BCC Minutes 09/11/1990 R Rsplee, ~lorlda, September 11, 1990
LZT %? BE REWiE{4BERED, that the Board of County Comml~mlonera in
~ for the County of Collier, and almo acting ss the Bosrd of Zoning
App~&ls and se the governing board(m) of such special dia:ricts am
~ve b~en created according to law and having conducted ~isiness
herein, m~t on this date at g:OO A.M. in R~OD~ SESSION in Building
"~' of the Oovern~nt Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the
following members present:
CHAIRI4AN: 14ax A. Hasse~, Jr.
VIC[-¢XAIRI~A{{.' Michael J. Volpe
Richard 9. i.hanahan
Burr L. 9aunders
Anne Ooodnlt'ht
ALSO PR~S[~T: Ja~s C. Oiles, Clerk; Wands Arrishi, Annette
~r; Won NcL~r~, A~slst~nt County Nanao~r; ~en Cuyl~r, County
Attorney; Br~ ~il~on and ~rk ~son, Assis~ant County AZtorneys;
~O Ochs, Adsinlstratlv~ 9~rvlc~s Adminlstra~or; William ior~nz,
~nvlronm~n~al 9~rvlc~s Administrator; Barbara Cacchion~, FroJ~ct
Plsnn~r; K~ln O'~xmell, ~blic ~lc~s Administrator; Oeorg~
Archibald, Tr~ns~rtatlon 9~rvlcms Adslnlstrstor; ~rank Bru~t,
Co~l~y ~lo~nt ~lc~s Administrator; Mlk~ Arnold, Utilities
i~lnisirmtor; Crystsl Blink~nship, 9h~riff's Office [thence Dlrsc~or;
M~s~e Director; ~eff Perry, ~PO Director; ~ohn ~daJewskl, Project
W~Zi~ {e~lce~ ~na~er. Jeff W~lk~r Risk ~anaoem~n~ Dlrea~or; Steve
Car~ll, ~rc~elng Director; Oeorge Yll~z, Pollution Control
Director; Russell Shreeve, Housing and Urban Improvement ~iractor; Ron
Wl~ a~ ~b ~rd, Planners; Sue Filson, Administrative Aid to the
~ard; ~ ~puty Byron Tomllnson, Sheriff's Office.
September' 1!, 1990
Commlssion~r ih~n~u~,n moved, seconded by Commissioner goodnight
carried unanimously, that the agenda ~nd consent agsruta be
&pprov~d with the followir~ chums:
Item 5D - Proclas~atlon designating September 15ts as Collier
County Zstuary Day and September 22nd as Beach Clean Up Day
(Commissioner Hasse] - Added.
Item 9Fl - To inform and gain approval from the Board of
County Commissioners for a propomed realignment plan within
the County's Emergency Service Division for Fiscal Year 1991
- Continued to September 18, 1990.
Item 13A - Budget amendment for the allocation of school
crossing guard revenues I~ursuant to Resolution 85-194 and
state statute 318.18 - Deleted at Sheriff Hunter's request.
Item IiCI - Recommendation to award bid number 90-1600 for
concrete waste containers at various Collier County community
park mites, in the amount of 910,260 - Deleted at Public
Services request·
Item 14C4 - Recommerutatlon to ~srd bid number 90-1607 for
Tot lot fencing st various Collier County community park
sltem in the m~ount of $27,8S0 - Deleted at Public Services
Request.
Item 1403 ~oved to Item 904 - Recoaendntion to award Naste
Tire Recycling Contract to provide volume reduction smrvlces
of waste materials st the Naples Landfill pursuant to RFP
90-1545. (Commissioner Volp. e'$ request}
Item 1405 moved ta Item 903 - Recommendation that the Board
of County Commissioners certify the special assessment roll
for ~andatory garbage collection fees for the 1991 service
year, (Environmental Services' request)
Comaismionmr Ooodnlght quemtioned why Sheriff Hunter requested
Item i3A regarding budget amendment for the allocation of school
crossing guard r~enuem be remarked from the agenda, specifically
qummtioning If it is because Sheriff Hunter does not want the public
to kr~o~ that part of this fund is being paid by traffic fines, to
which County ~tmnager Dorrill replied that he did not kno~.
Cosaismior~er Vol pe questioned that if this item ia not dlscumsed am
part of th~ agenda hca~ will it be determined where the 953,000 short-
fall will be budgeted from mince this Am a budget transfer. County
I~er Dorrill stated that he Is not familiar enough with the opera-
budget of thim item and cited that the Sheriff has until the
~eptember ll, lggo
end of the risc.! year to make any nec.os, fy budget amendment.
Conaissioner Saundera stated that he has no concern with con-
tinuing thin item a. long aa the crossing guard program in not
effected, to which County Nan.gar Dorrt]! commented that he did not
fee] the Sheriff would cancel the program the night before the budget
~eting if thin were the cane. Couiseloner Hanes et.ted this item
c~ ~ heard at the ~dget ~etJng Septe~ ~2, 19go.
Zt~ e4
Co. in.loner Shanahan ~, ~econde~ b~ Commls~lone~ Goodnight
a~ carried unanlaou~ly, that the ainutea of the regular BCC meetings
of ~y 29, ~une 5 and 5un. B, lggo a~ the ~dget meetlng of 5un. 8,
1990, ~ approved a~ presented.
Co. la]loner Haeae rec~nJzed Su~an Cop. land, Uttliti.e/
~intotration, aa Empl~ee of the ~nth tot September, i~go.
~ s~i~ ~~v ......
Co~laeioner Volpe presented [~ployee S~rvice A~ards to the
~oll~i~ County empl~eeei
~r~ Seith, Parks i Recreation ~partment 15 years
Ro~rt C. Allen, Parka & Recreation Depart.eat 15 yeare
Xt~ ~
~ ~ ~~ ~C~TZO~ DAY - ~O
U~n introduction of th~ 1990 Little League ~eens an5 Senio~
~ B~nv~ softbnll tenms ~ Commis~ione~ Hanse ~nd the p~e~en-
~1~ ~ ~ft~ll ~c~ltl~ Day ~ ~ted.
lPItOCZ~TXOM D~Xg~tTXM~ S~PX~PIB~t l~th ~ COLLX~ CO~ ~~ DAY
U~ the prementatAon of the Proc~amatlo~ ~ Co~Amstoner Hasse to
Litton, Dtrecto~ of Rooke~ Bay P~egerve, CmAmmi~mr VoZ~
~lm~l~ ~sl~tl~ ~te~r lath ~s Colltsr ~y lstva~
~ ~~r 22~ ~ ~h Clm~ Up Dray ~ ~ted.
OgO,,-,: 14
1990
(YI~DX~ ~0-68 RZ FETXTION ZO-90-4 COMI~ITY DEVELOFMENT iERVICE-q
DXVXSX~, ~~l~ ~ ~ mY CO~ C~ISSXO~, REQ~STXMG
~ ~ TO ~ COLLX~ C~ ZOMZNG O~ZN~CK 82-2 ~ ~XNG
S~ZOM 7.27 (~) - ~D ~ ~E STX~TION OF ~XG~ BEING A
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
August 22, 1990, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with
t~e Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition Z0-90-4,
filed by Ccrm~unity Development Services Division reprementing the BCC
requesting an aNnd~ent to the Collier Count~ Zoning Ordinance 82-2,
Section 7.27 (PUD).
~oJect Planner Mino mtmted that the intent of the amendment is to
ml]~ r~JmJonm to the ~D ~mter P~mn ~ithout being encumbered with
the r~ire~nt of two ~b~ic hemrlngm m~ ~e]] as the review and
m~r~a~ of the Planning Co~lemion and the Board of County
C~iemlonerm, He affirmed that Staff and the Development Community
feel that if an a~ndment doe~ not ~terlall7 effect the Intent o~ the
original approval and ia re]at~vely minor Jn nature much
family d~elo~nt ~lng changed to m single-family development where
the density Is actuall7 ]~ered, then such an amendment should be
a~r~ed in a ~ch ~re ex~dltlous ~nner. He advised that the pro-
~sed a~ndsent states the co~lttons under which a PUD ~ster Plan
~ld ~ analyzed and ter~d a substantial change, explaining that
~ pro~sed cha~e does ~t Incur with the conditions set then this
c~e ~uld be considered non-substantial. Mr. Nlno reported that
t~ a~lysis of whether a c~nge la substantial or not would be the
~ll~ of the Planing Co--la.ion, and if they ruled an amendment
~n-~tanttal then a m~lflcation would be ~de which wo~ld :lnalize
t~ decision.
Hr. Mlno clarified for Commissioner Hesse that any increase
intensity or density of land use would bm determined m substantial
Co~issio~r Vol~ ~lnted out that the change In height Is not
~rmmmed in t~ Ordl~nce, and Mr. Mlno co~mnted t~t this would
September 11. 1990
appe&r to b~ en intensity or density tncrease &nd would be considered
I mub~tantlal change,
revised to add the words, "or Increase lo height."
C~lsaJoner Saundere~ expressed concerns regarding zoning changes
to which this ordinance ~rs~ts a pro,eot zoned eultl-~aally to be
cha~ed to single-family at an admlnietratlve ~eve:. and asked County
Atto~ Cuyler ig this ia delegating authority ~yond ~hat is per-
matted. Atter receiving an a~lr~tive answer ~rom ~r. Nino regarding
~ether this was a~cl~tcally the intent o: the ordinance, Mr. Cuyler
etated that this ordinance ~ ~en revi~ed ~ hie o~ice and no
problem has ~en ~ound ~lth it, h~ever, this speci:ic question
~t raised and the ~lnt ia well taken.
~t. Wino clarified that due to the ~int made bw Commissioner
~ere regarding zonl~ c~ngee, an a~nd~nt could only be deemed
~n-aubetantial l~ It la a ~p cha~e, ~t i~ there la any text change
then it ~ouid ~ coneidered eu~tantial. County Attorney Cuy]er
agreed with thee etate~nt. Commi,~toner Saunder~ stated that he
eatietied with this expla~tion.
~ieel~r I~ ~, ~c~d ~ C~ieei~r ~ight
~lael~r I~ ~, ~c~d ~ C~tmmt~r g~Aght
~ ~i~ ~i~ly, t~t t~ Ordi~e as n~r~ ~d titl~
~1~ ~ ~pte4 ~ entered Into Ordl~nce ~k ~o. 39 with the
~1~1~ of ~t~t r~lr~t ~l~ ~ted as a n~t~tlal
O~I~C~ 90-6~
A~ ORDINANCE ~E~IDI~G ORDINANCE 82-2, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING
REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY,
~RIDA. BY A~E~DING SECTION T.2T, (PUD) PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT, ~ENDING SUSSECTION T.2T J., CHANGES AND ~ENDMENTS,
~OVIDI~O DEFINITIONS FOR SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE5 AND ~KNDMENTS, BY
PROVIDING A REVI~ PR~EDURE [OR CRANGES; BY PROVIDING PROCEDURES
FOR ~D ~CUNE~T A~EN~ENTS; BY PROVIDING ~OR CONFLICT AND
5~BILITY; A~D BY PROVIDIN~ AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
September il, 1990
August 9, 1990, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with
the Clerk, public hearing was op~ned to consider Petition R-90-19,
filed by Pa~ela S. {4ac'Klm of Cummings & Lockwood representing Astron
Develol~ment of Naples, Inc. requesting a rezone from E-Estates to PUD
for A~tron Plaza.
Planner Lord stated that the subject mite is in the southeast
quadrant of a designated activity center on the Future Land Use Nap.
He noted that the revie~ criteria established within the Activity
Center Subdlatrict of the Gro~th 14~nagement Plan ls consistent.
Planner Lord informed that this petition was heard at the August
28° 1990, B~C M~eting at which time it waa determined to continue
~x~tttion until further Information could be assembled and to clarify
tha traffic intensity on Pine Ridge Road with relation to the subject
project. He explained that he ham drafted a memo, Identifying them as
p&gss 95 through 99 which addraases the issues from that seating, and
clarified that the ~aln issues are whether Naps Way should remain open
or closed, whether there should be & fence along lOth Avenue S.W., and
an explanation of Staff's report regarding the Level of Service (LOS)
"F" on Pine Ridge Road and whether additional traffic impacts should
t>e allowed if the L~39 ie ih fact an
Planner ford stated that although no decision wa~ rendered
regarding Nape Way the petitioner agreed during the Public Hearing on
January 16, 1990, to contribute $5,000 to assist ]n the closing of
lepe ~a¥, but aa an alternative the petitioner agreed to construct the
entrance 0~ the project in such a manner as to discourage traffic from
entering or leaving from the loth Avenue S.Wo access.
Planner lord infor~d that the petitioner did agree to Install an
eight foot high chain link fence along lOth Avenue S.~. with
appropriate hedging along the exterior of the fence. He explained
that Co~u~issioner Shanahan's suggestion of a wall am originally
recluemted b~ the neighbors would be more appropriate.
l~g&rding the traffic intensity of Pine Ridge Road with LOS
Page 7
September 11, 1990
and th~ approval of tha project by added additional Impacts, Planner
Lord co--anted that the Staff report dated July 13, 1990, has been
corrected, He explained that Staff has determined that the project
wi]] ~ot generate a volu~ of traffic tha~ will exceed 5% of the LOS
~bllcatlon of the orlglna] Staff re~t. a ne. Collle~ County service
standards, and Pine Ridge Road was reclassified to an arterial road
mtltul which regulted in an Improved LOS on Pine Ridoe Road West and
~t of 1-75 to
2) ~ eight foo~ wall with ~he appropriate landscape be Instal]ed
I~r~ed baled on the CCPC
c~talned In the staff re~rt and the PUD docum.nt.
l~cmping ~y ~ sufficient.
P~ ~c~le, ~tltloner, noted that ~lth the n~ Plu~er report
the tr~s~rt~tlon issues see~ to be solved; however, In regards to
tM fence, s~ explained t Mt ~c~use this ts a ne~ PUD for an office
c~lex, · fence is ~ longer necessary since there ~111 be a 30 foot
~tur~l l~sc~ ~long ~lth ~ 100 foot right-of-way. She ~lnt~d out
t~t e~fety 1~ ~ longer a concern a~ng the residences, and they too
feel t~ ~tural la~scaplng Is enough buffering.
Co~lsslo~r ~iss~ expressed his concerns regarding N~p~ ~ay being
left o~n since this w~s of ~}or concern to the nelgh~rs In the
Page 8
September* 11, i990
b,lglnning and the suggestion of not putting up a fence, and he would
like to ~ake sure the resldencee agree to the proposed item changes.
Co~mlmmloner Vol~ noted that n~ that Pine Ridge Road has been
r~cl~s~tfted from a collector road to an artertal road the PUD should
~ r~i~d to ensure that lte~ to which the petitioner has committed
~ch ~s lighttng ~re c~nged to reflect thts reclassified statu~.
Pl~n~r ~rd ~fflr~d t~t this revl~ w111 ~ made.
{herl Bamett, ho~er, nelgh~rlng the proposed project,
~ltted t~t Initially this project w~s to Include a motel, a gas
static, ~ fas~ f~ restaurant, ~nd a restaurant, and she along with
t~ surr~ndino nelgh~rs were ve~ ~ch against th~ whole project.
~ lndlcsted, h~er, thtt mince the project has changed to ~n
office c~plex the feeling ~ng the residences directly bordering the
Co. lex, of whom she contacted ~rsonally, have become more receptive
with ~ objections to the project ~lng ~llt. $he related that the
ge~r~l consensus of the nelgh~rhood Is that there Is no longer a
~ed for · w~ll or · fence, ~nd her ~rso~l feelings regarding the
closing of Nap~ May Is t~t it ~es not ne~d to be closed since
~s ~t ~p~r that t~rs will ~ ~ considerable amount of traffic.
k ~t~ ~ ~t~r~ luto Ordl~ ~k ~o. lQ, with ~ r~lrs~nt
~IM~CE 90-~9
AN ORDI~AWC~ ~MDINO ORDINANCE ~HB~R 82-2, TH~ COHPREHEN9IV~
ZONINg REgULATIOnS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY,
F~RIOA, BY AH[WDI~O THE OFFICIAL ZONIN0 ATLAS ~AP NUHBER 49-26-3;
~ CHAngING TH~ ZONING CLASSIFICATION O~ TH~ HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL
~OP~Y ~ '[' ~STAT[S TO "~D' PLA~NED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
A~ AS~O~ PLAZA FOR A COlOR, IAi, O~FICE PAR~ ON PROPERTY BORDERED
TO TH~ ~ORTH BY PIN~ RI~E ROAD (C.R. 896), TO TH~ ~AST ~Y OAKS
~ULEVARD, TO THE SOUT~ BY IOT~ AVENUE S.~. ANn TO TH~ ~ST ~Y THE
D-2 CA~AL, ~ATED IN SECTION 17, T~SHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26
~T, COLLIER COUNt, ~ORIDA, CONSISTING OF 7.6+- ACRE~: AND BY
~IDIIO AN EF~IVE DATE.
11, 1990
~gal notice having ~en published in the Naples Dally ~e~s on
Au~st 22, 1990, as evidenced ~ Affidavit of ~bltcatlon flied .ith
t~ Clerk, ~bllc hearing ~as o~ned to consider Petition R-89-34,
~lled ~ ~llllaa C. ~Anly & Associates, P.C., representing John
B~goer, as Trustee, re~estlno a rezone from A-2 to PUD for a mixed
residential d~elop~nt to ~ kn~ as ~llshire Lakes located on the
~rth sid~ of Va~erbllt Road, tmdlately contiguous to the west
~~ of 1-75 in Section 31, T~shlp 48 South. RanGe 26 East,
Collier C~nty, Florida.
Pl~r ~1~ stated t~ requested ~D Is a residential development
c~slsti~ o[ 414 d~llino units o~ ~hlch 306 units will ~ slnole
f~lly units a~ 108 will ~ ~]tl-~lly units located on a total
214 acres of land. He ~ted t~t this Is a 1~ denelcy development
with 1.9 ~111~ units ~r oross acre. He Informed that all the
related ~encles ~vs revl~d this ~tltlon and all environ~n~al
c~l~ratlons have ~en included Into the design o~ the plan.
~d~d that no road will ~ Impacted, theregore, there Is no level
~lce problem. H~ ~vim~d that the p~tltlon la conslmtont with the
Or--th ~Se~flt Plan ~nd ~11 other rel~tiv~ ordlnance~ of Collier
~ty.
Hr. Ni~ lnfor~d that the Planning Co~lsslon heard this petition
~ A~st 16 a~d u~nl~usly recommended the adoption of the
Ordl~nce. ~e added that no ~m~r of th~ public presented any oppo-
sition to t~ ~tltlofl. ~e s~clfled t~t all conditions have been
I~cl~d In the ~O docu~nt ell~l~ting an agreement sheet.
Hr. ~1~ expl~l~d to Couissioner Vol~ that the pro,act ~tll be
se~ed ~ Collier County ~ater System ~lth an lnterls packmGe tre~t-
~nt plant ~d ~t~ble ~ter ~111 ~ available ~o th~ site.
~tght ~au, repre~nti~ the Petitioner, advised that the
tr~rtation .tall la requiring a ~ld~alk along the entire
V~rbllt Beach frontage of the project, and this issue ~lll be
eS 21
September ll, 1990
lddreeeed at the tls~ of the subdivision ueter plan review.
reference to the public facilities, Hr. Nadeau affirmed that there ia
a developer agreen~nt to construct a sewer main to the project site
which will eliminate the need for the package treatment plant. He
stated that ~table w~ter la available on the north ~ide of Vanderbilt
~ach
~~lng to Coa~lsaloner Vol~'~ ~estion regarding a phasing
· ch~dule An the ~D docu~nt, Hr, ~adeau confirmed there la a sche-
dule, calling attention to page 8-2, Section 8.4 of the PUD document.
C~A~Soner Vol~ clarified h$~ ~estion ~ ~klng ~hat the tiding
t~ pro~ect Is for d~e~o~nt to ~hlch Hr, Nadeau related that the
client~ intent lm to develop i~dlately u~n approval rrna the Board
~d tl~ fra~s ~ P~t see~ to ~ necessa~ ~nc~ the project Is
pla~ed to ~ ~llt ~t a~ ~n a~ ~s~lble, H~, ~Ano res~nded to
C~elo~er Volpe'~ question, noting that Staff Is
regarding tbs Issue of
In regards to the question of lighting r~ls~d by
~e, Hr. ~i~ explained that It Is built Into the PUD
Oeorge ~eller, President of Collier County Civic Federation, com-
e.ed the developer on the project ~c~u~e of lt~ lo~ density
g~ plannit; ~ver, h~ ~inted out that ~]1PUD'~ ehould have
develo~nt ti=lng licit of at least 10 ye~r~. H~ ~dded that Collier
Co~ty~$ ro~d l=p~ct f~e~ ~h~ld ~ Increased to wh~re the d~veloper
1~ ~ylng their eh~re ~nd the cltlz~n~ of Collier Count~ do not
to c~r~ the ~rden In year~ to co~.
~ta~loner H~s~e questioned Assistant Count~ ~n~ger HcLe~re
tO ~re Collier C~nty stands regarding tspact f~es. ~r.
ree~ed that St~ff continues to u~ate road l=pact fees ~hlch
done ~t t~ Board's direction.
In re~n~e to Co~ie~ioner Shanah~n, Hr. Nino stated that ~h~ther
the gmrll l~el of ~ervlce or the Plumr'~ level of se~lce 1s used
~ t~ traffic ~lysls, It ~uld not change the results reg~rdl~
Page 11
September 11, 1990
Mr. Madaau addremsed Commissioner Volpe'e question by exp)atning
that 750 square feet per unit is the mintmus standard for the zoning
ordtr~ance which te com~ton practice to use when subnitttng regulations
to be re~lewed by the C~nty: h~eve~, afte~ the condo~ntu~ asso-
ciatl~s are for~d, a restrictive covenant limiting the size of the
~$te will ~ misted. Mr. Nadeau confirmed to Commissioner Volpe that
It Jm not the ~ntent to ~Jld 750 ~are foot units.
~1~ ~ ~~ ~ ~sr~ Into ~dl~c~ ~k lo. 39, ~b~ct to
mti~latt~
~l~ 90-70
A~ ORDI~ARC~ ~DI~ ORDX~AgCE ~BER 82-2, THE COHPR[HENSIVE
ZOKI~G REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPO~TED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY,
~O~IDA, BY ~DI~G THE OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS NAP NUHBER 48-26-9,
BY CXA~OI~Q TH~ ZOninG ClaSSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL
PROPER~ ~O~ A-2 TO "~D' PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT KNO~R AS
MI~HIRE ~AKES ~ATED NOR~ OF VANDERBILT ROAD RIGHT-OF-NAY,
ADJAC[~ A~D ~EST OF THE 1-75 RIGHT-OF-NAY, FOR 306 SINGLE YAMILY
U~ITS AND IO8 ~LTI-FAMILY IINITS~ L~ATED I~ SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP
48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 ~ABT, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIOA, CONSISTING OF
214! ACRES; AND BY ~OVIDINO A~ EFFECTIVE DAT~.
~~~ ~XSZO~ ~ ~ l~~ ~ Ol~ 0~, ~1 0~,
~~ ~ ~ ~ SZ~ OF AI~-~LIXG ROAD ~ XOR~ OF GOLDEN
Legal notice having been published lr~ the Naple~ D~IIy News on
tuft 26, 1990, aa ~vldenced ~ Affidavit of Publication filed with
the Clerk, ~blic hearing was o~ned to consider Petition SHP-90-16,
~iled ~ Milan, Hiller, Barton & Peek, Inc., representing Halstatt
Part~rehlp, requesting su~ivlslon ~ster plan approval for Grey Oaks
- ~ ~e, located on the west el~ of Alr~rt-~lling Road (C.R.
31) a~ p~rth of Golden Gate Parkway (C.R. 886), Section 24, To--ship
49 ~th, ~ge 25 ~st, collating of 516.97 acres.
Pl~r el~ lnfored t~t this request for suM ivision ~aster
Page 12
September 1I, 1990
Plan {$14P} approval was flied following the adopted PUD for
Naletatt/Orsy Oaks, DRI and rezone, and thla la the first phase of the
project ~d~ich will b~ a single family subdivision wtthln a golf course
co~znityo He stated t~t this S~'s layer ts entirely consistent
~lth the Gr~t Oaks Master Plan. He explained that the t~ue of den-
sity c~ld not ~ addressed up front because the density applies to
t~ entire PUD, and the ~nitorlng of the density will need to ~ sade
aa each a~lication for d~elo~nt ~ re~ested, He did point out
that ~ referring to the plan, the densitW ~iI3 not exceed the
r~Jred three unitm ~r acre, Nr, MJno related that the Planning
Cm$ma$~ unanl~sly endorsed the ~titJon ~Ith the exceptions that
are included An the agree~nt ~heet and stated that there has been no
~blJc
Nr. MJ~ re~rted t~t the ~titJoner Js In agreesent ~Ith
mtJ~lat$ons except the Jmm~e of ~Ad~alks, He explained that $taff
fee]~ ~e~ lot ah~ld ~ aeee~mable to a pedestrian systec In a con-
Co. lslio~r 8aunders questioned ~here the issu~ o[ the p~tltloner
providing certain public fmcllitles stood? Hr. Arnold ~tated that
~ree~nt regarding this Issue ~111 ~ presented to the Board the
of Septen~r 17, 1990.
Co~leeioner Vol~ questioned the exception being granted for cul-
~-s~e In excee~ of 1000 feet s~cific~lly r~garding the issue of
fire. Plan~r NI~ answered that the diameter of th~ cul-de-sac lm
~lde e~ugh for tire equip~nt~ h~ever, the proble~ arises 1[ the
~o~ tu~ ts ~e which results In loss of ti~ In having to turn
ar~. Mr. ~l~ ~ded t~ issue of cul-de-sacs needs to be revisited
to ~ress proble~ which ~rtaln s~ciflcally to the Florida environ-
In ~planation to Co~$smloner Hasse, Project Revl~ Services
~er ~J~ki misted t~t there .re t~ designs for cul-de-sacs,
~ ~1~ directly centered off t~ right-of-way, and the other oft-
set ~1~ ba~d on land confl~ration and lot restrictions ~hlch Is
Psgm 13
September 21, 1990
mlmo an accepted dasign ntandard. Mr. MadaJewski clarified that If
tl~m prol~r radium of the cul-de-mac ~xists, it Is then an accepted
design standard.
Hr. Iqada~ewsk~ presented the Staffs* desires and concerns regard-
Artg mtdewaikm. He pointed out that the pro~ect consist9 of one loop
romd with 16 ~l-de-sacm feeding off from It with the shortest cul-d~-
Imc ~i~ 375 feet and the longest ~lng 3,375 feet. He explained
tbmt Staff ham revl~d t~ pro~ect aJong the lln~m of At being a go]f
c~rme c~nJty ~here al~ the ]otm ~rde~ the golf course and some
mort of ~deetrlan clr~lation c~ld ~ included. He noted that this
pro~mct Is located dlrect]7 across from an elementary school, and
~ ~t yet ~en determined Jf there ~]ll ~ school bus service to the
entire de~elo~ent reNu]ting in the echool chi]dren having to
t~ etreete. He referred to Staff and the deve3oper arriving at
I~te~tlve ~destrian circulation Jn ~h~ch there ~o~ld be acces~ to
the Iota other than the street. He re~rted that at this tl=e no
def~ pathways even ]n the ~nner of a ~lched path have been pre-
~nted.
CoMJseloner Saundere qu/itioned t~t eince there w~ll be criteria
~tiblJe~d for general 4~licabllity throughout the County regarding
~etr~en c]r~letlon ~lthJn the next Iix ~nthe, could this petition
~ ~ld to t~t eeteblJihed criteria, therefore, elleinating
Atto~ey ~orge V~rnad~ In,or,d t~t due to the
~lch this project Is proceeding, It ia not ~eaalble to
Co~t~'s d~elop~nt stan~rd code to ~co~ law.
AI~ ~ynold~ of ~llson, ~iller, Barton & Peek, Inc. ~tated that
~ is In full ~ree~nt ~lth ~1~ etl~latlons, ~nd the pr~tston for a
~estrl~n circulation s~ate~ Is part of the stlpulatlon~;'ho~ever,
Is ~ s~cltlc ~rt ot thl~ stipulation r~gardtng 1~ volu~, lo~ speed
~l-~-s~s t~t c~uses the problem, gr. Re~nolds re~rked that he
feels t~t It Is Inappropriate to ~ve std~alks In all cul-de-sacs
Page
~lch Is a require~nt of the County St&ff. He stated that the
ovsrsll pedestrian circulstlon ~yste. Jn this type of project has
several ele~nts, and the subdivision re~latlon ~hlch he operates
under today is spectfic to the questton of sidewalks and s~dewa]ks
only. He noted though that this regulation does state that there are
alternatives that can be considered and potnted out that cul-de-sacs
are an area that can be r~l~ed on s case-b~-case basis to determine
t~hether slde~alka are necessary. He explained that similar projects
~uch sm the one propomed use an integrated bikeway/pedestrian system
wt~lch ~and~rs thrcrugho~t the project and could be located along the
roadways or through the open spaces and many times connecting to the
golf cart path system. He pointed out on the s~ap displayed where
there would be aid~a]ks and noted the cul-de-sacs where there would
~ot be any sidewalks which ~ould be the smaller ones with 40 lots or
less, but those cul-de-sacs would tie into the primary road clr-
cu]&tlon s~'stem. He said throughout the project there would be access
to the golf cart paths.
In response to Conissloner Volpe, ~r. Reynolds commented that the
interpretation of Stafftl position is that th~ alternate pathway
system proposed by the d~veloper ~a~uld have to be directly asseNsable
tO each lot at the rear property llM~ and in the came of the golf
course corridor, there will be a single golf path system which means
that depending on which side of the fairway the golf path is on, a
duplicate path would have to be ~de on the other side which would
create an aesthetic problem with the golf course.
Nr. 14acla~e~sk! cownted that ~hen Staff set with the developer on
July 30, the require~nt ~de by Staff ~as that there would be a
p~demtrian system on one side of the entrance road and Internal loop
road ~nd, additionally, on one side of all cul-de-sacs there would be
a p~deetrlan system unlemm ~n alternate pedestrian circulation plan
~ de~eloped for the project. Hs stated that the proposad altsr-
r~tlve Is acceptable to Staff ~lth the exception that Staff ~ould not
approve the idea of people walking across the grass am an undefined
September li, 1990
.sikh,ay in lieu of a aldewmlk.
In response to Cossiasioner Volpe, Nr. MadaJewskl acknowledged
that this stipulation was not approved by the CCPC, and the only
direction was that Staff and the applicant were to work out the
language for the ~tlpulatlon. Hr. MadaJewskt noted that Staf~ does
feel that there ta ~cceptable lan~age, ~t does not agree to a
gr~ssed ~re~ ~lng ~n alternate clr~l~tion p~th.
Co~lssioner SauCers c~nted that ~ std~alk syste~ is a safety
issue seafaring ~d~trians fro~ traffic; h~ever, he do~s not see
~re · ~destrl~n circulation syste~ behind the houses satters. ~r.
~J~ki explained that s~ sort of syste~ should be designated In
or~r to pr~ent liability cir~sstances to the County.
C~nty Attorney Cuyler r~s~nded to Commissioner Saunders'
question ~t liability, and stated that there Is no liability on the
~rd o~ C~nty Co~lssloners at a planning level.
Res~Jng to Co~lssioner Vol~, Mr. Re~olda related that the
~ttti~r feels t~t the cul-de-eac~ due to the lo~ traffic voluae
c~ ~ used aa part of t~ ~destrian circulation eyste~ and the Staff
Calmmio~r launderm ~eetioned If there Is a hazard or safety
reas~ for r~uirl~ sid~alks on the cul-de-sacs, and if not, then
t~re am not meem to ~ any reason to ~ve an alternative. Mr.
~zard, end referred to the su~lvlslon re~latlons as ~tng 15 years
old ~lth st~ards developed tot ~ County that ~as extre~ly small.
~e stated t~t Staff feele it la necessary to have so~e alternative
~stem available to the reel~nce, and whether they use It or not
~p to t~s. Coulssio~r Saunders declared that he does not feel that
~ alter~ttve circulation systee solves the Issue of safety, If In
~eff Per~ of Or--th PIa~I~ explained that the ~re lots on a
~l~-~c t~ greater the risk ~cauee there ~ould naturally ~
traffic. ~e ~inted out t~t street lighting la another relevant
September ~1, 1~90
I&fety Issue regarding the pro~ect because If there Is not adequate
street lighting at night then the pedestrian walking along the street
cannot be seen easily and ts at a hJgher risk. He stated that per-
eon~l]y he would prefer sidewalks.
Co~lselo~r Voljp~ counted he feels that short cul-de-sacs
Ihould be all~d ae ~rt of the ~deetrJan circulation and reconmends
t~t am a ~tter of ~llcy to t~ ~ard. Co~iesloner Hesse
~eatJoned ~hat constitutes a short cul-de-sac?
~ gtv~ aa to h~ short Ja o~rt, stating that the number of users of
the ~l-~-sac Je pro~bly the k~. CoaaJssioner Vol~ pointed out
t~t ~Jght ~, -lth~t an exception, ~]-de-eac~ are not to be ~o~e
tMn 1000 feet long, and that this should ~ used to set a standard as
within this or any other pro~ect, he mup~rtl and endorses this con-
cept for ~ny reaeon~ and safety Jl one of thee. He added, however,
t~t it $ea Jo~ ~tand$~ accepted practice in Collier County to con-
~rti~larly on private a~d dead-end streets In this p~opoeed ktnd of
~o~nt. He asserted that ~hat ]e requested tm direction f~o~ the
~rd gJv$~ flexibility Jo the conei~etJon of side,elks on a ca~e-
~-ca~ ~eJe either Jn length or number of unite because each one can
~ ~al~ted eepeFetely a~ thim can ~ ~orked out ~lth Staff.
Coa/es~oner Saunderm rel~ed to Couimmioner Hesse's com~nt ~
mtat$~ t~t Jt Hr. Reynolds can work out this d~fference ~ith Staff,
t~ t~re $s ~ ~ed to co~ back ~fo~e the ~a~d.
to ~e t~ flexibility ~rticularly ~hen there are differences bet-
~k ~fo~e t~ ~ard.
H~, ~J~ekJ ~inted ~t t~t the au~JvtsJon ~kee ~efe~ence to
September 11, 1990
uae of the Planning Commission to solve · disrate such ss this, and
that Jm the reaaon the stipu]atlona &re so worded. If the Board
It Is S~rtant enough to adopt an tnte~a type ~llc~ o~ cIea~er
direction to staff, then he suggests the stlpvlatlon contain the
~nt to cequl~e any mp~ml to co~ ~ck to the Board, and the
Planing Co~isslon sh~]d ~ so ~nfo~med. Co~Isslone~ Volpe agreed
t~t this ~i11 satisfy the c~ce~n~ expressed.
to ~ ~-~16 with t~ stl~l~tt~ t~t t~ ~l~r ~ Staff
Atto~ ~o~ge V~~ ~t~ted t~t ~taff ~nd the applicant ~ould
~th e~reciate the ~ard, at least lnfor~lly, stating that they
Mr, ~J~ekI read.ed t~t Staff u~erntanda that the Board has
given a direction to ]~k at t~ Jesus using short cul-de-sacs as part
of t~ ~etrtan cJrcu]ation ~etee and basically thJe ~JJl create
Co~ieeJ~r Vol~ e~cifJed t~t Art$cle 10. Section 16 of the
· u~Jv$elon ~eter Plan mhould ~ a~nded to provide that In the event
t~re ~ a dleagree~nt ~tween the developer and Staff that the
a~al ~llI co~ ~ck ~tore the ~atd of County CoeeIaelonere.
~~k$ re~eeted the ~ard of County Co~salonets to so not~fy
the CC~ of this action.
~m~ ~ ~ him ~tt~ to lncJ~ t~
~ly, t~ ~ti~ ~lutia 0~434.
September 11, 1990
~S1~ ~ ~ ~~SX~ ~1~, ~ 76-6 ~ ~~, FOR
~g~l notice h~v~ng ~en ~bliohed in the Naples Daily Ne~s on
8/2~/90, 8~ evidenced ~ Affrld~vJt or ~b]lcatJon ffI3ed with t~e
~ St~efl Ouflden or N$~oofl, M~JeF, hFton i ~ee~, Inc., Fepreoent~ng
~nt~tofl off Mep2eo, Inc., r~eotlng variances ~d exceptions to the
Su~lvloJon Re~At~ono, OrdJneflce 76-8, am amended, ~or property
~oclted Xn Pelican B~y, pro~oed Unit ~elve, Parcel 2, ff~ontIn~ on
Pe~c~ Bey ~u~vaFd ~nd 0a~nt PaF~ay, Jn Section 33, T~o~p 49
P~tn~r N~ exp%elned the Su~v~o~on
vehicle Mlthln It ~or epplyl~ dSrectly ~o~ exceptlono ao oppoged to
· ~ project end will on%~ cons~gt
~1~ referred to a~ the m~.ice drive iff the adjacent mhd parallel
tt~r Is r~otJN: s reduction Jn the requlred right-of-May fro~
60 fff~ to 50 feet~ 8 reduction In the p~vem~flt width to 20 feet
from 24 feet, with the paveMnt coflit~cted ~$th special brick paver
tfeat~nt; exceptlone to curb radii and tangen~ Intersection rela-
tl~hJ~; a~ an exception free the ~le that etatea corner iota can-
~t c~taJn drlv~aya ~thln 1OO feet of an lntereectlon. ~e added
t~ ~tJtlo~r la silo Mkl~ for an exeept~on free sidewalk re~Jre-
~to, ~$ch ~ ~l agreed to leave at the dlecretlon of the Country
~eJ~nt Director. He re. fred t~ CCPC hae unan~uely endoreed
thee ~tJtJon. He concluded Staff recoa~nd. Petition SDV-90-1 for
In mr to Co~$eeloner Vol~, Hr. Nine advloed that the 10 lote
Page 19
9ept~mber 11, lOgO
will front on J~stom~n ~ne which w111 1~ a gated, private road. He
said thsre will b~ no direct access to the collective road system In
Pell¢&n
St~ven O~n. representtnO Huntinoton of Naples, Inc., explained
t~ ~rlty 9~tes will ~ o~rated ~ a system similar to a
~r ~r ~ ~t thr~Oh a c~rd-actlvated system. He said there
will ~ t~ entry Oates, side ~ side, on the Oak~nt Parkway
~or me. Ice ~nd e~rO~n~y vehicles, with phone access for security
~r~s. He ~ed pave~nt widths it the entry aisles will be a
stnl~ ol 14 f~t, ~r an ~gree~nt with the North ~aples ~lre
~rt~nt.
38
legal notice having been published In the Naples Daily News on
8/26/90. as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication fi]ed with the
Clerk, public hearing was ol~ned to consider a rate increase in solid
w~ete tipping feemo
Bob FaT, Solid Waste Director, reported a rate Increase has not
been requested mince 1986 because of an annual increase of 19~ In
solid mte. He maid the ~ rates reflect the franchise collection
cmtract re-negotiatJon~ ~hlch have recently been completed, and
cau~ a e~ll adJu~t~nt to e~ collection fees, but not to residen-
tial die.eel fee~. He indicated a second ~rtion of the rates are
t~ result of t~ 1988 solid ~aete legislation ~hich requires par-
t~ l~llll. H, ~t~t,d t~ ~olid w~,t~ ,~ter plan adopted for
~lller County last year 11 alBo reflective of those requiremeni~. He
e~lal~d t~ diet,al a~ proce~.J~ of tires, bio.ns and construc-
tion ~lltion are causing the Increase In di.~sal ~eea because
t~ ~ to ~hred thom. ut~rial~ or i~olate them for special treat-
Mat. He I~ed ~t~r arei of coKern ii the tranmfer Itatlons,
~Ich ~ve hiitorically o~rated at leal t~n corot ~o t~t peopie
~Id ~ enc~r~ed to ule t~ I~ reduce the amount ot littering.
Ne laid t~ colts d~mlo~d for the tranmf.r mtazlon r~vimed fee~ are
~ ~ t~ Ict~I coe~ o~ o~ratlng thome stations over the
year.
Co~iesi~r S~~ ~ked tf t~ transfer stations are n~
~st~ to bre~ ~en, with ~ profl~ involved?
Nr, F~ ~red in the afflr~tlve, cautioning tha~ with the
{~{~ntmtlon of ~atory collection, 9tmff can only predict the
~t of ~e t~t will oc~r. ~e said there ~y be a ~ed ~xt year
to furt~r ~J~t t~ rates to reflect the results of ~n~ory
collection.
Page 21
]n ~n~r to Co~lssioner Hmsse, ~r. ~&hey responded the ~eee for
disposal of general waste will reaaln at $18.00 per ton, which breaks
dc~rn to $2.50 per ~onth, per
C~lmsiaer SauMera ~estloned If the tipping fees are high
~gh to c~er not only the cost o~ land[illtng but also the cost
1~4 ~ ot~r costs assxlated ~tth the laMftlltng o~ration?
~r. ~ah~ stated all costs are c~ered, explaining the County
obllg~ ~ l~ to pr~lde sinking funds for closure, post-closure and
t~ K~isitton of ~ sites
C~ty ~ger ~rrtll ~ntt~ t~t tipping fees in Collier
~ty are t~ l~st In t~ State, ~ith neigh~rlng counties charging
~40-55 ~r ton of ~nicipa] solt~ ~aste.
~r. Fa~ ~d~ed t~t ti~l~ fees in ~nroe County are $120
t~.
~t~ ~ tires.
~. ~ res~ed t~t ~en Initiated in 1989, the charge
.50~ ~r tire ~hlch ~s risen to ~1.00 In 1990. Ne said that fee
~Jd ~ tires are ~rc~.d, ~hlch c~ers th~ dollar cost the State
~ established to die.se and shred tires. Ne stated Collier County
receives a grant from the State annually ~sed on ~pulation, to off-
~t t~ cost of ehre~l~ ~ processing t~se tires.
C~Issio~r ~nlght re~rted abe has been contacted ~ a tire
co--ny In the C~nty ~o Indicated ~lth the surcharge to the State
s~ ~t t~ car~ to the landfill, they have paid ~11,843 to date.
S~ laid If the rate for dis~sl~ tires Increases fro. SI8 to ~6 per
t~, tlrl c~nlel ~ill ~ passing t~t Increase o~ to consults.
Nr. Fa~ ~vlsed an o~rtunity is available in Collier C~nty
~$ch mll~l t~ problem to ~ addressed c~a~r than other counties.
~ e~lai~d t~ price established ~111 c~er the c~t on a bid basis
:: ~tt. of t~ l~fill ~ith a ~tenttal ca.city of three stilton
~.: rjr.. ~ laid i~roxi~te]y 500,000 tires are currently at the ]and-
Page 22
1990
fill. He ~dded they ars looking to ~selst other communities by
~eceiving tires chJpl~d to that Ilze from them and, in doing so,
Collier County m~y receive & recycling credit.
Co~=~tesior~er Vo]pe co~nted a ~nage~nt company is being con-
sidered to ~er~e the shredding of tires at the landfill.
Nr. Za~ Infold that this company ~lll not oversee, but will
~rfo~ the actual shredding pr~ess.
C~tsslon~r Vol~ Indicated t~t the C~nty 1~ required under the
consent decr~ to ~y the shredder.
Nr. ~ stated the str~t~ will ~ to exasine the process of
the v~rl~s shredding procedures. He s~ld If It is determined that
certain ki~s of ~ch$~ ~re ~tter, he ~lll be back before the
~ard ~Ithin a 7ear ~ith a recom~ndation to either continue ~lth a
v~r processing the ~terlals or to ~y the ~chinery and have the
shr~l~ done ~ staff.
Co~lseloner Vol~ asked it thl~ pro~sed contract la In lieu of
t~ ~rc~se of the ~253,000 shredder?
Hr. Yah.~ Indicated that is correct. He said this ts aa alter-
~tlve to ~rc~i~ and o~ration ~ County Staff. He added the con-
~t decree r~iree t~ C~nty to s~nd ~15,000 to test shredding
~i~nt aM ~t to ~y ~quJ~nt.
Co~issloner Vol~ amked if the ~selblltty of conducting this
~rltlon with exiltJ~ ~r~nnel hms ~en explored?
C~nty ~ger ~rrJll said this cannot be done with existing per-
~1. fie stated t~ ~rt~nt of Environmental Re~latlon la con-
ce~d w~t~r or ~t Collier County has adequately funded its o~ra-
tlon. ~e re~rt~ the ~olld Naste Department is beginning a T day per
~ek, 11 ~ur ~r ~y o~rmtlon ~ust to handle solid waste.
~lsslo~r Vol~ reiterated this ~nage~nt company ~s a very
~r fl~ial state, et to ~1* such a ~or o~ratlon.
~lssloner S~~ ~ntlo~d t~t according to the report, an
t~lvt~l ~a only recently fo~d this company, ~t ha~ been
taolvlt in tM tire abrading ~siness for ~ny years.
Pege 23
September Il, 1990
Nr. Fah~y reported the lop,est bidder was $®]ectsd, anticipating
that he mill be able to deliver the size product that ts needed. If
he cannot deliver, he said, that cospany's services will be rejected
arid tbs n~xt bidder will be approached.
Com~issioner Saunders asked If there ~111 be a savings by using
C~nty staff ye hiring a ~gesent coapany that ~111 lease the equip-
~nt aM ~rfors the o~ratlon?
Nr. Fah~ res~nd~ he ~tll provide the Co~lsston an eett~te of
t~ ~ration costs Involved, ~t ~ does not have that lnfor~tto~
~atlable at this ti~.
~leslo~r VoI~ stated the rate established for tire shredding
is pr~lcated on the cost of the contract ~lth the ~nageaent coapany.
C~lesloner Saunders co~nicated the rate for shredding tires
can ~ cM~ed at any tJ~ if there la a need.
~lseloner Vol~ asked If the County ~ants to encourage other
c~ttes to bring t~ir tires Into tM landfill?
Nr. Fa~ replied t~t he ~lll ~ hap~ to accept those tires
long aa they are shredded to the correct size. He said that will off-
set e~naee related to core sand ~teria] to p~rform the sa~e func-
tion a~ also ~y e~ble t~ County to gain a recycling credit at the
~rge Xeller, Preel~nt ol Collier County CIvic Federation, al~ed
If, ret~r t~ tires, eny ~unt of t~ ~00,000 ~ons oC cos~ercl~l
co~t~ction uterl~l ~lng disused of each year can be used as a
~e for ~ le~tlll?
Hr. ~ r~ed the ~irel ~111 not ~ used ~or ~he base.
lndtcltid once ~he ~ee ii Installed ~nd the liner ~ established,
Ic~ cl]]l (or o~ ~oot of th~ core sand and a one foot layer o~
tires to protect tM liner froB the u tlrl41 ~o be dusped in the cell.
~e Mid i contract ~ recently ~en eppr~ed ~lth · loc~l person ~ho
Nlll re.cie ~lt t~ ~00,000 toni of conet~ction ~erl~l. He said
t~ pr~ rite Ic~ule ~l i no c~rge cate~o~ for iner~e, i.e..
concrete, brick, block~, loa~ or earth that can be used ~or the b4ae
~ept~mbe~ 11, 1990
)tr. Keller commented there 11 I trem~ndoue a~ount of lo~
Collier County. He said there should b~ sore investigation Into
wt~tber sos~ of the 100,000 tons ~r year const~ctlon satertal can be
~ed ~ private land to ~ild it up to the required heights for
c~stncti~. He ~lso ~ggested tires being considered for use as
~rtiflcl~l
~tllte Anthony co~ntc~ted his concern of the r~stdential l~pact
of t~ tt~l~ fees. ~e said th~ rates ~ere es~bllsh~d and fixed for
I ~ri~ of thre~ years, ~hich n~ ~y be raised because of the
tncr~a~ tipping f~es. ~e asked for clarification of what residents
~ill ~ sll~ to do ~lth ~ste if th~ do not have access to the
C~lsst~er S~ban ~dvlsed that residents can ~ake ~rrange~n~s
~lth ~ste ~n~ge~nt for dis~sal of appliances, etc.
~ty ~ger ~rrlll Indicated t~ rates for Collier County
r~sl~ts r~g~rdl~ ~ato~ pick-up ~111 not increase.
~ty d~s not ~ant l~lvldual t~cks or cars at the landfill because
of t~ ~er involved. He expl~lned the r~tes ~re Increasing for
t~ c~rcisl ~si~sses ~M do not Mve du~pster se~lce and con-
tl~ to us~ t~ transfer stations. He said the transfer
~ve o~r~t~d at · lo~s for years, and t~e County Is attempting only
~~ ~1~I~, to clm t~ ~bllc ~erl~.
~lssl~ ~ ~cl ~ C~lssiar Vol~ a c~rrled
~~ly, ~t ~lutta ~-436 ~ ~t~ lncreui~ ~lld
September ll, 1990
~ TO T~Z corf]t&CT ~ F~OF~ZORAL ~GI~Z~RIRG ~L'~VIC~ #ZTH
Russell ihreeve. Director of Housing and Urban Improvement,
explained & contract was entered into in February with Anchor
F.r~gineering for the engineering connection with the Community
D~velol~nt Block Grant for the Infrastructure of Collier Village. He
~id t~ contract states m cap of $75,000. He Indicated that It has
~en dlsc~ered t~t the ~or hired ~ the ~er was not going to
price this project within the t~ year deadline. He said if this
ti~llne Is not adhered to, Collier County ~lll be obligated to pay
~ck to the ~t~te the m~nt of the grmnt. He re~rted that Anchor
l~gl~erl~ h~s, therefore, ~en ~sked to provide the services for
plltti~. He mdded envlron~ntal concerns have ~lso been discovered,
c~usl~ ~ddltlo~l feet. He concluded this request ts to extend the
~t of the contrmct to c~er t~se environmental ~nd plmttlng fees
~ll ~ on-site const~ctlon ~lsion.
Cosslssloner $hir~h~n questior~d if th~ increase is due to
. ~rr~es ~oM control to which Mr. ihreve answered In the atilt-
:~;~ Cmmleslon~r Volpe indicated the budget for this project was based
i!i on the bld~ received and asked where the &ddltlonal $36,000 will come
fro~7
Hr. Shreeve rempor~i~d $600,000 was set aside for this project and
the bids c~ In at $4OO,000 aG they are ~11 within the budget and
gr~utt. He laid the increase ia coning out of the Cosmunlty
DevelolNkent Bl~k Grant ~nd ~t out of C~nty funds.
~ ~~ ~~ly, to i~r~ t~ ~nt to t~ c~tr~ct with
September 11, 19gO
Fred Bloetscher, Assistant Utilities Administrator, stated this
project Involves drilling two deep wells to 1,600 feet and seeking at
01~ of those sites, potentisl for ~llfleld and aquifer storage. He
amid when this was discussed at the Board meeting on 8/28/90,
questions were ralmed, and the executive euem~ry has been expanded to
sddress those concerns. He added Staff was asked to contact Marco
Island Utilities for their participation in this project. He reported
they h~ree ·greed to participate in the ·mount of $65,000. He Indi-
cated the first site being looked Into is on PLanatee Rs·d, which
fJgurem Into long range plans of the County for s water plant site.
~e amid there la short term potential for aquifer storage at that site
I)eca~e of the existing tank.
Commissioner Yelps asked If the Hanatee Road site will be the
future site rot · water ire·iNet plant to supply water to Soclh end
Mr. Bloetmchsr indicated that la correct and p~rhaps to Narco
Island. He ~dvlsed the plan is to have three plant mites: one In the
north part of the County which is currently being engineered, a
central plant which is existing mhd st sou point, a plsnt in the
south part of the County.
Commissioner Shanahan asked If Narco Island Utilities will par-
tlclpate Jn the study of the Nanatee Road site?
see Ralph ?strafe, Chief Engineer for Southern States Utilities (SSU)
arid Narco Island Utilities, st·ted they are willing to participate in
t~m cost of tbs proposed study with the condition that they mlso p&r-
tlcipate In the capital coat If a plant Is built at the Manatee Road
site, ~e said they md · rate of return In their business which they
do not receive by contlnuirua to buy water from the County. He advised
B~U would like construction of m plant In that area to be a Joint yen-
~eptember 11, 1990
tuts b~tween them and the County,
In reslx)nse to Co-~.lsaloner Shanahan, Mr. ?erraro raported a
design has b~en completed for the reverse osmosis plant and has been
~kitted to DER. H~ said the blddino process should begin within the
~xt t~ ~ks. H~ stated, h~v~r, there has ~en an objection filed
r~rdl~ th~ plant site. B~ ~dvlsed that. althouoh representatives
of his c~ny hav~ ~t with t~ complainant to ~xplaln the reasons
for utilizing t~t site, he ~s Indicated he will not withdraw his
ob~ecti~.
~lssimer Vol~ c~ted t~t this pro~sal provides a back-up
~st~ to ~rco Isla~ Utilities In the event that the utility is not
able to ~et Its obligations. He said that ads.ate provisions seem
to ~v~ ~n ~d~ thr~gh th~ y~ar 2000 for ~table water Eof Marco
Hr. Terraro r~s~ed t~t ~ter ~ality In this area is very
~llcat. a~ th~ I million gallons per day ~hey purchasa fro~ Collier
C~nty ~ly pr~ldes a cushion to avoid exceeding limitations s~t In
~.t~r q~llty rs~ul.tions.
Nr. Bl~tsc~r ~lsed t~t this pro.scl Is a Collier County
~lutlon a~ the fact t~t ~rco Islam may be hel~d at the same time
Hr. T. rrsro clarified t~t his company Is ~llllng to co.lt
~5,~ for t~ pro~d stay ~lth th~ condition that they ~ con-
sld~r~d for co-~ershtp In any plant ~llt in th. future at tha~
sit..
~la~lo~r Volpe co~nlcated that the ~Jor costs associated
~lth this pro.scl are at the ~tee Road site and the urgency
~lch t~ County Is approaching t~t ~rtlon of the contract 1.
~c~ of ~rco Island. He Indicated there see~s to be · certain
~t of redu~ncy, ~s~d on what ~rco Island Is presently doing.
~ ~ld ~ la ~slt~t to approv~ a contract of approxi~tely ~650 000
~ t~t site ~r the~ co~ltlons.
Cmlssio~r S~n advised a study was conducted regarding the
Page 28
September 11, 1990
iliter plan en~ a rsconaendation that resulted wes to study the
~a~tee Road location as a potential source of w&ter not on]¥ for
M~rco lml&~, ~t fo~ the ~the~n and central portions of the
To~ N~s~i~ of Nl~ a~ A~oc~atee, Inc., ~nd~cated that
co~ect. He e~]ained a p~ ~ec~ndatJon ~as to locate ~ source
of ~te~ ~pp]y at the ~natee Road site a~ ~a~t~fy ~t Jn ter~s of
~ ~ch Is available. He maid anotha~ tm~rtant Issue ~ega~dlng the
~Jter storage a~ recove~ symte~ Is the plant cap, city will need to
~ Increased to ~et ~ak season de.nde ~or the future. ~e stated
u~erg~ storage a~ rec~e~ o~ ~ater ~ll red.ce operating and
capital c~tm.
C~lsslo~r S~na~n asked ~ ~65,000 la a ~alr share ~ Narco
lsla~ Otlllttem for this stay?
Nr. Bl~tmcher I Mlcated that ~65,000 la 20~ of the costa for the
~p ~Jl and for tJhdI~ the actual ~ater source and ~ae agreed u~n
~JeeJ~er Vol~ re. fred this project l. not part of the Or.th
~e~nt PJan or the Capital l.pr~e~nt ~]e~nt and he continues to
Cmtseloner H~s~e s~ld that 10 and 20 years ~go, planning for the
current probleu. He stated ~ ~entl to ~ aura Jt does not happen
~~ 4/1 (~l~t~r Vol~ ~) to a~r~e ~ ~8~1802 for
~tml~l ~l~rl~ ~lc~ w~th M~eil~r ~ ~lat~, Inc.
f~ ~ ~f~ i~tJ~tlu for ~e ~ter ~rc~ in u mt
62
Page 29
September ll, 1990
eeo Dllput~ Cllrk SOffm~n replaced Deputy Clerk Ouevln at thio
~ ~ ~ KZ~ ~Y ~,,~ HOLIDAY
A~lflistratlve Services Adtlfllstrator Ochs stated that this item
is · rec~~tlon to 8~d pr~latons o~ the County's Personnel
'Rules ~ Re~18~lofls relating to holidays and personal leave days.
Mr. ~hs recalled t~t In ~rch, 1990, Mr. Her~r~ Cambridge
~ltt~d t~ ~rd ~o consider lnco~oratln~ the obse~eflce of the
~rtin Lurer lI~ ~liday Into the C~nty'o schedule. He noted that
Staff m directed to a~l~e t~t ls~e and provide a reco~endatton
with regard to the I991 holily schedule. He advised that
~s~rces staff ~s su~eyed 1T c~ntle~ and eunlclpallties In central
a~ s~thern Flori~ ~hlch l~lcatee that those organizations do
o~e~e and rec~nlze this holiday. He stated that staff Is recom-
~1~ t~t t~ ~rtln Lurer ling ~lJday ~ added as a fixed holi-
ly, to the 1991 County ~ld leave schedule.
Mr. ~ explal~d t~t In order to offset the lost ties cost of
~t~ this ~li~y, staff I~ recomndlng t~t the Coealsslon delete
~ of t~ t~ current ~reo~l leave days that accrue aa part of the
pr~r~. He l~lcated t~t t~re ~111 ~ a ~elnal a~unt of direct
l~ct for presius ~y for the shift ~rkere, i.e. ~S or Treat~nt
Plant ~l~eee. He related t~t the elisl~tlon of one ~rsonal
leave ~y ~ill reduce the lost pr~uctlve tl~ to approxi~tely
~O,000. He requested t~t the ~ll~y leave schedule and the per-
~1 leave sc~dule ~ r~lsed aa recomnded.
In a~er to Co~laaloner Sha~han, Hr. Ochs re~rted that
~i~tely ~3,OOO - ~4,OOO would ~ paid to the shift personnel
t~t ~ld ~rk on this
~lmmlo~r Haole q~itlo~d ~thmr It w~ld ~ ~re feasible
~Or ~l~eem ~ ~ls~d to obese this ~ll~y to use o~ o~ thilr
?~r~l Zm~m ~yI. Nr. Oc~ e~lalned t~t employees ~rrently
~J~ 9 fl~ ~ll~s, a this r.cowndatlon ~ould Increase t~t
Page 30
Septemb~.r 11, 1990
rrmaber to I0 fixed holidays in addition to two discretionary holidays,
Re stated that the problem with the floating holiday concept Is that
it is difficult to determine and schedule work since there Is no cer-
tainty as to which employees ~ld or would not be working.
Commissioner Volp~ asked If the uJorlty of the e=ployees use
t~tr t~ ~rsone] leave days. Hr. Ochs replied that last year, 42~
of t~ e~l~ees used ~th of their ~r~o~l leave days.
Co~lssloner Vol~ stated that if the other Constitutional
Officers ~opt this holiday schedule, I.e. the Sheriff, there ~ould be
giltiaal pr~lus ~y for the shift e=pl~ees since they ~ould be
~r~l~ ~ a holiday. He es~ed ~hether a fl~re has been deter=ined
~ith r~ard to t~ total cost including all the Constitutional
Officers.
~erlff'e Ofilce Finance Director Blankenshlp re~rted that she
estl~tes t~t It ~Ill approxl~tely ~100,000 if her Agency adopts
this ~llday ec~dule, ~eed on the shift workers. She noted that
~rrently, the Sheriff's Office o~e~es 11 holidays, ~ith ~ personal
Co~imsioner ~asse .tared that It seems that It Nould b~
· ~r~rl~te for ~t~ff to ~lu~te the total cost to ~11 Constitutional
Officers.
In ~ns~r to C~ls~io~r Vol~, ~r. Ochs ~dvlsed that the School
~rd ~ th~ ~nks o~erve ~rtin Luther ~ing O~y. County ~nager
~rrlll stated t~t Collier County Is currently the only government
~en~ on t~ entire ~est Co.st of ~lorl~, south of Ta=pa that does
~t rec~nize this holiday.
~. ~ ~vl~d t~t tr~dltto~lly, ~he t~o discretiona~ holi-
~ys ~e ~n the ~y ~fter ~nksglvlng and Christ.s Eve.
Cmission~r Vol~ suggested that ~ssibly, ~rtln Luther lin9 Day
~uld ~ ~lter~ted every ot~r year ~lth President's D~y ~s ~ fixed
~li~. ~r. Oc~ stated that ~taff ~d considered this option,
felt t~t It ~ent ~al~t the grain of ~r. Ca=bridge's original peti-
tl~ to o~e this ~s a fixed holiday. Additionally, he
Page 31
~eptember 11, 1~0
that this ~ld present the sase types of scheduling probleas as those
ass~lated with ~rmonal leave days.
~issloner Sounders asked the nua~r of holidays that are
o~e~ ~ the other g~em~ntal ~tltles In addition to celebrating
~rtln Luther ~ln9 Day. ~r. Ochs advised that th~ results of th~ sur-
v~ t~lcates that ~ld holidays for this 9r~p ranged b~tween 10.5
~ 12 ~s ~r year.
Cmisslo~r Vol~ noted tMt ~sslbly the enployees could use
~rml loire for Chrlstaas ~ve, there., savlo9 money in the pro-
~ty ~ger ~rrlll stated that lC Is easier to have a fixed
~lrmnt rather t~n ~vi~ ~iscretlonary ~lldays. He noted that
tt il ve~ ~l~flcult to 91ye ~pl~eee the choice since everyone
~anto to have Chrl~teal Eve o~f. He indicated that the original
~Jnt, was to close 411 County offices In obse~ance of ~rtln Luther
· I~ ~y.
Hr. ~rald ~enzie, representI~ the NAACP, stated that he appre-
ciates staf~ ~rk In considering Hr. Caabrldge's request. He noted
t~t tM ~ iNicatee t~t ~ny ot~r g~ernlng bodies recognize
this holily, and encouraged the Coaalssion to be aware of the signals
t~t are ~Ing sent out.
CooIeelo~r SauCers explained that he feels that tt ~y be wise
to c~tin~ this Ires for a week or two In order to obtain additional
in/erst Ion.
Pollution Control Director Ytl~z stated that this agenda item Is
· reception to a~ard 8$d ~90-1567 to A. C. Laboratories, Inc.,
~eptember ]1, ~990
tbs qualified low bidder and that the Chairman execute the contract
for l&borator¥ services for pollution control programs.
Commissioner Hesse noted that EO$ Laboratory's bid is $80,000 ]ess
than that of the recommended firs, and questioned the rationale.
Hro Ytlm~z called attention to Attachments "A", "B", and "C" of
the Executive Summary, and noted that Risk ~tanagement and the
Purchasing Department have evaluated the vendors and have determined
that EOm should be disqualified due to that company waiving the mtnl-
~ insurance require~nts that other firms have provided.
Co~umlssloner H&sse questioned whether it would be feasible to have
a ~ater chemist on Staff to i>erfor~ water analyses st the County's
plants. Hr. Yll~az advised that there are a number of concerns with
regard to this testing being done In-house: capital investment would
~mount to spproxl~tely $250,0OO - $1 million for the sophisticated
equipment; sufficient space to m~et DER &nd NRS requirements which
would ms,oust to ap~,roxi~tely ~2OO,0OO1 and legal concerns associated
with this issue if water s&mples ~ere to be brought before the courts
since an Independent opinion would be required from an spproved
laborstory.
Risk I~nage~nt Director Nalker advised that when he reviewed the
proposal from EO~, he found that they ~re the lo~eet bidder, but
d~tsr~in~d the bid to be unacceptable on the basis of Insurance and
lruleaniflcatlon. He IMlcated that they h~ve Included provisions
· d~ich limits their liability.
C4~m~lsslonar $&undmrs misted that he is willing to go with the
r~rxt bidder, and pay the additional $?0,000, but only If Staff lndlca-
te~ that because of the type and the danger of the work that is to be
p~erfolrm~d and the potenti&l exposure to the County if so~ething Is
do~e wrong, these provisions are essential.
Hr. Yllm~z relsted that random sampling Is done which Involves
lr~dividual houses with wells. ~e indicated that assuming that the
laboratory ~d~ich is under contract with the County goes to these sites
axl4t m~kes an error, and indicates that the drinking water is safe If
Page 33
September il, 2990
it act~lly Is a potential hazard to the health of those persons, and
eoa~e gets sick, the County would have a potential liability.
In a~er to CouJasioner Hasse, Mr. ¥i]~z stated that when a
col~]alnt is recelved ~tth regard to drinking or surface ~atev, a
fol]~ ~p Js conducted. He noted that tf health Issues a~e
mtat~tm are Issued to the affected ~artiem.
~rchalJng Director Carnal] re~rted that discussions ~ere held
~lth the ~ratlng ~nager fros the Naples office of EOS, who
~ ~en ~ld to a lecger cor~ratJon ~hJch objects to the County's
transfer of ri~k on a num~ of k~ /]e~nt~ within the contract
~age, He ~oted that the cor~rat/ hea~arters' ~sition Js that
t~y are a ~]tl-blJJlon dollar cor~ratJon and It ~ouJd be a deep
~ket te~e If th~ ~re o~ to this ty~ of risk.
Nr. Carnell stated that there ts ~re Involved tn the price dtf-
fer~m of the bide t~n ~rely the cost of the insurance
He ~t~ t~t ~ ~ae Jnfor~d ~ ~0~ that the ~lk of the coat
fer~cel ~t~en the first and lecond ]~ bidders l. due to efficien-
cies a~ t~ ~th~ ~ ~hlch~the samples are processed.
of concern ,lth ree~ct to t~ ~J~ of the exceptions taken by
~e ~vJ~d t~t t~ do ~t p~otect Co]]Je~ County, and they are not
liable to p~otect t~ ~blJc t~t uy euffe~ daaage and fils a la~
~Jt ~aJnst the County. ~e ~e]at~ that the ~equJ~e~nta ~n the
~c~e protect the public as ~ll as the County. He noted that to
Ill~ I differentiation of treat~nt for this bid proposal, ~y create
a ~t~tl~l for cospl~int by the other bidders ~ho have not had the
op~rt~lty to enter into dial--s stating t~t they c~ld have given
a l~r bid ~ c~ed the or~r of the bid res~nsibilities.
C~tssio~r Vol~ stated t~t ba~d u~n the lnfor~tlon that has
~n pre~nt~, he is lncli~d to re~ect all bids and have this work
Page 34
September 11, 1990
Mr. Carnell related that if the bids mrs to be rejected and re-
bid, Staff will need direction if there Is to be a contract without
the full level of insurance and indemnification as required in the
c~arremmt sl~ectflcatlons. He noted that the current contract with
Thornton Lab~ emrpirea on October 16th, a~ requested that this
c~tract ~ exte~ed for t~ ~re ~nths If there la to ~ a re-bid.
~1~ h~-~ ~, ~~ ~ Cal~lar VolW ~
~~ ~l~l~, to ~J~t all bl~; Ztaff to obtain ~ bl~,
wl~ ktm ~ to k ~~ for 60 ~, ~tle goi~ t~h tk
~b~ ~.
BID ~1611 ~ 37,~ ~X~ ~Z~ C~AX~ - ~~ TO
Re~c]i~ C~rdlnator Klpp announced that curbmide collection
re~clablem were Included In the ren--al of Naste Management'e
c~tract a~roved ~ the Co~{mmJon on ~une ~2, ~900. He advised that
m~r~l~te]y 36,000 mille f~iJy ho~m will ~ serviced throughout
Collier C. nty, a~ the pr~ram lm mchmduled to ~gln on November
llth, a~ all Waple. area ~ will receive se~lce by ~anuary 1,
l{{1. fie r~rted that the 2~km]em area will ~ implemented in
~r. itpp explained that t~ contract .tates that the County ia
rew~ible for the ~rc~me o~ ~rbmlde containers. He indicated
t~t on Auger 2gth, submittals ~re o~ned for the purchase o~ curb-
· 1~ re~cli~ containers. He re.fred t~t notices were sent to 14
v~r. of ~lch six rea~. He i~icated that the bid specified
t~t a contal~r ~uld ~ supplied for temtlng ~r~ses, noting that
c~tai~rl ~lch Mt all s~ciflcattonl were submitted from Rehrig
e~lfl~ ~ Ye~er Oletrl~tln{.
hrc~lng Director Ca~]l ~tsed t~t this Item Involves a
t~lcal error as de~rl~ ~ ~hrlg Pacific. He explained t~t the
Psge 35
9eptember 11, 1990
I~'opos~l p~ge of the bid sp~clflcmtlons ssked that all the vendors
provide a price p~r l,O00 containers. He advised that Rehrlg sub-
mitred a bid of $4.31. Ye noted that their Intent was $4.31 per con-
rain. r, as Indicated in a letter fro~ that ftr~'s sales representative
(c~ of letter ~t pr~lded to the Clerk's Office). He stated that
If ~hrlg*s expla~tlon lm accepted, their price of 84.31 ~r unit
~ld ~ a~roxl~tely ~20,000 less t~n the next acceptable offer.
H~ indlcsted that the tmmue as to whether or not this ts a minor error
or slur lrre~larity Is to ~ d~t~rmln~d ~ th~ Commission, and
~, t~ bl~ s~ld ~ ~ard~d ~ccordlnolY.
T~4
C~lmstoner ~aaoe r~rked t~t co~n sense would indicate that
this lm an ~rror ~ich ~s ~d~ ~ th~ t~lst.
Conlosioner ~fllght ~ted that the request is to purchase
37,0~ recycll~ containers, ~fld questioned Mhy coflqlderatlon has not
~ tmk~ with regard to gr~th since It seems that It Mould be
c~o~r to plan for the future needs for t~ next year,
Mr, ~lpp otatpd that t~ total numar of containers that will be
~ed~ for th~ ~epl~s/I~kalee are~ Is 36,478. H~ noted that 10~
· ~e t~ 27,000 fi~re MIll ~ ~rch8sed since there are 2,~00 oingl~
rnJly ~$ comlflq on line e~ch y~ar In Collier County,
Cmlgolo~r ~nlgh~ stated t~t her concern lo that If the
~ty lo able to ~rc~oe these containers at ~4,31 ~r unl~, she
~ll~eg t~ it ~ld ~ ~tter to ~y additional containers
r~t~r t~n waiting for a c~ple of years ~hen the price will
Mr. Ki~ st8ted t~t the problem t~t 1~ encountered 1~ the
lity to store extra containers.
~~ ~ ~ ~l~ ~m~ ~ ~R ~~ ~XD ~
~~ ~ Pl~ ~ ~ 1991 S~ ~ -
OCO,, :llO
September 11, 1990
Solid 14aste Hmnmge~nt Supervisor Russell requested that the
C~Jaelon certify the anna] So]id Halts Co,]action and d~sposal spe-
cial a~e~s~nt roll for ~ndato~ collection. He provided a letter
of tranaittal fr~ Pro~rty A~ra~ee~ CoIding, fo~ardJng the roll
tO the ~lsslon.
Clerk GJ~e~ ~ked Jf t~ ~se~nt ro~] ~ll~ b~ submitted to
~rd ~lnutea a~ Records. Hr. Russell advised that the hard copy
~Jll ~ turned ~er to Hi.tee ~ Records.
~l~ ~l~l~ t~t t~ ~ of C~ Cmlsel~rs certify
~ ~1~1 ~~t ~11 for ~to~ 8olld ~ste Collectl~ ~
lt~ ~4
~~ ~ ~ ~ TX~ ~XMO ~ ~ ~DE
~ ~lg ~tnl~, t~t Itn ~4 ~ catl~ for ~ ~km.
Its ~1
~,.
Assistant C~nty Iqanag~r I~Lemore ~dvimed that this is th* second
of t~ collection contrmctm that the Co~lmmlon authorized Staff to
Mgotimte. H~ I~lcmted t~t this contract i~ oisllar to that ~hich
~m m~r~ for Haete ~nmge~nt, with sinor exceptlonn. He noted
t~t exJetJ~ cut~lde a~ ~ckyard collectton tares ~tll continue at
as.50 ~ ~o.5o te~ctlvely. He explained t~t the coatcJal rate
et~tute ~ d~elo~d as ~rt of t~e negotiations, since there ~a~
~t a c~rcJa~ o~ ~lk contatne~ rate tn the prior f~anchtee
~ ~i~ ~1~, to ~m t~ ~hi~ ~~t with t~
BE 0C0, 120
Page 37
Septsaber 11, 1990
Amsimtant County Attorney Hi/son advised that this item was con-
tJnued fro~ s previous m~ettng. She explained that the Executive
iv~ry includes a breakd~ of the fee~ as contained In the
rf~lutlofl. She indicated thit the resolution as prepared ts based on
t~ ~1~ Re-Evaluation e~ Ad.ate ~bltc Ficilltles Ordinances
~lch r~ires t~t hearing officers ~ hired and compensated at a
rsts to ~ detailed ~ the Co~lsslon ~ reis~rs~ W the appli-
In anMr to Co~losio~r 5~na~n, Attorney NJlson stated that
after die.solons Mlth oth~r Counties, she learned that two hours
t~ ~er~ hearJ~ tiM, in a~ition to preparation and review time,
~ich t~ 5 ~r fl~re for t~ C~nty Attorney's staff ~as based
~Joolo~r g~flight stated t~t letters were ~lled to land
~rs ~vioi~ t~t t~lr pro. riles ~ld ~ going through the
~l~ b-~aluation process, ~blJc hearings will be held to answer
~eotJono, e~ t~n the a~licants Mill file for coapatlbillty and pay
~ty ~e re-zend th~le pro. riles, and the 'little ~y', ~ho has
~ ~l~ taxes for ~ny years, ~Ill ~ hurt. She re~rted that she
f~ls t~t t~ ~ees s~ld ~t ~ c~rged until after Staff ~s ~de a
r~l~ of t~se pro~rti.s ~ ~temines if they are vested or con-
.tibia. S~ ~t~ t~t if ~ a~al of ~inistratlve hearing
~ at t~ State l~el, the applicant d~s not pay for this, until he
~i~ t~ c~rt
~lsslo~r Vol~ stat~ t~t If a ~rson desired to have his
pretty r~d, tMre ~ld ~ a cost ~netlt to s~l~ the
to protect his lnvest~nt. ~e related that he feels that there should
k ~ t~ of llidi~ ~alt t~t ~ld tie Into the actual cost of
Page 38
Beptember ll, 1990
the tin involved.
Assistsnt County Attorney Nlleon remarked that the difficulty with
creating a sliding scale ie that the a~ount of time which will be
Involved ts not ~ beforehand.
Casals·loner Baunder· Indicated that he believed that a certain
lueount is charged on a per acre basis roi' various projects.
Platter Meeks reported that there Is a set fee for rezone peti-
tions, and there is a flat fee plus · charge for PUD's: $3,000 plus
$30 per acre.
Commissioner Saundere affirmed that Commissioner Volpe's
muggestion with reeD·ct to the ~ltding scale, based on the size of the
project, ~ould help out the 'little guy' with a small piece of pro-
p~.rty since the fee ~uld be sm~ller.
Ns. [aren Petereon, representing Collier County Builders and
Contrectors Association, stated that If ~oseone comes before the
Commission for a vested rights determination, It is because they
believe that a regulatory act of Collier County ha~ In some way adv~r-
Nly effected their rights, ~ t~y ~re not ~sking that any
till v~lue ~ given to t~s for t~l~ pro~rty. She Indicated that
t~ ~le ~re ~iq c~rged for their day In court. She reported
that t~ ~r~ of C~pter 120 of the l~l Process, is to give an
iNlvlal t~ op~rtunlty to ~estlon the correctness of ~ declston
of g~e~nt. Zhe related t~t she does ~t believe that ~n lndlvl-
d~l s~ld ~ r~ired to ~y a significant amount for the right to
pre~t their cl~.
Attorn~ B~ce A~erson cited thl~ pro.esl Is asking pro~rty
~rm to ~y t~ fees In.fred ~ the County as a result of the
~i~ c~es Initiated ~ the C~nty. He ~dvised that this
mituti~ im different t~n ~n · pro~rty ~er ~ltlons the County
to c~e t~ z~i~ on him 1~. He ~ggested ~ flat, no~l~l fee of
~0, ~tl~ that th~ ~ver~ge l~n ~ilI ~t b~ able to complete the
· ~llc~tlon sl~e It is quite le~thy a~ Involved.
~ls~io~r ~se ·tared t~t there ~ould still be the cost of
S$ 0 0-,, 205
Page 39
1990
I~25 to the County for attorn4~s fses. Attorney Anderson suggested
that the taxa, that had been collected over the years from commercial
properties that will no longer be commercially zoned properties be
=~ed to defray the~e costeo
]n ~ to CoutssJone~ Saunde~s, Atto~ey Aflde~son ~ep]~ed t~at
hi feels t~t · fa]~ m~nt ~]d ~ ~ f~mt fee of $50 dog,ars.
~ld c~eider the reception a~ provided ~ Staff, but deducting
the ~t of tJ~ billed for C~nty ~taff time. She noted that the
re~lutlon am pre~ented t~y ~ ~ changed from what was presented
t~ ~ek~ ago since It n~ lncludeo an additional fee of 8900 for
~tJbllity Exception
C~JeeJ~r ~ight voiced conceal with ree~ct to the amount
of ~ an J~lvid~l ~ld ~ to ~y to go through the vested
r~ghto or c~tJbllity deternJ~t~on a~ ~f they are ruled agalnet,
t~ ~ld in~r further costs In the ap~al process. ~he noted that
of tM t~ deterel~tJon., ~t there are instances ~here the~e folks
c~]d ~t afford the fees, a~ t~retore, they would not ~ a~lowed to
obtain t~t
C~leelo~r Sau~re indicated that the fees In the resolution
spear to ~ on t~ high ni~, a~ euggeeted a flat fee for all five
o~]icatlone a~ ~r acre fees aa foil--s: Vested Rights - ~200 fee
pl~ ~50 ~r acre; Ap~al of a Ve~ted Rights determl~t~on - $100
~50 ~r acre; A~licatlon for Vested Rights ~ternJnation - 8100 plus
,50 ~r ~re; A~al of Ve~ted Rights ~terel~tlon for Ads.ate
~blJc Facilities - ,100 p]us 850 ~r acre; and CoepatJb~]~ty
In mr to Co~leelo~r Vol~, Assistant County Attorney
~vt~ t~t t~ ]an~ge In the ordinance states that the County
to ~ relabur~ for t~ ~ari~ officer and the court re~rter costa.
~lsslo~r Vol~ noted t~t he feels t~t the ordi~nce doe~ not
Page 40
September 11, 1990
111o~ for the diffsrsnces in tho nature o~ the services to be pro-
vid4d, i.e. the lize of the parcel and ectlvity of s·me. He suggested
that Staff come back and provide · cost ·nalysts In terms of Staff
tim with regard to the agpeale.
Ore--th Planning Director Blench·rd expl·lned that the size of a
Wop~rt¥ cannot be coasted to the a~nt of tt~ that is required for
t~ r~i~ since the complexity of the l~e need~ to ~ considered.
Be r~rted t~t the vested rights deter~lnation ]a the last step of
t~ pr~els and th~ ~ning Re-~al~tlon Ordl~nce has a specific set
Of c~ltl~s to assist ~le In dete~lnlng ~hether it Is worth
t~lr ~ile to a~ly. He explained tMt c~rging sinl~l a~nts for the
· ~llcatlons ~lll enc~rege frlvol~s applications. He indicated that
· s an alter~tlve to ~h~t J~ ~lng pro~ed, he ~lleves that it la
· ~roprlate to c~rge the a~ltc~nts based on an estt~ted hourly
~Iesloner Sha~n suggested that St~ff co~e up with a sliding
scale ~lth t~ ~xl~s a~unts ~ing those es recommended in the
~s~ resolution.
~slstant C~nty Attorn~ ~lleon clarified the reference that has
~n ~ ~lth regard to the inclusion of Compatibility Exception
~lch ~s ~t included In last ~eek~s resolution, noting that this
i~vertently oaltt~d from t~ orlgI~l resolution.
~ig ~/2 (~loel~ S~ ~ ~lght ~~}, to direct
S~f to ~ with tb C~ itt~*s Office in ~1~t~ a
olldl~ ~tlo ~ ~ tb tim l~lv~ tn t~ a~ltcatl~s, with t~
mlm mis bi~ ~2,250, ~1,2~8, $2,250, ~1,275 ~ ~300; ~ In
~ h~ls, start to ~c~t i~llcitia frs t~ e ers wtlll~
tim ~ Clerk ~in ~IK~ ~7 Clerk ~rt~ ***
000 ~Ni~r Vol~ left t~ mti~ it thio ~il
Page 41
September !!, 1990
Aaaiatant County Attorney Mark l.awaon atsted the County Attorney's
Office has ~eorked ve~ closely ~Jth representatives of Lely Community
~elo~nt Ol~t~]ct In the ]a~t ~e~al weeks. He said t~e agenda
~c~ $nc]ude~ three J~t~ntl: 1) ~ ~randum of agreement bet-
~n ~]y C~nity ~elo~nt Dimt~ict and Co%~le~ Count~ 2) a
~e~lutl~ which sup~rts c~eat$on of the Lely Comm~n~ty Development
Dilt~]ct~ ~ 3} · p~e-bem~Jng itJ~latJon. He ~efer~ed to page~
~d 8 of the stJ~]ation, indicating a f~ ~lnor changes have
~. Be mdvised that lte~ "D" on pmge ~ has ~en changed f~om "the
~' to "the ~ ~ the ~elo~nt Order". He ~aid in Item
~ge 7, a correction ham ben ~de to the page nut.ring to reflect
t~t Jt Jm one and the sam Jn the existing petition. He repotted on
~e 8, t~ reference ~de to the ~aples Daily News tears~eets
cafes 8/2~/g0 twice. He said the second reference should read 8/28/90.
fie concluded the C~nty Atto~*s Office recommenda approval of the
three lnet~nte aa
~Jali~tJ~ of ~ ~t with ~l~ ~J~t
at~ et kl~ ~iW ~l~t Olmtrict, t~re~
~1~ ~4~.
Mr, ~ ~ted t~t a M~to~ ~blic hearing Jl required on
thio ifa at ~ich t~ County Attorn~i Office ~ill participate for
t~ ]Jilted ~~ of fol]~Jng thr~gh with the docunente and for
~t~liahl~ t~ ~l~lines for ~eiible future citations of a
lit ~ture.
OCO, 208
Page 4 2
~epte~be~ l~.
ICU~!~T~ il)0-3]1/320: 90-339: 90-342; 90-344/349 - AIXIPTID
C4mmioeloeerOoo~nlght mov~l, seconded by Cou~JeeLoner Seunders
mnd c~a~rJod 4/0 (~loelouer~o]pe not present), that Budget
~ 90-~11/320~ 90-339= 90-342= m~d 90-344/349 be &dopted.
C4~mlo~rr Ooodnl~t moved, seconded by Co.missioner S~undere
4/0 (Commissioner Volpe not present), tl~ut Budget
]to~0lution 90-32 be &dopted.
[inar~ce Director ¥onkos~t asked for direction from the Board
regarding bond issues that )Mrs originally approved during the
tmdgetlng process. Re said so~e tl~e during the year, the decision
w~s ~ r~t to issue thole bonds. Ne advised by reducing the actu&l
tmdget, th~ Board is reducing the annual tmdg~t and this will caus~
eqbet&ntlal fluctuations when it Is reviewed next year.
It w the constnsua to sllo~ Staff time to Investigate the teplt-
cations of this concern prior to furtl~er discussion.
Psge 43
~eptember 11, 2990
S~ FJ]G~, A~lnistratJve Aslimtant to the ~ard, explained the
~rd of Buildl~ ~umt~ntm mhd A~Im. Sh~ advised he Is repre-
~tl~ t~e c~tego~ of g~eral contractor. She re.fred Hr. ~ay has
~ c~tact~ aM Ms i~lcated t~t he is Interested In being reap-
~lntg to ~.~ ~th~r tm~ ~ this ~mrd. A m~ has ~en
.~ receive, m~ said, from J~ ~grl, ~st~r Services ~nager, recom-
~l~ rea~lnt~nt of Hr. ~ to t~ ~ard of ~lldlng Adlustments
~ A~mlm.
~lg 4/0 (~~l~ Vol~ Mt ~t}, to re~int ~. ~lo
~~ ~lut/m ~438,
000,, : 226
Page 44
September II, 1990
Donald Day, representing the Organized Fishermen of Florida,
Collier County Branch, explained this proposal was drafted by his
organization. He said the basis of the ordinance is to ensure that
all commercial vessels operating In the waters of Collier County
during 14ullet Ro~ Run Season have at least the minimum safety require-
m~nts ~ hue obtained the necessary permits. He reported there have
been concerns raised by citizens of Collier County on several issues,
I.e., tho Influx of fishermen, typ4 and areas of fishing and safety
concerns. Ns advised after meeting with the County Attorney's Office
And Envlronmaental Services Staff, several changes have been ~ade to
th~ proposed ordinance. Ne said the proposal requires each vessel
oemer to obtain & safety decal from the County for a cost of $25,
which will indicate to 1~ enforcement that the vessel is in
compliance w/th all Mafety codes and possesses the restricted species
endorse~mflt and other sndorseNnte needed in tM County. He concluded
thio ordinance will not address all the Issues raised by concerned
citizens, but it ia s good starting point.
Iff anMr to Comlssioner Naese, Mr. Day responded that the
Sbariff's DepertNnt and the Marine Patrol are responsible for
enforcing safety regulations. He said both of these departments are
lar~derstaffed, ben,ever, and displaying safety decals will alleviate the
~med for lane enforcement personnel to stop and search each vessel for
compliance.
Commissioner Shanahan uked ho~ the $25 fee was calculated?
Hr. Day indicated that figure 18 derived from the time the tax
collector will spend looking at the vessel registration and issuing
the perBlt.
Co~mlasioner Shag comnted that there will likely be a
~betantlsl liK~ant of tin spent during the laullet Roe Run Season to
228
Page 45
enm~re that all the boatl coaing into Collier County have the
Ippropriate safety eClUlp~ent and are safe to operate in County waters.
He Itlted the $25 fee does not seem to be an adequate amount.
I(ro Day pointed o~at e section within the proposed ordinance
sp~cifJel that a temporary license c&n only be obtained in the month
0£ October prior to each Huller Roe Run Season.
Bobl~y Johnson, a local fisher,an, spoke in favor of the ordinance.
At Commissioner Saunders~ suggestion, it was the consensus that
the overall ordinance and specifically Section I! be reviewed by the
County Attorni~,'s Office arid be brought back to the Board for further
co~e idera t ion.
~ ~ carried 4/0 (Co~mlaeJon4~ Volpe not present),
tJ~t th4 follo~ir~g its m"a~er th consent agenda be
13ir. lVA/~OII PIIIXZT
ROLO
2°
All disturbed areas propoend for excavation shal! be exca-
vated to the m4xlsmm depth attainable without blasting. The
I, txllum excavated depth shall be liaJted to -5.0 nord.
Upon conpletlon of lake excavation, the Developer shall sub-
alt I detailed survey indicating lake bottom elevations are
at the top of the cap rock. The Developer shall also comply
with County Ordinance No. 88-26 in regards to the require-
manta for annual and final reporting.
The proposed Aamnd~ent to the existing Zoning and Development
DocuNnt for Orangetree shall include language to ensure
that, in the event the proposed lake ia ever located within a
residential area, the lake shall be ~odified to satisfy
const rmction requirements of a 'Development" excavation, in
regards to side slopes, depth, setbacks, and other require-
ma~nts of County Ordinance No. 88-26, latest revision, or any
other applicable County Ordinance.
4°
Prior to Issuance of this permit, applicant shall provide a
copy of the South Florida Niter Management District construc-
tion per~lt.
Prior to issuance of this perslt, applicant shall cancel
Excavation Per. It Mo. 69.292.
Off-site re~oval of material shall be subject to "Standard
Conditions' Imported by Tram~portation Services in docu~nt
dated ~ 24, toll,
All appropriate lsq~ct fees shall be paid prior to issuance
or this pez~llt.
Pa~e 4~
September 11, 1990
Prior to Issuance of this permit, the PDA revlsing the PUD
Meister Plan sho~Jng this lake shall be approved.
Item #14A4
/rZIAZ, /'/.AT 01~ A 'I~3~LAT 01~ A PORTZOll O~ AU1XIBOW CO~ITRT CLUB, UIlXT
AS RBC::CS~3) X1 i*LAT BOO[ 15 PA, GLS 30 TKRCXJG'H 35" - ~ TO BE
~011 1<)-440 ~3~IJITZM~ ~Xlt~L A4~"I~aT~ O7 TEE ROAI~AY, DI~ZMAGE,
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I'XIAL PLAT 0r 'ROY~LL KARCO
i, Authorize the relem of the ~alntenance security.
S.. Pag*q ~/
Zt~B ~24&4
II~ITE~ ~O-441AOTMOIIIZX]I~lqlZCOqTMTTTO PAY TH~ ROAD IMPACT
LX~ldMrl'~ IMP&CT l~g~S, PART~ AMD R~'I~ATZOllAL WACZLXTI~ IIq~ACT
I~Z~, AIII) N~XVZ ~TXLDI]Ig i*~]O~I?I~Z~ ~ TI~ 40 011I? 8AWDI3L9 PXWZS
&~Awllis3r~xo ~_~ mT I~I~S WOW-pNO~..T So~.IWe, IWC.
See Pages
Xtem ~1AA?
The water facilities to serve the project cannot be placed
Into urvice and no Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued
until the Florida D~p&rtMnt of Environmental Regulation fur-
alohas a letter suthorlzlnt] tho ume of the I~er system and
appr~l~ the ~tter dlmtrl~tlon mymtmm for service, and;
Bacteriological testing h~s met the County's requirements;
T1~ Fire Flo~ requirements of the project have been
satisfied, and the Fire DistrAct furnishes a letter accepting
the fire hydrant tar ownership and maintenance.
The water facilities to serve the project cannot be placed
into service and no Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued
until the Florida Depart~nt of Environmental Regulation fur-
nlabea a letter authorizing the use of the ae~er system and
approving the water distribution mystem for service, and;
ham met the County's r~ulre~nte,
satisfied0 &nd the ,ire Dlltrict furnishes & letter eccepttng
the fire hydrants for m~mmerehip and maintenance.
That the developer will provide the appropriate construction
an4{ maintenance agreement and securities upon approval of the
Unit Twelve bridge plane.
Xtmmf~14,&lO
Xtmm el4B1
L3v~mrrow ~D, R3mrr-o~-~T
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ OOTLZM~D IM BXD WO. gO-1~4
~ ~ B* J. K~CAVATXM~ ~lT~ltXSt~, XWC. AMD AUTHORZZ~ ~XWAL
?~ lW ~ JtMiPVM'T 01P'
Xt~m ~24C2
~ ~ W~t~lCt~ - ZW T~IX: ~ 0F 838,909
Ztmm m~4~
Item #l&C4 deleted
KX'llI~m~T'HBOOgZl
ZMC.
~ TO Ji~XM~tOltWl HOMI 1713'OT, ZMCo ~ lJrSTALLATZOM OJ* A PORTIO~
OS' C.Z.K. IK). 844 (CO(71rTY'S 1S' MATB:R MAIM OII PZMI RIDGE ROAD) - ZW JLM
Page 48
September 11, 1990
UI'XLZTT ~ Ir~T~ M~l~lq~tl~ irl']l~, INC. A~D ~'BO~DINATZO~ WZT~
~ BAZI~ F~ T~ C~T1~DCTZOM 01' Jt PA.~f ~ THE =~'f~ COUNTT R.EGZOIAL
See
Xtmm ~14D4
Xtmm ~14~1
~ ~ ~T-1 WIT~ g~g & ~ ~ TI~ C01~XZ~ Jur/~ COITIU, CT
~ II~V~ ~ ~TZOI~ TO PROV'ZDg ~DZFZCATZOM~ TO ~
~ ~ ~ LAJI~LL~ A~D SXTZ~ 0~' COI~TRI~'TZOI/D~IOLITZO~
~ ~ V[,.*~ MI:TI V'ZCTOI LATAVXSH ~ CUR3LK2FF A. B3J'UAL colrt~tAG~ ~
~II(~I~r'I~F~U~ IIZI"VZCI:I ~ 1~3IOVAT'ZOMI 01' ~l~lllg R~ AT
Page 4 9
32
$4
· ,,,, Pag.._3'O,47'-
1I Incre~e [ire Line
12 ~lflcation to Olass~rk
13 Nlscell~s ~lficatlons to
[lectrlc~ ~n~,
14 C~s~rk .~ ~all ~lflcatlons
15 ~ltl~l grwd Nails a~ Celll~s
1~ ~l[lcatlons to ~rtsl~ll
TOTtL
28 D~all a~ Frasl~
29 Ulectrlcal, Se~rlty
C~rt~ Plaza
30 ~r ~rc~ ~teriall
31 [l~stor ~ificit ions,
· lectrlcal and Cds~rk
CasKrk for Tr~fflc/~l~s
h~itl~ Krk Yraffic/Ylnes
~letlofl of ~rk - Building A
AMOUNT
$15,351.00
5,175.00
2,792.00
3,412.00
15,7~6.00
7,719.00
$50,205.00
16,744.00
304,302.00
(lO,?So,oo)
36,181.00
41,037.00
31,494.00
TOTAL $(223,702.00)
Page 50
Wo. pa t ,e
711 8/22/90
lOO2 TAX ROLL
403
279
267
2S3
407-408
409
272-273
274
227-228
229
23O
1006 TAX F~LL
September 21, 2990
8/23/90
8/23/90
8/23/00
8/23/90
8/23/90
8/28/90
8/23/90
8/28/90
8/22/90
8/22/90
0/28/00
T~e following elscellaneoul correei~0ndence was f/led and/or
referred to the various d~partlente al indicated bale.:
Copy to ComMissioner Hesse of letter dated 8/23/90 to Harry
I~uber, Technical Services Supervisor, Capital Projects, from
Pmla B. Reader, Preeldeflt, Coastal Revegetatlon, Inc., re:
Narco Island Beach NourlshBent Project; Dune Vegetation Bid
lie. 90-16-1 At, rd of ¢on~Fa~. x¢: Iliad.
Letter dated 8/32/~0 to Coulssioner Hesse, from Tom Lewis,
Kesber or Congress, ret Infrastructure l~provmnts for
Imsokalee Airport Industrial park. xc: iell Dorrtll, Sandy
T~ylor, ami Flied.
Letter dated 8/30/00 to Commissioner Raise frmu I(axine T.
bndrlck, Senior 14anageskent Analyst, Department of
Administration, re: payroll examination; quarter ending
12/31/S9. Copies to James C. OIlee, John Yonkosk¥, Barbara
KOrlOrrry, Oloria SCal.serfield, and filed.
000,-
Page 01
10o
11.
12.
13.
14.
September 11, 1990
L~tter dated 8/17/90 to Colatleeloner Haese from Gordon b.
Outhrle, Director, Dep~rt~nt of Com~vnlty Affairs, re:
8{-¢J-?5-O{-el-Ol-O33/Enfor¢ement/Ai~rehenslon. Copies to
Well Dorrlll, Prank Brutt, and filed.
Letter dated 8/20/90 to Commissioner Hasse from Thomas G.
Ps]ham, Secretary, Departlent of Com~mnity Affairs, re:
Procedures to receive funds to update of Hazardous Materials
~rgen~ Plan. C~ies to Nell ~rrlll, Frank B~tt, Bill
~renz, ~nd filed.
Rulmking notices dated 8/17/90 to appear in the 8/17/90
Plo~ld~ Administrative Meekly. Notice of Public Norkshop~,
Notice of Proposed Ruleuking. Copies to Nell Dorrtll, Frank
Brutt, Bill [~orenz, and filed.
letter dated 8/28/90 to BCC from Patrick Kenney, Environmental
Specialist, Depart~nt of Envlroru~ntal Regulation, re:
Naples Yacht Club, dredge and fill activities. Copies to
Nell Dorr111, Frank Bruit, BIll Lorenz, and flied.
Coif to BCC of letter dated 8/13/90 to Brett D. Moore from
Kirby B. Green, III, Director, Division of Beaches and
Shores, DepertNnt of Natural R~ources, re: Approval of
Tlm~ Extension: Per. it Pile Rumber: CO-216; Permlttee Name:
3ohm D. Remington & Bo lion $. Drackett, Successor,
Co-Trustees. xc: Nell Dorrlll, Frank Bruit, Bill Lorenz,
and filed.
Letter dated S/21/90 to BCC from George M. Percy, State
Rlstoric Preservation Officer, Division of Historical
Resources, re: Parker Rouse nominated for the Rational
Register of Historic Places. Copies to Rail Dorrlll, Non
Jamro, Kevln O'Donnell, and filed.
#inute~ received and flied:
A. ~ibrsry Advisory Board minutes of 7/26/90.
Information and Referral Blue Ribbon Task Force
Comllttee agenda of 7/29/90 and minutes of 7/28/90.
CCPC agenda of 9/6/90 and minutes of 7/5/90, 7/19/90,
S/2/90 and ./1~/90.
Ooldan Gate Citizens Advisory Co~mittee minutes of
7/2?/90.
Notice to Owner dated 8/21/90, to BCC from Robert L.
Johnston, Trl-M Rental, under an order given by American
A~phalt for ~terlals/sarvlces at the Courthouse. xc: Reel
Dorrlll, John Yonkosky, St~ Carnell, and filed.
Notice to O~mer dated 8/24/90, to BCC from Sa~es A. Carmel,
South Florida Plumbing, under an order given by Don Cahill
{90-2260) for plumbing at Discovery Cottage, Collier County
Project ~189-14, a/k/a Collier County Museum. Copy to Nell
Dorrill, Steve Carnell, ~ohn Yonknmky, and filed.
· otlcm to O~mer dated 8/2?/90, to BCC from Karen Price,
· ~uthern Pre Stress Inc., under mn order given by Coastal
I~rlM Conat. l~., for ~lcel ~crlb~d as ~nufacture
~liver s~t pile, for Se~I] ~35?5/Coastal ~r ProJ~
90~-1543, ~rco Zsl~ ~ach M~rlsh~nt. Copies to Nell
~rrlll, Stye Ca~ll, ~ohn YeS.ky, and filed.
~otice to Ow~ter dated 8/28/90, to KC and HO Rutledgs & Sons,
In~o, from R. MaterfJeld, M H Symteu Corporation, under an
CC0.-235 ,.0. ,,
September 11, 1990
order given by Hartford South for Alumlnue Snap-Lok Coping
for the Realth and Public Services Building. Copies to Nell
Dorrlll, Steve Carnell, 3ohm Yonkoeky, and flied.
1S.
iIefore the Public Bervice Commission re: Application for new
classification of service entitled 'General Service -
Agricultural L~bor Camps', 'General Service - RV Parks" and
'Hultl-Resldentlsl Service - General' in Collier County by
Rookery Bay Otiltty Co~pany. Docket No. 900328-SU, Order
Wo. 23380. Issued: 8/21/90. xc: Nell Dorrill, John
Yonkosky, Steve Carnell, and filed.
16.
17.
B~fore the Public Service Commission, Notice of Cancellation
of Service Hearing to Southern States Utilities, Inc .... the
Office of Public Counsel and All Other Interested Parties re:
Docket Wo. 900329-HS, Application For A Rate Increase.
Issued: 8/21/90. xc: Nell Dorrlll, Ken Cuyler, and filed.
L~tter dated 8/29/90 tO ~CC from Benjamin C. Pratt, Assistant
to the Director, Iurfece Hater Hanagement Division, Fort
Hyers Area Office, South Florid& Hater Hanhgement District,
re: Barefoot Beach/Public Bathhouse, Collier County,
SO6/T48/R25. Copies to Nell Dorrlll, Harry Huber, Kevin
O'Donnell, &,,-'~d flla~t,
28.
Ple~o dated 8/24/90 from Director, Atlanta Regional Census
Center, Bureau of the Census, United States Department of
Cos~erce, encloslr~ Form D-74B ~hlch was omitted from the
p~ckage containing Postcensus Local Review Listing. Copies
to Nell Dorrili, Tom NcDanie], and filed.
19.
Ne~o received s/28/90 from Director, Atlanta Regional Census
Center, Bureau of the Census, United States Department of
Commerce, providir~ Form D-?T, Poetcensus Local Revle~
Llstir~. Original to T~ ~Danlel. Copies to Nell Dorrlll
· M flied.
lte~,ldlLt
or~ LID ~ P~ 01' O'~lO ZI~TM~,W.V.,~BOLIMA,R
LOT t, ~ ~S 0~~ B_~-I~;*lS OWlT 2
I,&'I"ZS~P&CTIOII O/' LI~31 ~ FROI)I:XTY O~ LLSTZA ~. H&CR'EI~NJUS IIX AND
PAI'IIKZCZ& ~__s-'T~'s~_aw, LOT 3, -B'r--J~"K- 2~0, ~O B[~_~JS OlilT [lqll'l'
See Page
LI.~OII O'~ LX~31 FO'R PRG'F'Z:XTT 01r R/.GX]~ M. BJ..Z,CZXZJ~, LC)T 17,
See Page
O{ OOO,,;, 236
Page 53
September 11, 1990
SAT'ZSB*AC'T'ZOI O~ L. II3J FOR ~ 01' BE31'IFETT, rATE, AB'D SC*HOLLY,
l,'~X:smr, LL Jml, n:z~ErrA~ oF ~ .~oAx BARRY MZZSMILLZX LSTATZ, LOT
See Page ~q;~ ~P~
FOR PROFI:RTT CFF LYIt3J D. MAJF~, LOT 8, BLOCK 389,
See Page
SATISTACTIOW OF LII:X FOR FROI'IITY OF JOSKI'H FOR]II ABD EDITH SADOWSE!,
LIFTS 41, 4:2 AJrD 43, BLOCJC 80 CF/' MAF'b,E~ PAR3~ SUBDIVISIOX, UMXT NO, 6
Ztmm ~24L'"7
SATZSrA,C'FZOg O~ LZI~ for PROPZITY 01~ LEST~ Z. ~ ZIZ
P&3"~ZCIA KI,CEIX~4X, LOT 3, JI,0CE 2Om, JqAitCO S~.J~ mrzT lzaH'r
LX~3I ~ PIIOi~ C~ Ci~ I. D~(~KT, LOT 11, BLOCK
Il OIP IgbiCO m ~IT FlVl~
See P.ge -~ ~:~ g
SA~ON OJP LXI3I FOR I~tC)lt'KRTT OJ' CLAR:~Cl STRXCI:ZTT AJFD BFrTY 3.
rrl~cz:rr'r. LOT 104, FOUR SIAIOWI
SATZ~I~&~TZOSI OJp LZI3~ J'OR ~ OF J"KI~T IPZLXOTI$, LOT 2, BLOCK 420
~ O~ Cl:lt~fl~ OY ]:]{D~i'l~t~$ A{ID ]{OTIC~ O, LIS i~ZIID~ FOR
~ O~ Mo 11. DAVIS ~1~, INC., LOT 26, BZX:ICl( '~0, RAFLI:9
FAR]i, UIIIT 5
Tt~re belr~ no further b~mJrmss for t~ O~ of the Count~, the
mtl~ ~ ~J~d ~ Or~r of t~ ~lr - Time: 3:45 P.M.
~ARD O~ COU~ CO~ISSIONERS
~D O~ ZORIRG APPEAL~/~
O~ICIO GOVERNING ~ARD(S) OF
8~CIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS
COBOL