The URL can be used to link to this page

Backup Documents 11/03/1998 R BCC RE(iULAR blgETING 0~' THE ~OARI) OF COUNTY NOVgMBER 3, Nov~-mtx:r 3, ]998 I~OA{~) OF CO[~I~ CO~ISSION]~{S AG~ ~lesday, Novom~r 3, 1998 9:00 a.m. ~ICE: ~,L P~SONS WISIIf~ q~ SPF~ ON ~Y AG~A IT]~ MUST PRIOR ~ SPF~]'~. SPF~KF~S MUST RF~S~{ ~1 '~IE CO[~ ~INIS~A'~R PRIOR '~) ~E PRES~AT]ON OF ~ AG~A IT~ ~ ~D~SS f~. ~S7'S '~ ADDI{ESS 77[1{ ~AIU) ON SUI~EC'FS ~{1CH ~ N~I' ON 'IT[JS ~ST BE S~I~F~ IN ~{iTi~ Wl~g{ ~P~'IQN ~ gT~ CO~ ~NIS~R AT LF~ST 13 DAYS PRIOR ~ T}~ ~ OF ~7~ ~]~ ~Y P~ ~tO D~IDES ~ APP~ A D~fS]ON OF ~{IS ~ WILL ~ ~ ~T A ~T~ ~O~ OF ~ PR~E~I~S IS M~E, ~{I~ ~OR ~ES 7~{E TEST~O~ ~ ~ID~CE U~N ~{I~ ~[E APPF~L IS ~ ~ED. ~ESS P~ISSION FOR ~)DITIO~, q'[ME ]S G]~]{D ]{Y '~{E CHAI~N. ~SIS~ LiST~[~ D~ICES FOR T]~{ }~I~ I~AI[~ A~ AVAI~B[,E gT~ CO~ C~ISSIO~S' OFFICE. L~{ RF~ESS S~i~LED FOR ]2:00 ~N ~ 1:00 P.M. ! INVOCATION - Keverend Su~an Diamond. 2 PLF~DG, E OF ALI,'EGIANCE 3 ~ OF AG~AS Approved and/or Adopted with chang{~s A. ~PR~ OF CONS~ AG~DA. B. ~PR(~AL OF ~Y AG~A. C. ~PR~ OF R~{~ AG~A 4 APPR~AL OF MI~S Approv~ as present~ - 5/0 First Christian Church 5/0 B. October ]3, i998 - Regular meet Jng PROCLAMATIONS AND SKRVICE AWARDS Page November 3, 1998 A. PROC[,~MATION$ 1) Proclamation proclaiming November as Collier County Adoption Month. To be accepted by Daneille Stewart, President of Adoption Task Force of Southwest Florida, Inc. and Monica Moehn, Chairperson of National Adoption Month Comraittee and Kathy Rushing, Operating Program Administrator for the FL Dep Of Children & Families. Adopted - 5/0 2) Proclamation honoring veterans. To be accepted by Henry R. Sherman, President of Collier County Veterans Council. Adoptc~ - 5/0 B. SERVICE AWARDS 1) Ronald Portokalis, Water - 5 years 2) Kurt Schabbe!, Road and Bridge - 5 years 3) Joanne Dalbey, HUI - 10 years 4) Kart Jokela, Facilities Management - 1.0 years 5) Nancy Lochner, Services for Seniors -- 10 years 6) Toni Mort, Real Property - 10 years 7) Miriam Ochelt~ee. Graphics - l0 years 8) Hernan Pantoja, Traffic Operations - lO years 9) Wanda Warren, Customer Service/Bldg. Review - ]5 years C. PR~, SI~ATION$ Recognizc~ I) Recommendation to recognize Officer Arcadio Rivera, Security Officer, Facilities Management/County Security Department, as Employee of the Month for November, 1998. 6. APPROVAL OF CLERK'S [~PORT A. AI~ALYSIS OF ~U~KS TO RESER~,S FOR CONT/NGF~CIES. 7. PUBLIC P~TITIONS 8, CO~ ;UI~IST~ATOR'S REPORT A. CO~UNITY DEVI~.~OPMENT & F/~VIRONMENTAL SERVICES ControllED t) CO~FII~) FROM ~IE 1.0/20 ~q~TING: Determination of Emergency ~-~--a! Servicus Impact ~nes t~, be pai,] by the Cleveland Clinic Naples. 2) Community Development and Environmental Services Division Page 2 November 3, 1998 requeSt!hq the Bo~ard o£ County Commiss]oner~ to ~et a Pub Heoring date fo~ [~)A-9~.3, Bretone Park, ~lse kno~ ~ Gl, Public Ilenrlng .~t. lot Jaoun~ 12, 1999 - A~r~l 510 A res,~[ution of the Collier County Board of Commissionerr4 ,m<lor~;ing Stnt~ Scenic Highway Designation of the Tam]ami Trail ns p[esc:]bed by tbs Corridor Advoc~lcy GrouD's C'orri,]or Manaqement Plan. Bess]ut{on 98-440 - Adopt~d ,5/0 MOVED FI{(~ ITI~M 16Ali ,$)Approval of a ]ease ,~qzeem~nt between Coil ~er County and Cai flor Enterprises Realty Grasp, Inr', Continu~ ;or two weeks .- 5/0 Mot. Jan Lo reconsider - 5/0 B. I~.J331,T C C. I'L'BI, [C S~CR~/I CES ~{'.v]~w of options for Recreational usgs for 315 acres of Z~,] id Wast,? Property dnclared as surplus adjacent to the current landfill. Staf~ to ~e fo~ard to [Dsue ~P for architect for ut~(~; enqJr]oer to I~ contract~ for wetland study; site to [~ pre[~r'ed for co~blnod use; and staff to ac~lnit[on of additional ~rcela · 3/2 D, b'UI'PORT S;{RVI CRS E, CO~ AITMIN] STRATON ].) 'l~tlS 1T[~ ?I]~ (.'I~?AIN FOR 9:30 A.M. Consideration of Itf Asso~Ji~::ed with the T~~vernmental Services t~ the City of Marco Island. Contractors I.,ic~nsin9 ~re~nt A~rov~ with c~9~; with ~xc~tions; ~d Staff to A~d the Co.~unity Parks I~ct Foe Ordinate and c~ ~ck to tho [~C - 5/0 Staff to a~d Fraoehi~le ~re~nt~ with ~rtlal assize1 to thu City of ~rco allying th~ to collect the fee~ - ~ (C~lost~or ~c'Kie and C~]soJonor Constantine ~o~ F. AIRPORT AU771OR I~5' 9, COUIFI"f ATTO~'S REPORT 10. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PaGe 3 .............................. ] ...................................... 2 .........L November 3, 1998 Appointment of members to the Black Affairs Advisory Board. Resolutlon 98-441 Appointing Albert Wal~y and Jennifer }line{ to fulfill the re~,lnder of the vacant terms and staff to advertise for the vacant seat - Adopted 5/0 Appointment of member to the Tourist Development Council. Resolution 98-442 Appointing C~ne Vaccaro - Adopted 5/0 Ted Spraque. R~por t accc~)t ed the tourism study rc. sults by Bill Miller and Lake Trafford renovation (Commissioner Berry). Staff to look at the n,,_xt 3 y~!ars and determine unbudgeted funds and plc~k3e that amount up to $2 mfll]on to Lake Traffol 4/1 (Commissioner Constantine od~posod) E. Discussion regarding salary adjustment/performaDce rating fol the County Administrator (Commissioner Berry) County Admini{~trator to received a 2.5% salary increase - 5/( F. Discussion and direction regarding Golf Tournament Contract (Co~missioner Haucock) County Attornc-y to work w/Clerk of Courts and State Attorney re misappropriation of funds and re, port ~ck - 5/0 11. O~{ER ITI~S A. OTID~R CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS B. PUBI.IC COMMENT ON GF~-ERAL TOPICS PU]]L/C ~{EARINGS WILl, BF. }{EARl) IM)~EDIATELY FOLIX~ING STAFF 12. AI3~7'iSED PUBLIC }{EARINGS - BCC A. COMPR~{ENSIVE PLAN AMI~T~M~TS B. ZONING AMY~WI]Mfg~P S C. OTHER 13. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS A. AI~VERTISED I~JHLIC }{EAI{INGS Page 4 14. STAFF'S COMMUNICATIONS Nove~b~r 3, 1998 A. Emergency M~nagement Director Pineau re upcL3te on Tropical Storm Mitch. 15. BOARD OF COUN~I'Y COMMISSIONERS' COMMUN$CATIONS 16. CONSENT AGFiN-DA - Ail matters ][sted under this item are consider( to be routine and action will be taken by one motion with( separate discussion of each item. If discussion is desire( by a member of the Board, that [tom(s) will be removed the Consent Agenda and considered separately. Approved and/or Adopted with Changes - 5/0 A. COMMI/NIq"{ DrfVEI~)PM}]~{T & ENVIRONMEN'~AL SERVICES .... ~,>~o~e the final plat. of Capri Co~mercial Center . 2) Reques~- ~o approve the final plat of "Pelican Strand Repi~ w/Construction and Maint¢:n~nce Agreement and stipulations. Recom~'nendat[on ~.o approve Excavation Permit No. 59.657 Dupree located ]n Sect]on 4, Towo~hip 48 South, Ran¢~e 28 East; BoundQ~ on the north by 58~n Avenue NE ~/W,' o~ the w/st ]pu lat]ons 4> Petition No. C ~8-~, Pastor Joseph Spinelli of St. Elizabe Seton Catholic ~.hurch, requesting a permit to conduct a ca{~ival from November 11 through November 15, 1998, at 53 28 Avenue S.W., Golden Gate. Florida. Carnival Permit 98-'; 5) Lien Resolutions - Code Enforcement Case Nos. 70521-001 - Thomas Melvin A]lmon !II ~ Kenneth Dean A]lmon; 71203-115 Edward Leroy & Melinda Anne Wilson; 80122-028 - Dominguez Estate, Julio c/o John R Dominguez; $0205-010 - M Buttazzoni; 802230-024 Gilbert & Martha Mendes & Antone Mendes. Res. 98-428 through 98-432 6) Lien Resolutions - Code Enforcemen~ Case Nos. 51129-016 - Pal Borgersen Jr; 60509-019 -- Sylvia S. Miller; 70820-060 Cliff Thieleke; 71210-0t8 - Dina Sinning; 71216-021 - ,IT Gaunt. Res. 98-433 through 98-437 7) Es%ablishment of an Ad Hoc Collier County Census 2000 Page 5 November 3, 1998 Complete Count Committee. Res. 98-438 ~) Petition VAC 98-022 to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County's and the public's interest in a portion of a parcE of land conveyed to Collier County as a drainage easement, recorded in Official Record Book 209~, pages 1724 through 1727 and being located in the Ster]ing Oaks subdivision i~ Section 10, To%~ship 4g South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. w/Quit Claim Deed 9) Request to extend the term of Marco A. Espinar to serve o~ the Envirenmental Advisory Board for an additional two mo~ period (December 30, 1998) or until the successor environmental board is created. Res. 98-439 10)Appro'za! of Budget ~nendment to cover permitting costs fo! 35 units to be built by the Collier County Housing Author] in I~mokalee. In the amount of $13,909.00 MOVED qC; IT'57~ 8A4 ii)Approval of a lease agreement between Collier County and <fcllier Enterprises Realty Group, Inc. ADDED 12~Request to approve the Final Plat of "The Shores at Serkshire Lakes, Phase Two'. (Commissioner Berry) With Construction and Maintenance Agreement and Stlpulatic B. I~BLIC WORKS Approve budget amendment for Developer Contribution Agreement between Collier County and TRG Naples, Ltd. In the amount of $433,981.00 Award Bid #98-2859 to ~M South incorporated for installation of a reclaimed water pond liner system. In the amount of $148,300.00 To direct ~he County Attorney to prepare an Amendment to Ordinance 90-111, as amended, that would reduce the Pelica Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee to thirteen members and the voting and quorum requirements accordingly. 4) Approve budget amendment for transfer of funds for Stormwater Swale Maintenance and Water Quality Monitoring Naples Park. Page 6 November 3, 1998 5) Authorize the advance NAPA Boulevard access improvements pursuant to the NAPA Boulevard, Pine Ridge Road Agreement. V Group of Florida, Inc., on behalf of the Developer to solicit bid,~ for construction and perform the constructiox on behalf of the County. Approve Bid #98-2844, Davis Boulevard MSTD Grounds MainteDance. Awarded to Environmental Care, Inc. C PUBLIC SLG{VICES i) Approve budget amendments to fund the previously approved Park projects. $218,305 for the Golden Gate Fitness Center Project; and $55,000 for the Bayvi~w Lighting Project. 2) Amend the Cocohatchee River Marina Concession Agreement. D. SUPfORT SERVICES i) Memorandum of Understanding between the Florida Wing of t~ Civil Air Patrol and Collier County. 2) To Rep]ace Current inventory of ECG/12 Lead Monitors with Physio-Control Life Pack 12SL Monitors. Formal competitive process waived E. COL~NTY AD~2I~II STRATOR 1) Budget ~endment Report BA's 99-005, 99-007, 99-009, 99-012 and 99-014 F. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS G. MISC~J.ANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE !) Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as directed. H. OTfIER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFIc~/{S 1) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment recognizing Florida Department of Transportation Grant Award #J7-99-0~ 06-01 in the amount of $100,400. 2) Recommendation to accept the COPS (Making Officer Redeploylnent Effective) More 98 AwaId. I. COL~f A~OKNEY Page 7 Nov,raher 3, 1998 1) RecoMmendation that the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County approve the Stipulated Final Judgment relative to the easement acquisition on Parcel No. 101; at the lawsuit entitled Collier Count}, vs. Collier Developme! Corporation, et al., Case No. 96-4052-CA~0i (Naples Park Area Drainage Improvement Municipal Service Benefit Unit Project). J. AIRPORT AUTHORITY 17. SUI4MA~Y AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS MUST ,l,,_{~rr THE FOLLOW/NG CRITqgRIA: 1) A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPR(~ FRG~M STAFF; 2) UNANqlMOUS RF, COMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY T}fE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION OR (YIT{Igl{ AUTHOKIZIlg(D. AGEIgCIES ALL MEMBERS PRESE~Ff AND VOTING; 3) NO WRI'i'I'~N OR ORAL OIkTECTION: TO ~ ITE~ RECEIVED BY STAFF, TIlE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING C%7~]MISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING AGI~qCIES OR q~{E BOARD, C~ OF TIIE BC MEETING ON WI{iCH 'ITIE ITEMS ARE SCTIEIX~.~D '. BE IIF, AIID; AND 4) NO INDI'VT1-FJ~LS ARE IAEGISTI~tEI) 'PO SPF. AK OPPOSITION 'PO ~TIE ITEM. 18. ADJOURN INQUTRIES CONCFJ1NTNG CHANGES TO 771E BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD BE M~I)E TO COUNTY AL~4//~ISTI~%TOR'S OFFICE AT 774-8383. Page 8 AGENDA CHANGES BOARD OF cOUNTY COAfMI.$',~IONEI~' MEETING NOVEMBER ~. 1998 ADD: ITEM lO(E) DISCUSSION REGARDING SAI~4RY ADJUSTMENT~ PERFORMANCE RATING FOR TtlE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR (COMMISSIONE~ BERR 19. ADD: FFEM 16(A)(12). - REQUEST TO APPROVE TtfE FINAL PLAT OF "THE SIIORE3 AT BERKSHIRE LAKES, PIIASE TWO". (COMMISSIONER BERRY). ~ONTINUE: ITEM 8(A)(O - DETERMINAITON OF EMERGENCY MEDICAl. SERVICES IMPACT FEE,5' TO BE PAID BY TIIE CLEVELAND CLINIC - NAPLE, g: (COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S REQUESI). NQTE_: IF UNRESOLVED ITEMS REMAIN REGARDhVG TIIE CITY OF MARCO ISLAND, DETERMINE DA TE FOR A JOINT MEETING. NOTE: TIlE FISCdL IMPACT.5'TATEMENT FOR ITEM 16(6' )2 INDICATES THAT A PAYbI£-NT BY TIlE COUNTY WILL BE MADE BY CHECK WlIEN IN FACT, PAYMENI WILL BE MADE TItROUGII A REDUCTION h¥ FUTURE CONCESSIONAIRE PA YMENTS. WIIERF~4S, 1~71EREAS, WIIEREAS. ~IEREAS, .°R O_..CLd MA TI ON eve? chihl ha~ thc right lo grow in a secure, b~ving fi*mi(v and adoption ts a po. Wtivc w~v to build a fitmil),; and thc .4daption Task Force t~,53utbwe~t Florida. Inc is a colhtborative effort Of .doplion brings untoM benefit.* to Collier County reside.ts that are affected by ~ btrth parents, adoptive parents and the their extended families: t~'IIEREAS, n is a pos#lye ~ of Collier ~ agencies, reltgiou~ families that DONEAND ORDERED THIS 3rd Da), of Navember. 1998. BO3RD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNT); PZORIDA CLERK WHEREAS, PRO¢~A/~ATION November It, 1998. is o day set aside as a national holiday to honor the sacrifices and contributions of our Country's milita~ veterans; and WHEREAS, this holid(~, was originally de.eignated Armistice ~ to re~1~ember the close of World War I and hns since been reserved to honor all our veterans; and WHEREAS, our veterans personify commitment to citizens responsibility in the defense of our Nation; and WHEREAS, such examples our Count~ survives Co of :lotion know and enjoy ATTEST: U ' RESOLUTION NO. 98- 440 A RESOLUTION OF TIlE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF' COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ENDORSING STATE SCENIC HIGHWAY DESIGNATION OF THE TAMIAMI TRAIL AS PRESCRIBED BY THE CORRIDOR ADVOCACY GROUP'S CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT PI.AN Whtreoa, thc mission of thc Fk)rida Scenic Illghways Program is to pm.serve, maintain. protect and enhance the intrinsic resnurees o£scenlc corridors; Whetea.~, thc Tamiami frail is of significant natural value encompa.~sing exceptional vegetation and wildlife that is dislinctivc of and defines Soulhwcst Florida; Whereas, thc 'l'amiami Trail tells a story of Collier County and is inextricably lied to thc history of the region: Whereas, thc pronx~tion and preservation of the 'l amiami Trail. ils history and its scenery is of great value to Ioday's residents and future generations: Whereas, State Scenic Highway Designation affords the Tamiami Trail special mention on road maps pmvlding a tourist draw and an economic benefit to Collier County; Wherea~, State Scenic llighway Designation would render the Tamkami Trail eligible Iht dedicated Ihnding sources v, ith v. hich to achieve the goals established in thc Corridor Manageracnt Plan: Whereas, thc Corridor Advocac7 Group. a coalition of citb'x:ns, users and stakch(,Iders, and rcprcscntalives ol'government and business and ibc environment have complied with the required procedures to achieve Slam Scenic Highway Designation for a 50 mile length of thc Tamiami ]'mil. from (Jollier -- Seminole State Park to the Collier - Dndc County llnc; 'and with public input prepared the guiding Corridor Managcmenl plan document; Wherea~, thc Corridor Advocacy Ge.up ndoptnd the Corridor Management plan at their meeting of Scplcmher 30. 1998; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED b~, the Ccllicr County Board orCon~nk~sioners that: SECTION 1. 'l he Collier County Board ol'Commissioners endorses State Scenic l lighway Designation for thc Tamiami Trail ~md approves the application for State Scenic I [ighway Designation as described in thc Corridor Mar.~gerncnt Plan. SECTION 2. The appropriate member of thc Collier County Board of Commissioners may execute thc applicalion ms indicated in Iht application included in the Corridor SECTION 3. This l~.csolutlon shall take eflbct immediately upon adoption. -8A3 This Resolution adopled after motkm, second ~md majority vote. Dated th s 4ay.~.t~_ of "7]~ ' 1998. ~" V ,'~:-qi~:<.. ' ; · ~LERK APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUF~CIENCY: M~orJe Studenl. Asss a it Counl~' A o~y COI.LIER coUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BARB~-kRA B~ BERRY~..CHA~hRM~ Corridor Management 8A] CORRIIX)R MANAGEM]~rr I~LAN Submi~ed to: Florida Department of Transportation Scenic Htghws~ C~mr P.O. Box 1249 B~.'tx~-, Florida 33831-1249 The Tamiami Trail Scenic Highway C. AG c/o N~pl~s (Collier Count~) ~ 2800 N~-~h Horse~ Drive Naplea, Florida 34104 C~a~h~g Jaclc~m Kerd~ Angiin Lopez Rineh~c Inc Community Planners 33 E~t Pir~ Stree~ Orlm~lo, Florida 32801 August 1998 Y. arrL, n ~s no has be~n ',he m~',)iration h)r this pro~e~t, .SA¸ ackno~'ledRement to Robert Mr, Warren has spent mo~t o~ his lif~ near the Trail and k~o~ ~ :he Es erglades a.~ ~e~' or' tm do. Long before the lo.at on ot thc ~ orridor Advt~ac} (Sroup. ~lr. Warren had sp~ many years wor~ng ronsard des~gnating the Tmniamt Trail as a scenic higMvav so that othe~ couid g~n a d~per appr~a~on or its extraordin~rx. ~cenic value and historic signmcance. Mr, Warr~ con0num to sYurk k)x~ard his dream and the Grou~ is gra~-tul for his sup~rt, . h Tank ~ou, Nit. ~,% arren, tot blazing ~he trail toward a Florida Scenic Highway designation. ',: Gratetul acknowledgement is given to members ot/he !.'.- deveio:,ment ot this application: Promonons and Tourism Subcommittee C~mmumtv Outreach Subcommittee Governmee ~ and Business Outreach Subcommittee ~ Corndor Management Entity Subcommitt~ subcommittees for their contribution in the Special thanics also go to the people who participated in ti~e Public '~% ork.shops; your commer Ls and ideas were mvaiuable. A sincere Thank You to CI.~ de and Nildd Butcher trom the Big Cypress Gallery ~or generously donating photographic artwork to include in this document. ' Executive Summary The Tamtamt Trail tells a umaue FIoflda al~ ~ Tta~ c~ pt~nde a ~nd~ lo ~t past ~d an ap~a~ tot ~e ~m'aO~ of ~o~ of ~ Comdor ~d~aw Gmu~ iCAG) wa~ A I~t ol eli~i~ for the Tatar'[rail was Is~u~ ~om 51rice that hrn~. th~ CAG. [~or{da Department Transportation Db~ict One, and the Naple~ CounW) Nlet?om~iitan Plannin~ Organ~'arlon haco conducted a corn~umtv participation program. vision tot this ~enJc hi,way, and ~attedthb Cortitio[' Management Plan. The vision is show~ on thc following pages [he improvemen~ and e~ancements that comprise ~ts vision ~ de~lo~ ~d pOofi~zed by membem o{ ~e public ~d ~e ~G dung a ~es of p~blic word, hops. A Co~dor Mana~m~t En~' ~lI ~ ~ed on~ Hi,way d~t~aaon h~ ~n ~t~ted. ~i~ enOW ~il be ~ as the ca~ak~ ol ~e ~nic ~wav by ~u~e · at all co,dot a~ am mortised and i~plem~t~ a~r~R ~ ~s Co~dot Mana~m~t Plan ~d that ~e The completion n! the Tamiaml Trail Itom Na County in A while Ii ~emal~s a~a ~abl~ by Naa~ ~efl~ and o~et etibbh~ ea~ w~. ~e Tt~ thigh ~0 mi}~ of b~ath.a~n~ ~e led~ O( ' ,~w~ and mb~p{~l Tamiami Trail Scenic Highway Action Plan i, P~motlon~lCommunl~ Pi~lctp~tlon C. Admtnl~t~tto~Coo~lnitlon ~~ ,. · ..,., _._ ~ ~: ~ I~, ,t leto ber~ Franklin Ad.m~ 'red [~arbnra flarrv ~teve t~,h~u nt J~n ~rock Fet~ ~r~km~n ~uddv ~nker Bill Carryall Ani~a Chapman ~audia Dawmp~r~ Frank Dennmger ElJzab~h Duprt, e ~onta Durrwach~er tVaJly Hibbnrd ram~ Huu~ Jc~hn lenkm~ EHc Kieler Su~an Kln~ ~n ~omnBham Ellie K~er ~ren ~uw~ma Eddie I.owery Mike Mayer Chuck M(,hlke Martha Napier Jim Newton .quean I'arelgll Debr~h Pr~t~ Rober[ Read Rnbert Robinson Bdan Sheehan Michael Stmonik R.J. S~anlcy Chris,ne Straton Sl~eilah S~obul Amy ~aylor George Toppln No~ Trebilco~ Robert Warren James Webb Gene Wooten ~ra ,lean Young Letter of Intent Flori~s ~:cai¢ Highways Program Nauonal Designation? [] Yes Sub~,~,'i.',a of this Letltr of latent verifi~s that d~ignaao~ ~ a Florida S~nic Highway i.s being sought fat th~ ocs~'~dar idtmfifi~l I~ow. Pl~a.~ submit t.~ ¢~r~ttn.,~ form to the DisCo's SC~U¢ Highways Rasdw~Rou-, Number ~md N~me - ProviZ: ~ ~ ~ US r~ n~r (if~pfi~le), thc I~ or ~' ~y r~,~ r~y ~ ~, ~ a ~ s~m¢ ~y US ~ ~r: US 41 ~ N~: Tam,ams Tr~l P~ ~ic l~ihway N~e: ~Tamtamt Tratl ~entc Htghw~: ~lghw~ of the P~t... f[tghw~ of the Future R~:~sa~,Corridor Limiu - D¢ft~ t~ roadway/corridor limits Ibegmmn~cnctm$ u:rmi~) according to t~: pr~.~-,~ afdc m~lc r~r~ u well u ~ r~i~hte g~p~c I~ ~/or m~ic ~. Pr~ ~ ~mdor Im~ m ~1~ ~ a~h a l~oa ~ dc~lbg ~dor ~. ~ ~ttd cat, dOt length It appro=~ttly 49 J ~les. ~t hmtt$ be~n at the north e~r.a~ ~ough the Fa~tchee Stra~ Stats Pork. t~ Ten ~o~a~ hla~ Nano~l ~t~t~ ~e~e a~he B g Cypress Natto~l Prtse~e aM e~ at the Dade Coun~ Line. Gas e:r~a:~l Jurisdictioas - Provide the names of all loc~J gcn¢~ purpose govcrnmen~ a.s well ~s thc pL,~mmS.~'~"~.me, at ~enc~es whose junsdicfioa ~ comdor u'averses. 'These include, but are hoc limitr, zt to cr~.', c.o.,m'y, wuncoq>or'~ are.aa, M~ropoliu~n PlarUmag Orgzmz~tion. s. W~ Management Dis~cts, Fore.fy 5<or, ce, Transport,~on Authonties a~ Paxks ~d Recre~uon Department. Number: Big Cypress National Preserve B/II Carroll Star Route. Box 10 Ochopee. Florida 941-69~.2000 extenston 17 ~'-~;,~ Ackb'~ss: Number. Calller./$emJnolt Slats Park Mr..l~trt tfenry 20200 East ~'amtomt Trail Naples. FL 33961 941-$94.$$97 Coetac~: Address: Number: Faltahatchee Strand State Park ?.0. Bo~: 548 Copeland. FL $J926 941-695-4~93 r,,,~. Name: Number: Collier County Go~ernmtnt Betty~ Matthews. Count. Commtsstoner. Dl$trtct J SJOl ~xt Famtamt Fratl Hap/es. ~ 3396 941-774~097 P~a~ NLUnber: Name: Number: South Florida Water Managtm. ent DLurict Big CypreJ. t BaMn Area O~etce 6167 Jnne~ ~ Name: Co~atact: Florida Deparlmtnt of Transponalion Su~an King P O, Boz 1249 Borrow. F'L Ten T'noutand I$1and~ .Va~onal W'ddlife Refuge ./tm Krakaws,:; cio ~ortda Panther Nanonal $Vtldhfi Refuge J860 Tollgate Blvd. Sutte JO0 Naples, FL -1J942 tt.f/.jSj~442 v,.~, Name: Southwe-rt Florida Regional plannb*g C~uncil Jtm Newton 4980 Bayllne Dr~ve 4~ Float P O, Box J4.{-1 North Fort bfyer$. FL 3.1918 9.fl.656.7720 l:Scayune Strand, Division of Foetxtry Sonla Durrwachter 68 [adultnal Naples, FL JJ942 941-4J4-5000 or JiJ-Sj14 \Leffer of Jnten~ / 8A3 Statement of Significance - In the space provided, identi~.' and discuss the ditTerent :ypes o£ intrinsic re.ureas present in the corridor. Ccncen:rate on detailing why these resources are lmpormm a~d v.~lued bY the community. In other words, what rna.~s this roadway special to the ~ community and its visitors. Fha completion of the Tamiami ~-rail,tFom ?,'aples to Miami in April 1928 hallmarked the end of the final pioneer period in Collier Couno,,. The Trail opened the "fronn er" area to commerre. ~etllement and developrnent. Today ~'hi[e it remains a vital link for commerce. an area inhabited b.y Native Americans and other established families and comrmmities, it is ~t splendid scentc resource for the local residents at~d the thousands of tourists *s'ho visit each year T/et Trail lin~ Collier Count)' to Dada CounO' through approximately 50 miles of breath[ toktng $cetI c lamtlscape$ of xa~vgras$ and subtropical wilderness. Along the faa&ida, the traveler ca~t have a clo$er look at Florida wildlife. Alligators and birds, such as great blue heron.r, at~hDtga$ and wood xlorP~, are ofie~ see~ sunning themseA.es or feedit~g and nestling albng t~te ~ atern'oy$ a~'acent to the Trctl. ~ 5'able pioneer era towns easily accessible fi'om D'atl. $;zch a~ Ochopee. Copeland and Everglades Ci~ introduce the traveler to a remnat~t of "Old Florida ". Vast tracts of publicly owned lands, to incl tde Big Cypress National Presem'e. Evergt'ade$ .'.}tttonat Pari Ten Thousand Islands ,XDtional lfqldl~e Retiree a~*a' the Fa~i~atci:ee :t~d (7o,'[ter. qemmole State Por~ ore a4iocent to ;i~e Trail and offer the traveler a spectacular exflerte~tce Of ~cemingly endle.s;~ vt.~lax a~d opport n ties to ex~lorc' ~outh ~[orld~ [g natural land, carles, l,tdeetL the Tamiami Frail corridor provide~ a rich array of scenic, natural hfstoric. Cztltttrrtl ~/H.[ recreationa[ t~flflorlumtics. Pre-Applicahon Meeting - Please indicate several times v.'hen thc GAG could meet for the Pre- Application Meeting or the time and date of a Pre-Application Meeting that has already been arranged with the District Scenic Highways Coordinator. Pre.,qpplieation meeting ha, been arranged with ,~usan /x'ing, District One Scenic Hi.giro rt~'~ (-'onrdinator, JbrlO a.m. on August 7. ! 996 C'orHdor ..~ d, vocfffcy Gha~rper~ ~,~ctl Gent/ral~c~trpose Government R~presentattve Date · Date Addi:ional Information - On a separate sheet, provide the names, lilies, addresses and phone numbers for :he following groups: 1) additionaI government/planning/management entities. 2) additional local general purpose government representatives with signature, and 3) CAG Chairperson. Vice Chairperson and additional membership. D=a.' ,k&- I have r.".:::v=d ~= recommendation of ~hc Scenic Highways Adv~so~ Co~o (S~C) ~d, a~ c~eful cons~derat:on, ~Dced ~h~ ~e T~i Trnil Scemc Highway ~.S, 4 I) c~bits ~e ~ic qualities :sscn:al for =lig~bdib' ~d preen a desi~a~ion as a Florida Scenic Hi,way. Yo~ Eli~bili~ Application Pla~mg Org~lzaion OZPO). Big C~ress National Present, E'.'erg[ades National Park. Collier Seminole by "telling a sto~" about ~e beau~ and ~queness of the Tarsi Trail Scene Hi~y md con~bu~ to the quali~' of life in the State of Flo~da Com~ MPO for yo~ diligence md work quali~ in ~mpltt~g tM cli~bili~ ph~e ~e next phase requirts · e T~i Trail Comdor Adv~acy Group to pr~p~ a CoMdor Mmagtment Plan (CMP). Pcrso~ct revolved wi:h ~c Hofida Scenic Highways PtoF~ look lo.yard to ~sist~g you m ~s endeavor. TFB:cll Nk. Davit T~ddy, Dismct One Secretary ' Mr. LarO' Ba~field, State Sceruc Hi,ways Coordinator Ms. Sus~ ~g, Dismct One Scenic Hi,ways C~rdmator Ms. ~bbic H~t, Dis~ct One Dkector of Pl~g ~d Pm~s i Designation Application Florida Scenic Highways Program National Designation? [] Yes No ~u~rn:ssion of :h~ Deagncttcn ADpficaflon torm cna ~ts Cccsmc, cn,/~ng Camcor Mancigemenl Plan that ces~gnc~an cs = Ftoncc [ce~c HIghw~ ~ ~e~ng ~cugnt for r~e czm~or identified below. Please ~ce Crc,ACed in 5ec,~on J.2 Se~on ~on ~d CMP Roa~way/~oule Numbe~ and Name - ~to~e ~e tt~e ~c US road numcer 0t app~cUle} c~ the Ioc~ or CF,'/reglO~OlN reccg~ea n~ tcr me U541 ~ami ami Trai Scenic Highway Hame - .~rc','.ce ~',e scenic highway nome rc ce u~ea m Ch,/Dromotianol aclMties. Tam,ami TraiJ 5cem¢~i~hwav: Hi~hwav of: the Past...~i;zhwav of theFu:ure Cote at £11gJbility. Prc'.~Ge :ne core at the Letter at E~glE~ll'v. December 2, 1997 CarnCor Advocac7 G¢ou~ - ~,c,.~c~e the following ~t'ormctlcn regcrcinG ~e CAG chairperson. William R. O'Meil[ C"A~ CY, czr~er~on c/oNacdes(Ccliier Countv)/'AP~ 28DO North Horseshoe Dr. Na~ies. FL 341D4 (q41)$c~1-3332 Aadre~ Car,dot Manogemenl Enflly C/dE C~c/rperson or Eadvclent Phone Number ¢hone Number Dad o/our kno~edge, /~e zepre~entoflb~ o/ /~e co,dar and t~e resou~e$ /or w~b~ dedgnoffon os o ~odda '" Comaor A~acy Group Coniaor M~agement ~nfl~ Chat~er~n Date, X Date Local General Purpose Government ~epresenla~ve Date .~ ~: Local Gener~ Purpose Governmen~ ,,.~ ~ ~ ASdltlon~l ntor~flon - On On ~ffoched sheet. ~ro~de ucdoted nome[ ~fles. ¢ddre~es numbers for ~e following: ~) 6AG Ch~trperso~ ~c~ho~perso~ other o~cers/com~ee heods temoin~g memDer~l~ ~ 2) oddlflon~ local general ~urpose gover~ent representoflves with ', I. Introductmn ................................................ · Uorndor Description ............................................ 3 a. Vision ................................................. b. Corridor 5tory 4 Opportunities and Cons rants AnaJvsi~ ............................. 27 0. Descnptton ............ ' ................ 27 c, Roadway Ri§ht or Way ................................ 27 d Environh~ental Conditions ............................ 29 e. Existin~ Land Use and Zonmx ............................... 30 r Future/and Use ...................................... ~i' SafetvSigna§essues 36 . .37 i Traffic Volume~ . .38 m. Other Programs 42 a. Program Overview . ...................................... 73 ]. Workshop ~umber Une ....... 5 :iiiii::i:74'74 2, Workshop Number l'wo ............................. 79 3, Civic Meetings ......................................... 82 d. Suppornng Documentation ............................... 82 7. DesignaUon Criteria ...................................... 87 a, Universal Criteria . b. Resource Speo tic Cntena .................................... 90 8, Protection Techniques ................................... 93 a. Public Lands .............................. 93 b. Pfiva e Lands 95 i0 Relam)nsh~p m Comprehenswe Plan ................. 101 I 1. Partnerships and Agreements ........................... 103 12. C'-omdor Management Entity ........................... 105 13. Goals. Ob}etlwes and Strateg:es 107 14. At, ion Ptan ............................................. 11 API;:~'~[tc~ IUnder Separate Binding~ g. Fuvare L~ncl Use Map C. Right-of-Way Maps D. $ignage Inventory E. Crash Data ' F. Other Proiects that Could Allect the Scemc Highway C. Project Mailing List H. Newsletters, Workshop Handouts and Comment Forms I. Interview Data Forms J. Letters of Support, Articles and Corridor Impression Surveys The I a.'mam~ f'rail tells a unique Florida story. Traveling aiong the Trail can provide a window to our past and an appreciation for the preservat:on of outstanding natural resources for future generations. In order to seek "Scenic Highway" designation, a local grassroots effort in the form of the Corridor Advocacy Group (CAG) was initiated, A letter ot eligibility for the Tamiami Frail was issued from the Florida Department of Transportatmn on December E, 1997. Since that time, the CAG, FDOT District One, and the Naples (Collier County} .Metropolitan Planning Organization have conducted a communi .fy participation program, developed a vision for this scenic highway, and drafted this Corridor Management Plan (CMP). Fhe purpose ot this Plan ~s to outline the scenic highwav's future management and protection strategies and to share the vision for this beaut/rial and unique resource. '['he proposed scenic highway is described in Section 2, followed by the vision statement and corridor story, in Sect/on 3. Opportunities and constraints that exist along the Tamiami Trail are detailed in Section 4. The Conceptual Master Plan is unveiled in Section 5, followed by an overview of the Community Participation Program in Section 6. Scions 7 through 10 address designation criteria, protection techniques, funding and promotion, and relationship to comprehensive plan, respectively. Potential partnerships and the Corridor Management Entity are outlined in Sections 11 and 12. Goals, o~ectives and strategies are listed in Section 13, followed by the Action Plan in Section 14. The suppomng documentation for this Plan can be found in the Appendix, which is under separate cover. Scenic highway designation is an opportunity for a modem public-private parmership to preserve and build on the intrinsic resources of the Trail. The scemc corridor will provide improved access to the Everglades environment. It will allow the roadway to be improved in ways that will emphasize the natural beauty of the route. It can be used to preserve the Native American history of the area, as well as the more recent history, of growth and development. At the same time, the Tamiami Trail can be maintained, not as an historical artifact, but as a living artery., in keeping with its principal , original purpose. The proposed Famlamt Frail 5o.,n:c Hi.qhwav a 50 - mile segment at US .Il located in L'ollier the Coilier-Summole State I'ark and extends eastward through the I~icayune S~and State sorest. Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve. the Tun [housand [glagds National Wildlife Rehlge and the Big ( .. press National Preserve, Fhis ,~egment or the famtaml Frail connecLs the City of Napk~s m {dallier County with Dade County Fhe Famtaml [rail also provides access via State Road 29 lo Everglades c. dltv and the Everglades National ['ark..ks the name mdicate% the Famiami by Native Americans and other established families rot the local residents and the thousands at tourists who visit each year. The Trail link~ Collier County tu Dade CounW l~ough appt~imately 50 miles nj breath-takin~ scenic landscapes o~ sawgrass and ~ubtrop~cal wilderness. .\long the roadside, the traveler can have a closer look at FIorlda wi!dli[e, Alligators and birds, such as great blue herons, anhingas and wood storms, are otten seen sunning thcmselves or feeding and nesting along the waterways ad[seem to the Trail. Viable p:oneer-era towns ea.,~ily accessible from the Trail, such as Ochopee, Copeland and Everglades City introduce the traveler to remnants of 'Old Florida'. Vast tracks of publicly owned lands {Big Cypress National Preserve, Everglades Nation~l Park. Fen Fhousand Islands National Wildlife Rrtuge. Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve and Collier-Seminole State ParksJ are adjacent to the ['rad and offer the traveler a spectacular experience of seemingly endless vistas and opportunities to explore South Florida's natural landscapes. Indeed, the Tamiami 'Frail corridor provides a nch array of scenic, natural, histonc, cultural and recreational opportunities. a. C. or~dor V~ion ~. The Tam,ami Trail ~,, a leslament to human drive hnd ,~mnltlon. II I, h~n~ h~to~'. ~ tan~Ib]~ rcmmdc~ of the r~)~ ol Colher County. ~e Trail lells a 'm~queb .Xmenc.m.~ ~e s~ory o 'a man. Barton Collier. ,~dlin~ lo ~I a fortune on his dream, of 1he hardships ~ endured and ~he m~enm~ employed m Ihe Trail's This hL~hv,;ty Is also a ~ mdow on a ~lobally umqu¢ i ¢cosyslem. Marjoo ~toncma~ Douglas tau~h( us tO prize ~he E~crg)ad~s and many arc ~ea~-hi~g us m appreciate ks ~ubtlc beamy. ~¢ go~¢~mem and ~he ~k se~'~ces ate comm~ucd to ~ts prcsc~'auon. ~c ~gmcn[ of thc Tamiam~ Trml east of Naples provides mc principal CX~U~C for ~ ~0~ of [r~vc[¢~ [o thc Everglades, ~cenlc hl.~hw;ly desl.~nahon is al3 opportunity for modem public-private parmershm [o pres¢~ and build ,m ~th Ihcsc as~c~ o~ ~hc Trail. The ~nlc comdor ~lJ] p~ld¢ ~moro~ cd access lo Ibc Eye,Irides envlronmcn{. ]t wilt allo'~ [h~ roadway ,.vay~ Ih~t ~ HI em pnasiz< thc natural beauty of Ibc route. h can be u>cd io prcsc~.c me Naln'¢ American history of (he area. as well as thc more rcccm histo~ o/'gmwlh and ~¢velopmcnL At {he same time. th~ TamlamJ maintained, not as an historical aml~cL but ~ a livin~ a~¢~. in k¢¢pin~ ~lh ~ts principal on,mai A Florida Scenic Highway designation is only one step in th~s process, but ii is a b~g step. This opportunity is not to hc m~sscd to t'unhcr acs[heuc, cultural, public sat'cry. educalional and commercial goals all in a single enterprise. The Tamiami Trail Story. The t:ior,.e,,a ',cen:c Highway Program :~as !ormea .o increase awareness ,.[. ri:story a.nd 'ntrinszc resources. The Prograr~ otters grassroo:s opportunities/or commuvaties to avviv tot a ~cemc H:gm~av designatmn. ; . . ' ' ' ' . 2';rvose o~ t~$ presentation is to s~owca~,e olde such ,..;tort lot a roadway that [s special to commu~tv: Eke T~miaml [?ail .~. ',ocai Comdor Advocacy Grouo ICAGi ~as ~ormed to a~?.c to,- a Fio~:ida Scl;nit Highway D~s~gna~on. ' .~nyone can ~art:c:vate. Our C.~G is made u~ o~ :nterested C:zens, ~overnment oltidais, and ' exper~ in areas SUCh as plannin~ engm~rm~ '.aw. history and namraI resources. ~he CAG is :he A~piicant m the designation 7~e C.~G ~orked m concert with the Community .md ioca[ ~o'.'ernmen~ to deve[o~ a mana~emen~ economic development. The mission or (>ur C.\G ~as to appiv rot a Florida Scenic Highway designatmn tot a 50imiie se§merit ot US 41. Locally known as the Tamiami Trail, the designation would begin at Collier - Seminole State Park and end at the Dade County tine. As the CAG proceeded through the applicati~n process they sought support from citizens, interest groups, ' agencies and others. l'he famiami Trail tells a unique Florida Story. Traveling along the Trail can provide a wmd/)w to our past and an aopreclation tot the preservation oi: outstanding natural resources ~or our mt'are. Designation could mean enhancing exceononal educa~aonal opportunities for visitors as welt as residents traveiing the frail. The application process has three phases: eligibility determination phase, designation phase, where the' community and the CAG worked together to develop a corridor management plan, and an implementation phase. T!trough all these phases the purpose is to gain k~owiedge oi the 'Famiami Trail and develop ways it can be showcased/or its intrinsic resources. ' 8A3 Corridor Vision ectlo.", Cultural. Archeoiogical & I--Ii~tonc Resource~ ;ne req~:."ces a.on~; me lam:ami Iran tel[ the , here are ,Ix lr, lnnsic re,~ources mat haw., been .'iocume:lied. ~"- , · .,e first ttaree are the Cultural \rcheoio,.,:cai ana Histonc. U~e com:.,iev, on ot the ram~aml Frail in April 1925 .a ,v. ar~,eo me em ot the nnal moneer period in , oa;er t., :.n,v. Pioneer communities ooce linked oniv by v. ater are now avoroad:ab e by automoblie, :'~ro,.'ldin~; commerce and deveiovment ,~'ovor,",:n:::cs tot residents ~vhiie remaining close to :.~e~r hen:age. Fodav. :,. a:ie i: remains a ~ aai link for commerce, and an area inhabited by \at:ye Americans and other esraoiished families an~ communities, it is ai~ ; ~Die:m;d ~cemc resource tt,r :~e iocai residents and 7ra:i i:nks t_'o!~wr t'ountv to Dude County through avvnmma:eix y.) miles ,,t 0Fearn taMnb scemc '.andsca=e~ ot ~a~vgras~ aod subtropical wilderness. Uong the roadside, the tra,,eier can have a closer I~k at Flonaa x~fidlife..Xd'gators and birds, such as great bite herons, anhmgas and wood storks, are ~een sunmng themseives or feeding and nes~ng nion~ ti~e waterv.'avs adiacent :o the Frail. ~. iabJe ?:oneer-era tot,. n,~ easfi'.' accessible lmm Dali, ~,ucn as Ochopee, Cooeiand. and Everglade.i t...~ mtroci',ce t.;'.e traveler ',o remnants ot 'Old } !onda. ' ;i~e ~ a:~a Ind)an~ :r.r.,lud this re;mn with canot~ :,~ bt' ttx~t ~,CO0: enr~ n~o. Evidence o~ the tirst ', :'eo~c :n :ht~ rca:on :~ ,carte. rheir ~urvivnl was .~e~vndcnt ~,n hun:;r<, ::~hin~ and gathering wild ~ 2~ants, ; ~e~r ~va~te ~,r ~:.nch, Oyster. and Clam ,~eiN created [arKe mounds found along the Fen [~nt~atld I~lano (]~;t G)a~t and interior ot Collier ·..'ountv. ~.me .~,ecu.ate that the mounds ~sere built .:l~e~tlollaJ['. PrO';ld;:]q a~ escape from ~osquit{~.5 -~va~nD ~ vre t~e 3vm;n.ies Ircm the ~aroilna5. ;'~lev ~,)t:~ht ~atetv .~ad a qu:t.t lite, but round the ,'~O0~lte J~le bemmoie Indian ~Xar t~egan in the 1930'$ ~ hen C.:lgre~ deemed all lndlan~ t~ere to be relocated west pi the Mississippi ~ver. By 1859, the relocaMon proRram ended. It was believe~ that less :.hah 300 Semln~,k,s reran:ned in the area. ,rho'~e Iilat remained continued to live tn small bands ~:~ tile B:g (..'x :.~re,;.; Swamp, [~xo spoken :anzua~es ~parated them into two d~stlnct grot;ps, :he Nlicco~ukee and Seminole Indian ',[em~er~ -t both grou~s st:ii live nionB the [ tad. Corr~dor~,slon :~?; ,~bxmd~t ~atural R~urce~ Attracted New Se~e~ and ,~[ ~outm~ ('~t ~Iortda nl ~Jl~ {u~l ~ Each ei~t) had ~,ml:~ :,, pt, c,uqe t(, tht, numer(~uw Uird rnokt, rlt,~, ~ince p:uma~e *,', a~ nl(~t briJlian: durim~ the m'.~tm)4 .i,]u~htt,r ,,t wild bJrd~ h~r /,l~Jlll)ll, h;rud W,lrdt'll~ Jo watch r)vt,r the J,]r~t,r r()(,kerlt, s, I~Ptr,l~io~ I~f t~q road ~V,l~ ~eefl I~ [Ua/ur~'cto~ed the ~ amp Dy rail Blazer~ gained ~allond{ In lU2.t. (/oilier Cc, trot,, undertook Ihe FJofldd Jnok (,vet and/i;lt~hed the last I~elve mlleg: d~ lhe bdqe OI OU~f~tlotlq, IA'ca{ I~dla~ were ~fnong ~ervlce brought In machinery and l'he mo,q rimlCeable piece ot equlpmetlt ~vd,~ the WdlkitlR DredRe, It wa~ a machine thai propelled ~he~ I~{a~lett rock a~ a hqmddtio~ for the J'fa~l, ~:m ~h~, hi~mrv .I tiu)~ uarh' piom, er d,w~ and w~ i ','~,., h,t~, r,, b',lih I.',v dr~.d)~inR and lilt, ~ I~P, a ionR ,,tr,llRhl ?~l.lln ~revl ~lld · ',',,.'rfr,,m. ['r,lVL'illlR d'~rou)~h lht~ town, h)c,1~cd just mm m, 8A3 H~tonc SLt'uciurem Brinl~ ~'~ce ol ~ Put ~l~J ~H Ih~' J~:()'~. Olhvt olde~ building) in~lud~ II)~. Rod and Gun Club, kn.~ n mr hoMtlll~ WJlltL, r l'hou~and l.l,md~ .mc~, thc l~'~, ~ Close by on Chokuh)skue ldand is Ihe ~lnalhvood rradinR POit built in J~. rhe ,tore. a local point in tile t'~lrJy day~. ha~ many itorJe~ bt)Ih bad and ~ood, ;...nera: ~tor~. 9nil[ it burned m [033, ri~e presto -~mcture, ail 7'3~ x $'4", had been the tool shed :andmark on the [ami.~m~ l'rail ,md a~vidt~ ['!:ere ~ ere s~x service, stations built alon~ th,.. !'am~acm ['ra:l b~' Barton Collier. Monroe 5ration. ,~!le OI lne ~fx, ~,ll built in 1928. Che station was the~ rrml. Ioo~ng tot Itrande~ I~O{OHMt. ['he road the road. Monroe St.mon. located m the heart ot the ~ig C} pr~s ~vam~, has many color~l ston~ aRached to its 60 plus years ot ooeraBon. Sce~U~ Natural & Recr~ationai R~ourc~s t~. hiie ti~e frail had mtroouced new commerce to re,ton ~ nth na~ral ~onders. Common sties ot wiidlite and scenic vistas along me trad has introduced countless travelers to the area and has dra~vn regtonai, s:ate, and even natlonal .tttem:otl ti) ~o~m ~lorl~a s unique ecosystems. ~.'ast tracks at publicly owned lands, including Big Cypress National Preserve. Everglades National Park. ['eh l'housanct Islands National Wildlite Retuge, [~icayune Strand State Forest, Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve and Collier-Seminole State Park are adiacent to the rrad and offer the rraveier a spectacular experience or seemmg!y endless vistas ,lad OOL~Ortunltles to e\Diore 5out}l Florida s natural !andscaDe~. I his brings us to the tit. x: three intrinsic resources directly {inked to the [ raft: :!lc natural and scenic qualities and the rt'creauonai opportunities. CorricJor V;lion Tro.mcal Hardwood Hammocks at Collier-Seminole State Park 71~t' .~ct'm¢ Htt~h~%a~ ticsi~llatlo~l IS ~roposed ti) ~'J~k Jno s~ arch tot t~e subtle env[ronmcntat :hanses a, ~e heaa east along the [rail '.n the caw, l~qO',~, t;arron Collier made plans rot a -ar~,. ~'.;:s Ua:k, :nci:adcd a 130-acre stand at :nagnmccnt nan~e royal oalms that the Southern ~tatcs l.and and T~ber Company ch~e not to cut down t, ccau~, they ~cit it had national siRnificancc, In 104F t~.e Lind Co',i~er had reserved was turned over to the S~a~e o~ Florida ~or management. 'Fodav the Coiiier-~emmo~e ~ate Park is 0,423 acres and ~eature~ ~ t'gctat;on ,md ~ fidlife typical at the E'.'er~:ade~ :rot~;cai i~ard~ooo h,mlmock, l'hese :()rests art, :he D,e,,t hldles aaa the ~ ucatan. Hammocks appe~ to be m~penetrablc u'~th their wails of tangJt~ , shrubs, saw palmettos, and vines. But once inside, hammocks are less ~ungie like. A mature hammock has a dense canooy, aiiowing little light and minimal growth on d~e rarest lloor. Most at the vegetation m a i~ammock is up high as ~ees stmggle to get the most light. On the trees and rarest floor, beneath the canoov, hve air olants, terns and c)rcmds. Royal Pahr~ and Orchids .,t £akahatchee Strand $~te Preserv,, · ;'.e ,,c',, vark, as you :rave~ east al(me, the 1 .a I, s '.re Fakahatchee bt:a.".a brute l~reser,.'e. The .~ akahatci~ee_,,aha';'" ~'~ ';',,.e n:a~or drainage siough ot ::'.e sou:m~ estern Big C ~ ~ress .C, wamv and the ~arg,.,sr and most unusual ot the stra~nds. .'-he tim,. ot water :brough the Fakahatchee S."rand is ,:,,~el:v. ai to ~ts contmut:d health and that ot the ,.",mar;es to tire south, l',s forest ot w, lxed baid- c'. pres,:es, m;'al vaims, and avundant epiphytic .,iants :,; un:qu.:, i he Fakahatchee ~trand ix .~eprcmmately 20 relies iong, but only three :o nyc :,'n;le~ v, ~de. But, :he namrai ,,'aiuc~ or :he Fakahatchee ~trand ::~a~ ye !:rearer th.m :hose m any area ot comvarable .:/e ::: :i~e 5tare o! I'ior)da, It conta:ns the largest -~r'a.~n ot tl,ltl;'t, ro,,'a; k~,li,~, s. It also has the largest ,:once:~:r,'mon and '. arx'tv or orchids in Norris kmer:ca, lhe orchids :~ hen in bloom add a .,plash ,,t color :o the Strand, such az the cow horn and pine pink orchid. ' 8A3, j Unloue r'lortda WlldliYe at Ten i'housand Islands N,attonai Wildlife Refu~e 2' . oeateo t,:; :ne *.o'.I:,'1 Mdc t~£ the [';a~i Is :~e {'ell 7 ?',ou*,ancx I ~a,,t~., ....~,~onm 'tx, ud,,te Retu,.:¢. I he ;~ atllng: b:rd,~. ,*'.:¢~ ns the american kkoocistork. ~ .qlCh 1,~ h*.tect 2. ,t :ederall', endanKerecl *,~ecles. Gulf Coast Entrance to Everglades Nattonai Park Fhe Gu;t Coa.,t en.'rance to EVerglades Xationai Park i'~ located a -nort distance .'.om the iraiL e',tabli,~hment ot :he Park ~n 1o47 recogn:zed the !:5 ert~iade~, ,x~ utl;oue t~o,,,t *~tem and it% I:n~ortance ',*, ater I!okt. ,md ii/e-'4P, lmt *=::miner :h'.ar, c~erstorn:s t,*, corn=icrc the na:urai c~ cie. I he l:'.'ergiades -upport ri:ore ti~an %10 '~pecxes ol birds a;~d ovt'r FLORIDA TEN NATIONAL WILDLIFE [he guJtcoast area ~s knot,, n tot tLS Red .'xlangroves. The red mangrove is easily recognizable t,v~th its ,~tilt-tike prop roots that arch outward trom the mai trunk, the mangroves provide a habitat tot several endangered species, 3ncludmg sea turtles and the manatee. ', i,itor~ ~ ho drive through :he I'rest. rvus 7:9,000 acres n .,~ see an expanse or o~efl ~raJg~ W th ;nterna,~ ,, tree islands dotted with cvpr~'trees,: .,meianos and dark mreste~ swamvs. dommam vegetannn tS.~es m the Big Cypress M~tion,~ Pre~erve. File cvpres~ Co~u~l[V rile inost common s~uc~es are Bald Cypress which 130 reel ~ tt~ broa,~ g.m,me~..~ deciduou~ member or thc rt'~wood r,l~iv, :}lc c~'r.ress droos Its needles itl No~embur and Droduce~ new growth ill March, when ~,,er levels ,Ire high, 8Al ~f ~(~ ~ md :~at n,~uralh ,~t~ under ~ ater durln% the ~ * - , ' ~ lie ~t~m .f the I ~ca),une ~ a nlt~r~ ~atural ~tate, :Vana~ oH' the TratJ and F.x'p. er~ence a ReaJ F~orjda Adventure :~rther 1:1:() th~, ,,~ dciurnc~. Knm~ n to(1,1~ ~l~ 4~d unmarked ~ atur?.ays t~ the ~i~ Cvpr~ ~xx,~m~ anO [ch [h~u~and l,;ano~. I:le area .~ttract~ iocaI and long dNta~ce visitors to hunt Rirdm,,:, a:~d ~ddhle ~,t~er~ ,~::on i~ a ~remtum a',on~ cycle ~,r i;te during the brce~:ng and roo~tm~ Night adventures ca:l L, nn~. interesting discoveries. But :Io znatter how x ,,t; avpmach the experience... ., berber :: :s camping, canoeing, day long hikes or ;:sh:ng, a2[ are vertec: ~x ,ws to share tile beauty .ca:ed a:,m~ the Fa::;:,m~: Frail. r/ TRAIL ~ H;C..Y,-IY~AY Travel the Tamtamt Trail and Expenence the tlnl .ou~ Beau .ty of South Florid~ -... ere?.: :or the colYIDlt, tlon o[ :~e I'~lllllalll! ttnes~ anc~ avprecmte t!',e surro::ndinl~ beauty ot area. i'he F'.orma bcemc High~xav Pro,ram otter,~ a ;:'creased tour;sm, l'l;e vrogram aiio~.~ us Corridor Vision 8A tke [anthlmi I'rali Scunlc H:ghwaycOrddor ..~ Xwe been identitied and are detailed l~t~S~ ~ · ~c:10m Go:d~, Oblecuve~ and s:rate~es deveioped :., addre~ tnc~e tssue~ are noted ~n ~aremheses ate detaded m ~ec~on t3..k Conce~tua~ MaSter ',3s Peen dcvt'Joeed ba~ud on th~e oDDortunifies a. Des~pflon =0- re:lc ~eRmen: ot US -11 It cared In Codger Countv~ F:or)da. Fhe t, row~sed seen c roadway corridor ~:ate I~re~er~ e and t, xtend~ ea~m ard through the 2~ca~ uae ~:ra:m ~tate ~ ore~t. F, kahatchee $:rand '. ~'.d2:e Rctu.~c and the B:~ L'. ~'~es~ Xa~onal :?ds '~t.g:nen: ot the I a;ll)aml [rali connects the City ,a Napies in Collier k'ountv with Dade County. The Famhum l'rai[ also pro'.qdes access via State l~oad 29 to Everglades City and the Everglades National Park..\s the name indicates, the ramiami Trail originally connected l'ampa with Miami, a distance. ot aoproxmlateiv 245 miles. b. Corridor tJmit~ 7he ~rooo.~eci corridor length is ,mproxsmately 50 ..... ts, , .1,. u.,...s begin at ttle north bounciarv or Collier-Seminole State I'ark as ~t crosses U.S 41. 'the corridor then ~averses through some commercial and res c'lentiai properties as Plea,. uae Strand State Forest, Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve, Ten Thousand Islands National ~,'~ Idh 'e Retuge and the Big Cypress National Preserve and ends at the Dade County Line, . Consistent ,,viii3 respect tot private prover~' rights, ..: :and:ivithout intending unduly to restri .. Et[vale property owners - :qlny case wsthota proper action by government authority - the ' Management Plan recognize :he highway as a scenic corridor iS deiin ,¢emc v:ev;s, i ile preservation arid ennancement ali scenic aspects is central to its deligna~on and mmntenance a~ a ~cemc highw,l~, h~ ~eneraL the goals ot vre~ervmg v~tas si~ouid L,e achievable by , ,'nhanceme~t, mvoMng public lands, the ' ", anv~heds'.., h~ch are required to be defined in m )r document should be deenletl to include at , Frail Scemc Highway..However, there are · ,, here the vie~ s~ mUCh more restrictive than t~s~ and there is no retention by ~o defining the '. lew~hed to imoh-., that the view ~hould be opened tot that distance or that there should be interterence , tth vnmertv r:gilts wmthin rna, region e. Roadway ~t~f-Way L 5 41 is runcnonaih' classified b'. :he I)evartment ot [ ransvor:a~on as a t~rinc~¢ai Arterml. The road is a :~o lane undivided highway, rhe Flodda .. * Department or rransvorta~on's right-ot-wav ~ vredomman:iv IS3 leer but narrow~ in some ' :oca~ons to as h~le as 133 feet. (See Appendix C fo~ Right0f Way Mapsl. there are 79 bridge s~uctures on ins 49.5-mdc segment of US 41 through ~e ' : Evergla?s. [}~e only ma or intersec~ng s=cets with US 4l amng this corridor are the entrance road to :he Collier Seminole State Park, SR 29 and CR 94. t_'urrentl',' :here arc m) slde~valks or designated bike '} ?aths aolacent to this roadway, ,there are no ": [andsca~l~g ~ea~ents ahmg the roadway, File FDOT is currently planning to add paved shoulders ?:,: Coil:er ~.oun:v Bio.'cle and Pedestrian Plan. Paved -boulders have already been added to the ~c~on ol the ram:am~ Frail between ~t~te Road 951 and State I here are acivantages and disadvantages to the add!tion,n vavement along the scenic highway From an a,2,,:het~c standpoint, the additional paw.,.~..ent ma',' detract trom the natural and beauxtu! surroundings: hov.'ever, the paved · ,boulders could provide a safer place mr bi% citsts to nde. ~ comprehensive plan regarding the addinon ot paved shoulders rbicvcie lanes along the -cen:c :::~,n:~ a', shouid be deveJor~edl(;ual Obiec::'.v 2.1.5:ra:eg~. 2. I.;~ [he Hot:da Deoartrnent ot rransm)rtatmn H:DOD :nam:alr',$ the road,.vav. Mo',*,ing ts done by also mowed as needed and the trash is picked up twice per week. Shoulder repmr, asphalt repair, sign re,air, guatdrail repair and tree trimming are done on an as needed basis. The highway pavement markings and retleetive pavement markers are mainta:ned by the FDOT nr their contractor, l'he bndges are the responsibility ot the FDOT also and Because the FDO[ right-or-way width is limited throughout this prolect, opportunities for Iomt use lands should be explored (Goal r, 1; Objecnves 1.2 and 1.3L Specitic projects that should be :nvest~ga:ed t~.)r iomt u',e mciude the bouth ]:iorma ~.', ater Management [)i~ct cuivert/hydrolog~cai restoramm ¢rt~t, I:~[ badge revlacement ~,rOleCtS. and the Big C~ ¢rt*~ National Preserve ~ i~ltor Saietv Improvement I~ro~ect. lhe exact X~camm o~ the ~[vertt hydrologic restoranon areas have not ~et ~n iden~,ed bv the Water Management Dist~ct; the progresn of this prolect should be tracked ct~ly to facilitate cooperation I(;oal :I Objechvtm 1.2, 1.3; Strategies 1.2.1.I.2.3. 1.2.5. [3~: Gt)a~ :2; Obi~tv,'e 2.1: Strategms 2.1 2.2.1.3~ Nme .~,,,,-[e'.el br;dges along the Famiami Frail $cemc H:ghway are proposed to be replaced, E."xhancements such as small parking areas, fishing :'qattorm~ and/or canoe iaunches could be bridge', c,,uid bt, replaced :~ith bridges that Frail IC;oai -' I; Obiec~ve 1.2; Strategies 1.2.1, 1.2.5: Goal r. 2: Objecnve 2.1; Strategy 2. I,21. i'he preliminary engineering phase/or bridge numbers 030077, V30013, 030102. 030103, 030104, O30105, ,~30107 ~:n,~ mno;n~ '.e: a.*~(~e tor nscai ~ear v, h.'c~ ;~ :oca:ecl nt I ,.oD Road. ~ ~[ated tot tiscaJ made b~ Big (.; vre',s Nabonal Pre~erve have not ~et ~ t:n~lzed. ~ ~rm~t ~hould also ~ ~acked c!~!v to fac~iit~t~ Iol~t U~ Ol ~Goa[ = I: O~t[ve I 2. Strategy 1.2.2; ~a[ = l; Object,ye 2.1: 5:~ategy 2. I d. Environmental Condtflom Fhe proposed scemc corridor ~a'.'er,~e,~ through the central Everglades re~on and or)ers an unrivaled -<ou:h Florida's ur,:cue ecos;'stems. Overall the condiuons or the scenic and naturai resources along the provoked scemc highway are ouLstanding. Vast tracts o) publicly owned land (approximately 80~,. o) proposed scenic corridor) .) 8A. :.., O~oortun~'~es OhO Consfi'Jin s Anolvs,s ~ ,,t ~t,u:n I h)nda Habitats. These inciudc :v. angro~es, :ro::)icai ~l.lrd~ood hammock.s, royal ~amm~k,. vmeiand~, and bald cypress mangrt,.~'- ~,r ~dzlaLs. the namra~ conditions appear :t, t~' v~st:ne lust outside the righ: or way to a~ tar a~ thc eve ca~ ~. the proposed corridor a[~ pa~e~ thr()ugh *~,.'era[ cypr~s ~trands and [ hrou~ tEC~ dark canopied areas the concht[ons oi the naturai env)ronment appear to be iht:ping. Fhere are some dis~ areas immediamN piants such as Braz~iian ~per and meiaieuca. been v~oc~cd by ,.e~eta~on. ~am[v cabbage -oadwav. as illustrated in the photograph below l [~ese area could be o~ned uv m vrowde addi~ona', ~ce~c and ~ fldlife rmv. trig areas. be iound in Append[x ,\. was the number one public priority expressed at Se Ar)hi Workshop ior this prolect, rhe land managers ut the tederal and state-owned lands have to address this problem. I'he FDOT is res~oo.sibie · Set,on 4 for n~.llntalmn~, and mana~m~ :ne ~egetat~on :he~r ~ht-n~-wav. This management shouid be c~rd:nated ~ ith and comoiet~ i the am4cent iando~ ner~ ~ he,ever ~o~ib[e :h Ob~ec~e I.I; ~att'Rlt~~.,.,' ' ' 1.1.2, I.I.3. .\n avune, ance tit ~ :;dhle car. r'e vle~ ed ahmg the! · ram:a:::: Daft ~cemc hiRh:~a~. 'A ildli~e that can ~ :nuna a~on~ the I raft mciude .kmencan alligator, ,ott~heH turtle, vemnsula c~mter. Florida wat~ ,haLe, Viack racet, ~ atet moccasin, bald eagie, pfieatea ~ ~do~ker. an~nga, ~ hire ibis. w~tork, great eRret, cattle e~ret, snowy egret, grin-backed heron, great blue heron, tacolored heron, viac~-nec~ed ~tHt, greater and lesser : elIo~ ~e~s, t~eited ~nRnsher. cou0ie-crested cnrmor~m, ?:ed-bflIed ~reve, te~-~ mgt~ blackbird. nortr, ern snoveier, Amenca~ c~t, common :n~rhen. a~adillo, rncc~n, ma~h rabbiL aver · otter, manatee. E'.'ergiades mink. black bear. wild h~s, ~ hire tailed d~r, florida vanther, and various fresh and salt water t~sh. ~rdwal~, o~ation platforms, and addition~ pullotfs should be c~s~ucted in areas that wildli& viewing op~rvdmtes IGoal :2; Ob~ec~ve 2.1; S~ategl~ 2.1.1, 2.1.6, 2.1.T; Goal :7: Ob~ec~ve 7. h $tategies 7.1.3. %1.4~ e. E~tmg ~ U~e ~ Zor~g A summary or existing land us~s. zon:n~ minor land owners, ac~ibility, general developm~t patte~s and fu~m developm~t ~la~ is provided in ~is se~on, the I~al governing ~ard is the Collier Count. Board of Counw Commmsmnem and lands, both public and private, that are adlacent to · e pto~ comdot are su~t to ~e Coun~"s ~nd Deveiopment Code. Approximately eighty percent of the lands adjacent to the proposed scenic corridor are public land areas. These ate Collier-Seminole State Park, Pica%'une Strand State Forest, Ten Thousand Islands ,~a. honal Wildlife Refuge, Fakahatchee Strand State Forest and Big Cypress Na~onal Preserve. A brier discussion of existing land uses and any known development v[ans along the corridor tot each of these public land areas are vrovided in this section as well. Collte~ Comaty Government File zoning ot the properties along the i'ammm~ [rail must be consistent with the Furore Land Use Map unless such uses were non-contorrmng uses existence vnor to the zoning regu[ationsL These nonconforming uses would be deemed legal preexisnng uses. [he zoning along the proposed ~cenic Comdor I~ predommatelv "Conservation" and "Agrlcuiraral" which is consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. Development Order numbers are currently listed on otficial zoning maps. 5ome of the pre-existing uses along the proposed seenj,~ corridor include the C-3 zoned prooer~, at the southeast corner oi State Road ~(an£e Z', East, t~ the P~rt-(~t-the-I.ianos Jeve:,,~ment located on the south s~de at ~.S, 4 I. Other commeroal u~,s include a -maii C-4 oarce~ at :he corner or U.S. 41 and Rovai Palm Drive and two · 2arce~ a: the east and t~ t~t sectlo~ lines ~ it~n 5ec~o~ ;R. Townshio 52 South. Range ~ East. : ;acre :- a .mai[ C-5 coned parce: on :he north and ?auth. Range 34 East. The i:',:ersec::on ol State Road 20 anna 'famiaml [rail ;; the ~a:e~ ay to Everglades ~,_'itx and Big Cx press Narmnai I':eserve..\t the southeast corner at the ram~am~ Frail and State Road 29 i') the Everglades Cit',' C',~amber at Commerce ~, i,;itors [ntormat:on Co~et-Semmole State Park ~ L.md Uses: Existing land uses ~,.tthtn the C~,liier-.Semlnoie State Park Include recreational actIvltttm, resource management at natural areas, and envrron~ental '~ fie area t:'.'e mli,.-~ north or the park's boundaries {north side at vro~ed scenic corridor} is reiativeiy undeveloped, tx I:h a tetv houses and ca~nps existing. five m:i~ ~outh ol :he ~ark are mangroves and ~ housand Islands Na~onat WHdI[fe Kc/uge). Acc~b~ ~o Ad)~c~t Lands: Nlaior land ox~ nets are accessible by way of US 41. Camvs and housing to the north and within the area at the Goiden Gate blocks are accessible from L.S 4 t by way at Miller Boulevard Extension tram the -:outh, .r ~hrouzh roads stemming; tram CR 951 to Picayune $ttanCi State Forest I':cavune 5rr. ana State Forest is adiacent tu the propo.'~'d scenic corridor along the north side of lamiaml frail tram Miller Boulevard Extension to the Faka {dnion L'anal at the Port al the Islands Resort. Thi,~ area adtacent to the [rail is known locally, as Bad Luck I'raine. Existing land uses include recreational and outd~x~r acnvit...s. It has ~,n us~ extens~e[~ b~ tour ~ heel drive ve~cJes, ATV'~. a~d ~wamp bu~gtes. It is al~o used for hunting. [he canal aJon~ the north side ut the [amiami [raft ~ used lot tmhin~ mostly at rnad~ ay inte~ections. Major I.and Owners: Picayune Strand is part ut the Save Our Everglades Conservation and Recreational t,ands (CARL) prolect. Within the l'icayune Strand State Fore.~t. the State ut Florida has already purcha~d a liRle under h~f of the area. the rest ~ the =ea is turned bv numemu~ ~m~tlv ab~ntee) landowner. Average :ot sizes are 5 a~e~. n~e maior excep~on ~ec~on ~ e~t ut the Faka Union canal and on the north side ut L'S 4 h ~s is owned by ~b Hardy Port ut the Islands Resort Community. Fo~t ~om ~e Tamiami Tra~ at th~ ~me. Miller ~uievard Extemiun would pr~ide Picayune 5~and State Foist ~om the mu~ when it is improv¢~. Miller Boulevard Extension w~t is ~y a sbu ~ an~ to Ilier- [ State ar . o ~di t Co Seminoe P k The Picayune Sffand State Forest can be accessed from the east t~ough Jan~ Memo~al S~nlc D~ve. lanes Memorial Scemc D~ve ~gim approximately 3 mll~ north ol the Tam, a~ Frei tr~ State Road 29. Travel time from State Road 29 along ~ls road would take 3040 minutes. Genera/De~e~opmmt P~ There are no permitted buildings within five miles of US 41 within the boundaries o~ the Picayune Strand State Forest...\t this time. there are a few small hunelng camps. As acquisition by the State continues, it is anticipated that this area will return to its natural state. Plains tot the Picayune Strand State Forest ate described In a hydrological restoration plan prepared bv the South Flonda Water ~lanagement District at the request ut the Governnr's (.)ffice. Tbls plan ~,. vresently being reviewed bF the Department ,,~ Environmental Protection ~DEI'). DEP has stated :hat ~ork wdl not commence until ALi, the affected properties have been acquired by :be State. Yo .~ummar~te. once all affected prnpetfies are acquired. the canal system wdl be blocked with earthen plugs and svreadet canals and pump stations will be constructed ~uth of Interstate 75, The water then .,beet flow .~outhward. to restore the historic water ieve!s..".lane of the roads m soutb Golden Gate ~:tH be removed, leaving only those needed for management purposes and to provide public access tot recreation. Ten ~ousand ~danda Nafio~ W~e R~ge ['un l-bousand Islands National WiidJi£e Refuge is adiacent to the proposed scenic corridor on the soutb side o! the l'amiami Trail from near the eastern boundary of Collier-Seminole State Park to the western boundary ut the Fakabatchee Strand State Preserve. Upon federal receipt ut reiuge lands in December 199~, existang land uses are pnmarily resource management lOT fish and wildlife conservation purposes, Selected wildlife-dependent recreation may be permitted where compatible with primary fish and wildlife purposes and where adequate refuge resources are available to ~easibly manage wildlife-oriented recreation. The land is owned by the USA and managed by the US Fisn a?,d ~.~. Ildhfe Sev,,ice. A ~b~llO, m Ad]acent Lance: Access is primarily limited to immediate refuge lands by CS 41. Hov..ever, SR 92 Irom the commuter./o~ Goodland provides other veNcle access to lands south O[ Collier-Seminole State Park. Ve~, limited access to the extreme southern segments of the viewshed may be attained by Fum.,.e Developmmt Pla,nm ~,', ht[c !iw i,md w-e ,c:;cm,_, .~ ~[i not chan~,e trom the ~ ould revolw., around lov,'-Impact, compatible tish and ~fidhw-onented recreamm. [hese p[an,~ ma',' .ndude develoDmem ot ~ chicle puHou~ to provide ~ fldlile vhotograDhx. ~s~ng access, and ~ fldlite e~tablNhm~ ~av~dr e,h~b:t~ at puilout~. Opemng :7: Ob,'c~:~ e 7.1,5:ratc~x 7 Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve [ he F,~kahatchee S.'-ra.':d S!ate I're,,ervr t~ adiacent to of the ['eh [housand Iqand National V','ildhfe Refuge. on the south 'qde or the frail and appro'qmatelv three mlleq ~ e,~t ot Big Q, press Bend on the north 'qde at the Icad to approximately five ,~ ¢ (:" Ol~onuni~ies and Constraints Analysis ~ EMstlng Land Uses and Mznag~m~nt Prac~ces: I.X. creat:on d:i,.hln,~ Bi~ L'? press Bend t~oard~ a:k. t~ lidlite v:ewinb canoeing tm East RivetL .MrN~at R~des Pr:v.tte iease north ot U5 41 from 0.7 to 3,8 reties west nt 5R 29) I vergJade~ Private Airboat Yours m~:wd by Xhtch House ¢outh ot US 41 IfOlll 0,7 ti, 3.S Re~mrce Nlatlagement tprescribed burning, Major L~d Owners: ['he malor land o~x ner~ within the boundar:es ot the Fakaha/chee S?and Stale Preserve are mi~ted beIo v: I:akahatchee Strand State Preserve (Department ot Em. mmmental Protection Division ol Recreatum and P~/Florida ['ark Service) ' Collier Co~oration Big C~ pr~s ~nd Indian Village · Weavers Station (Jam~ Billie) Site or Histor:c Gas Station on south side of old .II destroyed by Hurr~cnne Andrew. AecessfbEtty to AdJaceflt Land~: Provvqon lot acct~slbilitv to adlacent [ands within ti~e I're~erve boundane~ are the Big C} press Bend [x)ardwa[k. air,)at and canoe landings and the East River canoe and small boat launch. (;eneral Development PaRern: Current development includes the -'-tare V:escrve laolifies. I'Nerglades Private Airbo;~t ]'or.rs, Big Cvpre~s Bend Indian Village and Craft Shop and tVeaver~, Statam ,,~,uth t)t Big C'ypress Bund (james Billie), ·: .... :.: i Big Cypre~ National Pr~er~e Big ~,'~ press Natinnai I'reserve ~,~ adtacent to the proposed ~cemc corridor on the m~rth and south qdes at the l'amhm~: trail Imm 5tare Road 29 to the [)adc L'ountv line. F. xis~$ l.~nd Use: the proposed scenic highwav passes through the ; Big C'~ press National Preserve and is managed bY the Natmnai Park Svrmce (N~). Authorized by' Congress m 1974, by Public Law q3-440 (the Ac't), the Pre,rye was established to orval'e, conserve, and protect the scemc, hydrologic, floral, faunal, and recreat~onai vdJu~ al the Ihg C~ press Watershed. [he area south and north m the hlgh~ay Is zoned Conservatmn-Area or Cri~cal 5~ate Concern 5peoal Dea~em ICON-AC~/ST) by Collier County. rl~e Pr~erve ts also m ~e Big Cvprt~s Area at Critical S~ate Concern. The land is used ;;or active and passive and consumptive recrea~on activities. Pass,ye land uses include sightseeing, wildlife watching, picnicking, canoeing and hiking. Active land uses include hunting, fishing, frogging and oil road vehicle based recreation. I'he Na~onal Park Service ts required to limit and control these activities, Approximately ninety-mae percent o~ the land within the Big Cypress National Preserve boundary is fl.'derail?owned land that is managed by the National Park Service. There are also 43 private propew.' owners who have ~rontage aJong the highway. The major private landowner is Wootens Airboat Four. The other 42 private small acreage tracts are comprised of small single family homes, Indian '.'iHages, Ochopee Fire Control station, and three other commerdal properties (loan's Quick Stop, Trail Lake Campground and the Big Cypress Gal{cry). The Ronda Nat~one] $cemc Trail crosses ~S 4 ! at the Big Cypress Visitor Center (Oasis) and enhances pedes~an acce~ north and south o~ L,'S -IL .\H Nationai Park Service land along the cnrridor is open to public use. This land is primarily accessed by off road veiudes (4X4 street legal vehicles, airboats, ',~ amp buggies and all terrain vehich..s~. Other malor access points include Seagrape Drive, Dona Drive. Birdon Road (C'.R, 841), Turner River Road {C,R, S39), and Loop Road (C,I,L 9-1.) C, ene~l Developm~t Patt~ms: ,ks legislated by the Congress of the United States, the law that establish~ the Big Cypress National Preserve hm~Ls and controls private property land owner~hipand development. Most ~nimproved private pm~er~ has been acquired by the National Park 5erv}ce. An owner of an improved property {as or N,vem~r 23. 1971}. c~n retain and use the prope~y m a manner and to the same extent that existed tm Novem~r 23, 1971. rhe National Park Service mumtors thee properties and wor~ closely with county zoning offidals to insure compliance with the Act. rigs private property can remain in phvate owners~p fo~.ver. The National Park Service can only acquire these properties by dona~on or ~m a willing seller or if the use of thc property is d~med detrimental to the purpose of ti~e Preserve. ~va~ property owners along the corndor who want to ~11 to the National Park Service r~eive high pNo~ for land acquisition tunds. ,:; i-u2 ',he .",atmnai Park ~crvlce agorc'.ea a r;enerat Management l'Jan that ~ouid ~u;de ,.an Men::ne~ iocatmn~ needed mr v:~;:or racfiih' m=rovements along the corridor. [hese racfiit:es ~=rner R:ter na:ure trmlL canoe access, racking For ,,rr road ~ ei~c!es and hikers, m;d inrormaaon · ~e Nat onai I ark Service is comple¢.ng initial oians mr satetv and access improvements to ',he Big C.. =tess National Preserve. FDOF and Collier Coumv have coordinated ~ ith the Par.~ 5ermce :e~,arait',g these nnvrovements..\ coov or the dran :,mllalm Frail Ccrrldor Manat~vment I':an has been Obiectlve I.,:' Strategy I .... ' "; (k,ai " Oblectlve the Monroe ' · . b.aaon area has historic slgnliicance. rhe Nat'onal Park Ser'.qce Is seeking a :lumber ot ovuons to enhance and interpret the site. .\ future development that will have significant impact on the corridor is the effort by the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Working Group to obtain rending under the t, Vater Resource Development .\ct (WRD;\I to improve :,,ater flow ;.:rider L5 41. l'he highway currently ac;s as a dike ,md holds back water on the north side or the roadway consequently disrupting the normal sheet t!ow to the south, the Arm}' Corps ot Engineers is ruouestmg approximately 515 million to complete this proiect, l'he prolect is ranked as the number two priority by the Working Group. these plans should be monitored by the Corridor Management F. ntitv {Goal -'1; Obiective 1.3; Strategy 1.3.2}. Conclusion: .\II lands tboth public and prwateJ located adiacent to the proposed corridor are subiect to the Count,,.' Land Development Code. Existing land uses are in compliance with these codes; any future changes in the land use will be subject to these same rules. No ctmriicts Feinted to t.,x~snng. Sari0 u,,e and zoning 'a ere :dentmed. , )',*'r ,~*1 k, ercrnt ol [Bt' l,llltl adlacellt to the [allllaalJ Scenic H:gh~,ay ~stn, ned and managed by a ?ubhc cntttv. Each or these oubiic landowners has "'~., s. ,~' .,.at ,ac[udes recreaNon, resource :nanagement, and envtronmental and historical educntwn and interpretation. Since .~re consistent with and complementary to the overall m:ssion or the Scenic Highway, parmershi ,.,ppormnmes ~tth each ot these landowners be explored ~Goal :h ObjectWe 1.2. 1.3: S~rategies i.2.2. !.3.2. 1.3.3L ¢. Fu~e ~d Use . .~t, lh....s tot the ~rouosed [amlami Trail Scenic ht:gi~v, a,. are vredommatelv '.ocated within a h onservatmn land use designa~on depicted on the;i, Furore Land Use Mav d:LUM) ot the Colher Grmx th Management Plan n[ppendix B ). Some areas adiacent to the Frail are also designated Agriculmral/Rura[. All lands adlacent to the proposed scenic highway are devicted as Areas Environmental Concern on the FI,UM. From Collier-Seminole State Park's eastern boundary to the Dade County line, the lands adjacent to the Critical State Concern. the purpose ot the Conservation designation is to conserve and maintain the natural resources o~ Collier County and their assodated environmental and recrea~onal benefits. All native habitats posse ecological and physical characteristics that lustily ,mempts to maintain them as important natural resources. An area with the Conservation designation is given par~lar recog~on and attention because o~ im ecological value and sens~avay to perturba~on. All proposals for development in an area with a Conserva~on t nd use designanon is subiect to rigorous review ~tandards. The Co~erva~on l~d use desi ~ill accommodate tuture non-residential uses including essenaal services; par~: open space ~d recreational use; commu~N facilities such as churches, cemete~es, sch~ls, museums, fire and ,.. ~ectlon 4 lhe A.4r:cuiturai Rural mture land u,e des~gnat;on ts tot mose areas that are either remote from the ex~st:n~: deveioc~ment pattern, !ack public facilities and ~e?.':ces. are environmentally sezlqltive or are agrlcc:it~re uroductlon. LrbanlZnt!on ~ not promoted, th~retore ailownNe land uses are ot intens~tx. A limited se[ectmn ol services; parks. open qDace n~d recreational use: com~Itv tamlint% ~uch as churches, cemeteries, schm>ls, tire and ¢oi~ce stauon~: unlitv nnd commuffication taOlities: earth mining; agfi~lmre: and oil extrnct;on and related Cr~esslng; ~sphalt plant may be considered a~ Condifionnl Uses and nrc ~ comc~a::~ih~', ru,:~t%~ as detme0 m the Collier Cnuntv L,lnd Development Code. Conduzion: Over ~0 percent ot the land adiacent to the l'am~ami frail Sterne Highway m in public ownership. Some of this land has been acquired recently {within the past several yearsl. As management plans are developed for these lands, there is an opportunity to coordinate with the landowners and land managers to explore parmership opportunities tot enhancements to the Scenic Highway IGoal Obiecuve 1.2, 1.3; Strategy 1.2.2, 1.2.5. 1.3.1, 1.3.2, 1.3,3L Some privately-owned tracts ot land do exist along the corridor. As these lands {both public and privatel are developed or improved, it is advisable that their development is consistent with the character m the scenic highway. One way to guide this development would be through aesthetic/design guidelines for the Tamiami Trail Scenic Highway. Another opportuni ,ty to monitor and intluence tumre land use changes is through the CounB"s future land use map amendment and zoning processes IGoal ~ 1; Obiect~ve 1.2; Strategy 1.2.61. g. Si~na§e rcgtfianon~, can be round in Florida Stat,.tte Chaotcr l?o -t)utdoor Advertising. [he Florida IX, parnnent ,,I [ ranqm)rtatmn is r~ponsible tor regulating the -~ze. height, lighting and spacing m signs in areas ad~ncen: :o the ramiami Trail in accordance ['X,rida 5:atute Chapter 479. This ci~apter contains a comtqete and comCrehensive set of regulations and :, more :hah adequate mr maintaining the integrity ot :he ~,ro?osed tcemc highway. Additionally, nearl5 tv.o thirds of the corridor is surrounded by :he Big Cyprus National Preserve. This stretch nearly devoid ot any billboards and will remain so. there are mfoma~ona[ signs along this fifty mile corndor, most of which note park and preserve [,oundant~, mileage, tourist desonations, as well as Indian ~ :Zlages and Cnmifive campgrounds. numar nnd placement ot existing signs along the Frail do not de,act trom the scenic highway currend'. ~See Appendix D for a list of the current the regulation of lucre signs must be continued maintain the integ~ty of the proposed scenic highway, the d~ign and placement o~ future sigms could also be guided by aesthetic/design guidelines tot the lamiami Frail scenic highway. Ooportunmes exist to oe','eio~ a mile-m;u'ker *vstem that can b~ r~erred to on maps and brochures ot the area to ~a~li~te the l~a~on of sites and servic~ along the [ammm~ Trail Scemc Highway. I~ ~onda Debarment ot Transporta~on has ' developed soeciai signs tor thor Sce~c Highwavs.: Ih~ s~gns ~ill b~ome the symbol extranrdinarfiv scemc roadways throughout the State. these signs ~iil ~ erected along ~e Tamiami rr~l ~cemc Higmvav u¢on a~rovai ot the Scenic Highwav des~gnanon ~Goai =4: Obic~twe 4.1; Strategy 4. t.2: Goai =7: Ob,ecuve 7.1: Strateglm 7.1~, 7.1.3L Oooortunities and Constrabts Analysis h. Salety Since there are no designated ~viidlife and scemc ~:sta: :ewmg areas, some travelers oi this segment or the '[amlami trail puli off any~ here aiong the side o~ the road for fishing, wildlife viewing and ph.oto-taldng opportunities. As a result, on-coming venic!es must use extreme caution to pass: this creates a potenfiailv dangerous situation, l'hese salet: co:lcerns may be addressed by a sceruc rugby, av designafion tot this roadway and tke addltann ot oulloffs, designanng viewing areas. !nto..,?.auonal signage and paved shoulders. I'he Conceomal Master Plan develoved for this scenic highway illustrates locations in which these ~mprovements could be made [Goal ~2: Obiecuve 2.1: $~ategy 2.1.4: Goal -'4: Obiecnve 4.1: Strategies 4.1.1 4.1.2L On the otfier hand. the Trail is, and always oeen. a valuable commercial artery. Nothing m this Comdor Management Plan is indicated to dictate that speed limits along the route should be necessarily decreased. Intact. the FDOT has recently raised speed limits along the corridor. The FDOT will continue to post speed limits consmtent with its obligations as to the safety ot the route, recogmzmg its commercial character. Safety concerns should be addressed bv the other devices set out above such as vuil-o/fs. Non-Vehio dar Us~s There are no sidewalks or bike paths along this segment ot Tamiami Trail. The Collier Coun .ty Comprehensive Pathway Plan vroposes for pavea shoulders on both sides of the roadway within the corridor limits. Currently, US 41 is being resurfaced between SR 951 and SR 92 and both sides of the roadway will have paved shoulders. As the resurtacmg continues east, paved shoulders will be added on both sides of the roadway. There are designated bicycle pathways on both sides of ' County Road 29 from US 41 to Chokoloskee island. There are advantages and disadvantages to the add. itionai pavement along the scenic highway, From an aesthetic standpoint. :.~e additional pavement may detract trom t?,e natural and beauv, tul surroundings, however, the paved · hauiders couid provide a safer place tot bicyclists' :o nde. A comprehensive plan regarding the addition or paved shouldersl bicycle lanes along the :,ceruc highway should be deveiooed (Goal ;2; Obiective 2.1: Strategy 2.1.5). ~ It bicycie lanes are added to the scenic highway, suggestions to enhance the co:'rIdor for safe blt'cie and pedestrian could be to: provide places to secure bicycles and vehicles while owners explore the area: · ~mprove signage, informanon and education on existing accommodations and destinations; and provide additional facilities such as wildlife and ,cenic vista viewing areas. Three Year ITmtory of Vehicular Crash Data The Department of Transportation's Dis~ict One Highway Safety, Office has concluded, after review of crash data (Appendix E), that no high crash spots or high crash segments exist on the segment of US 41 being considered for Sce~c Highway designation. The Florida Department ot Transportation will continue to monitor accident rates along the Trail (Goal ~4; Obiecfive 4.1; Strategy 4.1.5). i. Traffic Volum,.~ C_,.omme~ial Corridor ~md A~l~lal P. oadw&y U~e The Tamiami Trail is a vital commercial link to the commumties, private properties and businesses adjacent to the Tamiami Trail and Everglades Ci.ty via State Road 29. Economic development strategies for the area are enhanced by the Everglades Ci~' Enterprise Zone and plans for future expansion of visitor facilities. Ihe chart below depicts the recent tread in two way. average annual daily traffic IAADT) voiumes at the only location ~ithln the proiect iimks at which :rattic count records are kept, last east of S..q. 29. .the average annual daily traffic in I996 was 4250 : chicles per day Cvpd). Average Annual Daily Traffic at U.S. 41 E. East of S.R.29 Vpd 2500 2OOO 1500 I091 ;992. 1993 1994 1995 1996 j. Level of Service Currently, the adopted Level of Service d.OS) ~tandard on this segment of U,S. 41 East is LOS C, tot which the maximum allowable volume is 9,400 vel'tides per day (vpd). This same segment wouid be declared as uperating at LOS D with traffic volumes up to I5,000 ppd. :\ computer simulation model is used to predict future traffic volumes beyond the period of the Florida Department of Transportation's Five Year tVork Program..\Il approved future land uses around the study area are accounted for in the modeIing process. The model predicts a year 2020 AADr of 14,500 vehicles per day. This is within a LOS D for this road cross section Itwo lane rural). There are no programmed capacity improvements to the corridor in the Five Year Work Program. The Florida Deparanent of Transportation will cotinue to monitor the level of service along the trail (Goal ~ 4; Obiective 4.1; Strategy 4.1.61. lc Transportation Plans and Roaciway ['he se~,ment ot U.S. 41 East within the st'adv area a ::,. o iane taciiity in the year 2020 Financially t:eas:o;e .Network contained in the Collier County LonR Ran§e i'ransvortation Plan. Nine low level b~d~es aiong the l'arniami Trail Scemc Highway are prow)sed to be repiaced. Enhancements such as ,mail varkinR areas, i~shing plati'orms and/or canoe launches could be constructed in conjunction with these bv. dge re~)lacements. ,\lso, where appropriate, these b~dges coulo be replaced with bridges that ailo~ canoe access both north and south of the i'am:a=l i'rail. Fhe vreiiminary engineering phase for br!d.qe numbers 030077, 030083. and 030102 thru 030107 h~ vanding set aside for fiscal year 2000/0L Const~czon ota new bndRe, number ~ h~ch ;s iocated ar Loop Road. is slated tot v. scai ~'ear I~'98; 9°. Rou::ne guardraii repiacement :rill also occur throul~hout the proposed scenic corridor. As bridges and guardrail along the l'amiam: l'raiI Scenic Highway are replaced, consideration should be given to the type of materials used (Goal Objective 1.2: Stategy 1.2.1; Goal ~4; Objective 4.1; S~rategy 4.1.4). Ooportunaies and Consti'alnJs Analvsls The resources visible from the ?amiami Trail Scenic Highwa? are afforded extensive protection through :i~e Collier Count~.' Growth Management Plan and o:her existing reguiation.s and policies ot Collier Counp.' Government. F!orida Department of Community Affairs. and the S~,ate and Nationai Park ser~'ices as described belo~v. Comet County Ninet}' percent of the land adiacent to the proposed <cenic highway, east ot Collier-Seminole State Park, :s ~ithin the Big Cypress ,'~rea ot Critical State Concern as disvlayed on the Future Land Use Map , .\ppendix B) and adopted as part of .~i~e Collier County Growth Management Plan. This area was established by the 1974 Florida Legislature and all ~eveiovment ~ithin the area must comply with C!~apter 27F-3 ot the Florida Administrative Code, 'Boundary and Reguiations tot the Big Cypress Area ot Crit'ical State Concern" or Collier County Regulations, which ever are more restrictive. The Port ot the Islands development is located in this area, and is also adjacent to the Trail. A portion of the development was determined as "vested" by the State of Florida, thus exempting it from the requirements ot Chapter 380, Florida Statutes. Other local agencies providing protection of resources along the corridor are IJ~e fo{Iowing: · Section Collier Count. Sheri~s Office ~nd Florida I-fi~hway Patrol authority on LS 41. The Si~enrr's Office maintains a ~ub-stat:on a: :he intersection ot LS 41 and State Road 29. Ochope~ Fzre Contel Disteiet This agency has primary ~trucVarai and traffic accident feinted tire and hazardous material spiii resoonse along the highway. The National Park Service and the State Forestry Division have mutual aid agreements with the district and wilt respond to requests tot assistance in tire suppression incidents along :he corndor. Emergen .c7., M'ed/ca/.,cerv/ces CoiIier County t£MS mamta:ns a ~,tanon m Everg!ades k'it'.' Fhe Ochovee F~re Control District -:aV.~m m Ochovee provides related services. Approximately e~ghty percent ot the lands adjacent to the l'amiam~ Frail ~ ithm the corridor limits is publicly' owned. Regulations and policies of state agencies and those of the State and National parks provide addifionaI protections to the scenic Florida Game and Freshwater Flail Commis~'on The Game Commission controls hunnng and fishing on both public and private iands. It sets the hunting ceasons and provides enforcement tot game laws. The Game Commission also controls A'I'V use on state lands, and enforces trespass laws. South Florida Wa~ MmaSement DLetrtct The District is responsible for permitting for water management acnvities for all of South Florida. It conducts permitting review in conjunction with the Army Corps of Engineers. Collier-Seminole S~ Park The Florida Department of Environmental Protection Division ot Recreation and Parks has numerous policies, standards and regulations to afford protection to the resources of state parks, \~I oiant and ammal life is protected in state parks. State ia~ s and reguiations which protect the state's naturai resources, including those ot the Florida ~do , n ',a ~:, ko ~ er--',emmo e State Park maintairm :eguiar vat'rois along a!l park boundaries including the '..'ark boundary along U.S. 4I. H,'~yune Stt~nd $tat~ Forest The Florida Division of Forestry is the sole land manager tot the Picayune Strand State Forest. This infest includes south Golden Gate Estates· la addison, lands purchased by the state within the Belie Meade CARL prolect are being added to F!ca,.une S.'rand State Forest and will be managed :he ':amc way. Fhese lands wiit be open to the vublic, and soon will have horse, bicycle, and hiking trails. Hunting and fishing are ailowed. Yhe Division ot Forestry has primary responsibility for control of brushfires throughout the scenic highway corridor. While much of the Seuth Florida ecosystem is dependent upon fire to control u,,vaaing brush, brushfires can cause serious damage if they occur in dp/or windy condi~ons. !)ne tool utilized to prevent brushfires is prescribed burning under the Hawkins Bill. The Division of Forestry can conduct prescribed burns on lands that have multiple absentee landowners, in order to prevent devastating wildfires. IPrescribed burning is utilized by all the public agencies along the Trail, w~thin their own boundaries.) Ten Thousand l. danda Natlonal 14'dddile Refuge the following are highlights of existing policies and regulaLons providing resource protection to the Fen Thousand Islands National Wildlife Refuge: Executive Order 12996, Llanagement and General Public Use of the National Wildlife Refuge System. March 25, 1996 prescribes the Refuge System's purpose of preserving a national network of lands and waters for corcservauon or ash, ~xiidlife. and plants ot the L nj(ed States tot the benent ot present and tuture generations: :dent~fies compatible ,., ddlife-depenaent recreatmnat activities as pnorm' uses ot the s5 stem: outlines guiding pnncioles (or management ot the System w~th habitat parmersh:vs, and public involvement. Yhe Fish and Wildhte Semce Manual (o31 IRX'4L outlines oolicv to grade refuge planning. protect:on, and operation ot national wildlife retuges on various administa'.ative levels. Public Law 100-6~ O, KA Arizona - Florida I.and Exchange~ outiined an exchange ot land at the Phoenix Indian :3chon( tot 107,fl00 acres ot :and in Collier County and :334.9 million (rom corooranons m~ ned bv the Collier tflmii~. \oproximatelv I'a. o20 acres ot land wflI be used to establish l-eh Ihousand IMands NWR. l'he National Wildlite Retuge System Administratmn Act, implemented under l'itle 43 CFR 24.3, provides directives for management ot refuges for protectang and conserving fish and wildlife including those threatened with extinction, those on wildlife ranges and water(owl production areas. Service otficials are authorized to permit by regulation the use ot any refuge where such uses are companble wah the maior purpose ot the remic. Other PolYde~ And Regulations · Executive Order 11990, Protection ot Wetlands, May 24. 1977 orders federal agencies to avoid adverse impacts associated with new or improved development in wetlands, minimize destruction, loss, or degradation o[ wetlands and preserve wetJands and incorporate measures to minimize harm to ~eflands. Migratory Bird Treat;,' Act. implemented under Fi(lc 50 CFR establishes a tramework for the protection and conservation o~ migratory birds: regulations govern all facets of harvest, use, and propagation of these wildlife. 8A3 ' Oooottunifies ond Consfraln s Anolvsls x ? Marine Mammal Protection Act. lmoiemented L:ndcr :?:e Fitle 50 CFR IS prescribes protection the manatee land other marine mammals) by :edc, rai regulation. Bald Eagie Protection Act ( 16 USC 66S-or, Sd), ::n~iemented under rifle 50 CFR 22 outlines ;,rn:ect:o:', reguiations tot the bald eagie (and i:o[den eagiel by prohibiting the take. [~oq~-~-",Mon. and commerce ot such birds. [ ile i-ndangered Species Act of 1973 { I6 USC I-;M-15.I4L implemented under l-(tie 50 CFR 17 umm v.i~:ch threatened and endangered species or t:'-h, v. fidlite, and plants depend through a varletv t,; measures Including enforcement ot x.~u.a,-.o:~s ~ hich prohibit (ak/ag. possessmn. ,ale ann transport ot these species and ",rchae,Xog~cal Resources Protection Act 116 L SC 470aa-470111 established protection prm.'~stons tot unauthorized removal, or damage ot archaeoiogtcal resources/rom federal lands. 5imdar provisions are afforded under the .\ntlqult:es Act, which covers not only archae-ingical resources but objects ot antiquity on/ederai lands. Big C.v'pres~ National Preserve Fhe N,monai Park Service (NPS) has a myriad of pm(cc(mn techniques that can be employed depending on the situation, the primary law govern:ag how Big Ct'press lands ',viii be protected Is Pubhc law '0-440 (the Act) which describes ,~pec,tic ac(wines which will be limited and controlled through the regulatory process. This law also limits vnvate property development in the Preserve and requires that private property owners compiv w~th all state and county ordinances. The NPS is allowed to acquire private property when a landmvnet tails to comply with these rub.'s and regula,~ons. NFS rangers have law enforcement pov,'ers to regulate visitor and resource protection activities on NPS land. The NP$ is also responsible h Section 4 tot ail v. fldland fire suppression and prescribed burning activities aiong the curt:der..\ primary management goal is to restore normal sheet flow and to remove fiH materml that may impede water flow. fhe NFS is also removing soiid waste and removing abandoned structures alonR the corridor. Most of the Big Cypress National Preserve is a Type 1 Wildlife Management Area. l'he NFS and Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commtssion (GFC) wnrk in close cooperation to manage hunting activi.es. rhe GFC also has enmrcement authority on these lands. Conclusion '[he resources visible from the i'amiami Frail Scenic Highway ,are afforded extenmve vrotection through '.he Collier Count,',' Growth Management Plan and other ex~sting regulations and policies ut Collier Coup .fy Government. Florida Department ut Community Affairs, and the State and National Park 8A3 ,erv~ces as de,,cnbed above. Fhere are opportunities to develop parmerships with each of the maior !andowners aiong the corridor in order to facilitate this protectmn tn a cohesive fashion. One maior tunctum ut the Corndor Management Entity will also be to facilitate this protec~nn. m. other ;\ literature r~view o~ Hydrological and Ecological ['roiect~ that may aff~t the Tamiami Trail ha~ been prepared tor the ~oHda Department of Fransvo~a~on. S~fically, this s~dy was :nteo&~ to determine the potential impact these prolects or s~dies may have on the Tamiami Trail corridor/rom Napk~ to Miami and assess the magni~de ut the~ ~mpacts from a scenic highway perspec~ve. A compilation of the agencies and pro~ects that could poten~ally al[ect the scenic highway project can ~ found in Appendix F. l'he Comdor Managem~t Enfi~' will be responsible tracking these pr~ec~ and agenoes in order to [adlitate mint use ot thtnr resources and [acfllltes. Additiona~ technical a'~s~tance and funding opp~rtumtte~ tnt scenic hJgh,,va.v development and enhancements could include prwate and public ~utces. Some ot these potential ~urces are briefly described bek~w: Fu~dJn~ Sour~ and/or ~tance Oppom, mJt]es · I'rivnte Donatmns/ Local Fundraismsand Spon~r~hip Opportunities · Chamber,~ ot Commerce · Economic Development Counols · Conservation, Environmental and Hzstonc · Local Government · FDOr %'~'ork Program Department of Commerce (provides technical assistance, information and planning for economic development and tourism et'[or~ through its Bureaus of Economic Analysis and Busine~ and Commum ,fy Services and its Division o~ Tourism) Historical Museums Grants.~n-Aid for the development nE educational exhibit project~ on Florida History, · Historic I'reservattonGrantsom. Aid · Florida Highway BeautHication Couno] Grant Program for landscaping protects State and/or District l'ranaportation Enhancement Funds · NattonaIScenic BywaysGr4nt OoportunaiesendCon!troinlsAnol~s;s ~ Lo~al lundmg sources may be used for scenic high~ ay development projects or as source for local match reqmrements. Funding sources/partners are Menti~!ed in more detail in Section l Iot this (:~rrMor Managument Plan (Goal: h Objective 1.3; (;oai :~,: Obicct:vu 6.1; Strategies 6.1,1, 6.1.2, 6,1,3). C~nce?t',;aj XTa,,ter I':.m '.'.as (teve](~d mr the d~cr;r,e,~ each or the :'~ro~osed l'eatu,r~ of thc X~as~er t'~an. ~,rov~des ex,~pi~ or thee teatures, Infoi-,¥' ation Centers One purpose of the Intormation Centers I~ to disseminate information about the Scenic Highway and. the area. These centers will provide access to' 7~ Ill"marion tegardin$ the historv of the Trail and the surrounding environmenL a~ well as information regarding things to do and see along the Trail. These centers should be private/public ventures to facilitate access to both public and private facilities. The scale ot these facilities could range from a simple intormatton display to a visitor center complex. I'he most appropriate locations tot these iacilities are at the western and eastern ends of the Scert~c Station. Information Centers'located at the end of the Scenic Highway could simply consist of audio information booths with maps, brochures, and ,. tours of the Trail The visitor center complexshould~!i~, be more centrally located and should act as a cleannghouse for all information related to the l'amlami Trail Scenic Highway. Gateways The ourDose ot these §ateways Is to announce :o the '. ~sitor :hat they have entered a umc~ue histor:c and -cemc piace. [he gatewa), concept has histor;cai precede:It: a stone arch was erected at the eastern end ot the Trail in the 1928. These §ateways could ' "8A3 be a varletv of scales from small, simt~le signs to a stone arch. The most appropriate io~at'ions for these tream~e,.~ts are at the east and west termini of the Scenic Hi§hwav. Another appropriate location is at the Famiami Tbail/SR 29 intersection at Carnestown. I Camping Camping provide., an aitemauve to hotels,' moteis usecl to enhano: o:her acuvines .~uch as tishim~ and huntmR..\denua:e camvmg areas exist along the these/oc~i~fies couid be upgraded to :nclude ch~ckee camvsites. 8otb vublic and privately-owned campgrounds ex:,,: along the l-rail: we do · ~ugg~.~t that th~s Wan lntertere w~th these couid also be ,~:: ,~'. ern:'cht a:rboat ',amn tour. ~ Inte..rpretive / Nature Trail~ i' hese ~a:is prowde cclucatlonai o~portum.~e~ ~is.o .~ow the ~ave~:ng pubLc to leave their :rafts couid inciude NaUve American ~storv. x egetagve commum~. ~iidlffe, natural s5 ~tems -~gnmcance ot the [ra:i. the Florida .~',;t~on,;l Scemc :~c~u~e Ro~a[ J~a:m Hamm(Kk/ColJier- 5cm:noie ~or:~ 4outh direc~on between Evergiade~ Come,and. CCI~IDO~ ~ F ~Seceio~ 5 place tot people to stretch, eat, relax and take photographs v.'hile surrounded by nature. Picnic '.-~' areas can consist of picnic tables only, or they can include amenities such as grills, water tuumains, restrc~ms, shade structures (i.e. gazebos), or screened areas. I'imic areas could also doubJe ,,s ,1 .~..'.' . '"';'"'"~L.~.~ ~ ~ailhead ia colJec~on o! amenitlesl aiong ti~e . Tamiaml Trail Scenic Highway. New picnic area~ should be co-located with other amenities where possible. Observation Tower per~¢nveontheexpan~eol ~: Evt, rg[ades. I~s center and would include interpretive ~ignage tegar~;:~g the natural sv~tem~ viewed ~rom the ~,~:eot~ol ~aster Plon 8A$ Wildlife Observation Areas I vt'r!~iadc~ i!:ese ,~rv are,is in v,}~:c~l ',,.l[dl[Je i!cctlr~ 4 Educational Center / Historical Muse~m Conceofual Master Plan, ~ Histofi_caJ Sites Conceptual/~asfer Plan -, ? Vehicle Pull Offs ;,lace tot the travellii'~g pubi[c ta stop and view d;elr conjunction ~'.lth other amemties such as wildlife viewing areas, picnic tables and shade tre,..,s, andor alert traveiers ot tEese tac:.iities so that they may ,.'xit the rc, ad,.',av satel:' and etticientl,.,, 8A3 ExtraorciLn a bceruc Sites -: t,k,v,l/,~ TRAIL SC[:NK: ~Y 8A3 l! Indian Vi.LIages .)Section Airboats / Tourboats / Swamp .Buggies .~:rboats/:ourboats/s~,.'amv bu~;g~es vrov~de ':eaitMr:aa'. No new raciJities are ~ro~osed as It. it.Il, SCENiC HIGHWAY Canoe Launch .\ddit!onm canoe access aio:'~g the lamiam: .:ou[d ,-"~ver:,.'nce :ne E',er~iades. Canoe iau:;cb, es and couid include some pa:king spaces ~o: anoelsts arid tithe: sightsee:s, ii:ese parking a:eas aNo p:ovide a sate place w: vehicles to stop ¸ ,I, Fishing Access ~o risi;lag areas could be e::hanced through [?ardwaiks, nshing ?:a::orms and ?arking areas in ::~e '.':c!ni:v o~ the brid~es aiong t}~e i am~am~ !raii Scenic Highway, ~8A3 xS¢c~ion ~ Bridge Enhancement ~he b""~'¢.,~5 ,,." Furner River is proposed m be reoiaced; th, is ~as an histtmc navtgable ,a aterv, av :hat. s~as used rot tishing and hunting. ~}~e brid<e replacement ;wo}ect design could inclade a canoe .aanc,=,,g &ea, smmI par~mg nrea, nad o t;sning piat~ormt 5cenlc overlook. 8A3 a:~d on ::~e prmr~ties set b', the pubiic during the ~mders:and the P!,m, ;t has been di','ided into ;i~arac:er and theme, ~,n;ch is dictated by the ~:urr~.)unding ecosystems as ;,.eii as ti~e histor*,' Rovai P~:n Hammock to Weaver's $~tion · , ;t.'v, ~, m t~c~e s',~tems arc blocked by roadsicte L'e studied ,md cnmycd at Co[lier-Scml:-,o[c State -cen:c/l:~}i'¢.Jv, [ he Park's tropxcai hardwood :'!~c il:..tor:' sr t!~e cons:ruction of the Famiami FraiJ :. a kev vicment ut the ~,cenlc idghwa?,. I'he u. aikim,i d~spiav at C¢i',iur-Serninoie 5:ate Park, Ihe historic Rov;d Palm Way Station ~'4 also located near thc · ,,, estern end o: ~he scemc high,.vav, ,,klthm_ulh parts the h~stonc building ~s st:H intact and could be CO P..m~ ~XDR A~¢~AC~.u'AEN [ PLAN , S-.ction 5 / Weaver's St~t~on to Cmmestown [xtraordinarfi,. scerfic slte~ and v, ildlib: obser,.'atloct comvrlsed ol ';awgrass prairie with cabbage pahn [lammoc~s and some open water. Adjacent to the ['am~am~ [rail is ~he [:akaha~chee S~rand S',ate ['reserve, within the ]'reserve, Iorests ol bald cypress arc as m~presswe as any m the state, ihe Preserve contains the largest stand ol native royai ?alms arm the largest concentra:ion and variety oi cpL~hyuc orchids in North America as well as other specws ol plants that are extrcmeiv rare. ['he Conceamal Master l']an supports the character of the area b/ focusing on the eJements of wildlife ,,bst'rvatmn/observatJon tower and vehicle pull offs. Carnestown to Turner River Way Station ',cemc hU,,hv, av arid $ I,~ 29 in C,Irnestown, Vvith could also ~erve as a gateway, into Evergladt, s City and Chokoloskue. ' ('i' press National Preserve is located on either ,idt, ot the lamiami Trail throughout this secdon hi~¢~,,w. Within thc I'rcserve, d~e surrot~r~dmg iandscapc., are dominated by cypress s rands, pmelarxN, and sawgrass prairies, l'hese habitats <~ppor~ a variety ot wildlife, which can bu seen (rom scenic highway. Other proposed etemems of the Master Plan include canoe launching facilities, vehicle pulh~ffs, and wildlife observation areas. Turner River Way Station to Monroe Station [he surroul'Ming environments consist ot cypress · ;trand.~ and pinelands dm~ughout this secmm. Extraordinarily scemc s~tes and proposed vehicle puilolfs and wildlife observation areas are scattered along thc ~cenic highway, as ~hown on the Master Plan above. Kirby 5torter Roadside Park could be enhanced by adding amenmcs such as picnic tables, shade structures, an re?roved boardwalk, and interpretivesignage. An environmental educatmn exhibh could also be used tv explain the ecology ot the area and the importance of ongoing environmental restoratmn projects. lliw bem:noie Monument is located about one mile wrst ()l Xhmroe Stadon. [ his spot marks thc Iocation where Florida Governor Shoitz met with leaders ot the Seminole and Miccosukee Nations to discuss concerns and try to come to an agreement. An l~istor:cal exhibit is proposed for this site. The }nstorv m the area could be expressed or symbolized :n several ways. One such way would be through the uqe m public art, or sculptures, along the scenic hUIh~x a', :o mark these stgmticant sites. 8A3 Monroe Station to Paolil~ Way Station con'~tr;;c:;o:~. Fhe ex~tmg bul[di:~g ~s styli inlact and Preserxo Ibis '-l~e couid be red~.,('c',o:~cd i:lto an [~igh',~,~ l~oard'¢,alks,md/or:laturetra;]scould Frail For several miles aF~d along or observation deck i,; proposcd to b~' h~cated I ,~:~uatn~ ['rail in the vicmitv ~t the Big Cypress could be constructed adjacent to the Frail il'~ t.ducate hikers regarding the history a~d ..\n ct~try gate,va5, and information kiosk is highxvay, l'his h~catiot~ had aF~ historical gateway on t};e Frail in t}~e 1920s, Conce~h~a' Master Plan 8~3 ':'.;permhmdcnt t~. aJ[act. ~ tibbard ot l~i!'. L '. '.,mtm.fl i're"-er..'c and Mr. ~ JHJam J~ (1 aL:ornev ~ith Buckingham, DooitttJe and ~t[ I'errv, ~hen the MVO Coordinator. prescnted mtormatmn nn thc F~orida 5cemc I(~ghwav [~roHram process [heMFOunammousiyapprovedmnvJng [:h~rida Scenic HJghwa,.'s [%~gram. thc MI'O ~,taH the first meeting held in May [Ugh, .\t theft mcehng. repruscnMtives park o/fidaJs, ,l~d e~pert~ m plan~ug, cngin~urm~;, Jaw, history and natural The io~ent ol a Scenic 14igh'way :testKnatmn m h) e:mch the traveiers recreational and educationai hlOCtlCtl ~l [he I ]drrJdor/\dv(~cacv Grtlup(G/\G) ]~ [u tora Florida Scenic Highway desi~natmn mr a ~egment n( the Irai]. [he L'AC; serve, as thc .Applicant m the applJcatmn pruccs~ and ~il] bc responsible R)r developing a management plan mr the CorrMor Communih/Particic, atio, n Proc]ra, am ~ lrail. [he group has ejected a Chair and Vice-Chair, obtained el[gib[hr from the Florida [Department ot i ransportatiun and formed subcommittees to M,ma~tcmcnt I",ar~ aod conducted ~t. veraJ pub[it has been lo encnurage p,'~rtI~erJng, community mv¢lvmm?nt and c(insensus building I'he C,\¢;'s t,~r the dcsignntmn phase. Iii order to gai]~ greater public participation anti mt,ut into the Corridor Management I'Mn, the de~Jgllt2d to ga!![ Input and suppor~ !mm the ~esidents and business owners that live and work ,,biectivc~ ol public owarenes~ and public input tdea~. I I~c ~tudv team developed the Corridt~r ~O~R f,A~NT PLA~ ~ N~wal~t~,~ / P~ss R~lea~tq h,put [1,c nrq I't~blic tV-rk.i~,p txa. i.'ld on FuL,rumv 2~. SCENIC I~C.~+(V,~¥ , , David I' qhcaN h)O c ;uldifl~ I'fl1~d ph,~ 8A3 ~mmvni!v Potti¢ip(~ljOq Ptoqtom .) l',~mlami Tr*tl U~r Group hat nl,tAl'~ !/,r J,;dumui It,iii I.,mh ~ttlall group pre~,2med lhtqr i'e~pun~us lu the ,,vcr.ql firuup, ,md the ,letlvllit,~ a~d (nclJtlle~ !alrt uwd h~ develop ~h~ OppOtltlllttt~ alld Irtii? .\ I ,mahJ cltucloUp, vtt(EvrtidrMc~kHv) TAla ¢ouph, Is the/ound~ of ~he "W~7~d~ Inn", ,t ~mbl~flon B~ and B~nk[~¢ cal$ and nutd~,r ~ ~tvr and t~mmut~ to ~ o[~c~ tn North and aro ~nMly lumtng n p~t. A, Frcqucndv VI.hot .3 · '1~o McKinnon tamily [nmi/y o/£our is W~Nm~ Ro~do [or th~ woe~ th.Jr home tn S~dand, ??letr mt~on Is to ~ l)i.~n~y World, Galorl~d and Unlv~l Studtot, I hit/,' .\~rho.d.., ,d]iy,,llol~. Ibc h.¢d,' ,md ire'mc ,fl iii' WIIh,un.~ ti'II.It ntud,f l'¢u c/I,mE¢ ,d,,mt t/lu Ir, Id,' Vl~ttor ~4 - Jay J~? 1~ tm ~rboat tour ope. r,~tor 41~at tou~ ~ ~ gv~adet, He la t ~aduate o[ ~Iadm ~ ~ ~ and I~nd on w~d~, I.)2, IVh,Jt m,tkc,'~ the l',uIIl,Jml Fr, ut untlllt¢? the Ir, Id: Visitor/tS - Evelyn £vel. rn is a srmwbird riving m Naples. 5he is sixty. ~ome~hlng ~d ~ ~m G~ Po~ ~g~. S~ ia a m~r of ~e Co~n~ and plays m a ~ lea~e 3 ~es a w~ Ev~ ~ [r~u~t ~ ~m h~ 3 ~ c~l~n ~d 5 ~de~ '8A3 ~ommunit¥ Padicioalion Pro~,rom [~'h,lt would I'~t/ c]),ln/;e ,II,out t/if [rd/J? markers, audiotape tour, shopping guide, Vt~ttor ~6- Rob Rob is an Everglades City Commioaton~r and tm Commi~o~ Itc ~ 2 t~age c~&~ ~d e~o~ gol[ and ~k ~ng tn ~ ~ ~e. ~'rail? · \ it's my lifeline. the Trail? Fhe/\cddent. (.)2, I'r.~il ; ~.Vl[dI~tt! '.'lewtIl~ t~ :t}l C}UJdrcr~. O.t. What do you tull your friends and £anli(v visitinl, f /rom Ollt O[ town ,~bout the 77ai17 Be careful. Watch for tour;~;ts, I'he natural beauty, f)5. /tow hi?eh do you usc the !;~mi,~mi /Tail? .k All the time. the l'rnH? · '"., 5ceing 150 white pelicarts m F.tka}~atchee (2.1. D,'/],]t do you tull Your tricnds vis~titl~ from out of town about thc lTnil? Collier-Seminole State Park, History of the Road, Villages, ExhibiLs. Everglades City a good destination, especially during the ,-\. 2-3 times per ,','ear. I..)6, What would you chnn,~e abo ~t t t' I'rnJl? .\ Not much It's my lifelinc. Maintain relationM~ip ~ith Everglades City', Vi,atm- #7 - t~ y la ~n enrolled me. mbe. r o£ the Micco~Mr_.e Tribe · nd~vezin ~n Indian Vllla$~locat'edon the T~aniamt Tr~ll. H~ ia in lq, a 40~ worka wtth disabled chtldrm, ~d £ouncied the Trlb~l billnguM/bi- cultural effuc~tion j:~oSt~ lot tho M!cc~:~ukee Tribe, Photo$raphy ia his [avorit~ p~rt ~e. I.)l, D, hat is ynur [avonte teflturc, ot' the Tnmiatni /Tail ? ,X. Xlaintcnnnce of the cultural heritage. thl., I r, ltl? Visitor #8 - Tim, Wade and Frank Th~se otmys are on Spring Break .6-om Appalachln~n St,~te CoLlege in North Carvlina. 7hey b~Jcpacki~g a~d canoe atmptng from b/am./ngo to C1~ok~io~kee. '1'hey ran out o/beer on Day ;~ the), £orgot ~ repedJ(mt and bought a can from a locad l~'man for $20. [rail7 ;Vh,lt m,lkes t/le I.*m~anli Frail unlqt~e? Ulat ,~r~d wet. ['~blic/private operation. .".lap,, br~chure ~,, i th al', information place. e~:per~ence on the Trail? snake, being rescued b?' beautiful (..).l. Wh,~t do v¢>u t('i! v~;ur tr:ot),.t.s ,it)d f, lm:!v (.)5. t fow olten do ?)u use the r,)m~ami Frail? .\ It · our first time, b',It w,., ]lb,: back Wh,)t would ~'ou ~'hanl;c ,)b~)t~t the Frail? ,',t~d insect repel!cm. VISIONS '. :',:o~',' ~r :i~c' l-an'dami 'Frail Scenic l [ighway. ,\ coila~e% to the overall group. [ he l~HIo~,, if, il ,.,isior~s illustrated below were created: i Work~hop Number Two am!am: j r,ui 5ce:::c i hgh'.',av. I }:e pur?ose ot dU', ?,larke:tng 5trateg:.' .~r :i:e lamiam~ i rail Set:mc Hig!v,\av. [!;e v, urksi-,o:) ~eam mciuded phmmn!,, ', amm:m [:afl...",opro'.mateJy 3(5 p.~ole ,It:ended Partidpanm lames Moms \rev i ,wlor l",.ck v t.tliie Fr.m~., Dcn:.nger I im i lm'.'n rd Robot: Warren Debb:e J ov,'er Rick Durr Community Pcrficioation Proo, rom Maxine Morris Ken Heathurmgwn Wallv Hibbard Jeff ['err>' David Sb. eai v Nancy I'rine ,Mark Benedict Ben .'sottingi~nm Frank Mears Nathan 5iiva Mary Raulerson t!gan Worlc~op Agenda , 3,, - 2:!~) pm 2:00- 31×] pm 40fl- .L30 pm 4:30 - 5:0q pm Introduction · t'amlam~ Frail Scemc Highway Designatmn Proces~ ,Schedule · Overview nt February 26, 1998 Work.shop Propo,,ed Improvements · Review / Revise Proposed Improvemenks Strategy l'eams · Tarniami Trail lm provemerds / Enha ncenlents · Marketing and Prom(mon Strategy I'eam Prc3enh~tlons Action Plan · Improvements/EnhancemenLs · blarketing and Promotion · Funding Section Improvement / En.?tancement Program the Famiam: Dali Scenic Highway was developed. Parttctoants at the .,",pti[ workshop used colored dots to vote and prioritize these improvements. The io[lowing ~s the pnormzed lis ha was developed: I. Exotics Removal/Vegetation Management 2. Pull-offs 3. information Center 4. Wildlife Observation Erdaance Bridges 5. Mile ,Markers Cultural / Historical Interpretive Signs 6. Entry Gateways Boardwalk Canoeing 7. Observation Tower 8. Promotional Brochure Fist'dng Hiking 9. Picnic Area Restroom Airboat/Tourboat Trallhead Wayside Rest .Area Historical Museum Guardrail Replacement Bicycling Utilizing this list of prioritized improvements, one group developed a Preliminary Conceptual Master Plan Famiami Frail Scenic Highway Fhis plan was included in the Master PMn Section of this Corridor Management Plan. Marl~ting and Promotion While one s=ategy ~eam ',,.'as developing the Master Plan, the other strategy team developed the following *larke~ng and Promo~on Plan: The Tamiaml 'Frail tells a rich and colorful stor', ot geography, man andna~ure. Fhisstory, likea Seminole legend or the caII of a snowy egret is not '.','eli knov,,n by Florida's vtsitors and residents, and many people ,,,.'ho live only a short distance a,,,.ay have never ~'aveled the Tamiami Trail and experienced the remarkable beaulv. Building Awarm~ess l he first step m a comprehensive promotion plan is ',o build awareness, including activities that lead to desire m visit an area or learn more about the natural history and people of the area. Members of the Curridor :\dvisory Group and the public discussed .t thc 5cen:c High;ray. Fine following ideas and I he [ am!am: Frail Scemc Highv. ay corridor has both outstanding and one-of-a kind characteristics that · Natural Beaut,,' · Environmental Functso~s and Values · Culturai history of the area, the native people and the historic building of thc highway · Wildlife · OpportuniV. es to experience a umque landscape · Opportunmes to get out ota vehicle and · Local businesses and amenities including Indian villages, campgrounds, food services. Targeting Awarene~,s Activitim In the near future, it is conceivable that a family in German?' will investigate scemc highways on the lnternet and plan their Florida vacation to include a day trip to tour the Tamiami 'Frail. In the immediate future, however, there appears to be a need to target acuvities locallv. 2'he following are groups and businesses that were identified in the public workshops as priority marketing targets: · Coiiier, Lee and Dude County toumst feinted :'ental car offices, welcome centers and c!',amber or commerce, airport, etc.) in addititm to tne avmiabHnv ot orinted material, this campaign shou!d be directed toward educating personnel ::~ ii,ese businesses ',o that rite;' ~'.tii be able to then encourage their parents to visit the area.) Prcrmoticrn~ Tec~'~qu~s -uggested. i:~ciuding the h~ilov.'ing: · .\ Speaker';. Bureau Imost effectively directed toward the tourism business industry, c~,,'ie assoc,,a~ions such as Rotary, speaai interest organizations such as ]ocaI histoncaJ societies, Audubon chapters, etc. I · [:'tinted ,Mater~a], spedficaily an overail map and attractions a!ong the f'amiam~ Trod. · Video tape promoang the Tamiami Frail (12 20 minutes iong/ that could be distributed !ibrarles, schools, television stations, etc. · Fesbva]s nod Speciai Events-booths and pnnted material should be displayed at lesnvals and · Frade Shows · AudioTape or CD Tour that would enhance the views with cultural and environmental from their cars. · Visitor's 'IV Channel spots or spec~ais · Internet/Web Page · Gateway / Visitor Complex, a jointly sponsored visitor center that ,,:,auld provide information about all the opportunities to enjoy the area, and amenities in the area. 8A3 CommuniN Participation Pro,~ram .~ k3t this list, the comptehenslw., map ,',nd the gateway '. :sitor compiex are the two techmques that would be most effective and should be undertaken as soon as possible. Potential Partners 5e roi[owing ,.,.'ere identified as potential partners help promote or lurid promotional activities for '::e Iamiami Frail Sceruc [{ighway: · National Park Service · Fish and Wildlife Service , State of Florida Department of Enviromnental i'rotecnon, Park Service · Florida Department of 'Fransportation · Collier County School District · Cities of Marco Island. Naples, Chokoh)skce and Everglades City · Independent Miccosukke and Seminole · Private Businesses and Land owners along the corridor · Elected O~ficials · Economic Development Council · Chambers of Commerce · State of FIorida Bureau of Historic Preservation · South Florida Water Management District · Local Sports ami EnvironmentaI Interest Groups Measunng Promotional Succe*s [ be measurable indicators ol a successlul awareness promotion campaign could include more visitors, longer visitor stays, and more dollars spent in the = 8 A 3 / 3. Civic Meetings in/ormaaon regarding the [amiami l rail Scetnc High:;'av. Following ts a list ot these meetings: Everglades Chamber of Commerce Historic Board Marco Island Chamber ot Cummerce Conservancy of Southwest Florida Native Plant Society Economic Development Cokmcii - Everglades .-'*,rea i ask Eorce League of W,nmen ~,'t,ters Tourist Development Counc:i \'isit Napies. loc d. Supporting Documen~t~cm Ali o£ the t.etters o[ Support, Resoiutions, Corridor impression Surveys, and Newspaper :\r~cles ~', hicin support the Famiami Frail Scenic Highway are in Appendix J, Fhe folbawing highlights ,~ fe~.,, kev demonswations of support ,il Communiht, Participation Proclram ,) ·Pdi: Leru=r of Support z%r TazrZ~'~ Trail Scenic . TM National Audubon Sc~e/w~ formod a~ a r~t olde' ~ to pmt~ ~d pr~c' · e ~ ~ ~ in ~1~ O~ 1~ ~t~ h~ b~ ~vo~ for 0~'30 ~C ~ ~e v~ue of~ w~ We ~ ~lad to ~w that ~nt;O~ ~ a ~ ~u* of~. " Sincerely, Club Su~mn CORRIDOR A~'~EMENI PtAN ~t~ / William R. O'Neill, (~ainnan Tamiami Trail Corridor ,'\dvccacv, ;mup c/o Collier Coun:v M.P.O. 2~C0 N. Hors~ho~ Dr. Napies. ~ 54104 April 8, 1998 Dear Mr. O.~eill: Tae E*mrd o' Dtrectcm o{ thc Ecuthwesr F!oridn Land Preservation :nc. wnolehe'arte¢,t,r' suppor~.s thc de~;igrmuon o{ tke t ammmi TmJI a.~ a ~onda Scenic Highway. Ottr mission, and that m: Your gratm, are s~milar in our wish to our region% nature! beauty and hentnge. 7~te Trust ackatowleg~ the =nevimbilk7 o( growth in our area, however our goal i~ to ertsure that we maintain our beautilS~t character a.s we grow. To that cart, the d¢~ignntion of' d',e F. asr Trail aa a *canic highway will provide a cor,~dor of hbtoncal $ignific. ance and acces~ to env:ranmcntal pr~ervarion that wall educate our citizen.~ and visitor~. 'finis education and e.'oposure to our past a.* well aa to Co[tier Counw's natuaraI amer, rides will fi~;ther that goal. 5mce;~ur~ ~ Scott Car~ernn, President Communih, P~rtkipation Pro~?m. ~> Leag-ue of Women Voters of Collier County ?az~.a:,-.i Trail ?or:-~.dor ;..d',%ca~/ gro,;,p Collier C3~ty ~ve~nt Center 280C N. Horseshoe Dri'~, Naples, F'ic=t~a ~4104 !~rch '], 1998 ' numb~.~.r of lor. g held Lea~m .positions. -lqe ~mi~e scenerv and keaut7 of the Tr~i! .ma~ this corriJor well ~/allfied for special desi~r..3t[on. CreetiF.~ opportunities fer tr~v~!eru to learn ~bout ~nd enjoy the u~zmy naturni wonders of the area is an e£~.cel!ent !fee. 660 9th S[reet N., Suite 35B · Naples, r lonca ,.410. ' Phone !941J 263-4856 · Far 194!) 2~53-465 a. UvJversa] Crit~a Lq Application U~versal Criteria No. I I~vsource!si mum bt, v, hich re,,ourcvs are '.'*,tbie lmm, thc I rail Odqcr Iraii~,id,!,landShdePresentan,m lhc\idco, u, The Corndor Impresst,ms 5urn'cF' identified that cxt.tlc For exodc piant, s on public lands d'ds pro\em ['he Comdor Smrv mr the [ami,mm i'raH Sccmc Highv.,w ;!~ included m %cm~n 3 .r this plan ,\ii "Frail" S0~r-: was presented tu groups interested in the designauon o~ the [amiami Frail as a Honda 5cemc Higb~,av. Additio~q methods ~or sh~lrlg the [raj] Univemal Crit~da No. 3 ..... l Ne roaci,.; ay r'n u:;t he a public road tha: ~ateh accommodatc~ t,,,.t,-wheei drive automobiles I he road',~ ay is a ledera[ highway designated as Lr.$ 41, Pt'[er t~ IQoad~,, a,. /' ROW De~TiL~tion in Sccuon 8 of this Un/versa] C2'iteria No. 4 lilt cilmdor must Pr~*tect!~;n I cchn:ques tn St. ctlorl h lit this CMP). t:~cu, ranonai Photographs throughout this Plan and ~Se lam~am~ Frail Slide Presentabon i!nd Video dearh' development of [.he su,wounding commumn2s. Indians, >; x'.ell a!;, modem Indian Viih~ges can be found near the l'rad Fhe co~s~chor, nf ~e I rail was ,.metal in the development of su~oundJnF, p:oneer era cnn~rnunmes Refer to the Tamiami lrailSIide ['resentahon. Field Inventories and Conceptual Master COI~R~DOR ^%NAGEM[NT PLaN ~ Urdv~-..aJ Criteria No. 6 ',, nun,mi,, or d~c Urtivm-sa] Critmla No. 7 \ ( ~,rridor (Jrt)up I(~,\(j~ tltu',t bp ,,r~;,!n!zed Ibc ( orndor i raH. to nbtam E!ig~bHit,. Item the I:]orid,~ ru,qul,!ri,, scheduled n;eeting, the LAG ,cheduied agenda itemfs), but shall not be ( h,urm,m and Vice-chmrman ,.xdl be elected at thc CAf; orgamzation,d meeting, and ~xill serve tut lC months fhe Chairman and Vice- },lectm~: 5chcduh? - Meet:nfD et thc CA(; ma,' be reguiarlv ~chcduJed meetings ,md/or ma'. c.dled b}'thc t-hairman nr by 2 or more ,hould bt' provided v, tth an opl'ortuntty lo Meetings ~xitl be tape rt'corded and summary rnmutc,, ~,itl bc prepared Axendas ~dl be prepared and distributed one pro. Med tt) the media and the CAGs maiiin~i will generally be provided at least two Urdvt,'rs.a~ 0dm'ma No. 8 "Th 'ce5 Biueprmtmr(i:'ic.\ctaondatedAprit, 1993 Ihe Blueprint was presented to and accepted by local bodies including the E'.'erglades City {.]ounci] and the ' ,filler t ,)untx. the }:vergiades Y. nza \ ~rtuall) u','ery public agenc}' aflectec: bv the \dvocac7 I;mup, as ~ t'il as private persons trom the tmmediately surrounding area and areas more tar aneld [he X,mics (Collier COLH~tV) Metropolitan members vx the C.\G, 'c. ere mmiied ol these questions and state concerns, ltie Naples i)ail} 7,,e,.vs commercia! uti]it:,, o~ the corridor f~ecause or these concerns, ~t ;:'as felt that. rather than seek formal support trom public or private agenoes f~r Ihe 5cemc Highwa? designatnon at the Eligibility phase, the C,-\G ~ouid seek to develop a Comdor Mana§ement Plan v, hich addresses as many as possible ol the public support and to present the overall plan the lam!mai [railSccnlc High~,.av .\ cop)' Universal C. rit~zia No. 10 ...... \ Corridor Management Plan (C.MP) must be developed with the endorsement ot focal government(s). \ ('orrtdor Management I)!an has been drafted and recmvecl the endorsement o~ the Collier County b. Resource Speo,fic Crit,~ma H2stotSc .4~:heolOglc_.,rd o~d Cultar*.d the h~stonc, cultural and archeologicai resources ,dong ~he [ am~am~ Frail scemc comdor represent tmportant periods m [:kwida history and serve to educate ,.mewers while providing an appreciation h)r the past fhe Research, Held Inventory and C;raDhic Depiction Sections of this application be§tuning v, lth the region s first inhabitants, the Cc. lusas, to the .Miccosukee Indians who live along !he [railtoda,, lheotherstnrvlsof FIodda'searh' pameur era and the completion ot the lamiami Frail. [ he constructlon ot the I rail marked the end of the >omc b;gt'dights are the restored Bay City \Valking Dredge lhispteceotequtpment;,.'astlsed todredge and buiid the l rail at thc same nme. It is located airing the ['rail at the Collier-Sen-dnole State Park and :4 on the National Register tar Historic structures, ~TA?A~ fiN& 5C'3~C HiGq"3~Y ]here ,'.re a hume,.: o: indian \ illaRes along the [r~fi Micco'~ukee [dbe h~dian Cra[ts are handmade and ~old at local '. dlag¢~ aha the ~rad~dona[ chKkee huts 1here arc a num~cr c,~ Indian mounds along the l rail Also the remains c,~ the Stone Archwa~ that crossed ~he Ifad at the Dade Ct~unt? hnc are adiacent to the Frail but not x~stb[e from the Irai[ !heseandcthcr tfirough mterprctz', u facilities Natu, rM, $ceruc, and RecreationaJ the Ifad are v, eii documented in the Research, Field Inventory and Gravmc l)eplction Suctions or thru (_'orrldor Managemer-t Plan [he naturai protecuon tot Iuture generanons to appreciate [ he natural s', stems a,'e tully ,. mible to the travemr and represent South F!onca Everglades ecosystems ot Sawgrass, Fropical Hard:',ood Hammock~,. ,Mangroves, Saltmarshes, and C?press StTands I he Recreational opportul;it~es along the ]raii are abundant and directh' relate to the natural environment adiacem te the Frail For exampJc. swamp buggy and ai~boat rides are ~remendous also represent the [~iestvie and culture o~ the independent toi~ ~,Ho have settled m the ;:rea small tn',,.ns and v~]lages 8A3 E)e}i~noHon ~rff(Vio .~ CO~R/,~qNJ~F_~E,~ Ehr r PLAN a, l~blic Lands CoLlier Coun9. C~lli~ ~tv Sh~iLts Office ~d Florida and ~',a~c Road 20 Ocho~ F~ C~trol D~tric~ ih;x a!Icncx Emergency. Medical Services. P~"ida Game and Freshwater Fish Commassion 5out~ ,t-]onda Water Management Distnct Collier-Seminole Stat~ Park ~cayune Strand State ~(,XI~I.) L~FOIPCt aFC ~ci~g addeci lo I'icavunc Strand :u~i}nv, ax corndor while muci~ ol thc South F1orida CORRIDOR M..'~,~aC~/A~NT PLAN '~.,~ Ten ThOusand Islands National Wildlife Refuge Big Cypress Natior~ai Preserve b. Private VolunU~ry Protection Measures Educa Oor~l lnitiative~ Intt"rFn~tve 'Four Guide Roadside l'ulloffs and Interpretive Sll~nage Demgn Guidcline.a is tho , ,, , NotiflcaUon and Recognition Incentive Programg De~gnatJon L.a~d and F.a.,~zm. ent AcquL~t~on Regulator,' Prot~lJan Meaa~J.,~ R,.'gulaturv protectmn tcchmquus that couJd by duvv4)prn~tn~ r~ghts and corridor ovrria,, zonus. Dcsignauon ~o be ruguJatory in nar'are. [~ecause so much o[ fi',e land along the Tarmami [rail Scenic pursued b~ ',i~e FD(.)[ .,,::b, the~ou~i~ Florida ~,\atvr I'amu~m; has bt, un the ['amhm~: Ira:i Scemc }{igh,,:a;: Naliona] Park Scm;ce U.S. Fish and WiJdlife Sem']ce Co!lief k.'ounp,, School [)~str~ct Evergiades Ci:5 Independent Miccosukee and Semmoie Elected OffimaN ~mo~on The I'amiam~ 'Frail tees a ach and coMrful stor~ m geography, man and nature Ihisstorv,[ikea Fvndinq ond PromofiQq > Building A wartm~ss :~atura[ h:~;torx and pcopie ot the area .\t a public kd,,[~r,, C]rou[~ and public discussed (?pormnities I 'uhurai history ot thc area, the nauve pcoph: thc hL',tor;c building ot thc [IAgh'.x,lv ~ki]diitc OpportumUes to get out ota vehicle and walk, TargeOmg Awartm. ess Acti'cities In the near f'umre, ~t ;s conceivabJe that a tamilv in (;erm,~nv ',,. ill ;nvest~gate '~cemc i~:gh'~x a'.s on thc acn,.'mcs [ocall,, I'he foIlo;:,ing are groups and !,usmesses that were identified in the pub]it '.'.orkshops as priority marketing targeLs: Collier, I.ce and Dade County tourist related ot commerce, mrport, etc) In addition to the a'.aiiabiliw ot printed material, this campaign ~,hould be directed toward educating personnei n these businesses so that the',, will be able to ',Ve, l,~ PLAN CONDOR, /x Section ? P~uuLOtictrtal T ech:mclues Several promotional techniques have been suggested, including t'ne foiio~; rog: :\ Speakers Bureau mmst eHectiveiv directed toward ~e tourism business industry, local civic asso~ations such as Rotary, special interest organizat;ons '-uch as iocai h:stoncai sac:eries. Audubon chapters, etci Printed Material, soecff!caily an overali rvap that Video tape p~omotmg the Tamiami Traii (12 - ;0 minutes long) that could be distributed to Festivals and Special Events-booths and pnnted matenai shouid be displayed at testivals and Tracte Shows AudioTape or CD Tour that v, ould enixancu thc their cars Internet / Web Page Gateway/Visitor Complex, a iointly sponsored v~sitor center that '.~pu[d provide intormation about ali the opporp~mmes to enloy the area. and Nationai ['ark Service 5ou~h F!onda Water Management District L'S. Fish and WildIife Service State o~ Florida Department of Environmental Protect:on, Park Service Florida Department at Transportat:on (-oH~er Count~ School D~strict Cities o~ Marco Island, Naples, Chokok~skec and I(~ ergiades City I;~dupcndent Miccosukee and Seminole I'rivate Businesses and Land owners along the comdor Elected OfficiaIs Econoline Development Council C[~ambers o~ Commerce ~tate o~ Florida Bureau of Hist(~ric Preserva:~on Mea-~trmg t:~m:notional Succ~s longer '.~si~or sta) s, and more dolIars spent m the Of this list, the comprehensive map and the gatewa*, v~s~tor comp!ex are the two techniques that would be most effective and should be undertaken as soon as possibIe. Potential Partnea',s The foilo,.ving ',,.'ere idenmied as p,,)tent~al partners to help promote or fund promotional activ~taes for the Tamiami Trail Scenic tiigh,a a?': 8A3 :undina (:nd Promotion Funuing Source Activities Applicable Matchin§ CORR.'DOR,V,A,N,~_-$d,,~NI PlAN -' Through thc C~>rrldor ,,\d','ocacv Group. a FMnda RugmnaJl'nilc,. I'[an. ihcl;u,fls, 50,000, thu pnl,qar, ruso~m',ibi]it;, mr ~ran'q)ortatlcn Organlzatmns (NiPOL wi~ich ar~.' comprlsl.d ~I h~caJ dtvand o~untvelectcd tff[icia~s, Annua[]v, thc Napk.~-C¢i]ie: Count'. N[[~O pr('pares a Planning W~,rk Pre,gram fUPWP) that detai] thc hm~s for the upcoming yuar [ar uvurv public mr)de nt transportation or pubhc tac~Jitv rransportat;on hnprow~munt Plan ~ prepar~,d annuaily that speoflcaH7 aih~cam* thu budgeted funds fl~r ','armus prnlucL,, UI'WP and the [ Il' c(n~t,lill ','.¢~rK lask~ HigM*a', 8A3 ~!~l,on~hl~ o Corrlpr~hcn~v~ Plon ~ P~Ftn~,rshb~ ond A~re~-m~t~~ 8A3 DRAFT (August 20. 1998) U.S. 41 SCENrIC H2GHWAY CORRI])OR MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT Courted /EDC; 8A3 Ob}ective 1.I: Mar. Igc '. ege!at;on along ti~e >u:n;c r ',)ordi:mtcd Management Program mr managing L,', iix t [ ',hou[d be coordina:cd v, ~th removal by :':ct'err' ,,v.n,.us a!ong mc Scenic regarding the importance ot '"~ver~ake the ON.ye 1,2: Insure nat des~g:- ar o ~ I tigh,,x ax xs these bridges are NationaJ Preserve, Collicr-Smninoie SLate [)ark l huusand islands Nanonai ~.ildlife I'~uqugv, Pica?'une Strand State Forest. and Fakahatchev brazilian pepper and cabbage paims located adjacent t¢ the l rod wRhin the westernmost sc'.un miles aha rmle number 26 through 27 and 31 area m mile 9 throughl0 and 12 through 15. Strategy 1.12: ()pen up some oI the obstructed views alon§ the scenic high:,, ay through select:ye ,,egvtabon ciearmg/management, Focus these et'~orts l,. hhin the areas described m Strategy i .gtratc,~j) ," 1.) Ct>ordinate ','.'~d~ the L.S \tm', ','ur'as Engineers IUSACOE) in relation to their Integrated Managemen~ Program and their btr,ltc,!Lx ,12 2. Coordinate v.;ti~ the Big C}press ",,ationa[ l)rc'ser'.'c' regardblg desu;n and '-,!ratc,q', ! 2.3: Coordinate x,.ith the USACOE -e!,,ardin~; ti~e Moditied ~x. ater l)t, iivenes to i ',ergiadc~ National Park prolcct, l)armershiD ~tratc);~ ". -' t .\s the exmtlngguardraiils repiaced. :: ,,i~ou',d be designed and constructed ,.'. ith a ~uardt'a:~ t}pe that enilancus, or. at a minimum, modihcat;ons are implemented, these tacilitics ',houid be constructed so that they ,,:ill not detract trom the scenic nature ot the corndor :,. bile maintaining the purpose and intent of the water conveyance structures. Perhaps, through ~,, bile constructing additional structures. Fhese could include scenic pullouts, informauonal disoia'~ s, kiosk.s, observanon areas, etc. CC)~OOR/v~J,~_~A~T PLAN ~g~ Objective 1.3: r oorc::::at,' ,, :ti~ mi;er h!dcra], ,',,5~c Tamiam: J'raii :cu:;:c !{ig'r~w,l,., i['.'eFV ettort shuu[d be made to coordinate and collaborate o:1 these cfmrts, 72 poe1 re~uu:'c* ', and u:itabli'~h lundint: commit:nut,ts :o accom2',ish a higher qua!ir. ~utcnme than ct~uid ~:,~, accomphshed a]~mv i Ior:da [ico~,,. stem Ib:,torat;on Fhis org,m:za::on :s comprised o~ [:ederai. Suite and pnor:t~zmg E,.erg[ace,~ and South Engineers (USACOE Stratcg)' 13.3: Coord;nate v, ith the US Environmental Frotecaon Agency (EFA) and the Florida Department ot Environmental Protection (FDEP) regarding d~eir comprehensive water quaint7 strateg) for the South FIvcida region and their comprehensive ~edands conserva~iom m~gatlon and permitting swategms. Objective 1.4 !din:m;ze envlr(;nmentai impacts GOAL /t2: [o preser'.e, mamta:n, and eni~ance Objective 2.1: [::'.i~ance rite recreatlona] opportum~:es ak',ng me i'armami Frail So:mc Highwa,,. ' reriacemer;: ~,r the bridges along the [a;~iar2~z [raii kcumc I~;~',~ ay. Consideration ~}~ouid be gwcn to :he des~Rn and construct;on so that they enhance the : creatmnat o;)uortunme~ he. dshing and canoeing) (dvordir, ate wi Ih the Big (.'.ureas regarding recrcat;onaJ ~,ssoc:ated v. ith their safety, access ')tratc,~L,, ._' ,'; De~eiop a recr,zatlon guide which ii!ustrat,..s the ,.'anous reCeat:onal npporturufies ,donative ~ra:i Developa rniit,-marker ~],'stemto ;.St I)e':eiou ,* ~.ompr,zi',ensrce strateg) the addition ot bic}'c]e lanes or paved .Sh'ategy 2.! ? Construct,.enctepuUoffsa]ong '<emc h~ghwa',, m the areas idennfied in ConceDtual bIaster Plan GOAL ~3: I o preserve, maintain, and enhance ti~e culturai and historic resources of the Irail reladng to Ot~c'tive 3.1; T,.) enhance the understanding -f t}:e '~cemc High:'. a,,. Famiami Fra!i to ', ,' , ~ ' , t provide C'oiJier k. ou;;t? residents an GOAL .5, "1 for the Scen:c tqighv:a'v Objective 5.1: i:~ciude ' 8A3 an .t,r'.' X · ears: :::cIudc a Citizen Particlpatlo:l Objective 6. I: (;,*m,uppor: h,r the F,un,am: :ra'.','[t'r~, :.*,!: '.'. ii] t'xt, i,lm lhe gioballv umq'Je scenic Obje,mve 7.1: I ducate trw. viers rt, garding the -tr, ltt,~:,,' 2; ! Dcveiup a Ga:ewav/x, isitor Com:0[ex Scc.:c t{i>;h,.,,~ r'his compiex would house :nh)rmauo:~ rcgardin~ both L'ublic and private tine s;gn,lge stud)') along the boardwalks and hikin;q pat!~s :o uducate visitors about their >tr,m,.g,, ,-,' i Deveiup an identification guide (,t c-mrn.:~i'.-.:~;h~ed wildlife ,liong the 1 amiaml Frail. GOAL ~8: h, preserve tot/uture generations a truly '9 CORDDOR/AAN,.~Z~./~NT PLAN .'~mencan cuiturai i;entage. Ob~ctive 8.1: ¥o enhance the understanding ot the cuituraI and i~storical resources reia!ed :o the Strate,~.v,< 1,;: Prepare or obtain a ~,tud', re)Nrdin!~ the cuiture a:',d history o~ the area 5tnm,,g)' ,'~.12 Cm',struct tnlormatmn k:nsks th,it e×plam tile cuhurai and histoncai s~gn;;:cance ot Scenic I Ib~hwa?,. Strate,gy ,'; 1.3: Develop an audio tour of the Scenic Highway that emphasizes the culture and history ot the area, :nduding the natwe .,\mencan cuilure ,md the [ rail. Strate,kw ,~ 1,4: I)e','eh? a broci~ure. marker and 'qgnage system that e?M',i;s the the I'rmI. Strategy ,'~, 1.5: Facilitate access ~o public indian villages along the l"amiami Trail Scemc Highwa? using a mile marker and signage system Strate,g)' 8. I.6: CeIebrate the culture and heritage ot the area through local customs and test;,,'ais ~ #9: i'o support the deveIopmem and Tra~I. O~tive 9.1: Support the public/private serwce entities ,dong the Scenic Highway 5tratcgv u I.I: Encourage pnvatizatmn ol businesses along the Tamiami Trail Scenic Hi§hv,,a7. Explore public, private partnerships whh ',hese businesses 5tratc,~,)' '~. 1.2: Develop a star'.dardizcd iomt (private/public) brochure to promote the services and amenmes akmg d~e Fraii. Goal #10: To support econon'dc duvt, k)pmcnt. ecotounsm and other recreattooaI and commercial opportunaies. C)b~ve 10.1: Dc',.'eiop uuormat~onal and promotional materlais and distribute them to appropriate puuiic and private tourism 5trate,gy I0. I.I: Devciop a standardized loint (prwate,, punic) brochure to promote the services and amen;ti..:s aiong the Frail. 5tr.~te.~}y Il)1,2: (:oordinate with local and regmnal toun'~m-reiated business to dlstnbute this qtr, ltc,i;i Ill. l.i l)eveiop an inturm!t ;vebpage that promote, lam:and IrailScenicHighway. Link this ',',ebpat,,c t~ h~ca], reF,~ona[ ,md state tourism-related Objective 10.2: Coordinate promotional campaigns ,with businesses and tourism-related assoc~atmns aJon~; the Scenic High,.vav. cou]d include thin~;s such as swamp buggy parade~;, J,umaml I raii Scemc Hig}lway Cleanup Da?', Native .\mencan Culturai Festivals, and/or Bicycle Races. 8A$ Action Plan (1998-1001) C. Administration/Coordination ........ Coord[nate/ScTi~'c]uli~/~iiauoh Nai~gilne~i- ........... 1~ -~ ~ ~oordinate with FUOI re~~{~ ..... 1}~'~] ......... P ~m~~111'11117~ ..... -----C~67dinate with Local A~encie~ and Bi~ Cyp~ss N~don~ Precede 1998 - 2~3 " ' ' ' ~.~?~r _~~ ~ CORRIDOR/AAN/C-_E./AEN f PLAN 17 74 4" / I "8Cl GOLDEN GATE AREA CIVIC ASSOCIATION 4701 Golden Gate Parkway Golden Gate, FI, 34116 September 15, 1998 Mr. Timotily J Constantine Commissioner, District 3 Board of Collier County Commissioners 330I East 'l'amiami Trail Naples, Florida 34112-4977 RE: Executive SummaO' Presentation - Tentative Agenda ]tern September 22nd - Alternate Use - Surplus [.and Adjacent to Landfill Dear Commissioner Constantine During our general membership meeting on September 14th. [ was requcsled to provide the Golden Gate Area Civic Associations support of the proposal m ntitize thc surplus land for alternate activities We do. however, think a public golf course w'itb 18 boles, allowing more acreage for ahcrnate sporting actixities is a more acceptable arrangement It is our understanding ',,.'hen this proposal ,.vas originally presented to file Commission. thc uses were for alternate activities fbr Ibc youth of Co!lier County. Those ])resented uses ,.,,'ere, remote control airplanes and race cars. paint ball. BMX Motorcross track. A'tV course, crc) Therefore. ;ye support ,.,.hatever decision thc Commission should make Io utilize this land. keeping in mind the original presentation X'ql~am ava/lable to discuss this in [~rtber detail if you should st) desire [:eel f?ec to contact me at 353-7969 Again. thank ',ou fbt reviewing this matter Cordialh ,~llj~. ~'L. Newman President John C Norris. District ] 'fimoflLv L Hancock, District 2 Pamela S Mac'Kie, District 4 Barbara B. Berry., District 5 Deputy Sarah Lanius, Collier County Sheriffs Olfice Presented By: SENIOR TIMES GOLF .... GOLF COURSE CYPRESS WOODS GOL/~, -C~U-"~'RY ~LU" 592~B601 HErO ~R(~;LO~.I~L JOHNSON H~8~SC~[~'~'~ p 774-3559; ~ c,~m~ COUR~ ~ LELY RESORT BOULEVARD -<Y~EE~RERITAGE'ObLF & COU~mTI~Y CLUB 417-9990 ' 597-6622 41~ GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY 8El MEMOR ANF)UM Date: To: Re: December l, 199~ Connie Johnson, Administrative A::si:;tant Community Development Services ill ] 1~ ;{of fm/~n, Dep,Jt'/ CJr. rk Interlocal Agreement - City o[ Marco Island aad Collier County Licensing and Discipline of Contracuors Enclosed please find the original document a:; referenced above, Agenda Item ~SE1, as approved by the Board of County Commissioners on November 3, 1998. Please forward this agreement to the City of Marco for the required signatures and kindly return the fully executed original to Minutes and Records. If you should have any questions, please contact me at: 774-8406. Thank you, Enclosure 8E'7 INTERLOCAI. AGREEMENT CITY OF MARCO ISLAND AND COLLIER COUNTY I,ICENSING AND DISCIPLINE OF CONTRACTOR,$ 'Fills AGREEMENT, made and entered into this ..b~ _ day o f__~.(~(/.'.,_, 1998, by and between the Board of County Commissioners o£Collicr County, Florida, ("County") and thc City of Marco Island, Florida, a Florida Municipal Coqmration. ("City"). WITNESSE'FIt: WlIEP. EAS, file County and the City desire an Agreement regarding issuance of Contractors' licenses and discipline of licensed contractors and persons performing unlicensed conlracting; and WItEI'I, EAS, continuation off issuance of contractor's liccnses by thc County will eliminate thc ~eed of such services to bc pcrfommd by thc City: and WIIEREAS, the County currently provides active field supervision wi!hin City of licensed and unllccnscd regulated "conlracting" by means of investigations and disciplinary, activ~ly; and WItEREAS, thc County and thc City both have statutory authority Io disciplinc certain violations vis-awls such "contracting." NOW, TItEREFORE, thc Board off County Commissioners of Collier County and tile City CouucJl of the City of Marco Island, Florida, agree as [follows; !. Pursuant lo County Ordinances and/or Florida ,~'laltdes, thc County issues licenses to contractors working within unincorporated Collicr County. Under those same ordinance and/or ,5'laltlle,':, thc Cotmty will continue to issue such liccnscs to such contractors who will bc working within thc City's municipal boundaries. ' 8El 2. Thc County is cntidcd to collect thc licensing fees for those contractors liccnsed lo work within Ihe County per Counly issued county-wide licenses. 3. TIDe County shall providc adequalc staff, supervision, equipment and supplies necessary to issue such new and renewed contractor's licenscs. The County will, in cooperation with thc City, provide all supervisory and investigative personnel to investigate and, at tile County's discretion, will discipline licensed ami/or unlicensed contractors in tile applicablc courl(s) and/or before the County's then applicahlc disciplinaO' hoards vis-a-vis such contraclors. 4 Thc County Contractor Licensing .5upcrvisnr shall suplzrvisc all contractor-lie(using iuvestigations and advise thc County's Building Divisiou of same. 5 Iht County sinai] provide to thc City with monthly writlcn reports of tim liccnsingand investigative activity within lido ('it>. County and City staff will provide each other assistance as is needed. 6. The County will in its discretion refer disciplinary matt(rs to the County's Contractors' Licensing Board. The County's Cent(utter Licensing Board shall include at least one (I) one voting member thereof who then rcsidcs within thc City's municipal boundaries. This mcn~bcrship rcqturcmc~tt shall bc instilatcd at lbo first membership vacancy. Because of rcccnI amendments to Flu(ida I.a,,v, it is prohahlc that this fir.;( "City Member" must be a "Consumcr Rcprcsentativc." 7. Thc parties acknowledge (a) tile City has lawful authority 1o issue licenses and olher forms of evidence of qnalilScations to conduct "contracting" within the City's mtmicipal boundaries, and (h) thai d~c C'ity has htwFul authorhy to fom~ il quasi-judicial Board that can function much thc sltr]le ~s thc County's Contractor's Licensing Board. ltowcver, in Ihc event that such a Board is established by thc City, it is agreed that such City Board shall have no jurisdiction over any disciplinary matter pressed due to an event or ()mission that occurred prior to tile date of the active [btam(ion of such a City Board. 8. This Agreement shall become effective retroactively to October I, 1998 and shall in all events condnuc until its anniversary date of September 30, 1999. Moreover, this Agreement shall conlinuc thereafter for such successive one (1) year terms unless and until wrhtcn notice is delivered by one party to thc othcr prior to July 1 of the rcspcclivc year to notify the other party that the noticing parly desires to terminate this Agreement as of thc next succeeding anni;'ersary date ATTEST: By: City Clerk Approved as to form and Legal sufficiency: CITY OF MARCO ISI.AND BY: [)avid Brand(, Chairman of the City Council Kenneth B. Cuyler City Attorney · "' G T '"' '"' erk Approved~ to form and Legal sufficiency: ~ David Weigel, County Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COI,L1ER COUNTY, FLORIDA ,8E1 ~'<1~0 RANDUM December 2, 1998 Connie Johnson, Administrative Assistann Community Development Services Ellie Hoffman, Deputy Clerk Minutes & Records Department Ingerlocal Agreement of City of Marco Island and Collier County Transferring Jurisdiction of Public Roads and Road Rights-of-Way Within the City of Marco Island Enclosed please find the original document as referenced above, Agenda Item ~SE], as approved by the Board of County Commissioners on November 3, 1998. Please forward this agreement ~o the City of Marco for the required signatures and kindly return the fully executed original to Minutes and Records. If you should i~ave any questions, plea.~e contact me at: 774-8406. Thank you. Enclosure SE1 ' , [NTERLOCAL AGREEMENT OF CITY OF MARCO ISLAND AND COLLIER COUNTY TRANSFERRING JURISDICTION OF PUBLIC ROADS AND ROAD RIGHTS-OF-WAY WI'I-IIIN TliE CITY OF MARCO ISLAND THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT made Ibls ~x~.day by and between the City of Marco Island, a municipal corporation located wilhin Collier County, Florida, bereinaaer referred to as "CITY," and Collier County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred lo as "COUNTY.' WITNESSETII: WHEREAS, the area within Collier County identified as Marco Island became incorporated as a municipal corporation known as the City of Marco Island on August 28, 1997; and WHEREAS, the CITY and the COUNTY have worked cooperatively and agreed to do all things necessary to transfer Io the CITY the jurisdiction of public roads and the responsibility for operation and maintenance within the right-of-way of public roads within the CITY including maimenance and operation of ail bridges, drainage easements, street lights, traffic control devices including traffic signs, signals and pavement markings on or within such ro~ds and rights-of-way; and WHEREAS, this Agreement is entered into in compliance with Section 335.0415, Florida Statutes NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration oflhe premises and other good and valuable consideration received and acknowledged by the parties Io be sufficient, the CITY and COUNTY agree as follows I Except for the entirety of Counly Road 92 and its associated road right-of-way, the jurisdiction of all public roads and the responsibility for operation and maintenance within the right-of-way for all public roads located within the boundaries of the CITY are transferred from COUNTY to the CITY. 2 The jurisdiction and responsibility for maintenance and operation of~,ll bridges, drainage easements, street lights, tr~.fc control devices, including Irafc ~igns, signals and pavemem markings on or within such roads and associated road rights-of-way, including County Road 92, is concurrently transferred from COUNTY to tile CITY. Page I o£ 2 ' The elTective date of this IntedocaJ Agreement is Oclober I, ~998. 4. This Interiocal Agreement shall be recorded in the Public Records of Collier County. IN WITNESS WtiEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these presents to be executed by thclr respective authorized signatories. DATE: ATTEST: D ,w~u~! ~,90:, C~k ::.~¥: 'i ' [Jepu~' Clerk 'Atteit al to Chai~'s s~nature onll, ', BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER CO~TY. FLORIDA ATTEST: LAURA LITZAN, Clerk BY: CITY OF MARCO ISLAND CITY COUNCIL BY: DAVID BRANDT, Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Approvcd as to form and legal su fficicncy: Kenneth B. Cuylcr, City Attorney I ~'I'I';I'II.O(:A I, (]T¥ Ill" ~IAII('O ISI,^NI) ANI) ('Ol,l,ll']'l ('OU~¥1'¥ I,I(:~:~IN(; A~I) I)I~('IH.INI': ()1" ('()NTIIA(]'Oil~ ~ , ,' /~!~ .., Tills AIilIF',I':~II':~'I', m;M~' ;Ind ~'lll~'l'c(I illin tl~is '~ ~1;])' ~VI'I'~ I':~ ~ I':'1'1 I: ~ III']II':A~. t'nHIlllll;:ll~,ll ~l'i:,x~w~:c'u pi C~,lHr;lch,l'x li~'c~:~cs hy Ihu (]~unly will ~VII~:III':A~, It~u ('nulll)' cllrr~lll]~' l~r~','~k'~ ;~'1~' fluid ~q~.rv~si~;~ ~vilhi~ OR: 2514 PG: iTl Ibc aplqiC;~blc cm~rl{s) ;illd/~)r i~ul}~rc Ibc ('[lilllty'S Ihcll ;,pplic;Iblc 'Iht parties acknmvlcdgc hO Iht ('ily h.s h~wi'ul md]mrily h) issuc licenses 2120 ('it)' Board '~llall have Ilo jurisdiclioil (9.'ct :lily disciplhlary illatlcr pressed duc ti) ;Ill cvcnl Iii' Illlli!{Ni(lII thai occur'red pri~I 1o Ibc dale o1' lilt: ach',c Ir~l'[ll;llillll Ill' rcspcclivc year m ~l~lil.',' I]~c olhc~ i~aHy dial Ibc ~lldlCIiIl', pady dt.'!;irc!; h~ ICllllill;llC Ihb, /,,T'I'I':ST: ¢ 'il)' ('lcrk IIOAI(I) ()1,' ('OUNTY ('()MMISSI()NEI(S ('(}l, ,II,,R ( ()lrN'i Y, I,'I,OJ,HI)/~ I..\]?I3.AP,/\ B IH!KK'Y (3uumm~]~ This Rcsolution adoptcd aflcr motion, sccond and majorily 'rotc, DA.T~.D: Novcnlbcr 3. 199g AT'f EST: D\VIG1]T F~ BROCK. Clerk /~tt~st a: to C?atr~an'$ BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLl.!ER COUNTY, FLORIDA avid C, Wcigcff ~) R~.:SOI,U'I'ION NO. 98-442 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING GENE VACCAP-O TO TIlE TOURIST DEVEI,OPMENT COUNCIl, WIIEREAS. Collier County Ordinance No 92-18 crcaIcd Ihe Tourist Development Council and provides that tile Council shall be composed of nd;c (9) members pursuant to Section 125.0104(4)(e), Florida Statutes: and W]tEREAS, there Is currcndy a vacancy on this board for the category of tlon-owncr/ operator: and WIIEREAS, thc Board oF Coullty Commissioners prc',iously provided public notice soliciting applications from intcrcslcd parlics NOW, THEREFORE, I½E I[ RESOLVEI} BY 'IltE BOAI<[~ ¢)F COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COI.LI[:R COUNTY, I:I.ORII)A. dun Gene Vaccam. representing thc catcgo~' of non-owner/operator, is hereby appointed to 11~¢ Tourist Development Council to fulfill thc remainder of thc ~ acant term, said term expiring April 21. 1999. This Rcsolulion adopted after motion, second and majorily vote. DATED: Nowmbcr 3,1998 AT'lES l': DWIGttT Ii, BROCK, Clerk lcga] sufficiency: BOAP, D OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ('Ol.':NT'f .\I)~iI~ISTI*,.VI'()IUS Id'~l~'|:OP'bl''~'x'Cl') EV.-\I.UATIO:N OPTIONS: CONSI'RUCTION AND MAiN I'ENANCIi AGB. I;I~MENT FOR SI. JBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS PRIOR ¥O RECORI)ING O[: Pi,AT fills CONS'IRUCFION AND MAIN":N~.NCE A(iREEMENT FOR SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS PRIOR TO RECORDING OF PIAT entered into this / ~u day of ~'Z~,c,. 1~8. by bctx~c~ Pelican Strand l,td., hereinafter refereed to as ~D~'elopc~, and the Board of Count5 ~5ommissioncrs ~fCollicr Coum~. Horlda. hereinafter referred to as thc "Board." RECITAl S I l)e~cloper has. simuhaneousl) vdth Ibc dcli',cP, of this ,,\grccment. applied for thc approxal b> the Board of a certain plat of a ,;ubdlx4,ion to he knoxx~ as Repbt 6 - Tract 10 at Pelican gtrand 2 Di,.ision 32 nflhc Collier ('ounD' I~'md I)¢xclopmcnt (.'ode allows tile Developer to cons~mcl tile imptoxcmcnts required b)* ~aid subdl;ision regulations prior m recording; thc final plat NO\V. I lI[:REIORIL itl consideration of thc foregoing premises and mutual covenants hereinafter sci [~mh. Dexcloper and the Board do hereb) co'.cnanl and agree as Polio's,s: t Dcxcioper 'Mll cau',c m be constructed: Roadway, Drainage arid Ufititlcs hnprovemems for the rcsldcmial construction within 12 monlhs from thc date of approval of said subdhision phi. ,,.aid impro'~¢mems hereinafter referred to as the rcqulrcd improvemcm~. 2. Dc'.'¢loper hercv, ith agrees to constmcl s~id impro'~emcnts prior to recording subdivision plal and thc Board of County Commissioners shall nol approve thc plat lbr rccordlng until ~id improxcmcnts have been completed 3 Upon completion ~f said impro,.cmenls, the Developer shatl lender its subdivision performance sccurhy in the amount of $_26.32_8,93_ '.,,hlch represents Ien percent (10%) of Ibc total contract co~ to complete construction Upon receipt of said subdivision perfomlance security b) thc Dcx¢lopmcnl Scrxiccs Director. the Developer may request the Board of Courtly Commissioners to appro'.e the subdi,,ision plat for recording and grant prelhninary approval o£ said plat 4 'Ibc required improvemems shah nm be considered complete unlil a sta~cmenl ~bstantbl completion by I)exeloper's engineer along ~.qth thc final project records have been fumlshed to be rc,,ic'.~,cd and approxed by thc [)e,.'elopmcnt Scr,.iccs Director for coml,lbnce ~til the Collier County Land [)e~clopnlcnt Code 5 'Vne Dcxelopmcnt Scr,.4ces Efircctor s~all, within fifteen (15) days of receipt of the state of substantial completion, either: a) notify thc Developer in v*~-itlng of his prelimlnaD approval of the improvements: or b) notify Ibc l)evelopcr in ;*.zlting of his refuel to ~ppro,,e thc improvemenm therevdth spcclf)4ng those conditions which the Dcwelopcr must fulfill in order to obtain the Director's approval of'the impro,.cments lto;*.cver, in no event shall thc Se~Mccs Director refuse preliminary approval of the improxcments if they are in fact constructed and submitted for approval in accordance v. ith the requlremcnls of this Agreement, %car al~cr preliminary approval b) thc I)¢xclopmcm S,¢rx'ic¢~ Director. ARcr Ibc one )car ~nalmcnancc period by thc I)c~cIopcr bas tcmfinated. ~l~e Dcxclopcr ~alJ pc66on thc Dc~eJopm~t Services 0ircctor ~o ins~cc~ thc requited impro~ cments '1 he DcveJopmcnt So. ices Director or his desi~cc ~all in~ect thc improvem~ts and. i[' found to be s~ill in compliance ~th ti:e ('oilier Cmmtv l~nd Dcvclopmcm Code as reflected by final approval by thc Board, thc Board ~all reJca~ thc ten percent (10%) subdivision pcrfom~ancc ~curlty 1~c [)~,c]opcFs rcs~onsibilit) lbr maintenance of thc required impro~cmcnt~ ~all continue unless o~ un61 thc IIoard accepts ma~mcnancc rcsponsibillty Ibr thc County 7. In Ibc excnt thc Dcxclopcr shall Ihil or neglect to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement. upon certification of such [hilu*e. thc (;ottnt} Adminlsl~ator may call upon the ~bdi~qsion performance ~curhy to ~zcurc ~tisJ~ctor> complcllon, repair and malntcmance olthe rcqulredimproxcmcnts Phc Board shallhaxctherigh~tocon*xm¢~ and malntaln, orcau~tobc con~m~ed and maimaincd, pursuant to public adxeni~mm;t and receipt of acc~tance of bids. thc it~ro~cmems rcquire~ herein 'lhe De, eloper, as principal under thc mbdMslon performance ~curky. ~all be liable to pay and to indemnity' the Board, upon completion of such conslruction thc final total coq to thc Board thcrco[ includlng~ bu~ not limited to. cngineering, lefal and comiflgcnl costs, together ~ith an5 damages, wither direct or con~quenlial, which the Board may ~slain on account of thc Pailure of the [)cvcloper to i¢lfill ali of ibc provisions ofthls Agrecnmn~ Signed, scaled and delivered in Ibc presence of ae~Ord~n~ to the 2a an ~te C~ty, Un~: 6 Also lot ~, Bloc~ Unit &, sccorolng ~0~ GOlden Ga~e~ v~zze~ COUnty~ r! Public ~eco~d~ Or 16~4 St. Elizabeth Seton Church RECEIVED OCl { 3 {998 r, ljui'4e~ ~g'Vioir ~ nccordlnq ~o the ;~ County, Ylorl~m, PA~e~ 12~ to I~ !r~c, r'u~llc r~cor~ or C 9 8 7 DATE: St. LlizaDeLh beton Catholic Churc~ Cnl,h.n r;._j,.L,_l.,_!'_l..._.,_,/~,jj/.~ ....... TELEP O E 455..~90rI FAX 455-6 lEGAL DESCRIPTIOH OF SUP. JECT PROPERTY: Church & 5chool 6ENPRAL LOCATION: 5325 28th Ave, bW CUI{RZNT ZONING: Church CUILR. EUT USE: NATURE OF PETITIOH: f~,l Iv;l! Nnvemhor Church property THE FOLLOWING INFOP, M. ATION I$ INCLUDED IN THIS PETITION. EXPI,kNATION, SEE REVERSE SIDE.) 3.u. 3,w.1) 2,u,4) 3.w.7) 3.b. 3.e.2) 3.e.5) 3.c. 3.e.3),, -- 3.0.6) 3.e.9), 3.d. __ Commentu: (FOR SrGHA~TORE al'~ ~TITIONER DATE REVIEWED by Board of County Commissioners: .... A~rov-e.d,: Disapproved: Conditionu of Approval: SIGNATURE OF COUNTY MANAGER 16A4 Excerpt from Ordinance No. 75-11 Filed Secretary of State 3/6/75 ~. Ai~pli~atinn on,t F .... fr, r i',.rmtr. A minim,lm nf twnnty (20) days bu~uZ'u uccupylrl,~ LHu carIIIvdl ur cxhibiLioH blLu, dj] api~llc~Liurl for a permit ~h~ll be submitted to the County.Manager in £our (4) copies accompanied by: company authorized to issue such bonds in Florida, conditiongd upon the operdtor complying with each provi~ion of thi~ Ordindnce and subject to ~or~eiture under the reruns provided in Paragraph 8 hereinbelow. b. Evidence of current public liability insurance coverage, i~sued by ~ company authorized to do business in Florida, in the minimum amount of $100,000 for any one person and $300,000 for any one incident. c. A non-refundable fee of $200. County '£=x Collector, and ., Including th. following information: 1) The name dnd huddquarturs address(es) of the carnival or exhibition company(les) with a direct or indirect financial interest; name(s) and address(es) of any sponsoring organization(s), and the nams and local address of the applicant representing the carnival or exhibition company(les); 2) A description of the every activity to be conducted such as but not limited to, menageries; circus and side-show performances; amusement, merry-go-round and other ride activities; food and drink dispensing facilities: booths for conduct of games of skill or chance not prohibited by State law to be open to thc public for an admission or participation fee and number of pur~onu to operate the activities; 3) Name, identification and social security number of each person accountable for the operation of each activity; 4) A description and ~ketch of tho site shot;lng tho location of each activity proposed, the location and number Of sanitary fdo~li%i~b; parking ~,lcilitic~, dnd provi~ion for lighting and public §) Application for Food Establishmen~ Operating Permit from the County Health Department as required by Ordinance 74-45. 6) Thc p]z~n for r~fll!:e, garbaqn, debris, and sewage di~posol during and alter operation et the circus or exhibition. 7) Provisions for traffic control, fire safety and mecurity precautions; 8) The date and time each activity is to be conducted and concluded; 9) Written approval from the owner of the property authorizing the use of his premises for such carnival activity. 10) Legal dsscripticn of property to be utilized. t6A4 S~ON8OIR ~OT%F%CAT%ON FO~ IOR TEMPORARY Na~e of event St. elizabeth beton Festival 52nd Terrace Address of event Date(s) of event Sponsor of event bt. ~Iizabeth beton Parish Pereon in charge of food service wesley Bates Phone 553-5616 Number of food and beverage booths Estimated number of attenders expected at the event at one time? 5000 w~ukeod 12 noon-liD. f~ov. 11-15, 1~8 Hours o~ operation 6 to I0 p.m. N~mber of tollete to be provided : Portable: Male ( 12 ) Female (12 ) Permanent: Male ( ) Female ( ) 5anl[a:'y Oep~ Describe method of liquid kitchen waste disposal: Describe containers and method of solid waste disposal (garbage): Garbage c~ns .ith elastic liners Number of solid waste disposal containers provided: 3-20¥d []umDstcr5 Deecribe facilities and method of handwaehing: running water with sink Deecribe facilitiee and method of utensil washing, rineigg Source of potable water: city water 16 4 As the sponsor o~ this event you are responsible to notify all food vsndor~ of the temporary food s~rv£cu r~quir~ment~. Failure to comply may subject the booths to be closed for public health reasons. Do you understand this completely? Yes No I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief all of the statements contained herein and on any attachments ars true, correct, complete, and made in good faith. I understand that these regulations include food intended for service to the public regardless of whether there is a charge for the food. I agree to assume responsibility for this event and certify that said business will be conducted in compliance with the Florida Administrative Cods, Chapter lOD-13. 16 4 ~ BOOTH NOTIFICATION FOP. M FOR TEXl~DP~d~y ~NTB Name of event: bt. [lizabetn beton Festival Name of booth: Person in charge of booth: _,, Wesley Bates Types of fo~ or beverage to be served: ~~ita_lia___sn sausa e cake & cookies Florida Administrative Code, Chapter lOD-13 requires all food to comm from an approved source. All food Btoragm, preparation and Utensil cleaning for this event shall not be done in private homes. L~cation of advanced food preparation: approved fond bonth~$'' How will food be transported to event location? Method of keeping food hot and/or cold at event mite: Method of cooking food at the location: Food must be protected from dust, insects, flies, coughs, sneezes. How will you provide this protection? Describe type of structure: erich booth [5 screened in metN] Adequate facilities and supplies shall be provided for employee handwashing. How will you provide this? each booth has a sink Failure to comply with applicable food service requirements in accordance with Chapter lOD-13, Florida Administrative Code, may result in enforcement action. Do you understand this completely? Yes No I certify that to the beet of my knowledge and belief all of the statements contained herein and on any attachments are t~ue, correct, complete, and made in good faith. I understand that these regulations include food intended for service to the public regardless of whether there is a charg, for th. food. I agruu to a~sumu ru~ponmibili~y for this establishment and I certify that said business will be conducted in compliance with the Florida Administrative Code, Chapter 10D-13. ~i~aturW ~f/applicant 1 ~ ~OOTH NOTIFICATION FOP. M FOR TE~POP. ARY EVENTS Name of boo~h: Taffy Wagon Person in charge of boo~h: John T01ve Types of food or buverage to be served: ~od0, [3oucorn, cotton candy, tally c0a[ed aDDles ~lorida Adminlmtrative Code, Chapter 10D-13 rsquiras all food to come from an approved source. All food storage, preparation and utensil cleaning for this event shall not be done in private homes. L~c~tlon of advanced food preparation: How will food be transported to event location? Method of keeping food hot and/or cold at event site: ... electri? %rove Method of cooking food at the location: stov~ Food must be protected from dust, insects, flies, coughs, sneezes. How will you provide this protection? Describe Adequate facilities and supplies shall be provided for employee handwashing. How will you provide this? sink 16A4,, GOLDEN GATE FIRE CONTROL & RESCUE DISTRICT 474 I GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY · NAPLES, FLORIDA 34115`6901 (941) 455-2~21 · FAX (941) 455-7917 Octobe~ 5, 1998 Reverend Jose[~h A, 2'IUU b£nd Naples, Florida 34116 Dear Father Spinel]i: pertaining to tile St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church annual festival to be held on November 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15, 1998. fo[ dj! [e~tiVd] [~cilitics to bu in~pected by a fire department inspector after they are set up and prior to their being opened to the public. Fifo Chief DRP/pm cc: Collier County Zoning Department Collier County Govt. Complex Bldg. - J 3,301 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FL 34112 Telephone (AC 941) 774-4434 October 8, 199g l'~uv Jos,~ph Spmclli Sl lili/.abeth Scum Uhulch 2760 52 Terrace SW Naples, Florida 34116 Dc,tf Rev ~p[nelh We have received and reviewed Hie request Ibr Security lbr the St Elizabeth Seton Festival, to be held November I [ - 15, 1998 Thc plal]s alu hclcby applo',cd b~,r thc ('olbcl ('otttlly Shctifl's Ollicc a[id adequate security ,,will be provided Questions and conccnls should be directed lo Sgt. Mike Wittenberg, as representalives of Sherif£ Don llunter Very Truly Yours, . . ~,.,,/ // /7 / '--// /..- -- /\Chtlg ~,~. Mike W'itlcnbcrg , / (;olden Gatt: Substation ./ MW/kin cc. file · ACORD. CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE:;b.~,.~, ,.cx:~c~ (210)829-7634 FAX (210)829~7636 endel S. Kaliff Insurance lt'm: Peggy B. 5chu]z Ex~: A · ,. 09/24/1998 10,000, O( DDITIONAL INSURED AS RES},E(_IS O}'LSAIiONS OF NAMLD INSURED: SI.ELiZAU[.[II SEION CATHOLIC CHURCH ~TES: 11/11/98 - 11/i5/98 !RTIF~CATE HOL~ER CANCELLA?ION ST, ELIZABETH SETON CATHOLIC CtiURCH AI~'N: REV. SPINELL[ 2760 52ND TERRACE SW GOLDEN GATE, FL 33999 OLD RET'UI~L IC: ~LIGEE F'LA- 320968 l CARNI'VAL PERMIT 2760 52ND 1ERh:ACIL .q · W. NAF'LES, FL :3,3999 COLLIER CTY 3501 E. TAMIAMI 1R NAPLES, F'L 33962 CONTINLJATION CERTIFIC? ' 11/15/199~ ~ 1/15/1999 THIS BOND CONTJNUES iN FORCE TO I'HE ABOVE EXPI~tAI'ION DATE COtNDITIONED AND PROVIDED THAT THE LOSSES OR RECOVERIES Oti IT ANO ANY AND ALL ENDOIISEMENTS SHALL NEVER EXCEED I'HE PENALTY SET FORTH IN THE BOND AND WHETHER THE LOSSES Oil RECOVERIES ARE '¢JJTHI/I lite FiI~:~T ,',tiE* OF~ SUBSEO!J[ tit Oil ¥/IT~-IJN ANY EX [~ NSION OR F~Et'dEWAL PERIOD. PRESENT. PASt OR FUTURE SJOUED AND DATED THIS .......... ~i~.!:~L F ! H 92-2L~6S I',:T GDHAN P 0 DOX 24U0 BONITA SF'RINGG, F'L OI.D I(L.F'UL~LIC ~4LIRE/Y {J(Jrl;'AN¥ A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROVIDING FOR ASSESSMENT OF LIEN, FOR T}{E COST OF T}{E A~BATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCE, IN ACCORDANCE WIT}{ ORD!NANCE 91 4'7. W}{EREAS, as provided in Ordinance 91-47, the direct costs of abatement of certain nuisances, including prescribed administrative cost inc,]fred by the County, shall be ass~ssed acainst such property; and ~ ~;BEREAS, the cost [hereof to the County as to each parcel shall be calculated and reported to the Board of County Commissioners, together with a description of said parcel; and ~IBEREAS, such assessment shall be a legal, valid and binding (obligation upcn the property against which made un[il paid; and >;HEREAS, [he assessment shall become due and payable thirty {30} days after [he mailing of No[ice of Assessment after which interest shall accrue a[ a rate of t'~elve percent (12.0%) per annum on any unpaid portior~ thereof. NO~;, T[{EEEFORE, BE iT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF CO~TY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, [hat the property described as follows, an5 na'v~ng been aba[ed of a public nuisance after due and proper notic~ .h~_o= ~o the owner of said property, is hereby assessed the follo'~ing cos[s of such abatement, to wit: NA14E: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: COST Allmon III,Thomas Melvin The West 75 feet of the EAST $ 1,160.00 Keruneth Dean Allmon 150 feet of Tract 41, GOLDEN P O Box 11172 GATE ESTATES, UNIT 88, according Naples, FL 34101-1172 to plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 5,Page 27, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. REFERENCE: 41343320008 70521-001 The Cie~l: of the Board shall mai! a notice of assessment of lien to the owner :3r owners of the above described property, and if such owner fails to pay such assessment '^'ith~n thirty (30} days hereof, a certifi~d copy of this Resolution shall be recorded in the official records of Collier County, to constit[~te a lien against such property according to la~ unless s~]ch direct[or~ is sta~,,e~ by this Bo~rd ,upon DATED: {k%; q~ BOA?,D OF COLI~J'FY ~?OMMISSIONERS :t,~R~'7~RA B. B~RR'f,x~ 2403992 OR: 2487 PG: 3396 BOARD OF CO'NTT CO~ISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA LEGAL NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT OF LIEN 6A5 Thomas Melvin Allmon III, & Kenneth Dean Allmon P 0 Box 11172 Naples, FL 34101-1172 DATE: REFERENCE 70521-001 #41343320008 LIEN NUMBER: The West 75 feet of the EAST 150 feet of Tract 41, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, UNIT 88, according to plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 5, Page 27, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. YOU, as the owner of the property above described, as recorded in the records maintalner] by ~he office of the Property Appraiser, are hereby BOARD OF C03NT! COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNT~, FLORIDA LEGAL NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT OF LIEN Tho~s Melvin Allmon III, & Kenneth Dean Allmon P O Box 11172 Naples, FL 34101-1172 DATE: R~FERKNCE 70521-001 #41343320008 LEGAl, DESCRIPTION: The West 75 feet of the F2%ST 150 feet of Tract 41, GOLDEN ~ATK ESTATES, UNIT 88, according to plat thereof recorded in Plat Rook 5, Page 27, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. You, as ti~. owner of the property above described, as recorded in the records maintained by the office of !:he Property Appraiser, are hereby advised that t~e Compliance Services Manager, did on 6/27/97, order the abatement of a cert&in nuisance existing on the above p£operty puobibited by ©rdinance 9]-,17, se~vlng notice thereof upon you, such nuisance being: Prohibited dumping, accumulation, storage or burial of litter, waste or abandoned property. Tires, RV Trailer, Auto Parts, 2 Abandoned Veh~, Cans, Raw Trash, Batteries, Full Drums ETC. expenditure of public funds at a direct cost of $ 960.00 and administrative cost of $200.00 for a total of $ 1,160.00. Such costs, by Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Col/Jet County, NOV 0 3 f998 RESOLUTION NO. 98-t2L__ A RESOLUTION OF TNE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROVIDING FOR ASSESSMENT OF LIEN, FOR THE COST OF THE ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUIS~;CE, IN ACCORD~4CE WIT}{ ORDINANCE 91-47. WHEREAS, an prcvlded in 0rdi.~ance 9!-{-7, the direct cc~t~ of abatement ol certain nuisances, including prescribed administrative cost incurred by the County, shall be assessed against such property; and WHEREAS, the cost thereof to the County as to each parcel shall be calculated and reported to the Board of County Commissioners, together with a description of said parcel; and WHEREAS, such assessment shall be a legal, valid and binding obligation upon the property against which made until paid; and WHEREAS. the assessmen( shall become due and payable thirty (30) days after the mailing of Notice of Assessment after which interest shall accrue at a rate of twelve percent (12.0%) per annum on any unpaid portion thereof. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTy COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER CO[~TY, FLCRIDA, that the property described as follows, and having been abated of a public nuisance after due and proper notice thereof to the owner of said property, is hereby a~sessed the following costs of such abatement, to NAME: LEGA~L, DEsC~P__TION Allmon III,Thomas Melvin The West 75 feet of the EAST Kertneth Dean Allmon 150 feet of Tract 41, GOLDEN P O Box 11172 GATE ESTATES, UNIT 88, according Naples, FL 34101-1172 to plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 5,Page 27, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. ~O~T $ 1,150.00 41343320008 70521-001 The Clerk of the Board shall mail a notice of assessment of lien to the owner or owners of the above described property, and if suet] owner fails to pay such assessment within thirty (30) days hereof, a certifiud copy of this Resolution shall be recorded in the official records of Collier County, to constitute a lien against such property according to law, unless such direction is stayed by this Board upon appeal of the assessment of the owner. This Resolution adopted after mo~ion, second and majority vote. DATED:%~_~i ATTEST: -', , ~ ~ DWIGHT E. 'BRO'CK~'i CLERK AND, LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: COUNTY ATTORNEY BOARD OF COUNTy COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BAR~ARA ~. CSce 11 - 1/98 16A5 COOT 71203-115 #22670360006 Lot 12, RBPLAT AVALON $245.OO 2403993 OR: 2487 PG: 3398 COHII L~O BOAAD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA LEGAL NOTICE OF ASSEBSM~NT OF LIEN DATE: NOV U 3 ,~d Edward Leroy G Melinda Anne Wilson 4440 Bayshore Dr Apt 127 Naples, FL 34112 exce~s of 18" in height in a subdivision other than Golden Gate Weeds over 18", BOARD OF COUNTX CO~4ISSIf~ERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA LEG~L NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT OF LIEN DATE: Edward Leroy & Melinda Anne Wilson 4440 Bayshore Dr Apt 127 Naples, FL 34112 T~FE~.ENCE 71203-115 #22670360006 I,I!£!~ IIUMB£R: Lot 12, P~EPLAT AVALON ESTATES, Unit One, according to plat in Plat Book 4, Page 65, Public Records of Collier County, Florida. You, as the owner of the property above described, as recorded in the records maintained by the office of the Property Appraiser, are hereby advised that the Compliance Services Manager, did on 12/04/97, order the abatement of a certain nuisance existing on the above property prohibited by Ordinance 9I-,17, setting notice thereof upon you, such nuisance being: Prohibited accLuuulation of non-protected mowable vegetation in excess of 18" in height in a subdivi.ion other than Golden Gate Estates. Weeds over 18". adlainistratIve (est ©l $200.00 for a to:a] of $ 245.00. Such costs, hy Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, have been assessed against the above property or, N0V0 ] ]~8 and shall become a llen on the property ~hirty {]0) days after such Government Center, Naples, Florida 34112 in writing within thirty (30) CLERK, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CSce 9- 1/93 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROVIDING FOR ASSESSMENT OF LIEN, FOR THE COST OF TBE ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUIS;~CE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ORDiN~d~CE 91-47. WHEREAS, as provided in Ordinance 91-47, the direct costs of abatement of certain nuisances, including prescribed administrative ccst ~ncur:ed by the County, shall be assessed against such property; and WHEREAS, the cost thereof to the County as to each parcel shall be calculated and reported to the Board of County Commissioners, together with a descriptlon of said parcel; and WHEREAS~ such assessment shall be a legal, valid and binding obligation upon !~he property against which raade until paid; and WHEREAS, the assessment shall become due and payable thirty (30) days after the mailing of Notice of Assessment after which interest shall accrue at a rate of twelve percent (12.0%) [)er annum on any unpaid p©rLion time,eof. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESQLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTy COMMISSIONERS O~ COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the property described as follows, and having been abated of a puklic nuisance after due and NAME; L._E_G~Ab DESCRIPTION: Edward Leroy & Melinda Anne Wilson 4440 Bayshore Dr Apt 127 Naples, FL 34112 R~FERENCE: 71203-115 #22670360006 Lot 12, P~EPI~T AVALON ESTATES, Unit One, according to plat in Plat Book 4, Page 65, Public Records of Collier County, Florida. c_o~%! $245.00 The Clerk of the Board shall mail a notice of assessment of lien to the owner or owners of the above described property, and if such owner fails to pay such assessment within thirty (30) days hereof, a certified copy of this Resolution shall be recorded in the official records of Collier County, to constitute a lien against such roa~rt according to law, unless such direction is stayed by this Board upon appeal of the assessment of the owner. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote. ATTEST ] . ~ LEGAL ~ '~ ~,)SUFFICIENCY: ~t~ DAVID WEIGEL COUNTY ATTORNEY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CSce 11 - 1/98 16A5 A RESOLUTIOH OF THE BOARD OP COI~,ITY COIdMISSIONERS PROVIDING FOR ASSESSMENT OF LIE[{, I"OB TRE COST OF THE ABATEME[:T OF PUBLIC NUISAtICE, iN ACCORDkNCE NOW, THEREFORE, BE I7 RESOLVED BY i'HE BOARD OF COUNTY NAME: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: COST Dominguez Estate, Julio John R Dominguez P/R 74 Ashley St Bridgeport, CT 06610 Lot 8, Block 175, Unit 5, Part - GOLDEN GATE according to plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 5 Page 122 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. $245.00 REFERENCE: 80122-028 #3624840000 The Clerk cf the Board shall mail a notice of assessment of lien [o the owner or owners of the above described property, and if such owner ~al..~ to [)ay such assessment within thirty (30) days hereof, a ATTEST: DWIGHT E. ER©CK,~ CLERK AND LEGAL 'S ]FFICIENCY' '-DAVID WE!GEL COUNTY ATTORNEY BOARD O? COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BAR~A B. B:RRY "Ct{A~(p~1 2403994 OR: 2487 PG: 3400 BOAP~ OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA LEGAL NOTICE OF ASSESSM~ OF LIEN 16A5 Dominguez Estate, Julio John R Dominguez P/R 74 Ashley St Bridgeport, CT 06610 REFERENCE 80122-028 #3624840000 DATE: ~0~ 0 3 1998 Lot 8, Block 175, Unit 5, Part - GOLDEN GATE according to plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 5 Page 122 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. You, as the owner of the property above described, as recorded in the records ma!nra:ned by the office of the Property Appraiser, are hereby advised ~hat the Ccmpila::c~ Ser';lces Manager, dlc cn 01/26/98, order abatement of ~ 'retrain nuisance ezlstinq on the above property prohibited by Ordl;]ance 91-47, servln~j notice thereof up©i% you, such nuisance being: Prohibited acc~u~ulation of non-protected mowable vegetation in excess of 18" in height in a subdivision other than Golden Gate Estates. Weeds over 18". You failed to ar:ate s~ch nuisance; whereupon, ~L was abated by the e:<pendit~re of ?c~!~c: fur. ds at a direct cost of $ 45.00 and administrative ct3t Of $200.00 for a total of $ 245.00. Such costs, by Pesolution of ::he ~oard of County Commzssloners of Collier County, Florida, have been assessed against the above property o~ ~0~ 0 ond shall become a [ten cn the property thirty (30) days after such assessment. Government Cie;tte:, [;aples, Florida 24112 in writing within thirty 16A5 RESOLUTION NO. 98- 431 A RESOLUTION OF THE EOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROVIDING FOR ASSESSMENT OF LIEN, FOR THE COST OF TBE ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCE, iN ACCORDANCE WITH ORDINANCE 91-47. WHEREAS, as provided in Ordinance 91-47, the direct costs of WHEREAS, the cost thereof to the County as to each parcel shall be ca]culate~] :,n.] rep~ttcd to the Boar{] of County Commissioners, together WHEPEAS, such assessment shall be a legal, valid and binding obligat!on upon the property against which made until paid; and WHEREAS. the assessment shall become due and payable thirty days after thc mailing of Notice of Assessment after which interest shall accrue at a rate of twelve percent (12.0%) per annum on any NAME: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: COST M Buttazzoni 288 Albinson St Sud~ury Ontarzo Canada P3C 3W2 Lot 10, Block 2, Naples Park Unit 1, according to plat recorded in Plat Book 1, page 106, Public R~cords of Collier County, Florida. $245.00 REFERENCE: 80205-010 #62410240003 The Clerk o£ the Board shall mai! a not,ce of assessment of lien to the owner or ~-~wners of the above described property, and if such BERRY, CHAt I~N 2403995 OR: 2487 PG: 3402 BOARD OF CO%rNTY CO~ISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA LEGAL NOTICE OF ASSESSKENT OF LiEN 16A59 M Buttazzoni 288 Albinson St Sudbury Ontario Canada P3C 3W2 DATE: A RES©LUTION OF TBE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY Tile BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OV COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the property desclfibed Gilbmrt & Martha Mandes An tone Mendes 3000 70t~ St SW Naples, FL 34105 Lot 23, Block 8, Naplms the Plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 110 of the Public Records Of Collier County, Florida. $245.00 80223-024 ~62154920003 i*ARBkRA B. 'JE~RY, ¢ AIR~AN 2403996 OR: 2487 PG: 3404 BOARD OF COUNTY .COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA LEGA~ NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT OF LIEN Gilbert & Martha Mendes Antone Mendes 3000 70~ st SW Naples, FL 34105 ~EFER~NCE 80223-024 #62154920003 ~ATE: NOV 0 3 1998 Lot 23, Block 8, Naples Manor Annex, according to the Plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 110 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. You, as the owner of the property above described, as recorded in the RESOLUTION NO. 98- 16A6 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROVIDING FOR ASSESSMENT OF LIEN, FOR THE COST OF THE ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ORDINA2~CE 91-47. WHEREAS, as provided in Ordinance 91-47, the direct costs of abatement of certain nuisances, including prescribed administrative cost incurred by the County, si%all be assessed against such property; WHEREAS, ~:he cost thereof to the County as to each parcel shall be calculated and reported to the Board of County Commissioners, together wit)] a descliption of said parcel; and WHEREAS, such assessment shall be a legal, valid and binding obli~atlon upon the property against which made until paid; and WHEREAS, the assessment shall become due and payable thirty {30) days after the mailing of Notice of Assessment after which interest shall accrue at a rate of twelve percent (12.0%) per annum on any unpaid portion thereof. NOW, THEREPORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY* THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Of COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the property described as follows, and having been abated of a public nuisance after due and p~o:~.~ notice ~hereof to the owner of s~id property, is hereby assessed Pal Rorgersen ,iR Lot 21 Block 280 of Marco $245.00 Gronneropvil!ain Beach Unit EiGht a Subdivlsicn Box 3911 Uiievc!d Hageby 0805 according to {he Plat thereof, Oslo Norway recorded in Plat Book 6 Page 63-68, of rte Public Records of Collier County Florida The Clerk of the Board shall mail a notice of assessment of lien to the owner or owners of the above described property, and if such owner fails to pay such assessment within thirty ~30) days hereof, a certified copy of this Resolution shall be recorded in the official records of Collier County, to constitute a lien against such property according to law, unless such direction is stayed by this Board !]pon appeal 9f the assessment of the owner. 'This Resolution adopted after motlon, second and majority vote. AT'~EST:'.', ' ~ { BRWm CLER ~tt~st ~ ~D LEGAL ~UFFICIENCY: ~- DAVID WEIGEL COUNTY ATTORNEY CSce 11 - 1/98 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BAR . E. 2403997 OR: 2487 PG: 3406 DATE: Gronneropvillain Box 3911 Ullevold Hageby 0805 Oslo Norway P. EFERENCE 51129-016 #57738240004 LIE~] NUMBER: LEGAL DESCRI ?TIOH: Lot 21 Block 280 of Marco Beach Unit Eight a Subdivision according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 6 Page 63-68, of the Public Records of Collier County Florida. You, as the owner of the property above described, as recorded in the records maintained by the office of the Property Appraiser, are hereby advised that the Compliance Services Manager, did On 11/29/95, order the aba~ement of a certain nuisance exlstin9 on the above property prohibited by Ordir:ance 91-.;7, 2er-/lng not,ce thereof upon you, such nuisance being: Prohibited accumulation of non-protected mowable vegetation in excess of 18" in height in a subdivision other than Golden Gate Estates. Weeds over lB". You failed to abate such nuisance; whereupon, it was abated by the expenditure of public funds at a direct cost of $ 45.00 and admJnistrstLve cost cf $200.00 for a total of $ 245.00. Such costs, by Resol,JtJon of th.~ ~oard of County Commissioners of Collier County, ~'iorida, ha'/e been assessed against ~he above property on~0~ 0 3 ~o~ and shall become a lien on the property thirty (30) days after such assess~e:~t. You may request a hearing before the Board of County Commissioners to show cause, if any, why the expensgs and charges incurred by the County unJer this Ordinarice are :~nwdrr0nted or e>:ccsslve or why such expenses sho,~ld not constitute a !ie7~ against the property. Such ~equest for hearing m:~st }De made to the Clerk of the [%oard of County ConuniSSlO~lers, Gove=nment Center, Naples, Elorida 34112 in writing within thirty (30) days ~rom the Cate of this assessment to be valid. CLERK, BOARD OF COUHTY COMMISSIONERS CSce 9- ]/93 16A6 RESOLUTION NO. 98- 434 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROVIDING FOR ASSESSMENT OF LIEN, FOR THE COST OF THE ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ORDIN~lqCE 91-47. WHEREAS, as provided in Ordinance 91-47, the direct costs of abatement of certain nuisances, including prescribed administrative cost incurred by the County, shall be assessed against such property: amd WHEREAS, the cost thereof to the County as to each parcel shall be calculated and reported to the Board of County Commissioners, together with a description of said parcel; and WHEREAS, such assessment shall be a legal, valid and binding obligation upon the property against which made until paid; and WHEREAS, the assessment shall become due and payable thirty {30) days after the mailing o~ Notice of Assessment after which interest shall accrue at a rate o~ twelve percent (12.0%) per annum on any unpaid portion thereof. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the property described as follows, and having been abated of a public nuisance after due and proper notice thereof to the owner of said property, is hereby assessed the followin~ costs of such abatement, to wit: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: I301 Delaware Ave SW Apt H-622 Washington, DC 20024 Lot 1 Block 219 of Marco Beach Unit Seven a Subdivision according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 6 Page 55-62 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. COST $245.00 REFERENCE: 60509-019 ~57~076000] The Clerk of the Board shall mail a notice of assessment of lien to the owner or owners of the above described property, and if such owner fails to pay such assessment within thirty (30) days hereof, a certified copy of this Resolution shall be recorded in the official records of Collier County, to constitute a lien against such property according to law, unless such direction is stayed by this Board upon appeal of the assessment of the owner. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote. ATTEST: DWm ~ . ~ROCKi' CLERK BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 2403998 OR: 2487 PG: 3408 BOARD OF COUNTy COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA LEGAL NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT OF LIEN 16A6 DATE: Sylvia S Miller 1301 Delaware Ave SW Apt N-622 Washington, DC 20024 NOV 0 3 Lq98 REFERENCE 60509-019 ~57680760001 L!EH NDMBER: Lot I Block 219 of Marco Beach Unit Seven a Subdivision according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 6 Page 55-62 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. You, as the owner of the propert7 above described, as recorded in the records maintained by the office of the i~roperty Appraiser, are hereby advised that the Compliance Services Manager, did on 05/21/96, order the abatement of a cortaln nuisance existing on the above property prohibited by Ordinance 91-47, serving notice thereof upon you, such nuisance being: Prohibited accumulation of non-protected mowable vegetation in excess of 18" in height in a subdivision other than Golden Gate Estates. Weeds over 18". YOU failed to abate such nuisance; wheret]pon, it was abated by the expenditure of public funds at a direct cost of $ 45.00 and administrative cost of $200.00 for a total of $ 245.00. Such costs, by Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, ?ior£da, have been assessed against the above property on NOV 0 3 1~98 and shall become a lien on the p:operty thirty (30) days afCe~ such hea~Lng must be made to the C!e~k oE the ~oa~d oE County Commissioners, Government C~nter, bap±e~, Florida 34112 in writing within thirty {30) CLERK, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CSce 9- i/93 MEMORANDUM DATE: NOVEMBER 20, 1998 TO: MAUREEN KENYON/CLERK OF COURTS CC: KATHY/DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE FROM: JULIE BELANGER RE: CASE ~70820-060 FOLIO#56854680002 CLIFF THIELEKE MAUKEEN I AM FORWARDING A COPY OF THE CHI:CK AND RESOLUTION 0/IA/FAX') AS YOU REQUESTED. PLEASE PULL RESOLUTION #98,435 FROM BEING RECORDED. IF YOU }lAVE ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CALL ME AT 403-24ll. 'FHAN~,~ JUI. IE~'A~RT'CODE ENFORCEMENT Jl,klr~a BOAteD OF CO~rNTy COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COD-~TY, ~LORIDA LEGA~ NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT OF LI~N 16A6 Cliff Thieleke 1819 Williammbridge Rd Apt 6C Bronx, NY 104616 REFERZNCE 70820-060 #56854680002 DATE: Nov 0.3 ~ Lot 18, Block 78, Marco Beech, Unit Three, according to the Plat in Plat Book 6, Pages 17 to 24 inclusive, Public Records of Collier County, Florid&. 16A6 A REf;©LUT!ON OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIOMERS PRO'/[DING FOR ASSESSMENT OF LIEN, FOR THE COST OF THE ABATEMEHT OF PUBLIC NUISANCE, If; ACCORDANCE WITH ORDINANCE 9]-47. ~I, rMr.. , m:':n asse~$'~en~ shaB] h. , ie?a], valid -and binding .N_ _~._E_: b F~q;~ L__D. ~_C R_ I_P T I O N: C_O~_T ~EFERENCE: The Clerk of the Board shall mai) a not:ice of assessment of lien ATTEST: ' ' ~" DWIGHT E, BROCK, CLERK BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTy, FI~)RIDA 16A6 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROVIDING FOR ASSESSMENT OF LIEN, FOR THE COST OF THE ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCE, IN ACCORDANCE WIT}{ O.~DIN)LNCE 91 -47, WHEREAS, as provided in Ordinance 91-47, the direct costs of and WHEREAS, s~ch assessment sh,~!l bca legal, '/~]id and binding obligation upon the property against which made until paid; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the property described as follows, and having been abated of a public nuisance after due and proper notice thereof to the owner of said property, is hereby assessed the following costs of such abatement, to wit: NA~E~ LEGAL DESCRIPTION; ~ Dina M Sinning 173 Glendale Dr Mi~u~i Springs, FL 33166 Lot 3 Block 221 of ~4arco Beach Unit FIVE a SuJDdivision according to the Blat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 6, Page 39-46, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florid~. $245.00 REFERZNC_~= 71210-018 #57210200009 DATED: ./ ATTEST: ' D~IGHT E[ BROCK;., CLERK AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: g~-/DAV I D WEIGEL CO~TY ATTORNEY BOABD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CSce i1 - 1/98 2403999 OR: 2487 PG: 3410 BOARD OF COUNT~ CO~4ISSIONERS COLLIER COUNT~, FLORIDA LEGAL NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT OF LIEN 16A6 DATE: Dina M Sinning 173 Glendale Dr Miami Springs, FL 33166 NOV 0 ~ ~8 REFERENCE 71210-018 #57210200009 Lot 3 Block 221 of Marco Beach Unit FIVE a Subdivision according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 6, Page 39-46, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. $200.00 for a t';ta: cf $ 245.00. Such costs, by 16A6 RESOI,UTION NO. 98-&37 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTy COMMISSIONERS PROViDiNG FOR ASSESSMENT OF LIEN, FOR THE COST OF THE ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCE, IN ACCORDANCE W~.~ ORDINANCE 91-47, WHEREAS, as provided in Ordinance 91-47, the direct costs of ab~e-cn_ o~ certain nuisances, including prescribed administrative ccst incurred by the County, shall be assessed against such property; and WHEREAS, 'h~. cost th,'reof to the County as to each parcel shall be calculated ,3n~] :eported to the Board of County ~o~rmlssloners, together J T Gaunt PO Box 757 Clewiston, FL LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 33440 Lot 21, Block 6, Mainline Subdivision of I~okalee, Florida, as recorded Plat Book 1, Page 98, Public Records of Collier County, Florida. $1,940.00 ~FERENCE: 71216-021 #56405840000 This Resolution adopted after motl,~r;, second and majority vote. ATTEST: DW~GHT/E~ ~OCK, 'CLERK AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: / DAVID WEIGEL CODNTY ATTORNEY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS -O~,L~m, COUNTY, FLORIDA 2404000 OR: 2487 PG: 3412 BOARD OF COUNTy COMMISBIONERS COLLIER COUNTX, FLORIDA LEGAL NOTICE OF A~SESSMENT OF LIEN 16A6 DATE: ltO¥ 0 3 ~ J T Gaunt PO Box 757 Clewis ton, FL 33440 recorded Plat Book 1, Page 98, P~lic Records of Collier County, 16A? P. ESOI.UTION NO. 98- t, 38 A RESOI,UTION ESTABI,ISIIIN(; TIlE COI,I,IER ('¢)UNTY CENSUS 2000 COiMPI,ETE COUNT COMMITTEE FOR 'FILE PURPOSE OF PLANNING AND IMPLE,MENTING PROGRAMS TO PROMOTE AND PUBLICIZE TIlE IMPORTANC£ OV CENSUS 2000; TO PROMOTE WIDESPREAD PARTICIPA. TION IN TIlE ¢'ENSUS: AND TO PROCURE A C(')MPI,ETI~; AND ACCISRATE REPORT ON TIlE COMPOSITION OF RESIDEN'IS IN IIOTlI TIlE UNINCORPORATED AND INf'ORP()RA'I'E[) ARI-;AS OF (7¢)I,I,IER ¢;OUNTY. WI tIiRI.AS, 13 U.S(~lalia) I I9')~). pto'.Mcs fllal ow!D, ten {10) years, the Sccrclary of C'omi'ncrce of Ibc !]hi{cd Slates shah take a dcccml~ai ccnst;s Io determine thc popu[atJon in each WH/{REAS. l/;c Federal government considers thc dcccnmnl censuses provided by thc program cstabhshcd by or under [:cdcral law which provides bcncfils In slate or loc;il govcmmcnl's cli~ibilily for. or Ibc amounl of such bcnct]ts. ~oold hc detcmiincd by takillg mnlo NOW, 1HEREFORE, BE 11 RESOI.V[:D BY TIlE [Jf)ARI) OF COUN'fY SECTION ONE: Creation oftlleAd IIoc (;olller ('ounly Census 2000 Complete Count Committee. (;ommissioncrs Ilcrcby establishes ;md crealcs 0lc ad hoc ('~liicr ('rarely Census 2000 C'omplctc Collier Counly. Florida. MI':(fF]ON TWO: Compo,~Jllon of Ihe (:oilier ('ounly Cen~u~ 2¢ 00 Complete Count CommJltee. Members of ~hc ('ensus ('ommittcc shall be permanent residems of (.'oilier Cnunty. Consideration shall bc givcn those persons who Imvc shown an intcrcsl in public affairs. cs~abJishJng Iht membership on the Cen~u~ ('ommillee. r~rcscnt;dion of Ihc full spcclrum of residcm~ of Collier Coumy shall be ~ughL as well as a balanced socioeconomic, c0mic and geographic representation. The Census Commitlee ~hatl consist of fifteen (ltl) members from both ~nco~oratcd and unmcorpor;aed area nf ('oilier Cmmty ~hat arc inw)lvcd with varmus SECTION TIIREE: Appoinlmcnl~, 'I'erm~ of Office. Failure lo Attend SECTION FOUR: Officer!s, Quorum, ('ompensalion. The officers of tile Census ('ommiltec shall be elected by Ihe members of thc Cens;us Committee and shall include a ('haim~an, Vice ('h;firman and Secretary. The presence of eight (g} or more members shall consIilute a quorunl, 'ibc ('cnsus Commiltce shall, by majorily w~tc shall keep a record of meetings, findings, determinations and CCrlStlS protnotional activities. The SECTION FIVE: I,oca/ionofMeeHn~s. All mcelings o£thc Cel~sus Conlmittce shall be p.blic mcclJrlgs. Meetings shall be held in thc Board of County ('ommis~ioner~ Commission Meeting Room located on the third floor of thc Adminislratlon Building at thc C;o~icr County Go~crmncnt ('enter, 3301 East Tamiami 'Frail, Naples, Florida. unless another location is deemed appropriate by thc Chai~an of Iht Census CommJltce, or his designee. Public notice as to date, lime and location of each meeting shall be posted at the Administration Building of the Collier Coumy Government Center. SECTION SI X: Funcftons, Powers and Duties of Ihe Collier County Ctnsus 2000 Complete Counl CommJltee. 'thc functions, powcrs and dulics o[ thc Census Committee shall be ~o promote C'ollJcr County awareness ofCcnsus 2(~)0 and Io rnotivmc all rcsidcms of Ihis community Io pail Jo[pate by filling out thc census questionnaire and rclummg i~ promptly. Thc Ccnsu~ Committee shall develop a I~al targeted plan of action to supporl Census 2000 operations, rcc~ifing, m~d promotion. Thc Census Committee shall a.cmpt m procure dm se~iccs of highly visible and respited local community [ca&rs to increase suppofl for and response to thc census. The Census Commiltcc shall mi[izc local government dc~aflmcnts, paflJcularly lbose agencies with cx~cnsivc public comacls, lo implement ncfivhJcs Ihat will improve census p~icJpalmn by alt rcsidems, cspccially historically undcrcounted segments of the ~pulalion. The Census Committee shall augment media programs, publJcily and promotions conducted by thc Census Bureau, while augm~ting the C~us Bureau's commitment lo co~fidemialhy. ]he Census Commiuec shall make all efforts ncccssa~ to assJsl the Census Bureau with educating Ioca~ residents on programs and aclJvltics provide by thc Census Bureau. 'D~e Census ('ommJllcc shall suppofl the Census Bureau's r~mhmcnt of cmpbyces ucedcd to conduc~ the The Census Committee may organize and create subcommittees lo accomplish ~hc activities outlined ab.vt as lhey deem ncccssa~, BE IT FURTItER RESOI.VED that this Rc~ulion shah be rccordc4 in the minmcs of the Board of County Commissioners. This Rcsolufton was adopted after nmfi~n, sccoml, arul majority vote. A'F£EST~. i ,'~ ~WIGIJT~ E.,BR'OC~.; ~". Clerk Approved as 1o ~onn and ~c~al su~ficlcncy: BOARD OF COtJNTY COMMISSIONERS ('OI,[.IER ('OIJNTY. FI,ORIDA fiAR~ARA B. B'ERR*'Y'~ Chm~.~-' MarjohoOM. Student Assistant County Attorney h:Kay/Rcsolutions 2392667 OR: 2478 PG: 1269 QUITCLAIM DEED lO.SO THIS QUITCLAIM DEED made this i ~ ~ day of ~Y~m~/, 1998, by the Board of Coun~ Commissioners of Collier County, Flodda, GRANTOR and Commun ty Dare opment Corporation of Sterling Oaks, a Flodda Corporation, their successors and assigns~ GRANTEE. WITNESSETH: That the GRANTOR, for and in consideration of Petition VAC 98-022 and the sum of Ten Dollars and other valuable consideration lo it in hand paid by the GRANTEE, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, hereby remises, releases and quitclaims unto GRANTEE forever, all dght, title, interest, claim and demand which the said GRANTOR has in that certain portion of a Drainage Easement interest in, of, and about the follO'.~ng described lands being located in Collier County. Flodda, to-wit: (See Exhibit 'A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reCerence) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the GRANTOR has caused these presents to be executed in its name by the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS acting by the Chairman and Vice Chairman of said Board, the day and year aforesaid DATED: {\-'~ J~X ATTEST: . DWIGHT E, BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BA'~BARA B: ~3ER'J~¥. Ch~irm~ 16 9 PESOLUTIOH A RESOLUTION TO EXTEND THE TERM OF MARCO A. ESPIIIAP TO SERVE ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY HOARD FOR A PERIOD OF TWO MONTHS OR UNTIL A SUCCESSOR HOARD IS CREATED. WBEREAS, Ordinance No. 92-]02, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, established the Environmental Advisory Board, and provides that the Advisory Board shall consist of seven (7) members; and WHEREAS, the terms of two members expired on September 30, 1998, and there was one (1) resignation thereby causing a total of three (3) vacancies on this Board; and WHEREAS, one of the two members whose term ezpired has not exceeded the term limit established by Ordinance !lo. 86-41, as amended; anc WHEREAS, on August 4, 1998, the Board of County Commissioners approved staff's recommendation to consolidate the Environmental Advisory Board and the Environmental Policy Technical Advisory Board into a single board; and WHEREAS, the Environmental Advisory Board will continue to meet WHEREAS, there may ~rlse schedidlir~g and/or other conflicts which could prevent some of tn,~ remaining four {4) members, whose terms have not expired, from attending the scheduled meetings, thereby causing a !ack of quorum; and NOW, THEREFORE BE iT RESOLVED, BY THE BOARD OF County COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER County, FLORIDA, that: -1- 16A9 ': 2, The term of Marco A. Espinar is hereby extended for a period of two months; said term, to expire on December 31, 1998, or until a new board is established. This Pesolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote. Done ~h.~ . - day of 0n'~ __, 1998. · ATTEST :. DWIGHT~E ~ ~BR~OCK Clerk A~oroved,,~s.,to Form and L.d?~a 1 ,s~fficiency: BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT FOR SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS PRIOR TO RECORDING OF PI.AT 16A12 Tf,S CONSTRUCT OS AND .', A,,'TENANCE AGREr, ,E T fOR SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS PRIOR TO RECORDING OF PLAT AGREEMENT entered in'° this~(~ day of'~{~ 1998 between Coast Communilie, Corporation. a Florida Corporation, herelna~er referred to as "Developer", and the Board of County Commiss~oners of Collier County, Florida, hereina~er referred lo as lhe "Board" t Developer h~s, s~muhanco~sfy ~i[h the dei~vcO' of ~Ns A~rcerncnL appl}cd for ~l~e appro~ a[ by the Board ora ce~ain p[a~ ora subd~vislon ~o bc known as 2. Division 3 2 of the Collier County Land Developmem Code allows the Developer to constpact Ihe improvements required by said subdisision regulations prior lo recording final plat NOW, THEREFORE. in consideration of the Foregoing premised and mutual covenants hereina~er set forth, Developer and the Board do hereby covenant and agree as follows: Landscaping within 36 monfl~s from the date of approval of said subdivision pla~, said improvement herebla~er referred Io as the required improvemenls 2 Developer herewJlh agrees ~o conslrucl snid Jmprovemenls prior to recording said subdivision plaJ and the Board of Counly Commissioners shall not approve the plat For recording until said improvements have been comple:ed 16A12 Upon completion of said improvcmenls, the Developer shall tender its subdivision performance security in the amount of $116.028 95 which represents ten percent (10%) of Ihe Iolal contract cost to complele construction Upon receipt of said subdivision performance security by lhe Development Services Direclor. the Developer may request the Board o£Coumy Commissioner5 to approve the subdivision plat for recording and grant preliminary approval ofsald plat The required impro'.'cn~cnts shall not be considered complete until a statement of substantial completion by Developer's engineer along with the final projccl records have been furnished to be revlev..ed and approved by ~he Development Services Direclor for compliance ~ith tile Collier County l.and l)c'.clopmcnt (]ode The Development Ser¥ices Director shall within sixty days of receipt of thc statement of substantial completion, either: a) noilly the De;eloper in ;vrhing of his preliminary approval of the impro'.'ements; or b) notify the I)c'.'clopcr in wr{ting oFhis reprisal to approve thc improvements, therev, ith specifying those conditions which II,e Developer must fulfill in order to obtain thc Director's approval of Ibc imprt~vemenls floweret, in no event shall tile Development Sen'ices Director refuse preliminary approval of the improvements if they are in fact constructed and submitted for appro;'al in accordance ;vhh Ihe requirements of Ibis A~recmcnl lhe Dc'.elopcr shaU maintain ail required ilnprt~'.enlents F~r ,~ mini;tltlm period of one )'ear after preliminary approved by the Dev¢lopmenI Services Director After the one year maintenance period by the Developer has terminated, fl~e Developer shall petition the Developnqcnt Services Director Io inspect the required improvements. The Development Scr¥ices Director or his designee sha~i inspect the improvements and. if found to be still in 18A12 compliance with Ihe Collicr County [.and Development Code as reflected by final approval by thc Board, The Board shall release the 10% subdivision performancc security The Developer's rcsponslblbty {'or maintenance of' thc required improvements shall continue unless or until the Board accepts maintenance responslbi[ily (or the Counly. ? In thc event the Developer shall fall or neglect to fulfill its obligations under this Agrccmcnl. upon cerlification of such Failure. tile Counly Achninistrator may call upon the subdlvi~ion performance sccurhy to secure satisfactory completion, repair and maintenance of thc required improvements The Board shall }lave tile right to construct and maintain, or cause to be constructed and maintained, pursuant to public advertisement principal tinder the subdivision pcrR~rmance secunt.',, shall be liable [o pay and Io indemnify Ibc Board, upon completion of such conslruclion, thc final total cost lo the Board therco( including, hut nol limited lo. engineering, legal and contingent costs, togcthcr x*.'i{l~ any damages, riff}er direct or consequential, which thc Board may suslain on account of the failure of Ibc I)cveloper Io fulfill all of tile pro;'islon~ of this Agreement thc Developer and respective successors and assigns oPdae Developer 16A12 IN WITNESS WIIF. REOF, thc Board and thc [)cvclopcr have caused this Agrcemcnt ~obc .... )CD- day of [ ~(_~/~j~_ 1998 execulcd by their duly authorized rcprescnlatr.'es this,_- ~ , Signed· scalcd and delivered in lhe presence o£ Prinlcd Name DEVF4.OPF. R Coas! Communldcs Corporation, A I:lor~da Corporallon ~"rc~dcnl Wilncss Prhlled Namc ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CI.F. RK &,'.. :' ~y.;,, Deputy Clerk n~rov~d as, to form and Icg~( su~icncy: David C V,'eigel Collier Counly A~lorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLI.IER COUNTY, FLORIDA ('halrm:ln 16A12 R 26E GOLDEF GATE CITY~ 2 VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE November 5, 1998 Marla Ramsey, Director Parks and ~ecreati©n Departmen% Ellie Hoffman, Depusy Clerk Agreement Including Amendlnq Cocohatchee River Marina Concession Agreement Enclosed for your use, please find one original document as referenced above, Agenda Item ~16C2, approved by the Board Of County Commissioners on November 3, 1998. I have forwarded one original to Finance and one original is being retained for the record, If you should have any questions, please contact me at: (8406), Thank you. Enclosure 16C AGREEMENT. INCLUDING AMENDING COCOIIATCHEE RIVER MARINA CONCESSION AGREEMENT Thc cffccti;c date of this Agrccmcnl is October 20, 1998, As a result of six separate meetings between March 19. 1998 and October 6, 1998, bctv,'ccn the County, representatives of Fish Finders. lnc,. and/or representatives of the Vandcrbill Beach Flotilla, Inc.. it is agreed by Collicr County. Florida, and Fish Finders Inc., ,&no/a/ Cocohatchee River Marina (CRM), as FOUR BOAT SLIPS NOT AVAILABLE FOR [;SE BY MARINA. ia). ()ti November 10. 1992, Collier County entered into a ten year Ica.sc with thc Vandcrbih [leach Flotilla, Inc.. to lease to the Flotilla "two assigned boat dock spaces". Nowhere in thc )casc (or elsewhere to the best of everyone's knowledge) is it specified the precise geographic area that comprises Ibos¢ tv,'o boat spaces. On May 20, 1997, the County cntcrcd into a Concession Agrccmcm v,'ith Fish Finders Inc.. d,no/a,/Cocohatchee River Marina (CRM). which Concession Agreement licensed to CRM thc' area therein called the "Cocohatchcc River boat slips, docks, concession building and parking area" CRM, nol knowing of thc Flotdta Leas2 at thc time of signing ~he Agreement. believed that CRM was being licensed to usc thc Flotilla's i,,~o assigned boat dock spaces Those two assigned slips are designated as slips #4 and e3 on Exhibit "A" auached hereto, Because they ','.'crc already leased to thc Flotilla, thc County had rl,~ retention of Ifccnsing those t'~,.o boat dock spaces to CRM. During the nogs[ia[ions for ~hc Concession Agrecmcnl and up until that Agreement was excculed by both panics, only Iv;o of t}~e Flotilla's boats v, crc docked at thc mahna, occupying those two assigned boat sIips. Subsequent to that date, thc Flotilla has moored additional boats at Ihe Marina slips #6 and ~51 and }las not paid CRM or the Counly an.,,' additional money for any such additional boat spaces. lb). CRM has no rights lo thc Flotilla's t;vo assigned boat dock spaces, the same bcmg designated as Mips #4 and ti3 on Exhibit "A" altachcd hereto. "Tv, o boat dock spaces" ;ts used in linc Flotilla l.casc cannot reasonably he greater in arcs than as slips a3 and #4 are depicted oil Exhibit "A' As used in said Lease, the intern of thc words *'two assigned boat dock spaces" meant the same as "space for two boats" or "Iv,'o boal slips." (c). Under its Lease. thc Flotilla has leaschokt rights to occupy only its original two assigned boal dock spaces (slips), (slips #4 and g3 on Exhibit "A"). However, CRM borcby relinquishes lo thc Flotilla CRM's rights to a third and a fourth dock slip and CRM hereby agrees that the Flotilla is authorized to occupy those two (2) addilional boat slips with its boats for the duration of the Flotilla Lea~e. The two additional boat slips are shown on the attached Exhibit "A' as slips ~2 and #I. The Flotilla docs not have to pay CRM or thc County additional rent For such use of either of those two slips (#1 and #2). (d). CRM and/or the County shall notify thc Flotilla to vacate all dock spaces being occupied by thc Flotilla except for slips #1. #2, #3 and #4. If thc Flotilla requests to CRM to occupy boat dock space in addition to Ihose four boat spaces, the Flotilla will have to come Io an 16C2 agreement with CRM. CR.M '*'.'ill cooperate '.~.lth thc Floflla anti '*.ill rent In Ibc Flotilla additional dock space al a market slip rental rate then bc. ing paid by others for substantially similar slips, and possibly at a lesser rental rate. 2. FLORIDA STATE TAXES PAYABLE BY CRM. CRM will hcrcafier pay to thc County only Subseclion 212.031(I)(a)(10)(c)./:.S. 'Tand Use License Taxes." which taxes arc based on a percentage of the land use license fees paid monthly by CRM Io the County. CRM '¢.'ill pay all other Florida taxes directly lo thc Stale Department of Revenue. which taxes include Section 21205. FS. general retail sales taxes (now 6°/.,L plus Purl 11 of Chapter 212. F.¥. fi~cl taxestnow 6%1 tcxcc-pting only fuel taxes paid b? ('RM's directly to its fuel suppliers), plus Subsection 213.03(6). F.5'. taxes on thc dock space rcm receipts pa/d lo ('RM (now 6%) ']'his entire paragraph 2 amends Arlicle 13 of thc Concession Agreement 3 EXEMPTIONS [:ROM LAND USE LICENSE TAXES. Some heretofore unquantified portion of the total land area being licensed by the County to CRM is exempt from said Florida l.and Usc License 'Faxes. The Count...' and CRM have mutually agreed on thc square footage of total land area that comprises thc "boat slips, docks, concession building and parking areas" being licensed to CRM. which is depicted on Exhibit "B". attached hereto. CRM asserts lo the County that CRM and the Florida Dcpartmcnl of Revenue have come Io an agrecmcnl with regard to CRM's l.and Usc l.icense Tax exemptions, resulting in a conclusive determination of thc legally correct elTcctivc tax rate CRM ;'.'ill hereafter remit these I.and Usc License 'Faxes to thc County cacb month concurrently whh each land usc liccnsc fees paytnent. 4. I.ICENSE FEES. The County acknowledges receipt of all fees that had been withheld from Ibc County by CRM as of March 18. 1998. Wilhholding or delaying any such payments to the County violates the Concession Agreement. CRM shall not withhold or delay any further payments, but will promptly remit each payment to the County. including monies, if any. paid "under protest" in '¢.hich event CRM shall specify exactly what CRM is protesting unless Ihose payments arc then being withheld pursuant to prior appro..'al ora court of la'c.. 5 RECO(..LS.IJAf.,L~7~~.5 AND ACCORD AND SATISFACTION. Ibc Corral.', ackno~',lcdges that tim two additional Nmi slips (u 6 and #5) that have been used by tile Flotilla v. erc assumed hy (RM to he boat spaces ~dfich CRM }lad the right lo lease and through such leases, generate rc..enucs. Because boal spaces ti6 and #5 have not been available to CRYi to rent to olhers. CRM ha.s lost monlhly ~cvcnucs. [:or such lost revenues, the Count}.. hy this agreement, grants to CRM a credit of FIFTEEN THOUSAND EIGHT-ItUNDRED DOLl. ARS ~5!5.8OO}. ']'his credit shall be deducted from CRM's November license fees paymcnl Io the County and shall continue by deduction from ftnure fcc paymems unlit zeroed out .'"his S 15.8(g) credit constitutes a full accord and salh. faction 6 REDUCED YlONTilLY LICENSE FEES PAYAB -- · C ' J)2:~ CILM CRM ;',ill hereafter pa,',' 1o the ('ounly license fees of S3.900 or [0% of CRM's gross rc;'enucs, whichc'.er is greater. This is a reduction from the former license fcc minimum of $4.200 per monlh or I(P/o. whichever ..'.as greater Ibis recognizes that CRM is relinquishing boat spaces rtl and ,2 to thc Ftoldla. 1602 7. AMENDMENT TO CONCESSION AGREEMENT. This Agreement (with hs Exhibits "A" and "B") amends the Concession Agreement to thc extent inconsistencies may exist between this Agreement and the Concession Agreement. Dated: October 20. 1998 WITNESS C-orpor~e gcc,..l,a'y -- D fiGHT E. BROCK, Clerk .% .. ~¢A: '~ -.. Deputy Clerk- Approved as lo found legal sufficlcncy Thomas C. Palmer, Assistant County Attomcy (L. S.) BOARD OF COUNTY COMYIISSIONERS, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 16C2 II , ii 16C2 160t ~OR.~ ~;ovember 5, i99~ Date: To: Ken ?ineau, Director Emergency ~<anagement Department From: Eilie Hoffman, Deputy Clerk ~4inutes & Records Department Re: }.Iemorandum of Understanding by and Between the Civil Air Patrol, inc., by the Florida Wing and Collier Co:3nty Board of County Co,~un, issioners Enclosed for your use, please find two original documents as mentioned above, Agenda Item #16D1, approved by the Board of County Com.missioners on ~ovember 3, 199~. If you should have any questions, please contact me at: 774-8406. Thank you. Enclosures 16B1 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BY AND BETWEEN THE CIVIL AIR PATROL, INC., BY THE FLORIDA WING AND COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 1 ?_u_r~pose_. Yhe purpose o[ this Memorandunl of Understanding (MOU) is to set foflh, define and establish mutual agreements, understandings and obligations by and between Ihe Collier County Board of County Commissioners. and the Florida Wing of Ihe Civil Air Palrol, Inc, (CAP) 2 T_be__C_i_~fil_.A_!_r_p_a~trot,!n_c, lhe FIorida Wing of the Civil Air Patrol isa subordinate unit of CAP. a federally chadered corporation under title 36, United Stales Code. Sections 201-208, and Ihe volunteer civilian auxiliary of Ihe United States Air ForcefUSAF) One of CAP's principal functions islo assist stale and local governmenls *n responses to nalural disasters and olher emergencies CAP's ability to generate quickly and organize large numbers of highly trained and motivated volunteers v,,ilh ready access to up-to-date equipmenl results in extremely cost effective suppod to government agencies The Collier County Board of Coun~ Commissioners. The Collier County Board of Commissioners through the Emergency Services Division, provides coordination of emergency services within the Counly. including the seleclion and utilization of various resources and orgamzations capable of rendering Air_E_or_c_e. A_u_th_o~ri_zed_C_A_E M.i_s._s. ions_¢or C_ol_[ier__Cqu+n_ty¢ The Florida Wing of the CAP agrees to provide Collier County with volunleer personnel, eqaipment and olhnr resources at ils dispnsnl to assist Collier County respond to Ihe following types of emergencies: Air and Ground Search and Rescue (SAR) Operations. (1) When CAP assistance for search and rescue operations is needed. the Emergency Services Director, or his/her designated agent, shall immedialely contact the US Air Force Rescue Coordination Center (AFRCC) at 1~800-851-3051, or DSN 574-8119. and request Air Force reimbursed mission authorization for the CAP, Florida Wing to initiate emergency suppod operations. AFRCC may issue Air Force mission numbers in support of life saving effods, only when Ihe Collier County Board of Counly Commissioners has no other adequate resources readily available (2) In the event Air Force authorilies are not able to grant Air Force assigned reimbursed mission authorization, the Florida Wing may nevertheless conduct SAR operations as an Air Force assigned non- reimbursed mission, if so requesled by Ihe Collier County Board of County Commissioners Paragraph 7 of this MOU provides guidance 1 1601 regarding Board of County Commissioners reimbursement to CAP when an Air Force assigned non-reir'nbursable mission is requested b. Disaster Relict (DR) Operations. (1) When Florida Wing assislance is desired in major disasters, the (]oilier Courtly 13~,ard of County Commissioners should immedialely conlact the Air Force NalionaJ Security Preparedeoss (AFNSEP) duly officer, et 1-800-366-005 I, or DSN 367-4342. [o request Air Force assrgned reimbursed mission au~horizalion for [he Florida Wing to *niliate emergency response operations AFNSEP may grant such authorization in "irnminenlly serious" situations requiring immediale action in order lo save human lives, prevent human su~ering, and/or mitigale great property damage, or in "Presidential Declared" disasters A verbal request for CAP disasler relief assislance musl be followed as soon as possible by a wdt[en request to AFNSEP i, a nalural disasler which has nol been deemed 'imminenfly serious" or "Presidential Declared". and for which Ihe Air Force is not able to grant Air Force assigned reimbursed mission authorization, the Florida Wing may nevertheless perform disaster relief operations when requested by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners as an Air Force assigned non-reimbursed mission (3) Ho(il the Florida W*ng and Collier (;otJnty t3oard of County Commissim~ers agree to mainlain conflnual and effective liaison with Ihe Air Force Emergency Pfeparedoess Liaison Officer (EPLO) assigned ID Florida's Adiutan[ General's Office and with lhe CAP liaison officer assigned to Ihe Florida W~ng in order to ensure Ihe training necessary for effective CAP participation in dJsasler relief ('hiss*ohs is made available ID. and is fully utilized by. both the Florida Wing and the Collier Counly Board of County Commissioners c. Other authorized Florida Wing Missions (Non-Air Force Reimbursed) (1) Environmental Protection Operations. The Florida Wing may assisl the Collier County Board of County Commissioners through appropriale County agencies.. Departments and offices, and appropriate federal agencies. Io respond to environmental disasters In addition, at the request of the Collier County Board of Counly Commissioners or federal agencies, the Florida Wing may conduct environmenlal surveys of rivers, forests, lakes and/or wildlife. (2) Organ and Tissue Transportation Operations. Al the request of the Collier County Board of Couniy Commissioners, the Florida Wing may fly missions to transport human organs and/or lissue, including organs, bone marrow, blood and serum, as humanitarian missions. Such missions shall only be conducted by CAP in silualions where 2 aflernative commercial means of transpoHalion are not capable at satisfying Ihe underlying requirement necessitating the organ/tissue transportation requesl (3) Aerial Reconnaissance. At Ihe request of the Collier Counly Board of County Commissioners, the Florida Wiung may conduct aerial reconnaissance at ground condilions and surface traffic. CAP members may not, however, engage in surveillance or olher law or~/orcerT]ent ~c flvilies (4) Transportation of Emergency Equipment and Supplies. At the request of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners, the Florida Wing may provide light air and ground Iranspod of medical supplies, personnel, shelters, etc. in response to a slate or Collier County emergency TransPortation of Collier County. Officials and Other Non-CAP Members. The Florida Wing may carry Collier Counly officials as passengers on CAP mrcraft as authorized by CAPR 60-1. Pre-approval to carry any other non- CAP passenger aboard a CAP flight must be obtained from HQ CAP- USAt:/XO anrfl ttO CAP/DO 6 C_omm___a_nd q~d__Co_n.~[o_l: Irnmediale command and control over all CAP MOU. shatl rest w,U~ lhe CAP al all times Any palty to this MOU any time and for any reason, to include but nol bo limiled to, unsafe operating conditions All CAP operations conducted pursuaol to this MOU shall be conducled in accordance with applicable CAP direclives 7. Reimbursement. It the Air Force authorizos a reimbursed mission. the Florida Wing shall not seek any addilional reimbursement from lhe Collier County Board of County Commissioners. For non- reimbursed missions, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners agrees to pay fifty dollars ($5000) for each hour flown in support of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners operations to cover the cost at Ihe CAP operations 8. Air Force Assigned Missions, ApprovalotthisMOUbylheCAP.USAF Commander serves lo confer Air Force assigned (reimbursed or non- reimbursed) mission status upon missions listed in paragraph 4, above Air Force assigned mission status serves to confer Federal Tort Claims Act fFTCA), and Federal Employees CompensaUon Act (FECA) coverage on eligible CAP members FTCAand FECA coverage applies both to Air Force assigned reirnbursable missfons and Air Force assigned non-reimbursable missions 16D1 16D1 9. Corporate Missions, Any CAP mission not approved by HQ CAP-USAF either directly, or through this MOU, is considered a "Corporate Mission". All such 'Corporate Missions" authorized by this MOU shall be listed and described separately at Attachment A to this MOU CAP "Corporate Missions' are not covered by either the FTCA or the FECA CAP's aviation and general liability insurance policies cover CAP "Corporate Missions" 10. Effective Date. This Memorandum of Understanding is not effective unless approved by HQ CAP and HQ CAP-USAF. It must be signed by an authorized representative of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners and shall remain in effect for three (3) years from its effective date, It may be extended for additional three year periods with the approval of the Florida V~ng and the Collier County Board of County Commissioners, Any party may terminate this Agreement by sending a sixty (60) day advance writlen notice of termination, signed by its designated representative, to the designated representatives of each of the others signatories, IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Memorandum of Understanding on the dates indicated below. For the Collier County, Florida Board of County Commissioners: Chairman Date: I t - ~ %. CAP ~Headquaders E~e~ecio~. CAP Date: ~ ~ ~ For the Florida W)ng. Civil Air Patrol: Andrew E. Skiba. Colonel Commander Date: ~ 2'~M cfc CAP-USAF (Name) Commander, CAP-USAF Date: ATTEST: Dwight E. Brock, Clerk I Deputy Clerk App,:eyed as to legal form and suf fici~r~cy Thdma~ C. Dalmer Assistant County Attorney 4 16D1 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BY AND BETWEEN THE CIVIL AIR PATROL, INC. BY THE FLORIDA WING AND COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTACHMENT A Ail missions are described andau{borizedintbisMOU. Tbereareno "Corporate Misslorts". SCHEDULE A REIMBURSEMENT FOR CIVIL AIR PATROL SUPPORT FUEL AND OIL: Th County agrees to pay the actual cost of the fuel and oil ~onsurned for i'Ve mission. The originai fuel receipt must be presented for payment. The average fuel consumption by type aircraft is: CESSNA 172 - 8 gallons per hour CESSNA 172XP . g gallons per hour CESSNA 182 - 13.5 gallons per hour MAINTENANCE: Maintenance costs will be calculated at a maximum established figure of $85 for each hour flown in support of Collier County Emergency operations. The County agrees that, if a change in the maintenance cost to the CAP occurs, the amount of reimbursement w~l be ~ncreased/decreased effective of the dale of notification of such change by the Florida Wing Commander (or designee). BOARD OF COUNI'Y CDMMISSIONERS MISCELI.ANEOI$S CORRESPONDENCI5 NOVI(MIIER 3. 1998 of ('nuns: Submillcd fi~r public record, pursuanl 1o Florida Slalul~s. Chapter >( ] }, IBc disbursements fi~r Ihe Board of ('o n y (' ~mmissioncrs for ho per o : Ocl~bcr 5 - 9. 1998 IlcaJth Planning Council oJ' Soulhw~.M I:]orida. Inc. J. Quant'fly Rc~ of Program Activltics - District fl/guag¢r Ending ficplcmbcr 30. lggfl Norlh Naples Fire ('onlrol & Rescue Districl Resolution csk~bHshing thc millage rare fi~r Fiscal Year 1998-1999 2 Budget fi~r Fiscal 1998-1999 I ('c~ification of lands within SFWNID boundaries SFWMD Resolution No. 98-93 - Tax Ratcs/Ccnificatkm of levy fiFWMD R¢.solulion No. 98-95 - Budget fi;r Fiscal Year 1998-99 he [.akc Trafford Restoration Task [:oreo' M,:cting Agenda ~ffOctober 2. 1998 and Minutes oJ Scptcmbcr,l. 199g Airport Auflmrib Agenda of October 12. ! 998 and Minutes of September 2 I. 1998 Plannln~ Commission Agenda of Octubcr I. 1998 and Minutes of September 3. 1908 Planning Commission Agenda of October 15. 1998 and Minutes of September 17, 1998 AGENDA iTEM NOV 03 19B8 A. (. D. Environmental Ad;'isory Board - Minutes oFScptcmbcr 2. 1998 and Agcnda October 7. 1()gg Golden (Jalc l)caudficalion Advisory £'ommillcc ,",linulcs of Scplcmber 8, 199g and Agenda of¢)ctober 13. 1008 Golden ¢}a1¢ Eslat¢'; [,and Trusl ('ommiucc Minulcs .£ Augu~.t 24. Iggg G. I,ibrao' Ad,.isoor Board Regular Session Minules of June 24. 1998; ,Annual Meeting Minules of June 24. I~)¢1§ and Dircclor's Report or'September 15. 1998 t I, Och,pce Fire ('.ntmt District AdvisoO' Board Meeting Minutes o1' June I. 199g Pelican Ba.', 3.15 [ BI,: Ad,.'ison,' Committee Agenda of October 7. 1998 and Meeling Minules of September 2. 1998 Radio Road I~eautificafion Ad'.isory Commiltee Agenda of Oclobcrr 2. 1908 and Meeting Minules o£Seplcmbcr 14. 1998 K. ~3, alcr and Was c:'.a er Auth Idb Minutes oF Meedng of August 24. 199g AGEN~A~ T~M No. If.~ NOV 03 1998 P~. ltl 12'199g RWB Mi~. Corre~ Copies To: BCC PAYROLL MANUAL WARRANT LOG 16Gl 10/5~98 Mark Holmes 523 37 194215 OvedJme Hours 1015/98 Mark Kennedy 30764 194216 Overlime Hours BCC VENDOR MANUAL WARP, ANT LOG DATE NAME 10/5/98 WEFTEC '98 I 0,'5/98 Hampton Inn 1016/98 Dwight E Brock. Clerk AMOUNT 280.00 69.75 2,750.00 419,472.66 168,801,71 468818 468819 468820 468821 469317 Seminar - M, Thampi Hotel - M. Thampi Final Judgement Voucher Water Treatmen[ Plant HEALTH PLANNING COUNCIL OF SC)UTHWEST FLORIDA, INC. TO: FROM: MEMORANDUM Barbara Berry, Chairman Collier Board of County Commissioners H~ncock Constant ine L~~ Mis~. Corr~ Date; / f~ Mary W. Schulthess, Executive Director Health Planning Council of Southwest Florida, la~ ~ / DATE: October 1, 1998 SUBJECT: QuarteHy Report of Program Activities District 8/Quarter Ending September 30, 1998 Copi~ To: The attached report of program activities for the three month period ending September 30, 1998, represents a broad description of the continuing efforts of the Health Planning Council of Southwest Flodda to meet its contractual requirements with the FIodda Department of Health. We are providing you with a copy to enhance awareness of your local health council. Please feel free to share this report with your fellow commissioners. Should you have any further suggestions or questions regarding this report or the council's activities, please contact me at the council office. 9250 COLLEGE PARKWAY SUITE 3 FORT MYERS, FL 33919 (941) 433-6700 SUNCOM 731-6700 FAX (941) 433,4703 16Gl , 1441 PINE RIDGE ROAD ' NAPLES, FLOR[DA (941 ) 597-3222 Fax (941) 597-7082 September 24, 199R Board of County Co~missJonets 3301Tamiami Trial East Building F Naples, FL 34112 Dear County Commissioners: Enclosed p]ease find a copy of the original resolution adopted by the Board of Fire Commissioners establishing the final millage rate for the District for fiscal year 1998-1999. Also, enclosed is a copy Of the fina] budget adopted by the Board of Fire Commissioners for fiscal year ]998-1999. Sincerely, NORTH NAPLES FIRE CONTROL & RESCUE DISTRICT Lisa $tefani Executive Assistant Chief James W. Tobin RESOLUTION 9 -oo 1 6 G 1 WHEREAS, NORTH NAPLES FIBRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT, established pursuant to Chapter 6i-2032, F.S., as ~Lmended, held a meeting to establish the millage ra~e tc be ie-:ie~ for providing fire protection services to the distric% as required under Chapter 200, Florida St~%utes~ ':fHE9EAS, Section 200.]{5, Florida Statutes recuires disclosure of the ~ercenBage by ',.:hich the m~!!a~e rate %o he ie':ied 'ezceeds the rolled back rate, and the 'Board ha-:i~ determiued that the millage rate %o be levied exceeds the rolled back ra%e by ~.91%, .... ~ ........ BE i'~ ~ESCq, VED, cn motion m~de '" ~ and seconded by r~/Cb~C/ S: , the ~ARD OF FIRE COlmZ icc T~''-- ~ Of . ......... nrc ~RTH ~LES FI~ CO~L ~ ~S~ DIS~CT, in confo~ity ~,l~..~rthe =~..~ =~ .... = -~=.~.,~, 5ces hereby ie'.7 a tax cf one ~1.000) mill per 51,0u~.0C: cf assessed va?:e on lands ~n the district for providing fire protec%icn services to the ~istrict; and be it FUPiHE~ ?ESCL':EE, fha% the Roard of Fire Ccrmissioners adopts the levy of one ~i.,C .... ~ ~ · .~, ml;; .~. ~roviding fire services for the year 1998-1999 beginning Cctsber is%, :99% and ending Septe~er 30, 1999; and be ~t for. ., ir. Dac%~.~_ ~.fees Cf 5.15 ~er square foci cf defined living area on residential industrial s ........ ~ - ~ ....... e= ~ cafined; and be ~' FUR/HER RESSL'.'ED, :ha5 a cody of this resolution and a copy of the adopted budge[ be de!~';ere5 %0 the Board of County Co~issioners cf Collier County, Fist!da, an~ tc the Comptroller cf the State of Florida. Duly ~a~sed in S~ecial Session this 23 _.. day of SEPTE/~BER, NORTH NAPLES FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT NORTH NAPLES FI~E CONTROL AND RESCu= DISTRICT OPE~ATIN~ BUDGET CAPITAL LM~ROVEMENT BUDGET I~ACT FEE BUDGET FIRE B~fDRANT BUDGET FIRE CODE OFFICIAL BUDGET 1998 - 1999 16Gl OP EP. ATIN~ BUDGET CAPITAL IMPROVE~ENT BUDGET IMPACT ~=~ ~UmGET FIRE HYDRANT BUDGET FIRE COD~ OP?ICIAL BD~ET 1998 - 1999 Board of Fire Commissioners North NaDles Fire Control & Rescue District BOARD OF FIRE C0~4ISSIONERS Ed Maguire, Chairman Steve Milligan, Treasurer Ed Messer, Secretary DISTRICT OFFICERS James W. Tobin, Chief Kenneth W. Rodgers, Assistant Chief BOA~D OF FI~E CO~g~ISSIO~RS NORTH NAPLES FIP. E CONTROL AND RESCU~ DISTRICT DescriDtion Pace Overvlew i Sun.nary Page 4 Income Detail Ad Va!crem 'ia:.: Fe'/enue 6 Interest 6 Inspection Fees 7 Other income 8 recap cf income 8 Expense Detail Staff Salaries and Benefits 9 Commissioners Salaries 9 Recap of Salary information 11 Compensation and Benefit Costs 12 F. mployee Welfare Benefit Program 14 Sick 'rime Liability 14 ','acaticn Comp 14 ~p]oyee Fh}'sic~is 15 cffice Supplies 15 Office Equipment 16 £ubscri~tions & Dues 17 Additional Fees 18 Administrative Training 20 Lperatlons Uniforms 21 Protect:','e Gear 22 New '/ehicles 22 Building Repair ~ Maintenance 23 Equipment Repair & Maintenance 29 Station Supplies 30 Telephone 31 Utilities 31 Vehicle Fuel & Oil 32 Vehicle Repair & Maintenance 32 Medical Equipment 32 Fire Equipment 33 Training 34 Fire Prevention Educational Material 35 F~re Prevention Training 36 Public Information officer 37 Special Te~ms 37 MOU Training 37 Capital Improvement Budge% 38 impact Fee Budget 39 Fire Hydrant Budget 40 Fire Code official Budg'et 41 ii 16Gl Dear Ccm.~issicners: Submitted to ~ou for )'our consideration is the 199R/1999 North Nap]es Fire Control & ~escue District's Budoet. The budget is based cn 95k of our ad valorem ta):es that h~ve been estimated by ~,~ier County Appraiser's Office, plus interest, inspect]on fees, and other income for a t~ta] operating budget of $~,64~,(~37.00. This represents a S3tl,O00.OO or 5.2% increase over last year's budget. You will also find in this budget a cash reserve of $900,000.00. This is a balanced budget based line items that you have before )'cu. The District bas saved S129, I15.00 by participating in the Chapter i75 and Drop ~ension plans, and continues to do well in You ?/ill also find enclosed a Capital Improvement budget of S302,~50.00 for ~'cur consideration. This budget has been established to give a better understanding of how the funds are budgeted for new vehicles out of the operational budget, this year new vehicles are being budgeted for in the Capital 16Gl qhis budget in,glumes repairs that are needed for two of the Department's e....s.inc stations one on Pine Ridge Road, and the other in Pelican Bay. Station 40 on Pine Ridge Road is in need cf a new roof, inside painting, and a new air conditioning unit. ~.a~:on ]n Pelican Bay ~s in need of painting inside of the stat!ch. Shere i! included the purchase of two new vehicles, one for fire p~eventlon and one for ' ' over ten ','ears cid, training. The vehicles now being used are · ~oos~er line hose will enable our fire fighters · · c~ the road that can not be reached by brush The phone tree is needed to alert the Corrmaunity Emergency Response Tea.- in the event of an emergency, and the new pagers are for spec~.al . ~- cf an emerqenct,' ,.e~., .-,embers so that they may be alerted in case The fire rescue baat is needed to meet our ex~sting and expanding ].5 ml!~,on, for a tctai of $3,700,000.00 In addition to the ~- impact bucuet of S3,700,(i00.00. The 2.~ ril]jcn dollars budgeted for Stations 45 & 46 is an estimate which includes all building needs, office equipment and The ~'^'c rescue squafs ','.'ere approved in last year's budget but will not be received until November, 1998. Therefore, this item was brought forward In the 1998,'1999 budget. 2 16Gl ; A new pumper tanker will carry 1500 gallons of water needed to meet the requirements of cur District where there is a lack of hydrants, in particular, ?~ne Ridge Road, Oaks Boulevard, and bi¥ingston Road. We feel this pumper tanker can meet our water needs and act as a back up and reserve for our front line apparatus. The Departmen5 has also requested a brush truck as the two currently oiled by the Department are over thirty years old. This truck will be a smaller, mere maneuverable vehicle that w~il act Es a quick attack unit in our growing District where houses and preserved land exists. The technical rescue vehicle wi]] bo used to carry our Haz ;4at and technical rescue equipment to meet cur ever growing I want to take this opportunity to thank ali of the staff, especially Lisa, for the hard work the}, put into this budge~ and we are excited that the budget is only increased by 5.2% wi=., the addition cf two ne'~: stations and additional ne>.' personnel being added to the department· James W. Fire Chief 3 BAL~4CE FORWAi~D Income Ad Valorem Tax Revenue interest Inspection Fees Other income TOTAL FIIN-DS AVAIL3tBLE: Expense Staff Salaries & Benefits Employee Sa]aries Commissioner Salaries Prepay Holiday Overtime Compensation & Benefit Costs .~np]oyee Benefit Program Sick Time Liability Vacation Comp Short/Long form Total Salaries & Benefit Costs: A~ministrative Employee phvsica]s Insurance Office Supplies Office Equipment Subscriptions & Dues Professional and Account/n% Special Assessors Fee Election Fees Contingency Impact Fee Collection Miscellaneous A~ministrative Travel Total Administrative Costs: Operations Uniforms New Vehicles Building Repair & Maintenance Equipment Repair & Maintenance Station Supplies Telephone Utilities Vehicle Fuel & Oil Vehicle Repair & Maintenance Medical Equipment SUI~y PAGE 7,358,037.00 100,000.00 lO0,O00.O0 40.000.09 $950,000,00 +S7.598.037.0Q $8,548,037.00 53,786,083.00 30,000.00 99,120.00 87,153,00 188,500.00 1,502,217.00 ~00,000.00 -0- 58,484.00 ,;O,O00.O0 30,000.00 69,309.00 14,539.00 !8,695.00 9,825.00 59,000.00 ''?2,793.00 q,'OOOlOb ]49,136.00 ~O,O00.O0 35,000.00 22,500.00 25,000.00 ]2,006.00 27,301.00 8,000.00 45,000.00 10,458.00, 24,000.00 51,000.00 49,000.00 32,450.00 140,000.00 13,700.00 $6,391,557.00 $ 531,903.00 Fire Equipment Training Fire Prevention Ed. Material Fire Prevention Training Public Information Officer Special Te~ms MOU Training Total Operations Costs: tess Total Expenses: Reserve to Capital Improvement Fund Capital Reserve BALANCE: 20,000.00 60,475,00 21,692.00 9,802.00 7,699.00 35,800.00 27,000.00 S 583.377.00 $7,506,837.00 141,200.00 900,000.00 BAL~;CE FCPi<ARD The balance forward incluJes ad valorem received above the budgeted amount. It consists of monies that meet the Department's liabilities, such as sick leave, vacation, death benefits, and two month's of operational cash for October 1 thru December 1, 1998. This enables the Fire Department to operate and not have to borrow money until ad valorem is received. These are monies used in the case of a catastrophic emergency such as a major hurricane. The Department may need to use this money to operate on as there could be a decrease in the ad valorem taxes. 16Gl" INCOME DETAIL AD VALOREM TAX REVENUE,: Gross Taxable Value of Millage $ 7,745,301,851 $ 7,35~,036,758 .001 PROJ~CTED AD VALOREM REVENI~: 7,358,037. To estimate interest for the budget year 1998-1999 an average of the previous four years was used. 1 1994/1995 9~,010.00 2 1995/1996 111,260.00 3 1996/1997 112,790.00 4 1997/1998 Thru May (~ MOS) 78,393.00 TOTAL ESTI~4ATED I~EREST: 398,453.00 /4 : 99,613.00 $ 100,000.00 16Gl ' Inspection Fees reDresen~ funds received from the review and on site inspection of conssruction of new co~mercia] buildings and new residential buildings in excess of %hree units. IExisting buildings which are inspected annually are hOC charged a fee for inspection.) Inspection fees are based upon tke number of square feet built and is dependent upon growth of commercial and multi-unit residential construction. In estimating income from inspection fees, there is difficulty forecasting the growth of cc.'~r, ercial and multi unit residential development because of the fluctuation in this type of building. Historical data was used showing income £rcm inspection fees for the previous four year period. 1 1594-95 $ 73,871. 2 1995-96 $ 93,218. 3 1996-97 $122,234. 4 19~7-~ ~ MS~. 5 ~.274 5377,597, / 4 : $ 94,399.00 PROJECTED INSPECTION FEE INCOME: $i00,000.00 7 Other general funJ ]ncome is made up of various sources including but not limited tc the following: Burn Permit Fees Hydrant Flow testing fees Alarm Malfunctions Sale of Security Key Boxes Fire Wcrks permits The Sale of Capital Equipment Because it's difficult to predict or anticipate the likelihood of conditions resulting in an assessment of the above fees, it is equally hard to project income frcm such and other sources. To this end, historical data was alsc used to make approximations of income from the sources referenced, and others. The amount used is a moderate estimate of the 5 year average calculated. %'ear ~ount 1993-94 21,755. !9~4-95 27,241. 1995-96 25,326. i996-97 35,414. 1997-98 YTD 8 I.IOS. 53,552. S163,2%%. / 5 : 32,658,00 ESTIMATED OT~R INCOM~: $ 40,000.00 INCOME RECAP CASH C~RRYOVER AD VALORE]4 TAX, REV£NUE: TOTAL ESTIMATED INTEREST: PROJECTED INSPECTIOH FEE II:COME~ ESTIMATED OTHER INCOME: TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR 1998-1999: S 7,3n3-~q/37/.U0~ $ 100,000.00 S 100,000.00 $ 40,000.00 8,548,037.00 8 16G1 STAFF SALARIES AND BENEFITS 3,786,083.00 9 $ 99,120.00 TOTAL HOLIDAY PAY: $ 87, 153.00 ''* Noliday pay is distributed to union pmrior~nml and it is contractual. Zvsry union 10 1 6Gl $188,500.00 $ 4,190,856.00 11 1661 $ 320,~02.00 $ 249,651.00 12 , $ ~64,656.00 16G $ 911,9~4.00 13 The total e~ti~ted pr~m for 199~/1999 im $~00,000.00. 14 16(~1 $98,484.00 1681 $ 3D,C50.00 $ 4,500.00 S24,809.¢0 ~2,000.00 $ 69,30~.00 15 16Gl 1~5.00 50.00 1,000.00 495.00 3,000.00 12,230.00 16 16Gl $ 50.00 40.00 60.00 !50.00 80. O0 25.00 180.00 20.09 200. O0 20,00 84.00 3,661.92 175.00 800.00 ~12.00 102.00 1,260.00 96.00 200.00 78.00 116.00 50.00 $9,825.00 $ 9,925.00 $45,000.00 $14,000.00 72,793.30 SPECIAL ASSESSOR'S FEE FOR STATION 44 4,000.00 $149,136.00 10,000.00 18 22,500.00 19 1.~00.00 $ 1,550.00 2,456.00 ~O0.OO ~00.00 1,500.00 $12,006.00 2O 16Gl' l~;,;; 35 4,800,~0 ~27~01,00' 21 ~ ~000,00 22 350.00 1S0.00 450.00 100,00 400.00 ~0,00 3,~00.00 300,GO ~0.00 250,00 250.00 ~;~, 8~0,00 23 1661 TOTAL $3,425.00 350.00 200.00 300.00 100.00 125.00 700.00 225.00 3,000.00 250.00 250.00 50.00 250.00 $5,800.00 ~9,225,00 24 16Gl 1,200.00 500.00. 150.00 1~5.00 150.00 NA 175.00 300.00 TOTAL $3,175.C0 150.00 350.00 200.00 250.00 150.00 75.00 e00.00 ~50.00 2,500.00 350.00 125.00 150.00 250.00 $9,415.00 25 26 C ....... & Fettili~a:ica ~y Ou~ide Contractor £UB-T9TAL SUB-TC?AL TOTAL Si,200.00 $I,450.00 150.O0 ~50.00 200.00 350.00 150.00 250.00 $1,450.00 $2,900.00 27 16G1 £UR-/OTAL SUB-TCTAL $1,200.00 250.QQ 51,450.00 150.00 550.00 350.00 150.00 250.00 $2,9~0.00 9,225.00 9,415.00 $45,000.00 28 Filters, Oil, Air Quality Tes: & Miner Repair Nozzle Repair ?rg~ram $ 1,561.00 $ 5.000.00 $10,458.00 16 1 29 4 Sponge mo~ 60.00 TOTAL CL~m:iNG Z~Ui?ME:~T I ~'~,. SDraye: ]0.00 ! Blower 10~.00 $18,969.35 260.00 470.00 16G1 ],~00.00 500.00 $24,000.00 3O Total: Average cost of 2 New S=acicns ¼ year Average Cost Al! S%aclons: ~v,,,9.00/09 X t2 40,478.00 10,195.00 $ 51,000.00 TOTAL ESTIMATE OF TELEPHONE SERVICE: Total 39,!46.00 $ 51,000.00 49,0C0.00 TOTAL PROPOSED UTILITIES COST: $49,000.00 31 5 Engines 2 Aerial 2 Telesquir~s 2 Brush Trucks 13 Scarf & SUD~cr~ 2 Reserve TOTAL VEHICLE F~IEL & OIL $32,450.00 $32,450.00 VEHICLE MAINTENA~NCE & REPAIR PARTS TOTAL VEHICLE ~iAINTEhL~CE & P~PAIR Medical Gloves SharDs Waste Containers Medical euDp!y ~ eT~i~r, ent replacemen~ 02 bottles refill and ser'.'~ie from IAP 9 Der week X ~2 '.~eeks=4{~ ~c~tles S ~.~9 ea. Batteries for Heart Star% TOTAL M~DICAL EQUIPMENT $74,600.00 65,400.00 $140,000.00 $4,200.00 350.00 3,390.00 4,212.00 1.548.00 $13,700.00 32 · 16Gl FI~ EQUIPMENT Purchase Nozzles, appliances Scott Filters for Brush Trucks 2 ~ L~. Wt. Hose w 1 1/4 SB Nozzle for 2 Ladders, Color Code Hose Lines 9,088.00 Miscellaneous Tools, adapters, Salvage Covers, Power Tools TN~ tools, Foam tubes (~i al! Eng., 3-Tac~ron I/c Ccn%rol Boards TOTAL FI~ EQUIPMENT 10,912.00 $20,000.00 33 !6G' Employee Assiscance ~rsgram Extrication Manuals & Materials Courses 'travel Safety Training Aids & E~uiDmen~ Digital Camera Laptop Video Cassettes DeveloDmen5 Adult C?R Mann~kln infant CF? Mannikin Manuals & 5~cks Outside Trainin~ Unannounced Operations St. Fire Cti!ege Co~nd & £%aff EMT Paramedic { Fire A~min C~urse Training F.D.i.C. knf Classes TOTAL TB3%INING: $ 4,~0.00 i,!20.00 !,}90.00 2,500.00 6.~25,00 ,~00.00 ,460,00 ,)00.00 ,~80.00 ~50.00 $60,~75.00 34 FIBE P~{EVENTION EDUCATIONAL MATERIAL: Item Descrio~i~& 8OOO 5000 3000 3500 8O 80 4000 100 3 3000 set 4 2 5000 5000 5000 1 Fire Helmeus Pluggie Bad,es Fire extinT;isher pamDhle:s Packs of 35 ~m Film Film Develgp!ng Firefighssr badges Class Pack FPB handcu: material for Schools-Inc. Fel ~e!. Marsh Elementary Flashlights Magic Supplies P!uggie Repair 8 ¼ x i! ssftware 13 vrlumes 1997 NFPA 290 Codes NFPA 101 Life Safety C:de and Handbook S:andard Building Code 1998 & Handbook set Bumper Stickers Fire Truck Magnets Subscription Service il User Total Cost 4,000.00 900.00 1,090.00 574.85 560.00 9~0.00 400.00 4,~00.00 45.00 750.00 350.00 350.00 710.00 400.00 80.00 1,197.00 1,035.00 1,239.75 2,250.0C TOTAL FIR~E P~EVENTION EDUCATIOnaL NATERIAL~ $21,692.00 35 ~UiTION Fla, FM Arson 150.00 S.W. Firs Preven%icn 90.00 FL Arson Seminar 175.00 Unannounced Classes F1 Fire inspects~ Class 300.00 Scala Arson Invest. 240.00 TOTAL TRAiNiNG/FiRE V~RSHAL REYNOLDS IAAI FL CHAPTER ReGistration Room S~.00 (5 Says) Meals TOTAL IA~I INTERNATiC~:AL SEMINAR Registration Room S95.$~ ~ n:gh~s) Meals Air Fare TOTAL ROOM 425.00 255.00 3~0.~00 373.00 200.00 105.00 84.00 117.00 585.00 468.00 NO OF PEOPLE 2 2 2 2 2 TOTAL 1,360.00 858.00 1,3~4.00 550,00 1,258.00 2,016.00 7,406.00 125.00 390.00 105.00 620.00 130.00 570.00 126.00 650.00 476.00 300.00 TOTAL FIRE PP~V£NTION TP. AININ~ 9,802.00 36 16 1 ' ?UB~iC INFORMATION OFFICER -~/¢T17¥: 0UANTITY Quar[erly newsletter !5,000 Miscellaneous (includes unexDected areas ~ertinent to image enhancement, ~ublic infcrc~ion, etc. COST 5,500.00 2,199.00 TOTAL BUDGET FOR PUBLIC INFO~qATION OFFICER $ 7,699.00 SPECIAL TE~MS ...... eS.= ............ CERT ~rogram TOTAL SPECIAL TEA/4S $35,800.00 MOU TRAINING emergency medical training under ;he dires[ion of the medical TOTAL MOU TRAINING $27,000.00 37 Nor~h Naples Fire Control & Rescue District capita! Improvement Budqet 1998-1999 $ 93,281.00 - 4,597.00 Capital Reserve BuJ~e~ 1997/1998 Capital Reserve Bui}ez 19~8/!999 Total Cash Ava:fable: 64,337.00 141,200.00 $ 303,415.00 New Roof Stab:on 49 Painting Ssa%::n 4~ Painting Station 4~ New Air Conditicn:ng Uni% Statist 4% Two Replacemen~ Venue!es ~Cne for Fire Prevention, New Rooster L~ne H~se for Brush 42 & Brush 44 Phone Tree and PagEr System for CERT Teams and Special Opera,ions Teams Fire Rescue Bce% Station 42: New Tile in cfr!ce and dayrocm Dishwasher Kitchen Chairs Recliners Bunker Gear Lzckers 3 Air Compressors !5600.00) Air Packs Reach LT. ergency Response Vehicle Total Expenditures Reserves: One for Trainingl 50,030.00 lO,OCO.O0 4,500.00 40,050.00 1,500.00 20,000.00 40.00¢.00 1,800.00 450.00 400.00 2,500.00 2,000.00 200.00 800.00 1,800.00 86,000.00 10,000.00 20,000.00 302.950.00 465.00 38 North NaDies Fire Control & Rescue District impact Fee Budget 1998-1999 Cash Carryover 19~7/1998 Interest: Revenue frcm im~ac= Fees: Total Cash Availah!e: $ 100,000.00 - 1.500,000.0~ $ 3,?00.000.00 ExpendiTures: Suaticn 45 PermiT%ing & Misc. UTilities site Work Building Tanks &PumDs Total S5a~ion 45 STaticn 46 $i=e Work Building ToTal Station 46 TOTAL OF STATION 45 & ~6 Squads Equipment Pumper Tanker Brush Truck Technical Re~cue Equipment Total Expenditures Reserves: 146,500.00 104,000.00 348,600.00 1,768,900.00 21.000.00 $2,389,000.00 174,000.00 337,000.00 511,000.00 $2,900,000.00 340,000.00 50,000.00 195,000.00 65,000.00 100,000.00 50,000.00 $ 3,700.000.00 $ -0- 39 FIRE }{¥DRANT BUDGET 1998/1999 Cash Carryover 1997-!998 Total cash Available: Hydran: Maintenance Salary 2 Cases of Peniblube 2 Cases hyd. markers 2 Cases marker glue 2 Marker glue guns 4 Replacement Plungers for 20 Gallon hydrant paint 200 Tubes of hydran~ grease ! Box rags $ 122,500.00 $ 143,875.00 i8,000.00 116.00 396.00 180.00 120.00 24.00 537.00 2,000.00 10.00 10,000.G0 $ 31,383.00 $112,492.00 1 6G1 OFFICE OF THE FIRE CODE OFFICIAL COLLIER COUNTY FIRE DISTRICTS 1998;99 Cash Carryover Revenue Plan Review Fees Total Cash Available: Expenditures: SALARIES & BEN~FiTS Fire Code Official Salary Fire Code Official Workers Comp (9.34%1 Fire Code Official Ketirement (17.5%) Fire Code Official Social Security (7.~5%} Health/Life insurance Overtime Asst. Fire Code Official Salary ASSr, Fire Code Cfi!cia! Worker's Comp ASSt. Fire Code Cfi!cia! Retirement Asst. Fire Code Efficlal Sscial Security Health/Life insurance Overtime TOTAJ~ SA~kRIES & BENEFITS VEHICL~ EXPENSES Miscellaneous Vehicle E~ipment Gas & Oil Maintenance TOTA~ VEHICLE EXPENSES OFFICE EXPENSES County Rental S~are Computer Workstas~cn & Operatin~ Software Cellular/Digital ~hcne for ia~ts~ s~uter E~aipment Mainsenance ~ Sof~ware Office/Operating Sup9!ies Telephones Codes & Standards Membership Dues & Suhscri~itns TOTAL OFFICE EXPENSES PERSONNEL EXPENSES Training & Certification Ma~nienanoe Physicals Pagers Uniforms TOTAL PERSONAL EXPENSES 107,900.00 $225,000.00 $332,900.00 43,72~.14 4,084.21 7,652.42 3,345.20 3,888.00 1,419.06 4!,620.76 3,887.38 7,2~3.63 3,183.99 3,888.00 1,350.67 123,980.78 500.00 2,800.00 800.00 4,100.00 2,000.00 2,500.00 1,200.00 2,500.00 650.00 1,500.00 1,500.00 500.00 12,350.00 2,500.00 600.00 300.00 700.00 4,100.00 41 County Plan Revle~ Clerk 7,500.00 7,500.00 7.601.54 159.632.32 173,267.68 Ail of the Fire Code official's budgeting is a se~f ~upporting fund derived entirely from fire plans review and has no impact on any of the f~ra districts' budgete. 42 ADM 02-06-04 TI)l) 1'56t) 697-2~74 C rre September 25. 1998 Chairman of thc Board of County CommiSSar'[O: Collier Count>' '.,~t~nt~ne ~/ .... 3301 E.Tamiami 'Frail Naples. FL 34112 Dear Chairman: Enclosed is a certification of the lands in your county lying within the boundaries of the Smnh Florida Water Management District, Also enclosed are copies of Resolution number 98-93 "Adopting the Tax Rates and Certifying the Lev)' for the South Florida Water Management District, the Okeechobee Basin, and the Everglades Construction Project within the Okeechobee Basin" and number 98-95 "Adoption of the Budget for Fiscal Year 1998-99". Sincerely, Michael Slayton Deputy Executive Director MS/If c: County Property Appraiser w/o attachment CERTIFIED MAIL Enclosures (4) G~mtrning Board' Frank William~,m. Jr.. Chair,nan Eugene K. Petrie. Vice Cham,.m Mitchell W. Berger Vera M. Carter Richard A. 51.arhek Samuel E. Po(fie IIL Executive Director }i William E. Graham Michael D. Mmmn Michad Sla~on, Depu~ Exe~dve Director William }lammond Miriam Singer , ,~ Milling At.s: P.O. ~ 2~, Were Prim B~ch, IL 3M16-~ , ~i 1999 CERTIFICATE TAX LEVY SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT I hereby certify that the boundaries of South Florida Water Management District as established by Chapter 373. Florida Statutes, and the Big Cypress Basin of the South Florida Water Management District. as established by Chapter 373. Florida Statutes as amended, embrace all land and taxable property within the limits of Collier County. EXCEIrF hercfrom, for taxing purposes) so much of said lands as were certified as being immune from taxution tin list furnished on the 20th dayof February .A.D., 1998 : said list bemg those certain lands wherein title or use rights are vested in South Florida Water Management District. IN WITNESS WHEREOF. lhereunto set my hand and the official seal of South Florida Water Management District this23rd day' of September .A.D. 1998. SOUTH FI,ORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT Secret."~z 1999 CERTIFICATE TAX LEVY SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRIC'F I hereby certify that the boundaries of South Florida Water Management District as established by Chapter 373, Florid~ StatUtes, and the l~,ig Cypress B~sin of the South Florid~ Water Mnnagemcnt District, ~s cstablighe~ by Chapter 373, Florid~ Statutes n~ amended, embrace all land arid taxable pr~perty within the ]milts of collier County, EXCE~ herefro*, (for t~xlng purposes) so much of said/ands ~s weft. certified a~ being immune from ~ax~tion on list furnished on the 20th d~yof ~eb~uary ,A.D., 1998 : s~id list being those cert~in lands wherein title or use rights are ve~ted in South Florid~ W~ter Man~g~men~ District. IN WITNESS WFIE~EOV, I hereunto set my h~nd gad the official sc~l ~f South Florld~ W~tcr ~gnagement District,this ~ d~y of September , A,D, 1998. SOU'TH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICt' CERTIFICATE 1, Tony Burns, Assistant Secretary to the Governing Board and Official Records Custodian of the South Florida Water Management District, do hereby certify that the following document(s), attached hereto and described below, is (are) a true and correct copy of Ibc official records of the South Florida Water Management District, which are kept in the usual and ordinary course of business. Resolution #98-93 - Adopting the Tax Rates and Certifying thc Levy for the south Florida Water Management District, the Okeeehobee Basin of the South Florida Water Management District, and thc Everglades Construction Project within the Okecchobee Basin. Resolution #98-94 - Adopting the Tax Rates and Certifying the Levy for the South F orlda Water Management D~strict and thc Big Cypress Basin of tile South Florida Watcr Managcmcnt District. Resolution #98-9. - Adopting of the Budget for Fiscal Year 1998-99. Dated thiso~- ~ rc_~ day 0f._~ Ass'l~taa~reta ~." ' ~ fln '." ~ 't Frank Willianlmn. Jr,~ Chal.m., Mitchc~ W, Better Vet: M, Carter Rkhard A. Machek Samud E. Pool~ Ill, l~¢cut;vc Director William E. Graham Michael D, Mint.n Michael Sla~on, Dcp.ty Executive Director William Hammond Miriam Singer Ma~inZ Addr~: P.O. ~ 2~, W~t P~n l~ad~, Iq~ 33416-~ SOUTII FLORII)A WATER MANAGEMENT I)ISTRICT P, ESOI~UTION NO. 98-93 Al)OFFING TIlE TAX RATES AND CI.;RTIF¥1NG Till'; LEVY FOR TIIE SOUTII FI,ORII)A WATER MANAGEMF~NT DISTRICT, TIIE OKEEClIOBEE BASIN OF TIlE SOUTII FI,ORIDA ~VATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, AND 'File EVERGI,ADES CONSTRUCTION PROJECT WlTItlN TIIE OKEECIIOBF~E BASIN WIIEREAS, tim Governing Board of tile South Florida Water Management District in compliance with and by authority of Chapters 200 and 373, Florida Statutes, as amended, and Chapter 25270, Laws of Florida, Act of 1949, shall on September 23, 1998, adopt its budget for Fiscal Year 1998-99 and shall approve and confirm lists of lands against which taxes of thc District and the Okccchobcc Basin are to be asscsscd; and WIIEREAS, it is determined that a tax levy of two hundred eighty-four thousandths mill (.284 mill) ($.284 per $1,000 of assessed value) upon all property lying within thc District subject to thc District's tax is necessary to provide funds for District budgeted expenditures; and WItEREAS. it is dctcrmincd that a tax levy of thrce hundred thirteen thousandths mill (.313 mill) ($.313 per $I ,0OO of assessed value) upon all property lying within the Okeechobee Basin subject to thc Basin's tax is necessary to provide funds for Okeechobee Basin budgeted expenditures; and WHEREAS, it is determined that a tax levy of one tenth mill (, 100 mill) ($, 100 per $I ,000 of assessed value) upon all property lying within the Okeechobee Basin subject to the Basin's tax is necessary to provide funds for the design, construction, and acquisition of the Everglades Construction Project; and WItEREAS, it is dctermincd that the combined total tax levy of thc District and thc Basin is six hundred ninety-seven thousandths mill (.697 mill) ($.697 per $I,000 of assessed value); and WHEREAS, the millage rate to be levied by the District for the District tax is 3.65 percent (3.65%) greater than the rolIed-back rate and said percentage is the percentage increase in property taxes to be adopted by the District; and WIIEREAS, the millage rate to be levied by the District for the Okeecbobee Basin tax (other than for the Everglades Construction Project) is 3.64 percent (3.64%) greater than the rolled-back rate and said percentage is the percentage increase in properly taxes to be adopted by the District; and WHEREAS, the millage rate to be levied by the District for the Everglades Construction Project is 3.09 percent (3.09%) greater than the rolled-back rate and said percentage is the percentage increase in property taxes to be adopted by the District; NOW, TI tEREFORE, BE IT P, ESOLVED by the Governing Board of the South Florida Water Management District that there is hereby levied and assessed on the tax rolls for the year 1998 a uniform ad valorem tax on all property in the District as determined for county taxing purposes at thc rate of two hundred eighty-four thousandths mill (.284 mill) ($.284 per $1.000 of assessed value) on the dollar on the assessed valuation of such property; and BE IT FURTItER RESOLVED by the Governing Board of the South Florida Water Management District that there is hereby levied and assessed on the tax rolls for the year 1998 (for purposes other than the Everglades Construction Project) a uniform ad valorem tax on all property in the Okeechobee Basin as determined for county taxing purposes at the rate of three hundred thirteen thousandths mill (.313 mill) ($.313 per $1,000 of assessed value) on the dollar on the assessed valuation of such property; and BE IT FURTItER RESOLVED by the Governing Board of the South Florida Water Management District that there is hereby levied and assessed on the tax rolls of the year 1998 a uniform ad valorem tax on ail property in the Okeechobce Basin as determined for county taxing purposes at the rate of one tenth mill (. 100 mill) ($. 100 per $1,000 of assessed value) on the dollar on the assessed valuation of such property for the purposes of design, construction, and acquisition of the Everglades Construction Project; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said two hundred eighty-four thousandths mill (.284 mill) ($.284 per $I ,000 of assessed value) tax lew and the lists of lands included in the District are hereby certified to the Department of Revenue and the respective Tax Collectors and Property Appraisers of each of the counties wholly or partially embraced within the limits of the South Florida Water Management District for extension on 1998 tax rolls of each of said counties; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said three hundred thirteen thousandths mill (.313 mill) ($.313 per $1,000 of assessed value) tax levy and the lists of lands included in the Okeechobee Basin are hereby certified to the Department of Revenue and the respective Tax Collectors and Property Appraisers of each of the counties wholly or partially embraced within the limits of the Okeechobce Basin for extension on 1998 tax rolls of each of said counties; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said one tenth mill (. 100 mill) ($. 100 per $1,000 of assessed value) tax levy and the lists of lands included in the Okeechobee Basin are hereby certified to the Department of Revenue and the respective Tax Collectors and Property Appraisers of each of the counties wholly or partially embraced within the limits of the South Florida Water Management District for extension on 1998 tax rolls of each of said counties; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the combined total lew of the District and Okeechobee Basin (including the Everglades Construction Project) is six hundred ninety-seven thousandths mill (.697 mill) ($.697 per $I ,000 of assessed value); and BE IT FLrRTHER P, ESOLVED that the millage rate hereby levied by the District for the District tax is 3.65 percent (3.65%) greater than the rolled-back rate and said percent is the percentage increase in property taxes hereby adopted by the District; and 16Gl BE IT FURTIiER RESOLVED that the millage rate to be levied by the District for the Okeechobee Basin tax is 3.64 percent (3.64%) greater than the rolled-back rate and said percent is the percentage increase in property taxes hereby adopted by the District; and BE IT FURTttER RESOLVED that the millage rate to be levied by the District for the Everglades Construction Project tax is 3.09 percent (3.09%) greater than the rolled-back rate and said percentage is the percentage increase in property taxes hereby adopted by the District. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd Day of September 1998. SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT BY ITS GOVERNING BOARD BY Frank Williamson, Jr., Chairman ATTEST: JSamuel E. Pome m, Secretary APPROVED: Thomas R. Wolfe, '(5ffice of Cou~el- 16G1 SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 98-95 ADOPTION OF BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998-99 WHEREAS, Chapters 200 and 373, Florida Statutes, as amended, and Chapter 25270, Laws of Florida, Act of 1949, require that the Governing Board of the South Florida Water Management District adopt a final budget for each fiscal year; and WHEREAS, the Governing Board of the South Florida Water Management District, after careful consideration and study, has caused to be prepared a tentative budget for the District covering its proposed operation and requirements for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 1998, and ending September 30, 1999; and WHEREAS, notice of intention to adopt said tentative budget, or as the same may be amended, setting forth said tentative budget in full as the final budget for said District for said fiscal year, was duly published in newspapers of general circulation in each county having land in the District, all required by law; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Governing Board of the District in West Palm Beach, Florida, on September 23, 1998, at the time and place provided in said notices; and WHEREAS, the Governing Board of the Distdct desires to, simultaneously with the adoption of this resolution, approve the transfers of funds to the extent set forth below; and WHEREAS, the budget presented here contains an estimate of $106,508,238 in commitments previously entered into and anticipated to be outstanding at the start of the fiscal year, including the source of funds anticipated to be used in completing these commitments. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Governing Board of the South Florida Water Management District that the following budget be, and it is hereby adopted as the final budget of the District for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 1998 and ending September 30, 1999, and it shall be the official operating and fiscal guide of the District for said fiscal year. This Resolution authorizes all transfers of funds in individual amounts dudng said fiscal year within, but not among funds, departments or major object groups as set forth below. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the adopted FY98-99 Budget will reflect actual commitments outstanding at the start of the fiscal year as well as the source of funds anticipated to be used in compTeting these commitments if different from the estimates contained herein. PROJECTED REVENUE Ad Valorem- District Ad Valorem- Okeec~c~oee Basin Ad Valorem- Big Cypress Basin Ad Valorem - Everglades Restoration IntergoYemmental AgrtculturaJ PrMlege Taxes Uc. enses, Permits & Fees Investment Earnings Misceflaneous Department Charges TOTAL REVENUES Fund Ba[m-K:e: Desigr~ted TOTAL PROJECTED REVENUES AND BALANCES Operating Transfem (Net) TOTAL Re.sen*ed BaJanc. e s TOTAL PROJECTED REVENUES, BALANCES AND TRANSFERS BUDGETED EXPENDITURES ExecuINe Offices PersonAl Servloes ~ Se~ices OpemiJng Cap~aJ Ou'day Acquls~o~ of Lsnd Rxed Capital Outlay Rxed Capital Ou'day Pem,3naJ Services ~ Services Operat~g Expenditures Outreach Pe r'r,~:~'~ Services O~erat~ng F_x,oend~u~s O~emfl~ Caplta~ O,.r~y Con,.~uc~n & Land Management Palatial Sewlces Con~ Serv~:~s O~erat~ F_,~pend~tures OperaSng Capital Outlay Cont _r~c~_. m_! Services O~r~lng F_,x~nditur~s Millages 0.284 0.313 0.278 0.100 ToM TotaJ Tola~ TolaJ Total Total GENERAL FUND 85,702.540 134,807 2,025,008 1,935,000 6,878,781 96,676,136 8,675,585 105,::}.51,721 (17,708,285) {~7.643.436 18,759,529 1~6.402.965 19,514,251 8,432,960 8,824,939 2,691,070 39,463.220 173,000 173,300 59,757 59.757 3,221.478 1,631,084 169,963 6.950 5,029,475 43,217 25,308 7,293,~1 ~7,043 ~4,4~ 198,445 8,3~,0~ TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS 88.067,631 5,731,505 18,515,599 61,700 3,684,000 3,036,000 119,096,435 22,413,468 141.509.903 (3,884,254) 137.625.649 20,932,561 158.558.210 622.471 500.140 2,198,167 57.802 3,378,580 570.000 570,000 28,056,781 8,463,245 16,154,269 3,130.169 55,864,464 5,061,712 15,307,580 1,425,854 378,014 22,173,160 8,678,230 2,019,115 953,996 417,23~ 12,068,577 ,067,065 352,760 20,896 38.400 1,479,121 TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS 28,136,623 67,007,399 12,549,563 6,025,000 113,718,585 109,322.164 ~3,040,749 21.592.539 244.633.288 66,766,40.4 311.399.692 221,433 1,057.202 1,247,385 34,180 2,560,200 102,979,122 102.979.122 80,692,675 80,692.675 470,920 470,920 1,086.679 479.143 10,755,141 14,256 12.335,219 TOTAL APPROVED INTERNAL BUDGET SERVICE FY 1999 85,702,540 88,067,631 5,731,505 28.136,623 85,657,805 12,549,563 2,086,708 350,216 11,994,216 9,914,781 2,307,422 2,307,422 2,657,638 332,148,794 30,000 140,441,217 2.687.638 472.590,011 0 0 2.687.638 472.590.011 49.744 106,508.238 2.737.382 579.098.249 1.622,123 21,980.278 224,806 10,215.108 840,709 13,111,200 2.783,052 2,687.638 48,089,638 107.344,12~ 107.344.122 81,435,675 81,435,675 28,056,781 8.523,002 16,154,269 3,190.189 55,924.221 8,283.190 17.409.584 1,595,817 384.964 27,673,555 9,808,126 2.523.568 11,709,137 431,492 24.472,321 8.360,158 gO9,803 345,390 23~,845 9,852.1~4 Water Resource Evaluation PersonaJ Services Contraclua] Services Operating F_.x.oenditures Operating Capital Outlay Big Cypress Basin Pemona] Services Opera. ting Expenditures Operating Capita] Outlay Pemona] Set.~ces Contractual Sec'ices Operat~ Expenditures Operating Capital Outlay Ecosystem Resto~'atkh3 Persoe. aJ Services Contractua] serv'~ces OperaJng Expenditures Operating CapitaJ Outlay Debt Reserves TOTAL BUDGETED EXPENDITURES ENCUMBRANCES TOT.AL BUDGETED EXPENDITURES AND ENCUMBRANCES : TOTAL TOTAL SPECIAL CAP.AL GENERAL REVENUE PROJECTS FUND FUNDS FUNDS 10,118,031 2,385,274 7,111,290 3,502,883 1,579,407 349,105 932,108 363,848 Tota] 19,740,836 6,601,110 1,138,223 74,000 645,371 750 556,823 160,883 Tota] 74,750 2,501,300 Total Total Tota] Total 21,000 21,000 9,346,392 167,304 3,620,541 2,370,989 12,254,649 397,144 166,193 6,000 13,550,270 2,544,293 12,254,649 6,770,328 1,906.733 15,000 10,717,255 15,002,637 704,408 533,382 293,457 7,026,858 15,000 18,485,448 24,469,610 7,856,315 7,856,315 1,095,530 7,594,596 993,578 1,095,530 7,594,596 993,578 87.643.436 137.625.649 244.633.288 18,759,529 20,932,561 66,766,404 106.402.965 1~,.~.~8,210 311.399.692 16Gl TOTAL APPROVED INTERNAL BUDGET SERVICE FY 1999 12,503,305 10,614,173 1,949,512 1,295,956 26,362,946 1,138,223 719,371 557,573 160,883 2,576,050 9,513,696 18,246,179 397,144 192.193 28,349,212 8,677,061 25,734,892 1,237,790 7,320,315 42,970,058 7,856,315 7,8..~,315 9,683,704 9,683,704 2,687.638 472.590.011 49,744 106,508,238 2.737.382 579.098.249 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd Day o! Seplember 1998, .//~amue~ E. Poole III, S~creta~ Thomas R. W~e. SOUTH F~RIDA WAT/ER MANAGEMENT DISTRI~7'~ BY ITS/GO.~, ~RNING BOARD Frank Williamson, Jr., Chairman 10/01 '98 15:3'2 ID:BIG CYPRESS BASIN FAX:941-597-4987 PAGE 1 South Florida Water Manageme~ ~k~ict I"~ (941) ~97-4')H7 · Suucom 721-7920 TEL~.COPY COVER SHEET DATE: Norris Hancock Constantine L/ Mac'Kie Berry l/ TIM~: Iq~BER C~IJk:D: NUMBER OF PAGES TO T}~NSMIT INCLUDING THIS FOI~'J: ~.~q ~J~o~- ~bf? c,¢ ~i~. Co~e~ SUBJECT: Item// copies I0: /~dK~ BIG CYPRESS BASIN 6089 JANES LANE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34109 TELEPHONE NUMBER: 941-597-1505 ~SSACE: (~CA FAX .NUMBER: 941-597-4987 TRANSMITTED FRfkM LANIER FAX 3800. PLEAS£ CALL ANN CHRISTIAN AT 941-597-1505 OR QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS TRANSMITTAL. IF YOU HAVE ANY PROBLEMS I)~mtilte~Iquxvro~..13fll(. Jn(.].l,l(m , '() .x2,I6~),W~ ;d. 1c~d~,1.1,33416 46A0.(~61)(~(6-88~0 I:].WAINI-I~X)-43221.H5 10/01 '98 15:33 ID:BIG CYPi:UESS BASIN FAX:941-59?-498? TH E LAKE TRAFFORD RESTORATION TASK FORCE MEETING October 2, 1998, $:30 A.M. 16Gl 4 Roll Cali Approval of August 7, 1998 Minutes Old Business Updates · BCB/USGS Cooperative l.ake Trafford Water Quality M°nit°rin8Pr°gram ' ClarenceYEric + l,egislativ¢ Initiative · Wildlife Foundation Fund - Annie/Frank · Educational Activities- Annie · Web Site- Eric Environmental RcsourcePermlt Application + Dade County Grant Proposal - Frank · Land Appraisal Process- Clarence New Business 'Fourist Development Council Prcscntalion Friends of Lake Trafford 1. Clyde Butcher Dinner 11. Clyde Butcher Photo Shoot C.O.E. Agreement - Clarence 5. Other Business 6. Adjournment 10,4)1 '98 15:33 ID:BIG CYPRESS BASIN SENT §Y:CO HOUSINO AUTHORITY :in- l-g8 ~ 2:0m)pil ~ FAX: 941-597-49~7 Frm~k t,b'mlo ¢1~ TP/* ~ Hemrn ~ (7~y C,O,E. · Thl~ w~m ta.l:x~d unlll ~ next m'nee~r~. DATE: I'L, ACI';: OCT O9 661 COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY AGENDA / ¢~. ~,;~Rh Nc'd COpy October 12, 1998 Marco Island Executive Airport, 2003 Mainsail Drive, Conference I~,oom, Naples, FL TIM E: 1:00pm Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this Airport Authority will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and will need to ensure that a vcrbatitn record of the proceedings is made, which record will include all testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. 1. (kill meeting to Order and Quorum Check I1. Approval of Agenda I11. Approval of September 21, 1998 Meeting Minutes IV. Administrative A. Pay Range IL F, xccutive Director's Performance V. Everglades Airpark A. USFWS Visit- Eagle's Nest VI. hnmokalce Regional Airport A. Airfield Signage Grant B. Supplemental Grant for AWOS C. Development Standards D. Manufacturing Incubator VII. Marco Island Executive Airport Vlll Old Business A. Point of Sale System IX. New Business X. Adjournment Misc. Date;. Itemg COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT AUTilORITY MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 21, 1998 MEMBERS Monte Lazarus I'RESENT: l lerberlNoren Steve Price Michael Williams Ernest Spinelli Richard Anderson Gene Schmidt ABSENT: None STAFF: John Drury Thomas Palmer Julie Burdelle PUBLIC: [,uc Cartiere David Wilkonson Ron Davis George Barron I. MEETING CALLED TO ORI)ER AND QUORUM CIIECK Meeting called to order at 1:15 p.m. and quorum '.vas present. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. La:,ams introduced Mr. Schmidt, tile newly appointed Board member, to tile Authority Board members. Mr. Dmry reported that the Marco Island Airport video ,.vas completed. Mr. Drury requested that Good Time Helicopter be added to the Agenda under IV Administrative. Election of New Officgrs, Enterprise Rental Car, Sheriff vehicle donation to hnmokalee Airport, pre-construction meeting for the Incubator, and retirement plan lbr slaff be added to tile agenda. Mr. \Villiams moved to approve the Agenda. Mr. Splnelli seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. I11. APPROVAL OF AUGUST 17, 1998 BOARI) MINUTES Motion was moved to approve the August 17, 1998 Board Minutes. seconded. Motioo p,'~ssed unanimously. Motion was Airport Authorhy Board Minnies September 2 I. 199g Page 2 16 1 IV. ADMINISTRATIVE l. Marco Island Airport video 'File completed video ,,vas played for Ibc Board members. 2. Gondtime l lelicopter- Ron Davis Mr. Drury reported that he spoke with Enterprise Rental Car regarding giving llp their space and have the Airport continue to handle their rentals for a fee. This would open up space to allow Goodtime llelicopter Tours to operate at Marco Executive Airport. Mr. Drury introdnced Ron Davis of Goodtimc Helicopter Tours to give an .verviexv of his plans for bis company at lhe Marco Airport. Mr. l)avis reported that be would be doing the same type of tours that licit- Tours ,.vas doing. Arial photos would be taken and sold to public. Concern was raised regarding the competition of another operator. It was reported that at the present time licit-Tours does not have a helicopter and their plans for £uture tours were unknown. Mr. Drury reported that if it were an FBO he would be concerned, tlowever, Mr. Dmry sees it as two operators providing the same sen, ice competing on price and service and he dkl not see it as a big problem. Mr. Drury recommended that we take over Enterprise Rental Car, be paid a fca, and open up thc space to allow Goodtimc llelicopter Tours to operate at the Marco Executive Airport. Mr. Drnry requested that tile Board authorize staff to enter into an annual agreement with Goodtime tlelicopter Tours under tile same terms and conditions as tile past helicopter tour that ,,vas entered into about 8 months ago. Mr. Spinelli moved for approval to enter into an annual agreement with Goodtime Helicopter Tours. Mr. Notch seconded tile motion. Discussion ,.vas held and motion passed unanimously. Airport Authority Board Minutes September 21, 1998 Page 3 16Gl 3. Industrial Park Lots- Immokalce VI-4 Mr. Drury requested that item VI-4 be taken out of order. I,uc Carrier and l)avid Wilkison's who were present at tile meeting had a busy schedule and their input was requested for this item. Mr. Drury reported that tile airports have been very flexible with lease pints and there arc no lease plot boundaries. What we arc asking of our tenants is tn tell tls what amount of land they need and work xvith our Engineers or their mvn Engineers. snrvey their own plot and make it part of the exhibit. Mr. I)rury Ms foond that tiffs does not work vcD, well because tile majority of potential tennnts wnuld like lease plots already defined. The other issue is that we are about m go bcymxt our permitted areas which was secured by Gcnrge Archihald. Mr. Dnlry feels that we have come to n time where we need to permit the whole phase one development area; survey each and every indnslrinl lease plot and have n map with lhe honndaries nnd stakes put in place; and lake a serious look nt oblaining a master umbrella permit for lhe entire airport. Mr. Drury introduced Mr. Cnrriere Ill introduce what we would need to make this easier for our tennnts. Mr. Can'icrc presented a copy of tile Airport IVlaster Plan. Mr. Carricre reported on tile environmental issues and how the Immokalce Airport ,.vas dealing with those issncs, lie pointed out varions a"cas that coold bc developed and areas that had hcen approved. Lense lots were identified bul tile size of the lots needed to be identified in each area. Thc airport needs lo adopted a Stormwater Management Plnn allowing for large drainage ditches around thc Industrial Park. The devdopment of thc Incubator facility filled in part of tile ditch. Thc main goal is to minimize tile amount of time that a developer has be spend to where he cnn actually come in and start building. IVlr. Wilkison reported what tile district required antl ~vhat he Felt was needed for tile Immokalee Airport. lie spoke about obtaining a Conceptual Enviromnental Resource Permit. This permit looks at impacts Io wetlands, lands, endangered species, and surface water flood. After speaking with Mr. l)rury their plan was to look at tile entire airport based upon the Master Plan and with the Conceptual Permit permitting tile conceptual development of tile entire Airport. The Conceptual Permit locks you into the criteria oFtoday and it gives you the ability once you get outside the first phase to permit tilings quicker allowing thc Airport to get tenants into tlmir spaces with minimal difficulty. The permit could take up to a year to obtain. Airport Authority Board Minutes September 2 I, 1998 Page 4 16G1 Mr. Drury requested that the P, oard give authorization to negotiate xvilb DuFrcsnc-} Icnry a work order that would accomplish cvcrythiog that is needed to bc done. Mr. Drury will tbeo come back and prcscnt to tile Board what bas bccn negotiated. The other issue that Mr. Drury wanted to address ,,vas the utility services. Mr. Dmry would like more detail on tile lvlaster Plan where all ibc underground water, sewer, telephone, and electric lines are mapped out. Wbcn tile time comes he will then be able to know where the substation for soille of tile larger manufacturing companies will be and bow large fl~ey will hc and who will pay For tlmm. Mr. \Villiams moved for approval to Mr. Drury's request. Mr. Nnrcn sCcmldcd tile motion. Discussion was held and motion passed unanimously. 4. 'l'axi~vay Mitigation Work Order-VIM Thc Enviromnemal Resource Permit No. 113054565 issucd by the Florida Dcparhncnt of Environmental Protection requires tllat thc Airport Authority kill 4.6 acres of Brazilian Peppers in thc Collier Seminole State })ark ils mitigation for tile environmental impact of tile mangrove clearing at tile Marco [Shuld l';xccutive Airport. Staff bas negotiatcd a supplemental '..york order wifll Dufrcsnc41enry in the amount of $29,370.00 to address v,'ork nccessar3, to comply with the terms anti conditions o£ the Enviromnental Resource Permit. The supplemental ~vork order specifically covers the cost of tile initial Ircalment of thc exotics, three .','cars of maintenance and annual monitoring. Mr. Drury recommended that thc Authorily approve Iht snpplenleotal work ardor with I)ufresne-llenry in tile amoaot $29,370.00 anti authorize lbe Chairman to cxccale thc documents with his signature. Discussion was held. Mr. Spinclli moved for approval of Mr. Drury's recommcndatioo. Mr. Williams seconded tile motion. Motion passed unanimously. 5. (mi aroma ed Sail Renlidiafion Award oF Bid On September 9, 1998 tim Collier County Purcbash~g Department received 5 bids fi)r thc soil rcmcdiation project at the Marco Island Executive Airport. Staff recommends tbat tile Authority accept tile Iow bid £rom W.E.S. Inc. anti authorize tile Chairman o execute a contract with W.E.S., Inc. in Iht amount of $48,746.40 Airport Aull~ority Board Minutes September 21, 199g Page 5 Mr. Price moved for approval of stal'l's recommendation. Mr. Spinclli seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. 6. Mangrove Clearing Award of Bid VII-3 Mr. Drury reported tbat we received bids in Ibc amount of $167,587.00 from Flnrida Environmental which exceeds our budget by about $35,000.00. We requested from FDOT a supplemental grant for $32,000.00 which is 90% of our short fall. They have awarded us with additional grants to take care of this aver budget item. Mr. Dairy recommendation is flint the Authority transfer $3,500 from our reserve to nmtch the $32,000.00 additional grnnt to award the Mangrove cutting for Marco Executive Airport to Florida Environmental in thc amount ors 167,587.00 Mr. Spinelli moved for approval of Mr. Drury's recommendation. Mr. Williams seconded thc motion. Motion passed unanimously. 7. George Barron Mr. Barron spoke to thc Board and reported tlmt lie bad enjoyed working with Ibc Board 1bt Ibc past nine year and wished that only the best for the Airport Authority. 8. Quarterly Financial Statements Mrs. Learner updated thc Board on lhe Quarterly Financial Statements. Everglades fael sales are down due to El Nino which bad taken out a number of aircrafts. Immokalee is selling enough fuel to pay for staff. Revenues were reported to be on track. As of October I, 1998 there will be a rent increase to all tenants. Management report expenses for the overall airport is in line for thc 9 months. 9. TDC Grant Mr. Drury informed the Board that the BCC unanimously approved the TDC Board's recommendation to award a $90,000100 grant to market the airports. All fnnds must be expended consistent with the grant application and documentation must be provided identifying the number of"head in Beds" the program developed during the summer season. EVERGLADES AIRPARK I. Special Event- Pancake Fly-Inn Airport Authority Board Minutes September 2 I, 1998 Page 6 16Gl ', Mr. Drury in£ormed the Board that Everglades Airpark was kicking off a Pancake Fly-lnn. This is a way to track people through rural airports. These individuals become familiar with the airport and tbey come back to visit. Mr. Blalock is selling this activity np and in order to do so he ',viii need lo purchase a griddle, serving table, supplies, pancake batter, syrup, etc. This will be a monthly event. Staff recommendation ',','as for approval of Resolution 98-37 authorizing the purchase of materials necessary to commence and put on Ibis special event. This sum shall not exceed $3,625.00 Mr. Spinelli moved for approval of staff's recommendation. Mr. [,azarus t, seconded the molion. Motion passed unanimously. VI. IMM()KAI.EE REGIONAl. AIRPORT I. Manufitcturin~4 Incnbalor Proiect Mr. l)rury reported that there will be a pre-construction meeting at the lmmokalce Airport on October I, 1998 at 10:00a.m. Tbe contractor, engineer, and Mr. Drury '.viii get together and discuss various schedules. On October 9, 1998 there will be a meeting with USI)A at the lmmokalee Airport. at I0:00a.m. and a Notice to Proceed will be issued. 2. Declaration of Development Standards Mr. Drury requested that tile Board look over the draft of the Declaration of Development Standards for the next couple of weeks. Mr. Drury requested that if there was any suggestions to fax them to btm with tbeir notes. At the next Board meeting Mr. Drury will be asking the Board to adopt tile Declaration of Development Standards which sets tile tone of tile Industrial Park. 3. AWOS This item ',','ill be presented at the next Board meeting. Airport Authority Board Minutes September 21, 1998 Page 7 4. ENVOI, Manufacturing Mr. Drury reported that ENVOL is in the process of&signing a 3,000 square fool facility to construct parachute wings for ultralight type aircraft. The Board xvill be npdaled as negotiations move forxvard. 5. Empowcrment Zone Resolntion Mr. I)rury reported that tile County Planning Department has asked if we will parmership with them on the Empowerment Zone application process. Staff was recommending that the Board accept Resolution No.98-36 for Authority's signature. Mr. Williams moved for approval of staff's recommendation. Mr. Spinelli seconded thc mntion. Motion passed unanimously. 6. Motnr Vehicle Department Lease Mr. Drury requested that the Board approve renewal of the Motor Vehicle Department lease. Their rent will be doubled in order to be charged fair market valne. This will bring their payment up to $640.00 a year. Mr. Price moved for approval of slaws recommendation. Mr. Spinelli seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Accept Supplemental Grant - Scrub Jay Implementation Mr. Drury reported that the FDOT has agreed to a purchase of a commercial tractor mower to manage tile Scrub Jay habitat area. The FDOT will pay for 80% or $28,374.19 of the cost of this capital acquisition which was approved by the Authority on June 8, 1998. The Authority is asking that the description of the original Supplemental Grant be changed to include the mower. The staff recommends that the Authority accept the supplemental grants from thc FDOT and authorize tile Chairman to execute the grant documents. Mr. Spinclli moved for approval of slaws recommendation. Mr. Price seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Airport Authority Board Minutes September 21, 1998 Page 8 16G1 Vll. MARC() ISLAND EXECUTIVEAIRI'ORT I. Catering Services Award Contract Mr. Drury reported that Fat Pelican has been providing the airport with catering services for the airport customers. The Authority's requested proposals from firms interested in providing catering services to the customers of the Marco Island Executive Airport. The only response received was from Fat Pelican. Staff recommends that the Authority accept Fat Pelican's proposal to providc catering services to thc airport's customers for a 10% concession fee and authorize the Chairman to execute an agreement with Fat Pelican for a 2 3'car period renewable for an addition 2 year period at the Authority's discretion. Mr. Spinelli moved for approval of staff's recommendation. Mr. Noren seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Vlll. O1.,I) BUSINESS None IX. NEW BUSINESS 1. Enterprise Rental Car Mr. Drury reported that negotiation arrangements had been made for Enterprise Rental Car to service Immokalec Airport and the Everglades Airpark. A sign for Enterprise Rental Car will be set up. They presently service Marco Executive Airport. Out of their Bonita office they will deliver cars to Immokalee. They will deliver cars on a flat bed to the Everglades Airpark. This will allow all three airports to have car rental service. The Sheriff has agreed to donate a courtesy vehicle for the Immokalee Airport. We are working with Fleet Management to determine what it will cost to keep it properly maintained. The County has comprehensive liability for all the vehicles and we will need to add this vehicle to our list of inventor3'. Mr. Spinelli moved for approval for Mr. Dmry to look into the cost of maintenance. Mr. Price seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Airport Authority Board Mitmtes September 21, 1998 Page 9 2. Executive Director's Contract IVlr. Drury reported that the County has a pay range for different positions. When you exceed the top of your pay range the County no longer pays for retirement. Mr. l)rury requested that the Authority would authorize the Chairman of the Aulhority to execute the necessary documents authorizing the payment of retirement benefits consistent with every other County employee being equal to the approved percentage for their salary, and that the range not be capped off at tile County's range but be capped of at the Authority's range. Discussion was held. Mr. Price moved for approval that a range be set for review at the next Authority meeting for all management personneh Mr. Spmelh seconded tile motion. Motion passed unanimously. 3. Aullmrit¥ Board Service Mr. l,azarus asked if an individual that had served on the Board receives a certificate recognizing their service. Mr. Drury indicated that individuals receive a certificate from the Board of County Commissioners and a plaque from tile Authority. It was decided that it would be made a matter of policy that a plaque he presented to Board members at the end of their tenn, 4. Election of New Officers It was motioned that Michael Williams be elected as the new Chairman. Mr. Price seconded tile motion. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Spinelli moved that nominations be closed. Mr. Noren seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Williams was unanimously elected as Ch:firman. It was motioned to elect Mr. Noren as Vice Chaimmn. Mr. Spinelli seconded tile motion. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Noren ',','as unanimously elected as V'ce Chmrman. Airport Authority Board Minutes September 21, 1998 Page 10 16Gl Mr. Price motioned to clect Mr. Schrnidt as Secretary, Mr. Noren sccondcd the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Schmidt was unanimously elected as Vice Chairtnan. 5. Single Engine Aircraft Thc Authority instructed staff to investigate tile acquisition of a single engine aircraft and report back its findings, 'File aircraft would be nsed by staff to get to tile three airports, FAA in Orlando. FDOT in Barrow and Tallahassee. AD.IOURNMENT Meeting ad.journcd at 3:02p.m. AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 8:30 A.M., THURSDAY, OC]'OBER I. 1998 IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, COUNTY GOVF. RNMENT CENTER, 3301 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST. EAST NAPLES. FLORIDA: NOTE; INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITI:,D TO 5 MINUTES ON ANY ITEM. INDIVIDUALS SELECTED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZATION OR GROUP ARE ENCOURAGED AND ,',,lAY BE AI.I.O'VFED 10 MINUTES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM IF SO RECOGNIZED BY TIlE CIIAIRMAN: PERSONS WISHING TO ItAVE WRITFEN OR GRAPltlC MATERIALS INCLUDED IN TIlE CCPC AGENDA PACKETS MUST SIJBMFF SAID MATERIAL A MININIUM OF 3 WEEKS PRIOR TO TIlE RESPF. CTIVE PUBLIC tlEAPdNG. IN ANY CASE, WRITTEN MATERIALS INTENDED TO BE CONSIDERED BY 'FILE CCPC SHALL BE SUBMITFED 'FO 'FILE APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO TIlE PUBLIC IIEARING. ALL MATERIAL USED IN PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE (.'CPC WILL BECOME A PERNIANENT PART OF TIlE RECORD AND WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR PRESENTATION TO TIlE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IF APPI.ICABLI.i ROLL CALL BY CLERK ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA ANV PERSON WltO DF. CIDES TO APPEAl. A DECISION O1: TIlE CCPC WILL NEED A RECORD OF TIlE PROCEEDI'NGS PERTAINING TIfERETO, AND TIIEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEED~GS IS MADE, WHICII RECORD INCLUDES TIIE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WtlICII ]'tie APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. B~r~ 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 4. PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES: 5. BCC REPORT 6. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT 7, ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS: l,'iisc. Corres: Date:, Copies 'fo: ]/~'~ Petition No. V-95-8, Bill ltoover of tloover Planning. representing Roger D. Withers and OPM-USA-Inc., requesting approval of a 65 foot height variance from the required 185 feet to 250 feet for an existing 185 foot communications tower located at 5630 Taylor Road, within the $ & C Indus,'iai Park, in Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 2.5 East. (Coordinator: Fred Reischl) ConsMer Recommendations for Tran~rrdilal of 1998 Growth Management Plan Amendment~ to the Department of Community AITaita. (Coordinator: Comprehensive Staff) ' ~, 10. 11. 12. OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS A. Election of Officers PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA ADJOURN 10/I/98 CCPC AGENDA/md 16Gl September 3, 1998 TRANSCRIPT OF THE P~EETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COM~4ISSION Naples, Florida, ~September 3, 1998 LET IT BE REI~E/~BERED, that the Collier County Planning Commission in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 8:30 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Michael Ao Davis Russell A. Budd Michael J. Bruet Edward J. Oates, Jr. Russell A. Priddy Michael Pedone Karen Urbanik Gary Wrage ALSO PRESENT: Ron Nino, Planning Services Marjorie M. Student, Assistant County Attorney Page 1 September 3, 1998 CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Collier County Planning Commission to order, calling the roll. Mr. Priddy? CO~4ISSIONER PRIDDY: Here. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Ms. Urbanik? CO~4ISSIONER URBANIK: Here. CHAIPd~AN DAVIS: Mr. Budd? COMMISSIONER BUDD: Here. With a gavel I will call this meeting of the and we'll begin by CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Mr. Bruet? COMMISSIONER BRUET: Present. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Mr. Davis, here. Mr. Oates? COMMISSIONER OATES: Here. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Mr. Pedone? CO~4ISSIONER PEDONE: Here. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Mr. Wrage? COMMISSIONER WRAGE: Here. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Ail present and accounted for. Addenda to the agenda? It appeared to me that we need to continue item B -- COMMISSIONER OATES: I would so move. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: -- to -- COMMISSIONER BRUET: Second. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: -- September 17th. CO~4ISSIONER OATES: Oh, I thought it was August the 20th. Oh, beg your pardon. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Yeah, B is continued -- COMMISSIONER OATES: I'm sorry, yeah. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: -- too. So a motion by Mr. 0ares to continue item B to September 17th, 1998, seconded by Mr. Budd. All those in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Carries unanimously. We have minutes from August 6th, 1998. COMMISSIONER OATES: Mr. Chairman, I would move we approve the minutes, but I would move that we strike the fact that Mr. York was here, because he isn't and wasn't. COMMISSIONER BUDD: Second. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Motion of approval by Oates, seconded by Mr. Budd. All those in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Carries unanimously. Any absences planned? ~ Anything in the way of a BCC report, Mr. Nino? MR. NINO: No report. CHAIP24AN DAVIS: Under chairman's report, I believe the one vacancy we have will be on the BCC's agenda for next Tuesday. Page 2 I September 3, 1998 COMMISSIONER OATES: Do they still just have the two applications? CHAIRMAN DAVIS: I think there were two submitted, that's correct. And I think that does it. It's the only thing that I know of. With that, moves us right into our advertised public hearings. Petition BD-98-29. I'd ask all those present that may want to testify on this petition to stand and raise your right hand so that you may be sworn by the court reporter. (Ail speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Mr. Gochenaur. MR. GOCHENAUR: Good morning, commissioners. For the record, Ross Gochenaur, planning services. The petitioner is requesting a 28-foot extension to allow for a 48-foot boat docking facility accommodating one 16-foot skid. The property's located at 141 Lopez Lane on Chokoloskee Island and contains about 110 feet of water frontage. The waterway Chokoloskee Bay is about one mile wide at the proposed site. The extension's needed because of the shallow bottom at the proposed site. No objections to this project have been received. The proposed facility meets all criteria, and staff recommends approval. Yesterday I talked to Mr. Bill Lindsay who is the petitioner's agent and also the petitioner's son. He lives and works in Coral Gables. And I told him that since there were no objections and the petition met all criteria, that I thought I could probably answer all of your questions and that he wouldn't need to be here this morning, although he offered to do so. - So if there are any questions, I'll be glad to try and answer. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. Any questions of Ross? Anyone from the public that would like to speak? Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: Mr. Chairman, I move that we approve BD-98-29. COMMISSIONER BUDD: Second. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Motion of approval by ~{r. Priddy, seconded by Mr. Budd. All those in favor? Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Carries unanimously. That brings us to item C. PUD 94-4(1) (sic.) Once again, I'd ask all those present that may want to speak on this petition to please stand, raise your right hand so the court reporter may swear you in. MR. NINO: May I suggest you go to the last item? CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Ail -- the petitioner's representative isn't her~, Mr. Nino? MR. NINO: Yeah. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. Well, we'll do just that then. Thank you. Page 3 September 3, 1998 That will move us over to item D, CU-98-12. Once again, I'd ask all those present that may want to testify on this petition to please stand and raise your right hand so you may be sworn by the court reporter. No? COMRMISSIONER OATES: Joe, do you want to talk? CH~.IRMAN DAVIS: Apparently we have just one speaker from the group. (Ail speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Mr. Badamtchian? MR. BADA/4TCHIAN: Good morning, commissioners, Chahram Badamtchian from planning services. Mr. Jeff Davidson, representing Mr. Joseph D. Bonness, trustee, is requesting a conditional use of agricultural zoning district from earth mining activity. This property is located on Oil Well Road, approximately four and a half miles east of Immokalee Road in section 16. ~nd this project is one square mile. Takes one entire section. And they are proposing to excavate to a depth of 20 feet. CO~4ISSIONER OATES: How many? MR. BADA/TTCHIAN: Twenty feet. COM/4ISSIONER OATES: Twenty. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: And staff reviewed this petition, recommends approval subject to staff stipulations. As you can see from my staff report, there's a school, proposed school, which is going to be open next year on Oil Well Road, where Orange Tree -- where the Waterways of Naples is located, to the east of that development. And I talked to the school board. They had some reservations, but they said they are going to provide sidewalk on eith%r side of the road for children living in the Orange Tree development. And I haven't received any letters of opposition. Staff recommends approval subject to staff stipulations. The EAB heard this item yesterday. They added several stipulations, which I had to add to my staff report -- to my agreement sheet. They were basically standard stipulation that they have to obtain clear -- permit before clearing, even though the site was a potato farm and it's already cleared. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Mr. Bruet? COM/~ISSIONER BRUET: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, I need to recuse myself from this. We had some possible discussions about a business opportunity with the Bonness people, so I'm going to recuse myself. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. COMMISSIONER BRUET: My apologies for proceeding. MR. NINO: For the record, I think it's important to appreciate the resolution that's proposed is one that only grants approval of this for a five-year period. =CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Right. P[R. NINO: And that needs -- at that time, it would be reconsidered by the Board of County Commissioners. That stipulation is in there in anticipation that as the area increases to urbanize, Page 4 September 3~ 1~8 that the day will come when that operation is no longer considered suitable for an area within an area being heavily urbanized. And that's why there's that time window -- that window in there. CHAIPaV~A/~ DAVIS: Mr. Priddy? COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: Chahram, I was -- I guess maybe I wasn't understanding the concern with the school, because that new school is being built some three or four miles to the west of this. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Yes, but trucks, they have to travel on Oil Well Road to reach Immokalee Road. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: Okay. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: And school buses, they will also use the same two-lane road. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: Okay. All rightl I understand. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Mr. Badamtchian, in your expert opinion, though, the traffic impacts and truck traffic, you're comfortable with that? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Yes. This road is mostly being used by trucks for agricultural uses. There are farms on either side of the road, and most of the traffic is truck traffic on that roadl And they are proposing to add 162 trips per day, which is one truck every four to five minutes. I'm comfortable with this, yes. CHAI~u~N DAVIS: Thank you. Any other questions of staff? Petitioner's representative have a presentation? ~lr. Simpson? MR. SIMPSON: Hi. My name is Glen Simpson, I'm representing Southern Sand and Stone, and working in conjunction with Mr. Jeff Davidson in this application. There are a couple of things that I'd like to note, and there are some concerns about the agreement that's proposed; none of which we're concerned about as far as safety issues and things like that. It's really more the appropriateness and how to apply those concerns to this operation. This area really isn't adding a lot of truck trips to that area. The place that we are proposing this is in a very remote agricultural area, and we're actually replacing the agricultural operation there. This has been a vegetable operation, which has many heavy trucks loaded, hauling produce out of there along the same roads during the season. Ours will be more yearly, but the intensity during that part will be actually reduced. Impact to the area from noise, basically you have pumps, big tractors running. We're replacing that with trucks and a couple pieces of equipment to do the excavation and moving. So it's really not a new impact to the area. The main concerns that we have primarily focus on several issues, and it may be just a matter of the wording in -- that's proposed in the agreement. Do you have the agreement in front of you, proposed agreement? First I'd like to go to item H, if that would be acceptable. COMMISSIONER 0ATES: Item what? MR. SIMPSON: H. CHAIRF0kN DAVIS: I think we've all got it. MR. SIMPSON: Okay. It says in there that the -- basically the Page 5 September 3, 1998 traffic routing plan would be submitted to the county and the school board for review and approval. We have no problem with that part where it would be submitted to the transportation department and the school board for review. But basing our ability to operate on approval by the school board is somewhat unique to this operation. I don't think that's really the intent of what the comment was. I think it's just a matter of the wording of this. And I'm not sure that we really want to put the school board in the position of being a permitting agency in this particular instance. We understand they have concerns about the potential for traffic, as we do, and we intend on addressing those if they become a problem, but I'm not sure that this is really what the intent of this statement was supposed to do is put them in approval position. MS. STUDENT: Just to -- would the school board just be approving the traffic, whatever the plan is, as opposed to the actual operation of the -- the actual conditional use? Because from a legal perspective -- let me turn this around -- you have problems with invalid delegations of authority to other entities where it's not spelled out in the code, and there's a big problem. School board is a little different. But when -- or could be a little different. But there's a big problem when this is done and private individuals are permitted to pass on, you know, whether or not a property owner can have a particular land use. And those have been struck down as unconstitutional. Again, school board being, you know, some sort of governmental agency may be different. But I do have a concern about that language, so -- MR. SIMPSON: We would not object at all to it being submitted for their review and their comment to the county, but the county is really where we think any reference to approval should come. MS. STUDENT: And I think that's entirely appropriate to have him comment and then the county would be the ultimate decider. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: I have no problem with modifying the language for county approval, and a copy of that approval shall be forwarded to the school board. CHAIRFJ~N DAVIS: For informational purposes? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Yes. MR. SIMPSON: Thank you. The next item that I'd like to bring up is somewhat of a question about the item G, the previous one, regarding the maintenance bond as opposed to a performance bond. And we understand it's common to have a performance bond posted and accept that in order to assure that the operation is constructed as it's proposed and permitted. We don't have a problem with that. But I'm not sure that we are familiar with the application in this case of a maintenance bond and what that would be used.to maintain and how that applies to our particular operation. MR. BADAMTCHIA~N: That's a transportation department stipulation, and %hey want this bond to maintain the road in case they do not maintain the road and the truck causes damage to the road. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: How much is the bond? Page 6 September 3, 1998 MR. BADAMTCHIAN: That has to be set later. There's no dollar a~nount yet. MR. SIMPSON: It's my understanding that that's what the impact fees on a particular operation would accomplish is minimizing the impacts to the highway system throughout Collier County, including the roads that are close to the operation, as well as far away. That's part of how they're determined is the distance and travel. ~d from what that tells me is it seems like the transportation department's kind of double dipping on the impact fees or the cost of maintenance right there. CHAI~ DAVIS: Staff response? MR. NINO: I don't believe impact fees are used for maintenance. Impact fees are used to only increase the capacity of their -- the county's arterial highway system. It's new roads and widening. MR. SIMPSON: Well, then how will this particular operation be assessed their portion of the impact to the maintenance of the roads, as opposed to replacing the existing traffic that's there and the effect of the other agricultural hauling operations and commercial operations in the area? MR. NINO: That's a good question. I wish Mr. Kant had been here. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Well, what we may want to do is we may want to strike this part with our recommendation today and give transportation the opportunity at the board hearing to justify it if they want to take that opportunity. Because it would -- I agree, it would be nice if we had someone here we could ask about it today. That might resolve the issue. But I think Mr. Simpson raises a valid point. MR. SIMPSON: With that in mind, the previous statement about the maintenance, we really don't have a concern with. But the way that they were both proposed, we felt like we were getting twisted a little bit. The next item that we have concern with would be item K on the next page. I can understand the -- in an urban area or an area that's highly traveled by traffic going to and coming from our community or within our community, the need to have some kind of site and sound barrier. In this particular operation, as ! mentioned before, we're in a very remote part of the county. From the site there are only two houses that you can see. Granted, there is area around it that is Golden Gate Estates. On the west side is the Fakaunion Canal, plus 30 feet of property to the west of our boundary, before you even get to a lot where anyone could build. So that's roughly about 150 feet there. Plus, we are providing the appropriate setbacks in distance, and it just seems like in this particular location that's kind of unneeded. And I'd like the board to consider that, because of the location of the site. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: This area, even though there are very few home~, they're all subdivided Golden Gate Estate lots. And people may buil-d on those lots soon. They're individually owned subdivided lots, and that's why we asked a berm to act as a buffer between those single-family lots and this mining operation. Page 7 September 3, 1998 MR. SIMPSON: It's kind of interesting, because yesterday at the EAB meeting, staff was recommendinglthat we have no separation, and in fact tie into the Fakaunion Canal as part of our operation, because they felt like it would perhaps benefit the landowners to be adjacent to a large lake like that. That's not part of our proposal, but I think the difference in philosophy here and suggestions is rather interesting. ~ M~. NINO: Is that staff or members of the EAB? MR. SIMPSON: It was staff and!-- received positively. But since that was not part of what we are proposing, it was not -- it was not incorporated. MR. BADA~4TCHIAN: I believe that was done for what, management purposes, and that adding one square mile of lake to the canal system can help with flooding in the area. However, I believe the south Florida water management district denied that. And -- but those lots being waterfront lots, in the future -- this operation is going to be there for 20 to 25 years. So in 25 years, yes, some people are going to have waterfront lots. But we are talking about 25 years of mining operation adjacent to single-family lots, Golden Gate Estate lots. COM~ISSIONER OATES: We're only talking about five years, though. MR. NINO: That's right. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: We are giving him a conditional use for five years. Then after that they're going to come back for review. But the life of operation, as presented by the applicant, is going to take 20 to 25 years. CHAIRF~%N DAVIS: The addition of berming might be very well addressed in five years then. That is an option. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: But they are starting the Phase I, which is adjacent to the Golden Gate Estates, and they are moving toward the agricultural area. That's why we are asking for the berm now. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. COMMISSIONER OATES: Does it need to be on all sides? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Yes, it has to be on all sides as they progress. We are not asking to build a berm at one time around the one square mile area. MR. NINO: The idea that -- would be that the area that they're working on would be encircled with some kind of a berm, visual buffer, at least reduce the opportunity for particular matter, you know, to get onto adjacent properties within the five-year window. Who knows if there may be another 25, 50 houses built adjacent to this property on the west side and on the south side. COM~ISSIONER OATES: If they continued to develop that property as they have in the past, it will be a long time before anything's built there, before 45 or 50 homes are built, in my opinion. MR. NINO: Could be. CHAIRM~%N DAVIS: Mr. Priddy? COM}4ISSIONER PRIDDY: When -- is this going to be rock mining or just fill? MR. SIMPSON: No, it's fill. It's just a sand fill pit. This will be dug wet. It doesn't have the dust associated with rock mining Page 8 September 3, 1998 and dry rock mining materials. C019~ISSIONER PRIDDY: Is the objection to the berm eight feet or -- as opposed to four feet? I mean, I'm in favor -- I'm in favor of a berm of some type. MR. SIMPSON: Our design provides or proposes a berm primarily to retain the water and to -- should there be a flood -- COMMISSIONER OATES: You have to come up and use the microphone. MR. SIMPSON: He's t~lzing to trick me, get me to use a mike that doesn't work. Our design proposes to retain all the water up to the 100-year storm on-site without any discharge, which is far beyond what -- COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: How high is that berm that does that? MR. SIMPSON: Well, now, beyond that, the berm would retain it and only allow it to discharge through a discharge structure. So the berm holds it even beyond the 100-year storm event on-site. COMMISSION~R PRIDDY: My point is you got -- MR. GOCHENAUR: It's a foot high. MR. SIMPSON: It's a foot high? It's a one-foot hiqh above natural ground. But the 100-year storm event brings it up to about a foot and a half below natural ground because of the location. This is on Big Corkscrew Island. It's a high area. So from the water table at the 100-year storm event to the top of that berm, you're talking about two and a half feet, anyway. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: My point is, is you're going to construct a berm anyway -- MR. SIMPSON: Right. C0~ISSIONER PRIDDY: -- so we're talking about some difference between two and a half feet and five feet or six feet. If this were, you know, almost any other project, there would be either a landscape buffer or some -- you know, something around this project, and it would seem to me that it would be simple enough to go on and throw this berm up as the project builds, not around the whole section at one time, but, you know, around the part that's being -- MI{. SIMPSON: Well, let me suggest a compromise here, if I may. The area along the west side is what staff was talking about connecting. Now, we have not only the canal, but 30 feet of property before you get to our property line, and then the setback that's on our property. MR. GOCHENAUR: 100 feet. MR. SIMPSON: That's this 100 feet. So that gives us really almost 200, 220 feet from the actual buildable property line, and then the property goes back west from there. This isn't close enough that it would really cause an impact during the construction, because this is our first phase of construction. Our plan is to start on Phase I in this corner, install our structure, and go on. So if it's needed on this side, I kind of wonder whether the homeowners -- and there's only one homeowner anyQhere close, and it's right up -- right in this area, just one house over there. Whether they like to look at lake or like to look at berm, I don't know. Page 9 September 3, 1998 Along this side here, these lots do back up onto the -- our operation. It's also a rather short area. And maybe the appropriate thing to do there is to put the berm along there to help break up the potential impacts of people that own these lots. Even though nobody's building there, there is the second house that's over here, which is the very last place it would be built. But as we start operation in this area, maybe it's appropriate to put one along here. Whether we need one here to protect the farmer that's Going to continue farming against the impacts from our operation, I doubt that that's really needed. We'll have a ditch and a small berm for water management purposes so that we don't have any impacts to this water management system, but I doubt if he's going to be affected by it. So that just leaves the area along the front. And I think we're proposing our setbacks and -- to have a pleasant appearance along there, along with our office site. And maybe there's some interest in having a berm or something along in that area. But as far as encompassing each phase with an eight-foot berm, I just feel that's excessive and I really think it's going to add more cost than is necessary. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: Yeah, I would only be able to support a berm around the perimeter barrier of the section, not around the interior phase portion of it. MR. NINO: Yeah, that was the intent of the stipulation. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. So in other words, the interior line -- MR. NINO: No. CHAIRMJkN DAVIS: -- no berm was envisioned there. MR. NINO: Correct. It was never intended. ' COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: And the berm can be constructed in phases as they, you know, move along. I don't think we need to impose that they need to go throw up a berm around -- you know, four miles of berm around the section of land, but that be done as -- ~R. NINO: That too was never intended. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: -- as the phasing. COMMISSIONER W-RAGE: I support that. MR. SIMPSON: The way that it's written, we interpret it as being around each phase, the perimeter of each phase, which I think is what was stated also here. That being the case, then -- COMiMISSIONER PRIDDY: We're just talking about exterior. MR. SIMPSON: -- what do we do on the west side? CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Right, yeah. COMMISSIONER OATES: Do we need an eight-foot berm? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: I'm saying that along the property line on each phase. The phase line is not the property line. So we have to think about north, south and east -- or west. MR. SIMPSON: West, primarily. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Well, we've Got that much clarified on the rec6rd, so that's Good. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: I don't know that we need -- they need an eight-foot berm, but I -- you know, I'd certainly say something -- Page 10 September 3, 1998 MR. NINO: How about noise -- how about noise attenuation? I mean, how much -- what kind of equipment do you have out there -- MR. SIMPSON: Right now he's got -- MR. NINO: -- creating noise? MR. SIMPSON: -- diesel pumps. I believe there are three, four diesel power units operating for the irrigation system. There are five or six diesel pumps operating for the water maintenance, plus the tractors, the diesel tractors, and then during the harvest season you have the trucks and the activities in there. So it already has a pretty heavy noise impact to the area. We would be replacing that with a machine for excavation, whether it be a drag line or a backhoe, front end loader to load trucks. We don't have processing equipment. It's not like we're putting up an aggregate plant or anything that would have additional noise, other than the engines running. And then you'd have the noise from the trucks that are coming and going, and I don't see where they would be any louder than the diesel trucks that's hauling produce. So as far as new -- adding any noise impacts to the area, I don't think that it would be significant. CO~{MISSIONER PRIDDY: Let me ask the question in a different way. What height of berm can you all live with? MR. SIMPSON: You're talking -- COMAMISSIONER PRIDDY: On the property line. MiR. SIMPSON: Four feet? May I confer with my client a second? CHAIRMAN DAVIS: You bet. (Off-the-record discussion.) MR. SIMPSON: In talking with my client, it seems like, you know, they feel a four-foot berm wouldn't really put a lot of additional expense to them. And it, you know, is not a lot of material and expense. And the equipment they could use would be much less to operate, and we have no problem in doing that, if that would be acceptable to the board. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. COMMISSIONER URBANIK: I have a question. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Yes. COMMISSIONER URBANIK: I'd like to see you keep your expenses low. The only question I would have, perhaps from staff and from yourself, is the safety issue as far as surrounding homes, if children would wander over to that location, if that was in fact why the eight foot was possibly recommended. Is that a -- was that a consideration to keep children out of the -- MR. BADAMTCHIAN: That is part of it. Right now there are no children, but we anticipate that in the future there will be some homes. And yes, that's part of the problem we have here. The other thing is, they -- earth mining is a noisy and dusty business, and they have large equipment. And we're trying to hide tho~e equipments and have a buffer, noise buffer, between those potential single-family homes in the area and the operation here. We are talking about lake here, but the lake is going to happen in 20 Page 11 16Gl September 3, 1998 years, and for the next 20 years we're going to have heavy equipments and we're going to have dust and noise in the area. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: What type of landscaping are they required to do around this, if any? MR. NINO: They have to plant a tree every 30 feet; 10-foot tree every 30 feet to -- within a 10-foot wide earth berm -- I mean, landscaped area. That's about all. CHAIRPiAN DAVIS: Okay, any other questions? Anything to add, Mr. Simpson? MR. SIMPSON: No, not on this point. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. We may have some questions for you at the end, as we will for staff. MfR. SIMPSON: Just two more items, and I'll move on. CHAI~N DAVIS: Please. MR. SIMPSON: The next item is the issue of the groundwater monitoring. I don't know if you have -- the whole issue there -- frankly, I'm surprised we didn't address this yesterday at the EAB, but the groundwater quality monitoring, I think the intent was based on an assumption that we might be going through a confining unit between ~he water table aquifer and the lower Tamiami and the lower Tamiami's primary drinking water aquifer for the area, so there might be the potential for cross-contamination. And that's a very legitimate concern. But this is a copy of the preliminary assessment of the groundwater resources in western Collier County, performed by the water management district and published in February, 1986, and their data shows that to the -- within a half mile of our site to the west, what is shown as the lower Tamiami confining unit is well below 25 feet% It's down around 30, 35 feet. And then the next well, which is about two miles to the east, the confining unit within that well is down around 40 feet, approximately. So the confining unit is well below what our proposed excavation would be, and the groundwater monitoring for that purpose seems to be somewhat alleviated. And this really didn't come up until this letter came out that we knew that this was a consideration, or we would have had this resolved before it got to the board. But I defer to staff, and I'll also give you this book to look at. CHAIRMA/~ DAVIS: Staff comments? MIR. BADAIMTCHIAN: The stipulation has come from Dr. Gail Gibson. He's senior hydrologist working for pollution control. And he had concern about cross-contaminations. And I did not discuss this in detail with him, but he had concerns about the cross-contamination of Tamiami aquifer. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: All right. MR. SIMPSON: His concerns were limited to the cross-contamination issue. That's what -- ,MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Yes, I have a copy of his memo. -COMMISSIONER OATES: Well, why don't we leave this stipulation in, since we again don't have anybody here to dispute it one way or the other, and resolve it between now and the time it gets to the Page 12 September 3, 1998 I'd like to have it resolved before we get to the County Commission. MR. SIMPSON: County Commission, not at the County Co~nission -- CO~4ISSIONER OATES: Well, no, I meant -- MR. SIMPSON: -- but I agree with what you're saying -- COMMISSIONER OATES: -- said before. MR. SIMPSON: -- agree with what you're saying. That's why I provided the information from the district, to show that his concerns were legitimate, but he didn't have the information provided to him to -- COMMISSIONER OATES: And I -- MR. SIMPSON: -- show one way or the other. CO~4ISSIONER OATES: And I don't dispute that one way or the other, but I'm not an expert enough to have any idea what they're talking about -- I mean you're talking about. So I think we ought to leave it in and then resolve it before it gets to the County Commission° MR. BADAMTCHIAN: If I received a memorandum from Dr. Gail Gibson saying the problem's resolved, that's fine with me. CHAIRF~N DAVIS: Well, I think -- I think like we talked about, what I suggested on the other issue, on traffic, is -- and we may want to treat this item very similarly -- that we don't see any need to leave these two items in there and then that gives staff the opportunity at the board hearing or working with the petitioner in the meantime to present credible evidence that it needs to be in there. For consistency I'd just like to -- COMMISSIONER OATES: Okay. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: -- treat them all the same. ' COMMISSIONER OATES: That's fine with me. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: I have a question. Is it a very expensive operation to do groundwater monitoring? MR. SIMPSON: You have to construct monitoring wells, which is several thousand dollars, and then you have to have an ongoing sampling where you physically have to take the samples and send it to the lab. And it is a pretty expensive -- and it's also in an area where there's no indication of the confining unit. It's never been required and it's really kind of hard to justify. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: I'm not an engineer, so you're going to have to bear with me a minute. You're saying that the Tamiami water aquifer, or whatever you want to call it, is not underneath this particular portion? MR. SIMPSON: It is beneath it but well below it. There is a confining unit -- COMMISSIONER PEDONE: But you're saying that's 30 feet, I think you said, and the -- and your excavation's only 20 feet? MR. SIMPSON: The confining unit starts in the -- to the west of our~property at about 30 feet. That's the confining unit, not the aquifer. Then there's a space where the confining unit is there, and the confining unit's what prohibits the water from moving into the aquifer. Page 13 September 3, 1998 COMMISSIONER PEDONE: But the thickness of the earth above it makes no difference in the filtration process? In other words, if you have 20 feet above it versus 40 feet above it, isn't it a better filter to have the 40 feet above it than the 20? MIR. BADAMTCHIAN: I don't have the expertise to -- COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Here's why. I would just think more filter, the better, you know, so -- CHAIPR4AN DAVIS: This being a technical issue, I think as the traffic was with Mr. Kant's office, I think if we treat both of them that way, then we've got some level of comfort that they're going to be dealt with between now and the board. COMMISSIONER OATES: Geotechnical versus geophysical or something. Mit. SIMPSON: I just showed Mr. Pedone the actual top of the aquifer is down around -- if I remember what i just saw there, about 75 feet below surface. So the confining unit, the area that's shown as the confining unit itself, is rather thick so that the potential for our impact is minimal. And it's something that has -- similar situations have never been required. If I thought it was going to cause a problem, I'd be one of the first ones up here to ask you to require it. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: I've got to tell you, I'm lost. Just out of curiosity -- COMMISSIONER 0ATES: Read this letter from this PhD. COMMISSIONER PEEK)NE: It looks like a brick wall to me. CHAIRF~%N DAVIS: A confining unit is a layer of clay that keeps one area from intruding into the other area? MR. SIMPSON: Yes, the confining unit is a layer of clay or rock and %lay and marrow that actually can perch the water table above it and prohibit the infiltration. Now, the ability for the water to move through that confining unit can take hundreds and -- or thousands of years. It moves laterally much faster than it moves vertically. In this case, since we've got a 75-foot -- I mean, excuse me, a layer that's about 30 foot thick, that would take somewhere in the neighborhood of thousands of years for that water to move through. By that time, the confining unit itself is really one of the best filters you could have, especially since we're not looking at chemical contamination or anything, we're looking at just from the excavation of mixing up the dirt and water. CHAIR/~J~N DAVIS: Describe your operation again for me. It's fill removal as opposed to rock processing? PLR. SIMPSON: Absolutely. This area has a very high quality sand content. The sand goes down to the -- wherever the -- that confining unit is. And then we know that it's -- all the indications are that it's, you know, down around 30, 35 feet. The area needs that. Right now the material is comparable to this. We're having to haul in from Lee .County or further away. This is something our community really needs. We're not digging rock, we're not digging blasting, we're not doing any processing of material. We're digging it wet. In other Page 14 16Gl September 3, 1998 words, we're not de-watering. We're piling it up. The water seeps out right back into the hole we just dug it out of and we load it in the trucks and out it goes. There's no drying. It's basically a wet process that doesn't generate a lot of dust. It's not handled like rock processing is. It's really -- for this -- for any type of mining, it's a very iow-impact type operation. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: I think it's important that's on the record. Anything else? MR. SIMPSON: One more, and I'll be done. CHAIRlW3%N DAVIS: I thought there might be. MR. SIMPSON: The issue of the review in five years. When I was sitting here and I heard a few minutes ago that that review in five years was to determine whether this was an appropriate activity in this area or not, that concerned me greatly. I can understand a review in five years of the appropriateness of the facilities that are serving it or the maintenance, whether my clients' been doing their share to protect the community from the impacts of it. But to review whether they can continue to operate or not seems very excessive. They're going to be spending millions of dollars in our community to buy this property, to perform the operation, to keep many people employed locally moving material locally. To sit here and hear that they have only a five-year window that they have any certainty of being in business really concerns me. The issue of protecting the community, protecting the children at the school, the impacts of the traffic is their concern. They're not in any way wanting to minimize that issue. But from what I heard this morning and the way that I reread this, the ability to come back in five years and deny their -- the continuation of this operation I thir[k is a bit extreme. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: But it -- I mean, we're dealing with a -- they're asking for a conditional use, not a -- I mean, what you would be asking for would be a rezone as opposed to a conditional use. MR. SIMPSON: If it's felt that the -- that this is not an appropriate use for that operation, you can go through a procedure to change that use anyway. To set up a five-year review to determine the appropriateness of the use I think is excessive. I mean, what kind of certainty do they have? And why would they want to invest in our community? And I don't mean my client, I mean any company that only has five years of certainty that that use is going to be there if they don't -- outside of the normal procedures of revocation. Normally if there's something wrong, they get penalized, that's understandable. But to have a review process that introduces a five-year uncertainty in their ability to operate, I don't know of many businesses that would want to locate in our community like that. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: Every model home that's constructed has that same constraint, don't they? MS. STUDENT: Mr. Chairman -- = CHAIRMAN DAVIS: They do. MS. STUDENT: -- there's precedent for this, because we have some other uses that have some heavy impacts, and I -- maybe Mr. Nino might Page 15 16Gl September 3, 1998 know the particular one, and I believe it's out in the ag. and it may an asphaltic batch plant. But this is one that predates my tenure with the county, so it's over 10 and a half years old, that's come back in five-year increments to, you know, be -- get another approval. And the language I have, it's clear, it says the approval expires in five years. So it's not like you're -- you know, it's right up front you get this for five years, and there is precedent for it. And under our code we can put reasonable conditions on the approval of a conditional use. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: That is what it says. MR. SIMPSON: Excuse me, let me confer with my client. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: PLr. -- Chahram, maybe you can help me a little bit to understand the area. It's in an agricultural zoned area now that's what, you get one unit per five acres? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Yes. CHAIRM3%N DAVIS: Does it fall into that area that the Board of County Commissioners is currently talking about changing it to one to 20 acres? MR. NINO: No. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: It does not. MR. NINO: No. But it's surrounded on three sides with estate zoning; that is, one house per every two and a quarter acres. CHAIRMA/~ DAVIS: Right. That's about the eastern limit of the Estates zoning, isn't it? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Yes. MR. NINO: Yeah. But it's unusual, because it goes right around the property -- CHAIR/W_AN DAVIS: Right. ' MR. NINO: -- north and south. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: And granted, it is at Orange Tree, Oil Well Road where we are starting to see some development patterns after a long, long time. MR. BltDAMTCHIAN: A five-year limit is not unusual. We have several other conditional use with time limit, and we had one that we reviewed for five-year review and we recommended approval and the Board of County Commissioners approved extension of that use. It's not unusual. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. MR. SIMPSON: I was -- the item that was mentioned a few minutes ago about the asphalt plant, I conferred with my client a second. That specific situation, I understand, is a portable plant, it's not a long-term fixed investment. So if they had to move to another location within the county, it's a portable plant. If it's denied there, they can -- it's designed to pick it up and move it somewhere else. It's kind of difficult to do that when you're talking about the commitment to the ownership and development of a piece of property. From what I understand, there's really not a precedent set for a fill pit operation to be set up like this. Now, I think there's a big difference in a model home and an excavation operation. And the permanence and the use and whether it's a model home or a residential Page 16 September 3, 1998 home, you've got an alternative there that you could sell it for a residence if you're not going to continue using it as a model. That's not the type of options that are available when you're making an investment like this. And that's why we've tried to find a location that would be appropriate for a long-term use, an area that the changes are going to be minimized and yet in planning for the development and evolution of our community we know it's potentially a long-term operation. And we have tried everything we could do to find a location that we could plan for that activity to be in place for the long term. When you're investing the kinds of -- the kind of money that they are investing, you have to make those kinds of considerations. As I said, there's no objection to looking at the impacts to the services to the people, the potential risk to the community that this might provide. But to have them come back to see if in five years if they have to shut down and walk away after they have made the investment that they have in our community I really think is excessive. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Do you have a number for us, Mr. Simpson? MR. SIMPSON: A number? CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Yes. MR. SIMPSON: Of what? CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Well, staff is telling us and arguing five years. Do you have another number to propose? MR. SIMPSON: Well, let me see. We're probably looking at a 20-year to 30-year operation. If they had to accelerate that to a shorter period of time, that would increase the impacts on the community. They'd have to run more trucks more frequently. Excuse me while I go through -- CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Sure. MR. SIMPSON: -- the process. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Sure. MR. SIMPSON: And that would be a market driven function. And if the marketplace was there to accelerate it, it would be feasible to put more equipment on there and to start loading faster, if we went to a 15-year window or something like that. But I think for the potential life of the pit, the five-year review on the resulting impacts -- like I said, the five years isn't a problem there, but the appropriateness of the land use, I think 20 years would be minimum that you would consider, and that would also mean accelerating from what the current plan is. CHAIP~MAN DAVIS: Okay. ~Lr. Priddy? COMI~ISSIONER PRIDDY: I'm all in favor of the project and I think it is needed and I, you know, think that location is fine, but I'm not so sure that you all have asked permission in the appropriate manner. I mean, every conditional use we have in this county has ---that I'm familiar with from sitting on this board for five years has had some time frame tied to it to revisit. It almost appears that you need to ask ~or a rezone to industrial or whatever to have the assurances, you know, that -- MR. SIMPSON: Well, the problem is, is this isn't classified as Page 17 September 3, 1998 industrial use, it's classified as a conditional use within the agricultural area. And I think that that was part of the reason of that type of classification, because originally it was felt that the impacts were relatively comparable. As we've talked about, the diesel trucks and the traffic, it's similar. And it would not cause a significant change in impact that would require a zoning change. We don't have a five-year limitation on the agricultural use, and if this use is -- COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: That's not a comparison, Glen. MR. SIMPSON: Well, it is, if they're making a large investment in our community. COP[MISSIONER PRIDDY: That investment isn't going to disappear if their right to not dig dirt is taken away in five years. And in fact they're probably going to be able to -- the residual value of the land there is going to -- around that lake is going to have increased several times over what they may have paid for the initial cost of the land, so it's not a -- you know, it's like something's going to evaporate. They're going to develop that to where it's going to have, you know, value at the end of the mining period. And I know the family fairly well from their reputation of being here, and they're not going to go out there and walk away in 20 years with, you know, just a hole of water, not thinking that there's some use to that beyond that point. They're going to give some thought to that ahead of time. So, you know, the argument that they're making this big investment that's going to evaporate in five years if the county takes away that use is -- MR. SIMPSON: I'm not saying that there would not be some residual value to the property. But the time line for the development of ~hat to recover the investment, I think five years, it's not even close to balancing out not just the purchase of the property but the additional investment that's made. It's a very remote area. It's not an area that's, you know, close to what's being urbanized. It's not even designated as future urban development. And the operation they're proposing is a large pit. If they were planning on selling that for homes at this time, I'm sure it would be configured differently. But right now there's no potential in the marketplace that we can foresee today that says that the best use of that land or the -- even a minimal use of that land would be anything other than for the pit. That's why there's no land within the area that's being left for homes and other uses. CHAIR/W3~N DAVIS: Ms. Student, you had a comment? MS. STUDENT: Yes. I just want to remind the board and -- a conditional use, you don't have it as a matter of right. And I think sometimes a lot of people think that just because it's listed as a conditional use in our code that you almost automatically get it but you just have to go through this extra process, and that is not the case. And the code even says that it's something that may be granted but=you don't have it as a matter of right just because it's on a list. And then you go to our four criteria in 2 -- I think it's in 274 where the compatibility, noise, odor, glare, effects, consistency Page 18 September 3, 1998 with the comp. plan and the land development code and all that are listed, and the board has to do a balancing test to whether it's in the public interest or not as to whether the applicant gets the conditional use. And the burden is first on the applicant to show that they meet all those criteria, then it shifts to the government to determine whether or not it's in the public interest, looking to those four criteria whether or not to grant it. But it's not something you automatically have just because it's on a list. MR. SIMPSON: I agree with what Ms. Student said. And we have done that. We went through that before we ever made the application. We've gone through the exercise with staff, we have met that criteria. That's why they're recommending approval. Their proposed agreement has a catch in it that has come up at this point that really wasn't part of our discussions or any part of the planning up 'til -- up until yesterday, actually, is when it came out. And then today I heard and it was confirmed the nature of that intent is where the concern came up. So as far as meeting the public interest test and Going through what this -- whether this is appropriate land use or not for this area, we've done that, and we realize it's not something that's an entitlement, but it's a design and appropriate use, and we've tried everything we can do to make sure that this meets those criteria. And staff has confirmed that it does. MR. NINO: I think it's important to -- Ron Nino for the record. It's important to reflect that the five-year takes on significance directly proportional to the extent to which that area urbanizes. I mean, if in five years there's only another five or 10 houses out there, the likelihood that the petition will be renewed by the board is greater, obviously, than if for some reason a greater number of houges are built out there. And I don't think you can ignore the fact that an elementary school is Just down the road, and that very well might increase the rate of development within the Estates area to the east of that school. It's going to -- whether or not it's renewed will depend upon how well your argument is in five years and what happens between now and five years. You can't presuppose that you're not going to get some additional window of opportunity. MR. SIMPSON: The considering of risk that Mr. Nino has just suggested, we agree with. And we're saying that's -- we support that, looking at the impacts to -- resulting from the school and the development, the impact to the roads. But the appropriateness of the land use, I think that, you know, if you don't plan for it to be in this part of our community for a long period of time, where do you plan for it to be? Because it's something that to serve the rest of the community we need. And this is -- this is a very -- from what I understand, a very new application of this particular type of review for an earth mining operation of this nature, and one of this magnitude. ' COMMISSIONER WRAGE: And frankly, I -- you know, I think it's a good operation, but I'm having a problem here with compatibility even as it sits, simply the fact that people can build houses around on Page 19 1 6Gl" September 3, 1998 three sides of that. I have a compatibility problem now. And we've heard the figure five years, which is unacceptable to you, and I think 20 years is probably unacceptable to most of the people on this board. And either we, you know, come to a compromise on that or, you know, I probably won't support it based on compatibility. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Mr. Nino -- I'm sorry, Chahram, if I could ask you a question. We've been told -- when I first read this thing, you know, I thought of the standard rock pit, you know, with the machine, the processes and then the various sizes, aggregate and all that kind of stuff. We've been told on the record that this is not that, it's something different, it's a softer operation, if you will, if they are in fact Just excavating this sand. The point of that is, it's a less intense use in my mind because of that. Was that considered in the review process, the distinction between what kind of operation it is? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Yes, it was. Otherwise, probably we would have ended up recommending denial. But the area, as I said, it's already subdivided lots, and people may build homes. And the school being close by, that's going to help development of the area. And we would like to have this five years so we can make sure that in five years it's still compatible with the land use in the area. This is not a permitted use, this is a conditional use, and these are the conditions of this type of land use, basically. COM}4ISSIONER OATES: Can we write it so that it doesn't expire but they must come back every five years to review the process, the project? MR. NINO: I think the -- but the objective is that indeed the review is to determine whether or not it ought to cease and desist. Tha~ is the very purpose of the five-year limitation. And as a -- and as a function of that, compatibility, noise and all of those issues will be reviewed that will determine the decision whether they ought to continue, be allowed to continue or cease and desist. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Yeah, exactly. COM/4ISSIONER OATES: And that's what I'm saying, that they must -- they need to come back every five years for review, but does it automatically expire? MR, NINO: Oh, no, no, no, no. COMMISSIONER OATES: Well, it says it does. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: It says right here that it does. MR. NINO: I'll be happy to change that. No, the intent -- the intent is that every five years -- COMMISSIONER OATES: Well, that's -- you don't have any problem with that, do you? MR. NINO: The intent is that in five years -- COMMISSIONER 0ATES: You don't have a problem with that, do you? MR. SIMPSON: No. Because you have the right to -~ CHAIRMAN DAVIS: State -- if you would, Mr. Nino, state for the record exactly what the five-year interval means, because it tells us here in five years they're out. MR, NINO: Well, that's improperly worded. Page 20 September 3, 1998 CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. MR. NINO: The intent is that in five years the matter would go to the board of zoning appeals for a review to determine whether or not additional time ought to be granted for the operation of that activity. COM~ISSIONER OATES: Can we change the verbiage to that -- MR. NINO: Sure. COMMISSIONER OATES: -- basically? MR. SIMPSON: That would be fine. That's basically what we were saying. You have the right to go and ask that we cease and desist if we violate the requirements anyway. So you've got that. But the fact that it would expire is what our concern was. COMMISSIONER OATES: Yeah, I understand. MR. SIMPSON: I -- thank you very much. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: So what Mr. Nino Just read into the record sits okay with you and your client? MR. SIMPSON: Yes. MR, NINO: And I'm sorry for that confusion. I didn't know that's what we were arguing. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Well, when -- it Just -- the agreement says this approval shall expire in five years -- MR. NINO: No, that's -- CHAIRMAN DAVIS: -- from the date of approval. MR. NINO: No, that wasn't the intent. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: I would like -- CHAIRMAN DAVIS: You're -- to me that says you're done. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: I would like for the record that the applicant mtates that they are not proposing any blasting or any type of exDrosion. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: He has. CO}94ISSIONER OATES: He has. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: That was in the record and that's how we understood it. MR. NINO: I would -- we'd be happy to change the wording B to indicate that in five years it is subject to consideration for renewal. C}~IRMAN DAVIS: Okay. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: No blasting, no rock crushing. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Yeah. And Chahram, you're -- in the agreement with what's been stated on the record today, that may very well need to be stated in here, too, so that we have a good understanding of what the operation's going to be. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Okay. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Any other questions of the applicant's representative? Additional speakers on this petition today~ Okay. Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER 0ATES: Mr. Chairman, having filled out my con~itional use petition -- what do you call it -- finding of fact, I would move that we submit this petition to the Board of County Commission with a recommendation of approval, subject to the following Page 21 September 3, 1998 changes: Changing the verbiage on item B, as was discussed by Mr. Nino, eliminating item G, eliminating item b, changing the verbiage on item H, as we previously agreed, changing item K to four feet berm, and with the understanding that it's in phases along the perimeter of the property. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: I'll second that motion. I would do so with one little comment. I really think that it's in the petitioner's best interest to put up a higher berm, because the fewer people that know what he's doing there and what's going on, the fewer people that's going to be here to complain five years from now when your review comes up. COM~ISSIONER OATES: Would you want me to raise that from four feet then, or -- COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: I would -- I would feel better with, you know, maybe a six feet, but they're the ones that's going to have worry about the people complaining five years from now, so -- COMMISSIONER WRAGE: I will be driving by it every day between now and then, I'll monitor it for you. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: So did we go to six? COMMISSIONER OATES: If you want six, I'd be glad to change COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: I'll go with six. COMMISSIONER OATES: All right° I'll change the motion then to six feet. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: A motion of recommendation of approval by Mr. Oates with the noted changes, seconded by Mr. Priddy. And Mr. Badamtchian, did you get all that okay? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Yes. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. And -- ' COMMISSIONER OATES: I should add that we add the item about not doing rock, and it would be sand that you're going to add. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: NO blasting, no rook crushing. CHAIRMJ~N DAVIS: Okay. Any other discussion on the motion? All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN DAVIS: That carries unanimously. If you'd pass your findings of fact down to our secretary, Mr. Priddy. And that brings us to item PUD 94 -- excuse me, item PUD-95-4(1). Ail those here that may want to speak on this petition, please stand, raise your right hand so you may be sworn by the court reporter. (Ail speakers were duly sworn.) COMMISSIONER OATES: Glen? Joe, Joe, give -- these are Glen's books. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Yeah, we'll see that he gets them back there. Okay. Mr. Badamtchian? · MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Good morning, Chahram Badamtchian from planning services. CHAIRMAn; DAVIS: This one's not real hard, is it? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: No, it's real easy. Page 22 September 3, 1998 COMI~ISSIONER PRIDDY: So was the last one when we started. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: This is an existing PUD. And the applicant is proposing to add 0.19 acres of land to the existing PUD to provide for 10 -- 15 additional parking spaces. They are not proposing any expansion of the existing building. And they're also proposing to change the access point, future potential access point, to the side. There was one shown on the east side; however, the county is building a bridge over the canal at the intersection of Immokalee and Airport Road. The county requested them to move the future access to the west side of the development, which they agreed. And they're also showing a future access point, which probably will be a shared access interconnection between two developments, one development to the east -- the parcel to the east is developed. Staff reviewed this petition and recommends approval. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: It just seems to make sense for everybody. COM~4ISSIONER OATES: Mr. Nino, I have a question. Obviously they're -- because it is a doctors/therapists' building, they're adding additional parking spaces because they need additional parking spaces. I'm sure they're not doing it just for the fun of it. Should we -- and that has nothing to do with this particular petition, but should we go back and look at the parking spaces required for medical facilities and maybe increase them? MR. NINO: Probably makes good sense if -- have you done some empirical studies that show that you really need additional parking, or what does this result from? You've been open about a year there, haven't you? MR. SICILIANO: Yes, yes. And I don't ).enow that the -- if I were to say -- ' CHAIR/~AN DAVIS: Name for the record? MR. SICILIANO: Excuse me, for the record, my name is Bruce Siciliano, I'm the agent for the applicant. And commissioners, let me say first, I apologize for being a little late. The traffic got me this morning. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Well, you've been duly punished by listening to the other petition. MR. SICILIANO: In terms, I guess, of the overall comment about parking, you know, and I've looked at -- it's kind of ironic because I've had to deal with about four doctors' offices on issues in the last couple of months. I don't know that the standard in my opinion is really -- needs to be raised. I think what you have sometimes is you get one doctor, perhaps, or two doctors intend to be on one end of the building that end up being a little busier than the other ones, and -- but I don't know, Collier's standard is -- I think is pretty comparable. I don't -- I mean, I really can't react more than that. I think when I've been by their office, it's not like I've seen them full and overflowing. I think they're looking, one, for convenience for their customers -- I mean, their patients more. ~ In this case it's a little bit different as well. What they're doing here is -- was partly to add some more parking because a couple of doctors wanted the additional space. The other situation was, is Page 23 16Gl ' September 3, 1998 they've kind of got an eyesore back there, they're both sharing the condo, and the doctors want to eliminate it. There's a ditch back there. Basically it's all overgrown with weeds. They've all kind of wanted it cleaned up for years, and so they've made the decision to go ahead and, you know, let's just make it more parking lot and then we'll extend the landscaping. So that's a lot of the driving force here. I mean, the doctors did want the additional spaces as well. The access issue really was, as Chahram said, kind of came up with the county. They've always plar~ned on having that access on the east side, and now with the bridge going in, the county didn't want the driveway close. They've kind of accommodated and said okay, we've lived with basically one to the west, but leave us the option when that -- if a road goes through. Because actually, they don't own the land to be able to extend the driveway to the north. They said let us have another driveway to the parking for the convenience of the customers -- the patients later. That's really the circumstances. Doctors are busy offices, and I will say that. They -- they -- you know, it's kind of a peak thing. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: I think sometimes with parking we see too -- I can think of a couple restaurant activities in town that success is their -- is the problem for them. That -- most of them, what the code provides for is more than adequate in the way of parking. But then you get those one or two that are hugely successful and cause a parking problem. So, you know, maybe a part of the answer here too is, is from when I drive by it seems to be a very busy place and they have -- seem to have enjoyed some success there, so -- MR. SICILIANO: Yeah, and there's a flip side when you have huge, empty parking lots. And you don't want to go that way either. 'MR. NINO: That's why I asked the question, because we -- I don't know that we've ever had a problem with the standard. Normally those things kind of get back to us. And I can't -- I obviously go to three or four doctors, but they're -- I can't tell you whether they have parking that is as required by the code or whether they have excess parking to begin with. And, you know, we -- it's not unusual to find that most developments come in and if the parking requires 21, they may be providing 23 or 24 or 25. But we can't really tell. I know that I've never had a problem going to any doctor's office in this area. COMMISSIONER OATES: I know it's not in the county, it's in the city, but I happen to go to the Naples Medical Center, and it is a huge problem there and to the fact ~- to the point that they even have now valet parking so you can get in and out. So, you know, it may not apply in the county, but it definitely is a problem there. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: But Mr. Oates raises a good point. I mean, when we see things like this, we -- that's a good question to ask, is -- COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: Sure. · CHAIRMAN DAVIS: -- it time to rethink the criteria that we're currently using, because a lot of tithes these are indications. And I think staff does that, this is an indication that something's wrong. COMMISSIONER OATES: Possibly. Page 24 September 3, 1998 CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Possibly. In this case it doesn't seem to be true. If anyone has to renew their~driver's license and visits their new location on the East Trail, they'll learn about a parking problem. COMMISSIONER OATES: Yeah, right. M~. SICILIANO: One thing to be cognizant of. In fact, I have a case in the city that we worked to solve here just in the past month is office, conventional office space, has a different parking standard than medical. It's quite -~ you know, it's one to 300 versus one to 200. So it's quite different. Sometimes you'll get situations where you get an office building that was constructed for office then converts to medical, or gets medical into it. That, you know, at times pops up to where -- is where the problem surfaces. It ends up really being deficient, not because of the code, though. It's the leasing issue that causes the issue. MR. NINO: You're right. A_nd the stuff around the hospital is very bad. CHAIR/~AN DAVIS: Yeah. Anything else? Any questions? Anyone else to speak on this petition? Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing. Motion? COMMISSIONER BRUET: ~Lr. Chaira~n, I recommend we forward our approval to the Board of Commissioners for petition nua%ber PUD-95-4(1). COMMISSIONER URBANIK: Second. CHAIRM3%N DAVIS: A motion of approval by Mr. Bruet, seconded by Ms. Urbanik. Any discussion? All those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed? (No response.) - CHAIRMAN DAVIS: That carries unanimously. That brings us -- we have no old business. Under new business, we have the Land Development Code amendment cycle listed. And Mr. Nino, you've been kind enough to include a rather detailed schedule for us, which we appreciate. COMMISSIONER BRUET: Yes. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: One cogent I have. The -- we show on November 4th that we'll have our first public hearing, and also on November 4th the final recommendations and approval by DSAC. I've observed in the past a dilea~a where they're not done when it comes to us. And I for one a~n saying to you, they will be done before it comes to us. It's -- it confuses things, and I don't think that's a good idea. And I think with the ample time involved, they -- their review is important, don't misunderstand me, but I think by the time it comes to us, just like we try our best to be completely done when it goes to the BCC, I think it just -- it flows better, it's less confusing for everyone. MR. NINO: We have a lees confining window developed for this sequence than we did the last time. · CHAIRM3%N DAVIS: Yeah. So that may solve the problem. But I thihk that was a point that needed to be made. MR. NINO: Okay. CO~4ISSIONER BRUET: How will that work, Mr. Chair~n? If they Page 25 16Gl September 3, 1998 approve it on the 4th and we receive it on the 4th, they won't be rewritten, or you're assuming there aren't going to be any changes, or what? How do we handle that? MR. NINO: Well, I think that the 4th is the second time they'll be looking at it. I don't have it in front of me. COMMISSIONER BRUET: You're assuming there will be no changes at the second -- CHAIRMAN DAVIS: October -- COMMISSIONER BRUET: -- DSAC meeting? CHAIRMAN DAVIS: October 21st is their final review and recommendations -- MR, NINO: Yes. COMMISSIONER BRUET: So if -- CHAIRMAN DAVIS: -- on the land use sub-committee, okay. COMMISSIONER BRUET: But if they have some recommendation, that's going to be MR. NINO: No, we're -- COMMISSIONER BRUET: -- an attached sheet, I assume? MR. NINO: We're going to have to, correct, make them at your meeting. COMMISSIONER BRUET: Okay, they meet at 4:00 or 5:00 -- MR. NINO: They meet in the day, you meet at night. COMMISSIONER BRUET: Yes. You better hope there's not a lot of changes, I guess. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: I would say then -- is it a requirement -- I don't think ours have even been advertised yet. MR. NINO: No. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: You know, if the schedule needs to be rethought, I tMink it should be. MR. NINO: Okay. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: I mean, don't the rest of you agree? COMMISSIONER OATES: Yeah· COMMISSIONER BRUET: Yeah, I -- yeah, I dislike that immensely is when you've got, you know, a large set of documents that you think -- that you've read at home and spent some time on, all of a sudden you get, you know, 20 or 30 items that change a lot of what you've read MR. NINO: All right. I'll take a look at that. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: What does the -- how heavy is -- are these? MR. NINO: Not going to be heavy. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Not bad? MR. NINO: It will be very light. CHAIP/4AN DAVIS: So a good time to put this idea in place. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Is this -- COMMISSIONER OATES: But being light doesn't mean anything, though -- · MR. NINO: There's a pound. morning doesn't mean that we'rb:C~oU~:gW~o betho~tSoi~U~etir°eniWnel~amdintuhit:s. COM}4ISSIONw. g PRIDDY: We were going to be gone in 15 minutes -- ! 6G September 3, 1998 COMMISSIONER OATES: Right. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: -- when we started. COMMISSIONER BRUET: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Yeah. COMMISSIONER BRUET: The meetings on the 4th and 18th are 5:157 COMMISSIONER OATES: 5:00. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: 5:05 -- COMMISSIONER BRUET: 5:05. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: -- as required by state law. COM}{ISSIONER OATES: But I agree with Mr. Davis, that we need to get the November 4th date either backed up to October 21st or something like that. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: Or the rest of them move forward. COMMISSIONER OATES: Or the rest of them move forward, whatever. We could have it on Thanksgiving. That would be okay with you, wouldn't it, if we made it Thanksgiving? COMMISSION~K PRIDDY: As long as it's at your house. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: And you su~ly the turkey. CHAIRM3%N DAVIS: We also have -- I'll remind everyone again, we have our public comment opportunity. That does not include the press. Or it could. COMMISSIONER OATES: It could -- CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Or it could. COMMISSIONER OATES: -- if he wants to. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: And I see no one here for public conunents, so we are adjourned. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 9:50 a.m. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MICHAEL DAVIS, CHAIRF~%N TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY CHERIE' R. LEONE, NOTARY PUBLIC Page 27 AGENDA REOEIVED COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 8:30 A.M., THURSDAY. OCTOBER 15. 1998 IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM. ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, COUNTY' GOVERNMENT CENTER, 3301 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST. EAST NAPLES. FLORIDA: ~..(:ZI~: INDIVIDUAL SPEA¢,ERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES ON ANY ITEM, INT)IVIDUAL$ SELECTED TO SPEAK ON BEIIALF OF AN ORGANIZATION OR GROUP ARE ENCOURAGED A/~3 MAY' BE ALLO1TED 10 MINU'T'ES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM IF SO RECOGNIZED BY 'DIE alAIRMAN. PERSONS WISHING TO ttAVE WRI 1 ll~N OR GRAPH'IC MATERIALS INCLUDED IN TIlE CCPC AGENDA PACKETS MUST SUBMIT SAID MATERIAL A MINIMUM OF 3 WEEKS PRIOR TO THE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC HEARING, IN ANY CA.gE. WPdll/~N MATERIALS INTENDED TO BE CONSIDERED BY TIlE CC'PC SHALL BE SUBMITYED TO 'file APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO T}IE PLrBLIC IIEARING. ALL MATERIAL USED IN PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CCPC WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF TIIE RECORD AND W~LL BE AVAILABLE FOR PRESEN'TATION TO TIlE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IF APPLICABLE ROLl. CALL BY CLERK ADDENDA TO TIlE AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES: ANY PERSON WIIO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF TIlE CCPC WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND TI{EREFORE MAY ,WEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF TIlE PROCEEDINGS IS ,MADE, WIIICIq RECORD INCLUDES TIIE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WIIICql 'DIE APPEAl. IS TO BE BASED. September 17, 1998 PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES: BCC REPORT CIIAIRMAN'S REPORT ADVERTISED PUBLIC IIEARINGS: 16G1 OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS A. Election of Officers PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA ADJOURN 16Gl September 17, 1998 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples, Florida, September 17th, 1998 LET IT BE RE~E~BERED, that the Collier County Planning Commission in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 8:30 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION in Building 'F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: ALSO PRESENT: CHAIP~QkN: Michael A. Davis Russell A. Budd Edward J. Oates, Jr. Michael Pedone Terri Tragesser Karen Urbanik Gary Wrage NOT PRESENT: Michael J. Bruet Russell A, Priddy Bob Mulhere, Planning Director Marjorie M. Student, Assistant Counsel Page 1 COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 8:30 A.M., THURSDAY, SEFI'EMBER 17, 1998 IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY' COMMISSIONER~ MEETING ROOM, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, 3301 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST, EAST NAPLES, FLORIDA: ~ INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES ON ANY ITEM. INDIVIDUALS SELECIgD TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZATION OR GROUP ARE ENCOURAGED AND MAY BE ALLO~FED 10 MINUTES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM IF SO RECOGNIZED BY 'DiE CHAI]>dvIAN. PERSONS WISHING TO HAVE WRIilEN OR GRAPHIC MAIF. KIALS INCLUDED IN THE CCPC AGENDA PACKETS MUST SUBMIT SAiD MATERIAL A MINIMUM OF 3 WEEKS PRIOR TO TIlE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC IfEAR~G. IN ANY CASE, WtGiigN MATERLKLS [NTENDED TO BE CONSIDER.ED BY THE CCPC SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MATERIAL USED IN PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CC'PC WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF THE RECORD AND WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY' COMMISSIONERS IF APPLICABLE. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE CCPC WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS I',LMDE, W}HCH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTFMONY AND EVFDENCE UPON WHICIt THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. 1. ROLL CALL BY CLERK 2. ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 4. PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES: 5. BCC REPORT 6. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT 7, ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARJNGS: A. P~dfion No. BD-98-30, Nelson Ma~ne Con~ In;., tq~-min8 Larr/Ortmlr/, r~lu~tang a 15 foot bo~ dock *xt~mion ~o ~low fo~ · 20 foot boat dock a~t tx~t lift for pro. my {oca~d at 210 Sixth St~r.*t 16Gl PctiUoa No. PSP-97-1 $, ICtr~ Bishop of Project ,M~g,m~-'m Scnfces. Inc., t~,t¢~cntmg Napl~ Golf E,ta~s, Inc.tT~ Ronto Group, tcqur4ting ap~oval ora ~tclimlnnry S~visioIl pl~t ~ for Fot~t Glen of Napks (formally Naples Golf Esta~*), Ioc~tr.d on C.IL 951 md Davis Boulm'~rd (S.IL 84) ha Section 2, Township 50 South, Kange 26 East, co~is~ng of 624.22 aero. (Coordinator. Eny Bellows) Petmon No. PsP-g$-I 1, ~,"~' A. Cart, P.E., of Agnoli, Barber & Brmu:~g~, Inc, t,.~nti~g Dr. Kichatd Pcfiaon No. PDI-98:3, Blaic A. Foley, P.E., of Coastal Engin~fing Conautma~, l~:., rcl~n~g Southpom~ Yacht Club, requemag it~ub~taatial cbaag~ to th~ So~l~poiat~ Yacht Club PUD Maator Plan d~sign by replacing thc marina buildings with dwclliag uaiu, ,AAi-$ · sidewalk fi'om the patk~8 lot to thc dock ur.a. and adding pad, ting spac~ on az ~x, fh,l,l, of az man ~m'mce ro~d for ~ located 1/2 trait so~ath of'l'hommson Drive in Soc~on 23, Town.h~ 50 SO~I~, P. zug¢ 25 East, Colli~ County, Florida. {coordinator: Ray Bellows) (Continued from Scpmnbcr 3, 1998) P¢ftioa No. PDI-95-4, Poab~t Duane of Hole, M~ & A~ocialta. Inc., ,~t,,,.,cmln~ Raymond Schayck, Trustee, ~ e. qu~tmg aa maub~t.xnfal chaa~c dc-t~;~,~,n lo az Audubon Count:-/Club PUD Ma~t~r Plan by Petition No. PUD.98-S, Marl; W. Mino~ of q. C. nady Miao~ & Aaa~ciama, P.A., rolm:seating William E. 8. OLD BUSINESS 9. NEW BUSIlqESS I O. PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM ! 1. DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA 12. ADJOUP. N I 6Gl'"q' September 17, 1998 CHAIR/~ DAVIS: We'll call this meeting of the Collier County Planning Commission to order, and begin by calling the roll. And with the calling of the roll, I'd like to welcome Terri Tragesser to our midst. She was recently appointed from Commission District 2. Glad to have you with us. COMMISSIONER TRAGESSER: Nice to be here. C~AIRMAN DAVIS: Ms. Urbanik? COmmISSIONER URBANIK: Here. CHAIP~MAN DAVIS: Mr. Budd? COM~ISSIONER BUDD: Here. CHAIRMA/~ DAVIS: Mr. Davis, here. Mr. Oates? COMMISSIONER OATES: Present. CHAI~4A/~ DAVIS: Mr. Pedone? CO:MISSIONER PEDONE: Here. CHAiR/~AN DAVIS: Mr. Wrage? CO~4M/SS IONER ~zWAGE: Here. CHY~I~AN DAVIS: ~4r. Bruet and 14r. ?riddy are both excused today. Addenda to the agenda. In the -- MS. Murray, maybe you can help me here. In the comp, plan a~en~ents, there's a notation on item 4(A) (i) that the petitioner is requesting a continuance until October Ist? MS. MURRAY: That's agenda item I? CHAIP/4A34 DAVIS: I, yes. Under the Golden Gate area master plan? CO~4ISSIONER OATES: It's not the whole thing, it's juzt part of it, Susan, MS. MURRAY: Oh, just a portion of it? CHAI~AN DAVIS: Right. MS. MURRAY: Okay, I was unaware of that. C HA I R~IAN DAVIS: Okay. MS. MURB~Y: I don't see -- CHAI~%N DAVIS: There's a notation to that effect. MS. MUP~R~.Y: Okay. I don't see -- COMMISSIONER OATES: Mr. Chairman, I would move we continue that one to the October 1st meeting then and contin -- 7(I) (a) (1), right; is that correct? C}{AIP~ DAVIS: Yes, it's CP-98-03. COMMISSIONER pEDONE: Second. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay, we have a motion and a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMA~ DAVIS: Carries unanimously. There seems to be some discussion on CP-98-01 that it may be requested to be continued, but there's nothing in our agenda, so we'll just wait 'til we get to that point, Z guess. COld~ISSIONER OATES: Okay. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Item E on our ageuda today, PDI-98-3, I think we're all in receipt of an appeal that's been filed on that particular petition. Page 2 Septeraber 17, 1998 My sense of the situation is, with an appeal being filed of the Board of County Commissioners, it would k~ my idea that we continue that until such time as the appeal has been resolved. CO~4ISSIONER OATES: Mr. Chairman, I would move we continue item PDI-98-3 until further notice. CO~4ISSIONER BUDD: Second. CHAIpuv~dq DAVIS: A motion to continue from Mr. Oates, seconded by Mr. Budd. Ms~ Murray, do we -- do we have any dates certain on that appeal being heard, or is that still up in the air? MS. MURJ~AY: I'll let Mr. Bellows speak to that. CHAIRPL~N DAVIS: Okay, thank you. MR. BELLOWS: It's my understanding that Mr. Mulhere requests this -- or would like this continued until such time as the appeal is heard by the board. CF~AIRF~a~N DAVIS: So we'll just leave it open at this -- MR. BELLOWS: Yes. CHAIPJ~AN DAVIS: -- point? Okay, fine. We'll just leave the date open. Discussion on the motion7 All those in favor, signify by saying aye~ Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRM;dq DAVIS: That also carries unanimously. We have a set of minutes subject for approval. COMMISSIONER OATES: I would so move, Mr. Chairman. COMMISSIONER ?~{AGE: Second. CP[AIR~3%N DAVIS: Motion of approval of the minutes by Mr. Oates, seconded by Mr. Wrage. Discussion? All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAI~4;dg DAVIS: Carries -- MS. MIFKRAy: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman. CHAIR34AN DAVIS: -- unanimously. Yes. MS. ~Y: Also, item B. I didn't know if you wanted to continue that, at least until the end of the agenda today. CHAIRPL%N DAVIS: Move that to the end of the agenda? MS. MUP~RAY: Yes. CHAIPd4~kN DAVIS: Okay. That's item B, PSP-98-14. Is there a motion to move tb~t to the end of our -- COM~ISSIONER BUDD: So moved. COMMISSIONER URBANIK: Second. CPL~IRF~kN DAVIS: Motion by Mr. Budd, seconded by Ms. Urbanik. All those in favor, signify by saying aye, Opposed? (No response.) CMAIRPLa24 DAVIS: Carries unanimously. SO B is now at the end. Any absences planned? Page 3 September 17, 1998 Ms. Murray, anything in the way of a BCC report? MS. MURP~AY: I just wanted to report to you, Mr. Chairman, that on September 8th, the Board of County Commissioners voted to approve three petitions which I believe you all made a unanimous recommendation for approval on. That would be PUD-98-4, the Oak Grove PUD: PUD-98-6, the Mirimar PUD, which also included a small scale end use map amendment; and the amendment to the Windsong PUD. Additionally, Mr. Reischl's boathouse -- and I don't have a petition number for that, but the boathouse located on Vanderbilt Lagoon -- for which you all unanimously recommended approval, the neighbor is filing an appeal for that boathouse. CHAIPJ~AN DAVIS: Okay. MS. MURRAy: That's all I have. CHAI~A/J DAVIS: The summary agenda seems to be working pretty well? MS. MURRAY: It seems to be working very well, yes. CHAIN{AN DAVIS: That's good to hear. Well, nothing in the way of a chairman's report today, so -- other than to remind you all we'll have our -- we'll start our new year October ls~ and have election of officers. And with that, brings us to our first advertised public hearing, BD-98-30. I'd ask all those present that may want to testify on this petition to please stand and raise your right hand so the court reporter may swear you in. (All speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Mr. Reischl? MR. REISCHL: Good morning, commissioners, Fred Reischl, planning services. This is a request for a boat dock extension and boathouse on -- if you can turn your monitors on -- on the Bonita Shores area. You can see it marked on the map. This is an 80-foot wide canal, so the permitted extension for a boat dock with just a building permit is five feet. This is a request to extend it to 20 feet. In addition, it's also coming before you because of the boathouse. The maximum protrusion on a canal of this width would be 25 percent of the canal width, and since it's 20 feet on an 80-foot canal, they're not protruding further than the required 20 percent. Staff recommends approval. And we -- I received a phone call from the neighbor across the canal, and she basically wanted to know how she could apply to get the same thing for her. CHAIP~4A/4 DAVIS: Okay. Any questions of staff? Anyone else here today that would like to speak on this petition? Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing. CO~MISSIONER OATES: Mr. Chairman, I move we approve petition BD-98-30. COMMISSIONER WRAGE: Second. COMMISSIONER URBANIK: Second. CHAI~4AN DAVIS: Motion of approval by Mr. Oates, seconded -- who seconded it? Page 4 16G1 September 17, 1998 COI~4ISSIONER OATES: Ms. Urbanik, I think. CHAI~4AN DAVIS: Ms. Urbanik. Discussion on the motion? All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAI~4A_N DAVIS: Carries unanimously. Item C, petition PSP-97-18. Once again, all those present that may want to speak on this petition, please stand, raise your right hand so you may be sworn by the court reporter. (All speakers were duly sworn.) CHAi~4A~4 DAVIS: Mr. Bellows? MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Rellows, planning services staff. Petitioner, Karen Bishop, representing Ronto Golf Estates, Incorporated. They're requesting a preliminary subdivision plat of a 642-acre site know~ as the Forest Glen of Naples PUD. They're going to create seven residential tracts, three of which will be subdivided into 114 single-family lots, and there will be four other lots for multi-family use. AS you can see on the subdivision plat, the main entrance is off of County Road 951. And a secondary residential access to a single-family dwelling off of Beck Boulevard. Staff has not received any letters for or against this petition. The design of the subdivision is consistent with the master plan. The lot area for single-family development is 12,323 square feet with an 85-foot frontage, and the setbacks would be 20 feet for the front 15 feet for the rear, and five feet on the sides. Traffic impact statement indicates that there are no level service problems with this subdivision. Therefore, staff is recommending approval. Any questions? CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Questions of staff? Any questions of the petitioner's representative? Anyone else here today that would like to speak on this petition? Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing. Motion? COMMISSIONER URBANIK: I move PSP-97-18 to the Board of County Commission -- oh, this is the -- CHAIRMA/g DAVIS: We approve. COMMISSIONER URBANIK: We approve this. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: I'll second that. CHAIR/~A/~ DAVIS: Motion of approval by Ms. Urbanik, seconded by Mr. Pedone. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRM3%N DAVIS: Carries unanimously. Petition PSP-98-11. Once again, I'd ask anyone present that may want to speak on this petition to please stand so that the court reporter may swear you in. Page 5 September i'7, 1998 IAll speakers were duly sworn.) C}{AIP2~A~ DAVIS: Mr. Bellows. MR. BELLOWS: Again, for the record, Ray Bellows. Bruce Siciiiano is representing Elias Brothers. This is a subdivision master plan preliminary subdivision plat for the Windsong planned unit development. This PUD was recently amended before this board and approved. They are creating 144 residential lots, utilizing the approved PUD zero lot line development standards. As you can see in the main entrances off Rattlesnake Hammock Road, there's a construction access point off of County Barn Road, and it's designed around a centralized lake system. The minimum lot area is -- provided is 4,900 sc~are feet with a 36.50 lot frontage, and the setbacks would be 20 in the front, 15 on the rear, and zero and five on the side, for a zero lot line. No traffic impacts for this subdivision. Staff has not received any letters for or against this petition and, therefore, staff is recommending approval. CHAIRMAlq DAVIS: Question of Mr. Bellows or the petitioner's representative? COI~M. ISSIONER TRAGESSER: Chairman, I have a question. CHAIR/4AN DAVIS: 'fen. COMMISSIONER TRAGESSER: Are there going to be sidewalks in this community? MR. BELLOWS: There are one -- sidewalks on one side of the street. I think I have a detail I can show you, CHAIRF~4 DAVIS: Ray, were the sidewalks included just recently on the road widening project? MR. BELbOWS: Off of -- on Rattlesnake? CHAIPd~AN DAVIS: Rattlesnake H~mock. ~4R. BELLOWS: I believe so. I can't recall for sure. CHAIP2~A/~ DAVIS: I think they were when they recently widened the road. I believe that was part of the project, that there were sidewalks there now on Rattlesnake Hammock, but I'm not -- County Barn, that would be the question, if the project includes them on County Barn. MR. BELLOWS: I'm not sure. CHAIRM~ DAVIS: Maybe the petitioner -- M~. BELLOWS: I know the project itself doesn't, but the internal road, there's sidewalks on one side of the street. MR. CARR: For the record, Jim Carr, from Agnoli, Barber and Brundage. The Rattlesnake Hammock did include sidewalks on the four-laning, and the County Barn Road is planned to be four-laned in the future. So at this time it's two lanes with no sidewalks. C}~IRF~ DAVIS: So we would make the assumption that once it's four-laned that it would get the same treatment as Rattlesnake Hammock Road did? MR. CARR: Yes. CHAIR/~ DAVIS: And then internal to the project, it's sidewalks Page 6 September 17, 1998 on one side of the street? M~. CARR: Correct. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Which seems to be pretty much the standard. MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, typically for zero lot line development we typically ran with the sidewalks on one side of the street. CHAIP. MA/~ DAVIS: Any other questions? Thank you. Anyone else to speak on the petition today? Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing. COM~ISSIONER PEDONE: I'd like to make a motion that we approve PSP-98-11. COMMISSIONER BUDD: Second. CHAIRMA~ DAVIS: 14orion of approval by Mr. Pedone, seconded by Mr. Budd. Discussion? All those in favor, signify ~y saying aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Carries unanimously. COMMISSIONER 0ATES: Mr. Carr, do you want to pick these up? MR. CARR: Sure. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Let's see. Item E, PDI-98-3 has been continued. That brings us to item F, PDI-98-4. Once again. I'd ask all those present that may want to speak on this petition to stand, raise your right hand so the court reporter may swear you in. (Ail speakers were duly sworn.) COMMISSIONER OATES: Mr. Chairman, I should for the record say that I had some discussion with Mr. Pezeshkan regarding this particular petition. CHAIRMAn; DAVIS. Any other disclosures~ Thank you. Mr. Bellows? ' MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, for the record, Ray Bellows. Petitioner Robert Duane is representing Raymond Sehayek. The applicant wishes to amend the currently approved PUD master plan for the Audubon Country Club. They're requesting to add a zecond entrance point to the co~z~ercial ~ract south of the main entrance road. Here's the main entrance road off of U.S. 41. The commercial ~ract has an existing approved access and internal access off of the main entry road. They're also proposing this second access point off of 41 to serve the commercial tract. The intent is to relieve traffic congestion at the existing access point off of 41, and also to relieve traffic movements in and out from the internal access road into the commercial tract. Staff has determined that this change is insubstantial to the PUD and, therefore, we are requesting approval of the PDI master plan. Staff has had conversations with several residents within the Audubon Country Club. They had expressed some concerns about the existing access point into the commercial tract. Their kind of fear was that there would be some possible traffic movement hazards from residents -- or individuals entering the site and then turning left in 1 651 September 17, 1998 front of vehicles exiting from this development. I took some pictures of the site to look at any -- if there were possible traffic hazards. There is a tight distance between -- let's see if I can zoom in on this. There, as you can see, is the gated community~ And off to the left where the vehicle is, on the screen, that is where the entry -- into the commercial tract off of Audubon Boulevard. Staff is of the.opinion that it could be designed in a safe manner. It was approved in the original PUD as an access point, so, therefore, i don't see any valid reason to eliminate this access point, It will serve residents within the Audubon Country Club to access this commercial tract without having to exit onto 41 and then turn back into the commercial tract. Any questions? CHAIPJ4AN DAVIS: Any questions of staff7 The petitioner? MR. DUANE: Yes, for the record, Robert Duane -- COM~ISSIONER OATES: Ask if he got sworn. MR. DUAl;E: -- from Hole, Montes and Associates. CHAIRMA~g DAVIS: Let me just swear you in, please. (Mr. Duane was duly sworn. I MR. DUANE: For the record again, Robert Duane from Hole, Montes and Associates, We're ~n agreement with the staff recommendation. The third access point that we're going to place along the southern portion of the property, as Ray has indicated, is really designed to relieve traffic congestion at the two northerly-most access points. So, therefore, we would respectfully request your support this morning. And the entrance, as Ray indicated, too, is important along Audubon Boulevard, because that is our only way to get -- when it's signalized, to wet left-hand turning movements to travel north on U.S. 41. The project was always designed with that in mind since it was initially approved more than 10 years ago. $o we again would appreciate your support for our southerly-most access point. I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. CHAIR/~AN DAVIS: Any questions of Mr. Duane7 Thank you. MS. MURKAY: Mr. Chairman, I do have a registered speaker. Adam Scheer. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Mr. Scheer? M]~. SCHEER: Good morning. My name is Adam Scheer, I'm an Audubon resident, and I have with me a petition that we have prepared that has been signed ~f approximately 260 Audubon residents, representin~ over 150 homeowners. And I'd like to read the petition to you, if I may. CF~IRMAN DAVIS: Please do. MR. SCBEER: The undersigned petitioners, all of whom are property o~ers in Audubon Country Club, respectfully reqllest that the Collier County Planning Commission, in its consideration of petition number PDI-98-4, Robert Duane of Hole, Montes and Associates, Incorporated, representing Raymond Sehayek, trustee, requesting a Page 8 September 17, 1998 change determination to the Audubon Country Club PUD master plan, by adding a second access point into the commercial tract from Tamiami Trail, U.S. 41, for property located on the west side of U.S. 41, extending westward across Vanderbilt Beach to Little Hickory Bay, in sections five, seven, eight and nine, township 48 south, range 25 east, only approve said petition on the condition that such additional access be considered an exchange for the existing access to the property from Audubon Boulevard, which existing access would be deleted from the Audubon PUD. The petition has been signed, as I said, by over 150 homeowners, and we have over 260 signatures. The reason that we are requesting this change is that there is a serious safety consideration if the entry and exit from Audubon Boulevard were to be implemented into the co~ercial tract. I'd like to ta~e you through a blowup of the area so you get an appreciation for the distance. Coming in here from -- this is U.S. 41, this is Audubon Boulevard, which is divided here, as you can see. The current easement is across here. It's a 50-foot wide easement, and it is right at the foot of the gatehouse. A car coming in here to make an entry turn, a left-hand turn into the commercial property, is not visible by -- from a car exiting the property right now. I've got some pictures here that I'd like to pass to the commission, if I may, that will demonstrate that. The first picture, you'll see a car starting a turn into the commercial property, and you'll see a car exiting from Audubon. In the second picture, you'll see what the view looks llke from inside the car that is exiting from Audubon. The car that is turning left into the co~ercial property is clearly not visible. In the third picture, the picture is taken from inside the car that is making the left-hand turn into the commercial property. And again, the car that is exiting the property is not visible. And in the fourth picture, I will show you that as the two cars continue, they are in a collision path. AS it was indicated, the change to the PUD that we are requesting with the exchange for the southern entrance, although this was part of the PUD originally, Audubon is a residence that will have over 400 residences. It's an association. Across the street from us, directly across, is another development, Sterling Oaks, which will have 700 residences upon build-out. These two developments constitute major traffic at the intersection of U.S. 41 and Audubon Boulevard. Having an exit and an entrance from the commercial property will only exacerbate this traffic condition, and we feel it is a serious safety concern. I also have a letter that I'd like to read into the record, and it's from the president of the Audubon Foundation, which is basically the property owners' association. And it reads TO whom it may concern. Please be advised that this letter is being written on behalf of the Audubon Foundation property Page 9 September 17, 1998 owner association. The foundation strongly endorses the petition which has been developed, presented and signed by as many members of the foundation as possible in the short period of time which has been available. We consider this request to be of utmost importance for the future safety of the community. Thank you for your attention in this matter~ Audubon Foundation, Robert H. Flynn, president. Given the overwhelming concern of the Audubon residents, and given the fact that all of them have signed the petition that we were able to reach, we -- this being the summer, a lot of them are traveling and were unreachable -- we would ask the commission to consider making that trade-off in exchange for the southern entrance, and ask the developer to give up his right to the easement for an entrance from Audubon Boulevard. I had been told that the only reason the developer had requested that entrance to begin with was for the convenience of the Audubon residents. I have not found a single Audubon resident who favors that as an entrance to that commercial property for their convenience or ease of use. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Thank you. 14R. SCHEER: Thank you. ~4S. STUDE~;T: I have a comf~ent~ Any easements, the county -- that's a private matter, and the county doesn't ~- oh, for the record, Marjorie Student, assistant county attorney. Dealing with those private issues, I don't know that the county has any authority to get involved with any easement relationships that r~ay exist between one property owner or the other. And I just wanted to state that for the record. CHAIrmAn; DAVIS: Thank you. Thank you~ sir. l~r, Duane~ could you maybe comment on what the speaker had to say? MR. DUANE: Well, I think more germane to the issue is a procedural one that's before you. This was -- my understanding was it very specifically advertised for an insignificant change to this PUD to add the southernmost access point, and I'm going to ask Ms. Student to, you know, render an opinion to you this morning. I'm not sure that we can reach into other access points or into other easements of this project. If we were before you on a zoning petition or we were otherwise amending in some substantial way this planned unit development, then I think that this issue certainly could be on the table. But it's not part of what this petition is about this morning. It's merely to add an access point which will have the effect of relieving congestion at the other two access points. And I think that Mr. Bellows has articulated very well in the staff report that he feels this will improve traffic circulation and it will improve public safety. So that's the testimony that your staff has rendered this morning. And I would like to ask Ms. Student if in fact we can open this up and go beyond issues that really, I don't believe, are part of the petition that's before you this morning. Page 10 September 17, 1998 MS. ST~3DENT: Again, Marjorie Student~ assistant county attorney, for the record. First of all, I don't recall something like this coming up before in the context of a PDI, or an insubstantial change to a PUD master plan. Correct me if I'm wrong, because I ~- Mr. Duane was talking to me while there was testimony being presented, but I did think that I heard someone saying -- maybe Mr. Bellows can correct me -- where an attempt was made to show an access between the third access point and some exacerbation of a problem as perceived by surrounding -~ or property owners in the project concerning this turning area at the entrance right before the gatehouse, that somehow the third access point would exacerbate that. Is that what I heard, Mr. Bellows? MR. BELLOWS: ,Well, basically what I stated was, as you can see in the photograph on your monitor, that there is sufficient room to provide adequate and safe turning movements into the co~mmercial tract off of Audubon Boulevard. And that would be done at the time of site development plan stage where we could have adequate review to ensure proper turning movements. As you can see in the photograph, there is room. The car is about pulling in where the access would be designated on the Master Plan. Staff is of the opinion that the turning movements -- if this was not there, the traffic in this Audubon Count~ Club would be forced to use U.S. 41 to get to this con%mercial tract instead of internally, which adds additional traffic onto the arterial road. MS. STUDENT: And just correct me if I'm wrong, I think I heard testimony that the thought was that an extra -- this extra access point -- M~. BELLOWS: Third one. MS. S~JDENT: -- that's being requested as part of this, or the third access point, would somehow exacerbate this problem. MR. BELLOWS: Well, it would reduce -- yeah, it would reduce the traf -- turning movements on Audubon Boulevard, because there's one less -- there's one additional access point vehicle -- MR. MULHERE: Ms. Student? Bob Mulhere for the record. Are you asking if other individuals testified that they felt as %hough this could be problematic? MS. STUDENT: That's what I'm asking, if -- MR. BELLOWS: Oh, I heard -- MS. STUDENT: -- because I was engaged in conversation with Mr. Duane when the testimony was being presented, and I thought I -- the board has to, you know, weigh that testimony to see. I would say if there is -- if you're satisfied that there is a connection between what's being requested and this problem, you could address it. If you don't think there is, then you cannot. It's not up to me to weigh the evidence to tell you what you can consider and what you can't. You've heard staff testimony and you have heard testimony from property o'~ners within the project. And so that would be my opinion, that if you are satisfied that Page 11 September 17, 1998 there is in some way a connection between the two, then you could consider it. If you find that th~.re is not, then you should not. An.d if there is a problem that's perceived -- if you should find that there is no connection, and the residents of the project perceive soma sort of problem, then they should come and also, you know, make their own petition to correct whatever perceived problem they see. But again, this hasn't come up before in the context of a PDI, in my recollection, so -- CHAIP~MA~; DAVIS: Mr. Duane? MR. DUA3;E: Just finally, to respond, we don't believe the additional access point will exacerbate any of the traffic circulation problems that are perceived to exist b~/ the residents on Audubon Boulevard. Therefore, you have to make that decision yourself whether you think there's a linkage· it's my professional opinios ~ ~ t~a~ it will overall improve traffic circulation within the planned unit development and, therefore, it can be viewed ~ you on its merits as it's before you today. Thank you~ CHAIPJ4A2~ DAVIS: Thank you, Additional speakers on this petition? MS, LIVI~;GSTO~;: Can another person speak if they're sworn in? CHAIR34A/; DAVIS: Have you registered to speak, ma'am? MS· LIVI~;GST0~;: ~;o, I haven't. CHAIP34;J; DAVIS: If you want to be brief, and we'll swear you in very quickly, yes, come to the podium. (Ma. Livingston was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAn4 DAVIS: If you'd state your -- MS. LIVINGSTOn;: My name is Jean Livingston, I live at 312 Chancery, in Audubon. The concern that the Audubon people have here is, is that the developer seems to feel that we would like to have access to that shoppin~ strip. The bottom line is we really don't want to ~o into that shoppin~ strip· It's 12 acres, it will not provide us with the type of shopping that we would do on a daily basis or two or three times a week, so the strip center offers nothing to the advantage of those people living in Audubon. When season is on, we have a real traffic problem ~ettin~ out of Audubon onto 41, which has increased since Sterling Oaks was built across the road. We all know that this problem is only goin{~ to get worse. For us to have to have traffic come in our front gate and cross in front of us as we exit is a major problem to those of us who live there. I have always said that I'm going to die with my husband making a left-hand turn, and I really don't want to do that at Audubon's front ware. I will say that I think that some of the drawings that the planners have worked with, through no fault of their own, are drawings that were done before the actual building of the 9ate and the further construction in Audubon. I think that Mr. Bellows would agree that there is a very limited safety factor there. We have no problem whatsoever with the developer havin~ a third Page 12 September 17, 1998 road cut ~hat he's asking for down on the south end of his 12 acres. That's fine with us. Our problem is we feel that we really don't want access to the shopping center from Audubon, and we feel that if we are to put uD with that traffic, it is indeed a true safety factor and a burden on those people ',;ho live there. And I'm sure that if the people from Sterling Oaks were represented here today, they would feel the same, because they have to come across that same intersection to get southbound on 41. I've heard reference here to a light eventually there. You all know what we would have to go through to try to get a traffic light at that intersection. At least two, three of us would have to be killed there before we could get anybody's attention to get that done. So having a light there is not a real probability. We're asking you to consider what the residents of Audubon prefer. The strip center does nothing to enhance our community. Having the traffic from that strip center on our community's road would be a major hazard and a problem for our residents. Thank you for allowing me to address the issue. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Thank you. Any other -- any additional registered speakers? Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing. Motion? It strikes -- I'll express my opinion. It strikes me that -- what's before us is a PPI, and if we read the Land Development Code, it strikes me that we can consider just that, the change that's been requested. And I don't -- personally, I don't think it's within our authority to change one thing for another. It -- to me, it's a situation of us either approving or denying the additional access that's been requested. COMMISSIONER BUDD: Mr. Chairman, I agree with your comment. I'd be prepared to make a motion to approve petition PDI-98-4. COMMISSIOneR W~AGE: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: A motion of approval by Mr. Budd, seconded by Mr. Wrage. Discuss on the motion? COMMISSIONER URBANIK: Is it within our jurisdiction to limit -- to suggest safety with those bushes and things, having them removed? Is that within our Jurisdiction to make any recommendations -- MR, MULHERE: Yes -- COMMISSIONER URBANIK: -- if that goes forward for approval? MR. MULHERE: -- I think you can place conditions on the approval. MR. BELLOWS: Even off-site? MR. MULHEKE: Off-site, no, I don't -- CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Not off-site. MR. BELLOWS: It's unrelated? CHAIRF~kN DAVIS: I think you can make that observation, certainly, for the record. COMMISSIONER URBANIK: I'd like to make that part of your motion, however the wording would be correct, to say it. Page 13 16Gl' ~''' September 17, 1998 CHAIRi~4 DAVIS: Any other discussion on the motion? All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Opposed? INo response.) C~I~A~; OAVIS: Carries unanimously. MR. :4ULHERE: 14r. Chairman, the item -- for the record, Bob Mulhere. The item that was continued to the end of the agenda, now item J, I think previously item B -- CHAIrmAN DAVIS: Yes. MR. MULHERE: -- PSP-98-14, as I understand it, that the applicant is going to request that that be continued. I'm not sure if they have a time certain. CHAI~3; DAVIS: Excuse me, if you could please leave the room quietly. I~R. M~ILHERE: I'm not sure if they have a time certain or not. Emilio Robau is here representing the applicant. I just thought if they were going to continue it, no need for those folks to stay here until the end of the -- CHAIR/~AN DAVIS: Certainly. M~. MULHERE: -- hearing. CPL~IRPIAN DAVIS: Certainly. Yes, if you'd like to address this on the continuance issue. MR. ROBAU: Yes. For the record, my name is Emilio Robau, my firm is RWA, Incorporated, and we'd like to confirm Bob's request and our request on behalf of the petitioner for a continuance of this 'til the next planning commission. MR. MULHERE: Two weeks then. MR. ROBAU: Two weeks. CHAIR/4AN DAVIS: Two weeks, 'til October lst? MR. ROBAU: Yes, sir. COMRISSIONER BUDD: So moved. CO~4ISSIONER OATES: Second. C}{AIR/4A,N DAVIS: A motion to continue PSP-98-14 to our meeting on October 1st by ~4r. Budd, seconded by ~4r. Oates. All those in favor? Opposed? (No response.) C~LAIRF~AN DAVIS: Carries unanimously. Thank you. Let's see. That brings us to item G, R-98-5. I'd ask all those presents here today that may want to speak on this petition to please stand, raise your right hand so you may be sworn by the court reporter. (All speakers were duly sworn.) COMMISSIONER OATES: Mr. Chairman, for -- excuse me, for the record, I would like to state that I received letters from Mr. Peacock and Ms. Moll, who apparently are on the board of directors of International College. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: As did I. COMMISSIONER URBANIK: As did I. COMMISSIONER BUDD: Likewise. Page 14 16C, 1 September 17, 1998 COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Likewise. COmmISSIONER WRAGE: So did I. And further disclosure, I've had conversations with Terrf McMahan and David Zucarelli both. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. MS. Tragesser, probably you weren't on the mailing list yet. Don't feel slighted. ~. 14ULHERE: Mr. Chairman, I noticed that several people stood up and were sworn in ~o speak, but ! don't believe I have any registered requests to speak. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: If you're going to speak, you need to fill out a foITa and be registered to speak. Miss Murray? MS. ~JRRAY: Susan Murray, planning se~¢ices. The applicant is requesting a rezoning action from RSF-4, residential single,family, to CF, community facilities, in order to relocate the main campus of International College to this site. The site is located on the south side of Seagate Drive. It's approxima[ely a quarter mile west of its intersection with U.S. 41, and it's located between the Seagate Elementary School and the Naples United Church of Christ. And the site is currently functioning as the North Naples United Me[hodist Church. It's developed with a 22,000 square foot main structure, which houses areas for a church sanctuary, a fellowship hall, Sunday school classrooms, child day care center and church offices. At the rear of the site there's an existing single-story 3,000 square foot structure which functions as a~ninistrative office buildings. The existing parking lot has 126 paved parking spaces and approximately 150 spaces for grass parking. Surrounding properties to the north, the site again abuts Seagate Drive. North of that across Seagate Drive is zoned Pelican Bay PUD, and it's developed with a tennis club facility. Property to the south is located in the City of Naples and it's currently developed with single-family residential structures. Property to the east, also located in the City of Naples, is currently developed with Seagate Elementary School. And to the west, also in the City of Naples, the Naples United Church of Christ. Staff analyzed the petition and found that it was consistent with the required rezoning findings. Also, I wanted to discuss a little bit about staff's analysis with regard to compatibility, and that is that staff is of the opinion that the rezoning to a limited CF zoning district is compatible with surrounding environment, because primarily the Seagate Drive frontage, although it's outside the jurisdictional boundary of the county, is largely developed with similar public use type of facilities, as well as comraercial uses, which are concentrated towards U.S. 41. Furthermore, the bulk of the structures on the site are located adjacent to Seagate Drive towards the front of the site, away from the residential properties to the rear. And the parking area is located at the rear of the site closesu to the residential development to the Page 15 September 17, 1998 south. Again, the site is abutting properties. To the east, Seagate Elementary School, and to the west, a church, contained uses which would be permitted under CF zoning designation, as well as the present use of the site, which would be permitted under the CF zoning designation. Staff did examine the possibility of imposing an enrollment cap as a condition of approval; however, we felt that since the site was five acres in area, it would be -- and due to its location, it would be somewhat self-restraining in terms of any planned extensive e~ansion of the university, or limiting the possibility of any large-scale university, which might have -- in the future which might have some significant outdoor athletic activities associated with it. Additionally, ~the nature of International College is such that it serves a higher percentage of working students, and we just felt that the limited size of the site really didn't lend itself to any large-scale university. Analyzing the traffic impacts: Currently the existing church generates approximately 768 trips on a Sunday. There's also a day care there, which generates 790 weekday trips, and the church generates 143 weekday trips. So the total -- the resulting total is 933 weekday trips for the two uses as the site is currently functioning. The proposed college will generate 328 trips a weekday and no trips on Sunday. Therefore, it's anticipated that the proposed rezoning will actually reduce the site generated trips by approximately 605 trips on a weekday; the most notable difference being on weekends, especially Sundays. Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend conditional approval of this petition. And those conditions, I'll summarize as follows: That the uses on the site shall be limited to conditional uses in any use permitted by right in the CF zoning district, except for social and fraternal organizations. Our thoughts were that those type of organizations typically have a lot of nighttime activities associated with them. The category of social and fraternal organizations is a rather broad category encompassing a lot of different uses, but could bring about compatibility issues with the residential property to the south. A second condition was related to the college use that no outdoor activities, student housing or recreational facilities shall be developed or occur on ~he site. Also, that classes, student activities and the general hours of operation shall cease at 10:00 p.m., seven days a week, and classes shall not be held on Sundays. That the use of the existing structure at the rear of the site shall be limited to administrative offices and faculty offices. No classes shall be held in this building, again trying to direct the level of activity toward Seagate Drive and away from the residents. And prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, that the site shall be brought up to the current landscape code Page 16 - IIII I1' IIIII 16 1 , September 17, 1998 requirements. And the other two stipulations are fairly standard. I'd be happy to answer any questions for you. CF~I~AN DAVIS: Questions of Ms. Murray? Ms. Murray, I see a City of Naples boundary that's labeled 1989. The site we're dealing with is in the county, correct? MS. MURRAY: The site is in the county, that's correct. CHAi~4A2~ DAVIS: That's a little misleading. ~4S. MURPJ, y: The -- I'm sorry, are you thinking that the boundary goes around the site? The darkened boundary is actually just identifying the site, and then the dashed boundary would -- CHAIRMAN DAVIS: It says Naples city limit. MR. ~4ULHERE: The -- Mr. Chairman, it's hard to see on that, but that dotted line actually goes do~rn and around the property and then back across, but it's obfuscated by the dark line around the subject property. CHAIRFJ~ DAVIS: Okay, that answers it. That is a little unusual. MS. I~3RP~Y: I did also, I'm sorry, receive a letter in support from the Naples United Church of Christ for this petition. CHAI~4AN DAVIS: Thank you. Yes, Ms. Tragesser? COM~tISSIONER TRAGESSER: I just had a couple of questions. First of all, are ail the accesses in and out of the existing church now on Seagate Drive, or are there other access points to the south? MS. MURRAY: No, they're all located on Seagate Drive. COMMISSIONER TRAGESSER: And the other question I had, that area is, from the standpoint of character, is very well defined, the heights of the buildings, the residential character of the buildings along that corridor. Were this petition granted -- and let's move forward five years from now, the college very successful, enrollments up -- the existing footprint and the existing building no longer serves their needs. What could they do with their zoning in the way of maybe going up higher, spreading out the footprint? f4S. MURPJ~Y: Well, the CF zoning district, first of all, restricts building heights to 30 feet, which is pretty limiting, considering that the single-family zoning district in the county is -- the limit is 35 feet. The CF zoning district recognizes that it's a zoning district that's typically integrated or adjacent to residential zoning districts to provide uses that serve the immediate public, recognizing that the CF zoning district is set up for setback requirements and height limitations and use limitations that are typically compatible with residential -- nearby residential dwelling units. In order to expand the site, they would have to meet all those requirements: Setback requirements, they'd have to meet parking requirements on-site, they'd have to meet landscaping and water management requirements. So they'd be further restricted by those requirements. COMMISSIONER TPAGESSER: Thank you. Page 17 II I]11 II1 1 1 6G'l September 17, 1998 CHAIRF~J~I DAVIS: Would the architectural standards apply? HS. HURRAY: Not in this case. It's not a commercial zoning district and it's not a commercial component of a PDD, so no, CHAIRF~] DAVIS: Okay. No requirement then for the -- for it to be residential, a new building to be residential in character, given its close proximity to a residential neighborhood? HS. ~JRP~Y: HO, not by code. CHAI~4A3~ DAVIS: Okay. Any other ~:estions? The petitioner's representative? I4R. SPAGHA: Good morning, ladles and gentlemen. My narae is Neno Spagna, aBd I'm very pleased to be here this morning to represent international College. And I want to thank the cormmission for your hearing our case, our petition. Also, there are other members of the faculty and adrainistration of the International College here with me this morning. I'd like to introduce the president of the college, Dr. Terry McMahan, and I'd like ~o also mention that there will be other speakers. Wayne Arnold will be here. He will explain the petition and how it complies with the future land use plan and the comprehensive plan. And also, Jeff Perry is here wi~h us, and he will explain the traffic impact s~atement. All of us will be happy to answer any questions which you may have. Briefly, I'd like to just say a few words about the college. It was founded in 1990 as an independent private educational institution. It does have a nonprofit 501(C) (3) status, It's licensed by the State of Florida to account for associate and baccalaureate degrees, and it is accredited. As a matter of fact. I believe it's the only four-year accredited college by the Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. We do have a Naples campus hers, and also one in Fort ~4yers, and there are learning sites in Sarasota and North Port. The ~~ it is primarily, as I believe was mentioned earlier, an adult student facility. The average age of our students is 30 years. Most of the students are employed and have one or two or more children, We are locally governed by a board of directors, most of whom live here in the area. There may be some of them here this morning, I'm not sure. Also, we are very community minded, and the colleue has participated in activities that benefit the community in general. ~o that I would like to mention is the creative retirement center, which is a department that's operated by the senior citizen group, who provide seminars and other educational type programs for anyone that's interested, but particularly the older senior citizen group. Al~o, the Freenet, which the college was a very vigorous and initial sponsor, and which we still house out on the college facilities. So with that ~eneral introduction, I would like to ask Wayne Arnold to come up here and explain the petition to you. And again, I do want to thank you for this opportunity. Thank you. Page 18 September 17, 1998 CHAIRM~4 DAVIS: Thank you. MR. ARNObD: Thanks, Ileno. For the record, Wa)ne Arnold, Wilson, Miller, Barton and Peek. I won't go in and t?y to repeat what Susan Murray and the staff report have already told you, but I'd like to focus for a few minutes just on the land use compatibility issues that we have, comprehensive plan consistency, et cetera. I've displayed over here on the board the site location map which shows its relationship to the Park Shore residential structures that abut the Church of Christ, as well as the Seagate Elementary School. Our church site of course right now is the main sanctuary building for the First Methodist Church. You can see the internal courtyards, the green space. It's a very well landscaped site. Grass parking, essentially the rear 300 and some odd feet of the site that abut the residential structures and Park Shore. The CF zoning district, which we're trying to achieve today, is one of those districts that the comprehensive plan says should implement all the nonresidential ty~e uses that are allowed in the urban residential district, which are such things as church and day care centers and colleges, schools, et cetera. So it's the most appropriate district and, in fact, the only district outside of a PUD which, because of our size we do not qualify to ask for, it was the district that was approved by the Board of County Commissioners several months ago as an appropriate district for colleges and universities. The land use relationships that we have of course abutting Seagate Elementary School, Church of Christ, those are also permitted uses in the CF zoning district. We also have the Catholic church essentially across the street, which is again another permitted use in the CF zoning district. And again, access to the site is from Seagate Drive. No access is available to Crayton Road or any other residential street that serves Park Shore. I'd like to also point out to you here that what we've tried to achieve is utilization of a site that currently exists. There are no immediate plans to reconfigure the site in any way. We intend to utilize the building essentially as it is with some internalized modifications to it to house classroom space, a library, et cetera. It's currently set up as a sanc~uarium and other church and day care related uses. But as you can see, the site is currently well landscaped, and in a moment I'd like to address a couple of staff stipulations that we're certainly generally concurrent with the recommendations and their conditions of approval, with maybe a couple of very minor exceptions to some of the language that they've offered. I think it's obvious that the conversion of the church building into the college campus will be a good neighbor to the residences to the south. I think the predominant use along Seagate Drive and that corridor is nonresidential in nature, very much an institutionalized sort of corridor there because of the nature of the uses. But we also, when you look at the relationship of the Page 19 September 17, 1998 comprehensive plan, the existing land use pattern being one of institutional type uses; for instance, the existing site is currently used for a CF zoning use. And I think it's important to point out that it isn't an island of county zoned property, everything else was in the city limits of Naples that surrounds it to the south, east and And again, the zoning change merely represents conversion from one institutional use to another that are permitted in the CF zoning district. And I think staff has tried very hard to condition that approval so that the more noxious type use that might be occurring in the CF zoning district is prohibited on the site. And that's a condition that runs with the !and, unless we come back to Planning Commission/Board of County Commissioners at some future date; some future user will have to come back and ask you to approve a fraternal organization as a zoning change again. Again, the staff assessment I think was very clear, and I don't want to belabor the presentation here. We are going to hear some -- one of the big compatibility issues that arose earlier on was traffic. Jeff Perry is going to present you with some very important traffic information which we think will dispel the issue of traffic as an issue for the site. I would like to take one brief moment, I think, right now to address staff stipulations, unless I could reserve just a couple of minutes after ~dr, Perry's presentation to sort of wrap up on that issue. CHAIRPIAN DAVIS: That would be fine. MR. ARNOLD: Okay, I'll do it that way. I think it would be a little better. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. MR. ARNOLD: I would like to also mention that we do have a petition with nearly 300 names of registered voters in the community that I'd like to present to the record, and I have copies for each you, if you wish, or I'll just hand you a few copies that you can certainly peruse. C}~IRF~ DAVIS: I think a few copies will suffice, and we'll make sure they are made part of the record. ~4R. A~4OLD: Thank you. MR. FERRY: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, commissioners. For the record, my name is Jeff Perry. I'm with Wilson, Miller, Barton and Peek. I, too, will be brief and do not want to belabor a lot of the information that's in your agenda packet in the traffic impact statement, as well as inforraation that staff has already provided. I did want ~o mention a few things and highlight a couple of things that I think are significant in this particular petition. First of all, there's a lot of good data. We had two existing uses: A church with a lot of existing and historical information available; we also had a college with a tot of existing data, as well as historical information. W~ile it's not unique, it's certainly different when you're trying to do a traffic impact analysis and have all of this Page 20 ....... September 17, 1998 information available to you. Going into the project, we realized that we had to compare these different uses to determine whether or not the change in use was going to significantly affect either positively or negatively the traffic in the area. It was clear when we were done that the change in use would be a positive factor of traffic in the area. We found that the daily traffic on an average day would be reduced by about 65 percent, but more importantly, the peak flow in the morning would be reduced by over ~0 percent. .It's primarily due to the fact that the church operates a very busy preschool, has a lot of traffic coming to and from the project early in the morning hours. '~nat is significant is that that traffic is also competing with Seagate Elementary,early morning school hour traffic. So by eliminating all of that early morning church site related traffic, we are improving traffic conditions along Seagate Drive. Weekend traffic, as Ms. Murray also mentioned, will also be significantly reduced because of the significant reduction in weekend activities associated with the college activity. 9~en we looked at the college traffic, we were able to look at the student body, we were able to look at the student travel patterns, the class schedules. We looked at two different semesters, took the worst of the two different semesters in terms of traffic and student activities. We also found it was clear that the student population, the total student population enrolled, was not the student daily enrollment that actually impacted the particular site. In fact, we found that about half of the students enrolled were actually attending classes on any given day. Many students attend only one class per day. We also found that there was a significant portion of the -- of student population that was involved in distance learning, on-line class schedules, something that is a model, I think, for telecommuting nowadays, where as much use is used at the property without actually being physically at the property all of the time. Students could come and use the library resources, they could use -- meet with their instructors as needed, but a lot of their classes -- and we believe this to be a significant future trend in the growth of the college. One thing we wanted to do after analyzing the existing data was compare that with national average information. You're all aware that traffic planners and engineers typically use the Institute of Transportation Engineers' guides and manuals on traffic generation. When we compared what we had developed with what ITE gave us as national standards, we found a very high level of confidence or consistency between the two, with the exception of the p.m. peak hour trip rates generated by the college, which was explained easily by the fact that many of the students attend classes in the evening, are arriving for the 5:00, 6:00 shift of class schedules, perhaps a little bit higher concentration at that kind of trip making at this particular college, as opposed to a national average college Page 21 ..... 11 II ................... IIT-'- September 17, ].998 environment. We also looked at projecting the traffic. We -- because of historical data that was available, we were able to project growth at the church, should it remain at that particular site, and also the college, if their -- what would happen over the next five years. We found that the college traffic in fact generated less traffic than just the preschool alone. That trend would exist five years out into the future. We recently exqpanded that to 10 years -- actually 12 years, to 2010; found that the college traffic would be actually less than the church site related traffic is today. So that traffic in the future ',/as not an issue. Lastly, 'we looked at distribution of the trips. Where were these trips coming to and from, what roads were they impacting. We found that.by doing an origin and destination analysis on both the church site traffic, specifically the preschool traffic arriving in the morning, as well as all of the student traffic, we found that the bulk -- the vast majority of the college-related traffic would be entering the site via Seagate Drive from the U.S. 41 side, that there would be little or no traffic impact on intervening local streets such as West or Crayton Road. Contrary to that, the -- we expect that the population in the surrounding area that frequents the church site today, either for church-related activities or for the ancillary type of preschool activities, oftentimes are coming from the surrounding neighborhood, and they are using local streets. So we feel that this particular petition will in fact have again a positive benefJ', to traffic on the local street system. There is no impact, significant impact, on any arterial highway, primarily because of very low traffic volumes being generated by the proposed site. In conclusion, I'll just reiterate that the traffic impact to the college is substantially less than the existing church-related site. The normal hours of operation for the proposed college will result in a significant reduction during peak hours, especially on weekends. Traffic impact on local streets is expected to be less than is normally occurring today. And future traffic impacts resulting from the growth and college student population are expected to be less than current levels, and far less than the impact would be attributed to the growth that could be expected at the church site, if it were to stay and remain at that location. And if you have any other q~estions, I'll be glad to t~y and answer them for you. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Any questions of Mr. Perry? Thank you. Mr. Arnold, you had some wrap-up? MR. AR/gOLD: Yes, thanks. I think between what you've heard staff say, the report information, my presentation, Mr. Perry's analysis of traffic, again, we think we're clearly compatible with the few surrounding residents that we have as our southern neighbor. A couple of points that I wanted to address relative to staff's recommended conditions were really on two of those. Rage 22 16G1 SeptemJ~er i7, 1998 The first one that was their condition number two that limited no outdoor activity, student housing or recreational facilities. I think we concur that we certainly have no athletic tea_m, we don't have any active recreational facility or intent to construct that. We're very much a learning institution and very much, as was said, a center that will focus entirely on academics. But I think when I look at the site and the limitation that that says, no outdoor activities, the student housing is no concern to us, nor would the recreational facilities, we don't intend to build them. But outdoor activities, looking at the plan, you can see on the prima~j structure, there's some fairly large internalized courtyards to the building. We certainly would hope and would like to persuade you that those are certainly areas that our students should enjoy as outdoor learning areas or recreation areas to have their snack, cigarette, whatever they choose to do, between class or prior to class. I've offered something as a compromise which might read that the outdoor activities would be precluded on the southerru~ost 250 feet of that, which is essentially anything that is part of the grass parking area and beyond. Because not knowing exactly what type of things we might want to do, but if we wanted to host some sort of student mixer or faculty/student mixer and have it sort of external to the site for a day, I would hate to be precluded from that into the future. ~nat I've offered is that we would be allowed to use our primary building envelope that's on the north end, and that outdoor activities would be restricted on the southerr~most 250 feet, unless and until we went to the county to receive a temporary use permit for some other intermittent activity that we might have, whether it be some fundraising activity, et cetera, just as any other user would have to go through the temporary use process at the county. The other condition was one of the county recommendation on looking at the landscaping issue prior to occupancy of the building. We've had our landscape architects on the site. We believe the code currently meets all required code requirements for landscaping, with exception of the rear buffer requirement adjacent to residential neigh~rs. We believe that a stipulation would be in order that would require us to vegetate that with a hedge and trees, according to the LDC requirements. You can see to the top of the colored rendering over here that there's a strip of essentially grass right now that's between the hedge and fence that's on the neighboring residential structure site. We would propose to have that landscaped as our commitment for the -- meeting the landscape code requirements, in lieu of the staff's recon%mendation, which just said bring it to code. Because the code actually says bring it to code to the greatest extent possible. T~ically on a reuse site, that involvement does not involve going back and heavily landscaping a site, especially one that has 20 years of mature vegetation on it. The only other stipulation that at this point I'm not willing to say ~ha[ it's problematic for us, but Z did want to address, because Page 23 September 17, 1998 we're going to be working on this between now and the time we go before [he County Commission, and that is the stipulation that said there would be no Sunday classes. The college has just recently implemented a master's and business administration program, it's an executive t yl~e course. The -- operationally speaking, currently it's a Friday, Saturday course work. Projecting ourselves out into the future, we don't necessarily envision Sunday activity, but the trend has been for some of these executive ~BA classes to accelerate someone's ability to achieve one, they can be on a Friday, Saturday and very limited Sunday basis, as opposed to just Friday and Saturday use. So we're going to look at that and see if that really fits into our f~ture operational characteristics, and j,~st wanted to let you know that. We're willing to accept that today, but it may be one point that we're going to deal with the County Commission further. COb~MISSiONER OATES: If you read it technically, it says you can operate seven days a week 'til 10:00 p.m. Md{. AP~;OLD: That's correct, it does say that. I think we'd be willing to restrict that to probably five days a week, if I'm not mistaken, to the 10:00 p.m. usage. I don't believe there's a Saturday characteristic for 10:00 p.m. use. So we'd certainly be willing to restrict that to five days for the 10:00 p.m. class use. A~d to specify, that would be Monday through Friday. Thank you. Any other questions, I'll be happy to answer them. CHAIRMA~ DAVIS: Questions for Mr. Arnold? five?MS. Murray, your reaction to Mr. Arnold's numbers two, three and MS. ~URRAy: I guess I would need to get some clarification on five for the landscaping. Is it your intent to bring it up to the code to the greatest extent possible? Is that what I understood~ MR. ARNOLD: That's correct. MS. M~RRAy: Okay. MR. ARNOLD: The existing pavement between the drive aisle and the property line is approximately eight feet. Probably couldn't achieve 10 feet unless we were to go ahead and remove existing pavement. We would prefer not to do that, certainly, and believe that the current church site has operated with no clear buffer on its site for nearly the last 20 years, so we wouldn't envision that our reduced traffic trips, and certainly reduced usage of the overflow parking, would create a problem for the residents with that limitation on two feet of landscaping -- COM~ISSIONER OATES: You did state, though, that you'd bring the rear buffer up to -- the rear -- the south -- MR. ~d~NOLD: The amount of vegetation that we would place within the eight feet as opposed to the 10 feet we would certainly do. MS. MIIP~RAy: That seems reasonable. That's tYpically what we do on reuse sites anyway, so that's reasonable to staff. Nuraber three -- CHAIP~ DAVIS: 10:00 p.m. Monday through Friday? MS. MURRAy: For classes? Page 24 16Gl ' September 17, [998 CHAIP2~A14 DAVIS: Yes. MS. HUp~RAy: Let me just clarify that a little bit. I recognized that although classes may not be held on Sundays, thaE other operations of the college may occur on a Sunday. For example, a faculty member may want Eo come hold a meeting or something like that, or do some work. That's why it appears to be a contradiction there, but it really isn't. I really don't -- I apologize, I -- my -- the premise behind limiting classes to Sundays was that the applicant made a significant argument that traffic and activity levels, et cetera, would be significantly reduced on Sundays and weekends, and I kind of -- my opinion was that typically people are home on weekends and at work Monday through Friday. It might provide residents a little bit more of a quiet enjoyment on the weekends when they were typically there. I think with some sort of limitation, perhaps -- perhaps it doesn't go 'til 10:00 p.m. on Sunday or something like that, or, you know, ends early afternoon or something like that. I think we could reasonably accommodate that~ MR. ~3LHERE: At this point, I think they're agreeing to no classes on Sunday, if I'm not mistaken. CHAIRM;~ DAVIS: Yes, exactly. I think the one thing we don't know is, we've talked about ~'!ve days a week, Monday through Friday, 10:00 p.m. is the limit. MR. MULHERE: What concerns me there is the one -- is the Saturday. CHAIP~J%N DAVIS: Right, that was going to be my question. MR. }gJLHERE: What's the issue? Do we want to go 'til midnight or -- and I don't think that was the intent, but it seems to be unclear. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Maybe Mr. Arnold could help us there with operationally what we might consider on Saturday, leaving Sundays out for now. MR. ARNOLD: The current Saturday course schedule for the International College has classes wrapping up very early afternoon, tylDically just after the noon hour. Certainly -- CHAIRMAN DAVIS: 6:00 p.m.? MR. ARNOLD: ~- 6:00 p.m. on a Saturday is adequate for us. MR. MULHERE: I thought that was the intent. I just wanted to get -- CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Yeah. Well, I had the same question, Bob. We were getting all the days but Saturday. So Saturdays would be 6:00 p.m. And Sundays, for now, we're leaving out. MS. MURKAY: AS far as the outdoor activities, et cetera, in the language that Pfr. Arnold proposed, we don't have a problem with that. Our temporary use permit process typically provides for some level of staff review as far as impacts on special events and whatnot. And again, given the location of the church structure or the sanctuary structure close adjacent to the roadway, I don't think we have a problem with that. CHAIrmAN DAVIS: Okay. Page 25 September 17, 1998 COMMISSIONER WRAGE: Just a question. Do we leave that -- limit it to the northern 250 feet? Is that correct? MR. MI/LHERE: Yeah. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: That was Mr. Arnold's suggestion. MS. MURRAy: Yes. CHAI~MA/g DAVIS: That seems to make sense. MS. MURRAY: Yes, that's what staff would support. COMMISSIONER WRAGE: All right. C0I~MISSIONER OATES: Excluding -- I thought the way he said it was no outdoor activities on the south 250 feet. COMMISSIONER BUDD: That's what I heard. ~S. ~Y: Without a temporary use permit. COMMISSIONER OATES: Yeah. CNJ%iR/~A~ DAVIS: Right. MS. MURRAY: Right. CPLAIRF~ DAVIS: Okay. All right, additional registered speakers on this petition? A lot of people raised their hands, so please come forward. MR. CRONIN: Good morning, Mr. Chairman. For the record, my name is Dennis Cronin. I'm an attorney with Bond, Schoeneck and King, and i represent the Park Shore Homeowners' Association, which, obviously from the residential character of the site, we have a strong interest in. We have had some limited discussions with International College and have had some presentations there. I think that this diagram that's shown here best indicates the residential character of this area, all right, both behind and across the street in the Seagate neighborhood. And that's really our main concern is the compatibility of this location, all right, with a residential neighborhood. Once you get past West Street on Seagate, all right, the -- we feel that the -- that the character of the whole area changes. You're into neighborhood areas at that point in time. We have serious issues with respect to the compatibility here. At the time the original amendment for the Land Development Code came before you to add colleges to the CF zoning, we advocated for conditional use at that point in time so that there would be another level of review to specifically deal with neighborhood impacts, because this site was in the background at that point in time and was part and parcel of that process. The intensity of the use that's proposed here is of particular concern to us. There is -- it is adjacent to an elementary school. I question whether the traffic study dealt with Crayton Road and West Boulevard. My review of it, it doesn't seem to deal with those issues. Those are neighborhood areas that I believe will be impacted by students coming to this site. It seeans to me that they dealt primarily with Seagate Drive and did it on an average basis using the Sunday numbers and then spreading them out, and that's how they come up with a net reduction. But I question the rationale in proposing that. Page 26 September 17, 1998 International College is a contract purchaser of this site, and I think that the petition that was presented here, I want you to review that and see how many members -- residents in this area are signatories on that, or whether that's just a church membership in a very self-serving type of petition for showing support for International College. I hope you don't find that persuasive. I think that we have serious concerns on the potential for other CF uses that are here, in the event that International College, for whatever reason, decides not to continue with use of this property. They've talked about authorizing the elimination of social and fraternal organizations. There's also, under 2.21921, Subsection 5, nursing homes, family care facilities, group care facilities. I'd also like you to consider the elimination of those, as well, from this proposed,use so that any subsequent user -- and there is a church that's next door, and I think there's certainly a potentiol for International College to grow onto that site as well, that those be eliminated so that any subsequent user would be precluded. The -- again, the impacts on this site enrollment. I think we've heard Mr. Perry talk about five-year plans and traffic studies going out to 2010. I presume there are enrollment figures that go witl~ this. International College has told us that they're in the area ©f 300 to 400 students at this point in time with a five-year plan to g~ to perhaps 500 to 700. I think that should be part and parcel of this -- that five-year plan, that ceiling on enrollment, so that we are assured that these impacts are as they've been represented here, that we don't suddenly have a situation where this is approved that in a three-year period of time we have 15 or 2,000 or 2,200 students there. Now, the self-imposed site questions, I think that we met with Ms. Murray and we all recognized that parking is going to be somewhat of a restriction. But I think that if there's an adjacent property, or the opportunity to acquire adjacent property, that that expands the potential. So I'd like to -- I think that needs to be part of this consideration. I'd like to have some address on lighting, all right? You've got the south 250 feet, but there are -- there is perking in that area that could potentially be utilized. Is there going to be lighting at night? How's that going to affect the residential area that buffers this? }{ours of operation, I think that you've addressed. I think that we'd like to see some -- a little bit more intensive buffering and landscaping on the area that immediately abuts the residential area. So I think that those are our main concerns. We have serious compatibility concerns based upon the residential character, and I hope that you would consider these in your deliberation on this issue. And if you have any questions, I'll try to answer them at this point in time -- CHAIRM~24 DAVIS: Any questions? MR. CRONIN: -- and we have other speakers here, as well. Thank Page 27 September 17, ]998 you, Mr. Davis. CHAIRFL~N DAVIS: Thank you. Additional speakers? MR. K~uNNENSOHN: Good morning. My name is Jeff Kannensohn, and I'm here in opposition to the petition, and I'm -- have a prepared statement, so hopefully you'll bear with me, My n~me is Jeff Kannensohn. My family and I reside at 525 Whispering Pine Court, which is on the south boundary of the church property, no more than 30 feet from the existing administration building and also adjoining the parking lot. i'm appearing here in strong opposition to this application I've also been requested by our neighbors, Richard and Sally VanBuskirk, who also reside next to the parking lot, John Regas, William Cushman, Mark and Leslie Borrelli, who also reside on Whispering Pi~%e Court; and Leslie and Jeffrey Febacher, who reside in a home on the west boundary of the property, to speak on their behalf in opposition to this petition. We as a neighborhood are in strong opposition to the application, because the intended use of the property as a college is not compatible with the neighborhood, and the general rezoning request to a co~3vnunity facility will open the property to future uses which we believe will be detrimental to our neighborhood and to our properties. Let me state at the outset that our comments today are not t o criticize or to demean the purpose and the operation of the col]e¢;e. Our concern is centered on the fact that we believe that this property is not an appropriate place for the college to be relocated or f~)r the proposed rezoning. The present zoning for the property is RSF-4. The church Ju a grandfathered nonconforming use, the day care center operated a~ the church is a nonconforming use. Over the years the church has had little or no impact upon our property or the neighborhood. The only noticeable church activi*y is on Sunday morning and on Wednesday evening when the church holds services and the parkin~ lot is filled. That's only in the wintertime. As a general rule, the church, Seagate School to the east a~d the church to the west are dark at night, and Seagate Drive becomes ,% quiet residential street to be enjoyed by the local neighbors who are often seen walking, biking, running and whatever, enjoying the local neighborhood. There is little if any business activity or traffic in the evening hours. While International College is a private post-secondary school, it is clear that it is a business, which must be so operated in order to survive and prosper. The present enrollment of the college is approximately 300 students, but we have been advised by the college representatives that their five-year growth plan is for a student population of at least 700 students. Since the college is primarily tuition supported, it will have to maximize its enrollment in order to survive and prosper financially. Page 28 16G1 September ]7, lq98 They will operate from 8:00 a.m. in the meriting 'til 10:00 p m. in the evening; therefore, the activity on the canlpus will be and continual, The overwhelming majority of students attending college reside in areas a significant distance from the property Based upon the stated purposes of the college and the demographics of the student body, present and future, the cell. age will continue to predominantly serve persons outside the local community, thereby attract:ng persons into our local neighborhood from all ,aver the county and outside the counties that would otherwise have no /eason to regularly travel there. The applicant has submitted a traffic statement and conclud¢*~ that the college will cause no adverse impact on the neighborhood We believe that many of the assumptions and conclusions contained ~ ~he traffic 0iud7 ara eithe! overstated, erroneous or irrelevant:. For example, the study quantifies, without any on-site traffic studies, that the dally trips generated from the day care activity at beiIl~ approximately 790. This number we helieve is greatly overstated based ~pon o,J[ daily observations of activity at the church. The study then compazes Lhat number to a projected daily trips that would be generater] by the college, estimated a~ 328. Since church arid the day care are nonconforming uses, if the property I!~ not rezoned but is sold for a residential use or a church gurpose which does not operate a day care facility, the traffic burden generat¢.d by the day care center would be eliminated. Therefore, the day carr~ facility generated traffic should not be used, or at least should be discounted as a stattstlca] means to demonstrate that the colleq.~ wou],l gptle~abe s reduced traffic load, The traffic generated by this nonconforr~ing use may disappear, while the traffic from the college wil! be real, permanent and ever increasing. If the study had not placed such a heavy emphasis on the day (:are facility generated traffic, it would have shown the projected day trips from the college, 328. That's far greater than the wepkday trips that are generated by the church, 143, Further, the study makes no effort to analyze and compare traffic impact by the college, as compared to the use of the property for residential purposes. By riot changing the zoning, there is n very good chance that the ;~ext use of the property, under the current zoning, will in fact reduce the traffic burden. Wouldn't it be much better planning Lo look for opportuniti¢~ to reduce traffic impacts by staying with the existing zoning, rather than using a nonconforming day care facility use to rationaliz(~ ~ change of zoning into a more burdensome permanent use. The study also underestimates the potential growth of the college, using a l0 percent factor, which is ]uwer than the planned growth to 700 students in the next five years, and also overestimates the church's growth rate at 15 percent, though it is highly questionable that the church could grow that quickly or that much, Given the parking constraints on the property and the limitations in the sanctuary that have caused the church to contract to buy anofher piece ,Jr prop. rt.y and move. Page 29 September 17, 1998 The study also asserts that there will be little impact on West Boulevard and Crayton Road, since ail the students will travel via the Pine Ridge Road, The assumption ignores the current overwhelming congestion on Pine Ridge Road that will certainly leave students ~o use these ;%elghborhoods that are already overburdened. Also, n~) consideration is given to the impact that the college traffic wi]] have on the current con~estion on Seagate Drive caused parents dropping off and picking up studsr]ts at Seagate Elementary in planning staff take a much closer look at the analysis and the I raffic study, and also require an on-site traffic count to assure the more reliable Al~o, ~t ~s ~y understanding that Park Shore Association, which review and analyze the traffic ~tudy. fn light of the significant impact of the proposed zoning ~r~ the neighborhood, we strongly urge this board to table this appl]cs~ ion pend]n~ a more thorough review of the study and a more considere,l neighborhood traffic, ~hat there will be adverse negative impact, traffic impact, on A large portion of the traffic ~enerated ~t the site now when there is little traffic on the road and the surrounding neighborhood. additional trips, our recent co,~nt of cars parked on the site itl the each morning. pres,£1t and future traffic will be generated during peak busine~;!: hours at 8:00 a,m, in the morning, until 10:00 each evening. will cause further burden on Seagate, Crayton and West Boulevard, which are presently overburdened. In addition to traffic impacts, the college will negetiv, ly impact the neighbors to th~ south. At the pre~ent time, we are ~nly periodically affected by parked cars near our property line on f~,~nday mornin~ and Wednesday evening. With the collage operatin~ from 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p,m., we will be faced with a constant activity and noise of cars coming and going in the parking lot. As a result, we will suffer continual noise from the run, sinG of motors, opening and closing of doors early and ]ate into the evening, and also the possibility of loitering in the parking lot, as well as the intrusion of lights in our backyard and not to mention possible increased security concerns, The college asserts in the application that there will be Page 30 September 17, ]998 future development will occur, 3ubJect to provisions of the CF zoning. But you should note that under the CF zoning, we have been advined by staff that there is no open space requirement other than a 10-foot land,cape buffer on the rear lot lines. And I would note then t~nder RSF there is presently a 25-foot 3etback line. With sufficient growth demand, the college could decide to reconfigure the site plan, which it's already indicated it might do in the future, and ~nst. al] additional buildings and possibly a parking garage to increase its capacity, or go next door and obtain additional capacity from the church, This would clearly negatively impact o~ the space area located on the properties to the south. And under the present CF zoning, there would be no restrictions upon such an expansion. In addition, under the CF zoning, there are many permitted uses, the scope of which cannot really be foreseen at this time. When taken into account, these unforeseeable uses and the relatively lax development standards contained in the CF zoning regarding open space and setbacks, we are le9itimately concerned ~hat the property could be used in the future for purposes which are clearly incompatible with and damaging to our neighborhood. It is not at all clear whether this college, which is a primarily tuition driven college, will be able to support itself on a neaz or long-term basis. In that case, the neighbors could be faced with a prospect of the property being sold to a third party to be used for the various permitted uses, which are included civil and cultural facilities, museums, nursing homes, controlled care facilities, parks and play grounds and social and fraternal organizations. C}~IP~ DAVIS: If you'd let me interrupt you for a moment. MR. F3J~NENSOHN: Sure. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: You've far exceeded your time limit of five minutes, Are you pretty close to being done? MR. K~ENSOHN: I understand. I have one more page. CHAIRMAJq DAVIS: If you could wrap it up. Thank you. 14R. KANNENSOHN: We are also -- we believe -- these are broad categories that are subject to interpretation in the future by the Planning Department. It's difficult if not impossible to identify all the types of uses that can be encompassed by these permitted uae~. We also believe the values of our properties will be adversely affected by the rezoning. When we purchased our houses, we knew the limitations of the zoning and what could be -- what our property was going to be used for. We relied upon that zoning and permitted use of the church property in making our decisions to make rather substantial investments in our homes. We had no reason to believe that this substantial rezoning would take place. And as I'm sure you're aware, uncertainty in markets, including real estate markets, certainly will affect ~- adversely affect real estate values. Conversely, the church's property fair market value is based upon its current permitted uses. Whether the property as presently zoned is worth the three million dollar purchase price is uncertain, but it Page 31 September i7, 1998 is clear that based upon the sales contract attached to the application, that international College is not 'willing to purchane the property unless it obtains the rezoning. Therefore, it is fair to conclude that the zoning will significantly enhance the value of the property, not only for its intended use but as a result of additional uses. It would be patently unfair for the board and the County Conunission to grant a rezoning request that would monetarily benefit the church and the college while at the same time hurting the market values. In conclusion, we purchased and improved our properties in reliance upon the existing zoning on the church property. The proposed rezoning is a major adjustment on the land use plan that we -- in the neighborhood that we each bought into. A change as significant as this must be supported by compelling reasons, not an analysis that in essence says that rezoning can do no harm. We, the adjoining property owl~ers, are the persons best situated to assess the impact of this proposed rezoning on our neighborhood. In balancing the rights of the various parties involved, this board and the County Commission should and must give great weight to the concerns and objections of the surrounding property o%nlers who wiI1 be heard over those of the church, which will be moving to greener pastures, while leaving us to suffer the consequences, and a college 'which ,will clearly benefit financially from this action. There's no grounds for all the support in the Park Shore/Seagate neighborhoods for this college to be relocated into this neighborhood. It is difficult to understand how putting a school onto this property will serve the needs of the local neighborhood that can't be served by Iocating this college in an activity center adjacent to some major arterial road, not in a quiet residential neighborhood. We look to the Planning Board and the County Commission to pro~ect our neighborhood and properties from ill-advised and overly broad zoning application, and we urge you to protect the residents and reject this application. ff you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer them. CHAIR~ DAVIS: Questions of the speaker? Thank you. MS. Student? MS. S773DENT: Marjorie Student, assistant county attorney. I just have a couple general observations. First of all, the law of this state is that you cannot -- when you do a straight rezone to a district, you can't pick and choose what uses. All the uses go with it, or they don't. And that's the case law of the State of Florida. Secondly, we don't have a plus meter zoning. Your decision today must be based upon competent and substantial evidence, and that can be fact testimony from surrounding property owners, as well as the professional opinions of your planning staff and any other planners that testify today. C~AIRMAN DAVIS: And the 17 points of analysis in our Land Development Code. Page 32 September 17, 1998 MS. STUDENT; That's correct. CHAI~4AN DAVIS: Additional speakers? I'd remind you not to be repetitive and limit your remarks to five minutes. Not that I assumed you would be. MRS. KQ~ENSO~J: I am Janine Kannensohn, and -- obviously his wife, and I won't be repetitive, but I did want to emphasize some of the points that he made. And if I could walk over there and just point to where our homes are, I think that might be very helpful so that you understand how very strongly we feel about this. CHAIPd4A/; DAVIS: Just point, if you want to, and then walk back. MRS. KA~D~E1JSOHN: My home is -- COmmISSIONER OATES: If you're going to talk, you're going to have to use the mike. CHAIR/4AN DAVIS: Right. We saw where your house is. IdS. K~EMSOHN: The other residential home is here. And Khen we ail go around from here. CHAiRJ~M~ DAVIS: All right, if you'd come back to the microphone. 14RS. K3~£I;SO}R~: So you saw where I pointed to my home. And then the Buskirk's home is sort of in the center of that parking lot. So we are really right behind there. And I don't know what those little bushes things back there are all about, because those were taken out. So it's basically just grass and our fence and that building. It is really sort of a barren territory back there. V~en cars pull in, we see all the lights come into our family room. So basically one of the things that concerns me the most, really, is the nighttime activity. And I heard the Planning ConLmission say that fraternal orders would be taken out of this particular equation. And I would say for the very same purpose, I would be concerned about nighttime activity, 10:00 at night. I wen~ to college and people s~and around and talk and kibbutz and stay, and it's possible that people could be in that parking lot until 11:00 at night, driving and pulling in and out. I would also make the point that Waterside Mall, for heaven's sakes, most of those shops close at 6:00 p.m., and yet here we are tucking in back behind homes something that's literally open from 8:00 in the morning until 10:00 at night. This is a business that's going to be operating in my backyard. I also heard the attorney for the applicant state that they didn't want to say that they didn't -- weren't going to be using the property on Sundays. I heard them say [hat they could have all kinds of social activities in that far back corner, What I'm really hearing them say is we really want to use our property any way we want it for as long as we want to use it. And I just want you to bear in mind how close we are and how much noise that's going to cause to us on a daily basis. In addition to that, I heard that -- I heard someone mention that the Church of Christ is for this particular application. And I have -- I have spoken with someone from the Church of Christ and the reason Page 33 September Z?, 1998 being that they would be able to use the parking lot on Sunday. i would understand that the Catholic church could use the parking lot on Sunday. So I'm getting a picture of a facility that's going to be used, have intensive use, really, round the clock daily. The last issue I'd like to bring up is the issue of security. When we're bringing this many more people into our neighborhood and also late at night, that's a lot more cars back there. As it stands right now, the parking lot is basically empty, and if a car pulls back there, we're sort of aware of it. If we're going to have lots and lots of cars, this really would provide someone -- an ability for someone to pull in, park the car and walk back behind the fences and have access to our neighborhoods. So as a mother with children, I wonder and wor~j. An~ay, I hope that you will censider these objections and realize that we really, in Park Shore, feel ve~j strongly against this. We feel that this is an assault on our neighborhood. So thank you. CHAI~2~ CAVIS: The cours reporter has a question, THE REPORTER: If your husband could bring me the letter that you read from. CHAIPJ4AN DAVIS: Yes, we'll need that for the record. Ms. Student? MS. STUDENT: Hr. Chairman, I just need to make one other little statement about the limitation on the uses. That is the case law. However, when we've had site specific rezones, we've taken the position here that if the applicant for the site specific rezone agrees to a limitation on uses, that's okay, because the issue would never come up, because they or a subsequent property owner would be estopped. So I just wanted to further flush that out a little bit. C~IAIP~ DAVIS: We appreciate that clarification. Next speaker? Oh, everyone's done. Okay, we'll close the public hearing. And Mr. Arnold, if you could come up here, I wanted to ask you a couple of questions. Could you address the lighting issue for us, what your intentions are there? MR. A31NOLD: Our intentions are to utilize the existing lighting of the university -- or the Methodist Church. We don't have any intentions to increase lighting back there. If we did, I believe our intent would only be to provide pedestrian level lighting for security purposes. CPLAIRF~ DAVIS: Okay. And the -- I think we determined that there's enough room for an eight-foot buffer at the rear of the property. What sort of opacity are we talking about for that buffer? I kind of look to each of you. MS. ~fURP~AY: Well, the current code requires 80 percent opacity within one year. CHAIRF~ DAVIS: 80 percent? MS. h'dAP, AY: Uh-huh. CHAIRF~AN DAVIS: Okay. Page 34 September 17, 1998 COM~ISSIONER OATES: Mr. Chai~--man, I would move we recommend approval of petition R-98-5 to the Board of County Commissioners with the following changes: Item number two, that no outdoor activities be allowed on the south 250 feet without a tempora~t use permit; the hours of operation change from seven days a week to five days a week, Monday through Friday, from -- 'til seven -- pardon me, 'til 10:00 p.m., and on Saturday 'til 6:00 p.m.; and item n%Lmber five, that the rear buffer be installed with -- in the eight-foot area with opacity to be 80 percent within one year. CO[~4ISSiONER BUDD: Second. Bud~.CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Motion of approval by Mr. Oates, seconded by Mr. Discussion on the motion? COMMISSIONER TP~AGESSER: I have a couple of questions, Mr. Chairman. And this one's for the petitioner. Does the college have a maximum enrollment capacity that it views for the existing facility? In other words, given the existing facility, does the college know how many on-site students they can accommodate? M~. ARNOLD: I don't think we have a clear number on what that could be. We currently do block scheduling of courses. There are a lot of different operational methods of using your classroom space, et cetera. I think it's important to note that the college has seen over the last couple of years, with its relationship with the Naples Freenet, the distance learning as an opportunity. They currently go out to the communities, the Sheriff's Department and other places of business to conduct training on their sites, rather than bringing them to the university site. So we think that that factor will increasingly be a stronger commitment not to have the students on-site. The introduction of the Fort Myers campus, for instance, and potential future of Bonita Springs type campuses will probably again limit ~he actual enrollment on-site. And I think, as Mr. Perry pointed out, the enrollment in itself doesn't necessarily equate to daily students on-site, because you have some students who may be enrolled for one class per week or one class per term as a part-time student, as opp',sed to those who may be there for a period of their block of 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. type classes. COM~ISSIONER TRAGESSER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Anybody else? Any discussion on the motion? MS. MURRAY: Could I get some clarification on the motion, Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Certainly. MS. MURRAY: Just number three, I just want to clarify, we had discussed this earlier, that the landscape buffer was going to be -- the landscaping on the site was going to be brought up to current code to the greatest extent possible. Is that your intent, Mr. Oates? COM~ISSIONER OATES: No. My intent was that the back piece, the rear, would be buffered to the eight-foot depth that it -- Mr~ Arnold Page 35 September 17, 1998 said would be no problem, and that the opacity be 80 percent within the next year. I~S. !4URP~ky: Okay. And the rest of the site is of no concern? CO[~MISSIOMER OATES: Right. MS. ~JRRAY: Okay. CHAI~k/.I DAVIS: [4r. Oates, would you consider an addition to your motion, or do you think there's a need for this site specific rezone to be exclusive to the college that's being requested, and the other uses be eliminated? COmmISSIONER OATES: Well, I was under the impression what Ms. Student just said, that we really can't limit it without their okaying the limitation then. Is that not what you said? MS. STUDENT: That's what I said. If the applicant agrees -- there's case law on this in Florida. If the applicant agrees to a limitation of uses, which we have done before, because we've had the applicant agree to that, then i don't see that there's a problem with it. CO~MISSIONER OATES: Yeah, but they've already agreed they won't use it for social and whatever the other -- I'm sorry, social and fraternal organizations. I would hate to limit this for the next eons, and we could -- and in fact, if they agree to limiting it, which they may or may not do, but if we did forever it would be limited to a university, and I don't know what's going to happen 50 years from now. 14S. STUD~4T: Mr. Chairraan? COM~ISSIONER OATES: I won't be here to worry about it. ~4S. STUDENT: It wouldn't be limited forever, because they could come in and rezone it again or do a PUD or something like that. So it wouldn't necessarily be limited forever. But -- CHAIrmAN DAVIS: We'll go ahead and vote here. And I'm going to support the motion, but I just wanted to get that out. That might be something that they might want to consider. Just a thought. And with that, any other questions or discussions? Ms. Tragesser? COM~ISSIONER TRAGESSER: I have one more for staff. Under a CF we have commercial guidelines and standards for commercial buildings~ Does the CF fall under that, or what -- what would dictate a future change in the facade of the -- what would be the college? In other words, if they came in and wanted to do an expansion, would they be under any sort of aesthetic review? MS. MURRAy: At this point, no. The architectural standards only address structures within commercial zoning districts, and then commercial components of planned unit developments. And this is a community facility zoning district and as such is not considered commercial. COMMISSIONER TRAGESSER: So the answer is no? MS. ~URRAy: That's correct, at this present time. If the code was amended in the future, it might be a different story, but presently, no. COMMISSIONER TRAGESSER: So if they wanted to do something to Page 36 1 6Gl September 17, 1998 their building, an expansion, a change, they could do whatever they wanted? ~S. ~JRP~Y: Pretty much. As far as architectural Goes. I~R. MULHERE: I think I'd have to qualify that statement a little bit. I don't think they can do whatever they want. CO~MISSIONER TRAGESSER: I know, I -- MR. MULHERE: They can do whatever they want within the confines of the Building Code and Land Development Code. There are no architectural standards at this point in time. COM~ISSIOMER TRAGESSER: Well, I have a real concern with that, given the beauty of that area now and the way it's developed. You know, as one Planning Commission person, I would be concerned that perhaps we might be able to better define that, should they decide 5o change the facade of the building. CP~I~N DAVIS: It may very well be. ;~d as with my statement, that being on the record here, and there's some time that's -- I get the sense that ~here's a consensus of approval for the motion, the petitioner may 'want to consider some sort of limitations for future redevelopment that would keep it in the residential character of the neighborhood. ~R. ~ULHERE: Correct. I was -- we have in the past had several, I Guess, community facility or residential type projects that had a condition tha~ limited development or redevelopment to a residential scale. It's obviously a pretty broad condition that is going to require some evaluation that's not very specific on the part of staff; in other words, the parameters are not really set forth. But Given the height constraints and the constraints of the site, I think a statement that indicates that the -- any redevelopment of the site will consider the neighborhood and will be residential in character and scale would afford us some oversights -- some additional oversight than we have now. COMMISSIONER TRAGESSER: Mr. Oates, would you consider including that in your motion? COMMISSIONER OATES: Sure. COMMISSIONER BUDD: Fine. COMMISSIONER TRAGESSER: Thank you. CHAIP~ DAVIS: Okay, that's been added to the motion, both by the motion maker and the one who seconded the motion. MS. MURRAy: I'll need you to be specific. I'm sorry, so -- MR. MULHERE: I think I can repeat what I said, and if -- CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Yeah, please do. COMMISSIONER OATES: It's compatible with an area. MR. MULHERE: Any future development or redevelopment of a site be compatible with the surroundinG residential neiGb, borhood and consider -- and shall be compatible in scale and architectural design with the surrounding residential neighborhood. COMMISSIONER OATES: That's exactly what I meant. MS. MU~_RAy: Thank you. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: All right. With that, I'll call for the vote. Page 37 1'6 81 September 17, 1998 Ail those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHA!P~'~ DAVIS: That carries unanimously. Let's take about a five-minute break. (A recess was taken.) CF~IP2ZAN DAVIS: I call the meeting back to order. Brings us to PUD-98-5. i'd ask all those present that may want to speak on this petition to please stand, raise your right hand so you may be sworn by the court reporter. (All speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRM~ DAVIS: Ms. Murray? MS. MURRAY: Susan Murray, planning services. I'm going to be fairly to the point on this. It's the Walgreen's PUD, which is located on a 15,68 acre tract at the southwest corner of the intersection of Vanderbilt Beach road and Airport Pulling Road. The western 10 acres of the site is presently zoned as La Fontana PUD, and the remaining five acres is presently zoned agricultural~ Basically what this petition purports to do is rezone the entire 15 acres from PUD and ag. to Walgreen's PUD to allow commercial uses which are generally found within the C-4 zoning district. The Walgreen's PUD will permit a maximum of 156,800 square feet of commercial uses. The PUD would also permit a hotel and motel use on this site at a density of 26 dwelling units per acre. Most of the development would occur along the front of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Airport-Pulling Road. A portion of the southwestern section of the site will contain approximately 4.71 acres for water ~nagement and native vegetation retention, and that is the portion that is adjacent to the Emerald Lakes PUD to the south~ The proposed master plan. The proposed master plan indicates that access will be provided via two points of ingress and egress from Vanderbilt Beach Road and one from Airport-Pulling Road. And I would also tell you that the current master plan indicates an interconnect with the Emerald Lakes development to the south. That is going to be removed, resulting from a meeting between the homeowners of Emerald Lakes and the petitioner. All the structures on-site will be required to comply with the county's architectural and design standards. The site is located within a mixed use activity center; therefore, a rezoning to commercial land uses is consistent with the future land use map. There really weren't any traffic issues or infrastructure issues. That brings us to the development standards. The development standards will be similar to those found in the C-4 zoning district. However, unlike the C-4 zoning district, building heights will be limited to 50 feet, except for the hotel/motel use, which is permitted at a maximum height of 100 feet. And, currently, C-4 zoning allows buildings to be a maximum of 100 feet tall. The only issue we really have that we could not necessarily agree Page 38 16Gl September 17, 1998 on was that the petitioner is requesting additional signage in the form of an additional directory sign, and one development identification sign. Each would be allowed to have 250 square feet per sign face. The development identification sign would be located at 5he intersection of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Airport-Pulling Road. The present code allows multiple occupancy parcels, such as shopping centers containing 25,000 square feet or more of gross leasable floor area, and containing at least eight or more independent businesses, to have one directory sign, 250 square feet in area, for a single entrance onto each public street. It's ~he opinion of staff that the additional directory sign is not warranted. The site has sufficient visibility due to its location at the corner of a major intersection, and the site is relatively small in area. Staff's recommendation is that you forward a recommendation for approval to ~he Board of County Commissioners with the following stipulations: That the directo~/ sign would be limited to one sign with a maximum size of 250 square feet for a single entrance on each public street, and shall be permitted for multiple occupancy parcels, such as shopping centers, provided they contain five or more independent businesses, and that any out-parcel which did not have frontage on Vanderbilt Beach Road or Airport-Pulling Road could be included in meeting that five -- the requirement for independent businesses, so could be calculated towards that five. A second stipulation would be that one ground sign used only to identify the name of the development would be permitted at the intersection of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Airport-Pulling Road, and that sign would be limited to a maximum size of 250 square feet. I did meet with property owners -- or a representative of the property owners of Emerald Lakes PUD to the south, and they just handed me a letter right now, and I believe they will speak to the issues that they have. COM~ISSIONER OATES: I'm curious, just one thing. Where is the five agricultural acres? Is that on the south side, or -- MS. MURRAY: That's on the east side. COMMISSIONER OATES: On the east side. MS. MURRAY: Yes. It's actually that little finger that abuts Airport. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Ms. Murray, they have -- the interconnect to the residential community you spoke about, that's down below by the -- that green and blue area? MS. MURRAY: That's correct. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: So they have an entrance on Airport and two accesses on Vanderbilt? MS. MURRAy: That's correct. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. On the sign issue, as you may expect, I want to speak to that. I don't disagree that the interior out-parcels counting towards the -- that magic number are important, and I think that's appropriate. I think the solution to this is just simply say they're Page 39 Septer0ber 17, 1998 allowed what the code currently allows and nothing more. 14S. I~UR~{AY: And that would be inclusive of allowing them to count those interior -- CHAI~4A_N DAVIS: Yeah. I think probably the -- that's in the spirit of the code. !4S. ~4URRAY: That's -- number one, your first stipulation is taken verbatim from the code, with the exception of counting the five out-parcels, CHAI~N DAVIS: Yeah. /~nd I think it's a matter of probably eliminating completely the second one. As I understand the code, the code says that single or multiple occupancy parcels with an excess of 150 feet of frontage can have a 100 square foot pole sign. !4S, ,MURRAY: That's correct. CF3{IRMA~I DAVIS: And then it goes on to say, as you pointed out, 25,,900 gross leasable square footage. Then you can have -- in addition to that 100 square foot sign, you can have 250 square foot directory signs at each entrance on each public street. NS. ~3RRA'f: That's correct. C}~I~A/~ DAVIS: I think that's certainly sufficient. And to depart from this petition for a moment, I'd make an observation that while the code says that, I think the intent was, is when the -- a one or two-directory option is exercised, that that initial 100 square foot sign then was intended to be only to identify the shopping center. And I would suggest that staff take a look at the code and give some consideration to maybe clarifying that point in the code. I think a good example of where that was applied is Carillon Shopping Center, and it worked out -- I think it worked out quite nicely and it looks a lot better. 14S. 14URRAy: Okay. CHAI~4.%N DAVIS: Any questions of staff? COM~ISS IONER WRAGE: Yeah. CHAI~4~ DAVIS: Mr. Wrage? COI~4ISSIONER WRAGE: For the layman, it's my understanding then they're going to have an identification sign on the corner, and they're allowed to have two signs -- two on -- of the three exits; is that right? MS. MURRAy: That's correct. COMMISSIONER WRAGE: One of the exits would not have a sign? MS. MURRAY: That's correct. It would be -- there would just be one on Airport-Pulling Road and one on Vanderbilt Beach Road. And then any parcel that had 150 feet of frontage could also have an additional pole sign. CHAIRMAR DAVIS: As an out-parcel. MS. MURRAy: As an out -- right, correct, as an out-parcel. CHAIRF~ DAVIS: Which, under our architectural standards, now limits them to 15 feet in height and 60 square feet in area. That keeps them more in scale, as should be, with an out-parcel. And where we've seen that accomplished, I think it's worked quite well. Anything else? The petitioner? Page 40 16gl September 17, 1998 I~R. THI~{ES: Good morning. My name is Bob Thinnes, certified planner with Grady Minor Engineering. With us today also is Mr. Grady l{inor of the firm. We also have the representatives o~ the developer, Olympia Development. We have John lgoody and we have Mike Turchinik {phonetic), and we have t{r. Seisky, who is the attorney for Olympia Development. I wanted to thank Susan. She did a great job working us through the system, and she conducted herself in avert professional and courteous manner. For your convenience, we provided you with a colored plan to try to give you some conception of what the project looks like. It's sometimes pretty difficult in black and white to see what you're looking at. The flesh color is the development area. The gray would be your internal circulation -- that's, you know, conceptual -- and the buffers along the rights-of-way and adjacent properties. And to the south we have a preserve area, along with a lake. Prior to this meeting, we on our own initiative contacted Emerald Lakes to meet with them to discuss the concept of the project and get their input. At that meeting, we agreed to delete the access down by that preserve area. Right there. They felt that the traffic coming in and out of the shopping center would be a detriment to their residential project. We totally agree with staff on everything that they've proposed and suggested in your recommehdation to the board, except for one issue obviously, was the directory signs. We suggest that there is one more warranted. In view of the fact that the frontage along Vanderbilt Beach Road is about 1,200 feet, or almost a quarter of a mile, and because of the access to -- two access points that are going to be somewhat regulated by separation, we felt that two directories were important to the benefit of the traveling public. knd, obviously, directories are not -- or signage is not really intended to be advertisement, but for identification. And, of course, insufficient signage can sometimes be as bad as excessive signage. So you have to find that happy medium, and we felt that that second directory was appropriate. One other reason we felt that directory was important is over a period of time as shopping centers mature, especially the landscaping and the vegetation, you do have a problem with interior view of the parcels not abutting the right-of-way. So that directory is important. And especially if you have a long lineal frontage along a highway, those two directories, I believe, would be appropriate, strictly for identification to let the traveling public know this is your access point to these people. Because they can't really look into the site and you really don't want them looking into the site, because then you have a potential traffic problem. Understanding the staff's problem with that second directory, we would be willing to reduce the size of that directory to 125 square Page 41 September 17, 1998 feet, and we would be more than happy to find out how the board would receive that reduction in signage for the second directory. If we could get a straw vote. i don't -- I know the board's having a problem with the second directory, and we're trying to reach that happy medium. CHAIPJ4AN DAVIS: I stated how I feel, and I'll have to rely on the res~ of them to sta~e how they feel. As the code reads right now, you can have three directory signs. You can have two 250 square foot directory signs and you can have a i00 square foot pole sign, which, if you so desire, you can use as a directory. There's nothing in the code to limit you from doing that right now. In fact, you may have heard me make a suggestion to staff that in keeping with what I believe to be the spirit of the code, I think we should look at that and maybe change what the code says today. And to be very frank with you, I think that's adequate, and it keeps the playing field level with all the other commercial development in the area. And you may remember that in the architectural standards, there is a cone of vision required to be maintained now with all signage, so the inability to be able to see the signage really isn't there any more. That was a problem in the past, but with the architectural standards, %hat has been dealt with. So I feel very strongly about -- that what the code allows you to have is adequate, and I think maybe a year or two down the road we may find that there'll probably be some reduction in those sizes. ! think we've -- you know, with architectural standards, we've heard this from the community that smaller is better. But for now, I think you've got what you need. COMmISSIOn;ER OATES: I was going to say, I really don't know all that much about signs, but I can't imagine that 25 square feet is going to cause much of a problem, between 100 and 125 that you want. i can't see that that's a problem, personally. CHAIRbIA~ DAVIS: I don't know, is there any feeling on the board as far as the petitioner's request here? CO~MISSIONER WP. AGE: I support that. i -- COM/~ISSIONER TRAGESSER: I'm comfortable with our existing signage language. COMMISSIONER URBANIK: So am I. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: I guess we're kind of unanimous on that. MR. THINNES: That's all I have. If you have any other questions regarding the project. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Any questions of the petitioner? COMMISSIONER TRAGESSER: The plan that you've submitted thus far is considerably generic at this point. Do you plan on the water retention area to be a feature, or are you looking at it strictly as a functional -- you've got a rectangular little object there. Do you plan on making that a feature, or are we going to see that rectangular MR. THINNES: That was a design element that I think that Mr. Page 42 September 17, 1998 Minor could address that. That was -- lake was put there for a purpose. COMMISSIONER TRAGESSER: A purpose as in? MR. THIN, ES: Buffer. COM]4ISSIONER TRAGESSER: You know, we've kind of tried to -- I know what we're trying to get away from is looking at just -- if it's going to retain water and it's going to be there as a lake, then let's make it nice. Let's not just draw a little square on the map and -- MR. THIN%;ES: Right. COP/MISSIONER TRAGESSER: -- so that would be -- ~R. Ci{INNES: You're looking for more of a sinuous type of -- COMMISSIONER TRAGESSER: Exactly. MR. THINNESt -- shoreline. Sure. I think Grady would probably adjust that. .MR. 14ULHERE: May I just add a comment? I think that's a very good question. And, in fact, for purposes of the rendering, it's shown in ,~ typical engineering design, which is geometric in fashion. However, the Land Development Code, in 28471, which is the architectural standards, has a stipulation that says the shape of a manmade body of water, including wet retention areas, shall be designed to appear natural by having offsets in the edge alignment that are a minimum of 10 feet and spaced 50 feet apart. So the code already requires that there be some additional design efforts to cause those retention areas to appear more natural. And then it goes on to provide further -- address those board of bodies (sic.) further, if they are -- if they exceed 20,000 square feet in area and are located adjacent to a public right-of-way, they shall be incorporated into the overall design of the project in at least one of the following ways, and that's where we try to provide an interconnection or interaction between the public and the waterway. If in fact the waterway is designed at the rear of the building, not visible or functionally approachable by the public, then they still have to design it so that it appears nice, but they don't necessarily have to provide the interconnection or the interaction. CO[~MISSIONER TRAGESSER: And I just have one more. What we found with the architectural design standards, and we've had a couple of Walgreen's that have come in; I think one has come in since our new architectural design standards. But -- and this is something that the LDC doesn't currently address, but it's a concern. I think they might even be looking at it now. Vending machines on the exterior of the building. There -- what we're finding is that they're building these much better looking Walgreen's, and forgive me for saying, Eckerd's at this point, but -- and then they stick these soda machines out in front that detract from what the initial intent was. And I guess I would like to ask if you would consider not putting any vending machines on the exterior of the building. MR. THINNESt I think John Moody could probably discuss that further, since that's -- they've done a number of Walgreen stores. Page 43 16G1 September 17, 1998 ~nd I don't ~ow if they have any renderings or not, or any pictures. MR. MOODY~ Hi. John Moody, I'm with Olympia Development Group, and I brought the right picture. This one doesn't show any vending machines in front of the store. Olympia Development Group retains most of its Walgreen s~ores. Some of the stores we sell to Walgreen's. It's not typically our policy to allow vending machines at the front of the store. I don't know if you're familiar with any of the recent cases where these machines have tipped over and children have gotten injured or killed by these things. And to us it's a liability issue. i can't say that a future owner of this store may look at those liabilities, but it's not generally our policy to allow vending machines, and I know Walgreen's corporately does not typically place vending machines in front of its stores. Not to say that there aren't those exceptions. And I'm interested to go see those. Is one of those the one at Airport -- rather, 41 and Vanderbilt, for instance? I would be interested to see that. But again, that's not typically our policy. CO~4ISSiONER TKAGESSER: Would you consider stating for the record that you will not put vending machines in the front of your buildings? MR. MOODY: Could we trade that for the sign? CO~d~ISSIONER TRAGESSER: I beg your pardon? ~R. I~OODY: Yes -- CHAIRMA/; DAVIS: No. MR. MOODY: -- I would commit to the board that we will prohibit vending machines at the front of the Walgreen's property. The remainder of the tract is kind of open for development right now. There could be a Wal-Mart, could be a K-Mart, Home Depot. Who knows what kinds of retailers may end up on the remainder of the policy (sic.) And I would be -- or of the proper~y, I'm sorry. And I would be somewhat hesitant to place those restrictions against the property at this time, not knowing the nature of the retailer. I know, for instance, that Wal-Mart does typically place vending machines in front of its properties. I know that they've always got their Sam's Cola next to the Coke machines and the water, I think, that they sell now. Again, I'm somewhat hesitant to do that at this point, not k~owing who would be there. I do think, though, that perhaps there are some controls that could be placed on the development to restrict how the vending machines could appear or where they could be placed. You're probably right, it's probably not appropriate to put them out where they detract from the architectural standards that the county's enacted. But on (sic) the same time, it's a convenience for a customer who wants something to drink. And it gets hot here in Naples, as it does other areas of the state, and I don't think it's unreasonable to allow patrons of a shopping center a place where they can get a Coca Cola if they want. MR. ldULHERE: Mr. Chairman, I would -- I think that again, that's Page 44 16Gl September 17, 1998 also an excellent question, and that is something that we will be looking at. As you may or may not be aware, the -- we're doing a comprehensive review of the architectural standards that have already been adopted and bringing that review forward as part of the upcoming land development code amendment cycle. In fact, we've contracted with Joe ~4cHarris, who assisted us o~iginally. And that probably will come to the board in December. ~4S. MURRAY: December. I4R. MULHERE: It will come to you in November and come to the Board of County Commissioners in December. So there could be somewhat of a lapse here, this coming forward prior to that point in time. I think it is within your purview if you wish to condition that no vending machines be located outside anywhere. You can make that a condition of the PUD, if you choose to. MR. MOODY: Is there a draft of what's being proposed for vending machine limitations? And the reason I ask that is if, for instance, there were to be some changes to those architectural standards enacted in December, and that would affect the majority of this project, perhaps we could place those sa_me standards onto -- MR. MULHERE: Yeah. MR. MOODy: -- the Walgreen's portion, which I anticipate would be sometime in early to mid-November that we'd be bringing that before the staff. And that the regulations would be consistently applied through the remainder of the development. MR. MULHERE: Yeah, I think that's a good idea. There is a draft. I'm not sure how far along it is. But certainly within the next, let's say, two weeks it will be, far enough along to share with the public. You can get with Susan and perhaps exchange a phone number after this meeting, and we'd be happy to share those with you. And I do -- when I say that the architectural standards -- I guess I should correct my previous statement. They certainly would apply to any -- because of the way the PUD, I'm sure, is worded, it probably says that the development has to adhere to the division -- 2.8 of the County Land Development Code, which is the architectural standards. So when that's amended, those standards equally apply, as long as we don't have a site development plan approved and construction underway prior to the adoption of those amendments, and that's highly unlikely. So those architectural standards most likely will apply in this case. So I want to correct my previous statement, and we could share those 'with you, sure. MR. MOODY: Would that be fair, we could attach whatever draft regulation -- CHAIRI~ DAVIS: Yeah, I think that -- MR. MOODY: -- to the Walgreen's? COMMISSIONER BUDD: Yeah. COMMISSIONER TRAGESSER: Sure. Page 45 September 17~ 1998 CMAIRMA~4 DAVIS: Yeah, we're going to -- and we'll certainly -- as you saw by that, we're going to have our opportunity at two meetings to have quite a bit of impact with those architectural standard refinements that Bob spoke about. Thank you. Anything additional? MR. THIN~ES: I have nothing else of Mr. Minor, unless someone else has any other questions. Ct~IRMA/~ DAVIS: Any other questions of the development team? MR. MOODY: If I could have you~ time for a couple of minutes. About two weeks ago, myself and other representatives of Olympia Development Group and Q. Grady Minor and Associates had contacted the Emerald Lakes Condominium Association -- and they are our neighbors to the south -- to go in and meet with them and discuss how our development may impact the Emerald Lakes development and to hear any input. We find it to be especially good marketing research, as we're out marketing these properties, to find out what kind of shops and businesses they would like to see in there. And one of the issues -- and I think that we'll probably hear from Emerald Lakes today -- that was discussed was the proposed buffering between our PUD and Emerald Lakes. I wanted to point out that we are proposing, one, a water management berm that has a 15-foot top and then slopes, and I believe that's about two and a half feet high, so the probable total width is about 20 to 25 feet. That would be planted with canopy trees and hedges. And in addition to that, there is a 100-foot wide natural vegetation buffer, and then a minimum 100-foot wide retention pond, or retention lake that would be buffering Emerald Lakes from the development on this property for the first building. And I got a letter from the condominium association earlier this week that asked for the construction of a six-foot high berm at the property line with a little bit stricter planting requirement, and I've made an offer to the condominium association to allow them to increase the plantings on the berm that's currently proposed; something that they could maintain at a density thickness and height that suits their needs. I can't guarantee that the Olympia Development Group will own this project forever and maintain them how Emerald Lakes would see fit, and it may be best if they do so. I tend to believe that we are providing buffering that's in excess of any buffering you would find typical in Collier County, or any other county here in this state, for that matter, and that a six-foot high berm is probably somewhat of an excessive requirement. We are willing to work with the Emerald Lakes Condominium Association to come to some reasonable solution to provide buffering that is consistent, something that they can live with. I understand, I probably wouldn't want to look at the back of a Publix store or a Wal-Mart if I lived in that neighborhood. But I do think that we're providing buffering that's in excess of 200 feet, and that's typically much greater than you would find in any C-4 zoning Page 46 16G1 September !7, 1998 district throughout the county. CF. AIRMAN DAVIS: Thank you. Additional speakers? bSR. MULHERE: I have a couple -- several registered. CHAIrmAN DAVIS: Okay. ~{R, MULHERE: Let's see if I can do this. Mr. Terechenok? Please come forward to -- COMMISSIONER OATES: Well, I think he's with them. C}{AIRMAN DAVIS: That is, if you have anything to say. b~R. TERECHENOK: Actually, I don't. CHAIRFJkN DAVIS: If not -- MIR. TERECHENOK: John Moody's already covered everything. CHAI~4AN DAVIS: Okay. Next speaker? MAR. MULHERE: ,Kenneth -- is it English or Engler? MR. ENGLER: Engler. MR. MULHERE: Engler, thank you. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Come on up, Mr. Engler. MR. ENGLER: Good morning. My name is Ken Engler, and I'm a resident at 2318 Mill Stream Court, in Emerald Lakes. And a couple of weeks ago the developer came in and provided a very good informational presentation to us, and we really thank him for having a concern to come in and provide us an opportunity to give him some impact. Right off the very beginning he did volunteer to remove the vehicular access into our development, and that was one of our major concerns. And we're very appreciative that he's taken that into consideration and has moved it. The buffer and the lake area there are all Great. We appreciate the construction of those. And what we're looking at is a little bit more than just the minimum code requirement. Butting up against this area right here are two-story condominiums. The one-story condominiums are going to have some buffering through some of the vegetation that already exists. However, from the second floor, it doesn't matter whether you're 100 feet or 300 feet away, you're still going to have a bird's eye view into the back of the development dumpster, so on and so forth. Now, we understand that the county has its minimum requirements for sheltering that and operational hours and Board of Health hazard requirements for keeping the area clean, so on and so forth. However, from a protection of our own property values, with probably 500 units within a two-mile radius that are comparable in size and price to this, the view of the back of a shoppinG center isn't really going to be to the benefit of any of the homeo~a%ers back there. And what we're asking for is that the berm be built higher and that it be planted with five-foot high shrubs and canopy trees and some sables, just to break it up. And we made a suggestion, and your planner has that. And we're asking that be installed now, not when the rest of the development takes place some years down the road or six months from now. Page 47 September 17, 1998 My understanding is that the stor~water management lake is going to be constructed now and all the non-native vegetation will be removed at the beginning of the project. Basically, if anyone's walked out in that area, there are a few tall pine trees, but the majority of it is Brazilian pepper. ~und the way that.they're going to go in, I don't P~ow how they're going to proceeG in doing that, but the most economical way, since it's mostly Brazilian pepper and not much undergrowth or anything else in that area, is to bulldoze it out. That will leave us with a barren area. And unless it's planted now, we have a Great view of nothing. ~-,d if it's constructed now and planted at this point in time, then by the time the rest of the development comes in, we have a half a chance of havinG a visual buffer of the back of the development. Also, and this wasn't addressed, with the removal -- MS. STUDE/gT: You need to be on the mike. ~. ~{GLER: I'm sorry. I'm sorry. With the removal of the vehicular access onto Tennis Court Lane, is the buffer area going to be extended all the way over to the property and the berm? Because right now the berm is there, I understand, for stormwater management to prevent flooding from coming over towards us. That berm really needs to extend over to the property line, because if there's a gap in it and there is flooding, well, it's going to go directly to us. So that's just a question that I have to ask. COM~ISSIONER OATES: It would seem to me that if they're going to take the road out, they've got to put the berm all the way across. Is that not correct? CSfAIRMAN DAVIS: That's exactly -- MR. THINNES: That's correct. FIR. MOODY: That's correct. MR. ENGLER: All right, good, good. AGain, alls I can say is that we're concerned with our property values and looking at the back of the shopping center. We understand we have a choice. If we really don't like it, we can buy the property. That's not going to happen. So what we're asking that we do -- asking of the board and the developer -- is to go beyond the minimum, provide a buffer, a visual buffer, that will prevent it, so when somebody is out on their lanai or in their living room or off in one of the other rooms looking out the back, that we don't have the view of the shopping center, and that it be installed now at the very beginning of the project so it has an opportunity to mature. We have also, you know, made a few other suggestions there. And again, as the developer said, we'd like to talk with him and be a good neighbor and work something out between us. But if the board could make the recom,mendation that -- you know, look at our landscape proposal or come up with another idea and have it put in at the very beginning, it would really be a good sign of neighborhood development and protecting of residential areas up against commercial spaces. Thank you. Page 48 lgG1 September 17, 1998 CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Thank you, ~ir. Any additional speakers, Bob? MR. b~LHERE: NO, sir. CHAIP~IA}~ DAVIS: Okay. With that, we'll close the public hearing. Motion? COMMISSIONER OATES: Mr. Chairman, I'm going to move we fo~,vard PUD-98-5 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval, with the stipulation that the number two -- stipulation number two come out, which has to do with one ground sign. COMMISSIONER BUDD: Second. CHAIP,MAN DAVIS: A motion of approval with a second. ~at about the timing on the installation of the buffer, the -- a point that Mr. Engler just made. Could you comment on that for us? MR. MULHERE: Yeah, I think that that was a good observation and reasonable observation. Generally, landscaping is something that occurs at the end of the development process because of the construction process and the concern over damaging landscaping during the parking, installation of parking and water management. But based on the fact that that particular buffer is located well away from the balance of the construction that's going to occur, don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that the landscape buffer and berm be installed at the same time as the site improvements are being performed; site improvements on the initial construction phase. And it seems to me that that's a reasonable requirement. COMMISSIONER TKAGESSER: And that would include the irrigation of same? MR. MULHERE: Yeah, they'd have to irrigate it. If that became a problem, there could be a temporary irrigation system until such time. But they would have to irrigate them so that those -- that vegetation -- and we have a process through the site development plan review that once they have their approved site plan, they have a preconstruction meeting and they can begin to make site improvements. And generally, %he landscaping occurs -- again, the landscaping inspections and installations do not occur as part of the site improvements, they occur in conjunction with the building permitted improvements, the tail end, But I think it's a good observation that the exotics, once they're removed, will provide a very open view there. And this gives that vegetation in that particular area a little bit more time to grow and minimizes, I think, some of the inconvenience during the construction process for those residential neighbors. CHAIRMA~ DAVIS: Would you be willing to add that, Mr. Oates? COMMISSIONER OATES: Sure. He wants -- MR. MINOR: Just a clarification? CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Sure, Mr. Minor. MR. MINOR: My name is Grady Minor. I'm a professional and project engineer for this. We only abut Emerald Lakes along this line right here. There's Page 49 September 17, 1998 only three buildings involved. I think what I'm asking is, Bob, are we only going to be talking about doing this initially that we wouldn't have to -- MR. MULHERE: NO, just -- MR. MINOR: -- fill MR. MULHERE: No, just initially -- let's see, that would be the MINOR: It's 400 and some feet. Z473LHERE: Is that the east property line? MINOR: This is our south property line. F~3LHERE: South property line, I'm sorry. I'm t~yinG to look for the arrow. MR. MINOR: Only these three abut Emerald Lakes. MR. WJLHERE: ,And that would be -- MR. MINOR: That's the only one we're talking about. ~R. MULHERE: -- what my intent -- correct. Obviously, later on you'll have to install the other landscape buffers, but it seems appropriate that those occur later on, because they'll be in close proximity to construction. MR. MINOR: Good. Thank you. CHAIRPLAN DAVIS: Anybody have anything else? Okay, with that, all those in favor, signify by saying aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Carries unanimously. Ms. Murray, or Mr. Mulhere, just a thought. With the refinement of the architectural standards, if it's not too late on this signage issue, let's consider reducing 250 square feet down to 120 square feet. And where those directories are used at the entrances, then that 100 square foot sign be changed to a 60 square foot Ground sign, and see how that flies. MR. MULHERE: Okay. And I'm not sure, I haven't reviewed the draft amendment for the architectural standards as to whether or not that included any proposed amendments to the sign section. Of course, we have to make them compatible, so I'm just throwing that out. And we'll take a look at 2.5 as well. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: In my discussions with Mr. McHarris, I think some of it is in there. And another observation, in the case of -- is it an Eckerd's or a Walgreen's that's at the corner of Pine Ridge and 41, the new -- CO~4ISSIONER TRAGESSER: Eckerd's. COMMISSIONER OATES: Eckerd's. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Eckerd's. The ability to -- in the code to spread your sign out instead of containing it all within the geometric shape I think has presented a problem there. And you might just take a look at that also. I think that because of its square footage, it meets the ability to separate it into pieces. MR. MULHERE: Or -- and if I'm correct, also, are we talking Page 50 September 17, i998 about the issue where if you say 100 square feet, can you have a 50 by 20 sign? Is that kind of what you're referrinq to, rather than a geometrically proportioned sign? COMMISSIONER GATES: Fifty by two. MR. MULHERE: Fifty ~] two, yeah. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Fifty by two, yeah. Wel], the issue -- there's -- as I recall in the code, you can separate a sign into three independent pieces, and you don't have to count the square footage as air space in between. MR. MULHERE: Now, that definitely would be a problem, if that's the case then. CHAI~ DAVIS: Yeah. And I think that's the problem there, because it's -- it's overwhelming when you drive by. MR. ~3LHERE: ,Because I thought that the intent -- and I'll have to check the actual language -- but I thought that the intent was for a sign, you draw a geometric shape around that sign and anythinq that's inside of that sign, that may not be actually sign area, nevertheless counts towards the maximtun square footage. And i~ we haven't made that clear yet, I appreciate that. We will. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Yeah, I think we should take a look at that. Thank you. Which now brings us to -- COMMISSIONER GATES: Stan the man. C}{AIKMAN DAVIS: Yeah, we haven't seen Stan in a long time. MR. LITSINGER: Good morning, Mr, Chairman and commissioners. For the record, Stan Litsinger of the comprehensive planning section. This item this morning is the first of two public hearings, as you're well aware, for the transmittal of the proposed 1998 Growth Management Plan amendraente. It's your opportunity to revie,; proposed amendments and make recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners on the amendments that are to be transmitted to the Department of Community Affairs, with a review period which will result in objections, comments and recommendations report in approximately 45 days. Based on that, we will formulate the final Growth Management Plan amendments for 1998 for adoption public hearings; usually takes place in the Februaz-] time frame after the first of the year. A couple of notes on the proposed amendments today. At the request of the petitioners on item 3-A-l, due to a necessity to have further discussions with staff on some issues raised by staff, they have requested that that item be continued until October the let. Also, with item 4-A-l, the petitioner has requested a continuation until October 1 of '98 so that there can be some meetings with residents of the area affected by the proposed amendment. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: That one we already continued. COMt4ISSIONER GATES: We already continued that one, but I would move that we continue 3-A-1. MR. MULBERE: Can you just for the record -- I'm sorry, can you just for the record indicate the nature of those two that are being continued? Page 51 September 17, 1998 MR, LITSINGEK: 3-A-1 is a proposed amendment to the future land use element designation, description and section page, LUI-38, to add a new aubdistrict entitled Goodletta/Pine Ridge commercial inf~ll aubdlstrlct. The nature of the amendment to the Golden Gate area master plan ia an increase to the acreage re~irement Of the Pine Ridge Road, County Road 951 neighborhood center, and by modifying access all,] buffering requirements of said neighborhood center. MR. ITJLHERE: Thank you. MR. LITSZNGER: In the -- as a matter of further information relative to the proceeding here today on the amendments that are not continued, since this -- these amendments will be transmitted as a package, we would propose that staff give you the presentation and receive your recommendations on the other items, and that you take a straw vote on those items, with a final vote to take place on October let, so that staff does not have to return -- unaffected staff does not have to return on that day. And if you will -- C}~I~4AN DAVIS: Yeah, we -- yeah, that's how we normally do do it, so that's fine. Now, we had -- for the continuance of CP-98-01, we had a motion to do so by Mr, Oates, with -- COMMISSIONER URBANIK~ Second. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: -- a second? Ms, Urbanik seconded that. All in favor7 Opposed? (No response.) C}{AI~4A34 DAVIS: Okay -- MR. MULHERE: Mr. Chairman? CHAIrmAn; DAVIS: -- that's duly continued. MR, MULHERE: I'm sorry, one other item. With respect to - there were several items that were continued today. I believe, actually, the two comprehensive plan amendments and two other petitions also continued for -- I believe all of them were continued for two weeks. C}~IRMA~; DAVIS: With the exception of the one under appeal, MR, MULHERE: Correct. CHAIrmAN DAVIS: We continued it until the appeal has been resolved. MR, MULl{ERE: And my question was one of really what's mot- convenient for you. Obviously we're trying to save trees. With respect to the PDI that's under appeal, that may be 30 days, 45 days before you hear that, or even e little bit longer than that, so we obviously will redistribute that staff report. The other one's being only continued two weeks. We wonder if perhaps you could hold on to those staff reports and bring them with you in two weeks, then we don't have to redistribute them, COM~ISSIONER OATES: I can. I've got mine right here. CHAIRF~ DAVIS: PDI-98-3. MR. MULHERE: I'm setting myself up so I don't get criticized in two weeks, Page 52 16Gl Se~)tember 17, ]998 CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Yeah, end PSP-98-14 was continued, eo everybody hang on to that one. ;4R, :4ULHERE: We appr,ciate that, thank you. CHAIP~/~ ;)AVIS: r;o, i think that meke~ sense, because ther~'s lot of big maps and things there. And the other one was -- COHI41SSIONER OATES: These two we just did, CP-98-01 and CP-9~-03, C}{AIP~4A~ DAVIS: R~ght. ;4R. I{ULHERE: Correct. CHAIP~4A~; DAVIS: R~ght. So that w~ll take care -- COMI4ISSIONER PEDal/E: Let m~ bring this up before I mix it ,~]1 up, okay? CHAIP$4AN DAVI£: Yea, Okay, Stan. CO~414ISSIONER OATES: Just put it in a little pile to the side. r4R. LITSI~;GER: If you will bear with me -- I'm a stand-in -- on the transportation element, item one, primarily what we're looking at in trane -- proposed transportation element amendments that we want you to transmit to DCA for review consists of pretty much housekeepinq matters to bring the maps and charts in the transportation element up to current status to reflect the long-range transportation plan which wes adopted in February, 1998. There are no proposed changes to the text or the general GaP's of the transportation element relative to policy-making decisions. I can -- if you have any questions, I can try to answer them for you relative to any of the maps, but the maps and the one chart that are included in this package are intended to indicate the changes to the transportation network that would result through the implementation of the 1998 transportation plan, COMI4ISSIONER OATES: I have Just one very small question. II~m project number 69101, I4rs. Berry's Immokalee Road, is that going ~o MR, LITSINGER: The situation on -- you want me to -- ;~R. ;4ULHERE: Yeah, go ahead. ;4R. LITSI}iGER: The Irr~okalee Road project that was discussed yesterday at the board meeting will be addressed in the annual updated inventory report, which we are currently preparing. Of course, it lea new project which otherwise might not have appeared in the five-year work plan. It is not addressed here, CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay, COM~4ISSIONER OATES: Thank you. ~R. LITSINGER: Any question -- further quest;one on the transportation element, on that -- CHAIP~4AN DAVIS: Any questions? COMMISSIONER OATES: I'd certainly be -- if you're looking for a straw vote, I'd be willing; to -- CHAIR14AN DAVIS: Yeah, on the transportation element, any objections to a recommendation to transmit on that? Okay, we're good on that one. 14R, LITS[~iGER: The next item is number two, capital improvement Page 53 September 17, ]998 element. And I need to pass a couple of ~- well, one corrected page that has a trans -- the page in your package has a transcription error. CHAI~4AN DAVIS: Okay. MR, LITSIHGER: The proposed amendments to the transpor -- excuse me, %he capital improvement element reflect the necessary changes to bring the current capital improvement element up to reflect direction given to the staff relative to level of service -- level of service changes and projects identified in last year's annual updated inventory report -- as it turns out, the cycle runs in -- everything's about a year behind -- to reflect the direction given to us last November for changes to the list of projects, sources of revenues and several level of service changes. I will point out the highlights to you and then ask if there are any questions. On page one, the only change here is to add the designation that Vanderbilt Beach Road several years ago was declared as constrained level of service due to a policy decision. The previous capital improvement element did not make that notation, so that's a correction. Page number two, we made several changes to the level of service standards for the state road network to reflect changes at the direction of the MPO, in cooperation with FDOT, that have occurred since the last adoption of the capital improvement element. And here again, there may -- just really housekeeping to make the capital improvement element to reflect recent decisions. What I'd like to point out to you also is under county potable water system, since the last capital improvement element, there has been a new water and sewer master plan adopted, which revised the level of service standards. We are up -- we're amending the capital improvement element to reflect these level of service standards, with the notation that we're currently in a state of concurrency on ali the new level of service standards at this time. We're also adding in the -- to be consistent with the water and sewer master plan, the level of service standard for the City of Naples' system, and to update the City of Naples -- I mean, City of Everglades' level of service standards within the city limits, also. And the county sanitary sewer system, here again, is also an amendment to the level of service standard to reflect changes as a result of the amended water and sewer master plan. COMMISSIONER OATES: The change you handed us this morning deals with the north and south sewer area, is that -- MR. LITSINGER: Yes, we had through, I don't know, maybe my error in reviewing this, we -- the copy that was sent to you, we did not include that information. But that is in fact a proposed change also. One other change, the level of service standard, which is consistent with board policy of several years ago, the county library collection, level of service standard for the current fiscal year has been amended to 1.3 volumes per capita. The current policy is to increase that by .5 per volume per capita per year until we reach the Page 54 ! III I III IIIIIIIIII .... September 17, 1998 1.65 standard. And that's going to be an ongoing process. Those are all the changes to level of service standards. Are there any questions? CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Any questions? COMMISSIONER WRAGE: Yes. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Mr. Wrage? CO~4ISSIONER WRAGE: No, I -- my question was on the solid waste disposal facilities. MR. LITSINGER: Yes. CO~4ISSiONER ?~RAGE: Some folks contacted me about A6.2, and the word they were talking about was the two years and the I0 years. MR. LITSINGER: That's correct. COmmISSIONER WRAGE: Can you explain that to me? Is that -- where that comes from? MR. LITSINGER: That is the adopted level of service standard that we have had for 10 years, and we will be again asking the board for recommendations or direction. There will be probably a new change in the level of service standard and how we approach that with the proposed closure of the current landfill and several options, as you're aware of, for new landfill and the way we measure level of service standard. But as of today, as we speak, there have been no formal changes to the level of service standard which we have to maintain. COMMISSIONER WP~AGE: That's just the standard. Because it's my understanding that we exceed that -- MR. LITSINGER: Oh, yes. COMMISSIONER ~RAGE: -- now. MR. LITSINGER: We're in good shape for the next couple of years. But we are at a point where the board needs to make some decisions. COMMISSIONER WRAGE: Because the constituent's concern was that this was it, that it was chiseled in stone, I think. And the magic word was exceeds these levels. MR. LITSINGER: Next year when we come back to you with this same process, you'll probably see some dramatic changes in the way we measure the level of service standard. Possibly a new method of measuring level of the service for solid waste disposal. Any other questions on level of service? CHAIRMAN DAVIS: NO, I don't think so. MR. LITSINGER: Just for your information, the following page is just a delineation of projects that are included in the CIE in order to maintain adopted level of service based on the direction received by the staff and the Board of County Commissioners at the AUI, our presentation last November. That goes through page CIE-46. Here again, to point for Mr. Wrage, if you notice on page CIE-46 that we have no capital projects under landfill, as we were looking at other alternatives to doing any increase in the operating of the current landfill. The last page is page 47 and 48; is merely the required reconciliation of revenues available and proposed projects to make the comprehensive plan financially feasible. Page 55 September 17, 1998 Here again, the balancing figure is about approximately over the five-year planning time frame, about i3 million dollars in capital ad valorem taxes to fund several projects. And this is again consistent with policy the board has directed previously. That concludes the presentation of CiE. If there are any questions -- CI~IFM~%34 DAVIS: Questions? Any objection to recommending forwarding of the capital improvement element? COt4MISSIONER OATES: No. CHAIKMA~ DAVIS: Okay, we're good on that one, thank you. Thank you, Stan. MS. PRESTON: Good morning. For the record, Debrah Preston, principal planner with the planning services department. The comp. plan amendment that I have before you today is 98-2, which is the creation of a new commercial subdistrict entitled Neighborhood Village Center. The petitioner states that the intent of the neighborhood village center is to create a new commercial subdistrict that would allow for small-scale mixed use commercial centers which provide public activities and serve to reduce traffic congestion by providing a central services within walking or biking distance of residential neighborhoods. Some of the locational criteria include the parcel mus~ be within the urban area; it must be on a collector or an arterial roadway; parcel size is limited between one and 13 acres; and the property must be a minimum of one half mile away from the intersection of an activity center, and a half a mile from the boundaries of any other neighborhood village centers that would be created. The staff analyzed this petition and we had two major questions that we looked at. The first one was whether or not there was a need for another commercial subdistrict. The 1997 marketing conditions study that was done by Mohlke and Fraser reported that we had adequate supply of commercial property within the urban area to at least the year 2005, and probably beyond. During the EAR process and the adoption of the 1997 Growth ~nagement Plan, we created two new commercial subdistricts. The first one was the office and infill subdistrict, which allows for commercial development of up to 12 acres. If a parcel abuts commercial zoning on at least one side, uses would be limited to office and low intensity commercial, and if the property was abutted on both sides by commercial, a higher intensity commercial use could be allowed. The maximum acres eligible for office and infill district within the urban and mixed use district is 250 acres. The second district that was created was the PUD neighborhood village center subdistrict, which allows for small-scale retail, office and services that are to serve the residents of the PUD. The acreage would depend on the number of units that were approved in the PUD, but the maximum acreage would not exceed 15. Page 56 16Gl September 17, 1998 In addition, the business park subdistrict was also a,mended to allow for -- to allow it to occur outside of the urban industrial district, and you could have up to 30 percent of the total acreage for nonindustrial uses, such as retail services, medical facilities and offices. Also, the 1997 Growth Management Plan allows for the traditional neighborhood district to be approved. And that would also allow for pedestrian oriented neighborhood commercial ty~e projects. During the EAR process, there was also the neighborhood commercial subdistrict that was transmitted to DCA, which is very similar to the subdistrict before you here today. But that district was not adopted by the board and is not included in our new plan. The second question that staff looked at was, will the petition achieve the criteria that is set forward? Which is mainly to reduce traffic congestion by creating a linkage between the residential development and the commercial facility. Since there are no requirements in this petition right now that requires any proximity to any residential development, we're not sure that this intent of this petition could be achieved with the limited locationat criteria that is currently presented in the petition. Also, there is no spacing criteria between existing standalone commercial and the neighborhood village center, which could lead to strip commercial development in the future. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward this petition to the BCC with a recommendation not to transmit this petition to DCA, because the intent of the district to reduce traffic congestion by providing commercial services within walking or biking distance of the residential neighbors would not be achieved, and that the commercial districts are already adequately provided for in the 1997 Growth Management Plan as adopted. If you have any questions at this time, I'd be more than happy to answer them. And also, Karen Bishop's here, representing the petitioner. CHAI~43%N DAVIS: Any questions of Ms. Preston? Ms. Bishop? MS. BISHOP: I'm a little cold, so if I start chattering. My name is Karen Bishop, for the record, agent for the owner. I'm going to try to touch on a few things. I don't want to read this document. I'm sure you guys have kind of looked at what we put together here. And I want you guys to k~ow that we have been working on this document for almost two years with the staff and the commission, and it's true we were not forwarded on for approval at the BCC, but they did instruct staff to -- they thought we had a good idea and to work with us to see if we could come to some agreement on some of these issues that we believe need to be addressed in the commercial districts. The idea of neighborhood village centers is not really new. I mean, we have a few here in town already. We have -- Venetian Village could be considered under our criteria as a neighborhood village Page 57 16G1 September 17, 1998 center, and as downtown Naples, Fifth Avenue, could also be considered neighborhood village centers. We show inside of our document several case studies from local areas, as well as all over the United States, showing how these things are done. In most of these case studies we show you, they were retrofitted into existing areas with residential around them, or areas that had been depressed of sorts that were partially commercial, depressed and then reevaluated and made into these neighborhood village centers and now are thriving, as the case studies that we show you. The summa~/ of our case s~udies shows all the elements that make up the typical neighborhood center. These have been incorporated in our zoning ccdes to ensure the success of what we're trying to do here. We do have locational criteria, It provides for the distribution of centers to existing and new neighborhoods. The 1997 market study only identifies the acreages and estimate demands, but leaves out two critical factors. One is where is the commercial needed, and two is what kind of commercial should we be developing in our community? The neighborhood village centers are designed to be located in existing neighborhcods where the rooftops are already there to support viable centers, while providing the high standards that will add and define the small to~zn nature of Collier County. I think we looked at the fact that activity centers isn't quite what we had in mind, now that we see the one built out to its extent. That's just not quite what we had in mind. The neighborhood village centers is intended to lessen those kinds of developments in areas that would be a little bit more conducive to smaller commercial areas. There are several around the county specifically, but we -- the staff is saying this is going to -- this would affect a large amount of acreage, and I believe that zoning is not an entitlement, and the fact is that neighborhood village centers are Going to be utilized on a case-by-case basis. And so having this criteria in the code doesn't guarantee anyone anything, as far as that goes. The -- we have provided a diagramic (sic) analysis inside there which goes through all of those case studies and tells you what the elements are and how each of those elements are met. It is provided to show the creativeness and diversity of the design possibilities that neighborhood village centers provide. They will not be the same all the time. They will be different, depending on each case. The zoning code we have provided in here has also been provided to show exactly what, where and how the neighborhood village centers will be accomplished. We've divided -- defined permitted uses, which includes residential, like on the second and third floor, like you would see in a lot of downtown areas being developed. Pensacola is one that's been very successful in the way that they've redeveloped some of their commercial areas to include very high end residential above those areas. Page 58 September 17, 1998 There are general standards of design. We've included setbacks, maximum building sizes, street designs, sidewalks, parking standards, buffers, signage, architectural standards that includes four-sided architecture~ So some of the things I heard here on some early petitions about looking at the back side of buildings would not be an issue because this criteria contains four-sided architecture. We also are limiting the amount of commercial that would be allowed on a site. Earlier the petition was for 158,000, which is essentially 10,000 square foot per acre. This type of product is much, much lower, 6,000 -- 5 to 6,000 per acre. So this kind of cuts out all those boys who aren't serious about doing a good job of com~.ercial design within a residential area. We've sho',~ different sizes, shapes and designs of those areas to show that tkere isn't any one design that can be created. But the one thing you should notice, that there is no strip designs in any of those examples that we've given you. They're more campus oriented, more pedestrian oriented. The buildings are all grouped together so that people park and walk from building to building to building instead of getting up and kind of like what you do at Carillon if you go into Beall's, you are done there, then you get in your car and you drive over to ?arget on the other side of, you know, the south forties. The staff conclusions. I just want to comment on a ccuple of the staff conclusions. We do provide for interconnect through the extensive use of sidewalks on the property, along with roads that hook up to the adjacent neighborhoods. It's a little difficult for us to mandate interconnecting of existing properties. However, you know, if you build it, they will come, that's what I believe. But if the neighborhoods see that there's a convenience for them to put their sidewalks from an existing property to this area, then they will do that in some way. The new projects will in fact have sidewalk criteria because of the standard subdivision regs that we have concerning sidewalks and interconnecting internal to external roadways. The criteria of separation from standing alone commercial, I have a problem with thinking that a 7-Eleven out in the middle of the road could dictate someone doing a better job closer by. So I don't want to see necessarily a criteria that puts in one more restriction to any existing commercial, because that might be a bad example of what could be done and no~ a good example of what we will be doing. Let's see. AS proposed, along with our extensive design development standards, preclude the notion of strip centers and better planning and design of our own communities. The intent of a subdistrict's PUD and what they call traditional neighborhood designs, well, there really isn't any traditional neighborhood designs that exist today. There are PUD's around, but I do realize, and most of you guys too, that we're quickly running out of land that is going to be able to utilize -- this is pretty general, but there is a woman who lives inside a PUD who was commenting how they didn't really like the fact that this commercial was messing with Page 59 1661 "' SeptenfDer 17, 1998 the -- what she said was the ambiance of her neighborhood, I believe. And that was at Audubon. So that may or may not work. So it's not a given, just because the PUD's allowed to have it, that they actually will have it put in there. Those things show up anyway, because you have to have the rooftops to support the commercial. And that's what we believe, that commercial is market driven. Let's see. The interconnection is mandated in the neighborhood village center by the interconnection of parking lot and sidewalks for a complete system. We show in all our exhibits the ability to attach to the neighbor's next door. Some of the things I've seen -- well, I hate to use Golden Gate City as an example, but there's a couple areas there where you have separate little commercial areas where you literally have to get out of your -- get back in your car, either jump a little wall or go all the way around to about 10 feet into the next driveway to get back in. This would be the kind of thing that that wouldn't be allowed. We'd be connecting these things through walkways and parking lots and -- like the City of Naples is trying to do now, bring these properties together to get a big grip on the traffic. Bicycle access provides additional access. Shorter trips are generated as convenience services and work are brought into the close proximity of these neighbors. Staff -- the residential element does in fact have -- is in fact in our zoning regs on page 18, section three. We have permitted uses, which say residential dwelling units is a permitted use. And on page 19, item five, we restrict the residential density to six units an acre, as based on case studies as provided, you know, by the staff; and by what I have heard, that the Board of County Commissioners is looking to down zone those intersection areas. In conclusion, the activity center strip commercial is taking away from what we believe is the small town, quaint attitude that we were all kind of looking for Naples to stay as. And that -- we have brought before you what we consider is a viable alternative to those areas. We even foresee that as some of these activity centers come in for zoning, that some of these standards can be applied to them; design standards of these neighborhood village centers in the way that they address the design of the site, in the way that they -- in what they put on the site, and in the amount of coverage that they put on the site. CHAIP~fAN DAVIS: Ms. Bishop, staff says to us in the staff report here that if we choose to transmit this, that there are two things they want us to consider. MS. BISHOP: Right. CHAIP~MAN DAVIS: Would you comment on those two? The one -- the first one being no closer than one-half mile from the boundary of an activity center, property zoned commercial or other neighborhood village centers. You had made that comment about the 7-Eleven. MS. BISHOP: Right. We -~ from the activity center, we chose the intersection as the measurement because of the different boundary Page 60 16Gl September 17, 1998 changing on each of these activity centers. They're not a guarantee -- you know, it's not a defined -- it is a defined area now, but people are coming in and changing the shapes of them. One of the things that was brought up to us is that people won't walk more than a quarter of a mile from one place to another. And so if ',~e use the center line traditionally, the activity centers extend pretty close to a quarter of a mile. That would put these distances within what they considered a viable walking distance. So I would not like to change it to the half mile from the boundary of that. I'd rather keep it at the intersection, which is the way that we have it now. The second thing is that adjacent to residential subdivisions with the -- I'm not quite sure what that means, actually, number two. CHAIR/~; DAVIS: Ms. Preston, could you amplify on that? MS. PRESTON: Yes. What the suggestion would be is that these parcels would have to be located adjacent to a residential development, and that you would try and get a interconnection between the residential subdivision and the commercial property owners. MS. BISHOP: Okay. Well, that would definitely be something that we're intending to do, because these are meant to be adjacent to residentials. So that would not be a problem for us. And certainly, most developers, especially in a case of where you're going to be putting a commercial use around residential, do take the opportunity to meet with the neighbors, do take the opportunity to find out what it is they can do for them, what it is that their concerns are and their needs. And that would be the opportunity for us to talk about interconnecting roadways or sidewalks or anything else that they may wish at that time. So number two I think is fine, but number one, I do not want to do that. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. Questions? COMMISSIONER WRAGE: And I realize they're not in here. Did you look at the type of communities like Divosta puts together? I'm curious as do those people actually walk, or do they still drive to their little activity center, so to speak? MS. BISHOP: You know, I'm really not sure about the case-by-case basis, but here's a couple of things that comes to mind when I think about whether these people are going to -- we hear more and more people aren't going to walk, but yet, you know, the county is making a serious push for sidewalks and bike paths and to have these things available. And so I would believe that they know more than me, that the reason why that they are providing these things is that people are actually going to use them. So I would say that, you k/qow, most communities, given the opportunity for a pedestrian system will in fact use it. Now, whether or not they drive up to their -- I ~ow my son walks up to Eckerd's when I want him to go get something, because I'm not going to give him the car, so he walks up there. Or -- you know. Or -- and I, of course, live in Golden Gate City, and we do have, you know, a fair amount of people who walk the sidewalks to go to the Page 61 September 17, 1998 store and walk home, and so you're seeing more of that. And maybe it's because in Golden Gate City not everyone has two cars, but there is -- what I see, there are children on bicycles, I see adults on bicycles, grocery shoppers walking home. I see that happening. I think it depends on the time of year. I mean, if it's, you know, the middle of the summer and 110 degrees, I'm driving. I mean, I'll be in my car driving up there, rather than walking. But if it's in the spring or summer or winter, then a nice afternoon walk would probably be more appropriate. CMAIRMA2; DAVIS: Anybody else, questions? Comments. ?~at's everybody's feeling on this one? We've got a -- staff's telling us that we shouldn't recommend transmittal to the board, and if we do, a couple of criteria, which you've heard Ms. Bishop comment on. What do you all think? COMMISSIONER OATES: I'm in favor of fo~'arding it to board, personally. COMMISSIONER BUDD: I agree. CHAIRF~{ DAVIS: 9~at do you think about the locational criteria which staff has told us, about the half mile from the boundary? So that would be from boundary to boundary, as opposed from center to center? ~4S. PRESTON: Right. And I think the bigger issue here is not so much from the intersection of the activity center as the fact that we're also asking for a distance requirement from the standalone commercial, because we have no -- so I have a map here on the board, if you'd care to look at it, that staff has analyzed some of the properties that would qualify under this criteria without any spacing requirements. And so there are a number of parcels there. The blue would qualify underneath the petitioner's locational criteria. And there are a number of spots that you can see the blue sticking out that would be sandwiched in between existing commercial properties. And the office and infill will also, once one neighborhood center would go into place, then the office and infill could kick in and you could have another commercial property next door to that. So I think that's one of staff's concerns is that there's no spacing criteria between existing standalone commercial, as well. Also, just to, if I could, comment on the design standards that have been a part of this petition. I think we all feel that those are very good standards, something that we would want to encourage in the PUD neighborhood centers and in the traditional neighborhood centers, because that's where you would tend to see these. I think our only concern is that, unless it's adjacent to a residential development, that you're not really going to have people walking and biking there. And there are not very many properties that are going to meet that requirement right now within the county, as we looked at that. CHAIR~ DAVIS: I know that's something that the Board of County Commissioners has wrestled with before. It seems to me to be Page 62 September 17, 1998 appropriate to forward it on to them and give them another shot at it. I certainly don't have a problem with recommending transmittal. COPR4ISSIO~ER TRAGESSER: I see it as a proliferation of commercial in areas that are already well se~ed. I think it needs further defining if it's really going to produce the intent. i am familiar with a couple of the areas there that this would apply to, and they're incredibly well served already, so I couldn't support transmittal. CHAIP~2%N DAVIS: Okay. Well, let's take a straw vote. I guess we're talking about transmittal. You'd spoke first, Mr. Oates. And how is the two number one and two stipulations staff had on there? COr~MISSIONER OATES: Well, I don't think there was any problem with number two, as I understood it, so that's a moot point. I'd say send it with the existing conditions to the Board of County Commissioners. In all their wisdom, they can change it or throw it back out or whatever they want to do. CHAIP34AN DAVIS: With one and two? COM/4ISSIO}iER OATES: Pardon me? C~3%IP, MJ%/q DAVIS: With one and two? CO~4ISSIONER OATES: Well, two is -- CHAI~4A/~ DAVIS: Yeah, right. COMMISSIONER OATES: -- a moot point. If you want to put it in, that's fine. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. Terri just told us how she feels. }{ow about you, Hs. Urbanik? COM~4ISSIONER URBANIK: I just have a concern about, as Debrah said, it may be redundant, that it's already in the plans, some of these neighborhood type, you know, developments. The parts that are not addressed in this particular presentation, is it possible that we can somehow insist that they meet those Land Development Code requirements that already exist in the Land Development Code? MS. PRESTON: COMMISSIONER MS. PRESTON: COMMISSIONER MS. PRESTON: COMMISSIONER MS. PRESTON: Are you referring to the design guideline -- URBANIK: Yes. -~ part of it? URBANIK: The spacing and everything else. Oh, the spacing, as well? URBANIK: The spacing, uh-huh. A~nd the height. I think there are -- the requirements are already set up as far as the office and infill and the business park, and the PUD neighborhood would, of course, go along with the PUD. So I don't -- guess I don't quite understand your question. COMMISSIONER URBANIK: Well, I just want to make sure that if we forward this, that we don't in fact weaken codes we already have in place, that's my concern, in the Land Development Code. CHAIR/42%N DAVIS: It strikes me if anything, they'd be stricter. COMMISSIONER URBA,NIK: Stricter? Okay. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Yeah, I would think. MS. PRESTON: Because this couldn't be in effect until after the design guidelines were implemented into the Land Development Code, as Page 63 September 17, 1998 one of the recfuirements. CKAIP/4AN DAVIS: Mr. Budd? COI~4ISSIONER BUDD: I'm in favor of recommending this petition for transmittal. CHAI~4A~ DAVIS: And as I am. And Terri, your comments, I think it needs a lot more polishing and tweaking, and I've got some confidence that if we get it on to the board that that's either going to happen or they're going to throw it out, one or the other, so -- Mr. Oates, we know how you feel. Mr. Pedone? COMMISSIONER PEDONE: I vote for transmitting it to the board. CO~4ISSIONER WRAGE: As do I. C~IRMAN DAVIS: Okay. So the consensus is to transmit to the board, leaving these two staff stipulations. MS. PRESTON: Without the staff stipulations. COMMISSIONER OATES: No. CHAIR/~A~ DAVIS: No, with. MS. PRESTON: With both one and two? COMMISSIONER BUDD: Yes. CHAIKMAN DAVIS: Yes. MS, PRESTON: And could I just ask also, there is no density listed in the comprehensive plan amendment, which would define it when people are going to interpret this. Their zoning code lists the six units per acre as a maximum, but that's not stated in their petition here, and that's something that -- CHAIPJ4A~ DAVIS: Is the six units what -- MS. BISHOP: Sure. So we just need to add that to the other language. Not a problem. CHAIRMIAN DAVIS: Okay, fine. MS. PRESTON: Okay, thank you. CHAIR/~AN DAVIS: All right, thank you. And we have just one more, I think? Santa Barbara? COMMISSIONER OATES: Sorry. C}{AIpuv~%N DAVIS: And we're -- let the record show Mr. Oates deserted us. No, no, he's taking off. COMMISSIONER OATES: Not a sinking shiD, though. C~IRMAN DAVIS: No, that's true. Very good. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: He has to get home to take his nap, is that CHAIB/4AN DAVIS: And I think Mr. Weeks is presenting this one. Mr. Weeks, I'll just -- as I drive up and down Santa Barbara going home every day, all I can say is hallelujah. MR. WEEKS: Good morning, commissioners. I am David Weeks of the county's planning staff, sDecifically the comprehensive planning section. As is indicated in the staff report, this is an amendment that was directed by the Board of County Commissioners. The specific direction is to amend the Golden Gate master plan to change the designation of the properties located on the east side of Page 64 16Gl September 17, 1998 Santa Barbara Boulevard within Golden Gate City, approximately 500 feet north of Golden Gate Parkway, all the way up to 22nd Place Southwes[, to change the designation to a commercial subdistrict of some ty~e. Staff has proposed a subdistrict that provides for additional opportunities for small-scale commercial development for the subject properties. The subject properties do consist of a total of 3i parcels -- 30 platted lots, but there's been some subdivision -- 31 parcels, comprising approximately 11 acres. The type of comar~ercial again would be small scale. It would serve the surrounding neighborhood, as well as the local traveling public. We propose a limited access for the properties. Each of these properties would be allowed to have its own access point as it presently exists. It's zoned ~4F-12 and designated urban residential. The proposal would be to limit access to one per 200 feet which would require an aggregation of lots; however, we cannot actually require that, we can only encourage it so that though it may be listed as a requirement, there would be a relief mechanism for the property owners. So that again, we cannot enforce the aggregation. There would be a limit -- the -- there would be some type of architectural standards included to try to make sure that these properties are developed as commercial that would be compatible with the nearby residential area, and also, adequate buffering be provided, as well, to be compatible with the surrounding area. To the north of the property is property zoned C-2, a commercial convenience zoning district; and to the south is property zoned C-4, commercial general zoning district; and to the east is property zoned RMF-6, a residential zoning district. These properties are all designated urban residential in the Golden Gate master plan. Across Santa Barbara Boulevard to the west is properties that are zoned E Estates. They're developed with single-family dwellings, some undeveloped parcels and also a church. Of the subject 31 parcels, i1 of them are undeveloped, 20 of the parcels are developed, with a total of 59 dwelling units, so the majority of the site is already developed at present, with residential land uses. In reviewing this petition for compliance with the requirements of our comprehensive plan, and most particularly with state statutes, we have to look at the data and analysis. Is there a need for additional commercial could be one of the justifications for approving this petition. And in staff's review, three -- we suggest, in reviewing the EAR based amendments and the commercial study that was prepared for that, that there is not a need for additional commercial within the Golden Gate planning community as a whole. ~en we narrow it down just to the Golden Gate City area, that four square mile area, and for the nearby surrounding properties within the Estates, and including local traffic, we don't know. There is no needs assessment for that reduced area, that smaller area. We Page 65 September 17, 1998 suggest that it may be appropriate to have some additional commercial there. We do know that Golden Gate City's retail uses -- or the zoning for retail uses, excuse me -- is approximately 68 percent built out. And that's a correction in your staff report which states 66 percent. So about two-thirds of the existing retail zoning in the Golden Gate City, four square miles, is already developed. So as the surrounding areas, as well as the remainder of Golden Gate City develops, as additional traffic travels on Santa Barbara Boulevard, there may be a need for some additional commercial zoning. The EAR based -- excuse me, the commercial study that was prepared as part of the EAR, and indicating that there was -- seemed to be a sufficient amount of commercial -- look at commercial categories as a whole. They do not address, however, office uses specifically. So that is an unanswered question as to whether or not there would be a need for additional office use or not. This proposed subdistrict would allow for additional office development to occur. Within Golden Gate City itself, there is about 25 acres of undeveloped office commercial zoning. Most particularly, the bulk of that, 22 acres, is in the Golden Gate office commercial district that is located on Golden Gate Parkway itself, none of which is presently developed. So any office development that might occur on the subject lots would presumably be competing with that office development that is provided for on Golden Gate Parkway. In analyzing the various types of impacts that are noted in your staff report, enviror~mental impacts, effects on population, traffic, et cetera, staff's conclusion is that this petition would not lower the levels of service of any of the Category A public facilities. Specifically referring to transportation, there's some information in your staff report that shows that this petition would approxiraately double the amount of traffic that is generated if it goes from a residential designation, as it currently has, to a commercial designation, from about 618 trips for residential or almost 1,300 trips, if it were developed as commercial. And that assumes 2,500 square feet per lot of development. We've had -- staff has had, along with Commissioner Constantine, three different meetings with the property owners in that area, and approximately one-third of the owners participated in the meetings. There was some concern on the part of property owners about some of the conditions that are proposed here, as well as some of the requirements to develop these properties as commercial in our zoning code. One of the proposed requirements in this subdistrict is that the existing residential development, which again is about two-thirds of the lots, must cease within 10 years. So if you've got a residential use on the property, you've got 10 years to maximize your use of the property, After that 10 years, you're going to have to cease that use. One specific exception, prior to any comments that I believe Ms. Student is going to make afterwards, is that the condominium that is Page 66 16G1" September i7, 1998 located at the extreme southernmost part of this area, the southerly most ~wo lots, would not be subject to that requirement. Legally speaking, if a property is o'~ner occupied, which the condominiums will be considered to be, they cannot be required to cease their use. You can't just go out and throw somebody out of their house. Zf it's a rental property, it's an income-producing property, it's ';iewed differently, i suppose more like a commercial type use. I{S. STUD~IT: And if I may, David presented me with this issue this s~.~m, er, and i did national legal research on using an article that collecced cases dealing with this issue that we call amortization of the use. And where you have income-producing property -- and that's what all the cases dealt with, were some sort of income-producing property -- for purpose of tax, you can depreciate that use over a period of time or amortize it, and usually that period is seven years. So the t0 years would be ample, because a property ovrner that had rental residential property would be able to depreciate that over, believe, a seven-year period and recoup their investment. So they haven't lost anything or the county hasn't taken their property. ~ere the problem arises is where you have owner occupied residential dwelling units. And, 'you know, the only thing l'ou get to deduct on your taxes there is the interest you pay on your mortgage. But you don't get to depreciate your own home. So that's not to say that the county couldn't take that, if they wish to pay for it, either under a condemnation claim, or just condemn it, the county could, and then make sure it's redeveloped commercial. Other than that -- and that may -- the facts as presented to me this summer was that just that condo was owner occupied residential units. And I suggested to Mr. Weeks that we not specifically exempt the condo but have broader language, because that's what the law says, that ic was an owner occupied residential dwelling unit. A~nd that's again, to protect the county from any takings claim. Because I believe that an ovaler of a home that he lived in, if we said you've got 10 years to live there and then you have to take it down, he could sue the county on an inverse condemnation claim, as well as a Bert Harris private property rights claim. So that's the reason for that exemption. And also, it should be in the broader language, too, and not just the condos, because that's what the law -- you know, by not discussing it, that's what it leaves out. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: You say 10 years is adequate. Is seven acceptable, from a legal standpoint? MS. STUDENT: I believe that I would want to, you know, double-check that with an accountant before -- I think 10 is ample. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Depreciation then -- MS. STUDENT: But I could check that with an accountant to see what the -- when you do your depreciation if it -- you know, if it ever goes over the seven, and then we could bring that back to the Page 67 September 17, 1998 board. C~4AIRMA/{ DAVIS: Thank you. Mr. Weeks? Any wrap-up? MR. WEEKS: Well, moving towards wrapping this up, let me point to the new exhibit I put on the board. It's still showing the subject properties. This is a map that is within your staff report identifying the ownership pattern. And I've circled on the one that's on your screen here and drew with arrows, identified the three that we believe, based on the tax roll records, are owner occupied. These are -- all of these structures are either duplex, triplex or quadplexes, and we show that three of them for the tax roll are owr~er occupied. And unfortunately, they're distributed throughout the district. The condominium, as it's located on the map, being at the extreme end of the district, would not be such an issue, but now that we're spreading them throughout, that -- that's kind of difficult. Because now we end up with these little pockets of residential that would be allowed to remain with commercial development all around it. This is a new issue for staff to wrestle with, but nevertheless, our recommendation will stand. Before I get to the conclusion, I just want to point to the diagram that's on the board. We used this at the second meeting with the property owners. At the first meeting they raised some good questions and issues. We responded to those at the second meeting, and you have the copy of the handout that was given to them in your staff report. This sketch that's on the board shows -- the first and second one shows two different existing residential structures as they might be converted to a commercial use. These are just for the purposes of getting some idea visually of what could occur with the properties, because that was a strong point that the property owners made, can I convert my existing residential structure, or am I going to have to tear it down? This gives you some idea of both the site plan and the structure modification, as well. It's difficult to develop these properties because of their size, parking requirements, and most specifically, because they're not served by a central sewer. They're dependent on drain fields and septic tanks, and that eats up a pretty sizeable part of the property. That's a constraint that most properties don't have to contend with, with the exception of some other commercial properties in Golden Gate City. The k~Dttom diagra~ is of three undeveloped lots that are developed with brand new uses. In conclusion, staff's recommendation, after the findings that are listed in your staff report, is that you transmit -- recommend to the board that they transmit this amendment. C~3%IR/43%N DAVIS: Discussion? Questions? I spoke first. I think we should transmit this, and if it can be seven years instead of 10 years, I think it should be, as far as the Page 68 September 17, 1998 MS. STUDENT: And we'll look into that. But the Gist of my conclusion was always that if it was an owner occupied dwelling unit, that there would be a problem, a takings problem. But that would not stop the county from purchasing it outright so you could have a consistent, you know, development patzern~ And if there was only a couple of units left, the county, in fac~, may wish to do that. It's the same rationale as why we can't force aggregation of already subdivided lots. Exact same rationale. CHAIp~w~N DAVIS: You know, David made some very Good points about kind of looking in his crystal ball for the future. But we've got a what's Going to be a residential exit on 1-75 at Golden Gate Parkway; the point being there will not be any commercial there that's going to empty people out this way. The Cleveland Clinic and the surrounding development there., Santa Barbara's become the northwest corridor for Golden Gate City and the entrance. So I think if you shined your crystal ball a little bit more, it will probably make a lot of sense for us in the future. Any objection to recommending transmittal of this, as staff has recommended? COMMISSIONER TRAGESSER: I think it's a positive approach to what -- a land use that's no longer fitting its initial purpose, and I would support it. CHAIRMA~{ DAVIS: Very good point, COmmISSIONER PEDONE: I think it's a vast improvement over what's there now. COM~{ISSIONER WRAGE: I would have to agree with that. I'm not sure shortening that dow~ to seven years as a property owner -- you know, I'm assuming that's a drop dead day, right? CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Well, I just -- I know firsthand -- COMMISSIONER WRAGE: I don't see extending it the 10 years, I just don't see shortening it up. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: I just make that suggestion, and it will take some research. But I can't think of any there that have been there less than four or five already. MR. WEEKS: There's one structure that I think was built in '97. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. MR. WEEKS: Which was a bit of a surprise. Most of them were built I think between '77 and '84; one I think in '90 and one in '97. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Yeah. My memory's not that Good then. We seem to have an agreement to transmit, Mr. Weeks. MR. WEEKS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Is there anything else? Does that bring us a close to the comp. plan? ~Ro MULHERE: That's it. CHAIR/~AN DAVIS: That's it? Oh, I'm sorry. MR. LITSINGER: We just ask that you would continue the public hearing until October Ist of this -- of 1998. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: We need a motion to continue this -- COMMISSIONER BUDD: SO moved. Page 69 16Gl September 17, 1998 COMMISSIONER URBANIK: Second. CHAIRMAn] DAVIS: Hearing two -- our meeting in October, October 1st, 1998, which would be what, at the end of our regular agenda? MS. CACCHIONE: Or you can do it at the beginning. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: I think we'll do it at the end. Thank you very much. That motion by Mr. Budd, seconded by Ms. Urbanik. All those in favor? (Unanimous vote of ayes.) And we -- and anybody have -- let's see, we always have to remember now, no public comment? We have one person. He may have had public comment. He didn't. With that, we're in adjournment. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 12:10 p.m. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MICHAEL A. DAVIS, CHAIRMAN TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY CHERIE' R. LEONE, RPR Page 70 DATE: TIME: PI,ACE: MINUTES OF TIlE ENVIRONMENTAl, ADVIEORY BO,ARD herr ~ September 2. 1998 Han~o¢~ 900 a m ~¢'K~I Berrl 3TM Floor Boardroom. Administration Building. Collier County Center. Naples. Florida EAB STAFF PRESENT Dejong Absent Ashton Espinar X Burgcson Foley _ X Chrzanowski I lermanson X Kuck ttill X Lenberger t linchcliff X .".tulhere Saadeh r%Le_nL Seal MINUTES BY: Stephen I.enbergcr. Environmental Specialist Il {~A[,LED TO ORDER AT: 905 am ADJOURNED AT: 10:35 a.m. PRESIDING: Paul ttinchcliff. Chairman ADDENDA TO TIlE AGENDA: APPROVAl, QF MINUTES: Molten made by Mr. Espinar. seconded by Mr tlermanson and carried 5/0. to approve minutes of July I, 1998 MiSC, Corros: // u~te; --~'4 =r~ ITEM: Regular Agenda - Item VA Item, PETITIQ~ NO: Commercial Excavation No 59 654 "Jolly/Evers Excavation" Copies To: ~--~-'" REOUESTING: To excavate a 20 (Z) acre hake on a 5 acre tract in Golden Gate Estates 16G1 Environmental Advisory Board Minutes .......................................... September 2, 1998 Page 2 MOTION: Made by Mr. Foley seconded by Mr. Espinar and carried 5/0. to approve Commercial Excavation No. 59.654 "Jolly/Evers Excavation" with S alps stipulations. Water Managcr~ent: The excavation shall be limited to a bottom depth of 12' below control. ,,\H distributed areas proposed for lake excavation shall be excavated to a minimum dcplh of 6' below control. Off-site removal of material shall be subject to "Standard Conditions" imposed by the Transportation Sen'ices Division in document dated 5/24/88 (copy attached), File lake linora[ zone shall be created and planted as indicated on thc Plan Rccord. All provisions of Collier County Ordinance No. 91-102. Division 3.5 shall be adhered to. 5. Groundwater shall nol bc pumped during thc excavating operation. No blasting '.viii be permitted unless issued a separ.ate permit by Collier Count>' Engineering Review Services. Stockpile side slope shall be at a maximum of 4:1 unless fencing is installed around the entire perimeter of the stockpile area. No excavation permit shall bc issued until all impact fees have been paid. These fees will be determined by Transportation Services Division. ITEM: Regular Agenda - Item V.B. PETITION NO: Commercial Excavation No. 59.648 (Companion to C.U. 98-12) "Winchester Lake Fill Pit" To excavatc a 604.75 acre hake on 654.12 acres of agriculturally zoned property. Glenn Simpson. representing Southcm Sand & Stone 16Gl ~nvironmcntal Adv{son,., Board ~[nutes .......................................... Scptcmber 2, 1998 Page 3 MOTION: Made by Mr. Foley. scconded by Mr. Hcrmanson and carried 5/0, to approvc Commercial Excavation No. 59.648 "Winchester Lake Fill Pit" with Staff's stipulations. Environmental Staff rccommcnds approval o£ Commcmial Excavation Permit No. 59.642 "W{nchcstcr Lake Fill Pit" with thc following stipulations: Thc excavation shall bc limited to a lov,'cst possible bottom elevation of 25 feel below cxisting grade unless a permit modification is applied for through thc EAB and the BCC and shall bc no shallower than I0 fcct below existing grade. 2. Offsite removal of material shall be subject to standard conditions imposed by thc Transportation Department (attached). 3. No blasting will bc pcrmittcd unlc.~ a Collicr County approved Blasting Pcrmi~ is obtained A scparatc vcgetation removal permit (pcr Collier County Land Dcvclopmcnl Codc. Division 3.9) shall be obtained from Collier County Community Dcvclopmcnt Environmental Scrvices Division beforc commencing the proposed cica. ring. The site plan shall be revised to include thc following note: "Exotic vcgctation, as defined by thc CCLDC Section 3.9,6.4.1, shall be removed from the sitc. Subscqucnt annual cxotic rcmoval (in perpetuity) shall bc the raspor~ibility of thc pmpcrly owner." Prior to any site improvement proposed in relation to this excavation or clearing. the owner shall contact the USACOE and SFWMD to determine if wetland permitting is needed. If so, all agoncy permits shall bc obtained, prior to thc commencement of any site improvements. ITEM: PETITION NO: KEOUESTING: Regular Agenda - Item V,C. Planned Unit Development No, PUD-98- I 0 "Cambridge Square PUD" A commercial PUD with office, adult living facilities and other transitional uses. 16 1 Environmenta~ Advisor' Board Minutes .......................................... September 2,199~ Page ,s REPRESENTED }3.~ David Morin. Hole, Montes and Associates. Inc. MOTJQN: Made by Mr. Espinar. seconded by Mr. Hill and carried al0, to approve Planned Unit I)cvelopmem No. PUD-98-10 "Cambridge Square PUD" with Staff's stipulations. Mr. Hermanr, on abstained from the vote. Water Maniag~ment: I. A copy of the SFWMD permit is required prior to development plan approval. 2. For perimeter berm hcights in excess oft:va feet. side slopes shall be at a maximum of 4:h En','irgn mc'~tal: No addilJona[ stipulations. ITEM: Regula~ Agenda - Item V.D. PETJTION NO: REOUESTING: RE P R ES F,N'['I'3 D BY; .P~JBLIC SPEAKERS: Planned Unit Development No. PUD-98-9 "Glen Eden on the Bay" A multi-family subdivision. Mark Minor. O. Grady Minor & Associates. P.A. Ken Passarclla. Passarella & Associates. Inc. Michael Myers. Passarella & Associates. Inc. Karen Johnson, South Florida Water Management District Michael Simonik, The Conservancy of Southwest Florida Tills ITEM WAS CONTINUED BY TIlE PETITIONER ITEM: Regular Agenda- Item V.E. PETITION NO: Planned Unit Development No. PUD-98-11 "Tamiami Professional Center" REOUESTING: A PUD containing a mix of office, retail and assisted living facility. Environmcntal Advisory Board Minutcs .......................................... Scptcmbcr 2, 1998 Pagc ~ REP/IF,$ E~NTED BY: Robert Dnanc, Hole, Momcs and Associates. Inc. Gcza Wass dc Czcgc, Southern Biomes EIS, Inc. MOTION: Madc by Mr. tlill, seconded by Mr, Foley and carricd, 4/0 to approve Planned Unit Development No. PUD-98-11 "Tamiami Profcsslonal Center" with Staffs stipulations, Mr. tlcrmanson abstaincd from thc vote. s,_Vat e r Mana£ement: Thc petitioner shall submit a copy of the SFWMD permit application to Collier County Development Services Engineering Staff for review and comment. Environmentah Fhc /bllowing language shall be added to thc PUD documcnt, "A Conservation Easement shall be placed ovcr thc preserves and recorded on thc plat (or by separate instrument if thc parcel is not platted) will] protective covenants per or similar {o Seclion 704,06 of Ibc Florida Statutes. Conservation areas shall be dedicated on the plat lo Ibc project's homeowners associalion or like entity for ownership and maintenance responsibility and to Collier County with no responsibility for maintenance." COMMENTS: For a complete record of thc proceedings rcadcr is directed to thc tape recording of this mccting, located in thc Office of thc Clcrk [o the Board. 5'~' Floor, Building 'F". Collier County, Government Complex. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned by order of thc Chair. Environmental Advisory Board Paul Hinchcliff, Chairman ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY BOARD AGENDA REC£:JV '6al pr' O~(ob~r 7, 1998:9:00 a.m. Constant Ine ~ 1. ROLL CAI,I, Il, APPROVAL OF MINLFI'ES - September 2. 1998 Ill. ADDENDA Eleclion of Chairman and Vice-Chairman [V CONSENT/ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL AGENDA Misc. Corres; Item# 4~ All matters listed under this ilem are considered to be routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of each Item. If discussion Is destred by a member of the Board, that item(s) will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. V, REGULAR AGENDA Planned Unit Dcvclopmcnt No. PUD-98-9 "Glen Eden on the Bay PUD" (continued from September 2. 1998) C. Planned Unit Development No. PUD-98-7 "Wyndam Park PUD" Planned Unit Devc[opmcm No, I'UD-84-11(2) "Thc Vincentian PUD" D, E. Planned Unit Development Amendment No. PUD-98-3 "Lely Lakes Golf Resorl PUD" Planned Unit Development Amendment No. PUD-98-13 "Collier Tract 21 PUD" F. Conditional Uso Petition No. CU-98-17 "Golf Club of the Everglades" 16Gl EAB Agenda ................................................................................................ Ocioher ?, ]998 Page 2 VI. OLD BUSINESS EAB/EPTAB Consolidation - Proposed EAC Amendment to the current EAB Code. September 16, 1998 preliminary draft £ot review and comment. VIL NEW BUSINESS VIII. ADJOURNMENT IX. WORKSIfOP NOTES: A. IBoard Members[: Notify thc PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT (403- 2400) no later than 5 P.M. on October l, 1998, if you cannot attend this mc~ing or if you have conflict and thus will abstain from voting on a particular petition. B. [General Public]: Any per,'.,on who decides to appeal a decision of this board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto; and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. 16G Minutes of September 8, 1998 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS & MOTIONS: Minutes of the August 11" meeting: Sabine Musci moved to approve the minutes as submitted: seconded by Chuck McMahon and carried unanimously. 6. OCPM REPORT C The medians on CR 951 '//itl need to be sprayed for weeds prior to the work Ambush Pest Control quoted a price of $600 for a one-time application. Sabina Musci made a motion authorizing the expenditure of $600 to have the medians sprayed; seconded by Chuck McMahon and carried unanimously. 7 TRANSPORTATION LANDSCAPE SERVICES REPORT Regarding the median cut throughs. Russ and the supervisor of Traffic Operations visited the sites. Russ thought that the area on Tropicana will be taken care of by Traffic Cps and the one on Hunter 81vd. W~ll be paved where the day care center is due to the amount of traffic. Val recommended that a sleeve be placed under the area before paving. Vaf distributed cop~es of Bid #98-2836, Golden Gate Beautification MSTU/MSTD roadway grounds maintenance. A lengthy discussion regarding the work areas ensued Afthough four vendors attended the pre-bid conference, only two bids were received: Environmental Care ~ $349,940 and Commeroal Land Maintenance. Inc ~ 2211.961 Fund 104 will fund S196.331 (work area #1) of the contract and Fund 136 will fund $15.630 (work area #2). V',Ath the consensus of the committee, Sabina Musci made a motion to recommend to the Board of Count'/ Commissioners that bid #98-2836 be awarded to Commercial Land Maintenance: seconded by Chuck McMahon and carried unanimously ',./al advised that Mike McGee's services will end at the end of September. A quote for the scope of services for both Golden Gate Parkway (fund 104) and the new construction (Fund 136) will be obtained. Mike advised that he is waiting for his new contract to be returned by the County As it was the consensus of the committee to continue to have McGee & Associates provide Iandscape architectural services on all aspects of the MSTU and MSTD, Chuck McMahon directed Russ Muller and Val Prince to provide a proposal at the nex~ meeting; seconded by Sabina Musci and carried unanimously.Misc Corre~ 1681 Minutes of September 8, 1998 1. Meeting called to order at 4:10 p.m. at the Golden Gate Community Center. Roll Call: Present: 8onner Bacon, Sabina Musci, Charles McMahon, members; Val Prince, Russ Muller, and Sheila Convey, Transportation Landscape Services; ,Joe Delate, Office of Capital Projects Management; Mike McGee, McGee & Associates: Chuck Buckley, Commercial Land Maintenance, Jacqueline Silano. secretary. Excused Absence: Cheryle Newman. Absent: Mark Houghton, member 3. Minutes of the August 11~' meeting: Sabina Musci moved to approve the minutes as submitted; seconded by Chuck McMahon and carded unanimously. 4. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE REPORT Chuck Buckley advised that selective fedilization was applied to plant material; insecticide and fungicide was also applied; trees have been removed from medians 12 and 14; the turf is yellowing and may be deficient; the semi annual shrub trimming has been done. 5. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT'S REPORT A Mike reported that there are no major problems. A dead sable in median 15 needs to be removed as it appears to have been struck by lightning. The yellowing of the turf and some plant materials and trees may be due to an iron deficiency and he recommended another application of fertilizer and this resolve the problem, Samples may need to be taken. 6, OCPM REPORT A. Joe Delate advised that he will be moving to Parks and Recreation and his replacement. Mike Massaquoi. will take over in October. Joe advised that the Board of County Commissioners last Tuesday approved the bid, The contractor should return the contract shortly and the construction should start in the first or second week of October. Florida Power and Light has done the electric work and the medians will be pulverized before then Final completion date is estimated to be February 14, 1999 (120 days). The medians on C.R. 951 will need to be sprayed for weeds prior to the work Ambush Pest Control quoted a price of $600 for a one-time application. Sabina Musci made a motion authorizing the expenditure of $600 to have the medians sprayed; seconded by Chuck McMahon and carried unanimously. 7. TRANSPORTATION LANDSCAPE SERVICES REPORT A Russ advised that there are no plans for curbing medians or widening Santa Barbara Boulevard in the foreseeable future. Val advised that turn lanes would be installed through Fund 104 prior to the median improvements being done Russ and Val will follow up with Ed Kant. B. Russ advised that the Community Traffic Safety Team will conduct studies regarding the light at the fire station. C Regarding the median cut throughs, Russ and the supervisor of Traff}c Operabons visited the sites. Russ thought that the area on Tropicana will be taken care of by Traffic eps and the one on Hunter Blvd. Will be paved where the day care center is due to the amount of traffic. Val recommended that a sleeve be ptaced under the area before paving. D, Copies of the Budget Status dated September 1998 were distributed. Copies of an Executive Summary requesting a contract increase for Commercial I.and Maintenance. Jnc, which exceeds 10% of the original contract amount weCe also distribuled This was for additional services provided by Commercial Land Maintenance, which was authorized by the Committee at their December 9, 1997 meeting. The funds were originally drawn from Fund 104 and a journal entry has been requested to back charge Fund 136 for $6685.79, E Copies of budget for Fund 104-163646 (Golden Gate Area Services) were distributed and reviewed Val will follow up with Road and Bridge regarding funds encumbered from Fund 126. F Val distributed topees of Bid #98-2836. Golden Gate Beautification MSTU/MSTD roadway grounds maintenance. A lengthy discussion regarding the work areas ensued, Although four vendors attended the pre-bid conference, only two bids were received: Environmental Care @ $349,940 and Commercial Land Maintenance, Inc. ~ $211,961. Fund 104 will fund S196.331 (work area #1) of the contract and Fund 136 will fund $15,830 (work area #2) With the consensus of the committee. Sabina Musci made a motion to recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that bid ¢98-2836 be awarded to Commercial Land ¢¢laintenance seconded by Chuck McMahon and carried unanimously G Val advised that Mike McGee's services will end at the end of September A quote for the scope of services for both Golden Gate Parkway (fund 104) and the new construction (Fund 136) will be obtained Mike advised that he ~s waiting for his new contract to be returned by the County. As it was the consensus of the committee to continue to have McGee & Associates provide landscape architectural services on all aspects of the MSTU and MSTD, Chuck McMahon directed Russ Muller and Val Prince to provide a proposal at the next meeting; seconded by Sabina Musci and carded unanimously, As there was no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 5:45 p.m. The next scheduled meeting will be held on October 13, 1998 at 4:00 p.m. at the Golden Gate Community Center. 1681 Agenda- October 13, 1998 5. 6. 7. 9. 10. Meeting called to order Roll Calf Approval of Minutes - Meeting of September 8, 1998 Landscape- Maintenance Report - Chuck Buckley Landscape Architect's Report - Mike McGee OCPM Report - Joe Delale lransportalion Administration Services Report - Russ Muller Committee Members' Repons Old Business "~ew Business Public Comments Adjournment Next Meeting: November 10, 1998, 4:00 p.m. @ Golden Gate Community Center TO: FROM: DATE: RE: MEMORAf,IDUM Board of County Commissioners J~dith Krayc~k, Secretary ,J - Real Property Management Department October 5, 1998 Golden Gate Estates Land Trust Committee Minutes ntt 0 6 ~/// ~onstsntlne ~j% Pursuant to Ordinance No. 87-48, enclosed please find the approved minutes of the Golden Gate E$latas Land Trust Committee from the August 24, 1998 meeting. If you have any questions ~ comments, please advise. Misc. Cortes: GOLDEN GATE ESTATES LAND TRUST COMMIHEE- MONDAY, AUGUST 24, 1998 GOLDEN GATE ESTATES BRANCH LIBRARY Matthew Hudson Charles 'Skip' VanGelder Karen Acquard Sandra Taylor - Chairman - Vice Chairman - Member - Director, Real Property Management Department Judith ~aycik - Secretary, Real Property Management Department Mike Wittenberg - Past President, Golden Gate Estates .'~'ea Civic Association Linda Hartman - President, Golden Gate Estates A~ea Civic Association Golden Gate Estates Residents DISTRIBUTION: Financial Statement as of Jury 31, 1998 I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Matthew Hudson, Chairman. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES o July 20, 1998 Skip made a motion lo approve the minutes as drafted. Karen seconded [he motion and the minutes were so approved. III. APPROVAL OF TREASURER'S REPORT AS OF JULY 31, 1998 Sandy reported the ending cash balance as of July 31, 1998, was $331,897.34 and the available cash balance was $322,259.54. Sandy noted the allocation for the Rural Safely Structures is not included in this report. Skip made a motion to approve the Treasurer's report. Karen seconded the motion and the report was so approved. IVo COMMITTEE MEMBER VACANCY Sandy stated there is nothing to report, V. RURAL SAFETY REFUGE STRUCTURES Sandy stated after submitting the Agreement to the Transportation Department, Ed Kant, Transportation Director, recommended minor changes. Mr. Kant does not wish to be restricted to the order of which the shelters will be built. He said it may be financially advantageous to build them in an east to west or west to east order. He said he attempt to adhere to the order but would prefer to have the option to deviate from it. Therefore, Sandy said she has added the word 'attempt' to that section of the Agreement. Karen expressed the concern that a stop with a minimal number of students may get a shelter where as a stop with many students may not. Sandy stated that the list of ten locations previously specified is still going to be used Sandy sa~d another of Mr. Kant's concerns was the documentation request for payment. She stated she had written that into Ihe Agreement and has changed the wording of paragraph five to state that the Transportation Department must provide evidence of the expenditures by the County She said her concern is that the payments are well documented Mr, Kant's third and last concern was that the structures be totally completed within six months, His request is to change that compJetion time to one year. Skit3 stated that seems reasonable. Matt agreed. Mike Wittenberg slated he spoke to Russ MuIJer of the Transportation Department who said the concern is that if sevep structures are completed in six months but the eighth is not. according to the Agreement, all of the expended funds must be returned to lhe Trust. Matt responded that would not pose a problem as the Agreement could be extended. This siluation has arisen before, as with the Gun Range, when the Committee voted to extend the Agreement. Sandy said that concludes the changes and, in order to present the Agreement to the Board of County Commissioners for approval, she must have a recommendation from the Committee. Karen asked if there had been any changes regarding obtaining the property owners' permission who will be affected by the construction of the shellers. Sandy responded that had stayed the same. She said the Agreement states that prior to the construction of the Shelters, verification from the County Attorney that the Shelters may be constructed within existing road right-of*way must be obla[ned, If the shelters cannol be built in the road right-of-way, the County must obtain the written consent of each property owner affected by the Shelter location. Sandy said that Heidi Ashton, Assistant County Attorney, has responded that, in her opir~ion, it is allowable to construct the shelters [n the existing road right-of-way. Skip made a molion that the Agreement as revised be presented to the Board for approval. Karen seconded the motion and all in favor. Sandy said the Agreement would be presented in approximately two to three weeks. A Golden Gate Estates resident questioned the locations of the shelters. Mike Wittenberg explained how these locations had been determined, He added to keep in mind the purpose of the construction of these first shelters is to provide community interest in this project, VI. NEXT PROPOSED MEETING DATE Monday, September 28, 1998 (7:00 p.m ) or Monday, October 26, 1998 (7:00 p m) Skip stated he will be unable to attend on September 28. Sandy said the only item that may need to be addressed ts the Commiltee member vacancy. Karen stated that her term will expire before the October meeting. Sandy said she should forward her resume to Sue Filson, Karen answered she already has Judy mentioned Ihat Steve Greenberg's membership will also expire on October 13. Matt asked if a September meeting should be held to address these memberships. Sandy said it should but, as Skip cannot attend, Slave's attendance must be confirmed so there will be a quorum, Therefore, lhe next scheduled meeting is tentatively set for Monday, September 28, 1998, at 7:00 P.M. at the Library If Steve cannot attend, the meeting will be scheduled for [he second week of Octobor VII. PUBLIC COMMENT Sandy stated a number of inquiries have been received regarding the land the Committee has placed on the 'Reserved' list She has been responding to these inquiries by explaining the current status of these properties, However, she would like to verify this Committee directive. The members agreed they wish these properties to remain 'Reserved.' Sandy congratulated Steve McDonald and Janet Mellersten, regular attendees of the Golden Gate Estates Land Trust Committee meetings, on their recent marriage, Mike Wittenberg inquired if the Committee has received any recent updates on the public's ability to utilize the Sheriff's Office Multipurpose Gun Range, The Committee unanimously agreed they have given up on this issue. Sandy stated the last report was that if a certification course was successfully completed by a member of the public, they would be allowed to use the gun range on certain days of the week at specific times VIII. ADJOURNMENT Skip made a motion to adjourn the meeting, Karen seconded the motion and the meeting was adjourned at 7:20 P,M. 16{il Naples, Florida. JLmC 24, 199g Con,taft,ne. ~"' [,ET Fl' BE KNOWN. that die [,IBRAP, Y ADVISOR'/ BOARD met on this dale ]n rcg ar sess n I 2:00 p,m m thc Main Library wilh Ihe following members present: ('HAIR: Syd Mellingcr Sabina Musci [)aris I.cwis Diane Williams ABSEN'I: Jaculyn Dcring Al,SO PRESEN'F: John W Jones, Library I)ircctor Frank Cullcn. Pres., Friemls o£thc l.JbraD' Marilyn Norris, Itcad of Extension Scp.'iccs [,uz Piclri. Sr. Sccrcla~ APPROVAl. OF MINU'FES: Mrs. Mellingcr ;Lskcd for commcnls or corrections In Ihc minutes of May 27, 1908. There being none, Mrs, Lewis moved, seconded by Ms. Musci ami carried tmanimouslv that Ibc minutes be approved as stlbnldted, RI~PORTS OF OFFICERS - None ('OMMIJNICA'I IONS - None UNFINISIIED IIUSINESS In reference to the Northern Regional Library. Mr. Jones reported that since the l;mt Board meeting, be has been proceeding on in an altempt to secure the oki animal control site, ired mosl important, to try to secure il at no cost. An architect was hired to dn the preliminary site study and a proposed elevation for thc building Also, an Execulive Summary has been prepared requesting BCC approval to issue an R.F.P. for architects to prepare detail drawings for the library. Thc Board rcvicwcd thc nominations that were submitted for thc sclcclion of Ibc Library's Employee of thc Month. Since Ire Board would not be meeting during the monlhs of July and August, 3 employees were selected. Barbara Shcehan was selected for June, Della Mitchell for July. and Claire Oss for August. Mr. Jones asked for Board approval Io install an Intcrnet filler called 'Web Sense'. Mrs Mellinger cmcrtaincd a motion for appro'.al. Mrs. Lewis moved, seconded by ,'vls. Musci and carried unanimously, to approve it. In rcl~rcncc to thc FY99 Budget. Mr Jones staled thal cvcryttfing ,,vas O.K. so far. In reference Io the Exhibils Policy, thc Board opted to kecp it Ire way h reads, except to add to the title thc words 'and Displays'. NEW BUSINESS Mr. Jones requested that the Board adopt an interim policy, with amendments, if necessary, for Irc use of the Marco Island Branch Gazebo. A few requests for its usc have come through and thc Library needs direction until a formal policy is issued. Mrs. Mellingcr enlertained a molion for approval of the interim policy. Mrs. Williams moved, with Mrs. Lewis seconding Iht modon. Motion carried. G F. NERAI. CONSIDERATIONS Mr. Jones suggested lhal tim Board members ,.,,'rite their corumissioncrs a Icttcr thanking Ihcm for their support during rte budget process and for its approval. DIRECTOR'S REPORT - Attached REPORT OF THE FRIENDS Mr. Cullcn reported that the Friends are in the process of trying to worr out a deal · *'itl', an electrical company to do the lighting work at the lmmokalce B~anch, similar to thc one at the Vanderbilt Branch. fie also reported that Mrs. Lacey King has resigned from thc Board. Lastly, he reported that thc Friends are still looking for new Board members to bclp with thc day to day operation and for new memberships. ADJOURNMENT Thcre being no further business to corec bcfore the l.ibrary Adviso~ Board, Mrs. Mcllinger declared thc meeting adjourned, TJmc: 2:50 p.m LIBRARY ADVISORY BOARD ANNUAL MEETING June 24, 1998 LET IT BE KNOWN that thc LIBRARY ADVISORY BOARD met on this date in the Main Library at 2:51 p.m. in order to conduct their ANNUAL MEETING. The following members were present: CHAIR: Syd Mellinger Sabina Mu.sci Doris Lewis Diane Williams ABSENT: Jaculyn Derlng ALSO PRESENT: Luz Picm, Secretary NOMINATIONS AND ELECTION OF OFFICERS Ibc main purpose of this meeting was lo sclec~ new officers for the coming year. Mrs. Mellinger opened the nominations. Mrs. Lewis moved, seconded by Ms. Musei and camed unanimously, to elect Jaculyn Dering as the new Chairman. Mrs. Mellinger moved, seconded by Ms. Musci and carried unanimously, to elect Mrs. Lewis as Vice*Chairman. Ms. Mu.sci agreed to continue as Secretary. OTHER BUSINESS - None ADJOURNMENT There being no other business to come before the Library Advisory Board, Mrs. Mellinger declared that the meeting be adjourned. Time: 3:00 p.m. DIRECTOR'S REPORT September 15, 1998 BUDGE1 q'hc budget has undergone the first public hearing with no changes. I feel certain that it w/Il remain intact through the second hearing The bottom I/ne is that the Library budget is in good shape for thc upcoming year. REGIONAL LIBRARY Thc BCC has now accepted the old animal control site as the location for this nc'.,.' facility. A prelim/nary site study has been completed and an R.F.P. issued to interested architects. An official architectural firm should be selected in October. NEW PERSONNEl. Our new Reference Librarian is Harriet Protos and she came from Tarpon Spnngs. Our new Exlension Children's Librarian is Sally Payne, ',','ho had previously worked at the East Naples Branch as a Senior Library Assistant. Whh these two appoJntmems, we are nov;' at 100% in professional staf£ CIRCULATION It no,.,.' appears that our ycarty circulation totals will equal last ycar*s c rcu a on. This is extremely positive since Marco was operating out ora small rental location (closed completely for I I/2 montbs) for much of the .','ear. FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY have enclosed a copy of my budget request for the Friends for next fiscal year. bey will meet in October for discussion, modification and approval COMPUTERS Ill II - - 111111 I I II-' 16Gl We are moving our computers September 18~' and 19e~, thus, the Librm'y system will be closed on those dates. For the employees, a full day of stafftraining is planned for September 18th. BOOKSALE Our fall booksale will be held October 9 to 12. This sale will feature several hundred videos donated to the Library, but unusable for thc collection. ()('H()P[:I{ FIRE ('ONTROI. I)lS I'RICI ADVISORY BOAI>,I) MEPTI'iNG IIEI.D JUN[ 1. 1998 IN ]lie EV[~R(iI,ADI~S (TI'Y COMMUNITY CENTI-;R COnstantine k ... bm? Brc~k ~aid he knows that We need lo be pla?lng the game v.c'rc suppose to be playing lie said thc) had 3 inches of rain in the last fe.~ da?s so il is m, as dr:, as il was h's a lire waiting to happen Nat il is Iht Park 5,ersiccn lhey base thrce helicopters and a fire learn Mike Ilarl said ac all agreed tx~ using thc aluminum storage N~xes to Moce fire hose wilh the nozzle. We can jusl iron out v. hcxe be can put il at. We might be able to put *t at the water plant too. which is a fenced in are'a v,h ich ~e cctald gel ace,s to lie doesn't think ~andalism weald be a p~oblem in that atm. Misc, Cotres: BUSINESS: RESERVE PIJMPI R C*x'nmand~r Wii~m ~aid the deal with the Cily of Napl~ for thc rc~ve engine ts going to go thr~ time ~is mmm~. EMS is giving ~ a d~ifi~ am~l~ to I~ into a hi~ ~¢ h~ Page 2 ever)lhin~: went thr*~Jgh okay Walk~ o~al of there okay Then ~ go~ ph~nle ca;[ Frl~> thai informcxl mc Page 3 ] 6Gl ('ocnmande~ Wil..~m .,aid he did n~ has¢ the complete de~ails as to v. hat is going oo. But if we do sign an Commandex Wilso~ said if Ochope~ Fire Conti'ol Ois~icl purchases the n~w bunk~' gear it would be offered lo the paid personnel fir~ then pas,; just like we wo~ld nocmally. It's the Volunteers Organi?.atio~ Page 4 Page 5 NEW BUSINESS: DISCUSSION OF WHETHER THE ADVISORY BOARD SftOUI.D CON FINUE TO MEEr 1 HROUGH 'File SUMMER OR ADJOURN TILl, (~]OBER. 1998 Kent Orner ,.ald if we did do that ~.e ccmld stipulate (8'~cm l~en a special mcc6ng c~ld be called. If there Comm~dct Wilson said thai is ',~hal he wo~ld like to do. He said he wo~ld like to inform them thai the budgel it going to the l~rd of C~mnty Commissioners and that b~sically it will be their decision. If you feel slrmgly that we n~ed to movc foeward in these ~re~s and the station al Po~ of the Islands. I invite Mike tlan said now this is no~ going to be one of those meu'dngs where the) won't allow you to talk Cotomand~- Wilso~ said no, you do nm have to do a scheduled referendum, this is a b~dgcl w(~kshop. I ~o~ld .like t~ add anothe~ g units to the Po¢~ of the Islands area that just pasl CO I knew of another 18 umts going up I have been informed that there are more like 28 units that are in the proct-ss of gothg up With the intentions of starting more in the next little bit. Troy Brock asked if we were doing the inspections at Poet of the Istands. Commander Wilson said no, Wayne Bryant who is o~t of the No,th Naples Fke Department and is coraracled with the County to do Fire Inspections. Brock wanted to know why we don't do it. Page 7 Mike [lan said instead of b~ildinig a staticm at Alligator Alley. and SR 20 lets pul a slation at Lee C)pre. s. Because thc,.,e per,pie al P(~ o£the Nland~, even though they. gel all thai tax base and all that mcmey Iht? rcsixmse timc. I1 wasn'l caused jusl by EMS is was cau.,4~J by a c,'~nb~ncd ¢lTo~ or ['irc and I~M$ in this and pul it ~n a c~tral ~ation. SdU couW jusd['-' having a '~tation at Po~l of the I~.l~'~ds. ! think everybody The gend~men froth pc~t ef the I~landn sam he wield like lo ze thc ¢xl:~nslon w th o~t je~pardizing the Page I 0 d¢~ ¢1(~1 re31 quick Meeting adjourned al 8: I OPM I;h~lie Reynolds C'hai~an j Ochot~.'e Fire Clairol District Ad~i~' Board Page COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION 801 LAUREL OAK DKIVE SUITE 605 NAPLES, FL 34108 (94l) 597-1749 FAX (941) 597-4502 NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE IS HEREBY GI~.~N OF A REGULAR MEETING OF TIiE PELIC.\N BAY MSTBU ADVISORY AGENDA ~orr Is . Hsn¢ock I Roll Call Iq&C'K le AdJourn ADDITIONALLY. THIS NOTICE ADVISES THAT, IF A PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE PELICAN BA'~ ADVISORY COMMI~I-EE. WITlt RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING. tie WILL NEED A RECORD OF TIlE PROCEEDINGS AND THAT EOR SUCH PURPOSE. HE MAY NEED TO ENSURE TIIAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF 'DIE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES TIiE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH TIlE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED · ~'~ '~'-~:"~ ' :- 1 6Gl Naples. Florida Seplcnlber 2. ]99g LET IT lie KNOWN. tim{ Ibc Pelican Bay MSTBU Adxisor5 Commhle¢ mci in Rcgular Dr Alan Varlcy. Chairman (Absen0 Mr George Wcmer. Vice Chairman Mr James Carroll Mr. John HO>I Mrs. Cornelia Krcigh Mrs Maureen McCarlh) Mrs Cora Oblcy ALSO PRESENT ApproxJmatc[y 13 Pclican Bay res~dcms: Mr Ed Ilschncr. Division Adminislrator ROI,[. CALl.: APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF TIlE AUGUSTf, 1998 SlEETING SIIERIFF'S REPORT Mr Wcrncr inlroduccd Dcpul) Scott Proper of Hie Collier Counu, Shc~iff-s Ol~cc ;lad and ,he trcammn, hc nmagcdb received Date: //,/~q ~7~ Item~ ~ff PELICAN BAY ADVISORY COMMITTEE SEPTE.MBER 2. 199~ RESTORATION AND MANAGEMENT PLAN 16Gl 16Gl SEPTEMFJER 2. 1998 3183 PELICAN BAY ADVISORY COMMITTEE SEPTENIIBER ?. 199~ ..... I II III .............. ~ _j 16Gl PELICAN BAY ADVISORY SEPTEMBER 2. 199g 16G1 ,, PELICAN BAY ADVISORY COIvlMITTIH~ Mt. 11~4 stated Ihal tile second thin8 il lO changg Ibc ordl~flnce ~uiidarlcs ct~llll~ thc Bay Sewlcel Division lo extend out ]~lo IJ~ Ilt~di~l. We ~d lo do thai ~rore i~ fldopl n~iy budgcl c~l~ Ibc MS~U Io Includ~ Ihe US 41 mcdi~,. Ilml d~ 1~Ol COmll~il Ils Io nn)lbilt~ d~s Mt. M,dge Jlal~ II~l Ibc PUD ~¥oldd h~v~ lo ~ nmclJdcd Mr W~rd staled lhal d~ iml contrail )ou 10 nfl)ibid,. Illl~ll~lll~l, t¥~ ~ noJ coa ~ lilt g Ollr~J~R~ lo J~lld~[}l~ Ihc l~5 J I IIICdJ~lll~'~ [3olh hll' ',¥ntd nnd Mt. Ilsclmct teplicd no Mr. l]tm* n nskcd ol' Ibnl precluded nn)o,e cl~e from p;~) lng fnt ii if' il i~ tllchldcd in Pcllcnn Hn? ~3ofb/~fr. Wn~'d ,nd MI. II~clmel' tcplted ~Jr Gli~lb llskcd iflhe MSTUU ~m~d;~tle~ cotddlt'l ~ c~[mqdcd s~ilbolll nmcndmg thc Mr. W~/d replied Ilml )ou do not tllllclld Iht PUD. bill Ibc Ordimmcc Crcilllllg Ibc MSTIJU Mr. Modge slaled thai Iht illedblll ~JOll~S lO Ibc Mt, Wnfd teplled )'~;, bill lb; ~olnll). Jlll~ IJ~ H~bl Io Cr;al~ nn ~Tfll. I pvc~ Ibnl property, Jtl~l ~ ordlnnnce only. ~. ~V;tli;[ ~lnled Ihnl Jic ~¥~lll~ lO IllakR il ~l~lu Ilfffc Ibnl ~ nfe not ~OllllllJllJll~ pllf;ch'c~ IAf~d~flptn; US 41 fll IIIi~ ~l~; O~ Ibc ~1111~ ~V~ ;Ire ~Oll~Jd;~Jll~ JJ ilfld d(Hll~ ~OlllC Ihifl~S Ih;il wmpld enable IJJ Io do il, Jr il Il decided IIl~ll il il Iff Ib; ~1 Jlllcr;~l o[ Ibc conlll,lllJl) ~r. Browfl ;lalcd IbAI be tJ ¥cq' bi; off Mt. Bfo~ll ;oltlJflll;d IJtlll ~e Olt~hJ Io ;il J?Jl~k lind IJ~l;ll lo ~Qml i~ ~nid Spmc~y ~;1111~ lO pill Dftd uy we h~te IO ~dd lrfl~llofl Oul 16Gl '' PELICAN BAY ADVISORY COMMi-~.rEE I 8 SEPTEMBER 2. PELICAN BAY ADVISOR')' COMMITTEE SEPTEMBER 2. I 16G1 PELICAN BAY ADVISORY COMMI'I-YEE SEPTEMBER 2. 199g 16G1 '' ,",ir l]<hncf tcplicd, no sir Tlmt median is prcscnlly undcr cOnlrOl of {{~c Sta{c and ~c ~ork 3[96 PELICAN BAY ADVISORY COMN~ITTEE SEPTI~.MBER 2, 199:~ 16Gl 3197 go PELICAN ~3AY ADVISORY COMMITTEE SEIq-EMBER 2. 199g 16Gl CO,M M ITTE F, REQUESTS }~XOTIC, REMOVAL TRA FEJ~,' .~I(;NA L PELICAN BAY ADVISORY COMMITEEE SEPTE/~,~BER 2. 199g 1 6Gl",~ 32t~) TO FROM DATE SUBJECT Pelican Bay Advisory Committee JamesP Ward October I, 1998 Pelican Bay Advisory Commillee Replacement Wilh Ibc resignation of,',.ir Fred Flalto from Ihe Advisory Board, the Board of County Commissioners advertised Io fill Ihe unexpired term of office of Mr. Fred Fla~to One resume was received, and the Advisory Board requested Ihe Board o£ County Commissioners to re-advertise lhis position, since Mr, Flauo's term also expired on January 29, 1999 The Board of County Commissioners decided to hold ~he appiicallon in abeyance pending Ihe Advisory Committee's decision to "don-size" the commiuee Since lhe Advisory Commiuee has not discussed this issue, I would recommend Ihat the Advisory Committee provide direction to the Board o£ County Commissioners as to whether the Advisory Board desires to amend Ihe Ordinance Io reduce the number of members, or whelher the AdvisoR,' Board would llke the Board o£ County Commissioners m advertise fiw the llve posilioos which are scheduled to expire on January 29, 1999 OCT 01 '98 11:01 FR DISTRICT OFFIC~ ~2 345 1~ 5~pt~mb~' 16, Igq~ Mr. Larry J. 5aama~ ~04 Pine Village l.anc Naples, Fl, 34108 Subjec[: Pelican Boy MSTBU Advlso~ Commi~¢ D~r Mr. Salz~u~: Whlic convened in rcgu]~ session on Scpt~mbc~ 15, 199Z, tJt¢ Board o/Coun~ Commi/s~n~ ~ ~e applier,s f~ ~it~ ~ ~ mbj~ ~vi~ ~d. At ~t ~. it w~ brou~t to ~ ~*s a~nd~ ~1 fl~ Pcli~ B~ MSTBU ~i~ ~ml~ iS cu.mtly ~in~ on ~st~ng ~ ~mmi~ ~d r~ucin~ ~ mcm~ip from 15 ~ lO m~rs. S~e ~e ~ai~r of ~ v~: t~ is for ~y 4 monks, ~ ~d ~ ~ to fill {he v~cy until ~ pm~d ~e~ ~ ~e o~i~n~ ~s brou~t ~k ~ ~e ~d for ap~aL Your ~:sume will be held ia abcTaac~ pending U~e ~ment of the ~di~nc¢. ~ ~fo~ ~e Bo~d. t~ ~mi~ i~ ~ ~ ~ 10 mem~, y~ wall ~ consi~r~ for a~in;m~t at ~a~ time. ] a~log~ for ~7 ~J~e ~i~ m~ ~ve Wc wish to express our g~afitudc td you lee pen~i~i~[ your name to be submi[zcd for COnsideration. Your willingness to sc~,c thc rcsldcnts of Collier County is ~.ppteclated. Very u-uly yours, Commissioner, District 5 BBB:sf cc: James W~d, Pelican Bay Services Divlsiun 16 1 ~ T~ur~ay, ~q:~.mbm' 17.1998 1 '1:2:3 AM TO: sml~J S~ubjec~' RF.: Adv~ry Comm~ee ~en~ The I~-,,C decld~ m h~kJ the ~:~:Xlcan'a. rc~ume due Io fhe down'-m~ of Um ~ommlS. ee: E ~ ~mme~ ~ not dorm-razed h o.~ 1999, he vRI be c~emd ',h~n. I received ~our 8~ptembm' 2. lg~8 e- re. m1 r~gmcli~g the ~ Commllee ~m_ The recomm<mdago~ af U~e Pelican Bay SemSce~ P~ol 16Gl ~J The BCC dedd~ to hold the applicants resume due Io U~ ~wn-~a~g of ~e commlltee: If t~e comme~ ~ not P~el Naples. Florida Aug~sl LET IT BE KNOWN. that thc Clam Bay Sub-commitlcc of Ihe Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee {Tic{ oI~ this date al R;O0 AM, at the Foundalion Center. 8962 [{alnmock Oak Drive. Naples M D:l~id BoeHig. Chairman (Absent) Dr Alan Varley Nit Edx~ard Grimlh Mr Mac Hatcher Mr James Carro[I Mr. ~slic Brown Mes~rs T~d Tu~rell and lan Bt:tier. Turrcll & As~iates. Mr. James P, Ward, Pelican Bay Sec'ices Di~ i~ion Depaflrnenl Direclor and Mrs Barbara Smhh. Recording ~retaD,' ' Roll Call AdJourn DISCUSSION ON (7ONSULTANT SEI.I-;¢TI0~' FOR IMPLEMENTATION {]F TIlE B~Y RESTORATION AND MANAGEhI~NT pleaN 16Gl ', CLAN~ BAY SUB-CO,'-4MI'ITEE/ADVISORY COM~.I~ AUGUST 2(,. 199x CLAM BAY SUS-COMMITTEFJADV1SOR¥ COMMrl-FEE AUGUST 26. 199g Dr Varig' shared lha~ be would thank Ms, World' ahead of time and when Ibc ti~nc comes, we will b¢ knocking on Thc Conscrvan~,'s door [or I~ ~'i~s. ADJOURN 16Gl Naples. Flori~ September 30. 199g LET IT BE KNOWN. that thc Clam Bay Sub--commiltoe of the Pelican Bay MSTI3U Advisor',' Commitlc~ inet on this date at 3()O P.M. al Ibc F~.mdalion Center. 8962 Hammock Oak Drive. Naple~ M Daxid Roellig. Chairman Dr. Alan Varle:,.. Mc. Ed~ard Grimll~ Mr. Mac Hatcher Mr James Carroll Mr. Leslie Brown ALSO PRESENT: T~o (2) Pelican Bay resider*is; Mr. Brett Moore. Humiston & Moore; Mr. Todd Turrcl]. Turrc[I & Associates. Mr. James P. Ward. Pelican Bay Ser,'ices Division Department Director ~ Adjourn ROLL CALL 6 CLA,~I BAY SL~-COMMiTTEE/ADt. qSORY COMMI3'I'EE SEPTEMBER 3fL 199g 16Gl CLANI BAY SUf~-COMMII~'EE/ADVISORY COMNfl'~FEE CLAM BAY SUB-COMMI'KTEE./ADVISORY COMMI 1 6Gl" ' Mr. David Rocllig. Acling Chairman 16G1 PELICA.N BAY SV.R~ICES D/VISION CLAM BAY R~.$TORAT]ON FUND AUGUST SI, 1998 EXPENDITURES Eavtroumental Consol[ Taclm~ & Othc~ F.Y. 1997 P.Y. 1991 Tota/ Exp. Aulg.98 __ Bud~.__ Bud[~ Budget To Date BaJance Expcaae.~ 47.112 7.00 I 10.550 18.524 54.532 $ 207.700 $ 207.683 $ 17 7.~,O $ 79.0~ $ 78.732 $ 268 $ 32.316 $ 86.500 $ 86.500 $ 0 $ 42.8~8 $ OO,000 S 67.675 $ 22.325 $ 684 20.599 $ 27,600 $ 9.997 38.550 S 49,100 $ 10.550 $ 38.550 161.794 $ 180.318 $ 23.874 $ 156.444 $ 328.219 $ 720.218 $ 485.011 $ 235.207 $ 684 Capila/Outlay Impr~cmcnls GcncraJ $ 15.459 $ 1.320.9~) $1.336,359 $ J§.45O $ J.320.~1~ OIhct Machlncr~ & quip $ 2.827 $ $ 2,827 $ 2,827 $ .~b-Tmal $ In.286 $ 1.320.~) $1.339.186 $ 18.286 $ 1.320.~m $ ProperlyAppra[scr $ $ 13.4OO $ 13.400 $ 8.637 $ 4.763 R~.'cnuc RcSCnc $ $ 2.t.600 $ 23r600 $ $ 23.600 S~b-Trnal $ 10.214 $ 57.000 $ 67.214 $ 31.678 $ 35.536 TOTAl. APPROPRIATIONS $ 190.4t~) $ 1.7~6.119 $ 2.126,618 $ ~34.974 $ 1,591.644 $ 684 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE - AUGUST SERVICES DATE INV. NO. AMOUNT TIIRU thIIxam Hlllcslad 12/29/97 12/29/97 $ 29.700~) 12/31/97 A~riaJ Catlog~ph~cs ~9~4/98 7~38 $ 3.~.~ TOTAL INVOICES $ 33.2~.~ 16Gl Meeting- September 14, 1998 SUMMARY OF MOTIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS: B There was some discussion regarding the selection of chairperson for the committee Leona Hyland nominated Crystal Kinzel as chairman; seconded by Kate Godfrey-irwin and carried unanimously. 4 Transportation Services Report D Sheila reviewed the proposed budget for new fiscal year, which begins on October 1~. Depending on whether construction will actually take place next :,'ear. budgel amendments can be done to move the funds to the appropriate objecl code when necessary Crystal indicated that she has received and outcry from various residents regarding the increase in taxes. She felt that this should have been put on a batlot and voted on and that no millage should have been ~mposed for the upcoming year. She felt that the current reserve could have covered the design fees. A length:,', sometimes heated, discussion ensued. Crystal Kinzel made a motion to reduce or eliminate the tax allocation for this year No second was made The motion was defeated. With the exception of Ms Kinzel. the other members felt that by collecting the % mill in taxes now wou]d accumula!e the funds that v/ill be necessary once the project has begun Leona Hyland made a motion to continue the existing tax at % mill; seconded by Bdl Jaeger Kate Godfrey-Irwin was also m favor. Ms. Kinzel opposed The mclion carned with 3 to 1 votes E Russ advised the group of the four landscape architectural firms that the count:,' has approved by via:,, of the RFP process There was a brief discussion. Bill Jaeger made a motion directing Russ Muller to make arrangements to have these firms make 20-minute presentations at the next meeting; seconded by Leona Hyland and carried unammously Misc. Oorres: /&?e To: ~/~/~C 1 681' Agenda - October 12, 1998 1 Meeting called to order 2. Rorl Call 3 Approval of Minutes - Meeting of September 14. 1998 4 Presentations by Landscape Architects 5 Transportation Se~ices Report 6 Committee Members' Reports 7 Old Business 8 New Bus~ness 9 Adjournment Next Meeting - 4:30 p.m., November 9th, Golden Gate Community Center 16 1 Meeting- September I4, I998 1 The meeting was called to order at 4:30 p,m at the Golden Gate Community Center 2 Attendance: Bill Jaeger. Kathryn Godfrey-lrv.,in. Leona Hyland, and Crystal Kinzel members; Russ Muller and Sheila Convoy, Transpodation Landscape Services: Jacqueline Silano, recording secretary. Excused absence: Wolfgang Schultz Guest: Charles Schueddig. resident of Sapphire Lakes. 3 New Business A The new member, Bill Jaeger, was introduced to the group. Lots were drawn to determine the length of term: Mr Jaeger and Ms. Hyland picked three years each, leaving the four year term to be served by Mr, Schultz. There was some discussion regarding the selection of chairperson for the toronto'!too Leona Hyland nominated Crystal Kinzel as chairman; seconded by Kate Godfrey-lrv;in and carried unanimously A Russ ga,ze abnef over',qew of the duties of the landscape architect and landscape contractor B An update of the budget '.','as provided and reviewed C A discussion regarding the s~x-laneing of Radio Road ensued The section frorn Airport Road to Kings VVa7 ~s projected to be deficient by 2005 and the county has up to three years after thal time to w~den the road It was noted that the median landscapfng could be designed with trees in the center to allow for lhe v;idening Crystal expressed her concerns about curbing She did not want the project to be torn up a year or [we after completion. Russ advised that the landscao~ng and irrigation design and permitting would run approximately 290000 ($30 000 x 3 miles) with the construction costs runmng about $200.000 permde, or 5600,000 Annual maintenance wfll run 550.000 per mileannunily D She~!a re`z~ewed the proposed budget for new fiscal year, which begins on October 1" Depending on whether construcbon v,'fll actually take place next year budget amendments can be done to move the funds lo the appropoate object code when necessary Crystal ~ndicated that she has recewed and oulcW fromvar~ousresldentsregardingthe~ncreaserntaxes She felt that thisshould have been put on a ballot and voted on and that no mdlage should have been ~mposed for the upcommg year She felt that lhe current reserve could have covered the design fees A Iengthy. sometimes heated, discussion ensued Crystal Kinzel made a motion to reduce or eliminate the tax a~location for this year. No second was made. The motion was defeated. With the exception of Ms. Kinzel. the other members felt that by collecting the ¼ mill in taxes now vwould accumulate the funds that vwirl be necessary once the project has begun. Leona Hyland made a motion ~o continue the existing tax at ¼ mill; seconded by Bill Jaeger Kate Godfrey-Irwin ',';as also in favor. Ms Kinzel opposed. The motion carried with 3 to 1 votes E Russ advised the group of the four landscape architectural firms that the county has approved by way of the RFP process. There ',','as a brief discussion. Bill Jaeger made a motion directing Russ Muller to make arrangements to have these firms make 20-minute presentations at the next meeting; seconded by Leona Hyland and carried unanimously 5 Other Bus~ness A Crysta~ requested Russ to provide a written schedule of the proposed road widening proiects at the next meeting. As there was no furlher bus~ness,to discuss, the meeting vwas adjourned at 5:55 p m The next meeung will be held at 4:30 pm. on October 12~ at the Collier County Governmont Complex, Board Room. / ¢~qst~ntine ~ ~,, TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Sue Filson, Administrative Assistant to thc Board 3/C./ Bleu Wallace, Director, Utility and Franchise Regulation Transmittal of Minutes o Collier County Water & Wastcwatcr Authority RECEIVED 166] DATE: September 22, I998 Transmitted herewith arc thc approved minutes of thc Collier Courtly Water and V';astewater Authority for Augusl 24, 1998. These minutes were approved September 21. 1998 Direct any qucs OhS 1o mc at extension 7146. COLI.IER COUNTY WATER AND WASTEWATER AUT}IORITY Minute~ of Meeting Board Room, 3r'~ Floor, Administration Building 3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida 34112 2:00 P.M., Monday, August 24, 1998 An audio record of the following proceedings is on file with the Department of Utility and Franchise Regulation. Suite 203, Administration Building, County Government Center. 3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida 34112, Phone (941) 774-8577. Ass/slant Count.,,' Attorney Thomas C. Palmer was present lo provide legal advice to the Authority and Director D.E. "Bleu" Wallace was present to represent the Department of UIility and Franchise Regulation. 1. Call to Order (Determinafioo of Quorum) Chairman Bennett called the meeting to order at 2:05 P.M. Authority members present were; Ct~airman Robert C. Bennett, Vice Chairman Dr. Fay R. Biles. Mr. George J. Schroll, and Dr. Neno J. Spagna, constituting a quorum. Il. Appro','al of Minutes - Jul)' 27, 1998 Dr. Biles had a question reeardin~ Orange Tree Utility territory expansion request, which ,',,Ir. Wallace addressed ' ~ A typographical error was noted on page 006 of the agenda packet (page 5 of the minules), paragraph 5. second line. kine should read ...... Count,,. Commissioners could take aulhority over an)' item before ~ this ....... ' Dr. Spagna made a motion to approve the minutes with the above correction noted; motion seconded by Dr. Biles. Motion passed unanimously (4-0). Chairman Bennetl commented on the resigr~ation of Mr. Joseph Mandy from the Author/ry. A motion was made by Mr. Schroll with a second by Dr. Biles for Chairman Bennett to send a letter of thanks and appreciation to Mr. Mandy for his service while sen, lng on the Authority. Motion passed unanimously (4-0). Chairman Bennett commented on last months Authority meeting regarding the Orange Tree / Waterways issue. As a result of that meeting, Orange Tree and Waterways have executed a developer's agreement and Orange Tree has submitted an application to the DEP to expand to 350,000 gallons per day. II1. Open to Public No public comment was received. IV. Items Requiring Action by the Authority: October I, !998 Pass-Through Reduction I. Florida Cities Water Company (Golden Gate) 2. Goodland Isles, Inc. 3. North Marco Utility Company, Inc. 4. Orange Tree Utility Company, Inc. 5. Eagle (:reek Utillp,.' II, Inc. Chairman Bennett requested Mr, Wallace address this item. Mr. Wallace stated that on luly 28. 1998. thc BCC adopted Resolution 98-271 establishing thc nc',,.' regulator,,, assessment fcc cffcclivc October I, 1998 to I V,.%. Thc resolution requires rates adjusted accordingly by way ora pass-through decrease. Staffhas coordinated with all the utilities by pro`.'iding them ;vith the new calculations. Staffrecommcnds that thc Aulhor/Ev adopt Final Orders 98-03 through 98-07 inclusive. This will accommodate Florida Cities Wale,~ Co.. Goodland Isles Inc. North Marco Utility Co., Or, a~. ge Trec Utility Co. and Eagle Creek Utility 11. Mr Wallace advised that Florida ~,ater S¢~ ices ~Marco Island / Marco Shores) would be addressed later in this agenda. A motion aas marie by Mr. Schroll. seconded hy Dr. Biles. lo adopt Final Orders 98-03 through 98-07 £c,r the October 1. 1998 Pass-Through Reduction. Motion passed unanimously'~4-O) October I, 1998 Combined Rate Adjustmenl~ I. Florida Water Ser','ice$ Corporation (l'qarco Island/Marco Shores) .".Ir. Wallace advised that Florida Water Services has submilted an abbreviated filine that included price index adjustment and also a pass-through increase that was previousl'-y direcled by the FPSC in conjunclion with its 1995 rate ca~e. In the Final Order that ;vas issued in September 1996. the FPSC reduced the Utilities return on equity by 50 qualilv points ( I/2%). This ;'.'as to remain in effect for two years at which time the FPSC would gi;'¢ the Ulility the full revenue requirement. The price index increase, the relum on equiw adjuslment increase, and thc regulatory assessment fcc decrease, made this a combined rate adjustment. Mr. Wallace noted that Florida Water Services agreed to make ail adjustments effective on October I. 1998. Mr. Wallace added that the return on equity adjustment did not affect Marco Shores rates, only Marco Island. After directing several questions to staffand Florida Waler Sen'ices legal counsel, Mr. Matthev., Fell. Dr. Biles made a motion to adopt Final Order 98-08. The motion ',,,'as seconded by Mr. Schroll and passed unanimously (4-0). C. Par One Ilomeowners Association / Florida Cities Water Company Chairman Bennett gave a brief outline of the complaint filed by Pm' One as he understood it and asked Assistant County Attorney Palmer what the Authority's responsibilities wcrc regarding the matter. Mr. Palmer advised that this was a qua~i-judiclal matter before the Authority. with the Authority as the tryer of fact; that the Authority would hear testimony from both parlies and weigh the evidence. Palmer advised that two findings were necessary if the plaintiff(Par One) wer~ to prevail; (1) a finding of fact that a certain amount of water leaked on the ground and did not ~nter the re~pondent~ (FCWC) wastewater treatment system for treatment; and (2) a finding of law that the sewer charges Ievied by the utility for wastewater that was in fact not treated unfair or unre~onable. If the evidence is such that support~ these findings, the Authority could order a refund to Par One. Palmer advised that the staff was not a party to these proceedings. ~'bc Chairman called on ,".Ir. Herb Brock, legal counsel for Par One, who gave an exlensi;,e opening statement regarding thc case. Upon calling ,",ir. Delfino as a witness. Mr. Palmer asked Mr, Wayne Schiefelbcin. legal counsel for FCWC, ifhe wished It) may an opening statement. Mr. Schicfelbcin waived his opening statemenl. - M.r Wallace ad;'iscd the chairman that since this was a quasi-judicial proceeding, thc Mr. Brock called Mr. Joseph Delfino, an engineer and resident of Par One. as an expert wJmcss He confirmed thc fact that he had been sworn. Mr. Delfino responded to Mr Brock's questions and elaborated on Ibc methodology and historical flow data that he used in preparing the exhibits included in the Authority Agenda Packet. Mr. Dclfino fielded numerous questions from the Authority members regarding his testimony and thc data presented. ' .".ir. Schicfelbein made a brief opening statement and called Mr. Mike Acosta, Water and Wastewa er Engineer for FCWC. Mr. Acosta confirmed that he had been sworn. Mr. Schicfelbcin questioned Mr. Acosta regarding Mr. Delfino's approach Jn Par One's calculalions and conclusions. Acosta then explained the methodologies used in his statistical analysis, discounting certain anomalies utilized by Delfino. Authofily members direcled questions to both Acosta and Delfino during this exchange of information. The panics were unable to agree on methodologies or resulting calculations. ,",Ir. Schicfclbein correclcd his letler in the agenda packet, Page 254, to read: "In a nutshell. POHA is asking thc Authority to assume that flows higher than thc historical maximum momhb. wa~er consumption over the seven-year period can not be attributed ~o ansqhing other Ihan "leaks" which did not reach the sewer system.'* Mr. Schiefelbein slated emphatically ha this is the summa~, of he ufility's case. .".ir. Brock made a statement in summary and rebuttal that restated walcr flow consumption for months in 1994 and 1996. Mr. Acosta addressed Mr. Brook's comments in disagreement. Chairman Bennett closed thc hearing and Authority began it's deliberations. After a lengthy discuss/on by all members, Mr. Schroll made a motion that the calculations be limited to the nine month period between July 1996 and April 1997, with ,c, omputalions of the difference for each mort h of"actual' ~.a er consumption and the maximum five year average" be considered as water that was leaked and did not return Io the sewer system. This difference would constitute the gallonage for which a sewer credit was wan'anted. The motion was seconded by Dr. Biles. Mr. Delfino stated that this remedy was acceptable to Par One. Mr. SchJefelbein stated that Florida Cities was concerned with the precedental issue; that Florida Cities would stand on its legal case; that he did not feel that Par One had proved its case; that Florida Cities does not feel that a furlher sewer credit is warranted. The Chairman called for a vote on the motion; vote was 3-I, with Chairman Bennett dissenting. 16Gl Mr. Palmer asked the Chairman for clarification regarding the action taken by the Authority. Palmer reiterated the steps to be taken. Mr. Wallace queried thc Chairman regarding directions ;o staff. Thc Chairman asked for advice from Mr. Palmer regarding subscquem actions by thc Authority. Mr. Palmer suggested that Authority direct Ire panics to perform the calculations and submit thc results to staff for review; that the Authority direct staff to prepare an Order citing thc findings of fact and conclusions of law, for adoption at the Authority's next meetingon September28. 1998. The Authority affirmed Palmer's suggestions. V, AuthoriD' Memben Discussion No discussion. Adjournment Mr. Schroll moved for adjournment and Dr. Spagna seconded thc motion; motion approved unanimously (4-0). ] No'/ember 5, 1998 Joyce Houran, Grants Coordinator Collier County Sheriff's Office Ellie Hoffman, Deputy Clerk Minutes & Records Department Cops More 98 Award Enclosed please find for your use, one original document as referenced above, Agenda Item 16H2, approved by the Board of County Com~missioners on November 3, 1998. If you should have any questions, please contact me at: (8406). Thank you. Enclosure U. S. Department of Justice O~Tce of Community On'eared Policing Services COPS MORE 98 AWARD 16H/ Felephone Collier County SherifFs Department 98CLWX0131 FL01100 59609056 I Sheriff Don Hunter 3301 Tarniami Trail East Building J, Government Complex Naples, FL 34l 12 (94 I) 793-9203 (94 I) 793-9333 Ckainnan John C. Norris 3301 Tamiarni Trail E~t. Bldg. F, Govt. Complex Naples. FL 34I [2 (941 ) 774-g39 I (941 ) 793-9333 Award End Date: g/31/1999 Number of Redeployed Officers: 40.20 Number of Redeployed Offlcer~: 0.0 Humber of Redeployed Officers: 40.2 S£P 2 5 Don Hunter, Sheriff 10/13/98 ~ai~n, ~unty ~i~~~'', --