A&SDS Ad Hoc Minutes 02/12/2014 February 12, 2014
MINUTES OF THE COLLIER COUNTY ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE
DESIGN STANDARDS AD HOC COMMITTEE 0 q rE -
Naples, Florida, February 12, 2014 fi SEP 1 l 2014 I
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, the Collier County Architectural and Site D B• Al�
Standards Ad Hoc Committee in and for the County of Collier, having conducted
business herein, met on,this date at 1:30 PM in a REGULAR SESSION at the Growth
Management Division Building, Room 609/610 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL
with the following persons present:
James Boughton, AIA (Excused)
Rocco Costa, AIA
Kathy Curatolo, CBIA
Dalas Disney, AIA
Bradley Schiffer, AIA
Dominick Amico, P.E.
Ron Waldrop, P.E (Excused)
ALSO PRESENT: Carolina Valera, Principal Planner
Tami Scott, Lead Architect Reviewer
1
February 12, 2014
1. Call to Order
Mr. Costa called the meeting to order at 1:36pm and a quorum was established.
2. Review of LDC Section 5.05.08 —Architectural Review Standards Draft
Ms. Valera provided a copy of the Draft as revised based on Committee recommendations for
review. She reported the purpose of the meeting was to continue review of the draft LDC
Amendment. The Committee resumed their review and provided the following actions/comments.
Staff reported they contacted Brad Muckle of the Immokalee Community Redevelopment
Agency to see if they are working on any changes required to exempt areas in the City of
Immokalee.
Section 5.05.08.B -Applicability
The Committee revisited the Section and discussed the following items:
• The rationale for the original adoption of the standards noting the general concern at the
time was the introduction of larger scale retail establishments such as"big box stores."
• Should the standards only apply to a minimum square footage threshold(i.e. 10,000 sq.
ft.)?
• The current standards are generally geared toward regulating the larger structures or
business franchises, not the local entrepreneur.
• The standards as currently written are a deterrent to owners wishing to improve buildings
that are currently non-conforming.
• Should certain buildings be exempted from the standards?
Staff noted, one form of relief from the standards is the "deviation process" whereby an applicant
may request exemptions or alternates to a specific requirement(s).
Section 5.05.08.B.2.c (added)
Mr. Schiffer moved to amend the Section from "A proposed building's footprint would be
located within 300 feet of the boundary of a residentially zoned district"to "A proposed
building's footprint would be located within 150 feet of the boundary of a residentially zoned
district." Second by Mr. Disney. Motion carried 4 "yes"—1 "no." Mr.Amico voted "no."
Section 5.05.08.B -Applicability
Mr.Amico moved to limit the "Applicability"of the standards to commercial activity centers.
Second by Mr. Disney. Motion failed 1 "yes"—4 "no." Mr. Disney,Mr. Schiffer,Mr. Costa
and Ms. Curatolo voted "no."
Section 5.05.08.B.3
The Committee discussed the section and the concept of amending it from"To all renovations and
redevelopment, including additions of a building or site... " to "To all renovations and
redevelopment subject to 5.05.08.1, including additions of a building or site... "
It was noted the County Attorney's Office should provide comment on the proposed language.
Section 5.05.08.0
2
February 12, 2014
General discussion of how to format the document to separate the requirements for activity centers
vs. non-activity centers, etc., and will it discourage development of activity centers if the non-
activity centers are exempted or subject to reduced requirements.
Section 5.05.08.C.2.b
The Committee discussed ramifications of the standard, including if it should be reduced or
eliminated.
Committee queried how the proposed changes are being documented as an ongoing revised
document has not been provided to the Committee by Staff.
Staff reported, beginning with the next meeting, the document will be displayed on the overhead
visualizer during the meeting with real time changes and comments added to track the
comments and recommendations proposed by the Committee.
Section 5.05.08.C.3—Facade/wall height transition elements
Mr. Schiffer moved to eliminate Section 5.05.08.C.3. Second by Mr. Costa. Motion Carried
unanimously 5—0.
Section 5.05.08.C.4—Variations in Massing
Mr. Schiffer moved to eliminate Section 5.05.08.C.4.a.ii—v. Second by Mr.Disney. Motion
Carried unanimously 5-0
3. Adjournment
Being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:30pm
Collier County Architectural and Site Design
Standards Ad Hoc Committee
(aerhtjj
The Minutes were approved by the Board/Committee Vice Chair on Au u( , 2014,
"as submitted" DU OR "as amended" [ 1.
3