The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 01/08/2002 R COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA January 8, 2002 9:00 a.m. NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 99-22 REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT. REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMI'I-FED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS". ANY PERSON 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. ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO FIVE (5) MINUTES UNLESS PERMISSION FOR ADDITIONAL TIME IS GRANTED BY THE CHAIRMAN. IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (941) 774-8380; ASSISTED LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE. LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M. 1 January 8, 2002 1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE A. Reverend Mary Anne Dorner, Church of the Resurrection 2. AGENDA AND MINUTES A. Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended. (Ex Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for summary agenda.) B. November 27, 2001 - Regular Meeting C. November 28, 2001 - Special Meeting D. November 30, 2001 - Special Meeting E. November 30, 2001 -Workshop F. December 3, 2001 - Workshop G. December 5, 2001 -Workshop H. December 7, 2001 - Special Meeting I. December 11, 2001 - Regular Meeting J. December 18, 2001 - Special Meeting K. December 19, 2001 - Special Meeting 3. PROCLAMATIONS A. B. C. Proclamation for Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr's. Birthday Celebration. accepted by Laverne Franklin, Rufus Watson and Irene Williams. SERVICE AWARDS Five-Year Attendees: Proclamation for Purple Martin Week. To be accepted by Carter Smith. Proclamation for Children's Day in Collier County. To be accepted by Joe Paterno. To be Patricia Rosen, Parks and Recreation Annette Velasco, Parks and Recreation Linda Hatke, Public Utilities Engineering 2 January 8, 2002 1) 2) 3) Ten-Year Attendees: 4) Bobby Allen, Parks and Recreation Fifteen-Year Attendees: 5) Steven Epright, Emergency Medical Services 5. PRESENTATIONS A. SELECTION OF CHAIRMAN AND VICE-CHAIRMAN PUBLIC PETITIONS AND COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS A. Public Comments on General Topics B. Request by the Conservancy of Collier County for the Board to consider a resolution supporting the Florida Forever Program funding. 7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. VA-2001-AR-1207, Doug Schroeder, representing Cocohatchee Nature Center requesting a 30-foot variance from the required 30-foot rear yard to 0 feet; and a 5-foot variance in the width of the Landscape Buffer adjacent to Tamiami Trail North from the required 15- feet to 10-feet for property located at 12345 Tamiami Trail North, further described as Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM THE DECEMBER 11~ 2001 BCC MEETING. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. VA-2001-AR-1166, Avl Baron, PLS, representing Montclair Fairway Estate Building Corporation, requesting an after-the-fact variance of 2.3 feet from the required 5 feet to 2.7 feet for property located on 797 Provincetown Drive, further described as Lot 29, Montclair Park North, in Section 5, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS A. Appointment of members to the Vanderbilt Beach Beautification Advisory Committee. 3 January 8, 2002 MSTU B. Discussion regarding approved PUD's with agricultural exemptions. (Commissioner Henning) C. Appointment of member to the Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board. D. Appointment of members to the Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee. 10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT A. Discussion regarding Green Space Committee. (Thomas W. Olliff, County Manager) Authorization to draft, advertise, and bring to the Board for Public Hearing an Ordinance to amend the Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance to provide a limited window for after-the-fact applications for the existing $7,500 Impact Fee Waivers applicable to specified entities that are exempt from payment of Federal Income Taxes, and subject to adoption of the proposed amending ordinance, to present to the Board two already received applications for these Impact Fee Waivers. (John Dunnuck, Interim Administrator, Community Development) C. Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Olde Cypress Tract 12". (John Dunnuck, Interim Administrator, Community Development) D. This item has been deleted. E. This item has been deleted. Approve an Interlocal Agreement for First Responder Training between Collier County and the Immokalee Fire Control District. (Tom Storrar, Administrator, Emergency Services) THIS ITEM TO BE HEARD AT 10:00 A.M. Presentation regarding the results of the special legislative session and upcoming 2002 regular legislative session. (Leo E. Ochs, Jr., Assistant County Manager) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners authorize staff to prepare a Scope of Services and issue a request for proposal for the development of the Naples Park Community Plan. (John Dunnuck, Interim Administrator, Community Development) 11. AIRPORT AUTHORITY 12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT 13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS 4 January 8, 2002 14. 15. FUTURE AGENDAS STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS Announcement of a scheduled public hearing of The Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Forestry (DOF) and the Okaloacoochee Slough State Forest Management Plan Advisory Group to be held Tuesday, January 29, 2002. 16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1) Recommendation that the Community Redevelopment Agency direct staff to submit a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Application for a drainage project on Linwood Avenue in the BayshoreJGateway Triangle Component Redevelopment Area to further promote redevelopment; find that project complies with the Collier County Growth Management Plan and the Collier County Redevelopment Plan; authorize CRA Chairman to sign application and letter certifying that the project will meet a national objective and that the CRA has the capacity and resources in place to undertake this project. 2) Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Willoughby Pines Replat" and approval of the standard form construction and maintenance agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. 3) Final acceptance of water and sewer utility facilities for Arbor Lakes at Naples Heritage. 4) Final acceptance of water utility facilities for Ibis Club Apartments. 5) Request to grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements for the final plat of "Timarron Unit Two". 6) 7) Request to grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements for the final plat of "Arielle (Phase Two)". Recommendation that the Community Redevelopment Agency direct staff to submit a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) application for a neighborhood revitalization street-lighting project in weed and seed target area of the Immokalee Component Redevelopment; find that project complies with the Collier County Growth Management Plan and the Collier 5 January 8, 2002 8) 9) 10) County Redevelopment Plan; authorize CRA Chairman to sign application and letter certifying that the project will meet a national objective and that the CRA has the capacity and resources in place to undertake the project. Adopt a Resolution approving and ratifying filing of appeal and designation of local official regarding flood insurance study maps proposed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency for Collier County, Florida. Approve Committee Selection of firm for contract negotiations for RFP 02- 3317 "Consultant Services for Impact Fee Update Studies". Carny-2001-AR-1852, Duane Wheeler, Carnival Chairman, Rotary Club of Immokalee, requesting a permit to conduct a carnival at the Immokalee Regional Airport January 17th through January 20th, 2002. B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES 1) 2) Approve Developer Contribution Agreement with DiVosta Building Corporation and IslandWalk Development Company for Road Impact Fee Credits subject to developer complying with all conditions of the agreement imposed by the County. Recommendation to approve Bid #01-3277 "Mowing of grassed or vegetated areas", and direct staff to award contract to Southern Services of LaBelle Incorporated at an estimated annual cost of $103,000. 3) 4) Approve Amendment No. I to Work Order No. ABB-FT-01-02 with Agnoli, Barber and Brundage, Inc., for the preparation of contract documents for intersection improvements at Radio Road and Davis Boulevard (S.R. 84), Project No. 65031, CIE #16 in the amount of $57,610. Approve a Budget Amendment recognizing carry forward for the Tropicana Boulevard project in the amount of $12,340 from FY 01 in the Golden Gate Municipal Services Taxing Unit (MSTU) Fund 136. 5) Approve the expenditure of funds for the purchase of right-of-way for the construction and maintenance of roadway, drainage and utility improvements for Phase Two of the Immokalee Road four-laning project from Rivers Road to just West of Wilson Boulevard, Project No. 60018 in the amount of $1,097,154. C. PUBLIC UTILITIES 1) Approve Budget Amendment to re-appropriate funds for the North County Water Reclamation Facility flow equalization tanks, Project 73077, in the re-appropriated amount of $2,500,000. 6 January 8, 2002 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) Award Bid #01-3301 for the purchase of a roll-off truck to RDK Truck in the amount of $81,246.00. Award RFP #01-3729 for corrosion inhibitor product and services at an estimated cost of $100,000. This item has been deleted. Approve Binding Agreement with Florida Department of Environmental Protection related to reclaimed water storage ponds at Eagle Lakes Park. Request Board of County Commissioners to waive purchasing policy and authorize work orders in excess of threshold and to waive annual threshold for Contract #00-3046, "Solid Waste Characterization and Program Analysis". Approve $165,000 Budget Amendment and award Bid 02-3322 for Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging. D. PUBLIC SERVICES 1) Approve the renewal and amendment of Contract #96-2489 "Tennis Facility and Operations" with Lewis Tennis Inc., for the Pelican Bay Tennis Facility. 2) Approve Budget Amendment recognizing $2,000 revenue from a donation for a memorial bench. 3) Approval of additions to agreements between Data Research Associates Inc. and Collier County Board of County Commissioners for Public Library Internet Services. E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 1) Approve Budget Amendments transferring funds within 301 projects for required air conditioning repair and replacement at the Sheriff's North Horseshoe Drive Operations Facility ($74,900) and to finish the new Golden Gate Sheriff's Substation ($219,000). 2) Approve shortlist of firms for Contract 01-3290 "Fixed Term Professional Engineering Services". 3) Approve shortlist of firms for Contract 01-3292 "Fixed Term Professional Structural Engineering Services". 7 January 8, 2002 F. EMERGENCY SERVICES 1) Award Bid No. 01-3262 for the purchase of personal protective equipment for the Emergency Medical Services Department to Municipal Equipment, Ten 8-Fire Equipment, Elite Fire and Safety Equipment and Bennett Fire Products in the amount of $37,335. 2) A request to obtain Community Specific Training in the Integrated Emergency Management Course at the National Emergency Training Center. COUNTY MANAGER 1) Approval of Budget Amendment Report - Budget Amendment #02-085; #02-090. H. AIRPORT AUTHORITY I. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS J. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE 1) Miscellaneousitemstobefiledforrecord withactionasdirected K. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS 1) That the Board of County Commissioners amend the spending plans associated with the Office of State Court Administration Grant-in-Aid Agreements for the Years 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002, authorize the Clerk to recognize grant proceeds into the General Fund, authorize the Clerk to return unjustified grant proceeds to OSCA, and authorize the sworn statement attesting to compliance with the Fiscal Year 1999 Grant-in-Aid Agreement. 2) Authorize the Board's Chairman to sign on the Board's behalf an agreement between the Sheriff's Office and the Quail Creek Owner's Office to enforce traffic laws over private roads within the Quail Creek Estates Subdivision in Collier County. 3) State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) 2002 Delegation Letter. 8 January 8, 2002 4) 5) Authorization to prepare an Ordinance for Teen Court Funding. Obtain approval for the payment and budget amendments related to Rebatable Arbitrage on the Special Obligation Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series 1997 and the Florida Local Government Finance Commission Pooled Commercial Paper Note A-10-1. L. COUNTY A'R'ORNEY 1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners enter into Settlement of Allstate Insurance Company v. Collier County, Case No. 01- 1824-SP, now pending in the County Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida, pursuant to which the County shall pay Allstate insurance Company $331.80. 2) Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to respondent, Jerjo Limited, Inc., for Parcel 142 in the amount of $14,500.00 in the Lawsuit styled Collier County v. Owen M. Ward, Trustee, et al, Case No. 99-1291- CA. Project No. 65031. 3) Approve the Stipulated Final Judgment relative to the condemnation of Parcel 175C and 575C in the Lawsuit entitled Collier County v. Richard H. Evans, et al, Case No. 01-1235-CA, Livingston Road Project No. 60071. 4) Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to respondents; Russell Baisley and Patricia M. Baisley for Parcel 160 in the amount of $29,960 in the Lawsuit styled Collier County v. Russell Baisley, et al, Case No. 01- 0758-CA, Project No. 60071. 5) Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to respondent, Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland, Trustee of the Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland Residuary Trust, for Parcels 172 and 772 in the amount of $18,000 in the Lawsuit styled Collier County v. Dominque C. Rihs, et al, Case No. 01- 0819-CA, Project No. 60071. 6) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve the pre-litigation settlement between Collier County, Florida (hereinafter referred to as "County") and its former Third Party Administrator, Cramer, Johnson, Wiggins & Associates (hereinafter referred to as "CJ&W") for its failure to give notice and obtain consent of the defendant, National Union Insurance Company, in the amount of Nine Thousand, Seven Hundred and Fifty Dollars ($9,750). Said Pre-Litigation Settlement Negotiations were previously referenced in the Case Styled Collier County v. National Union Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and AIG Claims Services Inc., Case No. 00-2305-CA, which was settled and approved by the Board of 9 January 8, 2002 7) County Commissioners on September 11, 2001. Said settlement was arrived at during pre-suit settlement negotiations. Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to respondent, Pine Ridge Associates Ltd., for Parcels 103B and 703B in the amount of $1,000.00 in the Lawsuit Styled Collier County v. Pine Ridge Associates, Ltd., et al, Case No. 00-0488-CA (Pine Ridge Road Project No. 60111). 8) Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to respondent, Pine Ridge Associates Il, Ltd., for Parcels 103A and 703A in the amount of $1,000.00 in the Lawsuit Styled Collier County v. Pine Ridge Associates, II, Ltd., et al, Case No. 00-0483-CA (Pine Ridge Road Project No. 60111). 9) Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to respondent, Elfrieda Houghton SutheHand, Trustee of the Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland Revocable Trust, for Parcels 170 and 770 in the amount of $20,700 in the Lawsuit Styled Collier County v. Fred R. Sutherland, et al, Case No. 01- 0756-CA, Project No. 60071. 10) Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to respondents, Elliot Cortes, Sr., and Gladys Cortes, for Parcels 246 and 246T in the amount of $3,150.00 in the Lawsuit Styled Collier County v. Jose Alvarado, et al, Case No. 00-1969-CA, Golden Gate Boulevard Project 63041. 11) Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to respondents, Jose Alvarado and Dolette Alvarado, for Parcels 244 and 244T in the amount of $2,700.00 in the Lawsuit styled Collier County v. Jose Alvarado, et al, Case No. 00-1969-CA, Golden Gate Boulevard Project 63041. 17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRI'I-I'EN OR ORAL OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. SHOULD ANY OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS BE MOVED TO THE REGULAR AGENDA ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN. Petition AVPLAT-2001-AR1557 to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County's and the Public's interest in a 3 foot wide portion of the 13 foot wide lake maintenance easement located along the rear of Lot 190, according to the plat of "Glen Eden Phase Two" as recorded in Plat Book 34, Pages 18 through 21, 10 January 8, 2002 Public Records of Collier County, Florida. Located in Section 9, Township 48 South, Range 25 East. Petition AVPLAT2001-AR-1457 to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County's and the Public's interest in a portion of the 10' wide utility easement located along the rear property line of Lot 21, Block 17, according to the plat of "Lely Golf Estates St. Andrews West" as recorded in Plat Book 10, Page 93, Public Records of Collier County, Florida. Located in Section 20, Township 50 South, Range 26 East. This easement vacation petition is a Companion Item to the petition for Variance VA2001-AR1380. VA-2001-AR-1380, Christopher J. Thornton, Esquire, of Treiser, Lieberfarb, Collins and Vernon, Chtd., representing Raymond F. Erickson, requesting an after-the-fact variance of 1.3 feet from the required 10 feet to 8.7 feet for property located at 231 Pebble Beach Circle, in Section 20, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. This is a Companion Item to Petition AVPLAT2001-AR-1457. An Ordinance adopting the Florida Building Code and amending Chapter One, Administration, thereof; establishing the exact location of wind speed lines in unincorporated Collier County by the adoption of maps relating thereto; repealing certain County ordinances and adopted codes in their entirety; providing for incorporation in Code (s); providing for conflict and severability; providing for penalties, and providing an effective date. Petition PUDA-01-AR-1573, George L. Varnadoe of Young, VanAssenderp, Varnadoe and Anderson, P.A., representing Antaramian Capital Partners, LLC, requesting a rezone from "PUD" to "PUD" Planned Unit Development to be known as Sandpiper Village PUD for the purpose of decreasing the number of residential dwelling from 180 units to 170 units, increasing the commercial floor area from 45,000 square feet to 52,500 square feet and revising the master plan to increase compliance with the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay for property located on the Southwest Corner of Tamiami Trail East (US 41) and in Section 11, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. THIS ITEM HAS BEEN CONTINUED INDEFINITELY. PUD-A-2001-AR-1404, Dwight Nadeau, of RWA, Inc., representing Conquest Development U.S.A., L.C., requesting an amendment to the Silver Lakes PUD for the purpose of reducing the Park~l'ravel Trailer area from 26 to 24 acres, the buffer area from 5 to 3 acres, the commons/recreation area from 97 to 78 acres and increasing the conservation area from 3 to 26 acres, for property located at 1001 Silver Lakes Boulevard, in Section 10, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. 18. ADJOURN INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383. 11 January 8, 2002 AGENDA CHANGES BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING January 8, 2002 CONTINUE ITEM 7B TO FEBRUARY 12, 2002 BCC MEETING: (This item was continued from the December 11, 2001 BCC meeting.) VA-2001-AR- 1166, Avi Baron, PLS, representing Montclair Fairway Estate Building Corporation, requesting an after-the-fact variance of 2.3 feet from the required 5 feet to 2.7 feet for property located on 797 Provincetown Drive, further described as Lot 29, Montclair Park North, in Section 5, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (Petitioner request.) CONTINUE ITEM 10(C) TO JANUARY 22T 2002 BCC MEETING' approve for recording the final plat of "Olde Cypress Tract 12". request.) Request to (Petitioner MOVE ITEM 16(C)1 TO 101: approve budget amendment to re-appropriate funds for the North County Water Reclamation Facility flow equalization tanks, Project 73077, in the re-appropriated amount of $2,500,000. (Commissioner Fiala.) MOVE ITEM 16(C)6 TO 10J: Request Board of County Commissioners to waive purchasing policy and authorize work orders in excess of threshold and to waive annual threshold for Contract #00-3046, "Solid Waste Characterization and Program Analysis". (Commissioner Fiala and Commissioner Coletta.) MOVE ITEM 16(C)7 TO 10K: Approve $165,999 Budget Amendment and award Bid 02-3322 for Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging. (Staff request.) DELETE ITEM 16(E)2: (Received bid protest.) Approve shortlist of firms for Contract 02-3290 "Fixed Term Professional Engineering Services". (Staff request.) in o very shmq ~'me. thousands of mm very be=uffful feothered fn'ends, the Purgle /~arffna, will reNrn from their wintor t~me in ~razil; and, to nest and reor their yauag; and, MAR77;N CAPITAL Otr FLORZDA; and, creatores by plat/raj said hause~ on their property; WHEREAS, durin~ ZO0~, the Purple A~a~t/n public to how the in~ect and NOW of for these to pro~tct and DOtVE AND ORDERED BOARD OF COUNTY WHERE~$, WHERE~$, WHERE~$, IIFHERE~$, WHERE~$, WHERE~$, PRO~LA44A T-TON Call~er 5ethel Raadir~s Coelih'o~, in co~lu~c#~t with tS F~'~ ~1 l~e Fl~'ida Sfofo l.~i~lat~'~ ie celet~olfn~ ~"l~il~'~ I~u$1t~s~ ar~l cammu~itJ~ b~Mfit when children am p~o~dad hJ~ ~lity ear~/ c~ild~o~d pPo~; and, families must be assu~d of hi~ ~uality early childhoo8 programs so t~eir c~ildr~# will ~ r~aEy fo ~gta school ar~ fo succeed i~ by callir~ affentio~ to tho Me# fo~ ~lify early ~d~oti~ aM core ~ ~fo, will ~m~fo t~tir ~lJ~ ~ ' education altd DONE AND ORDERED T'HZ$ 8~ t. AGENDA ~TEM Pg' I PROCLAtAA TXON birthday of T~e Rewm~d De. 4~or~in Luther Klm2, Jr. as a I~tionol Holiday; and, the Pe~sid~nt of t~e United Stat~s $i~d 1~2[$1ation autho~izim2 T~e Rev~nd Dr. Ki~'s birthday, Jamm~ 7§ as a National Holiday; and, i~t~atio~ol r~¢o~itio~ and his leadership nonviolence; Advancement of will hold commemorfltive celebrations by sponsorin9 NOW month of D~NE AND DW2*~HT E'. BROCK, CLERK AGENDAITEM No. ~ JAN - 8 2002 pg. ~ RESOLUTION Resolution of thc Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida opposing the continued reallocation and reduction of funds from the Florida Forever Program and calling for the timely replacement of funds taken in the 2001 Regular Legislative Session .... WHEREAS: The Florida Forever Program was ~stablished to acquire and preserve environmentally important and sensitive lands in the State of Florida with the protection of over 1.25 million acres; and WHEREAS: Preserving Florida's valuable ecosystems for present and future generations is imperative with the rapid development of natural areas; and WH1R~EAS: Publicly owned land not only provides refuge for many endangered and threatened species, it ensures a clean and abundant water supply, unpolluted air and recreational enjoyment for the citizens of Florida; and WHEREAS: The Florida Forever Program is especially meaningful for Collier County due to the existence of four "A" list Florida Forever land acquisition projects within its boundaries; and WHEREAS: The reduction, diversion, or reallocation of funds from the Florida Forever Program could result in cutbacks to the four land acquisition projects in Collier County; and WHI~REAS: During the Regular 2001 Legislative Session, the Florida Legislature diverted 75 million dollars from the Florida Forever Program to Everglades Restoration, a program independent of Florida Forever;, and WHEREAS: Given the current economic crisis, it is likely that once more, funds may be siphoned out of the Florida Forever Program in the future for other purposes; and WHEREAS: The continued diversion of funds from the Florida Forever Program compromises the validity and original purpose of the Florida Forever Program; and WHEREAS: It is vital to the future of the State of Florida to continue to acquire and protect natural resources and equally important for Legislators to fulfill voter intention in the oven~helming passage of thc Florida Forever Act of ~i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY VA-2001-AR-1207, DOUG SCHROEDER, REPRESENTING COCOHATCHEE NATURE CENTER, REQUESTING A 30-FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 30-FOOT REAR YARD TO 0 FEET AND A 5-FOOT VARIANCE IN THE WIDTH OF THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER ADJACENT TO TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH FROM THE REQUIRED 15 FEET TO 10 FEET FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12345 TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH, FURTHER DESCRIBED AS SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. OBJECTIVE: That the commumty's interest is maintained in the reduction of a setback and a landscape buffer. CONSIDERATIONS: The petitioner requests a 30-foot variance from the required 30-foot rear yard setback to O-feet and a 5-foot variance in the width of the Landscape Buffer adjacent to Tamiami Trial North from the required 15-feet to 10-feet. The site is on an island in the Cocohatchee River with access only from Tamiami Trail North (US 41). A portion of the island is mangrove wetlands with a Special Treatment (ST) Overlay. A portion of the island consists of uplands resulting from a "spoil pile" from past dredging in the area. The site is constrained by three factors: the fact that it is an island; the existing mangrove wetlands on site; and the approximately 6ofoot difference in the elevation of the access road (Tamiami Trail North) above the existing grade of the island. (The grade separation constrains the site because, with the wetlands to the west, the developable area is not very deep. Therefore the petitioner must apply to destroy additional wetlands for fill to raise the site, or raise the site on a platform. Constructing the building and parking on a platform would prevent additional deslxuction of mangroves.) The subject property is zoned Agricultural with a Conditional Use for an ecotourism educational facility (ecological boat tours). An ST Permit was approved as a companion to the Conditional Use in 2000. When actual site design work began, the petitioner determined that the desired facility could not be constructed without certain variances to the dimensional and landscape standards of the Land Development Code within the area permitted by the ST permit. , .JAN 0 8 2002 Section 2.6.4.4 of the Land Development Code p~mfits waterfront yards, particularly along "tidewater inlands", to reduce the required setback to zero. This provision applies to the side yards, which are clearly waterfront. The rear yard is technically waterfront because it is adjacent to the river. However, there are mangroves growing in that portion of the river creating a "forested waterfront". Because of this unusual condition, County Staff took a conservative approach and recommended that the petitioner apply for a variance to reduce the setback. The petitioner also requests a reduction in the required landscape buffer along Tamiami Trail. A 10-foot buffer would allow the project, as designed, to fit into the area permitted by the ST permit. In addition to the 10-foot buffer, the petitioner has obtained permission from the Florida Department of Transportation to utilize 4 feet of the Tamiami Trail fight-of-way for landscaping. Additional landscaping will be provided at the shoreline on the north and south banks, to buffer the structure from boaters. In 2000, the petitioner made a presentation to the Board concerning a joint operation with Collier County's Barefoot Beach Preserve and Cocohatchee Nature Center. No agreement was reached and there are no current plans for a joint operation. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this petition will have no fiscal impact on Collier County. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Approval of this variance will not affect or change the requirements of the Growth Management Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: A Special Treatment (ST) development permit was approved for the parcel in 2000. During the processing of the petition, the Environmental Advisory Council recommended approval by a unanimous vote. 2 JAN § 8 2g~ HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is not located within an Area of Historical and Archaeological Probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no survey or Waiver of Historic and Archaeological Survey & Assessment is required. EAC RECOMMENDATION: The Environmental Advisory Council did not review this petition because the EAC does not normally hear variance petitions. CCPC RECOMMENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission heard this petition at its December 6, 2001 meeting. The CCPC voted 7 to 1 to forward petition VA-2001-AR-1207 to the BZA with a recommendation of approval. Commissioner Abemathy voted in opposition, reasoning that the project is too big for the site. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: There is a land related hardship associated with this variance. An ecotourism use has been approved and the site is constrained by physical and manmade factors, not created by the petitioner. Therefore, Planning Services staff recommended that the CCPC forward Petition VA- 2001-AR-1207 to the BZA with a recommendation of approval, subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to approval of the Site Development Plan, the landscape plan shall indicate a hedge, five feet in height, along the southern boundary of the parcel at ground level. 2. Prior to approval of the Site Development Plan, the landscape plan shall indicate plantings {leather fern or another plant that will tolerate existing conditions) at ground level along the north property line. 3. Prior to approval of the Site Development Plan, the landscape plan shall indicate raised planters with overhanging plants sufficient to cover such planters located at the ends of each row of parking. 4. Prior to approval of the Site Development Plan, the landscape plan shall indicate building perimeter plantings a minimum of 5 feet in width. ~ 3 JAN 0 8 2002 pREPARED BY: PRINCIPAL PLANNER DATE REVIEWED BY: CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR DATE DATE APPROVED BY: Jo~"'~ ~. DU~SdCm m I~PdZM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AD~IlqlSTRATOR execudve sun-gmxryN A-2001 -AR- 1207 DATE & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 4 JAN 0 B 2002 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM COLLIER COUNTY PLANNENG COMMISSION PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES NOVEMBER 19, 2001 PETITION VA-2001-AR- 1207 AGENT/APPLICANT: OWNER: Cocohatchee Nature Center 823 Tanbark Drive, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34108 AGENT: Doug Schroeder 823 Tanbark Drive, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34108 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests a 30-foot variance fi.om the required 30-foot rear yard setback to O-feet and a 5-foot variance in the width of the Landscape Buffer adjacent to Tamiami Thai North fi.om the required 15-feet to 10-feet. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located at 12345 Tamiami Trail North across fi.om the Pewter Mug restaurant. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The subject property is zoned Agricultural with a Conditional Use for an ecotourism educational facility (ecological boat tours). When actual site design work began, the petit] JAN O 8 2002 that the desired facility could not be constructed without certain variances to the dimensional and landscape standards of the Land Development Code. Section 2.6.4.4 of the Land Development Code permits waterfront yards, particularly along "tidewater inlands", to reduce the required setback to zero. This provision applies to the side yards (waterfront) only. The rear yard is adjacent to a mangrove wetland and is therefore subject to the setback requirements of the Code. The site is on an island in the Cocohatchee River with access only from Tamiami Trail North (US 41). A portion of the island is mangrove wetlands with a Special Treatment (ST) Overlay. An ST Permit was approved as a companion to the Conditional Use in 2000. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Subject: Undeveloped land; zoned A and A/ST Surrounding: North - East - South - West - Cocohatchee River and undeveloped land; zoned A and A/ST Tamiami Trail North ROW, across which is the Pewter Mug restaurant; zoned C-4 Cocohatchee River, across which is the Cocohatchee River Trust PUD, which includes The Bayhouse restaurant; zoned PUD Cocohatchee River and undeveloped land; zoned MST HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is not located within an area of historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, a Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment or waiver is not required. EVALUATION FOR IMPACTS TO TRANSPORTATION~ INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENT: Approval of this variance request will have no effect on infi:astructure, transportation or the environment. ANALYSIS: Section 2.7.5 of the Land Development Code grants the authority to the Board of Zoning Appeals to grant variances. The Planning Commission is advisory to the BZA and utilizes the provisions of Section 2.7.5.6.1 through 2.7.5.6.8, which are general guidelines to be used to assist the Commission in making a determination. Responses to the items in Sectiol ~ follows: co f. Are there special conditions and circumstances existing, which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land, structure or building involved? Yes. The site is constrained by three factors: the fact that it is an island; the existing mangrove wetlands on site; and the approximately 6-foot difference in the elevation of the access road (Tamiami Trail North) above the existing grade of the island. (The grade separation constrains the site because, with the wetlands to the west, the developable area is not very deep. Therefore the petitioner must apply to destroy additional wetlands for fill to raise the site, or raise the site on a platform. Constructing the building and parking on a platform would prevent additional destruction of mangroves.) Are there special conditions and circumstances, which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property, which is the subject of the variance request? Yes. As stated previously, the site is constrained by three factors: the fact that it is an island; the existing mangrove wetlands on site; and the approximately 6-foot difference in the elevation of the access road (Tamiami Trail North) above the existing grade of the island Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this Land Development Code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant? Yes. The Board of Zoning Appeals approved a Conditional Use for ecotourism on the site in 2000. The site is constrained by pre-existing physical factors, which limit that use. Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety and welfare? Yes. The dimensional variance and landscape variance will make possible a small office and the required parking on the site without applying to destroy additional mangrove wetlands. Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by thes~ zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district? Yes, the granting of this variance will allow the petitioner to have a smaller rear yard and different required landscaping fi.om the minimum required in the A zoning district. Will granting the variance be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this Land Development Code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare? AOrO~A rr~ JAN 0 8 2002 3 Pg. ~ No, this variance will allow the structure to be closer to the rear lot line than other structures in the A zoning district. However, the structure is adjacent to mangrove wetlands. In addition, the landscaping will be less than the amount typically required. The conditions in the Resolution require alternative plantings, which minimize any detriment to the public. Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf courses, etc.? Yes. The rear yard abuts a wetland. In addition, the conditions in the resolution require alternative plantings, which will help to screen boat traffic from a view of the underside of the structure. h. Will granting the variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan? Approval of this variance will not affect or change the requirements of the Growth Management Plan. EAC RECOMMENDATION: The Environmental Advisory Council does not normally hear variance petitions. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: There is a land related hardship associated with this variance. An ecotourism use has been approved and the site is constrained by physical and manmade factors, not created by the petitioner. Therefore, Planning Services staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition VA- 2001-AR-1207 to the BZA with a recommendation of approval, subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to approval of the Site Development Plan, the landscape plan shall indicate a hedge, five feet in height, along the southern boundary of the parcel at ground level. 2. Prior to approval of the Site Development Plan, the landscape plan shall indicate plantings (leather fern or another plant that will tolerate existing conditions) at ground level along the north property line. 3. Prior to approval of the Site Development Plan, the landscape plan shall indicate raised planters with an overhanging plant that will overhang the deck edge at the ends of the rows of parking. 4. Prior to approval of the Site Development Plan, the landscape plan shall indicate building perimeter plantings a minimum of 5 feet in width. nar. noA fro6 JAN 0 8 2002 Pg. ~ PREPARED BY: pFP~ALIS CHL, AICP PLANNER //./ I)^TE~ REVIEWED BY: CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER TISOMAS E. KUCK, PE INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR APPROVED BY: J(~HN M. DUNNUCK 1TI DATE I~ERIM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR Petition Number: VA-2001 -AR-1207 Collie[ County Planning ~mmission: JOYCEA~INA J. RAUTIO~ CHAIRMAN JAN 0 $ 2002 VARIANCE PETITION (VARIANCE FROM SETBACK (S) REQUIRED FOR A PARTICULAR ZONING DISTRICT) Petition No. Commission District: Date Petition Received: VA-2001-AR-1207 COCOHATCHEE NATURE CENTER Planner Assigned: _ PROJECT #2001050060 DATE: 7/24/01 FRED REISCHL ABOVE TO BE COMPLETED BY STAFF GENERAL INFORMATION: Petitioner's Name: Cocohatchee Nature Center Petitioner's Address: 823 Tanbark Drive, Suite 201 Naples, Florida 34108 Telephone: 592-1282 Agent's Name: Doug Schroeder Agent's Address: 823 Tanbark Drive, Suite 201 Naples, Florida Telephone: 592-1282 COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN SERVICES/CURRENT PLANNING 2800 N. HORSESHOE DRIVE - NAPLES, FL ~4104 PHONE (941) 403-2400/FAX (941) 643-6968 AppLication for Variance Petition - 8/98 JAN 0 8 20~ Page 1 of 8 Complete the following for all Association(s) affiliated with this petition. (Provide additional sheets if necessary) Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address N/A City State __ Zip Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address City State __ Zip Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address City State __ Zip Name of Master Association: N/A Mailing Address City. State Zip Name of Civic Association: Mailing Address N/A City State Zip PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal Description of Subject Property: Subdivision: Section 21 Twp. 48 Unit Range 25 Lot (s) Block (s) Property I.D. # 00157240001 00157280003 Metes & Bounds Description: Address of Subject Property: 12345 Tamiami AppLication for Variance Petition - 8/98 Trail North, at. ND A iTEM 7t¢ Naples, FL Page 2 of 8 (If ctifferent fi.om Petitioner's address) Current Zoning and Land use of Subject Parcel: use - educational, Agricultural (conditional cultural and recreational). Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: ZONING N S W E LAND USE No adjacent properties Minimum Yard Requirements for Subject Property: Front: Side: 15' 15' Comer Lot: Yes [] No [] Waterfront Lot: Yes [] No [] Re~: 30' Nature of Petition ACk. DA ITEM 7 i JAN § 8 20~2 Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 Page 3 of 8 Provide a detailed explanation of the request including what structures are existing find what is proposed; the amount of encroachment proposed using numbers, i.e. reduce front setback from 25' to 18'; when property owner purchased property; when existing principal structure was built (include building permit number (s) if possible); why encroachment is necessary; how existing encroachment came to be; etc. Applicant is proposing to create a parking area, deck and mobile-office space on the property. A portion of the proposed structure encroaches into the rear setback and, at the point of encroachment, the rear setback is reduced from 30' to 0'. The structure, and a future stairway, reduce the left-side setback from 15' to 0'. The structure reduces the right-side setback from 15' to 0'. Certain dimentional and locational landscape requirements cannot be satisfied due to wetlands on the property. The property was purchased in February 2001. Encroachment is because of the adjacent Cocohatchee River and wetlands. Due to restrictive conditions unique to the property, and occasioned by the adjacent river and wetlands, it is not possible to achieve a reasonable use of the property without a variance. AGENDA ITEM ~ JAN 0 2002 Application for Variance Petition - 8/95 Page 4 of 8 Please note that staff and the Collier County p!onning Commission shall be guided in their recommendation to the Board of zoning Appeals, and that the Board of zoning appeals shall be guided in its determination 1o approve or deny a variance petition by. the below listed criteria (1-8). (Please address this ,criteria using additional pages ff necessary.) Are there special conditions and c~x~,m~nces exist~g which are peodiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land, sUwzture, or building involved. Yes. The land, being adjacent to the Cocohatchee River and a natural preserve (wetland), is restricted by size and lot depth. These conditions are peculiar to the land. 2. Are there sPeCtal conditions and circumshmces which do not result from the aCUon of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property which is the subject of the variance request. Yes. The special conditions and circumstances did not result from the action of the applicant. The conditions relative to the property were pre-existing. Will a literal interpretaUon of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties on the applicant. Yes. A reasonable use of the property cannot be achieved under a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code and, such interpretation would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant and create practical difficulties. W~lthe~fiance, ffgramed.~ the ~mumvahancethat~llmake~ss~lethereasonable~eof the~n~buildingorstructureandwhichpromotestandar~ofheal&safeW°rwe~re' Yes. The variance is the minimum that will make possible the reasonable use of the land. The variance is with standards of health, safety and welfare. JAN 0 8 2002 Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 Page $ of 8 Will granting the variance l~luested confer on the pelitioner any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district. No. The variance requested will not confer any special privilege that is denied by the zoning regulations to other lands. W~ granting ~¢ variance ~ m ~rmony ~ ~e in~nt ~d purpo~ of th~s zomng code, ~d not ~ ~urio~ to ~e nci~rhood, or otherwi~ detrimen~l to ~e ~b~c weffare. Yes. The variance ..... ~ be in harmony with the intent and purpose of the zoning code and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or detrimental to the public welfare. Are~e~ ~tucal~n~o~orphysi~l~ m~ce~n~o~thatame~te~eg~lsa~ ~j~vesof~e~gul~onsuchas~turalp~es, l~es,~ff~urse, etc. Yes. The existence of a natural preserve (wetland), adjacent to the land, ameliorates the goals and objectives of the regulation. 8. Will ~r~a~ing the ~na~ce b~ ~J~nt ~4th the ~rowth management plan. Yes. The variance is consistent with the growth management plan. Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 JAN 0 8 2002 Page 6 of 8 VARIANCE PETITION APPLICATION SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST THIS COMPLETED CHECKI,1ST IS TO BE SUBMI'I'I'LD WITH APPLICATION PACKET! REQUIREMENTS # ov COPIES REQUIRED 1. Completed Application 15 2. Completed Owner/Agent Affidavit, Notarized 1 3. Pre-application notes/minutes 15 4. Survey of property, showing the encroachment 1 (measured in feet) 5. Site Plan depicting the following: 15 a) All property boundaries & dimensions b) All existing and proposed structures (labeled as such) c) North arrow, date and scale of drawing d) Required setbacks & proposed setbacks 6. Location map depicting major streets in area for 1 reference 7. Application fee and Data Conversion Fee, checks shall be made payable to Collier County Board of Commissioners 8. Other Requirements - As the authorized agent/applicant for this petilion, I attest that all of the information indimted on this checklist is included in this submittal package. 1 understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result i,'t~¢ delay of processing of this petition. Applicant/A~ent Signature ~D~ate/~ / JAN 0 8 2002 Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 Page 7 of 8 AFFIDAVIT We~l, Cocohatchee Nature Center being first duly sworn, depose and say that we/l am/are the owners of the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing; that all the answers to the questions in this application, including the disclosure of interest information, all sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application, are honest and true to the best of our knowledge and belief We/l understand that the information requested on this application must be complete and accurate and that the content of this form, whether computer generated or County printed shall not be altered. Public hearings will not be advertised until this application is deemed complete, and all required information has been submitte:i. As property owner We/l further authorize Doug Schroeder to act as our/my representative in any matters regarding this Petition. ~~~'~'~ of PrapertyOwner Signature of Property Owner Signature Doug Schroeder, President TypedorPrintedNarneofOwner of Cocohatchee Nature Center Typed or Printed Name of Owner or oi instrument was acknowledged before me this ~ . day of ..J ,~ ~°z~r,~b~ ~ ..~'--~ fc.~-~ who is perso~lly ~n ,o me or ~ priced ~. ~ ~ ~i~,,fication. State ofF'o"~ I I I ~bbfNo~Public'State oj Coun~ of Collier ~ ~ Flo~) n~ N~e of Not~ Pu, tic)jAN 0 Application for Variance Petition - 8~98 Division of Corporations Page I of 2 Florida Department of State, Division of Corvorations Florida Non Profit COCOItATCHEE NATURE CENTER, INC. PRINCIPAL ADDRESS 823 TANBARK DRIVE SUITE 201 NAPLES FL 34108 MAILING ADDRESS 823 TANBARK DRIVE SUITE 201 NAPLES FL 34108 Document Number N99000006736 FEI Number 650951416 Date Filed 11/12/1999 State Status Effective Date FL ACTIVE NONE Rel~istered Al~ent Name & Address SCHROEDER, BARBARA J 823 TANBARK DRIVE SUITE 201 NAPLES FL 34108 Officer/Director Detail Name & Address Title scm~OEOE~ B~R~ J 823 TANBARK DRIVE, STE. 201 T NAPLES FL 34108 SCHROEDER, DOUGLAS P 823 TANBARK DRIVE, STE. 201 T NAPLES FL 3410g ARRINGTON, ARDEN 1520 LEE STREET T FORT MYERS FL 33901 .../cordet.exe?al =DETFIL&n 1 =N99000006736&n2=NAMFWD&n3=0000&n4=N1 AC-iF. NDA IT~ ~7fv JAN 0 8 2002 rl =~2-d~/?/2G01 Division of Corporations Page 2 of 2 Report Year 2o00 II ~4~ 20o~ II o~tz~oo~ Annual Re orts II Filed DateIll[il Intangible Tax Il Previous Filing I Retum to List I Next Filing No Events No Name History Information View Document Image(s) TItIS IS NOT OFFICIAL RECORD; SEE DOCUMENTS IF QUESTION OR CONFLICT JAN 0 8 2002 ps. 20 I .../cordet.exe?al=DETFiL&nl=N99000006736&n2=NAMFWD&n3=OOOO&n4=N&rl=&r2= 12/6/2001 RESOLUTION NO.02- __ RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER VA-2001-AR-1207 FOR A VARIANCE ON PROPERTY HEREINAFTER DESCRI3BED IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on all counties in Florida the power to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning and such business regulations as are necessary for the protection of the public; and WHEREAS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development Code (Ordinance No. 91-102) which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County, among which is the granting of variances; and WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Appeals, being the duly elected constituted Board of the area hereby affected, has held a public hearing after notice as in said regulatzons made and provided, and has considered the advisability of a 30-foot variance ftom the required 30-foot rear yard setback to O-feet and a 5-foot landscape variance from the required 15 feet to l0 feet for a landscape buffer adjacent to Tamiami Trial North as shown on the attached plot plan, Exhibit "A", in an "A" Zone for the property hereinafter described, and has found as a matter of fact that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Section 2.7.5 of the Zoning Regulations of said Land Development Code for the unincorporated area of Collier County; and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given opportunity to be heard by this Board in public meeting assembled, and the Board having considered all matters presented; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida, that: The Petition VA-2001-AR-1207 filed by Doug Schroeder, representing Cocohatchee Nature Center Inc., with respect to the property hereinafter described as: Exhibit "B" be and the same hereby is approved for a 30-foot variance fi.om the required 30-foot rear yard setback to O-feet and a 5-foot landscape variance from the required 15 feet to 10 feet for the landscape buffer adjacent to Tamiami Trial North as shown on the attached plot plan, Exhibit "A", of the Rural Agricultural Zoning District wherein said property is located, subject to the following conditions: ~,ENDA JAhl 0 8 2002 1. Prior to approval of the Site Development Plan, the landscape plan shall indicate a hedge, five leet in height, along the southern boundary of the parcel at ground level. 2 Prior to approval of the Site Development Plan, the landscape plan shall indicate plantings (leather fern or another plant that will tolerate existing conditions) at ground level along the north property line. 3. Prior to approval of the Site Development Plan, the landscape plan shall indicate raised planters with overhanging plants sufficent to cover such planters located at the ends of each row of parking. 4 Prior to approval of the Site Development Plan, the landscape plan shall indicate building perimeter plantings a minimum of 5 feet in width. BE IT RESOLVED that this Resolution relating to Petition Number VA-2001-AR-1207 be recorded in the minutes of this Board. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote. Done this day of ,2002. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: Approved as to Fox'Tn and Legal Sufficiency: Matjori$'M. Student Assistant County Attorney JAN 0 8 2002 EXHIBIT "A" COCOHATCHEE NATURE CENTER LEGAL DESCRIPTION A parcel of land in the N 1/2 of Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. lying within the Bulkhead Line No. 4, as recorded in Bulkhead Plat Book 1, page 16, Public Records of Collier County, Florida, and the Westerly Right of Way line of U.S. Rt. 41{S.R. 45), more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the poim ofbeginmng of Bulkhead Line No. 4, as recorded in Bulkhead Line Plat Book 1, Page 16, Public Records of Collier County, Florida; run S 73°49'13" W, for 281.74 feel. to a point of curvature; thence run 257.08 feet along thc arc of thc curve, concave to thc Northeast, having a radius of 100.00 feet, and subtended by a chord having a length of 191.91 feet and bearing N 32°31'58'' W, to a point of compound curvature; thence run 420.68 feet along the arc of a curve, concave to the Southeast, having a radius of $00.00 feet, and subtended by a chord having a length of 408.38 feet and bearing N 65°13'02"£, to the point of ending of said Bulkhead Line No. 4, said point lying on the Westerly Right of Way line of U.S. Rt. 41 (S.R. 45); then run S 0°40'47" E, along said Right of Way Line, for 254.49 feet, to the Point of Beginning. JAN 0 8 2002 TRACT ..... .'"~;~EaVE AREA TRACT BAY J JAN 0 8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY VA-2001-AR-1166, AVl BARON, REPRESENTING MONTCLAIR FAIRWAY ESTATE BUILDING CORPORATION, REQUESTING AN AFl'ER-THE-FACT VARIANCE OF 2.3 FEET FROM THE REQUIRED 5 FEET TO 2.7 FEET FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON 797 PROVINCETOWN DRIVE, FURTHER DESCRIBED AS LOT 29, MONTCLAIR PARK NORTH, IN SECTION 5, TOVCNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. OBJECTIVE: That the community's interest is maintained in a single-family neighborhood. CONSIDERATIONS: There is no land-related hardship with respect to this petition. The petitioner requests a 2.3-foot after-the-fact variance from the required 5-foot side-yard setback to 2.7 feet, for a single-family house. The petitioner wishes to remedy an encroachment caused by an incorrect survey on a single-family house used as a model. The Building Review & Permitting Department issued a building permit for the house on February 17, 2000 with correct setbacks noted on the site plan. The spot survey was submitted and approved showing the correct setbacks. The house received a Certificate of Occupancy on September 22, 2000. The property was resurveyed and the error on the first survey was discovered. This encroachment is the subject of this variance. An alternative remedy to the encroachment, a lot line adjustment with the neighbor to the east, appears to be possible. A lot line adjustment is an administrative process, which would cause the relocation of the side yard to a point at which the structure complies with the setback requirement. The Planning Commission encouraged the petitioner to talk to the neighbor to the east about a lot line adjustment. A letter of objection from the neighbor to the east (the neighbor most affected) was received. In addition, he spoke at the Planning Commission meeting. JAN 0 8 2002 FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this petition will have no fiscal impact on Collier County. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Approval of this variance will not affect or change the requirements of the Growth Management Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: There are no unusual environmental issues associated with this petition. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is not located within an Area of Historical and Archaeological Probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no survey or Waiver of Historic and Archaeological Survey & Assessment is required. EAC RECOMMENDATION: The Environmental Advisory Council did not review this petition because the EAC does not normally hear variance petitions. CCPC RECOMMENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission heard this petition at its November 15, 2001 meeting. They heard testimony from the property owner and the affected neighbor. The discussion among the Commissioners concerned the best way to encourage the petitioner and neighbor to reach an agreement on a lot line adjustment. The alternatives were a continuance with the petition being reheard by the CCPC, or a recommendation of denial. The CCPC voted 9 to 0 to forward petition V-2001-AR-1166 to the BZA with a recommendation of denial. JAN 0 B ~ PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: There is no land related hardship associated with this after-the-fact variance. There are no ameliorating factors existing for the encroachment (and with the house 2.7 feet from the property line, it does not appear that an effective landscape buffer could be planted). Therefore, Planmng Services staffrecommended that the CCPC forward Petition VA-2001-AR-1166 to the BZA with a recommendation of denial. PREPARED BY: PRINUIPAL PLANNER /2..Z/.Ol DATE REVIEWED BY: /$CUSAN MURRAY, AICP CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER DATE INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR DATE /7.-'2- / -~/ JOHN M. DUNNUCK, nI DATE INTERIM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR executive summary/VA-2001-AR-1166 3 JAN 0 8 2O02 Pi. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES OCTOBER 17, 2001 PETITION VA-2001 -AR- 1166 AGENT/APPLICANT: OWNER: AGENT: Montclair Fairway Estate Building Corp. 1400 Gulf Shore Boulevard, Suite 223 Naples, FL 34102 Carol E. Nelson, PLS 3871 White Boulevard Naples, FL 34117 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests a 2.3-foot after-the-fact variance from the required 5-foot side-yard setback to 2.7 feet, for a single-family house. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located at 797 Provincetown Drive within the Glen Ea PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The petitioner wishes to remedy an encroachment caused by an incorrect survey on a single- family house. The Building Review & Permitting Department issued a building permit for the house on February 17, 2000 with setbacks noted on the site plan. The spot survey was submitted and approved showing the correct setbacks. The house received a Certificate of Occupancy on September 22, 2000. The property was resurveyed and the error on the first survey was discovered. This encroachment is the subject of this variance. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Subject: Single-family house; zoned PUD Surrounding: North - East - South - West - Tract "P" preserve; zoned PUD Single-family house; zoned PUD Provincetown Drive ROW Embassy Woods Boulevard West ROW HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staffs analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is not located within an area of historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, a Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment or waiver is not required. EVALUATION FOR IMPACTS TO TRANSPORTATION~ INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENT: Approval of this variance request will have no effect on infrastructure, transportation or the environment. ANALYSIS: Section 2.7.5 of the Land Development Code grants the authority to the Board of Zoning Appeals to grant variances. The Planning Commission is advisory to the BZA and utilizes the provisions of Section 2.7.5.6.1 through 2.7.5.6.8, which are general guidelines to be used to assist the Commission in making a determination. Responses to the items in Section 2.7.5.6 are as follows: 2 JAN 0 8 2002 a. Are there special conditions and circumstances existing, which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land, structure or building involved? No. The home was designed to fit on the lot. A surveyor's error resulted in the encroachment. Are there special conditions and circumstances, which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property, which is the subject of the variance request? No. The house was configured on the lot as a result of a surveyor's error. The encroachment was not caught at the spot survey stage, because the survey itself was in error. Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this Land Development Code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant? No. There is no land-related hardship. The house could have been configured to fit on the lot, even with the correct survey. Removal of the encroachment may result in a financial hardship on the property owner, however a financial hardship is not typically a justifiable reason to grant a variance. Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety and welfare? No. A house of a size, which meets the required setbacks, would be a reasonable use of the land. However, the requested variance is the minimum required to remove the encroachment, as requested by the petitioner. An alternative remedy to the encroachment, a lot line adjustment with the neighbor to the east, appears to be possible. A lot line adjustment is an administrative process, which would cause the relocation of the side yard to a point at which the structure complies with the setback requirement. Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district? Yes, the granting of this variance will allow the petitioner to have a smaller side yard than the minimum required in the Bretonne Park PUD. Will granting the variance be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this Land Development Code, and not be injurious to the neighborl~ ~ detrimental to the public welfare? ~ ~1 ~_ JAN O 8 2002 3 No, this variance will allow the house to remain closer to the side lot line than other houses in the PUD. If the neighbor to the east decides to construct an addition, he could build to within 5 feet of the common property line. If that scenario occurs, the resulting separation between structures will be 7.7 feet. That would be injurious to the neighborhood since the required separation in the rest of the neighborhood is 10 feet. Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf courses, etc.? No. The house is, at its closest point, 2.7 feet from the property of the neighbor to the east. The neighbor's house is farther than the required minimum of 5 feet, however, he could construct an addition to within 5 feet of the common property line. The 2.7-foot side yard of the subject house is not wide enough to plant a significant landscape buffer. h. Will granting the variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan? Approval of this variance will not affect or change the requirements of the Growth Management Plan. EAC RECOMMENDATION: The Environmental Advisory Council does not normally hear variance petitions. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: There is no land related hardship associated with this after-the-fact variance. There are no ameliorating factors existing for the encroachment (and with the house 2.7 feet from the property line, it does not appear that an effective landscape buffer could be planted). Therefore, Planning Services staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition VA-2001-AR-1166 to the BZA with a recommendation of denial. PREPARED BY: PRINCIPAL PLANNER REVIEWED BY: DATE ~URI~ENT PLANNING MAN THOMAS E. KUCK, PE INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR DATE DATE APPROVED BY: JOH~ M.'D~CI~ m DATE INTI~RIM COMMUNITY DEVELOPME~ & E~mO~m~ SERVICES ~M~ST~TOR Petition Number: VA-2001-AR-1166 Collier County Planning Co~on: JAN 0 B ~ MONTCLAIR FAIRWAY ESTATE BUILDING CORP. PROJECT #20010?0022 DATE: 7/11/01 FRED REISCHL ¥ .RIANCIE PETITION (VARIAlqCI~ FP, OM 5E'rBAC][ (~) [~I~Q~ FOR A PARTICULAR ZONllqO DISTiCh) petition No. Commission District: _ Date Petition Received: __ ,,, AIJOV~ TO B~ CO~P~ J:[~'D ~Y STAFF GENERAL UNFORMATION: petitioner's Name: _tVIITIIX~IR FAIRWAY E.STATE BUILDING (SOP, PI. pciitioner'sAddress: 1400 Gulf Shore Boulevard North 223 Naples~ Florida 34102 Telephone: (q41) 9/,1-7117 Agent's Name; Carol E. Nelson, PI..5 Al~ent's Addre. ss: 3871 l~ite Boulevard Naples, Florida 34117 Telephone: (941) 304-0055 Appllcatioe for Va-ism Petition - 8~8 Pqe ! JAN O'll 21112 COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNLNG SERVICES/CURRENT pLANNING 2800 N. HORSESHOE DRIVE - NAPLIF~ FL PHONE (941) 403-2400/FA~ (941) 6436968 Complete the followi~ for ail Assooi~tlon(~) ~ffili~ted with this petition. (Provide additional sheets ifn~c~ssary) Name ofllom~O~llerA~ocisitol: Montclair Fair--ay KstatP t4~-r~m~r. A,~-,-..,- MailingAddr~s 1400 Gulf Shore BIYd.N City__Naples State FL Zip 3_~jll~ Name of Hom~o~Tler Association: Mailing Address _ City Sta~ __ z~_ Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address Ci~ Stat~ Zip iqameofMssterASsochtion: Glen Eagle Golf and Country Club Master Assoc. MailirlgAddre~s Glen F~_~l~ Blvd. City l~l-pl-~ $1ate FI, Zip 34104 Name of Civic ~fsocialiOil: _ Mailir~ Address City State ~ Zip PROPI~RTY DESCRIPTION: · 31ock (s) ~ Twp. ~ P~nsc ~ G _ Property I.D. # ~a, I Metes & Bounds Descripiion: _ ,4~plicttlon for Var'Janes pedtion .~=NDA ffEM JAN 0 B 2002 Addre~sofSubjectProperW: 797 Prnvi Of different ~o~ Pcti~io~e~'s Current Zoning and Land use of Subject Parcel: Si~l e Fami 1¥ Hc~e qdlfid Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: N $__ Single Family Homes ~lnimum Yard Requlrementx for Subjec~ property: Front: afl ' Side: 5 ' Comer Lot: Yes [] No [] Walert~ont Lot: Yes [] No [] Ee~. _ 15' Application far Variance petition Provide a derailed explanation of the re. quc~t including what struttings ar~ existin~ and wha~ is proposed; the smo~mt of encroachment proposal usin~ numbem i.©. n~tu~e ~o~.t sotback/rom 25' to 18'; when property owner purchased prope~y; whe~ exisi/ng pfincipnl stn~cture was built (/uclude build/rig permit number (s) if possible); why encroacb, m~a/is necesssr~, how ex/s~ing encroachm~mt came to b~4 ~c. survey. Later £ound %o be wron~ setting. by ~h~ Goun~y. The m~s~ake ~ee~s ~o be in for V~ri~ P~tflo~ - ~ JAN 0 B 2002 de~¥ · v~'i~ peQt~on by the below li~t~d crt~oria (1-8). (Please addre*s ~ c~,'~a u~in¢ nddiQonsl page~ if I. Ate there special cono, i~em and ctfcun~ances ex~sm~ wtdcb a~e pecuha~ t° thc I°cuu°n' s~ md characteristics of ~he land, su'uc~e, or buiMine., involved- Axeth~el~cialcondtliolssandcircmmmnc~ whtch~netn~uhfl~n~e House ~ilt infomtion. _~ater fox,nd to ha urron_~. 3. W~II n literal inte~fem6on of the provi~lom of ',his ~ code work unnecee*nry and undue hnr~ on the applicant or ctea~e p~ difflc~fle~ on ?~ applicant. Will the v~i~nce, if gran~ed, be the ll~l~lmllm vluis~:e that will tnlke po~sth|e thc rcl~Ollab:e use of the I~nd, Imlldt~ m structure ~nd which promote ~ of health, safety m welt·re_ Yes for ysrlnnee l~e~t~on - 8~98 ? ,r2 JAN 0 § ~ Will gr~.~g th. verieuce requmed coafe~ on the pemlo, er ,ny special iniv~g¢ tl~ is cleated by the~ z~nln_~ zeg-l~'o~s to o~ct lea~. buildings. ~ ~u~-iurea in thc same zoning $isu~t. Will gml~ the vL-~mce b~ ira hztmony with fl~¢ inmnt and ]pm~os~ of 1~is zo~i-~ c~i¢, and ~o! be i~urious ~o ~¢ ne~hl~thoo<l, O! o~hcrwise ~ tO ~ pubic natural condi~ioM or l~l~si~lly indu0ed conditiom thst ~meliorete the soils end objective~ of thc regulation such a~ mturSl preeerve~ lake~ Soil course, e~c. No will gromm~ ~e ApplJc~t~MJ for Vorlal~e J~effgfoa - 8~}8 JAN 0 8 2002 a~/ar~t'he owners of the property described herein and which i~ the z'ubject matter of the proposed hearing; that all the answers to tho questions in t~is application, including the disclosure of interest information, all sketche~, data, and other sap. ol~mentar), matter attached to and made a part of this ,2p£1icatiot~ are honest and true to the best of our knowledge and belief. ~refl understand that the tnformaticn requested on this application rnu~t be complete and accurate and that :he content of thO form, whether computer generated or County printed shall not be altered. Public hearingz ~ll not be adv~rt~ed unal this application is deemed complete, and all required information tJas been submitted. A~ properS, owner We/l.~trfher authorize as our/my representative in any matters regarding this Petition. Signature of flrop~rty OwnerJ $igncaure of Property Owner act l~d or Printed lVame of Owner Typed or Printed Name of Owner _l~ ~ Le foresoing~instrument )g/t~ acknowledged before me this c~ ~ day °f ~-ff-"/L ' ' by f ~ ~_~O_~ M.~,--. .~ho is v~r~_o~ll¥ /~now. to rn.e or no, produced ~ ~' as ~dentification. State of Florida Count)' of Collier AppHestioa for Varitnce PeUtion - 8~8 Division of Corporations Page 1 of 2 Flogda Department Of State, Division a[ Corporations Florida Profit MONTCLAIR FAIRWAY ESTATES BUILDING CORPORATION PRINCIPAL ADDRESS 1400 GULFSHORE BLVD. #223 NAPLES FL 34102 Changed 04/29/1997 MAILING ADDRESS 1400 GULFSHORE BLVD. #223 NAPLES FL 34102 Changed 04/29/1997 Document Number FEI Number Date Filed P96000090586 650706789 ! 1/04/1996 State Status Effective Date FL ACTIVE NONE Re [istered Asent Name & Address PAULICH, JOHN III 801 ANCHOR RODE # 203 NAPLES FL 34102 Officer/Director Detail Name & Addr~s Il Title BARON, AVl 14~0 GULgSHORE BLVD. $t223 Vi) NAPLES FL 34102 · ../cordet.exe?al =DETFIL&n 1 =P96000090586&n2=NAMFWD&n3=0000&n4=Nt A6F. I~IDA I'IT.M ~ JAN 0 8 2002 Division of Corporations Page 2 of 2 Annual Reports Report Year 1999 II Filed Date Il Intangible Tax II 04m/1999 II s l{ O~,TaOO, II previous F~in~ I No Events No Name History Information N~Filing j View Document Image(s) THIS IS NOT OFFICIAL RECORD; SEE DOCUMENTS IF QUESTION OR CONFLICT · ../cordet.exe?al =DETFIL&nl=P96000090586&n2=NAMFWD&n3=OOOO&n4=N JAN 0 8 2002 xl=&r2 10/26/2001 James V. Mudd 787 Provincetown Drive Naples, Florida 34104 14 October 2001 Mr. Fred Reischl Principal Planner Planning Services, CDES Division 3301 East Tamiaml Trail, North Horseshoe Naples, FL 34112 Dear Mr. Fred Reischl, I am writing this letter to object to the petition for a variance, VA 2001-AR 1166, by Mr. Avi Baron of Montclair Fairwav Estates Building CP, the owner/builder of the adjacent lot to my heine. The house on lot 29, which is being used by Mr. Baron as a model, is in total violation oftbe setback roles of the LDC, in this case a 5-foot setback fxom the adjacent property line. This entire house violates thc setback starting at the fxont right side of the house, where it infringes the setback by inches, and it gets worse as one moves along this side toward the rear of the house, where it infi-inges the setback by some two and a half feet. In the rear of thc model house on lot 29, when one opens the model side lanai screen door, thc door breaks the plain of thc property line. Property could be purchased that would alleviate the need for seeking this variance. I have attached a sketch of the setback violation for your use. Sincerely, JAN 0 I~ 2002 LOT 29 FOUND 5/8 ~40 ?7.5' ' '0. FOUNDATI[ EL= 10%6 " 278. SO FT '~-' a FOUND 5/8 ROD EDGE OF PAVFMFNT RESOLUTION NO. - RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER VA-2001-AR-1166 FOR AN AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE ON PROPERTY HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on all counties in Florida the power to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning end such business regulations as are necessary for the protection of the public; and WHEREAS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development Code (Ordinence No. 91-102) which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County, among which is the granting of variences; and WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Appeals, being the duly elected constituted Board of the area hereby affected, has held a public hearing after notice as in said regulations made and provided, and has considered the advisability of a 2.3-foot after-the-fact variance fi.om the required side yard setback ot 5 feet to 2.7 feet as shown on the attached plot plen, Exhibit "A", in a PUD Zone for the properly hereinafter described, and has found as a matter of fact that satisfactory provision end arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Section 2.7.5 of the Zoning Regulations of said Land Development Code for the unincorporated area of Collier County; and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given opportunity to be heard by this Board in public meeting assembled, and the Board having considered all matters presented; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS of Collier County, Florida, that: The Petition V-2001-AR-1166 filed by CAROL E. NELSON, PLS, representing MONTCLAIR FAJ~WAY ESTATES BUILDING CORP., with respect to the property hereinafter described as: Lot 29, Montclair Park North, as recorded in Plat Book 18, Pages 29 end 30 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida be and the same hereby is approved for a 2.3-foct after-the-fact variance from the required side yard setback of 5 feet to 2.7 feet as shown on the attached plot plan, Exhibit "A", of the PUD Zoning Dis~ct wherein said property is located, subject to the following conditions: JAN 0 p,. l .. This variance is for the encroachment shown in Exhibit "A" only. Any other encroachment shall require a separate variance. 2. In the case of the destruction of the encroaching structure, for any reason, to an extent equal to or greater than 50 percent of the actual replacement cost of the structure at the time of its destruction, any reconstruction shall conform to the provisions of the Land Development Code in effect at the time of reconstruction. BE IT RESOLVED that this Resolution relating to Petition Number VA-2001-AR-1166 be recorded in the minutes of this Board. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote. Done this day of ,2001. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA JAMES D. CARTER, Ph.D., Chairman Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency: Ma~jor~ M. Student Assistant County Attorney AGENDA IT EIv~"J_ JAI - 002 CURVE R~130.O0' D-08'42'50' A--19.77' C='19.75' CB=S88'O3'50'E CURVE 2 R=20. O0' D=91"1T05" A=.31 C=28,60' CB=S38'O2'22'E CURVE 5 R-- 10,30.00' D=04'23'26" A=78.9`3' C=78,91' CB=NO5'24'28'E FOUND TRACT "P' FOUND t84o C5 $1,4' FOUND IONUMENT LOT 29 44.0' COVERED CONCRETE 44.0' FOUND ~40 LOT 30 FOUND #840 ONE STORY CONCR£TEBLOCK ~ 5.0' 12.5'm- 20.0' NOTES: ,~""r)RESS: 797 PROVINCETOWN DRIVE , OD ZONE "X" PANEL NO. 120067 0415 D. BASIS OF BEARINGS NORTH PLAT LINE N69'49'44"E. P=PLAT, M=MEASURED, C=CALCULATED UE=UTILtTY EASEMENT, PE=POOL EQUIPMENT ~?.E N~T..E,R, _ U..N.E ,,, ,W. ? WA TE R METER I PRO V IArCET (60' JAN 0 B 2002 T A "KT'I-'~ C~TTD'~T"E~V EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER(S) TO THE VANDERBILT BEACH BEAUTIFICA~ON MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE serve on the VanderbiR Beach Beautification MSTU O.Q.=~..~: To appoint 2 members to . . ' organizational ~ The Vaaderbiit Beach Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee . This $ member committee will aid was established on July 31,2001 by Ordinance No. 2001-43- and assist the BCC in carrying out the purposes of the MSTU, t° 1xepare and recommend t° the BCC an itemized budget for the MSTU and recommend work programs and priorities to the County lv~nnager. Memnon, s must be permanent residents within the MSTU. ARer initial appointments, terms will be 4 years. A list of the current membership is included in the backup. A press release was issued and resumes were received from the following 2 interested citizens: ~ CATEGORY DIST ELECTOR ADV. cOMM. One COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION..: new organized - no recommendation ~~.g.~: NONE ~ROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: NONE RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners consider the request for appointment, appoint 2 members, and direct the County Attorney to prepare a resolution confirming the appointments. Prepared By: Sue Filson, Executive Manager Board of County Commissioners Agenda Date: JANUARY 8, 2002 Memorandum To; From: Date: Subject: Sue Filson, Executive Manager Board of County ~sioners Edward J. Kant, p..E,~,~' Transportation Operations Director December 5, 2001 Vanderbilt Beach Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee Thank you for providing thc additional names of those interested in serving on the subject committee, Ms. Carol Wright and Mr. Alvin Doyle, Sr. We have reviewed the applications as requested; however, you asked us to categorize the applicants in areas of expertise. There is no specific expertise rcquis~ment or exclusion of which we are aware in thc enabling Ordinance. That said, we offer no particular categorization, nor do wc offer any objection to either of the tow individuals who have expressed interest. Please put their names before the Board of coUnty Commissioners and advise if you need anything additional at this time. cc: Para Lulich, ASLA, Landscape Operations Manager Bob Petersen, Landscape Operations MSTU Liaison File: Vanderbilt Beach Landscape MSTU Transportation Operations Department Vanderbilt Beach Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee Name Mr. Frank Halas 405 Flamingo Avenue Naples, FL 34108 District: 2 Category: Resident Ms. Betty Jane Savard-Boyer 479 Palm Court Naples, FL 34108 District: 2 Category: Resident Mr. Richard E. Lydon 450 Tradewinds Avenue Naples, FL 34108 District: 2 Category: Resident Work Phone Appt'd Exp. Date Term Home Phone DateRe-appt 2ndExpDate 2nd Term 592-9969 594-1977 597-2746 11113/01 11/13/01 11/13/01 Vaca~ Naples, FL District: Category: Vacant Naples, FL District: Category: Thursday. November 15, 2001 Page I of 2 Vanderbilt Beach Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee Worh Phone Appt'd Exp. Date Term Name Home Phone DateRe-appt 2ndF_.xpDate 2nd Term This 5 member commitlae was eata~ished on July 31, 2001 by O~linance No. 2001-43 to aid and ~ the BCC in canying out the ~ of the MSTU, to prepare and rec~3mmend to the County Manage. Membem must be permanent msidentsv/ithin t~he MSTU. A/ret initial FL STAT Chapter 125, 165 & Staff.' Ed Kant, Transportation Operations: 774-8494 Thursdm,. . No~ember 15, 2001 Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM DATE: December 3, 2001 TO: FROM: Board of County Commissio~ RE: Voter Registration - Advisory Board Appointments The Board of County Commi.~.sioners will soon consider the following individuals for appointment to one of the county's advisory committees. Please let me know if those listed below are registered voters in Collier County. Also, please list the commi~ion district in which each applicant resides. VANDERBILT BCH BEAUT MSTU ADV COMM COMMISSION DISTRICT Carol Wright 9362 Gafifi~hore Drive Naples, FL 34108 Alvin Doyle (Bud) Martin, Sr. 9790 Gulfshore Drive, #306 Naples, FL 34108 Thank you for your help. J JAN ~ ~ 2~02 MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: December 3, 2001 Ed Kant. Transportation Op atio irmor Sue Fitson, Executive Manager"~/L ~ Board of County Co,,,,~issioners Vanderbilt Beach Beautification MSTU Advisory Co,~,',fittee As you know, we currently have vacancies on the above-referenced advisory committee. A press release was issued requesting citizens interested in serving on this committee to submit a resume for consideration. I have attached the resumes received for your review as follows: Carol Wright 9362 Gulfshore Drive Naples, FL 34108 Alvin Doyle (Bud) Martin, Sr. 9790 Gulf,~bore Drive, #306 Naples, FL 34108 Please let me know, in writing, the recommendation for appointmem of the advisory committee within the 41 day time-frame, and I will prepare an executive summary for the Board's consideration. Please categorize the applicants in areas of expertise. If you have any questions, please call me at 774-8097. Thank you for your attention to this matter. FROM : Carol & La?7-~ Wright P~ NO. : 941 514 ddd~ ~v. 25 ~01 O'~:5?PM P3 Board o~ Count~ Commbs~oaers 3301 gs~ Tom. mi T~ ~a. ~ Mill Applic~do" for Advisory Committees/Boards JAN ~ FROM : Carol & La~-r~ Wpight PHO~ ND. : 941 514 5555 N~ ~0 O1 lO:~8a Sue Fil~on Board of County' Commissioners Nnples, I~L (941) Fax: (~41} 7743602 Application for Advisory Committees/Boards ~ ymt n rejls~.~! m~ In Cnlllsr C~t~: Yes J .No Doy~u~-urres~yl~ldp~lbl~ol~e~? Yes No ,,, ~ s JAN '" Donna Fiala District 1 Jame~ D. Ca-mr, Ph.D. Dl~*ict 2 Tom i-leaning DistY~ct 3 Fred W. Coyle Dlstrtc{ 4 Jim C,~etm District 5 3301 East Tamiami Trail · Naples, Flodda 34112-4977 (941) 774-8097 · Fax (941) 774-3802 December ! 7, 2001 The Honorable Abe Skinner Collier County Property Appraiser 3301 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 Dear Mr. Skinner: This is in response to your letter of December 10, 2001 regarding Planned Unit Developments and agricultural classification. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I will be bringing this issue up for discussion at the next County Commissioner's Board Meeting. It is my intent to request that the County Attorney draft an ordinance demanding any developer coming before the Board of County Commissioners asking for any re-zone, to be required to apply to the County Appraiser's Office. The application must be based upon the PUD's most intensive zoning use. This not only would catch zoning changes from agricultural to PUD's, it would also catch, for example, residential zoning to commercial zoning changes. I hope this will be an acceptable solution to the problems you are currently having with agricultural exemption benefits. Again: thank you for your letter and the information you provided to me. Tom Henning, Commissioner District 3 TH:mst Cc: Board of County Commissioners Dave Weigel, County Attorney .// Sue Filson, Executive Manager to BCC V COLLIER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER DF JDC ~FC JC December 10, 2001 Honorable Tom Henning Board of County Commissioners Administration Bldg., 3rd Floor Naples, FI 34112 Dear Commissioner Henning: For' some rime now I have been concerned about property with an approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) designation also having an agricultural exemption benefit. In the past, I have expressed my concern to some of you, my colleagues (Property Appraisers) and anyone else who would listen to me. I have indicated that the solution to this concern is in your hands. I have suggested to you that if someone requests an approval for PUD status, and if they have the agricultural classification, you should tell them that they cannot have both. If they want PUD approval, they must rescind their application for agricultural classification with the Property Appraiser's office. If they insist on retaining their agricultural classification, you should not grant the PUD. PUD's that have not been active and come back to you for review and approval, should be given the same choice. Rest assured that every orooerty with agricultural classification is physically inspected by my staff each year to make certain they still qualify for the agricultural exemption. MEMBER: FLORIDA AS$OCfi4TION OF PROPERTY APPRAISERS * INTERNATIONAL ASSOClA770N OF ASSESSING OFFICERS 3301 Tammmi Trail East ,, Building C-2 · Naple~, Flor/fda 34112-499~ · ~41) 774-8141. Fax: (941) 774-2071 www. co/Imrappra~se~ co m Page 2 We deny a number of appllcatlom each year. Some have protested to the Value Adiusm~ent Board, and we have defended our denial. A few years ago, one developer with a PUD applied for agricultural classification to Faze cattle, i denied the request. The developer sued me, but after realizing the error of his ways, he dropped the suit. The a~ricultural classification was not Ip'ante& Please share your thoughts with me concerning this matter. The attached document is all the feedback ! have received. Sincerely, Abe Skinner, CFA Collier County Property Appraiser CC: Honorable James Coletta Honorable Donna Fiala Honorable Fred Coyle Honorable Jim Carter Tom Olliff Marjode Student Date: 8/23/Q1 To: Office °(the C°°nt~ Att°ruey'At~n:- Dln~dWoi~ Mirjories~udeu~, pt~ickWhite Tdephoae # (~.~.[~): 403~2385 i~: IUD 7,ouins - Aueumeat of*Value by Property Appraiser (mdt,a) BAC:ICGROU~TD OF ILE(~UEST/PROBLEM: This item hu/bas mot beth previously submittmd. (Ir ptmbudy mimdmd pt~do Coemy Ammuy'o Oatm iqlo A~L) AC-B/ON REQUESTED: lqesse develop bmguqe for fature PUD's bt acknmfledpm tim property mtm be flied w~h the PropeWj, Appraiser's Office based upon its meet intemive sonhs use. Ox']tw~R ~: Susmm Murray, Current Planning Manager EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER(S) TO HISPANIC AFFAIRS ADVISORY BOARD OBJECTIVE: To appoint 1 member to fulfill the remainder ora vacant term, expiring on June 25, 2005 on the Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board. CONSIDERATIONS: The Hispanic Affairs Advisory Committee has 2 vacancies due to resignations with the terms expiring on June 25, 2005. This 9-member board identifies and evaluates problems unique to the Hispanic Community, reviews and recommends ways to ensure · · ' ' County Government and provides open communication between the mmonhes and Colher periodic reports to the Board of County Commissioners. Terms are 4 years. A list of the current membership is included in the backup. Mr. Eugene Greener, Jr. resigned on October 17, 2001 and Ms. Yolanda Cisneros resigned on August 24, 2001. A press release was issued and 1 resume was received fxom the following interested citizen: APPLICANT CATEGORY Lourdes Ramann--~-~ N/a COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: DIST ELECTOR ADV. COMM. ~uni~( of Character Council No Recommendation FISCAL IMPACT: NONE GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: NONE RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners consider the request for appointment, appoint I member, and direct the County Attorney to prepare a resolution confirming the appointment. Prepared By: Sue Filson, Executive Manager Board of County Commissioners Agenda Date: JANUARY 8, 2002 j g 2 3B2 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Sue Filson, Administrative Assistant Board oi~.~ssioners Ramim Mafialich, Chief Assistant County Attorney December 18, 2001 Applicants for the Collier County Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board I have received your memoranda with the application on Lourdes Ramann for consideration of appointment to the Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board. The next meeting of this Board will not take place until January 25, 2001 and, therefore, the Board will be unable to consider Ms. Ramann's application within the 41-day timeframe set forth by the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) Resolution, Please consider placing this application on the BCC agenda without a recommendation by the Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board. Thank you for your attention in this matter. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. RM/kn Attachments cc: David Correa, Chairman, Collier County Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board David C. Weigel, County Attorney Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board Work Phone /lppt'd Foct~ Date Term Home Phone D,~.l?e-appt 2nd~cpDate 2nd Term Ms. Sofia Pagan 238 Pebble Beach Blvd., Apt. 604 Naples, FL 34113 District: 4 Category: 732-780O 1 i/14/00 417-6107 06/25~3 Mr. Carlos Aviles 713 North 9th Street Immokalee, FL 34142 District: 5 Category: 657-4493 09/25/01 279-8372 06/25/03 Mr. Frank G. Loney 131 Tahiti Street Naples, FL 34113 District: I Category: 08/01/95 06/22/99 06/25~9 06/25~3 Mr. Dav~ Correa l1257Long~ogWay We~ NapEs, FL 34119 District: 5 Category: 06/06/95 10/20/98 06/25/98 06/25/02 Mr. Robert J. Pina 11/14/00 5501 Rattlesnake Hammock, Apt. 113 821-5433 Naples, FL 34113 District: 1 Category: Mr. Eugene Greener, Jr. ~' ~-< 435-9800 06r27/01 4021 GuffShore Boulevard, N.,//1602 Naples, FL 34103 District: 4 Category: 06/25/02 06/25~5 2.5 Years 1.9 Years 4 Years 4 Years 3 Years 4 Years 1.5 Years 4 Years t./ Wednesday, September 26, 2001 Page 1 of 2 Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board Ms. Susan Calkins 740 High Pines Drive Naples, FL 34103 District: 4 Category: Ms. Yohnda Cisaeros Box 2508 P.O. Immokatee, FL 3414:3 Category: Worh Phone /lppt'd EaClX Date Term Home Phone Date_~e-appt 2ntlF_.xpDate 2nd Term 434-8O95 05/22/01 06/25/05 4 Years 368-4456 05/22/01 06/25/05 4 Years 657-4323 Mr. Pete Cade 1210 Lee Street Immokalee, FL 34142 District: 5 Category: 867-3220 09/25/01 06/25/05 4 Years 657-1763 This 9 member committee was created by Ord. No. 91-37, amended by Ord. No. 91-78) to identify and evaluate pro,lams unique to the Hispanic commtmity, review and reoommend ways to ensure ~ co.mun~ between mino~tJes and Collier County government and provide periodic relx~s to Ihe Board of County Commissioners. Terms are 4 years. FL $ TAT Sta.~: Ramiro Manalicfl, Chief Assistant Attorney: 774-8400 Wednesday, September 26, 2801 Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM DATE: November 27, 2001 TO: FROM: Sue Filson, Executive Manager/,J, ~ Board of County Col:nn,i~4ol~/r.J RE: Voter Registration - Advisory Board Appointmems The Board of County Coaauissioners wi]/soon consider the following individuals for appointment to one of the county's advisory committees. Please let me know if those listed below are registered voters in Collier County. Also, please list the commission distri~ in which each applicant resides. HISPANIC AFFAIRS ADVISOK~y BOARD COMMISSION DISTRICT Lourdes Ramann 16 Maui Circle I/~-~ Naples, FL 34112 Thank you for your help. MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: November 27, 2001 Ramiro Mafialich, Chief Assistant County Attorney Sue Filson, Executive Manage~ / Board of County Commi~ion~d Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board As you know, we curremly have 2 vacancies on the above-referenced advisory committee. A press release was issued requesting citazens interested m serving on this committee to submit a resume for consideration- I have attached the resumes received for your review as follows: Lourdes Ramann 16 Maui Circle Naples, FL 34112 Please let me know, in writing, the recommendation for appointment of the advisory committee within the 41 day time-hame, and I will prepare an executive ~,mmary for the Board's consideration. Please categorize the applicants in areas of expertise. If you have any questions, please call me at 774-8097. Thank you for your attention to this matter. SF Attachinems A~A ffEM 3 2002 Board of County Commissioners 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 (941) 7748097 Fax: (941) 774-~602 Application for Advisory Committees/Boards AH you a r~d voter h Cohr CouW: Yes ~ No yom eu~m~ b~ pub~ o~t? YH No ~ No ~ Pltas~ list your commHity acL~ (civic chbs~ n~f~h~bor~ ~hgod inoculations, etc. and positions NON-KESIDEICr MEaMBF-.R.S 351 4~0~. 89th, Smut #1D New Yo~, NY 10128 (H) (212) 996:7360 10936 Imm Awmue l'~ (213) .t44-9333 TujU~a~ C~ 9~2 ~ (818) 35~-8100 ~uss~, J~ir~7 P.O. BOx 600580 J~..ksonvillc, FL 32241-0580 (~l (904) 534-1043 11043 ~ Por~ Dr., W (H4,x) (904) 886.4297 jadmonvillq FL 32223 IH~a~ ~-.~bi)l jprus1234~aol.com PI'AC~, Ru~ NewsTV 616 Kmmcky (~) (785) 838-4800 Lawte~e, KS 66044 (w-6~ (913) 74940~9 Wagon Wheel ~ KS 66044 (:-I) (913) 865-0890 laJ(~Jsl, C_,emma P~ (N~) National hdcasting Co. 30 Rockc~Jler Plaza New York, NY 10021 245 E. 63rd Stxeeq #718 New York, NY 10021 ~ (212) 7594987 A.M. Best CO. 529 14th Sixeeq NW,'#1117 Wasbingto~ DC 29045 (~) (202) 347-30~ (g=~x) (202) 34%3091 (Work ~M~il) 1319 Augustine A~muc F~ede~ksbu~ VA 22401-5305 ~c~ (540) 899-%01 Chenolet Motor Dbfision 100 Rmaismn~ Cmmr, P.O. Box 100 Detroit, MI 410.65-1000 ~) (313) 667-9181 ~ (313) 6674007 QLm'qI..~N, M~y g~y (NE,) 7523 S. 35t~ 5t~t Lincoln, NE 6~16 ~ (~2) 42~1473 quni-ro, Joe7 Cali/om~ Journal for filipino .~mc~m 9201 Wdshire Bird #103, P.O. Box 11229 Bev~ly Hills, CA 90210 (w) (310) 278-9201 (wy~x) (310) 278-92.55 (Wor~ E-~t~) lnfo~cjfllam.com RABE, Eric W. Bell Attaatic Corpo~tion 1717 Arch Street, #29N (w) (215) 963-6531 ,~;l~Jol,g;~ R~. 19103 (~-~) (215) 5754961 ~ E-M~I) mz.w~tlamieJ:om 112 Buck Lane Haver~rd, PA 19041 {14) (610) 896:9880 RAMANN, Lourde~ F. (NR) Ramaan aaa C, xa~'rV, b~ 16 Maui Circle Naples, FL 33962 (H) (914) 965-3024 RANI)AL, Judith E (NR) Mouse Trap Fax'm 37950 Stevens Road ~v) (540) 822-5715 Lovettsville, VA 20180 (~-6ax) (540) 822-9071 ~k ~-~,il) mousetral~a~undspnng.com Frederick News-Post EO. Box 578 Fredezick, MD 21705-0578 (~) (301) 662-1177 {w-~} (301) 682-7831 (monk £-Maa) 8eotgegspm~aoLcora 15011 Mott~ Station Road Rocky Ridge, MI) 21778 ~I) (301) 447-3656 RANDOLI~ jm,~m~ (Goldm OM) 9(,48 Oliv~ #225 Olivem, MT 63132 ~ COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION December 7, 2001 801 LAUREL OAK DRIVE SUITE 605 NAPLES, FL 34108 (941) 597-1749 FAX: (941) 597-4502 Ms. Sue Filson Executive Manager Board of County Commissioners 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, Florida 34112 RE: Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee Dear Ms. Filson: At the November 7th Meeting of the Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee the issue with respect to the expiration of terms for four members of the Advisory Committee was discussed. It was determined at that meeting that the members whose terms are to have expired on January 29, 2002 should have their terms extended until such time as the MSTBU Ordinance issue has been resolved. If you have any questions please contact our office. Yours sincerely, -" ~PELICAN BA)~: SERVICES DIVISION , , , ]",II , //James P. Ward / Department Director JPW/bcs EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER (S) TO THE PELICAN BAY MSTBU ADVISORY COMMITTEE OBJECTIVE: To re-appoint 4 members to serve 4 year terms, expiring on January 29, 2006 on the Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee. CONSIDERATIONS: Thc Pdiean Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee has 4 t¢,ms expiring on January 29, 2002. This 11 nx~mber Advisory Committee was established by Ordinar~ce 90- 111 as amended. The Division pmvidns landscaping services, including all public road maintenance and park areas, street lighting services, ~luatie n~n~gemem services, beach cleaning, and the Clam Bay Restoration Project. It is the Division's responsibility to provide the framework of long-t~,m community planning so that residents can enjoy the benefits of Pelican Bay while ensuring both the social and financial well-being of the Pelican Bay Comm,mity. A list of the current membership is included in the backup. The terms for James A. Carroll, David A. Roellig, Cornelia Kriegh, and Glen D. Harrell will expire on January 29, 2002. A press release was issued and resumes were received fi.om the following 4 interested citizens: APPLICANT CATEGORY DIST ELECTOR ADV. COMM. James A. Carroll ResidenffEn8ineer 2 Yes Pel Bay MSTBU David A. Roellig Resident/Engineer 2 Yes Pel Bay MSTBU & C~n! Advisory Committee Cornelia Krinsh .Resident 2 Yes Pel Bay MSTBU Glen D. Hnrreli Commercial/Developer 3 Yes Pel Bay MSTBU COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Re-appointment of all 4 members. NOTE.: Section Seven (B) of Ordinance 2001-55 states "Terms of office for Board members shall be limited to two consecutive terms of service on any one Board..." Under (D) of the same section, it is noted that "By a unanimous vote of the Commission, the limitations set forth m subsection (B) above may be waived". According to available records, Mr. Glen D. Harrell has served 2 full terms. Should the Board wish to re-appoint Mr. Harrell, the limitations on two consecutive terms will need to be waived. FISCAL IMPACT: NONE GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: NONE RECOMMENDATION: That the Board ofCouuty Commi.~sioners consider the recommendation for appointment, re-appoint 4 members, and direct the County Attorney to prepare a resolution confirming the appointments. Prepared By: Sue Filson, Executive Manager Board of County Commissioners Agenda Date: JANUARY 8, 2002 Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee Mr. David A. RoeRig 6000 Pelican Bay Blvd., 1/204 Naples, FL 34108 District: 2 Category: Resident/Engineer Mr. Thomas C. Brown 8415 Excal~ur Circle B- 1 Naples, FL 34108 District: 2 Category: Resident Mr. Glen D. Harrell 5415 Tamiami Trail N. #320 Naples, FL 34108 District: 3 Category: Commercial/Developer Mr. Maurice James Burke 5801 Glencove Drive,//508 Naples, FL 34108 District: 2 Category: Resident Mr. James A. Carroll 8430 Abbington Circle, C-31 Naples, FL 34108 District: 2 Category: ResidenffEngineer Mr. George H. Wemer 1919 Trade Center Way, #2 Naples, FL 34109 District: 2 Category: Residant/CAPB 02/10198 594-2210 01/24/95 594-1949 02/09~99 598-1605 02/08/94 02/10/98 05/22/01 598-3140 02/10/98 597-9767 591-2171 02/02/93 566-3381 05/22101 01/29~2 01/29/99 01/29~03 01/29/98 01/29/02 01/29/05 01/29~2 01/29/97 01~9/05 4 Years 4 Years 4 Years 4 Years 4 Years 4 Years 4 Years 4 Years 4 Years Thursday, May. 24, 2001 Page I of 3 Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee Name Mr. Lou Vlasho 6790 Pelican Bay Boulevard Naples, FL 34108 District: 2 Category: Resident Mr. John Domenic 801 Knollwood Court Naples, FL 34108 District: 2 Category: Resident Mr. Joseph'A. Bawduniak 803 Knollwood Court Naples, FL 34108 District: 2 Category: Resident Work Phone Appt'd Exp. Date Term Home Phone DateRe-appt 2ndExpDate 2nd Term 591-3248 566-3179 598-1976 02/09/99 01/29/03 4 Years 05/22/01 01/29/05 4 Years 02/09/99 01/29/03 4 Years Ms. Cornelia Kriegh 02/10/98 5964 Pelican Bay Boulevard, #434 597-8872 Naples, FL 34108 District: 2 Category: Resident Mr. Christopher F. Sutphin 05/22/01 8720 Bay Colony Drive, # 104 596-1351 Naples, FL 34108 District: 2 Category: Resident 01/29/02 4 Years ..-/" 01/29/05 4 Years Thursday, May 24, 2001 Page 2 of $ Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee Work Phone Appt'd Exp. Date Term Name Home Phone DateRe-appt 2ndExpDate 2nd Term This 15 member committee was created by Ord. No. 90-111 and amended by Ord. No. 91-22 and 93-15 to aid and assist ~e County manager and the Board of County Commis~ers in determining the need and quantity of extraordinary law enforcement in Pelican Bay. Also to aid, ,~&st, and provide ir~ut to the County Manager and the Board in effecting a smooth and expeditious transfe~ of sis'eel lighting, water management and ~ ~ervices, re~bitiliee and obligations from the Pelican Bay Improvement District. On 11/3/98 the BCC reduced the rnambership from 15 to 13 members. Terms are 4 years. On A~ori111, 2000, the BCC adopted Ord. No. 2000-22 reducing the membemhip from 13 mambem to 11 members. FI. STAT 125.01 Staff.' Jim Ward, Pelican Bay Services Division: 597-1749 Tltursday, May 24, 2001 Pa~e 3 ors MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: December 26, 2001 James Ward, Pelican Bay Services~sion Board of County Commi~ione'rsO- Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory CO.lmittee As you know, we curremly have vacancies on the above-referenced advisory committee. A press release was issued requesting citizens interested in serving off this committee to submit a resume for consideration. I have attached the resumes received for your review as follows: James A. Carroll 8430 Abbington Circle #C-31 Naples, FL 34108 David A. Roellig 6000 Pelican Bay Blvd., #504 Naples, FL 43108 Comeli~Kriegh 5964 Pelican Bay Blvd. Naples, FL 34108 Glen D. Harrell 9589 Crescent Gardens Drive, Unit 202 Naples, FL 34109 Plea~ let me know, in writ~.', the recommendation for appointment of the advisory comniittee w~hln the 41 day time-frame, and I will prepare aa ex~utive Sh, lu~y for the Board's consideration. Please categorize the applicants in areas of expertise. If you have any questions, please call me at 774-8097. Thank you for your attention to this matter. SF Attachments !2/14/2001 {~9:89 9415~74cJ4? JIMCARROLL PAGE 81 Board of County Commi~ioners 3301 East Tamiami T~ail Naples, FL 34112-4977 Attention: Ms Sue Figson 12/14/2001 D~ar Ms Filson I am responding to your letter of November 30, 2001 iu~w_~ting that I am eligible for re~lppointmen! and i,qquiril~g abotR { am imev~, ted in cominuing to sere¢ on the MSTBU Advisory Commit~ze until time propo.~'d Ovdinam:c issue has been resolved and new Commitlee members have been ! am the Chairman of the MSTBU sub co,,~,,;i~e revizwing this proposed Ordinance and working with Mr. Brock whom I'm sure you know has prepared the dralt ofthis ordinance Char review is about finished and we are planning meetings with Pelican Bay properly owmws in January. Final action is not expected before the end of March. I am quite willing to serve in this interim period and if new members are not appointed until Iht whiter of 2003, I will be pleased to serve ~ then. Attached i~ your application form and an updated copy of my Resume. Ch~n V~sho i2/14/2001 09:09 941597494? J!MCA~ROLL PAC~ 02 Board of County.Co. mmissioners 3301 E~t Tammmt Trail N~e~ gL 34112 (941) 7/4-8097 Fax: (941) TT4-3602 Application for Advisory Committees/Boards ROm Add~~~~ C~: E~am~t: ( oat misuloa D4sqr~t, ~ ~4o~er, e~l~m~4~lelM, lay ~ e~. Are you a registered voter in Collier Cogat~: Yes ~ No Do you eurreutiy IN4d pmblJc ofl~e? Yes Please iht your community activities (civic ch .bs, neJgbiMrhood nfaoclations~ etc. and positions 12/14/2001 09:09 9415974947 JIMCAK~OLL P~GE 83 Jnmel A Carroll Residence: 8430 Abbington Circle Unit C31 Naples FL :MI08 Td 941 S9'/9767 Date of Birth: !1~20/21 Fax 941 S97 4947 E-Mail JLmJonPnt~AOL. eom CoBege: Illinois Institute of Technology Degree: BS in Meehami~al Engineering Oetober, 1943 Wife's Name: DeEIda Married: Oetober 20, 1943 ChiMren: 3 children 7 Grand ChiMren Military ,~rv~e: US Navy Engineering Oflleer 1944/194~ · · Procter & Gamble CO 1945-1982 Manager of Corporate Engineering Division '67to' 82 Retired- 1982 ~_~ President - Southwestern Ohio Water CO 7S-82 Consultant with Brazion Management Consultants - Boston MA 82-86 Loeal and National Civie Activities: United Way - Many Positions Advisor}' Commlt/ee- Wyoming Ohio School Board Riverfront Advisory Committee Chairman (1977 to 198/) City of Cincinnati City of Cineinnati Infrastructure Task For~ (1986 to 19~) Pr~ident Reagan's Grace Commission on Cost Rednctlon-Washington-1982 Pc!lc-an ltay Scr~'ie~ Di%'ision Advisory Committee-(MSTBU) Collier County - Vice Chairman 1998/2001 Pelican Bay Foundation Cable Commit'ncc Profesmlonai Associations: Amcric--n Socic~, of Mechanical Engineers Registered Professional Engineer in the State of Ohio Lcadership Collier - Masters Program Condominium Ez_nerienee: (-;rn~'enor Condominium of Pelican Bay- Board .~¢mb~r- 4 )'ars = President - 3 years Crc~lcent Condominium - Treasurer 48 monthl Quail Creek Conner)' Club - Nnple~ FI - Board member 92=96 - Pruident 94-96 Moeriap Country Club FoFum Ciub- MembeF 1992 - Board Member I~JS thFu 1999 Blrchwond C!ountry Club - Harbor Springs, Michigan December 11, 2001 Ms. Sue Filson, Executive Manager Board of Collier County Commissioners 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, Florida 34112-3602 Dear Ms. Filson: This letter is in response to your letter of November 30, 2001 concerning membership on the Collier County Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee. Enclosed is a copy of my updated resume. I request consideration for reappointment to this Committee. I have nearly 30 years experience with the Army Corps of Engineers; the ma]or portion of my Corps' career involved work in the geotechnical and coastal engineering areas. I am a full time resident of Pelican Bay and an elector of Collier County. I currently serve as Vice Chairman of the Collier County Coastal Advisory Committee. Sincerely, David A. Roellig 6000 Pelican Bay Blvd. #504 Naples, Florida 34108 (941) 594-2210 2002 Pg._ RESUME Name: David A. Rnellig Education: B.S., Geology, Wayne State University Registration: Professional Geologist, Florida License #~2g Prior Experience: May 1966 to January 1981. Detroit District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, prepared or was responsible for more than 15 coastal erosion, and navigation studies, most of which have been authorized and constructed. Served as District Coastal Zone Management Coordinator and on subcommittees of the International Joint Commission and the Great Lakes Basin Commission. January 1981 to Septembtr 1990. Division Geologist for the North Central Division, Corps of Engineers, Chicago, Illinois. Provided consultation and guidance in the fields of engineering geology and coastal engineering to our subordinate district offices. The area of responsibility included the U.S. portion of the Great Lakes as well as the upper Mississippi River Basin. Also served as the Division Research and Development Coordinator and as a member of the International Joint Commission's Council of Great Lakes Research Managers. September 1 gg0 to May 1994. Geologist for the Headquarters, Corps of Engineers, Directorate of Civil Works, Washington D.C. Provided engineering geology consultation to all elements of the Corps of Engineers. Technical proponent of geology related training courses. Headquarters technical monitor of the Corps' coastal geology R&D. Provided guidance and oversight of civil works program development, and execution for a broad range of water resource and conservation projects. May 1994 to February 1998. Took early retirement, performed volunteer work and relocated to Florida in mid-1996. February 1998 to present. Serving on the Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee and also serves as chairman of the Clam Bay Restoration Subcommittee. June 1999 to April 2001. Appointed to the City/County Beach Renourishment Advisory Committee. Elected Chairman of the Committee at the October 2000 meeting. This Committee was disbanded and County Ordinance established the new Coastal Advisory Committee. May 2001 to present. Appointed to the Collier County Coastal Advisory Committee. Elected Vice-Chairman. Professional Affiliations: Member, Association of Engineering Geologists Member, Florida Shore and Beach Association Address: 6000 Pelican Bay Blvd. #504, Naples, Florida 34108 Telephone: (941) 594-2210 Board of County Commissioners 3301 East T~miami Trail Naples, FL 34112 (941) 774-8097 Fax: (941) 774-3602 Application for Advisory Committees/Boards /- '---'"'-- e-mall addren:~f -.-7~ Fax No. Bmine(J Phone: "--'""-- Cat~gory (if applicable): ~xample: Commba~n Dtm4ct, Devdaper, ~avir~memali~ lay petals, etc. Are you · registered voter h Comer Courtly: Yes ~// No Do you eurrenfly bom public or,ce? Yes No H'se, whst b th~ diJce? Home Address: Fax No. Board of County Commissioners .t~ 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 (941) 774-8097 Fax: (941) 774-3602 Application for Advisory Committees/Boards - Basbem Phone: Home Phone: Zip Code: e-moil address: Business: Board or Committee Applied for:. //~ % ~-~ ~. /~'~- ~-':' --~ Ca~o~ (if~fi~ble): ' ' A~ you a ~r~ voter h Co.er Con~) No Do you curreu~ ~M pu~ o~e? Y~ (~) if so, wbt b ~hs~ eflke.'. If yes, p6mse lb* the eommittms/b~ds' / Please list your community activities (civic elubs, neJlhborhond asSOcJation~, etc. end positions held: Edue~tion: plef~ smck ~fy ~_~_.nd~dl i~rm~dm~ ym feft pertbe~ Tl~ ~llee~ s&~td be f~,~s'ded M ,~w lq~ ]g've°~ M~n~l~e m 'se December 6, 2001 Sue Filson, Executive Manager Board of County Commissioners 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112-4977 Subject: Pelican Bay MSTBU AdvisoD, Committee Dear Ms. Filson: Please accept this letter as confirmation of my interest to continue to serve on the Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee. I am acutely aware of the two- term limitation and would like to be considered for an additional term. The taxpayers of Pelican Bay are facing a decision that may alter the method that Advisory Committee members are selected. As you know, this may come up in the future before the Board of Collier County Commissioners. It is my interest to continue on the Advisory Committee until a decision is made to change the current form of government or continue as it is presently organized. I have enjoyed serving as the Advisory Committee's only commercial representative and would like to continue in that capacity as long as it is possible. If you have~~estions or concerns, please feel free to call me. Si' GDH/ccg Attachment CC: James Ward, Pelican Bay Services Division CLARION REALTY SERVICES Glen D. Harrell, SCSM, SCMD, CLS 9589 Crescent Gardens Drive, Unit 202 Naples, Florida 34109 Home: (941) 597-4536 Work: (941) 598-1605 Fax: (941) 598-1773 PROFESSIONAL EXPER~NCE WATERSIDE SHOPS AT PELICAN BAY, Naples, Florida Vice President / General Manager CPS Naples, Ine d/b/a Clarion Realty Managemem Formerly Jones Lang Wootten Realty Advisors, NY THE BAY PLAZA COMPANIES, St. Petersburg, Florida Vice Presidem / General Manager - Retail Developmem J. C. Nichols Company, Kansas, MO OLD HYDE PARK VILLAGE, Tampa, Florida General Manag_er Amlea, Tampa, Florida THE BELL TOWER SHOPS, Ft. Myers, Florida General Manager Oxford Development Company, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania PEMBROOK MANAGEMENT, (CPI, Inc) New York, New York Assistant Manager/Rockaway Town Square, Rockaway, New Jersey Marketing Director/Countryside Mall. Clearwater, Florida 1992 to Present 1989 to 1991 1985 to 1989 1984 to 1985 1980 to 1984 EDUCATION University of South Florida, BA - Mass Communication Michigan State University - ICSC Marketing and Management Institutes Senior Certified Shopping Center M~nager ~SCSM Senior Certified Marketing Director - SCMD Certified Leasing Specialist - CLS Licensed Florida Real Estate Broker PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS International Council of Shopping Centers Pelican Bay Business Association Board of Directors Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee Member of Ciarion Partners/Clarion Realty Services Steering Committee A~F.N~)A ~ ' NO._,~/r~ /re To: From: Date: Subject: Memorandum Board of County Commissioners Thomas W, Olliff, County Manager. r~__~ December 26, 2001 Horizon Committees The majority of the Horizon Committees began in earnest in roughly the October time frame of this year. in order to keep the full BCC appraised of the progress of these important committees, I am suggesting that an update be provided from each committee on or about April, which would be the six-month point. Please keep in mind that these committees were intended to be limited in duration. Policy recommendations are expected to be made to the BCC from each relative committee regarding the particular topics. I have made a calendar reminder to send each of you a note in March asking that each appointed Commissioner and/or committee chair provide both a brief written and verbal update of the committee's progress in the month of April. Of the five topics that the BCC selected as important community-wide issues needing involvement by individual commissioners was the issue of green space. The Board's decision, at the time, was not to create another committee as there appeared to be a community-wide committee through the Conservancy looking at the issue. Commissioner MacKie was the BCC appointee to serve on this committee. This was similar to the BCC's decision to appoint Commissioner Carter to serve as the BCC representative to the existing EDC, Economic Development Committee in lieu of creating a new and additional County committee. cc: Kathy Prosser, Conservancy Executive Director Office of the County Manager For the green space effort, it is reasonable to assume that Commissioner MacKie volunteered for this assignment because it was an issue of particular interest to her, rather than because any unique relativity to district four. At this point there is no commissioner appointed to attend the Conservancy meetings to be able to keep up with the community's efforts in regards to green space. At this point the options for the BCC to consider include the appointment of Commissioner Coyle, who currently does not sit on any horizon committee, to select another commissioner or not to appoint any board member to the issue. Please give this some thought and hopefully the BCC can make a decision regarding this matter at a meeting in January. TWO/jb ~ ~'o ~ A EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AUTHORIZATION TO DRAFT, ADVERTISE AND BRING TO THE BOARD FOR PUBLIC HEARING AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CONSOLIDATED IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE A LIMITED WINDOW FOR AFTER- THE-FACT APPLICATIONS FOR THE EXISTING $7,500 IMPACT FEE WAIVERS APPLICABLE TO SPECIFIED ENTITIES THAT ARE EXEMPT FROM PAYMENT OF FEDERAL INCOME TAXES, AND, SUBJECT TO ADOPTION OF THE PROPOSED AMENDING ORDINANCE, TO PRESENT TO THE BOARD TWO ALREADY RECEIVED APPLICATIONS FOR THESE IMPACT FEE WAIVERS. OBJECTIVE: To obtain Board of County Commissioners authorization to pl-cpare, advertise, and bring to thc Board for a public hearing an Ordinance to amend Ordinance No. 2001-13. as amended, to add provisions that authorize qualified entities to apply the noxx existing S7,500 impact t~c waivers provided (l) thc applicant acqLlil'ed building pem3its and paid impact t~cs in INill within thirly (30) days proceeding October 9. 2001 (thc date that thc Board adopted Ordinance No. 2001-54), and (2) tl~c applicant meets all other existing cligibilit5 rcquircnlcnts applicable to these waivers, and, subject to adoption oF tl~c amending Ordinance, lo authorize Staff' to submit to thc Board txx o (2) impact t~c exemption requests, each not to exceed S7,500, which have been received fi-om two (2) not-t~w-profit organizatioos: Thc NcighboFhood Health Clinic, and Planned Parenthood oFCollier County, Inc. CONSIDER.VI'IONS: Background: On March 13, 2001 thc Board adopted Ordinance No. 2001-13, thc Collier County Consolidated Impacl Fcc Ordinance (CIFO), repealing and superccding all of' tile County's previOLl$l5 existing impact Fcc ordinances. For valid reasons, most of the prcvio~tsly existing provisions that exempted specified classes of dcvclopmcnt fl-onl CXelllptiOllS ;Yore deleted fi'om thc various impact Fcc ordimmccs by adoption oF thc CIFO. In particular, Ordinaoce No. 92-22, as amcnded (tile formcr Road hnpact Fcc Ordinance) exempted medical facilities thai were built by not-for-profit medical coqmrations. The stated rationale for tl~osc exemptions was that these medical l~cilitics served quasi- governmental hmctions. Staff's concern was that the paramctcrs for qoalifying for this exemption were too narrowly defined. Thcrc are numerous deserving nol-for-profit agencies in thc County that could be said Io setx'c quasi-governmental fimctions, but lhe services they provide arc not medical in nature, thus, they would not have qualified under thc prior medical 2xcilities exemption .... JAN O B 2002 I ,._ Requesls for Impact Fee Waivers Page 2 Another concern was tile potential loss of impact fcc revenues which resulted from those former tmfundcd exemptions. \Vhen tile County grants an exemption fi'om thc payment of an impact lkc, such action is in effect a finding lhat thc subject development either (I) creates no impact on thc particulnr infrastructure system (such as, for example, thc County's road nctwork), or (2) that the bcnefils to the COlnmunity fi-om thc development is so profound as 1o overshadow the impact on tl~e County's public facilities. Exemptions arc not funded. Waivers are funded. Because of capital ilnprovcment funding concerns, staff sought to obtain Board direction 1o replace the previous exemptions with a program for granting impact fee waivers, flint arc fimded by identified revenue sources. It v, as thc express intent of staff, after adoption of thc fIFO, to seek Board direction for tile subsequent adoption of ncw and improved regulations with which to aid specificct federal income tax exempt charitable organizations, while also addressing tho aforementioned collcelqaS. After a grcat deal of staff research and deliberation, tile County Altorncy's Office drafted ordinance text that established a fair, equitable, and more inclusive impact Ice (frilly funded) waiver program For various federal income tax exempt not-for-profit entities. The Board adoptcdth¢curront cxemption proxisions on October 9, 2001. by application of Ordinance No. 2001-54, thereby amending thc fifO. The abo;e ordinance amcndlncnt became cffcctivc on October 12, 2001 upon tiling in tile Offices of thc Florida Secretary of State. Thc new (funded) waiver program applies to any qualified dexclopmcnt for xxhich a building pcrlnit is issued on or subsequent lo October 12. 200I. Thc CUITCnt exemption program allows for eno waiver off up to S7.500 per dcx clopmcnt provided the applicant applies lbr lbo cxcmption belbrc the impact lkcs become duc and payable, which is not ]alcr that tiao date of issuance of thc applicable building petunias. At least two not-for-profit entities v, cre issued building permits within thirty (.30) days prior to tiao Board's adoption of Ordinance No. 2001-54. These agencies are (1) The Neighborhood Health Clinic, and (2) Planned Parenthood of Collier County, Inc. The building pennia for Planncd Parenthood ,,,,'as isstted by Collier County on September 10, 2001. Thc building pcrmit for Tile Neighborhood Health Clinic was issued by tile City of Naples oil October $, 2001. Representatives of these entities bad made inquiries to tile County and tile Cit.,,' about tile limn proposed (but not then adopted) ordinance amendments, and assumed that the respective entity would bc able to apply for the then envisioned wnivers subsequent Io tile effective date of thc Ordinance. Prior to adoption of the cmTcnt exemption progranl there :,,'as no exemption program that applied to these two entities. Cost and scheduling considerations made it impractical for these developments to delay obtaining their building petunias until after adoption of tho Ordinance. Coll¢[llSiO~lS: Because thc subject impact fees were paid bcforc adoplion of Ordinance No. 2001-54, slafFs believes that thc current CiFO prohibits Ibc County fi'om allowing these tv, o (2) entities to effectively apply for tile subject impact fee waivers. Hov,.'cvcr, cot :i,h-ring Lilt JAN 0 8 2002 Requesls fei' Impact Fee Waivers Page 3 timing of thc issuance of building permits just prior to tile adoption of thc Ordinance, and considering that these entities had made infom~al inquiries about the new (then proposed) waiver provisions and might have reasonably prcsumcd that each would be able to submit its application for these exemptions subscqucn! lo October 12, 2001, their requests merit special consideration. If it is the will of tile Board, the County can amend lhe CIFO to allow acceptance of applications for impact fcc xvaivers submitted For development that received building pemlits within thirty (30) days preceding tile October 9, 2001, provided all olher eligibility requirements as currently set forth in thc Ordinance arc met, and the respective applicant meets all of thc olher qualification requircmcnls in Ibc current CIFO. FISCAL IMPACT: Subject to having the CIFO amended to authorize this limited xxindow For a£ter-thc-fact applications, and at the discretion of the Board based upon thc content of cncb application for thc i'cspcctive excmption, each applicant may be granted a waiver o1' up to 57,500, therefore, the n~aximun~ fiscal impact of thc aboxc txxo (2) potential cxenaptions is 515,000. Impact fee waivers arc lNtnded by interest earned on the liquid assets of the various impact fee trtlsl accounts. A la~axilllUnl of S100,O00 in waivers may be granted each liscal year. There is a suflicienl FS' 02 beginning JSInd balance, funded in parl by the prior year's can~cd intcrcsl, in each impact Fcc trust accoont to l~md these lxx o potcotial xx aivcrs, if granlcd by thc Board. There arc sttfficicnt FY 02 budgeted reserves to absorb Ibc proposed costs. GRO~'TII MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. I~,ECOMMENDATION: That tile Board el'County Conlmissioncrs: Al this time deny each of these txxo requests fbi' exemptions, xxhich bare been received from (1) Tile Neighborhood l lcaltb Clinic and (2) Planned Parenthood of Collier County, Inc., because at this time Ordinance No. 2001-13, as amended. bas lie provisions for any after-the-fact applications for exemptions. Approval o£ this Executive Summary will direct Staff to t¢l-cpare, advertise, and bring to the Board For a public hearing an Ordinance to amend Ordinance No. 2001-13, ils amended, to tbereby add provisions which xxill authorize qualified entities to apply for these S7,500 impact fcc waivers provided (1) tile applicant acquired its building permits and paid impact fees in full within thirty (30) days proceeding October 9, 2001 (tile datc that tile Board adoptcd Ordinance No. 2001- 54), and (2) the applicant meets all other existing eligibility requirements applicable to these waivers. Approval of this Executive Summary will also authorize Staff to st~bmit to tile Board tile subject two (2) impact fee exemption requests, each not to exceed S7,500, subject to adoption of the amending Ordinance. ~GEI, ID ~ ITEM JAN O 8 2002 Requcsls for Impac! Fcc \Vaivers Page 4 I3'1': Ool.dinatoDat¢:r [ ~--- ~ ~ ~ f SUBMITTED REVIE\VEDBY: ~-- Date:]~-& ~-O / Denny Baker, Business Manager APPROVED BY :~~,.~'Mb~( Date: ,Z/ZT /~, J~hn M. ~u, nnuck, III, Interim Administrator ~ommunit5 Development and Environmenlal Services Division JAN 0 8 2002 I,:XI,XWTIVI: SUMMARY REQUI';ST TO AI'I'I{OVE F()I,I I{I:X'ORI)ING TIlE FINAL I'LAT OF "OIJ)E CYI'RI':5S TRACT 12". ANI) APPROVAL OF 1HE STANI)ARI) FORM CONSTRI'CTION ANI) MAINTISNANCE A(iI{EEMENT AND AI'I'ROVAI. OF TIlE AMOUNT OF Till'; I'EI/F()I~MANCE SECIq~ITY OBJI-:CTIVE: Fo approxc lot recording thc final plat of "()I.D}:. CYPRISSS FI~U\CI' 12". a subdivision et lands located in Section 2t. l'oxxnship 48 Sotlth. Range 26 East. Collier COtllll}. Florida. folloxxing the altematixe procedure lot approxal et subdix ision plats. CONSII) EI.~ VIJONS: .pccilication.. and tmal plat el "OLD}~ CYPRESS TRACI' 12". I'hc>c documents arc in compliance with thc Count} lxlnd DcxcIopmcnt Code and Florida 5tare 5tattllC No. 177. All COI/bllUC[iOI1 aba Maintenance :X~rccnlcnI tor ~ubdi~ision ]IllpFOXClllClIlS. shall bc pl'oxidcd and accepted b) thc Planning 5crxiccq Dit'cctor ~tlld Iht Count) ,Mtorncxs oHicc prior lo thc recordin~ oJ thc tinal plat. Fhix xkou[d be hi conJorlnancc xxilh ibc Count) [ and [)cxelopmcnt Code - l{n~inecrin,_' Rcx icxx Y, ection rccomnlcnds that thc final plat el "()l.I)l{ CYPRI S5, I'R\C I 12" bc apprc, x cd Itu' recording. I:ISC.\I~ IMI'ACT: ]'here nrc 110 required subdi,, ision impro'~ cmcnts nssocialcd x,. ith this plat l'hc CotlllI? \t. ill rcali.rc i'c\ elltlcs lis {ollo\\ 5: Fund: Conmmnil5 Dc',.clopmcnt Fund 11.3 Agone>: Count> Manager Cost Center: 138900 - Dc,,clopmcnt Scr',ices Revenue generated b) this pre jeer: Total 5525.00 plat re~icx~ fees jAN 0 8 2002 Executive Summary Olde Cypress Tract Page 2 12 HISTORICAL / ARCHEOLOGICAL ISSUES: Ti:er~ ~r~ ro hi: - :.~i,r-:_ / arckeo!ogical issues EAC RECOM14]ENDATION: Approval CCPC RECOMMENDATION: A PSP for Olde Cypress was approved by ~he CC}PC PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECO~NDATION: I'ha! tl~e Board of Cottnlx Ct n]mlSSlOllCl'S approxe the final plat oF "Olde C}prcss Tract 12- Iht Fccording xxilh the lblloxxing sdpulalion: 1-hat the plat is not recorded until tlac PUD commimaent rclatin~ to thc Cocohatdwc xx cir is Fcsolx cd. AGENDA ITEM No JAN - OLDE CYPR)~ FRACF 12 PRIiF'AI~I!I) BY: John R. I louldskx orth. Senior Engineer En.~inccring Rcvic~ Date C'om]~lnit~ Dc~clopmcn! & I{n'. ir~mmcntal F, cr', icc~ Da(c AC~ND A ITEI~ ~o. 1° C JAN 0 8 2002 I - 75 ~-- PR;)J£CT $1T~ VICINITY MAP N.T.S. JAN 0 8 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR FIRST RESPONDER TRAINING BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE IMMOKALEE FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT .OBJECTIVE: Board of Commissioners approval of an lnterlocal Agreement Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Collier County and the Immokalce Fire Control District in accordance with Florida Statute Chapter 401.35. CONSIDERATIONS: On July I. 1993. the State of Florida passed legislation, (Chapter 401.35F.S.) which requires all non-licensed first rcspondcr agencies to make all reasonable efforts to enter into a MOU with thc locaI, licensed EMS Provider. in order to coordinate emergency services at an elnergency scene. \Vith the execution of this Interlocal Agreement - MOU. tile professional standards of basic patient care and equipment, quality assurance and documentation as defined by State of Florida Bureau of Emergenc.', Medical Services ,.,.ill. lbr thc first time. be nchieved countywide. FISCAL IMPACT: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMEN DATION: Board of County Commissioners approve tile lnterlocal Agreement tbr First Responder training bctx~cen Collier ('ount} and tile hmnokalcc Fire Control District. SUBMITTED BY: ;:_. ~ Date: Jef' Page. ~rector of Dperations. EMS APPROVED BY: Tom Storrar, Emergency Sen'ices Administrator AGENDA IT. EM I No. /rPP' JAN - 8 2002 pg. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT - MOU THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT dated this day of , by and between Collier County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as "County" and the Immokalee Fire Control District, created by Special Act of the legislature in the Laws of Florida 65-2032, hereinafter referred to as "Fire District" WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, this Agreement is being entered into between the County and the Fire District for the purpose of establishing dispatch protocols, rules and responsibilities of First Responder personnel in an emergency scene and the documentation required for patient care rendered pursuant to Section 401 435, Florida Statutes. NOW, THEREFORE ~n consideration of the mutual covenants provided herein the parties agree as follows: A. DISPATCH PROCEDURE: The Fire District Operates on Collier County Sheriff's Office Control channel, therefore the Fire District shall continue to operate under existing Collier County Sheriff's Office dispatch procedures, also referred to as the Collier County Fire Chiefs Communication Manual. B FIRST RESPONDER QUALIFICATION: To be eligible to perform as a First Responder, an individual employed by the Fire District must (a) successfully complete at a m~nimum a course that meets or exceeds the 1979 U.S. Department of Transportation First Responder training course, or an Emergency Medical Technician-Basic Course, that meets the U.S, Department of Transportation 1994 Revised EMT-Basic National Standard Curriculum, or as amended. (Proof of course compIetion is required); and (b) successfully AGENDA I~EM No ~'o /-- JAN - 8 2002 Pg. ~ complete an AHA CPR Basic Life Support for Healthcare Providers, or ARC CPR Basic Life Support for professional rescue. (Proof of course completion is required). C. FIRST RESPONDER RULES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: All First Responders, upon arriving at a scene and deeming that the scene is safe, will begin patient care, if needed, following the guidelines set forth by The Collier County Emergency Medical Services Department Medical Director (the "Medical Director"). If the scene is not safe, the First Responder will retreat to safety and notify other responding emergency units of the unsafe situation. A copy of the guidelines is attached as Exhibit A; Basic Life Support Protocol, or as amended. D QUALITY ASSURANCE (NON DISCIPLINARY) 1 A quality assurance program will be conducted by the Collier County Basic Life Support Coordinator (the "Basic Life Support Coordinator") and Medical Director on a monthly basis using the Fire District run report Run reports are the responsibility of the Fire District 2 The Basic Life Support Coordinator will conduct a two-pad quality assurance review: Individual run report review by Basic Life Support Coordinator or Medical Director The Medical Director or Basic Life Support Coordinator or Designee shall inform the Fire District or EMCC/liaison of any Quality Assurance investigations. Field evaluation where the Basic Life Support Coordinator, the Medical Director and/or the Fire District's Emergency Medical Care Coordinator, "EMCC", randomly respond to calls without notice to the Fire District. If a quality assurance review determines that there is a deviation from the procedures and guidelines, attached in Exhibit A, the Basic Life Support Coordinator shall complete a quality assurance worksheet in the form of Exhibit B, or as amended. 2 AGENDA I. ZEk No. JAN - 8 20O2 pg, 3. The quality assurance worksheet classifies quality assurance concerns in the following categories: Level 1: Constitutes a serious breach of protocol and/or has a negative impact on the patient's prognosis. The individual First Responder together with the Basic Life Support Coordinator will review ail Level 1 concerns. The Basic Life Support Coordinator and the Medical Director in conjunction with the Fire District's EMCC shall assure that the individual First Responder receives additional training and education. Level 2: Constitutes a breach of protocol that had minimal, or no impact on the patient, but would be considered poor clinical treatment or decision-making The individual First Responder together with the Basic Life Support Coordinator will review all Level 2 concerns The Basic Life Support Coordinator and the Medical Director in conjunction with the Fire District's EMCC wilt assure that the individual First Responder receive additional training and education Level 3: Constitutes a minor protocol deviation. All Level 3 quality assurances shall be considered minor and shall be handled through confidential interdepartmental mail. Level 4: Provides a means for communication between the individual first responder and Basic Life Support Coordinator. E IN-SERVICE PROGRAM. The in-service program provides face-to-face training for the First Responder In-services will be mandatory for all personnel whose role and responsibilities will be or could be that of a first responder. At a minimum, twenty-one (21) AGENDA I~EM No. /~, JAN - 8 2002 pg. F in-service classes a year will be offered at the Fire District's Stations. Scheduling of in- services will be done in conjunction with the Fire District's EMCC. The in-services will follow the DOT/EMT-B first responder curriculum and will contain both didactic and hands-on skill evaluations. The Medical Director will approve one (1) hour of Continuing Educational Units (CEU) per hour of in-service topic. The CEU's can be applied toward the re-certification of an Emergency Medical Technician Basics (EMT-B) certificate. EMT-B's are responsible for attending inservice classes to acquire the minimum 32 CEU's required by the Florida Department of HRS to recertify biannually. Failure to meet this requirement will mean immediate suspension of the EMT-Basic's ability to work under the roles and responsibilities as an EMT-Basic. Actions of this type will involve the Fire District chain of Command In order to enhance the training program, the Fire District will identify one person to act as the liaison or Emergency Medical Care Coordinator to the Basic Life Suppor( Coordinator and the Medical Director The liaison or EMCC shall work with the BLS Coordinator to enhance the BLS Program and will assist in teaching per the annual published inservice schedule. F Automatic External Defibrillator (AED) TRAINING. AED training will be completed yearly through the regularly scheduled in-service program. The AED training will include re-certification of a first responders CPR for Health Care Professionals when necessary. The Basic Life Support Coordinator will also handle all record keeping and quality assurance. G. DOCUMENTATION. Upon completion of a medical call, the First Responder meeting the necessary qualifications will complete the Fire District run report. Confidential medical information documented by the Fire District's First Responder run report will be handled in a manner consistent with federal and state laws. All basic life support run reports are confidential medical information. The format for written documentation of a patient encounter shall be: chief complaint, age and sex of patient, vital signs and assessment J AGENDA ITE~¢ 4 iNo..,,,:, ,.- j J JAN- 8 2002 J findings, followed by the treatment rendered. The First Responder shall also document times and who pedormed the procedures. This information shall be provided to the responding EMS crew prior to departure from the scene. H. EQUIPMENT. All basic life support medical equipment, not on the Standardized Equipment List shall receive approval by the Medical Director prior to purchase This will create a system that provides for the standardization of all basic life support medical equipment throughout the nine area fire districts. I. NOTIFICATION OF EXPOSURE TO INFECTIOUS DISEASES. In the event that Collier County EMS Department is notified of an exposure to infectious disease, EMS shall notify the Training & Safety Officer and/or EMCC of the Fire District so they may take appropriate action Upon notification, the treatment procedures shall be the responsibility of the Fire District J. FILING: A copy of this Agreement shall be filed with the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, Bureau of Emergency Medical Services, 1317 Winewood Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida, 32399-0700 where it will be retained as part of the Collier County EMS Department License File. K. OTHER AREAS OF AGREEMENT: The Fire District's EMT Paramedics may also participate in any EMS training available to EMS personnel, i.e.: BTLS, ACLS, PALS and monthly ALS Medical Director Inservices. L. AGREEMENT TERM: This interlocaf Agreement shall remain in full force and effective from October 1, 2001 and, thereafter, shall be deemed extended year to year upon the same terms and conditions contained herein. AGENDA I~JEM No. /~ ~- JAN - 8 2002 M TERMINATION: The County or Fire District may cancel this Agreement with or without cause by giving thirty (30) days advance written notice of such termination to the other party. N NOTICE: Notice to the County shall be provided to: The CoIIier County Emergency Medical Services Department Notice to the Fire District shall be provided to: The Immokalee Fire Control District. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this interlocal Agreement to be executed by their appropriate officials as of the date first above written. ATTEST: DWIGHTE BROCK, Deputy Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Robert B Tober, MD Colli~ounty Medical Director /J~ Matthews, C~irma ,~mmokalee Fire Control District BY: JamesD Carter, Ph.D,Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency cqu~eline Hubbard Robinson, Assistant County Attorney AGENDA I~EM No. ,,'~ i- JAN - 8 2002 DEPARTMENT M.O.U,- BLS PROGRAM BASIC LiFE SUPPORT PROTOCOL r OR P~_RoONN~,_ F/RE,~RESCUE ~ ~ ' '~' ~.~ ~'~ , ,..,B .... M~.u C,-,L DIRECTOR ~, ,. ROE. Em ~ E. OYD mr~ ,,:-~ . rz-,., ~ AGENDA li~::E M No. /~ JAN - 8 2002 The intention of this BLS Protocol is to assist the fire departments p~rticipc, ting in Me MOU in deiivering basic patient care to our community, consistent with medical s~=ndards. This revised 2000 version of BLS Protocols provides the Off-line mad/cst direction the~. is required for the EMT-Sasic to function within the guidelines set forth in the 1994 EMT-8 stsncards. The fei/owing general measures ~hail be sppiied to help promote eC;Tc!ency and ~sfety when rendering emergency care tc ~.he ill or in.iur~l: When applicable, obtain verbal consent pdor to t.matment. Respect the patient's ,fight to privacy and dignity. Courtesy, concern and oommen sense will assure *.he best care. Any competent adult has '-..he right ~ refuse any and all medical cam. Should a patient ~fuee care, an EMS Department Paramedic must, as.sure the appropriate release fcrm read and signed by the paEent. The first respcnder shall provide informs, t/on to the ,~S unit recjarding t. he patient's condition and treatment to L~',at point. If medications have b~n ~dminist~red, t~ ~,~ shall include a time, name cf mediation; amount ~dministemd, route and vitat s~Gns from the initial sss~sment and feassessmen~. When ~rst respcnders and E.=~IS Pammedic~ arrive on scene together, both shail work t~gether with medical equipment needs, etc., tc assure that Ye patient receives initial treatment from tho highest trained medical professional. Fire personnel shall n~t ~ceed ~c e p. sdent's 3ide wib'~out minimum basic ai¢.¥ay equ(cment and AED. AGENDA IT_~M No. JAN ~ 8 2002 Pg. ....n-iec,lc~' u~ Di.~ease F,"o~ocoi At ~tl times, use uniroyal prec~-uticns: !. Wear gloves to prevent contact with patient body fluids. 2. Wear masks and protective eye gear during proc~-dure~ ~J!(ely to generate droplet~ of body fluids. ~. Wear gowns during procedures likely to generate splashes cf body fluids. 4. Practica the proper c~eaning and disinfection cr disposal of equipment and supplies. 5. Wash hands thoroughly befors and after patient contact, and after *~he removal of glcv~s, if a First responder becomes exposed, they should immediately wash the contaminated --rea with soap and water as soon as possible and advise the E.~IS Paramedic3 sc they can relay to the ER Physician where the patient is transported to that a" significant e×gcsure" has occurred and request that the patient be tested. ALWAYS FOLLOW YOUR DEPA~T,~,ENT'$ ~'(POSURE PLAN! INFECTION CONTROLS AGENDA ITEM JAN - 8 2002 Each p~tient encounter shail include an initial asses3ment followed by a SAMPLE histc~ a~d m~ic~i or '~u~a a~es~ent. ~asei{ne vi~ls '~{{ ~e ~b~in~ and documen~d sicno ~ih ssse~ment ~ndings on ~e trip sheet for ~he dspe~men~ The Ympc~ance c~ a ~ong ~e~ent c~nnot be emph~i~ed enough because ~'he ~cuer ;n~e~en~ or t~a~ based upcn ~e ~e~ment findings. QUICK REFERENCE HISTORY GUIDE For a ~aeic H~,~oC~: 8=SIGNS & SY,~PTCMS A=ALLERGIES M=hIEDiCATICNS P=PRE¥1OUS ILLNESS L=LAST E~F_~L 5=EVENTS FR~CR For a history/assessment of FAIN: O=ONSET(What were. you doing when ~his becjan?J P=P.~OVOKES(W,flat makes the pain wo~?) C=QUALITY(What do~ the di~cm~ feet tike?) ~=~DtATION(Do~ ~e disco~o~ move another?) S=S~VER[TY(On a ~ale d % ~O...~e your ~ain) T=TIMING (How tong ~go did ~his begin?- duraticn) V=Have you taken ~agra in ~e p~st 24 bm? !f YES, DO NOT USE NTG;H 8/00 QUiC;< ~EFERENC~- FOR SA?~FLE HX & AS,3E-C.~,'~1ENT AGENDA ITEM No. F JAN - 8 2002 TO ASSESS THE LOC, USE AVPU A= ALE.~T & ORIENTED V= RESPONDS TO VERBAL STIMUL! p= RESPONDS TO PAINFUL STIMULI U= UNRESPONSIVE CAUSES A= ALCOHOL E= EPILEPSY ~= INSUL!N 0= OPIATES U= UREMIA T= TFC,,U MA Is there etoh on board? Has this patient seized? Insulin shock? Narcotics or some Rx cough reeds? Chemical imbblance? Has there been a recent Trauma? i= iNGEST ON cr INFECTION Overdose ? OR ,.u?/c o,,cc. . ~ v,- u ,, -,~ Hysteria ? S ./N,,-,~P,- Fainted? Veso-vaga/eoisode? 8/00 QUICF, REFEF, ENCB FOR ASSESS?tENT I~I~.;~ON~C.-, FOR LOC AGENDA ITEM ,/¢:, ~" JAN - 8 2002 pg. /~:~ -!S THE SCENE SAFE? -USE UNIVERSAL PRECAUTIONS- gloves, masks, gowns as ina'looted. -AS YOU APPROACH LOOK AT THE GENERAL APP~qPC. NCE - cons/der trauma in any medical p=uenr of altered LOC and take spinai precautions/f heir/s any doubt. -OBTAIN CHIEF COMPLAINT Ask, What's wron¢? ...-Vor'-u METHOD -ASSESS THE LEVEL OF CONSCIOUSNESS BY ...... -A - AlP'cay o open and ma,.~,,a~n us ng head-ti t-,.,'~ln hff or J~.v ~hrust as indicated ,ndlwt~ -B - Breathing- assess the rate end quality- AFP£Y OXYGEN NOWifprctcccl ~ ' .... -C - Circulation- check the c,srotid and radial pulses -D - Disability- Is there any bleeding that needs control? Assess Capillary refill and skin color, quality and temperature -E - F_xpose- E.~pose the areas t,hat are to be assessed ih the focused assessment "' ~' ' of vital signs includino the ~ulse. respi~tions and full b/cod pressure fViTAL SIGNS P, ANC-ES FC'R ADULT ~,ILD AND INFANT C,N OPPOSITE ~.~Ej INITIAL ...... ~EN ~ AGENDA IT~'Vl No. /o /~ JAN - 8 2002 . ', ' - : your assessment: Obtain a SAMPLE histow wnne peso, m,ng H~AD:check pupils for equa~:W and response to ~¢¢~ * mouth and breath C .... ~ NECK: check for JVD, sccessow muscle use -~ ~' ~ rash-hives,re,rations and breath THO~X: check for equal exF:n~,o,,, ASDOMEN: cnu~k u ~e ~ene, al sppesrsnce- F.st rrotruden~¢ palpate: so~? rldid? ~end~r? psln,ul? ~eRde co~press~on should be ~cn-~ainfui PELV~S: 9e~ers! sppesranc~ ' ' ' ~ . - ¢ -~ * strencth, ~dDs, m~hes and distal EXTREMETiE~: cnecx ~or mcv~men pulses ~ACX. check the skin for rashes and breath sounds FOCUSED MEDICAL AGENDA ITE~ No. /~ /~ JAN - 8 2002 pp. ?-/ UNIVERSAL PRECAUTIONS & SCENE SAFE? · ASSESS THE MECHANISMS OF INJURY (as you approach) · STABILIZE C-SPINE · ASSESS THE LEVEL OF CONSCIOUSNESS -AV F U METHOD · OPEN AND MAINTAIN AIRWAY WITH JA'¢~HRUST · ASSESS BRE'i, THiNG RATE & QUALITY; APPLY OXYGEN NOW 15 Ipm NR,Mssk Provide ventilaton/ suppo~ via EVM 8, *uoo or 02 BY NRM 15 LPM · ASSESS PULSES AT CAROTID AND FA. DIAL; if absent star~ CPR immediateiy · ASSESS BLEEDING & CONTROL HEMOR,q. AGE , ~'~POSE & INSPECT NECK: JVD? TRACHEA MIDL!NE? SQ EMPHYSEMA,? . ... · EXPOSE & iNSPECT THO,~,~,'~: FLA. ILS?- s~ab~i~ze immediately with ~ ,~kv drs,~. · OFiN SUCK. lNG WOUND? cover immediateiy with occuisive , AUSCULTATE- breath sounds present & equal? , LIFE THREAT NOTED? PEP, FORM ,%~.PID C-SPINE [MMO_~IL!7_CA. TiON , TREi'.T FOR SHOCK- ELEVATE LEGS = PERFORM A FULL HE&D TO TOE EXAM -SPLINT & BANDAGE AGENDA ITF~Vl No. JAN - 8 2002 pg. sssessmenb' SAMPLE history, and vital signs - ' · ,- 15 fpmvis NRM ,:dm[ms,ur ox'/gen In the conscious known diabetic patient who can swel!ow on command And DOES NOT have any signs of OVA such ~s facial droop, unitetsrsl weakness, inabilibj to follow commands, AND who denies histow cf not %kin~ their insulin for days, the E~T-S she!l: Administer t tube Ins~-oiucose FO by squeezing -~ small Amount onto a tongue biade, inse~ing ~ between the cheek and gums. Reco~d the time, dose and route, .. (if patient's family can pe.,fform reassess LOC, v,t,:l signs, skin quality -romp & condition Turn ~atient over to a · . p,=,,=n, to ta!k to an informed E:~S Dept. P~amedic 8100 ALTERED LOC- '.KNOWN DIASET;C TRADE NAMES: GLUTOSE. INSTA -GLUCOSE MECHANISM OF ACTION: RESTORES CIRCULATING BLOOD GLUCOSE LEVELS INDICATIONS: KNOWN DIABETIC THAT DISPLAYS GENERAL WEAKNESS, COOL MOIST S;KIN, QR HUNGER AND WHO CAN FOLLOW THE COMMAND TO SWALLOW CONTRAINDICATIONS: INABILITY TO SWALLOW UNCONSCIOUSNESS ANY SIGNB OF CVA (STROKE): UNILATERAL WEAKNESS FACIAL DROOP HEADACHE NORMAL GLUCOMETER READING BY FAMILY- 75 OR GREATER S, ~DE EFFECTS: NONE COMPLICATIONS: POSSIBLE ASPIRATION OF GLUCOSE DOSING: ADMIN. 1 TUBE OF GEL BY SQUEEZING SMALL AMOUNT AT A TIME ONTO A TONGUE BLADE AND iNTO MOUTH BETWEEN THE CHEEK & GUMS AGENDA IT, T~M No /~ JAN - 8 2002 ... /¢ ccen and maintain airway using Heed-tilt Chin-rift method in non traumas ci~e.'~ and maintain air, ray using Jawthrust manurer in traumas In unconscious pts. without a gag reflex: place en oropharngeal air;~y in semi-conscious p~s. place a well lubed Nasal air,ray Administer oxygen by nonrebreather mask @ 15 Ipm or Ventilate via BVM ,Nth supptement,~l 02 @ 15 Ipm if indicted by assessment findings if a patient refuses mask 02 then offer a Nas, si cannufa @ 8 !pm. if ~.ET OR GURGLING sounds are noted immediately roll the patient to ¢J?eir side Suction =~% n~eded but not exceeding ~E eeconds wiLho'~r¢, reo:o~enefion In a fulminating Fulmonar/ Edema, in an ai~"c/ay that is wet but is c/ear of emesis/vomit, the E:~ITB may p.c$it~ve pressure ventilate aggressively wi~h ghe SV'M ~ ~5 /pm 02. Remember t~e ~V7¢1 is not ~u~t, for non breathing patients - it ~,s for padents who ~re in enouch distress that they no longer are effectively brearhing cn their own/if they allow you t-o sit them in high ~ow!e,'~$ CoaSt/on and ven~itate them...they need it/. Ah'~WA¥ MAINTENA~'~C.': PROTOCOL AGENDA I T.~v~ JAN- 8 2OO2 J OBSTRUCTED AIRWAY conscious ~dult or chiid: admin, abdominal thrusts until the ---in,ray is cleared or pt collapses; for infants ~iternate back blows/chest thrusts uncen~c/ous: a~empt to ventilate; if successful continue assisting va~¢.ilaticns. if unsuccessful: reposition airway and attempt vent again if stilt unsuccessful: admin. 5 abdominal thrusts - open airway, look. sweep and attempt vent. repeat this cycle until the airway is clear, for infants: add the alternation of 5 back blows & 5 chest thrusts NEVER BLINDLY SWEEP A CHILD OR INFANT'S AIRWAY! Once airway is c/eared: HypeP/entiiate with E~VM and supplemental oxygen ~ 15 Ipm to ret/eve hypoxi-~ Airccav maii~tenance with suction and OPA if gag is absent. Supp~.,'t ventilations until ?stient'~ respirations are of adequate r~:te and quslit'/ 8100 OBSTRUCTED AIRWAY AGENDA ITEM No._ /¢ (- JAN - 8 2002 assassment/$A,~lPL~baseiine vJ~ open ~nd m~intain the air, ray use aircJav mamCen~nce ~ ~ ~ .~' ~ * ventilate with BVM with supp. 02 @ 15 lpm. ¢cutts every 5 seconds child or infant svew 3 seconds ( with ~ppropriate size F:V?~I ) reassess frequently to assure the presence of a pulse 8/OO AGENDA ITJ~M No. /~ ~' JAN - 8 2002 ,,,,. a~e,s=ment / SA~IPLE his~.";/ & baseiine ,/i~l signs consider spinel Fr~ceut/on$ if hi~,or'/ unk. ccnsider c~us~s for dec;eesed LOC - USE A E I 0 U -T i F S administer oxygen ~ 2 lpm NC with nip-,ray ma{ntenanc3 ,urn !em !~terai recumbent position eilow a safe piece for pcssible seizure ecfivity/ guard hesd & aircvay trea~' fcr shoc~ as indicated suction ready; if emesis occurs note sppeerance / ccnten*J amcunt package patient and reedy for transport rs~ssess v[tai signs ever,:, 5 min. & record ~f peflent is Diabedc foilow KNOWN DiA~ETiC .crctocoi C',/AJ SE]ZUF~S" CONFUS;ON ALTERED LEVEL OF CONSC',OUSNESS AGENDA IT,~M No. /o /~ JAN - 8 2002 Unstable Ti~uma Vi~im Altered LOC, dyspnea, chest pain, reepiratory rate 10 or belcw or above 30!rain, da!eyed capiilaw refill, absent radial pulse. BP below 90 systciic, or have a general poor appearance they shall ~e considered unstable end extricated w/th rapid extrication techniques: assess ability to move extremeties epply long backbcard C-Collar (measure and sppiy appropriate sized) eppiy 3 straps using CROSS STRAP TECHNIQUE apply head stabilizing device reassess ability to move St~bte Patients wi, th ,VIEGHANISM OF INJURY er nec~,¢b~c, lf PAIN: assess abiiib/ ~ move extremeties apply tong b~ckboard C-Coilar (measure and apply appropriate size) KED apply ~ straps using C,~OSS STRAP TECHNIQUE apply head stabilizing device reessess abilib/to move .ALL WATER F. BLATED ACC;DENTS, HANGINGS, FALLS, ,~lVC~ SHOULD HAVE SP!NAL pRECAUTiONS; PREGNANT .~IOMS: TiLT THE FULLY ]i~tIVIOBIL!ZED ,~,'~OTHER-TO-EE TO THE LEFT DEGREES- bhis increases blocd flew back tc her and baby! SPINAL ?¢~OTiON RESTRICT;ON- STA~BLE / UNSTABLE AGENDA ITEM No, /0 ~ JAN - 8 2002 rapid trauma assessmentJSA;'~IPLE/base!ina v[ta) signs rapid extric~()on end p~c~ge ~dminismr oxygen ~5 [pm NRM prctec~ the ai~sy ~nd anticipate v~miting pcsition in trendetenburg - feet elevated 6-12" main~in body heat- cover ~th blanket splint painful or deleted extremities in the position REAS3ESS FREQUENTLY ~/00 SHCCK assassment/SAMFL~'base.qne vital signs evaluate the mechanism of injury for foreign bodies OR chemical burns of the eye: immediate flush of both eyes with 2000cc of sterile Saline or clean water if necessary cover both eyes with moist sterile dressings t,~e ~¥csptien to ~hts rule is pene~J'ating injury of ~he eyeball for an injured glebe of the eye: assessment~SAMPL~'baseline vital signs assess vision do not apply pressure to the eyeball piece a moist sterile saline dressing over the eye/cover EOTH eyes reassure the patient reaesess 8/00 EYE !N JURIES AGENDA IT,EM No. /~, t-' JAN - 8 2002 ADULT TF~U&IA CRITERIA: 1. Meets color-coded tdaga system of 2 ~LUES or 1 F~ED. 2. GCS cf 12 or less, exc!uding those with known 12 or less ss their normei LOC. 3. Meets Iccai criteria: Traumatic OB patients over 20 v~eks gestation with potential for fetal distress. 4. Patient does not meet any of the cdteria listed above but. in ~e judgment of the EMTB or Paramedic, shouid be transposed as s Trauma Aler[. PEDIATRIC TRAUMA CRITERIA: FOR 15 YRS OR LESS 1. Meets color coded Pedi tdage system for 2 BLUES or 1 ,~ED. 2. P-~tient does not meet any of the trauma cdteris ei 2 BLUES or 1 RED, but Should be transported as a TRAUMA ALERT due to EMTB or Pzramedic judgment and he/she documents the reason on the State of Florida Trauma Criteria Form. When Fire Depar~hent E~"ITE,;~ or Paramedice think they have ~. Trauma AFe..-t they shculd alert the MEDCOM in nat Division on EMS TAC 1. Advise what vou are acting that meets trauma eie~ criteria and c~ordinate with the incoming ~edic Unit & MEDCOM. It will be the decision of the MEDCOM to preflight or send MEDFL!GHT 1; 5his is consistent with CCEMS Gene~i Orders on ,~,FI sad is the same dirscticn for ~edic Units. TRAUMA ALERTS AGENDA [T.,_EM No. /~ (~ JAN - 8 2002 initial/rapid trauma assessment/SAMPLE/pe,fform baseline A VPU control the c-spine spinal immobilize expediently using. ~,A¢ID. EJXTP, iCATION open airway using ja,~hrust and mann,sin airway suction as necessary Administer o~gen ~ 15 Ipm NRM if conscious Ventilate with BVM and supplemental 02 15 Ipm @ 15 vents/min. OnJy if unconscious & po$¢uring: Hypet-/entilate ~ 24-30 vents/min. control any e~ernai bleeding; apply drsgs as indicated treat for shock position the fully immobilized patient with head eievated 6 inches perform a head to toe assessment as scon as pcssible after ABC's assured splint any deformed, swollen or p. ainful extremities as time perTn,~its 8iO'O HEAD INJURY AGENDA ~T_E M No. ~'~ JAN - 8 2OO2 assesamen~;$Ai~tFLE.,'OPQRSTV/basetine vital signs admin, oxygen @ 2 ipm NC if the patient has a normai LOC and skin color ac!rain, e:cygen ~ 12 lpm NR,~, or suppo~ YenfiiaQon l~ LOC or cT~notic position of comfort; caJm & reassure patient Look for signs of CHF or Pulmonary Edema; if none noted and if wheezes or dry diminished lung sounds ara auscultated the EMT-E shall: ~)determine if ~he patient has a pr~scribed Aibutsroi inhaler 2) check for expiration date 3) shake the inhaler 4) Administer ! puff/inhaled, docume.-.ting the time, dcse, and reute. 5) Reassess ~nd .~cte any chanc;es in dyspnea, breath sounds ~nd co!or of the skin $) repeat a fut~ set of vital signs 7} The EMT-~ may repeat the inhaler ~-eatment cnca AS ~ m.~IA/C..Fu/=.~ ..... ~=. A INHALERS: GENERIC NAMES: ALBUTEROL, METAPROTERNOL ISOETHARINE TF,~DE NAMES: PROVENTiL, VENTOL!N ALUPENT, METAPREL ERONKOSOL, BRONKOMETER MECHANISM OF ACTION: ERONCHODILATION INDICATIONS: COPD, ASTHMA, BRONCHITIS, EMPHYSEMA CONTRAINDICATIONS: PULMONARY EDEMAJCHF DOSING: ASSIST PATIENT WITH INHALER - ADMINISTER DURING INHALATION ADMINISTER 1 PUFF S~DE EFFECTS: tachycardia,hypertensicn, weakness, nervousness, n~usea/vcmit/ncj AGENDA..[TE M No. JAN - 8 2002 assessment/SAMPLe'/baseiine vital signs do the OFQF~S-PV history for pain and carefuily document findings administe: mo/gen @ 15 tpm via NRM ~,o~,,,on cf comfort; calm and reassure patient De~ermine if there is a his~,ory of ches~ .3'aurae; if none noted +,hen me E?~fT-B shall: 1) Determine if the patient has prescribed NTG & HAS NOTtaken Viagra within 24 hrs 2) Check the expiration date but do not shake prior to admin. 3) Assure that the blood pressure is 100 systoiic or above 4) Instr',J¢. the patient to lift tongue 5) Administer 1 NTG .4 mg (1 tablet or 1 spray ) SL, in a lying or sitting pos/f/on; document t~e time, dose, route and BP 6) RE. ASSESS THE SEVERI~F OF PAIN ON 1-I0 SCALE AFTE,~ 4 M, NU ~-~ 7) Repeat administration of NTG .4mgSL every 5 minutes as long as the BP > 100 and discomfo¢~ is present; if relief noted then ,note the time and reassess. ...¢ , t,~n,~elenmurg_ ~ they can toior~te this pcsftJon w~.thout objection. Continue high flow 02. Re~ssess vitals. CHEST ?AIN CF CARDIAC ORIGIN NiTRCG YLCEPdN GENERIC NAME: NITRCGLYCERIN TRADE NAMES: NiTROBID,NITROSTAT,NITRONY MECHANISM OF ACTION: RELIEVES PAIN OF ANGINA BY VASODILATION OF THE CORONARY ARTERIES INDICATIONS: CARDIAC CHEST PAIN CONTRAINDICATIONS: CHEST PAIN RELATED TO A TRAUMA HYPOTENStON BELOW 100 SYSTOLIC SIDE EFFECTS: HYPOTENSION, HEADACHE, FAINTING DOSING: ADMINISTER PATIENT'S NTG .4MG SUBLJNGUAL EVER'( 5 MINUTES AS LONG AS BP REMAINS 100 SYSTOLIC OR ABOVE OR uNTIL REL!EF NOTED AGENDA ITrF-M No. lo t- JAN - 8 200? assessment - if respirations &pulse absent BEGIN CFF, if airway obstructed follow obst. airway protocol cansider trauma? hazards - conductive surfaces age & weight limits - administer o~gen 15 ipm via BVM with rese~ior APPLY LIFEPAK500AED AND FOLLOW THE SHOCK PROTOCOLS (SEE FLOW CHART ON BACK) Ifa Fublic Access AED is in use upon arrival, the EMT-B s,,~ll assist the rescuer by taking over airway, utilizing oxygen, airways, suction and the BVM to enhance the resoue effort. If the lay rescuer is fairing to achieve basic AED operation then the FD EMT-B shall placa their AED on the patient and continue the rescue per protocol and notify the BLS Coordinator immediately. IF A PULSE IS REGAINED: reessess and suppo~ventiiations to re!isys hypoxia as needed protect :h~ a~rwsv and suction as needed assess pedusion and obtain a full se~,of vital signs treat for shock REASSESS FREQUENTLY FOR A CAROTID PULSE PERFORM A FULL HEAD TO TOE LOOKING FOR ASSOCIATED INJUI,C, ES 8lO0 · ~' ~ =- OR RESPIRATIONS & AIRWAY PATENT then -'~ NO. ,~l.= LP 500 may be used on patients 8 yrs and over or $0 lbs. DRY CHEST & MOVE PATIENT TO A DRY SURFACE DO NOT USE AED IN TRAUMA ARRESTS DUE TO BLOOD LOSS USE ANTERIOR- LATERAl- PAD pLACE:'VIENT ~ PROTOCOL MANDATES THE AED OPERATOR CALL FOR .A DOWNLOAD 890-2780 AGENDA lT._EM NO. /¢ /~- JAN - 8 2O02 s. ssessmentJ SAMPLE/baseline vital signs administer oxygen @ 15 lpm NRM treat for shock; calm and reassure p,~tient If F~ient is a known allergic with an E~i-auto-i~iectJen pen burning skin is no,ed OR signs of ~mpesding aic,~ay compromise ~nd cr shcc/< ~he EMT-B shaft: ASSESS THE ~P AND ASSURE SYSTOLIC ~ELOW 188 1) Obtain ~he ps[tents Epi-pen and check expiration da~e ~' ~-~osa the lateral mid- thigh on patient's c) Prep ,he ~,,- with an alcohol prep 4) Administer the Epi-pen dosage that their Dr. prescribed; usuat doses: ADULT = .3 mg CHILD = .15 mg · . ~ *, ~r may note that some adult patients have However, me ,es~u~. Epilens . ? 5rog, Chis is usu~/ly due to age or cardiac n'stor~/. 5)/mmediate!y dispose of t,be Epi-pen /n~o a ~ED biohazard container, DO NOT ~ECAP[ . . ' ¢ them by mouth. ~ ~ Aha K,t- admin. 6) iF =e,,ad~/ tabs are =¢~o nre~ant ;n ,, :.'-'- ~ PEN E.=iNEPHP, tNE 1:t080 AUTO GENERIC NAME: ,ADRENALIN ----^~c ,,, &M~- c-=l--,!JEC? ON BP-PEN, ARA KIT/ MECHANISM OF ACTION: CONSTRICTS BLOOD V:SS~_~, COUNTERACTS HISTAMINE EFFECTS (SHOCK) BRONCHODILATES INDICATIONS: ITL, H,NG, SURNING OR HIVES IN KNOWN ALLERGIC PATIENT AIRWAY COMPROMISE SIGNS SHOCK DUE TO ANAPHYLAXIS OF AN ALLERGIC REACTION OR SYSTOLIC >-l$0 CONTP. AINDiCATiONS: NO EVIDENCE DIZZINESS, CHEST PAIN, HEADACHE SiDE EFFECTS: TACHYCARDIA, PALLOR, NAUSEA. VOMITING, ANXIOUSNESS, TREMBLING, INCREASES 02 CONSUMPTION BY THE MYOCARDIUM DOSING: ADULT PEN DOSE= .3mg given mid-thigh, I~--ierally PEDI PEN DOSE = .15 mg given mid-thigh, laterally Note: Adrenalin increases the myccardisI oxygen consumption, therefere, MUST BE ADMINISTE,RED ALONG WI~'H HIGH FLOW OXYGEN to prevent cardiac ccm. p_romise, E~! THA~ HAS EXPIRED AND iS STILL WITHIN EXPh~ATION DATES APPEARS CLEAR BROWNISH IN COLOR- DO NOT ADMINISTEr! AGENDA No. JAN - 8 2002 assessment/SAMPL~_ibaseiine vital signs aisc, history of: due date?, prenata! care?, compiications?,cFowning?, feeiing need to move bowe!s? membranes ~uptured? place mom in lea lateral recumbent position untii delivery time remove clothing from the waist down and drape with sheet assist with the deiivery and immediate!y suction the nares & mouth perform the ABCD's for infant de!ivew: A= AIRWAY- sniffing position / maintain B= BREATHING- stimulate if rate/quality poc.r- resuction as necessaw C= CIRCULATION- check brachiai puise sta~ CPR < 80/min. D=DRY! - dry infant off immediateiy and wrap in c!ean wa~,"m toweis with cap! wait to cut cord until after AB:CD's NOTE 7!ME OF DEL/VE.-?,¢ kee,o baby below or love! to mother untii cord is c!amped & cut cla~o cord 6-8" away from infant and cut: inspect for bleeding if ble~ding noted then app!y another ciam~ I" closer to infant, cut. Pe~orm an APGAR score @ ! minute apd 5 minutes after de!ivory 8.100 PROt..APS~-g CORD Paeco mother in knee-chest pos/t/on wi~h Du~oc.~(s elevated secure ai¢¢,'av and edm/n/s~er oxygen 15 /pm N~M W/th a ate,die 21cved .hone:. gently .gush the beby up thc vagina ~, off the c3,~ to al/ow perfusion of the cord; cheo.~: for a pulse in the cord maintain this poe/t/on - wrep t,be cord with moist saline dress/nos reassure mom BREECH BIRTH If the infant's head is not delivered action must be taken to prevent suffocation. With a sterile gloved honE. the EMTB shall inserf a finger into ¢he infant's mout,~ and pull the chin down to the chest; have the mother push and the baby s,~ouid deliver. Suction ... Never attempt to puli the baby out of the vagina This is a true emergency; upon the ALS unit arrival the patient should be loaded for immediate trans~orf. 8/00 coMpLICATED CHILDBIRTH'/ APGAR SCORE AGENDA I,T_E M No. /~,/-- JAN - 8 2002 HEAT EXHAUSTION: cool-warm/moist skin, general we-~kne~, tschycardia.!ow or failing history or exposure to heat and humidity ,¢4th poor rehydrstion assessmen~SAMFLE~baseii~e vi~l signs MOVE THE FAT1E~T TO A SHADED/COOLER ARE~WE~L VE:VT~TED ~ure an ai~ay and ~dmini~er o~gen ~12 Ipm N~ cool the patient by removing exce~ive clothing and applying Lg. amounts of cool H20, DO NOT APPL Y iCE or CO~R WITH WET 70WELS If the patient is aleffi and has no nausea give water to d~nk fim~ Ne~ ~ G~tomde ~jpe drink dilut~ ~:1 with water t-2 giasses; if nausea or Ait LOC hold an~hing my mouth rea~S vi~ls .~., including amount and type o[ fluids if any we~ giv~ ~ive repO~ ~o ~ ~' H~T STROKE: Altered LOC to unconscicusn~s, hct d~ skin, tachyc~rd~a, hypotensicn. ~smen~SAMPL~'baseline vi~t signs ~OVE pATIENT TO A SH~DED/COOLE~ ARE~ELL VENTi~T~D secure ~n sm~y and ~dm~nister oxygen 15 ~pm NRM cr ~ ~s ~MMEDIATELY REMOVE CLOTHING .. COOL p. aTIE;~T with garden hcse OR fi~ Place a wrap~ cold pac.~ behind the nec~ AVOID USING TOWE[S TO COOL: F.~N ~A~ WET give no¢hing by mou~ [e~ ~/it~! signs and c3~inue c=oiing 8100 HEAT E~ERGENC~ES assessmentJSAMPL~baseiine vital signs gently remove patient from the cold environment (Remember: rough handling can cause cardiac arrest) remove any cold/wet articles of c~othing- replace with dry blankets administer oxygen 10-12 Ipm NRM (warTned If possible} 8/00 COLD EMERGENCIES AGENDA IT. EM No. /,~ /" JAil - 8 2002 assesementlSA,~lpLEibase{ine vita] signs STOP THE BURNING PROCESS if burning is present CONSIDER ASSOCIATED INJURIES- pen~orm ~ ccmpl~e head to ~ sdministsr high flow cxy~en ~t0-12 lpm NRM assess bhe ESA % using the Ru!e of Nines check ~e a~ay for signs of: soctie n~r~s, tongue n~d hoarssnsss, ccughin~ cover burns wi~h moist s~Hte snline drsssings then cover with d~ s~eriie wrap th~ patient in a c~ean d~ shee~ treat for shock ff [he burn w~s due to dry/iime: ~,~.USH OFF D~.Y L~,{E FIRST THEN FLUSH WiTH COP!OUS Ah~.GUNTS CF WATER tf the burn was due to other chemicals then: immedi~,e!y flush with c~pious amounts of w-c~r remember tc remcve c',cthing and jewetr~~ being c3refu! to keeF it with p~tient 8/00 5URNS THE.,RULE OF NINES ~mst~cn cf BumeO INFANT AGENDA IT, E~ No. ~o JAN - 8 FOR ST~NG F~ YS: pcsition o~ comfcr[ essessment & vital signs If ve.,'./warm water and a bucket is available then submerge the limb in vew warm water; the first responder should test the water first with own hand to prevent burn. Instant pain relief is achieved with submersion of the affected limb Hot packs may leak, causing chemical or ~ermal bun~s. DO NOT APPLY HOT PACKS TO THE iNJURY; immersion in ve~'y werm water is ',he goal. FiRE CORAL, JELLY FiSH AND MAN OF WARS: DO NOT RUB; causes ruptur~',~f venom sac~ in ~kin! Position of comfort assessment & vital signs Rinse affected area with saline or salt water Rinse with vinegar and then again with saline or salt water S~dnkle meat tenderizer on affected are-= and scrape cfi with a card Remove large tentacles with tape in quick pull off Monitor for developing symptoms Treat for shock with 02 15 Lpm and Trendelenburg if necessaw 81OO MARINE FAUNA iNJURIES AGENDA ITEM No. /o F JAN - Pcsition of comfort Da not ~llow the victim to ambulate! Assessment & vital sians Assess for envenoma~ion: PAIN, SWELLING, DISCOLORATION, SHOCK? ...,,, umlty Remove any constricting items or jewe!w from biEen ~'- ' O~gen 15 Ipm NRM If shcck is noted place patient in Trende!enburg position and cover w/blanket Wra~ bi,eh extremity with lymphatic (LIGHT) pre~sure in an ace bandage wrapped proximM to distal ~nd splint in a Hgid splint, keep hes~ ]evel 8/00 SNAK~5~TE AGENDA IT_EM No. /~ f- - n,', JAN 8 Pg. ~ Dl,e o should oe truoted for decompression s,c,~, =so ,or vympLom~ becin more than i0 minutes following the dive. !t usually appesrs within 12 ho~'rs after the dive but may cccur as IonL2 aS 48 hfs after the dive. Symptoms inc!ude: deep, dult ache with p~in on movement of the joints psra!ysis/paraesthesia ;. h' blotchy skin ,~C, .IRg, di~iness, staggering gate chest pain, dyspnea, pulmcnaw edema, unconsciousness P~ace patient in Left Lateral Recumbsnt position and elevate feet 6-12" O.~yge,q 15 ipm NRM/assure adequate ventJiation Vitats and sssess/resssess frequently/Obtain DiVE HISTORY AS SELOW Ad,zinc incaming E~S u~it ~f not already onsc~ne ~ec3u~e ,~¢EDFLIGHT ccnsideradon for ~is p~ent for a Iow aid~uce flight ~o ~y~e, ~r~c LEE DYSSA~JC DIVING iNJUPJES Di'¢E NISTOEY C, UICK REF: Number of dives in the past 72 hrs. Depth of dive .~ Bottom time on dive Surfaca interv@l of each dive Details of the IN WATER DECOMPRESSION Whether the diver attempted iN WATER DECOMPRESSION ( A NO NO!) Dive complications, if any Pre dive and post dive activities Onset of symptoms Decompression sickness will usually manifest it's seif within the first hour of surfacing and cert2, inly within the first 6 hrs. Symptoms occurring within the first 10 minutes suggest air embolism. Ref: p~ramedic Emergency Care, Brady AGENDApLTEM No. /'~ /- JAN - 8 2002 COLLIER COO~gTY MOU-~LS PROGRA~%Z WORKSHEET MEDICAL DIP,_ECTOR: COI~=.~,~!TS: DATE AGENDA ITE~ No, /~' F JAN - pg. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Presentation regarding the results of the special legislative session and upcoming 2002 regular legislative session. OBJECTIVE: To receive a presentation regarding the results of the special legislative session and upcoming 2002 regular legislative session. CONSIDERATION: On November 13, 2001 the Board of County Commissioners took an important step towards ensuring that Collier County Government's interests are well represented with the State and other governmental and/or private entities when they approved the appropriation for professional lobbyists services. As a professional lobbyist representing Collier County, Mr. Keith Arnold of Arnold and Blair, L.C., will present the results of the recently completed special legislative session and provide a preview the regular upcoming legislative session scheduled to convene on January 22. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board receives the presentation from Mr. ArnoLd regarding the results of the special session, and upcoming regular 2002 legislative session. SUBMiTTED~B~'~L'~-ZZcC'..,CZ- C~ /"(--~'~-'~-~ Date: ' Beth Walsh Assistant to the County Manager APPROVED BY: ~_.~- ~'%~ (~ C-' ---~ Date: ~ Leo Och./,~_r. / ' t Assis ant Cou K/Manager EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AUTHORIZE STAFF TO PREPARE A SCOPE OF SERVICES AND ISSUE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NAPLES PARK COMMUNITY PLAN. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners consider the priority of a community planning initiative and give direction on the timing and phasing, staff resources, and funding to initiate a community plan process for the current fiscal year and authorize staff to issue a request for proposals (RFP) so that community and corridor plans may be prepared for Naples Park. The purpose of a community plan would be to coordinate the improvement and redevelopment of a maturing commercial or residential area consistent with [ts community character such that property values, livability and commerce would be enhanced over time. CONSIDERATION: In the June 2001 Community Character Plan Workshop, the Board indicated its support for community planning for certain areas in the county by suggesting that funds be set aside for outside consulting services. In addition, the Board committed that Naples Park would be the first area to be considered for a community plan. Consistent with this objective, staff has met with community leaders from Naples Park. In order to proceed at this point, staff will need Board direction to begin RFP process for the consulting services. The community and corridor plans for Naples Park generally will include the following: Analysis of Assets and Opportunities · Land Use Data Analysis · Property and Business Owner Interviews · Market and Location Analysis · Existing Transportation Framework Analysis · Community Preference Survey Three Community Workshops · Community Vision · Alternative Concepts · Preferred Redevelopment Plan Preferred Redevelopment Plan · Design Guidelines, Zoning Overlay, Transportation Framework · Four Catalyst Projects with Cash Flows · Illustrative Plans to Include Land Use Plan, Transportation Plan, Open Space Plan, Design Guidelines Plans and Detailed Plans of Selected Subareas, Corridors, Local Streets and Prototype Blocks. ...... .... PF 3. Implementation Plan Marketing Strategy Recommended Funding Sources Evaluation of Establishing Additional Areas within the County's CRA Schedule of Actions: Timing and Phasing Other Implementation Strategies Upon selection of the consultant(s), extensive staff time would be dedicated to managing the contracts, gathering data, coordinating workshops, citizen advisory committees and public input, and evaluating documents. Staff proposes to manage the Naples Park Study with available staff resources. However certain positions affected by the hiring deferral programming need to be filled. While this is the first request to move forward with a community plan based upon the Dover Kohl Report, it is worth noting that staff has met with representatives from the Golden Gate and East Naples Civic Associations, and it is anticipated these Associations, as well as Immokalee, will be formalizing requests to the Board for similar studies in the near future as well. Further, the current planning projects of a similar nature include the Rural Lands Study, the Rural Fringe Study, the North Naples Corridor, the Golden Gate Master Plan and staff support to the Smart Growth Horizon Committee. It is recommended that these proposals be evaluated, prioritized and reviewed for resource impacts as part of the FY 03 Budget Cycle. FISCAL IMPACT: Costs associated with the type and extent of these plans could range from $50,000 to $100,000. However, that figure will not be definite until a firm is selected, a contract negotiated, and is brought to the Board for approval. Funds would be appropriated from MSTD general fund reserves. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Policy 4.7 of the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan adopted in October, 1997 states that redevelopment plans for existing commercial and residential areas may be considered by the Board. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners direct staff to prepare and issue a request for proposals for a community and corridor plan in Naples Park. To then bring back these proposals to the Board for consideration to determine if funds are available at that time. PREPARED BY: AMY TA,.~'LOR, .MCP~PRLNC[PAL PLAN.~'ER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN~NTNO SECTION REVIEWED BY: STAN LITSING~ER, AICP COMPREItENS~"E PLANNING MANAGER RE'~TE WE D BY: [HO.MAS KUCK. PE, LNTERi_M DIiLECTOR PL,~\~,I'qG SERVICES DEPAff4TMENY DATE DA [E DATE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT ,AGENCY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECO*IMENDATION THAT THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DIRECI' STAFF TO SUBMIT A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) APPLICAI'ION FOR A DRAINAGE PROJECT ON LINWOOD AVENUE IN THE BAYSItORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMPONENT REDEVELOPMENT AREA TO FURTtlER PROMOTE REDEVELOPMENT; FIND THAT PROJEC'F COMPLIES WITH TtlE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AND THE COLLIER COUNTY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN: AUTHORIZE CRA CHAIRMAN TO SIGN APPLICATION AND LETTER CERTIFYING TttAT THE PROJECT WILL MEET A NATIONAL OBJECTIVE AND THAT THE CRA HAS THE CAPACITY AND RESOURCES IN PLACE TO UNDERTAKE TttE PROJECT. OBJECTIVE: To receive direction from the CRA to submit a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) application for a project in thc Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Component Redexclopmcut area to further promote i-cdcx clopment. CONSll)I.;RATIONS: Oil March 14~ 2000 tile Board of County Cominissioncrs adopted Resolutions 2000-82 and 2000-83 establishing the Collier County Community Rcde,.elopment Agone) and identifvin~ t;;o areas v, ithin unincorporated Collier County (Bayshore/Gatcway Triaug]e and hmnol~ale~e) as areas in need of redevelopment. On May 23, 2000 and June 13, 2000~ rcspcctivel5. the CRA and tile Board of County Commissioners adopted tile Redevelopment Plan for both areas. Infrastructure improxemcnts to reduce flooding and improxe v. atcr qualit) v. erc of critical importance itl the Redc,,elopment Plan for both redc',elopment areas. On December 13. 2001, tile Ba.~shore/Gateway Triangle Local Redexclopment Adxisor5 Board rexicx~ed the needs for stormwater management and improved drainage in lhe Basshore and Gatex~a> areas and determined to recommend to the CRA that tx~o CDBG grants be prepared and su/mdttcd to the Housing and Urban Improxcment Department for thc folloxt lng t~xo projects: 1) Drainage improxemcnts akmg Linv. ood Avenue in tile Gateway Triaugtc/Shado'alav, n Neighborhood; and 2) Acquisitiou of t~,,o parcels or, ned by The Botanical Gardens, Inc. referred to as tile Prelude Gardens property/Lake Kelly (lots 108 and 109), totaling approximately 16 acres. The Advisory Board included in their recommendation that staff determine tile estimated costs of each project, including the estimated match that would be required. The Advisory Board supported both grants, but also recommended that if the costs are too high and tile matching fnuds insufficient to support both projects, that an application be prepared only for tile Linwood project this >ear. The decision to rank the Linwood project above the Lake Kelly project was based upon two factors: 1. There is an existing, compreh6nsive stonnwater management project underxvay invoh'ing an interconnected system of pipes, ponds and lift stations that will get tt~e water from mo of the most flood impacted streets - Kirkwood Avenue and Linwood Avenue down to a 2.5 acre holding pond and pump station on the north side of Lee Street where the water will be graduall~ge, kk{~ the pond throu~,h= the existin~ channel to the US 41 storm drain system. Thc ~th'aina~e~' mpc,_Z~ ~°n ~ iAN f~ g Lin;\ood ~ill then connec! to thc lurgcr interconnected system und will help to reduce some of Ibc periodic flooding of tile properties on Linwood Avenue and the surrounding neighborhood: and 2. Tile Pathways Ad;isory Committee (PAC) and the Mctropolitun Planning Organization (MPC) ha;c included Linwood Avenue from Airport Road to Commercial Drive in the Puthways 2002 Project for proposed pathways improxcments that will provide u sidewalk along the north side of Linwood Axenuc. Thc Metropolitan Planniog Organization has estimated that the sidewalk along Linxxood will cost approximately $65,000. Without the proper drainage system in place, the sidexxalk/bikepath would have to be constrncted closer to thc street and would not provide thc sumc level of safety that a more separated sidewalk could provide. The Lin;;ood project is therefore part of a larger program of infrastructure impro;ements underx; a.x itt Ibc rcdcxelopment areu. which ;,,'ill provide improved drainage for a large area und will proxide a sidexxalk for school children und residents to saI~ly move throughout the neighborhood. The adopted Redcxclopincnt Plan refers lo flooding as a problem: -significant and frequent flooding throughout the Oatcxxa) area is attributed to Iow elevations and inudequatc stoi'nl water munagcmcnt s}stcm5.' This improxcment xxill therefore contribute to u larger program of infrastructure improxcmcnts designed to address one of thc tm0or problems in the redevelopment arcu. The Rcdcxclopment Plan also identifies tiao absence of sidex~ alks on local streets within its listing of "unsafe or unsanitary conditions." Thc Bas5horc/Gatcx;a3 Local Rcdcxclopn/cnt Ad;isor3 Boarct also supported the sidcx;alk project. Staff has e;aluated tile grant and match potential and have determined that for no',~ the most efficient use of the tax increment ftmds filr this round of Cf)B(; grants is to pro',ide u match for tile lan;,, cod Axenue project only. Thc Ad~i*or5 Board bus also been xxorkmg ell a x;ork progrum for ullocation of thc 2000-200t TIF. xxlfich xxitl be presented to thc CRA for approval at a lurer date. Approxal of thc CDBG grant. hox~cxer, is needed immediately to meet thc grant deadline of Januar3 18. 2002. Thc match to be proxided for this grant is x~ithin the amount recommended by the Advisory Bourd for infrastructure improxcmcnts. The funcling for this match ~ill come from those 2000-2001 TIF dollars ah'cad) deposited in Fund 187 (total of S121.025). The Advisory Board has suggested itll allocation of 605; of the 2000-2001 TIF funcls for infrastructure and land acquisition needs. Thereh)re, staff anti the adxisory bonrd recommend that the CRA approve nn expenditure of the 2000-2001 TIF fnnds not to exceed $72~000. It is anticiputed thut with all the other projects underway in thc Gatexxa3 area that can also be used as a match, thc full 572,000 will not be necessary, ho~xcvcr, it is necessary for thc CRA to approve a maximum amount to be used as the cash match. FISCAL IMPACT: In tile early stages of CRA development, grants are particularly important as tile T1F a;ailuble is t)picully minimal and the funds in high demand. Thc CDBG Grant Program was chosen because it can pro;ldo funds for such infrastructure improvements and does not require a specific match. Such infrastructure improvements to improve drainage and s[orlllWa[el' lnanagomcllt were identified as critical projects fi~r Phase I (2000-2005) in the Redevelopment Plan. mor~ t~n Grant applicants are cncouru~cd lo provide matching funds, therefore, u use of n~ of thc 2000-2001 TIF is suggested by staff as a match for lhis project. Thi{ ,, allocation to bc recommended by tile Ad;'isory Board to tile CRA for infrastructure and land acquisition expenses. Costs associated with relaled infrastructure improvements, i.e. cost of sidexxalk improxemcnt {565.000) and associated drainage improvements all contribute towards the larger projccl and ~xill count as a match as \Nell. To make the overall program successful and lo coordi~lale thc construction schedules, thc CRA will need the cooperation of the Stormx~atcr Managcmem and Transportation Dcparm~cnts. Should the CDBG grant not bc awarded, other means to achiexe the infrastructure improvements will be necessary. GROWI'll MANAGI5MF~NT PI,AN/I,IEI)EVEI,OI'M15NI' PI,AN IMPACT: Tile proposed project implements the Growth Management Plan and tile Redc,.elopment Plan by proxiding infrastrtlcture improvements to improve tile health, Kafety and welfare of the community and to contribule to the rcde:'elopment goals of tile re'ea. ADVISORY BOARD ANi) P1.ANN1NG SERVICES RECOMMENI)ATION: Direct staff to submit a Comnlunity Dex'elopment Block Grant (CDBG) application for a drainage project on Linx,.ood Axenue in the Bayshore/Gatex~ay Triangle Component Redevelopment Area to further promote redcxelopment with a cash match not to exceed 572,000: fred that pru.iect complies xxith the Collier County Growth Management Plan and thc Collier Count5 Redexclopmcnt Plan: authorize CRA Chairman to sign application and letter certifying that the project will meet a national objectix e and lhal the CRA has the capacity and resources in place to undertake the project. PREPARED BY: NIARLENE FOORD PRINCIPAL PLANNER CONIPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION l)cccnfl'" ~'c1'17. 2001 DATE REVI,EWED BY: ,/ .. STAN LITSINGE~5,. AICP CONIPREHENSIVE PLANNING MANAGER DATE TONI KUCK INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR JOltN BOLDT ' STORMWATER MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR DATE DATE APPRgVED BY: /3 JOHN D'[JNNUCK 1NTERI~I ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES -3- DATE JAN 0 8 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM APPLICATION FOR FUNDING ASSIS~IANCE FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 FUNDING PERIOD: JULY 1, 2002 - JUNE 30, 2003 DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN IMPROVEMENT Greg Mihalic, Director COLLIER COUNTY HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDING FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 FUNDING PERIOD: JULY 1, 2002 - JUNE 30, 2003 DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION JANUARY 18. 2002. AT 5:00 P.M. *** PLEASE READ INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE COMPLETING **'~: *** FULL APPLICATION PACKET MUST BE RETURNED WITH ALL REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS (APPLICATION PACKET PAGES 3 TO 22) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF ADA, THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE REQUESTED IN AN ALTERNATE FORMAT. PLEASE CONTACT HOUSING AND URBAN IMPROVEMENT, AT (941) 403-2330 Greg Mihalic, Director Housing and Urbau lmproxelrtent 3050 North Horseshoe Dine, Suite 275 Naples. Florida 34104 (941 ) 403-2330 JAN 0 8 200? COLLIER COUNTY ItOUSING AND URBAN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT APPLICATION FORM TABLE OF CONTENTS Section SUMMARY OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ................................................................ ix IMPORTANT FACTS REGARDING THE APPLICATION PROCESS ........................................................................ 1. APPIACANT INFORMATION .................................................................................................................................... 3 II. ACTIVITY AND PROJECT INFORMATION ...................................................................................................... 3 111. ACTIVITY/PROJECT MANA(;EMENT AND IMI~I.EMENTATION ............................................................... 7 IV. PROJECT AND ACTIVITY BUD(;ET. ................................................................................................................ V. ACTIVITY IMPACT ............................................................................................................................................... 14 VI. CI)BG NATIONAL OBJECTIVE REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................................ 16 VII. I.EGAL STATUS AND CONSISTENCY ~ 1'[11 LOCAL GOVERNMENTAl. PLANS ................................. 17 VIII. COMMITMENT TO Al)DRESS TIlE COMMUNITY'S ttOUSING AND NON-IIOUSING NEEDS ...... 19 IX. ATTACHMENTS REQUIRED ..............................................................................................................................20 X. GLOSSARY OF TERMS ........................................................................................................................................ 23 XI. PRELIMINARY EVALUATION CRITERIA ...................................................................................................... 28 APPENDIX I INCOME LIMITS ....................................................................................................................................... 32 APPENDIX 2 INSTRUCTIONS FOR CDBG APPLICATION ..................................................................................... 33 - iii - ¢~' SUMMARY OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT Conm-css created tile Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) with the passage of tile Hou}in? and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended. Section 101(c) of the Act [42 U.S.C. 5301(c~'1 outlines tile following: "Tile primary objective of Title I of the Housing and Community De`.elopment Act of 1974, as amended, and of the Community Development Program of each grantee under tile Title is tile development of viable communities, by providing decent housing and a suitable livinE environment and expanding economic opportunities, principally to persons of lox','- and moderate- inco~le. Consistent v,'ith this primary objective, not less than 70.0 percent of CDBG funds receixed by a grantee shall be used in accordance with the applicable requirement for acti`, ities that benefit persons of Joy,- and [lloderatc-incollle." Tile United States Depal'tment of Housing and Urban Developmcnt (HUD) places adnfinistrati`.e responqbilit,, for tile CDBG Pi'ogram itl Collier County on tile Board of Commissioners (BCC). Collier Count`. Dep~;rtmcnt or'Housing and Urban lmproxemcnt (HUI) administers tile CDBG Progran~ on behalf of tile BCC. Tile Collier County CDBG entitlement jnrisdiction is comprised of all areas itl unincorporated Collier County. as well as t`.`.o t2) municipalities, x`.hich have signcd participating party agreements v. ith thc Count`. for Fiscal Years 2001. 2002 and 2003. These are Ciu of Naples and City of Marco Island: ItOUSING AND URBAN IMPROYEMENT (ItUI) WEI~COMES YOUR APPLICATION SUBMISSION. TWO (2) APPLICATION WORKSHOPS IIAYE BEEN SCHEDULED (DECEMBER 4, 2001, Al' 6:00 P.M. AT IMMOKALEE COMMUNITY PARK AND DECEMBER 6, 2001, AT 6:00 P.M. IN GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER) IIUi STAFF WILL PROVIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, IF NEEDED. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION. PLEASE CALL SUSAN ALDEN, HU1 MANAGER AT (941) 403-2339 OR I.EE COMBS, IIUl MANAGER AT (941) 659-5750. IMPORTANT FACTS REGARDING THE APPLICATION PROCESS - APPLICATIONS MUST BE RECEIVED BY IIU! BY $:00 I'.M. EASTERN TIME ON TIlE DEADLINE DATE (JANUARY 18, 2002). Al,l, APPIACATIONS MUST lie SUBMITTI:,D IN DUPIACATE (()NE ORIGINAl, AND ONE COPY). NO FAXES. - COMPLETE ALI, SECTIONS, FOLLOWING TIlE INSTRUCTIONS PROVIDED: · Please read the instructions given in the Application and in the Instruction Section. · Please use actual format (forms) included iu Application. Applications must be typed or printed. · Please clearh' label all attacbments. · No binders -' binder clips are acceptable. - APPLICATIONS, WltlCH DO NOT MEET TIlE ESTABLISttED DEADLINE WILL NOT I~;E CONSIDERED. NO EXCEPTIONS. NO WAIVERS. - SUBMISSION 1S FINAL - APPLICATIONS WILL BE EVALUATED AS SUBMI"I'TEI). NO AMENDMENTS WILL BE ALLOWED. - ACTIVITIES INVOLVING ONLY PLANNING STUDIES ARE PROIIIBITED. APPLICATIONS NO"I' MEETING THE REVIEhV THRESIIOED WILL BE ELIMINATED FROM FURTItER RE\FEW. PLEASE REFER TO TIlE INSTRUCTIONS. - ALL BLANKS MUST BE COMPLETED ' ANY MISSING OR INCORRECT INFORM-VrlON WILL ItAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON YOUR APPLICATION. USE N/A ~VtltlRE RESPONSE IS NOT APPLICABLE. - ALL APPLICANTS ARE ENCOURAGED TO PROVIDE MATCtIING FUNDS. MATCtIING CONTRIBUTIONS WILL POSITIVELY IMPACT YOUR APPLICATION. ALL MUNICIPALITIES MUST HAVE THEIR ACTIVITIES REVIE'~VED AND PRIORITIZEI) BY THE COUNCIL. (PLEASE REFER TO SECTION VII SUBSECTION A). - FOR ALL ACTIVITIES TO liE LOCATED WITIIIN MUNICIPALITIES, THF, APPIACANT MUST SUBMIT PROPOSED ACTIVITIES TO RESPECTIVE MUNICIPALITY FOR PRIORITIZATION AND/OR DETERMINATION OF CONSISTENCY WITtl LOCAL PLANS BY TIlE COUNCIL. ATTACIt OFFICIAL EVIDENCE OF Tills ACTION (e.g., MINUTES, RESOEUT1ONS, ETC.) TO "I'HE APPLICATION. (PLEASE REFER TO SECTION Vll.C.) ItAVE APPLICATION SIGNED BY THE APPROPRIATE PERSON: (Unsigned applications or applications signed by the inappropriate person, will nnt be consideredl Municipalities ...................... by Mayor or City Manager Agencies ............................... by Chairperson, Board of Directors County Departments ........... by Director of the Department Otherl ................................... by President *** CALL SUSAN ALDEN, HUI MANAGER AT (941) 403-2339 OR LEE COMBS, HUI MANAGER AT (941) 659-$750 FOR ASSISTANCE IN COMPLETING APPLICATION *** AGENDA ITEM ?nNO JAN COLLIER COUNTY ttOUSING AND URBAN IMPROVMENT ACTIVITY APPLICATION FORM READ ALL INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE COMPLETING APPLICATION "APPLICATION MUST BE TYPED OR PRINTED" "NOTE: PAGES 3 TO 22 MUST BE RETURNED WITH REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS" Contact Susan Alden at i9411 403-2339 or Lee Combs at (941 t 659-5750 t'or assistance -2- APPLICANT INFORMATION Organization/Agcncy Name: Collier County Comlnunity Redevelopment A~°ellCV Contact: Marlene Foord Title: Principal Planoer Address: 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive City; State: Zip Code: Naples. Florida 34104 Area Code and Telephone: .(941 ) 213-2903 Fax Number: (941) 643-6968 Print Name and Title of Person Sionilm: N ~1111e. Con1111issioner Title: CRA Chairman Signature: Date: II. ACTIVITY AND PROJECT INFORMATION Thc word "activitj" ils used in this application, denotes the actioo for x\hich functs are being requested. The word project, a used in this application, denotes all tile actions (or actixities) that constitute the project. In some instances, the activity is tile same as the pro.ject. ls the act v ty for \vhich funds are being requested part of an oxerall project? Yes X No_ -3- Please describe the project jn detail, and explain how the activit3 relates to the project (e.g.. land acquisition to de,,elop a park) Please attach extra pages il' necessary: See atlachnlent A for description of project and activity. ACTIVITY TYPE AND TITLE Type of Activit,r: Please check the applicable activity type. A glossar3 of terms ix prox ided in Section X of the Application. Examples of eligible activities are Sulnnaarized in Section XI. Rehabilitation Demolition/Clearance Public Set', ices Historic Preservation Fair Housing Microenterprise Assistance Other X Specify Public Facilities Acquisition of Real Property Removal/Architectural Barriers Special Economic Development Special Actix ity by a Communit>-Based Organization __ Title of the Acti',it~: Gateway Triangle/Shado'.'. lav, n Neighborhood Infrastructure lmprox ements ,-',cti,,itx Prioritx: Please insert the priority assigned by the Council/Commission. Prioritization must be pro'. ided for activities submitted b.', mnnicipalities and by applicants x'.hose activities are Iocaled within municipalities. P'iorit) Nt nbe. B. INTERRELATED ACTIVITIES (See Appendix 2) N/A to Countyv,'ide Activities. If separate applications are being submitted for interrelated acti,,ities, please complete the folio,.,, ing: Number of interrelated activities, including this application (e.g., I of 3): Name of Applicant: Title of Interrelated Activity:. -4- !AN 0 8 ~OOz[ Attachment A - draft Please descrihe the project in detail, and explain how the activity relates to the project (e.g., land acquisition to develop a park). Please attach extra pages if necessary: Stormwater nlanagemcnt and drainage improvements were identified as primary importance itl thc Redevelopment Plan adopted by tile Collier County Board of County Commissioners and thc Community Redevelopment Agency it/May/June 2000. Tile project is part of a comprehensive stormwater management program underway in the Gateway Triangle/Shadowlawn neighborhood. The goal is to reduce the severe and dangerous floodin~ conditions that result fi'om heavy rains, tidal movement and prolonged wet periods associa~-cd with Florida storms and rainy seasons. Significant and frequent flooding throughout the Gateway area is attributed to low elevations and inadequate stormwater management s~ stems. All of tile area `,~ithin tile Bayshore/Gateway Trianglc Redevelopment Area is `,~ithin tile AE Flood Hazard ils indicated on thc Flood Hazard Boundary Map. Zone AE are described as ha`,ing base flood elevations determined. In this area tile Base Flood Elevation is bct`,`,ccn 8 and 9 feet. Some of the streets and houses in tile area are only sexcral feet abo`,e sea le`,el and therefore prone to flooding. The program in`, ol`,es an ne`,`,' interconnected system of pipes, ponds and lift stations dlat v. ill get the `,:ater from t`,`,'o of the most flood impacted streets - Kirk;`,'ood A`, enue and Linv. ood A`, enue do,an to a 2.5 acre holding pond and pump station on the north side of Lee Street `,xhcre the `,`,ater ,,:'ill be gradually discharged fi'om tile pond throngh tile existing channel to tile existing US 41 on[fall and into tile main outfall ssstcm. Tile proposed project invohes installation of a drainage pipe and drain boxes along Litmood Ax enue from Airport Pulling Road to Commercial Drive itl tile Gateway Wriangle/Shadok~la`,~n nci_ohborhood. This drainage pipe will then connect to tile larger interconnected systenl alld will hcl¢ to reduce some of tile periodic flooding of tile properties on Linv. ood A`,enuc and tile sarrounding neighborhood. As a bonus, this improved drainage system will also make it possible for funding ah'ead.,, prioritized by the Metropolitan Planning Organization to be more effectively used on Lin`,`,ood to ms[all a safe and functional sidewalk for the residents and children to safely mo;'e throughout tile neighborhood. Without the proper drainage system, only a bikcpath would be financially feasible along Linwood, however, the street is extremely narrow and there are no lights so this could be more of a hazard to the residents. The Metropolitan Planning Organization has estimated that the sidewalk along Linwood will cost approximately $65,000. Therefore, the funding requested `,,,'ill find even more efficient use because tile project complements a host of related and extensive heuhh and safety related infrastructure inlpro;'ements. JAN 0 8, _002 ! ~.~CUT IVE SUI~RY REQUEST TO APPROVE FOR RECORDING THE FII~h~L PLAT OF .WILLOUGHBY PINES REPLAT" , AND APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND M~INTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFOI~M~NCE SECURITY OBJECTIVE: To approve for recording the final plat of "Willoughby Pines Replat", a subdivision of lands located in Section 24 Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, following the alternative procedure for approval of subdivision plats. CONSIDERATIONS: Engineering Review Section has completed the review of the construction drawings, specifications, and final plat of "Willoughby Pines Replat". These documents are in compliance with the County Land Development Code and Florida State Statute No. 177. Ail fees have been paid. Security in the amount of 10% of the total cost ol '--~the required improvements, and 100% of the cost of any remaining improvements, together with a Construction and Maintenance Agreement for Subdivision Improvements, shall be provided and accepted by the Planning Services Director and the County Attorneys office prior to the recording of the final plat. This would be in conformance with the County Land Development Code - Division 3.2.9. Engineering Review Section recommends that the final plat of "Willoughby Pines Replat" be approved for recording. FISCAL IMPACT: The project cost is $10,073.80 (estimated) to be borne by the developer. The cost breakdown is as follows: a} Water & Sewer - $ -0- b) Drainage & Grading $10,073.80 The Security amount, equal to 110% project cost, is S11,081.18 of the Executive Summary Willoughby Pines Replat Page 2 The County will realize revenues as follows: Fund: Community Development Fund 113 Agency: County Manager Cost Center: 138900 - Development Services Revenue generated by this project: Total: $678.25 Fees are based on a construction estimase of $10,073.80 and were paid in October, 2001. The breakdown is as follows: a) Plat Review Fee ($500.00 + $5./ac)- $505.00 c) Construction Drawing Water & Sewer ~.50% const, est.) Drainage, Paving, Grading (.42% const. Construction Inspection Fee Water & Sewer ~1.5% const, est.} Drainage, Paving, Grading (1.3% const, est.) GROWTH ~L~NAG~NT IMPACT: The Concurrency Waiver and approval has been reviewed and Office for the project. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: There issues HiSTORICAL/ARCHEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Review Fee - $-0- est.)- $ 42.30 $130.95 Release relating to condiuzon~ approved by the County Attorney's are no outstanding environmental There are no historical or archeological impacts EAC RECO~4ENDATION: Approval CCPC RECO~R~ENDATION: Approval PLANNING SERVICES ST~tFF RECO~R4ENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the Final Plat of "Willoughby Pines Replat" for recording with the following stipulations: 1. Approve the amount of $11,081.18 as performance security for the required improvements; or such lesser amount based on work completed, and as is approved by the En¢lneering Review Department. ITEM Executive Summary Willoughby Pines Replat Page 3 2. Approve the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement, and a. That no Certificates of Occupancy be granted until the required improvements have received preliminary acceptance. b. That the plat not be recorded until suitable security and an appropriate Construction and Maintenance Agreement is approved and accepted by the Planning Services Director and the County Attorney's office. 3. Any outstanding environmental issues shall be resolved prior to the recording of the plat. PREPARED BY: John R. H0uld~o~th, Engineering Review Senior Engineer REVIEWED BY: Thomas E. Kuck, P.E. Engineering Review Director / County Engineer ~a~ Johr Com~ ~VED BY: · Dunnuck III, Interim Administrator unity Development & Environmental Services Date jrh - A c.~ A rr~M .JAN 0 8 2002 L~'E~ATION 12 ' '~-: -~ ':- ' ....... ... ~ FP-99-02 C# 3223 -'.-' ~'~.~ · ":..,_'~ '. Willoughby Pines Replat II I II DUE DATE: 11/02/01 i Rev 2 ~.~'~CUT IVE FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF D~kTER AND SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES FOR ABBOR L~KES AT NAPLES HERITAGE OBJECTIVE: The Board of County Commissioners, Ex-Officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, to accept the conveyance of the water and sewer facilities. CONSIDEBATIONS: 1) The Developer of Arbor Lakes, has constructed the water and sewer facilities within dedicated easements to serve this development. See attached location map. 2) Preliminary acceptance was approved by the Community Development and Environmental Services staff on September 9, 1998, in accordance with Ordinance 97-17. 3) Staff has recorded all appropriate legal documentation which had been reviewed by the County Attorney's office for legal sufficiency- 4) The water and sewer facilities have been operated and maintained by the Collier County Water-Sewer District during the one (1) year warranty period. 5) A final inspection to examine for any defects in materials and workmanship was conducted by the Community Development and Environmental Services Division staff and found to be satisfactory- 6) The utilities Performance Security (UPS), in the form a Cash Bond in the amount of $3,501.65, will be released to the Project Engineer or the Developer's designated agent upon the Boards approval. FISC2tL IMPACT: The water facilities were constructed without cost ~r County Water-Sewer District. The cost of operating and maintaining the water and sewer facilities will be paid by monthly user revenues. ~w~TH D~ IMPACT: This project has been connected to the County Regional Water T£eatment Plant and South Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant. Capacity presently exists to serve this project. JAN 0 8 Executive Summary Arbor Lakes @ Naples Heritage Page Two RECOI~ENDATION: The Community Development and Environmental Services Division Administrator reconunends that the Board of County Commissioners, Ex-Officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, accept the water and sewer facilities for Arbor Lakes, and release the UPS to the Project Engineer or the Developer's designated agent. PREPARED BY: Shirley Nix, Engineering Technician II Engineering .l~eview Services REVIEWED BY: Thomas E. Kuck, P.E. Engineering Review Services Manager and Interim Planning Services Department Director Date D~te APPROVED BY: / John M. ~Unnuck, III, Interim Admiqistrator COMMUNITy DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES attachments Date JAN 0 8 2002 VICINITY MAP LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Section 9, Township 50, Ranse 26, Arbor Lakes @ Naples Heritage Golf & Country Club, Tracts Hi - H5 INDEX MAP NOT TO SCALE JAN 0 8 2002 Official Receipt - Collier County Board of County Commissioners _ CDPR1103 - Official Receipt Trans Number Date Post Date 73174 5/8/98 9:35:52 AM 518198 Payment Slip Nbr MS 36090 Sub-Div: Arbor Lakes, A Condominium Payor: US HOME Fee Information Fee Code i Description i GL Account ; Amount i Waived 12BOND I DEPOSITS-COMM DEV (CASH BOND1 67000000022011300000 $3501.651 Total [ $3501,65 Payments l Payment Code Account/Check Number Amount , CHECK 967200335 $3501.65! Memo: Total Cash Total Non-Cash Total Paid $0.00, $3501.65 i $3501.65 Cashier/location: TERILLA_J / 1 User: NIX_S Collier County Board of County Commissioners CD-Plus for Windows 95/NT Print, JAN 0 8 2002 P~.. FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF ~%TER u'£rLZTY FACZL'rTZES FOR 'rBZS CLUB APARTMENTS OBJECTIVE: The Board of County Commissioners, Ex-Officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, to accept the conveyance of the water facilities. CONSiDErATIONS: 1) The Developer of Ibis Club Apartments, has constructed the water facilities within dedicated easements to serve this development. See attached location map. 2) Preliminary acceptance was approved by the Community Development and Environmental Services staff on August 15, 2000, in accordance with Ordinance 97-17. 3) Staff has recorded all appropriate legal documentation which had been reviewed by the County Attorney's office for legal sufficiency. 4) The water facilities have been operated and maintained by the Collier County Water-Sewer District during the one (1) year warranty period. 5) A final inspection to examine for any defects in materials and workmanship was conducted by the Community Development and Environmental Services Division staff and found to be satisfactory. 6) The Utilities Performance Security (UPS), in the form of an Irrevocable Standby Letter of Credit No. SM413361C, in the amount of $18,996.90, will be released to the Project Engineer or the Developer's designated agent upon the Boards approval. FISCAL IMPACT: The water facilities were constructed without cost to the Collier County Water-Sewer District. The cost of operating and maintaining the water facilities will be paid by monthly user revenues. ~p~WTH~ENT IMPACT: County Regional Water Treatment Plant to serve this project. This project has been connected to the Capacity presently exists JAN 0 8 2002 p,. J Executive Summary Ibis Club Apartments Page Two R~CO~ENDATION: The Community Development and Environmental Services Division Administrator recommends that the Board of County Commissioners, Ex-Officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, accept the water facilities for Ibis Club Apartments, and release the UPS to the Project Engineer or the Developer's designated agent. PREPARED BY' . Shirley Nix, Engineering Technician II Engineeri~eview Services Date REVIEWED BY: Thomas E.--Kuck, P.E. Engineering Review Services Manager and Interim Planning Services Department Director Date APPROVED BY: John M.~unndc~k, IIi, Interim Admin. istrator COMMUNI~ DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES attachments Date JAN 0 B 2002 NOILVINVqd i. IOI. I~I.-:II~IU i. g6 UO 0 · 0 AC-~A ITEM JAN I) 8 200~ p~. ~ IRREVOCABLE STANDBY LETTER OF CREDIT NUMBER SM413361C I LETTER OF CREDIT AMOUNT I ISSUE DATE I EXPIRY DATE I BENEFICIARY: THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY ATTN: PRO~ECT PLAN REVIEW COLLIER COUNTY COURTHOUSE COMPLEX NAPLES, FLORIDA 3411~ APPLICANT: ~ERdO LTD., INC. 801 RICH DRIVE PALM SPRINGS, FL 3340~ GENTLEMEN: WE HEREBY OPEN OUR IRREVOCABLE STANDBY LETTER OF CREDIT IN YOUR FAVOR FOR ACCOUNT OF THE ABOVE REFERENCED APPLICANT IN THE AGGREGATE AMOUNT OF USO 18,~6.~O WHICH IS AVAILABLE BY PAYMENT OF YOUR DRAFT(S) AT SIGHT DRAWN ON OURSELVES WHEN ACCOMPANIED BY THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS: THE A STATEMENT PURPORTEDLY SIGNED BY AN AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS STATING THAT: "JERdO LIMITED, INC. HAS FAILED TO CONSTRUCT AND/OR MAINTAIN THE IMPROVEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE SUBDIVISION KNOWN AS IBIS CLUB APARTMENTS, OR A FINAL INSPECTION SATISFACTORY TO COLLIER COUNTY HAS NOT BEEN PERFORMED PRIOR TO THE DATE OF EXPIRY, AND SATISFACTORY ALTERNATIVE PERFORMANCES SECURITY HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED TO AND FORMALLY ACCEPTED BY THE BENEFICIARY." IT IS A CONDITION OF THIS LETTER OF CREDIT THAT IT SHALL BE DEEMED AUTOMATICALLY EXTENDED WITHOUT WRITTEN AMENDMENT FOR ONE YEAR FROM THE PRESENT OR ANY FUTURE EXPIRY DATE UNLESS AT LEAST SIXTY (60) DAYS PRIOR TO SUCH EXPIRATION DATE, WE NOTIFY YOU IN WRITING AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS VIA OVERNIGHT COURIER THAT WE ELECT NOT TO RENEW THIS LETTER OF CREDIT FOR ANY SUCH ADDITIONAL PERIOD(S). ALL BANKING CHARGES OTHER THAN OURS ARE FOR BENEFICIARY'S ACCOUNT. THIS IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT SETS FORTH IN FULL THE TERMS DF OUR UNDERTAKING. THIS UNDERTAKING SHALL NOT* IN ANY WAY BE MODIFIED, AMENDED, AMPLIFIED OR INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE TO ANY DOCUMENT OR CONTRACT REFERRED TO HEREIN. WE HEREBY AGREE WITH YOU THAT DRAFT(S) DRAWN UNDER AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS CREDIT SHALL BE DULY HONORED IF PRESENTED TOGETHER WITH DOCUMENT(S) AS SPECIFIED ABOVE AND THE ORIGINAL OF THIS CREDIT, AT OUR OFFICE LOCATED AT 8739 RESEARCH DRIVE~ CHARLOTTE, NC 28262~ ATTN: STANDBY LETTER OF CREDIT DEPARTMENT ON OR BEFORE THE ABOVE STATED EXPIRY DATE. DRAFT(S) DRAWN UNDER THIS CREDIT MUST SPECIFICALLY REFERENCE OUR CREDIT NUMBER. CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE WHICH FORMS AN LETTER OF CREDIT INTEGRAL PAR ..... JAN 0 8 2002 P&.. IRREVOCABLE STANDBY LETTER OF CREDIT SM4133~1C PAGE NO. 2 07/07/00 EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE EXPRESSLY STATED HEREIN* THIS LETTER OF CREDIT IS SUBJECT TO THE UNIFORM CUSTOMS AND PRACTICE FOR DOCUMENTARY CREDITS* ESTABLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, AS IN EFFECT ON THE DATE OF ISSUANCE OF THIS CREDIT. SINCERELY, LAUTHOR I ZED S fG~-"A~URE FIRST UNION NATIONAL BANK DMM AGENDA I~.M JAN 0 8 2002 pg. -~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY REQUEST TO GRANT FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF "TIMARRON UNIT TWO" OBJECTIVE: To grant final acceptance of the infrastructure improvements associated with that subdivision known as "Timarron Unit Two" CONSIDERATIONS: 1. On August 12, 1998, the Board of County Commissioners granted preliminary acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements in "Timarron Unit Two". 2. The roadway and drainage improvements will be maintained by the project's homeowner's association. The water and sewer improvements will be maintained by the County. 3. The required improvements have been constructed in accordance with the Land Development Code. The County Development Services has inspected the improvements and is recommending final acceptance of the improvements. 4. A resolution for final acceptance has been prepared and approved by the County Attorney's Office. A copy of the document is attached. FISCAL IMPACT: The roadway and drainage improvements will be maintained by the project's homeowners association. Water and sewer improvements will be maintained by the County's utility Department through their operation and maintenance budget. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None Executive Summary Timarron Unit Two Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements in "Timarron Unit Two" and release the maintenance security. 1. Authorize the Chairman to execute the attached resolution authorizing final acceptance. 2. Authorize the release of the maintenance security. PREPARED BY: John R. Houldsworth, Engineering Review Engineer Date REVIEWED BY: Thomas E. Kuck, P.E. Engineering Review Director APPROVE~BY: . John M. D~nnuck IIIj I~terim Administrator Communit~Dev. and Environmental Svcs. Date j rh JAN 0 8 2002 I VICTORI~ PARK PINE MONTNI~gY LOCATION MAP JAN 0 ~ 2002 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 40 42 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 52 53 54 55 56 58 59 60 61 RESOLUTION NO. 02- RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THOSE ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS IN TIMARRON UNIT TWO, RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE SECURITY, AND ACCEPTING THE MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY FOR TH~ ROADWAY, DRAINAGE WATER AND SEWER mWROV m rr's THAT NOT REQUm TO BE MAINTAIlxrED BY THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commi~iunere of Collier County, Florida, on December 17, 1996 eppmved the plat of Timarron Unit Two for recordnig; and WHEREAS, the developer has constxucted and maintained the roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements in accordance with the sppmved pla~s and specifications and as required by the Land Development Code (Collier County Ordinance No. 91-102, as mnended); and the Utilities Standards and Procedures Ordinance (Collier County Ordinance No. 97-17), and WHEREAS, the developer has now requested final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements and release of his maintenance security; and WHEREAS, the Engineering Review Department of Community Development Services has inspected the roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements and is recommending acceptance of said facilities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that final acceptance be granted for those roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements in Timarrun Unit Two, and authorize the Clerk to release the maintenance security. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the County accept the future maintenance and other attendam costs for the roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements that are not requited to be maintained by the homeowners association. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote favoring same. DATE: ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COLrNTY, FLORIDA By: Approved as to form and legal ~:ite Assistant Collier County Attomey AGENDA ITEM ,. JAN 08 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY REQUEST TO GRANT FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF "ARIELLE (PHASE TWO)" OBJECTIVEs To grant final acceptance of the infrastructure improvements associated with that subdivision kno~zn as "Arielle Phase Two)" CONSIDEHATIONS= On August 12, 1998, the Board of County Commissioners granted preliminary acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements in "Arielle (Phase Two)" The roadway and drainage improvements will be maintained by the project's homeowner's association. The water and sewer improvements will be maintained by the County. The required improvements have been constructed in accordance with the Land Development Code. The County Development Services has inspected the improvements and is recommending final acceptance of the improvements. 4 o A resolution for final acceptance has been prepared and approved by the County Attorney's Office. A copy of the document is attached. FISCAL IMPACT: The roadway and drainage improvements will be maintained by the project's homeowners association. Water and sewer improvements will be maintained by the County's Utility Department through their operation and maintenance budget. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None JAN 0 8 2002 Executive Summary Arielle (Phase Two) Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements in "Arielle (Phase Two)" and release the maintenance security. 1. Authorize the Chairman to execute the attached resolution authorizing final acceptance. 2. Authorize the release of the maintenance security. PREPARED BY: John R. Houldsworth, Engineering Review Engineer Date REVIEWED BY: ! Thomas E. Kuck, P.E. Engineering Review Director APPROVED BY: Jco°mhmnuMni t ~envUTka In~ I ~nvI ~tr~emntAad~i~vi cS ts .r a t ° r jrh AG~..NDA ITEId JAN 0 8 2002 I VICTOR~ PARK PI~VE RIDGE MON'I'EI~Y LO~ATION 2002 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 5O 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 6O 61 RESOLUTION NO. 02- RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THOSE ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER IMPROVE/s~NTS IN ARIELLE (PHASE TWO), RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE SECURITY, AND ACCEPTING THE MA.INfF. NANCE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ROADWAY, DRAINAGE WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE NOT REQUIRED TO BE MAINTAINED BY ~ HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, on June 26, 1996 approved the plat of Axielle for recording; and WHEREAS, the developer has constxucted and maintained the roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements m accordance with the approved plans and specificafions and as requirod by the Land Development Code (Collier County Ordinance No. 91-102, as amended); and the Utilities Standards and Procedures Ordinance (Collier County Ordinance No. 97-17), and WHEREAS, the developer has now requested final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements and release of his maintenance security; and WHEREAS, the Engineering Review Department of Community Development Services has inspected the roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements and is recommending ac~r~ptance of said facilities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that final acceptance be gxanted for those roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements in Arielle (Phase Two), and authorize the Clerk to release the maintenance security, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the County accept the future maintenance and other attendant costs for the roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements that are not required to be maintained by the homeowners association. This Resolution adopted after mofion, second and majority vote favoring same. DATE: ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: ved as to form and legal Patrick G. White Assistant Collier County Attorney JAN 0 8 2002 COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION THAT THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DIRECT STAFF TO SUBMIT A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) APPLICATION FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION STREETLIGHTING PROJECT IN WEED AND SEED TARGET AREA OF THE IMMOKALEE COMPONENT REDEVELOPMENT AREA TO FURTHER PROMOTE REDEVELOPMENT; FIND THAT PROJECT COMPLIES WITH THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AND THE COLLIER COUNTY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN; AUTHORITE CRA CHAIRMAN TO SIGN APPLICATION AND LETTER CERTIFYING THAT THE PROJECT WILL MEET A NATIONAL OBJECTIVE AND THAT THE CRA HAS THE CAPACITY AND RESOURCES IN PLACE TO UNDERTAKE THE PROJECT. ~ To receive direction from the CRA to submit a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) application for a Neighborhood Revitalization Streetlighting Project in the Weed and Seed Target Area of the Immokalee Component Redevelopment area to further promote redevelopment. CONSIDERATIONS: On March 14, 2000 the Board of County Commissioners adopted Resolutions 2000-82 and 2000-83 establishing the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency and identifying two areas within unincorporated Collier County (Immokalee and Bayshore/Gateway Triangle) as areas in need of redevelopment. On May 23, 2000 and June 13, 2000, respectively, the CRA and the Board of County Commissioners adopted the Redevelopment Plan for both areas. Infrastructure improvements such as streetlighting itt "hot spots" as identified by the Sheriff's Department as high crime areas was listed as critical in the Redevelopment Plan for the Immokalee Component Redevelopment Area. A successful CDBG application was submitted last year by the Planning Department for lights in Immokalee making it possible for approximately 40 streetlights to be installed by Lee County Electric Cooperative (LCEC) in the South Immokalee ama. Locations for the lights have been chosen and installation will begin soon. The lights will be maintained by LCEC for a period of five years and then the Collier Lighting District (MSTU) will assume the monthly cost of $20 per pole, which will require an estimated $9,600 annual budget amount if 40 more lights are installed. The proposed project for additional lights in "hot spots" in the Weed & Seed Target Ama (map attached) will work similarly to the current streetlight project with LCEC performing the installation and maintaining the lights for five years anticipating the maintenance to then be taken over by the Collier Lighting District (MSTU) at an estimated monthly cost of $20 per pole. Therefore, if 40 more lights are installed, an annual budget estimate of $9,600 for the lighting district will be necessary after five years. It is anticipated that the grant amount will be $60,000 to allow the installation of at least as many lights as in the first phase. This amount also allows for expected increase in installation and purchase cost of the lights. The Sheriff's Department will identify the locations for the new lights in coordination with the Immokalee Alliance and CRA staff. The Immokalee Local Redevelopment Advisory Board has not had an opportunity] request, however, no tax increment funds are being recommended as a match for this rev~t~gl~n t JAN 0 8 2002 The Immokalee Alliance (brochure attached); an ad hoc group initially formed under the leadership of the SherifFs Department and having as it's mission to "establish community pride by improving the quality Of life" discussed the need for additional lights during its meeting on December 13, 2001 and decided to recommend that the CRA apply for the CDBG grant. The Empowerment Alliance of Southwest Florida will also be a partner in the application and implementation of the grant. FISCAL IMPACT:, Although matching funds are encouraged in the CDBG grant application, staff is not recommending that any TIF dollars be used as a match for this grant and due to the holidays, the Advisory Board has not had an opportunity to make such a recommendation. The lights will be maintained by LCEC for a period of five years and then the Collier Lighting District (MSTU) will assume the monthly charge of $20 per pole, which will require an estimated $9,600 annual budget amount for the approximately 40 more lights. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN/REDEVELOPMENT PLAN 'IMPACT: The proposed project implements the Growth Management Plan and the Redevelopment Plan by providing infrastructure improvements to improve the health, safety and welfare of the community and to contribute to the redevelopment goals of the area. Installation of streetlights "in hot spots as identified by the Sheriff's Department as high crime area was listed as a project in the adopted Redevelopment Plan. PLANNING SERVICES RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff to submit a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) application for a Neighborhood Revitalization Streetlighting Project in the Immokalee Component Redevelopment area to further promote redevelopment; find that project complies with the Collier County Growth Management Plan and the Collier County Redevelopment Plan; authorize CRA Chairman to sign application and letter certifying that the project will meet a national objective and that the CRA has the capacity and resources in place to undertake the project. PREPARED BY: MARLENE FOORD PRINCIPAL PLANNER COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION December 17, 2001 DATE REVIEWED BY: STAN LITSINGER, AICP COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING MANAGER DATE TOM KUCK INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR JOHN DU~NUCK INTERIMWADMINISTRATOR COMMUNITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES -2- DATE DATE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM APPLICATION FOR FUNDING ASSISTANCE FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 FUNDING PERIOD: JULY 1, 2002 - JUNE 30, 2003 DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN IMPROVEMENT Greg Mihalic, Director JAN 0 8 2002 COLLIER COUNTY HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDING FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 FUNDING PERIOD: JULY 1, 2002 - JUNE 30, 2003 DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION JANUARY 18, 2002, AT 5:00 P.M. *** PLEASE READ INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE COMPLETING *** *** FULL APPLICATION PACKET MUST BE RETURNED WITH ALL REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS (APPLICATION PACKET PAGES 3 TO 22) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF ADA, THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE REQUESTED IN AN ALTERNATE FORMAT. PLEASE CONTACT HOUSING AND URBAN IMPROVEMENT, AT (941) 403-2330 Greg Mihalic, Director Housing and Urban Improvement 3050 North Horseshoe Drive, Suite 275 Naples, Florida 34104 (94!) 403-2330 AGE.~)A ITrr. M n~ la,q- '~ JAN 0 8 2002 COLLIER COUNTY HOUSING AND URBAN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT APPLICATION FORM TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page # SUMMARY OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ................................................................ iv IMPORTANT FACTS REGARDING THE APPLICATION PROCESS ........................................................................ v I. APPLICANT INFORMATION .................................................................................................................................... 3 I1. ACTIVITY AND PROJECT INFORMATION ...................................................................................................... 3 III. ACTIVITY/PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION ...............................................................7 IV. PROJECT AND ACTIVITY BUDGET ................................................................................................................. 10 V. ACTIVITY IMPACT ............................................................................................................................................... 14 VI. CDBG NATIONAL OBJECTIVE REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................................ 16 VII. LEGAL STATUS AND CONSISTENCY WITH LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL PLANS ................................. 17 VIII. COMMITMENT TO ADDRESS THE COMMUNITY'S HOUSING AND NON-HOUSING NEEDS ...... 19 IX. ATTACHMENTS REQUIRED .............................................................................................................................. 20 X. GLOSSARY OF TERMS ........................................................................................................................................ 23 XI. PRELIMINARY EVALUATION CRITERIA ...................................................................................................... 28 APPENDIX 1 INCOME LIMITS ....................................................................................................................................... 32 APPENDIX 2 INSTRUCTIONS FOR CDBG APPLICATION ..................................................................................... 33 JAIq 0 8 2002 - iii - SUMMARY OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT Congress created the Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) with the passage of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended. Section 101(c) of the Act [42 U.S.C. 5301(c)] outlines the following: "The primary objective of Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, and of the Community Development Program of each grantee under the Title is the development of viable communities, by providing decent housing and a suitable living environment and expanding economic opportunities, principally to persons of low- and moderate- income. Consistent with this primary objective, not less than 70.0 percent of CDBG funds received by a grantee shall be used in accordance with the applicable requirement for activities that benefit persons of low- and moderate-income." The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) places administrative responsibility for the CDBG Program in Collier County on the Board of Commissioners (BCC). Collier County Department of Housing and Urban Improvement (HUI) administers the CDBG Program on behalf of the BCC. The Collier County CDBG entitlement jurisdiction is comprised of all areas in unincorporated Collier County, as well as two (2) municipalities, which have signed participating party agreements with the County for Fiscal Years 2001, 2002 and 2003. These are City of Naples and City of Marco Island: HOUSING AND URBAN IMPROVEMENT (HUI) WELCOMES YOUR APPLICATION SUBMISSION. TWO (2) APPLICATION WORKSHOPS HAVE BEEN SCHEDULED (DECEMBER 4, 2001, AT 6:00 P.M. AT IMMOKALEE COMMUNITY PARK AND DECEMBER 6, 2001, AT 6:00 P.M. IN GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER) HUI STAFF WILL PROVIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, IF NEEDED. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION~ PLEASE CALL SUSAN ALDEN~ HUI MANAGER AT (941) 403-2339 OR LEE COMBS, HUI MANAGER AT (941) 659-5750. - iv - !AN 0 IMPORTANT FACTS REGARDING THE APPLICATION PROCESS _ APPLICATIONS MUST BE RECEIVED BY HUI BY 5:00 P.M. EASTERN TIME ON THE DEADLINE DATE (JANUARY 18, 2002). ALL APPLfCATIONS MUST BE SUBMITTED IN DUPLICATE (ONE ORIGINAL AND ONE COPY). NO FAXES. - COMPLETE ALL SECTIONS, FOLLOWING THE INSTRUCTIONS PROVIDED: · Please read the instructions given in the Application and in the Instruction Section. · Please use actual format (forms) included in Application. Applications must be typed or printed. · Please clearly label all attachments. · No binders - binder clips are acceptable. - APPLICATIONS, WHICH DO NOT MEET THE ESTABLISHED DEADLINE WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED. NO EXCEPTIONS. NO WAIVERS. - SUBMISSION IS FINAL - APPLICATIONS WILL BE EVALUATED AS SUBMITTED. NO AMENDMENTS WILL BE ALLOWED. - ACTIVITIES INVOLVING ONLY PLANNING STUDIES ARE PROHIBITED. - APPLICATIONS NOT MEETING THE REVIEW THRESHOLD WILL BE ELIMINATED FROM FURTHER REVIEW. PLEASE REFER TO THE INSTRUCTIONS. - ALL BLANKS MUST BE COMPLETED - ANY MISSING OR INCORRECT INFORMATION WILL HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON YOUR APPLICATION. USE N/A WHERE RESPONSE IS NOT APPLICABLE. - ALL APPLICANTS ARE ENCOURAGED TO PROVIDE MATCHING FUNDS. MATCHING CONTRIBUTIONS WILL POSITIVELY IMPACT YOUR APPLICATION. _ ALL MUNiCiPALiTIES MUST HAVE THEIR ACTIVITIES REVIEWED AND PRIORITIZED BY THE COUNCIL. (PLEAS-'-~-'~FER TO SECTION VII SUBSECTION A). - FOR ALL ACTIVITIES TO BE LOCATED WITHIN MUNICIPALITIES, THE APPLICANT MUST SUBMIT PROPOSED ACTIVITIES TO RESPECTIVE MUNICIPALITY FOR PRIORITIZATION AND/OR DETERMINATION OF CONSISTENCY WITH LOCAL PLANS BY THE COUNCIL. ATTACH OFFICIAL EVIDENCE OF THIS ACTION (e.g., MINUTES, RESOLUTIONS, ETC.) TO THE APPLICATION. (PLEASE REFER TO SECTION VII.C.) - HAVE APPLICATION SIGNED BY THE APPROPRIATE PERSON: (Unsigned applications or applications signed by the inappropriate person, will not be considered) Municipalities ...................... by Mayor or City Manager Agencies ............................... by Chairperson, Board of Directors County Departments ........... by Director of the Department Other .................................... by President *** CALL SUSAN ALDEN, HUI MANAGER AT (941) 403-2339 OR LEE COMBS, HUI MANAGER AT (941) 659-5750 FOR ASSISTANCE IN COMPLETING APPLICATION *** .¥- JAN 0 8 2002 COLLIER COUNTY HOUSING AND URBAN IMPROVMENT ACTWITY APPLICATION FORM READ A! J~ INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE COMPLETING APPLICATION "APPLICATION MUST BE TYPED OR PRINTED" "NOTE: PAGES 3 TO 22 MUST BE RETURNED WITH REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS" Contact Susan Alden at (941) 403-2339 or Lee Combs at (941) 659-5750 for assistance -2- APPLICANT INFORMATION Organization/Agency Name: Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency Contact: Marlene Foord Title: Principal Planner Address: 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive City; State; Zip Code: Naples, Florida 34104 Area Code and Telephone: (941) 213-2903 Fax Number: (941) 643-6968 Print Name and Title of Person Signing: Name: Commissioner Title: CRA Chairman Signature: Date: II. ACTIVITY AND PROJECT INFORMATION The word "activity" as used in this application, denotes the action for which funds are being requested. The word "project," as used in this application, denotes all the actions (or activities) that constitute the project. M some instances, the activity is the same as the project. Is the activity for which funds are being requested part of an overall project? Yes X No_ -3- Please describe the project in detail, and explain how the activity relates to the project (e.g., land acquisition to develop a park) Please attach extra pages if necessary: See attachment A for description of project and activity. ACTIVITY TYPE AND TITLE Type of Activity: Please check the applicable activity type. A glossary of terms is provided in Section X of the Application. Examples of eligible activities are summarized in Section XI. Rehabilitation Demolition/Clearance Public Services Historic Preservation Fair Housing Microenterprise Assistance Other Acquisition of Real Property. Removal/Architectural Barriers Special Economic Development Special Activity by a Community-Based Organization X Specify Public Facilities Title of the Activity: Neighborhood Revitalization Streetlighting Project in the Weed and Seed Target Area of the Immokalee Component Redevelopment Area Activity Priority: Please insert the priority assigned by the Council/Commission. Prioritization must be provided for activities submitted by municipalities and by applicants whose activities are located within municipalities. Priority Number: B. INTERRELATED ACTIVITIES (See Appendix 2) N/A to Countywide Activities. If separate applications are being submitted for interrelated activities, please complete the following: Number of interrelated activities, including this application (e.g., 1 of 3): Name of Applicant: Title of Interrelated Activity: Activity Type: -4- ITEM 2002 Attachment A - draft Please describe the project in detail, and explain how the activity relates to the project (e.g., land acquisition to develop a park). Please attach extra pages if necessary: The proposed project for additional lights in "hot spots" in the Weed & Seed Target Area (map attached) will work similarly to the current streetlight project with LCEC performing the installation and maintaining the lights for five years anticipating the maintenance to then be taken over by the Collier Lighting District (MSTU). It is anticipated that the grant amount will be $60,000 to allow the installation of at least as many lights as in the first phase. This amount also allows for expected increase in installation and purchase cost of the lights. The Sheriff's Department will identify the locations for the new lights in coordination with the Immokalee Alliance and CRA staff. The Immokalee Local Redevelopment Advisory Board has not had to opportunity to review the grant request, however, no tax increment funds are being recommended as a match for this prOject. The Immokalee Alliance (brochure attached), an ad hoc group initially formed under the leadership of the Sheriff's Department and having as it's mission to "establish community pride by improving the quality of life" discussed the need for additional lights during it's meeting on December 13, 2001 and determined to recommend that the CRA apply for the CDBG grant. The Empowerment Alliance of Southwest Florida will also be a partner in the application and implementation of the grant. 2002 JAN 0 8 2002 ~N B B 2~02 jAN B i~ 2~2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND RATIFYING FLUNG OF APPEAL AND DESIGNATION OF LOCAL OFFICIAL REGARDING FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY MAPS PROPOSED BY THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY FOR COLUER COUNTY, FLORIDA. OBJECTIVE: For the Board of County Commissioners to adopt a Resolution approving and ratifying the filing of an appeal o.f ~ flo~_..ins?a..nc~, maps .prop?sed by_t,h~_.~F~ed_~_a! Emergency Management A~ancy tot me City ot Naples ano unlncorpora~eu ~,,~, County (the Community); and approving and ratifying the designation of the Community's local Designated Official. CONSIDERATIONS: In December of 1998, the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA's) general consulting contractor, Dewberry & Davis, submitted preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Maps for unincorporated Collier County and the dries of Naples, Marco Island and Everglades. Shortly after receiving the flood maps, a committee was organized and comprised of all of the aforementioned local governments, along with representatives from the real estate, insurance, building, engineering and architectural sectors. The Committee made recommendations of proposed changes to FEMA who agreed in part to some of the changes and rejected others. This past summer, with the support of the Committee, Collier County and the City of Naples jointly retained Tomasello Consulting Engineers, Inc. (TCE) to study the proposed maps and provide a preliminary report to the Board. TCE raised some issues concerning the calculations and methodology of the coastal study conducted by the contracting consultants for FEMA. On July 31, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners considered the preliminary technical findings of TCE, a report from FEMA and it's consultants, and Committee representatives. The Board authorized TCE to further review FEMA's preliminary maps with an understanding that further study would likely result in preparation and filing of, an appeal with FEMA at the end of the agency's ninety (90) day appeal window. The nature of the appeal is to point out scientific and technical errors in the data and methodology utilized by FEMA to produce its proposed maps. The detailed results of TCE's study has lead to the conclusion that viable scientific and technical grounds exist for filing an official appeal. Because the TCE study was not completed until just before Christmas and the appeal was required to be filed with FEMA by December 27, 2001, the agency agreed to the timely filing of the appeal package (copy of text attached to the corresponding Resolution) by Bob Devlin, the City of Naples Flood Plain Coordinator and Committee chairman. Accordingly, said appeal was properly filed within the required timeframe on the Community's behalf with Mr. Devlin acting as the Community's Designated Official. In order to approve and ratify the filing of the appeal, and designation the Designated Offica,, the Board of County Commissi°ners is being req]es'~~ I the attached Resolution. ~ The costs of preparing and submitting the appeal Freedom of Information request) may be required to assist in FEMA's favorable consideration of the Community's appeal. The current estimate (as of December 21.~) of the cost of obtaining the requested information fi.om FEMA is approximately $4,500. Pending final billing by, and payment of, TCE, sufficient funds may still exist to obtain the requested information without any further fiscal impact. (~ROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION;. That the Board of County Commissioners adopt the attact~d Resolution approving and ratifying the filing of the appeal and the designation of the local designated official. Date: Prepared By: Gene Chartrand ~r Cot{nty ~F~A Coordinator Patrick G. White, ,~,~ssistant County .~,ttomey Jol~n M. Dunnuck III, C/~mmunity Development Division Administrator ! 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 15 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 .2.7 RESOLUTION NO. 2002 - RESOLUTION APPROVING AND RA'ru~'~TG FH,~G OF APPEAL AND DESIGNATION OF LOCAL OFFICIAL REGARDING FLOOD INSURkNCE STUDY MAPS PROPOSED BY Tl~ FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has proposed broadened and increased flood zones for the coasial areas of the City of Naples and Collier County which will substantially increase the number of homeowners forced to purchase mandatory FEMA flood insurance; and WHEREAS, the proposed changes will also ~reatly increase the cost of mandatory FEMA flood insurance for many existing homes; and WHEREAS, the proposed changes will ~reatly increase the cost of new construction in the affected areas; and WHEREAS, the total economic effect on the City of Naplas and affected areas of Collier County of the proposed changes will be hundreds of thousands of dollars; and ~ WHEREAS, the flood zone changes proposed by FEMA are based on d.tn that is 30 disputed by local officials who believe it proposes unrealistic predictions of rising water in 31 Collier County during a hurricane; and 32 33 WHEREAS, Collier flood and emergency officials have ahemetive data they believe to 34 be more realistic; and 35 36 WHEREAS, a joint city-county commiitea of building and flood specialists has been 37 working with FEMA since 1997 on the agency's proposed base flood map changes; and 38 39 W'Ii/~REAS, the commilleo believes FEMA has not been receptive to scientific data 40 produced by the committee that disputes base flood map calculations issuad originally by the 41 agency; and 42 43 Vi/KERF, AS, thc County and City, constituting the local Community, have jointly 44 retained the services of a coomltant to prepare and mbmit a scientific and technical rapor~ and 45 response meeting the requirements for an official appeal of the proposed base flood map 46 changes; and 47 48 WHEREAS, the A~peel w~ required to be iliad by the 27~ of December to be 49 comidesad timely fil~l, and was so timely iliad with tho r~uirad FEMA officials who 50 acquiesced to its filing under the signetur~ of the Community's Designated Official on behalf of 51 its Chief Executive Officer. 52 53 54 55 59 NOW 'rliI~REFORE, LET IT BE RESOLVED, thai the Board of Collier County Commissione~ in furtherance of the foregoing Rncimls, now formally approves and ratifies the timely filing of the Appeal (copy of text atianbed) of~he proposed base flood map changes on behalf of file Community with the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and further approves and ratifies the designation of Bob Devlin, City of Naples Flood Plain Coordinator, as the local Designatad Official for the purpose of further coordinating the Community's Appeal. lof2 JAN 0 8 2002 1 2 3 4 $ 6 ? 8 9 10 1! 12 13 14 15 17 15 This Re~olution is adopted this 8t~ day of January, 2002, after motion, seco~.d and majority vote favoring same. Al luST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COI .I .n:R COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Deputy Clerk , Chairman Approved ~ W fon~ and P~'tri~:k I~-. Whit~ A~i~t~nt Colli~ County Attorney 2of2 ,,~ /64 ,~ .JAN 0 B 2002 Appeal of Flood Insurance Restudy (RFIS) Proposed Base Flood Elevations For Collier County and the City of Naples Prepared for Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida And The City of Naples, Florida Prepared by T0masello Consulting Engineers, Inc. Jupiter, Florida December 2001 -//"~. ~, JAN 0 § 2002 I. INTRODUCTION ............................... II. BASIS FOR APPEAL ...................................................................... 1 A. STORM FREQUENCY AND PARAMETER PROBABILITIES ................ 1 1. Background .......................................................................... 1 2. Points of Appeal ................................................................... 2 a. Scientifically Incorrect BFE's .......................................... 2 1.) Frequency Adjustment ........................................... 2 2.) SFWMD Storm Statistics Assumptions ....................... 3 b. Technically Incorrect BFE's ............................................. 3 c. Appeal Alternative Analyses ............................................. 3 B. WAVE SETUP ........................................................................... 4 1. Background ......................................................................... 4 2. Point of Appeal ..................................................................... 5 C. WAVE SETUP PROPAGATION INLAND .............. 1. RFIS Wave Propagation Analysis Methods .................................... a. RFIS Method l/Points of Appeal ....................................... 5 b. RFIS Method 2/Points of Appeal ..................................... 6 c. RFIS Method 3/Points of Appeal ..................................... 6 d. Method 4 Independent Consultant Report/Points of Appeal ....... 6 2. Additional Appeal Comments .................................................... 7 3. Appeal Alternative Analysis .....................................................7 D. WHAFIS ANALYSIS .................................................................. 8 1. Input Stillwater Elevations ......................................................... 8 2. Transect Issues ....................................................................... 9 3. Appeal Alternative Analysis ......................................................... 10 E. Conclusions and Recommendations .................................................... 10 References Figures Appendices Appendix A - EDR Report Appendix B - Model Setup Appendix C - PROBS Application Appendix D - Appeal Analysis - Wave Setup Propagation Inland Appendix E - Survey Appendix F - WHAFIS Analysis with Appeal Still Water Elevations List of Figures Description No. Location Map .................................................................................... 1 100-Year Surge -SFWMD (FIS) Statistics vs Appeal Statistics ..........................2 North Collier County Coast - Final Grid Model ............................................. 3 North Collier County Coast Model Maximum Flood Profile - Grid Row (K-7) ....... 4 North Collier County Coast Model Maximum Flood Profile - Grid Row (K-10) ...... 5 North Collier County Coast Model Maximum Flood Profile - Grid Row (K-16) ...... 6 North Collier County Coast Model Maximum Flood Profile - Grid Row (K-20) ...... 7 North Collier County Coast Model Maximum Flood Profile - Grid Row (K-23) ...... 8 Recommended Base Flood Elevations - Transect 23 ....................................... 9 Recommended Base Flood Elevation - Transect 20 - 23 ................................. 10 Recommended Base Flood Elevation - Transect 18 - 20 ................................. 11 Recommended Base Flood Elevation - Transect 14 -1 7 ..................................12 Recommended Base Flood Elevation - Transect 10-14 ................................... 13 Recommended Base Flood Elevation - Transect 6-10 .....................................14 Recommended Base Flood Elevation - Transect 1 -10 ...................................... 15 JAN 0 ,~ 20117 I. INTRODUCTION FEMA presented the Flood Insurance Restudy (RFIS) and proposed revised Base Flood Elevations (BFE's) on December 1, 1998. Since that time several telephone conference calls have been made in attempts to resolve concerns over the mapped proposed BFE's. FEMA has agreed to correct some map errors (street names, etc.) and has agreed to display elevations in both NGVD and NAVD. But, no changes to the proposed BFE's have been agreed to by FEMA. FEMA published a notice of proposed new and revised BFE's in the Naples Daily News on September 20, 2001 and again on September 27, 2001. The date of the second publication began the 90 day appeal period. Collier County and the City of Naples are appealing the proposed BFE's. This report is intended to show that the proposed BFE's are scientifically and/or technically incorrect and to provide alternative analyses, incorporated assumptions, and supporting data that quantify the effect on the BFE's. The scientific and technical incorrectness of the proposed BFE's result from four major areas addressed by the RFIS: 1. Storm Frequency and Storm Probabilities 2. Wave Setup 3. Wave setup propagation inland 4. WHAFIS analyses This report presents the basis for the appeal of each of these areas and provides alternative analyses where appropriate. II. BASIS OF APPEAL A. STORM FREQUENCY AND PARAMETER PROBABILITIES 1. Background The FEMA Restudy (RFIS) Report addresses storm statistics applied in the SFWMD FIS, 1984, suggesting that the storm frequency used by SFWMD was too low and stating that "it was of interest to determine whether or not surge levels might require adjustment owing to revision of the storm statistics." The RFIS Report states that, "the average adjustment to the 100-year surge with tide was 0.16 feet while the largest adjustment was 0.27 feet". The RFIS Report displays a table (EMA's Collier County Technical Data, Section: Surge Adjustment, December 11, 1996) of these adjustments as they were applied to the SFWMD Fine Grid Model results. JAN 0 8 2002 The RFIS Report discusses various estimates of wave setup, including a setup of 1.2' after accounting for a number of considerations. The Report concludes, "Recalling that the adjustment of storm statistics suggests a average 100-yr surge adjustment of about 0.2', leads us to adopt 1.4 feet as a fair allowance for both setup and statistics". Clearly, the RFIS Report's 1.4 feet increase that was applied to the open coast still water elevations included a 0.2 feet frequency adjustment. 2. Points of Appeal This section along with Appendix A (a report prepared by _Dr. Lee E. Branscome and Michelle N. Campbell of Environmental Dynamics Research, Inc. (EDR)) present the appellant's contentions (related to the storm statistics only) that the BFE's are both scientifically incorrect and technically incorrect. The EDR report also offers the data and analyses that are used in subsequent quantiflcations (when coupled with model results) of the effects on the BFE's. a. Scientifically Incorrect BFE's The revised BFE's proposed by the FEMA (RFIS) are scientifically incorrect because they were based on "frequency adjustments" that were derived using inappropriate assumptions. Further, the RFIS reviewed the storm statistics and accepted two assumptions of the SFWMD study that resulted in overly conservative (higher) still water flood elevations. 1.) - Frequency Adiustment The frequency adjustment of 0.2 feet was based on the RFIS's conclusion that the storm frequency for the Collier County area was higher than the SFWMD determined value. The RFIS concluded that the higher frequency was supported by NWS-38. The attached EDR report, included in Appendix A, describes in detail an updated determination of storm frequency that closely agrees with the SFWMD frequency. The EDR report describes the error in the RFIS's frequency determination, namely the erroneous assumption that tropical depressions could be included in the storm count. Further, the RFIS's assumption that the NWS-38 Report was in agreement with the RFIS frequency is not correct. The NWS-38 storm frequency for Collier County is in close agreement with the SFWMD and EDR determined frequencies and is significantly below the RFIS's frequency. Even if the RFIS's erroneously determined frequency was valid, it is not valid to assume that the 100-year flood elevations can be adjusted for the frequency increase because the SFWMD storm probabilities were developed from a different population of storms (i.e. the population from which the SFWMD frequency was derived). AC.,r~A _1~ JAN ~ 8 2~2 2 ~g ~ 2.) - SFWMD Storm Statistics Assumptions Although the RFIS reviewed the SFWMD statistical analysis, it did not comment on the very conservative assumptions affecting the final 100-year still water flood elevations. The fa'st SFWMD assumption was that storm parameter probabilities are independent of each other. This assumption, particularly relating to independence of central pressure and storm direction, results in intense landfalling storms being assigned too high of a probability. A second SFWMD assumption that was "accepted" in the RFIS is inconsistent with one of the RFIS's stated criteria. The SFWMD assumption that the central pressure associated with a historic storm is the lowest central pressure while the storm existed in the study area circle (radius of 150 nm). For example, the 1935 "Labor Day Storm" was represented in the pressure probability plot as having a 120 mb central pressure depression. This pressure depression was measured while the storm was in the Florida Keys. This assumption is clearly inconsistent with the RFIS's stated criteria of defining the storm characteristics at the instant of closest approach to Collier County. The SFWMD assumption amplifies the conservativeness of the first assumption. The failure to address these important conservative assumptions are serious oversights in the RFIS which was reportedly intended to upgrade the flood elevation predictions. b. Technically Incorrect BFE's The proposed BFE's could also be considered technically incorrect because the methodology was not correctly applied to compute the most accurate flood elevations. The methodology for computing frequency was obviously incorrect. The methodology accepted for determining probabilities is inconsistent with the RFIS's own stated criteria (i.e. defining storm parameters at the point of closest approach) (See EMA's Collier County Data Report, Collier County Coastal Summary EMW-94-C-4392, Section 2.1 Storm Statistics, page I). The methodology accepted for establishing storm parameter probabilities as independent of each other, ignores the fact that the more intense storms have not been landfalling storms, but exiting and alongshore. c. Appeal Alternative Analyses Alternative methods for analysis of the storm statistics are presented in Appendix A, the EDR report, based on the assumption that storm parameter probabilities are interdependent. An updated determination of storm frequency demonstrated a result essentially unchanged from the original SFWMD frequency. A revised table of parameter probabilities was developed based on an expanded HURDAT tape. The revised frequency and probability tables were used in conjunction the hurricane surge model applications to the synthetic storms (defi~ed JAN B2002 3 /0 parameter compartments) to develop new estimates of 100-year storm surge elevations. The new elevations, developed through alternative analysis, compared to those developed in the SFWMD study were used to quantify the effect of the revised analysis on the proposed BFE's. Appendix B contains a full description of the model analysis performed to quantify the effect of the stated RFIS errors on the BFE's. Effect on Still Water Flood Elevations (Figure 2) displays the storm surge elevations computed for the open coast grids corresponding to the Collier County coastline for both the FIS (SFWMD) and Appeal (Alternative Analysis) storm statistics. The effect of the incorrect assumptions of storm statistics on the final BFE's can only be determined after addition of wave setup, astronomical tides, and wave height. B. WAVESETUP 1. Background Wave setup was estimated in the RFIS using Corps of Engineers methods described in the Shore Protection Manual. The computed setup, reported to be 1.2', was increased to 1.4' by a 0.2' adjustment for "frequency". This setup was added directly to the storm surge with tide elevations for new still water elevations. In some areas the wave setup was assumed to propagate inland without attenuation. The direct addition of wave setup to storm surge is technically incorrect since FEMA has not provided documentation to verify that storm surge modeling does not implicitly include wave setup through global and/or local model calibrations. Wind stress, bottom stress, and barrier island overtopping considerations are generally calibrated or at least validated through model hindcasts to historic storms and observed flood levels. Wave setup has not been explicitly part of the modeling considerations of past FIS's. Good comparisons of modeled hindcast storm surge to observed flood levels (particularly in bay areas affected by barrier overtopping ) would likely include wave setup effects implicitly through calibration of various factors affecting the flood levels. The above consideration was raised to FEMA in several communications and meetings over the past two years. Requests were made to FEMA for hindcast storm simulations in other coastal FIS's that would confirm the need for direct addition of wave setup to calibrated storm surge model results. No such data were provided. Again, at the beginning of the appeal period, this information was requested, this time in the form of a Freedom of Information Act request. No information had been provided at the time of this report, just prior to the end of the Appeal Period. 4 Only FEMA can provide the storm hindcast information. Without this information it is not possible to quantify the impact of the incorrect assumption of direct addition of wave setup to the storm surge computed by calibrated storm surge models. 2. Point of Appeal Inadequate documentation of the interrelationship between storm surge calibrations and the wave setup phenomenon renders the wave setup addition to storm surge scientifically incorrect. Quantification of the effect of this error is impossible without the information requested of FEMA. C. WAVE SETUP PROPAGATION INLAND 11 RFIS Wave Setup Propagation Analysis Methods The wave setup, assumed by the FEMA RFIS contractor (after storm frequency adjustment) to be 1.4' at the open coast, was also assumed to propagate inland to varying degrees. The RFIS documentation presented a series of inconsistent descriptions of the methods for determining wave setup propagation inland. Each method presented assumed that the 100-year storm surge (e.g. 11.0' NGVD) was present while the wave setup developed and propagated inland. Obviously in reality, the two phenomena occur in concert. The following descriptions were among those presented as methods for determining wave setup propagation inland: a. RFIS Method I The RFIS determined wave setup propagation inland as part of the open coast wave setup computations by assuming a new shoreline in places 10000' inland from the original shoreline. Points of Appeal - This method is scientifically incorrect. This is an incorrect application of the wave setup computations since the setup method assumes a uniform slope to the shoreline. The failure to recognize the nearly complete wave dissipation along the transects particularly at the barrier dunes and other obstructions along the way renders this method inappropriate. The WHAFIS analyses demonstrate that the waves dissipate to zero along many of the transects long before they reach the RFIS "new shoreline". The RFIS contractor reported that gravity is not part of the process for transporting wave setup inland (telephone conference call, August 1, 2000 ) Points of Appeal - This is a scientifically incorrect assumption. Gravity is certainly part of the process, probably the most important part. This was recognized by the FEMA RFIS contractor in subsequent methods txansmitted on the subject. 5 b. RFIS Method 2 The time for filling of the area behind the barrier was determined by RFIS using the equation for setup time in the publication, "Wave Setup of Harbor Water Levels", Rory O.R.Y., Thompson and Hamon, B.V. Point of Appeal - The application of this method as described by the RFIS contractor is scientifically incorrect. The equation is based on the change in momentum flux brought about by wave diffraction. The RFIS assumption that the inlet opening is the same as the bay width, along with the assumptions inherent in the method indicates no wave setup exists and therefore there can be no time to filling. c. RFIS Method 3 The RFIS contractor presented a paper, "Waves and Setup", September 25, 2000, that attempts to compute time to wave setup to fill the area behind the barrier in a number of ways. This paper presents a 1-D model analysis which assumes a bottom elevation of 0 ft -NGVD for a 10,000' channel with a Manning's N of 0.05 and an open coast wave height at 8.58'. Point of Appeal - The assumption of 0 fi-NGVD bottom elevation for the transect, the ignoring of flow impeding factors such as rising topography, roads, homes, landscaping and other obstructions, and the ignoring of the 2-D affects behind the barrier islands renders this method technically incorrect. The assumption of the original shoreline wave height applied at the seaward end is also technically incorrect. The latter ignores the wave dissipation between the original shoreline and the dune crest and ignores the return flows. This incorrect assumption leads to a significant over estimate of transport inland. d. Method 4 Independent Consultant Report FEMA brought in another consultant to review the RFIS methods described above. In their analysis they recommended a slightly higher open coast wave setup, ignoring the RFIS considerations for reducing the SPM computed wave setup. The independent contractor reported a I-D model analysis which repeated the RFIS erroneous assumptions of a continuous 0' NGVD bottom for 10000' behind the barrier island. Point of Appeal - This "Independent Analysis" was obviously not independent since it echoed the same erroneous assumptions made by the RFIS consultant. Further the FEIMA review contractor's contract with the "independent consultant" called for their review of the report before it was released. The erroneous assumptions applied rendered the analysis irrelevant to the wave setup conditions being analyzed. JAN 0 8 ~002 2. Additional Appeal Comments The methods described were presented by FEMA over the past two years as the Appellant attempted to ascertain how FEMA determined wave setup propagation inland. It appeared that FEMA does not have a method to do so and relied on a series of inadequate estimates. Each of the methods above were used to justify the lack of any attenuation of wave setup effects added to the storm surge still water levels. FEMA did not indicate which (if any) of the variety of analyses that were presented was the "accepted" method. 3. Appeal Alternative Analysis The alternative analysis presented in Appendix D includes the simulation of hypothetical storms using the FEMA SURGE model. The storm surge model was applied to a data file representing northern Collier County coast with the Cocohatchee River, barrier islands, roads, bridges, and the Wiggins Pass Inlet, and topography represented by (1502' by 1365') grids and associated barriers (See Figure 3). Several storm scenarios were simulated to approximate open coast flood marigrams with peaks on the order of the combined 100-year surge, tide, and wave setup. On the northern Collier County coast this peak elevation was determined to be 12.4' NGVD in the RFIS and 10.9' NGVD in the Appeal alternative analysis. The hypothetical storms simulated represents a range of central pressures, storm tracks, radii, and speeds. The storms are described as follows: Table 1 Hypothetical Storms used in the Floo Inland Pro ttion Model Anal' ,sis Case Pressure Radius Speed Direction Tracks (in. Hg) (nmi) (kt) (See (See Appendix A) Appendix A) 1 28.53 13 14.5 Direct -3 Landfall 2 27.12 27 21.5 Direct -5 Landfall 3 26.32 13 14.5 Alongshore -3 4 27.12 13 14.5 Alongshore -2 5 28.15 27 21.5 Alongshore 0 6 27.5 13 7.5 Alongshore -1 7 27.77 13 7.5 Alongshore 0 8 27.73 13 21.5 Oblique -3 Landfall 9 26.61 27 7.5 Oblique -~.,f~t, II-r.~ c Landfall ,,.. 16 4 ' _ JAN 0 B 2002 The resulting maximum flood elevation profiles from the open coast to the mainland are plotted on Figures 4-8. The profiles represent various conditions including relatively narrow lagoon areas behind the barrier islands and more protected inland low lands associated with the Cocohatchee River floodplain. As evident from the Figure 4-8 plots, the coastal flooding along the latter protected profiles demonstrated significant attenuation of flooding with distance inland. The flood attenuation was not as great for the narrow lagoons but still was present for all but the largest and slowest storms. Based on the model results attenuation of the 100-year still water flooding was applied to the WHAFIS analysis. Conservative estimates of 0.5' attenuation of flooding elevations for up to a mile inland was assumed. The coastal surge/setup flooding of the Cocohatchee floodplain was found to be significantly attenuated by topographic features, road barriers, and the storage volume. A reduction of 2.4 feet of still water 100-year flood levels was assumed applicable for the WHAFIS analysis applied to this portion of the coastal flooded areas. Clearly the two dimensional analysis, using realistic ground profiles and roughness estimates, embed river grids, and roads as barriers demonstrates attenuation of the flood peak (including wave setup) with distance inland from the open coast. D WHAFIS ANALYSIS 1. Input Stillwater Elevations The RFIS WHAFIS analyses were performed with still water elevations (prior to the addition of wave setup) that are not consistent with SFWMD computed hurricane surge 100-year flood levels as reported in the RFIS and the 1984 SFWMD study report. The elevations applied in the WHAFIS analyses (less the 1.4' adjusted setup) are typically 0.1' to 1.0' higher that the still water surge elevations reported in the SFWMD 1984 report. FEMA has no documentation (e.g. PROBS results) indicating where these new elevations came from and thus the RFIS agreement to the still water elevations has no basis. Point of Appeal -The use of undocumented still water flood elevations in the wave height analysis of the RFIS is technically incorrect. The computed surge elevations, adjusted for the tide (See SFWMD 1984 Report and RFIS Table) and wave setup are the elevations that should have been used in the RFIS. The SFWMD model fine grid results were the only documented still water flood elevations. These elevations should have been used in the RFIS WHAFIS analysis until some other documented elevations were available. JAN 0 8 2002 The resulting effects on the "Stillwater" flood elevations can be demonstrated by comparing SFWMD's open coast model results to those used in the WHAFIS's analyses (minus the RFIS assumed 1.4' setup.) Table 2 Examph Comparisons of SFWMD Surge with Tide to RFIS WHAFIS Inputs WHAFI~ Cor{esponding SFWMD F~ood WHAFIS Still Error in Transects SURGE Model with Tide water SURGE Stillwater Grids (K,J) Inputs Input C-1 (4,29) 10.9 11 0.1 C-4 (7,29) 10.4 11 0.6 C-10 (11,29) 10.0 11 1.0 C-16 (15,29) 9.7 10 0.3 C-18 (17,29) 9.4 10 0.6 2. TransectIssues Mr. Mike Maxwell, Registered Professional Surveyor and Mapper and President of the Florida Surveying and Mapping Society recently conducted a random technical review and re-calculation of the following (4) transects in Collier County and the City of Naples. His transect elevations were calculated at the exact same locations in accordance with the Federal Emergency Management Agency's final draft of March 1995 regarding "Guidelines and Specifications for Wave Elevation Determination." Mr. Maxwell's baseline transect elevations are in agreement with Degrove & Associates, Jacksonville, FL, however, right angle offsets from the baseline transects show higher elevations indicating that the choice of transect locations are representative of the lowest barrier profiles rather than the average. Please refer to Appendix E containing attached supporting documentation. Point of Appeal .The RFIS Transects are technically incorrect. The RFIS transects checked by Mr. Maxwell do not appear to be representative of the average elevations of the area consistent with the FEMA Guidelines representing high and low points. The RFIS transects appear to be representative of the lowest land in the area. It does not appear that the RFIS transects followed the FEMA Guidelines (Reference 4) requiring: transects representing average elevations for the area, with high and low ~oints the RFIS contractor apparently did not provide direction in the surveyor: work in accordance with FEMA Guidelines. It appears the guideline: published until after the Collier County RFIS was accomplished. 9 Transects were not spaced 1000 feet or so as recommended for developed areas with various building densities protective structures and vegetation cover. (Section 2.2 Selected Transects) Alternative Analysis Documentation of Mr. Maxwell's transect checks is provided in Appendix E. Elevations Appeal Alternative Analysis - WHAFIS analysis with Appeal Still Water WHAFIS analyses were performed for the Appeal generated still water elevations along the same transects applied in the RFIS. The attenuation of 100-year flood elevations with distance inland as estimated from the fine grid model analysis was applied at the north end of the study area, contrary to the RFIS, which assumed there was no attenuation of the flood with distance inland. The resulting flood elevations, including the wave height contributions are included in the WHAFIS analysis output files presented on diskette in Appendix F. Maps showing the resulting flood elevations and flood zones are shown on Figures 9 - 15. E. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This Appeal presents a number of elements of the RFIS that are either scientifically or technically incorrect. This appeal also offers alternative analyses that demonstrate the magnitude of the error introduced by the incorrect elements of the RFIS. It is recommended that FEMA modify the proposed FIRM's accounting for the corrections (alternative analyses presented) to the incorrect elements of the REIS. I0 REFERENCES 1. "Wave Setup of Harbor Water Levels", Rory O.R.Y., Thompson and Hamon, B.V. 2. "Waves and Setup",EMA, September 25, 2000, "Fl .... 3. ood Insurance Study, Gmdehnes and Specfficat~ons for Study Contractors", FEMA, January 1995. 4. "Guidelines and Specifications for Wave Elevation Determination and V Zone Mapping", FINAL DRAFT, FEMA, March 1995. 11 No. /6,'/ '~ JAN 0 8 2OO2 FIGURES ^C.~.~A ~.~ ~ JAN 0 Collier County, Florid; N TOMASELLO Consulting Engineers, Inc. SDT 7/01 Figure 2 Figure 3 - North Collier County Coast - Final Grid Model o ~ ~ o ~' 0 Fiaur~_ j Fiaure ..... l=iaure .~_ Figure 7 ~A~ 0 ~ 2002 Figure 8 Base Flood Elevation- Transe~t 23 _~"-/~-~'- \ Figure 9 \ Base Flood Elevation - Transect 20 -22 ~ -I '- ' ",:--:~_ _ _~,~ _ /- Base Flood Elevation - Transect 18 -20 cb ~-- ~ ...... :1---- -:- ...... -- ---~ ..... : , F_'-=----~'--~:~:~-:, . , ~ ...... I ,-- :~ '"~ ..... ~--~_~C._ -~._? --~-. _;~..t~2~ ~ ..-~.._~:-~_~ I~, ,~ . "~ ..,., Base Flood Elevation - Transec~ 14 -17 Bas¢-Floqd Elevation - Transect 10 -1~, Figure AG~3A ITEI~ .... JAN 0 B 2002. J Figure 14 Base Flood Elevation - Transect 1 -6 APPENDICES JAN § ~ ~007 APPENDIX A Storm Frequencies and Parameter Probabilities With attached EDR Report "Tropical Cyclone Climatology of Collier County, Florida" Phane561-575-~lO F~¢ 561.744-1865 to: Bob Devlin Gene Chartrand Patrick White From: Dick Tomasello Date: RE: October 15, 2001 Storm Frequencies and Parameter Probabilities _Introduction In accordance with FEMA's guidelines for appeals, we as appellants must submit data to show that the base flood elevations (BFE's) are scientifically or technically incorrect. Further, we must provide alternative analyses that incorporate different methodologies, assumptions, or data and quantify the effect on the BFE's. This memo and the attached report prepared by Dr. Lee E. Branscome and lVlichelle N.Csm.nbell of Environmental Dynamics Re,arch, Inc. present the contentions (related to the storm statistics only) that lhe BFE's are both.scientifically incorrect .and iechnlcally-incorrect~ .The EDR report also offers the data and analyses that will be used in subsequent quanfifications (when coupled with model results) of the effects on the BFE's. The FEMA Restudy Report addresses storm statistics applied in the SFWIVlD FIS, 1984, suggesting that the storm frequency used by SFWMD was too low and stating that "it was of interest to determine whether or not surge levels might reqtfir¢ adju~iment owing to revision of the storm statistics." to the 100-year surge with tide was 0.16 The Restudy Report states that, '~he average adjustment displays a table of these feet while the largest adjustment was 0.27 feet". The Restudy Report adjustments as they were applied to the SFWMD Fine Grid Model results. The Restudy Report discusses various estimates of wave setup, including a setup of 1.2' after accounting for a number of considerations. The Report concludes, "Recalling that the 100- surge adjustment of about 0.2', leads us adju~haent of storm statistics suggests a average yr to adopt 1.4 fl as a fair allowance for both ~p arid slAfisuc . I JAN 0 8 200? Clearly, the Restudy Report's 1.4 feet increase that was applied to the open coast still water elevations included a 0.2 feet frequency adjustment. Scientifically Incorrect BFE's The revised BFE's proposed by the FEMA Restudy are technically incorrect because they were based on "frequency adjustments" that were derived using inappropriate assumptions. Further, the Re~udy review of storm statistics accepted two ass~mptions of the SFWMD study that resulted in overly conservative (higher) still water flood elevations, 1 - Frequency Adju~b,,em The frequency adjustment of 0.2 feet was based on the Restudy's conclusion that the storm frequency for the Collier County area was higher than hie SFWMD determined value. The Restudy concluded that the higher freqhency was mpponed by NWS-3 $. The attached EDR report describes in detail an updated determination of storm frequency that closely agrees with the SFWMD frequency. The EDR report describes the error in the Restudy's frequency determination, namely the erroneous assumption that tropical depressions could be included in the storm count. Further, the Restudy's assumption that the NWS-38 Report was in agreement with the Restudy frequency is not correct. The NWS-3$ storm frequency for Collier County is in close agreement with the SFWMD and EDR determined frequencies and significantly below the Restudy's frequency. Even if the Resmdy's erroneously determined frequency was valid, it is not valid to assume that the 100-year flood elevations can be adjusted for the frequency increase because the SFWMD storm probabilities were developed from a different population of storms (i.e. the population from which the SFWMD frequency was derived). 2 - SFWMD Storm Statistics Assumptions Although the Restudy reviewed the SFWIVlD statistical analysis, it did not comment on the very conservative assumptions affecting the final 100-year still water flood elevations. The first SFWMD assumption was that storm parameter probabilities are independent of each other. This assumption, particularly the assumption that the central pressure probabilh'y dism'bution is independent of storm direction results in intense landfsllin~o storms being assigned too high of a probability. A second SFWMD assumption that was "accepted" in the Restudy is inconsistent with one of the Restudy's stated criteria. The SFWMD assumption that the central pressure associated with a historic storm is the lowest central pressure while the storm existed in the study area circle (radius of 150 nm). For example, the 1935 "Labor Day Storm" was represented in the pressure probability plot as having a 120 mb central pressure depression. This pressure depression was measured while the storm was in the Florida Keys. This assumption is clearly inconsistent with the Restudy's stated criteria of defining the storm characteristics at the instant of closest 2 approach to Collier County. The SFWMD assumption ampi/fins ~he conservativeness of the first assumption. The fa/lure to address these important conservative assumptions are serious oversights in the Restudy which was reportedly intended to upgrade the flood elevation predictions. Technically Incorrect BFE's The proposed BFE's could also be considered technically incorrect because the methodology was not correctly applied to compute the most accurate flood elevations. The methodology for computing frequency was obviously incorrect. The methodology accepted for deter~inlnS probabilities is incons/stent with the Restudy's own stated criteria (i.e.' defining storm parameters at the poim of closest approach). The methodology accepted for establishing storm parameter probabilities as independent of each other, ignores the fact thai the more intense storms have not been laedfAlling storms, but exiting and alongshore. Alternative Anal ses Alternative methods for analysis of the storm statistics are presented in the EDR report based on the assumption that storm parameter probabilities are interdependent. An updated determination of storm frequency demonstrated a result essentially unchanged from the original SFWMD frequenc3?. A revised table of parameter probabilities was developed based on an expanded HURDAT tape. The revised frequency and probability tables will be used in conjunction with the results of the hurricane surge model applications to the synthetic storms (defined by tabulated parameter compa~hsients) to develop new estimates of 100-year storm surge elevations. The new elevations compared to those developed in the SFWMD study w/ti quanti~ the effect of the revised analysis on the proposed BFE's. 3 Tropical Cyclone Climatology of Collier County, Florida Lee E. Branscome, Ph.D., C.C.M. Michelie N. Campbeli, M.Sc. Environmental Dynamics Research, Inc. 7338 155~' Place North Palm Beach Gardens, FL 3~18 October 2001 1. Introduction We have analyzed data on hurricanes and tropical storms that have come within 100 nautical miles of the central Collier County coast, during the period of June 1851 through mid-October 2001. The results of our analysis are presented In this report and are intended to provide input for storm surge calculations. We have also compared our findings to prior studies of the tropical cyclone climatology of Collier County. 2. Data Sources The historical database of North Atlantic tropical storms and hurricanes was obtaIned from the National Hurricane Center (NHC). A data file of "best track" and intensity estimates is maintained by NHC. The original version of these data was sometimes referred to as the HURDAT tape, which was a computer tape containing storm data for the period of 1886-1983. The data file has since been updated and expanded. It contains data on six-hourly storm positions and intensities at 00, 06, 12, and 18 UTC (Universal Time Coordinated). Position is given in latitude and longitude, and the intensity is indicated by the maximum sustained wind speed at each time and position and, in later years, also by central pressure. In addition to the computer data file, we referred to storm track and intensity maps in the report by Neumaun et al. (1993), entitled Tropical Cyclones of the North Atlantic Ocean, 1871-1992, published by the National Climatic Data Center in co-operation with NHC. Track and intensity maps for the years 1851-1871 and 1993-2001 were obtained from NHC's web site. We also utilized information from the report by Ho et al. (1987), entitled NOAA Technical Report NWS 38 - Hurricane Climatolog~j for the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts of the United States, published by the National Weather Service. The quality of the data improved through the period of record as observational techniques improved. Aircraft reconnaissance began in 1944 and satellite observations followed in the late 1960's. The year 1944 is considered to be the beginning of reliable seasonal statistics on the frequency and duration of storms (Landsea, 1993). Also, Landsea (1993) Indicates that the wind strength in strong hurricanes is biased to the high side for storms of the period of 1944-1969, and possibly for storms prior to 1944. He found a 5-knot overestimation for hurricanes wi~ (115 mph)wind speeds, with larger biases for stronger storms. We made no corr~honsNo,ior/6._~ ~,S 3. Storm Selection Methods We used a center reference point of 26.0°N and 81.75°W, which is near Marco or about 8 nm south of Naples. The same reference point was used in the 1984 report of the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), entitled The Determination of lO0-Year Coastal Surge Flood Elevations for Coastal Collier County, Florida. Data for all tropical cyclones of tropical storm or hurricane strength that passed within 100 nautical miles (nm) of the center reference point were extracted from the NIHC database. Our analysis did not include any cyclone or disturbance that was not of tropical storm or hurricane strength when it passed within 100 nm of the center reference point, even ff it was a tropical storm or hurricane at some other time and location along its track. That is, tropical cyclones that were in weak developing or decaying stages of their life cycle while inside the circle of 100 mn radius, were not included in our analysis. 4. Storm Frequency We fotmd 95 storms that passed within 100 nm of the reference point during the 151-year period of record. Independent of our study, Collier County management asked the National Weather Service to provide it with a list of all tropical storms and hurricanes that passed within 100 nm of Naples during the same period of record. Our list contained all of the storms on the list generated by the National Weather Service Forecast Office in Miami (which is co-located with the National Hurricane Center), plus one additional storm on the periphery of the 100 nm circle. Following the method in the SFWMD study for calculating total storm frequency, we divided the number of storms by the diameter of the circle (200 nm) and by the duration of the data period (151 years). The frequency is 3.15 x 10'~ storms per nm per year. The SFWMD study, which used a 150 nm radius and storms from 1886 through 1982, found 3.68 x 10.3 storms per nm per year. The difference in results is almost entirely due to the inclusion of the early portion of the data record, from 1851 to 1885, when the number of storms in the database is relatively small compared to later years. It is highly likely that many storms were simply not reported in this early period due to the very limited observing capabilities and record-keeping of the period. If the period of 1851-1885 is removed, then the frequency becomes 3.66 x 10.3 storms per mn per year. Thus, we found no significant change in frequency compared to the SFWMD study. The NWS 38 report analyzed ~he frequency of tropical storms and hurricanes that entered, exited, or passed offshore within 150 nm of the Atlantic end Gulf Coasts during the period of 1871-1984. The final frequencies were heavily smoothed using a spatial weighting filter that incorporated frequencies as far as 250 nm away from a center reference point. The landfalling frequency for Colher County in NWS 38 was about 2.1 x 10'~ storms per nm per year, while the exiting frequency was 0.5 x 10-3 storms per nm per year. The frequency of alongshore storms that passed within 100 nm to the west of the Collier County coast was 1.8 x 10.] storms per year, or about 21 storms in the 115 years of data used in the NWS 38 study. To compute the alongshore contribution to total storm frequency following the method used in the sFWMD stud),, we divide the number of alongshore storms by the duration of the data period (115 years) antthe of the circle (200 nm) and obtain 0.9 x 10.3 storms per nm per year. Adding the aloTgshcl~.result JAN 08. 2002 to the sum of the exiting and landfalling frequencies, we obtain 3.5 x 10.3 storms per nm per year for the NWS 38 study, or a slightly lower value than our total or the total from the SFWMD study. In determining storm frequencies along the Gulf Coast of the U.S., the Nqt/S 38 report only counted storms that made landfall or exited the Gulf Coast, along with storms that passed offshore within the Gulf. NWS 38 apparently did not count storms that entered somewhere along the Atlantic Coast, traveled inland, but never exited anywhere along the Gulf Coast. During the period of record (1871-1984) used in the NWS 38 report, five storms entered the Atlantic Coast of Florida, passed inland within 100 nm of the Collier County reference point, and never exited anywhere along the Gulf Coast of Florida. The frequency associated with these storms is 0.2 x 10.3 storms per nm per year, using the circle of 200 nm diameter. If this frequency is added to the sum of the frequencies for landfalling~ exiting and offshore storms as reported in NWS 38, the frequency for all storms within 100 nm of the center reference point of 3.7 x 10-s storms per nm per year, which is essentially identical to our study and the SFWIvlD study. The study by Engineering Methods and Applications, inc. (EMA), entitled Collier County, FL Coastal Summary EMW-94-C-4392, analyzed the storm frequency based on the period of 1886- 1994. This EMA study reported a total storm frequency of 4.13 x 10.3 storms per nm per year, a total higher than any of the previous studies and our current study. We identified 12 storms that EMA included in its total storm count that were tropical depressions when passing within 100 nm of the center reference point, but were tropical storms or hurricanes only at greater distances (in some cases, hundreds of miles from Naples). This approach appears to contradict the method used in the SFWMD and NWS 38 studies, as well as our own study, that counted only tropical storrr~ and hurricanes. The tropical depressions included in the EMA report increase the total frequency by 0.55 x 10.3 storms per nra per year, which essentially explains the discrepancy with the results of the other studies. The EMA study stated that "there have been an additional twelve years of storm data since the early (SFWMD) study - consequently, it was of interest to deterrmne whether or not surge levels might require adjustment owing to revision of storm statistics". The EMA study incorporated 12 additional years of data (1983-1994) beyond the period used in the SFWMD study of 1984. During that 12-year period of updated statistics, only 9 storms are shown in the list of storms appended to the EMA report, one of which was a tropical depression that eventually became a tropical storm in the Atlantic Ocean near Jacksonville. If all 9 storms are considered (even the depression), the storm frequency for the 12-year period is 3.75 x 10.3 storms per n_rn per year, which is essentially the same as the frequency found in the SFWMD study for the earher period of 1886-1982. If the depression is excluded, the frequency for 1983-1994 becomes only 3.33 x 10.3 storms per nm per year. The total frequency reported by EMA did not change relative to the SFWMD result because of any significant change in storm frequency during the 12 years of additional storm statistics. It changed because storms that were neither tropical storms nor hurricanes within 100 nm of the Collier County coast were added by EMA to the number of storms that occurred prior to 1983. ~,e tota~e~rt~ ,I The EMA report stated that NW$ 38 found 4.4 x 10.3 storms per nm pe~r year for L1 frequency within 100 nm of the Collier County coast. However, EMA s analysis q data on storm frequency is incorrect. EMA appears to have divided the NWS 38 alongshore frequency of 1.8 x 10-a storms per year not by the diameter of the drcle (200 nm), but by the radius (100 nm). Then it added the resultant frequency of 1.8 x 10.3 alongshore storms per nm per year to the sum of the land/ailing (2.1 x l0-a) and exiting (0.5 x 10'3) frequencies. Thus, the EMA study overstated the total storm frequency from the lqWS 38 report, and also overestimated the frecl~ency by including tropical depressions in its own calculations. 5. Direction of Storm Motion We determined the direction of motion for each storm at its closest approach to the center reference point and assigned it to one of four different categories: Exiting, Alongshore, Oblique Landfall, or Direct Land/all (Fig. 1). For consistency, we selected the direction categories to be essentially identical to the categories (compartments) used in the SFWMD study. The range of angles for each direction category and the fraction of storms associated with each category are shown in Table 1 on storm statistics. The fraction of storms in each category was roughly equal in the SFWMD study, in our study the Direct Landfall category shows the highest occurrence. Direct and obhque landfalls together account for about 60% of all storms in our study, compared to 48% in the SFWMD study. Exiting storms made up 20% of our study and 26% in the SFWMD study, while alongshore storms accounted for 20% in our study and 26% in the SFWMD study. Some of the differences between our results and the SFWMD results are due to an enhanced frequency (relative to other directions) of land/ailing cyclones, mostly tropical storms, in the early and late portions of our period of record. These parts of the record were not included in the SFWMD study of 1984. It is possible that the relatively larger portion of land/ailing storms in the early period is due to a lack of observations of alongshore storms. However, the tendency to landfalling storms in the most recent period cannot be explained by a lack of storm track data, but very likely is the result of natural variabihty in storm behavior. Data from NWS 38 indicate 57% of storms as landfalling, 14% as exiting and about 29% as alongshore (including storms passing to the east), whereas the EMA study showed 47% land/ailing, 38% exiting and 15% as alongshore. Differences in how the storm tracks were analyzed and classified likely account for some of the differences in percentages among the four studies. However, all of the studies demonstrate that about 40% to 50% of the tropical cyclones that affect Collier County are not landfalling storms. 6. Radius of Maximum winds Historical data on the radius of maximum winds are limited in quantity and quality. The radius of maximum winds is not contained in the NHC storm database. Generally, the radius of maximum winds is inversely related to storm intensity. The radius at closest approach for each storm in our study was estimated from an empirical relationship between the radius and central pressure depression (Twisdale et al., 1994). The relationship was derived from data on radii contained in the NWS-38 report and pressure data in the N'HC storm database. However, wide variation of the radius occurs for a given pressure depression in the limited historical observations, indicating that confidence in historical estimates of the radius of max ~ is low and that the relationship to the pressure depression is rather weak. 14o. /¢ ~q'. ~ 4 We selected two ranges of radii values (see Table 1 on storm statistics) that correspond to the same two ranges in the SFI6rMD study. The SFWMD study showed about equal numbers in each category. We found more storms in the larger radius category, primarily because the percentage of tropical storms (i.e., weaker storms with larger radii) in our study was greater than in the SFW/vlD study. 7. Storm Intensity The NHC database provides data on estimated or measured wind speeds for all storms and central pressures for storms in the latter portion of the period of record. The central pressure is usually not available for storms prior to the 1960's. Empirical relationships between central pressure and maximum sustained surface wind speed have been developed by several investigators over the years (e.g., Fujita, 1971; Atkinson and Holliday, 1977; Dvorak, 1984). These investigators have used the following general relationship: Vm, = A[Po - P,]~' where V~, is the maximum sustained surface wind speed in m s4, Po is the peripheral sea level pressure in millibars (mb) (e.g., 1010 or 1013 mb), Pc is central (minimum) pressure of the storm, and A and b are constants that are determined in the statistical analysis. We used wind and central pressure observations for 30 storms that passed within 100 nm of the Collier County reference point and found best fit values of A = 5.38 and b = 0.569 (using Po = 1013 mb) with an R2 = 0.91. For the rest of the report, we identify Po - Pc as Pa, the central pressure depression. In our analysis of storm pressure depressions (Pa), we used actual pressure observations when they were available. When observations of central pressure were not available, we used the empirical relationship with wind speed to generate an estimate of the central pressure. The fraction of storms falling withIn certain ranges of Pa at closest approach are shown in Table 1 for all storms and each dJxection category. The SFWMD study found about 33%' of storms were of tropical storm strength (maximum sustained wind speeds of 39 to 73 mph). Our study found about 54% were tropical storms. The difference appears to be related to the expanded period of record of our study and the methods used in the analysis. Following the period of record used in the SFWMD study, 70% of the storms that have affected Collier County have been tropical storms. During the early period of 1851-1885 (also not included in the SFWMD study), 60% were tropical stomas. Thus, the very early and most recent data periods that were included in our report, but not in the SFW1VID study, shift the intensity distribution toward tropical storms. Because the SFWMD study used a circle of larger radius (150 nm), the storm sample in the SFWMD study included more area south of the Keys and along the East Coast where the storm distribution is weighted toward hurricanes. Furthermore, SFWMD study may have chosen the maximum intensity that each storm had within 150 nm of the center reference point, whereas we used the intensity at closest approach to the center reference point. If so, the SFWMD study may have counted some storms as hurricanes, even though they were tropical storms at closest approach to Collier County. __..,,,..~.__._ The NWS 38 study found about 32% of storms had a central pressure depression of at least 40 mb, whereas the SFWMD study reported 44%. Our study found about 24% in that range, again partly due to a higher percentage of tropical storms in our expanded period of record. Thus, the SFWMD study is generally biased toward higher storm intensities and a larger percentage of hurricanes relative to our study and NWS 38. Again, the method for determining storm intensity near Collier County likely influences the result. For example, a geographic weighting function was applied to intensity probabilities in N'WS 38 that diminished the contribution from storms at greater distances, thus giving less weight to hurricanes in the Keys. On the other hand, the SFWMD study did not apply a weighting factor and all storms within the 150 nm circle counted equally. Thus, the percentage of Collier County storms with Pa -> 40 mb in the I'q'WS 38 report is somewhat influenced by hurricanes in the Keys, but less so than in the SFWMD study. In our study the strength of the storms at closest approach was used in calculating intensity probabilities, which diminishes the relative contributions from strong hurricanes on the East Coast or in the Keys. Assessing or comparing the probability of very strong storms is difficult because of the very small number of storms in the high ranges of Pa shown in Table 1. The SFWMD study apparently used only one storm with Pa > 81 mb, namely, the very strong 1935 hurricane. All of the storms in our study had pressure depressions below 81 mb at closest approach to the central reference point on the Collier County coast. The 1935 Saffir-Simpson Category 5 storm, that hit the Keys and traveled northward alongshore (west) of Colher County, had a measured depression of 121 mb when it was about 128 nm south of Naples. It is estimated that Pa was about 84 mb when it was about 84 nm from Naples and about 53 mb when it made its closest approach of about 29 nm. The question remains how, or even if, the 1935 hurricane should contribute to the probabilities of the Pa ranges above 81 mb. The SFWMD study used a range of 150 nm from a center point on the Collier County coast in its study. In its calculation of intensity probabilities, the SFWMD study used a Pa of 121 mb for the 1935 storm, which occurred when the storm was near the edge of the 150 nm radius, not at its closest approach. The storm's highest pressure depression was in the range of 81 to 95 mb when it entered a circle of 100 nm radius from the Collier County center point (the radius used in our study). A second probability distribution of pressure depression ranges is shown in our Table 1, calculated after moving the 1935 storm from the 40 to 54 mb range (at closest approach) to the 81 to 95 mb range (initially entering the 100 nm circle). Moving the 1935 storm from one intensity category to another doubled the probability of storms with Pd > 67 mb from 2% to 4%. Not surprisingly, the method that determines the appropriate Pd value for a single very strong storm can have a huge impact on estimates of probabilities of very strong storms. Differences between studies for very strong storms are, to some extent, the result of subjective choices in the methods of analysis. In any case, because the 1935 storm was very likely the only storm in 151 years to have a pressure depression greater than 81 mb within 100 nm of the central reference point, a pressure depression greater than 81 mb seems to be an event with a return period of more than 100 years. On average, the alongshore storms tend to be the strongest storms, compared to the the other direction categories. The strongest alongshore storms tend to be Atlan~ that pass through or south of the Keys and then curve northward close to the ~ cyclones in Florida, such as Donna in 1960 and the very strong 1935 hurricane. Other strong storms can also emerge from the central and western Caribbean and eventually move northward along the Gulf Coast. About 60% of alongshore storms are hurricanes at closest approach. Although the alongshore storms tend to be the strongest storms, the N'WS 38 report discusses why a strong hurricane in the Keys usually diminishes in intensity when it turns and moves northward along the Gulf Coast of Florida. A large portion of the eastern half of the storm is over the land mass of the Florida peninsula which reduces the energy source for the storm. Donna in 1960 and the 1935 hurricane am cited in N'WS 38 as examples of this effect. Exiting storms are usually Atlantic hurricanes that move westward across the peninsula after making landfall on the southeast coast of Florida (e.g., Andrew in 1992). These storms can be very strong when they make landfall on the East Coast. But, these storms are, on average, less intense near Collier County than the alongshore storms because of the weakening that occurs as most, ff not all, of the storm passes westward over the land mass of the peninsula. About 60% of exiting storms are hurricanes at closest approach to the Collier County coast. The landfalling storms are typically the weakest. They are often tropical storms that form in the southern Gulf of Mexico or western Caribbean and move rapidly northeastward. They are less likely to reach the strength of the Atlantic hurricanes that reach Collier County from the east or south. Only 30% of oblique landfalling storms and about 40% of direct landfalling storms are hurricanes at closest approach. 8. Forward Speed Forward speeds at closest approach are similar for the exiting, alongshore and oblique landfalling storms. However, the direct landfalling storms show a clear preference to speeds that are higher than speeds in any of the other direction categories. A storm making a direct landfall from the Gui/is moving toward the east or northeast and, therefore, is more likely to be moving in or near the westerly steering winds of the jet stream. The westerly winds in the Gulf are typically stronger than the easterly and southerly winds that drive Atlantic storms from the east and south. 9. Summary The total storm frequency was found to be about 3.66 x 10-~ per nm per year, in close agreement with the earlier SFWMD and NWS 38 studies. The EMA study incorrectly calculated the NWS 38 storm frequency, and overestimated the storm frequency in its own analysis by including tropical depressions. Storms that make landfall in Collier County are typically weaker than alongshore and exiting storms, primarily because they are not the strong Atlantic hurricanes that affect the East Coast and Keys. The landfalling storms are usually, but not always, tropical storms or weak hurricanes that originate in the southern Gu]/or western and central Caribbean. AC~r.I~A ~O(-~, JAN 0 8 2002 7 Alongshore and exiting storms are necessarily affected by the land mass of Florida, which diminishes their intensity as they approach the central and northern Colher County coast from the south or east. Thus, the intensity that strong Atlantic hurricanes have in the Keys or along the East Coast is not the best measure of their intensity when they pass in the immediate vicinity of the Collier County coast. For this reason, we examined storms that passed within 100 nm of the central Collier County coast and used the pressure depression of the storms when they were at their closest approach to the center reference point on the coast. 'the tropical cyclone climatology of the Colher County coast, and likely the west coast of the Florida peninsula in general, differs from the Gulf coasts of Northwest Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas. Most storms that affect the northern and western coastlines of the Gulf of Mexico are landfalling storms and their intensity is usually not diminished by an intervening land mass. Studies of the impact of tropical cyclones on the Colher County coast need to recognize the dependence of storm intensity on direction of motion and the unique geographic configuration that, on average, reduces the intensity of severe Atlantic hurricanes as they approach Colher County. 10. References Atkinson, G. D., and C. R. Holliday, 1977: Tropical cyclone minimum sea level pressure/maximum sustained wind relationship for the western North Pacific. Mon. Wea. Rev., 105, 421-427. Dvorak, V. F., 1984: Tropical cyclone intensity analysis using satellite data. NOAA Tech. Report NESDIS 11, 47 pp. Engineering Methods and Applications, Inc. (EMA), 1994: Collier County, FL Coastal Summary EMW-94-C-4392. [including follow-up memorandttm by D. Divoky, entitled "Clarification of coastal issues raised in the CoLlier County technical appeal"] Fujita, T. T., 1971: Proposed characterization of tornadoes and hurricanes by area and intensity. SMRP Res. Paper No. 91, Dept. of Geophysical Sci., Univ. of Chicago, 42 pp. Ho, F. P., J. C. Su, K. Hanevich, R. Smith, and F. Richards, 1987: Hurricane Climatology for the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts of the United States. NOAA Tech. Report NWS 38. 195 pp. Landsea, C. W., 1993: A climatology of intense (or major) Atlantic hurricanes. Mon. Wea. Rev., 121, 1703-1713. South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), 1984: The Determination of lO0-Year Coastal Surge Flood Ele'vations for Coastal Collier County, Florida. 54 pp. Neumarm, C. J., B. Jarvinen, C. McAdie, and J. D. ELms, 1993: Tropical Cyclones of the North Atlantic Ocean, 1871-1992. National Climatic Data Center, 193 pp. Twisdale, L. ^., P. J. Vickery, and M. B. Hardy, 1994: Uncertainties in the predic~on of hurricane windspeeds. Hurricanes of 1992. R. Cook and M. Soltani, ed., ASCE. AGENDA ITEI~ JAN 0 8 2002 pg. C1 C2 xiting i Alongshore C3 C4 Oblique Landfall Direct Landfall Figure 1. Direction of motion categories with cen- tral direction shown by arrow. Average orientation of Collier County Coast (at -27° relative to no] ' AC~_NOAI~-~£) shown by heavy line. ~__ /&~ JAN I) ~ ~2 + o o~o S~ooooo ~-~,~ JAN 0 8 2002 ,(~,!l!q~qo.~d ~,?,~ln~unD X~,ru~o ~, ~. JAN 0 8 2002 .,. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 JAN O I~ 2002 O O m 0 AC.-F._I,~A il F_J,I . JAN 0 $ 2.002 o. o. o. o. o o o. o o 0 AGEN*DA IT~-~ .JAN O 8 2002 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0 N 0 0 2002 c- ~ 0 ~ 0 ._ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O~ ~0 r~ co s~6E~uaoJad N APPENDIX B Storm Model Setup and Storm Analysis Memo to: Bob Devlin Gene Chartrand Patrick White Tomasello ConSulting Engineers, Inc. 5906 Center Sb'eet, Jupite*, Flodda 33458 Date: 11/05/01 Surge Model Setup and Storm Analysis Introduction The current FEMA FIRM's are based on Stillwater flood elevations computed by.the SFWMD and documented in the report, "The Determination of 100-Year Coastal Surge Flood Elevations for Coastal Collier County, Florida", April, 1984. The 100-year flood elevations reported in this study report were determined from model simulations of synthetic storms and a probability analysis of the model results. The proposed reanalysis of flood elevations based on the interdependence of storm parameter probabilities, particularly the dependency of' central pressure to storm direction, requires the model results, ltowever, the model results from the SFWMD study no longer exist. This memo report describes the SURGE model applications to compute the surge flooding results that Mil be used in the reanalysis. This modeling effort was intended to recreate the SFWMD coarse grid model.Themodel results will then be applied to the SFWMD probability disthbutions, and the revised distribution using the interrelated storm parameter probabilities. A quantifiable comparison of the SFWMD 1984 100-year flood elevations to the 100-year flood elevations based on locally generated and interrelated storm parameters will be possible. Model Setnp The "open coast" model used by the SFWMD is described in their 1984 study report. Although no copies of the original open coast model input files were located, the model setup was accomplished based on the report descriptions as follows: Number of Columns x Rows: Grid Size (Y x X) [nautical miles]: Max Water Depth [fl below NGVD]: Type of boundary condition used: Wind Field: Peripheral Pressure (in-Hg): Latitude of Element (1,1) center: Longitude of Element (1,1) center: An~e between Y-Axis and tree North (degrees counter-clockwvise): Computational Time Step (sec): 47x35 5.0 x4.5 300.0 Barometric/Uniform Flux Tetra Tech 29.92 28.14 deg N 81.80 deg W 16.5 deg 192.8 sec 1 Figure I displays a plot of the model grid with the grid numbering. Each grid was assigned a bottom elevation that was taken from Figures 2 and 20 of the SFWMD 1984 report. Ntodeled Storms The synthetic storms were defined by the parameter values developed by the SFWMD 1984 study. The storm parameters are described as follows: Central Pressure (in Hg): Storm Radius (nm): Forward Speed (kts): Direction (deg from lq): Number of Tracks: 26.52 26.91 27.32 27.73 28.15 28.53 28.95 29.36 13.0 27.0 7.5 14.5 21.5 261.8 327.5 11.3 55.1 7, (four to the left of the 0 track and two to the fight) (See Figures 8 - 15 of SFWMD Report, attached) MI combinations of the parameters listed above result in 1344 synthetic storms. However, because the SFWMD study demonstrated a linear relationship between surge height and central pressure, they modeled only 2 central pressures. To be consistent with the SFWMD this analysis also modeled two pressures, so the actual number of model simulations was 336, with the surge heights from the other 1008 synthetic storms determined by interpolation and extrapolation. The model results are reported on 336 output files, in binary format and another 336 files in ASCII format. The output file names are number designations from 0611111 to 0642237, where the digits represent the following: 0642237 track number (1 through 7) speed( 1 - 7.5 kts, 2 - 14.5 kts, 3 -21.5 kts) central pressure ( 1 - 26.52 in Hg, 2 - 28.95 in Hg) radius ( 1 - 13.0 nm, 2 - 27.0 nm) direction ( 1 - Oblique Landfall, 2- Direct Landfall, 3 - Alongshore, 4 - Exiting ) : .................... ASCII output : ........................ Open Coast (large grid) Table 1, is an example of the flood surge elevations for eight grid locations, computed for the 336 synthetic storms modeled for the Collier County study area. Recommendations The SURGE model results will be applied to the PROBS program to develop the 100-year flood elevations for original SFWMD parameter probabilities as well as the revised probabilities that reflect the parameter interrelationships. A re-computation of the SFWMD results was necessary because the final results reported in the 1984 report were for the fine grid model. The model results reported here are for the coarse grid. A comparison of the coarse grid computed flood elevations will quantify the error introduced by the SFWMD and the FEMA Restudy in assumptiom relating to storm statistics (see Memo Report of 10/15/01). COLLIER COUNTY AND FINE GRID MODEL BASINS FIGURE 2 11 Figure 1 GULF OF MEXICO R = 13 NM ~9= '11.3° N GULF OF MEXICO R -- 27 NM (3 -- 11.3o N R G I A GULF OF MEXICO N R= 13 NM e = 55.1© G_U__L.F O.F MEXIC9_ R: 27 'NM 8 =55.1° R G I A ~.-=~., Figure G E 0 R G I A GULF OF MEXICO R = 13 NM E) = -32.5° N 6 GULF OF MEXICO R = 27 NM 8 = -32.5° 7 GULF OF MEXICO R = 13 NM @ = -98.3© A i GULF OF MEXICO R = 27 NM E) ---98.3° i Figure 9 ted Sur Elevations for Eight Grids ~-torm- (21, 9) (21,10) 21,11) (22, 9) (22,10) 22,11) 23,11) (24, 9_)~- 0611111 4.35 :~. 1~5~- 2.432 5.41~ 4.04~ 3.1'08 3.516 6.777 0611112 1.418-- 1.009 0.815 2.589 1.924 1.482 2.017 3.936 ~611113 0.538 0.364 0.272 1.052 0.715 0.52 0.9~ ~_ 1.996 0611114 10.162 7.134 i~ 4.866 11.69 8.302 ~ 5.97~ 6.396 12.843 0611115 19.358 15.633 12.159 17.551 14.397 11.491 10.633 15.5~1 0611116 20.193! 17.908 14.976 17.819 15.841 ~-3.496- 12.165- 14.46~ 0611117 16.406 15.314 13.832 14.673 13.599 12.356 11.12 12.2911 0611121 6.354 5.269 4.641 6.606 5.339 4.544 4.703 6.58~ 0611122 3.964 3.326 2.886 4.388 3.708 3.175 3.289 4.58 O611123 1.777 1.498 1.298 2.242 1.86 1.582 1,799 2.667 -0611124 11.591 8.467 6.786 11.17 8.815 7.001 6.806 11.222 ~::)611125 19.678 16.145 12.711 17.538 14.38 11.852 10.58 13.689 0611126 19.394 17.252 14.382 17.34 15.386 12.976 11.848 14.032 0611127 16.607 15.166 13.362 15.103 13.741 12.194 11.194 12.658 ~:)611131 6.118 5.714 5.127 5.828 5.263 4.771 4.598 5.7~,~ 0611132 4.663 4.151 3.694 4.72 4.17 3.753 3.683 4.449 0611133 2.994 2.632 2.303 3.131~ 2.76 2.433 2.516 3.134 0611134 7.936 6.952; 6.014 7.545_ ~6.453 5.557 5.399: 8.324 0611135 15.944 12.25 9.179 13.887 10.777 8.952 8.196 10.423 0611136 16.369 13.914 11.467 14.554 12.594 10.552 9.946 11.774, 0611137 14.733 13.07 11.225 13.405 11.971 10.438 - 9.723 11.258- ~:)611211 0.644 0.482 0.42 1.025 0.79 0.634 0.779 1.503 0611212 0.239 0.22~- 0.22~ 0.517 - 0.436 0.385 0.513 0.868 0611213 0.098 0.072 0.066 0.204 0.177 0.167 0.264 0.42~ 0611214 2.305 1.53 1.064 2.596 1.78~ 1.268 1.349 2.892 ~)611215 I 4.6 3.47 2.569 3.~57 3.064 2.404 2.193 3.536 0611216 5.035 4.798 3-.443 4.272 3.669 3.019 2.6§3 3.41u ~::Po11217 -- 4.106 3.76 3.314 3.576 3.2L, 8- 2.898 2.558 2.944 0611221 1.74 ~.591 1.382 1.844 1.542 1.359 1.382 1.694 0611222 1.214 -1.104 0.983 1.293 1~'172 1.057 ~.074' 1.317 0611223 0.734 0.693 0.629 0.799 0.736 0.667 0.7 0.84~ 0611224 2.713 2.148 1.819 2.576 2.043 1.654 1.604 2.519 0611225 4.753 3.647 2.708 4.108 3.285 2.59 2.388 3.26~7 0611226 5.185 4.354 3.43 4.503 3.788 3.096 2.641 3.614 0611227 4.607 4.113 3.539 4.088 3.64 3.179 2.887 3.412 0611231 1.467 1.288 1.186 1.498 1.337 -1.202 1.237 1.41Z '0611232 1.19 1.093 1.039 1.205 1.137 1.059 1.051 1.137 O611233 0.864 0.821 0.776 0.87 0.836 0.7-75 0~771 0.833 0611234 1.734 1.328 1.13 1.556 1.272 1.161 1.101 1.731 0611235 4.08 2.507 11709 3.191 2.228 1.535 1.447 2.71 0611236 5.173 ~,.~ 22 2.899 4.236 3.4 2.601' 2.331 3.031 0611237 4.544 3.947 3.227 3.934 3.388 2.885 2.59 3.117 0612111 8.~17 6.796 5.407 9.976 7.678 6.07 6.651 1:2.613' 0612112 2.441 1.764 1.388 3.652 2.74 2.122 2.~35 5.116 0612113 0.306 0.307 0.308 0.31 0.311 0.312 0.~-17 0.319 0612114 22.12 18.751 15.543 20.893 17.718 14.85 14.34 19~721 0612115 23.271 21.471 19.177 20.815 19.24 17.439 -15.959 1-~._673 0612116 16.206 15.408 14.393 14.757 14.044 -13.252 -_1~:283 k'~_1'~.8~7- 0~12117 --11.565 11.0-- 8~--'~0.497~ 10.614 10.219 9.784 ~.163c,. 9.4_4..8._ Table 1 Computed Surge Elevations for Eight Grids Stor~- (21, 9) (21,10) 21,11)=~'~2_~7., 9) (22,10)_ (--22,11) 23,11i-' 0612121 10.935 9.382 7.682 11.402 9.391 7.925 7.8~- 12.459 0~12122 4.577 3.~771- --~227 -~.~4~3 4.355 3.67 4.021 5.708 061~ 23 ----1.259 0.96~1- ---~.781 1.685 1.311 1.049 1.302i 2.256 0612124 24.655 21.101 1~:325--23.085 19.564 16.379 15.446: 20.(~0-~' 0612125 23.227 21.33~ 19.051 21.171 19.434 17.527 16.164 18.05~ ~612126 17.446 16.475 15.328 16.161 15.253__14'2'~1 ---13.356 141~-_ 0612127 13.604 12.997 12.291 12.704 12.14 11.542 10.898 11.428 0612131 11.016 9.819 8.595 10.653 9.261 8.186 7.914 10.5-~" 0612132 5.867 5.147 4.483 6.047' 5.266 4.592 4.608 5.894 0612133 2.28 1.94 1.685 2.578 2.184 1.877 2.024 2.847 0612134 22.894 19.861 16.564 -21.085 18.0~' 15.569 14.236 17.17 0612135 21.06 19.121 16.985 19.335 17.613 15.829 14.75 16.612 0612136 16.722 15.705 i 14.566 15.641 14.674 13.663 12.86/ 13.899 0612137 13.852 13.217 12.518 13.056 12.444 11.805 11.182 11.8~ 0612211 1.753 1.29 0.978 2.1 1.531 1.156 1.273 2.652 '0612212 0.357 0.274 0.227 0.599 0.466 0.383! 0.51 0.914- 0612213 0.131 0,094 0,088 0.185 0.143 0.122 0.15~- 0.245 ~612214 4.991 3.935 3.066 4,519 3.605 2.882 2.744 4.191 0612215 / 5.649 5.081 47396 -- 4.936[ ~!..452 -- 3,937i - 3.561 ~4~151 0612216 I 4,099 3~-~68f- 3.~-~ ~,~-51 ~4~1!- 3.~§[ ~.0241 3.-2~ 0612217 l-' 3,015 2~9~ ~.~7h- 2.~1 ~.~- 2~9'~ --~.381 2.451 0612221 2.669 2.288 1.939 2,768 2.26 1.898 1.86 3.013 , 0612222 1.068 r 0.93§ -- 0.837 ---- -- 1 .21'~ 1.065 0.945 0612223 0.293 0.257 0.233 L 0.394 0.342 0.302 0612224 6.037 4.958 3.961~ 5.478 4.49 3.686 [061222~ 6.41 5.7421 4.982 5.723 5.131 4.53 ~D612~--6~ 7--1' 4.7~__ 4'.389- 4'.~9~----4.3~.69~ 4.064 [06--~2227----:--~[~--~ '~ - 3.6~6~ ~3~ ~ 3.408 ~[~231 2.5~[- ~.0~[ 1.859 2.284 2.0~ 1.803 I 0612~ ~[-- ~ ~;~9~ 'f:T~ ~8[ 1.231 [0612234 5.475 4,249 3,336 4,657 3.788 3,174 0612235 0612236 0612237 0621111 0621112 0621113 ~114 0621115 -0621116 0621117 )621121 )621122 ~621123 )621124 0621125 0621126 6,138 5.361 4.516 5,092 4.701 4.283 4.338 4.092 3,833 0.912 0,957 0,972 0.75 0.793 0.812 0,629 0.67 0.691 1.199 1,322 1.355 13.2 11,764 10.087 21,424 19,177 16.582 19.737 17.74 15,499 1.844 1.76 1.662 1.501 1.404 1.347 0.42 0.455 0.479 1.47 1.394 1.~6~8~ 15.415 12.9221 10.168 24.7 20.984 17.654 b621-i~7-~- 22:833-' ~'2~_ :3'i-~ ___ 1_7~ 40_7_. 5.417 4.747 4.093 4.692 4.34 3.989 4.059 3.835 3.61 0.826 0.881 0,914 0,686 0.735 0.766 0.581 0.625 0.654 2.345 2.543 2.158 13,839 12.694 11.382 20.216 17,628 15.026 17.205 15.478 13.702 2,383 2.202 1.974 1.972 1,796 1.644 0,817 0.768 0,71 3.479 2.494 1.777 16.674 13.705 11.401 22.986 19.557 16,242 20.453 1~.18¢ i 1.5.77~ 2 1.029 1.403 0.359 0.509 3.409 4.783~ 4.151 4.856 3.788 .... ~.14~ 3.208 3.407 1.783 2.194 1.264 0.552 2.926 3.85~ 3.771 4.5251 3.741 4.159 3.417 3.678 0.867 1.222 0.728 0.624 0.625 0.533 4.197 9.314 11.869 17.462 13.75 17.013 12.227 13.698 2.214 2.878 1.862 2.37 0.941 1.275 4.051 10.758 12.107 19.36 15.24 19.511 )uted Sure Elevations for Eight Grids Storm (21, 9) (21,10) (21,11) (22, 9) (22,1u) (22,11) (23,11) (24, 9) 062~ 131 3,016 2.865 2.77 3.306 3.135 2.975 ~3.068 3.401 0621132 3.265 3.052 2.941 3.368 3.198 3.038 3.094 3.4C~ -0621133 2.408 2.355 2.237 2.605 2.496 2,323- 2.395 2,781 2,152 2.071 2.15 4.81 2.906 3.086 3.848 12,342 0621135 16.622 12.977 9.401 18.532 14.204 10.19~ 11.195 20.284 ~)621136 26.286 20.86 16.712 24.506 20.337 15.8~7 15.506 20.571- 0621137 24.261 21.397 18,049 22.241 19.656 16.8Z9 15,586 18,183 0621211 0.691 0,713 0.711 0.662 0.686 0.69o 0,681 0.645 0621212 0,533 0.545 0,548 0.511 0.526 0.53Z 0,521 0.488 0621213 0,412 0.425 0,423 0.396 0.407 0,41-~- 0.402 0.378 0621214 0.9 0,919 0.917 0.854 0.881 0.891 0,875 2.026 0621215 3.178 2.873 2.402! 3.216 3.029 2.647 2.652 4.131 0621216 5.529 4.801 4.06 5.073 4.319 3.616 3,256 4.189 0621217 4.907 4.369 3,77 4.215 3.735 3,262 2.859 3.293 7::)621221 0.795 0.83 0.843 0,766 0.812 0.841 0.844 0.93;, 0621222 0.633 0.642 0.628 0,752 0,736 0,699 0,764 0,836 0621223 0.526 0.508 0.476 0.561 0,55 0.527 ~ 0.576 0,634 0621224 1.083 1.153 1.215 1.212 1.232 1.~76 1.606 2.569 ~D621225 4.103 3.654 2.942 4.202 3.8~- 3.09~- 3.185 5.285 0621226 7.144 5.882 4.828 6.576 ~,4 4.336 4.025 5.482 0621227 6.548 5.712 4.762 - 5.802 5.03~ 4.263 3.849 4.634 ~0621231 0.878 0.977 1,019 0.879 1.032 1,103 1.228 1.469 0621232 0.898 0.86 0.823 0.936 0.903 0.~ - 0.89 0.944 0621233 0.858 0.81 0.751 0.858 0.8,~ 0.764 0.774 0.834 06~21234 1.686 1.664 1.734 2~507 2.143 2.04~' 2.308 3.836 0621235 5.297 4.353 3.41 5.346 4.4 3.542 3.503 6.291~ 0621236 8.'4,44 6.45 4.995 7.683 6.687 4.59 4.4.36 6.31 0621237 7.635 6.586' 5.317 6.8¢4 5.u~4 ~4.888 4.49 5.493 0622111 0.774 0.842 0.879 1.256 0.774 -- O.u~4 1.757 4.934 0622112 0.552 0,615 0.65 0.499 0.57 0.616 0.589 0.439 0622113 0,414 0.472 0,507 0.38 0.442 0,464 0.466' _ 0,339 0622114 14.41 12.785 11.203 15.403 13.40-~ 1;I.828 12.537 18.331 0622115 26.253 23.33 20.64 24.027 21.557 19.268 17.926 20.675 0622116 18.461 17.051 -15.638 16.623 15.335 14.12~- 12.875 13.883 0622117 11.805 10.99 10.226 10,675 9.953 9.288 8.522 9.07 0622121 2.114 1.837 -~.673 3.084 2.63 2.272 2.715 6,413 0622122 0.302 0.329 0.34 1,047 0.849 0.715 1.091 1,835 0622123 0.289 0.292 0.296 0,292 0.295 0.298 0.3 0,296 0622124 17.765 15,247 13.365: 18.883 15.852 13.895 14.491 21.078 0622125 29.217 25.99 22.816 27.038 24.22~ 21,478 20.246 23,523 0622126 22.158 20,585 18,893 20.332 18.832 17.331 ' 16,008 17.317 0622127 15,402 14.465 13.509 14.207 13.327 12.46 11.562 12,302 0622131 4.303 4.001 3.75 4.781 4.292 3,898 4.082 6.893 0622132 2.791 2.71 2,471 3.011 2.781 2,516 2.607 3.33f;, 0622133 1.097 1.033 0.873 1.384 1.228 1.03 1.148 1.548 0622134 20.291 16.528 14.217 21.45 17.364 14.603 14.895 22.508 0622135 30.344 27.008 23.233 28.489 25~39 22.131 ~1.111 24.96~- 0672136 24.O6 22.364 20.517~ 22.355 20.716 19~39 17.733 ~19.~37~ (~6~2137 17.748 16.736 15.717 16.582~ 15.546 ~4..568 13.58~77 -- No, JAN I 3 rable 1 Com )uted Surge Elevations for Eight Grids Storm (21, 9) (21,10) (21,11) (22, 9) ~ (22,10) ~22,11~_ (23,11) (24, 9) 0622211 0.624 0.686 0.722 0.586 0.653 0.702 0.686 1.178 0622212 0.327 0.35 0.368 0.313 0.335 0.356 0.347 0.3 0622213 0.243 0.26 0.272 0.237 0.253 0.264 0.259 0.231 0622214 3.095 2.87 2.633 3.278 2.85/ 2.749 2.834 4.015 0622215 6.392 5.596 4.882 5.751 5.08~- 4.511 4.141 4.867 0622216 4.23 3.882 3.55 3.736 ~.43 3.153 2.841 3.084 0622217 2.622 2.434 2.256 2.335 2.17 2.028 1.845 1.975 0622221 0.877 0.85 0.795 1.106 1.016 0.923 1.007 1.46b 0622222 0.314 0.294 0.28 0.452 0.427 0.399 0.506 0.67~ 0622223 0.162 0.18 0.193 0.159 0.176 0.19 0.19 0.156 O6~??~4 4.227 3.701 3.42 4.514 3.765 3.557 3.68 5.21 0622225 8.235 7.189 6.224 7.597 6.689 5.865 5.493 6.62/ 0622226 5.989 5.536 5.64 5.474 5.019 4.591 4.219 4.658 06~???7 4.033 3.756 3.491 3.699! 3.438 3.204 2.963 3.206 0622231 1.271 1.173 1.138 1.348 1.297 1.212 1.407 2.014 ;0622232 1.069 1.009 0.943 1.126 1.053 0.981 ' 1.641 1.157 ~ O622233 0.364 0.359 0.343 0.429 0.421 0.387 0.423 0.494 0622234 5.022 4.462 4.077 5.457 4.528 4.152 4.207 6.065 ~ 0622235 9.402 8.121 6.795 §.788 7.649 6.52~ 6.212 7.742 0622236 7.127 6.56 5.94 -6.593 6.063 5.501 5.111 5.751 0672237 5.092 4.726 4.368 4.739 4.386 4.~53 --- 3.78 4.16-2- 0631111 17.981 14.326 10.727 15.821 12.724 9.83 9.201 13.167 0631112 10.57 7.95 6.127 10.057 7.624 5.927 --- 5.77 8.77~ (:3631113 5.792 4.335 3.34:,'---'5.778 4.382 3.391 --3.427 5.511- 0631114 I 17.843 16.19§ 13.606 :15.632 14.095 12.106 ---10.84 13.1~ ~)631115 14.061 13.305 12.204 12.573 11.841 10.975 -- 9.862 10.7~ 0631116 10.563 10.028 9.257 9.559 9.101 8.538 7.884 8.40 ~:)631117 7.93 7.507 6.908 7.187 6.86 6.44 6.018 6.463 (:~631121 17.369 15.081 12.606 15.158 12.923 10.957 9.702 11.44~- 0631122 10.87 8.984 7.381 9.872 8.235 6.953 6.515 8.11 ~:)631123 6.409 5.264 4.401 6.193 5.107 4.292 4.159 5.47 0631124 17.852 - 16.376 14.532 15.78 14.34 12.768 11.32 12.554 0631125 13.93 13.076 11.828 12.537 11.693 10.69 __9.628 10.509 0631126 10.232 9.568 8.706 9.389 8.78 8.069 7.47 8.15 0631127 7.809 7.321 6.688 7.205 6.766 6.283 5.877 6.421 0631131 14.105 11.726 10.443 1-1.865 10.301 -9.108 8.192 9.432 0631132 9.102 8.033 6.834 8.274 ! 7.185 6.298 _ 5.907 6.825 0631133 5.94 5.018 4.249 5.599 4.796 4.145 4.01 4.831 0631134 14.641 13.568 12.336 13.085 12.088 10.857 9.957 10.765 0631135 12.287 11.473 10.329 11.304 10.509 9.552 8.804 9.554 0631138 8.828 8.184 7.436 8.096 7.583 7.022 6.558 7.053 0631137 6.738 6.32 5.814 6.321 5.913 5.531 5.228 5.688 0631211 3.699 2.635 1.849 3.01 2.255 1.654 1.556 2.692 0631212 1.908 1.313 0.934 1.807 1.298 0.962 0.974 1.668 0631213 0.874 0.615 0.46 0.886 0.642 0.49 0.517 0.878 0631214 3.92 3.299 2.586 3.197 2.699 2.18 1.885 2.662 0631215 §.188 2.926 2.525 ---2.711 2.482 2.183 1.913 2.262 -- 1.791 - 1.615 ~-.1.842 0631216 2.434 2.252 1.997 __ 2.122 __1_:97 __~1~51~_.~1.~,~1 ~.~_~ / (::~ 1.8~98 1.769 ~1.587 1,682 1.577 ,~,. Com Jted Sure Elevations for Eight Grids ~torm (21, 9) i(21,10) (21,11) (22, 9) (22,10) (22,11) 23,11) (24, 9) 0631221 4.732 3.799 ' 2.926 3.995 3.25 2.59~) 2.322 2.882 ~31222 2.5 2.066: 1.704 2.26 1.896' 1.615 1.50~ 1.845 0631223 1.275 1.044 0.881 1.213 1.017 0.871 0.846 1.078 0631224 4.754 4.144 3.389 3.986 3.494 2.95~~- 2.635 3.169 0631225 3.459 3.157 2.743 3.026 2.758 2.414 2.163 2.505 0631226 2.618 2.399 2.115 2.35 2.157 1.9431 1.77 2.051 0631227 2.089 1.94 1.741 1.904 1.767 1.613 1.505 1.711 0631231 3.777 3.193 2.523 3.068 2.741 2.424 2.193 2.422 0631232 1.952 1.669 1.434 1.793 1.571 1.385 1.338 1.544 0631233 1.119 0.955 0.835 1.058 0.925 0.826 0.806 0.947 0631234 4.453 3.954 3.391 3.621 3.306 2.928 2.579 2.886 0631235 3,141 2.816 2.31 2.7 2.407 2.0uT 1.874 2.271 0631236 2,02 1.853 1,656 1.863 1.732 1,582 1.518 1.708~ 0631237 1,903 1.793 1.649 1.781 1.677 1.551 1.47 1.647 0632111 21.562 18.632 15.638 19.441 16.754 14.201 13.215 17.703 [-0632112 12.087 9.651 7,81 11,645 9.452 7.656 7.552 11.342 0632113 5.403 4.271 3.491 5.424 4.288 3.481 3.494 5.409 0632114 18,844 17.769 16.183 16.788 15.848 14.648 13.393 14.653 0632115 11.676 11.215 10.509 10.571 10.228 9.~763 9.115 9.497 0632116 7.94 7.646 7.226 7.251 7.043 6.774 6.376 6.554 C632117 6.406 6.21~ -- 5.94 5.909 5.781 5.~1 5.318 5.391 0632121 23.016 20.486 17.479 21.03 18.494 16.084 14.738 17.89 0632122 13.028 10.9261 9.228 12.50~ 10.47' 8,85 8.528 i 11.05~ 0632123 6.013 4.991 4.255 5.937 4,959 4.22 4.159 5.687 0632124 19.357 18,249 16.682 17,566 16.545 15.287 14.063 15.2~' 0632125 11.43 10.844 10.075 10.51~ 10.026 9.436 8.852 9.409 0632126 8.148 7.811 7.384 7.591 7.309 6.9811 6.619 6.925 0632127 7.314 7.084 6.778 6.891 6.694 6.458 6.174 6.365 0632131 20.812 19.065 16.694 19.066 17.325 15.432 14.13 15 87,1 0632132 12.307 10.5~5 8.907 11.554 9.968 8.612 8.326 10.087, 0632133 5.995 5.163 4.504 5.876 5.058 4.41 4.301 5.484 0632134 18.458 17.532 16.051 16.941 15.987 14.83 13.769 14.79 0632135 10.371 9.8 9.092 9.624 9.138 8.553 8.071 8.641 0632136 7.842 7.547 7.177 7.409 7.13 6.817 6,502 6.801 0632137 7.659 7.442 7.163 7.311 7.096 6.855 6.585 6.796 0632211 4.477 3.623 2.836 3.838 3.107 2.463 2.218 3.35,1 0632212 2.053 1.531~ 1.181 2.017 1.527 1.193 1.209 1.963 0632213 0.828 0.543 0.527 0.828 0.65 0.533 0.535 0.818 0632214 4.107 3.745 3.265 3.496 3.198 2.85 2.517 2.927 0632215 2.795 2.64 2.407 2.461 2.347 2.196 2.014 2.178 0632216 2.164 2.076 1.944 1.961 1.896 1.808 1.692 1.778 0632217 1.98 1.93 1.851 1.838 1.796 1.741 1.65 1.683 0632221 5.285 4.54 3.703 4.678 3.924 3.295 2.911 3.942 0639222 2.698 2.233 1.871 2.535 2.128 1.811 1.736 2.251 0632223 1.006 0.832 0.707 0.996 0.831 0.715 0.712 0.949 0632224 4,796 4,367 3.788 4.126 3,773 3,343 3,015 3.537 0632225 3,056 2.862 2.609 2.756 2.594 2.408 2.234 2.462 0632226 2.565 2.453 2.303 2,382 2.283' 2.171 ~.06 0632227 2.506 2.423 2.308 2.359 2,285 2--~198 ---~.102 ~' Table I Corn ~uted Surge Elevations for Eight Grids ~to~ (21, 9) (21,10) (21,11) (22, 9) (22,10) ~22,11) (23,11) (24, 9) 0632231 5.471 4.62/- 3.808 4.667 4.073 ~.51~22 3.149 3.747 06322~2 2.491 2.125 1.84 2.308 2.023 1.783 1.718 2.071 0632233 1.061 0.912 0,806 1.024 0.898 0.799 0.78~ 0.956 0632234 5.49 4.86 4.267 -4.556 4.293 3.68 3.291 3.68~ 063223~5 2.839 2.645 2.402 2.615 2.435 2.25 2,097 2.355 0632236 2.555 2.435 2,298 2.402 2.297 z.l~ 2.079 2.231 0632237 2.694! 2.616 2,515 2.566 2.488 2.4 2.304 2.405 0641111 2.365 2.333 2,259 2.212 2.189 2.148 2,048 2,047 0641112 5.882 6.092 6.123 4,992 6,689 7.~ 7.363 8.141 -0641113 13.311 12.424 11.113 11.643 10.816 9.844 9.192 11.507 0641114 2.244 2.22 2.155 2.107 2.093 2.065 1.967; 1.961; ~)641115 2.034 2.019 1.968 1.916' 1.911! 1.885 1.813 1.801 0641116 1.826 1.818 1.773 1.727 1.725 1.7 1,639 1.631- 0641117 1.551 1.551 1.524 1,466 1.47 1.456 1.403 1.386 0641121 2.735 2.672 2.569 2.629 2.569 2.483 2,405 2.479 0641122 5.7 5.569 5~085 4,952 4.998 5.914 5.886 6.29;~ 0641123 11.85 11.143 10.38 10.143 9.712 9.224 8.361 9.585 0641124 2.524 2.466 2.365 2.417 2.362 2,284 2.208 2,284 0641125 2.196 2.152 2.067 2,083 2,046 1.99~ 1.917 1,945 0641126 1.777 1./53 1.681 1.664 1.654 1.615 1.56 1.56~ 064~127 1.614 1.581 1.509 -~1.557 1.59 1.479 _ 1.461 1.545 0641131 2.684 2.472 2.314 2.484 2.3/~ 2.283 2.125 2.259 0641132 5.039 --- 4.818 4.228 4.417 4.296 4.637 5.146 5.192 0641133 10.233 9.883 9.165 8.669 8.531 8.133 7.375 7.888 0641134 2.64 2.38/ 2.217 2.398 2.26~ 2.132 1.981 2.045 0641135 2.215 2.047- 1.918 2.057 1.902 1.803 1.673 1.715 0641136 1.698 1.562 1.484 1.543 1.4~9 - 1.356 1.236 1.267 0641137 1.22 1.149 O. f:yo I 1.043 0.984 0.837' ~.728 ' 0.729 ~;)641211 0.728 0.715 0.692 ~.683 0.671, 0.65 __0.611 0.624 0641212 0.986 1.119 1.051 -1,051 1.361 1.33 1.47 1.687 0641213 2.769 2.392 2.04 2.279 2.053 1.852 1.622 2.167 0641214 0.723 0.712 0.689 0.68 0.67 0.648 0.615 0.63~ 0641215 0.685 0.676 0.651 0.645 0.635 0.~16 0.588 0.608 0641216 0.598 0.592 0.568 0.564 0.556 0.537 0.516 0.536 0641217 0.456 0.482 0.467 0.458 0.452 0.442 0.418 0.433 0~.1221 1.14 1.113 1.032 1.097 1.058 1~011 0.98 1.043 C:~::~ 1222 1.12 1.061 1.014 1.068 1.08 1.299 1.312 1.314 0641223 2.777 2.335 2.08 2.152 1.965 1.791 __ 1.649 1.7 0641224 1,154 1,107 1.039 1.111 1.075 1.009 0.995 1.068 0641225 1.109 1.059 0,989 1.079 1.036 0.965 0.945 1.021 0641226 0.988 0.935 0.861 0.953 0.906 0.845 0.825 0.897 0641227 0.881 0.817 0.739 0,848 0.792 0.725 0.707 0.803 0641231 1.162 1.037' 0.972 1.059 0.991 0.969 0.907 0.911 0641232 1,057 1.064 1.009 -1.037 1.052 1.007 1.204 1.122 0641233 2.474 2.184 1.904 1.879 1.768 1.596 1.382 1.4b ~641234 1.144 0.952 0.872 1.01 0.858 0.836 ___0.752 0.752 0641235 1.012 0.927 --0.779 ' 0.854 0.797 0.693 0.634 0.663 ~641236 0.818 0.745 0.707 '- 0,687 0.668 0.669 ~0.577 0641237 0.651 0.603 0.604- 0.551 0.535 0.543 --0.457 Table 1 Computed Surge Elevations for Eight Grids Storm (21, 9) (21,1~)) (21,11) (22, 9) (22,10) (22,11) (23,11) (24, 9) 0642111 3.178 3.175 3.245 2.924 3.025 4.605 5.869 5.373 10642112 14.688 14.196 13.052 12.784 12.518 11.833 11.292 13.521 0642113 18.232 15.894 13.837 15.893 13.933 12.259 10,99 12.63 0642114 2.545 2.57 2.535 2.352 2.403 2.412 2.305 2.168 0642115 1.987 2.023 2.016 1.846 1.898 1.918 1.834 1.697 0642116 1.504 1,552 1.553 1.396 1.458 1.488 1.432 1.294 0642117 1,054 1.117 1.131 0.968 1.05 1.089 1.055 0.904 0642121 3.637 3,591 3.478 3.426 3.404 3.336 5.094 3.36 0642122 14.071 13.51 12.643 12.017 11.871 11.396 10.598 12.51 0642123 16.386 14.619 13.005 14.397 12.736 11.468 10.237 11.513 0642124 2.636 2.627 2.544 2.451 2.466 2.433 2.333 2.256 0642125 1.652 1.671 1.617 1.527 1.574 1,564 1,53 1.444 0642126 1.296 1.294 1.218 1.179 1.206 1.174 1.14 1.072 0642127 0.276 0.3 0.28 0.278 0.275 0.272 0.274 0.282 10642131 3.469 3.434 3.059 3.067 2.994 2,906 3.357 3.025 !O642132 13.076 12.574 11.816 11.109 11.075 10.711 9.922 10.905 0642133 15.343 13.511 12.005 13.289 11.867 10.644 9.538 1Q5 0642134 1.896 1.792 1.607 1.711 1.682 1.565 1.516 1.504 10642135 0.295 0.292 0.288 0.297 0.293 0.29 0.292 0.304 j C)642136 0.286 0.283 0.28 0.288 0.285 0.282 0.283 0.291 i0642137 0.276 0.273 0.27 0,278 0.275 0.272 0,274 0.282 0642211 1.04 1.038 1.015 0.969 0.969 0,954 0.902 1.094 0642212 2.835 2.602 2.286 2.277 2.159 2,003 1,879 2.335 0642213 3.213 2.685 2,218 2.739 2.315 1.973 1,761 2.115 0642214 0.918 0.921 0.901 0,861 0.865 0.852 0.813 0.80~- 10642215 0.68 0.69 0.679 0,638 0.645 0.642 0.61 0.596 0642216 0.67 0.675 0.668 0.635 0.643 0.636 0.612 0.6 0642217 0.749 0.759 0.751 0.721 0.729 0.728 0.708 0,694 0642221 1.47 1.437 1.369 1.405 1.374 1.321 1.279 1,336 064~??? 3,07 2.712 2.416 2.355 2.259 2.084 2.019 2.274 0642223 3.041 2.577 2.19 2.559 2.234 1.94 1.747 1.951 0642224 1,237 1.215 1.151 1.181 1.163 1.116 1.086 1.133 0642225 0.928 0.902 0.836 0,885 0.862 0,811 0.792 0,86 0642226 0.582 0.566 0.517 0.549 0.539 0.5 0.493 0.553 0642227 0.343 0.346 0.31 0.316 0.32 0.304 0.303 0.318 0642231 1.523 1.432 1.345 1.44 1.352 1.263 1.198 1.278 0642232 2.999 2.732 2.341 2.259 2.199 2.049 1.919 2.002 0642233 2.786 2.424 2.083 2.324 2.081 1.847 1,656 1.74 0642234 1.063 0.996 0,894 0.927 0,904 0.847 0.798 0.724 0642235 0.443 0.464 0.469 0.387 0.406 0.422 0.361 0.292 0642236 0.225 0.27 0.193 0.15 0.221 ~ 0.162 0.122 0.083 0642237 0.079 0.078 ~ 0.077 0.079 0.078 0.078 0.078 0,08 7 APPENDIX C PROBS Application to SURGE Results Tomasello Consulting Engineers, Inc. 5906 Center Sb'eet, Jupiter1 Florida 33458 Phc~e 561-5'75-3910 Fax 561-744-1865 ~xletom@ad.c~rn lV[emo to; From: Date: RE: Bob Devlin Gene Chartran Patrick White Dick Tomasello 11/12./01 PROBS application to SURGE results Introduction My memo of 10/15/01 and its attached DR report described an alternative analysis of storm statistics to the SFWMD study and the FEMA Restudy. The latter two analyses assume the storm parameters are largely independent of each other and are defined by historic storm occurrences outside the area of the storms' closest approach to Collier County. Both assumptions were hypothesized to lead to over-estimates of the 100-year storm surge elevations. The alternative analysis is based on probability distn'butions that are defined fi.om observed parameters at the point of closest approach to the Collier County study area. The alternative analysis also considers interrelationships between storm parameters. My memo, dated 11/05/01, describes the model setup and storm simulations accomplished using the SURGE model applied to the "open coast" adjacent to the Collier County area. Since the 11/05/01 memo, a modification of the wind stress coefficients has been applied to be consistent with the recommended values in the latest User's Manual. Also a correction was made to the storm tracks (locations adjusted and an eighth track was added). A total of 384 storms were modeled with SURGE and the results interpolated/extrapolated to a total of 1536 max/mum surge elevations representing the total population of contributing storms. This memo is intended to present further information on radius probabilities and presents the results of the probability analyses accomplished on the SURGE modeled maximum surge outputs. The probability analyses include computing the 100-year surge for coastal grids (geographic locations) of interest for both the FEMA Restudy/SFWMD defined probability distributions and the alternative analysis derived distributions. The results will be compared to demonstrate the magnitude of the error in the FEMA Restudy's scientifically and technically incorrect base flood elevations (BFE)'s. ' Memo Collier Co. - PROBS 11/12/01 Page 2 Radius of Maximum Wind Probabilities The alternative analysis storm parameter probability distributions developed for the "closest approach" storm data and for interrelated storm parameters were applied as presented in my memo of 10/15/01 and attached EDR report. The EDR report indicates that the probability for radii of maximum winds must consider the relationship between central pressure and radius. In fact, the radii were computed from the central pressure in the alternative analysis. The radius associated with each central pressure compartment storm was computed by the equation, Rmax[km]=exp[3.85 -0.0067delP] where, delP = pressure depression = 1013 - central pressure (mb) Rmax[lon]~adius of maximum winds in kilometers Rmax[nm] = Rrnax[krn]l1.852 Rm&x[nm]= radius of maximum winds in nautical miles The resulting radius for each storm was translated into a probability for each of the two model simulated radii. For example, if the computed radius for a g/yen press~e was mid way between the lower (13 nm) and the h/gher modeled radii (27 nm), then the storms of that central pressure would be associated with 0.50 probability for both the smaller or larger radius. However, if the computed radius is close to 13 nm, then the radius probability for storms of that central pressure would be weighted more toward the smaller storm. The computed radius and resulting probabilities associated with the two modeled radii for each of the eight central pressure depressions are listed below: Computed DEL_~ Radius(nm) PR(R=13mn) PR(R=27mn) 19 22.3 0.34 0.66 33 20.3 0.48 0.52 47 18.5 0.61 0.39 60 17.0 0.71 0.29 74 15.5 0.82 0.18 88 14.1 0.92 0.08 102 12.8 1.00 0.00 115 11.7 1.00 0.00 Memo Collier Co. - PROBS 11/12/01 Page 3 Probabilitw Analysis A modified version of the PROBS program was written to allow the computation of 100-year surge elevations based on interdependent storm parameters. The PROBS program reads the 1536 computed surge elevations for the selected grid (geographio location) and computes the associated probability of each. For the selected grid, each of the 1536 surge elevations are associated with a probability that is defined by the equation: PROB(K,I) = FREQ*PD*PR*PP*PS*L where, Equation 1 FREQ = the frequency of storms per nautical mile of shoreline per year PD = probability of storm directions PR = probability of storm radius of maximum winds pp = probability of storm central pressure PS = probability of storm forward speed L = length of shoreline (or line perpendicular to the shoreline for alongshore storms) intersected by the storm ~xack The application of PROBS program to the original Si%VIVID and FEMA Restudy probability distributions and to the Alternative Analysis distributions resulted in 100-year flood levels displayed in Table 1. These flood elevations are based on surge only without astronomical tide conm'butions. Appendix A displays the upper end of the printout of the sorted surge heights (in descending order) for an example grid (24,9). The storm identification numbers are listed followed by the surge elevation and the associated SFWMD/FF_,MA storm probabilities and the cumulative total probability. The 100-year surge elevation is the elevation at which the cumulative probability totals 0.01 occurrences per year. Appendix B displays the same printout for the Alternative Analysis probabilities. JAN 0 8 ~00~ Pg. ~9-- Memo Collier Co. - PROBS 11/12/01 Page 4 Table 1 Computed 100-Year Surge Elevations CLlnextrapolated) Without Astronomical Tides -~en Coast Lotion FF_MA Restudy/ Altern~ve Analysis Gdds SFWMD Statistics Statistics ~2-- 3,9)_ North Collier Coast 10,35 8.95 (24,9) No. Naples Coast 10.01 8.52 (25,9) Naples Coast 9.33 8.14 .(26,9) North of Marco Island 9.06 7.84 (27,9) Marco Island 8.86 7.41 ~28,9) South of Marco Island 8.66 7.26 Conclusions and Recommendations The results of the PROBS program applications demonstrate that the FEMA Restudy and S!%VMD assumptions relating to storm statistics have led to 1.2' to 1.6' overestimates of 100- year storm surge. The FEMA Restudy/ SFWMD assumptions of storm parameter probability independence and their derivation using observations at points not in the vicinity of the storms closest approach led to scientifically and technically incorrect BFE's. The final computed corrections to the 100-year still water surge elevations will be applied to (along with any wave setup corrections) the previous 100-year still water elevations for use in the WHAFIS analyses. APPENDIX A FOR GRID (24, 9) DIRECTION Of STORM MOVEMENT DIR: 1 - OBLIQUE LANDFALL 2 - DIRECT LANDFALL 3 - ALONGSHORE 4 - EXITING RADIUS OF MAXIMUM WINDS RAD: 1-13NM 2 - 27 NM CENTRAL PRESSURE PRS: I - 26.52 IN HG 2- 26.91 IN HG 3 - 27.32 IN HG 4- 27.73 IN HG 5- 28.15 IN HG 6 - 28.53 IN HG 7 - 28.95 IN HG 8- 29.36 IN HG FORWARD SPEED SPD: 1 - 7,5KT 2 - 14.5 KT 3-21.5 KT TRACK TRK 1 - ZERO TRACK 2 - ONE STORM RADII TO RIGHT 3 - TWO STORM RADII TO RIGHT 4 - ONE STORM RADII TO LEFT 5 - TWO STORM RADII TO LEFT 6 - THREE STORM RADII TO LEFT 7 - FOUR STORM RADII TO LEFT 8 - FIVE STORM RADII TO LEFT SURGE - MAXIMUM SURGE LEVEL WITHOUT TIDES ST PROB - INDIVIDUAL STORM PROBABILITY ACC PROB - ACCUMLATIVE PROBABILITY OF SURGE STORM pARAMETERS: DIR RAD PRS SPD TRK SURGE STPROB ACCPROB 2 2 1 3 5 24.96 0.000000 0.000000 2 2 1 2 5 23.52 0.000000 0.000000 2 2 I 3 4 22.51 0.000000 0.(300000 2 2 2 3 5 22.20 0.000005 0.000005 2 2 1 2 4 21,08 0.000000 0.000005 2 2 2 2 5 20.81 0.000026 0,000031 2 2 1 1 5 20.67 0.000000 0.000031 2 1 1 3 6 20.57 O.O000(N, 0.000035 2 1 1 3 5 20.28 0.000004 0.000039 1 2 1 2 4 20.00 0.000000 0.000039 2 2 2 3 4 19.87 0.000005 0.000044 1 2 1 1 4 19.72 0.000000 0.000044 2 1 1 2 6 19.51 0.000024 0.000068 2 2 1 3 6 19,38 0.000000 0,000068 2 1 1 2 5 19.36 0.000024 0.000091 2 2 3 3 5 19.29 0.000005 0,000096 2 2 2 2 4 18.53 0.000026 0.000122 2 2 1 1 4 18.33 0.000000 0.000122 2 1 2 3 6 18,28 0.000003 0.000125 2 1 1 3 7 18.18 0,000004 0.000129 2 2 2 1 5 18,14 0.000036 0.000165 1 2 1 2 5 18,05 0.000000 0,000165 2 1 2 3 5 ' 18.040.000003 0.000168 2 2 3 2 5 17.96 0,000026 0.000194 3 2 1 2 1 17.89 0.000000 0.000194 2 2 2 3 6 17.19 1 2 1 3 4 17,17 2 1 2 2 5 17.10 2 2 3 3 4 17.09 2 1 1 1 6 17.01 1 2 1 3 5 16.61 2 1 1 2 7 16.60 2 2 4 3 5 16.39 2 1 2 3 7 16.15 2 2 2 1 4 16.03 1 2 2 2 5 15.93 2 1 3 3 6 15.88 2 2 3 2 4 15.85 3 2 1 3 1 15.84 2 1 3 3 5 15.68 3 2 2 2 1 15.65 1 1 1 1 5 15.52 I 2 2 1 5 15.50 2 2 3 1 5 15.47 3 2 2 1 1 15.40 2 1 2 1 5 15.32 3 2 I 2 4 15.30 2 2 2 2 6 15,29 2 1 1 3 8 15.21 2 2 4 2 5 15.11 1 2 2 3 4 15.03 1 2 3 2 4 14.99 2 1 2 1 6 14.95 2 2 3 3 6 14.89 2 1 3 2 6 14,89 3 2 1 3 4 14.79 2 1 3 2 5 14.73 2 1 2 2 7 14.68 1 2 2 3 5 14.67 3 2 1 1 4 14.65 1 2 3 1 4 14.61 2 2 1 3 7 14.54 1 1 1 1 6 14.46 2 2 4 3 4 14.32 1 2 1 2 6 14.30 1 1 1 2 6 14.03 2 1 3 3 7 14.01 1 2 1 3 6 13.90 3 2 2 3 1 13.90 2 2 I 1 6 13.88 1 2 3 2 5 13,71 2 1 1 1 7 13.70 1 1 1 2 5 13.69 0.000005 0.000315 0.000000 0.000315 0.000015 0.000330 0.000005 0.000335 0,000033 0.000367 0.000000 0.000367 0.000024 0.000391 0.000027 0.000418 0.000003 0.000420 0.000036 0.000457 0.000029 0.000485 0,000003 0.000488 0.000026 0.000514 0.000000 0.000514 0.000003 0.000517 0.000044 0.000561 O.O00036 0.00O597 0.000040 0.000636 0.000036 0.000673 0.000060 0,000733 0.000021 0.000754 0.000000 0.000754 0.000026 0.000780 0.000004 0.000784 0.000150 0.000934 0.000005 0.O00939 0.000029 0.000968 0.000021 0.000989 0,000005 0.000993 0.000015 0.001008 0.000000 0.001008 0,000015 0.001023 0.000015 0.001038 O.000005 0.001043 0.000000 0.001043 0.000040 0.001083 0.000000 0.001083 0.000036 0.001119 0.000027 0.001146 0,000000 0.001146 0.000026 0.001172 0.000003 0.001174 0.000000 0.001174 O. 0~8 0'0011 ~%; ~ %~ ~ ~'1~ ~ 0.000000 0.00111~2 ,;' ,~.~.~.;' ~ 0.000029 0.0012~1 0.000033 0.001244 jAN [~ 0.000026 0.001 2 2 3 I 4 13.62 1 1 2 I 5 13.60 4 2 I 1 2 13.52 2 1 2 3 8 13.49 2 1 1 2 8 13.47 2 1 4 3 6 13.47 2 2 5 3 5 13.41 3 2 2 2 4 13.41 2 1 4 3 5 13.32 3 2 3 2 1 13.30 1 2 3 1 5 13.22 2 2 4 2 4 13.18 3 1 1 1 1 13.17 2 2 3 2 6 13.15 3 1 I 1 4 13.11 2 1 3 1 5 13.07 3 2 2 3 4 13.01 3 2 3 1 1 12.98 1 2 1 1 6 12.88 2 2 2 3 7 12.87 1 1 I 1 4 12.84 2 2 4 1 5 12.80 2 1 3 1 6 12.79 I 2 3 3 4 12.79 3 2 2 1 4 12.77 1 1 2 1 6 12.69 1 2 2 2 6 12.67 2 1 3 2 7 12.66 I I I 2 7 12.66 I 2 3 3 5 12.63 4 2 1 1 3 12.63 I 2 1 1 1 12.61 2 2 4 3 6 12.59 3 I 1 2 4 12.55 2 1 4 2 6 12.53 4 2 1 2 2 12.51 1 2 1 2 I 12.46 1 2 4 2 4 12.42 1 1 2 2 6 12.36 2 1 4 2 5 12.35 2 1 1 3 4 12.34 I 2 2 3 6 12.34 2 2 1 2 7 12.30 1 1 1 1 7 12.29 2 2 5 2 5 12.19 2 2 2 1 6 12.15 2 1 2 1 7 12.03 1 1 2 2 5 12.02 4 0.000036 0.000023 0.000000 0.000003 0.000024 0.000015 0.000155 0.000044 0.000015 0.000044 0.000040 0.000150 0.000054 0.000026 0.000054 0.000021 0.000008 0.000O60 0.000000 0.000005 0.000036 0.000208 0.000021 0.000005 0.6)0(00 0.000023 0.000029 0.000015 0.000026 0.000005 0.000000 0.000O430 0,000027 0.000039 0.000085 0.000000 0.000000 0.000165 0.000016 0.000085 0.000004 O.O00OO5 0.000000 0.000036 0.000862 0,000036 0,000021 0.000016 0.001306 0.001328 0.001328 0.001331 0.001355 0.001370 0,001524 0.001568 0.001583 0.001627 0.001667 0.001817 0.001871 0.001897 0.001952 0.001972 0.001980 0.002040 0.002040 0.002045 0.002081 0.002288 0.002309 0.002314 0.002375 0.002397 0.002426 0.002441 0.002467 0.002472 0,002472 0.002472 0.002499 0.002538 0.002623 0.002623 0.002623 0.002788 0.002804 0.002889 0.002893 0.002898 0.002898 0.002994-~ 0.00_;~_32 O. O0~52JAN 0.003869 1 2 4 1 4 11.99 2 1 2 2 8 11.89 2 1 4 3 7 11.86 3 2 3 3 1 11.86 1 2 1 3 7 11.82 1 1 1 3 6 11.77 4 2 2 1 2 11.73 2 1 3 3 8 11.68 1 1 3 1 5 11.57 4 2 1 2 3 11.51 4 1 1 1 3 11.51 3 1 2 1 1 11.49 I 2 4 2 5 11.48 2 2 5 3 4 11.48 3 1 1 2 1 11.44 3 1 2 1 4 11.43 1 2 1 2 7 11.43 3 2 3 2 4 11.43 3 2 1 1 2 11.34 1 2 2 1 6 11.33 1 1 1 3 7 11.26 1 1 2 I 4 11.25 1 1 1 2 4 11.22 2 2 4 I 4 11.20 1 1 2 2 7 11.17 3 2 3 3 4 11.13 2 2 3 3 7 11.12 3 2 1 2 2 11.05 3 I 2 2 4 11.05 I 2 2 1 1 11.01 2 2 4 2 6 11.01 1 1 1 2 8 11.01 2 1 5 3 6 11.01 2 1 2 3 4 10.98 I 2 3 2 6 10.96 3 2 4 2 1 10.94 1 2 2 2 1 10.94 4 2 2 1 3 10.94 1 2 4 1 5 10.94 4 2 1 3 2 10,90 2 1 5 3 5 1Q90 4 2 2 2 2 10.87 2 2 1 3 8 10.84 2 2 2 2 7 10.84 I 1 3 1 6 10.82 2 1 4 1 5 10.82 3 2 3 1 4 10.79 1 I 2 1 7 10.79 5 0.000228 0.000015 0.000015 0.000008 0.000000 0.000005 0.000053 0,000003 0.000023 0.000000 0.000048 0.000034 0.000165 0.000155 0.000039 0.000034 0.000000 0.0000.44 0.000000 0.000040 0.000005 0.000023 0.000026 0.000208 0.000016 0.000008 0.000005 0.000000 0.000025 0.000040 0.000150 0.000026 0.000087 0.000003 0.000029 0.000250 0.000029 0.000053 0.000228 0.000000 0.000087 0.000038 0.000000 0.O00026 0.000023 0.000117 0.000060 0.000023 0.004097 0.004112 0.004127 0.004135 0.004135 0.004140 0.004193 0.004195 O.O04218 0.0O4218 0.004266 0.004300 0.004'!,65 0.004619 0.004658 0.004693 0.004693 0.004736 0.004736 O.O04776 0.004781 0.004803 0.004829 0.005037 0.OO5053 0.005061 0.005066 0.005066 O.O05090 0.005130 0.005280 0.005306 0.005394 O.OO5396 0.005425 0.005675 0.005703 0.005757 O.OO5985 0.005985 0.006072 0.006111 0.006111 0.006137 JAN C~ ~_ ZOO,? o.o~2' o.oo63; o.o~3~ 3 1 1 3 4 10.77 2 I 1 2 4 10.76 3 1 1 1 5 10.75 2 2 6 3 5 10.72 1 2 3 3 6 10.69 2 1 4 2 7 10.64 2 1 4 1 6 10.63 1 1 3 2 6 1 O.6O 1 2 4 3 5 1 O.59 1 2 I 3 1 10.57 3 2 4 1 1 10.56 2 1 1 1 8 10.56 1 2 4 3 4 10.54 1 2 2 3 7 10.51 3 1 1 2 5 10.51 4 2 1 3 3 10.50 2 2 5 2 4 10.43 1 1 1 3 5 10.42 1 1 2 3 6 10.37 2 2 3 1 6 10.33 2 1 3 1 7 10.27 1 1 3 2 5 10.26 2 2 5 3 6 10,24 2 1 3 2 8 10.23 1 1 1 3 8 10.18 1 2 2 2 7 10.14 1 1 1 1 8 10.11 2 1 5 2 6 10.10 3 2 1 3 2 10.09 2 2 5 1 5 10.07 3 1 2 2 1 10.07 4 1 2 1 3 10.01 4 2 2 2 3 9.98 1 1 2 3 7 9.95 2 1 5 2 5 9.92 1 2 1 3 8 9.91 2 1 4 3 8 9.88 4 2 3 1 2 9.84 3 2 2 1 2 9.84 1 1 2 2 4 9.83 3 2 4 3 1 9.82 1 2 5 2 4 9.79 1 1 2 2 8 9.73 3 1 3 1 I 9.72 1 2 3 1 6 9.69 2 1 5 3 7 9.67 3 1 3 1 4 9.67 3 2 2 2 2 9.64 6 0.000007 0.006367 0.000024 0.006390 0.000054 0.006445 0.000101 0.006545 0.000005 0.006551 0.000085 0.006635 0,000117 0.006753 0.000016 0.006769 0.000030 0.006799 0.000000 0.006799 0.000346 0.007144 0.000033 0,007177 0.000030 0.007206 O.OOOOO5 0.007211 0.000039 0.007251 0.000000 0.007251 0.000862 0.008112 0.000005 0.008117 0.000003 0.008120 0.000036 0.008156 0.000021 0.008177 0.000016 0.008193 0.000155 0.008348 0.000015 0.008363 0.000005 0.008367 0.000029 0.008396 0.000036 0~008432 0.000487 0.008919 0.000000 0.008919 0.001193 0.010112 0.000025 ,._ 0.010137 0.000030 0.010167 0.000038 0.010205 0.000003 0.010208 0.000487 0.010696 0.000000 0.010696 0.000015 0.010711 0.000053 0.010764 0.000060 0.010824 0.000016 0.010841 0.000045 0.010885 0.000948 0.011833 0.000016 0.011850 0.000034 O. 0118,¢~--'~.~-; 0.000040 0.0119~4 0.000087 0.0120! 1 0.000034 0,01204:5 0.000044 0.0120~9 1 1 3 2 2 2 4 1 1 I 1 3 3 I 1 1 1 4 2 2 6 2 1 3 3 1 2 3 2 1 4 2 2 3 1 3 2 1 2 1 2 1 3 2 4 3 1 1 3 2 1 3 I 2 2 2 4 1 2 3 1 2 3 2 1 1 2 2 3 I 2 5 3 2 4 2 1 2 2 7 9.61 3 8 9.59 2 3 9.59 1 4 9.57 3 5 9.55 1 5 9.55 2 5 9.55 3 4 9.54 3 4 9.50 1 5 9.5O 3 2 9.48 2 4 9.46 2 4 9.46 I 7 9.45 2 4 9.44 3 1 9.43 2 5 9.41 I 5 9.39 3 7 9.37 2 1 9.35 1 I 9.33 I 4 9.31 2 7 9.31 I 4 9.30 3 4 9.26 1 8 9.26 0.000016 0.000005 0.000034 0.000023 O.OO0007 0.000129 0.000562 0.000003 0.000004 O.O000OO 0.000007 0.000025 0.000015 O.O0(XXX) 0.000250 0.0O0007 0.000000 0.0O0034 0.0OO027 0.000029 0.000040 0.000033 0.000026 0.001313 0.0OO045 0.000021 0.012105 0.012110 0.012144 0.012167 0.012174 0.012303 0.012865 0.012868 0.012872 0.012872 0.012879 0.012904 O.O12919 0.012919 0.013168 0.013175 0.013175 0.013209 0.013236 0.013265 0.013305 0.013338 0.013364 0,014676 0.014721 0.014742 APPENDIX B FOR GRID (24, 9) DIRECTION OF STORM MOVEMENT DIR: 1 - OBLIQUE LANDFALL 2 - DIRECT LANDFALL 3 - ALONGSHORE 4 - EXITING RADIUS OF MAXIMUM WINDS RAD: 1-13NM 2 - 27 NM CENTRAL PRESSURE PRS: 1 - 26.52 tN HG 2- 26.91 IN HG 3 - 27.32 IN HG 4- 27.73 IN HG 5 - 28.15 IN HG 6 - 28.53 IN HG 7 - 28.95 IN HG 8 - 29.36 IN HG FORWARD SPEED SPD: 1 - 7.5 K-r 2 - 14.5 KT 3- 21,5 KT TRACK TRK 1 - ZERO TRACK 2 - ONE STORM RADII TO RIGHT 3- TWO STORM RADII TO RIGHT 4 - ONE STORM RADII TO LEFT 5 - TWO STORM RADII TO LEFT 6 - THREE STORM RADII TO LEFT 7 - FOUR STORM RADII TO LEFT 8 - FIVE STORM RADII TO LEFT SURGE - MAXIMUM SURGE LEVEL WITHOUT TIDES ST PROB - INDIVIDUAL STORM PROBABILITY ACC PROB - ACCUMLATIVE PROBABILITY OF SURGE STORM PARAMETERS: DIRPAD PRS SPD TRK SURGE STPROB 2 2 1 3 5 24.96 0.000000 2 2 1 2 5 23.52 0.000000 2 2 1 3 4 22.51 0,000000 2 2 2 3 5 22.20 0.000000 2 2 1 2 4 21.08 0.000000 2 2 2 2 5 20.81 0.000000 2 2 1 1 5 20.67 0.000000 2 1 I 3 6 20.57 0.000000 2 I 1 3 5 20.28 0.000000 1 2 1 2 4 20.00 0.000000 2 2 2 3 4 19,87 0.000000 1 2 1 1 4 19,72 0.000000 2 1 1 2 6 19.51 0.000000 2 2 1 3 6 19.38 0.000000 2 1 1 2 5 19,36 0.000000 2 2 3 3 5 19.29 0.000000 2 2 2 2 4 18.53 0.000000 2 2 1 1 4 18.33 0,000000 2 1 2 3 6 18.28 0.000000 2 1 1 3 7 18.18 0.000000 2 2 2 1 5 18.14 0.00OO00 1 2 1 2 5 18.05 0.000000 2 1 2 3 5 18.04 0.000000 2 2 3 2 5 17.96 0.000000 3 2 1 2 1 17.89 0.000000 3 2 1 1 1 17.70 0.000000 1 2 1 1 5 17.67 0.000000 1 2 2 2 4 17.56 0.000000 2 I 1 1 5 17.46 0.000000 2 2 I 2 6 17.32 0.000000 2 1 2 2 6 17.26 0.000000 ACC PROB 0.0OOOO0 0.0OO000 0.000000 0.0OOOO0 0.0OO000 0.0OOOO0 0.000000 0.000000 0.0OOOOO O.OOOOOO O.OOOOOO O.OOOOOO O.OOOOOO O.OOOOOO O.0OOOOO 0.0OOOOO 0.OOOOOO O.OOOOOO O.OOOOOO O.0OOOOO 0.OOOOOO O,OOOOOO O.O00OOO O.OOOOOO O.0OOOOO 0.OOOOOO 0,OOOOOO O.OOOOOO O.0OO( ~ ..... ;---~--~ 0.OOO( ~00 '~.--/&-'~ -~-~' JAN 0 8 ~_002 1 2 2 1 4 17.23 2 2 2 3 6 17.19 1 2 1 3 4 17.17 2 1 2 2 5 17,10 2 2 3 3 4 17,09 2 I 1 1 6 17.01 1 2 1 3 5 16.61 2 1 I 2 7 16.60 2 2 4 3 5 16.39 2 1 2 3 7 16.15 2 2 2 I 4 16.03 1 2 2 2 5 15.93 2 1 3 3 6 15.88 2 2 3 2 4 15.85 3 2 1 3 1 15.84 2 1 3 3 5 15.68 3 2 2 2 1 15.65 I 1 1 I 5 15.52 1 2 2 1 5 15.50 2 2 3 I 5 15.47 3 2 2 1 1 15.40 2 1 2 I 5 15.32 3 2 1 2 4 15.30 2 2 2 2 6 15.29 2 1 1 3 8 15.21 2 2 4 2 5 15,11 1 2 2 3 4 15.03 1 2 3 2 4 14.99 2 1 2 1 6 14.95 2 2 3 3 6 14.89 2 1 3 2 6 14.89 3 2 1 3 4 14.79 2 I 3 2 5 14.73 2 1 2 2 7 14.68 I 2 2 3 5 14.67 3 2 1 1 4 14.65 1 2 3 1 4 14.61 2 2 1 3 7 14.54 1 1 1 1 6 14.46 2 2 4 3 4 14.32 1 2 1 2 6 14.30 I I 1 2 6 14.03 2 1 3 3 7 14.01 1 2 1 3 6 13.90 3 2 2 3 1 13.9O 2 2 1 1 6 13.88 1 2 3 2 5 13.71 2 1 1 1 7 13.70 0,000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0,000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000018 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0OOOOO 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.00004:)0 0.000000 O. 000000 O.OOO00O 0.000058 0.000000 O.OOO00O 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0,000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000018 O.OO00OO 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000018 0.000018 0.000018 0,000018 0.000018 0.000018 0.000018 0.000018 0.000018 0.000018 0.000018 0.000018 0.000018 0.000018 0.000018 0.000018 0.000018 0.000076 0.000076 0.000076 0.000076 0.000076 0.000076 0.000076 0.000076 0.000076 0.000076 0.000076 0.000076 0.000076 0.000076 0.000095 0.000095 0.000095 0.000095 0,000095 0.000095 O, 0'000'~95 JAN'"' 1 1 1 2 5 13.69 2 2 3 1 4 13.62 1 1 2 1 5 13.60 4 2 1 1 2 13.52 2 1 2 3 8 13.49 2 1 1 2 8 13.47 2 1 4 3 6 13.47 2 2 5 3 5 13.41 3 2 2 2 4 13.41 2 1 4 3 5 13.32 3 2 3 2 1 13.30 1 2 3 1 5 13.22 2 2 4 2 4 13.18 3 1 1 1 1 13.17 2 2 3 2 6 13.15 3 I 1 I 4 13.11 2 1 3 1 5 13.07 3 2 2 3 4 13.01 3 2 3 1 1 12.98 1 2 1 1 6 12.88 2 2 2 3 7 12.87 1 1 1 I 4 12.84 2 2 4 1 5 12.80 2 1 3 I 6 12.79 I 2 3 3 4 12.79 3 2 2 1 4 12.77 1 1 2 1 6 12.69 I 2 2 2 6 12.67 2 1 3 2 7 12.66 1 1 1 2 7 12.66 1 2 3 3 5 12.63 4 2 1 1 3 12.63 1 2 1 1 1 12.61 2 2 4 3 6 12.59 3 1 1 2 4 12.55 2 1 4 2 6 12.53 4 2 1 2 2 12.51 1 2 1 2 1 12.46 1 2 4 2 4 12.42 1 1 2 2 6 12.36 2 1 4 2 5 12.35 2 1 I 3 4 12.34 I 2 2 3 6 12.34 2 2 1 2 7 12.30 1 1 1 1 7 12.29 2 2 5 2 5 12.19 2 2 2 1 6 12.15 2 1 2 1 7 12.03 4 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000040 0.000134 0.000000 0.000040 0.000000 0.000000 0.000058 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 O.OOOOOO 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 O.OOOOO0 0.000055 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 O. 000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 O.O000OO O.O000OO 0,000018 0.000000 0.000127 O.OOOO00 0.000000 0.000052 0.000000 0.000127 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000420 0.000000 0.000000 0.000095 0.000095 0.000095 0.000095 0.000095 0.000095 0.000135 0.000269 0.000269 0.000310 0.000310 0.000310 0.000367 0.00O367 0.000367 0.000367 0.000367 0.000367 0.000367 0.000367 0.000367 0.000367 0.000423 0.000423 0.000423 0.000423 0.000423 0.000423 0.000423 0.000423 0.000423 0.000423 0.0O0423 O.OOO441 0.000441 0.000568 0.0OO568 0.000568 0.000620 0.000620 0.000748 0.000748 0.000748 0.000748 0.000748 o.oo116 1 1 2 2 5 12.02 1 2 4 1 4 11.99 2 1 2 2 8 11.89 2 1 4 3 7 11,86 3 2 3 3 1 11.86 1 2 1 3 7 11.82 1 1 1 3 6 11.77 4 2 2 1 2 11.73 2 1 3 3 8 11.68 1 1 3 1 5 11.57 4 2 1 2 3 11.51 4 I I 1 3 11.51 3 1 2 1 1 11.49 1 2 4 2 5 11.48 2 2 5 3 4 11.48 3 1 1 2 1 11.44 3 1 2 1 4 11.43 1 2 1 2 7 11.43 3 2 3 2 4 11.43 3 2 1 1 2 11.34 1 2 2 1 6 11.33 1 1 1 3 7 11.26 1 1 2 1 4 11.25 1 1 1 2 4 11.22 2 2 4 1 4 11.20 1 1 2 2 7 11.17 3 2 3 3 4 11,13 2 2 3 3 7 11.12 3 2 1 2 2 11.05 3 1 2 2 4 11 .O5 1 2 2 1 1 11.01 2 2 4 2 6 11.01 1 1 1 2 8 11.01 2 1 5 3 6 11.01 2 I 2 3 4 10.98 1 2 3 2 6 10.96 3 2 4 2 I 10.94 1 2 2 2 1 10.94 4 2 2 1 3 10.94 1 2 4 1 5 10.94 4 2 1 3 2 10.90 2 1 5 3 5 10.90 4 2 2 2 2 10,87 2 2 1 3 8 10.84 2 2 2 2 7 10.84 1 1 3 1 6 10.82 2 1 4 1 5 10.82 3 2 3 1 4 10.79 0.000000 0.000050 0.000000 0.000040 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.0OOO0O 0.000052 0.000134 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 O. 000000 0.000000 0.000055 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000058 0.000000 0.000158 0.000000 0.000000 0.000031 0.00000(3 0.000000 0.000050 0.000000 0.000158 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000121 0.000000 0.001168 0.001218 0.001218 O.O01258 0.001258 0.001258 0.001258 0.001258 0.001258 0.001258 0.001258 0.001258 0.001258 0.001310 0.001444 0.001444 0.001444 0.001444 0.001444 0.001444 0.001444 0.001444 0.001444 0.001444 0.001499 0.001499 O.OO1499 0.001499 0.001499 0.001499 0.001499 0.001557 0.001557 0.001715 O.OO1715 0.001715 0.001746 O. O01746 0.001746 0.001796 0.001796 0.001953 0.001953 0.001953 0.001953 0,001 O.O02q 75 0.002( 75 1 1 2 1 7 10.79 3 I 1 3 4 10,77 2 1 1 2 4 10.76 3 1 1 1 5 10,75 2 2 6 3 5 10.72 1 2 3 3 6 10.69 2 I 4 2 7 10.64 2 1 4 1 6 10.63 I I 3 2 6 10.60 1 2 4 3 5 10.59 1 2 1 3 1 10.57 3 2 4 1 1 10.56 2 1 1 1 8 10.56 1 2 4 3 4 10.54 1 2 2 3 7 10.51 3 1 I 2 5 10.51 4 2 1 3 3 10.50 2 2 5 2 4 10.43 1 1 1 3 5 10,42 1 1 2 3 6 10.37 2 2 3 1 6 10.33 2 I 3 1 7 10.27 1 1 3 2 5 10.26 2 2 5 3 6 10.24 2 1 3 2 8 10.23 1 1 1 3 8 10,18 1 2 2 2 7 10.14 1 I 1 1 8 10.11 2 1 5 2 6 10,10 3 2 1 3 2 10.09 2 2 5 1 5 10.07 3 1 2 2 1 10.07 4 I 2 1 3 10.01 4 2 2 2 3 9.98 1 1 2 3 7 9.95 2 1 5 2 5 9.92 1 2 1 3 8 9.91 2 1 4 3 8 9.88 4 2 3 1 2 9.84 3 2 2 1 2 9.84 I 1 2 2 4 9.83 3 2 4 3 1 9.82 1 2 5 2 4 9.79 1 1 2 2 8 9.73 3 1 3 1 1 9.72 1 2 3 1 6 9.69 2 1 5 3 7 9.67 3 I 3 I 4 9.67 6 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000260 0.000000 0.000127 0.000121 0.000000 0.000O17 0.000000 0.000030 0.000000 0.000017 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000420 0.000000 0.000000 O.OOOOOO 0.000000 0.000000 0.000134 0.000000 0.000000 0,000000 0.000000 0.000495 0.000000 0.000401 0.000000 0,000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000495 0.000000 0.0OOO40 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000010 0.000377 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000158 0,000000 0.002075 0.002075 0,002075 0.002075 0.002335 0.002335 0.002462 0.002583 0.002583 0.0026OO 0.002600 0.002630 0,002630 0.OO2646 0.002646 0.002646 0.002646 0.003066 0.003066 0.003066 0.003066 0.003066 0.003066 0.003200 0.003200 0.003200 0,O03200 0.003200 0.003696 0.003696 0.004097 0.004097 0.004097 0.004097 O.O04O97 0.004592 0.004592 0.004633 0.004633 0.004633 0.0O4633 0.004643 0.005020 0,005020 0.005020 0.005020 0.005178~ 0.005178 JAN O 8 3 2 2 2 2 9.64 1 1 3 2 7 9.61 2 2 2 3 8 9.59 4 1 1 2 3 9.59 1 1 3 1 4 9.57 3 1 1 3 5 9.55 1 1 4 1 5 9.55 2 2 6 2 5 9.55 2 1 3 3 4 9.54 3 1 2 3 4 9.50 3 2 1 1 5 9.50 4 2 2 3 2 9.48 3 1 3 2 4 9.46 2 1 2 2 4 9.46 1 2 1 1 7 9.45 3 2 4 2 4 9.44 3 1 1 3 1 9.43 3 2 1 2 5 9.41 3 1 2 1 5 9.39 2 2 4 3 7 9.37 1 2 3 2 1 9.35 1 2 3 1 1 9.33 2 1 1 1 4 9.31 2 2 3 2 7 9.31 I 2 5 1 4 9.30 3 2 4 3 4 9.26 2 1 2 1 8 9.26 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 O.OOOOO0 0.000109 0.000816 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 O.000031 O.OOO000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000018 O.O00OOO 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000380 0.000010 0.000000 O.O05178 0.005178 0.005178 0.005178 0.005178 O.OO5178 O.OO5286 0.006103 0.006103 0.006103 0.006103 0.006103 0.006103 0.006103 0.006103 0.006134 0.006134 0.OO6134 0.006134 0.006153 0.006153 0.006153 0.006153 0.006153 0.006513 0.006523 0.006523 APPENDIX D Appeal Analysis - Wave Setup Propagation Inland (Diskette) Tomasello Consulting Engineers, Inc. 5906 Center Street, Jupiter, Florida 33458 Phone 561-575-3910 Fax 561-744-1865 dixietom~aol corn Mcmo to: From: Date: RE: Patrick White Bob Devlin Gene Chartrand Dick Tomasello 12/24/01 Appeal Analysis - Wave Setup Propagation Inland Introduction This analysis is intended to demonstrate the flood propagation inland caused by tile combination of stom~ surge, astronomical tide and wave setup. The analysis was restricted to the north Collier County coastline, as this is the only area that FEMA did not allow for an attenuation of the coastal flooding as it proceeded inland. A fine grid model (see Report Figure 2), driven by the Collier County open coast model was setup to represent the north Collier County coast and nearshore area. Thc model was made up ora 30 X 40 grid network, each grid element having the dimensions of 1365' in the x-direction and 1502' in the y-direction. Barriers to flow were established to represent the linear obstructions to flow such as barrier islands and roads (SR-971) with openings in the barriers to represent Wiggins Pass Inlet and bridges spanning the Cocohatchee River. The Cocohatchee River, itself, was represented by river input with the channel width and depths represented. Stoml Selection The same open coast model, used to develop the comparison between 100-year flood levels determined by the FIS (SFWMD) stom~ statistics and the Appeal Analysis stoml statistics, was used here to provide the coastal surge boundary condition for the fine grid model. Nine model scenarios were sinmlated to evaluate the flood propagation from the open coast to points inland. The storm case scenarios were selected as those that generated a peak surge at the coarse offshore grid that approximately equaled tile 100- year, as determined with the Appeal Analysis storm statistics. Once these stom~s xvere identified, they were mn through the coarse grid model to generate the open coast boundary conditions which were then applied to the fine grid simulation. The simulated storm's central pressure was adjusted until the open coast surge approximate the I00-. year surge elevation (Appeal Analysis) plus the SFWMD tide adjustment, ph~ the t~'~*^ f-, c('~ 1.4' wave setup. The 100-year open coast surge was detem~ined by the ratio )f thtt'~--- JAN O 8 2002 elevation computed for the Appeal Statistics to the FIS statistics, for offshore grid (22,9) 9.41 '/11.07' = 0.85 times the RFIS still ;rater surge without tide (10.2' NGVD or 8.9' NAVD). Thc target elevation for the north Collier County coast was therefore: 0.85 X 8.9' + 1.4' (wave setup) + 0.8' FIS tide adjustment = 9.8' NAVD or 11.1' NGVD The purpose for these storm simulations was to evaluate the inland propagation of the resulting open coast surge, tide, and wave setup. Would the flood waters fill the back bays and uplands behind the barriers to the peak elevations of the open coast floods or would there be attenuation. Results The attached diskette contains the open coast grid input files for each storm scenario and the fine grid model input, which is common to each scenario. The output files for both the open coast model and the fine grid model are also contained on the attached diskette. Figures 4-8 displays the peak flood elevations during each of the model simulations along various transects. Transects that ran into high gound within a fexv thousand feet of the barrier island exhibited the least flood attenuation, but the drops were not insignificant. More significant and consistent peak flood profiles were observed east of SR 971 where flood levels depended on road overtopping and flows under the roadway bridges. The simulations demonstrated a variability of flooding inland with storm size and speed, but some attenuation existed for nearly each case. Conclusions and Recommendations The results of the simulations demonstrate that, contrary to the RFIS assumptions, there is attenuation of flooding inland in the north end of the Collier County coast. The attenuation is most significant in areas east of the north-south aligned SR 971. Fine grid model inputs and outputs are contained on the attached diskettes. APPENDIX E Surveys APPENDIX F WHAFIS Analysis ~vith Appeal Still Water Elevations (Diskette) Tomasello Consulting Engineers, Inc. 5906 Center Street, Jupiter, Florida 33458 Phone 581-575-3910 Fax 561-744-1885 dixietom@aofcom Memo to: Patrick White Bob Devlin Gene Chartrand From: Dick Tomasello Date: 12/24/01 RE: Appeal WHAFIS Reanalysis Introduction The mapped flood elevations and flood zones on REIS FIRM's are a result of WHAFIS analyses performed on still water elevations along Collier County coastal transects. The still water elevations represent the 100-year surge elevations adjusted for astronomical tides and wave setup. The WHAFIS analyses determine the xvave heights associated with hurricane winds blowing across the water surface of the transects attenuated by the bottom elevations, vegetation, buildings, etc. Regeneration ofxvavcs is also possible along open coast and inland fetches. The wave heights are added to the still water flood levels to establish the final mapped elevations. Velocity zones are identified where the computed wave heights exceed 3 feet. WHAFIS Reanalysis The WHAFIS analyses were redone on the APPEAL generated still water elevations along the same transect applied by the RFIS. The wave setup was applied on the open coast as 1.4' (as in the RFIS). However, the still water elevations (surge and ~vave setup) were assumed to attenuate along the north county transects based on the analyses performed with the north county fine grid model. The still water elevations along transects in the central portion of the Collier County coastline were assumed to attenuate in a similar manner as assumed by the RFIS and the original FIS. The resulting flood elevations and flood zones are displayed on Figures 9 -15, draft FIRM's, which include the elevations and zones of the RFIS draft FIRM's. Conclusions and Recommendations The Appeal WHAFIS analyses incorporate the I00-year surge elevations as a.di_u.s_t~d from the REIS elevations from the results of the Appeal PROBS analysis. Tl~e wa(,e~-'''-~'~ setup is as applied in the RFIS with the exception of the north end of the stuc[v arEa~.~.vhcrc-J¢-- ! JAN 8 2002_ the Appeal bas computed flood attenuations from the open coast that were not considered in the RF1S. The Appeal WHAFIS analyses have not considered the following: 1. Possible increases in the assumed barriers island elevations through surveyed transect selection, 2. Possible reduction ofxvave setup as the result of future investigations into tbe implicit inclusion of wave setup in surge modeling. 3. Possible adjustments due to the apparent rounding up of the SFWMD computed flood elevations. Tbe resulting draft FIRM's appear to be much closer to the original FIS firms than the proposed RFIS FIRM's. We recommend that these maps be adopted as the final FIRM's to be used in the FIP in Collier County. The input and output WHAFIS flies are contained on the attached diskette. JAN [I 8 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE COMMITTEE SELECTION OF FIRM FOR CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS FOR RFP 02-3317 "CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR IMPACT FEE UPDATE STUDIES" OBJECTIVE: Obtain Board's approval of Committee's selection of firms for professional consultant services in the preparation of a Parks and Recreation Impact Fee update study and authorization to begin contract negotiations for subsequent Board approval. CONSIDERATIONS: Because of tbe need for timely infommtion with regard to impact fees, it was determined by staff to be in tbe best interests of the County to combine multiple impact fee update studies in one Request for Proposals. The Scope of Services included the following studies: Study I - Study 2 - Study 3 - Study 4 - Study 5 - Connnunity and Regional Parks Impact Fee Update, Fire Protectiou hnpact Fee Update Educational Facilities hnpact Fee Update Correctional Facilities hnpact Fcc Update New Law Enforcement hnpact Fee The RFP was issued in accordance with Florida State Statute 287.055, Consultant Competitive Negotiation Act, and publicly advcrliscd on October 31, 2001. Notices were sent to 134 finns with 28 vendors requesting full packages. Four responses were received by the due date of November 21, 2001. Different selection committees will be used to rank order finns responding to the other Community and Regional Parks, Fire Protection, and Educational Facilities impact fee studies referenced in the RFP. Due to technical similarities and common data characteristics, the RFP indicated tbat one firm would be selected to prepare both the Law Enforcement and Correctional Facilities impact fee stndies. Thc recommendations of these four selection committees will be brought to the Board in separate Executive Summaries. A Selection Committee meeting for the Parks and Recreation hnpact Fee update was held on December 21, 2001. By consensus of the members, after review and discussion, the following rank order of finns was determined: l. Duncan and Associates 2. Henderson, Young and Co. 3. Tiscblcr and Associates 4. Fishkind and Associates. Staff will negotiate an accelerated completion schedule to provide the results of these impact fees studies as soon as practicable. ,~_.~*, I~l-m JAN J] ~ 20n2 Parks and Recreation Impact Fee Update Consultant Selection Page 2 GROWTll MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This will provide funding for the expansion of the County's Parks and Recreation Facilities (Category B Facilities in the Growth Management Plan). FISCAL IMPACT: None at this time. The final negotiated contract agreement for these studies will be brought back to the Board for final approval. A target budget of $25,000 was identified in the RFP. Funds are available in the Community and Regional Parks Unincorporated Area Fund, Reserve for Capital Outlay (346-919010-993000-00000). RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: (1) Approve the Committee's ranking of finns. (2) Authorize staff to begin contract negotiations with Duncan and Associates. Prepared by: Philli~Tindall, hnpact Fee Coordinator Reviex~ ed by: De,:my Baker, Business Manager, CD&ES Date: Kely? \Vard/enior Purchasii2~ and Contracts John M. Dnnnuck, III, Interim Community Development and~Env ronmenta Services Administrator Approved By: Thomas W. 011iff, C6nnty MRnager JAN O $ 2 02 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PETITION CAl~.NY-2001-AR-1852, DUANE \VItEELER. CARNIVAl, CltAIRMAN, ROTARY CLUB OF IMMOKALEE. REQUESTING A PERMIT 'FO CONDUCT A CARNIVAL ON JANUARY 17"' THROUGtl 20th. 2002, ON COUNTY OWNED PROPERTY AT TIlE IMMOKAI,EE REGIONAL AIRPORT, 520 AIRXVAYS ROAD: OBJECTIVE: Duane Wheeler, Carnival Chairman, of the Rotary Club of Immokalee, is requesting tbat the Board of County Commissioners approve a permit to conduct a carnival on January 17th through 20th,, 2002, on County owned property located at the ImmokaIee Regional Airport. The applicant is also requesting waivers of the Carnival Fee, Occupational License and Surety Bond. CONSIDERATIONS: Duane \Vbeeler, Carnival Chairman, of the Rotary Club oflmmokalee, has made application to the Board of County Commissioners for a permit to conduct a carnival. Duane Wbeeler, Carnival Chairman, of thc Rotary Chlb of Immokalee has presented evidence that all tile criteria has been for tile issuance of this permit. Staff supports tile waiver of tile Surety Bond as there have been no pievious problems ~clatcd to clean up of thc site after the carnival. FISCAL IMPACT: The applicant is requesting a waiver of the $275.00 permit application fee x~atx'er has been eranted m past )'ears. It is a Board policy that requests for waiver of such fees be granted only by the Boar~. All proceeds raised through this event wi[I be distributed thrm~gtmut the community of Inm~okalee. GRO\VTtf MANAGEMENT 13,1PACT: There is no Groxxth Management Impact. RECOMMENDATION: Tha! the Board of County Commissioners approxe the permit to conduct the carnival and xxaive the carnival fee, occupational license and surety bond, PREI'ARED BY SUSAN MURRAY. AICP CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER I)ATE DATEt t JOHn61. DUNNUCK, II1 INT}kJRIM ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS. DATE Carny-2001-AR-1852 Ex Summ A C~.NO ^ ITE~* [ /4' /4. /4 JAN 0 8 2002 December 5, 2001 Board of County Commissioners Naples, Florida 34112 Dear County Commissioners, The Rotary Club of Immokalee, the only civic group in Immokalee, is planning a Carnival at the Immokalee Regional Airport. The dates for this event will be January 17t~ through 20th, 2002. The hours we will be open are Thursday through Friday 6pm to 11pm land Saturday and Sunday 3pm to 11pm. The Lisko & Son Amusement Co. Lowellville, Ohio, is the name of the carnival that will provide the rides and games. We are asking for your approval concerning this event. We are also asking that the Application fee, the Occupational fee, and the Security bond be waived. All proceeds raised through this even will be distributed throughout the community of Immokalee. Thank you for helping us with this event. Duane Wheeler Rotary Club of Immokalee Carnival Chairman JAN 0 ~ tOOt 01/22/01 09:21 FAX 941643696S ~]010 NOTIFICATION FORM FOR TEMPORARY EVENTS Address of event Date(s) of event,~t,~. Person in ~a~e of fo~ Numar of fo~ and boy.age b~ Estimated number of attenders expected at the event at one time? .. /~ Number of toilet~ to be provided: Portable: Mais ( ~ ) Permanent: Mate ( ) Method of toilet waste disposal: Female Female Describe method of Ii uid itchen waste disposal: Descn'be containers and_method of. sc4id waste disposal (garbage): Number or' sotid waste disposal containem provided: Describe facilities and rr~thod of handwa.shlng: _ 7-~,/~-~,~,:~ .~ Describe facititms and method of ut~nsi~ washing, rinsing and sanitizing: 3 /,zoO.,- .s:.z-~/d.," .. ITEM. JAN 0 8 2002 Fab. 89 28~1 ~4:02PM ~Jull Am the sponsor of ~is event you are tm;possible to notify eli fcx3d venda~ of the temporary 1o~3d ~ervice requirements. Failure t~ comp~ ~ ~Y ~ubj~ ~ ~ to be ~ ~r ~c hea~ raa~. ~ Y~ unde~ ~ ~P~ Yes V No ~ c. ontah'~l hem~ and o~ any atlacru"nents ore 'tree, ~ ~l;;~mm, .,N ,,~ ~ ~ ~ publ~ ~a~ of ~er ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~* I ag~ ~ ~ume ~ons~ili~ f~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ bu~ ~ ~ ~u~ in ~mpli~ ~ ~e F~ ~s~ ~e, Chair ~E-11. Signature of sponsor's agent , Date: A C. rrJ'~) A ITEM. JAN 0 8 2002 Lisko & Sons Amusement Co. L'itr, esseth: This contract ente,'e,J into this x)'.,J-~Y ar,,J bet~'emr, List::,:, a ::m:,r,~ Ar,,user,,er, ts party ,:,f first part an'J~'/~'~f//~ partie~ ,:,¢ second part. ~/~ ':- ~ ~:c._n.~ -.-tv '.-, fu:-:',[sh +[¢het se!~ers'~r::~.[e po[ice n[~}-~ ali .'l ~ ,c,:.ur, t~.~er,.J c[t~/ licer,~a~~ '-' '' - -: '"''f ~'"' " '~-~ ~,:r~:ir,~ f,z,r~a:.e) ;a place to, part¢ truck~ and ~emi's ,.hich wet'e used --. .... -,'~ ri.gas sr, d sufficient t,z,i!~t~ ,z,l' ~., either party by n':er, t[,z, ned in this C,Pflf. l'~Ct~f;'J th2C this c,:,ntract is subject Lo the a~pr,z, val by Hcn,f~,ffice of p, arty of the f[rst Dart. ~ ~ :~ ~ ~, ~,~..~'~:j~;. :..: ..... ~ ~ :~, ~,~ ....................... Fcl] D~rL/ ~ th~ fir~ Dec-04-O1 11:0Z~m Fr~m-A.LLEO I~$U~ANCE - T-OZ3 P ~2/OZ F-4Z4 CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE COMPA~IES AFFOT~DING COVERAG~ 05101102 05/01/01 JAN 0 8 2002 * r)DKESS1NG CHECgJ-.IST "]~i~ase complet~ the following. _Not all jtq/'~s wilt aool¥ to every ~roie..c.1, Item5 in bold tvl)e arc rcquil'ed. 1. Legal description of ubj.eq, t pro, peL~ or properties (copy ofle-n.g~hy de. set,priori t~a), be attache, tO f~. Folio (Property ID) r~umber(s) of above (attach to, or associate with, legal description if more than one) ' z e ,~/ , / ' 4. ~;-~act location ofprojecffsite in relation to nearest public road right-of-way (-rtach) 5. Copy of survey (NEEDED ONLY FOR UNPLAT'I-ED pKoPF-KTIES) 6. Proposed project name (if applicable) 7. Proposed sU-¢ct names (if applicable) 8. Site Development Plan Number (FOK EXISTING pROJECrs/sITES oNLY) SDP _ - -- q. Petifi'~n Type (indicat~ which is applicablc): SDP (Site Development Plan) --- --'- SDPA (SDP Amendment) __ · SDPI:'(SDP Insubstantial-Change) '" SIP (Site Improvement Plan) S~A (SIP Amendment) ~ Construction plansfPlat Land Use petition (V~riance, Conditional Use, Boat Dock Extension, em.) ~Su*ect Name Change (SNR) · Blasting pe~nit ~_. l~igh~-e f-_~-y~ ~ ,a~t - - Clea~-in~,~qegemtion KemeV~ permit ~ 5xca¥~tie~ p~rmi~ ~ n~ in, cendomiuinm~ docum~ts (if lO. project o~ development n~','ne~ proposed fo~, or ah'¢My app¢ ~pplic~bl¢; indic~t~ whcth~ proposed or existing) FOR STAFF USE ONLY Address Number.~ ' - Approved b)' _ , D~te JAN 0 8 2002 JAN 0 B 2002 PUBLIC WOPO'.S ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ,3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL NAPLES, FLOR1DA 34112 (041 ) '/74-8102 LEGAL DESCRIPTION (NOT A SURVEY) PROII!CT NO.. PARCEL NO... FOLIO NO... COMN{ENC1NG AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COLD,WY, FLORIDA; TItENCE SOUTH I DEOREII 30 MINUTES,24 SECONDS WIi~T, A DISTANCE OF 2680.88 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87 DEGREES 42 MIl'COTES 39 SECOND~ WEST ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COUNTY ROAD g46, A DISTANCE OF2~$0. l I FEET; THENCE NORTH 8'/ DEGREF..q 43 I~INUTES O0 SECO.WDS WF~q~, A DISTANCE OF 397,63 FIiET; TIIBNCE LE~.VIIqO SAID NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE NORTH 19 DEOREF~ 1 $ MINUTES I $ SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF 669.65 FEET; TttENCE NORTH I DEGP~E 2J MI~rLITF~ 45 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCli OF 180g.24 FRh'T; TflENCE NORTH 21 DEGREES 20 MINUTES 05 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF 45.29 FEET TO THE POIh"r OF BEGINNING; TH~NCE CONTINUING NORTH ALONG SAID LINE, A DISTANCE OF 213.26 SOoW'd I DEGREE 30 MINUTES 10 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF 360.00 FEET; TIIENCE SOLrI'H 85 00 SECONDS ~,ST, A DISTANCE OF 1S0.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 45 DEGREES 00 },tlNUTES 00 PREPARED I~Y~,'~,,.,~( .................. D AT E, ,~', .~ .~, .~ ~,. ~OEORGE R. RICHMOND PROFESSIONAL ~ND SURVEYOR-FL, PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING DEPARTME~. COLLIER COUN~ GOVERNMENT COMPLEX N~LES, FLORIDA 34112' Collier County Sheriff's Office 3301 Tamiami Trail East Building "J" Naples, FL 34112 Telephone (AC 941) 774-4434 December 9, 2001 Mr. Duane Wheeler Rotary Club of Immokalee P.O. Box 5274 Immokalee, Fl. 34142 Dear Mr. Wheeler This letter is to confirm that I have had the opportunity to review the proposed plan for the upcoming carnival event scheduled for January 17 through the 20th, 2002. In reviewing the plan, it appears the Lisko & Son Amusement Co. will pay for the security for the event. I recommend that they contact 1" Sergeant Mike Jones at 793- 9715 to review the crowd expectations and the number of security personnel needed. I will ensure that staffis aware of the event and able to assist if summoned. If any problems should arise, please contact the Imn~kalee SheriWs Substation at 657-6168 and we will address the issues. If any additional information is need please contact me. Sincerely, Lt. Mark W. Baker ID #762 Collier County Sheriff's Office Immokalee Substation M~rB JAN 0 3 2002 COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY 2003 Mainsail Drive Naples, Florida 34114 (941) 642-7878 Fax (941) 394-3515 www.collierairports.com December 6, 2001 Rotary Club of Immokalee Duane Wheeler P.O. Box 5222 lmmokalee, FL 34143 Dear Duane: Your request to lease the property on the Southwest portion of the airport for a carnival from January 17m through the 20~h is approved. Furthermore, we realize that you ,.viii also need several days before and after for setup and disassembling of tents and rides. If you have any questions please call me at 657-9003. Sincerely, John W. Kirchner Airport Manager Fi Marco Island Executive A~[port 2003 Mainsail Drive Naples, EL 34114 (941) 394-3355 (941) 394-3515 Fax 165 Airport Boulevard Immokalee, FL 34142 (941) 657-9003 (941) 657-9~91 Fax 650 EC Airpark Road Everglades City, FL 34139 (941) 695-2776 (941} 695-3558 Fax LMMOKALEE FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT 502 E. NEW MARKET ROAD, 13. LMOK~EE, FLORIDA 34142 December 5, 2001 Duane Wheeler Rotary Club of lmmokalee Dear Duane The lmmokalee Fire Control Dist. will provide fire protection and inspections for the carnival you are planning in January 17'~ thru the 20% Please provide the date and time that the state ride inspector is scheduled for. When planning the layout, keep in mind that the fire trucks need access around the midway. Provide at least 24' fire lane around the midway. Fire extinguishers will be needed per NFPA I0. Fire extinguishers shall be inspected and tagged as required. If you should have any questions, feel free to call me at 657-2700. Fire Inspector GENERAL OFFICE (941) 657-2111 FIRE pREVENTION (941) 657-2700 JAN 0 g 2002 PUBLIC WOl: S ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ,3.301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL NAPLES, FLORIDA 34112 (941) 774-8192 LEGAL DESCRIPTION (NOT A SURVEY) PRO.?EOT NO,. PARCEL NO,.. FOLIO NO... COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SE~YJON 2, TOWNSHIp 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIEg. COUNTY, FLO~DA; THENCE SOU~ I DEQRE~ 30 M~TES,14 $ECO~S ~, A DISTANCE OF 2680.88 F~; ~ENCE NO~TH 87 DEG~ 42 M~S 39 SECON~ WEST ALON~ ~B ~GHT OF WAY L~ OF CO~ ROAD ~ 6. A DISTANC~ 0F.2580.11 FEET; ~ENC~ NOK~ 87 DEG~F~ 43 MINUTES ~0 SE~S W~. A D~ANC~ OF 397.~ ~; TI~C~ L~Q SAID NOR~ ~G~ OF~AY L~E NOg~ lg DEGRE~ 15 MIN~S I 5 SECO~S ~ST. A D~AN~ OF 669.65 ~T; TH~CE NOR~ I DEG~E 25 M~ 45 SECO~ BAST, A DI~ANC~ OF 1808.24 ~EN~ NO~TH 21 DEG~ES 20 M~ 05 $~NDS WEST, A DISTAN~ OF 4129 FE~T TO ~ POI~ OF BEGINNING; ~ ~Q NOR~ ALONO SAID L~B, A D1ST~CE OF 213.26 FEET; ~NCE NOg~ 2a DEG~ES 38 M~S 25 S~CO~S ~ST, A DIe. CE OF ~56.39 OF ~ $~O~ COA~ ~ILROAD, A DI~ANCB OF ~0~.02 ~ET: ~CE NOR~ 18 ~GE OF WAY L~E NOR~ a4 D~GRE~S 30 M~ O0 SECO~$ ~$T, 'A DISTANC~ OF 840.00 FEET: ~CE SOU~ 1 D~G~E 30 M~ 10 SECONDg WE~. A DISTANCE OF ;25&~6 ~EN~ NORTH 8g D~REE~ 29 M~a 50 aECONbb W~, A DI~ANCE OF 450.00 FE~; ~ENC~ SO~H I DEGREE 30 M~ES 10 SECO~S W~. A DI~ANCE OF 360.00 FEET; ~IEN~ SO~ 88 D~G~ 20 M~E$ 50 ~CONDS ~, A DI~ANCE OF 4~0.~ FE~; ~ENCE SO~I 1 DEG~E MIN~ l0 $~COND$ W~T, A DI~ANC~ OF 7~.~ ~; ~CE SO~ 45 DEG~ 00 M~S ~ SECONDS ~ST, A DISTANCE OF 150.~ FE~; ~NCE SO~ 45 DEG~ES ~ M~ES O0 $ECON~ ~. A DISTANCE OF ] 50.00 FHa; ~CE SO~ 43 DEG~ 30 M~S 06 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF 1613.95 FE~; ~t~NCE HOE~ 1 DEGAS 2f M~TES 45 SECO~S EA~, A DISTAN~ OF 1480,00 FEET; ~CE SO~ 88 DEG~ggR 34 M~ I S SECONDS ~ST. A DISTANCE ~IE I'Ol~ OF BEGINNING; SAID DESCRIBED '1~ CONTAINING i37,084 AC~ (5,971,401) SQUA~ FE~, MORE OR I.ESS. ~'- GEORGE R. RICHMOND PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR-FL REG. #: · PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT COMPLEX 3301 FAST TAMIAMI TRAIL NAPLES~ FLORIDA '~4112' EXHIBIT "A" JAN 0 B 2002 Pen~t PERMIT FOR CARNIVAL EXHIBITION STATE OF FLORIDA: COUNTY OF COLLIER: WHEREAS, Duane Wheeler, Carnival Chairman, Rotary Club of Immokalee, has made application to the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, tora permit to conduct acamival; and WHEREAS, Duane Wheeler, Carnival Chairman, Rotary Club of Immokalee, has presented to the Board sufficient evidence that all criteria for the issuance of a peri'nit to conduct a carnival as set forth in Chapter 10, Article II, Amusements and Entertainments, of the Collier County Code have been satisfied and that such carnival/exhibition will be conducted according to lawful requirements and conditions; and WHEREAS, said Duane Wheeler, Carnival Chairman, Rotary Club of Immokalee, has requested v.,aivers of the Application Fee, Occupational License and Surety Bond; NOW, THEREFORE. this Pern~it is hereby granted to Duane Wheeler, Carnixal Chairman, Rotary Club ol Immokalee, to conduct a carnival from Janary 17th through January 20th, 2002, in accordance with the tern~s and conditions set forth in the petitioner's application and all related documents, attached hereto and incorporated herein for the folloxxing described property: (See attached Exhibit "A") The request for waivers ol the Application Fee, Occupational License and Surety Bond is hereby approved. WITNESS my hand as Chairman of said Board and Seal of said County, attested by the Clerk of Courts in and for said County this day of 2002. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA: Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency: Ma~jorie I4t. Student Assistant County Attorney JAMES D. CARTER, PhD., CHAIRMAN PUBLIC WOKKS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ~301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL NAPLES, FLORIDA 34112 LEGAL DESCRIPTION (NOT A SURVEY) PROJECT NO,. PARCEL NO,.. FOLIO NO... COMMENCTNO AT THE NORTHWEST CORf4ER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST. OF 2680.88 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87 DEGREES 42 MINUTES 39 SECONDS WEST AL(JI~[J 1 .,1~ fig RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COUNTY ROAD 846. A DISTANCE OF.2 $80. I I FEET; THENCE NORTH 87 DEGREF. S 43 MINUTES O0 SECONDS WEST, A Dk~TANCE OF 397,63 FEET; TI[ENOS LE~V12qO SAID NORTH I~.IGH'F OF WAY LINIi NORTH 19 DEGREES I$ MINUTES l ~ SECONDS EAST, A DISTANC~t OF 6~9,65 l~'T; THENCE NORTH I DEGR.EE 25 MI)fi. fi'ES 45 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF 1808.24 THENC.~ NORTH 21 DEGREES 20 M [NU'I'F~ 05 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF 45.29 FEET TO POINT OF BEGINNING; TH ENC'E C, ONTINUING NORTH ALONG SAID LnqE, A DISTANCE OF 213.26 FEET; TI~ENCE NORTH 24 DEGREES 38 M~/UT'ES 22 SECONDS W~ST. A DISTANCE OF 856.39 FEET; THT;NCS NORTH 18 DEGREES 23 MINU'I'BS 08 SECONDS EAST ALONG THS EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE SI1ABOARD COASTL~ KAILROAD, A DISTANCE OF 208.02 FEET; THENCE NORTH 18 DEGREES 46 MrN'U'I~S 49 SECONDS EAST. A DISTANCB OF 2?28.00 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID EAST I~IGHT OF %VAy LINE NORTH J4 DEGREES :~0 MINUTE-q 00 SECONDS EAST,'A DISTANCE OF 840.00 FEET; THENCE SOU"I~ I DEGREE 30 MINUTE~ 10 SECONDS WEST. A DI~TAHCE OF ~,25C 06 FEZ;'; THENCE NORTH 88 F-,E~REEE 29 MINIJTES 50 SF.,CONDfi. WEST, A DISTANCE OF 450.00 FEET; THENC" &OO'FH I DEGREE 30 MINU'TES 10 SECONDS WE~", A DISTANCE OF 360.00 FEET; TIIENCE SOUTH: DEGREES 29 MINUT;S $0 SECONDS EAST. A DISTANCE OF 450.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTI[ I DEGREE MIN~P~S 10 SECONDS W.F-qT. A DISTANC~ OF 700.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 45 DEGP. J~;S 00 MINUTES 00 SECONDS FAST, A DISTANCE OF 150,00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 45 DEGREES 00 M fNU'TES 00 SECONDS WEST. A DISTANCE OF 150.00 FEET; THENCE SOLFI'H 43'DEGREES 30 MI'NU'TES 06 SECONDS WEST. A DISTANCE OF 1613.95 FEET; 'THENCE NORTH I DEGREE 25 MTN1JTES 45 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF 1480.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88 DEGI:UEES 34 M[NUTF~ I$ SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF 6?000 FEET; THENCE NORTH I DEGREE 25 MINUTES 45 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OP 370.00 FEET; TllENCE NORT~ I 88 DEGRflKS 34 MINUTES 15 SECONDS WI[ST. A DISTANCE OF 837.52 FEET TO T~[E pOINT OF BEGINNING; SAID I)ESCRIDEI)TRACT CONTAINING 137.0i~4 AC[~5 (5,971.401) SQUARE FEET). MORE OR LESS. EXHIBIT "A" PROFESSIONAL L~ND SURVEYOR-FL RE 24 PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, COI,~IER COUNTY GOVERNMENT COMPLEX 3301 FAST TAMIAMI TRAIL NAPLES. FLORIDA 34112' EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT WITtl DIVOSTA BUILDING CORPOIL4TION AND ISLANDWALK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY FOR ROAD IMPACT CREDITS SUBJECT TO DEVELOPER COMPLYING W1TII ALL CONDITIONS OF THE AGREEMENT IMPOSED BY TIlE COUNTY OBJECTIVE: To obtain Board approval of a developer contribution agreement with for road impact fcc credits equal to the actual ce~lified cost of construction above that required as site related cun-cnt for the portion of Logan Boulevard norlh of Vandcrbilt Beach Road in Collier County. CONSIDERATION: Tile DiVosta Building Coq¢oration and islandWalk Development Coml)any' have constructed a portion of Logan Boulevard north of Vanderbilt Beach Road. Logan Boulevard is part of tile county's long-range transportation plan and transportation network. The amount of road impact fee credits for the section of' Logan Boulevard constructed by tire developed is only for tile portion of road that is abovc that required to provide access to the development. This total cost to construct was S102.838.03. Of that total, S79,262.06 was determined to be for access and site related improvements attributable to ibc Island\Valk PUD, specifically for the Cove development. The recommended impact fee credit is S23,575.97, total cost less tile site related improx ement costs. FISCAL IMPACT: Tile issuance ofilnpact fcc credits for tile remainder is consistent with tile then existing hnpact Fee Ordinance and has been considered in the development of' the Counly's ammaI budget. The Impact Fee Credits will be issued from tile Transpo~lation Impacl [:ce District I Fund. GROWTII MANAGEMENT: Growth Management is not aflk'ctcd. RECOMMENDATION: That tile Board of County Commissioners approves the developer contribution agreement. Prepared. by: -~.('~ , .X /'/~/- ( ~~L~.~ Date: Daw R. Wolfe, Tr, T,T~sportatio .z~'anning Departnlent Director Reviewed by: Stephen Miller, P.E., Director, TECM Department Approved by: Nommn E. Feder, Transportation Sen, ices Division Administrator l 7~/"2i/~'; ! AGENDAITEM JAN 0 8 2002 Pg. OFFICE OF THE CO UNTYA TTORNEY INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Dawn Wolfe Transportation Planning Director Jodi F. Crowe ,3ffO~ Legal Assistant, Collier County Attorney's Office December 19, 2001 IslandWalk Developer Contribution Agreement For Logan Bh,d. Cottstrttctiott Attached please find a copy of tbe Contribution Agreement for Road bnpact Fee O'edits for the above-referenced matter. At this time, the original is in my office. In a meeting Jacqueline Hubbard Robinson and I had last week, she indicated to me that you are to prepare the Agenda Packet for this matter. Jacqucline also informed me that Mr. Bruce Anderson anticipates that this matter will be placed on thc agenda for the first part of January. Please let me knox,,' if tbere is anything I can do to assist you in this matter. I can be reached at 774-8868. cc: David C. Weigel, County Attorney Jacqueline Hubbard Robinson, Assistant County Attorney JAN 0 B 2002 STANDARD FORM COLLIER COUNTY CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT FOR ROAD IMPACT FEE CREDITS 2001-002-TR-Logan Boulevard/lslandWalk THIS CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT is made and entered into this __ day of , 2001, by and between DiVosta Building Corporation (F.K.A. SUNCO BUILDING CORPORATION), a Florida corporation and IslandWalk Development Company, a Florida corporation duly organized and authorized to conduct business in the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as "Developers," by and through DiVosta Building Corporation(F.K.A. SUNCO BUILDING CORPORATION) a Florida corporation, its managing member, by Michael D. Rosen, Vice-President, who has been duly authorized to execute this Contribution Agreement for Road Impact fee Credits and THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF COLLIER COLrNTY, hereinafter referred to as "County." RECITALS: \VlqEREAS, Developers are desirous of entering into a contribution agreement with the County which grants a credit for road impact fees, in exchange lbr the contribution of off-site improvements and/or land donations to the County's transportation network; and WHEREAS, Developers originally had legal control over, or were the record title owners of all of certain lands described in Exhibit "A" (hereinafter referred to as "The Development") attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, which it develops subject to the imposition of road impact fees; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 97-6, the IslandWalk Planned Unit Development, was approved by the Board of County Commissioners on January 28, 1997; and WIIEREAS, it has been determined the ONE ftUNDRED TWO THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED THIRTY-EIGHT AND 03/100 DOLLARS ($102,838.03), is the Certified Cost Estimate prepared by WilsonMiller, Inc., the Developer's Engineer, Exhibit "B" (Certified Cost Estimate), for thc Devbloper to construct two lanes of the Logan Boulevard Extension fi.om Vanderbilt Beach Road + 1,470 L.F.; and WHEREAS, all parties to this Agreement acknowledge road Impact Fee Credits shall be a credit only against Road Impact Fees, and that such Credits shall not offset, diminish or reduce other charges, fees or impact fees for which Developer is responsible in connection with the development of the Property; and WHEREAS, the parties acknowledge that the valuation of eligible anticipated construction to the County's transportation network is based upon professional oEiaior~-c~4~)l~l project probable costs certified by a professional architect or engineer attached hetet~to.~~~ and I JAN 0 8 2002 WHEREAS, the parties acknowledge, in the case of contributions of construction or installation of improvements, the value of the developer's proposed contribution shall be adjusted upon completion of the construction to reflect the actual cost of construction or installation of improvements contributed by developer, but in any event not to exceed twenty (20) per cent of the estimated probable costs; rind WHEREAS, the term "road impact construction lands" refers to the land areas directly affected by the road impact construction as defined in the Collier County Code of Ordinances sections pertaining to road impact fees; and WHEREAS, the Transportation Administrator has recommended to the Board of County Comm/ssioners that the proposed plan for donation and/or contribution is in conformity with contemplated improvements and additions to the County's transportation network and that it will be advantageous to the public for Developer to contribute off-site improvements as described herein and in Exhibit "C" which are composed of, among other things, facilities that are requked to be made pursuant to a development order or voluntarily made in connection with road impact construction. WHEREAS, the parties acknowledge that all construction cost estimates shall be based upon, and all construction plans, specifications and conveyances shall be in conformity with the road construction standards and procedures of the County and shall be tkst approved by the Coll/er County Transportation Administrator prior to commencement of construction; and WHEREAS, Developer acknowledges and agrees that it had full power and authority to cause the construction or installation of the subject contribution and thereafter execute any and all documentation necessary to convey thc contribution or land donation to the County in conformance with the County's transportation standards, procedures, ordinances and regulations; and ~,¥~itEREAS. after reasoned consideration by the Board of Commissioners, the Board has authorized the County Attorney to prepare this Contribution Agreement upon the Board finding that: a. The subject Proposed Plan is in conformity with the contemplated improvements and additions to the County's transportation system; ID. Such Proposed Plan, .viewed in conjunction with other existing or proposed plans, will not adversely impact the cash flow or liquidity of the County's road impact fee trust account in such a way as to frustrate or interfere with other planned or ongoing growth necessitated capital improvements and additions to the County's transportation system; c. The Proposed Plan is consistent with the public interest; and The proposed time schedule for completion of the Proposed Plan is consistent with the most recently adopted five-year capital improvement program for transportation system; and No.___I~,.I~L%/ . ,/AN 0 2002 WqqEREAS, the Board of County Comnfissioners finds that the contributions contemplated by this Contribution Agreement are consistent with the County's existing comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, according to the Transportation Division= Developer did agree, in a separate Developer Contribution Agreement with County, to convey to County the lands upon which Logan Boulevard Extension was constructed under the terms of this Agreement and said lands have been previously conveyed to County; and ~VMEREAS, this Contribution Agreement shall not be construed or characterized as a development agreement under the Florida Local Goverv_ment Development Agreement Act. WITNESSETH: NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration exchanged amongst the pm-ties, and in consideration of the covenants contained herein, the parties agree as follows: The above recitals are true and correct and shall be incorporated herein. 1. In exchange for the contributions identified and contemplated in this Contribution Agreement as set forth in Exhibit "C," Developer shall be entitled to a cash reimbursement or a credit for road impact fees as more particularly described herein. 2. Developer has completed the construction ora 2-lane roadway within the future Logan Boulevard Extension, as shown on Exhibit "C" (Roadway plan and t,vpical roadway cross-section) starting at Vanderbilt Beach Road and terminating _+ 1,470 L.F. north of Vanderbilt Beach Road. 3. Whereas Developer has completed said improvements, as described in this Agreement, and the improvements have been deemed acceptable by the Collier County Transportation Division, the Developer shall be entitled to a Road Impact Fee Credit of $23,575.97 for the total non-site-related portion of the cost of the improvements, all of which are described in the Certified Cost Estimate Labeled Exhibit "B" (Certified Cost Estimate) and the schematic drawing labeled Exhibit "C" (Roadway plan and typical roadway cross-section). 4. The credit for road impact fees identified herein shall run with the subject Road Impact Construction Lands, as described in Exhibit "A" and shall be reduced by the entire amount of each road impact fee due on building permits issued thereon and each successive building permit until the project is either completed or the credits are exhausted or otherwise no longer available. It shall be Developer's obligation to notilq the County that a credit is available, each time a building permit is applied for. Ifa cred t4s:a~,aita4~, it shall be deducted fi.om the available balance. All credits shall be fi.e, [y.~'t'~fT~Z7 ~o, ~ ._ Ill~ descn~d-M throughout the road impact fee construction lands and as set forth in the arc exhibit "A". JAN 0 8 2002 ~g --~ 5. If more than one developer or parcel is to benefit from the impact fee credits under the Agreement, then Exhibit "A" shall describe each parcel and identit~ the owner thereof and shall assign and describe the proportion and/or initial dollar amount of the total credit available to each parcel. In such circumstance, the credit available to each parcel shall be reduced by the entire amount of the road impact fees due on the first building permit issued on each respective parcel and each successive building permit issued thereon until each respective parcel is completely developed or the respective credit amounts available are exhausted for each parcel or other-Mse no longer available. As well, and in all other respects relative to determining available credit or reimbursement under this Agreement, each parcel shall be treated in a manner proportionate to the credit available to it as indicated in Exh/bit "A." 6. The impact fee credit available under this Contribution Agreement may be used to evidence payment of road impact fees, provided such use will not cause an undue or unreasonable burden upon the administrative, accounting or audit resources of tlie road impact fee area. 7. An annual review and audit of performance under this Contribution Agreement shall be perIbnned by the County to determine whether or not there has been demonstrated good t~aitli compliance with the terms of this Contribution Agreement and to report the credit applied toward payment of road impact fees and the balance of available unused credit. If tlie Collier County Board of Commissioners finds, on the basis of substantial competent cvidence, that there has been a failure to comply with the terms of this Contribution Agreement, the Agreement may be revoked or unilaterally modified by the County. 8. The duration or availability of credits pursuant to this Contribution Agreement, shall not be for a period in excess of seven (7) years, exclusive of any moratoria, from the date of recording this Contribution Agreement in the Official Records of Collier County. Florida. 9. In the event the amount of Developer's contribution pursuant to the approved plan of construction exceeds the total amount of impact fees imposed or used on the subject Road Impact Construction Lands, Developer shall be entitled to the return of the excess or remaining balance of such contribution credit, provided funds are available and collected from fi]ture receipts by the County from road Lmpact fees collected. 10. Developer shall keep or provide for retention of adequate records and supporting documentation which concern or reflect total project cost of construction or installation of anv improvements to be contributed. This information shall be available to the County or its' duly authorized agent or representative, for audit, inspection, or copying, tbr a minimum of five (5) years from the termination date of this Contribution Agreement. The termination date shall be the date of the use of the last road impact fee credits, or issuance of any reimbursement or return of the remaining balance, available under thi :L~t~k,~ jTEIv!. Agreement. ~,1o. LL~ t3 JAN 0 8 2002 11. The failure of this Contribution Agreement to address any permit, condition, term, or restriction shall not relieve either the Developer or its successors, of the necessity of complying with any law, ordinance, rule or regulation governing said permitting, requirements, conditions, or terms of restrictions. This Contribution Agreement shall be modified or revoked as is necessary, to comply with all relevant State or Federal laws enacted after the execution of this Contribution Agreement which are applicable to and preclude the parties compliance with the terms of the Contribution Agreement. 12. Except as otherwise provided herein, this Contribution Agreement shall only be modified or amended by the mutual written consent of the parties hereto or by their successors in interest. 13. The burdens of this Contribution Agreement shall be binding upon, and the benefits of the Contribution Agreement shall inure to, all successors in interest to the parties to this Contribution Agreement. 14. This Contribution Agreement shall be recorded by the County in the Official Records of Collier County, Florida within fourteen (14) days after the County, by its duly authorNed Chairman, executes this Agreement. A copy of the recorded document will be pro~Sded to Developer. 15. Any party to this Agreement shah have the ability to file an action for injunctive relief in the Circuit Court of Collier County to enforce the terms of this Contribution Agreement, said remedy being cumulative within any and all other remedies available to the parties for enforcement o f this agreement. 16. Developer certifies, by virtue of entering into this agreement, that to the best of its ~knowledge all donations and contributions are consistent with the Collier County Comprehensive Plan. 17. The parties acknowledge that the land donation made pursuant to this agreement is an integral part of and a necessary accommodation to the Collier County transportation network. 18. The Developer certifies, by virtue of entering into this agreement, that to the best of its knowledge the off-site improvements contributed, if'any, are an integral part of and a necessary accommodation to the County's transportation network. 19. The off-site improvements, if any, exclude access improvements. 20. The Transportation Administrator has determined that the proposed road impact fee credit plan is consistent with the public interest. 2I. Developer has provided, in Exhibit "E", an attorney's opinion setting lbrth the legal authority and validity of any business entity utilized by the developer in the execution of this agreement, including an affidavit listing the names and addresses o f II pa4t~![~i¢. -~.,~iM partnership, and stating that the entity is in full force and effect. Ilo. l {~ ~ ! .. JAN 0 8 2002 F,~. / 22. The Collier County. Transportation Division and the Developer acknowledge that the contribution is properly characterized as work done by the Developer and property rights acquired by Collier County for the improvement of the atbrementioned roadway within the boundaries ora public right of way. 23. The amount of the road impact fee credit to be granted under this agreement is $23,575.97. 24. The failure of the contribution agreement to address any pertinent condition, term or restriction of any regulatory permit shall not relieve either the appkicant or ox,mcr, or their successors of the necessity, of complying with any law, ordinance, rule or regulation governing any permit requirements, conditions, terms or restrictions. 25. This agreement shall be modified or revoked as is necessary to comply with relevant state or federal laws, in the event state or federal laws are enacted after the execution of the agreement which are applicable to and preclude the parties compliance with thc terms of the contribution agreement. 26. Any future reimbursement for excess impact fee credits shall come from future receipts by the County of road impact fees. However, no reimbursement shall be paid until such time as all development, as defined by the transportation administrator, at the location that was subject to thc credit has been completed. Such reimbursement shall be made over a period of five (5) years from the completion of the development. 27. The road impact fee credit granted shall only be for donations or contributions made to the transportation network to accommodate growth and which were made within the respective road impact fee district where the road impact construction is located. 28. This contribution agreement shall not be construed as a development under the Florida Local Government Development Agreement Act. THIS AREA INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK .lAN O 8 2002 SIGNED, SEALED ~ND DELIVERED 1N THE PRESE~4Q~F: Signature / Printed or T~ed Nme Signature ~ ~ Prated or T~ed N~e DIVOSTA BU1LDING CORPOIL~TION (F.K.A. SUNCO BUILDING CORPORATION) a Florida Corporation By: ' ;lic~'~se~President STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The tbregoing Developer Contribution Agreement was acknowledged before me this ~ day of ~ff,(?~,~/} , 2001, by Michael D. Rosen as Vice President of DiVosta Bu~d~g Co¢oration (F.K.A. SunCo BuildNg Co¢oration ~d IsI~dWalk Development Company), a know~ t~me .... ~. · Florid Co~oration. He is personally ~~/~. ~ Sign~u;~;~Notao' P~lic ~ ~v.~; ~XF~iS:~a~:.~.~a tilex aeau P~ted N~e of Not~' Public IN THE PRES[,NCE OF: Sig_.~ature Printed or Typed Name Sier~ture ' ' PrNted or T~ed Nme ISI,ANDWALK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY a Florida Corporation Michael,D. Rosen, Vice President STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this c.~day of/~/&0 , 2001, by Michael D. Rosen as Vice President of IslandWalk Development. He is personally know~ to me. NOeXR'ZPUBLIC fJ (SEAL) Name: ~1~q~$ 7-/¢ ,~:_q~/ L&/,'O&/~W.4 (Type or Print) My Commission Expires: ?n. Q~ c~_~ AS TO COUNTY: Attest: Dated: DWIGIfT E. BROCK. Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA By: By: JAMES D. CARTER, Ph.D., Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Jacqueline Hubbard Robinson, Assistant County Attorney AGENDA ITEM ~o., [[Ct__.4 I,- .JAN 0 8 2002 EXHIBITS TO BE ATTACHED TO AGREEMENT Exhibit "A" - - Description of Land Exhibit "B" - - Certification of Probable Cost Exhibit "C" - - Description of Land Donation and/or Contribution Exhibit "D" - - Impact Fee Construction Lands Exhibit "E" - - Attorney's Opinion of Authority H:/Jack/e/Standard Form Agreement/Slandard Contribulion A~eement-DiVo~la 11/28 th'afl JAN O 8 2002 I t LEGAL DESCRIPTION All of Section 33, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. The Southwest 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 34, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, subject to an easement for public road right-of-way over and across the West 30 feet thereof and the South 30 feet thereof. The South i/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southwest I/4 of Section 34, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, and subject to an easement for public road right-of- way over and across the West 30 feet thereof. AND The North 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 34, Township 48 south, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida; and subject to an easement for public road right-of- way over and across the North 30 feet thereof and the West 30 feet thereof. LESS AND EXCEPT: The following described property situate, lying and being in Collier County, Florida: The South 170 feet of Section 33, Town.ship 48 South, Range 26 East, and the South 145 feet of Section 34, Township 48 South, Range 26 East; by Order of Taldng, Case No. 86- 1456-CA-01-HDH, recorded in OR Book 1215, Page 1662. EXHIBIT "A" pg. ~:~ LEGAL DESCRIPTION All of Section 33, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. AND The Southwest 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 34, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, subject to an easement for public road fight-of-way over and across the West 30 feet thereof and the South 30 feet thereof. The South I/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southwest I/4 of Section 34, Township 48 South, Range 26 -East, Collier County, Florida, and subject to an easement for public road right-of- way over and across the West 30 feet thereof. AND The North 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 34, Township 48 south, P, m2ge 26 Eask Collier County, Florida; and subject to an easement for public road right-of- way over and across the North 30 feet thereof and the West 30 feet thereof. LESS AND EXCEPT: The following described property situate, lying and being in Collier County, Florida: The South 170 feet of Section 33, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, and the South 145 feet of Section 34, Township 48 South, Range 26 East; by Order of Taking, Case No. 86- 1456-CA-0 i-HDH, recorded in OR Book 1215, Page 1662. EXHIBIT "D" JAN 0 8 2002 You~, v¢>~ ASSENDE1RP, VA]RNA]DOE ~: ~NI)EIR$ON, P. A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW Board of Count.', Comnrissioncrs Collier County ~01 E. TammmlTrall, ~ Floor Naples. FI. 34112 RE: Naples November 15, 2001 Developer Contribution Agreement with DiVosta Building Corporatiolr and tslandWalk I)ex elop]nent Company Fo \Vhom It May Concern: This letter is to advise Collier County that DiVosta Building Corporation (F}L;:\ SunCo Building Corporation) and IslandWalk Development Company are lawfully existing Florida corporations in 2ood standing with thc State of Florida and that Michael D. Rosen is Vice-President of both ~'orporations and is authorized to cxccutc the above refcrcnced agreement and to bind both corporations thereto. Should you have any questions, pleasc feel free to contact me. Thank you. Sincerely, R. Bruce Anderson F uscrs,BETSh' Wp9'DIVOST,\2001',BCC Itt 1 11601 x~pd EXHIBIT "E" ,JAN 0 8 2002 JAN 0 8 200Z Exhibit "C" Page 2 AGE,~DA .~EM No. ~ ~.~ ~ ,/ JAN 0 8 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE BID # 01-3277, "MOWING OF GRASSED OR VEGETATED AREAS," AND DIRECT STAFF TO AWARD CONTRACT TO LOW BIDDER. OBJECTIVE: To obtain Board approval of Bid # 01-3277 for the mowing of grassed or vegetated areas and direct staff to award the contract to the low bidder, Southern Services of LaBelle, Inc. CONSIDERATION: On September 6th, 2001, the Purchasing Department opened bids for the mowing of grassed and vegetated areas in Collier County. A total of three (3) bids were received and opened. The area to be mowed is 693 acres for one cycle of mowing There are estimated eight (8) mowing cycles per year, and the total acreage to be mowed per year is 5,554 acres The following is a summary of unit prices submitted by the bidders: BIDDER Southern Services of LaBelle, Greenwerx Groundskeeping Superior Landscape COST PER ACRE COST PER CYCLE Inc. $1520 S 9,925.60 $90.00 S62,370.00 $26.75 S18,.~77> Staffhas reviewed the bids and recommends acceptance of the bid submitted by Southern Services o£LaBelle, Inc., as the lowest responsible bid. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $103,00000 are budgeted and available in the MSTD General Fund. GROWTII MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact RECOMMENDATION: That the Board award Bid #01-3277 to the low bidder, Southern Ser¢ices of LaBelle, Inc. for mowing of grassed and vegetated areas in Collier County'. SUBMITTED By:/~,'- ,//-/..~'~/ Date: Joh/nn Vliet, Superintendent, Road & Bridge REVIEWED BY: ZCtXJci/q ~ (_.&/~ ¢~/ ../. Date:. ~ ~ ~ [ Stev~Car~e~, Direct=~, Purcha~hg~ ~- ~ REVIEWED n~';/'/~'/~ ¥~~ Date: /~7/~/~/' Edward J. Kant, Director;~nsponation Operations BY / /** 'f ~ Date' /~z./, APPROVED : 1, ~'' - · Norman F~der, Administrator, Transportation " ~~ JAN 0 8 2002 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO WORK ORDER NO. ABB-FT-01-02 WITH AGNOLI, BARBER & BRUNDAGE, INC. FOR THE PREPARATION OF CONTRACT DOCUMENTS FOR INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT RADIO ROAD AND DAVIS BOULEVARD (S.R. 84), PROJECT NO. 65031,CIE #16 OBJECTIVE: To gain Board approval to proceed with design changes and added work to acconrmodate additional SFWMD pemrit requirements, FDOT driveway requirements, changed standards for traffic light mast arms and signal heads, updated access management standards, newly adopted standards for traffic signal warrant studies and for conducting a Protected Species Sur~'ey. ~ N' CONSIDERATIO[ · On January 9, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners approved Work Order No. ABB-FT-01-02 with Agnoli, Barber & Brundage to update contract documents lot' tile intersection portion of a previously designed roadway. The cum-cnt Amendment No. I will authorize the consultant to proceed with changes and updates to thc construction plans that will ensure all construction work is ii1 compliance with recent cbanges and revisions to various standards. A cop5' of Amendment No. 1 is attached. ., FISCAL IMPACT: A budget amendment is needed to transfer S57,610 from the '~ix~' Transportation Impact Fee District 2 Reserve Fund. Source of Funds are hnpact Fees. GROXYTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The project is consistent with the Transportation Element of tile Growth Management Plan. RECOMMENDATION: That tile Board of County Commissioners approve Amendment No. 1 to Work Order No. ABB-FT-01-02 with Agnoli, Barber & Bnmdage, Inc. in the amount ofS57,610, authorize the Transportation Administrator to execute said Amendment No. 1 and approve the necessary budget ameudment. Allen R. Ruth, P.E., Senior Project Manager REVIEWED BY: 5'~'~/~ /t/~/'9'(~,~, fi::,,,.~ Date: Mitcb Riley, P.E., Principal Project Manager REVIEWED BY: ~--~'r'~"~"'-' /~' ///~'P';~-~' Date: ! Stephen L. Miller, P.E., Director, Transportation Engineering & Construction Management Department APPROVED BY: ~-~"-/'~/"'"~'"~'/-'' /:::r,,,.. Norman E. Feder, AICP, Administrator Transportation DMsion Date: JAN 0 B 2002; WORK ORDER # ABII-FT-01-02-A1 Agreement for Fixed Term Professional Engineering Services Dated December 8, 1998 (Contract #98-2835) This \Vork Order is for professional cnginccrlng ser',ices for work knov, n as ~Radio Road / S.R. 84 Intersection Preparation of contract documents for the construction of intersection improvements at Radio Road and S.R. 84 (Davis Bled) The v, ork is specified in the proposal daled No\ember 27, 2001, ,>.hich is attached hereto, and made a part of this Work Order Amendment. In accordance with tile Terms and Conditions of the Agreement referenced abo,,e, Work Order ~ ABB-FT-01-02-AI is assigned to Agnoli, Barber & Brundage, Inc. Scope of Work: As detailed oil the attached proposal; design changes to meet additional SFWMD and FDOT perlmt requirements; construction plan changes for traffic lane chances, added bike lanes, added directional turns to median openings, changes to si~e;valk x~idth and locations; stake out locations for FPL: changes to mast arm desien and traffic signal heads; added new sheets to the plan set; anti redoing t~e traffic Signal Warrant Study to meet ne,.',' standards. Schedule of Work: Complete v. ork v. ithin 180 calendar da,':,'-; from receipt of thc Nonce to Proceed authorizing s:art of v. ork. Compensation: In accordance x,,ith Article Fixc of fl~e .A. grcclllellt, tile Count5 will compensate Agno]i. Barber & Brundage. Inc m accord:mc,: v. ith negotiated lump suill amouBts indicated below. Ta>k A.I Permitting Task A 2 Construction Plans Task C Stake Out FPL Reimbursables Total Amendment No. Original \Vork Order TOTAL FEE TO DATE S 7,420 547,490 $ 700 S 2,000 557,610 583,676.50 5141,286.50 .-\n~ change within monetary authorit5 of this \Vork Order made subsequent to final department approxal ;:,ill be considered an additional serxice and charged according to Schedule 'LV' of tile Agreement. Allen R. Ruth, P.E., Senior Project Manager Date Mitch Riley, P.E., Principal Project Manager Date AG~I~ ITEM No. ~_L.~..~L"~ JAN 0 pg._ Stephen L. Miller, P.E., Dir¢c.mr, Transportation Date Engineering &Cor, struction Managenlent Department /~,~' Norman E. Fcder, AICP, Adminislrator Dale Transportation Di:ision Appro,.ed as to Form And Legal Suffic ency: Assistant County Mtornev .~.CCEPTED BY: ~,o_noli. Barber & Brunda2e. Inc. ,," Compau', Name ~ Author zed'Company Officer Tspe or Prin~ Name a~d Title Date AGEND,A~ ITEM-. No _ ,.~ JAN 0 8 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING CARRY FORWARD FOR THE TROPICANA BLVD. PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $12,340 FROM FY 01 IN THE GOLDEN GATE MUNICIPAL SERVICES TAXING UNIT (MSTU) FUND 136. OBJECTIVE: To obtain BCC approval of a budget amendment that will allow 'unexpended funds in FY 01 in the Tropicana Blvd. Project to be carried forward and re-appropriated in this project. CONSIDERATION: The Tropicana Blvd. project is from Golden Gate Parkway to 32"d Ave. SW. Funds were appropriated in the FY O1 budget, boxxevcr, staff was unable to encumber thc funds prior to the end of the Fiscal Year. The can'y-forward is required for the Irrigation Controllers, changes to plant materials, and towards thc cost of asphalt removal in an additional tun~ lane that is being put in. · ~?FISCAL IMPACT: A budget amendment is needed to recognize the additional carry · ' forward in the amount of S12,340 and will be appropriated in the Golden Gate MSTU Fund 136 under the Tropicana Blvd. Project. GROWTH MANAGESIENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact. RECOMMENDATION: That thc BCC approve/authorize the necessary budget amendment to recognize additional carry lbrward in FS' 02. SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: REVEIWED BY: APPROVED BY: Bob Petersen, Project Manager, Landscape Operations .~./1J. Lt~lic~ EC~]/~1 J. Kant,~ Nor'm~ E. F e d'e~ // Date: s. Manager Date: / z--/~,//¢/' portation Operations Di('ecto~ Date: dCP, Transportation AdministratOr JAN O 8 200~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF RIGHT- OF-WAY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF ROADWAY, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS FOP, PHASE TWO OF THE IMMOKALEE ROAD FOUR-LANING PROJECT FROM RIVERS ROAD TO JUST WEST OF WILSON BOULEVARD, PROJECT NO. 60018. OBJECTIVE: To obtain approval of the Board of County Commissioners to purchase all rights and interests in real property required for the construction and maintenance of a four- lane section (and ultimate six-lane section) of Immokalee Road between Rivers Road and Wilson Boulevard. CONSIDERATIONS: Upon its adoption of the annual budget for capital improvements in October 1999, the Board of County Commissioners added the expansion of Immokalee Road from two lanes to four lanes between CR 951 (Collier Boulevard) and 43rd Avenue NE to the transportation five-year work program. Due to the project's length of 8.1 miles and the high number of parcels to be acquired (130), the project has been split into three phases. Phase One extends from 43~d Avenue NE to just west of Wilson Boulevard; Phase Two from Wilson Boulevard to Rivers Road; and Phase Three from Rivers Road to CR-951. On November 27, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners adopted Resolution No. 2001- 450 that authorized the acquisition of right-of-way by 9ift or purchase for all three phases of the project. The total acquisition costs for Phases Two and Three were not known at the time, so in the interest of securing authorization to begin acquisition on Phase One as soon as possible, staff advised the Board that the acquisition costs for Phases Two and Three would be reported when available. ('SiFISCAL IMPACT: On November 27, 2001, the Board approved expenditures for the · acquisition of Phase One in the amount of $1,672,475. Staff's estimate for the total costs of acquisition for Phase Two is $1,097,154. The cost of acquisition for Phases One and Two totals $2,769,629. This figure includes the cost of land and improvements, appraisal fees, title commitments and policies, staff overhead and all miscellaneous expenses. This amount does not include cost associated with condemning any unsecured parcels. All expenditures will be funded from the Transportation Gas Tax Fund and Impact Fee District I Fund, Immokalee Road - CR 951 to Wilson Blvd. (Project No. 60018). Prior to commencement of right-of-way acquisition for Phase Three, staff will report back to the Board with its estimate of the cost of acquisition for Phase Three. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Immokalee Road Phase Two PaRe 2 GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: As the expansion of Immokalee Road from two lanes to four lanes between CR 951 (Collier BouLevard) and 43~d Avenue NE is identified as Capital Improvement Element No. 071 within the County's Growth Management Plan, the recommendation is consistent with the County's long-range }lanning effort. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County CommLssloners of Collier County, Florida: 1. Approve additional expenditures in the amount of $1,097,154 from the above-referenced fund for the acquisition of right-of-way for Phase Two; and 2. Approve any and all budget am,.~dtnents required therefore. SUBMITTED B Y ' .,,'"'~..././~.~..//'" ..~'K'evin ~endri/c. M3, Real Prope~lsor Real Properf~Management Department Ci~rles E. Carrington, Jr., ~l~,ANA?Director Real Property Management Department DATE: DATE: REVLEWED BY: Stephen MiLler, P.E., Director, Transportation Engineering and Construction Management APPROVED BY: Norman E. Feder, AICP, Administrator Transportation Division EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENT TO RE-APPROPRIATE FUNDS FOR TIIE NORTIt COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACIIATY FLOW EQUALIZATION TANKS, PROJECT 73077, IN THE RE-APPROPRIATED AMOUNT OF S2,500,000. OBJECTIVE: To ensure adequate funding £or the Florida Department of Environmental Protection's (FDEP) mandated North County Water Reclamation Facility Flow Equalization Tanks project. CONSIDERATIONS: On April I0, 2001, tile Board and the FDEP signed a Consent Order that nrandates that the NCWRF Flow Equalization Tanks be completed and on line no later than November l, 2002. While preparing cost estimates for the FY 02 budget, our engineering consultants, Hazes & Sawyer, P.C., and staff utilized preliminao' infomaation. Since that time, desio_n calculations and confining site conditions such as a imposing wetlands area to the north of the ~te, and electrical and sewer utilities to bc relocated, have changed the scope. Thc cost of'tho project bas propmlionately gone higher. As a result, instead of the original concept of' one 4-rog (million gallon) tank at a cost estimate of S4.8M, noxx two 1.5-rog tmrks must bc constructed at a cost estimate o£S7.3M, including a 10% contingency. FISCAL IMPACT: A budget amcndnacnt is necessary to re-appropriate 52.5NI from tile NCR\\T 30.6-mgd MMADF, project 73950 to thc NC\VRF Flow Equalization Tanks. project 73077 to ensure adequate funding. Funding source is hnpact Fees. GROWTII MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This work xxill have no impact on growth management. RECOMMENDATIONS: That tho Board of County Commissioners, as Ex-Officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, approve thc necessary budget amendment to re-appropriate funding in the amount of S2.5M, for thc NCWRF Flow Equalization Tanks, project 73077. SUBMITTED BY: '¢~{ ~ DATE: ['~/ 575'{ Peter Schalt, PMP, Project Managcr Public Utilities Engineering Department REVIEWED BY: - ~-~ ,~ DATE: Roy B'[ Anderson, P.E., Director Public Utilities Engineering Department Thomas c,.\Vidcs, Interm~ Administralor Public Utilities Division %/;/0,, so. /cd. [ JAN C 8 2001, J EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AWARD BID #01-3301 FOR THE PURCHASE OF A ROLL-OFF TRUCK TO RDK TRUCK IN THE AMOUNT OF $81,246.00. OBJECTIVE: To ensure effective and efficient operation of Solid Waste Management Department recycling center operation. CONSIDERATION: 1. The Naples Recycling Center was in need of a new roll-off truck to replace the current truck that was purchased in 1988. 2. Bid #01-3301 was posted on October 17, 2001. Thirty-one notices were sent and 12 packages were requested. Bids were received and opened on October 31, 2001. 3. Staff reviewed the bids received and deemed that the Iow bidder could not provide the vehicle per the specifications and was deemed non-responsive. Staff recommends award of Bid #01-3301 to RDK Truck as the lowest qualified responsive bidder in the amount of $81,246.00. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds for the purchase of the roIFoff truck are budgeted in the Solid Waste Fund in the amount of $81,246.00. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: associated with this item. There is no Growth Management impact RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners award Bid #01-3301 for the purchase of a roIFofftruck in the amount of $81,246.00 to RDK Truck. SUBMITTED BY: ~'~,~' ~ ,,-~ .,¢;'~¢' Date: /¢~rw'~ughridg'~, ~iel~peratCnS Supe~isor USolid Waste Management DepaKment REVIEWED BY: ,~,/,~g~ ')' ~/[~ Date: Steph~n Y. Ca~ell Director Purchasing/General Se~ices DepaKment REVIEWED BY: ~ ~ ~ ~Date: G. George Yilmaz, Ph.D., P.E., P.H., R.E.P. Director, Solid Waste Management Depa~ment APPROVED BY: ~~ ~~ Date: T~mas G. Wides, Interim Administrator Public Utilities Division JAN 0$2DOZ J JAN O 8 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AWARD RFP #01-3279 FOR CORROSION INHIBITOR PRODUCT AND SERVICES OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners, Ex-Officio, the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, award RFP #01-3279 for the purchase of corrosion it~ibitor product and services from Lazenby & Associates. CONSIDERATIONS: The Water Department is responsible for the treating of water to meet potable water standards for the Collier County Water District. Part of the treatment process is the addition of a chemical to control the corrosion in the water distribution system. The chemical being purchased as part of this RFP is liquid polyphosphate. A Request for Proposal was utilized because the supplier will be providing both product and services to assist the Water Department in attaining the best blend of water and polyphosphate to maintain water quality. The RFP was publicly advertised on August 14, 2001. Notices were sent to 77 firms, with 5 vendors requesting full packages. Four bid packages were received as a result of this Request For Proposals. A Selection Committee meeting was held on November 29, 2001 and after review and discussion, the following firms have been shortlistcd by consensus: 1. Lazenby & Associates 2. Carus Chemical Company 3. BetzDearorn, Division of Hercules Staff recommends that the Board approve the shortlisted finns and authorize negotiations x~ith the first shortlisted firm and if no contract can be reached, to negotiate with the second shortlisted finn and then the third shortlisted finn if necessary. FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact of this purchase is in the estimated amount of SI00.000, but will depend upon the amount of water treated and the amount of chemical required. Funds are available in the Water Operations Fund (408), South and North Regional Water Treatment Plant Accounts. The source of funds from these account is user t'ees. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact from the approval of this request. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners, Ex-Officio, the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, (1) approve the Committee's selection of firms, (2) Authorize staff to begin negotiations with the number one ranked finn, and (3) Authorize the Chairman to execute a standard County Attorney approved contract. /~la L~bby, W~ta~r/D~istribution Manager Paul Mattausch, Water Director REVIWED BY: APPROVED BY: Purc-'hasing Director ' 7 '~'?'~ Thbmas Wides, lnteri,n Public Utilities Division AdministratOr ,0.~&~__._~ [ i JAN 08 200~I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE BINDING AGREEMENT WITlt FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION RELATED TO RECLAIMED WATER STORAGE PONDS AT EAGLE LAKES PARK OBJECTIVE: To enter into an agreement with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) to avoid delaying the construction of time-critical capacity improvcments in the South Scwer Service Area. CONSIDERATION: On November 27, 2001, agenda item 16(C)(2), the Board attthorizcd the Public Utilities Administrator to negotiate a binding agreement with Florida Departmcnt of Enviromnental Protection (FDEP) related to the Reclaimed Water Storage Ponds at Eagle kakcs Park. A proposed agreement bas been reached with FDEP. The proposed agreement commits the County to providing improx ements including an open-air gazebo with an encased bulletin board 'for posting information and interpretative signs to help visitors identify plants and animals commonly found at the site. A copy of thc proposed agreement is attached. Execution of thc binding agreement xx ill enable FDEP to resume processing ofonr application for a permit to expand the South County Water Reclamation Facility (SC\VRF). Our April 10, 2001 Consent Order with FDEP stipulates that thc SCWRF nmst be expanded to 16 mgd by November 2003. 'Fo mcct this date, our construction contractor needed to start work on November 1,2001. Staff is communicating with FDEP to coordinalc au appropriate time extension in the event that the delay in issuing the permit causes the plant expansion to be completed after the compliance deadline in the Consent Order. FISCAL IMPACT: No funds are needed at this time; howe;'cr, funds \,.ill bc needed for capital improvements anticipated to be required by the binding agreement with FDEP. The fiscal impact associated with the binding agreement cannot be quantified at this time. No funds are specifically budgeted in FY 2002 for the anticipated improvements. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Increasing capacity to accept and treat wastewatcr in the Sonth Sewer Service Area is consistent with CIE 916 of our Growth Management Plan, and also, our 2001 Wastcwater Master Plan Update adopted by the Board on December 11,200l as agenda item 8(A). Thc proposed SCWRF expansion will increase the capacity to 16 mgd Maximum Month Average Day Flow. RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Board of County Commissioners, as Ex-Officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, approve, and authorize the Chaimmn to execute, a binding agreement with Florida Department of Enxironmental Protection related to the South County Reclaimed Water Storage Ponds located adjacent to Eagle Lakes Park, pending approval by the County Attorney. AGENDA ITEM No. JAN - 8 ZOOZ Executive Summary Binding Agreement with FDEP Related to Rechfimed Water Storage Ponds Page 2 -'~ .... Date: SUBMITTED BY: ~) - - /z/!a, ¢//o t Karl W. Boyer, P.E., Utilities Enginccrin~ Principal Project Manager Roy B~nderson, P.E., Utilities Enginccring Dircctor Tom Wides, Interim Public Utilities Administrator HO. /(-' ~' '~h JAN 0 8 2002 PG, STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Re: Renewal o f Operating Permit File No. FLA 141356-003 Continued Obligations for ERP Mitigation File No. 112784065 Collier Coun .ty BINDING AGREEMENT Collier County Board of County Commissioners and the State of Florida, Department of Environmental Protection ("Department") agree as follows: 1. Collier County Board of County Commissioners has ongoing obligations to meet mitigation success criteria, monitoring reports and exotic and nuisance vegetation eradication pursuant to ERP permit No. 112784065. 2. Collier County Board of County Commissioners has submitted an application for, and the Department has issued a renewal of an Operating Permit number FLA 141356-003, authorizing the continued operation of a waste water treatment plant that will discharge effluent meeting xvatcr quality standards for reclaimed water into a storage pond system located at the real property described as: LEGAL DESCRIPTION - SEE ATTACHMENT A 3. Such permit has been issued upon a finding by the Department that Collier County Board of County Commissioners has provided reasonable assurances that the renewal of the operating permit and discharge of the reclaimed water into the storage ponds will not cause applicable water quality standards to be violated and will not be contrary to the public interest. 4. Collier County Board of County Commissioners and the Department agree that such reasonable assurances have been provided only if certain general and specific conditions are met. All conditions of Permit Number FLA141356-003 are incorporated herein. 5. Collier County Board o f County Commissioners agrees and acknowledges their obligation in meeting the above-referenced water quality and public interest test, notwithstanding that the ERP permit for the reclaimed water ponds expired on February 2, 2001. The County shall evidence that obligation by agreeing and adhering to the following conditions as specified below: A.) Collier County shall maintain Ponds A and B that service the South County Water Reclamation Facility in a functional wetland condition pursuant to the success criteria listed in Part # G.) below unless and until the Department grants authorization to modify these requirements. AGENDA ITEM No. /~U. ~ JAN - 8 2002 pg.. 2, Renexval of Operating Permit File No. FLA141356-003 Continued Obligations for ERP Mitigation File No. 112784065 Collier County Page 2 B.) The parcels containing the mitigation area and conservation easement area both inside and outside of thc berms shall not be sold without first obtaining written Department approval. C.) Collier County shall construct and maintain a Department reviewed and approved interpretative center and boardxvalk at the South County Water Reclamation Facility effluent storage ponds in Eagle Lake Park located at 11567 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FL 34112 in Section 33, Toxvnship 50S, Range 26E in Collier County. An ERP application for the interpretative center and boardwalk shall be submitted to the Department within 90 days of the execution of this document. Construction of the interpretative center and boardwalk shall be completed within 18 months of the ERP permit issuance. Interpretative center shall consist of not less than signs that identify plants and animals commonly found at the site and an open air gazebo with an encased bulletin board for posting information. D.) Collier County shall implement and maintain an ongoing educational program in conjunction with the establishment of an interpretative center and boardwalk at the reclaimed water ponds. This educational program shall encompass wastewater treatment, beneficial reuse of rcclaimed water, solid waste recycling, created xvetlands, and wildlife viewing. This educational program shall be reviewed and approved by the Department before thc educational program is implemented by Collier County. A draR submittal of the educational program shall be submitted to the Department xvithin 90 days of the execution of this document. Collier County shall provide a Department approved operations and management plan for the reclaimed water ponds. A draft submittal of the operations and management plan shall be submitted to the department within 90 days of the execution of this document. If the proposed interpretative center and boardwalk are not feasible due to objections of a third party, then within 45 days of such determination an alternative plan xvill be submitted to thc Department for review, modification, (if deemed necessary) and approval by the Department. Continued compliance with the approved operations and management plan is required by the Department under this binding agreement. The operation and management plan may be modified upon request by Collier County subject to Department approval. Collier County shall provide a Department approved long-term maintenance plan for the reclaimed water ponds. A draft operations and management plan shall be submitted to the department within 90 days of the execution of this document. Continued compliance with the approved long term maintenance plan is required by the Department under this binding agreement. AGENDA Renewal of Operating Permit File No. FLA141356-003 Continued Obligations for ERP Mitigation File No. 112784065 Collier County Page 3 G.) Exotic and Nuisance Vegetation Eradication: All exotic and nuisance vegetation as listed in the most recent list of invasive species by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council (FLEPPC) shall be controlled within the entire mitigation area, conservation easement area and both inside and outside as well as on the berm (top and both inside and outside slopes) of the wastewater effluent storage ponds as described below. The exotic vegetation removal shall be considered successful when the following criteria are met: a. All exotic vegetation listed in the most recently amended Collier County Land Development Code sections 2.4.4.10 Control Species, 2.4.4.11 Prohibited Species, and 2.4.4.11 Prohibited Exotic Species are limited to 1% total cover area and are treated on a semi-annual basis. b. Exotic Vegetation listed in the most recently published list as category l invasive species by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council shall be limited to 10% or less of total cover area. c. Cattails (TyRha spl~.) shall be limited to 20% or less of total wetland cover area. Treatment of cattail will be timed to minimize impacts to nesting birds with a target management coverage of 10% static or declining. d. All exotic vegetation will be treated on a semi-annual basis from the conservation easement area outside of the berm and the mitigation and pond areas inside of the berm. The semi-annual exotic removal efforts shall be detailed in the annual statistical monitoring reports required by Item # 9.) below. e. Unless otherwise approved by the Department, Exotic vegetation in the surrounding conservation areas shall be removed using hand-held equipment in a manner that will minimize impacts to the existing wetland plants and will not cause ruts in the wetland soils which will impede or divert the flow of surface waters. Mechanical removal, in accordance with the long term maintenance plan, of nuisance vegetation may take place within the bermed wetland areas. f. Exotic vegetation shall be treated as necessary to prevent regrowth with an appropriate labeled systemic herbicide. H.) Success of Mitigation: The entire mitigation area and conservation easement area, both inside and outside and on top of the berms, shall be considered successful when all the following conditions have been met; a. In Wetland Mitigation Areas: Plant cover is at least 50%, excluding deep water areas and consists of wetland plant species listed in Florida Administrative Code Rule 32-340. Pement cover shall be reported for ~e aggregate of those wetland species, relative to the total area, including a measure of percent cover by non-wetland species, bare ground and water. A list of the wetland species included in the aggregate shall be included. The hydrology of the system is adequate to ensure the viability of the enhanced wetlands of the mitigation area. b. In Upland Mitigation Areas: Plant cover is at least 80%, and consists of nativefi_p.l_an._d plant species. Pement cover shall be reported for the aggregate of those nativd, uplanddiT_l,,D-~, ITEM - ~4,q.. 1~ ~- `.`% 2002. Renewal of Operating Permit File No. FLA141356-003 Continued Obligations for ERP Mitigation File No. 112784065 Collier County Page 4 plant species, relative to the total area, including a measure of percent cover by bare ground. A list of the species included in the aggregate shall be included. I.) Annual Monitorin,o Reports: The Respondent shall furnish to the Fort Myers DEP office annual monitoring reports of vegetation and wildlife sampling of the mitigation areas done by the methods described below. Data shall be taken at the end of the growing season. The initial (base line) report was received on July 2, 1998. The annual monitoring reports shall be submitted to the Department by September 30th of each year. Acceptable methods may be found in Daubenmire (1968), Oosting (1956), Mueller- Dombois and Ellenberg (1974), or other sources. Reports shall be submitted until a determination of successful enhancement has been made. Reports shall include the following: a. Wetland Mitization percent cover of listed canopy, ground cover, and exotic plant species. b. Upland Mitization percent cover of native and exotic plant species. Wildlife usage surveys including species observation lists and documentation of bird breeding using the methods established by the "Florida Breeding Bird Atlas" (Kale 1992). d. Photographs taken from the same permanent stations (some of which must be located in the vegetation sampling areas); e. Descriptions of problems encountered and solutions undertaken, and anticipated work for the following six months. f. The reports shall also include descriptions of exotic nuisance coverage on all areas of thc parcel and what maintenance was performed J.) If the annual statistical monitoring reports described in # I.) indicate that the enhancement efforts are not successful pursuant to the success criteria listed above, the Respondent shall present methods and proposals to be reviewed and approved by the Department to ensure success of the enhancement efforts. Once successful enhancement has been achieved, the conservation easement/mitigation area will be maintained in the enhanced condition as detailed in Item # G.). K.) Berm Structural Adequacy Reports: The wastewater effluent storage ponds were certified complete on June 28, 1998. Collier County shall submit to the Fort Myers DEP Office annually (due by May 31 st) structural adequacy reports on the impoundments berms. The structural adequac Renewal o f Operating Permit File No. FLA 141356-003 Continued Obligations for ERP Mitigation File No. 112784065 Collier County Page 5 shall meet the criteria as prescribed in Appendix 6, Basis of Review for Environmental Resource Permit Applications within the South Florida Water Management District. Such reports shall include proposal of technique and schedule for repair of any deficiencies noted and shall be signed and sealed by a Florida reg/stered Professional Engineer. This Agreement is an Order under Chapter 120, Florida Statutes, enfomeable by the Department utilizing the remedies provided by Chapters 403 and/or 373 and 120, Florida Statutes. This Agreement shall constitute a covenant running with the land and is binding upon Collier County Board of County Commissioners, his successors and assigns who have a legal interest in the structure. These covenants shall be recorded in the public records of Collier County within thirty (30) days from the execution of this Agreement. A copy of the recorded Agreement shall be submitted to the Department within five (5) days of recording. Collier County Board of County Commissioners hereby warrants that said property is not encumbered by any lien, mortgage, or other encumbrance which may impair the enforceability of these restrictions in the event that Collier County Board of County Commissioners becomes divested of title. This agreement is entered into in consideration of the issuance by the Department of Permit No. FLA141356-003. AGENDA ITEM Renewal of Operating Permit File No. FLA 141356-003 Continued Obligations for ERP Mitigation File No. 112784065 Collier County Page 6 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AS EX- OFICIO THE GOVERNING BOARD OF TIlE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk Chairman Approved as to legal form and sufficiency DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Dated Richard W. Cantrell Director of District Management South Florida District ACIG~IOWLEDGMENT STATE OF FLORIDA COUSqTY OF Execution of the foregoing was acknowledged before me this day of by . They are personally known to me or provided and as identification and did/did not take an oath. ,2000, (Affix Notary Seal) Notary Public My commission expires: AGENDA ',T E~) No_ _/(:,_ .Q_ ___'-9 OR: 2158 PG: 2067 ~--,~IT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION The West Half (~) of Section 33, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, lying North of U.S. 41 (Tamiam/ Trail) less the following described parcel; Commencing at the Northwest corner of Section 33, Township 50 South Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida; thence south 2' 49' 57" West 1473.24 feet to the North Right-of-Way line of U.S. 41 (Tam/ami Trail East) a/id a point on a cu,-Ye; thence Southeasterly along said Northerly Right-of-Way line 176.27 feel along the arc of a nontangential curve concaved to the Northeast have a radius of 3010.55 feet a central angle of 3° 21' 17" subtended by a chord which bears South 52° 44' 28" East £or 176.25 feet; thence South 54° 25' 01" East 658.91 feet along said Northerly Right-of-Way line to the Point of Beginning; Thence North 35~ 37' 03" East 1008.32 feet; Thence South 83* 12' 08" East 68.17 feet; Thence North 47* 29' 10" East 174.40 feet; Thence South 55* 46' 44,' East 692.25 feet; Thence South 2° 43' 11" West 1462.26 feet to the Northerly right of way line of said U.S? 4!; Thence North 54* 25' 01 "West of 1581.85 feet along said Northerly right of way line of to the Point of Beginning. Said excepted parcel containing 32.91 acres more or less. Page 1 of 2 AGENDA 'rEM. No. /~ d - JAN '8 21 02 2158 ?G: 2068 =i Page 2 of 2 AGENDA ITE /o EXECUTIVE SUMMARY REQUEST BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO WAIVE PURCHASING POLICY AND AUTHORIZE WORK ORDERS IN EXCESS OF THRESHOLD AND TO WAIVE ANNUAL THRESHOLD FOR CONTRACT #00-3046, "SOLID WASTE CHARACTERIZATION AND PROGRAM ANALYSIS". OBJECTIVE: To receive Board of County Commissioners authorization to waive purchasing policy and authorize work orders in excess of the $90,000 threshold and to waive the annual threshold of $500,000. CONSIDERATION: The Solid Waste Department has a contract for professional engineering services with Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., contract #00-3046, "Solid Waste Characterization and Program Analysis", BCC approved on 12/12/00, Agenda item 16C(2). Under this contract two work orders were issued that were over $90,000.00 each. Work orders that exceed $90,000.00 are required to have Board approval for the payments. Work Order #11-2001 for "Landfill Operations and Environmental Compliance Monitoring" was signed by the Division Administrator on 09/05/01 and a P.O. was issued on 09/10/01. This work order was opened to be in compliance with the second amendment to the Landfill Operations Agreement, BCC approved on June 12, 2001, Agenda item 10C. This amendment requires the monitoring of landfill activities for compliance with all regulations and conditions of the contract as well as local, state and federal regulations. The Work Order is in the amount of $110,247.00 and provides for Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. to inspect and review the existing operations pursuant to the contract for the Naples Landfill and compile a summary checklist. The checklist will serve as the basis for all operations monitoring activities. They will also do landfill inspections once a week for the duration of the work order, and prepare an inspection report. In addition, Malcolm Pirnie will review Waste Management's odor control system testing plan and provide comments on the adequacy of the plan. They will also observe odor control system testing, prepare draft odor control system test memorandum, and conduct on-site and off-site odor monitoring, among other things. Work Order #12-2001 for the project "Assist in the Preparation of Requests for Proposals for Gasification and Biological Processes and other Technical Assistance" was signed by the Division Administrator on 09/25/01 and a P.O. was issued on 09/26/01 in the amount of $262,252.00. This work order was initiated following Board approval and direction to Staff on 06/26/01, Agenda item 10E, to solicit RFP's for one or more competing multiple long-term options. Malcolm Pirnie has worked with staff to prepare three RFP's that have already gone out, Organic Waste Management, Grease Trap Waste Processing Facility, and Municipal Solid Waste Processing and Gasification Facility. Staff recommends that the Board waive Purchasing Policy Contract 00-3046 "Solid Waste Characterization and Program VIl(C)l(b) for Analy~" [1~,~ JAN 08ZOOZ · PG. limits work orders to $90,000 and establishes an annual contract amount of $500,000. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are available and budgeted in the Solid Waste Disposal Fund (470). GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no direct Growth Management impact associated with this item. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners waive Pumhasing Policy VII(C)I(b) for Contract 00-3046 "Solid Waste Characterization and Program Analysis" that limits work orders to $90,000 and establishes an annual contract amount of $500,000. SUBMITTED BY: Date: G. George Yilmaz, Ph.D., P.E., P.H., R.E.P. Director, Solid Waste Management Department Steph~ Y. Carf~ell, Director Purchasing/General Services Department 'f"homas G. Wides, Interim Administrator Public Utilities Division Date: JAN 0 8 ZOi;z PG. ~ i Work Order # 11-2001 "Solid Waste Characterization and Program Analysis" Contract 00-3046, Dated December 12, 2000 This Work Order is for Engineering serVaces, subject to the terms and conditions of the Contract referenced above, for work known as: Project: Landfill Operations and Environmental Compliance Monitoring Scope of Work: The County owns two landfills, Naples Landfill and Immokatee Landfill that have been operated and maintained by a contract operator, Waste Management, Inc. (WMI) since 1995. Malcolm Pimie will provide professional services to assist the County to monitor the overall operation, maintenance, development and performance of the Naples Landfill by WMI. Malcolm Pirnie will work with the County to monitor landfill operation and environmental compliance and assist the County with notifications to WMI of deficiencies found. Task I- Contract Review, Performance Checklist: Malcolm Pimie will review the existing operations contract for the Naples Landfill and compile a summary checklist of responsibilities of WMI. FDEP regulations may be incorporated in the checklist when referenced by the operations contract. This checklist will serve as the basis for all operations monitoring activities. The checklist may include, but is not limited to, monitoring of the following elements: · Litter Control Program · Erosion Control Program · Storm Water Management Program · Leachate Management including Contingency Plan Review · Odor Control Program · Ground and Surface Water Management Program · Major Facility Modifications Fill and Closure Plan (as filed with the FDEP) Deliverables: 1. Prepare operations monitoring checklist. Task II- Landfill Inspections Malcolm Pimie will inspect conditions at the Naples Landfill and monitor landfill operation and maintenance activity reports following the guidelines established in the checklist prepared under Task I. Inspections will be conducted once per week for the duration of this Work Order unless changed in writing by the County. Malcolm Pirnie will prepare an inspection report for each weekly site inspection noting conditions found at the Naples Landfill and corrective actions required under the contract be comg:!:~_ '2-_ ~_ operations agreement. At the end of each month, inspection reports will sc~n~s xxtn .o. /ca I JAN 082002 monthly monitoring memorandum. Twenty-five (25) copies of the monthly report (12 in color) will be provided to the County. Malcolm Pimie will attend a monthly meeting with the County and WMI to discuss deficiencies and corrective actions. Deliverables: I. Perform site visits and document field conditions. 2. Attend monthly WMI operations meetings. 3. Prepare monthly contract monitoring memorandum. Task IlI- Odor Control System Protocol and Compliance WMI is required to submit an odor control system testing plan and protocol (the "Plan") for County review by September 10, 2001. When WMI submits the Plan, Malcolm Pimie will work with the County to promptly review and provide comments on the adequacy of the Plan. Malcolm Pimie will attend one meeting with the County to discuss its comments. Malcolm Pimie will prepare comments on the Plan for review by the County and response to WMI. Malcolm Pimie will attend one meeting with the County and WMI to negotiate the final conditions and protocol of the Plan. After the County has approved the Plan, Malcolm Pimie will assist the County by wimessing odor control testing and evaluating the results. Malcolm Pimie will prepare a draft odor control system testing summary memorandum and meet with the County to discuss the testing results. Based on County comments, Malcolm Pimie will submit to the County recommendations for approval or failui'e of the odor control system test. In the event that the test is failed, any subsequent work performed by Malcolm Pimie will be addressed by change order to this work order or written authorization by the Director of Solid Waste. Deliverables: 1. Review and Comment on Plan submitted by WMI. 2. Attend meeting with the County to discuss comments to WMI's Plan. 3. Attend meeting with the County and WMI to negotiate final Plan protocol. 4. Observe odor control system testing. 5. Prepare draft odor control system test memorandum. 6. Meet with County to discuss testing. 7. Submit recommendation of approval or failure of test, as applicable. Task lV Odor Monitoring and Assessment Malcolm Pimie will conduct on-site and off-site odor monitoring and will assess the presence of off-site odors using FDEP criteria or industry standards. Odor monitoring will be conducted no less than six times per month. At the end of each month, Malcolm Pimie will compile odor monitoring data and documentation from the odor monitoring JAN 0 pG. visits and other on-going odor monitoring programs in the monthly memorandum, described in Task II. Deliverables: 1. Provide six odor-monitoring observations per month. 2. Compile odor-monitoring data from the County. 3. Incorporate odor-monitoring data and information in monthly memorandum described in Task II. Task V- Additional Services In addition to performing work identified in this Work Order, Malcolm Pimie will perform Additional Services, as requested in writing by the Solid Waste Director. The need for such services may arise from the completion of the tasks identified above, and cannot be fully defined at this time. However, it may be determined at some future date that these additional services are necessary to thoroughly complete or implement the Work. It should be noted that the fees for these services have not been included in this Work Order. Such tasks, and their level of effort, associated budgets and schedules will be described in detail in work authorizations to be issued at the time such tasks are requested by the County. Schedule of Work: This Work Order is for a three (3) month period from the effective date and may be extendedor modified thereafter with mutual consent of the County and Malcolm Pimie. Compensation: In accordance with Item 4 of the Agreement, the County will compensate Malcolm Pimie for all labor and expenses on a time and material basis as indicated in the following table: Task Estimated Estimated Estimated Labor Expenses Total Task I. Contract Review and $12,846 $375 $13,221 Performance Checklist. Task II. Landfill Inspections. $51,104 $2,230 $53,334 Task III. Odor Con~'ol System Protocol $16,620 $550 $17,170 and Compliance Task IV. Odor Monitoring and Assessment $25,142 $1,380 $26,522 Total (Not to Exceed) $105,712 $4,535 $110,247 no. /~a Ii 0 8 Any change made subsequent to final department approval will be considered an additional service and charged according to an executed Change Order. ISSUED BY: Project/Contract Manager Date REVIEWED BY: ACCEPTED BY: Date ~"I~1 all~olm P~'i'~-~m, ~n ~.- ~ Date BY: JAN 0 8 2002 .. ._ ~ ~ ~ ~'- = = = ~ ~ ~ ~ JAN 0 8 2002 Wo~Or~r#1~2~l "Solid Waste Characterization and Program Analysis" Contract 00-3046, Dated December 12, 2000 This Work Order is for ~..~neering Secviees, subject to the terms and conditions of the Contract referenced above, for work known as: Project: Assist in the Preparation of Requests for Proposals for Gasification and Biological Processes and other Technical Assistance Scope of Work: Collier County (the "County") has considered alternative, integrated long-term management options for processing, recycling, transport, and disposal of the combined solid waste generated within the County. The range of alternative plans has been narrowed to two types of integrated technologies. One involves expanded recycling programs with out of county hauling of residual solid waste by truck with disposal in a landfill constructed jointly with Glades County. The second option under consideration combines an extensive recycling program with an innovative, MSW gasification technology which has demonstrated the potential to process solid waste under continuous, full-scale conditions. Acceptable alternatives preclude mass bum or RDF incineration, or composting technologies for the processing of mixed MSW. This work order relates to the preparation of technical performance specifications that will be incorporated in a series of Requests for Proposals (RFP) for the development of specific elements of the integrated solid waste management program. All other components of the RFP will be provided and compiled directly or indirectly by the County's Purchasing Department. This work order is made on the basis that the County wilt provide all legal review. It is intended that development of the selected projects will utilize County funding and provide for County ownership, except where noted. Provisions will be incorporated in the RFP that will provide for performance guarantees by prospective vendors to minimize County risk. Task I -MSW Processing and Gasification Facility RFP Malcolm Pimie will prepare technical and performance specifications to be incorporated by the County in a RFP for a MSW processing and gasification facility to be built on County owned or designated property. These spedtications will be incorporated into the RFP as exhibits as described below. The facility will be designed, built, owned, and operated (DBOO) by the selected vendor. The facility will provide for processing of mixed MSW by recovering recyclable and inorganic waste, gasification of organic material .0. JAN 0 8 200Z in the absence of oxygen producing a synthetic gas, the production of electricity, and disposal of the remaining char. Sub-task 1.1. Compile, evaluate, and summarize existing information for the County solid waste stream and incorporate County provided projections of population growth and future solid waste stream characteristics in the technical specifications. Sub-task 1.2. Describe the site selected by the County for the facility including existing information on size and shape of the property, potable water supply, wastewater treatment availability, ingress/egress, known wetlands or restricted areas, etc. Sub-task 1.3. Prepare technical performance specifications for the facility which may include site work, construction quality, material recovery efficiency, volume reduction, odor control, wastewater generation, production and processing rates, air quality parameters, vendor responsibilities, County responsibilities (i.e. flow control), performance testing, expansion protocol, and operation and maintenance responsibilities. Sub-task 1.4. Prepare performance guarantees to be incorporated in the RFP. This may include startup and testing guarantees, operation performance guarantees, production guarantees, schedule guarantees, performance and payment bonds, insurance, material and equipment warrantees, and failed performance bonds. Sub-task 1.5. Prepare equipmem and performance criteria questionnaire to be incorporated in the RFP which may include describing patented and proprietary equipment components, authorization of use for patented and proprietary equipment, manufacturer information, guaranteed performance criteria, variations to the specifications, etc. Sub-task 1.6. Prepare price proposal forms to allow detailed financial evaluation of the proposal including a breakdown of censtmction costs, capitalized interest during construction through start-up and testing, operation and maimenance cost breakdown, and escalation for future expansions. Sub-task 1.7. Review and comment on final RFP documents prepared by the County prior to release. Sub-task 1.8. Following release of the RFP but prior to the advertised date for submission of proposals, prepare and issue to all recipients of the RFP documents, a DRAFT Contract issues paper which will outline some of the anticipated terms and conditions that will be incorporated in the final contract documents. Sub-task 1.9. Review Pr~p~osals for technical, economic, and environmental (regulatory) compliance, meet with Proposer(s) as needed for clarification of submitted documentation, prepare proposal evaluation summary report, and make a recommendation to begin negotiating a contract or reject the proposal(s). JAN 0 8 2002 On the basis of this Task, it has been assumed that the County will: 1. Provide all general conditions for the RFP, compile the final RFP documents, advertise and receive the proposals, and provide all legal opinions required during this process. 2. Prepare and negotiate flow control agreements with incorporated munidpalities within Collier County. 3. Directly or indirectly through the vendor, negotiate a power purchase agreement for the sale of surplus electrical power. 4. Provide for the disposal of non-processsble waste and residuals from the facility (vendor to be responsible for transportation). 5. Provide for the collection and transport of solid waste to the processing facility. Task 2 -Residential and Commercial Source Separated Organic Rich Waste Collection and Processing RFP The County has expressed interest in the residential and commercial collection and processing of source separated organic waste (organic rich waste). Under this Task, Malcolm Pirnie will develop technical performance based specifications for the collection and processing of source separated organic rich waste through a design-build-operate (DBO) project delivery system, which would be owned and financed by the County. The County will provide the property for the facility. The specific elements of this work are described below: Sub-task 2.1. Compile, evaluate and summarize existing information for the County solid waste stream and incorporate County provided projections of population growth and future solid waste stream characteristics in the technical specifications. Sub-task 2.2. Describe the site selected by the County for the facility including existing information on size and shape of the property, potable water supply, wastewater treatment availability, ingress/egress, known wetlands or restricted areas, etc. Sub-task 2.3. Prepare the technical specification for the collection of source separated organic rich material from single and multifamily units, and commercial establishments in the unincorporated areas of Collier County and those incorporated areas where dkected by the County. The vendor will be required to transport the material to the processing facility described in sub-task 2.4. Sub-task 2.4. Prepare technical and performance-based specifications for the processing of organic rich waste described under sub-task 2.3 above. The facility will be constructed on a site provided by the County, while the vendor will be responsible for design, construction, and operation. Processing will be in a totally enclosed structure with odor control provisions that will prevent nuisance to surrounding properties. The product may be bagged and sold by the vendor with the revenue offsetting the cost of operation and maintenance of the processing facility and a share of the revenue returned to the County. JAN O Sub-task 2.5. Prepare performance guarantees to be incorporated in the RFP. This includes startup and testing guarantees, operation performance guarantees, production guarantees, schedule guarantees, performance and payment bonds, insurance, material and equipment warrantees, and failed performance bonds. Sub-task 2.6. Prepare equipment performance specifications and criteria questionnaire to be incorporated in the RFP describing patented or proprietary equipment components, authorization for use of patented and/or proprietary equipment, manufacturer information, guaranteed performance criteria, variations to the specifications, etc. Sub-task 2.7. Prepare price proposal forms to allow detailed financial evaluation of the proposal including a breakdown of construction costs, capitalized interest during construction through start-up and testing, operation and maintenance breakdown, and escalation for future expansions. Sub-task 2.8. Prepare a DBO contract term sheet to be included in the RFP. The term sheet will identify general contract terms and conditions that may be incorporated into the final contract documents. Sub-task 2.9. Review and comment on final KFP documents~prepared by the County prior to release for bids. The review is a recommended quality control measure to ensure that the technical and legal elements of RFP have been coordinated. Sub-task 2.10. Review proposals for technical, economic, and environmental (regulatory) compliance, meet with vendor(s) to clarify proposal, prepare proposal evaluation summary report, and make a recommendation to negotiate or reject the proposal(s). On the basis of this task it has been assumed that the County will: 1. Provide all general conditions for the RFP, compile the final RFP documents, advertise and receive the proposals, and provide all legal opinions required during this process. 2. Provide any required flow control agreements with incorporated municipalities in the County. Task 3 - Landfffi Gas Utilization Technical RFP In order to utilize the gas produced by the completed, capped and closed sections of the Naples Landfill (Cells 3-4 and Cell 6 through Phase II), and in accordance with its obligations to Waste Management, Inc. ("WMI) under the Naples Landfill Operations Contract, the County has expressed imerest in issuing an RFP either directly or through WMI, for the design-build-operate (DBO) development of a system to convert the landfill gas into electrical energy and transfer that energy to County owned Utility facilities and/or to sell surplus energy. This work order is for the preparation of technical and performance specifications to be incorporated into a RFP for the development of such a landfill gas ,JAN 0 8 200Z utilization facility. Alternatively, the work contained herein may be used in conjunction with the work described under Task 1. Sub-task 3.1. Review the agreement with Waste Management, Inc. including eddendums for the contract operation of the Naples Landfill to det=~nzine the appropriate protocol for the development of an electricity generating facility to utili~g gas from the Naples Landfill. If required by the Agreement, Malcolm Pirnie will endeavor to negotiate a release from Waste Management that will allow the County to develop the landfill gas ufili?~ion facility. Malcolm Pirnie will attend up to three sessions with Waste Management and the County to negotiate any required releases or addendum to the agreement. Work performed in addition to the three meeting would be considered an additional service, as described under Task 5. Sub-task 3.2. Prepare technical and performance based specifications for the DBO development of a landfill gas utilization facility to utilize the Naples landfill gas for the production of electricity, ff the County so directs and depending on the outcome of negotiations with Waste Management described in Sub-task 3.1, the vendor may be granted the responsibility to expand, maintain, and operate the existing and future gas collection system facilities at the Naples Landfill, taking into account that the primary function of the gas collection system is the control of odors. Sub-task 3.3. Conduct a survey of the current and projected furore electrical demand for Collier County Utility facilities. Alternative methods of transmitting the electricity generated to these facilities will be evaluated for technical and economic feasibility. Where construction of electric transmission lines to the facilities appears to be technically and economically feasible, performance specifications will be prepared for inclusion in the landfill gas electricity generation RFP. flit is not feasible to construct dedicated electricity transmission lines to County Utility facilities, Florida Power and Light (FP&L) will be contacted to determine their interest in wheeling power to the County's facilities. Negotiations with FP&L for a contract to wheel power are not included in this task. If it is determined that FP&L is not interested in wheeling power to the County's facilities, the electricity generation vendor will be authorized to negotiate the sale of surplus power as appropriate, with a portion of the revenue returned to the County. Sub-task 3.4. Prepare equipment performance specifications and criteria questionnaire to be incorporated in the RFP describing patented or proprietary equipment components, authorization to use patented or proprietary equipment, manufacturer information, guaranteed performance criteria, variations to the specifications, etc. Sub-task 3.5. Prepare price proposal forms to allow detailed financial evaluation of the proposal including a breakdown of construction costs, capitalized interest during construction through start-up and testing, operation and maintenance breakdown, and escalation for future expansions. JAN 0 8 2002 PG. Sub-task 3.6. Prepare a DBO contract term sheet to be included in the RFP. The term sheet will identify general contract terms and conditions that may be incorporated in the final contract. Sub-task 3.7. Review and comment on final RFP documents prepared by County prior to release. The review is a recommended quality control measure to ensure that the technical and legal elements of RFP have been coordinated. Sub-task 3.8. Review submitted proposals for technical, economic, and environmental (regnlato~y) compliance, meet with vendor(s) to clarify proposal, prepare proposal evaluation summary report, and make a recommendation to negotiate or reject the proposal(s). On the basis of this task it has been assumed that the County will: 1. Provide all general conditions for the RFP, compile the final RFP documents, advertise and receive the proposals, and provide all legal opinions required during this process. Task 4 -Grease Trap Waste Processing Facility RFP The County has expressed interest in developing a grease trap waste processing facility. Under this Task, Malcolm Pimie will develop technical and performance specifications to be incorporated by the County in a RFP as described below. The facility will be designed, constructed, and operated by the selected vendor and will provide for processing of grease trap waste into a low-grade fuel. The County will provide the property for the facility. The specific elements of this work are described below: Sub-task 4.1. Compile, evaluate, and summarize existing information for the County grease trap waste stream and related regulations and incorporate County provided projections of population growth and future grease trap waste stream characteristics in the technical specifications. Sub-task 4.2. Describe the site selected by the County for the facility including existing information on size and shape of the property, potable water supply, wastewater treatment availability, residue and non-processed material disposal, ingress/egress, known wetlands or restricted areas, etc. Sub-task 4.3. Prepare technical and performance-based specifications for the grease trap waste processing facility including site work, constmctiun quality, odor control, wastewater generation, production and processing rates, air quality parameters, vendor responsibilities, performance testing, expansion protocol, and operation and maimenance responsibilities. The specifications will be developed to minimize County risk. n0. /r..c JAN 0 8 2002 Sub-task 4.4. Prepare performance guarantees to be incorporated in the RFP. This includes startup and testing guarantees, operation performance guarantees, production guarantees, schedule guarantees, performance and payment bonds, insurance, material and equipment warrantees, and failed performance bonds. Sub-task 4.5. Prepare equipment performance specifications and criteria questionnaire to be incorporated in the RFP describing patented (proprietary) equipment components, authorization to use patented (proprietary) equipment, manufacturer information, guaranteed performance criteria, variations to the specifications, etc. Sub-task 4.6. Prepare price proposal forms to allow detailed financial evaluation of the proposal including a breakdown of construction costs, capitalized interest during construction through start-up and testing, operation and maintenance breakdown, and escalation for future expansions. Sub-task 4.7. Prepare a DBO comract term sheet to be included in the RFP. The term sheet will identify general contract terms and conditions which may be incorporated in the final contract. Sub-task 4.8. Review and comment on final RFP documents prepared by the County prior to release. The review is a recommended quality control measure to ensure that the technical and legal elements of RFP have been coordinated. Sub-task 4.9. Review proposals for technical, economic, and environmental (regulatory) compliance, prepare proposal evaluation summary report, meet with the vendor(s) to clarify the proposal(s), and make a recommendation to shortlist, negotiate, or reject the proposal(s). On the basis of this task it has been assumed that the County will: 1. Provide all general conditions for the RFP, compile the final RFP documents, advertise and receive the proposals, and provide all legal opinions required during this process. 2. Provide such flow control agreements with incorporated municipalities and regulations or County Ordinance as necessary. Task 5 - Additional Services In addition to performing the work identified in this Work Order, Malcolm Pirnie will perform Additional Services, as requested by the County. The need for such services may arise fi-om the completion of the tasks identified above, and cannot be fully defined at this time. However, it may be determined at some furore date that these additional services are necessary to thoroughly complete or implement the Work. Examples of such services may include preparation of draft waste collection and inter-local agreements, site visits/tours, negotiation assistance, general engineering support, and Board of County Commissioner Meeting presentations. It should be noted that the fees for these services have not been included in this Work Order. Such tasks, and JAN 0 8 2002 their level of effort, associated budgets and schedules will be described in detail in work authorizations to be issued at the time such tasks are requested by the County. Schedule of Work: The Scope of Work defined herein will be complete within 120 calendar days of notice to proceed. The County will compensate Malcolm Pimie on a lump sum basis for services rendered in accordance with this Work Order in the amount provided below. Estimated Task Labor Expenses Amount Task 1 - MSW Processing and Gasification Facility RFP $87,458 $2,250 $89,708 Task 2 - Residential and Commercial Source Separated $58,442 $2,000 $60,442 Organic Waste Collection and Processing RFP Task 3 - landfill Gas Utilization Technical RFP $67,966 $2,000 $69,966 Task 4 - Grease Trap Waste Processing Facility RFP $40,561 $1,575 $42,136 Total (Lump Sum) $254,427 $7,825 $262~$2 Total Lump Sum Amount including Labor and Expenses: thousand two hundred fffiy two dollars). ISSUED BY: ~ r l~lm l~mie, Ino. Title $262,252 (Two hundred sixty two Date Date sO. JAN 0 8 2002 .G. II ~--~ .... ~ ~ ......... ~ ........ ~ .~-. ~ .... ~ ......................... · JAN O 8 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE $165,000 BUDGET AMENDMENT AND AWARD BID 02-3322 FOR WIGGINS PASS MAINTENANCE DREDGING OB,I[ECTIVE: To obtain approval of a budget amendment which transfers funding to Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging and to contract with the recormmended bidder. CONSIDERATIONS: The BCC approved $400,000 in this year's budget for the mai~ntenance dredging of Wiggins Pass. Three bids were received as follows: Lake Michigan Contractors $513,000 Inner Space $535,000 Southwind Construction $859,981 Incremental Beach Maintenance Activities (project # 10507), has a current budget of $8,500,000 based on 400,000 cubic yards of upland sand being required to recover from Tropical Storm Gabrielle. Now that the post-storm surveys have been analyzed, the current estimate is less than 300,000 cubic yards and therefore surplus funds are available. Staff has reviewed the bids received and recommends award to Lake Michigan Contractors, the lowest, qualified and responsive bidder. FISCAL IMPACT: The maintenance dredging of Wiggins Pass requires an additional $165,000 to fund the low bid and a 10% contingency. Incremental Beach Maintenance Activities (project # 10507) has a current budget of $8,500,000 in the Tourist Development fund (195). The source of funds is Tourist Development Tax. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no impact to the Growth Management Plan related to this action. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County cornnnssioners 1) approve a budget amendment in fund 195 transferring $165,000 from Incremental Beach Maintenance Activities (project #10507) to Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging (project # 10508) 2) award bid 02-3322, Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging to Lake Michigan Contractors in the amount of $513,000 a~nd 3) ~uthorize !he.Chairman to sign the agreement. . ~'1~ B. Anders~, p.~.,JDirector, PLIED J Cc, Date: Stephen Y. ~amell,-Purc~aasing/G~neral Services Director ~r'~f~ Date: ~ 1/~'a~- ,,t. ~'~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE THE RENEWAL AND AMENDMENT OF CONTRACT #96-2459 "TENNIS FACILITY AND OPERATIONS" WITH LEWIS TENNIS, INC. Objective: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the renewal and amendment of a contract with Lewis Tennis, Inc., for an additional five years with agreed to amended language. Considerations: Collier County has been under Contract with Lewis Tennis, Inc., for the operation and concession of the Pelican Bay Tennis Facility for the past five (5) years. Staff and Lewis Tennis, Inc., are agreeable to renew this agreement under mutually negotiated terms and conditions for five (5) additional years commencing December 31, 2001 and ending December 31, 2006 in accordance with the renewal clause in the agreement. The major change in terms for the additional five (5) years are that Lewis Tennis, Inc., is required to pay nine (9) percent of the annual gross revenues to Collier County monthly. Minor language changes were made to the contract language regarding the "Termination" clause and the "Insurance Requirements". Growth Management: None Fiscal Impact: The revenues associated with this contract will be deposited in the MSTD General Fund, Parks and Recreation. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Board approves the renewal agreement with Lewis Tennis, Inc., for an additional five (5) years and authorize the Chairman to sign. Prepared by: ~'.~.© ~--~ '~.~ames K. Fitzek, ~'~rations Manager Department of Parks and Recreation Date: Reviewed and ,-4~/// /) ~ Approvedby: /////l~ ff~ &ff~.d/.~Z~? ~l~ria i~amsey, Direc~ff'~ Department of Parks ~ Recreation Date: /Z~ 7~!~; / Reviewed and '~) ~~ Approvedby: -~q '~ ~ Steve ~ame[1, Director Department of Purchasing Date: Reviewed~nd I~ ] / _ ~.~ Approved by: c.J~, .~_)[ ~ Peter K/aley, Interim A/t~nistrator Division of Public Ser~ces Date: Agenda Ire* JAN 0 2002 Pg.~ COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT DIVISION OF PUBLIC SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT December 15, 2001 3300 SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD NAPLES, FL 34116 (941) 353-0404 FAX: (941) 353-1002 Website: colliergov, net Mr. Larry Lewis Lewis Tennis, Inc. 1205 W. Elizabeth, #E PMB 111 Fort Collins, CO 80521 RE: Renewal of Contract # 96-2489 "Tennis Facility and Operations" Dear Mr. Lewis: Collier County has been under Contract with your company for the referenced services for the past five (5) years. The County would like to renew this agreement under mutually negotiated terms and conditions for five (5) additional years commencing December 31, 2001 and ending December 31, 2006 in accordance with the renewal clause in the agreement. If you are agreeable to renewing the referenced contract, please indicate your intentions by providing the appropriate information as requested below: I am agreeable to renewing the present contract for Tennis Facility Operations and Management Services. I am not agreeable to renewal of this contract. Lewis Tennis, lnc Agenda Item No. /~'~ [ J~ U ~ ~' Pg. ~ ! Page 2 of 2 RE: Renewal of Contract # 96-2489 "Tennis Facility Operations and Management" Your prompt attention is urgently requested. Please return this letter to the Purchasing Department, with your response; no later than December 21, 2001. If you have any questions you may contact me at 941/774-8407. Very truly yours, Stephen Y. Carnell, CSM Purchasing Director Acceptance: Lewis Tennis, Inc. Contractor/Ven~dor Typed Name and Title (Corporate Officer) /RHG cc: Parks and Recreation James Fit~ek Agenda Item N°' /' ~ l ' EXHIBIT A -1 Contract Amendment g96-2489 "Tennis Facility and Operations" This amendment, dated ~ 20~1 to the referenced agreement shall be by and between, - ' ~ ' ' al a eement -0~/t'.~ldl~/~ (to be referred to as "Concessionaire ') ti~e part~es to me ongm gr , . · and Collier County, Florida, (to be refe'fred to as "County"). Statement of Understanding RE: Contract g96-2489 "Tenms Facility and Operations The following change to the above referenced agreement has been mutually agreed to by the Consultant and the County: Item 12 "Considerations" shall be change to read as follow: "The Concessionaire shall remit to the County as consideration for this Agreement, a percentage oftbe total gross revenue (adjusted for items returned) of the Concessionaire's business of operation and management of the tennis facility, including sale of pro shop items, and sale of food and sundry items as follows: Year 6 9% per Month Year 7 9% per Month Year 8 9% per Month Year 9 9% per Month Year 10 9%per Month OR $500.00 per month, whichever is greater In the event the County chooses to renew the Agreement for one additional five year period, the percentages offered above shall be renegotiated and will be subject to final approval by the Board of County comrmssioners- The percentage shall be based on total gross revenues per month. Each payment shall be tendered of each next succeeding month, and such payments shall be accompanied by a statement of gross receipts for the preceding month. The applicable Florida State Sales Tax on payments to the County as per this Agreement shall be added to the Concessionaire' s payment and forwarded to the County as part of said payments. The County is to receive its revenue payment as net, free and clear of all costs and charges arising from, or related to Concessionaire's obligations under this Agreement and the guarantee or the percentage of total gross revenues shall be paid monthly. The term "gross revenue" or "gross receipts" means all income collected, accrued or derived by the Concessionaire under this Agreement or other document entered into with the County, excluding amounts of any Federal, State, or other tax, collected by the Concessionaire from customers and required by law to be remitted to the taxing authority. The Concessionaire shall provide the County Finance Department a Statement of Gross Receipts. The Concessionaire shall provide a copy of its State Sales and Use Tax Report for the same accounting period as required for the Statement of Gross Receipts." Pg' ~ Item 29 TermanaUon shall be change to read as follow: "Should the contractor be found to have failed to perform his services in a manner satisfactory to the County as per any specification or requirement of this Agreement, the County may terminate said agreement immediately for cause· The County shall be sole judge of non-performance. Further the County may terminate this Agreement for its convenience by giving the Concessionaire a Sixty (60) day written notice of such intent. The Concessionaire has the right to terminate this Agreement for its convenience by giving the County a One Hundred eighty (180) day written notice of such intent. Item 34 (a) "Commercial General Liab~hty" shall be change to read as follow: "Coverage shall have minimum limits of $1,000,000 Per Occurrence, Combined Smgie Ltxmt for Bodily Injury Liability and Property Damage Liability. This shall include Operations; Independent contractors; Products and Completed Operations and Contractual liabhity." All other terms and conditions of the agreement shall remain in force. · ' the County have each. respectively, by an IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Concess~onatre and authorized person or agent, hereunder set their hands and seals on the date(s) indicated below. ATTEST Dwight E. Brock, Clerk of Courts By: _ Dated: (SEAL) BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: James D. Carter, Ph.D., Chairman Agend& Item No. JAN O 8 pg. ~, ~" First Witness 1Type/print witn~;s name? ~ec~)nd Witness ' ~' $Type/prmt wimess name'l' ..~ature Typed Signature and CORPORATE SEAL (corporations only) Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: ~Robert N. Zachary Assistant County Attorney Agend& Item EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING $2,000 REVENUE FROM DONATION FOR A MEMORIAL BENCH A Ob|eetive: To obtain approval of a budget amendment recognizing $2,000 revenue and authorizing expenditure to purchase a memorial bench. Consideration: The Parks and Recreation Department recently received a $2,000 donation for a memorial bench fxom a private source. The budget amendment recognizes the additional $2,000 so that it may be utilized to purchase a memorial bench. Fiscal lmpaet: Recognize revenue of $2,000 t?om a private source donation and appropriate it to Beach and Water Operation General Fund (001) for the purchasing of a memorial bench. Growth Mana ement: There is no impact to The Growth Management Plan related to this action. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the necessary budget amendment. Debbie Roberts, Operations Coordinator Parks and Recreation Departmem Marla Osvig Ramsoy, Director Department of Parks and Recreation Approved by: _ Joh~ Dunnuck Puffiic Services Administrator Date: Date: Date: AC~..NDA JAN 0 B 2002 EXF:CUT'~VE SUMMARY APPROVAL OF ADDTTTON$ TO AGREEMFNT$ BETWEEN DATA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, TNC. AND CO[[TIL:_R COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMALI:$$IONER$. OBSECT]:VE: Board approval to amend existing contract with Data Research Associates, [nc. (bRA) to increase the Internet bandwidth purchased annually for the Library system. CONSIDERATIONS: Collier County Public Library originally signed an agreement with Data Research Associates, ]:nc., on Sune 9th, [992. This agreement provided on automated library system for the Library. This agreement was amended on $eptember [st, 1998, November 9, [ggg, and on April 27th, 2000, to include internet service for all Libraries. In order to provide the same level of Internet access to the Library catalog, commercial databases, and the World Wide Web at the new North Regional Library, the bandwidth of the Library's [nternet connection needs to be mcreosed [nternet service from Data Research Associates, [nc., has been very satisfactory and reliable. The addition of the new 42,000 square foot Regional Library requires additional computer capacity to continue to function as reliably os it currently does. Approximately 50* computers will need access to the Library wide area network and the [nternet from the new location. The existing Znternet bandwidth cannot handle the existing computers and this large increase. The Additions to Agreements reflects this upgrade in Internet bandwidth and extends the original agreement that was signed in [992, to include these changes. FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost of the contract for FY 02, including the Additions To Amendments amount, is $72,700. Of this amount, $38,965 was previously budgeted in the Library's Grant Fund (129) for the current contract. The cost of the increased bandwidth is $33,73§, of which $25,000 is currently budgeted in the Library's General Fund (00[) operating budget for the new Headquarters Library. The remaining cost of $8,735 can be absorbed in the operating expenses currently budgeted ~n the Library Grant Fund (129). No new funds ore being requested to pay for this increased service. The additional Internet bandwidth service will begin February 1, 2002. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This agreement extension has no direct growth management impact. RECOMMENDATTON: Library Staff recommends that Additions to Agreements be signed by the Chairman, authorizing the Library to increase the Internet bandwidth purchased os part of our overall library automation services from Data Research Associates, Inc. (bRA). Administrator AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN DATA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, INC. AND THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WHEREAS. DATA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, INC. ("DRA") and the COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CCustomer') are parties to a contract dated June 9, 1992. and further amendments to that Agreement dated September 1. 1998, November 9, 1999, and April 27, 2000. (hereafter "Agreement"); and WHEREAS. Customer desires to upgrade its lnternet Service under the terms and conditions specified under the Agreement and the terms herein. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the undersigned parties hereby agree as follows: I. This amendment shall take effect January 1. 2002 and continue through December 31, 2002. This ameudment further amends the Agreement entered into on September l, 1998, as modified on April 27. 2000. Customer shall purchase from DRA the NxTI service at the price set forth on Schedule A. attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein, in lieu of the T-1 Internet Services set forth on the Schedule A of the amendment dated April 27, 2000. Customer shall pay DRA for said additional services within thirty (30) days folloxving delivery to Customer's site and receipt of invoice therefore. Customer shall pay DRA for miscellaneous expenses and services within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice therefore. Said miscellaneous expenses shall not exceed $3.000. 4 Except as otherwise stated herein, the services purchased herein are subject to the same terms and conditions set forth in tile Agreement between the pames concerning other Data Research Business lnternet Services. Tile provisions of this Agreement may be modified only in writing, and are binding only if executed by a representative of DRA and Customer authorized to execute legally binding agreements on each party's behalf. In the event ora conflict between the terms of this Agreement, and the terms of any Purchase Order issued by Customer. the provisions of this Agreement shall control. Except as hereinabove amended, the Agreement belxveen the parties is unchanged, and the applicable portions shall remain in full force and effect. Executed this 1/'3 dayof ~%//~,~'m.~.."- ,2001. DATA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES. INC.. a Missouri Corporation Andrew Morrme. VP Sales/Marketing au~l International Operations ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk Approved as to form and Legal Sufficiency: bo.- Thomas ~ Pahner Assistant County Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA By: JAMES D. CARTER, Ph.D. Chairman i Agend~Item Schedule A Unit Price Extended Price DRA $.o7~ MB Internet ATM Serx, ices le DRA Net Inverse Multiplx Multiple TI- ATM Service $5,100.00 $61,~00.00 1 DRA Net Inverse Multiplx Multiple T 1- ATM Service Installation $7,.500.00 $7,500.00 I Cisco NM~T I-IMA ATM Inverse Multiplexing Card $~-,000.00 $~,000.00 Subtotal DR/I Seroices $72,700.00 Total: $7~,700.00 This quotation is subject to DRA General Terms and Conditions *Hardware provided within this quote is for the ATM Inverse Multiplexor only, and assume customer will provide open interface on Cisco ~640 lnternet router for NIVI4T I-IMA card Agenda ~te~ No. /~ ~ Pgi'-- ~_~ __ General Terms and Conditions All prices are quoted FOB manufacturer's plant or warehouse; actual cost of freight and insurance will be added to all invoices, as will any applicable federal, state or local taxes. Unless otherwise specified, all prices for on-site services, such as training or installation, are quoted exclusive of DRA Staff travel expenses. When the service is performed, the customer will be billed actual cost for all travel expenses except meals and incidentals, which will be billed in accordance with the DRA corporate policy governing those items. Some DRA Services require us to limit class size. Contact your Account Manager, or review your DRA contract for specific details. DRA reserves the right to add and/or substitute equivalent products for any third part)' items quoted herein, in the event of product unavailability, software requirement and/or model number change. All items returned for credit must be done within 30 days of receipt and must be in original packaging. The installing vendor must open all system components. Any packages opened by the customer cmmot be returned tbr credit. 5. Description of Warranty Periods DIL~ Limited Software Warranty · 90 Days Software License Transfer · No Yvarranty period. New monthly maintenance begins upon software installation. Third Party Report Writer Limited Software Warranty · 90 Days Hardware Support Warranty · Hardxvare warranties vary depending upon the item(s) purchased. DRA recommends the purchase of appropriate warranty uplifts to put all hardware items on the same warranty schedule. See your Account Manager for details. This price quotation expires sixty (60) days from the quotation date shown. Unless otherwise specified, all prices are quoted in United States Dollars. Agenda Item EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENTS TRANSFERRING FUNDS WITHIN 301 PROJECTS FOR INDOOR AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS AT THE SHERIFF'S NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE OPERATIONS FACILITY AND TO FINISH THE NEW GOLDEN GATE SHERIFF'S SUBSTATION. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board approve budget amendments for the Sheriff's North Horseshoe Drive Operations Facility and the New Golden Gate Substation. CONSIDERATIONS: Sheriff's North Horseshoe Drive Facility: The County's Indoor Air Quality consultant has made a number of recommendations regarding the newly acquired Sheriff's North Horseshoe Drive Operations Facility. These recommendations include: environmentally clean and sanitize the air conveyance system (ductwork and air handlers) and environmentally wash and sanitize the drain pans and cooling coils; steam clean all carpets. The cost for the remediation is $34,900. Additionally, the life safety system (fire alarm) needs upgrading and is estimated at a cost of $18,000 and the replacement of minor air conditioning equipment ($22,000). There are other improvements that are being recommended (chiller and air conditioning component replacements, lighting, hurricane repairs) and will either be taken out of the Facilities Management operating budget or be "nursed" and submitted in the 2002-03 budget proposal. Golden Gate Sheriff's Substation: The budget estimate for the Golden Gate Sheriff's Substation was established in February 2000 (almost two years ago). Since that time, a number of issues have effected that project in terms of additional costs. Originally the project was estimated to be a 4000 square foot facility. After the design team programmed the Sheriff's needs, the result was a 5257 square foot building with the capability to go up one additional floor. Staff's approach was to try to work within the original budget, but with the change order presented from the general contractor and some unanticipated expenditures, additional funding is required. These expenditures include additional items requested by the Sheriff's Office, changes in the design to accommodate security issues, changes in design as required by the Architectural Design Committee, newly established building requirements (for public safety facilities) and higher than expected utility fees (power and water). Additionally, the Sheriff's Office has asked that the cost of furniture anda telephone system be included in the project budget. A detail list of these costs is attached. Approval of the change order is being requested as it is above the ten percent allowed by staff. FISCAL IMPACT: Funding for the Sheriff's North Horseshoe Drive Facility ($74,900) and for the Golden Gate Sheriff's Substation ($219,000) is available within current Fund 301 projects (Jail Re-roofing, 80172) and General Building Improvements, 80525). The Jail re-roofing project came in considerably under the original budget. No reserve funds are being requested. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no impact on the Growth Management Plan. l AOENDA No. Executive Summary Budget Amendment / Sheriff's Facilities Page Two RECOMMENDATION: That the Board approve the necessary budget amendments and change orders as addressed within this summary for the Sheriff's North Horseshoe Drive Operations Facility and the Golden Gate Sheriff's Substation. Prepared By: ~ "(7 ~_ Date: Daniel R. Rodriguez, Facil. l.~ Manaj~r The Department of Faci~,s/Manageinent Reviewed By: 9~7:L~/~7~7~) ' Up Ca.47, CFM, Dieter The Department of Facilities Management Date: Approved By: Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer, Administrator Administrative Services Division Date: /~./~/~//~ / Sheriff's Golden Gate Substation Project Charges Change Order #2 Amount Emergency Eye Wash 1,517.00 Concrete Fill in Security Wall ~,~d~ Ceiling Fan Additional TV Outlets & cable Additional conduits for data Electrical charges for UPS Electrical Generator changes Add Condensate Drain for Add A/C Add Cooling for Larger UPS Rear door built in floor mat system C.C. Fire Review Permit 1,684.00 2 56. 7_ 221.00 ....... oo_ 8,636.36 Exterior Signage for both buildings Add 400 AMP Breaker Delete Cables for Tel and Comp Add double water cooler ADA 1,300.00 140 mph Hurricane Shutters 9,038.00 Electric for shutters 350.00 Portico Roof Steel Framing 19,000.00 ~ire Aia~m Changes 3,694.90 Delete Dumpster Encl. __ -2,200.00 Add Curb in Parking Lot 1,280.00 PIV wiring and controls 3,394.54 Coping Flashing at Portico 99700 Sub Total Requested By: . Sheriff's Office I Sheriff's Office ~eriff's offi~ - _jSh~s O~ - I Sher[{~ ~ 5,272.72 150.00I-- 395.00 1,012.85 16,992.36 ~- 1,504.00 -2,248.00 Sheriff's Office Sheriff's Office Sheriff's Office Sheriff's Office 3ounty Staff (DSB) County Staff (FM) County Staff (FM) Left out of Org. Plans by Arch. County (BCC) County (BCC) Arch. Review-Com m ittee - County (Fi-re~ Not Needed cod 'ty Not shown in plans Due to adding Portico GC Overhead and Profit (10%) .T__ot~al__Change Order #2 7,301 80,314.40 80,314.74 FPL Changed length of power line Install 1 1/2" Water meter Furniture Telephones 3ontingency Additional Charges Original Budget 8,810.00 20,000.00 70,000.00 25,000.00 20,000.02 224,124.74 830,000.00 Funds transferred from GGGSC (for plaza improvements) ' 67,000.00 Revised Budget ......... i 1'121't24'74i Project Cost per square foot 5,257.00 1,121,124.74J 213.261 Construction Cost per sq. foot. 5~'~16~I --8-~,3~,~0'0/ 161.181 Project Cost per sq. ft. without contir ~,~57:O0_j __ _ ~i'1~)1,124.74J ..... Comparison: Golden Gate Government Services Center Project Square F~-o~ ~0sts: ~_ 210.00 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE COMMITTEE SELECTION OF FIRMS FOR CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS FOR RFP 01-3290 "FIXED TERM PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES" OBJECTIVE: Obtain Board's approval of Committee's selection of firms for professional consultant services for upcoming engineering services as needed, and authorization to begin contract negotiations for subsequent Board approval. CONSIDERATIONS: The RFP was issued in accordance with Florida State Statute 287.055, Consultant Competitive Negotiation Act, and publicly advertised on September 26, 2001. Notices were sent to 140 firms with 67 vendors requesting full packages. 28 responses were received by the due date of October 26, 2001. A Selection Committee Meeting was held on December 4, 2001 and after review and discussion; by consensus of the members, the following 18 firms were recommended for award (in no order): Johnson Engineering Agnoli, Barber and Bmndage Parsons Engineering Science Barraco & Associates Pitman Hartenstein Has Unan & Associates Malcolm Pimie Q. Grady Minor DRMP TKW Consulting Engineers HDR Engineering Stanley/RWA Joint Venture CH2M Hill TBE Group Hole Montes Boyle Engineering Consultants Coastal Engineering Wilson Miller The RFP referenced that work orders would be issued in accordance with the County's Purchasing Policy. Purchasing Policy Section VII 1 limits each work order assignment to a maximum initial amount of $90,000 and a maximum initial contract amount of $500,000. FISCAL IMPACT: Each using department shall allocate funds from the appropriate cost centers as the work orders are assigned. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This has no growth management impact. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners; (1) Approve the Committee's selection of firms. (2) Authorize staff to begin Contract negotiations with the selected firms. SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: APPROVED BY: Senior Purchasing & Contracts Agent ~ ~, ~h'~/~t' Date: Steve CamelI, Director Purchasing/General Services Department Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer Administrative Services Division Administrator JAN 0 8 20021 Pg. / J EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE COMMITTEE SELECTION OF FIRMS FOR CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS FOR RFP 01-3292 "FIXED TERM PROFESSIONAL STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING SERVICES" OBJECTIVE: Obtain Board's approval of Committee's selection of finns for professional consultant services for upcoming engineering services as needed, and authorization to begin contract negotiations for subsequent Board approval. CONSIDERATIONS: The RFP was issued in accordance with Florida State Statute 287.055, Consultant Competitive Negotiation Act, and publicly advertised on October 4, 2001. Notices were sent to 140 firms with 19 vendors requesting full packages. 8 responses were received by the due date of October 26, 2001. A Selection Committee Meeting was held on December 12,2001 and al~er review and discussion; by consensus of the members, the following 7 firms were recommended for award (in no order): CH2M Hill Stanley/RWA Joint Venture Jenkins & Charland American Consulting Engineers, PLC TKW Consulting Engineers, Inc. Anchor Engineering Consultants, Inc. Pyper Engineering, Inc. The RFP referenced that work orders would be issued in accordance with the County's Purchasing Policy. Purchasing Policy Section VII 1 limits each work order assignment to a maximum initial amount of $90,000 and a maximum initial contract amount of $500,000. FISCAL IMPACT: Each using department shall allocate funds fi.om the appropriate cost centers as the work orders are assigned. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This has no growth management impact. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners; (1) Approve the Committee's selection of firms. (2) Authorize staff to begin Contract negotiations with the selected firms. SUBMITTED BY: ~,~.~7~ ~ Date: ~j~sey ]~d S~enior Purchasing & Contracts Agent Steve Camell, Director Purchasing/General Services Department APPROVED BY: Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer Administrative Services Division Administrator Date: JAN 0 8 2002 / EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AWARD BID NO. 01-3262 FOR THE PURCHASE OF PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT FOR THE EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT TO MUNICIPAL EQUIPMENT, TEN~ FIRE EQUIPMENT, ELITE FIRE AND SAFETY EQUIPMENT, AND BENNETT FIRE PRODUCTS OBJECTIVE: To procure personal protective equipment in a cost effective manner through the bid process. CONSIDERATION: On October 1a 2001 the Collier County Purchasing Department sent bid invitations out to fifty-seven (57) vendors for the purchase of seventeen (17) personal protective equipment items. A total of twenty-four (24) bid packages were sent out with four (4) vendors submitting bids. On October 24~h 2001 the bids were publicly tabulated. The vendors are: Municipal Equipment, Orlando, FL Elite Fire and Safety Equipment, Naples, FL Ten-8 Fire Equipment, Bradenton, FL Bennett Fire Products, Woodstock, GA The equipment is necessary to provide the proper level of protection to Emergency Medical Services personnel. The equipment consists ora helmet, hood, coat, pants, and boots that meet all Federal and State standards. In evaluating the bids, EMS staff contacted the apparent low bidders to verify compliance with the published specifications. In order to maximize the best prices in the least amout of time, EMS staff recommends award of the bid on a line by line basis to the lowest responsice bidder for each item. It is further recommended that the entire bid offerings of each responsive bidder be accepted as secondary suppliers to be utilized in the event of the inability of the lowest responsive bidder to furnish equipment as needed. In such a situation, the next lowest bidder would be contacted, and the next lowest bidder and so on until needed products could be obtained. Attached is a list of the recommended primary awardees. (Attachment A) FISCAL IMPACT: The estimated yearly cost is $37,335. Funds are budgeted for FY-02 in Emergency Medical Services' Fund 490. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None AGE.ND_A ITEM No. /6/~ ~ JAN - 8 2002 RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners award Bid No. 01-3262 for the purchase of protective equipment for Emergency Medical Services personnel. SUBMITTED BY: Date:Glen Alderfer, Supply Officer Emergency Medical Services Department REVIEWED BY: REVIEWED BY: ~.~/~/ ~ Date: Je0~,~e, Ope'raflons Director Emergency Medical Services Department )g(e~ darnell, Director Purchasing Department APPROVED BY: Thomas Storrar, CEM Emergency Services Administrator Date: AGENDA ITEM No. /6/~ ~ JAN - 8 2~2 Pg. ~ A C-,-,-,-~ N D A ITEM No. /~ ,¢' ~ JAN - 8 200~ Pg. ,-~ AGENDA ITEM ~o. /~,,~ .lAN - 8 2~2 pg - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A REQUEST TO OBTAIN COMMUNITY SPECIFIC TRAINING IN THE INTEGRATED EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT COURSE AT THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY TRAINING CENTER OBJECTIVE: To gain Board of County Commissioners approval to request the Integrated Emergency Management Course for Collier County and municipal personnel at the National Emergency Training Center. CONSIDERATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency, through its National Emergency Training Center, offers courses in disaster preparedness at its Mount Weather Training Facility in Berryville, Virginia. The course would be developed to deal with the various ha?ards, including terrorism that might affect our community. If approved, it would be an excellent oppommity to tram 70-75 smdems in the All Hazards approach to emergency management. Due to the tremendous amount of preparation, it is anticipated that the course would be conducted during the 2003 calendar year. A listing of potential attendees is included in Attachment 1. With the exception of per diem costs ($125.00) for each attendee, travel and lodging costs are provided and reimbursed by FEIMA. Classes begin on Monday morning and end Friday morning. FISCAL IMPACT: Total cost for the entire class is estimated to be $10,000 and would be divided up by each agency's operating budget. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve and sign the attached request for the delivery of an Integrated Emergency Management Course-All Hazards, at the National Emergency Training Center. SUBMITTE Date: ..~/~t:~ --~o~--- ~neth F. Pineath Emergency Management Director APPROVED BY: mS~~ Date://d~) ~tor torr?~/er~cy Services Administm i AGF.,NDA ITEM No. IL,-* ,?2- JAN - 8 2002 Dorma FiaJa Tom Henn~ng District ~ Jim Coletta D~trict 5 3301 East Temiami Trail · Na01es, Flo~ta 34112-4977 (9~1) 774-8~7 · Fax (941) 774-3602 January 2, 2002 Mr. W. Craig Fugate Division of Emergency Management 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100 The Collier County Department of Emergency Management is interested in submitting an application to the Emergency Management Institute for the Community specific Integrated Emergency Management Course (IEMC) which would include representatives from our identified Emergency Support Functions (ESF's) to focus on short-term recovery coordination. This training would include, but not be limited to Collier County Government, and designed to include jurisdictions and agencies within: the City of Naples, the City of Marco Island, Everglades City and the various jurisdictions and agencies listed below. Collier County Emergency Management personnel will work with the jurisdictions to confirm participants. Collier County is a tuliq~e coastal comm~,mity located on the Southwest coast of Florida on the Gulf of Mexico, encompassing an area of approximately 2000 square miles, with 3 municipalities. Ultimately, the responsibility for emergency management activities is under the jurisdiction of Collier County Government. The Comm~lllieations Centers are staffed by trained professionals fi'om the Collier County Sheriff's Office and Naples Police and Emergency Services. This training would be utilized to coordinate resources and enhance knowledge needed for effective recovery from varying incidents in spoeific jmisdietions, including but not limited to weather emergencies, ha~"ardous materials & terrorists incidents and mass casualty situations. Collier County has a population of 251,000 year-round residents and over a m visitors per year as tourism is one of the highest ranked industz'ies. illinn sho~t term AGE[qDA ITEM JAN - 8 2002 Collier County Sheriff's Office, the Collier County Domestic Animal Services, Collier County Fire/Rescue, &e Collier County Pollution Control Division, the Collier County Social Services Department, the American Red Cross, the State of Florida Division of Emergency Management, the City of Naples, The City of Marce Island, Everglades City, Naples Police and Emergency Services, the National Weather Service, the Division of ForesUy, Florida Dep~mnent of Trami~,~on, Florida Highway Pa~ol, Collier County Mosquito Cuntrol, Collier County Airport Authority, Collier County Public Schools, Collier County Public Information Office, Florida Power & Light and private con~acto~ too numerous to mention. The Collier County F~mergency Management Del~,n~t has activated the EOC several ~imes in the past five years. In 1993 the Florida Division of Emergency Management revised the structure of response plans statewide. Collier County has made the revisions to these plans and has had the opportunity to test the changes during the 1993 Winter Storm, October 31, 1995 flood event, Hurricanes Erin in 1995 and Georges in 1998 and on a mutual aid basis in assisting the Florida Panhandle in the ai~xtmath of Tropical Storm Alberto. The EOC was activated on several occqsions due to brush fires in 1999-2001. The Collier County Emergency b,innnsemellt ~ommuaity has had effeG~ve pragtice during the response phase of disasters, however the county has had ]imlt. ed experience With regard to the immediate short term recovery phase. Collier County bad been impacted by the above mentioned storms, however the damage to the in~ was more localized and des~'uction has never impacted the population where b,mnn needs would have to be met on a grander scale. Collier County is at risk for the following as identified in the enclosed H-Tnrd's Vulnerability Analysis synopsis: NATURAL II~ZARDS Hurricanes and Tropical Storms Severe Weather/Flooding Brush Fires Dro-~t TECHNOLOGICALIMANMADE ~S Radiological Emergencies H~nrdous Materials Maritime Accidents Siroctural Fires Transportation Accidents Terrori~ Collier County Emergency Mnnagement has taken a proactive role in the establi.~hment of local, regional and statewide projects concerning disaster preparedness, reapon~, recovery and mitigation. It is the goal and oommi~lxlent of Collier County Emergency Management to functionally mirror federal and state emergency management operational procedures and i AGENDA No.__ JAN - ~ 2C02 guidelines and allow for thc training to the jurisdictions and responders within its borders to help them develop and maintain thc ~m¢ standard. I would greatly appreciate your endorsement for the community-wide endeavor. If you have any questions or require further information, please call Ken Pineau, Director, Collier County Emergency Management or Rick Zyvoloski, Coordinat,w, at (941) 774-~ Sincerely, Board of County Commissioners IEMC-TERROISM EXERCISE PARTICIPANTS County Commissioners City Councilmen (Naples, Marco, E'City) Sheriff/Police Chief Law F. nforgeulent Reps. Fire Department reps H~mat Reps Red Cross Salvation Army Civil Air Patrol Civil Air patrol Collier County Public Schools Rep Collier County Public Schools Transportation Rep Public Information Officers Hospital Reps (NCH and Cleveland Clinic) Police/Fire/EMS Dispatchers EMS Water Department Reps Wastewater Deportment Reps Emergency Management Pollution Conl~ol Airport Authority (naples end Collier County) Risk Management/Safety Medical Examiner Mosquito Control Rep Domestic Animal Services rep Solid/Hazardous Waste Managemem Transportation Rep Traffic Operations rep Public Health reps ATCH I APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENTS BCC Agenda of January 8, 2002 Lely Golf Estates Beautification (Fund 152) Budget Amendment 002-085 Lely MSTU Other ConUactual Services $20,000 Reserves Reserve for Contingencies Total: Explanation: Funds are needed to make necessary repairs for the continuation Lely Golf Estates. (20,000) of the beautification of Impact Fees District 1 (Fund 331) Budget Amendment #02-090 Capital Road Impact Construction (Airport Rd. to Vanderbilt Bch.) $6,225 Reserves Reserve for Capital Outlay (6,225) Total: -0- Explanation: Funds are needed for change order to Better Roads construction contract for six laning of Airport Road for replacing wooden and channel iron traffic signposts; adding a concrete median island at Citrus Lakes Drive at the request of the residents, and installing a water main dip at J&C Boulevard to eliminate a storm drainage conflict, AGENDA ITEM No. /,' ~- ~ JAN - 8 ZOO2 Pg. / BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE FOR BOARD ACTION: 1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED: A. Clerk of Courts: Submitted for public record, pursuant to Florida Statutes, Chapter 136.06(1), the disbursements for the Board of County Commissioners for the period: 1. Disbursements for November 20, 2001 - November 27, 2001. 2. Disbursements for December 5, 2001- December 11. 2001. 3. Disbursements for December 12, 2001 - December 18, 2001. 4. Disbursements for December 19, 2001 - December 25, 2001. B. Districts: 1. Golden Gate Fire Control & Rescue District_- Agenda for December 12, 2001. 2. Isles of Capri Fire Rescue District Advisory Board Meeting - Minutes of August 23. 2001. 3. Big Cypress Basin Board of South Florida Water Management District - Minutes of December 6, 2001. a) Big Cypress Basin Urban Mobile Irrigation Lab Quarterly Report, 3ra Qtr Project Year September 1 - November 30, 2001. 4. Collier Soil and Water Conservation District - Agenda for December 5. 2001. C. Minutes: I. Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Local Redevelopment Advisory Board Regular Meeting - Minutes of November 8,2001 a) Incentives Sub-Committee Meeting - Agenda for December 6, 2001 2. Immokalee Local Redevelopment Advisory Board - Minutes of October 25, 2001. AGENDA ITEM No. lO 'Fi JAN "8 2002 H:Data/Fo~mat Pg- 4. 5. 6. 7. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Southwest Florida Workforce Development Board, Inc. - Agenda for November 14, 2001, Minutes of September 28, 2001. Rural Lands Assessment Area Oversight Committee - Agenda for November 13, 2001, Minutes of September 17, 2001, October 22, 2001. Bayshore Beautification M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee - Minutes of October 3,2001. Historic & Archaeological Preservation Board - Agenda for November 16, 2001, Minutes of October 19, 2001 Collier County Airport Authority - Agenda for October 22, 2001, Agenda for November 19, 2001, Minutes of October 22, 2001 a) Collier County Productivity Committee Report to the BCC on Review of the Airport Authority, October 24, 2001 Collier County Library Advisory Board - Agenda for October 24, 2001. Environmental Advisory Council - Agenda for November 7, 2001, Agenda for December 5, 2001 Golden Gate Beautification Advisory Committee - Agenda for November 13, 2001, Minutes of October 9, 2001 Collier County Contractors' Licensing Board -Agenda of October 17, 2001. Collier County Planning Commission - Agenda for November 15,200 t, Agenda for January 3, 2002. Rural Fringe Area Assessment Oversight Committee - Minutes of November 14, 2001, Minutes of November 28, 2001. Emergency Medical Services Advisory Council - Agenda for December 5, 2001. Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee -Agenda for December 17, 2001, Agenda for November 29, 2001, Minutes of November 29, 2001, Sub-Committee Meeting Minutes - November 29, 2001. a) b) Clam Bay Sub-Committee Agenda for November 28,200l. Clam Bay Sub-Committee - Agenda for November 1,2001 D. Other: H:Data/Format AGENDA ITEM No. JAN - 8 2002 1) Collier County Tax Collector - Letter from Guy L. Carlton - Amendment to FY 2001-02 Budget. 2) Letter from Wilson Miller re: Immokalee Road South Conditional Use Property Owner Notification. H:Data/Format AGENDA ITEM No. }~.,, ~ p~. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AMEND THE SPENDING PLANS ASSOCIATED WITH THE OFFICE OF STATE COURT ADMINISTRATION GRANT-IN-AID AGREEMENTS FOR THE YEARS 1999, 2000, 2001, AND 2002, AUTHORIZE THE CLERK TO RECOGNIZE GRANT PROCEEDS INTO THE GENERAL FUND, AUTHORIZE THE CLERK TO RETURN UNJUSTIFIED GRANT PROCEEDS TO OSCA, AND AUTHORIZE THE SWORN STATEMENT ATTESTING TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE FISCAL YEAR 1999 GRANT-IN-AID AGREEMENT. OBJECTIVE: The Board of County Commissioners amend the spending plans associated with the Civil Traffic Hearing Officer Program Grant-In-Aid-Agreements for the years 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002. CONSIDERATIONS: Collier County has established a Civil Traffic Hearing Officer Program as is outlined in Florida Statutes, Chapter 318.30. The funding for the program is included in the total amount appropriated for Court Administration in fund 681. Since fiscal year 1999, the Office of State Court Administration (OSCA) through the General Appropriations Act of the State, has provided the County with a 50/50 Grant-in Aid-Agreement to assist with this program. The amounts of the grants were $14,606.21, $12,094.08, and $10,856.43 in fiscal years 1999, 2000, and 2001, respectively, and are funded at the level of $10,246 for fiscal year 2002. These grant awards are predicated on an approved spending plan that outlines the spending parameters for the grant proceeds. Although the General Appropriations Act of 1999 included appropriations to counties for the establishment of such programs, the fiscal year 1999 Grant-In-Aid-Agreement was between OSCA and the Twentieth Judicial Circuit. The information recently provided to the Clerk of the Cimuit Court indicates that Collier County is the only county within the Circuit that has established such a program. For the fiscal years 2000 and 2001 the agreements were between OSCA and the Collier County Board of County Commissioners. However, the parties amended the agreements whereby fiscal control of the funds were shifted away from the Chief Financial Officer of Collier County (the Clerk) to the Clerk of Lee County. The result of this action was that the majority of the grant proceeds were never receipted by Collier County and recognized as such to offset the original investment into fund 681, Court Administration, by the general fund. In addition, the Board of County Commissioners has not complied with certain specific requirements outlined in the grant agreements. More specifically, the requirement that the grantee (the Board of County Commissioners) prepare a sworn statement attesting to the grantee's compliance with the requirements of the Agreement and that such statement is provided to OSCA and the Auditor General. AGENDA ITEM No. /6. AFI JAN - 8 2002 Our review of the Civil Traffic Hearing Offieer Program for the periods 2000 and 2001 revealed that although there was sufficient spending in the program, certain categories of expenditures were not included on the approved spending plan and would not be allowed by the agreement. For example, the 2001 agreement included a single line item for bailiffs and hearing officers at a level of $21,712.86, which is shared by the grant and the grantee. Actual expenditures for the program for that year exceeded the threshold amount, but included expenditures for Court Clerks, office supplies, and secretarial assistance, which were not allowed by the grant agreement. Although the grant agreement for fiscal year 1999 was between OSCA and the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, the spending plan clearly documents that the funding was to be for $21,712.86. Actual expenditures for the program for that year totaled $15,755. FISCAL IMPACT: Sometime in October 200l the Clerk of the Circuit Court received $31,428.89 representing the unspent portions, along with the interest earnings on the 1999, 2000, and 2001 Grant-In-Aid-Agreements. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: Amend the spending plans for the fiscal years 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002 and authorize the Clerk to recognize $24,700.15 into the general fund, and Return to OSCA the unjustified grant proceeds for the fiscal year 1999 in the amount of $6,728.71. Approve the sworn statement attesting to the grantee's compliance with the requirements of the fiscal year 2000 grant-in-aid agreement and provide copies of said statement to OSCA and the Auditor General. S ubmi tt ed B y:. -//~.,.,~,~ ,~,,~// J~]~s L. Mitchell D'ifector of Finance and Accounting Date: Date: AGENDA ITEM No /~' JAN - 8 Coun~/Circu~ AmountofAwa~/: Civil Traffic Infraction Hearing Officer Grant-in-Aid Collier County. Twentieth Judicial Circuit $14,606.21 Grant, FY 1998-1999 Total Budget: $29,212.42 (Grant plus Match) Amended Spending Plan FULL- 73ME EQUIVALENT (FTE) 0 THER PERSONNEL SERVICES CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENTS Hearin~l Officers $7.800.00 $7,800.00 $15,600.00 Sect.Assistance $1'021'21l I ' $1'021'211 $2,042:42 Court C~erks $560.001 J $5~0.001 $1,120.00 F-D~ED CAPITAL OUTLAY Chief Judge , ~ W~lllam L Black-we# Chief Judge. 20th Judidal Circuit Date Dwight E. B,-'ock Cterk The Honorable James D_ Cadet, Ph.D. Chair. Board of County Co~missi(x~ers AGENDA ITEM N o _._/_~.~/~, ~ County/Circuit: Amount of Civil TralWc Infraction Hea~fng Officer Grant-in-Aid Collier County, Twentieth Judicial Circuit $12,0cJ4.08 Grant, FY 1999-2000 Total Budget $24,188.16 {Grant plus Match) Amended Spending Plan FULL-TIMEEQUIVALENT(FTE) I I I $0100 'O~R~so~/v~ s~v,c~s - I Clerks $3,675.00 $7,35o.ool ~-~r~ I $2,°6°.761 I s2,0~0.76 s4,~2~.52 " $0.0C $o.o~ $0.001 I 1 _2. _ C~ief Judge The Honorable James O. Carter. Ph.D. Chair, Boan:t of County Commissioners Attest Dale Dwight E. Brock Clerk AGEND,~, iTEM No _/~4'__ i JAN - 8 20§2 _County/Circuit: Amount of Award: Civil Traffic Infraction Hearing Of~cer Grant-in-Aid Collier Count~, Twentieth Judicial Circuit $10,856.43 Grant, FY 2000-2001 Total Budget: PF_F?SONNEL FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT (F'I'E) Hearin~l Officer Secretar,,/ ~THER PERSONNEL SERVICES )NTRA C TUAL AGREEMENTS Hearing Officer EXPENSE $21,712.86 (Grant plus Match) Amended Spending Plan $1,362.42 $545.84 $1,932.00 $1 $782.64 $1,362.42 $545.84 $1,932.00 $2,724.84 $1,091.68 $0.00 $3,864.00 $0.OO $O.00 $0.00 Court C~erks $4,650.00 $9,300.00 Court Baliffs $1,583.53 $3,167.06 Office Supplies $782.64 $1,565.28 ) THER CAPITAL OUTLAY (oeo) $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 CAPITAL OUTLAY $0.00 C~U~ Judoe ~nief Judge, 20th Judicial Circuit The H(3nora~e James D. Carte~, Ph.D. Chair, Board of.C~nty Commissioners Attest AGENDA ITE,M JAN - 8 2002 Pg._ b" County/Circuit: Amount of Award: Civil TraflT¢ infraction Hearing Officer Grant-in-Aid Collier County, Twentieth Judicial Circuit $10,246.00 Grant, FY 2001-2002 Total Bud~eL' $20,492.00 (Grant plus Match) Amended Spending Plan FULL- T/ME EQUIVALENT (FTE) Hearin~l Officer $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $4,000.0(3 Secretaq OTHER PERSONNEL SERVICES CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENTS Hearing Officer $2,000.0C $1,500.0C $4,000.0(3 $O,00 $0.00 $0.00 Court Clerks Court Baliffs Office Supfdies $808.50 $2,437.50 $4,875.00 OTHER CAPITAL OUTLAY $3,000.00 $1,617.00 $0.00 $8.00 CAPITAL OUTLAY $0.00 $0.00 C~ief Judge Chairman Chief Judge, 2~q Ju~cial Circuit Dab) The I-k)aorable Jm'nes D. Carter, Ph.D. Chair, Board of County C43nlm~Ss~oners Attest D~¢t E. ~ Clerk AGI~I~A ITEM No. /¢ JAN - 8 2002 Pg_ January 8, 2002 Donna t~rewer Grants Administrator Office of the State Courts Administrator Flor/da Supreme Court Building 500 South Duval Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1900 Florida Auditor General l 11 West Madison Street Claude Denson Pepper Building Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1450 Dear Ms Brewer: Please accept this as compliance with Paragraph 4 of the Grant-In-Aid Agreement for the Civil Traffic Infraction Hearing Officer Program in Collier County dated November 21, 1999, between the Florida Supreme Court, Office of the State Courts Administrator and the Collier County Board of County Commissioners. On this 8th day of January 2002, I, James D. Carter, Ph.D., Chairman of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners attest to Collier County's compliance with all of the requirements of the aforementioned agreement. Attest to Dwight E. Brock Clerk of the Cimuit Court James D. Carter, Ph.D. Chairman Board o f County Commissioners AGENDA ITEM JAN - 8 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AUTHORIZE THE BOARD'S CHAIRMAN TO SIGN ON THE BOARD'S BEHALF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND THE QUAIL CREEK OWNER'S ASSOCIATION, INC., TO ENABLE THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE TO ENFORCE TRAFFIC LAWS OVER PRIVATE ROADS WITHIN THE QUAIL CREEK ESTATES SUBDIVISION IN COLLIER COUNTY OBJECTIVE: As requested by Sheriff Don Hunter, to have the Board approve the subject agreement and authorize its Board's Chairman tb sign the Agreement to thereby enable the Sheriff's Office to enforce traffic control laws over private roads within the Quail Creek Estates Subdivision. CONSIDERATIONS: Subsection 316.006(3)(b), Florida Statutes, authorizes The Sheriff's Office to exercise traffic control jurisdiction over private roads subject to execution of a written agreement approved by the Board of County Commissioners. The Sheriff's Office and the management of the Quail Creek Estates Subdivision have negotiated and have signed the proposed written agreement. FISCAL IMPACT: In accordance with Subsection 316.006(3)(b)(1), Florida Statutes, the Sheriff's Office is to be reimbursed by the Quail Creek Property Owners' Association, Inc., to recover the Sheriff's actual costs of enforcement of traffic laws and regulations over private roads within the Quail Creek Estates Subdivision. The specific private roads are specified in Exhibit "B" to the Agreement. Section 8 of the Agreement provides that the Sheriff is to negotiate allocation of the costs of the subject enforcement. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATIONS: As requested by Sheriff Don Hunter, that by approval of this item thereby approve the subject agreement and authorize the Chairman to sign the Agreement on behalf of the Board to thereby enable the Sheriff's Office to enforce traffic control laws over private roads within the Quail Creek Estates Subdivision. ~,~,~ SUBMITTED BY: T~)~'~- DATE: I ~ ~ Z ~'.- O I Tom Palmer, Assistant County Attorney REVIEWED BY: ~.~ ~¢,~J DATE: David~3. W/eigel, Co~ty Attorney REVIEWED BY: /(./~//), ~ ~ DATE: l ~' ~'~ / M. W. Sch~yver, regal Counsel to Sheriff Don ~ NO. JAN 0 8 2002 Pg. Office'~"I n; ,, Collier C ~,;~, ,~2. ,.' t IS3301 East Naples, FL 34112 Telephone(AC 941) 774-4434 December 20, 2001 Thomas C. Palmer, Esq. Assistant County Attorney County Attorney's Office Collier County Government Center Bldg. F 3301 Tamiami Trail East Naples, FL 34112 RE: Traffic Control Jurisdiction Agreement/Quail Creek Property Owners' Association, Inc. Dear Tom: Enclosed please find a true copy of the §316.006, FL.STAT., Agreement for Traffic Enforcement in the Quail Creek Estates Subdivision. It has been duly executed by the Association and by the Sherifl~ and I am forwarding it to you with the understanding that you will place it before the Board of County Commissioners for ratification and adoption. I believe it is problematic for the Sheriff's Office to begin traffic enforcement prior to final · - · citations may be considered to be null adoption by the Board of County Comrmsstoners as anY ~ssued until final adoption. We will watch the agenda for a date of final adoption. Thank you for your help, and if you have any questions or comments, please give me a call at 793-9292. M. W. Schryver, Counse MWS:mbl Enclosures cc: Sheriff Hunter Chief Stiess Capt. Pat Mullen Lt. Karen Strickland Sgt. Mike Jones JAN 0 8 2002 pg. ,-% AGREEMENT A_PI~ROVING AND PROVIDING FOR COUNTY TRAP~C CONTROL d-UBISDi,,,-i-ION OVER ROAD~ ~ TH~ QUAIL CI~K SUBDIVISION THIS AGREEMENT is made and m~n~l into this __ day of ,20C~ ~ and among Ihe follov, in~ ~ par~: Quail Creek Owners' Association. 4886 Pond Apple D~iv~. Road. Naples. Florida, 34119; ~ Collier Cmmty Sheriffs Ofl'gc; nmi ~hc Board of County Commissioners of Collier County. Fiodda- 3X~IF_~EAS, all ~ within the Quail Creek Subdivision (in un.incorpornted Collier County) arc private roads that are not owned es maintained by Collier Coumy; and WHEREAS, thc Quail Creek Property Owners' Association, Inc., which is responsible for maintaining and conU'olling thc Quail Creek Subdivision, has tendered u) the Sheriff of Collier County, a Icaer request, dated July 2, 2001, attached hereto as Exhibit aA", and is thereby requesting that the Collier County Sheriff's Office pauol the privaVe ro~ds within the Quail Creek Subdivision and exercise jurisdiction over those private by enfo~ccmont of state tad couoty t~affic laws; and WHEREAS, Subsection 316.006(3Xa), Flaeida Statutes, provides that each Florida Coumy may exercise jurisdiction over private road(s) located within the unincorporated area m its boundaries provided the respective County and other parties owning or controlling such road provides, by wrinen agreement approved by the governing body of the County, fur county u'affic control jurisdiction over the road(s) covered by the agreement; and No. JAN 0 8 2002 12/83/2881 i5:30 918508788665 FSA PAGE 83 WIi[~R~,~, repr~scotativee of the Collier County Sheriff's OrTho lave monitored ~aff~ on private roads within the Quail Creek Subdivision and lave aflh'med that leaffic enfo~emen~ by the Collier County Sheriff's Off'~e is approp,hte ,,nd have agreed to provide ~'af~¢ control enforccmout in the h~ographic are~ requested (txhibit "B"); and WHF-.RF, AS, Collier Cmmty, a political sulglivisinn of the State of Florida, thtou~ r~preaantativ." of its Transportation Dep~mncnt, la~ reviewed and ¢ommunicat~l with an engineer for the Quail Creek Subdivision tezszding signage and a required subdivision sign maimenance plan (see i~xhth# "C" aunched hereto); and ~, the Bo~rd of County Commi~sione~ has reviewed these written requests and las dntermi-ed that it is in the interest of thc public health, safety and welfare to enter into this Agreemen% pursuant to Sulx, eetiou 316.006(3Xb), Florida Statutes. NOW THEREFORE, the three parties herc, o agree as follows: I. Th," recita~ and Exhibits ~tated and referenced above at." restated and are made a pan of this Agreement. 2. Collier Coumy, by action of its Board of County Conunissioner~, hereby dctermincs to exercise traffic ¢out~'ol juriediction over all private roads Io~ated within the geographic area of the Quail Creek Estate~ Golf& Count~, Club Subdivision es described in F-~hibit "B" pursuant to this Agr,:ement entered into pursuant to Subsection 316.006(3)(b), Florida Statutes. 3. Pursuant to Subsection 316.006(3XbX2), Florida Ststutos, the Collier County Sheriff's Off~¢ hereby expr:ssly waives thc statutory rexluitement concerning the effective date of this Agreement relating to the beginning of the next county fiscal yext and agr~ to fl~ effective date of this Agreement. AGENDA ITEM NO. JAN 0 8 2002 The Collier Couno/Sheriff's Office shall, commencin8 on the date of final action by the Collier County Bom'd of Com~ Commissioners and fl~stnsfler, un~il ~ Agreement is t~tninated, shall include as part of its duties, pa~ol &nd cnforccmcot of 811 count~ and stem traffic coutrol regulations and ¼we on and ova all privttu roads within the Quail Creek Subdivision, including such iddi~io~l r~ds, ~f in,/, bt may heru~r come into existence within the Quail Creek Subdivision. Thc pnflics recognize that all private roads within thc Quail Creek Subdivision (es such roads a~ dencn'bed herein) arc not p_ublic roads, arc nm County-owned, end neither thc County nor thc Shcs~.ff's Office Im any du~ or responsibflJV/for construction, maiotcoancc and/or s~'pab of aw/of the same, including si~nase, tfld Otis Agreement does not impose an~ such rcspor~ibilifles upon the County or the Sh~iff's Office. Signage mamtcnaocc, repoir ~nd adequacy on end along the roads within thc Quail Creek Subdivision is the responsibility of thc Homeowncr Association and/or other private property interesKs) within s~id Subdivision; and a maintenance pro,ram shall be devcloped by and shall be adhered to by the Quail Creek Proper~ Owners' Azsochtion, Inc. (See Exh|blt "C" ~nached hereto). For purposes ofidcotificetion and geographic specificity, the Quail Creek Subdivision is composed of: Sec Exhibit "B" and PB 13, PP 19-26, 74-77, ~24- 125; sad 7-20, of the public records of Collior CouflO/, Florida. The Quail Creck Property Owners' Association, Inc., hercby indcmnifies and hold Collier County and thc Collier County Sheri~s Office hrmlcss for nors- ne#ij%'nt acts, errors or omissions in providing thc exercise of u~ffi control jurisdiction es ngrccd to herounder. Collier County. I politic, si subdivision of the State of Florida, shall be included es "eddifion~l insured" on all &ppiicable liability insurance policies. AGENDA, ITEH NO. /~o/~' :~'' JAN 0 8 2002 The Collier County Sheriff's Off'lee hereby reserves the &uthofit7 under this ~ontrac! to ~r into n~gotintioM with Quail Cr~k Propect7 Ow·eh' Association, Inc., for purpeees of allocating costs purmant to sub~ection 316.0063(3)(bX !.) as · precondition m provision of enforcemont according to the TI~ A~reement ·my be chau~cd, amcndod modificd only by · Mm of a written documem executed with the same formality as this Asreement. However, fids Agrecmem may be tm·in·ted ~Milate~ally by the Board of Cennty Commissioners by adoption of· Resolution (at a public meeting of the Bo·sd of County Commissioners) providing that this A~reement be te'nfinnted, o~ by Quail Creek Propmy Owners' Assoc~tion, Inc. IN Wt z ~ WH~i~OF, the patties hereto have executed this Agreement, the Board of County Commissioners having approved th~ A~cement the __. day of ~SES: (two required) /,./j,/, ,/...~//./'~' Printed Name of Witness Pti·led Name of Witness ouAn. C-~tZ ~oeze~ ~s, President AGENDA. ITEM JAN 0 8 2002 Pg.., ~ Prin~ed Name of With/SS COUNTY A'I-I~ST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNT~, FLORIDA By By: Thomas C. Palmer, A.~is~nnt County AHom~y AC~r.,NDA ITEM NO. ~ JAN 0 8 2002 pg. "7 _ O tail Creek E tat July 2, 2001 M. W. Schr~ver Esq. Collier County Sheriff's Deparhnent 3301 East Tamiami Trail Collier County Government Center Bldg. J Naples, FL.33962. Re: Quail Creek Estates service agreement. Dear Mr. Schryver, The Quail Creek Property Owners Association, Inc. hereby requests the Collier County SheriWs Office to enforce all county and state traffic control regulations within the boundaries of the Quail Creek Property Owners Association, Inc. The Board of Directors of the Association approved the request for this action at their regular meeting held on February 5, 2000. Sincerely, Loren N. Laine Assistant Secretary For the Board LNL/cg Tel: (941) 59~.-6966 4886 Fond Apple Drive South, Naples, Florida 34119 JAN 0 8 2002 pg. Ts' Fax: (941) 594-6968 NO../-~.~ .lAN 0 8 2002 pg. AOE~IDA JTE.M JAN 0 8 2002 Pg' /~ O;mll Creek Estates November 7, 2001 Mr. Fhomas C. Palmer Esq. Assismm Ctmmy AItomcy Collier County Government Ccmpicx 3301 Tamimni '[rail E~t Naples, FL 34112 R e: S pecial I )etail 'l'ral I;~. Cunu o L ,\ grcdnlcnl [)ear Mr. Palmer, Further to our pl~one conversation of November 2. 2001 Quail Creek Estates maintains ali or'the signage in the community on a regular basis. Signage meets the crileria and standards o[the Manual on Unil'om~ l'ral~c Control Devices (M.U.'I'C.D3. All s~bmage is replaced as deterioration becomes evident. Ifyeu need tbrther inlbnnation regarding this issue plet~e do not hesitate to contact mc. Sinccrcl, y, ,._/ lx~rcn N. I.~qinc General Manager LNLtc}~ 4886 P2n~ I,::H;6' Drice $out'~ Iqa~teS Ftorida ~4] · '3 AGE. ND?. r No. /g,% .'"T JAN 0 8 2002 (81) TANDEM AXLE.---Any two axles whose cen- ters are more than 40 inches but nof mom than 96 inches apart and are individually attached to or articu- ~ted from, or both, a common attachment to the vehi- .... n- a connecting mechanism designed to cie, ~n. ctuu, ~ twean axles. ' ,,. 316.0~6 j urisdiction._-Judsdic§on to contr°l traffic vested as follows: , STATE.--The Department of Transportation have all odginel jurisdiction over all state roads this state, including those within the of all state institutions and the boondades of all te rks, and may place and maintain sta pa ,-:~- M,.form to its manual Ch. 316 STATE UNIFORM TRAI RC coNTROl- UNTIES (3) CO ,_ ;.'L'~. ~,~ve ~toinel iudsdiction ovm all (a) Co~n~..~..~sl~.~,l~t~l--within their boundaries, streets ~ I state roads and those streets, and except al L__..~.. ~,)~ mndmevplacoand melntaln specified in suose~u~, ~-~ .... such traffic control devk~es which coofon'n to the man- ual and specifications of the Department of Tmnsporta- 'don upon ail streets and highways under their odginal jurisdiCtiOn as they shall deem neceseaw to indicate and to oan¥ out the prov~sione of this chapter or to regu- late, warn, or guide tra~. un may exercise iudediction over any pd- (b) A.co ty~_ _. over .nv limited accesS mad or~ vste roaQ or roao~, u. ~'~ ' district, iccatoQ roads owned or controlled by a specml . . in the unincorporated area within its boundaries i~ the ~- --d *a~'' er pa~es owning or controlling such~ county ~u, ~ "~ ......... ,~on aQreement~ road or roads pro, hoe, u ~,,-,,~,,~- '--hr ~un tra o: ~-'1-'--F~~d for iisbliity insur- traffic control ane en~omu · tions upon all such highways as it shall specifica ....... ~, and to cer~ out the pray? ndemnificetion by the pa~ty or parties, and ~ necessary ~o ~.~_ ,~,~.late warn, or guide tra~- ance and --- --utuall~ agreeable, may be o~ this chapter or [u .~.~.. , such other terms as mu ,,, . MUNICIPALITIES.-- . . nc uded in such an agreement- Ii have ong~na ,~ o,U,r to entedng into an agreement which pro- r.h=~l~r~ munici ttss sha -~ ~,-:- ~. '"~ - --~ -.,~, *,'~ffiC laws of the state y, ......._d,, _....~.Paa~ highways Ioca[e~ w,u .. ,~l~s for enlorcemanx u, ?,- ~._~: ...... timited access , ,~intain such traffic control d?v..,.IC.,.-'~e~___ nwh~,.o,.~mant of road or ton, ds °~w_ .~.ne. _, e,e coounty shall consult wt ,th th.e . '~,on~d~tion u~on al streets m,u ,,u ~-_z_..., snann, mo ~'.~, ~__',~.~.',,~,'-;, t coun i,r ongmm lun~,u~-~,_.., ~.;'~mv sions of this chap- I ~~ ' indicate and to oarry uu~., .~ -raffic | m~"~~'um'u~' ~ ....... a,~-~ tar herein A mun c&pahty re, ay ex_e..m~u~-~ limited access .'% ~ _' ;--_.~.~au,. to iudsdictional autno-,y. ;,;'~'.~--ds Owned or controlled by a sP~..~m,~."~"~I exercised by cou,.n_ne~ .~,~,~.~ to'limit or remove any ~d with~? ~ u.,¥,__'~'-~".-,.,~ntraliing such road or ~;",~i~sdichonal authority. or p~rtms owmn? .,--~m~nt a~oroved by the '~ ' - ..... ~ subsection (2), each ~ prowbe, by written ~,,_.,_.;;...-- ~r ~unicieal traffic Notwithstanding the prov??;~,~ ...... ,late oark- ming body of the munm,.pa-y?~_ ._..~5 encore- -^,,,-~., shall have original roi lunsdrctlon o t: ' 13 rasolut,onotthebo , and ed bv such agreement. PurSU .a~.t the_? _o, costs of ~ng~, ?,.Y~ -rsctien of signs conforming t._o the Prevision ]or ~e.-,~,,--. __.~ ~^. liabi~ insur- o,,~-ifioations OT uw u,~l-,~,-----;.~, ~ or ~ by c control and an ........ or n~rties, and mu~(ing areas located --.l~-.~k areas are located and tndemnifioab ..... ~., ~raeabie, may be the county, whe. th.e _...~..,~,~-I munk~itms. . dsd ,n such an ag.r.~.n~..n_L.~_ ..... ided for heram ~4~ LEGISLATIVE DE.CLAR~A~ ...... xercise by an II be construed to limit or remove anY authority, such jurisdiction includ.e~ of access to such mad or roads by secumy or personnel. subsection shall not limit those counties which the charter powers to provide and regulate afte- and other roads, bridges, tunnels, and related proper exercise of those powers by and maintenance of traffic control conform to the manual and specifica- Department of Transpodation on streets located within municipal boundaries. the ravisione of chapter 87-88, ~..ws of which public credit may be Provielone unlfon~ throughout state.-- 316,007 ........ hall be ap~ioable and u'~n'~oP~ throughout this state and m a pomma sions and municipalities therein, and no local authority shall enact or enforce any ordinance on a matter cov- ered by this chapter unless expressly authorized. How- 1231 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECOMMEND THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS APPROVE A DOCUMENT FOR SIXTH YEAR STATE CRIMINAL ALIEN ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (SCAAP) GRANT FUNDS. OBJECTIVE: To seek consent from the Board of County Commissioners for a signatory approval letter for sixth year State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) grant funds. CONSIDERATION: On June 6, 2001 Board Chairman James D. Carter Ph.D. designated Sheriff Don Hunter as the signing official and contact person for fifth year State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) funding. A letter indicating Board designation of Sheriff Don Hunter as sixth year SCAAP grant funds signing official is needed. FISCAL IMPACT: Potential award of funds is for costs associated with incarceration of aliens. This would be an outright award with no required local match or other expenditure. GROWTH MANAGEMENT: No recurring costs for subsequent years. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the sixth year SCAAP grant signatory approval letter. Crystal K. Kinzel, Fina~ Director APPROVED BY. ' mi .... ~ : ~h~eri f f DATE: January 2, 2002 Donna Fiala Oistrict 1 James D, Ca~ter, Ph,D. DiStdCt 2 Tom Henning District 3 Fred W. Coyle District 4 Jim Coletta Dist dCt 5 January 8, 3301 East Tamiami Trail · Naples, Florida 34112-4977 (941) 774-8097 · Fax (941) 774-3602 2002 SCA3~P 2002 Bureau of Justice Assistance Control Desk 633 Indiana Avenue, Washington, DC 20531 Re: Designated Official For SCAAP application Ladies and Gentlemen: Pursuant to a Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) State Criminal Alien Assistance Program(SCAAP) compliance requirement, as the Chairman of the Collier County Board of Commissioners, I approve and designate Don Hunter, Sheriff, Collier County, Florida, or any future holder of that office as the signing official and contact person for application for SCAAP funding. Sincerely, Chairman Collier County Commission a: ssdelS Approved a~ to for~ & legal AGENDAITEM No. /~4' ..~ JAN - 8 ZOO2 pg. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PROPOSED ORDINANCE FOR TEEN COURT FUNDING OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners direct the County Attorney to prepare and advertise for public heating an ordinance to impose a mandatory court cost of $3.00, funding the Teen Court of Collier County pursuant to Section 938.19, Florida Statutes. CONSIDERATIONS: Teen Court was created pursuant to Section 775.083(2)(d), Florida Statutes, which authorizes the county to collect court fines to fund crime prevention programs. Teen Court is a court diversionao' program for first time juvenile misdemeanor offenders and court education program for student volunteers that has been in existence in Collier County since June of 1999. Teen Court is currently budgeted in the Court Administration Fund (681). Previously, Teen Court was partially funded by state juvenile prevention grants that are no longer available. Section 938.19 of the Florida Statutes enables a county to adopt an ordinance imposing $3.00 court cost to be assessed in specific cases in civil and circuit courts. Out of the 59 Teen Courts in the state of Florida, 34 of them are funded through the enactment ora county ordinance pursuant to Section 938.19, Florida Statutes (See Attached Statutes). FISCAL IMPACT: There is currently S31,800 budgeted in the FY 02 Court Administration Fund (681) for Teen Court revenues associated with the implementation of the proposed ordinance. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no impact to the growth management plan associated with this proposed ordinance. RECOMMENDATION: : That the Board of County Commissioners direct the C°unty Attorney's office to prepare and advertise for public hearing an ordinance funding the Teen Court of Collier County. BY: ' A.ori S. Wallace, Teen Court Coordinator REVIEWED BY: fl ('Jo~.~,-l.~_Date: t z/r~ Ot ~ennifer X03-elpedio, Assistant ~ounfy Attorney APPROVED BY: ~ Date: Mark Middlebrook, Senior Dept~ty Court Administrator__ AGENDA ITEM JAN - , ~---. , ----,~ tinn Attorneys Association, inc. The associa- :lStates, any0m~, ~ ",~ ntain such information, and make such ~at~' , anyof~er~ ~ ~nn~it0~'~ailable to the pub c upon request, for at ~ by more than ~-~r dc~nal ; ~al0.yearpedod.. .... I'he eurpose of th~s section ~s to prowde uniform ts(' also means ~ / (!_0~ t'ior those crimes made punishable under ~".',-l~n~and, to this end, a reference to this section mpts, hs (a)lt°.a.~r.C~n~t~~ se~'~utes a general reference under the doctrine of e~tance o~ 0~ e~ ~c~ratiO~ by reference. territoryoflheUMil~ r/~.~28 Violent offenses committed against law ~, foifowisg ~ I 1 -nt officers, correctional officers, state enteeceis~ ~lleff, eys assistant state attorneys, justices, or · ' ~ M~s~_The Legislature does hereby provide for an n nssthata~ masse and certainty of penalty for any person con- nder as deflned.~ ~dedofaviolentoffenseagainstanytawenforcement qey may seekt0~ ~c~ctic~al officer, as defined in s. 9~. .10(1. ), (2), t as a pnson ~ ~. (6), (7), (8), or (9); against any state anomey ~e state attomef ~ ~cted pursuant to s. 27.01 or assistant state aUomey of the evidencelal~ ~p~d under s. 27,181; or against any justice or ,,offender as ~ lap of a court described in Art, V of the State Consti- et e~igibie f~x se~ t~m which offense arises out of or in the scope of the nas and must be ~ d~ceis duty as a law enforcement or correctional offi- ~, r' b '--~ = the state attorney's or assistant state attorney's .y ,.e, y s te~ ~¥as a prosecutor or investigator, or the justice's or ~ tree's duty as a udicial officer, as follows: degree, by a ~ (I"-') For~urder in the first degree as described in s. . . ~/12.041, if the death sentence is not imposed, a sen- ~d deg~ree, oy s ~ ieee of imprisonment for life without eligibility for t d~ stl~by (2) For attempted murder in the first degree as ,. s. 782.0 (t), a sentence pursuant to s. ?_r para~e~ ~62, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. ~elease,'Sant=e~oro =,!'m~-'~ {3) For murder in the second degree as desonbed' =___.~ ,,,~ ar 782.04(2) and (3), a sentence pursuant to s. ~ ~..'~] ~62, s. 775 083, or s 775 084 the ccun ..... ' ~ H) For attempted murder in the second degree as _ ~,=, ~ a~i~lmt~ed in s. 782.04(2) and (3), a sentence pursuant nce of i~ T/5.0~2, s· 775.083, or s. 775.084. s. 775.084 ~ a F~r murder in the third degree as described in s. sentence pursuant to s. 775.082, s. murder in the third degree as a sentence pursuant to s. or s. 775.084. F~manstaughter as described in s. 782.07 dur- elude cgxm~ssi~ of a crime, a sentence pursuant to or s. 775.084. las describe~J in s. 787.01, a een- s. 775.083, ors. 775.084. as described in s. , a sentence pursuant to s. 775.082, s. aggravated assault as described in s. pursuant to s. 775.082, s. & 775.084. provisions of s. 948.01, with who is found to have violated this DEFINITIONS; GENERAL PENALTIES; REGISTRATION OF CRIMINALS Ch. 775 section, adjudication of guilt or imposition of sentence shall not be suspended, deferred, or withheld. 775.083 Fines,-- (1) A person who has been convicted of an offense other than a capital felony may be sentenced to pay a fine in addition to any punishment described in s. 775.082; when specifically authorized by statute, be or she may be sentenced to pay a fine in lieu of any pun- ishmant described in s. 775.082. A person who has bee~ convicted of a nonc~minal viotafion may be sen- fenced to pay a fine. Fines for designated crimes and for noncriminal violations shall not exceed: (a) $15,000, when the conviction is of a life felony. (b) $10,000, when the conviction is of a felony of the first or second degree. (c) $5,000, when the co~viction is of a fetony of the third degree. (d) $1,000, when the conviction is of a misde- meanor o! the flint degree. (e) $500, when the conviction is of a misdemeanor of the second degree or a noncriminal violation. (f) Any higher amount equal to double the pecuni- ary gain derived from the offense by the offender or double the pecunia~ loss suffered by the victim. (g) Any higher amount specificafly authorized by statute. If a defendant is unable to pay a fine, the court may defer payment of the fine to a date certain. (2)(a) A county may adopt an ordinance imposing, in addition to any other fine, penalty, or cost imposed by subsection (1) or any other provision of taw, a fine upon any person who, with respect to a charge, indictment, or prosecution commenced in that county, pleads guilty or nolo contendere to, or is convicted of or adjudicated delinquent for, a felony, a misdemeanor, or a criminal traffio offense under state law, or a violation of any municipal or county ordinance if the violation consti- tutes a misdemeanor under state law. (b) The fine is $50 for a felony and $20 for any other offense. When the defendant enters the plea or is con- victed or adjudicated, in a court in that county, the court may order the defendant to pay such fine if the court finds that the defendant has the ability to pay the fine and that the defendant would not be prevented thereby from being rehabifitated or making restitution. (c) The clerk of the court shell collect and deposit the fines in an appropriate county account for disburse- ment for the purposes ixovided in this subsection. (d) A county that imposes the additional fir. fines separately Imm othe~ county funds, as crime vention funds. The county, in consultation with t sheriff, must expend such fines for the costs of coils lng the fines and for crime prevention programs in t county, including safe neighborhood programs unc ss. 163.501-163.523. (3) The puq~ose of this section is to provide unite penalty authorization for criminal offenses and, to end, a reference to this section constitutes a gene 1117 938.01, municipalities and counties may assess an additional $2 for expenditures for criminal justice edu- cation degree prngmros end training courses, including basic recrdit training, for their respective offmers and employing agency suppo~ personnel, provided such education degree programs and training courses are foaoaoa~roved by the employing agency administrator, on a provided by the commission, for Iocei funding. (1) Workshops, meetings, con, f.ere~'-.es, and. .c~ ventions shall, on a form approvea Dy me comm~ssmn for Use by the employing agency, be individually approved by the employing a.ge,r~ a?n~ini~ ~m_to,..r. P~e~ to attendance. The form shall tncluoe, otn no~ ~ m~at to, a demonstration by the employing agency of the puq)ose of the workshop, meeting, conf.e?nce, .or c.o? vention; the direct relationship of the trmmng to tne om- car's job; the direct benatits the officer and agency will receive; and all anticipated costs. (2) The commission may inspect and copy the doc- umentation of independent audits conducted of the municipalities and counties which make such assess- ments to ensure that such assessments have been made and that expenditures are in conformance with the requirements of this subsection and with other al:~olicable procedures. 938.17 County delinquency prevention.-- (1) A county may adopt a mandatory cost to be assessed in specific cases by incorporating by refer- ence the provisions of this section in a county ordi- nance. Pdor to the adoption of the county ordinance, the shedff's office of the county must be a partner in a written agreement with the Department of Juvenile Jus- tice to participate in a juvenile assessment center or with the district sshcol board to participate in a suspen- sion program. (2) In counties in which the sheriff's office is a part- ner in a juvenile assessment center pursuant to s. 985.209, or a partner in a suspension program devel- oped in conjunction with the district school beard in the county of the sheriff's jurisdiction, the court shall assess court costs of $3 per case, in addition to any other authorized cost or fine, on every person who, with respect to a charge, indictment, prosecution com- menced, or petition of delinquency filed in that county or cimuit, pleads guilty, nolo contendere to, or is con- victed of, or adjudicated delinquent for, or has en adju- dication withheld for, a felony or misdemeanor, or a criminal traffic offense or handicapped perking ?.olation under state law, or a violation of any mumclpal or county ordinance, it the violation constitutes a misde- meanor under state law. (3)(a) The clerks of the county and circuit court, in a county where the shedff's office is a partner in an z (b) The defk of the circuit and withhold 5 percent of the assoSsment~ lects pursuent to this ssction, for the ~ tedng the co#action of I (c) Aesessments collected courts coml:~i, sed of more than coe counly IhW the funds collected pursuant to this ~ k coun~ in which the offense at issue was ~ (d) Any omar funds the shelf's olSoe ~ I~ the implemontation or operation of an ssseaaaent em. tar or suspension program may he delx~ited feio I~ designated account for disbumement to Ihe ~ needed. (4) A shedff's office that receives the cost ~ ments established in subsection (1) shall account funds that have been deposited into the de~jnsi~ account by August 1 annually in a whiten repo~ to juvenile justice county council if funds are used assessment canters, and to the district school funds are used for suspension programs. 938.19 Teen courta; operation and administtstio~ Notwithstanding s. 318.121, in each county in which s teen court has been created, a county may adopt mandatory cost to be assessed in specific cases as provided for in subsection (1) by incoqx)rating by refer- ence the provisions ol this section in a county ordi- hence. Assessments collected by the clerk ol the circuit court pursuant to this section shell be deposited into an account specifically for the operation and administra- tion of the teen court: (1) A sum of $3, which shaft he assessed as a coup1 cost by both the cimuit court and the county cou~1 in the county against every person who pleads guilty or noto contendere to, or is convicted of regardless of ad1~d~- cation, a violation of a state cdminal statute or a rnun~o- pal ordinance or county ordinance or who pays a fine or c vit penalty for any violation of chapter 316. Any pot- son whose adjudication is withheld pursuant to the p o- visions of s. 318.14(9) or (10) shall also be assessed such cost. The $3 assessnmnt for court costs shall be assessed in additico to any tine, civil penalty, or other court cost and shall not be deducted from the pr..o~e~ ~$s of that portion Of any fine or civil penalty~. _. k., m~,wnmn rece red by a municipe in the county in accordance with ss. 316.660 eno $3 assessment shall specifically he added t Y penalty paid for a violation of chapter 316, wbethe~ such penalty is paid by mail paid in persco without nation by the ¢OUrL However, mo ~.~ ...... ,,~ any not be made against a person for a state statutes, county ordinance, or.r~.J~,, the nanca relaUng to the perking of vemCma_.L~"~';;kino exca~ion of a vio~ben of the hah ' .dicah~e. _.,~.~ respective $3 assessments for court costs establ~sn~ in this subssc~on' and shall remit the same tO+oined ~ teenas courtmonth less5 rcant, which is to be re,~' · fy' pe circuit cou,, tee ~ncoma of the office of the clerk of the 39.019. o~SCREll sPEClRC ~buse pre operating '~ Law Enfc judgment.f Legal assl-~ ney's fee Court-imp(~ nal cese Judicial ov, Alcohol a ~anding any pro~ sstate, the court ~ i abuse prograff ~dant who plea( onvicted of, a vi( or which involve ~56.011, s. 856.0' ~er 56r add: eVde:l b. ,a, e0unt of the fine a~tis authorized t, [mai assessment i! ef~f to pay the fi ed will not be pre~ ~ or from makir ~38.23 Asslata ~ ab~se prngra (1) In addition ~minal offense ur tUation o! s. 31 la 562, chapter 5( ethofized, pursu~ ~impose an addit ~ amount ol the t~llional asssss~ ~se o! proviclin! reagent or ak~ as pmvidsd in s. '(2) All assess be collected by t mscrlctional cou ~,0esit into the C T~st Fund or to t se~css for dap ~ and Oft b~ons Trust ~es developed t andO, ~rug Ch. 938 cOURT COSTS nffa~ ratio,~t hic~ s :lopt a into an inislra- tinlhe or adiuo~- fine o~ ny ~r- ;hall ~ ~ee~ h~h ~s by ~ 71.~ ny ~ ~het~ ele~ nt ~; cl ~Y ~1 or~ ith ~ ~a~ Dlis~ ~ other moneys as become available for teen courts under the provi- PART IV DISCRETIONARY COSTS IN sPEC. IRC TYPES OF CASES Alcchol and drug abuse programs. Assistance grants for alcohol and other drag abuse programs. operating Trust Fund of the Department of Law Enforcement. judgment for costs on conviction. Legal assistance; lien lor payment of attor- ney's fees or costs. Coud-imposed financial obligations in crimi- Judicial oversight and udsdicrion. ~30t na cases; suppismantary proceedings, ~1 Alcohol and drug abuse programs.~Not- I~nding any provision to the contrary of the laws of state, the court may assess for alcohol and other gabuse programs as provided in s. 893.165 any mdant who pleads guilty or nolo contendere to, or evicted of, a violation ot any provision of chapter e0r which involves a criminal violation of s. 316.193, F~6.011, s. 856.015. or chapter 562, chapter 567, or b0tar 568, in addition to any fine and other penalty IW~ed by law, a court cost in an amount up to the e0unt of the fine authorized for the violation. The mt is authorized to order a defendant to pay an addi- ~ assessment if it finds that the defendant has the City to pay the fine and the additional assessment le will ~ot be prevented thereby from being rehabifi- ~ or from making restitution. ,~8.L~ Assistance grants for alcohol and other ~g abuse programs.-- ~ In addition to any fine imposed by law for any · hal offense under chapter 893 or for any cdminal f/~istio~ ol s. 316.193, s. 856.011, s. 856.015, or chap- 562, chapter 567 or chapter 568. the court shall be e0rized, pursuant to the requirements of s. 938.2~(~ i~p0se an additional assessment in an amount up lamount of the fine authorized for the offense. Such ~ assessments shall be deposited for the pur- I~ ol providing assistance grants to drag abuse batment or alcohol treatment or education p~ograms I~pmvided in s. 893.165. '[2/ Ni assessments authorized by this section shall e c011ecled by the clerk of court and remitted to the esclict~onal county as described in s. 893.165(2) for ~ into the County Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse ~ Fund or to the Department of Children and Family nices for deposit into the department's Community ~01 and Other Drug Abuse Services Grants and a ons Trust Fund pursuant to guide.nes s ~eveloped by the departmenL If a County a~c~r~o~ ~ Other Drug Abuse Trust Fund has not been estab- lished for any jurisdictional county, assessments col- lected by the clerk of court shall be remitted to the Department of Children and Family Services for deposit into the department's Community Alcohol and Other Drag Abuse Services Grants and Donations Trust Fund. ~938.25 Operating Trust Fund of the Department of Law Enforcement,--Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary of the laws of this state, the court may assess any defendant who pleads guilty or nolo contendere to, or is convicted of, a violation of any pro- vision of s. 893.13, without regard to whether adjudica- tion was withheld, in addition to any fine and other pen- alty provided or authorized by law, an amount of $100, to be paid to the clerk of the court, who shall forward it to the Operating Trust Fund of the Department of Law Enforcement to be used by the statewide criminal anal- ysis laboratory system for the purposes specified in s. 943.361. The court is authorized to order a defendant to pay an additional assessment if it finds that the defendant has the ability to pay the fine and the addi- tional assessment and will not be prevented thereby from being rehabilitated or from making restitution· .~ .~..s~ a~y oe_o,~_~_,°..~.~,,~"a'.",.~t ~ to 938,27 Judgment for costs on conviction.-- (1) In all citminal cases the costs of prosecution, including investigative costa incurred by law enforce- ment agencies, by fire departments for arson investiga- tions, ~ by investigations ef the D.ivir~ of kFiilnn~ an~nadI investigations ot the Department or man~ Finance, it requested and documented by such agen- cies, shall be included and entered in the iudgmant ren- dered against the convicted person, or o~ders only (2) If the court does not enter costs, partial costs under this section, it shall state ee the reo- ord the reasons therefor. (3)(a) The court may require that the defendant pay the costs within a specified padod or in st:~K:ified install- (b) The end of such geitnd or the last such install- ment shaft not be later than: 1553 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TO OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR THE PAYMENT AND BUDGET AMENDMENTS RELATED TO REBATABLE ARBITRAGE ON THE SPECL4L OBLIGATION REFUNDING REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1997 AND THE FLORIDA LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCE COMMISSION POOLED COMMERCIAL PAPER NOTE A-I O-I. OBJECTIVE: To obtain approval for the payment ofrebatable arbitrage on the Special Obligation Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series 1997 and the Florida Local Government Finance Commission Pooled Commercial Paper Note A-10-1. CONSIDERATIONS: Pursuant to Resolution 96-158 the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court is responsible for monitoring the calculation of arbitrage. In meeting this responsibility the Clerk administers to an arbitrage services contract with the accounting firm of Arthur Andersen LLP. During their review for fiscal year 2000 - 2001, Arthur Andersen calculated rebatable arbitrage of $81,272 relating to the Special Obligation Revenue Bonds, Series 1997 and $1,157 relating to the Florida Local Goverranent Finance Commission Pooled Commercial Paper Note A-10-1. In addition, interest of $641 and $9, respectively, is due. Arbitrage is calculated every year on all qualifying tax-exempt bond issues, however it is only the portion owed by the issuer as of the fifth annual calculation that is rebatable. It is important to note that the proposed payment does not represent a penalty, but an excess of interest earned on the investment of tax- exempt proceeds to date. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds totaling $83,079 will be made available by appropriating reserves of $369 in the General Fund, $20,812 in Road Construction, $5,532 in Regional Parks Impact Fees and $1,166 in Library Impact Fees. Additional carryfor~vard of $55,200 is available for recognition in the 1997 Special Obligation Refunding Revenue Bond Ftmd. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the budget amendment, enabling the Department of Finance to pay rebatable arbitrage. Dee~ne~M. Jotmssen, CPA al Accounting Manager Reviewed By:c/j~¢/j.~ ~/ /~/~/~*,~.~A/~/< Ja~m/s L. Mitchell, CIA, CF'E, CBA Director of Finance and Accounting Date: AGENDA ITEM No_ JAN - 8 2002 Pg. / EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ENTER INTO SETTLEMENT OF ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY V. COLLIER COUNTY, CASE NO. 01-1824-SP, NOW PENDING IN THE COUNTY COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO WHICH THE COUNTY SHALL PAY ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY $331.80. OB,]ECTIVE: For the Board of County Commissioners to authohze settlement of a lawsuit styled Allstate Insurance Company v. Collier County, Case No. 01-1824-SP, now pending in the County Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida, pursuant to which the County shall pay Allstate Insurance Company $331.80. CONSIDERATIONS: The County was sued in this action following an accident between a County ambulance and Allstate Insurance Company's insured's vehicle. The information obtained to date on this matter indicates that Allstate's insumd's vehicle was damaged in the amount of $1478.34. The question of liability is open. Nevertheless, to try this case, the County estimates it would cost well in excess of the settlement amount in terms of witness fees, deposition fees and staff and attorney time. The Risk Management Department also recommends this settlement. FISCAL IMPACT: Should this matter proceed to trial, the worst case for the County is the risk of paying the entire amount of the alleged damages, i.e., $1478.34. In addition, it is estimated that the County would have to take at least one deposition and subpoena one witness to trial and that the thai would require at least one half day to complete. By entering into the proposed settlement agreement, the County reduces its exposure substantially and obviates the need to take the deposition or spend money on subpoenas or incur the cost of staff and attorney time that would be necessary to prepare for and conduct a trial. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board of County Commissioners enter into settlement of Allstate Insurance Company v. Collier CounO', in the amount of $331.80 and that it authohze the Chairman of the Board to execute all necessary and standard settlement documents and releases. t'~fl"4~lker, Risk Management Director DATE: David C. Weigel, County ~ttomey DATE: JAN 0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AUTHORIZE THE MAKING OF AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENT, JERJO LIMITED, INC., FOR PARCEL 142 IN THE AMOUNT OF S14,500.00 IN TttE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. OWEN Al. IFARD, TRUSTEE, ET AL., CASE NO. 99-1291-CA. PROJECT NO. 65031. OBJECTIVE: To approve and authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment pursuant to Section 73.032 Fla. Stat. to Respondent, Jerjo Limited, Inc., in the amount of S14,500.00 as full compensation for the condemnation of Parcel 142 in Collier CounO' v. Owen M. Ward. Trustee, et rtl., Case No. 99-1291-CA. CONSIDERATIONS: On April 20, 1999, an eminent domain action was filed for the acquisition of property for the Radio Road four laning project. On June 18, 1999, an Order of Taking was entered by the Circuit Court as to Parcel 142, and on July 2, 1999 the good faith estinrate of value for this parcel, in the amount of S13,700.00, was deposited into the Court registry thereby vesting title ill the parcel in Collier County. The Offer of Judgment, a copy of which is attached, offers the property owners of this Parcel, Jerjo Limited, Inc., the suni of S14,500.00 as full compensation for the property taken, including any severance damages, business damages, damages to the remainder, and costs to cure. This figure takes into account the basis for the appraised value and die potential risks and costs in proceeding to trial. The making of the Offer of Judgment will require the property owners to carefully assess their claims for compensation. Jerjo Limited, Inc. has thirty days from the date of mailing the offer to accept. If Jerjo Limited, Inc. accepts, the County will be required to deposit an additional S800.00 into the registry, and the total sum of funds on deposit, or S14,500.00, will be paid to Jerjo Limited, Inc. by Stipulated Final Judgment of the court. If Jerjo kimited, Inc. rejects the offer, and thereafter fails to recover more than 514,500.00 for Parcel 142 either through settlement or jury verdict, the County will not be required to pay any costs incurred by Jerjo Limited, Inc. after the date of the offer's rejectiou. This would include any expert witness fees, such as appraisal fees. The County Attorney's Office has reviewed all considerations in making an Offer of Judgment and has calculated in good faith this offer of full compensation for the property interests taken. This office considers the terms of the Offer of Judgment to be reasonable. FISCAL IMPACT: A budget amendment is required in the amount of S800.00 in tire Road Construction Impact Fee District 2 reserve. Source of Funds are hnpact Fees. A G f_-!,; f)A~ !TEM GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. No ,/~ JAN '8 RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: 2. 3. 4. 5. Approve the terms of the Offer of Judgment and authorize its service on Respondent, Jerjo Limited, Inc.; and Approve the expenditure of funds as stated; and Authorize $800.00 to be paid into the Registry of the Court in the event the Offer of Judgment is accepted by Jerjo Limited, Inc.; and Approve Stipulated Final Judgment based on the acceptance of the Offer of Judgment. Approve necessary budget amendment. Ellen T. Chadwell Assistant County Attorney Date: REVIEWED BY: A1 Ruth, Sr. Project Manager Transportation/ECM Date: REVIEWED BY: Date: Mitch Riley, P.E., Principal Project Manager Transportation/ECM REVIEWED BY: Steve Miller, P.E., Director Transportation/ECM Date: REVIEWED BY: Norm Feder, Administrator Transportation Division Date: ['~ / 2 o/o [ APPROVED BY: David C. Weigel, County Attorney 2 Date: AGENDA ITEM NO. _ / ~' /--' Pg. 2 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF TIlE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL ACT1ON COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Petitioner, VS. OWEN M. WARD, Trustee, et al., Respondents. Case No.: 99-1291-CA Parcel No.: 142 OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO: John C. Lukacs, Esq. 201 Sevilla Avenue, Suite 305 Coral Gables, FL 33134 Plaintiff, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, pursuant to Section 73.032, Florida Statues, and Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.442, does hereby make this binding offer of judgment in this action to the Respondent, JERJO LIMITED, INC., for all compensation, including severance damages, business damages, costs to cure, together with the value of the taking, and any other claims of Respondent, JERJO LIMITED, hNC., arising out of the taking of Parcel 142, in the total amount of Fourteen Thousand Five Hundred and No/100 Dollars ($14,500.00), for Parcel 142, wh/ch includes the amount of $13,700.00 which xvas deposited pursuant to the Order of Taking dated June 18, 1999. There are no non-monetary terms or other relevant conditions to this offer except that this offer does not include interest from the date of the Order of Taking or attorneys fees and costs. AGENDA ITEM-'-, NO./~ L- ~.,, JAN 0 8 2002 Pg. The construction plans and specifications for the project on which the offer is based have been previously and continue to be made available for the Respondent(s) review upon reasonable notice o£such a request. Dated this day of ,2002. OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY Harmon Tumer Building 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, Florida 34112 (941) 774-8400 - Telephone (941) 774-0225 - Facsimile BY: ELLEN T. CHADWELL Florida Bar No. 0983860 Attorney for Petitioner CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished by U. S. mail to John C. Lukacs, Esq., 201 Sevilla Avenue, Suite 305, Coral Gables, Florida 33134 on this __ day of ., 2002. ELLEN T. CHADYVELL, ESQ. AGENDA ITEM No. JArl 0 8 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE THE STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE CONDEMNATION OF PARCEL 175C and 575C IN TIlE LAWSUIT ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V RICHARD H. EVANS, ETAL., CASE NO. 01- 1235-CA, LIVINGSTON ROAD PROJECT NO. 60071. OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners approve tile Stipulated Final Judgment as full and final compensation to be paid for the acquisition of the easement designated as Parcels 175C and 575C for the Livingston Road project in the lawsuit entitled Collier CotmO' v. Richard H. Evans, et al., Case No. 01-1235-CA. CONSIDERATIONS: On May 31, 2001, an Order of Taking was entered in Collier County Circuit Court regarding the condemnation of a twenty foot road right-of-way, drainage, utility and maintenance easement for the Livingston Road project (Project No. 60071). On June 12, 2001, Collier County deposited its good faith estimate of value with the Registry of the Court in the amount of Thirty Nine Thousand Two Hundred and No/100 Dollars (539,200.00) for Parcels 175C and 575C in accordance with the Order of Taking. Tile parent tract is an 18.868 acre tract encumbered by FPL easements and other easements except for 1.5136 acres in the northeast coruer and a 5 foot strip along the eastcru boundary. It is currently used as a nursery business. Our appraiser determined the highest and best use of the property as vacant is limited agriculture and the highest and best use of the property as iinproved is plant nursery. The property owner believes the highest and best use of the property is commercial and tire owner has asserted a business damage claim. Through negotiations, the parties have reached a settlement agreement whereby the Respondent, Richard H. Evans, will be fidly and fairly compensated for the property interests taken for the public purposes enumerated itl the resolution of condenrnation (Resolution No. 2001-46). The terms of the settlement agreement are set out in the Stipulated Final Judgment (attached as Exbibit "1"). The Stipulated Final Judgment provides for Forty Thousand Two Hundred Thirty Five and No/100 Dollars (S40,235.00) to be paid to the Respondent as full compensation including business damages for the property rights taken as to Parcels 175C and 575C. It also provides the County shall, at an approximate cost of $13,000.00, construct a right turn lane to Respondent's property. The County also agrees to waive its application deadline and permit Respondent to submit a proposed amendnrent to tile Furore Land Use Element of tile Collier County Growth Management Plan in the current amendment cycle to establish a commercial in-fill district on the remainder property allowing for professional and medical offices similar to tile development on Trade Center Way and/or non-commercial indoor storage by occupants of the buildings on Respondent's remaining land. This will allow Respondent to submit the proposed amendment in the current cycle and present the proposed amendment for recommendation and ultimate decision by the Collier County Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners in February or March of 2002. The Respondent's attorney has agreed to an attorney's fee ofS7,800.00. Pursuant to § 73.092(1), Florida Statutes, attorney's fees are based on the benefit derived and calculated at 33% of tile difference between the last offer of $29,300 and the full compensation of S40,235.00 plus the cost of the tum lane of approximately S 1 'uvJ~'I~flD^No. f/~ 12M 1 JAN 0 8 2002 pg. ,/ The Stipulated Final Judgment provides that Collier County shall deposit the additional amount of Eight Thousand Eight Hnndred Thirty Five and No/100 Dollars (S8,835.00) with the Registry of the Court. Staff has reviewed the County's obligations stated in the Stipulated Final Judgment and consider them to be reasonable. Growth Management staff has indicated no objection to a waiver of the time limit to submit a Growth Management Plan amendment application. t ,,.,s~F1SCAL IMPACT: A budget amendment is needed to transfer funds in the amount of S8,835.00 [,j,~x'" from Transportation hnpact Fee District 1 Fund Reserves. Source of funds are impact Fees. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: 3. 4. 5. SUBMITTED B'~: Waive the application and other procedural requirements set forth in Resolution 97-431 as necessary to carryout the terms of the Stipulated Final Judgment; and Approve the Stipulated Final Judgment; and Approve thc expenditure of the funds as stated; and Direct staffto deposit the sum of S8,835.00 into the Registry of the Court. Approve necessary budget amendment. ~ (. /,4_..~- ------.__ Date: [ 2-[ 2- t / O I Heidi F. Ashton, Assistant County Attorney REVIEWED BY: Mitch Rile)', P.E., Sr. Project Manager Transportatim9 ECM REVIE\VED BY: Steve Miller, P.E., Director Transportation/ECM Date: /-Z./z-:/,' / REVIEWED BY: Nom~ Feder, Administrator Transportation Division Date: /'2'/'z~/~' ! APPROVED BY: David C. Weigel ~ County Attorney 2 Date: IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR cOLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL ACTION COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Petitioner, RICHARD H. EVANS, et al., Respondents. Case No. 01-1235-CA Parcel No.: 175C & 575C STIPULATED FINAL J'UDGMENT THIS CAUSE having come before the Court upon Joint Motion made by Petitioner, by and through its undersigned counsel, and Respondent, RICHARD H. EVANS, for entry of a Stipulated Final Judgment as to Parcel 175C and 575C, and it appearing to the Court that the parties are authorized to make such Motion, the Court finding that the compensation to be paid by Petitioner is the full compensation due Respondent, RICHARD H. EVANS, and the Court being otherwise fully advised in the premises thereof, it is thereupon ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Respondent, RICHARD H. EVANS, have and recover from Petitioner, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORiDA, the sum of Forty Thonsand Two Hundred Thirty-Five and No/100 Dollars ($40,235.00) for Parcel Nos. 175C and 575C as full monetary payment for the property, interests taken for damages resulting to the remainder, if less I'han the entire property was taken, business damages, and for all other damages in connection with said parcels; it is further ORDERED that Collier County shall construct, at its expense, a right turn lane, curb cut and access driveway to Respondent's property during the construction of Livingston Road AGENDA ITEM -_,. J..,-~,rl 0 8 2O02 80/£0'd S~E0~666 Ol 866~ ~'Z~' I~6 ~]] A~ - SBS~ ~ S£:9~ ~00~]~3B~ in accordance with the pla.~ dated December 13, 2001 prepared by Davidson Engineering, Inc., provided Respondent conveys easements to Collier County pursuant to this Stipulated Final Judgment. Respondent agrees to assume all rislcs and any liability associated with the construction of the turn lane prior to the issuance of development permits and approvals including, but not limited to, site development plan approval; it is further ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Respondent, RICHARD H. EVANS, shall convey to Collier County, at no cost to the County and within thirty (30) days of this Stipulated final Judgment, an additional roadway easement twelve (12) f~et in width measured from the westerly edge of the County's existing road easement for the construction of the right turn lane into Respondent's property; and, a replacement ten (10) foot slope easement contiguous thereto to the west thereof; both easements free and clear of all liens and encttmbrance$; it is further ORDERED that the County agrees to waive its application deadline and permit Respondent to submit a proposed amendment to the Future Land Use Element of the Collier County Growth Mnn~gement Plan to establish a commercial in-fill district on the remainder propert~ allowing for professional and medical offices, similar to the development on Trade Center Way and/or non-commercial indoor storage by occupants of the buildings on Respondent's remaining land. The County agrees further that the proposed plan amendment will be reviewed as a non-transmitted comprehensive plan amendment to be considered by the Board of County Commissioners in the current plan amendment cycle; it is further ORDERED that Respondent shall submit its application for amendment to the Future Land Use Element of the County's Growth Management Plan to Collier County by January 4, 2002 and shall include a limited market study, a limited traffic anMysis, a conceptual plan, which will include the depiction of access, and a sketch or drawing of -2- QBNAP\332957.3 SO/P0'd ~h~~foperb j~.:~ rj 8 2002 The County may request additional information needed to evaluate the proposed amendment; it is further ORDERED that Respondent undersmn~ that if the plan amendment is adopted by the Board, it will be submitted to the DCA for review and that by proceeding with a non- transmitted ~mendmen£ and if there is a finding of nomcompliance, Respondent agrees to assume responsibility for defending the plan amendment, which may include intervening in an administrative proceeding, participating in a consent agreement, or any other act/on deemed oeczssary and appropriate to obtain DCA approval; it is further ORDERED that Respondent, RICHARD H. EVANS, receive from Petitioner as a reasonable attorneys' fee the sum of Seven Thousand Eight Hundred and No/100 Dollars ($7,800.00) for all monetary and non-monetary benefits. Except as provided herein, no attorneys' fees or other costs shall be awarded in connection with th,~ aboYe-styled caus~ of action as it relates to Parcels 175C and 57fC; it is further ORDERED that Petitioner shall deposit an additional Eight Thousand Ei*~ht Hundred Thirry-l:ive and No/100 Dollars (S8,835.00) subject to approval of the Board of County Commissioners within thirty (30) days of the date of this Stipulated Final Judgment; it is further ORDERED that the Court resetwes jurisdiction to award Respondent, as to Parcel Nos. 175C and $75C, reasonable costs incurred in the defense of this proceeding, including but not limited to reasonable appraisal fees as permitted by Section 73.091, Florida Statutes; it is further QBNAP\332957.4 L0/50 'ct AGENDA iTEi'~' ?'~- ,,qo, / & . &, _ .£ J,:,;i 0 8 2002 ORDERED that the Court reserves jurisdiction to apportion and disburse the award of Forty Thousand Two Hundred Thirty-Five and No/100 Dollars ($40,235.00) referred to above; it is further ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court shall disburse the total amount of Seven ~housand Eight Hundr~l dollars and No/100 ($7,800.00) to QUARLES & BRADY TRUST ACCOUNT c/o F. Joseph McMackin, 11I, Esquire, Queries & Brady LLP, 4501 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300, Naples, Florida 34103, for monetary and non-monetary benefits; it is further ORDERED that title to Paxcel No. 175C, a roadway, drainage, utility and maintenance easement, and Parcel No. 575C, a slope easement, being fully described in Ex~fibit ~A" attached hereto and incorporated herein, which vested in Petitioner pursuant to the Order of Taking dated May 31, 2001, and the deposit of money heretofore trade, is approved, ratified, and confirmed; it is further ORDERED that the Notice of Lis Pendens filed in the above-styled cause and recorded in Official Record Book 2795, Page 1659 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida be dismissed as to Parcel Nos. 175C and 575C; and it is further ORDERED that this Stipulated Final Judgment is to be recorded in the Official Records of Collier County, Florida; it is therefore -4- -- i AGENDA !TEA'~ , JAN 0 8 2002 QBNAP\332957.3 DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Naples, Collier County, Florida, ~his . of January, 2002. CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE Conformed copies to: Heidi F. Ashton, Esquire F. Joseph McMackin, Iff, Esquire Bernsen Nurseries, LC Collier Counq' Tax Collector Bookkeeping JOINT MOTION FOR STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT The Parties hereby stipulate and respectfully request this Court to enter thc foregoing Stipulated Final Judgment as to parcel Nos. 175C and 575C. Dated: December ~., 2001 ~. JOSF~It MCMT~_ C~i[N, m, F~QUIR~ Florida~tar No. 163810 ~ T~i Tr~ No~, Suite 300 Naples, Florida 34103 (941) 26Z-5959 - Telephone (941) 4344999 - Facsimile A~O~Y FOR ~SPO~ENT Dated: December ,2001 ItEIDI F. ASHTON, ESQUIRE Florida Bar No. 966770 COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Harmon Turner Building 3301 East Tamlami Trail Naples, Florida 34112 (941) 774-8400 - Telephone (941) 774-0225 - Facsimile ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER QBNAPX332957.3 EO×&O ' d -5- AGENDA ITEM ,, J .... O 8 2002 pg. "~ a..IPETUAL, NON-EXCLUSIVE ROAD R/O1FF-OF-WAY, DRAINAOE. PROJECT PARCEL NO; lAX PARCEL NO.~m~ SECTION 1J, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA SKETCH OF RIGHT-OF-WAY PARCEL (NOT A SURVEY) (SEE SHEET 6 OF 5 FOR DESCRIPTION OF RIGtiT-OF-WAY PARCEL) MATCHLIN£ SEE SHEET 2 OF 4 · Iltl~ ~ SECTION COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA SKETCH OF .RIGHT-OF-WAY PARCEL [NOT A SURVEY) (SEE SHEET 6 OF 6 'FOR DESCRIPTION OF RIGHT-~]F-WAY PARCEL) TAX PARCEL NO. __ TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST N MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 3 OF ~ I SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANOE 25 EAST COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA SKETCH OF RIGHT-OF-WAy pARCEl_' (NOT A SURVE'O ($£E SHEET ~ OF 6 FOR DESCRIPTION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY PARCEL) I ~ I PAR~L 175C ~ ROAO ~ J BEARINGS ARE BA5ED ON ~E FLORIDA STATE P~AN CODRDINATE SYSTEM. EAST ZONE ! SECTION 13, 'ERPE'FUAL, NON-EXCLUSIVE ROAD RIOHT~)F-%VA¥,DITAINAOE, . UTILITY & MAINT,/EASEMEN'r PARCEL NO. __ TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA DE'SCRIPTION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY ?A~L 175C AGENDA. ITEM ~°-5~-'-- · I JAr. O 8 2002 · .';';:' ~.'~' "/-/' PROJ[CT PARC[L NO; 5~CTIO~ 13, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RA~C~ 25 ~AST COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ~ . SKETCH OF SLOP~ EASeMeNT (~OT A SURVEY) (SEE SHEET 4 OF 4 FOR ~ESCRiPTION OF SLOPE EASEMENT~ MATCHLINE SEE SHEET ~ OF 4 ~ ~ 5CA~: 1" ~ 100' }ZZ Z ZZZZZZT--- ZZSZ[Z PROJECT pARCEL NO~ TAX PARCEL NO, SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA SKETCH OF SLOPE EAS£MFJqT (HOT ~ATCHLIN~ SEE SHEET 3 OF 4 ~'- :~ ~, ... IIII1~n"~n / / SCXL[:~ ' '~' SECTION 15, SKETCH OF SLOPE EAS~NT (NOT A SuRvEY) (SEE SHEET '~ OF 4 FOR DESCRIPTION OF SLOPE EASEI4ENT) TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA :p,ad., £AS;UENT F.P,&L £ASEU£HT PARCEL N [ii: - I ~j: ,':~ I MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 2 OF 4 eEA,'~INOS ARE eASED DN T~-~E FLORIDA STATE PLAN COORDINATE SYSTEM, 'EAST ZONE PREPARED BY: ' SHEE3~ ~ IIII1~'~ ' ~// s~.~,. · ,~ ~ ~ m ,m ~ ~ ,~ ,~.. ~-,,, Ira),,-,,* CHECKED B~A - PROJECT NO.;~ SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA D£'SCRIPTfON OF SLOPE EASEMENT AGENDA ri'EM JAN 0 8 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AUTHORIZE TIlE MAKING OF AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENTS, RUSSELL BAISLEY AND PATRICIA M. BAISLEY, FOR PARCEL 160 IN THE AMOUNT OF $29,960 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. RUSSELL BAISLEY, ET AL., CASE NO. 01-0758-CA. PROJECT NO. 60071. OBJECTIVE: To approve and authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment pursuant to Section 73.032 Fla. Stat. to Respondents, Russell Baisley and Patricia M. Baisley, in the amount of $29,960.00 as full compensation for the condemnation of Parcel 160 in Collier Cozm0' v. RusselI Baisley, et al., Case No. 01-0758-CA. CONSIDERATIONS: On February 22, 2001, an eminent domain action was filed for the acquisition of property for the Livingston Road project from Golden Gate Parkway to Pine Ridge Road, On May 31, 2001, an Order of Taking was entered by the Circuit Court as to Parcel 160. The County's last offer dated November 30, 2000 was in the amount of $13,300.00. On June 7, 2001, the good faith estimate of value for this parcel in the amount of $21,700.00 ;vas deposited into the Court Registry, thereby vesting title in the parcel in Collier County. The Offer of Jud~mnent, a copy of which is attached, offers the property owners of this Parcel, Russell Baisley and Patricia M. Baisley, the sum of $29,960.00 as full compensation for the property taken, including any severance damages, business damages, damages to the remainder, and costs to cure. This figure takes into account the basis for the appraised value and the potential risks and costs in proceeding to thai. The making of the Offer of Judgment will require the property owners to carefully assess their claims for compensation. Russell Baisley and Patricia M. Baisley have thirty days from the date of mailing the offer to accept. If Russell Baisley and Patricia M. Baisley accept, the County will be required to deposit an additional $8260.00 into the registry, and the total sum of funds on deposit, or S29,960.00, xvill be paid to Russell Baisley and Patricia M. Baisley by Stipulated Final Judgment of the Court. If Russell Baisley and Patricia M. Baisley reject the offer and fail to recover more than $29,960.00 for Parcel 160, either through settlement or jury verdict, the County will not be required to pay any costs incurred by Russell Baisley and Patricia M. Baisley after the date of the offer's rejection. This would include any expert witness fees, such as appraisal fees. The County Attorney's Office has reviewed all considerations in making an Offer of Judgment and has calculated in good faith this offer of full compensation for the property interests taken. This office considers the terms of the Offer of Judgment to be reasonable. FISCAL IMPACT: A budget amendment is needed to transfer funds in tbe amount of $8,260.00 from the Transportation Impact Fee District I Reserve Fund. Source of Funds are Impact Fees. AGENDA ITEM N O. ~.~_J--. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. JAN 0 8 2002 RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: Approve the temps of the Offer of Judgment and authorize its service on Respondents, Russell Baisley and Patricia M. Baisley; and Approve the expenditure of funds as stated; and Authorize $8260.00 to be paid into the Registry of the Court in the event the Off'er of Judgment is accepted by Russell Baisley and Patricia M. Baisley; and Approve Stipulated Final Judgment based on the acceptance of the Offer of Judgment. SUBMITTED BY: Approve tbe necessary budget amendment. Heidi F fAshton Assistant County Attorney Date: REVIEWED BY: REVIEWED BY: REVIEWED BY: APPROVED BY: Mitch Riley, P E., Sr. Project Manager Transportatiow'ECM Steve Miller, P.E., Director Transportatimz/ECM N~/~ ~~ator Transportation Division David C. Weigel County Attorney Date: Date: Date: Date: h:Lif EmDoma/ff Baislcy ExSum-Oft'erP 160 2 AGENDA. ITEM 'NO. JAN 0 8 2002 Pig.- 1N THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETIt JUDICIAL CIRCUIT 1N AND FOR COLL1ER COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL ACTION COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Petitioner, RUSSELL BAISLEY, et al., Respondents. / OFFER OF JUDGMENT Case No.: 01-0758-CA Parcel No.: t60 TO: Charles R. Fonnan, Esquire FORMAN, KREHL & MONTGOMERY 320 NW Third Street P. O. Box 159 Ocala, Florida FL 34478-0159 Petitioner, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, pursuant to Section 73.032, Florida Statutes, and Fla. R.Civ.P. 1.442, does hereby make this binding offer of judgment in this action to Respondents, RUSSELL BAISLEY and PATRICIA M. BAISLEY, for all compensation, including severance damages, business damages, costs to cure, together with the value of the taking, and any other claims of Respondents, RUSSELL BAISLEY and PATRICIA M. BAISLEY, arising out of the taking of Parcel 160, in the total amount of Twenty Nine Thousand Nine Hundred Sixty and 00/100 Dollars ($29,960.00) for Parcel 160, which includes the amount of $21,700.00 which was deposited pursuant to the Order of taking dated May 31, 2001. There are no non-monetary terms or other relevant conditions to this offer e! offer does not include interest from the date of the Order of Taking or attorney's fees AGENDA ITEM a n d4,."'~o s. LS ~_.]/0.J,___ JAN O 8 2002 The Construction plans and specifications for the project on which the offer is based have been previously made available to Respondents and continue to be made available for Respondents rev'ew upon reasonable notice of such request. Dated this day of January, 2002. OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY Harmon Turner Building 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, Florida 34112 (941) 774-8400 - Telephone (941) 774-0225 - Facsimile BY: HEIDI F. ASHTON Florida Bar No. 0966770 ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Offer of Judgment has been furnished to Charles R. Forrnan, Esquire, FORMAN, KREHL & MONTGOMERY, 320 W Third Street, P. O. Box 159, Ocala, Florida 34478-0159 by U. S. mail this __ day of January, 2002. HEIDI F. ASHTON, ESQUIRE h: LitXBaisI¢)\O ffer- 160 2 '~GENDA ITEM .,-' % JAN 08 2002 ....I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AUTHORIZE THE MAKING OF AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENT, ELFRIEDA HOUGHTON SUTHERLAND, TRUSTEE OF THE RESIDUARY TRUST, FOR PARCELS 172 AND 772 IN THE AMOUNT OF $18,000 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. DOMINIQUE C. RIHS, AS TRUSTEE OF THE LAND TRUST NUMBER S146-1, ETAL., CASE NO. 01-0819-CA. PROJECT NO. 60071. OBJECTIVE: To approve and autborize the making of an Offer of Judgment pursuant to Section 73.032 Fla. Stat. to Respondent, Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland, Trustee of the Residuary Trust established under Article V of the George R. Sutherland, Sr. Revocable Trust dated 5/8/85, in the amount of $18,000 as full compensation for the condemnation of Parcels 172 and 772 in Collier CounO~ v. Dominique C. Ribs, as D'ustee of the Land D'ust Number S146-1, et al., Case No. 01-0819-CA. CONSIDERATIONS: On February 22, 2001, an eminent domain action was filed for the acquisition of property for the Livingston Road project from Golden Gate Parkway to Pine Ridge Road. On May 31, 2001, an Order of Taking xvas entered by the Circuit Court as to Parcels 172 and 772. The County's last offer dated November 30, 2000 was in the amount of S9600.00. On June 7, 2001, the good faith estimate of value for these parcels in the amount of S 13,800.00 was deposited into the Court Registry, thereby vesting title in the parcels in Collier County. The Offer of Judgment, a copy of which is attached, offers the property owner of these Parcels, Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland, Trustee of the Residuary Trust, the sum of S18,000.00 as full compensation for the property taken, including any severance damages, business damages, damages to the remainder, and costs to cure. This figure takes into account the basis for the appraised value and tbe potential risks and costs in proceeding to trial. The making of the Offer of Judgment will require the property owner to carefully assess her claims for compensation. Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland, Trustee of the Residuary Trust, has thirty days from the date of mailing the offer to accept. If Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland, Trustee of the Residuary Trust accepts, the County will be required to deposit an additional $4200.00 into the registry, and the total sum of funds on deposit, or $18,000.00, will be paid to Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland, Trustee of the Residuary Trust by Stipulated Final Judgment of the Court. If Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland, Trustee of the Residuary Trust rejects the offer and fails to recover more than $18,000.00 for Parcels 172 and 772, either through settlement or jury verdict, the County xvill not be required to pay any costs incurred by Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland, Trustee of the Residuary Trust after the date of the offer's rejection. This would include any expert xvitness fees, such as appraisal fees. The County Attorney's Office has reviewed all considerations in making an Offer of Judgment and has calculated in good faith this offer of full compensation for the property interests taken. This office considers the terms of the Offer of Judgment to be reasonable. ¢~xFISCAL IMPACT: A budget amendment is needed to transfer funds in the amount of S4 200.00 from the Transportation lmpact Fee District I Reserve Fund. Source of Funds are Impact Fees. GROWTIt MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: 5. Approve the necessary budget.amendment. H'eidi F. Ashton Assistant County Attorney That the Board of County Commissioners: Approve the temas of the Offer of Judgment and authorize its service on Respondent, Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland, Trustee of the Residuary Trust; and Approve tire expenditure of funds as stated; and Authorize S4200.00 to be paid into the Registry of tire Court in the event the Offer of Judgment is accepted by Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland, Trustee of thc Residuary Trust; and Approve Stipulated Final Judgment based on the acceptance of the Offer of Judgment. Date: REVIEWED BY: REVIE\VED BY: REVIEXVED BY: APPROVED BY: Mitch Riley, P.E., Sr. Project Manager TransportatimgECM Date: Steve Miller, P.E., Director Transpor~atiot~"ECM Tra,n'sportation Division David C. Weigel ~ County Attorney Date: Date: h: Lit EmDomain\Rihs' ExSum Ofl~rPI72&772 2 AGENDAtTEM - NO. _lb.L~_ JAN 0 8 2002 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETIt JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL ACTION COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Petitioner, DOMINIQUE C. RIHS, as Trustee of the Land Trust Number S146-1, et al., Respondents. Case No.: 01-0819-CA Parcel Nos.: 172 and 772 OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO: Kenneth A. Jones, Esquire ROETZEL & ANDRESS 2320 First Street, Suite 1000 Fort Myers, Florida 33901 Petitioner, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, pursuant to Section 73.032, Florida Slatutex, and Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.442, does hereby make this binding offer of judgment in this action to Respondent, ELFRIEDA HOUGHTON SUTHERLAND, Trustee of the Residuary Trust, for all compensation, including severance damages, business damages, costs to cure, together with the value of the taking, and any other claims of Respondent, ELFRIEDA HOUGHTON SUTHERLAND, Trustee of the Residuary Trust established under Article V of the George R. Sutherland, Sr,. Revocable Trust dated 5/8/85, arising out of the taking of Parcels 172 and 772, in the total amount of Eighteen Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($18,000.00) for Parcels 172 and 772, which includes the amount of $13,800.00 which was deposited pursuant to the Order of taking dated May 31, 2001. There are no non-monetary terms or other relevant conditions to this offer except that this offer does not include interest from the date of the Order of Taking or attorney's fees and costs. AGI/NDA ITEM ~- No. _ .lAN 0 8 2002 The Construction plans and specifications for the project on which the offer is based have been previously made available to Respondent and continue to be made available for Respondent's review upon reasonable notice of such request. Dated this __day of January, 2002. OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY Harmon Turner Building 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, Florida 34112 (941) 774-8400 - Telephone (941) 774-0225 - Facsimile BY: HEIDI F. ASHTON Florida Bar No. 0966770 ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Offer of Judgment has been furnished to Kenneth A. Jones, Esquire, ROETZEL & ANDRESS, 2320 First Street. Suite 1000, Fort Myers, Florida 33901 by U. S. mail this day of January, 2002. HEIDI F. ASHTON, ESQUIRE h:Lil~EmDomainLRihs-Offcr 172&772 JAN 2002 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECOSLMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS APPROVE THE PRE-LITIGATION SETTLEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA (hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY") and ITS FORMER THIRD PARTY ADSHNISTRATOR, CRAMJgR, JOHNSON, WIGGINS & ASSOCIATES (hereinafter referred to as "CJ&W") FOR ITS FAILURE TO GIVE NOTICE AND OBTAIN CONSENT OF THE DEFENDANT, NATIONAL UNION INSURANCE CO., IN THE AMOUNT OF NINE THOUSAND, SEVEN HUNDRED and FIFTY DOLLARS ($9,750). SAID PRE- LITIGATION SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS WAS PREVIOUSLY REFERENCED IN THE SETTLEMENT IN THE CASE STYLED COLLIER COUNTY v. NATIONAL UNION INSURANCE CO. OF PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA attd AIG CLAIMS SERVICES, INC., CASE NO. 00-2305-CA, WHICH WAS SETTLED AND APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY CONLM1SSIONERS ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001. SAID SETTLEMENT WAS ARRIVED AT DURlNG PRE-SUIT SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS. OB,1ECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the pre-litigation settlement bemeen Collier County, Florida and its former third par~y administrator, CJ&W, in the amount of (59,750). Said pre-litigation settlement negotiations xvere previously referenced in the settlement in the case styled Collier CounO' v. National Union Insurance Company of Pittsburgh Pennsyh,ania and AIG Clabns Services, Inc., Case No. 00-2305-CA, which was settled and approved by the Board of County Commissioners on September 11, 2001. Said settlement was an'ived at during settlement negotiations. CONSIDERATIONS: Prior to pursuing litigation against the County's former third party administrator, CJ&W, a negotiated settlement was roached between the parties in the amount of $9,750. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the undersigned Assistant County Attorney and Risk Management Staff that the $9,750 settlement is reasonable under all of the circumstances. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve a settlement with the pnncipal terms set forth in this Executive Summary. Prepared by: x~Jilliam E. I~ou~tf~rd Assistant County Attomey AGENDA iTEM No.__/&& ~q( JAN - 8 2_002 pg._ / Reviewed and Approved by: David C. Weigel County Attorney Reviewed and Approved by: J6ffray W"alke~:, Director Risk Managemeot Department H:~'ublic\Li6~tlon',Open Cmses~Natkmal Union. AlG.Couglin\CJW EXECLITF~'E SUMMARY doc 2 AGENDA ITEM No, JAN - 8 ~00~. Pg.__~ Documents 09/11/200 16L I KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE pRESENTS; '~at COLLIER COLINB"Y, ~t political subdlvls~:~,n of the S'~te of Florida, for lbmelf and Its affiliates, agents, servanlJ, heir,., legal aesocislions a, nd assigns. (hereinafter Jcl?Sly ?Ma?ted to u "RELEASeRs"} for m?d in :onsidaretiori ~f the sum of SIXTEEN THOUSAND ($16,000,C~1 DOLLARS AND NO CENTS end or ethel ve[ual:~la c~neide?atJon, do HEREBY ?senile, ~eleese, acquit, sm/Idy, ~md fo?ever discharge NATIONAL UNI ON INSURANCE COMPANY OF PI'IB'SBURGH PENNSYLVANIA end AID CLAIMS SERVICES, [NC:-., ~9eir e~llmtes, m~erY~.& servants, heirs, legal rep?ese?al, at[vas, insurers, 'RBLEABEE6"), of mt~d ,fi~m ~u'~y, and ell menher ~ acl~on a.~d e~leris, cause and ceu,me~, of ect~on, wuits, del=la, dues, sums of moP, ay, ac, c~k~n~s, reCkOnings, bonds, bills, b. espasse~, damages, judgmeert& executl<:ri~, de[ms and d~'~ands whatsoever, in law or in equity, ,a, hlc~ ~mald EI::LEA~O~S ever hsd, now have, or whic~ any personal representer[Ye, ~cce~m~or, hair or assign of said RELEASCR$. ever he~ =r ~mv has, aga!n~ RELEAeEE for, ul:e~ cc by meson of any matt~, t~u~e e? thing whats<:ever, from the beginning of the world [o the day of ~ese premer'tt~ v~io9 r~1,,te and/or pertain lo any ~,nd ail maY. ers or th[n~ claimed or assayed, ~ which could have t:~n claimed cr asselrte~. In [he pLeadinGs In thai cedain Iewsuit pan~lng In the Ctt'c~it Cou~ of the 20~h J~:ilc1BI Circuit I~A~d per C~qller Cc~-,'~, Flodda and styled, coLmIER COUNTY, FIG?ida, e political .~Jt:~dlv~el~n of the $1~a FR.'Ida v. hIATIONAL UNION INSURANCE COMPANY OF PFITSBUROH pENNSYS.',/AIqlA a~ AIC, C;LAIMB ~ERVICEB, INC., Case No.; CO. 2305 CA. RELEASERS here'm/ warta~t and represent ~m~ no olher persons, fi?ms. pertn.~rsh[p~o corporations or entities have o? Rave he0 ar~y Ir~tereat I~ the claims, ~mer, ds, obligations tx,' causes ~ act, on re,fen, ed [o herelnah~¥e. P. ELEAI~ORS hereby 'w'm'ra~ and ~l:~'ese~ IJqey have the s~is right and excl~lve authority t~ execute thts re[ease en~l to receive the sum specified heteinabove. REL.EA$OR$ hereby w~'m~ &,'d ~,prese~!, they have r'~,t sold, assi~r~ed, k-et'et'erred, conveyetl or ,',Ihs?wise, ,41apoe~:~ of a~y of ~he claims, Camendlm, oOliga'do~s, or causes De' e~on t'~elTed to herel~above. It Is u~-st~od end e~rsecl by RELEASeRs that ~e ea~leme~t embodied In this release of claims Is · c~mprcmlse of disputed doubtful, arid coBUr~'~'~t claims, and the part ,,f any of the RELEASERS ~ wh~m any fault or IIabtli~/Ia expressly der, led, _ age [5380 of 547511 I Pov.'ered by LaserFiche WebLink ,.,5.01: Registered to Collier County Clerk of Court AGENDA ITEM qo /~ z. http://WWWmClerk.collier.fl.us/scfipts/LFWcbLink.exe/weblinklrcsults.html?d°c=l 1635&t '~" -'12/i'8~-00 I~--'- Documents 09/11/2001 R Page 2 of 2 Cailler Cra.tory w Netlo~al Un,on, etc. Llmitud Ra[aaga 16L 1 By e~tsdng In~o the settlan'u~nL m~rmm'r'm~ u~l~ ~ embodI~ In ~ls reload, of their ~w~ive a~me~, wh~ a~e Ihe a~e~ ~ ~elr ~ ~oi~', ~h~ ~e ~e~s ~ ~e ml~ ~ ~en ~lete~ ~ en~ ~laln~ ~o REL~ORS by their ~nabove set ~h an~ fat ~e ,~m~* p~ ~ ~r~[ud~ng ~mver ~y a~lon~ maims adsi~ our ~ ~e s~e~ incide~ ~IN WITNESS ~EREOF, ~ave heatrite aet ~ay ' ' ~h.D. ~ ~/' -' -~., ~ ,,.'~' COUN~ O~ ~ t~ f~i~ Inatrum~t and ~ ~e~ ~re ~e ~at he ~e~ l~ WI~ES$ my he~d ~nd ~ctal ~1 ~n ~ Cou~ a~ S~te las~ aforesaid ~T~ ~ IPage I53a~ of 54751 ~l Pox~ered by LaserFiche WebLink v5.01: Registered to Collier County Clerk of Court AGENDA ITEM No ...... _/~.._Z,_-- ,lAN - 8 21102 pg -f ' °'7 -~Z. J http://www.clerk.collier.fl.us/scripts/LFWebLink.exe/weblin 'k/results.html?doc=11635&t)... 12/18/2001 Documents 09/11/2001 R Page 2 of 2 16L 1 ~l IPage 18382 of 547511~ I Powered by LaserFiche WebLink v5.0 l: Registered to Collier County Clerk of Court AGENDA ITEM No. ,lAN - 8 pg._ __~ _ http:l/www.c~erk.c~~~ier.f~.us/scriptsFLFWebLink.exe/web~ink/resu~ts.htm~ ? d~c=~ ~ 6 3 5&t~... 12/18/2001 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AUTHORIZE THE MAKING OF AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENT, PINE RIDGE ASSOCIATES, LTD., FOR PARCELS 103B AND 703B IN THE AMOUNT OF $1000.00 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. PINE RIDGE ASSOCIATES 11, LTD, ET AL., CASE NO. 00-0488-CA. PROJECT NO. 60111. OBJECTIVE: Approve and authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment pursuant to Section 73.032 F.S., to Respondent, Pine Ridge Associates, Ltd., in the amount of $1000.00 as full compensation for the condemnation of Parcels 103B and 703B in Collier Cotolty v. Pine Ridge 'A Associates I1, Ltd., et al., Case No. 00-0488-£.. CONSIDERATIONS: On February 9, 2000, an eminent domain action was filed for the acquisition of property for the Pine Ridge Road project from Airport Road to Logan Boulevard. On April 5, 2000, an Order of Taking was entered by the Circuit Court as to Parcels 103B and 703B which are a roadway, sidewalk, drainage, utility and maintenance easement and a temporary construction easement. The County's last offer dated November 8, 1999 was in the amount of $300.00. On April 21, 2000, the good faith estimate of value for these parcels in the amount of $300.00 was deposited into the Court Registry, thereby vesting title in the parcels in Collier County. The Offer of Judgment, a copy of which is attached, offers the property owner of these Parcels, Pine Ridge Associates, Ltd., the sum of $1000.00 as full compensation for the property taken, includin~ any severance damages, business damages, damages to the remainder, and costs to cure. This figure takes into account the basis for the appraised value and the potential risks and costs in proceeding to trial. The making of the Offer of Judgment will require the property owner to carefully assess its claims for compensation. Pine Ridge Associates, Ltd. has thirty days from the date of mailing the offer to accept. If Pine Ridge Associates, Ltd. accepts, the County will be required to deposit an additional $700.00 into the registry, and the total sum of funds on deposit, or $1000.00, will be paid to Pine Ridge Associates, Ltd. by Stipulated Final Judgment of the Court. If Pine Ridge Associates, Ltd. rejects the offer and fails to recover more than $1000.00 for Parcels 103B and 703B, either through settlement or jury verdict, the County will not be required to pay any costs incurred by Pine Ridge Associates, Ltd. after the date of the offer's rejection. This would include any expert witness fees, such as appraisal fees. The County Attorney's Office has reviewed all considerations in making an Offer of Judgment and has calculated in good faith this offer of full compensation for the property interests taken. This office considers the terms of the Offer of Judgment to be reasonable. ~,x?FISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $700.00 are available in the Road Construction Gas ~Tax Fund. Source of Funds are Gas Taxes. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: 1. Approve the terms of the Offer of Judgment and authorize its service Pine Ridge Associates, Ltd.; and NO. 2002 Pg. Approve the expenditure of funds as stated; and Authorize $700.00 to be paid into thc Registry of the Court in the event the Offer of Judgment is accepted by Pine Ridge Associates, Ltd.; and Approve Stipulated Final Judgment based on thc acceptance of the Offer of Judgment. SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: REVIEWED BY: REVIEWED BY: ./"'p--,/-,-..~ ~--- Date: Heidi F. Ashton Assistant County Attorney Skip M~lichael, P.E., Project Manager Transportation~CM Mitch Riley, P.E., Sr. Project Manager Transportation/ECM Steve Miller, P.E., Director Transportation/ECM REVIEWED BY: APPROVED BY: Norm Feder, Administrator Transportation Division David C. Weigel County Attorney Date: h Lit\EmDomainq'ineRidgeAsstx:\ExSum-O ffe~P103 B&703B 2 JAN 0 8 2002 1N THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA C1V1L ACTION COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA a political subdivision of the State of Flor/da, Petitioner, Case No.: 00-0488-CA VS. PINE RIDGE ASSOCIATES I1, LTD., a Florida Limited Partnership, et al., Respondents. Parcel Nos.: 103B and 703B OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO: Lewis Ansbacher, Registered Agent 4215 Southpoint Boulevard Suite I00 Jacksonville. Florida 32216 Lawrence Ansbacher, Esquire P. O. Box 551260 Jacksonville, Florida 32255-1260 Petitioner, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, pursuant to Section 73.032, F.S., and Fla. R.Civ. P. 1.442, does hereby make this binding offer of judgment in this action to Respondent, PINE RIDGE ASSOCIATES, LTD., for all compensation, including severance damages, business damages, costs to cure, together with the value of the taking, and any other claims of Respondent, PINE RIDGE ASSOCIATES, LTD., arising out of the taking of Parcels 103B and 703B in the total amount of One Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($1,000.00) for Parcels 103B and 703B, which includes the amount of $300.00 which was deposited pursuant to the Order of taking dated April 5, 2000. There are no non monetary terms or other relevant conditions to this offer excel/t--'thaU;h~'~,.rr,ta .... offer does not include interest from the date of the Order of Taking or attomev's fees an~t cdeV.. The Construction plans and specifications for the project on which the offer is based have been previously made available to Respondent and continue to be made available for Respondent's review upon reasonable notice of such request. Dated this day of ,2002. OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY Harmon Turner Building 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, Florida 34112 (941) 774-8400 - Telephone (941) 774-0225 - Facsimile BY: HEIDI F. ASHTON, ESQUIRE Florida Bar No. 966770 ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Offer of Judgment has been furnished to Lewis Ansbacher, Registered Agent, 4215 Southpoint Boulevard, Suite 100, Jacksonville, Florida 32216 and Lawrence Ansbacher, Esquire, P. O. Box 551260, Jacksonville, Florida 32255-1260 by U. S. mail this day of ,2002. HEIDI F. ASHTON, ESQUIRE h: Lit~Pine RidgeA ss oc~OJ - [ 03B&703B 2 AGENr'~A/TEM ~ JAN 0 8 2002 Pg.__ ~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AUTHORIZE THE MAKING OF AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENT, PINE RIDGE ASSOCIATES II, LTD., FOR PARCELS 103A AND 703A IN THE AMOUNT OF $1000.00 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. PINE RIDGE ASSOCIATES II, LTD., ET AL., CASE NO. 00-0488-CA. PROJECT NO. 60111. OBJECTIVE: Approve and authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment pursuant to Section 73.032 F.S., to Respondent, Pine Ridge Associates II, Ltd., in the amount of $1000.00 as full compensation for the condemnation of Parcels 103A and 703A in Collier County v. Pine Ridge Associates H, Ltd., et al., Case No. 00-0488-CA. CONSIDERATIONS: On February 9, 2000, an eminent domain action was filed for the acquisition of property for the Pine Ridge Road project from Airport Road to Logan Boulevard. On April 5, 2000, an Order of Taking was entered by the Circuit Court as to Parcels 103A and 703A which are a roadway, sidewalk, drainage, utility and maintenance easement and a temporary construction easement. The County's last offer dated November 8, 1999 was in the amount of $300.00. On April 21, 2000, the good faith estimate of value for these parcels in the amount of $300.00 was deposited into the Court Registry, thereby vesting title in the parcels in Collier County. The Offer of Judgment, a copy of which is attached, offers the property owner of these Parcels, Pine Ridge Associates II, Ltd., the sum of $1000.00 as full compensation for the property taken, including any severance damages, business damages, damages to the remainder, and costs to cure. This figure takes into account the basis for the appraised value and the potential risks and costs in proceeding to thai. The making of the Offer of Judgment will require the property owner to carefully assess its claims for compensation. Pine Ridge Associates II, Ltd. has thirty days from the date of mailing the offer to accept. If Pine Ridge Associates II, Ltd. accepts, the County will be required to deposit an additional $700.00 into the registry, and the total sum of funds on deposit, or $1000.00, will be paid to Pine Ridge Associates II, Ltd. by Stipulated Final Judgment of the Court. If Pine Ridge Associates II, Ltd. rejects the offer and fails to recover more than $1000.00 for Parcels 103A and 703A, either through settlement or jury verdict, the County will not be required to pay any costs incurred by Pine Ridge Associates II, Ltd. after the date of the offer's rejection. This would include any expert witness fees, such as appraisal fees. The County Attorney's Office has reviewed all considerations in making an Offer of Judgment and has calculated in good faith this offer of full compensation for the property interests taken. This office considers the terms of the Offer of Judgment to be reasonable. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $700.00 are available in the Road Construction Gas ~Tax Fund. Source of Funds are Gas Taxes. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: 1. Approve the terms of the Offer of Judgment and authorize its service on Pine Ridge Associates II, Ltd.; and AGENDA ITEM ]AH 0 8 2002 Approve the expenditure of funds as stated; and Authorize $700.00 to be paid into the Registry of the Court in the event the Offer of Judgment is accepted by Pine Ridge Associates I1, Ltd.; and Approve Stipulated Final Judgment based on the acceptance of the Offer of Judgment. SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: Heidi F. Ashton Assistant County Attorney ~kip McI~'l~chael, P.E., Project Manager Transport'~tion/ECM REVIEWED BY: - '- ?.: Mitch Riley, P.E., Sr. Project Manager Transportation/ECM REVIEWED BY: Steve Miller, P.E., Director Transportation/ECM Date: Date: REVIEWED BY: APPROVED BY: Norm Feder, Administrator Transportation Division David C. Weigel w County Attorney Date: h Lit5EmDomainX~PincRidgeAssoz\ExSum OffcrPI03A&703A 2 AGENBA ITEM-) JAN O 8 2002 Pg. IN TIlE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL ACTION COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Petitioner, Case No.: 00-0488-CA PINE RIDGE ASSOCIATES II, LTD., a Florida Limited Partnership, et al., Respondents. Parcel Nos.: 103A and 703A OFFER OE JUDGMENT TO: Lewis Ansbacher, Registered Agent 4215 Southpoint Boulevard Suite 100 Jacksonville, Florida 32216 Lawrence Ansbacher, Esquire P. O. Box 551260 Jacksonville, Florida 32255-1260 Petitioner, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, pursuant to Section 73.032, F.S.. and Fla. R.Civ.P. 1.442, does hereby make this binding offer of judgment in this action to Respondent, PINE RIDGE ASSOCIATES II, LTD., for all compensation, including severance damages, business damages, costs to cure, together with the value of the taking, and any other claims of Respondent, PINE RIDGE ASSOCIATES II, LTD., arising out of the taking of Parcels 103A and 703A in the total amount of One Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($1,000.00) for Parcels 103A and 703A, which includes the amount of $300.00 which was deposited pursuant to the Order of taking dated April 5, 2000. There are no non-monetary terms or other relevant conditions to this offer e~ offer does not include interest from the date of the Order of Taking or attorney's fee ,q.~t that this JAN 0 8 20O2 Pg. The Construction plans and specifications for the project on which the offer is based have been previously made available to Respondent and continue to be made available for Respondent's review upon reasonable notice of such request. Dated this __ day of ,2002. OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY Harmon Turner Building 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, Florida 34112 (941) 774-8400 - Telephone (941) 774-0225- Facsimile BY: HEIDI F. ASHTON, ESQUIRE Florida Bar No. 966770 ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Offer of Judgment has been furnished to Lewis Ansbacher, Registered Agent, 4215 Southpoint Boulevard, Suite 100, Jacksonville, Florida 32216 and Lawrence Ansbacher, Esquire, P. O. Box 551260, Jacksonville, Florida 32255-1260 by U. S. mail this __ day of ,2002. HEIDI F. ASHTON, ESQUIRE h: Lit\Pin e Rid geA ssoc\O J - 103A&703A 2 AGENDA ITEM ~ NO./6~ '-:-.-'-r.-) JAN 0 8 2002 Pg. 7~. ~.~J~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AUTHORIZE THE MAKING OF AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENT, ELFRIEDA HOUGHTON SUTHERLAND, TRUSTEE OF THE ELFRIEDA HOUGHTON SUTHERLAND REVOCABLE TRUST, FOR PARCELS 170 AND 770 IN THE AMOUNT OF $20,700 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. FRED R. SUTHERLAND, ET ~IL., CASE NO. 01-0756-CA. PROJECT NO. 60071. OBJECTIVE: To approve and authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment pursuant to Section 73.032 Fla. Stat. to Respondent, Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland, Trustee of the Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland Revocable Trust, in the amount of $20,700 as full compensation for the condemnation of Parcels 170 and 770 in Collier County v. Fred R. Sutherland, et al., Case No. 01-0756-CA. CONSIDERATIONS: On February 22, 2001, an eminent domain action was filed for the acquisition of property for the Livingston Road project from Golden Gate Parkway to Pine Ridge Road. On May 31, 2001, an Order of Taking was entered by the Circuit Court as to Parcels 170 and 770 which are a roadway, sidewalk, drainage, utility and maintenance easement and a temporary construction easement. The County's last offer dated November 30, 2000 was in the amount of $12,300. On June 7, 2001, the good faith estimate of value for these parcels in the amount of 516,500 was deposited into the Court Registry, thereby vesting title in the parcels in Collier County. Tile Offer of Judgment, a copy of which is attached, offers the property owner of the~e Parcels, Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland, Trustee of the Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland Revocable Trust, the suni of $20,700 as full compensation for the property taken, including any severance damages, business damages, damages to the remainder, and costs to cure. This figure takes into account the basis for the appraised value and the potential risks and costs in proceeding to trial. The making of the Offer of Judgment will require the property owner to carefully assess her claims for compensation. Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland, Trustee of the Elfr/eda Houghton Sutherland Revocable Trust, has thirty days from the date of mailing the offer to accept. If Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland, Trustee of the Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland Revocable Trust accepts, the County xvill be required to deposit an additional $4,200 into the registry, and the total suni of funds on deposit, or $20,700, will be paid to Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland, Trustee of the Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland Revocable Trust by Stipulated Final Judgment of the Court. If Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland, Trustee of the Elfi'ieda Houghton Sutherland Revocable Trust rejects the offer and fails to recover more than $20,700 for Parcels 170 and 770, either through settlement or jury verdict, the County will not be required to pay any costs incurred by Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland, Trustee of the Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland Revocable Trust after the date of the offer's rejection. This would include any expert witness fees, such as appraisal fees. ~Fx.F1SCAL IMPACT: A budget amendment is needed to tr,a~sfer funds in S4,200.00 from the Transportation Impact Fee District I Reserve Fund. Sour~ Impact Fees. The County Attorney's Office has reviexved all considerations in making an Offer of Judgment and has calculated in good faith this offer of full compensation for the property interests taken. This office considers the terms of the Offer of Judgment to be reasonable. AGENDA ITEM. he Nlllount of' GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: That tire Board of County Commissioners: Approve the terms of the Offer of Judgment and authorize its service on Respondent, Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland, Trustee of the Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland Revocable Trust; and 2. Approve the expenditure of funds as stated; and Authorize $4,200 to be paid into the Registry of the Court in the event the Offer of Judgment is accepted by Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland, Trustee of the Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland Revocable Trust; and 4. Approve Stipulated Final Jud=oment based on the acceptance of the Offer of Judgrnent. 5. Approve the necessary budget atnend,}~mnt. He~ F. Ashton Assistant County Attorney REVIEWED BY: REVIEWED REVIEWED BY: APPROVED BY: h R~ley, P.E., Sr. Project Manager Transportatio~'ECM Steve Miller, P.E., Director Transportatior[/ECM Nom~ Feder, Administrator Trafisportation Division ~ . David C. Weigel ~ County Attorney Date: Date: t'~/'7/" I Date: Date: h:Lit limDomain',Sutherland',ExSum-O ffer P 170&770 2 -- AGENDA ITEM,~h NO. IfiL JAN 0 8 2002 IN TIlE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL ACTION COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Petitioner, VS. FRED R. SUTHERLAND, individually and dJb/a SUTHERLAND PAINT HORSES, et al., Respondents. OFFER OF JUDGMENT Case No.: 01-0756-CA Parcel Nos.: 170 and 770 TO: Kenneth A. Jones, Esquire ROETZEL & ANDRESS 2320 First Street, Suite 1000 Fort Myers, Florida 33901 Petitioner, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, pursuant to Section 73.032. Florida Statutes, and Fla. R.Civ.P. 1.442, does hereby make this binding offer of judgment in this action to Respondent, ELFRIEDA HOUGHTON SUTHERLAND, Trustee of the Elfrieda Houghton Suthcrland Revocable Trust, for all compensation, including severance damages, business damages, costs to cure, together with the value of the taking, and any other claims of Respondent, ELFRIEDA HOUGHTON SUTHERLAND, Trustee of the Elfrieda Houghton Sutherland Revocable Trust, arising out of the taking of Parcels 170 and 770, in the total amount of Twenty Thousand Se~,'en Hundred and 001100 Dollars ($20,700.00) for Parcels 170 and 770, which includes the amount of $16,500.00 which was deposited pursuant to the Order of taking dated May 31, 2001. There are no non-monetary terms or other relevant conditions to this offer except that this offer does not include interest from the date of the Order of Taking or attorney's fees 1 NO..d JAN 0 8 2002 The Construction plans and specifications for the project on which the offer is based have been previously madc available to Respondent and continue to be made available for Respondent's rex, iew upon reasonable notice of such request. Dated this day of January, 2002. OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY Harmon Turner Building 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, Florida 34112 (941) 774-8400 - Telephone (941) 774-0225 - Facsimile BY: HEIDI F. ASHTON Florida Bar No. 0966770 ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Offer of Judgment has been furnished to Kenneth A. Jones, Esquire, ROETZEL & ANDRESS, 2320 First Street, Suite 1000, Fort Myers, Florida 33901 by U. S. mail this __ day of January, 2002. HEIDI F. ASHTON, ESQUIRE h Lit\EmDomain\Rihs-O ffer 170&770 0 8 200 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AUTHORIZE THE MAKING OF AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENTS, ELLIOT CORTES, SR. AND GLADYS CORTES, FOR PARCELS 246 AND 246T IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,150.00 IN THE LA~VSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. JOSE ALEdRADO, ET AL., CASE NO. 00-1969-CA, GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD PROJECT 63041. OBJECTIVE: To approve and authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment pursuant to 73.032 Fla. Stat. to Respondents, Elliot Cortes, Sr. and Gladys Cortes, in the amount of $3,150.00 as full compensation for the condemnation of Parcels 246 and 246T in Collier County v. Jose Ah,arado, et al., Case No. 00-1969-CA. CONSIDERATIONS: On April 25, 2000, an eminent domain action was filed for the acquisition of property for a sidewalk, utility, drainage and maintenance easement and a temporary dfivexvay restoration easement. On July 7, 2000, an Order of Taking was entered in by the Circuit Court as to Parcels 246 and 246T, and on July 21, 2000, the good faith estimate of value for these parcels in the amount of $2,300.00 xvas deposited into the Court registry, thereby vesting title in the parcels in Collier County. The last offer made by the County to the Respondents, prior to their obtaining an attorney, was dated June 22, 1999 in the amount of $2,200.00. The Offer of Judgment, a copy of which is attached, offers the property owners of this parcel, Elliot Cortes, Sr. and Gladys Cortes, the sum of $3,150.00 as full compensation for the property taken, including any severance damages, business damages, damages to the remainder, and costs to cure. This figure takes into account the basis for the appraised value and the potential risks in proceeding to trial. The making of the Offer of Judgment will require the property owners to carefully assess their claims for compensation. Elliot Cortes, Sr. and Gladys Cortes have thirty days from the date of mailing the offer to accept. If Elliot Cortes, Sr. and Gladys Cortes accept, the County wilt be required to deposit an additional .$850.00 into the registry, and the total sum of funds on deposit, or $3,150.00, will be paid to Elliot Cortes, Sr. and Gladys Cortes by Stipulated Final Judgment of the court. If Elliot Cortes, Sr. and Gladys Cortes reject the offer, and fail to recover more than $3,150.00 for Parcels 246 and 246T, either through settlement or jury verdict, the County xvill not be required to pay any costs incurred by Elliot Cortes, Sr. and Gladys Cortes after the date of the offer's rejection. This would include any expert witness fees such as appraisal fees. The County Attorney's Office has reviewed all considerations in making an Offer of Judgment and has calculated in good faith this offer of full compensation for the property interests taken. This office considers the terms of the Offer of Judgrnent to be reasonable. FISCAL IMPACT: A budget amendment is needed to transfer funds in the amount of $850.00 ~¢from the Transportation Impact Fee District 6 Reserve Fund. Source of Funds are Impact Fees. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. AGENDA ITEM NO. ' Jk. i O 8 2002 Pg. -_Z RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: 2. 3. 4. 5. Approve the terms of the Offer of Judgment and authorize its service on Respondents Elliot Cortes, Sr. and Gladys Cortes; and Approve the expenditure of funds as stated; and Authorize $850.00 to be paid into the Registry of the Court in the event the Offer of Judgment is accepted by Elliot Cortes, Sr. and Gladys Cortes; and Approve Stipulated Final Judgment based on the acceptance of the Offer of Judgment. Approve the necessary budget amendment. SUBMITTED BY: Heidi F. Ashton Assistant County Attorney Date: REVIEWED BY: A. N. Korti, Project Manager Transportation/ECM Date: I ~-/[~'/o/' REVIEWED BY: Mitch Riley, P.E., Sr. Project Manager Transportation/ECM REVIEWED BY: Steve Miller, P.E., Director Transportation/ECM Date: REVIEWED BY: Norm Feder, Administrator Transportation Division APPROVED BY: David C. Weigel County Attorney Date: ~'Z- 2~/--~/ AGEN[~A. ITEM ~'~ , Nh. /~, /.. I~--' ;.'.;; 0 8 2002 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF TIlE T~NENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL ACTION COLLIER COUNTY, FLORDA, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Petitioner, VS. JOSE ALVARADO, et al., Case No.: 00-1969-CA Parcel Nos.: 246 and 246T Respondents. OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO: Elliot Cortes, Sr. and Gladys Cortes c/o Brian P. Patchen, Esquire EARLE & PATCHEN, P.A. 1000 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1112 Miami, Florida 33131 Plaintiff, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORDA, pursuant to Section 73.032, Florida Statues, and Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.442, does hereby make this binding offer of judgment in this action to the Respondents, ELLIOT CORTES, SR. and GLADYS CORTES, for all compensation, including severance damages, business damages, costs to cure, together with the value of the taking, and any other claims of Respondents, ELLIOT CORTES, SR. and GLADYS CORTES, arising out of the taking of Parcels 246 and 246T, in the total amount of Three Thousand One Hundred Fifty and No/100 Dollars ($3,150.00), which includes the $2,300.00 previously deposited pursuant to the Order of Taking. There are no non-monetary terms or other relevant conditions to this offer except that this offer does not include interest from the date of the Order of Taking or attc ~es and costs. AGENDA ITeM NO... JAN 0 2002 The construction plans and specifications for the project on which the offer is based have been previously and continue to be made available for the Respondent(s) review upon reasonable notice of such a request. Dated this __day of ,2002. OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY Harmon Turner Building 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, Florida 34112 (941) 774-8400 - Telephone (941) 774-0225 - Facsimile BY: HEIDI F. ASHTON Florida Bar No. 0966770 ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served upon Brian P. Patchen, Esq., Earle & Patchen, P.A., 1000 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1112, Miami, Florida 33131, and Joe W. Fixel, Esq., Fixel & Maguire, 211 South Gadsden Street, Tallahassee, FL 32301 on this day of ., 2002 by regular U.S. Mail, postage prepaid. Heidi F. Ashton, Esq. Assistant County Attorney 2 NOAGENDA//~/'"'ITEM j.t,:: 0 tl Pg. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AUTHORIZE THE MAKING OF AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENTS, JOSE ALVARADO AND DOLETTE ALVARADO, FOR PARCELS 244 AND 244T IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,700.00 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. JOSE ALVARADO, ET AL., CASE NO. 00-1969-CA, GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD PROJECT 63041. OBJECTIVE: To approve and authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment pursuant to 73.032 Fla. Stat. to Respondents, Jose Alvarado and Dolette Alvarado, in the amount of $2,700.00 as full compensation for the condemnation of Parcels 244 and 244T in Collier County v. ,lose Ah,arado, et al., Case No. 00-1969-CA. CONSIDERATIONS: On April 25, 2000, an eminent domain action was filed for the acquisition of property for a sidewalk, utility, drainage and maintenance easement and a temporary driveway restoration easement. On July 7, 2000, an Order of Taking was entered by the Circuit Court as to Parcels 244 and 244T, and on July 21, 2000, the good faith estimate of value for these parcels in the amount of $1,300.00 was deposited into the Court registry, thereby vesting title in the parcels in Collier County. The last offer made by the County to the Respondents, prior to their obtaining an attorney, was dated June 22, 1999 in the amount of Sl,200.00. The Offer of Judgment, a copy of xvhich is attached, offers the property owners of this parcel, Jose Alvarado and Dolette Alvarado, the sum of $2,700.00 as fldl compensation for the property taken, including any severance damages, business damages, damages to the remainder, and costs to cure. This figure takes into account the basis for the appraised value and the potential risks in proceeding to trial. The making of the Offer of Judgment will require the property owners to carefully assess their claims for compensation. Jose Alvarado and Dolette Alvarado have thirty days from the date of mailing the offer to accept. If Jose Alvarado and Dolette Alvarado accept, the County will be required to deposit an additional $1,400.00 into the registry, and the total sum of funds on deposit, or $2,700.00, will be paid to Jose Alvarado and Dolette Alvarado by Stipulated Final Judgment of the court. If Jose Alvarado and Dolette Alvarado reject the offer, and fail to recover more than $2,700.00 for Parcels 244 and 244T, either through settlement or jury verdict, the County will not be required to pay any costs incurred by Jose Alvarado and Dolette Alvarado after the date of the offer's rejection. This would include any expert xvitness fees such as appraisal fees. The County Attorney's Office has reviewed all considerations in making an Offer of Judgment and has Calculated in good faith this offer of full compensation for the property interests taken. This office considers the terms of the Offer of Judgment to be reasonable. ~\,~FISCAL IMPACT: A budget amendment is needed to transfer funds in the amount of ~0 fr-~m t~e rrransportation Impact Fee District 6 Reserve Fund. Source of Funds are Impact Fees. AGENDA I~'EM JAN 0 8 2002 Pg.. [ GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Comnfissioners: 2. 3. 4. 5. SUBMITTED BY: Approve the terms of the Offer of Judgment and authorize its service on Respondents Jose Alvarado and Dolette Alvarado; and Approve the expenditure of funds as stated; and Authorize $1,400.00 to be paid into the Registry of the Court in the event the Offer of Judgment is accepted by Jose Alvarado and Dolette Alvarado; and Approve Stipulated Final Judgment based on the acceptance of the Offer of Judgment. Approve the necessary budget amendment. [k,jt.x~//,t ~/~.._,,/t,___...---. Date: Heidi F. A~h(on Assistant County Attorney REVIEWED BY: Date: / '2 t:, 'A. N. Korti,' Project Manager Transportation/ECM Mitch Riley, P.E., Sr. Project Manager Transportation/ECM REVIEWED BY: Steve Miller, P.E., Director Transportation/ECM REVIEWED BY: Nom~ Feder, Administrator Transportation Division APPROVED BY: David C. Weigel F_~ - County Attorney 2 Date: L'.7'. 0 8 ?.002 pg..~z'z~ IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIl. ACTION COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Petitioner, VS. JOSE ALVARADO, et al., Case No.: 00-1969-CA Parcel Nos.: 244 and 244T Respondents. OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO: Jose & Dolette Alvarado c/o Brian P. Patchen, Esquire EARLE & PATCHEN, P.A. 1000 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1112 Miami, Florida 33131 Plaintiff, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, pursuant to Section 73.032, Florida Statues, and Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.442, does hereby make this binding offer of judgment in this action to the Respondents, JOSE AND DOLETTE ALVARADO, for all compensation, including severance damages, business damages, costs to cure, together with the value of the taking, and any other claims of Respondents, JOSE AND DOLETTE ALVARADO, arising out of the taking of Parcels 244 and 244T, in the total amount of Two Thousand Seven Hundred and No/100 Dollars ($2,700.00), which includes the $1,300.00 previously deposited pursuant to the Order of Taking. There are no non-monetary terms or other relevant conditions to this offer except that this offer does not include interest from the date of the Order of Taking or attorneys fees and costs. AGENDA ITEM NO ..... J,.., 0 8 2002 F'g. ,.,72 The construction plans and specifications for the project on which the offer is based have been previously and continue to be made available for the Respondent(s) review upon reasonable notice of such a request. Dated this day of ,2002. OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY Harmon Turner Building 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, Florida 341 I2 (941) 774-8400 - Telephone (941) 774-0225 - Facsimile BY: HEIDI F. ASHTON Florida Bar No. 0966770 ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that a tree and correct copy of the foregoing was sen,ed upon Brian P. Patchen, Esq., Earle & Patchen, P.A., 1000 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1112, Miami, Florida 33131, and Joe W. Fixel, Esq., Fixel & Maguire, 211 South Gadsden Street, Tallahassee, FL 32301 on this day of ,2002 by regular U.S. Mail, postage prepaid. Heidi F. Ashton, Esq. Assistant County A~tomey AGENDA ITEM J.t l 0 8 2002 Sheet I of 2 AVPLAT2001-AR1557 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PETITION AVPLAT2001-AR1557 TO DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY'S AND THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST IN A 3 FOOT WIDE PORTION OF THE i3 FOOT WIDE LAKE MAINTENANCE EASEMENT LOCATED ALONG THE REAR OF LOT 190, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF "GLEN EDEN PHASE TWO" AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 34, PAGES 18 THROUGH 21, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. LOCATED IN SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST. OBJECTIVE: To adopt a Resolution to vacate a 3 foot wide portion of the 13 foot wide Lake Maintenance Easement located along the rear of Lot 190, according to the plat of "Glen Eden, Phase Two." CONSIDERATIONS: Petition AVPLAT2001-AR1557 has been received by the Engineering Services Department from Blair A. Foley, P.E., of Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A., as agent for the petitioner, Sunny Days, Inc. requesting the vacation of a 3 foot wide portion of the 13 foot wide Lake Maintenance Easement located along the rear of Lot 190 because the pool deck and screen enclosure was built a few feet into the Lake Maintenance Easement and by vacating that portion of the easement, the pool deck and screen enclosure will no longer encroach into the Easement. A relocation easement is not needed because the property on the south side of Lot 190 is a lake and lake maintenance easement which was dedicated to Collier County by the plat. Letters of no objection have been received from Collier County Engineering Review Services, Collier County Stormwater Management and Glen Eden Lakes Property Owners Association. Zoning is P.U.D. FISCAL IMPACT: Planning Services has collected a $1,000 "Petition to Vacate" fee from the petitioner which covers the County's cost of advertising, recording and processing the Petition. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None ~,r. no^ irm-x Sheet 2 of 2 AVPLAT2001 -AR1557 PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: 1. Adopt the Resolution for Petition AVPLAT2001-AR1557 for the vacation of a 3 foot wide portion of the 13 foot wide Lake Maintenance Easement along the rear of Lot 190, "Glen Eden, Phase Two"; and 2. Authorize the execution of the Resolution by its Chairman and direct the Clerk to the Board to record a certified copy of the Resolution in the Official Records; and 3. Request the Clerk to the Board to make appropriate marginal notes on the recorded plat. PREPARED BY: Rick Grigg, P.S.M. Engineering Services DATE: Thomas E. Kuck, P.E. Engineering Services Director, Interim Planning Director DATE: John }~I. Dunnuck, m,"Interim Administrator Con, unity Development & Environmental Services AC~ENDA IFr. M JAN 0 8 2002 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 I0 Il 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION FOR PetitiON AVPLAT2001-ARIS$7 TO DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE TH~ COUNTY'S AND ~ PUBLIC'S II~I'EREST IN A 3 FOOT WIDE PORTION OF THE 13 FOOT WIDE LAKE MAINI'I~;NANCE EASEMENT LOCATED ALONG THE REAR LOT 190, ACCORDING TO ~ PLAT OF "GLEN EDEN. PI-IA~E TWO" A~ RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 34, PAGES 18 THROUGH 21, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COltn~'n COUNTY, FLORIDA, LOCATED IN SECTION 9, TOWNSI'I]~ 48 SOU'I~I, RANGE 25 EAST. WHEREAS, pt~suant to Section 177.101, Florida Statol~, Blah' A. Foley, P.E., ofQ. Orady Minor and Associates, P.A., as agent for the pefilioner, Sunny Days, Inc., do~ ber~by r~quest the vacation ofa 3 foot wide portion of the 13 foot wide l~k~ Maintenance Easement located along the renr of Lot 190, according to the plat of "Glen Eden, Phnse Two" as r~corded in Pint Book 34, Pages 18 through 21, Public R~cord~ of Collier County, Florida; and WHEREAS, thc Board has this any held a public he~ing to consider vacating the northerly 3 foot wide portion of the 13 foot wide Lake Mamtenence Easement located along tbe north end of the rear of Lot 190, according to the plat of"Glen Eden, Phase Two", as more fully described below, and notice of said public hearing to vacate was given as required by law; end WHEREAS, the granting of the vacation will not adversaly affect th~ owne~hip or right of convenient acceas of other property owners.- NOW, THEREFORE, BE 1T RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLI~aR COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the following descnbod pomon of the above stated easement b~ end is hereby vacated: See Exhibit "A" a~ached hereto and mcoqxna~d her~m. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Clerk to the Board is hereby directed to record a certified copy of this ResolUtion in the Official Record~ of Collier County, Florida, and to make proper notation of this vacation on the recorded plat a~ ~.fer~ced above. This Rr. solution is adopted this a~ond and majority vote favoring same. DATED: Al DWIGHT E. BROCK, Cl~rk day of ~'2002, after motion, App,'oved aa to form and legal ~mck ~. White, Esq., A~i~t County Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: James D. C. arter, Ph.D. AC~.NDA ,.lAN 0 8 2002 Q. GRADY MINOR & ASSOCIATES, P.A. Civil En.zineer~ · Land Sut~-~/or~ · P~anner~ EXHIBIT SHEET I OF 2 AYPLA'I'2001 -ARI $$7 O. GRADY MINOR. P.E. MARK W. MINOR. P.E. C. DF-AN SMITH, P.E. DAVID W. SCHMITT, P.E, MICHAELS. DELATE. P.E. D. WAYNE ARNOLD..~.I.C ERIC V, SA~fDOV.-~L. P.S. THOMAS CHERNESKY, P.S. AI._-~ V, ROSE~.L LEGAL DESCRi~ ~ K)N A PORTION OF A 20' LAKE ~ttJNTENAN~ ~ (SKETCH A Parcel of land located in SocUon 9, Township 48 South. Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida; being mom particularly dascsQ~ed as follows:. The Norih 3' oftJte Norih 13' of a Lake Maintenace Easement on Lot 190 as shown on the Plat of Glen Eden, Phase Two recorded In Plat Book 34 at Pages 18 through 21 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. This Pmpen*y is subject to easements, rasewaflons and/or m:~..~,ns of record. q-//-j! Signed , P.S.M. #5426 State of Florida g:~js~Jegals~B-2160.rtf AC~d4DA ITEM 9 JAN 0 8 2002 Attachment "B" PETITION FORM FOR VACATION OF PLATS OR PORTIONS OF PLATS OF SUBDIVIDED LAND Date Received: ~t~p. Z~, .~,-~t Petition#: Petitioner:. Sunnv Davs, Inc., Damon Warfel, President Address: 14510 Vanderbilt Drive City/State: Naples, Florida Agent: Q. Gradv Minor and Associates, P.A. Address: 3800 Via Del Rev City/State: Naples~ Florida Telephone: 941-592-7466 Zip Code: 34110 Telephone: 941-947-1144 Zip Code: 34134 Address of Subject Property: Glen Eden Lakes Lot 190 Location: Section 9 Township 48 Range 25 Legal Description: Lot 190 Block ~ Unit N/A Plat Book 34 Reason for Request: Encroachment into Drainnoe/Lake Easement Current Zoning: PUD Does this affect density? No I hereby s petition: [] Yes [] No ire of Petifi.~a~~ Subdivision: Glen Eden - Dbase two Page(s) 18-21 Print Name (Title) Please see "Policy and Procedure for the Vacation and Annulment of Plats or Portions of Plats of Subdivided Land" for the list of supportive materials which must accompany this petition, and deliver or mail to: Community Development & Environmental Services Division Planning Services__ Department 2800 North Horseshoe Dr. Naples, Florida 34104 Attachment "B" Page 4 of 4 (1) If applicant is a land trust, indicate the name of beneficiaries. (2) If applicant is a eorporution other than a public corporation, indicate the name of officers and major stockholders. (3) If applicant is a parmership, limited partnership or other business entity, indicate the name of principals. [ AG~.~A rTEM,,\ (4) ~ist all other owners. ~ /7 ~ JAN 0 8 2002 Official Receipt - Collier County Board of County Commissioners CDPR1103 - Official Receipt Trans Number 291928 Date Post Date Payment Slip Nbr 10/5/2001 9:21:42 AM 10/5/2001 AR 1557 Appl Name: Q. GRADY MINOR & ASSOC., P.A. Appl Stage/Status: COMPLETENESS STAGE/PENDING Address: BLAIR A. FOLEY, P.E. 3800 VIA DEL REY NAPLES FL 34134 Proj Name: GLEN EDEN PHASE TWO Type: RSF TAZ: 4 Subdiv Nbr: 3188 Project Nbr: 2001100018 Payor: DAMON CUSTOM Fee Information Fee Code Description GL Account 12TRVC REV ACCT/VAC EASEMENT-ROW 10116361032910000000 Total Amount i Waived $1000.00 $1000.00 i Account/Check Number Payments Amounti $1000.00 ! Payment Code CHECK 121363 Total Cash [ $0.001 Total Non-Cash [ $1000,00; Total Paid [ $1000.001 Memo: Cashier/location: MCCAULEYKATY / 1 User: SMITH_G Collier County Board of County Commissioners CD-Plus for Windows 95/NT JAN 0 8 20O2 I~g. q ~M }il WARRANTY DEED Thll Indenture. mede this ~ ~' day of Stall)re'. 2000. between REVCO/GE JOINT VENTURE, a FIo~do Son. Id bas, nee'ship, GRANTOR, and Sunny Oiyl. Inc.. · FIo~do ; eoq~otl~, whose tax idefltiflcetion number I1 end whose post · office so. ese Is 14510 Vendm'btlt Oftve, Nil)lee, FL 341 I0, GR~_EE. Witneuloth thlt said Grlnto~, for end In consideration of tho sum of TEN DOLLARS. end other good and velulbll coneidereflofl, to laid Greeter in heed plid by mold Grantee. the receipt whereof la hereby lckflowledged, have granted, bargained end eom to the Slid Grantee end Grantees heirs end assigns forever, the following described lend. situate, lying end i)oinQ itl CoHllr Couot¥. Florida: See Exhibit 'A' attached hereto Subject to riel Oltltu teXaS for tho yoor 2000: and oil lubsequent years, bearing Property IdlntiflCl6Ofl Numberl 36455000640 (Lot 125}; 35455001124 {Lot 139); 35455001140 ILea 140); 35455OOl168 ILea 1411 35465001205 (Lot 143}. Glen Eden. PhlUe One; end Property idenflficltion Numbers 35455004363 (Lot 147); 35455004408 iLea 148); 35455004422 ILea 140); 35465004440 (Lot 150}; 35455004464 (Lot 15114 35455004460 (Lot 152): 35456C, O4503 (Lot 153); 35455004529 JLOt 154); 35455004546 (Lot 15r.); 35466004561 (Lot 156); 35465004587 (Lot 157}; 35455004600 (Lot 165); 35455004625 )Lot 159); 35456004642 (Lot 160); 35456004694 (Lot 162); 35466004707 (Lot 163); 35456004723 (Lot 164); 36455004749 (Lot 185); 35455004765 (Lot 1551; 35455004781 (Lot 157): 35455004804 )Lot 168); 36455004620 )Lot 169); 35465004846 ILea 170): 35455004862 (Lot 171); 35455004866 )Lot 172); 35456004901 (Lot 173); 35455004927 )Lot 174); 35465004943 (Lot 176); 35455004969 (Lot 178l; 35455004986 (Lot 177}; 35455006007 ILof I 35.465005023 fLit 179}; ,~5456005049 (Lot 180}; 35455005065 ILot 18114 35465005081 (Lot 182): 36455005104 iLea 183); 36455005120 {Lot 164); 354550U5145 (Lot 185); 35455005162 (Lot 186); 36455005188 (Lot 167); 35455005201 ilea 168); -- IIII '1 35455005243 ILOt 190): 3646~00~:~9 (Lot 181~ 35455005286 (Lot 192); 35455006340 ILea 195); 35456005366 )Lot )96); 35466005382 (Lot 167). Glen Eden, Phoze Two. And Further subject to thole )terns contained on Exhibit "B' ett&'chod hereto and by reference mmJo a bert hereof. and laid Grlntor does hereby fully werreot the title to slid lind. end will dufond the some 8glinlt the IIwful cleimu of ell ;orions whomuoMr. RETURN TO: Y0m~. va, Asslnderp. Vsrnados & ~md~o~. P.A. PAI~L L' Lots 125, I39, I40, 141 sad I43, ~N EO£N, PHASE ONE, / PARCEL I1: / Lot= I~ t~h 192 ~; ~ Lots I~ ~ 197 In Wltnoel Whereof, the Oreotm' ham hetquflto llt.Orlntor'l ha~l end leol the day end year flrat above wrfften, · Signed, sealed end delivered In our preserve: REVCO/GE JOINT VENTURE, e Flodde ICorpmlte SIell BY: KINWOOD PALM-AIRE HOLDINGS, INC.. I ~ COll~m'etlon. ag STATE OF FLORI[~A COUNTY OF COLLIER J The foregoing instrument wes acknowledged before ma this ~J)*~" day of October, 2000, by Gory K. Klnlelll, President of Klnwood P. elm-~lte Holdings, Inc. a FIoride corporeflon, as General Partner of Revco/GE Joint.~t~'o,,~.F~o~ ~]onorll partnership. He le personelly known to me. ~,~ ~/~-~t,~/.~- . Signitt,v'e ~N~¥ ~llllc Nome of Notary. Printed. Typed or Stemmed My Co~ntlelion EloIfle: BENCHMARK .......... ""'* '"*"~ LEGAL DESCRIPTION SURVEYORS NOTES I~MMI LOT 189 CURVE TABLE Id i Radius Arc Ls~e~.S. Cho~l Ch Bear C-24 13'4'/'~5' 215.00' 51.82' $ ?4'~"JO~ 1' W SURVEYORS CERTIFlC ,.~ .NSAt'lO ~ ~'~ ~. _ _ ,.~..~ ~,~m~~~.~xm~~' ...£~ LEGEND AND ABBREVIATIONS ..,~,,,~Y survey OF I SANDY LAND SU~VEYW~ ~D ~i~C. ! I LOT ~e I ~i~{~ _ ~ ! I I e~EN ~EN PHAS~ Two I -~,,~,~ I I PLAT I~OK ~4 PAGES 18 THROUGH 21 COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA - DIrDICATIONS/RESERV, ATIONS J STATE OF FLORIDA ~ SS COUNTY OF COLUER ' KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT REVCO/GE JOINT VE [JRE, A FLORIDA REON HAVE DO HEREBY GENERAL PARTNERSHIP, THE OWNER OF THE LANDS DESCRIBED CAUSED THIS PLAT OF GLEN EDEN, PHASE TWO TO BE MADE AhlJ' DEDICATE THE FOLLOWING: TO THE GLEN EDEN HOMEOWNERS .*ASSOCIATION, INC,: I) TRACT "A' (GLEN EDEN DRIVE) AN EASEMENT FOR THE INSTALLATION AND MAIHTEHANCE OF A PRIVATE ROADWAY SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS CREATED HEREIN. 2) TRACT "L-4' AND TRACT "L-$' AND ALL LAKE: MAINTENANC EASEMENTS FOR THE PURPOS~ OF INSTALLATION AND MAINTF..~NAflCE OF THOSE RESPECTIVE FAClUTIE~ 'WITH THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE. 3) TRACT "g' (PRESERVE AREA) SHAL.L BE THE PERPETUAL RESI~ONSIBILITY OF GIIrN EDEN HOMEOWNER~ ASSOCIATION AND MAY IN NO ~/AY BE ALTERED FROM THEIR NATURAL STATE WITH THE EXCEPTION OF PERMITTED ACTIVITIES. ACTIVITIES PROHIBITED WITHIN THE PRESERVE All, AS INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO: CONSTRUCTION OR PLACING SOIL OR OTHER SUBSTANCES SUCH AS TRASH; REMOVAL OR DESTRUCTION OF TREES, SHRUBS OR OTHER VEGETATION. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF EXOTIC/NUISANCE VEGETATION REMOVAL; EXCAVATION. DREDGING OR REMOVAL-OF SOIL MATERIAl4 DYKING OR FENCING; AND ANY OTHER ACTIVITIES DETRIMENTAL TO DRAINAGE, FLOOD CONTROL. WATER CONSERVATION. EROSION CONTROL OR FISH AND WILDUFE HA. BITAT CONSERVATION OR PRESERVATION. *' 4) TRACT "C', AS AN ACCESS EASEMENT, AND AII DRAINAGE E~SEMENTS INDICATED ON THE PLAT. FOR THE PURPOSES OF INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THOSE RESPECTIVE FACIUTIES WITH THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE. TO THE COLUER COUHTY W*TER:SEWER DISTRICT.' 1) Ail COUNTY UTILITY EASEMENTS IN~Ifl?JI~TED ON THE PLAT FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING AND MAINTAINING WATER AND SEWER SERVICE WITHOUT RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE. 2) ALL POTABLE WATER DISTRIBUTION MNF.~ CONSTRUCTED WITHIN THE PLATTED AREA UPON ACCEPTANCE OF THE IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED BY THE APPLICABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.. 5) ALL SEWER FAClUTIES CONSTRUCTED WITHIN THE PLATTED AREA AND THE SEWER FORCE MAIN UPON THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED BY THE APPUCABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. TO COLLIER COUNTt'~ . .. ! ALL DRAINAGE EASEMENTS WITHOUT RESPONSlBIUTY FOR MAINTENANCE. A~ LA..E..AI.TEHA.CE EASE.ENTS ...OUT .ESPO.S,.,.~ FO. MA,.TE.A.CE.~' TRACT . C"BE~"VE AR~ WITHO...~.O.~,.U~ ~0. MA,.TE"~"~ ...C~ '~'. AS ~. ~CC~ ~.EN.. W..OUT ..~ .~.O.~,.,U~ ~t" ~~ I To co ER cou co ER ! ~) A~ COUH~ UTILITY EASEHENTS' AND T~CT 'A" (eLEN EOEH O.lVE) I ~. I~ I FO. THE PURPOSE OF INSTA~TION AND MAINTENANCE OF THEIR FACl ~ WITHOUT RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE. 'rF, ACT "B" PRESERVE AREA 191 ~ 190 189 188 ~ 187 ~ 186 45.29' 53.60' _S88'19 101.29' 50.20' 138.54'___--/ 20' L,M.E. TRACT 'L-5" LAKE MAINTENANCE AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT 7.0'1 -- ~ 13.0' 170 171 50.33' 172 ~ 173 50.33' 50.33' - NSr12'49"E 113.41 50.33' 08 2OO2 JAN 0 09/10/01 Q GRADY MIN~R 13:27 FAX 9416436968 COLLIER CO CO~UNITY DEr 9419920129?5 09/10 '01 10:42 NO.30& Cl. GRAD~ lvlINOR & ASSOCIATF~, P.A. c. DF..~N sldl'l'~ P.l!. DAVID .Iuly 30,2001 ~ 00g 02/03 I~- loire ttouldswo~ Collier Coumy D~v~lopmem S~rvio~ 1~00 North Horse.slx~ Drive Naples, FL 34104 Glen Eden La~s- Lot 190 Dra/nase/Lake ~at Vacation Dear Mr. Houldsworth: We woulA like w proc~e~ wi~h ~ac~tina_ ~ portion of the ~az lake maime~nce easement OZ ~u~z. s lo, _~u~-~.~-~ -- ~ ad/:t the 3 fe~t t~ the sou~h side o1: tl~ ease~:le~t. north 3 feet of the ~asem--~- be Ye- - -daz~ We arc reo~ you review the arm:bed r_k-~h and. if yo~ have no and replar,.~agm of the gasem,,~% sign below and return to our on:ice. If yoa lmve any questions or comm~mcs, please co~atact mc. Thank you- Very m~ly you-s. I i~ve ~ o~eetlo~ }ohu Houtdswonh Collier Coumy D~velopment Serv/ces Q. GRADY MINOR, P.E MAP, KW. MINOR, P.E. C. DEAN SMITH PE. DAVID W, SCHNI[TT, P.E. MICHAEL J. DELATE, P E. Q. GRADY MINOR & ASSOCIATES, P.A. Civil Engineers · Land Surveyors · Planners ~001 ~Ug - I D. WAYNE ARNOLD, A.I.C.P. ERIC V. SANDOVAL, P.~ Fi'I 2:25TH°MAscl'mRNEsI°''P's' ALAN V. ROSEMAN July 30, 2001 Mr. John Boldt. P.E.. P.S.M. Collier County Stormwater Management District 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Suite 212 Naples. Florida 34104 4~ t~-74c. RE: Glen Eden Lakes - Lot 190 Drainage/Lake Easement Vacation Dear Mr. Boldt: We xxould like to proceed with vacming a portion of the rear lake maintenance and drainage easement of this lot because the pool encroaches into the easement. We are proposing that the north 3 feet of the easement be vacated and add the 3 feet to the south side of the easement. We are requesting you review the anached sketch and if you have no objection to the vacation and replacement of the easements, sign below and return to our office. If you have an>, questions or comments, please contact me. Thank you. Very truly yours, Sharon umpenhour I hax e no objection John Boldt. ?.E,. D.S.M. Collier County Stom~water Management Director (941) 947-1144 · FAX (941) 947-0375 · E-Mail: engmeering~gradymi 3800 Via Del Rey · Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 JAN 0 8 21~0~^c tor.c~g. 10 ~'O. GRADY MINOR, P.E. ARK W. MINOR, P.E. C. DEAN SMITH, P.E. DAVID W. SCHIvlrl'r, P.E. MICHAEL J. DELATE, P.E. Q. GRADY MINOR & ASSOCIATES, P.A. Civil Engineers · Land Surveyors · Planners July 30, 2001 D. WAYNE ARNOLD, A.I.C.P. ERIC V. SANDOVAL, P.S.M. THOMAS CHERNESIOf, P.S.M. ALAN V. ROSEMAN Mr. Damon Warfel Glen Eden Lakes Property Owners Association 14510 Vanderbilt Drive Naples, Florida 34110 Glen Eden Lakes - Lot 190 Drainage/Lake Easement Vacation Dear Mr. Warfel: We would like to proceed with vacating a portion of the rear lake maintenance and drainage easement of this lot because the pool encroaches into the easement. We are proposing that the north 3 feet of the easement be vacated and ~drt the 3 feet to the south side of the easement. We are requesting you review the ~tt~hed sketch and if you have no objection to the vacation and replacement of the easements, sign below and return to our office. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me. Thank you. Very truly yours, Sharon Umpenhour I have no objection~ Damon Warfel Glen Eden Lakes Property Owners Association F:~OB\I~.V AC~DW010730.DOC (941) 947-1144 · FAX (941) 947-0375 · E-Mail: engineering~gsadymin 3800 Via Del Rey · Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 JAN 0 8 'r'c°m J Parcel Page I of 1 Collier County Tax Collector 2000 Tax Roll Inquiry System OWNER INFORMATION PROPERTY INFORMATION .ame:ll.~vco/G= ~O~NTV£NTU.£ P'rca~:ilas4S~OOSZ4= II Acr':llo'o0 Add~ess:ll~PCgS. FL 3411~2 Lega':l[ VALUE/EXEMPTIONS TAX INFORMATION PAY TERMS PAYM~T INFO ~.~,. W,~e:llzm~ ~:1[74.9A ~ov:ll~.s4 Pa~d ~ ~d ~:110 S~h~' *~:11..~ ~,.:11~.~ M.ch:ll09 Agricltr ex:Ilo c,~ r,~:llo.~ Feb:~12~.54 Paymt:JlZSZ'54 W~Uow ex:lto W~:llx~.~e ~'dl~"-Z~ ~o~:110 ~"~'~:110 ~,d~p~na:llZS.aZ ~:110.00 ,o, *U Va:Il" Advenisins:[~O'O0 TDA:t[o Back to Search Last Updated: 7/29/01 5:00pm http :/ /www.colliermx.com/RecordDetail.asp ?FolioI D=3 54 5 5005 2 4 3 GLEN EDEN LOT 190 AVPLAT2001 -AR1557 ABUTTING PROPERTY OWNERS Mr. Alberto J. Lostaunau 14742 Glen Eden Drive Naples, Florida 34110 Mr. & Mrs. Charles F. Messmer 13571 East Estrella Avenue Scottsdale, Arizona 85259 Mr. & Mrs. Witold K. Orbinski 14758 Glen Eden Drive Naples, Florida 34110 JAN 0 8 2002 Sheet I of 2 AVPLAT'2001 -AR1457 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PETITION AVPLAT2001-AR1457 TO DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY'S AND THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST IN A PORTION OF THE 10' WIDE UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED ALONG THE REAR PROPERTY LINE OF LOT 21, BLOCK 17, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF "LELY GOLF ESTATES ST. ANDREWS WEST" AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 10, PAGE 93, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. LOCATED IN SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST. OBJECTIVE: To adopt a Resolution to vacate a portion of the 10' wide Utility Easement located along the rear property line of Lot 21, Block 17, according to the plat of "Lely Golf Estates St. Andrews West". CONSIDERATIONS: Petition AVPLAT2001-AR1457 has been received by the Engineering Services Deptutment fi.om Christopher J. Thornton, Esq., of Treiser, Lieberfarb, Collins & Vernon, Chtd., as agent for the petitioner, Raymond F. Erickson, requesting the vacation of an approximately 1.3 foot deep portion of the 10' wide Utility Easement located along the rear of Lot 21, Block 17, so that the existing pool deck and screen enclosure encroachment will no longer encroach into the 10' wide Utility Easement. This easement vacation request is a compamon item to the Petition for Variance VA2001-AR1380. Letters of no objection have been received fi.om Collier County Public Utilities, Collier County Engineering Review Services, Collier County Transportation Services, Collier County Stormwater Management, Collier County Sheriff's Office, East Naples Fire Control and Rescue District, FPL, Sprint, Comcast Cable Communications, Lely Civic Association and the four abutting lot owners. Zoning is RSF-3. FISCAL IMPACT: Planning Services has collected a $1,000 "Petition to Vacate" fee from the petitioner which covers the County's cost of advertising, recording and processing the Petition. JAN 0 8 20~)? Sheet 2 of 2 AVPLAT2001 -AR1457 GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: 1. Adopt the Resolution for Petition AVPLAT2001-AR1457 for the vacation of a portion of the 10' wide Utility Easement along the rear line of Lot 21, Block 17, "Lely Golf Estates St. Andrews West"; and 2. Authorize the execution of the Resolution by its Chairman and direct the Clerk to the Board to record a certified copy of the Resolution in the Official Records; and 3. Request the Clerk to the Board to make appropriate marginal notes on the recorded plat. PREPARED BY: IzE'~, ~- ~-~ Rick Grigg, P.S.M. Engineering Services DATE: Thomas E. Kuck, P.E. Engineering Services Director, Interim Planning Director DATE: John M~Dunnuck, HI, Interim Administrator Community Development & Environmental Services DATE: JAN 0 8 2002 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 2`* 25 26 27 28 29 3O 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 `*1 `*2 43 44 45 ,*6 47 RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION FOR PETITION AVPI.~.T2001-AR1457 TO DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY'S AND THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST IN A PORTION OF THE 10' WIDE UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED ALONG THE REAR PROPERTY LINE OF LOT 21, BLOCK 17, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF "LELY GOLF ESTATES ST. ANDREWS WEST" A~ RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 10, PAGE 93, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COH.mR COUNTY, FLORIDA. LOCATED IN SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST. WHEREAS, pursuant to Sect~un 177.101, Honda S~atutea, Chriatopher J. Thornton, Esq., of Treiser, Lieberfarb, Collins & Vernon, Chtd., as agent for the petitioner, Raymond F. Efickson, does hereby request One vacation of a portion of the 10' wide Utility Easement located along the rear property line of Lot 21, Block 17, according to the plat of "Lely Golf Estates St. A~drews West" as recorded in Plat Book 10, Page 93, Public Records of Collier Counry, Florida; and WHEREAS, the Boerd has this day held a public heanng to consider vacating a portion of said 10' wide Utility Easement located along the real properW line of Lot 21, Block 17, according to the plat of "Lely Golf Estates St. Andrews West", as more fully described below, and notice of said public heanng to vacate was gwen as required by law; and WHERE~S, the gxantmg of the vaca6on w~ll not adversely affect the ownership or nght of convenient access of other properW owners. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLII~R COUNTY, FLOP. IDA, thal the following described poCaon of the above deserthed Uhlity Easement be and is hereby vacated, being more particularly described as set forth m: Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Clerk to the Board is hereby dtreCted to record a certified copy of this Resolution in the Official Record~ of Collier County, Honda, and to make proper notation of this vacation on the recorded plat as referenced above. This Resolution is adopted this day of , 2002, after motion, second end majority vote favoring same. DATED: ATTEST: DXVIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk Deputy Clerk Approved aa to form and legal patnck~3~ Wh'{te, Esq., Assistant County Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: James D. Caner, Ph.D., Chaurnan /7 ¥') SKETCH OF LEGAL PHONI LOT 8 / / / / LOT 22 LOT 9 PAGE I O? 2. EXHIBIT AVPLAT200~-ARI457 POINT OF COMMENCEMENT NORTHEAST CO~NER OF LOT 21, BLOCK 17 HONE -~. POINT OF BEGINNING o'/'"~ LOT 21 ~ BLOCK 17 CONTROL T LOT 20 LINEI DIREC~ON I DISTANCE I L1 S29'47'19'W 10.00' L2 S84'51'14'E 2.45' L3 S59'48'54'E 37.69' L4 S30'38'32'W 1.32' CUR~ I RADIUS I LENGTH I CHORD I BEARING I DELTA C1 2330.00' 12.85' 12.85' N60~)3'12"W OOq 8'5B' C2 2350.00' 39,90' 39.90' N59'24'17'W 00'58'52' -C3 2440.00' 73.07' 73.07' N59~l'12'W 01'42'57' C4 2320.00' 84.48' 84.47' S59qO'O6'E 02~5'11' THIS IS NOT A SURVEY RAYMOND F. ERICIf$ON. en unmerrled person COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMI5510NER5 TRE15ER. LIEBERFARBo COLLINS + VERNON. CMARTERED July 25. 2001 Date of b~rvey, 5ca~, 1' = ~0' Project No. LGEL21B17A NOT VALID UI%[$5 Job No. __0~2q2 E~IBOSbED W1TH SEA COPTiC*Mr 2001 8Y CAROL ~ NELSON. P~.. ALL ~C.d~T5 REG~ BEING A PART OF LOT 21. BLOCtf IZ LELY GOLF ESTATES. ST. ANDREW5 WEST. recorded ~ Pint ~ I0. pege q3 o? the ?ub~c Records of CoSier Comty. JAN 0 8 2002 ~lor~~e P,~n 2 of 2. 231 PEBBLE BEACM C~( Cerol f. Nelson. ?.L.5. ~5013 3871 ~te B~v~d N~, ~e 34117 Cq413 304-0055 Off~ Cq413 304-0047 F~6~ PAGE 2 2 EXHffirf "A# AVPLAT2001 -ARI457 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Part of Lot 21, Block 17, LELY GOLF ESTATES, ST. ANDREWS WEST, recorded in Plat Book 10, pages 93 of the Public Records of Collier Count~, Florida, being more particularly described as follows; Commence at the Northeast comer of said Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West, and run S29°47'19"W for 10.00 feet to the Southerly easement limit line of an existing 10 foot Utility Easement and being a point of cusp; thence 12.85 feet along the arc of a curve concave to the Northeast, having a radius of 2330.0 feet, a central angle of 00°18'$8", a chord of 12.85 feet and a chord bearing of N60°0yl2"W to the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continue 39.90 feet along thc arc of said curve, having a radius of 2330.0 feet, a central angle of 0o$8'$2", chord of 39.90 feet and a chord bearing of NS9°24'17"W to a point of cusp; thence run S84°51'14"E 2.45 feet; thence run S59°48'54"E for 37.69 feet; thence run S30038'32''W for 1.32 feet; to the POINT OF BEGINNING, subject to restrictions and reservations of record, containing 48.2 square feet more or less. Prepared by: Carol E. Nelson, PLS 3871 White Boulevard Naples, Florida 34117 ~.ai~DA I1T. M JAN c, :..2 Attachment "B" PETITION FORM FOR VACATION OF PLATS OR PORTIONS OF PLATS OF SUBDIVIDED LAND Date Received: gha~. Z~2~ 2~1 Petition g: Petitioner: Raymond F. Erickson Address: 231 Pebble Beach Circle City/State: Naples, Florida Agent: Christopher J. Thornton, Esq. Treiser, Lieberfarb, Collins & Vernon, Chtd. Address:Aofll N_ Tnmtnmt Trail: init~ ]]0 City/State: Nanles. Florida Telephone: (p) 982-4164 Zip Code: 34110 Telephone: 649-4900 Zip Code: 34103 Address of Subject Property:. 231 Pebble Beach Circle Location: Section 20 Township. 50 S Range 26 E Subdivision: Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrew ~/es t LegaIDescription: Lot 21 Block ll Unit__ Plat Book 10 Page(s). 93 Reason f or Request: Pool cage and deck built in 1993 encroach 1.3' into 10' platted utility easement :tn oac~ yarn. Current Zoning: RSF-3 Does this affect density?. No I hereby autho~rize~&ge~nt abov..~e~r~prese~t me for this petition: ~ Yes ~ No/ . . _ .... ,~gnatar~ of P~itioner ~ Date -- ~ond F. Erickson ~er Print Name (Title) Please see "Policy and Procedure for the Vacation and Annulment of Plats or Portions of Plats of Subdivided Land" for the list of supportive materials which must accompany this petition, and deliver or mail to: Community Development & Environmental Services Division Planning Services Department 2800 North Horseshoe Dr. Naples, Florida 34104 (1) (2) (3) (4) Attachment "B" Page 4 of 4 If applicant is a land trust, indicate the name of beneficiaries. If applicant is a corporation other than a public corporation, indicate the name of officers and major stockholders. If applicant is a partnership, limited partnership or other business entity, indicate the name of principals. List all other owners. [ AC.~A iTEM, I JAN 0 8 Official Receipt - Collier County Board of County Commissioners CDPR1103 - Official Receipt Trans Number Date Post Date Payment Slip Nbr I 286970 9/13/2001 8:40:05 AM 9/13/2001 AR 1457 I Appl Name: TREiSER, LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & VERNON Appl Stage/Status: COMPLETENESS STAGEJPENDING Address: CHRISTOPHER J. THORNTON, ESQ 4001 N. TAMIAMI TRAIL, #330 NAPLES FL 34103 Proj Name: ERICKSON, RAYMOND Type: TAZ: 151 Subdiv Nbr: 1696 Project Nbr: 2001080064 Payor: TREISER LIEBERFARB COLLINS & VERNON Fee Information Fee Code Description 12TRVC REV ACCT/VAC EASEMENT-ROW 00CKOV CHECK OVERAGE-CDS Total GL Account 10116361032910000000 11300000011542000000 Amount [ Waived $1000.00 I $25.oo $1000.00 . Payments Payment Code Account/Check Number Amount I CHECK 37872 $1025.001 Memo: Total Cash Total Non-Cash Total Paid $1025.00 I $1025.001 Collier County Board of County Commissioners CD-P/us for Windows 95/NT Cashier/location: MCCAULEYKATY / 1 User: ACQ~NOA ITEId JAN 0 8 2002 'AM Slanley J. Lieberfarb Farlner Treiser, Lieberfarb, Collins & Vernon 4001 Tamilmi Trail North Suite 330 Naples, FL .34103 File Number: 4647.001 Grantee S.S. No. Parcel Identification No. 55102280003 Warranty Deed This Indenture made this 31st day of May, 2001 between Bernd Schuler, a married person and Birgit Schuler, an unmarried person as their interest may appear whose post office address is Grafelder Str 13, Herzlaue 49770 of the County of , State of , grantor', and Raymond F. Erickson, an unmarried person whosc post office address is 231 Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, FL 341 I0 of the County of Collier, Stale of Florida, grantee*, Witnesseth, that said grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of TEN AND N O/I00 DOLLARS ($10.00) and o~cr good and valuable considerations to said grantor in hand paid by said grantee, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bai'gaincd, and sold to thc said grantee, and grantee's heirs and assigns forever, the following described land, situate, lying and being in Collier County, Florida. to-wit: Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West, accordiug to the plat thereof, recorded in Plnl Book 10, Page 93, Public Records of Collier County, F~oridn. and said grantor does hereby fully warrant the tide to said land, and will defend the same against lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. In Witness Whereof, grantor has hereunto scl grantor's hand and seal the day and year first above written Signed, sealed and delivered in our ' x~itn'~ss Na~e:~ ~ ~t~_/ (Seal) Birgit Schuler, by Bemd Schuler her aKomey-in-fact State of Florida County of Collier The foregoing instalment was acknowledged before me this 31st day3f.4May, .~,01 by I~emd~ler, individually and as agent of Birgit Schuler, who ~[~ is personally knowr~ or L~Tas pro~,u~~ti fication. ( / // ,, L' - My Commission Expires: Double' le~ JAN O 8 2007 Pi- ~ NO. .JAN 0 8 2002 .,. IO COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION 3301 E. TAMIAMI TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34112 (941) 732-2575 FAX: (941) 732-2526 August 7, 2001 Treiscr, Lieberfarb, Collins & Vernon 4001 Tamiami Tr. N. Ste 330 Naples, FL 34103 Re: 231 Pebble Beach Cir. Lot 21. Dear Mr. Thornton: This office has reviewed your request to vacate the 10' utility easement on the above-referenced site located on the back of your property. The Collier County Water-Sewer District has no facilities in the area and we, therefore, have no objection to the vacation of the Utility Easement. Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Lisa Taylor Engineering Technician I Paul Mattauseh, Water Director Joseph Cheatham, Wastewater Director Rick Grigg, Land Surveyor, Community Development g:\engineering tech\easement vacation\231 pebble beach cfi.doc 2002 TREISER~ LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & VERNON~ Cwm. Thomas A. Collins. II William J. Dempsey Fitzgerald A. Frater + Benjamin C. lseman Stanley J. Lieberfa~o C. Richard Mancini Christopher J. Thornton Richard M. Treiser Christopher T. Ve~on August 1, 2001 ATTORNEYS AT LAW The Northern Trust Building 4001 Tamiami Trail North Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941) 649-4900 Fax (941) 649-0823 Internet Address: www. swflalaw.com Richard Shapack of Counsel Mr. Stan Chrzanowski, Senior Engineer Collier County Engineering Review Services 2800 South Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Letter of No Objection for Utility Easement Vacation and Variance (1.3 feet) Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West 231 Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, Florida Dear Mr. Chrzanowski: We represent Mr. Ray Erickson and are in the process of applying to Collier County for vacation of a portion of a 1 O-foot utility easement and a variance from a 1 O-foot rear-yard setback in order to accommodate a 1.3-foot encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure. The pool and screen enclosure wen constructed in 1993 by the then-owner of the home, Mr. Steve Tracy. Mr. Tracy sold the home to Mr. Schuler in 1996, who in turn sold the home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting off this portion of the deck and moving the screen enclosure, which would result in a very narrow pool apron, we are applying for a variance and vacation of a portion of the easement. The proposed 1.3 foot reduction in the easement and setback would still leave 8.3 feet of easement on Mr. Erickson's property, as well as the adjacent 10 foot easement at the rear of the abutting lots, leaving intact an 18.7 foot utility easement. Copies of the plat, the boundary survey, and legal description with sketch of the encroachment are enclosed for your review. If you have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance, please sign this letter of no objection and return the letter to my office at your earliest possible convenience either by fax or in the enclosed envelope. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Very truly yours, TREISBR, LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & VERNON, CHTD. Chr~opher J. Thornton I have no objection ,o the proposed vacation ai~l'~irisace.--'· / Date Signature Name and TR]e AG~I~A ITEM, JAN g 2g 2 Thomas A. Collins, Il o William $, I~mp~y Fitzgerald A. Fra{¢r * ~ Benjamin C. ls~man Stanley J. Licberfarb C. Richard Mancini Christopher J. Thornton Richard M. Treiser Christopher T. Vernon August 1, 2001 TREISER, LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & VERNg_~ ~r~ ~ ATTORNEYS AT LAW The Northern Trust Building 4001 Tamiami Trail North Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941) 649-4900 Fax (941) 649-0823 lnternet Address: www. swflalaw.com OI~UM-2 PM 3:31 Richard Shapack of Counsel Edward J. Kant, P.E., Transportation Operations Director Collier County Transportation Services 2705 South Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 RE: Letter of No Objection for Utility Easement Vacation and Variance (1.3 feet) Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West 231 Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, Florida Dear Mr. Kant: We represent Mr. Ray Erickson and are in the process of applying to Collier County for vacation of a ,onion of a ! O-foot utility easement and a variance from a 1 O-foot rear-yard setback in order to accommodate a 1.3-foot encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure. The pool and screen enclosure were constructed in 1993 by the then-owner of the home, Mr. Steve Tracy. Mr. Tracy sold the home to Mr. Schuler in 1996, who in mm sold the home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting off this portion of the deck and moving the screen enclosure, which would result in a very narrow pool apron, we are applying for a variance and vacation of a portion of the easement. The proposed 1.3 foot reduction in the easement and setback would still leave 8.3 feet of easement on Mr. Erickson's property, as well as the adjacent 10 foot easement at the rear of the abutting lots, leaving intact an 18.7 foot utility easement. Copies of the plat, the boundary survey, and legal description with sketch of the encroachment are enclosed for your review. If you have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance, please sign this letter of no objection and remm the letter to my office at your earliest possible convenience either by fax or in the enclosed envelope. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Very truly yours, TREISER, LIEBEREARB, COLLINS & VERNON, CHTD. ChriStopher J. Thornton/~' JAN OS 2002 --, have no obj~.~fio, to the proposed vac` 't~aad J*/~riane~'y~ . ,,. . Date / / ' Sig'nat~r~ C:5~ )f - - . - Name and Title ' TREISER~ LIEBERFARB~ COLLINS ,Re VERNON~ Csto. Thomas A. Collins, Il = William ]. Dempsey Fitzgerald A. Fratcr · ~ Benjamin C. lseman Stanley J, Lieberfatb C. Richard Mancini Christopher ]. Thornton Richard M. Treiser Christopher T. Vernon August 1, 2001 ATTORNEYS AT LAW Thc Northern Trust Building 4001 Tamiami Trail No~h Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941) 649-4900 Fax (941) 649-0823 Internet Address: www. swflalaw, com Richard Shapack <~ of Couo.~el John H. Boldt, P.E., P.S.M Collier County Stormwater Management 2685 South Horseshoe Drive, Suite 212 Naples, FL 34104 RE: Letter of No Objection for UtiliW Easement Vacation and Variance (1.3 feet) Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West 231 Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, Florida Dear Mr. Boldt: We represent Mr. Ray Erickson and are in the process of applying to Collier County for vacation of a portion ora 10-foot utility easement and a variance from a 10-foot rear-yard setback in order to accommodate a 1.3-foot encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure. The pool and screen enclosure were constructed in 1993 by the then-owner of the home, Mr. Steve Tracy. Mr. Tracy sold the home to Mr. Schuler in 1996, who in mm sold ~he home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting off tl~s portion of the deck and moving the screen enclosure, which would result in a very narrow pool apron, we are applying for a variance and vacation of a portion of the easement. The proposed 1.3 foot reduction in the easement and setback would still leave 8.3 feet of easement on Mr. Erickson's property, as well as the adjacent 10 foot easement at the rear of the abutting lots, leaving intact an 18.7 foot utility easement. Copies of the plat, the boundary survey, and legal description with sketch of the encroachment are enclosed for your review. If you have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance, please sign this letter of no objection and return the letter to my office at your earliest possible convenience either by fax or in ~e enclosed envelope. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. .. Very truly yours, TREISFaR, ,LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & VEP,.NON, CHTD. Christopher J. Thornton I have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance. ~C.,~t. no ~ IXO,3 JAN I] 8 2002 TREISERs LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & VERNON, Cm'~. Thomas A. Collins, Il o William J. Dempscy Fitzgerald A. Frater + ~ Benjamin C. lseman Stanley J. Liebeffarb C. Richard Mancini Christopher .k Thornton Richard M. T~iser Christopher T. Vernon August 1,2001 Bill Stiess, Chief of Operations Collier County Sheriffs Office 3301 Tamiami Trail East, Bldg. J. Naples, FL 34112 RE: ATTORNEYS AT LAW The Northern Trust Building 4001 Tamiami Trail North Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941) 649-4900 Fax (941) 649-0823 Internet Address: www. swflalaw, com Richard Shapack c* RECEIVED CCSO/LEGAL Letter of No Objection for Utility Easement Vacation and Variance (1.3 feet) Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West 231 Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, Florida Dear Mr. Steiss: We represent Mr. Ray Erickson and are in the process of applying to Collier County for vacation of a '- ortion of a 10-foot utility easement and a variance from a 10-foot rear-yard setback in order to accommodate a 1.3-foot encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure. The pool and screen enclosure were constructed in 1993 by the then-owner of the home, Mr. Steve Tracy. Mr. Tracy sold the home to Mr. Schuler in 1996, who in turn sold the home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting off this portion of the deck and moving the screen enclosure, which would result in a very narrow pool apron, we are applying for a variance and vacation of a portion of the easement. The proposed 1.3 foot reduction in the easement and setback would still leave 8.3 feet of easement on Mr. Erickson's property, as well as the adjacent 10 foot easement at the rear of the abutting lots, leaving intact an 18.7 foot utility easement. Copies of the plat, the boundary survey, and legal description with sketch of the encroachment are enclosed for your review. If you have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance, please sign this letter of no objection and return the letter to my office at your earliest possible convenience either by fax or in the enclosed envelope. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Very tmly yours, TREISER, LIEBEKFARB, COLLINS & VERNON, CHTD. C . Thornton T have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance. [ AC.,E/~A ffr~ g-a-o / J -' Date Signature ~ JAN ~ ~ ~g? Name and Title I TREISER~ LIEBERFARB~ COLLINS & VERNON~ Cm~. Thomas A. Collins, I1 ~ William J. Dempsey Fitzgerald A. Frater + ~ Benjamin C. Beman Stanley J. Lieherfatb C. Richard Mancini Christopher J. Thornton Richard M. Treiser Christopher T. Vernon August 1, 2001 ATTORNEY5 AT LAW The Northern Trust Building 4001 Tamiami Trail North Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941) 649-4900 Fax (941) 649-0823 Interuet Address: www. swflalaw.com Richard Shapack o- of Counsel Assistant Chief Rob Pottieger East Naples Fire Control and Rescue District 4798 Davis Boulevard Naples, FL 34104 Letter of No Objection for Utility Easement Vacation and Variance (1.3 feet) Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West 231 Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, Florida Dear Mr. Pottieger: We represent Mr. Ray Erickson and are in the process of applying to Collier County for vacation of a portion of a 1 O-foot utility easement and a variance from a 10-foot rear-yard setback in order to accommodate e 1.3-foot encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure. The pool and screen enclosure we~ constructed in 1993 by the then-owner of the home, Mr. Steve Tracy. Mr. Tracy sold the home to Mr. Schuler in 1996, who in mm sold the home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting off this portion of the deck and moving the screen enclosure, which would result in a very narrow pool apron, we are applying for a variance and vacation of a portion of the easement. The proposed 1.3 foot reduction in the easement and setback would still leave 8.3 feet of easement on Mr. Erickson's property, as well as the adjacent 10 foot easement at the rear of the abutting lots, leaving intact an 18.7 foot utility easement. Copies of the plat, the boundary survey, and legal description with sketch of the encroachment are enclosed for your review. If you have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance, please sign this letter of no objection and return the letter to my office at your earliest possible convenience either by fax or in the enclosed envelope. Thank you for your attention ~o this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or Very truly yours, TREISI~R, LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & VERNON, CHTD. Ch~stophcr J. Thornton I hnvenoobj.tiontotheproposedvacn~/~n¢~ / / Narn-~'e ~r'~d Title~ AGi~IDA ITEM.~ JAN 0 8 2002 4105 lfth Avenue S.W. Naples, FL. 34116 FAX 353-6082 August 23, 2001 Tricker, Liebeffarb, Collins & Vernon The Northern Trt~t Building 4001 Tamiam/Trail Noah Suite 330 Napl~. Florida. 34103 Arm: Mr. Christopher J. Thornton Re: Letter of No Objection for Utility Easement Vacation (i .3 feeI) Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Gol t"Estates, St_ Andrews W~st 231 Pebble Beach Cimle. Naples~ Florida Dear Mr. Thornton, Florida Power & Light Company h'-,s no objectiun to the vacation ol'tl~c $otlth 37.69 ~t in lcnSti~. 1.3 IL'et in width, portion of' the e.xisdn,¢ B)' utility easement, that the pool enclo.~,ur¢ has encroached ,pon at thc above address. Legal Description prepm'ed by Carol E. Nelson. P.L.S.. 3871 White Blvd.. Naples, Fl.. 341 I*. and is attached. It is under~lo~t that ilo r[trtller encroachtnent illlO thc c:t~cn~cnt ,,x ill taka place lfyou have any questions, please contact me at 941-35349347 or 41(15 Sxx 15 Avenue. Naples Florida 34116 S ~cerely. ~4,.~)~ J.W. White Comstmcfion Desi_m~er ce:file TREISER, LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & VERNON, C~o. Thomas A. Collins, 11 o William J. Dempsey Fitzgerald A. Frater * ~ Benjamin C. laeman Stanley J. Liebeffarb C. Richard Mancini Christopher J. Thornton Richard M. Treiser Christopher T. Vernon August 1, 2001 ATTORNEYS AT LAW The Northern Trust Building 4001 Tamiami Trail North Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941) 649-4900 Fax (941) 649-0823 Internet Address: www. swflalaw.com Richard Shapack c~ Kimo Ulloa, Network Engineer Sprint P.O. Box 2469 Naples, FL 34106 Letter of No Objection for Utility Easement Vacation and Variance (1.3 feet) Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West 231 Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, Florida Dear Mr. Ulloa: We represent Mr. Ray Erickson and are in the process of applying to Collier County for vacation of a portion of a 1 O-foot utility easement and a variance from a 1 O-foot rear-yard setback in order to accommodate 1.3-foot encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure. The pool and screen enclosure wer~ constructed in 1993 by the then-owner of the home, Mr. Steve Tracy. Mr. Tracy sold the home to Mr. Schuler in 1996, who in turn sold the home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting off this portion of the deck and moving the screen enclosure, which would result in a very narrow pool apron, we are applying for a variance and vacation of a portion of the easement. The proposed 1.3 foot reduction in the easement and setback would still leave 8.3 feet of easement on Mr. Erickson's property, as well as the adjacent 10 foot easement at the rear of the abutting lots, leaving intact an 18.7 foot utility easement. Copies of the plat, the boundary survey, and legal description with sketch of the encroachment are enclosed for your review. If you have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance, please sign this letter of no objection and return the leuer to my office at your earliest possible convenience either by fax or in the enclosed envelope. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Very truly yours, T~J~S~R,. LIEB~LLINS & VERNON, CHTD. Christopher J. Thornton I have no objection to the proposed vacatio~pd va~Tan~c../~? Date Signature Name and Title TREISER, LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & VERNON, Cm'o. Thomas A. Collins, 11 = William ]. Dcmpscy F}tzgeraid A. Frater + ~ Benjamin C. l~man Stanley J. Lieb~rfarb C. Richard Ma~ini Chrisiopher J. Thornton Richard M. Trei~r Christopher T. Vernon August 1, 2001 ATTORNEYS AT LAW The Northern Trust Building 4001 Tamiami Trail North Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941) 649-4900 Fax (941) 649-0823 Interact Address: www. swflalaw.com Richard Shapack o of Counsel Gene Howell, Construction Manager Comcast Cable Communications, Inc. 26880 Old U.S. 41 Bonita Springs, FL 34135 RE: Letter of No Objection for Utility Easement Vacation and Variance (1.3 feet) Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West 231 Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, Florida Dear Mr. Howell: We represent Mr. Ray Erickson and are in the process of applying to Collier County for vacation of a eortion of a 1 O-foot utility easement and a variance from a 1 O-foot rear-yard setback in order to accommodate a 1.3-foot encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure. The pool and screen enclosure were constructed in 1993 by the then-owner of the home, Mr. Steve Tracy. Mr. Tracy sold the home to Ma'. Schuler in 1996, who in mm sold the home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting off this portion of the deck and moving the screen enclosure, which would result in a very narrow pool apron, we are applying for a variance and vacation of a portion of the easement. The proposed 1.3 foot reduction in the easement and setback would still leave 8.3 feet of easement on Mr. Erickson's property, as well as the adjacent 10 foot easement at the rear of the abutting lots, leaving intact an 18.7 foot utility easement. Copies of the plat, the boundary survey, and legal description with sketch of thc encroachment are enclosed for your review. If you have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance, please sign this letter of no objection and return the letter to my office at your earliest possible convenience either by fax or in the enclosed envelope. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Very truly yours, TREISBR,.LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & VERNON, CHTD. Christopher J. Thornton I have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance. g-7-o Date Signature Name and Tit~e TREISER~ LIEBERFARB~ COLLINS & VERNON~ Cmo. Thomas A. Collins, Il ~ William J. Dempsty Fitzgerald A. Fraler + ~ Benjamin C. lseman S~nley J. Lieberfarb C. Richard Mancini Christopher J. Thornton Richm'd M. Treis~r Christopher T. Vernon August 1,2001 ATTORNEYS AT LAW The Northern Trust Building 4001 Tamiami Trail North Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941) 649-4900 Fax (941) 649-0823 lnternet Address: www. swflalaw.com Richard Shapack ~ of Counael Robert Frank Lely Civic Association, Inc. 235 Pebble Beach Circle Naples, FL 34113 Letter of No Objection for Utility Easement Vacation and Variance (1.3 feet) Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West 231 Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, Florida Dear Mr. Frank: We represent Mr. Ray Erickson and are in the process of applying to Collier County for vacation of a portion of a 1 O-foot utility easement and a variance from a 1 O-foot rear-yard setback in order to accommodate 1.3-foot encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure. The pool and screen enclosure were constructed in 1993 by the then-owner of the home, Mr. Steve Tracy. Mr. Tracy sold the home to Mr. Schuler in 1996, who in turn sold the home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting offthis portion of the deck and moving the screen enclosure, which would result in a very narrow pool apron, we are applying for a variance and vacation of a portion &the easement. The proposed 1.3 foot reduction in the easement and setback would still leave 8.3 feet of easement on Mr. Erickson's property, as well as the adjacent 10 foot easement at the rear of the abutting lots, leaving intact an 18.7 foot utility easement. Copies of the plat, the boundary survey, and legal description with sketch of the encroachment are enclosed for your review. If you have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance, please sign this letter of no objection and return the letter to my office at your earliest possible convenience either by fax or in the enclosed envelope. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Very truly yours, TREI.S,E~, LIEB ERFARB, COLLINS & VERNON, C HTD. Christopher J. Thornton I have no objection to the proposed vacati//~ a~d variance. [ A6g. I~A IIEM t~ Signature ~ JAN 0 8 ~007 Name and Title ~/y ~.c ~. ~ ~' Rug 02 O1 04:37p Donald Sierinc 841 ?53 6?65 p. 1 k\uguSI 1. 2001 '[Ri~;iSER, LII,:BERI, ARIt, COLLINS & YERNON, 4001 Tamia,ni 'lrail NOl'lh Donald and Elizabetb Siering 225 Pcbble Beach Circle Naples. FL 34115 lol 21. Block 17. I.ety Golf Estates. St. Andrews West 231 Pebble Beach Circle. Naples. Florida Dear ~vlr. and Mrs. SieiJn~: \Ye represent Mr. Ray lirickson and are in the process o1' applying lo Collier Count) Ib~ xacatlon of a pOl'tlOB O[ a 10-1bm utili~x casement and a variance from a 10-foot rcm'-yard selback in order to accoIlllBodal¢ a t.3-1bo encroachment of an cxisltng pool deck and screen enclosure Thc pool and screen enclosure were collslructcd in 1993 b5 Ibc then-owner of thc home, Mt. Steve.Tracy. Mr. Tracy sold the borne to Mr, gcbuler in 1996. who in lurn sold the home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting off' tiffs portion of the deck and moving thc screen encJosmc, which would result in a very narroxx pool aprtm, xxe arc applying 1~' a variance and vacation ora portion of the easement. Thc proposed 1.3 Ibol reducBon ill Ibc easement and setback would still leave 8.3 [~el of cascmenl on Mr Erickson's propc~y, as well as Ibc adjacent l0 fi~ot cascmcnt al the mar o[llae abulting ors. leaving intact an 18.7 tbot utility casement. Copies of Ibc plat, tl~e boundary survey, and legal description x~itb sketch of tim encroachmcnl arc enclosed for your review. If you have no obiection to thc proposed vacation and yin'lance, please sign this better of no objection and return the letter to my office at yoor earliest possible convemence cilher by fax or in the enclosed envelope. '[hallk you for yom' attcl/tloll to this matter. I'lcase Ikel fi'cc to COlltact lilt if yot~ [llix ~ i~ll3 qt~¢stiolls O] Very lrnly yours. TREISER. LIEBERFA~. COLLIN & VERNON, CHTD. Ch;i~iopher J. Thornton I have no objection It} the proposed vacation and variance./ Signature JAN 0 8 200? TREISER, LIEBERFARB~ COLLINS & VERNON~ C.xn. Thomas A. Collins, I1 = William J. Dempsey Fitzgerald A. Fraler *, Benjamin C. laeman Stanley J. Liebcrfatb C. Richard Mancini Christopher $. Thornton Richard M. Treis~r Christopher T. Vernon August 1, 2001 ATTORNEYS AT !-AW The Northern Trust Building 4001 Tamiami Trail North Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941 ) 649-4900 Fax (941 ) 649-0823 Internet Address: www. swflalaw.com Richard Shapack ~* Robert and Marian Frank 235 Pebble Beach Circle Naples, FL 34113 Letter of No Objection for Utility Easement Vacation and Variance (1.3 feet) Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West 231 Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, Florida Dear Mr. and Mrs. Frank: We represent Mr. Ray Erickson and are in the process of applying to Collier County for vacation of a portion of a 1 O-foot utility easement and a variance from a I O-foot rear-yard setback in order to accommodate a 1.3-foot encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure. The pool and screen enclosure wet constructed in 1993 by the then-owner of the home, Mr. Steve Tracy. Mr. Tracy sold the home to Mr. Schuler 1996, who in turn sold the home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting off this portion of the deck and moving the screen enclosure, which would result in a very narrow pool apron, we are applying for a variance and vacation of a portion of the easement. The proposed 1.3 foot reduction in the easement and setback would still leave 8.3 feet of easement on Mr. Erickson's property, as well as the adjacent 10 foot easement at the rear of the abutting lots, leaving intact an 18.7 foot utility easement. Copies of the plat, the boundary survey, and legal description with sketch of the encroachment are enclosed for your review. If you have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance, please sign this letter of no objection and return the letter to my office at your earliest possible convenience either by fax or in the enclosed envelope. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Very truly yours, TRE~.~. LIEB~LINS & VERNON, CHTD. Christopher J. Thornton I have n°/°bjegti°n t° the pr°p°sed vacati°jrlmd vari~'~e' ~-~///__~/~/~{ t~(/..."'./~ [ No,~r'~tl'r~"~]l? ~-~ Date/ Si~ature // .JAN [1 8 2002 - TREISER~ LIEBERFARB~ COLLINS & VERNON~, Ca~. Thomas A. Collins, I1 = William J. l~mpsey Fitzgerald A. Fratcr + ) Benjamin C. lseman Stanley L Lieherfarb C. Richard Mancini Christopher J. Thornton Richard M. Tr¢iser Christopher T. Vernon August 1, 2001 ATTORNEYS AT LAW The Northern Trust Building 4001 Tamiami Trail North Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941) 649-4900 Fax (941) 649-0823 Internet Address: www. swflalaw.com Richard Shapack o of Counsel Robert V. Sobczak and Ilona E. Rauw 228 Saint Andrews Blvd. Naples, FL 34113 Letter of No Objection for Utility Easement Vacatiou and Variance (1.3 feet) Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West 231 Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, Florida Dear Mr. Sobczak and Ms. Rauw: We represent Mr. Ray Erickson and are in the process of applying to Collier County for vacation of a .-oortion of a l O-foot utility easement and a variance from a 1 O-foot rear-yard setback in order to accommodate a .3-foot encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure. The pool and screen enclosure were constructed in 1993 by the then-owner of the home, Mr. Steve Tracy. Mr. Tracy sold the home to Mr. Schuler in 1996, who in mm sold the home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting off this portion of the deck and moving the screen enclosure, which would result in a very narrow pool apron, we are applying for a variance and vacation of a portion of the easement. The proposed 1.3 foot reduction in the easement and setback would still leave 8.3 feet of easement on Mr. Erickson's property, as well as the adjacent l0 foot easement at the rear of the abutting lots, leaving intact an 18.7 foot utility easement. Copies of the plat, the boundary survey, and legal description with sketch of the encroachment are enclosed for your review. If you have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance, please sign this letter of no objection and return the letter to my office at your earliest possible convenience either by fax or in the enclosed envelope. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Very truly yours, TRE~. LIEB~LINS & VERNON, CHTD. Christopher J. Thornton ~. I have no objection to the proposed vac~~~_~ Date Signatt~ ~ Signature JAN 0 8 2002 Wt ~ J, D~rnpse,y Ben; n C. Is~man ^ugn~t 1,2001 ATTORN£Ya AT L~W The Northern Trust Building 400b Tamiami Trail North Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941) 649-4900 Fax (941) 649-0823 Interact Address: www, sw flalaw, com Richard $~ap~ck e. Daniel F. and I(.ristina N. Pineau 232 Saint Andrews Blvd. N~ pl~.~, L 34113 .er of No Objection for Utility Easement Vacation and Variance (1.3 feet) 21, Block 17, Lely Oolf Estates, SL Andrews West Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, Florida Dear Mr. and Mrs. Pineau: We represent Mr. Ray Eriekson and are in the process of applying to Collier County for vacetion of a portion ora 10-foot utilRy easement and a variance from a 10-foot rear-yard setback in order to accommodate a 1.3-foot encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure. The pool and screen enclosure were constructed in 1993 by the then-owner of the home, Mr. Steve Tracy. Mr. Traey sold the home £o Mr. Schuler 1996, who in turn sold the home to Mr. Eriekson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting off this portion of deck and moving the screen enclosure, which would result in a very narrow pool apron, we are applying for a variauce and vacation ora portion of the easement. The proposed 1.3 foot reduction in the easement and setback would still leave 8.3 feet of easement on Mr. EHckson'$ property, as well as the adjacent ! 0 foot easement at the rear of fine abutting lo~s, leaving intact an 18.7 foot utility easement. Copies of the plat, the boundary survey, and legal description with sketch of the eucroachment are enclosed for your review. If you have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance, please sign this leUer of no objection and return the letter to my office at your earliest possible convenience either by fax or in the enclosed envelope. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any, questions or contra'ns. Very truly yours, TREIS~'~ LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & VERNON, CH-I-L~. C~6pher J. Thornton / I have no objeclion to the proposed vacation and Date I Signature Signatnre ,,,,,. /7 57) DUPLICAT~ 2000 COLLIER COUNTY NOTICE OF AD VALOREM TAXES AND NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS uuNi tAKNtD 4~ IN NOV 3X IN DEC E% IN JAN 1% IN ?EB -V~-"~'-MAF UNT DUE 1,819.43 1,838.36 1,,t57.34 1,876.291 1,895. 3.5473 397.66 co~ 5 CQIJ.J~RCQWflYT~IO~CTOR 5. 1490 577.21 ~-~A~ I ~~-~DmGC-1 2. 5730 288.44 ~-~ i ~. 112,101 2.3425 262.60 ~N~ 3 ~ I 161 · 5620 63-D0 WA~KT. 1.6748 187.75 mO~.~ 2 SCHULER, BERND · 0391 4-38 V~.OaT. 6 SCHULER, BIRGI? 15.8877 1,781.04 20 GRAFELDER STR 13 49770 HERZLAUE ~ ~ NON-~V[ORBGK GERMANY ~IST i 114.20 ~ GB . j b~i]EEAOOO3 1,~95.e4 COMmN~T~ L~~ELY GOLF EST ST ~NDREW~ W PAID 01/01/10 1,857.34 BLK 17 LOT 21 RECe 1076D.D8 GUY L. CARLTON - TAX COLLECTOR ]00055102280003 0000189524 0000000000 00000 9 &CIF..Jk~ A ITEk~. JAN O Na~FL ~4113 o his. Msfbn I. Pmnk 23S Pddl Beml (:31de Na~iea, FI. 34113 Na~ Ft. ~4113 ]Mr. t.len~ W. Mens~ Ms. ~ M. Mene~ 211 Pcbblc Iknch Civic Naples, FL 34113 w. Na~les, Ft. 34113 192 Pebbl~ Iknch C'm:i~ 216 Pebble lk~:h_Cbde ~l~J~ FL. 34113 I Naples, Fl. ~4J113 Ma'. Eliery J. ~ T~? Na~Jes, FI. 34113 Ms. Lin4 A. Cowul 204 Saint And~ws Boulevard Naples, Ft. 34113 Mr. Scott E. flastian 222 Saint Andrews Boulevard N~les. FL 34113 Na~ies, FL 34113 Mr. Dared F. Pbem Kfisflna N. Hnmu ~.~ Saint And~-ws Boulevmd ~ FL 34113 Mr. James t.. Jo~stone 238 Saint Andrews Boulevard Naples. FL 34113 Mr. Walter J. Andmsen Ms...The~a_. !.. Andresen 240 hint Andr~u Bodowd Na~les, F't. ~4113 ABBINGTON VI~.LA. GE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. C/O R.P. PROPERTY MANG 265 AIRPORT RD 50 NAPLES FL 34104 US 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY VA-2001-AR-1380, CHRISTOPHER J. THORNTON, ESQUIRE, OF TREISER, LIEBEREARB, COLLINS & VERNON, CHARTERED, REPRESENTING RAYMOND F. ERICKSON, REQUESTING AN AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE OF 1.3 FEET FROM THE REQUIRED 10 FEET TO 8.7 FEET FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 231 PEBBLE BEACH CIRCLE, IN SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. COMPANION -TO AVPLAT-2001-AR-1457 OBJECTIVE: That the community's interest is maintained in a single-family neighborhood. CONSIDERATIONS: There is no land-related hardship with respect to this petition. The petitioner requests a 1.3-foot after-the-fact vahance from the required 10-foot rear-yard accessory structure setback to 8.7 feet, for a screened pool on a single-family house. The petitioner wishes to remedy an encroachment into the rear-yard accessory setback. Building permits were issued in 1993 for the pool and enclosure. Spot surveys for accessory structures were not required by the Building Department until 1994. The current owner discovered the encroachment and requests a variance. The pool and screen enclosure also encroach into a Utility Easement. Therefore a petition to vacate a portion of the easement will be heard by the Board of County Commissioners as a companion to this variance petition. Letters of no objection from the surrounding property owners have been received. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this petition will have no fiscal impact on Collier County. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Approval of this variance will not affect or change the requirements of the Growth Management Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: There are no unusual environmental issues associated with this petition. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is not located within an Area of Historical and Archaeological Probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no survey or Waiver of Historic and Archaeological Survey & Assessment is required. EAC RECOMMENDATION: The Environmental Advisory Council did not review this petition because the EAC does not normally hear variance petitions. CCPC RECOMMENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission heard this petition at its December 6, 2001 meeting. The CCPC voted 8 to 0 to forward petition V-2001-AR-1380 to the BZA with a recommendation of approval. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: There is no land related hardship associated with this after-the-fact variance. However, there are ameliorating factors: the encroachment has been in existence since 1993, landscaping buffers the encroachment from the closest neighbor, and letters of no objection have been received from the neighbors, in addition, the current property owner purchased the property with the existing encroachment, and was not the cause of the encroachment. Therefore, Planning Services staff recommended that the CCPC forward Petition VA-2001-AR-1380 to the BZA with a reconmaendation of approval. 2 AGENDA ITEM JAN O a 2002 PREPARED BY: FRE~~SCH~, AICPC~ PRINCqPAL PLANNER DATE REVIEWED BY: SUSAN MURRAY, AICP CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER DATE THOMAS E. KUCK, PE INTER_[M PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR DATE APPROVED BY' f JOHN ~. DUNNUCK, Ill DATE INTER~ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR executive summary/VA-2001-AR-1380 MEMORANDUM TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DATE: NOVEMBER 15, 2001 SUBJECT: PETITION VA-2001-AR-1380 AGENT/APPLICANT: OWNER: AGENT: Raymond F. Erickson 231 Pebble Beach Circle Naples, FL 34110 Christopher J. Thornton Treiser, Lieberfarb, Collins &Vemon, Chartered 4001 North Tamiami Trail, Suite 330 Naples, FL 34103 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests a 1.3-foot after-the-fact variance from the required 10-foot rear-yard accessory structure setback to 8.7 feet, for a screened pool on a single-family house. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located at 231 Pebble Beach Circle within the L subdivision. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The petitioner wishes to remedy an encroachment into the rear-yard accessory setback. Building permits were issued in 1993 for the pool and enclosure. Spot surveys for accessory structures were not required by the Building Department until 1994 (see attached memo fi.om Ken Badke). The current owner discovered the encroachment and requests a variance. The pool and screen enclosure also encroach into a Utility Easement. Therefore a petition to vacate a portion of the easement will be heard by the Board of County Commissioners as a companion to this variance petition. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Subject: Single-family house; zoned RSF-3 Surrounding: North - East - South - West - Single-family house; zoned RSF-3 Single-family house; zoned RSF-3 Pebble Beach Circle ROW Single-family house; zoned RSF-3 HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staffs analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is not located within an area of historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, a Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment or waiver is not required. EVALUATION FOR IMPACTS TO TRANSPORTATION~ INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENT: Approval of this variance request will have no effect on infrastructure, transportation or the environment. ANALYSIS: Section 2.7.5 of the Land Development Code grants the authority to the Board of Zoning Appeals to grant variances. The Planning Commission is advisory to the BZA and utilizes the provisions of Section 2.7.5.6.1 through 2.7.5.6.8, which are general guidelines to be used to assist the Commission in making a determination. Responses to the items in Section 2.7.5.6 are as follows: JAN 0 8 2002 a. Are there special conditions and circumstances existing, which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land, structure or building involved? do f. No. The enclosure was designed to fit on the lot. A construction error resulted in the encroachment. Are there special conditions and circumstances, which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property, which is the subject of the variance request? No. The enclosure was configured on the lot to meet the 10-foot rear yard requirement. The encroachment was not caught at the spot survey stage, because spot surveys and final location surveys were not required at the time for accessory structures. Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this Land Development Code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant? No. There is no land-related hardship. The enclosure can be modified to fit on the lot. Removal of the encroachment may result in a financial hardship on the property owner, however a financial hardship is not typically a justifiable reason to grant a variance. Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety and welfare? No. A house and accessory structures of a size, which meet the required setbacks, would be a reasonable use of the land. However, the requested variance is the minimum required to remove the encroachment, as requested by the petitioner. Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district? Yes, the granting of this variance will allow the petitioner to have a smaller rear yard than the minimum required in the RSF-3 zoning district. Will granting the variance be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this Land Development Code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare? No, this variance will allow the house to remain closer to the rear lot line than other houses in the subdivision. 3 ,/Td JAN 0 8 2002 g. Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf courses, etc.? Yes. A landscape buffer separates the encroachment from the neighbor to the north. h. Will granting the variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan? Approval of this variance will not affect or change the requirements of the Growth Management Plan. EAC RECOMMENDATION: The Environmental Advisory Council does not normally hear variance petitions. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: There is no land related hardship associated with this after-the-fact variance. However, there are ameliorating factors: the encroachment has been in existence since 1993, landscaping buffers the encroachment from the closest neighbor, and a letter of no objection has been received from the neighbor to the north. In addition, the current property owner purchased the property with the existing encroachment, and was not the cause of the encroachment. Therefore, Planning Services staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition VA-2001-AR-1380 to the BZA with a recommendation of approval. 4 JAN 0 8 2002 PREPARED BY: PRINCIPAL PLANNER II, {6, .o/ DATE REVIEWED BY: SU~AN MURRAY~ CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER DATE THOMAS E. KUCK, PE' INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR DATE APPROVED BY: JOI~l M: DUNNUCK m DATE ]2~FI~ERIM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR PeUtion Number: VA-2~01 -AR- 1380 Coili~,~_9 County Planning~ ~ssion: JOYCE A~J.~UTIO, 5 JAN 0 8 2002 VARIANCE PETITION (VARIANCE FROM SETBACK (S) REQUIRED FOR A PARTICULAR ZONING DISTRICT) Petition No. Commission District: / VA-2001-AR-13S0 PROJECT #2001080064 Date Petition Received: - DATE: 8/27/01 FRED REISCHL Planner Assigned: ABOVE TO BE COMPLETED BY STAFF GENERAL INFORMATION: Petitioner's Name: Raymond F. Erickson Petitioner's Address: 231 Pebble Beach Circle Naples, Florida 34110 Telephone: (p) 982-4164 Agent's Name: Christopher J. Thornton, Esquire Agent's Address: Tretser, Lieberfarb, Collins & Vernon~ Chtd. 4001 North Taliami Trail, Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone: 649-4900 COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING SERVICES/CURRENT PLANNING 2800 N. HORSESHOE DRIVE - NAPLES, FL 34104 PHONE (941) 403-2400/FAX (941) 643-6968 Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 Pag~ oA n o Complete the following for all Association(s) affiliated with this petition. (Provide additional sheets if necessary) Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address 235 Pebble Beach Circle Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address City Lely Civic Association, Inc. City Naples State ~ Zip 34110 City State __ Zip State __ Zip Name of Master Association: Mailing Address City State __ Zip Name of Civic Association: Mailing Address See above City State Zip PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal Description of Subject Property': Lely Coif Estates, Subdivision: st. A~drews I/est Section 20 Twp. 50 $ Unit Range 26 Lot (s) 21 Block(s) Property I.D. # 55102280003 17 Metes & Bounds Description: Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 Pa e2oJAN 08 20~ Address of Subject Property: same (If different from Petitioner's address) Current Zoning and Land use of Subject Parcel: RSF-3 zoning Land use one stn61e family detached residence Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: ZONING LAND USE N RSF-3 S R~F-3 and RHF-12 W .RSF-3 E RSF-3 single family hoses Pebble Beach Circle right-of-way single family hoses single family hoses Minimum Yard Requirements for Subject Property: Front: 30 Comer Lot: Yes [] No [] Side: 7.5 Waterfront Lot: Yes [] No [] Rear: 25 Rear Accessory $~ructure: IO Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 JAN 0 8 2002 Pag 3 of 8 Nature of Petition Provide a detailed explanation of the request including what struct~u'es are existing and what is proposed; the amount of encroachment proposed using numbers, i.e. reduce front setback from 25' to 18'; when property owner purchased property; when existing principal struet~u-e was built (include building permit number (s) if possible); why encroachment is necessary; how existing encroachment came to be; etc. Petitioner proposes a reduction in the rear accessory structure setback 10' to 8.7' in order to accomodate the 1.3' encroachment of an existing pool deck and screenenalosure mhich have re.a/ned in their current location since 1993. Petitioner's existing single family home was constructed in 1978 (Per. it #78-3236). The pool (Permit 193-4577) and screen enclosure (Permit t93-4578) were added in 1993 by Hr. Steve Tracy, the then-o~mer of the home. Hr. Tracy sold the home to Mr. Bernd Schuler in 1996, who in turn sold the home to the Petitioner on Jun 1, 2001. No new structures are proposed. The variance is proposed in order to accomodate the existing encroachment and avoid the time aha expense of cutting off the rear of the pool deck and modifying the screen enclosure. If the Petitioner is required to cut off the rear of the pool deck and hove the screen enclosure in, the resulting pool apron will be very narrow. Heavy vegetation shields the screen enclosure from the properties abutting at the rear. Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 AGENDA IY~'I Pas, 4N 0 8 2002 Please note that staff and the Collier County Planning Commission shall be guided in their recommendation to the Board of zoning Appeals, and that the Board of zoning appeals shall be guided in its determination to approve or deny a variance petition by the below listed criteria (1-8). (Please address this criteria using additional pages if necessary.) Are there special conditions and circumstances existing which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land, structure, or building involved. Yes. The screen enclosure was per~itted and CO'd by the eh~n-owr~r 8 years a~o. A recent survey revealed the encroseh.~nt. Are there special conditions and circumstances which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property which is the subject of the variance request. Yes. The encroachment was caused by the then-o~mer of the home 8 years ago. The home has changed hands twice since that time. 3. Willaliteralinte~retationoftheprovisionsofthiszoningcode work unnecessa~ and undue ha~shipontheapplicantorcreatepracticaldi~cultiesontheapplicant. Yes. Literal interpretation would require Petitioner to cut off and move in the deck and screen enclosure a distance of 1.3'. In addition to the obvious costs, the resulting pool apron would be very narrow due to the location of the lip of the pool. In addition, portions of the drainage and skimmer systems are located within this rear apron, and alterations to these systems would be difficult and 4. Will thevariance, ifg~nted, bc ~e minimum variance th~ willmakepossible the ~onableuseof expensive. theland, building orsWactu~ and whichpromom standar~ ofheaith, sa~ty orwelfare. Yes. Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 Page JAN 0 8 2002 nfs Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning distxict. No. Will granting the variance be in harmony with the intent and purpose of this zoning code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Yes. No views will be impacted. Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf course, etc. Heavy vegetation shields the screen enclosure from neighbors to the rear. 8. Will granting the variance be consistent with the growth management plan. Yes. Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 Pa JAN 0 8 2002 of 8 VARIANCE PETITION APPLICATION SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION PACKET! REQUIREMENTS # oF COPIES REQUIRED 1. Completed Application 15 2. Completed Owner/Agent Affidavit, Notarized 1 3. Pre-application notes/minutes 15 4. Survey of property, showing the encroachment 1 (measured in feet) 5. Site Plan depicting the following: 15 a) All property, boundaries & dimensions b) All existing and proposed structures (labeled as such c) North arrow, date and scale of drawing d) Required setbacks & proposed setbacks 6. Location map depicting major streets in area for 1 referenee 7. Application fee and Data Conversion Fee, checks shall V/ be made payable to Collier County Board of Commissioners 8. Other Requirements - _ As the authorized agent~applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay ~.~ng °f-~ ~ate /~ Applicant/AgentSignature ~ 7~ O/ Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 Pa JAN 0 8 2002 ~7of8 AFFIDA I/IT 17r'e/L llavmond g. l:r{ elrnou being first duly sworn, depose and say that we/I am/are the owners of the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing; that all the answers to the questions in this application, including the disclosure of interest information, all sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application, are honest and true to the best of our knowledge and belief We~1 understand that the information requested on this application must be complete and accurate and that the content of this form, whether computer generated or County printed shall not be altered. Public hearings will not be advertised until this application is deemed complete, and all required information has been submitted As proper~ owner We/I further authorize Christopher J. Thornton as our/my representative in any matters regarding this Petition. to act Signature of Property Owner Raymond F. Erick$on Typed or Printed Name qf Owner Typed or Printed Name of Owner The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~a~,_~ day of ~, 209! , by Ramona g. gr~el~n~n who is personally known to me or'has l)~oduced as identification. Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 (Signature of Notary Public - State of ~ida) t (Print, Type, or Stamp C~ Name of Notary Publit JAN O 8 2002 8of8 4105 lSth Avenue $.W. Nnples, FL. 34116 FAX 353-6082 Augtmt 23, 2001 Tdeser, Lieberfhrb, Collins & Vernon The Northern Tn~ Building 4001 Tanfimn/Trail North Suite 330 Naples. Florida. 34103 Ann: Mr. Christopher: J. Thornton Re: Lelter of No Objection for Utility Easement Vac.',tion (1.3 lkel) Lot 2 l, Block 17, Lely Golt'Estates, St. Andrews West 23 [ Pebble Beach Circle. Naples. Florida Dear Mr. Thornton, Florida Power & Lighl Company h'.,s no objection to tine ,,'ac:men of the ~ottth 37.69 C~ 1.3 tL"et in width, portion of ~.hc exisdn:4 la' utility e:tsemcm, that thc pool enclo.,,urc has encroached upon at thc above address. Legal Description prepm'ed by Carol E. Nelson. P.L.S.. 3871 White Blvd., N0,plus, FI., 34117. and is attached. It is undet'~tood that no Rmher er~eroachlment i~lo the cm.;emcnt x;ill take place m thc ft~turc. I f yeti haxe any questions, please contact me at 9a 1-355-0047 or 4 t (15 S ~x 15 Avenue. Napi es Florida 34116 Sincerely, t ~ Cortstmetion D~i~m~er cc:file an ~p/Group Coml:~n¥ ITEM JAN 0 8 2002 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION 3301 E. TAMIAMI TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34112 (941) 732-2575 FAX: (941) 732-2526 August 7, 2001 Treiser, Lieberfarb, Collins & Vernon 4001 Tamiami Tr. N. Ste 330 Naples, FL 34103 Re: 231 Pebble Beach Cir. Lot 21. Dear Mr. Thornton: This office has reviewed your request to vacate the 10' utility easement on the above-referenced site located on the back of your property. The Collier County Water-Sewer District has no facilities in the area and we, therefore, have no objection to the vacation of the Utility Easement. Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Lisa Taylor Engineering Technician I CCi Paul Mattausch, Water Director Joseph Cheatham, Wastewater Director Rick Grigg, Land Surveyor, Community Development g:\engineermg tech\easement vacation\231 pebble beach cir.doc ~alTIOA JAN 0 $ 2002 TREISER~ LIEBERFARB~ COLLINS & VERNON~ C.xo. Thomas A. Collins. 11: William ]. Dempsey Fitzgerald A. Frater + , Benjamin C. lseman Stanley J. Lieberfarb C. Richard Mancini Christopher J. Thornton Richard M. Treiser Christopher T. Vernon August 1, 2001 ATTORNEYS AT LAW The Northern Trust Building 4001 Tamiami Trail North Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941) 649-4900 Fax (941) 649-0823 Internet Address: www. sw flalaw.com Richard Shapack ~ of Counsel Mr. Stan Chrzanowski, Senior Engineer Collier County Engineering Review Services 2800 South Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 RE: Letter of No Objection for Utility Easement Vacation and Variance (1.3 feet) Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West 231 Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, Florida Dear Mr. Chrzanowski: We represent Mr. Ray Erickson and are in the process of applying to Collier County for vacation of a ,rtion of a 1 O-foot utility easement and a variance from a 1 O-foot rear-yard setback in order to accommodate a 1.3-foot encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure. The pool and screen enclosure were constructed in 1993 by the then-owner of the home, Mr. Steve Tracy. Mr. Tracy sold the home to Mr. Schuler in 1996, who in mm sold the home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting off this portion of the deck and moving the screen enclosure, which would result in a very narrow pool apron, we are applying for a variance and vacation of a portion of the easement· The proposed 1.3 foot reduction in the easement and setback would still leave 8.3 feet of easement on Mr. Erickson's property, as well as the adjacent 10 foot easement at the rear of the abutting lots, leaving intact an 18·7 foot utility easement. Copies of the plat, the boundary survey, and legal description with sketch of the encroachment are enclosed for your review. If you have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance, please sign this letter of no objection and return the letter to my office at your earliest possible convenience either by fax or in the enclosed envelope· Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel flee to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Very truly yours, TREISI~R, LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & VERNON, CHTD. Chn~ Thornton have no objection to the proposed vacation a~l variance. Date Signature Name and Title JAN 0 8 2002 n. £0 TREISER, LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & VERNO~N~. Thomas A. Collins, tl = William J Dcmpse) Fitzgerald A. Fraler * > Benjamin C. lscman Stanley J. Licberfarb C. Richard Mancini Christopher J. Thornton Richard M. Treiser Christopher T. Vernon August 1, 2001 ATTORNEYS AT LAW The Northern Trust Building 4001 Tamiami Trail North Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941) 649-4900 Fax (941) 649-0823 Internet Address: www. swflalaw.com 01 PPI3:31 Richard Shapack ct of Counsel + Also admitted in New york o Also edmiued in Kcmucky Also admitted in New Jersey Edward J. Kant, P.E., Transportation Operations Director Collier County Transportation Services 2705 South Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 RE: Letter of No Objection for Utility Easement Vacation and Variance (1.3 feet) Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West 231 Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, Florida Dear Mr. Kant: We represent Mr. Ray Erickson and are in the process of applying to Collier County for vacation of a portion ora 10-foot utility easement and a variance from a 10-foot rear-yard setback in order to accommodate 1.3-foot encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure. The pool and screen enclosure wet,, consu'ucted in 1993 by the then-owner of the home, Mr. Steve Tracy. Mr. Tracy sold the home to Mr. Schuler in 1996, who in turn sold the home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting offthis portion of the deck and moving the screen enclosure, which would result in a very narrow pool apron, we are applying for a variance and vacation of a portion of the easement. The proposed 1.3 foot reduction in the easement and setback would still leave 8.3 feet of easement on Mr. Erickson's property, as well as the adjacent 10 foot easement at the rear of the abutting lots, leaving intact an 18.7 foot utility easement. Copies of the plat, the boundary survey, and legal description with sketch of the encroachment are enclosed for your review. If you have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance, please sign this letter of no objection and return the letter to my office at your earliest possible convenience either by fax or in the enclosed envelope. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Very truly yours, TREISER, LIEBEREARB, COLLINS & VERNON, CHTD. / / Chr~o'pher J. Thornton/ J ,,] JAN 0 8 2002 I have no objectio ,~ to the proposed vacat~and¢,~, rianc4 Date // 7 ' SignatUre ~IT~/ : , f/WI . Name and Title TREISER, LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & VERNON, csm. Thomas A. Collins, Il: William ]. Dempsey Fitzgerald A. Frater + ~ Benjamin C. lscman Stanley J. Lieb~rfarb C. Richard Mancini Christopher J. Thornton Richard M. Tr¢iser Christopher T. Vernon August 1, 2001 ATTORNIEY~ AT LAW The Northern Trust Building 4001 Tamiami Trail North Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941 ) 649-4900 Fax (941) 649-0823 Interne! Address: www.swflalaw.com Richard Shapack of Counsel John H. Boldt, P.E., P.S.M. Collier County Stormwater Management 2685 South Horseshoe Drive, Suite 212 Naples, FL 34104 RE: Letter of No Objection for Utility Easement Vacation and Variance (1.3 feet) Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West 231 Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, Florida Dear Mr. Boldt: We represent Mr. Ray Erickson and are in the process of applying to Collier County for vacation of a ,rtion of a 1 O-foot utility easement and a variance from a 1 O-foot rear-yard setback in order to accommodate a 1.3-foot encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure. The pool and screen enclosure were constructed in 1993 by the then-owner of the home, Mr. Steve Tracy. Mr. Tracy sold the home to Mr. Schuler in 1996, who in mm sold the home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting offthis portion of the deck and moving the screen enclosure, which would result in a very narrow pool apron, we are applying for a variance and vacation of a portion of the easement. The proposed 1.3 foot reduction in the easement and setback would still leave 8.3 feet of easement on Mr. Erickson's property, as well as the adjacent 10 foot easement at the rear of the abutting lots, leaving intact an 18.7 foot utility easement. Copies of the plat, the boundary survey, and legal description with sketch of the encroachment are enclosed for your review. If you have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance, please sign this letter of no objection and return the letter to my office at your earliest possible convenience either by fax or in the enclosed envelope. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concems. Very truly yours, TRE[SFgR, LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & VERNON, CHTD. Christopher J. Thornton have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance. Date JAN 0 8 2002 TREISER~ LIEBERFARB~ COLLINS & VERNON~ Cum. William ]. Dempsey Fitzgerald A. Frater + ~ Benjamin C. lscman Stanley J. Lieberfarb C. Richard Mancini Christopher J. Thornton Richard M. Treiser Christopher T. Vernon August 1, 2001 ATTORNEYS AT LAW The Northern Trust Building 4001 Tamiami Trail North Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941 ) 649-4900 Fax (941) 649-0823 lnternet Address: www. swflalaw.com Bill Stiess, Chief of Operations Collier County Sheriffs Office 3301 Tamiami Trail East, Bldg. J. Naples, FL 34112 RE:~ Letter of No Objection for Utility Easement Vacation and Variance (I .3 feet) Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West 231 Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, Florida Richard Shapack of Counsel RECEIVEDCCSO/LEGAL Dear Mr. Steiss: We represent Mr. Ray Erickson and are in the process of applying to Collier County for vacation of a portion of a 10-foot utility easement and a variance from a 10-foot rear-yard setback in order to accommodate 1.3-foot encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure. The pool and screen enclosure we. constructed in 1993 by the then-owner of the home, Mr. Steve Tracy. Mr. Tracy sold the home to Mr. Schuler in 1996, who in mm sold the home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting off this portion of the deck and moving the screen enclosure, which would result in a very narrow pool apron, we are applying for a variance and vacation of a portion of the easement. The proposed 1.3 foot reduction in the easement and setback would still leave 8.3 feet of easement on Mr. Erickson's property, as well as the adjacent 10 foot easement at the rear of the abutting lots, leaving intact an 18.7 foot utility easement. Copies of the plat, the boundary survey, and legal description with sketch of the encroachment are enclosed for your review. If you have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance, please sign this letter of no objection and return the letter to my office at your earliest possible convenience either by fax or in the enclosed envelope. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concems. Very truly yours, TREISER, LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & VERNON, CHTD. C . Thornton I have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance. g-3-O l Date Signature ,,,. /,r d-- JAN 0 8 2002 Name and Title TRE1SER, LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & VERNON, cmo. Thomas A, Collins, 11 o William J. Dempsey Fitzgerald A. Frater + ~ Benjamin C. Iseman Stanley I. Liebeffarb C. Richard Mancini Christopher J. Thornton Richard M. Treiser Christopher T. Vernon August 1, 2001 ATTORNEYS AT LAW The Northern Trust Building 4001 Tamiami Trail North Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941 ) 649-4900 Fax (941) 649-0823 lnternet Address: www.swflalaw.com Richafd Shapack of Counsel Assistant Chief Rob Pottieger East Naples Fire Control and Rescue District 4798 Davis Boulevard Naples, FL 34104 Letter of No Objection for Utility Easement Vacation and Variance (1.3 feet) Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West 231 Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, Florida Dear Mr. Po~ieger: We represent Mr. Ray Erickson and are in the process of applying to Collier County for vacation of a '-- yrtion of a 1 O-foot utility easement and a variance from a 1 O-foot rear-yard setback in order to accommodate a · .3-foot encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure. The pool and screen enclosure were constructed in 1993 by the then-owner of the home, Mr. Steve Tracy. Mr. Tracy sold the home to Mr. Schuler in 1996, who in turn sold the home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting off this portion of the deck and moving the screen enclosure, which would result in a very narrow pool apron, we are applying for a variance and vacation of a portion of the easement. The proposed 1.3 foot reduction in the easement and setback would still leave 8.3 feet of easement on Mr. Erickson's property, as well as the adjacent 10 foot easement at the rear of the abutting lots, leaving intact an 18.7 foot utility easement. Copies of the plat, the boundary survey, and legal description with sketch of the encroachment are enclosed for your review. If you have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance, please sign this letter of no objection and return the letter to my office at your earliest possible convenience either by fax or in the enclosed envelope. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concems. Very truly yours, TREISI~R, LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & VERNON, CH'ID C~J. Thornton --haven°°bjecti°nt°thepr°p°sedvaca~/~n¢~) / f ' '~'~ Date ~ " S~n~'tu?¢ - Name and Title TREISER~ LIEBERFARB~ COLLINS & VERNON~ CHTD. Thomas A. Collins. 11 ~ William J. Dempsey Fitzgerald A. Frater + ~ Benjamin C. la. man Stanley J. Liehadarb C. Richard Mancini Christopher }. Thornton Richard M. Treiser Christopher T. Vernon August 1, 2001 ATTORNEYS AT LAW The Northern Trust Building 4001 Tamiarni Trail North Suite 330 Naples. Florida 34103 Telephone (941) 649-4900 Fax (941) 649-0823 lnternet Address: www.swflalaw.com Richard Shapack of Counsel Kimo Ulloa, Network Engineer Sprint P.O. Box 2469 Naples, FL 34106 RE: Letter of No Objection for Utility Easement Vacation and Variance (1.3 feet) Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West 231 Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, Florida Dear Mr. Ulloa: We represent Mr. Ray Erickson and are in the process of applying to Collier County for vacation of a portion of a 10-foot utility easement and a variance from a 10-foot rear-yard setback in order to accommodate e 1.3-foot encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure. The pool and screen enclosure wer constructed in 1993 by the then-owner of the home, Mr. Steve Tracy. Mr. Tracy sold the home to Mr. Schuler in 1996, who in turn sold the home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting off this portion of the deck and moving the screen enclosure, which would result in a very narrow pool apron, we are applying for a variance and vacation of a portion of the easement. The proposed 1.3 foot reduction in the easement and setback would still leave 8.3 feet of easement on Mr. Erickson's property, as well as the adjacent 10 foot easement at the rear of the abutting lots, leaving intact an 18.7 foot utility easement. Copies of the plat, the boundary survey, and legal description with sketch of the encroachment are enclosed for your review. If you have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance, please sign this letter of no objection and return the letter to my office at your earliest possible convenience either by fax or in the enclosed envelope. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel fi'ee to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Very truly yours, TRE. I~S]~R, LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & VERNON, CHTD. Christopher J. Thornton vacation nd variance. Date Signa~re Name and Title JAN 0 8 2002 TREISER, LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & VERNON, Thomas A. Collins. 11, William J. Dempsey Fitzgerald A. Frater + ~ Benjamin C. lseman Stanley J. Lieberfarb C. Richard Mancini Christopher J. Thornton Richard M. Tr¢lser Christopher T. Vernon August 1, 2001 ATTORNI~Y$ AT LAW The Northern Trust Building 4001 Tamiami Trail North Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941) 649-4900 Fax (941) 649-0823 Internet Address: www.swflalaw.com Richard Shapack of Counsel Gene Howell, Construction Manager Comcast Cable Communications, Inc. 26880 Old U.S. 41 Bonita Springs, FL 34135 RE: Letter of No Objection for Utility Easement Vacation and Variance (1.3 feet) Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West 231 Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, Florida Dear Mr. Howell: We represent Mr. Ray Erickson and are in the process of applying to Collier County for vacation of a ~rtion of a 1 O-foot utility easement and a variance from a I O-foot rear-yard setback in order to accommodate a 1.3-foot encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure. The pool and screen enclosure were constructed in 1993 by the then-owner of the home, Mr. Steve Tracy. Mr. Tracy sold the home to Mr. Schuler in 1996, who in turn sold the home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting off this portion of the deck and moving the screen enclosure, which would result in a very narrow pool apron, we are applying for a variance and vacation of a portion of the easement. The proposed 1.3 foot reduction in the easement and setback would still leave 8.3 feet of easement on Mr. Erickson's property, as well as the adjacent 10 foot easement at the rear of the abutting lots, leaving intact an 18.7 foot utility easement. Copies of the plat, the boundary survey, and legal description with sketch of the encroachment are enclosed for your review. If you have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance, please sign this letter of no objection and return the letter to my office at your earliest possible convenience either by fax or in the enclosed envelope. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Very truly yours, TRE~R~LIEB~LLINS & VERNON, CHTD. Christopher J. Thornton have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance. ,. Date Signature Name and Tit~e JAN 0 8 2002 TREISER~ LIEBERFARB~ COLLINS & VERNON~ C.xo. Thomas A. Collins. II = William ]. Dempsey Fitzgerald A. Frater * ~ Benjamin C. lscman Stanley J. Lieberfarb C. Richard Mancini Christopher J. Thornton Richard M. Treiser Christopher T. Vernon August 1, 2001 ATTORNEYS AT LAW The Northern Trust Building 4001 Tamiami Trail North Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941 ) 649-4900 Fax (941) 649-0823 Intemet Address: www.swflalaw.com Richard Shapack of Counsel Robert Frank Lely Civic Association, Inc. 235 Pebble Beach Circle Naples, FL 34113 Letter of No Objection for Utility Easement Vacation and Variance (1.3 feet) Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West 231 Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, Florida Dear Mr. Frank: We represent Mr. Ray Erickson and are in the process of applying to Collier County for vacation of a portion of a 1 O-foot utility easement and a variance from a I O-foot rear-yard setback in order to accommodate v !.3-foot encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure. The pool and screen enclosure werc constructed in 1993 by the then-owner of the home, Mr. Steve Tracy. Mr. Tracy sold the home to Mr. Schuler in 1996, who in turn sold the home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting offthis portion of the deck and moving the screen enclosure, which would result in a very narrow pool apron, we are applying for a variance and vacation of a portion of the easement. The proposed 1.3 foot reduction in the easement and setback would still leave 8.3 feet of easement on Mr. Erickson's property, as well as the adjacent 10 foot easement at the rear of the abutting lots, leaving intact an 18.7 foot utility easement. Copies of the plat, the boundary survey, and legal description with sketch of the encroachment are enclosed for your review. If you have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance, please sign this letter of no objection and return the letter to my office at your earliest possible convenience either by fax or in the enclosed envelope. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Very truly yours, T REI~,E]L, LIEBERF ARB, C O LL INS & V E RN ON, C H T D. Christopher J. Thornton I have no objection to the proposed vacati~s~: and variance. Date Signature Name andTitle Z~/~ ~:~-, ~. 2 JAN 0 8 2002 Ru~ 02 O1 04:37p Donald Siepin~ 941 793 6?65 p. 1 ,-\ugusl I. 2001 '[RId.'.,I.at, J~,II,]II.~RI.:kRB, (lOLl]h,.", ~ '~ LRNON, ~.., JO{ti Tamiami I rail NIIIIJl Donald and Elizabeth Sicrm~ 225 Pebble Beach Circle Naples. Fl, 34113 I.cttcr of No Objection Ibc L tiht) I,.ascmci)t Vaciltion alld Valiancc ~ i3 llzct} [.o1 21. Block 17. txly Golf Estates. St. Andre~vs Wesl 231 Pebblc 13cach ('ircle. Naples. Florida l)car lVlr. and Mrs. Siccing: \Ye represent Mr. Ray Erickson and are in the process of applying Io Collier C'otmt> Ib~ ~ncation of a porlion of a l O-Ibol utiliI5 casement and a variance from a 104001 rear-yard sclback in order to accommodate a .3- ooi encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure The pool and screen enclosure wcre construcmd in 1993 by thc then-owner of the home, Mr. S eve.Tracy. Mr. 'Fmc). sold the home to Mr ficbulcr in 1996. who in turn sold the home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting off this portion of the deck and movmu the screen enclosure, which would result in a very nan'oxy pool apron, we arc applying l~)l' a variance and w~cation of a portion of lhe easement. I he proposed o Ibol reduclmn m the casement and setback would still leave 8.3 t~el'of eascmenl on Mr. Erickson's propc~y, as well ns Iht ndjnccnt 10 lbot casement at d~e rear oflhe abulting tots, leaving inlact an 18.7 tbot utility casement. Copies of thc plat. the bmmdarv survey and leual description xfilh sketch of the encroachment arc enclosed l~r your rcvmw. If you have no O[~leCllOll Io thc proposed vacation and vmiancc. }>lense sign this letter of no objection and relurn the Idler to my office aI your earliest pofigihle ctmvenience ciflqer by fax or hi tl~e enclosed CliVe]Ope 'F lallk yOtl for yOUl atlclltio~l lo lhis illatter. I>lcas¢ Ikel Ii-cc to CUlltOct I])C if you llaxC ira> qucsuons o] Very Iruly yours, TR~ISER, LIEBERFAi~, COLLINS ~ VERNON. CHTD. ChrJsiopher J. Thornton I have no objection lo the ])roposed vacation and variance..· [)ale , Signah. e ~?~r.r. NOA IWr.~ JAN 0 8 2002 TRE1SER~ LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & VERNON~ CuR. Thomas A. Collins, 11 ~ William J. Dempsey Fitzgerald A. Fratcr + ) Benjamin C. Is~man Stanley i. Lieberfarb C. Richard Mancini Christopher J. Thornton Richard M. Tr¢iser Christopher T. Vernon August 1, 2001 ATTORNEYS AT LAW The Northern Trust Building 4001 Tamiami Trail North Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941) 649-4900 Fax (941) 649-0823 Internet Address: www. swflalaw.com Richard Shapack o of Counml Robert and Marian Frank 235 Pebble Beach Circle Naples, FL 34113 RE: Letter of No Objection for Utility Easement Vacation and Varin.',,ce (1.3 feet) Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West 231 Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, Florida Dear Mr. and Mrs. Frank: We represent Mr. Ray Erickson and are in the process of applying to Collier County for vacation of a portion of a 1 O-foot utility easement and a variance from a 1 O-foot rear-yard setback in order to accommodate a 1.3-foot encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure. The pool and screen enclosure we constructed in 1993 by the then-owner of the home, Mr. Steve Tracy. Mr. Tracy sold the home to Mr. Schuler_ 1996, who in mm sold the home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting off this portion of the deck and moving the screen enclosure, which would result in a very narrow pool apron, we are applying for a variance and vacation of a portion of the easement. The proposed 1.3 foot reduction in the easement and setback would still leave 8.3 feet of easement on Mr. Erickson's property, as well as the adjacent 10 foot easement at the rear of the abutting lots, leaving intact an 18.7 foot utility easement. Copies of the plat, the boundary survey, and legal description with sketch of the encroachment are enclosed for your review. If you have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance, please sign this letter of no objection and return the letter to my office at your earliest possible convenience either by fax or in the enclosed envelope. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel fi'ce to contact me if you have any questions or concerils. Very truly yours, TREI_SI~R, LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & VERNON, CHTD. Chrl~J ~ · Thornton I have n°/°bjet~tion to the proposed vacati~/nd variglf~e. . Date / Signature [ JAN 0 8 2002 Signature -- TREISER~ LIEBERFARB~ COLLINS & VERNON~ C,~. Thomas A. Collins, 11 o William J. Dempsey Fitzgerald A. Frater * ~ Benjamin C. lseman Stanley J. Lieb~rfarb C. Richard Mancini Christopher J. Thornton Richard M. Treis~r Christopher T. Vernon August 1, 2001 ATTORNEYS AT LAW The Northern Trust Building 4001 Tamiami Trail North Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941 ) 649-4900 Fax (941) 649-0823 Internet Address: www.swflalaw.com Richard Shapack <~ Robert V. Sobczak and Ilona E. Rauw 228 Saint Andrews Blvd. Naples, FL 34113 RE: Letter of No Objection for Utility Easement Vacation and Variance (1.3 feet) Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West 231 Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, Florida Dear Mr. Sobczak and Ms. Rauw: We represent Mr. Ray Erickson and are in the process of applying to Collier County for vacation of a ~--oortion of a 10-foot utility easement and a variance from a 10-foot rear-yard setback in order to accommodate a · .3-foot encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure. The pool and screen enclosure were constructed in 1993 by the then-owner of the home, Mr. Steve Tracy. Mr. Tracy sold the home to Mr. Schuler in 1996, who in turn sold the home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting off this portion of the deck and moving the screen enclosure, which would result in a very narrow pool apron, we are applying for a variance and vacation of a portion of the easement. The proposed 1.3 foot reduction in the easement and setback would still leave 8.3 feet of easement on Mr. Erickson's property, as well as the adjacent 10 foot easement at the rear of the abutting lots, leaving intact an 18.7 foot utility easement. Copies of the plat, the boundary survey, and legal description with sketch of the encroachment are enclosed for your review. If you have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance, please sign this letter of no objection and return the letter to my office at your earliest possible convenience either by fax or in the enclosed envelope. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concel'~S. Very truly yours, Tm ), LIEBERE^=, COLL S Christopher J. Thornton _ Signature JAN 0 8 2002 TREISER~ LIEBERFARB, COLLINS & YERNON, ', ~. ColIIRs. U o W, * J. Deml~7 August 1, 2001 AT?ORN£¥e~ AT L-AW The No,them Trust Building 4001, Taminmi Trail North Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941) 649-4900 Fax (941) 649-0823 Internel Address: www.swflalaw, com Daniel F. ~ Kris-tinn N, Pineau 232 Saint Andrews Blvd. NJ p|~, L 34113 .er of No Objection for Utility Easement Vacation and Variance (1.3 feet) 21, Block 17, Lely Oolf Estates, St. Andrews West Pebble Beach Circle, Naples, Florida Dear Mr. and Mrs. Pineau: We represent Mr. Ray Erickson and are in the process of applying to Collier County for vacation of a portion cfa 10-foot utilfly easement and a variance from a 10-foot mar-yard setback in order to accommodate a 1 B-foot encroachment of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure. The pool and screen enclosure were constructed in 1993 by the then-owner of the home, Mr. Steve Tracy. Mr. Tracy sold the home to Mr. Schuler 1996, who in turn sold the home to Mr. Erickson in June 2001. In order to avoid cutting off this portion of th,. deck and moving the screen enclosure, which would result in a very narrow pool apron, we are applying for a variance and vacation ora portion of the easement. The proposed 1.3 foot reduction in the easement and setback would still leave 8.3 feet of easement on Mr. Erickson's property, as well as the adjacent 10 foot easement at the rear of the abutting lots, leaving intact an 18.7 foot utility easement. Copies of the plat, the boundary survey, and legal description with sketch of the encroachment are enclosed for your review. If you have no objection to the proposed vacation and variance, please sign tb. is letter of no objection and return the letter to my office at your earliest possible convenience either by fax or in the enclosed envelope. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or COnCCD.'1S, Very truly yours, TREISI~, LIEBERFARB, COLLINS 8~ VERNON, Ch_rhfdpher J. Thornton I have no obje~ion to the propesed vacation and va~;.aj~ Date ~ Siga.ature Signature RESOLUTION NO. 02 RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER VA-2001-AR-1380, FOR A VARIANCE ON PROPERIY HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORDA. W~EREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on all counties in Florida the power to establish, coordinate and enfome zoning and such business regulations as are necessary for the protection of the public; and WHEREAS, the County pumuant thereto ha~ adopted a Land Development Code (Ordinance No. 91-102) which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County, among which Is the granting of variances: and WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Appeals, being the duly elected constituted Board of the area hereby affected, has held a public hearing after notice as in said regulations made and provided, and has considered the advisability of al .3-foot variance from the required I0- foot yard setback to 8.7- feet as shown on the attached plot plan, Exhibit "A", in a RSF-3 Zone for the proper~y hereinafter described, and has found as a matter of fact that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Section 2.7.5 of the Zoning Regulations of said Land Development Code for the unincorporated area of Collier County; and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given opportunity to be heard by this Board in public meeting assembled, and the Board having considered all matters presented: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Zoning Appeals o1 Collier County, Florida, that: The Petition V-2001-AR-1380 filed by Treiser, Lieberfarb, Collins and Vernon, representing Raymond R. Erickson, with respect to the property hereinafter described as: Lot 21, Block 17, Lely Golf Estates, St. Andrews West, according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 10, Page 93, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida be and the same hereby is approved for a 1.3-foot variance from the required 10- foot yard setback to 8.7- feet as shown on the attached plot plan, Exhibit "A", of the RSF-3 Zoning District wherein said property is located, subject to the following conditions: 1. This variance is for the encroachment shown in Exhibit "A" only. Any other encroachment shall require a separate variance. .17 JAN 0 8 2002 2. In the case of the destruction of the encroaching structure, for any reason, to an extent equal to or greater than 50 pement of the actual replacement cost of the structure at the time of its destruction, an3' reconstruction shall contorm to the provisions ot the Land Development Code in effect at the time ot reconstruction. BE IT RESOLVED that this Resolution relating to Petition Number VA-2001-AR-1380 be recorded in the minutes of this Board. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote. Done this day of ,2002. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK. Clerk BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COLLIER COUNT.Y, FLORIDA Approved as to Form and Lega Sufficiency: BY: JAMES D. CARTER, Ph D ,Chairman Ma~jori~ M Student Ass stant County ^ttumey ('"' JAN 0 8 200?. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE AND AMENDING CHAPTER ONE, ADMINISTRATION, THEREOF; ESTABLISHING THE EXACT LOCATION OF WIND SPEED LINES IN UNINCORPORATED COLLIER COUNTY BY THE ADOPTION OF MAPS RELATING THERETO; REPEALING CERTAIN COUNTY ORDINANCES AND ADOPTED CODES IN THEIR ENTIRETY; PROVIDING FOR INCORPORATION IN CODE(S);- PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. OBJECTIVE: Board of County Commissioners approval of an Ordinance adopting the Florida Building Code (FBC) which also amends Chapter One, adopts windspeed lines, and repeals certain other county ordinances and codes in their entirety. CONSIDERATION: The State of Florida has adopted a statewide building code, the effective date of which has been delayed until March 1, 2002. Section 553.73(4)(a) of the Florida Statutes authorizes local governments to adopt local amendments to the administrative provisions of the Florida Building Code provided they are more stringent than the minimum standards described in the FBC, such amendments are transmitted to the Florida Building Commission within 30 days of enactment of the ordinance, and the County makes such amendments available to the public in a usable format. The Ordinance proposed to the Board of County Commissioners establishes administrataive guidelines for the Building Review and Permitting Department and meets the aforementioned criteria. The FBC further allows Collier County to establish the exact location of windspeed lines. Those windspeed lines are denoted on the map attached as Exhibit A to the proposed Ordinance. The adoption of this proposed Ordinance would further effect a repeal of Ordinance 98- 76 (the Building Construction Administrative Code); Ordinance 98-79 (the Gas Code); Ordinance 98-78 (the Mechanical Code); Ordinance 98-74 (the Swimming Pool Code); Ordinance 98-80 (the Structural Code); Ordinance 98-77 (the Electrical Code), as well as the 1997 Standard Building Code, the 1997 Standard Gas Code, the 1997 Standard Mechanical Code, the 1994 Standard Pool Code, the 1996 National Electric Code, and the 1994 Standard Plumbing Code. FISCAL IMPACT: The implementation of the new Florida Building Code will have a fiscal impact on those purchasing new homes due to added construction costs; however, the Code will go into effect March 1, 2002, with or without the ad ~I~~". ~ Ordinance. The adoption of this Ordinance will have no fiscal impact on tl[e Cg~.~t-Yf It/ is simply an administrative tool for the Building Review and Permitting Del~artm~t. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve this Ordinance adopting the Florida Building Code, amending Chapter One Administration; establishing windspeed lines, repealing certain codes, providing for incorporation in codes, providing for conflict and severability, and providing an effective date. SUBMITTED BY:~ Joh~nig/Gebhardt' Permittin~rvisor Datel//J)- -~'2o. o/ Building Review al)~gt~ing/Dept. REVIEWED BY: <~'""~ - ~i ~ '-q--./'/"~- ~'~'~'-- Date: -- Edward S. Pefico, Director B~ding Review and Permitt~g Dept. APPROVED BY: ~.}14.(~'k'~k ~~' Date: k2. rE2/0 { Jol~Dtirmuck, Interim Administrator Cd01munity Development and Environmental Services JAN O 8 2002 COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2002 - AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE AND AMENDING CHAPTER ONE, ADMINISTRATION, THEREOF; ESTABLISHING THE EXACT LOCATION OF WIND SPEED LINES IN UNINCORPORATED COLLIER COUNTY BY THE ADOPTION OF MAPS RELATING THERETO; REPEALING CERTAIN COUNTY ORDINANCES AND ADOPTED CODES IN THEIR ENTIRETY; PROVIDING FOR INCORPORATION IN CODE(S), PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Article VIII of the State Constitution and Chapter 125 of the Florida Statutes provide that counties, as political subdivisions of the State, have the governmental and proprietary powers to enable them to conduct government, perform services, and may exercise any such powers for public purposes, except when expressly prohibited by law; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 52-C, 2"" Engrossed, the Legislature of the State of Florida has proposed legislation, in part, delaying the effective date of the Florida Building Code from January 1, 2002, to March 1, 2002; and WHEREAS, Section 1606.1.6 of the Florida Building Code allows Collier County to establish the exact location of wind speed lines by local ordinance; and WHEREAS. Section 553.73(4)(a), Florida Statutes, authorizes local governments such as Collier County, Florida to adopt local amendments to the administrative provisions of the Florida Building Code (FBC) provided: 1) they are more stringent than the minimum standards described in the FBC, 2) such amendments are transmitted to the Florida Building Commission within 30 days of enactment of this Ordinance, and 3) the County makes such amendments available to the general public in a usable format; and WHEREAS, Collier County desires to provide a single ordinance compiling the administrative amendments to the new Florida Building Code which are intended to be followed in, and , enforced by, Collier County (County), and such amendments are more stringent than the minimum standards set forth in the FBC, and the County will make such amel~ available to the general public in a usable format and transmit such amendments to the Florida Building Commission within 30 days of enactment of this Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA: SECTION 1: Adoption and amendment of the Florida Building Code, (a) Adoption. There is hereby adopted by reference, the Florida Building Code, 2001 edition (FBC), to be enforced by Collier County in the unincorporated portions of the County. (b) Amendment. Chapter 1 of the Florida Building Code, Administration, is hereby amended, as follows: Section 101.1, entitled "Scope," is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: 101.1. The purpose of this Code is to establish and adopt a single regulation uniformly addressing the non-technical and administrative requirements for the Florida Building Code, 2001 edition, the National Electric Code, 1999 editions, adopted Fire/Life Safety Codes, and all other adopted technical codes and ordinances not superseded by the Florida Building Code. Section 101.2, entitled "Title," is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: 101.2. The following regulations shall constitute and be known and cited as the Collier County Administrative Construction Code ("ACC") hereinafter referred to as the "ACC." Section 101.3.3, is a new section entitled "Permitting and Inspection" which will read as follows: 101.3.3 Permitting and Inspection. The permitting or inspection of any building, system, or plan by Collier County, under the requirements of this Code, shall not be construed in any court, or otherwise, as a warranty of the physical condition or adequacy of any such building, system, or plan. The County and employees thereof shall not be liable in tort, or otherwise, for damages for any defect or hazardous or illegal condition or inadequacy in any such building, system, or plan, nor for any failure of any corr] such, which may occur before, during or subsequent to any such nsp?~tion /~_Lj or permitting. / ,1 JAN 0 ~ 2002 Page 2 of 19 p~,__~L.~ Section 101.4.9.1, is a new section entitled "Fire," which will read as follows: 101.4.9.1. The provisions of the National Fire Code shall apply to the construction, alteration, repair, equipment, use, occupancy, location and maintenance of every building or structure, or any appurtenances connected with or attached to such buildings or structures. Further, the National Fire Codes shall apply to the installation of mechanical and fire protection systems, including alterations, repairs, replacement, equipment, appliances, fixtures, fittings and/or appurtenances, including ventilating, heating, cooling, air conditioning and incinerators, and fire related systems or installations. Section 101.4.9.2, is a new section entitled "Maintenance," which will read as follows: 101.4.9.2. All building, structures, electrical, gas, mechanical, plumbing, and fire protection systems, both existing and new, and all parts thereof, shall be maintained in a safe and sanitary condition. All devices or safeguards which are required by the technical Codes when constructed, altered, or repaired, shall be maintained in good working order. The owner, or owner's designated agent, shall be responsible for the maintenance of buildings, structures, electrical, gas, mechanical, fire and plumbing and all other applicable systems. Section 102, is a "Reserved" section entitled "Building Department," which will include a new Section 102.1., entitled "Restrictions on Employees," which will read as follows: 102.1. An employee connected with the enforcement of this Code, except one whose only connection is as a member of the board established by this Code, shall not be financially interested in the furnishing of labor, material or appliances for the construction, alteration, or maintenance of a building, structure, service, system, or in the making of plans or of specifications thereof, unless he is the owner of such. No such employee shall engage in any other work that is inconsistent with his duties or is in conflict with the interests of the department. Section 102 will also include a new Section 102.2, entitled "Records," which will read as follows: 102.2. business of the department. Except as may be otherwise specified The Building Official shall keep, or cause to be kept, a record of the Page 3 of 19 JAN 0 8 2002 Statutes, including the Public Records Law, all records of the department shall be open to public inspection. Section 102 will also include a new Section 102.3, entitled "Liability," which will read as follows: 102.3. No County employee nor any member of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals, charged with the enforcement of this Code or any technical Code, acting for the applicable governing authority in the discharge of such duties, shall thereby render himself personally liable, and is hereby relieved from all personal liability for any damage that may accrue to persons or property as a result of any act required or permitted in the discharge of such duties. Any suit brought against any employee or member because of such act performed by him in the enforcement of any provision of this Code or any of the technical Code, shall be defended by the County Attorney until the final termination of the proceedings. Section 102 will also include a new Section 102.4, entitled "Reports," which will read as follows: 102.4. The Building Official shall submit annually a report covering the work of the preceding year. He may incorporate in said report a summary of the decisions of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals during said year. Section 103.8, is a new section (with numbered sections) entitled "Right of Entry," which will read as follows: 103.8. Whenever necessary to make an inspection to enforce any of the provisions of this Code or the technical Codes, or whenever the Building Official has reasonable cause to believe that there exists in any building or upon any premises any condition or code violation which makes such building, structure, premises, electrical, gas, mechanical, plumbing or fire systems unsafe, dangerous or hazardous, the Building Official may enter such building, structure or premises at all reasonable times to inspect the same or to perform any duty imposed upon the Building Official by this code, provided that, if such building or premises is occupied, he shall first present proper credentials and request entry. If such building, structure, or premises is unoccupied, he shall first make a reasonable effort to locate the owner or other persons having charge or control of such and request entry. If entry is refused, the Building Official shall have recourse to every means provided by law to secure entry. 103.8.1. When the Building Official shall have first obtained inspection warrant or other means provided by law to secure owner or occupant or any other persons having charge, care, or Page 4 of 19 any building, structure, or premises shall fail or neglect, after proper request is made as herein provided, to promptly permit entry therein by the Building Official for the purpose of inspection and examination pursuant to this Code. Section 103.9, entitled "Stop work orders" is a new section which will read as follows: 103.9. Whenever a life, health or safety issue is present or any work is being done in violation of the provisions of this section or in variance with the terms of any permit issued for such work, the Building Official may order all work on the job stopped until such violation or variance is eliminated and any work or installation made in violation of this section is corrected. Such stop order, if oral, shall be followed by a written stop order within 24 hours (excluding Saturday, Sunday or holidays). It shall be unlawful to do or perform any work in violation of such stop order, except as may be necessary to prevent injury or damage to persons or property. Section 103.10, entitled "Revocation of Permits," is a new section (with numbered sections 103.10.1. and 103.10.2) which will read as follows: 103.10. Revocation of Permits 103.10.1. Misrepresentation of Application. The Building Official may revoke a permit or approval, issued under the provisions of this Code or the technical Codes in case there has been any false statement or misrepresentation on which the permit or approval is based. 103.10.2. Violation of Code Provisions. The Building Official may revoke a permit upon determination by the Building Official that the construction, erection, alteration, repair, moving, demolition, installation, or replacement of the building, structure, electrical, gas, mechanical, plumbing, or fire systems for which the permit was issued is in violation of, or not in conformity with, any provision of this Code or the technical Codes. Section 103.11, entitled "Safety," is a new section (with numbered subsections 103.11.1. and 103.11.2) which will read as follows: 103.11. Safety 103.11.1. Unsafe Buildings or Systems. All buildings, structures, electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing systems which are unsafe, unsanitary, or do not provide adequate egress, or which constitute a fire hazard, or are otherwise dangerous to human life, or which in r~ existing uses, constitutes a hazard to safety or health, are c~nsi~r~ed ! unsafe buildings or service systems. All such unsafe buildings, structures or service systems are hereby declared illegal and shall be abated by repair and rehabilitation or by demolition. 103.11.2. Physical Safety. Where pool construction commences prior to occupancy certification of a one or two family dwelling unit on the same property, the fence or enclosure required shall be in place at the time of final building inspection. The final pool inspection shall be satisfactorily completed prior to issuance of the dwelling unit's Certificate of Occupancy. Where pool construction is commenced after occupancy certification of a one or two family dwelling unit on the same property, the fence or enclosure required shall be in place prior to filling of the pool unless during the period commencing with filling of the pool and ending with completion of the required fence or enclosure, temporary fencing or an approved substitute shall be in place. Failure to call for a final pool inspection within thirty {30) days of filling the pool shall result in an inspection rejection. Section 104.1.3.5, entitled "Prohibited Activities Prior to Permit Issuance," is a new section which will read as follows: 104.1.3.5. A building permit (or other written site specific work authorization such as for excavation, tree removal, well construction, approved site development plan, filling, re-vegetation, etc.) shall have been issued prior to the commencement of work at the site. Activities prohibited prior to permit issuance shall include, but are not limited to, excavation, pile driving (excluding test piling), well drilling, formwork, placement of building materials, equipment or accessory structures and disturbance or removal of protected species or habitat. Where minor clearing of underbrush can be accomplished without protected habitat or species disturbance, permitting is not required. Where test piles are required to establish bearing capacity for design purposes of a project, prior to the issuance of a building permit, a test pile permit shall be obtained before any piles are driven. All test pilings must be driven within the footprint of the building and applicable fees shall be charged for the permit. At the time of applying for the test piling permit the contractor shall provide, a bond, letter of credit or certified check equal to 125% of the estimated cost of removing the test piling and grading the site back to the condition it was in prior to the test piling in the event construction does not commence. If the project does not proceed and the test piles need to be removed, then they shall be removed to a minimum of 2 ft. below natural grade. In any event, the test piles are onl, allowed to remain exposed for a maximum of six (6) months. ~END~-rr~ P~g~ofl~ JAN 0 8 2002 Section 104.2.1.2, entitled "Additional Requirements," is a new section which will read as follows: 104.2.1.2 Additional Requirements: 1. Drawings to scale, minimum scale is 1/8". 2. A site plan which shows the location of the proposed building or structure and every existing building or structure on the site or lot. 3. The first sheet of the Architectural Plans shall provide an information block with the following details: (a) Occupancy classification(s). If the building contains more than one (1) occupancy classification and/or tenant use areas, list each separately with the individual square footages. (b) Establish the required live load for the intended use of each floor and/or mezzanine area. (c) Building area (sq. ft.) for each floor and mezzanine area. (d) Grade elevation of first floor + N.G.V.D. (e) Applicable Flood zone. (f) Elevation of first habitable floor + N.G.V.D. (g) Height of building in feet above grade. (h) Building height in stories. (i) Type of construction. (j) Designed for applicable wind load. (k) Parking summary for occupancy classification(s) consistent with the calculation and supporting documentation from the approved final site development plan. 4. The permit documents (drawings) shall be no larger than 24" x 36." 5. The Building Official may require details, computations, stress diagrams, panel schedules, and other data necessary to describe the construction or installation and the basis of calculations. 6. Pre-manufactured Building Components. (a) Building components designed by specialty engineers (i.e. roof trusses, floor trusses, precast floor slabs, etc.) are required to be submitted at time of permit application. Extra loading of the trusses, beams or girders with hot water heaters, air handlers, compressors or other loads not specifically considered in the specialty design will not be allowed without engineered sealed drawings acknowledging such extra loads. (b) The specialty engineer shall acknowledge that additional loading has been considered in the design and the type of roof covering shall be designated on the truss plans. (c) There will be no jobsite modifications of product allowed without an approved design by the specialty engineer. (d) During the design process of roof trusses, floor trus ;sib~¥~es' or precast floor slabs, consideration must be given to the po JAN Page 7 of 19 that point loading (i.e. girders and columns) may dictate redesign of bearing footing. This shall be coordinated by the design professional. (e) The design professional shall make a statement on his plan that he has considered and coordinated the truss layout plans, anchor details, uplift loads and reaction loads into his architectural plans by naming the truss manufacturer, their job number, and the date of the truss manufacturers plans on his architectural plans. (f) Provide the truss layout plans and details by the truss' manufacturer to include the profiles for all special trusses that have reaction loads over 5000# and uplift loads over 1000#. These special reaction and uplift connections shall be keyed into a schedule that coordinates with the truss layout plan by a highlighted indication on the truss layout plan for quick reference. The truss manufacturer or the design professional shall provide the recommended anchor for each special connection in the required schedule. The engineered cut sheets for all trusses shall be available at the job site prior to the required inspection. (g) Provide an anchor bolt plan, fastener schedule and shop drawings as furnished by the steel building manufacturer. (h) Product approval is not required; however, all exterior doors, windows, skylights, vents, etc. shall be approved at the final inspection with either a certification sticker, by an approved testing laboratory and applied to the product by the manufacturer, or a signed and sealed document by the design professional indicating that the item is able to withstand the applicable windloading requirements as set forth on the maps adopted pursuant to 1606.1.6, of the 2001 edition of the FBC, for the exact location of windspeed lines. (i) Engineered drawings shall be submitted with a signature and raised seal for all miscellaneous structures such as awnings, shutters, screen enclosures, swimming pools, spas and seawalls. Note: Job specific engineering is not required for aluminum structures that meet the specifications of approved Master Plan Design manuals. These manuals shall be signed and sealed by a Florida State Registered Engineer and be provided to the Building Department. The Master Plan service provider shall periodically update their approved client list. Only approved clients of the service are allowed to reference the Master Plan Design manual. . (j) All signs and electric light standards shall meet structural and other standards regarding sign and light pole construction, erection, electrical wiring, etc. set forth in the building code. Plans ~ pole or ground sign exceeding 32 square feet n area and/or e ht ~tS~ Page 8 of 19 JAN 0 p~. IO ,. feet in height or light pole exceeding 8 ft. in height shall be accompanied by foundation drawings signed and sealed by a licensed architect or engineer or the manufacturers recommendations as published by their representative engineer. (k) The Florida State certified architect or engineer of record shall sign and seal all submitted documents that were prepared under his/her license for the structural and functional components of the structure. The architect or engineer of record shall also indicate their company name, his/her legal name and State of Florida license number, address and phone number in the title block. A Lot Drainage Plan shall be submitted by the permittee at time of approved Lot Drainage Plan at time of Certificate of Occupancy Inspection. Ground elevations shall be gradually sloped away from the building to effectively drain water away and to be managed on site through roof guttering or earth grading. No significant stormwater run- off is permitted to flow from the subject premises onto abutting properties. Plans shall show that construction of the lowest finished floor meets the elevation criteria listed below or engineered properly to a site specific design and certified by an architect or engineer, when conflict exist between the FIRM elevation and others, the higher elevation shall be required; (a) FIRM elevation - the elevation that has been established by the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM). (b) Paved Road - a minimum of 18 inches above the crown of the nearest street or interior roadway system if finished with paving; or (c) Graded or Unfinished Road - 24 inches above the crown if graded or otherwise unfinished; or (d) Mean Sea Level - seven (7) feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL) based on the 1929 National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD); or (e) Water Management Design (1) Buildings within projects which have water management routing and storage facilities designed and built for a 25-year, three (3) day storm event in accordance with South Florida Water Management District's criteria may use a finish floor elevation in accordance with the project's water management designed 100 year zero discharge elevation or the FIRM elevation, whichever is higher. (2) Buildings which are not within projects having a water management storage facility designed and built for a 25-year, three (3) day storm event in accordance with South Florida Water Management District's criteria shall use a finish floor elevation of 18 inches above the adjacent roadway crown elevation or the FIRM elevation, whichever is higher. ~r. NOA).~Ja Page 9 of 19 JAN 0 8 2002 9. On parcels where unusual topographic conditions exist and the above standard conditions cannot be reasonably applied, the Building Official will consider requests to decrease the finish-floor elevation. All requests will require an analysis by a Florida registered professional engineer of the 25-year, three (3) day storm event and the 100 year, three (3) day storm event, using zero discharge for the entire drainage basin in which the proposed structure is located. Reductions may be allowed on the basis of the analysis, but in no case shall the finish floor be less than the FIRM. Note: Slabs for garages, carports, screen enclosures, etc., must be at least equal in elevation to the crown of the nearest street. 10. Building permits that require a foundation inspection or floor elevation inspection shall submit a current survey with the permit application. 11. For fire damage issues, a professional review and written report shall be submitted concerning the components to be salvaged and all structural systems shall be certified by an architect or engineer. These documents will be required before issuing a permit for reconstruction of a fire- damaged structure. Section 104.4.1.6, entitled "Licensed Contractor/Designated Agent," is a new section which will read as follows: 104.4.1.6. All construction within the County's jurisdiction shall be performed through and supervised by a licensed general contractor. A licensed contractor shall sign the application but may designate an employee or permitting service to submit and/or receive a building permit. Such designation shall be by power of attorney, and a separate power of attorney shall be required for each specific project or permit request. The power of attorney shall remain in effect for a period of one (1) year and it is the contractor's responsibility to notify the Building Review and Permitting Department of any change in status of the designee. Section 104.1.7, entitled "Unlicensed contractor," is a new section which will read as follows: 104.1.7. A permit may be issued by the Building Review and Permitting Department to an unlicensed builder to build or improve a one-family or two- family residence or a farm outbuilding which is for their own use or occupancy and which remains under the same ownership and occupancy for a period of at least two (2) calendar years from the date Certificate of Occupancy is issued. During such two (2) year period, no additional permits, other than accessory, will be issued to this individual. All owners constructing their own residence shall carry public liability insurance equal to that as required for general contractors, and shall file a Cert ~ Insurance with the Building Services Division. The Building Re iewl~~ Page 10 of 19 JAN 0 2002 Permitting Department may also issue a permit to an unlicensed builder to build or improve their own commercial building provided the costs does not exceed $25,000 and the building is for their own use and occupancy and not for sale or lease. Section 104.1.7.1., is a new section which will read as follows: 104.1.7.1 A building permit issued to a licensed contractor by the Building Review and Permitting Department may be transferred to the subject- property owner as an unlicensed contractor to complete construction of a single-family residence consistent with the terms and conditions specified in Section 104.1.7. Prior to the actual transfer of the building permit from the licensed contractor to the unlicensed contractor either of the following must occur: (i) (ii) The licensed contractor shall execute and submit to the Building Review and Permitting Department a sworn affidavit consenting to the full and complete release and transfer of the building permit from the contractor's control to the unlicensed contractor to complete construction of the single-family residence; or In the event the licensed contractor will not execute the aforementioned affidavit of release and transfer, the unlicensed contractor shall enter into an agreement with the County addressing the following to the satisfaction of the Building Official: (a) That the unlicensed contractor has requested that the licensed contractor provide an affidavit of release and transfer, and that the licensed contractor has refused; (b) That the unlicensed contractor has requested that the County transfer the building permit from the licensed contractor to the unlicensed contractor to complete the construction of a single-family residence; (c) That the unlicensed contractor will comply fully with the terms and conditions of Section 104.1.7 and will complete all applicable Building Review and Permitting Department applications prior to permit release and transfer; (d) That the unlicensed contractor is responsible for fully complying with all requirements of Chapter 173, Florida Statutes; and (e) That in consideration for the release and transfer of the building permit by the Building Review and Permitting Department, the unlicensed contractor agrees to ' ' __. and hold Collier County harmless from any and ~i~c~,~_r~_ Page 11 of 19 J JAN 0 8 2002 losses, penalties, damages, and professional fees, including attorney fees and all costs of litigation and judgments associated with the release and transfer of the building permit. Sections 104.5.1.1 to 104.5.1.4, are replaced with the following: 1. The permit application and the plans shall be reviewed, approved, and ready for issuance within a reasonable time from the date of application. Permits shall be issued to the permittee and notified that the permit has been approved. The review process includes appropriate responses from the permit applicant when the permit cannot be approved. When the applicant is advised of deficiencies and does not respond within six (6) months with corrected plans or an appeal to the Code Enforcement Board, the permit application will be canceled. The cancellation process includes disposal of the application and plans. 2. Building permits shall expire and become null and void if the construction authorized by such permit is not commenced within one hundred and eighty (180) days from the date of the issuance of the permit. Date of issuance is the date of permit pickup. Additionally, the building permit shall expire if the work authorized by such permit is not completed within 18 months from the date of issuance of the permit, unless prior to the issuance of the building permit a time schedule has been submitted to and approved by the Building Official or his designee predicated upon customary time for construction of like buildings indicating completion of construction in excess of 18 months. In the event a time schedule has been submitted by the permittee, the building permit shall expire 30 days after the date of completion set forth in the approved time schedule. For purposes of this section, the construction authorized by such permit shall not be deemed to have commenced unless and until all foundation inspections have been requested and satisfactorily completed. 3. The Building Official or his designee may authorize a maximum of two (2) extensions of an active, valid building permit for a period of 90 days each, upon payment by the permittee of a filing fee for each extension. As a condition to granting a permit extension, the Building Official may require a building schedule from the permittee setting forth the date of completion. The filing fee for each permit extension shall be equal to ten percent (10%) of the original building permit fee or one hundred dollars ($100.00), whichever is greater, but shall not exceed five hundred dollars ($500.00). The filing fee is intended to cover the cost of reviewing existing or amended building plans to determine and verify code compliance. No further extension may be granted by the Building Official and the permit shall expire and become null and void. 4. If construction has commenced within one hundred and eigh days from the date of issuance of the permit, and is subs Page 12 of 19 2002 abandoned or suspended as determined by the Building Official, the permit shall expire and become null and void. Permit abandonment shall be deemed to have occurred if a required inspection has not been requested or satisfactorily completed within a six (6) month period. Once construction has commenced on a building project, it shall be prima facie evidence of abandonment or suspension of the project if the permittee during any six (6) month period fails to actively engage in construction and fails to complete at least sixty percent {60%) of the construction that would be considered average for the industry for that six (6) month time period predicated upon a customary time for construction of like buildings. Such project shall not be considered abandoned or suspended if the permittee furnishes the Building Official satisfactory evidence, in writing, that the delay is occasioned due to unavailability of construction supplies or materials, and every effort has been made to obtain substitute materials equal to those called for in the specifications, or due to delay in delivery of construction supplies or materials, or due to fire, weather conditions, civil commotion or strike. Increased cost of building materials or supplies or financial hardship shall not be considered by the Building Official as evidence that the project has not been abandoned or suspended. 5. In the event that the Building Official declares a permit to be null and void as the result of abandonment or suspension of the project, the permittee shall be so notified, in writing, at his usual place of business. Within 15 days after receipt of the Building Official's decision, the permittee may appeal the decision of the Building Official to the Board of County Commissioners or a duly authorized Board. The permittee shall have the burden of establishing that the project has not been abandoned or suspended upon which City Council or a duly authorized Board may reverse the decision of the Building Official. Section 104.5.4, entitled "Waste Materials Management," is a new section which will read as follows: 104.5.4. Inert waste materials may be buried on-site provided that such disposal is in conformance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Inert waste materials as used herein are specifically limited to brick, block, concrete, rock, stone, earth and sand that is free from contamination and of other types of waste, and that is capable of serving as fill material without environmental harm to, or pollution of, ground waters or surface waters. All other wastes, including garbage, hazardous waste, rubbish, refuse, paper products, containers, cloth, wood and wood products, sweepings, liquids other than water, sludge, tree limbs and trunks, undergrowth, and material produced by clearing and grubbing, and other horticultural wastes, shall not be buried on-site (unless specifically allowed by County Ordinance or the Land Development Code), bul ~ otherwise lawfully disposed of. N~__L~ P~ge ~3 of 19 JAN 0 Section 104.5.5, entitled "Dust Control," is a new section which will read as follows: 104.5.5. Adequate dust control measures shall be employed by the permittee to prevent complaints arising from unhealthy, unsafe or damaging conditions. Failure to utilize adequate dust control procedures shall be sufficient cause to order cessation of the work causing such dust and to decline inspection requests. Section 104.5.6, entitled "Noise Control," is a new section which will read as follows: 104.5.6. Construction activities are permitted only during the following times: 6:30 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. No work is permitted on Sundays and the following holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, 4th of July, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day. Section 104.6.2, entitled "Work Commencing before Permit Issuance," has been deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: 104.6.2. If any person commences any work on a building or structure before obtaining the necessary permit, he shall be subject to a penalty of quadruple (four times) the permit fees. Section 104.6.4, entitled "Schedule of permit fees," has been deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: 104.6.4. The Board of County Commissioners shall establish, by resolution, a schedule of fees and charges pertaining to permit and inspection processes under this Code and related Ordinances. It is the intent of these regulations that the County shall not be required to bear any part of the cost of applications made under this Code. These fees may be changed by Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners and are not subject to the appeal process. No permit shall be issued until the fees prescribed in this section have been paid, nor shall an amendment to a permit be released until the additional fee, if any, due to an increase in the estimated cost of the building, structure, electrical, plumbing, mechanical, or gas systems, has been paid. Section 104.6.5, entitled which will read as follows: "Tenant improvements," Page 14 of 19 is a ne JAN 0 ~ 20Q2 104.6.5. The general contractor of record for the building shell permit will be all~wed to apply for a permit for tenant improvements before the shell has been given a Certificate of Occupancy. Only the general contractor of the building shell will be able to obtain a permit for a tenant improvement prior to the shell being given a Certificate of Occupancy. Each tenant space (i.e., unit, suite, etc.) that is not finished under the original building contract will require its own permit for improvements. Revisions to the original scope of work will not be considered for complete tenant improvements after the original permit is issued. No tenant spaces will receive a Certificate of Occupancy until after the shell has been given a Certificate of Completion. Exceptions will be considered and reviewed by the Building Official, or his/her designee. Final decision will be made based upon Life, Health and Safety issues. The shell permit will be referenced on the tenant improvement permit. Section 105.4.1, entitled "Building (4)- Partial building inspections," is a new section which will read as follows: 105.4.1. Partial inspections for structural, plumbing, mechanical, and electrical will be made as requested, providing the request meets one or more of the following guidelines; (a) Submit an inspection plan. (b) There are more than seven (7) units on one (1) floor. (c) Stepped construction (discontinuous floor levels). (d) Outside perimeter walls to allow for start of insulation on large commercial jobs. (e) Underground electric, sewer or water piping where cave-in is of concern. (f)Under slab work. (g) Buildings with three (3) or more floors for fire rating of ceilings. All other partial inspections may be arranged after submittal of an approved specific inspection plan, satisfactory to the Building Official. Note: Failure to follow an approved inspection plan may result in the removal of the completed work that was accomplished after the last approved inspection. Section 105.6.1, entitled "Building Inspections - As-Built survey," to read as follows: 105.6.1. within 10 calendar days of this inspection, a location survey depi building foundation. The location of the building and the finished be precisely dimensioned in relation to each and every lot line as e,, It is the duty of the permit holder to submit to the Building Official, oor~nall_~Z~ :ablished Page 15of19 JAN D B 2002 by the zoning district or as established by conditions attached to the development permit, applicable to the permitted structure and the property upon which said structure is being constructed. The As Built Survey shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of a Florida registered land surveyor and certified by same. Any work done prior to the survey required hereby shall be at the permit holder's risk. The Building Official shall review the location survey and approve same if all setback requirements are met. Deficiencies or encroachments detected by such review shall be corrected by the permit holder forthwith and prior to further work. Failure to submit the survey required hereby or failure to make said corrections shall be cause to issue a Stop-Work Order for the project. Exception: Elevated finish floors will have the survey submitted within 10 days of completion of the floor. Section 105.6.2, entitled "Accessibility for Building Inspectors," is a new section which witi read as follows: 105.6.2. The permit holder shall provide, have on site, and have present at the time of inspection, a job representative to assist the County Inspector with all required ladders, scaffolds, ramps etc. for the proper inspection of all building components. Such temporary or permanent access facilities shall be provided for and maintained by the permit holder in addition to all insurance and liability issues. If accessibility to the required inspection is not available to the County Inspector at the time of his or her inspection, then the permit holder shall be subject to a re-inspection fee. Section 106.1.2 entitled "Issuing Certificate of Occupancy," is a amended as follows: 106.1.2 Issuing Certificate of Occupancy. Upon satisfactory completion of construction of a building or structure and installation of electrical, gas, mechanical and plumbing systems in accordance with the technical Codes, reviewed plans and specifications, and after the final inspection, the _Building Official shall issue a Certificate of Occupancy stating the nature of the occupancy permitted, the number of persons for each floor when limited by law, and the allowable load per square foot for each floor in accordance with the provisions of this Code. Section 106.1.3 entitled "Temporary/Partial occupancy," has been deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: 106.1.3. Temporary/Partial Occupancy. Permitted structures may occupied (used for its intended purpose) until all final building inspi (structural, electrical, mechanical/plumbing, fire, engineering, drainage and landscaping) have been passed and a Certificate of Oec Page 16of 19 not be =ctio ,r~j,~J~Al?~ ark~. ! '7!~ has been issued. This certificate may be temporary, contingent or final and shall be signed by the Building Official or his/her designee. The permittee shall preclude premature use of the structure by the owner (or others) unless prior written approval (for limited purposes) of the Building Official is obtained, and then only if inspections can be conducted unhindered and no regular occupancy is to occur. Section 106.1.4, entitled 'Existing Building Certificate of Occupancy," is a new section which will read as follows: 106.1.4 Existing Building Certificate of Occupar~cy. A certificate of occupancy for any existing building may be obtained by applying to the Building Official and supplying the information and data necessary to determine compliance with the technical Codes for the occupancy intended. Where necessary, in the opinion of the Building Official, two or more sets of detailed plans or a general inspection, or both, may be required. When, upon examination and inspection, it is found that the building conforms to the provisions of the technical Codes and other applicable laws or ordinances for such occupancy, a Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued. SECTION 2: Adoption of the Wind Speed lines. There is hereby adopted by reference, and pursuant to the authority of FBC § 1606.1.6, the Official Zoning Map Atlas with the wind speed lines overlayed in one mile-per-hour increments. Any such maps depicting the exact location of these wind speed lines will be applied to all construction and will be enforced by Collier County in the unincorporated portions of the County. A one page summary map generally depicting the wind speed lines is attached as Exhibit A. SECTION 3. REPEAL OF ORDINANCES AND CODES. Upon the effective date of the Florida Building Code, Collier County Ordinance 98-76, the Building Construction Administrative Code Ordinance; Ordinance 98-79, the Collier County Gas Code; Ordinance 98-78, the Collier County Mechanical Code; Ordinance 98-74, the Collier County Pool Code; Ordinance 98-80, the Collier County Structural Code; Ordinance 98-77, the Collier County Electrical Code; as well as the adopted provisions of the 1997 Standard Building Code, the 1997 Standard Gas Code, the 1997 Standard Mechanical Code, the 1994 Standard Pool Code, the 1996 National Electric Code, and t Standard Plumbing Code, are each and all repealed in their ent rety~an(! will be of no further effect. JAN 0 {~ 20{32 Page 17 o/19 SECTION 4. INCORPORATION, CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY 1. It is the intention of the Board of County Commissioners and it is hereby ordained that the provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Code of Ordinances of Collier County, Florida, and that the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered or re-lettered and that the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section", "article" or other appropriate word. 2. All sections or parts of sections of the Code of Laws and Ordinances of Collier County, Florida, all Collier County Ordinances or parts of ordinances and all Collier County Resolutions or parts of resolutions in conflict herewith are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict. 3. If any word, phrase, clause, subsection, or section of this Ordinance is for any reason held unconstitutional or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, the invalidity thereof shall not affect the validity of any remaining portions of this Ordinance. SECTION 5. PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION If any person, firm, corporation, or other legal entity whether public or private, shall fail or refuse to obey or comply with, or violates, any of the provisions of the ordinance, such person, firm, corporation, or other legal entity whether public or private, upon conviction of such offense, shall be punished by a fine not to exceed five-hundred dollars ($500.00) or by imprisonment not to exceed sixty (60) days in the county jail, or both, in the discretion of the court. Each day of continued violation or noncompliance shall be considered as a separate offense. In addition, any person, firm, corporation, or other legal entity whether public or private, convicted under the provisions of this section shall pay all costs and expenses involved in the case. In addition, the provisions of this ordinance may be enforced by any means appropriate under Florida Statutes Section 125.69, or Chapter 162, or as set forth in Section 1.9 of the Collier County Land Development Code SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall take effect upon filing with the Secretary of State, following adoption by the Board of County Commissioners. Page 18 of 19 JAN 0 8 2002 ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk · Deputy Approved as to form and Legal sufficiency: Patrick G. White, Assistant County Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BY: · Chairman Page 19 of 19 JAN 0 8 2002 EXHIBIT "A" 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PETITION PUDA-01-AR-1573, GEORGE L. VARNADOE OF YOUNG, VAN ASSENDERP, VARNADOE & ANDERSON, P.A., REPRESENTING ANTARAMIAN CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC, REQUESTING A REZONE FROM "PUD" TO "PUD" PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO BE KNOWN AS SANDPIPER VILLAGE PUD FOR THE PURPOSE OF DECREASING THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS FROM 180 UNITS TO 170 UNITS, INCREASING THE COMMERCIAL FLOOR AREA FROM 45,000 SQUARE FEET TO 52,500 SQUARE FEET AND REVISING THE MASTER PLAN TO INCREASE COMPLIANCE WITH THE BAYSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMENT OVERLAY FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TAMIAMI TRAIL E. (US-41) AND IN SECTION 1 l, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners consider an application to rezone the subject site from PUD to PUD in order to amend the Sandpiper Village PUD Document and Master Plan as noted above in a manner consistent with all the applicable codes and regulations in order to ensure that the community's interests are maintained. CONSIDERATIONS: The petitioner is proposing to decrease the number of residential dwellings from 180 units to 170 dwelling units, to increase the commercial floor area from 45,000 square feet to 52,500 square feet and to revise the Master Plan to increase compliance with the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. The changes depicted on the proposed Master Plan illustrate a revised land use tract configuration and internal road system. The "R" Residential tract in the northwest comer of the currently approved Master Plan has been changed to a "MU" Mixed Use District on the proposed Master Plan. This change allows for a common architectural theme project to be developed along the entire frontage of US-41, which is consistent with the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. Other changes depicted in the proposed Master Plan include an additional roundabout and cul- de-sac along with a secondary service road that connect the various Mixed Use Tracts. The Transportation Department has reviewed the applicant's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) and has the following comments. The site-generated trips for the currently approved project are estimated to be approximately 3,422 Weekday Trips and 293 P.M. Peak Hour Trips. The proposed amendment is estimated to increase the site-generated traffic to 3,647 Weekday Trips and 309 P.M. Peak Hour Trips. The difference in project trips will not have a significant impact on US-41 or on any County road. It should be noted that US-41 was recently widened to an eight-lane divided arterial road to Davis Boulevard (SR-84) and transitions to 6-lanes southeast of SR-84. This segment of US-41 is operating at LOS "C'. In addition, all road segments within the project's radius of develo ,ment influence will operate at an acceptable level of service at the project build-out in 2004/05. AC.,~OA JAN 0 8 2002 FISCAL IMPACT: This PUD by and of itself will have no fiscal impact on the County. However, if this request meets its objective, a portion of the existing land xvill be further developed. The mere fact that new development has been approved will result in future fiscal impact on County public facilities. The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of building permits to help offset the impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects in the Capital Improvement Element needed to maintain adopted levels of service for public facilities. In the event that impact fee collections are inadequate to maintain adopted levels of service, the County must provide supplemental funds from other revenue sources in order to build needed facilities. The following impact fees v¢ill be applicable to this project: · Park Impact Fee: · Library Impact Fce: · Fire Impact Fee: · School Impact Fee: · Road Impact Fee: · Correctional Facilities: · Radon Impact Fee: · EMS Impact Fee: · Building Code Adm.: · Micro Film Surcharge: $578.00 per unit $180.52 per unit $0.15 per square feet of building $827 per unit $890 per unit $117.98 per dwelling unit S0.005 per square foot of building $2 per unit $0.005 per square foot of building $1.50 per unit For an average unit size of 1,000 square feet, the total fiscal impact will be $2,757.18 per unit. Since this project proposes 170 units, the total amount of residential impact fees collected at build-out will total 5468,720.60. The commercial portion of the project will have impact fees of approximately 5152,890. It should be noted that because impact fees vary by housing type and because ttfis approval does not provide this level of specificity as to the actual type of use, the total impact fee quoted above is at best a raxv estimate. Additionally, there is no guarantee that the project at build-out will have maximized their authorized level of development. Other fees will include building permit re,,,iew fees and utility fees associated with connecting to the County's sewer and xvater system. Building permit fees and utility fees have traditionally offset the cost of administering the community development review process, whereas utility fees are used on their proportionate share of impact to the County system. Finally additional revenue is generated by application of ad valorem tax rates. The revenue that will be generated depends on the value of the improvements. At this point in time a model has not been developed to arrive at a reasonable estimate of tax revenue based on ad Valorem tax rates. Nevertheless, it should be appreciated that not xvithstanding the fiscal impact relationship, development takes place in an environment of concurrency management. When level of service requirements fall beloxv adopted standards, a mechanism is in place to bring about a cessation Certain LOS standards apply countywide and would therefore bring about a co~ determination versus roads that may have local geographic concurrency implicatio 2 nt yw~t.e concurrency --17 t. JAN 0 8 200 ' GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: All of the subject properly is located within the Urban Mixed Use - Urban Coastal Fringe Sub-district on the Future Land Use Map (FLUE) to the Growth Management Plan (GMP). A description of Urban Coastal Fringe District in the FLUE advises that residential uses are permitted at a maximum of 4-units per acre along with certain nonresidential uses including commercial uses. The residential density may be increased as provided in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. Since, the County portion of the subject site is within the boundaries of the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Plan and Overlay as provided for in the FLUE, a higher density (12 units per acre for projects with direct access to US-41) are permitted. Therefore, the proposed density of 11 units per acre is consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAl- IMPACT: Staf?s analysis indicates that the petitioner's properly is not located within an Area of Historical and Archaeological Probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no Historic and Archaeological Survey & Assessment or a waiver is required. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The Environmental Reviexv Staff has recommended approval since the site has been previously developed and does not contain any environmentally sensitive lands. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIl. (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: Tile petition to amend the Sandpiper Village PUD was not required to go to tile Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) because of the project's consistency with the policies of the Growth Management Plan. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) reviewed this petition during their public hearing on December 6, 2001. By a vote of 8 to 0, the CCPC forwarded Petition PUDA-01-AR-1573 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval subject to the provision of a pedestrian access ways to be depicted on the Master Plan and revisions to the sales center language to provide a two year time limit for a sales trailer or the sales facility to be located within the first mixed use structure when completed. The Planning Commission found that this petition is consistent ;vith the Growth Management Plan (GMP) and is compatible with the surrounding development. Since staff has not received any letters of objection and no one spoke in opposition during the public hearing, this petition was placed on the summary agenda. JAN 0 8 2002 PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Petition PUDA-01-AR-1573 subject to the provision of the pedestrian access xvays to be depicted on the Master Plan and revisions to the sales center language to provide a two year time limit for a sales trailer or the sales facility to be located within the first mixed use structure when completed along with the stipulations contained in the PUD document and as otherxvise described by the Ordinance of Adoption and Exhibits thereto. PREPARED i~q RAY'BELLOWS, CHIEF PLANNER CURRENT PLANNING SECTION REVIEWED BY: SUgAN MURRAY, AICP, MANAGER CURRENT PLANNING SECTION THOMAS E. KUCK, P.E., ACTING DIRECTOR APPROYEDL~-~(~ I,~ BY: JOHN M. ~UNNUCK, III, INTERIM ADMINISTRATOR COMMUTk;qTY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS. DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE PUDA-01 -AR-1573~EX SUNIMARY/RV[Vrb L- JAN 0 8 2002 Pg. 4' T~ AGENDA ITEM 8-E MEMORANDUM TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DATE: NOVEMBER 15, 2001 PETITION NO: PUDA-01-AR- l 573, SANDPIPER VILLAGE PUD AGENT/APPLICANT: Agent: George L. Varnadoe Young, van Assenderp, Vamadoe And Anderson, P. A. 801 Laurel Oak Drive Naples, Florida 34108 O~vner: Antaramian Capital Partners, LLC 365 Fifth Avenue South Suite 201 Naples, Florida 34102 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject PUD is located on the southxvest comer of Tamiami Trail E. (US-41) and Frederick Street in Section 11, Township 50 South, Range 25 East. It should be noted that approximately the western 140 feet of the subject site is located within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Naples. (See illustration on following page) REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner is requesting a rezone from PUD to PUD for the purposes of amending the Sandpiper Village PUD (Ordinance Number 2001-15) PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The Sandpiper Village PUD was rezoned to PUD on March 27, 2001. It currently allows for a mix of residential and commercial retail and office facilities. The purpose of this petition is to rezone the subject site from PUD to PUD in order to amend the Sandpiper Village PUD by reducing the number of dwelling units from 180 units t, 17o increasing the commercial floor area from 45,000 square feet to 52,500 sqr Lre fe[ct~o revising the Master Plan to increase compliance with the Bayshore/Gatev ~y ~angto JAN 0 8 2002 PUDA-2001-AR-1573 PROJECT # 19990023 DATE: 10/9/01 RAY BELLOWS CURRENTLY APPROVED.MASTER PLAN · " ' SANDPIPER VILLAGE ' ACtA ITEM_ ~,_/7 L JAN 0 8 200'2 SANDPIPER STREET __ FREDERICK STREET ~AN 0 ~ ?00?. Redevelopment Overlay. The changes depicted on the proposed Master Plan illustrate a revised land use tract configuration and internal road system. The "R" Residential tract in the northwest comer of the currently approved Master Plan has been changed to a "MU" Mixed Use on the proposed Master Plan. This change allows for a common architectural theme project to be developed along the entire frontage of US-41. Other changes depicted in the proposed Master Plan include additional round-about roads and a secondary service road that connect the various Mixed Use Tracts. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Existing Conditions: The subject site previously contained a shopping center but is currently vacant. The site is also zoned the Sandpiper Village PUD. Surrounding- North: East: South: West: US-41 and existing commercial uses zoned C-4. Frederick Street and commemial uses zoned C-4. Existing residential zoned RMF-6. Mixed residential zoned R3-12 and RI-7.5 and located xvithin the City of Naples jurisdictional boundaries. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: All of the subject property is located within the Urban Mixed Use - Urban Coastal Fringe Sub-district on the Future Land Use Map (FLUE) to the Growth Management Plan (GMP). A review of consistency relationships with elements of the GMP is as f 57115'~I~.~ I~EM .. JAN 0 8 2002 Future Land Use Element (FLUE) - A description of Urban Coastal Fringe District in the FLUE advises that residential uses are permitted at a maximum of 4-units per acre along with certain nonresidential uses including commercial uses. The residential density may be increased as provided in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. Since, the County portion of the subject site is within the boundaries of the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Plan and Overlay as provided for in the FLUE, a higher density (12 units per acre for projects with direct access to US-41) are permitted. Therefore, the proposed density of 11 units per acre is consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. Transportation Element - The Transportation Department has reviewed the applicant's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) and has the following comments. The site-generated trips for the currently approved project are estimated to be approximately 3,422 Weekday Trips and 293 P.M. Peak Hour Trips. The proposed amendment is estimated to increase the site-generated traffic to 3,647 Weekday Trips and 309 P.M. Peak Hour Trips. The difference in project trips will not have a significant impact on US-41 or on any County road. It should be noted that US-41 was recently widened to an eight-lane divided arterial road to Davis Boulevard (SR-84) and transitions to 6-lanes southeast of SR-84. This segment of US-41 is operating at LOS "C". In addition, all road segments within the project's radius of development influence will operate at an acceptable level of service at the project build-out in 2004/05. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staffs analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located outside an area of historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment is required. Pursuant to Section 2.2.25.8.1 of the Land Development Code if during the course of site clearing, excavation or other construction activity a historic or archaeological artifact is found, ail development within the minimum area necessary to protect the discovery shall be immediately stopped and the Collier County Code Enforcement Department contacted. EVALUATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL~ INFRASTRUCTURE: TRANSPORTATION & This petition was referred to all appropriate County agencies for their review. Since no level of service (LOS) standard will be adversely affected by this amendment, these agencies have recommended approval. In addition, this petition was not required to go to the Environmental Advisory Council since the site has been previously developed and does not contain any environmentally sensitive lands. Lastly, the Transportation Department has recommended approval subject to stipulations that have been incorporated into the PUD Document. ~c,L~ rrDa 3 JAN 0 8 2002 ... /0 EVALUATION: Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and the criteria on which a favorable determination must be based. This evaluation is intended to provide an objective, comprehensive overview of the impact of the proposed land use change, be they positive or negative, culminating in a staff recommendation based on that overview. The listed criteria are specifically noted in Section 2.7.2.5 and Section 2.7.3.2.5 of the Land Development Code thus requiring staff evaluation and comment, and shall be used as the basis for a recommendation of approval or denial by the Planning Commission to the BCC. A summary of the potential impacts or considerations identified during the staff review is listed under each of the criterion is folloxved by a conclusion culminating in a determination of compliance, non-compliance, or compliance with mitigation. These evaluations are completed as separate documents and are attached to the staff report. Appropriate evaluation of petitions for rezoning should establish a factual basis for supportive action by appointed and elected decision-makers. The evaluation by professional staff should typically include an analysis of the petition's relationship to the community's future land use plan, and whether or not a rezoning action would be consistent with the Collier County GMP in all of its related elements (See Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B"). Not~vithstanding the above, staff in reviewing the determinants for adequate findings to support a rezoning action advise as follows: The subject site is currently undeveloped and is zoned PUD. The currently approved PUD allows for 180 dwelling units and 45,000 square feet of commercial floor area. The proposed amendment reduces the residential units to 170 units and increases the commercial floor area to 52,500 square feet. Based on the analysis by staff, the proposed PUD project does not adversely impact any adopted level of service standard. Relationship to Future Land Uses: A discussion of this relationship, as it applies specifically to Collier County's legal basis for land use planning, refers to the relationship of the proposed zoning action to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Groxvth Management Plan (GMP). In the case at hand, and based upon the Future Land Use Plan, we have an expectation that the land will be used and developed for those commercial and residential land uses authorized within the PUD. The proposed density is consistent with the Density Rating System since it allows for increased density for properties within the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. After considering the availability of community infi'astructure and services it is clear that the development of the subject property is timely and consistent with the FLUE to the GMP. 4 JAN 0 8 2002 Relationship to Existing Land Uses: A discussion of this relationship concerns the compatibility with the adjacent properties to the north, south, east, and west. The petitioner's stated intent is to primarily construct a mixed-use (commercial and residential) development. The property to the south is an existing residential neighborhood that is zoned RMF-6 while mixed residential dwelling types are located to the west within the City of Naples. To the north is US-41 and existing C-4 commercial uses while to the east there are also some existing commercial uses that are zoned C-4. These proposed development standards are consistent with the standards for mixed-use PUD zoning districts in the area. Therefore, staff is of the opinion that the proposed amendment is compatible with the adjacent properties. Furthermore, the application of the PUD architectural theme requirements should remove any perception that there are any incompatibilities in dwelling types with adjacent land areas. Utilitx' Infrastructure - The site is accessible to a public sanitary sewer and municipal water supply. This amendment will not change or impact the previous approval. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) for~vard to the BCC a recommendation of approval of Petition PUDA-2001-1573 for the purposes of amending the Sandpiper Village PUD. 5 pREPARED BY: C:~'~'N~PL~/ANNING SECTION R DATE REVIEWED BY: CURRENT PLANNING SECTION THOMAS E. KUCK, P.E., ACTING DIRECTOR PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT //- ~/ DATE //7_2'/-O / DATE AP. PROVED BY: // JO14~ M. DUNNUck, m, INTERIM ADMINISTRATOR Co.UNITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS. Staff Report for December 6, 2001 CCPC meeting. COLLIR~ J ~ C'LO'~bea-"~~COUNTY PL~ .G COMMISSION: DATE JAN 0 8 2002 FINDINGS FOR PUD PUDA-01-AR-1573 Section 2.7.3.2.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code requires the Planning Commission to make a finding as to the PUD Master Plans' compliance with the following criteria: The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, svater, and other utilities. Intensify/rig land development patterns produces economics of scale relative to public utilities, facilities and services, which are currently available in this area. Development of land that has legal access, is adjacent to existing residential uses is particularly suitable for a mixed-use commercial/residential development. Conversely, existing neighboring residents often perceive new development as an intensification near their existing neighborhood as contributing factors to inconveniencing traffic movements to and from their place of residence, increasing noise and pollution, and reducing property values. Jurisdictional reviews by County staff support the manner and pattern of development proposed for the subject property. Development conditions contained in the PUD document give assurance that all infrastructure will be developed and be consistent with County regulations. Any inadequacies that require supplementing the PUD document will be recommended to the Board of County Commissioners as conditions of approval by staff. Recommended mitigation measures will assure compliance with Level of Service relationships as prescribed by the Growth Management Plan. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Documents submitted with the application provide evidence of unified control. The PUD document makes appropriate provisions for continuing operation and maintenance of common areas. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). The subject petition has been found consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the GMP. A review of consistency relationships with elements of the GMP is as follows: The subject PUD proposes to allow residential uses at a which is consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP (See Staff report). --~c_.~a~A-~--'-'-'---~ /_7 ._L Exhibit "A" JAN 0 B 2OO2 The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. The subject 14.99-acre site has been designed to provide an architectural design and development standards that reflect the approved Sandpiper Village PUD design character. In addition, landscaping has been provided to buffer the adjacent residential and non- residential tracts. The PUD Master Plan has been designed to optimize internal land use relationship through the use of various forms of open space separation. External relationships are automatically regulated by the Land Development Code to assure harmonious relationships between projects. The adequacY of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The amount of open space set aside by this project is consistent with the provisions of the Land Development Code. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. The proposed PUD amendment will not adversely impact the timing or sequence of development that is currently allowed under the existing zoning. Furthermore, the adopted concurrency requirements ensure that further LOS degradation is not alloxved or the LOS deficiency is corrected. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. Ability, as applied in this context, implies supporting infrastructure such as wastewater disposal system, potable water supplies, characteristics of the property relative to hazards, and capacity of roads, is supportive of conditions emanating from urban development. This assessment is described at length in the staff report adopted by the CCPC. Relative to this petition, development of the subject property is timely, because supporting infrastructure is available. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular ease, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. FINDINGS FOR PUD4)I ~AR-1573/RVB/rb This criteria essentially requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. The development standards in this PUD are similar to those standards. JAN 0 8 2002 REZONE FINDINGS PETITION PUDA-01-AR-1573 Section 2.7.2.5. of the Collier County Land Development Code requires that the report and recommendations of the Planning Commission to the Board of County Commissioners shall show that the Planning Commission has studied and considered the proposed change in relation to the following, where applicable: Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives & policies of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan. Development Orders deemed consistent with all applicable elements of the FLUE of the GMP should be considered a positive relationship. The proposed development is in compliance with the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. The density permitted xvithin this PUD is consistent with the Density Rating System contained in the Groxvth Management Plan. 2. The existing land use pattern; The adjacent uses include residential to the west and south while commercial land uses are to the north and northeast. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts; The parcel is of sufficient size that it will not result in an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. It is also consistent xvith expected land uses by virtue of its consistency xvith the FLUE. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. The existing PUD district boundaries are logically dra~vn and they are consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. The proposed amendment will not change these boundaries. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. The proposed PUD Amendment is appropriate based on the approved commercial and residential land uses surrounding the subject site. Furthermore, the subject PUD has a positive relationship to the GMP. EXHIBIT"B" ~._ / 7 _JC JAN 0 8 2002 Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood; The proposed development standards (i.e. setbacks and landscaping) made a condition of approval will go a long way towards offsetting any potential adverse influences by the Sandpiper Village PUD on the residential subdivision to the south and west. Conversely, the location of the subject site could cause increased noise and traffic impacts on the nearby residences. However, due to the proposed landscape and buffer areas, the proposed PUD should not adversely impact the adjacent properties. In summary, the proposed PUD Amendment will not adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood because the currently approved development standards and other conditions for approval have been promulgated and designed to ensure the least amount of adverse impact on adjacent and nearby developments. Recommended mitigation actions should serve to ameliorate impact on the adjacent residential area. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. Evaluation of this project took into account the requirement for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP and was found consistent. In addition, this project xvhen developed will not excessively increase traffic congestion while certain traffic management system improvements are required as a condition of approval (i.e. turn lanes, traffic signals, dedications, etc.). In the final analysis all rezone actions are subject to the Concurrency Management System. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem; The Land Development Code specifically addresses prerequisite development standards that are designed to reduce the risk of flooding on nearby properties. New development in and of itself is not supposed to increase flooding potential on adjacent property over and above what would occur without development. However, as urban intensification in the absence of commensurate improvement to inter-county drainage appurtenances may increase the risk of flooding in areas when the drainage outfall condition is inadequate. In summary, every project approved in Collier County involving the utilization of land for some land use activity is scrutinized and required to mitigate all sub-surface drainage generated by developmental activities as a condition of approval. This project was reviewed for drainage relationships and design and construction plans are requ_ir_%d to meet County standards as a condition of approval. ACk,UA IT[M JAN 0 8 2002 o 10. 11. 12. 13. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas; All projects in Collier County are subject to the development standards that apply generally and equally to all zoning districts concerning the need to provide the required open space. The subject development standards are designed to ensure that light penetration and circulation of air does not adversely affect adjacent areas. Whether the proposed change xvill adversely affect property values in the adjacent area; Typically urban intensification increases the value of contiguous underutilized land. However, this is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results, which may be internal or external to the subject property that can affect property values. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning, however zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since value determination by law is driven by market value. The mere fact that a property is given a new zoning designation may or may not affect value. Whether the proposed change svill be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations; The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in the zoning division of the LDC is that their sound application when combined with the administrative site development plan approval process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in a deterrence to improvement of adjacent property. Whether the proposed change vdll constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare; The proposed amendment to the Sandpiper Village PUD complies with the Growth Management Plan, which are public policy statements supporting zoning actions when they are consistent with said plans. In light of this fact the proposed change does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLLTE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning; The subject property can be developed in accordance with the existing zoning, however to do so would deny this petitioner of the opportunity to maximize the development potential of the site as made possible by its consistency relationship with the Growth Management Plan. _L. JAN O 8 2002 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the Count3'; The project is designed in a manner that is compatible with surrounding and approved PUD property in size and scale. It is also consistent with the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. 15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in distriets already permitting such use. There are many sites, ~vhich are zoned to accommodate the proposed development. This is not the determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness of a rezoning decision. The determinants of zoning are consistency with all elements of the GMP, compatibility, adequacy of infrastructure and to some extent the timing of the action and all of the above criteria. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, ~vhich would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed, zoning classification. The extent of site alteration xvill be determined as a function of obtaining a Site Development Plan approval to execute the PUD's development strategy. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier Count3' Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended. A multi-disciplined team responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP has reviexved this petition and they have found it consistent with the GMP. The conditions of approval have been incorporated into the PUD document. Staff reviews for adequacy of public services and levels of service determined that required infrastructure meets with GMP established relationships. REZONE FIN DINGS/01 -AR- 1573/RVB/rb & C~EMO A ITEM /7 JAN 0 8 2002 4 ICI APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD AMENDMENT/DO AMENDMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION CURRENT PLANNING 1. Name of Applicant(s) Antaramian Capital Parnters, LLC Applicant's Mailing Address 365 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 201 City Naples State Florida Zip 34102 Applicant's Telephone Number: Bus.: 941/434-0600 Fax.: 941/434-6656 Is the applicant the owner of the subject property? X Yes No .... (a) If applicant is a land trust, so indicate and name beneficiaries below. __X__ (b) If applicant is corporation other than a public corporation, so indicate and name officers and major stockholders below. (c) If applicant is a partnership, limited partnership or other business entity, so indicate and name principals below. (d) If applicant is an owner, indicate exactly as recorded, and list all other owners, if any. (e) If applicant is a lessee, attach copy of lease, and indicate actual owners if not indicated on the lease. (0 If applicant is a contract purchaser, attach copy of contract, and indicate actual owner(s) name and address below. Jack J. Antaramian and Robert W. Weinstein, as Co-Trustees of the Antaramian Family Trust (trust dated January 4, 1999) - 50% ownership; and Kraft Enterprises Company, Inc.- 50% ownership. (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page.) 2. Name of Agent George L. Varnadoe, Esq. Firm Youne, van Assenderp, Varnadoe & Anderson, P.A. Agents Mailing Address City __Naples Telephone Number: Bus.: 941/597-2814 __ 801 Laurel Oak Drive, Suite 300 State Florida Fax.: 941/597-1060 Zip .34108__ /7 L JAN 0 8 2002 2-.0 o PUD ORDINANCE NAME AND NUMBER:_Sandpiper Village PUD, Ordinance No. 2001-15_ DETAILED LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY COVERED BY THE APPLICATION (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page. If request involves change to more than one zoning district, include separate legal description for property involved in each district. If property is odd-shaped, submit five (5) copies of survey (1" to 400' scale). THE APPLICANT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SUPPLYING THE CORRECT LEGAL DESCRIPTION. IF QUESTIONS ARISE CONCERNING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION, AN ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION SHALL BE REQUIRED. SECTION 1~1 TOWNSHIP 50 South RANGE __25 East See attached Legal Description, Exhibit "A" Address or location of subject property:The properW is located on Tamiami Trail East CU.S. 41), and is bordered on the north by U.S. 41, on the west by Sandpiper Street, on the east by Fredrick Street, and on the south by residential development. Does property owner own contiguous property to the subject property? If so, give complete legal description of entire contiguous property. (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page). No~ TYPE OF AMENDMENT: _X_A. PUD Document Language Amendment _X_B. PUD Master Plan Amendment C. Development Order Language Amendment DOES AMENDMENT COMPLY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: X__Yes No If no, explain: HAS A PUBLIC HEARING BEEN HELD ON THIS PROPERTY WITHIN THE LAST YEAR? IF SO, IN WHOSE NAME? Yes, Antaramian Capital Partners, LLC DATE: March 27, 2001 PETITION *7:PUD-2000-19 /7 t2 JAN 0 8 2002 10. HAS ANY PORTION OF THE PUD BEEN SOLD AND/OR DEVELOPED? ARE ANY CHANGES PROPOSED FOR THE AREA SOLD AND/OR DEVELOPED? Yes. X No. IF YES, DESCRIBE: (ATTACH ADDITIONAL SHEETS IF NECESSARY). JAN 0 8 2002 EXltIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SANDPIPER VILLAGE ALL OF LOTS 107 & 108, GOLDEN SHORES SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO PLAT I:N PLAT BOOK 3, PAGE 25, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. THE WEST ½ OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 50 SOLrI'H, RANGE 25 EAST, LYING SOUTH OF STATE ROAD NO. 90 (TAMIAMI TRAIl.), EXCEPT THE SOUTH 264 FEET. ALL THAT PART OF THE SOUTH 264 FEET OF THE SOUTHWEST ¼ OF THE NORTHWEST IA OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LYING NORTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF WALKER'S SUBDIVISION AS DELINEATED ON A PLAT OF RECORD IN PLAT BOOK 1 AT PAGE 36, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. AND LOTS 1-8 INCLUSIVE COL-LEE-CO TERRACE, ACCORDING TO PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 32, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. **LESS** THOSE PARCELS DESCRIBED O.R. BOOK 1969, PAGE 977 AND O.R. BOOK 2119, PAGE 1344 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY. TOTAL ACREAGE = 14.994- ACRES. F:\usets~LANA\Wp9~uNTARAMIAN~CFIULMSKYXSandpiper Village Amendment~Legal Description - Exhibit A. /7 pd JAN 0 8 2002 IMDIOKALEE RD VANOERBILT RD GOLDEN C~TE BLVD. DI 886 RADIO RD DAVIS BLVD OREEN BLVD. C.R. 864 LEGEND EXISTING ROADWAY NETWORK SANDPIPER TRAFFIC STUDY PROJECT LO, AFFIDAVIT We /~h r~ ~. ~ being first duly sworn, depose and say that ' -~-' .... ~" - ......... fthe we are the owners of the property described hereto and whmh ~s the subject matter o proposed hearing; that all the answers to the questions in this application, and all sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application, are honest and true to the best of our knowledge and belief. We understand this application must be completed and accurate before a hearing can be advertised. We further permit the undersigned to act as our representative in any matters regarding this Petition. No~~ERS ARE MANDATORY. S~RI~ OF OWNER SIGSAN~%II~.E. OF AGENT State of Florida County of Collier The foregoing Application was acknowledged before me this ~ day of ~47~m~r" , 2001 by ,.~t.oJc,,J. j4Fr~OaqqiOJ'-} , who is personally ~no'wn to me.or who has produced as identittcation and who did (died not) take an oath. ~Pu~lic) NOTARY PUBLIC Commission #~ My Commission Expires: State of Florida County of Collier The foregoing Applica.ti. on was 9ckno,.w. ledged before me this 0ff~ day of ~l~ff-~/~/) ,2001 by _~r~./,/Z&i~*O~ , who is personally kno~vn to me ~_w_ho has praduce~ ' - - .2s id~ntlt'eatiOn ~_nd who did (SignOre ol~ Iklstal-y 15ublic)-~ff (did not) take an oath. NOTARY PUBLIC Commission # ~(1~ p~...p'~..~z/ My Commission Expires: - F.\user$\LANAXWp9kANTARAMIAN\CHULMSK~Sandplper Village Amendment\PUD Amendment Application Form.wpd /7 ¥ JAN 0 8 2002 ORDINANCE NO. 02- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 91-102, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH INCLUDES THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS MAP NU3~BERED 051 IS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM "PUD" TO "PUD" PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS SANDPIPER VILLAGE, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST, (U.S. 41) IN SECTION I1, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 13 ACRES; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 01-15, THE FORMER SANDPIPER VILLAGE PUD; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, George L. Vamadoe, Esquire, of Young Van Assenderp, Varnadoe, and Anderson, representing Antaramian Capital Partners, LLC, petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification ol the herein described real property; NOW, THEREFORE, BE 1T ORDAINED BY the Board of Collier Count Commissioners of Collier County, Florida; SECTION ONE: The Zoning Classification of the herein described real property located in Section 11, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from "PUD" to "PUD" Planned Unit Development in accordance with the PUD Document, attached hereto as Exhibit "A", which is incorporated herein and by reference made part hereof. The Official Zoning Atlas Map numbered 0511S, as described in Ordinance Number 91-102, the Collier County Land Development Code, is hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO: Ordinance Number 01-15, known as the Sandpiper Village PUD, adopted on March 27, 2001 by the Board of County Conunissioners of Collier County, is hereby repealed in its entirety. SECTION THREE: This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. JAN 0 8 2002 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board oI County Commissioners oI Collier County. Florida. this day of .2002. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency BY: JAMES D. CARTER, Ph.D., Chairman Marjofie M. Student Assistant County Attorney JAN 0 § 2002 SANDPIPER VILLAGE A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PREPARED BY: George L. Varnadoe, Esq. Young, van Assenderp, Varnadoe & Anderson, P.A. 801 Laurel Oak Drive, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34108 941/597-2814 Revised by Collier County on: December 12,2001 Date Reviewed by CCPC: December 6, 2001 Date Approved by BCC: Ordinance Number: ~. /7 C JAN 0 8 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS ~,tatement of Compliance Section I Section II Section III Section IV Section V Legal Description, Property Ownership and General Description Project Development Residential District Mixed Use District General Development Commitments LIST OF EXHIBIT Exhibit "A" PUD Conceptual Master Plan L- JAN 0 8 ~002 STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE The purpose of this Section is to express the intent of Antaramian Capital Partners, LLC. hereinafter referred to as the "Developer", to create a Planned Unit Development ("PUD") on fifteen (15) acres of land located in Section 11, Township 50 South, Range 25 East in Collier County, Florida. The name of this Planned Unit Development shall be Sandpiper Village. Development of Sandpiper Village will be in compliance with the planning goals and objectives and policies of Collier County as set forth in the Gro;vth Management Plan. The development ;vill be consistent with the Growth Management Plan, Future Land Use Element and the applicable land development regulations for the following reasons: Sandpiper Village is compatible with and complementary to existing and future surrounding land uses as required in Policy 5.4 of the Future Land Use Element. The development of Sandpiper Village will result in an efficient and economical extension of community facilities and services. Sandpiper Village is designed as a functionally interrelated community and is planned to encourage innovation as set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code Planned Unit Development District Section. Sandpiper Village represents an infill community within the Urban District, thereby discouraging urban sprawl as required by Policy 5.3 of the Future Land Use Element. Sandpiper Village furthers the objectives of Policy 5.5 of the Future Land Use Element by using existing lands zoned for urban intensity uses, as opposed to permitting development of other areas. The Sandpiper Village project furthers and implements the goals and objectives of the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay District as follows: The project will constitute a redevelopment of an aged commercial center and a revitalization of part of the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle District. bo The project will provide a mixed-use project, incorporating both residential and commercial uses in an urban environment. / 7 ,.,? JAN 0 8 2002 The mixed use project is designed to be pedestrian and bicycle friendly, and to provide opportunity for residents of the project and the surrounding residential area to access the commercial uses without traveling onto maj or roadways. The mixed-use project xvill provide access to existing neighborhoods and ease of access to adjoining neighborhood commercial projects. SHORT TITLE This ordinance shall be knoxvn and sited as the "Sandpiper Village Planned Unit Development Ordinance". iii ~ GF_IX~ A ITEM .o,/7 L JAN 0 8 2002 SECTION ONE LEGAL DESCRIPTION, PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION 1.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the location, legal description and ownership of the property, and to describe the existing conditions of the property proposed to be developed. 1.2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Sandpiper Village, being approximately fifteen (15) acres, thirteen (13) acres of which are located xvithin the jurisdiction of Collier County and two (2) acres of which are located xvithin the jurisdiction of the City of Naples, is legally described as follows: ALL OF LOTS 107 & 108, GOLDEN SHORES SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO PLAT IN PLAT BOOK 3, PAGE 25, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. AND THE WEST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST iA OF THE NORTHWEST lA OF SECTION 11, TO*VNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, LYING SOUTH OF STATE ROAD NO. 90 (TAMIAMI TRAIL), EXCEPT THE SOUTH 264 FEET. AND ALL THAT PART OF THE SOUTH 264 FEET OF THE SOUTHWEST IA OF THE NORTHWEST lA OF THE NORTHWEST 1¼ OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LYING NORTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF WALKER'S SUBDIVISION AS DELINEATED ON A PLAT OF RECORD IN PLAT BOOK 1 AT PAGE 36, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. AND LOTS 1-8 INCLUSIVE COL-LEE-CO TERRACE, ACCORDING TO PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 32, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. **LESS** THOSE PARCELS DESCRIBED O.R. BOOK 1969, PAGE 977 AN PAGE 1344 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY. 1-1 D QdR. BOOK 211© JAN 0 8 2002 TOTAL ACREAGE = 14.99+ ACRES. PROPERTY OWNERSHIP The subject property is currently under the equitable ownership or control of Antaramian Capital Parmers, LLC, whose address is 365 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 201, Naples, Florida 34102. 1.4 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF LOCATION OF PROPERTY The property is located on Tamiami Trail East (U.S. 41), and is bordered on the north by U.S. 41, on the west by Sandpiper Street, on the east by Fredrick Street, and on the south by residential development. Bo The zoning classification of the subject property as of this submittal is C-4 (Collier County) and R3-12 (City of Naples). The property constituting the project has been previously cleared of native vegetation, although vegetation has grown along the drainage ditch on the south side. The site is currently partially developed with a commercial center. '~.5 APPLICABILITY Although the PUD Conceptual Master Plan shows the proposed uses for the entire Sandpiper Village project, this Ordinance xvill only be applicable to and control uses on that part of the project within the jurisdiction of Collier County, Florida. 1-2 AGENDA ITeM _ JAN 0 § 200~ ' SECTION TWO PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS 2.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to generally describe the plan of development for Sandpiper Village PUD to identify relationships to applicable County ordinances, policies, and procedures. 2.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT PLAN AND PROPOSED LAND USES Sandpiper Village ,,viii include a variety of housing choices, together ~vith convenience and service type commercial activities, general offices, and recreational amenities in a traditional urban design setting. A graphic illustration of the PUD Conceptual Master Plan is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". A land use summary indicating approximate land use acreages is shown on the Plan. The location, size, and configuration of individual tracts shall be determined at the time of Preliminary Subdivision Plat approval in accordance xvith Article 3, Division 3.2, Section 3.2.7, of the Collier County Land Development Code. The project is designed to be pedestrian-friendly xvith retail and office uses bein~ convenient to the residential uses, while still allowing the ability to attract outside traffic for sustainability of commercial uses. D. The project is designed to make an efficient use of the land resources and full use of urban services. 2.3. COMPLIANCE WITH COUNTY ORDINANCES Regulations for development of Sandpiper Village shall be in accordance with the contents of this PUD ordinance and applicable sections of the Collier County Land Development Code (to the extent they are not inconsistent with this PUD ordinance), ~vhich are in effect at the time of issuance of any development order, to which said regulations relate which authorize the construction of improvements, such as, but not limited to, final subdivision plat, final site development plan, excavation permit, and preliminary work authorization. Unless otherwise defined herein, or as necessarily implied by context, the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code in effect at the time of Site Development P1; 2- 1 JAN 0 § 2002 Development permitted by the approval of this PUD will be subject to concurrency review under the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Article 3, Division 3.15, of the Collier County Land Development Code. Unless modified, waived or excepted by this PUD or by subsequent request, the provisions of other applicable sections of the Land Development Code remain in effect with respect to the development of the land, which comprises this PUD. All conditions imposed herein or as represented on the PUD Conceptual Master Plan are part of the regulations, which govern the manner in which the land may be developed. The Subdivisions Division of the Collier County Land Development Code (Article 3, Division 3.2) shall apply to Sandpiper Village PUD, except where an exemption is set forth herein or otherwise granted pursuant to Land Development Code, Section 3.2.4. The Site Development Plans Division of the Collier County Land Development Code (Article 3, Division 3.3) shall apply to Sandpiper Village PUD, except where an exemption is set forth herein or otherwise granted pursuant to Land Development Code, Section 3.3.4. Multi-modal streets will be the norm within Sandpiper Village. In order to further the traditional urban design, careful street sizing will be utilized, and the Developer reserves the right to request substitutions to Code design standards in accordance with Article 3, Division 3.2, Section 3.2.7.2 of the Collier County Land Development Code. Parking shall be allowed on all streets xvithin Sandpiper Village. Some streets xvill be designed for parking on both sides, and some may alloxv parking on only one side of the street. 2.4 LAKE SETBACK AND EXCAVATION The lake setback requirements described in Article 3, Division 3.5, Section 3.5.7.1 of the Collier County Land Development Code may be reduced with the administrative approval of the Collier County Development Services Director. 2-2 JAN 0 8 2002 2.5 USE OF RIGHTS-OF-WAY Utilization of lands xvithin all project rights-of-way for landscaping, decorative entranceways and signage may be allowed subject to review and administrative approval by the Developer and the Collier County Development Services Director for engineering and safety considerations during the development review process and prior to any installations. 2.6 MODEL HOMES/SALES CENTERS Model homes, sales centers and other uses and structures related to the promotion and sale of real estate such as, but not limited to, pavilions, gazebos, and parking areas, shall be permitted principal uses throughout the Sandpiper Village project. Sales Centers may be authorized by utilization of a Site Development Plan for such use alone on a temporary basis, not to exceed two (2) years, or three (3) months after the first principal mixed use structure receives its certificate of occupancy, whichever first occurs, whereupon such sales center shall be relocated ~vithin a mixed use structure. Other non-permanent structures may be authorized through the issuance of a temporary use permit. 2.7 CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS TO PUD DOCUMENT OR PUD CONCEPTUAL blASTER PLAN Changes and amendments may be made to this PUD Ordinance or PUD Conceptual Maste" Plan as provided in Article 2, Division 2.7, Section 2.7.3.5 of the Collier County Lam. Development Code. Minor changes and refinements as described in Section Five of this PUD document may be made in connection with any type of development or permit application required by the Collier County Land Development Code. 2.8 LANDSCAPE BUFFERS, BERtMS, FENCES AND WALLS Landscape buffers, berms, fences and walls are generally permitted as a principal use throughout Sandpiper Village PUD. The following standards shall apply: A. Landscape berms shall have the following maximum side slopes: 2. 3. 4. Grassed berms 3:1 Ground covered berms 2:1 Rip-Rap berms I: 1 Structural walled berms - vertical 2-3 AGENDA ITEM JAN 0 8 2002 Fence or wall maximum height: six feet (6'), as measured from the finished grade of the ground at the base of the fence or wall. For the purpose of this provision, finished grade shall be considered to be no greater than eighteen inches (18") above the highest crown elevation of the nearest existing road unless the fence or wall is constructed on a perimeter landscape berm. In these cases the wail shall not exceed six feet (6') in height from the top of berm elevation for berm elevation with an average side slope of 4:1 or less, and shall not exceed four feet (4') in height from the top of berm elevation for berms with an average side slope of greater than 4:1 (i.e. 3:1). Landscape buffers, berms, fences and walls may be constructed along the perimeter of the Sandpiper Village PUD boundary prior to preliminary subdivision plat and site development plan submittal, subject to approval of County Staff. All such areas must be included in a landscape easement on final plats, or in a separate recorded temporary easement, prior to final platting. Pedestrian sidewalks and/or bike paths, water management systems and drainage facilities may be allowed in landscape buffers. Prior to construction of residential units along the southern boundary, the Developer shall construct a six-foot (6') high xvall, with a Type B landscape buffer across the southern boundary of the project, utilizing existing native vegetation where practicable. 2.9 DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS The Collier County Planned Unit Development District is intended to encourage ingenuity, innovation and imagination in the planning, design and redevelopment of tracts of land under unified ownership or control, as set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code, Article 2, Division 2.2, Section 2.2.20.1. Sandpiper Village is planned as a urban mixed use project containing low to medium density residential, convenience and service retail, office, and associated recreational facilities in an interrelated community under unified control. The project is designed to be pedestrian friendly with retail opportunities convenient to residences within the project and adjoining neighborhoods; although the commercial areas will be located to provide visibility from U.S. 41 to attract customers from outside the project for sustainability. The project is designed to make efficient use of land resources, full use of urban services, with detailed human scale design. Sandpiper Village is planned as a functionally related, urban style, mixed-use project under _unified control. As such, the elements of the development, including a r~.?c~~e, .andscaping, and lighting shall be coordinated and contain a unified theme. ~.-/? C JAN 0 8 2002 2-4 The Developer may also establish supplemental design guidelines and standards by means of recorded covenants, conditions, and restrictions, the existence of which shall be noted on the final subdivision plat or final site development plan. The commercial and mixed-use aspects of the project are incorporated into buildings surrounding the "town square". Parking for these uses shall be on the streets serving the town square, to the rear of said buildings, and in the parking structure on Fredrick Street. Surface parking facilities between buildings and U.S. 41, or in areas adjacent to U.S. 41, shall be limited to those instances of parking integrated into project streetscapes, and parking for recreational facilities. 2.10 GENERAL PERMITTED USES Certain uses shall be considered general permitted uses throughout the Sandpiper Village PUD. General permitted uses are those uses xvhich generally serve the Developer and residents of Sandpiper Village PUD and are typically part of the common infrastructure or are considered community facilities. A. General Permitted Uses: Essential services as set forth under the Collier County Land Development Code, Section 2.6.9.1. 2. Water management facilities and related structures. Lakes including lakes xvith bulkheads or other architectural or structural bank treatments. Community and neighborhood parks, recreational facilities, community centers. Temporary construction, sales, and administrative offices for the Developer and the Developer's authorized contractors and consultants, including necessary access ways, parking areas and related uses. Landscape features including, but not limited to, landscape buffers, berms, fences and walls subject to the standards set forth in Section 2.8 of this PUD. Development Standards: Any other use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and which the Development Services Director determines to be compatible. JAN 0 8 2082 ~' Unless otherwise set forth in this Document, the following development standards shall apply to structures: Setback from back of curb or edge of pavement of any road - ten feet (10') except for gatehouses, access control structures, and entrance features which shall have no required setback. Setback from external property boundaries - one half (92) the height of the structure. Minimum distance between structures, which are part of an architecturally unified grouping - five feet (5'). 4. Minimum distance between unrelated structures - ten feet (10'). 5. Maximum height of structures - forty feet (40'). 6. Minimum floor area - None required. 7. Minimum lot or parcel area - None required. Sidewalks, bikepaths, and cart paths may occur xvithin County required buffers; however the xvidth of the required buffer shall be increased proportionately to the width of the paved surface of the sidexvalk, bikepath, or cart path. Standards for parking, landscaping, signs and other land uses xvhere such standards are not specified herein or within adopted Sandpiper Village PUD design guidelines and standards, are to be in accordance with the Collier County Land Development Code in effect at the time of site development plan approval. 2.11 OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS A minimum of thirty percent (30%) of the project's gross area shall be devoted to open space pursuant to Article 2, Division 2.6, and Section 2.6.32 of the Collier County Land Development Code. The total project is approximately fifteen (15) acres requiring a minimum of 4.5 acres to be retained as open space throughout the Sandpiper Village project. The thirty percent (30%) open space requirement shall not apply to individual development parcels or tracts or lots. 2-6 JAN 0 8 2002 2.12 NATIVE VEGETATION RETENTION REQUIREMENTS Although the subject site has been previously cleared, some native vegetation exists along thr drainage ditch on the south side of the property and as landscaping on the west side of the property. A portion of this vegetation shall be retained on site as required by Section 3.9.5.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code. Mitigation pursuant to this Section will be allowed. 2.13 SIGNAGE General - Except as specifically provided herein, signage shall be in accordance xvith the Collier County Land Development Code. B. Entry Signs Major entry signs shall be allowed on both sides of the major entry on U.S. 41. No sign shall exceed 160 square feet in size on any side, and shall not exceed ten feet (10') in height, although entry signs may be part of the architectural features common to the project that exceed ten feet (10') in height. Minor entry signs are allowed on either side of each entrance road to Sandpiper Village. Such minor entry signs shall not exceed one-hundre, (100) square feet in size on any side, and no entry sign shall exceed six feet (6') in height. Minor entry signs may be part of a larger architectural feature or monument that fornqs part of the entry into the project. C. Internal Signs Directional identification signs are allowed xvithin the project. Such signs may be used to identify the location or direction of approved uses, such as: commercial buildings, recreational facilities, sales centers, information centers, etc. Individual signs may be a maximum of four (4) square feet per side in size and eight feet (8') in height, or signs maintaining a common architectural theme may be combined to form a menu board with a maximum size of twenty-four (24) square feet, and a maximum height of eight feet (8'). A single external sign band may be applied to the side of each building containing any commercial or office activities, providing that it shall not exceed two feet (2') in vertical dimension by any length. The sign band ma,, contain multiple individual signs, but all must refer t~~, building Signs shall consist of letters applied directly orl the~aca, d.e of the 2-7 , JAN 0 8 2002 building. A maximum of two sign bands may be placed on the facade of each building. Additional pedestrian signs or shingles may be attached to a building perpendicular to the facade, extending up to four feet (4') from the facade, or may be placed underneath an awning structure and attached to the awning structure. These signs shall not exceed 18 inches by 4 feet. There may be one individual pedestrian sign for each business located on the first floor. In addition, the vertical drip of an awning may be stenciled xvith letters no more than eight inches (8") in height by any length. This provision will only apply to structures containing commercial or recreational uses. A perpendicular sign identifying the primary entrance shall not exceed one foot (1') in height, nor two feet (2') in width. For any multi-story commercial or mixed use building, an entry plaque may be located on both sides of the first level entries. These entry plaques shall be no more than four (4) square feet, shall be attached to the building, and may contain the name of the building or tenant(s) occupying any upper floor space. Project identification signs Two project identification signs may be located in proximity to the project's boundaries on U.S. 41. Said project identification signs may contain architectural features, which xvill not be assessed as part of the signage of said project. A project identification sign may be two-sided, and shall not exceed 120 square feet in area on any side of each sign. There shall be no setback requirements for such signs, as the purpose thereof is to direct traffic from multi-lane U.S. 41, and to identify the project to traffic traveling on U.S. 41. 2-8 JAN 0 8 2002 SECTION THREE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 3.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to identify permitted uses and development standards for areas within Sandpiper Village designated in the Conceptual Master Plan as "R". 3.2 MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS A maximum number of 170 residential dwelling units may be constructed in Sandpiper Village, including the portion of the project within the City. The number of units within the County shall be limited to 156 units. 3.3 GENERAL DESCRIPTION Areas designated as "R" on the Conceptual Master Plan are designed to accommodate a variety of loxv to medium density residential dwelling types: compatible non-residential uses, recreational facilities, essential services, and customary accessory uses. The approximate acreage of the "R" District is designated on the Conceptua Master Plan. This acreage is based on conceptual designs and it is approximate. Actual acreages of all development tracts will be provided at the time of site development plan, or preliminary subdivision plat approvals in accordance with Article 3, Division 3.3 and Division 3.2, respectively, of the Collier County Land Development Code. Residential tracts are designed to accommodate internal roadxvays, alleys, open spaces, parks and amenity areas, recreational facilities, lakes and water management facilities, and other similar uses found in residential areas. 3.4 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or part, for other than the following: A. Principal Uses: Single Family Detached Dwellings. Single Family Patio and Zero Lot Line Dwellings. 3-1 JAN 0 8 2002 4. 5. 6. Two-family and Duplex Dwellings. Single Family Attached and Townhouse Dwellings. Multi-Family Dwellings including Garden Apartments. Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and which the Development Services Director determines to be compatible in the "R" District. Accessory Uses and Structures: t. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with principal uses permitted in this District. Any other accessory use which is comparable in nature xvith the foregoing uses and xvhich the Development Services Director determines to be compatible in the "R" District. 3.5 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS _~ A. Table I sets forth the development standards Residential District. for land uses xvithin the "R" 3-2 AG, F~JqDA ITEM ~ ~,_/~' L- JAN 0 8 2002 TABLE I Sandpiper Village DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR "R" RESIDENTIAL AREAS PERMITTED USES SINGLE PATIO & TWO SINGLE FAMILY MULTI FAMILY ZERO LOT FAMILY & ATTACHED AND FAMILY AND STANDARDS DETACHED LINE DUPLEX TOWNHOUSE DWELLINGS Category I 2 3 4 5 Front Yard 20 10 10.3 10 10 Front Yard for 10 10 10 10 10 Side Entry Garage Side Yard 7.5 0 or 7.5 0 or 7.5 0 or 10' 25' Rear Yard Principal 20 10 10 10 10 Rear Yard Accessory 10 5 5 5 10 Rear Yard Special '~ 10 5 5 5 .5 BH Maximum Building Height '2 35 35 35 40 42.4 Distance Between 15 10 0 or 15 20' 25' Principal Structures Floor Area Min. (S.F.) 1500 SF 1200 SF 1200 SF 1200 SF 750 SF BI-I: Building Height All distances are in feet unless other~vise noted. *i - Rear yards for principal structures on lots which abut lake and open space. The setback from the lake for all principal and accessory uses may be zero feet (0') providing stabilized bank treatment is incorporated into the design by the developer and subject to written approval from the Planning Services Department. Front yards shall be measured as follows: A. If the parcel is served by an external right-of-way, the setback is measured from the adjacent right-of- way line. B. If the parcel is served by an internal road or driveways, the setback is measured from the back of curb (if curbed) or edge of pavement (if not curbed). · 2 Building height shall be the vertical distance measured from the first habitable finished floor elevation to the uppermost finished ceiling elevation of the structure. Parking is permitted under residential structures. ,3 _ Zero feet (0') or a minimum of five feet (5') on either side except that where the zero foot (0') yard option is utilized, the opposite side of the structure shall have a ten foot (10') yard. Zero foot (0') yards may he used on both sides of a structure provided that the opposite ten foot (10') yard is provided. Patios, pools and screen enclosures may encroach into the ten foot (10') yard a maximum of five feet (5'). - L~m~ted to three (3) stones of units over one (1) level of parking, w~th each fourte .~. ee~~~ height, as measured by the standards of the Collier County Land Development Code, colside~[~ on~oryI Site development standards for category I - 4 uses apply to individual residential lot boundaries. Category 5 standards apply to platted parcel boundaries. Standards for parking, landscaping, signs and other land uses where such standards are not specified herein or within adopted Sandpiper Village PUD design guidelines and standards, are to be in accordance with the Collier County Land Development Code in effect at the time of Site Development Plan approval. Unless otherwise indicated, required yards, heights, and floor area standards apply to principal structures. Development standards for uses not specifically set forth in Table I shall be established during Site Development Plan approval as set forth in Article 3, Division 3.3. of the Land Development Code in accordance with those standards of the zoning district which is most similar to the proposed use. In the case of residential structures with a common architectural theme, required property development regulations may be waived or reduced provided a site plan is approved by the Collier County Planning Commission in accordance with Article 2, Division 2.6, Section 2.6.27.4.6 of the Collier County Land Development Code. Common open space requirements are deemed satisfied pursuant to Section 2.11 of this PUD. Off-street parking facilities required for residential uses may be accessed by parking aisles, alleys, or drivexvays, xvhich are separate from any roads, which serve the development. On-street parking shall be allowed on all roads within the project. Single family patio and zero lot line dwellings are identified separately from single family detached dwellings with conventional side yard requirements to distinguish these types for the purpose of applying development standards under Table 1. Patio and zero lot line dwellings shall be defined as any type of detached single family structure employing a zero or reduced side yard as set forth herein, and which confom~ to the requirements of the Collier County Land Development Code, Article 2, Division 2.6, Subsection 2.6.27. Residential structures abutting Sandpiper Street shall be limited to two (2) stories over one (1) level of parking. 3-4 JAN 0 B ~002 SECTION FOUR MIXED USE DISTRICT 4.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to identify permitted uses and development standards within Sandpiper Village PUD designated on the Conceptual Master Plan as "MU". 4.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION Areas designated as MU on the Conceptual Master Plan are designed to accommodate a limited range of retail, service, and office commercial uses; residential uses in the same structure with retail or office uses; and essential services and customary accessory uses to commercial or residential development. Buildings in the MU District shall contain commercial uses only, or a mix of residential and commercial uses; provided however, that both commercial space and residential units shall be constructed in the MU District. The approximate acreage of the MU District is indicated on the Conceptual Master Plan. This acreage is based on a conceptual design and is approximate. Actual acreage of all development tracts shall be provided at the time of site development plan or preliminary division plat approvals in accordance xvith Article 3, Division 3.3 and Division 3.2, respectively, of the Collier County Land Development Code. MU tracts are designed to accommodate internal roadways, open spaces, lakes and wate,' management facilities, and other similar uses found in commercial districts in traditional urba, development. 4.3 MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE/UNITS A maximum of 52,500 square feet gross floor area of retail and office uses may be constructed in Sandpiper Village, together xvith multi-family residential units, provided the total number of residential units in the Sandpiper Village project shall not exceed 170 units. 4.4 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or part, for other than the following: A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures: 1. Accounting, auditing and bookkeeping services (Group 8721). Amusements and recreational services (Groups 7911, 7922 only, 7991, 7993). 4-1 r~rnmnrLi~ /.7 JAN O 8 2002 3. Apparel and accessory stores (Groups 5611-5699). 4. Hardware stores (Group 5251). 5. Business services (Groups 7311, 7313, 7322 - 7338, 7361 - 7379,7384, 7389 except auctioneering, field warehousing, bottle labeling, packaging and labeling, salvaging of damaged merchandise, scrap steel cutting and slitting). 6. Childcare services (Group 8351). 7. Civic, social, and fraternal associations (Group 8641). 8. Depository institutions (Groups 6011-6099). 9. Drug stores and proprietary stores (Groups 5912). 10. Eating and drinking establishments (Groups 5812, 5813, except for bottle clubs). 11. Engineering, architectural, accounting and surveying services (Groups 8711-8713, 8721). 12. Food stores (Groups 5411-5499). 13. General merchandise stores (Groups 5311-5399). 14. Group care facilities (Category I and II); Care Units, except for homeless shelters, nursing homes and assisted living facilities. 15. Health services (Groups 8011-8049, 8082). 16. Home furniture, furnishing, and equipment stores (Groups 5712-5736). 17. Insurance carders, agents and brokers (Groups 6311-6399, 6411). 18. Legal services (Group 8111). 19. Management and public relation services (Groups 8741-8743, 8748). 20. Miscellaneous retail (Groups 5912-5963, except materials, 5992-5999, except auction houses). 21. Multi-family dwellings, including garden apartments. 4-2 pawnshops and building JAN 0 8 2002 22. Non-depository credit institutions (Groups 6111-6163). 23. Personal services (Groups 7211, 7212, 7215, 7216 non-industrial dry cleaning only, 7221 - 7251, 7291). 24. Real estate (Groups 6531, 6541). 25. Paint, glass and wallpaper stores (Group 5231). 26. Public administration (Major Groups 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96). 27. Security and commodity brokers, dealer, exchanges and services (Groups 6211- 6289). 28. United States Postal Service (Group 4311 except major distribution center). 29. Video tape rental (Group 7841). 30. Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses (including general and professional offices not specifically listed above) and which the Development Services Director determines to be compatible in the "MU" district. B. Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures 1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with principal uses permitted in this district. 2. Any other accessory use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and which .the Development Services Director determines to be compatible in the "MU" district. 4.5 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. In mixed use buildings, that is buildings containing residential uses together with commercial uses (retail, service and/or office), commercial uses are permitted on the first two (2) stories only; residential uses are permitted on the second story and above. B. Minimum yard requirements for mixed use buildings shall be those set forth for multi- family buildings in Table 1 hereof. C. Minimum yard requirements for buildings containing commercial us 4-3 oalT: /7 i JAN O 8 2O02 1. Front Yard: Ten feet (10') minimum. 2. Side Yard: Ten feet (10'). 3. Rear Yard: Ten feet (10'). 4. Any yard abutting a residential parcel: T~venty feet (20'). 5. Any yard abutting a mixed use parcel: Ten feet (10'). 6. Setback from a lake or water management feature for all principal and accessory structures may be zero feet (0') provided architectural bank treatment is incorporated into the design. 7. Setbacks from U.S. 41: Minimum of fifteen feet (15') and maximum of twenty- five feet (25'). D. Exterior lighting shall be arranged in a manner which will protect roadways and residential properties from direct glare or unreasonable interference. E. Maximum height of structures shall be as follows: 1. Buildings containing only commercial uses are limited to a maximum height of three (3) stories. 2. Buildings containing both residential and commercial uses are allowed a maximum height of four (4) stories. 3. For purposes of this Section, each fourteen feet (14') of building height shall be considered one story. For purposes of this Section building height shall be the vertical distance measured from the first habitable floor elevation to the uppermost finished ceiling elevation of the structure. F. Minimum distance between all other principal structures - Twenty feet (20'). G. Minimum distance between all other accessory structures (excluding drive-through facilities) - Ten feet (10'). H. Minimum floor area - Seven hundred (700) square feet gross floor area on the ground floor. I. Maximum building footprint - Buildings containing commercial utes 01t]Y are_limite( to the maximum building footprint of 20,000 square feet. ~ JAN082002 Standards for parking, landscaping, signs and other land uses where such standards are not specifically set forth herein are to be in accordance with the Collier County Land Development Code in effect at the time of site development plan approval. It is specifically understood that the design of this District is to be of an urban nature; it will encourage pedestrian access; allow shared parking; allow reduced width roadways and accessways, and other vestiges of traditional urban design. The limitation on the location of parking as set forth in Section 2.3.4.11.9 of the Collier County Land Development Code shall not be applied to this project. The dimensional standards for roadways and parking spaces contained in Section 2.3.4.12 of the Collier County Land Development Code shall not be applicable to this project; however, the dimensional standards shown on the Conceptual Master Plan shall control for purposes of this project. At least fifty percent (50%) of the trees and shrubs used to fulfill the requirements of the Collier County Land Development Code shall be native South Florida species. In order to alloxv flexibility in the placement of trees in buffer areas, clustering or grouping of trees shall be allowed as tong as the quantities of trees required in Section 2.4.7.4 are complied with, and subject to the approval of the County Landscape Architect 4-5 JAN 0 8 2002 SECTION FIVE GENERAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS 5.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the development commitments of the Developer within Sandpiper Village PUD. 5.2 GENERAL All facilities shall be constructed in accordance with the final site development plans, the final subdivision plats, and all applicable state and local laws, codes and regulations relating to the subdivision of the land, except where specifically noted or otherwise set forth in this document, or as otherwise approved by Collier County. All state and federal permits shall be effective according to the stipulations and conditions of the permitting agencies. Final master plans, final site development plans or final subdivision plats, and standards and specifications of the Collier County Land Development Code relating to the same shall apply to this project, except as otherwise set forth herein. In addition, the PUD Conceptual Master Plan and the regulations of the PUD document as ~]opted along with any other specific conditions or stipulations as may be agreed to in the ,'ezone hearing before the Board of County Commissioners shall control and be applicable to development of the subject property. The Developer, its successors and assigns, shall be bound by said documents, commitments, and stipulations. 5.3 CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN The PUD Conceptual Master Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "A" is an illustrative conceptual development plan. The design elements and layout illustrated on the PUD Conceptual Master Plan shall be understood to be flexible, so that the final design may satisfy the Developer's criteria and comply with all applicable requirements of this ordinance. The Development Services Director shall be authorized to approve minor changes and refinements to the PUD Conceptual Master Plan upon written request of the Developer. A. The following limitations shall apply to such requests: The minor change or refinement shall be consistent with the Collier County Growth Management Plan. 5-1 JAN 0 8 2002 The minor change or refinement shall not constitute a substantial change pursuant to Article 2, Division 2.7, Subsection 2.7.3.5.1. of the Collier County Land Development Code. The minor change or refinement shall be compatible with adjacent land uses and shall not create detrimental impacts to abutting land uses, water management facilities, and reserve areas within or external to the PUD. B. The following shall be considered minor changes or refinements, subject to the limitations of PUD Section 5.3.A: Reconfiguration of lakes, ponds, or other water management facilities where such changes are consistent with the criteria of the South Florida Water Management District and Collier County. Internal realignment of fights-of-way other than a relocation of external access points. 5.4 WATER MANAGEMENT A. An Excavation Permit will be required for proposed lake(s) in accordance with Division 3.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code. B. Design construction of all improvements shall be subject to compliance with the appropriate provisions of Division 3.2 of the Collier County Land Development Code. C. A Master Water Management Plan shall be submitted at the time of preliminary subdivision plat, in accordance xvith Section 3.2.7.1.25 of the Land Development Code. D. Stormwater calculations, signed and sealed by a Florida professional engineer, shall be provided at the time of SDP or plat submittals, whichever comes first. The Stormxvater Management System of this PUD shall incorporate off-site flows generated by the Palm Street outfall, and it will be reviewed and approved by the Collier County Stormwater Management Department Director or his designee. The off-site flow will be designed to discharge unattenuated through the site, and a drainage easement shall be reflected on the SDP or plat submittals, whichever comes first. 5.5 UTILITIES A. The project will be served by central potable water distribution sewage collection facilities. 5-2 fire protection .JAN 0 8 2002 B. Water distribution, sewage collection and transmission facilities to serve the project are to be designed, constructed, conveyed, owned and maintained in accordance with Collier County Ordinance No. 88-76, as amended, and other applicable Collier County rules and regulations. 5.6 SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARD DESIGN SUBSTITUTIONS Sandpiper Village shall be required to conform to the subdivision improvement requirements set forth in Collier County Land Development Code Article 3, Division 3.2, Section 3.2.8., unless otherxvise stated in this PUD or at the time of site development plan approval. The following substitutions, to the improvements standards are approved for final subdivision plat requirements. A. Sidewalks/bike paths shall be constructed in the locations set forth in the Conceptual Master Plan, in substitution for the requirements of Section 3.2.8.4.14 and Appendix B of the Collier County Land Development Code. B. Streets shall conform with the right-of-xvay and pavement widths showu on the Conceptual Master Plan, in substitution for the requirements of Section 3.2.8.4.16 and Appendix B of the Collier County Land Development Code. · 7 TRANSPORTATION A. The Developer shall provide appropriate left and/or right turn lanes at all community access points to public rights-of-xvay at the time of construction of each access. B. The Developer shall provide arterial level street lighting at all con'ununity access points to State, County, or City public rights-of-way at the time of construction of each access. The Developer shall provide the total capital and design cost of traffic signals at any community access points to a public right-of-way xvhen deemed xvarranted and if approved by the County. These signals will be owned, operated and maintained by Collier County. Payment of road impact fees shall be in accordance xvith the applicable impact fee ordinance as it may be amended with the stipulation that payment shall occur at the time of building permit issuance or in accordance xvith the requirements of the Collier County Land Development Code, Division, 3.15, Adequate Public Facilities. The PUD Conceptual Master Plan shoxvs the general location of sidewalks/bike paths to be provided xvithin the Sandpiper Village PUD. Sidewalks shall also be )rovided within the residential areas and connecting them to the paths identified on the m~ ~-3 JAN 0 8 ZOOZ F. The PUD Conceptual Master Plan indicates the approximate location of access points to the Sandpiper Village project, and indicates full access or directional access. The location of these access points is subject to change, and will be finalized at the time of permitting. There will be public access to the Mixed Use District and its uses from al accesses to surrounding public streets or highways. 5.8 PARKING Because of the urban nature of the project and the interaction between the residential, commercial and recreational uses, and in order to minimize the impervious surface and preserve open space, shared parking will be allowed in Sandpiper Village. In the Mixed Use District, minimum parking requirements shall be eighty-five percent (85%) of the required spaces for each individual use. B. Parking for residential units may be provided in the Mixed Use District and parking for the Mixed Use District may be provided in the Residential District. In the Residential District, one-bedroom units shall be required to have a minimum of one and one-half (1-'A) parking spaces per unit, and all other units shall have a minimum of two (2) parking spaces per unit. Because of the urban nature of project, and in order to encourage utilization of sidewalks/bicycle paths, a minimum number of parking spaces (not to exceed 10) will 1: installed at the recreational facility. 5.9 ENVIRONMENTAL An exotic vegetation removal and maintenance plan shall be submitted to Current Planning Section Staff for reviexv and approval prior to final site plan approval. F 'users LANA',Wpg~ANTARAM IAN\CHULMSKY~Sandpiper Village Amcndmcnt~FinaI PUD Docurnent.~pd [December 12, 2001] 5-4 /7 JAN 0 8 2002 SANDPIPER STREET __ FREDERICK STREET AGENDA ITEM