Loading...
CCPC Minutes 09/17/2015 COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 17, 2015 September 17,2015 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples,Florida,September 17,2015 LET IT BE REMEMBERED,that the Collier County Planning Commission,in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION in Building"F"of the Government Complex,East Naples,Florida,with the following members present CHAIRMAN: Mark Strain Stan Chrzanowski Diane Ebert Karen Homiak Charlene Roman ABSENT: Andrew Solis ALSO PRESENT: Raymond V.Bellows,Zoning Manager Fred Reischl,Principal Manager Heidi Ashton-Cicko,Managing Assistant County Attorney Tom Eastman,School District Representative 1 { Page 1 of 49 AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 9:00 A.M., THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 2015, IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER,THIRD FLOOR,3299 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST,NAPLES,FLORIDA: NOTE: INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES ON ANY ITEM. INDIVIDUALS SELECTED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZATION OR GROUP ARE ENCOURAGED AND MAY BE ALLOTTED 10 MINUTES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM IF SO RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIRMAN. PERSONS WISHING TO HAVE WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC MATERIALS INCLUDED IN THE CCPC AGENDA PACKETS MUST SUBMIT SAID MATERIAL A MINIMUM OF 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC HEARING. IN ANY CASE, WRITTEN MATERIALS INTENDED TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CCPC SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MATERIAL USED IN PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CCPC WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF THE RECORD AND WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IF APPLICABLE. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE CCPC WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. ROLL CALL BY SECRETARY 3. ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA 4. PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—August 20,2015 6. BCC REPORT-RECAPS 7. DISCUSSION 8. CONSENT AGENDA 9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS NOTE: This item has been continued from the August 20, 2015 CCPC meeting and further continued to the October 15,2015 meeting: A. PUDA-PL20150000178: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 95-33, the Briarwood PUD, as amended, to add upscale storage facilities as a principal use in Tracts B & C: Community Commercial, to add accessory uses associated with upscale storage facilities as an accessory use in Tracts B & C: Community Commercial, to add minimum standards for upscale storage facilities, to increase the 1 maximum floor area for upscale storage facilities in Tracts B & C: Community Commercial from 20% of the commercial land area to 40%of the commercial land area,to add a deviation allowing an alternative Type D landscape buffer along Livingston Road and Radio Road, to allow architectural review of properties without recorded covenants or deed restrictions to be regulated by architectural review standards of the Land Development Code at the time of Site Development Plan or Plat approval, to add a new Alternative Landscaping exhibit for Livingston Road and Radio Road, and to add a new Conceptual Master Plan for the upscale storage facility, for the PUD property consisting of 209.17+ acres located on the east side of Livingston Road, north of Radio Road, in Section 31, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida; and by providing an effective date. [Coordinator: Eric Johnson,AICP,CFM,Principal Planner] NOTE: This item has been continued from the August 6, 2015 CCPC, then again from the August 20, 2015 CCPC meeting and further continued to the October 1,2015 meeting: B. PUDA-PL20140000548: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 2003-11, the East Gateway Planned Unit Development, by adding 250 residential dwelling units to be developed in addition to the commercial development on the commercial development area or as an alternative to industrial and business park development on the industrial business park development area; by changing the name of the planned unit development to the East Gateway Mixed Use Planned Unit Development; by adding Permitted Uses for residential development; by adding Development Standards for residential development; by adding Deviations; by revising the Master Plan; by adding Exhibit B and Exhibit C, Road Right-of-Way Cross Sections; by revising Developer Commitments for the PUD located on the north side of Davis Boulevard and west of CR 951 in Section 34, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida consisting of 37.5+ acres; and by providing an effective date. [Coordinator: Fred Reischl,AICP,Principal Planner] C. CU-PL20140000543: A Resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida providing for the establishment of a Conditional Use to allow a church within an Estates (E) zoning district pursuant to Section 2.03.01.B.1.c.1 of the Collier County Land Development Code for a 4.05+ acre property located on the south side of Pine Ridge Road (C.R. 896),one- quarter mile east of Interstate 75, in Section 17, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County,Florida. [Coordinator: Fred Reischl, AICP,Principal Planner] D. PUDA-PL20140002683: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 03-54,as amended,the Royal Palm International Academy Planned Unit Development(PUD), by increasing the number of dwelling units from 550 to 600; by amending Ordinance Number 2004-41, the Collier County Land Development Code by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of an additional 15.35+ acres of land zoned Rural Agricultural (A) to the Royal Palm International Academy PUD; by revising the development standards; by amending the master plan; and adding deviations and revising developer commitments. The property is located on Livingston Road in Section 13, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida consisting of 178+ acres; and by providing an effective date. [Coordinator: Fred Reischl, AICP, Principal Planner] 10. OLD BUSINESS 11. NEW BUSINESS 12. PUBLIC COMMENT 13. ADJOURN CCPC Agenda/Ray Bellows/jmp 2 September 17,2015 PROCEEDINGS CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good morning,everyone.Welcome to the Thursday,September 17th meeting of the Collier County Planning Commission. If everybody will please rise for Pledge of Allegiance. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Okay. If the secretary will please do the roll call. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes. Good morning. Mr.Eastman? MR.EASTMAN: Here. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mr.Chrzanowski? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Here. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mr.Solis is absent. Ms.Ebert is here. Chairman Strain? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Here. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Ms.Homiak? COMMISSIONER HOMJAK: Here. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mr.Doyle is absent. And,Ms.Roman? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Here. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. First item up on today's agenda is the addenda to the agenda. We have two items,and I'll ask to have motions made on these separately. The first item is for a continuance of PUDA-PL20150000178. Its the one project commonly known as the Briarwood PUD. They've requested a continuance to October 15th. And somebody want to make a motion? COMMISSIONER EBERT: I make a motion for the continuance till October 15th. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there a second? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Seconded by Karen. Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor,signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 5-0. MS.ASHTON-CICKO: And that item will be readvertised. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you. The other item that needs to be continued or has been requested to be continued is the PUDA-PL20140000548 known as the East Gateway Mixed Use Planned Unit Development. Is there a motion to continue? That item's 9B. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Make a motion that we continue. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: And I'll second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Seconded by Charlette.Motion made by Karen. Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor,signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye. Page 2 of 49 September 17,2015 COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 5-0. That takes care of those matters. There are no other changes to the agenda at this time. Planning Commission absences. Brian Doyle resigned,and there's--he was appointed from the City of Naples district,Commissioner Taylor's district. So they've advertised for a new representative. I certainly appreciate Brian's assistance and volunteering for this board for the time he was here and wish him the best of luck in his new endeavor. So we will have an absence and a vacancy for a little while. Hopefully not too long. The other item I want to mention,I don't know if it's congratulations or condolences to Stan and Charlette. They've both applied,and thank you for doing that,and have been reappointed to the Board by the Board of County Commissioners. (Applause.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So we're very pleased you guys are back on board. We need your expertise,and so thank you. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Your condolences are accepted. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sometimes you--you know,Stan--the way to get to Stan is if we're running late,just bring him a pizza. He'll be very happy. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: He has brownies today. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ali,there you go. The next couple of announcements is next week is the AUIR,the Annual Update and Inventory Report. It's a capital improvements schedule for all the different elements of the Growth Management Plan and how they're going to spend the money that factors its way into the budget for the next upcoming year or more. That is a requirement to come through the Planning Commission,one of the recommendations to the Board. We hear it every year. In years past it's been a joint effort with us and the Productivity Committee. It's just us now.And that's going to occur next Friday at 9 o'clock.And the meeting will be over at Developmental Services in the big conference room over there. It won't be in this room. And the reason for that is the elements of the Growth Management Plan are represented by various departments,and it's much more convenient to have the employees and department representatives closer to us,and that room works out real well for the length of time it takes to get through this and the interchange of personnel. So that's where we'll be next Friday. Does anybody know if they're not going to make it to next Friday's meeting? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: I may have a conflict with that on such short notice. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. That will leave us with four. Ray,would you mind making a note to call Andy and see if he's aware of it or can make it to that meeting as well? MR.BELLOWS: Will do. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Because that way in case we lose one we've still got a quorum. The second meeting we have or the next announcement of our meeting is the following week. October 1st is our first regular meeting. Does anybody know if they're not going to make it to that meeting? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. We'll have a quorum for that one,too. In the packet of information that we received electronically,either way,the August 20th minutes were included. Is there any discussion on those minutes? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: I make a motion to approve. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And I have just one comment. I can't remember,Terri,if you did Page 3 of 49 September 17,2015 the October 20th--or August 20th minutes or not,but throughout the minutes there's numerics,two numbers in particular, 128 and 9. They keep cropping up on different paragraphs throughout the whole series of minutes,and I can't figure out what they mean unless it's some shorthand way that court reporters use. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I didn't—it wasn't in mine. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: I didn't see that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh. Well,I got an electronic version,and it was in mine. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Must be that thing you use. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Maybe it's the conversion between the operating systems. Hmm. Okay. I didn't know if--I thought it was something standard. Since I get electronic copy,I thought everybody got the same thing. Okay. Well,forget it,Terri. I guess it's just my computer. Okay. With that then,there's been a motion made and seconded. All those in favor,signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 5-0. That brings us to our BCC report and recaps,and for once there was a meeting for--a quiet spell for a couple months. MR.BELLOWS: There was a meeting,but no land use items were heard on that meeting. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So you've still got nothing to say. MR.BELLOWS: Nothing to say. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So you sit there for all these mornings and nothing to say. MR.BELLOWS: The next meeting. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh,okay. We'll look forward to that then,Ray. Thank you. Consent agenda. We don't have any items on consent agenda. So with that,we'll move directly into our advertised public hearing after the two continued ones. 9A and 9B were continued. That takes us to 9C. ***9C is the one commonly known as the Summit Church location on the south side of Pine Ridge Road. It's a conditional use request. It's CU-PL20140000543. All those wishing to testify on behalf of this item,please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. If you intend to say anything at all,address this board,you've got to be sworn in. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Disclosures on the part of the PIanning Commission;we'll start with the far—my far right,Tom. MR.EASTMAN: None for this matter. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Stan? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: None for this matter. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Diane? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Staff and Mr.Hancock. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And I had met with Tim Hancock and representatives of the church and,of course,numerous staff members,and I've gone through and reviewed all the historical information on this area. Karen? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Nothing. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Charlette? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Yes. I talked to staff and I also went out to the site. Page 4 of 49 September 17,2015 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And with that,Tim it's all yours for your presentation. MR.HANCOCK: Mr.Chair,members of the Planning Commission,for the record,Tim Hancock with Stantec representing the Summit Church,the property owner and applicant on this matter. And Commissioners Roman and Chrzanowski,thank you for your gluttonous volunteerism. It's much appreciated. This is not an easy task that you do for the high salary you demand,so we appreciate it. I'd like to introduce our team. Here is Jeff Perry,AICP,our transportation planning consultant with Stantec. Also members of the applicant are,first and foremost,Pastor Johnny Pereira. He is the pastor for Summit Church. John,if you could raise your hand. There you are;Jason Nigh,who is the youth pastor, right behind Johnny;and Nate Johnson,who has basically been the project manager for Summit Church as this process has gone through. As you can see from the aerial location exhibit,we have a parcel that is highlighted totaling 4.05 acres lying immediately south of Pine Ridge Road and immediately north of Napa Woods Way.It is approximately 250 feet east of the intersection of Pine Ridge Road and Napa Boulevard. The property is designated Estates on the Future Land Use Map and lies immediately adjacent to a medical office which is designated activity center. The current zoning is Estates,and this application seeks to add Conditional Use No. 1 to allow for a church with a maximum of 400 seats and 30,000 square feet. The subject property is eligible for this designation under the existing Growth Management Plan and indicated as transitional/conditional uses. In 1998,the property immediately to the east was added to the activity center and rezoned to commercial. At that time churches were allowed as a conditional use within the Estates zoning district. In 2003,the Growth Management Plan was amended at the request of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan restudy committee which,in essence,revised the definition for transitional conditional uses,and based on that adopted criteria,which refers to that use as being allowed when lying adjacent to existing commercial on one side and Estates residential on the other,this parcel qualifies to seek application for a conditional use. The two master plans contained--and conceptual site plans contained in your application packet are the result of many iterations and changes to work to address issues of compatibility and concerns raised by neighbors at the neighborhood information meeting. There are two plans. One shows a preserve retained on site,and one shows the preserve being off site. In either case,the building as shown meets or exceeds the minimum setback requirements and height limitations of the Estates zoning district. The front yard setback is required at 75 feet along Pine Ridge Road;approximately 250 feet is provided. The side yard setback to the east requires 30 feet;somewhere between 75 and 85 feet are provided as shown. The side yard setback to the west,which is adjacent to the existing commercial zoning,30 feet is required,and 30 feet is provided,particularly since this building is closest to the existing medical office and allowing us to push it further away from the residential to the east. For the rear yard setback,75 feet is required,and approximately 90 feet is provided.That is to the property line. The property line--I'm song. That is to the edge of the roadway easement. The property line extends to the center line of Napa Woods Way to the east. The effective measurement from the back of the building as shown here to the edge of pavement is approximately 150 feet. The final building location was based primarily on information attained at the neighborhood information meeting that requested shielding of the neighbors to the south from noise,light,et cetera,that may emanate from the parking area and through trash collection. By positioning the building more to the rear of the site,it will serve,in essence,as a barrier for noise and glare by allowing us to put all parking between the building and Pine Ridge Road away from the residential to the rear and away from the residential street. The buffers shown on the concept plan include a 15-foot Type D buffer along Pine Ridge Road as required,a 10-foot Type A buffer between this property and the adjacent commercial designation is to the west,and a 15-foot Type B buffer along the east property line where we've also requested a deviation to allow for a vegetative buffer in lieu of a wall. The request for that deviation is based on conversation with the adjacent property owner who stated to us that his preference would be a vegetative buffer versus a wall. We'd be happy to provide with any Page 5 of 49 September 17,2015 deviation request a letter from that property owner stating that if we get to requesting that deviation. We also show a Type D buffer along the south property line inclusive of a 6-foot wall should the native preserve be located off site. This aerial exhibit shows something that's a little bit unique about this site. Because the property line extends to the center line of the right-of-way,there's existing vegetation between the edge of pavement and our property line.Approximately 55 feet of trees and shrubs exist there today. It's comparable to what you see next door on Dr.Peta's site. So basically,even if the site were to develop all the way out as shown on the site plan,there would be 55 feet of vegetation retained between the edge of right-of-way and the edge of pavement.That 55 feet plus the minimum 15-foot buffer is a 70-foot vegetated area inclusive of a 6-foot privacy wall. On April 10th,we held the required neighborhood information meeting at Vineyards Community Park,well attended by more than 30 people. The site plan that was part of the application at that time was this one. This site plan contained components that we thought at the time made sense from a buffering and building position standpoint. We located the sanctuary as far to the west as possible adjacent to the existing commercial buildings. We located the preserve over to the east nearest the closest existing residential structure. We had parking on three sides of the building,as shown here,and the water management to the south. Despite our attempts to minimize traffic on Napa Woods Way by having a directional opening that would only allow entering left-turn movements and exiting right-turn movements on Napa Woods Way,it was very clear to us that those present expressed an overwhelming concern about any traffic to Napa Woods Way. With an existing church at the west end of Napa Woods Way already,using the street and the traffic signal at Napa Boulevard on Sundays,it was expressed to us through a primary concern that traffic was the key issue. When it was suggested that we have access only off Pine Ridge Road,there was applause. We listened. We also spoke of the ability to relocate the preserve to the rear of the property and our ability and request move it off site. We didn't hear many concerns related to buffering at the time. Instead,the primary focus was traffic,traffic,and traffic. Secondary concerns were the potential for intrusion of noise and glare to the neighborhood,and I heard that mostly from property owners lying to the south. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: It's upside down,I think. MR.HANCOCK: Our team went back and looked one more time at whether we could accommodate the wishes of the neighborhoods and have access solely on Pine Ridge Road. By doing so,it did actually reduce the depth of our parcel by approximately 12 feet. We have to accommodate a turn lane,which is costly--by the time you get done designing and building it,it's around$200,000--and removed an entire row of parking from the existing site plan. Additionally,there's water management in the right-of-way immediately south of the roadway and the sidewalk. That water management will have to be accommodated on our property,creating a further intrusion and not really giving us the ability to accommodate a new turn lane without losing land. Nonetheless,the domino effect,while it consumes land,was clear to us that we had a responsibility to the neighborhood to make this happen. So at great expense to the landowner and based on the input from the community,we felt we'd be hard pressed to be seen as a good neighbor in any way,shape,or form if we continued with access on Napa Woods Way. This was a significant change to the plan and one that we certainly hope met with the approval of our neighbors. We also eliminated direct pedestrian connections to the medical office next door. The concern raised again at the neighborhood information meeting was that that parking lot would be used as a satellite or auxiliary parking area where people would come in and out of Napa Woods Way or Napa Boulevard,park at the doctor's office,and easily walk over to our church. While I wasn't sure that necessarily would be a large number of people,we certainly didn't want to Page 6 of 49 September 17,2015 ,& add to the conditions and concerns on Napa Woods Way any further. So we've provided the minimum connection which is from our site out to the right-of-way to that sidewalk. We have not had any or do not plan any direct pedestrian connections to the adjacent commercial site. And just by background,when we started this process,we did meet with Dr.Pe±a and talked about trying to have a joint or shared access with him.Operationally,for him,it was going to be problematic. And I think after the neighborhood information meeting and what we heard there,it wouldn't have mattered anyway. It would have put that traffic onto Napa Boulevard. And what the residents were very concerned about is many of them said they'll sit there and wait forever for the light to change and,when it changes,two cars go through,and then the light changes again. So,you know,there may be a signal-timing issue or whatnot,but by having our access as a right-in, right-out only on Pine Ridge Road,we at least have avoided having any impact on that. What this means,by having access as a right-in,right-out only on Pine Ridge Road,is that folks that are going to the church from the east will make a U-turn at the circle you see on the left,which is the intersection of Napa Boulevard and Pine Ridge Road. Those folks,when they depart,will make a right and go about their merry way. The folks that actually arrive to the church coming from the west will have a right turn into the church off Pine Ridge,and when they leave,they will make a U-turn at Vineyards Boulevard,which is the circle you see on the right,and go back towards the west. As part of these revised site conditions,at the request of the Transportation Department,we performed traffic counts and observations on Sunday morning during the peak period for the existing church at the end of Napa Woods Way. What we found is that neither turn lane—I'm sorry--that both turn lanes had sufficient stacking for the capacity that was being utilized with only one to,at most,three cars being in the queue at any one time,providing ample space for additional cars for U-turn movements. As a matter of fact,most of the time there was a near free-flow of turning movements due to the low volume of traffic during Sunday mornings. As a part of our request today,also,is to move the preserve required off site. Based on the existing vegetation,the required preserve would be approximately.35 acres. That would be across the rear of the property,329 feet wide,approximately 45 feet in width. The existing vegetation in this area,however,contains between 26 and 50 percent exotics. Even with hand clearing,once the exotics are cleared,approximately half or more of the vegetation at line of sight would be removed. We,of course,would replant with natives,and they would grow in over time. We feel a better approach would be to focus on additional buffering,if it's the desire of the community,to do so along the southern property line through plantings. We would be required to expand the south buffer from 15 to 25 feet and double the number of trees planted in a staggered row which,when combined with a 6-foot wall and the required screening,would be far more effective. This approach—and I believe we have allowed room within the site plan to accommodate this—would give us a far higher degree of visual security,if you will,or blocking out the building,if you will. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Excuse me,Tim. Sir,would you mind sitting down until we call for public participation. Thank you. MR.KOBERLEIN: Sir,how do you do that? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Just sit down,please. Tim,go right ahead. MR.HANCOCK: Bottom line is we feel that we can do a better job with plantings along the south area with a 6-foot wall than a 45-foot-wide native vegetation area would be as far as visual screening. And, again,happy to discuss how that can be accommodated. We also discussed some additional items over the past couple of days and have—some of these items we discussed at the neighborhood information meeting,but I don't think they made it into the resolution that's before you today. Some of them are fairly new based on some recent actions this body has taken. So what I'd like to do,if I may--I have copies for you,and I'll put one on the visualizer—is go over what we Page 7 of 49 September 17,2015 feel are potential operational conditions that we think would serve to greatly increase the compatibility over what is currently proposed. I recognize this is difficult to read,and I will go through them one at a time. The first is height limitation. We are seeking no height in excess of what the current 35-foot estates limitation is. Secondly,hours of operation;6:30 a.m.to 10:00 p.m.daily for all existing operations.Exceptions may be made for high holidays,such as Christmas and Easter,up to three times per year,but all services would be held indoors. No school or daycare operations will be allowed. No playgrounds or outside recreational equipment will be permitted. Exits to the rear of the building will be limited to those required by fire code. The primary entrance will be on the north face of the building,and all doors and windows will be closed during services and periods when performances or music practice is occurring. The building will be set back a minimum of 90 feet from Napa Woods Way and 75 feet from the east property line. All other setbacks will meet minimum standards for Estates zoning. The south and east exterior walls will be constructed with sound dampening applications to reduce through-wall penetration of noise. Lighting will be limited to 25 feet in height and will utilize flat-panel fixtures and cut-off shields to ensure light spill does not negatively impact neighbors. Lighting located to the south and east of the building will be limited to security lighting and will be aimed downward;in other words,no Wall Pack lighting,none of those bright lights they just stick on the side of the wall. If the preserve is located off site,the rear buffer will be increased to 25 feet in width,and the number of trees will be doubled and planted in a staggered row to create 80 percent opacity at 12 feet in height within one year of planting. The facilities will only be utilized by one church. Leasing of facilities to allow for more than one church entity to use them is prohibited. Based on some other conditions that have been applied to similar situations throughout the county, we feel these are both reasonable and prudent and hopefully continue to speak to our desire to allow ourselves to exist in this location in a harmonious way with the neighbors. One additional question at the neighborhood information meeting was whether there are any other neighborhoods that had two churches on their street The answer to that is yes. A similar situation exists along Immokalee Road where currently five churches front Immokalee Road,the rear of each backs up to Autumn Oaks Lane,and that's in a stretch from I-75 to Logan Boulevard. Some do have access to Autumn Oaks Lane;most do not. There is a close example of what we're proposing. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It's upside down,isn't it,Tim? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Yeah. MR.HANCOCK: This is St.Monica's.St.Monica's fronts Immokalee Road,a six-lane arterial. It has an access solely on Immokalee Road. It does have a directional left turn in.This campus is just over six acres. Has two buildings. Both buildings front on Immokalee Road with no parking or activities to the rear of the building. Water management has been placed in the rear,nearly identical to our plan,and buildings here are located as close as 95 feet from the edge of the adjacent residential roadway. That's 50 feet closer than what we're proposing for our site. While I'm not aware of any complaints nor am I aware of any lack of complaints with regard to this location,I wanted to at least show a credible example of how the proposed approach that we have for this site currently exists in the community in a nearly identical situation. At the neighborhood information meeting,we told those present that we would communicate any changes to them as well as notifying them of the planned Planning Commission hearing date. On August 24, we sent a letter to all attendees from the NIM as well as all those who were originally notified of the neighborhood information meeting. In addition to asking folks to contact me with any questions they may have,we included a cover Page 8 of 49 September 17,2015 letter from Pastor Pereira. The cover letter asked for open communication with residents and,quote, welcomed their input,end quote. As we stand here today,neither my office nor that of Summit Church,which provided a direct-dial number to Pastor Pereira,has been contacted by any neighbors with any questions or any concerns or any desire to meet or speak with us further. That door,however,remains open to address any matters of compatibility in harmony with the neighbors on our end. If there are additional measures related to noise and buffering that can be applied to address concerns raised here today,we are more than happy to have those discussions. The church currently meets at Barron Collier High School and searched extensively for a property that would accommodate them as a home for a permanent church. Unlike many churches which establish themselves in one location and look to grow and expand their campus,the philosophy of Summit Church in planting new ministries is a return to the smaller,more focused area-focused churches. Should this church grow to the point that it outgrows this space,then a new church would be planted in an area that will serve the growing future population. This is not a seed church to grow in this location. This is a church to serve an existing community,an existing community of worshipers that currently are meeting at Barron Collier High School,and we believe this is the appropriate location for that church. 4 This is not just a piece of property the church owns. Ifs where they wish to make their home and,in doing so,will do all that's within their power to be a good neighbor. We simply ask that they be given the chance to prove that. At this point,I'll offer any members of our team to address any questions you may have. And following any public comment,we simply ask for the opportunity to address any outstanding issues or concerns at that time. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Okay. Questions from the Planning Commission of the applicant? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: I have one question. Tim,in the example that you're showing here with St.Monica's,I can't tell for sure but it looks like a lot of the native vegetation was retained along the roadway to the south;is that correct? MR.HANCOCK: Yes,ma'am. Similar to our situation,their property line extends to the center line of the roadway. Most of that vegetation appears to lie within the public right-of-way. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Okay. Thank you. MR.HANCOCK: I believe they have a buffer along there. They do have some areas of native vegetation to the south and east as well,but primarily most of that vegetation lies within the right-of-way. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Just quick. I know that the appraiser's property lines sometimes are a little off,and this one looks awful close to the residential property to the east. Are there any encroachments,or is it— M .HANCOCK: To my knowledge,no. I did not review the approved SDP,so I'm afraid I really can't answer that accurately. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: That's okay. I'm assuming anything that comes up between--I'm assuming he's in the right place. MR.HANCOCK: I would assume so also,but I can't confirm that. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. Thanks. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,Tim,we'll start from the beginning of the packet. And as I mentioned to you yesterday,the idea of removing the preserve,at least from my perspective,is a real deal breaker. In Golden Gate Estates,when these conditional uses were established,the premise under that was there would be adequate natural buffers left between those conditional uses and the remaining residential. So to remove that preserve to an off-site would set a precedent that I think would be a mistake in regards to the Golden Gate Estates area. And—so for that reason,I certainly can't go along with the plan that recommends Page 9 of 49 September 17,2015 removing the preserve. You also noted that you were having an optional--you're offering a wall along the south side,and I think that's warranted. Last meeting we had a similar situation in the area that's on the overhead right now,or close to this area.Just slightly to the left there's some vacant lots that were proposed to be modified with some C-1 uses. The applicant there had numerous meetings with the neighborhood and established a series of standards for compatibility,that the neighborhood finally resolved their issues,and they had no objection then to the project going forward. A little different than a church;it was C-1 uses. But through that process,they were established with a preserve and setbacks. Setbacks is comparable to what you've got here. They had a water management system behind their project,but they agreed to additionally buffer that with bald cypress spaced accordingly for the plants'canopy. The preserve area that was left had to be hand cleared,and as a result of that hand clearing,they were looking at—and one of the people in that neighborhood was a professional landscaper,and he came back and realized that if you were to clear or hand clear--especially hand clear—the exotics from these preserves,you end up with a lot of straight trunks in a lot of cases and not much understory. So they recommended,and it was agreed to by the applicant,that the understory would be—first of all,it would be hand removed,and the other story would have a series of plants that would thrive as an understory,and within a year they'd have 80 percent opacity within that area.And the plants were wax myrtle,cocoplum,green buttonwood,sabal palms,myacin(phonetic),and live oak. Now,those were all added to the process to help establish some compatibility—or additional compatibility with the neighborhood in line with what the intention was when conditional uses were utilized in Golden Gate Estates to the limited areas they could be utilized. And I would suggest—and I'm going to certainly want to hear the public's input on this,but some of those standards need to be further incorporated into this just as a beginning or a starting point. That's why I mentioned my concern over the suggestion that you would do the preserve off site. I don't think that is something that is acceptable,at least from my perspective. As far as the wall on the south side,like the one on Immokalee Road from last meeting,I think that wall is necessary. I would suggest it would go between the preserve and the north side of the water—after the building,of course,so you don't need a wall where you've got a solid building. But then the wall on the east side is another concern. That was required on Dr.Pefa's property as well as the others that I just mentioned from last week. I notice you suggested you wanted—you were possibly going to get a letter of support from the residential neighbor next door that he would prefer landscaping over a wall. When he made that comment, was it explained clearly to him that the landscaping with that wall will be on his side of the wall? MR HANCOCK: Yes,sir,it was. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Because we have some other churches that have gone in the Estates in transitional areas,and I have personally received complaints from the neighborhoods about the cars coming in at night and the headlights going onto their properties and bothering them because walls weren't always required. And it's the neighbors directly adjacent to these other properties that are impacted by such things. So I think the letter from that individual would probably be very well warranted if you're going to seek that deviation. That's the only way that I could suspect the deviation could be considered is if the neighbor next door was addressed,because that's a pretty case-by-case situation. MR.HANCOCK: We would commit not to seek the deviation without the support of the neighbor. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The--staff had recommended a series of changes to the property,or stipulations. I've reviewed those,and I wanted to get your input on them. Number one is the no accessory from Napa Woods and Pine Ridge,so I think you've resolved that one. Two had to do with the off-site preserve,and it had to do with about the same thing if the preserve is located off site. So neither of those,from my perspective,should be warranted for this property. That's something that,obviously,you can decide what to do before the meeting's over if we—depending on how the Page 10 of 49 September 17,2015 meeting comes out. Number four,they reference the wall with the option of a deviation. If this is to go forward,that has to have some additional language applicable to the east side subject to the neighboring--neighboring letter acquiescent to that. Five is a Collier Area Transit staff issue.Six is traffic control,which is typical to all the churches in the county that we oversee,and the last one,compensating right-of-way. And I spoke to you about this, because in the application on Immokalee Road,we learned that compensating right-of-way on six-lane roads isn't always needed.And so what the county does is requests a reservation for the right to ask for that. Now,the advantage to the applicant is that if that happens sometime in the future through the reservation,then you would have the ability to utilize the post-date plan conditions to modify your site. It wouldn't then require you to push the site back like you've portrayed here,which I think is an advantage because it keeps that preservation area as wide as it needs to be or as wide as it can be,so... MR.HANCOCK: If I may,sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sure. MR.HANCOCK: We did take a further look at that,and the problem was not just a reservation of right-of-way or a donation of land. The problem stemmed from the water management area that is south of the sidewalk along Pine Ride Road. When we put the turn lane in,it will displace that water management area. One of the issues with that is,much like a lot of water management conveyance areas within county rights-of-way,it does not meet the county's minimum side slope requirements. So it either has to get wider when it's displaced,or we have to pipe it in certain areas,otherwise,at one point when we looked at it,to meet code requirements,the displacement of that would have taken over 30 feet. So I think it's a water management displacement issue that consumes physical space on our site more so than a reservation of right-of-way. Because of that,we then have to build our buffer off of that. So I appreciate that as an option. I think the water management is what's driving the land consumption. We've been able to accommodate that with a plan to pipe the water management along the front,but—and minimize it to about a 15-foot impact as opposed to a 12,but that's the primary driving force on that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. But,in essence,you still can do the reservation. You just said you can pipe it. So if you put RCP in or something like that underneath your turn lane,which is really for a conveyance swale--which Pm assuming that is. It's not—it is not treating water;ifs conveying it,I would think,if it's alongside a roadway—then your piping solves the problem. MR.HANCOCK: Fm not sure if they're going to like the idea of the stormwater pipe underneath the turn lane,but we certainly would—I mean,we're open to all options. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Every driveway has them,so— Anyway,it's a situation that needs to be addressed because,by your pushing back the building,it creates a loss of the preserve area that really is the effective buffer to the projects to the—neighboring to the south,and that's a concern. MR HANCOCK: The only other benefit to pushing the building back,which then created the space constraint on the preserve issue,is that we were then able to put all of the parking forward of the building. By shifting that building up towards Pine Ridge Road,some of the parking then is going to roll over to the right side of the building. We can still wall that off,but I just wanted to mention that that was--you know, that was part of the design considerations. We felt,based on particularly--the gentleman,who lives right across Napa Woods Way from the rear of our property,he had concerns about dumpsters and car doors,and those are all very reasonable concerns. So we tried to create a single parking field as far as away from him as possible. Again,Fm not—Fm just discussing with you some of our site constraints that led us to the issue of what if we took the preserve off site. I think the question I would like to have with any of the neighbors that are willing to discuss it with us would be which of these two approaches would you prefer,an existing native vegetation buffer there or a more structured buffer in a smaller space?We're open to either one,sir. But I welcome that conversation. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I—I always try to understand and work with the neighborhoods. I Page 11 of 49 September 17,2015 think this board has done that as a precedent. MR.HANCOCK: Yes,sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But there's also a factor of consistency. What applies to your site gets to apply to any site similarly situated. Golden Gate Estates has been established as a rural area very protective of its native vegetation. We also—we have projects that are constantly asking to do preserves off site so they can build more and take up more site. That may be fine in urbanized areas where you've got commercial and a lot of tight sites. This site is an Estates site on a large lot. Ifs only tight because you want a building and the parking to go with it of the size you're asking for. So if you really have that much of a problem,there's another solution. And Pm really concerned about the lack of preservation—moving that preservation off site,Tim, so— MR.HANCOCK: Yes,sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --it's an issue that I have. And I'm not sure this board has it,but at least that's where Pm coming from. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Well,I also share that concern,and I'll just make that clear right now with that same preserve. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Thank you. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: After visiting the site and driving down Napa Woods Way,looking at the homes that were along the way,that preserve has some very,very tall trees. It's—it meets the character of the same road,and I thought it was an important consideration for this project MR.HANCOCK: Yes,ma'am;thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I notice,too,that in the minutes of the neighborhood information meeting there was a concern over uses such as rehabilitation. That isn't,I think,a standard accessory use to a church or one that would necessarily be allowed in this location,but I would certainly suggest that needs to be added to your list of prohibitions if this goes forward like that. MR.HANCOCK: And we have no problem with that prohibition. It's prohibited by land use. But if it needs to be specifically called out,that's fine with us. We have no intention of operating a clinic in this site. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. The sound has been an important issue when you move facilities, whether they're this or commercial,into—near neighborhoods. We,a lot of times,specify a"no exterior amplified sound." Do you have any objection to that? MR.HANCOCK: No,sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Your height of your parking lot,your parking field,is 25 feet for your lighting. I would suggest 15 feet is ample. That may mean you need a few more fixtures. But as you know in Collier County,you've got landscaped islands every 10 spaces anyway,and that will be plenty of spread for you,and that keeps the distraction of light from anywhere else minimal. I agree with your no connections to the clinic to the west,and I think that should be something added to the list of issues. Dumpster locations,and that is for an early morning noise issue. Where is your dumpster location--well,let's put it this way. Your dumpster location needs to be defined,and it needs to be on a plan so that it is in a location least offensive to the neighborhood. MR HANCOCK: And the dumpster location is shown on the plan. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR.HANCOCK: Basically utilizing the building to block it from the neighbors to the south. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And those are the comments I have so far. Like you,I reserve the right to have more. MR HANCOCK: Yes,sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Does anybody else have any questions of the applicant? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. With that,we'll go to staff presentation. And after staff presentation, we'll go to the public comments. Fred? Page 12 of 49 September 17,2015 MR.REISCHL: Thank you,Mr.Strain. Fred Reischl with the Zoning Division. With the change of access after the neighborhood info meeting,staff is in support with the conditions that you read,and we have no objection to the proposed conditions. Just one nit-picking change on No.5 where it says,"exits to the rear of the building,"if we change that to"south facade,"since technically that's also a front because it fronts on our right-of-way. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Now,what that means is the architectural standards that this will have to abide by are for decorative facades as they would be facing Pine Ridge;that would be the same similar type facing the south? MR.REISCHL: I'm not positive what they are.They can request an architectural administrative deviation because the Pine Ridge side is the arterial. Napa Woods is a local road. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. And I'm just thinking that more of that architectural articulation does more to distract than to help,so it might be something that should be considered to the south side especially with a preserve opacity and the wall—or the wall that's going to go over from the edge of the building eastward. MR.REISCHL: And the unpaved right-of-way--I spoke to Transportation Planning. They said even in the long-range transportation plan there's no plans for having Napa Woods Way at its full 100-foot width. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,it's similar to Autumn Woods. I mean,there'd be no-- MR.REISCHL: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: There's no benefit to do that. So I can't imagine anybody would think that's even going to happen,so... Okay. Did you have anything else you wanted added to your comments,Fred? MR.REISCHL: No;thanks. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody have any questions of staff? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. With that,we'll ask for public speakers. We'll start with those registered. After your name's called,if you'll come up to one of the mikes,identify yourself for the record. If you haven't been sworn in,please let us know because you need to be sworn in before you start speaking. So thank you. And the time is limited to five minutes per person. MR.REISCHL: The first speaker is Lou Perez followed by Luis Cid. MR.PEREZ: Good morning,ladies and gentlemen. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good morning. MR.PEREZ: I'm here basically to represent the homeowners and myself. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Your name is? MR.PEREZ: Lou Perez,sorry. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: L-o-u or L-o-u-i-s or— MR.PEREZ: L-o-u. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: L-o-u. Okay,thank you.The court reporter has to make sure she's accurate in the spelling of your name,so thank you. MR.PEREZ: Basically,I'm going to go on the fly because I've had everything written out for me. But based upon the comments that I've heard this morning,it's interesting to note that the information given by Stanco(sic)and Summit in regardings to the change of the entry for the proposed plan of construction and the parking area lends to great concern regarding water management. The current location between this proposed property,the buffer or transitional property,which will be called later again,maybe 12 years from now,that area floods. We have low-lying area there. Currently, right now that whole area is under water. So by adding—excuse me--by adding so much flat asphalt on that piece of property for parking, that will displace the water table or the capability of the water to settle on the property before it actually goes into the street. And it's a concern,because currently when we have rains like we have in the last couple of weeks,we have water up to the edge of the road. So these are some of the things that concern us. Page 13 of 49 September 17,2015 The other thing also is the hours of operation that they stated,6:30 to 10:00 at night every day of the week. It's not feasible because we should have,as residents,a day off from their activity,their noise,and it's not offered to them. It's not offered by them by their hours of operation that they're planning. Another thing,Pefa,when that was—when that was actually proposed and passed in 1998,key people were involved back in those day. And I have meeting minutes from those--from those planning or review to C-1/transitional,and they made statement that this was the last stand,that this would be transitional transitional property. And now I don't know if—in 2003,that that information change as a zoning code to the Golden Gate Estates property may have affected that. But these words on that—in those meeting minutes and that proposal to the residents of then 10th Avenue Southwest,which is now Napa Woods Way,that was solidified,and that's why we went ahead and allowed this transitional property to occur. And if you were to drive by the Pena clinic,you can actually see that it looks residential.The height of the house—of the structures takes away from nothing else on the street And what we're—the current transitional property,transitional transitional again,what they're planning is 35 feet,no higher. A good mention of the street—of the parking lamps to 15 feet. They should actually meet the exact height of all of the Peta construction if they were to be approved. But the hours of operation is just unfair,impossible. And I know what's going to happen. If it's approved,we'll have more flooding. There will be no place for the water to go. The vegetation will be removed,naturally,because you can't have a natural buffer that's already in place for so many years. I personally have been here since 1966. I've had vested interests in Collier County,and my family has taken root in 1984 on that street. So I've seen the growing. I've seen the expansion of Pine Ridge. Water management has not done their job when we ended up getting all the water that comes off of Pine Ridge. So now that water coming off of Pine Ridge onto this parking area has nowhere to go but in our front yards. And when we built our homes,most of the houses back in 1984 had only--did not have the 18-inch requirement from the crown of the road at the baseline of the structure. So a lot of these houses will be now flooding right through their front door because of this situation. And that's one of the issues that I could foresee that will be happening. The other issue is that—a statement regarding the traffic flow. Well,you have within so many feet the entrance and the deceleration lane which they propose,which is fine,great,but given when two churches release their people that are visiting,I do believe that there will be a big difference. And there's also a hospital right across the street with emergency vehicles entering into the traffic way at any given time. So this is a variable that we can't--that we can't actually put a finger on. The other thing is I have seen numerous accidents as a resident on that corner waiting for that light. That takes a long time most of the time to allow you to leave Napa Woods—Napa Woods Way into Napa Boulevard,which is a short stretch,and then into the four corners traffic intersection in front of the Pea clinic. As a matter of fact,we have done some investigation with the Collier County Sheriffs Office and the Department of DOT,and we have a report obtained from them with five accidents occurring in April alone on the corner of Pine Ridge and Napa Boulevard. A 400-seat complex. They currently have,I believe--I forget what their current size is,but they're moving up to 400 seats,and I believe the parking area that they have for 400 seats--because not everybody will come to church together in a car--is going to overflow. And when they overflow—I understand that Pefa did not want to have anything to do with this situation,and that's why they originally proposed to Pe:a to have egress and entrance to the said property,the proposed property,but Peta refused because he didn't want anything to do with that And I applaud him. But here we are again now,naturally,and we're looking at the same situation again where we were guaranteed that this was it. This was the last property that would be considered a corner property, C-1/transitional. And so if we're going to go from C-1,Pefa,current construction,and go to a 30,000-square-foot building in comparison to PeLa,that very--that building pales and is not a transitional. Ifs actually an up--going up in traffic,usage,and other environmental impacts that we may not be able to Page 14 of 49 September 17,2015 foresee but we will definitely feel,and this will actually reduce the value of our homes yet again because of people not wanting to be in a neighborhood that has this much traffic count in the general area. Properties,naturally,as maybe another 10 years go by and we have another transitional transitional, then we'Il end up having the properties continue to go down. That's what I could see. The safety concerns regarding the programs that they have,Pm glad to hear that they don't have a problem with not bringing in the programs that they currently have at their existing location,which I hope that they never do decide to bring in any of those programs and rename them something else after they—if they do get this. But the consensus is that we really,really don't want this,period. And we know why we don't want it,and we're just bringing up the issues that are pertinent to the Board that—to be reviewed as best possible and looked into. I yield my time back. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. One question,sir. In part of your comments you mentioned two churches'traffic. Where's the other church? MR.PEREZ: The other church—I'm sorry.The other church is Unitary Universalist Church.They currently own a 10-acre tract at the end,and they actually are on the water management easement to be able to get to their property. They're on the west--furthest west point of Napa Woods Boulevard. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You mean east? West would be Doctor—towards Dr.Pefa's. So there's a church— MR PEREZ: Past Dr.Peta's. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But that's a PUD on an--that's already zoned— MR.REISCHL: Continue south of that. It's to the west and ifs— CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh,and it's off the road to the south,way to the west behind the--near the interchange. MR.REISCHL: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Gotcha,okay. MR.PEREZ: It's next to the I-75 water management canal. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I understand now. Thank you. That's what I—they're not built,though,are they? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Yeah. MR.PEREZ: Oh,they've been there for years. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Have they really? MR.PEREZ: And they—I'm glad you asked about that. I'm sorry. I'm going to jump— CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,I'm not familiar with the interchange area,so— MR.PEREZ: So I still have a few more minutes,I'm sure,but— CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. We've asked the question,so you certainly can answer it. MR PEREZ: The situation with their property is when we commented with one of the members of that church,he expressed to us that they only had 250 seats,they had 10 acres,and they had overflow parking on the 10 acres which is still preserve because they didn't pave over it. They basically put parking stops and the road--you turn off into a grassy area,and that's how they managed to keep the preserve and the parking that they needed. But they made a comment saying that we don't know how they're going to get 400 seats with the amount of parking space that they have. That was—I almost forgot about that one. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: How do they get in and out of their property? MR PEREZ: Well,they actually have to come in either from Napa Woods Way and travel west and go all the way to the dead end and make a southbound turn,left,to get to their property— CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR.PEREZ: --or they could come in from the four corners,1-75,right there at the entrance at Pe±a and come south on Napa Boulevard and then head west on Napa Woods Way and continue. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you for that information. I appreciate it. MR PEREZ: Thank you. Page 15 of 49 September 17,2015 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Stan? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Just a little something to offer. Your—I've looked at the LiDAR topography of this parcel,and it is fairly high compared to other parcels on your street. About three or four parcels to the east there's a slough that's a historical slough,used to be at the Vineyards,come across. My guess is that the water flows there no matter what,and those people are going to--you know,they're getting water from both sides. It's a historical slough. Ifs meant to be wet. If you have water standing,it's probably because your swales—you're very close to that D2 canal. There's no reason you shouldn't shed water very quickly unless—sometimes they're afraid to drain the slough because they'll drain it too low and kill the vegetation,so they may not be digging--and I know Trinity's probably going to copy this down and talk to somebody at Road and Bridge. They may not be digging low enough to relieve your water problems because,if they do,they'll kill the cypress and the other vegetation in that neighborhood. I don't know that for a fact. Pm just speculating because rve looked at the LiDAR,and you do have some low areas that are away from the canal where water should pond. MR.PEREZ: That is correct. In approximately 2005,two thousand and—or 2004,we had a county commissioner that lived on our street at the time,and he pushed for the swale to be lasered and retrenched because of that situation where the soil had fallen into the Swale into different locations,and that was actually blocking the waterway or the natural path of the water to the east where there are large retention ponds just south on Santa Barbara or Logan Boulevard that were done when the Logan Boulevard expansion occurred some years ago. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: To the east. So they're not--even though you're,like,right next to the D2 canal,they're not draining you to the D2 canal? MR PEREZ: That is correct. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. rm just curious. MR.PEREZ: Yep. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you,sir. Appreciate it. MR.PEREZ: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Fred,you want to call the next speaker? MR.REISCHL: Luis Cid,followed by Addie Cid. MR.CID: Good morning. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good morning. MR. SID: My name Luis Cid,and I live right across the street from that property. And in the first meeting,my concern was besides—they're going to do a commercial property,that it should be a residential. And I bought that property with the idea that it would be residential in that block. And the problem that I have is the traffic—one of the problems I have is traffic and noise and lights. That's going to affect me 100 percent of the problem. Dr.Pefa gets his garbage pickup once a week about 6 o'clock in the morning. The garbage containers,they're banging. They wake you up that day every day. Now with this property,ifs going to have to have two garbage containers,because now the county requires two,one for recycle,one for garbage. So that means that's two days a week they're going to be doing that. Plus,the time of operation they have is pretty much all day,every day,Sunday. So you will not--we don't have a residential property anymore. We have a commercial property that we'll not be able to live on,and we'll not be able to sell it because our property value's going to go down. The other thing about it is I've been visiting the property where they do the Summit Church now,and I've been counting cars there now,been going there a few times. I was there on September 12th,last Sunday, and I count in off season 162 cars.What that means is,that—all those cars are off season is going to be all over our property in Napa Woods Way or Napa Boulevard,either way,but it's going to be in the street. In an amount of time they're going to be even bigger because I never see a church get smaller. They always get larger. So that's going to affect us in the long way five years, 10 years from now. Also,it's obvious they're going to push the property owner next door to get bigger,or anybody else, to go commercial again,and that's a concern.By the time,they're going to start pushing all of the property Page 16 of 49 September 17,2015 owners from that side of the street to make it commercial. The property next door,they don't mind—this building goes in there because the guy's a rental,it's a rental house,and obviously he doesn't care because he doesn't live there,but the other property next to it,they do live there. Also,the property they--the building they have is like--I just went also to Fort Myers where they have the main building,and it looked like a compound. Doesn't even look like a house,doesn't look like a property. It's a really big construction. They're really ugly. And if you ever see it--you can Google it,and you can look at it too. I went personally to it when I see it.And that property was more than 500 cars,so that's a concern also. And,also,I don't know—I have a neighbor that is--he wasn't opposed to the--to sign the petition. I got over 150 people they oppose the petition,and I have signature for it,and he didn't oppose because I guess he think in the future he can gain from that. And he told me before even I see the plans,the new plans,they will mail it to me--he told me this is going to pass. They already changing.And obviously he knows somebody that he knows it's going to pass. I don't know how he got that information. But Pd like to talk—this information should be public,and we didn't know anything about it. And he approached me in my driveway and he say it's going to pass. Basically he's telling me Pm wasting my time coming here today to(sic)you guys can hear me,my voice. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sir,you said you had a petition. Did you bring it with you? MR.SID: Petition? I didn't say petition. MS. SID: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh,I thought you said you had--ma'am,I'm sorry. MR.SID: That's my wife. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You can't interrupt him. I thought you said you have 121 signatures. MR.SID: Yes,yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. If you do have such a document,we need to have that for the record, if you don't mind. MR.SID: Sure. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Fred,we're the ones you should be paying attention to,not the applicant at this point. That--how many copies do you have there? MR.REISCHL: One. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Can you—while we're hearing the rest of the speakers,can you verify the quantity of signatures on that? Thank you. Thank you,sir. MR.SID: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ray,next speaker? MR.REISCHL: Addie Cid,followed by Alfa Perez. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. MS. SID: Thank you. Good morning. I am not a speaker,so please bear with me. I just want to say a couple of things in response to Mr.Hancock. The first thing is that we are gathered here today to define logic.According to Mr.Hancock,back in 1998 he said,and I quote,in the minutes—when the Pefa hearing was being done that day,he says,it is illogical—it is an illogical step to transitional—transition a transitional use.This is the last stand. And I know it has been said by the other people today. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ma'am,could you just slow down a—it's me up here. MS. SID: Sorry. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You're talking really fast,and we really want to understand what you're saying-- MS.SID: I gotcha. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --so if you could just slow down a little bit for us,okay. MS.SID: Okay. Let me say it again. Page 17 of 49 September 17,2015 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. MS.SID: We are here today to define logic.According to Mr.Hancock back in 1988 with the minutes from Pefa's hearing,he says,it is illogical to transition a transitional place. So then on the other page,Mr.Hancock,which was then the commissioner,and Mr.Tim Constantine said,I didn't think that you can leapfrog a CT—C-l/T use. That cannot be perpetuated or perpetual--it cannot be made perpetual. You cannot just leapfrog or creep from one property to the other. This Pefa proposal is the last stand. So the next,as long as you could assure me today that the property to the east,the property in question today,is and will remain residential. I want to ask you,Mr.Hancock,what changed today? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And,ma'am,you've got to direct your discussion to us. You can't interact with the other people. MS.SID: Okay. So I would like to ask him what changed. He was the one taking a stand for us over the neighborhood,and now he's the one pushing this our throat(sic). We do not want this project. This is a residential area. The other thing that I want to bring up is one point that he made that there are more similar projects like this one that they're proposing like St.Monica on Immokalee Road. Well,St.Monica on Immokalee Road does not have such a hub--busy hub like 1-75 within a quarter of a mile. It does not have a hospital right then and there,and it does not have a major plaza across the street with Publix and other major merchants,two banks and many,many other restaurants and a gym with over 7,000 members. So this is a very,very busy street,very,very busy area all within a quarter of a mile. The traffic issue has not been addressed. One of the things here on the staff report,and I quote—if I could find it,Pine Ridge Road--let's see. The applicant--oh,shoot. I will fmd it. So sorry. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm glad you picked that word carefully. MS.SID: Shoot,shoot. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I know. MS. SID: May I get my glasses? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes,ma'am;go ahead. MS.SID: Sony. Okay. A couple of things.The site—on the staff report,one of the conditions that needs to be met for a property to be considered for transitional use,the site should provide adequate buffer. We already discussed that. An off-site buffer,I don't think works,or whatever you call it. The area will be deforested,and we will lose valuable green space. Policy 5 also—5.4,the project is not in keeping with the area architecture. It does not fit. It looks,in my opinion,more like a prison or a crypt. It does not look like the Mediterranean styles of our homes. It stands out like a sore thumb. The other thing that I want to say,one of the—the other conditional use is that the area must be—in order to meet conditional use,the area does not—is generally not appropriate for residential use. That area is just fine to put a house,and I'll be more than willing to buy it if it became available and build a house for my parents and live right across the street from me. It's a great area. It has never been for sale or marketed as a residential community. It's just the sale of this property,we don't know when it happened and how it happened because,again,we've always been interested in this property. The other point I want to bring is that--oh,yes;there it was. Page 8 of the staff report. Acknowledge—the staff acknowledges that the Pine Ridge Road access does not meet the spacing criteria. Well,let me tell you,every day I come home,and I have to put my signal light at least a quarter of a mile right from 1-75 to make a right into Napa Boulevard. And I put my signal,and then I say a prayer,because most of the time I come very close to being rear-ended. I have been rear-ended in the past right at that corner. But every day when I do that,people don't speed--don't observe the speed limit. There's a lot of aggression, and this is a very busy area. I don't know when the study was done. They say on a Sunday morning;maybe at 5 o'clock in the morning when everybody was sleeping. But this is not right,and I hope that the Board listens to our plea and Page 18 of 49 September 17,2015 sides with us. And I'm sony I'm getting emotional. But this is--that passionate--I'm that passionate about it. This is my family. My family lives in this street. My aunt,my brother-in-law,my sister. My children have grown up in this street,and hopefully my grandkids will grow up there. That's it. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you,miss. Appreciate it. Next speaker,Fred? MR.REISCHL: There were 118 signatures that I counted. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Great;thank you. MR.REISCHL: Next speaker,Alfa Perez,followed by--excuse me for mispronouncing—Leelo Bolla(sic). MS.PEREZ: Well-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Wait till you get to the mike,now,okay. MR.PEREZ: Well,Pm following my sister.Hello,everybody. I lived on the street since 1997. My kids were there from the beginning of their childhood,basically. My little one was two,my oldest was five, and now we--later on,a couple years later we had a girl. Right now she's 15. She takes the bus,and she has to walk from the corner to our house. We do not want any more people coming into our area--I'm sorry. A church will bring at least four more hundred people,according to the seating that they're asking for. That's not only going to be 400 people. When they have special events,Christmas,holidays,anything,people will invite their friends,and they'll come over,and that's going to bring more people into our area. I am very concerned about kids playing on the road. They said they're going to go through Pine Ridge,but they're right there. If you find some individual who has any bad ideas,they could just drive around and go and do whatever they want,and nobody's keeping an eye on them. This is just another place to bring more people into a residential area that does not need this kind of people coming over there. It doesn't matter what kind of people they are. It's just more people. We are very content with the quietness and the kind of residential area that we have where our kids could play outside. And I've been there,and I love the area.Were right across the street from a shopping center. We have a hospital. Like my sister said,we have a gym. We have everything right there. We do not need anything else. If we needed a church,we already have one down the street. We do not need another one. And it's nothing against anybody or anything.This is our area. This is our houses. This is our property. We paid a lot of money for our homes,and we do not want anybody changing our area.We're very happy with the way it is,and we do not need or want any more changes. That property that Pefa.made back then in 1998,they say it was transitional because nobody will buy it. First and most of all,the one next to it,it's never been transitional. Ifs always been residential. It's beautiful property. It has a lot of greenery. It adds to the value of our property,and we do not want a sea of concrete put over there with 400,200, 100 cars. It doesn't matter. We do not need that,and we don't want that. I speak for everybody who came here from our beautiful residential community. We do not want this. Please hear us out. We do not want it. Please make it somewhere else. We don't care where you make it,but not in our community,not in our property. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you,miss. Next speaker,Fred? MR.REISCHL: Thank you. Leelo Bobo(sic),followed by Mike Spertoli. MS.BOLLA: Good morning,everyone. And I especially want to thank Mr. Strain. And I apologize for saying your name wrong,so I'll just say--call you Stan. You can call me Leela. You raised some of the questions that I— CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Please,could you state your name for the record,and probably spell any-- MS.BOLLA: Oh,by the way,Pm Leela Bolla.Pardon,my husband wrote my name,so you know Page 19 of 49 September 17,2015 how guys write,right? But anyway--Fm also a doctor,so I'm going to mock my own writing. But I have four or five questions for you. I just want to verify for the record that the gentleman,Mr. Hancock here,is the same gentleman that was referenced in 1998 at the meeting regarding Pe±a's office;that gentleman was a County Commissioner? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes,he is the same gentleman. MS.BOLLA: Okay. Now,I'm surprised. And I want to know if this Planning Commission recognizes the words or the concept"leapfrog"and"creep,"and my husband will expand on that. Do you in the planning board still use that verbiage,or do you understand the meaning of leapfrog and creep now as it was done in 1998? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Occasionally that verbiage comes into discussion. It's not something this board generally utilizes on a regular basis for describing something. MS.BOLLA: But everybody understands the meaning of it,right? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes. I would believe so,yes,ma'am. MS.BOLLA: It's new. And thank you,Mr.Reischl. And I apologize if I'm pronouncing your name wrong. You just were on vacation,and you were so kind,the minute you came back,you gave us the minutes of that meeting. I really thank you for that. The other question I have,one of the site plans Mr.Hancock put up there shows--and you brought it up,Stan,if I may call you that—that their plan actually abuts almost in the middle of that house,the house east of it. So I want to understand why that was presented to us as a site plan. And they have already negotiated,and Mr.Hancock has appraised(sic)us that he's in negotiations with the next neighborhood. So now,the last stand—and I'm quoting and my husband will quote—County Commissioner Hancock and County Commissioner Constantine,that Manuel Pe±a's office is the last stand of transitional use where the commercial property west of Napa Boulevard and this building--and the road—the road cannot be considered transitional or anything. And these are—Fm not saying verbatim,but my husband will, Mike Spertoli. And the transitional is the last stand,and rm quoting Mr.Hancock right now. What happened to their word? And if you're giving out your word today to us that this will be the last stand,what is the property next to—that will be secretly sold most likely to this company? Because they're--I don't see. Fm a common-sense person. I'm a doctor. I understand numbers and people. You can't cram 400 people into four acres when quarter of a mile down the street a church has bought 10 acres,literally quarter of a mile west of us,10 acres,and most of their parking is out on the street. Nobody goes there because that's a dead end.Everybody's going to come down our street. Everybody's going to go down Pine Ridge. So the logical thing is that Summit Church bought this property with the understanding they're going to do the same thing and bulldoze their way into the next home. And there are two other properties,then it's my house. So pretty soon rll be living in a strip mall that I did not bargain for. The other question I have--I'm a doctor.When the Cleveland Clinic Foundation wanted to come into this town,there was a discussion about a certificate of need. I know a hospital is not a church,but the point is,if we wanted to pray and we have a church a quarter of a mile down the street,where is the need for another big church right in our community in a residential area? And one of the things I want to point out--and I don't need to preach to the choir. You are land development people. You are experts at this.This church has bought commercial property at the cost of residential property,and they will continue to do so based on their own actions which speak against their own words from 1998. Same gentleman is now counteracting his words. And correct me if I'm wrong,he was very emphatic as a county commissioner,this is the last stand.Nothing else is transitional. The next--east of Pefa's property is residential,in his words. So the question is— CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ma'am,you said--to correct you. There is one thing you haven't—now, Fm not saying it's right rm just telling you the way the process works. In those same minutes it was Mr.Hancock or Mr.Constantine that said they cannot bind the hands of Page 20 of 49 September 17,2015 future boards. And what that meant was a prior commission can't take a vote—and it's always going to be subject to potential change down the road. So from that aspect,whatever they said at the time they were commissioners was consistent with while they were on that board,but it may not always hold that way with new boards. And Pm not saying this is going to change. Pm just telling you the opportunity's there,so... MS.BOLLA: Mr. Strain,that's exactly my problem. If you allow this church to go in here,what is going to stop them to buy the next property and the next three lots,if not them,someone else,and we'll have the same conversation every two years? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No,you're exactly right.I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just trying to tell you— MS.BOLLA: Yeah. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --guarantees are not politically carried on from one board to the next. That's the difference. MS.BOLLA: I completely agree with you. That is why the last stand was Peka's office. You cannot allow a commercial entity like Summit Church—maybe Pm saying the politically incorrect word,but it is a commercial property.It will be viewed as a commercial property. If they build a church and knock it down,it will be sold at commercial value. So when Mr.Hancock says we are taking a financial hit,it's not true. They're making a quadruple leap,quadruple leap in their cost,because on Santa Barbara 1 asked;an acre is$1 million. They bought the property for 200,000;$50,000 an acre. Go down Santa Barbara a little bit south of Logan,you're going to pay—they would have paid$4 million for land. So they're—no,they're not losing money when they're trying to appease some of us. And,again,Addie brought up the issue. They said they did traffic control,and there was no traffic. Okay. You could do it at midnight in September,and anybody that's lived in this town through one season knows what seasonal traffic is right across the street from Pine Ridge. And I want to know what month and what time you did your traffic assessment to show that there was no problem. And me,personally,I was never offered your pastor or your personal telephone number to contact you because,if you did,I would have called you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You need to direct your comments to us. And thank you. We certainly understand what you're saying. MS.BOLLA: Thank you. I thank you for your time and for your comments earlier. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Well,there's one thing you said and somebody else said. Now,this concept kind of floors me. I'm a Catholic. I only go to Catholic churches. I travel a distance to go to the church. Ifs not like a 7-Eleven. You know,if they build a 7-Eleven here,you go there.But if you're a member of a certain church,you know,just because they built a different--Pm right next to the Greek church. I don't go to the Greek church even though it's right next door. So,you know,the concept that there's already a church in the neighborhood,everybody should go there,just floors me. No offense. MS.BOLLA: No. I don't take offense,because Pm not Catholic. Pm a Hindu Brahman,but I believe in every religion and every religion's right to pray. And so I completely get it. I know--none of us are members of this church either. And my question is,in extension to your thought--and I understand. My husband belongs to San Marco Church in Marco Island. We live in Naples. And he attends there. He's a member.He's a lector. I get it. My father--my adopted father is Jewish. I understand every religious aspect I went to a parochial school for 12 years. A lot of the people in this room probably didn't go so long. I was raised in a Catholic environment. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Pm not talking different religions. What I'm saying-- MS.BOLLA: No,no,no. I understand your point. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: What Pm saying is it's not like a 7-Eleven. Just because Page 21 of 49 September 17,2015 there's one in your neighborhood doesn't mean everybody can go there. MS.BOLLA: I understand. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: You have to understand that people have to build churches where they can. MS.BOLLA: Where they believe,and I completely understand that,because even in Hindu— COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: It sounds like you don't. MS.BOLLA: Well,I'm going to clarify it,because I do understand it,because Hindu temples are the same. A seed temple is also a Hindu temple,but a Hindu Brahman won't go there. I will. I believe in every--I believe in every religion. I go to all churches. In fact,I just came from Rome. My number one dream was to go to the Vatican and receive communion from the Bishop there,and I did. And I'm a Hindu Brahman. So you do not know how 1 feel. But I'm telling you,I do believe. And I completely agree with you that the people who would go to Summit--or the people on our street may not go to the church here. My comment was based on the traffic flow. If a church community that has-- COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: It was the way you worded it. MS.BOLLA: Then I'm going to re-correct my statement. Two-hundred-people church, 10 acres; 400-member church,four acres. How do the numbers add up? That's my question? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. We appreciate your comments,ma'am,and we will proceed. MS.BOLLA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. And right now we'll take a 15-minute break,and we'll return at--well, 17 minutes— 10:45. (A brief recess was had.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. If everybody will please take their seats. We're going to resume the meeting. Fred,we need to start the meeting back up. Sir,would you just finish. Thank you. MR.KOBERLEIN: Thank you,sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Just so everybody—so we let you know what the process is going to be for the upcoming hour or two,we will break at a little before 12,maybe five to 12, 12 o'clock for lunch for one hour,and then come back after that. I would suspect the application that's in front of us now might final before that time,and we'll get started on the second one,which is the Royal Palm Academy,most likely,before lunch,and we'll continue it till after lunch. With that,we were leaving--left off with public speakers. And,Fred,would you call the next public speaker,please. MR.REISCHL: Sure. Mike Spertoli followed by Jorge Rhodes. MR.SPERTOLI: Thank you. My name is Mike Spertoli. Mr.Chairman,Planning Commission members,and planning staff,let me first say that Summit Church deserves a good home in Collier County,a place where they can practice their faith and continue the good works for both members and the community. I'm not a member of Summit—Pm a Catholic—nor do I know of any members living on Napa Woods Way,but that doesn't matter. What matters? Is this location a safe and suitable site for Summit and for the neighborhood? I say no. And I offer you the following reasons why:One,with regards to the Growth Management Plan for consistency. As a transitional property from commercial to residential,the property should phase or transition between high-density commercial and low-density residential. The applicant has attempted to satisfy the code,but does it? I say no due to the size,capacity,and the contrast within this neighborhood,but I'm not an expert in land use. I do have expert testimony,sworn testimony of a witness certified by the Collier County Commission on January 13, 1998. This date is important because the Pe±a project hearing for rezoning from residential to commercial was held that day. Page 22 of 49 September 17,2015 kA The Pe±a project has created this conditional use/transitional opportunity for the Summit project. The planning expert,a Mr.Robert Duane,expanded on this very issue of transitional use.And he states,and 1 quote,typically transitional uses are identified through a step down in height or reduction in development intensity,period,wall treatment,berms,landscape buffers,and the like to soften the edge. So let's look at the facts. The Pe±a project, 12,000 square feet,single story in two buildings,a Spanish-style or mission-style office plaza.They have parking for 35,40 vehicles,maybe 100 visitors in season. The Summit project as proposed consists of a monolith two-story,30,000-square-foot facility with 400 seats,and parking,200;200 vehicles. Now,Mr.Duane offers an easy guide for laymen like myself to follow. The Summit project doesn't reduce activity or intensity. Indeed,it expands both exponentially. How does this project--how is this project consistent with the Growth Management Plan? I believe it's not. Number two,during the Pefa review,two Collier County Commissioners back in 1998 had expressed heartfelt concerns for the residents,then 10th Street Southwest,now ifs Napa Woods Way,and the objections to the very issue we're actually dealing with today,the creep and the leapfrog. Now,Commissioner Constantine voiced his concern about creep of commercial up that road and that the folks that live there want some assurance that ifs not going to turn into several commercial properties and all the impacts that that has. So I need some assurance on how we can address this issue. Now,Ms.Lane,reported back,well,we're transitioning another commercial C-1 type which is next to another single-family. Commissioner Hancock: Well,that defies logic because C-1/T,when it was created,it was supposed to be the last stand. Commissioner Constantine: That's the word, "transition." Commissioner Hancock: Yes. And so I understand that it can happen,but it's an illogical step to transition a transitional use. Ms.Lane: Someone is going to have to take the stand that the next one--that we're going to say no, we're not going to amend the Comp Plan to allow that. Commissioner Hancock: I didn't think you could leapfrog C-1/T uses. There are places in the Land Development Code that say you simply cannot perpetuate time after time after time. And,you know,we can't legally bind future boards,but if this were to approve today,it would--I would only support it if it's stated on the record that this is,indeed,a transitional use to a residential use on the east side,and that being on the record makes it very,very difficult later from transition--to transition the transitional use.It defies logic,so Pm comfortable with that. So 17 years ago then Commissioner Hancock was rightfully concerned on mission creep,I'll call it, future encroachment into our low density residential community. Point number three: Ingress and egress.Although the applicant has addressed one of our main concerns by removing direct access onto and out of this property via--on Napa Woods Way,I do not see any comment as to the close proximity of this property exit to the Napa Boulevard intersection. Pll guesstimate 150,200 feet. Now,I travel this route daily. Typically,Pm sitting waiting for the light to change green,but when it turns yellow,I see vehicles well exceeding the posted speed limit trying to make that light. I don't know if they're--I wouldn't ask for a show of hands,but I presume we all may be guilty of that sometime. But consider,the sun. Let's see. As you know,Pine Ridge runs east to west. During peak hours traffic,around 5 p.m.,you've got the sun setting lower down towards the horizon. Those people exit the property;the sun will be directly affecting their ability to see oncoming traffic.And I'll tell you,my heart breaks every time I hear the screech of tires brake—trying to brake and the sound of metal crumpling I hear it from our house. I say a prayer for those passengers. The only mitigating factor is that we have a very fine emergency room just minutes away from this particular site. And I think--I honestly think that this is avoidable if you say no to this project. And,in closing,I close with this final request. Mr.Chairman,members of the Planning Page 23 of 49 September 17,2015 Commission,I respectfully request your careful consideration as to the material defects in this project on Napa Woods Way,that you come to the same conclusion as two Collier County Commissioners in 1998 and a vast majority of residents of Napa Woods Way and I that this plan calls for far too much,too close,into our low-density residential neighborhood,and it belongs in a safer location for both their members,residents,and the visitors in Collier County. Please be that next commission to say no to mission creep,no to leapfrog,and no to this project. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you,sir. Next speaker,Fred? MR.REISCHL: Next speaker,Jorge Rhodes,followed by John Pereira. MR.RHODES: Good morning,gentlemen,ladies and gentlemen. I am not a public speaker,nor am Ian eloquent speaker by any means. I am just a typical American,and I want to raise my concerns,as do my neighbors,that I can't see any better use for that land than residential. I think that our neighborhood would be best served— CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Move a little closer to the mike,sir. Thank you. MR RHODES: Oh,sorry. I believe that that land would be best used as residential. I think it would be the safest. I think it would be the best for the neighborhood as far as safety,as far as property values. I don't see any gain in any sort of commercial structure added to that area. I just don't. Pm not a professional. You-all are. But I just don't see any better use for that land than residential.I think the neighborhood would be best served by some beautiful homes there. I've been living there for 21 years,and it's a great neighborhood. I think it's one of the most comfortable neighborhoods in that we--at least on my side of the street I have woods in the back,and when—but yet I have everything I need across the street. It takes me a couple of minutes to get across the street if I can--if I can catch the green. I have Publix;I have Winn Dixie;I have everything. We all have just about everything we need. We have a beautiful neighborhood there. And I think that we—with four homes,three or four homes,whatever would allow there,would be--the neighborhood would be better served. And my hope is,and the hope of all my neighbors,is that your panel or your planning board,I guess-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Commission,planning board. MR RHODES: --planning board would please consider our situation. Put yourself in our position. If you had children,if you had family,dogs,please,that's all we ask. All we ask is that you give this serious consideration;put yourself in our position and see why anything else than residential homes would be better. I don't see it. Again,I'm not a professional. But I think that the best use for the remaining property there would be residential. And I would just plead with you-all to put yourself in our position and give this serious,serious consideration that any commercial building there is not going to enrich our lives. That's about all I got to say. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And one correction,for the record. You had indicated that you thought it would be fine for maybe three or four homes. That would be widely and strongly inconsistent with the Growth Management Plan for Golden Gate Estates.The smallest lot you currently can subdivide to is 2.25 acres. That would not support more than two homes on that location if they could use the old acreage that was originally platted with that property. I would never want anybody to think that we can start seeing more homes going on Golden Gate Estates lots. It would ruin our lifestyle out there. MR.RHODES: Oh,that would. No. Of course.I'm sorry. That was my mistake. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. I just wanted to make sure you understood that piece of it. MR RHODES: Then two homes. Pm just trying to get the point across that residential--I think that the best thing for that--the area in question are residential homes,and I would hope that you-all would put yourself in our position and give this serious thought that there's nothing to gain by having any commercial structure,especially a structure of that size. That's all I've got to say. And we're putting our hope and faith in you-- Page 24 of 49 September 17,2015 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you,sir. MR RHODES: --to do the right thing. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Appreciate it. Thank you. Next speaker,Fred? MR.REISCHL: Next speaker,John Pereira,followed by William Koberlein. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: How many speakers do we have remaining? MR.REISCHL: Those are the last two. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR.REISCHL: Last two registered. MR.PEREIRA: I want to thank everybody for their time;thank you for everyone being here. I just wanted to—I don't want to speak for Tim because I know Tim's probably going to address some of the things that have been brought up in some of the neighbors around that area. But I do think ifs important that you hear from the pastor of the church;I think that's important. When we—I just wanted to address a couple of—a few things. When we looked—I just want to say,when we looked--when our church looked at the property,the only reason we looked at the property is because we saw that it was zoned in such a way that would possibly make this an opportunity for us to build a church on there. I want to make sure we understand and have it for the record that by no means was it a transaction done that was underhanded or under the table in any means. Summit Church has a good reputation in the area,and we would never do anything to compromise that. The reason why we actually even have moved forward in even considering this land is because of the due diligence that was done through the traffic,through all the things,abiding by the guidelines that was set up by Collier County. So I just want to--just want to make that known. I understand that by no means does that mean that we are going to build but just want to make sure that--on the record that everyone understands that the only reason we are at this process is because of the things that have been decided on in the past in regards to that property. We do desire to be good neighbors. And I apologize to some individuals that may have not received that—that letter as well as from Stantec. We did send it to all the addresses that were provided from the neighborhood informational meeting along with,as was stated,my direct line. Obviously I would have loved to have the opportunity to speak with any individual that even spoke today to be able to address their concerns,whether that's meeting with them face to face or over the phone. And we did provide the opportunity to do that. I think we can see,though,that it's not an issue as much of compromise but an issue of just not wanting it there at all. And I think that's been made--that's been made clear,and I just state that to say that ifs probably the reason why we didn't hear much back from anyone is because of the stance that the majority of the people are making. As far as times of operation,just want to make clear that that's windows of time. I can assure you that our pastoral staff doesn't get paid enough to be there from 6:30 to 10:00 p.m.,I promise you that,nor the capacity. But that gives us windows of time to—maybe to do a men's or women's bible study in the morning, which is not at the capacity of what a Sunday morning would be. So just want to make that—and let the residents know that as well,that those are just--that's just a window of time. By no means are we going to be there from 6:30 to 10:00 p.m. I might be looking for another church if that was the case. As far as expansion,I think ifs important that everyone on record and you-all and the residents hear our mission. Our philosophy in how we go after starting new churches is we firmly believe that we can go better after our mission and present the gospel of Jesus Christ by starting smaller churches to more areas of the Naples and Southwest Florida community rather than building one large congregation to where everybody comes.We believe that ifs more important for us to scatter than to gather. So expanding this property any further than what it is now does not even fall in line with our mission statement. So I think that's important to note. As far as the building look,I apologize that some individuals don't like the way the building was Page 25 of 49 September 17,2015 designed up at our Estero campus. We understand that there's different guidelines that have to be abided by in Collier County. So I can assure you that all compliances would be done in such a way so that you don't have—I can't remember how it was even described—but a gray building that is distasteful to some. As far as traffic,traffic continues to be brought up. I think on the site plan--I just want to reiterate some things—because I know other things have been reiterated--that we have taken the steps to alleviate the traffic on Napa Woods Way. In fact,it's not even advantageous for any of our members to travel on Napa Woods Way to even get to the property. So I just want to thank you-all for your time,thank you for the residents being here expressing their concerns,but I think it's important that you hear from one of the pastors on some of these issues as well. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I have one question for you.You mentioned due diligence,and in a prior life that's what I did for a profession. And I worked that in different parts of this country and sometimes outside this country. And my first thing I would do is pull up all the public records,and of value were minutes of the public records when they were available. Not all jurisdictions have them,and they're not easily available. In your due diligence,since the record is public and it is clear and ifs on the--easily attainable on the website,did you find the comments made by Commissioner Hancock,Commissioner Constantine,and the other commissioners regarding Dr.Peta's property at that time? MR.PEREIRA: No,we didn't. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you. MR.PEREIRA: Thank you. COMMISSIONER EBERT: I have a question for you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Diane? COMMISSIONER EBERT: They're saying that this property was kind of bought without being for sale.How did you acquire this property? Was there a for sale? I mean,was it— MR.PEREIRA: Yeah. Dan OBerski,who works for TCG,a commercial real estate agent,is the one that let us know of the property. So we had a real estate agent that was looking for possible properties for sale,and so he brought this one to our attention. So that's how we found out about the property. COMMISSIONER EBERT: So it was listed as— MR.PEREIRA: Yeah. I can't comment as far as how he--how he saw that property,but he came (sic)aware of that property and then presented it to us as a church. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. Thank you. MR.PEREIRA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you,sir. Next speaker? MR.REISCHL: Your fmal registered speaker is William Koberlein. MR.KOBERLEIN: Thank you very much for seeing me. As of 2:40 in the afternoon yesterday,I just found out I had cancer,so I'm not very prepared. My legal counsel from New York is tied up in Atlanta. They left at 6:30 this morning,and they are not here. That's when my phone rang;they were calling me. And I apologize for bothering and whatever. I am a very blunt individual. I am the retired president,due to the cancer,of Chase Manhattan Bank worldwide,okay. My parents have been--my parents and grandparents have been natives of Collier County since 1937. Andrew Carnegie,Ford,and my grandfather--my great grandfather created International Harvester Bank. Before they all died,they had one thing in mind;they loved to hunt. Okay. Last—two years ago we dedicated,with no cost to the state,$2.9 million. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sir,do you have something to contribute to the issue at hand? MR.KOBERLEIN: Yes,I do. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Can you move towards your comments that are relevant to the discussion we're having here today? MR.KOBERLEIN: Okay. Yes,I do. Yesterday coming home at 2:40,coming out of the play--school on the right-hand side of the road, Page 26 of 49 September 17,2015 turning into where I live in Milano—I have eight units in there. I've got 16 people total that either live there or rent. And make a long story short,a young boy got hurt. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sir,where's Milano? MR KOBERLEIN: Milano is right across the street where you put your sign to say all this stuff is coming. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm sorry. Does anybody know where Milano--more of an accurate— MS.ASHTON-CICKO: He's here for the Royal Palm Academy. MR.REISCHL: Royal Palm Academy. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You're on the wrong—you're talking--sir,that sign was up for the hearing that's coming up next,not this one.You're on the wrong subject matter. MR.KOBERLEIN: Well,why I'm calling on this—I talked to the gentleman over there. This I did not see. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sir,you've got to use the mike. MR.KOBERLEIN: I'm song. That I did not see or hear. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That isn't on today's discussion. That's an example of a project up the road from today's discussion. Today's discussion is not on that overhead. MR.KOBERLEIN: The discussion,okay,is this.With me,being what I'm permitted to do,I have bought numerous pieces of property in everywhere from Lighthouse Point,Florida,Palm Beach for my father and grandfather's blind estate. If this area does not go through,okay,and you do not take and make a church or whatever involved,I would be interested in paying--I'm permitted to pay 125 percent of market value. And I'm just saying I did not know anything about it,and I asked the gentleman to do it. And,Mr. Strain,Pd like to thank you for—on the first person that you talked to,you were concerned about wildlife and basically the way the county was back then and when I was a boy. I'm 62 years old at the present. So I will talk to you concerning the other aspect of things. But I wanted you to know one other thing. I live on Milano;I come down Livingston. From Livingston to Radio Road today,on the left-hand lane 151 cars passed me by. It is an extremely dangerous road. It is not dedicated road by the state or the federal government,so it's the county's responsibility,and that's just going to raise our taxes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you,sir. Fred,do we have any other? MR.REISCHL: No other registered speakers. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Are there any other people who have not spoken that would like to address us on this matter? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. With that,we will move then back to the applicant for rebuttal. MR.HANCOCK: Again,still good morning. A couple of items that I wanted to address that were raised today. First and more foremost,water management. Mr.Chrzanowski is correct,this site is predominantly what's called an exporter.It's a little higher than the surrounding land,so it really doesn't serve the purpose of holding water from other properties at this time;however,that calculation will be performed in detail as a part of the water management permitting. If the property does import water from other areas,it will be required to continue importing that water and to contain it on site in addition to its own water management. So the idea that the development of this property will in somehow,some way flood other property is not only inconsistent with required regulations but is simply false and does not,pun intended,hold water. There was a petition provided with 118 signatures. That petition expresses significant concern with regard to traffic on Napa Woods Way.Of the 118 signatures, 103 of them were before our neighborhood information meeting. Fifteen were after. None of them occurred after the site plan was changed moving access to Pine Ridge Road. I encourage you to look at the cover sheet of that petition. I would put to this board that the basis for Page 27 of 49 September 17,2015 that being--and Mr.Reischl's putting it up. The basis for this petition focuses almost primarily,if not singularly,on traffic through a residential area. So,yes,we agree. We moved the access,so all 118 signatures,based on this basis,are getting what they're looking for with regard to traffic. We have no trips coming through Napa Woods Way. We have no trips on Napa Boulevard. We simply are turning in and out of a six-lane roadway into our site. Our access is some 500 feet to the east of Napa Boulevard. We are including a deceleration lane,and the majority of our trips will be at a time when the roadways are at some of their lightest traffic,which is Saturday mornings. Our traffic study was taken on May 10th,2015,between 9:30 in the morning and 12:30. We could have taken it earlier had we known the Transportation Department would request it. But since our access was coming through Napa Boulevard at the traffic signal,it was not required until we moved the access to Pine Ridge Road. And we took the traffic counts in what is called shoulder season. Probably through Easter its probably peak season. Going into about May 15th is shoulder. So we would expect traffic might be a little bit worse than that during season,but not a lot. I found it interesting that--the discussion of the 1998 minutes and records from the hearing on Dr. Pefa's site. Prior to accepting Summit Church as a client,I reviewed those minutes. I wanted to make sure that anything that I had said or pushed for was not inconsistent with the request before you today. One of the things that is being mistakenly repeated over and over and over today is that Summit Church is a conditional use--Pm sorry--is a commercial use. Churches are not commercial uses. They're not classified as such. They're not valued as such. They're not appraised as such.Their overall average daily traffic is substantially lower than even 12,000 square feet of medical. They are off-peak uses. They,in essence,are quiet and dark the vast majority of the time. So to say that a desire in 1998 to ensure that a Comprehensive Plan amendment that was redesignating an estates zoned property to a commercial use and that a concern that we don't continue to have commercial uses on down the line on Pine Ridge Road is somehow inconsistent with this application is false. Conditional uses were permitted on estates zoned property in 1998. This property could have come in asking for a church in 1998. And in 2003 it got a little bit tougher to locate a church in the Estates. Because churches were being located in a various—a variety of areas in the Estates,a citizen committee took a look at that language and made further refinements. The refinements that citizen committee made,which was adopted as a Comp Plan amendment in Ordinance 03-44 in 2003,further limited the location of churches as conditional uses to properties that are bordered on one side by commercial and one side by residential,and that language specifically states that you cannot use an existing commercial or existing,excuse me,church site as the basis for requesting another church site. So if this church goes in,the conditions in 2015 are the same as they were in 1998 in that,as Ms. Lane stated on the record immediately following the comments that some folks so want to put out there as a conflict,the following: Pm saying--and this is Ms.Lane--they can come in and request it,and the Board or someone's going to have to take the stand that this next one we're going to say no. And I quote,we're not going to amend the Comp Plan to allow that This is not a Comp Plan amendment As a matter of fact,the Comp Plan was amended specifically to target properties such as this as being appropriate for transitional uses. So the request before you today is entirely consistent with your Growth Management Plan and not altogether inconsistent with the comments in 1998 that talk about commercial creep. There's also a statement unsubstantiated that there are negotiations with the property owner to the east. That also is entirely false. This board heard at one time a church expansion project on U.S.41 called Covenant Presbyterian. There were significant concerns about traffic and impact of traffic. And Covenant Presbyterian lies on a street network that is directly connected to residential communities. Pll hold out to you that Covenant Presbyterian not only has been a good neighbor,but the concerns and fears have not been founded about it destroying the neighborhood. In fact,I hear a lot of compliments about the operation of Covenant and how their new building Page 28 of 49 September 17,2015 actually promoted compatibility. I understand fear of the unknown. We all do.But there's no evidence,there's no record that's been created that says a church destroys neighbors,particularly a church that has access on a six-lane arterial roadway,doesn't put a single trip on a residential street and,if planned appropriately,will be all but invisible from someone walking their dog along Napa Woods Way. The church went forward with this project as churches are wanting to do. They have faith. They have faith on decisions based in the facts. I hold that same faith,and I believe that if there are matters that can be undertaken to further address compatibility,my client stands ready,willing,and able to address those issues today or at any time in the future. And I thank you for the time to provide additional comments. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Tim,some comments to your comments. When you said that you're not changing the Comp Plan in response to the statement made in 1998 that there would be no Comp Plan f, changes that would be more or less affecting this,yes,there was. I was chairman of the committee in 2000 to 2001 that put the changes through that you—you made the comment about in 2004. And we did change the Comp Plan,so the Comp Plan did change in relationship to that statement made in 1998. Also,the transitional—the commercial—the C-1/T was established,and I'll read the ordinance, 92-73. The C-1/T commercial/professional transitional district is intended to apply to those areas that are transitional located between areas of higher and lower intensity development that are no longer appropriate for residential development. The uses in this district are intended as an alternative to retail and meet the intent of the C-1/T commercial professional transitional district It certainly seems to indicate that the transition to residential is intended to be this particular property. And I understand your argument about the Golden Gate Master Plan,and I saw where comprehensive staff weighed in on that. I would—I'm trying to be tactful. I would suggest that they don't have as much information about the intention of that plan as I do. And Pm not certain that what they've come up with is an accurate interpretation of what we intended in those days that that was put together. But that's all I needed to say on that matter. I just wanted to make that statement,so... Other than that,thank you,Tim. I'll see if we have any other comments from the Planning Commission. (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. With that,we'll close the public hearing,and we'll entertain a motion. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Excuse me. I do have one question. Is there more property on Pine Ridge between there and Napa Woods Lane for sale that you know of, or is it just all homes all the way down from there on? MR.HANCOCK: It's a mix of homes and vacant lots,but this is the only property that would qualify for transitional conditional use. The balance of the properties,because there's no other commercial on Pine Ridge Road,would allow the adjacent property to even request a conditional use. This is the only one. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. With that,we will go into more discussion. Thank you,Tim. Does anybody on this board have any discussions,any comments,or does someone know where they'd like to go with this? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,if you all are going to be quiet,then I'll—I normally strive for compromise and,Tim,I met with you,and I have great respect for the church that you represent or that was--that you're here for today. And yesterday I told you if we could find a compromise,I had a lot of ideas to provide to you,depending on how the neighborhood reacted to it. I haven't heard a positive reaction today from the neighborhood. I'm an Estates resident myself and,as I told you yesterday and days past,I would have welcomed a church near to my home because they seem to be,at the time,great neighbors. But churches,like gas stations,have changed in what they do and how they affect parties. Page 29 of 49 September 17,2015 We know that gas stations have gotten to be much,much larger and much more active,and so have churches,and thafs not bad for churches. They do--I mean,their services to the community are phenomenal,but they may not work in all neighborhoods. And I have to respect the people that have spoke today in concern for the neighborhood because I live in a neighborhood,and Pd be just as concerned without adequate protection from some of the churches that could go in there. I don't know how to get yours to a point where ifs more acceptable to that neighborhood. I offered to you yesterday that if you needed more time to try to do that,Pd more than welcome that.The best solution to anything is a compromise that works for all parties. Rarely does this board turn something down without stipulating a compromise. But I don't know how to get there today,Tim.I'm just not there. I've heard a lot—I know that our country is wrought with politicians who say things,and nothing turns out the way they say it. And maybe ifs time we started acknowledging and sticking by commitments made by political parties at a certain time and date,which is what happened in 1998. If the neighborhood was convinced that this could be a compatible asset to the neighborhood,it might be easier to understand. But at this point,Pm still concerned about it,as I was yesterday and as we talked. And I know you went to great lengths to provide a lot of compatibility standards to increase the compatibility need for this church,but the mere fact that the church is more intense than the property next door confuses the issue of transitional,and I just can't get there with what we've got on the record today. So that's where Pm coming from. Stan? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Yeah,thafs my only comment. The site appears to be more intense than--every time a church comes in here,no offense to the people in Golden Gate,but the people in Golden Gate show up and say we don't want a church in our neighborhood. I don't understand that. Like Tim said,they're very quiet,nice neighbors. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,they used to be. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: But--well,they used to be. And I can't think of one that isn't. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The— COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I've got two of them that have—I've gotten complaints about that Pm just shocked at what I've learned,so... COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: But the site does look very intense compared to the Pefa site next door just,you know,based off your plan. So I'm kind of leaning with Mark right now. MR.HANCOCK: Commissioner,if I may? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sure. MR.HANCOCK: And,obviously,a denial here today,we could move forward to the Board and take our chances. That's not our preference. I don't know that reaching out to the folks in the community is going to bear any fruit. I don't know how to deal with"we just simply don't want you." We can put up bigger buffers. We can do more landscaping. We can change access. We can reduce the number of seats. We can reduce the footprint. All of those things are possibilities,but you need someone on the other side who is at least willing to sit down and discuss those possibilities with you. And our attempts to reach out and ask for that open communication,we just don't have anybody who wants to talk to us. And so,you know,obviously,getting a denial here today is not our desire. I haven't heard anyone who wants to discuss anything with us. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You know,Tim,you did say something about the petition,and you made the comment that—the signatures on the petition was received prior to the new plan,and you haven't received any signatures--or you haven't—you don't know of any signatures on the petition that are after the new plan. And I don't know how many people here today realize the plan that was discussed today,because Page 30 of 49 September 17,2015 some of the compatibility standards you put on the table were newer. Fm not trying to get your hope up falsely,but I'm grasping at straws trying to figure out a compromise that might work,and I don't know how to get there with this one. I honestly don't. And I think this board has always gone to the'nth degree to try to find solutions to every application that's come before us that somehow we can get two properties that aren't on the same page,two groups,and somehow get them closer. I don't know how to do that with what I've heard today. If you want to—if you want time to try again,you're more than welcome to it. And I just would have to hope we'd see different results and different reactions when it would come back then.But at this point,I don't know what else to do. MR.HANCOCK: At this point,Pd rather request a continuance and take a look at some of the matters that have been raised today that have not been addressed or that the residents have not had a chance to even consider or look at. Can we do more? I think you can always do more. So Pd rather have an opportunity to take a look at it and see if there's some things we can do to address the intensity of the site. Are there things we can do to bring a little more green space into the site and a little less,you know,asphalt parking? I heard that as a concern. Can the footprint or the total size of the building be refused and still achieve,you know,the goal of what we want to do? That may be,as well,a possibility. And can we address the issue--when you say more intensive,let's look at the full spectrum and let's see,are we really more intensive than a 12,000-square-foot medical operation next door? If so,then we're not transitional. I would agree with you. But if we're not-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The word--and I think the determination of a definition of intensive is where it starts to fall apart. I mean,you look at it from a zoning aspect,but you also need to look at it from the physical attributes of both the site that it's built on and the site you're proposing.That may have some impact on how intensity is determined. And,Tim,I don't know what the rest of this board feels about it. If you want to continue,I don't have a problem with that. I would hope that if that happens,I plead with the neighbors to approach it with an open mind and just listen and see if it's something that will work for you,and come back and let us know. That's where ifs—that gets it to the end point. I don't know how else to do at this point. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes,can I? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sure. Go ahead,Diane. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Tim,Fm glad that you did ask for a continuance on this. We just had something similar to this two weeks ago on Immokalee Road,which is Golden Gate Estates on one side and commercial and homes on the other side,just like this. They showed you a picture,in fact,with St.Monica's Church. That happens to be one of four churches on that road. It was going to be a 40,000-square-foot medical office building. They did have several meetings with the neighbors,and they all concluded that they were for it as long as there was a nice,large wall on the southern border and that there were trees aligning it and so you wouldn't be able to see anything. Again,there was no access to Autumn Woods Lane. Everything was on and off Immokalee Road. So if you could get together with these people and see,as long as there was a barrier on the other street,the people did not have a problem. MR HANCOCK: We may also be able to address some of the unknowns,such as architecture and those types of things that,really,in a zoning action you're not necessarily prepared to detail.But that was raised as something today that--you know,that I think we can have some impact on. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,when zoning actions have objectors,many times,as you know from when you were a commissioner and since you've been in your professional planning,you've come in with architectural detail to try to help soften the concerns that were expressed. That might be a good point to look at. MR.HANCOCK: Through a continuance,we'll have the opportunity to do that. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: And can you bring back an exhibit that shows how much Page 31 of 49 September 17,2015 landscape you're going to have in the parking lot? Because when I look at the Pete site next to you,I see a lot of trees in the parking lot. But your site,you know,it looks bad because you don't see that.It doesn't look vegetated. But I know when you're done,you're going to have all this vegetation,and it might just soften the look of it. MR.HANCOCK: With all due deference to my good engineering friends,they don't draw the prettiest plans. So,yes,sir,we certainly can have something more graphically accurate than the line drawing in your packet. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I think a discussion with the neighborhood on what programs you are proposing for this location. I can tell you,many of the other churches that have come to us had not needed seven-day-a week hours of operation such as you're proposing. You might want to look at that a little closer. That's about all I can-- COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Even God took a day off. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Yeah,I have one thing,Mr.Chairman. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead,Charlette. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: And also,Tim,I would favor a project that showed a preserve much like we discussed with the understory plants,and if you could come back and bring a diagram of how you plan to approach that so that the residents could also understand what they're getting. MR.HANCOCK: We'll be happy to do so. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So you've requested a continuance. Do you have a date specific that you want to continue to? Remember you'd have to have something prepared to staff and distributed,so that's not going to happen too quickly. MR.HANCOCK: Something in the area of four weeks would give us at least two weeks to work on these types of issues with the residents that are willing to sit down with us,and then we can have something to staff in time. Does that work from-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's October 22nd? MR.REISCHL: October 15th. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Fifteenth,I'm sorry.Twenty-second is my other meeting. MR.HANCOCK: When would we have to have things to you in order for that date to occur? MR.REISCHL: November 5th would work better for our review. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I was going to suggest;we have a difficult meeting already scheduled for October 15th. We already know how difficult that meeting's going to be. So I would suggest maybe,Tim, could you attempt--would November work for you? MR.HANCOCK: Yes,sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Is there any problems with the County Attorney's Office, November? MS.ASHTON-CICKO: I'm trying to count weeks. COMMISSIONER EBERT: They might have to readvertise. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I don't know;yeah. MS.ASHTON-CICKO: You said November? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: What's the date,November 5th? MR.REISCHL: November 5th. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: November 5th. MS.ASHTON-CICKO: I'm counting that as seven weeks,so ifs too long. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You need the mike,Heidi. MS.ASHTON-CICKO: That's too long. It's seven weeks. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,if we schedule it for the 15th and then potentially continue it,or is that still too long? MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Yeah. If they're not ready by the 15th,then you can continue it again. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,why don't we schedule it for the 15th with the intention of continuing it to the November meeting. That way it keeps the advertising in place,and we can let everybody know now that we're looking at the November 5th date.Monitor the October 15th meeting. And if anybody wants to Page 32 of 49 September 17,2015 call the county office,Fred,what's your phone number? MR.REISCHL: 252-4211;252-4211. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Fred Reischl is the planner. He'll be monitoring the schedule. With that,is there a motion to continue? COMMISSIONER EBERT: I make a motion to continue this presentation. Do you want the number? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Please. COMMISSIONER EBERT: CU PL201400000543,the Summit Church conditional use. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: To the October 15th meeting? COMMISSIONER EBERT: To the October 15th Planning Commission meeting. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Heidi? MS.ASHTON-CICKO: And I'd recommend that you continue it to that date. Some other items could get dropped or moved. You don't really know. And if they're ready,hear it,if they're not ready,then continue it again. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. We just want to make sure—those people in the neighborhood who filled out the speaker slips,Fred will make sure that you're—and,Fred,for those that have,if you--did they put email addresses on those slips? MR.REISCHL: No. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Phone numbers? MR.REISCIIL: No;addresses. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. If you have someone in your community that's central to the contact person that we can notify as this approaches so that you don't miss an opportunity to address us again,we want to make sure we do that. And I think one gentleman--I think the gentleman standing up,didn't you say you represent the neighborhood? Someone did when they started;the first speaker this morning. MR.PEREZ: Possibly,yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Would you mind getting together with Mr.Reischl after the—whenever you can and provide him with some contact information? MR.PEREZ: Yes,sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you very much. Okay. With that,there's been a motion made to continue to the October 15th meeting. All those in favor,signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I'll second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh,I'm sorry. Seconded by Stan. I forgot there wasn't a second. Thank you,Stan. All those in favor,signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 5-0. Thank you. MR HANCOCK: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: ***Okay. The next item up is our last hearing item for today. It's PUDA PL20140002683. That's the Royal Palm International Academy Planned Unit Development,PUD. I'll wait for the room to clear a little bit.All those wishing to testify on behalf of this item,please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) Page 33 of 49 September 17,2015 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Disclosures on the part of the Planning Commission. We'll start with Tom at my far right. MR EASTMAN: I spoke briefly with Mr.Yovanovich for a clarification this morning. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Stan? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: And I spoke briefly Mr.Yovanovich. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We'll get Diane's when she comes back. I spoke with staff,Mr.Yovanovich. I think that's all on this matter and,of course,reviewed all the documents. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I spoke to Mr.Yovanovich. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And,Charlene? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Yes,I spoke with Rich Yovanovich and staff. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. With that,Richard,it's all yours. Sir,if you don't mind sitting down. We can't hear over your discussions. You'll have an opportunity to talk in a little while. Thank you. MR.YOVANOVICH: Good morning. For the record,Rich Yovanovich on behalf of the petitioner. I have a lot of people with me here today. Hopefully we won't have to hear from anyone. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You only needed one. He's sitting there,right there in the aisle.Mr.Banks. He's a jack-of-all-trades lately. MR.YOVANOVICH: I saved him for last. Yeah,Mike Hunnican and Pat Butler from Pulte;Alexis Crespo and Brendan Sloan from Waldrop Engineering,Jim Banks,who is the utility infielder for our team who will testify to traffic and anything else you need him to testify to;and Craig Smith who will testify regarding environmental issues. The petition before you is an amendment to the Royal Palm Academy PUD. I've put on the visualizer an aerial. The yellow outline is the existing Royal Palm Academy PUD,which is basically on Livingston Road north of Immokalee Road and a little south of Veterans Memorial Boulevard. Outlined in red is the 15 acres we're going to add to the PUD. The PUD is currently 163 acres,and we're going to 178 acres,and we're going from 550 units to 660 units. There's a history to the Royal Palm Academy PUD and access-related issues between the Royal Palm Academy PUD,the Brandon PUD and,ultimately,this piece of property that's being added to the Royal Palm Academy as well as some properties to the north. If you will—if you-all recall,when we came forward last year with the Brandon PUD,which is in this area right here,there was a question about access to not only this piece,which is owned by Center Point Church,but properties up here that are multiple property owners broken down into different ownership. They're all about five-acre pieces. I forget cumulatively how many acres it was. But one of the things that was agreed to as part of the Brandon PUD was to provide for access. MR.REISCHL: BIow it up. MR.YOVANOVICH: No. I think you want to--I think it will be okay,Fred. This is the 15 acres we're talking about adding to the PUD. That was the church property at the time. There was--as part of the Royal Palm Academy and specifically the Verona Pointe plat,there is a platted public utility easement that goes on and off in this direction right here on our master plan that was intended to provide access to the church property. As part of the Brandon PUD,we agreed to give a tenth of an acre from the preserve of Brandon PUD because at that time it was believed that in order for this access to work,you might have to impact a piece of the Brandon preserve. We don't need to do that,so that one-tenth of an acre easement that's already in place to serve the church is not necessary for that access. Likewise--do we have an exhibit? Thank you.This is the Brandon PUD over here. Likewise,there was also an access easement provided along this roadway within the Brandon project to provide access to properties to the north,and those properties to the north would come through the church property to get access to this cul-de-sac in the Brandon PUD,and the church committed,as part of the Brandon PUD hearing process,to allow for those property owners to come through its property to get access to that cul-de-sac. Page 34 of 49 September 17,2015 This is a blow-up,obviously,of what is on our master plan which probably you can't really determine when you look at those words in our PUD master plan that say"future vehicular interconnect." That is what I just showed you in a bigger detail as to how that future vehicular interconnection will occur for those properties that are to the north,which is up here on the aerial. So we are addressing,as we committed to,or the church committed to,the ability for properties to the north to have access through the church property so that they at some point will have access to Livingston Road. One of the access concerns that came up—and I spoke to Sarah Spector yesterday about the Verona Pointe parcel,and that is the platted access that we will connect to when we add this property to the PUD. And we committed to,any improvements related to using that public access utility would be 100 percent on my client's dime as well as any future maintenance for the actual connection. That's how it will all work through the existing public access easement. So all of the improvements necessary within the public access easement would be paid for and maintained 100 percent at my client's expense as well as there would be a shared pro rata responsibility for any costs related to that shared use of Ravina Way,I think it's called. We committed that before we get to the Board of County Commissioners in a few weeks we would put this to paper and come up with a maintenance agreement to put in place. And I committed to Sarah that if I didn't get our summary correct,she could obviously come up and point out where I may have missed it. But I hope I summarized that correctly with purposes of the interconnection. It's a pretty self-explanatory and,I think,rather easy amendment to the PUD. We're just adding another R tract to the property with the same development standards that previously existed in the PUD. We did revise and—over the last day or so revise what is Paragraph 6.5(D)in the PUD which was how we were going to verbally address the interconnection to the north. I have not had a chance to share this with staff. I was in Sarasota all day yesterday,so I didn't get to see it till yesterday late in the evening. The yellow is the change that was previously there. Previously we had basically cut and paste the previous language in the Brandon PUD limiting the size of the access area to a tenth of an acre,and that 20-foot width was not correct. So we struck that line to make sure that we're not in any way improperly limiting that connection to the north. Like the Brandon PUD,we would expect the neighbors to the north to come to us when they're ready to use that access point and enter into an appropriate agreement to use that access area,and they will also need to reach an agreement with the Brandon PUD individuals as well as provided for in the Brandon PUD. So hopefully that change clarifies any concern about the width of the easement as well as the overall acreage size of the easement. There is only one area,I believe,of the staff report that we don't agree with. The Royal Palm Academy was approved many years ago,and in that PUD document already exists a requirement to only build a sidewalk on one side of the street.Staff is recommending—I think it's comprehensive planning staff is recommending that that deviation not apply to this 15-acre piece. I don't believe that is how it has ever been applied in the past if you already have a deviation in a PUD. I don't recall an instance where it was not applied to acreage added to the PUD. But even if you were going to try to do that,this is such a small 50-unit subdivision,I clearly believe it is overkill to require sidewalks on both sides of the street for a gated subdivision containing a maximum of 50 units,but we believe the deviation should apply to us anyway. That's,overall,a summary of what we're proposing to do. Obviously if you have any questions, we're happy to answer them,and that concludes our presentation. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Questions of the Planning Commission. Diane? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes,I have one. Is this not a plan amendment,a PUDA? MR.YOVANOVICH: Yes. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. So that opens it up? MR.YOVANOVICH: Of course. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. Just so that we have that straight. This,in reading the information—and I remember the Royal Palm Academy before,and Brandon. Page 35 of 49 September 17,2015 This is--this is in no way going to be connected to the Pulte Homes across the street;is that correct? So this is completely separate? MR.YOVANOVICH: Correct. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. If this is a plan amendment and is being opened up,ifs going to be an area of its own,although I understand there will be no clubhouses. MR.YOVANOVICH: Correct COMMISSIONER EBERT: So it's just going to be a gated community,period. That's where the sidewalks come in where it can be on both sides because it has nothing to do with the other communities,my feeling on it anyway. I just wanted you to know that The other thing I'm going to ask you about is the connection to the north,these other properties. How many--do you know how many other properties—besides where the church was,how many other properties are to the north of this? MR.YOVANOVICH: I want to say five,but I don't remember if that is correct. I think there were four 20-acre parcels that had agreed to share an access and one five-acre parcel—and let me put the Brandon master plan up to better show you how that all was going to work. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. Thank you. MR.YOVANOVICH: If you see this arrow on the cul-de-sac-- COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes. MR.YOVANOVICH: —that was--that's to be the access point for this grouping of properties,and I believe that's 20 acres. This person right here,which I believe is five acres,did not agree to work with the other property owners,so Brandon provided that person an accesses point as well. All of them were properly notified under the Brandon PUD regarding Brandon got all of its approvals. You have that period of time to go forth and request that connection,whether that's--anybody has or hasn't,I don't know. But where I showed you the alignment,this is the 20 acres that will come down through—this is basically the property line for the church to get to this cul-de-sac right here. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. Are they still going to use that one--so there was nothing—Richard,there was nothing to the north way up far north where the R's come around? There was nothing up there where people could get to their property from the north? MR.YOVANOVICH: If you'll recall,Mr.Carmonie(phonetic),who's here—we're adjacent to an FP&L easement. So they were asserting that they had no ability to go north to get to Veterans Memorial and that their only way to get out,at that time they were claiming,was through the Brandon PUD. The church,likewise,argued that their only way to get out was through the Brandon PUD,if you remember,because they were concerned about this preserve,and that's why we gave them the tenth of the acre to make the alignment work. Obviously,that tenth of an acre is not necessary anymore,so the church does have its way out through what was always planned for as part of the Royal Palm Academy PUD for properties to the north to come through this point right here to get to the Ight COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. Because I remember back then it was—there was a lot of questions,you know,at the time of the Brandon PUD. So you will be coming out south? MR YOVANOVICH: That's how we're--whoops.That is how we will be coming out So we will come out of our project connecting to Ravina Way,as always contemplated,and can go north/south at that point. Correct? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. Which is Verona Pointe then. MR.YOVANOVICH: Verona Pointe. We're going to come out through Verona Pointe. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'd like to ask the Planning Commission what they want to do about a lunch break. This one's--there's not very many people who are going to speak on this,so we could move through Page 36 of 49 September 17,2015 it if we didn't want to take a full lunch break. COMMISSIONER HOMLAK: Move through it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,right,but there's a little caveat. COMMISSIONER EBERT: We have one caveat. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Stan is going to leave in a few minutes. That leaves four of us,and that's okay. We can still continue,but—I'm sorry? MR.REISCHL: Three speakers. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. That's not like 12,so that works. We have three speakers. We have to finish with the questions from the applicant's professionals and stuff like that. Stan could come back after lunch if we took a lunch break. We've probably got,based on three speakers,45 minutes to an hour to finish up. We could finish up maybe by 1 o'clock,or we could take a break and come back at 1:00,because Stan's going to leave anyway. Rich,do you have any preference from your perspective of losing one of our members? MR YOVANOVICH: I would hate to keep you-all through lunch if—let me rephrase that. I would hate to not work through lunch if that's the preference of the Board. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Based on a number of speakers,I'd just as soon we took lunch and come back at one o'clock. I know Karen's already expressed she'd just like to— COMMISSIONER ROMAN: I'd prefer to work through it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay,two. Diane? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Doesn't matter. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Stan can't,so it's a tie.I don't mind working through it then. We'll just go that route. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I'll just come back for my stuff CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,there might not be anybody here,but we should be close to that time wrapping up,so-- COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Don't throw it away. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Mr.Chair,if we just take a break,that would be nice. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Let's take a break till 10 after 12 and come back and resume at that time. (A brief recess was had,and Commissioner Chrzanowski was absent for the remainder of the meeting.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Everybody welcome back from the break. We're going to move forward with this current hearing. We left off with discussions between the applicant's representative and the Comnussion. Diane,did you finish all your discussion? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Does anybody else have anything else they'd like to ask the applicants at this point? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: I have one question. If we could go back to the diagram that was on before this one. It was a line diagram. Yeah,it was the one just right underneath. MR.YOVANOVICH: This one? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Yeah,Rich,right there. And we—towards the western edge where the preserve is—there,yes—there's a black line if you see it in the lower left-hand—yeah,that black line. Is that where you've extended the preserve to meet that end,or what is that? MR.YOVANOVICH: If you will--and I--go back to the Brandon-- COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Okay. MR.YOVANOVICH: —PUD master plan,that's a retaining wall for the road But just so—I'm 100 percent today,for the record. In the Brandon PUD,there was a concern that a sliver of this preserve would have to be impacted to create this curve. So what you're seeing here is the Brandon PUD preserve. Page 37 of 49 September 17,2015 COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Okay. MR.YOVANOVICH: We're not impacting the Brandon PUD preserve as was originally thought would have to happen as part of this project. So hopefully that doesn't confuse you,but that is—we're outside of the Brandon preserve. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: But that preserve that you're showing there is the one that's on this particular project. MR YOVANOVICH: Am I right? Are you sure?Oh,I apologize. You are right. I was just--I was incorrectly oriented. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Record that. MR.YOVANOVICH: It is recorded. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Video it;video it. MR.YOVANOVICH: You are correct,and that's a retaining wall. I was incorrectly oriented. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: So this is your preserve,one of your preserves that you're showing. MR.YOVANOVICH: And it matches up with the Brandon preserve— COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Preserve on the other. MR.YOVANOVICH: --on the other side. That's where I got myself confused. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Is that-- MR.YOVANOVICH: This will make it better for you. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: It shows the contiguous preserve. MR.YOVANOVICH: Back to 100 percent. Yes. You see how that lines up and where I got myself mixed up. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Okay. Because my question had to do with one of the items from the environmental perspective where the county does not require you to relocate the butterfly orchids on the property;however,where you're planning to put the majority of your residential units,that's were the highest population of the butterfly orchids are. And I was just looking at seeing if they can't be relocated,at least some of them,rather than just destroyed. MR.SMITH: For the record,my name is Craig Smith with Dex Bender&Associates, environmental consultant. The majority of the butterfly orchids we saw out there are about that big(indicating). They were fresh sprouts primarily on Brazilian pepper.There are--per the code,I understand,if you have those species represented in the preserves,that you do not have to relocate them. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Oh,I understand that.But you noted 19— MR.SMITH: Yes. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: —plants. MR. SMITH: Yes. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: And in the preserve itself there's only five. I was just asking if there were opportunities to relocate some of them,if you would consider that. MR SMITH: I'd have to talk to the client about that. They are so small I think you'd have a hard time removing them from the pepper that they're growing on to attach them to something else. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Sure. But there might be some bigger ones,too. MR. SMITH: There were a few larger ones,but from my recollection they were all very small with only one or two pseudobulbs. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Did you have anything else,CharIette? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: No,none. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else have any questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I think now two things should happen. Number one,Diane,you didn't—you were gone when we did disclosure on this one.Do you want to provide any? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes. I only spoke with staff on this. Page 38 of 49 September 17,2015 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And I need to supplement mine. When I met with Richard,Alexis and two gentlemen from maybe—yeah,two gentlemen from the applicant's project were with him as well, so... And then during break I talked to Heidi for a minute,and she had wanted to discuss the language that was presented in regards to the interconnection. So,Heidi,is this convenient? MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Sure. My comments to that are they need to make a couple changes. One is they've got the reference to the wrong PUD. Second is that they're talking about putting this accessway through the conservation easement,so all that reference to the conservation easement and area in the proposed language needs to be deleted. And I would ask that since they know what the area's going to look like,because they've got it shown up there,if they could put that on the master plan to show the location of the access easement,because it's not technically in the northwest corner. So we could delete that language and just reference the shaded-in section on the master plan. And that covers it all. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there any problem from the applicant's side? MR.YOVANOVICH: No problem. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you,Heidi. So your language that you provided would have to be repaired to coincide with Heidi's recommendations. MR YOVANOVICH: Yeah. And I'm sure we can work through that with Heidi. We always have. MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I think that's fine.That will work. Any other questions? If not,I have a handful. There are three staff recommendations.The third one I know that you're not on the same page. How about the first one? I believe it's accomplished,but if it isn't, then someone needs to tell me that it isn't. MR REISCHL: Staff believes that it is. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So the first one's not necessary either because it's already--ifs on the master plan as requested. The second one—what was the intent of the second one? I mean,I read it but it says—I hate language that says to the maximum extent feasible. That's really an open-ended description.I mean,it could be--what you think is maximum could certainly be different than somebody else,and it's hard to defend that kind of language. MR.REISCHL: I believe that this was written—well,it was definitely before I saw the more detailed interconnect. And I don't think he knew that this was an interconnection from one PUD to the adjoining ag uses. I think that's where the confusion was. This--the interconnection that we're talking about-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We've got two interconnections. MR.REISCHL: --is from the Brandon. Oh. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We've got one to the south and one to the north. This refers to the one to the north. MR.REISCHL: That's my understanding. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR.REISCHL: And I believe it's the one from the Brandon,and they're using a small strip of Royal Palm to access the ag sites,and I don't think that was fully understood when this was written,so that,I think, is the genesis of that one. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So the language is still needed? MR.REISCHL: Not after—well,not to me. I didn't write this one. But after meeting two days ago, now I understand a whole lot better how the connection works,so Pm not confused anymore. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Just out of curiosity,who wrote this? MR.REISCHL: Corby Schmidt. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh,okay. I just thought it might have been more zoning. It's not—I was hoping--we've got Mike Sawyer back there,and he wrote a lot of stuff and passed it on. I thought,well, Page 39 of 49 September 17,2015 there he is. We can ask him. But—okay. So one and two are basically resolved to your satisfaction. Three is an issue that Diane had brought up. And so with that,I will move on to the rest of my questions and get past those,at least. And let me see what I've got. And the only one I had was the language for the interconnect.So I think we're in good shape,Rich,at least at this time. So with that,if there's no other questions of the applicant,we'll move to staff. MR.REISCHL: Fred Reischl,Zoning Division.With those clarifications,we continue to recommend approval. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. That's short and to the point. Anybody have any questions of staff? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If not,why don't we start calling our registered public speakers. If you'll come up and please use one of the microphones and identify yourself for the record. Go ahead,Diane. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Can I ask Transportation to come up,please? MR.YOVANOVICH: Not you. She needs her transportation. COMMISSIONER EBERT: The other transportation. MR.SAWYER: Good afternoon. Mike Sawyer,project manager,Transportation Planning. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Can you look at the No.3,the deviations for the sidewalks. You are using 2.15(C)on this. They're saying the language has not been modified. Can you kind of go into this a little bit,please. MR. SAWYER: Again,for the record,I did not do the transportation review on this particular petition;however,I—my opinion in this case would be that for this portion of the PUD it would be reasonable to expect to have sidewalks on both sides of the roadways where they're double loaded.You know,clearly there are a substantial portion of the roadways that are not double loaded in this case,and I don't think you'd necessarily need to warrant sidewalks on those roadways. But on the ones that are,in fact, double loaded,I think it would be reasonable to expect that you would have sidewalks on both sides. It should be reasonably easy to identify this portion of the PUD on the master plan and make sure that that clarification could be followed through for this particular portion of the development. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. So—well,I can't quite see the whole thing here,the whole 15 acres. So you are suggesting also—Transportation is also suggesting that where it's double loaded,have the double sidewalks;where it's not,the other,the single? MR.SAWYER: If I were reviewing this myself at this time,that would be my recommendation, yes. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. With that,Fred,would you call the public speakers,please. MR.REISCHL: The first speaker is Sarah Spector,followed by Frank Richards. MS.SPECTOR: Good afternoon. Sarah Spector with Becker&Poliokoff on behalf of the Verona Pointe Recreation Association. I just wanted to speak briefly.Mr.Yovanovich did correctly summarize what we had asked for with regard to the interconnect through Verona Pointe with regard to construction and maintenance. We would just request that—Mr.Yovanovich has also committed to working with us between now and the Board of County Commissioners'meeting to draw up the agreement that we spoke of regarding maintenance and construction on the off-chance that--and we're committed to doing so as well.On the off-chance it doesn't happen between now and the Board of County Commissioners'meeting,we would like that added to the ordinance. We'd be happy to take it out,at the time of the BOCC meeting,from the ordinance if we had the agreement in place at that time. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So you're looking to perfect an agreement before it gets to the Board of Page 40 of 49 September 17,2015 County Commissioners,simple as that? MS. SPECTOR Yes. And in the off-chance that it's not,we'd like the recommendation or language added to the ordinance requiring that agreement after its approved. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Richard,do you have any concern,or are you opposed to that,or do you feel comfortable with it? MR.YOVANOVICH: About putting it in the PUD and it coming out at the BOCC-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No,making it a stipulation so that it occurs between now and the time of the board meeting? MR.YOVANOVICH: No. I said it on the record. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Were good. We'll stipulate it. But you want it in the ordinance? MS.SPECTOR: If it doesn't happen between now and the BOCC. MR.YOVANOVICH: Well,the only way— CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,that's up to your argument in front of the Board more than it would be for us to try to put it in the ordinance right now. MS.SPECTOR That's fine. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If it doesn't happen,you'll have good grounds to talk to the Board about it, and you'll certainly have your opportunity to. MS.SPECTOR: Perfect. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So we will stipulate it as a request,but it won't be in the ordinance, and you'll deal with that if it doesn't happen by the time the board meeting occurs. MS.SPECTOR Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. MR.REISCHL: Frank Richards. MR.RICHARDS: I'd first like to start by thanking the Planning Commission for allowing me to speak. My name is Frank Richards. I am the president of the Verona Pointe Recreation Association. I have lived there as a resident since 2009. I have seen a lot of changes in the general area,and one of the changes that I've seen is the amount of families with children that are moving into the area. Okay. That area was pretty secluded at one time. There was only a couple of areas of housing which were not exactly in front of North Naples Middle School. And the newly(sic)school that was built,Veterans Memorial,only had a few beginning students with it. Right now they have made a lot of traffic as far as people wanting to be in that school system.My son is one of them. He went from Veterans to North Naples. Now he's a freshman in Gulf Coast.And the schooling system there and the teaching system there is overwhelmingly accepted by the parents 100 percent. With that being the case,different developments have gone up,and a lot more family-motivated people are moving into the housing in that general vicinity to be in that particular school district. The area that's a concern of mine is in the--is the entranceway towards Verona Pointe. This has been brought to my attention a few times,and I always had something to say in relation to ifs a traffic hazard. And they looked at me and said,why. I says,well,you only have one way in and one way out with Verona Pointe. Now you're looking to add another entrance point where the traffic from a different direction is going to be coming in and coming out,crossing what is the traffic for Verona Pointe. The schools there do not allow for busing.Because of the close proximity to the school,the children have to cross the street of a six-lane highway. And in the past,that was only a blinking light until the construction phase of Camden Lakes started to begin and also with Horton now and the firehouse. Ifs actually still a blinking left turn at that intersection, okay,which means the children have to cross the street at different times without the traffic knowing what the school hours are. There's no signs indicating blinking to slow traffic down to a certain speed limit,and the cars are coming across 50 to 60 miles an hour to beat the lights when they change. Okay. I see that as a hazard, especially since the children have to cross from Verona Pointe and,possibly this new development,they would have to cross also a six-lane highway. When the firehouse was being constructed,the side of the firehouse had a crosswalk,a sidewalk. Page 41 of 49 September 17,2015 That was closed up during the construction phase,and it made it almost virtually impossible for the children to cross the street because of the time differential between the elementary school and the middle school. The middle school starts at 9:00.The elementary school starts at 8:20,okay. Those blinking lights only occurred during the times of each. So they were trying to pass the light at Verona Pointe entrance to get past the light on Veterans Parkway. One child,while he was trying to cross the street,almost got hit by a car that went actually through a red light. The school provided at that time a sheriffs officer to stay in the ditch right near the intersection to try and slow up traffic with his lights in his vehicle,okay,but at no point in time was there ever a crossing guard, okay. Verona Pointe and Milano are the major--are the major factors for those schools to be in existence. There's over 1,000 people— 1,000 students in North Naples Middle School,and there's about 800 in Veterans Memorial. There's a great deal of children. Since then there was another development built and,from what I could see,there was another PUD ready to be made in perspective of across from the firehouse. Okay. That particular PUD is the Enclave PUD. They're looking to facilitate close to 3-to 400 units of retired people of 55 years of age,okay. And their access point is going to be on Learning Lane,such as Camden Lakes,okay. Camden Lakes actually comes on a school street,okay,and exits in and out to their properties,okay. I see Pulte went through a little bit of extreme to help that—prevent that problem from occurring from the people from Milano walking to school,so he made a designated spot right in the middle of the road where the car had to stop whether there was children or not coming,okay.They had to cross that street to get on the sidewalk to walk up to the school. Now,the other one,I don't know what stage they're in now,has made an effort to try and make that an exit point cutting through that sidewalk right at the end of the gate where you would enter North Naples Middle. As far as I'm concerned,the reason why you don't have about 130 people here is because Milano and Verona Pointe is a working-class community,okay. It's basically owned by mostly investors.The investors bought a lot of property up during the foreclosure period in 2008 and up to 2011. 1 transitioned with Pulte in 2011,and I have been the president there ever since. And I hate to tell you,but there was a lot of promises made about a lot of things that never reoccurred and never went through. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sir,I may have missed what you're trying to get to. What is the--what do you see is an issue that can be resolved here today? I understand the global perspective you're looking at and all that,but what's your suggestions? MR.RICHARDS: The major issue that I feel could be a potential problem is the safety of the children that have to use that intersection to cross the streets,okay,whether it be for the Veterans Memorial or North Naples Middle. They have to cross Livingston Road,which is a six-lane highway. And no one is making any provisions to modify the situation to where it would be a safety issue,okay. They're going through trying to say,well,they'll have this one come in through that way and this one come in through that way,but what they're doing at that intersection is making it a major traffic intersection, and that's my concern. And one of the reasons—I've tried to send a letter out to my community and,believe it or not,I never got any response because the basic owners of my community are investors,okay. I couldn't open that up to the renters that are there,okay,the way our bylaws read. So I made an effort to come here myself. The only other thing that I have to say is that when Pulte built Camden Lakes,there was an issue of water flow. I don't know if anybody on the Board was involved with that particular situation. That was supposed to be Royal Palm Academy school,okay. That was supposed to facilitate a church,maybe a possibly first grade to college level or high school Ievel as far as in the Catholic religion. For some reason,it did not work out. Pulte turned around and bought the property back from Royal Palm and made it Camden Lakes. When they first started that construction,there was a water problem with the rainage(sic).The Page 42 of 49 September 17,2015 county came in and made them build a trench around the whole entire property to have the waterflow come in. Now,that waterflow comes into Livingston Street,from what I could see,when it built up,crosses over to these three large pipes that are facing this particular section here where they're going to be cutting into the area where they're going to use the easement. Now,that—when you look on the map,you don't see it here,but they're talking about making an entrance and exit on a piece of property that's maybe 25 feet long,okay,and I can't see how that's going to work. That come--the exiting traffic from Verona Pointe comes through a gate where there's a 9-foot wall before they get past the gate where they wouldn't be able to see the oncoming traffic to go into the place. It does not look like it would really facilitate the amount of traffic flow that's going to be in that easement area,okay. And also in that easement area there's an 8-foot drop to facilitate the water flow. Now, if they have to go through that 8-foot drop,they naturally have to raise the property up,okay,to handle the road.They can't make it go over the swell,and that seems to make me feel that that waterflow will go right down our Ravina Way and come into our community,let alone the back of the community as well,because we butt up to that property with all the lanais of the people that are on that side of the property line. So that's basically my concerns and,you know,I wasn't able to get a petition. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Have you talked to the Transportation Department or the school system about your concerns with the traffic? MR.RICHARDS: Yes. I went to the other building,at one time the zoning or the another board on Horseshoe Drive,and I explained the situation to the gentleman that was there at that particular time,and I don't believe Pulte was the one that was involved,if he's involved. I still don't know who's buying the property,okay. At that time there was another person that was trying to buy the church and--property,and he turned around,looked at the situation,and decided not to purchase. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you. Anybody have any questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you,sir. MR.RICHARDS: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mike? That gentleman's a registered speaker,so we've got some information.Could you take a look into the issues he's raised with that cross interchange or intersection between Ravina Way and what's across the street and see if any improvements are needed. MR.SAWYER: Again,for the record,Mike Sawyer,project manager,Transportation Planning. We'd be happy to do that,Chairman. We do meet with traffic operations on a weekly basis,so it would be quite easy for us to both follow up with the discussion with them— CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. MR.SAWYER: --and then follow up with the gentleman. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If the gentleman's concerns are validated by the warrants or whatever's needed for the situation there,we need to acknowledge it,and so-- MR.SAWYER: We can definitely have it studied. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: —why don't we take a look at it and follow up. Okay. Thank you,Mike. MR. SAWYER: No problem. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Appreciate it. Anybody else? Are there any other public speakers,Fred? MR.REISCHL: No other registered public speakers. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Anybody from the public who has not spoken wish to address the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. With that,we'll move to rebuttal by the applicant,to whatever extent the applicant would like. Could you back that off enough so we could see the whole plan. MR.YOVANOVICH: It's too—I don't think it's all going to fit,but rll move it along. Page 43 of 49 September 17,2015 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It will. MR.YOVANOVICH: Will it? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Keep backing it off. Make it smaller. There you go. MR.YOVANOVICH: Now,if I'd have put that up there on that size originally,you would said to me-- COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Can you zoom in? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,Pm trying to understand—Pm trying to understand Diane's concern that we have sidewalks on both sides of the street where ifs double loaded. MR.YOVANOVICH: Well,here's my— CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You don't have a double-loaded project. MR.YOVANOVICH: No,but what I want—I just want you to know,we don't have double loaded, but we also intend--because I know nobody believes me when I say this,but people who buy these lots don't want the sidewalk on their property. So we're putting our sidewalk on the single-loaded street on the other side of the street So these people are going to have to walk 24 feet of pavement to get to the sidewalk. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,wait a minute. Why would you do that? MR.YOVANOVICH: Because the people don't like the sidewalk in their front yard. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,I bet if every project in the county put sidewalks in their front yard, they'd have to take what they wanted to live here,wouldn't they? MR.YOVANOVICH: Well,Mr.Strain,the-- COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I don't like it. I looked all over for a house without a sidewalk in the front yard. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh,well. You're--okay. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: rm what? rm what? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You're one of those rare individuals that Richard keeps talking about. MR.YOVANOVICH: But,Mr.Strain,I don't like sidewalks either. I live in a community that doesn't have any. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But,see,you're forcing everybody to walk across the street to get to a sidewalk. MR.YOVANOVICH: Mr. Strain,you've heard me say this 100 times,if you can't walk across the street on a 50-unit or smaller subdivision to get to the sidewalk,you're not going to go on the sidewalk in front of your house. This is--we are doing a sidewalk in a community that is low,low density with no through traffic. It's a gated community. We are simply making people walk across the 24 feet of pavement to get to the sidewalk if they want to and respect their wishes to not have people walking in their front yard with or without their dogs and the like. So I think this makes a lot of sense. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: You touched on something with the dogs and the curbing the dogs. MR.YOVANOVICH: Right So I think we are being more than reasonable in this layout on such a low level intensity project that originally was approved with the deviation in the first place. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mike,would you mind answering another question. I'm assuming this project's going to be built with valley gutters,because they're not going to be able to afford the amount of curb cuts that would require access through all the driveways. How do valley gutters meet ADA requirement? Because the slopes and all valley gutters are more severe than ADA allows. So that means every—all the valley gutters in there would have to be flatter than standard,I would assume. MR.SAWYER: Correct Again,for the record,Mike Sawyer,Transportation Planning. You're correct,standard valley gutters do not meet the standards for ADA. What is recommended in those cases where you do have a sidewalk or a pedestrian access across the street,you are required to actually pull that out so that your actual valley gutter actually flares out. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,if you don't have sidewalks on the sides of the streets with the houses and everybody has to come out their driveway and roll across—if they're in a wheelchair,roll across the street to the other side,then wouldn't you need a valley gutter of the appropriate slope or ADA requirements both at the base of the driveway and across the street where they would try to enter the sidewalk. Page 44 of 49 September 17,2015 MR.SAWYER Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Is someone in staff checking that when these plans come in? MR.SAWYER I believe so. It would be done at time of platting. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Ill talk to John Houldsworth. Thank you. MR SAWYER No problem. MR.REISCHL: Just to confirm,we do have an ADA reviewer for plats and SDPs. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Something new. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. It would just be a lot simpler putting it on the same side of the street as the house,but if that's what they want to do,then that's certainly a possibility. Anybody else have any questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER EBERT: I was going to ask about the stormwater. At one portion in here--I can't find right now—maybe Steve can help me. This was—kind of said it was in the Cocohatchee Slough kind of area,and there are a lot of water that these--this area holds tons of water. MR.LENBERGER: Stephen Lenberger,Engineering and Natural Resources Division. I don't have an answer for you. I know a lot of the area off Livingston Road historically is very wet and is wetter around the North Collier Regional Park. But I don't review for the stormwater,so I can't answer your question. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. Because the other gentleman from Verona Pointe also mentioned quite a bit of water;that they're worried about that,too. I notice that you have two lakes on here on the plan,and it is just to maybe assure him that you have to keep your water on your property,so it should not be running over into theirs. MR.LENBERGER: I would have to defer to--I know the project is in for environmental resource permitting with the Water Management District,so it would be better just to ask the applicant how much storage they're having on site and make sure they're meeting all the requirements. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. All right. Then maybe Richard can answer it. MR.YOVANOVICH: As you know,we do have to get a permit from the Water Management District,and all of those factors will be considered before the permit is issued. So we will accommodate what the gentleman's concerns were regarding historic flow through the site. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else have any questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think that's it. Richard,there are a few notes I made. The--what is your reaction to relocating the butterfly orchids that Charlette brought up the issue for? MR.YOVANOVICH: I think that to the extent that they're relocatable and will survive—I don't think that costs much to do. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So the butterfly orchids that are not in a preserve area,to the extent they can be,will be relocated to the preserve area. MR.YOVANOVICH: If it makes sense,yes. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Yeah. If they're too small and they can't be relocated,you can make that judgment. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And you're going to modify the interconnection language that Heidi brought up? MR.YOVANOVICH: We'll work with the County Attorney to make sure she's comfortable with whatever the interconnection language needs to be. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And those are the two items that I think need to be stipulated to Page 45 of 49 September 17,2015 pertain to the ordinance. And then as a note,you're going to perfect the language of Verona Walk prior to the BCC meeting; otherwise,obviously,the attorney representing the recreational facilities will probably be at the board meeting to discuss that item. MR.YOVANOVICH: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else have anything else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there a motion? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I'll make a motion to approve PUDA-PL21 —I mean--20140002683 with the stipulations that you just listed. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: And I'll second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion made and seconded. Discussion? Okay. I will be voting no to the motion. It makes no practical sense to put sidewalks on the opposite side of the street unless the Board wants to suggest that's an alternative to the previous policy they set with the sidewalks in the front yards of projects. MR.YOVANOVICH: Hold on a second. Hold on a second. I'd like to comment on it,if I can. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR.YOVANOVICH: Do you mind? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sure,go ahead. MR.YOVANOVICH: The Board's policy has been for one-side-loaded houses to have a sidewalk on one side of the street. They have not weighed in on where that goes. And as long as we meet the ADA requirements,I don't know why it would be a problem to have it on the side of the street where the houses are not located. We would be consistent with board policy and I believe the Planning Commission's policy. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If the Planning Commission is unanimous on this vote,it goes on consent, and it's never discussed by the Board. I'd like the Board to be able to discuss this item. And by having an objection to it,it will get on their regular agenda,and they can discuss it. And then whatever policy comes out of the Board I'll follow from here forward. rm not—and I'm not so sure they only intended it for one side—the opposite side of the street. So until that's resolved,I'm not comfortable with it,Rich. MR.YOVANOVICH: Well,let me ask you one other question before you vote,if you don't mind.I just want to know,have there been any objections from the county's perspective that should your vote change that would result in my not going on the summary agenda anyway? I am not aware of any objections from anybody other than if you vote no that would put me on the regular agenda. I just want to confirm that before I decide my next step. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,that's Ray and somebody else. I don't know. MR.REISCHL: Yeah. I was just discussing that. This was Mike Sawyer's project initially.Unless he heard some objection when he was project managing this,I have not,up until I got the email from Sarah Spector--I don't think that was an objection,that she just wanted to put her association's point on the record. I don't consider that an objection. So if this is a unanimous decision,then it would be scheduled for summary agenda. MR.YOVANOVICH: I just wanted to make sure that the other speaker was not an objection. I think ifs a fair request. MR.REISCHL: And there was a head shake from Mike Sawyer. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think Fred just answered it for you. It would be a staff call on how it's scheduled for the board hearing. MR.YOVANOVICH: Well,I'm just asking now,Mr. Strain,if they know--am I going on summary agenda if I capitulate and put the sidewalk on the side of the street that Mr.Strain wants it on? MR.BELLOWS: Yes. MR.REISCHL: Yes. MR.YOVANOVICH: Well,against my wishes,rd rather be unanimous. Page 46 of 49 September 17,2015 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well,that means that you're going to put the sidewalks on the side of the stiet that the houses are on,so that means we'd have to stipulate that,and that would be to be accepted by the motion maker and the second MR.YOVANOVICH: Correct. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Can I ask a question?Since this is additional acreage being added to the former Royal Palm Academy PUD,did we do sidewalks on both sides or one side for the rest of this PUD? MR.REISCHL: There's an approved deviation that allows sidewalks on one side,but it doesn't specify which side. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And Pm comfortable with it being on one side,and they could easily be on one side because this isn't a double-loaded project.But I had always assumed—and had I known this yesterday when I spoke with Mr.Yovanovich,I would have certainly brought it up then. I assumed the logical location would have been the side the house is on that the sidewalk theoretically serves. So I still think that's the most logical location. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Why wouldn't this apply,the way it's written in here,to the whole PUD? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It does. Sidewalk will be on one side of the street. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: So why is there a change? MR.YOVANOVICH: Because Mr.Strain's voting no because he wants to identify the exact location in the PUD. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I want the—if— COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: On that--just in this portion and not the rest of it? MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Correct COMMISSIONER ROMAN: This parcel-- COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Not for the whole PUD? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. Ifs still one side. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Then that wouldn't be the same as the rest of the PUD. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It is. It's on one side of the street. They've chose not to put it on the side that it serves and houses are. They want to put it on the opposite side. If the Board was intended to do that, that's fine. I want the Board to have the option to discuss it. They don't have the option to discuss it if we just send it forward. MR.YOVANOVICH: Sure,they do. They could pull it CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And that means someone's going to have to go to them to tell them that's necessary. I don't necessarily think that's the right way to go. MR.YOVANOVICH: They may not think it's necessary. They may say that there was discussion at the Planning Commission,and the Planning Commission unanimously voted to put it on one side of the street,being the other side. If it's an issue that's important to the Board,they can pull it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well,they'll have the option to pull it for sure if they--I'm not changing my position,so if the panel wants to-- MR.YOVANOVICH: Well,I would-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: —modify their motion to stipulate that the sidewalks will be on the side of the street that the homes are on,then I'll support the motion. If not,I can't. That's—and it's--who was the motion maker? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Me. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. The motion maker would have to accept the stipulation. If you won't,that's fine. MR.YOVANOVICH: Pm asking you to please do that. So go ahead and put it on the— COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Mark's? MR.YOVANOVICH: Yep. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Then your house is next. Page 47 of 49 September 17,2015 COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Okay. Pll change-- MR.YOVANOVICH: I kind of regret—I kind of regret being honest with the Planning Commission,because my own pointing that out probably put me in this position. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I didn't realize you'd even consider it except on the side of the street that the houses are on,to be honest with you. Did you? COMMISSIONER EBERT: No,no. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: I think we've done this before. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Huh? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: I think this has happened before. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Nope. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Yes,it has. MR.YOVANOVICH: It's okay. I'd rather be unanimous. And Pll go ahead and ask the motion maker and second to please do that. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: So Pm changing the motion. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And,Charlette? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Pll keep my second. COMMISSIONER EBERT: So you will-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You'll add the stipulation that they be on the side of the street that the house is on? COMMISSIONER ROMAN: That's what she said. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's correct COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Yeah,and ru second. I was the second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor,signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. That takes us to old business.There's none listed. New business,there's none listed. Is there any other members of the public that would like to speak? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: There are none. So with that,is there a motion to adjourn? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Motion to adjourn. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: By Karen. COMMISSIONER EBERT: I'll second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Seconded by Diane. All in favor,signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 4-0. COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Thank you for working through lunch a little bit and just taking a Page 48 of 49 September 17,2015 break.I appreciate it. ******* There being no further business for the good of the County,the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 12:52 p.m. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMNIISSION m J. cHrAkt".\ STRAIN, ATTEST DWIGHT E. BROCK,CLERK These minutes approved by the Board onto'I �7 'S ,as presented ''or as corrected TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICE,INC., BY TERRI LEWIS,COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC. Page 49 of 49