Loading...
A&SDS Ad Hoc Minutes 12/15/2014 r December 15, 2014 V li ' ■ S OF THE COLLIER COUNTY ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE /Mod DESIGN STANDARDS AD HOC COMMITTEE c0 V_ ",d1 - Naples, Florida, December 15, 2014 8y LET IT BE REMEMBERED, the Collier County Architectural and Site Design Standards Ad Hoc Committee in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 2:30 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: Rocco Costa, AIA (Excused) James Boughton, AIA Kathy Curatolo, Collier Building Industry Association Dalas Disney, AIA Bradley Schiffer, AIA Dominick Amico, P.E. ALSO PRESENT: Stefanie Nawrocki, Planner Madeline Bunster, Architect Jeremy Frantz, Planner 1 December 15, 2014 Any person in need of a verbatim record of the meeting may request a copy of the audio recording from the Collier County Growth Management Division, Department of Planning and Zoning. 1. Call to Order Mr. Amico called the meeting to order at 2:30pm and a quorum was established. 2. Approve Agenda Ms. Curatolo moved to approve the Agenda. Second by Mr. Schiffer. Carried unanimously 4—0. 3. Meeting Minutes Continued 4. Next Meeting Available dates to meet-Doodle Results The next meeting will be held on January 12, 2015. 5. Follow-up items from previous meeting a. Amenity Centers in PUD Master Plans The Committee discussed if amenity centers and/or maintenance facilities, etc. in PUD's should be subject to the standards. They noted: • Maintenance facilities are generally not visible to the public, located on the interior of developments with the developers undertaking measures to "camouflage"the uses through screening, etc. • The developers voluntarily undertake measures to ensure their clubhouses and dining buildings are of a higher quality design. • There are instances where the maintenance/utility facilities are located along the perimeter of properties visible to the public. An example was given of a golf course maintenance building visible from Goodlette Frank Road across from the Collier County water reclamation facility. • Open storage areas and carport type facilities may need to be addressed as well. Mr. Boughton arrived at 2.53p.m. The Committee noted it would be beneficial to ensure the above mentioned facilities visible to the traveling public or in close proximity to adjacent residential properties meet the intent of the standards. Mr. Disney moved to create an exemption in Section 5.05.08.B.4 for public and private ancillary facilities or accessory structures not fronting on an arterial or collector road and located a distance greater than 150 feet from an adjacent residential use or similar language. Second by Ms. Curatolo. Carried unanimously 5—0. Staff reported they would research the Land Development Code for any requirements to for screening carports and open storage areas and report back to the Committee. b. Follow-up regarding review of interior courtyards Staff reported facades of buildings facing interior court yards are not subject to the standards. 2 } December 15,2014 c. Discussion regarding definitions in section 5.05.08 C.2 Primary facade standards Staff submitted definitions of the following terms according to Merriam-Webster: Courtyard, Entry, Entryway, Monumental, Monumental Stone and Plaza for information purposes. The Committee noted "Courtyard"references the term "court"and it may be beneficial to define it as well. The Committee requested Staff ensure the cross references incorporated into the proposed standards cite current sections of the Land Development Code or other regulations. 6. Recommendations from County Attorney's Office Staff reported the County Attorney's Office has recommended the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) be updated on the current draft of the proposed standards and given an overview of major changes. The Committee noted the proposed amendment should be totally vetted by all applicable Committees before submittal to the BCC. Submitting a draft is misuse of the BCC's time given the Committees have not fully reviewed the proposed changes and the final version submitted to the BCC may be different than the current draft. 7. Review of materials a. Updated strikethrough/underline version with Staff questions Ms. Nawrocki left the meeting to make copies of the version for the Committee Members to review and provide comment at the next meeting. Mr.Disney expressed concern on the language found in Section 5.05.08.D.9.b.i requiring the following: "For buildings larger than 10,000 square feet in gross building area a minimum of two roof-edge or parapet line changes are required. Each vertical change from the dominant roof condition must be a minimum of ten percent of building height, but no less than three feet. At least one such change must be located on a primary façade. One additional roof change must be provided for every 100 linear feet of the façade length. " He referred to an application for a proposed building and Staff has interpreted the requirements apply to all facades, not just the primary facade. He agreed the language could be interpreted either way, but the intent of the Section is to limit long runs of roofs or parapets along a primary facade not all facades. Staff and the Committee agreed the language should be clarified. Ms. Nawrocki returned. The Committee recommended Section 5.05.08.D.9.b.i read: "For buildings larger than 10,000 square feet in gross building area a minimum of two roof-edge or parapet line changes are required for all primary facades. Each vertical change from the dominant roof condition must be a minimum of ten percent of building height, but no less than three feet. At least one such change must be located on a primary façade. One additional roof change must be provided for every 100 linear feet of the façade length." 3 December 15, 2014 Staff and the Committee noted Section 5.05.08.D.4.9.b.ii is applicable to all facades. b. Amenity Centers in PUD Master Plans Previously discussed c. Glazing requirements Continued. d. Non-conforming section Continued. 6. Adjournment Being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:55p.m. o her County Architectural and Site Design S;a •ards Ad Hoc Committee r` \ ,l These minutes appytved by the Board/Committe ChairmanNice Chairman on �/12- , 2014 as presented V or as amended 4