will be attached to the back of the decision,and then that will be
finalized.
MR.TURLEY: Okay,no problem.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: And you'll have a final decision within 30 days.
MR.TURLEY: Okay.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay? That's all there is to it.
MR.TURLEY: All right,thank you very much.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Thank you.
Is there anything else,Fred,that you wanted to contribute?
MR.REISCI-[L: No,that's everything.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Any members of the public here to speak on this item?
(No response.)
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay. ,We're done. Thank you.
MR.TURLEY: Have a good day.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: You too. Thank you.
Page 5 of 11
January 23,2014 HEX Meeting
MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Did we mark the Exhibits A and B on that one?
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Yes,the--well,if we didn't,we'll do it right now.Exhibit A will
be the Notice of--
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you wish me to mark each item separately?
REARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Yes,we need separate notices of advertisement and staff reports
for every item that--every single case.
You didn't get a packet with all those in it?
THE COURT REPORTER: I might have. I haven't--
MS.ASHTON-CICKO: You have one copy of the entire agenda.
THE COURT REPORTER: Okay,thank you.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: And the office is right across the hall so you can get them there.
Okay,now that takes us to the last item we have on today's agenda,which will take a little more time.
It's Petition No.PE-2013000--oh,I'm sorry,no,we're now number four.Glad you came up,Alexis. I almost
forgot.
MS.CRESPO: I was concerned with that intro.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Petition SV-PL20130000387,Lely Apartments,LLC. And this
is for a sign variance.
All those wishing to testify on behalf of this item,please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter.
(All speakers were duly sworn.)
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: I saw Mike Bosi rise;I'm going to see what he's got to say.
My disclosures are I did meet with Alexis and the landscape architect. We had a discussion over it.
I've talked to staff at various times about this one,trying to understand what was happening out there,and I
think we have a good handle on it.
So with that,Alexis,the--I've read all the staff report. You know we've had our discussions. Is
there anything you want to add to the record?
MS.CRESPO: We are in agreement with the staff report and want to thank Mr. Reischl for his
assistance in preparing this.
The one thing that I would like to add to the record is that the existing offsite monument sign is double
faced,as outlined in the 1998 approval. And we would request continuation of having a double-faced sign for
this new variance request.
MR.REISCHL: And that's how staff reviewed--
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Staff reviewed it as a double-faced sign?
MR.REISCHL: Yes.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay. I'll make a note of that.
I think I had one issue. The easement.The easement was never recorded,from what I understand.
MS.CRESPO: That is correct.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: And as part of this approval,do you have any problem with the
condition that the easement will be recorded?
MS.CRESPO: No,sir.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Within what kind of time frame are you comfortable with?
MS.CRESPO: The sign drawings are prepared to file the permits,so we would be doing that in short
order,at the same time as filing the sign permit request with the county.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Within 30 days?
MS.CRESPO: Correct,yes.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay. Anything else then,Alexis? Is that it?
MS.CRESPO: No,sir,that's all.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: I think that's everything. Let me make sure I--Heidi?
MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Just Exhibits A and B again.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Yeah,I'm sorry,Exhibit A will--and before we started I
mentioned to her and I should do it for the record each time,though,that always Exhibit A will be the Notice of
Advertisement and the staff report will be Exhibit B. And then we'll go into any other exhibits.
Page 6 of 11
January 23,2014 HEX Meeting
The next hearing we will have additional exhibits,but for this one we don't.
Okay,I just looked and all the issues that I had have been resolved. I think we're good.
Is there any staff comments to report?
MR.REISCHL: No additional issues,thank you.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: You get them all today,huh?
Any members of the public wish to speak on this item?
(No response.)
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: If not,Alexis,I'll have a decision to you within 30 days.
MS.CRESPO: Thank you very much.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Thank you.
Now the next one up will be taking a little more time. Petition No.PE-20130001408.It's the K&B
Commercial Rentals#5,LLC. It's for a parking exemption in Immokalee.
We do have to make a note,there's a new owner,and we'll do that the first thing up.
All those wishing to testify on behalf of this item,please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter.
(All speakers were duly sworn.)
THE COURT REPORTER: Could you identify yourself for the record,please.
MR.HOWELL: Brian Howell,with Phoenix Associates.
THE COURT REPORTER: Last name?
MR.HOWELL: H-O-W-E-L-L.
THE COURT REPORTER: Thank you.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay,Brian.There's some cleanup we need to make.
First of all,did you bring a--or does staff have a new representation—authorization of representation,
since this is a new owner?
MR. REISCHL: Yes,I do.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: You do? Okay.Do you have a copy for the record that we can
enter into the record?
MR. HOWELL: We have a copy for the record.
MS.ASHTON-CICKO: So that will be Exhibit C?
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: It will be Exhibit C,yes.
You also--I don't need a new application. I think it's--
MR.REISCHL: I have that in my file.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay. This is Exhibit C right here.
And before we go too far,let's get all the exhibits lined up. You brought a new site plan and
dimension plan,I believe it is?
MR. HOWELL: That's the new one,Mark.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: For the record,I'll read this in. The new owner is Shivshakti
One LLC,Thakor Patel. And it's an authorization for Phoenix Associates to represent them.
The second exhibit will be the site that's labeled--it's two pages. Cover page is labeled Site
Development Plan for Patel Building. It's number C-1,and it has a date, 11/4--no, 1/23/2014 is the latest
revision date on the cover page. It's followed by a second page,SDP-1,the same date,and it is a dimensional
plan and site plan layout. And that will be Exhibit D.
Okay. Well,Brian,it's been a--as far as disclosures go,I have talked at numerous times with Brian
in the last 24 hours. Before that we had never talked too much. We talked to Chris on the phone. I think I've
had a conversation with Randy. These are all members of Phoenix.
I've had numerous conversations with many different staff people to get here today.There's been some
needed corrections on the site plan pertaining to buffers. And I'll let--Chris,if you could walk us through
those changes,that would be helpful.
MR.HOWELL: The parking lot exemption being requested,the changes that have been most
recently made are on the north property line,that being a 10-foot buffer required,and on the south property
line,that being a 15-foot landscape buffer required.
The reconfiguration of the parking and the trash area has allowed us to get both the 10 and the 15-foot
Page 7 of 11
January 23, 2014 HEX Meeting
required for the parking.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay. In order to accomplish that you had to move two spaces
onto the Main Street right-of-way.
MR.HOWELL: Two spaces,yes,that we're allowed to use on Main Street are now part of the
parking calculation. So therefore there is a total of 22 required. The first parking spaces one and two are on
Main Street and the next 20 are on this lot.
REARING EXAMINER STRAIN: And the previous site plan showed the dumpster on the
commercial lot. You now have it in the corner,closest to the commercial in the parking--the new parking lot.
MR.HOWELL: Correct.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Behind that you've shown your recyclable containers and you
put your loading area next to that.
MR.HOWELL: Yes,sir.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay. Those are generally the changes on this plan. You went
to some parallel parking instead of straight in,and you reduced the width of the parking spaces down to nine
feet for most of them. Is that--
MR.HOWELL: The nine foot is the standard dimension for the 90-degree parking.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay.
MR.REISCHL: That's the required.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: That's the mini--okay.
MR.HOWELL: The parallel parking shown is nine by 23.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Nine-and-a-half.
MR.HOWELL: That's a curb. We have a nine-foot space plus six inches of curbing.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay. I think the big question is going to be has staff reviewed
this? Because it came in this morning. I know you haven't had a lot of time.But based on the intensity that
we've looked at it over the past day or so,Fred,is staff now comfortable that these changes are more--or at
least as consistent as they need to be with our codes?
MR.REISCHL: Yes. The--I got the plan about 8:15 this morning,so I spent that time until now
reviewing it. And it looks like the parking fits. There's a small reduction in the size of the building that
works.
The on-street parking,I spoke with John Podczerwinsky,and he said that that is allowable. So I
believe all the changes help to make the new site plan work.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay. Staff had some recommendations. And one of those
recommendations won't work with the current site plan. The two recommendations were the use of the
subject lot for parking is permitted only in conjunction with the adjacent commercial lot,not as a freestanding
parking facility.
And number two,the subject site is to be used for parking,water management,landscaping and
directional and safety signage only. Other structures,including dumpsters,are not permitted. So I think you
need to drop the reference to dumpsters in there.
MR.REISCHL: Right. I'm comfortable with doing that.
As you recall from the pre-app meeting,it was suggested that the dumpster would be better on the
commercial site and not on the VR site.There's no prohibition to it. A dumpster is normally associated with a
parking lot. So I have no problem removing the prohibition against dumpsters.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay. Some of the parking exemption criteria that have to be
considered is the width of the buffer and the wall that would be in place. I notice the wall wasn't culled out.
So one of the conditions,Brian,would be that a six-foot wall will be installed on the sides of that parking
exemption lot that are adjacent to VR zoning.Do you have any problem with that?
MR.HOWELL: We don't have a problem with that.
For clarification,that would be just the 190 foot south property line? Or do we turn and go north
along the 75—
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: You have to go both of them.
MR.HOWELL: Okay.
Page 8 of 11
January 23, 2014 HEX Meeting
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Yeah,you'd have to do the short and the long one. That's
because both of that's VR. You know,that's the problem. Somebody has a home behind it or to the
south--or to the--
MR.REISCHL: It's mobile home to the west. But that's also residential.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Well,it's residential,I'm sorry.
Okay, let me make sure I don't have any other notes on here.
Parking lot lighting. One of the things in the pre-app I noted to you is that generally if there are--if
there is problems in the neighborhood,it's due to lighting and dumpsters,dumpsters for noise.
What is your intention for the lighting in the parking lot?
MR.HOWELL: Right now it's slated for three sight lights,approximately 20 feet in height.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Three sight lights,20 feet--
MR. HOWELL: Three sight lights in the parking field.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: What are you--
MR.REISCHL: I'm sorry,I wasn't paying attention. Mike just pointed out that the western buffer of
the parking lot shows it as 10. It should be 15 also,because it's adjacent to a mobile home. It looks like
there's space to put it in there.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Well,let me take a look at that then. The western side is--
MR.REISCHL: Adjacent to a mobile home,which is also a residential district.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Oh,he's showing the 10-foot setback and landscape buffer,but
he's got a clearance of it looks like a lot more space over toward the dumpsters.
MR.REISCHL: Closer to 20,yeah.
MR.HOWELL: There's 18 and a half feet available there.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Yeah. So you can make that correction to the plan also?
MR.HOWELL: Yes,sir.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: I've got to make a couple of notes on this,because the decision's
got to reflect these things.
So from the--
MR. REISCHL: I'm sorry,I didn't hear your--
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Staffs perspective on lighting. He's looking at 20-foot high
lights in that parking lot adjacent to the residential.
Do we--I know we don't have any code that may restrict the height of that lighting less than that,but
what is our typical heights for lighting in parking lots like this? Do we have any standards?
MR.REISCHL: Yeah,it's in our 505,the Architectural Code. But I don't know if there's--yeah,I
don't think 20 is an issue with height,but I'm just wondering now if there's a question on the Main Street--oh,
that's not in the Main Street overlay. Okay.
MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Do you want to look at the code?
MR.REISCHL: Well,the parking lot will not be in the Main Street overlay,so therefore any
restrictions of the Main Street overlay won't apply.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Right. And I'm just concerned that we don't get lights that are
too high and they glare into the neighborhood.
Brian,could you live with a shorter light?
MR.HOWELL: We can live with a shorter light. We typically install 25 to 30-foot poles. So in
this case we did drop it to 20. Even going to 15 will be adequate.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: I was going to ask you,because I know we've approved 15-foot
in residential locations before. I think that would be a lot more comfortable. They'd also have to be shielded.
MR.HOWELL: Correct.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: You probably intended to do that anyway?
MR.HOWELL: Correct.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Okay. There was a--on the original plan there was an error in
the setback on the side of the commercial. It was 4.75 plus five,which is nine and three-quarter,and it should
have been 10 feet. I noticed that's corrected on this plan.
Page 9 of 11
January 23, 2014 HEX Meeting
MR.HOWELL: Yes,sir.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: I think that's the only issues I have.
John Pod.,since you're here,just for the record I'd like you to acknowledge that the parking on the
street doesn't pose a problem from transportation.
MR.PODCZERWINSKY: Correct,it does not.That is actually governed--State Road 29,also
known as Main Street,is governed by FDOT.And I've had discussions with Mark Clark at FDOT in the past.
The on-street parking is allowed in that area in that business district.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Thank you.
I think that wraps everything up. Is there anything that you needed to add,Brian?It's been a long 24
hours,so--
MR.HOWELL: I think we're good.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: I'm glad that we got to this point and was able to proceed today.
Fred,did you have anything you wanted to add from a staffs perspective or staff report?
MR.REISCHL: No,just to thank Brian for his hard work in the last 24 hours. I didn't think it could
be done,but it looks like he did it.
MR.HOWELL: I do--I'm sorry,Mark,I have one more question. The changes adding the wall and
the typographical on the landscape buffer. Make these changes and send them right back to you,Fred?
MR.REISCHL: I believe you would need that for your decision,correct?
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: What I'll do is Pd like to get a corrected graphic and I'll attach it
to the decision as well. That way it's all buttoned up and there's no question in the future.
MR.REISCHL: And then I will--because the current SDP is submitted,I will reject that today and
then you can resubmit tomorrow with--or as soon as you're ready with the corrected plan.
MR.HOWELL: Another 24 hours.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Mike,was there anything newly discovered?
MR. SAWYER: Yeah,we did check the architectural code and the limitation on a pole height is 25
feet,so 20 feet is no issue.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: And he's agreed to go to 15 in that,so we're good. I just wanted
to keep it down next to the neighbors,so that--if the applicant doesn't mind,I'd prefer we go that route.
Okay,I think that's--any members from the public wish to speak?
(No response.)
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Mike Bosi,you've got nothing to say?
Okay,with that,Brian,within 30 days you'll have a decision. And if you could get those corrected
layouts in as quickly as possible,it would help get the decision out as quickly as possible.
MR.HOWELL: Thank you,everybody.
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: Hey,appreciate your patience too. It was an interesting
journey.
Okay,that takes us through the remain--all five petitions.
Is there anything else anyone else wants to contribute? Discussions?
(No response.)
HEARING EXAMINER STRAIN: If not,this meeting is adjourned. Thank you all for attending.
***************
There being no further business for the good of the County,the meeting was adjourned by order of the
Hearing Examiner at 9:49 a.m.
COLLIER COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
IA/ WI I vv
MARK STRAIN,HEARING EXAMINER
Page 10 of 11
January 23,2014 HEX Meeting
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK,CLERK
These minutes approved by the Hearing Examiner on 3-( 5 " 1"( as presented t,../or as
corrected .
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF
GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICES,INC.
BY CHERIE' R.NOTTINGHAM,CSR,COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC.
Page 11 of 11