Minutes 09/14/2015 September 14, 2015
MINUTES OF THE COLLIER COUNTY ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE
DESIGN STANDARDS AD HOC COMMITTEE
Naples, Florida, September 14, 2015
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, the Collier County Architectural and Site Design
Standards Ad Hoc Committee in and for the County of Collier, having conducted
business herein, met on this date at 2:00 PM in a REGULAR SESSION at the Growth
Management Division Building, Room 609/610 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL
with the following persons present:
Rocco Costa, AIA
James Boughton, AIA
Kathy Curatolo, Collier Building Industry Association (Excused)
Dalas Disney, AIA
Bradley Schiffer, AIA
Dominick Amico, P.E.
ALSO PRESENT: Caroline Cilek, LDC Manager
Matt McLean, Principal Project Manager
Richard Henderlong, Principal Planner
1
September 14, 2015
Any person in need of a verbatim record of the meeting may request a copy of the audio recording from the
Collier County Growth Management Department, Division of Planning and Zoning.
1. Call to Order
Mr. Costas called the meeting to order at 2:00pm and a quorum was established.
2. Approve Agenda
Mr.Amico moved to approve the Agenda. Second by Mr. Disney. Carried unanimously 4—0.
3. Approve August 25,2015 meeting minutes
Mr. Disney moved to approve the minutes of the August 25, 2015 meeting as presented. Second by
Mr.Amico. Carried unanimously 4—0.
4. Public Comments
Jeff Curl,Landscape Architect requested clarification on Section 5.05.08 D.2b.viii which allows trellis
or lattice work be used covering a minimum of 15 percent of the primary façade. He queried how a
determination is made on the achievement of 80 percent opacity after 1 year of planting. Additionally,
how is the square footage for the trellis or lattice work measured?
Discussion occurred on the element with Staff noting the square footage is determined by the facial area
of the element in relation to the primary façade. There are no established parameters for the
determination of opacity and inspections generally do not occur unless a code enforcement case is
initiated. To date Staff has not encountered any problems dealing with the treatment.
The Committee recommended Staff monitor the issue and if any problems are encountered in the
future when dealing with the item, the issue be brought forth to the necessary party for discussion.
Dissemination of Proposed Standards for Public Comment
The Committee reported a copy of the proposed amendment was disseminated to the Collier Building
Industry Association, the American Institute of Architects (local chapter). Consideration should be
given to disseminating it to the American Society of Landscape Architects (local chapter) and Naples
Area Board of Realtors.
5. New Business
a. Comments from CAO review
Section 5.05.08 D.2.b.iii and x.
Staff reported the County Attorney's Office has reviewed the proposed standards and opined under
Section 5.05.08 D.2.b.iii and Section 5.05.08 D.2.b.x the term "monumental" is too subjective and
under Section 5.05.08 D.9b.i "roof area"needs to be defined.
The Committee discussed the Sections noting the easiest means to deal with the concern is simply
removing the term "monumental" from the Sections.
Mr.Amico moved to amend the first sentence of Section 5.05.08 D.2.b.iii to read "Covered
entrance with a minimum horizontal dimension of sixteen feet and a minimum area of 200 square
feet"and the first sentence of Section 5.05.08 D.2.b.x to read "Elevated entry a minimum of 16
inches in elevation above the primary finished floor of the building adjacent or connected to the
2
September 14, 2015
building face with a minimum of 400 square feet in area." Second by Mr. Schiffer. Carried
unanimously 4—0.
Section 5.05.08 D.9.b.i
Staff reported the County Attorney's Office has indicated that the term"roof area" is unclear and
should be defined is used in the LDC.
The Committee discussed the concern and determined the easiest means to deal with the concern is
relating the requirement to building floor area as defined under the Land Development Code.
Mr. Schiffer moved for the first sentence of Section 5.05.08 D.9.b.i to read "For buildings with a
floor area that is larger than 10,000 square feet, a minimum of two roof edge or parapet line
changes are required for all primary facades." Second by Mr. Disney. Carried unanimously 4—
0.
Mr. Boughton arrived at 2:43pm
b. Follow up issues in amendment text
Staff presented an updated version of the LDC Amendment Request dated 9-11-15 and the
Committee reviewed the following items:
Page 12 "Summary of Applicability Changes"
The Committee recommended:
1. The narrative and chart be consolidated to the same page for clarity.
2. Identification of the "deleted sections."
3. Clarification the 4,000 square feet is a new threshold under the proposed standards.
4. The header of the chart is revised from "Existing Applicability"to "Existing Standards" and
"Proposed Applicability" to "Proposed Standards."
Color Standards
Discussion occurred on the final determination on how to address color standards in the proposed
standards with the Staff reporting they are to remain as defined in the existing standards.
Staff reported they have completed a final review of the narrative and requested clarification on
some items.
Page 2, 4th paragraph,
The Committee recommended the 4th bullet read - "Provide relief from over-restrictive standards. "
Page 4, Proposed Section 5.05.08 B.1
Staff noted the proposed standards are to apply to an Assisted Living Facility(ALF)when
considered a"commercial use." Staff requested clarification on how the Committee defines
"commercial use"
Committee/Staff discussion occurred on the following items:
• Staff reported the use is defined as "commercial" when there is commercial function
within a building, however defining that function can be difficult given it may only serve
3
September 14, 2015
the residents. If so, should the use be subject to the proposed standards in these
instances?
• Aesthetic impacts may need to be addressed depending on locations. Those not visible
from an arterial road may differ from those that cannot be seen.
• How conversions of existing apartment buildings/condominiums to ALFs would be
treated as they may be more common in the future given the demographics of the region.
• One measure to address the item could be subjecting all residential uses greater than a
certain threshold to the proposed standards.
• Staff should review other codes for definitions of commercial uses such as skilled care
which may assist Staff in determining if the use proposed is "commercial" or
"residential."
Mr. Schiffer requested the Committee be polled to determine ifAssisted Living Facilities should
be exempted from Section 5.05.08 of the Land Development Code even if they provide on site
amenities for use by the residents and guest only. Mr. Schiffer,Mr. Costas,Mr.Amico,Mr.
Boughton "yes." Mr. Disney "no."
The Committee requested a comment be added to the Staff note addressing the Section stating
"Staff will be studying the item to determine if it is necessary to address any issues associated with
ALF uses and architectural standards"(or similar language).
c. Additions to cross-references amendment
Staff reported cross references to Sections of the Land Development Code have been added to
increase awareness of the requirements of Section 5.05.08. The cross references designed to be a
tool to increase awareness of Section 5.05.08, not create a triggering mechanism for the proposed
standards (i.e. a statement in LDC Sections such as "For projects subject to 5.05.08 see...").
Staff requested Committee Members to notify them if there are other areas of the Land
Development Code other than those identified that need to be considered for "cross referencing."
d. Additional changes to amendment narrative
Remaining Track Changes
Staff reported there is remaining track changes outlined in the narrative Section and requested
Committee Members to notify them if they have a concern with any of the changes proposed.
Motion to Accept the Proposed Amendment as Developed by the Committee
Mr. Schiffer moved to accept the product of the Committee (Proposed Section 5.05.08 of the Land
Development Code)subject to the minor changes recommended today. Staff to disseminate the
final copy of the proposed amendment to Committee Members in order to ensure its compatibility
with their recommendations. Second by Mr. Disney. Carried unanimously 5—0.
Staff reported the proposed amendment will be forwarded to the Development Services Advisory
Committee for consideration,followed by the Collier County Planning Commission. They
requested a Committee representative be present at those meeting to answer questions.
6. Next Meeting(s)
Available dates to meet- Doodle Results
4
September 14, 2015
Not applicable at this point.
6. Adjourn
Being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:05pm.
Collier County Architectural and Site Design
Seta dards Ad Hoc Committee
\i,
\:,,
These minutes appr ed by the Board/Committee/Chairman/Vice Chairman on ( i/I b , 2015
as presented vi or as amended .
5