BCC Minutes 06/08/1990 S Naples, Florida, 3uns 8, 1990
LET ZT BE RBMEMBERED, 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 aa
have been crested according to /aw and having conducted business
herein, met on this date at il:l§ A.M. in SPECIAL S~SION in Building
'F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the
following members present:
CHAIRMAN: Max A. Hasae, Jr.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Michael J. Volpe
Richard S. Shanahan
Burr L. Saundars
Anne Goodntght
ALSO PRESENT: James C. Giles, Clerk; John Yonkosky, Finance
~or; Harriet Beech, Deputy Clerk; Nail Dorrill, County Manager;
· ... Ron McLemore, Assistant County Manager; Tom Olliff, Assistant to the
y Manager; Ken Cuyler, County Attorney; Leo Ochs, Administrative
~s Administrator; Stanr. itsinger, Growth Management Director;
Bob Blanchard, Chief Planner; Barbara Cacchione, Project Planner;
O~Donnell, Public Services Administrator; George Archibald,
~.'. Transportation Services Administrator; Frank Brutt, Community
Development Services Administrator; Jeff Perry, MPO Coordinator;
Patrtcia Sikowsk!, Growth Planning, MPO.
·
3une 8, 1990
PRESENTATION OF THE FY90 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY
REPORT ON THE PUBLIC FACILITIES (AUIR) AS PROVIDED
FOR IN SECTION 7.2 OF THE ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES
ORDINANCE NO. 90-24
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
June 4, 1990, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with the
'Clerk, special meeting was held to hear the presentation of the FY90
~Annual Update and Inventory Repo=t on the Public Facllitius (AUIR).
!Mr. Dorrill, County Manager requested two items be added to the
i~.agsnda. He said the flrst is a proposed resolution directing the
chairman to execute mutual agreements as contemplated by Section 4.2
of Chapter 74-462 Laws of Florida, regarding the Pelican Bay
Improvement D~strlct.
Cowmiestoner Saunders noted that the City of Naples had been
invited to attend but the City stated they have no objections to this
transaction and wtll not attend today's meeting.
.' Mr. Dorrlll said the second item to be added to the agenda is a
,irequest for approval of the FY 89/90 through FY 94/95 secondary road
~!Progr~m including major road projects, signal installation, and
reconstruction projects.
:~i:' c~ '$/0 to ~dd the secondary road p~ogra~ tt~ to tl~ agemda.
';.$.' C~~r t~mdnlght and Co~atmmtoner Yelps ~re not present at thl~
· lt~W~XOM.MO. 90-328 AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAMTO EXECUTE AM~T~AL ./~_
;' ~ ~ ~CIP~ ~ I~O~ ~~ CO~~'~
C4~mm/mmionmr Shanmhmn moved, eecondmd by Comm/mm/onmr Smundmrs &nd
cal*~led 3/0, to i~prov~ lt~solut/on No. 90-328 author/z/rig tl~m Chm/~mmn
~ O0 1090
with Muntcipe]. Bond I~ors ~~
Pa~'e 3,
June 8, 1990
OW AI~BUAL UFDAT~ AJrD l~rvlZ~ORY R~.PORT A~ DZ~t~:~I~D ~Y
Stan Litsinger, Director of Orowth Management, said h. is
requesting direction from the Board on projects and funding sources
for inclusion in the second annual capital improvement element update
and the ~Y 90/91 tentative Collier County annual budget.
Mr. Liteinger said the findings of this AUIR shall form the basis
¥,i 'for the annual update, the CIE, any proposed projects to be included
~' in the county's tentative annual budget, the determination of any
i~/areae,of si~nificant influence and the review and issuance of develop-
~'-;,~ merit orders during the next year.
:~'~" Mr. Lttsinger said staff has identified through traffic analyses
and existing inventory analyses the need for construction of $108
million in county roads over the §-year period ending September SO,
1995. There are revenue sources identified of $~6.8 million, leaving
' 'an additional $5! million for which funding sources must be found, he
said. The proposed ?th Cent Sales Tax revenue is identified as the
.Primary funding source, Mr. Litsinger noted, but requested direction
from the Board as to an alternative funding source, should the
referendum fail to pass. Staff suggests the most viable funding
~.alternative would be a county-wide road assessment d/strict, Mr.
Litsinger said.
· Cosualesioner Saunders noted that the Board has committed to
!."~x~nding tho local share of state roads, but has not yet committed to
::.funding. county roads. Commissioner Volpe queried staff as to pro-
~Jected deficiencies, saying it 18 his understanding that there are no
d~ficiencie8 in the county road system. Mr. Litsinger explained that
at the time of the adoption of the current CIE update last September,
staff had identified approximately $17 million in deficits in the
county road system which staff proposed to fund with the 7th Cent
'Sa/es Tax revenues. Since that time, he said, it has become necessary
Suns 8~ ~990
~'® certain projects up in ti.lng and we ara now looking .t pro-
, ects brought from the "sixth year" Into the first five-year
~(:'.tImefra~e. This was determined through traffic analyses and Increased
.. population projections, and that deficit has since grown to $51
i:--: million for the five-year period, he said.
Co-missioner Volpe asked what specific projects have been brought
'(' Into the five-year program from the sixth year, and Hr. George
~ :Archibald spoke to this, saying that staff has been push. lng construc-
..::riCh phases out on a number of projects in order to do design within
~.. i. the dollars available at the present time. In reference to the five
j"year plan, he said projects currently unfunded are #! illth Avenue;
'". #31, Bonita Beach Road, going Into the design phase costs shared with
, Lee County, Collier's share is a half-mil/ion: #11, Isle of Capri
(S.R. 951), from Rattlesnake Hammock to S.R. 84; #37, Isle of Capri
(S.R. 951) from Golden Gate Boulevard north to 846; ~25, Vandsrbllt
Drive, that project to be split between first 5-year time frame and
;~"' second five year timeframe; ~32, Santa Barbara Boulevard from Davis to
:'?~L...Rattleenake Hammock Road; #16, Radio Road, continuation east end from
"Santa Barbara to Davis; #15, Radio Road, four-lantng from Airport Road
to Santa Barbara; and #42, Vanderbtlt Beach Road two projects east to
~:- Airport Road and another to the west to Gulf Shore Drive, four-laning.
"": In response to various questions from Board members, Mr. Archibald
..lade the fo/lowing comments on the above projects:
~.': He said staff had to choose between four-lantng County Barn Road
(now at Service Level D) tn the first five-year time frame or
extending Santa Barbara.through to Rattlesnake Hammock Road; the
better use of priorities, it was decided, was to extend Santa Barbara
which will remove some of the traffic burden from County Barn Road.
He ~aid at the northern end of Santa Barbara, it will be connected
'wi~h Logan tn an S-curve and Logan will be widened tn order to
colpletm a corridor from Golden Gate City to Pine Ridge Road. In
regard to County Barn Road from Rattlesnake Hammock to Davis:
~.:Boulevard, he said that will be in the five-year plan, but 1:he Santa
Page 5
June 8, 1990
Bl'rb~ra extension will be undertaken f/ret In 1992-1993 and the County
~!~i. Barn segment tn the latter part of the five-year time frmne
.,:Archibald said when Santa Barbara Boulevard ties Into St Andrews, it
create a corridor to U.S. 41 and remove much of the traffic bur-
den from County Barn Road and part of Davis Boulevard.
Mr. Archibald spoke to Va~derbilt Beach Road, saying two projects
':are planned there, one of which had not been planned wa~ the four-
laning from U.S. 41 going west to Gulfshore Drive. He said that the
amount of traffic has increased dramatically along that segment,
attracted from the north. When Pelican Bay begins to build out at the
northern corridors, all those road connections wall place traffic on
Vanderbtlt Beach Road, and there are a/ready two new road connections
: between Pelican Bay and Vanderbllt Beach Road, he said. Developers
~are providing right-of-way for four-laning and have made other co~mlt-
~.)menta, Mr. Archibald noted.
ii~.[. The dollars are very large for these main projects brought into
the five-year plan, Mr. Archibald said, about $34 million.
!(i Commissioner Volpe asked if any projects have been moved out of the
first five-year plan and into the second phase. Mr. Archibald
explained that Gulfshore Drive has been deleted; instead of becoming a
future urban corridor, it will be reconstructed in the current year to
Beet improvement requirements, thus deleting it from the future needs
listing. He further noted that no road has had a decrease tn traffic
levels but, for example, staff does expect a decrease tn traffic on
County Barn Road as soon as the extension of Santa Barbara has been
~..completed.
Co~mtssioner Volpe asked Mr. Archibald about Pine Ridge Road from
Airport Road to U.S. 41, what developments are contributing to the
traffic burden tn that area. Mr. Archibald responded that segment has
always been in the five-year plan for six-laning, and in the second
five-year plan there ts an urban interchange planned. The volume 'on
that roadway will require Improvements on Pine Ridge Road between 1-75
Airport Road and he pointed out that 1-75 ia one of the major
feeders to the traffic burden on Pine Ridge Road.
Paga 6
June 8, 1990
Nr. LitsInger said there ts a need In the County to construct
;67 million of capital roads by September 30, 1995, on the state roads
· network. The Florida Department of Transportation at this time has
Identified approximately $15 million in available revenues which leads
to a deficit of $52 million, Nr. Lttstnger said, and the proposed
,~;:.funding source for that deficit ts the ?th Cent Sales Tax. He added
that if the Governor signs the gas tax bill, there will be a ~xt~u~
for the county of about $20 million from that source against'this
deficit over the five year period, leaving a deficit of about
~.,.llllton. Nr. Litsinger noted that the primary funding for these
~'~, Costs Is the ?th Cent Sales Tax pending the referendu~ outcome in
~.-~ovemb~r, and staff requests direction for alternative funding sources
~i"should the sales tax referendum fall.
Co~aisstoner Goodntght queried if Collier County ts part of the 6
cent local option on the gas tax legislation no~ pending, and Hr.
!;i::,?~ Lttstnger confirmed that was correct. He co~ented that the projects
::';listed on Attachment B need to be Included tn the capital tmprove~nt
eleaent in the five-year time period, except for S.R. 951 (from O.S. 41
to Natnsatl) ~htch is in the state's current five-year work proart.
Co--missioner ¥olpe asked which ones are not already in the CIE and
Hr. Lttetnger said S.R. 951Natneatl to Narco Bridge, and a couple of
seg~aents of Ta~tamt Trail North and Tamtami Trail East, nmabere ~33
iand ~44. Co~tsstoner Volpe asked about the advertised public hearing
by the FDOT on a ae~nent of Davis Boulevard, and Nr. Archibald
eXl~,lalned that prior to federal funding of the arterial road network
there ia a requirement that the state go through a planning and design
[:'i~' pr~limtnar¥ stage, which Involves traffic projections and a sertes of
~destgn alternatives fo~ the corridor. He said the state has completed
that activity for Davis Boulevard between Airport Road and S.R. 951 so
the advertised public hearing ts simply confirmation that this has
b~en done and notification that the information ts now available for
the public. That design report, he continued indicates what is
.
June 8, 1990
needed In that area at build-out, but there Is no duplication of
effort; the County Is designing and building one segment, the FDOT
] will build another section to federal standards in order to obtain
· ~ federal funding.
Contsstoner Shanahan questioned if the 88,819,000 for S.R. 951 to
'...;Mainaatl is included tn the $14,684,000 and Mr Litatnger said it was
roughly there is $6 million available outside that project.
.: ' Commissioner Yelps questioned whether his understanfltng is correct
'.that in the year 2000 there will be on Pine Ridge Road an urban
interchange at U.S. 41 and Pine Ridge, and on the east there will be
~i i. another urban interchange at Airport Road and Pine Ridge, and to the
' ' south another interchange at Airport Road and Golden Gate Parkway.
Mr. Archibald said that is correct and this will facilitate travel in
· l%d around the County.
Mr. Lttstnger pointed out that direction to staff is needed for
'alternative revenue sources for funding the state road projects.
~-/ Conlastoner Saunders commented that at any time tn the future the
county can decide not to build a segment, or change a level of ser-
vice, but today a decision must be made to direct staff to accomplish
the f~,ding even though the total may be changed in the future.
Co~-tsstoner Saunders said the basic Issue is that if the ?th Cent
:Sales Tax do~s not pass tn November, then how will the entire short-
fall be funded, even though the amount can be changed in the future by
'.adding or deleting roadway projects. Mr. Lttatnger pointed out if
~?proJecte are removed from the five-year plan now, it will make the
[-: problems worse next year.
.' I
Com~issioner Volpe expressed concern that there is no interlocal
~". agreement with the City of Naples on the segment of U.S. 4! lasted,
and Commissioner Saunders explained that if the Board chooses to
establish a county-wide assessment district, the City of Naples will
be included in that, which answered Commissioner Volpe's concern.
i,,:,.. C~ZT~ ~--~1¥, tO approv~ the County Ro~d projects ~in~ on
Co~ssioner Volpe asked that Item ~44 the grade separation on
('Taint Trail North at P~ne R~dge Road, be removed from the CIE.
Jeff Per~, Growth Pla~ing Department, said the project was added
1993-94 ~d ~ually there will be adjustments made to the l~8t~ng ~d
:~¥.t~m~ng. Co~lss~oner Volpe noted this was brought ~nto the first
year phase from the second f~ve-year phase ~d he would
oe~ th~8 $10 m~llion project placed into the second five-year phase.
Mr. Lttstn~er 8poke to the alternate ff~dtnO 8ource, 8a~tn~ that
8tafff reco~ends the count,-wide
~=[':'tt c~ be bonded, and t8 an equitable and ~atr eource sT revenue.
Contsetoner Sanders 8aid he had been tn favor off the m~tctpal 8er-
v/ceo t~tnO unit, but a~ter dtscu881on8 with Hr. HcLemore and Mr.
~yler he decided the county-~tde opec/al assessment district ts the
more v/able option, ptcktnO up large l~d holders tn the co~t~ who
'.'n~ not ~ contrt~ttng to roads et present.
~. Mr. Lttetnoer mentioned the need for dte~s~lon sT short-term
~"brtdGe" fftn~ctnO. Hr. Hc~emore said 8taf~ will return;t~ the Board
(/~o~ essa ~tth ~ executive su~ar~ to start the proce88, ~d aethodo-
10~ ~or proceedtn~ with the
~oatd the Board had alread~ given that direction, and Mr. McLemore
ol/d co8~o ~ot be discussed, then Co~isstoner Saundero 8nAd the
Su~,e 8, 1990
,;. can provide direction to staff today to solicit propoe&ls to
provide the back-up materials and analysis needed and staff can return
? ~(to the'Board with a proposal which the Board can then take action on
. Af it As deemed cost-effective. Mr. McLemore acknowledged that there
~,k.i. is a vex7 short time in which to develop an assessment district should
,: hat be necessary, and the very earliest time for accomplishment of
,~? that ~a¥ be 1991-92, should the sales tax referendum fat1.
'~.,dtlm~t~t~ e~ltctt appropriate experts to do an mm/~mte to map-
Im~t~ ~ le~r~.mment ~e~e~waent district, what entttte~wtl!
cO~tl-tbaat~ to thte ~nd ho~ ~uch, tak/n~ Into con~tdmratton
· ~x~; ~d w~ff to ~oltctt proposals and brtn~ back a
~~ ~ t~ 1t~ for t~ ~d*e c~tderatt~.
Co~tsstoner Volpe asked to whom the RFP's will be sent 'and Wt.
~ ;Mc~re said the re.est for ~ro~osals w~ll be sent to en~neering
~d pla~ln~ firms and to bond co.eels, for the legal aspects.
C~isstoner Volpe asked if they will analyze front foot or acreage?
Mr. McLemore sa~d they will put the methodolo~ to~ether ~d /dent/fy
~s~es fo~-the Board to determine, ~t this must be ~n place before
Mr. Lltsinger pointed out the sugary for project timing ~d cost
over the five-year period for projects which ~he Board has d~rected
staff to include in the CIE, Category A Road ~roJect~, Collier Co~ty.
He ~s~ested direction on the source of interim flnanctn~ for the $37
~lll~on deftest in order that the budget will balance tn'the ~oad ~d
also to ensure a financially feasible funding plan for the CIE.
Mr. Llts~nger suggested a bond ~tlclpatton note or short-term
'f~cing. Mr. Dorr~ll explained that th~s wil~ be part of the
hearings on the budget later, and no further action on this ~tem
'r~red
Ltteinger said the major revenue source for this item will be
development fees or impact fees, with no additional revenue.
Page,lO
'5~ ,Tune 8, 1990
~m,t'cea. needed.
~~ly, to dtr~t staff to lnol~ t~ ~J~e In
~ter ~tn tn t~ ln~l CII ~tt.
Mr. Lltatnger said these Improvements will also be f~ded with
~ate~ d~elopsent fees ~d asked for the Board's direction.
:i.(i.I Mr. Lttstnger said that a forthcoming stor~ater z~tnagement study
will identify necessary levels of service for the future. He said
..... staff hu planned $44 million of capital Improvements to the drainage
throughout the county over the next five years, and the current
source of revenue is the storm~ater utility fee currently under deve-
,lop.ant which will be brought to the Board at a future time.
Co~u~lssioner Volpe mentioned that the Board had not yet seen a pro-
.posed ordinance and Hr. Dorrtll advised waiting until the workshop on
[~e ato~ater projects. No action was taken on this item.
:~.:' Nr. Litslnger explained that currently planned tn the CIE is $19
~ :llll/on tn improvements which will result in the fifth year, 1995, a
,pro,tected surplus tn capital recreation facilities of approximately
$4.9 million. Staff has identified revenue sources of Impact fees,
~atlng /~rovement funds, gas t~es (which pay the b/cycle paths por-
t,oil} ~d $10,600,000 from the 1 mill capital revenue f~d.
Co~iscto~,:r Volpe ~esttoned the ~o~t of money to be spent tn
Suns 8, 1990
:~ ~e~t five years on recreational facilities and Hr. Litlinger laidl
'$i8.9 million to catch up with past deficiencies, and actually it is
i'84.9 million ~ore than needed to ~aintain concurrency, baaed on the
,i;.;. CUrrent population projections.
~;.? Mr, Lltstnger said that staff has Identified a deficit of approxi-
nately 25.3 acres tn the five year span with revenue sources for both
the CIB and the five-year deficit being colnunlty park Impact fees,
adding that no additional revenues are anticipated to be needed. He
~ald the Board ts being asked to add an 8th Community Park project to
the CXE to eliminate the 5-year deficit and ~alntatn concurrency.
~ion~r aam~ere moved, seconded by Commissioner Ooo~night
Hr. Lttstn~er said there t8 no inventory at present, ~d 633 acres
is re~lred ~ 199~ for the regional park and the pl~ tn the CIE
to ~c~e ?00 acres to provide for a slight surplus tn t~ fifth
year. The currently planned revenue source
r~farend~ ~d supplemental revenue sources
revenues, he ~'atd.
t~ mlatln ~tng ~ce ~ t~ 7th C~t Sales T~
No action was teen on this item.
June 8, 1990
,. :,~ .Lttslnger mentioned that staff has Identified a five-year
i~lCIt Which can be funded through library Impact fees and recommends
ii' that the Board direct staff to Include a new project of approxtatatel¥
9,000 square feet to eliminate the deficit tn FY 1995.
~ ~1~, to dt~ staff to incl~ t~ Li~ ~lldl~
~ ~-0~ ~te to ~ ~le~ ~ ~uly
:*~=~-~1~t~ ~ t~ ~ ~1 ClX
:"L~mOv-MqoE,VTOCS:- (c&~ B)
~.~...,:' Nr. LitstnGler said there will be a 5,696 deficit In library book
i::~t°c ko by 1995, and library impact fees are the projected revenue
8ou. r cs.
:. ~ t~ ~ ~t~f to lmcl~ this its in th~ Cig Upd~ts to b~ ~1~
)/}' b~ J~IY 2.8. lOOO and to purchase 5.606 books to elisinate the pro-
~d ds~tctt in FT 2995.
Coutastoner Yelps asked If this establishes a certain number of
per capita and that to not being changed, and Mr. Lttstnger
that his understanding ts correct.
.'gj~a. sail fo~ the question, the motion ~azwted
Commissioner Saundera asked to postpone this Item as he is In
agreement with Commissioner Volpe that the Board needs to see more
.information on this item before taking action. No action was taken on
this item.
Mr. r-ttsinger noted that staff projects the need for one more
station to add to the two already In the CI~- Update, the deficit t~ be
~inded fros the 1 mill capital fund. Commissioner Volpe suggested
F~4S impact fee8 (now under study by the County Attorney) be the
primary funding source, backed by the 1 mill capital fund.
~ ~ genera! obligation ~ond ~eferend~n. he sa~d. Nr.
questioned why th~s item had to be scheduled for 199! and
Lltstnger said he received that date from the Capital Projects Office.
Hr. Dorrtll said the Board ts currently engaged tn a correctional
alternative study and he feels perhaps 199! ts not realistic.
~.P~, 4~1~ ~ co~t~ct~on of a 400-~ ~mct~t~ ~n t~ CIE
~ ~~ ~ ~ly 15, 1990, ~ to ~e General Oblt~tlon ~
Contsstoner Volpe asked if there ts a deficiency existing now in
~the nuaber of beds and Hr. Lttstnger said there is a present deft-
ctencw~ of 109 beds tn this year.
'~-e~il f~ tl~e question, the ~otion c~rt~ ~~11.
Page
June ~, :1990
There being no further buetneee for the Good of the County,
was adjourned by Order of the Chair -
the
Time: i:10 P.M.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS
CONTROL
minutes approved by the Board on
~',~as.'Preeented / or as corrected
Page