BCC Minutes 10/23/1990 R ~' . Naples, Florida, October 23, 1990
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners in
and for the County of Collier, and also acting as the Board of Zoning
ri~J
': Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such special districts as
have been created according to law and having conducted business
herein, met on th~s date at 9:00 A.M. in REGULAR SESSION in Building
"F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the
following members present:
CHAIRMAN: Max A. Hasse, Jr.
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Michael J. Volpe
Richard S. Shanahan
Burr L. Saunders
Anne Goodntght
James C. Giles, Clerk; John Yonkosky, Finance
ALSO PRESENT:
Director; Annette Guevin, Wanda Arrigh! and Ellie Hoffman, Deputy
~Clerks; Nell Dorrill, County Manager; Ron McLemore, Assistant County
i Manager; Ken Cuyler, County Attorney; Mike Arnold, Utilities
Administrator; William Lorenz, Environmental Services Administrator;
Kevin O'Donnell, Public Services Administrator; George Archibald,
Transportation Services Administrator; Frank Brutt, Community
Development Services Administrator; Ken Baginski, Planning Services
Manager; Ron Nino, Bryan Milk, Wayne Arnold and Ray Bellows, Planners;
Sue Filson, Administrative Assistant to the Board; and Deputy Byron
~Tomlinson, Sheriff's Office
Page 1
October 23, 1990
He stated DCA requires, because of the amendment to the PUD
document, that the Development Order be amended to show the modifica-
to the Master Land Use Plan and the Land Use Schedule. He said
:~.this petition is requesting a determination that this particular
change is insubstantial under State law. He concluded the Southwest
. Florida Regional Planning Council, DCA and Staff have concluded this
!change ts Insubstantial.
Cc~dnAoner Saunders ~ved, seconded by Co~tesion~r Shanahan and
c~=Tied unani~onsly, to close the public hearing.
Oo~tsston~r Shanahan moved, seconded by Coutsstonsr S&unders and
carried unanimly, that Petition DOA-90-3 be approved, thereby
a~ptiN Development Order 90-6 and Resolution 90-502.
15
Page 8
October 23, 1990
RESOLUTION 90-503 R~ PETITION SMP-90-28, JAMES B. ROBERTS OF ANCHOR
KIIQll[EERIN~ CONSULTANTS, INC., P~PRESENTING THE VINEYARDS DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION AND U.S. HOM~ CORPORATION, REQUESTING SUBDIVISION RASTER
PLAN APPROVAL FOR 'STONEYBROOK ESTATES" FOR PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN
THE ~ARDS PUD - ADOPTED SUBJECT TO PETITIONER'S AGREEMENT SHEET
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
October ?, 1990, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication flied with
the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition SMP-90-28,
)filed by James B. Roberts of Anchor Engineering Consultants, Inc.,
OrePresenttng The Vineyards Development Corporation and U.S. Home
· Corporation, requesting Subdivision Master Plan approval for
Stoneybrook Estates at the Vineyards, located in the North 1/2 of
· Section 1, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida,
containing 196.69 acres, more or less.
Planner Milk presented Petition SMP-90-28, stating this sub-
division consists of 275 single-family home sites, two multi-family
tracts and a 5.91 acre commercial tract. He reported current zoning
is PUD/DRI and is undeveloped. He stated the sub3ect property is
within the urban residential area on the Future Land Use Map and is
consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management
Plan. He added that, due to the vested status of the Vineyards
PUD/DRI, the 5.91 acres of commercial property is deemed consistent
with the Growth Management Plan. He concluded that Staff and all
appropriate County agencies have reviewed this petition and recommend
)proval, subject to the conditions listed in the Agreement Sheet.
In answer to Commissioner Hasse, Ken Baginskl, Planning Services
Manager, replied that with the additional stipulations contained
within the Agreement Sheet, Staff has indicated water and sewer capa-
i[iclttes are adequate.
Commissioner Volpe commented that with approval of this
Subdivision Master Plan and the petition for Stoneybrook Golf and
Country Club, there will be an additional 528 single-family units
which will be phased in by the year 2000. He asked if all appropriate
agencies have considered these in relation to the timing of when the
Page 9
October 23, ~990
~ne~ County water and sewer facilities will be tn place?
Planner Milk stated that every available agency has reviewed this
project, and the Vineyards projects coordinator has met many times
with County Staff to ensure that adequate rights-of-way, utilities,
water lines and hook-ups are available for each project.
Commissioner Volpe asked if this project was ever proposed to have
an on-site treatment plant?
. Michael Saadeh, representing The Vineyards Development Corporation
and U.S. Homes Corporation, replied that the Vineyards built a water
treatment plant on an interim basis until the County could provide
service. He said that service was implemented in 1988 and was
designed to incorporate the entire Vineyards development. He added
Vineyards currently has a wastewater treatment plant that services
the entire development east of 1-75, which is also an interim plant.
He stated agreements are now being drafted to allow the County to ser-
vice, the Vineyards projects, both east and west of 1-75. He said
those utilities should be in place early in 1991 at which time the
:Vineyards wastewater treatment plant will be dismantled.
Commissioner Volpe asked for clarification of access points to
: this development.
Planner Milk indicated the main access is int,.~nded for Vanderbilt
Beach Road with another point of access onto Airport-Pulling Road.
Frank Dolan, with U S Home Corporation clarified that the
single-family community will have County dedicated roads, however,
there will be private, gated roads in the golf course community.
C~sm/ut~ner Shanahan moved, seconded by Commissioner Saundere and
c~rried~t~u~l¥, to close the ~bltc hearing.
~i~ S~ ~, sec~d~ ~ Co~t~stoner O~tght
~ ~ ~~ly, to m~r~e Petition ~-90-28, ~b]ect to the
c~t~ 1~ ~n t~ A~t Sh~t, there~ ~opt~n~ Resolution
90-503.
Page 10
October 23, [990
Zt~a ~C2
][ESOLOTIOII 90-504 RE. PHTITION SMP-90-29, HAROLD T. BENOIT, OF HOLE,
~ & ASSOCIATES, INC., REPRESENTING THE VINEYARDS DEVELOPMENT
CORPOP~TION AND U.S. HOME CORPORATION, REQUESTING SUBDIVISION MASTER
~ ~JtOV&~ I~R "STONEYBROOK GOLF A~D COUNTRY CLUB" FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED WITHIN THE VINEYARDS PUD - ADOPTED SUBJECT TO PETITIONER'S
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
October ?, 1990, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with
the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition SMP-90-29,
filed by Harold T. Benoit, Jr. of Hole, Montes and Associates, Inc.,
representing The Vineyards Development Corporation and U.S. Homes
Corporation, requesting Subdivision Master Plan approval for
Stoneybrook Golf And Country Club, located on the South side of
Vanderbilt Beach Road, CR-901, between the proposed Livingston Road
and 1-75, in Section 1, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, and Section
6, Township 49 South, Range 26 East.
Planner Milk indicated the petitioner is proposing to subdivide
this tract into 253 single-family home sites, six multi-family tracts,
a 23.4 acre commercial tract and an 18 hole golf course. He said this
~:~358 acre tract is within the Vineyards PUD/DRI, is zoned PUD, and is
~ currently undeveloped. He stated the subdivisior is consistent with
the Growth Management Plan. He reported the CCPC has forwarded this
petition by a vote of 7/0 to the Board with a recommendation of appro-
val, sub3ect to all Staff stipulations. He concluded Staff recommends
~approval of Petition SMP-90-29, subject to the conditions listed in
.~the Agreement Sheet.
In answer to Commissioner Volpe, Planner Milk responded there are
i~two proposed access points to this subdtv~sion. He said the Agreement
Sheet states that if the 23.4 acre commercial tract is left as commer-
iii i cial, the developer will provide a connector to the future Livingston
Road right-of-way.
~' ' Commissioner Volpe inquired if the County owns the right-of-way
~°r'Livingston Road in this area?
Frank Do/an, w~th U.S. Homes Corporation, stated a program has
Page
October 23, 1990
set up to allow the County to acquire all 275 feet between the
power lines and the Vineyards property lines. He stated the peti-
tioner is dedicating right-of-way for future Livingston Road along
both the subdivision for Stoneybrook Estates and Stoneybrook Golf and
· Country Club.
Co~ts~Xoner Shanahan moved, seconded by Commissioner Goodnight
-~n~ C~mTied~xmousl¥, to close the public hearing.
~inXoner Shanahan moved, seconded by Commissioner Goodnight
: ~ c'a=-'r~ wnsm~mously, to approve Petition SMP-90-29, ~ub]ect to the
~::.cc=ld/tion~ listed tn the Agreement Sheet, thereby adopting Resolution
Page 12
October 23, 1990
· O-79 1~ PETITION PD&-89-17, ~ILLIAM R. V~S 0F VI~S ~
INC., ~S~ING N~LES ~SOCIA~S, ~ OHIO CO~TION,
~ TO ~ ~ON ~S PUU BY ~GIN~ ~ ~I~
~~ ~SID~I~ ~ITS ~OM 577 TO 507, E~GING ~E
~ TO 2~.3~ A~S, ~DING CLUST~ HOUSING ~ A PEriOD
~IIATING T~ ~O~SED ~~ ~~ p~ _ ~ED
~ ~I~TIONS IN ~ ~ ~~ AS ~ED
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
October 3, 1990, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with
.the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition PDA-89-17,
' {f~led by William R. Vines of Vines and Associates, Inc., representing
Naples Associates, an Ohio Corporation, requesting amendments to the
Heron Lakes PUD by changing the maximum number of permitted res/den-
rial units from 577 to 507, enlarging the 19.7 acre lake to 21.31
acres, adding cluster housing as a permitted use, and eliminating the
proposed temporary treatment plant for property located North of 1-75,
South of the Golden Gate Canal and East of the Golden Gate Community
Park in Section 33, Township 49 South, Range 26 East.
Planner Ray Bellows explained this petition will amend the Heron
Lake PUD document by reducing the maximum gross density from 5.66 to 5
%~rlits per acre, which will bring the project into compliance with the
Growth Management Plan. He stated that cluster housing has been added
as a permitted use. He indicated all applicable County agencies have
reviewed this petition and have determined that no level of service
standards will be adversely affected. He reported that all stipula-
tions have been incorporated into the PUD document, however, an addi-
tional stipulation to the Environmental Section has been agreed upon
and will be added this date to the ordinance and PUD document. He
concluded the CCPC has forwarded Petition PDA-89-17 to the Board with
a recommendation of approval.
Commissioner Vo]pe questioned where the access points to the pro-
~ect will be located?
Planner Bellows indicated that access will be provided through the
improved Recreation Lane.
In answer to Commissioner Hasse, William R. Vines of Vines and
Page 13
October 23, 1990
Inc., replied the petition includes commitment to make
:substantial improvements at the intersection of Recreation Lane and
Santa Barbara Boulevard, to provide a divided landscape median entry
with left and right turning lanes. He added that the plan is to
construct only single family homes, but the option will remain to
~develop the southern portion as cluster housing.
'" Planner Bellows pointed out that if this project is developed con-
g entirely of single-family homes, the total number of dwelling
will be reduced to 322 as opposed to 507.
In answer to Commissioner Volpe, Planner Bellows stated the appli-
cant has not specified providing any widening of Recreation Lane.
Commissioner Volpe asked for clarification on the buffering for
lots along 1-75.
Mr. Vines responded there are two buffer features: l) there will
a so/id wall; and 2] there will be a 20 foot landscape buffer strip
which will include preservation of all existing native vegetation plus
when necessary.
Commissioner Volpe commented that the original proposal included
reservation of right-of-way to connect this project to 1-75, which has
since been deleted.
Planner Bellows indicated the applicant at one time was planning
to delete that stipulation, however, the CCPC deemed it to be
,appropriate, and the petitioner will provide for that access.
Mr. Vines added they have agreed to preserve a 60 foot right-of-
for ~uch connection to the east as is deemed appropriate when that
land ts developed.
Commissioner Volpe stated the document provided at this meeting
does not provide that information.
Planner Bellows agreed, stating those amendments were made after
agenda packets were mailed.
..
! Mr. Vines stated the intention is to create a stub street to pro-
,~vide access to the property by emergency vehicles, or to provide for
an extension to the east of The Heron Lake street pattern to serve
40
Page 14
October 23, 1990
"additional acreage if the currently undeveloped land ts developed, and
if It is deemed appropriate. He said this will prohibit the creation
~of a short cut that may generate high speed traffic in this restden-
.ttal neighborhood. He reported the applicant and the CCPC concurred
on this Issue, and added that the ultimate decision of whether or not
to extend that street is left with the County.
Commissioner Hasse questioned if sidewalks are being provided?
Mr. Vines communicated that the development plan includes
· sidewalks extending throughout the project. He stated there will be a
large, lakefront, internal community park plan that Includes
. sidewalks wh/~ch continue to the entrance of the pro3ect, which is
acent to the Golden Gate Community Park.
~ Charlotte Westman, representing the League of Women Voters, com-
mented on stipulations with regard to water and sewer that are pro-
within the proposed ordinance.
C~sd#loaer Shan~mn movsd, aeconde,~
~t~ ~imly, to close the ~bltc hearing.
~. 7: ~lst~r S~ ~ed, seceded ~ Coatsst~er G~tght
~ ~t~ ~imly, that
: '~1~ ~ ~, nbJect to the ~nded stt~l~tto~, md ~tered
[~;'~ ~~ ~k No. 41:
ORDINANCE NO. 90-?9
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 83-47, WHICH ESTABLISHED
HERON LAKE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, BY AMENDING THE PUD DOCUMENT
TO ADD CLUSTERED DWELLINGS AS A PERMITTED USE AND PROVIDE A
DEFINITION THEREFORE; AMENDING PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES AND
STRUCTURES, BY ADDING A CHILDREN'S DAY CARE FACILITY AND
MODIFICATIONS TO SALES OFFICE USE: AMENDING GROSS PRO3ECT DENSITY
TO REFLECT CURRENT PRO3ECT DENSITY; AMENDING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
TO REFLECT THE NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS ALLOWED BY CLASS AND TO
PERMIT REDISTRIBUTION OF UNITS AMONG CERTAIN TRACTS; ADDING A SITE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL SECTION TO COMPLY WITH THE ZONING
ORDINANCE SECTION 10.5; ADDING A SUBDIVISION PLAN APPROVAL SECTION
TO COMPLY WITH THE COUNTY SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS; AMENDING
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, MULTI-FAMILY SITES TO REFLECT REVISED
MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENTS AND TO ALLOW
MODIFICATIONS TO THE CUL-DE-SACS IN THE TRACT IV IF DEVELOPED AS
MULTI-FAMILY; ~4ENDING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SECTION TO ADD
DEVELOPMENT STANDARD FOR CLUSTERED DWELLINGS; AMENDING DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS, SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, TO REFLECT INCREASED MINIMUM FLOOR
AREA REQUIREMENTS; AMENDING TITLE OF RECREATIONAL FACILITIES TO
REFLECT CHANGE TO RECREATIONAL COMMONS, AND BY DELETING
MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT AND MASTER PLAN SUBSECTIONS OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SECTION; AMENDING TITLE OF PARK AND OPEN
SPACE SUBSECTION OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SECTION TO REFLECT
Page 15
October 23, 1990
CONSENT AOENDA - APPROVED WITH CHANOES
~mmioner Shanahan moved, seconded by Commissioner Ooodnight
~?.?t Iz~ c~.rrie~ unanimously, that the agenda and consent agenda be
~ with the fo/lowing changes:
1. Item *SA - Richard F. Joswig requesting public petition
regarding an abandoned building in Lake Champagne - Request
by Commissioner Hasse to hear this item at 10:00 A.M.
2. Item #12B - Anna Ripperdan of Immokalee Neighborhood Services
requesting waiver of dumping fees - Added. (Requested by
Commissioner Goodntght.)
3. Item #9Gl - Recommendation to approve a budget amendment
recognizing FY 89/90 carry forward for the Natural Resources
Dept. - Added. (Requested by Staff. }
4. Item #6B3 - Petition R-90-23, request for a rezone from A-2MH
to GC for a golf course and accessory uses for property
located i mile south of Immokalee Road (C.R. 846) and 2 miles
east of C.R. 951 - Continued to 11/27/90. (Requested by the
Petitioner. )
5. Item #12C - Discussion regarding mosquito control to be beard
at 12:00 P.M. - Added. (Requested by Commissioner Saunders.)
Xte~ #4
OF R~ULAR BCC M~ETING OF ?/31/90 AND BUDGET WORKSHOP OF
6 - AS PRESENT D
O~mm/ssioner Sha~mhan moved, seconded by Co~issioner Good. night
: al'~d =~rrie~ u~nimousl¥, to approve the Minutes of the Regular BCC
;~,i.c~t. fn~ of ?/31/90 ~nd the Buxlget Workshop of 8/6/90.
.. Itu ~A
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY GRANT INCREASE OF $1,757,510 FOR
"EAST AND SOUTH NAPLES SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM" PROJECT -
ACCEPTED AND UTILITIES ADMINISTRATOR AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE THE GRANT
Mike Arnold, Utilities Administrator, presented Chairman Nasse
"with a check in the amount of $1,757 510, from the U.S Environmental
Protection Agency. He stated this is a grant increase for the East
South Naples Sanitary Sewer Collection System, which brings the
~! ~ total in Grant funds for this project to $6.8 million. He added that
the total received and anticlpat, ed in grant funds and State loans is
.~pproximately $23.2 million, which is a substantial portion of the
total cost for this sanitary sewer collection system. He reported
{Il 0.9
': !. Page 2
October 23, 1990
:' this has substantially mttlgated the assessments for this project.
· Oommtssioner Shanahan moved, seconded by Coutsstonsr Saunders and
¢~rried zmamimousl¥, to accept the ~rant Increase and authorize the
~:~f Utilities Ad~tnistrator to exerts the ~t ~en~nt.
Xt~ ~B
~. ~~ S~ICE AW~S - ~SE~ED
Commissioner Hasse congratulated the following employees and
presented their Employee Service Awards:
Bennie L. Spencer, Pro3ect Review Services - 15 years - absent
Kathleen McLarty, Transportation - 15 years - absent
Rhonda L. Snell - Facilities Management - 10 years - present
Alice L. Toppe, Risk Management - 5 years - absent
Cleothta Washington, Road and Bridge - 5 years - absent
~::P~TITIO~PDA-90-? & DOA-90-3, HOLE, MONTES AND ASSOC., RET'RESZNTING
VI'N~fARD~ DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND U.S. HOME CORPORATION KEQUESTING
A DETERMINATION REGARDING SUBSTANTIAL DEVIATION - SAID PETITIONERS
DE'rE]~[I~ED NOT TO CONSTITUTE A SUBSTANTIAL DEVIATION
Legal notice having been published tn the Naples Dally News on
· 'il, October 7, 1990, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication flied with
· the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider if the proposed
~!i.i:changes to the Vineyards (PUD) Planned Unit Development and (DOA)
ii~( Development Order constitute a Substantial Deviation, which ts
requested by the Vineyards Development Corporation and U.S. Home
Corporation, represented by Hole, Montes and Associates and ts com-
pa/lion petition to PDA-90-7 and DOA-90-3 which will also be heard this
.date.
Planner Bryan Milk stated he ts presenting a series of p~tltions
Concerning the Vineyards PUD and DRI. He said the first is a petition
for the Board to determine whether Petitions PDA-90-? and DOA-90-3,
amendments to the Vineyards of Naples PUD and DRI, are insubstantial
or substantial, followed by presentation of Petitions PDA-90-7 and
DOA-90-3, and concluding with companion items SMP-90-28 and SMP-90-29.
~lanner Milk explained the Vineyards of Naples is a ~,925.4 acre
'PUD located tn Section 1, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, and
~*,, Sections 5, 6 and 8 in Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier
i0
Page 3
' ~ October 23, 1990
~ ~Count¥, Florida. He said this development was approved in May, 1985,
and allows 460,000 square feet of co~mercial, 3,071 residential
stngle-f~mily units and 3,907 multi-family units. He reported the
i petitioner is proposing amendments to the PUD document and Master
Plan, as well as the Development Order. He stated the Southwest
Florida Regional Planning Council and the Florida Department of
Community Affairs (DCA) have reviewed the amendments proposed and
' determined that they do not constitute a substantial deviation. He
concluded that Staff, based upon the criteria set forth in the State
statutes, concurs and recommends that the Board determine that these
"/i' ' a~aendments do not constitute a substantial deviation.
Com~issioner Volpe asked that the proposed amendments be iden-
tified.
Mr. Milk reported the amendments are located west of 1-75 which is
~ '- an undeveloped tract of land. He said a revision to the Land Use
Master Plan is being requested under this Development Order and PUD
~ a~ndment to realign the roadway network and also to enlarge the golf
course area. He indicated Staff feels this revision is well designed
~i !~and modi~ied. He mentioned that, because of the revision to the
master plan, the petitioner was asked to revise the Land Use Schedule,
which tallies the originally proposed land uses and what is being
requested. He stated that minor changes have been added to this petl-
· tion. He said the petitioner is also requesting clarification of
right-of-way, to better access the development and the proposed new
and better internal network of roads within the development.
!i He continued, stating that the words "detached dwellings,' have
~ been added to Section 3.03, which allows flexibility to construct zero
lot type homes. He said this will allow the petitioner the flexibi-
lity to work out their own development regulations. He explained that
~ the PUD document contains only minimum requirements in caaes of zero
..10t lines. He said the developer has gone one step further and deve-
their own guidelines.
Commissioner Hasse inquire~ if this amendment will increase den-
Page 4
October 23, 1990
i!sity in the development?
[i!i~~ Mr. Milk indicated the density has actually decreased by allowing
/single family dwellings in a larger portion of the tract and by
~i enlarging the golf course.
In answer to Commissioner Shanahan, Mr. Milk stated there are no
Increases in either dwelling units or commercial square footage in
:hiaparticular amendment.
Commissioner Volpe commented that the area west of 1-75 will now
be developing sooner than expected, and certain roadways tn North
il/Nap/es will be impacted. He asked what is being done to address the
transportation network?
'!~i~. Mr. Milk communicated that the petitioner has prepared a traffic
impact statement to warrant the impacts of the roadways. He stated
they are claiming that the eastern portion of the Vineyards is not
developing as fast as originally intended, therefore, that will offset
impact of the western tract. He reported the Southwest Florida
Regional
Planning Council and the State have mandated that certain
portions of all roadways in and around the Vineyards be updated during
· ' dlfferent phasing. He stated because the petitioner is requesting
Subdivision Master Plan approvals, they must prove to the County by
leans of traffic impact statements that they are not increasing dys-
n of the roadways.
:.Commissioner Volpe questioned when the developer will be assuming
commitment made to pay for improvement of these roadways7
Robert Duane representing U.S. Homes, stated that impact fees
provided commensurate with their impacts, based on annual assessment
by the Vineyards. He also clarified that build-out of the Vineyards
ia occurring much slower than anticipated when the project was
approved in 1985. He said the overall impact on the roadway system is
~uch less than originally expected. He indicated there is a moni-
toring process built into the Development Order that continues to
update the impacts on those roadways.
In answer to Commissioner Volpe, Mr. Milk stated the eliminated
].2
Page 5
"* October 23, 1990
~i/an~ge regarding bulldtng heights and commercial uses was repett-
~?: tire, because it is contained as a safeguard within another ordinance.
-He said there is no change in the permitted uses within the commercial
portion of this property.
C~i~eloner Shanahan ~ seconded ~ Co--testier Goo~tght
~ ~1~ ~iml~, t~t the ~blic he~tng ~ closed.
C~.~ S~ ~ed, seconded ~ Co~ts.toner Goo~tght
'~ ~ ~t~1Y, t~t Petitions PDA-gO-~ ~d ~A-gO-3 do not
. ~~ 9~78 ~ ~TITION PDA-90-7 (COn. ION TO PETITION ~A-90-3),
' ~B~ L. ~, OF HOLE, MO~ES ~ ASSOCIATES, INC.,
' ~ ~~S D~~ CO~TION ~ U.S. HO~ C0~OP~TION,
~Q~IN~ A ~D ~IT D~LO~ ~~ TO THE ~I~Y~S 0F
N~S POo - ~D
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
October 3, ~90, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication fi/ed with
Clerk, public hearing was o~ened to consider Petition PDA-~0-7
~(Oo~p~Aon to Petition DOA-90-~), requesting a Planned Unit
~ment amendmen~ to the V~neyards of Naples PUD for proper~y
~. located between A~rport-Pulling Road (C.R. Sl) and Golden Gate
~'~ Estates, North of Pine R~dge Road (C R. 8~6) and South of Vanderb~lt
~ach Road (C.R.862) in Section ~, To.ship 49 South, Range 25 East,
~d Sections ~, 6 and 8, To.ship 49 South, Range 26 Eas~, Collier
Co~y, Florida, containing ~,~25.4 acres.
. ~ ~iest~ S~ ~ed, seconded ~ Cmtestoner Goo~tght
;',.:-"; ~1~ ~A~ly, to clo~e the ~bltc hearing.
'~: ~seA~r S~ moved, seconded ~ Co~/setoner Sanders
=~ ~t~ly. t~t the ordtn~ce aa n~red ~d titled
~ ~t~ ~ entered into Ordt~ce Book No. 41:
O~IN~CE NO. 90-78
~ ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 85-15, WHICH ESTABLISHED
T~E VINEYARDS OF NAPLES PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, AS AMENDED,
~ENDING SECTION II - PROJECT DEVELOPMENT, SUBSECTION 2.05, SITE
PLAN APPROVAL, PARAGRAPH A), TO REQUIRE SAID APPROVAL IN
ACCORDANCE WITH T~E STANDARDS OF SECTION ~0.5 OF THE ZONING
ORDINANCE AND DELETING PARAGRAPH D) THAT REQUIRES SAID APPROVAL OF
SITE PLANS WITHIN 10 DAYS; AMENDING THE LAND USE SCHEDULE BY
ADJUSTING APPROXIMATE ACREAGES; AMENDING SECTION III - SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, AMENDING SUBSECTION 3.03, PERMITTED USES AND
[] O00 A,. 13'
Page 6
October 23, 1990
STRUCTURES, PARAGRAPH B) PERMITTED PRINCIPAL USES AND STRUCTURES
REQUIRING SPECIFIC SITE APPROVAL ACCORDING TO SECTION 2.05,
SUBPARAGRAPH B) BY ADDING DETACHED DWELLINGS AS A PERMITTED USE;
BY AMENDING SECTION IV - MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, BY DELETING
SUBSECTION 4.03, PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES, PARAGRAPH B),
PERMITTED PRINCIPAL USES AND STRUCTURES REQUIRING SPECIFIC SITE
PLAN APPROVAL ACCORDING TO SECTION 2.05, SUBPARAGRAPHS l) AND 2)
AND RELETTERING PARAGRAPH C), PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES AND
STRUCTURES AS PARAGRAPH B); AMENDING SUBSECTIONS 4.04.04, MAXIMUM
BUILDING HEIGHT, TO INCREASE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT; BY DELETING
SECTION VI - COMMERCIAL (RETAIL AND INTERCHANGE COMMERCIAL),
SUBSECTION 6.02.01, RETAIL, PARAGRAPH B), PERMITTED PRINCIPAL USES
AND STRUCTURES REQUIRING SPECIFIC SITE PLAN APPROVAL SUBPARAGRAPHS
l) THROUGH 4), AND BY RELETTERING PARAGRAPH C), PERMITTED
ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES, AS PARAGRAPH B); AMENDING SECTION
IX - GENERAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS, AMENDING SUBSECTION 9.02,
DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS, PARAGRAPH C), TRANSPORTATION,
SUBPARAGRAPH 7) TO REPLACE WITH NEW LANGUAGE SETTING FORTH THE
RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUIREMENTS FOR LIVINGSTON ROAD AT THIS LOCATION;
AMENDING PARAGRAPH F), EXCEPTIONS TO COUNTY SUBDIVISION
REGULATIONS, SUBPARAGRAPH 2) TO REFERENCE NEW ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY
CROSS SECTIONS BY REFERENCING A NEW EXHIBIT "B"; DELETING EXHIBIT
"A", T~E MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN WEST OF 1-75 AND INSERTING A
REVISED MASTER PLAN AS EXHIBIT "A-l"; ADDING CCPC RECOMMENDATIONS
AND STAFF STIPULATIONS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
D~ ORDER 90-6 AND R~SOLUTION 90-502 RE PETITION DOA-90-3
(CO~PA~ION TO P~TITION PD&-90-?}, ROBERT L. DUANE, OF HOLE, MONTES AND
ASSfR:IATES, INC., REPRESENTING THE VINEYARDS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
/%ND U.S. HOg~E CORPORATION, REQUESTING AN AM~uMENT TO DEVELOPMENT
ORDER ~5-2, DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT KNOWN AS THE VINEYARDS OF
NAPLES - .ADOPTED '
Legal not/ce having been published in the Naples Daily News on
October ?, 1990, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with
the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition DOA-90-3,
fl!ed by Hole, Montes and Associates, representing The Vineyards
Development Corporation, requesting an amendment to Development Order
85-2, as amended, by amending the Master Land Use Plan for that
of the Vineyards West of 1-75, amending the Land Use Schedule
;~u~d ~ak~ng a determination concerning a substantial deviation for pro-
located on the South side of Vanderbilt Beach Road, between 1-75
and Airport Road.
Planner Milk explained the purpose for amending Development Order
85-2 is to amend the Master Land Use Plan Exhibit "A" through Exhibit
i:'"A-1#, and the Land Use Schedule for that portion of the Vineyards
of 1-75, located in Section 6, Township 49 South, Range 26 East
~l~/~d Section l, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, consisting of 555+
--
Page 7
October 23, 1990
CHANGE TO RECREATIONAL COMMONS; ADDING BUFFERS SECTION WHICH SETS
i~. FORTH BUFFER REQUIREMENTS; ADDING "ROADS TO BE PRIVATE" SECTION TO
~]'~':~" REFLECT CURRENT ROAD OWNERSHIP; AMENDING EXCEPTIONS TO SUBDIVISION
REGULATIONS SECTION TO REFLECT SIDEWALK ALIGNMENT CHANGES AND
i'! ' RIGHT-OF-WAY CROSS SECTION; ADDING ENVIRONMENTAL STIPULATIONS
SECTION; ADDING WATER MANAGEMENT STIPULATIONS SECTION; ADDING
ENGINEERING STIPULATIONS SECTION; ADDING UTILITIES STIPULATIONS
SECTION; AND BY PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
O0~I~T~ATTOI~B~"~ DIRECTED TO PuKSUE LEGAL ACTION REGARDING AN ABANDONED
?~i:' '~I~ I~ ~ CHAMPAG~ 9.ND REPORT BACK IN TWO WEEKS, AND CODE
~!, ~ ~]1~I$OR TO I~OVIDE A VEHICLE TO FREV~I~ SIMILAR
Commissioner Hasse read a letter prepared by himself and dated
.~9/12/90, addressed to Judge Blackwell (Copy not provided to the
to the Board. )
Commissioner Saunders stated for the record that any comments made
b~ Commissioner Hasse in reference to himself and the Judiciary are
solely and completely comments made by Commissioner Hasse.
Commissioner Hasse stated he continues to stand by the letter,
~ lnd~¢ating he has done nothing wrong by writing it. He said the aban-
'doned house in Lake Champagne is not only an eyesore but it is a
dangerous situation.
~'. Co~isstoner Saunders commented that everyone on the Board of
Commissioners is sympathetio with the situation of the resi-
dents in that area and hope to find a solution to the problem. He
added for the record, however, that he personally has a great deal of
respect for Judge Blackwell, and the letter put him in a position of
requiring the Judge to exempt himself from the case.
County Manager Dorrill indicated a petition has been received in
con~%~nction with this item containing several hundred signatures.
The following people requested the Board of County Commissioners
to assist in resolving the problems associated with the abandoned
;buildIng in Lake Champagne:
.;~ · Richard F. Joswig Wtni Burton
,.. George Keller William M. Laskey
i:$', John Sweda Jerome Marks
,~qJ~umes W. Nichols
: Commissioner Hasse asked if the Board can lift the license of the
Page 16
October 23, 1990
in guestion to help resolve this 'matter?
'~.' County Attorney Cuyler stated if there is a violation of the com-
petency law for a builder, a complaint must be filed.
Commissioner Saunders asked if Staff can be directed to inspect the
~home and make a determine as to whether it is a hazard and, if so,
that it be torn down?
~ Dick Clark, Code Enforcement Supervisor, reported this house has
examined on several occasions. He said the County has an unsafe
~ structure ordinance, however, it requires that specific criteria be
~resent. He explained the criteria is generally for those houses that
are deteriorated, not newly constructed homes. He said, in his opi-
nion, Staff does not have the authority under this ordinance to tear
down the house.
Commissioner Saunders asked if a determination can be made that
the building is a public nuisance?
i::.. County Attorney Cuyler replied that if the County does not operate
under an existing ordinance, it may become involved in a civil suit.
]{e added the builders are currently in civil court and it seems that
;the residents are more interested in perhaps moving that case up on
the docket.
Commissioner Saunders commented if the Board .~ntervened tn
lawsuit and indicated that the County wants the building removed
because of its condition, perhaps that may spur those involved to
;~'proceed more quickly with a resolution.
Commissioner Volpe asked if there is any ability under existing
ordinances that the County could administratively move forward with
~any remedial type of action?
Mr. Clark stated that he is currently proceeding to bring this
before the Code Enforcement Board as illegal land use, because the
permit has expired which permitted a structure on this piece of pro-
perry. He said that gives the 'County the ability to levy fines of
i~: $250 per day, but does not give the authority to remove the structure.
In answer to Commissioner Volpe, Mr Clark explained the two par-
Page
October 23, 1990
involved filed suit, which is now in civil court. He added,
however, the financial institution involved went insolvent, and the
goverrnment regulatory authority has taken it over. He stated this has
~-.{ become extremely complicated because everyone involved is either in
litigation or filing bankruptcy, and the government agency refuses to
take any action until they receive title to the property.
Ccnmaissioner Saunders communicated that the quickest approach is
to direct the County Attorney to intervene in the lawsuit and if that
is not possible, to file a new suit with the aim being to tear down
.~he building,
Commissioner Shanahan asked if the Code Enforcement Supervisor has
any other ideas to expedite solution to the problem?
Mr. Clark stated there are a few areas under the Administrative
Codes that can be pursued to keep this from happening again. He asked
the Board's direction on adding, for example, if any builder allows
the building permit to expire past a certain date, that he be subject
~':'~ to disciplinary action. He said that authority is not currently pro-
? vided.
il;-: Commissioner Shanahan stated that corrective action should be
'~ taken as a result of this current situation.
~Ion~- $&~u~dere ~'~d, seconded by Co~lssi~er Vol~
'~lg ~imly, to direct the C=~ ittomq to t~ ~t~sr
-1~ ~i~ tm ~stblm to ~ the h~ r~ed, to gi~ this
a t~ ~Ao~i~ ~ re~t back within ~ ~e~ ~ to ~t
~ ~l~le ~ ~t he ts plying; ~d the C~e
"~i~r to ~i~ t~ ~ard with m vehicle to pr~t this
D~~ 0~ 90-7 ~ ~SOLUTION 90-505 RE PETITIO~ ~A-90-4,
~ING S~N TAVIL~, ~Q~STING ~~ TO D~LO~
O~ NO. 90-~, ~GEN~ VIL~GE, ~SOLUTION NO. 90-67, ~U~ TO T~
~I~ ~~ AG~ BE~EN THE DEP~ OF CO~I~
~~, SO--ST P~GION~ P~ING CO~CIL ~ S~N TAVIL~ -
44
Page 18
October 23, 1990
regal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
October 7, 1990, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with
the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition DOA-90-4,
filed by George Varnadoe of Young, van Assenderp, Varnadoe and Benton,
P.A., representing Stephen Tavtlla, requesting amendment to
Order No. 90-1, Regency Village, Resolution No. 90-67,
..<pursuant to the Stipulated Settlement Agreement between the Department
of Community Affairs, Southwest Regtona] Planning Council and Stephen
Tavilla, for property located in Sections 18 and 19, Township 48
:{;South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
Planner Nino stated that Petition DOA-90-4 is an amendment to the
:.~ l~egenc~ Village of Naples Development Order as a result of a
Stipulated Settlement Agreement between the Department of Community
?':Affairs and the Petitioner. He commented that the original
Order was appealed because of a transportation issue which
!?involved providing facilities concurrent with the impacts of develop-
ment pursuant to the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. He noted
that the Stipulated Settlement Agreement satisfies the concerns of DCA
~'end the Petitioner.
He stated that Staff recommends approval of the subject 13etition
~ with one minor change which is to add the words, "to the
Transportation portions," to the Development Order, page 3, sub-
..;paragraph (1}, changing the second sentence to read, "Any amendment to
.the Transportation portions of that Ordinance by Collier County shall
be effective or applied ..."
C4]~l~ut~Xoz~er Goodntght moved, seconded by Commissioner Shanahan
"~": '-~ cal-~ted ~nt~ly, to close the public hearing
'~ ~ ~~ly, to a~ PetXti~ ~A-90-4 with the addi-
tX~ ~~ ~ not~ a~, t~re~ adoring ~el~t Order
Pqe 19
October 23, 1990
90-80 A~DING T~E C~ILDRER'S sERVIcES COUNCIL 0RDINARCE
FItOV/D~ ~ SELECTION OF & CO~WlSSIOR~R FOR APPOI~ TO
C~E~CIL BT I~L3ORITY VOTE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY CO~MISSIORERS -
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
October 3, 1990, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with
the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider an amendment to the
~Children's Services Council Ordinance in order to provide for selec-
· ion of a Commissioner for appointment to the Council by majority
· vote of the Board of County Commissioners.
i~ C4~mutsst~ Sa~nders mo~ed, seconded tm/ Commissioner Shanahan and
c~a'l~t~I/n~ntmo~ly, thmt the public bearing be closed.
Co~/sstoner Saunders moved, seconded by Coatesioner ¥olpe and
cm~rted~x~ntmously, that the Ordinance u numbered and titled below
; be a~pt~d ~ e~tered into Ordinance Book No. 41:
ORDINANCX 90-80
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CHILDREN'S SERVICES COUNCIL ORDINANCE,
~' ~ COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 90-64, BY REVISING SECTION FOUR TO
PROVIDE FOR SELECTION BY BOARD; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND
SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
lt~a ~B
.~ ~ CMC ASSOCIATION OF NAPLES, INC. REQUESTING WAIVER OF AT THE LANDFILL - APPROVED
Henry Maxant, resident of Pine Ridge area and Director of Pine
,Ridge Civic Association, requested that the County waive tipping fees
for eight dumpaters on Saturday, November 3, 1990, on behalf of the
Pine Ridge Civic Association and Waste Management for their free
· cleanup day.
Mr. Maxant added that as a member of the Pine Ridge Civic
A~soctatton for twelve years, this has been one of the most popular
!i..*
programs, and the residence of Pine Ridge have requested it be
repeated. He noted that this time, however, the dumpsters will be
to eight which will bring the tipping fee to approximately
:$?00 to $800. He informed that the Pine Ridge Civic Association will
/rprovide the monitors, advertising, make sure that the areas of the
52
Page 20
t' ' October 23, 1990
duat~ters are cleaned up afterwards, and pay the gratuities of the
[drivers.
· Commissioner Hasse commented that in the past the County has
accepted this kind of request because it does enhance the community.
... Co~uloner Volpe ~ed, eeconded by Cmtssi~er S~rs ~
P~ ~ Civic ~sociatta's cle=p ~ m N~em~r 3 1990.
Z~ ~liB
Commissioner Goodntght stated that she was contacted by Anna
Rtpperdan of the Immokalee Neighborhood Services %~ho informed her that
the Daily Bread/Food Bank will be delivering 22 pallets of food for
four agencies tn Immokalee. She commented that Ms. Rtpperdan has
~'? infol~med her that there will be approximately four or five pickup
loads of food from this delivery that will not be edible and she does
not want to have it placed in garbage cans where people could have
access to it and become sick.
~ ~t~ ~t~ously, that the tipping fees at the landfill be
Itms~&l
*' R~'~ci~I~7~IOM 90-BOG R~ P~TZTION ~-90-13, 30~PH CALl R~QU~STING & 10
:~ ~ YAI~IAIIC~ ~ TH~ R~QUIRED ~RONT YARD S~TB&C~ OF 75 I~g~-~ TO 65
~~______~F~I~I~ T~i)CATED AT 6330 22ND &Y~RITE SOD~I~I~TEST - ADOPTED
Legal notice having been published tn the Naples Daily News on
October ?, 1990, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with
{the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition V-90-13,
filed by Joseph Call, Calt Industries, requesting a 10 foot front yard
setback variance from the required 75 feet front yard setback to 65
~!~feet, in the "E" Estates zone for property described as the South 220
'."feet of Tract 3, Golden Gate Estates, Unit No. 31, according to the
Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book ?, Page 59, of the Public Records
.>~of Collier County (South side of 22nd Avenue, S.W.).
53'
Page 21
October 23, 1990
Planner M~lhere stated that the petitioner is requesting a 10 foot
reduction to the required front yard setback of 75 feet to 65 feet in
order to complete construction of a guest house on the Subject pro-
perty and to obtain a CO for this guest house.
Planner Mulhere informed that the petitioner applied for and
received a permit to construct a guest house on the subject property.
-~' He noted that the permit application showed the setback in question to
· be 65 feet, as did the site p/an submitted with the permit applica-
:. tion, however, the building permit indicated a required front setback
of 75 feet. He explained that due to this confusion the structure was
placed l0 feet too close to the east property line.
Planner Mulhere noted that the violation was discovered as a
result of the spot survey which is required 21 days after the Issuance
of the Building Permit; and by the time the spot survey was filed and
:.!;the violation noted, further construction of the guest house had taken
place.
Planner Mulhere pointed out the non-standard location of the lot
question, noting that the lot does not front upon a pub/lc or pri-
..vats street, therefore, being a non-traditional lot relationship it
~akes the function of the setback less important.
Planner Mulhere stated that the CCPC recomme~;ded unanimously the
apDrova! of the variance request.
Planner Mulhere answered Commissioner Hasse's question by pointing
? out that it ie against the Zoning Ordinance to rent the guest house,
and the petitioner is aware of this Ordinance.
Robert McGinnis, representing the petitioner, commented that a
~ermit was applied for with a Job site plan and both noted 65 foot
~: setbacks. He added that when the Building Permit was returned theme
was no ind~cation that the 65 foot setback was Incorrect. He reported
that the construction on the guest house was started and ~Dartiall¥
completed before the spot survey noted that it did not conform to the
?~ foot setback. He stated that there was no clearing done to
construct the house.
Page 22
October 23, 1990
In an~er to Coauaisstoner Volpe, Mr. Mulhere answered that the
~ guest house is accessed by a separate drive from the main house.
Planner Hulhere indicated that there were two letters of opposi-
tion to the subject petition from the same person. He stated the
opposition was related to the possibility of leasing or renting the
g~est house. Mr. N~lhere affirmed that the petitioner ts aware that
~renttng or leasing the ~est house is against the law.
~i~ Saers ~, sec~d ~ C~tssi~er Vol~ ~d
;~:~"~i~~ly, to cl~ t~ ~blic he~lng.
..~
~i~ S~ ~, seceded ~ Coatssi~r ~ight
"~ ~i~ ~aly, to aF~e Petttton V-90-!3 ~ r~~d ~
St~f ~ ~ ~llter C=~ Plan~ing Cat,i~, there~ adopting
Page 23
October 23, 1990
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
"October 7, 1990, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication fi/ed with
the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition V-90-14
~ filed by Gale Graham of Gulfside Pools, Inc. representing Robert Hall,
req~esting a 2.5 foot side yard variance from the required 10 foot
i~L Bide yard setback and a 5 foot rear yard variance from the required 15
< foot rear yard setback, in a PUD Zone, for proper~y located 411
Widgeon Point, Lot 14, Unit "B", Naples Bath and Tennis Club.
['i ~, Planner Badamtchian stated that the variances are requested in
~order to enclose the pool area of said property. He noted that there
..ii ia a heavy landscaped area and lake in the rear of the property making
:/ mintmal aesthetic concerns for the neighborhood.
Plaruner Badamtchtan advised that the Collier County Planning
Commission held a public hearing on October 4, 1990, on the subject
;~petttton and forwarded this petition with a 5/2 vote recommending
approval.
Gale Grahm, representing Robert Hall, stated that the reason for
request is because the house is not set parallel with the left
property line which brings the rear property line across at an angle
· preventing a square enclosure of the pool area to be constructed
with the required setbacks. He noted that other houses tn this deve-
lopment have received variances of this type. He pointed out that
there is an existing hedgerow along the left side and extensive
landscaping behind the house between the proposed area and the lake.
In response to Commissioner Vo/pe, Mr. Grahm informed that the
'enclosure has not been constructed.
~ione= Sh~nahan ~.~d, eeconded by Co~issionsr S~un~rs and
that thy public hearing b~ closed.
[] O00P, , 59
~ 24
Octobez- 23, 1990
moved, ~conded by Commt~stoner S~unders and
Petttt~ V-90-14 ~ a~r~ed, t~re~
90-50~.
Pa~e 25
0ctob~.r 23, 1990
~O~t~ F~3&, ..TR., REPRESENTING DONALD K. ROSS &ND ROBERT
D~IP/~N~D B~N~FIT PENSION TRUST, R~QU~STING A ~ ~
~ ~ ~~ ~A~D AT ~ ~ CO~ OF T~g I~E~ION OF
I~ ~ O~ RO~ ~ S.R. 951 - STA~ DI~CTED TO ~EDI~
~ ~ ~ ~LO~ O~ ~ BRING BACK ~ ISSO~ OF
~~I~ ~ATION ~R A ~LIC ~ING AS SOON AS
Mr. Vega stated that the petftloners~ Development Order has a con-
, dttton which prohibits any development of the subject property until
S.R. 951 ts four-laned. He noted that the County has co~ttted to
w;~.:.f~r-l~tng S.R. 951; and, therefore, this petttton ts tn compliance
:u~wtth the concurrency re~trements. He ~otnted out that other permits
~ for ~tldtng along S.R. 951 have been issued and stated as an example
the M~atee Sho~tng Center which ts for approximately ~29,000
~.feet. He reported that Staff ts In agreement and as a result the said
~tttton has been b~ought before the Board of County Commissioners to
tne that the petitioner ts in compliance.
In responding to Co~tsstoner Volpe, Mr. Vega co~ented that the
original petition was brought before the Co~isston seven years ago.
~la~ned that the PUD consists of 8.96 acres and was a commercial
P~ that was change~ to a 150 unit motel which ~owered the traffic
~m~act.
Jeff Perry of the Growth Planntn~ Staff a~vlsed that th~s tract
~art of the Marco Shores DRI which ts primarily to the north ~nvolv/ng
~[* holdings of Deltona Corporation. He informed that when the
~;Developmen~ Order was issued approximately seven years ago there was
['no funding or Improvement schedule for S.R. 951 and all the holdings
b~ Deltona were conditioned on the four-lanlng of S.R. 951. He
:.e~1atned that since the original Development Order was issued there
.have been many changes, and if the Development Order was re~ested
to~y the concurrency management system wou~d apply and development
would ~ permitted because the funding is approved for the four-lanlng
of S.R. 951. ~e remarked that because this tract of land ts 9art of
~he old Development Order t~ cannot be developed while the land all
aro~d it be can developed.
Page 26
October 23, 1990
!~' In answer to Co~missioner Hasse, Mr. Perry commented that the Con-
Management System and the policies in the Growth Management
allow the County to take credit for improvements that are in the
if they are funded In either the County or State's work
program. He reiterated that Development Orders are being issued right
now to property not subject to some other Development Order.
Commissioner Volpe commented that this is the fallacy of
Concurrency Management because it is hypothetlcal. He stated that if
!i~this condition were removed and building was started immediately,
there would be an instant impact on an already congested road that
only has a commitment for funding of its improvements. He recognized
~' that this property is unique in that it has this condition, however,
he commented that a decision needs to be based on reality not on what
planned.
ii Commissioner Shanahan pointed out that by 1992 under the current
~work plan S.R. 951 will be four-laned considerably past the Marco
!~Shores DRI and by 1995 all the way to the bridge.
Richard Bart of Bart, Dunlop & Associates stated that this is a
small project cons/sting of a 150 room hotel and a 200 seat restaurant
which will not impact S.R. 951 substantially at the current two-lane
'service. He advised that the project would meet concurrency and not
degrade the present level of service with 109 peak hour trips in and
~out of the project.
....~. County Attorney Cuyler questioned if this petition is requesting
an amendment to the Development Order7
Mr. Vega responded that this is not the request. He stated that
/ihs feels the petition is in compliance and is asking that the building
/~permtt be issued.
In response to Commissioner Saunders, County Attorney Cuyler
that if the Development Order is clear that no building permits
are to be issued until S.R. 951 is four-laned, then his suggestion ks
to direct Staff to amend the PUD through the Planning Commission and
bring it back before the Board of County Commissioners.
Page 27
October 23~ ~990
Mr, Perry commented that there are two documents pertaining to the
[ ".'; development, one being the PUD and the other being the Development
~,.. Order. He explained that specific language within the Development
'ii~ Order restricts construction until S.R. 951 is four-laned. He added
,! that the Board may determine the compliance of the PUD through
. interpretation of the concurrency with funding of improvements of said
road, but modifications are needed to prevent the petitioner from
being reproached from the State regarding the conditions stated in the
Development Order.
Commissioner Saunders stated that there seems to be no alternative
' ~ other than to direct Staff to assist in expediting the amendment of
the Development Order.
Commissioner Volpe remarked that he feels this is the proper
~anner in which to handle this situation, however, he advised that
this is not an indicator as to how he will vote when the amendment
comes back before the Board for consideration. He pointed out that
the Board did vote against a subdivision master plan along S.R. 951
because of the impact it would have on the road.
,.' Mr. Perry noted that project was denied at the rezone level, and
this petition was rezoned years ago and is being held up by a mora-
torium that no one else that was rezoned at the same time has to con-
with.
Commissioner Shanahan agreed that an amendment to the Development
Order needs to be expedited and suggests that Staff be directed to do
so.
I%:'~ Donald Ross, an owner of the subject Property, stated that since
the time he has been prevented from developing, 5,000 living units
along S.R. 951 have been granted by the County as well as approval of
a SDP for a project much larger than the subject petition.
He noted
~ :/that he has done everything possible to comply with the wishes of the
y, but as it stands now his property is the only land along that
h of road that has not been allowed to be developed He advised
?ii'ithat hie Corps of Engineers permit which is critical to his property
~...
Page 28
October 23, 1990
;is a ten year permit and is now seven-and-a-half years old. He added
:that he has to build the boat docks before that permit expires,
however, this situation has made it impossible for him obtain a loan
In response to Commissioner Saunders, Dave Weeks of Growth
Planning Department stated that in order to amend the Development
,;~ Order it first needs to be reviewed by the RegionaI Plannlng Council
and the Department of Community Affairs before the local government
takes any action. He informed that once the amendment is in the local
governments control, then it will take two or three months.
~,. Mr. Vega reported that this matter does not need to go before the
~.Regton because it is not a substantial deviation
Mr. Weeks responded that on this petition, it hay not been deter-
il , mined that whether this is a substantial deviation or not and has been
an area of disagreement between the County and petitioner. He cited
that the petitioner did come before the Board about two years ago with
a different petition but the same request which included a date cer-
tain access; and the Board did determine that the petition was not a
substantial deviation to the Development Order but Indicated to the
applicant that the Board was not Going to approve the amendment to
provide the date certain which the petitioner removed as part of that
petition. He noted that a decision was made to take this petition
back before the Region because if the County deemed that this was not
a substantial deviation and approved the request then the County
~,would be subject to a potential appeal by the Region or the State. He
added that at the time the sub3ect petition was filed, the Region did
[have concerns regarding lifting this moratorium on this property.
Mr. Vega quoted from June 23, 1987, minutes of the Board of County
Oo~missioners of Collier County that "Commissioner Saunders moved that
it be determined that the requested language deletion from the Shore's
~:~<.pUD is not a substantial deviation." He stated that this motion
i..'Passed and the 45 day appeal period passed with no appeals by the
Regional or the State Planning Department. He commented that now a
decision needs to be made that either the petition meets the require-
Page 2 9
October 23, 1990
or goes ahead with the amendment and not go back to the State.
County Attorney Cuyler questioned as to a prior State review
before the Board took the motion on this previous petition to which
Mr. Weeks replied that there had been a State review. Mr. Weeks noted
that this previous petition included the deletion of the ltmtted
access to U.S. 41 as well as the change of the actual use of the
~ ~tract. County Attorney Cuyler further questioned if the DCA found it
not to be a substantial deviation? Mr. Weeks answered that DCA and
the Region did have a chance to review the petition and did not file
appeal. However, Mr. Weeks added, that'in recent conversations
with the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council they have
.expressed concern.
Mr. Weeks stated that Staff's position Is that it is not in the
~best interest of the County to determine that this is not a substan-
.tis1 deviation if the Region were to file an appeal.
Commissioner Saunders commented that the Commission should he
bour. d by a previous decision by the Board that the type of language that is
presented today was determined not to be a substantial deviation
Co~missioner Volpe stated that if this was the determination of
~the Board at that time and this is the same issue then the Board
¥i. should be hound by that decision unless there has been a change of
tance.
~rt~ ~az~ov~ly, that Staff be directed to expettt~ the a~end~ent
,:.-'to tl~ D~velo~ment Order for this particular petition, and Staf~ bring
before the C~tsston as quickly as possible for a public h~artng the
:~.'ts~m~ o£ ~tl~sT this is · substantial deviation.
For clarification of the motion, ~r. Perry asked If Staff is to
~'process the amendment to the Develogment Order without re~.~est or
application made through the State for their interpretation or deter-
n?
., ¢o~tsstoner Saunders confirmed that this is the intent of the
Page 30
October 23, lggo
~ ~L - MONITOR ON A DAILY BASIS AND PROVIDE EXPANSION OF
· ~ ~ NECE~E~"f SPECIFICALLY IN IMMOKALEE & EVERGLADES
County Manager Dorrill informed the Board that a Health Advlsory
has been issued by the Health Department as well as the Collier County
Mosquito Control District requesting people to have an increased
awareness of the situation around the State. He advised that he is
proposing a measured approach which will monitor the situation on a
basis. He stated that if the situation changes by either
)resumed or confirmed counts of encephalitis or there is an increase
/ii of this particular type of mosquito in Collier County, then the recom-
~endation would change to take additional steps of precautionary
mea~res. He co~ented that there are two issues at hand which are
the Cowry Parks where there are evenlng recreational programs and the
Hall~een evening festivities. He ~nformed that at the present t/me,
there seems not to be a need to take any action to change the evenlng
~er, t s.
Commissioner Volpe called attention to the School Board's action
~:]to cancel certain evening events and stated that he has some concerns
to why they have chosen this avenue of action while the County has
chosen a measured approach.
County Manager Dorrill stated that the Advisory was issued Friday
)on, October 19, 1990, as a result of a confirmed case in Lee
County. He pointed out that very quick decisions needed to be made at
that time for the weekend which produced the cancellation of some
'i'~'~football games and closing the parks over the weekends. After revi-
~i~stting the situation on Monday with al/ the affected agencies in the
i!~ C°lultY and with the advice of professional counsel, Mr. Dorrill noted
that a measured approach seemed more appropriate at this time. He
~entioned that the School's have elected to maintain the decision of
Friday because tickets are being sold to the evening school sponsored
events, and they feel an inherent liability.
Page 31
October 23, 1990
~ ' Public Health Director Polkowski stated that the Health Advisory
wu ~ssued because the conditions in the area have been changing over
the past couple of weeks based on the accumulation of information
received from adjoining areas as well as the fact that Collier County
has two suspect cases. She explained that there are three levels
of cases, the first being the suspect where other possible causes of
illness are considered. She noted the second ts the presumptive level
which indicates a good chance that encephalitis will be confirmed, and
then the actual confirmed case as the last level.
Dr. Polkowski explained that this Advisory was issued to inform
the people that they should be taking precautions by wearing long
sleeves and long pants in the evening as well as mosquito repellent,
if possible to reschedule evening events to the daytime hours.
L Commissioner Saunders questioned if the Commissioners should
consider closing the County Parks in the evenings as well as any
County events that are presently scheduled for the evening?
Dr. Polkowski replied that the Health Advisory recommends that
evening events should be rescheduled; however, the different agencies
have to decide for themselves as to what they should do. She added
that there will be a variable increase risk in the County because not
everywhere is there mosquito control activities.
:.< Commissioner Chanahan suggested that the County address these
areas where there is no control activity at present such as Immokalee
and Everglades City and start testing.
County Manager Dorrill commented that these areas are presently
being ~onitored.
· Polkowski advised that the Public Heslth Department cannot
to the different agencies of the County, but it is recom-
that evening activities be rescheduled.
In response to Commissioner Volpe, Dr. Polkowski advised that
older people, over the age of §0, are more likely to develop the more
severe forms of encephalitis and have a higher death rate.
Dr. Frank Van Essen, Director of Collier County Mosquito Control
Page 32
October 23, 1990
Dietrict, added that there is only one species of mosquito that
~ carries the disease of which they are monitoring for. He noted that
are approximately 30 light traps throughout the District with
relatively low findings of this particular mosquito at this time. He
iadvised that this monitoring is being done on a day-by-day basis
i~/tncluding~!~ the weekends. He affirmed that three light traps are being
~. set up in Immokalee as well as some in the Everglades City area. He
commented that while the risk is minimal, it is there.
Commissioner Hasse remarked that the mosquito control this year in
particular has been excellent.
County Manager Dorrill reiterated that while the County supports
~ the Advisory, monitoring of the mosquitos will continue on a day-by-
basis and no official action of closing parks or rescheduling
events will result at this time. He added that if anything of signi-
ficance were to develop, action will be taken immediately. He noted
!~ 'that the citizens of the County at this time need to make their own
decision as to whether to go out in the evenings and take their own
'precautions if they do.
Commissioner Volpe pointed out that the City of Naples, the School
: Board, and the adjoining Counties have taken stronger action, and
:stated that he has concerns regarding Collier County's measured
approach especially since the Public Health Director has recommended
rescheduling evening events.
Com~issioner Shanahan stated his concern regarding this issue,
however, does feel comfortable with monitoring the situation on a day-
; ~t-day basis.
Commissioner Saunders related that although he would not like to
ience anyone, he does feel that because of the advice of two
professionals on this issue, the County should consider closing the
parks in the evening.
In response to Commissioner Hasse, Dr. Van Essen replied that in
daytime these particular mosquitos are not active unless in a
< shaded, humid, or wooded area.
Page 33
October 23, 1990
C' ~ Dr. Van Esaen commented that it is not likely that the Advisory
will be lifted before Halloween, and it is difficult to say when it
.may be lifted.
>~ Commissioner Goodntght remarked that she agrees that it is up to
the people to take their o~ precautions and the responsibility of the
County is to Inform the citizens of the Advisory.
Dr. Polkowskt remarked that this year's Advisory is different from
previous years In that there have been an increased number of cases
;throughout the State of Florida which has resulted in a stronger
· Advisory warning. She noted that tn Palm Beach County there are four
confirmed cases as well as four presumptive cases of encephalitis.
C~/selonew S~unders moved, seconded by Co~]'-Isaloner Volpe, and
;'.~ fmtl~ l/l (Co~isstoners Hawse, (tocalntght, and Shanahan opposed), to
~.i~ . follow the mdvl~e of the Health Advisory and close the parks during
tho ~i~ ho~rs ~ well ms reschedule evening events and that Dr.
P~ll~o~lkt ~nd Dr. Van Essen on a dally buts advise the County Manager
:/ ~io~ ~ ~v~d, second~ by Ccr~tsstoner Goodnight,
· ~r~t~ ~u~ni~ously, to monitor the situation on a daily basis and
;~ pxc~i~ ~rpsm~ion of testing as necessary specifically in I~n~okslee
city.
!.~$$~t~F Clel'k ~off~an r~pla~ Deputy Clerk ~tght at this
T~"~ 1~[/~ ~0. 59.403 ~OR "PI~ RID(~ II~DUS~RIAL PARE N~U- -
,, Community Development Services Administrator Brutt requested
approval of an excavation permit for the "Pine Ridge Industrial Park
i~TU". He noted that there have been drainage concerns tn that area
and the residents desire to move ahead with the project to Improve the
drainage. He indicated that Staff recommends approval of Excavation
tPermtt No. 59.403, subject to the stipulations as referenced in the
Summary.
Saumiers moved, ~econd~d by Co~missioner Goodnight
October 23, 1990
¥ ~:.
!~'.~t~ ~mousl¥, to ~m ~civatt~ Pe~tt lo. 59.403 for
'P~ ~ I~trtal ~k ~', nbJect to the foll~tn~ mttp-
;~ ] .'
-.*~ ~.
Off-site reuoul of uterial shall be subject to "Standard
Co~ditiozt8' i~poe4~d by the County Kngineer in document dated
5/24/88.
Mhere groundwater is proposed to be pumped during the
_~___~vattng operation, a I>ewatertng Per~tt shall be obtained
from the South Florida Water Management District, and a copy
provided to Project Review Sez~tces for approval prior to the
commencement of ~ny dewatering activity on the site.
· o bluttng will be permitted unless issued a separate per. it
'oyColller County Project Review Services.
If tr~ ere to be removed as a result of fha excavating
operation, a Tree Removal Permit, required by Ordinance
75-21 ahal! be obtained fron Collier County Project Review
Servtcts beffore work shall commence.
Cop~ of South Flor/da Water Management District
¢~d~truction/ol~ration permit or early work permit shall be
provided prior to excmtion permit issuance.
ltll ~A~¥riate t~pact fm shall be paid prior to Issuance of
The e/ntu depth, width, elope and setback requirements ere
con~td~%-edwatv~d, since the proposed work will be constructed
within ditches which are located in ex/sting right-of-way and
e~e~ents which are limited In size.
i' DZ~:JS~IOJl RE TOUR/ST DKVKLOPJiKIFT TAX AND SALKS TAX RKVKNUK ISS1FES -
Assistant County Manager McLemore stated that the Commission asked
[that Dr. Williams of the Florida Economics. Consulting Group, Inc.,
comment on the Tourist Development Tax with respect to the bond Issue
;required for the spring training facility; the findings of the study
was prepared for People Acting For Collier Essentials (P.A.C.E.)
to the sales tax; and a projection of revenues with regard to
recent events.
,; Dr. David Williams advised that he prepared a report detailing the
that can be expected to be generated from the Tourist
Development, Tax over the next 30 years. He reported that his forecast
~'~ indicates that $558.5 million can be generated from this tax. He
Page 35
October 23, 1990
~oted that his forecast is very conservative and does not believe that
fit is necessary to revise same due to the uncertainty of the economy.
In answer to Commissioner Volpe, Mr. McLemore indicated that the
revenue stream will support a bond issue in the approximate amount of
$15 million.
.'.Dr. Williams explained that when he does his projections, he
a regression based model which forecasts taxable sales and has
a function of other variables: State tourism, County population
growth, and County income growth. He noted that there is a stronger
than average growth rate tn Collier County than the average Florida
ccamty.
With regard to the one-cent local option sales tax revenue, Dr.
Williams stated that he feels that over the next ten years, approxtma-
:i, tely $375 million In revenue will be generated.
In response to Commissioner Volpe, Dr. Williams advised that
approximately 25~ - 30~ of the tax would b~ paid from out-of-county
!residents.
Commissioner Volpe asked what the average tourist spends In
dollars in Collier County. Dr. Williams replied that the average
tourist in Collier County spends 2~-3~ higher than the average tourtst
!in the State, or about $160 per day, He Indicated that the definition
a 'tourist' is an Individual who does not stay longer than six
! Mr. George Keller, President, Collier County Civic Federation,
that he does believe that 20%-30~ of the sales tax will be
~generated from tourists. He indicated that sales tax ts a big issue
~,for the State and he feels that they will be asking for an additional
penny next year in order to balance their budget.
In answer to Commissioner Volpe, Assistant County Manager McLemore
;;ilstated that the total cost of the identified projects tn the sales tax
ireferendum is $380 million.
~' No action was required on tkts item.
~ ~O. 33-90--91 FOR PURCHASE AND/OR LEASE OF Thk MARCO ISLAND AIRPORT
'a~:'FJtO~Tl[~ D~P~ OF NATU~u~J= RESOURCES - STAFF TO PROCEED IN
;tSlI~$1ITTII~ p~OPOSAL TO ~ AND REPORT BACK TO BCC
Page 36
October 23, 1990
. ' Transportation Services Admin/strator Archibald stated that this
item ts a proposed response to the RFP's advertised by the DNR for the
lease or purchase of the Marco Island Airport. Ne reported that the
County has been operating the airport as agent for the DNR since mid
April and it has been determined that during the past 4-5 months, the
revenues collected equal or exceed the expenditures. He noted that
'because of the infrastructure in place, the airport has the potential
]of not only producing sufficient revenues to operate, but will also
~"handle the capital infrastructure costs long term. Ne indicated that
Staff feels that the potential of the airport is that of a positive
flow operation and something to be considered long term. He
that Staff has prepared a proposed response to the RFP as
by the DNR.
In answer to Commissioner Volpe, Mr. Archibald replied that
gh the DNR did advertise locally, Collier County did not receive
,;the proposal until the middle of October and Staff is caught in a time
crunch since the proposal has a due date of November 1, 1990. He
i=explainedthat the is submitted to the Commission two
proposal
being
'~ weeks ~n advance which will allow the prerogative of either not sub-
m~tting the proposal or to revise same, and there w~ll be sufficient
time to revisit this issue if need be. Ne indicated that the proposal
as prepared is not definite with respect to a final decision since DNR
may come back to negotiate an ultimate agreement which the Commission
'~would act upon at some later point in time.
Mr. Archibald reported that Staff has prepared an outline of the
experience and capabilities to operate the 'airport and a sec-
!~lon has been included which addresses the capital infrastructure and
;ital investment. He related that there is also a section which
'i oontaine an overall business plan with regard to operating the air-
He noted that the DNR looks to the Marco Airport as a revenue
~roducer, but they must be aware that whoever operates the airport
produce enough revenue to pay for operating expenses in addition
Page 37
October 23, 1990
paying off infrastructure needs to ensure that the building and
,rovements are maintained and that the airport is upgraded to handle
'.commuter service during the season.
Mr. Archibald advised that a finance plan is recommended and there
a menu of four options. He suggested that a proposal be submitted
outlining the options and then DNR cou]d select their choice relative
~to negotiating a final agreement. He explained that DNR has the
alternative of accepting any proposal from any party and Collier
y will have to compete but unfortunately, hard dollars cannot be
offered nor does Staff desire to submit a proposal that would put the
So~-~t¥ at risk.
Mr. Archibald addressed the options as outlined. He noted that
the first is a purchase option where the County, over a period of
time, would purchase ]ands in Golden Gate Estates where DNR has an
'~ active purchase program and transfer those to them on a per acre
rate. He explained that he foresees this being approximately
1-4 acres of Estates property for 1 acre of the Airport property.
Clerk Giles questioned why the land would be purchased and then
i.i~[[tswapped rather than giving the DNR the money that would be used to
l~urchase the Golden Gate Estates land. Mr. Archibald explained that
[~ae o~ the bigges~ e~enses to ~he DNR ~s go~ng ~hrough the ~rchase
~o~ed~e. He ~e~ated that ~he County has the advantage ~n ~his case
~'~ ~n~ a~p~ox~mately 1,O00 acres ~n the Estates. He noted that
~de~ the GAC ~and T~ust, the County already o~s the ]and, and one
~ department within the County would need to sell ~hat p~operty to
~[~othe~ department and there would have to be an exchange of revenue.
H~ ~nd~ated that this particular option is not very cost effective
~o~ the DNR's perspective s~nge they are looking at the value of the
~?[airport being $1.5 mill~on - $2.5 million.
Mr. Archibald stated that Option 2 ~nvolves three sections of land
in the Fahk~atchee Strand which were given to the County years ago.
~e ind~cated that this property borders on Janes Scenic Dr~ve and the
DNR w~ld like to purchase same, which encompasses 1,850 acres. He
Page 38
October 23, 1990
>repOrted that he feels that an exchange of those 3 square miles of
~:,:'propert¥ for the Marco Airport should be given some credence. He
?, indicated that the value of that land approaches $1 million and this
is a more comparable swap.
In answer to Commissioner Goodnight, Mr. Archibald advised that
?.<the proposal could indicate the various options that the DNR could
,,~ consider and also that the County may consider a combination of the
options.
Mr. Archibald disclosed that Option 3 Is a /ease/purchase idea
'~wherein the DNR may wish to consider an arrangement over a period of
~0 years where the County would pay a certain amount of money each
<~ear from net profits, with a cap of $60,000. He remarked that the
,County would reserve the right to be able to reduce the net profits or
:!. control the gross profits and put the excess gross profits into capi-
;~i!tal infrastructure, if necessary. He revealed that this option would
i~be a fail-safe so that the County could put the profits back into the
airl;ort rather than shift those to DNR but DNR may not consider this
as an acceptable option.
Commissioner Volpe declared that in previous discussions, the
~ Commission indicated that there was no desire to get into the airport
business and questioned If, in the likelihood of acquiring the airport
and leasing it to a Fixed Base Operator, the County would still be
~, eligible for federal grant monies. Mr. Archibald replied afflr-
In response to Commissioner Volpe, Mr. Archibald affirmed that one
the decisions tn a series of reports indicates that there is a long
~term need for the airport. He mentioned that if this airport no
'longer exists, somebody else would need to build another facility in
the same area to serve the same purpose and the environmental effects
that would be a very serious concern He indicated that the air-
port, as it presently exists will have less adverse impact on the
environment than construction of a new airport at an adjacent loca-
tion. With respect to fueling operation, he noted that the Deltona
77
Page 39
October 23, 1990
Corporation has spent a considerable amount of money to remove the old
tanks and there are currently new tanks above ground and properly
~. Cow'issioner Shanahan stated that the DNR, In a resolution, signed
~iby the Governor and the Cabinet, agreed that they would not return the
&irport to its pristine past, and that they would continue to operate
it as an airport.
· ~,i Commissioner Saunders stated that he feels that an environmental
audit Is necessary before Staff proceeds to acquire any property. He
related that the ultimate cost to the County for operating the airport
'i. and the real need for it are unknown. He noted that he believes that
a full report should be provided relative to the potential uses and
revenues in addition to whether this is an intricate part of an air
trallsportation system since the Naples Airport is very close by.
Mr. Archibald advised thai' he has a fairly recent report from the
DNR consultant which addresses Commissioner Saunders' concerns and
Will provide copies to the Commission.
Mr. Archibald suggested that he submit some type of proposal to
DNR and as a result, be a catalyst for them responding back to Collier
County to work out an agreement, i.e. lease, purchase or transfer. He
indicated that he believes that the four should be forwarded to DNR,
.with the qualifier that any final decision is subject to action by the
Board of County Commissioners
~NioneT Sh~nahan ~oved, seconded by' Commissioner Saunders
-that Staff be ttr~cted to proceed in developing the proposa! to DNR
~d ~a~ort back to the Commission.
Commissioner Volpe commented that he has not heard any discussion
with respect to the airport being In the community's best Interest as
,:& part of a transportation resource for the community, and therefore,
cannot support the motion.
Co,missioner Hasse stated that his feelings are in accordance with
Col~lsstoner Volpe's remarks.
"~11 for the question, tha ~otton carried 3/2 (Co~imsionera
Page 40
"~ i October
~ BID ~ MAIV~D; D~ZF~C&TZOIq UNIT ~R ~ CO~ ~IO~
Utilities Administrator Arnold stated that this item ts a request
for authorization for Staff to pursue the purchase of a degastfication
!.IL, lit for the County Regional Water Treatment Plant. He requested that
' 'the formal bidding process be waived and that the purchase be made
the firm that has manufactured the three existing units at the
!Plant.
Mr. Arnold explained that a second water treatment plant will be
line by the early part of 1992 and in the interim, projections have
· ~ade which indicate that the flows will exceed the existing capa-
city of the water treatment plant as well as some other components of
>.the water process. He noted that the County currently has a 12 MGD
,
Fi.Plant and actions can be taken at that plant that will allow 16 MGD to
~i~be produced. He indicated that the total expenditure to realize this
is $200,000, and wlll enable the County to meet the demands until the
second plant ts brought on line.
Mr. Arnold stated that the request to waive the formal bid process
i'wlll allow a unit to be purchased which ts identical to the three that
,." are already at the plant and facilitate the matntcnance and the parts.
ii!~ He requested authorization to purchase the degasiflcation unit from
De LoaCh Industries, Inc., tn the amount of $45,000.
,. Commissioner Volpe questioned whether any other options have been
,lored since this Is merely a stop gap measure. He remarked that
!'~°nce the new plant is brought on line, there will be excess capacity.
~... Mr. Arnold revealed that strategic plans for the coming year will
:'be discussed next week but noted that the Plant currently has the
capacity of 12 MGD. He explained that during the peak of last season,
' -ithe top demand was 13.4 MGD. He reported that demand~ for this month
at ?.5 MGD and currently, at the later part of the month, the
~Y demand is 10 MGD. He affirmed that it is anticipated that this
season, the demand will be 15 MGD and therefore, the interim Improve-
79
Page 41
October 23, 2990
are being undertaken now in order to prepare for the coming
C~lmll~l~ion~, Sh~ ~ov~d, eecond~d ~ Co~i~er G~ght
~ ~ly, to ~ t~ foml bi~ing ~c~s ~d t~t
~ ~tz~ to ~c~ me d~tftcation ~tt from ~ Loach
~t~, I~., for tM R~t~I ~ater Treater Pl~t.
~1
STA~T TO p~sCO?__C~S A~D ~STRUc-ruRx PROgrAM RE EMPLOYEE P~.SONAL
Human Resources Director Whttecotton advised that this item ts a
recommendation to establish an employee personal computer purchase
plan. He noted that this program Is being proposed to supplement the
fore,al computer training and allow employees to work on a personal
computer away from the office and outs/de of normal work hours. He
ii;.[~;menttoned that this is designed to allow employees to Improve computer
literacy, be more at ease with computers, and support the County's
~(:productfvlty efforts through the use of computers.
Mr. Whitecotton stated that It Is proposed that the County would
provide a loan to employees, noting that Interest will be charged, and
$1,$00 will be granted per employee to pay back through payroll deduc-
tions over a period of 24 months. He disclosed that the County must
approve the purchase in advance and there wi/] be a written, executed
agreement with respect to the payment, maintenance, insurance and
related Items. He requested $20,000 for the program which should be
self-sustaining.
Mr. Whttecotton divulged that 60 employees have expressed
Interest, thus far, and it is anticipated that there will be many more
people desiring to participate in the program. He related that there
most likely be a lottery, to determine who will benefit from the
program this year. He affirmed that similar programs are in extsten-
. ce: City of Naples, City of Gatnesvtlle, and Volusta County. He
explained that these programs have been very successful with no
defaults.
Page 42
October 23, 1990
~' Coamissioner Shanahan noted that the termination clause in the
agreement protects the County in the event of early departure.
~.. Commissioner Saunders stated that he does not see any benefits to
'~3;.be generated from this program. He noted that the employee will
receive title to the equipment immediately and indicated that typi-
'ically, if some type of an installment sale is taking place, a
{~.financing arrangement is made so that the equipment may be retrieved
the event of faulty payment. He remarked that there is no infer-
as to the cost to administer this program and believes that
is a legal problem with respect to making loans to employees,
arid noted that he has a problem with the lottery system. He revealed
that he disagrees with the philosophy of this program.
Mr. ~itecotton advised that the legal issues have been satisfied,
auld noted that the long term goal is to reduce training costs relating
,Jto office automation and pc's. He indicated that he believes that as
employees become more at ease and familiar with computers, produc-
tivity and efficiency should increase.
Commissioner Volpe stated that he has the same reservations,
relating to this program, as those expressed by Commissioner Saunders,
and therefore, cannot support this request.
Co~issioner Shanahan stated that it appears that there will not
a sufficient number of votes in favor of this program, and
~llggested that this item be brought back to satisfy the issues and
concerns that have been expressed. He indicated that he feels that
there are real benefits to be derived from this program.
C~,~ Shanahan moved, seconded by Com~isaloner Goodnight
amd C~Tted 3/2 (Comaissionera Volpe and Saundera opposed), that Staff
~t~ the co~ente and questions aa expressed; restructure the
~ti~factorily acceptable to the Co~uaiasion, and revisit this
~ ~ I~COGNIZING FY 89/90 CARRY FORWAI~D FOR TH~ NATURAL
I':-. ~ DEpAK~ISM~]~T _ APPROPRIAT~ RESERVES FOR CONTINGENCIES IN THE
", ~OO~IT~34 APPROVED
Page 43
,. ~ October 23, 1990
Natural Resources Director Santos requested approval of a budget
recognizing FY sg/g0 Carry Forward in the amount of
$13,434, for the Artificial Reef Program.
Clerk GA/es stated that this is the third request that has been
'~.recetved to recognize carry forward as of October 1st, and noted that
the auditors have not completed their audit, the Finance Director has
inot completed his adjusting entries, and in some cases there is
accrued payroll, and outstanding bills are still coming in. He
?~ind/cated that this program may be a cut and dry fund, but suggested
that in other instances, the Commission should hesltate before
approving same.
Dr. Santos advised that there are no sa/aries involved, noting
that these monies were earmarked for the reef for last fiscal year and
there has been no activity in this account.
Finance Director Yonkosky explained that the safest method is to
appropriate Reserves for Contingencies and then when carry forward is
~lnalized, the Reserves should be reimbursed.
~imiCm~T ~tanahan a~d, ~econded by Co~aissioner Goodnight
,'/:~d =~XTie~ 4/0 (Commissioner Saunders out), to appropriate Reserves
~o~ Contin~e~cte~ in the a~unt o~ $13,434.
~ PEI~SON~ TO BE CONSIDERED FOR APPOINTMENT TO ~ COLLIER
~ T~I~IST DEFELO~ COUNCIL - ADOPT~D
County Attorney Cu¥1er reported that the proposed resolution
authorizes Staff to advertise for resumes from interested persons to
'be considered for appointment to the Tourist Development Council, as
explained In the Executive Summary.
, ;'am~-e~rrie~ &/0 iOoa~lssioner Saunders out), that Resolution 90-508 be
Page 44
October 23, 1990
· ~E~TIO~ FO~ THE B~C TO CHANGE T~g PERIOD END DATE OF ~ AUDIT
~= ~ D~R ~ ~G~IA~ A~IT COSTS N~ TO ~C~ $22,000
Ft~ce Director Yonkosky explained that th~s ts a request to
c~ge the audit cut-off date for the Pelican Bay Improvement
District (PBID). He affirmed that when the Co~tss/on acted on June
19, 1990, to asses control over Pelican Bay, Coopers ~ Lybrand was
to perform an audit as of that date. He reported that since
~'t~t t]me, the State has provided ~nformat]on indicating that they
will accept one audit report He re~ested that there be one audit
~/]~[~ from 10/1/89 through 9/~0/~0 with cash basis cut off statements to
that the cash flowed over correctly when the Board took
control. He affirmed that there w~ll be some ~ncremental savings
the audit fee, and reco~ended a not to exceed price of $S0,000, and a
not to exceed price of $5,000 for the cut-off statements.
In ~e= to Co~lssioner Shanahan, Mr. Yonkosky stated that the
~n~t~al a~proach was that there would be two audits: one through
6/1~/~0 ~d ~other full audlt from that per~od forward.
Co~se~oner Volpe ~est~oned what the budget for PBID ~rovides
~'~for in the area of audits, to which Mr Yonkosky replied that last
~e~ $22,000 was ~dGeted. Co~iss~oner Volpe noted that a contract
~ s~ed ~ast week with the auditors on board, and asked whether
~th~m audit fails under that contract w~th Coopers ~ Lybrand.
~'~Yo~os~ stated that this ts a separate contract, adding that the
Oom~issfon entered into an engagement arrangement with Coopers before
the audit contract was st~ed. He indicated that one of the recommen-
dations on the day that the Board assumed control of PBID, was to have
~ ~O~rs a Lybrand perfo=m an audit, and he believed that there would
~ a full audit for that period in the amount of $20,000-$22,000
In ~er to Co~lssloner Volpe, Finance Director Yonkosky advised
".'~that ~f a co~itment had not been made with respect to the audit,
Staff w~ld normally negotiate or Go out fo= bids, but Coopers were
~till the auditors of record on June ~th.
Page 45
October 23, 1990
Clerk Giles explained that Florida Statutes requires that auditors
be separately engaged for each occasion for auditing services, and
'~'this appears to be a part of the occasion which is the County,s
annual financial audit.
[~!" In answer to Commissioner Hasse, Mr. Yonkosk¥ reported that PBID
:paid $20,000 for their audit last year and they had budgeted $22,000
for their 9/30/90 audit, noting that there will be an increase over
Jwhat they had actually budgeted.
Commissioner Volpe suggested using the people who did the PBID
ii.:.audit last year rather than paying $30,000, and questioned whether
~.there are any alternatives in approaching this in a more economical
~aru~er Mr. Yonkosky advised that the audit could be competitively
bid.
:ii" Clerk Giles suggested that the Commission limit Mr. Yonkosky's
authority to negotiate the audit at $22,000.
Comm/oe~oner Shanahan m~ved0 seconded b~ Couuisstoner Volpe and
c~rrM 4/0 (Coum/eeioner $iu~ders out} to change the per~od end date
of th~ mad/t for the PBID and F~nance Director Yonkoak~ to negotiate
th~ ~ud~t in mn mB~unt not to exceed 822,000.
Item
J~SOLUTION 90-509, AFPOIIFFINa &. CAROL PAHL, SUT. ANNK FOSTER AND JOHN
~I'~ID~L~ TO THE !~-~$$ ADVISORY CO~ITT~2 - ADOPTED
Administrative Assistant to the Board Fllson stated that this ~tem
is a request to appoint three members to the Homeless Advisory
Co~mittee. She indicated that three members have resigned from this
¢o~u~Ittee, and a press release was issued and four resumes have been
received.
.¥.q Mrs. Fi]son advised that one applicant declined. She reported
ilthat the committee is recommending the appointments of: A Carol Pahl
to fill the term exp~rfng on 5/~5/91; Suzanne D. Foster to fill the
expiring on 5/15/92; and Rev. John A. Llndell to fill the term
~'explring on
October 23, 1990
retried l/O (Coe~tsstoner Saunders out), that Resolution 90-509 be
~~ I. C~ol ~1, ~ Poster ~d 3o~ Lt~ll to
':~ klm ~~ ~tt~,
Page 47
October 23, 2990
ese Com~im~ioner Goodnight ~oved, seconded b~ Coamtssioner
S~z~mahan and carried 4/0 (Co~a~ss~oner Saunders out), that
th~ followin~ ttm under the Con~ent Agenda be approved
--~ and/or adopted:
( Xte~ ~lAAl
~'.'~d:~C~I~T~ O~ ~AT~ A~D S~WER FACILITIES FOE WELLINGTON AT LOlq~ OA~,
~IONM
The water fac/lit/es to serve the project cannot be placed
into service and no Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued
until the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation fur-
nishes a letter authorizing placement of the sewer system
into service and approving the water distribution system for
service, and;
.~ 2. Bacterfologfcal testing has met the County's requirements,
3. The Fire Flow requlrements of the project have been
satisfied, and the Fire DAstr~ct furnishes a letter accepting
:-} the fire hydrant for ownership and maintenance.
~', , Recorded in OR Book 1586 P~'ges 27 41
;: ::**Xt~ ~14A2
~ FL~T OF "~ ~.A~ ~ ~SO~, ~a~ ~- WI~ ~T~TIO~.,
~. That the final plat not be recorded until the re,ired impro-
vements have been constructed and accepted or until approved
security is received for the Incompleted ~mprovements and
that construction shall be completed within 36 months of the
date of th~s approval.
2. Authorlze the Chairman to execute the Construction and
Maintenance A~reement.
That no building permits be issued until the final plat is
recorded.
4. That the off site drainage easements will be recorded prior
to resubmAsston of this plat for recording.
.Pages _ /o 7
~:-:.':~:~,~,~'"1'~{:~[ 90-510, AUTHORIZING PI~LIMINAI{Y ACCEPTANCE OF RO~AY,
~ ~ ~~ OF I~ABLE L~ OF ~EDIT - WI~ STIP0~TION~
· ~. 1. Accept the Irrevocable Letter of Credit as security for main-
"r;[ tenance of the infrastructure until the Board of County
Co~tsstoners grants final acceptance of all Improvements
2. Authorize the recording of the final plat of "Wellington at
Lone Oak, Unit ~o."
3. Authorize the Chairman to execute the Maintenance Agreement
for Preliminary Acceptance and Resolution authorizing prell-
minary acceptance.
4. Prelim~nary acceptance of the improvements w~ll not become
effective until water and sewer facilities have been conveyed
~, to Co/l/er County Water-Sewer District.
October 23, 2990
NAPr_.,~CAP~ 90 CO~F'~q. AC~ ON U.S. 411~OMNAPLES CITY
AND FINAL PAYM'~m~ TO BgYY~K ROADS
See Pages
NOTE: DOCUMENT NOT PROVIDED TO CLERK TO THE
BOARD OFFICE AS OF JUNE 10, 1991
J~CC~ OF ~ DE~D GKANTED BY ROBERT J. M~LI & ADAM FUEREDI,
~, ~ ~ ~I0~IS~ ~OFIT S~ING ~, ~R RO~
RI~F~y ~N~ T~ SO~ ~~ 0F I~O~n~ R0~
See Pages //~-- //&
~ON 90-511, AUTHORIZING TH~ ACQUISITION OF THE RIG~T-OF-WAY ON
I~ADIO Iq~AD FIM~q AIRPORT ROAD TO EAST OF SANTA BARBARA BLVD. FOR
::' C~ON OF ROAD, UTILITY AND DRAINAGE IMP~0VE~-rS
SeePages. /94
*~-' ~ ~ NOo 4 IN TH~ JLMOONT OF 915,900, FOR ADDITIONA~
";c:~ D~:~I~ ~'It~ FO~ BATHHOUSE FACILITIES ~ZTHIN T"~- L~LY ~ PARI~
'~FT~-T~-P&CT~ C~CTION AUTHO~IZATION FO~ PAKKIN~ nOT
See Pages
~ TO THE ESCRC~4 AGI~ BETW[~FN COLLIER COUlrfqff AND ~
See Pages J 01-- ~ 0 ~
-BUDqtHT JUq~NDMENT FO~ FUND 111 (IMMOKALEW-) MSTO IN ORDER TO RECOGNIZE
CA~Y FK~ARD - IN THE AMOUNT OF $27,935
~D ~-1~15 ~ ~ MAI]IT~q~ANCE AT VARIOUS COLLIER COUNTY LIBRARY
: ~1~1~ JLND TN~ ~PME~T SE]~VICKS CENTER - AWARDED TO D & M LAWN AND
H~ ~C~ OF NAPLES~ FLORIDA IN THE AMOUNT OF $28~620
90
Page 49
October 23, 1990
~rZT~ /LOHID& DEPT. 0F A~3~ZCD'LTITR~ AND CONSUME~ SKNI/I~ AND
TSm ~CC ~ $~9,000 RE ~~ Am~ COSSTmZCTIO~ OF A COLLIER
See Pages
C~ION KASEMK]FT A~]~KKMENT AND UTILITY EASEMENT
IqID(YK ROAD MATER FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
See Pages ~
PAINTIJR3 AND SEALING OF BUILDING =F= - ANARDED TO
OF FLORIDA IN~. IN TH~ AMOUNT OF 3~075
T~ ~'v~s AIm~ORT ~,AST~ PLA~ COST
_PT~kN DEVELOPMENT COST~
Item
r: COJrTH&CTB WI~H ATaT RE COJ~INICATIONS HARDWARE
See Pages
~ ~ ~R SOLE SO~ ~ FOR ~ CO~
CAPITAL PROJECTS IN FUND (303.) IN TH~ AMOUNT OF
~ P~'tOGlrZZING F~' 90/93. RESERVES FOR CO~%'I~GENCT FOR THE
BID ~00--1633 FOR CO~rSTRUCTION OF PHASE III OF CELL #6 AT ~APLES
AP C-FLORIDA INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF I 348 80
': :, Zt.m~ dr1443
BID d~)0--1539 '1'0 SMUlq~I? RECYCLING FOR COLLKCTION AND SK~TION 0F
~~ P~; ~ ~ ~ MC~I~ ~I~KN~CE*S CO~ T0
Page 50
October 23, 1990
FOR ~ ~900---91LITTKR PRKVE]rrIoN (IRA]Fl*
~:~l'II~ 90-512, &CCBI~T~ OF EASKNWIITS T'O THREK LELY EIITRJLNCK
~f'q ~ E AUTItOIIIlIG ~ IICLUSIO! OF SAID NOII13I~NTS WITHIN THE
~,~ nit-ny (~)LF E~TJkTES BE&UTIFICATION I~STU MAINTENANCE PROGRAM
#14112
~ BID PI~0C~S$ M&IFED; POROUS PIPE IUIUTI01 ~ 0F ~0RIDA
I~ ~, 2 ~ 3 L~Y GOLF K~A~S B~IFICATION ~ - IN ~
~ TO ~ TI~ ~ ZN Iq:TND 318: H&.RCO ZSL&ND
IN TI~ AtK)~IT OF ~60~000
~I~ S~K~lON ~ESS HAI~D; C0~ B~
~~ - ~ ~ ~ OF ~25,ooo
It. ~lXl See Pages
~ ~ ~ TO ~CIL
~IOIP LIEII~ FOR LOT 20, BLOC~ 1, INNOEAL~ H~IGHT~ - NARY
See Page,
NLTI~FJkCTIOI[ OF LIEII FOR LOT 11, BLOCK 61, RMtC0 BEACH, UNIT ~ -
ilt:; P~'L ~T~ ~ ALBERTINE STHKHHOUT, AND ALFRKD CORTHALS AND MARIA
See Pages
OF LIKJr ~OR SW CORNER OF TRACT 'A=, MAIXLINK SUBDIVISION
AND JULIKNNK D_wr_.o~c~ OWNERS
See Pages
OF LIENFOR UNIT NO. 35, M~S'T WIND MOBILK HOME ESTATES -
OW~rKR
Page 51
;.~.· October 23, 1990
i~t "" See Pages ~
O~' LI'~'w FOR I,OT 2, BLOC~ 389, MARCO BEAC~ U~F~T 12 -
See Pages ~
- I~LKD~M~D OR ~D
,~. The following miscellaneous correspondence was filed and/or
referred to the various departments as Andlcated below:.
1. Memo dated 9/26/90 to County Constitutional Officers, Finance
Directors and County Administrators, from Mary Kay Falconer,
Executive Director, Florida Advisory Council on
Intergovernmental Relations, re Delay in Providing Actual
Salary Figures. xc: Tom Whitecotton, John Yonkosky and
filed.
2. Letter dated 10/9/90 to Circuit Court Clerk from Janet Cason,
CMC/AAE, City Clerk Naples, re Ordinance #90-6380, amending
Section 1.2 of the Charter of the City of Naples relating to
the boundaries of the City. xc: Filed.
Letter dated 10/5/90 to Honorable L. Joyce Hampers, Assistant
Secretary for EDPA, from Porter Goss, Member of Congress,
expressing support for the grant appl~cation submitted by BCC
for the proposed Immokalee Airport Industrial Park. xc:
MAke Arnold, Neil Dorrill and filed.
4. Letter dated 10/5/90 to BOO from Richard Gorden, Forest Area
Supervisor, Division of Forestry, re summation of fire acti-
varies for the past fiscal year. xc: Bill Lorenz, Ltnda
Denning and filed.
5. Undated memo, to Local Governments, from Lewis O. Burnside,
Jr., Director, Division of Housing and Community Development,
Department of Community Affairs, re Elderly Homeowner
Rehabilitation Program Funding Cycle. xc: Frank Brutt,
Russell Shreeve and filed.
6. Memo dated 10/5/90 to Chief Elected Officials and Other
Interested Parties, from Lewis O. Burnside, Jr., Director,
Division of Houslng and Community Development, Department of
Community Affairs, re Federal Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991
Small Cities Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program
Workshop Registration Fee. xc: Nell DorrA]l, Russell
Shreeve, Frank Brutt and filed.
7. Letter to Chairman dated 10/9/90, from Jon M. I~lehart,
Environmental Specialist, Department of Environmental
Regulation, re Collier County-WRR, File #11187455~. xc:
Nell Dorrlll, Frank Brutt, Bill Lorenz and filed.
8. Letter to Chairman dated 10/8/90, from Jon M. Iglehart,
Environmental Specialist, Department of Environmental
Regulation, re Collier County-WRR, File #11187379. xc: Nell
Dorrill, Frank Brutt, Bill Lorenz and filed.
9. Rule Making Notice dated 10/5/90, from Department of
Environmental Regulation.
filed.
xc: Frank Brutt, Bill Lorenz and
99'
Page 52
11.
17.
19.
October 23, 1990
Memo dated 10/1/90 and book to Chairman Hasse from Hugo D.
Menedes, Secretary, and Robert A. Morris, Jr., Chairman,
Governor's Select Committee Workforce 2000 re nolces for
Florida,s Future." xc: w/book to Tom W~nttecotton. Copy of
memo to Nell Dorrlll and filed.
Letter to Collier County dated 9/27/90 from Tony D. McNeal,
Engineer, Bureau of Coastal Engineering and Regulation,
Department of Natural Resources, re Public Notice, File
#C0-280, Permittee, Westinghouse Communities of Naples, Inc.
xc: Nell Dorrill, Frank Brutt, Bill Lorenz and filed.
Copy of Letter dated 9/28/90 to Coastal Engineering
Consultants, Inc., from Tony D. McNeal, Engineer, Bureau of
Coastal Engineering and Regulation, Department of Natural
Resources, re Notice to Proceed Withheld, Permit #C0-272,
Permtttee Name, Barefoot Beach Assoc., Ltd. xc: Netl
Dorrtll, Frank Brutt, Bill Lorenz and filed.
Letter dated 10/4/90 to Commissioner Shanahan from Gary D.
Lytton, Manager, Rookery Bay National Estuartne Research
Reserve, Department of Natural Resources, re proposal for an
ad hoc citizen's advisory committee on the Proposed Boundary
Expansion. xc: Nell Dorrill Frank BrutE, Bill Lorenz and
filed. '
Memo dated 9/28/90 to Interested Parties from Fran p.
Matnella, Director, Division of Recreation and Parks,
Department of Natural Resources, re Pub/lc Workshops on
Recreation and Park Issues. xc: Kevtn O'Donnell, Cliff
Crawford and flied.
Copy to BCC of letter dated 9/27/90 to Coastal Engineering
Consultants, Inc., from Tony D. McNeal, Engineer, Bureau of
Coastal Engineering and Regulation, Department of Natural
Resources, re Notice to Proceed Permit #C0-280, Permlttee
Name: Westinghouse Communities of Nap/cs, Inc. xc: Frank
Brutt, Bill Lorenz and filed.
Copy to BCC of letter dated 10/5/90 to Brett Moore, P.E.,
Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc., from Tony D. McNeal,
Engineer, Bureau of Coastal Engineering and Regulation, re
Approval of Governor and Cabinet Permit: C0-237, Permtttee
Name: Barefoot Assoc., Ltd. xc: Frank Brutt, Bill Lorenz
and filed.
Copy to BCC of letter dated 9/24/90 to W. H. Buckhannan from
Tony D. McNeal, Engineer, Bureau of Coastal Engineering and
Regulation, re Notlce to Proceed Withheld, Permit Number:
C0-281, Permlttee Name: Contessa Development, Ltd. xc:
Frank Brutt, Bill Lorenz and fi/ed.
Copy to BCC of letter dated 10/5/90 to Charles Maurer, Jr.,
President, Maurer Construction Co., Inc., from Tony D.
McNeal, Engineer, Bureau of Coastal Engineering and
Regulation, Department of Natural Resources, re
After-the-Fact Permit Approval and Assessment of
Administrative Fine, Approval of Governor and Cabinet Permit:
CO-262 ATF CF, Permtttee Name: Beach Garden "H" Association,
Inc. xc: Frank Brutt, Bill Lorenz and filed.
Copy to BCC of letter dated 10/3/90 to Ms. Barbara Henderson
Cawley of Wilson, Mil/er, Barton & Peek, Inc., from Kirby B.
Green, III, Director, Division of Beaches and Shoes,
Department of Natural Resources, re Approval of Time
Extension, Permit File #C0-173, Permtttee Name: Equity Sound
Development Group. xc: Nell Dorrtll, Frank Brutt, Bill
Lorenz and filed.
94
Page 53
20.
29.
October 23, 1990
Copy to BCC of letter dated 10/8/90 to W. J. Johnson &
Assoc., Inc., from Tony D. McNeal, Engineer, Bureau of
Coastal Engineering and Regulation, Department of Natural
Resources, re Notice to Proceed, Permit Number CO-296,
Permittee Name: Charlene Land Development Corporation. xc:
Neil Dorrill, Frank Brutt, Bill Lorenz and filed.
21. Memo dated 10/2/90 to Property Appraisers, Tax Collectors,
Clerks of the Circuit Courts and Chairmen of the County
Commissions, as Addressed, from Jerry Wood, Bureau of
Collections and Services Division of Ad Valorem Tax,
Department of Revenue, re Approved Bidder List. Original to
John Yonkosky. xc: Steve Carnell and filed.
22. Letter dated 10/9/90 to Commissioner Shanahan from Norman E.
Feder, District Director, Department of Transportation, re
Adopted Six Year Work Program. xc: filed.
23. Memo to BCC dated 5/1/90 from Mary W. Morgan, Supervisor of
~lections, re Budget Advance. xc: John Yonkosky and filed.
24. Public Notice #90FL-O1/CERCLA dated 10/15/90 from U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Region IV, Waste Management
Division. xc: Frank Brutt, Bill Lorenz and filed.
25. Validated Tax Receipts data for J~ly, 1990, dated 9/18/90, re
DOR Administered Taxes/DOR Accounts, Monthly Statistics Tax
Collections by County. Filed.
26. Copy to BCC of Letter dated 10/5/90 to Division of Ad Valorem
Ta~ "TRIM" Compliance, from Chief Donald R. Peterson, Golden
Gate Fire Control & Rescue District, enclosing copies per-
raining to budget adoption, xc: Budget Office and filed.
27. Letter dated 10/10/90 to Chairman Hasse from Guy L. Carlton,
Tax Collector, with enclosed forms in compliance with Section
218.36 F.S. xc: Neil Dorrill, John Yonkosky and filed.
28. Notice of Public Meetings from The Land Acquisition Advisory
Council. xc: Frank Brutt, Bill Lorenz and filed.
Minutes Received and Fi/ed:
A. Golden Gate Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting of
8/3[/90.
30.
31.
32,
B. Golden Gate Parkway Beautification Advisory Committee
agenda of 10/9/90 and minutes of Special Meeting of
9/18/90.
C. Collier County Planning Commission agenda for 10/18/90.
D. District 8 Coalition Meeting of 9/14/90.
Memo dated 10/2/90, from Jimmy L. Higginbotham, Chairman,
Nassau BCC, with copy of Resolution 90-146, supporting
Amendment 3 on the November, 1990 ballot, xc: Ken Cuyler,
John Yonkosky and filed.
Letter dated 10/5/90 to BCC, from Patrick B. Reinert, Vice
President, National Development Properties of Flcrida, Inc.,
re Well Drilling Permit. xc: Environmental Health, Frank
Brutt and filed.
Notice To Owner dated 10/4/90 to BCC from Ferguson
Undergound, Inc., advising that it is furnishing pipe,
valves, and/or fillings for the installation in the water
95
Page 54
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
October 23, 2990
and/or sewer system for the EMS Golden Gate Facility, under
an order given by Carter Contracting, Inc. xc: Steve
Carnell, John Yonkosky and filed.
Notice to Owner dated 10/9/90 to BCC from AG Mauro Co. of FL
Archt. Division, advising that it is or will furnish hollow
metal frames and finish for the Collier County Courthouse,
under an order given by Kraft Construction Co., Inc. xc:
Steve Carnell, John Yonkosky and filed.
Notice to Owner dated 10/11/90 to BCC from Krehllng
Industries, Inc., advising that they have or will be fur-
nishing concrete and/or all other related building materials
for Tallahassee Meridian under an order given by Ewlng
Construction. xc: John Yonkosky, Steve Carnell and filed.
Letter dated 10/8/90 to Chairman Hasse from James L. Jones,
Fire Chief, North Naples Fire Control & Rescue Service
District, asking for confirmation of tax distributions made
by the BCC for Fire Control District #1. Original to John
Yonkosky. xc: Filed.
Letter dated 10/2/90 and draft copy of Florida's Energy
Emergency Contingency Plan to Chairman Hasse from W~lliam W.
Goode, Jr., Acting Director, Governor's Engrgy Office, re
gu/dance in any energy planning that the Bec may undertake.
xc: Gary Arnold, Neil Dorrtll and filed.
Letter dated 10/4/90 to Chairman Hasse, from Rick Almand,
General Manager, Palmer Cablevision, announcing intent to
enter into a management agreement with Colony Communications
Inc. xc: filed. '
Petition from Riviera Golf Estates Homeowners Association,
requesting BCC to oversee the completing or the tearing down
of the Structure on the corner of Marseilles Dr. and Chamonix
Ct. in the Lake Champagne area of Naples. xc: Neil Dorrill
Ken Cuyler, BCC and filed. '
Public Service Commission application for a rate increase,
filed by Marco Island Utilities & Marco Shores Utilities
(Deltona), Certificate of Service, Docket #900329-W$, Filed:
October 11, 1990. xc: Neil Dorrill, Mike Arnold and filed.
Public Service Commission application for a rate increase,
filed by Marco Island Utilities & Marco Shores Utilities
(Deltona), Docket #900329-WS, Synopsis. xc: Nell Dorrlll
Mike Arnold and filed. '
Undated letter to BCC from San J. Colding, Property
Appraiser, re commissions due his office. Original to
Finance. xc: Filed.
Memo dated 10/4/90 to BCC from Sheriff Don Hunter, re
Sheriff's Confiscation Trust Fund, Third Quarterly Report -
1990. xc: Budget and fi/ed.
Letter dated 10/9/90 to BCC from Ben3amin C. Pratt, P.E.,
P.L.S., Assistant to the Director, Surface Water Management
Division, South Florida Water Management District, re Notice
of Intent to Construct Works Modification of Permit No.:
11-00360-S, Permittee: BCC, Pro3ect: Pine Ridge Industrial
Park, Location: Collier County, S11/T49S/R25E. xc: Neil
Dorrlll, Tom Conrecode, George Archibald and filed.
Letter dated 10/9/90 to BCC from Barbara Fronczek, Right of
Way Permitting, Department of Land Management, South Florida
Page 55
October 23, 1990
Water Management District, re South Florida Water Management
Dtstrtct Permit Number 9216. xc: Netl Dorrill George
Archibald and filed. '
45.
46.
Letter dated 10/11/90 to BCC, from Laura Ann Lythgoe,
Supervising Professional, Right of Way Permitting, Department
of Land Management, South Florida Water Management District,
re Permit (MOD) Number 9216 (Cocohat6chee Canal). Original
to George Archibald. xc: Neil Dorrill and fi/ed.
Letter dated 10/12/90 to Chairman Hasse from Wayne E. Da/try,
Executive Director, Southwest Florida Regional Planning
Council, re "Collier Tract 22" Application for Development
Approval, DRI #5-8990-10§. xc: Frank Brutt, Bill Lorenz and
filed.
FOR GROUP ACCIDEZIT IN~]P~%.NCZ THROUGH THH COUNT"f
~ Clerk ~Agh~ r~/a~ ~ C~erk ~off~
~O~$I~t~ - 9~OZ~F~S~OP FOR IMPA~T FEES SCHEDULED ~R ~B~
~.~, Bill Merrill, Consultant on Affordable Housing, stated that he
w
~ll attempt ~o explaln each ~ssue that has been ~a~sed by the Board
' ~n ~eg~ds to the p~oposed 0rd~nance on Affordable Hous~nG.
M~. Me~ill co~ented that Tables A and B found on page 11 of the
~.~/ p~oposed 0~dfnance a~e one of the key a~eas of ~hfs Ordinance because
~ e~la~ns how much Affordable HousinG needs to be p~ov~ded, the
~ which needs to be provided, and how much density as a bonus w~ll
~ ~ece~ved ove~ what the cu~en~ base density is. He advised that
$~ Table A determines ~he facto~ which will be applied to Table B. He
~added ~hat this facto~ has ~wo aspects to it which a~e the level of
'/~he household ~ncome and ~he numbe~ of bedrooms per unit requlred. He
· ~lafned that the definition fo~ income levels fo~ a family of fou~
~'~ ~ent o~ pay mo~t~aGe pe~ month at the top of each level ~s fo~
moderate ~ncome $842.00, low ~ncome $~58.00, and very low $383.00.
In response to Commissioner Volpe, M~. Me~fll informed that the
f~es sh~ are the maximum numbe~ of density bonus that can be
g~ven; however, th~s p~ocess ~s based on ~ezon~ng and ~f othe~ factors
97
Page 56
October 23, 1990
~ruch as compat~bility with the surroundings or level of service
problem with the access road determine that the maximum bonus should
.not be given, even though the developer qual~fies for a certain
.. amount, then the Board has the authority to deny the rezonlng or
~reduce the density bonus number.
Mr. Merrill pointed out that the proposed Ordinance is for density
and the waiver of impact fees is a totally separate Ordinance.
~He added that this proposed Ordinance is aimed at the /ow to moderate
income families and whether a developer under this Ordinance would
even consider building Affordable Housing is to be determined He
~!~ noted that the numbers included in the proposed Ordtnence are
adjustable and changes can be made.
Mr. Merrill responded to Commissioner Vo[pe's co~ment by stating
~.. ~' the waiver of impact fees is a proposed Ordinance that ts
requesting public money to subsidize Affordable Housing and this den-
sity bonus proposed Ordinance is the same as a rezoning only using
different criteria. He advised it could be decided that the waiver of
impact fees may only be applied to the very low income, where the den-
e~ty bonus applies to all three income levels.
County Attorney Cuyler intsr~ected that whether the impact fee is
~a~ved for very low income Affordable Housing is a policy decision
~i~- the Board will need to make, but that decision does not impact
Ordinance one way or the other.
Mr. Merrill suggested to Commissioner Volpe regarding the devel-
oper's profit from Affordable Housing that either in this proposed
Ordinance or the proposed Impact Fee Ordinance, a statement could be
inserted stating that if one Ordinance is utilized for Affordable
::~Housing then the other cannot be used.
Commissioner Volpe questioned that of the 6,000 Affordable Housing
~:%lnite the County has been told it needs, what percentage of these
be for moderate, low, and very low income levels?
~i County Attorney Cuyler advised that Mr. Shreeve's office of
!!~i~Houstng and Urban Improvements would need to provide these numbers to
Page 57
October 23, 1990
Mr. Merrill and then the numbers can be adjusted to the desired
'~ Mr. Merrill commented that he would like direction from the Board
: as to what they would like to hold the numbers to in as far the income
level is concerned? He noted that the average rental per month for
Collier County is $608.00 and the top end of the moderate income level
]s listed b~ the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
'~::.: {HUD) as $842.00, and questioned if the Board wants to remove the
.~ ~oderate income line? He informed the Board that any changes
~" necessary can be made to the proposed Ordinance. He related that the
.key issue for passing this proposed Ordinance is who does the County
want to target for Affordable Housing.
County Attorney Cuyler questioned the intent of using the $842.00
~"fi~ure for moderate income people?
Mr. Shreeve replied that he is concerned that in regards to den-
:'. city, it appears that apartment complexes would be totally eliminated
ii and would force this level of income people to buy houses which
[:.cr'~ates a problem of having a down payment He mentioned also that if
the density bonus is not given for moderate income levels, the prices
.-'"of houses will not be affordable to this level.
~<~. Mr. Merrill pointed out that the Collier County,s Growth
?..)Management Plan does address the issue for the moderate income level
<because it allows 16 units per acre. He stated that if it is the
]~ desire of the Board to add=ess only the low to very low income levels
i~i~'there is no problem in doing that with the proposed Ordinance. He
~remarked that a tracking mechanism could be provided and when the 6000
· ~ ~fts are reached the Ordinance would be repealed. He emphasized that
the proposed Ordinance is totally flexible.
Commissioner Shanahan pointed out that in the future more
-' Housing may be required; however, his feelings are that
densit~ bonus for Affordable Housing should be provided for the
?: $400.00 to $600.O0 rent per month level and not above. As far as
fee waivers, he commented that this should be looked at below
99
Page 58
October 23, 1990
$400.00 rent per month level.
-. Assistant County Manager McLemore stated that what is trying to be
done by the County with Affordable Housing is to address the level of
][~:iinco~e that the average housing market cannot supply He pointed out ·
the area of concern has been identified as the very /ow income
:level rental units where the market rate is much higher than the
income earned. He reported that this level will not be reached by
only allowing density points but also impact fee waivers will be
necessary as well as other incentives for developers. He explained
that as well as the low level income rental units being a major goal
be addressed, also the County has a goal to promote homeownershlp
:which is hoped to be achieved through single family hom~:s and con-
dominiums where density bonus will be important.
Commissioner Volpe pointed out that what is not know~; here is what
population needs to be served.
Mr. Shreeve stated that Reinhalt p. Wolfe Economic Research, Inc.
~'d'~d a study in 1989 indicating that Collier County has 55% of its
lng families making ]ess that $25,000 per year which translates
that 500 apartments need to be provided in the low income level.
Mr. Merrill commented that the problem is that the median income
for Collier County is $36,000 according to HUD, however, the average
worker household income for Collier County is $22,000, and the numbers
presented in the proposed Ordinance are based on the median income.
He disclosed that this number in between is what the Board needs to
! dec,de on. He added that one chart could be developed for rental
~n~ts and another for sale units.
F.:.i~ Responding to Commissioner Volpe, Mr. Merrill pointed out that
Collier County's Comprehensive Plan as well as other studies show a
need for Affordable Housing in Collier County. He informed that not
~ore than 30% of a family's income should be spent on housing per
:~°nth.
Commissioner Volpe suggested that the target for rental per month
should be $658.00 and below or lower the density bonus amount for
Page 59
October 23, 1990
~e ~ncome level He added that there does not appear to be a
for Affordable Housing for the moderate income level.
Regarding Commissioner Volpe'a concerns, Commissioner Goodnlght
commented that the Density Bonus Ordinance and the Impact Fee
.~... Ordinance are two separate proposed Ordinances which will need to be
~i'~. addressed individually. She stated that a petitioner would need to
f','apply and qualify separately in order to receive the benefit of either
'ii( Ordinance.
Assistant County Manager McLemore clarified Commissioner Hasse's
;,':;i question by stating that some projects will be able to be provided
/:ii:through density bonus, but others will need further assistance in
to provide for Affordable Mousing and each individual project
will be reviewed before the Board separately for qualification of
- either benefit.
.,? In summary regarding the direction from the Board as to what they
-would like to have the proposed Ordinance on density bonus reflect,
"":k'i' Mr. Merrill suggested that the moderate income level have available
'' ' only the single-family for sale housing, up to s~x units per acre.
Assistant County Manager McLemore questioned if ownership con-
.'i domintum units could be available for low income levels?
Mr. Shreeve responded that this can be done because there are
~':~,':'!~ developers that plan to build units and sell them at an average of
~i$45,000 per unit with a monthly payment of approximately $500.00 which
'i~a low income family could afford.
~.~: Mr. Merrill proposed that Table A would change to reflect under
!~oderate income level only owner occupied single-family for sale
housing with the maximum density at 40% being 2 add~tional units per
ii 'acre. He noted that the iow and very iow income levels of Table A and
all of Table B as amendment by the Planning Commission would apply to
~'i'"" rental type structures. He noted that the low and very low
lnco~ levels should also apply to the for sale units. He stated that
"research will need to be done as to multi-family units being provided
Page 60
;~" > . i. October 23, 1990
ifor ~oderate income levels at the low end. He added that he will make
changes and bring them back before the Board.
In reference to Assistant County Manager McLemore's memo (not pro-
vided for the record) detailing the other issues, Mr. Merrill remarked
that he agrees with all the points that were made. He noted the first
?:.~otnt is regarding density points being applied only to an Affordable
~ Ho~sing section of a rental complex and pointed out that this defeats
the incentive the developer has to provide Affordable Housing because
the developer needs the density bonus to be able to provide market
:. rate units which will offset the Affordable Housing unit~.
Mr. Merrill emphasized that the figures used in the Tables are
~' ~aximl/m amount number and even if the developer q~/alifies for the
~axim%L~ amount the petition would have to come back beforo the Board
for rezontng and at that time the Board can deterl&ine whether the
' !~,, number is suitable for the neighborhood and if not has the right to
ideny or lower the number for the rezoning.
.,. Regarding the committee concept, Mr. Merrill reported that a com-
mittee is not recommended because it would cause an administrative
review process which only encumbers the Ordinance He informed that
!~'the County does have a contract with NDC which has expertise in the
appropriate areas to evaluate the economic portion of the proposal.
Mr. Merrill explained the monitoring of verification has been made
the responsibility of the developer, requiring them to provide tnfor-
~ation verified under law. He added that if the information provided
~a found to be untrue it is the responsibility of the County to
~.. enforce prosecution. Me advised that it will be Staffs position to
review the information submitted to ensure the forms are completed
Y.
In response to Commissioner Volpe, Mr Merrill affirmed that a
~recommendatton to have on-site management has been added to the
i'Ordinance as Section 8.1.19 on page'13
.- Mr. Shreeve noted the need to readvertise the public hearing for
Affordable Housing for a date other than November 13, 1990 due to the
Page 61
October 23, 1990
ava/lability of Nr. Merrill at this time and suggested November 27,
i2990 at 5:05 P.M.
Mr. McLemore informed that the impact fee exemption ~ssue will be
[ed at the meeting of October 30, 1990.
There being no further business for the Good of the County, the
i~et[ng was adjourned by Order of the Chair - Time: §:30 P.M.
. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
' " BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS
· CONTROL
:cs.,approved by the Board on ~'-~--~-//J///W
or as corrected
Page 62