Minutes 04/06/2015 April 6, 2015
MINUTES OF THE COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
ADVISORY COMMITTEE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
SUBCOMMITTEE
Naples, Florida, April 6, 2015
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, the Collier County Development Services Advisory
Committee —Land Development Code Subcommittee in and for the County of Collier,
having conducted business herein, met on this date at 2:00 PM in a REGULAR
SESSION at the Growth Management Division Building, Room 609/610 2800 N.
Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL with the following persons present:
Chairman: Robert Mulhere
Clay Brooker
Blair Foley
ALSO PRESENT: Caroline Cilek, LDC Manager
Jeremy Frantz, Planner
Richard Henderlong, Principal Planner
Scott Stone, Assistant County Attorney
1
April 6, 2015
Any persons in need of the verbatim record of the meeting may request a copy of the audio recording
from the Collier County Growth Management Department—Planning and Regulation building—
Contact Mr. Evy Ybaceta at 239-252-2400.
1. Call to order
Mr. Brooker nominated Robert Mulhere as Chairman of the Subcommittee.
Nominations were closed and Mr. Mulhere was named Chairman.
Chairman Mulhere called the meeting to order at 2:04pm.
2. Approve agenda
Mr. Brooker moved to approve the Agenda. Second by Mr. Foley. Carried unanimously 3—0.
3. Approve Oct. 30,2014 meeting minutes
Mr. Brooker moved to approve the minutes of the October 30, 2014 meeting. Second by Mr.
Foley. Carried unanimously 3—0.
4. Next meeting
The next meeting will be held on April 23, 2015.
5. Review Amendments
a. LDC Section 2.03.07
Staff noted the proposed amendment provides for the use of the interim deviations for the
Immokalee Urban Area until future Comprehensive Immokalee Overlay LDC amendments are
adopted. They recommend the interim status be adopted until the Comprehensive LDC
amendments are adopted in the Land Development Code given the interim deviations have been
extended twice since 2010.
Mr. Brooker moved for the Development Services Advisory Committee to recommend the
Board of County Commissioners adopt the proposed amendment as presented. Second by Mr.
Foley. Carried unanimously 3— 0.
b. LDC Section 4.02.04
Staff noted the amendment proposes allowing windows to be designed on the zero lot line
portion of a dwelling unit when such wall is adjacent to an adjoining lot line. The amendment
will continue to apply to conventional zoning districts and PUD districts.
The Subcommittee recommended:
• An explanation be included in the "Reason Section"that historically windows on zero lot
lines could not meet the fire code but recent changes in technology have resulted in
windows that can meet the 1 hour fire rating. This reduces concerns of a fire spreading if
the windows are less than 3 feet from the adjacent dwelling unit.
• Explain cluster housing is a design technique or form of development in the narrative.
Line 7 of the narrative to reference "Cluster housing includes permissibility of zero lot
lines..."
2
April 6, 2015
• Section 4.02.04 A—Consider removing the reference to PUD's in the language. Staff
reported they will review the language in this Section and make any changes as
necessary.
Mr. Brooker moved for the Development Services Advisory Committee recommend the Board
of County Commissioners approve the proposed amendment subject to the changes
recommend above. Second by Mr. Foley. Carried unanimously 3— 0.
c. LDC Sections 4.06.02; 4.06.05; 5.06.04
4.06.02
Staff reported some portions of 4.06.02 have been tabled such as sign holders so additional
research can be completed.
4.06.02.C.4.e
Staff reported the amendment is to provide relief from the required right-of-way Type D buffer
in order to allow for visibility within a shopping center and visibility of commercial on-premise
signs which include the choice of two alternative type D buffer designs. They outlined the
changes as follows:
i. Shopping centers adjacent to the right-of-way may replace up to 40 percent of the total
required canopy trees at a one-to-one ratio with a cluster of three medium trees. The medium
trees shall be planted 10 to 15 feet apart, as shown in Figure 4.06.02 C.4.e. Clustered tree
plantings shall not exceed 50 feet between clusters.
ii. A signage visibility triangle may be created for on-premises signs located in the Type D
buffer, as shown in Figure 4.06.02 C.4.e. The line of visibility shall be no less than 60 linear
feet along road right-of-way line. Within the triangular area, groundcover and shrubs
required under section 4.06.05 D.4 and 5, shall be limited to the lesser of 6 inches below the
bottom of the lowest text of the sign or a height of 30 inches.
The Committee recommended Section 4.06.02.C.4.e.i be clarified to provide for each canopy
tree removed, a cluster of 3 trees needs to be planted. They noted the relief is only along road
right-of-way and not applicable to perimeter landscape or the other landscape buffers.
They acknowledged shopping centers need a maintenance plan.
Staff noted they are still awaiting final comments from landscape design professionals on the
Section and will return the proposed amendment to the Committee for final consideration.
d. d.5.06.04.F
Staff provided an overview of 5.06.04F - On-Premise Signs noting the four changes are designed
to clarify existing provisions and provide relief for certain commercial parcels. The rationale
for the proposed changes are as follows:
a) This section currently identifies a minimum 1,000-foot separation between on-premise signs
along the road frontage for a single-occupancy or multiple-occupancy parcel. However, it is
not clear how the separation is measured. The proposed amendment clarifies that the distance
shall be measured along the road frontage, rather than as the crow flies.
b) Currently, there is a limit of two signs, located 1,000 feet apart, for single-occupancy or
multiple-occupancy parcels. It is proposed the two sign limitation is removed. All signs
3
April 6, 2015
located on the parcel will still be required to meet the minimum 1,000-foot distance
separation requirement.
c) Currently, the section establishes standards for grounds signs for all commercially zoned
parcels with frontage between 100 and 219.9 feet. However, the Commercial Intermediate
District (C-3) allows for parcels with a lot width of 75 feet. The proposed amendment seeks
to allow the smaller lots to apply for a ground sign.
d) LDC section 5.06.04 F.3 establishes the requirements for directory signs. Directory signs are
commonly used for multi-tenant buildings and shopping centers and have multiple panels
that identify businesses that are located within the commercial complex. The current standard
allows for 8 panels with a maximum of 150 square feet of area and it is proposed that the
limitation on the number of panels is removed and the maximum square footage is increased
to 200 square feet. The panels do not regulate the number of business displayed or the size of
the text. Removing this limitation will allow greater flexibility for a commercial complex to
promote additional tenants on a directory sign and the larger sign area improves the ability to
inform and communicate tenants within the designed sign area to the public.
Further, it is proposed that the shopping center square footage identified in this section is
decreased from 25,000 to 20,000 square feet in order to be consistent with the definition of
shopping centers in LDC sections 1.08.02 and 4.02.34 A.
2) Additional minor clarifications were made throughout the section in order to remove
ambiguity and vagueness about signage standards.
LDC Section 4.06.05
The Committee recommended Section 4.06.05.D.4—Shrubs and hedges—line 4 be amended to
read ".... or 3) where...:
Mr. Mulhere explained the reason for limiting a sign to 8 panels was to restrict these signs to
only 8 tenants in a building and that it should be mentioned in the narrative or beginning
section.
Mr. Foley moved for the Development Services Advisory Committee recommend the Board of
County Commissioners approve the proposed amendments for Sections 5.06.04F and 4.06.05
referenced above subject to the changes recommend. Second by Mr. Foley. Carried
unanimously 3— 0.
e. LDC Section 4.06.05—Slope Treatments
Staff reported the proposed amendment eliminates slope treatment requirements for single family
lots. Additionally, for slopes which are no steeper than 3:1, the amendment exempts slope
treatment requirements for slopes 2 feet in height or lower.
The Committee recommended:
• The exemption shall not apply to berms within platted easements.
• Consider amending the Slope Table to include "sod" as a treatment for slopes under 3:1.
4
April 6, 2015
Mr. Foley moved for the Development Services Advisory Committee to recommend the Board
of County Commissioners approve the proposed amendments subject to the recommendations
above. Second by Mr. Brooker. Carried unanimously 3— 0.
f. LDC Section 4.06.05—Rip-Rap
Staff reported the amendment proposes to remove the limitation on rip rap and other forms of
erosion and scour protection in concentrated, rapid flow water management areas or sloped areas
with less than 200 square feet and a maximum height of 30 inches contained in the slope
treatment table.
The Committee recommended:
• Staff clarify the rationale for "slopes being stabilized with geo-textile fabric and be
planted with ground covers or vines to provide 80 coverage within 1 year"and whether
it is always necessary and should be a requirement.
• Slope Table 4.06.05 J. -Determine if it is necessary to incorporate a Landscape
Architect into the section given the items are related to the engineering profession.
Staff reported they will review the recommendations and return the item for Subcommittee
review.
Mr. Brooker moved for the Development Services Advisory Committee to recommend the
Board of County Commissioners approve the proposed amendment subject to the clarifications
above. Second by Mr. Foley. Carried unanimously 3—0.
g. LDC Section 10.02.04
Staff reported the amendment proposes to remove an inadvertent error in the criteria for a Minor
Subdivision Plat. Section 10.02.04 D.Le stipulates that a subdivision must not be part of a
Planned Unit Development in order to request a Minor Subdivision Plat. This item is proposed
to be removed from the list of criteria.
Mr. Foley moved for the Development Services Advisory Committee to recommend the Board
of County Commissioners approve the proposed amendment as presented. Second by Mr.
Brooker. Carried unanimously 3—0.
h. Appendix-A
Staff reported the proposed amendment is to add standard provisions of performance bond
requirement for Excavation Work Permits, Early Work Authorization, Site Development Plans
and a Standard Letter of Credit in Appendix A with a table to specimen forms.
Mr. Foley moved for the Development Services Advisory Committee to recommend the Board
of County Commissioners approve the proposed amendment as presented. Second by Mr.
Brooker. Carried unanimously 3— 0.
6. Public comments
None
5
April 6, 2015
There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by the
order of the Chair at 3:25PM.
COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Robert Mulhere, Chairman
These Minutes were approved by the Committee on 7/ / 7 7‘) , as presented
, or as
amended
6