CCPC Minutes 02/18/2016 February 18,2016
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Naples,Florida,February 18,2016
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,3299 East Tamiami Trail,Naples,Florida,with the following members
is
present:
•
CHAIRMAN: Mark Strain
Wafaa F.Assaad
Stan Chrzanowski
Diane Ebert
Karen Homiak
Charlene Roman is
Andrew Solis
ALSO PRESENT:
Raymond V.Bellows,Zoning Manager
Nancy Gundlach,Principal Planner
Heidi Ashton-Cicko,Managing Assistant County Attorney
om Eastman,School District Representative
Ali
ryryJ}}�
11
.t'
1
ti
Page 1 of 9
AGENDA
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 9:00 A.M., THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 18,
2016, 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-December 17,2015
6. BCC REPORT-RECAPS
7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT
8. CONSENT AGENDA
9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
Note: This item has been continued from the February 4, 2016 CCPC meeting and requested by
staff to be further continued from the February 18, 2016 CCPC meeting to the March 3, 2016
CCPC meeting:
A. PUDZ-PL20150000204: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida
amending Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which
established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida,
by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein
1
described real property from a Rural Agriculture (A) zoning district to a Residential Planned Unit
Development (RPUD) zoning district for the project to be known as the Abaco Club RPUD, to allow
construction of a maximum of 104 residential dwelling units on property located at the southwest corner
of Immokalee Road and Woodcrest Drive in Section 26, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier
County, Florida, consisting of 15.9 +/- acres; and by providing an effective date. [Coordinator: Daniel J.
Smith,AICP, Principal Planner]
B. PL20150002354/CPSS-2015-2: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,
Florida amending Ordinance No. 89-05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan for the
unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, specifically amending the Future Land Use Element by
revising the Hibiscus Residential infill subdistrict to increase the height to a maximum of four stories. The
subject property is located on the south side of Rattlesnake Hammock Road at the intersection of
Hibiscus Drive in Section 19, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, consisting of 7.9 acres; and
furthermore, recommending transmittal of the adopted amendment to the Florida Department of Economic
Opportunity; Providing for severability and providing for an effective date. [Coordinator: Sue Faulkner,
Principal Planner] (Companion to PUDA-PL20150002326)
C. PUDA-PL20150002326: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida
amending Ordinance Number 2015-25, the Hibiscus Residential Planned Unit Development, to increase
the multi-family zoned height from 45 to 50 feet and the actual height from 50 to 55 feet; and to increase
the number of residential units allowed per building from 12 units to 16 units. The subject property is
located on the south side of Rattlesnake-Hammock Road at the intersection of Hibiscus Drive in
Section 19, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 7.9+/- acres; and by
providing an effective date. (Companion item to PL20150002354/CPSS-2015-2, Hibiscus Residential infill
subdistrict.) [Coordinator:Nancy Gundlach,AICP,RLA,Principal Planner]
10. OLD BUSINESS
11. NEW BUSINESS
12. PUBLIC COMMENT
13. ADJOURN
CCPC Agenda/Ray Bellows/jmp
2
February 18,2016
PROCEEDINGS
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good morning,everyone.Welcome to the Thursday,February 18th
meeting of the Collier County Planning Commission.
If everybody will please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Could the secretary 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?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Here.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Ms.Ebert is here.
Chairman Strain?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Here.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Ms.Homiak?
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Here.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mr.Assaad?
COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Here.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: And,Ms.Roman?
COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Here.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Addenda to the agenda. The next meeting coming up is March 3rd.
Does anybody know if they're not going to make it to that meeting?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. We'll have a quorum.I will know on the Wednesday before the
meeting whether or not Pll be here. I got—which seems to be a very popular event for the Clerk of Courts is
to call me to jury duty,so--but I get it more frequently,I think,than anybody else.
So I've got another jury duty situation I've got to deal with,and I may be called that day.And if it is,I
won't be here,but I'll try to notify Ray so he can let Karen know.
And the other item is Item 9A. This is the Abaco Club RPUD. Staff has asked for a continuance
until the March 3rd meeting. Does anybody have any questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there a motion to continue to March 3rd?
COMMISSIONER ROMAN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Second.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Second.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: By Charlette,seconded by Diane.
Discussion? Stan?
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Is this the one that last meeting you asked them—
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: —why they weren't continuing it?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I knew they couldn't get it done by now,but they—
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --didn't think they--so anyway. It needs to be continued,just like we
thought.
So with that,all those in favor,signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
Page 2 of 9
February 18,2016
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Aye.
COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 7-0.
Planning--let's see. Approval of the minutes for December 17,2015. Does anybody have any
changes?
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Move to approve.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Made Karen. Seconded by?
COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Pll second.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Charlette.
Discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor,signify by saying aye?
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Aye.
COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 7-0.
Ray,BCC report?
MR.BELLOWS: Yes. On February 9th,the Board of County Commissioners heard the rezone
PUD amendment for Rockedge that also included the termination of affordable housing density bonus
agreement. That was approved subject to Planning Commission recommendations by a vote of 4-1 with
Commissioner Henning opposed.
And the conditional use for the Summit Church,the motion to approve failed by a vote of 3-2 with
Commissioner Fiala and Taylor in opposition.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you.
I don't have a chairman's report. There is no consent for today.
9A,which is the Abaco project,has been continued.
***So that will move us into our remaining two advertised public hearings on the same matter. We
will discuss those concurrently and then vote on them separately. The first one is a GMP amendment.It's for
PL20150002354/CPSS-2015-2. It's for the Hibiscus PUD on Rattlesnake Hammock Road at the intersection
of Rattlesnake Hammock and Hibiscus Drive.
The second part of that is a change to the PUD. It would be PUDA-PL20150002326. Same project,
same location.
So with that,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.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Are there disclosures? We'll start at the end with Tom.
MR.EASTMAN: None.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Stan?
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I didn't talk with anybody about this.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: None.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: None.
Page 3 of 9
February 18,2016
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I've had conversations with staff,and I had a conversation with Mr.
Arnold the other day. And I'm not sure if I spoke to Mr.Yovanovich or not;I can't recall if I did.
And with that,Karen?
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Nothing.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Wafaa?
COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: None.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Charlette?
COMMISSIONER ROMAN: None.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. With that,we'll move right into the issue. We'll take questions from
the--first of all,presentation of the applicant,and then we can start our questions on either one of the
documents.
MR.ARNOLD: Good morning. I'm Wayne Arnold with Grady Minor,professional planner on the
project. With me is Rich Yovanovich,land use attorney,and Al Moscato,property owner.
This is a small-scale amendment that was approved early--or late last year,and it created the
Hibiscus residential infill subdistrict,and it authorized up to 64 dwelling units to be constructed on the 7-acre
parcel that's located on Rattlesnake Hammock Road at the entrance to the Hibiscus Country Club.
I don't know if you need a refresher,but we started out as an 84-unit project and,through the
analysis,the project was reduced to 64 units ultimately approved by the Board. We had a restriction in the
Comprehensive Plan language that said we would have a maximum building height of three stories.
The change to the subdistrict today is very simple. Ifs changing three stories to allow four stories to
be built on the property. That also carries forward to the PUD amendment,which we're changing the
Development Standards Table to increase the height of the zoned and actual height by five feet to then
support the four-story buildings that we're proposing.
There was also a restriction on the maximum number of units per building,which we didn't really
catch on the fly with the changes,from 84 to 64 units,but we're proposing to eliminate the 12-unit restriction
and allow up to 16 units per building.
That's really the essence of the two changes that we're proposing. If you need more discussion,I'm
happy to,or we're happy to answer any questions you might have.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Any questions at this time from the Planning Commission?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Wayne,can you explain why,if you were able to do three stories with 84
units previously,you can't fit 64 units in three stories?
MR.ARNOLD: We could fit 64 units in three stories. This really is a matter of,I guess,it's,one,of
economics and,two,just efficiency.We can—a four-story building with 16 units,we can build fewer
buildings on the site which allows us to really preserve more open space on the property and have fewer
buildings than we would under the three-story scenario. And,again,it's an increase of five feet.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And then just out of curiosity,your construction technique,according to the
NIM,you are going to build floor-to-ceiling heights of nine feet. So if you had three floors that,obviously,
would be 27. Four floors would be 36. Why do you need the height that you're asking for today for zoned? I
understand there's a thickness in the slab. Whether it's precast,post-tension or what,it's going to be a
different thickness,but you seem to have a lot of latitude there,especially with the ductwork and air
conditioning systems that would go in.
What justified the construction technique to make that additional need?
MR.ARNOLD: I'm not sure. Maybe Mr.Moscato can answer you on the construction side of that.
But the buildings will have elevators at four stories,which has,you know,different appurtenances and then
roofline,et cetera.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,the mechanical support of the building is an exception to the zoned
height. Your zoned height,I believe,is going to,what,50 feet?
MR.ARNOLD: Correct
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. You've got four stories at nine;that's 36. You've got six--if ifs
post-tensioning,it's going to be 6-or 8-inch slabs depending on your column spacement. If it's going to be
Page 4 of 9
February 18,2016
{
precast or it's going to be Keystone joists or something else,it's going to be deeper.How do you get the need
for 50 feet? What construction technique are you using? How are you justifying that?
MR.ARNOLD: I don't know the construction technique,Mr.Strain.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,that doesn't get us a lot of answers.
The other question I have is in the Comp Plan,generally we try not to clutter the Comp Plan with
stuff not needed,and there is no requirement in the FLUE regarding the height for this project. So why
would we want to keep any reference to height or stories in the Comp Plan? Why don't we just strike that last
sentence? Do you know why that is there? Is that put there by someone specifically with a purpose?
MR.ARNOLD: Well,we put it there just as extra,I guess,caution. This was an infill subdistrict,
and we were looking to put that height in there. I agree it's not always normal to put a height in your
Comprehensive Plan language. I don't think we have a problem eliminating it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And if staff doesn't have,I think we could--we're going to be specifying in
the PUD the height. And one of the changes in the PUD we need to add is a footnote to indicate 50 feet not
to exceed four stories.
So I'm just wondering why we need to keep it in the Comp Plan unless there's a reason from staff or
somebody that it needs to be there.
MR.ARNOLD: I'll let staff answer that,but we have no objection to removing it.
And with regard to--you mentioned the footnote to me in our brief conversation,and I was
wondering if--might it not be easier,then,in our development table where it says the 50 feet,and just to put
"slash four stories"like is also done in others?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah,as long as it's"not to exceed." You want to have the ability to go less
if you want to,but yeah.
MR.ARNOLD: Correct,yes. I mean,it would be expressed as the maximum building height,
which would be 50 feet or four stories.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. I have no—well,no. Fifty feet or four stories,but not to
exceed--you can't exceed 50 feet.
MR ARNOLD: Correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I think that's a cleanup,because you've actually used the four stories
as the crux of your argument. I think we ought to make sure four stories appears in the PUD somewhere.
MR.ARNOLD: Okay. I have no objection to either adding a footnote or simply referencing it under
the maximum building height.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Wayne,do you happen to have a photo of the planned development?
MR ARNOLD: I have a rendering that was prepared that was shown at the neighborhood
information meeting of the four-story.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. Because the other places right around there,they're only three
stories. So you're going above what is normal in that neighborhood.
And I like Mark's thing,but I'd like to see your rendering.
MR.ARNOLD: Nothing with color,but that was prepared by John Titus,the architect that's helping
the property owner.
COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Mr.Chairman?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes,sir. Pm sorry,Wafaa.
COMMISSIONER AS SAAR: Pd like to hear more about the justification for the higher density,the
higher number of units.
MR.ARNOLD: Well,our unit count isn't increasing. We're increasing the building height by five
feet. We originally--as offered to the county,we had an 84-unit project.
COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: You had an 84-unit—
MR.ARNOLD: Yes. And through the discussion of the Planning Commission and,ultimately,the
Board,that number, 84,was reduced to 64 on this site. There's also some language that requires us to set
aside in easements parts of the golf course so that the density actually is less.
I mean,keep in mind,the owner of the golf course owns this property. We could have come in with
the entirety of the golf course property and come in with an extremely low-density project. But this used to
Page 5 of 9
February 18,2016
be the old clubhouse for Hibiscus,those of us that have been around long enough to appreciate that.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Mark?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes,sir.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Is the height of the building measured halfway between the
eve and the peak or how?
MR.ARNOLD: The zoned height would be measured in that manner. The actual height is
essentially the top of the roof or any of--the tallest point of the building.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. So you're going for the top of the roof but not of the
stairwell,or is it the stairwell?
MR.ARNOLD: Well,the elevator--any of the elevator equipment would count toward the actual
building height.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. That looked like the stairwell. And I assume you're
going to a taller building because,for a given square footage,the taller you are,the less of a footprint you
have,the less of an impact you make on the water management system,and the more green space you have?
MR.ARNOLD: That's correct. We ended up with fewer buildings on the site by increasing to four
stories.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay.
COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Do you have an illustrative site plan?
MR.ARNOLD: To the bottom of the page is the existing canal,which is for orientation,and to the
top is Rattlesnake Hammock. So you can see that this allows us to put three buildings on the
Rattlesnake--on the west side of the Hibiscus Drive and then the one building to the east in this concept.
It actually allows us to,in this manner,orient the buildings farther away from any of the residences
off Doral Circle who attended our neighborhood meeting,and I don't believe they found any objection with
what we're proposing.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Could you put that elevation back up? The slab-to-slab lines on this
elevation are a scale;let's say they're nine feet because that's what you said at the NIM. If you go from the
center point of that roof to the highest point of the highest tower,which is probably your stairwell or elevator
to over on the left,it looks like you're going to need more than five feet because you're limited to 55 feet for
actual. How do you plan to do that?
MR.ARNOLD: I don't know. Pm not familiar with the construction techniques,Mr.Strain,in terms
of
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Pm just trying to save you a time to have come back again,but okay. I
mean,just by scale,you're not going to get to that highest tippy top of the—as,I think,Richard used to use
the word"tippy top"--of that highest tower that you have on the left from the midpoint of that immediate
roof that's over the building. So I don't know--
MR ARNOLD: Well,I don't know that this is their construction-ready version. I mean,this was
presented at the neighborhood meeting as the concept at the time. So,I mean,keep in mind the heights that
we asked for are the maximum heights.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh,I know. I'm just trying to understand it. I mean,based on that
rendering and scaling down from 55 feet,you wouldn't need to change the zoned height,but--because
you've got too much height in your architectural features.
Well,okay. We'll move on.
Anybody else have any questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Is there a staff presentation?
MS.GUNDLACH: Good morning,Commissioners. Staff is recommending approval.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Do you see any problem with the removal of that one sentence in the GMP
Plan section taking out the reference to the stories?
MS.FAULKNER: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good morning,Sue.
MS.FAULKNER: Sue Faulkner,principal planner with.Comprehensive Planning.
Page 6 of 9
February 18,2016
I do not see a problem with removing that final sentence with that restriction on the stories that are
there.
We had talked about that,actually,originally,but the proposed changes were brought to us in this
manner.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody on the Planning Commission have any problem seeing
that sentence deleted?
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Great staff presentation.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Very concise.
MS.GUNDLACH: Thanks,Stan.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there any member--then,thank you,Sue.
MS.FAULKNER: You're welcome.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else have any questions of staff at this time?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Is there--any members of the public wish to speak on this matter?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Seeing none,Fm assuming,Wayne,you don't want a rebuttal
because you have nothing to rebut.
So with that,we'll close the public hearing.
Discussion for the Planning Commission? If the Planning Commission so pleases,I would suggest
we,in our motion for the first one,which will be the GMP,to stipulate to drop that sentence since it isn't
needed in the Growth Management Plan,and then the second one,that we add some language stipulating that
"not to exceed"four stories within the PUD so that the height is tied to no more than four stories.
Is there motions from the Planning Commission?
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Pll make a motion to approve with those stipulations.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Let's do them each—yeah,the first one is for the GMP amendment. It's
PL20150002354/CPSS-2015-2.
And,Karen,are you still going to make a motion to approve subject--
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Yes,I'll make a motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --to the one stipulation?
Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Second.
COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Pll second.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Seconded by Stan.
Discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor,signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Aye.
COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposes?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 7-0.
Second item for motion is PUDA-PL20150002326.
Is there a motion with any stipulation?
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Make a motion--
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Pll move to approve PUDA-PL20150002326 with the
stipulation.
Page 7 of 9
February 18,2016
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Second.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: By Karen.
Discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor,signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Aye.
COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 7-0.
Thank you all.
MR.ARNOLD: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That takes us to--
MR.BELLOWS: Mr.Chairman?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Appreciate it.
Yes,sir?
MR.BELLOWS: One question. Will this need to come back on a summary or are you approving it
without a summary?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It doesn't come back on consent unless we make a motion to do so. So I
think the lack of such a motion would signify we don't need it back on consent,so...
MR.BELLOWS: Thank you for the clarification.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Appreciate it.
MR.ARNOLD: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
There is no old business listed on the agenda.There is no new business.
Is there any members of the public that wish to make any comments at this time?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Hearing none,is there a motion to adjourn?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I make a motion to adjourn.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: By Karen(sic). Seconded by?
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: By Stan.
All in favor,signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER ASSAAD: Aye.
COMMISSIONER ROMAN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. We're out of here.Thank you.
Page 8 of 9
February 18,2016
*******
There being no further business for the good of the County,the meeting was adjourned by order of
the Chair at 9:18 a.m.
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
0,1 (4,
STRAIN,CHAIRMAN
ATTEST
DWIGHT E.BROCK,CLERK
These minutes approved by the Board on 5-1/- 1LP ,as presented V or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF
GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICE,INC.,
BY TERRI LEWIS,COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC.
Page 9 of 9