BCC Minutes 05/01/1990 R Naples, Florida, May 1, 1990
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners in
for the County of Collier, and also acting as the Board of Zoning
Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such special districts as
.:::.have been created according to law and having conducted business
herein, mst on this date at 9:00 A.M. tn REGULAR SESSION in Building
"F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the
following members present:
i!.' CHAIRMAN: Max A. Hasse, Jr.
': . VICE-CHAIRMAN: Michael J. Volpe
Richard S. Shanahan
Burr L. Saunders
Anne Goodnight
James C. Giles, Clerk; John Yonkosky, Finance
ALSO PRESENT:
Director; Ellis Hoffman and Harriet Beech, Deputy Clerks; Nell
"Dorrtll, County Manager; Ron McLemore, Assistant County Manager;
~iii... Thomas Olltff, Assistant to the County Manager; Ken Cuyler, County
Attorney; MarJorie Student and Mark Lawson, Assistant County
Attorneys; Ken Baginski, Planning Services Manager; Barbara Cacchtone,
Robert Mulhere, and Ron Nlno, Planners; Frank Brutt, Community
Development Services Administrator; George Archibald, Transportation
Services Ad~nistrator; Leo 0cbs, Administrative Services
Administrator; Mike Arnold, Utilities Administrator; Bill Laverty,
Growth Management Planner; Stan Lttsinger, Growth Management Director;
~' ' John Boldt, Water Management Director; Heyward Bo¥ce, Compliance
Services Manager; John MadaJewskt, Project Review Services Manager;
i!i Deputy Byron Tomllnson, Sheriff's Office; and Sue Fl/son,
?"Administrative Assistant to the Board.
Paoe I
May 1, 1990
Oae~i~eloner Volpe ~ov~d, seconded by Co~tsslonsr Saunders and
4/0 (C~leeloner ~o~ght not present), t~t t~ a~nda ~d
Item 5E - Growth Management Award - Added.
Item lea - Discussion of a referendum for a Tourist
Development Tax to include Marco Island - Added (Requested by
Commissioner Hasse). (To be heard prior to 6C1).
Commissioner Saunders requested that this item be discussed
prior to approving the agenda as amended.
3e
Item 6C3 - Petition AW-90-1, John D. Lee, representing Dennis
Mullins requesting waiver of separation requirements between
places servicing alcoholic beverages and churches, located at
5224 North Tamtami Trail. Added. (This item is listed on the
agenda and Indicated as continued to 5/15/90. Petitioner
Indicated problems if this item is continued). After briefly
discussing this item, the petitioner withdrew his request and
agreed to a continuance until 5/15/90.
4e
Item 6B1 - Petition R-89-31, Jeff Hunt of Erickeen
Communities, representing Radnor Corporation, requesting a
rezone from A-2 to PUD for retail and office development to
be known as Plaza 21, to be located northwest of the inter-
section of 111th Avenue North and U.S. 41 tn Section 21,
Township 48 South, Range 25 East, consisting of 17.2 acres -
Continued to 6/5/90 (Requested by petitioner).
Item 6B2 - Petit/on R-89-26, Jeff Hunt of Ericksen
Communities, representing Radnor Corp., requesting a rezone
from A-2 to PUD for a total of 800 single family/multi-family
units, with recreational amenities, to be located northwest
of the intersection of lllth Avenue North and U.S. 41 tn
Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County,
Florida consisting of 265 acres - Continued to 6/5/90
(Requested by petitioner).
6e
Item 6C5 - Petition SMP-90-3, Jeff Hunt of Ertcksen
Communities, repreaenttng Radnor Corp., requesting approval
of a subdivision master plan creating single family zero-lot
line, two-family lots and multi-family tracts for a total of
800 dwelling units known as Beachwa¥ to be located northwest
of the intersection of 111th Avenue North and U.S. 41 in
Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County,
Florida, consisting of 265 acres. (Companion to R-89-26) -
Continued to 6/5/90. (Requested by petitioner).
Item 6C2 - Petition CCCL-89-8, George Varnadoe, Esquire of
Young, Van Aseenderp, Varnados and Benton, P.A., representing
Developments Duken, requesting a coastal construction control
line variance to construct a condominium, parking and a
boardwalk to a/low beach access, for property located on the
west side of Gulfshore Drive, approximately 0.5 miles north
of Vanderbllt Beach Road (Lots 23 and 24, Block A, Unit 1,
Conner's ~anderbllt Beach Estates), Section 32, Township 48
South, Range 25 East, Col//er County, Florida - Continued to
5/8/90.
Item ?A2 -Petttton NUA-90-1, Charles Luck, the property
owner requesting an expansion of an existing non-conforming
Page 2
May 1, 1990
single-family mobile home tn order to add a carport with a
roof over it for property located at 1219 Bald Eagle Drive,
Lot 15, Port Marco, Inc., Marco Island, Florida - Continued
to 5/15/90.
Item 14A4 Moved to 9A2 - Marco Shores Unit 30 - Golf Course
Construction Agreement.
At this time a brief discussion was held relative to adding Item
1lA to the agenda. The Commission agreed to discuss a referendum for
a Tourist Development Tax to Include Marco Island, prior to hearing
Item 6C1.
Item
MZNU~ OF T~H REGULAR BCC MEETING OF MARCH 20, 1990 - APPROVED AB
Comm/uloner Shinahan moved, seconded by Co--tsston~r Volpe and
.,~?~ carried 4,/0 (Conntoetoner Ooodntght not pre.ant), to approve the ntnu-
tee of the ~eg~lar BCC ~eettng as presented.
~,;~':, Commissioner Hasse presented Walter Suttlemyre, of Compliance
~': Services with an employee service award and pin for five years of 8er-
?' "vice with Collier County Oovernment.
'!.,MARY 8TUCZI'3~K! RECOGNIZED AS EMPLOYEE OF THE .J~_..UTH FOR MAYf 1990
Commissioner Rasse announced that Mary Stuczynski, Senior Office
Assistant in the Human Resources Department, has been selected as
'/~ii"Employee of the Month for May, ~990".
Commissioner Hasse congratulated and commended Mrs. Stuczynski for
her contributions to the County and presented her with an exceptional
performance plaque and a $§0 cash award.
'~<'~PROCLAMiTXO~I-DESZ~IIATZNG MAY 6-12, 1990, AS 'DRINKING NATKR NEKKu .
Upon reading of the proclamation Commissioner 8aunders moved,
eeca~4ed'bF ~tutonsr Yelps, and carried 4/0 (Co~os~oner
Goo~lg~t z~ot pre~ent), to adopt the Proclmt~on
6-12, 19~, ~ m~/~tng Mater
Page 3
~a¥ 1, 199~
CoUtas~oner Volpa preeented the proclamation to Uttltt~es
Admin~strator Arnold.
Page 4
May ! 0 :1990
'~~~Ol I~)I$I~T~'NG MAY ~,, 1990~ AS LO~.~'I~ DAy -
Upon reading of the proclamation by Co~tss~oner Haase,
~~t~ S~ ~, ~econ~d ~ Co~ss~oner Vol~ ~d
~~ 4/0, (C~ee~oner ~ght not present), t~t the
~l~tl~ ~t~tlng ~y 1, 1990, II L~alty Day ~ adopted.
Co~tsstoner Hasse presented the proclamation to Colander
Clarence S~uder, of Golden Gate Veterans of Foreign ~ar Post ~21.
Page5
May 1, 1990
Commissioner Hasse announced that Collier County received a plaque
from Governor Martinez relating to the Florida Growth Management Award
for Natural Resource Protection.
Commissioner Hasse advised that Collier County has been selected
to have the most outstanding Environmental Elements of the
Comprehensive Plan tn the'stats. He presented the plaque to
,v' Environ~ental Services Administrator Lorenz, com~ending hi~ and ~he
Citizens Advisory Comities for ~heir ~ong, hard hours in pu~tng the
do~en~akion ~ogekher.
~L~XO~ 90-231, ~ ~-89-4, ~B~T F. ~XN, ~8~X~G ROBOT
~ ~X~ STAC~LK, FOR S~DXVXSION ~8T~ F~ ~OVAL ~R
L~CO PZ~, ~A~D SO~ OF WAlK RO~, CONS~STXXG OF 2~ LOTS ~
~3+ ~ OF ~, WCO lS~r ~ORXDA - ~D
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
April 8, 1990, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with the
Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition SMP-89-4, filed
by Albert Raulin, P.E., representing Robert and Ernesttne Stackpole,
requesting Subdivision Master Plan approval for Marco Pines, located
at the west 1/2 of northeast 1/4 of northwest 1/4 east 1/2 of east
1/2 of northwest 1/4 of northwest 1/4, containing 33 acres, more or
less, all in Section 14, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, south of
Manatee Road, C.R. 31.
Planner Nino explained that the proposed Subdivision Master Plan
)proval Is for property located at the end of Roost Road, which ia a
private street, and is accessed from Manatee Road, and consists of 111
lots. He noted that the petition Is consistent with the Growth
Management Plan, but the density Is .3 units per acre greater than
what the Future Land Use Plan would dictate following its adoption.
He stated that this argument may be sst aside since the petitioner has
iii indicated in writing, that he is prepared to interface this develop-
ment with the adjacent vacant lands, thereby, adding 1 unit per acre
( OeC[OOl4
Page 6
Nay ~, 1990
for the tnterconnection. He informed that given that scenario, the
~'":'Staff Report needs to be revised to indicate that there le no density
problem and that the density that would apply to this project ts 4
units per acre, and may produce more than ~11 lots.
Mr. Nino stated that all of the reviewing agencies are recom-
mending approval of this petition, subject to stipulations which have
been included in the Petttioner*s Agreement. He mentioned that there
· have been discussions relative to the status and quality of Roost
Road, and noted that the Agreement Includes a provision that states
i:.i! that it must be brought up to County standards prior to Initiation of
' any development activity on the property.
Mr. Ntno Indicated that it ts the opinion of Staff that this
Petition should be approved.
Commissioner Shanahan stated that he believes that tt ts essential
that Roost Road be paved, and that this become a part of the
Petittoner~s Agreement.
In answer to Commissioner Volpe, Mr. Ntno advised that the peti-
tioner has agreed that his streets will be available to provide access
to the unplatted land.
Commiss~oner Volpe noted that this petit/on is exempt from pro-
riding sidewalks. Mr. N/no replied that tn Staffts opinion, sidewalks
in an isolated subdivision of this nature is a luxury that Is unne-
cessary and it is felt that there is sufficient room for pedestrians
to exercise on the paved surface of the road since there will be a
very low volume of traffic on this tYl~e of road In the subject area.
Con~os~o~er Sha~ahan~ stated that eve~ though this maF ~e an
la,ed p~ece of propertF, it rea~lF lo not Isolated at all. He
attention to the fact that there t8 a considerable mobile home park
~d a travel ~ra~ler park in the area, and noted that other develop-
ments are also going ~nto this area, and there are genuine concerns
Ibot~t tr~sportat~on. He co~ented that he needs reassurance that
additional mobile ho~e e~tes w~ll not crea~e additional problems on
O0 CBO015
May 1, 1990
Road and S.R. 951.
!'!*~i~ Planner N/no reminded the Couisston that the traffic impact from
this development will not exceed 5~ of Level Of Service "C" on S.R.
951. He stated that if there are concerns relative to this Impact, an
'additional condition could be Included which states that no physical
development will occur, until the 4 lanlng of S.R. 951 takes place.
With regard to the extension of Manatee Road to U.S. 41, he noted that
the Collier County Planning Commission did recommend that this road be
extended.
Commissioner Volpe questioned whether any consideration has been
given to phasing this project? Mr. Nlno replied that Staff has deter-
alned that the size of the project ts relatively small, and the
impacts on S.R. 951 will be Insignificant.
With regard to the unimproved road to the south, Commissioner
Volpe asked If the developer Is required to prove the ability to use
that property to which he Is attempting to Interconnect with, tn order
to obtain the density bonus credit? County Attorney Cuyler advised
that the only commitment for future development ts that the developer
have the ability to connect to the property, but if there is an
existing development, the developer must show that he has the right to
travel on those roadways.
Mr. Ntno stated that subsequent review of the development request
for that land would require the planning of the platted land to con-
nect to the stub street in the Marco Pines Subdivision.
Mr. Albert Raultn, P.E., representing the petitioners, advised
that the developer la planning to construct the remainder of Roost
Road to this project, including the paving. He affirmed that the
developer does have legal rights to uae Roost Road and the road right-
of-way to the south. He noted that he presented the deed, giving
those rights, and his attorney's opinion that they have those rights.
Mr. Raultn explained that the reason for securing one more unit
per acre is that the developer has opened up an additional tract of
land with his road system.
00 C[0 16
Page 8
May 1, 1990
.... Mr. Nlno reported that this subdivision will only be accessed from
Manatee/Roost Road, and it is bordered on the south by a street that
ia part of the Master Plan for Marco Shores. He noted that in order
that the applicant not loose any further lots, he is proposing to stub
the street to vacant undeveloped lands to the west in order to obtain
the density bonus.
Mr. Raulin advised that the final plans need to be designed, and
construction of the subdivision needs to start which will take at
least 1-1/2 years, and he does not anticipate any sales until 2-3
!:~:ysars. In addition, he noted that there are no sidewalks in the
.entire area, and reported that no recreational amenities are proposed
for the subdivision.
There were no other speakers.
~l~aer Shanahan ~oved, ~econded by Commissioner Qo<~dnlght
· n~ C~Tied unanimously, that the public hearing be closed.
Co~/ule~er Shanahan ~oved, seconded by Couiss/oner S&undere to
ipprl~vl Pltttton ~MP-Bg-4, thereby adopting Resolution 90-231, ~ubJect
that Ibeeet ~ Is to be paved and co-plated into the project.
Commissioner Volpe asked if the petitioner would give any con-
sideration to providing sidewalks in this subdivision? Mr. Raulin
explained that the owner is incurring extraordinary expenses relating
to this project, i.e. building 1,SO0 feet of roadway to get to hie
property. He indicated that the sidewalks, which will not serve any
purpose, will he an additional expense that the owner does desire to
incur.
I]~elll £er the question, the motion carried
Page 9
May 1, 1990
O~D~I~I~ ~0-~2, ~I~NDZNQ TR~ "COLLZ~ COUNTY QR~ ~G~
~~ ~Az~ - ~~ s~ TO ~ ~ ~ ~LZ~ 0.20
Legal notice having been published tn the Naples Daily News on
April 5 and 18, 2990, as evidenced by AffSdavtt of ~bltcatton f/led
with the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider the adoption of
remedial ~endments to the Collier County Growth Management
addressing and relating to the Stipulated Settlement Agreement w~th
the Department of Co.unity Affairs (DCA) amending the ~ture
U~e Element, Cap~tal Improvement Element, Conservation and Coastal
'~i/ Mant'Jgement Element, and the Public Facilities Element (Drainage
Sub-Element ).
Growth Management Director Litslnger reported that this Item is a
request for the Commission to adopt the remedial amendments to the
Growth Management Plan as provided for in Exhibit "B" of the
Settleaent Agreement with DCA.
Mr. LItstnger advised that Mary Frances Mull/ns of DCA ts pre-
sent at todayes public hearing, as requested by County Attorney
Mr, Litsinger stated that on September 5, 1989, the Con,mission
?:approved a Stipulated Settlement Agreement with DCA which was executed
by all parties on September 14, 1989. Ne noted that a transmission
hearing was held in November, 1989, and the Department's Objections,
"- Reconnendattons and Comments report wa8 received on February 22, 1990.
Mr. Lltstnger Indicated that on April 5, 1990 the Collier County
· .Planning Commission reviewed Staff'8 recommended adopted page changes
ii!ill..'and rscomaended that the Commission adopt same (Attachment
Mr. LItstnger called attention to Page 40 of the Executive
.'~ Summary, advising that Policy 5.10 has been added to the Future Land
Use Element, which will be presented by Planner Cacchtone.
Mr. Lttetnger affirmed that adoption of the remedial Plan amend-
ments will bring the Collier County Growth Management Plan into full
compliance with Chapter 163, Part II, F.S. and Rule 9J-5 of the
Page 10
Hay 1, 1990
Florida Achainletrative Code. He informed that Staff Is recommending
the adoption of these amendments (Attachment B) by ordinance for
transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs for final
~, ' co~pliance review.
Planner Cacchione provided the Conuatsston with copies of the
:' ch~,~ges to Po/icy 5.10 (not provided to the Clerk's office). She
explained that this la the language which was presented to DCA and to
'i.. the CCPC on April 5, 1990. She noted that the Policy as written
today, applies merely to the exemptions in the Zoning Re-evaluation
Ordinance. She called attention to a provision within the ordinance
which indicates that an amendment to the Growth Management Plan is
required before building permits may be issued on the upfront exemp-
.,. ttons, and in order to do this, they would have to go through the
regular amendment cycle, unless the option of including same is
included within the Stipulated Settlement Agreement. She reported
that in aany cases the exemptions contain time limits, i.e. commer-
cially zoned properties, and noted that by the t/me the amendment
cycle was completed, there would only be a few months remaining on the
exemptions. She indicated that it was felt that given the time ele-
ment of some of the exemptions, that it would be appropriate to
~nclude this Po/icy for exemptions only as part of the Agreement. She
informed that DCA has indicated that they will consider this language.
Mrs. Cacchione stated that Policy 3.1K, as amended by the
Stipulated Settlement Agreement, requires that the Plan be amended for
compatibility exceptions which are granted after going through the
process. She noted that Staff will be coming back with an amendment
i.i relative to compatibility exceptions.
Mrs. Cacchione explained that all references to compatibility
'exceptions have been changed or eliminated. She related that the
upfront compatibility determination applies to parcels of 10 acres or
less and are based on certain percentages of surrounding developed
'!' ~ properties. She indicated that there are 6 categories of exemptions
which are addressed ~n Policy 5.10.
Page
May 1, 1990
In answer to Commissioner Volpe, Mrs. Cacchlone stated that DCA
45 days to react to the plan amendments as adopted.
There were no other speakers.
Ooesdeelooer Shanahan ~oved, seconded by Co---iseloneF 9aunders and
ca~visd~aeatsously, iht the ~blic he~t~ b close.
cml~ ~i~sly, to ~opt the re,dial ~n~nts, ~bJ~ to
Nli~ [.10 e ~~, for tr~ittal to the ~t~nt
tttl~ ~1~ ~ adopted ~d enter~ Into Ordt~ce ~k No. 38:
O~IN~E 90-32
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE
"COLLIER COUNTY GRO~H MANAGEMENT PLAN", FOR THE UNINCORPORATED
AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; SUCH AMENDMENT ADDRESSING AND
RELATING TO THE STIPULATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF CO'UNITY AFFAIRS OP SEPTEMBER 14, 1989; BY
~ENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT POLICIES; BY AMENDING THE
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT POLICIES; BY AMENDING THE PUBLIC
FACILITIES ELEMENT (DRAINAGE SUB-ELEMENT) POLICIES; BY AMENDING
THH CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT, OBJECTIVES AND
POLICIES; BY PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND BY PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
10:20 A.M. - Reconvenad 10:35 A.M.
PUBLIC H~ARING R~ TOURIST DNV~LO~ TAX TO INCLUDE MARCO ISLAND TO
BI ADVI:RT~813:) FOR MAY 29, 1990; GKOGRAPHIC ARKAS TO BK DISCUSSED AND
WHITEIR 0it ]lOT TO PLACE THE ~sSU[ ON TUE ~ttOT
Co~mlssloner Hesse stated that he requested that this item be
discussed today and noted that he believes very strongly that the 2~
bed tax should be levied throughout the entire County. He explained
';" that he feels that It Is proper for everyone to pay for the main-
· tenance of the beaches and passes, and does not think that any por-
tions of the County should be excluded. He noted that tn order for
him to support the 1¢ sales tax, he would like to see the 2~ bed tax
for the entire County on the referendum.
Co..~ls81oner maunders Indicated that it appears that Commissioner
ii,i" Hesse ts linking the 1¢ Local Option Sales Tax with the Bed Tax, and
..he does not under~tand his way of thinking. He stated that he does
!!/',not Understand the rationale between the Tourist Development Tax which
May 10 1990
generate $1.5 - $2 million per year to be used for specific
tourlmt related activities and the linkage of the 10 Local Option
Sal~s Tax which will generate $450 million over 10 years to be used
for a variety of infrastructure t~pe projects.
Co-missioner Hasse replied that the linkage is that one tax will
provide for the development and the improvement of the beaches and the
~ other will provide for the continued maintenance of the beaches.
Com~lssioner VelDs Indicated that he believes that another linkage
%~<,.' between the two taxes Is that the Blue Ribbon Sales Task Force recom-
~.~ . mended that the Bed Tax and the Optional 1¢ Sales Tax go hand in glove
· and that the Bed Tax be considered before the Sales Tax. He stated
~ that the last time these issues were discussed, they were flip-flopped
In order to accommodate the school board since they needed a deter-
mlnatton before October. He noted that the status of the legislation
relative to the County sharing the 1¢ sales tax with the School Board
ts unknown, and the Supreme Court has upheld the right of the School
Board to use certificates of participation, to move into their next
c&pltal project phase. He commented that he believes that there ts
Justification to have the bed tax on the ballot in September, and then
,' have the sales tax on the November referendum. He stated that since
~ the State ts experiencing a shortfall tn its revenues he would not be
surprised if there is an increase in the state sales tax He noted
· that he is in favor of including Marco Island tn the Tourist
Development Tax.
Commissioner Saunders mentioned that there is a taxing district on
~ Marco Island that was established to pay for beach renourIshment, and
the 1¢ Local Option Sales tax which would be paid by those residents
and the vis~tors to Marco would be used for beach renourtehment. He
questioned whether Commissioner Volpe feels that It ts fair to tax
these people a th/rd time for beach renourtshment and beach malntenan-
: i Ce?
Co~mlesloner Volpe stated that in one Instance a sales tax will be
,~ ' Page ! 3
nbaitted to the electorate and $21 million of that tax will be used
for beach rsnourtehment and Marco Island has already arranged for the
funding of their beaches so they will be paying for something for
which they w~ll not receive any benefit. He noted that the sa]es tax
will also generate revenues for other things for the community, and he
believes that the entire picture needs to be looked at.
Co~miesioner Shanahan indicated that he does not believe that
there should be any linkage between the two taxes, and noted that he
feels that th~e is unacceptable. He =elated that there have been
hours of presentations that positively convinced the Commission that
Marco Island had taken care of its own problem, and that a MSTU should
be developed for the beach at the northern end of the County. He
stated that a decision was made and voted on, and now to consider
linking this tax to something else is something that he does not
understand. He commented that there are currently two MSTU's on Marco
which have been taxed twice, and noted that it Is possible that some
of the residents may support a third tax to pay for beach maintenance.
With regard to the Certificates of Participation by the School Board,
he indicated that if this changes their need, he has no problem with
changing the sales tax ~esue from September to November, but he does
have a problem in terms of delaying this tax.
Co~isstoner Goodnight announced that she had a meeting in
Tallahassee yesterday with Representative Mary Ellen Hawkins and noted
that she no longer has the negative of
feeling8
sharing
the
tax
with
the $¢hool Bosrd. She reported that the last time the sales tax was
discussed, County Manager Dorrill and the School Board had indicated
that there was no problem with the tax being cut off the day that a
::: sufficient amount of money was collected to build whatever was on the
~,:. '. list. She indicated that she Informed Ms. Hawkins that tf she went
}j!i.' alon~ with the 4¢ gas tax, the amount of money that will be brought in
"~'/. Collier County to build state roads will be that much less than what
..,'(i would need to be collected from the taxpayers to build those roads.
Coma~ss~oner Ooodn~ght stated that she does not understand why the
Page 14
Nay 1, 1990
sales-tax is being linked with the bed tax, noting that she does not
believe that Immokalee, Everglades and Port-of-the-Islands should pay
a bet tax for beaches that they do not use. She Indicated that the
Ph!lh&rl~onlc certelnly will not bring people Into these comaunltlee.
She related that she feels that Marco has been pulling their fair
share, and it ts unfair to include the bed tax and the sales tax
together. She mentioned that in every county where the additional
sales tax failed, the fact remains that the Board of County
Commissioners was not unanimous in their decision and they did not all
get out and sell lt. She related that the Commission Indicated that a
moratorium is not desired, but questioned how the state roads will be
Commissioner Shanahan stated that there ~s considerable belief
'that even if the Enabling Act does not pass, there are other options
for the School Board.
Courlty Manager Dorrtll advised that he spoke with Mr. Wilson at
the School Board, noting that the Certificate of Participation process
Is short term borrowing, and will enable them an opportunity to borrow
over m short term. He advised that his desire is to maintain a
referendum date In September rather than In November.
Conunlesloner Volpe stated that it Is Important to Inform the elec-
torate, and he believes that there ts a real advantage both in wtnntng
and informing to have the referendum In November.
Com~isstoner Saundera remarked that the reason for the emphasis of
m September referendum was due to the School Board's problem, but that
is no longer the case. He related that he has no problem of placing
this Issue on the November ballot because of the change in those cir-
cumstances, but It would be inappropriate for the Commission today, to
make a decision without an advertised public hearing on the Tourist
Tax.
Commissioner Nasae asked If this issue could be placed on a future
County Attorney Cuyler replied that the Commission wtll be
... · ' Page 15
Nay !, 1990
:;receiving the TDC Ordinance prior to the summer recess. He indicated
that thio matter can be advertised for the May 29, 1990 meeting.
Mrs. Charlotte Westman, representing the League of Women Voters of
Collier County, stated that she has discussed the subject of the bed
tax with Supervisor of Elections Morgan, and it will require federal
clarification since the dimensions of the districts must be drawn for
;:'.'-:~ those areas that are voting, and this takes a longer time slot.
noted that if the tax ts to be County-wide, the process is much
faster.
She
Mr. George Keller stated that the Sales Tax Committee determined
that other sources of income should be reviewed, and they mentioned
the fact that the bed tax should be placed on the September ballot and
the sales tax should be voted on In November. He explained that he
· feels that the public has been given a selling Job relating to the
'~' sales tax, and have not been given the facts. He noted that the
School Board ts now out of their bind, and Staff is still pushing for
a,~i~ a September referendum. He stated that if there is a bed tax it ! should be County-wide, and placed on the September ballot,
;:?!i' C~Tt~ ~1¥, tO ~dv~rtt# the ordinance for the bed t~x for
~,~.' : e-~-~ ~ ~lm t~ ~ t~ ~llot will ~ dts~.
' 'TY-~ ·
Legal notice having been published tn the Naples Dally News on
March 22, 1990, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication flied with
the Clerk, public hearing having been continued from April 10, 1990,
to consider an ordinance calling for a referendum on the Local Option
Infrastructure Sales Tax.
County Manager Dorrtll reported that changes have been made as
,.directed by the Commission two weeks ago, and noted that the additions
to the original project list are $420 million over 10 years. He
Page 16
Hay 1, 1990
explained that there are two additions under the County Commission:
$10 million for Regional Parks and $10 million for the CREW Trust
acquisition. Ne related that the City of Naples Includes the
additions tn the amount of $8,950,000: City Storm Water Utility
Drainage project for $6,950,000; City park and/or green space for
$1 atlllon; and City local road network for $! million. He advised
that the City of Everglades has the addition of a Storm Water Drainage
project in the amount of $680,000. Be Informed that there were no
changes tn the reserves, noting that they continue to be Just under
$30 million since there is no escalation built Into the project costs,
and the interim cash flow financing will be provided over those years
when projects need to start prior to receiving the money. He
explained that the total reserves are $29,649,000.
County Manager Dorrtll advised that the ordinance calls for an
election to be held tn 1999 to determine whether or not there will he
the collection of the tax after the 10 year period. He Indicated that
the Supervisor of Elections pointed out that the Commission has pre-
vlously been reluctant to call a special election and Incur the cost
for same. He suggested that the Commission schedule the election for
a subsequent 10 year period as part of the genera/ election tn 1998
and no additional costs wtll be Incurred.
County Attorney Cuyler called attention to a change tn the
language tn the ballot question. He indicated that it did not flow
grammatically correct and therefore, has been changed.
In answer to Commissioner Volpe, Assistant County Manager McLemore
explained that the amount for state roads has not changed. Be
Informed that the amount has been taken from the County's portion of
the reserves and allocated back to the state road projects.
With regard to the Interlocal Agreement, Commissioner Volpe asked
if the School Board has agreed not to increase their millage beyond
1.5~? County Attorney Cu¥ier advised that the Interlocal Agreement
states that the school Board may not use the sales tax revenues to
i~) ~upplant or replace user fees or reduce ad valorem taxes in the
Page 17
~': ' Hay 1, 1990
[District prior to the levy of the surtax, but it does not mandate that
not increase their millage rates.
Co.missioner Volpe questioned whether prtorttlzatton ts being
given to the regional park that Commissioner Saunders requested to be
added. Co~ualsetoner Saunders remarked that the rationale for
including the regional park is that it only be built if there ts a
funding source, noting that ad valorem taxes will not be raised for
this project. He indicated that he feels that one of the things that
· 'makes a community more liveable is the amount of park space it has.
He remarked that once that open space Is gone, there will be no oppor-
tunity for acquiring lt. He informed that the proposed ordinance
indicates that it ts active and/or passive recreation areas.
Comatssioner Saunders advised that he asked Supervisor of
Elections Morgan the percentage of people voting in September versus
the percentage of people voting in November, In a non-presidential
election year, and was Informed that tn 1986, 66~ of the registered
voters voted in September and 70~ voted in November.
.'. ~ ~:!:' .
}~?~4. Mr. George Keller stated that he feels that the Commission should
wait until the Enabling Act is passed, and then a determination could
be made aa to whether the 1¢ Sales Tax should be on the ballot, and
who should receive the money. He indicated that he does not believe
that the public has been given the facts on the sales tax presen-
ration.
County Attorney Cuyler advised that the ballot question will be
a~ended, deleting the schools, if the Legislation does not pass.
Hr. Ira Evans remarked that he has followed the subject of the lC
County Sales Tax for the past 3 years and he feels that many incorrect
statements have been made. He revealed that there are some provisions
tn the proposed ordinance that should be modified: repeal of the
ordinance when sufficient revenues have been collected to fund the
projects as set forth in the ordinance and Section Five states that
such repeal shall be made upon completion of said projects; Section
Twelve indicates that the proceeds of the tax may be pledge for the
Page 18
Nay 1, 1990
=purposes of servicing new bond indebtedness, and with the timing
involved that it will be repealed when the money ia accumulated, he
doubts the practicality of that statement and it will cost some money.
He noted that he does not believe that anyone can make a realistic
projection of how much revenue will be raised by this tax in one
period of time, and questioned how this will be bonded. He commented
that he questions the wisdom of putting the question to the people of
Collier County that says because the 1¢ sales tax ts for capital pro-
Jects, they are being asked to vote on taxing themselves to bond the
money, when the beneficiaries of the bonding money are the people who
review, underwrite and sell relating to a bond Issue. He noted that
if the Intent is that it Is necessary to spend the money before it is
collected, that should be spelled out, and if this is the case he
asked what happens to the spending plan If the referendum does not
pass. He suggested a provision in the ordinance that says that the
Board of County Commissioners will not "tax swap". He Indicated that
the people have a right to know what they are voting for, and
suggested that the ordinance be published tn the paper, verbatim so
that everyone will be informed.
Co~tsstoner Hasse stated that he will make sure that the media
and the public is made aware of all the Information relative to the
sales tax Issue.
Co.missioner Shanahan Indicated that many discussions have been
held to identify the projects and the duration of same, and he feels
that there Is a commitment to provide these. He stated that he ts in
favor of the 1¢ sales tax since there ts a tremendous need to main-
tain, enhance, and improvement the quality of life in Collier County,
and this is the most pain'less way.
In answer to Cosuatssloner Shanahan, County Attorney Cuyler advised
that he has looked at a number of ordinances that have been passed
around the state, and this ordinance ia far more detailed than a great
~aJority of other ordinances. He explained that he has not seen
any other ordinance with a repeal provision which indicates that once
Page 19
Hay ~, 1990
:~ the monies are collected for the identified projects the ordinance
'~111 be repealed, With regard to the bonding language0 he Informed
th.~t this ts statutory language. He cautioned the Commission that
there are some things tn the ordinance that may cause a problem with
bonding. He related that if this were set up with 5, 5, and 5 years
there ~ould be a serious problem since there would be a 5 year revenue
strain, but with 10 and 5, there is a better chance of doing that.
Mrs. Charlotte Westman, representing the League of Women Voters of
Collier County, stated that the proposed ordinance Is a great Improve-
ment over the ordinance which was previously addressed. She noted
that the League does want the voters to be informed. She called
attention to Page 6 of the ordinance, the official ballot as noted,
and questioned whether "authorizing an additional one cent sales tax
for 10 years" should be changed to "8 years".
County Attorney Cuyler advised that this ts the date for the sub-
sequent voter approval of the additional 5 years over the initial 10
years, in the event sufficient monies are not collected to fund the
projects as specified.
Mrs. Westman explained that she feels clarification needs to be
made for the ballot since the language presently reads that the 10
year surtax, with up to 5 additional years, subject to voter approval,
and suggested that it should read "subject to subsequent voter appro-
val" due to the lan~age on the first page. She further questioned
why the ballot states "school facilities" and not Just "schools",
since these facilities may not be schools, but rather athletic fields,
Mi.using pools, etc.
County Attorney Cuyler Indicated that the Commission may wish to
:i'=[dIscuss this, but in order to account for capacity in a school, there
are other things Involved than Just the school building, and he does
believe that there is any intent that the schools be limited to Just
school structure_ s.
CoDtseloner Volpe questioned whether the proceeds could be used
Page 20
Hay 1, 1990
for a net, administrative building for the school board, to which
Co'~nty Attorney Cuyler Informed thai: the proceeds could not be used
fear an administrative building under the Interlocal Agreement.
Mrs. Wes,man referred to the language relating to the repeal of
the ordinance and noted that she would like to see language which
refers to "the collection of funding" rather than "completion of the
project". County Attorney Cuyler advised that he does not have a
problem If the Couisslon want~ to consider language stating "such
repeal ~ay be made and effective upon collection of all surtax reve-
nues necessary for said projects".
Mrs. Wes,man asked when the Interlocal Agreements will be con-
summated? Assistant County Manager McLemore advised that the
Interlocal Agreements will be consummated within the next two weeks.
Mrs. Wes,man stated that the League would like to see the
Interlocal Agreements made a definite part of the ordinance; support
the Inclusion of the CREW properties; the "s" should be deleted from
"Jails"; and "school boards" should be replaced by "schools".
County Attorney Cuyler advised that if "subject to subsequent
voter approval" ts to be Included, "facilities" will need to be
stricken, due to the limited number of words In the ballot quest/on.
Mr. Mike Slay,on, Administrator of the Big Cypress Basin, remarked
that ha reviewed the proposed ordinance and supports the language tn
the drift. He Indicated that the last time this issue was discussed,
Commissioner Volpe raised the question whether the sales tax revenues
could be'used for water resource Infrastructure. He advised that he
researched this question with the District counsel and DCA counsel,
and ha was Informed that the answer Is "yes".
Attorney Dudley Goodlette, Chairman of the Sales Tax Committee,
indicated that the comments that were made earlier by George Keller
ara an Insult to every member of the'Co,mt,tee. He Indicated that to
~uggest in any way that the Committee was driven by some notion that
Staff had fixed this entire Issue, is absurd. He related that the
Committee came to the Commission with the recommendation for a special
Page 21
May 1, 1990
~lot to encourage the Legtelattve Delegation to paee that on In case
there was & need for lt. He Indicated that he feela that the cosmlt-
fee's recoe~endatton relative to the 10 years and the 5 year renewal
,option should be accepted, and that the date of the election be
SepteBber or NoveBber, at the Comaleeion~a discretion. He noted that
the contttee did recouend November, and that the Bed Tax be put on
~the referendua prior to ~hat. He co,ended Staff for ~ork~ng out the
Interloc~l Agreement w~th the C~ty.
Attorney Goodlette affirmed tha~ the co~tttee ts convinced
~' the sales t~ ts an avenue to provide so~e ad valorem tax relief to
the residents of Collier County, and ~11 enable a reduction ~n the
escalating increase In the ad valorem t~es. He stated that If
Issue Is to be placed on the ballot, he hopes that there will be una-
nimous approval by the Co~1sslon to do so. He remarked that he does
tot ~l~eve that anything ~tll be gained by deferring this Issue any
longer.
There ~re no other speakers.
I~e ~, ~ mtermi into Ordinance Boo~ No. 30, with the follmetng
che=~ll~ ~ 1, t~ first "~u= will re~ N~r 6; ~ S,
~~ll~t/m o~ ~11 ~t~ ~ ~c~ for ..... ~ ~ S ~
~tJ~ 14 t~ ~te s~ld ~ c~ to reflect t~ ~ refer~
vt~,"mls"~ ~ 2, ~ "~tW ~k" to the list of proJ~ts;
J ~t ~ itto~ ~ler ~ ~t~rlz~ to me tM a~roprlate
ORDZNAZlC~ 90-33
AN ORDINANCE OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RELATING TO A ONE PERCENT
DISCRETIONARY SALES SURTAX; PROVIDING FOR THE LEVY OF A ONE
PERCENT DISCRETIONARY SALES SURTAX, SUB3ECT TO REFERENDUM
1990
APPROVAL, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 212.055(2),
FLORIDA STATUTES, WHICH AUTHORIZES A LOCAL GOVERNMENT
INFRASTRUCTURE SURTAX: PROVIDING FINDINGS~ PROVIDING FOR THE TIME
PERIOD DURING WHICH THE SURTAX WILL BE IN EFFECT; PROVIDING FOR
DISTRIBUTION OF THE ONE PERCENT LOCAL GOVERNMENT INFRASTRUCTURE
SURTAX; PROVIDING A GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF INFRASTRUCTURE TO BE
FUNDED; PROVIDING FOR ENACTMENT OF A REPEALING ORDINANCE;
PROVZDINO FOR A REFERENDUM ELECTZON; PROVIDING FOR THE FORM OF
BALLOT; PROVIDING FOR POLLING PLACES; PROVIDING FOR ELECTION
OFFICIALS; PROVIDING FOR THE HOURS OF ELECTION: PROVIDING FOR THE
NOTICE OF ELECTION; PROVIDING FOR CONSTRUCTION AND INTENT;
PROVIDING FOR NOTIFICATIONS TO BE MADE BY THE CLERK; PROVIDING FOR
THE COMMENCEMENT DATE OF TAX COLLECTION; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
P.M. - RICOIT~tJ~ed 1.'10 P.M. a'l: .hlch time
Belch Z"I~IIC'I4 DI1m, ty Clez-k Eofflln eeo
· ", ~01t0-~2 RK t~XTXOM MUA-OO-2, JAMIS PAY'lB, THI PROPIRTY
Legal notice having been published tn the Naples Dally News on
April 8, 1990, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with the
Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petltlon NUA-90-2 filed
by James Payne, the property owner, requesting a replacement and
expansion of a non-conforming mobile home tn order to install a new
.:~:. double-wide mobile home and storage shed with a roof over the shed for
property located at 1219 Bald Eagle Drive, Lot 8, Port Marco, Inc.,
Marco Island, Flor/da.
Planner Hoover explained that the petitioner is requesting to
..replace a 1965 model, 12 foot wide by 42 foot long mobile home and
shed with a new 26 foot wide by 42 foot long mobile home and new
storage shed. Mr. Hoover stated that the petitioner no longer desires
to have a carport on this lot and ha8 submitted a revised site plan at
the request of the CCPC. He said the Planning Commission held thelr
public hearing on April 5, 1990, and forwarded Petition NUA-90-2 with
a recouuendation of approval subject to stipulations as recommended by
staff to have a minimum setback of 3.5 feet on the south side and on
the west side, a mlntmum setback of 10 feet. He said the side yard on
the east should have a minimum setback of 5 feet and the side yard on
the north should have a minimum setback of 3.? feet. Commissioner
: Hesse asked if these were not extremely close lots. Mr. Hoover said
that it 18 an extremely compact mobile home park and the main problem
ts with the distance from the mobile home to the north, so the peti-
tioner ts expanding to the east and west.
~ ~ ~ly, t~t t~ ~1tc ~~ ~ c1~.
i ~ UBIy, t~t ~luti~ 9~232 ~ htitia .~i-~2
Page 24
May l, 1990
X~II el&
J~q. ~ P. BASLE ~'rl~ SAW MARCO PARK - STAFF TO APPROVE SDP
Ms. Dabble Orshefsky, of Greenberg, Traurig, et al, Ft.
.,.:. Lauderdala, appeared before the Board to speak on behalf of Mr. Baslk
:i.. in this matter regarding right-of-way approvals for the eastern cam-
'. marcial property, the western commercial property and one for an RV
' park. She said that staff approval for the Site Development Plan
. (SDP) has been delayed because the plat must be approved and recorded
prior to SDP approval. Based upon her review of the regulations and
:~ ordinances, she continued, there is no express provision that requires
a Subdivision Master Plan (SMP) to be approved prior to receiving SDP
approval. She said that staff may regard the sequence of approval
:)~ processes a8 administratively convenient, but there extsts no express
~?.. requirement for this delay. She asked the Board to direct staff to
process and approve the SDP wttha proviso that no building permits
be obtained and no construction to take place until all approvals have
~:..' been secured.
?.., Project Review Services Manager MadaJewskt addressed the Issue of
~::;:~: , the SMP and the SDP tn the County's zoning process. Mr. MadaJewskt
i..'.,! said they had at first a very clear project situation, but when the
right-of-way was created, it divided the property. He continued,
other property divisions also took place and now there are Issues
involved of RV zoning, commercial zoning and industrial property. The
three parcels thus created, he maintains, now constitute a subdivision
by regulatory standards. Mr. MadaJewskt said that a staff recommen-
dation was submitted and approval was granted on two parcels of cos-
merctal properties; the RV park, and the Industrial property. He
noted that now the petitioner has created further subdivision of this
property without plat reviews, prior to having the final SMP approved.
Staff cannot grant final approvals, he advised, until platting is
done. He said that the final SMP approval must take place to create
subdivided parcels first, providing the utility Infrastructure (water
Page 25
Nay 1, 1990
~n~g~nt plan and system) needed for consideration by staff during
review of the SDP. He further noted that the owner contends that the
entry road right-of-way for the proposed GTE radio tower should not be
considered a separate parcel, therefore SMP approval is not required
for this right-of-way.
Contsstoner Volpe asked If it Is true that this property should
not have been subdivided and sold prior to the approval. Mr.
MadaJewakt responded that staff contends that the County should not
approve and grant building permits under the current situation because
the owner can create many small pieces which do not require much water
· ~anage~ent. If one piece ts denoted a subdivision, It would require
water, sewers, roads and drainage, he stated, but the water management
plan for this project ts lacking. Nuch communication has taken place
along with correspondence, he said, and staff has been working with
the applicant to initiate a Site Development Plan. Mr. MadaJewski
continued, staff has recently received more Information, but the water
~anage~ent system plan has not been received, nor has a concurrency
certificate. The new information received late last week has not been
:reviewed completely, he said.
Conlsstoner Hesse asked how long this matter has been tn process.
Mr. MadaJewskl said since September, 1988 and staff did not receive
preliminary 5DP Information until February, 1990. Mr. MadaJewskl
stated that staff cannot consider an exception to the ordinance until
this review Is completed.
Attorney Orshefsky stated that the basic question ts whether a
requirement exists that the SNP be approved before the SDP can be
' approved? There has been discussion between staff and her client
whether this property must be platted, she said, and staff has deter-
mined that the owner must plat, but this process cannot be completed
within three months' time. The owner contends, she continued, that he
needs the SDP approval now In order to make progress, and not in three
~°ntha.
Co~t881oner Saunders asked If the owner wants the SDP without
May 1, 1990
the ~ approval? Ms. Orshefeky replied in the affirmative.
'Co~allsloner Saundera then asked Mr. MadaJewaki, if the Board would
permit this, would it create a problem for staff? Hr. MadaJewski said
it would create grave difficulties for the staff work process. He
~aintained that staff needs a clear approved infrastructure before
they can ~ake sense out of the project.
County Attorney Cuyler said the Board members should consider the
.~:~: practical effect of dealing with ordinances and how decisions made by
the Board might affect staff's work.
Com~lssioner Hesse asked if this was a problem that had been
created by staff actions and Mr. MadaJewski said no, as there has been
staff involvement on this project since the mid-1980s.
Commissioner Volpe asked if the Board denies the Petition, will it
have to go back through the site review process? Mr. MadaJewski indi-
cated that is correct. Commissioner Shanahan commented it would be a
pity if, because of administrative needs, the petitioner is punished.
Mr. MadaJewskt said he sees this as a legislative Issue of ordinance
req~irements, affecting other projects also. If the owner, he noted,
divides the property, then staff must deal with the subdivision Issue
first.
Co--ilsioner Shanahan asked if staff has always administered ordi-
nances fairly in other cases, and Mr. MadaJewski indicated he feels
this is true. Com~issioner Hesse asked if staff's requests had been
answered ttsely, there might not have been a problem? Mr. MadaJewski
advised that this petitioner has not provided information requested in
a timely manner, thus creating the problem.
Commissioner Volpe asked Mr. Larry P. Basik when the GTE parcel
:~,: ' was conveyed? Mr. Bastk said it was in November of 1989.
Mr. Larr~ Basik said when he started the project, he had problems
because the road was installed before negotiations ensued with the
~ U.S. Corps of Engineers and the Department of Environmental Regulation
'~,', (DER), and he has recently completed the work with those agencies
Page 27
explains the long delay. He said his consulting engineers feel
::~'th&t the road right-of-way has not bisected the property, thus
. platting is not required. When the third parcel became a right-of-
way, his consultants advised that a right-of-way did not constitute a
parcel of land, he continued. He explained that he has received an
SDP for the RV park prior to working with the Corps of Engineers and
DER. Mr. Basik asserted that he did have an approved SDP, but had to
wait for the SPWMD to approve the water management plan.
Mr. MadaJewski interposed that the preliminary SDP was approved
prior to changes ~ade in the property and moreover, it contained sti-
pulations which have not been complied with, to date. He said staff
~cannot approve it under the current ordinance, because the engineering
consultants have requested modifications for the RV park plan.
Conissioner Volpe pointed out to Mr. Baslk that if he goes
through the entire process again, it will take 120 days.
Mr. XadaJewskt said that staff cannot take further action without
the Board's authorization. Commissioner Shanahan noted that Mr.
Bastk has appeared many times before the Board and he recognizes that
the petitioner Is faced with a financial dilemma. County Attorney
Cuyler said he has concern that other people who are in the same posi-
tion, based on the same criteria, may petition the Board as well.
mad e~~n~nt~m~ly, that staff be granted per~tssion to giv~
fii~ ~ to the SDP in an e~pedttiou~ f~hton, p~lor to
~-ee~w~W ~e ~, co~tingent upon the petitioner providing II~D
-:- S-~t II,ns and a c~ncurre~c~ certificate.
,.~-m.ieeeeeed: 2:00 p.m. - ~couv~1~d: 2:10 p.m. eeo
q%~.~II~D-:IVlOIO,-~JlBI~I~XI~ PI3~MXT eeo-e20, DRXVIN&Y VARX&ICl - I~rrxTXOIER
Frardc Brutt, Community Services ~evelopment Administrator, explained
that this item relates to a violation of a right-of-way permit for the
/construction of a driveway. He said an application was made by ~r.
00CCI00§1
Page 28
~990
· ,-,az ,
Evans to construct a 16 foot wide driveway on his property line and
:i~f:, after the permit was taken out a driveway of 31 feet In width was
:, constructed. Nr. Erutt noted that Nr. Evans had been informed by the
';.~ Inspector when they were setting the grades of the requirements for
the particular width. He added that when he met with Mr. Evans he
· . asked him why he violated the permit and Mr. Evans Informed him that
he simply desired to make It wider. Mr. Brutt presented photographs
:~;. and a copy of the permit which was Issued which contained stipulations
!'~'. relative to safety and other considerations which explained why the '
~g; County needed to hold the driveway to a certain size. Mr. MadaJewskt
s~'" explained that the ordinance allows an aggrieved petitioner to appeal
for a vartance prior to construction, but since the applicant accepted
the permit, and has constructed the driveway In violation of the per-
mit and ordinance, staff does not feel a waiver should be granted.
CoBlssloner Saunders asked if It would be appropriate for a
variance petition to be filed and if there ts such a procedure? Mr.
MadaJewski responded that ts no procedure for an after-the-fact
situation due to the applicant proceeding with construction that did
not comply with the permit.
Commissioner Hasse said the driveway evidently Is the full width
of a three car garage for its entire length, and that is not per-
mitred, Is that correct? Mr. MadaJewski said that 24' is the maximum
width approved for a permit at the right-of-way line, but it does not
prevent an expansion tn width after the driveway crosses that point,
tO Include a "third lane" for access to the garage on the property.
' Co,missioner Haeae asked if It la a private home and Mr. MadaJewskt
confirmed this. He then asked Mr. MadaJewskt to view the photographs
and state whether it is similar to what was approved to be
constructed. Mr. MadaJewski said that in review of the case with
staff, they asserted that the approved plan ts for a maximum of 16
feet at the right-of-way line. He then provided the Commissioners
with coptes of the approved plan for their Information.
Mr. Evans contends that no inspector ever told him It would be In
oo £e0o52
Page 29
May 1, 1990
,violation to change the driveway size. He claims he never inten-
tionally intended to violate the rules, and when he asked for a
Certificate of Occupancy on the dwelling, this matter arose. The
Issue, he says, ~e that he did not come to staff and ask permission.
He added that he did not know about the 24 foot restriction. Mr.
Brutt Interjected that the 24 foot width can be permitted on the
o~ner~s right-of-way, and a 30 foo~ ~tdth at flare-out.
Co~lsstoner Saunders remarked that if ~he Board approves a
var~ce at th~s point after certain s~atements about staff have been
~de ~ the petitioner, the Board w~ll, in effect, be confirm~ng that
staff ~s 'doing th~e to p~sh the petitioner." Co~issioner Hesse
sa~d that the petitioner's o~ plans show a 16 foot driveway.
Co~ssloner Volpe asked how ~ch of a burden ~t would be to change
the driveway? Mr. Evans said that staff told h~ he must go to ~
outside contractor and post a bond. Mr. Brutt explained that Mr.
Ev~ asked for the best solution to obtain a Cert~ficate of Occupancy
~d Mr. B~tt told Mr. Evans he could come to the Board, bu~ he
:~?( reco~ended that If the Board said the drive had to be put back Into
code conform~ce, it would be beet to obtain a cash bond to perform
that course of action. He said Mr. Evans told him that he could do it
himself for $100. He said hie notes of that conversation read that
Mr. Evans could file for a variance, but staff would reco~end against
He requested that Mr. Evans provide him with a letter from an
independent contractor of what it would cost to remove the excess dri-
veway in order to bring it back into conformance. Then, he continued,
staff could sake a proposal that the Board could approve and staff
~ould have a guarantee that it would be brought into conformance. He
said Mr. Evans could have changed the driveway himself iuediately and
the Certificate of Occupancy would have been issued, but Mr. Evans
wished to bring the matter before the Board and did not choose to
follow the first suggestion. Mr. Brutt said he feels staff should
have a guarantee that the driveway will be brought Into conformance
should the Board choose to make that decision.
Page 30
Hay 1, 1990
Co--laatoner Saunders said if no action ts taken by the Board, it
go to the Code Enforcement Department. Coatsaloner Hasae asked
what mpeclflc work is necessary and Transportation Services
Administrator Archibald said the petitioner can remove the excess
concrete and brick and create a flare at the road which would provide
a turning radius. Commissioner Hasse satd that the petitioner must
· :', deter~tne which option he wishes to pursue.
Hr. Brutt said Hr. ~vane
could resubatt the plans showlng a driveway of 24 feet with a flare at
roadside, bringing the driveway into conformance with the code, and
then he would be Issued the Certificate of Occupancy. ~ t~
Mm thmt tM p~tttlon~r confer with staff ~nd r~olv~ th~
~.-'DOII&~*~FJX~-~D1~ ~TI~ON~FUD. M&I'V~I~ OF 1~ ~ TIH~
Hr. Dudley Goodlette of Cummings and Lockwood, Inc., requested a
waiver of the twelve month waiting period which ts required by the
zoning code after the Board has denied an application for rezontng of
property, during which time the Planning Commission Is prohibited from
considering any further application for the same rezontng for a period
of twelve months, or alternatively, for any other rezone for six
aonths. He said his clients are now In a position to bring this peti-
tion before the Board with considerably reduced uses in accordance
with the discussions held previously with the Board, and the limited
purpose today is to request a waiver from that twelve-month period of
time before this may be considered. The basis, he continued, ts
established by the Zoning Code Section 14.4 tn Appendix No. I and it
states, "The time limit of Section 14.13 may be waived by three afftr-
mattv~ votes of the Board of County Commissioners when such action ts
deemed necessary to, on one hand, prevent injustice or, on the second
hand, tO facilitate the proper development of Collier County." Hr.
Goodlette stated '~hat the petition addresses the latter of the two
conditions for a variety of reasons. One of which, he explained, ts
Page 31
May 1, 1990
the clients are prepared to go forward now with a /ow intensity,
Low density commercial development on this activity center. Mr. Volpe
asked if the client is prepared, if this is granted, to file a new
application and enter the process once again7 Mr. Goodlette confirmed
that fact.
:L ' Mr. George Keller, representing Collier County Civic Federation,
;" reminded the Board that on two occasions in the past this PUD was
before the Board and citizens spoke against it in public hearings. He
~,':" aald he feels this project h&s hed edequate hearings becauss it went
before the Planning Commission twice, before the Board twice, and now
is before the Board on a public petition. The petitioner, he indi-
cated, has had generous consideration by the County and now should
comply with the law as it is written.
Commissioner Saunders moved, seconded by Commissioner Shanahan and
carried 4/2, (Commissioner Hesse opposed), to waive the twelve-month
~'!.',]~: waiting period requirements for the Planning Commission consideration
, icl a new application for rezoning.
.':.<. RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SET DATES FOR
ii~, PUBLIC WORKSHOPS FOR THE IMMOKALEE MASTER PLAN AND GOLDEN GATE MASTER
f,:u PLAN AND A PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS -
~i! ADOPTED
Barbara A. Cacchlone, Chief of Long Range Planning, recommended
i~ .dates for two public workshops on the Golden Gate Master Plan and the
Immokalee Master Plan as well as requesting that a date be set for a
public hearing on the Growth Management Plan amendments.
Couissioner Volpe moved, seconded by Commissioner Shanahan and
c&rried unanimously, to set Thursday, May 17 at 7:00 P.M. at the
) Oolden Gate Community Center for the Oolden Gate Master Plan workshop;
.Wednesday, May 31 at 7:00 P.M. at the University of Florida
i':"" A~Ticultural Center in Xmmokalee for the Immok&lee Master Plan
(:!'-, workshop; and Wednesday, July 25 at 9:00 A.M. in the Boardroom, Srd
'~' Floor, Bnildin~ F, of the Cowry ~over~ent Center, for the public
>..' he~i~ on the ~ro~h M~agement Pi~ ~en~ents.
0 ( 0055
Page 32
~ ~ c~ x~zo;~ ~ o; ~ox~=~ - ~o~
'; Mr. MadaJewsk1 ea/d that this request ts for the Board to enter
[;' into an a~reement with City National Bank of Florida to permit commen-
cement of construction of a ~olf course, construction access road and
associated water management improvements prior ~o final pla~ approval
of the land subdivision created by the development of the ~olf course.
~;~ . The a~reement has been worked out, he continued, between staff, the
County Attorney's office, and the developer and Bank's attorneys for
limited earthwork construction on a ~olf course. Mr. MadaJewski
noted s~aff As currently reviewtn~ the necessary documents for final
approval of the subdlv/slon plat. The ~olf course does not require
~y requisite infrastructure at the present time and the agreemen~
very specific to the point that butldin~ permits are not involved, the
'~'a~ree~ent dea/a only with earthwork and stormwater reroutin~, he
~.~.' advised. There Is precedent, he explained, tn the Marco Shores DRI
? ( and ~ ts not an ~ssue of subdivision master planning. Mr.
MadaJewskl said staff recognizes tha~ it will take twelve months to
~ properly construct the golf course and they need some lead ~lme to
~ taka advantage of plan~lng season. There are no structures ~nvolved
:.~ . w~th this particular pro,eot under agreement, he said.
~: Coffee,Chef Hasse asked about traffic and Mr. MadaJewsk~
· : responded that they w~11 have l~m~ted construction traffic off U.S. 41
:J; and all construction on the golf course w~ll be within the
which the petitioner o~e In ~otal. There w~11 be no access from
951 ~t~l September of 1990, he advised. Commissioner Hasse then
. asked If the proJec~ Is completed at the end of ~990, will all access
~'be fFom S.R. 951 at ~ha~ t~me? M=. Mada~ewakl said that the agreement
in the PUD allows for golf course construction access only from
.95~ ~d only after September, ~990.
Debb~e O=shefsky, an attorney representing ~he develops=, said
::.:;... that the agreemen~ under consideration today does no~ affec~
Page 33
~a¥ 1, 1990
access quest/on as agreed to in the PUD and DRZ which was approved in
*"'3une of 1989. She stated that al! construction access for this golf
;~/courss will come off of U.S. 41. The golf course ts a year away from
being operational, she noted, and there ts no prohibition, once it is
in operation, to connect to the connector road which leads to S.R. 951
which ts planned for in all the documentation.
Commissioner Volpe asked about irrigation during the construction
phase of the golf course and He. Orshefsk¥ responded that within a few
!,~i. days the developer will receive a consumptive use permit from the
5F~4D with respect to irrigation, since the developer is providing
Irrigation, using well water.
C~m/~loner 8hanah~n ~oved, seconded ~ Co~lestoner G~lght,
C~W ~ of Cooissto~rs ~ the City National ~ of F/or/da
fo~ ~ ~m, Unit 30, Golf C~se C~t~ctton.
Page 34
Nay 1, 1990
Nr. George Archibald, Transportation Servtcas Administrator,
requested that the Board approve a contract with Chevron USA, Inc. to
deliver fuel to the Narco Airport on an Interim basis. He explained
'that the availability of fuel must be assured and that the sale of
fuel ts the largest revenue producer at the Airport. Dealers
currently under contract to the County do not carry aviation fuel nor
Jet fuel; hence, a fuel source must be secured, he said. Currently
Chevron USA. Inc. provides fuel to the Narco Airport and staff recom-
· ' mends they be issued an Interim contract to continue this service, he
-." added. Since the availability of fuel must be continuous, he noted,
there Is not time to enter into a bidding process at this point.
?". Collssloner Volpe asked about the status of the lease agreement
~. and Nr. Archibald said DNR asked for one revision to the lease and
': then resubmitted it to the Board; the County Attorney's office is
reviewing that revision which states that if a profit is realized from
the sale of avtatton and Jet fuel, and the money Is not put back Into
~?; . the operation of the Airport, then such monies shall be divided bet-
...: ~een the County and the State.
Co.,aissloner Volpe asked ho~ the price of fuel at Narco Airport
co~rpares with the price of fuel at the Naples Airport? Nr. Archibald
-- responded that the fuel price at Narco is two to four cents below the
.? price at Naples Airport. He said that fuel price was established to
ensure that Narco Airport remains competitive. Commissioner Shanahan
~)!i suggested that consideration be given to ratstng the price of gasoline
at the Narco Airport.
00 £[0070
~ 1, 1900
Nlchael Arnold, Utilities Administrator, said that this item is
regarding proposed developer agreements to construct a portion of the
North County Se~er Naster Plan transmission main system. He explained
· that the Utilities staff have held discussions with several developers
% ':' in the North Cotxnt¥ Sewer Service Area concerning the possibility of
i'.:.iff..,, these developers constructing portion8 of the tr~smisston main system
'~. in exch~ge for e~er impac~ fee credits. Savings can be made, he
said, on the cost of const~ctlon because the private sector t~tcally
secures construction bids less than those incurred by the County.
Mr. Arnold said that three separate agreements are under
discussion: first, construction of the North County sewer force main
#1.06, a 24-inch line on Orange Blossom Drive between Goodlette-Frank
Road and Airport-Pulling Road; second, North County sewer force mains
· 1.O? and ,1.12, a 20-inch and 16-inch line on Airport-Pulling Road
.from Norld Tennis Center to Orange Blossom Drive; and third, North
County sMr force mains #1.13 and #1.14, a 20-Inch and 16-inch line
,!/. on Vanderbtlt Beach Road from the Vineyards to Airport-Pulling Road,
and a 20-Inch line on Airport-Pulling Road from Vanderbilt Beach to
~'~ Orange Blossom Drive.
Mr. Arnold explained that there are several package plants along
Airport-Pulling Road which have potential problems, and this arrange-
ment can benefit the County tn the future. Re said this is not a
carte-blanche extension of credits to everyone who might show an
Interest, but rather it will only be applied to certain projects that
the ~oard agrees will benefit the County water/sewer district insofar
as utilizing this mechanism. The County would 8et up "bank accounts"
(impact fee credits) for which the developers involved may draw upon
aa they puli building permits, he continued, at the rate or level
which they will be set at for that particular time.
Contsstoner Ha.se asked if staff t0 now wai
Page 36
and figures and will come back to the Board with those? Mr. Arnold
:aid the reason for the presentation is because it is a relatively new
concept and is to be incorporated into the water/sewer impact fee
ordinance; thus, before staff proceeds with drafting detailed multi-
party agreements, he needs the Board's direction.
Co.missioner Hesse asked if all the developments in the information
papers would fit into this program. Mr. Arnold said all developers
will not be participating, but the few they are working with at the
present time are showing genuine interest and a cooperative effort.
,,~. Comlssloner Volpe asked if there la a mechanism for allowing the
' first developer involved to be reimbursed from other developers or
!~ ..
property owners along the route constructed? Mr. Arnold said staff
will look at this, but the only way is for the County to ask develo-
Pers if they want to contribute to this, or the County will have to
set up an assessment project. He said there is nothing formal in
place at the present time to address that Issue, but in the past there
have been separate agreements for ups/zing portions which would bens-
fit a particular development. Commissioner Volpe said there are a
number of developers in the area who have put in water lines or
transmission lines at their own cost in the past and have not received
credit against impact fees. Now, he continued, the County is looking
at a policy change and it may be on a dollar-for-dollar basis as it
relates to construction costs. Perhaps, he noted, in this new policy
or arrangement, the staff could look at giving developers ha/f-credits
because they are getting the benefit of the projects. Commissioner
l~;u : Volpe suggested that for discussion purposes, consideration should be
~,~,,'- given to less than dollar-for-dollar agreements, or perhaps a percen-
tags of Impact fees. Mr. Arnold stated that this concept is intended
for the benefit of the County water-sewer district, and is not
intended primarily to benefit developers.
Assistant County Attorney Lawson said that the alternative to what
the Utilities Division is proposing and what the developer weighs in a
decision to cooporate0 is putting in a package plant. He said there
Page 37
,. are problems that come with individual package plante and with com-
peting utilities within the water/sewer district, He advised that
this idea furthers the concept of a regionalized utility and the draft
ordinance limits credits to five years altd limits the credits to mat-
tere within the Master Plan 5-year window, This provides funds and
gets the work done earlier In the Master Plan 5-year plan, he said.
Comu~lssloner Volpe reiterated his feeling that half-credits as opposed
to full credits ts a better plan, and suggested staff give further
consideration to something less than dollar-for-dollar credits.
Co~-tssioner Shanahan noted that tf the developers lose incentive
iff,!.' because of an Imposition of lower Impact fee credits, it Hill not be
worthwhile. Conceptually, he added, he feels the County should move
ahead with this, but staff should address a cost/ratio for the future.
Mr. Arnold noted that timing Is critical on this particular matter and
. feels It Hill fall apart If it Is not done on a dollar-for-dollar
basle. He added that developers will be paying user fees In addition
~ to the impact fee credits. Co~-lasloner Volpe asked if this first
..project plan ~ust proceed timely? Mr. Lawson agreed with that
aasess~nt, saying that timing is a critical factor.
Attorney John Brugger spoke on behalf of developers who are dealing
with issues of package plants and future development, noting that a
group of Individuals are separately looking at development of various
properties along Airport-Pulling Road, and each ts working on their
Independent plans to develop their property, all entailing package
plants. They feel that If all the parties get together they can do
something which will benefit all, Mr. Brugger stated, but If this
does not come together now, It could fall apart tn the next three
weeks. He noted that l~yndemere and World Tennis Center have contracts
pending to increase their package plant sizes and if it ts not struc-
~!:tured timely as discussed In their meetings with staff, they Hill lose
;interest in pursuing the idea.
Commissioner Volpe said It sounds like a good Idea, but other
ooeEmoo' 3
Page 38
Nay 10 1990
:.:districts to the south and east are assessment districts and
if the lndividu&l homeowners pay fees too under this plan?
Mr. Arnold said they will require developers who make these contrlbu-
tlons to Identify specific parcels of land and give them an account on
their very first Impact fee required for that property, but their
first building permit will reduce this account by that amount of that
'impact fee and after every successive impact fee, they will use that
account expeditiously. Among themselves, their sub-developers, and
the people they sell land to, they will recoup that amount, he stated,
:, and thus the end homeowner will pay that impact fee. The system will
be designed0 he continued, to remove the ability to speculate.
Nr. Arnold noted that staff is still finalizing discussions with
ii. developers. Assistant County Attorney Lawson commented that develo-
i;~ pets may have to absorb "soft costs" amounting to 5 or 6 percent
~.because impact fee credits only deal with "hard costs" which are the
actual construction costs.
· m~ e~ied ~naminly0 that staff be directed to proceed on a
, be~ts l~Oard~ the agroeeents to construction m portion of the
~'-. ~ ~ I~q~¢t l~e ct-edits to be brought back to the
00flCl0074
Page 39
Page 40
Nay 1, 1990
See Page, I-'
FOR FINAL FL~T OF 'q~lklL ~
Accept the Irrevocable Letter of Credit as security for main-
tenance of the Infrastructure until the Board of County Com-
missioners Grants final acceptance of all improvements.
2o
Authorize the Chatrman to execute the Maintenance Agreement
for Preliminary Acceptance and Resolution authorizing
preliminary acceptance.
Preliminary acceptance of Improvements will not become effec-
tive until water and sewer facilities have been conveyed to
Collier County Nater-Sewer Dtatrtct.
~&~&~ ~ to eOA2
I~q~T~W ~-23e F~IVIDZ~ FOR a~S~l~f OY LZ~ ZI~ ~ TO ~t~COV~R
~'~ TO ~T~ IN~LZC ~YI~ O~ LOT 36, B~ 240, ~
Xte~
See Pagee~~~:~~...~*~_*~~*
~ ~O-~41 I~tOVZDZII~ 1OR ,I~:~MEWl' OF LX~M ZM ~ "re ~
~ ~ W*/* ~ COq~M'Z~ TO A,~Ik'I~ IR~BLXC M~Xg&MC~ OM LOt' ~5,
m,OC~ ~'1, ~ e~'t'1, aW~T $ (,TOIm R, CRJUW! ......
See Pa.ges~
Xtw ~14B1
O~ ~ OF GOIIIBRV&TX011 B&IBMI31~ I'ROM
~ Off M&PLI~, ILK:. AMD ~ DETEZ,O~,
TWO WXTWZW TRACT "&" Off PZLXC_A~ BAY ~WXT 8, COLLXmI
See
See Pagee~
Xtem ~14~1
OM' AGX~G ~ ~
DXIWK ZFZTXATZV~ FRO~RAN
Xtem dr14,D1
~ ~ IK). 8 'LC) T. A. I'C)RSBEX8, Z~.' $ /'OR coIr'rRAC~ /'OR
~T BItXVK/BOMXTA BEAL~ ROAD MATER M&XM* ~ XM ~
See Pages~~
1. The required maAntenance bond ham been approved by the County
Attorney'8 Office.
2. Bactertologica! teottng hmo met the County'm requirements.
Xtmm ~14m4
1. The Florida Department of Environmental Regulation furnishes a
letter authorizing to place the sewer system into service and
approving the water distribution system for service.
2. Bacteriological testing has met the County's requirements.
3. The Fire Flow requirements of the project have been satisfied
and the Fire District furnishes a letter accepting the fire
hydrants for o~nershtp and maintenance.
CQIrFR&CT ~ TIZ BOARD OF COUlrfY CCMNZSSIOIZRS AND POg RI8~
~ ~I3~ZC~S, lffC. TO RZFT~F JLT~XZ8 RISK HAX&~, l~. JLS
,TEE Sm~'Elmm, ~ xmrtn~__m~ To ~'oI RzsE m~_~~ staunch, xxc.
· ~ ~rr or BI~S FOR TI~ K&L~ OF ~. 47 JtCR~S OF SURPLUS CO01TY TdMID
· L OC&%~ OI'OqIXL~ ~TR~T &L-,Cln~ FJto~ ~ I~BB IN T~Z ANOUIFf OF
$18,~ B IZD OFFI3~ FRON ~ RICKI~DSOI AID ~LYII L. RYALL
N&RCO ~ B~ TO T~Z AG~JZN~IT FOR PROFESSXO~tL SZlK~ZCKS FOR
I~XYR'rS10~I31T FRO31~T ~ COASTAL
cremate, X~c. xx rex aHomrr OF ~?6,s2s.oo
'.~ Zt~ ~1411
' ~; _~RI:~/~_ (Xl' ~O-244 APPOZXTZIG BOB~FB ~ZC~SOll TO T~E LELT GOLF
Page 43
May 1, 1990
1988 T~XBL~ F~ONAL
4/19/90
198~ TA~X~Z~ ~
4/18/90 - 4/19/90
'~-. *. The following mlscell~eous correspondence was flied and/or
referred to the various departments aa indicated below:
1. Letter dated 4/18/90 from Tom Lewis, Congress of the United
Stereo, to Chairman Hesse regarding funds available to the
County through the Department of Justice's Drug Control and
System Improvement Formula Grant Program for faecal year
~990. xc: Nell Dorrlll, Sheriff Hunter, and flied.
2. Letter dated 4/20/90 from Gordon L. Guthr~e, Director,
Florida DCA, to Chairman Hesse regarding
89-CJ-75-09-01-O33/Knforcement and Apprehension. xc: Neil
Dorrlll, Jay Rea=don and f~led.
3.
Letter dated 4/17/90 from Thomas O. Pelham, Florida DCA, to
Chairman Hesse regarding announcement of Collier County's
selection as the recipient of a Florida Growth Management
Award. xc: Nell Dorrill, Stan Litstnger and filed.
Letter dated 4/18/90 from Patrick Kenne¥, Environmental
Specialist, Florida DER, to Chairman Hasse regarding Collier
County - WR, File #111789035, Drackett & Remington, Trustees.
xc: Nell Dorrlll, Bill Lorenz, Frank Brutt, and filed.
Notice dated 4/13/90 from Flortda DER regarding Notice of
Workshops and Notice of Public Workshop. xc: Nell Dorrlll,
Bill Lorenz, Frank Brutt and filed.
Thank you letter dated 4/13/90 to Sir/Madam from Gary D.
Lytton, Manager, Rookery Bay National Kstuartne Research
Reserve, DNR. xc: Nell Dorrlll, Bill Lorenz, Frank Brutt
and filed.
Public Notice dated 4/13/90 to BCC from Tony McNeal, Bureau
of Coastal Engineering & Regulation, Florida DNR, regarding
File CO-239, Permtttee: John D. Remington and Bo/ton S.
Drackett, Co-Trustees. xc: Nell Dorrtll, Bill Lorenz
Frank Brutt and flied. '
Letter dated 4/13/90 from Tony McNeal, Bureau of Coastal
Engineering & Regulation, Florida DNR, to Whom It Nay
Concern, regarding Request for Public Comment, DBS 89-247 CO,
Gulfvtew Beach Club,Inc. xc: Nell Dorrtll, Bill Lorenz
Frank Brutt and filed. '
Page 44
Minutes received and filed~
May 1, 1990
A. Citizens Productivity Co~tttee Minutes of 3/26/90,
4/2/90 and 4/9/90.
10.
Letter dated 3/23/90 from National Transportation Safety
Board to Chairman Hasse regarding reply to 1-90-13 through 15
signed by James L. Kolstad, Chairman. xc: Nei! Dorrlll,
Risk Management, Ken Cu¥1er and filed.
11.
Notice to Owner dated 4/17/90 to Friend of the Huseum and BCC
from Naples Lumber & Supply Co., Inc. regarding various
building materials supplied under an order given by Don
Cahlll, Architect/Builder. xc: Neil Dorrill, Steve Carnell,
John Yonkosky and filed.
12.
Notice to Owner dated 4/17/90 to BCC from Schofleld Corp.
regarding dewatertng equipment under an order given by Jim
Owens Excavating. xc: Nell Dorrlll, Steve Carnell, John
Yonkosky and filed.
13.
Notice to Owner dated 4/17/90 from APAC-Florida, Inc.
regarding labor, materials and equipment supplied under an
order given by Mitchell & Starke Construction, Inc. xc:
Nell Dorrlll, Steve Carnell, John Yonkosky and filed.
14.
Letter dated 4/5/90 from A. W. Addison, Deputy Tax Collector,
to Chairman Hasse regarding postage used and due for the
second ta~ notice mailing. Filed.
15.
An Order dated 4~18/90 from U.S. Dtstrtct Court, Middle
District, Tampa Division regarding Case #88-878-CIV-T-l?C,
Leonard N. Yanks va. Polk County Board of Commissioners.
xc: Kenneth Cu¥1er and flied.
There being no further business for the Good of the County, .the
meeting was adjourned by Order of the Chair - Time: '4:0~.~i~.M.....
.' BOARD OF COUNTY
BOARD OF ZONING ~S/~'
C. GILES, CLERK
SPECIAL DISTRICTS .Xl~IrNDI~R,I .'~..~ . ..'
~~/~SSE, ~R
These minutes approved by the Board on~~
Page 45