Loading...
Agenda 07/30-31/2002 R COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA July 30, 2002 9:00 a.m. and July 31, 2002 NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 99-22 REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT. REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS". ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO FIVE (5) MINUTES UNLESS PERMISSION FOR ADDITIONAL TIME IS GRANTED BY THE CHAIRMAN. IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (239) 774-8380; ASSISTED LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE. LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M. 1 July 30, 2002 1. INVOCATION A. Reverend Mary Anne Dorner, Church of the Resurrection 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. AGENDA AND MINUTES A. Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended. Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for summary agenda.) B. May 28, 2002- Regular C. May 29, 2002- Special D. June 12, 2002- Special E. June 17, 2002- Workshop F. June 18, 2002- Special G. June 19, 2002 - Special (Ex 4. PROCLAMATIONS Ae Proclamation recognizing four officers from the Collier County Sheriff's Golden Gate Sub-Substation for heroic efforts in a house fire incident. To be accepted by Corporal Todd Sanner, Corporal Chris Jordan, Deputy Juan Morales, Deputy Byron Tomlinson. Be Proclamation to declare September as Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month in Collier County. To be accepted by Carolyn Benivegna, President and Founder of Ovarian Cancer Alliance in Florida. Proclamation to recognize John T. Conroy, Jr. for his 22 years of service to the Collier County community as a member and Chairman of the Housing Finance Authority. To be accepted by John T. Conroy, Jr. 2 July 30, 2002 5. PRESENTATIONS Presentation of a check in the amount of $120,000 for a Florida Recreation Development Assistance Program Grant for renovation and new construction of boat docks and support facilities at Bayview Park. To be presented by Senator Burt Saunders and State Representative J. Dudley Goodlette. o PUBLIC PETITIONS A. Public Petition request by Albert Lee to discuss the Recreation Center on School Drive, Immokalee. B. Public Petition request by Garrett F. X. Beyrent to discuss moratorium impact on proposed affordable housing development. C. Public Petition request by George Risher to discuss access issues on Golden Gate Boulevard. 7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. VA-2001-AR-1747 Pamela Stewart, Esquire, representing Mark Yon Spitzock, requesting a 5-foot variance from the required rear yard setback of 10 feet to 5 feet for accessory structures for property located at 1249 Pompei Lane, further described as Lot 12, Block H, Sorrento Gardens Unit 3, Section 15, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. Bo This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. VA-2002-AR-2691, Don Cahill, of Don Cahill Architect/Builder, representing William and Joann Reckmeyer, requesting variances in the PUD Zoning District as follows: 1) From the required Gulf front yard (PUD Ordinance 85-83) setback that aligns with the State of Florida Coastal Construction Setback Line (CCSL) to allow (A) the balconies to extend a maximum of 8 feet West of the CCSL; (B) the roof to extend a maximum of eight feet five inches West of the CCSL; (C) the shear wall to extend a maximum of ten feet five inches West of the CCSL; and 2) from the required ten foot access drive right-of-way yard setback (PUD Ordinance 85-83) to allow: a building setback of eight feet, a variance of 2 3 July 30, 2002 feet, on the East side along Dominica Lane, for property located at 107 Dominica Lane, further described as Lot 9, Block C, Lely Barefoot Beach Unit 1, Plat Book 12, Pages 34-37, as recorded in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida in Section 6, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. VA-2002-AR-2035, Kenneth D. Goodman, Esquire, of Goodman and Breen, requesting a 25-foot variance from the required 75-foot front yard setback to 50 feet for 20 lots in the Shady Hollow Trust Subdivision, which is located in Section 9, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, further described as Lots 1-20, Shady Hollow Trust, Collier County, Florida. 8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS Ao Adoption of a Resolution amending the Road Impact Fee Rate Schedule, which is Schedule One of Appendix A of Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Law and Ordinances, the same being the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, as amended. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Petition ST-2194, Michael Landy, P.E., o! Landy Engineering, Inc., representing Southwest Florida Opportunity Fund, L.L.C., requesting a Special Treatment Development Permit to construct a 11,200 square foot drug store and a 266-seat restaurant via the Site Development Plan approval process on a 4.02-acre site zoned C-3ST, located at the Northeast corner of the Intersection of US-41 and CR-951, in Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. This item has been deleted. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Petition PUDA-01-AR-2491, Robert Duane of Hole Montes, Inc., representing James and Diane Williams, requesting a rezone from "PUD" to "PUD" Planned Unit Development to be known as the Arrowhead PUD having the effect of increasing the number of approved dwelling units from 900 units to 1,254 units, which increases the project density of 4.3 units per acre, change the mix of single family and multi-family dwellings, delete mobile homes as a permitted use, revise the currently approved master plan to allow for the reconfiguration of the commercial tract, update the PUD document to reflect current terminology and code references, reduce the maximum building height from 100 feet to 50 feet for the commercial tract, modify the list of permitted commercial uses, and revising 4 July 30, 2002 the development standards consistent with the developer's workforce housing requirements for property located at the Southwest quadrant of the intersection of Lake Trafford Road and the future extension of Carson Road in Section 31, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida. This item has been deleted. This item has been deleted. This item is being continued to the September 10~ 2002 BCC Meeting. An Ordinance amending Ordinance Number 91-102, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which includes the Comprehensive Regulations for the Unincorporated Area of Collier County, Florida, by providing for: Section One, Recitals; Section Two, Findings of Fact; Section Three, Adoption of Amendments to the Land Development Code, including amendments to Division 2.3, off-street parking and loading; Section Four, Conflict and Severability; Section Five, Inclusion in the Land Development Code; Section Six, Effective Date. Adoption of an Ordinance amending Chapter 74 of the County's Code of Laws and Ordinances, as previously amended by Ordinance No. 2001-13 (The Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance), prohibiting early payment of impact fees to avoid rate increases and distinguishing payment of impact fees from pre-payment of estimated future impact fees prerequisite to issuance of a Certificate of Public Facility Adequacy. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Petition RZ-01-AR-1143, James G. O'Gara, representing Golden Gate Capital, Ltd., requesting a rezone from "RSF-3" Residential Single Family to the "RSF-5" Residential Single Family Zoning District to allow for a maximum of 16 single-family dwelling units for property located at the Northeast Corner of 50th Terrace SW and 22nd Avenue SW in Section 21, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. Public Hearing to consider adoption of an Ordinance establishing the Tuscany Reserve Community Development District (CDD) pursuant to Section 190.005, Florida Statutes. Public Hearing to consider transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs of a Resolution amending Ordinance No. 89-05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan, for the Immokalee Road/Collier Boulevard Area (Heritage Bay Development of Regional Impact) to establish the "Urban-Rural Fringe Transition Zone Overlay" for Sections 13, 14, 23, 24, T48S, R26E, Collier County Florida By: Amending the Future Land 5 July 30, 2002 Use Element and Map Series; Amending the Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element; Amending the Potable Water Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element; Amending the Water and Sewer Service Boundary Map of the Public Facilities Element; Providing for Severability; and, Providing for an Effective Date. 9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS This item has a time certain of 1:15 p.m. Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board request for the County Commission to support a "Living Wage"/Farm Worker/Agricultural Issues Forum and Dialogue. Request that the Board of County Commissioners recognize that the Collier Hispanic Task Force serves a valid public purpose and approve the use of County resources to provide meeting notices and meeting space. (Commissioner Fred W. Coyle) C. Appointment of member to the Collier County Water and Wastewater Authority. D. Confirmation of appointment by the City Licensing Board. of Naples to the Contractors' E. Approve the Employment Agreement for the County Manager. (Commissioner Jim Coletta) 10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT A. Proposal to impose a temporary moratorium on projects in the Whippoorwill Area (bounded on the North by Pine Ridge Road, on the South by the Wyndemere Subdivision, on the East by 1-75, and on the West by proposed Livingston Road) until such time as a master plan showing proposed infrastructure improvements, including at a minimum, potable water distribution, sanitary sewage collection, stormwater management, and roads, has been accepted by the Collier County Community Development and Environmental Services Division. (Joe Schmitt, Administrator, Community Development) Approve the purchase ($2,750,000 Purchase Price) of a 99-acre tract of land identified as the major source of mitigation for wetland impacts associated 6 July 30, 2002 with the construction of the Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project (Project No. 31101). (Norman Feder, Administrator, Transportation) C. To adopt proposed FY2003 Millage Rates. (Mike Smykowski, Director, Office of Management and Budget) Do This item has a time certain of 11:30 a.m. Approval of two Interlocal Agreements between Collier County and the City of Marco Island: First, providing for the collection of County Impact Fees by the City Government, providing for the percentage distribution between the two entities of road impact fees collected by the City, and providing for reimbursements from the County to the City for administrative costs associated with the collection of County Impact Fees other than those for roads; and Second, providing for relinquishing jurisdiction for County Roads 92 and 92A to the City of Marco Island; authorization for the Chairman to sign the Interlocal Agreements on behalf of the Board of County Commissioners. (Norman Feder, Administrator, Transportation) Status report to the Board to provide a review of current roadway landscaping enhancement issues and requests for additional funding and to request the Board determine a policy for current and future roadway enhancement initiatives. (Norman Feder, Administrator, Transportation) Fe This item continued from the June 25~ 2002 BCC Meetin_cl. That the Board consider a request from the Livingston Road Phase II Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee for support for the Beautification of Livingston Road Phase II. (Norman Feder, Administrator, Transportation) This item continued from the June 25, 2002 BCC Meetinc~. Status Report for the Board's review of the Interchange Enhancement Recommendations requested by the Golden Gate/I-75 Ad Hoc Beautification Committee. (Norman Feder, Administrator, Transportation) This item continued from the June 25~ 2002 BCC Meetin_(3. Approve an Addendum to the Landscaping Installation and Maintenance Highway Agreement with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) within the Unincorporated Area of Collier County, Florida; authorizing the Chairman to expand the boundaries of the existing US41 North Phase I Agreement to Vanderbilt Beach Road. (Norman Feder, Administrator, Transportation) 7 July 30, 2002 11. 12. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS COUNTY A'i-rORNEY'S REPORT Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve a Settlement Proposal for Shader-Lombardo Investments, LLC v. Collier County, Case No. 01-4135-CA-HDH, now pending in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida. 13. 14. 15. Approval of the Form of Public Petition drafted by the County Attorney's Office at the request of Citizens of Golden Gate Estates for the widening to four lanes of Golden Gate Boulevard from Wilson Boulevard to DeSoto Boulevard. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS AIRPORT AUTHORITY STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS 16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. Ae COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1) Approve a Budget Amendment for a Red Cockaded Woodpecker (RCW) Habitat Survey of Section 24 and the North Belle Meade Overlay in the amount of $15,000 using $12,500 from MSTD General Fund (111) Reserves. 2) Recommendation to approve Commercial Excavation Permit No. 59.803 "Blue Heron Offsite Hauling", located in Section 33, Township 49 South, Range 26 East; bounded on the North by Interstate 75 R/W, on the West by Sapphire Lakes Subdivision, on the East by Sherwood PUD, and on the South by Radio Road, R/W. 3) Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Sabal Bay Commercial Plat Phase One", and approval of the Standard Form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the Performance Security. 4) Proposal to accept a Master Plan and Legal Agreement for infrastructure to serve projects in the Whippoorwill Area (bounded on the North by Pine Ridge Road, on the South by the Wyndemere Subdivision, on the East by 8 July 30, 2002 1-75 Right of Way, and on the West by proposed Livingston Road, which is presently under construction). 5) Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Indigo Lakes Unit Seven", and approval of the Standard Form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the Performance Security. 6) Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Carson Lakes Phase Ii", and approval of the Standard Form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the Performance Security. 7) Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Noah's Landing". 8) Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Island Walk Phase Seven A". 9) 11) 12) Approval of the Mortgage and Promissory Note for a Seventy-Five Thousand ($75,000) Dollar Loan to Renaissance Manor, Inc., a Non-Profit Housing Provider, to assist in the construction of a Special Needs Affordable Housing Development. Approval of Third Amendment to 2002 Tourism Agreement with Kelley Swofford Roy, Inc., as recommended by the Tourist Development Council. Approve 2003 Tourism Agreements between Collier County and Kelley Swofford Roy, Phase V of Southwest Florida Inc., and Evans-Klages Inc., as recommended by the Tourist Development Council. Adoption of a Resolution approving an application for a Waiver of Impact Fees for a not-for-profit, charitable organization, Hospice of Naples, in an amount not to exceed $7,500 for an inpatient facility; said waiver being fully funded from accumulated and unencumbered interest in each of the affected Impact Fee Trust Accounts. 13) This item has been deleted. 14) Recommendation to approve a request for exemption from payment of impact fees, in the amount of $3,872.82, for a mobile home emplaced, but not then permitted, on the homeowner's property prior to adoption of applicable Collier County Impact Fees, provided the property owner obtains all necessary permits and completes all improvements required by the County and pays all other associated fees. 15) Authorization to redistribute approved funds between two existing purchase orders for the consulting services agreement with RWA, Inc., for the rural and agricultural assessment orders. 16) Authorize Assistant County Attorney to bid on behalf of County at Foreclosure (Code Enforcement Lien) Sale to be scheduled by the Clerk in Board of County Commissioners v. Wayne Thibodeau, Case No. 00-3935- CA. 9 July 30, 2002 17) 16) 19) Request to grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements for the final plat of "Pelican Marsh Unit Sixteen". Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Hammock Bay", and approval of the Standard Form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve an Amendment to the FY02 Adopted Budget of the Comprehensive Planning Section for Expenses Incurred Relative to Final Order No. 99-002. B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES 1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners adopt a Resolution fixing the date, time and place for the Public Hearing for approving the Special Assessment (Non-Ad Valorem Assessment) to be levied against the properties within the Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit for maintenance of the Water Management System, Beautification of Recreational Facilities and Median Areas, and Maintenance of Conservation or Preserve Areas, and establishment of Capital Reserve Funds for ambient noise management, maintenance of conservation or preserve areas, U.S. 41 berms, street signage replacements within the median areas and landscaping improvements to U.S. 41 entrances, all within the Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit. 2) 3) Approval of three (3) Impact Fee Refund requests totaling $81,086.92. Approve Committee Selection of Five Firms for Contract Negotiations for RFP #02-3371, "Fixed Term Professional Transportation Planning Consulting Services". There is $200,000.00 budgeted in the first year for this contract. 4) Approve Bid #02-3378 Immokalee Triangle Landscaping Installation, in the amount of $134,445. 5) 6) 7) Approve Change Order with Apac, Inc., for roadway improvements at Golden Gate Parkway and 53rd Street SW in the amount of $22,644.50, Project #60016. Approve to purchase and install bus stop shelters for Collier Area Transit (CAT), in the amount of $57,472. Approve a request for Advanced Funding to the Livingston Road Beautification Municipal Services Taxing Unit (MSTU) in the amount of $228,583.08, to install decorative lighting during the Livingston Road, Phase II Improvement (Project No. 60071). Also, approve Change Order No. 5 with Better Roads Inc., to purchase decorative lighting fixtures and perform additional construction services related to street light installation for an amount of $352,021.80. 10 July 30, 2002 8) Approve Budget Amendment request for median improvements by Better Roads, Inc., in the amount of $83,294.75 on Airport-Pulling Road, Project No. 60175. 9) Approve an Agreement with Waterways Joint Venture, et al, to purchase Parcels 190A, 190B, 190D, 790B, 790C, 790D, 790F, 890A, and 890C for four-laning improvements to Immokalee Road. 10) Adopt a Resolution amending Resolution No. 2002-98 authorizing condemnation of right-of-way and/or easements required for the construction of a six-lane section of Livingston Road between Pine Ridge Road and immokalee Road, Capital Improvements Element No. 58 (Project No. 62071). 11) Approve the piggybacking of a Broward County Contract for the purchase of light emitting diode traffic signal components. 12) Approve a Budget Amendment to transfer $100,000 from Gas Tax Reserves to reimburse the City of Naples for the construction of Goodiette-Frank Road improvements at the City's Pump Station. 13) Approve a Budget Amendment to transfer $50,000 from Gas Tax Reserves to reimburse the City of Naples Airport Authority for the County's share of the Airport Road Landscape Project. 14) Approval of the recommended Management Company to enter into a contract with Collier County Government, serving as the Community Transportation Coordinator for the Collier County Transportation Disadvantaged Program as identified in RFP #02-3383 and authorization for the County Manager to negotiate and enter into a contract with the selected management company. 15) Approval of a First Amendment to Lease Agreement with LB/P Groveway, LLC for its two-month continued use of county-owned property netting the County $4,000 in additional rent. 16) Recommendation to approve the purchase of one (1) double drum vibratory roller, in accordance with BID #02-3391, in the amount of $64,995. 17) Removal of a non-warranted traffic signal from the intersection of Radio Road at Commercial Boulevard. Removal of the traffic signal poles and equipment will cost approximately $3000. 18) Board approval of a Lease Agreement with Volusla County for the use of two trolley/buses in the amount of $500.00 per month, per bus and authorization for the Chairman to enter into the Agreement. 19) Request that the Board approve a loan o! $60,000 to the Forest Lakes Roadway and Drainage MSTU for the completion of drainage work necessary to help prevent flooding of homes in this community. 11 July 30, 2002 20) Request that the Board approve a loan of $20,000 to the Livingston Road Phase 2 Beautification MSTU for the initial landscape design and to cover secretarial expenses for the remainder of the Fiscal Year. 21) Award a Construction Agreement to APAC-Florida, Inc., for the construction of North 11th Street Extension from State Road 29 to Roberts Avenue, Collier County Project #62021, Bid #02-3387, in the amount of $144,150. 22) Award a construction contract in the amount of $1,928,170.77 to Better Roads Inc., and allocate $190,000.00 (10% of the construction cost) for contingency purposes to construct the proposed Immokalee Road/l-75 Interchange project, Proiect No. 66042A. Co PUBLIC UTILITIES 1) Authorization to execute and record Satisfactions for certain water and/or sewer impact fee payment agreements. Fiscal impact is $135.00 to record the Satisfactions. 2) Request a Budget Amendment for Wastewater Collections Facility for $145,000 to be transferred from Reserves to cover the expenses for sewer lines repairs and chemicals. 3) Adoption of a Resolution approving Special Assessment Hardship Deferrals for certain sewer special assessments for the 2002 tax year. The Fiscal Impact is $21.00 to record the Resolution. 4) Approve Work Order GH-FT-02-9 with Greeley and Hansen LLC, to perform Phase 2 Engineering Services for design and construction of the Santa Barbara Sewer Force Main Interconnect between the North and South Wastewater Collection Systems, Project 73132, in the amount of $659,080. 5) Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Acquisition by Gift or Purchase of non-exclusive perpetual utility interests by fee simple interest and/or easement for the construction of a force main and pump station sites required for the Collier County Water-Sewer District Santa Barbara Sewer Force Main Interconnect Project between the North and South Wastewater Collection Systems, Projects 73076, 73132, 73150, and 73151, at a cost not to exceed $470,012. 6) Authorization to acquire and implement a Call Center Telephone System for Customer Service Functions in the Public Utilities Division-Cost is $181,365.85. 7) Adopt a Resolution and approve a Corrective Declaration of Easement for two water well house sites and a pipeline to be located within a portion of property acquired for a future park site at a cost not to exceed $24.00. 12 July 30, 2002 8) Authorization to acquire consulting services to implement Phase II of the Utility Billing Software System and to acquire technical assistance during acceptance testing, data conversion verification, parallel processing, and cut-over to the live environment-cost of services is $46,200. 9) Approve Reimbursement Agreements with Florida Power and Light Company related to new brackish water supply wells serving the North County Regional Water Treatment Plant at a credit of $9,158.50, Projects 70075 and 70094. 10) Approve a Resolution and the Granting of a Revocable Temporary License and Utility Easement to Lee County Electric Cooperative Inc., for installation of an electric power line on the Carnestown Transfer Station Property, the cost of which will not exceed $50.00. 11) Approve Amendment No. I to that Agreement No. HW465 with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection for electronics recycling. 12) Approve Resolution supporting continued federal funding of coastal projects. 13) Award RFP 02-3339 for construction and demolition waste artificial reef recycling to committee's shortlist selection of firms, McCulley Marine Services Inc., for an estimated annual amount of $250,000. 14) To authorize monthly billing of irrigation water availability charge as identified in the executed agreement by and between the Collier County Water-Sewer District and the Old Collier Golf Club, Inc. 15) Approve Task Order 6 in the amount of $6,106,261 with Youngquist Brothers, Inc., for North County Water Reclamation Facility Deep Injection Well Construction, Contract 01-3193, Project 73948. 16) Approve an amendment to the April 10, 2001 Florida Department of Environmental Protection Consent Order related to the North and South County Water Reclamation Facilities, Projects 73077 and 73949, at no additional cost. 17) Adopt a Resolution to set the date, time and place for an Advertised Public Hearing where the Board of County Commissioners will adopt fees (Special Assessments) to be collected on the property tax bills for curbside trash collection services for the 2003 Budget Year. 18) Authorize conveyance of a utility easement to Florida Power and Light Company for the installation of underground electric facilities to serve water wells to be located on County-Owned Future Park Property, the cost of which should not exceed $30.00. 19) Request a Budget Amendment for the North County Water Reclamation Facility for $241,400 to be transferred from Reserves to cover expenses for overtime, sludge transportation, electricity, operating supplies and equipment repairs. 13 July 30, 2002 20) Approve a Budget Amendment for $258,500 primarily for the construction work on the Price Street-Barefoot Williams Road Water Municipal Services Benefit Unit (MSBU) Special Assessments Fund (409), Project #70077. 21) Approve a Budget Amendment in the amount of $200,000, to fund unanticipated expenses within the North Water Treatment Facility Cost Center. PUBLIC SERVICES 1) Approve a Budget Amendment in the amount of $70,000 for the design and permitting of a soccer field at East Naples Community Park. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 1) Award Bid #02-3386, Tire Services, to Collier Tire and Auto Repair as Primary Vendor and Collier Retreading, Inc., as secondary vendor at an estimated cost of $35,000 annually for the services and $100,000 annually for new tires. 2) Approve an increase of the RFQ #99-0290 "File Retention" services $25,000 threshold to $33,000 with Robert Flynn Moving and Storage. 3) Approve a Letter of Support for the Empowerment Alliance of Southwest Florida to submit a front porch Florida Application for designation of South Immokalee as a Front Porch Florida Community. 4) Approve a Budget Amendment totaling $72,500 for expenditures related to the temporary relocation of the Law Library. 5) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners convey a Grant of Utility Easement to Sprint-Florida, Inc., for relocation of a cable connection cabinet from Airport Road Right-of-Way to the County's Main Government Complex property. There will be no financial impact to the County as a result of this request. 6) Approval of a Budget Amendment to the Group Health and Life Plan in the amount of $2,217,100 recognizing additional premium revenue and increasing budget expenditures for insurance claims, reinsurance, and life insurance premiums through September 30, 2002. 7) Approve a Budget Amendment totaling $37,000 for the installation of additional lighting for the Harmon Turner Building (Building F) South Parking Lot to create a safer parking area. 8) Approval of an amendment to the contract between Collier County and Insurance and Risk Management Services Inc., for the placement of National Flood Insurance and Builder's Risk Insurance Policies. 14 July 30, 2002 9) Approval to grant employees hired through the Recap program who have provided continued full-time, uninterrupted service to the County, a vacation accrual date consistent with their original recap hire date. F. EMERGENCY SERVICES 1) Approval of fixed fee performance based agreement, in the amount of $7,947.00, between Collier County and the State of Florida Department of Community Affairs; said agreement provides reimbursement to Collier County for the review and update of hazard analyses at designated facilities within Collier County that possess extremely hazardous substances at or above the threshold planning quantity. 2) Approve Ochopee Fire Control District Application for a matching (50/50) Grant offered by the Florida Division of Forestry in the amount of $7,974.50 and approve the necessary Budget Amendments. 3) Award Bid No. 02-3389 to Pyramid II, Inc., for the purchase of janitorial supplies for all Collier County Departments. 4) Approval of Federal Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Applications for funding to improve hurricane protection of County Public Safety Facilities and retrofit the Foundation of the Everglades City Hall against flooding. 5) Recognize and appropriate revenue for two Florida Department of Health, Bureau of Emergency Medical Services Matching (25% County Funds/75% State Funds) Grants to appropriate and transfer County matching funds in the amount of $53,346.80 from the Emergency Medical Services 490 Reserves, and recognize the State Funds of $160,040.40. COUNTY MANAGER 1) Summary of Consent and Emergency Agenda Items approved by the County Manager during the Boards scheduled recess. H. AIRPORT AUTHORITY I. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS J. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE 1) Miscellaneous Items to File for Record as Directed. K. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS 15 July 30, 2002 1) 2) That the Board of County Commissioners make a determination of whether the purchases of goods and services documented in the detailed report of open purchase orders serve a valid public purpose and authorize the expenditure of county funds to satisfy said purchases. Open Purchase Order Report from June 18, 2002 through June 30, 2002 available for review in the County Manager's Office. New Precinct Lines to reflect the realignment of political boundaries within Collier County as established by the Federal Judicial Panel. COUNTY ATTORNEY 1) Approve the Agreed Order awarding Expert Fees relative to Easement Acquisitions of Parcel 175C and 575C in the Lawsuit entitled Collier County v. Richard H. Evans, et al, Case No. 01-1235-CA, Livingston Road Project No. 60071. 2) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners authorize the filing of a Lawsuit against a Collier County employee to seek reimbursement of a debt owed to the County by the employee in the sum of Eleven Hundred Three Dollars and Sixty-Two Cents ($1,103.62), plus costs. 3) Approve General Release submitted by WCI Communities providing for payment of previously unpaid education impact fees for Marbella at Pelican Bay, Inc. 17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. SHOULD ANY OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS BE MOVED TO THE REGULAR AGENDA ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN. A. This item has been continued indefinitely. Petition CU-01-AR-1912, R. Bruce Anderson of Young, Van Assenderp, Varnadoe and Anderson, P.A., and Margaret Perry of Wilson Miller Inc., representing Bonita Bay Group Inc., requesting Conditional Use "17" of the "A" Rural Agricultural Zoning District to allow for a golf course and related facilities for property located on the South side of Immokalee Road (CR-846) and approximately four miles East of Collier Boulevard (CR-951), in Sections 29, 30 and 31, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. B. Petition SNR-2002-AR-2239, the Community Development and Environmental Services Division, requesting a street name change for a portion of 16 July 30, 2002 Thomasson Drive to Thomasson Lane, located in Sections 13 and 24, Township 50 South, Range 25 East. C. Petition AVROW2002-AR2439 to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County's and the Public's interest in a portion of the road right-of-way for 14th Street North which was dedicated to the County by the Plat of "North Naples Highlands", as recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 12, Public Records of Collier County, Florida, located in Section 22, Township 49 South, Range 25 East. D. Continued from the June 11~ 2002 BCC Meetin!;l. Petition PUDZ-01-AR-1553, Michael R. Fernandez, of Planning Development, Inc., representing Relleum Inc. and Granite Development II, L.C., requesting a rezone from "A" Rural Agricultural to a Planned Unit Development (PUD) to be known as the Balmoral PUD allowing mix of residential dwelling types for property located on the East side of the future Livingston Road (CR 881) and approximately one mile South of Pine Ridge Road (CR 896) in Section 18, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. E. Petition DOA-2002-AR-2208, Robert J. Mulhere of RWA, Inc., representing Parklands Developments, L.P., requesting an amendment to the "Parklands" Development of Regional Impact (DRI) in order to extend the date of commencement for the project by one year to March 11, 2004 for property located on the East side of the future Logan Boulevard Extension and approximately 2 miles North of Immokalee Road (CR 846) in Section 9, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. F. VA-2002-AR-2444, Golden Dream Homes, representing Edith Montero and Osvaldo Rivero, requesting an after the fact variance of 2.5 feet from the required 37.5 foot front yard setback to 35 feet for property located on a corner lot at 1795 Desoto Boulevard South, further described as the South 180 feet of Tract 63, Golden Gate Estates Unit 85, in Section 21, Township 49 South, Range 28 East, Collier County, Florida. G. To adopt the proposed Resolution to establish fees for the processing of background checks and issuing driver identification cards; to reaffirm application and certification fees for certificate to operate a public vehicle for hire business; and to repeal Collier County Resolution No. 93-127, as amended. H. Petition PUDA-01-AR-2028, Robert Duane of Hole Montes Inc., representing Cypress Glen Development Corporation, requesting a rezone from "PUD" to "PUD" Planned Unit Development to be known as the Cypress Glen PUD for the purpose of decreasing the maximum building height from 3 stories to 2 stories, reducing the landscape buffer from 10 feet to 5 feet, revising the development standards, revising the master plan to depict the proposed internal placement of structures and modified traffic circulation system, and to add a water management area along the Western edge of the property for property located on the North side of Pine Ridge Road (CR 896) and approximately one quarter mile West of Livingston Road in Section 12, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. I. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners adopt an Ordinance utilizing CRA Funds to create a site improvement grant and impact 17 July 30, 2002 fee assistance grant for the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area of the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA). Ke This item has been continued indefinitely.. PUDZ-2001-AR-1464, Robert Duane, of Hole Montes, Inc., representing Robert C. Malt, requesting a rezone from "A" Rural Agricultural to "PUD" Planned Unit Development to be known as Estuary Bay, for 236 multi-family units and 79 affordable housing units for a maximum of 315 mutti-tamity units, for property located on the West side of Collier Boulevard (SR 951), 2 miles South of the intersection of US 41 and Collier Boulevard (SR 951), in Section 15, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 78.7 +/- acres. Approve a Resolution to amend Ordinance No. 2000-70 for changes to the by- laws of the Emergency Medical Services Advisory Council. 18. ADJOURN INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383. 18 July 30, 2002 AGENDA CHANGES BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING July 30, 2002 CONTINUE ITEM 7B TO THE SEPTEMBER 10~ 2002 BCC MEETING: VA-2002-AR- 2691, Don Cahill, of Don Cahill Architect/Builder, representing William and Joann Reckmeyer, requesting variances in the PUD Zoning District as follows: 1) From the required Gulf front yard (PUD Ordinance 85-83) setback that aligns with the State of Florida Coastal Construction Setback Line (CCSL) to allow (A) the balconies to extend a maximum of 8 feet West of the CCSL; (B) the roof to extend a maximum of eight feet five inches West of the CCSL; (C) the shear wall to extend a maximum of ten feet five inches West of the CCSL; and 2) from the required ten foot access drive right-of-way yard setback (PUD Ordinance 85-83) to allow: a building setback of eight feet, a variance of 2 feet, on the East side along Dominica Lane, for property located at 107 Dominica Lane, further described as Lot 9, Block C, Lely Barefoot Beach Unit 1, Plat Book 12, Pages 34-37, as recorded in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida in Section 6, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (Petitioner request.) CONTINUE ITEM 7C TO SEPTEMBER 10~ 2002 BCC MEETING: VA-2002-AR-2035, Kenneth D. Goodman, Esquire, of Goodman and Breen, requesting a 25-foot variance from the required 75-foot front yard setback to 50 feet for 20 lots in the Shady Hollow Trust Subdivision, which is located in Section 9, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, further described as Lots 1-20, Shady Hollow Trust, Collier County, Florida. (Petitioner request.) ITEM 8A WILL BE HEARD AT THE CONTINUATION OF THE JULY 30, 2002 BOARD MEETING TO BE HELD JULY 31, 2002 WITH A TIME CERTAIN OF 9:00 A.M. TO Bt: FOLLOWED BY ITEM 8H: (8A) Adoption of a Resolution amending the Road Impact Fee Rate Schedule, which is Schedule One of Appendix A of Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Law and Ordinances, the same being the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, as amended. (8H) Adoption of an Ordinance amending Chapter 74 of the County's Code of Laws and Ordinances, as previously amended by Ordinance No. 2001-13 (The Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance), prohibiting early payment of impact fees to avoid rate increases and distinguishing payment of impact fees from pre-payment of estimated future impact fees prerequisite to issuance of a Certificate of Public Facility Adequacy. (Commissioner Coletta request.) CONTINUE ITEM 8K TO SEPTEMBER 10, 2002 BCC MEETING: Public Hearing to consider transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs of a Resolution amending Ordinance No. 89-05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan, for the Immokalee Road/Collier Boulevard Area (Heritage Bay Development of Regional Impact) to establish the "Urban-Rural Fringe Transition Zone Overlay" for Sections 13, 14, 23, 24, T48S, R26E, Collier County Florida By: Amending the Future Land Use Element and Map Series; Amending the Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element; Amending the Potable Water Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element; Amending the Water and Sewer Service Boundary Map of the Public Facilities Element; Providing for Severability; and, Providing for an Effective Date. (Petitioner request.) ADD ITEM 8L THIS ITEM REQUIRES THAT ALL PARTICIPANTS BE SWORN IN AND EX PARTE DISCLOSURE BE PROVIDED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS: ST- 99-03, David Farmer, PE, of Keystone Custom Homes, requesting a Special Treatment Development Permit to allow development within a Special Treatment (ST) Overlay (ST Parcel 23A), located within the proposed Little Palm Island subdivision, in Section 23, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (Joe Schmitt, Administrator, Community Development) DELETE ITEM 10A: Proposal to impose a temporary moratorium on projects in the Whippoorwill Area (bounded on the North by Pine Ridge Road, on the South by the Wyndemere Subdivision, on the East by 1-75, and on the West by proposed Livingston Road) until such time as a master plan showing proposed infrastructure improvements, including at a minimum, potable water distribution, sanitary sewage collection, stormwater management, and roads, has been accepted by the Collier County Community Development and Environmental Services Division. (Staff request.) ITEM 10E WILL BE HEARD AT 10:30 A.M. Status report to the Board to provide a review of current roadway landscaping enhancement issues and requests for additional funding and to request the Board determine a policy for current and future roadway enhancement initiatives. (Staff request.) ADD ITEM 13A THIS ITEM WILL BE HEARD AT 9:30 A.M. Discussion by Dwight Brock, Clerk of Courts relating to issues that concern the North Collier Wastewater Treatment Plant. AMEND THE TITLE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON ITEM 16(A)4 TO READ AS FOLLOWS: Proposal to accept a master plan and acknowledge the lega~ agreement for infrastructure to serve projects in the Whippoorwill area (bounded on the north by Pine Ridge Road, on the South by the Wyndemere Subdivision, on the east by 1-75 right-of-way, and on the west by proposed Livingston Road, which is presently under construction. (Staff request.) DELETE ITEM 16(A)9: Approval of the Mortgage and Promissory Note for a Seventy-Five Thousand ($75,000) Dollar Loan to Renaissance Manor, Inc., a Non- Profit Housing Provider, to assist in the construction of a Special Needs Affordable Housing Development. (Petitioner's Request) CONTINUE ITEM 16(B)15 TO SEPTEMBER 10, 2002 BCC MEETING: Approval of a First Amendment to Lease Agreement with LB/P Groveway, LLC for its two-month continued use of county-owned property netting the County $4,000 in additional rent. (Staff request.) CONTINUE ITEM 16(C)14 TO SEPTEMBER 10, 2002 BCC MEETING: To authorize monthly billing of irrigation water availability charge as identified in the executed agreement by and between the Collier County Water-Sewer District and the Old Collier Golf Club, Inc. (Staff request.) AGENDA CHANGES BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING July 30, 2002 NOTES: Items 10F, 10G, 10H, contingent upon decision of 10E. Item 16(C)16: This is an extension in the process because of issues with Florida Department of Environmental Protection. N/HEREA$, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, N/HEREA$, ~HEREA$, N/HERE,4$, WHEREA$~ PROCLA/dA TION approximntely $$, 000 women will be diagnosed with ovarian cancer in the U. $. every year. The majority of these (70 p~rcent) will be detected in the advanced stages: mhd, ovarian cancer is the most deadly ~tynecolo~ical cancer becaute it usuo#y diagnosed in its late sto~s when it is more difficult to treat; on~, fJ~s haw shown only m/n/mM impertinent over the I~$t I~-~ , years; and, if diaEnoaed and t~ated at an early $taEe, ~-95 pe~tnt of women ~9noxtd with ovarian cancer w/Il bt aliw ~ive years later; an~ the incidence of ovarian cancer/s increa$i~ over time, with a 30 percent incrtaxe in th~ ~varian cancer cas~$ diagnosed and an I8 ~ent ~varJan cancer ~po~ed in ~8~ and 1995; and, WHEREAS, it/s more about ovarian the Ovarian Cancer Alliance Ovarian Cancer Awareness Afonth NON/THEREFORE, be it proc/aimed by the 8ante of County Commissioners of Co/lite County, ?Joe/do that ~ptember b~ Ovarian Cancer Awareness/Aanth in Co/Her Coun~ 2~2. DONE AND ORDERED THIS $Oth Day of ~Tuly ZOOZ. BOARD OF COUNTY COtANIZ$$ZONER$ COLLZER COUN7¥, ?LORZDA DN/I~HT E BROCK, CLERK ~-~A4 COLLar J U L 3 O 200Z Pg- / pROCLAA~A T~ON WHEREAS, on the morn/n9 of June $ 7~, ZOO2 a house fire was reported Golden Gate City; and, WHEREAS, the £ollow£m2 law enforcement officers responded to the emergency call: Corporal Todd Sanner, Corporal Chris ~Tordan, Deputy ~Tuan /Aura/as, Deputy Byron Tomlinson; and, WHEREAS, these brave 9entlemen did not think twice when on-lookers informed them the occupant was still in the house. They entered the burn/n9 house, r/skin9 their lives in order to save the life of the homeowner; and, the expertise and bravery of these 9ent/emen prove that there are true heroes anon9 us, right here in our community; and, these officers went beyond the call of duty in order to ensure the sa£ety of a Coil/er County cffizen. NOW THEREFORE, be if proclaimed by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that these members of the 6olden Gate Sheriff's station be applauded for their heroic efforts and unselfishness in the line of dory. DONE AND ORDERED TFI_r$ $Oth Day of ~Tuly ~00~. BOARD OF COUNt/COI~I~-~$$£ONER$ COLI. ZER COUN"~t, FLOR£DA A ~-FE$ T: J£1~ COL~FVA, DWXGHT E. BROCK, CLERK .o. - - JUL 3§ 21~OZ Pg. I .. PROCLAMATZON WHEREAS, the Housing Finance Authority of Collier County (the "Authority") was duly created by Ordinance No. 80-66 adopted by the Board of County Commissioners af Collier County, Florida, on ,Tuly 29, 1980 for the purpose of assisting persons of Iow, moderate and middle income in obtaining affordable housing in Collier County; and, WHEREAS, $ohn T. ~on~oy, ,Tr. was as original appointee to the Authority at its c~eation in 1980; and, WHEREAS, $ohn T. ~onroy, `Tr. has served as Chairman of the Authority since ' 1982: and, WHEREAS, under his leadership, the Authority has provided financing for the construction of mo~e than 3,400 single and multifamily housing units in Collier County; and, WHEREAS, under his inco~;s~- inJttmted.prTx3eams to ~fi~.persons: ,:,nd, has made g~ants to community for persons of Iow for Humanity, and has assistance for ?~.:~ed from .the' Aul'hOri:ty i~;~at, studies ~t NOW THEREFORE be it proclaimed'by the Board of ~'~?:~dlier catmty.-l~t_aHcla that, :.~Tohn T. DONE AND ORDERED this 3( Conroy, ,Tr. has full time post ~mmissioners of · `Tr. is hereby Collier County Housing Finance on behalf of the g~titude of this ..E~hn T. ¢onroy, `Tr. the all his future endeavors. BOAI~b OF CO~#~-Y CO&~X~ORE~ CO! ! rER CO~)I~vY. ~LODZDA ~ COLETTA, CI4AX~AAI DFI/'X~I7' ~. BROCK, C~ERK AGE N~A~ITEM l 0 COLLIER COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE 3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL NAPLES, FLORIDA 34112 (941) 774-8383 FAX (941) 774-4010 July 1,2002 Mr. Albert Lee 909 Pine Street Immokalee, FL 34142 Re: Public Petition Request to Discuss the Recreation Center on School Drive, Immokalee Dear Mr. Lee: Please be advised that you are scheduled to appear before the Collier County Board of Commissioners at the meeting of July 30, 2002, regarding the above referenced subject. Your petition to the Board of County Commissioners will be limited to ten minutes. Please be advised that the Board will take no action on your petition at this meeting. However, your petition may be placed on a future agenda for consideration at the Board's discretion. Therefore, your petition to the Board should be to advise them of your concern and the need for action by the Board at a future meeting. The meeting will begin at 9:00 a.m. in the Board's Chambers on the Third Floor of the W. Harmon Turner Building (Building "F") of the government complex. Please arrange to be present at this meeting and to respond to inquiries by Board members. If you require any further information or assistance, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, Deputy County Manager JVM:jb cc: David Weigel, County Attorney Joe Schmitt, CD&ES Administrator - RECEIVED - JUN, 7 2002 :._ :~ ,~. -u~ Immokalee, FL COUllty Comllliss~o%~'rs J~e 13, 2002 Mr. James N. Coletta, Chai~an Collier Cowry Board of Cowry Commissioners 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, Florida 34112 Dear Mr. Chai~an: We the me~ers of the Black co--unity would like to be placed on the Board of County Commissioners' agenda to talk about the building that is ~o~ as the Recreation Center on School Drive. Some 30 years ago, we went into an agreement with the Commissioners for a 99-year lease, at $1.00 a year. We purchased the building that was a lo~ge and bar belonging to Sam Heath. We moved the building on that particular piece of property, we maintained it, paid for water and lights, and are still doing so. ~d, to the best of our knowledge, the County has not paid one pe~y for anything in or on that building. ~d now they want to tear it dom. The co--unity is still using that building and would like to continue using it. We are t~ing to get your attention by getting on your agenda. So please let us continue using our building. We would like to get on your agenda to discuss it further. cc: Tom Olliff, County Manager Commissioner James D. Carter Po~t-~'FaxN0te 7671 Commissioner Donna Fiala '" ~ ~, -~Ol~3~ Co~issioner Tom He~in9 --- Co~issioner Fred Coyle COLLIER COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE 3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL NAPLES, FLORIDA 34112 July 3, 2002 (941) 774-8383 Mr. Garrett F. X. Beyrent 3115 Collier Boulevard Naples, FL 34116 Re: Public Petition Request to Discuss Moratorium Impact on Proposed Affordable Housing Development Dear Mr. Beyrent: Please be advised that you are scheduled to appear before the Collier County Board of Commissioners at the meeting of July 30, 2002, regarding the above referenced subject· Your petition to the Board of County Commissioners will be limited to ten minutes. Please be advised that the Board will take no action on your petition at this meeting. However, your petition may be placed on a future agenda for consideration at the Board's discretion. Therefore, your petition to the Board should be to advise them of your concern and the need for action by the Board at a future meeting. The meeting will begin at 9:00 a.m. in the Board's Chambers on the Third Floor of the W. Harmon Turner Building (Building "F") of the government complex. Please arrange to be present at this meeting and to respond to inquiries by Board members. If you require any further information or assistance, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, James V. Mudd Deputy County Manager JVM:jb cc: David Weigel, County Attorney Joe Schmitt, CD&ES Administrator ~~-~;..';.~ ..... ~. Norman Feder, Transportation Services Administrator ... 3 ,~ 2~,,,. lOa.. ~ for t~ opportmt~ to ~ my con~s to some o£you aft~. ~at~ ~~s, b~ ~s ~ at the ~ ~e ad ~p~ ~ ~~. ~ ~ a~ ~ ~d b~ o ~) bus ~ pr~ ~e ~ b~s ~ b ~ ~e ~b~. b '~e to ~ ~ ~ ~ ~M~ h~g. a~bb m~ ~ ~ a~te ~e d~pmw ~~~ p~ ~r ~ k~8. ~ ~r ~ ~m~, RECEIVED COUNTY MANAGER OFFICE ( arrett e rent Real Estate Broker / Developer :: -:.~ r~ ACTION , 3115 Collier Blvd. Tel (941) 434-433(~ Naples, FL. 34116 Cell (941) 821.765~1LE Dear Collier County Manager Mudd, 7/9/02 This letter shall serve as my official request to appear and speak before the Collier County Board of Commissioners at the July 30,2002 Public Meeting. I am requesting to speak only regarding my request to exempt the Growth Managements Plan for Affordable Housing from the moratorium. (garrrtt Y.X. i!Irl/rent ileal Estate Broker / Developer 506 Gordonia Road Naples, FI. 34108 're~ (941) 434-4330 Cell (941) 821-7656 Donna Fiala, 7-9-02 Attached please find the two letters that I recieved last week from Commissioners Coletta and Henning. I am also enclosing a letter I recieved from County Planner Margaret Wuerstle. She is responding to six questions i asked her regarding the effects of the moratorium on my Magnolia Pond PUD which I have resubmitted as an Affordable Housing or Work Force Development. This would also include Housing for the Elderly. The only possible way that I could provide this desperately needed shelter would be in the following manner. LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 2.6.9 and 2.6.9.4 shall be ammended to allow Affordable Housing for the use -. o~ Work Force and' Elderly Housing and LDC SECTIONS 2.2.3.7.1.2, 2,2.3.7.4.,and 2.6.9.4 of the Collier County Land Development Code shall also not apply. I am not an attorney or land planner but I have had the great fortune to have been in the land development industry in Collier County for over 30 years. I have worked to put roofs over some 10,000 peoples heads that could never afford to live in a place like Port Royal. I hope that you will support me in my efforts to continue what I sincerely believe to be a worthwhile effort. Sincerely, Garrett F.X. Beyrent Real Estate Development Corporation of America ( arrett i!i rent Real Estate Broker / Developer 3115 Collier Blvd. RI (941) 4~330 Naples, FL. ~116 ~11 (~1) 821-7656 Dear Collier COUnty Commissioner Coyle, 7/9/02 I realize that this letter to you will be falling on deaf ears. I am assuming this from the remarks you made at the last County Commission Meeting. When the project that dramatically reduced both its density and some of it's Golf Course you saw to rubber stamp it's approval with out even public comment. I thought you might just be joking but some people thinklow density "urban sprawl", is better than the concentration 'oft!high density" housing in the Urban Area. This is exactly the reason that so many low density, high end, golf course projects have proliferated through out Collier County. These projects are jamming our roads with single individuals in each car driving several miles just to go shopping. I myself began riding the County's new C.A.T. trollys and have come to understand the need for public transportation. If you really feel that work force housing, affordable housing, and Housing for the Elderly is a joke and that you will render it only lip service as so many Commissioners have done to me over the past 30 years that I have spent in this sector of the Collier County housing market;then please feel free to vote against the following ammendment that I will be proposing before the Board of Commissioners on July 30. LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 2.6.9 and 2.6.9.4 shall be amended to allow Affordable Housing for the use of Work Force and Elderly Housing and LDC Sections 2.2.3.7.1.2 , 2.3.3.7.4 and 2.6.9.4 of this code shall also not apply. This request has only one purpose, it is expressly needed for the protection of "entry level "housing in Collier County. Sincerely, Garrett F.X. Beyrent Real Estate Developmen' Corporation of the United States of America. ( arr tt J.X. Real Estate Broker / Developer 3115 Collier Blvd. Tel (941) 434-4330 Naples, FL, 34116 Cell (941) 821-7656 Dear Collier County Commissioner Carter, 7-10-02 I sincerely hope that you will not allow that "TYRANT" Fred Tarrant, to replace you on the Board of County Commissioners! You owe it to your constituants to protect them from this LUNATIC. The rest of this letter has nothing whatsoever to do with the above. I am writing in reference to a change that I will be requesting on July 30th, before the Board of Commissioners in the Land Development Code, more specifically Codes. 2.6.9 and 2.6.9.4. which I asking to be changed to allow for Affordable Housing, Work Force and also Housing for the Elderly to be exempted from the pending moratorium. This would also require the deletion of LDC Sections 2.2.3.7.1.2, 2.3.3.7.4 and 2.6.9.4 as well. This will allow me to continue to process the current rezoning application I have in your Planning Pre-App. Level. I am seeking to c~ange my current "and vested" Magnolia Pond PUD to allow for 700 Multifamily dwelling units, to be construction in accordance with the Affordable Housing Element of the County Land Development Code. As Chairman Coletta so '~oted ,~ '" Yeah, Your Cheap Condos, East Naples". I of course retorted , "Yeah, then Commissioner Donna Fiala 1.c the "Queen of Affordable Housing". In any case I am begging you not to quit your "DAY JOB" as a member of the Board of County Commissioners as you well know,if t~e looney gets in, nothing will be acomplished in BLDG F 3rd Fl. Sincerely, Garrett F.X. Beyrent Real Estate Development Corporation of America Sarr tt e ren! Real Estate Broker / Developer 3115 Collier Blvd. Tel (941 ) 434-4330' Naples, FL. 34116 Cell (941) 821-7656 Dear Tom Henning, Vice Chairman Commissioner, District 3 7/9/02 Thank yov for your letter to me dated June 21,2002 a copy of which I have attached. I am attaching a map of the area around my Magnolia Pond PUD to familiarize you with the road access situation. Originally my property had direct access to Radio Road (SEE MAP) however this access was eliminated with the construction of Interstate 75. At that time the State of FL. in lieu of condemning my property, provided another access route to it. This new road was dubbed ACCESS ROAD ~ 2 and was to provide a direct link to Ccllier Blvd. Unfortunately the State informed me in 1998 that they had no intention of building this road even though today they still own the 60 X % Mile piece of land on which the road is to be constructed. In effect, the State is leaving it up to Collier County or the developers that will be using it, to build it. One third of this road was constructed this year by the developers of the Noah's Landing PUD and the Collier Ccunty School Board is currently working with myself in completing the final portion to access the new Golden Gate High School. As far as the suggestion that I access my PUD via Santa Barbara Blvd, I must report that this is not possible. For one thing the Forrest Park PUD, which I would have to go through!is a "Gated "community with private,not public, roads. This is further complicated by the fact that the Eastern terminis of what is known as Recreation Lane, is planned to be gated and designated for .Fire and Rescue Access only.(SEE MAP).Furthermore, Collier Blvd!s traffic level of service is much greater than Santa Barbara Blvd. which will soon be failing if it is not extended to Rattlesnake Hammock Rd. or improved by other means. The irony of all this was best explained to me by Affordable Housing Chairman Mark Strain, when he pointed out that the traffic backing up at the Davis Blvd/ Collier intersection is mostly due to Collier "Workforce" drivers who are forced to commute to Lee County as they cannot afford to live here. I hope this informatio~ has been of some value to you, but if you need more, please contact me at your earliest convience. A letter I recieved today from County Planner Margaret Wuerstle is also attached. Sincerely, ~ --%t~.z---[ ,.~.AGE~k~:.~_ t Garrett F.X. Be yrent ',' ! Owner / Developer ~ .... ~, &~:, [ Magnolia Pond PUD (fiarrett el rent Real Estate Broker / Developer 3115 Collier Blvd. Tel (941) 434-4330 Naples, FL. 34116 Cell (941)821-7656 Dear Jim Coletta', Chairman Commissioner, District 5 July 8,2002 Thank you for your letter to me dated June 28,2002 a copy of which I have attached. I am requesting the right to discuss the recent moratorium proposed by the County and the effects it will have on both my Magnolia Pond PUD and other Affordable Housing developments in the area. As I have previously asked the Board at two recent Commission meetings, I once again am requesting the exemption of all Affordable Housing projects from the moratorium.Considering the fact that the Commission has seen it fit to exempt such "Essential Services" as Schools, Fire Stations, police stations and Churches and Hospitals, it seems only logical to me that "Workforce housing, considering the fact that Collier County is some 20,000 dwelling units shy of the States Growth Mgmt. demand, should be included in the aforementioned list of exemptions from the moratorium. At this time I am also requesting a formal inclusion of the above at the July 30 Commission Meeting. I am also attaching a letter from Planning Director Margaret Wuerstle regarding the above. Sincerely, Garrett F.X. Beyrent Owner / Developer CC Com. Fiala cc ~omi Uen~ing ccCC om°m' ~ao~[~r cc MGR. Mudd COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION Suly 3, 2002 PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FL 34104 Mr. Garrett F.X. Beyrent 506 Gordonia Road Naples Florida 34108 Dear Mr. Beyrent: RE: Magnolia Pond PUD (Ordinance 98-49). Responding to your letter of June 13, 2002, Planning Services offers the following comments in response to your five questions: 1. Our current PUD (Ord. 98-49) allows for 5.5 units per acre and accesses Collier Blvd. Via Magnolia Pond Lane. What effect does the moratorium have on our ability to develop this PUD? Response: Magnolia Pond PUD (98-49), .located in Section 34, Range 26, Township 49, with access limited to Collier Boulevard (CR 951), falls within the "immediately adjacent" area defined by the interim development control (moratorium) {}2.2.3.7.1.2 as: "any development that obtains through direct connection or use of a non-major public or private roadway access to the county's major roadway system via an interim development (moratorium) segment as depicted on the attached map". Section 2.2.3.7.4 "Limitations on development: Except for the exemptions listed below, no development order, including any building pen-nit, shall be issued for any improvements upon any lot tract or parcel of land lying: (1) Immediately adjacent to those roadway segments or links outlined under the Geographic Areas above; or (2) Adjacent/contiguous to those roadway segments or links outlined under the Geographic Areas above, and on which development of land contributes greater than de minimus impact to the interim development control (moratorium) segment". Therefore, you will be unable to obtain any development order or building permit for Magnolia Pond PUD until the Comprehensive Plan amendments providing for a new transportation concurrency management system and the implementing land development regulations become legally effective. ~~:~:. Phone (941) 403-2400 Fax (941) 643-6968 www. colliergov, net Garrett F.X. Beyrent July 3, 2002 Page 2 2. What effect does the moratorium have if we continued with our application for a re-zone to affordable housing at up to 15 units per acre? Response: Planning Services will accept applications for re-zoning of land affected by the moratorium, however, until the moratorium has been lifted or repealed, no development order may be issued. 3. With the Benderson Group and WalMart having pre-paid impact fees, have they affectively swallowed up all the remaining road capacity to the exclusion of others? Response: Exemptions, defined by the interim development control (moratorium) §2.2.3.7.5(4) as: "any development for which a valid certificate of public facility adequacy has been issued and remains in effect as of the adoption date of this ordinance". (5) "Any development pursuant to a final site plan or final subdivision, for which no waiver and release has been executed pursuant to § 3.15.7 of this code, or building permit issued between 1995 and the adoption date of this ordinance". "Also, any development or project that is deemed to be "vested" according to the common law as established by the Florida Courts". Should you feel that your project is "vested" you may make application for determination of vested rights. Road capacity, under the current "check book" approach, is administered on a first come first served policy. Assuming that the road capacity has been exceeded by the proposed developments, your project would be subject to "conditions". Once t-he "conditions" were established and in place,' this would satisfy the deficit in capacity and permit continuation of your plans. 4. If we are delayed by this moratorium with our development plans, will there be any LDC changes to prevent our PUD from sun setting? Response: The delays created by the moratorium are delays initiated by the government and therefore will not penalize your project for any time-constrained issues. 5. Is it possible to revisit the current moratorium passed on Tuesday by the BCC, and include affordable housing as an essential service along with Police, Fire, EMS and Schools? Garrett F.X. Beyrent July 3, 2002 Page 3 Response: You are free to petition the BCC for any cause that you deem appropriate. However, the Land Development Code § 2.6.9 defines "Essential Services" and § 2.6.9.4 states: "Essential services shall not be deemed to include the erection of structures for commercial activities". I trust that the foregoing assists you in your decision-making. Should you require additional information, please call Planning Services at 941-403-2400. Sincerely, cc: Susan Murray, Planning Manager Ray Bellows, Chief Planner PUD 98-49 Correspondence File File G:SchneiderMagnoliaPUD COLLIER COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE 3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL July 8, 2002 NAPLES, FLORIDA 34112 (941) 774-8383 Mr. George O. Risher, President FAX (941) 774-4010 G.J.R. of Naples, Inc. G's General Store 21 Golden Gate Boulevard, East Naples, FL 34120 Re: Public Petition Request to Discuss Access Issue on Golden Gate Boulevard Dear Mr. Risher: Please be advised that you are scheduled to appear before the Collier County Board of Commissioners at the meeting of July 30, 2002, regarding the above referenced subject. Your petition to the Board of County Commissioners will be limited to ten minutes. Please be advised that the Board will take no action on your petition at this meeting. However, your petition may be placed on a future agenda for consideration at the Board's discretion. Therefore, your petition to the Board should be to advise them of your concern and the need for action by the Board at a future meeting. The meeting will begin at 9:00 a.m. in the Board's Chambers on the Third Floor of the W. Harmon Turner Building (Building "F") of the government complex. Please arrange to be present at this meeting and to respond to inquiries by Board members. If you require any further information or assistance, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, 7James V. Mudd Deputy County Manager JVM:jb cc: David Weigel, County Attorney .,.-.- Norman Feder, Transportation Services Administrator ----Original Message .... From: Rich Yovanovich [mailto:RYovanovich@gcjlaw.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 6:47 PM To: coletta_j Cc: 'caycon@aol.com' Subject: G's General store Dear Commissioner Colletta: I have forwarded your June 17, 2002, letter to me and received in my office on June 24, 2002, to our client, George Risher. Our client instructed me to send this e-mail expressing that he is upset and disappointed that you did not schedule his public petition request before the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) for the June 25, 2002, BCC agenda. Mr. Risher was fully aware that he was facing an uphill battle in convincing the other Commissioners that access to his property should be provided to those traveling east on Golden Gate Boulevard. However, Mr. Risher believes he was promised certain access to his property when he agreed to convey a portion of his property to the County prior to the construction plans for Golden Gate Boulevard being finalized. Mr. Risher is working with his neighbor to the east to see if he can purchase the property to assist the County in resolving the access issue which resulted from the County's failure to keep its commitment to Mr. Risher. Time is of the essence to provide a temporary resolution to this matter so that the existing tenants of Mr. Risher do not suffer from the County's taking of the access to Golden Gate Boulevard. Mr. Risher again requests that he be placed on the next BCC agenda so that he can discuss this matter with the entire Board of County Commissioners. Please schedule thiS matter for the Board's July 30, 2002, agenda. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Risher, or myself. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY VA-2001-AR-1747 PAMELA STEWART, ESQUIRE, REPRESENTING MARK VON SPITZOCK, REQUESTING A S-FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED REAR YARD SETBACK OF 10 FEET TO $ FEET FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1249 POMPEI LANE, FURTHER DESCRIBED AS LOT 12, BLOCK H, SORRENTO GARDENS UNIT 3, SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. OBJECTIVE: That the community's interest is maintained in a single-family neighborhood. CONSIDERATIONS: The petitioner requests a 5-foot variance from the required 1 O-foot rear-yard setback to 5 feet, for a pool enclosure on a single-family house. The petitioner has a pool with a fence and wishes to add a screen enclosure around the pool. The pool meets the 10-foot rear yard accessory setback (the fence is not required to meet the setback). In order to meet the 10-foot setback, the screen enclosure would be abutting the lip of the pool. For safety in maintaining the pool, the petitioner requests a 5-foot variance to allow a walkway around the pool. In addition, the petitioner states that a screen enclosure around the pool will prevent neighborhood children from accidentally falling into the pool. Staff analysis determined that the home was permitted and built with a fi'ont setback of 35 feet. The RSF-4 district requires a 25-foot front yard, so the house was originally built with a fi-ont yard 10 feet deeper than required, resulting in a smaller back yard. The smaller backyard resulted in a smaller area to construct the pool and screen enclosure. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this petition will have no fiscal impact on Collier County. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Approval of this variance will not affect or change the requirements of the Growth Management Plan. JUL302002 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The site is a platted lot with an existing single-family home. There are no unusual environmental issues associated with this petition. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is not located within an Area of Historical and Archaeological Probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no survey or Waiver of Historic and Archaeological Survey & Assessment is required. EAC RECOMMENDATION: The Environmental Advisory Council did not review this petition because the EAC does not normally hear variance petitions. CCPC RECOMMENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission heard this petition on June 20, 2002. The Commissioners heard the Staff presentation and a presentation by the petitioner. A motion was made by Commissioner Strain, seconded by Commissioner Wolfley, to recommend approval of the variance. The Planning Commission voted 7 to 0 to forward the petition to the BZA with a recommendation of approval. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The petitioner was limited in the area of the backyard in which to construct a pool. A pool with a fence exists, but the addition a pool enclosure would not leave room for maintenance around the pool if the setback were met. No calls or letters of objection were received. The petitioner provided letters of no objection. However, there is no land related hardship associated with this variance. Therefore, Planning Services staff recommended that the CCPC forward Petition VA- 2001-AR-1747 to the BZA with a recommendation of denial. JUL 3 0 2002 2 pg. 2.. PREPARED BY: F~ISCHL, AICP DATE PRINCIPAL PLANNER REVIEWED BY: .-/~USAN MURRAY, AICP / DATE CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER MARGARFA'IWUERSTLE, AICP DATE PLANNIN(LSERVICES DIRECTOR APPROVED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR ~'ecutive summary~VA-2001 -AR- 1747 JUL 3 0 2002 MEMORANDUM TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DATE: MAY 29, 2002 SUBJECT: PETITION VA-2001-AR-1747 AGENT/APPLICANT: OWNER: Mark W. Von Spitzock Gloria J. Von Spitzock 1249 Pompei Lane Naples, FL 34103-8913 AGENT: Pamela Stewart, Esq. 11983 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 136 Naples, FL 34110 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests a 5-foot variance from the required 1 O-foot rear-yard setback to 5 feet, for a pool enclosure on a single-family house. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located at 1249 Pompei Lane within the Sorrento Gardens subdivision. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The petitioner has a pool with a fence and wishes to add a screen enclosure around the pool. The pool meets the 10-foot rear yard accessory setback (the fence is not required to m ~'et th6~q~t:ll:~/h In order to meet the 10-foot setback, the screen enclosure would be abutting the li oft~e pool. t7 ~ JUL 3 0 2002 For safety in maintaining the pool, the petitioner requests a 5-foot variance to allow a walkway around the pool. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Subject: Single-family house; zoned RSF-4 Surrounding: North - Single-family house; zoned RSF-4 East - Single-family house; zoned RSF-4 South - Pompei Lane ROW West - Single-family house; zoned RSF-4 HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is not located within an area of historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, a Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment or waiver is not required. EVALUATION FOR IMPACTS TO TRANSPORTATION~ INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENT: Approval of this variance request will have no effect on infrastructure, transportation or the environment. ANALYSIS: Section 2.7.5 of the Land Development Code grants the authority to the Board of Zoning Appeals to grant variances. The Planning Commission is advisory to the BZA and utilizes the provisions of Section 2.7.5.6.1 through 2.7.5.6.8, which are general guidelines to be used to assist the Commission in making a determination. Responses to the items in Section 2.7.5.6 are as follows: a. Are there special conditions and circumstances existing, which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land, structure or building involved? Yes. The home was permitted and built with a front setback of 35 feet. The RSF-4 district requires a 25-foot front yard, so the house was originally built with a front yard 10 feet deeper than required, resulting in a smaller back yard. b. Are there special conditions and circumstances, which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property, which is the subject of the variance request? ~-- No. The pool was constructed to a size that would make it difficult to olaCtnlet enclosure in the future. ~io._~ rr~- JUL 3 0 2002 c. Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this Land Development Code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant? No. There is no land-related hardship. A house exists on the property. A pool is customary, but not a requirement. A pool of a smaller size could have been constructed with an enclosure that would meet thc 10-foot rear yard setback. d. Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety and welfare? No. A fence around a pool meets building regulations; there is no requirement for a screen enclosure. However, the requested variance is the minimum required to construct a pool enclosure to the size requested by the petitioner. e. Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district? Yes, the granting of this variance will allow the petitioner to have a smaller rear yard than the minimum required in the RSF-4 zoning district. f. Will granting the variance be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this Land Development Code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare? No, this variance will allow the screen enclosure to be closer to the rear lot line than other houses in the zoning district. g. Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate .the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf courses, etc.? No. The subject property is adjacent to a house to the north. h. Will granting the variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan? Approval of this variance will not affect or change the requirements of the Growth Management Plan. 2002 EAC RECOMMENDATION: The Environmental Advisory Council does not normally hear variance petitions. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The petitioner was limited in the area of the backyard in which to construct a pool. A pool with a fence exists, but the addition a pool enclosure would not leave room for maintenance around the pool if the setback were met. However, there is no land related hardship associated with this variance. Therefore, Planning Services staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition VA- 2001-AR-1747 to the BZA with a recommendation of denial. PREPARED BY: FR~__D. '~EIS CHL, AICP DATE PRINCIPAL PLANNER REVIEWED BY: ,-SUSAN MURRAY, AICP DATE CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER & INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR APPROVED BY: JOSEPH K. SCHMITT DATE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR Petition Number: VA-2001-AR-1747 Collier County Planning Commission: KENNETH L. ABERNATHY, Q~AIRMAN JUL 3 0 2002 VA-2001-AR-1747 PROJECT #2001110026 DATE: 11/15/01 FRED REISCHL VARIANCE PETITION (VAR/ANCE FROM SETBACK (S) REQUIRED FOR A PARTICULAR ZONING DISTRICT Petition No. Date Petition Received: Planner Assigned: h~/'c_- ,b Commission District: .,, ABOVE TO BE COMPLETED BY STAFF GENERAL INFORMATION: Petitioner's Name: Mark and Gloria Von Spitzock 1249 Pompei Lane Petitioner's Address: Naples, FL 34103 Telephone: (941) 263-2789 Agent's Name: Pamela Stewart, Esq. Agent's Address: 11983 Tamiami Trail N., Suite 136, Naples, FL 34110 Telephone: (941) 514-4989 JUL 3 O 2002 Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 Pa 1 oleg. COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PL.~NING SERVICES/CURRENT PLANNING 2800 N. HORSESHOE DRIVE - NAPLES, FL 34104 PHONE (9411) 403-2400/FAX (941) 643-6968 Complete the following for all Association(s) affiliated with this petition. (Provide additional sheets if necessary) Name of Homeowner Association: Nlailing Address City State __ Zip. Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address City State __ Zip. Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address City State __ Zip. Name of blaster Association: Mailing Address City State __ Zip Name of Civic Association: Mailing Address City State __ Zip PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal Description of Subject Property: Subdivision: Sorrent. o Gardens Unit 3 Lot (s) 12 Block (s) H Section Twp. Range Property I.D. # 73930440000 Metes & Bounds Description: ~__~..__~ ~'"~- JUL 3 O 2002 10 Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 Page _ v Address of Subject ProperW: ~ I f different from Petitioner' s address) Current Zoning and Land use of Subject Parcel: Urban Residential RSF-4 Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: ZONING LAND USE N S Right Right of Way W E Minimum Yard Requirements for Subject Propert?': Front: 25' Comer Lot: Yes [--] No ITl Side: 7 1/2' Waterfront Lot: Yes [--] No [] Rear: House 25', pool 10' JUL 3 0 2002 Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 Page 3 of 8 Nature of Petition Provide a detailed explanation of the request including what structures are existing and what is proposed; the amount of encroachment proposed using numbers, i.e. reduce front setback fi'om 25' to 18'; when property owner purchased property; when existing principal structure was built (include building permit number (s) if possible); why encroachment is necessary; how existing encroachment came to be; etc. The Petitioners are constructing a pool at their residence and for safety reasons would like to erect a pool enclosure. The pool enclosure would encroach 5' into the rear setback, i.e. reduce the rear setback from 10' to 5'. The pool permit number is 2001 061 504. JUL 3 0 2002 .I Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 Page 4 [[8 1~8.-- -- Please note that staff and the Collier Count3' Plarmmg Connrnssion shall be guided in their recommendation to the Board of zoning Appeals, and that the Board of zoning appeals shall be guided m its determination to approve or den)' a variance petition by the below listed criteria (1-8). (Please address this criteria using additional pages if necessary.) 1. Are there special conditions and circumstances existing which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land, slructure, or building involved. 2. Are there special conditions and circumstances which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property which is the subject of the variance request. 3. Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties on the applicant. 4. Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety or welfare. JUL 2002 Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 Page 5 ~f 8 Pg. 1~ 5. Wilt granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district. l~o. 6. Will granting the variance be in harmony with the intent and purpose of this zoning code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Yes. 7. Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf course, etc. No. 8. Will granting the variance be consistent with the growth management plan. Yes. JUL 3 0 2002 ,I Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 Page 6 o! ~ P~' IT VA-2001-AR-1747 Q PROJECT #2001110026 DATE: 11/15/01 FRED REISCHL VARIANCE PETITION APPLICATION SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION PACKET! RE Q UIREMENTS # o COPIES REQUIRED 1. Completed Application 15 2. Completed Owner/Agent Affidavit, Notarized 1 3. Pre-application notes/minutes 15 4. Survey of property, showing the encroachment 1 (measured in feet) ~,~/~a-~'~-~ ~ 3~"...dL ~ 5. Site Plan depicting the following: 15 a) All property boundaries & dimensions b) All existing and proposed structures (labeled as such) c) North arrow, date and scale of drawing d) Required setbacks & proposed setbacks 6. Location map depicting major streets in area for 1 reference 7. Pre-Application fee, Applicaton fee and Data Conversion - fee, checks shall be made payable to Collier County Board of Commissioners ~'~ ~5,~2 ~ 8. Other Requirements- - As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing of this petition. Applicant/Agen-~'~ign~tt~re - / D~ate JUL 3 0 2002 Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 Pal;, ? ofl~- ~ ~ ApplicanV'Agent Signature Date A FFIDA FIT Mark William gon Spitzock & [{re'~ Gloria ,lean Von Sptizock being first duly sworn, depose and say that we~ktRrl~are the owners of the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing; that all the answers to thc questions in this application, including the disclosure of interest information, all sketches, data, and other supplementary ~natter attached to and made a part of this application, are honest and true to the best of our knowledge and belief IFe~ understand that the information requested on this application must be complete and accurate and that the content of this form, whether computer generated or County prmted shall not be altered. Public hearings will not be advertised until this application is deemed complete, and all required information has been submitted. As property owner BZe, tI furlher authorize parna 1 a st'.awart, Esqulra to act as our ~r' representative in any matters regarding this Petition. /ped or Printed Name of Owner Typed or Printed Name of Owner Mark William Yon Spitzock Gloria Jean Yon Spitzock The foregoing instrumed~t was ackno~his /~'day of OeT-~.~et/~, t1~01, by JkJpt,:4-~/o~;,~ ~ ¢/; ,-l ccct w~e or has produced as identification. State of Florida (Signature of Notary Public - State of (Print, Type, or Stamp Commissioned Name of Notary Public) YA-200'I-AR-'174 PROJECT #200111 FRED REISCHL PLUMB DEEP HEAT ~ ~ '; / i - RETURN TO SPA BOTTOM: ~ SPA STE~ - - " . k : , ~ Spa .Size CENTER ~ ~ :' ~' & '~ ' ~ ~ Spa De~h ~uSEWrTH BALL1 ! '2' VALvESCH 40~PVC 1 ~' LEDGED SPILLWAY ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . , ~ Jets 4 Ben~ ~~_ ~ J SK~MMER~ ~ hea~er Wino~ Ale. S R~ ~n~' . Skimmer -.,, __~o~,~ _ LOCATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1' 0" VA-2001-AR-1747 DATE: 11/15/01 FRED REISCHL ~- JUL ,~ 0 2002 ,~._ Lc, _ Details Page 1 of i Fo,o No. II 73930440000 II Property Addressl} 1249 POMPE, LN Owner Namell VON SPITZOCK, MARK WILLIAM AddressesllI YON1249 SP,TZOCK.~oMPE, 'N GLOR,A JE^N c'~ll NAPLES II statell FL II ZiPll 34~03-8913 Legal{ SORRENTO GARDENS UNIT 3 BLK H LOT 12 Sectio, II Township II Range It Acres Il Map No. II Strap NO. su~.o. Il ~,,,00 II SORRENTO GARDENS UNIT3 II ~ Milla,eArea II ~ Millage ~usec°de II ~ IlS'NGLEFAM'LY"Es'DENT'AL II ~ I[ ~.~,~ 2001 Final Tax Roll Sales History I Land Va,ue Ii $ 68,513.00 I I Date II Book- Page II Amount I J(+) Improved Value }L s 40,140.0011 01 / 2001 II 2789- 2135 Ii $ o.ooi ] (=) Market Value JL $1o8,683.oo]l 01/2001 l[ 2769-2134 II $0.00[ [ (-) SOH and/or Agricultural Exempt Value l[ $42,918.00II 02,~999 II2509-2185 Il 50.001 I (=) AssessedValue II $ 65,738.00 II 02'1999 it 2~09- 2184 II $ 0-001 I(-) Homestead and otherExempt ValueI[ $ 2s.soo.oo II 0211999 II 2~09- 2183 II , o.oot I(=)TaxableValue l[ * ~0,=3S.00 It 0~'~ II ~"e3- SS II * 0.001 SOH = "Save Our Homes" exempt value due to cap on assessment increases. The Information is Updated Weekly. JUL 3 0 2002 http://www.collicrappraiser.com/RecordDetail.asp?FoliolD=0000073930440000 -->/29/2002 2002 ~ / Aquatic Architechs FIBER OPTIC / STUB-UP ',,,. --PLANTER ( Naples, Florida 't~ / I CUSTOMER: VONSPITZOCK 941-263-2789 ~XX~ ~i~ 7 fi. 6.0 in. , ADDRESS: 124~ POMPEI NAPLES. FL 4'X RETURN Pool Size: 14 x 35 Tile, Waterline: SAHARA ".1~.._ Depth: 3' - 6' Tile, Pour Over: ' e" Area Sq. Ft.: 418 Tile, Step Edge: ,, MAIN DRAIN =" Capacity: Main Drain: ; is' ?- Turn Over: Time Clock: INCI '~'i ? 11 f~. 6.0 in. I [ / PI~NTEF Returns: 4 GFI: IF NEEDED '" 1 / ~ Spa Size: 5' x 8' Spa Light: FIRER ~ .-~? ,,'"~/~ '= Spa Depth: 3' 6" Spa Elevation~ '.~._"~ ~.~~ "Jets: 4 Ben~: Around Spa & Deed ~ ~ Pool Pump: ~ Handrail: ~ - FIBER OPTIC " 8~M D~ht STHB-~ 8pa ~ump: ~OMMO~ Tmn~fo~r:~ ~t _ Heater: Window Ale,s: ~ Heat Pump: HeatStar 136K S~een By: Aquatic Architem ~ ~ISTING SEPTIC Skimmer: INCL Lands~ping: SYSTEM , Cleaner: Oui~k~l~n In-Fir DiA removed: INCL ~AUTOFILL : Air Blower: 1 HP Fill Needed: Lighting: SAM LIGHT : Automation: No~s for Su~: " Interior: Diamond-white aua~ ~v.: ,' Deck By: · Deck Sq. Ft.: 1200 Plumb.: Nnt. Fi~r ,' Deck Type: SP~Y - COLOR: D~ Elec.: ~. ~her 1' Gun,e: Note spa Bench m.m · out Other 2: ~ --~'~~B~' Deck: Unde~mund Conduits Watch Stakes... ' CELL PHONE 272~026 SPA BACK-VIEW DETAIL FOR TILE P~CEMENT SCALE: ,2002 PLANTER ,,, FIBER OPTIC, ..... 'LIGHT HOUSING SPA IS ~,UMBER NOTE: '~ SPA JET · ' ~ - // ~ F. TURN TO,SPA BOTTOM ~. SPA STEP / / '/TH 1 112" SCH 40 PVC =" J 18" LEDGED SPILLWAY / JSE BALL VALVE (~! ~ ~ 2UIPMENT) , ,qr EXISTING UNDERGRqUND?// RETURN /i, SPA JET / RETURN CONDUIT (ELEC & WA,.TER) -- / TUNNEL PLUMBING ~ ~ ] ,, UNDER SIDEWALK EXISTING SIDEWALK UNITE & DECK NOTE: ' . O TRUCKS PAST FRONT I IDEWALK - BRING ENOUGH OSE TO PUMP FROM STREET PPROX 1~0 FEET ' ACCESS ',. PATH - PLUMBER NOTE-:.. _ J USE BYPASS ON CHLORINE GENERATOR ~ee~-I----- PLUMBER NOTE: . USE JANDY THREE WAY VALVES ON POOL to SPA VALVES N SEE OUICK.~L£EN IN FLOOR PLUMBING DIAGRAM LOCATION JUL 3 0 2002 4 .'~ and Kathleen Sorbara 65 ,~ompei Lane ptes, FL 34103 41 ) 643-71 30 ae 2.0, 2001 · and Mrs. Mark Von Spitzock 49 Pompei Lane pies, FL :]4103 whom it may concern: We are writing this letter to state that we have no objection to a pool enclosure at 1249 mpei Lane. The enclosure would be beneficial as an added barrier for small children and pets. ;nga parent of three small children as well as an immediate neighbor, We support the enclosure :i feel it would be an added safety feature. ,cerely, X ~' ~ and Kathleen Sorbara JUL 3 0 2002 Colleen MacAlister 5061 Napoli Drive Naples, FL 34103 June 25, 2001 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Von Spitzock, We are currentlv Sorrento Gardens home owners and have no objection to the granting of a variance for your pool enclosure. We are happy that you have decided to add the pool and enhance the value of your property and along with it, the neighborhood. Please feel free to let us know if the county needs ansrthing further from us to help you get this matter resolved satisfactorily. Sinc. erely, /I Colleen and Dan MacAlister 941-4.~4-0_ 8z 2002 - To whom it may concern: We are neighbors of Mr. & Mrs. Mark Von Spitzock, who reside at 1249 Pompei Lane, Naples, Florida, 34103-8913 and we support them in their effort to acquire a variance so that they may erect a pool enclosure. We feel that neighborhood safety would be enhanced because we believe that a pool enclosure is a much more effective deterrent to older children and teenagers, intent on going for a swim, than a fence, ;vhich could be climbed. Signature '---) Street Address Print Name Signatu~ Street Address Print Name Signature" Street Address Print N~me Signature Stree~ Address Print Name' JUL 3 0 2002 To x~ho~n it may concern: '~Ve are neighbors of Mt'. & Mrs. Mark Von Spitzock, who reside at 1249 Pompei Lane, Naples, Florida, 34103-8913 and we support them in their effort to acquire a variance so that they ma3' erect a pool enclosuge. We feel that neighborhood safety would be enhanced because we believe that a pool enclosure is a much more effective deterrent to older children and teenagers, intent on going for a swim, than a fence, which could be climbed. ? · /.,': 2/~-' ,.,. ' , , ..... ..' : , 11/ ,~ ,'. ---, ' . , ,' ~I.,A~ "' . " ~ ~:,' /~,c.,_h.~ ,~- ' ' ~gnature Street Add~ess . ,~ , .!/ Print Name ,'l .. .~.~..~. ~.~. " Sisnalure Street Address ~rint Name :, ,,') .. Signature Street Address ~f" 'l ~ , Print Name: - ~ - ~ : ~-~ % . " Street Address- Signature : .¢ ,, ,,~ Print Name ~ To whom it ~nav concern: We are neighbors of Mr. & Mrs. Mark Von Spitzock, who reside at 1249 Pompei Lane, Naples, Florida, 34103-8913 and we support them in their effort to acquire a variance so that the)' may erect a pool enclosure. We feel that neighborhood safetv would be enhanced because we believe that a pool enclosure is a much more effective deterrent to older children and teenagers, intent on going for a swim, than a fence, which could be climbed. Sighature Street Address Print Name Signatu~ Street Address Print Name Signature Street Address Priyt Name , Street Address Print Name JUL 3 0 2002 To whom it may concern: X, Ve are neighbors of Mr. & Mrs. Mark Von Spitzock, who reside at 1249 Pompei Lane, Naples, Florida, 34103-8913 and we support them in their effort to acquire a variance so that they may erect a pool enclosure. We feel that neighborhood safety would be enhanced because we believe that a pool enclosure is a much more effective deterrent to older children and teenagers, intent on going for a swim, than a fence, which could be climbed. gnature Street Address Prin Name Signature Street Address Signature Street Address Print ~ame Signature Street Address Print Name m,~A ~ JUL 3 0 2002 To whom it may concern: We are neighbors of Mr. And Mrs. Mark Von Spitzock, who reside at1249 Pompei Lane, Naples, Florida, 34103-8913 and we support them in their effort to acquire a variance so that they may erect a pool enclosure. Vqe feel that neighborhood safety would be enhanced because we believe that a pool enclosure is a much more effective deterrent to older children and teenagers, intent on going for a swim, than a fence, which could be climbed. Signature Street Address Print Name Sit.at.re Street Address Print Name ~ignature // Street Address Print Name Signature Street Address Print Name' JUL302002 To whom it may concern: We are neighbors of Mr. & Mrs. Mark Von Spitzock, who reside at 1249 Pompei Lane, Naples, Florida, 34103-8913 and we support them in their effort to acquire a variance so that they may erect a pool enclosure. We feel that neighborhood safety would be enhanced because we believe that a pool enclosure is a much more effective deterrent to older children and teenagers, intent on going for a swim, than a fence, which could be cl~ Signature Street Address Print Name Signature Street Address Print Name Signature Street Address Print Name Signature Street Address Print Name' ~o. Q ~r- JUL 3 0 2002 To whom it may concern: We are neighbors of Mr. & Mrs. Mark Von Spitzock, who reside at 1249 Pompei Lane, Naples, Florida, 34103-8913 and we support them in their effort to acquire a variance so that they may erect a pool enclosure. We feel that neighborhood safety would be enhanced because we believe that a pool enclosure is a much more effective deterrent to older children and teenagers, intent on going for a swim, than a fence, which could be climbed. Sig~aiu're ~/f ~- Street Address Print Name Signature Street Address Print Name Signature Street Address Print Name Signature Street Address Print Name' J U L 3 0 2002 RESOLUTION NO. 02- RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER VA-2001-AR- 1747, FOR A VARIANCE ON PROPERTY HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on all counties in Florida the power to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning and such business regulations as are necessary for the protection of the public; and WHEREAS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development Code (Ordinance No. 91-102) which establishes regulations for the zoning ot particular geographic divisions of the County, among which is the granting of variances; and WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Appeals, being the duly elected constituted Board of the area hereby affected, has held a public hearing after notice as in said regulations made and provided, and has considered the advisability of a 5-foot variance from the required rear yard setback for accessory structures of 10 feet to 5 feet for a screen enclosure as shown on the attached plot plan, Exhibit "A", in a RSF-4 Zone for the properly hereinafter described, and has found as a matter of fact that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Section 2.7.5 of the Zoning Regulations of said Land Development Code for the unincorporated area of Collier County: and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given opportunity to be heard by this Board in public meeting assembled, and the Board having considered all matters presented: NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS of Collier County, Florida, that: The Petition V-2001-AR-1747 filed by Pamela Stewart, Esquire, representing Mark and Gloria Von Spitzock, with respect to the property hereinafter described as: Lot 12, Block H, Sorrento Gardens Unit 3, as recorded in Plat Book 6, Page 38 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida be and the same hereby is approved for a 5-foot variance from the required rear yard setback for accessory structures of 10 feet to 5 feet for a screen enclosure as shown on the attached plot plan, Exhibit "A", of the RSF-4 Zoning District wherein said property is located, subject to the following condition: 1. This variance is for the encroachment shown in Exhibit "A" only. Any other encroachment shall require a separate variance. JUL 3 0 2002 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution relating to Petition Number VA-2001-AR-1747 be recorded in the minutes of this Board. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote. Done this day of ,2002. ATTEST: BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: JAMES N. COLETTA,CHAIRaMAN Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency: Matjori~.dM. Student Assistant County Attorney VA-2001 -AR-1747;FFL sp JUL 3 0 2002 ..... JUL 3 0 2002 EXHIBIT "A" EXECUTIVE SUMMARY VA-2002-AR-2691, DON CAHILL, OF DON CAHILL ARCHITECT/BUILDER, REPRESENTING WILLIAM AND JOANN RECK_MEYER, REQUESTING VARIANCES IN THE PUD ZONING DISTRICT AS FOLLOWS: 1) FROM THE REQUIRED GULF FRONT YARD (PUD ORDINANCE 85-83) SETBACK THAT ALIGNS WITH THE STATE OF FLORIDA COASTAL CONSTRUCTION SETBACK LINE (CCSL) TO ALLOW (A) THE BALCONIES TO EXTEND A MAXIMUM OF 8 FEET WEST OF THE CCSL; (B) THE ROOF TO EXTEND A MAXIMUM OF EIGHT FEET FIVE INCHES WEST OF THE CCSL; (C) THE SHEAR WALL TO EXTEND A MAXIMUM OF TEN FEET FIVE INCHES WEST OF THE CCSL; AND 2) FROM THE REQUIRED TEN FOOT ACCESS DRIVE RIGHT-OF-WAY YARD SETBACK (PUD ORDINANCE 85-83) TO ALLOW: A BUILDING SETBACK OF EIGHT FEET, A VARIANCE OF 2 FEET, ON THE EAST SIDE ALONG DOMINICA LANE, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 107 DOMINICA LANE, FURTHER DESCRIBED AS LOT 9, BLOCK C, LELY BAREFOOT BEACH UNIT 1, PLAT BOOK 12, PAGES 34-37, AS RECORDED IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA IN SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLAR COUNTY, FLORIDA. OBJECTIVE: That the community's interest is maintained in a single-family neighborhood. CONSIDERATIONS: The applicant is requesting two variances seeking relief in the PUD zoning district as follows: 1) from the required Gulf Front Yard (PUD Ordinance 85-83) setback that aligns with the State of Florida Coastal Construction Setback Line (CCSL) to allow (a) the balconies to extend a maximum of 8 feet west of the CCSL; (b) the roof' to extend a maximum of eight feet five inches west of the CCSL; (c) the shear wall to extend a maximum often feet five inches west of the CCSL; and 2) from the required ten foot access drive right-of-way yard setback (PUD Ordinance 85-83) (a variance of 2 feet) to allow a building setback of eight feet, on the east side along Dominica Lane. Staff' has analyzed the purpose and intent of the PUD zoning district, and the standards for a variance in conjunction with the applicant's request, and provides that synopsis below. Section 3.4.4.E. of the Lely Barefoot Beach PUD Ordinance, regarding Gulf of Mexico setbacks for lots within the platted Lely Barefoot Beach Unit 1, of which the subject property is part, is quoted below: Gulf Front Yard: No structure may extend gulfward of the line approved b~' ~"~ Internal Improvement Fund as a variance to the State CoastalSetb ~, I ' Trustees of the 1 tJUL 3,0 2002 G:\Current\Deselem\Variances\Reckmeyer variances\EXECUTiVE SUMMARY for PUD variances.do ~ Page 1 of 4 Line, approved by the Florida Department of Natural Resources (Governor and State CabineO on 12-17-74. The PUD gulf yard setback distance requirement is synonymous with the Coastal Construction Setback Line (CCSL), by this section of the PUD Ordinance. The property owners sought and received a Coastal Construction Setback Line (CCSL) variance to allow the building's infringement into the Coastal Construction Setback, per the requirements of LDC Section 3.13.6. Nevertheless, that variance did not address the PUD specific "gulfward" setback requirement, thus the subject variance petition has been submitted to address that issue. The balconies on the proposed structure will extend a maximum of 8 feet west of the CCSL: the roof will extend a maximum of eight feet five inches west of the CCSL; and the shear wall will extend a maximum of ten feet five inches west of the CCSL. The application also seeks relief for that portion of the proposed structure that will extend into the roadway setback. Section 3.4.4.B of Ordinance 85-83 is quoted below: Yards which abut an access drive right-of-way which extend westerly from Lei3' Beach Boulevard: 10 feet The proposed structure will be located eight feet from the property line, a variance of two feet. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this petition will have no fiscal impact on Collier County. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Approval of this variance will not affect or change the requirements of the Growth Management Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The site is a platted lot. There are no unusual environmental issues associated with this petition. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is not located within an Area of Historical and Archaeological Probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no survey or waiver of Historic and Archaeological Survey & Assessment is required. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: The EAC did not review this petition because the EAC does not normally hear variar .'e p O UL 3 0 2002 G:\Current\Deselem\Variances\Reckmeyer variances\EXECUTIVE SUMMARY for PUD variances.doc Page ~.~ 4 COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC will hear this petition on July 18, 2002, which is after the deadline for the preparation of this Executive Summary. The Community Development & Environmental Services Administrator directed staff to schedule this petition for the July 30, 2002 BZA meeting. The CCPC recommendation will be presented verbally to the BZA. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: There is a land-related hardship associated with this variance. The lot has limited road frontage which can create design and orientation issues. Staff has considered two ameliorating factors: the smaller lot size and limited road frontage, and the fact that the Board of County Conunissioners approved the CCCL setback variance, which although a separate variance and a separate variance procedure, basically offers the owner the ability to construct to the same point on the lot. Planning Services staff considered the general guidelines for variance requests, and found that there were special conditions or circumstances; and the petitioner could be faced with a practical difficulty: and the conditions recommended by staff will ensure Growth Management Plan consistency. Because approval of the variance will not compromise or act to the detriment of the ..... General Purpose of the EDC (Section 2.1.2), Planning Services staff recommended that the CCPC forward Petition VA-2002-AR-2691 to the BZA with a recommendation of approval with following conditions. 1. In the case of the destruction of the structure for any reason, to an extent equal to or greater than 50 percent of the actual replacement cost of the structure at the time of its destruction, any reconstruction shall conform to the provisions of the Land Development Code in effect at the time of reconstruction; and 2. Construction must occur in compliance with the set of plans identified as "Partial set of architectural plans, pages 2-5 and 7-10, stamped Received June 13, 2002; and 3. This approval is subject to compliance with the conditions adopted by the Board of County Commissioners in conjunction with Resolution 01-394. JUL 3 0 2002 .-~ G:\Current\Deselem\Variances\Reckmeyer variances\EXECUTiVE SUMMARY for PUD variances.d< : p~,age'~of 4 PREPARED BY: SELEM, AICP DATE PRINCIPAL PLANNER REVIEWED BY: DATE CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER MARGARE~J~ V~qJERSTLE, AICP DATE PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR APPROVED BY: JO~VI~H K. SCH'J~i:I'T / DATE"' C~I)(4M~ITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR Executive summary/VA-2002-AR-2691 JUL 3 0 20O2 . G:\Current\Deselem\Variances\Reckmeyer variances\EXECUTiVE SUMMARY for PUD variance~ doc Pg. p ~,~; 4 nf 4 AGENDA ITEM 8-G MEMORANDUM TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: CURRENT PLANNING SECTION; PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION DATE: June 18, 2002 SUBJECT: PETITION VA-2002-AR-2691 AGENT/APPLICANT: AGENT: Don Cahill of Don Cahill Architect-Builder 708 110th Avenue, North Naples, FL 34108 APPLICANT: William G. & Joann Reckmeyer 141 Barefoot Circle Bonita Springs, FL 34134 REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant is requesting two variances seeking relief in the PUD zoning district as follows: 1) from the required Gulf Front Yard (PUD Ordinance 85-83) setback that aligns with the State of Florida Coastal Construction Setback Line (CCSL) to allow (a) the balconies to extend a maximum of 8 feet west of the CCSL; (b) the roof to extend a maximum of eight feet five inches west of the CCSL; (c) the shear wall to extend a maximum of ten feet five inches west of the CCSL; and 2) from the required ten foot access drive right-of-way yard setback (PUD Ordinance 85-83) (a variance of 2 feet) to allow a building setback of eight feet, on the east side along Dominica Lane. The Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) Section 2.2.20.1 sets forth the following in the Purpose and Intent of the PUD zoning district: · PUDs produced in compliance wi th the terms and provisions of this Code [LDC] and the growth management plan may depart from the strict application of sett~-acK~.._.. _ height, and minimum lot requirements of convent: °nj~a l~ zoning districts ..... ' Petition VA-2001-AR-2015 CCPC Date: July 18, 2002 Page ~ qf ~'. 3 0 2002 The Collier County LDC stated purpose of a variance is quoted below: 2. 7.5.1. Purpose. In specific cases, variance from the terms of this zoning code may be granted where said variance will not be contrary to the public interest, safety, or welfare and where owing to special conditions peculiar to the property, a diminution of a regulation is found to have no measurable impact on the public interest, safety or welfare; or a literal enforcement of the zoning code wouM result in unnecessary and undue hardship, or practical difficulty to the owner of the property and would otherwise deny the property owner a level of utilization of his~her property that is consistent with the development pattern in the neighborhood and clearly has no adverse effect on the community at large or neighboring property owners. Staff has analyzed the purpose and intent, and the standards in conjunction with the applicant's request, and provides that synopsis below. The PUD zoning was approved for this home site as part of the overall PUD re-zoning for Lely Barefoot Beach PUD, in Ordinance Number 77-48. That PUD zoning has been amended numerous times since the original approval. Ordinance Number 85-83 is the most recent amendment to address the setback issues that are the subject of this variance petition. Section 3.4.4.E. of that Ordinance, regarding Gulf of Mexico setbacks for lots within the platted Lely Barefoot Beach Unit 1, of which the subject property is part, is quoted below: Gulf Front Yard: No structure may extend gulfward of the line approved by the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund as a variance to the State Coastal Setback Line, approved by the Florida Department of Natural Resources (Governor and State CabineO on 12-17-74 The PUD gulf yard setback distance requirement is synonymous with the Coastal Construction Setback Line (CCSL), by this section of the PUD Ordinance. The property owners sought and received a Coastal Construction Setback Line (CCSL) variance to allow the building's infringement into the Coastal Construction Setback, per the requirements of LDC Section 3.13.6. Nevertheless, that variance did not address the PUD specific "gulfward" setback requirement, thus the subject variance petition has been submitted to address that issue. The balconies on the proposed structure will extend a maximum of 8 feet west of the CCSL; the roof will extend a maximum of eight feet five inches west of the CCSL; and the shear wall will extend a maximum of ten feet five inches west of the CCSL. The application also seeks relief for that portion of the proposed structure that will extend into the roadway setback. Section 3.4.4.B of Ordinance 85-83 is quoted below: Yards which abut an access drive right-of-way which extend westerly from Lely Beach Boulevard: lO feet The proposed structure will be located eight feet from the property line, a variance of two feet. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION (See Attachment A): The subject property is located at l07 Dominica Lane, further described as Lot 9, ~lock C, JUL 002 Petition VA-2001-AR-2015 CCPC Date: July 18, 2002 Page i~of 9 Barefoot Beach Unit 1, Plat Book 12, Pages 34-37, as recOrded in the public records of Collier County, Florida in Section 6, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: The petitioners are requesting two variances to allow construction of a single-family home on Lot 9. The home that the petitioners want to construct would encroach into the required gulfward and roadway setbacks. A building permit was issued for the house, but the permit was put on hold when it was discovered that there were encroachment issues that needed to be resolved. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: The site is located in the Urban Mixed Use Residential land use classification on the County's Future Land Use Map. This land use category is designed to accommodate a variety of residential uses including single family, multi-family, duplex, mobile home and mixed-use projects. As previously noted, the subject petition seeks variances for a single family home that is located within a single-family subdivision, which is an authorized use in this land use designation, therefore, the single family home use is consistent with the Future Land Use Map. The Growth Management Plan does not address individual variance requests; the Plan deals with the larger issue of the actual use. The Growth Management Plan does address coastal barriers and developed shorelines in the following objective: OBJECTIVE 10.4: Developed coastal barriers and developed shorelines shall be continued to be restored and then maintained, when appropriate by establishing mechanisms or projects which limit the effects of development and which help in the restoration of the natural functions of coastal barriers and affected beaches and dunes. That objective is to be implemented and met by adherence to the following policies: Policy 10.4.3: Prohibit activities which would result in man induced shoreline erosion beyond the natural beach erosion cycle or that would deteriorate the beach and dune system. Policy 10.4.4: Require dune stabilization and restoration improvements in land development projects along beach areas. Policy 10.4.5: Initiate and support beach and dune restoration and preservation programs where appropriate. Policy 10.4.6: Require native vegetation as landscaping in development activities in developed coastal barrier systems and on the beach and dune systems. Policy 10.4. 7: Prohibit construction seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line except where the same would be permitted pursuant to the provision, of the Florida Coastal Zone Protection Act of 1985 or where said prohibition wo~ [d resgffJqOA Ilrr. M f~ in no reasonable economic utilization of the property in questions, or f~ r safat~ r~ ~ reasons. In such cases, construction will be as far landward as is practic, ~ble and JUl 3 0 2002 Petition VA-2001-AR-2015 CCPC Date: July 18, 2002 Page ,.~ of 9 pg. I-7 effects shall be minimized on the beach and dune system and the natural functions of the coastal barrier system. The CCCSL variance that was approved in Resolution No. 01-394 (See Attachment B) included conditions that ensure consistency with the GMP. Staff has included a condition as part of the approval recommendation for this PUD variance petition to require compliance with the conditions of Resolution No. 01-394. The requested variance is therefore consistent with this portion of the GMP. LAND USE AND ZONING {See Attachments C and D for larger Zoning Map and Aerial Photo): Subject: a cleared gulf-view lot fronting on Dominica Lane Surrounding: North - Beach Garden Area C, zoned PUD East - Dominica Lane and Lot #8, an undeveloped lot, zoned PUD South - a single-family home, zoned PUD West - Gulf of Mexico BEAQt ~ARDEN HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staffs analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is not located within an area of historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, a Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment or waiver is not required. EVALUATION FOR IMPACTS TO TRANSPORTATION~ INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENT: Approval of this variance request, as conditioned, will have no effect on tfrar~._cture, r7 _ transportation or the environment. PetitionVA-2001-AR-2015 CCPCDate: July18,2002 Page of 3 0 2002 ANALYSIS: Section 2.7.5 of the Land Development Code grants the authority to the Board of Zoning Appeals to grant variances. The Planning Commission is advisory to the BZA and utilizes the provisions of Section 2.7.5.6.1 through 2.7.5.6.8, which are general guidelines to be used to assist the Commission in making a determination. Responses to the items in Section 2.7.5.6 are as follows: a. Are there special conditions and circumstances existing, which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land, structure or building involved? Yes. The lot is bordered by the Gulf of Mexico and the Coastal Construction Setback limits construction along the Gulf. However, a Coastal Construction Setback Line variance has been granted to allow construction of this home. The Board of County Commissioners found that variance, as conditioned, consistent with the GMP. Because the PUD variance along the gulf seeks virtually the same variance, staff finds that the conditions the Board of County Commissioners attached to CCSL are appropriate to adopt by reference to make this petition consistent with the GMP. The Beach Garden Area roadways are narrow dead-end streets that connect directly to Barefoot Beach Road. The roadways provide access to the homes located along the specific roadway; there are no interconnecting roadways. The subject property is at the · -'- western terminus of the subject roadway, Dominica Lane. There likely will be no negative impact upon the traveling public or any of the neighboring property owners if the roadway variance is approved. The structure on the only abutting developed lot, Lot #1 in Block D, is oriented toward the Beach Garden Area and away from the subject lot. The driveway and garage area will face the side of the proposed structure. Inspection of the photos included below indicate that the patio areas of the abutting home actually look away from the proposed structure and there are few windows on the abutting side. The stakes for the proposed structure are shown in the photos, as is the abutting structures building orientation. JUL 3 0 20O2 Petition VA-2001-AR-2015 CCPC Date: July 18, 2002 Page 5 >t~ 9 The structure's comer for the majority Gulf-ward variance abuts the Beach Garden area. Thus it appears that the impact of this variance's approval on the other homeowners of the area would be negligible. The proposed structure is surrounded by structures designed for the same use that have the same zoning, however, the nearby homes do not appear to be of a similar type and construction, based upon the pictures of the model home (See Attachment E for photographs of the model home). The fact that the structures are not visually similar does not affect the variance or the appropriateness of the use. b. Are there special conditions and circumstances, which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property, which is the subject of the variance request? Yes. The lots within this subdivision are configured around the Beach Garden areas (See Attachment A). The lots along Barefoot Beach Boulevard are amply sized lots. As the lots arc away from Barefoot Beach Boulevard and angle around toward the gulf, they become much smaller. The subject lot is located at the end of the roadway, at the far end of the angle thus it is a smaller lot. The lot is platted with only a small portion of the lot along the roadway, thus roadway access and driveway/garage access can present a design and orientation issue for a home. c. Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this Land Development Code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant? Yes. The hardship offered by the applicants is limited to a financial hardship. Hardships should relate to the land or structure or unique and unusual circumstances related to the land or structure. Financial issues are given relatively little weight in the analysis of the variance's appropriateness. However, the petitioner's could be faced with a "practical difficultf' (LDC Section 2.7.5.1) if the variance is not approved and the ~me hat t,, h~ -- redesigned. No._F/ . PetitionVA-2001-AR-2015 CCPC Date: J. y 8,2002 Pag °gtJL 3 0 2002 d. Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety and welfare? No. The applicants have not demonstrated that this variance is the minimum variance. The house could be redesigned to comply with the setback requirements. e. Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district? Yes, granting of this variance will allow the petitioners to have a home located closer to the Gulf and to the roadway than what is enjoyed by the neighboring lots within that portion of the PUD zoning district. f. Will granting the variance be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this Land Development Code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare? Approval of this variance will not compromise or act to the detriment of the General Purpose and of the Land Development Code [LDC Section 2.1.2] which states that the general purpose of the LDC is: "... to protect, promote, and improve the public health, safety, comfort, order, appearance, convenience, morals and general welfare of the residents of the county". g. Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf courses, etc.? Yes. This home is situated on the Gulf of Mexico at the western terminus of a dead end street, adjacent to an undeveloped common area on the north side. h. Will granting the variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan? Yes, as conditioned. As previously stated, conditions of the CCSL variance will be incorporated by reference. Those conditions ensure consistency with Objective 10 and the ensuring policies of the GMP. EAC RECOMMENDATION: None. The Environmental Advisory Council does not normally hear variance petitions. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff has analyzed the guidelines associated with this variance petition, and finds that there are special conditions and circumstances that make approval of the variance an appropri~ ce the conditions recommended by staff are incorporated into the approval. Therefor ,,, pll~)aing~, t."~ Petition VA-2001-AR-20,5 CCPC Date: ,July 18. 2002 Page 7 f.! 9 .JUL 3 0 2002 Services staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition VA-2002-AR-2691 to the BZA with a recommendation of APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS. Staff is recommending approval of the variances with the following conditions: 1. In the case of the destruction of the structure for any reason, to an extent equal to or greater than 50 percent of the actual replacement cost of the structure at the time of its destruction, any reconstruction shall conform to the provisions of the Land Development Code in effect at the time of reconstruction; and 2. Construction must occur in compliance with the set of plans identified as "Partial set of architectural plans, pages 2-5 and 7-10, stamped Received June 13, 2002. A reduced copy of which is attached hereto; and 3. This approval is subject to compliance with the conditions adopted by the Board of County Commissioners in conjunction with Resolution Number 01-394. A copy of which is attached hereto. PetitionVA-2001-AR-20,5 CCPC Date: July 18,2002 Page IUL 3 0 ZOO7. PREPARED BY: K~ESELEM, AICP DATE PRINCIPAL PLANNER REVIEWED BY: INTERIM DIRECTOR, PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT APPROVED BY: ITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION Collier County Planning Commission: KENNETH L. ABERNATHY, CHAIRMAN DATE Staff report for the July 18, 2002 Collier County Planning Commission Meeting Tentatively scheduled for the September 10, 2002 Board of County Commissioners Meeting Attachments: A. Location/Site Map B. Copy of Resolution No. 01-394 C. Copy of Zoning Map D. Copy of Aerial Photo E. Photographs of the model home F. Partial set of architectural plans, pages 2-5 and 7-10, stamped ' ,_A__. .... Petition VA-2001-AR-2015 CCPC Oate: Ou,y,8, 2002 ~'ag, 9 o~0L 3 0 2002 RESOLUTION NO. 01- 3 9 4 RESOLUTION APPROVING V¢ITH CONDITIONS PETITION CCSL-2001-2, REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM THE COASTAL CONSTRUCTION SETBACK LINE (CCSL) TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, LOCATED AT LOT 9, BLOCK C, UNIT 1, LELY BAREFOOT BEACH, SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, Don Cahill, with Coquina Enterprises Inc., representing William Reckmeyer, requests a variance bom the Coastal Construction Setback Line (CCSL) as required by the Collier County Ordinance 91-102, Division 3.13, as amended, to allow construction cfa single family residence with appmx/mately ten foot o~overhang seaward of the CCSL (Exh/bit A); and WHEREAS, the subject property is a single family lot located on the west end of Dom/n/ca Lane, within the Lely Barefoot Beach Planned Unit Development; and WHEREAS, the proposed overhang/nc structure will extend approxhnately l0 feet seaward of the adopted CCSL and platted Coastal Development Lim/t Line; and WHEREAS, the petition is cons/stent with the Collier County Land Development Code, Division 3.13, as amended; and WHEREAS, the petition is consistent with the Collier County Growth Management Plan - Conservation and Coastal Management Element. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: Variance Petition CCSL-2001-2 be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. All proposed improvements shall be designed in accordance with the standards of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), Bureau of Beaches . and Coastal Systems and an approved FDEP permit shall be obtained. Copies of this permit must be provided to County staff, prior to issuance ora Collier County building permit. 2. Construction activities shall not occur within one hundred (100) feet of the sea turtle nesting zone, defined by Collier County Land Development Code Division 3.10, between May I - October 31, sea turtle nesting season, without first submitting and obtaining all necessary FDEP permits and Collier county Construction in Sea Turtle Nesting Area Permits. 3. The petitioner shall notify Planning Services Staffone week prior to commencing work seaward of the CSSL and shall again contact Staff within one week following completion of work seaward of the CCSL. 4. Outdoor lighting associated with construction, or development within three hundred (300) feet of the high tide line, shall be in compliance with Division 3.10 of the Collier County Land Development Code. 5, The petitioner shall utilize only native coastal dune vegetation for all on-site landscaping beyond the 1974 Coasts/ Construction Control Line, or platted .~-.. Coastal Development Limit Line. 6. The petitioner shall re-vegetate the dune where the dune is d, ~°id o~ ~e vegetation. A planting plan shall be approved by Planning S rvice~~ vegetation shall be completed, prior to the issuance cfa CertL cate of O-~cupancy. JUL 3 0 2002 Attachment B 7. The petitioner shall remove all exotic vegetation from the subject property in accordance with Subsection 3.9.6.6 of the Collier County Land Development Code. 8. Minor revisions to Coastal Construction Setback Line Variance CCSL-2001-2 (including changes in siting and structures) may be approved, in writing, by the Planning Services Director or his/her designee. Be it Resolved that this Resolution, relating to Petition Number 2001-2, be recorded in the minutes of this Board. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote favoring same. Done this ~ day of ~ ,2001. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA DATE: OCT - 9 ~§~! AM~~ ATTEST: BY: .. D .W'~, ~H.T E. BROCK, Clerk I R, Ph D, Chairman '~:';.'~L, ..... . ~.,'.". ' - :. --,~ .~/- : ~-!~ '.:., DEPLr'~..CLERK ltt~st ,, to .. "--- ;~ _ $1o~ature Approved a~ to l~'orm ~dLegal Sufficiency: Ma~ri~vL stUddni Assistant County Attorney JUL 3 0 2002 Attac sOU~. Attachmen' 2002 SOUTH EAST Iii i~ JUL 3 0 ZOO2 ~...,~ JUL 3 0 2002 JLIL :) 0 2002 JUL 3 0 2002 JIJl_ 3 0 2002 JUL 3 0 2002 JUL 3 0 2002 . VARIANCE PETITION (VARIANCE FROM SETBACK (S) REQUIRED FOR A PARTICULAR ZONING DISTRICT) VA-2002-AR-2691 Petition No. Date Petition Received: PROJECT #2002060019 'DATE: 6/12/02 K~Y DESELEM Commission District: Planner Assigned: ABOVE TO BE COMPLETED BY STAFF GENERAL INFORMATION: Petitioner's Name: William G. and Joann Reck. meyer Address:141 Barefoot Circle, Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 Petitioner's Telephone: ( 239 ) 992-2292 Agent's Name: Don Cahill of Don Cahill Architect-Builder 708 110th Avenue, North ,Naples, Florida 34108 Agent's Address: Telephone: { 239 } 597-6266 · ~; (~, !" ~) . f.~ ................... JUL 3 0 2002 _. Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 Page of 8 · COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING SERVICES/CURRENT PLANNING 2800 N. HORSESHOE DRIVE - NAPLES, FL 34104 PHONE (941) 403-2400/FAX (941) 643-6968 Complete the following for all Association(s) affiliated with this petition. (Provide additional sheets if necessary) Name of Homeowner Association: Barefoot Beach Property Owners Association Mailing Address #1 Barefoot Beach BlvdCityBoni~a~.State~ZiP_3--4-t3A- Name of Home6wner Association: Mailing Address City State Zip Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address City State . Zip. Name of Master Association: N/A Mailing Addres's City State .. Zip Name of Civic Association: N/A Mailing Address City State Zip PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal Description of Subject Property: Subdivision: Lely Barefoot Beac~nit 1 Lot (s) 9 ,. Block (s) c, Section_ 6 Twp. 485 Range_25_F.__ Property I.D. # OnOnO~47~ tqannna Metes & Bounds Description: N/A .~c.., , JUL ~lication for Variance Petition - 8~98 Page ,r ~ Address of Subject Properly: 1 07 Dominica Lane, Bonita Springs; FL 341_~4 (If different from Petitioner's address) Current Zoning and Land use of Subject Parcel: PUD (Single Family Residential) Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: . ZONING LAND USE pun Sinqle Family Residential W-NTA Gulf of Mexico Sinqle Family Residential ~UO ...... Minimum Yard Requirements for Subject Property: Front: 7 1/2 ~:~- & 10 ft Comer Lot: Yes [--] No ~] Side: _7 ~/2 ft Waterfront Lot: Yes ~] No [--] Rear: ~l_~B~ac~-~arden ) West 0 (Coastal construction limit line) JUL 3 0 2002 Application for Variance Petition - 8~98 Pa ' 't ow ~ Nature of Petition Provide a detailed explanation of the request including what structures are existing and what is proposed; the amount of encroachment proposed using numbers, i.e. reduce front setback from 25' to 18'; when property owner purchased property; when existing principal structure was built (include building permit number (s) if possible); why encroachment is necessary; how existing encroachment came to be; etc. Property owner purchased the property in 1999 This variance petition consists of 3 parts: 1) The petitioner requests a variance to allow certain elements of the building to extend westerly over and seaward of the Coastal Construction Setback Line by a maximum of approximately 10 feet. These extensions would be over the petitioner's own private property. The very same request, in the form ofa CCSL variance, was approved by the Collier County Planning Commission in September, 2001 after a public hearing and was again approved by the Board of County Commissioners on October 9, 2001 after another public hearing. This is the first time that the County has required a variance that is virtually the same as a previously approved variance. The Florida State Department of Environmental Protection has also approved the project. Collier County issued Building Permit No. 2002022617 for this project on May 22, 2002. 2) The petitioner requests a variance to allow 2 balconies to extend northerly over and above the 0 setback line on the north and into a common area owned by 6 other people by a maximum of 18 inches and to allow a roof to extend over and above the same line by a maximum of 3 feet. Overhangs into the common space are typical in Barefoot Beach to prevent characterless boxes from being designed. Furthermore the sites are so small that overhangs are the only way to provide adequate floor space. 3) The petitioner requests a variance to allow the building to cantilever 2 feet over a 10 foot setback on the east side, similar to an 11 foot wide bay window. In all 3 parts of this petition the footprint of the proposed building remains within all setbacks. JUL 3 0 2002 ....... ~..fo~..r_i~n__c.e_. petition - 8/95 Page 4 Please note that staff and the Collier County Planning Commission shall be guided in their recommendation to the Board of zoning Appeals, and that the Board of zoning appeals shall be guided in its determination to approve or deny a variance petition by the below listed criteria (1-8). (Please address this criteria using additional pages if ~-~ necessary.) 1. Arc there special conditions and circumstances existing which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of thc land, slructvrc, or building involvcd. The special conditions and circumstances that are peculiar to the location of the land and structure thereon are: (a) This project has already received a Coastal Construction Setback Line variance approval for extensions over, above, and seaward of the CCSL of approximately 10 feet after public hearings by both the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners and this is the first time in history that the County has required overlapping almost redundant variances for the same thing. Florida's Department of Environmental issued Building Permit No 2002022617 for the project. (b) Overhangs into the common beach garden areas are extremely commonplace throughout Barefoot Beach and have not required variances. The Property Owner Association's Architectural Review Committee (ARC) has already thoroughly reviewed the project for fairness and compliance to the community's rules. 2. Are there special conditions and circumstances which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property which is the subject of the variance request. A site condition that creates a significant hardship and that does not result from the action of the applicant is the extremely small area of the site. Due to the Coastal Construction Setback Line, the l0 foot east setback line and the 7'-6" south and east setback lines, the build-able area of the property is very small. The primary side of the building faces the Gulf to the west. Due to this western orientation of the building and this subtropical area, sun control becomes extremely important. Sun control is essential for making the building habitable. This variance application seeks to change the dimension that is allowed in the County's Land Development Code for overhangs from 3 feet to approximately 10 feet. Such a change would exactly match the previously approved CCSL Variance for the same thing. This request would allow the building to have a substantial roof overhang for sun control as well as allowing sun control from lower balconies. JUt. 3 0 2002 Pag ' '~ -' ° 3. Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary and undue hardsh/p on the applicant or create practical difficulties on the applicant. A literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code will work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant because of the enormous expense I have incurred for structural and architectural design fees. Based on the County's repeated assurances over the last 8 months that the County would require no more approvals, I went forward and had the building completely designed resulting in more than 44 large drawings that were required by the County for the issuance of Building Permit No. 2002022617. Denial of this petition would force me to have the building completely redesigned thereby doubling the already extremely expensive design fees. Furthermore, denial of this petition would force me to reapply to the County and the State that would result in delaying construction for possibly more than a year. The lost construction time would amount to a serious increase in construction cost. 4. Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety or welfare. If the variance is granted, it would be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land and building. The sun control that the variance would provide will promote the welfare of the building's occupants md it will also make a significant contribution to the saving of valuable energy, no. r"] ~'5 JUL 3 0 2002 Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 Page ~ B q~. '~ ~-' 5. Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district. The granting of the requested variance will not confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations. This question has obviously been considered many times by both the County in several venues, by the State, and by the local neighborhood Architectural Review Committee. Other homes in the neighborhood have also been allowed to build extension elements over setback lines including extensions over the Coastal Construction Setback Line. 6. Will granting the variance be in harmony with the intent and purpose of this zoning code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. The granting of the variance will be in harmony with the intent and purpose of this zoning code and will not be injurious to the neighborhood. The neighborhood, by the Architectural Review Committee, has already thoroughly reviewed the proposed project with the requested extensions and has given it their approval. 7. Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf course, etc. The natural condition ti~at ameliorate, i.e. improve the goals of the regulation is the sand dune along the beach which is located 50 feet to the west of the Coastal Construction Setback Line. The extensions requested in this variance will have no affect on this natural condition. 8. Will granting the variance be consistent with the growth management plan. The granting of the variance is definitely consistent with the County's Growth Management Plan. Barbara Burgeson, the County's Senior Environmental Specialist, has written a letter on September 6, 2001 that confirms the project's consistency. The unanimously approved CCSL Variance by the County's Board of Commissioners on October 9, 2001 further verifies consistency (see A rrroa attachments). ~ ~ JUL 3 0 2002 Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 Pa : 6 o~1~' '~c7 VARIANCE PETITION. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION PACKET! UIREMENTS # ov COPIES REQUIRED 1~.' Completed Application 15 2. Completed Owner/Agent Affidavit, Notarized 1 3. pre-application notes/minutes 15 4. Survey of property, showing the encroachment 1 (measured in ~'eet) 5. Site Plan depicting the following: 1 $ a) All property boundaries & dimensions b) All existing and proposed structures (labeled as such) c) North arr.ow, date and scale of drawing d) Required setbacks & proposed setbacks 6. Location map depicting major streets in area for 1 reference ~ 7. Pre-Application fee, Applicaton fee and Data Conversion - fee, checks shall be made payable to Collier County Board of Commissioners 8. Other Requirements - - As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing of this petition. ~Applicant/Agent Signature Date AC.,EnOA I~/~ JUL 3 0 2002 AFFIDAVIT We//, William G. & Joann Reckme_ver being first duly sworn, depose and say that we/I am/are the owners of the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing; that all the answers to the questions in this application, including the disclosure of interest information, all sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application, are honest and true to the best of our knowledge and belief. Well understand that the information requested on this application must be complete and accurate and that the content of this form, whether computer generated or County printed shall not be altered. Public hearings will not be advertised until this application is deemed complete, and all required information has been submitted. As property owner We~l further authorize Don Cah'i 1 1 to act as our/my representative in any matters regarding this Pe~tion. ~t~ u~of Pr~er~'ow~e1 Sigrg~ur~'e~of Prol~erO~ O~ne'~' ] I William G. Reckme_ver Joa~n Reckmeyer Typed or Printed Name of Owner Typed or Printed Name of owner The foregoing instrument was acknowledged b.efore me this ~ ~-c day of .)~ ~ ~ , d,92Z~._..~ by ~/c.C, aa-, ~-. [: dOann ~cE~rso_n. gldy known to m~'..,or has produced ~ .' ~ ' ~ as identification. State of Florida (Signature of Notary Public- ~ .... ~A rrr.~ County of Collier ...... ___ ............. Florida) , /~ ~**~* ~ ' M~ co~,O~tx~,,m: ,,, ,*.' cc O:TS~m ~J (Print, Type, or Stamp Comm 's~i~. 3 0 2002 ~,~ ~L~s~~ Name of Nota~ PubliO, Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 Page 8 o · ADDRESSING CHE CKI, IST Please complete the following and submit to the Addressing Section for Review. Not all items will apply to every proiect. Items in bold .type are required. 1. Legal description of subject property or properties (copy of lengthy description may be attached) 2. Folio (Property ID) number(s) of above (attach to, or associate with, legal description if more than one) 3. Street address or addresses (as applicable, if already assigned) 4. Location map, showing exact location of project/site in relation to nearest public road right-of-way (attach) 5. Copy of survey (NEEDED ONLY FOR UNPLATTED PROPERTIES) 6. Proposed project nam~ (if applicable) 7. Proposed Street names (if applicable) 8. Site Development Plan Number (FOR EXISTING PROJECTS/SITES ONLY) SDP - 9. Petition Type - (Complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition Type) [~ SDP (Site Development Plan) [-"] PPL (Plans & Plat Review) [~] SDPA (SDP Amendment) [-'] PSP (Preliminary Subdivision Plat) [-I SDPI (SDP Insubstantial Change) r-] FP (Final Plat) [-1 SIP (Site Improvement Plan) r-] LLA (Lot Line Adjustment) [-'] SIPA (SIP 3mendment) [-] BL (Blasting Permit) [--1 SNR (Street Name Change) r-] ROW (Right-of-Way Permit) I--I Vegetation/Exotic (Veg. Removal Permits) [-'] EXP (Excavation Permit) [~ Land Use Petition (V._ari_'anee,_ Conditional Use, ~] VRSFP (Veg. Removal & Site Fill Permit) Boat Dock Ext., Rezone, PUD rezone, etc.) [--] Other - Describe: 10. Project or development names proposed for, or already appearing in, condominium documents (if applicable; indicate whether proposed or existing) 11. Please Check One: r-] Checklist is to be Faxed Back [-] Personally Picked Up 12. Applicant Name _~'--_9o!~ C'~.~.LL. ~.~. ~;.~Phone ~-gqT-~Z6_f,., Fax ~'.q"/- ~'O 13. Signature on Addressing Checklist does not constitu[e'Project and/or Street Name approval and is subject to further review by the Addressing Section. FOR STAFF USE ONLY i Primary Number..L_L~_~_q_~ Address Number Address Su/mber Approved ~ Date (/a d JUL 3 0 2002 ZcvJ$¢d 3-21-01 p~. RECEIVED June 15,2002 JU/~° ~ 9 2002 Ms. Kay DeSelem, AICP Principal Planner Planning Services Department Community DevelopmenI & Environmental Services Division Collier County Government 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: Testimony in Favor of the Reckmeyer Variance # VA-2002-AR-2691 Dear Ms. DeSelem, We are seeking the Planning Staff's Approval and support for the following reasons. Fourteen (14) months ago I made a variance application for extensions over, above and seaward of the Coastal Construction Setback Line (CCSL). From application date of April 1 l, 2001 until the variance approval date of October 9, 2001, this very same project was thoroughly reviewed by the Planning Services Department. The result of this lengthy six- month review was that the Planning Staffreeommended approval. This conclusion is well documented in a September 6, 2001 letter written by Ms. Barbara S. Burgeson, Senior Environmental Specialist for Collier County's Planning Department (see attached copy). In the letter she states that the project "...has been reviewed for ...compliance with local setback requirements, zoning and building codes .... As submitted, the project is in compliance with the County's setback and zoning requirements .... Staff is recommending approval and finds no reason by County Code or Growth Management Plan policy to expect that the BBC would not approve this Since you are a member of the same Staffto which Ms. Burgeson refers, since you are governed by the same roles as those in effect during the prior review, and since the project has not changed from April 1 l, 2001 to date, your approval can be the only crechq>le conclusion to Part No. 1 of the petition. Please note that the Property Owners Association's Architectural Review Board (ARC) has the mandate to represent and follow their own PUD requirements for the good of the entire community. The ARC approved the project on both January 17, 2001 and again on May 20, 2002. PART 2 of the petition relates to overhangs into the POA owned common spaces. Don Cahill who is the architectural consultant to the POA for many years, did a survey of overhangs on existing homes in Barefoot Beach. Of the 35 homes that he had plans for a full 46% of them have overhangs beyond the beach garden property line. An expanded study of all buildings in Barefoot Beach would probably produce a similar figure, ne .JUL :3 0 2002 ARC, representing the POA, carefully looked at this overhang issue and granted me approval for 18 inches for the 2 balconies and 36 inches for the roof. To deny this aspect of the variance would amount to selective enforcement ora rule that is of course illegal. PART 3 of the petition relates to a 2 foot overhang over the eastern 10 foot setback line. The 10' setback line is 2'-6" more than the typical 7'-6" side yard setback. The ARC had absolutely no problem with this overhang because of it being at the end of a street where the 10' setback itself accomplishes nothing more than what the typical 7'-6" setback already accomplishes. Bay windows are allowed to project 2' into a setback area. Instead of debating the definition of bay window, Mr. Joe Schmitt, Administrator, Community Developmem wanted us to include this 2' overhang as part of the variance. Please note that both Don Cahill and myself are architects and as such we are still flexible with the design. We request interaction with you to assure that we receive Planning Staff approval. Sincerely, Willian~ G. Reckmeyer ~ cc: Dr. James D. Carter, Commissioner Joseph K Schmitt, Administrator, Community Developmem Tony Lawhon, Attorney John P. White, Attorney Don Cahill, Architect JUL 3 0 2002 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONM~.NTAL SERVICES DMSION September 6, 2001 PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Don Cahill 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE 708 110'a Ave. North NAPLES, FL 34104 Naples, Florida 34108 RE: Reckmeyer Residence, Lot 9, Block C, Unit I Lely Barefoot Beach, Collier County, Florida CD-2001-7 Dear Mr. Cahill: The project identified above has been reviewed for consistency with the Growth Management Plan and compliance with local setback requirements, zoning and building codes. The following inform'ation is provided to assist in the review process of the Coastal Construction Control Line application filed with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. A. Consistency with the Future Land Us Element The subject property is located within the Urban Designated Area that permits residential, commercial, industrial and other non-residential uses provided certain criteria are met. Proposed residential development is permitted within the Urban Area at a base density of four dwelling units per gross acre. The density of proposed residential development is further limited to as iow as two units per gross acre for those properties located within the Coastal Management and Traffic Congestion boundaries. The subject property is located within both the Coastal Management and Traffic Congestion boundaries, which reduces the permitted density to two (2) dwelling units per acre. However, Policy 5.9 of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) provides that properties, which do not conform to the density requirements of the FLUE but are improved through the Zoning Re- evaluation Program (ZRO) described in Policy 3. IK, shah be considered consistent with the FLUE. B. Consistency with the Conservation and Coastal Management Element Policy 11.4.7 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Growth Management Plan restricts construction of all structures seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL), as established by the Florida Coastal Zone Protection Act of 1985. The CCCL included in the Collier County Growth Management Plan is that which was established in 1974; is referred to as the Coastal Construction Setback Line (CCSL) by Collier JUL 3 0 2002 PHONE (941) 403-240f) ~'a¥ foA~ ~ a~o aaa~ -~ .... - ,,. ~ CD-2001=7 Page 2 County. Lely Barefoot Beach PUD established a Coastal Development Limit Line (CDLL) which will be the line used for this consistency determination. Staffs review of the subject property and the request found the construction as proposed to have minor alterations beyond the County CDLL. The improvements include eantilevedng of the above ground floors and the structural wall of the home going seaward of the CDLL. It cannot be found consistent with Policy 11.4.7 and, in turn, with the Conservation and Coastal Management Element, until the Board of County Commissioners approves the CCSL variance petition, is scheduled before them on October 9, 2001. Staff is recommending approval and finds no reason by County Code or Growth Management Plan policy to expect that the BCC would not approve this variance. Staff expems this petition to be brought to the BCC on their summary agenda in September, which would not require the petitioner to be present at the meeting, and would not include discussion of the item. C. Consistency with local zoning, setback, and building codes As submitted, the project is in compliance with the County's setback and zoning requirements. The property cannot be found in compliance with the County's Building Codes until building permit applications are submitted and approved. Such approvals are a routine mater once the appropriate construction drawings are submitted and found to meet the requirements of the County's adopted building codes. The above comments indicate that CD-2001-7 is consistent with the Collier County Growth Management Plan, contingent upon approval of CCSL variance 2001-7, by the Board of County Commissioners. IfI can be of further assistance, please call me at 941=403-2400. Sincerely, Barbara S. Burgeson Sr. Environmental Specialist cc: File CD=2001-7 FDEP, Tallahassee JUL 3 0 2002 JUL 3 0 2002 I I I ',,,,~l~a '~l..~,,, I ! !~ ! ~ Il !it i ! i  I JUL 3 0 200~ | JUL 3 0 200~ Conditions for William G. ~ ]oann Reckmeyer Petition # VA-2002-AR-22691 1. In the case of the destruction of the structure for any reason, to an extent equal to or greater than 50 percent of the actual replacement cost of the structure at the time of its destruction, any reconstruction shall conform to the provisions of the Land Development Code in effect at the time of reconstruction; and 2. Construction must occur in compliance with the set of plans identified as "Partial set of architectural plans, pages 2-5 and 7-10, stamped Received June 13, 2002; and 3. This approval is subject to compliance with the conditions adopted by the Board of County Commissioners in conjunction with Resolution 01-394. 6/21/02 EXHIBIT B JUL 3 0 Z002 G:\Current\Deselem\Variances\Reckmeyer variances\Conditions for Reckmeyer resolution.doc 'i 110 St. Eustacius Lane Bonita Springs, Fl. 34134 June 25th,2002 Collier County, Government Planning Services Dept. 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 Dear Kay: I am writing thi.q letter in response to your letter dated June 18, 2002. I am president of the Barefoot Beach Poa One and set on the Architectural Review Committee. The request for a variance for a home for Mr. Reckmeyers should be should be turned down for the following reasons. The homes with a 7.5-foot setback on each side is hardly enough separation between homes. There is a real safety hazard here as fire would jump between houses and ther,e would be little room to fight a fire. The 1 Oft. setback on the road was most likely put there so fire and safety equipment would have room to park and mm around ifnecessary.'There have been a lot ofmi~akes make in thi~ community and the board of directors has been hard at work trying to correct them We were informed by Mr. Reckmeyer that he had a variance with approval for an encroachment into the CCSL. of 10tt. He agreed to only go 36"and the ARC reluctantly agreed based on the county approval, however we have installed roles against it in the future. I really don't understand his request for a new variance unless the first was not really approved. His neighbors strongly oppose him being able tg. build into the CCSL area as it will affect there views. I am afraid that if this is approved it would set a precedent that xve don't want for our comn,mnity. Last but not least we have been in a struggle to retain a little sod between our homes and the dunes and am afraid that ifthi.q variance is allowed it will send a wrong message to our community. Please mm the request for a variance down and in the future please don't allow encroachments in to any setback areas in Barefoot Beach POA ONE comrmmlty. Respectfully yours, Daniel L. George President Barefoot Beach POA ONE 2002 ant By: YVVAj 239 bgf ~uuu$ Phil · F'l:~t.~ ;D¢:~ ~ FrO4 NC). :I 219 2~4~'~75 Ju~. 28 :]hr~-4e~ De~c~ POA ONE 2002 f rchitect · Buildor July 9, 2002 Collier County Government Community Development & Environmental Se~ices Division Planning - 2800 No~h Horseshoe Drive Naples, F~orida 34~04 Attn: Kay Deslem, AICP Principal Planner Re: Petition VA-2002-AR-2691 Dear Kay: Mr. Reckmeyer's letter to the neighbors has yielded a number of positive responses to his variance petition. Attached are the ones I have which cover many of the residents within the 150 feet. For your convenience I placed these names on your aerial photo - Attachment D of your Staff Report. I believe Bill Reckmeyer may have a positive response in his possession from the Dolans' Lot C 1 and the Christs' Lot C 4 but is out of town now. Thank you for your attention. Your Staff Report was a thing of beauty - very impressive. Sincerely, Don Cahill AIA JUL 3 0 2002 June 14, 2002 "" '0'/ Mr. and Mis. David Keery "j7~ j/ ' L..... 1~..' Beach Garden C, Lot 3 104 Curacao Lane Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Dear Mr: and Mrs. Keery, Please be advised that it is our intent to make application to Collier County for a variance from the requirements of the zoning regulatiom as th~ apply to the following property: Lot 9, Block C, Lely Barefoot Beach, aka 107 Dominica Lane, Bonita Springs, Florida On the describe3 property, our intent is to ask the County to allow us to do the following: (1) With the footprint oftbe building on the Coastal Consmmtion Setback Line (CCSL), to extend above and seaward of the CCSL a roof(8'), a curved vertical shear wall (as it rises vextically, from a 0" overhang at th~ ground to 10'-5' at floor northwest, 7'-10"; 2'a floor, 6" to 7'-10"; 3~ floor southwest, 4'; 3~ floor northwest, 6'. All of these balco~ are curved and all oftbe above dimensions occur at only one point. Tbereb~, the majority of every bal~ny is much smaller. (2) W'rda the footprint oftbe bugding on the property line of the commonly owned property called Beach Garden C, to extend a roof 36 inches and two balconies 18 inches into Beach Garden C. (3) With the footprint of the building on the easterly 10' setback line, to overhang a section, or bay, of the upper building 24 inches into the setback area. In order to provide you with an oppo~ to become fully aware of our intention and the reasons for the Coumy requiring a second variance, we wi]l be contacting you directly in the next few days or you may choose to telephone our architect, Don Cahffi (239-597- 6266) or us (315-476-7400) for fuxther information. Please be advised that we are interested in assuring you that our request will not adversely affect your property interests. S' Bare FL 34134 cc: Petition # VA-2002-AR-2691 JUL 3 0 2002 Jun 108 Curacao Lane Bo~ta Spriags, FL 34134~ De~r N~'ghbor, A~ you blow ','e are tlTing to build a hous~ on Be~¢i~ Cra~dca C, Lot 9. You Ii,ye recently received a letter whose ¢oate~ v~'a~ dictated b~ ~ Colm~5'. We felt ~ this short letter m;~ht b~ h¢Ipfiil to clazify tl~ Tl~e bm'lding will have ~m~ overhangs: (1) 2' on the east, (2) 18" balcony and 3' roof oa tl~ aordl, mid (3) a variety on tl~ ~s! over az~ abov~ tl~ Coastal Co~tra~ion ¢or~rol Li~ (CCSL). Bazcfoot Beach's Ar~ectu~l Revie~ Commkte¢ has givca us ~p. ovals hoth on ]anual-y i7, 200! and on May 20, 2002. For ~he we~t ~id¢, we m~l¢ a virim'lce application with the ~lm~d on Apr~ 11,200~. ARcr propez adv~-tiscmem and a publ~ ~ ia fro~ of~ Cou~l~ Commi~ncrs on O~ober 9, we r~e~ived approw, l oftl~ variance. Subsequemly the State also approved thc proj~t 'I~ Couri'y as.vire~ us ~hat no mor~ a~p-o~,~ w~z~ ~.cc.s~' except for die Buildiag Permit. We received thc County appro'~ inth¢ form of an i.s~ed Buildir~ P~'mit on May 22, 2002. On May 23, 2002 ~ Coum7 mopp~ ¢omg~-u~tion ~ a r~l~t of an objection by our ~ighboz, Mr. Lewail~ who ~ tl~t his ~ will ~ removed fi.om ou! oft~e north window of his home as a lx~qiR ofth~ vm-ian~. His attorney ¢o~tends ~hat ~ second va_,~a~ is r~luired. Our attor~y disagr~s. We rece~l~ m~t with Mr. Lcwa]l~'s a~tome¥ to show him ~ ~he building's d~i~, a~ a resutt oftl~ ~ r~l~c.~s Mr. L~allen's vi~v by only 4" as via:wed 3T a,~ly and even th~ ¢oukl bc rez~ved. In fang as all archit~% ! w~ vcz'y cazefu] to es~abli~h sighflines fi'om withi~ his home ami to carcfully desiga th~ building so that it would not ot~z~i¢~ his ~ as a res~ oft~ vazizap.,e. Mi'. Lcwallen ~ f~r ma~y years enjoyed the priva~ cre. a~ed ~ being sui'rou~ted by 3 va~a~ lo~s. I c~l d~ nothing abou~ dimhaished privai~ he will h~v¢ as a re~t of rely building being m:xt ~o Mrn~ ~ I iiavc di~endy tri~d ~ promct his privacy, cron offcriag to mtai~ thc lanlscaping li~ plant~ on o~ lot. Thc rea.son thc vazianc~ i~ i ~mportant to us is ~ it wilI allow ~ to ¢onfal¢ ~ home oR only o~ lot, Lo! 9. Therefore, this ~ allow us ~o cre. lt¢ ~ garden on our adj~cem Lot g for all of'us to eajoy. Ifyol~ ~¢ so incline& A PROMtrl' RESPONSE FROM YOU would be v~ h~lpfiil ~o us in ~tt~l~ ~s problem ree, oNed with thc Coaz~ty. Plel~e require the enclosed note with your signature, c~te, and Boni~ Springs address in die enclosed ~av¢lop~ so that we c. an ~et on wi~il ~ornin~ a good neighbor. THANK YOU! Siaccrdy your ~tm¢ neighbors, 3odi mid Bill R¢~kmey~r JUL 3 0 2002 Date: To: Kay De.leto, Principal p~rmer, Collier County Gov~ Mr. Joseph lc Sehmitt. Administrator, Comer Co ty Comm mity Development Re: Reckn~er Variance # VA-2002-AR-2691 We are hereby in favor of the residence as described in letters dated June 14 ~ June 16, 2002 from ~ G. ~ Jo.Ann g~Icmey~. Date: To: Kay Deselem, Principal Planner, Collier County Goveaxunem Mr. Joseph lC Schmitt, Administrator, Collier County Community Development Dr. James D. Carter, Collier County Commissioner Re: Reckmeyer Variance # VA-2002-AR-2691 We are hereby in ~avor of the residence as described in letters dated June 14 and June 16, 2002 from W'flliam G. and JoA~ ~Rec~. Names Printed' Bonita Springs'Address: /~9~ ~6~,~,~q o_4~c, ~q/~-- LotNo.: ,_~ Date: To: Kay Dese~ Principal Planner, Collier County Govemmem Mr. Joseph IC Schmitt, Administmlor, Collier County Comnnmity Development Dr. James D. Carter, Collier County Commissioner Re: ll~eckm~er Variance # VA-2002-AR-2691 We are hereby L,~ l~vor of the residcnce as descn'Ixxt in lcttcrs dated June 14 and Jm~e 16, 2002 from W'flliam G. and Jogam.Reckn~:ver. Names Printed: i~&?F,. ~.; t.')~x)t?l,~e.z-F~ BcachGarden: (' JUL 3 0 2002 Bonita Springs Address: Lot No.: 6_ .:;-' ..~6] To: Kay Deselenk Principal Planner, Collier County Government Mr. Joseph IC Schmitt, Administrator, Collier County Community Development Dr. James D. Carter, Collier County Commissioner Re: Reckmeyer Variance # VA-2002-AR-2691 We are hereby in favor of the residence as described in letters dated June 14 and June 16, 2002 from W'flliam (3. and JoAnn Reckmeyer. To: Kay Deselenk Principal Planner, Collier County Government Mr. Joseph K. Schmitt, Administrator, Collier County Community Development Dr. James D. Carter, Collier County Commissioner Re: Reckmeyer Variance # VA-2002-AR-2691 We are hereby in favor of the residence as described in letters dated June 14 and June 16, 2002 fi.om William G. and JoAnn Reckmeyer. Names Printed: /'~2, D3~klr~e.h~.. ~ Beach Garden: Bonita Springs Address: Lot No.: ~ Date: ~t4. l..'f ~'i ~O 0 ~--- To: Kay Deselc:~ Principal Plmmer, Collier County Govern:tnt Mr. Joseph K. Schmitt, Admbistrator, Co~ier County Community Development ~ ITE~ Z-~' Dr. James D. Carter, Colfier County Con~ssioner ~' ~ ~ Rc: Rcckmeyer Variance # VA-2002-~-2691 JUL 3 0 2002 Wc are hereby in fiwor of the rcsklcncc as descried in letters dated June 14 and Jim Pg. . . 2002 l~om William G. and JoAnn Rcckmeysr. k ;~ //~/0 ~'~ ¢['~ Nanlcs lprintcd: · ~ Beach Gardcn: .~ RESOLUTION NO. 02- RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER VA-2002-AR-2691, FOR A VARIANCE ON PROPERTY HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on all counties in Florida the power to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning and such business regulations as are necessary for the protection of the public; and WHEREAS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development Code (Ordinance No. 91-102) which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County, among which is the granting of variances; and WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Appeals, being the duly elected constituted Board of the area hereby affected, has held a public hearing after notice as in said regulations made and provided, and has considered the advisability of variances in the PUD zoning district as follows: 1) from the required Gulf Front Yard (PUD Ordinance 85-83) setback that aligns with the State of Florida Coastal Construction Setback Line (CCSL) to allow (a) the balconies to extend to a maximum of 8 feet west of the CCSL: (b) the roof to extend a maximum of eight feet five inches west of the CCSL; (c) the shear wall to extend a max/mum of fen feet five inches west of the CCSL; and 2) from the required ten foot access drive right-of-way yard setback (PUD Ordinance 85-83) to allow; a building setback of eight foot, a variance of 2 feet, on the east side along Dominica Lane, as shown on the attached Partial set of architectural plans, pages 2-5 and 7-10, stamped "Received June 13. 2002", Exhibit "A", in a PUD Zone for the property hereinafter described, and has found as a matter of fact that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Section 2.7.5 of the Zoning Regulations of said Land Development Code for the unincorporated area of Collier County; and WHEREAS. all interested parties have been given opportunity to be heard by this Board in public meeting assembled, and the Board having considered all matters presented; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED By The Board Of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida, that: The Petition VA-2001-AR-2691 filed by Don Cahill, Architect/Builder representing \Villiam G. & Joann Reckmeyer, with respect to the property hereinafter described as: Lot 9. Block C. Lely Barefoot Beach, Unit 1, as recorded in Plat Book 12, Pages 34-37, as recorded in the public records ot Collier County, Florida. be and the same hereby is approved for variances in the PUD zoning district as follows: 1) from the required Gulf Front Yard (PUD Ordinance 85-83) setback that aligns with the State of Florida CoastaI Construction Setback Line (CCSL) to allow: (a) the balconies to extend a maximum of 8 JUL 3 0 2002 feet west of the CCSL; (b) the roof to extend a maximum of eight feet five inches west of the CCSL; (c) the shear wall to extend a maximum of ten feet five inches west of he CCSL; and 2) from the required ten foot access drive right-of-way yard setback (PUD Ordinance 85-83) to allow: a building height of eight foot, a variance of 2 feet, on the east side along Dominica Lane, as shown on the attached Partial set of architectural plans, pages 2-5 and 7-10, stamped "Received June 13, 2002", Exhibit "A", of the "PUD" Zoning District wherein said property is located, subject to the conditions shown on Exhibit "B": BE IT RESOLVED that this Resolution relating to Petition Number VA-2002-AR-2691 be recorded in the minutes of this Board. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote. Done this day of ,2002. ATTEST: BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency: Patrick G. White Assistant County Attorney Exhibits: A. Partial set of architectural plans, pages 2-5 and 7-10, stamped "Received June 13, 2002" B. List of Conditions 2002 Il I // 8 VA- 002-AI~'Z269 i - ~"'~1~I~ 30 2002 v^- ~, ~l~?~[I 2002 V ~!q!~x.3 JUL 3 , 2 £~hibit Conditions for William G. ~ ]oann Reckmeyer Petition # VA-2002-AR-269! 1. In the case of the destruction of the structure for any reason, to an extent equal to or greater than 50 percent of the actual replacement cost of the structure at the time of its destruction, any reconstruction shall conform to the provisions of the Land Development Code in effect at the time of reconstruction; and 2. Construction must occur in compliance with the set of plans identified as "Partial set of architectural plans, pages 2-5 and 7-10, stamped Received June 13, 2002; and 3. This approval is subject to compliance with the conditions adopted by the Board of County Commissioners in conjunction with Resolution 01-394. 7/10/02 VA-2002-AR-2691 JUL 3 0 2002 G:\Current\Deselem\Variances\Reckmeyer variances\Conditions for Reckmeyer resolution.doc EXECUTIVE SUMMARY VA-2002-AR-2035, KENNETH D. GOODMAN, ESQUIRE, OF GOODMAN & BREEN, REQUESTING A 25-FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 75-FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK TO 50 FEET FOR 20 LOTS IN THE SHADY HOLLOW TRUST SUBDIVISION, WHICH IS LOCATED IN SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 2'~ EAST, FURTHER DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1-20, SHADY HOLLOW TRUST, COLLIER COUNTY, I~LORII}A. OBJECTIYE: That the community's interest is maintained in a single-family neighborhood. CONSIDERATIONS: The petitioner requests a 25-foot variance from the required 75-foot front-yard setback to 50 feet, for 20 contiguous lots within the Shady Hollow Trust subdivision. An earthmining operati:~o~ took pinaco on the parcel to thc north and included a portion of the subject site (when it wa~s Tract "A", Golden Gate Estates, Unit 52). When the subject site xvas excavated, earthmining was considered a permitted use in Estates zoning, provided a buildable area was left after the excavation. Shady Hollow Trust subdivision was platted in 2000, utilizing the entire area of the former "Tract. A", including the portion bat is submerged. (Minimum lot size is calculated on gross acreage, including water, roads, etc.) Therefore, the parcels meet minimum lot size in gross acreage, a portion of which includes submerged lands. The remaining "house pad", after setbacks are factored in, is large enough to build thc minimum size house required by the Estates zoning district (1,000 square feet). The petitioner, however, wishes to create a subdivision with a rear yard that is maximized to utilize the waterfront. He therefore requests a variance to reduce the front yard setback from 75 feet to 50 feet. The variance is for 20 contiguous lots. The proposed single-family houses will be a minimum of 185 feet from the neighbors to the south. Increased distance from an encroachment can become an ameliorating factor and ensure compatibility. The variance is for 20 contiguous lots. Therefore it will effectively create a uniformity and compatibility with side-to-side neighbors JUL 3 0 2002 FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this petition will have no fiscal impact on Collier County. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Approval of this variance will not affect or change the requirements of the Growth Management Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The site consists of 20 undeveloped platted lots. There are no unusual environmental issues associated with this petition. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is not located within an Area of Historical and Archaeological Probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no survey or Waiver of Historic and ~rchaeological Survey & Assessment is required. EAC RECOMMENDATION: The Environmental Advisory Council did not review this petition because the EAC does not normally hear variance petitions. CCPC RECOMMENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission heard this petition on July 18, 2002, after the deadline for the preparation of this Executive Summary. (The CCPC was originally scheduled to hear it on June 10, 2002, but the advertising requirement was not met, due to a miscommunication between the petitioner and a staff member who was leaving County employment.) Because of the miscommunication, the Community Development & Environmental Services Administrator directed staff to keep the petition scheduled for the July 30, 2002 BZA meeting. The CCPC recommendation will be presented verbally to the BZA. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: There is no land-related hardship associated with this variance. However, there are two ameliorating factors: if the variance is approved, there will be a 185-foot separation from the closest homes; and because the variance is for 20 contiguous lots, the effect will create a uniform - i~.~A ITE. M JUL 3 0 2002 and compatible development with side-to-side prop6rties, but will be out of character with the Estates-zoned properties to the south. Planning Services staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition VA-2002-AR-2035 to the BZA with a recommendation of denial. PREPARED BY: REVIENVED BY: USAN MURRAY, AICP -~ DATE CURRENT PLA~O MANAGER M~G~T ~RSTLE, AICP DATE PLA~G SERVICES D~CTOR APPROVED BY: JOSEPH K. SCHMITT D~TE" C~MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR executive summary/~A-2001-AR-2035 2002 AGENDA ITEM 8-E MEMORANDUM TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DATE: JUNE 4, 2002 SUBJECT: PETITION VA-2002-AR-2035 SADDLEBROOK LAKES VARIANCE AGENT/APPLICANT: OWNER: Panther Lake Development Corporation c/o Kelmeth D. Goodman, Esquire Goodman & Breen 3838 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103-3586 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests a 25-foot variance from the required 75-foot front-yard setback to 50 feet, for 20 contiguous lots within the Shady Hollow Trust subdivision. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located on Shady Hollow Boulevard West. This street ;vas formerly kno;vn as 43rd Avenue NW. The street runs ;vest from Immokalee road north of the Collier County Fairgrounds. The Shady Hollow Trust subdivision is a replat of a portion of Tract "A" of Golden Gate Estates Unit 52. The land was replatted in 2000. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The petitioner requests a variance to reduce the front setback from 75 feet to 50 feet for 20 --. contiguous lots. - JUL 3 0 2002 An earthmining operation took place on the parcel to the north and included a portion of the subject site (when it xvas Tract "A", Golden Gate Estates, Unit 52). When the subject site xvas excavated, earthmining was considered a permitted use in Estates zoning, provided a buildable area xvas left after the excavation. Shady Holloxv Trust subdivision was platted in 2000, utilizing the entire area of the former "Tract A", including the portion that is submerged. (Minimum lot size is calculated on gross acreage, including xvater, roads, etc.) Therefore, the parcels meet minimum lot size in gross acreage, a portion of xvhich includes submerged lands. The remaining "house pad", after setbacks are factored in, is large enough to build the minimum size house required by the Estates zoning district (1,000 square feet). The petitioner, however, wishes to create a subdivision with a rear yard that is maximized to utilize the waterfront. He therefore requests a variance to reduce the front yard setback from 75 feet to 50 feet. The variance is for 20 contiguous lots. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Subject: 20 undeveloped single-family lots; zoned E Surrounding: North - Lake - a former earthmining site East - Canal, across which are single-family lots; zoned E South- Shady Hollow Boulevard ROW, across xvhich are single- family lots; zoned E West - Remainder of undeveloped "Tract A"; zoned E HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staffs analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is not located within an area of historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, a Historical/Archaeological Surx, ey and Assessment or waiver is not required. EVALUATION FOR IMPACTS TO TRANSPORTATION, INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENT: Approval of this variance request will have no effect on infrastructure, transportation or the environment. ANALYSIS: Section 2.7.5 of the Land Development Code grants the authority to the Board of Zoning Appeals to grant variances. The Planning Commission is advisory to the BZA and utilizes the provisions of Section 2.7.5.6.1 through 2.7.5.6.8, which are general guidelines to be used to assist the 2 JUL 3 0 2002 Commission in making a determination. Responses to the items in Section 2.7.5.6. are as follows: a. Are there special conditions and circumstances existing, which are pe~uli'~-:'¥0 ihe location, size and characteristics of the land, structure or building involved? Yes. Tract "A" was platted utilizing gross acreage to calculate the minimum 10t siZe. The "building envelope" for each lot is large enough to construct a house, which meets at least the minimum requirements of the Estates District. However, the petitioner wiShes to reduce the front yard of the 20 lots. b. Are there special conditions and circumstances, which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property, which is the subject of the variance request? Yes. The land was platted by the Shady Hollow Land Trust; the current owner is Panther Lake Development Corporation. c. Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this Land Development Code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant? No. There is no land-related hardship. A house, xvhich meets at least minimum size, could be constructed on each lot xvith the existing setbacks. d. Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety and welfare? No. A reasonable use of the land can be attained by ~onstruction of a house within the existing setbacks. e. V~'ill granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district? Yes, the granting of this variance will allow the petitioner to have a smaller front yard than the minimum required in the Estates zoning district. f. Will granting the variance be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this Land Development Code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare? No, this variance will allow a house to be closer to the front lot line than other houses in the Estates zoning district. Staff's analysis showed possible impacts to tx, a n.,-tio~ Th~ motoring public along Shady Hollo,v Boulevard would be impacted JUL 3 0 2002 closer to the road than the houses on the south side of the Boulevard. However, the petitioner states that this effect xvill be mitigated by a deed restriction that will require xvalls and/or gates at each lot. (Please note that the County does not enforce deed restrictions.) Additionally, the lots on the south side of Shady Hollow Boulevard will have houses 25 feet closer to them if the variance is granted. However, the general purpose of setbacks is to alloxv adequate air and light circulation. If this variance is approved, the houses on the south side of Shady Hollow Boulevard will be a minimum of 185 feet from the houses on the subject lots. 75-foot front yard (south side of Shady Holloxv Boulevard) 60-foot ROW (Shady Holloxv Boulevard) + 50-foot proposed front yard (Saddlebrook Lakes) 185-foot separation The variance is for 20 contiguous lots. Therefore it will effectively create a uniformity and compatibility with side-to-side neighbors g. Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf courses, etc.? Yes. As stated above, the houses xvill be a minimum of 185 feet from the neighbors to the south. Increased distance from an encroachment can become an ameliorating factor and ensure compatibility. h. Will granting the variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan? Approval of this variance will not affect or change the requirements of the Groxvth Management Plan. EAC RECOMMENDATION: The Environmental Advisory Council does not normally hear variance petitions. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: There is no land-related hardship associated with this variance. Hoxvever, there are two ameliorating factors: if the variance is approved, there xvill be a 185-foot separation from the closest homes; and because the variance is for 20 contiguous lots, the effect will create a uniform and compatible development with side-to-side properties. Planning Sep,'ices staff recommends that the CCPC lo,yard Petition VA-2002-AR-2035 to the BZA with a re~ omme~d~.tirm JUL 3 0 2002 PREPARED BY: ,' PRINCIPAL PLANNER ;:"a i~ ' REVIEWED BY: SLfSAN MURRAY, AICP : ::, DATE CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER & INTEREM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR APPROVED BY: /. / / , / / I. JOSEPH K. SCHMITT DA'TE , COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ~ENVIRON~iENTAL SER\;IC£~. ADMINISTRATOR Petition Number: VA-2002-AR-2035 '' ..:-Z &7' Collier County ?lannin~ Commission: .... ...... · ::. ,~'~..~c~ ~ ~ C- JUL 3 O 2002 5 pg. ~ Division of Corporations Page 1 of 2 Florida Department off State, Division of Corporations Florida Profit PANTHER LAKE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION PRINCIPAL ADDRESS 3838 TAMIAMI TRAIL N., #300 NAPLES FL 34103 MAILING ADDRESS 3838 TAMIAMI TRAIL N., #300 NAPLES FL 34103 Document Number FEI Number Date Filed P00000059499 651042104 09/20/2000 State Status Effective Date FL ACTIVE NONE Registered Agent Name & Address GOOD~ & BP. EEN P.A.N 3838 TAMIAMI TRAIL N. SUITE 300 NAPLES FL 34103 Name Changed: 02/26/2002 Address Changed: 02/26/2002 Officer/Director Detail Name & Address Title GOODMAN, KENNETH D 3838 TAMIAMI TRIAL N.,//300 D NAPLES FL 34103 DORRILL, W. NElL 5800 STRAND BLVD. D NAPLES FL 34110 OSBORNE, LARRY D 9120 CORSEA DEL FONTANA WAY D .. NAPLES FL 34109 JUL 3 0 2002 o% lC) .Division of Corporations Page 2 of 2 5600 STRAND COURT D NAPLES FL 34110 Annual Reports Report Year20012002 ]'ll[[ Filed Date02/26/200202/20/2001 ]Ill Intangible Tax [I No Events No Name History Information View Document Image(s) THIS IS NOT OFFICIAL RECORD; SEE DOCUMENTS IF QUESTION OR CONFLICT JUL 3 0 2002 Details Page 1 of 1 Folio NO-II 73310000248 II Property Addresslt42S SHADY HOLLOW BLVD W Owner Namel[ PANTHER LAKE DEVELOPMENT CORP Addresse~{ 3838 TAMIAMI TRL N STE 300 Cityll NAPLES ]I St~tel} FL Ii ZiplI a4'~o3 - 3sss Lega,ILSHADY .OLLOW TRUST II LOT ~2 Section '11 Township Ii Range II Acres II Map.o. II Strap ~b~o. II ~o0 ~.~.o~o~,~, Il ~ MillafleArea I~ ~ Miila~ 2001 Final Tax ~oll Sales Histo~ i ~.~w~ ~,~'-~ I ~ )I ~oo.-.~ 11 ~o~n~ Improved Value I 0.00 (=) Market Value I ~,471.~0 80~ and/or Agricultural Exempt Val~e' f 0.~ (=) Assessed Valu~ I ~,4~1.00 ~omest~ad and ot~r Ex~pt Valu~ f 0.~0 ~=) ~e w~e s s,~.0o SOH = "Save Our Homes" exempt value due to cap on assessment increases. The Information is Updated Weekly. VARIANCE PETITION (VARIANCE FROM SETBACK (S) REQUIRED FOR A PARTICL~ ZONING DISTRICT) VA-2002-AR-2035 PROJECT #2002010042 Petition No. Date Petition Received: DATE: 1/28/02 FRED REISCHL Commission District: Planner Assigned: ABOVE TO BE COMPLETED BY STAFF GENERAL INFORMATION: Petitioner's Name: Saddlebrook Lakes c/o Kenneth D. Goodman, Esq. Goodman & Breen, 3838 Tamiami Tr N, Suite 300 Petitioner's Address: Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone: ( 941 ) 403-3000 Agent's Name: Agent's Address: Telephone: .~ JUL 3 0 2002 Apl)tication for Variance Petition - 8/98 PI c x u£ 3 COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING SERVICES/CURRENT PLANNING 2800 N. HORSESHOE DRIVE - NAPLES, FL 34104 PHONE (941) 403-2400/FAX (941) 643-6968 Complete the following for all Association(s) affiliated with this petition. (Provide additional sheets if necessary) Name of Homeowner Association: N/A Mailing Address City State ~ Zip Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address City State ~ Zip Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address City State ~ Zip Name of Master Association: Mailing Address City State Zip Name of Civic Association: GG Estates Civic Association Mailing Address City Naples State FL Zip PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Legal Description of Subject Property: Subdivision: GG Estates Unit 52 Lot (s) 1 -20 -B4eok (s) Tract A Section 9 Twp. 48-S Range 27-E Property I.D. # 39440040507 -- 1Metes & Bounds Description: All of part Tract "A" lying East ~.~crfh/S~uth 0~-~'~,~-' ~e of Seci:~on o Twsr~ 48 S,Rano~ 7-E Unit 52 I JO["~.., 2002 Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 Page Address of Subject Property: N/A (If different from Petitioner's address) Current Zoning and Land use of Subject Parcel: Estates Distr±ct ( E ) and P~low density residential development in a semi rural / environment previously a closed commercial excavation Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: ZO_____~NG LAND USE agriculture - undeveloped estates - undeveloped aqriculture - undeveloped estates - semi developed Minimum Yard Requirements for Subject Property: Front: 7 5' Comer Lot: Yes [~] No Side: 3 0' Waterfront Lot: Yes [] No [~] Re~: 75' JUL 3 0 2002 Application for Variance Petition - 8/98 Pa~e 3 of 8 Nature of Petition Provide a detailed explanation of the request including what structures are existing and what is proposed; the amount of encroachment proposed using numbers, i.e. reduce front setback from 25' to 18'; when property owner purchased property; when existing principal structure was built (include building permit number (s) if possible); why encroachment is necessary; how existing encroachment came to be; etc. The subject property is located along the north side of Shadyhollow Blvd. (fka 43rd Ave., N.W.) approximately 7 miles east of 1-75. Due to excavation of the 160 acre lake, approximately 1-1 1/2 acres of all or portions of the northern portion of lots 3-20 are now part of the lake. This creates a unique condition pertaining to the lots and "footprint" of the remaining buildable area. The remaining upland portion of each lot is approximately 200' wide and 185' deep. A 75' estates front yard set back is unnecessary and creates a hardship that is disproportional to the remaining upland area of between .82 - I .25 acres. This petition seeks to establish a RSF-1 front set-back of 50' feet to allow a suff-icient remaining rear yard for optimal site utilization. All adjacent areas are undeveloped and the subject site will be further governed by architectual controls, individual gated entries, and landscape requirements under a Recorded Homeowners Association. JUL 3 0 2002 ^pl)iication for Vari;mce Petition - 8/98 Page 4 of 8 Please note that staff and the Collier County Planning Commission shall be guided in their recommendation to the Board of zoning Appeals, and that the Board of zoning appeals shall be guided in its determination to approve or deny a variance petition by the below listed criteria (1-8). (Please address this criteria using additional pages if necessary.) 1. Aretherespecia~c~ndifi~nsandckcumst~cesexis~gwhicharepecu~iart~the~ca~n~s~eand characterisficsoftheland,structure, orbuildinginvolved. the northern 200-400' of each lot were excaved as part of the Shadyhollow Trust ~ This creates a peculiar condition for these effected lots for the remaining buildable upland area. 2. Aretherespecialcondifionsandcircumstanceswhichdonotresult~om theacfionoftheapplicant suchaspre-exis~gc~ndi~nsre~ativet~thepr~rtywhichisthesu~ect~fthevariancerequest. the pre existing condition of each current lot as noted above are conStr&ined by the excavation area. To try and fill the rear yard to attain a deeper lot is not practical due to the depth of the lake and required finished slopes. 3. WiHaliteralinte~retafionofthepro~sio~of~szoningcodewo~"nnecessaryand ~due h~hipontheapplicantorcreatepmcficaldifficultiesontheappScant- Yes the remaining upland building envelope while approximately 200' wide will result in a remaining rear yard of as little as 30'. 4. Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety or welfare. Yes the requested front yard variance of the remaining upland portion of each yard is consistent with RSF-1 zoning. _ ....AC, ENO ~"iIEI~ -'-~ JUL 3 0 2002 ,,xppiication fo]' Variance Petition - 8/98 Pa 5. Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by ~ these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures same zoning the district. No 6. Will granting the var/ance be in harmony with the intent and purpose of this zoning code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. 7. Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf course, etc. Yes - :Pre ex±st:'incj lake excavat:±on t:o l:h.6:-:rear of each of lo'cs 3-20 8. Will granting the variance be consistent with the growth management plan. JUL 3 0 2002 .,-,ppii~ati~n ~'or Variance Petition - 8/98 Pa 1 ~ __ cOLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Planning Services Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 Novemb~ 20, 2000 To Whom It May Conc. x~: .' RE: ?~¢ition/Proj~a Submittal On December 4, 2000, the Planning Servic~ Department will implement a new Developm~t Revlon' computer tracking module. The addition of this module will - enable staff to expedite the processing of your project Please be advised effective November 27, 2000, all projects submitted for review to the ~lanningS~a'vic-,~ Department, which includ~_Cu-rr~t Pl...am'fing, Addressing; Engineering Review and Comprehensive Planning, shall be required to follow the procedure beloW. The enclosed Addressing Checklist shall be completed blt the applicant and approved blt the Addressing Customer Servic~ Agent Supervisor. ThLn process will require 3 working day~ to complete. The signed Addressing Checklist shall be submitted at the pre-application meeting. If a pre_application meeting is not required, the signed Addressing Checklist shall be submitied with thc application package and may be personally brought in to our Addressing office or faxed to the number below. Failure to submit.tiffs.information at proj.~._.t_sgb.-mi.'-tta!- --wi-ll not allow your project to be ......... entea'~d and r~viewed All application submittals d,.all be directed to Chea-yl Soter, Curt*ut Planning. If there are any questions, please contact PeggY Jan-ell at 403-2482 or fax to 659-5724. SincerelY, Robert J. Mulhere, A1CP, Director Plan'ting Services Department JUL 3 0 2 02 asRESSING CHECKLIST e complete the following and submit to the Addressing Section for Review. Not all items will apply to every project. Items in bold type are required. 1. Legal description of subject property or properties (copy of lengthy description may be attached) A part of section 9 twsp 488 Ranqe 27 E, A replat of part Tract A Gold_~Jl Gate Estates Unit 52 2. Folio (Property ID) number(s) of above (attach to, or associate with, legal description if more than one) 39440040507 0209640306 3. Street address or addresses (as applicable, if already assigned) 4. Location map, showing exact location of project/site in relation to nearest public road right-of-way (attach) 5. Copy of survey (NEEDED ONLY FOR UNPLATTED PROPERTIES) 6. Proposed project name. (if applicable) Saddlebrook LaKes 7. Proposed Street names (if applicable) Iq/A 8. Site Development Plan Number (FOR EXISTING PROJECTS/SITES ONLY) SDP N/A - ~a~ Petition Type - (Complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition Type) [--] SDP (Site Development Plan) [--] PPL (Plans & Plat Review) [--] SDPA (SDP Amendment) ['-] PSP (Preliminary Subdivision Plat) ['--] SDPI (SDP Insubstantial Change) [--] FP (Final Plat) [--J SiP (Site Improvement Plan) 1--] LLA (Lot Line Adjustment) [-] SiPA (SIP Amendment) [--'] BL (Blasting Permit) [--'] SNR (Street Name Change) [--] ROW (Right-of-Way Permit) ['--] Vegetation/Exotic (Veg. Removal Permits) [--1 EXP ('Excavation Permit) [] Land Use Petition (Variance, Conditional Use, [-] VRSFP (Veg. Removal & Site Fill Permit) Boat Dock Ext., Rezone, PUD rezone, etc.) [--] Other- Describe: 10. Project or development names proposed for, or already appearing in, condominium documents (if applicable; indicate whether proposed or existing) lq/A 11. Please Check One: [] Checklist is to be Faxed Back ['-] Personally Picked Up 12. ApplicantName_~o. nno-th Goodman Phonf --403-3000 Fax 403-0010 13. Signature on Addressing Checklist does not constitute Project and/or Street Name approval and is subject to further review by the Addressing Section. FOR STAFF USE ONLY Primary Number Address Number ~,~ddress Nmnber ~,rr. NOA ~'r~ ddress Number ......... .___ Approved by Date __ _.__~ r"/ .~ 3U L 3 0 2002 keviscd 3-21-01 JUL 3 0 2002 Corkscrew ;ar'los Park · AGENOA ITEM JUL 3 0 2002 Bird Rookery Swamp ,.,Corkscrew C~ Park )rings , . ,, I SUBJECT PROPERTY I I I oThe Cana/ 2002 JUL 3 0 2002 ~ Pg 1 1 4- $ 4 1 ] r--~~ pu,ib,, 5 z~I ] ~U"1"11 ~__ TRACT A ,~a ~ 26- ~7 ¢1 ¢6 ~ 2002 ~NINOZ °3° i-- . . -~1-~ ? ~.m' . ::.~ ' "':~ '":?~'~:.'-' ~ ~ .- · {~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ AG~A ~ ~" JUL 3 O 200. RESOLUTION NO. 02-__ RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER VA-2001-AR-2035, FOR A VARIANCE ON PROPERTY HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORXDA. WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on all counties in Florida the power to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning and such business regulations as are necessary for the protection of the public; and WHEREAS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development Code (Ordinance No. 91-102) which establishes regulations for the z~ning of particular geographic divisions of the County, among which is the granting of variances; and WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Appeals, being the duly elected constituted Board of the area hereby affected, has held a public hearing after notice as in said regulations made and provided, and has considered the advisability of a 25-foot variance from the required 754oot front yard setback to 50 feet on the attached plot plan, Exhibit "A", in an Estates District (E) Zone for the property hereinafter described, and has found as a matter of fact that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Section 2.7.5 of the Zoning Regulations of said Land Development Code for the unincorporated area of Collier County; and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given opportunity to be heard by this Board in public meeting assembled, and the Board having considered all matters presented; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida, that: The Petition VA-2001-AR-2035 filed by Goodman and Breen, representing Panther Lake Development Corporation, with respect to the property hereinafter described as: Lots 1-20, Shady Hollow Trust, as recorded in Plat Book 36, Pages 84-86, in the Official Record Books of Collier County, Florida. be and the same hereby is approved for a 25-foot variance from the required 75-foot front yard setback to 50 feet as shown on the attached plot plan, Exhibit "A", of the Estates District (E) Zoning District wherein said property is located, subject to the following condition: 1. This variance is for the encroacttment shown in Exhibit "A" only. Any other encroachment shall require a separate variance. JUL 3 0 2002 %2 BE 1T FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution relating to Petition Number VA-2001-AR-2035 be recorded in the minutes of this Board. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote. Done this day of ,2002. ATTEST: BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN Approved as to Form and Legal Suf[iciency: 'Matjc(rJe 5.I. Student~ Assistant County Attorney AGENDA ITEI~ JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE ROAD IMPACT FEE RATE SCHEDULE, WHICH IS SCHEDULE ONE OF APPENDIX A OF CHAPTER 74 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAW AND ORDINANCES, THE SAME BEING THE COLLIER COUNTY CONSOLIDATED IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE, AS AMENDED OBJECTIVE: Board of County Commissioners adoption of a Resolution amending Schedule One of Appendix A (the Road Impact Fee Rate Schedule) of Chapter 74 of the Collier County code of Law and Ordinances, as amended, the same being the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, as amended. CONSIDERATIONS: Collier County has used impact fees as a funding source for growth-related transportation capital improvements since October 7, 1985. The Board of County Commissioners established the current impact fee rates on January 11, 2000, and these rates took effect on April 1, 2000. Prior to this latest increase, the rates had not been updated since April 16, 1992. The current rates have been in place for more than two years. On March 6, 2002, the County executed a consultant contract to update these fees to reflect both the current level of service and up-to-date costs of providing transportation-related public facilities. The enclosed reports update previous studies prepared for Collier County by Tindale-Oliver and Associates, Inc. in 1991, Collier Count3.' Transportation bnpact Fee 1991 Update Study, and in 1999, Collier Counn, 1999 Transportation hnpact Fee Update Study. The County's exceptional growth in the past three years, in conjunction with growing capital construction costs, which are largely driven by escalating land acquisition prices, has necessitated an increase in Road Impact Fee rates. This update includes recalculating the roadway construction costs (includes all costs associated with adding additional lane capacity) and changing several other factors used in the impact fee calculation. The changes to these variables include an update of the fuel efficiency rate from 16.0 to 20.1 miles per gallon based on new data from the Federal Highway Administration; an increase in the gas tax credit (offset) from 14.8 cents to 24.1 cents; a adjustment of the Interstate mileage reduction, which relates to the percentage of local trips that include the use of Interstate 75, from 13 percent to 6 percent; and corrections to trip generation rates of several land use categories to be consistent with the latest edition of Trip Generation, a reference book published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Resolution - 2002 Road Impact Fee Update Page 2 The proposed impact fees were presented to the Board's Development Services Advisory Committee (DSAC) on July 3, 2002. Representatives of the Collier Building Industry Association (CBIA) were also present. By unanimous vote, the Committee opted to recommend that the Board postpone consideration of the proposed new Road Impact Fee rates until September 2002. Meetings were also held on July 12, 2002 with the CBIA and their consultants to discuss the cost estimate methodology, on July 16, 2002 with the CBIA, Chamber of Commerce, Economic Development Council, Board of Realtors and the public, and on July 17, 2002 with the Collier County Citizens Productivity Committee. Staff has published in the Naples Daily News a Resolution that specified a recommended average increase of 228 percent to these Impact Fees based upon a preliminary draft report developed for public review and comment for further refinement. Staff has met with all interested parties to review the data used to develop the proposed fee schedule. As a result of these meetings the increase that is being recommended by staff to the Board has been adjusted to a recommended average increase of 154 percent. The Resolution attached to the Executive Summary reflects staff's downward revised recommendation of an average increase of 154 percent. As a result of the aforementioned discussions with interested parties, staff and the consultants applied a revised approach to calculation of right-of-way costs for this update cycle. Unlike other phases of capacity projects, the right-of-way phase pays out over a number of years and is site and situation specific. Given the fact that project history is recent, the riehts-of-way are not closed out with ongoing negotiations and litigation on parcels. T~erefore recent project history has not resulted in documentation of full r/ght-of-way costs. Rather than estimating project costs when so man.,,' variables that affect the final cost are unknown, the previous right-of-way cost estimate from the 1999 impact fee update study was used with an increase applied based on the percentage of increased property value over the last three years. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The proposed impact fee rates are designed to provide adequate funding for capital improvements to transportation-related public facilities as indicated by the Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan. FISCAL IMPACT: There are sixty-two (62) separate land use categories in the current Road Impact Fee schedule. The proposed new fee schedule would increase Road Impact Fee rates by an average of 154 percent. A comparison of the current and proposed rates is attached. The attached resolution provides that the proposed rate schedule shall become effective on September 1, 2002. The contemplated annual increase in revenue to be generated by the recommended impact fee rates is over $27 million per year, provided the current level of building permitting activity remains about the same. Attached is a side-by-side comparison of the current and proposed impact fee rates. : JUL 3 0 2002 Resolution - 2002 Road Impact Fee Update Page 3 In addition to administrating the Impact Fee Program, the Community Development and Environmental Services Division (CDES) oversees the County's Economic Development and Affordable Housing and State Housing Initiative (SHIP) Programs. Although these programs are not directly related to the establishment of impact fee rates or to the costs associated with construction of a lane-mile of road, the items discussed below are anticipated ancillary effects of recent and proposed impact fee increases. Last year the County spent approximately $1 million of SHIP funds assisting 165 families with payment of impacts fees deferred under the impact fee waiver and deferral program. CDES estimates that the proposed Road Impact Fee rate increase, joined with the increase in Water and Sewer Impact fees that took effect January 1, 2002 and the increase in Parks and Recreational Facilities Impact Fees adopted June 25, 2002, would reduce the number of families aided by $1 million in SHIP funds to 101, a reduction of 38.8 percent. In addition, the CDES Economic Development Manager deems that the proposed rate increase may potentially dissuade two major firms from relocating to Collier County due to the increased relocation costs resulting from this proposed rate increase, and consequently may result in a net loss of approximately 181 mid- to high- paying jobs as well as the potential loss of up to $1 million in impact fees. The proposed development of a 305-acre Industrial/Business Park may possibly be affected as `*,ell. Despite the noted social and economic impacts, the proposed Road Impact Fee rate increase must be evaluated from a long-term perspective. The above economic considerations notwithstanding, the cost to expand the capacity of the County's transportation network to accommodate growth is still $3,157,279 per lane mile and is likely to continue to increase in the years to come. If the County does not adopt the proposed Road Impact Fee rates at these (downwardly) revised recommended amounts, a funding shortfall for road construction will inevitably result. The County could be forced to resort to significant future increases in property taxes to make up for funding shortfalls in order to maintain its adopted level of service pursuant to Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. Any action taken to effectively delay implementation of the proposed impact fee rates could also result in a funding deficit with compounding, multi-year effects. An important attractor of ne,,' business in Collier County is our low property tax rates. Increases in property taxes--which are not one-time expenditures like impact fees but annual recurring costs to businesses--in order to augment transportation capital funding could discourage enterprises from moving to this area in the years to come. The increased tax burden, for which there is no County assistance program, could significantly reduce the population of persons able to afford newly constructed, low-cost housing. Failure to adequately address transportation capital funding needs will ensure years of continued congestion on our roadways, which will likely dissuade new businesses from rrioving to this area. If the County does not aggressively confront its : JUL 3 0 2002 Resolution - 2002 Road Impact Fee Update Page 4 transportation funding needs, the resulting impact on our quality of life could ultimately harm economic development, as well as public health, safety and welfare, far more than the short-term impact of the proposed increase in Road Impact Fees. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners adopt the attached Resolution, mending Schedule One of Appendix A of Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Law and Ordinances, as amended, the same being the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, as amended, promulgating the proposed Road Impact Fee rates with an effective date of September 1, 2002. Prepared by: .~ff...~~~~~7~'/Date: 7'''''~'/''~'~ Phil Tind~ll/, Impact Fee Coordinator Reviewed by:/~~--~~ Date: / JoSeph K. Scl;fmitt, Adrm'nistrator / ¢"omm~ Development & Environmental Services Division Approved by: //~' ~, ~ ~'~~ Date: ........ Norman E. Feder, AICP, Administrator Transportation Services Division I RESOLUTION NO. 2002- .~ A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER.~ OF COI.I.IER 4 COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING SCHEDULE ONE OF APPENDIX A OF CHAPTER 5 74 nV TIlE COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAW AND ORDINANCES, AS AMENI)ED, 6 THE SAME BEING Tile COLLIER COUNTY CONSOLIDATED IMPACT FEE 7 ORDINANCE; INCREASING ROAD IMPACT FEE RATES FOR ALL LAND USE 8 CATEGORIES LISTED IN TIlE CURRENT ROAD IMPACT FEE RATE SCHEDULE 9 BY AN AVERAGE OF ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY-FOUR PERCENT; PROVIDING 10 FOR A DELAYED EFFECTIVE DATE OF SEPTEMBER 1, 2002. I1 12 13 WHEREAS, on April 16. 1992, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County 14 adopted Ordinance No. 92-22, thc Collier County Road Impact Fee Ordinance. thereby 1 5 establishing the County's then applicable road impact fee rates; and 16 WHEREAS, on January' 11. 2(100~ the Bcmrd of County Commissioners adopted 17 Ordinance No 2000-3, thereby establishing updated road impact fee rates using the same 18 calculation formulas as those used for thc rate schedule established by Ordinance N~. 92-22, bnt 19 employing updated variables; and 20 WHEREAS. on March 13. 2001. the Board of County Commissioners adopted 21 Ordinance Nc). 2001-13. thc Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance. repealing and 22 superseding all of the County's then existing impact foe rcgulamms, and consolidating all ot the 23 County's ~mpact fee regulations into that Ordinance, codified as Chapter 74 of the Colhcr County 24 Code of Law and Ordinances Ithe Code). and incorporating the aforementioned road fcc rates 25 cstablishcd by the adoption of Ordinance Nt~. 2000-3; and 26 WHEREAS. Section 74-502 of thc Code states that ~mpact fee studies should be 27 reviewed at lea~t e~ery three (3))'ears: thus the County has retained CXDCr[ consultants to evaluate 28 and update unit costs and recommend changes to the lees where appropriate; and 29 WHEREAS, Collier Count)' uses ~mpact fees to supplement the lunding of necessary 30 capital improvements required to provide public facilities tt~ serve new pr~pulation and related 31 development; and 32 WHEREAS, the County's excepticmal growth in the past two 12) ycars, in conjuncture 33 with sharply increasing road construction costs, warrants that the Board should undertake 34 proactive measures to match road construction funding with documented future needs: and 35 WHEREAS, the County's Consultant recommends road impact fcc ram increase~, an 36 average increase of one hundred and fifty-four percent (154 %), for all land use categorics listed in 37 the current road impact fcc rate schedule, Schedule One ol' Appendix A of Ordinance No, 2001- 38 13. as amended, the same being Schedule One of Appendix A of Chapter 74 of the Collier County 39 Code of La.w and Ordinances; and 40 WItEREAS, staff has thoroughly reviewed the Consultant's findings and 41 recommendations and concurs with the recommended road impact l~ee rate increases as specified 42 herein. 43 NOB', THEREFORE Big IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF 44 COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. that: | The P, uard of Count)' Commi~,sic, ncrs hereby declares that the road impact fee rates scl 2 I'~rlh in the revised Schedule ()ne or Appendix A of Ordinance No. 2001-13, as amended, lhe 3 Collier County Consolidated Impact Fcc Ordinance, lhc same being Schedule ()ne of Appendix A 4 of Chapter 74 of the Collier Count)' Code of Law and Ordinances, attached hereto (and 5 incorporated by reference herein as Exhibit "A") are fair and reasonable, and shall be assessed as 6 auth0nzed by Collier County Ordinance No, 20OI-13, as now or hereafter amended. ? BE iT FURTIIER RESOLVED that the afiwesaid revised mad impact fee schedule shall 8 takc cffcxt on Scptcmbcr I, 2002. 9 This Resolution is adopted after motion, sccond and majority votc favoring adoption this 10 __ day of Jul)'. 2002 1 1 ATTEST BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS I 2 Dwight F.. Brock, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA 13 14 15 t6 By' 17 Deputy Clerk James N. Coleua. Chairman 18 19 2O 21 Approved as to form 22 and Icgal suft'lcicnc): *';3 .,.--, 25 Thomas C7 Palmer. 20 Assistant CounD Altorney JUL '"-' APPENDIX A 3 SCHEDULE ONE 4 5 ROAD IMPACT FEE RATE SCHEDULE 6 7 Residential 8 9 Single Family Detached House 1 Q")¢ t~t~ ' 10 Less than 1,500 Sq. Ft. $ ........$4,388.00/Dwelhng Unit 11 1,500 to 2,499 Sq. Ft.$ ~$5,848.00/Dwelling Unit ¢'~ Q'* 1.0056,898.00/Dwelling Unit 12 2,500 Sq. Ft. or larger ~, .... 13 Multi-Family ( 1-2 Stories) $1 .......$4,337.00/Dwelling Unit 14 Multi-Family (3-9 Stories) $1,S 11.0054,364.00/Dwelling Unit I A "/ 15 Multi-Family(Above 10 Stories $ I ....... $2,764.00/Dwelling Unit 16 Assisted Living Facility (ALF) $253.00 $643.00/Dwelling Unit '"} thth 17 Condominium/Townhouse $ 1,51 .... $3,647.00/Dwelling Unit I 11<'1 th11 9 18 Mobile Home $ ........$_,547.00/Dwelling Unit 19 Retirement Home/Adult Congregate 20 Living Facility (ACLF) $1,0 .....$2,455.00/Dwelling Unit 21 High-Rise Condominium $ ........$_.60_.00/Dwelling Unit 22 ' ~ Lodging 25 Hotel $1 .......$4,590.00 Per Room ¢~n~ t~11qx,514.00 Per Room 26 Motel ....... ~'~ 27 Resort Hotel $1 .......$6,349.00 Per Room 28 RV Park ,~ ........ $~,567.00/Dwelling Unit 29 30 Recreation 31 32 Golf Course $1 ......... $377,440.00/13 Holes ¢111 ¢'/1 aaqlql 'TdO (1i3 Per Screen 33 Movie Theaters * ......... ~'-'-, ...... 34 Marina $ ......$2,075.00/Boat Berth 35 36 Institutional 37 38 Hospital , ........ $9,058.00/1000 Sq. Ft. 39 Nursing Home $-340:005832.00 Per Bed 40 Church $2,1 .....$5,279.00/1000 Sq. Ft. ¢9 ! ~ r~aq;~ 14.00 Per Student 41 Elementary School . ,~ ...... ¢~-,,~ r~r~q'r~ on Per Student 42 Middle School ....... ~- ...... 43 High School $4944~$1,014.00 Per Student ¢'~ 11c~q;Qgl 13(1 Per Student 44 Jr./Community College , ......~ ...... ¢~c~ tathq:l d.9~ OO Per Student "'~ University * ......*-, ...... ,,. Day Care $ ......$569.00 Per Student ' JUL 3 1 2 APPENDIX A 3 4 SCHEDULE ONE 5 6 ROAD IMPACT FEE RATE SCHEDULE (CONTINUED) 7 8 9 Office 10 11 Office 50,000Sq Ft or less ~$9,542.00/1000 Sq. Ft. ......... $8,122.00/1000 Sq. Ft. 12 Office 50,001-100,000Sq Ft or less ¢-~ .~:~ an 13 Office 100,001-200,000Sq Ft or less ,~..,vv¢'~ ~:~ .0056,917.00/. 1000 Sq. Ft. 14 Office 200,001-400,000Sq Ft or less $2,435.9955,888.00/1000 Sq. Ft. 15 Office Greater than 400,000Sq Ft ,~_¢'~,~'~. 8.9955,362.00/1000 Sq. Ft. 16 Medical Office $7,255.90517,589.00/1000 Sq. Ft. 17 18 Retail 19 20 Specialty Retail $5, I ..... $14,880.00/1000 Sq. Ft. 21 Retail 50,000Sq Ft. or less ......... $8,420.00/1000 Sq. Ft. 22 Retail 50,001-100,000Sq Ft ......... $9,500.00/1000 Sq. Ft. 23 Retail 100,001 - 150,000Sq Ft $3,911.0059,636.00/ 1000 Sq. Ft. ~A 24 Retail 150,001-200,000Sq Ft ......... $9,898.00/1000 Sq. Ft. 25 Retail 200,001-400,000Sq Ft $-~. ,51 ~ .00510,998.00/1000 Sq. Ft. 26 Retail 400,001-600,000Sq Ft $g,750.00511,531.00/ i000 Sq. Ft. 27 Retail 600,001 - 1,000,000Sq Ft ~,¢g4-:O0512,058.00/1000 Sq. Ft. 28 Retail greater than 1,000,000S q Ft $5,05 ! .00512,212.00/1000 Sq. Ft. 29 Pharmacy/Drug Store w/Drive-Thru .~ ........ $8,883.00/1000 Sq. Ft. 30 Home Improvement Superstore $4;-3644~$10,507.00/1000 Sq. Ft. 31 Restaurant: High Turnover ~, ......... $26,229.00/1000 Sq. Ft. 32 Restaurant: Low Turnover ~,..,.~¢n -~ ..... $22,822/1000 Sq. Ft. 1~1 33 Restaurant: Drive-in $21 .......$53,850.00/1000 Sq. Ft. 34 Gasoline/Service Station t¢2-v406-:OO$6,127PerP-umpFuel Position 35 Supermarket ~c44-8-:O0510,935.00/1000 Sq. Ft. 36 Quick Lube gO~gg04~$11,161.00 Per Bay 37 Convenience Store $-M-;4684~$30,525.00/1000 Sq. Ft. 38 Convenience Store w/Gas Pumps ~,,,,..q:t: a,..~.,.,,.,~,.,o,. '~ nnq:l~ 123.00PerPumpFuel Posn. 39 Convenience Store/Gas/Fast Food $13, ! ..... $34,428.00/1000 Sq. Ft. 40 41 Services 42 43 Auto Repair/Body Shop $4r466~$10,855.00/1000 Sq. Ft. 44 Tire Store ¢~ ~:o nnq:R BIG an Per Bay 45 New/Used Auto Sales ~, ........ $19,498.00/1000 Sq. Ft. 46 Bank/Savings: Walk-in $&~35.99516,5 .~ APPENDIX A 3 4 SCHEDULE ONE 5 6 ROAD IMPACT FEE RATE SCHEDULE (CONTINUED) 7 8 9 10 Bank/Savings: Drive-in $i ! ....... $27,996.00/1000 Sq. Ft. ¢,n n,~ nn,~ga qqq aa Per Bay 11 Car Wash * .........*--, ...... 12 13 14 Industrial and A~ricultural 15 ¢, ,~,Ta nntq atilt 1000 Sq. Ft. 16 General Industrial ......... ,~, 17 Business Park (Flex-space) $4,3 .....$10,6,9.00/1000 Sq. Ft. 18 Mini-Warehouse $5~7.0951,367.00/ 1000 Sq. Ft. 19 20 3 0 Collier County 2002 Road Impact Fee Update Percent Increase by Land Use Category Rate Percent Item Land Use Cate~lory Current Proposed Per Unit Chan~le 1 SFH <1,500 sf $1,825.00 $4,38800 Dwelling Unit 140% 2 SFH 1,500-2,499 sf $2,433.00 $5,848.00 Dwelling Unit 140% 3 SFH >2,500 sf $2,871.00 $6,898.00 Dwelling Unit 140% 4 MF 1-2 stodes $1,800.00 $4,337.00 Dwelling Unit 141% 5 MF 3-9 stories $1,811.00 $4,36400 Dwelling Unit 141% 6 MF above 10 stories $1,147.00 $2,764.00 Dwelling Unit 141% 7 Mobile Home $1,053.00 $2,547.00 Dwelling Unit 142% 8 ACLF $263.00 S643.00 Dwelling Unit 144% 9 Retirement Home/ACLF $1,012.00 $2,45500 Dwelling Unit 143% 10 Condo/Townhouse $1,512.00 $3,647.00 Dwelling Unit 141% 11 High-Rise Condo $1,079.00 $2,602.00 Dwelling Unit 141% 12 Hotel $1,762.00 $4,590.00 Room 160% 13 Resort Hotel Sl ,550.00 $6,349.00 Room 310% 14 Motel S89200 $3,514.00 Room 294% 15 RV Park $1,065.00 $2,567.00 Prepared Site 141% 16 Marina $86200 $2,07500 Berth 141% 17 Golf Course $156,334.00 $377,440.00 18 Holes 141% 18 Movie Theaters $10,571.00 $51,749.00 Screen 390% 19 Hospital $3,763.00 $9,058.00 1,000 Sq. Ft. 141% 20 Nursing Home $340 00 $832 00 Bed 145% 21 Elementary School $213.00 S514 00 Student 141% 22 Middle School $322.00 $776 00 Student 141% 23 High Schoot S421.00 $1,014 00 Student 141% 24 Jr/Comm College S38200 S921 00 Student 141% 25 University S590.00 $1,42300 Student 141% 26 Church S2,190.00 $5,279.00 1,000 Sq Ft 141% 27 Day Care $225.00 $569 00 Student 153% 28 Office 50,000 sf or less S3,947.00 $9,54200 1,000 Sq. Ft 142% 29 Office 50,001-100,000 sf S3,361.00 S8,122 00 1,000 Sq. Ft 142% 30 Office 100,001-200,000 sf S2,861.00 $6,917 00 1,000 Sq. Ft 142% 31 Office 200,001-400,000 sf $2,436 00 S5.888 00 1,000 Sq. Ft 142% 32 Office >400,000 sf S2,218.00 S5,362 00 1,000 Sq Ft 142% 33 Medical Office $7,26600 S17,58900 1,000 Sq. Ft 142% 34 Specialty Retail S6,110.00 $14.880 00 1,000 Sq Ft 144% 35 Retail 50,000 sf or less $3,35800 S8,420 00 1,000 Sq. Ft 151% 36 Retail 50,001-100,000 sf S3,838.00 $9,500 00 1,000 Sq Ft 148% 37 Retail 100,001-150,000 sf $3,911.00 S9,636 00 1,000 Sq. Ft 146% 38 Retail 150,001-200,000 sf $4,032.00 $9,898.00 1,000 Sq. Ft 145% 39 Retail 200,001-400,000 sf $4,514.00 S10.998 00 1,000 Sq. Ft 144% 40 Retail 400,001-600,000 sf S4,750.00 S11,531 00 1,000 Sq Ft 143% 41 Retail 600,001-1,000.000 sf $4,984.00 S12,058.00 1,000 Sq. Ft 142% 42 Retail >1,000,000 sf $5,051.00 $12,21200 1,000 Sq. Ft 142% 43 Pharmacy Drug St w/Drive-Thru S3,589.00 $8,883.00 1,000 Sq. Ft. 148% 44 Home improvement Superstore $4,354.00 S10,507.00 1,000 Sq. Ft. 141% 45 Restaurant: Low Turnover $9,310.00 $22,822.00 1,000 Sq Ft 145% 46 Restaurant: High Turnover $10,575.00 $26,229.00 1,000 Sq. Ft. 148% 47 Restaurant: Drive-in $21,161.00 $53,850.00 1,000 Sq. Ft. 154% 48 Service Station $2,405.00 $6,12700 Fuel Position 155% 49 Quick Lube $4,570.00 Sl1,161.00 Bay 144% 50 Supermarket $4,418.00 $10,935.00 1,000 Sq. Ft. 148% 51 Convenience Store $11,468.00 $30,52500 1,000 Sq. Ft. 166% 52 Convenience Store w/Gas Pumps $6,913.00 $18,12300 Fuel Position 162% 53 Convenience Store/Gas/Fast Food $13,182.00 $34,428.00 1,000 Sq. Ft. 161% 54 Auto Repair/Body Shop $4,456.00 $10,855.00 1,000 Sq. Ft. 144% 55 Tire Store $3,268.00 $8,015.00 Bay 145% 56 New/Used Auto Sales $8,093.00 $19,49800 1,000 Sq. Ft. 141% 57 CarWash $10,017.00 $24,555.00 Bay 145% 58 Bank/Savings: Walk-in $6,636.00 $16,518.00 1,000 Sq. Ft 149% 59 Back/Savings: Drive-in $11,125.00 $27,996.00 1,000 Sq. Ft. 152% 60 General Industrial $2,279.00 $5,470.00 1,000 Sq. Ft. 140% 61 Business Park (Flex-space) $4,385.00 $10,629.00 1,000 Sq. Ft. 142% 62 Mini-Warehouse $567.00 $1,367.00 1,000 Sq. Ft. 141% Average 154% Low 140% High , 2U'L 0 2002 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM EVALUATION AND UPDATE OF UNIT COSTS FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA JULY 24, 2002 JUL :3 t~ 20~2 " TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1 II. CURRENT COST EVALUATION .................................................................................... 1 A. Design Related Costs .................................................................................................. 1 B. Right of Way Costs ..................................................................................................... 3 C. Utility Costs (Relocates) ............................................................................................. 3 D Construction and CEI Costs ........................................................................................ 5 E Mitigation Costs .......................................................................................................... 5 III. RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................... 8 A Cost Per Additional Lane Mile .................................................................................... 8 B Inflation Rates ............................................................................................................. 8 '"" I. INTRODUCTION The decisions concerning transportation policies require accurate information. This report provides an evaluation of current cost data to be used in updating impact fees for roadway capacity improvements in Collier County, Florida. The purpose of this report is to identify and provide the supporting cost data for providing roadway improvements. The intent is to base the update of costs for establishing impact fees on recent actual costs or estimate the costs using current data. The costs to provide roadway improvements are derived from six(6) phases of project development and implementation. The first phase is the design which includes the preparation of plans and bidding documents. The second phase is the acquisition of additional right-of-way required by the design. The third phase is the relocation of the utilities which would be in conflict with the design. The fourth phase is the construction and the engineering and inspection during the completion of the construction. The fifth phase is the cost of mitigation required by the projects. The costs associated with each phase were evaluated to develop an average cost per additional lane mile. The sum total of all phases provides the cost per additional lane mile which is to be utilized in the formula to determine impact fees. '-- II. CURRENT COST EVALUATION A. Design Related Costs The design cost for a roadway improvement includes the costs for engineering, surveying, preparation of plans and bid documents and obtaining all related permits. Design costs were based on an evaluation of actual fees of design projects to be let by the County in Fiscal years 2002 and 2003. The designs of these projects are approaching completion and are representative of current costs for these services. Table 1 summarizes the information obtained from county records for each project. The cost per additional lane mile is determined for each project. In reviewing the costs per additional lane mile projects 60027 and 60071 are significantly higher and lower than the other projects. Therefore they were removed from consideration in the evaluation. The average design costs for the remaining projects is $226,901 per additional lane mile. 2002 L B. Right of Way Costs Unlike other phases of capacity projects, the right-of-way phase pays out over a number of years and is site and situation specific. Given the fact that project history is recent, the rights-of-way are not closed out with ongoing negotiations and litigation on parcels. Therefore recent project history has not resulted in documentation of full right-of-way costs. Rather than estimating project costs when so many variables that affect the final cost are unknown, it is recommended that the previous right-of-way cost estimate from the 1999 impact fee update study be used with an increase applied based on the percentage of increased property value over the last three years. The Just Value growth percentages for the last three years used in this analysis comes from the Property Appraiser and equals 13.65% in 2000, 21.92% in 2001 and 20.42% in 2002. When these growth percentages are applied (compounded growth) to the $712,778 right-of-way cost figure from the previous update it results in a new fight-of-way cost estimate of $1,189,316 per lane mile. However, it is recommended that project right-of-way costs continue to be analyzed so that project specific data may be utilized in next year's impact fee update. With further parcels finalized by negotiation and condemnation; more specific current project right-of- way cost information can be considered along with the yearly inflation increases for construction, as appropriate, for the 2003 interim update. Additionally, it is recommended that the local travel characteristics and possibly certain trip rates be updated as part of the 2004 full impact fee study update when the 2000 Census data is available and the Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) is updated by the Metropolitan Planning Organization. C. Utility Costs (Relocates) The cost of utility relocations was estimated by County Staff for the same projects considered for design costs. The relocates are for only county owned facilities. Any costs associated with upsizing improvements are paid for through funding separate from impact fees. The estimates were prepared by evaluating the necessary relocations from the plans and applying costs history from recent construction. The relocations are anticipated as the result of the design/construction of the capacity improvement. The estimates are summarized in Table 2 and the resulting average cost per additional lane mile is $232,261. JUL 3 0 2002 D. Construction and CEI Costs The current costs for construction and CEI (Construction Engineering and Inspection) were derived from projects which are presently under construction or have been recently completed. The bid summaries and costs related to changes made during construction were provided by the County for seven roadway capacity improvement projects. The bid tabulations were reviewed to remove any costs for utilities in the contract. Utility relocations are covered in the previous section and utility improvements are paid for from another funding source. The list provides costs for construction and CEI services for the following projects: Project Number Project Name Limits 63041 Golden Gate Boulevard CR 951 to Wilson Road 62031 Airport-Pulling Road Pine Ridge Road to Vanderbilt Beach Road 60061 Livingston Road Radio Road to Golden Gate Parkway 60071 Livingston Road Golden Gate Parkway to Pine Ridge Road 60111 Pine Ridge Road CR 31 to Logan Boulevard 69101 Immokalee Road 1-75 to CR 951 65031 Radio Road at Davis Intersection Improvement Boulevard The project descriptions and costs are summarized in Table 3 along with the cost per additional lane mile. The last project (#65031) is for an intersection improvement and was not considered representative of the other projects. Therefore, it was not included in the averaging. The average construction and CEI costs per additional lane mile for these projects is $1,465,917. E. Mitigation Costs In recent years the mitigation of impacts to wetlands and flood plains has been required for major projects. The construction of mitigation areas required by permits are also a cost to be considered in impact fees. The cost for mitigation on recent and soon to construct proje, cts are summarized in Table 4. The costs shown for the first four projects in the table are estimates prepared by county staff from the review of the plans for the projects and current costs of construction. The costs for the second four projects are actual costs to construct on the projects. The average cost of mitigation per additional lane mile is $42, 884. , .L.,,_ 3 2002 III. RECOMMENDATIONS A. Cost Per Additional Lane Mile The evaluation to develop current costs per additional lane mile to provide capacity improvements is summarized as follows. Cost per additional lane mile Design $ 226,901 Right of Way $1,189,316 Utilities $ 232,261 Construction and CEI $1,465,917 Mitigation $ 42,884 TOTAL $3,157,279 B. Inflation Rates The construction costs/rates used in this process are derived from 2001/2002 data. The following inflationary rates are utilized by the FDOT for programming costs for projects in the respective years. The data is from the most recent report on the FDOT price trends index prepared by the F-DOT, Office of Planning. The rates are recommended for consideration by the county to estimate costs in subsequent years. Year Rate Compounded Year Rate Compounded 2003 3.6 1.036 2011 3.3 1.346 2004 3.5 1.072 2012 3.3 1.390 2005 3.3 1.108 2013 3.3 1.436 2006 3.3 1.114 2014 3.3 1.483 2007 3.3 1.182 2015 3.3 1.532 2008 3.3 1.221 2016 3.3 1.583 2009 3.3 1.261 2017 3.3 1.635 2010 3.3 1.303 2018 3.3 1.689 The cost of right-of-way and mitigation is still evolving as current projects are being implemented. As it was mentioned in the right-of-way section, the right-of-way cost estimates should be updated next year when more complete project data is available. If sufficient additional negotiated settlements across a number of different corridors are not available, then the percent change in Just Values from the Property Appraiser should be used along with the construction inflation rates to update the impact fees for next year. Special attention also needs to be given in future updates to any change in rates required for mitigation. I JO-I_-- 3 0-2002 COLLIER COUNTY 2002 TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE UPDATE STUDY FINAL DRAFT SUMMARY REPORT Prepared for: Collier County Board of County Commissioners Prepared by: URS Southern Corporation Tampa, Florida July 2002 COLLIER COUNTY 2002 TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE UPDATE REPORT INTRODUCTION The Collier County Road Impact Fee Ordinance was originally adopted in January 1985, and established a transportation improvement funding source for the County. With this funding source, transportation improvement needs could be constructed concurrent with development demands resulting from continued growth within the County. Under the provisions of the Ordinance, the County was required to review and update the Impact Fee Ordinance every two (2) years, as of the adoption of the Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, March 13, 2001, the updates are required every three (3) years. This update report is prepared to satisfy the required update schedule. This report, 2002 Transportation Impact Fee Update Report, updates previous studies prepared for Collier County by Tindale-Oliver and Associates, Inc: Collier County Transportation Impact Fee 1991 Update Study, April 1992 and Collier County 1999 Transportation Impact Fee Update Study, July 2000. (See Appendix) Review of these documents and their methodology reflects that the formulation and methodology are based on sound general engineering practices. It is therefore determined that the 2002 update would build upon this foundation and analyze the individual components of the Impact Fee Formula and provide a recommendation to update the values of formula factor. The detailed formula contained in the adopted Impact Fee Ordinance and as contained in the 1992 and 1999 Tindale-Oliver studies is as follows: Demand (Trip Generation Rate (H))*(size (J))*(% New Trips (I)) = Trip Ends / Day (Trip Ends / Day)*(Assessable Trip Length (L))*(Interstate Mileage Reduction (G)) = Lane Miles / Day (Lane Capacity (A))*2 i i~°'/kC'~nl'~---~~: '~' Cost I JUL 3 0 2002 (Lane Miles / Day)*(Cost / Lane Mile (B)) = Gross Impact Fee 1 DR~ July 24, 2002 Credit (Work Days/Yr(F))*(Trip Ends/Da¥)*(Total Trip Length(K))*(Fuel Tax(C))*(Present Value Factor(E)) = Credit (Fuel Efficiency (D))*2 Fee Gross Impact Fee - Credit = Impact Fee Due Note: (H) in the formula indicates the section reference in this report This detailed formula can be reflected as a general formula to discuss the overview aspects of the relationship to land use. The general formula for a given land use is: (Demand x Cost) - Credits = Fee The "demand" function within the equation incorporates both the travel demand created by the proposed development, as well as the roadway improvement needs that result. The travel demand is defined in terms of vehicle miles of travel (VMT), which includes the magnitude of the traffic volume in terms of vehicles per day as well as the average distance traveled. With this travel demand and the capacity of the impacted roadways (at the desired level of service), the lane-miles of roadway improvements needed are defined. The cost of building the roadway improvement is expressed in terms of dollars per lane-mile of roadway. The "credits" function, within the equation, is an assessment of the revenues generated by the development from transportation-related motor fuel taxes, which are allocated to roadway construction or transportation system capacity expansion. In this manner, the fee represents an "up front" payment for a portion of the cost to provide the transportation facilities consumed by a development. Since Collier County's original Transportation Impact Fee was prepared and adopted, additional and/or new information relevant to transportation impact fees has become available. Some of this relevant data has been included in prior updates to the Transportation Impact Fees. However, as part of th'is review and analysis, additional updated data and significant issues have been identified and discussed within this study, these include: 2 DRAFF July 24, 2002 · Updates in construction cost estimates o Modifications in gasoline tax credit · Updated data regarding travel forecast modeling and travel characteristics · Revised trip generation rates This summary report identifies key issues affecting changes in the transportation fee schedule, provides a discussion for each issue and provides a proposed estimate of the effects of the changes on the fee schedule relative to each of the issues. Finally, an estimate of potential and projected revenues resulting from the revised fee schedule is provided. REVISIONS TO FEE VARIABLES Each of the variables contained within the impact fee formula was researched and analyzed as a potential update to the rate schedule. The following summarizes the analysis for each variable and provides the resulting general recommendation based upon that analysis. A. Lane Capacity This value provides for the conversion of travel (calculated in vehicle-miles) to units of lane- miles so the cost of new facilities needed to serve new travel can be computed. The value used in the current Ordinance is 8,685 vehicle-miles per lane-mile, which represents the maximum volume for the adopted level of service on the arterial roadways. This value has been retained and utilized through prior update cycles. Research including the Florida DOT Level of Service Manual and the Highway Capacity Manual indicated there were no significant changes to industry standards, and therefore, no change has been recommended as part of the 2002 update. B. Implementation Costs As has become apparent in the economic market place, the cost to purchase and the cost to construct increases over time. This aspect has become most apparent in the observed increases that have occurred in the costs associated with the transportation system industry. Escalating costs can be readily associated with increases in technology and materials required in JUL 0 21302 L 3 ,; 1:~ (:~'-~ t July 24, 2002 construction, but the largest increases having been observed appear to be associated with right- of-way costs. Right-of-way costs have in recent years been the target of increases that have resulted from costs associated with business damages, legal fees, relocation costs and other costs generated through the legal system. Previous updates have relied upon the assumption that the existing right-of- way was adequate to accommodate a large portion of the roadway expansion, and this would minimize right-of-way acquisition for improvements. The existing construction cost per mile ($1,635,298) contains only $712,778 per mile for land purchases. This has left the County in an ever-deepening deficit when trying to generate the necessary revenues for the construction of roadway projects. Revenues have not kept pace with the rate of increase to right-of-way acquisitions. This update includes a recommendation for construction cost estimates that includes a right-of-way allowance ($1,189,316 per mile) for a total cost of $3,157,279 per mile, that is more closely associated with actual right-of-way acquisitions taken from Collier County projects. However, it is recommended that project right-of-way costs continue to be analyzed so that project specific data may be utilized in next year's impact fee update. With further parcels finalized by negotiation and condemnation; more specific current project right-of-way cost information can be considered along with the yearly inflation increases for construction. The PBS&J Technical Memorandum, Evaluation and Update of Unit Costs for Impact Assessment, dated July 1, 2002, (See Appendix) details the analysis of each component contained in the unit construction costs. This Memorandum was developed for the County as part of this update process to identify more current construction cost estimates. From this analysis the consultant has developed an accurate assessment of the construction costs that have been incurred by the County. These were derived directly from project costs within Collier County and consistent with FDOT statewide averages. The conclusion in the Memorandum is that the unit cost per additional lane mile should be increased from $1,635,298 to $3,157,279, an increase of 93.1%. The detailed breakdown of this revised construction cost is summarized as follows: 4 , JUL 3 0 2002 , ~ July 24, 2002 Cost per Additional Lane Mile Design $ 226,901 Right-of-Way $1,189,316 Utilities $ 232,261 Construction and CEI $1,465,917 Mitigation $ 42,884 TOTAL $3,157,279 The consultant further recommends that the County consider adopting inflation factors to assist with maintaining a consistency with changing market conditions. This will provide an added benefit during those periods when the fee schedule is not being considered for revisions. The rate of 3.3% compounded over 15 years is the rate used by FDOT for the programming efforts of the State of Florida. Adjustment of the construction cost alone would increase the impact fee of a single-family residence from the current $1,825 per dwelling unit (less than 1,500 s.f.) to $4,207 per dwelling unit for the same size home. This component is the most critical of the variables considered in this update report and results in the most significant increase to the fee schedule. C. Fuel Tax Travel generated by development creates the need to purchase gasoline. Purchases of gasoline within the County generate revenues in the form of gasoline taxes, a portion of which is utilized to expand the transportation system. The present value of gasoline taxes generated by new development over a 25-year period, is credited against the cost of the system consumed by travel associated with that development. The portion of gasoline taxes allocated to system expansion in the current Impact Fee Ordinance is 21.2 cents (7.7 cents from State sales tax and 13.5 cents from County taxes). The County, in 2002, extended the effective date of the five-cent local option gasoline tax (the second local option gas tax) to 2023. This provides the County with a continuing source of revenues through gasoline sales. Further, the County is no longer relying on the gas taxes to fund the maintenance of roadways, i - 'AC.~iL~i~TO~M ' JUL 30 2002: i DRAFT !'[ ~0. ~ t July 24, 2002 Gasoline taxes, in the structure of an Impact Fee Ordinance, are utilized in the calculation of credits that are deducted from the gross fee calculated. It is a legal requirement to provide a mechanism that will deduct the portion of the impact fee for the improvements that are funded through other revenues. Those "other revenues" are those generated through gasoline taxes. The effective gasoline tax credit used in the existing fee schedule is 14.8 cents. The recommendation of this report is to increase the credit allowance from the gasoline tax to reflect the current levels (2002) of taxes for State and local sources. State gasoline taxes have increased to 9.6 cents through recent legislative sessions, an increase of 1.9 cents over the previous level identified above. The following table compares the per gallon taxes for each of the resources in the existing, and the proposed impact fee updates. 1999 Road Impact Fee Update Study 2002 Road Impact Fee Update Study Existing Gas Tax Credit Calculation Proposed Gas Tax Credit Calculation Funding Source Amount Funding Source Amount State Gas Tax f7.7¢) $0.077 State Gas Tax (9.6¢) $0.096 Constitutional Gas Tax (2¢) $0.020 Constitutional Gas Tax (2¢) $0.020 County Gas Tax (1¢) $0.010 County Gas Tax ( 1¢) $0.010 Voted 9thc Gas Tax (1¢) $0.010 Voted 9~h¢ Gas Tax (1¢) $0.010 6¢ Local Option Gas Tax $0.060 6¢ Local Option Gas Tax $0.060 5¢ Local Option Gas lax $0.050 5¢ Local Option Gas Tax $0.050 Subtotal (22.7¢) $0.227 Subtotal (24.6¢) $0.246 Less Voted 9~h¢ Gas Tax -$0.005 Less Voted 9thc Gas Tax -$0.005 Used for Debt Service (-1/2¢) Used for Debt Sen, ice (-1/2¢) Less -$0.010 Gas Tax Allocated to System Expansion - $0.241 Reallocated to Rd. Maint. (-1 ¢) Proposed Gas Tax Credit (24.1¢) Gas Tax Allocated to System Expansion (21.2¢) $0.212 Expiration of 5¢ Local Option Gas tax & -$0.064 Transition of 6¢ Local Option Gas Tax Maint. Annualized 25 yrs. Effective Gas Tax Credit (iq.se) $0.148 ;ource: Collier County Office of Financial and Records Management, 2002 JUL zuu 6 [tag c:>,9'"~ i DRAFT ~ ~;..7- . . .- ...... .. - July 24, 2002 As shown in this table and the previous discussion pertaining to updating the sales tax, reinstating the allowance for the 5-cent Local Option Gas Tax (extended to 2023), and reallocating the portion of the 6-cent Local Option Gas Tax from maintenance to system expansion, will generate gas tax revenues more representative of the needs of the County. The proposed 24.1 cents of gas tax is then reflected in the impact fee formula as the Gas Tax Credit. D. Fuel Efficiency The fuel efficiency of the fleet of motor vehicles using the roadway network over the next 25- years, is used to estimate the quantity of gasoline consumed by the total amount of travel associated with each land use. This value is utilized in the fee formula for calculating the credits associated with the gas tax per gallon. A value of 16 miles per gallon was used in the previous fee update (see Appendix for 1999 update). Information obtained through published sources for the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Office of Highway Policy Information, Highway Statistics 2000, Section V: Roadway Extent, Characteristics, and Performance, Table VM-1, indicates that improvements to the efficiency of vehicles justify revisions to the Fuel Efficiency factor. Estimates for 2000, by FHWA, reflect that the fuel efficiency for all 2-axle, 4-wheel vehicles is 20.1 miles per gallon. This includes light trucks and other light haul vehicles. The recommended increase to 20.1 miles per gallon will decrease the total credit for gas tax and result in an increase in the individual transportation impact fee. E. Present Worth Factor The Present Worth Factor reflects the discount rate at which gasoline tax revenues might be bonded, over the life expectancy of a roadway facility. The factor is used in the computation of credits for gasoline taxes. The current ordinance and fee schedule is based upon an expected facility life of 25 years, and a discount rate of 6 percent. This equates to a factor of 12.783, contained in the existing fee structure. Because of constant fluctuations in the market values, it is not recommended that the County take any action regarding revisions to the Present Worth Factor. DRAFT July 24, 2002 F. Number of Work Days For all land uses, 365 days per year of operation is an assumption that is adopted in the current Impact Fee Ordinance. This variable is a component of the credit calculation of the fee formula, providing assurances of credits for gas taxes associated with the land uses within the proposed development. Historically, the use of 365 days per year has been considered a "conservative" approach to ensuring adequate credits for gasoline taxes. This approach is not uncommon to the approaches of other local govemment jurisdictions, given that many businesses are generally open seven days a week. No revision to the Number of Work Days is recommended as part of this update. G. Interstate Mileage Reduction This variable is used to recognize that improvements to the Interstate Highway System are funded through Federal and State sources, and are not directly attributed to local funding sources. The rationale for this reduction factor is to provide a mechanism to "extract out" those trips that utilize the Interstate as an alternative to the local roadway network and are those that are attributed to proposed new development. The current Impact Fee Schedule includes a 13% reduction factor for local trips on the Interstate. Using the Transportation Forecasting Model for Collier County, trip distribution and highway assignment networks, were developed to isolate and trace trips that are generated by local new development. These would be trips with a portion of that trip on the Interstate for internal Collier County trips. The data and methodology utilized for this analysis has also been used in the analysis for the 1-75, PD&E study. Through these modeling efforts it has been determined that local trips (in vehicle miles traveled, VMT) using the Interstate is approximately six percent (6%). It is recommended that the Interstate Mileage Reduction factor be revised to 6%, to more accurately reflect the travel patterns of local development. The findings and results of this Impact Fee Study Update are consistent with the accepted 1-75, PD&E report. 8 ,; J[Jk 5 r~ 2~02 ~ DR~'T .... ~ <:~q i July 24, 2002 H. Trip Generation Rates The trip generation is a function of the land use of the proposed development. The rates utilized in the fee calculation are derived from the latest resources published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The current edition of the ITE, Trip Generation Manual, is the 6th Edition. Most of the land uses adopted in the Impact Fee Ordinance were revised through prior updates, and are current with the latest research data. Those land use categories that were not updated previously, are suggested for revision to the 6th Edition standards. Included in these land uses are hotels, resort hotels, motels, and movie theatres. The comparative trip generation rates for these are as follows: Old Trip Rate New Trip Rate Hotel (per room) 8.23 8.92 Resort Hotel (per room) 5.90 10.09 Motel (per room) 5.63 9.11 Movie Theatre (per screen) 109.97 220.00 Updating these trip rates will result in increases to the impact fees for each of these land uses proportional to the degree of change in the rate. I. Percent New Trips The Percent of New Trips is an input variable to the formula that is dependent on the specific land use proposed. This represents the portion of trips on the adjacent roadways that are the direct result of the proposed new development, and would otherwise be assigned to different roadways in the absence of this new development. The current adopted percentages have been developed through extensive Trip Characteristic Studies, through prior study efforts, and any recommended changes will require new Trip Characteristic Studies. No revisions to the Percent New Trips are recommended as part of this update. However, changes to development patterns and data relative to driver behavior, suggests that updating this variable may be warranted in future Ordinance updates. JUL 3'0 :,,I]02 ' DRAFT ~" '~ ~'~O. iJuly 24' 2002 J. Size of Facility Size of the facility is a developer/applicant dependent variable to the impact fee formula that will vary for each submittal. No revision to the formula structure is recommended for this variable. K. Total Trip Length The Total Trip Length is an input variable to the formula that is dependent on the specific land use proposed. Values adopted by the County represent extensive Travel Characteristic Studies and are contained in the existing fee schedule. These represent the average total trip lengths that are the direct result of the proposed new development. Any recommended changes will require new Trip Characteristic Studies. L. Assessable Trip Length The Assessable Trip Length is an input variable to the formula that is dependent on the specific land use proposed. Values adopted by the County represent extensive Travel Characteristic Studies, and are contained in the existing fee schedule. This represents the average trip lengths that are the direct result of the proposed new development, and are associated with travel on only those roadways that are eligible for impact fee use. Based on the prior study efforts, any recommended changes should be based on new Trip Characteristic Studies. RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY Several of the variables contained within the transportation impact fee formula require updating to maintain pace with changes to market conditions as well as changes to actual costs associated with roadway construction. Based upon the discussion in this report, it is recommended that these variables should be revised as part of an amendment to the Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance and Fee Schedule. The recommended revised values are as follows: Construction Costs .......................... $3,157,279 per added lane mile Gas Tax ....................................... $0.241 per gallon (24.1 ¢) Fuel Efficiency ............................... 20.1 miles per gallon Interstate Mileage Reduction ................. 6% to i, JUL 3 3 2002 i July24,2002 c-'A ..... The following revised schedule reflects a partial list of land use categories taken from the existing Impact Fee Schedule and updated to include the above revised variables. The complete Impact Fee Schedule will be updated and contained within the Final Summary Report recommendation. !: JUL 3,2 2002~ 11 i ' DRAFT ~ .... ~.. ..... _.--~ July 24, 2002 TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE SCHEDULE Fee Comparison Table Land Use Category Unit Factor OLD FEE NEW FEE RESIDENTIAL S F Residence (Detached) < 1,500 sq ft du $1,825 $4,388 1,500 to 2,499 sq ft du $2,433 $5,848 > 2,500 sq ft du $2,871 $6,898 Multi-Family 1-2 stories du $1,800 $4,337 Multi-Family 3-9 stories du $1,811 $4,364 Multi-Family 10 stories & up du $1,1 47 $2,764 Mobile Home Park du $1,053 $2,547 Congregate Care Facility (ACLF) du $263 $643 Retirement Home du $1,012 $2,455 Condominium / Townhouse du $1,512 $3,647 High-Rise Condominium du $1,079 $2,602 du = dwelling unit LODGING Hotel room $1,762 $4,590 Resort Hotel room $1,550 $6,349 Motel room $892 $3,514 RV Park mh site $1,065 $2,567 mh site = mobile home site RECREATION Marina berth $862 $2,075 Golf Course 18holes $156,334 $377,440 Movie Theaters screen $10,571 $51,749 INSTITUTIONS Hospitals 1,000 sq ft $3,763 $9,058 Nursing Homes bed $340 $832 Elementary School student $213 $514 Middle School student $322 $776 High Schools student $421 $1,014 Junior / Community College student $382 $921 University student $590 $1,423 Church 1,000 sq ft $2,190 $5,279 Day Care student $225 $569 OFFICE <= 50,000 sq ft 1,000 sq ft $3,947 $9,542 50,001 to 100,000 sq ft 1,000 sq ft $3,36'~ $8,122 100,001 to 200,000 sq ft 1,000 sq ft $2,861 $6,917 200,001 to 400,000 sq ft 1,000 sq ft $2,436 $5,888 > 400,000 sq ft 1,000 sq ft $2,218 $5,362 Medical Office 1,000 sq ft $7,266 $17,589 1.2 I DRAFT ? JUL ~ ¢ 2~2 ' July 24, 2002 Land Use Category Unit Factor OLD FEE NEW FEE RETAIL Specialty Retail 1,000 sq ft $6,110 $14,880 < 50,000 sfgla 1,000 sq ft $3,358 $8,420 50,001 to 100,000 sfgla 1,000 sq ft $3,838 $9,500 100,001 to 150,000 sfgla 1,000 sq ft $3,911 $9,636 150,001 to 200,000 sfgla 1,000 sq ft $4,032 $9,898 200,001 to 400,000 sfgla 1,000 sq ft $4,514 $10,998 400,001 to 600,000 sfgla 1,000 sq ft $4,750 $11,531 600,001 to 1,000,000 sfgla 1,000 sq ft $4,984 $12,058 > 1,000,000 sfgla 1,000 sq ft $5,051 $12,212 Pharmacy/Drug Store w/Drive-Thru 1,000 sq ft $3,589 $8,883 Home Improvement Superstore 1,000 sq ft $4,354 $10,507 Quality Restaurant 1,000 sq ft $9,310 $22,822 High-Turnover Restaurant 1,000 sq ft $10,575 $26,229 Fast Food Rest. w/Drive Thru 1,000 sq ft $21,161 $53,850 Gasoline Station fuel pos $2,405 $6,127 Quick Lube bays $4,570 $11,161 Supermarket 1,000 sq ft $4,418 $10,935 Convenience Store 1,000 sq ft $11,468 $30,525 Convenience Store w/Gas Pumps fuel pos $6,913 $18,123 Convenience/Gasoline/Fast Food Store 1,000 sq ft $13,182 $34,428 Auto Repair or Body Shop 1,000 sq ft $4,456 $10,855 Tire Store bays $3,268 $8,015 New/Used Auto Sales 1,000 sq ft $8,093 $19,498 Self-Service Car Wash bays $10,017 $24,555 Bank/Savings Walk-In 1,000 sq ft $6,636 $16,518 Bank/Savings Drive-In 1,000 sq ft $11,125 $27,996 INDUSTRY General Industrial 1,000 sq ft $2,279 $5,470 Business Park 1,000 sq ft $4,385 $10,629 Mini-Warehouse 1,000 sq ft $567 $1,367 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PETITION ST-2194, MICHAEL LANDY, P.E., OF LANDY ENGINEERING, INC., REPRESENTING SOUTHWEST FLORIDA OPPORTUNITY FUND, L.L.C., REQUESTING A SPECIAL TREATMENT DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A 11,200 SQUARE FOOT DRUG STORE AND A 266-SEAT RESTAURANT VIA THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS ON A 4.02-ACRE SITE ZONED C-3ST, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF US-41 AND CR-951 IN SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. OBJECTIVE: That the community's interest is maintained through the consideration of a Special Treatment Development Permit. CONSIDERATIONS: ...... The petitioner requests a Special Treatment (ST) Development Permit to construct a 11,200 square foot drug store and a 266-seat restaurant via the site development plan approval process on a 4.02-acre site zoned C-3ST. As stated in section 2.2.24.2.1 of the Land Development Code (LDC), the ST overlay district classification will be used for those lands of environmental sensitivity and historical and archaeological significance where the essential ecological or cultural value of the land is not adequately protected under the basic zoning district regulations established by Code or by ordinance. All land within the ST overlay district shall be designated as environmentally sensitive. Section 2.2.24.1 of the Land Development Code states the purpose and intent of the ST overlay district, and reads as follows: "Purpose and intent. Within Collier County there are certain areas, which because of their unique assemblages of flora and/or fauna, their aesthetic appeal, historical or archaeological significance, rarity in Collier County, or their contribution to their own and adjacent ecosystems, make them worthy of special regulations. Such regulations are directed toward the conservation, protection, and preservation of ecological and recreational values for the greatest benefit to the people of Collier County. Such areas include, but are not necessarily limited to mangrove and freshwater swamps, barrier islands, hardwood hammocks, xeric scrubs, coastal beaches, estuaries, cypress domes, natural drainageways, aquifer recharge areas and lands and structures of historical and archaeological significance. The purpose of this overly ,~ ~lro~ .... district regulation is to assure the preservation and maintenance of these envirom tent~nc~ ()h JUL 3 O 2002 and cultural resources and to encourage the preservation of the intricate ecological relationships within the systems and at the same time to permit those types of development which will hold changes to levels determined acceptable by the Board of County Commissioners after public hearing." The subject property has an ST overlay over the entire parcel. Typically the ST designation is used to identify jurisdictional wetlands on-site, the boundary of which is determined by the petitioner and then verified by the South Florida Water Management District, prior to submission of an application to the County. Jurisdictional wetlands are located along the eastern portion of the subject property and total 1.31 acres. Final action on the site alteration plan or site development plan for a Special Treatment Permit lies with the Board of County Commissioners. The applicant originally sought administrative approval of the Special Treatment "ST" development permit through an interpretation from the former Planning Services Director. The County Attorney's Office has since determined that the request would have to follow the procedures set forth in section 2.2.24.6 of the Land Development Code. A copy of the legal opinion from the County Attorney's Office is attached to the EAC staff report for reference. FISCAL IMPACT: This petition for a Special Treatment (ST) permit by and of itself will have no fiscal .... impact on the County. However, if this request meets its objective, a portion of the vacant existing "C-3ST" zoned land will be further developed for retail uses. The mere fact that new development has been approved will result in future fiscal impact on County public facilities. The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of building permits to help offset the impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects in the Capital Improvement Element needed to maintain adopted levels of service for public facilities. In the event that impact fee collections are inadequate to maintain adopted levels of service, the County must provide supplemental funds from other revenue sources in order to build needed facilities. The total amount of impact fees for the proposed commercial uses are $49,206.52. It should be noted that because impact fees vary by housing type and type of commercial development, and because this approval does not provide this level of specificity as to the actual size and type of use, the total impact fees quoted above is at best raw estimates. Additionally, there is no guarantee that the project at build-out will have maximized their authorized level of development. Other fees will include building permit review fees and utility fees associated with connecting to the County's sewer and water system. Building permit fees and utility fees have traditionally offset the cost of administering the community development review process, whereas utility fees are used on their proportionate share of impact to the County system. Finally additional revenue is generated by application of ad valorem tax rates. The revenue that will be generated depends on the value of the improvements. At this point in time staff has not d ,~velot~ed a method to arrive at a reasonable estimate of tax revenue based on ad valorem t~ .x ra.t.~A JUL 3 0 2002 Nevertheless, it should be appreciated that not withstanding the fiscal impact relationship, development takes place in an environment of concurrency management. When level of service requirements fall below adopted standards, a mechanism is in place to bring about a cessation of building activities. Certain LOS standards apply countywide and would therefore bring about a countywide concurrency determination versus roads that may have local geographic concurrency implications. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The subject site is located within the Urban-Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Sub- district that is intended to provide higher densities and where existing and planned public facilities are concentrated. This district is also within Activity Center 18 that permits non- residential uses and commercial uses consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). A consistency analysis with applicable elements of the GMP is as follows: Future Land Use Element: The subject site is currently zoned C-3 and is adjacent to a commercial tract of the PUD project to the north. The pre-existing C-3 zoning may be deemed consistent with the Activity Center Sub-district Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. Conservation & Coastal Management Element: Objective 2.2 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Growth Management Plan states, "All canals, rivers, and flow ways discharging into estuaries shall meet all applicable federal, state, or local water quality standards." To accomplish that, Policy 2.2.2 states, "In order to limit the specific and cumulative impacts of stormwater runoff, stormwater systems should be designed in such a way that discharged water does not degrade receiving waters and an attempt is made to enhance the timing, quantity, and quality of fresh water (discharge) to the estuarine system." This project is consistent with Objective 2.2 and policy 2.2.2 in that it attempts to mimic or enhance the quality and quantity of water leaving the site by utilizing a dry detention area connected to an indigenous preserve and water management area to provide water quality retention and peak flow attenuation during storm events. With regards to native vegetation preservation and wetland issues, the following Objectives and Policies apply: Objective 6.2 states, "There shall be no unacceptable net loss of viable naturally functioning marine and fresh water wetlands, excluding transitional zone wetlands which are addressed in Objective 6.3." The loss of 1.08 acres (82 percent) of the viabl: nC,~,.~A tXrOaD JUL 3 0 2002 freshwater wetlands on this site may be considered unacceptable and therefore may be inconsistent with Objective 6.2. Policy 6.2.10 states, "Any development activity within a viable naturally functioning fresh-water wetland not part of a contiguous flow way shall be mitigated in accordance with current SFWMD mitigation rules. Mitigation may also include restoration of previously disturbed wetlands or acquisition for public preservation of similar habitat." This project is consistent with this policy in providing for off-site mitigation pursuant to SFWMD mitigation rules. Objective 6.4 states, "A portion of each viable, naturally functioning non-wetland native habitat shall be preserved or retained as appropriate." Policy 6.4.7 states, "All other types of new development shall be required to preserve an appropriate portion of the native vegetation on the site as determined through the County development review process. Preservation of different contiguous habitats is to be encouraged. When several different native plant communities exist on site, the development plans will reasonably attempt to preserve examples of all of them if possible. However this policy shall not be interpreted to allow development in wetlands, should the wetlands alone constitute more than the portion of the site required to be preserved. Exceptions shall be granted for parcels which can not reasonably accommodate both the preservation area and the proposed activity." The loss of 1.08 acres (82 percent) of the wetlands on-site may be considered inconsistent with Policy 6.4.7. It is staff's opinion that the applicant has not reasonably accommodated both the preservation of wetlands on-site and the proposed activity. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: Approximately 1.31 acres of South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD)/Collier County jurisdictional wetlands occur on the subject property. These wetlands extend off-site on undeveloped lands to the east. The combined size of both the on and off-site wetland is estimated to be 5 to 6 acres. The project as proposed will impact 1.08 acres (82 percent) of the wetlands on-site. Mitigation was provided by the applicant through the purchase of 1.86 credits at the Panther Island Mitigation Bank. Off-site mitigation included impacts for all of the wetlands on-site. The SFWMD Environmental Resource Permit for the project was issued on October 11, 2001. Approximately 1.77 acres of native vegetation exist on the subject property. This includes 1.31 acres of SFWMD/Collier County jurisdictional wetlands and 0.46 acres of pine, oak and cabbage palm on the upland portion of the site. The minimum preservation requirement for the site, pursuant to 3.9.5.5.4 of the Land Development Code. is 0.18 acres (10 percent of the existing native vegetation found on the property). ~ II'r~ .~)' ' JUL 3 0 2002 Observations for protected species were made while conducting site visits for vegetation mapping, wetland flagging, and wetland jurisdictionals. No protected species were observed on or adjacent to the property. HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staffs analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located outside an area of historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no historic/archaeological survey and assessment is required. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of Special Treatment Development Permit ST-2194, "Center Point" for the following reasons: Section 2.2.24 of the Land Development Code identifies lands of environmental sensitivity where the ecological value of the land is not adequately protected under the basic zoning district regulations established by Code or ordinance. The subject property has a Special Treatment (ST) overly, of which 1.31 acres are vegetated with a forested freshwater wetland containing laurel oak, cypress, red maple and cabbage palm. This wetland has been determined to be jurisdictional by the South Florida Water Management District. Freshwater swamps are identified in section 2.2.24.1 of the Land Development Code as a type of habitat requiring protection under the Special Treatment (ST) regulations. The petitioner proposes to impact 82 percent (1.08 acres) of the jurisdictional wetlands on-site and to provide mitigation off-site as compensation. The remaining 0.23 acres of wetlands are proposed to be retained on-site within a proposed stormwater retention area. The purpose of this overlay district regulation as stated in section 2.2.24.1 of the Land Development Code, is to assure the preservation and maintenance of these environmental and cultural resources and to encourage the preservation of the intricate ecological relationships within the systems and at the same time permit those types of development which will hold changes to levels determined acceptable by the Board of County Commissioners after public hearing. It is staff's opinion that an 82 percent impact, regardless of off-site mitigation, is an unacceptable level of impact to ST designated land containing environmentally sensitive habitat. EAC RECOMMENDATION: The Environmental Advisory Council heard this petition at its July 3, 2002 meeting. A motion was made by Council Member Carlson and seconded by Council Mem! er .qantnrf~ JUL 3 0 2002 to support staff's recommendation of denial of ST-2194. The vote on the motion passed unanimously, 6 to 0. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The applicant requested that the petition be heard by the Environmental Advisory Council, Collier County Planning Commission, and Board of County Commissioners as soon as possible. At the applicant's request, the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator scheduled the petition for the July 30, 2002 Board of County Commissioners meeting. The Collier County Planning Commission will have heard the petition on July 18, 2002, after this executive summary has been prepared. The Planning Commission's recommendation will be presented orally at the Board of County Commissioner's meeting. PREPARED BY: ~TEPI~Elq LENBER~ER, ~'~ DATE ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST CURRENT PLANNING SECTION V. BELLOWS, DATE CHIEF PLANNER CURRENT PLANNING SECTION REVIEWED BY: ~/~US MURRAY, AICP, MANAGER DATE CUR1LENT PLANNING SECTION ., MARGA~T WUERSTLE, AICP, DIRECTOR DATE PLANNI/X~ SERVICES DEPARTMENT JUL 3 0 2002 APPROVED BY JOS)EPH K. SCHMITT, ADMINISTRATOR -- q)ATE CO/MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SLtRVICES DIVISION ST-2194/EXECUTIVE SUMMARY/SL JUL 3 0 2002 AGENDA ITEM 8-K MEMORANDUM TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DATE: JULY 18, 2002 RE: PETITION: ST-2194, CENTER POINT OWNER/AGENT: Agent: Michael Landy, PE Landy Engineering, Inc. 2780 South Horseshoe Drive Naples, Flor/da 34104 Owner: Southwest Florida Oppommity Fund, LLC 2223 Trade Center Way Naples, Florida 34109 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests a Special Treatment (ST) Development Permit to impact property zoned C- 3ST. As proposed, the project will impact 1.08 acres (82 percent) of the wetlands on-site. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located at the Northeast comer of the intersection of US-41 and Collier Boulevard (CR-951) in Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The petitioner requests a Special Treatment (ST) Development Permit to construct a 11,200 square foot drug store and a 266-seat restaurant via the site development plan approval process on a 4.02- acre site zoned C-3ST. nar. t~,~ I ~r~A_),~ JUL 3 0 2002 The Land Development Code requires Special Treatment (ST) Development Permit to be submitted to the Environmental Advisory Council and Collier County Planning Commission for their review and recommendations. Final action on Special Treatment (ST) Development Permits lies with the Board of County Commissioners. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Subject Parcel: Undeveloped; zoned C-3ST Surrounding: North: Falling Waters Beach Resort; zoned PUD East: Undeveloped; zoned Agricultural South: Tamiami Trail CLIS-41) West: Collier Boulevard (CR-951) GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: The subject site is located within the Urban-Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Sub-district that is intended to provide higher densities and where existing and planned public facilities are concentrated. This district is also within Activity Center 18 that permits non-residential uses and commercial uses consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). A consistency analysis with applicable elements of the GMP is as follows: Future Land Use Element: The subject site is currently zoned C-3 and is adjacent to a commercial tract of the PUD project to the north. The pre-existing C-3 zoning may be deemed consistent with the Activity Center Sub-district Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. Conservation & Coastal Management Element: Objective 2.2 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Gt.owth Management Plan states, "All canals, rivers, and flow ways discharging into estuaries shall meet all applicable federal, state, or local water quality standards." To accomplish that, Policy 2.2.2 states, "In order to limit the specific and cumulative impacts of stormwater runoff, stormwater systems should be designed in such a way that discharged water does not degrade receiving w~iters and an attempt is made to enhance the timing, quantity, and quality of flesh water (discharge) to the estuarine system." This project is consistent with Objective 2.2 and policy 2.2.2 in that it attempts to -,L:~/: 9,' ~nharlqe the quality and quantity of water leaving the site by utilizing a dry detention are co1~~o'~5 2 JUL 3 0 2002 indigenous preserve and water management area to provide water quality retention and peak flow attenuation during storm events. With regards to native vegetation preservation and wetland issues, the following Objectives and Policies apply: Objective 6.2 states, "There shall be no unacceptable net loss of viable naturally functioning marine and fresh water wetlands, excluding transitional zone wetlands which are addressed in Objective 6.3." The loss of 1.08 acres (82 percent) of the viable freshwater wetlands on this site may be considered unacceptable and therefore may be inconsistent with Objective 6.2. Policy 6.2.10 states, "Any development activity within a viable naturally functioning fresh-water wetland not pan of a contiguous flow way shall be mitigated in accordance with current SFWMD mitigation rules. Mitigation may also include restoration of previously disturbed wetlands or acquisition for public preservation of similar habitat." This project is consistent with this policy in providing for off-site mitigation pursuant to SFWMD mitigation rules. Objective 6.4 states, "A portion of each viable, naturally functioning non-wetland native habitat shall be preserved or retained as appropriate." Policy 6.4.7 states, "All other types of new development shall be required to preserve an appropriate portion of the native vegetation on the site as determined through the County development review process. Preservation of different contiguous habitats is to be encouraged. When several different native plant communities exist on site, the development phins will reasonably attempt to preserve examples of all of them if possible. However this policy shall not be interpreted to allow development in wetlands, should the wetlands alone constitute more than the portion of the site required to be preserved. Exceptions shall be granted for parcels which can not reasonably accommodate both the preservation area and the proposed activity." The loss of 1.08 acres (82 percent) of the wetlands on- site may be considered inconsistent with Policy 6.4.7. Staff, believe that the applicant has not reasonably accommodated both the preservation of wetlands on-site and the proposed activity. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staffs analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located outside an area of historical and archaeologicaI probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Theref6re, no historic/archaeological survey and assessment is required. EVALUATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL~ TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE: The proposed impact o.f this Special Treatment Development Permit on transportation and the environment was reviewed by the applicable reviewing agencies and their comments have been incorporated into this Staff Report. The Collier County Transportation Planning Department met with the petitioner and the owner of the property immediately to the east, during their representative pre- application meetings, and instructed (in accordance with section 2.6.38.4.3 of the Land Development Code) to provide interconnection to each other's sites, nc.,t~ ~'r~ r) 3 JUL 3 0 2002 ANALYSIS: As stated in section 2.2.24.2.1 of the Land Development Code (LDC), the ST overlay district classification will be used for those lands of environmental sensitivity and historical and archaeological significance where the essential ecological or cultural value of the land is not adequately protected under the basic zoning district regulations established by Code or by ordinance. All land within the ST overlay district shall be designated as environmentally sensitive. Section 2.2.24.1 of the Land Development Code states the purpose and intent of the ST overlay district, and reads as follows: "Purpose and intent. Within Collier County there are certain areas, which because of their unique assemblages of flora and/or fauna, theft aesthetic appeal, historical or archaeological significance, rarity in Collier County, or their contribution to their own and adjacent ecosystems, make them worthy of special regulations. Such regulations are directed toward the conservation, protection, and preservation of ecological and recreational values for the greatest benefit to the people of Collier County. Such areas include, but are not necessarily limited to mangrove and freshwater swamps, barrier islands, hardwood hammocks, xeric scrubs, coastal beaches, estuaries, cypress domes, natural drainageways, aquifer recharge areas and lands and structures of historical and archaeological significance. The purpose of this overlay district regulation is to assure the preservation and maintenance of these environmental and cultural resources and to encourage the preservation of the intricate ecological relationships within the systems and at the same time to permit those types of development which will hold changes to levels determined acceptable by the Board of County Commissioners after public hearing.''~ The subject property has an ST overlay over the entire parcel. Typically the ST designation is used to identify jurisdictional wetlands on-site, the boundary of which is determined by the petitioner and then verified by the South Florida Water Management District, prior to submission of an application to the County. Jurisdictional wetlands are located along the eastern portion of the subject property and total 1.31 acres. These wetlands consist of forested freshwater wetlands containing oak, cypress, red maple and cabbage palm. Final action on the site alteration plan or site development plan for a Special Treatment Permit lies with the Board of County Con.missioners. The applicant originally sought administrative approval of the Special Treatment "ST" development permit through an interpretation from the former Planning Services Director. The County Attorney's Office has since determined that the request would have to follow the procedures set forth in section 2.2.24.6 of the Land Development Code. A copy of the legal opinion from the County Attorney's Office is attached to the EAC staff report for reference. 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: The applicant requested that the petition be hear by the Environmental Advisory Council, Collier County Planning Commission, and Board of County Commissioners as soon as possible. At the applicant's request, the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator scheduled the petition for the July 30, 2002 Board of County Commissioners meeting. The Environmental Advisory Council will have heard the petition on July 3, 2002, after this staff report has been prepared. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of Special Treatment Development Permit ST-2194, "Center Point" for the following reasons: 1. Section 2.2.24 of the Land Development Code identifies lands of environmental sensitivity where the ecological value of the land is not adequately protected under the t~asic zoning district regulations established by Code or ordinance. 2. The subject property has a Special Treatment (ST) overly, of which 1.31 acres are vegetated with a forested fi'eshwater wetland containing laurel oak, cypress, red maple and cabbage palm. This wetland has been determined to be jurisdictional by the South Florida Water Management District. Freshwater swamps are identified in section 2.2.24.1 o£ the Land Development Code as a t3)pe of habitat requiring protection under the Special Treatment (ST) regulations. 3. The petitioner proposes to impact 82 percent (1.08 acres) of the jurisdictional wetlands on-site and to provide mitigation off-site as compensation. The remaining 0.23 acres o£ wetlands are proposed to be retained on-site within a proposed stormwater retention area. The purpose of this overlay district regulation as stated in section 2.2.24.1 of the Land Development Code, is to assure the preservation and maintenance of these environmental and cultural resources and to encourage the preservation of the intricate ecological relationships within the systems and at the same time permit those types of development which will hold changes to levels determined acceptable by the Board of County Commissioners after public hearing. 4. Staff does not believe that an 82 percent impact, regardless of off-site mitigation, is an acceptable level of impact to ST designated land containing environmentally sensitive habitat. 7.002 PREPARED BY: S'~EPHEN LEN[BERGER DATE ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST ~OND V. BELLOWS DATE CHIEF PLANNER REVIEWED BY: wSCUSAN ~Y, AICP / DATE INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR APPROVED BY: DATg (/¢o~~.v~om~ ~ ~,~o~~,~ s~,~s ~s~o~ ~,~s~,~o~ "~ Petition ST-2194 COLLIER COUNTY PLANING COMMISSION: KENNETH L. ABERNATHY, CHAIRMAN g/current/reischl/rezones/cays/staffreport/ST-2194 JUL 3 0 2002 Item IV./ ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIl. STAFF REPORT MEETING OF JULY 3~ 2002 I. NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT: Petition No.: Special Treatment Permit No. ST-2194 Petition Name: Center Point Applicant/Developer: SW Florida Opportunity Fund, LLC Engineering Consultant: Landy Engineering, Inc. Environmental Consultant: Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. II. LOCATION: The subject property is a 4.02 acre site located at the Northwest corner of the intersection of Collier Boulevard and U.S. 41, in Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. III. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES: Surrounding properties include developed and undeveloped parcels, and two roadways. ZONING DESCRIPTION N - PUD (Falling Waters Beach Resort) Partially Developed S - R.O.W. U.S. 41 E - Agricultural Undeveloped W - R.O.W. Collier Boulevard IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The petitioner is requesting a Special Treatment "ST" Permit on the subject 4.02- acre site that is zoned C-3ST. The petitioner proposes to construct an 11,200 square foot drug store and a 266-seat restaurant via the site development plan approval process. JUL 3 0 2002 EAC Meeting Page 2 of 9 V. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: The subject site is located within thc Urban-Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Sub-district that is intended to provide higher densities. This district also permits non-residential uses and commercial uses consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). A consistency analysis with applicable elements of the GMP is as follows: Future Land Use Element: The subject site is currently zoned C-3 and is adjacent to a commercial tract of the PUD project to the north. The pre-existing C-3 zoning may be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. Conservation & Coastal Management Element: Objective 2.2 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Groxvth Management Plan states, "All canals, rivers, and flow ways discharging into estuaries shall meet all applicable federal, state, or local water quality standards." To accomplish that, Policy 2.2.2 states, "In order to limit the specific and cumulative impacts of stormwater runoff, stormwater systems should be designed in such a way that discharged water does not degrade receiving waters and an attempt is made to enhance the timing, quantity, and quality of fresh water (discharge) to the estuarine system." This project is consistent with Objective 2.2 and policy 2.2.2 in that it attempts to mimic or enhance the quality and quantity of water leaving the site by utilizing a dry detention area connected to an indigenous preserve and water management area to provide water quality retention and peak flow attenuation during storm events. With regards to native vegetation preservation and wetland issues, the following Objectives and Policies apply: Objective 6.2 states, "There shall be no unacceptable net loss of viable naturally functioning marine and fresh water wetlands, excluding transitional zone wetlands which are addressed in Objective 6.3." The loss of viable freshwater wetlands on JUL 3 0 2002 EAC Meeting Page 2 of 9 V. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: The subject site is located within the Urban-Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Fringe Sub-district that is intended to provide transitional densities between the Urban Designated Area and the Agricultural/Rural Designated Area. This district also permits non-residential uses and commercial uses subject to the location and development criteria of the Office and Infill Commercial Sub-district of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). A consistency analysis with applicable elements of the GMP is as follows: Future Land Use Element: The subject site is currently zoned C-3 and is adjacent to a commercial tract of the PUD project to the north. The pre-existing C-3 zoning may be deemed consistent with the Office and Infill Commercial Sub-district Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. Conservation & Coastal Management Element: Objective 2.2 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Growth Management Plan states, "All canals, rivers, and flow ways discharging into estuaries shall meet all applicable federal, state, or local water quality standards." To accomplish that, Policy 2.2.2 states, "In order to limit the specific and cumulative impacts of stormwater runoff, stormwater systems should be designed in such a way that discharged water does not degrade receiving waters and an attempt is made to enhance the timing, quantity, and quality of fresh water (discharge) to the estuarine system." This project is consistent with Objective 2.2 and policy 2.2.2 in that it attempts to mimic or enhance the quality and quantity of water leaving the site by utilizing a dry detention area connected to an indigenous preserve and water management area to provide water quality retention and peak flow attenuation during storm events. With regards to native vegetation preservation and wetland issues, the following Objectives and Policies apply: Objective 6.2 states, "There shall be no unacceptable net loss of viable naturally functioning marine and fresh water wetlands, excluding transitional zone wetlands which are addressed in Objective 6.3." The loss of viable freshwater wetlands on - JUL 3 0 2002 EAC Meeting Page 3 of 9 this site may be considered unacceptable and therefore may be inconsistent with Objective 6.2. Policy 6.2.10 states, "Any development activity within a viable naturally functioning fresh-water wetland not part of a contiguous flow way shall be mitigated in accordance with current SFWMD mitigation rules. Mitigation may also include restoration of previously disturbed wetlands or acquisition for public preservation of similar habitat." This project is consistent with this policy in providing for off-site mitigation pursuant to SFWMD mitigation rules. Objective 6.4 states, "A portion of each viable, naturally functioning non-wetland native habitat shall be preserved or retained as appropriate." Policy 6.4.7 states, "All 'other types of new development shall be required to preserve an appropriate portion of the native vegetation on the site as determined through the County development review process. Preservation of different contiguous habitats is to be encouraged. When several different native plant communities exist on site, the development plans will reasonably attempt to preserve examples of all of them if possible. However this policy shall not be interpreted to allow development in wetlands, should the wetlands alone constitute more than the portion of the site required to be preserved. Exceptions shall be granted for parcels which can not reasonably accommodate both the preservation area and the proposed activity." The loss of 1.08 acres (82 percent) of the wetlands on-site may be considered inconsistent with Policy 6.4.7. Staff, believe that the applicant has not reasonably accommodated both the preservation of wetlands on-site and the proposed activity. VI. MAJOR ISSUES: Stormwater Manal~ement: Center Pointe is a proposed commercial project on the north east corner of County Road 951 (Collier Boulevard) and U.S. 41. The site is located within the Henderson Creek Basin. The existing ditch along U.S. 41 is maintained by Collier County Stormwater Management. The Water Management for this site consists of a dry detention area connected to a wetland preserve. These areas will provide the water quality retention and water quantity peak flow attenuation required to throttle the discharge rate down to acceptable levels. The project will be permitted by SFWMD because of the amount of wetlands on-site. 2002 EAC Meeting Page 4 of 9 Environmental: Site Description: A fruit stand currently exists on a portion of the subject property. Scattered slash pines, oaks, cabbage palms and ornamental vegetation are located on the developed portion of the property. The eastern third of the site contains a forested freshwater wetland vegetated with laurel oak, cypress, red maple and cabbage palm. Groundcovers in the wetland, consists mainly of swamp fern and sedges. Existing fruit stand located on the developed portion of the property. Looking east at the forested freshwater wetland on the east side of the property. A single ~;oil type is found on the property, Pineda Fine Sand, limestone substratum (Soil Map Unit No. 14). This soil type is listed as hydric by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). JUL 3 0 2002 EAC Meeting Page 5 of 9 Site elevations vary from a high of approximately 9.1 feet NGVD on the developed portion of the property, to a low of approximately 3.6 feet NGVD in the wetlands on-site. The control elevation for the project is 5 feet NGVD, and was established according to adjacent projects and roadways. The adjacent U.S. 41 Canal is controlled by the Big Cypress Basin (Structure Hen CR-1) and is operated at 5.00 to 6.00 feet NGVD. Special Treatment (ST) Overlay: As stated in section 2.2.24.2.1 of the Land Development Code (LDC), the ST overlay district classification will be used for those lands of environmental sensitivity and historical and archaeological significance where the essential ecological or cultural value of the land is not adequately protected under the basic zoning district regulations established by Code or by ordinance. All land within the ST overlay district shall be designated as environmentally sensitive. Section 2.2.24.1 of the Land Development Code states the purpose and intent of the ST overlay district, and reads as follows: "Purpose and intent. Within Collier County there are certain areas, which because of their unique assemblages of flora and/or fauna, their aesthetic appeal, historical or archaeological significance, rarity in Collier County, or their contribution to their own and adjacent ecosystems, make them worthy of special regulations. Such regulations are directed toward the conservation, protection, and preservation of ecological and recreational values for the greatest benefit to the people of Collier County. Such areas include, but are not necessarily limited to mangrove and freshwater swamps, barrier islands, hardwood hammocks, xeric scrubs, coastal beaches, estuaries, cypress domes, natural drainageways, aquifer recharge areas and lands and structures of historical and archaeological significance. The purpose of this overlay district regulation is to assure the preservation and maintenance of these environmental and cultural resources and to encourage the preservation of the intricate ecological relationships within the systems and at the same time to permit those types of development which will hold changes to levels determined acceptable by the Board of County Commissioners after public hearing." The subject property has an ST overlay over the entire parcel. Typically the ST designation is used to identify jurisdictional wetlands on-site, the boundary of which is determined by the petitioner and then verified by the South Florida Water Management District, prior to submission of an application to the County. Jurisdiction. al wetlands are located along the eastern portion of the subject property and total 1.31 acres. Final action on the site alteration plan or site development plan for a Special Treatment Permit lies with the Board of County Commissioners. The applicant originally sought administrative approval of the Special Treatm,:nt JUL 3 0 2002 EAC Meeting Page 6 of 9 development permit through an interpretation from the former Planning Services Director. The County Attorney's Office has since determined that the request would have to follow the procedures set forth in section 2.2.24.6 of the Land Development Code. A copy of the legal opinion from the County Attorney's Office is attached to this staff report for reference. Wetlands: Approximately 1.31 acres of South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD)/Collier County jurisdictional wetlands occur on the subject property. These wetlands extend off-site on undeveloped lands to the east. The combined size of the on and off-site wetland is estimated to be 5 to 6 acres. The project as proposed will impact 1.08 acres (82 percent) of the wetlands on- site. Mitigation was provided by the applicant through purchase of 1.86 credits at the Panther Island Mitigation Bank. Off-site mitigation included impacts for all of the wetlands on-site. The SFWMD Environmental Resource Permit for the project was issued on October 11,2001. Preservation Requirements: Approximately 1.77 acres of native vegetation exist on the subject property. This includes 1.31 acres of SFWMD/Collier County jurisdictional wetlands and 0.46 acres of pine, oak and cabbage palm on the upland portion of the site. The minimum preservation requirement for the site, pursuant to 3.9.5.5.4 of the Land Development Code, is 0.18 acres (10 percent of the existing native vegetation found on the property). Looking east towards the undeveloped portion of the property. The jurisdictional wetland is in the background. JUL 3 0 2002 2.0 EAC Meeting Page 7 of 9 Listed Species: Observations for protected species were made while conducting site visits for vegetation mapping, wetland flagging, and wetland jurisdictionals. No protected species were observed on or adjacent to the property. VII. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends denial of Special Treatment Permit No. ST-2194 "Center Point" for the following reasons: 1. Section 2.2.24 of the Land Development Code identifies lands of environmental sensitivity where the ecological value of the land is not adequately protected under the basic zoning district regulations established by Code or ordinance. 2. The subject property has a Special Treatment (ST) overly, of which 1.31 acres are vegetated with a forested freshwater wetland containing laurel oak, cypress, red maple and cabbage palm. This wetland has been determined to be jurisdictional by the South Florida Water Management District. Freshwater swamps are identified in section 2.2.24.1 of the Land Development Code as a type of habitat requiring protection under the Special Treatment (ST) regulations. 3. The petitioner proposes to impact 82 percent (1.08 acres) of the jurisdictional wetlands on-site and to provide mitigation off-site as compensation. The remaining 0.23 acres of wetlands are proposed to be retained on-site within a proposed stormwater retention area. The purpose of this overlay district regulation as stated in section 2.2.24.1 of the Land Development Code, is to assure the preservation and maintenance of these environmental and cultural resources and to encourage the preservation of the intricate ecological relationships within the systems and at the same time permit those types of development which will hold changes to levels determined acceptable by the Board of County Commissioners after public hearing. 4. Staff does not believe that an 82 percent impact, regardless of off-site mitigation, is an acceptable level of impact to ST designated land containing environmentally sensitive habitat. JUL 3 0 2002 EAC Meeting Page $ of 9 PREPARED BY: CHRZANOW/S~I, P.E. DATE STAN ENGINEER SENIOR ~. A~)AI~MES MINOR. P.E. DATE ENGINEER SENIOR S~TEP HE~q LENBERGER DA'~E ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST c~y~p:/ G ./7.oz DATE ffRELLOWS REVIEWED BY: THOMAS E. KU.CK, P.E. DATE ENGINEERING SERVICES DIRECTOR JUL 3 0 2002 EAC Meeting Page 9 of 9 SJ~AN MURRAY,~ Z"" CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER / INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR APPROVED BY: DkTE' / ,Q(DMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ~-"ADMINISTRATOR ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL 2002 MEMORANDUM DATE: March 18, 2002 TO: Susan Murray, AICP, interim Planning Services Director FROM: Patrick G. VVhite, Assistant County Attorney , RE: ST Designation - Center Pointe RLS # PLS 02030417 You have asked a series of questions with regard to the referenced request. As background, my understanding is that on July 28, 1987, the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) approved Ord. # 87-59. This Ordinance rezoned the subject property to a conventional C-3 Zoning District and imposed an "ST" designation over all 4.02 acres + of the subject project. Along with the Ordinance reflecting the zoning approval an~ ST designation, Mr. Tony Pires (attorney for the property owner) also provided me with an "Agreement" attached to the Ordinance which pertains to certain conditions (stipulations). My review of the attached "Agreement" reflects that it was not "signed or sworn to" by the then property owner until August 4, 1987. This appears to be at a point in time where the already adopted Ordinance was actually en route to the Secretary of State's office, where it was filed and became effective on August 5, 1987. Thereafter, the Ordinance was not received from the Secretary of State by the Clerk of Courts until August 10, 1987. Because the Agreement was not signed until August 4, 1987, it is not possible that an agreement binding the property owner could have been included as part of the Ordinance which the BOCC approved on July 28, 1987. This conclusion is bolstered by the fact that the Ordinance nowhere makes reference to the Agreement and fails to incorporate the Agreement as part of the Ordinance. The Agreement is not even identified as an exhibit to the Ordinance. In contrast, Ord. # 87-64 (provided by your office for a comparative review of the typical process followed in the late 1980's for similar rezoning requests) dearly shows that when staff and the BOCC intended to include such agreements as part of an ordinance there was an established form and precise means to do so. By comparison, Ord. # 87-64 also created commercial zoning and imposed an "ST" designation on a parcel of land of almost the same exact size. This Ordinance expressly stated that the "ST" designation was "per the stipulations contained in the Agreement sheet" which was "attached" to the Ordinance and was "incorporated" as part of the Ordinance. The Agreement was labeled, referred to, and identified as, Exhibit "A." Additionally, the date the Agreement was "sworn and subscribed to" by the property owner was July 16, 1987, which was the date'of the prior Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) meeting. That Ordinance was approved by the BOCC on August 11, 1987, and was filed by the Secretary of State and became effective on August 17, 1987. Page 1 of 5 JUL 3 0 2002 From Ord. # 87-64 and its attached Agreement we see that the forms and process to create legally effective conditions on "S'I'" designated lands were available and used when required. Admittedly, although the desire of the staff and property owner, may have been to include the "Agreement" as part of Ord. # 87-59, the facts lead this office to conclude that from the documents provided the stipulations/conditions in the Agreement attached to Ord. # 87-59 are not, and never have been, legally effective. This is a reasonable conclusion in light of a contemporaneous ordinance that also imposed an "ST" designation where an almost identical agreement was timely adopted and expressly made legally effective. Accordingly, the following answers will be based on the foregoing conclusion, except where stated assumptions may be made in order to provide a more meaningful answer. The answers are provided in the order of the questions you have asked. You first ask what the County's current regulations allow the Planning Services Director (PSD) to do with respect to wetlands when other agencies with jurisdiction to regulate the development of such wetlands have issued permits or otherwise authorized the property owner to clear and develop those lands. As you may well know, Collier County does not have an express set of regulations specifically providing for the preservation of wetlands. In fact, the current policy of the County appears to be one of acquiescing to the determinations of the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) and Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). In this case the ACOE has advised the property owner that "no permit" is required. for the proposed project. Similarly, the SFVVMD has issued a permit allowing the purchase of off-site mitigation credits and has only required the preservation of 0.23 acres of wetlands as part of the project's stormwater management system. The only requirements which appear to regulate the preservation (or not) of wetlands are those found in the LDC's "ST" provisions to the extent such wetlands would be required to be preserved as part of the approval of an SDP or SIP for lands designated "ST." Because the subject lands are so designated, this office is of the opinion that even if the SFVVMD and ACOE have granted permits to allow development activities to occur within the wetland area of the subject site's "ST" overlay, the PSD may, consistent with the provision of LDC § 2.2.24, et seq., require preservation of on-site wetlands under appropriate facts. Second, you asked whether the LDC allows for an administrative removal of the "ST" overlay, provided the applicant submits the above-referenced permits. Regardless of whether the applicant submits any permits authorizing development, LDC § 2.2.24.2.1., makes clear that the only permissible means of removing an "ST" overlay from a zoning district is through thb zoning code and official zoning atlas amendment process found in LDC Division 2.7. Third, you ask essentially the same question again except as to whether there is an / ?-.- ! JUL 3 o2002 1 again assuming the above-referenced permits are provided. You reference LDC § 2.2.24.5., as part of your question. This section requires an applicant to apply for and obtain approval of such plans by the BOCC, as provided for in LDC § 2.2.24.6,. Jr~.that section review and recommendation are required by appropriate county staff, the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC), and CCPC before such site plans can be considered for final action by the BOCC. The only exception from these procedures is for those lands comprising less than 20 acres where no transfers of development rights are involved. If these conditions are met, then so long as the provisions of LDC § 2.2.24.8., can otherwise be met by the application, then the PSD may administratively approve the applicant's site alternation or site development plan. The same would be true for activities which qualify for an "exemption" under LDC § 2.2.24.9., which does not, however, appear to pertain to this project. In order to more fully answer this question, and assuming for the moment that the conditions of the Agreement in Ord. # 89-57 were held to apply to the facts of this case, thiS office is of the opinion that neither paragraph "h." or "1." of that Agreement would act to override the above-cited LDC provisions. Paragraph "h." purports to reduce the size of the "S'I'" overlay to only those portions of the 4.02 acre site, which are determined to have jurisdictional wetlands specifically located on the site. This provision conflicts with the express terms of the Ordinance itself which, in its only operative provision, imposes an ST designation over the entirety of the subject lands. Much has been made of the effect of Paragraph "1.," but this office reads this provision (notwithstanding its convoluted and complex phrasing) to simply be a "timing" provision. Stated differently, Paragraph "1." merely precludes al..JI development activity outside of the wetland jurisdiction area until after compliance within the permitting requirements of "all appropriate local, state and federal agencies for any use [or] activity within the [wetland] jurisdictional area." (Emphasis added). Thus, even if the state and federal agency permits are obtained (as here), the remaining requirement to comply with the local permit provisions, i.e., those in LDC § 2.2.24, has not been obviated. Accordingly, these provisions of the Agreement do not act to afford the applicant any greater relief even if they were effective. Although, the applicants may argue that when these provisions were considered in the prior PSD's letter, they lead to the inescapable conclusion that their SDP must be administratively approved, this office, after carefully considering the referenced letter, does not reach that same conclusion. At most, the letter should be read to state, consistent with this office's recognition that Paragraph "1." is merely a "timing" provision, that once a site development plan was submitted, it would not be approved until the needed permits were received. This is clearly recognition that no SDP approval could occur, administratively or otherwise, until the permits were provided. If the letter is argued to be a "shoehorning" in of the provisions of the "exceptions" section of the LDC in § 2.2.24.8., then arguably, the applicant's proposed SDP, regardless of other agency permits, would still have to qualify for such an "exception" under the terms of LDC § 2.2.24.8. Page 3 of 5 JUL 3 0 2002 After reviewing the detailed "exception" criteria in LDC § 2.2.24.8.1.a., this office concludes this provision, as written, can logically only apply to lands (or portions~ of a site's lands) that would not otherwise qualify for an "ST" designation. In essence, the provision allows an "exception" only if the SDP proposes or requires no activities which are almost universally required to develop any parcel of land regardless of its environmental sensitivity or not. For example, only a sufficiently elevated site (i.e., above flood level) with its own natural, on-site retention of all of its stormwater, and that was devoid of flora and fauna (except exotics), would appear to qualify for this exception. Given that all LDC provisions should be read (and applied) to afford them meaning, it was not beyond the exercise of reasonable professional judgment for the prior PSD to apply these exception provisions in this case in a way to have concluded that an administrative approval would be warranted. This is especially true in light of the assumed applicability of the Agreement's provisions pertaining to providing permits from the other agencies. As stated above, this office's opinion is that the Agreement was never legally effective, thus, any staff opinion relating thereto was not unsupported by both the record and the then existing regulations. Your fourth question asks what the proper procedure is for an applicant to resolve a conflict between two differing interpretations of successive PSD's. This office believes that under the present facts and apparently differing "interpretations" being offered, the LDC affords the applicant the opportunity to request an Official Interpretation under LDC Division 1.6, to resolve any perceived "conflicts" in successive "interpretations" of the County's regulations. If dissatisfied with a more recent Official Interpretation of the current PSD, the applicant many appeal to the BZA for review. To summarize, this office concludes that, absent a judicial determination otherwise, the Agreement's provisions are not deemed legally effective. Additionally, assuming solely for the sake of argument that such provisions were considered to be legally effective, there is nothing in the Agreement which alters the applicability of the provisions of LDC § 2.2.24. As such, in order to entirely remove the subject parcel's "ST" designation, the procedures of LDC § 2.2.24.2.1., and Division 2.7., must be followed. In an effort to clarify the actual scope of the "exceptions" set forth in LDC § 2.2.24.8. (especially sub-section 1.), this office recommends the immediate re-drafting of these provisions. Lastly, absent qualifying for an exception allowing for administrative approval, the subject project's SDP must be approval pursuant to LDC §§ 2.2.24.4., 2.2.24.5., and 2.2.24.6., as is expressly stated at the very end of LDC § 2.2.24.8. Please let me know if you require any further assistance in this matter. PGW:kit JUL 3 0 2002 cc: David C. Weigel, County Attorney Marjorie M. Student, Assistant County Attorney Joseph K. Schmitt, Administrator, Community Development & Environmental Services Division Steve Lenberger, Environmental Specialist Barbara Burgeson, Sr. Environmental Specialist JUL 3 0 2002 July ~ 1, 2000 Mr. An~or.y P. Pix~s, Woodwind. Pir~s, & Lomba:do, P.A. 801 L~I O~ Dr., S~te 710 Naplc~, F1.,34108 ~: Ordin~c 87-59 [R-$7-3c] NE ~t~cction ColBer Boulc~'~d D~ ~. on thc pm~V/r~f~cn~d a~vc, ~rd condi~ons wi~ ~id r~fc~c~d ~vclopment approv~(Le, or~. 87-~9), it is o~ po~idon ~at ~c ~ip~a~ of For putouts of complyi~ ~th ~ s~p~ariou ~t i~ our option ~at ~ l~d within M~ag~m~ D[s~ct. Should ~ey d~e~e ~ approv~ inclusiv~ of ~iz ~ ~t ~on ~11 be s~cicnt for ColH~ Co~ stip~udon h~ ~ n~t. A ~it~ d~vc[opm~n~ p[~ submitted to ~,cers ~c received, lf~c agencies ~ow d~vclopm~t ~ea of ~e identified sp~i~ tr~m~t overlay dis~, fl~ ~sc appg)v~s wot become p~ of ~te SDP approve. If I c~ ~ offer assi~a~ee, ptease do not h~iiate to ~l. Six~ccr¢ly Robert J. Mulhere,AICP Phone (943.) 403-2400 F~x (94I) 648.6968 w~,,co.ccmer, Fi.us JUL 3 0 2002 Center Point Environmental Impact Statement Collier County Section 03, Township 51 South, Range 26 East Approximately 4.02 Acres Prepared by: ]~oylan '-~" nvironm'e~'~L.._~ Consultants, ,'~c. Wetland & Wildlife Surve~onmental Permitting, Impact A~ssessments 11000 Metro Parkway, Suite 4, Fort Myers, Florida, 33912 Phone: (941) 418-0671Fax: (941) 418-0672 February 5, 2002 Revised: April 30, 2002 JUL 3 0 2002 3.8. 5.1 Applicant information 1. Responsible owners who wrote the EIS and his/her education and job related environmental experience: Jeremy Sterk, B.S., Aquatic Biology, 7 years job related experience. 2. Owner/Agent name & address: Patrick Moorton Southwest Florida Opportunity Fund, LLC 2223 Trade Center Way Naples, FL 34109 3. Affidavit of proof of authorized agent: See attached letter. 3.8..5.2 Development and site alteration infortnation 1. Description of Proposed Use. The proposed use is a 4.02 acre commercial development.. 2. Legal Description of Site. THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW 1/4) OF SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA: FROM THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW 1/4) RUN WITH THE SECTION LINE NORTH 89023'53'' WEST A DISTANCE OF 324.27 FEET TO THE EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 951; THENCE WITH SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE SOUTH 35o40'08'' WEST A DISTANCE OF 887.72 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING WITH SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE SOUTH 35o40'08'' WEST A DISTANCE OF 365.00 FEET TO ITS JUNCTION WITH THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 90; THENCE WITH THE RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 90 SOUTH 24°19'52 EAST A DISTANCE OF 69.99 FEET AND SOUTH 54°20'16'' EAST A DISTANCE OF 159.38 FEET; THENCE NORTH 35o39'44'' EAST A DISTANCE OF 400.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 54°20'16'. WEST A DISTANCE OF 220.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. TOGETHER WITH: THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW 1/4) OF SECTION 3, TOWN .gum <~ SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA: !~_ ~ [.~ 3 0 2002 GgJ3EC\C-D Projects\Center Point(9951 )\Collier County ELS\( IlierC~.Sml.doc __ FROM THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW 1/4) RUN WITH THE SECTION LINE NORTH 89023'53'' WEST A DISTANCE OF 324.27 FEET TO THE EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 95 l; THENCE WITH SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE SOUTH 35040'08'' WEST A DISTANCE OF 1252.72 FEET TO ITS JUNCTION WITH THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 90; THENCE WITH THE RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 90 SOUTH 24°19'52" EAST A DISTANCE OF 69.99 FEET AND SOUTH 54°20'16" EAST A DISTANCE OF 159.38 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. THENCE NORTH 35039'44'' EAST A DISTANCE OF 400.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 54°20'16" EAST A DISTANCE OF 220.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 35039'44'' WEST A DISTANCE OF 400.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 54°20'16" WEST A DISTANCE OF 220.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. 3. Location and address description. The 4.02 acre site is located at the northwest comer of the intersection of Collier Blvd. (C.R. 951) and U.S. 41, Collier County, Florida. 3.8. 5.3 Mapping and support graphics I. General location map. See attached Location Map. 2. Native habitats and their boundaries shall be identified on an aerial photograph of the site extending at least two hundred feet outside the parcel boundary. This does not mean the applicant is required to go on to adjacent properties. Habitat identification will be consistent with the Florida Department of Transportation - Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System and shall be depicted on an aerial photograph having a scale of one inch equal to at least 200feet when available from the county, otherwise, a scale of at least one inch equal to 400feet is acceptable. Information obtained by ground-truthing surveys shall have precedence over information presented through photographic evidence. Native communities were mapped according to the Florida Land Use and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS) and their boundaries are depicted on the attached 2000 aerial at a scale of 1"=100'. Also attached is an 8 ½ X 11 sheet (1 "= 100') with FLUCCS mapping. 3. Topographic map showing upland, bathymetric contours, and existing drainage patterns if applicable. Site elevations vary form a high of approximately 9.1 NGVD to a Iow of approximately 3.6' NGVD. The site is bordered by two major roadways (U.S. 41 ,A to the south and Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951) to the west. Currently "o;-o'-e i~ to the south, into the U.S. 41 canal. Iqo-K~'~O Ir°a{')'h'---,' JUL 3 0 2002 G:\,B EC~C-D Projects\Center Point(9951 )\Collier Counly EIS\C lierCo. EISml.doc ~Z 4. Existing land use of the site and surrounding area. The existing land use for the parcel is agricultural. The surrounding landscapes include: East - Undeveloped. West - Collier Blvd. North - FPL Easement & Falling Waters Beach Resort South - U.S. 41 5. Soils map at a scale consistent with that used for the Florida Department of Transportation - Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification Systems determinations. Soils have been digitized from Soil Conservation Service (SCS) maps of Collier County: A map detailing soils at a scale of 1"=100' is attached on an 8½ X 11 sheet. 6. Proposed drainage plan indication basic flow patterns, outfall and off-site drainage. See attached 8 ½" x 11" Paving/Grading/Drainage Plan. 7. Development plans including phasing program, service area of existing and proposed public facilities and existing proposed transportation network in the i'mpact area. See attached 8 ½" x 11" Paving/Grading/Drainage Plan 3.8. 5. 4 Impact Categories 3.8.5. 4.1 Biophysical Impacts 1. Air quality. A. Changes in level of air pollutants as defined by current regulations. No impacts are expected from the ST Development in its post - development state. Appropriate Dust Control methods will be utilized during construction to mitigate for any adverse conditions, which might arise. All areas disturbed during construction will be sodded or grassed and mulched at the earliest opportunity. B. Number of people that will be affected by air pollution resulting from the project. With no changes in air quality anticipated, no people are expected to be affected. C. Procedures that will be used to reduce adverse impacts of air pollution. JUL 3 0 200 G:XBEC\C-D Projects\Center Point(9951 )\Collier County ELS\( ollier0~ISml ~ Appropriate dust control methods will be utilized during construction to mitigate for any adverse conditions, which might arise. All areas disturbed during construction will be sodded or grassed and mulched at the earliest opportunity. 2. Water quality Impacts. A. Changes in levels and types of water pollution as defined by current regulations. The project currently has an approved South Florida Management District (SFWMD) permit and will comply with their criteria regarding water quantity and quality and will incorporate Best Management Techniques during construction. No changes in water levels or water pollution are expected as a result of the project. B. Inventory of water uses that are restricted or precluded because of pollution levels reSulting from this project. No water uses are restricted or precluded because of pollution resulting from this project. C Persons affected by waterpollution resulting from this project. · '"' None. No water pollution is anticipated as a result ofthisproject. D. Project design and actions which will reduce adverse intpact of water pollution. The project currently has an approved South Florida Management District (SFWMD) permit and will meet all their requirements and Collier County Land Development Code requirements for water quality. 3. Physiography and Geology /t. Description of soil types found in the area. The approximate boundaries of the single soil type found on the parcel, as defined by the NRCS, is mapped at a scale of 1"=100' on the attached 8 ¥2" X 11" sheet. 14 -- Pineda Fine Sand, limestone substratum: This nearly level, poorly drained soil is typical in sloughs and poorly defined drainage areas. The permeability is slow. Natural vegetation may include slash pine, chalky bluestem, wax myrtle, and blue ~naidencane. B. Area extent of proposed topographic modification through excavation, dredging, or filling. JUL 3 0 2002 G:XJ3EC\C-D Projects\Center Point(9951)\Collier County ElS\Co lierCoPL~o.,Ld,.,~ Modifications will be accomplished by using clean fill material that is obtained from offsite. As stated in the approved SFWMD permit, 1.31 acres of Collier County wetlands are proposed to be impacted by filling. C. Removal and/or disturbance of natural barriers to storm waves and flooding. The project is located far from the Gulf of Mexico and is not subject to storm waves. No adverse impacts are expected due to development of this parcel. D. Proposed modifications to natural drainage patterns. The site will be developed according to Collier County and SFWMD requirements for design of surface water management systems. Natural drainage patterns will be incorporated into the system where possible. See attached 8.5" x 11" Conceptual Drainage Plan. The project has been reviewed by South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) for surface water management. (Permit #11-01987-P dated October 11, 2001). The proposed system calls for routing stormwater runoff (via a pipe and catch basin system) to a created dry detention area at the northeast corner of the parcel. This detention area has been created and sized for water quality purposes. From there, it bleeds down to an indigenous preserve/natural area, which is also used for water management purposes. The overall system has been designed to provide storage for the 25 year-3 day storm event in accordance with SFWMD criteria. Both pre and:post-development discharge is to the U.S. 41 drainage ditch. E. Extent of impervious surface and percent of groundwater area to be covered. Preliminary estimates of land use breakdown: Building 0.52 ac 12.9% Vehicle Use 1.91 ac 47.5% Impervious area 2.43 ac 60.4% Green 1.33 ac 33.1% Retention 0.26 ac 6.5% Open space 1.59 ac 39.6% Total Site 4.02 ae 100% F. Annual drawdowh of groundwater resulting from use. No net annual drawdown of groundwater is expected. G. Increased siltation in natural water bodies resulting fi'om the proposed use. I~x ~' JUL 3 0 2002 G:\BEC\C-D Projects\Center Point(9951 )\Collier County EIS\Coll erCo. L~I a~-" The site will be developed according to SFWMD and Collier County criteria. No natural water bodies are located in the vicinity of the project, so increased siltation in natural water bodies is not expected. Best Management Practices will be incorporated during construction. 4. Wetlands A. Define the number of acres of Collier County Jurisdictional Wetlands pursuant to the Collier County Growth Management Plan by vegetation type species, vegetation composition canopy, midstory and ground cover, vegetation abundance, dominant, common, occasional, and their wetland function. There is a single 1.31 acre SFWMD \ Collier County wetland on the property. See attached wetland jurisdictional determination from the SFWMD for verification. The following is a FLUCCS vegetation description of the wetland community mapped on the parcel: Mixed Wetland Forest, FLUCCS 630 This community is dominated by cypress, laurel oak, red maple, and cabbage palm in the canopy. Brazilian pepper has invaded the margins and melaleuca has invaded the interior. Groundcover consists of swamp fern, wiregrass, saw grass, poison ivy, and dog fennel. B. Determine the present seasonal high water levels and high water levels by utilizing lichen lines or other biological indicators. Average natural ground height on the parcel varies significantly, especially for a small site, from a high of approximately 9.1 NGVD to a low of approximately 3.6' NGVD. Control elevation was established according to adjacent roads and projects and is set at 5.0 NGVD. It was confirmed by the SFWMD in the permitting process. See attached SFWMD permit. The adjacent U.S. 41 Canal is controlled by the Big Cypress Basin (Structure Hen CR-1) and is operated at 5.00 to 6.00 NGVD. C. Indicate how the project design improves / affects pre - development hydro - periods. The surface water management system for the subject project will be designed to provide water quality pretreatment and water quality storage as required by Collier County and the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) design Criteria. The project is located in the Henderson Creek Drainage Basin as designated on the Collier County Drainage Atlas and will be limited to a discharge rate of 0.15 CFS per acre. According to site topography, under current ~ site conditions drainage occurs from northwest to southeast. During surt~ :_'z :-'~'~- · review by the SFWMD, stormwater management routing calculations we' ~A l'tr~93 prepared by Landy Engineering. The proposed system calls for routing · JUL, 3 0 2002 G 5BEC\C-D ProjectsXCcnter Point(0951 )\Collier County £1S\Collicrt o. £IS~_,~I~, stormwater runoff (via a pipe and catch basin system) to a created dry detention area at the northeast comer of the parcel. This detention area has been created and sized for water quality purposes. From there, it bleeds down to an indigenous preserve/natural area, which is also used for water management purposes and has been isolated by construction of a perimeter berm. We would expect the hydroperiod of the preserve area to be greatly improved. The overall system has been designed to provide storage for the 25 year-3 day storm event in accordance with SFWMD criteria. Discharge from the site will be to the adjacent U.S. 41 drainage ditch. D. Indicate proposed percent of defined wetlands to be impacted and the effects of proposed impacts on functions of wetland areas. There is a single 1.31 acre SFWMD \ Collier County wetland on the property. Duringthe ERP permitting process with the SFWMD, it was determined that the best long solution for no net loss of wetland function would be to mitigate for the wetland offsite. 100 percent of the wetland is proposed to be impacted. The ACOE classified the wetland as isolated and is requiring no permit. See attached letter. The 1.31 acres of wetland on the subject property is part of a small isolated wetland that continues offsite to the east. The overall wetland is approximately 6 acres, but is surrounded by development & major highways. Of the six acres, 25% has already been mitigated as secondarily impacted by Falling Waters Beach Resort. Therefore, off-site mitigation is the method of compensation that best offsets the necessary wetland impacts. Even under a do nothing scenario, the quality of the wetland will continue to decline as the density of Brazilian pepper that has invaded it continues to increase and provide seed source for surrounding properties. The best option for maintaining wetland function is to mitigate this small isolated wetland offsite in a bank that will restore and maintain large tracts of environmentally sensitive land in perpetuity. Offsite mitigation has been provided for the entire 1.31 acres. As required by approved SFWMD permit #11- 01987-P, 1.86 credits were purchased at the Panther Island Mitigation Bank. See attached letter that confirms the purchase. E. Indicate how the project design minimized impacts on wetlands. On advice from the SFWMD and their preference that isolated wetlands smaller than 3 acres be mitigated offsite, the project is proposing to impact the entire wetland. The 1.31 acres of wetland on the subject property is part of a small isolated wetland that continues offsite to the east. The overall wetland is approximately 6 acres, but is surrounded by development & major highways. Of the six acres, 25% has already been mitigated as secondarily impacted by Falling Waters Resort. Therefore, off-site mitigation is the method of compensation JUL 3 0 2002 G:XBEC-~C-D Projects\Center Point(9951)\Collier County ElS\Coil ~,.EISml.doc '~ offsets the necessary wetland impacts. Even under a do nothing scenario, the quality of the wetland will continue to decline as the density of Brazilian pepper that has invaded it continues to increase and provide seed source for surrounding properties. The best option for maintaining wetland function is to mitigate this small isolated wetland offsite in a bank that will restore and maintain large tracts of environmentally sensitive land in perpetuity. Offsite mitigation has been provided for the entire 1.31 acres. As required by approved SFWMD permit #11- 01987-P, 1.86 credits were purchased at the Panther Island Mitigation Bank. See attached letter that confirms the purchase. The ACOE classified the wetland as isolated and is requiring no permit. See attached letter. F. Indicate how the project design shall compensate for the wetland impacts pursuant to the Collier County Growth Management Plan. Offsite mitigation has been provided for the entire 1.31 acres. As required by approved SFWMD permit #11-01987-P, 1.86 credits were purchased at the Panther Island Mitigation Bank. See attached letter that confirms the purchase. 5. Upland utilization and species of special status. A. Define number of acres of uplands by vegetative type species, vegetation composition canopy, midstory and ground cover, vegetation abundance, dominant, common, occasional, and their upland function. Farmer's Market, FLUCCS 142, Approximately 2.71 Acres This portion of the property contains an active farmers market. Canopy is nearly absent and groundcover is dominated by a variety of turf grasses. The area is routinely mowed. B. Indicate proposed percent of defined uplands to be impacted and the effects of proposed impacts on functions of upland areas. The uplands on the parcel were previously cleared and contain little or no native vegetation. Total open space, including landscaped areas will total 1.59 acres (39.6%). C. Indicate how the project design minimizes impacts on uplands. Impacts to uplands will be minimized by meeting the appropriate requirements for open space preservation on the parcel. D. Provide a plant and animal species survey to include, at a minimum, species of ~ ~eci~A ~xoa ~ JUL 3 0 2002 G:XBEC\C-D Projects\Center Point(995 I)\Collier County ElS\Collie ~'o. EIS'~'a._~''''''~ status that are known to inhabit biological communities similar to these existing on site and conducted in accordance with the guidelines of the FGFWFC. Observations for protected species were made during all field visits, such as vegetation mapping, wetland flagging, and wetland jurisdictionals. No protected species were observed on or adjacent to the property. Due to the disturbed nature of the property and its location at the intersection of two major roads, it is anticipated that listed species are not using the property. E. Indicate how the project minimizes impacts on species of special status. Observations for protected species were made during all field visits, such as vegetation mapping, wetland flagging, and wetland jurisdictionals. No protected species were observed on or adjacent to the property. Due to the disturbed nature of the property and its location at the intersection of two major roads, it is anticipated that listed species are not using the property. 6. Marine and estuarine resources. A. Provide current State of Florida classification of waters (Florida Administrative Code, chapter 17-3) None present. B. Define number of acres of marine and estuarine resources by submerged grass beds, breeding areas and nursery areas and their marine and estuarine fimctions. N.A. C. Indicate proposed percent of defined marine and estuarine resources to be impacted and the effects of proposed impacts on fimctions of marine and estuarine resources. No marine or estuarine resources are proposed to be impacted. D. Estimate changes in the dockside landing of commercial fish and shellfish N.A. E. Estimate changes in the sport fishing effort and catch. N.A. F. Provide past history of any environmental impacts to the area including oil spills. ! None known. JUL 3 0 2002 G:~BEC\C-D Projects~Center Point(9951)\Collier County ElS\ ollierC~lSml.doc ,, G. Indicate how project design minimized impacts on marine and estuarine resources. The project is not impacting the U.S. 41 Canal, which is considered the salinity barrier in the area. Impacts are to freshwater wetlands. H. Indicate how the project design shall replace the lost marine and estuarine functions. N.A. 7. Noise A. Describe changes in decibels and duration of noise generated during and after the project (both day and nighO that will exceed Collier County regulations. The proposed use will not generate noise beyond the existing background noise created by Collier Blvd. (C.R. 951) and U.S. 41. Noise is not expected to exceed county standards. B. Describe steps that will be taken to reduce noise levels during and after the project. All applicable standards for construction activities will be met. C. Project compliance with Federal Aid Highway Program Mamta1:7-7-3. No Federal Highway Aid is being requested for the project. 3.8. 5.4. 2 Public facilities and services 1. Wastewater Management A. Describe existing treatment facilities as to capacity, percent capacity being used, type of treatment and degree of treatment. The Collier County Utility System will be servicing the project, specifically the South Waste Water Plant. The existing plant capacity is 9.2 million gallons per day. 79.7% of the capacify is currently being used. The type of treatment is conventional activated sludge and the degree of treatment includes secondary & tertiary treatment. B. If applicable, describe similar features of proposed new treatment facilities. None anticipated. C. Describe the character and fate of liquid and solid effluents. JUL 3 0 2002 GSBEC\C-D Projects\Center Point(9951 )\Collier County EISXColl Liquid effluents include typical domestic wastewater; solid effluents will be typical of a commercial development including various paper products, yard waste, and recyclables, etc. All solid waste products will be picked up and hauled away at least once per week by a licensed commercial hauler. The Collier County Utility System will be servicing the project. 2. Water Supply. A. Estimate average daily potable and non-potable water demand by the project. Potable: 17,080 gallons per day average. Non-potable: 18,500 gallons per day average. B. Source of raw water supply. The Collier County Utility System will be servicing the project. C. Analysis of on site treatment systems relative to State and County Standards. None anticipated. 3. Solid Wastes. A. Estimate of average daily volumes of solid wastes. Approximately 3,780 lbs. per week or 1,350 lbs. per day. Assuming: 2 dumpster loads per week, 7 cubic yards capacity, 10 lbs. per cubic foot (2 dumpsters * 7 CY/dumpster * 27 CF/CY * I0 cu. fl. = 3,780 lbs.). B. Proposed method of disposal of solid wastes. Dumpsters on site will be provided and scheduled for regular pickup at least once per week by a licensed commercial hauler. A licensed hauler will likewise dispose of recyclables. C. Any plans for recycling of resource recovery. Recycling will be in accordance with Collier County's current waste recycling program. 4. Recreation and open spaces. A. Acreage and facilities demand resulting form the new use. Based on the project being a commercial development, no increase in demand is expected from this project. JUL 3 0 2002 G:'~BEC\C-D Projects\Center Point(9951>XCollier County EIS\Colli rCo. EISml.doc B. Amount of public park or recreation land donated by developer. None. C. Management plans for any open water areas if one-half acre of more within the project. There will be no open water areas in the project. D. Plans for recreational development by the developer on dedicated lands. No lands will be donated by the developer. E. Amount of public recreation lands removed from inventory by the new use. No public recreation lands are being affected by this project. F. Development and/or blockage of access to public beaches or waters. No access to public beaches or water is blocked by this project. 5. Aesthetic and cultural factors. A. Documentation form Florida Master Site File, Florida Department of State and any printed historic or archaeological surveys conducted on the project area. A request was submitted to the Division of Historical Resources requesting that they review the project. See attached response. B. Known historic or archaeological sites and relationships to proposed project. A request was submitted to the Division of Historical Resources requesting that they review the project. See attached response. C. Demonstrate how the project design preserves the historical/archaeological integrity of the site. A request was submitted to the Division of Historical Resources requesting that they review the project. See attached response. D. Indicate any natural scenic features that may be modified by the project and explain what actions will be utilized to preserve aesthetic values. , No natural scenic features are present on the site. JUL 3 0 2002 G:~BEC\C-D Projects\Center Point(9951 )\Collier County EIS\Coi E. Provide the basic architectural and landscaping designs. All buildings, signage, landscaping, and visible architecture infrastructure shall have a similar architectural theme and be aesthetically unified. Said similar architectural theme shall include: a similar architectural design and use of similar materials and colors throughout all of the buildings, signs, and walls to be erected on the site. Landscaping and streetscape materials shall also be similar in design throughout the site. 6. Monitoring A. Describe the design and procedures of any proposed monitoring during and after site preparation and development. No mo.nitoring is proposed. Sec. 3.8. 6 Specifics to address. 1. Indicate how the proposed project has incorporated the natural, aesthetic, and cultural resources and other environmental considerations into the planning and design of the project. Upland preserves will be enhanced through exotic removal providing better habitat for upland dependent species. Attempts will be made to consolidate smaller preserve areas into larger areas to prevent breaking up remaining upland habitat. 2. List the environmental impacts of the proposed action and the reasons the impacts are unavoidable and that the impacts represent the minimum impacts possible to the environmental quality of the site and surrounding area which might be affected by the proposed use. The 1.31 acres of wetland on the subject property is part of a small isolated wetland that continues offsite to the east. The overall wetland is approximately 6 acres, but is surrounded by development & major highways. Of the six acres, 25% has already been mitigated as secondarily impacted by Falling Waters Beach Resort. Therefore, off-site mitigation is the method of compensation that best offsets the necessary wetland impacts. Even under a do nothing scenario, the quality of the wetland will continue to decline as the density of Brazilian pepper that has invaded it continues to increase and provide seed source for surrounding properties. The best option for maintaining wetland function is to mitigate this small isolated wetland offsite in a bank that will restore and maintain large tracts of environmentally sensitive land in perpetuity. Offsite mitigation has been provided for the entire 1.31 acres. As required by approved SFWMD permit #11- 01987-P, 1.86 credits were purchased at the Panther Island Mitigation Bank. See attached letter that confirms the purchase, nc, rr.~s, t'r~ .~' JUL 3 0 2002 GSBEC\C-D Projects\Center Point(9951)\Collicr County ElS\Col' :~o. EISml.doc i i_ ' '2.- 3. Provide substantial alternatives to the proposed project to that reasons for the choice of course of action are clear, not arbitrary or capricious. The proposed use for this property is consistent with the Collier County Growth Management Plan and is an appropriate use for this property. The property meets the requirements of a commercial development and will provide some of the much needed commercial property for this portion of Collier County. 4. List immediate short-term and long term impacts to the environment. Short Term: 1) Construction noise. Long Term: 1) .Approximately 2.71 acres of disturbed uplands & 1.31 acres of wetlands would be developed. 5. List any irreversible or irretrievable commitments of natural resources which would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented. The consumption of fuels and building materials will be required for construction. Approximately 2.71 acres of uplands & 1.31 acres of wetlands would be developed. : NOTARIZED LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION July 6, 1999 RE: 4.016 Acres Norlheast Corner US 41 & SR 951 Naples, Florida To Whom it May Concern: Please be advised that the following firms and individualsl have been officially engaged to serve ~ authorized agents regarding the subject property refe.~n¢¢d above. They are hereby authorized to make all applications for a S!a.nd~[dRe+z_o.n~and Final Site "~':u Developmentimprovements.plans and all permits necessary to allow constmotion of the proposed Butler Engineering, Inc. 0f 2223 Trade Center Way, Naples, Florida 34109 ltoylan Environmental C~nsultants, Inc. of 11000 Metro Parkway, Fort Myers, FL , 1 33912 Mr. Anthony Pires, Jr. ol Woodward, Pire~ & Lombardo P.A. 801 Laurel Oak Drive, Suite 710, Naples, Florida 34108 .Si~rely ~ ' ..... $12800 4 formerly known as Land Trust 50-0656 dated August 15~, 1980, and not individually Sworn an.~l subscribed before me This ~. day of July, 1999. M~Commlssion ]~Xpi~s ///a / Z ~Notary Public ' JUL 3 0 2002 C.R. 951 & U.S. 41 Site Location Location Lat. & Long: N26 ° 0Y 48" W81 ° 41' 56" q. o~. Ac. 15.00 I I C.R. 951 JUL 3 0 2002 I ~.~ Z 0 uJ · AGENDA IT'EM~ ~ ~ JUL 3 0 2002 C.R. 951 ,~ South Florida Water Management District Regulation Department September 1, 1999 Mr. Jim Keltner Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. 11000 Metro Parkway, Suite 4 Ft Myers, Florida 33912 Subject: CR 951 - US 41 Parcel; Informal Jurisdictional Wetland Inspection; Collier County, S-3 / T-51-S / R-26-E Dear Mr. Kelmer: The District offers the following in response to your request for a determination of the jurisdictional wetland boundaries and other surface waters located within the subject property. - Craig Schmittler, Environmental Analyst, of the Natural Resource Management Division, conducted a site inspection on August 20, 1999. The project boundaries shown on the attached aerial identify the approximate limits of the property, inspected. Based on the information provided and the results of the site inspection, the jurisdictional wetlands, as defined in Chapter 62-340 F.A.C., are shown hatched in red on the attached aerial photographs. This correspondence is an informal pre-application jurisdictional determination pursuant to Section 373.421(6) and F.A.C. 62-312.040(7). It does not bind the District, its agents or employees, nor does it convey any legal fights, expressed or implied. Persons obtaining this informal pre-application jurisdictional determination are not entitled to rely upon it for purposes of compliance with provision of law or District rules. A binding jurisdictional determination may be obtained by submitting an application to the South Florida Water Management District Ft. Myers office for a formal determination pursuant to Chapter 40E-4.042 F.A.C. or by applying for a permit. JUL 3 0 2002 .i.~'9---'' Goverrung Board: Michael Collins. Chairman Vera M. Carter Nicolas J..Gutierre:. Jr. James Harvey. In~'rrm £xecurit~e Director Mr. Keltner CR 951 - US 41 Parcel Page 2 A file has been set up at the Ft. Myers Service Center office with pre-application materials. If you have any further questions please contact Craig Schmittler at (941) 338-2929 ext. 7739. Sincerely, . 'Karen M. J0hns~n Supervising Professional Ft. Myers Service Center KMJ/cds - Attachment (Memo, Location Map, and Aerials) c: USACOE - Ft. Myers w/memo, location map, and aerial DEP- w/memo, location map I Ill JUL 3 0 2002 TO: File ~D~ FROM: Craig D. Schmittler, P~WS, Environmental Analyst, NRM Division THROUGH: Karen Johnso. n, !SUl~¢rvising Professional, NRM Division DATE: August 31, 1999-" SUBJECT: CR 951 - US 41 Parcel, Informal Wetland Jurisdictional Inspection, Collier County, S-3 / T-51-S / R-26-E A site inspection was conducted on the above referenced property on August 20, 1999. The property inspected encompasses approximately 4.1 acres. The subject property is located in the northeast quadrant of the intersection at US 41 and CR 951 in Collier County. Adjacent property to the north is currently being developed as a residential golfing community known as Falling Waters. Adjoining property to the east is undeveloped natural wetland habitat. The jurisdictional wetlands, as defined by Chapter 62-340 F.A.C., have been identified on the enclosed aerial. A bold blue line identifies the approximate property boundahes on the attached aerial photograph. The area hatched in red identifies the approximate location of the ribboned wetland line that was inspected and approved during this inspection. The entire eastern 1/3 of the property is a forested wetland system dominated by cypress with scattered red maple and cabbage palm also present. Melaleuca has invaded this wetland in moderate numbers. Brazilian pepper has also invaded the fringe and disturbed areas within this system. The groundcover species include dense swamp fern, with various sedges and broomsedge. Pickerelweed and arrowhead are sparsely scattered throughout the wetland in the deeper depressions. Cattails are also present with primrose willow also very common. The entire western 2/3 of the property has been cleared and a small vegetable market has been constructed at the comer of CR 951 and US 41. Scattered slash pine, oaks and several exotic trees planted by the nursery at the market make up the dominant tree species on the cleared section of the property. Groundcover is predominantly Bahia. There were no listed species observed during this inspection. JUL 3 0 2002 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS FORT MYERS REGULATORY OFFICE 2301 MCGREGOR BOULEVARD, SUITE 300 FORT MYERS, FLORIDA 33901 March 1, 2001 Regulatory Division West Permits Branch Fort Myers Regulatory Office 200003513(NPR-DY) Mr. Mike Landry Landry Engineering,' Inc. 2780 South Horseshoe Drive Suite 6 Naples, FL 34104 Dear Mr. Landry: Reference is made to your Environmental Resources Permit Application, submitted on behalf of Southwest Florida Opportunity Fund, LLC, requesting authorization from the Department of the Army to construct a drug store, a 266-seat restaurant, associated parking, driveways, water, sewer and drainage site improvements. The project is located in the northeast corner of the intersection of U.S. 41 and C.R. 951, in Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. The project site consists of 2.25 acres of uplands, 1.39 acres of disturbed freshwater-forested wetlands, and 0.38 acres of disturbed herbaceous wetlands within the Henderson Creek Basin. The project would require the discharge of 7,270 cubic yards of fill into 1.51 acres of wetlands. The remaining 0.26 acres of wetlands would be incorporated into the surface water management system. The 1.77 acres of wetlands were determined to be isolated and the nexus to interstate commerce was based on migratory birds utilizing the wetlands, or the wetlands contain habitat for migratory birds. In accordance with current policy these isolated wetlands are no longer regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Provided the work is done in accordance with the enclosed plans, the project will not require a Department of the Army permit in accordance with Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 as it is not located within navigable waters of the United States. Furthermore, a permit will not be required in accordance with Section 404 of the L;~ea~.,F.N~A ~Tm Water Act as it will not involve the discharge of dredged or fill material into wate of~e ~ _t~ United States. JUL 3 0 2002 .--- 209003513 (NPR-DY) Center Pointe This determination reflects current policy and regulations and is valid for a pedod no longer than 2 years from the date of this letter. If after the 2-year period, the Corps of Engineers has not specifically revalidated this determination, it shall automatically expire. This letter does not obviate your requirement to obtain State, local or other Federal permits, which may be necessary. Should you propose any deviation or should additional work be contemplated, you should contact this office for a re-evaluation of this determination. If you have any questions regarding this letter or Corps of Engineers regulatory program, please contact Ms. Mindy Hogan at the letterhead address or telephone 941-334-1975. Sincerely, ORIGINAL SIGNED Ronaid H. Silver, C.E.P. Chief, West Permits Branch Copy furnished: (w/o enclosures) SFWMD; Fort Myers, FL (Applic #000914-6) Mr. Jeremy Sterk Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. 110000 Metro Parkway, Suite 4 Fort Myers, Florida 33912 JUL 3 0 2002 FF>Ofi : RL.r, PHONE NO, : 4301E~4 .l~ar'~. 18 2002 02:06F,'1 P3 ENDANGERED. THREATENED & SPEC[ES OF SPECIAL CONCERN SUMMARY: No wetland-oependent endangered/threatened species or species of special concern were observed on site. and submitted information indicates that ootential use of the site by such specles is minimal. This permit does not 2elleve the applicant from complying with all applicable rule~ and any ct. her agencies' requirements if 'in the future, endangered/threatened species or species of special concern are discovered on the site. LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL: The applicant proposes offslte mitigatio~ for wetland impacts at Panther Island Mitigation Bank. No later than November 30, 2001. the applicant shall pro,~ide documentation that 1.86 credits have been debited from the Bank as proposed. WETI. A~iD PRESERVATION AND IMPACT SUMMA.RY: - The project proposes to directly impact 1.08 acres of wetlands by filling for development. The remaining 0.23 acre will be bermed off and incorporated into the water management system Due to the resulting disturbance and abutting proposed development, this portion of the wetland is considered secondarily impacted and the applicant proposes to provide full mitigation for the entire onsite wetland. Secondary impacts may also occur to the adjacent offs}re wetland: however, these impacts are considered offset by mitigation previously provided by the Falling Waters project for secondary impacts to this system (Application No. 990519-14). In addition, to minimize potential encroachment of the preposed development on the offside wetland a 4 feet high fence will be provided ac the development boundary as s~own i~ cross sectlon G on Exhibit Due to the location of this wetland system adjacent to a major intersection and the presence cf e'<isting development to the north, It was determined that ~nsite preservaticn was ~ot a feasible alternative to maintain a functional ,wetland system in the long term. Therefore, the applicant proposes to offset wetland impacts by purchasing 1.86 credits at Panther island Hitigation Bank M ITIC~TION MONITORING: The applicant proposes to mitigate for dlrect and secondary ~mpacts. to 1.31 acres of wetlands by purchasing 1.86 credits at Panther Island Mitigation Bank. Offsite mitigation at the Bank is considered apprcpriate for this specifi- project due to the wetland's locaticn and relative lsolation within a developed area. The combined si~e of the on and off site system is estimateo to be ~ to 6 acres and the long 1~erm viabil~,ty of maintaining a functional preserve at this location was deemed impractical, The prcject is located in the same basin as the offsite mitigation bank. as shown in Ftg~re ~.2.8-1 of the Basis of Revi.~w. Therefore, no cumulative impacts to resources wlthln the JUL 3 0 2002 FROfl : RLD PI-I3HE NO. : 43016~4 Feb. !8 2Erg2 02: [4PH Pt '-(~\ SOUTH FLORIDA.,,, WATER MANAGENIENT DISTRI£q'.. , ~ , V 3.301G,m Club Road, %Ve,t Palm Beach, Flori,"lalM06 ' ' .....'~--RSGI * FLl~¥A'~ol.800-132.2C~t$ · TOD(.~,I) 697.2574 Mailing Ad.d,'es~: [%0. Hox 14&qO, We~t Palm Beach, FL CON 24 PO~l. lt'Fax Note 7671 October 18, 2001 f~'' ~ Dear Consultant. Enclosed is a courtesy copy of the Pesmit authorized by the Governing Board of the South Florida Water Management District at its meeting on October 11, 2001. If you have any ~ues~ions, please do not hesitate to con~ac[ tki~ office. Sincerely, Jennifer Krumlauf Deputy Clerk Envirorunental Resource Regulation Department Enclosures FROM .: ALD PHONE i',rJ. : 4301664 Feb. 18 2002. 02: 15PH F'2 SOUTH FLORIDA WATEK t~NAGEMENT DISTRICT ~.NVIROIT~ENTAL RESOURCE PERMIT NO. 11-01987-P DATE ISSUED: OCTOBER 11, 2001 PERMI'r[F..E:SOUI'HWEST FLORICAOPPORTUNITY --UNO tLC (CENTER POINT) 22.23 TRADE CENTER WAY, NAPLES, FL 341C9 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: AN ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE PERMIT AUTHORIZING CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM SERVING A 4,02-ACRE COMMERCIAL PARCEL DISCHARGING TO HENDERSON CREEK VIA THE US-41 ROADSIDE SWALE. PROJECT LOCATION: COLLIER COUNTY, SECTION 3 TWP 515 RGE PERMIT DURATION: FK, e years ~mnl the date iss~ed to complete cur~sbuction ol Ihs sudace waist management system as authorized hem~n. See attached Rule 40E.4.321, ~orida Adminis~rstive Code. '~,t,S }"¢rTJni[ is If, sued pursuaJ3t to Apphcatton No. 000914-G. d~ted ,a~tl~tl$,[ 25, 2000. i-'ern~Rtec a~r.e.~ to hold ~nd save the ."~ud~ [c'lor~da Water M~ag~ment Dtstd(:t ~nd its successors harmless fi'om an), and a.ll damages, cl~n%s or Ii:abilities which may by reaso~ of the ¢onstrucUon, opcrahon, m~ntcnat~ue o¢ u~e of ae. tW1tles aul.horized b3' this PermJt, 'This ~'ern'~t Is t.~$um:] under thc pro~,..lOU~ of Chapter ,373 , Part ~' Flo~ld,~ Statutes [F,S.), ~r~d the Op~r3t.~g A~eement Ct.men.hZ Rr:8~latton Under Pa,~ ~,f this Pc~mt cons~JRttes c~rtifi,:gtlOn ofcompll~ce ~th state wat~ quality standards where necc~s[~;*~' I]UI'Stt~T[ tO ~ctlo~ Public ~xw 92-5~, 33 U~C SecUon 134 ~ , unl~8$ ~1~ Pc~it i$ l~sucd pt~suant to thc net it~pf~'~mcn[ ~O~S~O~ of ~uh~cttons purSUit to the al)proptlatC pro~tuns CZ Cheptcr :T73, F.S, ~d S(~,:tiuns 40E-4.3~1 (1). {2), a1~d (4). FA C. all cort(lil~s. ~d ~l ptan~ and s~cl~[ca[iorm inco~ot~tcd by re/erencc. ~rc a p~ O~ thl~ I'c~[. ~1 acti','iUr~ a,~onz~d hy in ~e EnvlroTuIle~l[~ R~gource Permit ~taff Review 5umma~. Wtl.hm 30 days ;dior compltt~on of ~n~tcuctlo~ ~d'lim ~nl~tted actl~', lite Pent~ttee sh~lJ ~ut)lni[ a ~lttcn ~t~telliel3l Of comptcLton ~d C~t~calh~tl by a registered p~fes~ional ct3gineer o¢ o~er acvrop~atc tt)dlvldu~, pul-~U~rd to the Appt'o~dnl. c provlslon~ 0¢ Chapter 37:~, F~. and ~cUm~s 40E-a.361 ~d 40E-4.:~RI. F,A.C, ,3 apploved hy th. Di~[~c[ ptll'~tl~mt to ~tJ[~ 40E-1.6107. ~'.A,C. SPECIAL AND GENERAL CON~TIONS ~E AS FOLLOWS: SEE PAGES 2 2 OF 5 (10 SPECIAL CONDITIONS). SEE PAGES 3 5 OF 5 (19 GENE~ALCOflDITIOm). FILED W~TH THE CLERK OF rile SOUTH SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT FLORIDA WAT[R M~AGEMENT ~STmCT DISTRI~, ~? ITS GOVERNI~ BOARD o~ ORIGINAL S~GNE/[. · Origina~ 5igne~ by '"~NNIFER K R'~L~-- TONY ~y _. DEPU~ CL~RK ASSISTANT SEC~T~Y PAGE 1 OF 5 JUL 3 0 2002 F--I~,OPI : RLD PHOHE FID. : 431D1GG4 Feb. ~8 2~:~02 02:]E-~P1 P3 :%FECIAI, CO~;U ITI ON,~3 141NIMUM B{:ILOI:4C, FLOOR, ELF. VA'?.ICbl; 10.75 FEE'I' NGVD. MINIM%~ PARKING LOT ELEVATION: 8.5 FE~T W~VD. DY ~CMAP. OE F~CILITI Zg~ I- 25' DiA. CIRCULAR ORIFICE WITH %~ERT AT ELEV. 5' NGVD. 88 LF OF 1.5' DIA. REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE CULVERT. R2CEIVIN(; BODY ~ [:S-41 ROADSIDE SWALE CONTROL ~bg%' : 5 FEET NOIr. /5 FEET N(2VD DRY SEASON. 4. 'FHF. PE~4ITTF~ S}~LL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR TMZ CCRKEC'rlO~; OF A~ EROSI(PN SNOALI};G OR WATER Q{3~IT'f PP. OBL~'YS THAT RESUL'I' FROM THE CONSTRUCTION C~ OPE~%TI,DN OF THE SURFACE WATER ~NAGEMENT .SYSTEM. 5. M~ASURES SHALL S~ TAKEN DURING CONSTRUCTIOn2 TO II4SURE THAT SEDIME~ATIO~7 AND/OR TURBIDITY PROBLEMS AP.E NO'.P CREATED i~,~ T}{E RECEIVII;G WA'PEP. 6. TNE DISTRICT RESE~.VES TNE EIG24T TO ~.EQUIRE THAT ADD%'~ION~. WATER OUAT..ITY TRFATM~N'P ME'fRODS BE i~;CORPOP~TED INTO THE ~P~IMAGE $YS%EM IF SUCH MEASUF~S ARE S~CV~ TO BE };EC~SSARY · 7. FACILITieS OTHER TM~ 'FMOSE STATED HEEEiN SHALl, 5~O'? BE CONSTKUC%'EE WITHOUT APPROVED MODI[iCATION OF THIS PERMIT. OPEF~TICH OF THE 5UK~ACE WATER ~3[AGEMENT SYSTE~q SHAL5 BE T]{E RES~f)NSIBILiTY SOOTIEST Fl,OF fDA OPPORT~%Y F~'H~) 9. ACTIVi']'IES AS$(~'~IA'r~D WITH IMFLEMENTATIO~ OF THru WETL~D MIYIGA'[~ION, ~O~:ITORIMG AND ~AI~N~';CE SHAL. b ~E IN ACC0~.~;CE WITH THE FOiL.OW'lNG WORK SCHEDULE. ANT DEVIATION FROM THRSE TIME FPJ, MES SHALL REQU1RE FOR~L SFW~D APPROVe. SUCN REQUESTS MUST B~ ~DE IN WRITINg] ~]D S~ALL ]NCLUUE (1) REASOW FOR THE MODIFICATION: (2) PROPOSED START/FINiSH DAIE9: A~;D (3) PROGRESS REPCR'I' ON TIlE $TATUg OF THE EFFORTS. COMPbETIGN DATE ACTIV%TY NOVEMBER 30, 2001 SUBMIT DCCt~ENTATION OF PURCHASE OF MITIGATIO~ CREDITS 10. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION ~D NO ~TER TH.~ NOVE]dBER 30. 2001, THE PERMIq'FEE PROVIDE 7'HE DISTRICT WIT}{ A b~P~'ER OF COM~4ITMENT FROM THE P~TMER ISLED MITIGATION B~K (SFWMD PE~IT NO.11-000C2-~} DEMONST~TING T){AT THE B~K MkS CREDITS AVAILAPLE ~ THE PERMITTEE ~S FURC;IASED 1.86 CREDITS AS MITIGATION TO OFFSET THE 1.31 OF WETLanD IMPACTS. 2002 ,., F-POi~I : tqLD Pt-t3I, IE I'-I-J. : 4301F--J~4 Feb. *.8 ~qt3-' O:v: p~:~,'2llT I,v.): _.[. -U.tYt~ '..F GENF..EAL COl, ID t'rIoNS t:.. ALL ACTI'JITIEF.; .~UTNCRIZED BY '['~.IS p~.:RMIT SHAI,[, B% II{PLEMENTEI) Ag SET FOF. XH IN PL.~g$, SPECIFICATIONS ~ID PERFORI&~ICE CRITERIa. AS APPROVED BY THIS pERMi~. ~Y DEVIATIOn1 FROM TNK i:EP~4ETTED ACTIVITY ~.ND THE CONOITIOMS FOR %INDERTAKItI'D THAT ~CTiVIT'I SRALL GONST:fq'UTE A VIObA2ION OF tHIS PERMI'f ~D PARr ]:V, CHAPTER 373, 2. WEIS PE~IT OR A COPY THERFOF, CG~{P[~ETE WITH ~.L,L CONDITIONS, ATTACHMENTS, EXHIBITS, ~ID I4ODIFICATIONS SHALL BE KEPT AT THE WORK SITE OF THE pERMITTED ACTIVIg'Y. THE COMPLETE PEF~IT SMALL BE AVAILABLE FOR R~JIEW AT T~E WORK SITE UPON REQ[~RST BY DISTRICT STAFF. THE PE~4ITTEE SEALL RBC, UIRE THE CON~RACTOR TD REVI. EW THE COMPL~E PERMIT PRI'OR TO COMMENCEMENT OF THE ACTIVITY AUT~IORIZED BY THIS PERMIT- 3. ACTIVITIES Ai'FROVED BY THIS PE~IT SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN A M~IER WHICH DOES NOT CAUSE VIOLATIONS OF STATE WATER QUALiT~ ST~DARDS. THE PE~ITF~f: SHALL IMPLEMENT BEST I~IAGEMENT PRACTICES FCR EROSION AND POLLUTION CONTROL TO PREVENT VIC. I~TtQN STATE WATER QUALITY 5TAMDARDS. TEMPOF~kRY EROSION CONTROL SHALL BE IMPLEME~'ED TO ~ DURING COt4$TRUCTiON, ~%ID PEP~NE~T CONTROL MEASURES S~bb BE C.DMPLETED 7 DAYS CF Abrf CO:,I~TRUCTION ACTIVITY, TURBIDITY BARRIEP. S SN~L BE iNgT.{LLED I~.INTAINED AT ALL LOCATiQMS ~F. RZ THE POSSIBilITY OF T~SFERR~NG ~USPENDED SOLIDS IN'~ THE RECEIV.IN,g WATERBODY EXISTS DUE ~O THE PE~}IITTED WORK. TURBIDITY ~RK~ERS SN~L P.E~IN IN Pl.,ACE' AT ~L LOCAT~OtSS ~TIb CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED ~ SOILS ARE ST~ILIZED ~1D VEGETATION NAS BEEN ESTAgLISHED. ALL PRACTICES S~%LL BE fb~ ACCORDANCE WiTH THE GUIDELINES ~'D SPECIFICATIONS DESC. R[BED IN C~APTER 6 OF TEE FLOR'IDA b~ DEVELOPM~T NA}~KL: A GUIDE TO SOUND L~ID AND WATER I~AGEMENT (DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRO}~ITAL, EF~ULATIOII, i?88~, INCORPOPATED BY REFERENCE IN ~.ULE: .~0E.-4.091, ~LEgS A PROJECT-S~ECIFIC EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PL~] IS kPPRC. VED AS PART CF TEE PERMIT. TMEREAF~'ER THE PE~!~EF. SMALL BE RESPONSIBLE FC.R Tile REidOVAL OF THE BARPIER~. THE PEP~IITTE~ SHALL CORRECT ANY EROSION OR SHOAL, lNG TgAT CAUgES ~DVERSE ~{PACTS 'tO TEE WATER PESOURCES. 4. VIlE PEP~ITTEE SHALL }I[)TIFY THE DISTRICT OF THE 1,34TICIPATED CONSTRUCTION START DATS WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE DATE THAT TI-IlS PE~IT IS ISSUED. Al' LEA~I' 48 HOURS ~RIOR C0lg4ENCEldENT OF ACTIVITY AUTHORIZED BT THIS PE~IT, THE pERtain'FEE S~_~LL SUBMIT TQ ?HE DISTPIC'? ~g EbgIiROI~E~TAL RESOURCE PERMIT CCNSTRUCTION (OMMENCEtf~T NOT[CE NO. 0960 iNDiCA'rI~]G THE ACTUAL 9TART DATE AND 'tHE EXPECTED C{3I~FLSTtON DATE. 5. W~Ei'I THE DUP~NTICht 0F CONSTRUCTIOI'] WILL EXCEED ONE y~AR, THE FE~iTTEE Si~ALL SUBM!T CONSTOU~q'iON STA'I'[~S REPORTS TC) THE DISTRICT ON AN ~[~ P. ASIS US'IblZl~]'~ kN STATUS ~EPORT rOPM. STATUS REPOW. T FORSIS Si-IALL BE SUBMitTED T~E FOLL%~WING ,It~E OF EACII YEA~. 6 m %'~rrH!N 3C DAYS AFTER COMPLETION OF CON$'I'RttCTIOIJ CF THE PERMI~FD ACTIVITY, FEKMI~TEE S~ALL SUBMit A W~rTTEN STATEMENT OF C<)MPLETION ~D CERTIFICATION ~Y A ~EGiSTS~.ED PROFESSIOI,]Lb EMGiNEER OR OT}~ER AFFROPRrATE I~IV!DU;~ AS AU'.PtgORIZED DAW, UTTLTZIN(; THE SUPPLIED E~.tR0~ENTAL RESOURCE PE~IT COMPLETION/CCb~STRUCT!ON CERCIFIC.%TIGN FO~4 M0,0881. THE STATEMENT OF COMPLETION %qD CERTIFICATION $HAt,L BE BASED 0N ONSITE OBSERVATION OF CONSIR~C_I-.,~ OR ~.EVIEW OF AS~UILT D~WZNCS FOR THE PUKPOSE OF DETERMI.t~ING IF T}IE WORK WAS COMPLETED IN CO.4PoI~,~: WI'i'M PERMITTED ~L~S ~D SPECIFICATIONS T~IS SUBI.~ITTAL HALL SERVE 't'C NOTIFY TEE DSSTFICT THAT THE SYSTEM IS READY FOR itJSPECTION. ADDITIONALLY, 1F DEVIA~rON FRO[q THE APPROVED DRAWINGS ARE DISCOVEKED DU~.Ibtg THE CERTiFiCATION PP. OCESS, '~I-{E CERTiFiCATION ~IUST BE ACCOI~PAI.IIED BY A COPY OF THE APPROVED D~WINGS WIT}! DEVIATIONS NOTED, BOTE THE OmTf;INAL ~D ~7ISED SPECIFICATIONS 5rJST BE ~.I,b SURVEYED DIMENSIONS A~ID ELL~ATI,ONS $HAI,.[, BF CERTIFIED BY A REGISTEW. ED SLJRVEYO~. JUL 3 0 2002 F't~0rl RLD PI-ICItlE HO. : 4301C-~4 Feb. t8 2002 02: !?F'H PS pat?..?, .1 C,F' FOR CO[,FJFR:-',/C;,"] 'DF E~;IRO~4ENTAL RESOURCE PERMIT F../C,M CONSTRU'2'Ti(.)N PHASe; TO OFE~AT[ON pHASE, FORM ~x~.b920; THE GIST~ICT D~TERM]~[4ES T]4E SYSTEM TO BE IM COMPLIANCE WI~M THE PERMUTED p[.A~S ~ID SPECIFICATIOn]S; ~D THE ~['rY APPROVED ~Y TF~: DISTRICT iN ACCOF. O~CE WIg'H SECTIDNS 9,0 ~$D 10.0 OF THF. BASIS OF REVIEW FOR ~NVfROS~EN~AL RESOURCE PEPA:IF AP['LICA'2IONS NfTHIN THE SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MA~ACEMEN'[' DISTRZCT -- AUGUST 1995, ACCEPTS NESPOMSIS(C~TY FO~ OPE~TION ~D MAIN~EN~{CE OF TH~ SYSTEM. THE PEPMIT S~AL5 NO~ BE TR~SPERRED TO SUC~ APPROVED OPEKA'fION ~ ~INTf~ANCE EN~I'f'Y ~TIL THE OPE~TION P~ASE OF T~E PE~.('r BECOMES EFFECTIVE. FOLLOWING INSPECTIOn; ~) A~PKCVAb OF THE PERI~IT'['ED SYSTEM BY THE DiUTR~CT, ~HE PEP~ITTEE SHALL INITIATE TP~SFER OF THE PERMIT TO THE APPROVED RESPO~]SiBLE OPE~ING E~ITY IF ~IFFERE~I' F~OM THE FE~ITTE~. ~TIL THE PERI, IT IS T~SFE~RKO PURSU,~NT TO SECTION 40E-!.6107, V.A.C.. THE PERMITTER SI-[ALL BE LIABLE FOR COMPLI~]CE WIT~ THE TE~S OF · rNE PE~IT. EACH PFASE OF. INDEPENDENT PORTION C)F '~HE PEkMI~ED SYSTEM MUSl' BE COMPLETED IN ACCORD~]CE W~TH 'l~ME PEP~fTTED PLZ~S ~3 PE~IT CONDITIONS P~IOR TO THE INITIATION OF THE PE~}~IT?ED USE OF SITE ~NF~STRUCTU~ L~AT~ WSTHIN THE ~EA SERVED BY %~RAT ~ORTION OR PHASE 0F T~E SYSTE[~. ~2AC[~ PHASE O~ INDEPENDEMT PORTION OF THE :{UST BE fOMPLETED XM ACCORD~{CK WI~H THE PE~.~ED PL~;S ~1~ PER~iT C,D[~:DITIONS TO T~7i:FE~ OF RE~POMSIBILITY FO~ OPE~TION ~4D ~iMT~ANCE OF THE PHASE OR OF THE SYST~.[ TO A LOCAL GOVE~]ENT OR OT~[ER RESPO~ISIBLE 9. FOR THOLE 9YS']"E~G THAT 'NELL B~ OPE~FED OR ~INTAINED BY ~] ~TIT~ 9~HAT WI],L REOUIiE ~< EASEME~,~T OR DEED ~ESTRIC~iON iN ORDER TO EMABLE THAT ENTITY TO C, PEP~TE OR MAINTAIN THE SYSTEM iR CONFORMA~C~ WITH 5HIS PE~IT, SUCH EASEME~TT O~. DEED REST~IC'~IO~I MUST BE ~.ECORDED IN THE PUBLIC RECO~9 ~D SUBMITTED TO THF DISTFICT ALONG %SI'tM ~TY ~HEE FINAL OPE~TION ~D ~INT~NA~CE r~'~4ENTS REQUInED 8Y SECTIONS 9.{3 ~D [{0.C OF THE DASIS 0F REVIEW FOR E[~IRO~ENT~ RESOURCE PE~(IT APFLIC.~TIONS WI'f~[IN THE SOU~'~: FLORIDA WATER ~;.GE~E}I'f DIST~.ICT - AUGUST 1995, PRIOR TO LOT OR '~ L~:I'~' SALES ,D~ PRIC.R 'fO THE CO~IPL, ETION OF THE SYSTEM, WHI~HEV%:R '~CCUPS VfRST. OTHER DQC%~ENTS C,D~]CE~.N[[~ THE ESTABLISH~ENT ;~D AUTH(TRITY OF ?HE 'CPERATI~(~ ENTITY MUS'r FILED %~qT]'[ tHE SECRETARY OF STATE WHERE APPROPKIATE. UO9. TM(3SE S':'STEMS WFL[CN ARE P~.CPOSED TO BE ~%INTAIt~ED BY THE C0~.~TY OR M~ICIPAL ENTITLES, Ff~;AL OPERATION 0PE~ATiON <)F ~'F(~. SYSTEM IS ~CCEPTED BY TM~ LOCAL GOVE~ENT ENTITY. FAILURE TO SU~MIT THE APFPCPRiATE FINAL ~C~ENTS WILL RESULT I~] 7ME PERM,?TEE RE~INING LIABbS F0m CAF. RYIK~ C~.:~ M.~(~]TEM~CE ~D OPErATiON OF THE PE~I/TSD SYSTEM ~D ~' P EPJ~I T CO~JDIT [ C,[,;S. SM~it.~D ~'~' OTHER REGi]LATOR~ AGENCY REQUIRE C~GES TO T~E PEPHITTED SYSTEM, THE PERI4ITTEE ~I{ALL NOTIFY,' TI4~ DISTD. ICT Il4 WRITIMG OF THE C~GE~ PRiOW TO iMmI,E:.IEN'rATIOM EO THAT A DETERMINATION C~' BE E~DE WHE'~HER A FEP.>iIT ~O~IFiCA?ION REQUIREr,. !i THIS FER~I%' DC~EG NOT ELIMINATE 'r~lE R'ECESSITY TO OBTAIn; ~/ B~QUIRZD FEDERAL, L~AL ~D SPSCIA~, OI'STRICT AUTHORIZATIONS PRIOR TO THE START OF ~Y ACTIVITY APPROVED ~Y THi~5 PErMiT. THIS P~RM~T DOES NOT CCb~'EW TO THE PEF~IT'['~E OR CREATE THE PERMITTER ~{Y PROPERTY RIGHT, OK ~Y I[~TERES~ IN REAL PROPERVY~ ~'OR DOES IT AUTHORIZE ~Y EN~B.~CE UP$M OR ACTIViTiES ON PROPERTY WHICH IS NOT OWMRD OR CO~.;TROLL~O BY THE PERMISEt. 0~ CO~EY ~ ~ICRTS OR PRIVlbFGES OTHEF. TH;~; THOSE ~PECIFIE~ IN ~E PERMIT ~D CHAPTER 40E-4 OK CHAPTER 405-40, ]~' 'P~E PE~MITTEF iS HEREBY ADVISED THAT SECTICN 25~.77, F.~. STATES THAT A PE~.SON ~:OT CO~{~iE~CE ~'~Y EXCAVATION, CONSTRUCTION. OR ()TKER AC'~IVI'I'Y !~DYObVING THE USE SOVEREiG~; (3R OS'HER L~DS OF THE STATE, THE TITbS TO WHICH IS VESTED ~N THE BOARD TRUSTEES OW T:~ I~'ERNAL IMPrOVEMeNT TRUST F~D WXTMOUT OBFAiFI~'G THE %,EASE, LfCf'],~S~, EASEM~, OR OTHER PC~ OF CONSENT AUTHORIZ~{G THE PROPOSED THEREFORE, T~[E PE~i~TTEE l'g RE~PO~SIBLE FOR OBTAINING ANY N~CESSARY YP. OM THE Bf:~D OP TRUSTEFS P~ICR TO CC~EMCING ACTIVITY ON SOVEREIGN~Y L~DS OR Q-'HER 5T~T~.'--O',~i,~ED L~DS. JUL 3 0 FPO,'1 : PLD PF,131-1E fl3. : -1301664 Fei,.-.,. 18 2003 ~2.: IE-,,c'f'l F6 · '' ~pf..;K,'.~."l' f,;(,: 1' 0 [ AG[-: :: OF TH=T :'£R'.4ITTEE [.,i:..I'S"l" 0RTAIf.I ,~ t,.,..xTBl'; USE PEP..MTT PR:'r'.bR '1'O COf,I%TRUC"["/O,'q DEWATERING, 'JTIL, ESS '~'.ME ;'CORK QUALIFIES FO~ ~ GEblERAt, ;'ERblI'I' PU~SUAh!T TO SUB;.4ECTIOM 40E-20. 302 ~4), F.A.C., .~,LSO KN,9~rN AS THE "NO NOTICE" RULE. 14. '!.HE PERHI'FD'EE $1IALL HOLD AND SAVE 'I'h'E DISTRICT HAkDILESS FROM AN'k' AND ALL DAMAGF,:J, CLAIMS, OR I.,IABILITI£S WHIC}I MAY ARI,~E BY REASON OF THE CONSTRUCTION, ALTER;'%.TION, (9. PEI~%TION, [!~,IND'ENANC~:, REI4OVAL, ABA. MDONMENT OR USE OF ,'%N-Y SYSTEM AUTHORIZED BY TqF. 15. wkNY DELiI'IE~.?IOt'i OF 'rME [~XTENT OF A WETLAND OR OT~IER S'JRFACE WATER SUDMITTED AS PART OF THE PERI4tT APPLICATION, INCLUDING PLANS OR CTMER SUPPO~,TING DOCUIVIE}3TATION, SHAI.,b ~;OT BE CONSIDERED 8II':Dli'IG [?NLESS A SPF. CIFIC CONDITION OF' THIS PERMIT OR A FORIIAL DEE'.EP,~.INAI'IO.~I UI, ID~R SECTION 37~.421(2}, F.S., PROVIDES DTHERWISE. i,~,. TH~: PEI~}IIrTEE SHALL NOTIFY T~.E DISTRICT IN WRITING WITHIN 3[9 DAYS OF .%DP: SALE. CON'v'EYANCE, OR orMER T?~a, NSFER OF OI?a%IERSMIP OR CONTROL OF A PERMITTED SYSTEM OR THE [~.?~Ab PhOPKR'PY ON W}{ICl! THE PER}IITTFD SYSTEM IS LOCATED. }.bi TR.AI'$SFERS OF O~¢NERSHI? DP, TRANSFERS OD' A ?E!~.I,IIT ARE SUBJF. CT TO TIlE REQUIREMF. NTS OF RU6£S 40E-1.6105 AMD 40F-1 .6107, F.A C...-'r~!E PERIDITTEE TRAtlSFERRII'IG THE PEI~MIr SH~.LI. REMAIN LIABLE FOR CORRECTIVE ACTIOI'IS THAT M~,Y BE REQUIRE. D AS A RESULT OF A.'CY 'JIOi~ATICNS ~RIOR TO TIqE SALE, CClCVEYANCE OR O'I'~ER TR,MMSFER OU ?HE SYSTEM. JIF'ON REASONABLE [4r3TICE TO THE pIEPJv~ITTEE, DISTRICT ALITH(.)RIZED STAFF WiTI4 PROPER Ii3ENTSFICATiON SH.%L,I, HAVE PEPLItSS.~ON TO ENTER., INSPF. CT, ,qAi'll:LE kND TEDT THE SYSTEM TO INSURE CONFOP, MIT¥ WITH THE PI,AI~IS Al,ID .qPECIFICATIOiDS APPROVED BY TIlE PER.~IIT. iV. IF HI,'~TOP, IUAI., C~..~RCHAE,O:~OCIC'AL AKTIFACTS ARE DIS,';OvERED AT ANY TIHE ON THE FR©JECT SITE, 'IHE PEItl-IITTEE SHALl, IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE A?PRCPRIA'YE DISTRICT SERVICE 1~'. THE P£PJ:IT~I'~iE SI-!.ALL IMDIEDIATELY N©?fIF'f THE DiSTRiCT IN WRITIDIC, OF Al'fl PREVIOUSLY SUF. MITTED I. NFORIvt~TION THAI' IS LATER DISCOVERED TO BE INACCURATE. JUL 3 0 2002 ,,,. (¢) _ FRO~I : ALD PHOHE NO. : 4301664 F~_b, 18 2¢J02 82: 19F'M F'7 ~NVIROI',IMENTAL RESOURCE PERMIT CHAPTER 40E-4 (10/95) 40E-4.321 Duration o¢ Permits (I) Unless r,",'oked or otherw;se modified the duration el an environmental ~esource permil issued under this chapter or Chapter 40E-40, F,A,C. Is as follows: la) For a conceptual approval, two years frcm Ihe date of issuance or the date specified as a condition of the permit, unless within II,at period an application for an individual or standard general petmil is filed for any portion el the project· If an application for an environmental resource permit is Iliad, then the concepluat approval remains vahd until linal action is taken on the environmental resource permil application. I! the applicalion is granted, then Ihe conceptual approval is valid for an additional Iwo years from lhe da,'e cf issuance el the permit, Conceptual apprcvals whici~ have no individual or standard general environm¢,, nra; resource permil applications filed for a period of two years sl'-all expile automaticalry at the end et Ihe two year period. lb) For a conceptual approval filed concurrenIly with a development of reg:onal impact (DRI) application for development approval (ADA) and a local government comprehensive plan amendment, the dura=~on of Ihe conceplual approval shall be two years from wh:chever one of the following occurs at the lalest date 1 the ef.leclive date et the local government's comprehensive plan amendment. 2 the effective date el the local government development order· 3. ;he da',e on which the District issues the conceptual approval, or ;he latest date el the resolution of any Chapter 120.57. F.A.C., adm:nistrative proceeding or otl~er legs; apDeais For a~ mOIvid~.,al or standard general environmental resource cermi[, five years from ;he date of issuance or such amc, unt of time as made a conoiton el the permit (d) Fur a noticed general permit issued pursuant to chapter 40-E-400, F.A.C,., five year.~ ~rom the date the nolice of intent to use the perrn,t is provided ID the District. (2Jla) U~less pr.ascrioed by special permil conditior, permits expire e,u,omatically according to lhe timeframes indicated in this rule If application for extension is made in wribhg pursuant lo subsection t3], the peq'mt shall rer~ain in full fo:ce, and effecl until: 1. the Govern,no Board takes action on an appl.calion for extension of an individual permit, or 2. staff takes action on an application [or exlension ¢1 a standard ger~:,ral perml~ ,,bi Installation c:f the projecl outfall struclure shall not constitute a vesting of the permit. ~3) The porn'fit extension shall be Issued provided that a permittce files a writlen request with the Oistnct ~howirg ~.ood cause prior to the expiration of the permit. For the purpose el Ihis rule, good cau:~e shall mead a set et extenuating circumstances outside of the control el the permittee. R.~quests for exter:sions, wl',c~ shall include documentation of Ihe extenuating circumstance~ and how they have delayed th~s projecL will not be accepted more than 180 days I~rior to the expiration d~te. (4) S~bslanlial modihcations Io Conceptual Approvals will extend the duration of the Concept,;al Approval for two years from the dale of issuance el the modification. For the purposes of Ibis section, the term 'substantial modification" shall mean a modification which is reasonably expected to lead ;o subs:antia;ly differer, t water resource or environmental impacts which req .e a dr ...-,.i.ed r.~vlew. (5) Substan[ial modih(.;ation~ to individual or standard general environmen!al ~esource pern~it$ issued pursua~.t to a permit application exlend the duration of the permit for three years lrom the date of ir~suanco of the modificaticn, Individual or stand~rd general environmental resource permit moditicalions do not extend the duration of a conceptual approval· (6) Permil modifications issued pursuant to subsection 40E-4.331 (2)(o), F.A.C, (!otter [nodi~ications) do not extend the duration of a permit. (7) Failure to complete construclion or alteration of the s~rface water mac, agement system and obtain operation phase approval from the Dislrict within t~e permit duration ~,holl require a new per'frei! authorization in order to continue construction unless a permit extension is granled. specilic, aulhc~it7 373 O.'4. 573.: !3 ~c S. Law Implern~'~h~d 373.413. 373.4'15· 373.4tg. 373 l~'"R F·~; A~n¢¢~dc~'J t-3~ 8;· I~-f $;~. Forrne,'ly ! 6K .1 0;'(-I~ Amended 7. % .86 4/;J0,~J4. ^mend~,,d 7.1 85. &'2C,"~4. 13-3.~.~ JUL 3 0 2002 SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT FORT MYERS SERVICE CENTER 2301 McGregor Boulevard, Fort Myers, FL 33901 (941) 338-2929 ° FL WATS 1-800-248-1201 ° Suncorn 748-2929 · Fax (941) 338-2936 ° www.s[wmd.gov/org/exo/ftmyers/ CON 24-05 Environmental Resource Regulation Application No' 000914-6 November 29, 2001 Patrick Moorton Southwest Florida Opportunity Fund, LLC 2223 Trade Center Way Naples, FL 34109 Dear Mr. Moodon: Subiect: Final Monitoring Report, Environmental Center Point Collier County, S3/T51S/R26E This letter is written to inform you that on November 26, 2001 this office received correspondence demonstrating that 1.86 credits have been purchased from the Panther Island Mitigation Bank. Thus, environmental Special Condition Number 9 and 10 of Permit 11-01957-P has been satisfied. The District appreciates your efforts to maintain compliance with the environmental conditions of the permit. Please be advised that this notice pertains only to the environmental special conditions of your permit. Should you have any questions or require fudher assistance, please contact me at (941)-338-2929. Sincerely, Hal Herbst, Senior Environmental Analyst Environmental Resourc~ Compliance Foal Myers Service Center JUL 3 0 2002 Go VER~ING BOARO Michael Collins, Chairman Vera M. Carter Nicolas I. Gutierrez, Jr. Frank R. Finch, P.E., E.reclrlit'e Dircctor Ch~p Merriam, Dlrrctt,r Michael D. Minton, Vice Chairman, Oerardo B. Fernandez Harkley R. Thornton James E. 81ount, Chic[e~St,d~ Mitchell W. Berger Patrick J. Gleason Trudi K. Williams Patrick Moorton Southwest Florida Opportunity Fund, LLC November 29, 2001 Page 2 c: Jeremy Sterk/Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. Mike Landy/Landy Engineering, Inc. Desmond Duke/PIMB Klm Maheuron/Collier Co. Engineering Review Jennifer Culbertson/USAOOE/Jacksonville JUL 3 0 2002 · . .' Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council 4980 Bayline Drive, 4th Floor, N. Fi. Myers, FL 33917-3909 (941) 656-7720 P.O. Box 3455, N. Fi. Myers, FL 33918-3455 SUNCOM 749-7720 FAX 941-656-7724 September 29, 2000 Ms. Karen Johnson Fort Myers Service Center South Florida Water Management District 2301 McGregor Boulevard FORT MYERS, FL 33901 RE: IC&R Project//2000-434 SFWMD 0000914-6 USACE 4/ Council Staff Request For Additional Information Regarding The Proposed "Center Point", Commercial Development, U.S. 41 and C.R. 95 I, South Naples Area, Collier County. Dear Ms. Johnson: The staff of the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council reviews various proposals, Notifications of Intent, Preapplications, permit applications, and Environmental Impact Statements for compliance with regional goals, objectives and policies, as determined by the Strategic Regional Policy Plan. The staff reviews such items in accordance with the Florida Intergovernmental Coordination and Review Process (Chapter 29I-5, F.A.C.), and adopted regional clearinghouse procedures. Normally, staff provides such projects with a recommendation as to whether or not the project is regionally significant (or less than regionally significant) and whether the project is consistent with the adopted Strategic Regional Policy Plan. However, periodically Regional staff requires additional information regarding proposed activities before a recommendation can be provided. The above~ referenced project is such an instance. Therefore, Regional staff is requesting that the applicant provide the following additional information: I. Has a protected species survey been performed on the subject property? If so, please include the information developed from the survey. Please indicate the protected spec,i6s of vegetation and/or wildlife which were identified onsite, as well as any protective measures to be utilized by the applicant to ensure the onsite survival of populations of those species. JUL 3 TO: Ms. Karen Johnson DATE: September 29, 2000 PAGE: 2 RE: IC&R 02000-434. 2. Please provide a description of the mitigation proposed for any onsite'wetland 'impacts/" Please include the amount and types of vegetation to be planted, the planting density, and proposed monitodngtmaintenance criteria. If no mitigation is proposed, please'explain why the applicant feels that the project does not require mitigation. 3. Please indicate the square footages of all land uses proposed for the project. If the project is part of a multi-phase development, please indicate the total planned square footages of any other land uses, proposed for the entire development. ., : Regional staff is willing to meet with the applicant, and/or its agents, to discuss the proposed . activities and the staff concerns. Likewise, staff would be willing to meet with other agencies ' concerning these issues. Please contact Mrs. Nichole Gwinnett, IC&R Coordinator, or Mr. Glenn Heath, Senior Planner, with any such request, or with any questions concerning staff review of this item. Sincerely, ~HWEST FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL , Executive Director WED/geh cc: Ms. Nichole Gwinnett, IC&R Coordinator, Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council Mr. David Burr, Planning Director, Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council Mr. Skip Bergmann, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Mr. Mike Landy, Landy Engineering, Incorporated Boylan Environmental 3 0 002 FLORIDA DEP~TMENT O? ~ATE Dep.~t ~t v(~' ~ Kalhe~tn~ ~re~ of DI~SION OF H~ORICAL R~URC~ February la,, 2002 Jeremy Stark Boylan Environmen~l Consultants, Inc. 110CK) Metro Parkway, Smt~. 4 Fort Myers, Fi. 33912 FAX # (941) 418-0672 Dear Mr, Sterk; - -' In response to your Inquiry of February 14, 2002, the Florida Master Site File lists no previously recorded cultural resources or surveys in the t'ollowing parcels: TSIS, R Z6E, Section 03 In interpret~g the results of our search, please remember the following points: · Areas which have not beeu completely surveyed, such as yours, ma~' contain unrecorded archaeological sites, unrecorded historically imporlaat structures, or both. · As you may know, state and federal l*ws require formal enviroament~l review for some projects. Record searches by the staff of the Florid~ ]Vlas~er Site File do not constitute such a review of culturnl resources. If your project falls under these laws, you should contact the Compliance Review Section of the Burenu of tltstoric Preservation -',1 850- 245-6333 or at this address. Patrick Gensler Data Analyst, Florida Master Site File Phone: 850-245.6a40 Division of'Historical Resources State SunCom: 205-6440 R. A. Gray Building Fax line: 850-245-6439 500 South Bronough Street Email: fm.sfile~mail, do.~.state.fl.t~s Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 Web: http:/Arww, do.t.~tate~'l.u,t/dllr/m,~f/ JUL 3 0 2002 500 S. Bronough Street · Tallehnssee, FL 32399.02S0 · http:i/www.flherit~ge.cor C~ Di~cto~l O(~cc ~ ~chaeolo~cal Re~t~h O Hlltofle ~el~a~on ~ } ,1 Mueeums (~) 245-~ · F~: 2~ (8~) 2~-~ * F~X: g~6 (8~) 245~333 * FAX: Z~37 U ~alm Beath Re~e~l Office O St. Au~ne Re,oriel Olflce ~ T~ Re~onll (561) 2~-147~, ~: ~.t476 (~) a~-~, F~: 8~.~a (813) 2~-38~ * P.~X: TOT~ ~, ~ . ~. ~ :~ ~ ~ ~ ,-. . -. '~. ~ .;~" ''; '., .;~ i ; i ~:'. ' '1 ~ ...~.: ..... ..,,'~' ... ~,~ . .6,'.,,C. ~. ,, .: ' ~!~1~ , . ...., , :.~..,~' __ _ Z~ '. /I "- ~:~'~'~ -~ ' ' ' . ~:v ~ .., · . ~ ~; , -~~" "L~',: ' '" -'-'< *' ~ ~ ~..,~' '~' ~ ~ .' ...... ' - ... ,. '"~,~',~...~ . ,. . ,' ,- -- - ..~ i , :. · .. ? ~/' ',.[~ " ~.2' / / ,... ' . ;,' ,., .~.. ~., - / ~ .::,' . ~. · COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY DEV. & ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS. DMSION PLJ~'I~NO SERVI~S~ DEPA.RTSJtl~ CURRENT PLANNINO SECTION DEVELOPM~TNT PERMIT PETITION FOR "ST" LAND PETITION NO : ST- - DATE: PETITIONER' S ADDRESS: -.' TELEPHO~: LE~ DESCRIPTION OF S~CT PROPERS: NOTE: THIS PETITION MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A PLOT PLAN AND ANY OTHER APPLICABLE INFORMATION AND DATA REQUIRED BY THE DIRECTOR · Filing Fee: 1~3 , O~ Date: ($150.00 minimum 5 acres or less, plus $50.00 per acre over 5 Signature of Petitmoner .......... THIS SPACE FOR OFFICE USE ONLY .......... On-site Inspecti.on By: Comments: COpe; ~"~/(-f /Y JUL 3 2002 ~" ' '.':"~";'."";' ~' '"'-7"- ~: "-'..'-." ' ' :;":" :"" ~ ~: ' o.. - _ ~ ' ~l iCI 1%~ ~ ~. oo'~r a.~o,~.~c N / ,. ~ 'x ~ ff ~/ ~ ~. - ..' " .' "~" o Z ~ e z % %4 J ''~ -' .~JUL 3 02002 I · Z~ I~.11~.11~.1 I I ~ I~1 ~.' o~ ,,_ ~.~ z~ ..... ~ [ JUL 3 0 I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PETITION: PUDA-01-AR-2491, ROBERT DUANE OF HOLE MONTES, INC., REPRESENTING JAMES AND DIANE WILLIAMS, REQUESTING A REZONE FROM "PUD" TO "PUD" PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO BE KNOWN AS THE ARROWHEAD PUD HAVING THE EFFECT OF INCREASING THE NUMBER OF APPROVED DWELLING UNITS FROM 900 UNITS TO 1,254 UNITS, WHICH INCREASES THE PROJECT DENSITY TO 4.3 UNITS PER ACRE, CHANGE THE MIX OF SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTI-FAMILY DWELLINGS, DELETE MOBILE HOMES AS A PERMITTED USE, REVISE THE CURRENTLY APPROVED MASTER PLAN TO ALLOW FOR THE RECONFIGURATION OF THE COMMERCIAL TRACT, UPDATE THE PUD DOCUMENT TO REFLECT CURRENT TERMINOLOGY AND CODE REFERENCES, REDUCE THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT FROM 100 FEET TO 50 FEET FOR THE COMMERCIAL TRACT, MODIFY THE LIST OF PERMITTED COMMERCIAL USES, AND REVISING THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CONSISTENT WITH THE DEVELOPER'S WORKFORCE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT OF THE INTERSECTION OF LAKE TKAFFORD ROAD AND THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF CARSON ROAD iN SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners consider a rezone application amending the Arrowhead PUD Document and Master Plan as noted above in a manner consistent with all the applicable codes and regulations in order to ensure that the community's interests are maintained. CONSIDERATIONS: The currently approved 307.3-acre Arrowhead PUD was approved on May 28, 1991 and permits 900 dwelling units, consisting of 300 mobile homes, 276 single family units and 327 multi-family residential dwelling units, which results in a density of 3-units per acre. In addition, approximately 15 acres was approved for commercial uses with a maximum of 130,680 square feet of floor area. The purpose of this petition is to amend the Arrowhead PUD Document as noted above. The petitioner is requesting to develop workforce housing which requires increasing the maximum number of residential units from 900 units to 1,254 units. This includes changing the mix of proposed dwelling types to allow for 436 single-family units and 809 multi-family units. As a result, the project density will be increased to 4.3 units per acre. In addition, the project is required to be phased to insure that adequate levels of service are maintained on the local road network. The first phase will allow the construction of 300 multi-family and 300 single-family dwelling units or as many units as permitted in order to maintain acceptable levels of service. The remaining units can only be developed when the site-generated traffic doesn't significantly impact a deficient road segment. ,, JUL 3 0 2002 FISCAL IMPACT: This amendment is only to provide greater flexibility in meeting the needs of the current market seeking single-family and multi-family residential dwellings. This includes the following comparisons of approved development to the proposed land uses for the Arrowhead PUD: APPROVED. PROPOSED AMOUNT OF INCREASE PUD PUD OR DECREASE TOTAL ACRES: 307.3 Acres 307.3 Acres 0 RESIDENTIAL UNITS: 900 1,254 +354 Units RESIDENTIAL ACRES: 146 Acres 140 Acres -6 Acres COMMERCIAL AREA: 130,680 S.F. 130,680 S.F. 0 COMMERCIAL ACRES: 15 Acres 15 Acres 0 For an average unit size of 1,000 square feet, the total fiscal impact will be $2,757.18 per unit. Since this project proposes 354 additional units, the total amount of residential impact fees collected at build- out will total $976,041.72. It should be noted that because impact fees vary by housing type and because this approval does not provide this level of specificity as to the actual type of use, the total impact fee quoted above is at best a raw estimate. Other fees will include building permit review fees and utility fees associated with connecting to the County's sewer and water system. Since the approved commercial intensity will not change, this amendment by and of itself will have no additional fiscal impact on the County. The overall fiscal impact for this development was determined at the time the property was rezoned to PUD. In addition, the County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of building permits to help offset the impact of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects in the Capital Improvement Element needed to maintain adopted levels of service for public facilities. In the event that impact fee collections are inadequate to maintain adopted levels of service, the County must provide supplemental funds from other revenue sources in order to build needed facilities. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The subject property is designated (Urban) Residential, Low Residential District, and Neighborhood Center District, on the Immokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management Plan. Relevant to this review, 274 acres of the proposed PUD is located in an area designated Low Residential on the Immokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map. This district permits single family, duplexes, multi-family and mobile home development not to exceed a density of four (4) dwelling units per acre. In addition, relevant to this review, 33.3 acres of the proposed PUD is located in an area-designated Neighborhood Center District on the Immokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map. This district allows for a mix of uses, including commercial, governmental facilities and residential development being limited to a maximum of 12 units per acre. JUL 3 0 2002 Also, the PUD Commercial District allows commercial development within a Planned Unit Development provided size and development criteria are met. There are three (3) categories for PUD Commercial. The commercial component within a PUD is allowed to develop up to the maximum acreage specified under Categories I, II, and III. The subject site qualifies under Category m (300+ acres) and so is allowed to develop up to the maximum of 20 acres of commercial uses as found in the C-2, C-3 and C-4 zoning districts. The subject property comprises of 307.3 acres; 274 acres are within the Low Residential District and is proposed for 15 acres of commercial uses and 259 acres is eligible for 1036 dwelling units or (at the maximum 4 units per acre). The additional 33.3 acres is within the Neighborhood Center District and is eligible for 400 dwelling units (at the maximum of 12 units per acre). Therefore, the subject PUD is eligible for a total of 1,436 dwelling units. Since this PUD proposes 1,245 dwelling units (4.26 DU/A), the residential component is consistent with the Density Rating System of the Growth Management Plan. In addition to the above criteria, the following standards for PUD Commercial District must also be met (followed by staff's analysis): a. Commercial zoning shall be no closer than one (1) mile to the nearest commerce center and no closer than one mile from the nearest PUD commercial zoning of ten acres or greater in size; The commercial parcel is greater than one mile from nearest commerce center and greater than one mile from nearest PUD commercial zoning of ! 0 acres or greater. b. The configuration of the commercial parcel shall be no more frontage than depth unless ....... otherwise authorized by the Board of County Commissioners; The configuration of the previously approved commercial portion of this PUD is 880 feet (frontage) on Lake Trafford Road and approximately 750 .feet (depth) on the future right-of-way of the Carson Road Extension. This was approved at the BCC's discretion, based upon the fact that the greater frontage was primarily due to the easterly alignment of Carson Road Ext., at its intersection with Lake Trafford Road. This petitioner is requesting approximately 1450feet OCrontage) on Lake Trafford Road and approximately 500 feet (depth) on the future right-of-way of the Carson Road Extension. This requested frontage far exceeds the depth and therefore does not comply with these criteria, unless otherwise authorized by the Board qf County Commissioners. c. Commercial zoning or development shall be no closer than a xA mile [1320'1 from the nearest existing elementary school boundary; Measured from the closest edge of the property lines, the commercial tract is 1,400feet from Lake Trafford Elementary School site. d. No construction in the commercial designated area shall be allowed until 30% of the project has commenced construction unless otherwise authorized by the Board of Count3' Commissioners. The developer of Arrowhead is requesting that this standard be modified to allow construction of commercial uses once 20% of the building permits have been issued for residential dwelling units, which will coincide with the first development phase (see staff report). 3 Pg.. :¢ ,, Based on the above analysis, the commercial component of this PUD does not meet criteria (b) and (d) of the Planned Unit Development Commercial District. Given the proposed justification for the use of discretion, allowed in criterion (b) and (d), the configuration of the commercial tract, and the proposed reduction to 20 percent of commencement of residential construction, may not be found to be consistent with the Immokalee Area Master Plan unless otherwise authorized by the BCC. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located within an area of historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. As a result, a Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment was previously prepared when the property was first rezoned to PUD. Based on this survey, an archaeological mound was discovered on the subject PUD and will be preserved in its entirety within the dedicated preserve area. In addition, an old vacant structure located on the site was previously determined not to be of' historic significance. Therefore, this petition is consistent with the Land Development Code subject to Section 2.2.25.8.1 of the Land Development Code as follows. If' during the course of site clearing, excavation or other construction activity a historic or archaeological artifact is found, all development within the minimum area necessary to protect the discovery shall be immediately stopped and the Collier County Code Enforcement Department contacted. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The project site consists of a home site, improved and unimproved pasture totaling 307 acres and is currently used as pasture for grazing of approximately 200 cattle. The majority of the remainder of. the site consists of mixed wetland hardwoods that have been slightly stressed due to the cattle grazing and pasture improvement activities. Ground cover and mid-story vegetation has been significantly impacted on the entire site, which is comprised of 48.67 acres of.wetlands and 258.33 acres of uplands. Uplands on-site include live oak hammock (15.81 acres), improved pasture (237.83 acres) and an existing home site (4.69 acres). South Florida Water Management District/Collier County jurisdictional wetlands total 48.67 acres. The limits of SFWMD jurisdictional wetlands and "other sur£ace waters" were reviewed and approved in the field on June 6, 2002. Wetlands on-site include mixed wetland hardwoods (28.12 acres), improved pasture-hydric (10.01 acres), a cypress head (1.06 acres), flag marsh (6.99 acres), cattle pond (0.70 acres) and other surface waters- ditches (1.79 acres). ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL {EAC) RECOMMENDATION: Since the project's Environmental Impact Statement (ELS) was approved over five years ago, the petitioner was required to submit a revised EIS. As a result, this petition was presented to the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) on July 3, 2002. JUL 3 0 2002 4 Pl. The EAC has recommended approval by a 6 to 0 vote subject to the project being reviewed and approved by Collier County Stormwater Management Section prior to construction plan approval. In addition, the petitioner must obtain a surface water management permit from the South Florida Water Management District while offsite flows going through the property shall be analyzed to make sure that there is sufficient capacity in the Fishbranch Creek and wetland to convey them. If the capacity is not adequate, improvements will be required to make sure that the upstream flows are properly conveyed through. The flows will be based on the actual runoff of the lands and not on the culverts under Trafford Lake Road. This information shall be provided at the time of construction plan review. Lastly, buffers shall be provided around wetlands, extending at least fifteen (15) feet landward from the edge of wetland preserves in all places and averaging twenty-five (25) feet from the landward edge of wetlands. Where natural buffers are not possible, structural buffers shall be provided in accordance with the State of Florida Environmental Resources Permit Rules and be subject to review and approval by Current Planning Environmental Staff. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Due to the BCC vacation in August and since this petition is intended to provide work-force housing in Immokalee, this petition was scheduled for the July 30, 2002 BCC meeting in order to allow the applicant to meet funding timelines. As a result, the recommendations and findings from the July 18, 2002 Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) could not be incorporated into this executive summary. However, the CCPC recommendations will be presented to the BCC during their July 30, 2002 public hearing on this item. Therefore, this petition could not be placed on the Summary Agenda. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) a recommendation of approval of Petition PUDA-2002-AR-2491 subject to staff stipulations that are contained in the attached Ordinance. Based on staff review of the proposed changes to the commercial tract, the proposed amendment will b._~e consistent with the PUD Commercial District of the Immokalee Area Master Plan subject to the Board of County Commissioners making the below referenced findings. 1. The configuration of the commercial parcel shall have no more frontage than depth unless otherwise authorized by the Board of County Commissioners; This petitioner is requesting more commercial frontage than depth and therefore does not comply with this criteria. The petitioner has indicated that the planning basis_for the recon_lqguration o_f the commercial area boundary has to do with the _fact that the current PUD Master Plan lq/Ct an unusable area between the southern boundary of the commercial tract and a wetland area idento~ed on both the existing and proposed PUD Master Plans. Therefore, the proposed reconj~guration of the commercial tract was designed to utilize area more e_fficient!¥_for a_ffordable housing and to provide more usable area_for Multi-_family Tracts 1 and 2 as can be seen on the proposed PUD Master Plan. , JUL 3 0 2002 2. No construction in the commercial designated area shall be allowed until 30% of the project has commenced construction unless otherwise authorized by the Board of County Commissioners. The developer of Arrowhead is requesting that this standard be modified to allow construction of commercial uses once 20% of the building permits have been issued for residential dwelling units, which will coincide with the first development phase PREPARED BY:. 'RAY/'B ELLbT, V'S7 CHIEF PLANNER DATE la' CURRENT PLANNING SECTION REVIEWED BY: /SUSAN MURRAY, AICP, MANAGI~R DATE CURRENT PLANNING SECTION M~G~T ~RSTLE, ~CP, D~CTOR DATE PLA~G SERVICES DEP~TMENT APPROVED BY: JOSEPH K. SC~IMITT ADMINISTRATOR DATE ,COMMUNITY' DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS. PUDA-01-AR-2491/EX SUMMARY/RVB/rb JUL 3 0 2002 AGENDA ITEM 8-1 ~ MEMORANDUM TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DATE: JUNE 21, 2002 RE: PETITION NO: PUDA-02-AR-2491, ARROWHEAD PUD AGENT/APPLICANT: Agent: Robert Duane Owner: James & Diane Williams Hole Montes, Inc. 1300 North 15 Street 950 Encore Way Immokalee, Florida 34142 Naples, Florida 34110 Contract Purchaser: MDG Capital Corporation MDG Companies of Naples 2180 Immokalee Road, Suite 308 Naples, Florida 34110 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject PUD is located at the southwest quadrant of Lake Trafford Road and the planned extension of Carson Road in Sections 6 & 31, Township 47 & 46 South, and Range 29 East. (See illustration on following page) REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner is requesting a rezone from PUD to PUD for the purposes of amending the Arrowhead PUD (Ordinance Number 91-44). PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The currently approved 307.3-acre Arrowhead PUD was approved on May 28, 1991 and permits 900 dwelling units, consisting of 300 mobile homes, 276 single family units and 327 multi-family residential dwelling units, which results in a density of 3-units per acre. In addition, approximately 15 acres was approved for commercial uses with a maximum of 130,680 square feet of floor area. The purpose of this petition is to amend the Arrowhead PUD Document and Master Plan as follows: JUL 3 0 2002 APPROVED MASTER PLAN ~ JUL 3 0 PROPOSED MASTER PLAN --- · Delete mobile homes as a permitted use. · Increase the maximum number of residential units fi.om 900 units to 1,254 units, which increases the project density to 4.3 un/ts per acre. · Change the mix of proposed dwelling types to allow for 436 single family units and 809 multi-family units. · Project phasing to insure that adequate levels of service are maintained on the local road network. The first phase will allow the construction of 300 multi-family and 300 single-family dwelling units or as many units as permitted in order to maintain acceptable levels of service. The remaining units can only be developed when the site-generated traffic doesn't significantly impact a deficient road segment. · Revise the currently approved Master Plan (see attached) to allow for the reconfiguration of the commercial tract to allow more frontage on Lake Trafford Road. (See the attached proposed Master Plan) The maximum allowable commercial floor area shall remain the same as currently approved. · Update the PUD Document to reflect current terminology and Code references. · Change the list of permitted commercial uses to primarily list the uses found in the C-3 Zoning District of the Collier County Land Development Code in lieu of the currently permitted uses that generally conform to the C-4 uses of the LDC. · Reduce the maximum building height from 100 feet to 50 feet for the commercial tract. · Revise the development standards consistent with the developer's workforce housing requirements. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Existing Conditions: The subject site is currently undeveloped and is zoned the PUD. Surrounding-North: Lands to the north are zoned "A" Agricultural and is partially developed with mobile homes. At the northwest comer of Lake Trafford Road and Carson Road is a commercial structure that is zoned C-3. East: The Partially developed with mobile homes and is zoned "A- MHO" Agricultural with a Mobile Home Overlay and "MH". South: Vacant lands and zoned "A-MHO". West: Vacant lands and zoned "A-MHO". GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: The subject property is designated (Urban) Residential, Low Residential District, and Neighborhood Center District, on the Immokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management Plan. Relevant to this review, 274 acres of the proposed PUD is located in an area designated Low Residential on the Immokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map. This district permits single family, duplexes, multi-family and . mobile home development not to exceed a density of four (4)dwelling units per icre~l~:~, ~.NW. la- 2 JUL 3 0 2002 In addition, relevant to this review, 33.3 acres of the proposed PUD is located in an area- designated Neighborhood Center District on the Immokalee Area Master Plan Furore Land Use Map. This district allows for a mix of uses, including commercial, governmental facilities and residential development being limited to a maximum of 12 units per acre. Also, the PUD Commercial District allows commercial development within a Planned Unit Development provided size and developme, nt criteria are met. There are three (3) categories for PUD Commercial. The commercial component within a PUD is allowed to develop up to the maximum acreage specified under Categories I, 1I, and III. The subject site qualifies under Category III (300+ acres) and so is allowed to develop up to the maximum of 20 acres of commercial uses as found in the C-2, C-3 and C-4 zoning districts. The subject property comprises of 307.3 acres; 274 acres are within the Low Residential District and is proposed for 15 acres of commercial uses and 259 acres is eligible for 1036 dwelling units or (at the maximum 4 units per acre). The additional 33.3 acres is within the Neighborhood Center District and is eligible for 400 dwelling units (at the maximum of 12 units per acre). Therefore, the subject PUD is eligible for a total of 1,436 dwelling units. Since this PUD proposes 1,245 dwelling units (4.26 DU/A), the residential component is consistent with the Density Rating System of the Growth Management Plan. In addition to the above criteria, the following standards for PUD Commercial District must also be met (followed by staff's analysis): a. Commercial zoning shall be no closer than one (1) mile to the nearest commerce center and no closer than one mile from the nearest PUD commercial zoning of ten acres or greater in size; The commercial parcel is greater than one mile from nearest commerce center and greater than one mile from nearest PUD commercial zoning of l O acres or greater. b. The configuration of the commercial parcel shall be no more frontage than depth unless otherwise authorized by the Board of County Commissioners; The configuration of the previously approved commercial portion of this PUD is 880feet (frontage) on Lake Trafford Road and approximately 750feet (depth) on the future right-of-way of the Carson Road Extension. This was approved at the BCC's discretion, based upon the fact that the greater frontage was primarily due to the easterly alignment of Carson Road Ext., at its intersection with Lake Trafford Road. This petitioner is requesting approximately 1450feet (frontage) on Lake Trafford Road and approximately 500feet (depth) on the future right-of- way of the Carson Road Extension. This requested frontage far exceeds the depth and therefore does not comply with these criteria, unless otherwise authorized bf.. the Board o_f Count~ Commissioners. The petitioner has indicated that the planning basis for the reconfiguration of the commercial area boundary has to do with the fact that the current PUD Master Plan left an unusable area between the southern boundary of the commercial tract and a wetland area identi.[ ~ ~" '- -'" .) the existing and proposed PUD Master Plans. Furthermore, a new wetland area has been identified to the west of the proposed commercial tract which also would have left an area with little utility between the boundary of the old commercial tract and the new wetland area. Therefore, the proposed reconfiguration of the commercial tract was designed to utilize area more efficiently for affordable housing and to provide more usable area for Multi-family Tr. acts 1 and 2 as can be seen on the proposed PUD Master Plan. ¢. Commercial zoning or development shall be no closer than a ¼ mile [1320'] from the nearest existing elementary school boundary; Measured from the closet edge of the property lines, the commercial tract is 1,400feet from Lake Trafford Elementary School site. d. No construction in the commercial designated area shall be allowed until 30% of the project has commenced construction unless otherwise authorized by the Board of County Commissioners. The developer of Arrowhead is requesting that this standard be modified to allow construction of commercial uses once 20% of the building permits have been issued for residential dwelling units, which will coincide with the first development phase. The planning justification for this, is that the closest commercial uses are 1 mile away from the Arrowhead PUD which will necessitate additional traffic on Lake Trafford Road to obtain goods and services, until Phase H undergoes development which could be for some time depending upon market conditions. Therefore, commercial uses to coincide with the development of Phase I will benefit project residents and have the potential to reduce traffic impacts. The developer has also had inquires from potential tenants at the present time which has the potential to bring additional jobs to the Immokalee area in addition to serving project residents and the general area. For the foregoing reasons the petitioner is requesting a lessening of the 30% standards to 20% or 250 dwelling units for the foregoing reasons. Based on the above analysis, the commercial component of this PUD does not meet criteria (b) and (d) of the Planned Unit Development Commercial District. Given the proposed justification for the use of discretion, allowed in criterion (b) and (d), the configuration of the commercial tract, and the proposed reduction to 20 percent of commencement of residential construction, may not be found to be consistent with the Im_mokalee Area Master Plan unless otherwise authorized by the BCC. Transportation Element - The Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) estimates the site-generated trips to be approximately 15,870 Average Daily Vehicle Trip Ends and 1,490 Weekday P.M. Peak Hour Trips at the proposed build-out in 2008. These site-generated trips will exceed 5% of the LOS "C" design volume on Lake Trafford Road and S.R. 29 after trip assignments are made. These road segments will also be operating below their adopted level of service standard during the peak season peak hour. However, the intersections in the vicinity of the site will continue under acceptable conditions. Turn lane improvements will be required and further defined at the time of site development plan approval JO L 3 0 2002 Pg. ~ ,,. The proposed PUD will only be in compliance with Policies 5.1 and 5.2, of the Transportation Element if the project is phased to insure that adequate levels of service are maintained on the local road network. The first phase will allow the construction of 300 multi-family and 300 single-family dwelling units or as many units as pem'fitted in order to maintain acceptable levels of service. The remaining units c.an only be developed when the site-generated traffic doesn't significantly impact a deficient road segment. Therefore, this petition is consistent with the standards referenced in the Transportation Element. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located within an area of historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. As a result, an Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment was previously prepared when the property was first rezoned to PUD. Based on this survey, an archaeological mound was discovered on the subject PUD and will be preserved in its entirety within the dedicated preserve area. In addition, an old vacant structure located on the site was previously determined not to be of historic significance. Therefore, this petition is consistent with the Land Development Code subject to Section 2.2.25.8.1 of the Land Development Code as follows. If during the course of site cleating, excavation or other construction activity a historic or archaeological artifact is found, all development within the minimum area necessary to protect the discovery shall be immediately stopped and the Collier County Code Enforcement Department contacted. EVALUATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL~ TRANSPORTATION & INFRASTRUCTURE: This petition was referred to all appropriate County agencies for their review. Since the project's Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was approved over five years ago, the petitioner was required to submit a revised EIS. As a result, this petition was presented to the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) on July 3, 2002. The EAC has recommended approval by a 6 to 0 vote subject to the following conditions: · This project shall be reviewed and approved by Collier County Stormwater Management Section prior to construction plans approval. ·This project must obtain a surface water management permit from the South Florida Water Management District. · Offsite flows going through the property shall be analyzed to make sure that there is sufficient capacity in the Fishbranch Creek and wetland to convey them. If the capacity is not adequate, improvements will be required to make sure that the upstream flows are properly conveyed through. The flows will be b~ed on the actual runoff of the lands and not on the culverts under Trafford Lake Road. This information shall be provided at the time of construction plan review. JUL 3 0 2002 5 i · Buffers shall be provided around wetlands, extending at least fifteen (15) feet landward from the edge of wetland preserves in all places and averaging twenty- five (25) feet from the landward edge of wetlands. Where natural buffers are not possible, structural buffers shall be provided in 'accordance with the State of Florida Environmental Resources Permit Rules and be subject to review and approval by Current Planning Environmental Staff. EVALUATION: Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and the criteria on which a favorable determination must be based. This evaluation is intended to provide an objective, comprehensive overview of the impact of the proposed land use change, be they positive or negative, culminating in a staff recommendation based on that overview. The listed criteria are specifically noted in Section 2.7.2.5 and Section 2.7.3.2.5 of the Land Development Code thus requiring staff evaluation and comment, and shall be used as a basis for a recommendation of approval or denial by the Planning Commission to the BCC. The evaluation by professional staff should typically include an analysis of the petition's relationship to the community's future land use plan, and whether or not a rezoning action would be consistent with the Collier County GMP in all of its related elements (See Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B"). Relationship to Future Land Uses: A discussion of this relationship, as it applies specifically to Collier County's legal basis for land use planning, refers to the relationship of the proposed zoning action to the Immokalee Area Master Plan. In the case at hand, and based upon the Immokalee Future Land Use map, we have an expectation that the land will be used and developed for a mix of residential land uses including single family, multi-family residential and commercial uses as currently authorized within the PUD. In addition, the proposed density of 4.26 units per acre is consistent with the Density Rating System. After considering the availability of community infrastructure and services it is clear that the development of the subject property is timely and consistent with the FLUE to the GMP. Relationship to Existing Land Uses: A discussion of this relationship concerns the compatibility with the adjacent properties to the north, south, east, and west. The petitioner's stated intent is to primarily construct mixed residential and commercial development within a master planned community that includes recreational amenities. In addition, the proposed amendment will reduce the maximum building height from 100 feet to 50 feet for the commercial tract and revising the commercial setback requirements in conformance to be in conformance with the currently approved requirements of the C-3 Zoning District as provided in the Collier County Land Development Code. As a result, staff is of the opinion that the proposed amendment will not adversely impact any of the consistency relationships that were approved when the project was rezoned to PUD. In addition, the proposed project as amended is compatible with the adjacent properties. JUL 3 O 2002 Utility Infrastructure - The site is accessible to the Immokalee Water Sewer District water and sewer facilities. At the time of construction plan submittal, the developer shall provide verification that the Immokalee Water Sewer District has approved the engineering construction documents. This amendment will not change or adversely impact the previous approval. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) a recommendation of approval of Petition PUDA-2002-AR-2491 subject to staff stipulations that are contained in the attached Ordinance. Based on staff review of the proposed changes to the commercial tract, the proposed amendment will be consistent with the PUD Commercial District of the Immokalee Area Master Plan subject to the Board of County Commissioners making the below referenced findings. · The configuration of the commercial parcel shall be no more frontage than depth unless otherwise authorized by the Board of County Commissioners; This petitioner is requesting more commercial frontage than depth and therefore does not comply with this criteria. The petitioner has indicated that the planning basis for the reconfiguration o_f the commercial area boundary has to do with the fact that the current PUD Master Plan le_ft an unusable area between the southern boundary o_f the commercial tract and a wetland area identified on both the existing and proposed PUD Master Plans. Therefore, the proposed. reconfiguration o_f the commercial tract was designed to utilize area more efficiently _for qffordable housing and to provide more usable area _for Multi- family Tracts ! and 2 as can be seen on the proposed PUD Master Plan. · No construction in the commercial designated area shall be allowed until 30% of the project has commenced construction unless otherwise authorized by the Board of County Commissioners. The developer of Arrowhead is requesting that this standard be modified to allow construction of commercial uses once 20% of the building permits have been issued for residential dwelling units, which will coincide with the first development phase. The planning justification for this, is that the closest commercial uses are 1 mile away from the Arrowhead PUD which will necessitate additional traffic on Lake Trafford Road to obtain goods and services, until Phase I! undergoes development which could be for some time depending upon market conditions. Therefore, commercial uses to coincide with the development of Phase I will benefit project residents and have the potential to reduce traffic impacts. The developer has also had inquires from potential tenants at the present time which has the potential to bring additional jobs to the Immokalee area in addition to serving project residents and the general area. For the foregoing reasons the petitioner is requesting a lessening of the 30% standards to 20°/60 or 250 dwelling units for the foregoing r~ ~,,,,~ .~ 7 JUL 3 0 2002 PREPARED BY: I~A.V'I~LLO'~§, CHIEF PLANNER DATE C~NT PLUG SECTION REVIEWED BY: /~USAN MURRAY, AICP, INTERIM DIRECTOR PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT APPROVED BY: // TOR D/A'I~ J~I~TY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS. Staff Report for the July 18, 2002 CCPC meeting. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: KENNETH L. ABERNATHY, CHAIRMAN RVB/rb/STAFF REPORT/AR-249 l JUL 3 0 2002 FINDINGS FOR PUD PUDA-01-AR-2491 Section 2.7.3.2.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code requires the Planning Commission to make a finding as to the PUD Master Plans' compliance with the following criteria: 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. Intensifying land development patterns produces economics of scale relative to public utilities, facilities and services, which are currently available in this area of Immokalee and Collier County. Development of land that has legal access, and is adjacent to existing residential and nonresidential development is particularly suitable for an affordable housing project. Conversely, existing neighboring residents may perceive the proposed increase in resident units as intensification near their neighborhood as contributing factors to increasing noise, blocking views and reducing property values. Jurisdictional reviews by County staff support the manner and pattern of development proposed for the subject property. Development conditions contained in the proposed Arrowhead PUD document give assurance that all infrastructures will be developed and are consistent with County regulations. Any inadequacies that require supplementing the PUD document will be recommended to the BCC as conditions of approval by staff. Recommended mitigation measures will assure compliance with LOS relationships as prescribed by the GMP. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Documents submitted with the application provide evidence of unified control. The PUD document makes appropriate provisions for continuing operation and maintenance of common areas. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). The subject petition has been found consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Immokalee Area Master Plan. The subject PUD proposes for a mix of residential dwelling types, which is consistent with the GMP (See Staff report). Exhibit "A" ~o.~.. ~ .~ t~l~ :]. JUL 3 O zOOZ ----- 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. The subject PUD provides a common architectural design and development standards. In addition, landscaping has been provided to buffer the adjacent residential and non- residential tracts. The PUD Master Plan has been designed to optimize internal land use relationship through the use of various forms of open space separation. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The amount of open space set aside by this project is consistent with the provisions of the Land Development Code. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. Thc proposed PUD petition will not adversely impact thc timing or sequence of development that is currently allowed under the existing PUD zoning. Furthermore, thc adopted concurrency requirements ensure that further LOS degradation is not allowed or thc LOS deficiency is corrected. Thc project shall be phased limiting thc residential development to not exceed 600 units in phase one. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. Ability, as applied in this context, implies supporting infrastructure such as wastewater disposal system, potable water supplies, characteristics of the property relative to hazards, and capacity of roads, is supportive of conditions emanating from urban development. 8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. This criterion essentially requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. The development standards in this PUD are similar to those development standards for cluster housing. FINDINGS FOR PUDZ-02-AR-2491/RVB/rb JUL 3 0 2002 2 ~ REZONE FINDINGS PETITION PUDA-01-AR-2491 Section 2.7.2.5. of the Collier County Land Development Code requires that the report and recommendations of the Planning Commission to the Board of County Commissioners shall show that the Planning Commission has studied and considered the prop. osed change in relation to the following, where applicable: 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives & policies of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan. Development Orders deemed consistent with all applicable elements of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Immokalee Area Master Plan and the Growth Management Plan (GMP) should be considered a positive relationship. The proposed development is in compliance with FLUE of the GMP. 2. The existing land use pattern; The adjacent uses include a Lands to the north are zoned "A" Agricultural and is partially developed with mobile homes. At the northwest comer of Lake Trafford Road and Carson Road is a commercial structure that is zoned C-3. In addition, the Lake Trafford Elementary School is on the north side of Lake Trafford Road. To the east is partially developed with mobile homes and is zoned "A-MHO" while to the south are vacant lands and zoned "A-MHO". (See Staff Report) 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts; The parcel is of sufficient size that it will not result in an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. It is also consistent with expected land uses by virtue of its consistency with the Immokalee Area Master Plan and the FLUE of the Growth Management Plan. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. The existing PUD district boundaries are logically drawn and they are consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. The proposed amendment will not change these boundaries. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. The Arrowhead PUD is appropriate based on the permitted land uses and compatibility with adjacent land uses. Furthermore, the subject PUD has a positive r~ Immokalee Area Master Plan and the GMP. EXHIBIT "B" JUL 3 0 2002 -- 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood; The proposed development standards (i.e. setbacks) made a condition of approval will go a long way towards offsetting any potential adverse influences 'and will not adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. Furthermore, the conditions for approval have been promulgated and designed to ensure the least amount of adverse impact on adjacent and nearby developments. Recommended mitigation (increased setbacks) should serve to ameliorate impact on the nearby residential area. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. Evaluation of this project took into account the requirement for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP and was found consistent subject to the phasing of the project as noted in the staff report. In the final analysis all rezone actions are subject to the Concurrency Management System. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem; The Land Development Code specifically addresses prerequisite development standards that are designed to reduce the risk of flooding on nearby properties. New development in and of itself is not supposed to increase flooding potential on adjacent property over and above what would occur without development. However, as urban intensification in the absence of commensurate improvement to inter-county drainage appurtenances may increase the risk of flooding in areas when the drainage outfall condition is inadequate. In summary, every project approved in Collier County involving the utilization of land for some land use activity is scrutinized and required to mitigate all sub-surface drainage generated by developmental activities as a condition of approval. This project was reviewed for drainage relationships and design and construction plans are required to meet County standards as a condition of approval. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas; All projects in Collier County are subject to the development standards that apply generally and equally to all zoning districts concerning the need to provide the required open space. The subject development standards are designed to ensure that light penetration and circulation of air does not adversely affect adjacent areas. JUL 3 0 2002 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area; Typically urban intensification increases the value of contiguous underutilized land. However, this is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results, which may be internal or external to the subject property that can affect property values. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning, however zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since value determination by law is driven by market value. The mere fact that a property is given a new zoning designation or amendment may or may not affect value. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations; The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in the zoning division of the LDC is that their sound application when combined with the administrative site development plan approval process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in a deterrence to improvement of adjacent property. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare; The proposed rezone to PUD complies with the Immokalee Area Master Plan and the Growth Management Plan, which is a public policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are consistent with said plans. In light of this fact the proposed amendment does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning; The subject property can be developed in accordance with the existing zoning, however to do so would deny this petitioner of the opportunity to maximize the development potential of the site as made possible by its consistency relationship with the Growth Management Plan. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County; The existing PUD and proposed amendment is designed in a manner that is compatible with surrounding property in size and scale. It is also consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. JUL 3 0 2002 15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. There are many sites, which are zoned to accommodate the proposed development. This is not the determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness of a rezoning decision. The determinants of zoning are consistency with all elements of the GMP, compatibility, adequacy of infrastructure and to some extent the timing of the action and all of the above criteria. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed, zoning classification. The extent of site alteration will be determined as a function of obtaining a Site Development Plan approval to execute the PUD's development strategy. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier Count), Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended. A multi-disciplined team responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP has reviewed this petition and they have found it consistent with the GMP. The conditions of approval have been incorporated into the PUD document. Staff reviews for adequacy of public services and levels of service determined that required infrastructure meets with GMP established relationships. REZONE FIND1NGS/02-AR-2491/RVB/rb JUL 3 0 2002 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR: PUD REZONE PUDZ-2002-AR-2491 Petition No.: Date Petition Received:_ PROJECT #2002050008 DATE: 5/9/02 Commission District: Planner Assigned: __ RAY BELLOWS ABOVE TO BE COMPLETED BY STAFF General Information: Name of Applicant(s) James E. Williams. Jr.. and Diane Williams Applicant's Mailing Address 1300 North 15 Street City Immokalee State FL Zip 34142 Applicant's Telephone # 941-594-8700 Fax # 941-596-4399 Name of Agent Robert L. Duane Finn Hole Montes, Inc. Agent's Mailing Address 950 Encore Way CityNaples State__FL Zip 34110 Agent's Telephone # 941-254-2000 Fax #__941-254-2099 COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT , PLANNING SERVICES/CURRENT PLANNING 2800 N. HORSESHOE DRIVE-NAPLES, FL 34104 PHONE (941) 403-2400/FAX (941) 643-6968 JUL 3 0 2002 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 10/98 P8 -- PAGt Complete the following for all Association(s) affiliated with this petition. (Provide additional sheets if necessary) Name of Homeowner Association: N/A Mailing Address City State ~ Zip. Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address City State __ Zip Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address City State __ Zip Name of Master Association: N/A Mailing Address City State ~ Zip Name of Civic Association: Immokalee Chamber of Commerce Mailing Address 907 Roberts Ave. City Immokalee State FL Zip 34142 2. Disclosure of Interest Information: a. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary). Name and Address Percentage of Ownership James E. Williams Jr. & Diane Williams 100% Tenants by the entirety JUL 3 0 2002 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE- 10/98 lag. '~_~/'~- PAGE .... b. If the properly is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each. Name and Address, and Office Percentage of Stock c. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. Name and Address Percentage of Interest d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership e. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership MDG Capital Corporation William Klohn, President Patrick McCuan, Vice President WM Klohn 1996 IRREV Trust 50% MDG Companies of Naples 50% 2180 Immokalee Road, Ste 308 (for all above entities) JUL 3 0 2002 Naples, FL 34110 Date of Contract:__Jul¥ 15, 20 1 f. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional p: individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust. APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PIID REZONE - 10/98 PAGE 3 OF 16 Name and Address N/A g. Date subject property acquired ( ) leased ( ): Term 9f lease yrs./mos. If, Petitioner has contract.op6oa-to buy, indicate date of contract opt4o~: 7/15/01 and Date option terminates: , or anticipated closing date 9/10/02. h. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. 3. Detailed legal description of the property, covered by the application: (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page.) If request involves change to more than one zoning district, include separate legal description for property involved in each district. Applicant shall submit four (4) copies of a recent survey (completed within the last six months, maximum 1" to 400' scale) if required to do so at the pre-application meeting. NOTE: The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If questions arise concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed survey may be required. A Portion of Section: 6 Township: __47 Range: 29 AND Section: 31 Township: 46 Range: 29 Lot: N/A Block: Subdivision: Plat Book Page #:__ Property I.D.#:00072520000 & 00132680107 Metes & Bounds Description: See Attached Legal Description 4. Size of orooertv: + 27,000 ft. X + 46,200 ft. = Total Sq. Ft. 13,390,344 Acres 307.4 5. Address/general location of subject property:. Comer of Lake Trafford Road and the proposed Carson Road Extension, in Immokalee Florida JUL 3 0 2002 APPLICATION FOR PLBL1C HEARING FOR PUD REZONE- 10/98 i~. PAGE 4 OF 16 6. Adjacent zoning and land use: Zoning Land use N A & C-3 Agricultural & Commercial with ST/WS4, ST/WS3, ST/WS2. & ST/WS 1 Overlays S A-MHO Agricultural with Mobile Home Overlay E A-MHO & VR Agricultural with Mobile Home Overlay with ST/WS 1, ST/WS2, & ST/WS3 Overlays W A-MHO Agricultural with Mobile Home Overlay Does the owner of the subject property own property contiguous to the subject property.9 If so, give complete legal description of entire contiguous property. (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page). Section: N/A Township: Range: Lot: Block: Subdivision: Plat Book Page #:__ Property I.D.#: Metes & Bounds Description: 7. Rezone Request: This application is requesting a rezone from the PUD zoning district(s) to the PUD zoning district(s) with ST/WS24 ST/WS3 ST/WS4 Overlays. Present Use of the Property: Vacant- Cow pasture & single family house (employee house) and accessory structures- see aerials Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property:_Residential - Single Family & Multi- family and Commercial C-3 District Uses with some variations 8. Evaluation Criteria: Pursuant to Section 2.7.2.5 and Sec. 2.7.3.2.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code, staff's analysis and recommendation to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission's recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners shall be based upon consideration of the applicable crite 'm Provide a narrative statement describing the rezone request with specific APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE ~ 10/98 JUL 3 0 2002 PAGE OF 16 criteria noted below. Include any backup materials and documentation in support of the request. Standard Regone Considerations (LDC Section 2. 7.2.5) 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and future land use map and the elements of the growth management plan. 2. The existing land use pattern. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property for the proposed change. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment (rezone) necessary. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular trqffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. ! O. Whether the proposed change will seriously affect property values in the adjacent area. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. 15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proI~osed u? in districts already permitting such use. .APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE-10198 JUL 3 0 2002 PAGE 6"OF 16 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. ! 7. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County growth management plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch. 106, art. II], as amended 18.Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the board of county commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. PUD Re;one Considerations (LDC Section 2. 7.3.2.$) 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the county attorney. 3. Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the growth management plan. 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. 8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications of justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. however, many communities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish ~ I APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE-10/98 JUL 3 '0 2002 civic or property owners association in the area for which this use is being requested in order to ascertain whether or not the request is affected by existing deed restrictions. 10. Previous land use petitions on the subject property: To your knowledge, has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? If so, what was the nature of that hearing? N/A 11. Additional Submittal requirements: In addition to this completed application, the following shall be submitted in order for your application to be deemed sufficient, unless otherwise waived during the pre-application meeting. a. A copy of the pre-application meeting notes; b. If this rezone is being requested for a specific use, provide fifteen (15) copies of a 24" x 36" conceptual site plan [and one reduced 8lA'' x 11" copy of site plan], drawn to a maximum scale of 1 inch equals 400 feet, depicting the following [Additional copies of the plan may be requested upon completion of staff evaluation for distribution to the Board and various advisory boards such as the Environmental Advisory Board (EAB), or CCPC]; · all existing and proposed structures and the dimensions thereof, ·provisions for existing and/or proposed ingress and egress (including pedestrian ingress and egress to the site and the structure(s) on site), all existing and/or proposed parking and loading areas [include matrix indicating required and provided parking and loading, including required parking for the disabled], · required yards, open space and preserve areas, · proposed locations for utilities (as well as location of existing utility services to the site), · proposed and/or existing landscaping and buffering as may be required by the County, a. An architectural rendering of any proposed structures. b. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), as required by Section 3.8. of the Land Development Code (LDC), or a request for waiver if appropriate. c. Whether or not an EIS is required, two copies of a recent aerial photograph, (taken within the previous twelve months), minimum scale of one inch equals 400 feet, shall be submitted. Said aerial shall identify plant and/or wildlife habitats and their boundaries. Such identification shall be consistent with Florida Dep.~t,,,~&llt0a Transportation Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System. Add tionill~y, a ~ ~ calculation of the acreage (or square feet) of native vegetation on site, by ~rea, ancl a "' APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE-10,98 .JUL 3 0 2002 :! PAGE 80F Pi. ~'~ / calculation and location(s) of the required portion of native vegetation to be preserved (per LDC Section 3.9.5.5.4.). d. Statement of utility provisions (with all required attachments and sketches); e. A Traffic Impact Statement (TIS), unless waived at the pre-application meeting; f. A historical and archeological survey or waiver application if property is located within an area of historical or archaeological probability (as identified at pre- application meeting); 5t. Any additional requirements as may be applicable to specific conditional uses and identified during the pre-application meeting, including but not limited to any required state or federal permits. JUL 3 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 10/98 Pg. PAGE 9 TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT (TIS): A TIS is required unless waived at the pre-application meeting. The TIS required may be either a major or minor as determined at the pre-application meeting. Please note the following with regard to TIS submittals: MINOR TIS: Generally required for rezone requests for property less than 10 acres in size, although based on the intensity or unique character of a petition, a major TIS may be required for petition of ten acres or less. MAJOR TIS: Required for all other rezone requests. A minor TIS shall include the following: 1. Trip Generation: Annual Average Daily Traffic (at build-out) Peak Hour (AADT) Peak Season Daily Traffic Peak Hour (PSDT) 2. Trip Assignment: Within Radius of Development Influence (RDI) 3. Existing Traffic: Within RDI AADT Volumes PSDT Volumes Level of Service (LOS) 4. Impact of the proposed use on affected major thoroughfares, including any anticipated changes in level of service (LOS). 5. Any proposed improvements (to the site or the external right-of-way) such as providing or eliminating an ingress/egress point, or providing turn or decel lanes or other improvements. 6. Describe any proposal to mitigate the negative impacts on the transportation system. 7. For Rezones Only: State how this request is consistent with the applicable policies of the Traffic Circulation Element(TCE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP), including policies 1.3, 1.4, 4.4, 5.1,5.2, 7.2 and 7.3. A Major TIS shall address all of the items listed above (for a Minor TIS, and shall also include an analysis of the following: 1. Intersection Analysis 2. Background Traffic 3. Future Traffic 4. Through Traffic 5. Planned/Proposed Roadway Improvements ....- 6. Proposed Schedule (Phasing) of Development blo._%~'~'-A I~ JUL 3 0 2002 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 10/98 i~ TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT (TIS) STANDARDS: The following standards shall be used in preparing a TIS for submittal in conjunction with a conditional use or rezone petition: :1.. Trip Generation: Provide the total traffic generated by the project for each link within the project's Radius of Development Influence (RDI) in conformance with the acceptable traffic engineering principles. The rates published in the latest edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Report shall be used unless documentation by the petitioner or the County justifies the use of alternative rates. 2. Trip Assignment: Provide a map depicting the assigmnent to the network, of those trips generated by the proposed project. The assignment shall be made to all links within the RDI. Both annual average and peak seasonal traffic should be depicted. 3. Existing Traffic: Provide a map depicting the current traffic conditions on all links within the RDI. The AADT, PSDT, and LOS shall be depicted for all links within the RDI. 4. Level of Service (LOS): The LOS of a roadway shall be expressed in terms of the applicable Collier County Generalized Daily Service Volumes as set forth in the TCE of the GMP. 5. Radius of Development Influence (RDI): The TIS shall cover the least of the following two are as: an area as set forth below; or, the area in which traffic assignments from the proposed project on the major thoroughfares exceeds one percent of the LOS "C". Land Use Distance Residential 5 Miles or as required by DRI Other (commercial, industrial, institutional, etc.) 0 - 49, 999 Sq. Ft. 2 Miles 50,000 - 99, 999 Sq. Ft. 3 Miles 100,000 - 199, 999 Sq. Ft. 4 Miles 200,000 - 399, 999 Sq. Ft 5 Miles 400,000 & up 5 Miles In describing the RDI the TIS shall provide the measurement in road miles from the proposed project rather than a geometric radius. 6. Intersection Analysis: An intersection analysis is required for all intersections within the RDI where the sum of the peak-hour critical lane volume is projected to exceed 1,200 Vehicles Per Hour (VPH). nc_.,ranoA ~ APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE-10/98 JUL 3 0 2002 ._-91 7. Background Traffic: The effects of previously approved but undeveloped or partially developed projects which may affect major thoroughfares within the RDI of the proposed ~"~ project shall be provided. This information shall be depicted on a map or, alternatively, in a listing of those projects and their respective characteristics. 8. Future Traffic: An estimate of the effects of traditional increases in traffic resulting from potential development shall be provided. Potential development is that which may be developed maximally under the effective Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and the Collier County Land Development Code. This estimate shall be for the projected development areas within the projects RDI. A map or list of such lands with potential traffic impact calculations shall be provided. 9. Through Traffic: At a minimum, increases in througb~ traffic shall be addressed through the year 2015. The methodology used to derive the estimates shall be provided. It may be desirable to include any additional documentation and backup data to support the estimation as well. 10. Planned/Proposed Roadway Improvements: All proposed or planned roadway improvements located within the RDI should be identified. A description of the funding commitments shall also be included. 11. Proiect Phasing,: When a project phasing schedule is dependent upon proposed roadway improvements, a phasing schedule may be included as part of the TIS. If the traffic impacts of a project are mitigated through a phasing schedule, such a phasing schedule may be made a condition of any approval. TIS FORM RVB/RJM 10/17/97 JUL 3 0 201)2 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 10/98 PAGE 1~' OF 16 STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS FOR PUD REZONE REQUEST NAME OF APPLICANT: James E. Willams Jr. and Diane Williams 2. MAILING ADDRESS: 1300 North 15 Street City Immokalee State FL Zip 34142 3. ADDRESS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY (IF AVAILABLE): N/A 4. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A Portion of Section: 6 Township: 47 Range: 29 AND Section: 31 Township: 46 Range: 29 Lot: N/A Block: Subdivision: Plat Book Page #:__ Property I.D.#:00072520000 & 00132680107 Metes & Bounds Description: See Attached Legal Description 5. TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED (Check applicable system): a. COUNTY UTILITY SYSTEM [] b. CITY UTILITY SYSTEM ¢. FRANCHISED UTILITY SYSTEM [] PROVIDE NAME d. PACKAGE TREATMENT PLANT [~] (GPD capacity). e. SEPTIC SYSTEM 6. TYPE OF WATER SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED: a. COUNTY UTILITY SYSTEM CITY UTILITY SYSTEM c. FRANCHISED UTILITY SYSTEM PROVIDE NAME d. PRIVATE SYSTEM (WELL) 7. TOTAL POPULATION TO BE SERVED:2985 persons (1194 units x 2.5 Persons Der ani JUL 3 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 10/98 PAGE 13 DF~" 16~. !'~ 8. PEAK AND AVERAGE DAILY DEMANDS: A. WATER-PEAK 911 GPM AVERAGE DAILY 304 GPM B. SEWER-PEAK 729 GPM AVERAGE DAILY 221 GPM 9. IF PROPOSING TO BE CONNECTED TO COLLIER COUNTY REGIONAL WATER SYSTEM, PLEASE PROVIDE THE DATE SERVICE IS EXPECTED TO BE REQUIRED: N/A. 10. NARRATIVE STATEMENT: Provide a brief and concise narrative statement and schematic drawing of sewage treatment process to be used as well as a specific statement regarding the method of affluent and sludge disposal. If percolation ponds are to be used, then percolation data and soil involved shall be provided from tests prepared and certified by a professional engineer. 11. COLLIER COUNTY UTILITY DEDICATION STATEMENT: If the project is located within the services boundaries of Collier County's utility service system, written notarized statement shall be provided agreeing to dedicate to Collier County Utilities the water distribution and sewage collection facilities within the project area upon completion of the construction of these facilities in accordance with all applicable County ordinances in effect at the at time. This statement shall also include an agreement that the applicable system development charges and connection fees will be paid to the County Utilities Division prior to the issuance of building permits by the County. If applicable, the statement shall contain shall contain an agreement to dedicate the appropriate utility easements for serving the water and sewer systems. 12. STATEMENT OF AVAILABILITY CAPACITY FROM OTHER PROVIDERS: Unless waived or otherwise provided for at the pre-application meeting, if the project is to receive sewer or potable water services from any provider other than the Count', a statement from that provider indicating that there is adequate capacity to serve the project shall be provided. Utilit3' Provision Statement RJM 10/17/97 JUL 3 0 2002 Pt. PAGE 14:712 PUD REZONE APPLICATION SUBMITTAL CHECKI,IST THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION PACKET! REQUIREMENTS # or Noir COPIES REQUIRED REQUIRED 1. Completed Application 17 17 2. Copy of Deed(s) and list identifying Owner(s) and all 2 2 Partners if a Corporation 3. Completed Owner/Agent Affidavit, Notarized 2 2 4. Pre-application notes/minutes 17 17 5. Conceptual Site Plans 17 17 6. Environmental Impact Statement- (EIS) 4 4 7. Aerial Photograph - (with habitat areas identified) 4 4 8. Completed Utility Provisions Statement (with required 4 4 attachments and sketches) 9. Traffic Impact Statement- (TIS) 4 4 10. Historical & Archaeological Survey or Waiver 4 Application 11. Copies of State and/or Federal Permits 4 N/A 12. Architectural Rendering of Proposed Structure(s) 4 N/A 13. Application Fee and Data Conversion Fee Check shall _ $3315.00 be made payable to Collier County Board of Commissioners 14. Other Requirements- As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. Agent/Applicant Signature Date JUL 3 0 21)02 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 10/98 U3426/02 ~['£ 15:07 F~X 19412542~ HOLE ~ONTES ~007 AFFIDAVIT We~I, ,lames E. Williams Jr. and Diane Williams being first duly sworn, depose and say that we/I am/are the owners of the prol~erly described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing; that all the answers to the questions in this app!ication~ including the disclosure of interest information, all sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application, are honest and true to the best of our knowledge and belief We/I understand that the information requested on this application must be complete and accurate and that the content of this form, whether computer generated or County printed shall not be altered Public hearings will not be advertised until this application is deemed complete, and all required information has been submitted. As property owner We~I further authorize Robert L. Duane to act as our/my representative in any matters re~,arding this Petition. ~arure of Property Owner /,~/ ' Signature of Property Owner . i t'i;x..~: ~_ C,L~ / /,,~-,,~ ',.Ir-' ~" Typed or Printed Name of Owner Typed or Printed Name of Owner The/fpregoing instr/u~ent was/~acknowledged before me this /f'J~ day of/~~ ,2002, byt,.~ad'/~/ ~__ }d~/~ ~ who is personally ~own to me or has pro~ed ...... ~ as iden~ficaffon. State of Florida (~ure of Nota~ Public - State of Coun~ of Collier APPI.ICATIIO,N FOR PUBLIC .I;I. EAI~I~G FOg Eg[D ~EZONZ - 10~ ORDINANCE NO. 02-__ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 91-102 THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH INCLUDES THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS MAPS NUMBERED 6931N, AND 7906N BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM "PUD" PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO "PUD" PLANNED LrN1T DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS ARROWHEAD PUD LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT OF THE INTERSECTION OF LAKE TRAFFORD ROAD (C.R. 890) AND CARSON ROAD, IN SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 307.3+ ACRES; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 91-44; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Robert L. Duane, of Hole Montes, Inc., representing James and Diane Williams, Jr., petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that: SECTION ONE: The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Section 31, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from Planned Unit Development (PUD) to "PUD" Planned Unit Development in accordance with the Arrowhead PUD Document, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference herein. The Official Zoning Atlas Maps numbered 6931N and 7906N, as described in Ordinance Number 91-102, the Collier County Land Development Code, are hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO: Ordinance Number 91-44, known as the Arrowhead PUD, adopted on May 28, 1991 by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, is hereby repealed in its entirety. SECTION THREE: This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this __ day of ,2002. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ATTEST: BY: JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK JUL3021]02 I ARROWHEAD PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PREPARED BY: HOLE MONTES, INC. 950 ENCORE WAY NAPLES, FLORIDA 34110 HM PROJECT 2001106 APRIL, 2002 REVISED JUNE 6, 2002 REVISED JULY 1, 2002 Date Reviewed by CCPC: Date Approved by BCC: Ordinance No. A Amendments & Repeals ~A ~ JUL 3 0 2002 F:~PUD Documents~ARROWHEAD2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 'i L TABLE OF CONTENTS Page SECTION I STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE .................................................................... 3 SECTION II PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, LEGAL DESCRIPTION, SHORT TITLE AND STATEMENT OF UNIFIED CONTROL ........................................................... 5 SECTION III PROJECT DEVELOPMENT .............................................................................. 7 SECTION IV PERMITTED USES AND DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ..................................................................... 9 SECTION V OPEN SPACE AREA ....................................................................................... 12 SECTION VI PRESERVE AREA REQUIREMENTS ........................................................... 14 SECTION VII COMMERCIAL AREA REQUIREMENTS .................................................... 15 SECTION VIII DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS .............................................................. 18 EXHIBITS EXHIBIT A - PUD MASTER PLAN EXHIBIT B - LEGAL DESCRIPTION JUL 3 0 2002 F:LPUD DocumentsLa, RROWHEAD2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 4 SECTION I STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE The development of approximately 307.3 acres of property in Section 6, Township 47 South, Range 29 East, and Section 31, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida, as a Planned Unit Development to be known as the Arrowhead PUD, will be in compliance with the goals, objectives, and policies of Collier County as set forth in the Growth Management Plan. The residential and commercial components of the project will be consistent with the growth policies, land development regulations and applicable comprehensive planning objectives of each of the elements of the Growth Management Plan for the following reasons: 1.1 The total site area comprises 307.3 acres of which 274 acres are located in the Low Residential District on the Immokalee Future Land Use Map in the Immokalee Area Master Plan. Within the Low Residential District fifteen acres are proposed for commercial use. Therefore, the Low Residential District that permits up to four dwelling units per acre, allows up to 1,245 dwelling units on 259 acres. 33.3 acres of the subject property are also located in the Neighborhood Center District on the Immokalee Future Land Use Map. Residential development within the Neighborhood Center District permits a maximum density of twelve units per gross acre within the Neighborhood Center District. The Neighborhood Center, therefore, can support a total of 400 dwelling units as provided for in the Future Land Use Element of the Immokalee Area Master Plan. The total permitted dwelling units for the subject property, therefore, is 1,436 dwelling units based on 259 acres located in the Low Density Residential District and 33.3 acres located within the Neighborhood Center District as depicted on the Immokalee Future Land Use Map. The proposed 1,245 dwelling units, therefore, maybe found consistent with the Immokalee Master Plan at a gross density of 4.3 dwelling units per acre. 1.2 The fifteen (15) acres proposed for commercial use along with proposed C-2, C-3 and C- 4 Uses is consistent with planned Unit Development Commercial District of the Immokalee Area Master Plan other criteria in this District allows for such uses and up to 20 acres in Commercial Use for residential projects in excess of three hundred (300) acres. The proposed commercial uses and area allocated for commercial use therefore, is consistent with the Immokalee Area Master Plan. 1.3 The subject property's location in relation to the existing or proposed community facilities and services supports the development's residential density as required in Objective 2 of the Future Land Use Element. 1.4 The proposed development is compatible with and complementary to existing and future surrounding land uses as required in Policy 5.4 of the Future Land Use Element. JUL 3 0 2002 F:~PUD DocurncntsLARROWHEAD2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 1.5 Improvements are planned to be in compliance with applicable land development regulations as set forth in Objective 3 of the Future Land Use Element. 1.6 The proposed development will result in an efficient and economical extension of community facilities and services as required in Policy 3.1.G of the Future Land Use Element. 1.7 The project is planned to incorporate natural systems for water management purpose in accordance with their natural functions and capabilities as required by Objective 1.5 of the Drainage Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element. 1.8 The Immokalee Area Master Plan requires in Policy 11.1.2 that Collier County shall closely coordinate the location, timing, intensity and design of future development. This policy shall be implemented through the County's Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. The Arrowhead PUD will comply with this requirement. 1.9 The Immokalee Area Master Plan Policy 11.1.3 requires land use transitions between lower and higher intensity of uses shall be achieved through use of natural vegetation open space buffers, physical barriers such as berms, hedges, or other landscape cover setbacks and height limitations as described in the zoning and landscape sections of the LDC. The Arrowhead PUD is consistent with this policy through the transition in uses depicted on the PUD Master Plan Exhibit "A" along with the distribution of open space and buffer areas. 1.10 All final development orders for this project are subject to the Collier County Concurrency Management System, as implemented by the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance in Division 3.15 of the Land Development Code and further required by Policy 2.3 of the Future Land Use Element. F:XPUDDocumentsL~_RROWHEAD2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 .~ JUL 3 0 2002 SECTION II PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, LEGAL DESCRIPTION, SHORT TITLE AND STATEMENT OF UNIFIED CONTROL 2.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the location and ownership of the property, and to describe the existing conditions of the property proposed to be developed under the project name of Arrowhead PUD. 2.2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION The subject property being approximately 307.3 acres is described in Exhibit B. 2.3 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP The subject property is currently under the ownership of James E. Williams, Jr., and Diane Williams, 1300 North 15th St., Immokalee, Florida 33934. 2.4 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AREA The subject property lies in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Lake Trafford Road and the planned extension of Carson Road, Immokalee, Florida. It is located in Section 31, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, and Section 6, Township 47 South, Range 29 East. 2.5 PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION The existing site is utilized for cattle grazing and is punctuated with natural cypress and water features which will be preserved and conserved as part of the PUD development. 2.6 PROJECT DESCRIPTION As an overview, Arrowhead is to be a + 307.3 acres, 1,245 unit moderately priced, readily definable neighborhood. A variety of housing types, ranging from single family dwellings and multi-family housing, is planned. The overall project will include recreational facilities and commercial uses. This development will also incorporate natural features. 2.7 SHORT TITLE This ordnance shall be known and cited and the "The Arrowhead Planned Unit Development Ordinance". JUL 3 0 2002 F:XPUD Documents~a~,RO~EAD2P~.doc 7/10/2002 2.8 STATEMENT OF UNIFIED CONTROL This statement represents that the current property owner has land under unified control for the purpose of obtaining PUD zoning on the subject property. 6 JUI_ 3 0 2002 F:~PUD DocumentsXARROWHEAD2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 SECTION III PROJECT DEVELOPMENT 3.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to delineate and generally describe the plan of development, the respective land uses of the tracts included in the project, as well as the project criteria for the Arrowhead Planned Unit Development. 3.2 GENERAL A. Regulations for development of Arrowhead shall be in accordance with the contents of this document. Section 2.2.20 PUD-Planned Unit Development District and other applicable sections of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) and the Growth Management Plan, and all other applicable Land Development Regulations in effect at the time building permits are requested. B. Unless otherwise noted, the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set forth in the Collier County LDC in effect at the time building permits are requested. C. All conditions imposed and all graphic material presented depicting development for Arrowhead shall become part of this regulation which governs the manner in which the PUD site may be utilized. 3.3 PROJECT PLAN AND LAND USE TRACTS A. The project Master Plan, including layout of streets and land use of the various tracts, is illustrated graphically in Exhibit "A". There shall be three multi-family land use tracts, a single family area and a commercial area plus necessary water management lakes, street right-of-way, open space and recreational areas. TABLE 1 USE ACRES Residential 140.5 Single Family 436* Dwelling Units 76.7 Multifamily 809 Dwelling Units 63.8 Community Park 1.2 Commercial 15.0 Lakes 29.9 Right of Way 33.6 Wetland Preserve 47.8 ,~A Upland Preserve 12.7 7 JUL 3 0 2002 F'APUD Documents~RROWHEAD2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 Upland Buffer 14.5 Open Space 12.1 Total +307.3 *The number of single family units may be increased with a corresponding reduction in the number of multi-family units and area provided for this dwelling unit type. 3.4 MAXIMUM PROJECT DENSITY A maximum of 1,245 residential dwelling units; single-family, and multi-family shall be constructed or placed in the total project area. The gross project area for residential use is 292.3 acres. The gross project density, therefore, will be a maximum of 4.03 dwelling units per gross residential acre less the commercial area comprising fifteen (15) acres. 3.5 PROJECT PLAN APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS Prior to the development of any tract, this project is required to obtain preliminary plat approval pursuant to the requirements of Division 3.2 titled Subdivisions of the LDC, and then, detailed construction plans and plat shall be approved for the overall project infrastructure to serve each tract. Once the plat and plans for the overall project infrastructure are approved, a site development plan, pursuant to Division 3.3 titled Site Development Plans of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC), shall be submitted for any development of a platted tract which will not be further subdivided. If a platted tract is to be further subdivided, then that tract will be required to go through the PSP process and construction plans and plat, pursuant to Division 3.2 of the LDC. A. The developer of any tract or parcel or separately defined portion, thereof, shall be required to submit and receive approval of a Site Development Plan in conformance with the requirements established within Division 3.3 titled Site Development Plans of the LDC, prior to the submittal of a final site plan for any portion of the multi-family or commercial tracts. B. Dedication and Maintenance of Common Facilities. All common facilities including open space, recreational, conservation/preservation and/or archeological areas will be dedicated to one or more homeowners associations or master association for the purpose of ownership, maintenance and/or disposition to public agencies. JUL 3 0 2002 F:~PUD Documents~RROWHEAD2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 pg. SECTION IV PERMITTED USES AND DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 4.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to identify specific development standards for areas designated residential on the PUD Master Plan Exhibit "A". 4.2 MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS The number of single family dwelling units allowed within the PUD shall be as follows: Four hundred and thirty six (436) single family dwelling units and eight hundred and nine (809) multi-family dwelling units, however, the number of single family units may be increased with a corresponding reduction in the number of multi-family units and land area allocated for multi-family land use. 4.3 Permitted Uses and Structures No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or part, for other than the following: A. Principal Uses: 1. Single family detached dwellings 2. Zero-lot line dwellings 3. Two-family and duplex dwellings 4. Single family attached and townhouse dwellings 5. Multi-family dwellings, including garden apartments 6. Any other housing type which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and which the Development Services Director determines to be compatible with residential uses. B. Accessory Uses and Structures 1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with principal residential uses permitted in this District, including recreational facilities, maintenance facilities, signs and water management facilities and similar kinds of uses JUL 3 0 2002 F:XPUD Documents~ARROWHEAD2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 ~ 4.4 Development Standards TABLE 1 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL AREAS PERMITTED USES SINGLE ZERO TWO ~INGLE MULTI- AND STANDARDS FAMILY LOT FAMILY FAMILY FAMILY DETACHED LINE & ATTACHED DWELLING DUPLEX AND TOWNHOUSE Minimum Lot Areas 6,000 S.F. 3,500 3,500 3,000 S.F. per 1 AC S.F. S.F.°) d.u. Minimum Lot Width (2) 40 30 45 30 N/A Front Yard 20(4) 15 15 20 20 Side Yard (3) 6.0 0 or 12°) 0 or 6 0 or 12°) 0 or .5 BH Rear Yard Principal 25 *6 25 25 25 25 Rear Yard Accessory 10 *7 10 10 10 10 Maximum Building 35 35 35 35 35 Height Distance Between N/A N/A N/A 10 .5 BH Structures Floor Area Min. (SF) 1000 1000 1000 1000 450*See note #5 All distances are in feet unless otherwise noted. BH = Building Height Notes 1. Each half of a duplex unit requires a lot area allocation of thirty-five hundred (3,500) square feet for a total minimum lot area of seven thousand (7,000) square feet. 2 Minimum lot width may be reduced by twenty (20) percent for cul-de-sac lots or lots located on curvilinear streets provided the minimum lot area is still maintained. 3. Where the zero (0) foot yard option is utilized, the opposite side of the structure shall have a twelve (12) foot sideyard. 4. Single-family dwellings, which provide for two (2) parking spaces within an enclosed garage and provide for guest parking other than private driveways may reduce front yard requirements to five (5) feet for the garage and fifteen (15) feet for the remaining structures. Side entry garage setbacks may be reduced to twelve (12) feet. 5. The minimum unit size for an efficiency units is 450 S.F., 600 S. F. for one bedroom units, and 750 S.F. for two bedroom units. F:~PUD DocumentsLARROWHEAD2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 J U L 3 0 2002 6. Rear yard requirements abutting preserve area twenty-five (25) feet. 7. Rear yard requirements for accessory structures abutting preserve area ten (10) feet. A. Building height shall be the vertical distance from the first finished floor to the highest point of the roof surface of a flat or Bermuda roof, to the deck line or a mansard roof and to the mean height level between eaves and ridge of gable, hip and gambrel roofs. Accessory buildings shall be limited to twenty-five (25) feet above grade. B. Development of individual tracts has not been finalized at the time of rezoning with respect to the particular type of residential dwellings. The location and mixture thereof will be based upon the following factors as are deemed appropriate by the Development Services Director for the harmonious development of each tract with a minimum of interference between different housing types based on the following criteria. 1. Physical separation of housing types into discrete areas. 2. Landscape or constructed barriers between different housing types meeting at a minimum the standards of Division 2.4, Landscaping of the Collier County Land Development Code. 3. Separation of housing types by common amenities. 11 JUL 3 0 2002 F:~PUD DocumentsXARROWHEAD2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 '~ SECTION V OPEN SPACE AREA 5.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the development plan and development standards for the areas as designated on Exhibit "A", the PUD Master Plan, for open space. The primary function and purpose of these areas will be to provide aesthetically pleasing open areas and recreational facilities. These areas comprise 12.1 acres and are in addition to preserve areas depicted on the PUD Master Plan. 5.2 USES PERMITTED No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Principal Uses: 1. Open Space 2. Nature trails/paths or other similar facilities constructed for purposes or access to or passage throughout the PUD. 3. Shuffleboard courts, tennis courts, swimming pools, open play areas, and other types of uses and facilities intended for outdoor use and/or recreation (i.e., recreational building). 5.3 DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS A. Overall site design shall be harmonious in terms of landscaping, enclosure of structures or areas, location of access streets, pedestrian ways and/or parking areas and location and treatment of buffer areas. B. Buildings should be setback a minimum of fifty (50) feet abutting residential tracts and a landscaped and maintained natural buffer shall be provided. C. Playground/recreational equipment shall be setback twenty (20) feet from any perimeter or lot line. D. Lighting facilities shall be arranged in a manner which will protect roadways and neighboring properties from direct glare or other interference. E. Maximum Height: 12 JUL 3 0 2002 F:LPUD Documents~RROWHEAD2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 'I 1. Principal Structures - Twenty-five (25) feet. 2. Accessory Structures - Twenty (20) feet 5.4 MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQU .II.~EMENTS As required by Division 2.3 Off-Street Parking and Loading of the LDC. 13 Jk3 L 3 {3 21302 F:~PUD DocumentskARROWHEAU2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 '" SECTION VI PRESERVE AREA REQUIREMENTS 6.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to identify development standards for the Preserve Areas as shown on Exhibit "A", PUD Master Plan. 6.2 PERMITTED USES The PUD Master Plan provides for a total of seventy five (75) acres of Preserve Area or 24.4% of the total project area distributed as follows: 47.8 acres are contained in a wetland preserve area, 12.7 acres in upland preserve area, and 14.5 acres in upland buffer areas. Minor adjustments may be made to the boundaries of preserve areas based on wetland permitting considerations. No building, structure or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in ~vhole or part, for other than the following structures: A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures: 1. Passive recreation areas. 2. Biking, hiking, nature trails, and boardwalks. 3. Water management structures. 4. Native preserves and wildlife sanctuaries. 5. Supplemental landscape planting, screening and buffering within the Preserve Areas, a~er that appropriate environmental review. B. Any other use deemed comparable in nature by the Development Services Director. 14 JUL 3 0 2002 F:~PUD DocumentsX. ARROWHEAD2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 ~ ~"P~'· , __ SECTION VII COMMERCIAL AREA REQUIREMENTS 7.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to identify specific development standards for the area designated commercial on Exhibit "A" the PUD Master Plan. This commercial component is intended to serve as a commercial general shopping center permitting a range of shopping and personal services to the surrounding area. 7.2 MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY The maximum allowable commercial square footage is 130,680 sq. fl. of gross leasable area on fifteen acres of which 1.4 acres is included in buffer area. The maximum site coverage by principal structures, accessory structures or outside sales area shall not exceed twenty (20) percent of the area designated for commercial use on the PUD Master Plan Exhibit "A". The applicable Collier County Zoning Districts used as the basis of this commercial component are the permitted uses in the C-2, C-3, and C-4 Districts of the LDC with development standards generally provided for from the C-3 District. 7.3 USES PERMITTED No building, structure, or part, thereof, or outside sales area, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Permitted Uses: 1. All permitted uses in the C-2, C-3, and C-4 Zoning Districts of the LDC in effect as of the date of adoption of this ordinance. B. Accessory Uses: 1. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to uses permitted as of right in the C-2, C-3 and C-4 Districts of the LDC. 7.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Minimum Lot Area: Ten thousand (10,000) square feet. B. Minimum Lot Width: One hundred (100) feet. C. Minimum Yard Requirements: ~.nOA I~ 15 JUL 3 0 2002 F:LPUD DocumentsX, ARROWHEAD2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 1. Front yard - Twenty five (25) feet or one-half of the building height as measured from grade, whichever is greater. 2. Side yard - One~half of the building height as measured fi.om grade, with a minimum of fifteen (15) feet. 3. Rear yard - Fifteen (15) feet or one-half of the height of the building as measured from grade, whichever is the greater. D. Distance Between Structures: Same as for side yard setback. E. Maximum Height: Fifty (50) feet. F. Minimum Floor Area of Structures: One-thousand (1,000) square feet per building on the ground floor. G. Maximum Density: Hotels, motels and time share facilities are limited to a maximum density of sixteen (16) units per acre. The maximum floor area for these uses is five- hundred (500) square feet. 7.5 OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS: As required by Division 2.3 Off-Street Parking and Loading of the LDC. 7.6 MINIMUM LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS: As required by Division 2.4, Landscaping and Buffering, in effect at the time building permits are requested. 7.7 MINIMUM LANDSCAPE BUFFER AREA: As required by Collier County regulations in effect at the time building permits are requested. At a minimum, a landscaped buffer shall be provided adjacent to all residential areas bordering the commercial portion of the PUD (except for access points) in accordance with Division 2.4, Landscaping of the Land Development Code. 7.8 SIGNS: As required by Section 2.5, Signs of the LDC in effect at the time sign permits are requested. 7.9 MERCHANDISE STORAGE AND DISPLAY Unless specifically permitted for a given use, outside storage or display of merchandise is the commercial portion of this PUD shall be eligible! ?or t~ prohibited. However, 16 JUL 3 o 2002 F:LPUD Documents~RROWHEAD2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 ' use permits for temporary sales, sports events, religious events, and community events in accordance with Section 2.6.33, Temporary Use Permits of the LDC. 7.10 Architectural and Site Design Standards Development of commercial uses shall meet the requirerrients of Division 2.8 Architectural and Site Design Standards and Guidelines for Commercial Buildings and Projects of the LDC. 7.11 Pedestrian Connections Pedestrian and vehicular connections shall be provided between the commercial and residential components of the project. 7.12 Project Phasing No construction in the commercial area shall be allowed until twenty (20) percent of the permitted dwelling units have been issued building permits. .,: JUL 3 0 2002 F:XPUD DocumentsXARROWHEAD2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 Pg..~Z7/7 SECTION VIII DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS 8.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the development commitments for the evelopment of this project. 8.2 GENERAL All facilities shall be constructed in accordance with the standards and specifications adopted as part of this PUD and applicable portions of the LDC in effect at the time building permits are requested. The developer, his successor and assigns shall be responsible for the commitments outlined in the document. The developer, his successor or assignee shall agree to follow the Master Plan and the regulations of the PUD as adopted and any other conditions or modifications as may be agreed to in the rezoning of the property. In addition, the developer will agree to convey to any successor or assignee in title any commitments within this agreement. 8.3 PUD MASTER PLAN A. The PUD Master Plan provides for areas of commercial and residential use, water management areas, and retained vegetation areas and road rights-of-way as depicted on Exhibit "A". The PUD Master Plan is designed to be flexible with regard to the placement of buildings, tracts and related utilities and water management facilities. More specific commitments will be made at the time of site development plan and permitting approval, based on compliance with all applicable requirements of this Ordinance, the LDC and local, state and federal permitting requirements. All tracts may be combined or developed separately subject to compliance with the applicable dimensional requirements contained within this document. B. All necessary easements, dedications, or other instruments shall be granted to insure the continued operation and maintenance of all service utilities and all common areas in the project. All easements and assurances will be submitted to the County Attorney at development plan review for review and approval to assure implementation of the development commitments. C. This project shall be developed in compliance with all of the applicable requirements of the Division 3.2 Subdivisions of the LDC. D. The Arrowhead PUD shall be subject to Section 2.7.3.4 of the LDC, Time limits for approved PUD master plans and Section 2.7.3.6, Monitoring Requirements. JUL 3 0 2002 FSPUD DocumentsLARROWHEAD2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 .~ E. Amendments to this Ordinance and PUD Master Plan shall be made pursuant to Section 2.7.3.5 of the Collier County LDC, in effect at the time the amendment is requested. 8.4 SCHEDULE OF DEVELOPMENT A. It is anticipated based on market conditions that the Arrowhead PUD will build out in six years or by 2008. 8.5 TRANSPORTATION A. All public street design and construction shall meet applicable Collier County transportation standards that are in effect at the time building permits are requested. B. Adjacent to the PUD boundary, along the eastern property line, the developer shall provide up to 100 feet of clear road fight-of-way to meet the needs for the Carson Road Extension. Additionally, adjacent to the PUD boundary, along the northern property line, the developer will provide right-of-way for Lake Trafford Road up to a width of fifty (50) feet as determined by the County Transportation Services Division for infrastructure improvements. Impact fee credits will be granted to the extent provided in Ordinance 2001-13 and amendments there of. Property value determinations for the purpose of credits shall be made at the time of property transfer based upon fair market value as determined by qualified appraisers. Furthermore, fair market value shall be based upon the highest and best land use (agricultural zoning) as existing prior to approval of Petition R-90-6 by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners. C. The developer shall provide westbound left turn lanes on Lake Trafford Road at each residential access. D. Lake Trafford Road shall be eligible for impact fee credits at such time as the Road Impact Fee Ordinance 2000-13 is amended to allow for impact fee credits for the developer to improve roads that are not contained in the Capital Improvement Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan, subject to a Developer's Agreement: E. The developer shall provide lef~ and right turn lanes on Carson Road at accesses to the commercial tract. Access improvements on Carson Road may be coordinated with the construction of that road, but shall be eligible for impact fee credits at such time as the Road Impact Fee Ordinance 2000-13 is amended to allow for impact fee credits for the developers to improve roads that are not contained in the Capital Improvement Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan, subject to a Developer's Agreement. F. Project phasing will be required to insure that adequate levels of service will be maintained family dwelling units and 300 single family dwellings, or as many dwelling 15} JUL 3 0 2002 F:~UD Documents~,ARROWHEAD2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 units as may be permitted by the Transportation Department to maintain acceptable levels of service on local roadways. The first phase will include a minimum of 300 multi- G. The developer shall provide a fair share contribution toward the capital cost of a traffic signal at any project access, residential or commercial, when deemed wan'anted by the County. The developer shall also make a fair share contribution'toward the capital cost of a traffic signal at the intersection of Lake Trafford Road and Carson Road. All such signals shall be owned, operated and maintained by Collier County. H. The developer shall provide arterial level street lighting at all access improvement points on Lake Trafford Road and collector level street lighting at all access improvement points on Carson Road. I. Road Impact Fees shall be as set forth in Ordinance 2000-13, and any amendment thereof, and shall be paid at the time building permits are issued unless otherwise approved by the Board of County Commissioners. J. Access improvements shall not be subject to impact fee credits other than those that maybe eligible for Carson Road. Excluding signalization, access improvements shall be in place before any certificates of occupancy are issued. K. All traffic control devises used, excluding street name signs, shall comply with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices as required by Chapter 316.0747, Florida Statutes. L. In consideration of the implementation of the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance in Division 3.15, and the potential of adjacent roadways not conforming to appropriate service level standards due to the rate of increase of traffic volumes versus scheduled/funded roadway capacity improvements, the developer is advised that future land development activities in the area may be subject to future land use control consistent with the above regulations. M. Sidewalks on both sides of the main access road shall be five feet. All other streets shall have one five foot wide sidewalk. N. Cul-de-sacs or dead end streets may exceed the 1,000 foot limitation set forth in Section 3.2.8.3.17(a) of the LDC to a distance provided for on the PUD Master Plan. O. A reduction in the street right-of-way width from 60 feet to 50 feet for a local road as required in Section 3.2.8.4 (5) of the LDC is approved as part of this Ordinance. P. Roads will be public and dedicated to Collier County at the time of platting. 2O .IU L 3 0 2002 F:XPUD DocumentsL&RROWHEAD2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 8.5 ENGINEERING A. Detailed paving, grading, site drainage and utility plans shall be submitted to Project Review Services for review. No construction permits shall be issued unless and until approval of the proposed construction in accordance with the submitted plans is granted by Project Review Services. B. Design and construction of all improvements shall be subject to compliance with the appropriate provisions of the Collier County Subdivision Regulations. C. An Excavation Permit will be required for the proposed lake(s) in accordance with Division 3.5 Excavation of the Collier County LDC and SFWMD rules. Lake setbacks shall be in conformance with Division 3.5 Excavation of the Collier County LDC. D. Work within Collier County right-of-way shall meet the requirements of Collier County right-of-way Ordinance 93-64. E. Access improvements into each tract as shown on the master plan is informational only. Location and number of access improvements is subject to Subdivision Master Plan or SDP approval. .-- F. This project is recommended for approval for rezone purposes only. A Subdivision Master Plan shall be submitted which complies with all the design standards of the Subdivision Regulations unless specific exceptions are requested and supported by sound engineering reasoning during its approval process. Approval of this rezone does not constitute an approval to any subdivision design standards contained within the petition or supporting drawings or exhibits. The master plan submitted shall not be considered to suffice for the Subdivision Master Plan required pursuant to Collier County LDC Division 3.2 Subdivisions. G. The project shall be platted in accordance with Collier County Subdivision Regulations to define the right-of-way, tracts, and easements as shown on the master plan. H. All roads, public or private, shall be in full compliance with the County Subdivision Regulations design and construction requirements. I. All cul-de-sacs shall be in full compliance with the County Subdivision Regulations, including design and construction requirements. 8.6 UTILITIES A. Verification from the Immokalee Water Sewer District stating they have reviewed and approved the water and sewer facilities engineering construction documents to serve this project is required and must accompany the detailed construction plans submission. JUL 3 0 2002 F:~PUD DocumentsL4~RROWHEAD2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 B. Verification of sewage treatment capacity pursuant to Ordinance No. 80-112 to service this project is required and must accompany the detailed construction plans submission. C. This project shall be designed and construction in full compliance with Ordinance 2001- 57 as amended. D. This project shall be designed for central water and sewer systems. 8.7 WATER MANAGEMENT A. The stormwater management system shall be designed in accordance with South Florida Water Management District, and Collier County rules and regulations. B. A copy of SFWMD Permit or Early Work Permit is required prior to construction plan approval. C. Prior to SMP approval, provide a copy of the South Florida Water Management District Conceptual Permit. D. Provide a 20 ft. maintenance easement around the perimeter of all lakes and a 20 ft. access easement from a public road to each maintenance easement. E. Pursuant to applicable South Florida Water Management District rules, a naturally vegetated buffer or structural buffer shall be provided around all wetlands to be preserved in lieu of the buffer requirements of Section 3.2.8.4.7.3 of the LDC. No construction will be allowed within this buffer. F. All historical off-site flows shall be routed through the project master system in accordance with provisions as required by South Florida Water Management District, Collier County, and as directed by the Collier County Stormwater Management Section. G. The future Carson Road drainage shall be routed through this project as shown on the Conceptual Drainage Plan, provided in this application and in accordance with the SFWMD Permit, Collier County, and as directed by Collier County Stormwater Management Section. 8.8 ENVIRONMENTAL A. Native vegetation preservation shall conform to the requirements of Subsection 3.9.5.5.4-3 of the Collier County LDC. B. If, during the course of site cleating, excavation, or other construction activities, an archaeological or historical site, artifact, or other indicator is discovered other than that already identified, all development at that location shall be immediately stopped. Development will be suspended for a sufficient length of time to enab ~ t_._sa:llfl~_[~ 22 ~('" ~'~ ~ "'" ' / F: PUD DocumentsLARROWHEAD2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 !! JUL 3 0 2002 . . County Historic and Archeological Preservation Board or a designated consultant to assess the find and determine the proper course of action in regard to its salvageability. The Current Planning Environmental Review Staff will respond to any such notification in a timely and efficient manner so as to provide only a minimal interruption to any construction activity. C. This PUD shall be consistent with the Environmental section of the Collier County Growth Management Plan Conservation and Coastal Management Element and the Collier County Land Development Code at the time of final development order approval. D. All conservation areas shall be designate as conservation/preservation tracts or easements on all construction plans and shall be recorded on the plat with protective covenants per or similar to Section 704.06 of the Florida Statutes. Buffers shall be provided in accordance with 3.2.8.4.7.3 CCLDC. Conservation easements shall be dedicated on the plat to the project's homeowners association or like entity for ownership and maintenance responsibility and to Collier County with no responsibility for maintenance. E. Buffers shall be provided around wetlands, extending at least fifteen (15) feet landward from the edge of wetland preserves in all places and averaging twenty-five (25) feet from the landward edge of wetlands. Where natural buffers are not possible, structural buffers shall be provided in accordance with the State of Florida Environmental Resources Permit Rules and be subject to review and approval by Current Planning Environmental Staff. F. An exotic vegetation removal, monitoring, and maintenance (exotic-free) plan for the site, with emphasis on the conservation/preservation areas, shall be submitted to Current Planning Environmental Review Staff for review and approval prior to final plan/construction plan approval. A schedule for exotic removal within all preservation areas shall be submitted with the above-mentioned plan. G. Environmental permitting shall be in accordance with the State of Florida Environmental Resource Permit rules and be subject to review and approval by Current Planning Environmental Review Staff. Removal of exotic vegetation shall not be counted towards mitigation for impacts to Collier County jurisdictional wetlands. H. All approved Agency (SFWMD, ACOE, FFWCC) permits shall be submitted prior to final Plat/Construction Plan approval. 8.9 ACCESSORY STRUCTURES Accessory structures may be constructed simultaneously with or following the construction of the principal structure, but not before the principal structure. 8.10 SIGNS ~A I;i'~ 23 JUL 3 O 2002 F:kPUD DocumentskA. RROWHEAD2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 '~ As required by the requirements of Divisions 2.5 Signs of the LDC in effect at the time sign permits are requested. 8.11 LANDSCAPING FOR OFF-STREET PARKING AREAS As required by the requirements of Division 2.4 Landscaping and Buffering of the LDC in effect at the time building permits are requested. 8.12 POLLING PLACES Polling places shall be permitted and provided for as deemed appropriate by the Supervisor of Elections, in accordance with Section 2.6.30 of the LDC, within the commercial or recreational portion of the overall PUD as deemed appropriate by the developer. 8.13 SPECIAL CONDITIONS An archaeological site consisting of approximately 0.26 acres is to be preserved in perpetuity and become part of the open space of the Arrowhead PUD. The structure contained on this site cannot be altered in any way until approval is obtained from the Collier County Historic and Archeological Preservation Board. 8.14 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS: A. The road running through the single family and multi-family components of this PUD, connecting Lake Trafford Road with Carson Drive shall be a public roadway. B. This project shall receive Plan Preliminary and Final Subdivision_Approval and/or Site Development Plan Approval prior to application for building permits. C. This project shall comply with Section 2.6.32 of the LDC. D. The excavation of earthen material and its stockpiling in preparation of water management facilities or to otherwise develop water bodies is hereby permitted. If, after consideration of fill activities on buildable portions of the project site, there is a surplus of earthen material, offsite disposal is also hereby permitted subject to the following conditions: 1. Excavation activities shall comply with the definition of a "development excavation" pursuant to Section 3.5.5.1.3 of the LDC, whereby offsite removal shall not exceed ten (10) percent of the total volume excavated up to a maximum of 20,000 cubic yards. 2. A timetable to facilitate said removal shall be submitted to the Development Services Director for approval. Said timetable shal.l.,~ 1~ JUL 3 0 2002 F:~PUD DocumentsX~ARROWHEAD2PUD.doc 7/10/2002 the length of time it will take to complete said removal, hours of operation and haul routes. 3. All other provisions of Section 3.5 of the LDC are applicable. E. Fire hydrants shall be appropriately located to meet the reciuirements and approval of the local fire district. Cul-de-sac dimensions shall comply with NFPA 1,2000 Edition Section 3-5.2. F. Development permitted by approval of this petition will be subject to a concurrency review under the provisions of the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance contained in Divisions 3.15 of the LDC shall apply at the earliest or next to occur of either final SDP approval, or building permit issuance applicable to this project. J U L :3 0 2002 F:~PUD Documents~RRO~,~rI£AD2PlJD.doc 7/10/2002 '~ EXHIBIT "B" A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, AND SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTH HALF OF SAID SECTION 31, MARKED BY AN IRON ROD 5.38 FEET SOUTH OF THE CENTERLINE OF LAKE TRAFFORD ROAD; THENCE S.01°I l'04"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 31, A DISTANCE OF 34.62 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.., A POINT ON THE ARC OF A CURVE OF THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF LAKE TRAFFORD ROAD FROM WHICH TIlE RADIUS POINT LIES N.00°36'38"E., A DISTANCE OF 11499.20 FEET; THENCE CONTINUE S.01°I l'04"E., ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF SECTION 31, A DISTANCE OF 2626.06 FEET TO TIlE CORNER COMMON TO SECTIONS 31 AND 32, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, AND SECTIONS 5 AND 6, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST; THENCE S.00°,$4' 14"E., ALONG THE EAST LINE OF AFOREMENTIONED SECTION 6, A DISTANCE OF 30.00 FEET; THENCE S.88°53'58"W., A DISTANCE OF 100.00 FEET; THENCE S.00°44' 14"E., ALONG A LINE 100 FEET WEST OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE EASTERLY LINE OF AFOREMENTIONED SECTION 6, A DISTANCE OF 1182.18 FEET; THENCE S.89°15'46"W., A DISTANCE OF 1660.14 FEET; THENCE N.54°44'53"W., A DISTANCE OF 626.03 FEET; THENCE N.43 °02'5 I"W., A DISTANCE OF 1245.23 FEET; THENCE N.01"30'27"W., A DISTANCE OF 570.20 FEET; THENCE N.75°33'2 I"W., A DISTANCE OF 681.54 FEET; THENCE N.86°52'40"W., A DISTANCE OF 550.82 FEET; THENCE N. 16°09'26"E., A DISTANCE OF 557.00 FEET; THENCE N.00°55'06"W., A DISTANCE OF 1427.65 FEET (1428.07 FEET CALCULATED) TO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF LAKE TRAFFORD ROAD; THENCE S.87°58' 12"E., ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY, A DISTANCE OF 3861.86 FEET TO THE P.C. OF A CURVE TO TIlE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 11499.20 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 01°25'10"; THENCE EASTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 284.88 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; CONTAINING 307.333 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS, RESERVATIONS OR RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. BEARINGS REFER TO THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 3 !, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS BEING S.01°I 1 '04"E. JUL 3 0 2002 W:X200 IL2001106LRLD\LEGALDESFORSUBMITTAL.doc I~. ~' 7 · EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 74 OF THE COUNTY'S CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES, AS PREVIOUSLY AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NO. 2001-13 (THE COLLIER COUNTY CONSOLIDATED IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE), PROHIBITING EARLY PAYMENT OF IMPACT FEES TO AVOID RATE INCREASES AND DISTINGUISHING PAYMENT OF IMPACT FEES FROM PRE-PAYMENT OF ESTIMATED FUTURE IMPACT FEES PREREQUISITE TO ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC FACILITY ADEQUACY OBJECTIVE: To obtain adoption by the Board of County Commissioners of the attached Ordinance to amend Chapter 74 of the County's Code of Laws and Ordinances, as previously amended by Ordinance No. 2001-13 - (The Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance). CONSIDERATIONS.' PLEASE NOTE: NO PROVISION OF THIS PROPOSED AMEMDMENT TO THE CONSOLIDATED IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE CHANGES ANY CURRENT POLICIES OR PROCEDURESmTHESE PROVISIONS INCORPORATE VERY PRECISE LANGUAGE TO CLARIFY THE ORIGINAL INTENTS OF THE COUNTY'S IMPACT FEE AND CONCURRENTCY-RELATED REGULATIONS AND TO AVOID POSSIBLE CONFUSION OR MISINTERPRETATION. On March 13, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners adopted Collier County Ordinance No. 2001-13, the "Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance," which now constitutes Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. Ordinance No. 2001-13 became effective on March 19, 2001. Ordinance No. 2001-13 consolidated all of the County's impact fee regulations into a single document, eliminated previously existing inconsistencies in the administrative provisions of the various Impact Fee Ordinances, clarified impact fee calculation methods, and implemented new procedures where needed. To clarify and improve the County's impact fee regulations, this proposed Ordinance implements the following amendments to Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances: 1. Limiting the time period in which an Impact Fee may be paid for a particular Development. Specifically, the proposed language prohibits County staff from accepting an impact fee payment prior to submittal of a complete building permit application for a particular Development. This provision is added to prevent early payment of impact fees solely for the purpose of grandfathering a Development from future Impact Fee rate increases. JUL 3 0 2002 Amendment to Chapter 74 of Code of Laws and Ordinances Page 2 2. Addition, text to distinguish payment of Impact Fees from pre-payment of an estimated sum of money equal to estimated future Impact Fees applicable to a particular Development submitted prerequisite to the issuance of a Certificate of Public Facility Adequacy (COA) (and deposited into a County escrow trust fund account) pursuant to Section 3.15.7.3. of the Collier County Land Development Code. 3. Text to provide clarification of the current policy that pre-payrfient of estimated future impact fees for a particular Development submitted prerequisite to the issuance of a COA (and deposited into a County escrow trust fund account) shall not grandfather a Development from subsequent Impact Fee rate increases. FISCAL IMPACT: Impact fee rate schedules are not being updated by these amendments. However, these amendments will have a positive impact on revenue receipts to the extent that Development cannot be grandfathered from Impact Fee rate increases. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Subject to input at the public hearing, that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the attached Ordinance to amend Chapter 74 of the County's Code of Laws and Ordinances, as previously amended by Ordinance No. 2001-13 - (The Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance) to prohibit early payment of Impact Fees to thereby attempt to immunize Impact Fee Development against future impact fee rate increases. Phillip~R. Tindall, In, pact Fee CoordinaUor REVIEWED BY: I~~-'~ Date:7-/~"~ ~ Denny Baker, Business Manager D ate: 7::'~ ~/~.~*--- ,' J~seph' ~K. schmitt, Administ/rator ./.Community Development & Environmental Services Division - AGE~A ITEM , JUL 3 0 2002 t ORDINANCE NO. 2002 - 3 AN ORDINANCE OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING 4 CHAPTER 74 OF THE COUNTY'S CODE OF LAWS AND $ ORDINANCES, AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NO. 2001-13 (THE (5 COLLIER COUNTY CONSOLIDATED IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE, AS 7 AMENDED) BY AMENDING SUBSECTION A IN SECTION 74-202, 8 PROHIBITING EARLY PAYMENT OF IMPACT FEES TO AVOID 0 IMPACT FEE RATE INCREASES, AND DISTINGUISHING PAYMENT l0 OF IMPACT FEES FROM PRE-PAYMENT OF ESTIMATED FUTURE t ! IMPACT FEES PREREQUISITE TO ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF !2 PUBLIC FACILITY ADEQUACY PURSUANT TO THE COUNTY'S 1.3 LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE t4 CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT !5 AND SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE /7 18 WHEREAS, on March 13, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier 1.9 County adopted Ordinance No. 2001-13, the "Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance," 20 which is Chapter 74 of the County's Code of Laws and Ordinances; and 2! 22 WHEREAS, some applicants attempt early payment of Impact Fees, such as 23 upon application for approval of a Site Development Plan rather than immediately 24 prior to, or concurrently with, issuance of a Building Permit, in an attempt to 25 grandfather the related Development from expected, projected or anticipated Impact 26 Fee rate increases; and 27 28 WHEREAS, staff desires to specifically limit the period of time that payment of 29 Impact Fees can be received by the County relative to a specific Development, and 30 to prohibit early pre-payment of an Impact Fee prerequisite to issuance of a Building 31. Permit, but continue to allow payment of estimated future Impact Fees applicable to 32 Impact Fee Development submitted prerequisite to issuance of a Certificate of Public 33 Facility Adequacy (and deposited into a County escrow fund account) pursuant to 34 Section 3.15.7.3. of the Collier County Land Development Code, which does not 35 grandfather such estimated Impact Fees from possible future increases that may 36 occur subsequent to pre-payment, but prior to the time that the estimated Impact 3? Fees subsequently being quantified, and becoming finally due and payable. 38 39 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY 40 COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: 4! 42 SECTION ONE. Article II, Subsection A in Section 74-202 of the Collier County 43 Code of Laws and Ordinances (Collier County Ordinance No. 2001-13) is hereby 44 amended to read as follows: NeAGENI:)A,~ ITEM 46 Section 74-202. Payment. - 47 A. Unless deferred or waived by a written Agreement with the County as a pa, ¥~ JUL 3 02002 48 thereto, or unless exempted, the Impact Fee shall be paid in full pr!or as, ~Jnderlined text is added; ~trucP. thrcu...Oh text is deleted. ! prerequisite to the issuance of a Building Permit for the Development, and no 2 Building Permit or any other authorization to use the land included in the 3 Development shall be issued until each applicable Impact Fee has been paid in full. 4 Notwithstandinq any other provision of this Ordinance, staff shall not accept pre- 5 payment (early payment) of Impact Fees prior to submittal of the related and 6 complete Buildinq Permit application for the respective Development in all cases '7 where issuance of a conventional buildinq permit renders the respective' Impact Fees $ due and payable. In instances where a conventional Buildinq Permit is not required 9 (e.a., ~lolf course, park, chanqe of use, etc.), staff shall not accept pre-payment (early tO payment) of Impact Fees prior to the (whichever occurs first) event that renders such !! Impact Fees due and payable. Payment of estimated Impact Fees prerequisite to !2 issuance of a Certificate of Public Facility Adequacy (COA) is not prohibited pre- !3 payment, and pre-payment of estimated Impact Fees shall not qrandfather such !4 estimated Impact Fees aqainst Impact Fee increases, if any, that occur subsequent !5 to such pre-payment but before the respective estimated Impact Fees are quantified !6 and become finally due and payable.. 1'7 !8 SECTION TWO: CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY. 20 In the event this Ordinance conflicts with any other Ordinance of Collier 2t County or other applicable law, the m~re restrictive shall apply. If any phrase or 22 portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional or by any court of 23 competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a such portion shall be deemed 24 separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the 25 validity of the remaining podions. 26 27 SECTION THREE: INCLUSION IN CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES. 28 The provisions of this Ordinance shall be mad a part of the Code of Laws ?.9 and Ordinances of Collier County, Florida. The sections of the Ordinances may be 30 renumbered or relettered to accomplish such, and the word "ordinance' may be 3! changed to "section", "article", or any other appropriate word. 3?- 33 SECTION FOUR: EFFECTIVE DATE. 34 This Ordinance shall be effective upon filing with the Florida Department 35 of State. 37 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier 38 County, Florida this ~ day of .., 2002. 40 ATTEST BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Ne 4! DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ' 42 JUL 3 0 2002 43 By:. 44 Deputy Clerk By:. J--f- 45 James N. Coletta, Chairman P~. 2 Underlined text is added; S!r'--'ck thrcu~h text is deleted. Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Thomas C. Palmer, Assistant County Attorney JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PETITION RZ-01-AR-1143, JAMES G. O'GARA, REPRESENTING GOLDEN GATE CAPITAL, LTD., REQUESTING A REZONE FROM "RSF-3" RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY TO THE "RSF-5" RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT TO ALLOW FOR A MAXIMUM OF 16 SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF 50'm TERRACE S.W. AND 22~4r~ AVENUE S.W. IN SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners consider an application to rezone Block 168, Unit 5, Golden Gate Subdivision from "RSF-3" to the "RSF-5" Zoning District thereby allowing the construction of 16 single family dwelling units that are consistent with all the applicable codes and regulations in order to ensure that the community's interests are maintained in this single-family neighborhood. CONSIDERATIONS: This petition was previously heard by the Board of County Commissioners and was remanded back to the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) because the advertising sign for the CCPC meeting ~"' (supplied by the applicant) did not contain all the required information. The sign should have indicated that the zone change for Block 168 is from the "RSF-3" Residential Single Family to the "RSF-5" Zoning District. By remanding the petition back to the CCPC, the petitioner will have time to revise the sign that is placed on the subject site with the required information. As a result, all the required advertising requirements have been met. The subject 3.7-acre site is currently zoned "RSF-3" and abuts an existing residential community that is also zoned "RSF-3". The site is currently vacant and was previously cleared and platted as Block 168 prior to the adoption of the Land Development Code. The petitioner has indicated that under the current "RSF-3" zoning, the resulting subdivision would yield 11 lots based on 3 units per acre. This would result in less lots than is currently developed on the adjacent properties. As a result, the petitioner is now proposing to rezone the subject site to the "RSF-5" Zoning District, which allows 18 lots. However, the petitioner has proposed to limit the project to 16 lots. The projected build-out for the proposed residential subdivision is projected to be in the year 2006. In addition, the access points to the proposed residential subdivision are from the existing local roads that abut the subject site. These roads also serve the other single-family residences in the area. In addition, the Transportation Planning Staff has reviewed the applicant's request and has the following comment. The Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) indicates that the 16 lot subdivision will result in approximately 160 Average Daily Trips and is estimated to be built-out in the year 2006. Based on this estimate, the proposed rezone will not generate traffic that will have significant impact on any County road. Therefore, this petition is consistent with Policies 1.3, 1.4, 5. and 5.2 of the ?'" Transportation Element. ~. ~ IW.~:__~ JUL 3 O' 2002 In regards to compatibility, it should be noted that Block 168 is surrounded by RSF-3 zoned properties while multi-family zoned lands are located one block to the west along Hunter Boulevard. Since the site abuts local residential roads on 4 sides, the subject site does not directly abut any existing residential lot. Furthermore, the storm water management system in the area will not be adversely impacted by this development due to the limited number of units proposed. The petitioner also indicates that the maximum density of the RSF-3 district will not allow for the platting of all the eligible units as allowed by the density rating system of the Growth Management Plan. However, the RSF-5 district will allow the platting of 16 lots of the eligible density. The final lot design will be evaluated at the time of preliminary subdivision plat (PSP) application for impacts (if any) on the surrounding land uses. Given the fact that the petitioner has committed to construct homes with a minimum floor area of 1,000 square feet per unit, the proposed petition should not adversely impact the existing residential land uses in the area. Therefore, staff is of the opinion that the development regulations, landscaping, screening and buffering requirements of the RSF-5 district are consistent with other residential properties in the area. FISCAL IMPACT: This rezone by and of itself will have no fiscal impact on the County. Hoxvever, if this request meets its objective, a portion of the existing land will be further developed. The mere fact that new development has been approved will result in future fiscal impact on County public facilities. The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of building permits to help offset the impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects in the Capital Improvement Element needed to maintain adopted levels of service for public facilities. In the event that impact fee collections are inadequate to maintain adopted levels of service, the County must provide supplemental funds from other revenue sources in order to build needed facilities. The following impact fees will be applicable to this project: · Park Impact Fee: $578.00 per unit · Library Impact Fee: $180.52 per unit · Fire Impact Fee: $0.15 per square feet of building · School Impact Fee: $827 per unit · Road Impact Fee: $890 per unit · Correctional Facilities: $117.98 per dwelling unit · Radon Impact Fee: $0.005 per square foot of building · EMS Impact Fee: $2 per unit · Building Code Adm.: $0.005 per square foot of building · Micro Film Surcharge: $1.50 per unit For an average unit size of 1,000 square feet, the total fiscal impact will be $2,757.18 per unit. Since this project proposes 16 units, the total amount of residential impact fees collected at build-out will total $44,114.88. It should be noted that because impact fees vary by housing type and because this approval does not provide this level of specificity as to the actual type of use, the total impact quoted above is at best a raw estimate. Other fees will include building permit reviex rTeesnitrfll~tl~-~ fees associated with connecting to the sewer and water system. ~.~ JU k 3 0 2 Building permit fees and utility fees have traditionally offset the cost of administering the community development review process whereas utility fees are used on their proportionate share of impact to the County system. Finally additional revenue is generated by application of ad valorem tax rates. The revenue that will be generated depends on the value of the improvements. At this point in time a model has not been developed to arrive at a reasonable estimate of tax revenue based on ad valorem tax rates. Nevertheless, it should be appreciated that not withstanding the fiscal impact relationship, development takes place in an environment of concurrency management. When level of service requirements fall below adopted standards, a mechanism is in place to bring about a cessation of building activities. Certain LOS standards apply countywide and would therefore bring about a countywide concurrency determination versus roads that may have local concurrency implications. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The site is located within the Urban - Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Sub-district area as identified on the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. This designation allows for residential land uses and certain non-residential uses including recreational facilities. Relevant to this petition, this Sub-district permits a base density of 4 units per acre and is eligible for three (3) additional units per acre (for a total of 7 units per acre) since the site is within the "Density Band" of Activity Center #15. This Density Band is located 1 mile around the Activity Center. Since the site is eligible for a maximum density of 7 units per acre, the petitioner could have requested a project allowing for 26 residential units. Because the petitioner is only requesting a density of 5 units per acre (with a limit of 16 lots), staff has determined that this petition is consistent with the Density Rating System contained in the FLUE of the Collier County GMP. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Petition RZ-01-AR-1143 subject to a limit of 16 dwelling units along with the stipulations contained in the Ordinance of Adoption and Exhibits thereto. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: The subject petition has been reviewed by the Community Development Environmental and Engineering staff for consistency with the GMP and the applicable sections of the Land Development Code. Due to the small size of the site, no Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required. The Current Planning Environmental Staff has approved this petition as submitted. Therefore, no Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) meeting was required for this petition. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) reviewed this petition during their public hearing on April 18, 2002. By a vote of 8 to 0, the CCPC forwarded Petition RZ-01-AR-1143 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval subject staff stipulations with the following additional stipulations. JUL 3 0 2002 · That the development of Block 168 be limited to 16 residential lots. All residential units shall have a minimum floor area of 1,000 square feet exclusive of a garage. · That the project shall connect with the water and sewer utilities available in the area. · The project shall be consistent the applicable development standards of the RSF-3 Zoning District. The Planning Commissioners determined that this petition is consistent with the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and is compatible with the surrounding development. Staff has received two letters of objection. At the Planning Commission hearing, one person spoke concerning the deed restriction on Block 168, Unit 5. The deed restriction that was recorded by the Gulf American Corporation for Block 168 (see attached) restricts the use of the site for civic purposes only. However, the County Attorney's Office has determined that Collier County does not enforce these types of private deed restrictions. Furthermore, there are other tracts within Unit 5 of Golden Gate that have similar restrictions but have been developed for residential purposes. Because of these objections, this petition could not be placed on the summary agenda. JUL 3 0 2002 4 p~. ~ PREPARED BY: FRAYS/BELLOWS, CHIE PLANNER DATE CURRENT PLANNING SECTION REVIEWED BY: SU~AN MURRAY, AICP, MANAGER / DATE C~ENT FLANNING SECTION MARGAR~ WIjER~TLE, AICP, DIRECTOR DATE PLANNIN~ SERVICES DEPARTMENT APPROVED BY: ,zIC~SEPH K. SCHMITT ADMINISTRATOR DATE C/OM~ITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS. RZ-01-AR-1143/EX SUMMARY/RVB/rb JVL 3 I} 21102 5 PSo_~ ,,. TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DATE: IUNE 21, 2002 RE: PETITION NO: RZ-2001-AR-1143, GOLDEN GATE BLOCK 168 REZONE AGENT/APPLICANT: Agent: Mr. James G. O'Gara, President Owner: Golden Gate Capital, Ltd. Marquette Development Company 5395 Park Central Court 5395 Park Central Court Naples, Florida 34109 Naples, Florida 34109 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located at the northeast comer of 50t~ Terrace S.W. and 22nd Avenue S.W. in Section 21, Township 49 South, Range 26 East. (See location map following page). REOUESTED ACTION: The Board of County Commissioners has remanded this petition back to the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) because the advertising sign for the CCPC meeting (supplied by the applicant) did not contain all the required information. The sign should have indicated that the zone change for Block 168 is from the "RSF-3" Residential Single Family to the "RSF-5" Zoning District. By remanding the petition back to the CCPC, the petitioner will have time to revise the sign that is placed on the subject site with the required information. As a result, all the required advertising requirements will have been met. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The subject 3.7-acre site is currently zoned "RSF-3" and abuts an existing residential community that is also zoned RSF-3. The site is currently vacant and was previously cleared and platted as Block 168 prior to the adoption of the Land Development Code. The petitioner has indicated that under the current RSF-3 zoning, the resulting subdivision would yield 11 lots based on 3 units per acre. As a result, the petitioner is now proposing to rezone the subject site to the "RSF-5" Residential Single Family Zoning District, which allows 18 lots. However, the petitioner has proposed to limit the project to 16-lots. The projected build-out for the proposed residential subdivision is projected to be in the year 2006. In addition, the access to the proposed residential lots are from the existing local roads that abut the subject site and that serves the other single- family residences in the area. , JUL 3 0 002 SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Existing Conditions: The subject site is vacant and is zoned "RSF-3". Surrounding: North: Developed single family residential, Zoned "RSF-3" East: Developed single family residential, Zoned "RSF-3" South: Developed single family residential, Zoned "RSF-3" West: Developed single family residential, Zoned "RSF-3" GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: This petition has been distributed to the appropriate jurisdiction review entities specifically for review for consistency with current Growth Management Plan and land development regulations. Future Land Use Element: The subject 3.7-acre site is located within the Urban - Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Sub-district area as identified on the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and map of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan of the Growth Management (GMP). This designation allows for residential land uses and certain non-residential uses including recreational facilities. Relevant to this petition, this Sub-district permits a base density of 4 units per acre. The site is also eligible for three additional units per acre (for a total of 7 units per acre) since the site is within 1 mile of Activity Center #15). The maximum density of 7 units per acre will allow for 26 residential units while the current RSF-3 zoning permits 11 units. Since the petitioner is only requesting a density of 5 units per acre (allowing 18.5 units), the proposed "RSF-5"District (limited to 16 lots) is consistent with the Density Rating System contained in the FLUE of thc Collier County GMP. Transportation Element: Transportation Planning Staff has reviewed the applicant's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) and has thc following comment. The petition to rezone the site to thc "RSF-5" Zoning District proposes 16 residential lots. This will result in approximately 160 ADT and 18 trips during the AM Peak Hour. As a result, the proposed zone change will not significantly impact any County road when completed. Therefore, this petition is consistent with Policies 1.3, 1.4, 5.1 and 5.2 of the Transportation Element. Sewer and Water: The subject property will be connected to the Florida Government Utilities Authority sewer and water system. Other Applicable Elements: Staff review indicates that this petition has been designed to account for all the necessary relationships dictated by the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. Mitigation measures and stipulations have been developed to ensure consistency with the GMP during the permitting process. Development permitted by the approval of this petition will be subject to a concurrency review under the provisions of Section 3.15 of the Collier County Land Development Code, Adequate Public Facilities, at the earliest or the next to occur of either Final SDP approval, final plat approval, or building permit applicable to this development. Therefore, this petition is consistent with the goals and policies of the GMP. Consistency with the goals, objectives and policies of other applicable elements of the GMP and level of service relationships are to be achieved by stipulations and/or development commitments made a part of the approval of this development order. ~W.,rd~ IW.~ ' JUL 3 0 2002 HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staf£s analysis indicates that thc petitioner's property is located outside an area of historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment is required. However, pursuant to Section 2.2.25.8.1 of the Land Development Code, this project is subject to the following condition. If, during the course of site clearing, excavation or other construction activity an historic or archaeological artifact is found, all development within the minimum area necessary to protect the discovery shall be immediately stopped and thc Collier County Code Enforcement Department contacted. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL~ TRANSPORTATION & INFRASTRUCTURE: The subject petition has been reviewed by thc appropriate staff responsible for oversight related to the above referenced areas of critical concern. This includes a review by the Community Development Environmental and Engineering staff, and the Transportation Services Division. These reviews help shape the content of the project and cause development commitments to be fo~-nulated to achieve GMP and LDC requirements. It should be noted that due to the small size of thc site, no Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required. The Cun-cnt Planning Environmental Staff has approved this petition as submitted. Therefore, no Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) meeting was required for this petition. In addition, the Transportation Department staff has also recommended approval subject to providing sidewalks at the time of preliminary subdivision plat review. EVALUATION: Appropriate evaluation of petitions for rezoning should establish a factual basis for supportive action by appointed and elected decision-makers. The evaluation by professional staff should typically include an analysis of thc project's relationship to the community's future land use plan. and whether or not a rezoning action would be consistent with the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and the GMP in all of its related elements. Other evaluation considerations should include an assessment of adequacy of transportation infrastructure, other infrastructure, and compatibility with adjacent land uses, a consideration usually dealt with as a facet of analyzing the relationship of the rezoning action to the long range plan for future land uses. Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and the criteria on which a favorable determination must be based. The listed criteria are specifically noted in Section 2.7.3.2.5 of the LDC thus requiring staff evaluation and comment, and form the basis for a recommendation of approval or denial by the Planning Commission once approved and/or otherwise modified to the Board of County Commissioners. Each of the potential impacts or considerations identified during the staff review is listed under each of the criteria as noted below. Each of the criteria is summarized culminating in a determination of compliance, non- compliance, or compliance with mitigation. These evaluations are completed as a separate document that is attached to the Staff Report (Exhibit "A"). Notwithstanding the above, staff in reviewing the determinants for adequate findings to support a rezoning action as follows: Relationship to Future Land Uses - A discussion of this relationship, as it applies specifically to Collier County's legal basis for land use planning, refers to the relationship of t zoning action to the Future Land Use Element of the Golden Gate Area Master Plz t. Sin~-~ JUL 3 0 2002 3 property is designated Urban Mixed-Use, Urban Residential Sub-district on the Future Land Use Map, this district permits residential uses as proposed. The site is also eligible for a total density of 7 units per acre (or 26 lots) since the site is within 1 mile of Activity Center #15 provided it is compatible with surrounding properties. Staff is of the opinion that the eligible density is not compatible with the existing neighborhood that is developed at RSF-3 standards. Since the petitioner is requesting a density of 5 units per acre, this petition is consistent with the FLUE and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. The existing RSF-3 zoning would permit a maximum of 11 lots on the subject site while the RSF-5 zoning allows the requested 16 lots. Relationship to Existing Land Uses - In regard to compatibility, it should be noted that the subject site is surrounded by local roads that fronts developed residential "RSF-3" zoned properties. In addition, there are multi-family zoned lands one block to the west along Hunter Boulevard. Since the site abuts local residential roads on 4 sides, the subject site does not directly abut the RSF-3 lots. Furthermore, the storm water management system in the area will not be impacted by this development. It should be noted that the petitioner indicates that because the subject site is curved the typical RSF-3 lot width of 80-feet and 95-feet for comer lots will not allow for the platting of all the eligible density. Conversely, the minimum lot width of the RSF-5 district is 60-feet and 70 feet for a comer lot will allow the platting of 16 lots of the eligible density. Lastly, the final lot design will be evaluated at the time of preliminary subdivision plat application for impacts (if any) on the surrounding land uses. Given the fact that the petitioner has committed to construct homes with a minimum floor area of 1,000 square feet per unit, the proposed petition should not adversely impact the existing residential land uses in the area. Therefore, staff is of the opinion that the development regulations, landscaping, screening and buffering requirements of the "RSF-5" District are consistent with other residential properties in the area. Utility Infrastructure - Water supplies are available to this site. All development must comply with surface water management requirements invoked at the time of PSP review. Traffic Circulation and Impact - Staff has identified the fact that the change in land use will not have a significant impact on any County road by virtue of the fact that vehicular site generated trips will not lower the level of service below adopted standards. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward Petition RZ- 01-AR-1143 to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) with a recommendation for approval subject to staff recommendations that are incorporated into the Ordinance of adoption. JUL 3 0 2002 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward Petition RZ- 01-AR-1143 to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) with a recommendation for approval subject to staff recommendations that are incorporated into the Ordinance of adoption. CURRENT PLANNING SECTION REVIEWED BY: SJ~SAN MURRAY, INTERIM DIRECrI'OR DATE PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT APPROVED BY: / /JqSEPH K. SOHMITT ADMINISTRATOR / ('/DMMUNITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS. Staff Report for April 18, 2002 CCPC meeting. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: RZ-01 -AR-1143/STAFF REPORT/RVB/rb 2002 REZONE FINDINGS PETITION RZ-01-AR-1143 Section 2.7.2.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code requires that the report and recommendations of the Planning Commission to the Board of County Commissioners shall show that the Planning Commission has studied and considered the proposed change in relation to the following, where applicable: 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and Future Land Use map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Development Orders deemed consistent with the density rating system and all applicable elements of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and the GMP should be considered a positive relationship. 2. The existing land use pattern; There are existing RSF-3 residential uses surrounding the subject site. (See Staff Report) 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts; The parcel will not result in an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts because it is adjacent to residential zoning and is consistent with the density rating system. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. The district boundaries are logically drawn and they are consistent with the FLUE of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and the GMP. The surrounding lands include similar residential uses while lands 1-¥2 blocks to the west are zoned for multi-family. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. The proposed zoning change is appropriate based on the existing conditions of the property. In addition, the proposed rezone serves as an extension of the existing single- family development surrounding the development. Therefore, the relationship of the proposed zone change to the FLUE of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and the GMP is a positive one. .....~ ,A IYEM EXHIBIT "A" ~o.~ ~ JUL 3 0 2002 ~ 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood; Existing residential units in the area operate without being adversely impacting the multi- family zoned properties 1½-blocks to the west. The proposed residential dwellings will significantly impact on noise or traffic in the area. The prt~posed change will not adversely influence living conditions in the adjacent residential neighborhood because the required development standards as contained in the Land Development Code have been promulgated and designed to ensure the least amount of adverse impact on adjacent and nearby developments. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. The petition to rezone the property as requested is consistent with all applicable policies in the Transportation Element. (See Staff Report) In addition, the property fronts directly on a public road thereby providing an immediate access to the arterial road network over which traffic from this subdivision would be defused. Conversely, urban intensification (6 additional lots) will result in greater volumes of traffic on the local and arterial road system serving the subject site. The evaluation of this project took into account the requirement for consistency with Policy 5.1 & 5.2 of the Transportation Element. As a result, this petition will not excessively increase traffic congestion on any County road. In the final analysis all rezone actions are subject to the Concurrency Management System. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem; The Land Development Code specifically addresses prerequisite development standards that are designed to reduce the risk of flooding on nearby properties. New development in and of itself is not supposed to increase flooding potential on adjacent property over and above what would occur without development. Conversely, urban intensification in the absence of commensurate improvement to intra-county drainage appurtenances would increase the risk of flooding in areas when the drainage outfall condition is inadequate. In summary, every project approved in Collier County involving the utilization of land for some land use activity is scrutinized and required to mitigate all sub-surface drainage generated by developmental activities as a condition of approval. This project was reviewed for drainage relationships and design and construction plans are required to meet County standards as a condition of approval. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas; The proposed rezone will not impact the circulation of light and air to adjacent areas. All ) projects in Collier County are subject to the development standards thai ~,'~' zoning district in which it is located. These development standards md .o. me~ apply JO k 3 O 2002 generally and equally to all zoning districts (i.e. open space requirement, corridor management provisions, etc.) were designed to ensure that light penetration and circulation of air does not adversely affect adjacent areas. 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area; Typically urban intensification increases the value of contiguous underutilized land. This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results that may be internal or external to the subject property that can affect property values. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning, however zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since value determination by law is driven by market value. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations; Staff is of the opinion that the 6 additional single-family residential lots will not be a deterrent to the improvement or development of the adjacent properties. The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in the LDC is that their sound application when combined with the administrative preliminary subdivision plan approval process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in a deterrence to improvement of adjacent property. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare; The petition is consistent with the FLUE of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and the GMP. Therefore, the proposed change does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with these plans are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning; The subject property can be developed in accordance with the existing zoning, however to do so would deny this petitioner of the oppommity to maximize the development potential as made possible by its consistency with the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and the GMP. If approved, the petitioner will be able to develop 6 additional residential lots on Block 168. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County: The proposed change to the RSF-5 zoning district complies with the GMP, however, the proposed density is slightly higher than thc existing RSF-3 residential sul~divi~inn , JUl_ 3 0 2002 surrounding Block 168. Lastly, staff's analysis, which has evaluated the scale, density and intensity of land uses, has deemed the change in zoning to be acceptable for this site. 15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use? There are many other sites that are zoned to accommodate the residential use. However, this is not the determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness of a rezoning decision. The determinants of zoning are consistency with all elements of the GMP, compatibility, and the adequacy of infrastructure. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. Physical alteration is a product of developing vacant land that cannot be avoided. However, the degree of alteration is not significant for this single-family subdivision. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier Count>, Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended. Staff reviews for adequacy of public services and levels of service determined that required infrastructure meets with GMP established relationships. AR-I 143/RVB/rb · . 'Map Output Page 1 of 1 JUL 3 0 2002 .../com. esr/.esrimap. Esrimap?S erviceName=ccpa_design&ClientVersi°n=3' 1 &Form=True&En¢4/3/2002 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR: STANDARD REZONE APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR STANDARD REZONE - 10/98 PAGE 1 OF 15 Petition No.: Date Petition Received: Rl=¥1$1ON #2 -- RZ-2001-AR- 1143 Commission District: Planner Assigned: PROJECT #2001060026 DATE: 1/15/02 RAY BELLOWS ABOVE TO BE COMPLETED BY STAFF General Information: Name of Applicant(s) Golden Gate Capital, Ltd. Applicant's Mailing Address 5395 Park Central Court City Naples State FL Zip 34109 Applicant's Telephone # 593-1100 Fax # 593-1130 Name of Agent ~".cl,~q~__~ O'(-mp~vo~ Firm Agent's Mailing Address 3001 Tamiami Trail North Suite 206 City Naples State FL Zip 34103 Agent's Telephone # 403-0223 Fax # 263-5096 COLLIER COUNTY. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING SERVICES/CURRENT PLANNING 2800 N. ltORSESllOE DRIVE-NAPLES, FL 34104 PllONE (941) 403-2400/FAX (941) 643-6968 Complete the following for all Association(s) affiliated with this petition. (Provide additional sheets if necessary) JUL 3 0 2002 Mailing Address City State Zip. Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address City State __ Zip. Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address City State __ Zip Name of Master Association: Wa Mailing Address City State __ Zip Name of Civic Association: n/a Mailing Address City State ~ Zip Disclosure of Interest Information: a. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary). Name and Address Percentage of Owmership Steve Robison 25% Golden Gate Capital, Ltd by: 1% James O'Gara 24% __Marquette Development' 5395 Park Central Court Todd Gates 25% 5405 Park Central Court James McVey 25% 5405 Park Central Court b. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each. Name and Address, and Office Percentage of Stock APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR STANDARD REZONE-10/98 JUL 3 0 2002 Iq c. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. Name and Address Percentage of Interest d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership e. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or parmers. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership Date of Contract: f. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust. ~'T~o,~ ~Ir~ Name and Address ~ {~ ~ JtJL 3 0 2002 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR STANDARD REZONE - 10/98 ~! PAGE p~.ZO g. Date subject property, acquired leased Term of lease yrs./mos. If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option: and date option terminates: , or anticipated closing date h. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur heating, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. 3. Detailed legal description of the property covered bv the application: (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page.) If request involves change to more than one zoning district, include separate legal description for property involved in each district. Applicant shall submit four (4) copies of a recent survey (completed within the last six months, maximum 1" to 400' scale) if required to do so at the pre-application meeting. NOTE: The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If questions arise concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed survey may be required. Section: 21 Township: 49S Range: 26E Lot: Block: 168 Subdivision: Plat Book Page #:__ Property I.D.#: 36242200001 Metes & Bounds Description: 4. Size of orol~ertv: ft.X ft. =TotalSq. Ft. 161172 Acres 3.7 5. Address/general location of subiect ~}roi~ertv: __2134 51St St. SW 6. Adiacent zoning and land use: t~,r~-~ iW. la - Zoning Land use ~u~._ ~' ~ JU k 3 {3 2002 APPLICATmON FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR STANDARD REZONE - 10/98 p~._O~- l PA~ 4, ~-"-~ N RSF-3 residential neighborhood, Golden Gate S RSF-3 residential neighborhood, Golden Gate E RSF-3 residential neighborhood, Golden Gate W RSF-3 residential neighborhood, Golden Gate Does the owner of the subject property own property contiguous to the subject property? If so, give complete legal description of entire contiguous property. (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page). N/A Section: Township: Range: Lot: Block: Subdivision: Plat Book__ Page #:__ Property I.D.#: Metes & Bounds Description: '7. Rezone Request: This application is requesting a rezone from the RSF-3 zoning district (s) to the RSF-5 zoning district(s). Present Use of the Property: _ undeveloped property Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property:. RSF-5 single-familv residential 8. Evaluation Criteria: Pursuant to Section 2.7.2.5. of the Collier County Land Development Code, staff's analysis and recommendation to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission's recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners shall be based upon consideration of the applicable criteria noted below. Provide a narrative statement describing the rezone request with specific reference to the criteria noted below. Include any backup materials and documentation in support of the request. Standard Rezone Considerations (LDC Section 2. 7. 2.5. ) I~hOrr'~t~ I~_ JUl_ 3 0 2002 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR STANDARD REZONE - 10/98 pg. ~- PAGE 5 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and future land use map and the elements of the growth management plan. The proposed zoning is consistent with the goals and ob/ectives of the Growth Management Plan (GMP), including allowable density in the urban designated area of Collier County.. 2. The existing land use pattern. The existing land use pattern is single-family. The proposed rezone will also be_for single family uses. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. Tthe proposed pro[ect will have a density consistent with surrounding properties, the product type will be similar to the surrounding single_family homes. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property for the proposed change. No.. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment (rezone) necessary. The requested zoning is necessar~ in order to provide additional competitive priced singleyamil¥ housing in the Golden Gate market. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The proposed zoning change will not adversely in_fluence living conditions in the neighborhood. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. As shown in the attached Traffic Impact Statement, the proposed pro/ect will not adversely impact the roadway network. 8. Whether the proposed change 'will create a drainage problem. Stormwater Management will be reviewed by Collier County at the time of platting. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. No. 10. Whether the proposed change will seriously affect property values in the adjacent area. The proposed single_family homes will be consistent with the size and pricing o_f similar homes in the immediate area. ~r.~t~ I '.IT~_ PUBLIC HEARING FOR STANDARD REZONE - 10/98. Ihl~_ ~ "-'~ APPLICATION FOR PAOE6 JUL302002 Whether the change will be a deterrent to the development 1 1. proposed improvement or of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. This project will result in single_family housing in an area where multi-~fami!¥ housing is not desired by the community. As such, this project will potentiall¥ improve the nature of development Of the surrounding properties. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. No. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. If developed under the existin~ zonin£, the resulting homes would have to be significantly smaller than the average home size in the area in order to be price competitive. The only alternative to single_family zoning would be multi-fami!¥ zoning. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. As the land values in Collier County increase, the opportunity to provide single .familv homes at or below the current median home price will become more limited. The proposed zoning will result in more qf_fordable home ownership opportunities in an area where the vacant land supply is diminishing. 15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. Land values in other areas do not tvpical!v permit the type o_f construction and affordabili~ that this project can achieve. ! 6. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. Currently the proposed site is undeveloped. Required alteration with the exception o_f vertical construction will be minimal. [Eater and Sewer availability will be accomplished by an assessment district through FGUA. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County growth management plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch. 106, art. II_], as amended The proposed pro[ect will have no impact to County water and sewer facilities. The Utility provider will be FGUA. Impacts to roadways will be minimal and within the limits established by the GMP. JUL 3 O 2002 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR STANDARD REZONE - 10/98 18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the board of county commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. While the County is seeking more affordable home ownership opportunities, this pro/ect as proposed will serve a much needed section o_f our population. Without this rezone, the only remaining financiallv feasible alternative to the property owner will be multi-family housin£. _focused on the rental market. 9. Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded from enforcing deed restrictions, however, many communities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact the civic or property owners association in the area for which this use is being requested in order to ascertain whether or not the request is affected by existing deed restrictions. 10. Previous land use petitions on the subiect property.: To your knowledge, has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? If so, what was the nature of that hearing? n/a 11. Additional Submittal requirements: In addition to this completed application, the following shall be submitted in order for your application to be deemed sufficient, unless otherwise waived during the pre-application meeting. a. A copy of the pre-application meeting notes; b. If this rezone is being requested for a specific use, provide fifteen (15) copies of a 24" x 36" conceptual site plan [and one reduced 8V2" x 11" copy of site plan], drawn to a maximum scale of 1 inch equals 400 feet, depicting the following [Additional copies of the plan may be requested upon completion of staff evaluation for distribution to the Board and various advisory boards such as the Environmental Advisory Board (EAB), or CCPC]; all existing and proposed structures and the dimensions thereof, · provisions for existing and/or proposed ingress and egress (including pedestrian ingress and egress to the site and the structure(s) on site), · all existing and/or proposed parking and loading areas [include matrix indicating required and provided parking and loading, including required parking for the disabled], · required yards, open space and preserve areas, · proposed locations for utiiities (as well as location of existing utility services to the site), · proposed and/or existing landscaping and buffering as may be required by the County, c. An architectural rendering of any proposed structures. d. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), as required by Section 3.8. of the Land Development Code (LDC), or a request for waiver if appropriate, nc, E~ Ixroa.~ JUL 3 O 2002 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR STANDARD REZONE o 10/98. ~ PAGt pg._c~ __ MARQUETTE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY January 31, 2002 Mr. Ray Bellows Planning Services Collier County 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 RE: Block 168 Golden Gate Rezone Dear Mr. Bellows: Golden Gate Capital, Ltd., the current owner of the land comprising Block 168 respectfully requests that henceforth I be designated as the agent for this rezone. Thank you. Sincerely, GOLDEN GATE CAPITAL, LTD. BY: MARQUETTE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, Managing General Partner G. O Gara, President JUL 3 0 2002 MARQUETTE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY -- 5395 PARK CE?<-rRAk COU~T · NAPLES, FLORIDA 34109 · 941- 593-1100 * FAX 941- 593-1130 * E-MAIL MARQUETTED@AOL.CONI THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION PACKET! REQUIREMENTS # OF POT COPIE REQUIRED REQUIRED S Completed Application 15 Copy of Deed(s) and list identifying Owner(s) and all Partners if a I x,/ Corporation Completed Owner/Agent Affidavit, Notarized 1 Pre-application notes/minutes 1 Conceptual Site Plans 15 Environmental Impact Statement - (ELS) 4 Aerial Photograph - (with habitat areas identified) 4 Completed Utility Provisions Statement (with required attachments and 4 sketches) Traffic Impact Statement - (TIS) 4 Historical & Archaeological Survey or Waiver 4 Application Copies of State and/or Federal Permits 4 ~,×~ Architectural Rendering of Proposed Structure(s) 4 Application Fee, Check shall be made payable to Collier - County Board of Commissioners 1. Other Requirements- As the authorized agentJapplicant for this petition, I at-test that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the d~¢lab~ff'/pr/o~cessing this petition. /' . · - A~nt~ppl'i~a~t SignatUre Date AFFIDAVIT We~l, being first duly sworn, depose and say that we/I am/are the owners of the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing; that all the answers to the questions in this application, including the disclosure of interest information, all sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application, are honest and true to the best of our knowledge and belief. We/I understand that the information requested on this application must be complete and accurate and that the content of this form, whether computer generated or County printed shall not be altered. Public hearings will not be advertised until this application is deemed com_~lete, ., and all required information has been submitted. APPLICATION FOR PUSLIC .EARING FOR STANDARD REZONE-10/98 JUL 3 0 2002 · :' ":'::;'.'!.7,.;::'".':5 ;... -- . ::... GON'I'Ib~UI' NUMB flail ::;' ..... '.... ....... -. - -...:" ~ -. · ,?.-:..:'~';~.:;....': .- '. 23-1693~ ..... -- · }>2)}2~I,'I'AX (I.i)] NIIMIII:JI ..... ~' ' 'l~fis Imlm~mre, n~le lifts 7' day ol'Scp~cm~r, ~0 Belden AVA'I'AR PROPI~I'I~ INO., P.O. ~* :: .':-'; .': .' · · ." ua,t.. '. ' D()IJ~5 ami Olhcr Valuahlc ~midcndions, lo k i, Im],l Ixlid. by z&l ImdyL~ of Iht second lrmy, the ~ .' .. 7: :' ~'".' '-' · s. ·: ;....¥.,. "." "" rubella wlmmf N he~l)y ackno~t~l~d, h~ ~mtml, I~u%-gn~(1 a,d mid Io the mid i)afly(s) or ihe sc~nd ~: .:. : ;........ · ' "'"'" i~, h~dtcir 1~5n and ~*~, rorc~r, Ihe lbllot6n~ (iu~n~i Nmi: : "'"' ;"' ' ~ .. ;.' :"':.:-5::';:" "'.: ':. . . ...'. SEE FXI'IlilFP"A' A'~I'ACI'IED I'I1?~1~ AND BY RIr~RENCE HEREIN MADE A PART '." ' HEREO~. ;' "'"":"" ': "' ' ' ' '2 .: :7.7 '.'7~'.:F .. -- Sub]~l to ~xe~ for ~e ~enl year, easementa, re~lficfion~ and r~e~alions of record. :' .. . . : ~. '?'.'~..:;.;?:c." - ~lS IS VACANT ~NO AND 1S NOT SU8~HCT TO HOMEST~ ~HMP~ON ~O N~VER :.:: :~..~:::.7'~.-..~:}. "... -- ~ ;:'. '..'.'5~. ' ".' ~d the said pa~ of the fi~t pail d~s hereby fully warrant the title to said land, and will defend ~. :....... :.... v ' ; . ~e same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. .' ...~.?....:~:-..:,.. ~.. ' '-i. [..¥. ;ttslll()r~t~[ olllc~:~, a.d ils cu,'la>Aflc ~m:l lo l~ allixe:l, lite lilly tmtJ year wriltett. ,, ~ ? ,, ?, , .."' ¥,,~, : · ~ ~ ~ ~, . ~~'. ..: ~'.:'5. :.. : .:5.:;7" : P.O. Box O_~, Mm,m, ~. 31 r,"'~5 nj ' .~; ' ' '.'"" ~:-' :"-~O. ~'5: : . .:ii' ;' ~'.'. '- ..~ :. -., ~7:-.'::"..'-' .:.., ' ' ffl'A'l'l~ OF ~.ORIDA C'..my of Mia,ii-Dude :.:. :.. PR()PIO¥1'! I~S lNG., a Iqorida coqmmtinn, lo me i~l~)n;dly known ami kl,nvn to ine lo I~ Ibc i]uli~dual . ....:: r~c atq m,I dtmd :u reich oil;ret Ji)r Iht tt~ and puq~= I]le~ilt exlJre~d: and Ires affixed Ilm~10 Iht "-.' · : ofl;~:d ~ni ofmah] ctJr[}oolloll, ai,I Iht ~t;tl illflllllltellt is Iht :t~ ami dec([ ofmt[(I ta)rl)o~lion, t...:..:-. :.. :. . -: ..: · ":' 7. ~:':;:- "::':-'.: ' '. ' ·.. · .. · . .... ,... - 7.-: .-: ":" '.' Wltn~ my hand and nllicl;d ~al at Miami, mid county and M31C, Ozl Ihia tl~e [ hh ~}:ty ofgcl~mnhcr, "'.." .":.~:'J:5..'7 ...... ' "'"': '..~ .- ~. '. -?.- .;:-?;:(: ... · '..;-' _.:... :.... ,- ..... ;. " .:' {SI:~D ~[~ WI -':'. 5':.7:.?5 :' . ':7 JUL ~ 0 ORDINANCE NO. 02- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 91-102, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS MAP NUMBERED 9621S BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM "RSF-3" TO ~RSF-5" RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR STAFF AND PLANNING COMMISSION STIPULATIONS; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, James G. O'Gara, President, Marquette Develpment Corporation, representing Golden Gate Captial, Ltd., petitioned the Board ot County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY the Board of County comrmssioners of Collier County Florida, that: SECTION ONE: The zoning classification of the real property located in Section 21, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, more parUcularly described as: Block 168, Golden Gate, Unit 5, recorded in Plat Book 5, Page 118 of the Official Records of Collier County, Florida, is changed from 'RSF-Y'to "RSF-5" and the Official Zoning Atlas Map numbered 9621 S, as described in Ordinance 91-102, the Collier County Land Development Code is hereby amended accordingly. The hereto described real property is the same for which the rezone is hereby approved subject to the following conditions. (EXHIBIT "A") SECTION TWO: This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Deparmaent of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this day of. ,2002. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY Mmjo~e ~. ~tudent' '~ Assistant County Attorney JUL 3 0 2002 7~2001-AR-1143 ~;~, ~ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (I~-O1-AR-1143) a) Pursuant to Section 2.2.25.8.1 of the Land Development Code, if, during the course of site clearing, excavation or other construction activity an historic or archaeological artifact is found, all development within the minimum area necessary to protect the discovery shall be immediately stopped and the Collier County Code Enforcement Department contacted. b) An exotic vegetation removal, monitoring and maintenance (exotic free) plan for the site shall be submitted to Current Planning Environmental Staff for review and approval prior to final site development plan approval. c) The developer shall provide sidewalks at the time of preliminary subdivision plat review as approved by the Collier County Transportation Department. d) All residential units shall have a minimum floor area of 1,000 square feet exclusive of the garage. e) The site and all structures shall comply with all applicable codes and ordinances, as may be amended or superceded. f) The project shall connect with the water and sewer utilities that are available in the area. g) The project shall meet the applicable development standards of the RSF-3 Zoning District. h) The development of Block 168, Unit 5, Golden Gate Subdivision shall not exceed 16 residential units. EXttlBIT "A" JUL. 3 0 2002 .i ,,J~ EXECUTIVE suMMARY PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE TUSCANY RESERVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (CDD) PURSUANT TO SECTION 190.005, FLORIDA STATUTES. OBJECTIVE: For the Board to review and consider a petition for the establishment of the Tuscany Reserve CDD by adoption of an ordinance. CONSIDERATIONS: On May 3, 2002, Panther Developments, LLC filed a petition with Joseph K. Schmitt, Administrator, Community Development and Environmental Services Division, for the establishment of the Tuscany Reserve CDD. A mandatory $15,000 application fee was submitted with the petition. The proposed District is located entirely within Collier County, Florida. The proposed District covers approximately 461 acres of land. The site is located in portions of Section 12, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, and Section 7, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, on the Lee County Line, betxveen Livingston Road (North/South) and Interstate 75. A map showing the location of the land area to be serviced by the District appears as Exhibit "1" to the petition (attached). The CDD includes in its entirety a previously approved Plamled Unit Development (P.U.D.) and Development of Regional Impact (DRI) £omaerly known as "Ronto Livingston." Although originally approved for 1,380 units, the Tuscany Reserve PUD is currently proposed to consist of up to 309 dxvelling units, 18 holes of golf, a clubhouse, and other amenities. As of July 1. 2002, the date of advertising for the establishment of this CDD, no P.U.D. amendment petitions for this project had been filed with Collier County. By adopting the ordinance and granting the petition the Board of Cotmty Commissioners would authorize the District, through its Board of Supervisors, to manage and finance certain basic infrastructure for the benefit of the landowners and residents of the Tuscany Reserve Development. This infrastructure, under section 190.012(1), Florida Statutes, includes basic urban systems, facilities and services: water supply, sewers and waste;vater management, surface water control and management (drainage), and roads, bridges and street lights. If adopted, the ordinance would constitute consent by the County to the further petition for the exercise of certain additional special powers authorized by Section 190.012(2), Florida Statutes. These powers may include the operation of parks and facilities for indoor and outdoor recreational, cultural, and educational uses, as well as security, including, but not limited to, guard-houses, fences and gates, electronic intrusion-detection systems, and patrol cars, with certain exceptions. JUL 3 O 2002 The District Board of Supervisors is initially elected for the first six years of the duration of this district in a property-based election (one-acre, one-vote), which has been specifically ruled constitutional (State of Florida v. Frontier Acres Community Development Dist., 472 So. 2d 455 (Fla. 1985)). By operation of law, in time, the Supervisors are elected on a one-person, one-vote basis. In order to provide the basic systems, facilities and services, the District has certain management and financing powers. It may only exercise those powers, however, if they comply with certain strict and detailed procedural requirements including ethics in government, disclosure, conflict of interest requirements, noticed meetings, government-in-the-sunshine conduct, accounting and reporting requirements to various local and state agencies, consultants' competitive negotiation procedures, competitive bidding procedures and others. The adoption of the CDD ordinance does not constitute a form of development approval. Adoption of the CDD and compliance with these many procedural requirements, does not, in any way, allow the District to manage and finance any of these services and facilities without a sho~ving that all legitimate policies, constraints, authorities, controls, permits or conditions on the development of the land, whether local, regional, state or federal in nature, and whether in the form of policies, laws, rules, regulations or ordinances, have been complied with concerning development of the property. In essence, adoption of the CDD ordinance does not exempt the petitioner from compliance with any applicable local, regional, state or federal permitting or regulator>' processes. In this sense, the Community Development District is merely a mechanism to assure the county and the landowners of the district that the provision of infrastructure and services for the P.U.D. is managed and financed in an efficient and economical way. Finally, in order to prevent potential abuses of districts by landowners or by other local governments, the Legislature has provided that the charter of the district, in the general statute itself, may be amended only by the Legislature. In order to provide these systems, facilities and services, the District also is given certain eminent domain powers, within tight constraints, as well as the authority to require service charges, fees or taxes for the various services rendered, ranging from installation of capital facilities to long-term maintenance and repair. Without the Cottnty's consent by resolution the aforementioned eminent domain power is limited to the boundaries of the District. The District may also issue revenue and other user bonds as well as general obligation bonds. Hoxvever, no general obligation bonds can be issued without a referendum and xvithout a showing that the bond will not exceed 35 percent of the assessed valuation of the property within the District. Even with these safeguards and constraints, during the first six years of the District's existence, the board of supervisors shall not issue general obligation bonds unless the board first holds elections on a one-person, one-vote basis for a new board of supervisors. Accordingly, if Collier County adopts the ordinance, then it establishes the Tuscany Reserve Community Development District, as a management tool to benefit both Collier County's existing and future landowners with pinpointed responsibility for timely, efficient, reliable and flexible service provision without burdening the existing taxpayers and finan ial s~'rg~ JUL 3 0 2002 p~._ ~ Collier County. In addition, the District is also a financing tool, off the balance sheet of the County and the developer. It will provide long-range and sustained quality service to initial and subsequent landowners without burdening Collier County and its taxpayers. Finally, such a District may not outlive its practical utility and usefulness. If it ceases to function it will automatically be disbanded by state law. If at any time during its existence Collier County determines by a non-emergency ordinance that it can provide any one of the district services in a more economical manner, over the long term, at lower cost but with higher quality, Collier County may then take that service away from the district and provide the service itself. Section 190.005, Florida Statutes provides that the exclusive and uniform method for establishment ofa CDD of less than 1,000 acres shall be by county ordinance. Section 190.005, Florida Statutes outlines the specific content required in the petition and further outlines six (6) factors for the Board of County Commissioners to consider in determining whether to grant or deny a petition for the establishment of a CDD, as follows: 1. Whether all statements contained within the petition have been found to be true and correct. 2. Whether the creation of the district is inconsistent with any applicable element or portion of the state comprehensive plan or of the effective local government comprehensive plan. 3. Whether the area of land within the proposed district is of sufficient size, is sufficiently compact, and is sufficiently contiguous to be developable as one functional interrelated community. 4. Whether the district is the best alternative available for delivering community development services and facilities to the area that will be served by the district. 5. Whether the community development services and facilities of the district xvill be incompatible with the capacity and uses of existing local and regional community development services and facilities. 6. Whether the area that xvill be served by the district is amenable to separate special-district government. County legal, planning, transportation and public works staffs have reviewed the petition and exhibits submitted by the petitioners (attached) relative to these six (6) factors and have found the proposed Tuscany Reserve CDD petition to be compliant with each of the six (6) review factors. FISCAL IMPACT: As previously noted, a $15,000 filing fee was submitted with the petition. Exhibit "7" of the petition, "Tuscany Reserve Community Development District Summary of probable costs and Estimated Timetable" (attached) delineates the fiscal impacts and timing of impacts to be managed by the district. It is noteworthy that the estimated internal infrastructure and services to be financed by the Tuscany Reserve CDD is $55,569,457, consisting of land clearing, utilities, general infrastructure, land mitigation and acquisition, water managen' nt. land.qcnnino ... JUL 3 0 2002 3 '~ engineering, permitting and contingency funds. Roadways and utilities are ultimately to be transferred to County ownership. DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES: According to the petition, the Tuscany Reserve Community Development District, if the ordinance is adopted, will assume responsibility for the following: (1) General development of the approved uses within the District; (2) Potable water, wastewater and stormwater facilities to support the approved development; (3) Items referenced in Exhibit 7 of the petition (attached); (4) Environmental mitigation activities, as referenced in Exhibit 8 of the petition (attached); and, (5) Water management improvements shown in Exhibit 8 (attached). GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The 461+ acres of the Tuscany Reserve CDD lies partially xvithin the Urban Residential Sub- district and Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District designations on the Future Land Use Map. Although the establishment of this district does not constitute any development approval, the plan of development previously approved for the subject property has been determined to be consistent with the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP). Accordingly, any fi~ture petitions for rezone or development permits will be subsequently reviewed at the time of submittal, and will be subject to the requirements and limitations specified in the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC), and will be required to be consistent with the GMP in effect at that time. RECOMMENDATION: Staff' recommends that the Board of County Commissioners adopt and enact the proposed ordinance establishing the Tuscany Reserve CDD (see Attached). Attachments: JUL 3 0 2002 4 ?g._~_..~ PREPARED BY GLENN E. HEATH, AICP DATE PRINCIPAL PLANNER ~TA~N LITSINGEi~, AICP (.~ DATE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING MANAGER PAT~C~ITE DATE ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTO~EY ~IARGA~ WUERSTLE PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR DATE APPROVED BY: JOSEPH SCHMITT. ADMINIST~TOR DATE COS'IMUNITY'DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS. ~;~any Rese~e CDD EX SUMMARY/gh J13L 3 0 2002 5 ~\ ~ I ORDINANCE NO. 02-__ 3 AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE TUSCANY 4 RESERVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT; $ ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT; PROVIDING FOR 6 AUTHORITY; DESCRIBING THE EXTERNAL 7 BOUNDARIES OF THE DISTRICT; NAMING THE INITIAL 8 MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS; NAMING 9 THE DISTRICT; RECOGNIZING GOVERNING LAWS; 10 CONSENTING TO THE EXERCISE OF CERTAIN SPECIAL 1! POWERS; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND 12 SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE 13 CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING 14 AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 15 16 RECITALS 17 18 WHEREAS, Panther Developments, L.L.C. has petitioned the Board of County 19 Commissioners (Board) of Collier County, Florida, a political subdivision of the State of 20 Florida, to establish the TUSCANY RESERVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 21 DISTRICT (District); and 22 23 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners, after proper published notice 24 conducted a public hearing on the petition and determined the following with respect to 25 the factors to be considered in Section 190.005(1)(e), as required by Section 2d 190.005(2)(c), Florida Statutes. 2? 28 1. The petition is complete in that it meets the requirements of Section 29 190.005 (I) (al, Florida Statutes; and all statements contained within the 30 petition are true and correct. 31 32 2. Establishment of the proposed District is not inconsistent with any 33 applicable element or portion of the local comprehensive plan of Collier 34 County, known as the Collier County Growth blanagement Plan, or the 35 State Comprehensive Plan. 36 37 3. The area of land within the proposed District is of sufficient size, is 38 sufficiently compact, and is sufficiently contiguous to be developable as 39 one functional interrelated community. 40 4t 4. The District is the best alternative available for delivering community 42 development services and facilities to the area that will be serviced by the 43 District. 44 45 5. The community development services and facilities of the District will not 46 be incompatible with the capacity and uses of existing local and regional 47 community development services and facilities. 48 49 6. The area that will be served by the District is amenable to separate 50 special-district government; and 51 .52 WHEREAS, it is the policy of the State, as provided in Section 190.002 (2) (c), 53 Florida Statutes, that the exercise by any independent district of its powers as set forth 54 by uniform general law comply with all applicable governmental laws, rules, regulations, 55 and policies governing planning and permitting of the development to be served by the 56 district, to ensure that neither the establishment nor operation of such district is a 57 development order under Chapter 380, Florida Statutes, and th~ : 1.1,~ .A..{:~C~u 58 established does not have any zoning or permitting powers governing evelo, pment; a~t'd"'~...,t~. d0 WHEREAS, Section 190.004 (3), Florida Statutes, provides the all governm_ental 61 planning, environmental, and land development laws, regulations, and )rdinJ~.gs,.~¢p~02 d2 to all development of the land within a community development di'. tract; and that a pg,_ [0 1 i, ! district shall take no action which is inconsistent with applicable comprehensive plans, 2 ordinances, or regulations of local general purpose government. 3 4 5 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY 6 COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: ? 8 SECTION ONE: FINDINGS OF FACT. 9 10 The foregoing Recitals are hereby adopted as if fully set forth here as findings of ! ! facts which are determined by the Board to be true and correct. !2 !3 SECTION TWO: AUTHORITY FOR ORDINANCE. !4 15 This Ordinance is adopted pursuant to Section 190.005 (2), Florida Statutes, and 16 other applicable provisions of law governing county ordinances. 17 18 SECTION THREE: ESTABLISHMENT OF THE TUSCANY RESERVE COMMUNITY 19 DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. 20 21 The Tuscany Reserve Community Development District is hereby established 22 within the boundaries of the real property described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and 23 incorporated by reference herein. 24 2_5 SECTION FOUR: DESIGNATION OF INITIAL BOARD MEMBERS. 26 2? The following five persons are herewith designated to be the initial members of 28 the Board of Supervisors: 29 30 1. Barry Siren 3. David Salko .31 24301 Walden Center Drive 24301 Walden Center Dr. 32 Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Bonita Springs, FL 34134 33 34 2. Edwin Stackhouse 4. Ken Plonski 35 24301 Walden Center Drive 24301 Walden Center Dr. 36 Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Bonita Springs, FL 34134 37 38 5. Wendy Beville 39 24301 Walden Center Drive 40 Bonita Springs, FL 34134 41 42 SECTION FIVE: DISTRICT NAME. 43 44 The community development district herein established shall henceforth be 45 known as the "Tuscany Reserve Community Development District." 46 47 SECTION SIX: STATUTORY PROVISIONS GOVERNING DISTRICT. 48 49 The Tuscany Reserve Community Development District shall be 9overned by the $0 provisions of Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, and all other applicable general and local _51 law. 52 _53 SECTION SEVEN: CONSENT TO GENERAL POWERS & RECOGNITION OF 54 RIGHTS REGARDING FUTURE SPECIAL POWERS. 5d The uniform charter of the Tuscany Reserve CDD is as set forth in Florida 57 Statutes Sections 190.006 - 190.041, which allows the CDD to exercise powers granted 58 by law under Sections 190.011. The Board specifically consents t, ~ r~,r~,~ .. 59 exercise of these statutory general powers. The Board further recogniz ~s the.~TFT~,,,.~ dO right to seek consent from Collier County in the future for additional, s ;cial .l~.wer.s.. in d! accordance with Section 190.012(2), Florida Statutes. 62 JUL 3 O 2002 2 Pg, , ! SECTION EIGHT: CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY. 2 3 In the event this Ordinance conflicts with any other ordinance of Collier County or 4 other applicable law, the more restrictive shall apply. If any phrase or portion of this $ Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such 6 portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent provision and such 7 holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. 9 SECTION NINE: INCLUSION IN CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES. 10 t ! The provisions of this Ordinance shal~ become and be made a part of the Code t2 of Laws and Ordinances of Collier County, Florida. The sections of the Ordinances may 13 be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such, and the word "ordinance" may be ].4 changed to "section", "article", or any other appropriate word. tS t6 SECTION TEN: EFFECTIVE DATE. t? 15 This Ordinance becomes effective upon filing with the Florida Department of ~ 9 State. 2O 21 22 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier 23 County, Florida, this __ day of ,2002. 24 25 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 26 COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 27 28 29 ATTEST: .30 DWIGHT E. BROCK 31 BY: _32 JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN 33 34 , Deputy Clerk 36 37 3g 39 Approved as to Form 40 And Legal Sufficiency: 42 43 44 PATRICK G. WHITE, 45 Assistant County Attorney JUL 3 0 2002 3 p~,._ '3 _ / TUSCANY RESERV~ CDD " I P~-~ I ~IONE:~S COMPOSFr~ E:)G~IBrF '1 -A' PROJECT LOCATION Memorandum To: Glenn E.~Principal Planner From' ~ar~'~ I~'~ber, Senior Project Manager Public Utilities Engineering Department Date: July 2, 2002 Subject: Tuscany' Reserve CDD Petition This office ackno~vledges receipt of the subject petition dated May' 3, 2002. Upon review, the following comments and recommendations are offered for consideration: 1. The 2001 Water Master Plan Update shows this area being served by an existh~g 16" ~vater transmission main. Exhibit 4 contah~ed in the petition indicates a proposed 12" water main along Livingston Road to serve this development. It is recommended that any extension of the existing water transmission facility necessary to enable connection by this development be provided in such size as to be consistent with that shovm on the blaster Plan. 2. The 2001 Wastewater Master Plan Update shoxvs an existing 16" force main ex-lending into Section 12 along Livingston Road. E,,chibit 4 shoxvs an existing and proposed 12" force main in this area. It is recommended that any extension of the existing wastewater transmission facility necessary to enable connection by this development be provided in such size as to be consistent with that shown on the Master Plan. 3. It is recommended that a separate delivery system be provided within the development for irrigation purposes ~vhich would be available tbr connection to the County's reclaimed water system when it becomes available in that area. Such would be consistent with the County objective of converting irrigation supply from potable to alternate sources to the greatest extent possible. Let me kno~v if you should have any questions or require additional information. cc: Roy B. Anderson, P.E., PLIED Director AC,~IOA ITl,..; - J U L 3 ~ Public Utilities Engineering Department pg._ I C ? GarciaGregory ,- From: GarciaGregory Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 9:53' AM To: Feder_N Cc: scott_d; muller_r Subject: RE: Tuscany Reserve CDD. Hi, Norm: The package will be returned and the only issue that may need to be addressed is to ensure that the second point of access via East/West Livingston will be a singular/shared access to both the golf maintenance facili~ and community. There still seems to be some confusion as to the number of accesses (it has been indicated it is their believe that they will be allowed b, vo separate accesses, one to the golf maintenance facility and another to the community). Thanks Greg ..... Original Hessage ..... From: Feder_N Sent: Wednesday, 3une 26, 2002 7:31 Phi To: scott_d; GarciaGregory Subject: FW: Tuscany R~erve CDD. Have you seen this and is it in process? If not. can you Iocate? ..... original Hessage ..... From: HeathGIenn Sent: Wednesday, .lune 26, 2002 9:48 AH To: Feder_N Subject: RE: Tuscany Reserve CDD. Norm: A couple of weeks ago, I sent out a CDD for review. Just checking to see if you received it. If so, who is your contact person? Thanks, Glenn E. Heath, AICP Principal Planner Collier County Comprehensive Planning (239) 403-2323 AGENOA IT[_.~ JUL 3 0 20O2 - ..IDT & $OCIATES, INC. 2nd RE-SUBMITTAL ~SP-2002-AR-1804 · .,;.. PROJECT//2001090005 DATE: 4/10/02 RAY BELLOWS s~NG April 8, 2002 ~RONM~T~. PEmX;~NG M;, Ray Bellows :' Collier Coun~ Pl~g Se~ices ' P~NG ' ~, 2800 No~h Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida-34104 ' L~NDS~E --. Tuscanv~~SP - 3~ Submittal ~CH~C~ Re: pSP-0 (~-1804~ Dear Nk. Bellows: In respome to Yo~ leRer request for iffo~ation dated M~ch 4, 2002, we ~e ' submiRing revised pl~s ~d doc~en~ for review. Enclosed herewith ~e of the foll°~ng: 1. 10'copies of Revi~ed Preliminau Subdivision Plat (sheet 1-7). The follow~g responses; w~ch ~e pdnted in bold, ~e provided for each of · e below listed, review co~ents: . T~NSPORTATION - RuSs Muller ~ Tampa 1. .. Sh0w'e~ffwest Li~ngstOn ~provemens. 2212.5;vann Avenue Ta~'~ [k 33606 LivingSton 'Road East-West is shown on the revised Plan. The Phon}}~Si3.253_:531 i road is shown inits PrOpOsed location as discussed with Collier [~:'~'[;~j¢:~}:]2478 .Coun~ Transportation:officials. Since WCI desires to utilke the roadway Prior to construction by COllier. Count, WCI will design, ~ ':' -- permit and construct' Bvo lanes of the east/west Livingston Road. ~ WCI will util~e the roadway for construction access, access to the Fort Myers maintenance site and as a seconda~ access to the communi~. In AG~A IT~ 3800 Colonial Blvd., ~200 ~.__qj ~. Phone?941.482.7275 JUL 3 0 2002 ~¥fr. Ray Bellows Apri! 8,. 2002 Page 2 order to accomplish this, WCI will prepare plans and submit a Collier County Site Development Plan application to Collier County for review and approval. WCI will also .apply for the'necessary SFWMD permit(s) in cooperation with Collier CoUnty. The design details and cross-section of the roadway.will be finalized during the coordination and SDP process. The roadway as shown on the Preliminary Subdivision Plan is sufficient for PSP approval at this time. 2. Access needs to be consistent with the PUD and as discussed in meetings with Transportation Planning. A second access has be~n provided, from the community as agreed, during our February 27, 2002 meeting wi~h Collier CoUnty Transportation officials. The location of the access has been designed to align with the potential access point at the Strand. The final, design for the connection from Tuscany Reserve Boulevard to Livingston Road East-West will be reviewed and approved with the Subdivision Construction plans and roadway SDP. The second access now shown on the PSP, is consistent with the PUD and therefore this PSP application is sufficient for approval 3. Need to show.5' sidewalk on ~he local roads and.6' on the collector. The sidewalk -along Livingston Road needs to be paid for as it is to be constructed xvithin the next 2 years. The roadway cross-sections on plan sheet 7 denote the required 5 feet wide sidewalk for all local roads and the required 6' feet wide sidewalk on Tuscany Reserve Boulevard. Tuscany Reserve Boulevard is the only roadway in the project that qualifies as a "collector road''. The sidewalks proposed are therefore in compliance w. ith the Land Development Code. NOte: the sidewalks are not shown' on'the Master Plan because of the scale of the dra~ving, but we have added a note 6 to sheet 2. We acknowledge that the sidewalk along the fronfage of Livingston Road (north- south)~ shall be paid. for bY the developer, because the Count)' will widen the roadway within the next two years. Once the Transportation Department determines the Cost of the sidewa'Ik, WCI can'make arrangements to pay the fee. Since, the review of the sidewalk and roadway improvements will take place ~vith the 'subdivision plans and. plat,-.we.suggest that you stipulate that-the- sidewalk (in lieu of) fee should be paid prior to the first Certificate of Occupancy' or prior to the accept'ance of the first phase of the Subdivision. (Both of these cases would be prior to traffic or pedestrian, use generated by the Tuscany Reserve project). Since ~ve have agreed to this stipulation, the PSP aPplication should be deemed complete. JUL 3 0 2002 Mr. Ray Bellows APril 8, 2002 Page 3 If you require any additional information prior to approval, please contact us. Sincerely, HEIDT AND ASSOCIATES,. INC. Richard H. McC6rmick, P.E. Vice president Rl~Idkd p:\'r ~c,-my Res erve%Mx.~e r p I an,,Corr e~ po n d e n cekkcl_lLM_l.l.l.l~ 1 t~3 C o I h es' CounB' PSP-0 I-AR- 1 SO4.dc~ JUL 3 0 2002 Board of County Commissioners Collier County, Florida RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO SECTION 190.005(2), FLORIDA STATUTES, TO ESTABLISH THE TUSCANY RESERVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT Petition for Establishment of a Community; Development District PA_NTHER DEVELOPMENTS, LLC. ("Petitioner"), by and through its undersigned attorney, petitions the BOARD OF COU~'TY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ("Commission") to adopt an ordinance: reco~m~.izing tt~e community development district ("District") as created bv general lax,,', the Uniform Community Development District Act of Florida, chapter 190, Florida Statutes ( 2000 and hereafter); ac~knowledging the uniform District charter contained in Sections 190.006-190.041, therein; establishing the District and designating the initial district Board of Supep,'isors; and, designating the proposed land area within which the District may manage and finance its basic infrastructure systems, facilities and services. In support thereof, Petitioner submits: 1. Petitioner, Panther Developments LLC. is a Delaware limited liability corporation, has its principal place of business at 24301 Walden Center Drive, Bonita Springs, Florida 34134, and its Vice President is Arthur Friedman. 2. The land area to be served by the District is located wholly within Collier County, Florida. The land area is bounded on the north by the vacant lands; the east by Interstate 75 highway; the south by The Strand PUD; and on the west by Livingston Road and Mediterra; and comprises 461.29 contiguous acres more or less. A map showing the location of the land area to be serviced by the District is attached as Exhibit "1". 3. A metes and bounds legal description of the external boundaries of the District is attached as Exhibit "2". There is no real property within the boundaries of the District . AGENOA lIE} which is to Joe excluded from the jurisdiction of the District. ~o._ JUL 3 0 2002 Page 1 of 6 4. Attached as Exhibit "3" is documentation constituting written consent to establishment of the District by the owners or controllers of 100% of the real properly .to be included in the land proposed to be serviced by the District. 5. The five (5) persons desig, nated as the initial members of the Board of Supervisors of the District, who shall serve in that office until replaced by elected members, as provided in Section 190.006, Florida Statutes, are: Barry Siren 24301 Walden Center Drive Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 Edwin Stackhouse 24301 Walden Center Drive Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 David Salko 24301 Walden Center Drive Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 Ken Ptonski 24301 Walden Center Drive Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 Wendy Beville 24301 Walden Center Drive Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 6. The proposed name of the District is the "Tuscan.,,' Reserve Community Development District". The District charter is a uniform charter created expressly in uniform general law in Sections 190.006-190.041, Florida Statutes. 7. Maps of the land area proposed for the establishment of the state-created, statutory District, sho~ving current major trunk water, sewer interceptors, utilities and outfalls, if any, are attached as Exhibit "4". 8. The estimate of proposed timetables and related costs of construction and provision of District systems, facilities and services which are contemplated by Petitioners and which may be proposed to the District's Board of Supervisors, when established, and based upon available data, which are subject to change, is attached as Exhibit "5". 9. Collier County ("County") has adopted all mandatory elements of its Local Government Comprehensive Plan ("Plan") in accordance with the Local Gore, ~ment Cornprehen'sive Plarming and Land Development Regulation Act of 19: 5, amended in 1986, and Collier County has completed its revised plan for mi~ irnu~'r~'~~ JUL 3 0 2002 Page2 of 6 Pg' criterion review pursuant to Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code. County Ordinance No. 2000-04, and all amendments thereto desig-nate the legal description of the land proposed to be serviced by the District as Urban Residential zmd the Collier County Land Development Code presently designates the land proposed to be serviced by the District as zoned for Planned Unit D. evelopment (PUD). A copy of the entire County Plan is on file with the County staff so that accordingly, Exhibit "6" attached hereto consists only of the portion of the Future Land Use Map applicable to the land area proposed to be serviced by the District. 10. A Statement of Estimated Regulato~ Costs ("SERC") of the Commission's granting of the Petition, and the establishment of the District pursuant thereto, in accordance and in compliance ~vith Sections 190.005(1)(a)(8) and 120.541, Florida Statutes, is attached as Exhibit "7". 11. Petitioner contemplates a petition by the District, once established, to obtain consent of the Commission, as provi.ded by Chapter 190.012 (2), Florida Statutes, to exercise some or all the powers granted therein to the District by general law charter. WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests the Commission to: A. Direct its staff to notice, as soon as practicable, a local, public, non- emergency and information gathering public hearing for the adoption of an ordinance hearing pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 190.005(2)(b), Florida Statutes, on the subject of whether to ~ant this Petition for the establishment on the proposed land area of the Tuscany Reserve Community Development District and to enact the ordinance establish/ng the District. B. Grant this Petition and adopt the ordinance to establish the District in conformity herewith: expressly to designate in the ordinance the land area to be the land served by the District, the name of the District, and the initial Board of Supervisors of the Distr'/ct and expressly to recognize in the ordinance, by statutory citation, that zhe uniform, general law charter of the District xvas created by the Florida Legislature in Chapters 190.006 - 190.041, Florida Statutes. Recognize the impending petition to allow the District to exercise powers ganted by laxv under Chapter 190.012 (2), Florida Statutes, and that such potential exercise has been reviewed and assessed to the date of the ordinance. Finally, provide that, with regard to any future specific consent by County to exercise by the District of any other special powers granted expressly in its general laxv charter, the legal existence and authority of the District, as created by State law and as established by this ordinance, shall have thereby been decided. JUL 3 0 2002 Page 3 of 6 '~. /ff'~ ._  day of May, 2002. l¢~hur Friedn~an Vice Presiden't''..--~'~ Panther Developments, LLC 24301 Walden Center Drive Bonita Springs, FL 34134 (941) 947-2600 JUL 3 0 2002 Page 4 of 6 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Petition to Establish Tuscany Reserve Community Development District was furnished to Stan Litsinger, Comprehensive Planning Manager, Collier County Community Development and Environmental Services Division, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104, by hand delivery this p,,A day of May, 2002. Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson, P.A. 4001 North Tamiami Trail Suite 300 Naples, Florida 34103 (941) 435-3535 AGEJ~O~AITEIV, ~'~ 2002 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit "1" Location of Land Area to be Serviced Exhibit "2" Metes and Bounds Legal Description Exhibit "3" Documentation of Consent of 100% of Landowners To Establishment of District Exkibit "4" Location Map of Water, Sewer and Out£alis Exhibit "5" Documentation of Proposed Timetables for Construction of District Sep,'ices and Estimated Cost of Constructing the Proposed Services EXt%it "6" Future Land Use Map Exhibit "7" Statement of Estimated Regulatoo' Costs JUL 3 o 2002 Page 6 old TUSCANY RESERVE CDD P=~,~;ONERS co~lPosrrE EXPliCIT PROJEOT LOCATION DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY :'ROJECT SITE Lm= COU.~E~t.I LMNGSTON RD RE) ! P~:~,,~ ;~,, HEIDT &ASSOCtATES, Inc. Tampa · Fort ~C:~v~l. E.NOINt~ NO Fort ~ \ / ~,~n~o~ram',,~_P~ ~,,~r'n~o, F~ EXHiBiT 2 TUSCANY RESERVE CDD METES AND BOUNDS LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel A: North one-half of the Northeast one-quarter of Section 12, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, LESS: The portion conveyed to Collier County, A Polit`ical Subdivision, by Warranty Deed recorded June 22, 2000, in Official Records Book 2689, Page .3368. together with: Parcel B: All of Section 7, Township 481 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, lying West of Interstate Highway 75, Right-of-way. PARCEL A and PARCEL B: TOGETHER BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS: A parcel of land lying in Section 7, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, and in Section 12, Township 48 South, Range 2.5 East, in Collier County Florida, and bein9 more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at Northwest Corner of Section 7, Township 48 South, Range 26 East. run thence otong the North boundary of the Northwest one-quarter d) of said Section 7, S.89°52'09"E. 2420.80 feet` t`o o point on the Westerly right-of-way line of Interstate Highway 75 (.324' Right-of-way); thence along said Westerly right-of-way line for the following three (3) courses 1) S.19°50'43"E. 2529.79' feet to a point of curvature; 2) Southerly, 1892.87 feet alan9 the arc of o curve to the right having a radius of 5567.58 feet and o central angle of 19°28'46'' (chord beorin9 S.09°46'20"E., 1883.77 feet); 3) S.00°01'57"E. 124.3.42' feet to o point on the South boundary of the Southeast one-quarter d) of said Section 7; thence along said South boundary N.89°10'15"W., 844.32 feet; thence along the South boundary of the Southwest one-quarter ~) of scid Section 7, N.89°10'25"W., 2627.45 feet` to the Southwest corner of said Section 7; thence along the West boundary of the Southwest one-quarter d) of said Section 7, N.00°S2'28"W., 262.3.15 feet`; thence along t`he West boundary of the NorAhwest one-quarter d) of said Section 7, N.00~50'25"W., 1514.18 feet; thence along Southerly boundary of the North one-half (~), of the Northeast one-quarter a)' of said Section 12, Township 48 South, Range 25 East`, S.89'21'50"W., 2599.53 feet to o point on the Easterly right`-of-woy line of Livingston Rood; thence along said Easterly right-of-way line N.00°24'47"W., 1.316.68 feet to o point on the North boundary of the North one-half (~) of the Northeast one-quarter (~) of said Section 12; thence along sa ~ boundary, N.89°25'08"E., 2597.37 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 461.29 acres, more or less. JUL 3 O 200 . P~,r_PARED ~: HEIDT & AS-¢ OClATES, Inc- :' Tampa -:.Fort~Myers .~)O-~ -  pg., --' .. I'vlL ENGINC~ING "~"~ ~'~'~'./' PLANNING 3800 Colord.~] p~.~,~'ay. #200 ~V~ SURVEYING Fort Myers..~c~C,a, 33912 ~ ...... Phone: 239--~82-7275 \ / ENVIRONMENTAL F~Mll~'~NG FA)(: 23~-2103 V LANDSCAPE ARCHrf~CTURE 'U=OUM'~''U''------A--'~'--'' sKETCH 0 1000 2000 "Exhibit 2-B" I I ,,{ -' SCALE: 1" = 1000' °ftheN°Rheast'/4S'c~n~)~~N°~hb°umda**ftheN°~hwes~;/4Sect;°n7, S.89'52'09'. 2420..0' ~ ~ ~ N.8F25'08~ 2597.37' 5~ ~ o~ u ~ ~ ~ NORTH 1 /2 af THE .~ ~ · m NORTHEAST I [4 OF SECTION I 2 ~ u ~ ~ z ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~LL 0F SE~TIO~ ~ WES~ OF ~ ~ INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 75, ~IGHT-OF-~MAY ' ~ ~ q ~ 0 ~ b . A= 1 ~28' ~8' L- 189Z87~ ~=S.OF46'20'~ Sout~ boundo~ of < N.8~10'25~. N.8~10'15 the Southwest I/4 Sect;on 7 LEGEmD ~ - OFF~C,*L ~E~O~O~ ~oo~ JUL 3 0 2002 ~.L.-- FLORIDA POWER ANO LIGHT CO. '~ ,,~su ~: HEIDT & ASSOO~TES. Inc. SKETCH BF LEGAL DESBRtP=FIB~=~~-. .... __~-  Tampa ', Fo~Myers TUSOANY RESERVE ~ ~g-~2-7275 [Date: 4/19/02 tOrder No.: ~T-TR LAINDOWNER'S CONSENT TO ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICT Panther Developments, LLC., a Delaware limited liability company ("Panther"), by and through its authorized representative, James P. Dietz, Vice President and Treasurer, hereby certifies that Panther, with its principal place of business at 24301 Walden Center Drive, Bonita Springs, Florida 34134, is the owner and or controller of certain property as more particularly described as follows: See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made part hereof By signing below Panther, as owner and or controller of 100% of the proposed land to be included in the establishment of the Tuscany Reserve .. Community Development District ("District"), as evidenced in the deed records of Collier County gives full consent to the expansion of the District in accordance with Chapter 190.005, Florida Statutes, and consents to the inclusion of its property within the proposed boundaries of said District. Executed as of this ~-/'~- day of May, 2002. Panther Developments, LLC By: - //V.~_..,~ ,, ~ tJ,.~'?~_ Jame ,s/P/./ Dietz, Vice i~resident & Treasurer Acknowledgement: State of Florida } Coun~ of Lee } The foregoing ins~ment was ac~owledged before me t~s ~3 ~ day of May, 2002, by James P. Dietz, Vice President and Treasurer, P~ther Developments, ~LC.~...who is personally ~qWnas identification.t° me or who has produced U o~ (seal) Printed Name:~ Co~ission Expires: EXHIBIT 2 TUSCANY RESERVE CDD METES AND BOUNDS LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel A: North one-half of the Northeast one-quarter of Section 12, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, LESS: The p6rtion conveyed to Collier County, A Political Subdivision, by Warranty Deed recorded June 22, 2000, in Official Records Book 2689, Page 5368. together with: Parcel B: All of Section 7, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, lying West of ]nterstate Highway 75, Right-of-way. PARCEL A and PARCEL B: TOGETHER BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS: A parcel of land lying in Section 7, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, and in Section 12, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, in Collier County Florida, and being more particularly described os follows: BEGINNING at Northwest Corner of Section 7, Township 48 South, Rc:nge 26 East run _thence along the North boundary of the Northwest one-quarter ~) of said Section 7, ;.89°52'09"E. 2420.80 feet to a point on the Westerly right-of-way line of Interstate Highway 75 (324' Right-of-way); thence along said Westerly right-of-way line for the following three (3) courses 1) S.19"30'45"E. 2329.79' feet to a point of cu~ature; 2) Southerly, 1892.87 feet ~long the arc of a cu~e to the right having a radius of 5567.58 feet and o central angle of 19"28'46'' (chord bearing S.09~46'20"E., 1883.77 feet);' 3) S.00~01'57"E. 1243.42' feet to a point on the South boundo~ of the Southeast one-qua~er ~) of said Section 7; thence along said South bounda~ N.89"lO'15"W., 844.32 feet; thence along the South bounda~ of the Southwest one-quarter ~) of s~id Section 7, N.89"lO'25"W., 2627.43 feet to the Southwest corner of s~id Section 7; thence clang the West boundary of the Southwest one-quarter ~) of said Section 7, N.OO"52'28"W., 2623.13 feet; thence along the West bounda~ of the NoAhwest one-quarter ~) of said Section 7, N.OO~30'25"W., 1314.18 feet; thence along the Southerly boundaw of the North one-half (~), of the Northeast one-quarter ~), of sa~d Section 12, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, S.89"21'50"W., 2599.53 feet to a point on the Easterly right-of-way line of Livingston Road; thence along said Easterly right-of-way line N.OO~2¢'47"W., 1316.68 feet to a point on the North bound~ of the North one-half (~) of the Northeast one-qua~er (~) of said Section 12; thence along sa~ boundary, N.89'25'O8"E., 2597.57 feet to the POINT OF BEO[NN[NO. Containing 461.29 .acres, more or less. HEIDT & AS~OC~S~ Inc. EXHIBIT A "~.,,...,., TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY ' .,,.~RO PKWY., #130, FORT MYERS, FL33916 o,.¢J)275-8212 OWNERSHIP AND ENCUMBRANCE REPORT First Fidelity Title inc. 24201 Walden Center Drive Suite 204 Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 Artn: Ann Roczko FiIe No.: 240200550 LEGAL: See Legal Description A~ached Dear Ann; We have made a search of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida through April 8, 2002, and the apparent record owner is Panther Developments, LP., by virtue of those Deeds recorded in Official Records Book 2761, Page 2558 and Official Records Book 2761, Page 2571, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. Said search discloses the following mortgages not satisfied of record nor otherwise terminated by law. 1. Consol!dated, Amend~ and Restated Mortgage and Security Agreement which was executed by WCI Communities, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, Bay Colony-Gateway, Inc., a Delaware Corporation and JYC Holdings, Inc., a Florida Corporation to Fleet National Bank f/k/a BankBoston, N.A., dated April 26, 2000 recorded April 23, 2000 in Off;cial Records Book 2689, Page 1472, Public Records of Collier County, Florida. 2. Financing Statement between Fleet National Bank f/k/a BankBoston, N.A., (Secured Party) and Panther Development, LLO., and Bay Colony-Gateway, Inc., (Debtor) recorded in Official Records Book 2534, Page 770, Public Records of Collier County, Florida. We exhibit all certified Judgments, Liens, and Decrees for money against the persons shov,,n in the instruments contained in the foregoing Certificate by the exact names and initiaIs as therein shown (and not other',vise) except ail Judgments, Liens, and Decrees for money which appear to be satisfied or released of record or have expired pursuant to Florida Statute 55.10, and all certified Judgments entered 20 years prior to the date certified to herein, other than those rendered in the name of the United States. No search has been made of the Index in the district office of the Internal Revenue Services under Section 6323 (1) (4) of the Internal Revenue Code. Tax information is provided for informational purposes only. The customer acknowledges and agrees that in the event of any error or omission by CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY which results in loss to the customer, CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY liability shall not exceed the lesser of the customer's actual loss or darr~ge, or $1,000.00, whichever is less. This search is not a Title Insurance Policy and should not be relied upon as such. For full protection, a Title Insurance Policy should be secured. TUSCANY RESERV~ CDD pETTT~ONER~r CO*I~POSITE~ EX).,BE~T '4' LOCATION M~ OF WATER, S~R, & o~LS VASARI PROJECT SITE MEDITERRA OUTFA4.L 2 ~ G S~O-N--~)A-D ~ ........................................ UND~LO~ THE S~p JUL 3 0 2002 IN~m F~~ V ~ ~ TUSCANY RESERVE CDD FUTURE LAND USE MAP COLLIER COUNTY (AS AMENDED MARCH 2001) A PORTION OF ENTIRE MAP URBAN DIFSIGNATION ] URBAN RESlDE]NTIAL SUBDISTRICT [] AGFIICULTURAI.~URAL MI)~D USE DISTR~CT i [] ESTATES SUBDISTRAC~T i COMMERCIAL DISTRICT __ CO~EE~ COtJNTY [] Mt)(~O USE ACTIVITY C~NTER SUBDISTRIOT ] INTI~IC;HANGE ACTIVT1-Y CE~ITEFJ SUE0~PJ~--Tr OVERLAYS & SPECIAL FEA~RES -- -- COASTAL HIGH HAZAI:~ AREA TUSCANY LEE COLT1NTY PR£PAR£]~ ~¥, HELOT & ASSOCIATES, Inc. . Fo~ ~ SURVE~ Jg L 3 O TUSCANY RESERVE CDD PETITIONERS COMPOSITE EXHIBIT 6-B FUTURE LAND USE MAP URBAN RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT DEFINITION GMP FLUE ONLINE urban residential subdistrict 1. Urban Residential Subdistrict The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide for h/gher densities in an area with fe~ver natural resource constraints and xvhere existing and planned public facilities are concentrated. This Subdistrict comprises approximately 93,000 acres and 80% of the Urban Mixed Use D/strict. Maximum eligible residential density shall be determined th.rough the Density Rating System but shall not exceed 16 dwelling units per acre except in accordance with the Transfer of Development Rights Section of the Land Development Code. TUSCANY RESERVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT Statement of Estimated Regulatory Costs Prepared By: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. 11869 High Tech Avenue Orlando, Florida 32817 April 22, 2002 EXHIBIT 7 JUL 3 0 2002 TUSCANY RESERVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED REGULATORY COSTS 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Purpose and Scope This statement of estimated regulatory costs ("SERC") supports the petition to establish the Tuscany Reserve Community Development District ("Tuscany Reserve" or "District"). As a new community development district ("CDD"), the limitations on the scope of this SERC are explicitly set out in Section 190.002(2)(d), F.S. (governing CDDs) as follows: "That the process of establishing such a district PUrsuant to uniform general law shall be fair and based only on factors material to manaqing and financinq the service delivery function of the district, so that any matter concerning permittinq or planning of the development is not material or relevant (emphasis added)." 1.2 Tuscany Reserve Community Development District The proposed District comprises approximately 461.29 +/- acres within Collier County, Florida ("County"). The current development plan for the community includes a total of 309 residential units (single fami.ly and multi-family) with an associated town center, an eighteen-hole championship golf course, a clubhouse and other amenities. A CDD is an independent unit of special purpose local government authorized by Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, to plan, finance, construct, operate and maintain community-wide infrastructure in large, planned community developments. CDD's provide a "solution to the state's planning, management and financing needs for delivery of capital infrastructure to service projected growth without overburdening other governments and their taxpayers." Section 190.002 (1) (a) F.S. A CDD is not a substitute for the local, general purpose, government unit, i.e., the county or city within which the CDD lies. A CDD does not have the permitting, zoning or police powers possessed by general purpose governments. A CDD is an alternative means of financing, constructing, operating and maintaining community infrastructure for planned developments, such as Tuscany Reserve. The scope of this SERC is limited to evaluating the consequences of approving the proposal to establish the District. ~~,~ JUL 3 {3 2002 -- 1.3 Requirements for Statement of Estimated Regulatory Costs Section 120.541(2), F.S. (2000), defines the elements a statement of estimated regulatory costs must contain, which also apply, because of Chapter 190, F.S., to this ordinance: "(a) A good faith estimate of the number of individuals and entities likely to be required to comply with the rule, together with a general description of the types of individuals likely to be affected by the rule. (b) A good faith estimate of the cost to the agency, and to any other state and local government entities, of implementing and enforcing the proposed rule, and any anticipated effect on state and local revenues. (c) A good faith estimate of the transactional costs likely to be incurred by individuals and entities, including local governmental entities, required to comply with the requirements of the rule. As used in this paragraph, "transactional costs" are direct costs that are readily ascertainable based upon s~andard business practices, and include filing fees, the cost of obtaining a license, the cost of equipment required to be installed or used or procedures required to be employed in complying with the rule, additional operating costs incurred, and the cost of monitoring and reporting. (d) An analysis of the impact on small businesses as defined by Section 288.703, F.S., and an analysis of the impact on small counties and small cities as defined by Section 120.52, F.S. (the County is not defined as a small county for purposes of this requirement). (e) Any additional information that the agency determines may be useful. (f) In the statement or revised statement, whichever applies, a description of any good faith written proposal submitted under paragraph (1) (a) and either a statement adopting the alternative or a statement of the reasons for reiecting the alternative in favor Of the proposed rule." Note: Since Tuscany Reserve is less than 1,000 acres, it will be established pursuant to ordinance rather than rule. For purposes of this SERC, the term "rule" means "ordinance" as it relates to the establishment of the District. 2.0 A good faith estimate of the number of individuals and entities likely to be required to comply with the rule, together with a general description of the types of individuals likely to be affected by the ordinance. 2 JUL B O 2002 The principal entities that are likely to be required to comply with the ordinance include the District, the State of Florida, and the County. In addition, future landowners in Tuscany Reserve will also be affected by the establishment of the proposed District. As noted above, Tuscany Reserve is currently designed to include a total of 309 housing units, an eighteen hole championship golf course, a clubhouse and other amenities. 3.0 Good faith estimate of the cost to state and local government entities, of implementing and enforcing the proposed ordinance, and any anticipated effect on state and local revenues. 3.1 Costs to Governmental Agencies of Implementing and Enforcing Ordinance There will be minimal costs to the State and local governments to implement the proposed ordinance establishing the Tuscany Reserve Community Development District. Since Tuscany Reserve is less than 1,000 acres and lies wholly within the County, it is the County alone that must evaluate and decide upon the proposed ordinance. The State has no role in evaluating the proposed ordinance. However, the State will have some modest implementation costs relating to the various reports the CDD must file. These are described below. Since Tuscany Reserve lies entirely within the County, the County will examine the petition to establish the District and decide upon the proposed ordinance. There will be staff costs for the review, the costs of a public hearing, and costs to the County's Board of County Commissioners to consider the proposed ordinance. These costs are modest for a number of reasons. First, review of the petition to establish the CDD is limited by statute to the financial and operational aspects of the District, and they do not include analysis of the Tuscany Reserve development project itself. Second, the petition itself provides most, if not all, of the information needed for a staff review. Third, local governments already possess the staff needed to conduct the review without the need for new staff. Fourth, there is no capital required to review the petition. Finally, local governments routinely process similar petitions for land uses and zoning changes that are far more complex than is the petition to establish a CDD. Furthermore, these should be fully offset by the $15,000 filing fee allowed under State law. Thus, the net cost to the County to review the proposed ordinance is very small, if it exists at all. As units of local government, CDDs must file all reports required by units of local government in Florida. These include, but are not necessarily limited to the following: :- 3 tilld copies ~of each annual financial report, for the previous year must be with the County and the Department ot Banking and Finance no later than March 31 of each year; (b) budgets for the upcoming fiscal year. are the subject of public hearing, after proper newspaper notice, and are subject to review and optional comments, by the applicable unit of local government within which the CDD is located; ' . t c) within twelve months of the close of each fiscal year, a CDD must ile certified copies of its audited financial statements w th the applicable unit of local government; (d.!,_ thien any year a CDD issues its specia assessment bonds it must file w~n Division of Bond Finance of the State Board of Adm nistration a complete description of such bonds (Chapter 218.38, F.S.); (e) each year a CDD must fie with the applicable unit of local government ~ schedule of time, date and location of all regular meetings of the District s Board of Supervisors (Chapter 1 89, F.S.); (f.) each year a CDD must file a p. ublic facilities report pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 189.415, F. S.; and (~o) the obligation to notify the Governor and the Legislative Auditing mmittee of any impending or existing financial emergency of the CDD (Chapter 189.409, F.S.). In addition, CDDs are governed by the provisions of Chapter 189.412 and must participate in the Special District Information Program conducted by the Department of Community Affairs. The Department charges a fee of $175 per year to each CDD to offset the Department's costs. The review and collation of all of these reports absorbs some resources of the State and its various agencies. However, the incremental cost of one additional set of local governmental reports is minimal. The same is true for the applicable unit of local government which will also receive various reports from the CDD for informational purposes. However, no ongoing action is required from either the State or the local governments. The CDD is an independent unit of local government with its own budget and its own staff. 3.2 Impact on State and Local Revenues Adoption of the proposed ordinance to approve the establishment of the District will have no adverse impact on State and local revenues. As noted above, the District's sole functions are outlined in Chapter 190, F.S. and relate strictly to the planning, financing, constructing, operating and maintaining community infrastructure and services to serve the Tuscany Reserve community. __. JUL 3 0 2002 p ~._-_ ~,,.',,' 4.0. A good faith estimate of the transactional costs likely to be incurred by individuals and entities required to comply with the requirements of the ordinance. Transactional costs to the State and local agencies in reviewing the petition to establish the District have been discussed above. Beyond those administrative costs, there will be no cost incurred by the State of Florida, any of its agencies, or local governments. The District is designed by law to plan, finance, operate, and maintain community infrastructure and services to serve the Tuscany Reserve community. The District will levy non-ad valorem special assessments on properties within its boundaries to finance the infras(ructure the District funds and to defray the costs of operating and maintaining that infrastructure and associated community facilities. The table below describes the facilities and services the District plans to provide. TUSCANY RESERVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT SUMMARY OF FACILITIES AND SERVICES FACILITY OR SERVICE FUNDED BY CDD OPERATED BY OWNERSHIP Roadways (Internal) No HOA HOA Roadways (Offsite) Yes County County Potable Water Yes County County Wastewater Yes County County Drainage Yes CDD CDD The total estimated construction cost (including engineering and construction contingency) for these facilities is approximately $44,873,290. Also, various financing reserves must be provided for, such as a Debt Service Reserve (approximately $4,836,675), 24 months of capitalized interest (approximately $7,618,661), and estimated costs of bond issuance of approximately $1,176,374. In total, the District plans to validate and may issue up to $58,505,000 in special assessment revenue bonds to fund the above costs. Prospective future land owners in the District would be required to pay off a portion of the special assessment revenue bonds in 30 annual payments in the form of non-ad valorem special assessments levied by the District and collected by the Collier County Tax Collector (the Tax Collector and Property Appraiser are reimbursed for their expenses). In addition, as lots are sold to final users, the remaining portion of the debt not evidenced in such 30-year bonds encumbering those lots is expected to be extinguished. ¢ JUL 3 O 2002 In addition to the levy of non-ad valorem special assessments for debt service, the petitioner for the District also plans an annual levy for operations and maintenance of the District. In considering the costs that must be paid by those affected by the proposed ordinance to establish the Tuscany Reserve Community Development District, two points are important. First, unlike most other situations, 100% of the costs that would be funded by the District would have to be incurred in any event. These costs are not peculiar to the establishment of the District. If the District does not provide these facilities and services, the Developer would borrow money, construct the facilities, and raise the prices for its real estate products to cover these extra costs. If the District does not operate and maintain these facilities, a homeowners association (or similar entity) would have to assess its members to pay for this service. The point is that these costs exist in any event. Second, State law requires that prospective property owners be notified that these District levies exist. Anyone purchasing property subject to the District's levies does so voluntarily and with full information. 5.0 An analysis of the impact on small businesses as defined by Section 288.703, F.S., and an analysis of the impact on small counties and small cities as defined by Section 120.52, F.S. Approval of the petition to establish the District will have only incidental impact on small businesses, and it is positive. The District must ,operate according to Florida's "sunshine" laws, and the District must take bids for the goods and services it will purchase. As a result, small businesses will be better able to compete for District business serving the lands to be included within the District. The County has an estimated population of 264,475 as of April 1, 2001. The definition of a small county is 75,000 or less; therefore, the approval of the establishment of the District will not have any impact on small counties and cities as defined in Section 120.52, F.S. The County is not a small county as defined. 6.0 Any additional useful information. The analysis provided above is based on a straightforward application of economic theory, especially as it relates to tracking the incidence of regulatory costs and benefits. Inputs were received from the developer's Engineer and other professionals associated with the developer. Finally, it is useful to reflect upon the question of whether the proposed District is the best alternative to provide community facilities and services to the project. As an alt:ernative to the District, the County could approve a dependi-r~t district for the area, such as an MSBU or a special taxing district und ;r Cl~ep___?,_r~_~"L/ JUL 3 0 ZOO2 170, F.S. Either of these alternatives could finance the improvements contemplated by the District in a fashion similar to the proposed District. However, unlike the District, the alternatives would require the County to continue to administer the project and its facilities and services. As a result, the costs for these services and facilities would not be solely allocated to the land directly benefiting from them, as the case would be with the District. Furthermore, a District is preferable from a government accountability perspective. With a District as proposed, residents will have a focused unit of government under their eventual direct control. The District can then be more responsive to resident needs without disrupting other County responsibilities. Another alternative to the District would be for the developer to provide the infrastructure and to use a prdperty owners' or home owners' association ("HOA") for operations and maintenance of community facilities and services. A District is superior to an HOA for a variety of reasons. First, unlike an HOA, a District can impose and collect its assessments along with other property taxes. Therefore, the District is far more assured of obtaining its needed funds than is an HOA. Second, the proposed District is a unit of local government. Therefore, unlike the HOA, the District must abide by rules and regulations applicable to local governments. This benefits property owners in the District. Thus, we conclude that the proposed District is the best alternative to provide community facilil;ies and services to the project. Arthur H. Diamond, Associate Fishkind & Associates, Inc. HAY 2 3 21102 GOODLETTE COLEMAN & JOHNSON, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW Kevin G. Coleman Northern Trust Bank Building Linda C. Brinkman J. Dudley Goodlette* 4001 Tamiami Trail North Eric M. Borgia Kermeth R. Johnson Naples, F134103 Pieter G. VanDien Richard D. Yovanovich (941) 435-3535 Kenneth B. Cuyler (941) 435-1218 Facsimile Harold J. Webre, III Jonathan D. Fishbane Writer's e-mail: rs, ovanovich~_ocilaw.com * Board Certified Real Estate Attorney May 22, 2002 via Hand Delivery Glenn Heath Principal Planner Collier County Planning Services 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 RE: Petition for Tuscany Reserve CDD Dear Glenn: Enclosed please find a White Paper from Richard McCormick from Heidt & Associates, Inc., the proposed District Engineer, and a White Paper from D. Wayne Arnold, AICP, the Planner for the Tuscany Reserve Community Development District. Also enclosed please find an acknowledgment that pertains to utility facilities and services to the proposed Tuscany Reserve Community Development District. This information is being provided to the County to assist in processing the Tuscany Reserve Community Development District petition which is scheduled to be considered by the Board of County Commissioners on its July 30, 2002, agenda. If you have any additional questions regarding the Petition or need any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, Richard D. Yovanovich RDY:smc Enclosures AGENDA ITE'" cc: Creig Veldhuizen w/o enclosure (via facsimile) Dave Caldwell w/o enclosure (via facsimile) , JUL 3 O 2002 F :\DATA~WPDATA\LITtGATE\WCI\5-22-O2heath.wpd "pl~._~ ~ ACKNOWLEDGMENT Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, as amended, expressly restricts and limits the exercise by a Community Development District of its special powers. The petitioner acknowledges that the Community Development District's Board of Supervisors is legally and ethically bound to exercise its special powers subject to, and not inconsistent with, the laws and regulations contained in the Collier County Water-Sewer District Special Act, and any applicable DRI Development Order, P.U.D., preliminary subdivision plat and/or other applicable development order as provided in Section 190.004 and 190.012, Florida Statutes. Accordingly, the proposed district cannot and will not act in such a manner as to erode the Collier County Water-Sewer District's customer base, as this would be inconsistent with Collier County ordinances and regulations and Chapter 190, Florida Statutes. Petitioner does not seek expressly or impliedly, directly or indirectly, do anything inconsistent with these requirements as a legal duty on the developer governing the development. In light of the statutory restrictions and mandates upon the powers and functions of a Community Development District discussed below, the proposed District will not and cannot diminish the customer base of the Collier County Water-Sewer District. Collier County under its ordinance is the permanent provider of water and sewer service to the development on which the Community Development District will be established. Also, the 1988 Special Act reestablishing the Collier County Water-Sewer District makes clear in Section 21 that: 1 ) Collier County can mandate connection to ~, sewer facilities; 2) Collier County can require installation and dedication of wa ;r an~'~ JUL 3 O 2002 facilities to the County; and 3) no water and sewer facilities can be built within the water- sewer district unless the district board (Collier County Commissioners) gives its consent and approval. The land area which the district will serve is in the jurisdiction of the dependent Collier County Water-Sewer District and is subject therefore to the terms of the 1988 Special Act. The community is also subject to a DRI Development Order, and PUD. In addition, the land area involved is also subject to Collier County Ordinance Nos. 90-86, as amended, and 90-87, as amended, utility facilities requirements, as well as the state, regional and local comprehensive plans, permitting agencies and all related land development regulations. All of these jurisdictional and binding documents in effect constitute the clear operative base of all State and Collier County laws, rules, regulations, policies and ordinances applicable to and governing the planning and permitting of the development to be serviced by the Community Development District on the proposed property. The proposed district is not exempt. The Florida Legislature, in Section 190.002(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2001), has stated as a finding that a Community Development District is a solution to the management and capital infrastructure financing problems faced by counties. In solving these problems, a Community Development District also provides a method of servicing projected growth without over-burdening other ~ocal governments and their taxpayers. In other words, the Legislature has found Community Development Districts, as management entities, are legitimate solution to infrastructure delivery. ~o._ ~'~_._ JUL 3 0 2002 Pi[._ zt- :? It is also the expressed policy of the legislature that Community Development Districts are "a legitimate alternative method available for use by the private and public sectors, as authorized by state law, to manage and finance basic services for community development." Fla. Stat. §190.002(2) (b) (2001). This language means that the district is a management tool for both Collier County and the petitioner. This management tool is to be used by both the developer and the county as authorized in Chapter 190 of the Florida Statutes. In Section 190.002(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2001), the Legislature has also found that it is in the public interest that "the operation of such a district and the exercise by the district of its powers be consistent with applicable due process, disclosure, accountability, ethics and government-in-the-sunshine requirements" (emphasis supplied). This law means that no decision of the Board of Supervisors can be made in secret, and that Collier County will be given ample noticed opportunities to monitor the exercise of the Board of Supervisors' special limited management powers, including any dealing with water and sewer services, which are not expected to be services provided in any way by the Community Development District. In other words, this language mandates that the district board of supervisors as a local government works with the Collier County local government. In regard to possible conflicts between general purpose local government laws and actions of a Community Development District local government, the Legislature has expressly stated as its policy that the exercise by a district of its powers shall "comply with all applicable governmental laws, rules, regulations and policies governing~¢,,[~,¢~ ~-'i JUL 3 O 2002 ,.. permitting of the development to be serviced by the district" in order "to insure that neither the establishment nor operation of such a district is a development order under Chapter 380, and that the district so established does not have any zoning or permitting powers governing developments". Fla. Stat. §190.002(2) (c) (2001). In addition, Section 190.003, Florida Statutes (2001), provides that a community development district function in such a manner"that all applicable planning and permitting, rules, regulations and policies control the development of the land to be serviced by the district". Even more illustrative of the Legislature's intent is the dispositive language in the "preemptive and sole authority" section of the Uniform Community Development District Act. Fla. Stat. 190.004 (3) (2001). First, the statute specifically states that "all governmental, planning, environmental and land use development laws, regulations and ordinances apply to all development of the land within a Community Development District." Id. Since the Collier County Water- Sewer District Special Act is a law of Florida, it applies to all development within the land to be serviced by the proposed Community Development District. Since "all development" includes by definition utility and other services, the Collier County Water-Sewer District requirements apply to all developments in the applicable land area, even after the establishment of the Community Development District. Second, the preemption section directly and specifically mandates that "a district shall take no action which is inconsistent with applicable comprehensive plans, ordinances, or regulations of the applicable local general purpose governments". This direct mandate is to the Board of Supervisors of the proposed Community Development Dist ~ JUL 3 0 2007_ take no action inconsistent with the Collier County Water-Sewer District Special Act. Accordingly, the Board members will be under ethical and legal duties, subject to malfeasance, non-feasance, and misfeasance of office, to take no action inconsistent with the Collier County laws and regulations affecting the water-sewer district customer base. Last, the special powers of the Community Development District, which become available upon its establishment by ordinance of Collier County (but which are not contemplated for the Tuscany Reserve CDD), are also severely limited by Section 190.012, Florida Statutes (2001) .This section provides in pertinent part that the district board of supervisors "may exercise [its special powers] subject to the. regulatory jurisdiction and permitting authority of all applicable governmental bodies, agencies and special districts having authority to any area included herein...". Here, the Legislature has answered directly the question of whether the district can act inconsistent with the regulations of the Collier County Water-Sewer District. The exercise of the proposed district's powers are unquestionably "subject" to those of the Collier County Water-Sewer District. All of the foregoing language expresses the Legislature's intent that the Community Development District be managed in a manner consistent with the laws and regulations of both Collier County and the State of Florida. Therefore, the state and Ioca~ ~aws, rules, and regulations applicable to the land of the district must be examined in order to determine what powers regarding water and sewer service the proposed development district will have or be able to exercise once established. JUL 3 0 2002 .:~. k'" DT & ASSOCIATES, INC. fort Myers tampa CIVIL ENGINEERING ':° PLANNING ':° SURVEYING ':' ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING ':' LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 3800 Colonial Blvd., #200 · Fort Myers, FL 339 [ 2 · Phone: 941.482.7275 · Fax: 941.482.2103 TUSCANY RESERVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT Engineering Considerations Establishment of Proposed Tuscany Reserve Community Development District. My name is Richard McCormick. By profession I am a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Florida. Attached is my resume. The purpose of this report is to raise and discuss engineering aspects and consequences of proposed new community development projects in general, and the various alternatives for the delivery of basic infrastructure to community developments. This includes the use of the specialized governmental entities kd~own as Community Development Districts for the provision of basic infrastructure. Regarding the Tuscany Reserve Colnmunity Development District, which would provide infrastructure to the Tuscany Reserve Community Development, I have assisted in the preparation of the Petition, certain exhibits, and additional information pertinent to the engineering consequences of establishing the District. This document constitutes a summary of the engineering consequences of establishing the District on the identified property in the County. The general laxv which creates the charter of the District requires information which must be contained in all petitions, as required in the uniform establishment procedure set forth in Section 190.005, Florida Statutes. The Petition, with its attachments, establishes initial information on the record and triggers the process which results in an ordinance establishing the District on the legally described property, pursuant to Section 190.005(1)(a), Florida Statutes. The Statute then requires pertinent information as to the six factors w'hich must be considered by the Petitioner, the County District Processing Team, and, ultimately, the members of the Board of County Cot missi~,~tl~tr~ Collier County in establishing the District, pursuant to Section 190.005(1)(e)1-6, FI :ida Statutes. JUL 3 0 2002 EIDT & ASSOCIATES, INC. Fort Myers Tampa CIVIL ENGINEERING ':' PLANNING ':' SURVEYING '~' ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING °:' I_ANDSCAPEARCHITECTURE 3800 Colonial Blvd.. #200 · Fort Myers. Fl. 33912 · Phone: 941.482.7275 · Fax: 941.482.210:~ This document addresses the engineering aspects of not only the information in the Petition and its exhibits, but also the information related to consideration of the six statutory factors. I have reviewed the engineering consequences of establishing this District with the assumption that the District xvould exercise all of the systems, facilities, and services it is empowered to provide as basic infrastructure to the community development under Sections 190.011 and 190.012, Florida Statutes. After reviewing the Petition and its exhibits, I used the six factors as a guide for my engineering analysis in order to determine whether a particular problem specific to Collier County and the District is identified. I have also anticipated questions and concerns oriented specifically toward Collier County near the end of this document. Please note that it was necessary to evaluate the factors in a different order than the statutory listing, because the analysis can be better understood that way. FACTOR ONE Regarding creation and establislunent of the District, my duties were to inspect the site within Collier County where the District is to be set up. I also helped prepare the Petition and its attacNments from an engineering perspective. In my opinion, as an engineer, the Petition and its attached exhibits are true and correct. Special Problems No special engineering problems ~vere evident during my review. FACTOR TWO Although not directly my responsibility because I am not a planner, I have reviewed the State Comprehensive Plan from an engineering perspective. I have found nothing in the State Comprehensive Plan with ~vhich creation and establisNnent of the District would be inconsistent. Furthermore, I have reviewed the Collier County Comprehensive Plan and have determined there is nothing with which creation and establishment of the District would be incon1 ;tsten .{~C_ ~t-~'' JUL 3 0 2002 }-x. IDT & ASSOCIATES, INC. Fort Myers Tampa CIVIL ENGINEERING °7® PLANNING °I° SURVEYING °:o ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING °;° LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 3800 Colonial Blvd., #200 · Fort Myers, FL 33912 · Phone: 941.482.7275 ° Fax: 941.482.2103 My work assumes for analysis purposes that the District, on this property in Collier County, will exercise its po~vers as set forth in acCordance with Sections 190.011 and 190.012, Florida Statutes. I have also used the six factors in Section 190.005(1)(e) 1 - 6, Florida Statutes, in the light of the District's powers set forth in Sections 190.011 and 190.012, Florida Statutes, to determine whether any specialized problems presently exist on this property in Collier County, or will evolve from the creation and establishment of the District. Preliminary to all of my xvork, I have reviexved the actual physical property to be included within the District. Regarding enclaves, I note that none exist or are proposed in the legal description of the District. Special Problems No special problems were evident during my reviexv. FACTOR THREE Having reviewed the property, in the light of the poxvers requested by the District, I then considered statutory Factor Three, which deals with whether the area of land within the District is of sufficient size, is sufficiently compact, and is sufficiently contiguous to be developable as one functional interrelated community. From an engineering perspective, a "community" is a residential, commercial or industrial community, or a community made up of a combination of uses. It will have an infrastrt,cture system which has certain engineering functions. All of these infrastructure systems must be designed and constructed so that their operation does not conflict with other services. These services also interrelate because they are necessary in combination to provide for the health, welfare, benefit, and enjoyment to the service users within the community. The term "functionally interrelated community", from an engineering perspective, means a xvhich provides systems, facilities and services in a consistent, reliable, and :ost ~. ~, community manner. JLlk 3 0 2002 HEIDT & ASSOCIATES, INC. Fort Myers Tampa.,. CIVIL ENGINEERING °:' PLANNING ':° SURVEYING ':' ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING. °:' LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTLIR,-. 3800 Colonial Blvd., #200- Fort Myers. FL 33912 · Phone: 941.482.7275 · Fax: 941.482.2103 The size of the land area is important in order to determine ~vhether the proposed community development can functionally interrelate, from an engineering viewpoint. Having reviexved the size of the land area in questions, I have determined that it is 461 acres, more or less. This acreage, in my professional opinion, is of sufficient size to provide for a functionally interrelated community development, which could be serviced by a Community Development District. From an engineering vie~vpoint, the word "compactness" means the lands within the community are situated such that the systems, facilities, and services can be provided in a functional and cost effective manner. In reviewing the land area for the proposed community development, I have determined that it is sufficiently compact because based on my experience with similar development, the community systems, facilities, and services can be provided in a functional and cost effective mariner. As an engineer, I understand the term "contiguous" to mean adjacent and abutting. After analyzing the proposed layout of the community, it is my opinion that the land area of the District is sufficiently contiguous to have its systems functionally interrelate in an economical manner. In my opinion, revie~ving the land area involved, I determined that it is of sufficient size, is sufficiently compact and is sufficiently contiguous to function as an interrelated community development itself. Special Problems No special engineering problems were evident during my review. FACTOR SIX Factor Six is addressed next. It deals with ~vhether the land area to be serviced by the District is amenable to special district governance. Having determined, by applying the information relevant and material to Factor Three, that the land area is of sufficient size, sufficiently compact and sufficiently contiguous to be ~~.~ interrelated community development, the question now arises xvhether the land ~rea ~ JUL 3 0 2002 [ 'IDT & ASSOCIATES, INC. Fort Myers Tampa CIVIL ENGINEERING °:° PLANNING .t' SURVEYING °:° ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING ':' LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 3800 Colonial Blvd.. #200 · Fort Myers. FL 33912 · Phone: 941.482.7275 · Fax: 941.482.2103 community development are serviceable by the District. The Statute uses the term "amenable". From an engineering perspective, this term means the area can be adequately and economically served by the District provided systems, facilities or services. The key factor is to determine if there are economies of scale by providing the required and desired services through a Community Development District. Is the land area too small to obtain the benefits ora District even though it is not too small to be permitted as a new community? The answer is that since the land area, based on the proposed layout of the community, is sufficiently compact and contiguous to efficiently provide services, its size does not limit or render it incapable of providing significant econornies of scale when governed by a special district. In my opinion the land area in the District is amenable because of its size and the contemplated layout of the community. Also, there are no existing or proposed land features, facilities, encumbrances or restrictions that would make the services and special capabilities of the District difficult or inefficient to provide. Special Problems No special engineering problems ~vere evident during my review. FACTOR FIVE Factor Five should be considered next. It deals with whether the District would be incompatible with any community development systems, facilities or services, either existing or authorized. From an engineering perspective, I understand the term "community development service or facilities" to mean those infrastructure providing use, benefit, and enjoyment to the users of the services or facilities. In reviexving the site, I have determined that the community development services and facilities of the District will not be incompatible with the capacity and uses of existing local and regional community development services and facilities. JUL 3 0 2002 HEIDT & ASSOCIATES, INC. Fort Myers Tamp CIVIL ENGINEERING ':' PLANNING ':° SURVEYING ':' ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING ':' LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTUIKE 3800 Colonial Blvd., #200 · Fort Myers, FL 33912 · Phone: 941.482.7275 · F~: 941.482.2103 Regarding the District facilities, systems and services, I view the term "compatibility", as an engineer, to mean that the District provided facilities, systems, and services can be integrated into adjacent existing facilities, systems, and services without significant loss of function or economy. In my opinion, creation and establishment of the District and its systems and facilities will not be incompatible with all of the existing or future authorized local and regional systems, facilities and services. There will not be an overlap or duplication of services. The services provided by the District will augment and improve those provided by Collier County and its special district. Special Problems No special engineering problems were evident during my revie~v. FACTOR FOUR It is now logical to review Factor Four. To determine if the District is warranted, it must be considered if it will be the best alternative to provide the required and desired services and facilities to the land area on which the District is to exist. There are three major public and private alternatives for the provisions of infrastructure systems, facilities, and services to proposed functionally interrelated community developments. Purely private alternatives include a developer and a property owner's association. The first public alternative is a Community Development District. The other public alternatives include the County, County management with a Municipal Service Taxing Unit (MSTU) or Municipal Service Benefit Unit (MSBU), County dependent special districts, and other regional and local independent district. In revie~ving these alternatives for the particular land area in question in Collier County, I reviewed the availability of existing services, the effort and cost required to extend service to the community development, the cost of providing daily service, and the long term level of management and maintenance required for the systems, facilities and services. HEIDT & ASSOCIATES, INC. ort yers rarnp CIvIL ENGINEERING o~*o PLANNING °:o SURVEYING o:o ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING o.~o LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTLIRE 3800 Colonial Blvd., #200 · Fort Myers, FL 33912 · Phone: 941.482.7275 · Fax: 941.482.2103 From an engineering perspective, although Collier County has decided under most circumstances to provide water, sewer and irrigation services through a dependent district, or independent purveyor, the County has not determined to provide other infrastructure to community developments. The County is not, in my opinion, the best alternative to provide those other systems, facilities and services from an engineering viewpoint for the following reasons: The Count>' has not master planned, designed, nor funded those other systems, facilities, and services. The purpose of the District is to design, build, fund, and operate those other systems, facilities, and services. Regarding the private developer, any private company, or property owner's association as an alternative way to provide the remaining systems, facilities and services, I note as an engineer, tha~ there are a number of disadvantages including: · The private developer may not have the funds to provide or complete the remaining systems. thcilities, and services. · The property owner's association may not adequately plan for the long term maintenance replacement of the systems, facilities, and services. Accordingly, the best alternative for this property, in my opinion as a professional engineer dealing with infrastructure provisions for the community development project, is the District itself. The basis for this opinion is my experience as a civil engineer working in Collier County and dealing with Collier County Government and the private development community on a daily basis. HEIDT & ASSOCIATES, INC. Fort Myers Tampa._ CIVIL ENGINEERING o:o PLANNING o:. SURVEYING oio ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING o:o LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURL 3800 Colonial Blvd., #200 · Fort Myers, FL 33912 · Phone: 941.482.7275 · Fax: 941.482.2103 Special Problems No special engineering problems were evident during my review. Respectfully Submitted, Richard H. McCormick. P.E. Florida License #48812 JUL 3 0 2002 /.-.~ .~ IICHARD H. McCORMICK, P.E. Vice President Heidt & Associates, Inc. Education Mr. McCormick has more than 15 years of experience in civil engineering. He B.E. Civil and Environmental Engineering serves as the Vice President and Director of Engineering for the Fort Myers office Vanderbilt University, 1987 ofHeidt & Associates, Inc., responsible for the coordination, direction and review M.B.A. of all ci-dl engineering projects in Southwest Florida. Florida Gulf Coast University, 1999 Mr. McCormick's recent experience includes the following projects: Registrations Professional Engineer · Escada, Castillo and Ventannas at Tiburon - Managed design and permitting of single-family estate subdi¥isions and condominium projects Florida, #48812 containing over 500 units in Collier Cotmty. Professional Affiliations · Cascades at Estero - Managed zoning support, environmental permitting, design and development order process for 620-umt subdivision in Estero. Lee Building Industry. Association. · Touchstone - Project management of surface water management design and Secreta~ & Treasurer environmental permitting through SFWMD. ACOE, and USFWS for nine- Ft. Mvers Building & Zoning Oversight hole golf course addition n-ith a multi-fanuly subdMsion. Committee. Chatrman · Naples Lakes Village Center - Responsible for engineenng and survey Lee County Economic Development services for retail center ;~ith Publix store and outparcels. Coalition, Past Chairman · Timber Ridge at Gateway - Responsible for the preparation of construction 'lorida Engineenng Society plans and platting of 160-umt subdixdsion. Real Estate Investment Society · Bellagio and Portofino at Sun City Fort Myers - Superxdsed design and Urban Land Institute, Member permitting process of m'o single family subdix,isions within the master National Society. of Professional Engineers planned commumty. American Water Resources Association · Sanibel View - Coordinated density bonus application through the planmng Captain, United States Army Reserves and public hearing processes in addition to the management of design and (Inactive) permitting for a 133 unit multi-family project. · Naples Lakes Country. Club - Zoning support, design and permitting of 785 umt, 490 acre residential golf commmUt3'. The project is location in environmentally sensitive area requiring creative and emensive environmental mitigation plans and close coordination with local, state and federal agencies in order to improve the regional drainage s3'stem · Westchase & Wesl~'ood Apartments - Two apartment complexes containing over 650 umts in the CiD' of Fort Myers. · Westminster Phase 3 and Phase 4 - Engineering and surveying services for residential subdivisions within a master planned community. While working for a consulting engineering firm in Naples, Florida, Mr. McCormick was responsible for zoning support, site infrastructure design and project management of residential, commercial and industrial projects. Selected projects, which he was involved in, include numerous single-family home subdivisions, a 640-acre drainage basin study', an I 1,000-acre vegetable and citrus development and a retrofit design of a neighborhood stormwater facility for Collier County Go~ernment. Mr. McCormick served for four years as an officer in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers stationed primarily in Germany. In addition t I leader~hi~ o~ermional and logistic assignments, Lt. McCormick was respons] >le fo~a~/l~51ff. ~road construction project involving over 30,000 man-hours an $1.Mi~.~r~s. JUL 3 0 2002 Revised: 5 27/02 Q. GRADY MINOR & ASSOCIATES, P.A. Civil Engh~eers · Land Surveyors ' Plaru'ter~ Q Gi<~DT MINOR. FLE D. WA'tNE ArCqOLD, A.I.C.P. NIARK W. MINOR ? E. ERIC V. SANDOVAL P.S.M. C. [.kr' AN 5~ lfqZI, P.E. TI-IC~NIAS CFfERNESF,~', P.S.M DAVID W. SCHMITT, P.E. ALAN V. ROSEMAN MICHAEL J. DELATE, P.E. NORMAN J. TREBILCOCK, A.I.C.P., P.E. TUSCANY RESERVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT Back.qround and Credentials of Planner My name is Donald Wayne Arnold, AICP. I am a professional urban planner, I am a Principal with the firm Q. Grady Minor & Associates and have over 14 years of experience in planning and permitting related to land development activities. I have previously been employed as a professional planner by local and State governments, including Palm Beach County, Collier County and South Florida Water Management District. t have been actively involved in Developments of Regional impact, growth management plan amendments, property rezonings, land development code amendments, site development plans, and land feasibility studies I hold dual degrees in urban planning: a Bachelor of Science Degree in Urban-RegionaIPlannmg from Southwest Missouri State University, and a Master of Urban Planning from the Universit,/ of Kansas. I have served as an expert in L;rban planning in a variety of local, regional and state growth management planning ~ssues and have testified in numerous hearings including Ftnrida Administrative Hearings, local planning and zoning boards/commissions, Hearing Exanfir,,ers Local Planning Agency board of zoning appeals Circuit Court. and County Commissions L;a.-.,.,d on my education and professional experience t'wd! address planning ::onsequences of the prooosed new Tuscany Reserve Community Development DIS? assisted in the preparation of the Petition. its required e×nib~ts arid acidmonai mforrnp, bo.' to ti~e piar',ning cons~de,~at~on of estabiisrHng the DIstrict Below is a sL!n'~r';~,,~r'/ :? tlhe cor~sequences of es~ar)l si In(~ the proposed Community Development D~strlct .,n C:rdiier ,. ~.", assessment of ~h~, s~x statutory factor's that must be met in order to estabHst: [ ' ' + D~str'ict ' ),,., ~e,opmen~ is disc~ssed below Project Description Tuscany Reserve comprises approximately 461 acres within nort.~er;~ C:oiiier bounded on the west by Livingston Road and the Med~terra Developn~ent. oy interstate 75. bounded on the south by the Strand Development and bounded Lee County arid Vasari Countr'/ Club The property is located with!n the LJrb~r; Subdistrict of the Cotiier County Future Land Use Map The Urban Reside~:tiaf described as follows .,-- The property ~s currently planned for a residential master planned golf course community with 309 residential units, but will not exceed a maximum of 799 residential units. The master planned community will include both single family and multi-family dwelling unit types, with an associated village center, an eighteen-hole championship golf course, a clubhouse and other golf and residential amenities. Therefore, this residential development would be characterized as a very Iow density (less than one unit per acre) development. The project has direct access to Livingston Road, a County arterial roadway. The Six Statutory Factors: Section 190.005 (1)(e)1-6, F.S. Section 190.005(2)(c), Florida Statues, provides that the County Commission shall consider the record of the public hearing and the following factors in making its determination to grant or deny a petition for the establishment of a community development district. 1 Whether all statements contained within the petition have been found to be true and correct. 2. Whether the establishment of the district is inconsistent with any applicable element or portion of the state comprehensive plan or of the effective local government comprehensive plan. Whether the area of land within the proposed district is of sufficient size. ~s sufficiently compact, and is sufficiently contiguous to be developable as one funct~ona! Interrelated commur~t/. ,/',~ ~eth,.~r the district is the best alternative - , ava~ al:),~ for delivering community 'h~vc'!oPment serwces and f~cihtles tO the area that will be ser',.J,;c~ by the d~stnct :. ~[.~: .... . the cornrnunlty development serwces and faclit~e:-~ 3? the d~stric;t wilt be i?,c,:)mpatir~le with the capacity and uses of existing local anr~ re,:]~or~a[ commL~nlty Jevelop~nent serwces anct facilities '/v'netner the area that wilt be served by me dis[riot IS a~nenaL:,le to separate special-district governmenl Factor One I. Wt]ether all staternents containert within the petition have been f~,tmd to be true a~d correct. my profession'al planning optmon the Petition and its attached e×l'm:~t~ satisfy the requirements of the statute and contain information treat ts both tree an:~ r-~ r-~%t Therefore ORe ,ri f-f ,/ ,-~[-,ir~ C,r IS sari:flied frc, m a ptanninq p..rsp..ct~v~., . JUL302002 Factor Two 2. Whether the establishment of the district is inconsistent with any applicable element or portion of the state comprehensive plan or of the effective local government comprehensive plan. Regarding Factor Number Two, I have done a considerable amount of analysis of both the State Comprehensive Plan and the Collier County Comprehensive Plan because this factor questions whether creation and establishment of the District is consistent with any applicable element or portion of the State Comprehensive Plan or the Collier County Comprehensive Plan. Discussion: The State Plan. The State Comprehensive Plan is set forth in Chapter 187, Florida Statutes. I have analyzed this State Plan with the assumption that the proposed District will exercise all of its powers set forth m. Sections 190001 through 190.046, Florida Statutes. I reviewed all twenty-six subjects twenty-six goals and several related policies under each goal m the State Plan from this perspective. Subjects. goals and policies of the State Plan that were not related to the development, nor to the creation and establishment of the District to serve the development were not evaluated I have identified and evaluated those subjects, goals and policies that do relate to the creation and establishment of a Community Development D~str:~ct As a professional planner. I have opined as to the consistency of proposed District wtth each related goal, objective and policy of the plan ! nave determined that there are fo~r state goals a,%i r,:-lated policies appl~c;~.b!.% t- es~abiishment of the proposed 'l'uscany Reserve C;ommLm~ty Development Distr,ct ! a',..-',',y..-:ed from a p':anr~mg perspective ea:.;l~ subject and goal an,:~ ti;e~ ~den~ified varlo~;:, =:o:c',e~: ~;noer each of them wii~cn related to the prormsed C,::~.::~ otnce ag;~i,~. .:~pply,r~.'] [r,,..,,.~ ta.'tors tc the assumptlO:, that ti,e District wod:d Oxerc~;e ~h c~f ~tS po?,,e"s cr "-/; .)~: a~',d 190 0}2. Fior~da Statutes ~..[[~ct and Goal 16 LAND USE Goal - In recognition of the importance of presaging the natural resources al~ft enhancing the quality of life of the state, development shall be directed to those areas which have in place, or have agreements to provide, the land and water resources, fiscal abilities, and se~ice capacity to accommodate growth m environmentally acceptable manner. > ~,:: t Nur';~ber 16 and its related goa~ are appi~cabie be~?~use tl~e su~;ect of develor,ment b¢-~:, . ::.:-::t-'-::; to areas hawng or programmed to have fur~ded ~arl(i arid water resources necessary infrastructure capacity to se~e gro~h in an environmentally resoonsib!e mann~' r:~l,qt¢,~ d~rectiv to the OomnqUPltV Development D~strict pt~rpose of ecorlomical ar~cJ The Tuscany Reserve Com~,'nunity Development is in an area of Collier County that has available access to regional water and sewer services, and roadway networks to serve a project of this scale. The District is located ~n the Urban Residential Subdistrict of Collier County and will meet all applicable natural resources regulations. The creation of the District is consistent with this goal Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 16(b)1. Promote state programs, investments, and development and redevelopment activities, which encourage efficient development and occur in areas which, will have the capacity to service new population and commerce. Establishment of the District is consistent with this Policy. Chapter 190, F.S., establishes that a District purpose is to provide necessary capital infrastructure to service projected growth without overburdening other governments and taxpayers. Local Specialized Problem' None Policy 16(b)2. Develop a system of incentives and disincentives, which encourage separation of urban and rural land uses while protecting water supplies, resource development, and fish and wildlife habitats. A District is a form of local government which, when established is required by law to provide service capacity ~n areas designated for urban services, and to provide such serv ce~_ environmentally sensitive manner 'fhe Establishment of the oroposed District ~s cons~s~r~ ,'."~ poiic'/ 16(b)2 the State Plan Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 16(b)3, Enhance the liw~t)ility and ch~rac~,:r of urban are[~s encouragement of an attractive ami functional m~x of livJn~j, working, sholJpln~j, recreational activities. with on-site recreational amenities desioned to serve tr~e res~der~ts of the Distnct Subject and Goal 18 PUBLIC FACILITIES fa) Goal - Florida shall protect the substantial investments in public facilities that alre~(ty exist and shall plan and provide for and finance new facilities to serve residen[s timely, orderly, and efficient manne~, Sub~ect 18 and ~ts related Goa! and poiic~es woulrt be du'ectly imptemeqted tqrou'.lf, Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 18(b)3,-AIIocate the costs of new public facilities on the basis of the benefits received by the existing and future residents. Facilities and services provided by the District are paid for through assessments and user fees by those property owners who benefit from those facilities and services. In my planning opinion, I believe that the proposed District is consistent with, and will implement, policy 18(b)3. Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 18(b)4.- Create a partnership among state government, local governments, and the private sector which would identify and build needed public facilities and allocated the costs of such facilities among the partners in proportion to the benefits accruing to each of them. Tine state legislature determined that a District is a legitimate alternative method of paying for and managing community development A District must be consistent with the plans of the State and local governments Establishment of the District. consistent with this legislative intent is consistent with Policy 18(b~4 Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 181b)5. Encourage local government financial self-sufficiency in provid~n.q pubhc facilities. Local Specialized Prohiem' NcH,e F'ol!~.~,. 1FJ(b)O. ldunti/y and ifllpiuHrit;nf. H]rlovat~ve but tlscally techniques for fi~Jancing public facilities. The spec~a!..purpose District ,*',~ ..... have limited powers to design, fLind and ,..uu~,.r,.,,u,.'~' 5e~'.,',cE.f-,:' ,., faciiities necessar,/ to accommoc.3te ti~(~. project's ser,.ace demands The proposed D~:?,',. · ~ Policy 18(b)?. Encourage the development, use? and coordination of Capit;d improve:mr, hr plans Dy all levels of governmeHt. '} 0 2002 .. The Distnct is subject to the reporbng provisions of Section 189.415, Florida Statutes, which in paragraph (6) states "For purposes of the preparation or revision of local government comprehensive plans required pursuant to s. 163.3161, a district public facilities report may be used and relied upon by the local general purpose government or governments within which the special district is located. This statutory provision is directed at fostering coordination between special districts and general-purpose governments. The proposed District, if established, will implement this policy, and is therefore consistent with the policy. Local Specialized Problem: None Subject and Goal 21 GOVERNMENTAL EFFICIENCY (a) Goal - Florida governments shall economically and efficiently provide the amount and quality of services required by the public. Chapter 190.002 finds that an independent district can be a solution to the state's planning. management, and financing needs by providing timely, efficient, effective and economic means of service delivery. The proposed District will provide services in an economical and efficient manner and is consistent with Goal 21 Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 21(b)1. Encourage greater cooperation between, among, and within all levels of Florida government through the use of appropriate interlocal agreements and mutua! participation for mutual benefit, ,..,,,' ..... ...,- ',*,,~ ,.. r',':.mmL~i;tv~, Development []oorcifn!tt!on Element and Public Faofit~c,s E:iement provide for the cf),.:brd~r,;~(vbr~ and coopera:,:",n et al~ (~o,*prnmentai entlbes, ii~Oludinq Community Peveiopmem Distr~cts Because the Statute reqt~tr'es cr,nslstenc,/ w~th the local gowzrnr-nentgrowth management p!a~ :m:iti~e D~stnct must o¢,op¢,ar~ w:t~ Ioo8', 9ovemments. ~t ~% rt~ opinion that the p ti).,,-; t Tuscanv Reserve Commurmy Devetopment D~str~ct wd! be consistent with Policy 71 ~D) 1 of the State Comprehensive Ptan Local Specialized Problem: None Polmv 21(h)2. Allow the creation of independent special taxin~l districts, which have uniform general law standards and procedures and do not overburden other governments and their taxpayers while preventing the proliferation of independe~t special taxing districts, which do not meet these standards. / JUL 3 O 2002 . .... the Community Development District. The general taxpayer has no obligation to pay for services within the District The Community Development District must be established according to the standards specified in Florida Statutes and must be consistent with local government plans. The proliferation of independent districts is restricted by the various factors required to establish a Community Development District. The proposed Community Development District in my professional planning opinion is consistent with Policy 21(b)2. Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 21(b)5. Eliminate needless duplication of, and promote cooperation in, governmental activities between, among, and within state, regional, county, city, and other governmental units. As stated previously, a District is required under Florida Statutes to prepare reports and public records with respect to its facilities and operations which are made available to owners within the Community Development District, as well as prospective purchasers These records are also filed with the County as public records and may be utilized by the local government This cooperative requirement of sharing information as well as the requirement to be consistent with the State and local government plans furthers the proposed Community Development District's consistency with Policy 2!(b)5 Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 21(b)9. Encourage greater efficiency and economy at all levels of governrnent throu.qh adoption and implementation of effective records management, information management, and evaluation procedures. ~"lc, r'da Statutes Cn;~r~ter ~, 90 reqLures that OommdnJt',l ,.'~=',;-,,,':,. ",.~c- nt..,, ...r- ....,:~,,-t....¢ nertr; n, extensive ,-.:c )rd keep nE ant; management and they are suhjoct tc :,, ,~:~, I,,na, ptann',n:l._ cp~n~.';n_ ti:ese requirements... . of the ( .~,,~r:~',u~,ty · r,~, rc..,~',~rernentg ,-' p~.!,- , :., !r,,,q a~,cJ the estabhshme,-,t ,pr t_ocal Specialized Problem' None, Subiect and Goal 26 PLAN IMPLEMENTATION (a~ Goal Systematic plan~fing capabilities shall be integrated into all levels of government in Floridu with particular emphasi~ on improving intergow;rnme~;L~! coordination and maximizing citizen involvement. ~ discussed previously, a Community Development O~strjct ha~ a statutory requirement 'c'F:o~t reformation concerning District operations. Further', beene;se a D',str~Ct ~S a $o~ciai JUL 3 O 2002 Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 26(b)2. Ensure that every level of government has the appropriate operational authority to implement the policy directives established in the plan. The fact that a District established pursuant to Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, must not be inconsistent with any applicable portion of the State Comprehensive Plan, a District is granted the defacto operational authority to implement policies of the Plan. The establishment of the proposed District is consistent with Policy 26(b)2. Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 26(b)3. Establish effective monitoring, incentive, and enforcement capabilities to see that the requirements established by regulatory programs are met. A District is not exempted from any applicable local, regional or state growth management regulatory programs, thus the establishment of the proposed Tuscany Reserve Community Development District is not inconsistent with this policy. Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 26(b)8. Encourage the continual cooperation among communities, which have a unique natural area, irrespective of political boundaries, to bring the private and public sectors together for establishing an orderly, environmentally, and economically sound plan for future needs and growth, T'r~e Distr:ct ~s re(']u~red to operate openly (~n tho SLnSh~r~e~. encouraging public pa~cipat~on .-,b"~ statec DI-[~V:OUS;~ ret)crt"::: ::t ''-, t.:. ,.,,~.,, ,.,~ ,~,~.,r,,~t~ and services st~t~ to ti~t~ (,,~r~.... Local Specialized Problem: COLLIER COUNTY LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN i-he adooted Coll~er County Local Government Growlh Management Plan is set forth ,~ the fottowin9 Collier CountyOrd~nances as amended This Pian is currently in force and effect~'.,e Collie,- County [.;~plt3~ Inlproveme~'.t Ei~::r~,:~.t Ord 2000-3; 'Fransportatl~l Element Ord 2000-32 PLibhc Facil ties Element B Ord 9 ;-58 Ord 97-57 2000-27 Housinq Elern~t Ord 2000-27 JUL 3 0 2002 Under the Fio~da Loca! Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act. Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, as amended, the P!an consists of various elements, sub-elements and appendices. I reviewed each Plan element with respect to the powers granted to a Community Development District under Section 190. Florida Statutes. As a professional planner, I have reviewed the Plan in order to determine whether there is any specific inconsistency between the proposed Community Development District Plan and the Collier County Growth Management Plan. I used a similar methodology to that utilized for the consistency review with the State Plan. All goals, objectives, and policies of the Plan were reviewed: however those that were in my professional opinion not related to the establishment the proposed District were disregarded. Those goals, objectives and policies that are relevant to the creation of the proposed Community Development District have been evaluated. The establishment of the Community Development District to provide the governmental services attendant to Tuscany Reserve complies fully with the goals, objectives and policies of the Collier County Growth Management Plan CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT. Objective I 2: Prowde pub!ic facilities m order to maintain adopted level of service standards that are within the ability of Ihe County to fund or within the County's authority to require others to provide Existm9 facility deficiencies measured against the adopted level of serYme standards will be eliminated with revenues generated by ad valorem taxes and intergovernment,a! revenue~ received based on economic activity FL]tur'e development will bear a proportion.at(: cost of fac?~tv m*,provements necessitated by gro'¢~lh, Future development's payments may t,a~'6: the form ',m[-,ac~ ~ees dedicat~c)n of !aha ~_;rQvls~c:n nf pur)!ic faciiities and futLtr(: [)a'.'r";~L'r'~F; ~f ',i.:.~, f~ ~_ ,. ta,,zed Problem: None Local Spec' '; PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT - POTABLE WATER SUBELEMEN F Poi~cy ! 2 ~5 Where Com, nqur~t,/ Developmer;t D~s, trtcts or other re?on:3~ sys~ecr 3.',d ir~!ernal faclhti¢~ sha!i E,e ,.;onveved whe~ acoo;:tabie t,~ '~. ', ,"' ~. .e, ..... ,-. :,. Water-Sewer Distnot for operahon an,'J ownersh,p in accordance wdh S8-76. the Utdities Standards and P~ocedure? Ordinance ado[,ted Septen'.m.' JUL 3 0 2002 Tuscany Reserve will provide and maintain potable water infrastructure to support the proposed development within the District boundaries and will connect the system to Collier County consistent with the Collier County Utdities Ordinance The establishment of the proposed District is consistent with this Policy. Local Specialized Problem: None INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT Goal 1. Objective 1.1, and Policy 1.1.1: Provide for the continual exchange of information and the use of any intergovernmental coordination mechanisms to resolve differences and to achieve compatible and coordinated plans. Tuscany Reserve has coordinated with both public and private sector agencies in the delivery of services such as Collier County Utilities. independent fire control districts. Collier County Department of Transportation. and Florida Power and L~ght to insure the services are coordinated and non-duplicative Tuscany Reserve Community Development District will continue to coordinate plans with the various governmental agencies as it develops The establishment of the proposed District is consistent with this goal and associated objective FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT c~t,.iccd~c. 5 ami t'olicx 5. I' In o~der to prox icie sound phmnin.~, cnsm'e om~palibili~v of l,md usc>, Local Specialized Problem' None estabhshment of the proposed r'uscany Reserve Community IL)e,,/en3pm. er}t Dtstrlct pLx'suar-q C,i':a~ter i90 Flor',da Statutes ts not inconsistent with the goals o~, eot,yes and pol~cms r.,¢, x UDon the af,3rornORtlOOed lx~Oh~gS, the creation and eStSDliShn~er~[ o~ thE, Z .t.~.bs~-..I fTh:q;,: t not be ncona,stent w~th aq.,,'., goals., policies, sections or poq~or~s of the Pfa~} (:,'.,=.,', .... .f :t v.,': JUL 3 g 2002 Further. the creation and establishment of the proposed District would not be inconsistent with those paris of the Plan. which do not relate to the creation and establishment of a District. Factor Three 3. Whether the area of land within the proposed district is of sufficient size, is sufficiently compact, and is sufficiently contiguous to be developable as one functional interrelated community. The proposed Tuscany Reserve Community Development District is of sufficient size and sufficiently compact to be developed as a functional interrelated community. The project's size is 461.29+ acres. This land area is large enough in land area to allow for the efficient provision of infrastructure systems, facilities and servicesr A project of this size and scope is most appropriately master planned to demonstrate how the various components of the overall project relate both internally and externally. The project is appropriately compact in size in that it will permit residential development and the required infrastructure support to be extended throughout the proposed District boundaries as one functional interrelated community The properties w~thin the proposed Tuscany Reserve Community Development District are contiguous, with the exception of those properties planned to be separated by internal access roads and drives This contiguous relationship will permit the District to function as a functlona! interrelated community ~rhe [~"-~, "fur~stional ,nterrelated communit,;,' f$ ,,r,d.tl:,e..,'" ,"" -~ ~n Chapter 190 F S ~- ~- . 2rofess~ona~ planmng opinion the term 'funct~or-~ai ~pterrelated communal',," m~,arm treat the .-yample that cern be master pl r .... 'Tnqr~quitV of the commL;r~ltV and its OVerall sIZL~ The propo~;ed [}~str~c; '¢z~ll L t hZe tl~e ...... ~ ,,: ,'h:' ,. elc, pmerlt... ,'. t'~-h..pt¢'¢- to. demonstrate the interre!atednt:m~; of '~h~' ent,re prolect. tr~e ~rqternai and external land use relat;onships have b)~e~r, shown s~r;e ~ho er~:;re con~mLm~t,,' is r't;astor plaRlled Tffis r~aster pi~,',ne,'~ Gro~*~h rqanagement Pla '~ Local Specialized Problem: None Factor Four ~. _ d..,~,.c Cs the '- ~' alternatme ava,labie c:,'.~]:r~ L, ~'._', t and facdit~es t.,_. !ne area that wdl be served Dy the d str Th~,re are. sev[;ral a terqatve w,a'.¢s to provide :.-.'posed to, be *.:er'vl,~-e,;t r/tr:,::- propose.! Oon;mtlni~ / :*p~:;: I~'~[ L.'L~FCO._:=_. ,'~,c)rt-,r-'l ~r; ('. ':_;,---¢C-;O,)n'~Er t D Sh';q JUL 3 0 2002 can be appropriate, however, with limitations in that long-term funding must be assured to support infrastructure for the life of the community, as is required through the issuance of bonds to support a Community Development District. Another limitation is in the overall size and scope of the community. Where privately funded improvements may be practical for properties that are limited in the scope and buitdout potential, projects having a scope and duration commensurate with the proposed Community Development District require a long-term commitment for service provision. The provision of services by the public can have limitations, especially where the community is a master planned and interrelated community that may desire services more appropriately directed at its property owners. The responsibility of a local government is to provide the basic infrastructure support for all communities within its Governmental boundary. A master planned community that may wish to achieve a higher than basic standard will not be well suited to provision of services through common general government funding alternatives The Community Development District option is a preferred alternative to the two former mentioned funding sources ('Private and General Public) in that the provision of services may be commensurate with the desired level of service of the community, while resulting in no burden to those properties outside the District The Community Development District cannot overburden the ex~st~ng facilities because of the required concurrency management requirements found the Collier County Growth Management Plan. Land Development Code and Chapter 190. F S Local Specialized Problem: None Factor Five {, v";ne~n,er tn.=. co~,,mun~ty ci£-,;elopment s~rwces and facilities of the district v'¢~il be mcc,~pah[, S ...... '.',,',,, .......... l::d..s3p~aC,! ,' a, .-i, ,~.-.:,t,~... r~f'~ .... ~t !OCa[ ,H ,.J ---:~r~m~"~ :~I .,,.... comrnunity dovelot)ma'tt, -r ..... - .... rPeve!or.. ,c~t [)~Stl~ct [},3',,,,,(;rs ar.a. gOvOrned by and must not be incons~ster'~t with -'- ~' . '~ - e , .~, ~ thefl~ndam~ntal requirements of(.hap,~, 1~c' t~';3! :b(-;J ....., ,..,.,,%,'-r' ,, *~'~;,.., ~Or~prencal'lStV~_ pl3ns ml,=t,..., ,r? ntifv_ capital facilities f'ec]Lt!reci ...,.p..cted gro,z,lh and that standards must De ado~¢te(t to ~nsure that min,]~um estabhst~e."i of sen,' ce for these facdlUeS can be maintained /I~iS r=quitement instal'es that the ,'npacts of devtslopmel~t are created concurrent ~.,,t~, Ii,= available capacity of necessary capital infrastructt~re Development may not occur untess. are aq~;quate ?.lbhc facilities avaiiah~e to SLl[)D,m't d ['h~se:. r~:qu~ren~en:~ i'~sure conlplial~,:':e wd~: Cour',t/ lar~d clcvelopment regulat',ons aha a :~. ~.:~::. public facility remHrements Collier County has not i, Jentified any inadequate public faciliti¢,~,that ,,*¢~H affect tile prooosed Distr ct Conve'se v. r*o m, frastructt~re support problems are r t JUL 3 O L Factor Six 6. Whether the area that will be served by the district is amenable to separate special-district government. Factor six deals with whether the area that will be serviced by the District is amenable to separate special-district government. As discussed in the prior factor analysis, the land area is of sufficient size, and is sufficiently compact and sufficiently contiguous to be functional as an inter-related community. The project area is also located in an area where other large-scale master planned communities have been developed, utilizing the community development district. In my opinion the land area for the District is amenable to special district government because the land area proposed to be established as a District has the need for the services that may be provided by the District The District would also benefit from the provision of District services in that the services will be tailored to the specific needs of the District while consistent with the goals, objechves and policies of the local growth management plan. Local Specialized Problem: None Summary Long term andsusta~ned adequacy and effic~encyof~nfrastructureareimport~mt andl note that among the three alternatives discussed the proposed District would more clc, sely and efficiently manage serwces and facdit~es g~ven th~.~t the D~strict's sole responsibility ~s the cu. rnm,,n~tV developmentsmfrastructureneeds both immed~ate and in the long tern~ F~nher n District ?:an b~-:, more responsivo to the prop..:~:,/ owners of :r'.e community devoIOpri~E-r~t ar~,J Ot~et af~e;cte~; fur~ct~onaily involved tn tlqe overaiJ pfb,'s~cal master plar~nlng of the oe,,,e~o~)r;~ent di~tribLItes t~e cost ar',d respons~b~ht~ws to the doers of the syste~'.~ ~LiO~';dGb tot ;or~ [etr['li malnte~ar~c~ al~d provides a greater asstJra~c~ t~lat Dy the T~scany Reserve Commcu~ltv Development wilt have a sustained ievo[ (:,r service to meet their quality of life objectives Respectfully submrtteS 2002 Q. GRADY MINOR & ASSOCIATES, P.A. CMl Engh'~eers · Land Surveyors · Planners ~AD~. XII."(C~[?',, [ .E. D. WA'YN'E ARNOLD, A.I.C.P MARK W. MINCER, 7 E ERIC V. SANDOVAL, P.S.M. C. DEAN SMITH. P.E. THOMAS CHEILN-ESK"Y, P.S.M DAVID W. SCHMITT, P.E. ALAN V. ROSEMAN MICHAEL 1. DELATE, P.E. NORMAN J. TREBILCOCK, A.I.C.P., P.E. TUSCANY RESERVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT Back.qround and Credentials of Planner My name is Donald Wayne Arnold, AICP. I am a professional urban planner. I am a Principal with the firm Q. Grady Minor & Associates and have over 14 years of experience in planning and permitting related to land development activities. I have previously been employed as a professional planner by local and State governments, including Palm Beach County, Collier County and South Florida Water Management District. I have been actively involved m Developments of Regional impact, growth management plan amendments, property rezonings, land development code amendments, site development plans, and land feasibility studies. I hold dual degrees in urban planning: a Bachelor of Science Degree in Urban-RegionaI Planning from Southwest Missouri State University, and a Master of Urban Planning from the University of Kansas. I have served as an expert in urban planning in a variety of local, regional and state growth management planning ~ssues and have testified in numerous hearings including Florida Administrative Hearings. local planning and zoning boards/commissions Hearing Examiners LocaIPlannmgAgency. board of zoning appeats Circuit Court and CountyCommiss~ons Bas:-d n:t my education and professional experience I ',,.viii address planning aspects; ~.onsequerK:es of the proposed new ~uscany Reserv~ Community Development District t as, s~ster: ~r~the prenaratlon of the Petition itsrequ~r'ede¥I'ub~tsandadditionai~nformatlon~eia':ed to th,4 piar'm,~;q sons~derat~on of estabhsning the Pistr;ct, Below ~s a sumrnary of the consequer:ces'of estabhshlng the proposed Community Developmept Dish ici ~n Collier My assessmoi~t of the s~x statutory factors that retest be met ~n order to estabiisi: a Comm,.~n~t/ qevelopment D str,c~ ~s discussed below Project Description 7uscanv Reserve comprises approximately 461 acres w~thin nodhern Colher Count./ Fic)rida bounded on the west by Livingston Road and the Medlterra Development bounded ontlne east :,,/ Interstate 75, bounded on the south by the Strand Development and bounded on thenorfh Lee County and Vasari Country Club The propert,/ ~s ioc:~ted witnin the ,'.Jr~an Subdistrict of the Collier County Future Land Use Map The Urban Residential Subaistr~,.st descnbed as follows The property is currently planned for a residential master planned golf course community with 309 residential units, but will not exceed a maximum of 799 residential units The master planned community will include both single family and multi-family dwelling unit types, with an associated village center, an eighteen-hole championship golf course, a clubhouse and other golf and residential amenities. Therefore, this residential development would be characterized as a very Iow density (less than one unit per acre) development. The project has direct access to Livingston Road, a County arterial roadway. The Six Statutory Factors: Section 190.005 (1)(e)1-6, F.S. Section 190.005(2)(c). Florida Statues, provides that the County Commission shall consider the record of the public hearing and the following factors in making its determination to grant or deny a petition for the establishment of a community development district. 1 Whether all statements contained within the petition have been found to be true and correct 2 Whether the establishment of the district is inconsistent with any applicable element or port.on of the state comprehensive plan or of the effective local government comprehensive plan Whether the area of land w~thin the proposed district is of sufficient size sufficiently compact and ~s sufficiently contiguous to be developab!e as or;r, functtona; ~nterrelated commun~t:,. Wi~ether the d~strict ',s the best alter¢,~t~ve ava~labie for deliverH~g cornrnur~,~tv .:leve~opment serwces and fatalities to ',he are~ that wi!l t)e served by tt'~e ci~str,tt - \rVh(}ther tPe coHli"fluFiity de,,eloomer~t st;:¢-'¢'}c;~:--s arid facilities of the(.~,_.~.'~:'r,,c.'t ',,.,!~ i.,,. ~ncompatlb~e 'w'Jth the capacity and use.~s of existing Icc:al ~-.~l;a r%'~iOndi C,.:),r'~ ',uriit./ developr-ner'~t services and facilities v";rlf~tr~er the area that wdi De S~l'~ special-district governrner'~t Factor I Whether all statements contained within thr: petition have been found t{~ he true, and correct, tn my professional ptanning opinion the Petition ar,,-] its attached exhibits sat:.sf,' th.z- requ~remems of the statute and contain information that ~s both true and coq-ecl JUL 3 0 2002 .i , Factor Two 2. Whether the establishment of the district is inconsistent with any applicable element or portion of the state comprehensive plan or of the effective local government comprehensive plan. Regarding Factor Number Two, I have done a considerable amount of analysis of both the State Comprehensive Plan and the Collier County Comprehensive Plan because this factor questions whether creation and establishment of the District is consistent with any applicable element or portion of the State Comprehensive Plan or the Collier County Comprehensive Plan. Discussion: The State Plan. The State Comprehensive Plan is set forth in Chapter 187, Florida Statutes. I have analyzed this State Plan with the assumption that the proposed District will exercise all of its powers set forth m. Sections 190.001 through 190.046. Florida Statutes I reviewed all twenty-six subjects twenty-six goals and several related policies under each goal in the State Plan from this perspective Subjects, goals and policies of the State Plan that were not related to the development, nor to the creation and establishment of the District to serve the development were not evaluated. I have identified and evaluated those subjects, goals and policies, that do relate to the creation and establishment of a Community Development District. As a professional planner I have o~)ined as to the consistency of proposed District with each related goal, ob~ectwe and policy of the plan. t nave. aetermined that there are fotir stat~ ¢]o~1~ and related policies appi'cabL-'~ estabhshrner~! ot the proposed Tuscan? Reserve Community Development Ehstr,,ct i nave ~]~ect and Goal 16 LAND USE Goal - In recognition of the impedance of preserving the natural resources and enhancing the quality of lifo of the state, development shall be directed to those areas which have in place, or have agreements to provide, the land and water resources, fiscal abilities, anti service capacity to accommodate growth ~n an environmentally acceptable manner. f:;:~[)~r.t Nun~be. 1C and Its related ~oa; are ap[fiK:ai,le because the sclblc, ct of de'.,eh',~,,'ne;"~ ;'..~r~: c~,r~':te'l tc arenas havl~]g or progran~rned to nave funded land and ~'ater qecessary InfrastrLm. ture capacity to serve gro,z,jh in an environmentally res[)r.~t~it-,ie relater dlrect!v to the C:ommunity Deve!opnlent ~i~trict purpose of economh:a~ J U L 3 0 2002 The Tuscany Reserve Community Development is in an area of Collier County that has available access to regional water and sewer services, and roadway networks to serve a project of this scale. The District is located in the Urban Residential Subdistrict of Collier County and will meet all applicable natural resources regulations. The creation of the District is consistent with this goal. Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 16(b)1. Promote state programs, investments, and development and redevelopment activities, which encourage efficient development and occur in areas which, will have the capacity to service new population and commerce. Establishment of the District is consistent with this Policy. Chapter 190, F.S., establishes that a District purpose is to provide necessary capital infrastructure to service projected growth without overburdening other governments and taxpayers. Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 16(b)2. Develop a system of incentives and disincentives, which encourage separation of urban and rural land uses while protecting water supplies, resource development, and fish and wildlife habitats. A District is a form of local government which, when established, is required by law to provide service capacity in areas designated for urban services, and to provide such services enwronmentally sensitive manner -['he Establishment of the proposed District ~s consistent w~th policy 16(b',,2 the State Plan. Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 16(b)3. Enhance the livability and character of urb;~n areas througi~ the encouragement of an attractive and functional mix of living, working, shopping, and recreational activities. Establishment of the District is consistent with th~s Policy. 'f'nrough the creattor~ of the Tuscany Reserve community w~ll be developed as a master planned res~¢tent~a! with on-site recreational amenities designed to serve the residents of the D~str~(~ Subject and Goal 18 PUBLIC FACILITIES (a) Goal - Florida shall protect the substantial investments in public facilities that alr~mdy exist and shall plan and provide for and finance new facilities to serve residents in timely, orderly, and efficient manner. Subject 18 and ~ts related Goa! and :'..c. iic~es wot~ld be d~rectly imptemer~t~.~,:~ throu;]~, ~. estabhshment of the proposed [;)~str,:,t t~ro,_lgi~ the~ re.,.~p,~nsib!e iorovIsl~?"~ of services and ,zz~en needed to ,those property o'ar~ors .'.'~tl'.:n t!'~~ Dxs~r'~.[. 7!~e est~lL'flishr~¢.r,? ~-~! ~"'e [):-.i~'.~ ,' . t,~. ........ cc~ns~ster,.t-*~it~, tI~is sublcCt an':~ ~;,,,.-. ~. AGENOA IT¢!~, JUL 3 0 2002 Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 18(b)3.-AIIocate the costs of new public facilities on the basis of the benefits received by the existing and future residents, Facilities and services provided by the District are paid for through assessments and user fees by those property owners who benefit from those facilities and services. In my planning opinion, I believe that the proposed District is consistent with, and will implement, policy 18(b)3, Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 18(b)4.- Create a partnership among state government, local governments, and the private sector which would identify and build needed public facilities and allocated the costs of such facilities among the partners in proportion to the benefits accruing to each of them. The state legislature determined that a District is a legitimate alternative method of paying for and managing community development ADistrict must be consistent with the plans of the State and local governments. Establishment of the District, consistent with this legislative intent is consistent with Policy 18(b'14 Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 18(b)5. Encourage local government financial self-sufficiency in providing public facilities The proposed Dlstr~ct :f f?sta~.)i~shed WOLi!d De a spec:~al-purpose local governrr~ent r;e self--suffic~ent ~n tr?. plovls!cr~ of ~nm'~structure. serwces and facilities g~ver, th;~t t Local Specialized Problem: Non~: Policy l,~(b)6. Idelitily and il~lplement innovative but fiscally sound and cost-effective techniques for financing public faciht~es. The sDec~al-purpose District will have !irn~ted powers to design, fund and construc~ send,cas facilihes necessary to accommodate ttte project's service demands The proposed cons;stent with this Local Speoahz~d Pro[,~cm Nc, tm Policy 18(b)7. Encourage tht, development, use, and coordination of capital Improv(.mpnt plans bv all levels of govemn~t:nt JUL 3 0 2002 The District is subject to the reporting provisions of Section 189.415, Florida Statutes, which in paragraph (6) states. "For purposes of the preparation or revision of local government comprehensive plans required pursuant to s. 163.3161, a district public facilities report may be used and relied upon by the local general purpose government or governments within which the special district is located. This statutory provision is directed at fostering coordination between special districts and general-purpose governments. The proposed District, if established, will implement this policy, and is therefore consistent with the policy. Local Specialized Problem: None Subject and Goal 21 GOVERNMENTAL EFFICIENCY (a) Goal - Florida governments shall economically and efficiently provide the amount and quality of services required by the public. Chapter 190 002 finds that an independent district can be a solution to the state's planning. management, and financing needs by providing timely, efficient, effective and economic means of service delivery The proposed District will provide services in an economical and efficient manner and is consistent with Goal 21. Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 21(b)1. Encourage greater cooperation between, among, and within all levels of Florida government through the use of appropriate interiocal agreements and mutual participation for mutual benefit. '~_)rlC6. ~,h( r?3n'~r'~lUr~[t'l DeYeiopment District ~s formed, mt wil~ func[~on as a form of 9ove~r'~n:ent a~,-J t~,e Statute perm,ts toe Distnct to enter Ir,to ~nterloca, a~j~eements w;th othe~ ~oca~ c~v~..~nrnent'x The Coili~-' (:cunt's, Grovdn Management PI3~ !ntergovernment~i Coordination ELiement and Public Facilities Element provide for the coordination and cooperation of al! governmental enbt~es inch~ding Community Development D~stricts Because the ru, qu~res cnnsistency with the loc~Jl government gro~i~ management pJ~n ~.md the Dismct cooperate w,th local governments. ~t Is my opinion that the proposed Tuscany Reserve Community Development District will be consistent with Policy 21 (b) 1 of the State Comprehensive Plan Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 2~(h)2. Allow the creation of independent special taxing districts, which have uniform general law standards and procedures and do not overburden other government~ and their taxpayers while preventing the proliferation of independent special taxing districts, which do not meet these standards. :r;f~a'~t,, r t~,: :..-...l, .'.'~r~:~,. ,nit/. ~, ..'~r?~.. tm,~,: ':,~ i, fl.,~. ...... sale chi var'~ous [y[z~-'t: ~.'~. h"r,~s for .,v! JUL 3 O 2002 the Community Development District. The general taxpayer has no obligation to pay for services within the District. The Community Development District must be established according to the standards specified in Florida Statutes and must be consistent with local government plans. The proliferation of independent districts is restricted by the various factors required to establish a Community Development District. The proposed Community Development District in my professional planning opinion is consistent with Policy 21(b)2. Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 21(b)5. Eliminate needless duplication of, and promote cooperation in, governmental activities between, among, and within state, regional, county, city, and other governmental units. As stated previously, a District is required under Florida Statutes to prepare reports and public records with respect to its facilities and operations which are made available to owners within the Community Development District. as well as prospective purchasers. These records are also filed with the County as public records and may be utilized by the local government This cooperative requirement of sharing information as well as the requirement to be consistent with the State and local government plans furthers the proposed Community Development District's consistency with Policy 21(b)5. Local Specialized Problem' None Policy 21(b)9. Encourage greater efficiency and economy at all levels of government through adoption and implementation of effective records management, information management, and evaluation procedures, Fior,:Ja Stat~tes Chapter 190 requ~res that Community Development Districts performexter,s~,,~ re::r',r:l k'e~C' n~] aI'~c'J manaqement, and they are subject to thc.. Florida Sunshine Law ',?, -;",, , nrofess~onat plar~n~ng open,on, these requirements of the Commu .... , Development District t[~_ requirements of Policy 21(b)9 and the establishment of tt~e [')istnct ~s consistent with poh::'., Local Specialized Problem: None. Subject and Goal 26 PLAN IMPLEMENTATION (a) Goal Systematic planning capabilities shall be integrated into all levels ¢4 .qovernmcnt in Florida with particular emphasis on improving intergovernme~t,',l coordination and maximizing citizen involvement. As d~cussed previously, a Community Development Distr~ct has a statutory requiremer, t t-, ~epc, rt ~r~f(',~f~'i~tlo~ concerning District operations. Further, bet:adze a t')~str~ct ~s a soeciai pu~ F,' :~.' · -1o,,~.~'.,::': ~t r~,~t ~ t,,ertlse its r'e,~.~dar!y scheduled m~:tinq~ er~Li~[l]9 the opport~.:~,t, .... ' JUL 3 0 2002 Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 26(b)2. Ensure that every level of government has the appropriate operational authority to implement the policy directives established in the plan, The fact that a District established pursuant to Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, must not be inconsistent with any applicable portion of the State Comprehensive Plan. a District is granted the defacto operational authority to implement policies of the Plan. The establishment of the proposed District is consistent with Policy 26(b)2, Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 26(b)3. Establish effective monitoring, incentive, and enforcement capabilities to see that the requirements established by regulatory programs are met. A District is not exempted from any applicable local, regional or state growth management regulatory programs, thus the establishment of the proposed Tuscany Reserve Community Development District is not inconsistent with this policy. Local Specialized Problem: None Policy 26(b)8. Encourage the continual cooperation among communities, which have a unique natural area, irrespective of political boundaries, to bring the private and public sectors together for establishing an orderly, environmentally, and economically sound plan for future needs and growth. The District ~s required to operate openly (m the sunsrune) er'~couragir'~g public participation anti as statoc Drev;ousJ? report, ing of the [Lhstrict's facii~ti~;s and serv,,:.es stat'.Js to tho Coum. ,:;overnment provides a rnechar~sm for coor;eraticn b}e[ween the ger,era~ our[pose and purpose governmental ent~ues The establ~sim~ent of the proposed District ~s consistent w~th po!it,/ Local Specialized Problem: None COLLIER COUNTY LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The adopted Collier County Local Government Gro~ Managen~ent Plan Is set fodh in the following Collier County Ordinances as amended. This Plan is currently in force and effective Collier County. Cap~taltmprovement Etemon~ (;rd 2000-31 Transpo~ation Element (';~d 2000-32 Pubhc Facilities Element B Oral 97-58 L)rd 97-57 2000--27 Housing Element 'D~ct 2000-27 Recreahon and Open Space Ei.-me~' Ord 97-51~ I JUL 3 0 2002 Under the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act. Chapter 163, Part It, Florida Statutes, as amended, the Plan consists of various elements, sub-elements and appendices. I reviewed each Plan element with respect to the powers granted to a Community Development District under Section 190, Florida Statutes. As a professional planner, I have reviewed the Plan in order to determine whether there is any specific inconsistency between the proposed Community Development District Plan and the Collier County Growth Management Plan. I used a similar methodology to that utilized for the consistency review with the State Plan. All goals, objectives, and policies of the Plan were reviewed; however those that were in my professional opinion not related to the establishment the proposed District were disregarded. Those goals, objectives and policies that are relevant to the creation of the proposed Community Development District have been evaluated. The establishment of the Community Development District to provide the governmental services attendant to Tuscany Reserve complies fully with the goals, objectives and policies of the Collier County Growth Management Plan CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT. Objective 1 2: Provide pubhc facilities in order to maintain adopted level of service standards that are within the ability of the County to fund. or within the County's authority to require others to provide Existing facility deficiencies measured against the adopted level of service standards wilt be eliminated with revenues generated by ad valorem taxes and intergovernmental revenues received based on economic activity Future development will bear a proportionate cost of facility ~mprover'nents necessitated by growth Future development's payments may take the form impact fce~ aedicat~or-., o'~ land provision of public far' ti,=s and future , ¢- ,~ ,-,f ,~,-~ ......... pa/m~n .... user ,~,. specia! assessments ancJ taxes '~-t~e T'L:SC'-3r~)' F:,'eser'va prole"'t wJ! be ~noependent of (¢our~ty-subsldized fac~ *r~(i ,¢.,J', ,-a Jr::-: p~¢pr'~t',.i~f¢, share ~ ~rffrastructure costs through paymeFq propers,, t~,es ;~r~r:] s.r:,(¢:: al assessments The establishme~t of the proposed Local Sp¢cialize(I Problem: None PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT - POTABLE WATER SUBELEMENT F'oi~c'/ I 2.6 VVhere Cornq~unlty Development Districts, or other similar spectal dist',cts a e established to provlde atoci for developers to finance infrastructure or otherp~rpo~es ,,.¢t;,:~ ;::~¢tiaiiy .,vithir: the (3olil¢-r C. ourlty Water-~ewer D ¢*-,*' ~ ,.,, ¢,'ater service shall be comnectc, d ~ ~,.~,onal_ syste~,~ and ir, r~3r'~31 fac,hti.~' ~ shall be co~vzey~d when acceptable to *~-=,, i~ C,O h,3r (... _ .-'. '..,'Vater.-Sewer District for operation and ownership in accordance with Collier County 88-76 the Ublitres Standards and Procedures Ordinance adopted September 27 tq88 .... iLIt,EF;t ,evision and DIstr'.ct ';( R~;trtlcti(-r: and operatir~(~) JUL 3 0 2002 .1 Tuscany Reserve will provide and maintain potable water infrastructure to support the proposed development within the District boundaries and will connect the system to Collier County consistent with the Collier County Utilities Ordinance. The establishment of the proposed District is consistent with this Policy. Local Specialized Problem: None INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT Goal 1, Objective 1.1, and Policy 1.1.1: Provide for the continual exchange of information and the use of any intergovernmental coordination mechanisms to resolve differences and to achieve compatible and coordinated plans. Tuscany Reserve has coordinated with both public and private sector agencies in the delivery of services, such as Collier County Utilities. independent fire control districts, Collier County Department of Transportation. and Florida Power and Light to insure the services are coordinated and non-duplicative. Tuscany Reserve Community Development District will continue to coordinate plans with the various governmental agencies as it develops. The establishment of the proposed District is consistent with this goal and associated objective FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT Ob. iective 5 and Policy 5.1: In order to prox idc sound planning, ensure compatibility of land use> and further the implementation of the Future Land [.:sc Element. &ll rezc, nimzs muq he c(msistent xxith this Grm~h Xlanaaemcnt Plan Local Specialized Problem: Non(; The establishment of the proposed Tuscany Reserve Community Development Distnct to Chapter 190. Florida Statutes. is not inconsistent with the goals obiecbves and pot~c~es ,';f the Colher County Gro~*,!h Managemenf f'tan Based upon the aforementioned findings, the creation and establishment of the proposed would not be incons~stent with any goals pohcies secbonsorpodions of the Pian even ~f~twere to exercise an,/ and ali of ~t5 statutor,/ powers In fact. the proDose~ [)v.~t~ct ~*,c,~,{i furtne JUL 3 0 2002 Further, the creation and establishment of the proposed District would not be inconsistent with those pads of the Plan which do not relate to the creation and establishment of a District. Factor Three 3. Whether the area of land within the proposed district is of sufficient size, is sufficiently compact, and is sufficiently contiguous to be developable as one functional interrelated community. The proposed Tuscany Reserve Community Development District is of sufficient size and sufficiently compact to be developed as a functional interrelated community. The project's size is 461.29+ acres. This land area is large enough in land area to allow for the efficient provision of infrastructure systems, facilities and services. A project of this size and scope is most appropriately master planned to demonstrate how the various components of the overall project relate both internally and externally. The project is appropriately compact in size in that it will permit residential development and the required infrastructure support to be extended throughout the proposed District boundaries as one functional interrelated community. The properties within the proposed Tuscany Reserve Community Development District are contiguous, with the exception of those properties planned to be separated by internal access roads and drives This contiguous relationship will permit the District to function as a functional interrelated communit,/ -r he te,-n'. 'funatior, a! ~nterrelated communit';'" ts undefined ~n Chapter *f'O F 5.; In rny professiona! piannm, g opinion the term. "functional interrelated comm~nltv' means that the l%,,Lu.l lal-~(J uses for :t, orl'lr~'~JPl.'."¢ -, ¢:r),-~ area has common characteristics i;', the sense of per examp!e that Can b=' master planned because of [t~e land use relationships, as cont~u,~,/ of the ..,n~,:unity and its overall size The proposed District will ut;i~:te develo~)ment cor}cep~ tr.) demonsFate the interreiatedness of ~he entire pro!eot whereb!/ no~ the interr~! and e×terna! tand uso relationships have been shown but the bash': mfrastr'ucture to serve the ert'Jre ::or'r'rr:ur, ity Is master planned. -['his master planned COr-r}rr~InltV and filrth.~:rs the lar[].c',r communm/s goals as outlined in the discuss,e~, ~..n tr,.e Growth bla~:aaement Plan Local Specialized Problem' None Factor Four ' '2. ncthe~ the d~$tnc, t ~s the b~:'~t alternative available ~or dellvennc] .':.:pntn-,~, ~ ':]e,.,'~:,h::,[,rq,-)';i services and facilities to the area that will be served by the district Them :~re several a!terr,ati,ze ways to provide basic infrastructure a~d servic, e~. to the i~r;.':; pr..,Fc, s,:~cl t:. ~. ~:cr'...~ce.l r:,l the proposed Commun~tv Development D,str~t't ¢¢,ence[;fiiv the;e :~-- JUL 3 0 2002 L pl.q _ can be appropriate; however, with limitations, in that long-term funding must be assured to support infrastructure for the life of the community, as is required through the issuance of bonds to support a Community Development District. Another limitation is in the overall size and scope of the community. Where privately funded improvements may be practical for properties that are limited in the scope and buildout potential, projects having a scope and duration commensurate with the proposed Community Development District require a long-term commitment for service provision. The provision of services by the public can have limitations, especially where the community is a master planned and interrelated community that may desire services more appropriately directed at its property owners. The responsibility of a local government is to provide the basic infrastructure support for all communities within its Governmental boundary. A master planned community that may wish to achieve a higher than basic standard will not be well suited to provision of services through common general government funding alternatives. The Community Development District option is a preferred alternative to the two former mentioned funding sources (Private and General Public) in that the provision of services may be commensurate with the desired level of service of the community, while resulting in no burden to those properties outside the District The Community Development District cannot overburden the existing facilities because of the required concurrency management requirements found in the Collier County Growth Management Plan. Land Development Code and Chapter 190. F .S Local Specialized Problem: None Factor Five 5, Whether the community development services and fac~tmes of the district will be ~ncompat~bie '.*.,'.tr~ the capacity aris uses of e×isttr'.g !ocai and regional cor~rnunity development services ,3r:~i C!~apt()r. *, E'0 F' $ r~,-,u~ret:~ .... fhat ali actions and ir,'np*emer~tation of any or ali Commute,! C.~evelopment District powers ~['e governed by and must not be inconsistent with the C,zuntv C~ro~h Management Plan One of the fundamental requirements of Chapter 163 F S '.s that local government comprehensive plans must identif,/ cap~tal facilities required to support expected gro~h and that standards must be adopted to insure that minimum established levels of service for these facilities can be maintained. Th~s requirement insures that the impacts of development are created concurrent wi~h available capacity of necessary capital infrastructure Development may not occur unless there .~re adequate public facilities available to suppod it l-hese requirements insure comphance with County land develupmer~t regulations and adec!uate public facility requirements Collier County has not identified any ~nadequate public facilities that will affect the proposed District Conversely. no infrastruct~re stl * ~ . pp~,r, problems are antio~pat,~d ,,~ '~ result of ~he pr~ ..... d D ~t l r,c[~l Sl.~eci~iized Problem: Nr.~l(- ~_ JUL 3 0 2002 Factor Six 6. Whether the area that will be served by the district is amenable to separate special-district government. Factor six deals with whether the area that will be serviced by the District is amenable to separate special-district government. As discussed in the prior factor analysis, the land area is of sufficient size, and is sufficiently compact and sufficiently contiguous to be functional as an inter-related community. The project area is also located in an area where other large-scale master planned communities have been developed utilizing the community development district. In my opinion the land area for the District is amenable to special district government because the land area proposed to be established as a District has the need for the services that may be provided by the District. The District would also benefit 'from the provision of District services in that the services wilt be tailored to the specific needs of the District while consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the local growth management plan. Local Specialized Problem: None Summary Long term and sustained adequacy and efficiency of infrastructure are important, and I note that among the three alternatives discussed, the proposed District would more closely and efficiently corP. ,!~.l manage services and facilibes given that the District's sole responsibility is the '- development's mfrastructure needs both immediate and in the tong term, Fdrther, a Dist~;ct~'-, be more responsive to the properly owners of the community development and other ~arties. than can be provided b'/ the alternatives wnicp, either have a broader ..... ~:ccokintaDility or moro narrowed interests Tile propose:~ THscar~' Reserve Community Development Distr~ct ~s the rr~ost approprla,,e n of providing comr~uruty development systems, services and facilities because ~t ..,,',! :,-.- functlonall./ invoh,.e:] ~n the overall physical master planning of tne cievelopment, most distributes the cost and responsibilities to the users cf t~e systems services and prowdes for iong term maintenance, and prowdes a greater assurance that the reslden[s se, v'~,: oy the Tuscany Reserve Community Development w,II have a sustained level cf service to their quality of life objectives Respectfl~lly submitted · \..; '... _. "-~, .... _ JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER TRANSMITTAL TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS OF A RESOLUTION AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, FOR THE IMMOKALEE ROAD/COLLIER BOULEVARD AREA (HERITAGE BAY DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT) TO ESTABLISH THE "URBAN-RURAL FRINGE TRANSITION ZONE OVERLAY" FOR SECTIONS 13, 14, 23, 24, T48S, R26E, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA BY: AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND MAP SERIES; AMENDING THE SANITARY SEWER SUB-ELEMENT OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT; AMENDING THE POTABLE WATER SUB- ELEMENT. OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT; AMENDING THE WATER & SEWER SERVICE BOUNDARY MAP OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. OBJECTIVE: For the Board to consider a petition seeking to amend the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map by: 1) Establishing the "Urban-Rural Fringe Transition Overlay" to encompass Sections 23, 13, 14, and 24, Township 48 South, Range 26 East; consisting of approximately 2,562 acres; 2) Amending the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) to show the area affected by the Overlay; and 3) Amending the Sanitary Sewer and Potable Water Sub-Elements of the Public Facilities Element to allow County sewer and water systems to serve the project. The petitioner has proposed a revised water and sewer district boundary map to accompany the changes to the sub-elements. Staff notes that the Rural Fringe Amendments also include the three Agricultural/Rural Sections in a "Rural Transition Water and Sewer District". (Note: This proposed amendment is related to an ongoing Development of Regional Impact (DP, I) review. Comprehensive platt antendments involving DRIs are not subject to the State's "twice a year" platt atnendment limitation, attd therefore do not need to await the County's platt amendment cycle periods. This proposed amendment also includes land areas that are subject to the County's Proposed Rural Fringe Amendments, that were adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on June 19, 2002 and were recently forwarded to the State for final review. Certain aspects of the proposed amendment are virtually the satne as portions of the Rural Fringe Amendments. However, some aspects differ. Similarities attd differences are pointed out itt the staff report where appropriate.) CONSIDERATIONS: Chapter 163, F.S., provides for an amendment process for the adopted Collier County Growth Management Plan. · Resolution 97-431 provides for a public petition process to amend the Plan. · Chapter 380.06(6)(b), F.S., provides that Plan Amendments related to Devek pmerlt~gqO,~ ~'r~ Regional Impact (DRIs) are not subject to "statutory or local ordinance lin its Old. the <~ ~-- frequency of consideration of amendments to the local comprehensive plan. JUL 0 2002 [Words underlined, are added, words struck through are deleted] ~ · The CCPC held their transmittal hearing on July 18, 2002. * This transmittal hearing considers amendments to the following Elements of the Plan: o Future Land Use Element o Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element o Potable Water Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact. AGENT/PETITIONER: Agent: R. Bruce Anderson, Esq. Petitioner: David Key, AICP Young, van Assenderp, Varnadoe & Anderson, P.A. Regional Vice President, 801 Laurel Oak Drive, Suite 300 U.S Home Corporation Naples, FL 34108 10491 Six Mile Cypress Fort Myers, FL 33912 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property, containing approximately 2,562 acres, is located in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Immokalee Road (CR-846) and the future Collier Boulevard (CR-951) Extension, approximately 3 miles east ofi-75. The subject property is comprised of all of Sections 13, 14, 23 & 24, less the south 100 feet of Sections 23 & 24, Township 48 South, and Range 26 East. (Please see Attachment I - Location Map) PROPOSED AMENDMENTS: Petition No. CP-2000-6 seeks to amend the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map by: 1) Establishing the "Urban-Rural Fringe Transition Overlay" to encompass Sections 23, 13, 14, and 24, Township 48 South, Range 26 East; consisting of approximately 2,562 acres; 2) Amending the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) to show the area affected by the Overlay; and 3) Amending the Sanitary Sewer and Potable Water Sub-Elements of the Public Facilities Element to allow County sewer and water systems to serve the project. The Petitioner has proposed a revised water and sewer district boundary map to accompany the changes to the sub-elements. Staff notes that the Rural Fringe Amendments also include the three Agricultural/Rural Sections in a "Rural Transition Water and Sewer District". The proposed map amendments are to the Future Land Use Map and map series, and to the Water and Sewer District Boundary Map. The proposed text amendments are as follows: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT Policy 1.5: [added text P~Y~Ai~J~A ITEM Overlays and Special Features shall include: A. Area of Critical State Concern Overlay JUL 3 0 2002 [Words underlined are added, words struck thrc'_'gh are deleted] B. Areas of Environmental Concern Overlay C. Airport Noise Overlay D. Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay E. Urban-Rural Fringe Transition Zone Overlay V. OVERLAYS AND SPECIAL FEATURES [new text, page 46] E. URBAN-RURAL FRINGE TRANSITION ZONE OVERLAY Sections 13, 14, 23, and 24, Township 48 South, Range 26 East consisting of+2,562 acres which overlap the Urban and Agricultural/Rural boundary line, north of the intersection of Immokalee Road and County Road 951, are under common ownership and through comprehensive planning may resolve potential local land use conflicts and provide for the realization of unique regional environmental opportunities. Among the causes of potential land use conflicts are the abrupt transitionless switch from urban densities (4+ units per acre) in Section 23 to rural densities (1 unit per 5 acres) in Sections 13, 14 and 24, and the continuation of earth mining in an increasingly urbanized residential area. Under existing permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) and Florida Department of Environmental Protection, a total of+1,700 acres in these four Sections have been or may be mined. Sections 13, 14 and 24 in the Agricultural/Rural Area contain large wetland areas in the north, which are contiguous to wetlands proposed for the Cocohatchee West Flow-way and ..... slated for acquisition by the Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed (CREW) Trust. These wetland areas extend in a contiguous fashion south into Section 23 in the Urban Area, in close proximity to the Mixed Use Activity Center quadrant desi_~nated within this Section. To resolve potential land use conflicts and protect environmental resources, an Urban-Rural Transition Zone Overlay is created which encompasses all four sections, and any residential development proposed within the Overlay area shall be deemed consistent with the other provisions of this Growth Management Plan provided that the followin~ performance standards are satisfied: 1. Approximately 533 acres of wetlands, which exist on the property, are currently in a conservation easement. An additional 300 acres of wetlands will be placed in a conservation easement status. To~ether these 830 + acres of wetlands have the potential to be connected to wetland sites off-site thereby providing an environmental and wildlife corridor connection. 2. Native vegetation or other natural areas (inclusive of conservation areas) shall cover a minimum of 40% of the gross land area (or its equivalent off-site) exclusive of existing rock quarries. 3. Seventy percent (70%) of the gross land area of the property shall be devoted to open space, including but not limited to, lakes (including existing rock quarries) golf courses and conservation areas. ~rmoA ~'r~ JUL 3 0 2002 [Words underlined are added, words struck through are deleted] ~ 3 4. To the greatest extent practical, the existing rock quarries should be incorporated into the regional water management system and utilized to accommodate the passing through of off-site water flows. 5. The property shall connect to the County's regional water and wastewater facilities, which exist at the southwest comer of the property at the intersection of Immokalee Road and County Road 951, which regional service area is expanded to include all of the property. 6. Gross residential density allowed on the four Sections shall not exceed the overall gross density allowed in Section 23 under the 1997 Growth Management Plan or 1.5 units per gross acre, whichever is less, which gross density may be allocated and developed among all of the Sections, and may be clustered, in order to achieve conformance with the other performance standards applicable to this Overlay. 7. Development of the property shall be designed to encourage internal vehicle trip capture by providing commercial and recreational uses and shall provide for pedestrian and bicyclist access to internal community recreation and convenience retail centers. Internal proiect roadways shall provide connections to the Activity Center located in the southwest comer of the property. Attachment II shows the proposed amendment to the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) to delineate the "Urban-Rural Fringe Transition Zone Overlay". The proposed text change to the Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element is as follows: POLICY 1.5.1: [added text: page SS-6I Discourage urban sprawl by permitting central sanitary sewer systems only in the Designated Urban-Rural Fringe Transition Zone Overlay and Urban Area of the Future Land Use Element of this Plan, and in areas where the County has legal commitments to provide facilities and service outside the Urban Area as of the date of adoption of this Plan. The proposed text change to the Potable Water Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element is as follows: POLICY 1.5.1: [added text: page PW-6| Discourage urban sprawl by permitting central potable water systems only in the Designated Urban-Rural Fringe Transition Zone Overlay and Urban Area of the Future Land Use Element of this Plan, and in areas where the County has legal commitments to provide facilities and service outside the Urban Area as of the date of adoption of this Plan. Attachment III shows the proposed changes to the County Sewer and Water District Bounda 'y. ~ ~ }( _. JUL 3 0 2002 [Words underlined are added, words struck through are deleted] ~ 4 PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The purpose of the proposed changes is to allow for development of the Heritage Bay Planned Unit Development (p.U.D.)/Development of Regional Impact (DRI). The proposed development is to consist of 3,450 residential units (of all types, plus 200 Assisted Living Units), 175,000 square feet of retail space, and 55,000 square feet of office space, plus amenities, all on 2,562 acres. SURROUNDING LAND USE~ ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Subiect Site: Approximately 66.5% o£the site is disturbed land that is either impacted by the ongoing rock quarry operation or could be so impacted. Most of Section 23 is designated Urban, Urban-Mixed Use District, and Urban Residential Subdistrict. However, a portion of this Section, in the northwest corner of the Immokalee Road/Collier Boulevard intersection, is designated Urban-Commercial District, and is within Activity Center #3. Also, most of Section 23 is in the residential density band surrounding the Activity Center. Sections 13, 14 and 24 are designated Agricultural/Rural, and are within the Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District, and are also within the County's designated "Rural Fringe" area. Currently, all four Sections are under the ownership of Florida Rock Corporation. All four sections are zoned "A-Rural Agricultural" with a conditional use permit for mining activities. Under the existing FLUE designation, the urban portion of the property that is inside the Activity Center (40 acres) could be developed as either commercial or high density residential, up to 16 units per acre. High density residential (up to 7 units per acre) could also be developed on the portion of the property inside the density band (471 acres), and loxver density residential (4 units per acre on 137 acres) could be developed outside the density band. The balance of the property (1,922 acres) could be developed as residential property at 1 unit per 5 acres (subject to the dictates of the Administration Commission's Final Order). If residential development of the property were approved at the highest allowable densities, the FLUE designations would currently allow the construction of 4,741 residential units (the Petitioner's estimate of 4,767 is in error) on the entire site. However, subject to the County's proposed Rural Fringe Amendments, the currently designated Rural Agricultural portion of the site would become a "Receiving Area", in which higher residential densities would be allowed based upon purchase of Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Credits from designated off-site "Sending Areas". Under such conditions, even more dense residential development would be allowed. Surrounding Lands: North - Property to the north is designated Agricultural/Rural, and is within the Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District and is undeveloped. This property is within the County's designated "Rural Fringe" area. This area is zoned "A-Rural Agricultural". All of Section 11 and most of Section 12 are within Natural' xeso~.~ rrr~,. Protection Areas (NRPAs) and Sending Areas under the proposed Rural Fr nge i~o..~.~..~ JUL 0 2002 [Words underlined are added, words struck through are deleted] ~ ~ Pg'__ -- Amendments. These Sections are also within the Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed (CREW) Trust purchase area. East o Immediately adjacent to the Heritage Bay property on the east are the Bonita Bay East Golf Course and undeveloped property. This area is within the Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District, and is also within the County's designated "Rural Fringe" area, and is also subject to the Final Order and is part of the proposed Rural Fringe Amendments. Beyond Bonita Bay is the developing Twin Eagles Golf & Country Club. These lands are zoned "A-Rural Agricultural". Portions of these two developments are also within the CREW NRPA. South - Lands to the south, across Immokalee Road are zoned "A-Rural Agricultural" and currently contain a nursery, driving range and undeveloped property. Section 26 is within the Urban Area and has designations similar to those described for Section 23, above. In Section 25, also across Immokalee Road, there is an approved conditional use permit for a golf course ("Grand Land") development of which appears to have begun. This area is designated Agricultural Rural, and Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District. The proposed Rural Fringe Amendments designate Section 25 as a TDR Receiving Area. West - Lands to the west, across the designated right-of-way for the Collier Boulevard/CR- 95 ! Extension (and in Section 22), are designated Urban and have sub-designations similar to those described for Section 23. All of these lands are zoned "A-Rural Agricultural". Section 22 currently contains a nursery and undeveloped property. North of Section 22, Section 15 is currently within the Agricultural/Rural designation, and the Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District. The proposed Rural Fringe Amendments designate this property as "Neutral". This designation means that this area is not subject to the TDR process, and that residential development is allowed at a density of 1 unit per 5 acres. The undeveloped property in this section is part of an approved 799-unit residential/golf course community, known as Mirasol. Across the intersection, to the southwest of Heritage Bay is the ongoing Pebblebrook Lakes Development, which includes the shopping center located at Immokalee Road and Collier Boulevard. STAFF ANALYSIS: Proposed Language: Comprehensive Planning staff is recommending certain changes to the proposed additional language within Section V., Overlays And Special Features. These are as follows: 1. Comprehensive Planning staff proposes the following changes to the Petitioner's third paragraph: "To resolve potential land use conflicts and protect environmental resources, an Urban-Rural Fringe Transition Zone Overlay is created which encompasses sections, and av?pr~sddemmt all development proposed within the Overlay al ea ...... ~,. are [Words underlined are added, words struck *~' ..... ~' deleted] JUL63 0 2002 be ~ .... " .... ;o.~, comply with the ^*~' ....... ;~; ....,-,~.;~ r: .... ..~. ~.s ........, m ....... ;~ *h~* the following perfo~ance st~dards: ~ These recommended changes introduce the word "Fringe", apparently omitted by the Petitioner; subject all t~es of development within the project to the perfo~ce star.ds; ~d, remove the reference to the GMP as u~ecess~. 2. Staff is recommending the following change to the Petitioner's sub-para~aph 4: "To the ~eatest extent practical, the existing rock qumes should shall be inco~orated into the regional water management system ~d utilized to acco~odate the passing t~ou~ of off-site water flows: and may be used for recreational pu~oses." ~ote: In this regard, staff has learned that the South Florida Water Management District will be requiring the Petitioner to prepare a Conceptual Surface Water Management System application (consistent with District practice for D~ reviews). The District Conceptual Permit, if issued, would likely require that quark'pits be used for Water Management purposes, barring some environmental reason why such could not be allowed.) The Florida Department of Communi~' Affairs (DCA) has requested that the District not require permit submittal until q~er completion of the plan amendment and DRI review processes. 3. Staff is recommending the following changes to the Petitioner's sub-para~aph 6: "The maximum number of residential units on the entire Heritage Bay prope~y shall not exceed 3,450, (not including~ 200 ALF units). Gress ~;~"~;~.~.~.,.,~. ~..o..v~; .... ~..~u ..... .. ~.,~ tess, whic~ ~csz~,,o.,~:*" This number may be allocated and developed among all of the Sections, in confo~ance with the enviromental preseD~ation requirements referenced in sub-para~aph 1., above, and may be clustered, in order to achieve confo~ance with the other perfo~ance standards applicable to this Overlay." The reference to the "maximum number of residential units" is more stringent than the language submitted by the Petitioner and is also consistent with the Application for Development Approval (D~ Application). Fu~he~ore, the Petitioner's language could have necessitated a calculation to dete~ine the number of allowable units, whereas the staff language clearly states the allowable number. The reference to sub-para~aph 1 essentially requires a plan amendment review if the Petitioner ever seeks to amend the D~ Development Order to ch~ge prese~e area acreage. 4. The Petitioner's sub-pma~aph 7, as originally submitted, w~ as follows: "Development of the prope~y shall be desired to encourage internal vehicle thp .~ capture by providing commercial and recreational uses and shall provide for ' pedestrian and bicyclist access to internal community recreation and convq 1 retail centers. ~temat project roadways shall provide co~ections to the fi Center located in the southwest comer of the property." ~orOs un0erlined are added, words ~* .... ~ '~rexg~ are 0elete01 .~ ¢ 2B 2 Comprehensive Planning staff had recommended to the Planning Commission that this paragraph be amended to include the specific commercial land use parameters, as indicated within the DRI Application. Absent use intensity, size and locational standards, the Overlay would allow all commercial uses, of any intensity, and in any location. This aspect of the Overlay could have allowed subsequent amendments to the DRI Development Order, and accompanying zoning changes to greatly expand commercial uses without any amendment to the Growth Management Plan. Also, absent more specific language, the relationship of the Overlay to the underlying land use designations, districts and subdistricts was unclear. In response, to these staff concerns, the Petitioner has submitted the following language: "Commercial activities are limited to a total of 40 acres within the activity Center located at the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Collier Boulevard and Immokalee Road and three "Village Centers" totaling approximately 26 acres within the residential part of Heritage Bay. The Activity Center commercial uses will include a maximum of 150,000 square feet of retail uses and 50,000 square feet of office uses. The Village Center commercial uses will include a maximum of 10,000 square feet of retail uses, 10,000 square feet of restaurant uses, 5,000 square feet of marina related retail uses, and 5,000 square feet of office uses." County staff has reviewed the above language and believes that it is sufficient for transmittal purposes. Any further recommendations as to "fine-tuning" this language will be based upon comments received from DCA. Staff had no comments regarding the proposed text changes to the Sanitary Sewer and Potable Water Sub-Elements of the Public Facilities Element. The language submitted by the Petitioner appears to be acceptable. Environmental Impacts: Approximately 840.7 acres (32.8%)of the site contain various types of native vegetation associations, including both wetland and upland vegetation. The Petitioner is proposing to preserve all of these areas. Environmental surveys of the property were conducted in 1994, 1999 and 2000. The following protected species were observed onsite: American alligator (Florida Species of Special Concern) Gopher tortoise (Florida Species of Special Concern) Little blue heron (Florida Species of Special Concern) Tricolored heron (Florida Species of Special Concern) Wood stork (State and Federally Endangered) Snowy egret (Florida Species of Special Concern) White ibis (Florida Species of Special Concern) Butterfly orchid (Florida Commercially Exploited) Wild-coco (State Threatened) - ~_.,rr. fiOA llr:J6/ - ~" Reflexed wild-pine (State Threatened) ~__~ ~ The proposed preservation areas should provide necessary habitat for these species. JUl.. 3 0 2002 [Words underlined are added, words struck through are deleted] ! 8 There are no wellfields on the subject property. There are no identified archaeological/historical resources or sites on the subject property. Effect on High Range Population Projections: Pursuant to CIE Policy 1.1.2, a significant impact in population is a potential increase in countywide population by > 5 %. The proposed development has the potential to generate approximately 7,107 residents. Assuming this population to consist entirely of new residents, the resulting County population increase would be approximately 2.8%, based upon 2000 Census data. Thus, under Policy 1.1.2, the project would not create a significant population increase. Public Facilities Impacts: This project includes both residential and commercial development. Accordingly, there could be increased impacts upon the County's parks and recreation facilities. However, approximately 1,800 acres of the development will consist of lakes, preserves, recreational facilities, open space, golf courses and buffer areas. Additionally, the project includes a 15,000 square foot recreation center. To some extent, use of these facilities by residents and guests of the development will limit impacts upon County facilities. Potable water and sanitary sewer service will be provided by Collier County Public Utilities. The projected potable water demand for Heritage Bay, at buildout, is approximately 1.38 million gallons per day. The projected wastewater treatment demand is also 1.38 million gallons per day. County sewer and water mains are currently located near the intersection of CR-951 and CR-846, and are expected to be extended into the project area upon final approval of the proposed Rural Fringe Amendments. The project's estimated demands were used by the County Utilities Department in its planning process for the planned extension. The Heritage Bay Development includes part of a proposed regional surface water flowway, to be kno~vn as the Cocohatchee Flowway that will serve to reduce flooding and improve hydrology in southern Lee and northern Collier Counties. The Flowway splits into two major arms just north of Heritage Bay. The Heritage Bay Development will include a portion of the Cocohatchee West Flowway. This is the same flowway associated with the Mirasol Development to the west of Heritage Bay. This project will likely increase the amount of land area devoted to stormwater management purposes in northern Collier County. The proposed stormwater management plan will utilize the existing quarry lakes, plus additional lakes, to provide required water quality storage volumes. Lakes and wetlands will also provide quantity storage volumes. Runoff will be conveyed to these areas via a system of culverts and swales, and via sheetflow. As previously noted, this project is currently undergoing a development of regional impact (DRI) review. State improvements to 1-75, currently scheduled for 2008, will address some of the project's impacts. The Petitioner has also recommended that Livingston Road be widened to six lanes, between Radio Road and Immokalee Road, and to four lanes north of Immokalee Road. to serve as an alternate route for 1-75. [Words underlined 8re added, words ~' .... ~''~ .... ~ are deleted] JUL 3 0 ~:002 L- ,, A number of other transportation improvements will likely be required by this project. These include improvements to the 1-75 ramps at Immokalee Road, the intersection of Immokalee Road and Oakes Boulevard, the intersection of Immokalee Road and Collier Boulevard, improvements associated with project entrances on Immokalee Road, the Collier Boulevard/Vanderbilt Beach Road intersection, and the intersection of Collier Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard. It is worth noting that the proposed amendment actually reduces the potential number of units in this area from that which could be built in this area under current Plan designations. This factor may act to prevent future road impacts from being as bad as they might have been, without the proposed amendment. Prior to project buildout in 2009, Collier Boulevard, between Vanderbilt Beach Road and Immokalee Road will require widening to 4 lanes. Further improvements will be required for the intersections mentioned above, as well. The companion DRI Development Order for this plan amendment will include specific provisions designed to mitigate transportation impacts. Such provisions will include specific road and intersection improvements, the timing of such improvements (by years and/or phases of the development), and monies to be paid by the Petitioner for such improvements. At buildout, Heritage Bay is expected to generate a solid waste disposal demand of 56.8 cubic yards (or 17 tons) per day. The Waste Management Corporation, which currently conducts solid waste hauling services in Collier Count}', is the expected solid ~vaste service provider for the project. APPROPRIATENESS OF CHANGE/ISSUES: As indicated by the Petitioner, the proposed residential development plan (containing 3,450 residential units) is significantly less than the 4,741 (once again, the Petitioner's estimate of 4,767 appears to be in error) units that could be approved under provisions within the current Future Land Use Element. However, it is not necessarily true that the Board of County Commissioners would approve the entire 4,741 units, or that all of these units would be built if approved. By undergoing a separate amendment process from the Rural Fringe Amendments, and thus having a fixed number of units spread across the four sections of the project, the Petitioner will essentially be removing themselves from the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) process described within the Rural Fringe Amendments. The development of Heritage Bay will not require TDR credits and there will be no need for the Petitioner to purchase such credits. While this factor could significantly lessen the development potential of this area, it may also impact the demand within the receiving area for TDR Credits. However, County staff has evaluated this factor and believes that it will likely be negated by the number of TDR credits retained in the sending areas as onsite homes. In other words, because "sending" residents will not sell all of the potential credits, Heritage Bay is not likely to have a significant impact on the ability of the receiving areas to absorb TDR credits. In a related matter, the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) has recommended that golf courses within the "Rural Fringe" portion of the Heritage Bay DRI be required to purchase TDR credits, as per requirements for golf courses in "Receiving" areas, as stated in the proposed Rural Fringe Amendments. The specific language recommended by the CCPC is shown below. In proposing to spread the allotted residential units across the entire subject property, the Petitioner has essentially copied the "density blending" provisions contained within the Rural Fring Amendments. In this regard, it is worth noting that the Petitioner and its consultants fret tent~. [Words underlined are added, words str,-'c~ through are deleted] JUL attended meetings of the County's Rural Fringe Oversight Advisory Committee and also attended most public heatings and staff presentations related to the proposed Rural Fringe Amendments, providing considerable input thereby. This factor accounts for many of the similarities between the two proposals. In the DRI Master Development Plan (Map H of the DR] Application) and accompanying text, the Petitioner indicates that the project will be divided into three "villages" or "towns", each containing a "Community Club/Town Center." In describing the Community Club/Town Centers (within the DRI Application), the Petitioner indicates that these areas will be designed to be consistent with the County's "PUD/Neighborhood Village" criteria. However, the Town Centers (as presented within the DR] Application) are inconsistent with the pUD/Neighborhood Village criteria, because the current County FLUE limits applicability of PUD/Neighborhood Villages to the Urban Area. In order to correct this inconsistency, the Petitioner has proposed additional language that does not directly reference the Urban Area (see above). Commercial Demand Analysis: The subject site is within the Corkscrew Planning Community, and is close to both the Urban Estates Planning Community and the Rural Estates Planning Community. A commercial demand analysis is being conducted as part of the concurrent DRI review process. The project is proposing to construct 175,000 square feet of retail space, and 55,000 square feet of office space. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: · A number of protected plant and animal species occur on the subject property. However, it appears that the proposed on-site preserves, as well as likely conditions ~vithin the DRI Development Order will address potential adverse impacts to these species. · Heritage Bay has the potential to have significant impacts to 1-75, between Immokalee Road and Bonita Beach Road, as well as to a number of Collier County roads. The Petitioner will be required to adequately mitigate such impacts as part of the DRI review process. · County staff does not find that the project will create adverse potable water, wastewater treatment demand, and stormwater management or solid waste impacts. As regards stormwater management, the project could have a net county and regional benefit. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the BCC transmit this amendment to the Florida Department of Community Affairs subject to the text changes noted earlier in this Executive Summary. The Draft Transmittal Resolution for the proposed Plan Amendments is included as Attachment IV. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS: The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) reviewed the proposed amendments on July 19, unanimously (vote: 6/0) that the BCC approve Petition CP-2000-6 as submitted, for Tr; ~sm~~ 2002, at a continuation of the regularly scheduled July 18, 2002 meeting. The CCPC rec the Florida Department of Community Affairs, subject to the following: [Words underlined are added, words struck through are deleted] 2002 o Staff and petitioner recommended text changes/additions, as contained in this Executive Summary (the CCPC report was prepared prior to such changes having been agreed to by staff and the petitioner). A text change to sub-paragraph 6 of the Overlay, as found on the top of page 8 of this Executive Summary, next to last line: "... referenced in sub-paragraph 1, above, and may shall be clustered, in order to achieve ...". Add a requirement that, for golf course(s) in the Agricultural/Rural designated portion of the site, TDRs must be purchased for that golf course acreage at a ratio of 1 DU/5 acres - see text .below. For golf course(s) on Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Receiving Lands (Sections 13, 14, and 24), for each five (5) .m-oss acres of land area utilized as part of the golf course - including the clubhouse area, rough, fairways, ~eens, and lakes, but excluding any area dedicated as conservation, which is non-irrigated and retained in a natural state - one TDR shall be acquired from Sending Lands. In this regard, the Planning Commissioner that added to the Motion the above TDR purchase requirement for golf courses expressed surprise and dismay that the Rural Fringe amendments did not require this for all golf courses on Receiving Lands (the Rural Fringe amendments exclude this TDR purchase requirement when density blending is utilized). All other Planning Commissioners were supportive of this added TDR purchase requirement. [Words underlined are added, words ctr'--'c~ thrcuGh are deleted] JUL 3 0 2002 PREPARED BY: Glenn E. Heath, AICP Principal Planner REVIEWED BY: ~ S t an'Li~'l'ng~r, AICP Comprehensive Planning Manager Margaret V~erstle Planning Services Director APPROVED BY: /j~, AdministratOr / OOmmunity Dev. & Environmental Services Petition Number: CP-2000-6 Executive Summary for July 30, 2002 BCC meeting. NOTE: This petition was reviewed at the July 19, 2002 CCPC meeting. DATE: DATE: 7 '"tl_~ DATE: JUL 3 0 2002 [Words underlined are added, words struck thrc'--'gh are deleted] 13 CA: 951 951 GENERAL LOCAllON MAP GROWTH MANAGI:::MENT PLAN AMENDMENT PREPARED FOR: U.S. HOME CORPORATION (US. 41) -© NORTHERN COLLIER COUNTY PFtEPAFIED ~ U.S. ~ COFIPOFIATION Wiisp. nMii~ ~ I'fE~ P ' I UNff 53 ROJECT: MAP H - EXISTING PROPOSED mmmmmmmmmm EXISTITN(~ COLLIER COUNTY WATER AND S~ER DISTRICT BOUNDARY .....--...PROPOSED COLLIER COUNTY WATER AND S~ER DISTRICT BOUNDARY WATER/SEWER BOUNDARY U.S. HOME CORPORATION WiI Miller NO 2; N0442-005-000 NO. SH E'er NO; C.M.P. 195 RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT; THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP; THE SANITARY SEWER SUB-ELEMENT OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT; AND THE POTABLE WATER SUB-ELEMENT OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT OF THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Flodda Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans pursuant to Sections 163.3184 and 163.3187, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County has prepared Plan Amendments to the following elements of its Growth Management Plan: Future Land Use Element; including the Future Land Use Map Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element and Potable Water Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission has considered the proposed amendments to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, Florida Statutes, and has recommended approval of said amendments to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments, various State agencies and the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) have ninety (90) days to review the proposed Amendments and DCA must transmit, in writing, to Collier County, its comments along with any objections and any recommendations for modification, within said ninety (90) days pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DCA must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments, within sixty (60) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, the DCA, within forty-five (45) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan Amendments, must review and determine if the Plan Amendments are in compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Act of 1985; the State Comprehensive Plan; the appropriate Regional Policy Plan and Rule 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code, pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, By The Board Of County Commissioners Of Collier County, Florida, that: Words underlined are additions; Words stn:ck tk. rcugh are deletions 2002 The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan Amendments prior to final adoption and State determination of compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 and Rule 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code, Minimum Criteria for Review of Local Government Comprehensive Plans and Determination of Compliance. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion; second and majority vote this 30th day of July, 2002. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS . COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BY: JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN Approved as to Form And Legal Sufficiency ' ~larjofie M. Student, Assistant County Attomey Words underlined are additions; Words strack tSrough are deletions JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ST-99-03, DAVID FARMER, PE, OF KEYSTONE CUSTOM HOMES, REQUESTING A SPECIAL TREATMENT DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT WITHIN A SPECIAL TREATMENT (ST) OVERLAY (ST PARCEL 23A), LOCATED WITHIN THE PROPOSED LITTLE PALM ISLAND SUBDIVISION, IN SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. OBJECTIVE: That the community's interest is maintained in a single-family neighborhood. CONSIDERATIONS: The petitioner requests a Special Treatment (ST) Development Permit to impact an area zoned RSF-3-ST. The impacts include less than 1 acre of wetlands. The applicant requests Preliminary Subdivision Plat (PSP) and Special Treatment (ST) development Permit approval in order to construct a residential subdivision under the subdivision regulations. The Land Development Code authorizes the Planning Services Director to administratively approve PSPs. However, since this proposed development contains land with an "ST" zoning overlay, and an Environmental Impact Statement was required, the Environmental Advisory Council, the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners are required to hear the ST petition. If the PSP and ST permit are approved, the petitioner will subsequently submit a Final Plat and construction plans (consistent with the PSP) to the Engineering Services Department. The Final Plat will be heard by the Board of County Commissioners. The petitioner previously submitted an application for a PSP and ST permit for this parcel with a gopher tortoise preserve smaller than the one in the current submittal. The BCC directed the petitioner to return with the PSP, ST and Final Plat at one meeting. Through a public petition, the petitioner requested that the BCC allow the presentation of the PSP and ST without the Final Plat (the Final Plat contains detailed engineering which would be expensive to revise if the BCC directed changes). The Board agreed to allow the petitioner to present the PSP and ST permit to the EAC, CCPC and BCC prior to submittal of the Final Plat. The petition currently before the Board is the ST permit, with the Preliminary Subdivision Plat presented to give the Commission the scope of the entire development. JUL 3 0 2002 The proposed development consists of 109 lots on 86.67 acres, for a density of approximately 1.25 units per acre, less than the maximum density of 3 units per acre permitted in the RSF-3 zoning district. The project retains the required 60% open space. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this petition will have no direct fiscal impact on Collier County since the property is currently zoned for single-family houses. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Future Land Use Element: The subject parcel is designated as Urban-Mixed Use on the Future Land Use map of the Growth Management Plan. The Urban-Mixed Use Land Use Designation is intended to accommodate a variety of residential and non-residential land uses. Therefore, if the Preliminary Subdivision Plat and a Special Treatment Development Permit are approved, the petitions shall be consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. Conservation & Coastal Management Element: With regards to native vegetation preservation, wildlife issues and wetland issues, the following Goals, Objectives and Policies apply: Objective 6.2 states, "There shall be no unacceptable net loss of viable naturally functioning marine and fresh water wetlands, excluding transitional zone wetlands which are addressed in Objective 6.3". This project accomplishes that with minimal impacts to wetlands. Objective 6. 4 requires the appropriate portion of native vegetation be preserved, by providing for on site preservation of 25% of the existing native vegetation. It states, "A portion of each viable, naturally functioning non-wetland native habitat shall be preserved or retained as appropriate". This project protects the majority of both the wetlands and xeric scrub habitat on site. Goal 6 of the GMP, protects the gopher tortoise population by providing the appropriate habitat on site and off site to try to ensure the survival of the on site tortoise population. It states, "The County shall identify, protect, conserve and appropriately use its native vegetation communities and wildlife habitat". The site plan identifies a large gopher tortoise preserve in the highest quality habitat on site 2 JUL 3 0 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The boundary of the ST parcel on this proposed Preliminary Subdivision Plat application covers 20.21 acres. Typically the petitioner's environmental consultant redefines the wetland boundary that is identified as .jurisdictional to Collier County. The consultant and South Florida Water Management District modified the wetland line and the current jurisdictional boundary encompasses approximately 10 acres, instead of the originally identified 20 acres. A complete description of the wetland area is available in the wetland section of the EIS. The petitioner proposes minimal impacts to the ST area, which are necessary for access to the upland portion of the site. The petitioner has proposed compensation for the impacts to the wetlands with enhancement to the remaining 9.9 acres. Approximately 69.5 acres of native vegetation exist on 86.67-acre site. This project is required to retain a minimum of 25% or 17.4 acres of native vegetation. The petitioner proposes preservation of 30.8 acres of native vegetation. That is 44% of all the native vegetation on site, 177% of what is required by the LDC, and 35% of the entire site. A gopher tortoise preserve is proposed, which covers 14.5 acres within the highest quality scrub habitat and is adjacent to the gopher tortoise preserve at Collier's Reserve. The tortoises that reside within the footprint of the proposed preserve will remain on site, with the balance being relocated, in accordance with the FWC permit, to an approved off-site preserve. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located outside an area of historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no historic/archaeological survey and assessment is required. However, the Collier County Historical and Archeological Preservation Board recommends that a historical marker designate the significance of the Old Tamiami Trail. EAC RECOMMENDATION: The Environmental Advisory Council heard this petition at its May 1, 2002 meeting. The Council heard presentations by County staff, the petitioner and the public. A motion to recommend approval of the ST permit was made by Councilman Carlson, seconded by Councilman Coe. The motion failed 3 to 4. Reasons stated for voting against the motion were that an updated gopher tortoise survey is needed, the gopher tortoise preserve should be increased in area, and that destruction of 50% of the gopher tortoise habitat is unacceptable. A6F. J~OA I'tt~ JUL 3 0 2002 A motion was then made by Councilman Gal to recommend denial of the ST permit. It was seconded by Councilwoman Santoro, but failed by a vote of 4 to 3 (Section 5.13.5.2 of the LDC states that "an affirmative vote of five or more members [of the EAC] shall be necessary in order to take official action"). Therefore, the Environmental Advisory Council forwarded this petition to the Board of County Commissioners without a recommendation. CCPC RECOMMENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission heard this petition on July 18, 2002, after the deadline for the preparation of this Executive Summary. The Community Development & Environmental Services Administrator directed staff to schedule this petition for the July 30, 2002 BZA meeting. The CCPC recommendation will be presented verbally to the BCC. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Planning Services staff recommended that the EAC and CCPC forward Petition ST-99-003 to the BCC with a recommendation of approval subject to the following conditions: 1. If applicable, existing or proposed easements for Collier County Stormwater facilities shall be maintained free of landscaping, berms or any other kind of obstacles that would impede adequate access to maintenance crews and equipment. 2. The existing canal, and existing lake on north side of the site shall be dedicated as a drainage easement to Collier County Stormwater Management Department for access and maintenance. 3. All development orders shall be consistent with applicable sections of the Collier County Growth Management Plan and the Collier County Land Development Code in effect at the time of final development order approval. 4. Buffers shall be provided around wetlands, extending a minimum of 15 feet landward of the edge of wetland preserves in all places and averaging 25 feet from the landward edge of wetlands. Where natural buffers are not possible, structural buffers shall be provided in accordance with the State of Florida Environmental Resources Permit Rules and be subject to review and approval by Current Planning Environmental Staff. 5. Environmental permitting shall be in accordance with the State of Florida Environmental Resource Permit Rules and shall be subject to review and approval by Current Planning 4 JUL 3 0 2002 Environmental Staff. Removal of exotic vegetation shall not be the sole mitigation technique for impacts to Collier County jurisdictional wetlands. 6. The petitioner shall comply with the guidelines and recommendations of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) regarding potential impacts to protected wildlife species. Where protected species are observed on site, a Habitat Management Plan for those protected species shall be submitted to Current Planning Environmental Staff for review and approval prior to final plat/construction plan approval. 7. Prior to final plat approval, all gopher tortoise preserves shall be identified on the plat with protective covenants. 8. All conservation areas shall be designated as conservation/preservation tracts or easements on all construction plans, and shall be recorded on the plat with protective covenants per, or similar to, Florida Statutes, Section 704.06. Buffers shall be provided in accordance with Section 3.2.8.4.7.3 of the LDC, which prohibits any buildings from being constructed within 25 feet of all upland and wetland preserves, and in no case shall any impacts, including grading, filling or clearing, be allowed within 10 feet for construction of accessory structures. 9. A Gopher tortoise relocation/management plan was submitted for review and approval. Prior to final plat/construction plan submittal, the following conditions shall be added to the relocation/management plan: · The 80-foot wide access easement (1 acre in total size) located at the north end of the gopher tortoise preserve, shall be restored with native scrub vegetation and supplemental planting material for the tortoises. · Add a requirement for hand clearing of exotic vegetation within preserves. · Add a requirement for a thorough gopher tortoise survey to be conducted, prior to the start of any relocation, to update the status and locations of all burrows. · Add the following language to the first sentence under "pre-development", "Prior to the excavation of all active and inactive gopher tortoise burrows...". · Off site relocation, if necessary, shall be approved by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. State permits shall be submitted to Collier County prior to the pre-construction meeting. · Additional relocation and management criteria shall be incorporated into the plans, in accordance with the recommendations in the technical research support material provided to County staff by professionals with expertise in gopher tortoise management. Such criteria shall include but may not be limited to the following conditions: IT'EM JUl 3 0 2002 1. The tortoise preserve shall be fenced off in a manner that prevents dogs and cats from being able to access the area. Access to the local residents should also be limited. 2. A more detailed monitoring of vegetation to determine if it's necessary to more actively manage the tortoise forage. 3. A controlled burn is the preferred method to prepare the tortoise preserve. If it is possible, the area should be burned 3 months prior to relocating tortoises into that area. 10. An exotic vegetation removal, monitoring, and maintenance plan for the site, with emphasis on the conservation/preservation areas, shall be submitted to Current Planning Environmental Staff for review and approval, prior to final site plat/construction plan approval. A schedule for exotic vegetation removal within all preserve areas shall be submitted with the plan. 11. Old Tamiami Trail has historic significance and a possible archaeological site. The petitioner shall place a historic marker on-site. The petitioner shall submit an application for historic designation prior to plat approval. Prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy, the petitioner shall place a plaque within the preserve tract explaining the historic nature of the Old Tamiami Trail. 12. The roads within Little Palm Island shall be privately maintained, but shall be open to the public. AGENDA ITEM 2002 PREPARED BY: ./BARBARA BURGESON ~J "SENIOR ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST ./'lbRED REISCHL, AICP PRINCIPAL PLANNER DATE REVIEWED BY: MURRAY, AICP ~ ~NT PLANNING MANAGER MARGAP~T WUERSTLE, AICP PLANNIND SERVICES DIRECTOR DATE DATE APPROVED BY: SEPH K. S MITT 'ME~4~J~iTSy~DMEIvELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTALD~ATE -- SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR cecutive summary/ST-99-003 7 JUL 3 0 2002 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES MAY 29, 2002 PETITION: ST-99-03, LITTLE PALM ISLAND OWNER/AGENT: Agent: Owner: David H. Farmer, PE Keystone Custom Homes, Inc. 24860 Burnt Pine Drive Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Palm River Estates, Inc. 113 Viking Way Naples, FL 34110 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests a Special Treatment (ST) Development Permit to impact an area zoned RSF- 3-ST. The impacts include less than 1 acre of wetlands. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located east of the Colliers Reserve PUD, south of the Imperial Golf Estates subdivision, and west of the Palm River Country Club subdivision. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant requests Preliminary Subdivision Plat (PSP) and Special Treatment (ST) Development Permit approval in order to construct a residential subdivision under the subdivision r~ JLIL 3 0 2002 The Land Development Code authorizes the Planning Services Director to administratively approve PSPs. However, since this proposed development contains land with an "ST" zoning overlay, and an Environmental Impact Statement was required, the Environmental Advisory Council, the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners are required to hear the ST petition. If the PSP and ST permit are approved, the petitioner will subsequently submit a Final Plat and construction plans (consistent with the PSP) to the Engineering Services Department. The Final Plat will be heard by the Board of County Commissioners. The petitioner previously submitted an application for a PSP and ST permit for this parcel with a gopher tortoise preserve smaller than the one in the current submittal. The BCC directed the petitioner to return with the PSP, ST and Final Plat at one meeting. Through a public petition, the petitioner requested that the BCC allow the presentation of the PSP and ST without the Final Plat (the Final Plat contains detailed engineering which would be expensive to revise if the BCC directed changes). The Board agreed to allow the petitioner to present the PSP and ST permit to the EAC, CCPC and BCC prior to submittal of the Final Plat. The petition currently before the Planning Commission is the ST permit, with the Preliminary Subdivision Plat presented to give the Commission the scope of the entire development. The proposed development consists of 109 lots on 86.67 acres, for a density of approximately 1.25 units per acre, less than the maximum density of 3 units per acre permitted in the RSF-3 zoning district. The project retains the required 60% open space. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Subject Parcel: Undeveloped; zoned RSF-3 and RSF-3-ST Surrounding: North: East: South: West: Imperial Golf Estates; zoned RSF-3 and GC Palm River Country Club; zoned RSF-3, RSF-3-ST, GC and GC-ST Palm River Country Club; zoned RSF-3 and GC Collier's Reserve; zoned PUD (Collier Tract 22) GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element: The subject parcel is designated as Urban-Mixed Use on the Future Land Use map of the Growth Management Plan. The Urban-Mixed Use Land Use Designation is intended to accommodate a variety of residential and non-residential land uses. Therefore, if the Preliminary Subdivision Plat and a Special Treatment Development Permit are approved, the petitions shall be con ;lSter01ll[Iq~t~ Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. JUL 3 0 21102 2 Conservation & Coastal Management Element: With regards to native vegetation preservation, wildlife issues and wetland issues, the following Goals, Objectives and Policies apply: Objective 6.2 states, "There shall be no unacceptable net loss of viable naturally functioning marine and fresh water wetlands, excluding transitional zone wetlands which are addressed in Objective 6.3". This project accomplishes that with minimal impacts to wetlands. Objective 6.4 requires the appropriate portion of native vegetation be preserved, by providing for on site preservation of 25% of the existing native vegetation. It states, "A portion of each viable, naturally functioning non-wetland native habitat shall be preserved or retained as appropriate". This project protects the majority of both the wetlands and xeric scrub habitat on site. Goal 6 of the GMP, protects the gopher tortoise population by providing the appropriate habitat on site and off site to try to ensure the survival of the on site tortoise population. It states, "The County shall identify, protect, conserve and appropriately use its native vegetation communities and wildlife habitat". The site plan identifies a large gopher tortoise preserve in the highest quality habitat on site. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staffs analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located outside an area of historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no historic/archaeological survey and assessment is required. However, the Collier County Historical and Archeological Preservation Board recommends that a historical marker designate the significance of the Old Tamiami Trail. EVALUATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL, TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE: The proposed impact of this Special Treatment Development Permit on transportation, infrastructure, and the environment was reviewed by the applicable reviewing agencies and their comments have been incorporated into this Staff Report. ANALYSIS: The subject property has a Special Treatment (ST) overlay identified on the zoning maps as ST Parcel 23A, covering 20.21 acres. The project area covers 86.67 acres, and includes 68.77 acres of uplands, 10 acres of wetlands and 7.9 acres of previously created surface waters. The southwestern one half of the site is mostly uplands and consists of a combination of habitat types, which include pine flatwoods, sex, flatwoods and previously disturbed lands. JUL 3 0 2002 The boundary of the ST parcel on this proposed Preliminary Subdivision Plat application covers 20.21 acres. Typically the consultant redefines the wetland boundary that is identified as jurisdictional to Collier County. The consultant and South Florida Water Management District modified the wetland line and the current jurisdictional boundary encompasses approximately 10 acres, instead of the originally identified 20 acres. A complete description of the wetland area is available in the wetland section of the EIS. Staff's recommendation is to remove or minimize impacts to the ST wetland. The petitioner proposes minimal impacts to the ST area, which are necessary for access to the upland portion of the site. Staff supports the owner's efforts to mitigate for the minimal impacts to the fringe wetlands and recommends that the developer be permitted impacts to build the road. The petitioner has proposed compensation for the anticipated allowable impacts to the wetlands with enhancement to the remaining 9.9 acres. Sixty-nine and a half (69.5) acres of existing native vegetation exist on site. This project is required to retain a minimum of 25% or 17.4 acres of native vegetation or mitigate for that area per Section 3.9.5.5.4 of the LDC. The petitioner proposes 30.8 acres of native vegetation being preserved in wetland preserves, gopher tortoise preserves and upland native vegetation. The EIS describes 9.9 acres of wetland preserves and 21 acres of upland preserves. On-site preserves will preserve approximately 35% of the site. Two listed species were observed on site. They are gopher tortoises and common wild pine (a bromiliad or "air-plant"). There were 165 active and inactive gopher tortoise burrows located within the scrub oak/scrubby flatwoods communities on site. Based on typical density calculations, it is expected that approximately 61 tortoises occupy this site. The petitioner states that he has obtained a Relocation Permit from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) to relocate those tortoises that cannot be accommodated on site. Collier County must protect listed species in accordance with the Collier County Land Development Code and Collier County Growth Management Plan, Conservation and Coastal Management Element. The petitioner provided a Relocation/Management plan for the tortoises they are proposing to relocate or keep in place. A gopher tortoise preserve has been identified on site, which covers 14.5 acres within the highest quality scrub habitat and is contiguous to the adjacent offsite preserve at Collier's Reserve. The tortoises that reside on site within the footprint of the proposed preserve will be kept on site, with the balance being relocated, in accordance with the FWC permit, to an approved off-site preserve. It is their proposal to enhance these areas with appropriate herbacious plant species to serve as additional food sources for the relocated gopher tortoises. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: The Environmental Advisory Council heard this petition at its May 1, 2002 meeting. The Council heard presentations by County staff, the petitioner and the public. A motion to recommend approval of the ST permit was made by Councilman Carlson, seconded by Councilman Coe. The motion failed 3 to 4. Reasons stated for voting against the motion were that an updated gopher tortoise survey is needed, the gopher tortoise preserve should be increased in area, and th~ 50% of the gopher tortoise habitat is unacceptable. 4 JUL 3 0 2002 A motion was then made by Councilman Gal to recommend denial of the ST permit. It was seconded by Councilwoman Santoro, but failed by a vote of 4 to 3 (Section 5.13.5.2 of the LDC states that "an affirmative vote of five or more members [of the EAC] shall be necessary in order to take official action"). Therefore, the Environmental Advisory Council forwarded this petition to the Board of County Commissioners without a recommendation. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Special Treatment Development Permit ST-99-003, "Little Palm Island" with the following conditions: If applicable, existing or proposed easements for Collier County Stormwater facilities shall be maintained free of landscaping, berms or any other kind of obstacles that would impede adequate access to maintenance crews and equipment. The existing canal, and existing lake on north side of site shall be dedicated as a drainage easement to Collier CoUnty Stormwater Management Department for access and maintenance. o All development orders shall be consistent with the Collier County Growth Management Plan and the Collier County Land Development Code in effect at the time of final development order approval. Buffers shall be provided around wetlands, extending a minimum of 15 feet landward of the edge of wetland preserves in all places and averaging 25 feet from the landward edge of wetlands. Where natural buffers are not possible, structural buffers shall be provided in accordance with the State of Florida Environmental Resources Permit Rules and be subject to review and approval by Current Planning Environmental Staff. Environmental permitting shall be in accordance with the State of Florida Environmental Resource Permit Rules and shall be subject to review and approval by Current Planning Environmental Staff. Removal of exotic vegetation shall not be the sole mitigation technique for impacts to Collier County jurisdictional wetlands. The petitioner shall comply with the guidelines and recommendations of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) regarding potential impacts to protected wildlife species. Where protected species are observed on site, a Habitat Management Plan for those protected species shall be submitted to Current Planning Environmental Staff for review and approval prior to final plat/construction plan approval. JUL 3 0 2002 /.3 7. Prior to final plat approval, all gopher tortoise preserves shall be identified on the plat with protective covenants. All conservation areas shall be designated as conservation/preservation tracts or easements on all construction plans, and shall be recorded on the plat with protective covenants per, or similar to, Florida Statutes, Section 704.06. Buffers shall be provided in accordance with Section 3.2.8.4.7.3 of the LDC, which prohibits any buildings from being constructed within 25 feet of all upland and wetland preserves, and in no case shall any impacts, including grading, filling or clearing, be allowed within 10 feet for construction of accessory structures. A Gopher tortoise relocation/management plan was submitted for review and approval. Prior to final plat/construction plan submittal, the following conditions shall be added to the relocation/management plan: · The 80-foot wide access easement (1 acre in total size) located at the north end of the gopher tortoise preserve, shall be restored with native scrub vegetation and supplemental planting material for the tortoises. · Label the 14.5-acre upland preserve as "gopher tortoise preserve" on all site plans. · Add a requirement for hand clearing of exotic vegetation within preserves. · Add a requirement for a thorough gopher tortoise survey to be conducted, prior to the start of any relocation, to update the status and locations of all burrows. · Add the following language to the first sentence under "pre-development", "Prior to the excavation of all active and inactive gopher tortoise burrows...". · Off site relocation, if necessary, shall be approved by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. State permits shall be submitted to Collier County prior to the pre-construction meeting. · Additional relocation and management criteria shall be incorporated into the plans, in accordance with the recommendations in the technical research support material provided to County staff by professionals with expertise in gopher tortoise management. Such criteria shall include but may not be limited to the following conditions: 1. The tortoise preserve shall be fenced off in a manner that prevents dogs and cats from being able to access the area. Access to the local residents should also be limited. 2. A more detailed monitoring of vegetation to determine if it's necessary to more actively manage the tortoise forage. 3. A controlled burn is the preferred method to prepare the tortoise preserve. If it is possible, the area should be burned 3 months prior to relocating tortoises into that area. 10. An exotic vegetation removal, monitoring, and maintenance plan for the site, with emphasis on the conservation/preservation areas, shall be submitted to Current Planning Environmental Staff for review and approval, prior plat/construction plan approval. A schedule for exotic vegetation ren preserve areas shall be submitted with the plan. to final site n,~l ,~;;th;.1 AOENOA ITEI~ JUL 3 I] ZOIgZ 11. Old Tamiami Trail has historic significance and a possible archaeological site. The petitioner shall place a historic marker on-site. The petitioner shall submit an application for historic designation prior to plat approval. Prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy, the petitioner shall place a plaque within the preserve tract explaining the historic nature of the Old Tamiami Trail. 12. The roads within Little Palm Island shall be privately maintained, but shall be open to the public. PREPARED BY: BARBARA ~. I~URGF-~ON SENIOR ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST F , AICP PRINCIPAL PLANNER DATE DATE REVIEWED BY: /~USAN MURRAY, AICP // DATE ' ' CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER & INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR APPROVED BY: ~OS/EPH K. SCItMIT DATE ~M~TY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION ADMINISTRATOR Petition ST-99-003 COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: KENNETH L. ABERNATHY, CHAIRMAN Wcurrent/reischl/rezones/cays/staffreportYST-99-03 2002 I i ~ I~ I -- ,-. JUL I1 II. III. Item. V.A ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIl, STAFF REPORT MEETING OF MAY 1, 2002 NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT: Petition No.: Petition Name: Applicant/Developer: Engineering Consultant: Environmental Consultant: LOCATION: Preliminary Subdivision Plat PSP 2000- 10 -AR 1902 / ST-99-3 Little Palm Island Keystone Custom Homes Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc. Passarella & Associates, Inc. The subject property is located between Colliers Reserve PUD and the Palm River Country Club subdivision; within Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES: The subject property is completely surrounded by residential/golf course communities. ZONING RSF/GC - Imperial Golf Estates DESCRIPTION Residential and Golf Course Commmfity Si:~.gle Family 2002 EAC Meeting ........................................................................................ 5T~99-3 / pSP-2000~ 10 ....... May 1, 2002 IV. p~OJECT DESCRIPTION: 'V. The applicant requests Preliminary Subdivision Plat (PSP) and Special Treatment (ST) Development Permit approval in order to construct a residential subdivision under the subdivision regulations. The Land Development Code authorizes the Planning Services Director to administratively approve PSPs. However, since this proposed development contains land with an "ST" zoning overlay, and an Environmental Impact Statement was required, the EAC is required to hear the petitions. The Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners will also hear the ST petition. If the PSP and ST permit are approved, the petitioner will subsequently submit a Final Plat and construction plans to the Engineering Services Department. The Final Plat will be heard by the Board of County Commissioners. The petitioner previously submitted an application for a PSP and ST permit for this parcel with a gopher tortoise preserve smaller than the one in the current submittal. The BCC directed the petitioner to return with the PSP, ST and Final Plat at one meeting. Through a public petition, the petitioner requested that the BCC permit the presentation of the PSP and ST'without the Final Plat (the Final Plat contains detailed engineering which would be expensive to revise if the BCC directed changes). The Board agreed to allow the petitioner to present the pSP and ST permit to the EAC, CCPC and BCC prior to submittal of the Final Plat. The petition currently 'before the Council is the ST permit, with 'the Preliminary Subdivision Plat presented to give the Council the scope of the entire development. 'The proposed development consists of 109 home sites on 86.67 acres for a density of 1.25 units per acre, less than the maximum density of 3 units per acre permitted in the RSF-3 zoning district. The project retains the required 60% open space. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: Futm'e Laud Use Element: The sut:d e~:;t parcel :is designated a.s Urban--Mixed. 'Iii'se. on the F'rm'~re I_a~.td Use map of ~h.e G-rc, wth Management Pl:~n. The '[ ~rbar~-M~ixed 'U'se Land ' . ........ .~ (tdi 'reS'lCtei~tt~at 3t'ld .... :..,..~..~ I.[ ' ' '"" JUL 3 0 2002 EA.C Meet:lug .............................................................................................. May 1, 2002 ~"[' o~ ~-' /PSP.2000~IO Conservation & Coastal Management Element: Objective 2.2. of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Growth Management Plan states "All canals, rivers, and flow ways discharging into estuaries shall meet all applicable federal, state, or local water quality standards. To accomplish that, policy 2.2.2 states "In order to limit the specific and cumulative impacts of stormwater runoff, stormwater systems should be designed in such a way that discharged water does not degrade receiving waters and an attempt is made to enhance the timing, quantity, and quality of fresh water (discharge) to the estuarine system. This project is consistent with the objectives of policy 2.2.2 in that it attempts to mimic or enhance the quality and quantity of water leaving the site by utilizing lakes and interconnected wetlands to provide water quality retention and peak flow attenuation during storm events. With regards to native vegetation preservation, wildlife issues and wetland issues, the following Goals, Objectives and Policies apply: Objective 6.2 states, "There shall be no unacceptable net loss of viable naturally functioning znarine and fresh water wetlands, excluding transitional zone wetlands which are addressed in Objective 6.3". This project accomplishes that with minimal impacts to wetlands. Objective 6.4 requires the appropriate portion of native vegetation be presmwed, by providing for on site preservation of 25% of the existing native vegetation. It states, "A portion of each viable, naturally functioning non-wetland native habitat shall be prese~wed or retained as appropriate". This project very successfully protects both the wetlands and xeric scrub habitat on site. Goal 6 of the GMP, protects the gopher tortoise population by providing tlhe appropriate habitat on site and off site to try to ensure O~e sarvi'val o:t'the on site to~oise pep'ulation, It -" .... ~' JUL 3 0 2002 EAC Meetin~ ..................................................... .......................................... May 1,2002 VI. M____AJOR ISSUERS_: 'Wat_____e_r Management: The existing site consists of mostly undeveloped lands with some existing development on the eastern fringe. The existing developed portion consists of lakes adjacent to the Palm River community and golf course tracts. An existing 40-foot wide canal runs along the northern boundary.. The canal functions as an outfall for the northern portion of the Palm River community. The two existing lakes and canal will not be incorporated into the proposed development's water management system. The completed project will consist of 141 residential lots. The front portion of the lots will runoff to the road via sheet flow, which drains directly to the lake system using a catch basin and pipe network. The rear portion of the lakefront lots will drain directly to the lakes. The rear portion of all other lots will drain into a rear yard swale and catch basin network conveying runoff into the lake system. The lake system will be controlled at elevation 7.0' NGVD and will discharge to the existing canal near the northern boundary. Environmental: Site Description.: '][he project area covers 86.67 acres, and includes 68.77acres of uplands, 10 acres of wetlands and 7.9 acres of previously created surface waters. The southwestern one half of the site is mostly uplands and consists of a combination of habitat types, which include pine flatwoods, sctn.tb oak, sc~n~bby flatwoods and previously disturbed lands. 'The uplands, particularly die oak scrub/scrubby flatwoods on site are high quality gopher tortoise habitat as evidenced by 'the large manber of bun'c,ws smweyed 'by the cons'ultmat. A total of 165 active and inactive 'bu..trows were located 'within these areas. '::lee the cq~ ~bc,- t-)rto'ise :~nrvey :['n the F'fS 'liar a map ~howhttg locati, o!:l~: a.'~'[ct ~:2[:a.s:~i[fic. a.itions oi' all identified blrrrow's. The listed pimTt 2002 Wetlands: The subject property has a Special Treatment (ST) overlay identified on the zoning maps as ST Parcel 23A, covering 20.21 acres. The following language is directly from the Purpose and Intent section for ST overlays, in the Land Development Code. "Within Collier County there are certain areas, which because of their unique assemblages of flora and/or fauna, their aesthetic appeal, their historical or archaeological significance, rarity in Collier County, or their contribution to their own and adjacent ecosystems, make them worthy of special regulations. Such regulations are directed toward the conservation, protection, and preservation of ecological and recreational values for the greatest benefit to the people of Collier County. Such areas include, but are not necessarily limited to mangrove and freshwater swamps, barrier islands, hardwood hammocks, xeric scrubs, coastal beaches, estuaries, cypress domes, natural drainage ways, aquifer recharge areas and lands and structures of historical and archaeological significance. The purpose of this overlay district regulation is to assure the preservation and maintenance of these environmental and cultural resources and to encourage the preservation of the intricate ecological relationships within the systems and at the same time permit those types of development which will hold changes to levels determined acceptable by the Board of Cmmty Corrm'fissioners after public hearing." Exceptions may be granted for ST permit request where 'the proposed site alteration will not require any modification, with the exception of exotic vegetation removal, of the topography, drainage, flora or fauna on site. The application does not qualify for that administrative review and therefore must be presented to all tt~ee County Boards for :review and approvals. f'he boundal7 of the ST parcel on this proposed Preliminary Subd. ivisi,m Plat application covers 20.21 acres. Typically the consultant redefines the wetland bom~dary that is identified as juhsdic, tional to Colliei' Co, tory a~d Sta;[7 ~-.¢c,)'mme:r~ds remo'ving ail development impatzl:s fi'on). 'th,:~t a:t'ea. The :~'nd South Fiofida Water Management District mndi:fied the wed:md !:i'~e a,:u:t !:he~ JUL 3 0 2002 EAC Meeting .............................................................................................. May 1, 2002 ST-99-3 /pSP-200fl,-10 wetlands and recmmnends that the developer 'be pem~itted impacts to build the road. The petitioner has proposed compensation for the anticipated allowable impacts to the wetlands with enhancement to the remaining 9.1 acres. Preservation Requirements: Sixty-nine and a half(69.5) acres of existing native vegetation exist on site. As required by Collier County environmental ordinances, this project is required to retain a minimum of 25% or 17.4 acres of native vegetation or mitigate for that same area per Section 3.9.5.5.4 of the LDC. The plan shows 30.8 acres of native vegetation being preserved in wetland preserves, gopher tortoise preserves and upland native vegetation. The EIS describes 9 acres of wetland preserves and 21 acres of upland preserves. On site preserves will preserve approximately 35% of the site. Listed Species,: Two listed species were observed on site. They are gopher tortoise and common wild pine. There were 165 active and inactive gopher tortoise burrows located and flagged within the scrub oak/scrubby flatwoods communities on site. Based on density calculations, it is expected that approximately 61 tortoises occupy this site. The petitioner proposes to obtain an Incidental Take permit from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, to provide funds to the State agency for the loss of gopher tortoise habitat and to relocate those tortoises that cannot be accommodated on site. Collier County must protect the species in accordance with the Collier County Land Development Code and Collier County Growth Management Plan, Conservation and Coastal Management Element. The petitioner provided a Relocation/Management plan for the tortoises 'they are proposing to relocate or keep in place. A gopher tortoise prese~we has been identified on site which, covers 14.5 acres within the hi,est quality scrub habitat and is conti~ous to the adjacent offs/re preserve at Collier's Reset.we.. The tm~oises that reside on site within the Ibotprint of the proposed preserve will be kept on site, with the balance being relocate~l, in accordance w'ith the Florida Fish. and Wildlife Conservation C~onxm. issi~m, t~ art approved off site prese~w'e. I't is their proposal to e~d~ance JUL 3 ............................................................................................. May 1, 2002 VII. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of Preliminary Subdivision Plat PSP-2000-10/Special Treatment No. 99-3, "Little Palm Island" with the following stipulations: Water Management: 1. Water Management concerns will be reviewed at time of Site Development Plan Submittal. This project will be permitted by' South Florida Water Management District. 2. If applicable, existing or proposed easements for Collier County Stormwater facilities shall be maintained free of landscaping, berms or any other kind of obstacles that would impede adequate access to maintenance crews and equipment. 3. The existing canal, and existing lake on north side of site shall be dedicated as a drainage easement to Collier County Stormwater Management Department to access and do maintenance. Environmental: This Subdivision shall be consistent with the environmental sections of the Collier County Growth Management Plan Conservation and Coastal Management Element and the Collier County Land Development Code at the time of final development order approvals. Buffers shall 'be provided around wetlands, extending at least fifteen (15) feet landward fi'om the edge of wetland prese~wes in all places and averaging twenty-five (25) feet fi'om the landward edge of wetlands. Where natural buffers are not possible, structural buffers shall be provided :in accordance 'with the State of Florida Environmental Resources Permit Rules and be subject to review and approval by Current Planning Environmental Staff: Environmental permitti~g shall be :in accorda'~:~ce w' t.t',, the state ':yfYl{):dda !Szwi'r,t.n_:n. enta'{-R.esoru'ce Perm:it Rules .a:c,d be subject tn t'ev:[ev/ atari. JUL 3 0 2002 PI[. ~'¢ ..... May 1, .A)( 2 EA C Meeting ...................................................................... ST.99--3 / pSp.2.(00-10 Habitat Management Plan for those protected species shall be submitted to Current Planning Environmental Staff for review and approval prior to final site plan/construction plan approval. Prior to Final Subdivision Plat approval, all gopher tortoise preserves shall be identified on the plat with protective covenants. All conservation areas shall be designated as conservation/preservation tracts or easements on all construction plans and shall be recorded on the plat with protective covenants per or similar to Section 704.06 of the Florida Statutes. Buffers shall be provided in accordance with 3.2.8.4.7.3 CCLDC. That prohibits any buildings from being constructed within 25 feet of all upland and wetland preserves, and in no case shall any impacts including grading, filling or clearing be allowed within 10 feet for construction of accessory structures. A Gopher tortoise relocation/management plan was submitted for review and approval. Prior to final Plan/Construction Plan submittal, the following modifications shall be made to that language: A. The 80-foot wide access easement (1 acre in total size) located at the north end of the gopher tortoise preserve, shall be restored with native scrub, vegetation and supplemental planting material for the tortoises. B. Label the 14.5-acre upland preserve as "gopher tortoise preserve" on all site plans. C. Add language regarding exotic vegetation removal within the gopher tortoise preserve to require it be done by hand clearing methods. ,~un exotic vegetation removal, monitoring, and maintenance (exotic-free) plan for the site, 'with emphasis on the conservation/preservation areas, shall be submitted to Current Planning Environmental Review Staff for review and approval prior to final site plan/construction plan approval. A schedule for exotic removal within all preservation areas shall be sub~nitted with-the above-mentioned plan. Historic Old Tanfiami Trail has historic significance along with a possible archaeological site. The petitioner shall place an historic marker on site. The petitioner will submit an application for historic designation prior to plat approval. The petitioner will submit an application for historic designation prior 'to plat approval. The petitioner shall place a plaque 'within the preserve tract explaining the histohc nature of the roadway of Old US- ~ 1 ~.rt d:e time of ~;crst certJ, fi. cate of occupancy of first JUL 3 0 2002 ~2-~.C )%{{e~'lir~g ............................................................................................... May 1, 20072 ST-90-3 /13~P-2-00-16 PRE, PARED BY: STAN CHRZANOWSKI, P.E. SENIOR ENGINEER ENGINEER, SENIOR DATE DATE BARBARA S. BD-RGESON ~ SENIOR ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST DATE REVIEWED BY: · C PR1N Z[E.AL PLA_N2'EBP. V./& .DP.. DATE D ATE JUL 3 0 2002 EAC Meeting .............................................................................................. May 1, 2002 ':i77. 99 3 / pSP-2000-10 .AS(['ROVED B'Y: /: CJOMMUNIT?g DEVELOPM DMINISTRATOR ENVIRONMENTAL D/ATE SERVICES ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL TtlOMAS W. SANSBURY, CHAIRM~ bsb/gdh/c: StaffReport JUL 3 0 2002 COLLIER COUNTY COMMU~-..£Y DEV. & ENVIRONMENTAL S%.~. DIVISION PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT CURRENT PLANNING SECTION ACSC-ST/SPECIAL TREATMENT PERMIT APPLICATION PETITION NO. ST- - PRE-APP. MEETING DATE APPLICATION DATE :titioner' s Name Paula Davis, Keystone Custom Homes [dress: 9051 N. Tamiami.Trail, Suite f/202, Naples 34108 Phone: 592-6111 :operty Owner's Name Palm River Estates, Inc. ldress: 1701 North Main Street~ Orrville, Ohio 44667 Phone: 303-682-00~0 · .neral Locatioh of Property: North Palm River Estates agal Description of Property:S23 T.~48 R 25 , Street(s)End of Cypress Way East Dning: RSF-3 Acreage: ~esent L~nd Use: Vacant ~ 20.2 urrounding Land Use:N Golf Course Canal , S Golf Course , W Vacant ormer Land Use, if known: --- roposed Activity: Single Family Home Lots and a Minor Road. OTE: This petition must be accompanied by information reques'ted ~uring the pre-application meeting. Additional information may be requested during the review process. 'iling/Review Fee: $229 Date paid: $85.00 minimum for 5 acres or less, plus $9.00 per acre over 5 acres; maximum fee $850.00.) [ have received a copy of Collier County Land Development Code Section ~.2.24 (ST/ACSC-ST), Section 2.2.24.7 "Submission requirements" and ~ave submitted with this application all information requested at the )re-application meeting, (see attached pre-application checklist). [ understand that additional information may be necessary to complete :he review. '~ou/ / ~ 12-3-99 ~ignature of ~e~~ Agent Date Return completed applications to: Dollier county Community Dev. & Environmental Svcs. Division Planning Services Department Current Planning Section 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive NapLes, FL 34104 Phone: (941) 643-8400 Make checks payable to: Board of Collier County Co:~missioners 6/96 ~,~/f:~,Environmemal Application F~'n',s'~ACSC~ST JUL 3 0 2002 Division of Corporations Page 1 of 2 Florida Det~artmen t of State, Division of Cort~orations Foreign Profit PALM RIVER ESTATES INC PRINCIPAL ADDRESS 321 VIKING WAY NAPLES FL 33942 Changed 05/17/2001 MAILING ADDRESS 321 VIKING WAY NAPLES. FL 33942 Changed 05/17/2001 Document Number 821753 State ND Last Event REINSTATEMENT FEI Number 591216822 Status ACTIVE Event Date Filed 01/29/1988 Date Filed 08/19/1968 Effective Date NONE Event Effective Date NONE Registered Agent Name & Address FF_JES, DEAN W. 113 VIKING WAY NAPLES FL 33942 Name Changed: 01/29/I 988 Address Changed: 01/29/1988 Officer/Director Detail Name & Address I Title JELENIK, J. 1701 N MAIN STREET PD ORRVILLE, OHIO 00000 SMITH, E A 356 CROMWELL CT VPD NAPLES FL .../cordet.exe?al=DETFIL&nl=821753&n2=NAMFWD&n3=0000&n4=N&rl=&r2=&r3 JUL 3 0 2002 -'~r,7 / 10/2002 Division of Corporations Page 2 ot'2 FEJES, D. 113 VIKING WAY NAPLES FL FEJES, J. 12606 BACK MASSILON RD. ORRVILLE OH Annual Reports II AST D View Events No Name History Information View Document Image(s) ' THIS IS NOT OFFICIAL RECORD; SEE DOCUMENTS IF QUESTION OR CONFLICT JUL 3 0 2002 .../cordet. exe?a 1 =DETFIL&n 1 =821753 &n2=NAMFWD&n3 =0000&n4=N&r 1 =&r2=&r3 =&r 7/10/2002 Details Page 1 of 1 Fo,io No.~ 00~69000003 II Property Addras,II NO SITE ADDRESS Owner Namell PALM RIVER EST INC AddressesJl 113 VIKING WAY ci~ll NAPLES II Legal I 23 48 26 ALL, LESS S 100FT OF lW 650FT AS DESC IN OR ~65 PG II 114, LESS R/VV FOUND IN OR 188 liP° 8.9, ,ESS PALM RIVER statell FL II zipl134, o-.35 Section !.~ Township 23 J! 48 Sub No. II 100 ~UseCode II 99 II, Ranoe II Acres II Map No. II 25 II 81.48 ~ 3A23 Strap No. I 482523 001.0003A23 I ~ ~ MIIla§eArea II II 69 II ~ Millage 13.7681 2001 Final Tax Roll I Land Value I (+) Improved Value I (=) Market Value I(-) SOH and/or Agricultural Exempt Value I (=) Assessed Value I (') Homestead and other Exempt Value $ 2,378,779.00 I $ o.oo $ 2,378,779.00 $ o.oo $ 2,378,779.00 $ 0.0o I (=) Taxable Value $ 2,378,779.00 SOH = "Save Our Homes" exempt value due to cap on assessment increases. Sales History Date II Book-PageII Amount I Last Updated: 05/712002 AGENDA ITEM JUL 3 0 2002 http://www.collierappraiser-com/RecordDetail.asp?F°li°ID=0000000159000003 5/29/2002 Prepared by and return tot Ti~omas B. Oafllck, Garlick, Stetler & Peer)les, LLP $551 Ridge. wood Drive, Suite iOl Naples, Florida 34108 2849825 OR: 2884 PG: 0228 HC0~DID l~ 0HICIA~ HCORD$ of CO&LIII COI1KTT, ILlC m ~9.50 Iltn: MEMoRANDuM OF CONTRACT On the 30th day of September,.1998; a ~main Purchase Agreement was entered into by Keystone Custom Homes, In~,,'~s PUr~haSer,:]md Palm River Estates, ln¢,, ~ Seller (the .. "Agreement"), pe~nlntng to certain renl.~ sltunte In Collier County, Florida, more pnrticularly described in Exhibit "A" annexed hereto and mad· a part hereof(the "Property"). The Agreement pro.rides for a closing on "final municiP~/~V~! .o.f. any PUD, preliminary subdivision plat, and · 'environmental resource permit~ etc".,i~he..nppli~oh, f6r which is pending ns of the date hereof. The Agreement may be assigned by. the Pm'cl~-r"~ursuant to the terms and conditions for such assignment as set forth in the Agreement~j;~i?.i'i:~-7.:'. ' In the event ora conflict betweeff, the terms of this Memorandum and the Agreement, the terms of the Agreement shall control. This'~,msrandum is only being recorded to provide notice to third parties thereto and in responsc't0 ~ aCtions by the Seller. This Memorandum shall automatically be null and vOid and.offiSi f~rther effect 0n the date of closing under the Purchase Agreement and recording of the deed 'fr~m th~:'Seiler tO the Purchaser, if not previously released or terminated by the parties hereto by rec°~! inS/rU~ent. IN WITleSS WHEREOF, Purchaser has caused Witnesses: :. Keystone Custom Homes, Inc., ... a Flor/da Corporation, Purchaser By: Paula J. Davis, President COUNTY OF Collier The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this~'?-C~ay ~o ! by Paula J. Davis, a~ President of Keystone Custom Homes, Inc., a Florida Corp6ration, on behalf of the corporation. _She is personally known to me or who produced as identification. ~..~.,'~,'.~f. ~ ,. ,.AN!E HYLAND ~),t,' ~.l ~t t ,1 )fflF ~ i%~iON # (7C 9~.~ ~,~f , .. ~,~ s. ,~.~ NotsU Public ' .Commission ~xpir~s: Exhibit "C" 0la.: 2884 PG: 0229 PARCEL 1 That part of Section 23, Township 48 South. Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. being described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest comer of said Section 23 run S89°55'59"E along the North line of the Northwes! quarter of said section 23 and the South line of Imperial Golf Estates Phase 3, a Subdivision recorded in Plat Book 13, Pages 52 through 54 of said Public Records for a distance of 2650.02 feet to the Noah quarter comer of said Section 23; thence along the North line of the Northeast quarter of said Section 23 and the South line of said Imperial Golf Estates Phase Three N 88°19'17"E 547.26 feet to an intersection with the Westerly line of Imperial Golf Estates Phase Four, a Subdivision recorded in Plat Book 14, Pages 102 throvgh 104 of said Public Records; thence continuing N88°19' 17"E along the Southerly line of said Imperial Golf Estates Phase Four for 736.78 feet to an intersection with thc Westerly linc of Palm Rivcr Estates Unit S, -.. a Subdivision recorded in Plat Book 10 Page 92 of said Public Records; thence along said line SI 1°58'20"W 238.33 feet to a found 4" X 4" concrete monument marking thc beginning of a ~ . non-tangent curve; thence 116.63 feet along the arc of said curve concave to the Northwest; having a radius of 140.00 feet, a central angle of 47°43'46'' and a.chord of 113.28 feet, bearing S35°49'07"W to a point of compound curvature and an intersection with the Northerly line of Palm River Estates Unit 3, a Subdivision recorded in Plat Book 8, Page 9 of said Public Records: thence 55.34 feet along the arc of said curve concave to the Northwest, having a radius of 75.00 feet, a central angle of 42° 16'25" and a chord of 54.09 feet, bearing S80°49' 12"W to a point of tangency; thence N78°02'35"W 500.00 feet to a point of curvature; thence 229.61 feet along the arc of said curve concave to the Northeast, having a radius of 220.40 feet, a central angle of 59041'28'' and a chord of 219.37 feet, bearing N48°1 I'50"W to a point of non-tangency: thence S88o22'45"W 1043.12 feet to the Northwest comer of Lot 1075 of said Palm River Estates Unit 3 Subdivision; thence continue along the boundary of said subdivision S00° 02' 35"E ! 85.00 feet to an intersection with the Southerly right-of-way line of Cypress Way as shown on the Plat of said Palm River Estates Subdivision; thence along said right-of-way line N89°57'25"E 9.74 feet to the Northwest comer of Lot 909 of said subdivision; thence along the West line of said Lot 909 S00°02'35"E 125.00 feet to the Southwest comer of said Lot 909; thence along the South line of said Lot 909 and along a portion of Lot 910 of said subdivision N89°57'25"!~ 110.00 feet to an intersection with the boundary of those lands recorded in O.R. Book 601, Pages 1467 and 1468 of said Public Records; thence along said boundary S00°04'37"W 350.00 feet: thence S40oo4'37"W 550.00 feet; thence S77°34'37"W 584,08 feet; thence N76°40'O4"W 72.39 feet to the Northeast comer of those lands recorded in O.R. Book 1436, Page 1854 of said Public Records; thence along the Northerly line of said lands N75°36'26"W 15.00 feet to the Southeast comer of those lands recorded in O.R. Book 2254, Page 1857 of said Public Records; thence along the Easterly line of said lands NI4°23'34"E 100.00 feet to the Northeast comer of said lands; thence along the Northerly line of said lands N75°36'26"W 25.00 feet to the Southeast comer of those lands recorded in O.R. Book 1519, Page 888 of said Public Records; thence along the Easterly line of said lands N14°23'34"E 125.00 feet to the Northeast corner of said lands; thence along the Northerly line of said lands N75°36'26"W 160.00 feet; thence S14°23'34"W 625.00 feet to the Northeast comer of Lot 889 of said Palm River Estates Unit 2 Subdivision; thence along the Northerly line of said Lot 889 N75°28'32"W 125.00 feet to the Northeast comer of said Lot 864 of Palm River Estates Unit 2 Subdivision: thence along the JUL 3 0 2002 OR: 2884 PG: 0230 Easterly line of said Lot 856 through 864 of Palm River Estates Unit 2 Subdivision S14°24'02"W 903.49 feet to the Southeast comer of said Lot 856; thence along thc Southerly line of said Lot 856 and along the Westerly extension of said line N75°35'58"W 185.00 feet t~ an intersection with the Westerly right-of-way linc of Old Tamiami Trail as shown on the Plat of said Palm River Estates Unit 2; thence along said right-of-x~ay line S 14°24'02"W 526.23 feet to the Northeast comer of Lot ! of Palm River Estates Unit 7, a Subdivision recorded in Plat Book 12, Pages 28 through 30 of said Public Records; lhencc along thc Northerly line of said Lot I N75°31'38"W 223.60 feet to an intersection with the West llne of said Section 23 and the East line of Collier's Reserve, a Subdivision recorded in Plat Book 20. Pages 59 through 87 of aid Public Records; thence along said line N00°33'39"W 2855.65 feet to the point of beginning. The above describes approximately 86.68 acres of land. Subject to easements, restrictions and reservations of record. -2- A6EI~A ITF. M JUL 3 0 2002 OR: 288q PG: 0231 *** PARCEL 2 A parcel of land lying in that part of Unit No. I of Palm River Estates as recorded in Pia.t Book 3, Page 90 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, being described as follows: Commencing at thc Southwest comer of said Unit No, i of Palm River Estates Subdivision, run Ngg°24'30"E along the South line o£ said subdivision t'or a distance of' 120.01 £eet to an intersection with the East line of those lands recorded in Official Records Book 1775, Page 2026 of said Public Records and the point of beginning; thence along the East line of said lands N00°01'I2"E 55.50 feet to an intersection with the South right-of-way line of Piper Boulevard; thence along said right-of-way line S89°$8'48"E 265.00 feet to a point of curvature: thence 39.27 feet along the arc of a curve concave to the Southwest having a radius of 25.00 feet. a central angle of 90000'00'' and a chord of 35.36 feet bearing S44°58'48"E to a point of tangenc¥ and an intersection with the West right-of-way llne of Palm River Boulevard; thence along said right-of-way line SO0°01'I 2"W 27.40 feet to said South line of Unit No. i of Palm River Estates Subdivision; thence along said line S89.°24'30"W 290.02 feet to the point of beginning; and; A parcel of land lying in that part of Unit No. I of Palm River Estates as recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 90 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida being described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast comer of said Unit No. I of Palm River Estates Subdivision. mn S89°26'00"W along the South line of said subdivision for a distance of 620.87 feet; thence continue along said line S89°24'30"W 125.01 feet to an intersection with the East right-of-way line of Palm River Boulevard; thence along said fight-of-way line N00°01'I2"E 26.34 feet to a point of curvature; thence 39.27 feet along the arc ora curve concave to the Southeast having a radius of 25.00 feet, a central angle ofg0°00'00" and a chord of 35.36 feet bearing N45o01 'I2"E to a point of tangency and an intersection with the South right-of-way line of Piper Boulevard; thence along said right-of-way line S89°Sg'48"E 720.84 feet to an intersection with the East line of said Unit No. I of Palm River Estates Subdivision; thence along said line S00°01' i 2"W 43.66 feet to the point of beginning. The above describes an area of approximately 0.81 acres of land, and 0.36 acres of ].and, Subject to easements, restrictions and reservations of record. -3- JUL 3 0 2002 Pg. ~ LITTLE PALM ISLAND COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT September 1999 'Revised December 1999 Revised April 2000 Revised July 2000 Revised August 2000 Prepared For: Keystone Custom Homes 905I Tamiami Trail North, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34108 (941) 592-6111 Prepared By: Passarella and Associates, Inc. 4575 Via Royale, Suite 201 Fort Myers, FL 33919 (941) 274-0067 JUL 3 0 2002 : i',!o. 1~.~ ~'~ TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 3.8.5.1 Applicant Information .......................................................................................................... 1 3.8.5.2 Development and Site Alteration Information ..................................................................... 1 3.8.5.3 Mapping and Support Graphics ........................................................................................... 2 3.8.5.4 Impact Categories ................................................................................................................ 7 3.8.5.4.1 B/o-physical ......................................................................................................... 7 3.8.5.4.2 Public Facilities and Services ............................................................................ 19 3.8.6.1 Specifics to Address - General Information ....................................................................... 22 References ...................................................................................................................................... 24 JUl, 3 0 200;~ IJST OF FIGURES Figure 1. .page prqject Location Map ............................................................................................... 3 Figure 2. FLUCFCS and SFWMD/Collier County Wetlands Map ........................................4 Figure 3. Soils Map ................................................................................................................. 6 Figure 4. Development Plan .................................................................................................... 8 Figure 5. Wetland Impact Map .............................................................................................. 13 ~,.~, ~/--. JUL 3 0 2002 Table 1. Table 2. Table 3. Table 4. LIST OF TABLES Page Habitat/FLUCFCS Types and Acreages .................................................................. 2 SFWMD/Collier County Wetland and OSW Acreages ......................................... 10 Wetland and Other Surface Waters Impact Summary ........................................... 12 14 Upland Acreages .................................................................................................... 111 JUL 3 0 2002 Exhibit A. Exhibit B. Exhibit C. Exhibit D. Exhibit E. Exhibit F. LIST OF EXHIBITS Page EIS Author's Resume ................................................................... A- 1 Aerial Photograph with FLUCFCS Mapping .......................................... B-1 Soils Descriptions ........................................................................... C-1 Listed Plant and Wildlife Species Survey and FLUCFCS and Gopher Tortoise Burrow Location Map ....................................D-1 Correspondence from the Florida Department of State ....................................... E-1 Gopher Tortoise Relocation Letter of Intent ........................................................ F-1 iv JUL 3 0 2002 INTRODUCTION This report represents the Collier County Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Little Palm Island. The ElS has been prepared in accordance with Division 3.8 of the Collier County Land Development Code (October 30, 1991 as amended October 14, 1992). 3.8.5.1 1. APPLICANT INFORMATION Responsible owner(s) agent(s) who wrote the EIS and his/her education and job related environmental experience. Michael A. Myers, Passarella and Associates, Inc. Consulting Ecologists (see Exhibit A for author's resume). Owner(s) agent(s) name, address. Paula Davis Keystone Custom Homes 9051 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34108 Affidavit of proof of authorized agent. Provided under separate cover. 3.8.5.2 1. o DEVELOPMENT AND SITE ALTERATION INFORMATION Description of proposed use. The project will consist of 141 single-family lots along the associated streets and infrastructUre. One lake will be excavated for water management purposes. Legal description of site. A boundary survey with legal description is provided under separate cover by Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc. Location and address description. The property is undeveloped forested land that is located approximately one hal oflmmokalee Road and one mile east of U.S. 41. The residential communities JUL 3 0 2002 Reserve neighbors the project area to the west, Imperial Golf Estates is to the north, and Palm River Estates is to the east and south. 3.8.5.3 MAPPING AND SUPPORT GRAPHICS 1. General location map. A project location map is provided as Figure 1. Native habitats and their boundaries shah be identified on an aerial photograph of the site extending at least two hundred (200)feet outside the parcel boundary. This does not mean the applicant is required to go onto adjacent properties. Habitat identification will be consistent with the Florida Department of Transportation - Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System and shaH be depicted on an aerial photograph having a scale of one inch equal to at least 200feet when available from the county, otherwise, a scale of at least one inch equal to 400feet is acceptable. Information obtained by ground-truthing surveys shah have precedence over information presented through photographic evidence. Vegetation mapping of the property was conducted using 1" = 200' scale aerial photographs and groundtruthing in November of 1998. The vegetation communities were mapped using Level III and IV of the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) (FDOT 1985). Level IV was used to identify hydrological conditions and disturbance. An aerial photograph with FLUCFCS mapping is enclosed as Exhibit B. A vegetation and wetlands map of the property is provided as Figure 2, and an acreage breakdown of the habitat types is provided in Table 1. Table 1. Habitat/FLUCFCS Types and Acreages FLUCFCS Habitat Acreage % of Code Total 411 Pine Flatwoods 9.98 11.5 4118 Pine Flatwoods, Recently Burned 6.31 7.3 4119 Pine Flatwoods, Disturbed 10.83 12.0 416/421 Oak Scrub/Scrubby Flatwoods, Mixed 17.62 20.8 422 Brazilian Pepper 0.10 0.1 4289 Cabbage Palm, Disturbed 0.50 0.6 4291 Shrubland/Pepper (76-90%), Hydric 4.24 4.9 514 Ditch or Canal 1.99 2.3 560 Stormwater Management Lake 5.91 6.~j,a ~lxl~ 6219 Cypress/Pepper (50-75%) 5.76 ~'~--['-} ~r-L JUL 3 0 2002 2 A N.T.S. R 25E  EC 23, T 48~, R 25 E ~c~,s Ji,~s ~o ~ 1 8 ~ 20 21 ; 22 2,3 24 19 -,- ~__..~. ,-. 25 .2.-- ~_6 27 25 ,30 Q~ 0 FIGURE 1. PROJECT LOCATION MAP CO'Tl~t{~g .~'COlO I{,$j~..~ LITTLE PALM ISLAND ORAWN BY: SLO DATE: 12/2 Table 1. (Continued) FLUCFCS Habitat Acreage % of Total Code 6249D Pine, Cypress, Cabbage Palm, Disturbed and Drained 14.20 16.4 740 Disturbed Land 8.00 9.2 743 Spoil Berm 0.38 0.4 814 Primitive Road 0.85 1.0 Total 86.67 100.0 o o Topographic map showing upland, bathymetric contours and existing drainage patterns, if applicable. A topographic survey of the property is provided as part of Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc.'s construction plans for the project. Existing land use of site and surrounding area. The 86.67+ acre project site is irregularly shaped and includes 68.77± acres of uplands, 10.00~ acres of wetlands, and 7.90-~: acres of "other surface waters" (OSW). The site's topography appears to generally mn toward the north and northeast. The southwestern one half of the site is mostly uplands and consists of a combination of habitat types, which include pine flatwoods (FLUCFCS Code 411), pine flatwoods, disturbed (FLUCFCS Code 4119), oak scrub/scrubby flatwoods, mixed (FLUCFCS Code 416/421), and disturbed land (FLUCFCS Code 740). The northeastern one half of the project area is a combination of wetlands, storm water lakes, and drained forest areas. The drained area is identified as pine, cypress, cabbage palm, disturbed and drained (FLUCFCS Code 6249D), while the wetlands include cypress/Brazilian pepper (50-75%) (FLUCFCS Code 6219) and shrubland/Brazilian pepper (76-90%) (FLUCFCS Code 4291). Ditches (FLUCFCS Code 514) and a primitive road (FLUCFCS Code 814) also bisect the project area. The project's surrounding development conSists of residential golf course communities. The neighboring developments include Palm River Estates to the east and south, Imperial Golf Estates to the north, and Collier's Reserve to the west. Soils map at scale consistent with that used for Florida Department of Transportation - Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System determinations. A soils map for the property is provided in Figure 3. Proposed drainage plan indicating basic flow patterns, outfall and off-site drainage. 5 JUL 3 0 2002 Symbol Description Stotus 17 33 36 39 Basinger fine sand Hydric Urban Land Hollopaw Basinger Complex Non-Hydric Udorthents Shaped Non-Hydric Satteli[e fine sand Non-Hydric FIGURE 3. SOILS MAP LITTLE PALM ISLAND N01~S: SOILS MAP SCANNED FROM NRCS COllIER COUNTY SOIL SURVEY. AGEI~A ITEM JUL 30 2002 rA 2~,~'. [NO_ r%S~S PA$$ARELLA and A$$0C Cor~s~lting Ecolo DRAWN BY: SLO DATE: 12/29/98 8 The proposed surface water management plan for the project site is provided as part of Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc.'s construction plans for the project. Development plan including phasing program, service area of existing and proposed public facilities, and existing and proposed transportation network in the impact area. The development plan for the site is provided in Figure 4. 3.8.5.4 IMPACT CATEGORIES 3.8.5.4.1 Bio-physical 1. Air quality Changes in level of air pollutants as defined by current regulations. There are no anticipated changes in air pollution as the project consists of developing a residential subdivision. The only anticipated air pollution during construction of the project is from the exhaust of typical construction equipment and possible controlled bums conforming to Collier County burning regulations. b. Number of peOple that will be affected by air pollution resulting from the project. No people are anticipated to be affected by air Pollution resulting from the project because the project is strictly residential. c. Procedures that will be used to reduce adverse impacts of air pollution. See response to 1 a. 2. V~ater quality a. Changes in levels and types of water pollution as defined by current regulations. The water management system will be designed to meet South Florida Water Management District's (SFWMD) water quality criteria. Co Inventory of water uses that are restricted or precluded because of pollution levels resulting from this project. No restricted or precluded water uses will exist on this project. Person affected by water pollution resulting from the project. 7 JUL 3 0 2002 ,~,~A IT'F.~. JUL 3 0 2002 bo do eo There is no anticipation of water pollution as the project consists of developing a residential subdivision. d. Project designs and actions, which will reduce adverse impacts of water pollution. Water pollution is minimized by means of a water management system that utilizes SFWMD criteria for water quality. Refer to the water management plan and calculations. Physiography and geology a. A description of the soil types found in the project area. ACcording to the Collier County Soils Map, the following four soil types are found on the property (Figure 3): Basinger fine sand (Soil Map Unit 17), Urban Land Hollopaw Basinger Complex (Soil Map Unit 33), Udorthents shaped (Soil Map Unit 36), and Satellite fine sand (Soil Map Unit 39). A detailed description of each soil type is provided in Exhibit C. Aerial extent of proposed topographic modification through excavation, dredging and filling. Aerial extent of proposed topographic modifications is approximately 60 acres. Removal and or disturbance of natural barriers to storm waves and flooding. Not Applicable. Proposed modification to natural drainage patterns. The natural drainage pattem has changed due to the adjacent developments such as Palm River Estates and Collier's Reserve. Several ditches have been cut through the property to relieve Palm River Estates from standing water. The design of this project uses lakes to intercept road and lot runoff. Discharge for the project will be routed to the north. Palm River Estates runoff will be redirected to the north via a swale and pipe system. Extent of impervious surface and percent of groundwater recharge area to be covered. 9 JUL 3 0 2002 A total of 27.06+ acres of impervious surface or 31 percent of the ground water recharge area is proposed for the development. f. Annual drawdown of groundwater level resulting from use. No groundwater withdrawals are proposed at this time. g. Increased siltation in natural water bodies resulting from the proposed use. A sediment control plan will be provided at the time of site development plan approval. Wetlands ao Define number of acres of Collier County jurisdictional wetlands (pursuant to the Collier County Growth Management Plan) by vegetation type (species), vegetation composition (canopy, midstory and groundcover), vegetation abundance (dominant, common and occasional), and their wetland functions. A total of 10.00-k acres of SFWMD/Collier County jurisdictional wetlands and 7.90-~ acres of OSW have been identified on the property (Figure 2). The jurisdictional wetlands are composed of two FLUCFCS codes, which include Shrubland/Pepper, Hydric (76-90%) (FLUCFCS Code 4291) and Cypress/Pepper (50-75%) (FLUCFCS Code 6219). Table 2 provides a breakdown of the wetland and OSW acreages, while a description of each follows. Table 2. SFWMD/ColIier County Wetland and OSW Acreages FLUCFCS Code Habitat Wetland OSW Acreage Acreage 4291 Shrubland/Pepper (75-90%), Hydric 4.24 514 Ditch or Canal 1.99 560 Stormwater Management Lake 5.91 6219 Cypress/Pepper (50-75%) 5.76 Total 10.00 7.90 Shrubland/Pepper (75-90%), Hydric (FLUCFCS Code 4291) This wetland habitat is located within the east half of the project limits and occupies 4.24± acres or 4.9 percent of the project area. The canopy vegetation consists of very scattered bald cypress (Taxodium distichum), while Brazilian pepper.(£~'--': .... . i' ~'"~A ITEM terebinthifoloius) dominates the sub-canopy. Other lesser species in lhe l~er 10 JUL 3 0 2002 n. O stratum include wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera) and saltbush (Baccharis glomeruliflora). The ground cover is dominated by swamp fern (Blechnum serrulatum), royal fern (Osmunda regalis), leather fern (Acrostechum danaeofilia), and centella (Centella asiatica). Ditch/Canal (FLUCFCS Code 514) This land use occupies 1.99+ acres or 2.3 percent of the project area and is classified as OSW. A large ditch or canal forms the project's northern border, while a smaller ditch cuts diagonally across the southern portion of the project area. The northern canal is mostly open water with scattered herbaceous vegetation such as duckweed (Lemna sp.), duck potato (Sagittaria lancifolia), and pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata). The southern ditch, in addition to the previously mentioned species, is heavily vegetated with Carolina willow (Salix caroliniana) and Brazilian pepper in its sub-canopy. Stormwater Management Lake (FLUCFCS Code 560) These OSW's are found in two areas and they total 5.9 lq- acres or 6.8 percent of the project area. Both lakes are located within the east half of the'project limits and are bodies of open water used for stormwater management purposes. Cypress/Pepper (50-75%) (FLUCFCS Code 6219) This wetland community surrounds the hydric pepper area and occupies 5.764- acres or 6.6 percent of the project area. The canopy vegetation is dominated by mature bald cypress and melaleuca (Melaleuca quinquenervia), 'while the sub-canopy is mostly Brazilian pepper (50-75 percent). Other lesser sub-canopy species include slash pine (Pinus elliottiO, dahoon holly (Ilex cassine), wax myrtle, melaleuca, and silk oak (Grevillea robusta): The ground cover includes swamp and royal fern, fox grape (Vitis labrusca), poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), and old world climbing fern (Lygodium microphyllum). Determine present seasonal high water levels and historical high water levels by utilizing Hchen Hnes or other biological indicators. In September 1999, present seasonal high water levels were recorded by Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc. within the project's northern canal at 4.5 NGVD and within the centrally located ditch at 7.0 NGVD. Indicate how the project design improves/affects pre-development hydroperiods. The hydroperiod of the preserved on-site wetlands, outside the water management system, will be unchanged at post development. Indicate proposed percent of defined wetlands to be impacted at proposed impacts on functions of wetland areas. 11 JUL 3,0'2002 A total of 0.89 acre or nine percent of the wetland is proposed to be impacted. The effect on the wetland is anticipated to be minimal, due to its degraded conditions fi.om exotic invasion and altered hydrology. The proposed impacts are to occur at the northern edge of the cypress/pepper habitat (FLUCFCS Code 6219). This area is heavily invaded by such exotics as melaleuca, Brazilian pepper, silk oak, and old world climbing fem. The hydrology in this region has also been severely altered by the drainage canal to the north and surrounding development. This is evident by the lack of observed hydrology in the impact area and the condition of the surrounding habitat (i.e., pine, cypress, cabbage palm, disturbed and drained). Approximately 0.34 acre of OSW impacts are also proposed for the filling and excavation activities to a ditch located in the south half of the project area. Proposed wetland and OSW impacts are summarized in Table 3 and shown in Figure 5. Table 3. Wetland and Other Surface Waters Impact Summary Not Impacted Wetland FLUCFCS Size Habitat Impacted Fill Excavation Number Type (Acres) (Acres) (Acres) (Acres) 1 Cypress/Pepper (50-75%) 6219 5.76 4.87 0.89 0.00 OSW Ditch 514 0.34 0.00 0.31 0.03 TOTAL 6.10 4.87 1.20 0.03 Indicate how the project design minimizes impacts on wetlands. The wetland impacts have been minimized through the alternative site plan selection process. The proposed project design has eliminated all wetland impacts, less 0.89± acre along the cypress and Brazilian pepper wetland's northern edge. The project design has further minimized impacts by limiting development to the more heavily degraded area of the wetland. Indicate how the project design shall compensate for the wetland impacts pursuant to the Collier County Growth Management Plan. Compensation for wetland impacts will include the preservation and enhancement of the remaining 9.11± acres of on-site wetlands. This will include 4.87+ acres of cypress with Brazilian pepper and 4.24± acres of hydric shrubland with Brazilian pepper. These areas will be enhanced through the treatment and removal of exotics such as Brazil/an pepper, melaleuca, silk oak, and old world climbing fern. 12 JLIL 3 0 2002 p,.62 JUL 3 0 20O2 I ! ! 5. Upland utilization and species of special status. ao Define number of acres of uplands by vegetative types ('species), vegetation composition ('canopy, midstory, and groundcover), vegetation abundance ('dominant, common and occasional,) and their upland functions. The property has a total of 68.77+ acres of uplands. The upland habitats are composed of ten FLUCFCS types: Pine Flatwoods (FLUCFCS Code 411), Pine Flatwoods, Recently Burned (FLUCFCS Code 4118), Pine Flatwoods, Disturbed (FLUCFCS Code 4119), Oak Shrub/Scrubby Flatwoods, Mixed (FLUCFCS Code 416/421), Brazilian Pepper (FLUCFCS Code 422), Cabbage Palm, Disturbed (FLUCFCS Code 4289), Pine, Cypress, Cabbage Palm, Disturbed and Drained (FLUCFCS Code 6249D), Disturbed Land (FLUFCS Code 740), Spoil Berm (FLUCFCS Code 743), and Primitive Road (FLUCFCS Code 814). Table 4 provides a breakdown of the upland acreages for the site, and a description of each upland FLUCFCS type follows. Table 4. Upland Acreages FLUCFCS Code Description Acreage % of Total 411 Pine Flatwoods 9.98 11.5 4118 Pine Flatwoods, Recently 6.31 7.3 ~ Burned 4119 Pine Flatwoods, Disturbed 10.83 12.0 416/421 Oak Scrub/Scrubby Flatwoods, 17.62 20.8 Mixed 422 Brazilian Pepper 0.10 0.1 4289 Cabbage Palm, Disturbed 0.50 0.6 6249D Pine, Cypress, Cabbage Palm, 14.20 16.4 Disturbed and Drained 740 Disturbed Land 8.00 9.3 743 Spoil Berm 0.38 0.4 814 Primitive Road 0.85 1.0 TOTAL 68.77 79.40 Pine Flatwoods (FLUCFCS Code 411) This upland community occupies 9.98+ acres or 11.5 percent of the project area. This habitat borders the scrub oak and scrubby flatwoods community (FLUCFCS Code 416/421) along its northern and southem sides. Vegetatively tl~ ca~ rl~ dominated by slash pine, while the sub-canopy includes wax myrtle, ~ast3/~oni~ 14 JUL 30 2002 (Lyonia fruticosa), beauty-berry (Callicarpa americana), cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), and young slash pine. The ground cover is defined by saw palmetto (Serenoa repens), while secondary species include fox grape, poison ivy, ceasar weed (Urena lobata), yellow-eyed grass (Xyris sp.), and bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum). Pine Flatwoods, Recently Burned (FLUCFCS Code 4118) This upland habitat is in the center of the site and occupies 6.314- acres or 7.3 percent of the project area. Due to a relatively recent fire (within five years), the canopy is mostly open with scattered snags and a few slash pine. The sub-canopy and ground cover are similar in species composition to FLUCFCS Code 411. The saw palmetto in this community is less dense and the vine growth more pronounced. Pine Flatwoods, Disturbed (FLUCFCS Code 4119) This upland community is located along the west side of Cypress Way West and north of the canal. It occupies 10.834- acres or 12.0 percent of the project area. The canopy and sub-canopy vegetation'is dominated by slash pine with an occasional ear- leafed acacia (Acacia auriculiformis), laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia) and live oak (Quercus virginiana). Brazilian pepper and cabbage palm are also common in the sub-canopy. The ground cover composition is similar to FLUCFCS Code 411; however, it is much less dense with many open areas. Oak Scrub/Scrubby Flatwoods, Mixed (FLUCFCS Code 416/421) This upland habitat makes up the majority of the southern two-thirds of the site. It occupies 17.624- acres or 20.8 percent of the project area. Vegetatively the canopy is dominated by scattered slash pine. The sub-canopy is the most prominent feature in this community and consists of myrtle oak (Quercus myrtifolia), sand live oak (Quercus geminata), chapman oak (Quercus chapmaniO, rusty lyonia (Lyonia fruticosa), and tallow-wood (Ximinia americana). The ground cover is dominated by saw palmetto, while lesser species include wiregrass (Aristida stricta), reticulated pawpaw (Asimina reticulata), sand club moss (Selaginella arenicola), and penny royal (Piloblephis rigida). Brazilian Pepper (FLUCFCS Code 422) This upland vegetation type is located in a single.area in the northeast corner of the site and occupies 0.10~ acre or 0.1 percent of the project area. The canopy and sub- canopy vegetation is dominated by Brazilian pepper (75-100 percent), while the ground cover is mostly open. Cabbage Palm, Disturbed (FLUCFCS Code 4289) This upland community is located along the west side of the hydric Brazilian pepper area and it occupies 0.50~ acre or 0.6 percent of the project area. Cabbage palm is the dominant canopy vegetation, while Brazilian pepper, wax myrtle, and t a occl~lOtlll~ 15 JUL 3 beauty-berry are found in the sub-canopy. The ground cover includes scattered saw palmetto clumps covered by fox grape and poison ivy. Pine, Cypress, Cabbage Palm, Disturbed and Drained (FLUCFCS Code 6249D) This upland community is located along the northern portion and occupies 14.20-~: acres or 16.4 percent of the project area. Vegetatively the canopy is dominated by slash pine and the sub-canopy by cabbage palm. Other lesser species include bald cypress, melaleuca, Brazilian pepper, rapanea (Rapaneapunctata), and beauty-berry. The ground cover is mostly open with scattered patches of fox grape, poison ivy, swamp fern, and St. August/ne grass (Stenotaphrum secundatum). Disturbed Land (FLUCFCS Code 740) This upland community type is scattered about the site and totals 8.00-~ acres or 9.3 percent of the project area. This land use has resulted from activities such as canal excavation and clearing for home sites. The canopy and sub-canopy vegetation is typically absent; however, in a few areas scattered bald cypress, slash pine, and Brazilian pepper occur. The ground cover includes species typical of disturbed areas such as ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), beggars tick (Bidenspilosa), bahia grass (Paspalum notatum), southern gaura (Gaura angustifolia), and ceasar weed. Spoil Berm (FLUCFCS Code 743) This upland land use is situated along each side of the southern ditch and totals 0.38± acre or 0.4 percent of the project area. Although the canopy is open, vegetation in the sub-canopy can be thick at times and includes scrub oak, cabbage palm, slash pine, and Brazilian pepper. The ground cover in places can be thick with fox grape. Other herbaceous vegetation noted is typical to disturbed areas (Disturbed Land, FLUCFCS Code 740). Primitive Road (FLUCFCS Code 814) This upland land use occupies 0.85+ acre Or 1.0 percent of the project area. This is a dirt road that extends in a northerly direction off of Old Tamiami Trail. The road eventually ties into a trail that extends along the south rim of the stormwater management canal to the north. Indicate proposed percent of defined uplands to be impacted and the effects of proposed impacts on functions of upland areas. Approximately 84 percent (i.e., 58.06+ acres) of the uplands on-site will be impacted by the proposed development. The function of providing wildlife habitat in these areas will be lost. 16 JUL 3 0 2002 do Indicate how the project design minimizes impacts on uplands. The project design minimizes upland impacts by preserving 9.7 lq- acres of uplands within the project area. The project further minimizes impacts by providing supplemental plantings within the retained upland areas that have been historically disturbed. Provide a plant and animal species survey to include at a minimum, 'species of special status that are known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site and conducted in accordance with the guidelines of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. See Exhibit D. e. Indicate how the project design minimizes impacts on species of special status. The gopher tortoise (GT) impacts will be minimized through the establishment of on-site GT preserves and off-site relocation. Three on-site GT preserves totaling 7.62 acres will be created within the project area. GT preserve No. 1 is 3.07 acres and is located on the north side of the canal, GT preserve No. 2 is 0.75 acre and is just west of the wetland preserve, and GT preserve No. 3 is found along the west property line and is 3.80 acres. Exotic removal will occur in the gopher tortoise preserves to further enhance the habitat. GT preserve No. 1 will also be supplementally planted with bahia grass to provide additional forage for the tortoises in this area. Pending Collier County and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission's (FWCC) approval, up to 17 gopher tortoises will remain on-site within the established preserves. Tentatively, GT preserve No. 1 will contain six tortoises, GT preserve No. 2 will contain two, and GT preserve No. 3 up to nine. These number totals will include an estimate of the tortoise population already present in the preserves, if applicable. Impacts to the tortoise habitat within the development footprint will be minimized by relocating the gopher tortoises off-site to an upland conservation area at Southern Sand and Stone (i.e., Willow Run Trust property). A letter of intent allowing the relocations is enclosed as Exhibit F. The off-site relocations will be conducted per FWCC guidelines and a detailed gopher tortoise management plan will be submitted to county staff prior to site development plan approval. Marine and estuarine resources Provide current State of Florida Classification of the Waters (Florida Administrative Code, Chapter 17-3). I~. ~ c~ ~ Not Applicable. JUL 3 0 2002 17 ~1 bo Noise Define number of acres of marine and estuarine resources by submerged grass beds, breeding areas and nursery areas and their marine and estuarine functions. Not Applicable. Indicate proposed percent of defined marine and estuarine resources to be impacted and the effects of proposed impacts on functions of marine and estuarine resources. Not Applicable. Estimate changes in the dockside landing of commercial fish an shellfish. Not Applicable. Estimate changes in the sport fishing effort and catch. Not Applicable, no docks are being proposed. Provide past history of any environmental impacts to the area including oil spills. Not Applicable. Indicate how the project design minimizes impacts on marine and estuarine resources. Not Applicable. Describe the changes in decibels and duration of noise generated during and after the project (both day and night) that will exceed Collier County regulations. Changes in decibels and duration of noise will only occur because of typical construction activities. In addition, construction will take place only during the hours set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code. No noise problems are anticipated after project completion. Describe steps that will be taken to reduce noise levels during and after the project. See 7a above. 18 AGF.~A ITEM JUL 3 0 2002 c. Project compliance with Federal Aid Highway Program Manual 7- 7-3. See 7a above. 3.8.5.4.2 Public Facilities and Services 1. Wastewater management bo Describe existing treatment facilities as to capacity, percent capacity being used, type of treatment and degree of treatment. The project area is located in the north region, which is served by the North County Water Reclamation Facility (NCWRF). The NCWRF is an 8.5 mgd facility that provides advanced secondary treatment through the activated sludge process. Total treatment capacity in the north region is 9.5 mgd. As of January 1, 1999, the reported average daily flow was 7.249 mgd. This represents 76 percent capacity utilization. A 5.0 mgd expansion of the NCWRF will commence in October 1999. If applicable, describe similar features of proposed new treatment facilities. Not Applicable. Describe the character and fate of both liquid and solid effluents. See la above. 2. Water supply ao Estimate of average daily potable and non-potable water demands on the project. It is estimated that 55,500 gallons of potable water per day will be consumed for drinking water use and 44,400 gallons per day for irrigation use. Source of raw water material Collier County Water-Sewer District. Analysis of on-site treatment systems relative to State and County standards. Not Applicable. 19 JUL 3 0 2002 o Solid wastes a. Estimate of average daily volume of solid wastes. The estimated average daily volume of solid wastes for the project is 2.50 cubic yards per day. b. Proposed method of disposal of solid wastes. It is proposed that Waste Management, Inc. or an equally qualified solid waste disposal finn will dispose of generated solid waste. c. Any plans for recycling or resource recovery. The project will comply with county recycling and resource recovery programs. Recreation and open spaces a. Acreage and facilities demand resulting from the new use. Per Collier County Capital Improvement Element Ordinance 97-55, the acreage and facilities demand resulting from the construction of 141 residential units, based on 2.5 people per unit, is 1.04 acres of regional parkland, 0.45 acre of community parkland, and $63,187.00 capital investment for recreational facilities. b. Amount of public park/recreation land donated by the developer. No public park/recreation land is proposed for donation by the developer. c. Management plans for any open water areas if one-half acre or more within the project. This project's lake system will be operated according to the conditions of the SFWMD permit as required by the Homeowner's Association documents. d. Plans for recreational development by the developer on dedicated lands. Not Applicable. e. Amount of public recreation lands removed from inventory by the new use. No public recreation lands will be removed from inventory by the m 20 3U[. 3 0 2002 o f. Development and/or blockage of access to public beaches and waters. Not Applicable. Aesthetic and Cultural Factors a. Provide documentation from the Florida Master Site File, Florida Department of State and any printed historic archaeological surveys that have been conducted on the project area. Correspondence has been received from the Department of State regarding historical, archaeological, or cultural resources that may be present on the site (Exhibit E). Based on a review of the State's Florida Site File, no significant archaeological or historical sites are recorded within the project area. b. Locate any known historic or archaeological sites and their relationships to the proposed project design. See response to 5a. c. Demonstrate how the project design preserves the historic/archaeological integrity of the site. See response to 5a. Indicate any natural scenic features that might be modified by theproject design and explain what actions shall be utilized to preserve aesthetic values. Not Applicable. Provide the basic architectural and landscaping designs. The property, when developed, will comply with applicable county architectural and landscaping requirements. do eo o Monitoring Describe the design and procedures of any proposed monitoring during and after site preparation and development. As part of the SFWMD permit for the project, the following wetland mitigation momtonng ~s proposed. Momtonng of the preserved wetland wallI ..... ~;~afaiT~u baseline, time-zero, and annual monitoring of vegetation, wildlife, r{infa~-.~niY"-"-~ ~ wetland water levels. The baseline report will document conditions onlthe pr6jecr t_, JUL 3 0 2002 21 t site as they currently exist. The time-zero report will document the conditions immediately following exotic removal. Sampling stations and methodology of data collection will remain the same for all monitoring events, including baseline, time- zero, and annual. To facilitate an intensive, accurate, and repeatable sampling program, the point frame method will be utilized (Bonham 1989). At each sampling station ten point quadrats will be sampled. Each point quadrat consists of lm2 wire grid with 25 cross points. Any plant species directly below a cross point will be recorded, including bare ground. Each cross point represents four percent of the square meter. Water depths will also be recorded at each sampling station. For each sampling station, species identified will be listed and percent cover computed and discussed. Regular observations of wildlife will be made during all monitoring events by qualified ecologists. This will consist of recording evidence and signs of wildlife (i.e., direct sightings, vocalizations, burrows, nests, tracks, droppings, etc.). Permanent fixed-point photograph stations will be established in each of the monitored areas thereby providing physical documentation of the condition and appearance of an area, as well as any changes taking place within it. Panoramic photographs will accompany vegetation data in each report. Locations of photo stations will remain the same throughout the duration of the monitoring program. A staff gauge will be installed within the preserved wetland. Water levels will be recorded and the data presented in the reports along with available rainfall data for the area. 3.8.6.1 SPECIFICS TO ADDRESS - GENERAL INFORMATION 3.8.6.1.1 Indicate how the proposed project has incorporated the natural, aesthetic and cultural resources and other environmental considerations in the planning and design of the proposed project. The proposed project has retained 9.11 + acres of wetland and 9.714- acres of uplands into the site development plan. Of the 9.714- acres of uplands, 7.62+ acres are designated for gopher tortoise preservation. The retained wetland and upland areas incorporate the natural and aesthetic resources into the plan's design by preserving indigenous vegetation, wetlands, and species of special concern. 22 2002 3.8.6.1.2 3.8.6.1.3 3.8.6.1.4 3.8.6.1.5 List the environmental impact(s) of the proposed action and the reason(s) that the impact(s) are unavoidable and that the impact(s) represent the minimum impacts possible to the environmental quality of the site and/or the surrounding area, which might be affected by the proposed use. The environmental impacts of the proposed action will include the cleating of upland habitats and minimal filling of wetland habitat. The alternative site plan section process has reduced the wetland impacts to 0.89-~: acre and further limited the impacts to a highly degraded area at the northern edge of the wetland. The remaining 9.114- acres of wetland will be preserved and enhanced through the removal of exotics. Upland impacts are minimized through the on-site preservation and enhancement of 9.71± acres of retained native vegetation. Probide substantiated alternatives to the proposed project so that reasons for the choice of a course o faction are clear, not arbitrary or capricious. The proposed residential development for this site is a land use that conforms well to the existing surrounding development (i.e., residential sub-divisions) making it a clear, non-arbitrary, course of action. List immediate short-term impacts to the environment. The short-term impact will include the loss of upland and wetland habitats on the site. List any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of natural resources which would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented. The loss of upland and wetland habitats will be irreversible and irretrievable. 23 JUL A6F. I'KM I'rE~ REFERENCES Bonham, C. D. 1989. Measurements for Terrestrial Vegetation. John Wiley and Sons, New York, New York. Florida Department of Transportation. 1985. Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System. Procedure No. 550-010-001.a. Second Edition. 24 JUL 3 0 2002 l:'g.~"/" -- EXHIBIT A EIS AUTHOR'S RESUME AC, E~A IT~ JUL 3 0 2002 Education Experience Continuing Education MICHAEL A. MYERS Vice President, Passarella and Associates, Inc. Environmental consultant and ecological services for private and public development, and road projects. Services include state, federal, and local permitting; agency negOtiations; environmental impact assessments; ecological assessments; listed species surveys, permitting and relocation; state and federal wetland jurisdictionals; wetland mitigation design, construction observations and monitoring. B.S. Wildlife Biology & Management, 1980 Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan Ecologist llI, Environmental Field Supervisor, Johnson Engineering, Inc., Fort Myers, FL, September 1992 - November 1996. Member of the firm's environmental section. Supervisor for ecological field studies, environmental planning, and regulatory agency coordination. Performed wetland jurisdictional determinations, protected species surveys, regulatory permitting, and wetland mitigation design and monitoring. · Victor Carlise, Hydric Soils Seminar (2000) Ted Below, Shorebird Seminar (1998) Dr. David Hall, Grasses, Sedges and Rushes Plant Identification Workshop (1996) Dr. David Hall, Sedges and Rushes Plant Identification Workshop (1995) Dr. David Hall, Plant Identification Workshop (1993) Native Plant Society Annual Conference (1993) Florida Department of Environmental Protection Wetland Delineation Workshop (1993) ~ Dr. Victor Carlisle Hydric Soils Workshop (1993) ~ Florida Chamber's Environmental Permitting Short Course (1993) Professional Associations Florida Association of Environmental Professionals President of Southwest Florida Chapter (1996 - 1998) State Board of Directors (1996 to 1998) Local Board of Directors (1994 to 1998) Florida Native Plant Society ~- Certifications Certified Wetland Delineator by the U.S. Army Corps of Enginee~ Certified to Perform Generic Gopher Tortoise Relocations by the Wildlife Conservation Commission :loridhq;roJ~&~ ~.'--" JUL 3 0 2002 EXHIBIT B AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH WITH FLUCFCS MAPPING JUL 3 0 2002 .,?7 EXHIBIT C SOILS DESCRIPTIONS JUL 3 ~ 2~2 17-Basinger fine sand This nearly level, poorly drained soil is in sloughs and poorly defined drainageways. Individual areas are elongated and irregular in shape, and they range from 20 to 800 acres in size. The slope is 0 to 2 percent. Typically, the surface layer is grayish brown fine sand about 3 inches thick. The subsurface layer is light gray fine sand to a depth of about 25 inches. The subsoil is brown fine sand to a depth of about 44 inches. The substratum is brown fine sand to a depth of about 80 inches. In 95 percent of the areas mapped as Basinger fine sand, Basinger and similar soils make up 83 to 98 percent of the map unit. In the remaining areas, the Basinger soil makes up either a higher or lower percentage of the mapped areas. The characteristics of Malabar soils are similar to those of the Basinger soil. The dissimilar soils in this map unit are small areas of Immokalee soils on flatwoods. These soils make up 17 percent or less of the map unit. The permeability of this soil is rapid. The available water capacity is low. Under natural conditions, the seasonal high water table is within a depth of 12 inches for 3 to 6 months during most years. During the other months, the water table is below a depth of 12 inches, and it recedes to a depth of more than 40 inches during extended dry periods. During periods of high rainfall, the soil is covered by shallow, slowly moving water for about 7 days. The natural vegetation consists of scattered areas of South Florida slash pine, cypress, cabbage palm, saw palmetto, waxmyrtle, blue maidencane, sand cordgrass, pineland threeawn, chalky bluestem, and St. Johnswort. This soil is poorly suited to cultivated crops because of the wetness and droughtiness. With good water-control and soil-improving measures, this soil is suitable for many fruit and vegetable crops. A water-control system is needed to remove excess water during wet seasons and to provide water through subsurface irrigation during dry seasons. Because of the C-1 rapid permeability, the water table is difficult to maintain. Row crops should be rotated with cover crops. Seedbed preparation should include bedding of the rows. Applications of fertilizer and lime should be based on the needs of the :crops. ~ With proper water-control measures, the soil is moderately suited to citrus. A water-control system that maintains good drainage to an :effective depth is needed. Planting on raised : beds provides good surface and internal drainage and elevates the trees above the seasonal high water table. Planting a good grass cover crop between the trees helps to protect the soil from blowing when the trees are younger. With good water-control management, this soil is well suited to pasture. A water-control system is needed to remove excess water during the wet season. This soil is well suited to pangolagrass, bahiagrass, and clover. Excellent pastures of grass or a grass-clover mixture can be grown with good management. Regular applications of fertilizer and controlled grazing are needed for the highest possible yields. This soil is well suited to range. The dominant forage consists of blue maidencane, chalky bluestem, and bluejoint panicum. Management practices should include deferred grazing. This Basinger soil is in the Slough range site. This soil has severe limitations for most urban uses because of the high water table. It has severe limitations for septic tank absorption fields because of wetness and poor filtration. Building sites and septic tank absorption fields should be mounded to overcome these limitations. This soil also has severe limitations for recreational development because of wetness and the sandy texture. The problems associated with wetness can be corrected by providing adequate drainage and drainage outlets to control the high water table. The sandy texture can be overcome by adding suitable topsoil or by resurfacing the area. This Basinger soil is in capability subclass IVw. JUL 3 0 2002 33-Urban land-Holopaw-Basinger complex These areas of Urban land and nearly level, poorly drained soils are in urban areas. Individual areas are blocky to irregular in shape, and they range from 20 to 500 acres in size. Typically, Urban land consists of commercial buildings, houses, parking lots, streets, sidewalks, recreational areas, shopping centers, and other urban structures where the soil cannot be observed. Typically, the Holopaw soil has a surface layer of dark gray fine sand about 5 inches thick. The subsurface layer is fine sand to a depth of about 52 inches. The upper part of the subsurface layer is light gray, and the lower part is light brownish gray. The subsoil extends to a depth of about 62 inches. The upper part of the subsoil is dark grayish brown fine sand, and the lower part is dark grayish brown fine sandy loam. The substratum is gray loamy fine sand to a depth of about 80 inches. Typically, the Basinger soil has a surface layer of grayish brown fine sand about 3 inches thick. The subsurface layer is light gray fine sand to a depth of about 25 inches. The subsoil is brown fine sand to a depth of about 44 inches. The substratum is brown fine sand to a depth of about 80 inches. In 90 percent of the areas mapped as Urban land-Holopaw-Basinger complex, Urban land makes up about 45 percent of the unit, the Holopaw soil makes up about 35 percent, and the Basinger soil makes up about 20 percent. In the remaining areas, the major components make up either a higher or lower percentage of the mapped areas. They occur as areas so intricately mixed or so small that mapping them separately was not practical. The Holopaw and Basinger soils may have been filled or reworked to accommodate urban land uses. The permeability in the Holopaw soil is moderate to moderately slow, and the available water capacity is moderate. The permeability in the Basinger soil is rapid, and the available water capacity is low. Under natural conditions, the seasonal high water table is within a depth of 12 inches for 3 to 6 months during most years. C-2 During the other months, the water table is below a depth of 12 inches, and it recedes to a depth of more than 40 inches during extended dry periods. During periods of high rainfall, the soil is covered by shallow, slowly moving water for about 7 days. Most areas have had a drainage system installed to help to control the seasonal high water table and the runoff. The present land use precludes the use of this map unit for cultivated crops, citrus, or tame pasture. Because of the complexity of this map unit, onsite investigations should be made for urban and recreational development and for septic tank absorption fields. This map unit has not been assigned a capability subclass. 36-Udorthents, shaped These nearly level to undulating, somewhat poorly drained to moderately well drained soils are on golf courses and in adjacent areas where the soil material has been mechanically altered and shaped. Individual areas are elongated and irregular in shape, and they range from 40 to 640 acres in size. The slope is 1 to 6 percent. No single pedon represents Udorthents, but a common profile has a surface layer of mixed grayish brown and pale brown fine sandy loam to a depth of 18 inches. The next layer is gray gravelly fine sand to a depth of about 37 inches. The subsoil is light brownish gray fine sandy loam to a depth of about 47 inches. Limestone bedrock is at a depth of about 47 inches. This map unit is composed of many altered soils that have widely differing chemical and physical characteristics. Some areas may be composed of soils that are fine sand to a depth of 80 inches. The depth to the water table varies depending upon the amount of fill material and extent of irrigation and artificial drainage in a mapped area. The present land use preludes the use of this map unit for other uses; therefore, this map unit is not rated for other uses. This map unit has not capability subclass. been assigned a JUL 3 0 2002 _ 39-Satellite fine sand This nearly level, somewhat poorly drained soil is on low coastal ridges. Individual areas are elongated and irregular in shape, and they range from 10 to 400 acres in size. The slope is 0 to 2 percent. Typically, the surface layer is gray fine sand about 3 inches thick. The substratum is light gray to white fine sand' to a depth of about 80 inches. In 95 percent of the areas mapped as Satellite fine sand, the Satellite soil makes up 81 to 100 percent of the map unit. In the remaining areas, it makes up either a higher or lower percentage of the mapped areas. The dissimilar soils in this map unit are small areas of Oldsmar soils in landscape positions similar to those of the Satellite soil. The permeability of this soil is very rapid. The available water capacity is very low. Under natural conditions, the seasonal high water table is at a depth of 18 to 42 inches for I to 6 months during most years. During the other months, the water table is below a depth of 40 inches. The natural vegetation consists of Florida rosemary, sand live oak, South Florida slash pine, saw palmetto, prickly pear, pineland threeawn, and creeping bluestem. This soil is poorly suited to cultivated crops because of the droughtiness. The number of adapted crops is limited unless very intensive management practices are used. With good water-control and soil-improving measures, this soil is suitable for many fruit and vegetable crops. A water-control system is needed to remove excess water during wet seasons and to provide water through subsurface irrigation during dry seasons. Because of the rapid permeability, the water table is difficult to maintain. Row crops should be rotated with cover crops. Seedbed preparation should include bedding of the rows. Applications of fertilizer and lime should be based on the needs of the crops. With proper water-control measures, the soil is well suited to citrus. A water-control system that maintains good drainage to an effective depth is needed. Planting on raised beds provides good surface and internal drainage and elevates the trees above the seasonal high water table. Planting a good grass cover crop between the trees helps to protect the soil from blowing when the trees are younger. This soil is moderately suited to pasture. pangolagrass and bahiagrass are adapted species, but they produce only fair yields with good management. Regular applications of fertilizer and controlled grazing are needed for the highest possible yields. This soil is poorly suited to range. The dominant forage consists of creeping bluestem, lopsided indiangrass, pineland threeawn, and chalky bluestem. The dense growth of scrubby oaks, saw palmetto, and other shrubs dominates the desirable forage. Management practices should include deferred grazing and brush control. Livestock usually do not use this range site, except for protection and as dry-bedding ground during the wet seasons. This Satellite soil is in the Sand Pine Scrub range site. This soil has severe limitations for most urban uses because of wetness and droughtiness. It has severe limitations for septic tank absorption fields because of wetness and poor filtration. If this soil is used as a septic tank absorption field, it should be mounded to maintain the system well above the seasonal high water table. For recreational uses, this soil also has severe limitations because of wetness and the sandy texture; however, with proper drainage to remove excess surface water during wet periods, many of the effects of the wetness can be overcome. Suitable topsoil or other material should be added to improve trafficability. This Satellite soil is in capability subclass Vis. C-3 JUL 3 0 2002 EXHIBIT D LISTED PLANT AND WILDLIFE SPECIES SURVEY AND FLUCFCS AND GOPHER TORTOISE BURROW LOCATION MAP JUL 3 O 2002 LISTED PLANT AND WILDLIFE SPECIES SURVEY Introduction and Methodology A listed plant and wildlife species survey was conducted on November 11 and 12, 1998 to detemfine whether the site was being utilized by state or federal listed species. The listed wildlife species survey included, but was not limited to, Florida scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens coerulescen~), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), woodstork (Mycteria americana), gopher tortoise ( Gopherus polyphemus), Eastern indigo snake (Dryrnarchon corais couperi), gopher frog (Rana areolata), Big Cypress fox squirrel (Sciurus niger avicennia), Florida black bear (Ursus arnericanusfloridanus), and Florida panther (Felis concolor coryi), (Wood 1996). The listed plant species survey included species typical to oak scrub'and pine and cypress wetlands in this geographical region, as well as listed epiphytes and terrestrial orchids common in Southwest Florida. The 86.67+ acre tract was surveyed for wildlife species listed by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS) as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern; and for plant species listed by the Florida Department of Agriculture (FDA) and USFWS as endangered, threatened, or commercially exploited. The survey was conducted by qualified ecologists walking parallel belt transects through all suitable habitat to ensure that sufficient visual coverage of ground and flora was obtained. Transects were spaced from 25 feet to 50 feet apart depending on habitat. All habitats were inspected for listed plant and wildlife species. At regular intervals the ecologists stopped, remained quiet, and listened for wildlife 'vocalizations. The "Florida Atlas of Breeding Sites for Herons and Their Allies" (Runde et al. 1991) was referenced for the location of breeding colonies for both listed and non-listed wading birds including the snowy egret (Egretta thula), tricolored heron (Egretta tricolor), little blue heron (Egretta caerulea), woodstork, and white ibis (Eudocimus albus). There was no reference in the atlas to any breeding colonies located within or adjacent to the project site. Survey Results The results of the November 1998 surveys found one animal and one plant listed species. The observed animal was the gopher tortoise. The tortoise and its burrows were observed within the oak scrub/scrubby flatwoods (FLUCFCS Code 416/421), pine flatwoods (FLUCFCS Codes 411, 4118, and 4119), and disturbed land (FLUCFCS Code 740) habitats. The FWCC lists the gopher tortoise as a species of special concern. A total of 165 active and inactive burrows were noted within these community types. The burrows were flagged and numbered in the field and are identified on the attached FLUCFCS and Gopher Tortoise Burrow Location Map. The listed plant species noted during the survey was common wild pine (T. fasciculata). The wild pine was observed in the oak scrub/scrubby flatwoods community. JUL 3 0 200:2 D-1 ~ 9--~ REFERENCES Runde, D.E., J.A. Gore, J.A. Hovis, M.S. RObson, and P.D. Southall. 1991. Florida Atlas of Breeding Sites for Herons and Their Allies, Update 1986 - 1989. Nongame Wildlife Program Technical Report No. 10. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Tallahassee, Florida. Wood, D. A. 1996. Florida's Endangered Species, Threatened Species and Species of Special Concern Official Lists. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Tallahassee, Florida. ~: D-2 JUL 3 0 2002 ~(z)'-' EXHIBIT E CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE JUL 3 0 2002 DMsIONS OFFLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF S'i Ofiice of th~ Secreta~/ Office of Iniemalio~l Relations Division of ~lections Division of ~orporatlC~s Division of Cultural Aff~m Division of l-F~torical Resources Division of Library and Information Services Division of Lice~ing Division of AckninistratIve Services June 1, 1999 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE Katherine Harris DIVISION OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES Mr. Michael Myers Passarella and Associates, Inc. 4575 Via Royale, Suite 201 Fort Myers, Florida 33919 DHR Project File No. 993776 Cultural Resource Assessment Request Little Palm Island Collier County, Florida MEMBER OF ~ FLORIDA CABINKF Tru~es o~ fl~ lnt~rnal ~t T~ ~ A~~ ~n ~g ~ ~ ~ ~d F~ ~of ~ ~ of ~w ~ of V~' ~ RECEIVED JUN 0 ? 1999 PASSARELLA AND ASSOCIATI~S, INC, Dear Mr. Myers: In accordance with the procedures contained in the applicable local ordinance, we have reviewed the above referenced project for possible impact to historic properties listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places, or otherwise of historical or architectural value. A review of the Florida Master Site File indicates that no significant archaeological or historical sites are recorded for or likely to be present within the project area. Furthermore, because of the project location and/or nature it is unlikely that any such sites will be affected. Therefore, it is the opinion of this office that the proposed project will have no effect on historic properties listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places, or otherwise o£historical or architectural value. If you have any questions concerning our comments, please contact Scott Edwards, Historic Preservation Planner, at 850-487-2333 or 800-847-7278. Your interest in protecting Florida's historic properties is appreciated. GWPfEse State Historic Preservation Off Sincerely, George W. Percy, Director Division of Historical Resources and 1LA, Gray Building · 500 South Bronough Street · Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 * http://www.t iD Director's Office iD Archaeological Research C1 Historic Preservation CJ (850) 487-2333 o FAX: 922-0496 (850) ~J (850) 488-1480 * I:AX: 488-3355 (850) 487-2299 · FAX: 414-2207 [] Historic Pensacola Preservation Board 23 Palm Bea,? R~o¥.nal ~ 4ffiTc6e [] St. Au~gust/ne, gegional Office ........ ~,, ~ -~r, ~ ~ . '~ .770- 47 (904) 8?..5-5045 FA~ 8Z5-5044 , JUL 3 0 2002 l;~ritage.com r'Tt7 [i.storillaJ Museutr~ 813) 272-3843 ' FAX: 972-2340 EXHIBIT F GOPHER TORTOISE RELOCATION LETTER OF INTENT JUL 3 0 2002 FROM Maupeen Bonn~s$ PHONE NO. : 941 348 8998 Aug. 07 ~000 08:25AM P1 FAX co~espondenc¢ 6 August 2000 Mike Myers Passarclla and Associates 4575 Via Royale, Suite 201 Fort Myers, FL 33919 I~: Gopher tortoise reh~tion Dear Mike, Willow Run Trust owns and maintains a 203 acre preserve adjacent to the Willow Run quarry in Collier County. In the northeastern region of the preserve there is approximately 35 to 40 acres of upland habitat that has been determined to be suitable for gopher tortoises. The area has been recently surveyed by biologists from your firm, and a small number of gopher tortoise burrows were located in this area. Willow Fun Trust tentatively agrees to accept relocated tortoiSes from Little Palm Island via Passarella and Associates. On this matter, I have exchanged communications with Joe Bozzo and Jim Beever (both from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission), as well as Klm Dryden (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) and Jay Garner (Florida Department of Environmental Protection). All of these contacts have either verbally approved of the relocation of gopher tortoises to Willow Run Preserve, or they have stated that the relocation does not conflict with permitted activities within the preserve. A copy of a letter from Mr. Beever is enclosed. on behalf of: Willow Run !.~d Trust 5590 Shirley Street Naples, FL 34109 2002 FROM : Maureen Bonness FLORIDA FISH AND PHONE NO. : WILDLIFE 941 348 8998 Aug. 07 2000 08:26AM P3 CONSERVATION COMMISSION JAMES L. "JAMIE" ADAMS, JR. Bu~haell BARBARA C. BARSH Jackson~'ll~ DAVID IC MIKEHAN St. Peter~bur~ JULIE, la MORRIS Sarasota ALLAN L. EGBERT, Ph, D., potecuttve ~r VlClOR J. I-I~LLE1L Au~tant E~u~c.tlve Dl~r Ms. Maureen Bonness 73.90 Rookery Lane Naples, Florida 34120 QUINTON L HEDGEPETH, DDS Miami H.A. =HERK'I~ HUPPM.qIg Deltona EDI~rlN p. ROBERTS, DC Pensacola JOHN D. ROOD dacksonvi/le July 26, 2000 OFFICE OF ENVIRONNtP. NTAL SI~RVIcL~ 29'~00 TUCKERS GRADE PUI~rA GORDA, lPl. 33955 (~41) t~AX (941) DEP Permit # 110134951-003, .Collier Coumy, Willow Run Quarry, Gopher Tortoise Relocation Dear Ms. Bonness: The Office of Environmental Services of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission has reviewexl your request concerning the use of the Willow Run Quarry Preserve uplands as a receiving site for relocated gopher tortoises. We have no objection to the use of the Willow Run Quarry Preserve as a gopher Wrtoise relocation receiving site provided that the natural attributes that make the Preserve valuable habitat for the Florida panther are not altered by management for the gopher tortoise. Specifically, the Preserve should remain a forested habitat that provides cover for this wide-rang/nE mammal and the pr/mary management goal for the preserve remains as providing habitat-for Flor/da panther. Please coqtact me at our Punta Gorda office at (941) 575-5765, if you have any questions. Sincerely, James W. Beever IH Biological Scientist IV Office of Environmental Services JWB/jwb ENV 3-2/1 willownmpreserve.wpd CC: Mr. Skip Bergman U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Fort Myers Regulatory Office 2301 McGregor Boulevard, Suite 300 Fort Myers, Florida 33901 JUL 3 0 2002 FROM Maur~en Bonn~s$ Collier County, Willow Run Quarry, Gopher Tortoise Relocation July 26, 2000 PHONE NO. : 941 Ms. Karen Johnson South Florida Water Management District 2301 McGregor Boulevard Fort Myers, Florida 33901 Mr. Andy EIier U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Office of Ecological Services Southwest Florida Suboffice 3860 Tollgate Boulevard, Suite 300 Naples, Florida 34114 Mr. Bill Lorenz Collier County Government Center 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Bldg D Naples, Florida 34112 348 8998 07 200{B 08: 26AM P4 Page 2 JUL 3 0 2002 RESOLUTION NO. 02 - RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER ST-99-3 FOR SPECIAL TREATMENT DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, STREETS AND ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE ON A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY WiTH A SPECIAL TREATMENT (ST) OVERLAY LOCATED WITHIN THE PROPOSED LITTLE PALM ISLAND SUBDWISION IN SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 125, Florida Statutes has conferred on Collier County, the power to establish, coordinate and enforce, zoning and such business regulations as necessary for the protection of the public health, safety and welfare; and WHEREAS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted Ordinance 91-102 as amended which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Commissioners, being the duly elected constituted board of the area hereby affected, has held a hearing in regular session as in said regulations made and provided, and has considered the advisability of allowing the construction of residential single family lots, streets and associated infrastructure on a portion of the property having an "ST" overlay, as shown on the attached plans, Exhibits "A" and "B", and has found as a matter of fact that satisfactory provision and arrangement has been made concerning all applicable matters required by said regulations and is in accordance with Section 2.2.24 of the Land Development Code for the unincorporated area of Collier County; and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given opportunity to be heard by this Board in public meeting assembled and the Board having considered all matters presented. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: Petition ST-99-3 filed by David H. Farmer, representing Paula Davis, Keystone Custom Homes, with respect to the property more particularly described as the proposed Little Palm Island Subdivision (legal description, Exhibit "C"), be approved for a Special Treatment Development Permit allowing the construction of residential single family lots, streets and associated infrastructure as shown on the attached plot plan, in an RSF-3/ST zoning district wherein said property is located, subject to the following conditions: 1. Existing or proposed easements for Collier County Stormwater facilities shall be maintained flee of landscaping, berms or any other kind of obstacles that would impede adequate access to maintenance crews and equipment. JUL 3 0 2002 .!'[ , 2. The existing canal, and existing lake on the north side of the site shall be dedicated as a drainage easement to Collier County, for access and maintenance, prior to the issuance of any building permits. 3. All development orders shall be consistent with the Collier County Growth Management Plan and the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) in effect at the time of final development order approval. 4. Buffers shall be provided around wetlands, extending a minimum of 15 feet landward of the edge of wetland preserves in all places and averaging 25 feet from the landward edge of wetlands. Where natural buffers are not possible, structural buffers shall be provided in accordance with the State of Florida Environmental Resources Permit Rules and be subject to review and approval by Planning Services Staff. 5. Environmental permitting shall be in accordance with the State of Florida Environmental Resource Permit Rules and shall be subject to review and approval by Current Planning Environmental Staff. Removal of exotic vegetation shall not be the sole mitigation technique for impacts to Collier County jurisdictional wetlands. 6. The petitioner shall comply with the guidelines and recommendations of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) regarding potential impacts to protected wildlife species. Where protected species are observed on site, a Habitat Management Plan for those protected species shall be submitted to Planning Services Staff for review and approval prior to final plat/construction plan approval. 7. Prior to final plat approval, all gopher tortoise preserves shall be identified on the plat with protective covenants per, or similar to, Florida Statutes, Section 704.06. 8. All conservation areas shall be designated as conservation/preservation tracts or easements on all construction plans. Buffers shall be provided in accordance with Section 3.2.8.4.7.3 of the LDC, which prohibits any buildings from being constructed within 25 feet of all upland and wetland preserves, and in no case shall any impacts, including grading, filling or clearing, be allowed within 10 feet for construction of accessory structures. 9. A Gopher Tortoise Relocation/Management Plan was submitted for review and approval. Prior to final plat/construction plan submittal, the following conditions shall be added to the Plan: a. The 80-foot wide access easement (1 acre in total size) located at the north end of the gopher tortoise preserve, shall be restored with native scrub vegetation and supplemental planting material for the tortoises. b. Label the 14.5-acre upland preserve as "gopher tortoise preserve" on all site plans. c. Add a requirement for hand clearing of exotic vegetation within tortoise preserves. d. Add a requirement for a thorough gopher tortoise survey to be conducted, prior to the start of any relocation, to update the status and locations of all burrows. e. Add the following language to the first sentence under "pre- development", "Prior to the excavation of all active and inactive gopher tortoise burrows...' f. Off-site relocation, if necessary, shall be approved by the FFWCC. State permits shall be submitted to Collier County Planning Services Staffprior to the pre-construction meeting. g. Additional relocation and management criteria shall be incorporated into the Plan, in accordance with the recommendations in the technical research support material provided to County Staff by the Ashton Biodiversity Research & Preservation Institute. Such criteria shall include but may not be limited to the following conditions: -2- JUL 3 0 21102 (1) The tortoise preserve shall be fenced off in a manner that prevents dogs and cats from being able to access the area. Access by the local residents will be limited. (2) A more detailed monitoring of vegetation shall be provided to determine if it is necessary to more actively manages the tortoise forage. (3) A controlled burn is the preferred method to prepare the tortoise preserve. If it is possible, the area should be burned 3 months prior to relocating tortoises into that area. 10. An exotic vegetation removal, monitoring, and maintenance plan for the site, with emphasis on the conservation/preservation areas, shall be submitted to Current Planning Environmental Staff for review and approval, prior to final site plat/construction plan approval. A schedule for exotic vegetation removal within all preserves areas shall be submitted with the plan. 11. Old Tamiami Trail has historic significance and is a possible archaeological site. The petitioner shall place a historic marker (plaque) on-site prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the first dwelling unit. This plaque shall be placed within the preserve tract and shall explain the historic nature of the Old Tamiami Trail. The petitioner shall also submit an application for historic designation prior to plat approval. 12. The roads within Little Palm Island shall be privately maintained, but shall be open to the public. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution relating to Petition Number ST-99-3 be recorded in the minutes of this Board. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA DATE: ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK BY: JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN DEPUTY CLERK Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency: Marjorie M. Student Assistant County Attorney bsb/ST Resolution -3- JUL 3 O 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY HISPANIC AFFAIRS ADVISORY BOARD REQUEST FOR THE COUNTY COMMISSION TO SUPPORT A "LIVING WAGE"/ FAIR PRICE/AGRICULTURAL ISSUF_3 FORUM AND DIALOGUE OB~fECTIVE: For the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) to consider a request from the Collier County Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board (HAAB) that the BCC call for and support dialogue and a forum on broad-ranging issues which vitally affect the Hispanic, minority and agricultural communities in Immokalee and other parts of Collier County. CONSIDERATIONS: For a number of years, the Collier County Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board has received information at public meetings regarding difficult conditions for both growers and farm workers in the Immokalee area. The HAAB has also received information that problems faced by various sectors of the agriculture industry have resulting impacts on Hispanics as well as the entire Immokalee community. A related matter was previously brought to the attention of the prior Board of County Commissioners but the Board chose not to act because it viewed the matter as a private sector labor dispute. However, the HAAB has found that conditions exist in the Immokalee area that present opportunities for free enterprise solutions if agricultural representatives will meet to begin discussing the possibihties. The HAAB has also found that farming operations in Immokalee very significantly impact the Hispanic community. The HAAB has learned of a potential solution in the agricultural crisis. Specifically, a "Living Wage" concept under which produce would be labeled with a "Living Wage" label that would motivate consumers to pay slightly more for Fair Price/USA grown produce which is safer and healthier to eat and would benefit American workers and businesses. At the March 28, 2002 HAAB meeting, the HAAB heard a presentation by Mr. Dick Nogaj, President of Harvest for Humanity, and the person responsible for the building of the "Jubilation" affordable housing community in Immokalee. Mr. Nogaj explained to the HAAB that it is his opinion and experience that wages are a critical issue in the agricultural industry. He stated that he had observed a systemic problem in the agriculture industry. He described farm workers who are paid very low wages and who do not have year around jobs. He mentioned that the growers do not set produce prices. Rather, the market is affected by buyers and brokers who work at the wholesale level to sell to retailers. U.S. consumers demand the cheapest and best products. The international free trade agreements have exacerbated the problem. Mr. Nogaj presented the HAAB with his vision of a potential solution to the agricultural crisis. The solution involves the "Living Wage" concept under which produce would be labeled with a "Living Wage" label and he believes that consumers would be willing to pay slightly more for such products. Consumers have already shown that they are willing to pay more for organic and other products that are safer and healthier to eat and which benefit American workers and businesses. There could also be national legislation creating tax incentives or credits for growers that raise "Living Wage" produce. That legislation could be sunseted for the time when higher prices are paid at retail for the "Living Wage" produce. Mr. Nogaj believes that growers have been reluctant to have dialogue in the past because of a lack of control over prices. Under the "Living Wage" concept they would have greater control over price and might be willing to discuss these issues with farm workers, buyers and brokers and retailer .~~, $'r~ht the Florida Gulf Coast University Director of Dispute Resolution has indicated that FGCU is willing to mediate any forum or dialogue over these matters. Finally, Mr. Nogaj mentioned that them is currently in operation a model blueberry farm which pays "Living Wages." Once the farm is profitable, it will become a For-Profit Corporation and options for stock shall be issued to the workers for purchase over 20 years with no interest. The HAAB believes that Mr. Nogaj's "Living Wage" concept merits a forum and dialogue as a potentially viable solution to the farm worker and agriculture issues in Immokalee and Collier County. The HAAB is hopeful that this concept will be of sufficient interest to all parties involved in the agricultural industry so as to motivate the parties to participate in the FGCU forum. The HAAB also continues to believe that that Collier County Commission should play a lead roll in calling for this forum by resolution. The BCC should do this to encourage participation by the parties in the discussion of issues which affect vital humanitarian, economic and agricultural issues in the County. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners adopt the attached proposed resolution calling for a forum for discussion of "Living Wage" and other agricultural issues affecting farm workers, growers, retailers, buyers, brokers and consumers in Collier County. Prepared by: Chief Assistant County Attorney and HAAB Staff Liaison Date: Reviewed and Approved by: David Correa, Chairman Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board Date: H/Ramiro/Executive Summa~/Request for Living Wage 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION REQUESTING A "LIVING WAGE"/FAIR PRICE/ AGRICULTURAL ISSUES FORUM AND DIALOGUE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 WHEREAS, for a number of years, the Collier County Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board 8 CHAAB") has received information at public meetings regarding difficult conditions for both 9 growers and farm workers in the Immokalee area; and 10 WHEREAS, the HAAB has also received information that problems faced by various 11 sectors of the agricultural industry have resulting impacts on Hispanics as well as the entire 12 Immokalee community; and 13 WHEREAS, a related matter was previously brought to the attention of the prior Board of 14 County Commissioners ("Board"). The Board chose not to act because it viewed the matter as a 15 private sector labor dispute. However, the HAAB has found that conditions exist in the 16 Immokalee area that present opportunities for free enterprise solutions if agricultural 17 representatives will meet to begin to discuss the possibilities; and 18 WHEREAS, the HAAB has learned of a potential solution to the agricultural crisis. 19 Specifically, the "Living Wage" concept is a voluntary program under which produce would be 20 labeled with a "Living Wage" label that would motivate consumers to pay slightly more for Fair 21 Price/USA grown produce which is safer and healthier to eat and which benefits American 22 workers and businesses; and 23 WHEREAS, information received by the HAAB indicates that the Florida Gulf Coast 24 University is willing to host a forum involving agricultural issues and solutions through the 25 "Living Wage" profit motivated concept; and 26 WHEREAS; the HAAB recommends that the Board endorse the concept of the "Living 27 Wage" program and encourages all the stakeholders involved in the agricultural industry in 28 Collier County to participate for the good of all. Said recommendation of the HAAB is only for 29 the Board to request the forum and dialogue and not for the Board to involve itself in the 30 dialogue or in the forum. 31 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY 32 COIVLMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: 33 The Collier County Board of County Commissioners hereby respectfully encourages 34 representatives of growers, workers, consumers, buyers, brokers and retailers from Southwest 35 Florida to explore and discuss the concept of a business promotion program that promotes 36 "Living Wage"/Fair Price/Agricultural Issues. The Board further recommends that this dialogue 37 occur through a forum to be mediated by the Florida Gulf Coast University. The Board makes 38 this request for the public purpose of seeking to improve living and economic conditions for all 39 members of the agricultural interest in Southwest Florida. 40 This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote. 41 1 DATED: 2 3 4 5 ATTEST: 6 DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk 7 8 9 By: 10 11 12 Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: 14 .' -- _ .... 15 -'R'"amiro Mafialich 16 Chief Assistant County Attorney 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RM/mw 29 30 h: RM'~IAAB~Reso- Living Wage{21 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA JAMES N. COLETTA, Chairman EXECUTIVE SUMMARY REQUEST THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RECOGNIZE THAT THE COLLIER HISPANIC TASK FORCE SERVES A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE AND APPROVE THE USE OF COUNTY RESOURCES TO PROVIDE MEETING NOTICES AND MEETING SPACE OBJECTIVE: To request that the Board of County Commissioners declare a valid public purpose to approve the use of County facilities to conduct meetings of the Collier Hispanic Task Force, and County resources to provide meeting notices. CONSIDERATION: Commissioner Fred W. Coyle formed the Collier Hispanic Task Force in January 2002, in an effort to assist unemployed and unskilled or low wage employees improve their standard of living through language and vocational training, assistance in job placement of qualified individuals, and improvement of housing conditions. Language training is the foundation of the program and depends upon self- help volunteerism. The mission statement of the Collier Hispanic Task Force is "To enhance the standard of living of our Hispanic residents with language and vocational training through volunteerism and coordination with existing facilities in Collier County". FISCAL IMPACT: Staff Time GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners recognize that the Collier Hispanic Task Force serves a valid public purpose and approves using County resources to provide meeting notices and County facilities for conducting meetings. PREPARD BY: SUE FILSON, EXECUTIVE MANAGER TO BCC DATE: JULY 30, 2002 JUL 30 200Z Pg · ._...L.~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPOINTlV~NT OF MEMBER(S) TO THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER AND WASTEWATER AUTHORITY OBJECTIVE: To appoint 3 members: 1 to serve as a Lay Member and 2 to serve as Technical Members on the Collier County Water and Wastewater Authority. CONSIDERATIONS: This 5 member council was established on February 27, 1996, by Ordinance No. 96-6 to regulate utility rates and related matters regarding non-exempt water and wastewater utilities in unincorporated Collier County. Three members shall be technical in nature, with expertise in engineering, finance and/or business administration. The remaining 3 members shall be appointed on the basis of individual civic pride, integrity, and experience in any area of regulation. Members are required to file a Form 1 Statement of Financial Interests each year with the Supervisor of Elections. After initial staggered terms, the terms will be 4 years. A list of the current membership is included in the backup. Mr. Roger P. Kastel (Lay Member) submitted his resignation on April 22, 2002; Mr. Andre M. LeCrone submitted his resignation on July 19, 2002; and, Mr. Gregory E. Smith submitted his resignation on May 21, 2002. A press release was issued and resumes were received from the following interested citizens: APPLICANT CATEGORY DIST ELECTOR ADV. COMM. Diane Lee Taylor Lay Member I Yes Community of Character Council Lowell Lam Lay Member 1 Yes None W. J."Jack" Markel Technical Member 1 Yes ~None Jason Williams Technical Member 5 /4~ None Heyward E. Boyce, P.E. Technical Member 1 Yes None Jerry P. Morgan Technical Member 2 Yes None COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: No Recommendation FISCAL IMPACT: NONE GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: NONE RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners consider the requests for appointment, appoint 3 members, and after the terms are determined, direct the County Attorney to prepare a resolution conftrming the appointments. Prepared By: Sue Fi]son, Executive Manager Board of County Commissioners Agenda Date: JULY 30, 2002 ^ar.N r" M / Memorandum To: Sue Filson, Executive Manager, Board of County Commissioners From: Bleu Wallace, Director, CDES Operations and Executive Director, Collier County Water and Wastewater Authority Date: July 22, 2002 Subject: Collier County Water and Wastewater Authority Vacancies I have reviewed the request of the applicants seeking appointment to the Collier County Water and Wastewater Authority, considering the qualifications required for one (1) lay member vacancy and two (2) technical vacancies. The Authority consists of five members, three technical members and two lay members. Section I-3 (E), Ordinance 96-6, as amended, provides: Lay members shall be appointed on the basis of individual civic pride, integrity, and experience in any area of relevant utility service and management, rate making, utility regulation, or other endeavors considered by the Board of County Commissioners to be beneficial to the proper functioning of the Authority. Lay members may be appointed from the same areas of expertise as technical members. · Technical members shall be appointed based on individual expertise in one or more of the following areas: (i) Engineering, with experience in water and sewer systems; (ii) Finance, accounting, rate making, and/or utility regulation; or (iii) Business administration. Ms. Diane Lee Taylor. Ms. Taylor resides in the US 41/Rattlesnake Hammock area of East Naples; very active in civic associations and governmental programs; familiar with the Collier County Code. She is qualified for appointment to a lay member position on the basis of civic pride, integrity, and her familiarity with county government processes. Mr. Lowell Lam. Mr. Lam has previously served on the Authority as a lay member for a partial unexpired term and served for one year as the Authority's Chairman. A resident of Eagle Creek, Mr. Lam is very involved in several committees of the Eagle Creek Homeowners Association. In view of his past experience as a lay member on the Authority, Mr. Lam has applied for a lay member position on the basis of civic pride and integrity and has vast experience in business management. Mr. Lam is highly qualified for appointment to a lay member position on the Authority. AOEI~,M'I~IM Operations Department NO.. Community Development & Environmental Services Divisio~ JUL Mr. W. J. "Jack" MarkeL Mr. Markel resides in the City of Marco Island and is very active in civic associations. He is qualified for appointment to a technical member position in view of his vast experience in managing water systems and utility system development. Mr. Jason Williams. Mr. Williams resides in the Orangetree subdivision and is an Engineer Technician for Q. Grady Minor & Associates. Based on his limited experience in construction engineering inspection, utility construction inspection, and one year land development design, I consider Mr. Williams minimally qualified for appointment to a technical member position on the Authority. Mr. Heyward E. Boyce, P.E. A Professional Engineer, Mr. Boyce resides in the City of Marco Island and is very active in civic and governmental programs; familiar with Collier County Government and Code. Mr. Boyce is qualified for appointment to a technical member position in view of his experience in engineering and environmental compliance. Mr. Jerry P. Morgan. Mr. Morgan is a resident of Pelican Marsh and is active in the Montclaire Homeowners association. He has thirty years experience in engineering and construction management. Mr. Morgan is qualified for appointment to a technical member position on the basis of his engineering background. While qualifications are capsulated above, no staff recommendation is contained herein. STAFF NOTE: Current Authority members in good standing are lay member Dr. Fay Biles of the City of Marco Island and technical member Robert C. Bennett, Jr. of Naples. Operations Department Community Development & Environmental Services Dh/is Utility Authority Work Phone Appt'd Exp. Date Term Name Home Phone DateRe-~tppt 2ndExpDate 2nd Term Mr. Robert C. Bennett 07/16/96 05/21/98 2 Years 7065 Dennis Circle 103 352-0219 06/11/02 05/21/06 4 Years Naples, FL 34104 District: 3 Category: ' Technical. Executive Management Dr. Fay R. Biles 05/12/98 05/21/99 1.5 Years 1588 Heights Court 394-3089 05/25/99 05/21/03 4 Years Marco Island, FL 34145 District: 1 Category: Lay Member Mr. Roger P. Kastel '.51''~ 04/24/01 05/21/05 4 years 4522 Ashton Court ¢~l~'n'~°~'a~ 417-1164 Naples, FL 34112 em?~°~lea~ District: 1 Category: Civic Pride Mr. Andre M. LeCrone~q.~ 434-0333 05/25/99 05/21/03 4 Years 3240 Valencia Drive ¢~/la Naples, FL 34120 District: 5 Category: Technical Mr. Gregory E. Smith ~,~ 775-0748 06/13/00 05/21/04 4 Years 2453 Dorset Court ~.~ ow 732-0958 Naples, FL 34112 District: 1 Category: Technical Wednesday., June 12, 2002 Page 1 of 2 Utility Authority Work Phone Appt'd Exp. Date Term Name Home Phone DateRe-appt 2ndExpDate 2nd Term This 5 member authority was established on February 27, 1996, by Ordinance No. 96-6 to regulate utility rates and related matters regarding non-exempt water and wastewater utilities in unincorporated Collier County. Three members shall be technical in nature, with expertise in engineering, finance and/or business administration. The remaining 2 membem shall be appointed on the basis of individual civic pride, integrity, and experience in any area of regulation: Members are required to file a Form 1 Statement of Financial Interests each year with the Supervisor of Elections. Terms are 4 years. FL STAT 125.0 ! (t) Staff; Bleu Wallace, Utility/Franchise Director: 403-2302 MEMORANDUM DATE: June 14, 2002 TO: Elections Office FROM: Sue Filson, Executive Manage Board of County Commissioners RE: Voter Registration - Advisory Board Appointments The Board of County Commissioners will soon consider the following individual.q for appointment to one of the county's advisory committees. Please let me know if those listed below are registered voters in Collier County. Also, please list the commission district in wNch each applicant resides. UTILITY AUTHORITY COMMISSION DISTRICT Diane Lee Taylor 200 Valley Stream Drive, #10 Naples, FL 34113 Thank you for your help. :~: '-- JUIq 1 9 2002 i)oard of Count~ Commissioners JUL 3 0 2C32 MEMORANDUM DATE: June 14, 2002 TO: Bleu Wallace, Utility Regulation M~_er FROM: Sue Filson, Executive Manag~, Board of County Commissione~ RE: -Utility Authority As you know, we currently have 1 vacancy on the above-referenced advisory committee. A press release was issued requesting citizens interested in serving on this committee to submit a resume for consideration. I have attached the resumes received for your review as follows: Diane Lee Taylor 200 Valley Stream Drive, #10 Naples, FL 34113 Please let me know, in writing, the recommendation for appointmem of the advisory committee within the 41 day time-fxame, and I will prepare an executive summary for the Board's consideration~ Please categorize the applicants in areas of expertise. If you have any questions, please call me at 774-8097. you &r your attention to this matter. Board of County Commissioners -~~ 3301 East Tamiami Trail ~ Naples, FL 34112 (941) 774-8097 Fax: (941) 774-3602 ~ Application for Advisory Committees/Boards Name: X-f'- x,'X~'(~'~,:~ L~ HomePhone: .~'x'S-C~L~/-~./--~ Fax No. ~ Business Phone: '"'---' e-mail address: Business: Board or Committee Applied for: ~ -LL=~ ~, ~ '~-'~' .~"~ -~x~c~ -~. ~/ t / Category (if applicabte): Kxample: Commission District, Developer, environmentalist, lay person, et~ Are you a registered voter in Collier County: Yes ~ No Do you currently hold public office? Yes No ~ If so, what is that office? If yes, please list the committeea/boards: x,~ ~;~c~ W~.~ '.-~c~,c~_Q ~_~C~"E' . Please list your community activities (civic clubs, neighborhood associations,~..; etc. and positions Education: "~-~,o,~x~,~.~xNxc~c,'~ ~:~'¢¢-.~0~--~ ~~ ~ Ple~e ~ach any addi~nal lnforma~on you feel pe~nent Th~ ~p~c~on should be fo~arded to Sue ~on, Board of C~n~ Comm~sionen, 3301 E~t T~i~i Tro~, N~s, ~ 34112. lf yo~ w~h, ple~e f~ your ~p~ca~n MEMORANDUM DATE: July 22, 2002 TO: Bleu Wallace, CDES Director FROM: Sue Filson, Executive Manager Board of County Commissioners RE: Utility Authority As you know, we currently have one (1) vacancy on the above-referenced advisory committee. A press release was issued requesting citizens interested in serving on this committee to submit a resume for consideration. I have attached the resumes received for your review as follows: W. J. "Jack" Markel 334 Henderson Ct. Marco Island, FL 34145 Jason Williams 970 Sapling Dr. Naples, FL 34120 Heyward E. Boyce 88 Madagascar Ct. Marco Island, FL 34145 Jerry P. Morgan 2350 Mont Claire Dr. #201 Naples, FL 34109 Lowell Lam 5 Grey Wing Pt. Naples, FL 34113 Please let me know, in writing, the recommendation for appointment of the advisory committee within the 41 day time-frame, and I will prepare an executive summary for the Board's consideration. Please categorize the applicants in areas of expert~e. If you have any questions, please call me at 774-8097. Thank you for your attention to this matter. SF Attachments Jul 22 ~2 ~gl~2a Sue ~illon 841-374-88G~ p.! ~--~E~.~ ~'l~ard of County Comrn;.~sioners ..... = =' "'" ~" ~ 3301 East Tandaml Trail ' Naplm, FL ~4112 Application for Advisory Committees/Boards Igaz Ne._ 7 3 ~f' O ~' _~}_ BmJnt~ Plmne: e-maU addresa: . __ Are :you a re&4s~d voter in Ceill~r County: Ye ~ ~qo ,,, Do you curr~nOy hold pubib oflS~c? Yes No ~" lfm~ wlsOt b that eVllcn? If yes, p3ems iiK thc cemmlltsekksntds.'..~__~.~_ Pleam Hs~ yoer communtty scttv[tlas (civic elebs, nei~hlmrlu~d aSlm~intions~ c~c. and p~sitions 'UL--18--2002 08 ~25 PM P. 02 W.J. "JACK" MARKEL 334 Henderson Ct. M~r,o r~land, FL 34145 H-239-389~997 F~x - 239-389-1~998 E.mail - bub~ade~prodi~.net WATER UTILITY MANAGEMENT Amerle~.~ Water System, 19~ to r~timment i~ yt~r 2000 Mana~ three wa/zr utilities wi~h diverse sour~s of supply,/n¢luding slmllow wells, impounding reservoirs, ~mll s~xeams containing mesa noa-poim sources ofpollut/on, deep wells (2300 ~), and the Ohio ami the Miss/-~il~ Riverz. These utililics ranged in size from 15 employees (1.2 mgd) ~o SS employees (49 mgd). Served as Manager of Operations and ¥icc President of 17 opcra~in~ water companies ~n Western Pennsylvania~ Thc size ofthcsc facilities ranged from 0.0:5 to ! 10.0 n~ocL Sources ofsupply included springs, 60 gpm shallow wells, numerous impounding reservoirs, Two L/ck Crock, Youghiogheny, Monongahela, a~d Allegheny Rivers. As Systems Analyst for slx months, observ~ ami monitored 135 employees pcr~orming ~2~ activities in the distn~ion and inside commexc~l deparm~cnts, resulting in work reassi~ments and consoldatian of some work a~vities. Cl~red $$00,000 automatic me~-reading study for Amer/can Sysmn and assisted on re-engineering survey for M_/sso~-~ Wztcr Company. Served on American Sysmm's ]~-nchmarking Commi~ec which established criteria for bc~ practices for accounting, f'm~n¢ial, customer service, and other common work activ/t/cs. Effor~ led m establishing one call PERSONNEL DEVELOPMENT As Director of Personnel Development for the 5000 employees in th~ American Sy~-m, resea~hcd, designed and faci~ programs from bazic supe~so~ training throu~ senior managem~ institutes. Developed technical tr~inin~ progran~ in such diverse areas as pumpin~o lin'ge main br~ks, and nmm~ging the production ~ function Developed and facilitated train-the tm/a~r programs tot ~amdarda md pofformance and appra/sal pro~'an~, lead/n8 conferences and non-e~empt cmploye~. In 1999 and 2000 assis/gd in developing Anmdcan Systgm's LEAD ~p, ev~,~on, and ~"v~opm~t) ~ngram. This effort helped identify tim existing skills and developmental nee. ds of ! 50 associates that could ascend to 21 critica/leadmship positions in American. Developed and fadlita~l training progntms for plant opcnttor training for Iowa and Hltnois Departments of Environmental Protection on topics ransqng fi~:~m Protecting Surface and Groundwalcr sources of Supply to Maiming, Basic Hydraulics, and Pumping. NATIONAL PRESENTATIONS Frequent national p~r at professional conferences (AWWA, WEF, AWWA/WEF. ASTD, AIMRA, NETA) on subjects such 85 "Putting Pizzazz into Yom' Presentations," 'Cn:tting iht Most out of Your Team," "Is Automatic M~ter Rmu//ng in Yom' Future?' Frequent university guest speaker (Hlinois, Utah, Florid~ State, Florida, California Sram at San Bernardino) on topics ranging from "Performance Management" to "Dealing with Abusive Cus~mlers" and "Identifying Strengths and Flat Spots in Yom' Team." STATE & NATIONAL LEADKRSFIIP Leadership in professional orgnnizatiom hnz included chaidn8 AWWA's Management Dev~lopmem Committee, chairing ASTD's national Ut/l/t/es Special/nterest Group, serving as A,qTD chapter presidem, serving o~ AMRA's Board of D/rectors and nn.,~,! conference ptamm~ commitme, and srrving on the AWWA Technical Trniniqg StdgommiRe~ ~ tile AWWA Wolman Institute Ad Hoc Committee. Community leadership has included serving as JC chapter prcsldent (mccived .lC Distinguished S~rvice Award), chairing two United Way mmpaigna, sea'vlng on two hospital advisory boarda, serving on the Monmouth University MBA Advisory Committee, and n:c¢iving the American Red · Cross Leadmahip Award. JUL. 3 ~ P.~ ~UL-- 1.8--2002 08:24 PM EDUCATION MA in Mana~ettt, Wcb~er Un/v~sity BS in Bus/ness ~ Calfforum Sm~e Univ~sity a~ Long l~ch Q.GRADY MIN6R 941992012975 07/10 '02 15:53 N0.557 Heyward E. Boyce 88 Madagascar Court Marco Island, Flodda 34145 July 19, 2002 Collier County Water and Wastewater Authority 3301 Tamiami Trail East Naples, Flodda 34112 Dear Sir: Please accept my application for membership on the Board of the Utility Authority. With some experience in water and wastewater matters in the County and registration as a Professional Engineer in the State, I believe this places my credentials in the "technical" category. Sincerely, Cc: AWM HEBIsp HEYWARD E. BOYCE, P. E. 88 Madagascar Court Marco Island, Florida 34145 (941) 394-7246 marcoboyce~juno.com 1992-2002 Director of Physical Plant, Bentley Village, Naples, Florida Organized and directed the first controlled maintenance operation for the building, grounds and golf course complex of the premier Hyatt retirement community. 38 major structures, 150 + acres, $5 million expense budget, $2 million capital budget. Supervised seventy employees in six deparilnents. 1986-1992 Collier County Compliance Services Manager, Naples, Florida Played key role in creating the "One-Stop-Shop" organization for land development and buiiding construction permitting and occupancy certification. Headed the building, engineering and environmental permit inspection, contractor licensing and land use code compliance staff of 57 employees. 1980-1985 Wilson, Miller, Barton & Peek, Inc., Naples, Florida Manager of subsidiary company (PCM, Inc) for construction management of development projects and resident engineer for a variety of water, sewer, storm water and road projects. 1980 Turtle/White Constructors, Inc. Marco Island, Florida Project Manager for an $11 million high-rise condominium building (17 story, 384,000 sq. ft.) during foundation through 9d~ floor. Developed closely integrated schedule resulting in achievement of six days per floor cycle. Emphasis of assignment was field supervision of own forces and subcontractors, with buy-out negotiation, cost control, material flow and schedule management. 1979-1980 Chief of Quality Control and Project Manager for a $12 million, 17 building, Barracks, gymnasium and dining facility complex at Ft. Bragg, NC, joining general contractors' team at the 70 % stage through turnover. EDUCATION: MSCE (Construction) Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA BCE Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY BS United States Naval Academy, Annapolis, MD TAU BETA PI and CHI EPSILON Engineering Honorary Societies Registered Professional Engineer - State of Florida/Cert. No. 24023 Application for Advisor).' Committees/Boards Y Are yOU a r~blered voter ia C:o~¢r (hmn~': Ye~ ~ N'o De you ~urteady hold public 0~¢~? glca~ Iai your ¢nmmunJly acfivilies (clv~ clubs, ueigh~r~ed associadoJJs, etc. ami ~siliofls ............. t~ ....... ~...~~ _.. ....... ~ --~-~~.~ ~---~.~.~ ~ ' ................. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER(S) TO THE CONTRACTORS' LICENSING BOARD OBJECTIVE: To confam the City of Naples appointment- of 1 member in the category of Specialty Contractor, expiring on June 30, 2005, to the Contractors' Licensing Board. CONSIDERATIONS: This 9 member board determines the qualifications of applicants for the various categories of the Contractors' Certificates of Competency. They also hold hearings to determine ii'the holder of a certificate of competency of any contractor, master or journeyman should be disciplined. A minimum 3 members shall be in the category of "Consumer". The consumer representatives may be any resident of the local jurisdiction that is not, and has never been, a member or practitioner ora profession regulated by the board or a member of any closely related profession. Section 3.1.1 of Collier County Ordinance No. 90-105, as amended, provides for a minimum of two members of the Contractors' Licensing Board to be residents of the City of Naples or to be recommended to the Board of County Commissioners by the Naples City Council. Members are required to fde a Form 1 Statement of Financial Interests each year with the Supervisor of Elections. Terms are 3 years. A list of the current membership is included in the backup. The term for Gary F. Hayes (Specialty Contractor) expired on June 30, 2002; the term for Sara Beth White (Consumer) expired on June 30, 2002; and, there is currently a vacant position representing a Consumer category expiring on June 30, 2003. A press release was issued and resumes were received from the following 4 interested citizens: APPLICANT CATEGORY DIST ELECTOR ADV. COMM. Gary F. Hayes/re-appt. Specialty/Plumbing 4 Yes Contractors' Licensing Board Jeffrey Frantz Specialty/Masonry Contractor 5 No None Barton C. Mercer Developer 4 Yes None Erie D. Guite City of Naples/Specialty 4 Yes None COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Q?~si Judicial - No Recommendation. The City of Naples has appointed Eric D. Guite as a Specialty Contractor. NOTE:"Section Seven (B) of Ordinance 2001-55 states "Terms of office for Board members shall be limited to two consecutive terms of service on any one Board..." Under (D) of the same section, it is noted that "By a unanimous vote of the Commission, the limitations set forth in subsection (B) above may be waived". According to available records, Mr. Gary Hayes has served 2 full terms. Should the Board wish to re-appoint Mr. Hayes, the limitations on two consecutive terms will need to be waived. FISCAL IMPACT: NONE GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: NONE AOxENDA ITEM 3UL 3 O I RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners co,.nfu'ml~ City of Naples appointment of Eric Guite as a Specialty Contractor and direct the Count:y A-ttlmaey to prepare a resolution confirming the appointment. Prepared By: Sue Filson, Executive Manager Board of County Commissioners Agenda Bate: JUNE 25, 2002 06/2412002 09:27 94i4344704 NAPLESCITYCLERK PAGE 02 Regular Meeting of Wednesday, June 19, 2002 Page 8 This document is promulgated solely for tile purpose of providing a brief reference to City Council action, It is not to be construed as eke minutes of tile City Council meeting or in any way the official record of said meeting. · 16 Resolutions 24. Consider appointing members to the · City Clerk following boards/committees: 24-a-1). 02-9712 Otlartvelt) / 7-0 (a) Citizens Advisory Committee for the 24-w.2) 02-9713 (Fryer) / 7-0 East Naples Bay Special Taxing 24-a-3) 0~.-9714 (TobyO / 7-0 District (5) 24-a-4) 02-971,5, (Barnett) / 7-0 (b) Code Enforcement Board (2) 24-a-$) 02-9716 (White)/7-0 (c) Community Services Advisory Board 24-1,-1) 02-9717 (Chorlton) / 7-0 (3) 24-b-2) CONT][NUE to ~21/02 (d) Moorings Bay Special Taxing FFiseman/Taytor/7-0 District Advisory Committee (l) 24-c-1) 02-9718 (Mercer)/5-2 ~ (e) Collier County Contractors Licensing (Russell' and Maclivaine dissenting) Boaxd (1) 24-c-2) CONTINUE to g/21/02 (f) StaffAction Committee (FiPda Galleberg / Russell / 7-0 Avenue Representative (1) 24-c-$) CO..NTINUE to 8/21/02 (g) Heart of Naples Committee (3) Taylor/Herms / 7-0 24-d) 02-9719 (Rozzi) / 7-0 ~ 24-e-D 02-9720 (Guile) / 7-0 24-e-2) CONTIIVU£ to 8/21/02 Wiseman / ~lacllvaine / 7-0 24-f-1) 02-97.21. (Thomas) / 7-0 24-f-2) Added Item 02.9722 (Kovac_s) 24-g-1) 02-9723. (Jones) Macll~atne / Wiseman / %0 24-g-2) 02-9724, ($anger) Macllvaine / MacKenzie / 7.0 24-g-3) 02-9725 (NicMoO Macllvaine / MacKenzie / 7-0 ,Resolution 25. Consider approving an Agreement to · Community Services furnish and plum trees and palms and 02-9711 directing that the Fleischmann maintain plant material on designated stree! Park project be completed first from the fights-of-my \ Vendor: Stahlman $100,000 allotted with the remainder Landscape Co., Inc., Naples, FL \ Cost: expended on street rights-of-way $100,000.00 (not to exceed) \ Funding: W"tseman./ Taylor / 6-1 flIerms dissenting) CIP #01 WI4. Added Item 26. Attorney/client session with reference to AUTHORIZE City Attorney to continue Hamilton Harbor liligation. negoti~ions witk Collier Enterprises in all matters related to Hamilton Harbor W~tseman / Russell / 7-0 COM-MLrNITY DEVELOPMENT dr ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DMSION BUILDEVG REVIEW AND PE~G 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 341o4 MEMO RAND U M ~C~-~ JUN 0 3 200Z DATE: May 30, 2002 tto~r~t ~f ¢oo~rt.~ Co~t~issioner~ TO: Sue Filson, Administrative Assistant Board of County Commissioners FROM: Ed Perico, Director ~ Building Review & Permitting Department SUBJECT: Contractors' Licensing Board I have reviewed the resumes for the Contractors' Licensing Board and listed the specific categories they are qualified for. They are as follows: Gary Hayes Plumbing 299 Airport Road N. Naples, FL 34104 If I can be of further assistance please do not hesitate to contact me at 403-2442. JL~L. 3 0 Z?~ ~ ~_cf _ COMMUNITY DEVEI OPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION BUILDING REVIEW AND PERMITTING 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34~o4 MEMORANDUM DATE: June 10, 2002 TO: Sue Filson, Administrative Assistant Board of County Commissioners FROM: Ed Perico, Director Building Review & Permitting Department SUBJECT: Contractors' Licensing Board I have reviewed the resumes for the Contractors' Licensing Board and listed the specific categories they are qualified for. They are as follows: Jeffrey Frantz Specialty Contractor 561 2nd Street, N.E. Naples, FL 34120 Barton C. Mercer Consumer 273 10~h Avenue South Napl. e.s, FL 34102 IfI can be of further assistance please do not hesitate to contact me at 403-2442. Contractors Licensing Board Work Phone Appt'd Fxp. Date Te~m Name Home Phone DateRe-appt 2ndExpDate 2nd Term Mr. Kenneth Lloyd 430~900 09/11/01 06/30/04 3 Years 5408 Freeport Lane 594-8685 Naples, FL 34119 District: 3 Category: Consumer Mr. Gary F. Hayes 643-2431 09/26/95 06/30/96 -lYear 341 Airport Road North /~ ,~[3-.57t4,~05/25/99 06/30/02 3 Years Naples, FL 34104 District: 4 Category: Specialty Contractor/Plumbing Mr. Kenneth H. Dunne 571-5280 11/27/01 06/30/04 3 Years 133 Sharwood Drive 594-0269 Naples, FL 34110 District: 2 Category: Engineer Mr. Michael D. Baril 642-8755 11/27/01 06/30/04 3 Years 832 Rose Court Marco Island, FL 34145 District: 1 Category: General Contractor Mr. Walter Mitchell Crawford, I 596-0291 06/13/00 06/30/03 3 Years 1280 Venetian Way 597-9604 Naples, FL 34110 District: 2 Category: General Contractor Mr. Richard E. Joslin, Jr. 455-5000 06/11/96 06/30/97 I Year 595 13th Street, N.W. 06/13/00 06/30/03 3 Years Naples, FL 34120 District: 5 Category: Licensed Commercial Pool/Spa Contr Wedn~sda)', ~ay 29, 2002 Page I of 2 t ! Contractors Licensing Board Work Phone Appt'd Exp. Date Term Name Home Phone DateRe-appt 2ndExpDate 2nd Term Ms. Sara Beth White $71-334§ 05/25/99 06/30/02 3 Years 346 Pirate's Bight 649-8828 Naples, FL 34103 District: 4 Category:. Consumer VACANT 06/30/03 Naples, FL 34119 District: 3 Category: Consumer Representative Mr. Les Dickson 514-1100 06/11/96 06/30/99 3 Years 202 Monterey Drive 05/28/02 06/30/05 3 Years Naples, FL 34119 District: 3 Category: Roofing Contractor This 9 member board was created by Ord. No. 78-2, 85-42, 90-105, 92-61 to determine the qualifications of applicants for the various categories of the Contractors' Certificates of Competency. They also hold headngs to determine if a certificate of competency of any contractor, master or journeyman should be revoked. A minimum of 2 members shall reside within the corporate city limits of Naples or shall be recommended to the BCC by the Naples City Council. FI Stat, Sec 489.131, sub 10 states that 3 members must be consumer representatives. Membership should be licensed architect, licensed general contractor, licensed engineer, licensed electrical contractor, licensed plumbing contractor, licensed roofing contractor, licensed residential or building contractor and a licensed representefive from one of the other specialty trades or prof_~ts__ions requiring a Certificate of Competency as provided in the Ordinance. These categories are merely directory and failure to have a member of each of the trades is not grounds for voiding any action of the Board. Terms are 3 years. This is a Quasi Judicial Board. Amended bv Ordinance No. 94-34. 95-11.97-68. 99-45. 2002-21 F£ STAT 489 Sta.~.' Ed Perico, Building Review & Permitting Director:: 403-2400 IVednesday, May 29, 2002 Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM DATE: May 24, 2002 TO: Elections Office FROM: Sue Filson, Executive Manage~,/,j Board of County Commissioners- RE: Voter Registration - Advisory Board Appointments The Board of County Commissioners will soon consider the following individuals for appointmem to one of the county's advisory committees. Please let me know if those listed below are registered voters in Collier County. Also, please list the commission district in which each applicant resides. CONTRACTORS' LICENSING BOARD COMMISSION DISTRICT Gary F. Hayes ~ ~' 299 Airport Road, N.~ Thank you for your help. r."'-.2,.' .-_, ,?--. ~ .-~'~ ~un 19 02 OB:~3a Sue Filson 941-??4-BBB5 p.1 MEMORANDUM DATE: .1',]ne 19, 2002 TO: Elections O~ce ~olr4 0F CoUaZ] C0m~ss~oners I~OM: Sue Filson, Executive Manage~~' Board of County Cornm(ssioners R~: Voter Registration - Advisor7 Board Appointments The B~ard of County Con~sioners ,,viii soon consider the following individuals for appointment to one of the county's advisory committees. Please let me know if'those ]~ed below are registered voters in ColUer County. AJso, please list thc con~dssion district in which each applicant resides. CObFI'RACTORS' LICENSFNG BOARD COM~SSION DISTRICT Sef~y Frantz 561 2"~ Street, N.E. Naples, 1~ 34120 273 10* Avenue, S. Naples, FL 34102 Thank you for your help. AGENDA P~- ,,, ~ 05/30/2002 18: 4i 94i43~70~ N~PLESCITYCLERK P~GE ~2 MAY ~ 0'2002  cl~ OF NAPLES ~pp~ca~ for Volun~r .~ y~u c~Ioycd ~ ~ City of Naples o~ A~ ym~ rc~ ~o ~yo~ ~plo~ ~ the C~ ~Nipla7 ~ O _ ~ ym~ now ~e, or ~vc ~u ~e~ ~. 85/30/2002 18:41 9414344784 NAPLESCITYCLERK P,~GE 83 05/38/2002 88:1~ 9414839365 I:~,OGIBES~V~ T~LE ~,,-,r_ uz Maine MEMORANDUM DATE: June 10, 2002 TO: Ed Perico, Building Review & Permitting Director FROM: Sue Filson, Executive Manage. r~, Board of County Commission~ RE: .Contractors' Licensing Board As you know, we currently have vacancies on the above-referenced advisory committee. A press release was issued requesting citizens interested in serving on this committee to submit a resume for consideration. I have attached the resumes received for your review as follows: Jeffrey Frantz 561 2~ Street, N.E. Naples, FL 34120 Barton C. Mercer 273 10t~ Avenue, S. Naples, FL 34102 Please categorize the applicants in areas of expertise. If you have any questions, please call me at 774-8097. Thank you for your attention to this matter. SF Attachments Pg._ _ / ,.~..., 05/30/2002 10:41 9414344704 NAPLESC:[TYCL. ERK P~..~E ~4 85/2912002 It :00 541-~96o7785 I c~ o[~.p~ Cl~ O~ NAPLES ~pph~ation for Volunteer ~ice CI~ CLE~ ~ you now ~old public office?_~_, fl'~. whn~ .~ }ou emp[oyod by ~h~ City o.f Na~le, ~' ~Y ol~er $ov~m~al ~y'? .. ~ .... I( ~. wba; is~&t bo~'d or I Pl~a~e L,~c~' v~. ~omm~mi~. ncti~qics (ci~c ctuh~, neishbo~d ~ss~imjons.. etc. ) _ Board of County Commissioners 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 (941) 774-8097 Fax: (941) 774-3602 Application for Advisory Committees/Boards Board or Committee Applied for: ~/7'/'~C~/'~' Z/'C~'/tY~'~'~'l,/q ~O~ Category (if applicable): Example: Commi~-~ion District, Developer, environmentalist, lay person, etc. Are you a registered voter in Collier County: Yes k//~' No Do you currently hold public office? Yes No ff so, what is that office?. Do you now serve, or have you ever served, on a Collier County board or committee? Yes No If yes, please list the committees/boards: ~ Please list your co)a~nunity activities (civic clubs, neighborhood associations, etc. and positions held: /~//al~'~ ~ ,11 // /~ Please attach any addL~_onal information you feel pertinen~ This application should be forwarded to Sue Filso, Board of County Commi~sioner~, 3301 East Tamiami Trai~ Naples, FL 34112. If you wish~ please fax your ap~ e-mail to suefilson@colliergov, net. Thank you for volunteering to serve the citizens of Collier County. Barton Clay Mercer Chief Operations Officer for Circle R Properties, Inc. Naples, Florida (239) 404.8085 Geographical History Bom in Norfolk, Virginia December 8, 1973. · Raised in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia. · Relocated to Parris Island in April of 1992. · Relocated to Winter Park, Florida in August of 1994. · Relocated to Naples, Florida in June of 1998. Educational Background · Associate of Ar~s, Blue Ridge Community College in Wyers Cave, Virginia. · Bachelor's Degree of Political Science received from Rollins College in Winter Park, Florida Military Service · United States Marine Corps--Honorable Discharge. o Position Held: Assistant to Regimental Command of Parris Island, SC. o Duties Performed: Boot Camp Curriculum Developmem, Office Management, and Clerical. Community and Government Experience · State Attorney's Office, Orlando, Florida--1995. o Position Held: Law Imem and Assistant to Time Berry, head of the Traffic Prosecution Division. o Duties Performed: Legal research, Forensic Research, Deposition Analysis, Pre-Trial Conferences, Case File OrganiTation. · Corporation Counsel, Washington, DC--1996. o Position Held: Law Intern with Juvenile Prosecution Division- o Duties Performed: Legal Research, Case Work-up, and Evidence J~'L 30200.! pg..,, ~-" Professional History · Equities Account Executive, Hall & Associates, Inc. Mar '98 - Oct '00. o Business: Equities and Options on Equities Trading. · Investment Analyst, JBM Realty Advisors, Inc. Oct '00 - Jan '02. o Business: Analysis and Sales of Multifamily Real Estate. · Chief Operations Officer, Circle R Properties, Inc. Jan '02 - Present. o Business: Residential Developer. Personal Recommendation Please see attached Letter of Recommendatiort Historical Verification Contacts · Tim Berry, Esq., former head of Traffic Prosecution for the State Attorney's Office of Orlando, Florida. o (407) 426-9020 · Eric Hall, former Presidem and CEO of Hall and Associates, Inc. o (239) 641-3650 · Ronald P. Victor, President and CEO of Circle R Properties, Inc. o (239) 430-7571 2002 06/04/2802 09:12 5482981054 VA IND PLASTICS PAGE 81 05/28/02 In l~gard to: Recomn~ndation of Mr. Barton C. Mcrccr. To Whom It May Concern: My name is Randell Snow. I have been a rn~mbcr of thc El~on Ruritan Club ~or many y~ars, and now hold thc office of Treasurer, of the Elkton, Virginia ct~oter of the Ruritan Club. I am also a Town Councilman in Elkton. Mr. Mercer telephoned me May 234, 2002, to inquir~ if I would agree to write him a recommendation lc~er for thc purposes of joining the Collier County Histodc. al Society Bom-d of Directors. Having known Mr. Mercer and his family for many years, I was morc than happy to oblige. Thc pr~scnce felt by our community from his family's involvement in their chm'ch and community service is generations old. Mr. Mcrccr communicatcd to mc ofhi~ desires and i~teni for involvemgnt in thc community to which he now calls horrg---Naples, Florida. I canno! think of anyone from s better background of s~rong moral chm'actcr and scnse of civic duty than for whom I am wriiing this letter. I firndy believe Mr. Mercer will be a vital asset in your organization, as w~ll as Naples a~ a whole. Therefore, ii is with great pleasure and pride ihal 1 recommend 1VIz. Mcrccr. Randcli Snow RuriUm Club Tre~urer Council Member, Elkton, Virgini~ MEMORANDUM DATE: May 24, 2002 TO: Ed Perico, Building Review & ~m~ Director FROM: Sue Filson, Executive Manager~,,/~' Board of County Commissioner~ RE: Comractors' Licensing Board As you know, we currently have vacancies on the above-referenced advisory committee. A press release was issued requesting citizens interested in serving on this committee to submit a resume for consideration. I have attached the resumes received for your review as follows: Gary F. Hayes 299 Airport Road, N. Naples, FL 34104 please let me know, in writing, the recommendation for appointment of the advisory committee within the 41 day time-fi.me, and I will prepare an executive summary for the Board's consideration. Plea~.~ategorize the applicants in areas of expertise. If you have any questions, please call me at 774-8097. Thank you for your attention to this matter. SF Attachments Board of County Commissioners Naples, FL 34112 C~z~V~? (941) 774-$O97 Fax: (941) 774-3602 ~,,..,, ~ ~ 2~2 ~rd of ¢0o~rt~ ~n~ss~o~ ~@pBcation for ~d~o~ Committccs/Board~ Home~ddress:o~ ~/~~ ~ ~ ~. ~~ ~ipC~: Fa~ ~o.~~~ ~ B~i~ ~on~:~-~- ~ ~/ ~ma~ addF~:~~ ~ardorCommi,~Xppliedfor: ~~(/~C~~ ~ [~~/~ Cat~o~ (ifa~li~ble): Are you a r~ter~ voter in Coflier CounW: Y~ ~ No ~ you c~rently hold public o~ce? Yes ~ No Do you now ~ or have you ever se~, on a Collier Coun~ ~ or c~mi~? Y~ lfy~ple~el~tthecommi~e~s: ~ , ~L ~i~ .~.~ Please list your community activities (civic clubs, neighborhood associations, etc. and positions held: ~ucatio.: /6~ a £ 5 1 I Please affack any ~g__~!~,nal inform~_n~_ n you fe~ ~ ~ ~p~n s~ ~ fo~ ~ ~e ~o~ ~ M~ W ~e ~d of ~ ~~, 3301 ~ T~ T~ N~, ~ 3411Z If yo~ ~ p~e f~ y~ ~p~n ~ (941) 77~3~2 or ~ ~ su~o~~.~ ~ you for v~ ~ s~e ~e ~ of ~ Cou~. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Approve the service contract of the County Manager Objective: To obtain Board approval of the service contract for the County Manager. Consideration: The County Manager tenured his resignation to the Board of County Commissioners on May 17, 2002. On May 28, 2002, the BCC approved his last duty day of July 15, 2002 along with the selection of the Deputy County Manager to be the Acting County Manager until the Board selects a permanent County Manager. At the May 28, 2002 BCC meeting the board decided to (1) secure and retain the services of Deputy County Manager as the Acting County Manager starting on July 15, 2002 and to provide inducement for him to remain in such employment until a County Manager is selected and employed by the County; (2) to assure the Deputy County Manager could apply for the County Manager position and if not selected would revert back to the Deputy County Manager. At the June 25, 2002 BCC meeting the board decided to select the Deputy County Manager as the next County Manager and directed that the County Manager Contract be negotiated with the Chairman and presented to the board at the July 30, 2002 BCC meeting. In the interim, the County Manager designee would be governed by an Acting County Manager Contract approved by the Board at the June 25, 2002 meeting, agenda item 16.G. 1. The New County Manager contract has an annual salary of $150,000. This contract uses a term 'universal' leave to replace vacation, sick and personal leave time. The contract is attached. Fiscal Impact: Funds are appropriated in the County Manager's office operating budget. GROW'rH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no Growth Management Impact associated with this item. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the County Manager's contract with James V. Mudd and authorize the Chairman to execute same. Acting County Manager COUNTY MANAGER EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of ., 2002, by and between COLLIER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter called "Employer," as party of the first part, and James V. Mudd, hereinafter called "Employee," as party of the second part, both of whom understand as follows: WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Employer desires to employ the services of James V. Mudd as County Manager (County Administrator) of Collier County, as provided by Collier County Ordinance No. 93-72, as amended, and Chapter 125, Part III, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the governing board, hereinafter called "Board of County Commissioners" or "Board," to provide certain benefits, to establish certain conditions of employment, and to set working conditions of said Employee; and WHEREAS, Employee desires to accept employment as County Manager of said Collier County; and NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, the parties agree as follows: Section 1' Duties The Employee shall have the authority, duties and responsibilities as set forth in Section 3 of Ordinance No. 93-72, as such Ordinance has been amended or may be amended or superseded in the future, or as such authority, duties and responsibilities are set forth for a County Manager in Section 125.74, Florida Statutes. Section 2: Term A. Employee agrees to remain in the exclusive employ of Employer for a period of four (4) years and two (2) months, as specified in Section 20, paragraph D herein, from the effective date of this Agreement, and neither to accept other employment nor to become employed by any other employer until termination of employment pursuant to this Agreement. B. On or before September 30th of the year immediately preceding the then ending year of the Agreement, including any applicable extensions, the term of this Agreement may be extended for a period of two (2) years by the mutual written agreement of the Page 1 of 9 Board and the Employee. It is contemplated that the Board will base its decision on the question of whether or not to grant the extension of the term of this Agreement on (1) the Employee's performance and (2) the Employee's ability to successfully achieve goals mutually developed and agreed to by the Employee and the Board. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the end date of the first extension term, if implemented, will be September 30th, so that the term of this Agreement will ultimately correspond with the County's fiscal year. -C. Nearing the conclusion of such four (4) year employment period, and any applicable extensions, the Employment Agreement may be renegotiated by the Employer. The Employee shall be given one hundred-eighty (180) days notice of Board's intent to renegotiate thc Agreement or to allow the Agreement to expire without renegotiation. In the event the Board's notice is not to renegotiate, but for the Agreement to expire, no salary and deferred compensation severance payment nor insurance benefits shall be provided Employee or his dependents upon the expiration of the Agreement. Elements of this Agreement may be changed at any time when mutually agreed upon in writing by the Employer and the Employee. D. Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with the right of the Employer to terminate the services of Employee at any time, subject only to the provisions set forth in Section 4 of this Agreement. E. Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with the right of the Employee to resign at any time from his position with Employer, subject only to the provisions set forth in Section 5 of this Agreement. Section 3: Suspension Employer may suspend the Employee with full pay and benefits at any time during the term of this Agreement, but only iff A. A majority of the Board and Employee agree, or; B. After a public heating, a majority of the Board votes to suspend Employee for just cause, provided, however, that Employee shall have been given written notice setting forth any charges at least ten (10) days prior to such hearing by the Board of County Commissioners' members bringing such charges. Just cause shall include only willful misconduct or willful failure or disregard of Employee's duties under this Employment Agreement. Section 4: Termination and Severance Pay In the event this Employment Agreement with Employee is terminated by the Employer before expiration of the aforesaid term of employment and during such time that Employee is willing and able to perform his duties under this Agreement, then, and only in that event, Employer agrees to pay Employee, in addition to any amounts then due Employee, including any unused leave, a lump sum cash payment within ten (10) working days after the effective date of termination, as follows: B. An amount equal to twelve (12) months of Employee's annual base salary and benefits (universal leave and retirement) at the rate effective on the date of termination, less any normally required deductions, until such time that the Employee is vested/tenured in the Florida Retirement System. C. After such time that Employee is vested/tenured in the Florida Retirement System, an amount equal to six (6) months of Employee's annual base salary and benefits (universal leave and retirement) at the rate effective on the date of termination, less any normally required deductions. Employee's individual and dependent health insurance benefits and term life insurance benefits shall also be continued and provided by Employer for a period of six (6) months after termination. In the event Employee is convicted of any felony or of any crime involving moral turpitude, Employer may terminate Employee's employment without notice and without any obligation to pay any aggregate severance sum or to provide post-termination insurance benefits described in the above paragraphs. Section 5: Resignation In the event Employee voluntarily resigns his position with Employer before expiration of the aforesaid term of his employment, then Employee shall give Employer sixty (60) days advance written notice. If Employee voluntarily resigns, providing Employer with less than sixty (60) days notice, Employee shall forfeit any payment for accrued leave otherwise due and owing. Section 6: Disability If Employee is permanently disabled or is otherwise unable to perform his duties because of sickness, accident, injury, mental incapacity or health for a period of four (4) successive weeks beyond any accrued leave, Employer shall have the option to terminate this Agreement, subject to the severance pay requirements of Section 4. Section 7: Salary A. Employer agrees to pay Employee for his services rendered pursuant hereto an annual base salary of~,.,,,,,,,.,v.v,. ¢~ ,:c~ acm ac~ $150,000.00 payable in bi-weekly installments. B. Employer and Employee shall negotiate in good faith to establish, within one hundred and twenty (120) days after execution of this Agreement, a performance based merit system through which the Employee shall be eligible for a merit adjustment upon the successful completion of measurable goals and objectives to be completed or attained by the Employee during the 2003 fiscal year and each fiscal year thereafter during the term of this Agreement. Such annual performance based merit adjustment shall not exceed a maximum of ten percent (10%) of the Employee's annual base salary. The minimum increase for satisfactory performance under such performance based merit system will equal the average percentage salary adjustment provided to all County employees for the given fiscal year or three percent (3%) whichever is greater. All such merit adjustments shall be included in the Employee's base salary. C. On the date that general wage adjustments (i.e., cost of living adjustments, special study pay adjustments, etc.) are granted generally to Collier County employees, Employee's base salary shall be modified to reflect the general wage adjustment granted to other County employees. Section 8: Performance Evaluation The Employer shall review and evaluate the performance of the Employee in accordance with the performance-based merit system as provided in Section 7. Written evaluations based on said performance system will be provided by each County Commissioner to Employee prior to September 1, 2003, and prior to each September 1st thereafter for the term of this Agreement. A summary of all evaluations will be prepared by the Board Chair for the Board and Employee including the recommended merit wage adjustment. A merit system wage adjustment will take effect on October 1, 2003 and each October 1st thereafter for the term of this Agreement. An updated performance merit system for Employee will be developed in good faith between the Board of County Page 4 of 9 ~ Commissioners and Employee and adopted by the Board prior to October 1 st of each fiscal year for implementation in the next fiscal year. Section 9: Hours of Work All duties required hereunder shall be preformed by the Employee personally, or through the assistance of such County employees as may be made available from time-to- time by the County and concerning which the Employee shall assume full responsibility; provided, however, that nothing herein shall be deemed to absolve the Employee of personal responsibility for the duties set forth herein. The Employee shall be "on-call" twenty, four (24) hours a day, available to perform said duties and agrees to make himself available as needed during said period. The manner and means of performance of the duties herein shall be determined by the Employee. All acts performed by the Employee, explicitly or implicitly, on behalf of the County, within the scope of his employment, shall be deemed authorized by the County as its agent, except that any act which constitutes willful misconduct or which may be unlawful shall be deemed to be an individual act of the Employee without authority of the County. Section 10: Outside Activities The Employee agrees to remain in the exclusive employ of the County while employed by the County. The term "employed" as used in this Agreement, however, shall not be construed to include occasional teaching, writing, speaking or consulting performed on personal time off, even if outside compensation is provided for such services. Said activities are expressly allowed, provided that in no case is any activity allowed which would present a conflict of interest with Employer. In the event overnight travel is required for such non-Employer related business, the Board shall be notified in advance. Section 11: Automobile and Cellular Phone Allowance Employer shall provide a car and cellular phone allowance of $550 per month aP, er-m-x~ to the Employee, payable in biweekly installments. Said allowance shall be intended to reimburse him for local travel only, defined as travel within Collier County. All travel outside of Collier County shall be reimbursed at a cents-per-mile rate equal to the Florida statutory allowable rate then in effect. Section 12: Insurance, Vacation, and Sick Leave A. As an inducement to Employee to become County Manager, at signature hereof, Employee shall be credited with the carryover of his accrued vacation and sick leave days to date plus given an additional [ /tan two (2) days into a universal leave account. Employee shall accrue to ~[ · ,~/j his universal leave account an additional thirty (30) days per year, not including County holidays, on a monthly basis of two and a half (2.5) days per month. Employee is highly encouraged to utilize his universal leave days Page 5 of 9 JUL not only for the Employee's individual health and welfare, but also for the increased effectiveness and efficiency of the County as a whole. B. Employer agrees to maintain in force for Employee all health, life insurance or other insurance policies provided by County to its other employees. C. Unused universal leave will be paid at Employee's current rate of salary upon termination, resignation or contract expiration. Employer agrees to put into force and to make required premium payments for Employee for insurance policies for life, accident, disability income benefits, major medical and dental, and dependent's coverage group insurance covering Employee and his dependents. Term life insurance for Employee shall be provided at a level of three times (3x) Employee's annual base salary. Disability insurance income benefits shall be a fifty percent (50%) of Employee's annual base salary. Employee shall continue to have the option of participating in the County Leave Bank. D. Employer agrees that annually, on the Employee's anniversary date of employment with the County, the Employee will be paid for all hours of accrued universal leave that exceed three hundred-sixty (360) hours. E. All provisions of law and regulations and rules of the County relating to holidays and other fringe benefits and working conditions as they now exist, or hereafter may be amended, shall also apply to Employee in the manner that they apply to other employees of the County, in addition to benefits specifically enumerated in this Agreement. Section 13: Retirement Employer agrees to execute all necessary agreements provided by ICMA Retirement Corporation (ICMA-RC) or NACO Public Employees Benefit Services Corporation (as determined by Employee) and the Florida Retirement System for Employee's continued participation in said retirement plans. Employer agrees to pay ~ maximmm allc, waSle ~,w, nual ~T.~,'.'.nt five percent (5%) of Employee's annual salary into the Employee's current retirement fund on Employee's behalf, on the effective date of this Agreement and on the anniversary of said date thereafter, and to transfer ownership to succeeding employers upon Employee's resignation or termination, or to Employee upon his retirement, in accordance with any applicable rules, regulations or laws. The County Manager is designated as a Senior Management Service Class Employee. Section 14: Dues and Subscriptions Employer agrees to budget for and to pay for professional dues and subscriptions necessary for Employee's continuation and full participation in national, regional, state, and local associations and organizations necessary and desirable for his continued professional participation, growth, and advancement, and for the good of the Employer, Page 6 of 9 ~t including but not limited to: International City and County Managers Association, Florida City and County Management Association and the American Society of Civil Engineers. Section 15: Professional Development A. Employer hereby agrees to budget for and to pay for travel and subsistence expenses of Employee for professional and official travel, meetings, and occasions adequate to continue the professional development of Employee and to adequately pursue necessary official functions for Employer, including but not limited to the ICMA Annual Conference, Florida City and County Management Association annual seminar, Leadership Collier, and Leadership Florida. B. Employer also agrees to budget for and to pay for travel and subsistence expenses of Employee for short courses, institutes, and seminars that are necessary for his professional development and for the good of the Employer. Including, but not limited to, attending civil engineering continuing education training (presently eight (8) Continuing Education Units every two years) to maintain the Employee's current professional engineer license in Florida. C. All out-of-state travel not specifically provided for herein shall be pre-approved by the Board. Reimbursement for out-of-county travel shall be as provided by Florida Statutes. Section 16: Indenmification In addition to that required under state and local law, Employer shall defend, save harmless, and indemnify Employee against any tort, professional liability claim or demand or other legal action, including costs and attorneys' fees relating thereto whether groundless or otherwise, arising out of an alleged act or omission occurring in the performance of Employee's duties as County Manager. Section 17: Bonding Employer shall bear the full cost of any fidelity or other bonds required of the Employee under any law or ordinance. Section 18: Other Terms and Conditions of Employment The Board and the Employee shall fix any such other terms and conditions of employment as they may determine from time to time, relating to the performance of Employee, provided such terms and conditions are not inconsistent with or in conflict with the provisions of this Agreement or any other law. JUL Page 7 of 9 Section 19: Notices Notices pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing, transmitted by personal service or by deposit in the custody of the United States Postal Service, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: (1) EMPLOYER: Board of County Commissioners Collier County Govemment Center 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 (2) EMPLOYEE: James V. Mudd 787 Provincetown Drive Naples, FL 34104 Notices shall be deemed effective upon delivery or receipt. Section 20: General Provisions A. The text herein shall constitute the entire agreement between the parties. B. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs at law and executors of Employee. C. This Agreement is a personal services contract and neither this Agreement nor Employee's obligations under this Agreement are assignable. D. This Agreement shall become effective commencing July 30, 2002 providing for an employment termination date of October 3, 2006 unless this Agreement is extended or renegotiated as provided herein. E. If any provision, or any portion thereof, contained in this Agreement is held unconstitutional, invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement, or portion thereof, shall be deemed severable, shall not be affected, and shall remain in full force and effect. UI. 30 21112 Page 8 of 9 ~ ~ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Employer has caused this Agreement to be signed and executed on its behalf by its Chairman, and duly attested by its Clerk to the Board, and the Employee has signed and executed this Agreement, both in duplicate, the month, date and year first above written. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By:. JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN WITNESSES: EMPLOYEE JAMES V. MUDD Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: David C. Weigel; "~"~.(.gOl'''~' Collier County Attorney .NplLibl:492392.l 7/23/2002 JUL 3 I1 i Page 9 of 9 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PROPOSAL TO IMPOSE A TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ON PROJECTS IN THE WHIPPOORWILL AREA (BOUNDED ON THE NORTH BY PINE RIDGE ROAD, ON THE SOUTH BY THE WYNDEMERE SUBDIVISION, ON THE EAST BY 1-75, AND ON THE WEST BY PROPOSED LIVINGSTON ROAD) UNTIL SUCH TIME AS A MASTER PLAN SHOWING PROPOSED INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING AT A MINIMUM, POTABLE WATER DISTRIBUTION, SANITARY SEWAGE COLLECTION, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, AND ROADS, HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this proposal is to delay the development of this area of the County until the infrastructure necessary to serve the entire area has been properly designed, and the expenses involved in constructing that infrastructure are clearly delineated, and the source of the funding of that infrastructure is defined. CONSIDERATIONS: On January 11, 2000, the Board of County Commissioners, acting in regular session, approved item 8(A)3 calling for design of "A sanitary sewer collection system and potable water supply distribution system.., having area-wide benefits ... (and to be).., prorated against all benefiting property owners." The BCC also approved direction to the staff that "Area-wide drainage facilities and appurtenances including land requirements shall be under the control of Collier County. Prorated improvement costs to benefiting property owners shall have been determined and approved by said property owners." The BCC approved all of Staff's recommendations dealing with preparation and implementation of an infrastructure Master Plan. Since that date, no Master Plan has been prepared and no consensus on funding has been reached. FISCAL IMPACT: Properly done, developer funded improvements will have minimum fiscal impact on the County. Any cost to the County would be in terms of Staff time for the different Divisions to review such plans as may be required. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: .--. None. AGEI~A. ITr-~ ._~ ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: There is a slough that runs through the area that is of interest to the South Florida Water Management District. They have reviewed projects in this area with a holistic approach, but discontinuities in the functioning of the slough must be dealt with in a basin-wide plan. HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: None. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Board impose a temporary moratorium on any portion of any project in the affected area of Whippoorwill Road (bounded as previously described) that has not started construction, until the following items are accomplished: 1. A "Master Plan" showing location and size of all potable water distribution, sanitary sewer collection and transmission, and stormwater transmission piping and appurtenances has been prepared. 2. All proposed road rights-of-way that serve the affected PUD's have been identified and provisions made for their inclusion in the County network. 3. An agreement as to how to fund all common infrastructure has been reached. Staff realizes that the seven main affected PUD's are in various stages of planning, design, permitting, and construction, and have a variety of existing or proposed available services (Water, Sewer, Roads). To insure an equitable distribution of cost/benefit, staff wilt take an active part in the necessary meetings. PREPARED BY: STAN CHRZANt~SKI, P.E. DATE SENIOR ENGINEER ::Sv-. } 2 REVIEWED BY: ~HON~AS E. KUCK, P.E. DATE ACTING PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR APPROVED BY: jOs~.~I~liTT' ADMINISTRATOR _ DATE ?C~MMUNITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS. .~9.731 EX SUMMARY/SC/H/EAB Exec. Suture. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE THE PURCHASE ($2,750,000 Purchase Price) OF A 99 ACRE TRACT OF LAND IDENTIFIED AS THE MAJOR SOURCE OF MITIGATION FOR WETLAND IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE LELY AREA STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (PROJECT NO. 31101) OBJECTIVE: Obtain the Board of County Commissioners' approval of a purchase agreement for proposed wetland impact mitigation land that is necessary to proceed with the environmental permitting and future construction of the Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project. CONSIDERATIONS: For many years the County Stormwater Management Department has been working to aquire environmental permits for the Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project. Staff has met with the applicable State and Federal regulatory agencies many times to address various environmental issues related to the project. The latest information submitted to both the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) has received favorable review. As part of the submittal information Staff and the consultant team developed a wetland impact mitigation plan of sufficient detail to show that the net result of constructing the project will not create an adverse impact to the wetlands in the overall drainage basins contingent on the purchase of the subject mitigation lands. The mitigation plan includes the County's proposed acquisition of a 99-acre tract of land in Section 15, Township 50 South, Range 26 East. This tract of land is located on the west side of Collier Blvd. adjacent to and north of the Naples Lakes PUD (a.k.a. Toll Brothers PUD). Staff had originally responded to an agent's sale price offer of $2.4 million, but the owner had not specifically authorized the agent to offer the land for this price and subsequently counter-offered back at $3 million. Two independent appraisal reports requested by Staff valued the property at $2,475,000 and $2,500,000. An offer was then made to the owner of $2,750,000 that is ten percent above the $2,500,000 appraisal and mid-way between the previous offer of $2,400,000 and counter-offer of $3,000,000. In the most recent written response from the SFWMD, the County has been informed that we must provide "proof of financial assurances to complete the proposed mitigation." Purchase of these lands at this time would be sufficient assurance of the County's intent to mitigate the project. Before any drainage structure construction activity can commence, even if approved permits are in the County's possession, the County must own the proposed mitigation land and provide a perpetual conservation easement to the SFWMD. In a previous Board of County Commissioners meeting, Commissioner Henning enquired about the property also being available for passive recreational use. Both SFWMD and Army C.O.E. have agreed to evaluate minimal impact features such as mulched foot trails that do not impact ,,.... wetland vegetation or wildlife, but the primary function must remain as a wetland mitigatiorI ,, property. - AGEI,~;kA k~F-.M No._ t L/!./ - Executive Summary Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project 99-Acre Mitigation Parcel Lease/Purchase Page 2 FISCAL IMPACT: The purchase of this property is to be funded by a commercial paper loan to be financed over a five year period. The repayment will occur from the General Fund out of the annual General Fund allocations for Capital Improvements. The total cost of purchasing the ~Q property is $2,766,959.50. This includes the purchase price of $2.75 million, plus closing costs (Title Policy $9,450; Environmental Audit $2,500; Recording Fees $19.50; Boundary Survey $5,000) totaling $16,959.50. These additional closing costs of $16,959.50 are available in Fund 325 (1981 Water Management CIP). Source of funding is ad valoram taxes. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The provision of stormwater management facilities to provide increased flood protection for the Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project is in accordance with the Drainage Sub-element and the Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners do the following: 1. Approve the purchase agreement for the 99-acre tract of land in Section 15, Township 50 South, Range 26 East for $2,750,000 for use as wetland impact mitigation for the Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project construction, 2. Authorize the Chairman to sign for the Board after the contract documents have been approved by the County Attorney; 3.Authorize the recordation of documents; and 4.Authorize staff to prepare proper documents to finance the $2.75 million property purchase. SUBMITTED BY: y,..,2~,~.~ Date: Robert C. Wilf~p(, P.E., Principal Project Manager Stormwater Management, TECM REVIEWED BY: ~)'~~ Gregg R. Strakaluse, Director Transport/gtion Engr. & Constr. Department APPROVED BY: ~ "/~, ~ Norman Feder, A.I.C.P., Administrator Trarl~portation Division AGENDA~EM _ i C"J .t_9 JUL 3 0 2002 , pr.j, Z ¢~F~OJECT: Lely Area Storrnwater Improvemer~t (31101) PARCEL ¢: 99 Acre Parcel FOLIO ¢~ 00418560006 AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between STEPHEN M, SAVAGE AND MAYER E. GUTTMAN, AS REPLACEMENT TRUSTEES for the Trust under the Will of Bernard M. Savage, by instrument recorded in O.R. Book 3061, page 2605, Public Records of Collier County, Florida (hereinafter referred to as "Seller"), and COLLIEI~ COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, its successors and assigns (hereinafter referred to as "Purchaser"). WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Seller is the owner of that certain parcel of real property (hereinafter referred to as "Property"), located in Collier County, State of Florida, and being more particularly described in Exhibit '"A", attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference. WHEREAS, Purchaser is desirous of purchasing the Property, subject to the conditions and other agreements hereinafter set forth, and Seller is agreeable to such sale and to such conditions and agreements. NOW, THEREFORE, and for and in consideration of the premises and the respective undertakings of the parties hereinafter set forth and the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00), the receipt and sufficiency of whict~ is hereby acknowledged, it is agreed as follows: I. AGREEMENT 1.01 In consideration of the purchase pdce and upon the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, Seller shall sell to Purchaser and Purchaser shall purchase from Seller the Property, described in Exhibit "A". II. PAYMENT OF PURCHASE PRICE 2.01 The purchase price (the "Purchase Price") for the Property shall be Two Million Seven Hundred and Fifty Thousand Dollars ($2,750,000.00), (U.S. Currency) payable at time of closing. Ill. CLOSING 3.01 The Closing (THE "CLOSING DATE", "DATE OF CLOSING", OR "CLOSING") of the transaction shall be held on or before ninety (90) days following execution of this Agreement by the Purchaser but not later than October 30, 2002, unless extended by mutual wdtten agreement of the parties hereto. The Closing shall be held at the Collier County Attorney's Office, Administration Building, 3301 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, Florida. The procedure to be followed by the parties in connection with the Closing shall be as follows: 3.011 Seller shall convey a marketable title free of any liens, encumbrances, exceptions, or qualifications. Marketable title shall be determined according to applicable title standards adopted by the Florida Bar and in accordance with law. At the Closing, the Seller shall cause to be delivered to the Purchaser the items specified herein and the following documents and instruments duly executed and acknowledged, in reoordable form: JUL 3 0 3.0111 Warranty Deed in favor of Purchaser conveying title to the Property, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances other than: (a) The lien for current taxes and assessments. (b) Such other easements, restrictions or conditions of record. 3.0112 Combined Purchaser-Seller closing statement. 3.0113 A "Gap," Tax Proration, Owner's and Non-Foreign Affidavit," as required by Section 1445 of the Internal Revenue Code and as required by the title insurance underwriter in order to insure the "gap" and issue the policy contemplated by the title insurance commitment. 3.0114 A W-9 Form, "Request for Taxpayer Identification and Certification" as required by the Internal Revenue Service. 3.012 At the Closing, the Purchaser, or its assignee, shall cause to be delivered to the Seller the following: 3.0121 A negotiable instrument (County Warrant) in an amount equal to the Purchase Price. No funds shall be disbursed to Seller until the Title Company verifies that the state of the title to the Property has not changed adversely since the date of the last endorsement to the commitment, referenced in Section 4.011 thereto, and the Title Company is irrevocably committed to pay the Purchase Price to Seller and to issue the Owner's title policy to Purchaser in accordance with the commitment immediately after the recording of the deed. 3.0122 Funds payable to the Seller representing the cash payment due at Closing in accordance with Article III hereof, shall be subject to adjustment for prorations as hereinafter set forth. 3.02 Each party shall be responsible for payment of its own attomey's fees. Seller, at its sole cost and expense, shall pay at Closing all documentary stamp taxes due relating to the recording of the Warranty Deed, in accordance with Chapter 201.01, Florida Statutes, and the cost of recording any instruments necessary to cIear Seller's tithe to the Property. The cost of the Owner's Form B Title Policy, issued pursuant to the Commitment provided for in Section 4.011 below, shall be paid by Purchaser. The cost of the title commitment shall also be paid by Purchaser. 3.03 Purchaser shall pay for the cost of recording the Warranty Deed. Real Property taxes shall be prorated based on the current year's tax with due allowance made for maximum allowable discount, homestead and any other applicable exemptions and paid by Seller. If Closing occurs at a date which the current year"s millage is not fixed, taxes will be prorated based upon such prior year's millage. IV. --REQUIREMENTS AND CONDITIONS. 4.01 Upon execution of this Agreement by both parties or at such other time as specified within this Article, Purchaser and/or Seller, as the case may be, shall perform the following within the times stated, which shall be conditions precedent to the Closing; 4.011 Within ten (10) days after the date hereof, Purchaser shall obtain as evidence of title an ALTA Commitment for an Owner"s Title Insurance Policy (ALTA Form B-1970) covedng the Property, together with hard copies of all (:xceptions shown thereon. Purchaser shall have thirty (30) days from the effective date of this agreement to notify Seller in writing of any objection to title other than liens evidencing monetary obligations, if any, which obligations shall be paid at closing. If the title commitment contains exceptions that make the title unmarketable, Purchaser shall deliver to the Seller written this Agreement. JUL 3 0 2002 4.012 If Purchaser shall fail to advise the Seller in writing of any such ob.iections in Seller's title in the manner herein required by this Agreement, the title shall be deemed acceptable. Upon notification of Purchaser's objection to title, Seller shall have thirty (30) days to remedy any defects in order to convey good and marketable title, except for liens or monetary obligations which will be satisfied at Closing. Seller, at its sole expense, shall use its best efforts to make such title good and marketable. In the event Seller is unable to cure said objections within said time period, Purchaser, by providing wdtten notice to Seller within seven (7) days after expiration of said thirty (30) day period, may accept title as it then is, waiving any objection; or Purchaser may terminate the Agreement. 4.013 Purchaser shall have the option, at its own expense, to obtain a current survey of the Property prepared by a surveyor licensed by the State of Florida- within thirty (30) days of the effective date of this Agreement. No adjustments to the Purchase Price shall be made based upon any change to the total acreage referenced in Exhibit "A", if any. Seller agrees to furnish any existing surveys of the Property, if any, to Purchaser within thirty (30) days of execution of this Agreement. V. APPRAISAL PERIOD 5.01 Purchaser shall have thirty (30) days from the date of this Agreement (Appraisal Period), to obtain the required appraisal(s) in order to determine the value of the Prope~y pursuant to the requirements of Florida Statutes 125.355. 5.02 if Purchaser is not satisfied, for any reason whatsoever, with the results of the independent appraisal(s), Purchaser shall deliver to the Seller within thirty (30) days from the expiration of the Appraisal Period, wdtten notice of its intention to waive the applicable contingencies or to terminate this Agreement. If Purchaser fails to notify the Seller in writing of its specific objections as provided herein, it shall be deemed that the Purchaser is satisfied with the results of ks investigation and the contingencies of this Article V shall be deemed waived. 5.03 Seller acknowledges that if the agreed Purchase Price stated in Paragraph 2.01 exceeds the average of t~vo (2) independent appraisals, if obtained, the Purchaser is required to approve the purchase by an extraordinary vote. If such vote is not obtained, then this Agreement shall terminate and the parties shall bear their own costs. VI. INSPECTION PERIOD 6.01 Purchaser shall have sixty (60) days from the date of this Agreement ("inspection Period"), to determine through appropriate investigation that the Property can be utilized as mitigation lands for wetlands impact and to complete a Phase I Environmental Audit. 6.02 If Purchaser is not satisfied, for any reason whatsoever, with the results of any investigation, Purchaser shall deliver to Seller prior to the expiration of the Inspection Period, written notice of its intention to waive the applicable contingencies or to terminate this Agreement. If Purchaser fails to notify the Seller in writing of its specific objections as provided herein within the Inspection Period, it shall be deemed that the Purchaser is satisfied with the results of its investigations and the contingencies of this Article VI shall be deemed waived. 6.03 Purchaser and its agents, employees and servants shall, at their own risk and expense, have the right to go upon the Property for the purpose of surveying and conducting site analyses, soil borings and all other necessary investigation and inspection prior to Closing. Purchaser shall, in performing such-tests, use due care not to damage the property in any manner. Seller shall be notified by Purchaser no less than twenty four (24) hours prior to said inspection of the Property. ' JUL 3 21]112 VII. POSSESSION 7.01 Purchaser shall be entitled to full possession of the Property at Closing. VIII. PRORATIONS 8.01 Ad valorem taxes next due and payable, after closing on the Property, shall be prorated at Closing based upon the gross amount of 2001 taxes, and shall be paid by Seller. IX. TERMINATION AND REMEDIES 9.01 If Seller shall have failed to perform any of the covenants and/or agreements contained herein which are to be performed by Seller, within ten (10) days of written notification of such failure, Purchaser may, at its option, terminate this Agreement by giving written notice of termination to Seller. Purchaser shall have the right to seek and enforce all rights and remedies available at law or in equity to a contract vendee, including the right to seek specific performance of this Agreement. 9.02 If the Purchaser has not terminated this Agreement pursuant to any of the provisions authorizing such termination, and Purchaser fails to close the transaction contemplated hereby or otherwise fails to perform any of the terms, covenants and conditions of this Agreement as required on the part of Purchaser to be performed, provided Seller is not in default, then as Seller's sole remedy, Seller shall have the right to terminate and cancel this Agreement by giving written notice thereof to Purchaser, and neither party shall have any further liability or obligation to the other except as set forth in paragraph 13.01, (.Real Estate Brokers), hereof. 9.03 The parties acknowledge that the remedies described herein and in the other provisions of this Agreement provide mutually satisfactory and sufficient remedies to eash of the parties, and take into account the peculiar risks and expenses of each of the parties. X. SELLER'S AND PURCHASER'S REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES 10.01 Seller and Purchaser represent and warrant the following: 10.011 Seller and Purchaser have full right and authority to enter into and to execute this Agreement and to undertake all actions and to perform all tasks required of each hereunder. Seller is not presently the subject of a pending, threatened or contemplated bankruptcy proceeding. 10.012 Seller has full dght, power, and authority to own and operate the Property, and to execute, deliver, and perform its obligations under this Agreement and the instruments executed in connection herewith, and to consummate the transaction contemplated" hereby. All necessary authorizations and approvals have been obtained authorizing Seller and Purchaser to execute and consummate the transaction contemplated hereby. At Closing, certified copies of such approvals shall be delivered to Purchaser and/or Seller, if necessary. 10.013 The warranties set forth in this paragraph shall be true on the date of this Agreement and as of the date of Closing. Purchaser"s acceptance of a deed to the said Property shall not be deemed to be full performance and discharge of every agreement and obligation on the part of the Seller to be performed pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 10.014 Seller represents that it has no knowledge of any actiorts, suits, claims, proceedings, litigation or investigations pending or threatened against Seller, at law, equity or in arbitration before or by any federal, state, municipal or other govemmental instrumentality that relate to this agreement or any other property that could, if continued, adversely affect Seller's abilit~a--~..t~;~ . AC-E.,~ ,_i'-g~ .... Property to Purchaser according to the terms of this Agreement. [~ N0,_._ ...... /? /~¢~) l ;' JUL 3 O 2002 10.015 No party or person other than Purchaser has any right or option to acquire the Property or any portion thereof. 10.016 Until the date fixed for Closing, so long as this Agreement remains in force and effect, Seller shall not encumber or convey any portion of the Property or any rights therein, nor enter into any agreements granting any person or entity any rights with respect to the Property or any part thereof, without first obtaining the written consent of Purchaser to such conveyance, encumbrance, or agreement which consent may be withheld by Purchaser for any reason whatsoever. 10.017 Seller represents that it has no actual knowledge of any incinerators, septic tanks or cesspools on the Property; all waste, if any, is discharged into a public sanitary sewer system: Seller represents that they have (it has) no actual knowledge that any pollutants are or have been discharged from the Property, directly or indirectly into any body of water. Seller represents, to the best of its knowledge and without investigation, that the Property has not been used for the production, handling, storage, transportation, manufacture or disposal of hazardous or toxic substances or wastes, as such terms are defined in applicable laws and regulations, or any other activity that would have toxic results, and no such hazardous or toxic substances are currently used in connection with the operation of the Property, and there is no proceeding or inquiry by any authority with respect thereto. Seller represents that they have (it has) no knowledge that there is ground water contamination on the Property or potential of ground water contamination from neighboring properties. Seller represents, to the best of its knowledge and without investigation, that no storage tanks for gasoline or any other substances are or were located on the Property at any time during or prior to Seller's ownership thereof. Seller represents none of the Property has been used as a sanitary landfill. 10.018 Seller has no actual knowledge that the Property and Seller's operations concerning the Property are in violation of any applicable Federal, State or local statute, law or regulation, or of any r~otice from any governmental body has been served upon Seller claiming any violation of any law, ordinance, code or regulation or requiring or calling attention to the need for any work, repairs, construction, alterations or installation on or in connection with the Property in order to comply with any laws, ordinances, codes or regulation with which Seller has not complied. 10,019 There are no unrecorded restrictions, easements or rights of way (other than existing zoning regulations) that restrict or affect the use of the Property, and there are no maintenance, construction, advertising, management, leasing, employment, service or other contracts affecting the Property, 10.020 Seller has no knowledge that there are any suits, actions or arbitration, bond issuances or proposals therefor, proposals for public improvement assessments, pay-back agreements, paving agreements, road expansion or improvement agreements, utility moratoriums, use moratoriums, improvement moratoriums, administrative or other proceedings or governmental investigations or requirements, formal or informal, existing or pending or threatened which affects the Property or which adversely affects Seller"s ability to perform hereunderl nor is there any other charge or expense upon or related to the Property which has not been disclosed to Purchaser in writing prior to the effective date of this Agreement. 10.021 Seller acknowledges and agrees that Purchaser is entedng into this Agreement based upon Seller's representations stated above and on the understanding that Seller will not cause the zoning or physical condition of the Property to change from its existing state on the effective date of this Agreement up to and including the Date of Closing. Therefore, Seller agrees not to enter into any contracts or agreements pertaining to or affecting the Property and not to do any act or omit to perform any act whici~,.,~,~,,'~,F.g~... - I: JUL 3 @ L~~ ~. ~~ ;,,~ ~--:,E~.~.,~,7,''- '~?.?i the zoning or physical condition of the Property or the governmental ordinances or taws governing same. Seller also agrees to notify Purchaser promptly of any change in the facts contained in the foregoing representations and of any notice or proposed change in the zoning, or any other action or notice, that may be proposed or promulgated by any third parties or any governmental authorities having jurisdiction of the development of the property which may restrict or change any other condition of the Property. These representations shall survive Closing. 10.022 Seller hereby agrees that it shall indemnify, defend, save and hold harmless the Purchaser against and from, and to reimburse Purchaser with respect to, any and all damages, claims, liabilities, laws, costs and expenses (including without limitation reasonable paralegal and attorney fees and expenses whether in court, out of court, in bankruptcy or administrative proceedings or on appeal), penalties or fines incurred by or asserted against Purchaser by reason or arising out of Seller's breach of any of the foregoing representations in this Section. This provision shall survive closing and is not deemed satisfied by conveyance of title. 10.023 Any loss and/or damage to the Property between the date of this Agreement and the date of Closing shall be Seller's sole risk and expense. Xl. NOTICES 11.01 Any notice, request, demand, instruction or other communication to be given to either party hereunder shall be in writing, sent by registered, or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: If to Purchaser: Transportation Right-of-Way Office 2685 S. Horseshoe Ddve Suite 214 Naples, Florida 34104 At-tn: Hope Brack With a copy to: Ellen T. Chadwell Assistant County Attorney Office of the County Attorney Administration Building 3301 Tamiami Trail East Naples, Flodda 34112 If to Seller: Stephen M. Savage, Trustee 5318 Brooklawn Terrace Boynton Beach, Florida 33437 With a copy to: Mayer Guttman, Esquire Levin & Gann, P.A. 502 Washington Avenue 8m Floor Towson, Maryland 21204 11.02 The addressees and addresses for the purpose of this Article may be changed by either party by giving written notice of such change to the other party in the manner provided herein. For the purpose of changing such addresses or addressees only, unless and until such wdtten notice is received, the last addressee and respective address stated herein shall be deemed to continue in effect for all purposes. ,' JUL 3 @ 2002 XII. REAL ESTATE BROKERS 12.01 Any and all brokerage commissions or fees shall be the sole responsibility of the Seller. Seller shall indemnify Purchaser and hold Purchaser harmless from and against any claim or liability for commission or fees to any broker or any other person or party claiming to have been engaged by Seller as a real estate broker, salesman or representative, in connection with this Agreement. Seller agrees to pay any and all commissions or fees at closing pursuant to the terms of a separate agreement, if any. XIII. MISCEI,.LANEOUS 13.01 This Agreement may be executed in any manner of counterparts which together shall constitute the agreement of the parties. 13.02 This Agreement and the terms and provisions hereof shall be effective as of the date this Agreement is executed by both parties and shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, personal representatives, successors, successor trustee, and assignees whenever the context so requires or admits. 13.03 Any amendment to this Agreement sha[l not bind any of the parties hereof unless such amendment is in writing and executed and dated by Purchaser and Seller'. Any amendment to this Agreement shall be binding upon Purchaser and Seller as soon as it has been executed by both parties. 13.04 Captions and section headings contained in this Agreement are for convenience and reference only; in no way do they define, describe, extend or limit the scope or intent of this Agreement or any provisions hereof. 13.05 All terms and words used in this Agreement, regardless of the number and gender in which used, shall be deemed to include any other gender or number as the context or the use thereof may require. 13.06 No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless it is in writing signed by the party against whom it is asserted, and any waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be applicable only to the specific instance to which it is related and shall not be deemed to be a continuing or future waiver as to such provision or a waiver as to any other provision. 13.07 If any date specified in this Agreement falls on a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, then the date to which such reference is made shall be extended to the next succeeding business day. 13.08 Seller is aware of and understands that the "offer" to purchase represented by this Agreement is subject to acceptance and approval by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida. 13.09 If the Seller holds the Property in the form of a partnership, limited pa~nership, corporation, trust or any form of representative capacity whatsoever for others, Seller shall make a written public disclosure, according to Chapter 286, Flodda Statutes, under oath, of the name and address of every person having a beneficial interest in the Property before Property held in such capacity is conveyed to Collier County, (If the corporation is registered with the Federal Securities Exchange Commission or registered pursuant to Chapter 517, Florida Statutes, whose stock is for sale to the general public, it is hereby exempt from the provisions of Chapter 286, Florida Statutes.) 13.10 This Agreement is governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida. " JUL 3 @ ~ XIV. ENTIRE AGREt:MENT 14.01 This Agreement and the exhibits attached hereto contain the entire agreement between the parties, and no promise, representation, warranty or covenant not included in this Agreement or any such referenced agreements has been or is being relied upon by either party. No modification or amendment of this Agreement shall be of any force or effect unless made in wdting and executed and dated by both Purchaser and Seller. Time is of the essence of this Agreement_ IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the parties hereto set forth their hands seals, Dated Project/Acquisition Approved by BCC: AS TO PURCHASER: DATED: Al I EST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLOR[DA BY: · Deputy Clerk JAMES IN. COLETTA, Chairman AS TO OWNER: DATED: Witness (Signature) STEPHEN M. SAVAGE, As replacement Trustee for the Trust under the wilt of Bernard M. Savage Name (Print or Type) Witness (Signature) Nam(; (Print or Type) As replao~r~ent Trustee for the Trust ~____~.~r¢_? /. ~._~'._.~ under th~rt~ill of Bernard M. Savage Name (Print or Type) (Signatu~re) Name (Print or Type) App_roved as to form and __. ch ow ...... sistant.County Attorney ? JUL 3 ~ TOTAL P~GE.10 ~ EXI-I~BIT "A" All of that land lying in the North V2 of Section 15, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (North Parcel) described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast comer of Section 15, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, thence along the North line of Section 15, South 87°37'14" West 100.16 feet to the West fight-of-way line of State Road 951 for a PLACE OF BEGINNLNG: then along the West right-of-way Line South 00°51'53'' West 892.87 feet: thence South 87°43'59" West 4870.63 feet to the West line of Section 15; thence along the West line of Section 15, North 00° 15'23" West 882.49 feet to the Northwest comer of Section 15: thence North 87°37'14'' East 4888.46 feet to the PLACE OF BEGINNING. LESS AND EXCEPTING THEREFROM the East 25 feet previously conveyed to Collier County by Special Warranty. Deed recorded in O.IL Book 2487, Page 3087, as re. recorded in O.R. Book 2492, Page 420, Public Records of Collier County, Florida. AG E.N D,tF~EM J>,' 2002 PROJECT: Lely Area Stormwater Improvement (31101) PARCEL No: 99 Acre Parcel FOLIO No: 00418560006 WARRANTY DEED THIS WARRANTY DEED is made this ~ day of 2002, by STEPHEN M. SAVAGE AND MAYER E. GUTTMAN, se replacement Trustees for the Trust under the Will of Bernard M. Savage, by instrument recorded in O.R. Book 3061, page 2605, Public Records of Collier County, Florida, whose mailing address is c/o Mayer E. Guttman, Levin & Gann, 502 Washington, 8t~ Floor, Towson, Maryland, 21204~4525 (hereinafter individually or collectively referred to as "Grantor), to COLLIER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, its successors and assigns, whose post office address is 3301 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, Florida, 34112 (hereinafter referred to as "Grantee"). (Wherever used herein the terms "Grantor" and "Grantee" include all the parties to this instrument and their respective heirs, legal representatives, successors and assigns.) WITNESSETH: That the Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other valuable consideration, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, hereby grants, bargains, sells, atiens, remises, releases, conveys and confirms unto the Grantee, all that certain land situate in Collier County, Florida, to wit: See Attached Exhibit "A" which is incorporated herein by reference. Subject to easements, restrictions, and reservations of record. THIS LAND IS NOT NOW, NOR HAS IT EVER BEEN THE HOMESTEAD PROPERTY OF THE GRANTORS, NOR IS IT CONTIGUOUS TO ANY HOMESTEAD PROPERTY OF THE GRANTORS. TOGETHER with all the tenements, hereditaments and anywise appertaining. ,,~ TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same in fee simple forever. AND the Grantor hereby covenants with said Grantee th~ land in fee simple; that the Grantor has good right and lawful aut ~10¢.~~ ,.~ ~'~ ~.,.c,p~v~-J-Z-. the Grantor hereby fully warrants the title to said land and will de~ of all persons whomsoever; and that said land is free of all encurr IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said Grantor has signed a year first above written. Dated: 2002 AS TO OWNER: Witness (Signature) STEPHEN M. SAVAGE, as Trustee for the Trust under the Will of (Print or Type) Bernard M. Savage, by instrument recorded in O.R. Book 3061, Page Witness (Signature) 2605, Public Records of Collier County, Florida. Name (Print or Type) STATE OF COUNTY OF The foregoing Warranty Deed was acknowledged before me this day of 2002, by, Stephen M. Savage, as Trustee for the Trust under the Will of Bernard M Savage, by instrument recorded in O.R. Book 3061, Page 2605, Public Records of Collier County, Florida who is personally known to me or who has produced as identification. (affix notarial seal) AGE~DAf~M (Signature of Nora (Print Name of No Lry PuD,~JL ~ U 2002 NOTARY PUBLIC Serial/Commissior #: r My Commission E plr~l~ii~. PROJECT: Lely Area Stormwater Improvement (31101 ) PARCEL No: 99 Acre Parcel FOLIO No: 00418560006 AS TO OWNER: Witness (Signature) MAYER E. GU'I-I'MAN, as Trustee for the Trust under the Will of (Print or Type) Bernard M. Savage, by instrument recorded in O.R. Book 3061, Page Witness (Signature) 2605, Public Records of Collier County, Florida. Name (Print or Type) STATE OF COUNTY OF The foregoing Warranty Deed was acknowleciged before me this day of 2002, by, Mayer E. Guttman, as Trustee for the Trust under the Will of Bernard M. Savage, by instrument recorded in O.R. Book 3061, Page 2605, Public Records of Collier County, Florida who is personally known to me or who has produced as identification. (affix notarial seal) (Signature of Notary Public) (Print Name of Notary Public) NOTARY PUBLIC Serial/Commission #: My Commission Expires: AGE~[.D/k~E M JUL 3 0 2002 All of that land lying in the North ¼ of Section 15, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (North Parcel) described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast comer of Section 15, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, thence along the North line of Section 15, South 87°37'14.. West 100.16 feet to the West right-of-way line of State Road 951 for a PLACE OF BEGINNING: then along the West fight-of-way line South 00°51'53' West 892.87 feet; thence South 87°43'59'. West 4870.63 feet to the West line of Section 15; thence along the West line of Section 15, North 00015'23.. West 882.49 feet to the Northwest comer of Section 15; thence North 87°37'14" East 4888.46 feet to the PLACE OF BEGINNING. LESS AN'I) EXCEPTING TI:IEREFROM the East 25 feet previously conveyed to Collier County by Special Warranty Deed recorded in O.R. Book 2,487, Page 3087, as re-recorded in O.R. Book 2492, Page 420. Public Records of Collier County, Florida. AG~DA~J_TE M JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TO ADOPT PROPOSED FY 2003 MILLAGE RATES OBJECTIVE: To adopt the proposed millage rates as the maximum property tax rates to be levied in FY 2003. CONSIDERATIONS: The tax rates hereby adopted must be provided to the Property Appraiser by August 4, 2002 for use in preparing the Notice of Proposed Taxes. Each Collier County property owner will receive this notice, which must be mailed by August 24 under Florida Truth in Millage (TRIM) law. During the September public hearings the Board may maintain or lower millage rates in each taxing unit at the level of the proposed millage rates. The millage rates may not be raised subsequent to this adoption, without meeting additional public notice and advertising requirements. The proposed millage rates and associated tax dollars are included as attachments entitled "Property Tax Rates - FY 03 Proposed" and "Property Tax Dollars - FY 03 Proposed". The proposed General Fund (001) millage rate of 3.8772 is equivalent to $387.72 per $100,000 of taxable value and is the same General Fund millage rate as that levied in FY 02. The proposed countywide millage rate of 3.9119 is equivalent to $391.19 per $100,000 of taxable value or $0.73 less than the adopted FY 02 tax rate, due to a reduction in the proposed Pollution Control millage. · The proposed Unincorporated Area General Fund (111) millage rate of .8069 is equivalent to $80.69 per $100,000 of taxable value and is the same millage rate as levied in FY 02. · The proposed 4.5970 aggregate millage rate, which factors in all special taxing districts, is equivalent to $459.70 per $100,000 of taxable value. Public hearings on the FY 2003 Collier County budget will be held on Thursday, September 5, 2002 and Wednesday, September 18, 2002 at 5:05 p.m. in the third floor boardroom in the W. Harmon Turner building at the County Government Center Complex. During the FY 03 budget workshops, the Board of County Commissioners directed that the County Manager develop recommendations that would provide for a millage neutral General Fund budget (required a budget reduction of $1,581,300) and also fund a $2,000,000 reserve dedicated to road construction. The Board also recommended that consideration be given to budgetary recommendations provided by the Productivity Committee. AGENE~'A ITEM NO. JUL 3 0 2002 On June 25, 2002 the County Manager presented an Executive Summary to the Board of County Commissioners that met the Board's previous policy direction through a combination of recommended budget reductions, revenue enhancements and shifts in funding totaling $5,207,400. (See Attachment B). The total of these recommendations exceeded the Board's policy direction, as it provided for a General Fund reserve dedicated to road construction of $3,626,100. Strong consideration was also given to the Productivity Committee's budget recommendations. Items with an asterisk on the attached spreadsheet amounting to $2,587,300 were recommendations of the Productivity Committee. These changes were incorporated into the recommended FY 03 Collier County budget. However, the consensus of the Board was to bring back the budget adjustments on July 30, 2002 for further discussion. Due to the potential millage implications, the list of budget adjustments was incorporated into this Executive Summary to facilitate one comprehensive discussion regarding budgetary matters. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no Groxvth Management Impact associated with this Executive Summary. FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed General Fund (001) millage rate of 3.8772 is budgeted to generate $153,584,700 in ad valorem tax revenue in FY 03. The proposed Unincorporated Area General Fund (111) millage rate of 0.8069 is budgeted to generate $19,314,500 in ad valorem tax revenue in FY 03. The total proposed tax levy, inclusive of all special taxing districts, is budgeted to generate $182,952,100 in ad valorem tax revenue in FY 03. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: 1. Adopt by Resolution the proposed property tax rates for fiscal year 2003 as detailed in the attachments. Submitted by: //2~[-'~~~~''~~ Michael Smykowski, OMB Director Approved by: -~~' -'~,~/~J Date: Jarl~es V. Mudd, Acting County Manager AGENDA ~___ No. /~ JUL 3 0 2002 pg._ 2.. ! RESOLUTION NO. 2002 - 3 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE COUNTY'S PROPOSED MILLAGE RATES 4 AND SETTING THE PUBLIC HEARING DATES FOR ADOPTION OF THE 2002/03 5 AMENDED TENTATIVE BUDGETS AND 2002/03 FINAL MILLAGE RATES AND 6 BUDGETS. 7 8 WHEREAS, Section 200.065, Florida Statutes, provides the procedure for fixing the millage rates; and 9 WHEREAS, Section 129.03, Florida Statutes, sets forth the procedure for preparation and adoption of the 10 budget; and 11 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has received and examined the tentative budgets for each 12 of the County's funds including all estimated receipts, taxes to be levied and balances expected to be brought forward 13 and all estimated expenditures, reserves and balances to be carried over at the end of the year; and 14 WHEREAS, Section 200.065, Florida Statutes, provides that the Board of County Commissioners shall hold 15 public hearings to adopt the tentative budgets. 16 NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF 17 COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: 18 1. The proposed millage rates as set forth in the attached Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein are hereby' 19 approved as the County's proposed millage rates pursuant to Section 129.03 and 200.065, Florida Statutes. 20 2. The public hearings to adopt the 2002/03 amended tentative budgets and 2002/03 final millage rates and 21 budgets, respectively, pursuant to Section 200.065. Florida Statutes, will be held by the Board of County 22 Commissioners on September 5. 2002 at 5:05 p.m. at the Collier County Government Center. W. Harmon Turner 23 Building, Third Floor Board Room, 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida and on September 18, 2002 at 5:05 24 p.m. at the Collier County Government Center, W. Harmon Turner Building, Third Floor Board Room, 3301 East 25 Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida. 26 This Resolution adopted this 30~' day of July, 2002 after motion, second and majority vote favoring same. 27 ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 28 DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 29 30 31 By: By: 32 Deputy Clerk James N. Coletta, Chairman 33 34 Approved as to form and 3635 l~c~~ David C Weig 37 38 . el ~ AGENDA ITeM 39 Collier County Attorney NO. JUL 3 O 2002 Attachment A Collier County, Florida Property Tax Rates FY 03 Proposed Prior Year Rolled Back Proposed Millage Millage Millage % Fund Title Fund No. Rate Rate Rate Change General Fund 001 3.8772 3.4485 3.8772 12.4°A Water Pollution Control 114 0.0420 0.0374 0.0347 -7.2% ~ 3.9192 3.4859 3.9119 12.2% Total County Wide Millage Rate Unincorporated Area General Fund 111 0.8069 0.7316 0.8069 10.3% Golden Gate Community Center 130 0A330 0.3948 0.2886 -26.9°/, Naples Park Drainage 139 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 #N/A Pine Ridge Industrial Park 140 0.0485 0.0459 0.0516 12.4% Victoria Park Drainage 134 0.1722 0.1593 0.1761 10.5% ,Golden Gate Parkway Beautification 136 0.5000 0.4543 0.5000 10.1% Naples Production Park 141 0.0304 0.0296 0.0238 - 19.6% Vanderbilt Beach MSTU 143 0.0000 0.0000 0.5000 #N/A Isle of Capri Fire 144 1.0000 0.8737 1.5000 71.7% Ochopee Fire Control 146 4.0000 3.6924 4.0000 8.3% Collier County Fire 148 2.0000 1.8700 2.0000 7.0% Goodland]Horr's island Fire MSTU 149 0.7377 0.6372 0.6173 -3.1% 'Radio Road Beautification 150 0.5000 0.4775 0.5000 4.7% Sabal Palm Road MSTU 151 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 #N/A Lely Golf Estates Beautification 152 2.0000 1.8736 2.0000 6.7% Hawksridge Stormwater Pumping MSTU 154 0.0696 0.0652 0.0297 -54.4% ?orest Lakes Roadway & Drainage MSTU 155 1.0000 0.9200 3.0000 226.1% Immokalee Beautification MSTU 156 1.0000 0.9237 1.0000 8.3% Bayshore Avalon Beautification 160 2.0000 1.7764 2.0000 12.6% Livingston Road Phase II MSTU 161 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000 #N/A Parks GOB Debt Service 206 0.0318 0.0285 0.0268 -6.0% Isles of Capri Municipal Rescue 244 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 #N/A Collier County Lighting 760 0.2002 0.1823 0.1653 -9.3% Naples Production Park Street Lighting 770 0.0413 0.0403 0.0420 4.2% Pelican Bay MSTBU 778 0.1994 0.1790 0.1802 0.7% Aggregate Millage Rate 4.5442 4.0418 4.5970 13.74% AGENDA ITEM pg._ Attachment A Collier County, Florida Property Tax Dollars FY 03 Proposed Prior Year Rolled Back Proposed Fund Tax Tax Tax % Fund Title No. Dollars Dollars Dollars Change General Fund 001 129,479,104 136,602,877 153,584,700 12.4% Water Pollution Control 114 1,402,590 1,481,499 1,374,500 -7.2% Total County. Wide Taxes Levied 130,881,694 138,084,376 154,959,200 12.2% Unincorporated Area General Fund 111 16,278,871 17,512,080 19,314,500 10.3 % Golden Gate Community Center 130 424,207 450,877 329,600 -26.9% Marco Island Beautification 131 0 n/a 0 #N/A Pine Ridge Industrial Park 140 16,906 17,177 19,300 12.4% Victoria Park Drainage 134 3,500 3,528 3,900 10.5% Golden Gate Parkway Beautification 136 237,393 244,762 269,400 10.1% Naples Park Drainage 139 0 0 0 #N/A Naples Production Park 141 9,064 9,204 7,400 - 19.6% Vanderbilt Beach MSTU 143 0 0 917,300 #N/A Isle of Capri Fire 144 261,522 266,738 457,900 71.7% Ochopee Fire Control 146 714,764 747,275 809,500 8.3%~ Collier County Fire 148 307,630 307,952 329,400 7.0%I GoodlancL/Horr's Island Fire 149 58,717 59,768 57,900 -3.1% Radio Road Beautification 150 358,351 374,751 392,400 4.7~ Sabal Palm Road MSTU 151 0 0 0 N/A Lely Golf Estates Beautification 152 159,736 160,806 171,700 6.894 Hawksridge Stormwater Pumping MSTU 154 2,600 3,075 1,400 -54.5% Forest Lakes Roadway & Drainage MSTU 155 106,795 106,803 348,300 226.1 O4 Immokalee Beautification MSTU 156 258,226 258,595 280,000 8.3°4 Bayshore Avalon Beautification 160 475,481 477,622 537,700 12.6O4 Livingston Road Phase Il MSTU 161 0 0 1,707,200 #N/A Parks GOB Debt Service 206 856,057 908,725 853,300 -6.1% Collier County Lighting 760 569,544 577,962 524,000 -9.3% Naples Prod. Park St. Lighting 770 12,386 12,576 13,100 4.2% Pelican Bay MSTBU 778 617,221 643,250 647,700 0.7% Total Taxes Levied 152,610,667 161,227,901 182,952,100 Aggregate Taxes 151,754,609 160,319,176 182,098,800 AGENDA ITeM No. ./¢_..._(.,,~__.~- JUL 3 0 2002 Pg._ 3' EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVAL OF TWO INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE CITY OF MARCO ISLAND: FIRST, PROVIDING FOR THE COLLECTION OF COUNTY IMPACT FEES BY THE CITY GOVERNMENT, PROVIDING FOR THE PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION BETWEEN THE TWO ENTITIES OF ROAD IMPACT FEES COLLECTED BY THE CITY, AND PROVIDING FOR REIMBURSEMENTS FROM THE COUNTY TO THE CITY FOR ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE COLLECTION OF COUNTY IMPACT FEES OTHER THAN THOSE FOR ROADS; AND SECOND, PROVIDING FOR RELINQUISHING JURISDICTION FOR COUNTY ROADS 92 AND 92A TO THE CITY OF MARCO ISLAND; AUTHORIZATION FOR THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. OBJECTIVE: To obtain approval from the Board of County Commissioners for two interlocal agreements between Collier County and City of Marco Island (City): 1]. Providing for the collection of County impact fees by the City government, providing for the percentage distribution between the two entities of Road Impact Fees collected by the City, and providing for reimbursements from the County to the City for administrative costs associated with the collection of County impact fees other than those for Roads; 2]. Providing for the County to relinquish jurisdiction over County Road 92 and 92A and obtain Board authorization for the Chairman to sign the interlocal agreements on behalf of the Board of County Commissioners. CONSIDERATIONS: The City of Marco Island was incorporated in 1997 by majority vote of the eligible residents residing within the proposed City limits. During Marco Island's transition to the status of a municipality, representatives of the County and the new City met and discussed numerous fiscal matters affecting both entities. Whereas, the City would take on the responsibility of permitting new residential and commercial construction within the city limits, it was necessary for the two entities to reach agreements on various issues related to the assessment and collection of impact fees. Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Law and Ordinances provides for the assessment of impact fees to provide a revenue source to partially fund capital improvements to the County's various capital facility systems. These impact fees are assessed for new construction in both the unincorporated and incorporated areas of the County. In order to ensure that County impact fees would continue to be assessed and accounted for in an expeditious and efficient manner, the two entities entered into an interlocal agreement on January 19, 1999. Among the provisions of the agreement, the City committed to the collection of all applicable County impact fees as a condition for the issuance of a building permit. The agreement stipulated that the City will retain 60% of the Road Impact Fees collected in each City fiscal year and that the fees retained shall be used for capacity improvements and additions to the transportation network necessitated by road impact fee construction. AGEhlD~ITEM JUl. ~ ~ 2OO2 Approval of an Interlocal Agreement with City of Marco Island Page 2 The County is required by law to ensure that impact fee expenditures are distributed commensurate to impacts on public facilities created by new construction throughout the entire impact fee benefit area. Road Impact Fee District 4, of which the City of Marco Island is a part, covers a large area generally extending south from Rattlesnake Hammock Road and east to the southwestern part of Golden Gate Estates and along the west side of San Marco Road (CR 92) beginning at its intersection with East Tamiami Trail (U.S. 41). In order to initiate a fresh review of growth-related transportation capital project funding needs of the two parties, on June 25, 2002, the Board directed the County Attorney to draft a Notice of Termination pursuant to Section VIII of the Agreement. After negotiations, the County and the City of Marco Island agreed to the terms of the new agreements as follows: 1]. The County will remit One Million Dollars [$1,000,000.00] per year to the City of Marco Island from any available County funds annually for a period of Fifteen [15] years; Marco Island will annually retain the first Two Hundred Thousand Dollars collected from Road Impact Fees and Two Per cent [2%] of all other Impact Fees and remit the remainder to the County; and 2]. The County will relinquish jurisdiction to the City for CR 92 and CR 92A within the boundaries of the City, guaranteeing not to block access to and from the Goodland area. '"~i' FISCAL IMPACT: Termination of the previous interlocal agreement and adoption of the new agreements will ensure that there is a rational nexus between the public facilities system impacts created by new construction and the geographic allocation of impact fee revenues for capital improvement project expenditures throughout the applicable benefit areas. Since FY 99, the City of Marco Island has retained more than $1.6 million in Collier County Road Impact Fees collected as a condition for the issuance of building permits. In the same period of time, the County has contributed nearly $620,000 to the City for transportation capital projects. County impact fee receipts over and above the $1.6 million retained by the City have been used to fund these contributions. The County has also provided the City almost $71,000 in additional contributions funded by gas taxes. The County will provide $1,000,000 dollars annually to the City of Marco Island for the maintenance costs of County Road 92 (CR 92) also known as San Marco Road and County Road 92A (CR 92A) also known as Goodland Road. Payments will be made on March 31st and June 30th of each year for 15 years for a total of $15,000,000 dollars. Funds will come from Transportation Services Funds (Gas Tax, Ad Valorem Tax and Impact Fees). The FY 03 Transportation Budget will need to be revised to include the $1,000,000 payment to the City of Marco Island. This payment will offset any responsibility the County may have, now or in the future, for capital improvements for any roadway segments within the corporate limits of the City. The approval of this amendment will result in a savings to the County for maintenance expenses for approximately five miles of roadway at a savings of approximately $10,000 annually. As a result of these agreements, the future expenditures will be fixed except for the Two Percent [2%] and the sums above the initial Two Hundred Thousand Dollars [$200,000.00], for Roads. Approval of an Interlocal Agreement with City of Marco Island Page 3 GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Adoption of a revised interlocal agreement will contribute toward ensuring that sufficient funds are available for capital improvement projects identified in the Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the interlocal agreements between the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County (County) and the City Council of the City of Marco Island (City), which provides for the collection of County impact fees by the City government, provide for the distribution between the two entities of Road Impact Fees collected by the City, and provide for reimbursements from the County to the City for administrative costs associated with the collection of County impact fees other than those for Roads and relinquish jurisdiction for CR92 and CR92A and that the Board authorize the Chairman to sign the interlocal agreements on behalf of the Board of County Commissioners. Also require the recordation of the two agreements. Sharon kekmah, Accounting Supervisor REV~WED BY: ~pcq~line Hubbhrd Robinson, ~ssistant County A tt~f~v / Joseph K. Sc~m(tt, Administrator ~C~nity ~lopment & Environmental Services Division BY:' ~~~ Date: APPROVED ~7{man E. ~ed~r, AICP, Administrator f ansponation Services Division 20',32 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MARCO ISLAND AND COLLIER COUNTY TRANSFERRING JURISDICTION OF PUBLIC ROADS AND ROAD RIGHTS-OF-WAY WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF MARCO ISLAND This Interlocal Agreement between Collier County and the City of Marco Island made this day of , 2002, by and between Collier County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as "County," and the City of Marco Island, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City." WITNE S S E TH: WHEREAS, on January 19, 1999, the County and the City entered into an Interlocal Agreement to transfer ownership of public roads and road rights-of-way from the County to the City; and WHEREAS, the above referenced Interlocal A~eement exempted from said transfer of jurisdiction certain specific roadway se~mnents identified herein in Exhibit "A" to this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the County and the City a~ee that said exemption is no longer necessary or desirable. WITNESSETH: NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, the above-stated clauses and other good and valuable consideration received and acknowledged by the parties to be sufficient, the County and City agree as follows: 1. The County will henceforth relinquish responsibility to the City for the ownership maintenance and operation of the entirety of County Road 92 (CR 9~ Page 1 ~ ~'~ __~. exists within the boundaries of the City as further described herein and all appurtenances thereto, including, but not limited to its road right-of-way, its traffic signs and pavement markings and its storm water drainage culverts crossing under or along CR 92 from its westerly terminus at the intersection of Collier Boulevard (SR 951) in a generally easterly direction to the western end of the approach to the Goodland Bridge (Collier County Bridge Number 030184, a distance of approximately 24,725 feet (approximately 4.7 miles). 2. The County shall relinquish to the City, henceforth, all ownership, operation, and responsibility for the maintenance of the entirety of County Road 92A (CR 92A), also known as Goodland Road as it currently exists within the boundaries of the City limits, and all appurtenances thereto, including, but not limited to its road right-of- way, its traffic si~s and pavement markings and its storm water drainage culverts crossing under or along CR 92A from its northerly terminus at the intersection of San Marco Road (CR 92) in a generally southerly direction to the City of Marco Island corporate line. a d/stance of approximately 2950 feet (approximately 0.55 miles). 3. The City agees it will not, in any way, impede egess and ingress to the residential and commercial currently unincorporated area known as "Goodland", an area located at the southerly end of CR 92A, currently outside the corporate boundaries of the City and within Collier County, except for temporary closure for maintenance and construction. 4. The County agrees to budget and appropriate on an annual basis and pay to the City the sum of One Million Dollars [$1,000,000.00] per year for a period of fifteen [15] years, in return for the City assuming, from October 1, 2002 and in th2 ~....~[~re all Page 2 maintenance and operational responsibilities for the roadway segments set forth in paragraphs one and two above, and for all roadways within the City as permitted under Florida Law. 5. The City, subject to the limitations of Florida Statutes, Section 768.28, shall indemnify and hold harmless the County its officers and employees from liabilities, damages, losses, and costs, to the extent caused by the negligence, recklessness, or intentional wrongful misconduct of the City and persons employed or utilized by the City in the performance of this Agreement. 6. The County, subject to the limitations of Florida Statutes, Section 768.28, shall Indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers and employees, from liabilities, damages, losses, and costs, caused by the negligence, recklessness, or intentional wrongful misconduct of the County and persons employed or utilized by the County in the performance of this Agreement. 7. The payments shall be made senti-annually, beginning with the first payment in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000) on or before March 31, 2003 and each March thereafter; and the second payment in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000) beginning on or before June 30, 2003, and each June thereafter, until paid in full. 8. The date and method of payments may be changed with the mutual prior written consent of the parties. 9. The source of funding for the County for the payments due pursuant to this Agreement shall be at the sole discretion of the County. ~ 10. The effective date of this Agreement shall be October 1, 2002. - L Z-L) ,JUL Page 3 11. This Interlocal Agreement shall be recorded in the Public Records of Collier County. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these presents to be executed by their respective authorized signatories. DATE: DATE: ATTEST: ATTEST: Dwight E. Brock, Clerk Laura Litzan, City Clerk BY: BY: Deputy Clerk Deputy Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CITY OF MARCO ISLAND COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: BY: James N. Coletta, Chairman Glenn Tucker, Chairman .APPROVED AS TO FORM ANT) LEGAL APPROVED AS TO FORUM & LEGALITY: SLTFICIENCY: Jacq~elin~/~I~ubbard~bbinson ' Kenneth B. Cuyler Assi~ant~ounty Attorney City Attorney EXHIBIT "A" INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE CITY OF MARCO ISLAND REGARDING IMPACT FEES THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of ., 2002, by and between Collier County, Florida (hereinafter called the "COUNTY") and the City of Marco Island, Florida (hereinafter called the "CITY"). WHEREAS, Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances provides for the imposition of impact fees to provide a source of revenue to fund the construction or improvement of parks and recreational facilities, the library system, the emergency medical sen, ices system, roads, correctional facilities and educational facilities system; and WHEREAS, the impact fees provided by the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances and its Land Development Code are imposed in both the unincorporated and incorporated areas of Collier County; and WHEREAS. the COUNTY and CITY are desirous of establishing a uniform procedure for the collection of impact fees whereby impact fees shall be imposed and calculated as provided in Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, and such impact fees shall be paid to the CITY prior to the CITY's issuance of building permits; and WHEREAS, Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances provides that the CITY may enter into an interlocal agreement with the COUNTY that JUL 3 0 2002 1 Pg. provides for the collection of impact fees and the manner in which such impact fees shall be collected and paid; and WHEREAS, the parties agree that it is in the best interest of the COUNTY and the CITY that impact fees imposed on new development be collected and accounted for in an expeditious and efficient manner; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY and the CITY agree that such efficiency can be achieved by the collection of impact fees by the CITY issuing building permits within its municipal boundaries. WITNESSETH: In consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein and other valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is agreed to by the parties, the COUNTY and the CITY a~ee as follows: Section I. A~reement. 1. The above clauses are incol-porated herein and made a part of this agreement. 2. The CITY hereby agrees to assist and cooperate with the COUNTY by collecting impact fees within the boundaries of the CITY pursuant to Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. Section II. Collection and Pa'anent of Fees. The CITY shall require, as a condition to the issuance of all building permits, the payment to the CITY of all required impact fees imposed by the COUNTY or proof of payment or credit for payment of all impact fees imposed by the COUNTY. JUl 3 0 2 Section III. Road Impact Fees. 1. The CITY agrees to assist and cooperate with the COUNTY in collecting Road Impact Fees on behalf of the County pursuant to Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. The CITY shall require, as a condition to the issuance of a Building Permit within the boundaries of the CITY, the payment to the CITY of the Road Impact Fees imposed by the COUNTY. 2. The CITY will retain the first Two-Hundred-Thousand Dollars, [$200,000.00], in Road Impact Fees collected in the CITY during its fiscal year [October 1 through September 30], which shall be used for capacity improvements and additions to the transportation network which are necessitated by development in accordance xvith the provisions of Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. 3. The Road Impact Fees collected by the CITY in excess of the first Two-Hundred- Thousand Dollars [S200,000.00] shall be remitted to the COUNTY in accordance with Section VII of this agreement. 4. hnpact fees remitted to the COU,'NTY pursuant to this Section shall be used for capacity improvements on CITY, COUNTY or State roads within or a~acent to the existing or amended boundaries of Collier County Road Impact Fee District 4 pursuant to Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Law and Ordinances. 5. Representatives of the CITY and COUNTY shall meet at least annually to coordinate and prioritize their respective projects to facilitate and evaluate the effectiveness of capacity improvements funded by the road impact fees. ,AG E[.:J D,A ITEM Section IV. Other Impact Fees. 1. This section shall apply to Regional Parks and Recreation Facilities Impact Fees, Emergency Medical Services System Impact Fees, Library System Impact Fees, Correctional Facilities Impact Fees, Educational Facilities System Impact Fees, and other applicable, subsequently adopted Impact Fees. 2. The CITY agrees to assist and cooperate with the COUNTY by collecting, as set forth in Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, within the boundaries of the CITY, Regional Parks and Recreational Facilities Impact Fees, Emergency Medical Services System Impact Fees, Library System Impact Fees, Correctional Facilities Impact Fees, Educational Facilities System Impact Fees, and any other impact fees that may be adopted by the COUNTTy subsequent to the effective date of this agreement. 3. The CITY shall require, as a condition to the issuance ora Building Permit, the pa3~ent to the CITY of the Regional Parks and Recreation, Emergency Medical Services System, Educational Facilities System, Correctional Facilities and the Library System Impact Fees, as well as any other impact fees that may be adopted by the COU~'NTY subsequent to the effective date of this agreement. 4. The CITY shall be reimbursed by the COUNTY for the costs incurred in the collection of these Impact Fees in an amount equal to two percent [2%] per annum of the amount collected for each respective Impact Fee as compensation for the annual administrative costs of collecting these Impact Fees. 5. Both parties acknowledge and agree that the two percent [2%] reimbursed is adequate to pay for the cost incurred by the CITY for the collection of these fees~ .JUL :3 0 2002 4 including any increase in bonding or surety costs that may result from the handling of these additional monies. 6. The fees collected by the CITY for Regional Parks and Recreation, Emergency Medical Services System, Education Facilities System, Correctional Facilities and Library System Impact Fees, and any other impact fees that may be adopted by the COUNTY subsequent to the effective date of this agreement, shall be remitted to the County in accordance with Section VII of this agreement. Section V. Developer Contribution Credits. The City of Marco Island shall not pant any impact fee credits. Section VI. Review Hearings. Collier County shall conduct any review heatings requested by an applicant or an owner pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. Section VII. Remittance. 1. Road impact fees collected by the CITY in excess of the first Two Hundred Thousand Dollars [$200,000] each fiscal year shall be remitted, without interest, by the CITY to the COUNTY. Payments for the first and second quarters of each fiscal year shall be remitted not later than April 15th annually. Payments for the third and fourth fiscal quarters shall be remitted not later than July 15th and October 15th, respectively, of each fiscal year. 2. All other applicable impact fees collected from developments within the city limits of Marco Island, except road impact fees, shall be remitted, without interest, by the CITY to the COUNTY on a quarterly basis. The remittance of these funds to the AqE.; ~D~,~TE M No lt_~ tr.~ JUL 3 O 2082 5 COUNTY shall take place no later than the fifteenth (15th) of the month following the quarter of impact fee collection. Section VIII. Term. This a~eement shall be for an initial term of twelve (12) months beginning October 1, 2002, through September 30, 2003. This initial term shall be automatically renewed for additional one-year terms commencing October 1 of each year and terminating September 30 of the succeeding year unless one party delivers a written notice of termination to the other party prior to August 1 of each year. Section IX. Rieht of Review. CITY and COUNTY shall each ag-ree to cooperate and shall have the reciprocal right to review the records of the other as to the receipt, allocation, and expenditure of impact fees, including records regarding the issuance of building permits. All such inspections shall be made upon reasonable notice and at reasonable times and places. Section X. Amendments. The COUNTY shall provide written notice to the CITY of amendments to Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances and prior to the effective date of any such amendment and shall provide a copy to the CITY of its Administrative Manual pertaining to impact fees. Section XI. Notices. All notices required under this agreement shall be directed to the following offices: 6 For the COUNTY: Office of the County Manager 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, Florida 34112 For the CITY: Office of the City Manager 50 Bald Eagle Drive Marco Island, Florida 34145 Section XII. Hold Harmless- COU~'NTY. The COLTNTY agrees to hold the CITY harmless from all liability, which may result from the negligent performance of the COU,~NTY's obligations as set forth herein, however this paragraph shall not constitutes a waiver of the County's sovereign immunity pursuant to Florida Stal~ttes, Section 768.28. Section XIII. Hold Harmless - CITY. The CITY agrees to hold the COUNTY harmless from all liability, which may result from the negligent performance of the CITY'S obligations as set forth_herein, done in accordance with the terms of this agreement. Section XIV. This Interlocal Agreement shall be recorded in the Public Records of Collier County. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands and seals the day and year first above written. .tUt_ .., 0 ATTEST: CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARCO ISLAND, FLORIDA BY: Laura Litzan E. Glenn Tucker, Chairman Deputy City Clerk DATED: BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk Deputy Clerk James N. Coletta, Chairman Approved as to form and Approved as to form and legal sufficiency': legality: ~hcqueline Hubbard Robinson Kemqeth B. Cuyler, Assistant County Attorney City Attol-ney A G -~,~ t2~,~T E M _.~ ~ ~3 " JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY STATUS REPORT TO THE BOARD TO PROVIDE A REVIEW OF CURRENT ROADWAY LANDSCAPING ENHANCEMENT ISSUES AND REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING AND TO REQUEST THE BOARD DETERMINE A POLICY FOR CURRENT AND FUTURE ROADWAY ENHANCEMENT INITIATIVES OBJECTIVE: To provide the Board with a review of current landscaping enhancement funding initiatives and to seek policy direction for staff with respect to both current requests and potential future requests for funding of such roadway enhancements. CONSIDERATIONS: Prior to 1997, landscape enhancement projects along roadways in Collier County were funded through private entity initiatives or through agreements between private interests and the Board of County Commissioners. Subsequent to the adoption of the Collier County Streetscape Master Plan (CCSMP) in 1996, the Board funded, wholly or partially, a number of projects as part of the annual budget cycle (Attachment No. 1). In addition, several .M.u. nic. ipal Service Taxing Units (MSTUs) have been formed over the past decade as a result of citizen ~mtxattves for beautification and landscape enhancement of several roadway segments. Currently, there are seven beautification MSTUs, and about a half-dozen existing agreements between Collier County and private entities for beautification enhancements to roadway segments. In addition to these, the following issues and initiatives have recently been brought to either staff or to the Board for consideration: 1. Enhancement of a portion of Airport Road along the frontage of the Tall Pines subdivision. 2. Revisiting the existing Agreement with the Vineyards Development Corporation for maintenance of a portion of the median along Pine Ridge Road. 3. A partnership between the Board and the Pelican Bay MSTU for the landscaping of US 41 North between Gulf Park Drive and Vanderbilt Beach Road. 4. A request from the Livingston Road MSTU Advisory Committee for Board participation on the MSTUs landscaping and enhancement initiative for Livingston Road from Golden Gate Parkway to Pine Ridge Road. 5. A citizen request (Mr. Dex Groose) for the establishment of another MSTU to fund the landscaping of Pine Ridge Road from Airport Road to 1-75. 6. A request from the 1-75/Golden Gate Parkway Interchange Ad Hoc Beautification Committee for additional funding for landscaping and hardscaping enhancements for the' proposed interchange area. 7. A request by the Berkshire Lakes Homeowners' Association for the County to take over maintenance of the Devonshire Boulevard landscaping improvements. Prior projects were funded as part of the budget cycle or on an ad hoc basis from reserves. These projects now require an annual expenditure in excess of $2,250,000 to maintain (Attachment No. 1). Current policy is to fund only capacity improvements and enhancements to the roadway network. Staff has researched and reviewed records of past landscaping projects and Attachment No. 1 provides a matrix showing existing landscaped roadway segments along with the construction costs ,~ AG E f-,,'D,~ ?rEM .IU[. 3 ',.! 200,.. Executive Summary Landscaping Policy Direction Page 2 of 2 Staff has also inquired of several other jurisdictions with respect to their policies and can report there is no consistent methodology except for consideration on a case-by-case basis. Therefore, staff has developed alternatives for the Board's consideration: 1. The Board may direct and identify funding for any or all of the seven requests noted above. Capital and operating requirements are identified in Attachment No. 2. 2. Adoption of a policy for ali future landscaping enhancements to be funded outside the County budget process. This policy would direct that no county funds would be used to defray the capital and maintenance costs for any new roadway landscaping and enhancement projects. 3. Endorse public-private partnerships with a fixed sum allocated each budget year for landscaping enhancements during the normal budget cycle. This policy would provide some county funds for new landscaping and other roadway enhancements on a "first-come, first-served" basis. Similar to the allocation provided for Road Impact fee Credits. When the funds have been allocated, no additional funds will be made available until the next budget year. 4. Adoption of a policy for an Urban Area Beautification MSTU, excluding the existing seven beautification MSTUs. This proposal was originally presented to the Board on December 11, 2001 (Attachment No. 2 - Urban Service Area Beautification Municipal Service Taxing Unit Executive Summary). This policy would direct that existing MSTUs continue to operate within the boundaries of their enabling ordinances and would assure that there would be no double taxation. 5. Collapse the existing seven MSTUs and create a single Urban Area Beautification MSTU as in Alternate No. 2 above. This policy would effectively provide for one single MSTU for the Urban Service Area (as defined in the Collier County Growth Management Plan). Staff requests that the Board consider these alternatives or any other approach and provide direction for staff to return to the Board at the next meeting with the appropriate ordinance or resolution for Board action. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no direct fiscal impact at this time. Depending upon Board direction, future agenda items will include fiscal impact statements specific to the item. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None ~ the alte ~atives resented b staff; hear testimony RECOMMENDATION: The Board consk }r ter~ p y from interested parties; and, d>Cige~staff toq ~tu~/x¢/ ~ed ordinance or resolution for Board action. SUBMITTED BY: -'~,-~[/'~2f,~ ~ DATE: Ed~Ij.)~/,] >ortation Operations Director / '/ PROVED BY: ._ _k~_. DATE: No~'nan E. Feder, AICP Transportation Administrator Attachments: No. 1 - Matrix of Existing Landscaped Roadway Segments No. 2 - Matrix of Requested Landscape Funding No. 3 - Countywide MSTU Agenda Item ~ ~c ~_,___ ooO.¢ =o o · -- ~ ~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AN ORDINANCE CREATING THE URBAN AREA BEAUTIFICATION MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT; PROVIDING THE AUTHORITY; PROVDING FOR THE CREATION OF THE UNIT EXCLUDING THE INCORPORATED AREAS OF COLLIER COUNTY AND EXISTING ROADWAY BEAUTIFICATION MUNICIPAL SERVICE T.~D(.ING UNITS; PROVDING A PURPOSE AND GOVERNING BODY; PROVDING FUNDI25G AND THE LEVY OF NOT TO EXCEED ONE-HALF (.5) MIL OF AD VALOREM TAXES PER YEAR; PROVIDING FOR THE COLLECTION OF TAXES; PROVDING FOR DUTIES OF THE COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE; PROVDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS ANqD ORDINANCES; PROVDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. OBJECTIVE: To enact an ordinance to fund the maintenance and landscaping of public roadways in the urban area of Collier County. CONSIDERATIONS: The County Manager directed staff to establish a Municipal Service Taxing Unit (MSTU) within the urban service area of Collier County for the purpose of landscape maintenance and improvements witlzin the County urban service area. After evaluating the scope of the CountDvide MSTU, it was determined that the Count3' roadway corridors would best be handled by creating one landscaping MSTU. The governing body of the MSTU shall be the Board of Comity Conzrnissioners of Collier County, Florida. The MSTU would provide curbing, watering facilities, plantings and maintenance of the median strips' and edges of roadways within the MSTU, and provide beautification and maintenance of other public areas within the MSTU. The incorporated municipalities of Collier County and existing roadway beautification MSTU's are excluded from the boundaries of the MST[_;. ' FISC.kL IMPACT: Annual costs for landscaping maintenance average almost $50,000 per centerline mile of roadway. Each roadway segment cost is unique due to the: varying width of the medians and roadway edges, and due to the differences in plantings along:leach segment. The total value of the MSTU as of December 3, 2001, per the Property. Appraiser, s Office, is about $17,533,615,894. A tax levy of 0.5 mils will raise about $8,76~.~:800. ? Tiffs rhillage cap should be sufficient to fund maintenance for a number of years into the ~fumre. 7::The/eStimated maintenance cost for FY 2003 is $2,546,000. -~ '.~ ' "~ :'~,- .~ - GROWTH NL4~AGEMENT IMPACT: None Collier County Beautification MSTU Page 2 of 2 RECOMMENDATION: That the Board, who has determined it appropriate to create a Beautification MSTU for Collier County urban service area based on perceived need in Collier County, review the attached Ordinance as outlined above and approve enactment for creation of the Collier County Beautification Municipal Service Iaxing Unit. SUBMITTED BY: ~P~'-- ~~ t~amela J' kUlich~,_dscape .OPerations Manager :i_ _ . ' ..' ..' ' . ' _ _.,;i~.-,.:/" REVIEWED BY: ,.,: ,'7'.:¢¢2~ .: i( ~' .¢':"~,fl- DATE: //- X - -- Edward J/kant, p,~Tr;ansp0rtadon Operations Director APPROVED BY: ./,' /')47-k: ~ ...-'_J~.LAZ-'.~-- . . . DATE: ,:7 N0rm~t 'E. Fed~r, XICP, Transportanon Administrator / / / ORD[-NANCE NO. 2001- AN ORDINANCE cREATING THE URBAN AREA BEAUTIFICATION MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT; PROVIDING TI:IE AUTHORITY; PROVIDING FOR THE CREATION OF THE UNIT EXCLUDING TI-IE INCORPORATED AREAS OF COLLIER COUNTY AND EXISTING ROADWAY BEAUTIFICATION MtrNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNITS; PROVIDING A PURPOSE AND GOVERNING BODY; PROVIDING FUNDING AND TllE LEVY OF NOT TO EXCEED ONE-HALF (.5) MIL OF AD VALOREM TAXES PER YEAR; PROVIDING FOR THE COLLECTION OF TAXES; PROVIDING FOR DUTIES OF THE COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the County has a lack of funding for the maintenance and landscaping of public roadways in the unincorporated urban area of Collier County; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has determined that the best method for funding the maintenance and landscaping of public roadways in the urban area of Collier County is by the creation of the Urban Area Beautification Municipal Service Taxing Unit. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAENrED BY THE BOARD OF COL%'TY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORDA, that: SECTION ONE. Authority This Ordinance is adopted pursuant to the provisions of Secdon 125.01 and Chapter 200. Florida Statutes, and other applicable provisions of law. SECTION TWO. Creation of the Municipal Service Taxing Unit There is hereby created and established the-Urban Area Beautification Municipal Sen, ice Taxing Unit, hereinafter referred to as "MSTLT'. The boundaries of the MSTU are as descr/bed on the attached Exhibit "A" that is incorporated herein by reference. The incorporated areas of Collier County and existing roadway beautification municipal service taxing units are excluded: ': from the boundaries of the MSTU. Existing roadway beautification municipal taxing service units include Radio Road Beautification Mumcipal Servicing Taxing Unit created by Ordinance No. 96-84, the Bayshore Avalon Beautification Municipal Service Taxing Unit created by Ordinance No. 97-82, as amended, the Golden Gate B~autification Municipal Service Taxing' Unit created by Ordinance No. 83-55, as amended, Vanderbilt Beach Beautification Municipal Service Taxing Unit created by Ordinance No. 2001-43, and Livingston Road-Phase II Beautification Municipal Service Taxing Unit created by Ordinance No. 2001- - ,IUL SECTION TI-IREE. Purpose and Governing Body The MSTU is created for the purpose of: (1) Providing curbing, watering facilities, plantings and maintenance of the median strips and edges of roadways within the MSTU; and (2) Beautification and maintenance of other public areas within the MSTU. The governing body of the MSTU shall be the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida. SECTION FOUR. Funding and Levy of Taxes For the purpose of implementing this Ordinance, the Board of County Commissioners shall annually, at the time required by general budgetar~ law, make an itemized estimate of the amount of money required to carry out thc business of the MSTU for the next fiscal year, which shall be fi.om October 1 to and including September 30 following. Thc estimate shall describe the purpose for which the moneys are required and the amount n~essary to be raised by taxation within the MSTU. At the time and place for fixing the annual rate of taxation for County purposes, the Board of County Commissioners shall fix and cause to be levied on all properties within the MSTU, subject to taxation, a millage rate not to exceed one-half (.5) mil per year. SECTION FIVE. Tax Assessment and Collection Taxes herein provided for shall be assessed and collected in the same manner and form as provided for the assessment and collection of general Count), [axes and subject to the same fees for assessing and collecting as general County taxes. SECTION SIX. Duties of the Count' Manager or his Designee The duties of the County Manager or his des~-~nee shall be: A.To administer the activities of the MSTU in accordance with established policies of the Board of County Com.'nissioners. B.To prepare the annual budget in accordance with standard County guidelines regarding the preparation of budgets. C.To provide periodic written reports to the Board of County Commissioners of the activities of the MSTU and its finances in accordance with established guidelines of the Board of County C0mmission5 .rs.; .: SECTION SEVEN. Conflict and Severabilit~ ..... . In the event this. Ordinance conflicts with any other ordinance of Collie~ County or other applicable law, the_more restrictive shall apply. If any court of competent jurisdiction holds any phrase or portion of this Ordinance invalid or unconstitutional, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. ATTACHMENT NO. SECTION EIGHT. Inclusion in the Code of Laws and Ordinances The provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Code of Laws and Ordinances of Collier County, Florida. The sections of the Ordinance may be renumbered or re-lettered to accomplish such, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section," "article," or any other appropriate word. SECTION NINE. Effective Date This Ordinance shall be effective upon filing with the Florida Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Flor/da this __ day of ,2001. ATTEST: BOARD OF COL2qTY COM2VflSSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk OF COIJ II=-R COLrNrEY, FLORiDA By: IAMES D. CARTER, Ph.D., Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency Heidi F. Ashton Assistant County Attorney h:HFA~:)rd\Ur b an AmaM STU TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL NAPLES, FLOR.DDA 34112 (941) 774-8192 SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION NOT A SURVEY COUNTY WIDE LANDSCAPE MUNICIPAL SERVICES TAXING UNIT COMMENCE AT THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE MEAN HIGH WATER LINE OF THE GULF OF MEXJCO AND THE NORTH LINE OF SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 48 sOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID NORTH LINE OF SECTION 6 TO THE soUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF BONITA BEACH ROAD; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY L~NE OF BONITA BEACH TO THE CENTERLINE OF VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE NORTH LINE OF COLLIER COUNTY; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF COLLIER COUNTY TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG ~-tE EAST LINE OF SECTIONS 9 AND SECTION 16 TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 21, THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SECTION 21 TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST; THENCE ~ASTERLY ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SECT1ON 22 AND THE NORTH LINE OF SECTION 23 TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 24 AND THE WEST LINES OF SECTIONS 25 AND 36, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST; THENCE sOUTHERLY ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SECTION i AND ~"~IE WEST LINES OF SECTION 1,12,13.24,25 AND SECTION 36 TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION I, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE WEST LiNE OF SECTIONS 1,12, 13.24,25,AND 36, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, ,RANGE 26 EAST TO A POINT LYING 1 MILE NORTHEASTERLY, AS MEASURED PERPENDICULAR TO, EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL, (U.S. 41); THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG A LINE LYING 1 MILE NORTHEASTERLY, AS MEASURED pERPENDICULAR TO, THE SAID EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL TO THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SECTIONS 7, 18,19,30.31 TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 3!. TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTH LINE O= SECTIONS 36,35 AND 34 TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST. TOTHE CENTERLINE OF THE MARCD RIVER: THENCE NORTHWESTERLY, WESTERLY, AND SOUTHwEsTERLY TO THE MEAN HIGH WATER LINE OF THE GULF OF MEXICO; THENCE MEANDER ALONG SAID MEAN HIGH WATER LINE NORTHWESTERLY TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. LESS AND EXCEPT: CITY OF NAPLES AND THE FOLLOWING MUNICIPAL SERVICES TAXING UNITS (M.S.T.U.'S) BAYSHORE DRIVE, GOLDEN GATE, RADIO ROAD, VANDERBILT BEACH, AND LIVINGSTON ROAD PHASE iL A;TAOHI~ENT NO. GENERAL NOTES ~PAUh~ ~ 1) P.O.C. = POINT OF OOMM~O 2) P.O.B. = POI~ OF BEGINNING pREPARED BY: 4) ~P. = TOWNSHIP / 5) ~GE. ~NGE ~EORGE 6) ~ = RIG~ OF WAY ~LLIER C~UN~ PUBLIC WORKS 7) ~L DISTANCES ~E IN FE~ AND DECIMALS THEREOF 3301 E. T~IAMI T~IL 8) NOT V~ID UNLESS SIGNED ~D s~ED WI~ THE N~LES, FLORIDA ~112 TO SCALE i[ TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ,,~... 3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL NAPLES, FLORIDA 34112 (941) 774--8192 SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION NOT A SURVEY - { - .e - ~ _ · ~ ~'~ 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY THAT THE BOARD CONSIDER A REQUEST FROM THE LIVINGSTON ROAD PHASE II BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR SUPPORT FOR THE BEAUTIFICATION OF LIVINGSTON ROAD PHASE II OBJECTIVE: To determine if there is financial support f~om the Board to parmer with the Livingston Road Phase II Beautification Adv/sory Committee for the beautification of the section of Livingston Road from Golden Gate Parkway to Pine Ridge Road, known as Livingston Road Phase II. CONSIDER.&TIONS: The Livingston Road Phase II Beautification MSTU was established by Ordinance 2001-76 on December 11. 2001 for the purpose of beautification of the section of Livingston Road knov,'n as Phase II. Prior to the lbrmation of the MS. TU, several interested property owners within this. area created the Livingston Road Beautification Associ~i~ion, which raised $50,000.00 of private funds to develop a conceptual landscape drawing for this roadway.' This committee worked with staff to overcome right-of-way issues with adjacent homeowner associations and Florida Power and Light Inc., whose power lines run adjacent to this roadway. This roadway was determined to be a major arterial roadway when compieted. Hi<toricalty the Board has participated in the beautification of the majon~ of other major arterials within tee coun¢', which were funded through the normal budget l~rocess. The county, also currently maintains the landscape on other landscaped arterial roadways, these are also funded through the normal budget ~rocess. However, recent policy of the Board has been to concentrate limited funding on capacit?' projects to address the backlog of transportation needs. FISCAL IMPACT: The Advisor?' Committee has developed a proposed budget of 51,700,000.00. Of rte amount they are requesting the coun.w to contribute 33.3%, or approximately 5600.000.00 as well as assume the maintenance after the project is complete. The estima:ed annual cost of maintenance is 5300.000.00 annually for this three mile stretch of roadway. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None RECOMMENDATION: The Board set up an MSTU at the request of the community to address this landscaping. While a gateway arterial, the Board has directed that funding be applied to needed capaci~' projects rather than landscaping. The Board needs to provide direction if this request to parmer on a landscaping project is to be pursued and funded. The Board can deny the request, agree to the request and make the adjustment to the budget, or provide a different amount and make the appropriate adjustment to the budgg.L.. //') , "-- Bo~/~}~_ eh, PrOJe,9 l~anal~r, Tr~l~portation toeranons REVIEWED BY: ~.~-~.~t/r~'~'~,~/_ _.~"~ ' '"' ctor DATE: Edwar.~d/J~,/Kant, P~__5~'Tr_~i}iportation Operauons ~tre Norman E. Feder. AICP, Transportation Admimstrator AGENDA.LT. EI~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY STATUS REPORT FOR THE BOARD'S REVIEW OF THE INTERCHANGE ENHANCEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS REQUESTED BY THE GOLDEN GATE / 1-75 AD HOC BEAUTIFICATION COMMITFEE. OBJECTIVE: Status report for the Board's review of the Committee's selection of bridge improvements, lighting, and landscape beautification for the 1-75/Golden Gate Interchange, and authorize the Committee to negotiate design options on unfunded items for subsequent Board approval. CONSIDERATIOn: In February 27, 2001, the Board approved the formation of the 1-75/Golden Gate Parkway Ad Hoc Beautification Committee (Committee) to advise on the landscaping and other aesthetic enhancements for the 1-75/Golden Gate Interchange at the request of the Metropolitan Planning Organization. The Committee has provided guidance in the aesthetic appearance of the 1-75/Golden Gate corridor and coordinated with the Florida Department of Ti-ans~5ortation (FDOT) as they developed their detailed design plans. In the Streetscape Master Plan, the 1-75/Goldett Gate Interchange was designated as a Transportation Network Gateway. As a gateway to the Community, the Committee focused on maintaining the residential character of the area consistent with current zoning. The methodology of the Committee was to incorporate the residential character into the design, focus on the concerns of the communiD', look at the long-term maintenance, and analyze the cost of each design element. Initially, the Committee members believed that they had Sl,000,000 dedicated to landscaping and irrigation alone. The Committee discovered that this figure was an approximation based on the initial FDOT budget. The actual FDOT Budget which FDOT provided dur/ng the PD&E Study, allocated 5874,000.00 for landscape and irrigation, conventional lighting, special signal poles, noise wall aesthetic treatment, spec/al light poles, bike lanes, wider sidewalks, and a contingency (Attachment No. 1). Through negonations with FDOT, several line items were added to the original $300~000.00 landscape beautificauon portion of the budget. The monies allocated for the noise wall aesthetic treatment, paint application to standard cobra-head light poles, meandering sidewalks, integral color for sidewalks and median separators were redirected to the landscape budget, thus providing 5446,462.00 in available funding (Attachment No. 2). The aesthetic enhancements to the bridge include the following expenditures: median planters; decorative wall and columns for light poles on the bridge; eight (8) decorative light poles on the bridge; and brick pavers on the bridge sidewalk and median. These enhancements will help maintain the residential character of the corridor. The total cost for these non-landscape items is estimated to be $150,318.00, leaving a landscape budget of $296,144.00 (Attachment No. 2). The items that are beyond the funding capabilities of FDOT, which the Committee would like the Board to consider, are as follows: · FDOT had originally proposed a chain-link cage, which the Committee was able to eliminate from the design. The current design incorporates a more decorative mesh screen. However, the Committee is not satisfied with the appearance of the decorative mesh, which is a federal requirement on bridges that have pedestrian sidewalks. The Committee is exploring design solutions and h~ ~ toward a decorative g'nllwork screen enhancement Conceptual designs were pre 5'~-~j~- \'0°%'- Executive Summary 1-75/Golden Gate Interchange Conumttee Recommendations Page 2 of 2 Meeting on June 6, 2002 and were well received by the Community. The estimated additional cost is $100,000 (Attachment No. 2). · The Committee has focused its efforts and limited f'mancial resources on bridge superstructure enhancements and landscaping. These remaining hardscape components are unfunded: texturing the bridge pier, colunm and beams ($70,656.00); and painting the slope pavement under the bridge or texturing and painting (max $24,378.00). The total estimate for these two lower portion enhancements of the bridge is $95,034.00. The landscape budget of $296,144.00 will provide basic landscaping and irrigation along Golden Gate Parkway from 60'h Street SW to 66~' Street SW. This basic landscaping will not provide the necessary visual buffer needed to screen the adjacent residences. In addition, there are several water retention areas that will require natural aquatic planting and landscape buffers. The Committee would like further analysis from FDOT describing the impact upon the existing buffer and the opportunity to focus on irngating these areas for future landscaping. Additional ~nds-in the amount of $300,000 are needed for lan~lscaping these areas and for enhancing the areas near residences. It is the intent of the Committee to apply for FDOT matching enhancement grants. These additional funds would be needed for Fiscal Year 05/06. FISCAL IMP_&CT: In order to accomplish the additional enhancements detailed above, an additional 5495.034.00 is necessary. If the Board agrees to fund all or a portion of these additional enhancements, a budget amendment transfemng monies from Fund (313) Reserves will be necessary. GRO%VTH M~NAGE3IENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact associated with this project. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board accepts this status report and considers the added enhancements requested by the Ad Hoc Committee. To address this request, the Board would need to revise prior direction or determine that this will be an exception to the programming of all available transportation funding to capacity projects. If the Board determines that additional funding is desirable, then staff also requests direction to prepare the necessary Budget Amendment and other required documentanon to carry out the intent of the Board's direction. , REViEWE/~Y: Ed~arst~/l~-ant, PE,/~Tra~nsport~n Operations Director APPROVED BY: (//[r'~' '~7~'~ Date: Norman,/i.'"Feder, AICP, Transportation Administrator Attachments: No. 1 - Original FDOT Budget Estimate Breakdown No. 2 - Revised Budget Breakdown (Funded v. Unfunded) No. 3 - Plan View of Interchange ,,, No. 4 -Elevation of Proposed Interchange A~tac,hment 1 Florida Department-o[ Transportation TaO~S r. Baa~a,,,. ja. JEB BUSH SECRETARY GOVERNOR .' August 16, 2001 MGR-L 13-01 1-75/Golden Gate Interchange Advisory Commit-tee Transportation Operations Depmunent 2705 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, FL 34104 Reference: Breakdown of Estimated Costs of Amenities 1-75 at GOlden Gate Park-way Nev~ Interchange Financial Management ID No. 200732-1-32-01 Dear Comminee Members: As requested at ~e Cornmirree meefin~ o±'August 9. ~,c,c,~ the foilo;vin~_ is a detailed treakdown of the estimated cos:s of :he amenities that were a~eed to by the FDOT during the PD&E Study; 1. Landscape & Irrigation $300,000.©0 2. Conventional Lighting (in lieu of high mast) S208,000.00 (increase) 3. Special Signal Poles (2 locations) $ 60,000.00 (increase) 4. Noise Wall Aesthetic Treatmem S $0,000.00 5. Special (Aesthetic) Light Poles $ 32,000.00 (increase) 6. Bike Lanes $ 32,000.00 7. Wider Sidewalk (from 5' to 6') S 16,000.00 Subtotal = S728,000.00 8. 20¢/0 Contingency (includes Mobilization, MOT, etc.) $146,000.00 Grand Total = $874,000.00 If you have any questions, please contact me at (941) 461-4300. Michhel G. Rippe Director, Southwest Area Office MGR\lss cc: Nicole Mills, FDOT Sryan Dems, Johnny Limbaugh, FDOT Sarah Clarke, FDOT District 2295 Victoria Avenue*Post Office B~x 1030*Fort Myers, FL 33902-1030 I:k3. (941) 4614300 *(941) 338-2353 (Fax) * MS 1-98 At~chrnon~ 2 GOLDEN GATE/I-75 INTERC~GE LANDSCAPE BUDGET ,~,,,mr~c_ ,'.xrnnTY INCORPORATE / ........ I - -Curb and gutter th~---~ $225,000.00 Landscaping budget [ Vetoed _----- frontage roads ...... ~ -~OT Eliminate except on Decorative Lighting 51921.00 per 30 pole, bridle' Committee based on Mediterra voted for st& 30' f~mre from light poles spun Architectural Area aluminum finish Lighting. 400 watt metal halide fixtures. Chmuaas Attac~txaent Approx'5.00 / pole ~ $16,037.00 FDOT Eliminate - use Meandering funds toward brick Side'~"~lks pavers - sidewalk & median* ~ . , --~-~74 00~(sw) FDOT -- -- --~liminate per to I~te~Tal color . . county's concern sidewalk and concrete l $11,175.00 (sep) regarding separator I maintenance - use ' funds toward brick i ~Slrate Oval ~ Landscaping b g ' ~,ledian planters on S66,500.00 shaped planters 10' bridge with decorative long x 5' wide, 1 fencing every 50'. Connect planters with deco fence. Color? Stylers-___ Overpass fencing Black vinyl coated FDOT ~ Incorporate per mesh fence included in DOT construction estimate. A change in . fence would be a deduction from the landscaping budget. : Pending acm Decorations for wire Depends on size =-- / meeting . mesh fence (ex. N~anatees with ($102,000.00, #1) i Wait- price ,,~v~s and s~ Decorative metal Price Pending No. work similar to L InteEral color on~¢ $14,560.00 FDOT Incorporate. Federal Standards color to bridge. Outside ma~h as clOSe as brid~e beam~, piers poss~le to and columns. English Iv~ Green. IntegraXe color on $10,944.00 FDOT Prc-dou~ vot~ was to iacorpora~. What baxrier, color? l~aint ¢xi~ag bridge $58,240.00 Landscaping budget Wait Brick pavers in ~?,400.00 side~ks L~ndscapmg budge~ In¢orpor~t~- sidew~ks ~nd median and sidev~lk $68~67.00 median decorative border in ($55.00 / SY) median (cost to be determined)* TexmrLze ~he bridge $18,240 (on barrier) 'L~inds~apmg budget Wa/t I concrete spray £orm piers) componenUs ~5~h $17,472 (on exist $34944 (on ex/st beams) Tou~I $ 70,656.00 Ps/n~ng of slope $20,315.00 Landscaping budget Wsk pavement, under brid¢¢. Texmrize slope $24,378.00 Landscaping budget Wak t pavement (inc. cmor~ I ~ ~ Modified jersey I $43,750.00 Landscaping budget Incorporate barrier, as depicted on (combination of Pain's drawing, barrier wall and colurrms listed below.) Colunms for hght See line above. Landscaping budget Incorporate poles, as depicted on Pam's drawing. Budget Summary: $ 300,000.00 landscaping budget 80,000.00 noise wall aesthetic treatment 32,000.00 painting light poles 16,037.00 meandering sidewalks * 7,274.00 integral color- sidewalk ' 11,178.00 integral color- median separator $ 446,462.00 available funding Expenditure~: $ 66,500.00 median planters 4~,7~0.00 barrier wall ~nd columns for light poles on bridge 2,168.00 decorative lights on bridge - 8 lights 37,400.00 brick pavers for sidewalks on bridge * S,000.00 brick pavers for median border - estimate * $ 150,.318.00 Total: $ 446,462.00 - 150,318.00 -- $ 296,144.00 - Discussed at meeting held May 30, 2002-. Consensus of members present; no quorum for official vote. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE AN ADDENDUM, TO THE LAaNDSCAPING INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE HIGHWAY AGREEMENT wrrtt THE FLOR1]DA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) W1THIN THE UNIhqCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; AUTHOILIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO EXPAND THE BOUNDARIES OF THE EXISTING US 41 NORTH PHASE I AGREEMENT TO VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD. OBJECTIVE: For the Board to approve an addendum to the Landscaping installation and maintenance ~ghway agreement with the FDOT. The original agreement is fi.om Pine Ridge Road (CR 896) to Gulf Park Drive, a County Road. The addendum would expand the existing boundary to Vanderbilt Beach Road. CONSIDERATIONS: Median landscaping for North Tatniarm Trail (SR 45), fi.om Gulf Park Drive to Vanaerbilt Beach Road (CR 862), has been identified in the Collier.County Streetscape Master Plan. On De_cember 14, 1999, the Board approved Item 12(C)(2~ for the Peiican Bay MSTBU to provide financing for 'landscape beautificanon on US a! North from Pine Ridge Road to Vanderbilt Beach Road. -/'ne Board approved cost shanng for landscape beautification of that portion of US 41 North from Pine tCdge Road to Vanderbilt Beach Road accordinz to the original agenda item. The estimated cos: of the US 21 North Beautification prOject was estimated to cost $502.000. The project was divided into two (2) segTnents: Segment 1: US 41 North Phase I segment, Pine Ridge Road to Guif Park Drive, was corn?leted the firs: Quarter of 2002. The US 41 North Phase I pro.~ect was a 50/50 match betxveen Fund 3''~ Pelican Ba~~ 5~.?.ation & Landscaping System .a_nalysis. and MSTD General F,and 111 for a total amount not to exceed $50~2,000. Through the execution of the Landscaping Installation and Maintenance H1ghway A~eement. Collier County assumed maintenance responsibiti~' of the US ~,1 North Phase 1. Segment 2: Pelican Bay MSTBU will fund the construction cost of US 41 North Phase II, Gulf Park Drive to Vanderbilt Beach Road (1.34 centeriine miles). Collier County is required to enter into an agreement for the maintenance of landscaping improvements within FDOT rights-of-way, therefore requesting Collier County to assume the maintenance responsibility, of US 41 Phase II. FISCAL IMPACT.: Estimated construction costs for US 41N are $288,000, which will be funded from Pelican Bay MSTBU Irrigation and Landscaping System Analysis Fund 322, Cost Center 183825. The fiscal impact associated with this project is maintenance for the landscaping and irngation improvements (1.3 total miles of improvements) at an estimated $105,000.00 per year, which will be maintained by Collier County Transportation Maintenance Department, Landscape Operations. Pelican Bay Services Division will maintain rights-of-way adjacent to the Pelican Bay Development. GROWTtt MANAGEMENT IhVIPACT: None. RECO~iEN~DATIO~: That the Board of Coun~ Commissioners approve the future landscaping of ~S 41 North from Gulf Park Drive to Vanderbilt Beach Road, authorize the Chairman to expand and to execute a Highway Landscaping Installation and Maintenance Agreement with the FDOT, and authorize staff to provide any documentation necessary to carry out the Board' s direction. PREP,~R-ED ,, ..~ Date: · BY. Pa:-~- ~ , Landscape Operations Manager Sa~es P. Ward, Depa~unent Director, Pelican Bay Services / Date: RE~v'12EWED BY: x ;- '-'~z o-c. ' Director 'Stephen' Y. Cameql, ?urchasinz Director .NornSan I~./~edei:i AICP. Transportation Services Administrator EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS APPROVE A SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL FOR SHADER.LOMBARDO INVESTMENTS, LLC V. COLLIER COUNTY, CASE NO. 01-4135.CA.HDH, NOW PENDING IN THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. OB~IECTIVE: For the Board to approve a settlement proposal for Shader-Lombardo Investments, LLC v. Collier County, Case No. 01-4135-CA-HDH, now pending in the Circuit Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida. CONSIDERATIONS: On June 25, 2002, this Board approved a settlement proposal for the case of Shader-Lombardo Investments, LLC v. Collier County along the lines set forth in the executive summary attached hereto as Exhibit 1. In addition, this Board directed the County Attorney's office to serve a formal settlement proposal under Fla. R.Civ.P. 1.442. A copy of that formal notice is attached hereto as Exhibit 2. On July 17, 2002, the parties to the lawsuit, including the intervening Vanderbilt Villas Condominium Association. reconvened mediation. After approximately six hours of mediation and discussion (as this Board will recall, the parties had also mediated this case on June 12, 2002), the parties agreed to recommend settlement as outlined in the Record of Mediation Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit 3. The chief differences between this proposed settlement arrangement and that approved previously by the Board on June 25, 2002, are as follows: I. Instead of using a formal appraisal process, the parties agreed that the Developer/Plaintiff would pay $90,000.00 to the intervening condominium association and that the County would contribute the previously approved $20,000.00 directly to the intervening condominium association. 2. The County will contribute the first $2500.00 in expenses for the necessary PUD amendment. 3. The Developer/Plaintiff will also install a gutter and downspout at its own expense on its building to assist the intervening condominium association in management of water runoff. 4. The intervening condominium association must get approval and releases of the County and the Developer/Plaintiff from all sixteen (16) of the Condominium Association unit owners by August 30, 2002, or the Record of Mediation Agreement will be void and the litigation will proceed. 5. The Developer/Plaintiff will release the County from all claims and will provide an individual indemnity against any claims against the County that could be raised by unit owners in the Developer/Plaintiff's building, although such claims are highly .... unlikely. FISCAL IMPACT: If the County agrees to this settlement, the maximum fiscal impact would be $22,500.00. It appears that those funds would be properly paid from the Count's Casualty Fund no. 516-121-650. It should be noted that approximately $1500.00 of the $2500.00 the County will contribute toward expenses for the PUD amendment process would be recouped as filing fees. Thus, the exact fiscal impact of the settlement agreement will be $21,000.00. If the County rejects settlement along these lines, litigation will continue and it is estimated that the cost in staff time, attorney time, deposition and other fees as well as expert witness fees will exceed $10,000.00 from this point forward. In addition, the Developer/Plaintiff of Phase II/Building 2 is claiming that it has been damaged in excess of $2 million. While the County vigorously disputes both the Developer/Plaintiff's position in the lawsuit and this claim of damages, there remains at least some risk that should the Developer/Plaintiff prevail, it will also be able to recover damages against the County. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve settlement along the lines outlined in this Executive Summary and direct the Office of the County Attorney to prepare and obtain the appropriate and necessary settlement documents and authorize the Chairman to execute those documents once they are approved by the Office of the County Attorney. Michael W. Pettit, Assistant County Attorney REVIEWED BY: ,.._ ~.x.~_...~..-- ~ DATE: J4ff Wfilker, Director, Risk Management APPROVED BY: David C. Weigel. Count), Attof:udy h:/Public/Litigation/Open Cases/shader Iombardo/executivesumm-bccnmg7-30-02-settlement EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY CO .MMISSIONERS_ APPROVE A SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL FOR SHADER.LOMBARDO INVESTMENTS, LLC V. COLLIER COUNTY, CASE NO. 01-4135-CA-HDH, NOW PENDING IN THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. OB:/ECTIVE: For the Board to approve a settlement proposal for Shader-Lombardo Investments, LLC v. Collier County, Case No. 01-4135-CA-HDH, now pending in the Circuit Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida. CONSIDERATIONS: This lawsuit arises out of the decision of the County to revoke certificates of occupancy on six (6) of the thirty-six (36) units in Phase II/Building 2 in the Vanderbilt Villas PUD. As the Board will recall, there were two (2) phases of buildings in this PUD. Phase I/Building I was built approximately twelve (12) years ago. Some time after Phase I/Building i was completed, the original developer sold its rights to another developer and that developer has now constructed Phase Il/Building 2. At approximately the time the certificates of occupancy for the thirty-six (36) units in Phase II/Building 2 were issued, an issue was raised as to the proximity of Phase II/Building 2 to Phase I/Building 1. Upon investigation, the County concluded that the buildings were too close together and that Phase II/Building 2 had violated the minimum distance requirement of twenty (20) feet as set forth in the governing PUD Ordinance, i.e., Ordinance No. 87-57, as amended. Accordingly, certificates of occupancy for six (6) of the thirty-six (36) units were revoked by the County. The developer of Phase II/Building 2 then sought a variance but withdrew its variance application without receiving a final vote from the Board 0f County Commissioners. Thereafter, the developer of Phase II/Building 2 sued the County and the condominium association for Phase I/Building 1, i.e., Vanderbilt Villas Condominium Association, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as the "Association") intervened as a defendant. Both the County and the Association counterclaimed and demanded that the units that were too close to Phase I/Building I be removed from Phase II/Building 2. On or about April 23, 2002, after review by the Count'~'s Building Department, the County agreed to enter into a partial settlement with the plaintiff/developzr of Phase II/Building 2 by releasing certificates of occupancy on three (3) of the six (6) units at issue. This partial settlement agreement was premised upon the fact that those three (3) units could be occupied provided the plaintiff/developer took necessary safety measures should it ever be determined that its position was incorrect and that the three (3) units closest to Phase I/Building I had to be removed. On June 12, 2002, a mediation was held in the case pursuant to an order from the Court. While the mediation remains open, the parties agreed to go to their respective clients with a proposed settlement agreement along the following lines: 1. Because the Association alleges that the unit owners in Phase I/Building I have been damaged economically by the failure of the Phase IIfBuilding 2 to meet the minimum distance requirement between principal structures in the Vanderbilt Villas PUD, both the Association and the Phase lJJBuilding 2 developer would retain MAI appraisers, who in turn would choose a third appraiser. to calculate these alleged damages. 2. The Association and the plaintiff/developer of Phase II/Building 2 w,-~,la:~,, ....... -, .... the amount ofdamaees determined by the three (3) appraisers._ 'qr',[ ; ...., '"~,~'~¥ i 3. The damages would then be paid by the plaintiff/developer of Phase II/Building 2 to the Association and the unit owners in Phase I/Building 1 according to a formula to be agreed upon between the Association and the plaintiff/developer of Phase Il/Building 2. 4. In order to facilitate this settlement, the County would pay up to $20,000.00 for appraisal fees and, to the extent the appraisal fees were less than $20,000.00, the remaining funds would be contributed to the damages to be paid to the Association and the unit owners in Phase I/Building 1. 5. The Association and the plaintiff and developer of Phase II/Building 2 would take the necessary steps to amend the Vanderbilt Villas PUD to reflect the settlement and would bear all costs associated with that PUD amendment. 6. The County would receive complete releases from all unit owners in both Phase I/Building 1 and Phase II/Building 2 as well as from the Association and the developer/plaintiff in the lawsuit. FISCAL IMPACT: If the County agrees to this settlement, the maximum fiscal impact on the County would be $20,000.00. It appears that those funds would be properly paid from the County's Property & Casualty Fund no. 516-121-650. If the County rejects settlement along these lines, litigation will continue and it is estimated that the cost in staff time, attorney time, deposition and other fees as well as expert witness fees will exceed $10,000.00 from this point forward. In addition, the plaintiff/developer of Phase II/Building 2 is claiming that it has been damaged in excess of $2 million. While the County vigorously disputes both the plaintiff/developer's position in the lawsuit and this claim of damages, there remains at least some risk that should the plaintiff prevail, it will also be able to recover damages against the County. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Nbne. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve settlement along the lines outlined in this Executive Summary and direct the Office of the County Attorney to prepare and obtain the appropriate and necessary settlement documents and authorize the Chairman to execute those documents once they are approved by the Office of the County Attorney. Michael W. Pettit, Assistant County Attorney REVIEWED BY: Sheree Mediavilla, Risk Manager APPROVED BY: f 15~vid 15. lhTeigel, ~e~-xfltnty Att~ey h:lPublic/Litigation/Opcn Cases/shader Iombardo/exec sum re settlement for 0625 bcc mtg.061702 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COU~NTY, FLORIDA CIVIL ACTION SHADER-LOMBARDO INVESTMENTS, LLC, a Florida corporation, Plaintiff, v. Case No.: 014135-CA-HDH COLLIER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Defendant, V. VANDERBILT VIIJ ~AS CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, hNC., Intervenor. DEFENDANT COLLIER COUNTY'S SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL TO PLAINTIFF SHADER-LOMBARDO INVESTMENTS, LLC AND INTERVENOR VANDERBILT VILLAS CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. 1. This Settlement Proposal ("Proposal") is made by Defendant Collier County ("County") to Plaintiff Shader-Lombardo Investments, LLC ("Plaintiff") and Intervenor Vanderbilt Villas Condominium Association, Inc. ("Intervenor") pursuant to Fla. R.Civ.P. 1.442 and, as applicable, Section 768.79 and 45.061, Fla. Stat. 2. The claims intended to be resolved by this Proposal include all claims asserted against the County by Plaintiff in the complaint in this case as well as any other claims, whether known or unknown, Plaintiff may have against the County that arise from or relate or refer in any way whatsoever to, whether directly or indirectly, any of the allegations in the complaint in this action, the Vanderbilt Villas PUT), County Ordinance No. 87-57, either Phase or Building of the Vanderbilt Villas PUD, the revocation of any certificates of occupancy for Phase Il/Building 2 of the Vanderbilt Villas PUD, or any damages or expenses or costs or injuries of any kind alleged or that could be alleged either by Plaintiff or any individual unit owner in Phase Il/Building 2 that concern or relate or refer in any way whatsoever to Phase II/Building 2 or the Vanderbilt Villas PUD or Ordinance No. 87-57. In addition, this Proposal is also intended to resolve all claims that could be asserted by the Intervenor against the County in this action as well as all other claims, whether known or unknown, the Intervenor may have against the County that arise from or relate or refer in any way whatsoever to, whether directly or indirectly, the allegations in the complaint or either counterclaim in this action, the Vanderbilt Villas PUD, County Ordinance No. 87-57, either Phase or Building of the Vanderbilt Villas PUD, the revocation of any certificates of occupancy in the Vanderbilt Villas PUD, or any damages or expenses or costs or injuries of any k/nd alleged or that could be alleged by Intervenor or any individual unit owner in Phase I/Building 1 of the Vanderbilt Villas PUT) that concern or relate or refer in any way whatsoever to Phase I/Building 1 or the Vanderbilt Villas PUD or Ordinance No. 87-57. 3. Plaintiff and Intervenor shall agree upon a mechanism using MAI appraisers to determine any alleged damages that may be owed by Plaintiff to Intervenor. Plaintiff and Intervenor shall abide by the results of any agreed method of determining damages. This damage determination and the payment of any damages by Plaintiff to Intervenor shall be in lieu of any demolition of any portion of Phase II/Building 2 of the Vanderbilt Villas PUD. 4. The County agrees to contribute up to $20,000.00 for appraisers or items of damage as may be agreed upon by Plaintiff and Intervenor and as described in paragraph 3 above. In addition, the County will draft necessary settlement documents. Finally, upon satisfaction of the conditions set forth in this Proposal, the County further agrees that it will dismiss its countemlaim with prejudice and that the certificates of occupancy previously revoked by the County for certain units in Phase Il/Building 2 shall be reissued. 5. As a condition to this Proposal, the County shall receive complete and full releases from all claims of any type, whether legal or equitable, that arise from or relate or refer in any way whatsoever to, whether directly or indirectly and whether known or unknown, the allegations in the complaint or either counterclaim in this action, the Vanderbilt Villas PUD, County Ordinance No. 87-57, either Phase or Building of the Vanderbilt Villas PLrD, the revocation of any certificates of occupancy for Phase II/Building 2 of the Vanderbilt Villas PUD, any damages or other harms or injuries alleged by either the Plaintiff or the Intervenor or any individual unit owner in either Phase I/Building 1 or Phase II/Building 2 of the Vanderbilt Villas PUD that concern or relate or refer in any way whatsoever to either Phase I/Building I or the Vanderbitt PUD or Ordinance No. 87-57, not only from Plaintiff and Intervenor but also from all individual unit owners in Phase I/Building 1 or Phase II/Building 2. As a second condition to this Proposal, the County also will require that Ordinance No. 87-57 be amended with respect to the minimum distance requirement between principal structures to reflect the effect of any settlement among the parties and that the cost of this PUD amendment shall not be borne by the County. As a third condition to this Proposal, Plaintiff must dismiss this action with prejudice and Intervenor must dismiss its counterclaim with prejudice. 6. This Proposal does not include attorneys' fees or costs and is therefore also conditioned upon the agreement of the Plaintiff and the Intervenor that each of the three parties 3 in this action shall bear its respective attorneys' fees and costs, subject to any agreement between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor that some or any portion of the funds being contributed by the County may be used as they mutually spec/fy. In no event shall the County pay any additional sums for costs or fees as part of this Proposal or any corresponding settlement. Respectfully submitted, ~MICHAEL W. PET-FIT, ESQ. Florida Bar No. 0970336 Attorney for Defendant, Collier County Office of the County Attorney 3301 East Tamiami Trail Administration Bldg. F, 8th Floor Naples, FL 34112 (941) 774-8400 - Telephone (941) 774-0225 - Facsimile CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished via regular U.S. mail, postage prepaid to George A. Vega, Jr., Esq., Vega, Brown, Stanley & Burke, P.A., 2660 Airport Road South, Naples, FL 34112, and to Pamela Stewart, Esq., Pamela Stewart, P.A., 11983 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 156, Naples, FL 34110-1603 on this ._x"lq.,,/ MICHAEL W. PETTIT, ESQ. h:/Public/LitigatioWOpen Cases/shader-lombardo/settlement proposal to plaint & interven.070202 _ -~,~J IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL ACTION SHADER-LOMBARDO INVESTMENTS, LLC, a Florida corporation, Plaintiff, v. Case No.: 01-4135-CA-HDH COLLIER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Defendant, V. VANDERBILT VILLAS CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, [NC., Intervenor. / RECORD OF MEDIATION AGREEMENT The above matter was heard this 1 7th day of July 2002, before Charles T. Carlton, Mediator. The Parties (i.e., Shader-Lombardo Investments, LLC, Collier County and Vanderbilt Villas Condominium Association, Inc.) have agreed to the following: 1. Plaintiff, Shader-Lombardo Investments, LLC ("Shader-Lombardo'), agrees to pay the amount of ninety thousand ($90,000.00) dollars to the Intervenor, Vanderbilt Villas Condominium Association, Inc., in full settlement of this action. 2. Defendant, Collier County ("County'), upon approval by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, agrees to pay the amount of twenty thousand , ¢- ' ($20,000.00) dollars'to the Intervenor, Vanderbilt Villas Condominium Association, Inc., ("Vanderbilt") in full settlement of this action. 3. The County also agrees to pay up to twenty-five hundred ($2500.00) dollars of the administrative and advertising costs to amend the PUD in question to reflect this settlement among the Parties. Shader-Lombardo agrees to file the PUD amendment and petition and shall pay all additional costs above $2500.00. 4. The County agrees, if Board approval is obtained, to pay the amount of twenty thousand ($20,000.00) within sixty (60) days of receipt of all fully executed releases. 5. Shader-Lpmbardo agrees to pay the amount of thirty thousand ($30,000.00) within sixty (60).days of receipt of all fully executed releases. The remaining sixty thousand ($60,000.00) dollars shall be paid to Vanderbilt from the sales proceeds of the remaining units in the amount of thirty-seven hundred fifty ($3750.00) dollars per unit as the units are sold, provided that the remaining $60,000.00 shall be paid in full, regardless of the status of unit sales within two (2) years from July 30, 2002. 6. Vanderbilt and its unit owners agree to execute full releases for the County and Shader-Lombardo with respect to any and ali claims that arise from or relate or refer in any way, whether directly or indirectly, to any claims, allegations, asserted facts, or events referred to in any of the pleadings in this action or to Ordinance No. 87-57. 7. Shader-Lombardo, and Jack Shader personally, agree to indemnify and defend the County from any and all suits that may be filed by any unit owners in Phase II/Building 2, that relate or refer in any way to any and all claims that arise from or relate or refer in any way, whether directly or indirectly, to any claims, allegations, ass?ted f~cts, or 2 events referred to in' any of the pleadings in this action or to Ordinance No. 87-57. In addition, Shader-Lombardo shall provide the County with a complete release for any and all claims it has asserted or could have asserted in this lawsuit. 8. Shader-Lombardo agrees to provide and install a gutter and downspout on the western edge of the roof of Phase II/Building 2. 9. The Final Judgment in this action will incorporate a settlement agreement that reflects the terms of this record of mediation agreement. 10. Vanderbilt has the obligation to obtain the consent and release of claims against the other parties in this action from each of its unit owners. The Parties agree that Vanderbilt shall not be, bound by this Mediation Agreement until and unless all sixteen (16) unit owners execute in writing and agree to these terms and conditions. These initial consents and releases must be received in a format to be approved by the County on or by August 30, 2002. The parties agree that if the consents and releases are not obtained by this date, this Agreement shall be null and void and the lawsuit shall continue. 11. No funds shall be paid until'all fully executed releases are obtained. 12. The Parties agree and acknowledge that the County is not bound by this Mediation Agreement unless and until it is approved by the Board of County Commissioners. This Record of Mediation Agreement constitutes full settlement of the above referenced lawsuit. Plaintiff o~ Plainti~s Representative Date (and as Jack Shac~r's Representative) Defendant or Defendant's Representative Date r or Inte~enor s Represe~tau~ // Date' Mediator :.. Date h :~d itigationLshader-lombardo~ecordmediationagreernent-rnrc EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVAL OF THE FORM OF PUBLIC PETITION DRAFTED BY THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AT THE REQUEST OF CITIZENS OF GOLDEN GATE ESTATES FOR THE WIDENING TO FOUR LANES OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD FROM WILSON BOULEVARD TO DESOTO BOULEVARD OBJECTIVE: Board of County Commissioners' consideration and approval of the public petition drafted by the County Attorney's Office on behalf of citizens of Golden Gate Estates who wish to secure signatures for a petition in support of the widening to four lanes of Golden Gate Boulevard from Wilson Boulevard to Desoto Boulevard. CONSIDERATIONS: The Board of County Commissioners has in place a Citizen Petition Process Policy that functions to provide a uniform, verifiable process for citizens to circulate petitions on matters of substantial County interest to submit to the Board for consideration and requested action. Presently a group of citizens have contacted the County, expressing an interest to achieve the widening (additional lanes) of Golden Gate Boulevard from Wilson Boulevard to Desoto Boulevard. The County Attorney has been requested to assist in drafting a petition form that is ostensibly consistent with the County's Petition Process Policy. The draft form provided with this Executive Summary may achieve the desires of the citizens' groups, but is provided for preliminary review by the Board for consideration of adequacy of the questions. Issues relating to the geographical parameters for this petition survey would appear to be relevant, as well as whether MSTU considerations/funding should be included in the petition question. If a petition goes forward under the Citizen Petition Process Policy; a sponsor of record should be identified. Section D of the Collier County Citizens Petition Process Policy provides: a. Proposed citizen petitions must be printed on cards or sheets of paper and may be signed by only one person, b. Proposed citizen petitions to be circulated for signatures must be printed on separate cards or individual sheets of paper. The minimum size shall be 3 inches by 5 inches and the maximum size shall be 8.5 inches by 14 inches, c. Once the petition has been approved for circulation, the sponsor may reproduce petition forms in newspapers, magazines, and other forms of printed mass media provided the forms are reproduced in the same format authorized by this policy and approved by the County Manager. d. The petition must contain adequate space for the signee's signature, printed name, residence street address, city, state, zip code, precinct number if known by the signee, date signed, and signee's date of birth or voter registration number or other identification, e. The top of the petition form shall be clearly and conspicuously entitled: "Collier County Citizen Petition No.__-__" f. Each petition form shall contain the following statement at the top of the form underneath the petition title. FISCAL IMPACT: None. AGE~ I,,~E M JUL 3 0 2002 1 Pg. / .... GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None unless widening approved by Collier County Board of County Commissioners at some later date. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board approve the form of this petition for use by the citizens. ( ~ac~ueline Hubt~ard Robinson ~0~ssistant County Attorney Approved by: /C657-,4-.*-'- _J_Z"~"O'~ Date: '~//' ?/~ ~ David C. Weigel, C~)unty/~orney ! AGENDA ITEM) "'-' NO. JUL 3 0 2002 2 pg._ i~ PETITION NUMBER 2002-1 COLLIER COUNTY CITIZEN PETITION IN FAVOR OF THE WIDENING TO FOUR LANES OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD FROM WILSON BOULEVARD TO DESOTO BOULEVARD A person who knowingly signs a pc, tM'on orpetitionsfor a candidate, a mlnorpollticalparty, or an issue more than one time commits a misdemeanor of the lTrst degre~ A person who signs another person 's name or a fictitious name to an.}' petition for an issue commits a misdemeanor ofthe first degree punishable as provided in §775.082~ §775.083, or §775.084. (§104.183,F.S.) Name Address Telephone # Identification (type) 1. Print Name Sign Name 2. Print Name Sign Name 3. Print Name Sign Name 4. Print Name Sign Name 5. Print Name Sign Name 6. Print Name Sign Name 7. Print Name Sign Name 8. Print Name Sign Name 9. Print Name Sign Name I0. NO. Print Name JUL 3 0 2002 Sign Name Pg.., EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR A RED COCKADED WOODPECKER (RCW) HABITAT SURVEY OF SECTION 24 AND THE NORTH BELLE MEADE OVERLAY IN THE AMOUNT OF $15,000 USING $12,500 FROM MSTD GENERAL FUND (111) RESERVES. OBJECTIVE: To accomplish the Red Cockaded Woodpecker (RCW) Survey for Section 24 and the North Belle Meade Overlay as required by the Rural Fringe Growth Management Plan (GMP) Amendments. CONSIDERATION: On June 19, 2002, the BCC adopted the Rural Fringe amendments to the Growth Management Plan. The amendments require the County to conduct an RCW survey within the North Belle Meade Overlay and specifically within Section 24. The results of this survey will be used to re-evaluate, and possibly change, the land use designations that the BCC adopted for Section 24 as part of the recently adopted amendments. The GMP amendments require the County to complete the RCW analysis within one year. FISCAL IMPACT: Staff has received an estimate of $15,000 for a biological consultant to ,'"'- conduct the necessary survey. This effort was not budgeted for FY02. The Natural Resources Department budget has $2,500 that can be reallocated to this effort as a result of a cost savings on a GIS computer. Staff recommends that $12,500 be transferred from MSTD Reserves in order for this study to begin as soon as possible within FY02. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This request implements a portion of the Rural Fringe Amendments adopted by the BCC on June 19, 2002. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the transfer of $12,500 from MSTD Fund (111) Reserves to conduct an RCW survey in the North Belle Meade Overlay and authorize staff to process the necessary budget amendments. PREPARED BY: DATE: 7<~-,-- "~)~ii-liam D. LqS~renz, Yr., P.E., Director Natural Resources Department APPROVED BY:-Z~ DATE: ' h K. Sclfmitt, CDES Administrator ~ ,'ix,~(2°mmunity Development & Environmental Services JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE COMMERCIAL EXCAVATION PERMIT NO. 59.803 "BLUE HERON OFFSITE HAULING", LOCATED IN SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST; BOUNDED ON THE NORTH BY INTERSTATE 75 FI/W, ON THE WEST BY SAPPHIRE LAKES SUBDIVISION, ON THE EAST BY SHERWOOD PUD, AND ON THE SOUTH BY RADIO ROAD, R/W. OBJECTIVE: To issue a Commercial Excavation Permit to Lucky Strike M.K. Inc., for the project know as "Blue Heron Offsite Hauling" in accordance with County Ordinance No. 92-73, Division 3.5. CONSIDERATION: The petitioner was issued a Development Permit on April 29, 2002. He now proposes to haul 100,000 C.Y. of fill offsite which requires a Commercial Excavation Permit. This Executive Summary has been reviewed and approved by Transportation Services. FISCAL IMPACT: The Community Development Fund, Development Services (113-138932940000000) has or will receive $850.00 in revenues broken out as follows: Application Fee: $850.00 TOTAL FEES Prior to permit issuance a Road Damage Fee in the amount of $4,700 will be paid to the Transportation Department. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: NONE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: NONE HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: NONE EAC RECOMMENDATION: No EAC public hearing was required because of the size of the excavation. CCPC RECOMMENDATIONS: No CCPC public hearing was required. AGENDA ITEM JUL 3 0 2002 Excavation Permit No.59.803 Blue Heron Offsite Hauling Page 2 ENGINEERING SERVICES RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the issuance of Excavation Permit No. 59.803 "Lucky Strike M.K. Inc. "Blue Heron Offsite Hauling" with the following stipulations: 1) All provisions of Collier County Ordinance No. 91-102, Division 3.5 shall be adhered to. 2) If trees are to be removed as a result of the hauling operation, a Vegetation Removal Permit, required by Land Development Code, Division 3.9 shall be obtained from Collier County Planning & Technical Services before work shall commence. 3) Off-site removal of material shall be limited to 100,000 C.Y. and shall be subject to "Standard Conditions" imposed by the Transpiration Services Division in document dated 5/24/88 (copy attached). 4) Transportation Services Division has required the following stipulations and will monitor for compliance: a) A video record of the existing conditions of all major roadways within two miles of the access point shall be taken prior to beginning the work. Thereafter, visual and video inspections shall be made at three-month intervals. b) The access point on Radio Road shall be paved from the edge of existing pavement to the right-of-way line. The area shall be swept or otherwise cleaned every day. c) A locking gate shall be installed at the access point to prevent unauthorized access. d) The site owner shall assume all liability for overloads, spills and traffic interface at the access point. e) A maintenance of Traffic Plan and a Right-of-way Permit shall be required for the access point prior to beginning any work. f) All costs associated with the foregoing stipulations and conditions shall be the responsibility of the property owner. AGENDA ITEM~ JUL 3 0 2002 Excavation Permit No.59.803 Blue Heron Offsite Hauling Page 3 PREPARED BY: Stephen ~'~',qSil~.", ¢¢' .... Datb" Senior Engineer REVIEWED BY: Thomas E. Kuck, P.E. Date Engineering Services Director ~..,.__.___ .~-, Joseph K. Sclimitt, Commuhity Dat~ Oommunity Development and Env. Services 2002 COLLrER CO~ TRANSPORTATION SERVICES "STANDARD CONDITIONS" EXCAVATION PERMIT APPLICATIONS LNVOLVING OFF-SITE REMOVAL OF MATERIAL The intent of these "Standard Condition~" are to provide excavation permit applicants a snmrn~ry of condition~ which may affect their projects and which should be taken into cor~ideration during ail stages of project development: 1. Haul route~ between an excavation site and'an arterial road shall be private with propen'y owner(s) approval or be a public collector road built to standards applicable to handle the resulting truck tra/~c. Where residential areas front collector roads, appropriate turn lanes, buffer and bikepath shall be requ/red as mlnirrmi site improvements and if recommetlded for approval, shall be so with the condition that the Transportation Services Administration reserves the right to suspend or prohibit off-site removal of excavated m~t,.rial should such removal create a hazardous road condition or substantially deteriorate a road condition; such action by the Transportation Services Administration shall be subject to appeal before the Board of County Commissioners. 2. Haul routes utili~i%, public wads shall be subject to wad maintenance and road repair or an appropriate fa/r shm~ by the permittee in accordance with Excavation Ordinance No. 91-102 ~ amended Div. 3.5 and Right-of-Way Ordinance No. 93-64. 3. Off-site removal of excavated material shall be subject to Ordinance No. 92-22 (Road Impact Ordinance). A tra~c and road impact analysis shall' be made by the County to determine the effects that off-site removal of excavated material will have on the road system within the excavat/on project's zone of influence. If appropriate, road impact fees in accordance with Ordinance No. 92-22 shall be paid prior to the issuance of an excavation p~miL ' 4. The T~on Service~ Adm/ni~tm/on re~,-rves the right to establi~ emer~m~ weight limits on public roadways affected by the off-site removal of excavated n,*t~-/al; the procedu~ for extablishment of we/ght limits shall be the present*rion of an applicable resol~/o~ before the ~ of Colliery Cottlmi~ionfi~ Should weight limi~ the pmn/tt~ shall be reapon~le to inclement me~ut~ to a.~ur= that all load/ngs ie~ving the pertn/t's pmper~y conform to the applicable weight restriction. $. The Exca~on Pe~mnmce ~ ~ ~l~ply to excawtion operation, o of'rwo JUl 3 0 2002 L , 6. Based on soil boring information per Ordinance No. 91-102 as amended, a blasting permit may be appropriate. Should a blasting permit application be submit'ted and should resident/al areas ex/st w/thin one mile of the excavation site, the County reserves the right to deny a blasting permit based on concerns for off-site impacts from blasting at an excavation site. Should a blasting permit be considered and approved, the minimum conditions of approval in addition to conditions per Ordinance No. 91-102 as amended are as follows: A. Structure hlventory/monitoring and applicable property owner release as required by the Development Services Director. B. Security bond applicable to private property damage acceptable to the County. C. Control of size/depth/number of charges per blast by the Development Services Director. D. The right of the County to suspend and/or revoke blasting permit authority should it be determ/~ed that blasting activities are creating unacceptable off-site conditions either in terms of private property damage and/or related physical effects of blasting operations. ~A 7. No excavation perm/t shall be issued until receipt of a release from the Transportation Services Administration applicable to proper mitigation of off-site impacts, meet/nE of applicable provisions of Ordinance No. 93-64, Ordinance No. /)2-22, and Ordinance No. 91-102 aa amended. Reference to letter of 5/24/88 Revised 1/13/98 kGE~k JUL ~ {) 2002 REQUEST TO A~PROVE FOR I~ECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF ~SAB~tL BAY COMMERCIAL PLAT P~A~E ONE", AND APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE A~REEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY. OBJECTIVE: To approve for recording the final plat of "Sabal Bay Commercial Plat Phase One", a subdivision of lands located in Section 24 Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, following the alternative procedure for approval of subdivision plats. CONSIDERATIONS: Engineering Review Section has completed the review of the construction drawings, specifications, and final plat of "Sabal Bay Commercial Plat Phase One". These documents are in compliance with the County Land Development Code and Florida State Statute No. 177. Ail fees have been paid. Security in the amount of 10% of the total cost of the required improvements, and 100% of the cost of any remaining improvements, together with a Construction and Maintenance Agreement for Subdivision Improvements, shall be provided and accepted by the Planning Services Director and the County Attorneys Office prior to the recording of the final plat. This would be in conformance with the County Land Development Code - Division 3.2.9. Engineering Review Section recommends that the final plat of "Sabal Bay Commercial Plat Phase One" be approved for recording. This Executive Summary has been reviewed and approved by Ed Kant of Transportation Services and Roy Anderson of Public Works Utilities. FISCAL IMPACT: The project cost is $965,360.95 (estimated) to be borne by the developer. The cost breakdown is as follows: a) Water & Sewer - $ 57,130.00 b) Drainage, Paving, Grading - $908,230.95 The Security amount, equal to 110% of the project cost, is $1,061,897.05. The County will realize revenues as follows: Fund: Community Development Fund 113 Agency: County Manager Cost Center: 138900 - Development Services Revenue Generated By this Project: $17,575.00 Fees are based on a construction estimate of $965 360 95 and were paid in February and April 2002. [_ ~ A~.~.~.~r~L. The breakdown is as follows: a) Plat Review Fee ($425.00 + $4./ac) - $ 810.00 b) Construction Drawing Review Fee Water & Sewer (.50% cons. Est.) - $ 285.65 Drainage, Paving, Grading (.42% const, est.) - $ 3814.57 c) Construction Inspection Fee Water & Sewer (1.5% const, est.) - $ 856.97 Drainage, Paving, Grading (1.3% const, est.) - $11807.81 GROW~~G~ ~ACT~ The Concurrency Waiver and Release relating to conditional approval has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's Office for the project. ENVIRONMENT ISSUES: There are no outstanding environmental issues. HiSTORiCAL/ARCHEOLO~ICAL IMPACT: There are no historical or archeological impacts. EAC RECOMMENDATION: Approval CCPC RECOMMENDATION: Approval PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the Final Plat of "Sabal Bay Commercial Plat Phase One" for recording with the following stipulations: 1. Approve the amount of $1,061,897.05 as performance security for the required improvements; or such lesser amount based on work completed, and as is approved by the Engineering Review Department. 2. Approve the Standard Form Construction and Maintenance Agreement, and a) That no Certificate of Occupancy be granted until the required improvements have received preliminary acceptance. b) That the plat not be recorded until suitable security and an appropriate Construction and Maintenance Agreement is approved and accepted by the Planning Services Director and the County Attorney's Office. 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PROPOSAL TO ACCEPT A MASTER PLAN AND LEGAL AGREEMENT FOR INFRASTRUCTURE TO SERVE PROJECTS IN THE WHIPPOORWILL AREA (BOUNDED ON THE NORTH BY PINE RIDGE ROAD, ON THE SOUTH BY THE WYNDEMERE SUBDIVISION, ON THE EAST BY 1-75 RIGHT OF WAY, AND ON THE WEST BY PROPOSED LIVINGSTON ROAD, WHICH IS PRESENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION). OBJECTIVE: The objective of this proposal is to formally adopt the attached Master Plan and Legal Agreement prepared by the engineers and attorneys who represent property owners in the above-mentioned Whippoorwill area. CONSIDERATIONS: On January 11, 2000, the Board of County Commissioners, acting in regular session, approved item 8(A)3 calling for design of "A sanitary sewer collection system and potable water supply distribution system.., having areawide benefits ... (.and to be).., prorated against all benefiting property owners." The BCC also approved direction to the staff that "Areawide drainage facilities and appurtenances including land requirements shall be under the control of Collier County. Prorated improvement costs to benefiting property owners shall have been determined and approved by said property owners." The BCC approved all of Staff's recommendations dealing with preparation and implementation of an infrastructure Master Plan. Staff has recently received documents that meet Staff's requirements. FISCAL IMPACT: Properly done, developer funded improvements will have minimum fiscal impact on the County. Any cost to the County would be in terms of Staff time for the different Divisions to review such plans as may be required and inspect the improvements. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. ~ JUt. 3{32002 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: There is a slough that runs through the area that is of interest to the South Florida Water Management District. They have reviewed projects in this area, but discontinuities in the functioning of the slough must be dealt with during construction. HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: None. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Board approve the attached Master Plan and Legal Agreement for the Whippoorwill Area subject to the following stipulations: l. To eliminate the possibility of a long-term dead-end pipe, the south end of the Whippoorwill Lane water main must be tied into the water main in Livingston Road with the Phase One improvements. Whippoorwill Lane roadway must be constructed to County Standards, and the construction of -' the roadway will be monitored and inspected by the Transportation Division, who will preliminarily accept the roadway upon completion. Final acceptance by the Board of County Commissioners will be after the roadway has passed final inspection after a one-year warranty period. 3. With respect to the proposed wastewater facility along Livingston Road, the responsibility for design, permitting, construction and conveyance of this facility to the County shall be contained in any Development Agreement approved pursuant to this item. PREPARED BY: STAN CHRZANO~7SKI, P.E. DATE SENIOR ENGINEt~R 2002 REVIEWED BY: THOMAS E. KUCK, P.E. DATE ACTING PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEWED BY: /. / i , NORMAN FEDER DATE TRANSPORTATION DIVISION ADMINISTRATOR REVIEWED BY: .... J~SDELONY DATE ~~I TIES D IV IS ION ADMI~T RAT OR APPROVED BY: ~ ,C~SEPH K. ~gCHMITT, ADMINISTRATOR DATE ~0MMUNITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS. 59.731 EX SUMMARY/SC/H/EAB Exec. Summ. JUL 3 0 2002 3 Pg. S DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is entered into this ~ day of ,2002, by and between PRIV, LLC, an Indiana limited liability company with a principal address of 77 W. Wacker Drive, Suite 4200, Chicago, Illinois 60601 ("Whiteco"); K&S Arlington Lakes, LLC, with a principal address of 73 S. Palm Avenue, Suite 223, Sarasota, Florida 34236 ("Arlington"); The Related Group with a principal address of 2828 Coral Way, Penthouse 1, Miami, Florida 33145, ("Related"), and Whippoorwill Pines, LLC, with a principal address of 26251 South Tamiami Trail, Suite 6, Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 ("Pines"). WlTNESSETH: THAT WHEREAS, Arlington is the owner of that certain parcel of real property located in Collier County, Florida, described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated by reference ("Arlington Property"); and WHEREAS, Related is the owner of that certain parcel of real property located in Collier County, Florida, described on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated by reference ("Related Property"); and, WHEREAS, Pines is the owner of that certain parcel of real property located in Collier County, Florida, described on Exhibit "C" attached hereto and incorporated by reference ("Pines Property"); and, WHEREAS, Whiteco is the owner of that certain parcel of real property located in Collier County, Florida, described on Exhibit "D" hereto and incorporated by reference (the "Whiteco Property"); and WHEREAS, each of the parties' properties fronts on Whippoorwill Lane and, as a consequence thereof and of provisions of some of their respective PUD Ordinances, each party has agreed to proportionately fund improvements to and in connection with Whippoorwill Lane; and WHEREAS, the parties hereto accordingly desire to extend Whippoorwill Lane southward from Pine Ridge Road, and to provide for the construction of roadway, water, and sewer improvements in connection therewith as set forth herein. The improvements are described in Exhibit "E", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and are hereinafter referred to as the "Project Improvements"; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, the mutual covenants herein contained and the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which being hereby specifically acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated herein by reference. ,~,ENO~,ITEM, '" ~ 2. Project Improvements. The improvements contemplated hereby inc L~de..l~/~.~,_.. ~2 ~/~_ JUL 3 0 2002 (a) Whippoorwill Lane. Whippoorwill Lane shall be designed in accordance with Collier County standards and constructed in two phases from Pine Ridge Road to the entrance of the Whiteco Property. The first phase shall extend southwards from Pine Ridge Road and shall terminate approximately 100 feet beyond the center of the intersection of Whippoorwill Lane and Nighthawk Road ("Phase I"). The second phase will extend from the terminus of Phase I to the entrance to the Whiteco Property ("Phase I1'). Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, each party hereto agrees and acknowledges that the costs of installing any turn lane on or in connection with Whippoorwill Lane to provide access to its property shall be and remain the sole responsibility of the owner of the property served thereby. (b) Water and Sewer System Improvements. Water and sanitary sewer lines to serve all properties abutting Whippoorwill Lane shall be designed and installed concurrently with each phase of construction of Whippoorwill Lane. Upon the completion of each phase of Construction the aPpropriatc Conveyance documents will be provided to the Collier County Water-Sewer DiStrict that relate to the Utility Project. These documents and record drawings will cOnform with the standards and procedures employed by the County for the acceptance of regional wastewater and water utility infrastructure...i ,h~. ~',,.I~,., ............ ,w. ~mpravcmcnts, 3. Dedication of Riqht-of-Way. The parties hereto each agree to dedicate a 40 foot wide easement and right-of-way along the portion of their property abutting Whippoorwill Lane to Collier County for roadway and utility purposes within ten (10) days after the date the last party executes this Agreement. 4. Project Mana.qer. The parties hereby designate Grady Minor and Associates as the Project Manager relative to the Project Improvements. 5. Designation of Representative. Each of the parties hereto designates Arlington as the authorized representative of the parties hereto to negotiate and enter into a contract with Project Manager on behalf of the parties hereto relative to Project Manager's provision of the services outlined herein. The compensation to be paid to Project Manager pursuant to such contract and the profeSsional fees incurred by Arlington relative to the negotiation thereof shall be funded in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 9 hereof. 6. Desiqn and Permittinq the Project Improvements. Within sixty (60) days after the date that the last party executes this Agreement, the Project Manager shall complete the design of the Project Improvements in accordance with the minimum standards established by Collier County and in a manner that includes ~-. an alignment, section configurations, and cross sections. All desi[lns shalI comply with all local, state, and federal requirements and must t)e ~~ all parties hereto prior to commencing construction. JUL 3 0 2002 Page 2 of 13 ~ 7. Permitting of the Proiect Improvements. The Project Manager shall have primary responsibility for: (a) obtaining all necessary permits in connection with the Project Improvements; (b) preparing all permit applications, including all related designs and analyses; (c) submitting all relevant applications; (d) responding to all permitting agency inquiries; (e) providing or coordinating access to sites as requested by permitting agencies; and (f) taking such other reasonable steps necessary or desirable to obtain such permits. Related agrees that it will modify its permit with the South Florida Water Management District to account for the drainage resulting from the installation of the Phase I Improvements, and Whiteco shall be responsible for such permits as they relate to the Phase II Improvements. 8. Wetland Miti.qation for the Proiect Improvements. In the design and construction of the Project Improvements, The Project Manager shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations pertaining to the mitigation of wetland impacts, if any. Notwithstanding any of the provisions of this Agreement to the contrary, each of the parties hereto shall be solely responsible for any and all necessary mitigation relative to any portion of the Project Improvements occurring upon the real property owned by such party without any right to receive payment, credit, or contribution from any of the other parties hereto. 9. Fundinq for the Proiect Improvements. (a) Arlington, Related and Pines shall pay, (i) a combined total of one-half (1/2) of the design and engineering costs contemplated in paragraphs 5 through 7 hereof, together with the fees and costs associated with the formulation and submission of the Whippoorwill Lane Master Plan that serves as the basis for the undertaking incorporated herein as well as the professional costs involved in drafting and negotiating this Agreement (all of such costs being hereinafter referred to as the "Design Costs"); and (ii) all construction costs related to the Phase I Project Improvements. (b) Whiteco shall pay, (i) one-half (Y2) of the Design Costs; and (ii) all construction costs related to the Phase II Improvements. (c) Construction of the Phase I Project Improvements shall be completed by December 31, 2002. Construction of the Phase II Project Improvements shall be commenced and completed at Whiteco's sole discretion. An estimate of the amount and allocation of the Design Costs and of the costs of construction of the Phase I Project Improvements is attached hereto as Exhibit "F". In the event the Phase I Project Improvements are not completed prior to December 31, 2002, Whiteco may, but is not obligated to, complete construction of the Phase I Project Improvements, and any expenses incurred by Whiteco to complete such construction shall be paid to Whiteco by the other parties. The other parties shall be jointly and severally liable for any expenses incurred by Whiteco in completing the Phase I Project Improvements and Whiteco shall have a lien on the other parties' properties until Whiteco is reimbursed for all expens -- complete the Phase I Project Improvements. JUL 3 0 2002 Page 3 of 13 '~- 10. Funding Obli.qations. Within thirty (30) days after the date the last party executes this Agreement, each party shall deposit with Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson, P.A., Escrow Agents, the sum of that party's anticipated proportionate share of the Design Costs. Such sum shall be held in escrow for application against that party's share of the Design Costs. Within ninety (90) days after written notice by the Project Manager that the design and permitting phase relative to the Project Improvements has been completed, and provided that all permits necessary to complete the Project Improvements have been obtained, each party responsible for the construction of the Phase I Project Improvements shall deposit with Escrow Agent the additional sum representing that party's anticipated proportionate share of the costs of the Phase I Project Improvements. If such deposits prove insufficient to pay any party's share of the Design Costs or the construction costs of the Phase I Project Improvements, that party shall, within ten (10) business days after receiving a written request from the Project Manager, deposit such additional funds with Escrow Agent as the Project Manager shall, in good faith, estimate as necessary to cover the balance of that party's share of such costs. If a party's deposited funds remain in the escrow account after full payment of those costs for which the party is responsible, such excess funds shall be promptly returned by Escrow Agent to such party. 11. Payment for the Costs of Design and Construction of the Proiect Improvements. The Escrow Agent shall disburse the escrowed funds in accordance with the procedures set forth in this Section 11. Specifically, the Project Manager shall submit monthly statements to the Escrow Agent and all parties hereto for payment which incorporates invoices of the contractors, consultants and others for which partial reimbursement is requested. Lien releases from contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers shall also be provided as may from time to time be required by the Escrow Agent. To receive disbursements, the Project Manager must certify to Escrow Agent that the specific item for which disbursement is sought is within the scope of this Agreement and has been incurred in accordance with approved plans and specifications. Invoices meeting the requirements of this paragraph shall be paid by the Escrow Agent, subject to Escrow Agent's actual receipt of the funds necessary to pay such invoices, within twenty (20) business days of receipt of such certification from the Project Manager. 12. Lien. The funding requirements of each party hereto, together with interest and costs of collection and reasonable attorneys fees, shall be a continuing lien upon the Whiteco Property, Arlington Property, Related Property and Pines Property, as applicable. Each owner of any portion of the above described properties, by acceptance of a deed for all or a portion of such property personally covenants and agrees to pay any such obligations falling due prior to or during the time of its ownership and such personal obligation shall survive any conveyance. The lien imposed hereby shall be considered a restriction and servitude running with the land. If any party(ies) does not timely pay the amounts required of it following demand therefore by the Project Manager, any party hereto may at anytime thereafter advance the unpaid funds on behalf of that party(ies) and recc 'cl ~n JUL 3 0 2002 Page 4 of 13 Records a Claim of Lien against the above described property for such amounts as have been advanced on behalf of that party and bring an action to foreclose the lien in the manner in which the mortgages on real property are foreclosed. In addition, any of the parties hereto, may bring an action at law against any owner of the above described property for any amounts which remain unpaid. The Claim of Lien shall include a description of the property encumbered, the owner's name, the amount then due and the date when due. The lien herein created is specifically declared to be subordinate and inferior to the lien and operation of any first mortgage given to a mortgagee to secure repayment of amounts advanced for the development, construction or improvement of the property burdened thereby. 13. Document Audits. Any party hereto shall have the right to access and audit the Project Manager's and/or Escrow Agent's books, ledgers, records, receipts, invoices, vouchers, correspondence, memoranda and other documents relating or pertaining to the disbursements of any funds contemplated under this Agreement. The Escrow Agent shall retain all documents pertaining to the reimbursement for a minimum of five (5) years after completion for the Project Improvements and final payment. 14. Mutual Cooperation. The parties hereto agree to reasonably cooperate with one another to coordinate and achieve the construction of the Project Improvements. 15. Bids for Construction Work. With respect to Phase I of the Project Improvements, the Project Manager shall obtain at least three (3) responsive bids from appropriately licensed bidders for the construction and installation of each of the Project Improvements. In lieu of or in addition to these bid requirements, the parties may elect to unanimously agree to utilize a form construction contract relative to the Project Improvements or any portion thereof. Such construction contract shall require the general contractor to procure appropriate payment and performance bonds. Each of the parties hereto shall execute and have the right to approve the construction contract relative to the construction of the Project Improvements; however, the parties each designate Arlington as the party entrusted to negotiate such construction contract on behalf of all parties to this Agreement. The legal expenses incurred by Arlington relative to the negotiation of the construction contract shall be deemed to be a part of the construction costs to be paid pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 9 hereof. 16. Site Inspection. The Project Manager, and/or any designated representative of a party hereto shall be granted complete access to the construction area and access to meeting space, telephones, and a fax machine within the Project Manager's construction trailer. In the event work is discovered, whether by the Project Manager or any of the parties hereto, which is defective or otherwise does not conform to the requirements set forth herein, the Project Manager shall promptly cause to be remedied such defective or non-conforming work. The Project Manager shall have the sole authority to supervise and direct the work to be performed by the contractor relative to the construction of the Project Improvements, and the means, methods, techniques, sequences, procedures of construction, and safety measures and programs employed by such contractor incident to such construction. A~r.J~A ITE~. Page 5 of 13 JUL 3 0 2002 17. Document Availability· The Project Manager shall make available for inspection, as requested by the parties, copies of all plans, specifications, schedules, correspondence, forms, change order requests, reports, field transmittals, job logs, shop drawings, samples, testing date and reports, bids and any other design, testing, construction engineering inspection, or construction documents requested by any party. 18. Change Orders. All construction contract change orders must be approved by the Project Manager in writing and the Project Manager shall have the authority to authorize and approve on behalf of the parties hereto written change orders relative to the construction contract, provided that the costs associated with such change order(s) are less than $10,000.00 as to any single change order and less than $50,000.00 in the aggregate as to all change orders. Notwithstanding any other provisions herein, once the design of the Project Improvements have been approved and a construction contract has been executed, any change orders regarding the construction of the Project Improvements requested by any party shall be paid for solely by the requesting party and the requesting party shall advance funds to the Escrow Agent for this purpose. 19. Insurance. The Project Manager shall procure insurance relative to each component of the Project Improvements and request that each of its design, testing, construction engineering and inspection consultants and its contractors to provide insurance in accordance with the following coverage: (a) General Liability $1,000,000.00 (b) Automobile Liability $500,000.00 (c) Worker's Compensation Statutory Limits (d) Professional Liability $1,000,000.00 (Consultant's only) The Project Manager shall cause each of the parties hereto to be named as additional insures on such insurance policies. 20. Liens and Warranties. The Project Manager shall act to prevent construction liens from being filed on any real property on which a component of the Project Improvements is being constructed. If a lien is filed, the Project Manager shall take the requisite action to have the lien removed, at a cost to be shared proportionately by and among the parties. Each construction contract applicable to the Project Improvements shall warrant the materials and work performed for a period of two (2) years following completion of the Project Improvements. 21. Construction Mana.qement Services. The Project Manager shall perform construction management services relating to the Project Improvements. Such services shall include, but are not limited to, the following: (a) coordination with all applicable governmental agencies or entities having jurisdiction; (b) project management; (c) construction engineering and inspection; (d) construction management; (e) scheduling; (f) reporting; (g) estimating; (h) project accounting; (i) quality control; (j) safety programming; (k) permitting; and (I) administration and oversight of design consultants, testing consultants, and construction and engineering consultants. AGENDA ITEM. Page 6 of 13 .JUL ,~ D 2002 22. Dispute Resolution. With regard to any material disputes between any of the parties regarding the construction of the Project Improvements, the parties agree to mediate the dispute with a mediator chosen by the parties. The parties shall equally share the costs of any such mediation. In the event such dispute is not resolved through mediation, the parties may initiate litigation. The parties to this Agreement agree that venue for any dispute relative to this Agreement shall solely lie in Collier County, Florida. 23. Further Assurances. In addition to the acts recited in this Agreement, the parties hereto agree to perform or cause to be performed any and all further acts as may be reasonably necessary to complete the transactions contemplated hereby, including, but not limited to, the execution and/or recordation of further instruments. 24. Notices. All notices, elections, requests, and other communications hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed given: (a) when personally delivered to the recipient; (b) three (3) business days after being deposited in the United States Mail, postage prepaid to the above listed address of the recipient; (c) the next business day after being deposited with a recognized overnight mail or courier delivery service; or (d) when transmitted by facsimile or telecopy transmission. 25. A.qreement Not a Partnership or Joint Venture. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to create a partnership or joint venture between the parties and none of the parties to this Agreement shall be construed under this Agreement as being partners or joint venturers for any purpose. 26. Entire Aqreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement among the parties hereto, and supersedes any and all prior agreements, arrangements, or understandings, whether oral or written and whether recorded or unrecorded, between the parties hereto or their predecessors in interest, relating to the subject matter hereof. 27. Modification. This Agreement may not be amended, changed, or modified, and material provisions hereunder may not be waived, except by a written agreement signed by all parties to this Agreement. 28. Disclaimer of Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is solely for the benefit of the parties to this Agreement and no right or cause of action shall accrue by reason hereof to or for the benefit of any third party not a party hereto. Nothing in this Agreement, expressed or implied, is intended or shall be construed to confer upon or give any person or entity any right, remedy or claim under or by reason of this Agreement or any provisions or conditions hereof, other than the parties hereto and their respective representatives, heirs, successors and assigns. 29. Severability. If any provision of the Agreement, the deletion of which would not adversely affect the receipt of any material benefits by any party to this Agreement or substantially increase the burden of any party to this Agreement, Page 7 of 13 JUL 3 0 2002 shall be held to be invalid or unenforceable to any extent by a court of competent jurisdiction, the same shall not affect in any respect whatsoever the validity or enforceability of the remainder of this Agreement. 30. Attorneys' Fees and Costs. In the event of any action to enforce the terms of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys', paralegals' fees, and costs incurred by each prevailing party. 31. Choice of Law. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with Florida law. 32. Memorandum of Aqreement. The parties hereto agree that a Memorandum of this Agreement in the form and content as set forth in Exhibit "G" attached hereto and incorporated by reference shall be executed by each of the parties hereto upon execution of this Agreement and that such Memorandum shall be recorded in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Agreement on the dates indicated below. Witnesses for PR IV, LLC PR IV, LLC an Indiana limited liability company Printed Name: By: Printed Name: Its: Date: Printed Name: Witnesses for K&S Arlington Lakes, LLC K&S Arlington Lakes, LLC By:. Printed Name: Printed Name: Its: Date: Printed Name: Witnesses for the Related Group The Related Group By: Printed Name: Printed Name: Its: Date: Printed Name: No. JUL 3 0 2002 Page 8 of 13 AGF~DA ITEM JUL 3 0 2002 Page 9 of 13 ~i Witnesses for Whippoorwill Pines, LLC Whippoorwill Pines, LLC By: Printed Name: Printed Name: Its: Date: Printed Name: STATE OF INDIANA COUNTY OF Sworn to and subscribed before me on this ~ day of , 2002 by as of PR IV, L.L.C. an Indiana limited liability company, who is personally known to me or who has produced as identification. Notary Public State of Indiana {Seal} Print or Type Name Commission No. STATE OF COUNTY OF Sworn to and subscribed before me on this __ day of , 2002 by , as of K&S Arlington Lakes, LLC, who is personally known to me or who has produced as identification. Notary Public State of {Seal} Print or Type Name Commission No. JUL 3 0 2002 Page 10 of 13 I~._ l/J/' STATE OF COUNTY OF Sworn to and subscribed before me on this __ day of , 2002 by , as of The Related Group who is personally known to me or who has produced as identification. Notary Public State of {Seal} Print or Type Name Commission No. STATE OF COUNTY OF Sworn to and subscribed before me on this __ day of , 2002 by , as. of Whippoorwill Pines, LLC who is personally known to me or who has produced as identification. Notary Public State of {Seal} Print or Type Name Commission No. JUL 3 0 2002 Page 11 of 13 p~,._ I ~' _ EXHIBIT A ARLINGTON PROPERTY A parcel of land lying in the West half of Section 18, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, and more particularly described as follows: The North half (N ~), of the Southeast quarter (SE ~,~), of the Southwest quarter (SW 1,,~), of Section 18, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida; and The Northeast quarter (NE lA) of the Southwest quarter (SW ~,~) of Section 18, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida; and The South half (S 1/2) of the Southeast quarter (SE 1,4) of the Northwest quarter (NW ~,~) of Section 18, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. Said parcel containing 78.83 acres, more or less, subject to easements, restrictions and reservations of record. AGENO^ ITEM. JUL 3 0 2002 Page 12 of 13 ~ EXHIBIT E DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS Water: Extension of an existing 12-inch water main from its present terminus at the entrance to the Reserve of Naples apartment complex to a point at the northern boundary of the Whiteco Property. Sewer: Extension of a 10-inch forcemain from Pine Ridge Road to a point at the northern boundary of the Whiteco Property, of which approximately 1,400 feet have already been installed by Related. Whippoorwill Lane: Resurfacing and landscaping of the approximately 1,800 feet of existing roadway, which has already been completed by Related. A new road will be constructed from the terminus of the existing Whippoorwill Lane to a point at the northern boundary of the Whiteco Property. It will be a two lane local road, 24 feet wide, and constructed to standards described in the Whippoorwill Lane Corridor Master Plan Study, prepared by Waldrop engineering, P.A. and Q. Grady Minor & Assoc., P.A., and submitted to Collier County Engineering Services on June 14, 2002. In addition, the project will include a five foot sidewalk installed on the East side of Whippoorwill Lane from Pine Ridge Road to the entrance to the Reserve of Naples apartment complex. JUL 3 0 2002 Page 13 of 13 WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDOR M_ASTER PLAN STUDY SUBMITTED TO: COLLIER COUNTY ENGINEERING SERVICES 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FL 34104 PREPARED BY: WALDROP ENGINEER/NG, P.A. Q. GRADY MINOR & ASSOC., P.A. 10641 AIRPORT ROAD NORTH #32 3800 VIA DEL RAY NAPLES, FL. 34109 BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34134 JUNE 2002 ' ~._l~f~ tUL 3 0 2002 WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION SECTION ONE UTILITY INTRODUCTION SECTION TWO POTABLE WATER SECTION THREE WASTEWATER SECTION FOUR TRANSPORTATION SECTION FIVE DRAINAGE SECTION SIX MISCELLANEOUS EXHIBITS Location Map Aerial Collier County Zoning Atlas JUL 3 0 2002 WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY SECTION ONE: INTRODUCTION The Whippoorwill Lane Corridor Master Plan Study has been prepared for the purpose of evaluating the minimum required infrastructure facilities for the study area. Analyses have been prepared to address the infrastructure needs for Potable Water, Wastewater, Transportation, and Drainage. Four of the Planned Unit Developments are responsible for the preparation of this Master Plan Study. The Planned Unit Developments are: o Whippoorwill Lakes Arlington Lakes Whippoorwill Pines o Whippoorwill Woods This Master Plan Study was a requirement within the PUDs for Whippoorwill Lakes, Arlington Lakes, and Whippoorwill Pines. Whippoorwill Woods has joined the other PUDs in contributing to this study because they realize the benefits the study will have on the development of this area. In addition to the Master Plan Study, the PUDs have agreed to enter into a Developer's Agreement that will establish the guidelines for developing the required infrastructure as discussed in this study. Therefore, the primary focus of this Master Plan Study focuses on the infrastructure along Whippoorwill Lane. The Whippoorwill Lane Corridor area consists of existing properties, properties slated for imminent development, and properties to be developed in the future. The study area comprising approximately 578+ acres of varying ownership and zoning designation, lies within northern Collier County (Section 18, Township 49 South, and Range 26 East) and is located immediately south of the Pine Ridge Road right-of-way, east of the Livingston Road right-of-way, west of the Interstate 75 right-of-way, and north of the Kensington Canal. The projects have been identified on the exhibits within this study. The following sections have detailed information pertaining to the evaluation of the potable water, wastewater, transportation, and drainage systems within the Master Plan Study area. ITEM / 2002 WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY SECTION TWO: UTILITY INTRODUCTION Utilities Introduction: The Whippoor~vill Lane Corridor Master Plan Study has been implemented in an effort to determine the potable water and wastewater infi'astructure facilities required to support existing and future development of the properties located within the study area. The study area along with the existing and proposed utilities are shown in Exhibit 2-1. The criteria for analyzing the water and wastewater systems for the study area was established in the Collier County Government Public Utilities Engineering Department 2001 Water Master Plan Update and the Collier County Government Public Utilities Engineering Department 2001 Wastewater Master Plan Update prepared by Greeley and Hansen, LLC. The criteria for the potable water system is as follows: Per Capita Flow 185 gpcd People per Dwelling Unit 2.3 ppdu Maximum Day Flow Factor 1.3 Peak Factor Ten States Standard Fire Flow 1500 gpm(residential) Minimum Pressure @ Max Day with Fire Flow 40 psi The criteria for the wastewater system is as follows: Per Capita Flow 145 gpcd People per Dwelling Unit 2.3 ppdu Peak Factor Ten States Standard This criteria was applied to the zoning parameters of the study area to establish the system demands. For the parcels that did not have established unit counts based on zoning, a zoning density of six (6) dwelling units per acre was applied. This density is consistent with the existing PUDs in the study area. Hydraulic analyses were prepared to evaluate the performance of the future utilities within the study area. It is assumed that irrigation for these developments will be provided by another source other than the Collier County potable water system. The following two sections provide the details of the analyses used to evaluate the water and wastewater systems. JUL 3 0 2002 WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY EXttlBIT 2-1 WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY WATER & SEWER PLAN JUL 3 0 2002 2802 WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY SECTION THREE: POTABLE WATER Potable Water Introduction The Whippoor~vill Lane Corridor Master Plan Study has been implemented in an effort to determine the potable water infrastructure facilities required to support existing and future development of properties in the study area. This section will discuss existing conditions and the future conditions for the potable water system based on the criteria outlined in Section Two. Existing Conditions An existing 12" water main is located within the existing Whippoorwill Lane right-of- way. This water main has been extended to serve the first phase of Whippoorwill Lakes. PUD. This water main is an extension of and connected to the Collier County owned and maintained water distribution system located within the Pine Ridge Road right-of way. An existing 16" water main is located within the Pine Ridge Road right-of-way and an existing 16" water main is located within the Livingston Road right-of-way. Reference Exhibit 2-1 for the location of these existing water mains. In the hydraulic models, the connection point for the Whippoorwill Lane water main is shown at the 16" water main along Pine Ridge Road. The pressure at this point of connection was assumed to be 65 psi. This pressure was assumed based on the information obtained from the Collier County Government Public Utilities Engineering Department 2001 Water Master Plan Update. This update indicated that the pressures along Pine Ridge Road will be as follows: Scenario 2006 2021 Peak Demand Hydraulic Model 76 psi 73 psi Average Demand Hydraulic Model 79 psi 80 psi The assumed connection pressure is lower than the anticipated pressures from the Master Plan update. In addition to the Master Plan information, a fire flow test that was conducted at the existing 12" water main along Whippoorwill Lane yielded a static pressure of 90 psi. Proposed Conditions The hydraulic analyses for the potable water system were based on the criteria outlined in Section Two. The following phases show that a 12" water main will adequately serve the study area. Also, the study area was divided into three phases. The phases are as follows: Phase One - Extend 12" water main to the northern boundary of Whippoorwill Pines to serve Whippoorwill Lakes, Arlington Lakes, Future Development Area 1, and Whippoorwill Pines. JUL 3 0 2002 WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORPdDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY Phase Two - Extend 12" water main to northern boundary at Whippoorwill Woods to serve Future Development Area 3 and Whippoorwill Woods. Extend 12" water main along Nighthawk Drive to serve Future Development Area 2. Phase Three - Loop 12" water main from Whippoorwill Lane to existing 16" water main along Livingston Road. Reference Exhibit 2-1 for the overall plan showing the developments, utility sizes and locations, and the phasing schedule. Phase One Phase One involves extending the 12" water main to the terminus point at the northern boundary of Whippoorwill Pines. The Phase One hydraulic analysis includes the existing developments along Whippoorwill Lane that are served by the existing 12" water main in addition to the proposed developments for Arlington Lakes, Future Development Area 1, Whippoorwill Lakes, and Whippoorwill Pines. The maximum day demands were modeled with a fire flow of 1500 gpm at the terminus point of the Phase One water main. With this fire flow condition, the minimum pressure in the water main hydraulic model is 55.6 psi. Therefore, the water main extension for Phase One will adequately serve the developments. Reference Exhibit 3-1' Hydraulic Analysis - Phase One with Fire Flow at Whippoorwill Pines. Phase Two Phase Two involves extending the 12" water main to the terminus point at the northern boundary of Whippoorwill Woods and extending the 12" water main along Nighthawk Lane to serve the Future Development Area 2. The Phase Two hydraulic analysis includes the existing and the Phase One developments along Whippoorwill Lane in addition to the proposed developments for Future Development Area 2, Future Development Area 3, and Whippoorwill Woods. The maximum day demands were modeled with a fire flow of 1500 gpm at the terminus point of the Phase Two water mains. One terminus point is at the Furore Development Area 2 and the other terminus point is at the northern boundary of Whippoorwill W_99ds. With the fire flow condition at the Future Development Area 2, the minimum pressure in the water main hydraulic model is 49.5 psi. With the fire flow condition at the n~ boundary of Whippoorwill Woods, the minimum pressure in the water main hyd~ aunc t fA ,q ,. / model is 48.8 psi. Therefore, the water main extension for Phase Two will adeqt atelY serve the developments. JUL 3 0 2002 3-2 WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY Reference Exhibit 3-2: Hydraulic Analysis - Phase Two with Fire Flow at Future Development Area 2 and Exhibit 3-3: Hydraulic Analysis - Phase Two with Fire Flow at Whippoorwill Woods. Phase Three Phase Three involves looping the 12" water from Whippoorwill Lane to the existing 16" water main at Livingston Road. Looping of the water main system will improve the pressures and water quality within the potable water system. By adding 'the looped water main, the pressure within the 12" water main will increase by approximately 11 psi at the junction with the fire flow demand. The potable water system has been modeled to provide a minimum of 40 psi in the transmission main along Whippoorwill Lane during a fire flow condition with maximum day flow demands. The worst case fire flow scenario is at the entrance of Whippoorwill Woods. The pressure at this junction with a 1500 gpm fire flow is 48.8 psi. Looping of the water main system will be required if the development's internal water main system cannot maintain the minimum pressure of 20 psi during fire flow conditions. Since the final design details within the developments are not known at this time, Collier County will need to monitor the potable water system as developments come online. It is suggested that the looping of the water main be considered and determined during the 'Collier County construction improvements review and approval process with an emphasis on using up-to-date system pressures and actual flows. Reference Exhibit 3-4: Hydraulic Analysis - Phase Three (Water Main Loop To Livingston Road). J UIz 3 0 2002 3-3 WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY POTABLE WATER ANALYSIS POTABLE WATER DEMA~NDS EXHIBIT 3-1 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS: PHASE ONE WITH FIRE FLOWS ~} WHIPPOORWILL PINES EXI:r~IT 3-2 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS: PHASE TWO WITH FIRE FLOWS ~ FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AREA TWO EXHIBIT 3-3 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS: PHASE TWO WITH FIRE FLOWS ~ ~VH~POORWILL WOODS EXHIBIT 3-4 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS: PHASE THREE (WATER M. AI~ LOOP TO LIVE~GSTON ROAD) AGENOA ITEM JUl_ JUL 3 0 2002 WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY EXHIBIT 3-1 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS: PHASE ONE WITH FIRE FLOWS WHIPPOORWILL PINES JUl' 3 0 2002 Scenario: Base _-. ,,,,.,,o, ,.,.,,, J U L 3 0 2002 T'~le: Whippoorwill Lane Corridor Study Potable Water Project Engin~ ~. C .... 7.,...~,L weeKS, i~.P-. d:~...'u'ire cc 2001(phase 1)6-14-02.wcd Waldrop Engineering, P.A WaterCAD v5.0 [5.0032] 06114/02 08:20:28 AM ~) Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page I of I Scenario: Base Steady State Analysis Pipe Report Label Length Diamete~Matedal Hazen- Discharge Pressure Headloss Velocity (ft) (in) /Villiam,, (gpm) Pipe Gradient (It/s) C Headlos., (ft/1000fl) (n) P-1 10.00 24.0 PVC 150.0 1,898.20 0.00 0.22 1.35 P-2 527.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 1,898.20 5.08 9.63 5.38 P-3 578.00 12.0 PVC 120.0, 1,893.70 5.54 9.59 5.37 P-4 106.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 1,891.00 1.01 9.57 5.36 P-5 319.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 1,692.00 2.48 7.79 4.80 P-12 247.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 1,669.00 1.87 7.59 4.73 P-13 744.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 1,569.10 5.04 6.77 4.45 P-14 86.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 1,569.10 0.58 6.77 4.45 JUL 3 0 200 Title: Whippoorwill Lane Corridor Study Potable Water Project Engineer:. Sean Robert Weeks, P.E. d:~...~re cc 2001 (phase 1)6-14-02.wcd Waldrop Engineering, P.A. WaterCAD v5.0 [5.0032] 06/14/02 07:27:49 AM ~) Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of I Scenario: Base Steady State Analysis Junction Report Label Base Flow Calculated Pressure Pressure (gpm) Hydraulic Grade (psi) Head (ft) (~) WHIPOORWILL PINES 1,569.10 128.54 55.61 128.54 AREA 2 CONN. 0.00 129.12 55.86 129.12 ARLINGTON LAKES 99.90 134.16 58.04 134.16 FUTURE AREA 1 23.00 136.03 58.85 136.03 WHIPPOORWILL LAKES 199.00 138.51 59.93 138.51 HOSPICE 2.70 139.53 60.37 139.53 CHURCH 4.50 145.07 62..77 145.07 J-1 0.00 150.15 64.96 150.15 AC.,ENOA ITEM. / JUL 3 0 2002 Title: Whippoorwill Lane Corridor Study Potable Water Projec~ Engineer. Sean Ro~ Wee~, P.E. d:~.Aflm ~ 2~l(pha~ 1)~1~2.w~ Waldrop Engineering, P~ Wate~D vS.0 [5.0032] ~14102 07:28:~ AM ~ Haestad Meth~s, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Wate~u~, CT ~70~ USA +1-2~75~1~ Page 1 of 1 WHIPPOORWILL LAaNE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY EXHIBIT 3-2 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS: PHASE TWO WITH FIRE FLOWS ~ FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AREA TWO AC~cNDA ITEM ~ JUL 3 0 2002 Scenario: Base ,~.$,.oTo. C~A~ AGENOA ITEJ~/' JUL 3 0 2002' Title: VYhippootwill Lane Corridor Study Potable Water Project Engi ;er:. S ' , P.i d:L..Vire cc 2 fur2 2001 6-14-.02.wod Waldrop Engineering, P.A " water~/~u ~,~.u L~.UU;~ 06114/02 08:21:06 AM ~ Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page I of Scenario: Base Steady State Analysis Pipe Report Label Length Diameter Material Hazen- Discharge Pressure Headloss Velocity (ft) (in) William., (gpm) Pipe Gradient (fi/s) C -leadlos., ff/1000ft) (ft) P-1 10.00 24.0 PVC 150.0 2,134.40 0.00 0.27 1.51 P-2 527.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 2,134.40 6.31 11.97 6.05 P-3 578.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 2,129.90 6.89 11.92 6.04 P-4 106.0~ 12.0 PVC 120.0 2,127.20 1.26 11.90 6.03 P-5 319.00 12.0t PVC 120.0 1,928.20 3.16 9.92 5.47 P-7 925.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 200.20 0.14 0.15 0.57 P-8 359.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 177.60 0.04 0.12 0.50 P-9 1,179.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 P-12 247.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 1,905.20 2.40 9.701 5.40 P-13 744.00 12.0' PVC 120.0 1,805.30 6.53 8.78 5.12 P-14 86.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 269.30 0.02 0.26 0.76 P-15 1,396.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 1,536.00 9.09 6.51 4.36 JUL 3 0 2002 Title: W~ippoorwill Lane Corridor Study Potable Water Project Engineer:. Sean Robert Weeks, P.E. d:~...~ire cc 2 rut2 2001 6-14-O2.wcd Waldrop Engineering. P.A WatetCAD vS.0 [5.0032] 06/14/02 07:31:12 AM ~) Haestad Methods, Inc.. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA, +1-203-755-1666 Page I of 1 Scenario: Base Steady State Analysis Junction Report Label Base Flow Calculated Pressure Pressure (gpm) Hydraulic Grade (psi) Head (~) (~) FUTURE AREA 2 1.536.00 114.51 49.54 114.51 J-9 0.00 123.39 53.39 123.39 WHIPPOORWILL WOODS 177.60 123.39 53.39 123.39 FUTURE AREA 3 22.60 123.44 53.40 123.44 WHIPOORWILL PINES 69.10 123.57 53.46 123.57 AREA 2 CONN. 0.00 123.601 53.47 123.60 ARLINGTON LAKES 99.90 130.13 56.301 130.13 FUTURE AREA I 23.00 132.52 57.34 132.52 WHIPPOORWILL LAKES 199.00 135.69 58.71 135.69 HOSPICE 2.70 - 136.95 59.25 136.95 CHURCH 4.50 143.84 62.23 143.84 J-1 0.00 150.15 64.96 150.15 ]UL 3 0 2002 TAle: Wl~ippoorwill Lane Corridor Study Potable Water Project Eno_ d:L..~m ~ 2 fu~ 2~1 ~1~2.w~ Waldrop Engineering, P~ Wate~AD v5.O [5.0032] ~14102 07:31:01 ~ ~ Haestad Meth~s, Inc. 37 Bmo~ide Road Wate~u~, CT ~708 USA +1-20~75~1~ Page 1 of WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY EXHIBIT 3-3 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS: PHASE TWO WITH FIRE FLOWS WHIPPOORWILL WOODS Scenario: Base 16' W.M. SOURCE / /" J-I i ~SPICE ~ma~d :2,~0 em ~E AREA ~i ~ DEVELOPMENT ~emum: 57.34 pi ~ ~ ~ESE~VE :1 ~ WHIPPO O RWIL ~ ~UN~TON ~KES ~ j ~ ~ { { ~ 2CONN. ~15 Dem..d :3l.OOg~m O, ~ ~ memum: S3.47 F.  ~UNGTO N LAK~ ~ ~OO~ILL P~ES ' ~ ~ W~PPOORWIL~ DEVELOPMENT PPO0 ~ILL ~ O~ 1 JUL 3 0 2002' ~ . d:L..~ ~ 2 wo~s 2001 ~14~2.w~ Waldrop Engineering, P~ ~-.' ;~&~=,~ v=.u [5.~32 ~/14102 08:22:28~ ~ Haestad Meth~s, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Wate~u~, CT ~708 USA +1-20~75~1~6 Page 1 of Scenario: Base Steady State Analysis Junction Report Label Base Flow Calculated Pressure Pressure (gpm) Hydraulic Grade (psi) Head (ft) (fi) WHIPPOORWILL WOODS 1,677.60 112.85 48.83 112.85 J-9 0.00 112.85 48.83 112.85 FUTURE AREA 3 22.60 115.60 50.02 115.60 WHIPOORWILL PINES 69.10 122.87 53.16 122.87 FUTURE AREA 2 36.00 123.59' 53.47 123.59 AREA 2 CONN. 0.00 123.60 53.47 123.60 ARLINGTON LAKES 99.90 130.13 56.30 130.13 FUTURE AREA I 23.00 132.52 57.34 132.52 VVH IPPOORVVILL LAKES 199.00 135.69 58.71 135.69 HOSPICE 2.70 136.95 59.25 136.95 CHURCH 4.50 143.84 62.23 143.84 J-1 0,00 150.15 64.96 150.15 JUL 3 0 2002 T'rUe: Wtfippoorwill Lane Corridor Study Potable Water Project Engi .,e~ S~11 R...~o~~. P. d:~...~re cc 2 wOods 2OO1 6-14-O2.wcd Waldrop Engineering, P.A 06/14/02 07:29:22 AM ¢3 Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Watedoury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1~36 Page I of Scenario: Base Steady State Analysis Pipe Report Label Length ~)iamete= Material Hazen- Discharge Pressure Headloss Velocity (ft) (in) Williams (gpm) Pipe Gradient (ft./s) C Headloss (ft/1000ft) (ft) P-1 10.00 24.0= PVC 150.0 2,134.40 0.00 0,27 1.51 P-2 527.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 2.134.40 6.31 11.97 6.05 P-3 578.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 2,129.90 6,89 11.92 6.04 P-4 106.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 2,127.20 1.26 11.90 6.03 P-5 319.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 1,928.20 3.16 9.92 5.47 P-7 925.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 1,700.20 7.27 7.86 4.82 P-8 359.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 1,677.60 2.75 7.66 4.76 P-9 1,179.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 P-12 247.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 1,905.20 2.40 9.70 5.40 P-13 744.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 1,805.30 6.53 8.78 5.12 P-14 86.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 1,769.30 0.73 8.46 5.02 P-15 1,396.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 36.00 0.01 0.01 0.10 JUL 3 0 2002 T~le: Wbippoor~vill Lane Corridor Study Potable Water Project Engin ~ d:~...\fire cc 2 woods 2001 6-14-02.wcd Waldrop Engineering, P.A WaterCAD v5.0 [5.0032] 06/14102 07:30:17 AM C Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1668 Page I of 1 WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY EXHIBIT 3-4 HYDRAULIC )aNALYSIS: PHASE THREE (LOOP WATERMAIN TO LIVINGSTON ROAD) jul 3 0 2002 Scenario: Base PHASE 3 FIRE FLOW ANALYSIS 16' W.M. SOURCE GOLW Ct. CHURCH HOSPICE P~...~ ,3 ,, ~,i~WHIPPOORWILL LAKES I ' FUT1JRE AREA 1 ARLINGTON LAKES j ~ srN~e ;~.~,~ ~RE AREA 2 ~RE AREA3 ~TVll VHIPPOORWILL WOODS LIVW.M. SOURCE 11 J-9 JUL 3 O 2002 _ Title: W'nippoorwill Lane Con'idor Study Potable Water Project Engineer:. Sean Robert Weeks, P.E. d:~...~fire 3 cc 2001 6-14-02.wcd Waldrop Engineering, P.A WaterCAD v5.0 [5.0032] 06114102 08:21:47 ~ ~) Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-16~ Page I of I Scenario: Base Steady State Analysis Junction Report Label Base Flow Calculated Pressure Pressure (gpm) Hydraulic Grade (psi) Head (~) WHIPPOORWILL WOODS 1,677.60 139.93 60.54 139.93 FUTURE AREA 3 22.60 140.50 60.79 140.50 ~ WHIPOORWILL PINES 69.10 142.06 61.46 142.06 FUTU RE AREA 2 36.00 142.22 61.53 142.22 ~AREA 2 CONN. 0.00 142.23 61.54 142.23 J-9 0.00 143.14 61.93 143.14 ARLINGTON LAKES 99.90 143.83 62.23 143.83 FUTURE AREA 1 23.00 144.49 62.51 144.49 WHIPPOORWILL LAKES 199.00 145.37 62.90 145.37 HOSPICE 2.70 145.79 63.08 145.79 CHURCH 4.50 148.06 64.06 148.06 J-1 0,00 150.15 64.96 150.15 J-10 0.00 150.15 64.96 150.15 - - AGENOA ITEM / JUL 3 0 2002 Title: VVhippoorwill Lane Corridor Study Potable Water Project Enginee -S'~n Rober~ Weeks, P.E. d:L..~fire 3 cc 2001 6-t4-O2.wcd Waldrop Engineering, P.A WaterCAD vS.0 [5.0032] 06/14/02 07:32:00 AM ~) Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbu~, CT0~708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Scenario: Base Steady State Analysis Pipe Report Label Length ::)iamete~Materia: Hazen- Discharge Pressure Headloss Velocity (ft) (in) William.· (gpm) Pipe Gradient (fi/s) C Headlos., ftJl000ft) (fi) P-1 10.00 24.0 PVC 150.0 1,174.75 0.00 0.09 0.83 P-2 527.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 1,174.75 2.09 3.96 3.33 P-3 578.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 1,170.25 2.27 3.93 3.32 P-4 106.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 1,167.55 0.42 3.92 3.31 P-5 319.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 968.55 0.88 2.77 2.75 P-7 925.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 740.55 1.56 1.69 2.10 P-8 359.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 717.95 0.57 1.59 2.04 P-9 1,179.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 959.65 3.21 2.72 2.72 P-10 2,573.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 959.65 7.01 2.72 2.72 P-11 10.00 24.0 PVC 150.0 i 959.65 0.00 0.06 0.68 P-12 247.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 945.55 0.65 2.65 2.68 P-13 744.00 .12.0 PVC 120.0: 845.65 1.601 2.15 2.40 P-14 86.00 12.0 PVC 1' 20.0 809.65 0.17 1.99 2.30 P-15 1,394.00 12.0 PVC 120.0 36.00 0.01 0.01 0.10 JUL 3 007. Title: VVhippoorwill Lane Corridor Study Potable Water Project Engineer. Seafl Robert Weeks, P.E. d:~...~re 3 cc 2001 5-14-O2.wcd Waldrop Engln~Hng, P.A, WaterCAD vS.0 [,5.0032] 06/14/02 07:32:07 AM O Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Water13ury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page I of 1 WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY SECTION FOUR: WASTEWATER Wastewater Introduction The Whippoorxvill Lane Corridor Master Plan Study has been implemented in an effort to determine the wastewater infrastructure facilities required to support existing and future development of properties in the study area. This section will discuss existing conditions and the future conditions for the wastewater system based on the criteria outlined in Section Two. Existing Conditions An existing 10" forcemain is located within the existing Whippoorwill Lane right-of- way. This forcemain has been extended to serve the first phase of Whippoorwill Lakes PUD. This forcemain is an extension of and connected to the Collier County owned and' maintained wastewater transmission system located within the Pine Ridge Road right-of way. An existing 16" forcemain is located within the Pine Ridge Road right-of-way. This existing 16" forcemain will also be utilized by the developments along the Livingston Road right-of-way. Reference Exhibit 2-1 for the location of these existing forcemains. In the hydraulic models, the connection point for the Whippoorwill Lane forcemain is shown at the 16" forcemain along Pine Ridge Road. The pressure at this point of connection was assumed to be 92.5 feet of head (40 psi). This pressure was assumed based on the information obtained from the Collier County Government Public Utilities Engineering Department 2001 Water Master Plan Update. This update indicated that the pressures along Pine Ridge Road will be as follows: Scenario 2006 2021 Peak Demand Hydraulic Model 40 psi 46 psi Proposed Conditions A hydraulic model was prepared to analyze the peak build-out demands within the proposed forcemain along Whippoorwill Lane. An extension of the 10" forcemain along Whippoorwill Lane will provide adequate capacity for the wastewater system. The extension of the forcemain will occur in two phases: Phase One Phase One involves extending the 10" forcemain to the terminus point at the northern bound_ary of Whippoorwill Pines. JUL 3 0 2002 WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY Phase One includes the existing developments along Whippoorwill Lane that are served by the existing 10" forcemain in addition to the proposed developments for Arlington Lakes, Future Development Area 1, Whippoorwill Lakes, and Whippoorwill Pines. Reference Exhibit 4-1' Hydraulic Analysis- Whippoorwill Lane Forcemain Phase Two Phase Two involves extending the 10" forcemain to the terminus point at the northern boundary of Whippoorwill Woods. Phase Two includes the existing and the Phase One developments along Whippoorwill Lane in addition to the proposed developments for Future Development Area 2, Future Development Area 3, and Whippoorwill Woods. Reference Exhibit 4-2: Hydraulic Analysis - Whippoorwill Lane Forcemain Livingston Road Forcemain The developments along Livingston Road will be served by a proposed 8" forcemain within the Livingston Road right-of-way. The forcemain will connect to the existing 16" forcemain along Pine Ridge Road. The design and approval of this 8" forcemain was previously coordinated with Collier County Public Utilities Engineering Department. The wastewater flows were estimated and compared to the velocities of different size pipes. The estimated flows have been updated to reflect the latest information for this area. The spreadsheet shows that an 8" forcemain is adequate to serve the peak build-out demands for the Livingston Road developments. Reference Exhibit 4-3: Hydraulic Analysis - Livingston Road Forcemain Downsizing of the proposed force main is possible, but cannot be accurately determined at this time. It is suggested that downsizing be considered and determined during the Collier County construction improvements review and approval process with an emphasis on using up-to-date system pressures and actual flows. JUL 3 0 2002 4-2 ~, g.~'~ ~ WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY WASTEWATER ANALYSIS n WASTEWATER DEMANDS EXHIBIT 4-1 HYDRAULIC PaNALYSIS: '$VI:[IPPOORWILL LANE FORCEMAIN El EXHIBIT 4-2 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS: LIVINGSTON ROAD FORCEMAIN AGENDA ITEM JUL 3 0 2002 JUL 3 0 2002 WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY EXHIBIT HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS: WHIPPOORWILL LANE FORCEMAIN JUL 3 0 2002 Scenario: Base EX. 16" F.M. _~ ~UTH ERL AND PUD - I HOSPICE / ~ ~u~ ~TURE AR~ I ~ ~ ~LINGTON ~S e~ ~ ~x~s ~flow - 2022 0 g pm 4 ~LI NGTO N LAK~ ~[ PPOORWlLL PIN~S ~I~OORWILL ~ODS I .=.E,.OTO. cA.~ AC.~A IT JUL 3 0 2002. Tale: ~ippoo~ill Lane Co.or Study S~er Proje~ Engin~e~ ~an ~o~A ~, P.E. d:~..~whip master ~wer ~ 2~1 ~1~02.w~ Waldrop Engineering, P~ Wate~AD v5.0 [5.~32] ~/14/02 08:23:14 ~ ~ Haestad Meth~s, Inc. 37 Broo~ide Road Wate~u~, CT ~708 USA +1-20~75~16~ Page 1 of I Scenario: Base Steady State Analysis JunctiOn Report Label Base Flow Calculated Pressure Pressure (gpm) Hydraulic Grade (psi) Head (~) (~) J-1 0.00 92.48 40.01 92.48 CHURCH 11,70 98,87 42.78 98.87 HOSPICE 7.00 105.20 45.52 105.20 WHIPPOORVVILL LAKES 402.80 106.97 46.28 106.97 FUTURE AREA 1 46.70 108.47 46.93 108.47 ARLINGTON LAKES 202.20= 109.87 47.54 109.87 FUTURE AREA 2 72.80 11 ~.71 48.33 111.71 VVHIPPOORWlLL PINES 140.00 112.13 48.51 112.13 FUTURE AREA 3 45.70' 113.46 49.09 113.46 WHIPPOORVVILL WOODS 359.60 113.76 49.22 113.76 JUL 3 0 2002 Title: Whippoorwill Lane Corridor Study Sewer Project Engineer. Sean Robert Weeks, P.E. d:~...\whip master sewer cc 2001 6-14-02.wcd Waldrop Englne~Hng, P.A WaterCAD v5.0 [5.0032] 06114/02 07:35:22 AM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Scenario: Base Steady State Analysis Pipe Report Label Length DiameterMatedal Hazen- Discharge Pressure Headloss Velocity (11) (in) VWlliam., (gpm) Pipe Gradient (11/s) C Headloss (ftJ100011' (ft) 24.0 PVC 150.0 -1,288.50 0.00 0.111 0.91 P-1 10.00 P-2 559.00 10.0 PVC 120.0 -1,288.50 6.39 11.42 5.26 P-3 564.00 10.0 PVC 120.0 -1,276.80 6.34 11.23 5.22 P-4 159.00 10.0 PVC 120.0 -1,269.80 1.77 11.12 5.19 P-5 274.00 10.0 PVC 120.0 -867.00 1.50 5.49 3.54 P-6 282.00 10.0 PVC 120.0 -820.30 1.40 4.95 3.35 P-7 626.00 10.0 PVC 120.0 -618.10 1.83 2.93 2.52 Po8 184.00 10.0 PVC 120.0 -545.30 0.43 2.32 2.23 P-9 987.00 10.0 PVC 120.0 -405.30 1.32 1.34 1.66 P-10 283.00 10.0 PVC 120.0 -359.60 0.30 1.07 1.47 AGENDA ITEM ,. JUL 3 0 ' T~le: ~ippoo~ill Lane Co.or Study S~er P~j~ En~ 3~c ~ ~n~ w~. ~ ~. d:~..~whip master ~r ~ 2~1 ~14-02.~ Waldrop Engineering, P~ Wate~AD v5.0 [5.0032] ~14/02 07:35:31 ~ ~ Haestad Meth~s, Inc. 37 Broo~e Road Wate~u~, CT ~708 USA +1-20~75~1~ Page I of 1 WHIPPOORWILL LAaNE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY EXHIBIT 4-2 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS: LIVINGSTON ROAD FORCEMAIN JUL WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY SECTION FIVE: TRANSPORTATION STUDY ELEMENT Transportation Study Introduction The Whippoorwill Lane Corridor Study has been implemented in an effort to determine the minimum transportation infrastructure facilities required to support existing and future development of properties in the area. This study will discuss existing conditions, future conditions and anticipated traffic generation, proposed design standards and pavement cross- sections, access management, proposed construction phasing, and necessary permitting for the roadway. Existing Conditions The entire Whippoorwill Lane Corridor Study area comprises approximately 578+ acres of varying ownership and zoning designations. The study area lies within northern Collier County (Section 18, Township 49 South, Range 26 East) and is located south of Pine Ridge Road, east of Livingston Road, west of Interstate 75 and north of the Kensington Canal. Only those properties having existing or proposed access to Whippoorwill Lane south of the Sea Gate Baptist Church will be included in the Transportation Study Element of this Master Plan. Those properties having existing or proposed access to Whippoorwill Lane include the following: Whippoorwill Lakes PUD, Whippoorwill Pines PUD, Whippoorwill Woods PUD, Arlington Lakes PUD, the Hospice of Naples, and Future Development Areas 1, 2, & 3. Future Development Area 1 currently consists of several single family residences. Future Development Area 2 consists of the Southern Exposure of Naples, Inc. and Future Area 3 contains a single family residence. A portion of the Whippoorwill Lakes PUD has already been developed as The Reserve of Naples. Arlington Lakes will also have access provided from Livingston Road for the western portion of this PUD. Arlington Lakes is split by a north-south wetland flowway. Those properties not included in this Transportation Study Element of the Master Plan are the Pine View PUD, Sutherland PUD, Balmoral/Alexandria PUD, Sea Gate Baptist Church, and those other properties not having direct connection with the Whippoorwill Lane corridor. The Pine View PUD, Sutherland PUD, and Sea Gate Baptist Church have not been included since they already or will access the existing dedicated Whippoorwill Lane right-of-way. Currently, the improved Whippoorwill Lane extends south from Pine Ridge Road approximately 1800 feet. It terminates south of the current entrance to Whippoorwill Lakes PUD (The Reserve of Naples). This section of Whippoorwill Lane consists of two 12-foot asphalt lanes with open swale drainage on each side. This also represents that portion of Whippoorwill Lane that is Collier County maintained. This section of roadway was resurfaced in 2001 by the developer of the Reserve of Naples. The Pine Ridge Road intersection was improved as part of the County's six laning of Pine Ridge Road completed in 2001. The remainder of Whippoorwill Lane is an unimproved dirt road terminating at the Kensington Canal. .o._] ¢/~ ~-' JUL 3 0 2002 SECTION FIVE: TRANSPORTATION STUDY ELEMENT Current traffic levels generated by the existing study area are low, given the extent of existing development. This traffic is limited to the Hospice of Naples, The Reserve of Naples, Southern Exposure of Naples and a few single family residences. Current access points on Whippoorwill Lane are shown on Exhibit 5-6. Proposed Conditions Development has already begun in the Whippoorwill Lane corridor with 300 multi-family units at The Reserve of Naples. The development along this corridor can be expected to continue over the next few years. Following is Table 5-I with a listing of the proposed developments which will be served by Whippoorwill Lane. It is anticipated that full development (based upon maximum units allowed by current PUD and estimates of potential units in existing agricultural zoned areas) will generate an average annual daily traffic level of 10,172 vehicles per day. This also results in a peak hour directional traffic volume of 629 vehicles per hour. This meets a Level of Service "C" in accordance with FDOT standards for a two lane roadway. In conjunction with Whippoorwill Lane, it can be anticipated that Future Development Area 2 will also utilize Nighthawk Drive for access. Other possible users of Nighthawk Drive may include Whippoorwill Lakes PUD and Whippoorwill Pines PUD for construction or secondary accesses. The proposed improvements to Nighthawk Drive have not been included in this Study, but it is anticipated that it will be developed as a two lane rural local street. Nighthawk Drive is currently unpaved. Any improvements to Nighthawk Drive would be the responsibility of those proposing to use this local street connection to Whippoorwill Lane The following standards are proposed for the design and construction of the Whippoorwill Lane improvements: 1. Design speed of Whippoorwill Lane shall be 40 miles per hour (MPH) with a posted speed limit of 35 MPH. Travel lanes of 12 feet will be utilized. 2. Turn lanes are to be provided in general accordance with Collier County policy for two lane roadways. Left mm lanes will be provided whenever the peak hourly volume of mining movements is 20 vehicles or more. Right mm lanes will be provided whenever the peak hourly volume of turning movements is 40 vehicles or more. 3. Turn lanes will be designed per the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Index 301. An l l-foot mm lane width will be utilized. Turn lanes will include a 155 foot deceleration length (including a 50 foot taper) and a queue length. A 50 foot queue is to be provided for all right mm lanes. Left mm lanes will provide a two minute queue with a 50 foot minimum length. A 60 foot control radius will be used for the left mm movements and 25 foot control radius for right mm movements. These turn lanes have been identified on Exhibits 5-4- &- 5-5. Provisions will be made for future north bound left mm and right mm lanes as required if Whippoorwill Lane is extended southward for furore connections to other roadways as depicted on Exhibit 5-6. Iqo._l ~_F ~ JUL 3 0 2002 SECTION FIVE: TRANSPORTATION STUDY ELEMENT 4. The proposed clear zone for all permanent objects in the right-of-way is 10 feet based upon the FDOT Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards. 5. The maximum longitudinal change in grade without using a vertical curve shall be 0.80% in accordance w/th the FDOT Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards. The minimum grade is to be 0.3% and maximum grade is 0.4%. The standard pavement cross slope will be 2% with applicable modifications at intersections. 6. Access management should be in general accordance with Collier County Resolution No. 01-247 for Class 6 without Median Restrictions. The minimum driveway connection spacing should be 220 feet; the connection spacing for single family residence drives shall be 30 feet. Modifications to the driveway connection spacings may be necessary to accommodate mm lanes or existing conditions. Exhibit 5-6 shows the anticipated access points. These access points will be further ref'med during the design process. 7. Lighting will be provided at all driveway entrances on Whippoorwill Lane as specified in the applicable PUD documents or Land Development Code requirements. Lighting for a single family drive will not be required. 8. Landscaping within the right-of-way will be permitted with Collier County individually by each property owner and in accordance with applicable PUD requirements. 9. Roadway drainage shall be provided by valley gutters or curb on both sides of the pavement. Valley gutter or throat inlets will be provided for discharge to a closed piped system. It is proposed that all roadway stormwater north of Nighthawk Drive will be routed through Whippoorwill Lakes PUD for quality treatment and attenuation. Roadway drainage south of Nighthawk Drive will be routed through the Whippoorwill Woods PUD system. I0. Off-site drainage from existing and proposed development north of the Study area (i.e., Seagate Baptist Church, Pine View PUD, the Hospice of Naples and the residential property south of the Hospice of Naples) will be through an open swale along the west right-of-way to Nighthawk Drive. At Nighthawk Drive this drainage would then be routed under Whippoorwill Lane to the south side of Nighthawk Drive and along Nighthawk easterly to discharge into an existing culvert and swale. This is in general accordance with the existing drainage patterns in the area. For additional information on drainage in the Study area, see the Drainage Study Element of this report. J U L 3 0 2002- F:~J OB\WHI?POORkDWSXStudy612.doc 5°3 WLMPT SECTION FIVE: TRANSPORTATION STUDY ELEMENT 11. Pedestrian and bicycle facilities are to be provided by a five foot wide sidewalk on both the east and west sides of Whippoorwill Lane. These sidewalks will be provided from the north property lines of the Hospice of Naples and The Reserve of Naples to the south terminus of Whippoorwill Lane at Whippoorwill Woods PUD. The construction of the west sidewalk north of the Hospice of Naples to Pine Ridge Road will be the responsibility of the Pine View PUD developer. It is proposed to construct a five foot sidewalk on the east side north of The Reserve of Naples to Pine Ridge Road as a part of the first phase of the proposed Whippoorwill Lane improvements. This will be dependent upon adequate room in the existing right-of-way and if necessary the ability to obtain a sidewalk easement outside of this fight-of-way for construction (Seagate Baptist Church, the Knights Inn and Chevron Gas Station). 12. Water and wastewater facilities are to be provided in the right-of-way for the proposed development. See the Utility Study Element for additional information. A water main will be located on the west side and sewage force main on the east side. Construction Phasing The proposed Whippoorwill Lane Roadway improvements will be completed in two phases and in conjunction with the utility construction described in the Utility Study Element. The initial phase will consist of the roadway improvements from the existing improved roadway south to Nigh Hawk Drive. Improvements will include a left-turn lane at the existing Whippoorwill Lake PUD (The Reserve of Naples) entrance, a fight turn lane at the proposed Arlington Lakes PUD entrance, a left turn lane at Nighthawk Drive and a left turn lane at the proposed south entrance to Whippoorwill Lakes PUD. The proposed roadway cross-section for this segment is illustrated on Exhibit 5-2. A five foot sidewalk will be provided on both the east and west sides from the north property lines of the Hospice of Naples and Whippoorwill Lakes PUD south to the terminus of the Phase 1 construction. The east sidewalk will be constructed northward to connect to the existing Pine Ridge Road sidewalk. The interceptor swale for off site drainage and the outfall along Nighthawk Drive will be constructed during this Phase along with the utility extensions. A cross section of the existing right-of-way is shown on Exhibit 5-3. Phase 2 of the project will consist of construction of Whippoorwill Lane from Nighthawk Drive south to its terminus at the Whippoorwill Wood PUD entrance. The proposed utilities would be extended southward in conjunction with the roadway improvements. Improvements will include a left hand turn lane for Whippoorwill Pines PUD and a northbound left turn lane for Arlington Lake PUD and the roadway will terminate with a left hand turn lane at Whippoorwill Woods PUD. Sidewalks will be extended southward from Nighthawk Drive on both the east and west sides. The proposed roadway cross-section for this segment is illustrated on Exhibit 5-1. JUL 3 0 2002 F:UOB\WHI PPOOR\DWS\Study612.doc 5-4 ~ SECTION FIVE: TRANSPORTATION STUDY ELEMENT Permitting Permits for the proposed construction of the Whippoorwill Lane Roadway improvements will need to be obtained from Collier County, South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE). A Collier County Right-of-way permit will be obtained to construct each phase of the roadway and would include roadway, utility, drainage, landscape and lighting requirements. Surface Water Management Permi~ modifications will be necessary to route the proposed roadway drainage through Whippoorwill Lakes PUD and Whippoorwill Woods PUD as previously discussed. The permitting for the SFWMD permit will be done in conjunction with the COE as applicable. An FDEP Stormwater Pollution Control Plan Permit will be obtained. jul 3 O 2002 F:UO B\WI-[I P POO R',D W S~S tudy612.doc 5- 5 =-~.~.. ........ · CLEARING LIMITS I PROPOSED 80' RIGHT OF' WAY i 12' I 12' I 1T, S' 8'" TRAVEL LANEJ TRAVEL LANE B' 5' g'" I I , I 1' LEVEL I i il' LEVEL I ~ ~ I I ~ 2' VALLE'ri Cull'ER I 2~ 2~. 2~ \ ~ iF MATCH EXIST. MATCH EXIST. I 5 ~ .=.-~ * ---=.- -- ~,~ GRADE I 1.0:t: GRADE ] 1.0± I NOTES: 1" TYPE S III ASPHALTIC CONG. · WHERE RIGHT OF' WAY IS UMITED TO 70 Fr. (I.E.F.UTURE DEVELOPMENT AREA 1~. 1' ASPHALT STRUCT1JRAL COARSE. TYPE STORM SEWER PIPE TO BE USED IN LIEU. OF' OPEN SWALE BACK OF' SLOPE TO GRADE = 9' AND BACK OF' CURB TO INSIDE SIDEWALK EDGE = 6'. TO CONTAIN !0" LIMEROCK BASE LBR 100, 98~ DENSITY WORK WITHIN THE RIGHT OF' WAY. 12' STABILIZED SUBGR~ADE LBR 40 WHIPPOORWILL LANE PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TYPICAL SECTION B-B N.T.S. EXHIBIT 5-2 CLEARING LIMITS I PROPOSED 80' I~CHT OF' WAY I g' 5' 12' TRAVEL LANE~ TRAVEL LANE 12'" 5' 9" I 1' LEVEL m Il' L~EL (J do~Z~ ~ 2' VALL~ ~ER o_ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~TCH EXIST. MATCH EXIST. ~ ~ NOTES: 1' ~P[ S III ASP~LTIC CONG. · ~E~ ~CHT ~ WAY IS LIMITED ~O 70 ~. (t~. ~ ~ELOPMENT ~ 3), REDUCE D)fT~CE F~ 12' TO 5' ~ 9' TO 6' FOR ~E ~ ~ CURB TO INSI~ ~0~ ~ ~K OF SI~W~K TO RI~T OF WAY, RESPECTNELY 10' LIME~ ~SE LBR I0o qR~ ~'e'~ - L~AL~ USE 2:1 SLOPE IN TH~ ~ AS ~PLICABLE. 12' STABILIZED WHIPPOORWILL ~NE PHASE 2 CO~SI~UClIO~ ~PICAL SECTION A-A JUL 3 0 2002 11' RIGHT 6' CONG. TURN LANE__ SIDEWALK 2' LEVEL PAVEMENT SECTION PER ~ /-- MATCH EXIST. MAINLINE ROADWAY. .~ J GRADE 11.0± TYPE 'F' CURB WHIPPOORWILL LANE RIGHT TURN LANE DETAIL N.T.S. -- EXHIBIT 5-,5 12' I1" 12' · TRAVEL LANE TURN~ LANE ~TRAVEL LANE * ROADWAY SHALL BE TRANSITIONED IN ACCORDANCE WITH FDOT STANDARD INDEX NO. 526, SHEET 2, WHERE Ld STANDARD = 240 F'l'. AND Ld MINIMUM UNDER RESTRAJNTS = 150 Fi", MAINLINE ROADWAY. WHIPPOORWILL LANE LEFT TURN LANE DE'TAIL N.T.S. EXHIBIT 5-4  J EXISTING 60' RIGHT OF WAY ~ 5' 13'± TRAVEL LANE _TRAVEL LANE 13'± 5' , z~ I z~,. ~ PROPOSED SIDEWALK , o~ I OC:- /AS PART OF PHASE  (J r 1 CONSTRUCTION ~EW P.U.D. (MAY MEANDER EXIST. SWALE EX~$T. SWALE SID['WALK INSIDE PROPERTY WITH APPLIC.~E LANDSCAPE. BUFFER EASEMENT DI<~CED WHIPPOORWILL LANE JUL 3 0 2002 T~ THE RO~ ~GHT OF WAY. EXISTING SECTION C-C ~ EXHIBIT 5-,.3 I-"'- """J ~ q QL~Y ~0~ ~ ~0CI~I~ ? ~. w.,PPOOR~LL LAN~ .~R PLAN STUD~ ~ ;.· . ,.~?'~;~,'~? ~ ~j~ ~j~ ~ TRANSPORTATION STUOY ELEMENT I~'~'~ -,~: ",'";~' ~* ~ ~ ~ EXHIBITS 5--3. 5-4 & 5--5 I~''~' '-"'1 ';''~' -~:-<:.':~':~ .............. '--" .....: ,-','-'-"- .............................. ,", ,',- j~ ..'r.s. j m~Q~ cmm.,,~ ~ ~,u'~.~,.m. ,'- ~ '-, I~m I ~ .*az: I WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY SECTION SIX: DRAINAGE STUDY ELEMENT Drainage Study Introduction This element of the Whippoorwill Lane Corridor Master Plan Study is intended to determine water management infrastructure needs to support existing and future development in the corridor study area. Included in this discussion will be consideration of existing conditions, proposed conditions post-development, existing constraints to stormwater conveyance, phasing requirements and proposed design standards for stormwater conveyance facilities within the study area. Existing Conditions The Whippoorwill Lane Corridor Study area encompasses the majority (578+ acres) Section 18, Township 49 South, Range 26 East in northern Collier County. It is located south of Pine Ridge Road, east of Livingston Road, west of Interstate 75 and north of the Kensington Canal. Stormwater conveyance capacity will be considered for all properties within the study area, however some properties along Pine Ridge Road and Livingston Road will discharge to those road right-of-ways on an interim 'or permanent basis. Existing development within the study area consists of: hotel, service station/convenience store and restaurant uses adjacent to Pine Ridge Road and east of Whippoorwill Lane (Sutherland Center PUD); the Hospice of Naples on the west side of Whippoorwill Lane and several existing single family homes. A representative sample of existing finished floor elevations were obtained from the existing buildings Table 6-3. The existing drainage system serving the Sutherland Center flows in several directions. The projects east of the center entrance (Lawson Way) at Pine Ridge Road flow to the eastern end of the project, through the Best Western Hotel site and into a small lake. Quality and quantity treatment is provided prior to discharge into the 1-75 right-of-way via the on-site wetlands. It then flows through existing drainage pipes under 1-75 to the D-2 canal. The gas station west of the center entrance and the IHOP restaurant adjacent to it discharge to Pine Ridge Road. The remaining areas discharge to Dudley Drive and/or Whippoorwill Lane and flow westward to Whippoorwill Lane. For purposes of this analysis, we have assumed a split in areas as shown on the attached Table 6-1. Drainage from the Hospice site and the adjacent residential homes flows west to a large existing lake west of the existing residences. Stormwater sheet flows from the lake into the surrounding undeveloped areas (flow-way). The remaining existing residential units drain via sheet flows into the surrounding undeveloped areas (flow-way). Refer to Tables 6-1 & 6-2, which include summaries of the available existing finished floor elevations, control elevations and design floor elevations for these existing proj I JUL 3 0 2002 F:UOB\WHIPPOOR\CDS\Whip Lane Drng Mstr Pin.doc 6-1 t I~PD SECTION SIX: DRAINAGE STUDY ELEMENT Proposed Conditions The study area is contained within the D-2 Canal Basin watershed. A portion of the study area is part of and included in the 1-75 drainage system (State Project #03175- 3408), an FDOT drainage basin designed to outfall to the existing borrow pit/lake, under 1-75 and ultimately into the D-2 canal. An allowable discharge rate of 0.1 $ cfs per acre has been established for the basin. Stormwater runoff within the study area will be conveyed to the 1-75 roadside system and ultimately discharging to the D-2 Canal receiving system. The majority of the proposed developments located on the west side of Whippoorwill Lane - Arlington Lakes PUD, Brynwood Preserve PUD, Balmoral PUD (on hold, not approved), Baldridge PUD (aka .Ion Ebert Golf Center under County review), North Naples Fire Station, Pine Ridge Center, an existing residence on Nighthawk Drive, and the 20+ acre Horse Farm property will be discharging storm water nm-off, post required water quality and volume detentions, to a proposed flow-way system. The flow-way system has been designed and submitted for permit approval to the'South Florida Water Management District and the Army Corps of Engineers as individual segments and when considered as a whole will provide for a continuous and complete conveyance and compensatory storm water storage system. This flow-way has been designed to ultimately converge with the Kensington Canal on the east side of Whippoorwill Lane through Whippoorwill Woods at 1-75. Some of the developments will discharge to the Livingston Road fight-of-way on an interim or permanent basis, but all have been included in capacity considerations for the proposed flow-way. The Hospice of Naples, the adjacent existing residences and future Pine View PUD improvement will be intercepted by a roadside drainage swale and conveyed south along Whippoorwill Lane and then east along Nighthawk Drive to the existing lake west of the 1-75 fight-of-way. These flows will bypass the proposed flow-way system. This is due to the existing lower control elevations, project location, and existing finished floor elevations for these properties, as applicable. The majority of the developments on the east side of Whippoorwill Lane - Sea Gate Baptist Church, Whippoorwill Lakes PUD, Whippoorwill Pines PUD, Future Development Area 2 and Future Development Area 3 will discharge, post required water quality and volume detentions, to the existing lake located west of the 1-75 right-of-way. This lake in turn discharges into the roadside area of 1-75, then via existing culvert(s) to the D-2 Canal. JUL 3 0 2002 F:UOB\WHIPPOOR\CDS\Whip Lane Drag Mstr Pin.doc 6-2 WLMPD SECTION SIX: DRAINAGE STUDY ELEMENT Whippoorwill Woods PUD discharges, post required water quality and volume detentions, directly to the terminal portion of the proposed flow-way. Refer to the Whippoorwill Lane Corridor Master Plan Study - Drainage Exhibit 6-1 for an illustration of the relationship between the projects. Existing Constraints There are several existing constraints to stormwater conveyance within the study area. 1. FPL patrol road within the proposed flow-way at the Arlington Lakes PUD project has been cleared and filled for access by FPL for maintenance of their utility facilities. It currently inhibits sheet flow of stormwater runoff through the proposed flow-way area. Construction of the Arlington Lakes PUD project will provide for removal of constraints to flow as part of the construction permitted with the South Florida Water Management District. 2. Roadside swale areas adjacent to existing Whippoorwill Lane and Dudley Drive and not graded to provide for optimum conveyance of stormwater runoff. Regrading, cleanup and maintenance of these facilities shall be completed with Phase One of the Whippoorwill Lane roadway improvements. 3. Deficient Control Elevations and existing low finished floor elevations in the vicinity of the Hospice of Naples create potential for flooding during significant storm events. These deficiencies will be addressed by cons*ruction of an interceptor swale system during Phase One roadway construction. The typical swale details are provided in SECTION 5: TRANSPORTATION STUDY ELEMENT. 4. Whippoorwill Lane has been cleared and filled for access south to the Kensington Canal. A portion of the unpaved access way crosses the proposed flow-way south of the proposed project entrance to Whippoorwill Woods PUD. Regrading and removal of the impedance will be completed as part of the permitted construction for the Whippoorwill Woods PUD project. Maintenance, repair and redirection of discharges at the eastern terminus of the Kensington Canal will also be completed as part of the permitted construction. 5. 1-75 Drainage connections may be restricted due to siltation at the structures. Through interlocal agency cooperation, a regular maintenance schedule for these existing facilities should be established. JUL 3 0 2002 . F:LIOB\WHIPPOOR\CDS\Whip Lane Drag Mstr Pin.doc 6-3 ~ WLMPD SECTION SIX: DRAINAGE STUDY ELEMENT Phasing Requirements Completion of Phase One construction of the Whippoorwill Lane improvements will provide for corrections of the major existing deficiencies to stormwater conveyance in the study area. It will alleviate constrictions to conveyance, address deficient control elevations, and provide for existing low finished floor elevations for the existing projects along the paved section of Whippoorwill Lane. The discharges from the Brynwood Preserve PUD and Jon Ebert Golf Center should not be redirected to the proposed flow-way until the Arlington Lakes PUD and Whippoorxvill [ \Voods PUD improvements have been completed (maintain interim flow to Livingston I Road drainage system). Proposed Design Standards The following standards are proposed for the design and construction of projects Within the study area: 1. Discharge rate of 0.15 cfs/acre has been established for this drainage basin. All projects will be designed to discharge a maximum of0.15 cfs/acre. 2. Quantity and clualiW storage will be provided for all projects on-site prior to discharging to the referenced flow-way, lake or roadside receiving bodies. 3. Control Elevations will be established for all projects that accounts for expected tailwater elevations within the proposed conveyance systems and meets applicable Collier County and South Florida Water Management District criteria. JUL 3 0 2002 F:',JO[I,XVhii~t~oom'ill'tDS'.Whip I.:m¢ Drn,.z, Fin:ti ,Mstr [~ln.docF:'!O.r! W!:i;-i,:-,.,.,-.~i!!"C'D? W!:]? L:'-'::' Dmk-' 5!:::r Pl::.d:TM 6-4 J WLMPD 2002 ~ z~'~ LI',4NGSTON ROAD RIGHT-Of'-WAY ~ ~a~ r I I . ~}~,~ ~ ;~ Iol ~ . ,__ ~~ ................ ,..;...~..Z. .... ,/ ~ . ~ 1~ L, ~ ~" ~ : ~, ~-~ ~==: ~ ~-'~': .... , ,, .:,~., ...... ,., ..... . .., , . '~' ~ ~ i~ :~ ~-~' ':L ~:;. ',"~' ". . .' . ~ ~ ~ ~ · - :.~: :,..: " '"'" '"'-,:-:':' ' :.~" '-' ' ?':~: JUL ~ fl ~--, ~'.  ~ N.~T. ~ ~ ~ D~'I~'~$-''- ' ' ~ -- I WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY MISCELLANEOUS EXHIBITS Location Map Aerial Collier County Zoning Atlas JUL 3 0 2002 .X. lap Output Page I of 1 CCPA GIS- HTML Ma gX~Ct~IV~ St~ REQUEST TO ~PRO~ FOR ~CO~ING THE FIN~ P~T OF "I~I~ ~S ~IT S~N", ~ ~PROV~ OF THE ST~~ ~ CONSTRUCTION ~INTE~CE AG~NT ~ ~PRO~ OF THE ~O~T OF THE pEr--CE SEC~ITY OBJECTIVE: TO approve for recording the final plat of "Indigo Lakes Unit Seven", a subdivision of lands located in Section 27 Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, following the alternative procedure for approval of subdivision plats. CONSIDERATIONS: Engineering Review Section has completed the review of the construction drawings, specifications, and final plat of "Indigo Lakes Unit Seven". These documents are in compliance with the County Land Development Code and Florida State Statute No. 177. Ail fees have been paid. Security in the amount of 10% of the total cost of the required improvements, and 100% of the cost of any remaining improvements, together with a Construction and Maintenance Agreement for Subdivision Improvements, shall be provided and accepted by the Planning Services Director and the County Attorneys office prior to the recording of the final plat. This would be in conformance with the County Land Development Code - Division 3.2.9. Engineering Review Section recommends that the final plat of "Indigo Lakes Unit Seven" be approved for recording. This Executive Summary has been reviewed and approved by Transportation Services and Public Works Utilities. FISCAL IMPACT: The project cost is $645,556.67 (estimated) to be borne by the developer. The cost breakdown is as follows: a) Water & Sewer - $173,440.00 b) Drainage, Paving, Grading - $472,116.67 The Security amount, equal to 110% of the project cost, is $710,112.33 ~~ JUL 3 0 Executive Summary Indigo Lakes Unit Seven Page 2 The County will realize revenues as follows: Fund: Community Development Fund 113 Agency: County Manager Cost Center: 138900 - Development Services Revenue generated by this project: Total: $12,294.21 Fees are based on a construction estimate of $645,556.67 and were paid in February and July, 2002. The breakdown is as follows: a) Plat Review Fee ($425.00 + $4./ac)-$ 705.00 b) Construction Drawing Review Fee Water & Sewer (.50% const, est.) - $ 867.20 Drainage, Paving, Grading (.42% const, est.)-$1,982.89 c) Construction Inspection Fee Water & Sewer (1.5% const, est.) - $2,601.60 Drainage, Paving, Grading ~1.3% const, est.) - $6,137.52 GROWTH MA/~AGF~NT IMPACT: The Concurrency Waiver and Release relating to conditional approval has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's Office for the project. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: There are no outstanding environmental issues HISTORICAL/ARCHEOLOGIC2tL IMPACT: There are no historical or archeological impacts F2~C RECOMMENDATION: Approval CCPC RECOMMENDATION: Approval PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECO~R4ENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the Final Plat of "Indigo Lakes Unit Seven" for recording with the following stipulations: 1. Approve the amount of $710,112.33 as performance security for the required improvements; or such lesser amount based on work completed, and as is approved by the Engineering Review Department. JUL 3 0 200 Executive Summary Indigo Lakes Unit Seven Page 3 2. Approve the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement, and a. That no Certificates of Occupancy be granted until the required improvements have received preliminary acceptance. b. That the plat not be recorded until suitable security and an appropriate Construction and Maintenance Agreement is approved and accepted by the Planning Services Director and the County Attorney's office. PREPARED BY: John R. Houldsworth, Engineer Da~e Engineering Review REVIEWED BY: Thomas E. Kuck, P.E. Da~e Engineering Review Director, County Engineer APPROVED BY: Jo~e~'h K. Schm'itt~ Administrator E~at~ C~r~unity Development & Environmental Services JUL 3 0 2002 E~C~IVE SUMM~RY REQUEST TO APPROVE FOR RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF "CARSON LAKES PHASE I I", AND APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND M]~INTENANCE AGREF/~ENT AND APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PER~"OP/~ANCE SECURITY OBJECTIVE: To approve for recording the final plat of "Carson Lakes Phase II", a subdivision of lands located in Section 30 Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida, following the alternative procedure for approval of subdivision plats. CONS IDERAT IONS: Engineering Review Section has completed the review of the construction drawings, specifications, and final plat of "Carson Lakes Phase II" These documents are in compliance with the County Land Development Code and Florida State Statute No. 177. Ail fees have been paid. Security in the amount of 10% of the total cost of the required improvements, and 100% of the cost of any remaining improvements, together with a Construction and Maintenance Agreement for Subdivision Improvements, shall be provided and accepted by the Planning Services Director and the County Attorneys office prior to the recording of the final plat. This would be in conformance with the County Land Development Code - Division 3.2.9. This Executive Summary has been reviewed and approved by Transportation Services as well as the Public Works Utilities. Engineering Review Section recommends that the final plat of "Carson Lakes Phase II" be approved for recording. FISCAL IMPACT: The project cost is $396,872.95 (estimated) to be borne by the developer. The cost breakdown is as follows: a) Water & Sewer - $124,092.00 b) Drainage, Paving, Grading - $272,780.95 The Security amount, equal to 110% of the AG~QA~ project cost, is $436,560.25 ~~ JUL 3 0 Executive Summary Carson Lakes Phase II Page 2 The County will realize revenues as follows: Fund: Community Development Fund 113 Agency: County Manager Cost Center: 138900 - Development Services Revenue generated by this project: Total: $5,246.82 Fees are based on a construction estimate of $272,780.95 (does not include Immokalee Water- Sewer District Improvements)and were paid in September, 2001. The breakdown is as follows: a Plat Review Fee ($425.00 + $4./ac)- $ 555.00 b Construction Drawing Review Fee Water & Sewer (.50% const, est.) - N/A Drainage, Paving, Grading (.42% const, est.)- $1145.68 c Construction Inspection Fee Water & Sewer (1.5% cons~, est.) - N/A Drainage, Paving, Grading (1.3% const, est.) - $3546.14 GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The Concurrency Waiver and Release relating to conditional approval has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's Office for the project. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: There are no outstanding environmental issues HISTORICAL/A/~CHEOLOGICAL IMPACT: There are no historical or archeological impacts EAC RECOMMENDATION: Approval CCPC RECOMMENDATION: Approval PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the Final Plat of "Carson Lakes Phase II" for recording with the following stipulations: 1. Approve the amount of $436,560.25 as performance security for the required improvements; or such lesser amount based on work completed and as is approved by the Engi~rin~ Review Department. JUL 3 0 2002 Executive Summary Carson Lakes Phase II Page 3 2. Approve the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement, and a. That no Certificates of Occupancy be granted until the required improvements have received preliminary acceptance. b. That the plat not be recorded until suitable security and an appropriate Construction and Maintenance Agreement is approved and accepted by the Planning Services Director and the County Attorney's office. PREPARED BY: Jo-hn R. Ho~fdsw~rt~]' ~ngineer Date Engineering Review REVIEWED BY: Thomas E. Kuck, P.E. - 7ate Engineering Review Director, County Engineer APPROVED BY: Jo/e~h K. ScH~i~, AdminZistrator Da/te ' Cdm~unity Development & Environmental Services JUL 3 0 2002 ~_XECUTIVE SUMMARY REQUEST TO APPROVE FOR RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF "NOAH'S LANDING" OBJECTIVE: To approve for recording the final plat of Noah's Landing, a subdivision of lands located in Section 34, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. CONSIDERATIONS: Engineering Review Section has completed the review of the final plat of "Noah's Landing". This document is in compliance with the County Land Development Code and Florida State Statute No. 177. Ail fees ~ d have been paid. There are no subdivision re±ate improvements associated with this plat. This Executive Summary has been reviewed and approved by Transportation Services and Public Works Utilities. Engineering Review Section recommends that the final plat of "Noah'~ Landing" be approved for recording. FISCAL IMPACT: The County will realize revenues as follows: Fund: Community Development Fund 113 Agency: County Manager Cost Center: 138900 - Development Services Revenue generated by this project: Total: $580.00 Plat Review Fees GROWTH M~NAGEMENT IMPACT: The Concurrency Waiver and Release relating to conditional approval has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's Office for the project. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: There are no environmental issues Executive Summary Noah's Landing Page 2 ~ISTORIC~ / AI~CHEOLOGIC2tL ISSUES: There are no historical or archeological issues F2~C RECOMMENDATION: Approval CCPC RECOMMENDATION: Approval PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the Final Plat of "Noah's Landing" with the following stipulations: 1. Authorize the recording of the Final Plat of "Noah's Landing." PREPARED BY: John R. Houldsworth, Engineer Engineering Review REVIEWED BY: D~te ' Thomas E. Kuck, P.E. Engineering Review Director / County Engineer APPROVED BY: Jps~ph K. ~i~t, Administrator ~a~e unity Dev. and Environmental Svcs. EXECUTIVE S~Y REQUEST TO APPROVE FOR RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF "ISLANDW]tLK PHASE SEVEN A" OBJECTIVE: To approve for recording the final plat of Islandwalk Phase Seven A, a subdivision of lands located in Section 33, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. CONSIDERATIONS: Engineering Review Section has completed the review of the final plat of "Islandwalk Phase Seven A". This document is in compliance with the County Land Development Code and Florida State Statute No. 177. Ail fees have been paid. There are no subdivision related improvements associated with this plat. Engineering Review Section recommends that the final plat of "Islandwalk Phase Seven A" be approved for recording. This Executive Summary has been reviewed and approved by Transportation Services and Public Works Utilities. FISCAL IMPACT: The County will realize revenues as follows: Fund: Community Development Fund 113 Agency: County Manager Cost Center: 138900 - Development Services Revenue generated by this project: Total: $450.00 Plat Review Fees GROWTH ~NAGEMENT IMPACT: The Concurrency Waiver and Release relating to conditional approval has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's Office for the project. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: There are no environmental issues Executive Summary Islandwalk Phase Seven A Page 2 ~ISTORIC2tL / A/~CHEOLOGICAL ISSUES: There are no historical or archeological issues F~C RECO~R~E~ATION: Approval CCPC RECO~R~ENDATION: Approval PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the Final Plat of "Islandwalk Phase Seven A" with the following stipulations: 1. Authorize the recording of the Final Plat of "Islandwalk Phase Seven A." PREPARED BY: John R. Houldsworth, Engineer Date Engineering Review REVIEWED BY: Thomas E. Kuck, P.E. Date' Engineering Review Director / County Engineer APPROVED BY: j strator Da~e ' CCunity Dev. and Environmental Svcs. 1.3 18 17 16 15 14 13 PROdECT 2,~ ~g 20 2~ 22 LOCATION NAPI,.E:S- IMMOKAI.E~ ROAD 2 30 29 28 27 25 25 ~ 36 31 32 35 36 '"'" "-'"' (C.R. 862) T 4'8 $ /ANDERBILT REACH I~ ,..~.,,=T 4.9 S ~ 9 10 11 12 NOT TO 12 .,=7 = -8 -, = ,=" '='' ==' SCALE ~ ~. 1,.3 18 1 17 16 15 14 1,3 LOCATION MAP JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVAL OF THE MORTGAGE AND PROMISSORY NOTE FOR A SEVENTY-FIVE THOUSAND ($75,000) DOLLAR LOAN TO RENAISSANCE MANOR, INC., A NON-PROFIT HOUSING PROVIDER, TO ASSIST IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SPECIAL NEEDS AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT. OBJECTIVE: To increase the supply of affordable housing for persons with special needs in Collier County by granting a loan to Renaissance Manor, a Florida Non-Profit Corporation, assisting in the construction of a 25-unit affordable housing development. CONSIDERATION: The Collier County Department of Housing & Urban Improvement has set aside $75,000 from the State Housing Initiative Partnership (SHIP) funds for a zero interest loan to Renaissance Manor, Inc., a non-profit special needs housing provider. This zero interest loan is provided for by the Land Acquisition/ Transfer With New Construction strategy approved by the Board of County Commissioners in the three-year SHIP Housing Assistance Plan on April 24, 2001. The County's interest will be secured by a mortgage on the property. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this Mortgage and Note will grant a $75,000 loan to Renaissance Manor, Inc. from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. The loan shall be repaid over a ten-year period in $7,500 increments, with the first payment due on July 1, 2007. Total payments shall be $75,000 due by July 1, 2017. Recording costs will be paid to the Clerk of Courts from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. It is anticipated that the project will qualify for a 6-year deferral of Impact Fees available to providers of affordable housing at time of building permit issuance. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This loan to Renaissance Manor, Inc. will allow Collier County to enhance the development of special needs affordable housing in accordance with the Housing Element of the Growth Management Plan of Collier County. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve this Mortgage and Promissory Note. Cormac J. Giblin/4dousing Development Manager  D/~rt/n~nt of ~oSsing and Urban Improvement REVIEWED BY: 4(-'{V ~,~ ~ ~ Date:'7-/c:~''' (~ 5~ Denton Baker, Interim Director Department of Housing and Urban Improvement .... APPROVED BY: // Date: .. ; Joseph hm~tt. Admir~strator / ¢ . . JUL302002 Commfinitv Development and Environmental Services Division i -'- Renaissance Manor, Inc. 1401 16~' Street Sarasota. FI. 34236 J Scot~ Eller, Executive Director Ph. 941-928-1814 Fax 941-955-0520 March 19, 2002 Mr. Denton Baker Interim HUI Director 3050 N. Horseshoe Dr. #275 Naples, FL 34104 Re: SHIP Funds Request -Housing for Adults with Mental Health Needs Dear Mr. Baker: This letter is to request SHIP funds to help create twenty-five units of new housing for adults with mental health issues in Collier County. Renaissance Manor requests $3,000 per unit or a total loan of $75,000. We request this loan with no interest and a payment deferral for five years. After the five years, we propose re-paying the loan one time a year in lump sum payments of $7,500, over ten years. For the same project, Renaissance Manor would also like to request delaying the impact fees for a period of six years. These funds will be paid at the end of six years at today's rate and with no interest. Additional details about the project are provided in the attached overview. Thank you for your help in this process. We look forward to additional discussions about how the housing needs of this population may be best met in the future. Sincerely, ~S/cott Eller Executive Director attachment JUL 3 0 2002 Collier County Proposed Units of Housing For Adults with Mental Health Issues Part one: Overview Location: 4150 Bayshore Road, Naples, Property ID#: 6183640004, approximately 2.83 acres. The property is contingent to a trailer park and is undeveloped. The majority of the land contains open fields, scattered with trees. Number of units: 25 Age of population: These units will provide housing for adults ages 18 to 65. Type of Residents: Independent living units How residents wi//be selected and projected occupancy rate: The organization accepts potential residents after an interview and reference check process that collects information from the patient, available family members, medical history and doctor's recommendations. Residents must be assigned a caseworker. Currently, the organization receives about two calls a week, mostly from caseworkers, inquiring about space at current facilities. Due to the need, Renaissance Manor anticipates keeping these units at greater than 90 percent occupancy. Support provided to residents: The housing provides residents, in a small cluster, a positive, supportive environment that offers independence, but also neighborly support. As needed suppor[ services are provided by caseworkers. By assisting with many daily living situations, caseworkers wilt help residents maintain independence. The service provided vary depending on individual needs. Residents eligible for these services are allocated an Optional State Supplement of $470 per month by the State of Florida. These fees are collected by the local mental health provider. Renaissance Manor, as real estate manager, will provide back-up services to these caseworkers activities and coordinate as needed with the local mental health provider to provide high-quality and successful housing opportunities for residents. Size and description of units: Each resident will have approximately 455 square feet of living space including a full kitchen, bath with either a shower or tub, a bedroom, a living room and small dinette area. Units will be constructed of concrete block with shingle roofing. Affordability: Residents will pay one-third of their income for the housing and support services (at current SSI rates, up to $225 per month.) The vast majority of residents will (currently 80 percent) receive only Social Security and Supplemental Social Security Income. Amenities: The site has convenient access to the bus line. A Publix shopping center and related stores is within walking distance. The David Lawrence Mental Health Center is approximately two miles from the site. JUL 3 0 2002 Architect: Don Lawson, Sarasota Part two: Financial Resources requested: $ SHIP funds: $3,000 per unit x 25 units= $75,000 Requested terms of SHIP loan: No interest loan, payment deferred five years. Repayment made over ten years in a once a year lump sums of $7,500. $ Impact Fee Deferrals: six years. Payment in a lump sum at the end of six years, at today's rate, no interest charge. Estimated cost per unit: $36,000 Estimated total cost: $900,000 for construction, includes $2,000 per unit for site work. Land cost: $243,764. Total cost estimate: $1,143,764. Anticipated Developer's fee: none Other resources: Renaissance Manor is seeking a grant from the United States ~.- Department of Agriculture for $400,000 to support land purchase and unit construction. Renaissance Manor, also, seeks to raise funds from foundations and other sources while the project is under development. Timeline We anticipate this project will take two to three years to complete, as funding becomes available. Part three: About Renaissance Manor Miss/on: Renaissance Manor, Inc. provides high-quality, permanent, long-term housing to mentally ill adults and supports their residence in the least-restrictive and safest environment possible. Tax status: 501(c)(3) Br/ef h/story: The assisted living facility, Renaissance Manor was created as a for-profit housing facility in 1982 and operated in this way for seventeen years until 1999. In 1998, Heather and Scott Eller obtained the property, which had deteriorated considerably and was sold "as-is." By investing their personal and sweat equity, the Eller's turned poor- quality housing into a high-quality housing that improved the lives of special need residents and supported the surrounding neighborhood's redevelopment. In 1999, a tax- exempt 501 (c)3, Renaissance Manor, Inc. was created to provide a mechanism to access community support and resources to better resident lives. The assisted-living !ac, ility se, rve. s,.41adults..This year, Renaissance Manor Inc. created ten new unil~ of ,~,.ltd~DA ll'F~ -- ,naepenaem ,,ving hous,ng for those who need a less restrictive environment at~ neNo. i[f f'~ ~ site in Sarasota. In partnership, with the local mental health provider, the organi,~ation ' JUL 3 0 2002 purchased an eight unit apartment complex. These units were purchased with a combination of SHIP funds and money from the Selby Foundation. Occupancy began in summer 2001. The units filled in November 2001. Staff and board qualifications: The Executive Director and the Administrator each have seven years of experience operating a housing facility for adults who have mental health needs. The Board of Renaissance Manor also provides expertise and guidance in both housing and mental health issues. Some board members have family members with mental health concerns and therefore are knowledgeable about the challenges and the support systems necessary to make housing for the mentally ill successful. Others members are active in the health industry. For additional information contact: Mr. Scott Eller Executive Director Renaissance Manor 1401 16tn Street Sarasota, FL 34236 941-365-8645 seller99@aol.com JUL 3 0 2002 Details Page 1 of 1 Folio NO.II 61836400004 11 Property Address[t NO SITE ADDRESS Owner Name{I ELLER, J SCOTT Addressesl11401 16TH ST Cityl[ SARASOTA ~ State~ FL ~ Zipl 34236- 0000 Legalt N G + TC L F NO 2 14 50 25 E l! 846FT OF N 150FT OF Sl/2 LOT ~ 53, OR 1683 PG 1703 & OR Section II Township il Range II Acres ~ Map No. Strap No. 14 II 50 II 2s II 2.83 II 5A14 504400 053.0015A14 Sub No. tl 504400 II N G & T C L F UNIT 2 fl e Millage Area ~ e Millag_e Use Code II 0 II VACANT RESIDENTIAL II 63 ~ 16.0679 2002 Pre/iminary Tax Roll Sales History (Subject to change) ! LandValue I' $141,500.001 [ Date ][ Book-Page Amount ,(+)lmprovedValue II S0.001[ 04/2002 ti{ 3021-2900 $250,000.00[ I (=) Market Value II S 141,500.00 I [ 06/1992 1723-2383 S0.00 I(-)SOHExemptvalue II S0.00 II 05/1988 ]1 1353-797 $55,000.001 I (=) Assessed Value II S 141,500.00 I !('i Homestead and other Exempt Value il S o.oo I I .'=, Taxable Value lJ S 141,500.00 I SOH = "Save Our Homes" exempt value due to cap on assessment increases. The Information is Updated Weekly. JUL 3 0 2002 Prepared Collier Count.,.' Housin~ and Urban improvement Dept. .",ir. Cormac Giblin. HUI Manager 2S00 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, ~'L 34104 941-403 -2330 THIS SPACE FOR RECORDING MORTGAGE Security Instrument THIS SECURITY INSTRUMENT is given on June .2002. The Borrower is: Renaissance Manor, Inc. ("Borrower"). This Security instrument is given to Collier County ('Lender"), which is organized and existing under the laws of the United States ol America, and whose address is 2800 Nortl'~ ltorseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34014 . Borrower owes Lender the sum of Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars (U.S. $ 75,000.00 ). This debt is evidenced by Borrower's Note dated the same date as this Security ;nstrument which provides for monthly payments, with the full debt, il not paid earlier, due and payable on July 1, 20 17. This Security Instrument secures to Lender: (a) tt~e repayment of the debt evidenced by the Note, with interest, ar,~ a: renewals, extensions and modifications; (b) the payment of alt other sums, with interest advanced under paragraph 7 ~c, Frotec', the security of the Security Instrument; and (c) the performance of Borrower's covenants and agreements un0er ::qis Secunty Instrument and the Note. For th~s purpose, Borrower does hereby second mortgage, grant and convey to Lender the following descnbed property located in Collier County, Florida. A.s mcre oart;culady described in Attachment A. (Legal Description) and which has the address i"PropertyAddress"}: 4150 Bayshore Road Naples, FL 3&112 TOGETHER WITH all the improvements now or hereafter erected on the property, and ali easements, rights, 3pou~enances rents, royaities, mineral, oil and gas rights and profits, water rights and stock and alt fixtures now or r~ereauer a part of the properly. All replacements and additions sha;I also be covered by the Security Instrument. All of the fcregom~ ;s referred to in this Securily instrument as the "Property'. BORROWER COVENANTS that Borrower is lawfully seized ol the estate hereby conveyed and has the rioht to mortgage, grant amd convey the Propecy and that the Property is unencumbered, except for encumbrances of reco~d. B~.rrower warrants and will defend generally the title to the Property against all claims and demands, sucject to any ancumbrances of record TH',S SECURITY INSTRUMENT compines uniform covenants for national use and non-uniform covenants with l;:r,i~ed variation by junsdicticn to constitute a uniform security instrument covering real properly. UNIFORM COVENANTS. Borrower and Lender covenant and agree as lollows: 1. Payment of Principal and Interest; Prepayment and Late Charges. Borrower shall promptly pay when due :ne pnncdai ot and interest on the debt evidenced by lhe Note. 2. Taxes. The Mortgagor will pay all taxes, assessments, sewer rents or water rates prior to the accrual of any ~enaities or interest thereon. The Morxgagar shall pay or cause to be paid, as the same respectively become due, (A)(1) all taxes and governmental charges of any kind whatsoever which may at any time be lawfully assessed or levied against or with respect to the Property, (2) all utility and other charges, including "service charges", incurred or imposed for the operation, maintenance, use, occupancy, upkeep and ~mprovement of the Property, and (3} alt assessments or other governmental charges that may lawfully be paid in installments over a period of years, the Mortgagor shall be obligated under the Mortgage Io pay or cause to be paid only such installments as are required to be paid during the term of the Mortgage, and shall, promptly after the payment of any of the foregoing, forward In Mortgagee evidence of such payment. 3. Application of Payments. Unless applicable law provides otherwise, all payments received by Lender shall be applied; first, to interest due; and, to principal due; and last, to any late charges due under the Note. 4. Charoes:_ . Liens. Borrower shali ?_ay alt taxes, _~sse~,,m.'~*¢, .......... chzrges, fines an'~ ,m'~%;~;~'~ ,,,~,,~ ::tribu'tabls to, th~ Proper~y vdhich may attain priority over this Security Instrument, and leasehold payments or ground rents, if any. Borrower sh, all promptly furnish to Lender ail notices of amounts to be paid under this paragraph, and all receipts evidencing the payments Borrower shall promptly discharge any lien which has priority over this Security Instrument unless Borrowen agrees in writing to the payment of the obligation secured by the lien in a manner acceptable to Lender; {b) contests in good faith the iien by, or delends against enforcement of the lien in, legal proceedings which in the Lender's opinion operate to prevent the enforcement of the I eh; or (c) secures from the holder of the lien an agreement satisfacton/to Lender subordinating the lien to this Security Instrument. if Lender determines that any part ol the Property is subject to a lien which may attain priority over the Secur ty nstrument, Lender may give Borrower a notice identifying the lien. Borrower shall satisfy the lien or take one or more of the actions set forth above within 10 days of the giving of notice. 5. Protection of Lender's Rights in the Property. If Borrower fails to pedorm the covenants and agreemf contained in this Security nstrument, or there ts a legal proceeding that may significantly affect Lender's rights in the Property (SUCh as a proceeding in bankruptcy, probale, for condemnation or forfeiture or to enforce laws or regulation~ then Lender may do and pay for whatever is necessary to protect the value ol the Property and Lender's rights in the Prope~y. Len0er's actions may include paying any sums secured by a lien which has priority over this Security Instru ~pearin~mc~urt~paymgreas~nab~eatt~neys`~eesandentering~nthePr~pertyt~maKe~epairs. Although Lender , JUL 3 ~ 2002 t~e act:ch under this paragraph 7, Lender does not have to do so. Any amounts ddsbursed by Lender under this para 7 s"al,' become additionai debt of Borrower secured by this Security tnslrument. Unless Borrower and Lender :errrs ef payment, these amounts shall hear in!erest from the date of d~sbursement at the Note rate and shall be payabh ,',,tn ~merest, upoq not,ce from Lender Io Borrcwer requesting payment ~, i 6. Inspection. Lender or its agent may make reasonable entries upon and inspections of the Properly. Lender shall give Borrower notice at the time of or prior to an inspection specifying reasonable cause for the inspection. 7. Condemnation. The proceeds ol any award or claim for damages, direct or consequential, in connection with any condemnation or other taking of any part of the Property, or for conveyance in lieu of condemnation, are hereby assigned and shall be paid to Lender. tn the event of a total taking of the Property, the proceeds shall be applied fo the sums secured by this Security instrument, whether or not then due, with any excess paid to Borrower. In the event of a part~ai taking of the Property~ in which the fair market value of the Property immediately before the taking is equal to or greater than the amount of the sums secured by this Security instrument immediately before the taking, unless Borrower and Lender otherwise agree in writing, the sums secured by this Secuhty instrument shall be reduced by the amount of the proceeds multiplied by the following fraction: (a) the total amount of the sums secured immediately before the taking, divided by (b) the fair market value of the Property immediately before the taking. Any balance shall be paid to Borrower. In the event of a partiaf taking of the Property in which the fair market value of the Property immediately before the taking is less than the amount of the sums secured immediately for the taking, unless Borrower and Lender otherwise agree in writing or unless applicable law otherwise provides, the proceeds shall be applied to the sums secured by this Security Instrument whether or not the sums are then due. Unless Lender and Borrower otherwise agree in writing, any application of proceeds to pnnc~psi shall not extend or postpone the due date of the monthly payments referred to in paragraphs 1 or change the amount of such payments. 8. Borrower Not Released, Forbearance By Lender Not a Waiver. Extension of the time for payment or moddica+,ion of amortization of the sums secured by this Security Instrument granted by Lender to any successor in interest of Borrower shall not operate to release the liability of the original Borrower or Borrower's successors in interest. Lender shalt not be required to commence proceedings against any successor in interest or refuse to extend time for payment or otherwise modify amortization of the sums secured by this Security instrument by reason of any demand made by the onginal Borrower or Borrower's successors ~n interest. Any forbearance by Lender in exercising any dght or remedy shall not be a waiver of or preclude the exercise of any right or remedy. 9. Successors and Assigns Bound; Joint and Several Liability; Co-Signers. The covenants and agreements ol this Security instrument shall bind and benefit the successors and assigns of Lender and Borrower, subject to the Provisions of paragraph 17. BorroweCs covenants and agreements shall be joint and several. Any Borrower who co-signs th~s Security instrument but does not execute the Nolo; (a) is co-signing this Security instrument only to mortgage, grant and convey that Borrower's interest in the Property under the terms of this Security Instrument; (b) ts not personally obligated to pay the sums secured by this Security Instrument; and [c) agrees that Lender and any other Borrower may agree to extend, modify, forbear or make any accommodations with regard to the terms of this Security instrument or the Note without that Sorrower's consent. 10. Loan Charges. if the loan secured by this Security instrument is subject to a taw which sets maximum loan charges, and that t&w is finally interpreted so that the interest or other loan charges collected or to be collected in connection v.'~m the loan exceed the permitted limits, then; (a) any such loan charge shall be reduced by the amount necessaw to reduce the charge to Ina permitted limit; and (b) any sums already collected from Borrower which exceeded permitted limits ,,,,'i;I be refunoed to Borrower. Lender may choose to make this refund by reducing the principal owed under the Note or by making a drect payment to Borrower. if a relund reduces principal, the reduction will be treated as a partial prepayment ?,.~tR3J[ apy prepayment charge under the Note. 11. Notices. Any notice to Borrower provided for in this Security instrument shall be given by delivering it or by mailing it by first class mail uniess applicable law required use of another method. The notice shall be directed to the Prope~y Address or any other address Borrower designates by notice to Lender. Any notice to Lender shall be given to Borrower or Lender when g~ven as provided in this paragraph. 12. Governing Law; Severability. This Security instrument shall be governed by federal law and the law of the }urisd~ction ~n which the Property is located. In the event that any provision or clause of this Security Instrument or the Note 3or-,flicts with applicable law, such conflict shall not affect other provisions of this Security instrument or the Note wretch can De g~','en effect without the conflicting provision. To this end the provisions of this Secunty Instrument and the Note are de: areal to be severable. 13. Borrower's Copy. Borrower shall be given one conformed copy of the Note and of this Security Instrument. 14. Transfer of the Property or a Beneficial Interest in Borrower. tf all or any part of the Property or any ,nterest m ~t is so!d or transferred (or if a beneficial interest in Borrower is sold or transferred and Borrower is not a natural F~rscn~ v.~thout Lender's prior written consent, Lender may, at its option, require immediate payment in full of all sums secured by this Security Instrument. However, this option shall not be exercised by Lender if exercise is prohibited by federal law as of t~e date of this Security instrument. tf Lender exercised this option, Lender shall give Borrower notice of acceleration. The notice shall provide a period of not less than 30 days from the date the notice is delivered or mailed within which Borrower must pay all sums secured by this Secur,ty instrument, if Borrower fails to pay these sums prior to the expiration of this period, Lender may invoke any remedies permitted by this Security instrument without further notice or demand on Borrower. 15. Borrower's Right to Reinstate. If Borrower meets certain conditions, Borrower shall have the right to have enforcement of this Security Instrument discontinued at any time prior to the earlier of: (a) 5 days (or such other period as applicable law may specify for reinstatement) before sale of the Property pursuant to any power of sale contained in this Security Inslrument; or (b) antW of a judgment enforcing this Security Instrument. Those conditions are that Borrower: (a) pays Lender alt sums which then would be due under Ibis Security instrument and the Note as if no acceleration had occurred; (b) cures and default of any other covenants or agreements; (c) pays all expenses incurred in enforcing this Security instrument, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney's fees; and (d) takes such action as Lender may reasonably require to assure that the lien of this Security Instrument, Lender's rights in the Properly and BorroweCs obhgation to pay the sums secured by this Security Instrument shall continue unchanged. Upon reinstatement by Borrower, this Security Instrument and the obligations secured hereby shall remain fully effective as it no acceleration had occurred. .~.owever, this right to reinstate shai~ not apply in the case ~f acceleration under paragraph 17. 16. Sale of Note; Change of Loan Servicer. The Note or a partial interest in the Note (together with this Security instrument) may be sold one or more times without prior notice to Borrower. A sale may result in a change in the entity (known as the "Loan Servicer") that collects monthly payments due under the Note and this Security Instrument. There also may be one or more changes of the Loan Servicer unrelated to a sale of the Note. If there is a change of the Loan Servicer, Borrower will be given written notice of the change in accordance with paragraph 14 and applicable law. The notice will state the name and address of the new Loan Servicer and the address to which payments should be made. The notice will also contain any other information required by applicable law. 17. Hazardous Substances. Borrower shall not cause or permit the presence, use, disposal, storage, or release of any Hazardous Substances on or in the Property. Borrower shall not do, nor allow anyone else to do, anything affecting the Property that is in violation of any Environmental Law. The preceding two sentences shall not apply to the presence, use. or slorage on the Property of small quantities of Hazardous Substances that are generally recognized to be appropriate [o normal residential uses and to maintenance cf the Property. Borrower shad promplly give Lender written notice for any investigation claim demand lawsuit or other act on by an, A~...-~J~ ~TFJ~ vernmenta or re ulator a eno or rlvate ar[ ~o , I g ' .Y g Y P. P y involving the Property and any Hazardous Substance or Environr~ ~ntal Law ct which Borrower has actual kno~viedge. If Borrower learns, or is notified by any governmental or regulatory au ~ority, . that any remora', or other remediation of any Hazardous Substance affecting the Property is necessary, Borrower shl Frompt;y take ali necessary remedial actions m accordance with Environmental Law. As used ;n this paragraph 20, "Hazardous Substances" are those substances defined as toxic or hazardous ,ubstan , by JUL 3 0 2002 Env:ronmental Lac,, and the following suostances: gasoline, kerosene, other flammable or toxic petroleum products 2est~cides and her$[o~des, volatile solvents, matercals containing asbestos or formaldehyde, and Pg. radioactive materials. As used in this paragraph 20, "Environmental Law" means federal laws and laws of the jurisdiction where the Property is located that relate to health, safety or environmental protection. 18. Acceleration; Remedies. Lender shall give notice to Borrower prior to acceleration following Borrower's breach of any covenant or agreement in this Securily Instrument (but not prior to acceleration under paragraph 17 unless aopiicaule law provides otherwise). The notice shall specify: (a) the default; (b) tt~e action required to cure the default; (c} a date, not less tr~an 30 days from the date the notice is given to Borrower, by which the default must be cured; and (d) that failure to cure the default on or before the date specified in the notice may result in acceleration of the sums secured by this Security Instrument, foreclosure by judicial proceeding and sale of the Property. The notice shall further inform Borrower of the right to reinstate after acceleration and the right to assert in the foreclosure proceeding the non-existence of a default or any other defense of Borrower to acceleration and foreclosure. If the default is not cured on or before the date specified in the notice, Lender, at its option, may require immediate payment in full of all sums secured by this Security Instrument without further demand and may foreclose this Security Instrument by judicial proceeding. Lender shall be entitled to collect all expenses incurred in pursuing the remedies provided in this paragraph 21, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney's fees and costs of the title evidence. 19. Release. Upon payment of all sums secured by this Secunty Instrument, Lender sl~all release this Security instrument, without charge, to Borrower. Borrower shall pay any recordation costs. 20. Attorneys' Fees. As used in this Security Instrument and the Note, 'attorneys' fees' shall include any attorneys' fees awarded by an appellate court. SIGNING BELOW, Borrower accepts and agrees to the terms and covenants contained in this Secudty Instrument and in any rider(s) executed by Borrower and recorded with it. Signed, sealed and Oelivered in the presence oh Renaissance Manor, Inc. Witness#l: Signature: Borrower: Scott Eller, Executive Director S~gnature: Witness~2: S,gna[ure: Address: STATE OF Ffodda COUNTY OF Collier The foregoing Mortgage was acknowledged before me this by Scott Eller of Renaissance (date) (name) (corporation Manor, thC. He is personally known name) to me or has produced as identification. %~ ~, o ~,:p l~c~,-~ & .leo. oi =u~¢~ci~,~¢2 signature of person taking acknowledgment title serial ~ (if any) JUL 3 0 2002 3 Attachment A, Renaissance Manor Inc. - Legal Description: Legal{[ NG + T CLF NO2 14 50 25 E i 846FT OF N 150FT OF SU2 LOT tt 53, OR 1683 PG 1703 & OR It 1723 PG 2383 JUL 3 0 2002 PROMISSORY NOTE /uno 2002 Borrower: Renaissance Manor, Inc. 4150 Bayshore Rd Naples Flori~ {Property Address; (City) (State) ! BORROWER(S) PROMISE TO PAY: I/We promise to pay Sevent~-Five Thoueaz~ Dollars ($75,000.00) (this amount will be called "principal') to the order of Collier County or to any other holder of this Note (the "Lender"), whose address is 2800 Horseshoe Drive North, Naples, Florida 34104 . I/We understand that the Lender may transfer the Promissory None. The Lender or anyone who takes this Note by transfer and who is entitled to receive payments under this Note will be called the 'Note Holder". 2 INTEREST: Interest on this Note shall be zero percent (0%) per a~mnum; except that if I/We fail to pay this Note as recfuired, the interest rate shall be twelve percent (12%) per ar~um from the date when payment of this Note is due until I/We pay it in full. 3 PAYMENTS: Principal payments of $7~500.00 shall be made yearly beginning on July 1, 2007 of each year to the collier County Housing and Urban Improvement Department until payment in full Ls received by July 1, 2017. My/Our total payment shall be U.S. $75,000.00 . BORRO~K'S RIGHT TO PREPAY: I/We have the right to make payments of principal at any time before they are due. A payment of principal only is know as a "prepayment'. When I/We make a prepayment, I/we will tell the Note Ho!der in writing that I/we am doing so. i't;e may make a full prepayment or partial prepayment charge. The Note Holder will use all of my prepa?~ents to reduce the ~ount of the principal that I owe under this Note. if i~We make a partial prepayment, there will be no changes in the due date or in the amount uf my mon5nly payment unless 5he No5e Holder agrees in writing to those changes. If I/We make a partial prepayment, there will be no prepayment penalty adhering to or associated ~..'ith such prepayment LOAIq CN3tRGES: If a law, which applies to this !c~ and which sets maximtlm loan charges, is z~nally interpreted so that the interest ar other loan charges collected or to be collected in con~ectlcn w!th this loan exceed the permitted limits; then (i) any such loan charges shall be reduced by 5he ~mount necessary to reduce the charges to the permmtted limit; and {il) any s'~urs already collected from me which exceeded permitted limits will be refuulded to me/us. The Note Holder may choose to ~ake this refund by reducing the principal that I/We cwo under this Note or by making a direct pa?~ent to me/us. If a refund reduces principal, %he reduction will be [reared as a partial prepays, ont. SUBORDINATION: Lender and Borrower acknowledge and agree chat this Security instrument subject and subordinate in all respects to the liens, terms, covenants and conditions cf any First Deed of Trust or mortgage and to all advances heretofore made or which may hereafter se made pursuant 5c ~he First Deed of Trust or mcrtgage including all advancei for the purpose of (a) protecting or further securing the lien of the First Deed si Trust or msrtgage, curing defaults bI, 5he Borrower under the First Deed of Trust or mortgage or for any other purpose expressly permitted by the First Deed of Trust or mortgage or (b} constructing, renovating, repairing, furnishing, fixturing or ecfuipplng Property. The terms and provisions of the First Deed cf Trust or mortgage are par~moun~ and controlling, ~nd they supersede any other terms and provisions hereof in conflic5 ~herewiuh. In the event of a foreclosure or deed in lieu of foreclosure of 5he First Deed of Trust, any provisions herein or any provisions In any other collateral agreemex5 restrlcting 5he use cf the Properzy to low cr moderate income households or otherwise restrict~n~ the Borrower's ability to sell the Properly shall have no further force cr effect on subsequent owners or purchasers of the Property. Any person, including his successors or assigns (other than the Borrower or a related entity of the Borrower), receiving title to the Property through a foreclosure or deed in lieu of foreclosure of the First Deed of Trust shall receive title to the Property free and clear from such restrictions. Furuher, if the Senior Lien Holder acquires title ~o the Property pursuant to a deed in !leu of foreclosure, the lien of this Security Instrument shall automatically terminate upon the Sen!or Lien Holder's ac~cisiticn of title, provided than (i) the Lender has been g~ven wricten notice of a default under the First Deed of Trust and (ii) the Lender shall not have cured the default under the First Deed of Trust within the 30-day period provided In such ~Otlce sent to the Lender. 7. BORROWER(S) FAILURE TO PAY AS REQUESTED: (A) Default if I/we do not pay the full amount as required in Section 3 above, I/we will be in default. if I am in default, the Note Holder may bring about any actions not prohibited by applicable law and require me/us tc pay the Note Holder's cost ~nd expenses as described in ~5! beicw. 15~, Payment of Note Holder's Cost and Expenses 15 the No:e Holder cakes such actions as described above, the Note Holder will h ye the / ua~h5 to be paid back for all of its costs and ex!o. enses, including, but nc% !imi ~d to, reascnable ~orneys' fees. 3Ut 3 0 2002 ~ GIVING OF NOTICES: Unless a~plicable law re~umred a iifferen~ me~hod, any no,ice ~h ~mus~ class m~il ts me a2 ~he ~r .... ~'~ A~dress cn ~c= i ~r az a ii£ferent a~Jress if I,~ _ the Note Holder a notice of my/our different address. Any notice that must be given to the Kote Holder under this Note will be given by mailing it by first class mail to the Note Holder at the address stated in Section 3(A) cr at a different address if I/we have been given a notice of that different address. 9 OBLIGATIONS OF PERSONS UNDER THIS NOTE: If more than one person signs this Note, each person is fully and personally obligated to keep all of the promises made in this Note, including the promise to pay the full amount owed. Any person who is a guarantor, surety cr endorser of this Note is also obligated to do these things. ~ny person who takes over ~hese obligations, including the obligations of a guarantor, surety or endorser of this Note, is also obligated to keep all of the promises made in this Note. The Note Holder may enforce its rights under this Note against each person individually or against all of us together. This means that any one of us may be required to pay all of the amounts owed under this Note. i0 WAIVERS: I and any other person who has obligations under this Note waive the rights of presentment ~nd notice of dishonor. "Presentment' means the right to require the Note Holder to demand payment of amounts due. "Notice of Dishonor' means the right to require the Note Holder to give notice to other persons that amounts due have not been paid. 11 UNIFORM SECURED NOTE: This Note is a uniform instr~unent with limited variations in some jurisdictions. In addition to the protection given to the Note Holder under this Note, a Mortgage, Deed of Trust or Security Deed (the 'Security Instrument"), dated the same date as this Note, protects the Note Holder from possible losses which m/ght result if I/we do not keep the promises which I/we make in this Note. That Security Instrument describes how and under what conditions I/we may be required to make immediate payment in full of all amounts !/we owe under this Note. Some of those conditions are described as follows: Transfer of the Property or a Beneficial Interest in Borrower. If all or any part of the property or any interest in it is sold or transferred (or if a beneficial interest in ~rrower is sol~ or transferred And Borrower is not a natural person) withou~ Lender's prlor written consent, Lender may, at its option, require immediate payment in full or all s~s secured by this Security InstrLu~,ent. However, this option shall not be exercised by Lender if exercise ~s prohibined by federal !aw as of the date of this Security Instrur~ent. Lf Lenter exercises this option, Lender shall give Borrower notice of acceleration. The n~tire shall provide a period of not less than thirty (30) days from the date the notice is delivered or mailed, within which Borrower must pay all sums secured by this Security insur~ment, if Borrower{s) fail to pay these su~ms prior to the e~iration of this period, Lender I~a'y invoke any remedies permitted by this Security Instrument without further notic~ or der. and on Borrower. - Nc~wi~hs~andlng the above, the Lender's rights to collect and apply the insurance proceeis hereunder shall be subject and subordinate to the rights of the Senior Lien Holder ~o cslieot and apply such proceeds in accordance with the First Deed of Trus~. This note is governed and construed in accordance with the Laws of the Sta~e of Florida. WIT:~ESS THE HA/~D{S) AND SEAL(S) OF THE UNDERSIGNED. (Seal) -~orrower SCott Eller, Executive Director Renaissance Manor, Inc. ======================================================================================== RETUF~N TO: Cc!lief County Housing & Urban Improvement Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Phone: (941) 403-2330 Fax: (941) 403-2331 2002 lA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVAL OF THIRD AMENDMENT TO 2002 TOURISM AGREEMENT WITH KELLEY SWOFFORD ROY, INC. AS RECOMMENDED BY THE TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL OBJECTIVE: Board approval of the Third Amendment to 2002 Tourism Agreement with Kelley Swofford Roy, Inc. CONSIDERATIONS,:. Kelley Swofford Roy, Inc. (KSR) is the County's Tourism Advertising vendor. On December 11, 2001, the Board approved the original 2002 Tourism Agreement with Kelley Swofford Roy, Inc. The Agreement was amended on two previous occasions by the Board to establish funding levels for tourism advertising/promotion recommended by the Tourist Development Council. On June 18, 2002, the Tourist Development Council was briefed by staff regarding this amendment, which would encourage savings and provide Kelley Swofford Roy, Inc. more latitude in negotiating advertising/promotional contracts with the media. The Tourist Development Council voted unanimously to recommend Board approval of this amendment to the agreement. This Third Amendment to the Agreement provides flexibility to the vendor to transfer unspent line item funds in their Board-approved Advertising/marketing Plan to the "Opportunity Marketing" line item category of the Plan with prior approval of the Administrator, Community Development and Environmental Services Division, or his designee. In all other respects, Kelley Swofford Roy, Inc. shall continue to comply with all of the County's policies and procedures, as set forth in the agreement, regarding expenditures of County funds and funding ceiling. FISCAL IMPACT:. No fiscal impact. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact regarding this action. RECOMMENDATIONS:, Board approve Third Amendment to 2002 Tourism Agreement with Kelley Swofford Roy, Inc. and aUthorize the Chairman to sign the Third Amendment to Agreement. pREPARED BY: ~ DATE: / D. E. "Bleu" Wallace, Director CDES Operations Department REVIEWED BY: ~~? %~' ~ DATE: Steve ~arnell, Ptlffchasing Director purchasing Department '"" APPROVED BY: ~'~"~~ DATE: 2..- ~)s~ph K. SciOn, Administrator  mmunity Development & Environmental Services Division JUL 3 0 2002 THIRD AMENDMENT TO 2002 TOURISM AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on this ~ day of , 2002, by and between Kelley Swofford Roy, Inc., hereinafter called the "Contractor" and Collier County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Collier County, Naples, hereinafter called the "County": WITNESSETH: 1. COMMENCEMENT. The Contractor shall have commenced the work December 1, 2001. This Amended Agreement shall commence on the date of approval of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners. The contract shall continue to be for the ten (10) month period, commencing on December 1, 2001 and terminating on September 30, 2002. 2. STATEMENT OF WORK. a) KSR will perform a combination of the following services, as approved by the County, in order to best serve the Collier Count's needs: b) Develop for approval and implementation advertising, public relations and marketing communications program to meet the County's objectives and budgetary limitations. c) Counsel the County on public relations, advertising and marketing communications opportunities, as appropriate for the County. d) Develop primary and secondary research including focus groups or internal consensus building workshops as required and approved. e) Develop press releases, a background profile on Collier County, photo library, video news releases (VNR) in English and other languages as required. f) Develop media target list of local, state, national and international media contacts. g) Plan an advertising program, from creative strategy, copy, layouts, and production to media research and scheduling, against the County's advertising budget. JUL 3 0 2002 h) Enter into contracts at the direction of and in the name of the County to effectuate the County's advertising program including, but not limited to media space and time. i) Develop required collateral material (brochures, newsletters, direct mail and any marketing and communications material) from copy, layout through to printing. j) Develop website and Internet advertising. k) Maintain a Contractor servicing office in Collier County to support the above listed activities. 1) Contractor will supply the County with monthly reports reflecting the number of ads placed, the cost of the ads and what the County's benefit is in result of the ads. m) KSR shall have the responsibility for the implementation of the previously approved Emergency Marketing Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "A" that was specifically approved on October 23, 2001 by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners for the Tourism Alliance of Collier County pursuant to the Third Amended Agreement to its 2001 Tourism Agreement with the County. The sums of $250,000.00 shall be expended from Tourist Development Disaster Recovery. Fund 196 and $250,000.00 shall be expended from Tourist Development Advertising Fund 194. These remain the same funds allocated by the Board of County Commissioners for the aforementioned 2001 Emergency Marketing Plan and shall be paid separately from the Contract Sum for KSR set forth below. n) KSR shall have the responsibility for the implementation of the FY01/02 Advertising/Marketing Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "B' that was specifically approved on April 9, 2002 by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners. The sum of $552,500.00, in its entirely, shall be funded from Tourist Development Advertising Fund 194. o) KSR shall have the responsibility for the implementation of the FY01/02 "Added Investment" advertising plan attached hereto as Exhibit "C' that was specifically approved on April 23, 2002 by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners. The sum of $250,026.00, in its entirety, shall be funded from Tourist Development Advertising Fund 194 Reserves. p) KRS may transfer unspent line item funds resulting from negotiating lower advertising costs to the Opportunity Marketing line item category_, with the prior approval of the Admini~rator, Community_ Development and Environmental Services Division~ or his designee. In all other respects, KSR shall continue to comply with all of the Court .ty's policies and procedures, as set forth herein, regarding expenditures of County. funds. _ JO k 3 0 2002 ~.- 3. REQUIRED NOTATION: All promotional literature and media advertising must prominently list Collier County as one of the sponsors, where practicable. 4. THE CONTRACT SUM. The County shall pay the Contractor for the performance of this Agreement as per the following responsibilities. a) The County will reimburse Contractor for expenditures incurred on behalf of the County including, but not limited, to those listed below. b) Beginning on December 1, 2001 and each month thereafter, the County will remit to Contractor a monthly retainer in the amount of $9,000, upon submission of invoices by Contractor in a timely manner, for public relations professional services. Activity, performance and monthly retainer amount to be reviewed quarterly, based on billable time as per professional fees included in Addendum A. Special projects such as market research must be authorized and approved by the County and will be billed separately. c) Specific marketing projects such as research, community consensus building, workshops and activities, and targeted marketing program development will be estimated and approved in advance. d) The County will reimburse Contractor separately for project work and production for ---- brochures, promotions, web site design, special events and other special projects, as well as for any media purchases like newspaper, print, radio or television made by Contractor on behalf of the County. All separate project work discussed in this section will be estimated by Contractor in advance, and the Administrator, Community Development and Enviro_mmental Se_rvices Division, or his designee, must sign Lhe estimate before work on these projects or purchases can commence. e) The County will reimburse Contractor for external expenses such as telephone, fax, messenger service, reproduction work, Internet charges, public relation news wires ,. · ,,7,, we!! mailing, packaging, shipping, taxes and duties, and ,.hpt.-,g sevAces, as as printing, copying and other expenses incurred by Contractor in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Such costs shall not exceed $200 per month without the prior written approval and consent of the County. For any communications between Contractor's office and the County, no charges will be made to the County for the above-mentioned expenses. f) The County will only reimburse Contractor costs for travel and entertainment on behalf of the County, provided such travel and entertainment has been approved and consented to, in writing, in advance, by the County. g) If media or other charges increase or decline following Contractor submission of an estimate, the County's responsibility will be adjusted accordingly. If the amount of '-" space, time, or other advertising services actually used is less than what wa: contracted, the County agrees to pay for any rate changes resulting from ch~ ~ge ~ ~ /{) JUL 3 0 2002 3 P~. of volume discount or because of higher scheduled rates. If additional space, time, or services results in a lower rate, the COUNTY will receive the benefit of the lower rate. Contractor agrees to notify the County of any such rate changes as soon as such information is available to Contractor. If the County, after having approved any planned advertising, cancels all or part of this advertising, the County will pay all costs incurred, including any non-cancelable commitments for time or space. h) Contractor will receive a fifteen percent (15%) commission on the gross charges, paid by the advertising media and printing. Purchases of goods and services must be pre- approved by the Administrator, Community Development and Environmental Services Division, or his designee, in advance of purchase. At that time a decision will made by the Administrator whether the County will be directly billed for the goods and services. i) Contractor will take a fifteen percent (15%) commission on the gross charges from third parties with whom Contractor has contacted for products or services used to implement the marketing projects or advertising approved by the County. j. All cash discounts allowed to Contractor by third party suppliers will be credited to the County provided such payments are made directly to Contractor in accordance with the specific discount terms contained in Contractor's invoices and provided the County is not in default on payment of any amounts due to Contractor. Professional Fees/Hourly Basis Art Direction $ 60 - $120 Production in-House 35 - 60 Strategic & Marketing Planning 100 - 250 Public Relation 80 - 150 Website Design 75 - 125 5. NOTICES. Ail notices from the County to the Contractor shall be deemed duly served if mailed by registered or certified mail to the Contractor at the following Address: Kelley Swofford Roy, Inc. Advertising Marketing Public Relations 355 Palermo Avenue Coral Gables, Florida 33134 Effective February 15, 2002, Kelley Swofford Roy, Inc. will move to new headquarters located at 3399 Ponce de Leon, Coral Gables, Florida 33134. All Notices from the Contractor to the County shall be deemed duly served if mailed by registered or certified mail to the County. to: ~t, ra~^ IlOa JUL 3 0 2002 4 Administrator, Community Development & Environmental Services Division, Collier County Government 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 The Contractor and the County may change the above mailing address at any time upon giving the other party written notification. All notices under this Service Agreement must be in writing. 6. NO PARTNERSHIP. Nothing herein contained shall create or be construed as creating a partnership between the County and the Contractor or to constitute the Contractor as an agent of the County. 7. PERMITS: LICENSES: TAXES. In compliance with Section 218.80, F.S., all permits necessary for the prosecution of the Work shall be obtained by the Contractor. Payment for ail such permits issued by the County shall be processed internally by the County. All non-County permits necessary for the prosecution of the Work shall be procured and paid for by the Contractor. The Contractor shall also be solely responsible for payment of any and all taxes levied on the Contractor. In addition, the Contractor shall comply with all rules, regulations and laws of Collier County, the State of Florida, or the U. S. Government now in force or hereafter adopted. The Contractor agrees to comply with all laws governing the responsibility of an employer with respect to -- persons employed by the Contractor. 8. NO IMPROPER USE. The Contractor will not use, nor suffer or permit any person to use in any manner whatsoever, county facilities for any improper, immoral or offensive purpose, or for any purpose in violation of any federal, state, county or municipal ordinance, rule, order or regulation, or of any governmental rule or regulation now in effect or hereafter enacted or adopted. In the event of such violation by the Contractor or if the County or its authorized representative shall deem any conduct on the part of the Contractor to be objectionable or improper, the County shall have the right to suspend the contract of the Contractor. Should the Contractor fail to correct any such violation, conduct, or practice to the satisfaction of the County within twenty-four (24) hours after receiving notice of such violation, conduct, or practice, such suspension to continue until the violation is cured. The Contractor further agrees not to commence operation during the suspension period until the violation has been corrected to the satisfaction of the County. 9. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS PRODUCED: All plans, preliminary outlines, sketches, copies, and all other intellectual properties or work that are produced pursuant to this agreement must be pre-approved prior to purchase by the Administrator or his or Her Designee. All such property will remain the property of the Contractor until such time as all payments due Contractor for the particular work have been made. Thereafter, all such material shall become the property of ~.':_ c'~,mty except copyrighted material to which the copyright is held by a third part or ~ unrelated to the Contractor. Upon termination of this agreement, all such p o>rPe~/{) materials shall be the property of the Contractor urdess the County pays ~Ja['n~'~ accordance with the terms of this agreement, even though the County or another party may have physical possession of the property in question. Contractor shall endeavor to utilize uncopyrighted material or secure releases of copyrights for the County. 10. TERMINATION. Should the contractor be found to have failed to perform its services in a manner satisfactory to the County as per this Agreement, the County may terminate said agreement immediately for cause. Either party may terminate this Agreement for convenience with a thirty (30) day written notice. The County shall be sole judge of non-perfo,~ance. Upon termination of this Agreement, Contractor will bill the County for all amounts not previously billed and due Contractor at that time. Contractor will not be entitled to payment for any advertisement if work on it commenced after Contractor received the notice of termination. Contractor will be entitled to payment for services for advertisements commenced and approved for placement in a specific media by the County prior to receipt of such notice; or with the expressed written consent of the County prior to the effective date of termination. 11. NO DISCRIMINATION. The Contractor agrees that there shall be no discrimination as to race, sex, color, creed or national origin. 12. INSURANCE. The Contractor shall provide insurance as follows: A. Commercial General Liability: Coverage shall have minimum limits of $300,000 Per Occurrence, Combined Single Limit for Bodily Injury Liability and Property Damage Liability. This shall include Premises and Operations; Independent contractors; Products and Completed Operations and Con~ractual Liability. B. Business Auto Liability: Coverage shall have minimum limits of $500,000 Per Occurrence, Combined Single Limit for Bodily Injury Liability and Property Damage Liability. This shall include: Owned Vehicles, Hired and Non-Owned Vehicles and Employee Non-Ownership. C. Workers' Compensation: Insurance covering all employees meeting Statutory Limits in compliance with the applicable state and federal laws. The coverage must include Employers' Liability with a minimum limit of $1,000,000 for each accident. Special Requirements: Collier County shall be listed as the Certificate Holder and included as an Additional Insured on the Comprehensive General Liability Policy. Current, valid insurance policies meeting the requirement herein identified shall be maintained by Contractor during the duration of this Agreement. Renewal certificates shall be sent to the County 30 days prior to any expiration date. There shall be a 30 day notification to the County in the event of can modification of any stipulated insurance coverage. J u L Contractor shall insure that all subcontractors comply with the same insurance requirements that he is required to meet. The same Contractor shall provide County with certificates of insurance meeting the required insurance provisions. 13. INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor/Vendor, in consideration of One Hundred Dollars ($100.00), the receipt and sufficiency of which is accepted through the signing of this document, shall hold harmless and defend Collier County and its agents and employees from all suits and actions, including attorneys' fees and all costs of litigation and judgments of any name and description arising out of or incidental to the performance of this contract or work performed there under. This provision shall also pertain to any claims brought against the County by any employee of the named Contractor/Vendor, any Subcontractor, or anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them. The Contractor/Vendor's obligation under this provision shall not be limited in any way by the agreed upon contract price as shown in this Contract or the Contractor/Vendor's limit of, or lack of, sufficient insurance protection. The first One Hundred dollars ($100.00) of money received on the contract price is considered as payment of this obligation by the County. This section does not pertain to any incident arising from the sole negligence of the County. 14. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION, This Agreement shall be administered on behalf ~-~ of the County, by the Housing and Urban Improvement Department. 15. COMPONENT PARTS OF THIS CONTRACT. This Contract consists of the attached component parts, all of which are as fully a part of the contract as if herein set out verbatim: insurance Certificate. 16. SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION. It is further understood and agreed by and between the parties herein that this agreement is subject to appropriation by the Board of County Commissioners. 17. COOPERATION. Contractor shall fully cooperate with the County in all matters pertaining to this agreement and provide all information and documents as requested by the County from time to time. Failure to cooperate, as interpreted by the County shall constitute grounds for the County to impose sanctions that do not result in termination of this agreement. 18. AVAILABILITY OF RECORDS. Contractor shall maintain all records, books, documents, papers and financial irfformation pertaining to work performed under this Agreement. Contractor agrees that the County, or any of its duly authorized representatives, shall, until the expiration of three (3) years after final payment under this Agreement, have access to, and the right to examine and photocopy any pertinent books, documents, papers, and records of Contractor involving transactions related to this Agreement. a~,~r~oA rr~ JUL 3 0 2002 7 19. PROHIBITION OF ASSIGNMENT. Contractor shall not assign, convey, or transfer in whole or in part its interest in this Agreement without the prior written consent of the County. 20. The County shall be the owner of and in possession of the originals of all intellectual property created or furnished pursuant to this agreement, including, but not limited to drawings, paintings, photography, film, video, and printed documents, unless specifically exempted by the County. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Contractor and the County, have each, respectively, by an authorized person or agent, hereunder set their hands and seals on the date and year first above written. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Dwight E. Brock, Clerk of Courts By: By: Dated: JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN (SEAL) Kelley Swofford Roy, In_..c. I ?//~ '- First Wi(ness SignatUre' -:/ Type/print witness na[n_ e Second Witness Typed signature and title Type/print witness name CORPORATE SEAL (corporations only) Approved as to foun and legal sufficiency: Jacqueline Hubbard Robinson Assistant County Attorney aC, S.~A JUL 3 0 2002 Pg.. E XHIB IT "A" SECOND AM]ENDI~ENT TO 2002 TOURISM AGREES~EN'!~ ~,VITH Ix~LLEY SWOFFORD ROY JUL 3 0 2002 EXHIBIT "B" SECOND ASFENDM~EN'I' TO 2002 TOURISM AGREEhfENT X~TYH IxtELLEY SWOFFORD ROY JUL 3 0 2002 EXHIBIT "C" SECOND AS{ENq)MENT TO 2002 TOURISM AGREEM-ENT Vv'ITH Ix~LLEY Sx, VOFFORD ROY JUL. 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE 2003 TOURISM AGREEMENTS BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND KELLEY SWOFFORD ROY, INC., PHASE V OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC., AND EVANS - KLAGES, INC., AS RECOMMENDED BY THE TOURIST DEVEOPMENT COUNCIL OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners waive Purchasing Policy to go out for bid and approve the 2003 Agreements between Collier County and Kelley Swofford Roy, Phase V of Southwest Florida, Inc., and Evans - Klages, Inc., as recommended by the Tourist Development Council. CONSIDERATION: Until December 2001, there were tourism agreements between the Tourism Alliance of Collier County and these three vendors; however, in an effort to improve accountability and efficiency while addressing a recent Attorney General Opinion relating to expenditure of County funds, the Board contracted directly with these vendors, with agreements in effect from December 1, 2001 to September 30, 2002. Also, on December 4, 2001, Community Development Operations assumed responsibility for the County's tourism effort, negotiating the existing contracts with the tourism vendors, as follows: · Kelley Swofford Roy, Inc. - Performs advertising/promotion/public relations. · Phase V of Southwest Florida, Inc. - Fields inquiries and distributes fulfillment ...... pieces. · Evans-Klages, Inc. - Performs statistical data and market research. There was another tourism contract with Prutos Public Relations~ Inc., which was terminated by the Board in March 2002, at which time the Board directed staff to begin recruitment for a tourism professional to head the County's tourism effort. The existing contracts expire on September 30, 2002. The normal approach to the scheduled termination of these contracts would be to advertise for requests for proposals for each functional area and select a vendor prior to fiscal year end; however, CDES Operations staff is not comfortable in drafting the scope of services for the three tourism vendors. Also, in view of the timing and eminent selection of a Tourism Manager, the new manager's tourism marketing methodology and/or strategic advertising plan for Collier County must be considered. Selection of the Tourism Manager is expected by late August. On June 18, 2002, staff presented the issue to the Tourist Development Council. After a lengthy discussion, the Tourist Development Council voted unanimously to recommend Board approval of renewal of annual contracts for the three tourism vendors under the same terms as the existing contracts without competitive bidding. After being advised by the County Attorney's Office that a finding of fiscal emergency would have to be found or some other exigent circumstances to merit a waiver of the County policies, the Tourist Development Council held an extensive discussion regarding this issue. It determined that existing circumstance warranted this action because, among other things, this action would insure that the advertising/promotion momentum continues into the new fiscal year. As each contract contains a 30-day termination clause, the new Tou ism ~t_l~, .! could initiate the RFP process and terminate the contracts upon selection of qualified ~ ~ndc~_] ff/q ~! JUL 3 0 2002 Under this scenario, the new Tourism Manager (recruitment action under way) would have ample time to meet with representatives of the tourism industry, the Tourist Development Council, and the Board to develop a meaningful scope of services in preparation for requesting proposals fi.om qualified vendors for FY04 or earlier. FISCAL IMPACT: Preliminary FY02/03 Budget for Fund 194, Advertising/promotion, has been established at $1,422,700 based on Tourist Development Tax revenue projections for FY02/03. The three tourism agreements are contingent upon FY02/03 budget approval. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners waive the Purchasing Policy and approve 2003 Tourism Agreements with Kelley Swofford Roy, Inc., Phase V of Southwest Florida, and Evans-Klages, Inc., as recommended by the Tourist Development Council. D. E. "Bleu" Wallace, Director CDES Operations Department Steve Ca~neil. Purchasing Director Purchasing Department Jo~ph K. Schmitt, Administrator ~CCmmunity Development & Environmental Services JUL 3 0 2002 2003 TOURISM AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on this __ day of , 2002, by and between Kelley Swofford Roy, Inc., hereinafter called the "Contractor" and Collier County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Collier County, Naples, hereinafter called the "County": WITNESSETH: 1. COMMENCEMENT. The Contractor shall have commenced the work October 1, 2002. This Agreement is effective on the date of approval of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners. The contract shall continue to be for the twelve (12) month period, commencing on October 1, 2002 and terminating on September 30, 2003. 2. STATEMENT OF WORK. a)KSR will perform a combination of the following services, as approved bv the County, in order to best serve the Collier County's needs: b) Develop for approval and implementation advertising, public relations and marketing conmmnications program to meet the County's objectives and budgetary limitations. c) Counsel the County on public relations, advertising and marketing communications opportunities, as appropriate for the County. d)Develop primary and secondary research including focus groups or internal consensus building workshops as required and approved. e) Develop press releases, a background profile on Collier County, photo library, video news releases (VNR) in English and other languages as required. f) Develop media target list of local, state, national and international media contacts. g) Plan an advertising program, from creative strategy, copy, layouts, and production to media research and scheduling, against the County's advertising budget. h) Enter into contracts at the direction of and in the name of the County to effectuate the County's advertising program including, but not limited to media space and time. i) Develop required collateral material (brochures, newsletters, direct mail nd ~~ marketing and communications material) from copy, layout through to 1~ :int~r~'. ]~ 4 JUL ,t 0 j) Develop website and Internet advertising. k) Maintain a Contractor servicing office in Collier County to support the above listed activities. I) Contractor will supply the County with monthly reports reflecting the number of ads placed, the cost of the ads and what the County's benefit is in result of the ads. m) KSR shall have the responsibility for the implementation of Marketing Plans, from time to time, after being approved by the County. Such approved Marketing Plans shall become exhibits and amendments to this Agreement, as appropriate, and shall be paid separately from the Contract Sum for KSR set forth below. n) Each Marketing Plan shall include a line item for "Opportunity Marketing", for the funding of miscell~'meous items not specifically identified in a specific Marketing Plan line item. o) KSR may transfer unspent line item funds resulting from negotiating lower advertising costs to the Opportunity Marketing line item category with the prior approval of the Administrator, Community Development and Enviromnental Services Division, or his designee. In all other respects, KSR shall continue to comply with all of the County's policies and procedures, as set forth herein, regarding expenditures of County funds. 3. REQUIRED NOTATION: Ail promotional literature and media advertising must prominently list Collier County as one of the sponsors, where practicable. 4. THE CONTRACT SUM. The County shall pay the Contractor for the performance of this Agreement as per the following responsibilities. a) The County will reimburse Contractor for expenditures incurred on behalf of the County including, but not limited, to those listed below. b) Beginning on October 1, 2002 and each month thereafter, the County will remit to Contractor a monthly retainer in the amount of $9,000, upon submission of invoices by Contractor in a timely manner, for public relations professional services. Activity, performance and monthly retainer amount to be reviewed quarterly, based on billable time as per professional fees included in Addendum A. Special projects such as market research must be authorized and approved by the County and will be billed separately. c) Specific marketing projects such as research, community consensus building, workshops and activities, and targeted marketing program development will be estimated and approved in advance. d) The County will reimburse Contractor separately for project work and 1: '°d~lf~i°n f°r ~(..,0 brochures, promotions, web site design, special events and other special )rojects, as JUL 3 0 ZOl~ well as for any media purchases like newspaper, print, radio or television made by Contractor on behalf of the County. All separate project work discussed in this section will be estimated by Contractor in advance, and the Administrator, Community Development and Environmental Services Division, or his designee, must sign the estimate before work on these projects or purchases can commence. e) The County will reimburse Contractor for external expenses such as telephone, fax, messenger service, reproduction work, Internet charges, public relation news wires and clipping services, as well as mailing, packaging, shipping, taxes and duties, printing, copying and other expenses incurred by Contractor in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Such costs shall not exceed $200 per month without the prior written approval and consent of the County. For any communications between Contractor's office and the County, no charges will be made to the County for the above-mentioned expenses. f) The County will only reimburse Contractor costs for travel and entertainment on behalf of the County, provided such travel and entertainment has been approved and consented to, in writing, irt advance, by the County. g) If media or other charges increase or decline following Contractor submission of an estimate, the County's responsibility will be adjusted accordingly. If the amount of space, time, or other advertising services actually used is less than what was contracted, the County agrees to pay for any rate changes resulting from charged loss of volume discount or because of higher scheduled rates. If additional space, time, or services results in a lower rate, the County will receive the benefit of the lower rate. Contractor agrees to notify the County of any such rate changes as soon as such planned advertising, cancels all or part of this advertising, the County will pay all costs incurred, including any non-cancelable commitments for time or space. h) Contractor will receive a fifteen percent (15%) commission on the gross charges, paid by the advertising media and printing. Purchases of goods and services must be pre- approved by the Administrator, Conununity Development and Environmental Services Division, or his designee, in advance of purchase. At that time, a decision will be made by the Administrator, or his designee, whether the County will be directly billed for the goods and services. i) Contractor will take a fifteen percent (15%) commission on the gross charges from third parties with whom Contractor has contacted for products or services used to implement the marketing projects or advertising approved by the County. j. All cash discounts allowed to Contractor by third party suppliers will be credited to the County provided such payments are made directly to Contractor in accordance with the specific discount terms contained in Contractor's invoices and Fc, vldo,~ ~I,~ County is not in default on payment of any amounts due to Contractor. ~..~..~W.~ ~ JUL 3 0 2~)02 Professional Fees/Hourly Basis Art Direction $ 60 - $120 Production in-House 35 - 60 Strategic & Marketing Planning 100 - 250 Public Relation 80 - 150 Website Design 75 - 125 5. NOTICES. All notices from the County to the Contractor shall be deemed duly served if mailed by registered or certified mail to the Contractor at the following Address: Kelley Swofford Roy, Inc. Advertising Marketing Public Relations 3399 Ponce de Leon Coral Gables, Florida 33134 All Notices from the Contractor to the County shall be deemed duly served if mailed by registered or certified mail to the County to: Administrator, Community Development & Environmental Services DMsion, Collier County Government 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Napies, Fiorida 34104 The Contractor and the County may change the above mailing address at any time upon giving the other party written notification. All notices under this Service Agreement must be in writing. 6. NO PARTNERSHIP. Nothing herein contained shall create or be construed as creating a partnership between the County and the Contractor or to constitute the Contractor as an agent of the County. 7. PERMITS: LICENSES: TAXES. In compliance with Section 218.80, F.S., all permits necessary for the prosecution of the Work shall be obtained by the Contractor. Payment for all such permits issued by the County shall be processed internally by the County. All non-County permits necessary for the prosecution of the Work shall be procured and paid for by the Contractor. The Contractor shall also be solely responsible for payment of any and all taxes levied on the Contractor. In addition, the Contractor shall comply with all rules, regulations and laws of Collier County, the State of Florida, or the U. S. Government now in force or hereafter adopted. The Contractor agrees to comply with all laws governing the responsibility of an employer with respect to person ..... the Contractor. 8. NO IMPROPER USE. The Contractor will not use, nor suffer or permit any person to use in any manner whatsoever, county facilities for any improper, immoral or offensive purpose, or for any purpose in violation of any federal, state, county or municipal ordinance, rule, order or regulation, or of any governmental rule or regulation now in effect or hereafter enacted or adopted. In the event of such violation by the Contractor or if the County or its authorized representative shall deem any conduct on the part of the Contractor to be objectionable or improper, the County shall have the right to suspend the contract of the Contractor. Should the Contractor fail to correct any such violation, conduct, or practice to the satisfaction of the County within twenty-four (24) hours after receiving notice of such violation, conduct, or practice, such suspension to continue until the violation is cured. The Contractor further agrees not to commence operation during the suspension period until the violation has been corrected to the satisfaction of the Count),. 9. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS PRODUCED: All plans, preliminary outlines, sketches, copies, and all other intellectual properties or work that are produced pursuant to this agreement must be pre-approved prior to purchase by the Administrator or his or her Designee. All such property will remain the property of the Contractor until such time as all payments due Contractor for the particular work have been made. Thereafter, all such material shall become the property of the County except copyrighted material to which the copyright is held by a third party or parties unrelated to the Contractor. Upon termination of this agreement, all such property and materials shall be the property of the Contractor unless the County pays for them in accordance with the terms of this agreement, even though the County or another party may have physical possession of the property in question. Contractor shall endeavor to utilize uncopyrighted material or secure releases of copyrights for the County. 10. TERMINATION. Should the contractor be found to have failed to perform its services in a manner satisfactory to the County as per this Agreement, the County may terminate said agreement immediately for cause. Either party may terminate this Agreement for convenience with a thirty (30) day written notice. The County shall be sole judge of non-performance. Upon termination of this Agreement, Contractor will bill the County for all amounts not previously billed and due Contractor at that time. Contractor will not be entitled to payment for any advertisement if work on it commenced after Contractor received the notice of termination. Contractor will be entitled to payment for services for advertisements commenced and approved for placement in a specific media by the County prior to receipt of such notice; or with the expressed written consent of the County prior to the effective date of termination. 11. NO DISCRIMINATION. The Contractor agrees that there shall be no discrimination as to race, sex, color, creed or national origin. JUL 3 0 200 12. INSURANCE. The Contractor shall provide insurance as follows: A. Commercial General Liability_: Coverage shall have mimmum limits of $300,000 Per Occurrence, Combined Single Limit for Bodily Injury Liability and Property Damage Liability. This shall include Premises and Operations; Independent contractors; Products and Completed Operations and Contractual Liability. B. Business Auto Liability: Coverage shall have minimum limits of $500,000 Per Occurrence, Combined Single Limit for Bodily Injury Liability and Property Damage Liability. This shall include: Owned Vehicles, Hired and Non-Owned Vehicles and Employee Non-Ownership. C. Workers' Compensation: Insurance covering all employees meeting Statutory Limits in compliance with the applicable state and federal laws. The coverage must include Employers' Liability with a minimum limit of $1,000,000 for each accident. Special Requirements: Collier County shall be listed as the Certificate Holder and included as an Additional Insured on the Comprehensive General Liability Policy. Current, valid insurance policies meeting the requirement herein identified shall be maintained by Contractor during the duration of this Agreement. Renewal certificates shall be sent to the County 30 days prior to any expiration date. There shall be a 30 day notification to the County in the event of cancellation or modification of any stipulated insurance coverage. Contractor shall insure that all subcontractors comply with the same insurance requirements that he is required to meet. TILe same Contractor shall provide County with certificates of insurance meeting the required insurance provisions. 13. INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor/Vendor, in consideration of One Hundred Dollars ($100.00), the receipt and sufficiency of which is accepted tlzrough the signing of this document, shall hold harmless and defend Collier County and its agents and employees from all suits and actions, including attorneys' fees and all costs of litigation and judgments of any name and description arising out of or incidental to the performance of this contract or work performed there under. This provision shall also pertain to any claims brought against the County by any employee of the named Contractor/Vendor, any Subcontractor, or anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them. TILe Contractor/Vendor's obligation under this provision shall not be lil~ited in any way by the agreed upon contract price as shown in this Contract or the Contractor/Vendor's limit of, or lack of, sufficient insurance protection. FE~ ~;"~ '~-^ 6 , JUL 3 0 2002 Hundred dollars ($100.00) of money received on the contract price is considered as payment of this obligation by the County. This section does not pertain to any incident arising from the sole negligence of the County. 14. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION. This Agreement shall be administered on behalf of the County by the Operations Department, under the purview of the Administrator, Community Development & Environmental Services Division. 15. COMPONENT PARTS OF THIS CONTRACT. This Contract consists of the attached component parts, all of which are as fully a part of the contract as if herein set out verbatim: Insurance Certificate. -1(2. SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION. It is further understood and agreed bv and between the parties herein that tMs agreement is subject to appropriation by the Board of County Commissioners. 17. COOPERATION. Contractor shall fully cooperate with the County in all matters pertaining to this agreement and provide all i~'dormation and documents as requested by the County from time to time. Failure to cooperate, as interpreted by the County shall constitute grounds for the County to impose sanctions that do not result in termination of this agreement. 18. AVAILABILITY OF RECORDS. Contractor shall maintain all records, books, documents, papers and financial information pertaining to work performed under this Agreement. Contractor agrees that the County, or any of its duly authorized representatives, shall, until the expiration of three (3) years after final payment under this Agreement, have access to, and the right to examine and photocopy any pertinent books, documents, papers, and records of Contractor involving transactions related to this Agreement. 19. PROHIBITION OF ASSIGNMENT. Contractor shall not assign, convey, or transfer in whole or in part its interest in this Agreement without the prior written consent of the County. 20. The County shall be the owner of and in possession of the originals of all intellectual property created or furnished pursuant to this agreement, including, but not limited to drawings, paintings, photography, film, video, and printed documents, unless specifically exempted by the County. 21. The execution of this agreement is contingent upon a finding by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners that adequate funding exists for the purposes set forth herein through approval of an mmual budget for fiscal year 2003. 'he amount of the contract shall be contingent upon the amount funded by the Board. ~'l~[(l'/'~ tl JUL 3 0' P~. C[ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Contractor and the County, have each, respectively, by an authorized person or agent, hereunder set their hands and seals on the date and year first above written. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Dwight E. Brock, Clerk of Courts By: By: Dated: JAMES N. COLETrA, CHAIRMAN (SEAL) Kelley Swofford Roy, Inc. By: First Witness Signature Ty pc/print witness name Second Witness Typed signature and title Type/print witness name CORPORATE SEAL (corporations only) Approved as to form ahd legal sufficiency: ~ ~lqC~u ~ine Hubb-~rd Robinson sistant County Attorney JUL302002 I 8 .j. 10 2003 TOURISM A G R E E M E N T THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on this ~ day of 2002, bv and between Phase V of Southwest Florida, Inc., hereinafter called the "Contractor" and Collier County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Collier County, Naples, hereinafter called the "County": WITNESSETH: 1. COMMENCEMENT. The Contractor shall commence the work October 1, 2002. This Agreement shall commence on the date of the issuance of a Purchase Order. The contract shall be for a twelve (12) month period, commencing on October 1, 2002 and terminating on September 30, 2003. 2. STATEMENT OF WORK. The Contractor shall provide the following services: a) Porting of the 2 toll-free numbers to the dedicated access provided by Phase V. Phase V agrees to ret-urn any toll-free numbers ported to Phase V or established by Phase V for the County to the County as long as the County's account is in good standing. b) Programming scripts, developing reports and training Telephone Service Representatives (TSR's) to respond to calls to the County's toll-free number. c) Preparing inventory control systems and receiving inventory. d) Preparing production methods to fulfill requests for the County brochures and videotapes. e) Assisting the County with establishing non-profit pre-sort standard and first class mail permits with the Fort Myers USPS BMEU. f) Beginning October 1, 2002, Phase V will continue responding to all calls from to the County toll-free numbers 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Two numbers will be for Marco Island and two for Naples and environs. Different answer phrases will be used for each number. The Marco Island international toll free number(s) may be rerouted to Phase V during off-hours. g) For each call, record name, telephone number, addr. ess, ad extension, when the caller intends to visit Collier County, source and additional information as requested by the Countv. JUL 3 0 2002 .,.// L h) Prepare daily listings of information requests and transmit to the production group for fulfillment. FuLfill information requests as follows: i) Naples toll-free number for calls as a result of print ads, fulfill with the Naples brochure. For calls from TV ads, fulfill with videotape presently being developed. j) Marco Island toll-free number - Fulfill all requests for information with a videotape. k) Requests for more information from convention (etc.) attendees - fulfill with a Fun Guide brochure presently being developed (normally in large quantities). I) Requests for both Marco Island and Naples information will be fulfilled by mailing both brochures, as appropriate. m) The brochures are 8.5' x11" glossy 14 page brochures. Fulfillment will include inserting the brochure into 9" x 12" envelopes with pre-printed return address and indicia (provided bv the County), imprinting the mailing name and address and barcode on label and affixing the labels on the envelopes, mail processing and delivering the envelopes to the BMEU for pre-sort standard mailing. Mailings will occur 2 to 3 times per week to meet the minimum mailing requirements. n) The present duplicates of the Marco Island videotapes are 8 minutes long and are housed in 4 color jackets. Videotapes will be inserted into bubble envelopes with pre- printed return address and indicia (provided bv the County), imprinting the mailing name and address and barcode on labels and affixing the labels on the envelopes, mail processing and delivering the envelopes to the BMEU for first class mailing. o) Future duplicates of the videotapes and the Naples videotape (when produced in a 10 minute or less videotape) may be duplicated in a self-mailing format. Phase V will have the videotapes reproduced with a 3-color label designed by the County. The reproductions will be on patented cassettes and sl'krink-wrapped for self-mailing. Reproduction will be done on a bi-monthly basis to minimize inventory. p) For the self-mailer videotapes, Phase V will print and affix a mailing label, affix postage, mail process and mail the videotapes via first class. q) Both brochures and videotapes will be mailed. r) Phase V will maintain an adequate inventory of brochures videotapes and envelopes to insure uninterrupted fulfillment of requests. Phase V will report on inventory levels on a monthly basis and will notify the Coun~ when more inventory is needed. - AGENOA ITE~~ JUL 30 .! s) Fulfill "Fun Guide Brochure" requests as requested by the County. The fun guide brochure is being developed now and will list area attractions. It is designed to respond to requests for more information from unusual sources, such as meeting planners. Normally they will be shipped in bulk. Phase V will prepare reports as follows: (t) Montl-dy - Listing of all information requests for the previous month - (Lead tracking report). Number of calls by state. Service and Productivity statistics Inventory tracking report All the above reports will be emailed to the Administrator, Community Development and Environmental Services Division, or his designee, in text format except the listing, which will be in comma delimited or .dbf format. (u) Montt-dv - Listing of all information requests to any Tourism Alliance member who requests them. These will be emailed in cram-ha delimited or .dbf format to those members who have email addresses. The scope of services may be changed, from time to time, at client's request. 3. THE CONTRACT SUM. The Count3, shall pay the Contractor for the performance of this Agreement per the following compensation and prices listed below. a. SETUP $400.00 for programming scripts, developing reports, installing toll free numbers in queues and training TSR's and production employees. b. CALL PROCESSING · $.80 per minute for TSR time on the phone with callers. This includes coterminous Untied States toll-free and long distance usage charges for the toll free numbers under Phase V's responsibility. · International toll-free and long distance charges will be billed at cost. · Pay phone charges will be billed at their $.35 cost. · $.75 per entry for manual data entry and $.35 per entry for automated data entry of brochure/videotape requests transmitted to Phase V by the County. c. FUFILLMENT · $.12 per mail piece for insertion of the brochure into the envelope, imprinting name, address and bar code onto a label, affixing the label onto the piece, sealing, or tabbing ~ and imprinting a self-mailer, mail processing and mailing. · $.02 per additional brochure inserted for pieces requiring more than ~ ~¢ b~~ ' JUL 3 0 200~ ... · $.12 per videotape for inserting the videotape into a bubble envelope. If a self-mailer videotape is used, this charge will not be necessary. · $.45 per videotape to print and affix a mailing label, affix postage, mail process and mail the videotapes (low volumes make this very labor intensive) · Postage charges, including County Mail Permit will be invoiced at cost. · Special Projects - $30.00 per hour to process special data entry or fulfillment requests. (i.e. Media Kits) d. INVENTORY MAINTENANCE AND CONTROL · $9.00 per month per pallet for brochure and videotape and envelope storage and inventory controls. e. REPORTING · No charge for the reports specified in this Agreement with Collier County. · No charge for the listing (Lead reports) emailed to the County. f. Phase V will submit to the County office serm-monthly billings for services. The Count}, shall pay all invoices in a timely manner and it is understood that services cannot be billed in advance. 4. NOTICES. All notices from the County to the Contractor shall be deemed duty served if mailed by registered or certified mail to the Contractor at the following Address: Phase V of Southwest Florida, Inc. 12290 Treeline Avenue Fort Myers, Florida 33913 All Not-ices from the Contractor to the County shall be deemed duly served if mailed by registered or certified mail to the Count}, to: Administrator, Community Development and Environmental Services Division 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 The Contractor and the County may change the above mailing address at any time upon giving the other party written notification. All notices under this Service Agreement must be in writing. 5. NO PARTNERSHIP. Nothing herein contained shall create or be construed as creating a partnership between the County and the Contractor or to constitute the Contractor as an agent of the County. 6. PERMITS: LICENSES: TAXES. In compliance with Section 218.80, F.S., all permits necessary for the prosecution of the Work shall be obtained by the Contractor. Payment for all such permits issued by the Count, shall be processed internally b) the ~T~I~. ~.lr~ , All non-County permits necessary for the prosecution of the Work shall be procured ---- and paid for by the Contractor. The Contractor shall also be solely responsible for payment of any and all taxes levied on the Contractor. In addition, the Contractor shall comply with all rules, regulations and laws of Collier County, the State of Florida, or the U. S. Government now in force or hereafter adopted. The Contractor agrees to comply with all laws governing the responsibility of an employer with respect to persons employed by the Contractor. 7. NO IMPROPER USE. The Contractor will not use, nor suffer or permit any person to use in any manner whatsoever, county facilities for any improper, immoral or offensive purpose, or for any purpose in violation of any federal, state, county or municipal ordinance, rule, order or regulation, or of any governmental rule or regulation now in effect or hereafter enacted or adopted. In the event of such violation by the Contractor or if the County or its authorized representative shall deem any conduct on the part of the Contractor to be objectionable or improper, the County shall have the right to suspend the contract of the Contractor. Should the Contractor fail to correct any such violation, conduct, or practice to the satisfaction of the County witNin twenty-four (24) hours after receiving notice of such violation, conduct, or practice, such suspension to continue until the violation is cured. The Contractor further agrees not to commence operation during the suspension period until the violation has been corrected to the satisfaction of the County. 8. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS PRODUCED: Countv shall be the owner of all documents produced pursuant to this agreement and Phase V of Southwest Florida, Inc. shall not receive an-,' additional compensation for their use or reproduction bv Collier County. 9. TERMINATION. Should the contractor be found to have failed to perform his services in a manner satisfactory to the County as per ti-Lis Agreement, the County may terminate said agreement immediately for cause; further the County may terminate this Agreement for convenience with a thirty (30) day written notice. The County shall be sole judge of non-performance. 10. NO DISCRIMINATION. The Contractor agrees that there shall be no discrimination as to race, sex, color, creed or national origin. 11. INSURANCE. The Contractor shall provide insurance as follows: A. Commercial General Liability: Coverage shall have minimum limits of $300,000 Per Occurrence, Combined Single Limit for Bodily Injury Liability and Property Damage Liability. This shall include Premises and Operations; Independent contractors; Products and Completed Operations and Contractual Liabilit~,. .... B. Business Auto Liability: Coverage shall have minimum limits of $500,000 Per Occurrence, Combined Single Limit for Bodily Injury Liabilitv .... --" ~atl~tl'A'ltt-4a '~ ...... ~ 5 JldL 3 0 2002 Damage Liability. TI-ds shall include: Owned Vehicles, Hired and Non-Owned Vehicles and Employee Non-Ownership. C. Workers' Compensation: Insurance covering all employees meeting Statutory Limits in compliance with the applicable state and federal laws. The coverage must include Employers' Liability with a minimum limit of $1,000,000 for each accident. Special Requirements: Collier County shall be listed as the Certificate Holder and included as an Additional Insured on the Comprehensive General Liability Policy. Current, valid insurance policies meeting the requirement herein identified shall be maintained by Contractor during the duration of this Agreement. Renewal certificates shall be sent to the County 30 days prior to any expiration date. There shall be a 30-day notification to the County in the event of cancellation or modification of any stipulated insurance coverage. Contractor shall insure that all subcontractors comply with the same insurance requirements that he is required to meet. The same Contractor shall provide Countv with certificates of insurance meeting the required insurance provisions. 12. INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor/Vendor, in consideration of One Hundred Dollars ($100.00), the receipt and sufficiencv of which is accepted through the sigrdng of this document, shall hold harmless and defend Collier Countv and its agents and employees from all suits and actions, including attorneys' fees and all costs of litigation and judgments of any name and description arising out of or incidental to the performance of this contract or work performed there under. This provision shall also pertain to any claims brought against the Count, by any employee of the named Contractor/Vendor, any Subcontractor, or anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them. The Contractor/Vendor's obligation under this provision shall not be limited in any way by the agreed upon contract price as shown in this Contract or the Contractor/Vendor's limit of, or lack of, sufficient insurance protection. The first One Hundred dollars ($100.00) of money received on the contract price is considered as payment of this obligation by the Countv. This section does not pertain to any incident arising from the sole negligence of Collier County. 13. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION. TI-ds Agreement shall be administered on behalf of the Coun~ by the Operations Department, Community Development and Environmental Services Division. 14. COMPONENT PARTS OF THIS CONTRACT. This Contract consists of ~: component parts, all of which are as fully a part of the contract as if herein et o~~ JUL 3 o 2oo2 verbatim: Insurance Certificate. 15. SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION. It is further understood and agreed by and between the parties herein that this agreement is subject to appropriation by the Board of County Commissioners. 16. COOPERATION: Phase V shall fully cooperate with the COUNTY in all matters pertaining to this agreement and provide all information and documents as requested by the County from time to time. Failure to cooperate, as interpreted by the COUNTY shall constitute grounds for the COUNTY to impose sanctions that do not result in termination of this agreement. 17. AVAILABILITY OF RECORDS: Phase V shall maintain all records, books, documents, papers and financial information pertaining to work performed under this Agreement. Phase V agrees that the COUNTY, or anv of its duly authorized representatives, shall, until the expiration of three (3) years after final payment under this Agreement, have access to, and the right to examine and photocopy any pertinent books, documents, papers, and records of Phase V involving transactions related to this Agreement. 18. PROHIBITION OF ASSIGNMENT: Phase V shall not assigm, convey, or transfer in whole or in part its interest in this Agreement without the prior written consent of the COUNTY. 19. The COUNTY shall be the owner of and in possession of the originals of all intellectual property created or furnished pursuant to this agreement, including, but not limited to drawings, paintings, photo~aphy, fihn, video, and printed documents, unless specifically exempted by the COUNTY. 20. The execution of this agreement is contingent upon a finding by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners that adequate funding exists for the purposes set forth herein through approval of an annual budget for fiscal year 2003. The amount of the contract shall be contingent upon the amount funded by the Board. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Contractor and the County, have each, respectively, by an authorized person or agent, hereunder set their hands and seals on the date and year first above written. JUL 3 0 20,02 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Dwight E. Brock, Clerk of Courts By: By: Dated: JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN (SEAL) Phase V of Southwest Florida, Inc. By: First Wimess Signature Type/print wimess name Typed signature and title Second Witness Type/print witness name CORPORATE SEAL (Corporations only) Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: {j a~qt~line__Hub.bar.d R°bi~°n ~k,~sistant County Attorney 2002 2003 TOURISM AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on this __ day of ,2002, by and between Evans-Klages, Inc., hereinafter called the "Contractor" and Collier County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Collier County, Naples, hereinafter called the "County": WITNESSETH: 1. COMMENCEMENT. The Contractor shall commence the work October 1, 2002. This Agreement shall commence on the date of the issuance of a Purchase Order. The contract shall be for a twelve (12) month period, commencing on October 1, 2002 and terminating on September 30, 2003. 2. STATEMENT OF WORK. The contractor shall provide the following services. a) Visitation Trend Research (Zip Code Analysis) $15,000.00 b) Occupancy Survey of Commercial Lodging Establishments/Management Barometer $ 8,000.00 '"' c) Value of Tourism Report: Economic Impact of Tourism on Collier County $ 6,500.00 d) Inquire Conversion Research/Visitor Profile $12,000.00 e) Will supply the County with monthly reports reflecting the statistical data collected and what the County's benefit is in result of the data. The monthly reports shall begin November 25, 2002 and shall be received by the County no later than the 25th of each month thereafter. 3. THE CONTRACT SUM. The County shall pay the Contractor for the performance of this Agreement in the amount of $3,458.33 per month. 4. NOTICES. All notices from the County to the Contractor shall be deemed duly served if mailed by registered or certified mail to the Contractor at the following Address: Evans - Klages, Inc. 600 South Magnolia Avenue Suite 350 Tampa, Florida 33606 All Notices from the Contractor to the County shall be deemed duly served registered or certified mail to the County to: .,. Ic) : Administrator, Community Development & Environmental Services Division, Collier County Government 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 The Contractor and the County may change the above mailing address at any time upon giving the other party written notification. All notices under this Service Agreement must be in writing. 5. NO PARTNERSHIP. Nothing herein contained shall create or be construed as creating a partnership between the County and the Contractor or to constitute the Contractor as an agent of the County. 6. PERMITS: LICENSES: TAXES. In compliance with Section 218.80, F.S., all permits necessary for the prosecution of the Work shall be obtained by the Contractor. Payment for all such permits issued by the County shall be processed internally by the County. All non-County permits necessary for the prosecution of the Work shall be procured and paid for by the Contractor. The Contractor shall also be solely responsible for payment of any and all taxes levied on the Contractor. In addition, the Contractor shall comply with all rules, regulations and laws of Collier County, the State of Florida, or the U. S. Government now in force or hereafter adopted. The Contractor agrees to comply with all laws governing the responsibility of an employer with respect to persons employed by the Contractor. 7. NO IMPROPER USE. The Contractor will not use, nor suffer or permit any person to use in any manner whatsoever, county facilities for any improper, immoral or offensive purpose, or for any purpose in violation of any federal, state, county or mtmicipal ordinance, rule, order or regulation, or of any governmental rule or regulation now in effect or hereafter enacted or adopted. In the event of such violation by the Contractor or if the County or its authorized representative shall deem any conduct on the part of the Contractor to be objectionable or improper, the County shall have the right to suspend the contract of the Contractor. Should the Contractor fail to correct any such violation, conduct, or practice to the satisfaction of the County within twenty-four (24) hours after receiving notice of such violation, conduct, or practice, such suspension to continue until the violation is cured.. The Contractor further agrees not to commence operation during the suspension period until the violation has been corrected to the satisfaction of the County. 8. OYVNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS PRODUCED: County shall be the owner of all documents produced pursuant to this agreement and Evans-Klages, Inc. shall not receive any additional compensation for their use or reproduction by Collier County. 9. TERMINATION. Should the contractor be found to have failed to perform his services in a manner satisfactory to the County as per this Agreement, the County may terminate said agreement immediately for cause; further the County ma) ' ..... ;tttlElqfl£t~lt~: .... ~t.;~ 2 JUL 3 0 2002 Agreement for convenience with a thirty (30) day written notice. The County shall be sole judge of non-performance. 10. NO DISCRIMINATION. The Contractor agrees that there shall be no discrimination as to race, sex, color, creed or national origin. 11. INSURANCE. The Contractor shall provide insurance as follows: A. Commercial General Liability: Coverage shall have minimum limits of $300,000 Per Occurrence, Combined Single Limit for Bodily Injury Liability and Property Damage Liability. This shall include Premises and Operations; Independent contractors; Products and Completed Operations and Contractual Liability. B. Business Auto Liability: Coverage shall have minimum limits of $500,000 Per Occurrence, Combined Single Limit for Bodily Injury Liability and Property Damage Liability. This shall include: Owned Vehicles, Hired and Non-Owned Vehicles and Employee Non-Ownership. C. Workers' Compensation: Insurance covering all employees meeting Statutory Limits in compliance with the applicable state and federal laws. The coverage must include Employers' Liability with a minimum limit of $300,000 for each accident. Special Requirements: Collier County shall be listed as the Certificate Holder and included as an Additional Insured on the Comprehensive General Liability Policy. Current, valid insurance policies meeting the requirement herein identified shall be maintained by Contractor during the duration of this Agreement. Renewal certificates shall be sent to the County 30 days prior to any expiration date. There shall be a 30 day notification to the County in the event of cancellation or modification of any stipulated insurance coverage. Contractor shall insure that all subcontractors comply with the same insurance requirements that he is required to meet. The same Contractor shall provide County with certificates of insurance meeting the required insurance provisions. 12. INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor/Vendor, in consideration of One Hundred Dollars ($100.00), the receipt and sufficiency of which is accepted through the signing of this document, shall hold harmless and defend Collier County and its agents and employees from all suits and actions, including attorneys' fees and all costs of litigation and judgqnents of any name and description arising out of or incidental to the performance of this contract or work performed thereunder. This provision shall also pertain to any claims brought against the County by any employee of ihe ~l~aa Contractor/Vendor, any Subcontractor, or anyone directly or indirectly en I t JUL 3 2002 Pt,. ,~'~ any of them. The Contractor/Vendor's obligation under this provision shall not be limited in any way by the agreed upon contract price as shown in this Contract or the Contractor/Vendor's limit of, or lack of, sufficient insurance protection. The first One Hundred dollars ($100.00) of money received on the contract price is considered as payment of this obligation by the County. This section does not pertain to any incident arising from the sole negligence of Collier County. 13. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION. This Agreement shall be administered on behalf of the County by the Operations Department, Community Development and Environmental Services Division. 14. COMPONENT PARTS OF THIS CONTRACT. This Contract consists of the attached component parts, all of which are as fully a part of the contract as if herein set out verbatim: Insurance Certificate. 15. SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION. It is further understood and agreed by and between the parties herein that this agreement is subject to appropriation by the Board of County Commissioners. 16. COOPERATION: Evans - Klages, Inc. shall fully cooperate with the County in all matters pertaining to this agreement and provide all information and documents as requested by the County from time to time. Failure to cooperate, as interpreted by the County shall constitute grounds for the County to impose sanctions that do not result in termination of this agreement. 17. AVAILABILITY OF RECORDS: Evans - Klages, Inc. shall maintain all records, books, documents, papers and financial information pertaining to work performed under this Agreement. Evans - Klages, Inc. agrees that the County, or any of its duly authorized representatives, shall, until the expiration of three (3) years after final payment under this Agreement, have access to, and the right to examine and photocopy any pertinent books, documents, papers, and records of Evans - Klages, Inc. involving transactions related to this Agreement. 18. PROHIBITION OF ASSIGNMENT: Evans - Klages, Inc. shall not assign, convey, or transfer in whole or in part its interest in this Agreement without the prior written consent of the County. 19. The County shall be the owner of and in possession of the originals of all intellectual property created or furnished pursuant to this agreement, including, but not limited to drawings, paintings, photography, film, video, and printed documents, unless specifically exempted by the Countv. 20. The execution of this agreement is contingent upon a finding by the Colli .~r Board of County Commissioners that adequate funding exists for the purpos, s se~ JUL 3"0 2002 herein through approval of an annual budget for fiscal year 2003. The amount of the contract shall be contingent upon the amount funded by the Board. IN VVITNESS WHEREOF, the Contractor and the County, have each, respectively, by an authorized person or agent, hereunder set their hands and seals on the date and year first above written. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Dwight E. Brock, Clerk of Courts By: By: Dated: JAMES N. COLETI'A, CHAIRMAN (SEAL) Evans - Klages, Inc. By' First Witness Signature Type/print witness narne Second Wimess Typed signature and title Type/print witness name CORPORATE SEAL (Corporations only) Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: j ~¥ue~ne Hul~bal,r d~Robinson - A~Xs~istant County Attorney JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A WAIVER OF IMPACT FEES FOR A NOT-FOR-PROFIT, CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION, HOSPICE OF NAPLES, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $7,500 FOR AN INPATIENT FACILITY; SAID WAIVER BEING FULLY FUNDED FROM ACCUMULATED AND UNENCUMBERED INTEREST IN EACH OF THE AFFECTED IMPACT FEE TRUST ACCOUNTS ~ That the Board of County Commissioners consider an application for an impact fee waiver for a charitable organization pursuant to Ordinance No. 2001-13, Section 74-203. If approved, the Board will adopt the attached resolution granting the requested waiver. CONSIDERATIONS: Chapter 74 of the County's Code of Laws and Ordinances, as amended (The Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, or CIFO) provides for a limited waiver program by specified not-for-profit, charitable entities that are exempt from federal income taxes under the specified provisions of Section 501 of Chapter 26 of the United States Internal Revenue Code, and which will provide services of substantial benefit to residents of Collier County at no charge or at reasonable, reduced rates. No development is eligible for an Impact Fee waiver in excess of $7,500. The funding for these waivers is limited to $100.000 in a fiscal year and is payable from accumulated and unencumbered interest in each of the affected Impact Fee Trust Accounts. The Board adopted the current exemption provisions on October 9, 2001, by application of Ordinance No. 2001-54, thereby amending the CIFO. Hospice of Naples has submitted a complete application for a waiver, including documentation of its tax-exempt status (attached). FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact will be to encumber up to, but not to exceed, $7,500 of this fiscal year's maximum of $100,000 in unencumbered interest, pro-rata, in the affected impact fee trust fund accounts, thereby reducing this fiscal year's cumulative total waiver eligibility to from $85,000 to $77,500. On February 26, 2002 the Board of County Commissioners adopted a Resolution (#2002-111), which granted waivers to two charitable organizations for a total of $15,000 thereby reducing the total waiver eligibility from $100,000 to $85,000. Sufficient interest earnings were realized in FY 01 in the Road, EMS, and Correctional Facilities Impact Fee Trust Accounts to fund the requested waiver. Approval of this request will not adversely affect capital project funding. The recommended distribution of the cost of the waiver among the applicable impact fee trust accounts is summarized in the following table. JUL 3 0 2002 Adoption of a Resolution Approving an Application for Impact Fee Waivers for Page 2 Charitable Organizations - Hospice Impact Fees 1 Estimated Dollar Percent Distribution Recommended Assessed Amounts Distribution of Waiver Road $5,440.00 74.28% $5,440.00 EMS $1,232.00 16.82% $1,232.00 .. Jail $651.38 8.90% $651.38 Total $7,323.38 100.00% $7,323.38 The above estimated amount is based on the current Impact Fee rates as of the date of preparation of this Executive Summary. If the developer does not apply for a building permit prior to the effective date of adoption of the anticipated Road Impact Fee increase, then the amount of Road Impact Fees to be waived would be adjusted as reflected in the table below. Impact Fees Estimated Dollar Percent Distribution Recommended Assessed Amounts Distribution of Waiver Road $17,216.00 90.13 % $6,759.75 EMS $1,232.00 6.45% $483.75 Jail $651.38 3.42% $256.50 Total i $19,099.38 100.00c~ $7,500.00 GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners adopt the attached Resolution thereby granting an impact fee waiver not to exceed $7,500 for the Hospice of Naples pursuant to Ordinance Number 2001-13, Section 74-203, waivers for charitable organizations. ate: 'Phil ~i~d~ll, ~pact Fee Coordinat ~V~D BY: DenffyB- , Business Manager APPRO~D BY: Date: / JoSeph ~ ~mmunity Development & Environmental Se~ices Di', JU[ 3 0 2002 hospice of naples, inc. June 11, 2002 Phillip R. Tindall, Impact Fee Coordinator Office of Financial Management Community Development & Environmental Services Division Collier County Government 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 RE: Impact Fee Waiver Hospice of Naples Inpatient Facility, SOP #AR-2201 Dear Mr. Tindall: Hospice of Naples would like to request a partial waiver of a portion of the impact fees which will be assessed on the construction of a new Inpatient Hospice Facility. I understand that not-for-profit organizations, such as ours, may request a partial waiver up to $7,500. Our documentation of 501©(3) status is enclosed. Please let me know if you need any additional information to process this request. We appreciation your consideration. Diane S. Cox President/CEO cc: Jim Coletta 3 0 2002 1095 Whippoorwill Lane · Naples, FL 34105 · Telephone (941) 261-4404 · Fax (941) 262-2429 www. hospiceofnaples.org Internal Revenue $ervice Oepartment of the Treasury District Director June 1983 P~r~on to Co. tact: A. Price/swd Cantmct Telephone Num~. (404) 221--4516 Hospice 0f Naples, Inc, Employer Iden~±£icacion 65-t2r. h Sr..''eec, South Number: Naples, FL 3~940 59-2201250 File Folder Number: 580021779 Dear Sir or Madam: This modifies our letter of ?,e above date ,_n which we stated that you would be treated as an organizer%on which '_s not a pr'_vate foundation until t~e expzr~tion of your advice ruk~ng per~od. B~ed on t2e ~nf0r~tion Y~ submztted, ~ have de%ermined that ycu are not ~ pr?¢~te fo~tlon '~Ihin the mean~n~ ~' section 509(a) of the Internal Revenue Code, became you ars an OF~Snlz~tlon ui the '~ ~n section * 'four exempt status under section 501(c}(S} of c~de is sti!! in effect. Grantors and co~%r%butors may rely on thla deteum~na~lon un%l! the Internal Revenue Sa~Lce publishes not~ce %o the contrary. However. grsntor or ~ contributor ~Y ~o% r~y on th~s determiner;on tf he or she Ln part responsible for, or ~as a~are of. the act or faf!ute to act that r~sulted in your loss of set--on * status, or acquired knowledge that the Internal ~evenua Service had %;yen ao%lce that you would be removed from clarification as a section * orEan~zat~on. Because this letter co~d help resolve any questions about your foun~tion status, please k~p it in your permanent ¢scords. If you have any questiens, please contact the person whose name and telephone n~ber are sho~n ~bowe. Sincerely yours. A=tac~en¢ ..... JUL- 3 O 2002 ~ ~ ~~ [~ ~e~o~ 509(~) (2) ~o se~[la= 1~0(~) (~(~) (~l) 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2002- 2 3 A RESOLUTION OF TIlE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF 4 COLLIER COUNTY, GRANTING AN IMPACT FEE WAIVER, PURSUANT TO 5 SUBSECTION (1r) IN SECTION 74-20;} OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF 6 LAWS AND ORDINANCES, ON BEHALF OF HOSPICE OF NAPLES, A 7 SPECIFIED TAX EXEMPTED, NOT-FOR-PROFIT, CHARITABLE ENTITY IN 8 AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED SEVEN THOUSAND FIVE IlUNDRED 9 DOIJ.6J~S. 10 11 WHEREAS, on October 9, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners of 12 Collier County adopted the current impact fee waiver provisions for charitable 13 organizations by application of Ordinance No. 2001-54, thereby amending subsection 14 (i) in Section 74-203 of the County's Code of Laws and Ordinances (the Code), as 15 previously amended by Ordinance No. 2001-13 - (The Collier County Consolidated 16 Impact Fee Ordinance); and 17 WHEREAS, Hospice of Naples has submitted an application for impact fee 18 waiver in conformance with the application requirements of Section 74-203.(i) of the 19 Code for an amount not to exceed $7,500; and 20 WHEREAS, County staff has reviewed said application and, having found it 21 complete and the applicant eligible for waiver, has by Executive Summary 22 recommended approval by the Board; and 23 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF 24 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: 25 The application for impact fee waiver for Hospice of Naples is approved and 26 grants said waiver in an amount not to exceed $7,500. 27 28 THIS RESOLUTION is adopted after motion, second and majority vote 29 favoring adoption this ~ day of ,2002. 30 31 ATTEST BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 32 Dwight E Brock, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 33 34 35 By. By: 36 Deputy Clerk James N. Coletta, Chairman 37 38 _Approved as to form 40  Thomas C. Palmer, · Assistant County Attorney .JLJ[. 3 ~ 2~2 [ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A REQUEST FOR EXEMPTION FROM PAYMENT OF IMPACT FEES, IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,872.82, FOR A MOBILE HOME EMPLACED, BUT NOT THEN PERMITTED, ON THE HOMEOWNER'S PROPERTY PRIOR TO ADOPTION OF APPLICABLE COLLIER COUNTY IMPACT FEES, PROVIDED THE PROPERTY OWNER OBTAINS ALL NECESSARY PERMITS AND COMPLETES ALL IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED BY THE COUNTY AND PAYS ALL OTHER ASSOICATED FEES OBJECTIVE: To obtain Board of County Commissioners approval of a request for exemption from payment of Impact Fees, in the amount of $3,872.82, for a mobile home emplaced prior to adoption of applicable County Impact Fees, provided the property owner obtains all necessary permits and completes improvements required by the County and pays all other associated fees. CONSIDERATIONS: In a letter dated June 13, 2002, a property owner requested relief from impact fees for a mobile home that is the subject of a Code Enforcement investigation in which it has been found that, among other violations, the home was emplaced without a permit. This matter was scheduled as a public petition item on the June 25, 2002 Board agenda, but was continued at the petitioner's request due to an unanticipated conflict. The property owner has agreed to have this item presented to the Board as a staff recommendation rather than as a public petition. On October 4, 2001, the Code Enforcement Department cited Mr. Calvin Etnoyer of 18660 Immokalee Road with a violation for having two mobile homes sharing the same well, septic system and electrical service. Only one of the structures has a permit on record. Code Enforcement advised him that he would have to obtain a permit for the other home as well as other applicable permits needed to bring both structures to up to code. Because of the requirement to obtain a permit, Code Enforcement also advised Mr. Etnoyer that he would be required to pay impact fees pursuant to Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Subsection A of Section 74-202, which states, "Unless deferred or waived by a written Agreement with the County as a party thereto, or unless exempted, the Impact Fee shall be paid in full prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for the Development, and no Building Permit or any other authorization to use the land included in the Development shall be issued until each applicable Impact fee has been paid in full." Mr. Etnoyer has provided County staff with documentation that the first of the two homes was emplaced prior to October 7, 1985, which is the date the first impact fees applicable to the property were adopted. 2002 Request for Impact Fee Exemption for Mobile Home Emplaced Prior to Adoption of Impact Fees Page 2 In reference to the above-cited provision of the Code, staff normally considers the point in time of submittal of a permit application to be the point at which the demands (impacts) on County infrastructure effectively occur. Impact fees are typically collected later, just prior to issuance of the permit, but the assessed fees are calculated at the rates in effect on the date of the permit application. This also enables the Board to provide for a delayed effective date of updated Impact Fee rates when a new fee schedule is adopted. Staff obviously did not contemplate Mr. Etnoyer's situation when .developing the language of the Ordinance. Under these circumstances, if staff can determine with certainty that both structures were in place prior to 1985, it is reasonable for the County not to assess impact fees. However, the Ordinance does not expressly provide for an exemption in this case. Since the Ordinance does not specifically address this type of scenario, any past variations from the staff's standard practice of assessing impact fees based upon the date of permit application have been at the direction of the Board. In recent years, there have been a number of Board decisions favorable to the petitioners in very similar code cases. The last such case occurred in 1998 involving two homes located in the Big Cypress Sanctuary, one that was not permitted and the other for which a Certificate of Occupancy had not been issued. A review of the BCC meeting transcript clearly shows that the Board favored not assessing impact fees for the two structures because they were in place prior to the point in time when the County began assessing impact fees. Mr. Etnoyer has been very cooperative with the Code Enforcement Department and is making an assertive effort to bnng the two homes up to code, including secunng of a loan to fund the necessary improvements and initiating the process of permitting the second structure. He is concerned that the cost of the impact fees may thwart his efforts to complete these improvements. His expressed desire is to continue to provide a home for his recently wido~ved daughter-in-law and her four children. FISCAL IMPACT: The property owner seeks exemption from Collier County Impact Fees in the following amounts: Roads Impact Fee Dist.6 (Golden Gate Estates) $1,800.00 Parks Impact Fees $820.84 Library Impact Fees $214.00 Educational Facilities Impact Fees $827.00 Correctional Facilities Impact Fees $117.98 Emergency Medical Services Impact Fees $93.00 Total: $3,872.82 JUL 3 0 2002 Request for Impact Fee Exemption for Mobile Home Emplaced Prior to Adoption of Impact Fees Page 3 FISCAL IMPACT (Cont.) Board approval of the petitioner's request would not adversely affect capital project funding. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the property owner's request for an exemption from the payment of impact fees, in the amount of $3,872.82, for a mobile home emplaced prior to adoption of applicable County Impact Fees, provided the property owner obtains all necessary permits and completes improvements required by the County and pays all other associated fees. PREPARED BY: ,./ ~ j ~,'~/4__- Date: / Philli~/R. ~indall, Impact Fee Coordinator REVIEWED BY: ~ Denny Baker, Director Financial Administration and Housing Department REVIEWED BY: ~//f//~ ~ ~(---- .[~ ~nate Michelle Arnold, Director Code Enforcement Department APPROVED BY: ~~1~"~ :/J~seph K. S~hmitt, Administrator Date: (,/ t~o~unity Development & Environmental Services Division JUL 3 0 2002 June 13, 2002 Mr. Thomas W. Olliff, County Manager 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34104 Subject: Request for Public Petition Dear Mr. Olliff: I am requesting an opportunity to petition the Board of County Commissioners at the June 25, 2002 regular Board meeting for relief regarding impact fees assessed on my mobile home located at 18660 Immokalee Road. I have been working with the Impact Fee Administration office and Code Enforcement Department, but the issue has not been resolved to my satisfaction, and I have no remaining recourse other than to petition the Board. I was sited for a Code Enforcement violation because I currently have two mobile homes on my property that connect to the same water, septic tank and electric. My home has been on the property since 1974. The second mobile home was permitted in 1981. At the time the first mobile home was placed it was common understanding that a building permit was not required on agricultural land, and therefore, I did not obtain a building permit. I am currently in the process of obtaining the proper perm/ts to bring both homes up to code, however I still require assistance with the matter of the impact fees. I am now applying for all of the proper building permits to legalize both dwellings, and it has been explained to me that I will be assessed impact fees on the mobile home at current rates because I did not have a building permit in 1974. The impact fees total $3,872.82 - for a home that has been in place for almost 30 years. This is creating a great financial. hardship. It is my understanding that the Board has given relief for similar requests in the recent past. Sincerely yours, Calvin Etnoyer cc: Board of County Commissioners (6) - JUL 3 0 2O02 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AUTHORIZATION TO REDISTRIBUTE APPROVED FUNDS BETWEEN TWO EXISTING PURCHASE ORDERS FOR THE CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH RWA, INC. FOR THE RURAL AND AGRICULTURAL ASSESSMENT ORDERS OBJECTIVE: To receive approval to redistribute approved funds between two existing purchase orders for the consulting services agreement with RWA, Inc. for the Rural Fringe Area Oversight Committee and the Eastern Lands Oversight Committee. CONSIDERATION: On September 25, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners approved amending the consulting services agreement with RWA, Inc. to include both the Rural Fringe Area Oversight Committee and the Eastem Lands Oversight Committee for the duration of the Rural and Agricultural Assessment process. The Board allocated funds not to exceed $27,300 for the continuation of consulting services for the Rural Fringe Area Assessment and $52,500 for the Eastern Area Assessment for an overall total of $79,800. A purchase order was opened for each process in order to facilitate tracking of services and billing. The split of monies between the two initiatives was based on an approximation of time to be expended for each project. On May 14, 2002, The Board approved an incremental increase to the contract in the amount of $24,200 to bring the total contract price to $104,000. This increase was necessary because the Administration Commission extended the deadline for the adoption of the Final Order amendments from June 2002 to November 1, 2002. The purchase order for the Rural Fringe Area Oversight was amended to include the additional $24,200. When the original Professional Services Agreement was submitted by RWA, the split of total monies between the two initiatives was based on an approximation of time to be expended for each project. Due to the complexity of the process, it became necessary to focus greater effort on the Rural Fringe Area Assessment and the money originally earmarked for the Rural Fringe has all been expended. However, money is available in the purchase order for the Eastern Lands. Board approval is required to redistribute the money from the Eastern Lands purchase order to the Rural Fringe purchase order with out exceeding the $104,000 cap. FISCAL IMPACT: As the $104,000 this project has already been approved by the Board and encumbered in purchase orders, there will be no further fiscal impact. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: NA .... JUL 30 2002. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board approve the redistribution of funds between existing purchase orders opened for the Rural and Agricultural Assessment currently being conducted by staff as required by Final Order of the State of Florida Administration Commission Order. SUBMITTED BY: ~(~.J~ .~.-./.~-~ ~ Date: r/_ Constance A. Johq,$/on, Operations Analyst Community Development and Environmental Services APPROVED BY: /~~ Date: //~q/seph K. Sch'mitt, Administrator [ ~/~mmunity Development and Environmental Services AGENDA ITE~ ,/ JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AUTHORIZE ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY TO BID ON BEHALF OF COL~NTY AT FORECLOSURE (CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN) SALE TO BE SCHEDULED BY THE CLERK IN BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS v. WA YNE THIBODEA U, CASE NO. 00-3935-CA. OBJECTIVE: To obtain the Board's authorization for the undersigned Assistant County Attorney to bid for property to be sold at a code enforcement lien foreclosure sale as a result of a Summary Final Judgment in favor of the County in Collier County v. Wayne K. Thibodeau, Circuit Court Case No. 00-3935-CA. CONSIDERATIONS: An action was filed on July 15, 2002 to foreclose a code enforcement lien imposed against real property owned by Wayne Thibodeau located at 4221 70th Avenue NE. Route 6, in the unincorporated area of Collier County. A Summary Final Judgment in favor of the County was entered by the court on July 15, 2002. in the total amount of $626.358.90. and foreclosing the interest of all defendants or persons claiming through said defendants upon public sale of the property by the Clerk. A copy of the unsigned Summary Final Judgment is attached hereto. The public sale will be scheduled within 45 days of the Summary Final Judgment and will be advertised and conducted in accordance with Florida law. There exists on the property litter, debris and an illegal concrete block structure. Consequently. the County desires to obtain title to the property in order to abate the remaining violations. Thereafter the property can be sold as surplus property. The County, however, will be required to enter a bid at the sale in order to obtain title to the property, and the undersigned will need authority to bid on the property. The County mav bid up to the amount of its judgment ($626,358.90) and receive credit against the judgment for its bid. Consequently there is no expenditure by the County. except for payment of the clerk's fee of $40.00. and the cost of advertising the sale. which costs must be paid at the time of sale. Staff recommends acquiring the property in order to insure that the violations are corrected and corrected in a timely manner. The County should be able to recoup these cleanup costs, as well as costs associated with the acquisition of this property, upon re-sale of the property. FISCAL IMPACT: Approximately $250.00 from Code Enforcement Department account. Fund No.: 111 Cost Center: 138911 Object Code: 649100. GROWTH .MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. JUL 3 0 2002 RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: 1. Authorize the Office of County Attorney, in particular, the undersigned Assistant County Attorney, to bid on the subject property up to the amount of its final judgment at the foreclosure sale; and 2. Accept title to the property and authorize recording of title, upon confirmation of the sale by the Clerk and issuance of a Certificate of Title; and 3. Authorize staff to pay any fees or expenses associated with the sale and recording of the Certificate of Title; and 4. Authorize staff to take necessary measures to abate the existing violations on the property and to thereafter surplus and sell the property in accordance with state and local laws. Ellen T. Chadwell Assistant County Attorney REVIEWED BY: ~ Date: Michelle Edwards Arnold, Director Code Enforcement Department APPROVED By: j.,~s~h K. Scht~itt, Admi, v~trator Date: .,C5/n~munity Developmefit & Environmental /S, krvices Division JUL 3 0 2002 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL ACTION COLLIER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Plaintiff, v. Case No.: 00-3935-CA WAYNE K. THIBODEAU; LISA ANN THIBODEAU n/k/a LISA ANN NYE; and STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Defendants. / FINAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT THIS CAUSE having come before the Court on July 15, 2002, upon Plaintiff, Collier County's, Motion For Final Summary Judgment of foreclosure, and the Court having reviewed the pleadings and affidavits, having heard argument of counsel, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, finds as follows: A. The Defendants, Wayne K. Thibodeau and State of Florida Department of Revenue CFDOR"), were each personally and properly served and the Court has jurisdiction over the parties and over the subject matter of this action. B. Defendant, Wayne K. Thibodeau, is the record owner of the subject property in this lawsuit. C. The County's interest in the code enforcement lien is paramount and superior to any right, title, interest, claims, liens, encumbrances and equiti;- .;f ~,g:~S, IT~. JUL 3 0 2002 Defendants, Wayne K. Thibodeau and FDOR, and all persons claiming any interest since the filing of the Lis Pendens in the subject property. D. The certified copy of the Order Imposing Fine/Lien rendered by the Collier County Code Enforcement Board was properly recorded on October 30, 1991, and constitutes a valid lien upon the property. The lien accrues at $150 per day. A certified copy of this Order has been filed with the Court in this action. E. Pursuant to §162.09(3), Florida Statutes, this Order imposed an enforceable lien against the property described therein as: The West 105 feet of the West 180 Feet of Tract 33, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 43, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 7 at Page 28 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. F. There are no other liens recorded against the subject property, which liens are superior to code enforcement liens. G. The violations, which are the subject of the Order imposing Fine/Lien, remain pending as of the date of this Order. H. The Plaintiff, Collier County, has incurred costs in the recording of the lien and its satisfaction through foreclosure in the amount of $558.90. See the Affidavit of Michelle Edwards Arnold which is filed with this Court. I. Default was entered against FDOR by the Clerk on February 28, 1991. J. As to each Defendant, there are no genuine issues of material fact, and Plaintiff, Collier County, is entitled to a judgment in its favor as a matter of law; accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Motion For Final Summary Judgment of foreclosure against Defendants, Wayne K. Thibodeau and FDOR, is ~erebpC~,t,A? JUL 3 0 2002 ~ GRANTED and a Final Summary Judgment for foreclosure ("The Judgment") is hereby entered in accordance with the terms that follow: 1. There is due and owing from Defendants, Wayne K. Thibodeau and Lisa Ann Thibodeau, to the Plaintiff, the total sum of the code enforcement lien which equals $625,800.00, as of July 15, 2002, and is due as of the date hereof with interest accruing at the legal rate of 9%, for which let execution issue. 2. Plaintiff, Collier County, is entitled to the costs incurred in this action, pursuant to §162.10, Florida Statutes, in the amount of $558.90. 3. Plaintiff has a code enforcement lien and security interest to secure the payment of the lien amount against the subject property. Unless the Defendants shall, at any time prior to the sale of the property described herein, pay to Plaintiff the total sum of $626,358.90 with interest at the rate prescribed by law, the Clerk of the Court, after publication of notice as required by law, shall sell the property at public sale on ,2002, at o'clock, to the highest and best bidder for cash, in the First Floor Lobby, Atrium area of the Collier County Courthouse, Naples, Collier County, Florida, in accordance with §45.031, Florida Statutes. The property shall be sold free and clear of all right, title, interest, claim, lien, encumbrance, remainder reversion, homestead, dower, or equity of redemption whatsoever of the Defendants named herein, and all persons or entities claiming interest in said property, as of the date of filing of the Notice of Lis Pendens. 4. Plaintiff is hereby given leave to bid at said sale and apply against any debt made by it, the amount found to be due Plaintiff in this Judgment. Section ~._.. 45.031(2), Florida Statutes, requires that the high bidder post with the Clerk a deposit equal to Five Percent (5%) of the final bid. In the event that the successful bidde faiisdo ]~ place the requisite deposit in accordance with Florida Statutes with the Clerk, said bid is void and the sale shall go to the second highest bidder who shall also comply with Florida Statutes in relation to the required deposit. However, if the Plaintiff is the successful bidder, it is excluded from the deposit requirement. 5. Out of the proceeds arising from the sale of the property, the Clerk shall retain his fees and shall distribute the proceeds of the sale, so far as they are sufficient, by paying: first, all of the costs as determined herein; second, documentary stamps affixed to the Certificate of Sale; third, the total sum due to Plaintiff as set forth in this final judgment, plus interest at the rate prescribed by law from this date to the date of the sale. If the property shall sell for more than enough to pay the above-mentioned sums with interest, the Clerk shall retain the surplus and report to this Court for the Court to further order. The Clerk of the Court shall hold the surplus in the registry of this Court. Thereafter, upon motion and notice of hearing to all parties, the Court will adjudicate the rights hereto according to law in equity. 6. Upon the sale being held in accordance with Chapter 45 of the Florida Statutes, and upon the Clerk filing a Certificate of Sale and a Certificate of Title, the sale shall stand confirmed and title shall pass fully and completely to the purchaser named in the Certificate of Title free and clear of any right, title, interest, estate, claim or equity of redemption of the Defendants or any person claiming, by, through or under them, or nay person claiming any interest in the subject property, and the purchaser at the sale shall be let into possession of the property. Further, any and all persons whosoever claiming against the subject property, by virtue of any liens or other interest unrecorded as of the date of the filing of Lis Pendens with the Clerk of this Court, shall be forever l: ._A~ ~.^- JUL 3 0 21102 asserting any such liens or other interest and any such liens or other interest shall be discharged forever, in accordance with the Florida Statutes. 7. This Court retains jurisdiction of this cause for purposes of making all other orders and judgments as may be necessary and appropriate herein, including, but not limited to, writs of assistance determining claims to any surplus and granting such other relief as may be appropriate. Section 162.09(3), Florida Statutes (1999), does not provide for the entry of a deficiency judgment in favor of the Plaintiff in the event that the proceeds of the sale of the property are insufficient to pay the amounts due and owing Plaintiff, pursuant to this Judgment. The Clerk is hereby authorized to issue a Writ of Possession for the premises after filing of Certificate of Title upon request of Plaintiff. DONE AND ORDERED at Naples, Florida, this __ day of July, 2002. HUGH D. HAYES Circuit Court Judge Conformed copies to: Ellen T. Chadwell, Assistant County Attorney Office of County Attorney 3301 Tamiami Trail East Naples, Florida 34112 Attorney for Plaintiff, Collier County Wayne Thibodeau 5393 Swaying Palm Drive Punta Gorda, Florida 33982 FDOR Dr. James A. Zingale, Executive Director 501 Calhoun Street, Room 304 Tallahassee, FL 32301 Bookkeeping JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMM~RY REQUEST TO GRANT FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF "PELICAN M~RSH UNIT SIXTEEN" OBJECTIVE: To grant final acceptance of the infrastructure improvements associated with that subdivision known as "Pelican Marsh Unit Sixteen" CONSIDERATIONS: 1. On June 2, 1999, the Board of County Commissioners granted preliminary acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements in "Pelican Marsh Unit Sixteen". 2. The roadway and drainage improvements will be maintained by the project's homeowner's association. The water and sewer improvements will be maintained by the County. 3. The required improvements have been constructed in accordance with the Land Development Code. The County Development Services has inspected the improvements and is recommending final acceptance of the improvements. 4. A resolution for final acceptance has been prepared and approved by the County Attorney's Office. A copy of the document is attached. FISCJtL IMPACT: The roadway and drainage improvements will be maintained by the project's homeowners association. Water and sewer improvements will be maintained by the County's Utility Department through their operation and maintenance budget. GROWTH M~NAGEMENT IMPACT: None JUL 3 0 2O02 Executive Summary Pelican Marsh Unit Sixteen Page 2 RECOM~4~NDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements in "Pelican Marsh Unit Sixteen" and release the maintenance security. 1. Authorize the Chairman to execute the attached resolution authorizing final acceptance. 2. Authorize the release of the maintenance security. PREPARED BY: John~R. Ho~lds~orth~ ~Engineer Date Engineering Review Thomas E. Kuck~ P.E. Date Engineering Review Director / County Engineer APPROVED BY: Jonahu K. Sd~r~i~t, Administrator C~m~unity Dev. and Environmental Svcs. JUL 3 0 2002 1 RESOLUTION NO. 02- 2 3 a RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE FINAL 5 ACCEPTANCE OF 'THOSE ROADWAY, 8 DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER 7 IMPROVEMENTS IN PELICAN MARSH UNIT ~ SIXTEEN, RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE 9 SECURITY, AND ACCEPT THE MAINTENANCE 1 o RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ROADWAY, t t DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER 12 IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE NOT REQUIRED TO 13 BE MAINTAINED BY THE HOMEOWNERS 14 ASSOCIATION. t 8 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, on 19 June l 7, 1997 approved the plat of Pelican Marsh Unit Sixteen for recording; and 20 21 WHEREAS, the Developer has constructed and maintained the roadway, 22 drainage, and water and sewer improvements in accordance with the approved plans and 23 specifications and as required by the Land Development Code (Collier County Ordinance 24 No. 91-102, as amended), and the Utilities Standards and Procedures Ordinance (Collier 25 County Ordinance No. 97-17); and 28 27 WHEREAS, the Developer is requesting final acceptance of the roadway, 28 drainage, and water and sewer improvements and release of his maintenance security; and 29 30 WHEREAS, the Compliance Services Section of the Development Services 31 Department has inspected the roadway, drainage, and water and sewer improvements, and 32 is recommending acceptance of said facilities. 33 34 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY 3fi COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that final acceptance be 38 granted for those roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements in Pelican Marsh 37 Unit Sixteen, and authorize the Clerk to release the maintenance security. 38 39 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the County accept the a0 future maintenance and other attendant costs for roadway, drainage, and water and sewer 4.1 improvements that axe not required to be maintained by the Pelican Marsh homeowners ,*2 association. 43 44 This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote favoring same. 47 48 DATE: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 49 ATTEST: COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA rio DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK 52 By:. 53 J,~MES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN 54 58 Approved as to form and legal 595857 sufficiency: ~j 50 Patrick G. White $1 Assistant Collier County Attorney IIEM 21)02 EXECUTIVE SUMM]KRY REQUEST TO A~PROVE FOR RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF "HAMMOCK BAY", AND A~PROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND M~INTENANCE AGREEMENT AND AI~PROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY OBJECTIVE: To approve for recording the final plat of "Hammock Bay", a subdivision of lands located in Section 26 Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, following the alternative procedure for approval of subdivision plats. CONSIDERATIONS: Engineering Review Section has completed the review of the construction drawings, specifications, and final plat of "Hammock Bay". These documents are 'in compliance with the County Land Development Code and Florida State Statute No. 177. Ail fees have been paid. Security in the amount of 10% of the total cost of the required improvements, and 100% of the cost of any remaining improvements, together with a Construction and Maintenance Agreement for Subdivision Improvements, shall be provided and accepted by the Planning Services Director and the County Attorneys office prior to the recording of the final plat. This would be in conformance with the County Land Development Code - Division 3.2.9. Engineering Review Section recommends that the final plat of "Hammock Bay" be approved for recording. FISCAL IMPACT: The project cost is $658,219.55 (estimated) to be borne by the developer. The cost breakdown is as follows: a) Water & Sewer - $205,036.00 b) Drainage, Paving, Grading - $453,233.55 The Security amount, equal to 110% of the project cost, is $724,041.51 20§2 Executive Summary Hammock Bay Page 2 The County will realize revenues as follows: Fund: Community Development Fund 113 Agency: County Manager Cost Center: 138900 - Development Services Revenue generated by this project: Total: $9,515.62 Fees are based on a construction estimate of $453,233.55 (does not include Florida Waters private Utilities) and were paid in April, 2002. The breakdown is as follows: a) Plat Review Fee ($425.00 + $4./ac)- $1720.00 b) Construction Drawing Review Fee Water & Sewer (.50% const, est.) - n/a Drainage, Paving, Grading (.42% const, est.)- S1903.58 c) Construction Inspection Fee Water & Sewer (1.5% const, est.) - n/a Drainage, Paving, Grading (1.3% censt, est.) - $5892.04 GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The Concurrency Waiver and Release relating to conditional approval has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's Office for the project. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: There are no outstanding environmental issues HISTORICAL/ARCHEOLOGICAL IMPACT: There are no historical or archeological impacts EAC RECOMMENDATION: Approval CCPC RECOMMENDATION: Approval PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the Final Plat of "Hammock Bay" for recording with the following stipulations: 1. Approve the amount of $724,041.51 as performance security for the required improvements; or such lesser amount based on work completed, and as is approved by the Engineering Review Department. AG~A~I~M~ JUL 3 0 2002 Executive Summary Hammock Bay Page 3 2. Approve the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement, and a. That no Certificates of Occupancy be granted until the required improvements have received preliminary acceptance. b. That the plat not be recorded until suitable security and an appropriate Construction and Maintenance Agreement is approved and accepted by the Planning Services Director and the County Attorney's office. PREPARED BY: 3ohn R. Houldsworth, Engineer Date Engineering Review REVIEWED BY: Thomas E. Kuck, P.E. Da~e Engineering Review Director, County Engineer APPROVED BY: ~at6 unity Development & Environmental Services JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners Approve An Amendment to the FY02 Adopted Budget of the Comprehensive Planning Section for Expenses Incurred Relative to Final Order No. 99-002. OBJECTIVE: To receive Board approval to move funds from MSTD General Fund (111) Reserves to defray contingent expenses incurred in complying with the Final Order and other previously approved initiatives. CONSIDERATIONS: During the FY02 Budget Cycle, the Rural Fringe and Rural Lands Committees were working with staff and consultants to develop the complex and comprehensive amendments to the Growth Manangement Plan to meet the requirements of the Final Order. The timing and costs of outside services and internal expenses to be incurred in achieving the mandated deadlines were estimated based on procedural schedules and work products projected to be needed to complete the process. The bulk of these charges have been centralized and billed to the Comprehensive Planning Cost Center. The requested budget amendment includes charges / costs through June 2002, and anticipated costs through the remainder of FY02. In addition to the Final Order related activities, the Board has initiated a Second 2002 Amendment Cycle to implement realtime "checkbook" roads concurrency GMP Amendments which will involve outside legal services. This budget amendment includes $50,000 for outside legal service and $48,000 for internal advertising, printing, postage, and travel.This additional funding request also includes approved contractual services as follows: 1. SWFRPC / Empowerment $30,000 Alliance Target Industry Analysis (August 2000) 2. Dr. James Nicholas $36,000 TDR Study *3. RWA, Inc. Final Order $24,000 Consulting Services Amendment (May 2002) 4. GGAMP Restudy Citizens $23,000 Survey $113,000 *The RWA, Inc. contract amendment was approved on May 14, 2002. This budget amendment authorizes the movement of funding from reserves. JUL 3 0 2002 FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this budget amendment will result in an increase to the Comprehensive Planning Cost Center 111-138317 expenses appropriation of $211,000.00. There will be a corresponding reduction to MSTD General Fund (111) reserves. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This budget amendment is supportive of the resolution of the Final Order mandates, the Collier TDR program, the GGAMP Restudy, and the overall implementation of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. RECOMMENDATION: That Board approve the attached Budget Amendment Request. SUBMITTED BY: Date:. /Sian~Litsinger, AI'CP, Con~ehensive Planning Manager REVIEWED By: 'Q~~ ~_/~~Date: '"7 '"" [ Margaret B/uerstle, AIC.P:, Planning Services Director Jc~s ,ebh Schmitt, ~dministrator, / .Community Development and Environmental Services JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ADOPT A RESOLUTION FIXING THE DATE, TIME AND PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR APPROVING THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT (NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT) TO BE LEVIED AGAINST THE PROPERTIES WITHIN THE PELICAN BAY MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING AND BENEFIT UNIT FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, BEAUTIFICATION OF RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AND MEDIAN AREAS, AND MAINTENANCE OF CONSERVATION OR PRESERVE AREAS, AND ESTABLISHMENT OF CAPITAL RESERVE FUNDS FOR AMBIENT NOISE MANAGEMENT, MAINTENANCE OF CONSERVATION OR PRESERVE AREAS, U.S. 41 BERMS, STREET SlGNAGE REPLACEMENTS WITHIN THE MEDIAN AREAS AND LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENTS TO U.S. 41 ENTRANCES, ALL WITHIN THE PELICAN BAY MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING AND BENEFIT UNIT OBJECTIVE: Adopt a Resolution fixing the date, time and place for the public hearing for approving the Special Assessment (Non-ad Valorem Assessment) to be levied against the properties within the Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit for maintenance of the water management system, beautification of recreational facilities and median areas, and maintenance of conservation or preserve areas, and establishment of Capital Reserve Funds for ambient noise management, maintenance of conservation or preserve areas, U. S. 41 berms, street signage replacements within the median areas and landscaping improvements to U.S. 41 entrances, all within the Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit. CONSIDERATION: The County Commission as part of the actions related to the succession of the Pelican Bay Improvement District Board of Supervisors are committed to hold a Public Hearing within the Pelican Bay community. There is no specific date established (other than prior to the final adoption of the County-wide budget), but staff would recommend that the Board consider Monday, September 9, 2002 at 6:00 P.M. for the Public Hearing, to be held at The Foundation Center, 8962 Hammock Oak Drive, Naples, Florida 34108. Pursuant to Section 197.3632, Florida Statutes, a Preliminary Assessment Roll (Non-ad Valorem Assessment Roll) must also be adopted between June 1 and September 15, 2002 in order to insure that the assessments can be placed on the Collier County Tax Collectors bills this year. Combining the adoption of the Preliminary Assessment Roll (Non-ad Valorem Assessment Roll) and the Budget Hearing in the Pelican Bay community will provide for increased public awareness of the Pelican Bay Services Division's budget and assessment for Fiscal Year 2002-2003. FISCAL IMPACT: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None JUL 3 0 200 Executive Summary Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners adopt a Resolution fixing the date, time and place for the public hearing for approving the Special Assessment (Non-ad Valorem Assessment) to be levied against the properties within the Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit for maintenance of the water management system, beautification of recreational facilities and median areas, and maintenance of conservation or preserve areas, and establishment of Capital Reserve Funds for ambient noise management, maintenance of conservation or preserve areas, U.S. 41 berms, street signage replacements within the median areas and landscaping improvements to U.S. 41 entrances, all within the Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit. , PREPARED Y:-¢ ~~.,'/.,. /.."...;~-;z DATE: James P. Ward, Division Administrator Pelican Bay Services Division APPROVED BY: ....~/~_~.~/~.P'~.../.~.~.~ DATE: Jarries V. Mudd County Mana,g~r /, AGENDA JIJ L 3 O 2002 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2002- 2 ~ 3 A RESOLUTION FIXING THE DATE, TIME AND PLACE FOR TIlE 4 PUBLIC HEARING FOR APPROVING THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT S (NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT) TO BE LEVIED AGAINST THE 6 PROPERTIES WITHIN THE PELICAN BAY MUNICIPAL SERVICE 7 TAXING AND BENEFIT UNIT FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE WATER 8 MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, BEAUTIFICATION OF RECREATIONAL 9 FACILITIES AND MEDIAN AREAS, AND MAINTENANCE OF 10 CONSERVATION OR PRESERVE AREAS, AND ESTABLISHMENT OF 11 CAPITAL RESERVE FUNDS FOR AMBIENT NOISE MANAGEMENT, 12 MAINTENANCE OF CONSERVATION OR PRESERVE AREAS, U.S. 41 13 BERMS, STREET SIGNAGE REPLACEMENTS WITHIN THE MEDIAN 14 AREAS AND LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENTS TO U.S. 41 15 ENTRANCES, ALL WITHIN THE PELICAN BAY MUNICIPAL 16 SERVICE TAXING AND BENEFIT UNIT. 18 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners adopted Collier County Ordinance 19 No. 2002-27, creating the Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit for the 20 purpose of providing street lighting, water management, ambient noise management, 21 extraordinary law enforcement service and beautification, including but not limited to 29 beautification of recreational facilities, sidewalk, street and median areas, identification markers, 25 the maintenance of conservation or preserve areas and to finance the landscaping beautification .A. 24 of only that portion of U.S.41 from Pine Ridge Road to Vanderbilt Beach Road; 25 WHEREAS, Section 197.3632, Florida Statutes, requires that a public hearing be held to 26 adopt a Non-ad Valorem Assessment Roll for purposes of utilizing the uniform method of 27 collection. 28 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY 29 COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: 30 SECTION ONE. This Resolution is adopted pursuant to the provisions of Ordinance No. 2002- 31 27, and other applicable provisions of law. 32 SECTION TWO. It is hereby found and determined that a Special Assessment which includes 33 thc establishment of Capital Reserve Funds for ambient noise management, the maintenance of 34 the water management system, beautification of recreational facilities and median areas, and 35 maintenance of conservation or reserve areas within the Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing 38 and Benefit Unit is necessary for funding the required payments for the operation, repair and 37 maintenance of the water management system, beautification of recreational facilities and 38 median areas, and maintenance of conservation and preserve areas during Fiscal Year 2002- A(i~Nt}A IT£~ No. 39 2003. J O L 3 0 2002 40 SECTION THREE. A public hearing before thc Board of County Commissioners on the .,, Preliminary Assessment Roil (Non-ad Valorem Assessment Roll) of the estimated costs, 2 including Capital Reserve Funds for the maintenance of conservation or preserve areas, U.S. 41 3 berms within the boundaries of the Unit, street sign replacements within the median areas, 4 ambient noise management, landscaping improvements within the boundaries of the District, 5 landscaping improvements to the U.S. 41 entrances within the boundaries of the Unit, the 6 maintenance of the water management system, and beautification of recreation facilities and 7 median areas, during Fiscal Year 2002-2003 between the County and each property owner of 8 land within the Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit will be held on 9 September 9, 2002 at 6:00 P.M. at The Foundation Center, 8962 Hammock Oak Drive, Naples, 0 Florida, at which time the Board of County Commissioners will hear objections of the owners of 1 the properties within the Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit or other 2 persons interested therein, to the adoption of the Preliminary Assessment Roll (Non-ad Valorem 3 Assessment Roll). The Clerk shall keep a record in which shall be inscribed, at the request of 14 any person, firm or corporation having or claiming to have any interest in any lot or parcel of 15 land within the Unit, the name and post office address of such person, firm or corporation, 15 together with the brief description or designation of such lot or parcel. The Clerk shall cause the 17 notice of such public hearing to be published one time in the Naples Daily News, a newspaper 18 published in Collier County and circulating in the Unit, not less than twenty (20) days prior to 19 said date of the hearing. Notice of such public hearing to consider the adoption of the 20 Preliminary Assessment Roll (Non-ad Valorem Assessment Roll) shall also be mailed first class 21 mail to all the property owners on the Preliminary Assessment Roll (Non-ad Valorem 22 Assessment Roll) at the address provided for on said roll. 2:3 SECTION FOUR. Notice of such hearing shall be in substantially the following form: 24 NOTICE 2,5 Notice is hereby given that the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, 96 Florida, will meet on September 9, 2002 at 6:00 P.M., The Foundation Center, 8962 Hammock 97 Oak Drive, Naples, Florida, for the purpose of hearing objections, if any, of ali interested persons 98 to the adoption of the Preliminary Assessment Roll (Non-ad Valorem Assessment Roll) 99 allocating the assessable costs including Capital Reserve Funds for ambient noise management, Ar~N~A IT£H 30 the maintenance of conservation or preserve areas, U.S. 41 berms within the boundaries of the J U L 3 0 31 Unit, street sign replacements within the median areas, landscaping improvements within the .1 boundaries of the Unit, landscaping improvements to the U.S. 41 entrances within the boundaries ~ 2 of the Unit, the maintenance of the water management system, and beautification of recreation :3 facilities and median areas within the Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit 4 which comprises and includes those lands described as follows: $ A tract of land being in portions of Sections 32 and 33, Township 48 6 South, Range 25 East; together with portions of Sections 4, 5, 8 and 9, Township 7 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, being one and the same as the $ lands encompassed within the Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit 9 Unit, the perimeter boundary of same more particularly described as follows: 10 Commencing at the Southeast corner of said Section 33; thence South 89 'l 1 degrees 59 minutes 50 seconds West along the South line of Section 33 a distance .19 of 150.02 feet to a point on the West right-of-way line of U.S. 41 (State Road 45), '1:3 said point also being the Point of Beginning; thence Southerly along the West .14 right-of-way line of said U. S. 41 (State Road 45) the following courses: South .15 00 degrees 58 minutes 36 seconds East a distance of 2.49 feet; thence South 00 16 degrees 55 minutes 41 seconds East a distarlce of 3218.29 feet; thence South 01 17 degrees 00 minutes 29 seconds East a distance of 3218.56 feet; thence South 00 18 degrees 59 minutes 03 seconds East a distance of 2626.21 feet; thence South 01 19 degrees 00 minutes 18 seconds East a distance of 2555.75 feet to a point on the 90 North right-of-way line of Pine Road as recorded in D.B. 50, Page 490, among the :>1 Public Records of said Collier County; thence departing said U.S. 41 (State Road 99 45) South 89 degrees 09 minutes 45 seconds West along said North right-of-way 9:3 line a distance of 2662.61 feet; thence South 00 degrees 51 minutes 44 seconds :>4 East a distance of 70.00 feet to a point on the North line of Seagate Unit I as :>fi recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 85 among said Public Records; thence South 89 '-"?8 degrees 09 minutes 45 seconds West along said North line of Seagate Unit I and z7 the South line of said Section 9 a distance of 2496.67 feet to the Southwest corner :>8 of said Section 9; thence continue South 89 degrees 09 minutes 45 seconds West a 29 distance of 225 feet more or less to a point on the mean high water line :30 established May 15, 1968; thence a Northwesterly direction along said mean high :3.1 water line a distance 15716 feet more or less; thence departing said mean high :32 water line South 80 degrees 29 minutes 30 seconds East and along the Southerly 313 line of Vanderbilt Beach Road (State Road 862) as recorded in D.B. 15, Page 121 :34 among said Public Records a distance of 7385 feet more or less to a point on said :35 West fight-of-way line of U. S. 41 (State Road 45); thence South 00 degrees 58 :36 minutes 36 seconds East along said West right-of-way line a distance of 2574.36 $7 feet to the Point of Beginning. :38 $9 A copy of the Preliminary Assessment Roll (Non-ad Valorem Assessment Roll) for each 40 lot or parcel of land to be assessed is on file at the Clerk to the Board's Office, County 4.1 Government Center, W. Harmon Turner Building, Fourth Floor, 3301 East Tamiami Trail, 4:> Naples, Florida and in the offices of the Pelican Bay Services Division, 801 Laurel Oak Drive, 4:3 Suite 605, Naples, Florida, and is open to the inspection of the public. 44 All affected property owners have a right to appear and be heard at the public hearing and 45 to file written objections to the adoption of a resolution approving the Preliminary Assessment ¢6 Roll (Non-ad Valorem Assessment Roll) with the Board within 20 days of this notice based upon A6ENDA IT£~ 47 the grounds that it contains items which can not be properly assessed against property, that the JUL 3 0 48 computation of the special assessment is incorrect, or there is a default or defect in the passage or 'l character of the resolution, or the Preliminary Assessment (Non-ad Valorem Assessment) is void 2 or voidable in whole or part, or that it exceeds the power of the Board. At the completion of the :3 hearing, the Board shall either annul or sustain or modify in whole or in part the Preliminary 4 Assessment (Non-ad Valorem Assessment) as indicated on such roll, either by confirming the S Preliminary Assessment (Non-ad Valorem Assessment) against any or all lots or parcels 6 described therein or by canceling, increasing, or reducing the same, according to the special 7 benefits which the Board decides each such lot or parcel has received or will receive on account 8 of such improvements. The assessment so made shall be final and conclusive as to each lot or 9 parcel assessed unless proper steps are taken within twenty (20) days with a court of competent `l 0 jurisdiction to secure relief. `l `l The Board will levy a Special Assessment (Non-ad Valorem Assessment) for operations `l 2 and maintenance of the water management system and the beautification of the recreational areas `13 and median areas, and maintenance of conservation and preserve areas utilizing an Equivalent '14 Residential Unit based methodology. The total assessment for maintenance of the water 1 $ management system, beautification of recreational facilities, and median areas, and maintenance `16 of conservation or preserve areas is $2,003,316.30 which equates to $258.02 per Equivalent 'l 7 Residential Unit based on 7764.19 assessable units. 'lB The Board will levy a Special Assessment (Non-ad Valorem Assessment) for the 'l 9 establishment of Capital Reserve Funds for ambient noise management, the maintenance and 20 restoration of the conservation or preserve areas, U.S. 41 berm improvements within the Unit, 2`l street sign replacement within the median areas, landscaping improvements and U.S. 41 entrance 22 improvements within the Unit, utilizing an Equivalent Residential Unit based methodology. The 23 total assessment for these Capital Reserve Funds is $272,600.71 which equates to $35.11 per 24 Equivalent Residential Unit based on 7764.19 assessable units. 25 The Special Assessment (Non-ad Valorem Assessment) will be collected by the Collier 96 County Tax Collector on the owner's Ad Valorem Tax Bill pursuant to Section 197.3632, Florida 27 Statutes. Failure to pay the Special Assessment (Non-ad Valorem Assessment) and your 28 property taxes will cause a tax certificate to be sold against the property, which may result in a 29 loss of title to the property. A~NDA IT£H. $0 Any person who decides to appeal a decision of thc Board will need a record of the 31 proceedings pertaining thereto and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the JUL 1 proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is 2 to be based. 3 4 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 5 COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 6 7 JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN 8 9 DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK 10 11 By:/s/Maureen Kenyon 1 :~ Deputy Clerk 13 14 (SEAL) 15 16 SECTION FIVE. The Clerk is hereby ordered and directed to spread this Resolution in full 17 among the minutes of this meeting for permanent record in his office. 18 SECTION SIX. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage. 19 This Resolution adopted this 30th day of July 2002, after motion, second and majority 20 vote. 21 22 ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 23 DW1GHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 24 25 26 BY 27 JAMES N. COLE'ErA, CHAIRMAN 28 Approved as to form and 3029 l~s,~cien;: ~ 32 D~avid C. Weigel 33 County Attorney 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 AG~NOA IT£N JUL 3 0 pELICAN BAY - OF ~~'~ MEXICO "~"~'" No. /~ t ~ JUL'3 0 2~2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVAL OF THREE (3) IMPACT FEES REFUND REQUESTS TOTALING $81,086.92.00 OBJECTIVE: To obtain Board of County Commissioners approval of three (3) Impact Fees refund requests totaling $81,086.92. CONSIDERATIONS: Following recent discussions between county staff and the staff of the Clerk of Courts, it has been jointly determined that requests for impact fee refunds for other than routine circumstances will now be forwarded to the Board for approval. Until recently, such requests were approved at the Division Administrator level; however, no County regulation expressly gave such authority. Staff is presently preparing an ordinance to amend Ordinance No. 2001-13, as amended, the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, which is also Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. Among the various updates to administrative provisions regarding impact fee assessments will be specific criteria and procedures for processing routine and non-routine requests for impact fee refunds. Many impact fee refunds are unavoidable during the course of a fiscal year. For example, oftentimes a builder is not able to complete a construction project subsequent to the issuance of a building permit and requests that the permit be cancelled. Such cancellations are often due to financing problems or other fiscal difficulties. Therefore staff has determined that Board action is merited to ensure that refunds are lawfully remitted. PR VI, LLi2. ($62,756.00) - On May 8, 2001, PR VI, LLC (the Developer) entered into a developer contribution agreement with Collier County entitling the Developer to Road Impact Fee credits in exchange for the contribution of off-site improvements to the County's transportation network. At the time the permits were issued to the Developer the agreement ledger was not yet properly set-up by the Collier County staff. Developer paid the fee with a check with the understanding that when the ledger was composed a refund would be issued and the corresponding debit entries made to the applicable impact fee credit ledger, offsetting the amount of the refund. Transeastern Properties ($4,557.00) - On November 9, 1999, developer paid impact fees on Permit No. 1999101820 for the property located at 701 Crossfield Circle. This permit was later cancelled. On February 8, 2000, impact fees were assessed and paid on Permit No. 2000020109 for the above mentioned property. Developer is now requesting refund for fees previously paid. A(~E I~D A J.~EM JUL 3 0 2,g02 Impact Fees Refunds Page 2 Phoenix Associates of South Florida, Inc. ($14040.58) - On April 5, 2002, a revision to Permit No. 2001051831 was submitted and approved by Collier County staff deleting a 3,013 sq. ft. mezzanine from original plans. A refund of impact fees assessed and paid based on the square footage of the mezzanine is now being requested _._,,, JzISCAL IMPACT: The recommended Impact Fees refunds will be transacted as debit : ~,\-~ntries against the al~plicable revenue budget line items in the following amounts: Road Impact Fee District Two (East Naples/Golden Gate City) - $ 1,379.00 Road Impact Fee District One (North Naples) - $ 72,873.65 Community and Regional Parks - $ 820.84 $ 180.52 Library o $ 1,778.00 School - Jail - $ 3,408.18 Emergency Medical Services $ 646.73 Total: $ 81,086.92 These refunds will not adversely affect capital project funding. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Remittance of the requested Impact Fees refunds will not adversely affect capital project fundings. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approves the requested Impact Fees refund requests, totaling $81,086.92; and that the Board approves any related budget amendments that may be required. SUBMITTED BY: . Date: "7 /,0 / ~ '2.-- Phill~ R. Tmdall, Impact Fee Coord~nato APPROVED ~"/~ Do~te: ~'//~/~" BY: Nofinan E. Feder, AICP, Administrat ' / / T/ansportation Services Division 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE COMMITTEE SELECTION OF FIVE FIRMS FOR CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS FOR RFP #02-3371 "FIXED TERM PROFESSIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING CONSULTING SERVICES". THERE IS $200,000.00 BUDGETED IN THE FIRST YEAR FOR THIS CONTRACT. OBJECTIVE: Obtain Board's approval of Committee's selection of firms for professional consultant services for upcoming "FIXED TERM PROFESSIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING CONSULTING SERVICES" as needed, and authorization to begin contract negotiations for subsequent Board approval. CONSIDERATIONS: The RFP was issued in accordance with Florida State Statute 287.055, Consultant Competitive Negotiation Act, and publicly advertised on April 10, 2002. Notices were sent to 169 firms with 34 vendors requesting full packages. Twelve (12) responses were received by the due date of May 17, 2002. A Selection Committee Meeting was held on June 17, 2002 and after review, ranking and discussion; by consensus of the members, the following five (5) firms were recommended for award: TBE Group, Inc. CH2M Hill David Plummer & Associates PBS&J Kimley-Horn and Associates The RFP referenced that work orders would be issued in accordance with the County's Purchasing Policy. Purchasing Policy Section VII, limits each work order assignment to a maximum initial amount of $90,000.00 and a maximum annual amount of $500,000.00. .,FISCAL IMPACT: Funding for the Consultant Services contracts will come from the Gas Tax fund (313). GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This has no growth management impact. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners; (1) Approve the Committee's selection of firms. (2) Authorize staff to begin Contract negotiations with the selected firms. Donald Scott Transportation Planning Director Ste~ve C'arnell, ~)irector / Purchasing/General Services Department "N~rm~.r~ El Feder ~-' Services Administrator EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE BID #02-3378 IMMOKALEE TRIANGLE LANDSCAPING INSTALLATION OBJECTIVE: To obtain Board approval for the award of Bid #02-3378 Immokalee Triangle Landscaping Installation to Hannula Landscaping Inc. CONSIDERATIONS: On April 29, 2002 the Purchasing Department sent out notices to 57 vendors for landscaping and irrigation of the Immokalee Triangle located at the intersection of SR 29 and New Market Rd. On May 14, 2002 a non-mandatory pre-bid meeting was held. On June 5, 2002 three (3) bids were opened. Staff reviewed the unit pricing on the bid tab and Hannula Landscaping Inc. ~vas the lowest qualified bidder. 1. Valley Crest Landscape, Inc. DBA Valley Crest $165,745.88 2. Commercial Land Maintenance, Inc. $136,052.80 3. Hannula Landscaping, Inc. $134,444.50 FISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $134,444.50 are available in the Immokalee ('~Beautification MSTU fund 156. ..... GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None RECOMMENDATION: That the Board award bid #02-3378 to Hannula Landscaping, Inc. for the Immokalee Triangle Landscaping Installation, and authorize the Chairman to execute the standard contract after review by the County Attorney's Office. SUBMITTED By: ~~.~ ~ DATE: 7"/Z-'°~'- Bob Petersen, Project Manager Edward J. Kant, PE, Transportation Operations Director SteTve~. ~-arnell, Purchasing Dir~ior APPROVF~D BY: 'Q//~~, ?& DAIE: Norm~ E. ~e~ AICP, Transportation Administrator JUL 3 O [002 Pg. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE CHANGE ORDER WITH APAC, INC. FOR ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS AT GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY AND 53lm STREET SW IN THE AMOUNT OF $22,644.50, PROJECT# 60016 OBJECTIVE: To gain Board of County Commissioners' approval of a change order for construction on Golden Gate Parkway and 53rd Street SW CONSIDERATIONS: This project consists of the addition of turn lanes, curbing and drainage improvements in conjunction with the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Golden Gate Parkway and 53rd Street SW. The original contract amount for this project was $79,814.45. This change order is in the amount of $22,644.50 and is necessary for the following reasons: · During the construction of the intersection improvements at 53rd St. SW and Golden Gate Parkway, it was determined that additional drainage improvements upstream of the intersection were necessary to assure that the intersection drainage would function properly. · The Golden Gate Beautification MSTU Advisory Board requested curbing modifications in the medians to minimize the impact of the new construction on the landscaping. · A valley gutter curb along eastbound Golden Gate Parkway right turn lane was changed to a raised curb and gutter to assure pedestrians safety along the adjacent sidewalk. · The above changes necessitated additional pavement for the turn lanes and along the medians. FISCAL IMPACT' Funds in the amount of $22,644.50 are available in the Transportation Supported !,) Gas Tax Fund. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: 1) Approve the change order with APAC, Inc., for the roadway improvements on Golden Gate Parkway and 53~a Street SW in the total amount of $22,644.50. 2) Authorize the Transportation Operations Director to execute the change order with APAC, Inc. SUBMITTED BY: /'3 ~-,, 9 I ~, .d'zc..~",~' .-'~' /~(&L.~' Date: '7'//~/~ Daniel G. Hall, P.E., Engineer ~p .13~~. ca~44, Dir~t0s,~hasing Department _ REVIEWED BY: ~~/.~ Date ~//~//~ J!!iO(v/trd J K~. ' j~,/A~F. TTransportation Operations Director APPROVED BY: ~ ~__.___~_~ Date / N~der, AICP, Transportation Administrator/ ' "-' Attachments:No. 1 - ~?oposed Change Order JUL 3 CHANGE ORDER CHANGE ORDER #: 1 CONTRACT NO. 98-2905 PO #: 205021 TO: APAC-Florida, Inc. 14299 Alico Road Fort Myers, FL 33913 DATE: July 8, 2002 PROJECT #: 60016 PROJECT NAME: Golden Gate Parkway & 53rd Street S.W. Turn Lane Improvements Under our AGREEMENT dated: 3/9/99 You hereby are authorized and directed to make the following change(s) in accordance with terms and conditions of the Agreement: Construct Drainage Improvements and Curb Modifications as Identified in Attached Exhibit "A". FOR THE total Additive Sum of: $ 22,644.50 (Twenty two thousand six hundred forty four dollars and fifty cents). Original Agreement Amount $ 79814.45 Sum of Previous Changes $ 0.00 This Change Order (Deduct) $ This Change Order (Add) $ 22,644.50 Present Agreement Amount $ 102458.95 There is no time change for this Change Order since the project has already been completed and accepted. Your acceptance of this Change Order shall constitute a modification to our Agreement and will be performed subject to all the same terms and conditions as contained in our Agreement indicated above, as fully as if the same were repeated in this acceptance. The adjustment, if any, to the Agreement shall constitute a full and final settlement of any apd all claims of the Contractor arising out of or related to the change set forth herein, including claims for impact and delay costs. Accepted: /-?- ~'- ~ Z.- ,2002 APAC-FIorida, Inc. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA W~'s Tanner, Vice President DANIEL G. HALL, PE EDWARD O. KANT, PE" Transportation Operations Director JUL 3 0 2002 F'cj. ~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY,, APPROVAL TO PURCHASE AND INSTALL BUS STOP SHELTERS FOR COLLIER AREA TRANSIT (CAT). OBJECTIVE: To obtain Board of County Commissioners approval to purchase and install bus shelters in various locations in Collier County to better serve the needs of the transit system users. CONSIDERATIONS; Staff is currently installing four bus shelters in Immokalee that were approved by the Board of County Commissioners at its October 9, 2001, meeting. The BCC also recommended that this bus shelter design be utilized for the entire county (see attached photo). Following discussions with Collier Area Transit staff regarding the rider-ship of each route, it was recommended that additional bus shelters be installed at, or near, the following locations: ROUTE # LOCATION I Naples Park, U.S. 41 @ 108th Avenue (7-11 store), across from Pier One Imports. 2 Goodlette-Frank Road @ Goodlette Arms, approximately 50 feet past entrance drive. 2 & 4 U.S. 41, east of Airport Pulling Road, in front of Exxon Station @ entrance to Albertson's. 2 & 4 Airport Pulling Road, just north of U.S.41.41, @ Collier County Government Center 3 Santa Barbara Boulevard @ Our Place Senior Center, I and 1/2 miles North of Golden Gate Parkway 3 Santa Barbara Boulevard Southbound @ Berkshire Lakes, Across From Recreation Lane 3 Golden Gate Parkway, west of Golden Gate Shopping Center, in front of Burger King. 4 Rattlesnake Hammock Road @ College Park Apartments. FISCAL IMPACT: Staff recently received the attached price quotation from Brasco International, Inc., for the purchase of the eight bus shelters needed. The total cost for installation of the eight 5' x 12' Canopy Style Shelters is $57,472.00, ($54, 472 for the shelters + $3,000.00 for labor and installation). The Board of County Commissioners has approved a budget for the purpose of transit enhancement from gas tax revenues (313), Project Number 61010. GROW'FH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This is consistent with the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan to promote transit in Collier County. -- AGENDA . - JUL 3 0 2002 RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the purchase and installation of bus shelters in the recommended locations R~)be~~~'~n' iP~~' 7-I "~- Reviewed by: Date: · "' (.,),~, Donald Scott, Transportation Planning Director Approved by: 1,"~ i Date: Norman E Feder, Transportation Services Administrator /, JUL 3 0 2002 Pg. AGENDA I~/,~M JUL 3 0 2002 Jun 25 02 05:44p Bpasoo Intepnational~ Ino (313)393-0499 p.2 B'RASCO INTERNATIONAL 1000 Mt. Elliott Detroit. MI 48207 Mr. Bob Herringt( n June 25, 2002 PHONE: (800) 893.3665 Transportation De ~artment FAX: (313)393-0499 WEB: www. brasco.com Collier County Government 3301 Ta'miami Trail East Naples, FL 34112 Re: Bus Stop Shelter Quotation Dear Mr. Herdngtoni' We are please to submit our quotation for additional shelters per your request, We propose to manufacture and deliver Eight (8) 5' x 12' Canopy Style Shelters. The shelters will be manufactured in accordance with the 4 shelters provided last year. Features are as.follows:. · Heavy Steel Frame , White Dome Roof -- · Oak Bench' Seating · · Hardware Kit and Installation InstructiOns · Delivery to Collier County,· FL · Eight (8) 5' x 12' Canopy Style Shelters $61809.00_ eaCh · Total Price .~54,472.00_ '. .. Please note that this pdce reflects a ,5% discount.· As .always, we Strive to be fair with our customers, and with the increase in' quantity, we are. pleased to. be able to lower our pdcing to you. We appreciate the opportunity, to serve you,. and' look forward to doing so. Please Call me if you have any questions Or need additional information. Sincjgrely,/ · . . Acceptance Authorization Kevin'Chown National Sales Manager . Title & Date The above prices·, specification, and conditions are.satisfactory and are .hereby accepted. You are authorized to do tt~e work as offered. _ .... Payment Terms: Net 30 Days . . AGF. nI~'_[ JUL 3.0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE A REQUEST FOR ADVANCED FUNDING TO THE LIVINGSTON ROAD BEAUTIFICATION MUNICIPAL SERVICES TAXING UNIT (MSTU) IN THE AMOUNT OF $228,583.08 TO INSTALL DECORATIVE LIGHTING DURING THE LIVINGSTON ROAD, PHASE II IMPROVEMENT (PROJECT NO. 60071). ALSO, APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 5 WITH BETTER ROADS, INC. TO PURCHASE DECORATIVE LIGHTING FIXUTURES AND PERFORM ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION SERVICES RELATED TO STREET LIGHT INSTALLATION FOR AN AMOUNT OF $352,021.80. OBJECTIVE: To receive Board approval to advance funding to the Livingston Road Beautification Municipal Services Taxing Unit (MSTU) for an upgrade to the recently approved County standard decorative street lighting pole, arm and fixture. Also, to receive Board approval of Change Order No. 5 for the purchase of decorative street lighting and additional construction services related to street lighting design changes. CONSIDERATION: On July 31, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners awarded a construction contract to Better Roads, Inc. to widen and improve Livingston Road, Phase II, from Golden Gate Parkway/CR 886 to the Community School entrance North of Pine Ridge Road/CR 896. The project included the installation of basic street lighting fixtures. The Livingston Road, Phase II, Beautification MSTU was established by Ordinance 2001- 76 on December 11, 2001, for the purpose of beautification of the section of Livingston Road from Golden Gate Parkway to Pine Ridge Road. The MSTU desires to add the decorative lighting fixtures recently approved by the Board (RFP 02-3346, Standardization of Decorative County Street Lights) to the roadway section from Golden Gate Parkway to Pine Ridge Road. Since MSTU funds will not be available until 2003, they cannot provide the funds to implement their request at this time. These additional. costs have been determined to be $228,583.08 and the Advisory Committee for the MSTU has agreed to this amount (see Attachment No. 1). To assure that the project is completed on schedule, the MSTU Advisory Committee has asked staff to request a funding advance from the Board. The advanced funds would be repaid over the next two years fi'om the proceeds of tax revenues to the MSTU. Included in the Change Order No. 5 ($352,021.08) is the incremental cost to the MSTU for the upgraded decorative street lighting ($228,583.08) plus the County's additional cost to address design changes to street lighting not associated with the upgraded features ($123,438.00). ,,,FISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $228,538.08 will come from the MSTD General Fund (111) and would be reimbursed to the MSTD General Fund from the MSTU's first two years of tax revenues (50% reimbursement per year). The balance of $123,438 will come from the Transportation Supported Gas Tax Fund (313). A Budget . ,, _ Amendment is needed to transfer funds in the amount of $228,583.08 frorr the ~.1~ IT~la General Fund (111) and appropriate in the project. No._ il ~ ~ / - JUL 3 0 2002 pg.' ~ GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact associated with this request. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board: 1. Approve the request for advance funding in the amount of $228,583.08 For the Livingston Road, Phase II, Beautification MSTU for decorative lighting for the Livingston Road, Phase II Roadway Improvements; and 2. Approve the necessary Budget Amendments for Change Order No. 5 o£ $352,021.08 to upgrade to decorative street lighting and fund the County's additional cost to address design changes to street lighting not associated with the upgraded features. SUBMITTED BY: t~ Lyn~ :Fho~e, P.E. Principal Project Manager ,~l'/l? ~VIE~D BY: '~d'(,y&~/~ Steve Cm~g, Bkecior APPROVED BY: DATE: Gregg R. Str~aluse, Dkector Transportation Engheer~g & C~tion M~agement Dep~ment / / .PROUD BY: ~/~~ DATE: No~ E. Feder, Ad~trator Tr~o~ation Services Division Sc/ESProject/160071 JUL 3 0 2C.02 pg. L Attachment No. I Minutes~ Livingston Road Phase 2 Beautification MSTU June 26~ 2002 Meeting called to order by Lu Lackore at 3:02 PM Present: Lu Lackore, Bill Confoy, Dex Groose, Pam Lulich, Trans. Ops. Design, Skip McMichael-TECM, Dave Martino- FPL. Absent, Charles Douglas, Tom Sansbury. Skip McMichael explained the process or system used to determine the costs of the Decorative lights, as outlined in attached handout. Committee had questions about the lighting bid process, and the protest, Pam Lulich explained the RFP process and the outcome. Dex motioned to accept the costs as reported by Skip so that the project lights can be ordered and installed. Seconded by Bill Confoy. No discussion, vote was unanimous. Dex motioned that the Transportation Department request maximum payback time for money's advanced to the committee for their share of the lighting costs. Seconded by Bill Confoy. No discussion, vote was unanimous. Discussion about the BCC meeting followed, and the July 30 BCC meeting which will be the meeting where there landscaping funding will be discussed. Discussion about the costs savings brought about by members of this committee's previous work with the Transportation Department. Their ability to get an extra easement from FPL prevented the need for a lengthy retaining wall and railing. Skip McMichael informed the committee that the costs of design for the lighting was being paid by TECM. Discussion about the different roadway classification followed, and Skip will provide that information when it is available to Pam, who will distribute it to the committee. This discussion also covered some of the history of Landscaping on the roadways, and who has/is paying for it. Bob P. introduced Dave Martino, the Landscape Architect for FPL who is working on the design for the FPL substations at the comer of Livingston and Golden Gate Parkway. Dave explained the stations and the Landscape plans for this area. He stated that FPL will work with the committee in plant selection and placement. AG~LIP~, !T,~M :'~o-_1%'D JUL ,:, ,3 23'32 Pg. Attachment No. 1 Dex motioned for Dave to proceed with the design as presented, but to leave out the trees which will be planted in the right-of-way east of the sub-stations, but to install the irrigation for future placement of these trees. Seconded by bill, no discussion, vote is unanimous. Further discussion about the FPL requirements for tree size and location followed. Final discussion about the next meeting date, Thursday August 15 at 1:00 p.m. was decided so that enough members would be in town for a quorum. List of action items: Pam. FPL plans Skip. List of road classifications Bob. Minutes, FPL plans to McGee, ES request for design funds. David Martino, FPL. Look into ways FPL can work with committee. Bill moved to adjourn, seconded by Dex, passed unanimous. Next meeting date August 15, 2002 at 1:00 p.m. at the Transportation Operations conference room. JUL 30 2092 Attachment No. I Alternate Design: (Costs For Providing Complete Pole Only) Same Design As Decorative Only Using Conventional Poles and Cobra Head Fixtures 66 each Conventional Poles (27-Foot Mounting Height)- Single Arm 53 each Conventional Poles (27oFoot Mounting Height) - Double Arm 18 each Conventional Poles (35-Foot Mounting Height) - Single Arm 66 each X $1,281.23 = $84,561.18 53 each X $1,858.49 - $98,499.97 18 each X $1,496.44 = $26,935.92 $84,561.18 + $98,499.97 + $26,935.92 = $209~997.07 Decorative Pole Design: 66 each Decorative Poles - Single Arm 53 each Decorative Poles - Double Arm 18 each Conventional Light Poles Decorative Pole - Single Arm 66 each X $2,673.99: $177,483.34 Decorative Pole - Double Arm 53 each X $4,418.13: $234,160.89 Conventional Light Pole 18 each X $1,496.44 = $26,935.92 TOTAL: $177,483.34 + $234,160.89 + $26,935.92 - S438~580.15 Shared Cost Proposal: $438,580.15 - $209.997.07: $228~583.08 CI:/.a2qGE ORDER//5 TO: blr. Joseph Restino FROM: Collier County Transportation Engineering Better Roads Ins. & Construction Management Department 5590 Shirley St. 2675 South Horseshoe Drive, Suite Naples, FL 34104 Naples, Florida 34104 Project Name: Livingston Road Phase li - 6 Laning Project No.: 60071 Construction Agreement Dated: Bid No.: 01-3241 Change Order No.: Five (5) Date: 7/08/02 Description: To furnish and install Decorative Lighting fixtures (RFP 02-3346) based on plans prepared by Tindal-Oliver, Inc. submitted by Agnoli, Barbara and Brundage entitled Revised Final Submittal Dated May 30, 2002. Original agreement amount ........................................................................ $ 8,443,248.42 Sum of previous change orders amount ..................................................... $ 869,821.65 This Change Order Amount ...................................................................... $ 352,021.80 Revised Agreement Amount ........................................................................ $ 9,665,091.87 Original contract time in calendar days to substantial ..................... 335 days Adjusted number of calendar days due to previous change orders ..... 142 days This change order adjusted time is .......................................... 0 days Revised Contract Time in calendar day's ....................................... 477 days Original Notice to Proceed date .......................................................... September 04, 2001 Completion date based on original contract time ................................ August 05, 2002 Revised cotnpletion date to substantial ......................................... December 24, 2002 Revised completion date to final ............................................ January 23, 2003 Your acceptance of this change order shall constitute a modification to our Agreement and will be performed subject to all the same terms and conditions as contained in our Agreement indicated above, as fully as if the same were repeated in this acceptance. The adjustment, if any, to this Agreement shall constitute a full and final settlement of any and all claims of the Contractor arising out of, or related to, the c.~D_.g~set forth herein, including claims for impact and delay costs. Prepared by: ~ ~ Date: ~'-~' ~ Trey Barclay, Project Engineer Reviewed by: ~?//~/Y/t/~ c y- ),/..p~b~' Date: Bill Flyma'~Project Mafi/ager -//// Reviewed by:~ Date: Lynn Thorpe P.E., Principal Project Manager Approved by: Date: Gregg Strakaluse, T.E.C.M. Director Accepted by: Date: Joseph Restino, Vice President, Better Roads, Inc. JUL 3 0 ~c~J2 ~; I',al ~ ~ 0 r- t- o o z 88°° °° ~ ~ _ ~ ~ -II :~ mmmm z o ~ _~r. · q ..q ?. > § ~ .o.~ ~ CD ;;0 o oOz mO..( Z _ --I ~ ,z --I ~ ~ ~,~~ '-I !IT1 C) u, --, g io Z ".4 ~ ".,I ~ I~ I01 Z · ,~ z ~ Itl r-~n~ ~ rtl Z z o C) z -T m z - JUL ,, BETTER ROADS ~ P.O. BOX 9979 · 5590 SHIRLEY St · NAPLES, ~ 34101 I RE: / / - /./ /, . (9~) s97-2,s~ · FAX (S~) S~7-~s97 I -. ~~. ~ 13391 SR 31 · PUNTA GORDA, FL33955 (941) 567-2231 · FAX (941) 567-2250 ~4456 TAMIAMI TRAIL · SUITE A7 · CHARLO~E HARBOR, FL 33980 (941) 743-2816 · FAX (941) 566-2737 ~ P.O. BOX 1908 · 2830 OLD STATE ROAD 8 · ~KE P~CID, FL ~862 ,~.5¢~.~ .. ~2¢~,~ ~t/o ~/ WE ARE SENDING YOU ~ached ~ Under separate cover via the ~ollowing items: ~ Shop Drawings ~ Pdnts ~ Plans ~ Samples ~ Specifications ~ Copy of Le~er ~ Change Order COPIES DATE NO DESCRIPTION / THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: 4~E'or approval [] Approved as submitted [] Resubmit copies for approval [] For your use [] Approved as noted [] Submit copies for distribution [] As requested [] Returned for corrections [] Return corrected prints [] For review and comment [] [] FOR BIDS DUE 19 ~ [] PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS COPY TO SIGNED If enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once. BETTER ROADS INC. June 7, 2002 KCCS 4535 Domestic Avenue Unit A Naples, Florida 34104 Attn: Trey Barclay Project Manager Re: Livingston Rd Phase II Golden Gate Parkway to Pine Ridge Road Collier County No.: 60071 Dear Trey: We are writing this letter to provide you the proposal for the new decorative lighting for the referred to project that were provided to us by Tindale-Oliver & Associates, Inc. Please refer to the attached segment that describes the sub - contractor's proposal along with our 5% increase on the new items. If there are any questions or concerns with the above, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Respectfully Submitted, BETTER ROADS INC. James R. Powel1111 Project Administrator AGENC~ ITeM ~o._1.~ t'_f_6 f .JUL 3 0 2002 Please Reply To: [] P.O. BOX 9979 · 5590 SHIRLEY STREET · NAPLES, FLORIDA 34101 · (941) 597-2181 · FAX (941) 597-1597 [] 13391 SR 31 · PUNTA GORDA, FLORIDA 33982 · (941) 567-2231 · FAX (941) 567-2250 [] 4456 TAM IAMI TRAIL · SUITE A7 · CHARLOTTE HARBOR, FLORIDA 33980 · (941) 743-2816 · FAX (941 ) 566-2737 [] P.O. BOX 1908 · 2830 OLD STATE ROAD 8 · LAKE PLACID, FLORIDA 33862 · (863) 465-5797 · FAX (941) 597-6609 ~- ..................................... PROJECT NUMBER: Lighting Change Order ~--~ E~, 9('~, COUNTY: Collier ~ LOCATION' Livingston Phase II 4586 Progress Avenue Naples, Florida 34104 BID OATE: June 5, 2002 ~ Ph°ne (941) 643-0266 Fax (941) 643-5821 ,20 I I 2,800.00 LF Grounding Electrode $3.85 $10,780.00 39 I 13 2.00 AS Electrical Power Sen4ce $435.70 $871.40 15 1111 70,133.00 LF Conductom(F&l)lnsula.#10 $0.25~ $17,533.25 15 1112 38,668.00 LF Conductors(F&l)lnsula.#8 $0.35 $13,533.80 15 1113 22,358.00 LF Conduclom(F&l)lnsula.#6 $0.40 $8,943.20 15 2 115 16,430.00 LF Conduit(F&IUG)Z'PVC $2.00 $32,880.00 15 2 237 1,778.00 LF Conduit (F&I UP) 4" RGS $13.05 $23,202.90 15 7 11 2.00 AS LoaclCenter(F&l)Seconda~jVoltage $7,186.00li $14,372.00 15 14 11 58.00 EA Pull Box, Roadside $157.00 $9,106.00 15 511 145 18.00 AS Light Pole Comp. (Sgl. Arm Shldr. Alum.) $2,251.00 $40,518.00 15511 124 66.00 EA Light Pole Comp. Decorative Single Arm $3;534.00JJ $233,244.00 15511 127 53.00 EA LicjhtPoleCornp. Decorative Double An'n $5,544.00~ · $293,832.00 .i Lighting Sub-Total $698,796,55 BID TOTAL $698,796.55 ~ NOTE5: t.) The above quoted prices are good for a period of 60 days. All work accordi~ to opplic~ble D.O.T. Specifications. 2.) THZ5 PRZCE ]:5 FOR DECORATZVE POLE5 FROM ARCHZTECTURAL AREA 3.) 16 WEEJ(5 ARE NEEDED FOR DELIVERY OF THESE POLE5 DOU& MCZNTY RE ~ = EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUEST FOR MEDIAN IMPROVEMENTS BY BETTER ROADS, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $83,294.75 ON AIRPORT-PULLING ROAD, PROJECT No. 60175 OBJECTIVE: To receive the Board of County Commissioners approval of the attached Budget Amendment Request for the median improvements on Airport-Pulling Road. CONSIDERATIONS: The roadway section of Airport-Pulling Road from Davis Boulevard to Golden Gate Parkway is experiencing safety and operational deficiencies. This project will apply modern access management guidelines to recapture roadway traffic capacity and enhance roadway safety through median improvements on Airport-Pulling Road consisting of the following: · Median closures at Domestic Avenue and Hibiscus Avenue · Restricted turns at Prospect Avenue, Westview Drive, Hazel Road, and Exchange Avenue · New traffic signal installation at Enterprise Avenue/Transfer Road (separate contract) Three proposals were received as follows: Better Roads~ Inc. Bonness, Inc. Florida State Underground $83,294.75 $89,520.67 $146,844.99 APAC-Florida, Inc. did not submit a proposal. Staff in-house cost estimate for this project was $135,630.61. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $83,294.75 are available in the Transportation Supported Gas Tax Fund but a budget amendment is required to transfer funds from the Advanced Right-of-Way fund (P/N 60171) to the Airport Road fund (P/N 60175). GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Mitigate previous growth impacts. RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Board of County Commissioners authorize the necessary budget amendment. Daniel G. Hall, PE, Engineer S tgtah'~" ~" Carngll: ~hasing/Department~_~.~/ '-/ ~~/~/ EdT'~/2/~~ ~.~Ortati°n Operati°ns Direct°r APPROVED BY: Date: No[than ~. Fed~r~, )~ICP, Transportation Services Administrator Attachment: No. 1 - ation Map N~. ~__~~ - No. 2- Budget Amendment Request .IUL 3 ~] 2002 Pg. (Ig HD) (IVOH Dlqrrlflc~-£HOcIHI~ ~u~s~ .~.. EXECUTIVE SUMMARy APPROVE AN AGREEMENT WITH WATERWAYS JOINT VENTURE, ET AL., TO PURCHASE PARCELS 190A, 190B, 190D, 790B, 790C, 790D, 790F, 890A AND 890C FOR FOUR-LANING IMPROVEMENTS TO IMMOKALEE ROAD. OBJECTIVE: To approve a proposed Purchase Agreement providing full compensation for Parcels 190A, 190B, 190D, 790B, 790C, 790D, 790F, 890A and 890C, sought to be acquired in condemnation proceedings styled Collier County v. Waterways Joint Venture, Case No. 02-2513- CA, and Collier County v. Naples Orangetree Ltd., Case No. 02-2543-CA. CONSIDERATIONS: In June, 2002, the County initiated two actions in Eminent Domain to acquire Parcels 190A, 190B, 190D, 790B, 790C, 790D, 790F, 890A and 890C for purposes of four laning Immokalee Road from Wilson Blvd. to 43rd Avenue. The parcels run along the entire frontage of the Waterways development and have been appraised by the County's appraiser at $108,150. Sixty percent of the appraised value comprises the cost of landscaping improvements impacted by the taking. A statutory pre-suit offer of full compensation was made by the County to the property owners in the amount of $128,400. Staff initiated discussions with the property owners to acquire the necessary parcels and to obtain consent from the property owners for the County's use of its lake system for purposes of stormwater discharge from Immokalee Road. The property owners have disputed staff's offer of full compensation as having taken into account the true impacts on the landscape berm by the proposed acquisition. The property owners maintain that the berm will need to be re-established in places as a result of the proposed construction and the difference in compensation between the parties is largely the result of fill and restoration costs. Staff has finally negotiated a purchase in lieu of condemnation with the property owners of these parcels, which provides for the payment of $172,000 as full compensation to the property owners for all property interests acquired, including landscape improvements, and all damages to the remaining property. In addition, and as part of this negotiated agreement, the property owners have provided the County with their written consent to the stormwater discharge as part of the County's environmental resource permitting. The Purchase Agreement also provides for the execution by the parties of a Drainage Maintenance Agreement which establishes certain rights and obligations regarding the use of these lakes by the County. And, finally, the agreement provides for the payment of a reasonable attorney's fee in the amount of $18,500, and the payment of expert costs of the landscape architect retained by the property owner. These costs are required to be paid by the condemning authority under §§73.091 and 73.092, Fla. Stat. The precise terms and conditions of this proposal are fully detailed in the attached Purchase Agreement, a copy of the proposed purchase agreement is attached hereto. AG~.NJ~A No._Lc4 JUL 3 0 2002 Staff has reviewed the terms and conditions of this proposed agreement and believes them to be reasonable and in the best interest of the County. Consequently, staff is recommending that the Board approve the proposed Purchase Agreement and authorize it execution. FISCAL IMPACT: The estimated costs of this purchase, including the attorney's fees, expert costs, recording fees, title policy premium, and miscellaneous closing costs is $200,000. Costs will be paid from Fund 331.. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: As part of the County's Capital Improvement element, the Immokalee Road expansion project is an integral part of Collier County's Growth Management Plan. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: 1.Approve the proposed Purchase Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and authorize the Chairman to sign the Agreement; and 2.Authorize a budget amendment, if necessary; and 3. Direct Staff to take such action as is necessary to carry out the terms of the Purchase Agreement, including requesting that Finance expedite issuance of the County Warrant in order to facilitate closing on the date proVided for in the Purchase Agreement. SUBMITTED B Y:~.d---r--.-x-'~ Ellen T. Chadwell Assistad~t Count.y/~ttorney REVIEWED BY,~-h~rp~~oject Manager Date: '7 [~/* 2' TE&CM Department APPROVED BY: ,_,~_. ~ / .,./.......---m D ate.'~o'r--'~' ,~/~'/~,::~ Gregg Strakaluse, P.'~., Director TE & CM Department APPROVED BY: Date: Norman Feder, A~dministrator Trans,.~ortation Division APPROVED By:~''~z~7'~ ~~_~ Date: ?--~'7'~ '2-_ David C. Weigel - ~ ' " County Attorney 3UI_ 3 0 20,02 2 PURCHASE AGR_EEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between WATERWAYS JOINT VENTURE, a Florida General Partnership, WATERWAYS JOINT VENTURE I~I, a Florida General Partnership, and WATERWAYS OF NAPLES HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION, INC., (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Seller"), and COLLIER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, (hereina.~er referred to as "Purchaser"). WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Seller is the owner of those certain parcels of real property (hereinafter referred to as "Property"), located in Collier County, State of Florida, and being more particularly described in Exhibit "A", anached hereto and made a part hereof by reference; and W-H~REAS, Purchaser has exercised its power of eminent domain in order to acquire certain property, for the construction of improvements to Immokalee Road and has initiated condemnation proceedings for that purpose; and WHEREAS, Purchaser is desirous of purchasing perpetual non-exclusive drainage easements in Parcels 890A and 890C, to which Seller is agreeable; and WHEREAS, Purchaser is desirous of purchasing a fee simple interest in Parcels 190A, 190B and 190D, to which Seller is agreeable; and WHEREAS. Purchaser requires temporary construction easements as identified by Parcels 790B, 790C, 790D and 790F, for purposes of constructing the proposed roadway improvements and to re-construct an existing access connection, to which the Seller is agreeable; and '~VHEREAS, Purchaser desires to acquire all such propert?~ interests as described in Exhibit "A," for purposes of four-laning Immokalee Road, subject to the conditions and terms hereinafter set forth, to which Seller is agreeable. NOW, THEREFORE, and in and for the mutual covenants and respective undertakings of the parties hereinafter set forth, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, it is agreed as follows: 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by the parties as part of this Agreement. 2. In consideration of the sum of $172,000.00 and upon the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, Seller shall grant and convey to Purchaser all of the Property more particularly described in Exhibit "A" and commonly referred to by the parties as Parcels 190A, 890A, 190B, 790B, 890C, 790C, 190D, 790D and 790F, together with all rights, privileges, tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances in any way related to, pertaining to or accruing to the benefit of the Property. 3. The Seller accepts the payment of $172,000.00 as full compensation for the Property interests taken and for any damages resulting to the remainder, if less than the entire property was taken and for all other damages in connection with said Property. The Purchaser agrees to pax, an attorney's fee in the amount of $18,500.00, which fee is based on the statutory benefits obtained by the Seller's attorney on behalf of the Seller. In addition, Purchaser agrees to pay a reasonable and necessary expert fee for Seller's landscape architect, Christian Andreas. The terms reasonable and necessary shall have the meaning applied in Chapter 73, Florida Statutes, and the decisional law interpreting said statutes. 4. The Closing (THE "CLOSING DATE", "DATE OF CLOSING", OR "CLOSING") of the transaction shall be held on August 2, 2002, unless extended by mutual written agreement of the parties hereto. The Closing shall be held at the Collier County Attome ~'s Office, Administration Building, 3301 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, Florida. The Yffr~ieg a~ee mat ' M a ,on. parties in connection with the Closing shall be set forth below. JUL 3 0 2002 5. Waterways Joint Venture (WYV) and the Waterways of Naples Homeowner's Association, Inc. (HOA) Shall convey a marketable title free of any liens, encumbrances, exceptions, or qualifications as to Parcels 190A, 190B and 190D. Marketable title shall be determined according to applicable title standards adopted by the Florida Bar and in accordance with law. At or before the Closing, the WJV and HOA shall cause to be delivered to the Purchaser the items specified herein and the following documents and insmaments duly executed and acknowledged, in recordable form: A. Warranty Deed in favor of Purchaser conveying fee simple title to Parcels 190A, 190B and 190D, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances other than: (1)The lien for current taxes and assessments. (2) Such other easements, restrictions or conditions of record. (3) OGM rights reserved by virtue of instrument recorded at Deed Book 30, Page 86. B. Warranty Deed from Naples Orangetree Ltd. in favor of Waterways Joint Venture, conveying fee simple tire to Parcels 190B, 790B and 790D. C. A "Gap," Tax Proration, Owner's and Non-Foreign Affidavit," as required by Section 1445 of the Internal Revenue Code and as required by the title insurance underwriter in order to insure the "gap" and issue the policy contemplated by the title insurance commitment. D. A W-9 Form, "Request for Taxpayer Identification and Certification" as required by the Internal Revenue Service. E. Such evidence of authority and capacity to Seller and its representatives to execute and deliver this Agreement and such other documents as may be required to consummate the transaction contemplated hereunder as Purchaser's counsel and/or the to Title Company may reasonably determine. (Partnership Affidavit) 6. WJV and Waterway Joint Venture ~ (WYV3) shall each grant a non-exclusive drainage easement (identified as Parcels 890A and 890C, respectively) in favor of the Purchaser in a form acceptable to the Purchaser. 7. Seller will grant temporary construction easements (identified as Parcels 790B, 790C, 790D and 790F) in favor of Purchaser with a duration period of three years from the commencement of the construction of the Immokalee Road (Phase I) project. These easements will be in a form acceptable by the Purchaser. 8. At the Closing, the Purchaser shall cause to be delivered to the Seller, or its designee, a negotiable instrument (County Warrant) in an amount to include the agreed-upon compensation ($172,000.00), attorney's fee ($18,500.00), and the expert fee, but only to the extent that the expert fee is not disputed by the Purchaser. No funds shall be disbursed to Seller umil the Title Company verifies that the state of the title to the Property has not changed adversely since the date of the last endorsement to the commimaent, and the Title Company is irrevocably committed to issue the Owner's title policy to Purchaser in accordance with the commitment mediately after the recording of the deed. Funds payable to the Seller representing the cash payment due at Closing shall be subject to adjustment for prorations as thereinafter set forth. 9. At closing, the Seller shall provide a properly executed Drainage Maintenance Agreement in a form acceptable to County. 10. Seller, at its sole cost and expense, shall pay the cost of recording any instrument necessary to clear Seller's title to the Property. The cost of a title policy and title commitment shall also be paid bv Purchaser. Purchaser shall pay for the cost of record ~ ti~c -6'--- ,ail and Easements. Real Property taxes shall be prorated through the date of 21o~ JUL 3 0 2002 2 current year's tax and paid by Seller. If Closing occurs at a date which the current year's millage is not fixed, taxes will be prorated based upon such prior year's millage. 11. Upon execution of this Agreement by Seller, the Purchaser shall provide a copy of its title commitment and Schedule B requirements. Seller shall have five (5) days within which to notify. Purchaser in writing of any objection to such requirements. In the absence of any objection, Purchaser shall expect Seller to meet said requirements, unless specifically excepted herein. If Seller objects as provided herein, Purchaser may deliver to the Seller written notice of its intention to waive the applicable contingencies or to terminate this Agreement. In the event Seller fails to object and/or falls to meet the Schedule B requirements, such failure shall constitute a failure to deliver clear and marketable title and a breach of this Agreement. 12. If Seller shall have failed to perform any of the covenants and/or agreements contained herein which are to be performed by Seller, Purchaser may, at its option, (a) extend this Agreement for an additional thirty (30) days by giving written notice of such extension to Seller, or (b) terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to Seller. Purchaser shall have the fight to seek and enforce all rights and remedies available at law or in equity to a contract vendee, including the right to seek specific performance of this Agreement. In the event Purchaser agrees to extend the closing date an additional thirty (30) days, due to Seller's inability to perform the covenants and/or agreements contained in this Agreement, the parties agree that Purchaser shall not be subject to any increase in compensation. 13. Seller and Purchaser represent and warrant the following: A. Seller and Purchaser have full right and authority to enter into and to execute this Agreement and to undertake all actions and to perform all tasks required of each hereunder. Seller is not presently the subject ora pending, threatened or contemplated bankruptcy proceeding. B. Seller has full right, power, and authority to own and operate the Property, and to execute, deliver, and perform its obligations under this Agreement and the instruments' executed in connection herewith, and to consummate the transaction contemplated hereby. All necessary authorizations and approvals have been obtained authorizing Seller and Purchaser to execute and consummate the transaction contemplated hereby. At Closing, certified copies of such approvals shall be delivered to Purchaser and/or Seller, if necessary. C. The warranties set forth in this paragraph shall be lrue on the date of this Agreement and as of the date of Closing. Purchaser's acceptance of a deed to the said Property shall not be deemed to be full performance and discharge of every agreement and obligation on the part of the Seller to be performed pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. D. Seller represents that it has no actual knowledge of any actions, suits, claims, proceedings, litigation or investigations pending or threatened against Seller, at law, equity or in arbitration before or by any federal, slam, municipal or other governmental instrumentality that relate to this agreement or any other property that could, if continued, adversely affect Seller's ability to sell the Property to Purchaser according to the terms of this Agreement, with the exception of the condemnation actions currently pending against the Property in the Circuit Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit. E. No party or person other than Purchaser has any right or option to acquire the Property or any portion thereof. F. Until the date fixed for Closing, so long as this Agreement remains in force and effect, Seller shall not encumber or convey any portion of the Property or any rights therein, nor enter into any agreements granting any person or entity, any rights with respect to the Property or any part thereof, without fu~t obtaining the written consent of Purchaser to such conveyance, encumbrance, or agreement which consent may be withheld by Purchaser for any reason whatsoever. o. s ,,e ows waste, if any, is discharged into a public sanitary sewer syste~ JUL 3 0 2002 3 Pcj. ,~ they have no actual knowledge that any pollutants are or have been discharged from the Property, directly or indirectly into any body of water. Seller represents that during the Seller's ownership of the property it has not been used for the production, handling, storage, transportation, manufacture or disposal of hazardous or toxic substances or wastes, as such terms are der-reed in applicable laws and regulations, or any other activity, that would have toxic results, and that no such hazardous or toxic substances are currently used in connection with the operation of the Property, and there is no proceeding or inquiry by any authority with respect thereto. Seller represents that the), have no actual 'knowledge that there is ground water contamination on the Property or potential of ground water contamination from neighboring properties. Seller has no actual knowledge that storage tanks for gasoline or any other substances were installed on the Property at any time during Seller's ownership thereof. Seller represents none of the Property has been used as a sanitary landfill during the Seller's ownership thereof. Seller has no actual knowledge or has otherwise received notice of (1) any spill on the Property, (2) any existing or threatened environmental lien against the Property or (3) any lawsuit, proceeding or investigation regarding the generation, storage, treatment, spill or transfer of hazardous substances on the Property. This provision shall survive closing for one year and is not deemed satisfied by conveyance of title. H. Seller has no actual knowledge that the Property and Seller's operations concerning the Property are in violation of any applicable Federal, State or local statute, law or regulation, or of any notice from any governmental body has been served upon Seller claiming any violation of any law, ordinance, code or regulation or requiring or calling attention to the need for any work, repairs, construction, alterations or installation on or in connection with the Property, in order to comply with any laws, ordinances, codes or regulation with which Seller has not complied. I. There are no unrecorded restrictions, easements or rights of wa), (other than existing zoning regulations) that restrict or affect the use of the Property, and there are no maintenance, construction, advertising, management, leasing, emplo)znent, service or other contracts affecting the Property. J. Seller has no knowledge that there are any suits, actions or arbitration, bond issuances or proposals therefore, proposals for public improvement assessments, pay-back agreements, paving agreements, road expansion or improvement agreements, utility moratoriums, use moratoriums, improvement moratoriums, administrative or other proceedings or governmental investigations or requirements, formal or informal, existing or pending or threatened which affects the Property or xvhich adversely affects Seller's ability to perform hereunder, with the exception of two condenmation actions regarding the subject property currently pending in circuit court in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit; nor is there any other charge or expense upon or related to the Propert3' which has not been disclosed to Purchaser in writing prior to the effective date of this Agreement. K. Seller acknowledges and agrees that Purchaser is entering into this Agreement based upon Seller's representations stated above and on the understanding that Seller will not cause the zoning or physical condition of the Property to change from its existing state on the effective date of this Agreement up to and including the Date of Closing. Therefore, Seller agrees not to enter into any contracts or agreements pertaining to or affecting the Property and not to do any act or omit to perform an), act which would change the zoning or physical condition of the Property or the governmental ordinances or laws governing same. Seller also agrees to notifs' Purchaser promptly of any change in the facts contained in the foregoing representations and of any notice or proposed change in the zoning, or any other action or notice, that may be proposed or promulgated by any third parties or any governmental authorities having jurisdiction of the development of the propertT which may restrict or change any other condition of the Property. 14. This Agreement ma)' be executed in any manner of counterparts which together shall constitute the agreement of the parties. 15. This Agreement and the terms and provisions hereof shall be effe tivoli, of the date _ JUL 3 0 2002 4 Pg. this Agreement is executed by both parties and shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, personal representatives, successors, successor trustee, and assignees whenever the context so requires or admits. 16. Any amendment to this Agreement shall not bind any of the parties hereof unless such amendment is in writing and executed and dated by Purchaser and Seller. Any amendment to this Agreement shall be binding upon Purchaser and Seller as soon as it has been executed by both parties. 17. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless it is in writing signed by the party against whom it is asserted, and any waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be applicable only to the specific instance to which it is related and shall not be deemed to be a continuing or future waiver as to such provision or a waiver as to any other provision. 18. If any date specified in this Agreement falls on a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, then the date to which such reference is made shall be extended to the next succeeding business day. The term "day" as used herein refers to a calendar day, not business day. 19. Seller is aware of and understands that the "offer" to purchase represented by this Agreement is subject to acceptance and approval by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida. 20. If the Seller holds the Property in the form of a partnership, limited parmerskip, corporation, trust or any form of representative capacit3' whatsoever for others, Seller shall make a written public disclosure, according to Chapter 286, Florida Statutes, under oath, of the name and address of ever3' person having a beneficial interest in the Property before Property held in such capacity is conveyed to Collier Count3'. (If the corporation is registered with the Federal Securities Exchange Commission or registered pursuant to Chapter 517, Florida Statutes, whose stock is for sale to the general public, it is hereby exempt from the provisions of Chapter 286, Florida Statutes.) 21. This Agreement is governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida. 22. This Agreement and the exhibits attached hereto contain the entire agreement bet~'een the parties, and no promise, representation, warranty or covenant not included in this Agreement or an3' such referenced agreements has been or is being relied upon by either part3'. No modification or amendment of this Agreement shall be of any force or effect unless made in ~viting and executed and dated by both Purchaser and Seller. Time is of the essence of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto set forth their hands/seals. Dated Project/Acquisition Approved by BCC: Resolution 02-125 dated February 26, 2002. AS TO PURCHASER: DATED: ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: , Deputy Clerk JAMES N. COLETTA, Chairman AS TO SELLER: DATED: WATERWAYS JOINT VENTURE, III, a Florida general partnership BY: WATERWAYS DEVELOPMENT, INC., a General Partner By: Witness: RICHARD DAVENPORT, its President Print Name: Wimess: Print Name: STATE OF COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this __ day of , 2002, by RICHARD DAVENPORT, President of Waterways Development, Inc., a General Partner of WATERWAYS JOINT VENTURE, III, a Florida general partnership, who is personally known to me or who produced as identification. (affix notarial seal) (Signature of Notary Public) (Print Name of NoraD' Public) DATE: WATERWAYS JOINT VENq-LJRE, a Florida general partnership BY: WATERWAYS OF NAPLES, LTD., a Florida limited partnership, a Partner BY: WATERWAYS DEVELOPMENT, INC., its General Partner By: Wimess: RICHARD DAVENPORT, its Presidem Print Name: Witness: Print Name: JUL 3 0 2002 pg. ,~ STATE OF COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2002, by RICHARD DAVENPORT, President of Waterways Development, Inc., General Partner of Waterways of Naples, Ltd., a Florida Limited Parmership and authorized General Partner of Waterways Joint Venture, a Florida general partnership, who is personally known to me or who produced as identification. (affix aomr/al seal) (Signature of Notary Public) (Print Name of Notary Public) DATED: WATERWAYS OF NAPLES HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION, INC., a Florida non-profit corporation BY: Witness: RICHARD DAVENPORT, President Print Name: Witness: Print Name: STATE OF COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument ~vas acknowledged before me this __ day of 2002, by RICHARD DAVENPORT, as President of WATERWAYS OF NAPLES HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION, INC., a Florida non-profit corporation, who is personally 'known to me or who produced as identification. (affix notarial seal) (Signature of Notary Public) (Print Name of Notary Public) Commission No. Commission expires: Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: AG E~I~ID~ ITE .,,I~l~ Ellen T. Chadwell NO. Assistant Count), Attorney JUL 3 0 2002 ? pg. q PiO.B. _ SBg'55'(~8"E N  ~ 0.02' NOT TO SCALE A portion"of Tract "C", Waterwoys of Naples, Unlt Two, occordlng to the plat thereof as recorded In Plot , Book 29, Pages 71 through 74 of the Public Records < of Collier County, Florida, belng more particularly !o~ described as follows: L~ o: Beginning at the Northwesterly Comer of sold Tract ,~: n; "C"; thence South 89'53'08" East, along the Northerly 0 Boundary of said Tract "C", for a distance of 9.02 ----'~,~ feet; thence South 03'35'47" for West, O distance of -- 1,49.3.87 feet to the beginning of o tangential circular curve, concave Easterly; thence run Southerly, along the arc of said curve to the left, having o radius of 12,214.67 feet, through o central angle of 01'33'08", i subtended by o chord of 330.89 feet at o bearing of South 02'~g'13" West, for an arc length of 330.90 -'--; R=12,21~.§7 feet to o point on the Southerly Boundary of sold  L=530.90 Tract "C", and the Northerly Right of Way Line of , f Tan=165.47 State Road 848 (0il Well Road), and on a circular '"1 6=1'33'08" curve, concave Northeasterly, whose radius point bears North 31'01'50' East, o distance of 25.00 feet _;! therefrom; thence run Northwesterly, along the a~c of said curve to the right, and along the Southerly Border of said Tract "C", having o radius of 25.00  R=25.00 feet, through o central angle of 62'33'57", subtended L=27.50 by a chord of 25.96 feet at o bearing of North Tan==15. l'9 27'41'12" West, for an arc length of 27.30 feet to the /" /~-62'33'57" end of said curve; thence North 03'35'47" East, along OiL WELL ROAD the Westerly Boundary of said Tract 'C', for o --- -- ~ 848 distance of 1,801.99 feet, to the POINT OF BEGINNING; '~ ........ ~- Containing 0.586 acres, more or less. 1. This Is not o survey. D~[V~ J. HYATr-/P.,~M.~LIIfOR THE FIRM) FLA. uc. NO. ~a34 -2. -Basle ef bearing is plot. NOT VAUD WITHOUT THE. SIGNATURE AND THE ORIGINAL RAISED SE:AL OF A FLORIDA 3. Subject to easements, reservotlons and UCE~SED SURVC'YOR AND MAPPER restrictions of record. SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION 4. All dimensions are plat, unless otherwise ~l,I~ll~ WILKISON noted. ~ ASSOC IATIE S ~ ~ I:NC. ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS .AND PLANNERS 3506 EXCHANGE AVE. NAPLES, FLA. 34104 (941) 643--2404 FAX NO. (941) 643-5173 FLORIDA BUSINESS LICENSE NO. LBS770 .. J SCALE I SEC/SUB I W.O. NO. DRA~I BY I FILE NAME R-50. O0 L-30.4-8 Tan=dS.73 ~==34."55'25' 0 N ,v, I.(J~ WATERWAYE OF NAPLES 01 UNIT FOUR '~' P.B. 31, PG. 39-42 /// // TM .__ L,=~7.60 P.O.B. I 0 50 100 150 Description: I A portion of Tract'l'A", Waterways of Naples, Unit Four, according to the plat thereof os recorded In Plot Book 31, Pages 39 through 42, Collier County, Florida, being more particularly described as follows: ~ Beginning at the Southwesterly Corner of said Tract "A"; thence North 01'18'28" East, along the Westerly Boundary of said TraCt "A", for a dis[once of 2.32.01 feet, to the Northwesterly Corner of said Tract "A", and to a point on a circular curve, concave Easterly, whose radius point bears South 88'41'03" East, o distance of 50.00 feet therefrom; thence run Southerly, along the arc of said curve to the left, having radius of ,50.00 feet, through a central angle of 54'55'2§", subtended by a chord of..'. 30.01 feet at o bearing of South 16'08'48" East, for an arc length of 30.48 feet to the end of said curve; thence South 01'18'26" West, for a distance of 87..38 feet; thence South 88'41'.34' East, for o distance of 12.00 feet; thence South 01'18"28" West, for o distance of 75.27 feet to o point on a clrculor curve, concave Southeasterly, whose radius point bears South 5~-'08'36" East, a distance of 50.00. feet therefrom; thence, run Southwesterly, along the arc of sold curve to the left, having a radius of 50.00 feet, through a central angle of 54'32'58", subtended by a chord of 45.83 feet at a bearing of South 28'34'55" West, for an arc length of 47.60 feet, to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Contalnlng 0.062 acres, more or less. Notes:'- DAVID NOT V~D ~OUT ~E ~A~RE 1. ~ls Is not a au~ey, ~E ~IGIN~ RAISED S~L OF A ~ORIDA 2. Basis of bearing is plat, Uc~s~ SUR~OE AND MAPP~ 3. SubJec[ to easements, reservations and SKETCH AND DESCRIP~ON restrictions of record. 4. All dimensions are plat unless othe~'ise noted. ~SSOCIATES .- ~ ~ IN'C. ~ ENGINES, SUE~ORS ~D P~NERS (35~8 ~C~GE A~. ~, ~ 3~104 941) 643-2404 F~ NO. (941) 643-5173 - LBS~O W.O, NO. I R~ NAME DRA~ BY i I~ 2 ......" ! IAS.NO~DFA~RWA~ 0014.1 / EAW I O0--01a-OOO.DWO L 47.60 I P.B. ,31, PG..39-42 N 2E~'s LANDSCAPE ~UFFER EMENT z POINT OF BEGINNING: . J LN '53'o 'w I 9.o2" DAVID J. HYatT, ~.$~l~. (FOR THE: FIRM) FL~ UC. Nd. NOT VAUD ~T ~E SiGNA~RE AND ~E ORI~NAL RAIS~ SE~ ~ A ~IDA ECENS~ SUR~ ~D M~P~ SKETCH AND DESCRIP~ON ENGINEERS. SU~ORS AND P~NERS 3506 ~C~GE A~ ~P~ ~ 3~04 (941) 643-2~ F~ NO. (a~l') 643-5,73 ~O~DA BUSINGS MC~SE NO. M I,S NO~B WA~RW 0014.1 EAW l O0-018-O00.DWG No I DA~ SH~T FB PG CHEWED BY, DWG. NO. JUL 30 2002 J 10/01 , 1 OF 2 DJH ~ IR-L-fOOD-1 Description: A portion of Tract "C", Waterways of Naples, Unit Three, according to the plot thereof os recorded in Plat Book 31, Pngss 35 through 38 , Collier County, Florida, being more particularly described os follows: Beginning at ihs Southwesterly Corner of said Tract "C"; thence North 05'35'47" East, along the Westerly Boundary Line of said Tract "C", for o distance of 630.67 feet to the beginning of o tangential circular curve, concave Southeasterly; thence run Northeasterly, along the arc of said curve to the right, having e radius of 50.00 feet, through o central angle of 54'32°58'0 subtended by a chord of 45.83 feet at a bearing of North 30'52'16" East, for an arc length of 47.60 feet' to the end of said curve; thence South 0.3'55'47" West, for o dlstonce of 215.87. feet; thence North B6'24'13" West, for a distance of 3.00 feet; thence South 03'35'47" West, for a distance of 200.00 feet; thence North 86'24'13" West, 'for o distance of 9.00 feet; thence South 03'55'47' West, for o dis[once of 254.98 feet; thence North 89'53'08" West, along the Southerly Boundary of eol~l Tract "C", for o distance of 9.02 feet, to the-POINT OF .BEGINNING; ContoInlng 0.234 acres0 more or Ieee. Notes: 1. Thls Is not a survey. 2. Basis of bearing is plat. 3. Subject to easements, reservations and restrictions of record. 4. Not valid without Sheet 1 of 2 depicting Sketch of Description and bearing the original signature and embossed seal of a Florida registered Surve.vor and Mapper. 5. All dimensions are plat unless otherwise noted. SKETCH AND DESCEIPTION iWILKISON T£S N(::;o ~ ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS AND PLANNERS 350.$ EXCHANI~E AVE. NAPLES, FLA. 34104 94.1) 643-2404 FAX NO. (S~1) 643-5173 FLORIDA BUSINESS MCENSE NO. LB5770 . SCALE SEC/SUB t W.O. NO. t DRAWN BY FI1F NAME i, .x....! JUL 3 0 ' 0/01 2 2 ' Dull UNE TABLE UNE LENGTH BEARING LI 87.38 ~;0118'26"W L2 10.00 .S88'4! '34'E L3 75.77 NOl'IB'26'E , CURVE TABLE CURVE RADIUS DELTA ARC LENGTH CHORD BEARING CHORD c~ 5o.oo I ~'55'~s" 3o.4s ~lS'OS'~"l~ I 3o,m C2 50.00 I 15'4507' 14..63 N4-1'5g33'w [ 14.58 DAVID ~ ~l~A'l'1'~,~.$:bl. (FOE THE FIRM) FLA. MC. NO. ~4 - NOT V~D ~OUT ~E ~I~N~ RAIS~ SEAL OF A ~ORIDA UC~S~ ~R~YOR ~D SKETCH AND DESCEIP~ON ~~ WILKISON ~ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, SUR~ORS ' (94~) e~-2~o$ F~ NO. (~) 65~-5~7~ A~E~~ I I ~AS NO~D~A~RWAY 0014.1 EAW O0-018-O00'DW' JUL 30 2~2 t ~ ~1~ / ~o/o~ /1OF2 DOH IR-L-79OB-1~ Temporary Driveway Restoration Easement Description: A portion of Tract "A", Waterways of Naples, Unit Four, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Pict Book 31, Pages 59 through 42, Coliier County, Floridc, being more particularly described as follows: Commence at the Northwesterly Corner of sold Tract A, said point being the beginning of o curve, concave Easterly, having a radius of 50.00 feet and a central. angle of 34'55'26"; thence run Southerly, along the arc of said curve to the left, having o radius of 50.00 feet, through a control angle of 34'55'26", subtended by a chord of 30.01 feet at o bearing of South 16'08'46" East, for on arc length of 30.48 feet, to' the POINT OF BEGINNING of the herein described parcel and the end of said curve; thence South 01'16'26" West, for a distance of 87.38 feet; thence South 68'41'3¢" East, for a distance of 10.00 feet; thence North 01'18'26" East, for o distance of 76.77 feet to a point on a circ.u, lor curve, concave Northeasterly, whose radius point bears North 39'37'24" East, c distance of 50.00 feet therefrom; thence run Northwesterly, along the arc of sold curve to the right, having o radius of 50.00 feet, through o central angle of 16'46'07", subtended by a chord of 1~.5B feet at o bearing of North 41'59'33" West, for on arc length of 14.63 feet, to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Containing .0.018 acres, more or less. Notes: 1. This Is not a survey. 2. Basis of bearing is plat. 3. Subject to eas&ments, reservations and restrictions of record. 4. Not valid without Sheet 1 of 2 depicting Sketch of Description and bearing the original signature and embossed seal of a Florida registered Surveyor and Mapper. 5. All dimensions are pict unJess otherwise noted. SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION .l~l~ WILKISON &c ~ASSOCIATES I I ~NC. I ENGINFFRS, SURV~ORS ~D P~NERS 3506 EXCHANGE AVl. NAPLES, Fb~ 34104. (94.1) 843-2404. FAX NO. (94.1) 643-5175 FLORIDA BUSINESS LICENSE qO. I_B5770 I ! t i JUL 30 2002 [10/01 /2 OF 2 DJH IR-L-79OB .00' o ~ r~' ~C~L -/90C o ~ TRACT "B" WATERWAYS OF NAPLES UNiT 7 Temporary Driveway Restoration Easement Description: The Westerly 11.00 feet, of the NortheHy 637.39 ~j ~~ feet of Tract "B". Waterways of Naples, Unlt 7, as Recorded in Plat Book 36, Pages 72, through Page 77, of the Public Records of Collier N~O~DVU~N~.~I~E ~TC, NATHi~EEANF1RI~) County, Florida. Containing O.161 acres, more or R D less. THE ORIGINAL RAISED SEAL OF A FLORIDA lICENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER SKETCH AND DESCRIP.TION 'l~ WILKISON &: '~l~I~ ASSOCIATES I I INC, I ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS AND PLANNERS ;3506 EXCHANDE AVE. NAPLES, FLA. ,34-104 (94.1) 643-2404 FAX NO. (941) 64'3-5173 FLORIDA BUSINESS LJCENSE NO. I. B5770 ' '10/01 1 OF 1' ' DJH IR-L-790C ,/.~ 0 50 100 150 UNF' TABLE UNE LENGTH BEARINO L1 75.27 N01'18'28'[ L2 10.00 S88'41 '34"E L3 89.75 $01"18'26'w CURVE TABLE CURVE: I RADIUS DELTA IARC LENGTHICHORD BEAR. lNG CHORD C1 50.00 t54'32'51~' 4,7.60 I N28'34'55. E I 45.83 C2 15000 I ~3~7'01'1 ~.~5 I SS2;Z4'54W I 1~.4.2 FLA. UC. NO. NOT VAUD 1MTHOUT THE SIGNA'I'LIRE AND THE ORI(31NAL RAISED SEAL OF A FLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR 'AND MAPPER SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION '~, ~ ~1~ WI.LKISON '~'~I~I~A S S O C I AT E S ~ ,I~ . ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS AND PLANNERS 350.6 ~CI-~AI~GE A~V~... N,*,o~ ~ 34104- 94.1) 643-2404. FAX NO. (94-1') 643-517,:3 Temporary Driveway Restoration Easement Description: A portion of Tract "A",' Waterways of Naples, Unit Four, according to the plat thereof os recorded in Plat Book 7, Pages `59 through 42 , Collier County, Florida, being more particularly described as follows: Commence at the Southwesterly Corner of said Tract "A", sold point being the beginning of a curve, concave Southeasterly, having o radius of 50.00 feet and a central angle of 54'.52'58"; thence run Northeasterly, along the arc of said curve to the right, having a radius of 50:00 feet, through o central angle of 54'.52'58", subtended by o chord of 45.8.5 feet at o bearing of North 28'54'55" East, for an arc length of 47,60 feet, to the ~OINT OF BEGINNING of the herein described parcel and the end of said curve; thence ~lorth 01'18'26" East, for a distance of 75,27 feet; thence South 88'41'34" East, for o distance of 10.00 feet; thence South 01'1B'2..6" West, for o distance of 69.75 feet to a point on o circular curve, concave Southeasterly, whose radius polnt bears. South 21'01'36" East, o distance of 50.00 feet therefrom; thence run Southwesterly, along the arc of sold curve to the left, having o radius of 50.00 feet, through o central angle of 13'07'01", subtended by a chord of 11.42 feet at o bearing of South 62'24'54" West, for on arc iength of 11.45 feet, to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Containing 0.017 acres, more or less. Notes: 1. This is not a survey. 2. Basis of bearing is plot. 5. Subject to easements, reservations and restrictions of record. 4. Not valid without Sheet 1 of 2 depicting Sketch of Description and bearing the original signature and embossed seal of a Rorida registered Surveyor ond Mapper. 5. All dimensions are plot unless otherwise noted. SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION '~,,~,,~, WILKISON & '~lml~ AS SOC lATE S ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS AND PLANNERS · 350S EXCHANaE AVF_ NAPLES, FL~ 3410~ (941) 643-240~, FAX NO. (94.1) 64.3-5173 , ~ FLORIDA BUSINESS UCENSE NO, LB5770 AGENDA ITEM ~ SCALE nL~ ,,,o. I oo,,..,I ,-^w i oo-o ,,-oo,:,.owo pg._ t~ k,.. - I'~f~'~/~l R-50.O0 L=1%4.5 S88'¢1'34"1 PARCEL 790F I X._NSS'41'34'W m q ~ 0 50 ~00 . ~50 ~ N88'21'20"E ~ ~ x10.00' ~POINT OF BEGINNING: ~20' LANDSCAPE BUFFER i / EASEMENT t POINT OF COMMENCEMENT: NOT V~D ~T ~E SI~A~R~ ~D ~ ~I~N~ RAISED S~ OF U~NS~ SUR~ AND M~PER SKETCH AND DESCRIP~ON ~~ WILKISON ~SSOClATES ENGINEERS, SU~ORS AND P~NERS (9~1) 643-2~4 F~ NO, (941) 6~3-5t73 FLORIDA BUSIN~ UC~SE NO. ~5770 No.([~[~fi ~HIB' lAS NOrD ~5 0014.1 EAW /0D.018-000. DWG Temporary Driveway Restoration Easement Description: A portion of Tract "C", Waterways of Naples, Unit Th~-ee, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Bo'ok 31, Pages .35 through 3B of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, being more particularly described as fallows: Commence at the Sobtheastedy Corner of said Tract "C"; thence North 01~18'26'' East, along the Westerly Boundary of said Tract "C", for a distance of 255.59 feet; thence South 8B'21'20" East, for a distance of 18.00 feet, to the POINT OF BEGINNING of the herein described parcel; thence North 01~18'26" East, for a distance of 199.94 feet; thence South 88'41'34" East, for a distance of 3.00 feet; thence North 01'1B'26" East, for a distance of 215.87 feet to a point on a circular curve, concave Southeasterly, whose radius point bears South 34'08'36" East, o distance of 50.00 feet therefrom; thence run Northeasterly, along the arc of said curve to the right, having a radius of 50.00 feet, through a central angle of 13'~7'01", subtended by a chord of 11.42 feet at a bearing of North 62°24'54" East, for on arc length of 11.45 feet to the end of said curve; thence South 01~18'28'' West, for a distance of 221.39 feet; thence North 88'41'34" West, for a distance of 3.00 feet; thence South 01'18'26" West, for o distance of 200.00 feet; thence North 8B'21'20" West, for a distance of 10.00 feet, to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Containing 0.096 acres, more or less. Notes: 1. This is not a survey. 2. Basis of bearing ~s plat. 3. Subject to easements, reservations and restrictions of record. 4. All dimensions are plat unless otherwise noted. SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION Wl LKISON & TES N¢o~ ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS AND PLANNERS 3506 EXCHANGE AVE. NAPLES, FLA. 34104 (941) 643--2404 FAX NO. (941) 6a~3-5173 ~o~D^ .us~NEss UCENSE NO. LB~770 jUL -2 02 , / //~/~ 10/01 2 OF2 DJH I IR-L-790F-2 Pg. ~ N N POt~'r OF W CORNER OF .~ACT 0 25 50 75 SCALE: 1"=5~ A portion of Tract "C" of Waterwa~ of Naples Unit Two aa recorded In Plat ~ Book 29 at Pages 71 through 74 of ~ the Public Records of Collier County, 0 Florida being more pa~Icularly ~ described as follows:  Commencing at th~ northwesterly · J J orner of said Tract 'C ~n Sout~°st 0 J J 01~8 26 West along th~ ~esterly ~ ~ ~.~o'._ boundary of sold Tract C also being ~ ~ j ~ ~ ~ the easterly right of way line of ~ ~ gZ~' Immokolee Road for a distance of /I ~J S ~'41'34' E 1169.~6 ?et; thence run South ~ J ]~ 88'~1 34 East for a distance of 10.00 ' . ~J ~GINNIN~ J, feet to the Point of Beginning. thence ~ m~ I ~ J~ conbnu, South 88'41 34' East for t zJ ~_ ~ JO West for a distance of 50 O0 feet; , ,~-~ . , . j nence ~o~n ~M'~I 5~ West for a ,~ ~, N S[~l:~ W dlst.nce of 92.00 feet; ~ence ~n J~J ~ No~h 01 18 2B East for o distance of ]~ ~1 50.00 feet to the Point of Be innin, ~ g g. ~ ~&l Containing 0.106 acres more or Ieee ~, [ I pt~ne coordlnotes, Florida Eoat ~./ J~Z¢'-.-, :' .,. Itl ~ 3. Subject to e~sements, ~ uc. ~ .;,. '..:. ~ ~ reae~tlon, end re.trlctlon, of ~Of V~D ' ' -- ~E ORIGINAL RAIS~,SE~ O~ A ~ORID~ I I 't record. UCENS~ 4. All dimensions ore plat SKETCH AND DESCRIP~ON un~es= oth,rwi, noted. ~I~ WILKISON ~OCIATES I I INC. I ENGINEERS, SU~ORS AND P~NEES 3596 ~C~GE A~. ~LES, ~ AGEN~"i~EM (9~1) ~3-24o4 F~ NO. (e41) S43-5173 No.~(OF~~ _ ~ORIDA BUSINGS UC~SE NO. ~5770 JUL 30 02 AS NOrD WA~RW 0014.1 EAW ~ O014-SgOA.DWC  ~.~-74.' ACCESS EASEMENT o~=., ~ ~ I 0 25 50. 75 SCA~: 1'=50' o~ I~ ~ . WA~RWA~ ~ NAP~ UNIT I ~ ] m / P~T BOOK 38, PAGES 72-77 ' I A po~ion of Tract "B" of Wot~wo~ of ONT ~ BE~NNIN~ . ~ ~ ~. Naples Unit Seven os recorded in Plat o I I~'~ Book 36 at Pages 72 through 77 of 0 I ~ the Public Records of Collier County, ~ ~ ~' Rorldo being more pa~lcularly described follows: ~ ~ J~ L C°mmencing at Ihs n°~hweSteHY re°si 0~ ~ ] comer of sold Troct 'B' mn Sou~ ~ ~s. · 01~8'56' West along ~e westeHy ~ I boundo~ of aoid. Troct "B' also being the easterly boundory of Tract sold Wote~o~ Unit 7, for o distance of 1211.59 feet to the Point of Beginning; thence ~n South 88'51'04' East for 71.00 feet; thence South  ] ' 01~8'56' West for o d~tonce of 50.00 I feet; thence No~h 88~1'04" West for o ' t distance of 71.00 feet; ~ence run No~h 01'08'56" East for a distance of , ] 50.00 feet to the Point of Beginning. A~c~n~Mw~''M~'~ I No~,,: Contoining 0.081 ocres more or less JUL 2002 ,~ plone coordinotes Ftorido Eost DA~D J. ~ NOT VAUD ~T.~ '~A~E AND ~ 3. Sub iect to eosements, ~E ORI~N~ ~AI~ ~L.~-; A'~ORIDA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ADOPT A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 2002-98 AUTHORIZING CONDEMNATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY AND/OR EASEMENTS REQUIRED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SIX-LANE SECTION OF LIVINGSTON ROAD BETWEEN PINE RIDGE ROAD AND IMMOKALEE ROAD, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT NO. 58 (PROJECT NO. 62071). OB~IECTIVE: To adopt a Resolution amending Resolution 2002-98 which authorizes the acquisition by condemnation of fee simple title interests and/or such easements necessary for the construction of a six-lane section of Livingston Road between Pine Ridge Road and Immokalee Road. CONSIDERATIONS: Initial authorization for the purchase of right-of-way for the Livingston Road Phase 3 project was given by the Board of County Commissioners on September 14, 1999, under Resolution No. 99-350. Since that time, appraisals have been prepared and purchase offers made to most of the property owners along the corridor. On February 12, 2002 the Board adopted Resolution 02-98, authorizing the condemnation of property necessary for the construction of a six-lane section of Livingston Road. Further review of the project, including costs, scheduling and contract administration, has revealed that a portion of Orange Blossom Drive should be constructed as a part of the project. The right-of-way necessary for the construction of this continuation of existing Orange Blossom Drive to its intersection with future Livingston Road is described in Exhibit "A," attached to the proposed Resolution. This 4.76-acre parcel has been appraised at $202,300, using a date of value as of February 12, 1996 (pursuant to an earlier PUD commitment). Staff has been unable to negotiate a purchase of this right- of-way with the current property owner due to a dispute as to the date of value; therefore staff is requesting that Board approve the acquisition of this parcel through condemnation in order to meet the project demands and concurrency objectives. The Board of County Commissioners has been further advised that it is necessary and in the public's best interest to acquire by condemnation, the fee simple interest in real property specified on the legal description attached to the Resolution as Exhibit "A. C~"FISCAL IMPACT: The condemnation of the fee simple interest could increase the '~",- costs specified in the Fiscal Impact section of the executive summary which accompanied Resolution No. 2002-98 (Agenda Item 10B, February 12, 2002) by as much as $150,000. It should be noted that the appraised value of this parcel was previously included in the total estimated project cost of $7,973,961 as part of the cash purchase/impact fee credit component. As with the costs and expenses authorized under Resolution No. 2002-98, any payments will be made from the Transportation Supported Gas tax fund and the Road Impact Fee Districts 1 and 2 Fund. Source of these funds are gas tax and road impact fees. ' ........... JUL 3 O 2002 GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: As part of the County's Capital Improvement Element, the Livingston Road project is an integral part of Collier County's Growth Management Plan. RECCOMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County: 1. Adopt the attached Resolution; 2. Authorize its Chairman to execute same on behalf of the Board; and 3. Authorize any budget amendments that may be necessary to implement the collective will of the Board as evidenced by the adoption of the attached Resolution and the approval of this Executive Summary. Ellen T. Chadwell, Assistant County Attorney REVIEWED BY: ,~v~~~'t~ D ATE.'~ DaleX/A.'ghtho~, P.E., i>rin. Project Engineer Transportation Engineering & Construction Management REVIEWED BY: ~. ~t'fl~ ~ DATE:~X~/~, Gregg Strakaluse, P.E., Director Transportotion Engineering & Construction Management APPROVED BY: ~//~J~ DATE: No{rn~n Fede'r, AICP, Administrator Tran/gportation Division t9 ._ JUL 3 0 2002 I RESOLUTION NO. 2002- 2 3 4 A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 2002-98 AUTHORIZING 5 THE CONDEMNATION OF FEE SIMPLE INTERESTS AND/OR THOSE 6 PERPETUAL OR TEMPORARY EASEMENT INTERESTS NECESSARY 7 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF LIVINGSTON ROAD BETWEEN PINE 8 R1DGE ROAD AND IMMOKALEE ROAD, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT 9 ELEMENT NO. 58 (PROJECT NO. 62071). 10 11 WHEREAS, after due consideration of the availability of alternate routes and 12 locations, the comparative costs of project alternatives, various impacts upon the 13 environment, long range planning options, and public safety concerns, the Board of 14 County Commissioners (Board), on February 12, 2002, adopted Resolution No. 2002-98, 15 authorizing the condemnation of fee simple interests and/or perpetual and temporary 16 easements necessary for the construction of a six-lane section of Livingston Road t7 between Pine Ridge Road and Immokalee Road (hereinafter "the Project"); and 18 WHEREAS, further review of the Project has revealed that the County will need 19 to acquire through condemnation certain right-of-way necessary for the completion of 20 Orange Blossom Road; and 21 WHEREAS, the location for const,'uction of the proposed improvements has been 22 fixed by survey and is represented by the legal description comprising Exhibit "A" 23 attached hereto and incorporated herein; and 24 WHEREAS, after consideration of tbe availability of alternate routes and 25 locations, the comparative costs of project alternatives, various impacts upon the 26 environment, long range planning options, and public safety considerations, the Board 27 desires to exercise its right to condemn property for public purposes. 28 NOW, THEREFORE, BE 1T RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY 29 COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that it has been determined by 30 the Board that the construction of a portion of Orange Blossom Road as part of the 31 Livingston Road Project is necessary and in the public's best interest in order to protect 32 the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Collier County. 33 AND IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that in order to construct the Project as AGENO,,~, !TI::M so._l_ 34 designed, it is necessary for the Board to acquire an additional right-of-way parcel JUL 3 0 2002 35 described in Exhibit "A," attached hereto. I AND IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that construction of the Project of the 2 County's long range planning effort, and is included in tile Transportation Element of the 3 County's Comprehensive Plan for Growth Management, as approved by the Florida 4 Department of Community Affairs. 5 AND IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that tile County Staff has reviewed 6 alternative locations for the Project, and the costs associated with the design, property 7 rights acquisition, and construction of the Project, as well as public safety and welfare 8 considerations associated with the design and construction of the Project, and various 9 impacts to the environment, and tile Board finds that after consideration of these issues, 10 the most feasible location for construction of the proposed improvements is collectively 11 represented by the legal descriptions compromising Exhibit "A" attached hereto and 12 incorporated herein. 13 AND IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the County staff is hereby authorized to 14 immediately acquire by condemnation in accordance with the provisions of Chapters 73, 15 74 and 127, Florida Statutes, the real property interests more particularly described in 16 Exhibit "A," attached hereto and incorporated herein. t? AND IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution supplements Resolution 18 No. 2002-98, which shall remain in full force and effect, and the adoption of this 19 Resolution shall in no way affect the validity of Resolution No. 2002-98. 20 This Resolution was duly adopted on this __ day of July, 2002, after motion, 21 second and majority vote. 22 23 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 24 ATI'EST: OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 25 DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK 26 27 By: By: 28 JAMES N. COLETI'A, Chairman 29 30 31 Approved as to form and legal 32 sufficiency: ~-- T/E/~ 33 ~.~ ~/~~ NO.~'~, ~ 34 3s JUL 3 0 2002 36 Ellen T. Chadwell 37 Assistant County Attorney 38 Pg- 39 ~ ~ a , ~.90,OG.gON ' ~ ,e['ooL ' o~ No . ~ JUL 3'0 2002 3..ozX~.oos I I ~ ,~O'ZL .... ~_ _ ~ .... ~. ........ ~z~ {~EXHIBIT ~-~ [~ 4 ,~ ~ LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL 2 ORANGE BLOSSOM DR/VE Being a pan o£ Section l, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Coil/er County. Flprida, more particularly described as follows:" COMMENCING at the Southeast comer of Section 1, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida; thence nm along the East line of said Section I, North 0° 53' 28" West, 2658.42 feet; thence ran North 89°25'49'' West 275.13 feet for a POINT OF BEGINNING; thence South 0°53'28" East 72.02 feet; - thence North 89°25'49" West 1539.23 feet to a point of curvature ora curve concave to the Southeast; thence nm 267.20 feet along the arc of said curve having a radius of 988.00 feet, a central angle of 15 °29'43", a chord of 266.39 feet and a chord bearing of South 82°49'19" West to a point of cusp; thence nm South 85 °50' 36" West for 56.09 feet to a point of curvature of a crowe concave to the Southeast; thence run 65.15 feet along the arc of said curve having a radius of 1000.00 feet, a central angle of 03 °43' 58", a chord of 65.14 feet and a cbord bearing of South 70 °02'57" West to a point oftangency; thence nm South 68 ° 10'58" West for 263.98 feet to a point of curvature ora curve concave to the Northwest; thence nm 352.14 feet along the arc or'said curve having a radius of 900.00 feet, a central angle of 22°25'04'', a chord of 349.90 feet and a chord bearing of South 79°23'30'' West to a point of tangemcy; thence nm South 89°23'58'' East for 0.28 feet; thence nm North 02050'06'' West for i 00. I 8 feet; thcmce nm North 89°23'58'' West for 6.29 feet to a point of curvature ora curve concave to the Northwest; thence nm 313.01 feet along the arc of said curve having a radius of 800.00 feet, a central angle of 22°25'04'', a chord of 311.02 feet and a chord bearing of North 79 °23'30" East to a point of tang~n'cy; thence nm North 68 °10~58" East for 263.98 feet to a point of curvature of a curve concave to the Southeast; thence nm 132.24 feet along the an: of said curve having a radius of 1100.00 feet, a central .angle of 06°53'18'', a chord of 132.17 feet and a chord bearing of North 71°37'37'' East to a point of cuxp; Thence nm South 89°25'49" Ernst for 1831.33 feet to the POI:NT OF BEGINNING, containing 4.76 acres more or less and subject to easementm, restrict/om and r~ervatiom of record. Prepared By: Carol E. Nelson, P.A. , Floridz Xcg. No. 5013 AGI~,'ND~ IT~ June 9, 2000 No JUL 3 O 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE THE PIGGYBACKING OF A BROWARD COUNTY CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF LIGHT EMITTING DIODE TRAFFIC SIGNAL COMPONENTS, OB~IECTIVE: To economically procure LED (Light Emitting Diode) replacement traffic signal components until these items can be included on our upcoming Traffic Signal Component bid. CONSIDERATION: Collier County Traffic Operations has begun a program of modifying traffic signal displays by replacing traffic signal light bulbs with LED signal heads. The advantage of LED signal heads is twofold: they require only ten per cent of the electricity of a traffic signal light bulb and normally fail slowly, one LED at a time, allowing scheduled replacement rather than emergency calls to replace burned out bulbs. With the County paying 6 cents per kilowatt-hour for electricity to operate the traffic signals, replacement of bulbs, which use 135 watts of electricity, with LED signal heads, which average 12 watts of electricity, will reduce electrical costs for operating the 8 traffic signal displays at a normal intersection by an average of $42 per month. Additionally, this will eliminate traffic signal crew call-outs for emergency replacement of burned-out bulbs. Traffic Operations has planned to replace bulbs with LED signal heads at 50 intersections this year, at a cost of $100,000 for the LED signal heads. The estimated annual electricity savings, based on the installation of LED signal heads at 50 intersections, is $25,200 and the estimated annual reduction in overtime for emergency calls is $15,600. Therefore, the $70,000 investment in LED signal heads will be recouped in approximately two years. Broward County has in place a contract number #E 6 01 139 B1 with Temple, Inc. and Dialight Corporation for the type of LED traffic signal components that are being used by Collier County Traffic Operations. Broward County used a competitive process to establish the contract and Staff believes that the cost of the contract is competitive, with prices averaging 30% less than other currently available sources. Collier County Traffic Operations can avail itself of this Broward County contract while preparing and letting its new annual Traffic Signal Component Contract this fall. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $100,000 for purchasing LED replacement traffic signal components were identified in the Transportation Supported Gas Tax Fund, Project 60172. Prices using the Broward County contract will allow the purchase of needed parts for $70,000, thus saving the County approximately $30,000. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the piggybacking of B roward County's contract number #E 6 01 139 B 1 with Temple, Inc. and Dialight Corporation for LED traffic signal replacementc0$nponents. _ Robert W. Tipton, P.~.., Traffic Operations M~nager REVIEWED BY: St~h~/l~arnell, ~ ~'Ch~irector Ed~l/~'///Kan~ ~'~s"~°rtati°n Operati°ns Direct°r'/ t/ APPROVED BY: / ~JJ ¢~/~ Date: y67nE. ~der, X.i.C.P., Transportation Division Administrator .................... JU.L 3 o 2oo2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO TRANSFER $100,000 FROM GAS TAX RESERVES TO REIMBURSE THE CITY OF NAPLES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF GOODLETTE-FRANK ROAD IMPROVEMENTS @ THE CITY'S PUMP STATION. OBJECTIVE: To obtain approval from the Board of County Commissioners to process a budget amendment to transfer $100,000 from Gas Tax Reserves to reimburse the City of Naples for the construction of Goodlette-Frank Road Improvements ~ the City's pump station. CONSIDERATIONS: During the fiscal year 2001 budget cycle, $100,000 was budgeted for the reimbursement to the City of Naples for the Construction of Goodlette-Frank Road Improvements ~ the City's pump station. These funds were not encumbered during the 2001 budget year and were over looked during the fiscal year 2002 budget cycle and did not get re- budgeted for the current fiscal year. The City of Naples has completed this project and is requesting a reimbursement of $100,000 from Collier County. FISCAL IMPACT: A budget amendment is needed to transfer $100,000 from the Gas Tax Reserve Fund. Source of funds are Gas Taxes. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no Growth Management Impact associated with this Executive Summary. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the necessary budget amendment and authorize payment to the City of Naples. Sharon Newrfian, Yra~Sportation Accounting SuperVi~sor' - APPROVED BY: ~~~7.~ Date: Norn~ E. Feder, AICP, Administrator Transpo~ati(~n Services Division / ."'"'- AG EN D~, 'ITEM No.~ JUL 3 O 2002 DEPARTMENT OF DEVEE©'.P_'MENT SERVICES TRANSMITTAL MEMO July 9, 2002 To: Collier County Transportation Services Division Attn: Sharon Newman 2705 South Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 From: George Archibald Subject: City Invoice for Construction of Goodlette-Fran2' Road Improvements ~ City's Pump Station Dear Sharon: Two years ago, the City re-designed its pump station on Goodlette-Frank Road to both relocate the station 'off' the northbound travel lane and to construct the 'missing' outside northbound lane. The cost of the construction work, not including design, r/w, permitting & misc. annual contract work, is reflected in the following purchase orders: i. D.N. Higgins Inc. Purchase Order #022040 (expenditures to date: $3,156,865.10) 2. Bonness Inc. Purchase Order #026822 (expenditures tO date: $44,372.68) During the budget process in FY 2000, the County recognized the above efforts of the City by allocating an amount of $100,000.00+ in Fund 313 to the City subject to completion of the work involving Goodlette- Frank Road. The work to include improvements on Goodlette-Frank Road was recently completed and accordingly the attached Invoice No. 3519 is being sent for reimbursement. In reviewing the above and the attached invoice, should any additional information be necessary from this office, please do not hesitate in contacting me at telephone number 213o5003. Also, by fax copy of this memo to Ed Kant, I am requesting his assistance in confirming the work performed and the cost advantage of such work to Collier County. cc: Ron Wallace Ralph LaCivita Ed Kant (Fax: 659-5787) " A(3ENBA"ITEM JUL 3 0 2002 FACSIMILE (941) 213-5010 TELEPHONE (941) 213-5000 SUNCOM 717-5000 ,~ ' 295 RIVERSIDE CIRCLE · NAPLES, FLORIDA 34102~6796 P(~. I NVO I CE CITY OF NAPLES 735 8TH STREET SOUTH NAPLES, FL 34102 (941) 213-1820 TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INVOICE NO: 3519 TRANSPORATION SERVICES DIV DATE: 7/08/02 2705 SOUTH HORSESHOE DR NAPLES, FL 34104 CUSTOMER NO: 2128 CUSTOMER TYPE: WM/ 115941 QUANTITY DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE EXTENDED PRICE 1.00 STORMWATER REPAIRS 100,000.00 100,000.00 RELOCATION OF THE CITY'S WATER MANAGEMENT PUMP STATION, CONSTRUCTION OF THE OUTSIDE NORTHBOUND LANE OF GOODLETTE-FP~ANK RD AND RECONSRUCTION OF RELATED DRAINAGE, UTILITY A_ND SIDE' WALK IMPROVEMETNS. REFERENCE BCC APPROVAL AS PART OF THE COUNTY CAPITAL ROAD FUND, FUND 313 IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT ~,~Y AT (941) 213-1812. TOTAL DUE: $100,000.00 PLEASE DETACH AND SEND THIS COPY WITH REMITTANCE DATE: 7/08/02 DUE DATE: 7/23/02 BOARD OF COUNT~ C(%MMT.qqTr~,T~R_° · [ RE~IT ~D ~KE CHECK P~Y~BBE TO: CITY OF NAPLES FIN~CE DEPT JUL 30 2002 s NAPLES FL 34102 (941) 213-1820 pg. ~ I~OICE N )~ 3519 - CUSTOMER NO: 2128 CUSTOMER TYPE: WM/ 115941 TERMS: NET 15 DAYS ~O~T: $100,000.00 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO TRANSFER $50,000 FROM GAS TAX RESERVES TO REIMBURSE THE CITY OF NAPLES AIRPORT AUTHORITY FOR THE COUNTY'S SHARE OF THE AIRPORT ROAD LANDSCAPE PROJECT. OBJECTIVE: To obtain approval from the Board of County Commissioners to process a budget amendment to transfer $50,000 from Gas Tax Reserves to reimburse the City of Naples Airport Authority for the County's share of the Airport Road Landscape Project. CONSIDERATIONS: On May 9, 2000 Ron Pennington the Chairman of the City of Naples Airport Authority at the time made a presentation to Board of County Commissioners in which he requested a joint participation with the City of Naples and the Airport Authority to each contribute $50,000 for the Landscape Improvements along Airport Road outside of the Naples Airport. The City of Naples Airport Authority had made a request to the County for an advance of the $50,000 in which they were advised by Tom Olliff on June 12, 2001 that after the work was completed and documentation of the purchase and delivery of the trees was provided to Collier County, a reimbursement check would be processed for the City of Naples Airport Authority. The City of Naples Airport Authority has met these requirements and provided copies of all invoices associated with this project. FISCAL IMPACT: A budget amendment is needed to transfer $50,000 from the Gas Tax Reserve Fund and appropriate in the Naples Airport Project. Source of funds are Gas Taxes. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the necessary budget amendment and payment to the City of Naples Airport Authority. PREPARED BY: '~-~ ~'~. ~_ ~'C~ .,~.. ~,~..~-.,_ Date: Sh~ Nj~, Tr~spo~tion Accosting Supemisor APPROVED BY:~///~~ Date: No E. Feder, AICP, A~s~ator T~spo~tion Seduces Division AGENDA iTEM .iUL pg. ~,body opposed? ~AIRMAN CGNSTIII~iTIN£'- Motion ca~ 5-0. MR. I~NT-' Tha~ ~u~ Comml~ioner, CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Thank you. Item #10A REPORT FROM THE CITY OF NAPLES AIRPORT AUTHORITY REGARDING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ALONG AIRPORT ROAD - PRESENTED; STAFF DIRECTED TO INCLUDE THE COUNTY'S 1/3 PARTICIPATION IN THE TREE PLANTING PROJECT IN THE UPCOMING BUDGET CYCLE L~-t's go to 10(A), which is a brief overelew of the City of Naples Airport Authority. Ron Pennington i~ with us, and actually has some pretty good news. Some good stuff happening up there. Hey, Ron. MR. PENNINGTON: That's right. Thank you. We're set up and we're ready to proceed. So good morning, Commissioners. I'm Ron Pennlngton, current chairman of the City of Naples Airport Authority, with our executive director, Ted Soliday, who will be highlighting areas on our visuals and responding to any technical concerns. And our assistant director for communications, Gall Cureton, who will be directing the projection. · Thank you for this opportunity to meet with you an(; to provide an overview of two of our major proJe~.-ts, North Road and Airport Road. The North Road project Is a long required relocation to separate North Road from the runway safety area at the southwest corner of the airport. The requirement was t~ ----- II~lge ~4 AGEND~I, ITEM-, ...... JUL 3 0 2002 M~ry g, 2000 move the road so that it would go around the 1,000-foot safety are·, extending from the end of the runwJy. To minimize Impact Into the wetlands, the runway was shifted 290 feet to the northeast. And ·long the new section of the road, we are adding a pedestrian and bike way, and It will Join the Gordon River Gr~=nway as it proceeds to the north ·nd to the east where the greenway Joins the airport's commercial terminal entrance. You will note the city/county line effectively bisects the relocated roadway. Upon completion, we will formally turn the new roadway and related right-of-way to the appropriate entity, county and/or city. Now, No~ Road that ties to the south of th6 airport is In the county. To the we~t of the airport, It is in the city~ However, we -nde.rat·nd th~,t In the mld-¶g50's, there was an agreement between the two parties that e~tablished the entire North Road as a county road and provided the right-of-way easement to the county. Now, that was something that George Archibald had advised us of. And ! guess If anybody knows going back that far, tt's probably George. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It's going to be George. MR. PENNINGTON: There's been little if ·ny maintenance done on that portion of the road that ties within the city. We have periodically trimmed the right-of-way and removed trees that had literally grown through the pavement. We recently asked the city's determination in this matter, and also ask you, whose road is It? Approximately two years ago, we advised you we were embarking on · program along Airport Road, which woutd include capacity enhancements, and stated we would be working with your staff In those areas of mutual concern. At that tlr. e, it was ~lay g, 2000 estimated to be a $4 million plus program. Subsequently, we have been more visionary. Our slte.~ have been ral~)cl. And, as you will see, the cost has Increased proportlonately~ Typical program. We have received both federal and state approvals of our environmental resources permit. Although we could have been grandfathered under 1984 requirements, we chose to meet current standards for our stormwater management, which will meet the needs for the ultimate airport build-out plan. Now, this include~ significant expansion or relocation of existing storage and settling ponds, and establishment of one new pond. A continuing challenge to our ~rmwater management Is that in the ea~ quadrant, where we havo significant impervious surface, 80 percent of the stormwater comes from the side of ~..~Jrport Road. We're providing the drainage side for ever 600 acres on that side. To ease the situation, we're mo~ng a large portion of our east quad generated stormwater across the airfield to an expanded pond at the north end of the quadrant. For many years there have been community compialnts about the appearance of the east side of the airport along Airport Road. The ditch along the road i~ an aesthetic disaster, and we have termed this photo up there as the ugly ditch. COMMISSIONER BERRY: As the what ditch? MR. PENNINGTON: The ugly ditch. For many year~, the Airport Authority has sought ways to effect Improvement. The continuing problem has been ~:'he lack of funds. Through the efforts and Ingenuity of our executive director, Mr. Soliclay, many programs Involving safety, stormwater management~ roadway improvements~ landscaping and signage have been brought together, which will enabi6 us to l~age 56 .... AGEND~ ITEM~ No. ........... JUL'-3 0 2002 pg. 2000 make the area a mile of beauty which we - which will meet the standards we expect for our Naple~ area. As we look from south to north, the No~th Road entrance will become a boulevard for the first 600 feet, with multiple turn lanes for Ingress and egress, separated by a median. We are also adding a southbound turn lane from Airport Road, which has been a long-term desire of Avon Park residents, and at least one of those has spoken to you on various occasions about that. COMMISSIONER NORRIS: Various. MR. PENNINGTON: There will be a pedestrian and bike way, which will ultimately be extended to our commercial entrance and Join the Gordon River Gr~enway. The corner will be landscaped to provide screening for the Rock Creek Trailer Park and for traffic along the Intersection with Airport Road. Going north, the existing storage pond will be moved outside the runway object free area. And the !nput/output will be via pipes. And there will be four, 4-foot by 16-foot cross-sectional area pipes, which provide additional filtration, and the existing ditch will be enclosed. At the Aviation Drive entrance, a tut, lane will be added from Airport Road and the entrance landscaped. Between Aviation Drive and Radio Road, the most conspicuous ditch area, again the ugly ditch, a new pond will be constructed which will have the features of the canal area along the Grey Oaks development. And in back of this pond is our entry park, which will continue as a space for auto shows~ boat shows, with pouibly some boat~ floating on the pond, seafood festivals and other community events. At Radio Road, the entrance to the park and our general aviation terminal will be attractively landscaped and the turn lane from Airport Road extended. P,~ 57 AG,END. A ITEM No.._lt.~f_~ I.'~_ ._ ............ JUL-3 0 2002 .... Pg. .-~ 2000 At the north end of the airport, the Enterprise Road entrance, attractive landscaping will be provided. Along all of Airport Road will be pedestrian and bike ways, which ultimately will extend around the airport. There will also be landscaping consisting of palms, canopy and flowering trees. For this part of the project, we are asking for the county's assistance and participation. With your concurrence, we will have our staff work with your staff to establish a budget for a Joint program. We have asked the City of Naples to also participate in this cooperatlve venture, a total community project. Our budget projection for tree planting along this mile of Airport Road Is $150,000. We propose 50,000 each for the county, city and the Airport Authority. We are rapidly mo.~lng forward with this program. We are now In final design and permitting for this very complex project, and plan to be under construction contract by the end of September. I have stated that Mr. Sollday had put this together from several programs. As we look at our funcllng sources, ~v(~ see that there is two and a half million dollars of federal; that is FAA funds~ 2.3 million of state from Florida Department of Transportation funds, and 2.3 million from us, from the Authority, for a total of Just over $7 million. Federal and state funding is assured. We are budgeting multi-year to accomplishing - to accomplish the landscaping. And with your and the city's participation, we can install more mature trees which will help significantly In effecting beautification of this part of Airport Road. I'd be pleased to respond to any of your questions. CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Questions for Mr. Pennington? Commissioner Mac'Kie? Ptge 58 --~ AGENDA ITEM No. !{0/% I~ - JUL 3 0 2002-, - Pg. ~ COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Not a question, but a great thank you for bringing forth such a great idea and the community Initiative that - the opportunity that It provides the county to participate In the Improvement of the Airport Authority, the City of Naples Airport. Because as we often talked about, it Is the City of Naples' Airport, but It is certainly an amenity for all of the county. I wonder if somebody has done the math to see Just how much off of the county budget your - how much money you're taking off of our necessity to spend money with the Improvements that you're making. MR, PENNINGTON: Well, just a small part, I know, and we'd look~d previously at Just the turn lane onto North Road, providing that turn lane. And I think then for the bicycle path and pedestrian ..~m!kway along Airport Road, and that was - we discussed that even back - way back when ! was on the MPO at that time, and I think It was 400,000 was the budget figurG the county had for that, I believe. -~* --* COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:* And those are Items, from years ago, and probably those numbers =re higher now. But those are Items that the board has prioritized end has requested and has indicated over and over we want to see constructed along there. It looks to me like, and maybe - you know, correct me I~ I'm wrong, but what I think you're asldng u. Is that if we will spend initiative, we will get 5400,000 worth of work that ~WaS previously piCa-il-ed to--~-d-~-n~-b-y-t'h~ ~*0~t-t~**iS' now going to be done Dy the AirpOrt Authorlty'-using' federal and state and Jlrport Juthorit~ money; and we will get an Airport Road beautification project. M~y 9, 2000 Typically we ask for a 50 percent match, This is a two- thirds match in the capital for the Installation. Am I getting that math right, Mr. Pennington? MR. PENNINGTON: Well that W_.qp. ld be right, Just for the tree program in Itself. So that's - that 150~000 is our budget projection Just for the tree plantlngg but that's a whole mile along there. And so we think this is a great boon for the community. We think It's a great opportun~ for our different government entitles to work together. That doesn't happen every day, unfortunately. And so we think the public can greatly benefit from this. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'd like to make a motion that 'we instruct staff to include that one-third participation In the tree planting program In this budget cycle that we're about to begin. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Second. COMMISSIONER BERRY: The three entitles again~ ~n, are - would be Comer County, the Naples Airport - MR. PENNINGTON: And the City of Naples. COMMISSIONER BERRY: - and the City of Naples¥ And after that's all done, the responsibility of maintenance ~alis to Airport Authority? MR. PENNINGTON: The airport's been doing most ot tha~ kind of thing. COMMISSIONER BERRY: Well, I was Just making - MR. PENNINGTON: So yeah, were been doing it. it's in county right-of-way along Airport Road. COMMISSIONER BERRY: ! understand. MI~. PENNINGTON: And I think county right now has been cleaning the swales. They're working along that one swale along there now. So the county has been diligent about maintaining the flow for stormwater through there. And so generally they a~e - Page 60 N ~, JUL 3 0 2002 May 9, 2000 like now, prior the summer rain starting, why, they're in there making sure we can get that flow through. COMMISSIONER BERRY: Well, I agr~_= that !t will be a real plus. There's no question about that. So ! applaud your efforts In moving forward on this and look forward to seeing it happen. And I think we have a motion and a a~.~nd, right? CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: We do indeed. Any further discussion? Mr. Olliff, anything you want to add on this? MR. OLLIFF: No. My only recommendation was going to be that you do review this an part of your budget cycle in light of all the rest of your other capital requests. And t think you need to keep In mind, this Is probably going to require an interlocal agreement too, which we will probably at least be ln~ puttl,g the framework together for you. CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: And that's the motion, is 4o bring it back as part of the budget. MR. PENNINGTON: Thank you all very much. CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Ali In those in favor, please state aye. Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN CONSTANTINE: Motion carries 5-0. Thanks, Ron. MR. PENNINGTON: Thank you. item #t08 RESOLUTION 2000-135, APPOINTMENT TO THE NAPLE~ AIRPORT AUTHORITY NOISE COMPATIBILITY COMMITTEE- APPROVED JUL 3 0 2.002 II;fAL P. IO COLLIER COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE 330) )ZAST TAMIAMI Ti]AIL NAPLES, FLORIDA 34112 (941) 774-8383 FAX_ (94 [) 774-4010 June 12, 2001 Mr. Theodore D. Soliday Executive Director City of Naples Airport Authority 160 Aviation Drive North Naples, F1 34104-3568 Dear Mr. Soliday: thc $50,000 contribution toward thc purchase of trees for thc ('hty (~? Naples :\iw(~rt Aathcdty's Airport Road landscaping project. Uafmtunatcly, Collier' ,':'o. unty will net be able to honor request, as these funds must be expended prior to thc Ctmnly providing t~tc $50,000 reimbursement. Upon receipt of documentation of the purch.:~se :~:d dcli,:c~,' t)l' Et,c trees, Collier County will expedite processing the reimbursement check. Thank you for your understanding in this matter. Please cee ~' ,- questions. Sincerely, Thomas W. Olliff County Manager cc: James L. Mitchell,, Finance Director AGENDA No. JUL 3 0 2092 ~. I~ CITY OF NAPLES AIRPORT AUTHORITY 160 AVIATION DRIVE NORTH · NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104-3568 ADMINISTIL~kTION (941) 643-0733/FAX 643-4084 OPERATIONS 643-0404/FAX 643-1791, E-MAIL administration@flynaples.corn 7 January 2002 Mr. Edward J. Kant, P.E. '- Transportation Operations Director 2705 S. Horseshoe Drive 35 Naples, FL 34104 Dear Ed: This letter is in response to your October 25, 2001 letter regarding funding reimbursement for landscaping at the Naples Municipal Airport. The landscaping portion of the Airport Road project is now complete. In accordance with your recommendation for reimbursement, we have enclosed a copy of the paid invoice for the landscaping. Please move forward in requesting a budget amendment for reimbursement of the $50,000.00. We look forward to your response. Thank you for your time and continued support of the Naples Municipal Airport. Sincerely, I~ANSPORTATI01~I DEPT. Craig FI. Davis '~TE: _ Director of Engineering and Planning ~TION: Enclosure: Paid Invoice for Landscaping 'o: CHD/uh "-: ,£F: JUL 3 0 2 ,02 NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT pnnled oo R~ F~. ~' 3 ~ ~' = AG~ND~A. ITEI~ No._~ JUL 3 0 2002 ~. /2~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVAL OF THE RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT COMPANY TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT, SERVING AS THE COMMUNITY TRANPORTATION COORDINATOR FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DISADVANTAGED PROGRAM AS IDENTIFIED IN RFP #02-3383 AND AUTHORIZATION FOR THE COUNTY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH THE SELECTED MANAGEMENT COMPANY, OB.JECTIVE: To approve the recommended management company from the three proposers and authorize the County Manager to negotiate, enter into, modify or terminate a contract with the management company. CONSIDEI~TIONS: On May 10th the Community Transportation Coordinator (Collier County Government) sent out a Request For Proposals for a Management Company to provide management services for the Transportation Disadvantaged Program. Three proposals were received and ranked by a selection committee. The consensus of the committee was to recommend ATC Paratransit as the Management Company, as they were ranked highest of the three respondents. McDonald Transit Associates was ranked number two and MV Transportation was ranked number three. pc_FISCAL IMPACT: The BCC reimburses the Management Company from funds 0received from the Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged, Florida Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration and County funds previously approved in the Public Transportation Development Plan (PTDP). The County has budgeted $751,400 in Fund 126 for the Transportation Disadvantaged Program. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Consistent with objectives 10 and 12 of the Growth Management Plan. RECOMMENI)ATION: That the Board approve the recommended management company, ATC Paratransit, and authorize the County Manager to negotiate and enter into a contract with ATC Paratransit as the management company to serve as the Community Transportation Coordinator for the Collier County Transportation Disadvantaged Program. Prepared by: .~,~ ~,/J~ Date: ~L(~ Donald Sc°~t, T'~an~P~)rt~tion Planning Director Reviewed by: - Date: '7'- t/- 0 '7. Steve C~rnell, Purchasing Director Approved by: /'~?" ~~. ¢~ Date: 7-/£''' °'''J- _.. Norr~/~n Feder, 'i'ransportation Services Administrator No.AGF"N D.,~ tL~_ I~ITEM~¢' / JUL 3 0 2002 I Pg. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVAL OF A FIRST AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT WITH LB/P GROVEWAY, L.L.C., FOR ITS TWO-MONTH CONTINUED USE OF COUNTY- OWNED PROPERTY NETTING THE COUNTY $4,000 IN ADDITIONAL RENT. OBJECTIVE: Approve a First Amendment to Lease Agreement (Amendment) with LB/P GroveWay, L.L.C., for its use of County-owned property for two additional months. CONSIDERATIONS: Effective June 22, 1999, the County and LB/P GroveWay, L.L.C., ("GroveWay") entered into a lease for GroveWay's use of 0.45 acre of County-owned road right-of-way located at the intersection of Livingston and Vanderbilt Beach Roads. The property houses GroveWay's Bridgewater Bay Sales Center trailer. The lease expired or~ June 30, 2002 and GroveWay requested that the lease be extended until August 31,2002, at the current monthly rental rate of $2,000 per month. This same request was included in the Consent Agenda at the June 25, 2002 Board of County Commission meeting, but was pulled at the request of the Transportation Division to resolve some last minute details with GroveWay. Other than the extended term and annual rent noted in the Amendment, all other terms and conditions in the original Lease Agreement will remain in full force and effect. The attached Amendment has been reviewed and approved by the Office of the County Attorney. FISCAL IMPACT: The $4,000 rental will be paid in one payment and be deposited into the ~.'? Transportation Services Fund (101). GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no impact to the Growth Management Plan. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve and authorize the Chairman to execute the attached First Amendment to Lease Agreement with LB/P GroveWay, L.L.C., once approved by the Office of the County Attorney. SUBMITTED 4-f..'. !r~ M~chael H. Dowling, Prope~t'y~nage t Specialist Property Acquisition & Construction Management Facilities Management Department NO. JUL 3 0 2002 pg. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY First Amendment to Lease with LB/P GroveWay, L.L.C. Page 2 Charles E. Carring r~ Jr., S'[~NA, Manager Property Acquisition & Construction Management Facilities Management Department ~v,~w~Y~ ~-~..~~. -~~~ ~AT~ S~'ip Camp, CFM, Director Facilities Management Department Gregg Strakaluse, TE & OM Director TranspoSition Services Department REVIEWED BY: Norman E. F~der, AICP, Administrator DATE: /.~'Q" Tran/portation Division AGENI~A ITEM JUL 3 0 2002 Pg. Lease #856 FIRST AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT entered into this __ day of 2002, at Naples, Collier County, Florida by and between LB/P GroveWay, LLC, a Delaware Company whose mailing address is 2055 Trade Center Way, Naples, Florida 34109, hereinafter referred to as '%ESSEE", and Collier County, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, whose mailing address is 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida 34112, hereinafter referred to as "LESSOR". WITNESSETH WHEREAS. the LESSEE and LESSOR have previously entered into a Lease Agreement ("Lease Agreement") dated June 22, 1999; WHEREAS, the LESSEE and LESSOR are desirous of amending that Lease Agreement; and NOW, THEREFORE. in consideration of the covenants and agreements provided within the said Lease Agreement dated June 22, 1999 and Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other valuable consideration, the Lease Agreement is hereby amended as follows: 1. The following provision shall be added to Article 2 of the Lease Agreement: This Lease term is hereby extended to September 1, 2002, hereinafter referred to as the 'Extended Term' provided the following provisions are adhered to: Lessee's one-time contribution of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00) agreed upon in the original Lease Agreement to be paid to Lessor, shall be paid in full by August 5, 2002. ff said payment is not received on or before the aforementioned date, this Amendment shall become null and void and the Demised Premises shall be vacated immediately and cause Lessee's Impact Fee Credits, which currently total $567,604.65 to be reduced by twenty-five (25) percent. The rent for the Extended Term shall remain at $2,000.00 montbJy and shall be paid in full by August 5, 2002. By August 15, 2002, Lessee shall vacate and fully restore the Demised Premises to its original condition as found prior to Lessee's occupancy. Failure of Lessee to vacate by this date will cause Lessee to forfeit to Lessor twenty-five (25) percent of Lessee's Impact Fee Credits. If by September 1, 2002, the Demised Premises is not vacated and fully restored to its original condition as found prior to Lessee's occupancy, Lessee shall forfeit fifty (50) percent of its total Impact Free Credits plus an additional Ten (10) percent for each day thereafter until the Demised Premises is vacated and retuned to its original condition. 2. Except as expressly provided herein, the Lease Agreement dated June 22, 1999 remains in full force and effect according to the terms and conditions contained therein, and said terms and conditions are applicable hereto except as expressly provided otherwise herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the LESSEE and LESSOR have hereto executed this First Amendment to Lease Agreement the day and year fa'st above written. AS TO THE LESSk-~.: LB/P G-roveWay, L.L.C. A Delaware Limited Liability Company DATED: By: GroveWay Development, L.C., it's Operating Member and Authorized Signatory: BY: Witness (signature) G. Smart Wood, Managing Member (print name) A(~EN~A ITE, M Witness (signature) No.~,[0 ~ f,~ (print JUL 3 0 2002 AS TO THE LESSOR: DATED:. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AT'rEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BY: BY: JAMES N. COLE'IrA, Chairman Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Tho . Palmer, Assistant County Attorney No./~©t~ JUL 3 0 2002 pg. ,4[ 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE PURCHASE OF ONE (1) DOUBLE DRUM VIBRATORY ROLLER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH BID # 02-3391 OBJECTIVE: To purchase a new Double Drum Vibratory Roller to assist in the construction and maintenance of new Roadways, Bike paths and Sidewalks. Which will provide expanded service to the citizens of Collier County. CONSIDERATIONS: Invitations to bid wet:e sent out on May 28, 2002, and opened by the County Purchasing Department on June 10, 2002, Staff has reviewed the bids and found that the first two perspective low bidders do not meet minimum qualifications and recommends the bid submitted by Nortrax Equipment Co., as being the lowest bid proposal meeting, or exceeding specifications. Summary of the bid tabulations is as follows: Vendor Name: Total Price: Briggs Equipment $ 61,283.00 G.S. Equipment $ 64,500.00 Nortrax Equipment Co. $ 64,995.00 L.B. Smith, Inc. $ 65,865.00 ~',~_ISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $64,995.00 are budgeted in the Transportation ~ F-'~nd 1-'~i Funds for repair and maintenance of the equipment are estimated to be $22,000.00, and will be budgeted for in Transportation Services Fund 101, over the life of the machine. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This purchase has no growth management impact. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners award Bid #02-3391, to Nortrax Equipment Co., for the purchase of one (1) Double Drum Vibratory Roller. ,,,-'Jfoh~ Vliet, Road Maintenance Superintendent REVIEWEO BY: ~/,_'. ~9_ _~_t.'_t/~.~t'Z DATE: Mik~ Etelamaki, Koad Maintenance Director REVIEWED BY: t~. ~'~' ~'/7 DATE: Ste~~~~ur~_~lrector APPROVED BY: . DATE!")Z.~-Z,-- Nor~lan E. Feder, AICP, Transportation Administrator AGENDA~ ITeM JUL 3 0 2002 Pg- perryman d From: gossard_t Sent: Tuesday, July 16. 2002 10:18 AM To: perryman_d Cc: VlietJohn Subject: Double Drum Roller Bid Diana, We choose the 3rd highest bidder for the following reasons. The first two rollers did not meet minimum bid specifications in the following areas, Hydraulic filtration, Drum circumference and Pli rating, Water distribution pumps, Alternator systems, Electrical systems and Engine specifications. In fairness we offered to demo the two rollers that did not meet specs to see if we could use them anyway. Sakai delivered a roller and we demoded it and also had fleet check out this piece of equipment. Both parties felt that this equipment would not be right for us. The Hamm roller was never demoded they did not bring a roller for us to demo even though we offered to look at there equipment. If you need any more info please let me know, Thank You Travis Travis D. Gossard SafeO' Coordinator Collier Count)' Road And Bridge Dept. Phone 239 774-8924 Fax 239 774-6406 JUL 3 0 2002 pg. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY REMOVAL OF A NON-WARRANTED TRAFFIC SIGNAL FROM THE INTERSECTION OF RADIO ROAD AT COMMERCIAL BOULEVARD. REMOVAL OF THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLES AND EQUIPMENT WILL COST APPROXIMATLY $3000. OBJECTIVE: To remove a non-warranted traffic signal from the intersection of Radio Road at Commercial Boulevard. CONSIDERATIONS: The Board of County Commissioners is responsible for the approval and authorization of the installation of traffic signals on the County roadways. A traffic engineering study, performed and approved by a Professional Engineer registered to practice in the State of Florida and on the staff of the County's Transportation Operations Department, has concluded with the determination that the subject intersection's traffic signal does not meet the minimum warrants for signalization, as set forth in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, and has recommended the removal of said traffic signal. The continued operation of an unwarranted ' traffic signal is an impediment to the safe and efficient operation of the County roadway system. P,~FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of the removal of the traffic signal support poles, signal heads, support cables, and controller cabinet foundation will be approximately $3000. The controller cabinet, signal heads, and electronic equipment will be salvaged and reused at other locations. Funds are available in Transportation Services Fund (101). GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This action will assist in growth management by increasing the traffic capacity of Radio Road in this segment. RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommendation of this Department that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Resolution, authorize the Chairman to execute the Resolution to deactivate and remove the traffic signal at the intersection of Radio Road at Commercial Boulevard, and direct the Transportation Operations Department to replace the traffic signal with appropriate "STOP" signs and pavement marking on Commercial Boulevard. PREPARED BY: R~.W/~/.~ipton, P.B~ ' - ' REVIEWED BY: Edwar~t'J. Kant,qE~ .~.' 0~~.~tot . "7/']/ ~,~or~an E.Feder, AICP Transportation Division Administrator f'/f~g~'" / /x-..- JUL 3 0 2002 pg. RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION TO REMOVE A NON-WARRANTED TRAFFIC SIGNAL FROM THE INTERSECTION OF RADIO ROAD AT COMMERCIAL BOULEVARD WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners is responsible for the approval and authorization of the installation of traffic signals on County roadways; and WHEREAS, a traffic engineering study was performed and approved by a professional engineer registered to practice in the State of Florida and on the staff in the County's Transportation Operations Department; and WHEREAS, the study concluded that the traffic signal at the intersection of Radio Road and Commercial Boulevard does not meet the minimum warrants for signalization, as set forth in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control De~,ices, and has recommended the removal of said traffic signal; and WHEREAS, the Board Of County Commissioners recognizes that the continued operation of an unwarranted traffic signal is an impediment to the safe and efficient operation of the County roadway system. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA THAT the traffic signal located at the intersection of Radio Road and Commercial Boulevard be Jeactivated, removed, and replaced with "STOP" signs controlling traffic on Commercial Boulevard on the north side of the intersection and the business driveway on the south Aside of the intersection. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion, second, and majority vote favoring same ~his day of 2002. ATFEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: BY: JAMES N. COLETTA, Chairman Approved as to form and 1 i~!~di~F. ~s~s h?o n Assistant Collier County Attorney JUL ,3 0 2002 1 2 3 RESOLUTION NO. 2002- 4 5 6 RESOLUTION TO REMOVE A NON-WARRANTED TRAFFIC 7 SIGNAL FROM THE INTERSECTION OF RADIO ROAD AT 8 COMMERCIAL BOULEVARD 9 t0 11 WItEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners is responsible for the approval and authorization 12 of the installation of traffic signals on County roadways; and 1.3 14 WHEREAS, a traffic engineenng study was performed and approved by a professional engineer !.5 registered to practice in the State of Florida and on the staff in the County's Transportation Operations I6 Department; and 17 18 WHEREAS, the study concluded that the traffic signal at the intersection of Radio Road and 19 Commercial Boulevard does not meet the minimum warrants for signalization, as set forth in the Manual 20 on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, and has recommended the removal of said traffic signal; and 21 22 WHEREAS, the Board Of County Commissioners recognizes that the continued operation of an 23 unwarranted traffic signal is an impediment to the safe and efficient operation of the County roadway 24 system. 25 26 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 27 OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLOR[DA THAT the traffic signal located at the intersection of Radio Road 28 and Commercial Boulevard be deactivated, removed, and replaced with "STOP" signs controlling traffic 29 on Commerciai Boulevard on ~he north side of the intersection and the business driveway on the south 30 side of the intersection. 31 32 THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion, second, and majority vote favoring same this 33 day of 2002. 34 35 36 ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 37 DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 38 39 40 BY: BY: 41 JAMES N. COLETTA, Chairman 42 43 44 45 Approved as to form and 464847 legal su['ficiencY: 0[ //4~.~.~'~ ]~'~]/~1 /')~ 49 Heicti~. A~'-~to ~' 50 Assistant Collier County Attorney 51 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BOARD APPROVAL OF A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH VOLUSIA COUNTY FOR THE USE OF TWO TROLLEY/BUSES IN THE AMOUNT OF $500.00 PER MONTH, PER BUS AND AUTHORIZATION FOR THE CHAIRMAN TO ENTER INTO THE AGREEMENT. OBJECTIVE: To approve a lease agreement with Volusia County for the use of two trolley/buses and authorizing the chairman to enter into the agreement. CONSIDERATION: Staff was notified of two (2) trolley type buses in Volusia County available for lease. These vehicles could be leased for $500.00 per month. The cost to purchase this type vehicle new would be approximately $200,000.00. On May 14, 2002, the Board granted approval to enter into a Lease Agreement with Volusia County for the use of two trolley/buses. Staff is now presenting the Lease Agreement for approval and signature. ~:t/'FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact for a one-year lease would be in the amount of $19,000.00 ($500.00 per month X 12 months X 2 buses + $3,500.00 X 2 buses = $19,000.00). The funds needed for this lease have been approved and are available in Transit Enhancement Fund No. 313. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Consistent with Objectives 10 and 12 of the Growth Management Plan. RECOMMENDATIONS: Authorization for the Chairman to sign the lease agreement with Volusia County for the use of two trolley/buses in the amount of $500.00 per month, per bus. j ~l I~1~. Brown, Public Transportation Planner Reviewed'by:'~~,'~/q'~ ~ Date: 7/16/02 Row~. He~/t~n~ MPO~__~ger Approved by: './ ~, '/~.~_.. Date: 7/16/02 No(m~h Feder, Transportation Services Administrator / JUL 3 0 2002 m LEASE AGREEMENT THIS LEASE AGREEMENT ("Lease") is made effective as of, by and between Volusia County, d/b/a VOTRAN, 950 Big Tree Road, South Daytona, FL, 32119, hereby known as "VOTRAN", and Collier County, hereby known as "The County" upon the following terrm and conditions: 1. LEASE. THE COI. TNTY, hereby takes and leases from VOTRAN, the buses listed in Schedule "A" attached and hereto (the "Buses"), for a period of 12 months with an option of additional months as a~eed to by both parties. Also, at the end of the lease, the option to buy (the "Buses") at a pr/ce subsequently agreed to by both parties. 2. TERM. This lease is for a term of 12 months, con~-nencing, and ending. 3. RENTAL PAYMENTS. THE COU-NTY covenants and a~ees to pay rent for the buses to, in equal monthly payments of $500.00, per bus for (number of buses and description of buses), on the first day of each and every month during the term hereof, commencing. THE COUNTY, shall not be entitled to any credit or deductions from rental payments for non-operation of the buses due to mechanical failure or any other cause whatsoever unless due to prior conditions of the buses subject to the provisions of Paragraph 6 herein. THE COUNTY, shall also pay any and all sales use and excise taxes that may be imposed or levied as a result of this agreement or the payments made hereunder. 4. TITLE. Title to the buses shall remain in VOTRAN at all times, and THE COUNTY, shall have no right, title or interest therein except the possessory rights expressly set forth in this lease. THE COUNTY, agrees at all times to keep the buses free and clear of any and all claims, liens, and encumbrances, and JUL 3 0 2002 expense, protect and defend VOTRAN's title to the buses and right of possession against all others. This lease is intended only to be an. agreement for rental of the buses and is not and shall not be deemed a sale and security agreement, conditional sales contract, or other instrun~nt of conveyance. 5. INDEMNITY. THE COUNTY, shall indemnify and hold harmless VOTRAN and its agents, officers and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses and expenses, including but not limited to attorneys' fees, arising out of or resulting from The COUNTY's rental and use of the buses, provided that the claim,. damage, loss and expense is caused in whole or in part by any negligent act or omission of THE COUNTY, and subcontractor, anyone directly or indirectly employed by any one of them or anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable, regardless of whether or not it is caused in part by a party indemnified hereunder, except THE COUNTY shall not have to indemnify and hold harm/ess VOTRAN if such claim,, damage, loss and expense is the result of the negligence of VOTRAN or of anyone directly or indirectly employed by VOTRAN or anyone for whose acts VOTRAN may be liable. LESSOR and LESSEE, each being a government entity by State Charter, each claims, as against third parties, the protection of sovereign immunity, as set forth bv Florida Statzttes, Section 768.28. Nothing herein shall be construed to waive tl~e soverei~ immunity conferred pursuant to Florida Statutes, Section 768.28. 6. CARE AND MAINTENANCE OF BUSES. THE COUNTY at their sole expenses, shall maintain buses in good repair, condition, and working order, and shall return thereto VOTRAN in the same conditions as when received fromVOTRAN. THE COUNTY shall not be responsible for norrml wear and tear or depreciation resulting fromthe authorized use thereof. The COUNTYshall be responsible for ail charges and costs incurred in connection with the use of the buses during the term of this lease. If a major drive line component failure occurs (being part of an engine, transmission, or drive axle) and is not the result of an accident or abuse, the cost of these repairs will be divided by the percentage of miles since last overhaul of said components and as operatedby VOTRAN and THE COUNTY, provided a verifiable estimate of repairs is given and is agreed to by VOTRAN. VOTRAN would also have the option of making the repairs, or providing the c{ I~nopent if AGEND~ 2 JUL 3 0 2002 pg. VOTRAN costs are less than the estimate received from THE COUNTY. THE COUNTY shall make no addition, alterations, removal or attachment to the buses without the written consent of VOTRAN, except for the installation of tires, a fare box and a radio system. All additions, attachment, accessories and repairs at any time made or placed upon the buses shall, at the expiration of the term of this lease, at VOTRAN's sole election, become part of the buses and shall be the property of VOTRAN without any obligation to make payment therefore or VOTRAN may require the removal thereof at THE COUNTY expense. THE COUNTY shall perform usual and customary servicing of the buses in a preventative maintenance schedule of every 6,000 miles. THE COUNTY shall maintain maintenance records of inspections, corrective and preventative maintenance actions, which shall include the date, bus number, mileage, action required and taken, and parts THE COUNTY replaced, and/or repaired. These records are to be sent to VOTRAN on a rmnthly basis. 7. TIRE RESPONSIBILITY. THE COU~'TY shall be responsible for the placerrent of tires on these buses during the term of lease contract. 8. REPORTING DOCUMENTS. THE COU2',rTY shall submit to VOTRAN monthly maintenance and audit reports reflecting actual miles operated, damage reports, tire mileage, fuel and oil usage reports, and preventative n'aintenance reports. 9. OPERATION OF BUSES. THE COUNTY shall assure each bus is operated only by a fully qualified, competent, licensed driver. THE COUNTY shall require each driver to have a good driving record and to operate will all due care and diligence to prevent loss and damage of any nature. THE COUNTY shall limit use of the leases buses to approved transit services and routes. 10. DELIVERY OF BUSES. THE COUNTY shall be responsible for all phases of the delivery/return of the buses under this agreen-ent from/to VOTRAN, 950 Big Tree Road, South Daytona, FL 32119. THE COUNTY shall indermify VOTRAN a JUL 3 O 2002 under Item 5 of this agreerrent. 11. RISK OF LOSS. If any or all of the buses shall be damaged or destroyed during the term of this lease, through no fault of VOTRAN, THE COUNTY at their expense and at VOTRAN's option shall either (a) repair the buses, returning each to its previous condition, or (b) replace each bus so darmged with a like bus acceptable to VOTRAN and in good condition and equivalent value, which shall become the property of VOTRAN or (c) pay VOTRAN the fair market value of the bus(es) as of the date of the loss. Upon payment under (c) above, this lease shall terminate with respect to such paid for bus(es), andTHE COUNTY shall take title hereto. In case THE COUNTY shall fail to repair, replace or pay for the buses, VOTRAN may repair or replace each bus so damaged at THE COUNTY expense and VOTRAN may charge all amounts incurred by VOTRAN as additional rental which shall be inm~ediately payable by THE COUNTY to VOTRAN. After compliance with the foregoing to VOTRAN's satisfaction, and provided that THE COU~'NTY is not in default under this lease, THE COUNTY shall be subrogated to VOTRAN's rights with respect to any insurance policies or clairrs or reimbursement by others. 12. INSURANCE. THE COUNTY shall, LESSEE shall, at their own expense, insure the buses at all times against loss by fire, theft, vandalism,, collision, malicious mischief, liability insurance and extended coverage insurance, and such policies shall name VOTRAN as an insured party and all proceeds shall be payable to VOTRAN although THE COUNTY shall not provide insurance against VOTtLA. N's sole negligence. THE COUNTY, at its own expense, shall insure buses (and all operations conducted thereon) at all times against loss from claims under Worker's Compensation Act, and all acts or laws from claims for personal injury, and damages to property of others as long as the claims are not due to VOTRAN's sole negligence. Such policies of insurance or letter of evidence of its self insurance shall be satisfactory to VOTRAN as to form, amount, and insurer, and shall provide for at least ten (10) days prior written notice to VOTRAN of cancellation. AGI~N,~)A }T~M 4 JUL 3 0 2002 Pg. ~ THE COUNTY shall furnish the policies or copies thereof to VOTRAN as proof of such insurance within ten (10) days after execution of this lease. The buses shall be insured for the stated value of each. VOTRAN may act as attorney-in-fact for THE COUNTY in making, adjusting, or settling any claims under any insurance policies insuring the buses and negotiating any payment drafts from insurers. VOTRAN and THE COUNTY, each being a government entity by State Charter, each claims against third parties the protection of sovereign immunity, as set forth by Florida Statute 768.28. 13. ASSIGNMENT_. THE COUNTY shall not assign or transfer this lease or any interest therein or sublease all or any of the buses or permit the buses to be used by anyone other than THE COUNTY or the employees and agents of THE COUNTY without the prior written consent of VOTRAN. 14. DEFAULT. If (a) THE COUNTY shall fail to rrake any rent or other payment hereunder when due or (b) THE COUNTY shall fail to perform any obligation or covenant herein not involving the pa,xment of money and such default continues for ten (10) days after written notice thereof to THE COUNTY byVOTRAN, such event shall constitute default and event of default hereunder, and to the extent permitted by applicable law, VOTRAN shall have the right to exercise any one or more of the remedies provided hereafter. ! 5. REMEDIES. In the event of any default, VOTRAN at its option, rmy at any time thereafter sue THE COUNTY at law' or in equityto enforce perforrmnce of this lease to recover damages for breach thereof, and to recover possession of the buses, or by notice in writing to THE COUNTY. In the event of The COUNTY's default, VOTRAN may terminate this lease or declare the entire amount of the unpaid rent for the balance of the termof this lease immediately due and payable. Upon prior notice and demand by VOTRAN, THE COUNTY shall return the buses to VOTRAN as provided therein, and VOTRAN shall be entitled to enter the premises where the buses --. may be found and take possession of and rerrove the buses if THE COUNTY JUL 3 O 2002 p(:j. ~.9 refuses to return the buses within a reasonable tim. In the event of any default under this lease, THE COUNTY shall be liable for and shall pay VOTRAN all reasonable costs and expenses incurred by VOTRAN in connection with the enforcement of any of VOTRAN remedies including but not limited to, all expenses of any repossession, storing, and repairing the buses and all VOTRAN expenses, costs, and attorney's fees in connection, within whether such fees are incurred out of court, in the trial court, on appeal or in bankruptcyor administrative proceedings. 16. DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES. THE COUNTY aclcnowledges that THE COUNTY personnel has inspected each of the buses subject to this ag-reement and that it accepts all of the buses in their present condition, "as is". VOTRAN SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS ALL IMPLIED OR EXPRESS WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PUT_POSE as well as any warranty with respect to the design or condition of the buses, the quality3r capacity of the buses with the requirement of any law, rule, specification or contract pertaining thereto, patent infringerrent, or latent defects. 17. TIME OF ESSENCE. Time of essence of this lease in each and all of its provisions. 18. EXTRA EQUIPMENT. The VOTRAN agees to supply one (1) spare wheel for each bus that is leased to THE COUNTY during the life of this lease ageement. In addition, VOTRAN shall provide one (1) copy of the parts and service manuals to THE COUNTY during the life of this lease agreement. Both the spare wheels and the manuals shall be returned to VOTRAN at the end of the lease agreemnt. 19. LESSEE and LESSOR reserve the right to terminate this Lease, with or without cause, upon Thirty (30) days prior written notice of such termination to the addresses set forth in ARTICLE 13 of this Lease. 2002 20. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: SEVERABILITY. This lease comprises the complete agreement between the parties, and the provisions hereto shall govern the rights and obligations of VOTRAN and THE COUNTY except as specifically modified in writing. If any provision herein shall be held to invalid, it shall be considered deleted from this lease, and shall not invalidate the remaining provisions of this lease. Each of the covenants under this lease shall be independent covenants. 21. DAMAGES. VOTRAN shall not be liable under any circumstances for loss of THE COUNTY profits, loss of their employees, or independent contractors time, loss of business or any other damages, direct or indirect, special, incidental. consequential or otherwise caused by or resulting directly or indirectly from use' of the buses by THE COUk2',;TY. LEASE AGREEMENT EXECUTION This lease sets forth all the agTeements, terms, and conditions, and understandinos, between LESSOR and THE LESSEE and there are no aaTeements. customs, usages, ternz, conditions, or understandings either oral or writtenTexpressed or implied, between LESSOR and THE LESSEE, as Lessor and Lessee, other than that are herein set forth. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunder set forth their hands and seals. AS TO THE LESSEE: DATED: ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: BY: Deputy Clerk James N. Coletta, (7 buh-,-~,, , , JUL 3 0 2002 AS TO LESSOR: DATED: VOTRAN By: , Secretary Ken Fischer, President Witness (signature) (CORPORATE SEAL) Print Name Witness (signature) Print Name STATE OF FLORIDA COU~'TY OF VOLUSIA Ken Fischer, as President of VOTRAN, acknowledged the foregoing instru~nt before me this _ dayof_, 20__. He is personally known to me or he provided as identification. Notary Public, State of Florida Print/T.vpe Notary Name Cormnission Number: Commission Expires: Approved as to form and t.7,~egal sufficie~.y../ ~ '~ r ~hcq-~lihe'I-Id%'bard RolSmso" n ~ssistant County Attorney 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY REQUEST THAT THE BOARD APPROVE A LOAN OF $60,000 TO THE FOREST LAKES ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE MSTU FOR THE COMPLETION OF DRAINAGE WORK NECESSARY TO HELP PREVENT FLOODING OF HOMES IN THIS COMMUNITY OB,JECTIVE: To obtain Board approval of an interest free loan in the amount of $60,000.00 to complete drainage work to help prevent flooding in Forest Lakes. CONSIDERATIONS: The Forest Lakes Roadway and Drainage MSTU has voted to increase the Mil rate from 1 to 3, however, due to higher than anticipated costs on other drainage projects, they do not have enough funds to complete the 4th of 4 projects outlined by staff this year as necessary to reduce flooding. Funds are also needed to open up swales that these drains feed into. FISCAL IMPACT: $60,000 will be needed as an advance to the committee. The $60,000 will be borrowed from the MSTD General Fund (111) and will be repaid from the 2002/2003 tax revenues collected in the Forest Lakes MSTU Fund (155). A budget amendment is needed to transfer the $60,000 from the MSTD General Fund (111) and appropriate in the Forest Lakes MSTU Fund (155). GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None RECOMMENDATION: That the board approve an interest free loan for $60,000.00 from the MSTD General Fund (111) so that the Forest Lakes Roadway and Drainage MSTU can complete needed drainage work and approve the necessary budget amendments. SUBMITTED BY: /, / DATE: Bob P..e. tets,en, Project 1V'kanag~/ REVIEWED BY: - DATE: Ed~rd/~/~~tion Operations Director APPROVED BY: ! ~,~r DATE: Not/rr i E.Feder, AICP, Transportation Administrator / JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY REQUEST THAT THE BOARD APPROVE A LOAN OF $20,000 TO THE LIVINGSTON ROAD PHASE 2 BEAUTIFICATION MSTU FOR THE INITIAL LANDSCAPE DESIGN AND TO COVER SECRETARIAL EXPENSES FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE FISCAL YEAR. OBJECTIVE: To gain board approval of an interest free loan to the Livingston Road Phase 2 Beautification MSTU so that they can proceed with the initial landscape design of this project, and so that the committee has adequate funds to pay for the secretarial service required to provide minutes to the monthly meetings. CONSIDERATIONS: The Livingston Road Phase 2 Beautification MSTU is requesting sufficient funds to begin the design for the Landscaping of this portion of Livingston Road. These funds would allow the committee to begin the design process, so that when the roadway is finished, the beautification process will be well started. FISCAL IMPACT: Initially $20,000.00 dollars will be needed as an advance to the committee. These funds are to be repaid from the years tax revenues from the Livingston Road MSTU funds. A budget amendment is needed to transfer $20,000 from the MSTD General Fund (111) into the Livingston Road MSTU Fund (161) GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None RECOMMENDATION: That the Board approve a no interest loan to the Livingston Road Phase 2 Beautification MSTU in the amount of $20,000.00 from the MSTD General Fund (111) and to be repaid to the MSTD General Fund from the 1st years tax revenues and to approve the necessary Budget Amendments. SUBMITTEDBY:~ ~/'~'~'/ / DATE: 7 Bob petersen, Project Ma~g~r / Ed ation perations Director -- APPROVED BY: · Administrator 7/ Nod'na/fl E. Feder, AICP, Transportation / JUL 3 0 20'.32 Pg. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AWARD A CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT TO APAC-FLORIDA, INC. FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF NORTH 11TH STREET EXTENSION FROM STATE ROAD 29 TO ROBERTS AVENUE; COLLIER COUNTY PROJECT #62021, BID #02-3387. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board approve the award of a contract for the construction of North 11~h Street Extension, from State Road 29 to Roberts Avenue, to facilitate smooth circulation of traffic through this corridor. CONSIDERATIONS: The consulting firm of Wilkison and Associates, Inc. prepared the construction drawings for the North 11th Street Extension Project. On June 10, 2002, the County requested separate sealed proposals for Bid #02-3387 from firms that are interested in providing construction services for the above-referenced project. The bid opening took place on July 3, 2002. The Purchasing Department received six (6) bids, which were checked by the County for mathematical errors and corrected as follows: BIDDER TOTAL BID AMOUNT APAC- Florida, Inc. $144,150.50 Better Roads, Inc. $155,735.57 Cougar, Inc. $163,888.00 Florida State, Inc. $164,244.02 Ajax, Inc. $177,725.26 Bonness, Inc. $197,021.81 APAC-Florida, Inc. submitted the lowest responsive bid. APAC-Florida, Inc. has performed similar work for the County and has established a satisfactory performance record in the past.  F ISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $144,150.50 are available in the Road Impact Fee - District 5 Fund (339). GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This project is consistent with the Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board (1) Award a construction agreement to APAC-Florida, Inc., for the construction of North 11th Street Extension from State Road 29 to Roberts Avenue; and (2) Authorize the Chairman to sign the standard contract after approval by the County Attorney. SUBMITTED BY: ~kad/~aU'~K° ~r _// ~..er~' Date: A.~n o~'~, Prig REVIEWED BY: ~~'~/'~/J -~~-, Date"~/'~/' 't~ Edward J. Kant,/~/'/~.~.ra~spsortation Operations Director / / REVIEWED BY: __J,~~ ~ -~'/,~~'~/ Date: '7///O/(~ "Z.- Ste~e~,~arn~l~, Pur~:hasi~ birector N~/nan Feder, AICP, Transportation Services Administrator No.A~ JUL 3 8 2002 pg. JUL 3 0 2002 P~. ~ .... JUL :3 0 2002 pg. '~' AGENDA ITEM ~o.~ JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,928,170.77 TO BETTER ROADS, INC. AND ALLOCATE $190,000.00 (10% OF THE CONSTRUCTION COST) FOR CONTINGENCY PURPOSES TO CONSTRUCT THE PROPOSED IMMOKALEE ROAD/I-75 INTERCHANGE PROJECT, PROJECT NO. 66042A. OBSECTIVE: To receive Board approval to award a contract to proceed with the construction of Immokalee Road/I-75 Interchange project for $1,928,170.77 as per certified plans to the lowest bidder, Better Roads, Inc., and allocate $190,000.00 (10% of the construction cost) for contingency purposes. CONSIDERATION: Four (4) Bids were received, Bid No. 02-3381, on July 18, 2002 from Bonness, Inc., APAC-Florida, Inc., Better Roads, Inc., and Ajax Paving Industries, Inc. for the construction of Lrnmokalee Road/I-75 Interchange project. The lowest bid was from Better Roads, Inc., at $1,928,170.77, which was very near the engineer's estimate. This contractor has demonstrated satisfactory performance on other projects in the past. The construction duration for this project is 150 calendar days. It is anticipated that a Change Order, to this Contract, will add the northbound off ramp, along with the improvements at Northbrooke Drive at no cost to the County, since these improvements are being paid for by private development. In addition, this Contract will not be fully executed until such time as a LAP (Local Agency Program) Agreement has been approved, representing an $850,000 contribution by the State (anticipated execution date - end of July). The 10% contingency funds will allow staff to proceed with unforeseen conditions, scope additions and modifications, or any other unanticipated necessary task in a timely and efficient manner. ~ FISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $1,600,000.00 are available in the Transportation Impact Fee Fund, District 1. A Budget Amendment is needed to transfer $518,170.77 from the Transportation Gas Tax Reserves. Source of the funds are Gas Taxes and Impact Fees. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This Capital Improvement Element (CIE # 66042) is consistent with the Transportation Growth Management Plan. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the necessary Budget Amendment and award a contract to Better Roads, Inc., for the construction of the proposed Immokalee Roadfl-75 Interchange project, Bid No.02-3381, and authorize the Chairman to approve the standard construction agreement after County Attorney approval. , '-" A N JtJL 3 O 2002 SUBMITTED B~. ~ ~' ~--- DATE: Lynn R. Thorpe, P.E., Principal Project Manager / Greg~ 1~. Strakaluse, Director, T.E. & C.M.D. Steve Came~l, Director Purchasin~ ~eneral Services APPROVED BY' q ,/0~ "~~ DATE: Norman :der, Adrmmstrator T msportation Division AG~.E~ ITEM No._I JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE AND RECORD SATISFACTIONS FOR CERTAIN WATER AND/OR SEWER IMPACT FEE PAYMENT AGREEMENTS. FISCAL IMPACT IS $135.00 TO RECORD THE SATISFACTIONS. OBJECTIVE: Approval of and authorization for the Chairman to execute satisfactions for eighteen agreements to extend installment payment of water and/or sewer system impact fees. CONSIDERATIONS: The Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida as Ex-Officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water Sewer District, is the owner and holder of the Notice of Promise to Pay and Agreement to Extend Payment of Water and/or Sewer System Impact Fees executed by: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" Full payment and satisfactions of these agreements have been made. The County Attorney's Office has reviewed and approved the satisfactions. FISCAL IMPACT: Satisfaction of these agreements has increased water and sewer impact fees by $40,086.20. The fiscal impact for recording the Satisfaction of Liens is approximately $135.00, which is to be charged to (Fund 408) the County Water/Sewer Operating Fund Utility Billing cost center. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Them is no Growth Management impact associated with this item. RECOMMENDATION: Recommendation to acknowledge full payment and the satisfactions of these agreements and to surrender the same as canceled. Authorize the Chairman to execute the Satisfaction of Notice of Promise to Pay and Agreement. N0 · ~.~L.. JUL 3 0 2002 Prepared by: "*"~-. - f ..... Pam Callis,...R~venue Supervisor Utility Bil!ing and Qustomer Service Reviewed by: .//x,~/z'~'-''r ~;- ' /~ ~"~"~'----~ Date: Te~'esa A. Riesen, Revenue Manager U,.tility Billing and Custorr~r Service Reviewed by: ~"r"(~k~.~,~,~'' ~'t?''''. Date: Jo~n A. Yonkosk_~, Direct.o.~r.,,~:~ UtilitY~l~illing and Custo, m~Z'Se~A'ce /.~ -'~a~ W. geLony, ~E., A~inistrator. c Utilities Division .o. //.~ ~ l J U L 3 0 2002 ~,G:. ,,?-- , EXHIBIT "A"SATISFIED 1. Del H. Ackerman, a married man, securing the principal balance of ten thousand two hundred twenty six dollars and eighty cents ($10, 226.80). Folio #52600120008 2. Robert C. Allen, a married man, securing the principal balance of one thousand one hundred eighty dollars and no cents ($1,180.00). Folio #49630160009 3. Lurline S. Bowein, seller, and, Bert Nile Deems and Janet Sue Deems, husband and wife buyers, securing the principal balance of one thousand five hundred dollars and seventy-five cents ($1,500.75). Folio #62096280005 4. Sheila F. Roberts Haddix, securing the principal balance of one thousand nine hundred sixty dollars and no cents ($1,960.00). Folio #22721040000 5. Milton Henderson, a married man, securing the principal balance of one thousand two hundred sixty dollars and five cents ($1,260.05). Folio #82640280004 6. Dan D. Jeftich and Julie Jeftich, husband and wife, securing the principal balance of one thousand three hundred forty dollars and no cents ($1,340.00). Folio #00270600007 7. Robert L. Mcdonald & AIvina P. McDonald, husband and wife, securing the principal balance of six hundred forty five dollars and no cents ($645.00). Folio #51665000287 8. William Anthony Petruzzi, securing the principal balance of one thousand five hundred six dollars and thirty-six cents ($1,506.36). Folio #61840400003 9. Thomas J. Zenz and Susan L. Zenz, husband and wife, securing the principal balance of one thousand five hundred dollars and seventy-five cents ($1,500.75). Folio #62043480007 10. Jerome J. Clausen, securing the principal balance of one thousand two hundred sixty dollars and five cents ($1260.05). Folio #48783040006 11. Paul Boyce, securing the principal balance of five thousand five hundred seventy five dollars and no cents ($5575.00). Folio #00255087441 AG~:NDA [TEN / JUL 3 0 2002 12. Harry R. Nichols Jr., and Sharlie E. Nichols, husband and wife, securing the principal balance of two thousand two hundred fortY dollars and no cents ($2,240.00). Folio #00250480001 13. Harry R. Nichols Sr., and Sharlie E. Nichols, husband and wife, securing the principal balance of two thousand two hundred forty dollars and no cents ($2,240.00). Folio #00250480001 14.Harry R. Nichols Jr., and Shadie E. Nichols, husband and wife, securing the principal balance of two thousand two hundred forty dollars and no cents ($2,240.00). Folio #00250480001 15. Steven J. Petrera and Joan Petrera, husband and wife securing the principal balance of one thousand one hundred seventy two dollars and seventy cents ($1,172.70). Folio #00258964707 16. John H. & Blanche Ann Basler, husband and wife, securing the principal balance of one thousand three hundred forty dollars and no cents ($1,340.00). Folio ff-46071850308 17. Bevy Stump, securing the principal balance of one thousand six hundred thirty eight dollars and Sixty-nine cents ($1,638.69). Folio #62253640006 18.Timothy R. McCamish and Lynn R. McCamish, husband and wife, securing the principal balance of one thousand two hundred sixty dollars and five cents ($1,260.05). Folio #53400320007 AGE I, IOA IT£~/ JUL 3 O 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY REQUEST A BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR WASTEWATER COLLECTIONS FACILITY FOR $145,000 TO BE TRANSFERRED FROM RESERVES TO COVER THE EXPENSES FOR SEWER LINES REPAIRS AND CHEMICALS. OBJECTIVE: To obtain approval from the Board of County Commissioner, Ex-Officio the Governing Board of Collier County Water-Sewer District authorizing a budget amendment for thc Wastcwater Collections Facility for $145,000 to cover operating expenses for Fiscal Year 2001-2002 (FY 01-02). CONSIDERATIONS: The Wastewater Collections Facility needs $145,000 to cover the operating expenses for the remainder of FY 01-02. This is due to a shortage of funds for sewer line repairs and chemicals. The repair funds have been depleted due to the unanticipated sewer line breaks. The chemical funds expired due to the completion of a comprehensive odor control study in FY 02. The results of the study were to increase dosage rates of chemicals and add several new chemical feed sites. FISCAL IMPACT: These expenditures were unanticipated in the FY 01-02 Budget. A budget amendment is needed to transfer funds in the amount of $145,000 from the County Water/Sewer Operating Fund (408) Reserve for Contingencies. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact associated with the Executive Summary. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board of County Commissioners, as Ex-Officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, authorize a budget amendment for $145,000 to cover the increase operating expenses for the Wastewater Collections Facility. SUBMITTED BY<, (~e(~ ~ (~L~~Date:. ~- ]~-'0'~ ~M/~Josq~h B. (~heatham,/~g'fi~ewater Director REVIEWED BY: x~ ~,.~ ~<~)~.~~ Date: I :~'---%v-~/~'t--  [nes W. DeLony, P.E., 16ublic Utilities Administrator APPROVED B .'YT-- Date: James V. Mudd, P.E., County Manager (Act:±ng) JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT HARDSHIP DEFERRALS FOR CERTAIN SEWER SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR THE 2002 TAX YEAR. THE FISCAL IMPACT IS $21.00 TO RECORD THE RESOLUTION. OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners as the Governing Body of Collier County and Ex-Officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District adopt a resolution approving the deferral of sewer assessments pursuant to the hardship program that was adopted in the year 1994. CONSIDERATIONS: On March 8, 1994 the Board of County Commissioners adopted an assessment hardship program that provides annual assistance for property owners who are living below the poverty level and who are at risk of losing title to their homes as a result of each assessment. Staff reviewed the applications for the next fiscal year and determined the portions available for deferral according to the Federal Poverty Guidelines and other specific criteria set by the Board. The deferred amounts will not appear on the 2002 tax bills. Each property owner must renew his/her application on an annual basis. Property owners who qualified are identified as follows: Project Account Number Deferred Amount Percent of Deferral 51000 255651 $ 301.03 90% 51000 230605 $ 280.97 100% 51000 361655 $ 156.09 70% 51000 450508 $ 353.46 90% 51000 406808 $ 334.48 100% 51000 379304 $ 254.91 100% 51000 450854 $ 249.75 70% 54000 495754 $ 44.84 10% The County Attorneys office has reviewed this for legal sufficiency. I JUL 3 0 2002 ~, I FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact of the proposed deferral for 2002 is $1,975.53. Sufficient funds are available in the Collier County Water-Sewer District debt service fund to ensure compliance with current debt service requirements. The recording cost of this resolution in the public records will amount to approximately $21.00 and will be charged to Collier County Water-Sewer District operating administration account. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None, RECOMMENDATION: The Utility Billing and Customer Service Director recommends that the Board of County Commissioners, Governing Body of Collier County and Ex-Officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, approve the 2002 sewer assessment deferrals and authorize staff to make appropriate adjustments to the assessment rolls prior to tax bills being issued and adopt the attached Resolution. AGENDA DATE: July 30, 2002 PREPARED BY: "' .,..~' ~".~ Date Pam Callis, Revenue Supervisor Utility.~.ill~ng & Customer Service Department REVIEWED BY: Teresa Riesen, Solid Waste Revenue Manager Utility Billing & Customer Service Department REVIEWED BY: '~-.¢'~-..c-,c.. t,~.,~,...,~.~,~.~'-~ Date. J0i~ A. Yonkosky~ DirectoF' 0tili~y Billing &~Custo. m.er'~rvice Department ~'~'---'~ames W. DeLony P.E./~,dministrator ~.~blic Utilities Division AG[NOA ITE.~ ,0. /&, C., .~ JUL 3 0 2002 PG. ~ ~ ~ z O~ z ~ ~ z~ ~ 0 0 o~ 0 ~ 0 m 0 O0 O+ z 0 0 0 ~~ 0~ 0 0 ~Z < o ~ 0 ~ ~ o Z ~ 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ o o o o o o ~~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 - NO. /~~ JUL 3 0 2002 0 0 0 0 0 0 AG£~DA I T£M,-~ JUL 3 0 2002 PG. 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2002-__ 3 RESOLU'I:ION NO. CWS-2002- 4 $ 6 RESOLUTION BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY ? COMMISSIONERS AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF s COLLIER COUNTY,. FLORIDA AND AS EX-OFFICIO THE 9 GOVERNING BOARD OF THE COLLIER COUNTY lo WATER-SEWER DISTRICT, APPROVING THE SPECIAL it ASSESSMENT HARDSHIP DEFERRALS FOR CERTAIN 12 SEWER SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR THE 2002 TAX 13 YEAR. 15 t6 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners in its individual capacity l? as the Governing Body of Collier County, Florida, and as Ex-Officio the ts Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, (hereinafter referred 19 to as the "Board") established by Resolutions No. 96-358, and No. CWS-96-9 a 2o program for the deferrals of special assessments for water and/or sewer 21 improvements for homeowners who qualify under said Resolutions; and ?-2 WHEREAS, Section Eight of said Resolutions provides that the Board .--. 23 shall approve by resolution the special assessment hardship deferrals which 24 shall include the property owner's name, mailing address, legal description of the 25 property, property folio number, the name of the special assessment district, 26 account number and the amount of the annual special assessment payment 27 being deferred. 28 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY 29 COMMISSIONERS, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AS THE GOVERNING 30 BODY OF COLLIER COUNTY, AND AS EX-OFFICIO THE GOVERNING 31 BOARD OF THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT THAT: 33 1. The owners identified on Exhibit "A" have been approved for the 34 special assessment hardship deferral. 35 2. This Resolution shall be recorded in the Public Records of Collier 36 County, Florida. ...-~ 37 3. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its 38 adoption. AG£I~DA I T£~_ N0. I~, ~ ~ JUL 3 0 2002 I THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion, second and majority vote 2 this - day of _, 2002. ' 3 4 5 ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISS ONERS 6 DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ,AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF COLLIER ? COUNTY $ 1o tt 12 By: JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN 13 14 15 Approved as to form and 16 legal sufficiency: 19 :o Robert ~aef~ry Assistant County Attorney 23 24 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE WORK ORDER GH-FT-02-9 WITH GREELEY AND HANSEN LLC, TO PERFORM PHASE 2 ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE SANTA BARBARA SEWER FORCE MAIN INTERCONNECT BETWEEN THE NORTH AND SOUTH WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEMS, PROJECT 73132, IN THE AMOUNT OF $659,080. OB,.IECTIVE: To design and construct a sewer force main interconnect system along Santa Barbara Boulevard and Logan Boulevard which will allow flows to be transferred between the North and South Wastewater Collection systems. CONSIDERATIONS: On December 11, 2001, the Board adopted the 2001 Wastewater Master Plan Update to establish priorities for the design, acquisition, and construction of the various capital improvement projects. Sewer interconnection projects are identified in the adopted Mater Plan. This interconnect project will allow sewer flows to be transferred between the North County Water Reclamation Facility (NCWRF) and the South County Water Reclamation Facility (SCWRF) by the construction of a sewer force main interconnect. Greeley and Hansen LLC was authorized in February 2002, per ----- Work Order GH-FT-02-02, to determine the design alignment and property acquisition requirements. The proposed sewer force main interconnect design and recommendations were presented in the Phase 1 Design Report finalized in June 2002 by Greeley and Hansen LLC. The proposed sewer force main interconnect is about six miles long and will be installed along Santa Barbara Boulevard and Logan Boulevard from Radio Road north to Vanderbilt Beach Road. The project also includes the construction of two (2) new pump stations and modifications to existing wastewater pumping stations. The force main was originally planned to be installed with the proposed Santa Barbara Boulevard road improvements starting construction in 2004 with completion by 2006. Since there were delays in obtaining the permit for the construction of the expansion of the SCWRF, the need to transfer flows between the north and south wastewater systems has become critical and the project needs to be accelerated to be designed, constructed, and operational by the end of 2003. Staff has negotiated a scope of work and fees under our Annual Fixed Term Utilities Engineering Services Contract 00-3119 with Greeley and Hansen LLC. Proposed fees for the Work Order GH-FT-02-9 attached are summarized as follows: JUL 3 0 2002 Executive Summary Approve Work Order #GH-FT-02-9 for Engineering Services for Design and Construction of Santa Barbara Sewer Interconnect between North and South Wastewater Collection Systems. Page 2 of 3 Task 1-Perform Final Design $455,460 Task 2-Bidding Services $ 15,760 Task 3-Services during Construction $187,860 TOTAL (Proposed) $659,080 FISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $659,080 are available in Project 73076 for North-South Sewer Interconnects. However, a new Project Number 73132 has been created to distinguish it from the other sewer interconnect projects. There are no funds currently available in this new project number 73132. Budget amendments are required to transfer funds from Project No. 73076 to Project No. 73132 in the amount of $659,080 plus $10,000 for other project expenses. Source of funds is Fund 413-Wastewater Capital Projects. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This project is needed to meet future sewer flow demands and to ensure sewer service reliability of the County's wastewater collection system as recommended in the 2001 Wastewater Master Plan Update adopted by the Board on December 11, 2002 as Agenda Item 8(a). RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners, as the Ex-Officio Governing Board of the Collier County Water- Sewer District, approve Work Order #GH-FT-02-9, and authorize the Public Utilities Engineering Director to execute this work order with Greeley and Hansen, LLC for the Phase 2 Engineering Services for Design and Construction of Santa Barbara (East) Sewer Interconnect between North and South Wastewater Collection Systems, and approve the necessary budget amendments. PREPARED BY: ~~-.~- ~-'~---~ DATE: ~//~//~?-- Mohan V. Thampi, P.E., Senior Project Manager Public Utilities Engineering Department J eatham, Wastewater Director Public Utilities Division AGENDA ITEMI /' JUL 3 0 2002 PG. Executive Summary Approve Work Order #GH-Fro02-9 for Engineering Services for Design and Construction of Santa Barbara Sewer Interconnect between North and South Wastewater Collection Systems. Page 3 of 3 REVIEWED BY: /L,-1 ,$,5~. DATE: Roy B/Anderson, P.E., Director Public Utilities Engineering Department ~ Ja~l~es W. DeLony,'P.E.,~dministrator (,~~blic Utilities Divisio~ AGItl4E, A JUL 3 0 2002 WORK ORDER # GH-FT-02-9 Agreement for Fixed Term Utilities Engineering Services Contract #00-3119 dated April 10, 2001 This Work Order is for professional engineering services for work known as: Project: Phase 2 - Engineering Services for Design and Construction of the Santa Barbara (East) Sewer Interconnect between the North and South Wastewater Collection Systems The work is specified in the proposal dated June 6, 2002, which is attached hereto and made a part of this Work Order. In accordance with the Terms and Conditions of the Agreement referenced above, Work Order #GH-FT-02-9 is assigned to Greeley and Hansen LLC. Scope of Work: Task I - Final Design Task 2 - Bidding Services Task 3 - Services During Construction Tasks shall be conducted as indicated in the attached Greeley and Hansen LLC proposal with detailed description of the subtasks in Exhibit A. Schedule of Work: Complete Task I to 3 within seventy (70) weeks from the Notice to Proceed authorizing start of work. Compensation: In accordance with Article Five of the Agreement, the County will compensate the Firm in accordance with the negotiated time and material sum amount indicated in the schedule below (if a task is time and material, so indicate and use the established hourly rate(s) as enumerated in Schedule "A" of the Agreement). Task 1 $ 455,460 (lump sum) Task 2 $ 15,760 (lump sum) Task 3 $ 187,860 (time and materials) TOTAL FEE $ 659,080 Any change within monetary authority of this Work Order made subsequent to final department approval will be considered an additional service and charged according to Schedule "A" of the Agreement. Mohan V. Thampi, P.E., Senior Project Manager / Date Public Utilities Engineer}ag Department Jos~ B. Cheatham, Wastewater Director Date !I/ublie Utilities Division APPROVED BY: Roy B. Anderson, P.E., Director Date Public Utilities Engineering Department ACCEPTED BY: Date: ..'3-,fly ~ i'ZDc~'2' GTCelC¥ and Hansen LLC ATTEST: Name of Firm - - --~"'~' Roger S. Howell, P.E., Associate Type Name and Title MVT:mvt Project 73132, 73150, and 73151 - Phase 2 Engineering Services for Design and Construction of the Santa Ba Interconnect between the North and South Wastewater Collection Systems / J U L 3 0 EXHIBIT A COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT PUBLIC UTILITIES ENGINEE~G DEPARTMENT Work Order #GH-FT-02-9 Phase 2 - Engineering Services for Design and Construction of the Santa Barbara (East) Sewer Interconnect between the North and South Wastewater Collection Systems PLIED Project Nos. 73132, 73150, and 73151 Scope of Services Greeley and Hansen LLC June 6, 2002 Greeley and Hansen LLC, herein referred to as ENGINEER, shall perform engineering services for Collier County, herein referred to as COUNTY, associated with Phase 2 engineering services for the East Interconnect between the North and South Wastewater Collection Systems, herein referred to as PROJECT, for COUNTY. This work order shall be completed in accordance with the terms of Contract 00-3119. The PROJECT includes Phase 2 engineering services for the proposed East Interconnect between the north and south wastewater collection systems. This PROJECT was identified in the 2001 Wastewater Master Plan Update, which was adopted by the Board on December 11, 2001 as Agenda Item 8(a). Preliminary details of the PROJECT were developed in the Preliminary Study of the East Interconnect between the North and South Wastewater Collection Systems, prepared by Hole Montes, November 2001. The East Interconnect will allow wastewater flow to be transferred between the North County Water Reclamation Facility (NCWRF) and the South County Water Reclamation Facility (SCWRF). The proposed force main is about six miles long and will be installed along Santa Barbara Boulevard and Logan Boulevard from Radio Road north to Vanderbilt Beach Road. The East Interconnect also includes two new pumping stations and modifications to existing pumping stations. A report was prepared in May 2002, which summarized the Phase 1 engineering services. The Phase 1 engineering services included development of pipeline alignment recommendations for the East Interconnect force main. The required easements were identified in the Phase 1 report, as well as recommendations for pumping station requirements and locations. The scope of services for Phase 2 is for the design and engineering services during construction of the East Interconnect. A description of the tasks for Phase 2 is presented below. Tasks 1 and 2 for design and bidding services, respectively, shall be performed as lump sum tasks. Task 3, Services During Construction shall be performed as a time and material task. The budget for engineering services is shown on Exhibit 1. JUL 3 0 ZO0 .5' TASK 1: FINAL DESIGN Prepare Contract Documents for PROJECT, which shall be comprised of all force main and pumping station drawings, special conditions, general conditions, supplemental conditions, specifications and bid and Agreement forms, necessary for construction of the project. Task 1.1 Perform Topographic Survey Existing topographic survey data will be provided in AutoCAD format by COUNTY for the locations of the proposed road improvements of Santa Barbara Boulevard from Davis Boulevard to Pine Ridge Road. The existing survey data shall be used by ENGINEER for the force main design. Provide topographic survey for the east or west half of the road right-of-way along Santa Barbara Boulevard and Logan Boulevard from Pine Ridge Road to Vanderbilt Beach Road, based on the recommended force main alignment in the Phase 1 report. The topographic survey shall consist of: · Locations of existing features, such as pavement limits, driveways, mailboxes, signs, fences, poles, valves, hydrants, manholes, ditches, trees, landscaping and other similar items within the right-of-way; · Locations of property comers and fights-of-way; · Horizontal and vertical control; ~-~ · Cross sections of grade elevations at 200-foot intervals; and · Invert elevations of all storm and sanitary sewers within the survey corridor that affect the design. Task 1.2 Perform Geotechnieal Investigation Perform a geotechnical investigation, which shall include not more than 30 Standard Penetration Test soil borings along the route of the proposed force main and at pumping station sites. Perform soil borings at all road and water crossing sites and at other locations selected by ENGINEER. Provide a summary report of the geotechnical investigation. Provide twenty copies of the report for use by bidders. Task 1.3 Prepare Force Main Design Prepare force main drawings and specifications. Drawings shall include plan and profile pipeline design and details sufficient for construction of PROJECT. Plan and profile drawings shall be at a scale of 1'= 40' horizontal and 1"= 4' vertical. Details shall consist of pipe bedding, surface restoration, thrust restraint, valves, air release appurtenances, blow-offs and special crossing details. Prepare the technical specifications, bid form, and special conditions for the specifications. COUNTY shall provide non-technical specification documents to ENGINEEK for review and input. COUNTY shall edit the non-technical specifications for conformance with the technical specifications. Page 2 of 6 ~ JUL 3 0 2002 Task 1.4 Prepare Pumping Station Design Prepare pumping station design drawings and specifications for two pumping stations. One pumping station will serve as a master pumping station and will be located near the intersection of Logan Boulevard and Vanderbilt Beach Road. The other pumping station will serve as an in- line booster pumping station and will be located north of Green Boulevard on the east side of Santa Barbara Boulevard. Incorporate the pumping station drawings and specifications with the force main drawings and specifications for bidding and construction as one contract. Include a site plan and details for piping, electrical, structural, odor control and miscellaneous details for each pumping station design sufficient for construction of PROJECT. Prepare details for modifications to existing Master Pumping Station 3.13 to allow wastewater flow to be pumped to the new East Interconnect force main. Prepare the technical specifications, bid form, and special conditions for the specifications. County shall provide non-technical specification documents to ENGINEER for review and input. COUNTY shall edit the non-technical specifications for conformance with the technical specifications. Task 1.5 Design Review Submit five copies each of drawings, specifications and construction cost estimates to COUNTY for review at the 60 percent and 95 percent complete stages. Incorporate COUNTY review comments into the final contract documents. One meeting with COUNTY shall be held after the 60 percent and one after the 95 percent submittals to discuss review comments. Submit five sets of the final Contract Documents and construction cost estimate to COUNTY. Submit monthly project status reports. Up to six monthly design review meetings will be held with COUNTY during design. Task 1.6 Prepare Permit Applications Prepare permit applications for submittal by COUNTY. Permit applications shall consist of the FDOT Utility Permit, FDEP General Use Pen-nit, COLTNTY Right-of-Way Permit, and the Noticed General Permit for submittal to the FDEP, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and South Florida Management Water District. Permit Application fees shall be paid by COUNTY. TASK 2: BIDDING SERVICES ENGINEER shall provide assistance in securing bids for PROJECT as follows: Task 2.1 Prepare and Issue Addenda Provide interpretation and clarification of plans and technical specifications, including preparation and issuance of addenda. Task 2.2 Coordinate with Purchasing Page 3 of 6 n0._~a_~ JUL 3 0 20'02 Coordinate bid process with COUNTY Purchasing Department, including advertisement, Contract Document sales and receipt of bids. Task 2.3 Distribute Contract Documents Print and distribute Contract Documents during bidding phase to prospective bidders. Distribute Contract Documents to up to five plan rooms in Collier County. Maintain record of Contract Document distribution. Task 2.4 Conduct Pre-Bid Meeting Organize and conduct pre-bid meeting with prospective bidders. Task 2.5 Prepare Bid Tabulation Attend bid opening. Prepare bid tabulation sheets. Task 2.6 Prepare Recommendation of Contract Award Assist COUNTY in evaluation of bids received. Provide COUNTY with a report on bids with a recommendation of contract award. Task 2.7 Prepare Conformed Contract Documents Prepare conformed contract documents and distribute five sets to COUNTY and five sets to contractor. TASK 3: SERVICES DURING CONSTRUCTION Task 3.1 Conduct Preconstruction Conference Organize and conduct preconstruction conference and prepare and distribute minutes. Task 3.2 Review Shop Drawings Review not more than two submittals each of shop drawings, schedules, samples and other documents that the contractor is required to submit for conformance with the design of the PROJECT and compliance with provisions of the specifications. Task 3.3 Issue Interpretations and Clarifications Issue interpretations and clarifications of the drawings and teeb. nical specifications during construction and evaluate requests for substitutions or deviations therefrom. Notify COUNTY of Page4of6 I M0.~ jut 3 all such requested deviations or substitutions and provide COUNTY with recommendations for such requests. Prepare change orders as directed by COUNTY. Task 3.4 Review Requests for Payment Review the contractor's requests for payment. ENGINEER'S recommendation for payment shall constitute a representation by ENGINEER to COUNTY, based on observations and evaluations, that: (a) the work has progressed to the point indicated; Co) the work is in substantial accordance with the Contract Documents; (c) the contractor is entitled to payment in the recommended mount. Task 3.5 Provide Full-Time Observation of Construction Provide full-time observation of construction of PROJECT, not to exceed 1,200 hours of Greeley and Hansen inspector time and $22,000 of subconsultant structural and electrical inspection time. Prepare daily field reports to summarize the daily work progress, number of workers, construction equipment used and to document the construction activities in general. Furnish copies of the daily field reports to COUNTY on a weekly basis. Take 3" x 5" color 35 mm photographs of critical aspects of the work. Log and categorize photographs as to work activity, date time, location and direction. Task 3.6 Prepare Punch List Upon receiving notice from the contractor that PROJECT is substantially complete, schedule and, with COUNTY, conduct a comprehensive inspection of PROJECT. Develop a list of items needing completion or correction and forward this list to the contractor and COUNTY. Substantial completion shall be deemed to be the stage in construction where PROJECT can be utilized for the purposes for which it was intended and all items that affect the operational integrity and function of PROJECT are capable of continuous use. Task 3.7 Conduct Final Inspection Conduct final inspection with COUNTY and assist COUNTY in closing out the construction contract, including providing recommendations concerning acceptance of PROJECT, preparing close-out change orders and review of final payment application. Task 3.8 Prepare Record Drawings Prepare and submit five sets of record drawings, one reproducible set and one electronic AutoCAD copy on CD. Record drawings shall be based on information received from the contractor. 'Ac~,~) x~, t ! Page 5 of 6 N0.._~__~-~ JUL 3 O 2002 COSTS Task 1:$455,460.00 (Lump Sum) Task 2: $ 15,760.00 (Lump Sum) Task 3:$187,860.00 (Time and Materials) Total: $659,080.00 SCHEDULE (After Notice to Proceed) Time for Cumulative Completion Time for Completion Task 1: 28 Weeks 28 Weeks Task 2: 6 Weeks 34 Weeks Task 3: 36 Weeks 70 Weeks Page 6 of 6 n0. _ / JUL 3 0 2002 p~. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION BY GIFT OR PURCHASE OF NON-EXCLUSIVE PERPETUAL UTILITY INTERESTS BY FEE SIMPLE INTEREST AND/OR EASEMENT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A FORCE MAIN AND PUMP STATION SITES REQUIRED FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT SANTA BARBARA SEWER FORCE MAIN INTERCONNECT PROJECT BETWEEN THE NORTH AND SOUTH WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEMS, PROJECTS 73076, 73132, 73150, and 73151, AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $470,012. OBJECTIVE: To obtain authorization from the Board of County Commissioners, as the Governing Body of Collier County and as Ex-Officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District (hereinafter referred to as the "Board") to acquire by gift or purchase all rights and interests in real property required for the construction and maintenance of utility improvements and facilities for the Collier County Water-Sewer District Santa Barbara Sewer Force Main Interconnect Project Between the North and South Wastewater Collection Systems, (hereinafter referred to as the "Project"). CONSIDERATIONS: On December 11, 2001, the Board adopted the 2001 Wastewater Master Plan Update to establish priorities for the design, acquisition, and construction of the various capital improvement projects. The Project will allow flow to be transferred between the North County Water Reclamation Facility (hereinafter referred to as the "NCWRF") and the South County Water Reclamation Facility (hereinafter referred to as the "SCWRF"). The proposed sixteen (16") inch force main is approximately six (6) miles long and will be installed along Santa Barbara Boulevard and Logan Boulevard from Radio Road north to Vanderbilt Beach Road. The Project also includes the construction of two (2) new pump stations and modifications to existing pumping stations. The force main was originally planned to be installed with the proposed Santa Barbara Boulevard road improvements starting construction in 2004 with completion by 2006. Since there were delays in obtaining the permit for the construction of the expansion of the SCWRF, the need to transfer flows between the north and south wastewater systems has become critical and the Project needs to be accelerated to be designed, constructed, and operational by the end of 2003. Priorities were placed on new force main alignments that would minimize interference with the proposed construction of the Santa Barbara Boulevard roadway-widening project, and avoid conflicts with the existing and proposed utilities. Staff has reviewed alternative locations, environmental factors, cost variables, safety and welfare considerations (see attached July 8, 2002 memorandum) as they relate to the construction of the Project and staff has determined that the most feasible location for the utility improvements for the construction of the Project is more particularly described in Exhibit "A" of the attached Resolution. This Resolution is to approve the negotiated purchase of property with owners without having tp present each parcel to the Board on a case-by-case - this procedure will expedite the Project. The Board may also be requested later to authorize condemnation of parcels not secured through negotiations. JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Resolution for Gift and/or Purchase - Santa Barbara Sewer Force Main Interconnect Project Page 2 FISCAL IMPACT: Total acquisition cost is estimated at $470,012 and includes all land, improvements, title policies, survey, staff time and appraisal fees, etc. In FY 02, funds in the amount of $470,012 are available in the Sewer Impact Fee Fund (413), N-S Sewer Interconnect Project (73076). New project numbers 73132, 73150, and 73151 have also been created and funds will be available in FY03 when the budget is adopted. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The project is recommended in the latest 2001 Wastewater Master Plan adopted by the Board in December 11, 2001, Agenda Item 8(A). RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: 1. Having reviewed alternative locations, environmental factors, cost variables, safety and welfare considerations as they relate to the construction of the Project, find that the most feasible location for the utility improvements for the construction of the Project is more particularly described in Exhibit "A" of the attached Resolution; 2. Adopt the attached Resolution authorizing the acquisition by gift or purchase of non-exclusive, perpetual utility interests by easement and fee simple as required to complete the Santa Barbara Sewer Force Main Interconnect Project between the North and South Wastewater Collection Systems; and 3. Authorize the Chairman to execute the attached Resolution. Cindy M. Erl~, Sr. Property Acquisition Specialist Property Acquisition & Construction Management Facilities Management Department loni~. Mo~, Supo~sor ~ropo~y ~cquisition & Gonstruction Manaoomont F~litios Mana~mont ~opadmont REVIEWED BY: . _ _ ~ ~, . DATE:~' ~' 0 ~ Charles E. Carrington, Jr., ~A, ~anager Prope~ Acquisition & Construction Management Facilities Management Depa~ment N0. A~"~ .... ~'" J U L 3 0 2002 PG. ~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Resolution for Gift and/Or Purchase - Santa Barbara Sewer Force Main Interconnect Project Page 3 REVIEWEDBY: ~ DATE: Skip Camp, Director Facilities Management Department Mohan V. Thampi, P.E., Senior Project Manager Public Utilities Engineering Department REVIEWED BY: ~' z:'~-~ / ~ ~ DATE: Roy B. 'Anderson, P.E., Director Public Utilities Engineering Depa~ment ~b~. ~eLony, P.E., Admini~rator Utilities Division AG~. NDA JUL 3 0 2002 .. PG. COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC UTILITIES ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: July 8, 2002 TO: James W. Delony, P.E., Utilities Administrator Roy B. Anderson, P.E., Director-PUED FROM: Mohan Thampi, P.E., Senior Project Manager ~ ~/'~ RE: Santa Barbara Sewer Force Main Interconnect, Project 73132 Force Main Alignment Analysis and Recommendation The proposed force main and pumping stations for the Santa Barbara Sewer Force Main Interconnect Project between the North and South Wastewater Collection Systems (East Interconnect) were identified in the 2001 Wastewater Master Plan and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on December 11, 2001. County hired Greeley and Hansen LLC to provide design engineering services for this project. Design recommendations were presented in June 2002 and are summarized below. The East Interconnect will allow wastewater flow to be transferred between the North County Water Reclamation Facility (NCWRF) and the South County Water Reclamation Facility (SCWRF). The proposed force main will be installed along Santa Barbara Boulevard and Logan Boulevard from Radio Road north to Vanderbilt Beach Road. The East Interconnect also includes two new pumping stations and potential modifications to an existing Master Pumping Station (MPS) 3.13. The East Interconnect force main was scheduled to be installed with the proposed Santa Barbara Boulevard road improvements starting construction in 2004 with completion by 2006. Due to delays in permitting and construction of the expansion to the SCWRF, the need to transfer flows between the north and south wastewater systems is critical and the East Interconnect needs to be operational by the end of 2003. An accelerated construction schedule has been developed to allow the force main and pumping stations in service by the end of 2003. The recommended alignment consists of 33,200-LF of 16-inch diameter force main, a new master pumping station to be constructed near the intersection of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Logan Boulevard, an intermediate booster-type pumping station located north of Green Boulevard, and modifications to the existing MPS 3.13. Most of the proposed 16-inch diameter force main can be constructed within the existing right-of-way of Santa Barbara Boulevard and Logan Boulevard with minimal disruptions to the existing roadway. One of the design criteria for the new force main was to investigate whether the construction could be completed within the existing rights-of-way, such that additional easements would not have to be acquired. Priorities were placed on new force main alignments that would minimize interference with the proposed construction of the Santa Barbara Boulevard roadway-widening project, and avoid conflicts with the existing and proposed utilities. Alternate alignments were examined that would enable the force main construction to be completed outside the proposed roadway project, but within the limits of existing right-of-way. Since the Santa Barbara roadway-widening project extends the propos:,~:.-;r.oadwayAo_t!~e.,~ Page 1 of 2 .~ 0 t.,.. ~ ' west, a large number of easements would need to be acquired to allow the proposed force main to be constructed on the west side of Santa Barbara Boulevard. Constructing the proposed force main on the west side of Santa Barbara Boulevard would also require extensive clearing ahead of the roadway construction, thus increasing the cost of force main construction. It was determined that the east side of Santa Barbara Boulevard would be better suited for the new force main alignment. There are four easements required for the proposed 16-inch diameter force main along the east side of Santa Barbara Boulevard near the Green Canal crossing, south of Green Street. An existing water main is located along the east side of the bridge crossing the Green Canal. A horizontal clearance of ten feet must be maintained between the existing water main and proposed force main. The proposed force main alignment is in easements ten feet east of the existing water main. An alternate force main alignment ten feet west of the existing water main was considered. The alternate alignment would require the proposed force main to be constructed under the pavement of Santa Barbara Boulevard and would require temporary closure of one lane of northbound traffic. In order to minimize public impacts and reduce construction costs, the east alignment (in easements) was selected. The east alignment will also provide for easier future access to the force main for maintenance, since it will be located outside of the pavement area. There are no environmental impacts with either force main alignment. There are also two proposed wastewater pumping stations, which are included with the East Interconnect project. Several alternate sites were evaluated for each station. Locations were selected based on proximity to the recommended force main alignment along Santa Barbara Boulevard, proximity to existing dwellings, site availability and cost. Each site would require similar footprints of construction and thus environmental impacts are similar for each site. Public safety issues are similar for each site. The intermediate pumping station site roughly measures 75 feet by 75 feet, and is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Santa Barbara and 14th Avenue. The Vanderbilt Beach Road Master Pumping Station site measures 200 feet by 200 feet, and is located on the west side of Logan Boulevard, north of 72 Avenue NW. Estimated construction costs for this project were developed from bids for recent similar projects and information obtained from manufacturers of the equipment. The total estimated construction cost for the project is as follows: 16-Inch Force Main $ 5,205,820.00 Vanderbilt Beach Road MPS $ 1,315,485.00 Intermediate Pumping Station ~; 689,770.00 Total Project Estimated Cost $ 7,211,075.00 cc: File 73132.07 MVT:mvt Page 2 of 2 ! RESOLUTION NO. 2002- 2 RESOLUTION NO. CWS-2002- __ 6 A RESOLUTION AUTtIORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF LAND BY GIFT OR 7 PURCHASE OF FEE SIMPLE TITLE INTEREST AND/OR NON-EXCLUSIVE, 8 PERPETUAL, UTILITY INTERESTS BY EASEMENT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF 9 PIPELINE AND PUMP STATION SITES REQUIRED FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY 10 WATER-SEWER DISTRICT SANTA BARBARA SEWER FORCE MAIN Il INTERCONNECT PROJECT BETWEEN THE NORTH AND SOUTH WASTEWATER 12 COLLECTION SYSTEMS. 13 14 15 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners, as the Governing Body of Collier and as Ex- 16 Officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, hereinafter referred to as 17 "Board", on December 11. 2001, adopted the 2001 Wastewater Master Plan Update for the County's 18 Sewer Service area in order to establish priorities for the design, acquisition and construction of the 19 various wastewater capital improvement projects; and 20 WHEREAS, the Santa Barbara Sewer Force Main Interconnect Project between the North and 21 South Wastexvater Collection Systems, hereinafter referred to as "Project", is one of the wastewater 22 capital improvement projects required under the 2001 Wastewater Master Plan Update for the ~ County's Se~er Service area; and ~~. WHEREAS, the Project involves the construction of a force main and pump stations that will 25 allow xvastewater floxv to be transferred between the North County Water Reclamation Facility, 26 hereinafter referred to as "NCWRF" and the South County Water Reclamation Facility hereinafter 27 referred to as "SCWRF"; and 28 WHEREAS, alternate locations, environmental factors, long range planning, cost variables, 29 concurrence, safety and welfare considerations have been reviewed as they relate to the 30 implementation of said utility improvements; and it has been recommended by County Staff that it is 31 necessary and in the best interest of Collier County, Florida, to construct the force main and pump 32 stations as part of the "Project" as identified on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by 33 reference; and 34 WHEREAS, the design and construction of said utility improvements and related facilities have 35 been determined by the Board to be necessary and in the best interest of Collier County; and 36 WHEREAS, the construction of the utility improvements and related facilities contemplated by 37 the Project are necessary in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Collier County by allowing the wastewater flow to be transferred between the NCWRF and SCWRF and will -Page JUL 3 0 2002 I assist Collier County in meeting certain concurrency requirements of the Growth Management Plan for 2 Collier County. 3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE 1T RESOLVED BY TIlE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF 4 COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF COLLIER AND AS EX- 5 OFFICIO THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT, 6 that: 7 1. The Board has considered the environmental factors, safety factors and fiscal 8 considerations relating to the final adopted location of the utility improvements and related facilities. 9 2. The utility interests by easement acquisitions identified on Exhibit "A" are the most 10 feasible locations, both necessary and consistent with the project requirements, in order to pen'nit the 11 construction and maintenance of the utility improvements and related facilities for the Project. 12 3. The Board has determined that the construction and maintenance of the Project and 13 related facilities are necessary for a public purpose and is in the best interest of Collier County. 14 4. The construction and maintenance of the utility improvements and related facilities are 15 compatible with the long range planning goals and objectives of the Growth Management Plan for 16 Collier County. 17 5. It is necessary and in the best interest of Collier County for the Board to acquire the 18 utility interests by fee simple title interest and/or non-exclusive, perpetual, utility interests by easement 19 identified in Exhibit "A"; and County Staff is hereby authorized and directed to acquire by gift or 20 purchase the fee simple interest and/or non-exclusive, perpetual, utility interests by easdment on the 21 properties identified in Exhibit "A". 22 6. The Chairman of the Board is hereby authorized to execute Appraisal Agreements with 23 the appraisal firm(s) selected from the list of firms pre-qualified by the Board of County 24 Commissioners. The Board further directs staff to use appraisal reports or internal compensation 25 estimates as staff determines is necessary to best serve the needs of the Project in a timely and cost- 26 effective manner. 27 7. The Board, hereby formally waives the requirement for a formal, independent appraisal 28 report for the purchase of a property where the purchase price of the parcel (the compensation due to 29 the property owner) is less than One Hundred Thousand and 00Il00 Dollars ($100,000.00). In lieu of 30 the independent appraisal report, staff is hereby authorized to make purchase offers for the properties, 31 the dollar amounts of which shall be predicated on "staff compensation estimates" based upon AGENDA ITE8 J U L 3 0 PG. I independent appraisals (and the data therefrom) obtained on similar properties and upon consideration and application of appropriate market value and cost data pertinent to the subject parcels. 3 8. Upon the approval by the County Attorney's Office of all documents necessary for the 4 subject property acquisition, Property Acquisition & Construction Management staff is hereby directed 5 to offer immediate delivery to the respective property owners of the full compensation (as established 6 by the appraisal or staff compensation estimates), in return for the immediate and proper execution of 7 the respective easements, or deeds and such other legal documents and/or affidavits as the County 8 Attorney's Office deems appropriate in order to protect the interests of the County; and the Board 9 hereby authorizes its present Chairman and any subsequent Chairman, for the life of the Project, to 10 execute any instruments which have been approved by the Office of the County Attorney, to remove 11 the lien of any encumbrance and for any such other purpose as may be required for the acquired utility 12 interests by easement or fee simple. 13 9. In those instances where negotiated settlements may be obtained via the "Purchase 14 Agreement" or "Easement Agreement" mechanism, the Director of the Public Utilities Engineering 15 Department, or his designee, is charged with the responsibility for completion of various capital ~ improvement projects, and is hereby delegated the authority to approve the purchase of land interests 17 above the staff compensation estimate or appraised value and pay normally related costs when it is in 18 the best interest of the Project, within the pro-rata share of the land rights acquisition budget for the 19 parcel being acquired, only when the difference between the purchase price and compensation estimate 20 or appraised value is less than Twenty Five Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($25,000.00) Or the current 21 purchasing limits established by the Collier County Purchasing Department; provided, Project funding 22 is available. 23 I0. That the settlement approval authority is delegated by the Board in accordance with the 24 provisions of Chapter 88-499, Laws of Florida. 25 1 I. The Chairman of the Board is hereby authorized to execute Easement Agreements and 26 Purchase Agreements where the land owner has agreed to sell the required land rights to the County at 27 its appraised value or at that amount considered the "Administrative Settlement Amount" as such term 28 is internally used by the administrative agencies of Collier County. 29 12. Where the property owner agrees, by sworn affidavit or agreement ("Purchase ~--.30 Agreement" or "Easement Agreement"), to convey a necessary interest in real property to the County, 31 and upon the proper execution by the property owner of those easements or fee simple title, and such I other legal documents as the Office of the County Attorney may require, the Board hereby authorizes 2 the Finance Department to issue warrants, payable to the property owner(s) of record, in those amounts 3 as shall be specified on a closing statement and which shall be based upon the appraisal or staff 4 compensation estimate in accordance with this Resolution, and the provisions of Chapter 88-499, 5 Laws of Florida. 6 13. All title to properties or interests in properties which have been obtained in the manner 7 described above shall be deemed "accepted" by the Board of County Commissioners, as the Governing 8 Board of Collier County and as Ex-Officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer 9 District, and as such, staff is hereby authorized to record in the Public Records of Collier County, 10 Florida, said easements or fee simple title and such other instruments as may be required to remove the 11 lien of any encumbrance from the acquired properties. 12 THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED on this . day of , 2002, after motion, 13 second and majority vote. 14 15 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF 16 COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS THE 17 18 ATTEST: GOVERNING BODY OF COLLIER COUNTY 19 DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK AND AS EX-OFFICIO THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER- 20 SEWER DISTRICT 21 22 23 24 Deputy Clerk By: 25 JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Approved as to form and 33 lega,~,sufficiency: 35 36 Ellen T. Chadweil 37 Assistant County Attorney ill .0. C ,B :- J U L 3 0 2002 PG: . ..- ~ I I EXHIBIT_?/" SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION. PRO4ECT, PARCEL ~/c~/ ~ee. / o,._~_ OF A 20' UTILITY EASEAfENT FOLIO IN LOT 1, BLOCK 157, GOLDEN GA~ UNIT NO. 5, P~T BOOK 5, PAGE 117-123, CO~ER COUNt, ~ORIDA SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD I 125.01' J/ "o CONTAINING i c~ 2567 SQ. FT. 'a LOT 1, BLOCK 157 Z I-- GOLDEN GATE UNIT NO. 5 rq FOLIO NO. 36234.200006 Z U3 OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 2332. r- :~ PAGE 2237 ~ 0 20 ~0 sc,u.s ( ]:N tEE? ) ~ inch = 4-0 ft. OESCRIPTION: THE W~ST 20 FE-E'T OF LOT 1, BLOCK 157, GOLDEN GATE UNIT NO. 5, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 5, PAGE 117-123, THE PUBLIC RECOROS OF COllIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. J/C~ES N. W1LKISON (FOR THE FIRM LB6773) NOT VALID ~ITHOUT THE SIGNATURE AND ORIGINAL RAISED I~ROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR AND MAPPER SEAL OF A FLORIDA UCENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER. FLORID.~.UCENSE NO. LS ~,876 THIS /~'- DAY OF,~r¢ 2002. THIS IS NOT A SURVEY ,JEFFREY ¢. ¢OONER AND ASSO¢IAIES, INC. SURVEYING AND MAPPING 3900 COLONIAL BLVD., 5-~JITE 4, FORT MYERS, FLORIDA 33912. PHONE.: (941)277-0722 FAX: (94.1)277-7179 E~AIL.: SURVEYING~COONER.COM CLIENT: GREELEY HANSEN, LLC DRAWN BY: JRF BY: PARCEL DF_.~CRIPTION: DATE: MAY 3. 2002 SCALE: 20' U'RUTY EASEMENT IN BLOCK 157, GG UNIT NO. 5 PROJECT No: 020410 No: 0204.105KD4 EXH~I~T "'~4' SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION PROJECT ~ .~ :,f ,, OF A 20' UTILITY EASEMENT PARCEL --IN LOT 1, BLOCK 158, GOLDEN GATE UNIT NO. 4-, PART 1, FOL]:O,~/~a3~ PLAT BOOK 9, PAGE 122, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD 100.00' ---, ..- _ 105.98'_ ~_.__~ P'I LOT 1, BLOCK 158 -r' m Z GOLDEN (:;ATE UNIT NO. 4, PART 1, "0 LESS THE NORTH 103.98' THEREOF. I-" 3> FOLIO NO. 36180360003 m '7 3> OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 2906, r- I PAGE 1710 i ~' LOT 1 4.O 0 20 4.0 SCALE ( IN FEET 1 inch = 40 ft. THE WEST 20 FEET OF LOT 1, BLOCK 158. (:;OLDEN GATE UNIT NO. 4, PART 1, LESS THE NORTH 101.3.98 FEET THEREOF, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK g, PAGE 121-124-, THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. __ ~.~_~.,....,._,~,._,_?_:py,/_~__c__.~._.__ NOT VALID WITHOUT THE SIGNATURE AND ORIGINAL RAISED JAI~S N. WlLKISON [FOR THE FIRM L86775) SEAL OF A FLORIDA UCENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER. PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR AND MAPPER I~iOsR~D~'z.~N'rS%F"O._gL,~SpTo~2. THIS IS NOT A SURVEY 5/22/02, REVlSE~: JEFFREY C. COONER AND ASSOCIAiF_.S, INC SURVEYING AND MAPPING I .3900 COLONIAL BLVD., SUITE 4., FORT MYERS, FLORIDA ,35912 PHONE: (94-1)277-0722 FAX: (94-1)277-7179 EMAIL: SURVEYINGCeCOONER.COIvl Cl lENT: GREELEY HANSEN, LLC__ IDRAWN BY: JRF ICHECKED BY: . . ,.^,, ,-..o I 2o. U~L,-- EASE,,,ENT IN BLOCK IPRO,,~'CTNo: 020410 low 158, GG UNIT NO, 4, PART 1 / PG. .- '; 7 7;, ' SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION PRO~ECT EXHIBIT "~" ... ~ .,~ o~ ,, OPA 20' UTILITY EASEMENT PARCELED2 IN LOT 1, BLOCK 158, GOLDEN GATE UNIT NO. 4, PAET 1, FOLIO PLAT BOOK 9, PAGE 122, COLJJER COUNTY, FLORIDA SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD 100.00' ~ 103.98' ~ CONTAINING --%~1 ~ 1946 SQ. FT. z , THE N. 103.98' OF LOT 1, BLOCK 158 ~ I GOLDEN GATE UNIT NO. 4., PART 1 r- D> Z :~ I FOLIO NO. 36160380009 rq r-- ~ OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 2906, I I PAGE 1773 ~ LOT 1 SCALE ( IN FEET ) DESCRIPTION; I inch = 40 rt. THE WEST 20 FEET OF THE NORTH 103.98 FEET LOT 1, BLOCK 158, GOLDEN GATE UNIT NO. ~, PART 1, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 9, PAGE 121-12a., THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLJER COUNTY, FLORIDA. JAiv(~S'/N. WlLKISON (FOR THE FtRU L96773) SEAL OF A FLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER. PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR AND MAPPER FLORIDA. LICENSE NO. LS ¢87~ THIS '?'t'"'-~AY OF~:~200:2. THIS IS NOT a SURVEY ,JEFFREY O. O00N£R AND ASSOCIATES, INO. SURVEYING AND MAPPING ._. 3900 COLONIAL BLVD., SUITE 4, FORT MYERS, FLORIDA 33912 PHONE: (9aa)277-0722 FAX: (941)277--7179 EMAII: SURVEYING~X:OONER.COM CUE:Nm: GREELEY HANSEN, L.LC DRAWN BY: JRF CHECKED BY: J.N. i_ PARCEL DESCRIPTION: DATE: MAY 3, 2002 SCA[E: 1"-~0' NO._i 20' U~UTY EASEMENT IN BLOCKt F..XH SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION PROJECT ,, P~ .~ of ~r OF A 20' UTILITY EASEMENT PARCEL IN BLOCK 152, GOLDEN GATE UNIT NO. 4, PART 1, -"OLIO PLAT BOOK 9, PAGE 122, COllIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ..... SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD I 330.03' --~ 'O CONTAINING 6333 SQ. FT. O3 Cq m "I" ~ BLOCK 152 Z "13! GOLDEN GATE UNIT NO. 4., PART 1 r- ~ FOLIO No. 36180080008 ("3 OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 1811, m PAGE 2315 r'~ 60 0 .30 60 sc~x2: ( r~ ~'~.? ) 1 inch. ~ gO ft. THE WEST 20 FEET OF BLOCK 152. GOLDEN GATE UNIT NO. 4., PART 1, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK g, PAGE 122. THE PUBUC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. J^~s~ N. ~U~,SON (~OR THE ~,R~ ,.~-~-/:) SEAL OF A ~OR~DA UCENS~ SUrVeYOR ^NO ~APPF. R. PF~OFES~ONAL SURVEYOR ANO ~^PPER FLORIDA LICENSE NO. LS 4-876 TH,Sq~",-DAY OF~OOZ THIS IS NOT A SURVEY JEFFREY C, COONER AND ASSOCIAteS, INC. SURVEYING AND MAPPING 3900 COLONIAL BLVD,, SUITE 4., FORT MYERS, FLORIDA 33912 PHONE: (94.1)277-0722 FAX: (94.1)277--7179 EMAII'- SURVEY1NG~COONER.COM CUE:Nm: GRF'_F'I Fy HANSEN, LLC DRAWN BY: JRF CHECKED BY: J.N.'~ PARCEL DESI:~IPTION: :DATE: MAY 3, 2002 SCAIF: 1"=60' NO._i(..~'.~ 20' u'rlUTY EASEMENT IN BLOCK DWG No: 0204-10SK06 J S~: 152, GG UNIT NO. 4., PART 1 PROJECT No:, 020410, /.~ SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION ~~~ A PUMPING STATION UTILITY EASEMENT IN THE NORTH 150' OF TRACT 3, GOLDEN GATE UNIT No. 34.. PLAT BOOK 7, PAGE 23'-¢'vuc~/. _ COLUER COUNTY, FLORIDA PARCEL_ 905' NORTH J FOUO No. 3E39016000,4 O.R. 1628. PG 1150 %~ ~SOU~ LINE N 150' /~p NBg'~O'50'W 101.64' .~ OINT OF  BEGINNING =o o ~o ~SOU~EAST R/W UNE DESCRIPTION; A PARCEL L~NG IN ~E NOR~ 150 FEET OF ~ACT 5, GOLDEN CA~ ESTA~S UNIT NO. 54, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 7, PAGE 25, ~E PUBUC RECORDS OF CO~ COUNt, FLORIDA. DESCRIBED BEGINNING AT ~E IN~RSEC~ON OF ~E SOU~EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY MNE OF SANTA BARBARA BOU~VARD AND ~E SOU~ BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID NOR~ 150 FEET OF ~ACT 5, ~6E RUN N. 55'42"50" E. FOR A DISTANCE 46.00 FEET ALONG SAID SOU~EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE; ~ENCE RUN S. 89'40'50' ~ FOR A DISTANCE OF 75.00 ~ET ALONG A LINE ~AT IS. PARALLEL TO SAID SOU~ BOUNDARY LINE; ~ENCE RUN S. 00'19"10" W. FOR A DISTANCE 0¢ 57.50 FEET TO SAID SOU~ BOUNDARY MNE; ~ENCE RUN N. 89'~'50" 101.64 ~ET ALONG SAID SOU~ BOUNDARY LINE TO SAID SOU~EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE OF SANTA BARBARA BOU~VARD AND ~E POINT OF BEGINNING. ~ } ~~ I. BEARINGS ARE TAKEN ~0, ~E P~T OF GO~EN GA~ --~J .-- E~TA~$, UNIT No. J4. JAm~ N. ~LKISON (FOR ~E ~Rm LB~77~) 2. NOT VAUD ~OUT ~E S1GNA~RE AND ORIGINAL RAISED PR~S~ONAL ~R~OR AND mAPPE~ SEAL OF A ~ORIDA LICENSED SUR~YOR AND ~APPER. ~OR~NSE NO. LS ~,s~,~ o~ =oo=. THIS IS NOT A SURVEY O. COONER ANB ASSOCIA S, INC. SUR~NG ~D M~PING ~ 5900 COLONIAL BL~., ~1~ 4, FORT M~S, ~ORIDA 53912 PH~E: (9~1)277-07~ F~: (941)2~-7179 ~AI~ SUR~NG~OON~.COM CU~T; GREE~Y HANSEN. ~C DRA~ BY: ~F CHE~ BY: J.N.V U~U~P~EAS~TD~CRIP~ON:~N mE PUMPINGNoR~ I~O'STA~ONoF DA~ UAY 5. 2002 SC~ reACT 5, O0~ GA~ [STA~S. UNIT 34 PR~ECT No: 020410 D~ No; 020~10~D1 F?hr -'XHIBIT "/t ',,, SKETCH ~ ~ o~ PUMPING STATION UTILITY EASEMENT UNIT No. 3&, PLAT BOOK 7, PA~E 23 COLLIKR COUNTY. FLORIDA SCA~ ( IN FEET ~ ~/ X NORTH LINE S 180' ~ ~ ~ POINT OF ¢~ ~7 BEGINNING ~ ,,~ CONTAININ~ ,~/ 4511 SQ. FT.  ~8~'~0'50'W 128.2~' ~ SOU~ 180' ~ACT 3 FOLIO No. ,38390200~ O.R. 18~7, S U~EAST R/W LINE DESCRIPTION: A PARCEL LY1NG IN THE SOUTH 180 FEET OF TRACT .3, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT NO. ,.34., AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 7, PAGE 23, THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTHEAST RIGHT-OF--WAY UNE OF SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD AND THE NORTH BOUNDARY UNE OF SAID SOUTH 18,0 FEET OF TRACT 3, THENCE RUN S. 89°40'50" E. FOR A DISTANCE OF 101.64 FEET ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY LINE; THENCE RUN S. 00'19'10" W. FOR A DISTANCE OF 37.50 FEET; THENCE RUN N. 89'40'50" W. FOR A DISTANCE OF 128.29 FEET ALONG A LINE THAT IS PARALLEL TO SAID NORTH BOUNDARY LINE AND TO SAID SOUTHEAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD; THENCE RUN N. ,35'42'50" E. FOR A DISTANCE OF 4.6.00 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHEAST RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. 1. BEARINGS ARE TAKEN FROM THE PLAT OF GOLDEN GATE __ ESTATES, UNIT No. 34. J/I~(ES N. WILKISON ([FOR THE FIRM LB6773) 2. NOT VALID WITHOUT THE SIGNATURE ANO ORIGINAL RAISED PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR AND MAPPER SEAL OF A FLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER. FLORIDA U~ENSE NQ.. LS ¢876 THIS ~_.?~_"~AY OF/_.~_~ 2002. THIS IS NOT A SURVEY REUSED: 5/22/02 JEFFREY C. COONER AND ASSOCIAt' 'S, INC. SURVEYING AND MAPPING 3900 COLONIAL BLVD., SUITE 4, FORT MYERS, FLORIDA 3.3912 PARCEL DESCRIPTION: PUMPING STATION DATE: MAY 3. 2002 I SCA,~:1"=20' J UTIUTY EASEMENT IN THE SOUTH 180' OF I TRACT ;3. GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, UNIT 34 PROJECT No: 020410 DWG No: 0204.10SKD2 S~T: F_XHIBIIT SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION 7 ,°f l--tO~ A PUMPING STATION UTILITY EASEMEN~PROJECT IN TRACT 16, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT NO. 95, PARCEL PLAT BOOK 9, PAGE 4.5, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA FOLIO ~/~ I i POINT OF i BEGINNING NORTH LINE, TRACT 16 200.00' SCALF- 1' = 60' ~:3 CONTAINS 0.92 Acres :i: ~ m o (40,000 Sq. Fi:.) TRACT 16 ~ FOUO No. *1820640007 OFFICIAL RECORDS 8OOK 2487, bJ PAGE 5475 200.00' 7TH AVE. NW - DESCRIPTION: A PARCEL LYING IN TRACT 16, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT NO. 95, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 9. PAGE 45, PUBUC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT 16 AND THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF LOGAN BOULEVARD, THENCE RUN SOUTHERLY 200.00 FEET ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE; THENCE RUN WESTERLY 200.00 FEET ALONG A lINE THAT IS PARALLEL TO SAID NORTH UNE OF TRACT 16; THENCE RUN 200.00 FEET ALONG A LINE THAT IS PARALLEL TO SAID WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE TO SAID NORTH LINE OF TRACT 16; THENCE RUN EASTERLY 200.00 FEET ALONG SAID NORTH LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. J~.MES N. W1LKISON (FOR THE FIRM LB6773) NOT VALJO WITHOUT THE SIGNATURE ANO ORIGINAL RAISED PROFESSIONAL SURVE:YOR ANO MAPPER SEAL OF AFI. ORIOA UCENSE0 SURVEYOR ANO MAPPER. LICENSE: NO. LS 4876 OAY 2002. THIS IS NOT A SURVEY ,JEFFREY ¢. ¢OONER AND ASSOCIAT[$, INC. SURVEYING AND MAPPING 3900 COLONIAL BLVD., .SUITE 4, FORT MYERS, FLORIOA 33912 PHONE: (9~,1)277-0722 FAX: (941)277-7179 EMAIL: SURVEYING~.IX;OONER.COM CUENT: GREELEY HANSEN, LLC DRAWN BY: JRF CHECKED BY: J.N.¥ PARCEL DESCRIPTION: DATE: MAY 3. 2002 SCALE: PUMPING STAT1ON UTIUTY EASEMENT IN TRACT 16. GGE UNIT NO. 95 PROJECT No: 020410 0WG No: 020410SK03 EXH|I~I "~" SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION PROOECT ~ Z ~ ~, " OF A UTILITY EASEMENT PARCEL IN THE WEST 1/2 OF TRACT 28, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES FOLIO UNIT No. 34-, PLAT BOOK 7, PAGE 23 t 0d '~- COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA o ~; ~5¢~~o'~- (0.26 ACRES' ~'~'~'~' '"''~ '"' ~~i_ NORTHTRACT 28/R/W -- N89'41 54 W 127.05 [ 192.42 ~ o 14TH AVE. SW Z SOUTH LINE TRACT 28 p0c SE CORNER / ~ACT 28 ~ POC- POINT OF COMMENCEMENT 1 inch = 40 fL R/W- RIGHT-OF-WAY SEE S~EET 2 Or 2 THIS IS NOT A SURVEYFOR DESCRIP~ON. JE EY C. COONER AND ASSOCIAteS, INC. SUR~NG ~O MAPPING 3900 COLONIAL BL~., ~1~ ~, FORT M~S, ~ORIDA 3~912 PHONE: (9&1)277-0722 FAX: (9~1)277-7179 EMAIL: SUR~NG~OONER.COM CUENT: GREE~NSEN, ~C DRA~ BY: ~F CHECKED BY: J.N.W. ~~ PARCEL OESCRIP~ON: DA~: MAY 5~, 2002 SCA~: ~"-40'NO._~ u~u~ EAS[~[~T ~. mi ~ST ~/20~ ~ACT 28, ~EN GA~ ESTA~S. UNIT 34 PR~ECT No: 020410 'DWG No: 020410~08 SH~I L SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION PROJECT EXHIBIT OF A UTILITY EASEMENT PARCEL Peg~ ~ '~~ ~E ~ST 1/2 OF ~ACT 28, GOLDEN GATE ESTA~S OLIO UNIT No. 34, PLAT BOOK 7, PAGE 23 COLLIER COUNt, FLORIDA DESCRIPTION: A PARCEL LYING IN THE WEST 1/2 OF TRACT 28, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT NO. AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 7, PAGE 23, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE WEST 1/2 OF SAID TRACT 28, THENCE RUN NORTH 00'18'06" EAST A DISTANCE OF .30.00 FEET TO THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY EASEMENT LINE OF 14TH AVENUE S.W.; THENCE RUN NORTH 89'41'54" WEST A DISTANCE OF 192.42 FEET ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY EASEMENT LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID LINE NORTH 89'41'54" WEST A DISTANCE OF 127.05 FEET TO THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD AND TO A POINT ON A NON TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT, RADIUS OF 1,200.00 FEET; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE AND THE ARC, THROUGH A DELTA ANGLE OF 04'56'52", A DISTANCE OF 105.65 FEET; THENCE RUN SOUTH 89'41'54" EAST A DISTANCE OF 100.00 FEET ALONG A LINE THAT IS 100.00 FEET NORTH AND PARALLEL TO THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY EASEMENT LINE OF 14TH AVENUE S.W.; THENCE RUN SOUTH 00'18'06" WEST A DISTANCE OF 100.00 FEET TO SAID NORTH LINE AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 11,275.22 SQUARE FEET OR 0.26 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. SEE SHEET 1 OF 2 FOR SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION. _ 1. BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE CENTERLINE 8EARING OF J.~ES N. WlLKISON (FO THE FIRM I..86775) 14TH AVE. S.W. BEN(3 S 89'41'54" W AS SHOWN ON THE F~ROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR AND MAPPER PLAN PROFILE SHEET 11 OF 62. COLLIER COUNTY PROJECT FLORIO~,;,b. ICENSE NS LS 4876 NO. 68052. THIS ~ '"' DAY OFy)'''''''~-, 2002. 2. NOT VALID WITHOUT THE SIGNATURE AND ORIGINAL RAISED ~ SEAL OF A FLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER. THIS IS NOT A SURVEY dEFFREY C. COONER AND ASSOCIAilr_S, INC. SURVEYING AND MAPPING 3900 COLONIAL BLVD., SUITE 4, FORT MYERS, FLORIDA 33912 PHONE: (941)277-0722 FAX: (941)277-7179 EMAIL: SURVEYINGC:i;COONER.COM PARCEL DESCRIPTION: DATE: MAY 31, 2002 ! SCALE: NA I NO.~/ UTIUTY EASEMENT IN THE WEST 1/2 OF n~ TRACT 28. GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, UNIT 34 PROJECT No: 020410 ~OWG NO: 020410SK1, SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION PROJECT ~.XHIB~--~- OF A UTILITY EASE]~ENT PARCEL cioq , ~:~e"---/"~-O~--'~lN THE WEST 180' OF TRACT 44-, GOLDEN GATE ESTATESFOLI0 '~k~>~4~'~' ' UNIT No. 95, PLAT BOOK 9, PAGE ,4-5 ~ ,'-'t L. COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIOA VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD 180.00' ~o:~ : I R/W LINE POE c.) < ~ CONTAINING 36,000 S.F. " SI o,- 0 ~ (0.85 ACRES) :N : *l I i,,-o IIl,I <il '~8o.00' I EAST 150' WEST 180' TRACT 4-4 CHERRYWOOD DR. ~ SOUTH LINE OF TRACT 44. ~0 0 30 ~0 SCALE ( IN FEET ) SEE SHEET 2 OF 2 ~ i,-,oh: 60 ~ THIS IS NOT A SURVEY FOR DESCRIPTION. JEFFREY C. COONER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. SURVEYING AND MAPPING 3900 COLONIAL BLVD., SUITE 4., FORT MYERS, FLORIDA ,33912 I.E~X~~_~.~, SKETCH AND DESCRIPTION ~RO~CT .. I( ,~ ~ OF A UTILITY EASEMENT p~:~L IN THE WEST 180' OF TRACT ~-4, GOLDEN GATE ESTA~LIO UNIT No. 95, PLAT BOOK 9, PAGE ~5 ~q ~ COLLIER COUNt, ~ORIDA A PARCEL LYING IN THE WEST 180 FEET OF TRACT 44, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT NO. 95, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 9, PAGE 4-5, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD AND THE WEST LINE OF SAID WEST 180 FEET OF TRACT 44, RUN SOUTHERLY A DISTANCE OF 200.00 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID WEST 180 FEET OF TRACT 44; THENCE RUN EASTERLY A DISTANCE OF 180.00 FEET ALONG A LINE THAT RUNS PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID WEST 180 FEET OF TRACT 4-4; THENCE RUN NORTHERLY A DISTANCE OF 200.00 FEET ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO THE SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD; THENCE RUN WESTERLY A DISTANCE OF 180.00 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 36,000 SQUARE FEET OR 0.85 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. SEE SHEET 1 OF 2 FOR SKETCH OF DESCRIPTION. ____ ', 1. BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE CENTERLINE BEARING OF JAME~ N. WILKISON (FOR THE FIRM L. B677.3) 14TH AVE. S.W. BEING S 89'4.1'54." W AS SHOWN ON THE PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR AND MAPPER PLAN PROFILE SHEET 11 OF 62, COLLIER COUNTY PROJECT NO. 68052. FLORIDA. LICENSE NO,,1 LS 4876 THISZL_.""'~__ DAY OF ~[.1,c=:~2002. 2. NOT VALID WITHOUT THE SIGNATURE AND ORIGINAL RAISED SEAL OF A FLORIDA UCENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER. THIS IS NOT ASURVEY JEFFREY C. COONF..~ AND ASSOClAI~S, INC. SUR~/I[YING AND MAPPING 3900 COLONIAL BLVD., SUITE 4., FORT MYERS, FLORIDA 3,3912 PHONE: (94.1)277-0722 FAX:~(94'1)277-7179 EMAIL: SURVEYING(~COONER.COM PARCEL DESCRIPTION: DATE: JUNE ,3, 2002 SCALE: NA NO. UTILiTY£AS£ME. NTIN TH£ WEST 180' OF I ! TRACT 44, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, UNIT 95 _DWG L .G....,~o ..... EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AUTHORIZATION TO ACQUIRE AND IMPLEMENT A CALL CENTER TELEPHONE SYSTEM FOR CUSTOMER SERVICE FUNCTIONS IN THE PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION- COST IS $181,365.85 OBJECTIVE: Board authorization to purchase (using a state contract bid price) and implement a call center telephone management system for the customer service functions in the Public Utilities Division (PUD) at South Horseshoe Drive CONSIDERATIONS: The existing telephone system is a typical telephone system used in an office environment. It is not designed for nor is it capable of handling the call traffic and functions associated with the customer service functions of the PUD. The customer service section receives and responds to more than 100,000 calls annually. There are more than 3,000 new utility customers added each year to the system. The proposed call center solution will: · Relocate the call entry point from North Horseshoe Drive to South Horseshoe Drive; ......... · Upgrade the mail server to accommodate PC desktop tools. Each customer service representative will have access to viewing/listening to both voice mail and fax mail; · Call routing errors (dropped calls) will be significantly reduced; · Call Classifier card will be added; only Utility Billing calls will come directly to the South Horseshoe Drive location; · The call center system will provide for an initial 25 agents capacity (upgradeable) to 50 agents; · A Basic Calls Measurement System to allow on-line measurement of traffic. This includes identifying number of calls waiting, agent availability (which agent is plugged in/out), length of each call, queuing time, and a host of other statistics. The base system provides for 124 standard reports; · Provide for an interactive voice response solution with the capability for a customer to access their account information over the telephone; and, · Double the capacity of incoming calls and solve the peak hour drop calls, busy signals, and other capacity and efficiency issues. · Include 25 call master phones (required for the call center) The telephone call center is part of the total solution for customer service functions at South Horseshoe Drive. The Call Center and the new utility billing software complement each other. They are designed to maximize the benefits available in each system. The cost of this call center is included in the project costs for the utility billing system. The technology incorporated in the call center is the same technology proposed in the Information Technology Department budget for FY2003. In fact, the call center license will be transferred to main campus when that system is eventually upgraded to this technology. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds for the services in the amount of $181,365.85 are available in the Utility Billing software project appropriations, do not require a budget amendment and will be funded in the FY 2002 budget. A total of $91,365.85 will be funded from the Utility Billing Software project funds in the Water Capital Fund (Fund 412) and $90,000 from project funds in the Sewer Capital Fund (Fund 414). i~ ~ro, j~cl- '~ '~'~z GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no Growth Management impact associated with this item. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve the purchase of a customer service call center solution for the PUD from Avaya Communications under the State Contract. Joh'~ ~ '~nkosk~ Direc[or ~ U~t~ Billing and Custom.er-S'e~ice Department BY:X /~x~~~'-~/~''''~ Date: 7//~/O'7..... REVIEWED aar~y Axe I r/al'd//~'~re'~to r I nformatio h,./Tech nology Department APPROVED BY: '~'"~"z~") ~ Date: Tom Wides, Fiscal Operations Director Public Utilities Division APPROVED BY~~, Date: ~~s W. DeLony, P.E., Adr~inistrator ~ Pu_~i'c Utilities Division N0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ADOPT A RESOLUTION AND APPROVE A CORRECTIVE DECLARATION OF EASEMENT FOR TWO WATER WELL HOUSE SITES AND A PIPELINE TO BE LOCATED WITHIN A PORTION OF PROPERTY ACQUIRED FOR A FUTURE PARK SITE AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $24.00. OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida (Board), adopt, approve and authorize its Chairman to sign the attached Resolution and Corrective Declaration of Easement to provide for the increased demand for potable water in the area. CONSIDERATIONS: Collier County recently acquired 128.9 acres of land located on the north side of the future extension of Vanderbilt Beach Road at the north terminus of 9th, 11th and 13th Streets N.W. for a future park and recreational facility. The Board of County Commissioners approved a Declaration of Easement on May 14, 2002, Item 16C1, for the placement of two well houses and a pipeline along the easterly boundary of the property. Because of environmental concerns at one well house site, the Public Utilities Engineering Department is requesting to shift the well house approximately 45 feet to the south. The attached Corrective Declaration of Easement replaces the previously approved and signed Declaration of Easement and provides for the location of the two well house sites and pipeline on the property. FISCAL IMPACT: The cost to record the Corrective Declaration of Easement should not exceed $24.00 and shall be paid from the Water Impact Fee Fund (411), North Wellfield Improvement Project (70075). GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This transaction meets with the County's Growth Management Plan. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: 1. Adopt the attached Resolution, approve the attached Corrective Declaration of Easement and authorize the Chairman to execute both on behalf of the Board; and 2. Authorize staff to record the Corrective Declaration of Easement in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. SUBMITTED Ton~'~.. Mott, Property A~quisition-s'~ervisor ' - Prgperty Acquisition & Construction Management _F~litie.~ U~..a~ent D.epa~tment ~ -C~a'~e~=. Carrin.~t~n, Jr., ~[=IANA, ~t~{nager ' Property Acquisition & Construction Management Facilities Management Department AG~,0^ ~,/3 ,o._1,/, y JUL'3 0 200Z .... EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Corrective Declaration of Easement Page 2 REVIEWED BY: ~ DATE: Skip Camp, Director Facilities Management Department REVIEWED BY: , DATE: Maria Ramsey, DirecTor Parks & Recreation Departrne,.~t Roy B./,'Anderson, P.E., Director Public Utilities Engineering~ent Ja~es W. DeLony, P.E., Adminis/tYator ~/blic Utilities Division .o. IL, ~ '( JUL 3 0 2002 1 2 3 4 RESOLUTION NO. 2002- ~ 5 6 7 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF 8 COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE CORRECTIVE 9 DECLAR~[TION OF A UTILITY EASEMENT. 10 11 12 WHEREAS, Collier County is desirous of encumbering property currently 13 owned by the County with a utility easement described in Exhibit 'A', attached hereto 14 and made a part hereof; and 15 WHEREAS, the described easement is a necessary element required for 16 installation and maintenance of utility infrastructure for well-sites and pipelines leading 17 to and serviced by the North County Regional Water Treatment Plant; and 18 WHEREAS, the easement will allow Collier County to proceed with expansion 19 of the necessary well-sites in a timely fashion; and 20 WHEREAS, the previously authorized and recorded Declaration of Easement 21 (O.R. Book 3039, Page 272) contained an incorrect legal description and the attached 22 instrument corrects that error by replacing the previously recorded Declaration of 23 Easement in its entirety. 24 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY 25 COMIVlISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: 26 1. The Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, hereby approves 27 the Corrective Declaration of Easement described in Exhibit "A" and authorizes 28 its execution and recording in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. 29 2. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption. 30 ADOPTED this ~ day of , 2002 after motion, second and 31 majority vote favoring adoption. 32 33 ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 34 DWIGHT E. BROCK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 35 36 37 By: 38 Deputy Clerk JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN 39 40 41 42 43 Approved as to form and ~ 44 lega~ufficiency: Sa£nOA IT£1~ ~ 45 ~Z.~ ~~~ NO..~~.~_ 47 "~l~llen T. Chadwell- - - 48 Assistant County Attorney PG._ ,~ PROJECT: NCRWTP EXH~T.-.~ PARCEL: 916W & 917W THIS CORRECTIVE DECLARATION OF EASEMENT IS BEING RECORDED TO REPLACE THE ERRONEOUS LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS IN THE ORIGINAL DECLARATION OF EASEMENT RECORDED IN O.R. BOOK 3039, PAGE 272. CORRECTIVE DECLARATION OF EASEMENT THIS DECLARATION is made this ~ day of , 2002, by COLLIER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, having a mailing address of 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida 34112, hereinafter referred to as "Declarant.' Declarant is the owner of certain real property situated in Collier County, Florida, more fully described below, hereinafter referred to as the "Property.' See attached Exhibit "A" which is incorporated herein by reference. Declarant hereby declares that the Property is and shall be held, transferred, sold, conveyed, used and occupied in accordance with and subject to a non-exclusive easement and privilege to enter upon, construct and maintain utility facilities on the Property as Contained in this Declaration, hereinafter referred to as the "Easement." The Easement, as set forth in this Declaration, shall bind, and the benefits thereof shall inure to Declarant and its representatives, agents, successors and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Declarant has caused these presents to be executed the date and year first above written. A'FI'EST: DWIGHT E. BROCK BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: , Deputy Clerk JAMES N. COLETTA, Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Ellen T. Chadwell Assistant County Attorney AGENDA .0. //. J U L 3 PG. /'~ ANDREW B. BECK, PSM 6065 ~ DATE CERTTFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION 1~ Not volid wi(hour the slgn'oO3re 'on~ the o~inol rolsed seol of o Florido licensed Su~yoF' ~ Mopper. ~:::.. ...... . ~:,- ' ~ 5~, ~ 27 ~ CO~ER COUN~ EAST. 1/. OF SEC~ON 32 co~ CO~ C~N~ ~/~. ~INT ~ EE~NNI~ ~ ~E ~ H~DN POINT OF BEGINNING (E) OF PROPOSED 40'X80' ~LL HOUSE EASEMENT ~ ~u~r ~rw~ to.~ SO~E ~ ~R~ oe '?~. ~ ~ :'~ ?%:? 3~C~' ,:~ ~ ~:~'; 4s so~ ~ 2z ~ corm cou~ ' '~ ~0~1~ ~ r ..... '~ (P~SEO 40'X80" ~ OOU~ ~) ~ S. 8T46"O~W. I00.00"  c~u~ cou~ ~.  POINT OF BEGINNING (A) TEMPORARY CONSTRUC~ON EASEMENT .., ~ ~ ~ 8E~NI~ (O) ~ ~E ~g~ HEREIN ~8~. POINT OF COMMENCEMENT SOU~EAST CORNER ~ 4 TO~HIP 4g S. ~ P~ ~1~ ~ ~ ~wse~ w~ 14 ~c~no~ 6[Izloz 8~ **. NOrA SU~ ,,* _ SK~CH ~'~'~'~'~~'~~ COLUE~ COUN~ I .~. .~ ' '- I NCFP,~TP ',,~ ! NUl~rm I ",,"%:.::-'?~.~.; :":'~,=~. '~ ~ ' ~ EXHI~, ~ ~ ~'. ,.' · ". ~ .~ ~ .:.:~ .... :~ .'~ ~ O~/p~v ~ P~r ~ ~C~CN J2. rO~/p · ~:b-~v ':~ ~'~ '~'~ :~'~ '~' ~ ' I I'~ '~ -, ',.. '.C-. :'~'.',' ~e.'~.'~- ~ c=~ ,r ~ ~ ~ or I o.,~. ~ocx 2~. ~C6 ~JZ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ cm~ ~ ~ u~ mum ~ ' ...... 2~.00" ~ ~6EI 77- 7~ POINT CF ~EC;NNING (~) ~ ~OU~. ~ 27 ~ cO~ ' CF PROPOSED ~C'xSO' co~ ~ ~. j ~MF~RARY CONS~UC~CN ~ ~m 07u'~ rO ~ ~0.~ pOINT OF COMMENCEMENT 0.~. = ~ ~EC~ R~ ~ ~. ~ , ~ ~/23/02 J ~8232-¢2-002-6C000 J ~ ~P'~C~[ ~L- EXHIBIT _ · N. 67'46'OT'E. 25 00' · , SM 606_ ,.' ' ~ ~ · ,,.. PROPOSEO o a lot,do hcensed $u~eyor and Mapper...[' ~1~,~; "~)' I~,.~ '7, OESCRIPrlON OF PARt OF SECnON JZ tOWNSHIP ~a SOUTH, ~ EAS~ COtUER COUN~ FLOR~. (PROPOSEO 23' BEGINNING AF tHE SOUtHEASt CORNER OF SECTION 3Z ~OWNSIIIP SOU~t. RANGE 27 EAS( COLUER COUN~ FLOR~OA: 80ARO Of COUNTY tHeNCE ALONG THE SOUTH UNE OF ~10 SECTION 32 SOUTH COZ¢~oSStONERS. COI. UER IVES[ ?5.00 FEEt; COUNt. FLORtDA [HENCE LEA~NG SUO LINE NORrlt 02'13'53' I~S[ 20~Z60 OR BOOK 2868, PACE J J02 [HENC~ NORTH 8~46'0~ EASt 25.00 FEEt TO A POIN~ ON THE EASE LINE OF ~zO SECttON 2Z' ~ THENCE 50UUt 02'lJ'SJ" EASE 2047,75 FEEt ~0 file POINT OF BEGINNING ~ ~ OF rile EASEMENT HEREtN OESCRtBEO. ~ ~ EASEmENt CONTAINS 51.189 50UARE FEE[ MORE OR LESS. ~ ~ SUBJECt tO EASEmENtS, RESERVATIONS AND RESrRIC~ONS OF RECORO, PROPOSED WELL ~6 GOLDEN GAlE ESZA~E5 UNff ', NO ~ 9 PLA~ BOOK /. f'AGt'5' 77.- 78 '. PROPOSEO 25' C.U.I G~C POINt OF BEGINNING SOUTHEAST CORNER ~ OF SECTION 32 80' ORAINACE EASgMENI PNOPOS~ O j ...................................... o ~ . ~ m~ 23' C.U[. "~ ~ ~ '""80' ORAINACE EASE TO.SHIP 4g S. ............................................... 5 8~JJ'22"~ /60IDEN ~tE ESrAI UNff NO. ~0 ~t J PROJECT: NCRWTP PARCEL: 916W & 917VV 3~t E~st T~t~TM Naples, TH~~IVE DEOLARATION OF EASEUENT IS BEING REOORDED TO REP~OE THE ERRONEOUS LEGAL DESORIPTIONS IN THE ORIGINAL DECLARATION OF EASEUENT RECORDED IN O.R. BOOK ~0~9, PAGE CORRECTIVE DECLARATION OF EASEMENT THIS DECLARATION is made this __ day of ., 2002, by COLLIER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, having a mailing address of 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida 34112, hereinafter referred to as "Declarant." Declarant is the owner of certain real property situated in Collier County, Florida, more fully described below, hereinafter referred to as the 'Property.' See attached Exhibit "A" which is incorporated herein by reference. Declarant hereby declares that the Property is and shall be held, transferred, sold, conveyed, used and occupied in accordance with and subject to a non-exclusive easement and privilege to enter upon, construct and maintain utility facilities on the Property as contained in this Declaration, hereinafter referred to as the "Easement.' The Easement, as set forth in this Declaration, shall bind, and the benefits thereof shall inure to Declarant and its representatives, agents, successors and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Declarant has caused these presents to be executed the date and year first above written. A'r-rEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: , Deputy Clerk JAMES N. COLETTA, Chairman Approved as to form and legal_sufficiency: Ellen T. Chadwell Assistant County Attorney AG[aDA IT(M ~ m JUL 3020112 J BY: _ . ~ ANDREW B. BECK, PSM 6065 · DATE Not volid without the signoture 'ond the o~ginol rolsed seol of o Floddo licensed Su~;eyor .o~.d Mopper.  D~C~IP~ON ~ P~T OF SEC~N 32, TO.SHIP E A $ T. OF SEC~ON 52 COU~ co~ C~ ~. ~E~E ~R~ 8~46'0~ ~ I~.~ ~. POINT OF BEGINNING (8) ~ OES~8~O. OF PROPOSED 40'X80' ~LL HOUSE EASEMENT N. 8746'O~E. r ...... ' ' ' ~ .... D~SCRIP~ON OF ~ :~ 48 SOU~ ~GE 27 ~ COLUER C~ ~ "~-- ~ORI~ ~ ~ .... f'~"" (P~SEO 40'X80' ~ HOUSE ~EMEN~) ~ ., S. 8~46'0~. I00.00' c~u~ COUN~ ~0~'  POINT OF BEGINNING (A) ~ ~E~CE ~ONC ~E ~ UNE ~ ~0 SEC~N 32 OF PROPOSED 100'X100' =~.~. ~ ~ENCE SO~ 8~46'0~ ~ 25.~ ~. TEMPORARY CONSTRUC~ON '-: EASEMENT q.~ ~ ~ ~ 8E~NI~ (E) ~ ~g ~g~ HEEEIN ~: ~ I ~g ~ 8746'0~ ~T 40.~ ~' o t2o G~HIC S~E ~ ~ ~ BE~M~ ~ ~E ~E~ HEREIN DE$CRIB~. POINT OF COMMENCEMENT SOU~EAST CORNER ~o: OF SECTION 32 o.~. = ~ ~c~o ~~ R~ ~ ~. ~EN~ P~T 4 TO.SHIP 49 TOWNSHIP ~ SOU~, ~ Z/ ~,e~ [T[, ~ "i /6 ! EXHIBIT l.p~ l.C . · I'Z ~ '~: '~l~' ~ ""~, '. 'z...- .,l ~.., B ..~]~ ~ ~ 'q ~ ~ scum. ~ zz ~ cetu~ cau~m ~ ~ , ... , . .~ t:~.~ · ,. ' ' ~1~ ...~. .. . ,.~,-..,~ ~:~-~... ,. [ ..~.~1~I~;~.1~~ ..~ CO~ ~UN~ ~' CO~ISS;ONENS, COLL!~ ~/Nr ~ ~ (A) ~ m~ ~r N~N O.,q. 800K 2868. ~4GE 13~2 ~lNr OF R~ ~ ~ ~P~r :, N ~Nx~ ~~ ~ -- ~ ......... 25. O0u ~ ~CES 77- 78 ~ ~ I00.0~ ~ SOU~. ~ 27 ~ cO~ER cOuo~ u OF PROPOSED ~O'XSO' / ~LL HOUSE EASEMENT ~ ~ (PRO~SEfl 40~' ~ ~u~' ~r) CO~WEN~ AF ~ SOU~ CORN~ O~  POINT OF ~ECiNNING (A) ~ ~0~ m~ 0~0 ~ ~ N ~ O~IP~ ~ t~478t ~' CF I QO'XIOO" POINT OF COMMENCEMENT I SOU~EAST CORNER ~ ~r ~ I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ CF SEC30N 32 ~~~ ~r ~r ~ .~ ~== 5 I ~ FOWNSHIP 4~ S. · .. NOr A SU~ .: TOWNSNIP ~ SOUm. ~ 27~S~ ~7 ! ] a O 2002 I J ~ N. 87'46'O7'E. 25.00' ~ PROPOSEO ~5' ¢.F.~ PROPOSED .~:~ :'~.'~' :~;~f'; ~','o =.'. GOLDEN CAfE ~, =3. ,~.~]~ .:; q~:...,. PLA[ 800K '7, ~ ~. ~T.,l~v~,~[,;'~,' '~ ~..~ PAGES 77-. 78 :., j~.,~, [~.~,,,;~i ,, ~ .:~, . EA5~ COLLIER COUN~ (PROPOSEO 25' C.U.E.) BEGINNING A~ THE SOUTH~ST CORNER ~ SECTION ~2, TOWNSHIP SOUTH. ~NGE 27 EA5~ COLLIER COUN~ FLORI~; 80ARO OF COUNTY ~ THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF ~10 5EC~ON ~2 SOUTH COZiA4~S5ION&RS. COLUER WEST ~'5.00 FEET; COUN~ FLORIDA ~ THENCE LEA~NC ~lO LINE NORTH 02'I~'5~* WEST 204Z60 FEET; O.R BOOK 2868. PACE ~J82 ~ ~ THENCE NORTH 8~46'0~ EAST 25.00 FEET TO A POINT ON ~E EAST LINE OF SMD SECTION ~ THENCE SOUTH 02'lJ'SJ" EAST 204Z75 FEE~ ~0 THE POIN~ OF BEGINNING ~ ~ OF THE EASEMENT HEREIN OESCR~SEO. ~ ~ EASEMENT CONTAINS 5~, ~8~ SOUARE FEET ~ORE OR LESS. SUBJECT ~0 EASEMENTS. RESERVATIONS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORO. - PRO. OS[O ~ ~ II1~ .... POINT OF BEGINNING ~ SOUTHEAST CORNER ~ J,J ~' C,u.[. I ~J~ ! i IM- ~ i TO.SHIP 48 S. ~ ~~~!~~ ' 4 ~ - ~_3: u~.~o. ~ ~ I .o.~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AUTHORIZATION TO ACQUIRE CONSULTING SERVICES TO IMPLEMENT PHASE II OF THE UTILITY BILLING SOFTWARE SYSTEM AND TO ACQUIRE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE DURING ACCEPTANCE TESTING, DATA CONVERSION VERIFICATION, PARALLEL PROCESSING, AND CUT-OVER TO THE LIVE ENVIRONMENT - COST OF SERVICES IS $46,200 OBJECTIVE: Board authorization to purchase project management assistance services for PHASE II of the utility billing system (work order and inventory processes) and to provide technical assistance for the duration of the project in the areas of acceptance testing, data conversion and verification, parallel processing, and cut-over to a live environment. CONSIDERATIONS: On September 11, 2001, the Board authorized the sole source acquisition of services from Vacarro Consulting, Inc. to develop a detailed implementation work plan and time schedules for the new utility billing software. The work plan tasks included: the development of specifications for the software modifications needed by the County; acceptance testing specifications for both the modifications and the core system; and acceptance testing for the interfacing requirements with external software systems. At that time, the approach envisioned by staff was to go live with the billing and customer relationship management portions (PHASE I) of the software before starting implementation of the work order and inventory management sections (technical services or PHASE II). The original time schedule for implementation of the utility billing software work order and inventory management sections has been changed to accommodate the SAP (financial accounting software)implementation schedule. Under this revised implementation schedule, the four major elements of the utility billing software system will need to be implemented concurrently. The compression of the time schedules to provide for concurrent implementation of all four sections of the utility billing software requires a change in the services purchased from Vacarro Consulting, Inc. · The primary services purchased under the September 11, 2001 authorization from the Board which have been completed are: · Design of a comprehensive implementation plan and time tables; · Design and development of the specifications and testing requirements for necessary software modifications; · Design and development of the specifications and acceptance testing requirements for the core software; and, · Design and development of the specifications, verification procedures, and acceptance testing for data conversion. Services not completed under the September 11,2001 authorization are: Monitor the execution of the acceptance testing for the software modifications and the core software; · Monitoring and reviewing the data conversion and acceptance testing; Monitoring and reviewing parallel processing; and · Monitoring and reviewing cut-over to live processing. This request is for permission to cancel the remaining services acquired but not completed under the September 11,2001 authorization, and to acquire implementation services from Vacarro Consulting, Inc. to accommodate the ....... revised implementation schedule for concurrent implementation of all four elements of the utility billing software. · Amount of original services $75,000 · Amount billed on original services $54,000 · Amount remaining $21,000 · Amount of revised services $67,200 · Less: amount remaining ~21,000 · Amount beyond original $46,200 FISCAL IMPACT: Funds for the services in the amount of $46,200 are available in the project appropriations, do not require a budget amendment and will be funded in the FY 2002 budget. A total of $23,100 will be funded from the Utility Billing Software project funds in the Water Capital Fund (Fund 412) and $23,100 from project funds in the Sewer Capital Fund (Fund 414). GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no Growth Management impact associated with this item. AGENDA ITE[y~ J U L 3 0 Pg. ,~- RECOMMENDATION: Recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve the change in services required as a result of a revised implementation plan for the Utility Billing Software system and approve the acquisition of these services from Vacarro Consulting, Inc. SUBMITTED BY: ~-~..~.~,,,~,.~c,-.~~'~..., Date: "7/\ ~ [CD 2~ John~.,~. Yonkosky,-D)rector ~ Utility'Billing and Customer Service Department APPROVED BY: Date: Tom Wides, Fiscal Operations Director Public Utilities Division~) /'" James W. DeLony, P."E., Adm,~istrator ~,~..~ _~:)lic Utilities Divisiont JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... APPROVE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENTS WITH FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY RELATED TO NEW BRACKISH WATER SUPPLY WELLS SERVING THE NORTH COUNTY REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT AT A CREDIT OF $9,158.50, PROJECTS 70075 AND 70094. ~ To facilitate timely completion of additional brackish water supply wells by constructing facilities for use by the local power supply company to provide electrical power to the new wells. CONSIDERATIONS: Given that the County's construction contractor is fully mobilized and actively making improvements to the weilfield, and given the urgent nature of completing the work in an expeditious manner, it will serve a valid public purpose to have the County construct all underground electrical conduits for later use by Florida Power & Light Company (FPL). Attached are two separate reimbursement agreements. FPL will reimburse the County for the value of the facilities at predetmTnined prices of $8,743 and $415.50 respectively. FISCAL IMPACT'.. The County will be reimbursed $415.50 by payment, to be credited to Fund 411 Project 70075, and $8,730 as a credit deducted against the final cost for FPL to provide the necessary electrical conductor cables and transformers. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no impact on growth management related to this item. RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Board of County Commissioners, as the Ex-Officio governing board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, approve and authorize Chairman to execute the two (2) Underground Conduit Installation Agreements with FPL. SUBMI~ED BY: ~ Karl W. Boyer, P.E., Utilities Engineering Senior Project Manager ~. DeUony, P.E., Public U~~dministrator ~~~ ~ Attachments: Underground Conduit Installation Agreement - ~L WO g87247 Underground Conduit Installation Agreement - ~L WO g59465 t JUL 3 0 2002 FPL Work Order No. 59465 Project Name: Well Station #13 UNDERGROUND CONDUIT INSTALLATION AGREEMENT This Agreement, made this __ day of~ 20__ by Collier County Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida as Ex-officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District (hereinafter called the Customer) and Flodda Power and Light Company, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Florida (hereinafter called FPL). WHEREAS; the Customer has requested the pre-approval of the location and installation of underground distribution facilities to be located in a described FPL easement provided by the Customer. WITNESSETH That, for and in consideration of the covenants and agreements herein set forth, the parties hereto covenant and agree as follows: 1. The Customer shall: a) install conduit, cable markers and associated materials provided by FPL in accordance with the instructions and specifications attached to this Agreement; b) be solely responsible for the installation of conduit at the correct location and the correct depth pursuant to the FPL construction drawing and specifications; c) provide reasonable notification of the conduit installation dates; d) at the discretion of FPL, either correct any discrepancies, within two (2) working days, found in the installation that are inconsistent with the instructions and specifications attached to this agreement or pay the associated cost to correct the installation within thirty (30) days of receiving the associated bill, and in either case, reimburse FPL for costs associated with lost crew time due to such discrepancies; e) provide survey points for FPL to stake the cable route; f) notify FPL when the conduit installation is complete; g) provide "as built" prints within two (2) weeks of final installation; h) provide for pick-up of materials; i) assume liability for materials lost, stolen or damaged once the customer receives material; j) assume liability for any delays and/or additional costs to FPL caused by a conduit installation that is not consistent with the instructions and specifications attached to this agreement. 2. FPL shall: a) provide written instructions and specifications for the installation of FPL provided conduit; b) provide required material to the Customer for the installation of underground facilities within the specified cable route; c) provide staking for the Customer along the specified cable route; Rev.~a'g'9/95 3. | JUL 3 0 2002 d) make payment to the Collier County Board of County Commissioners in the amount of $415.40, in the event that the customer has made or has agreed to make a Contribution in Aid of Construction for the underground distribution facilities associated with this Agreement (if the credit exceeds the contribution, or if no contribution is required, a payment shall be made to the customer); e) assume no liability for materials lost, stolen or damaged once received by the customer; f) furnish any additional material at the current cost plus applicable loading and delivery charges; g) assume no liability for delays caused by material delivery deficiency, including insufficient, lost, stolen or damaged material; h) assume no liability for delays because of misunderstanding of installation drawings or specifications; i) assume no liability for delays or additional cost caused by an inadequacy of the conduit system installation; j) assume no liability for special incidental or consequential damages of any nature. 3. This agreement is subject to FPL's General Rules and Tariff and the Rules of the Florida Public Service Commission. 4. Subject to the limitations set forth in §768.28, Fla. Stat., the customer shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless FPL, its parent, subsidiaries or affiliates and their respective officers, directors and employees (collectively "FPL entities") from and against any liabilities whatsoever, occasioned wholly or in part by the negligence of the customer or its employees, for injury to or death of person(s) and any property damage arising or resulting in connection with any activity associated with the work or service under this agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be duly executed to be effective as of the day and year written above. ATTEST: (As to Chairperson) BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS EX.OFFICIO THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT By: By:. Dwight E. Brock, Clerk James N. Coletta, Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: As~stan¥ Cou,~om y FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY -- B~ian U~l~l'e~ j/~itness Customer Project Manager W/itness ~/ ,L,__ I[,,-,.,~A,.~xAGENDA ITEM Rev. 9/95 / JUL 3 0 2002 SPECIFICATIONS FOR PRECAST TRANSFORMER LOCATION WORK ORDER NO: 59465 DATE July 9, 2002 R# 798NA NAME OF CUSTOMER: ,Collier County Government ADDRESS: Well Station # 13, 13~ ST NW FPL REPRESENTATIVE: Geoff Gratton TEL. NO. {941) 353-6040 SECONDARY DELIVERY VOLTAGE: 277/480 V,Three Phase, 4 Wire, WYE CUSTOMER AGREES TO: 1. GENERAL: 1.1 PROVIDE A SUITABLE LOCATION, COMPACTED AND LEVEL TO 3" BELOW FINAL GRADE, FOR FPL TRANSFORMER PAD AND INSTALL SECONDARY/SERVICE FROM PAD TO BUILDING AS SPECIFIED ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" AND AS OUTLINED BELOW. 1.2 IT IS FURTHER UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED THAT SUBSEQUENT RELOCATION OR REPAIR OF THE FPL SYSTEM, ONCE INSTALLED, WILL BE PAID BY THE CUSTOMER IF SAID RELOCATION OR REPAIR IS A RESULT OF A CHANGE IN THE LAYOUT OR GRADING BY THE CUSTOMER OR ANY OF THE CUSTOMER'S CONTRACTORS OF SUBCONTRACTORS FROM THE TIME THE UNDERGROUND FACILITIES WERE INSTALLED; AND THAT SUBSEQUENT REPAIR TO FPL'S SYSTEM, ONCE INSTALLED, WILL BE PAID BY THE CUSTOMER IF SAID REPAIR IS A RESULT OF DAMAGE CAUSED BY THE CUSTOMER OR ANY OF THE CUSTOMER'S CONTRACTORS OR SUBCONTRACTORS. 1.3 NOTIFY GENERAL CONTRACTOR, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR AND APPLIANCE SUPPLIERS OF THE SERVICE VOLTAGE TO BE SUPPLIED BY FPL. 2. EASEMENTS: PROVIDE FPL WITH GOOD AND SUFFICIENT EASEMENTS, INCLUDING LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS AND SURVEY WORK TO PRODUCE SUCH EASEMENTS,FOR THE INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF ITS ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES MUST BE GRANTED OR OBTAINED, AT NO COST TO FPL, PRIOR TO FPL'S ENERGIZING ITS FACILITIES. 3. SITE REQUIREMENTS: 3.1 GRADE: WITHIN THE EASEMENT, FILL OR CUT TO WITHIN 6" OF FINAL GRADE, PROVIDE GRADE STAKES AND CLEAR EASEMENT OF TREES, STUMPS, CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS, AND OTHER OBSTACLES BEFORE AND DURING CONSTRUCTION BY FPL OR FPL CONTRACTORS. 3.2 COMPACTION: AFTER FPL OR ITS CONTRACTOR HAS BACKFILLED THE TRENCH USING ROUGH-GRADING TECHNIQUES, THE CUSTOMER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING COMPACTION OR OTHER SPECIAL BACKFILL. FPL WILL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SETTLING OF THE TRENCH ROUTE. 3.3 PLANS: PROVIDE FPL WITH LOCATION AND DEPTH INFORMATION AND/OR DRAWINGS OF ALL EXISTING OR PROPOSED UNDERGROUND FACILITIES ON THE CUSTOMER'S PROPERTY. LOCATE OR EXPOSE UNDERGROUND FACILITIES WHEN REQUESTED BY FPL. 3.4 NOTIFICATION: PROVIDE FPL WITH AT LEAST THREE (3) WEEKS NOTICE PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF PAVING, LANDSCAPING, SODDING, SPRINKLER SYSTEMS AND OTHER SURFACE WORK. CUSTOMER WILL BEAR THE COST OF RESTORING THESE OBSTRUCTIONS TO THEIR ORIGINAL CONDITION IF ABOVE NOTICE IS NOT PROVIDED. 4. TRANSFORMER PAD LOCATION: 4.1 LOCATION: PAD WILL BE INSTALLED AT GRADE LEVEL AND LOCATED AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "A". SEE EXHIBIT "A" FOR EXACT LOCATION OF PRECAST CONCRETE PADS, HANDHOLES, AND CONDUIT TRENCHES. 4.2 CLEARANCES: A MINIMUM CLEARANCE OF THREE (3) FEET MUST BE MAINTAINED AT SIDES AND REAR OF TRANSFORMER PAD AND EIGHT (8) FEET IN FRONT OF PAD AS SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED DRAWING DCS UN-21. THIS CLEARANCE APPLIES TO ALL TYPES OF OBSTRUCTIONS INCLUDING LANDSCAPING AND FENCES. 4.3 PROTECTION: PROVIDE AND INSTALL CURBS AND/OR PROTECTIVE BARRIERS, WHEN REQUIRED, AS DETAILED ON DCS UN-21, AFTER THE INSTALLATION OF CONCRETE PADS AND TRANSFORMERS. CURBS AND/OR BARRIERS MUST BE IN PLACE PRIOR TO FPL ENERGIZING THE SERVICE. 5. CT METERING: WHEN METERING CURRENT TRANSFORMERS (CT'S) ARE REQUIRED, THEY WILL BE LOCATED AS SPECIFIED ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A' AND INSTALLED BY FPL, THE CUSTOMER WILL PROVIDE AND INSTALL A 1-1/4 INCH GALVANIZED CONDUIT FROM THE METER CABINET TO THE LOCATION OF THE CT'S. CONDUIT RUN IS NOT TO EXCEED 25 FEET IN LENGTH BETWEEN CT'S AND METER WITH NO MORE THAN TWO 90 DEGREE BENDS UNLESS PRE-APPROVED BY FPL. CONDUIT PULL OUTLET BOXES (LB'S) ARE NOT BE USED. ~1 ' AC~NDA ZT[M ,o. I/~ E.. ~ JUL 3 0 2002 6. SSDR METERING: IF SOLID STATE DATE RECEIVING (SSDR) METERING IS REQUIRED, THE CUSTOMER WILL PROVIDE AND INSTALL FACILITIES FOR THE SSDR METERING EQUIPMENT AS DETAILED ON THE A'ri'ACHED -CUSTOMER REQUIREMENTS FOR SSDR METERING EQUIPMENT" SHEET. 7. CUSTOMER SERVICE ENTRANCE~: 7.1 GENERAL: PROVIDE AND INSTALL SECONDARY/SERVICE TO PADMOUNTED TRANSFORMER FROM ELECTRICAL EQUiPMENT/METER ROOM. 7.2 CONDUITS: THE MAXIMUM CROSS SECTIONAL AREA TO BE OCCUPIED BY THE CUSTOMER'S SERVICE CONDUITS, IS LIMITED TO THE AREA GIVEN IN THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A'. TERMINATE CONDUITS IN PAD AT THREE INCHES ABOVE FINAL GRADE. ALL CONDUITS FOR FUTURE SERVICES MUST BE INSTALLED AT THIS TIME. BE LIMITED TO A MAXIMUM OF EIGHT (8) PER PHASE AT EACH CONDUCTOR: THE SERVICE CONDUCTORS ARE TO PER HI-LEG FOR 7.3 - TRANSFORMER. PROVIDE 7 FEET OF CABLE PER LIGHTING LEG AND NEUTRAL AND 7 FEET OF CABLE 120/240V 3 PHASE SERVICE) BEYOND CONDU~TS FOP. CONNECTION TO FPL FACILITIES IN TRANSFORMER COMPARTMENT. MAXIMUM SIZE OF CONDUCTOR IS 750 mcm or 600 mcm copper. 1. PROVIDE AND INSTALL CONDUIT (EXCEPT UNDER BUILDINGS), HANDHOLES, CONCRETE PADS, PADMOUNTED TRANSFORMERS, AND PRIMARY AND SECONDARY CABLE. 2. PROVIDE AND INSTALL GROUND RODS AT PADS. 3. PROVIDE ELECTRONIC MARKERS FOR CUSTOMER'S INSTALLATION WHEN REQUIRED. 4. CONNECT CUSTOMER'S SERVICE CABLES TO FPL FACILITIES IN TRANSFORMER COMPARTMENT. 5. PROVIDE AND INSTALL METERING WIRING BETWEEN METER CABINET AND CT'S WHERE APPLICABLE. 6. MAINTAIN ALL EQUIPMENT AND MATERIAL INSTALLED BY FPL. THIS SPECIFICATION IS BASED ON THE CUSTOMER'S SUBMITTED PLANS AND ANY CHANGES IN THESE PLANS MAY RESULT IN ADDITIONAL COSTS WHICH THE CUSTOMER AGREES TO PAY. WHEN REQUIRED, THE CUSTOMER AGREES TO PAY A CONTRIBUTION FOR THE DIFFERENTIAL COST BETWEEN OVERHEAD AND UNDERGROUND SERVICE. THE AGREEMENT AND REQUIREMENTS AS OUTLINED IN THIS SPECIFICATION, EXHIBIT "A", AND ALL ATTACHMENTS MUST BE ADHERED TO. ANY NON-CONFORMANCE OR CHANGES MAY RESULT IN DELAYS UNTIL THESE SPECIFICATIONS ARE MET. ANY CHANGES OR VARIATIONS FROM THESE SPECIFICATIONS MUST BE SUBMITTED TO AND APPROVED BY FPL IN WRITING. ACCEPTANCE OF SPECIFICATIONS: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT t AM AUTHORIZED TO ACCEPT THESE SPECIFICATIONS ON BEHALF OF THE CUSTOMER AND THAT WILL DELIVER A COPY OF THESE SPECIFICATIONS TO THE CUSTOMER AND ALL AFFECTED CONTRACTORS: REPRESENTING THE CUSTOMER: NAME: / TELEPHONE NUMBER: ( )_ j~,,~ ~ ~'3~?'7 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I AM A~HORIZED TO ACCEPT THESE SPECIFICATIONS ON BEH~F OF FP~ REPRESE~ING THE FPL: N~E: ~eoff G~ffon ... TITLE: S~nior Constmc~on Desiqner SIGNATUREf'~-/~'~ JUL 3 0 2002 FPL Work Order No. 87247 Project Name. Well Station #16 UNDERGROUND CONDUIT INSTALLATION AGREEMENT This Agreement, made this __ day of __ 20 by Collier County Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida as Ex-officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District (hereinafter called the Customer) and Florida Power and Light Company, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Florida (hereinafter called FPL). WHEREAS; the Customer has requested the pre-approval of the location and installation of underground distribution facilities to be located in a described FPL easement provided by the Customer. WITNESSETH That, for and in consideration of the covenants and agreements herein set forth, the parties hereto covenant and agree as follows: 1. The Customer shall: a) install conduit, cable markers and associated materials provided by FPL in accordance with the instructions and specifications attached to this Agreement; b) be solely responsible for the installation of conduit at the correct location and the correct depth pursuant to the FPL construction drawing and specifications; .... c) provide reasonable notification of the conduit installation dates; d) at the discretion of FPL, either correct any discrepancies, within two (2) working days, found in the installation that are inconsistent with the instructions and specifications attached to this agreement or pay the associated cost to correct the installation within thirty (30) days of receiving the associated bill, and in either case, reimburse FPL for costs associated with lost crew time due to such discrepancies; e) provide survey points for FPL to stake the cable route; f) notify FPL when the conduit installation is complete; g) provide "as built" prints within two (2) weeks of final installation; h) provide for pick-up of materials; i) assume liability for materials lost, stolen or damaged once the customer receives material; j) assume liability for any delays and/or additional costs to FPL caused by a conduit installation that is not consistent with the instructions and specifications attached to this agreement. 2. FPL shall: a) provide written instructions and specifications for the installation of FPL provided conduit; b) provide required material to the Customer for the installation of underground facilities within the specified cable route; c) provide staking for the Customer along the specified cable route; [3&g. '1 o:~ 2 Form804C (Non-St~e~0...__./.~__~..~ Rev. 9/95 / .. ----T- d) apply a credit in the amount of $8,743, in the event that the customer has made or has agreed to make a Contribution in Aid of Construction for the underground distribution facilities associated with this Agreement (if the credit exceeds the contribution, or if no contribution is required, a payment shall be made to the customer); e) assume no liability for materials lost, stolen or damaged once received by the customer; f) furnish any additional material at the current cost plus applicable loading and delivery charges; g) assume no liability for delays caused by material delivery deficiency, including insufficient, lost, stolen or damaged material; h) assume no liability for delays because of misunderstanding of installation drawings or specifications; i) assume no liability for delays or additional cost caused by an inadequacy of the conduit system installation; j) assume no liability for special incidental or consequential damages of any nature. 3. This agreement is subject to FPL's General Rules and Tariff and the Rules of the Florida Public Service Commission. 4. Subject to the limitations set forth in §768.28, Fla. Stat., the customer shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless FPL, its parent, subsidiaries or affiliates and their respective officers, directors and employees (collectively "FPL entities") from and against any liabilities whatsoever, occasioned wholly or in part by the negligence of the customer or its employees, for injury to or death of person(s) and any property damage arising or resulting in connection with any activity associated with the work or service under this agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be duly executed to be effective as of the day and year written above. ATTEST: (As to Chairperson) BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS EX-OFFICIO THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT By: By:. Dwight E. Brock, Clerk James N. Coletta, Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency:. Assistant Count~Attomey FLORIDA POWER & LIGI-IT COMPANY Customer Project Manager Page -- JUL 3 0 2002 '7 SPECIFICATIONS FOR PRECAST TRANSFORMER LOCATION WORK ORDER NO: 87247 DATE July 10, 2002 R# 798NA NAME OF CUSTOMER: Collier County Government ADDRESS: Well Station # 17, 12th ST NW FPL REPRESENTATIVE: Geoff Gratton TEL. NO. (941) 353-6040 SECONDARY DELIVERY VOLTAGE: 277/480 V,Three Phase, 4 Wire, WYE CUSTOMER AGREES TO: 1. GENERAL: 1.1 PROVIDE A SUITABLE LOCATION, COMPACTED AND LEVEL TO 3" BELOW FINAL GRADE, FOR FPL TRANSFORMER PAD AND INSTALL SECONDARY/SERVICE FROM PAD TO BUILDING AS SPECIFIED ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" AND AS OUTLINED BELOW. 1.2 IT IS FURTHER UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED THAT SUBSEQUENT RELOCATION OR REPAIR OF THE FPL SYSTEM, ONCE INSTALLED, WILL BE PAID BY THE CUSTOMER IF SAID RELOCATION OR REPAIR IS A RESULT OF A CHANGE IN THE LAYOUT OR GRADING BY THE CUSTOMER OR ANY OF THE CUSTOMER'S CONTRACTORS OF SUBCONTRACTORS FROM THE TIME THE UNDERGROUND FACILITIES WERE INSTALLED; AND THAT SUBSEQUENT REPAIR TO FPL'S SYSTEM, ONCE INSTALLED, WILL BE PAID BY THE CUSTOMER IF SAID REPAIR IS A RESULT OF DAMAGE CAUSED BY THE CUSTOMER OR ANY OF THE CUSTOMER'S CONTRACTORS OR SUBCONTRACTORS. 1.3 NOTIFY GENERAL CONTRACTOR, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR AND APPLIANCE SUPPLIERS OF THE SERVICE VOLTAGE TO BE SUPPLIED BY FPL. 2. EASEMENTS: PROVIDE FPL WITH GOOD AND SUFFICIENT EASEMENTS, INCLUDING LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS AND SURVEY WORK TO PRODUCE SUCH EASEMENTS,FOR THE INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF ITS ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES MUST BE GRANTED OR OBTAINED, AT NO COST TO FPL, PRIOR TO FPL'S ENERGIZING ITS FACILITIES. 3. SITE REQUIREMENTS: 3.1 GRADE: WITHIN THE EASEMENT, FILL OR CUT TO WITHIN 6" OF FINAL GRADE, PROVIDE GRADE STAKES AND CLEAR EASEMENT OF TREES, STUMPS, CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS, AND OTHER OBSTACLES BEFORE AND DURING CONSTRUCTION BY FPL OR FPL CONTRACTORS. 3.2 COMPACTION: AFTER FPL OR ITS CONTRACTOR HAS BACKFILLED THE TRENCH USING ROUGH-GRADING TECHNIQUES, THE CUSTOMER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING COMPACTION OR OTHER SPECIAL BACKFILL. FPL WILL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SETTLING OF THE TRENCH ROUTE. 3.3 PLANS: PROVIDE FPL WITH LOCATION AND DEPTH INFORMATION AND/OR DRAWINGS OF ALL EXISTING OR PROPOSED UNDERGROUND FACILITIES ON THE CUSTOMER'S PROPERTY. LOCATE OR EXPOSE UNDERGROUND FACILITIES WHEN REQUESTED BY FPL. 3.4 NOTIFICATION: PROVIDE FPL WITH AT LEAST THREE (3) WEEKS NOTICE PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF PAVING, LANDSCAPING, SODDING, SPRINKLER SYSTEMS AND OTHER SURFACE WORK. CUSTOMER WILL BEAR THE COST OF RESTORING THESE OBSTRUCTIONS TO THEIR ORIGINAL CONDITION IF ABOVE NOTICE IS NOT PROVIDED. 4. TRANSFORMER PAD LOCATION: 4.1 LOCATION: PAD WILL BE INSTALLED AT GRADE LEVEL AND LOCATED AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "A". SEE EXHIBIT "A" FOR EXACT LOCATION OF PRECAST CONCRETE PADS, HANDHOLES, AND CONDUIT TRENCHES. 4.2 CLEARANCES: A MINIMUM CLEARANCE OF THREE (3) FEET MUST BE MAINTAINED AT SIDES AND REAR OF TRANSFORMER PAD AND EIGHT (8) FEET IN FRONT OF PAD AS SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED DRAWING DCS UN-21. THIS CLEARANCE APPLIES TO ALL TYPES OF OBSTRUCTIONS INCLUDING LANDSCAPING AND FENCES. 4.3 PROTECTION: PROVIDE AND INSTALL CURBS AND/OR PROTECTIVE BARRIERS, WHEN REQUIRED, AS DETAILED ON DCS UN-21, AFTER THE INSTALLATION OF CONCRETE PADS AND TRANSFORMERS. CURBS AND/OR BARRIERS MUST BE IN PLACE PRIOR TO FPL ENERGIZING THE SERVICE. 5. (~T METERING: WHEN METERING CURRENT TRANSFORMERS (CT'S) ARE REQUIRED, THEY WILL BE LOCATED AS SPECIFIED ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" AND INSTALLED BY FPL. THE CUSTOMER WILL PROVIDE AND INSTALL A 1-1/4 INCH GALVANIZED CONDUIT FROM THE METER CABINET TO THE LOCATION OF THE CT'S. CONDUIT RUN IS NOT TO EXCEED 25 FEET IN LENGTH BETWEEN CT'S AND METER WITH NO MORE THAN TWO 90 DEGREE BENDS UNLESS PRE-APPROVED BY '.J:"__ r,_©~m UT "'111 I OUTLET BOXES (LB'S)ARE NOT BE USED. .0. JUL 3 0 2002 6. SSDR METERING: IF SOLID STATE DATE RECEIVING (SSDR) METERING IS REQUIRED, THE CUSTOMER WILL PROVIDE AND INSTALL FACILITIES FOR THE SSDR METERING EQUIPMENT AS DETAILED ON THE ATTACHED "CUSTOMER REQUIREMENTS FOR SSDR METERING EQUIPMENT" SHEET. 7. CUSTOMER SERVICE ENTRANCE.: 7.1 GENERAL: PROVIDE AND INSTALL SECONDARY/SERVICE TO PADMOUNTED TRANSFORMER FROM ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT/METER ROOM. 7.2 CONDUITS; THE MAXIMUM CROSS SECTIONAL AREA TO BE OCCUPIED BY THE CUSTOMER'S SERVICE CONDUITS, IS LIMITED TO THE AREA GIVEN IN THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A', TERMINATE CONDUITS IN PAD AT THREE INCHES ABOVE FINAL GRADE. ALL CONDUITS FOR FUTURE SERVICES MUST BE INSTALLED AT THIS TIME. 7.3 CONDUCTOR: THE SERVICE CONDUCTORS ARE TO BE LIMITED TO A MAXIMUM OF EIGHT (8) PER PHASE AT EACH TRANSFORMER. PROVIDE 7 FEET OF CABLE PER LIGHTING LEG AND NEUTRAL AND 7 FEET OF CABLE PER HI-LEG FOR 120/240V 3 PHASE SERVICE) BEYOND CONDUITS FOR CONNECTION TO FPL FACILITIES IN TRANSFORMER COMPARTMENT. MAXIMUM SIZE OF CONDUCTOR IS 750 mcm or 600 mcm copper. FPL AGREES TO: 1. PROVIDE AND INSTALL CONDUIT (EXCEPT UNDER BUILDINGS), HANDHOLDS, CONCRETE PADS, PADMOUNTED TRANSFORMERS, AND PRIMARY AND SECONDARY CABLE. 2. PROVIDE AND INSTALL GROUND RODS AT PADS. 3. PROVIDE ELECTRONIC MARKERS FOR CUSTOMER'S INSTALLATION WHEN REQUIRED. 4. CONNECT CUSTOMER'S SERVICE CABLES TO FPL FACILITIES IN TRANSFORMER COMPARTMENT, 5. PROVIDE AND INSTALL METERING WIRING BETWEEN METER CABINET AND CT'S WHERE APPLICABLE. 6. MAINTAIN ALL EQUIPMENT AND MATERIAL INSTALLED BY FPL, IMPORTANT: THIS SPECIFICATION IS BASED ON THE CUSTOMER'S SUBMITTED PLANS AND ANY CHANGES IN THESE PLANS MAY RESULT IN ADDITIONAL COSTS WHICH THE CUSTOMER AGREES TO PAY. WHEN REQUIRED, THE CUSTOMER AGREES TO PAY A CONTRIBUTION FOR THE DIFFERENTIAL COST BETWEEN OVERHEAD AND UNDERGROUND SERVICE. THE AGREEMENT AND REQUIREMENTS AS OUTLINED IN THIS SPECIFICATION, EXHIBIT "A", AND ALL ATTACHMENTS MUST BE ADHERED TO. ANY NON-CONFORMANCE OR CHANGES MAY RESULT IN DELAYS UNTIL THESE SPECIFICATIONS ARE MET. ANY CHANGES OR VARIATIONS FROM THESE SPECIFICATIONS MUST BE SUBMITTED TO AND APPROVED BY FPL IN WRITING. ACCEPTANCE OF SPECIFICATIONS: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I AM AUTHORIZED TO ACCEPT THESE SPECIFICATIONS ON BEHALF OF THE CUSTOMER AND THAT I WILL DELIVER A COPY OF THESE SPECIFICATIONS TO THE CUSTOMER AND ALL AFFECTED CONTRACTORS: REPRESENTING THE CUSTOMER: J / TELEPHONE NUMBER: (, ~ ~o I HEREBY CERTI~ ~AT I AM A~HORIZED TO ACCEPT THESE SPECIFICATIONS ON BEHALF OF FPL: REPRESENTING THE FPL: NAME: Geoff Gmffon TITLE: Senior Cons~on Desiqner SIGNATURE~ ~~~ ' ..... EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE A RESOLUTION AND THE GRANTING OF A REVOCABLE TEMPORARY LICENSE AND UTILITY EASEMENT TO LEE COUNTY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., FOR INSTALLATION OF AN ELECTRIC POWER LINE ON THE CARNESTOWN TRANSFER STATION PROPERTY, THE COST OF WHICH WILL NOT EXCEED $50.00. OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners approve and authorize the Chairman to execute the attached Resolution and Revocable Temporary License, and a Utility Easement to Lee County Electric Cooperative, Inc. (Coop) for the installation of an electric power line on, over and across the County-owned Carnestown Transfer Station property. CONSIDERATIONS: Electric power to the County's Carnestown Transfer Station is currently provided from onsite generators. The Solid Waste Department will be upgrading the Transfer Station and needs to improve its electric service. In order for the Coop to install the required utility facilities on the Station property, Collier County must first grant the Coop a Revocable Temporary License, and, then after the electric facilities have been installed, convey a permanent 16-foot-wide Utility Easement to cover the as-built facilities. The attached Resolution and Revocable Temporary License have been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's office and Solid Waste Department. FISCAL IMPACT: The cost to record the Utility Easement will not exceed $50.00. Funds are available in the Solid Waste Disposal Fund (470). GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This request is consistent with the Growth Management Plan. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: 1. Adopt the attached Resolution and authorize the Chairman to execute the Resolution and attached Revocable Temporary License on behalf of the Board; 2. Authorize the Chairman to execute a .permanent Utility Easement once the electric facilities have been installed. The Utility Easement will be reviewed by the County Attorney's office prior to being submitted for execution; and 3. Authorize staff to record the Utility Easement in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. A~NOA ITEN #--- JUL 3 0 002 I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Easement - Lee County Electric Cooperative, Inc. Page 2 Cindy M. Erb~'Sr. Property Acquisition Specialist Property Acquisition & Construction Management Facilities Management Department TonYA. M~-t, ~u~ervi~or-- - ' Property Acquisition & Construction Management Facilities Management Department Oharles E. Carrington, Jr., S~/A; I~anager Property Acquisition & Oonstruation Management Facilities Management Department REVIEWED BY: ~ DATE: Facilities Management Department REVIEWED BY: ~ '.r"-; ~ ~ ~ ~u.--------,~ DATE: George Yilmaz, Director Solid Waste Department /" ~lames W. DeLony, P.E., ~fministrator ,..__. ublic Utilities Division/' AG~NI)A NO._~_~_~__ JUL 3 0 ZOOZ ~. RESOLUTION NO. 2002- ~ 3 4 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY 5 COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA TO EXECUTE A REVOCABLE 6 TEMPORARY LICENSE TO LEE COUNTY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. THAT WILL 7 BENEFIT THE CARNESTOWN TRANSFER STATION 8 9 ~.0 WHEREAS, Collier County is desirous of providing Lee County Electric z ]. Cooperative, Inc., with a Revocable Temporary License for the construction, operation and ].2 maintenance of utility facilities, including but not limited to, distribution lines and other related ~.3 equipment, over and through the property, and more particularly described in Exhibit "A" 14 attached hereto. ~.5 WHEREAS, Lee County Cooperative, Inc., will be installing a new power line which ).6 will improve electrical service to the Carnestown Transfer Station. z'7 WH~-REAS, upon completion of the construction of the utility facilities on the [ 8 property, a permanent Utility Easement will be granted for the 16-foot strip of land wherein the 19 utility facilities are located. 20 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, finds 23. that the granting of a permanent Utility Easement is in the best interest of the Public. 22 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY 23 COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: 24 1. The Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, does hereby approve 25 the attached Revocable Temporary License to Lee County Electric Cooperative, Inc.; 26 and 2'7 2. The Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, is 28 hereby authorized to execute the attached Revocable Temporary License to Lee County 29 Electric Cooperative, Inc.; and 3o 3. The Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida does hereby approve 3 ~. and authorize its Chairman to execute a permanent Utility Easement to Lee County 32 Electric Cooperative, Inc. for the 16-foot strip of land wherein the utility facilities are 33 located. 34 THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED this __ day of ,2002, after motion, 35 second and majority vote. 36 3'7 38 DAY OF ,2002 39 40 ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 4]. OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 43 44 BY: 4~ N0. 47 "" J U L 3 0 OOZ Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: FUon 1. Ghadw~ll ^s~i~tant County AGENDA J U L 3 PG. Z~ Project: Carnestown Transfer Station REVOCABLE TEMPORARY LICENSE This REVOCABLE TEMPORARY LICENSE entered into this ~ day of ,2002, by and between COLLIER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, whose mailing address is 3301 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, Florida 34112, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY", and LEE COUNTY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., a Florida corporation, whose mailing address is Post Office Box 3455, North Fort Myers, Florida 33918, hereinafter referred to as "COOP", approving the use of County-owned property for the purpose of construction utility facilities. WHEREAS, the COOP requires the use of County-owned property for the purpose of constructing, operating, and maintaining utilities, including but not limited to, distribution lines and other related equipment, over and through the property as more particularly described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made part thereof; WHEREA, the COUNTY is willing to approve the use of County-owned property for such purposes; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. The COUNTY herein approves, for Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other valuable considerations, the use of County-owned property for the purpose of constructing, operating, and maintaining utilities, including but not limited to, distribution lines and other related equipment, over and through the property as more particularly described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof, hereinafter referred to as "Property". 2. The approval of the use of the Property by the COOP shall expire upon grant of a permanent Utility Easement. 3. Upon completion of the construction of the utility facilities on the property, a permanent Utility Easement will be granted for the 16-foot strip of land wherein the utility facilities are located. Upon the completion of construction, the COOP shall restore the surface of the Property to its original condition. The Utility Easement will be subject to certain conditions, including a right of termination in favor of the County in the event the COOP ceases use of the Utility Easement as contemplated herein for a period of six (6) months. 4. This Revocable Temporary License shall be administered on behalf of the COUNTY by and through the Collier County Property Acquisition & Construction Management Section of the Facilities Management Department. 5. The COOP, to the extend permitted by law, and as limited by §768.28, F.S., shall indemnify, save, protect and hold harmless COUNTY against any damages and claims arising by reason of COOP's utility installations or the operation of same. COOP agrees to indemnify County as a continuing condition of the Utility Easement. 6. COOP covenants and agrees not to assign this Revocable Temporary License or to permit any other persons to occupy same without the written consent of COUNTY. 7. The COUNTY and COOP specifically agree that this Revocable Temporary License represents a license for the COOP's use of the property and does not convey any estate in the property or create any interest whatsoever. JUL 3 0 2002 PG. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have made and executed this Revocable Temporary License as of the day and year first above written. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY' Deputy Clerk JAMES N. COLETTA, Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Ellen T. Chadwell Assistant County Attorney AGENDA IT£H J U L 3 ~ PG. EXHIBIT "A" Page 1 of 1 A parcel of land lying within the West one-half of the West one-half of Section 25, Township 52 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida, being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Northwest corner of Section 25, Township 52 South, Range 29 East; thence N 89o42'48" E along the North line of said Section 25 a distance of 999.17 feet; thence S 00°17'12" E 96.11 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING of the hereinafter described parcel of land; thence S 21°08'15" W 580 feet; thence S 68o51'45" W 330 feet; thence N 21°08'15" E 580 feet; thence N 68o51'45'' W 330 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. JUL 3 0 2002 _ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THAT AGREEMENT NO. HW 465 WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FOR ELECTRONICS RECYCLING. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners approve Amendment No. 1 to that Agreement No. HW 465 with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) for electronics recycling and authorize the Chairman to sign the Amendment. CONSIDERATION: On July 31, 2001 the Board of County Commissioners approved Agreement No. HW 465 with the FDEP for an electronics recycling program. Staff had successfully applied for and received one of only eight $50,000 grant awards to begin an ongoing electronics recycling program. Under the terms of the Agreement the FDEP has been invoiced by the Solid Waste Management Department on a cost reimbursement basis in the amount of $25,000. The purpose of the Amendment is to facilitate expenditure of the full grant amount of $50,000. As part of the electronics recycling program Staff has held two round up events. The first event was held on November 16, 2001 and 7,384 lbs. of electronics were collected. The second event was held on January 12, 2002 and 12,543 lbs. of electronics were collected for recycling. Since inception of the program an additional 13,171 lbs. of electronics have been dropped off at the Naples and Marco Recycling Centers, for a total of 33,098 lbs. of electronics diverted from the landfill. Staff successfully negotiated an extension of the grant funding completion date from June 30, 2002 to December 31, 2002. As a result of this negotiation, the DEP has sent the Solid Waste Management Department an Amendment to the original Agreement changing the completion date of the grant from June 30, 2002 to December 31, 2002. The Amendment will also allow the FDEP, the State, or authorized representative to have access to grant records for audit purposes during the term of the Agreement and for five years following completion of the Agreement. There are additional minor changes to the Agreement but the date change is the most important. FISCAL IMPACT: The Electronics Recycling Grant fund now generates revenue up to $50,000.00. The Amendment will enable funds to continue to be available through the first quarter of FY 2002/03. Funds will be received by submission of reimbursement requests. Funds are in the FY02/03 budget request and will be available from Solid Waste Disposal - Grant Fund (472). GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no Growth Management impact associated with this item. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve Amendment No. 1 to that Agreement No. HW 465 with the FDEP for electronics recycling and authorize the Chairman to sign the Amendment. SUBMITTED BY: ~'~--~_,'. ~-~/~'~"~'~ Date: -~/~r/~ o% Denise Kirk, RecyclingtDoordinator Solid Waste Management Department REVIEWED BY: ~--------:~--'~==-'-'~ ~ -~ Date: ¢//'~//Z_. . G. George Yilmaz, Ph.D., P.E., P.H., R.E.P. Director, Solid Waste Management Department APPROVEDB~Y: .,-z.~:¢.-, ~ /_~//~- ~'~1 Date: -- James W. D eLony, P.E. / ~-- blic Utilities Administrat~ .0._ /~e.F JUL 3 0 20 2 DEP AGREEMENT NO. HW465 AMENDMENT NO. I THIS AGREEMENT as entered into on the 31't day of July, 2001, between the STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (hereinafter referred to as the "Depamnent") ,and COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (hereinafter referred to as the "Grantee" or "Recipient") is hereby mnended as follows: -- Paragraph 2. is hereby revised to change the Agreement completion date from June 30, 2002 to December 31, 2002 ,and to change the final invoice due date from June 15, 2002 to December 15, 2002. -- Paragraph 3, item D is hereby revised to change the due date for the final invoice from June 15, 2002 to December 15, 2002. -- Paragraph 9, the second sentence is hereby modified to read as follows: The Dep,'mmeut. the State, or their authorized representatives shall have access to such records for audit purposes during the term of this Agreement and for'five years following Agreement completion. -- Paragraph 15 is hereby tnodified to change the Grantee's Grant Manager's phone number to 941/732-2508 or Stmcom 751-2508 -- The following Im~guage is hereby added to the Agreement as Paragraph 24: 24. A. No person, on the grounds of race, creed, col°r, national origin, age, sex, or disability, shall be excluded from participation in; be denied the proceeds or benefits of; or be otherwise subjected to discrimination in performance of this Agreement. B. An entity or ,~liate who Ires been placed on the discriminatory vendor list may not submit a bid on a contract to provide goods or services to a public entity, may not submit a bid on a contract with a public entity for the construction or repair of a public building or public work, ~nay not submit bids on leases of real property to a public entity, may not award or perform work as a contractor, supplier, subcontractor, or consultm~t trader contract with any public entity, and may not transact business ~with ,'my public entity. The Florida Department of Management Services is responsible for maintaining the discriminatory vendor list and intends to post the list on its website. Questions regarding the discriminatory vendor list may be directed to the Florida Department of Management Services, Office of Supplier Diversity at 850/487-0915. -- Attaclm~ent E, Pan V: RECORD RETENTION, the first sentence is hereby modified to change the retention period for records from three years to five years. In ,all other respects, the Agreement of which this is an Amendment, and attachments relative thereto, slkall remain m full force and effect. REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK #0...~~._ DEP Agreement No. HW465, Amendinent No. 1, Page I of 2 J U L 3 0 _002 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the pm-ties have caused this Amendment to be duly executed the day and year last written below. STATEOF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF Ol~l~N~R~N'~ladg PROTECTION ~o,~ co~s~o~s ~y:E1J/~/t~,~U~ By:_ ' Secr~ta/ry o] designee [ Ch~.nan* Date :_ "'19 ] 0 'L Date: AT'EEST: DEP Grant Manager Dwight E. Brock, Clerk DEp Contracts Administrator APPROVED as to form and legality  m and legal sufficiency: _/~ m.? ~ %~ ~ County Attorney ~P At[orney ' *For Agreements with govermneutal boards/commissions: If someone other than the Chairman signs this Amendment, a resolution, statement or other document authorizing that person to sign the Amendment on behalf of the Grantee must accompany the A~nenchnenL DEP Agreement No. HW465, Amenchnent No. 1, Page 2 of 2 JUL 3 0U~O~ P6. ,/'~, r,, '*~I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE RESOLUTION SUPPORTING CONTINUED FEDERAL FUNDING OF COASTAL PROJECTS ~ To obtain approval of a resolution in support of continued federal funding for coastal projects. CONSIDERATIONS: The Southwest Florida Beach and Inlet Convocation is an informal group consisting of representatives from Collier, Lee, Charlotte, Manatee and Sarasota Counties (city and county governments as well as the business community), along with state and federal government representatives. As part of their meeting agenda for June 24, 2002 in Fort Myers, all communities are urged to send resolutions to Congressional members in support of continued federal funding of beach restoration projects. The American Coastal Coalition has drafted a resolution for local community consideration and will be meeting with Congressional members. Though Collier County doesn't receive federal funding for beaches, without other municipalities in Florida receiving federal assistance, there would be less state funding available. Collier County does receive Florida Beach Erosion Control funding. FISCAL IMPACT.: There is no fiscal impact associated with this resolution. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no impact to the Growth Management Plan related to this action. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached resolution. SUBMITTED BY: ~ Date: ~ Ron Hovell, P.E., Coastal Projects Manager / / Public Utilities Engineering Department REVIEWED BY: _ f'/.-7 ~'5/~ ~'~"~'--"~ Date: '?/"-/~ Roy'B. Anderson, P.E.2,Di)rector c~~~/ti/~Tes~g Department APPROVED BY' ,,,,'7.~._/~ ~ '-~ -'7 Date: _,~'---7zt'6~'/'9 ~ ,,~ J~mes W. D.eLo~n.y, .P:,~, Administrator ~,,,,~ublic Utilities Divisi(on AGENDA IT£~- JUL 3 0 20t I~SOLUTION NO. 2002- -- RESOLUTION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SUPPORTING CONTINUED FEDERAL FUNDING OF COASTAL PROJECTS WHEREAS, America's beaches are one of the country's irreplaceable and invaluable assets as, both environmentally and economically, they are unparalleled as a source of storm protection, a magnet for national and international tourism and provider of healthful recreation for all citizens; and WHEREAS, the timely maintenance and restoration of these beaches is critical to preserve their value and viability, and to provide a boost to both the environment and economy of the nation; and WHEREAS, the role of the federal government in maintaining and restoring beaches is appropriate and crucial, in that it recognizes the benefits accrued to the federal government from the storm protection afforded by better beaches as well as the role of federal navigation projects in accelerating coastal erosion; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that~ Collier County, Florida requests that Congress appropriate in fiscal year 2003 no less than $101 million for the purposes of protecting and enhancing America's beaches. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Members of both Houses and both parties are urged to commit themselves to creating a dedicated funding source for beach maintenance and protection efforts, inasmuch as only with such funding can this crucial ~GC/? Z~T~. ~ JUL 3 0 2002 - 1 - p6. ~ federal effort be assured of the appropriations needed to ensure success over the decades; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Collier County, Florida strongly supports America's beachfront resources, and urges all Members of Congress to do the same at this crucial moment in time. This Resolution adopted this day of June, 2002 after motion, second and majority vote favoring same. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: JAMES N. Coletta, Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: ~ < ~cq~eline ~u~bard Robinson ~ssistant County Attorney AG~N~)A I T~:I~I .o. J U L 3 PG. .... EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AWARD RFP 02-3339 FOR CONSTRUCTION & DEMOLITION WASTE ARTIFICIAL REEF RECYCLING TO COMMITTEE'S SHORTLIST SELECTION OF FIRMS, McCULLEY MARINE SERVICES INC., FOR AN ESTIMATED ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $250,000. OBJECTIVE: Obtain Board's approval of Committee's shortlist selection of firms for CONSTRUCTION & DEMOLITION WASTE ARTIFICIAL REEF RECYCLING to provide on- going recycling of CAD toward environmentally beneficial use to enhance fisheries and diving activities. CONSIDERATIONS: On February 26, 2002, a Request for Proposal was issued pursuant to the Board's direction that was received on June 26th, 2001 as a follow up to previous presentations and workshops. Notices were mailed to 127 firms, and 17 firms requested full proposal packages. Two (2) proposal responses were received by the April 5th, 2002 deadline and were distributed to the Selection Committee members at a meeting on April 11, 2002. The Selection Committee met on May 1, 2002, which resulted in the following shortlist by consensus: 1. McCULLEY MARINE SERVICES INC. 2. KELLY BROTHERS, INC. The Selection Committee members wish to award the contract to McCULLEY MARINE SERVICES INC. based on better qualifications and a better facilities operation and maintenance plan. All Selection committee members ranked McCulley Marine Services Inc. first and Kelly Brothers, Inc. second. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds for this service are available in Solid Waste Disposal Fund (470) Reserves, Reserves for Capital Outlay and Reserves for Contingencies. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no Growth Management Impact resulting from this action. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: 1. Award RFP 02-3339 for CONSTRUCTION & DEMOLITION WASTE ARTIFICIAL REEF RECYCLING, to the Committee's selection of McCULLEY MARINE SERVICES INC. 2. Authorize the Chairman to sign the standard contract after negotiation by staff and approval by the County Attorney 3. Authorize staff to prepare necessary budget amendments. SUBMITTED BY: ~'-'""-'~-~-' ,,'~- ~ ~ Date: G. George Yilmaz, Ph.D., P.E., Solid Waste Director 2002 Steph~n-,y. Carnell, Purchasing/General Services Director REVIEWED BY: ,-~/.. ' '-'-') Date: .  s W. DeLony, P.E., Public Utilities Administrator JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY' TO AUTHORIZE MONTHLY BILLING OF IRRIGATION WATER AVAILABILITY CHARGE AS IDENTIFIED IN THE EXECUTED AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT AND THE OLD COLLIER GOLF CLUB, INC. OBJECTIVE: To authorize commencment of monthly billing of an irrigation availability charge in the amount specified in the Agreement by and between the Collier County Water- Sewer District and The Old Collier Golf Club, Inc.. CONSIDERATION: The Collier County Water-Sewer District and The Old Collier Golf Club, Inc. entered into an Agreement for irrigation water which was executed on December 14, 1999. The Agreement identified a service availability charge for a 12" service in the amount of $770.00 per month to be paid by The Old Collier Golf Club, Inc. to the Collier County Water-Sewer District upon availability of irrigation water in the quantities specified in the Agreement. The Agreement required that The Old Collier Golf Club, Inc., at its expense, extend an irrigation water main. The extension was to provide irrigation water service from the District to said location of the The Old Collier Golf Club, Inc. The referenced irrigation water line to supply The Old Collier Golf Club with County irrigation water service has not been installed. The Old Collier Golf Club, Inc., does not plan to install this line anytme in the foreseeable future. The Old Collier Golf Club, Inc. billed the County $75,000 in fees for permitting and engineering expenses that they incurred. The agreement stated that Collier County Water Sewer District would pay this fee when the irrigation water was available. Collier County Water Sewer District Staff met with The Old Collier Golf Club staff and explained that the County will not pay this fee since The Old Collier Golf Club, Inc. has not fulfilled the agreement between the two parties. The County plans to charge The Old Collier Golf Club, Inc. the availability charge due to the fact the irrigation water is available. The County entered into this agreement in good faith that The Old Collier Golf Club, Inc would take up to 800,000 gpd of irrigation water. A fee of 44 cents per 1,000 gallons was set up for them so that the County could recoup the expense of The Old Collier Golf Club, Inc.'s portion of the project. The Collier County Water-Sewer District has completed, and placed into service, a supplemental irrigation water source with current capability to supply irrigation water, in the quantities required in the Agreement, to The Old Collier Golf Club, Inc. AG£~OA IT£1,~ . · NO o~~_. JUL 3 0 ZO0 ~G. / FISCAL IMPACT: Annual revenues of $9,240.00 (applying the current rate). GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Collier County Commissioners, Ex-Officio of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, authorize staff to immediately commence collecting the applicable monthly availability charges from The Old Collier Golf Club, Inc. 'Joseph Cheatham, Wastewaster Director Thomas G. Wides. Public Utilities Oper'ation/s Director ~ ~ - 'James~.DeLo~,P.E.,Pu ...... r APPROVED BY: Date: James V. Mudd, Acting County Manager AG£Nr~A ITC# - ! J U L 3 0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE TASK ORDER 6 IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,106,261 WITH YOUNGQUIST BROTHERS, INC., FOR NORTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY DEEP INJECTION WELL CONSTRUCTION, CONTRACT 01-3193, PROJECT 73948. OBJECTIVE: To construct a deep injection well system at the North County Water Reclamation Facility (NCWRF) for the injection of reclaimed water when it cannot be reused. CONSIDERATIONS: On October 9th, 2001, as Agenda Item 16(C)(1), the Board approved and entered into an agreement with Water Resource Solutions, Inc. (WRS) for design and construction services for the North County Water Reclamation Facility (NCWRF) Deep Injection Well project. The wells provide a back-up method to dispose of excess reclaimed water at the NCWRF when it cannot be reused. Also, additional wet-weather disposal capacity is needed to keep pace with the on-going facility expansions. In May 2002, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) issued the construction permit to construct the NCWRF Deep Injection Wells. Pursuant to County's Annual Contract 01-3193 for Deep Injection Well Services with Youngquist Brothers, Inc., staff through the County's consultant, Water Resource Solutions, Inc., began negotiations in April 2002 for the construction of two deep injection wells and a deep zone monitoring well for the NCWRF. Youngquist Brothers, Inc. in their letter dated July 8, 2002 have agreed to do this work, designated as Task Order 6, for the negotiated price of $6,106,261.00. Supporting documentation with cost breakdowns and construction schedule are attached to this Task Order 6. Water Resource Solutions, Inc. in their July 8, 2002 letter describes the negotiations and recommends awarding Task Order 6. Staff recommends approving and authorizing Task Order 6. FISCAL IMPACT: For Task Order 6, funds are currently budgeted as part of the North County Water Reclamation Facility Deep Injection Well project. Source of funds are impact fees. Work will be authorized in two phases. For this FY02, $3,698,086.00 will be authorized for Injection Well No. 1, Dual-Zone Monitor Well, Sound Suppression Barrier, Fill & Compact Pond 2, Entrance including Culverts, and Indemnification. Injection Well No. 2 and Permit Fee Allowance costing $2,408,175.00 will be budgeted and authorized in FY03. NO. ~,~.~ JUL 3 0 2002 Executive Summary Approve Task Order 6 for NCWRF Deep Injection Well Construction, Contract 01-3193, Project 73948 Page 2 of 2 GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This deep well project is needed for the disposal at the NCWRF of reclaimed water which cannot be reused and provide disposal capacity to accommodate facility expansions. It was first recommended in the 1997 Wastewater Master Plan Update adopted by the Board on July 22, 1997, as Items t2(c)(4) and 12(c)(5). Two deep wells were recommended in the latest 2001 Wastewater Master Plan adopted by the Board in December 11, 2001 as Agenda Item 8(a) to keep up with the facility expansions to meet growth demands. RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Board of County Commissioners, as the Ex- Officio Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, approve and authorize the Public Utilities Engineering Director to execute Task Order 6 pursuant to Contract 01-3193 with Youngquist Brothers, Inc., to construct the NCWRF Deep Injection Wells. Mohan V. Thampi, P.E., Senior Project Manager Public Utilities Engineering Department J heatham, Waste ater Director Public Utilities Division REVIEWED BY: (,' '//'~ ~'-'~------- DATE: R~y ~. Anderson, P.E., Director Public Utilities Engineering Department Ja es W. DeLo~y, P.E. Administrator ~_~b~i; Utilities Division AGENDA IT~:~ NO. IIe J U L ,3 0 2002 Water Resource Solutions P. E. O. 428 Pine Island Road SW · Cape Coral, Flodda 33991 · 239 574-1919 Fax: 239 574-8106 '02 JUL lO A!I 10:58 July 8, 2002 Mr. Mohan Thampi, PIE., R.E.M. Project Manager Collier County Public Utilities Engineering 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Bldg. H Naples, Fl. 34112 Re: North County Water Reclamation Facility Deep Injection Wells - Revised Final Negotiations Summary and Recommendations. Dear Mr. Thampi: The following discussion summarizes the cost negotiations conducted for the fill and compaction for pond 2, construction of a temporary entrance road including culvert, construction of a sound suppression barrier, construction of two injection we!Is, and construction of dual zone monitoring well for the North County Water Reclamation facility (NCWRF). These discussions were finalized after our meeting on June 21, 2002. The results of this final agreement are provided as Attachment 1 to this submission. Chronology . April 16, 2002 A letter was sent to Mr, Ed 1VI¢ Cullers of Youngquist Brothers, Inc. (YBI). The letter included a draft copy of the well specifications, and a request for an approximate cost estimate May 10, 2002 YBI responded with a lump sum quote and proposed a cost for constructing three wells of $5,905,000. May 10, 2002 Based on the higher than expected amount of the cost estimate, WRS developed a cost summary sheet to be completed by YBI concerning construction costs for the three wells in comparison to the construction of other recent injection wells. AGENDA IT£H UL 3 0 2002 May 29, 2002 YBI faxed back schedule of values with hand written numbers. Total cost estimate was $ 5,789,000. WRS requested that totals be provided with costs clearly identified. May 31, 2002 YBI returned the "Schedule of Values" with a cost of $ 2,625,000 for IW-1, $ 2,584,800 for IW-2 and $ 580,000 for the dual zone monitoring well. The total amount was $ 5,789,000. This cost did not include the sound suppression barrier. June 3, 2002 WRS faxed a comparison of costs between wells that had been drilled recently plus the adjusted costs for drilling the current deep injection wells at the South County Regional Water Treatment Plan (SCRWTP) for consideration by YBI. WRS indicated that the cost for constructing the wells at the SCRWTP was $5,545,990 for similar wells without the additional costs associated for purchasing and installing the tubing. June 13, 2002 YBI submitted a new round of cost breakdowns. The new cost estimate for constructing the three wells including the sound suppression barrier is proposed to be completed for a cost of $5,578,850. This quote was conditioned as a lump sum. However, the detailed line items are proposed to be used for progress payment during well construction. The cost offered by YBI is in line with the work at the SCRWTP and is therefore considered acceptable by WRS. An additional cost estimate for filling and compacting the ponds and for the construction of a temporary access road with culvert were also included in the June 13 submission. June 18, 2002 WRS sent to Collier County's Project Manager, Mohan Thampi, a letter summarizing the negotiations including all the supporting documentation for the activities described above and a recommendation to accept the $5,578,850 cost quoted by YBI for the three wells. June 21, 2002 A meeting was held between Collier County staff, Water Resource Solutions, and YBI to develop a final cost proposal for this project. The costs for constructing a sound suppression barrier ($25,000), a temporary road entrance ($83,000), and to fill and compact Pond No.2 ($332,311) were added. YBI's cost proposal for all of the indicated work was $ 5,994,161. Collier County would prepare a IT£~I ...--- 2002 Task Order under its Annual Contract #01-3193 with Youngquist Brothers, Inc. upon receipt of the final cost proposal. A schedule was also requested from Y'BI and the County indicated that the first deep well and monitoring well should be operational by March 2003. YBI indicated that an early authorization to proceed in July 2002 from County would make the target date more likely to be achieved. June 25, 2002 YBI furnished a cost proposal and a schedule for completing the desired well construction including access road plus culvert, sound barrier and pond. Costs for Final Permit Fee Allowance ($15,000) and Indemnification ($100) were added. Total cost is $6,009,261. The final permit allowance has been added to previous cost negotiations to provide funds for additional construction permits that may be required by Collier County to complete this work. The permit allowance is in addition to the lump sum cost proposed for this work and will not be used if additional permits are not required to be paid for by YBI. June 28, 2002 After price negotiations were completed, discussions were conducted for the purpose of developing contractor schedules and work areas. During these discussions it was determined that the proposed work area could not support the construction of the second injection well, IW-2, and work on the pump station simultaneously. Construction of IW-1 and the dual zone monitoring well will be constructed prior to other contractors working in the area. Therefore, additional working space was required. The need for additional working space was resolved by temporarily adding two feet of fill between the permanent surface area being constructed in pond 2 for the wells and the west bank of pond 2. July 8, 2002 Negotiations were completed for the temporary filling and removal of fill from pond 2 for the purposes of extending the YBI work area to accommodate construction of IW-2 while other contractors work on building the new pump station. The additional cost for providing, compacting as required, and removing the temporary fill in pond 2 was $97,000. After this additional sum was added to the previous proposal, YBI submitted a new cost proposal for $6,106,261 to complete the work. This cost proposal (Attachment 1) will be included in the Task order from the County. The previously submitted schedule is also attached, and will be Attachment 2 in the Task Order. W'RS recommends that the County award the Task Order to Youngquist Brothers, Inc. for $6,106,261 to construct the three wells and associated construction as described in the final cost proposal dated July 08, 2002. This cost includes temporarily filling that portion of pond 2 previously described with 2 feet of fill and then the removal of the fill after the job has been completed. If you have any questions, please call me at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, Mark S. Pearce, Ph.D. Senior Scientist Cc: Lloyd Horvath, P.E., President TASK ORDER # 06 "DEEP INJECTION WELL CONSTRUCTION SERVICES" Contract #01-3193 with Youngquist Brothers, Inc. Dated April 10, 2001 This Task Work Order is for General Contractors Services, subject to the terms and conditions of the Contract referenced above, for work known as: Project: NCWRF Deep Injection Wells Construction The type of work is specified in Contract 01-3193 with Youngquiat Brothers, Inc. approved by the Board on April 10, 2001 as Agenda Item 16(C)(3). In accordance with terms and conditions of the Agreement referenced above, Task Order # 06 is assigned to Youngquist Brothers, Inc. Scooe of Work: Construct two deep injections wells and one deep zone monitoring well for the North County Water Reclamation Facility per proposal dated July 8, 2002 from Youngquist Brothers, Inc. 1. Deep Injection Well No. 1 2. Deep Injection Well No. 2 3. Dual Zone Monitoring Well No.1 4. Sound Suppression Barrier 5. Fill and Compact Pond No. 2 6. Construction Entrance 7. Permit Fee Allowance 8. Indemnification Initially in Ibis FY02, Items 1, 3, 4, 5, 8, 7, and 8 will be authorized and funded. Item 2, the second deep injection well, will be authorized and funded in FY03. Schedule of Work: Complete within 480 Calendar days from notice to proceed. Comoensation: In accordance with the Agreement, the County will compensate the Firm in accordance with the negotiated lump sum amount provided in the schedule below for each FY. FYO~ FY03 1. Deep Injection Well No. I $2,580,675 2. Deep Injection Well No. 2 $2,393,175 3. Dual Zone Monitoring Well No.1 $ 580,000 4. Sound Suppression Barrier $ 25,000 5. Fill and Compact Pond No. 2 $ 429,311 6. Construction Entrance $ 83,000 7. Permit Fee Allowance $ 15,000 8. Indemnification $ 100 Sub-total $ 3,698,086 $2,408,175 Total Fee = $6,'106,26t.00 Any changes made subsequent to final department approval will be considered an additional service and charged according to an executed Change Order as enumerated in Exhibit D of the Agreement. / Mohan V. Thampt, P.E., Project Manager / Date Public Utilities Engineering Department Ed McCullers, Vice President /Date~ Youngquist Brothera, Inc. APPROVED BY: Roy B. Anderson, P.E., Director Date Public Utilities Engineering Department VT:m /4 P:oj.ct - ,.ject,o. JUL 3 0 2O0g ATTACHMENT 1 Youngqui~t Brother~, Inc. 15465 Pine Ridge Road Fort Myer~ Florida ~390~ 239-489-4444 Mohan V. Thampi, P.E., R.E.M. July 8, 2002 Collier County Government Collier County Goverament Center 3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Bldg. H Naples, Florida 34112 Re: Proposal for The Deep Injection Well Construction At The Collier County North County Water Reclamation Facility, (Revised) Dear Mohan, Youngquist Brothers Inc., will provide all labor, equipment and materials to complete the tasl~ listed below for the Lump Sum Phces indicated: Deep Injection Well No. I $2,580,675 Deep Injection Well No.2 $2,393,175 Dual Zone Monitoring $580,000 Sound Suppression Barrier $25,000 Fill & Compact Pond No.2. $429,311 Entrance Including Culverts $83,000 Permit Fee Allowance $15,000 Indemnification $ I00 Total Lump Sum Amount S6,106,261 Tlfis proposal is based on following: 1.) There are (6) additional work items that may be required, if directed by the engineer, YBI will provide these itc-ms at the tm.it prices established on the attached form~. 2.) Notice to proceed dat~ ia early August 2002, 480 Contract Days 3.) (24) Hour a day (7) day a week - work schedule 4.) Sound Suppression Barrier is approximately (30' high x 200' long). 5.) Site accessible with semi trucks. 6.) Triple nm of 42" X 30' RCP Culverts plus the MES 7.) If the metal grates are not required on the IVIES you may deduct $10,000 8.) YBI, will provide sod on new permanent pond slopes and R/W ditch $1ope~ as necessary. 9.) Water Resource Solutions Inc. specifications dated April 16, 2002, May 172002 and sheets C 1 & C2 & dated 5/7/02. 10.) Filling & Compacting of Pond No.2, will be done per the above refemaced drawings & specifications. The west end of the pond will be temporarily filled with (2) feet of fill match-iai for use as a staaina a~a for drilling. The fill material will be r,','moved and the pond completed per the referenced drawing ~fter the completion of the drilling. The fill matexial removed form the temporn~.' drilling stain belongs to YBI. The county must maintain the pond l~'el at a level that will not flood the temporary staging area. If you have any questions or need an)' additional information please call us. Edward Mc'Cullers, Vice President AG[NDA IT[M. ,JUL 3 § PG._ (~ SCHEDULE OF VALUES IW-I Item Descriptions Quantity Unit Price Mobilization I Obtain required pem~its, Construct drill ~ and 4 monitoring wells, site set- up, i,~,, p~ c~ I Ea 600,000.00 600,000.00 2 Ddll 54-inch diameter hole to 400 ft 400 Ft. 175.00 70~,000.00 3 Geophysical Logging (GR,Cal.) 1 I.s 20,000.00 20,000.00 4 Install 48-inch,0.375 wall steel casing to 395ft. 395 Lf 150.00 59,250.00 5 Grout 48-inch casing in place (220ft 3)'and temperature logs 2200 CF 13.00 28,600.00 6 Drill 12-25-inch diameter pilot hole 1350 ft (950ff) 950 Ft. 125.00 118,750.00 7 Conduct geophysical logs (GR,CaI,D.I., Temp, BHC,FLOW LOG) 1 Is. 30,000.00 30,000.00 8 Perform 1st drill stem (packer test) 1 Is 13,000.00 13,000.00 9 Fill pilot hole wffh cement containing 12% Bentonite (1300ft 3) 1300 Ft. 11.00 14,300.00 10 Ddll nominal 42-inch diameter borehole to 1310 ft bis 910 Lf 125.00 113,750.00 11 Conduct geophysical logging (GR,Cal.) I I.s 22,000.00 22,000.00 12 Set 1300 feet of 34-inch O.D., 0.375-inch wall steel casing 1300 Lf 120.00 156,000.00 13 Grout 34-inch steel casing (11,000 ff 3) and temperature logs 11,000 CF 13.00 143,000.00 14 Ddll 12.25-inch diameter hole to 2200 feet (850) 850 Ft. 111.00 94,350.00 15 Perform flow & caliper logs 1 Ls 15,000.00 15,000.00 16 Drill 12.25-inch pilot hole to 3250 ff bls (1050 fi) (include water analyses) 1050 Lf 111.00 116,550.00 17 Perform 4 packer tests at specified depths 4 Ea 13,000.00 52,000.00 18 Collect 5 core samples (see T.$.3020) 5 Ea 7,500.00 37,500.00 19 Perform geophysical logging including video survey 1 LS 33,700.00 33,700.00 20 Set drillable bridge plug at approximately 2540 ff 1 LS 3,000.00 3,000.00 21 Fill pilot hole with Cement to 1310 It (1900ff 3) 1900 CF 11.00 20,900.00 22 Ream 34-Inch diameter hole to 2530 It 1220 Lf 120.00 146,400.00 23 Geophysical logs I I.s 20,000.00 ! JUL 3 0 2002 ~ P(~. /0 '.~, SCHEDULE OF VALUES IW-1 Item Descriptions Quantity Unit Price 24 Set 2525 feet of 24-inch diameter 0.500 in wall steel casing 2525 Lf 80.00 202,000.00 25 Grout 24-inch steel casing (excluding upcer 200 feet) in place (16,000 ff 3) with temperature logs 16000 CF 8.00 128,000.00 26 Ream 22-inch pilot hole to 3250 feet (725) 725 Lf 45.00 32,625.00 27 Develop well, collect analyses, water samples (Primary/Secondary) I Ls 5,000.00 5,000.00 28 Conduct cement bond log and other geophysical logs including video survey 1 Ls 15,000.00 15,000.00 29 Cement final 200 feet casing 1 Ls 5,000.00 5,000.00 30 Conduct MIT on 24-inch casing 1 Ls 20,000.00 20,000.00 31 Conduct controlled injection test 1 Ls 45,000.00 45,000.00 32 Demobilize 1 Ls 200,000.00 200,000.00 Total $2,580,675.00 ADDITIONAL ITEMS AS MAY BE REQUIRED If required the following items will be included. · Addition of gravel (first 20,000ft 3) $ 5.00 Ft. 3 · Addition of gravel beyond 20,000 ft 3 $ 3.50 Ft. 3 · Ream 48-inch hole (500 fi) $ 130.00 LF · Run 1000 feet of 42-inch diameter steel casing $ 110.00 LF · Perform required logging (caliper log) $ 12,000.00 LS · Grout 42-inch diameter steel casing in hole (4700 ft 31: $ 12.00 Ft. 3 JUL 3 0 2002 SCHEDULE OFVALUES IW-2 Item Descriptions Quantity Unit Price MODIIIZatlort 1 Obtain required l~e~mits, Construct drill pad and 4 monitoring wells, site sa~-up, install pit casing 1 LS 500,000.00 500,000.00 2 Drill 54-inch diameter hole to 400 ff 400 Ft. 175.00 70,000.00 3 Geophysicat Logging (GR,Cal.) 1 Ls 20,000.00 20,000.00 4 Install 48-inch,0.375 wail steel casing to 395ff. 395 Lf 150.00 59,250.00 5 Grout 48-inch casing in place (2200 ft 3 ) and 3 temperature logs 2200 Ft. 13.00 28,600.00 6 Ddll 12-25-inch diameter pilot hole 1350 ft (950ft) 950 Ft. 125.00 118,750.00 7 Conduct geophysical logs (GR,CaI,D.I., Temp, BHC) 1 Is. 30,000.00 30,000.00 8 Fill pilot hole with cement containing 12% Bentonite (1300ft 3) 1300 Ft. 11.00 14,300.00 9 Ddll nominal 42-inch diameter borehole to 1310 ft bis 910 Lf 150.00 136,500.00 10 Conduct geophysical logging (GR,CaI.) 1 Ls 22,000.00 22,000.00 11 Set 1300 feet of 34-inch O.D., 0.375-inch wall steel casing 1300 Lf 140.00 182,000.00 12 Grout 34-inch steel casing (11,000 ft 3) and 3 temperature logs 11,000 Ft. 13.00 143,000.00 13 Ddll 12.25-inch diameter hole to 2530 feet (1180) 1180 Ft. 125.00 147,500.00 14 Geophysical logging including video survey 1 I.s 36,975.00 36,975.00 15 Fill pilot hole with Cement to 1310 ft (1900ff 3) 1900 Ft. 3 11.00 20,900.00 16 Ddll 34-inch diameter hole to 2530 ft 1220 Lf ~ 30.00 158,600.00 17 Geophysical logs I Ls 20,000.00 20,000.00 18 Set 2525 feet of 24-inch diameter 0.500 in wall steel casing 2525 Lf 80.00 202,000.00 19 Grout 24-inch steel casing (excluding upper 200 feel) in place (16,000 It 3) with temperature logs 16000 Ft. 8.00 128,000.00 20 Drill 22-inch pilot hole to 3250 It (720) 720 Lf 90.00 64,800.00 21 Develop wel, collect analyses, water samples (Primary/Secondary) 1 Ls 5,000.00 5,000.00 22 Conduct cement bond log and other geophysical logs including video survey 1 Ls 15,000.00 15,000.00 N0 · _~z~.~ J U L 3 Pc. /.2_ SCHEDULE Of VALUES IW-2 Item Descriptions Quantity Unit Price 23 Cement final 200 feet casing 1 Ls 5,000.00 5,000.00 24 Conduct MIT on 24-inch casing 1 Ls 20,000.00 20,000.00 25 Conduct controlled injection test 1 I.s 45,000.00 45,000.00 26 Demobilize 1 Ls 200,000.00 200,000.00 Total $2,393,175.00 I ADDITIONAL ITEMS AS MAY BE REQUIRED If required the following items will be included. · Addition of gravel (first 20,000ft 3) $ 5.00 Ft. 3 · Addition of gravel beyond 20,000 ff 3 $ 3.50 Ft. 3 · Ream 48-inch hole (500 ft) $ 130.00 LF · Run 1000 feet of 42-inch diameter steel casing $ 110.00 LF · Perform required logging (caliper log) $ 12,000.00 LS · Grout 42-inch diameter steel casing in hole (4700 ff 3) 3 $ 12.00 Ft. J U L 3 0 SCHEDULE OF VALUES MW-1 Item Descriptions Qu~mtJty Unit Price 1 Mobilize (ddll pad, monitor well, pit casing) ! Ls 80000 80,000.00 2 Drill 30-inch diameter borehole to 400 tt bls 400 LF 60 24,000.00 3 Conduct geophysical logging I LS 4500 4,500 4 Set 24-inch O.D. casing, 0.375 wall steel casing 395 ~95 LF 75 29,625.00 Grout 24-inch O.D. steel Casing in place (1200 It 3) and 3 5 temperature logs 1:200 Ft. 13 15,600.00 6 Ddll 12.25-inch pilot hole to 1400 ft 1400 LF 45 63,000.00 7 Conduct geophysical logging I LS 21675 21,675.00 8 Ream 22-inch diameter hole to 1400 ff 1400 LF 50 70,000.00 9 Perform caliper log I LF, 4500 4,500.00 10 Set 14-inch O.D., 05-inch wall steel casing 1400 LF 45 63,000.00 Grout 1J-inch casing in hole (4900 ft 3) and temperature 3 11 logs 4900 Ft. 13 63,700.00 1:2 Ddll 12.25-inch pilot hole to 1600 feet (600 It) 600 LF 45 27,000.00 Perform single stage pump test / collect analyze water 13 samples 1 LS 9000 9,000.00 14 Extend pilot hole to :2000 feet 21300 LF 10 20,000.00 15 Perform geophysical logging including cement bond log an 14-inch casing 1 LS 7500 7,500.00 16 Install 6.625-inch O.D. 0.5962 well mild steel casing to 1900 ff bls · 1900 LF 20 38,000.00 17 Grout 6.625-inch casing in hole from 1900 feet to 1600 3 feet 300 (it 3) and temperature logs ~00 Ft. 13 3,900.00 18 Perform sector bond/log 1 LS 5000 5,000.00 19 Clean lower zone a~l develop for hours or until water is clear, collect water samples, perform video survey 1 LS 10000 10,000.00 20 Complete wellhead 1 LS 10000 10,000.00 Develop upper (24 hour each) lower zones/collect and 21 analyze water samples for Primary, Secondary and minimum criteda 1 LS 5500 10,000.00 Total $ 580,000.00 JUL 3 0 200 /,./: 941574810~ ~ATER RES. SOL. F-531 T-421 P-002 JUL I1 You~gqnist Brothors, Inc. 1~4~5 Pine Ridge Road Fort Myers, Florida 33908 239-489-4444 ~Vhrk P~ Wster ~ Solutions, h~. 428 Pine Island Road, S.W. Cnpe Coral, Florida 33991 Re: Prop~ to F'til, Compact & Grade; The Existing Reclsimed Wa~n- Storage Pond No. 7., A! The Collier County North Cotmty Water Reclamation Facility Dear Mark, Our Lump Sum Pricing is based On the following bre~kclown. 1.) Mobillzation/De-Mobliizttioa 2 FA. 14,000 $28,000 2.) Dewateri~ 1 IS, 23,000 S23,000 3,) Excavation 4,000 CY. 6 $2~000 4.) Fin & Compact Import Fill Mar. 32,3OO CY. 9.60 $306,8S0 ~.) StnbJl/ze Staging Area l~q00 6.) Remove F'fll Mat. (Stagbtg Area) 7,200 CY. 3.2.5 $23,~00 ?.) Grassing/Sod I,S'/S SY. S,) l~nish Grnde & Slopes 1 LS 7,561 ST,.q61 Total S429,311 ~you tutv~ a~y questions or need any actditional information plcase call us. JUL 3 0 2002 PG. Youngquist Brothers, Inc. 15465 Pine Ridge Road Fort Myers, Florida 33908 239-489-4444 June 17, 2002 Mark Pearce Water Resources Solutions, Inc. 428 Pine Island Road, S.W. Cape Coral, Florida 33991 Re: Proposal to Install An Temporary Construction Entrance Including Triple - 42" RCP Culverts per FDOT standards, At The Collier County North County Water Reclamation Facility Dear Mark, Youngquist Brothers Inc., will provide all labor, equipment and materials to fill, ditch at new construction entrance bed and install a triple run of 42" RCP Culverts plus the MES, provide & install a base rock surface and grass disturbed slopes for the Lump Sum Price of $83,000. If the metal grates are not required on the MES you may deduct $10,000. If'you have any questions or need any additional information please call us. Respectfully, Edward McCullers, Vice President ATTACHMENT 2 ~,G. 17 COLLIER COUNTY NORTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY DEEP INJECTION WELLS Contract 01-3193~ PUED Proiect 73948 TASK NO. 6 - SCHEDULE Item Description Completion Time 1 Permits, Entrance/Culverts, Access Thirty (30) days From Road, Fill Pond, Construct Drilling Authorization to Proceed. Pads, Temporary Utilities, Office Trailers, Site Prep 2 Mobilization Drilling Equipment Forty Five (45) days From Authorization to Proceed 3 Construct-InjectionWell 1 One Hundred Sixty Five (165) days From Authorization to Proceed 4 ~ Construct - Dual Zone Monitoring Well Two Hundred (200) days From Authorization to Proceed 5 Construct - Injection Well 2 Three Hundred Thirty (330) days From Authorization to Proceed 6 De-Mobilization Drilling Equipment Four Hundred Thirty Five (435) days From Authorization to Proceed 7 Construct - Surface Facilities, Final Four Hundred Eighty (480) Testing, Task Closeout days From Authorization to Proceed J U L 3 0 2.002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE APRIL 10, 2001 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION CONSENT ORDER RELATED TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITIES, PROJECTS 73077 AND 73949, AT NO ADDITIONAL COST. OBJECTIVE: To revise and extend the completion dates for the North County Water Reclamation Facility (NCWRF) Flow Equalization Tanks (FET) project and the South County Water Reclamation Facility (SCWRF) Expansion To 16 million gallons per day (mgd) Maximum Month Average Daily Flow (MMADF) project, which are both part of the April 10, 2001 Florida Department of Environmental Protection's (FDEP) Consent Order. CONSIDERATIONS: On April 10, 2001, (Item 8 (C)(1)) the Board and the FDEP signed a Consent Order that among other requirements mandates that the NCWRF FET project be completed by November 1, 2002, and that the SCWRF Expansion to 16-mgd MMADF be completed by November 1, 2003. Due to permitting delays on both projects, those dates are no longer feasible. The FDEP has agreed to extend the completion date for the NCWRF FET project to twenty (20) months fi.om the County's receipt of all FDEP permits. The permits were received March 2002, thus completion is projected to be November 2003. Further, the FDEP has agreed to extend the completion date for the SCWRF Expansion To 16-mgd MMADF to thirty (30) months from the County's receipt of all FDEP permits. The permits were received April 2002, thus completion is projected to be October 2004. The FDEP Amendment of Consent Order (attached) also includes the following provisions: (1) Upon written request by the County to the FDEP and subsequent approval, up to three of the four existing NCWRF oxidation ditches may be used for wastewater treatment on a case-by-case basis. If approved by the FDEP, the maximum time usage would be eight consecutive weeks, and (2) The future NCWRF Expansion to 24.1-mgd MMADF and the Expansion to 30.l-regal MMADF must be certified complete by January 1, 2005 and January 1, 2010, respectively. Although Item (2) is included in this amendment, it is unchanged from the April 10, 2001 Consent Order as approved and signed by the Board and FDEP. Deferring the completion and availability of the NCWRF FET project to peak season 2003-2004, will not affect the County's ability to treat wastewater during peak season 2002-2003. Provisions have been made to have two of the four new aeration basins (completed and on-line November 14, 2001) available for flow equalization purposes, if necessary. Deferring the completion of the SCWRF Expansion To 16-mgd MMADF until October 2004 as prescribed in the Amendment to Consent Order, will not affect the County's ability to meet the projected peak demands. The recently completed SCWRF FET is available for peak surge events, and it is planned to at least have the new Liquid Steam on line for peak season 2003- 2004. Therefore, staff recommends proceeding with approval and Chairman's signature on this amended Consent Order. FISCAL IMPACT: None NO.~ J U L 3 P~. I Approve Amendment To FDEP Consent Order Page 2 GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This work is consistent with the 2001 Wastewater Master Plan adopted by the Board on December 11, 2001, Item 8(A). RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Board of County Commissioners, as Ex-Officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, approve and authorize the Chairman to sign this Amendment to the FDEP April 10, 2001 Consent Order related to the NCWRF and SCWRF, projects 73077 and 73949, respectively, at no additional cost. Peter Schalt, PMP, Project Manager Public Utilities Engineering Department REVIEWED BY: , ~ .7/"~ c ~,/~ c_, ~ ..-- DATE: Roy E~. Anderson, P.E., Director Public Utilities Enginee~artment ~.~-~ --~-J~mes W. DeLony, P.E., A?ninistrator ublic Utilities Division JUL 3{120 2 [ uepar men ~.~ FL ",' .En i 'onmental Protection '~~'~2 JUN ~c. ?~,1 3: II South Distri~ Jeb Bush P.O. Box 2549 :: ,~.~t ~ ~; David B. S~uhs Governor Fo~ ~yers, Florida 33902-2549 Secre~ JUN ~ 9 2002 CERTIFIED MAlL NO.: 7001 2510 0001 0874 2495 RETLrRN RECEIPT REQLTESTED James D. Carter, Ph.D., Chain'nan Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3301 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 Re: Collier County - DW OGC Case No. 01-0552-11-DW Collier County North Regional FL0141399 Dear Dr. Carter: Enclosed is the proposed amendment to the Consent Order to resolve the above referenced case. Please sign this copy and return it to the Department within thirty (30) days. If you have any questions please contact Keith Kleinmann at (239) 332-6975, ext. 182. Your cooperation in resolving this case is appreciated. Sincerely, Richard W. Cantrell Director of District Management RWC/KK/cap Enclosure "/~ore Pro~ection, Less Process" ~""~ °" ~'~'~ ~°~'" J U L 3 O 2002 BEFORE THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION STATE OF FLORDA DEPARTMENT ) EN THE OFFICE OF THE OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, ) SOUTH DISTRICT ) Complainant, ) ) OGC FTLE NO. 01-0552-11-DW VS. ) ) COLL]:ER COUNTY BOARD OF ) COUNTY COlVhMISSIO~RS, ) ) ) Respondent. ) .) AMEiNDMENT OF CONSENT ORDER The State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection ("Department") and the Collier Board of County Commissioners ("Respondent") having entered into a Consent Order in OGC File No. 01-0552-11-DW ("Consent Order") to reach settlement of certain matters at issue between the Department and Respondent, and desiring to enter this Amendment of the Consent Order ("Amendment") to allow the below-described time extension to obtain a wastewater permit from the Department to increase the disposal capacity of the North Facility, the Department finds and Respondent admits the following: i. The below-described time extension is appropriate because the bermitting process has created unexpected delays in the construction schedule. 2. All of the paragaphs in the original Consent Order that are not amended below shall remain in full force and effect. Having reached a resolution to the matter, the Department and the Respondent mutually agree, and it is, ORDERED: AGt'~OA IT£M m ~ 1 J U L 3 0 2002 OGC File Number: 01-0552-11-DW .... 3. The following paragraphs will substitute for paragraphs 7, 12, 15, and 16 in the above referenced Consent Order. 7. The Department may approve, upon written request from the Respondent, the use of up to three of the four oxidation ditches of the 5 MGD expansion for treatment. Department approval to use the oxidation ditch for treatment will be on a case-by-case basis and will not be given for more than eight consecutive weeks at any given time. Upon completion of the requirements of paragraph 12 (below), approval from the Department to use the 5 MGD expansion for treatment will no longer be necessary. 12.Respondent shall complete the construction of the flow equalization/surge tanks, referenced in paragraph 1! in the original Consent Order, within twenty (20) months of the issuance of the required Department permits. 15. Respondent shall certify complete 5 MGD of the expansion to the North Facility, referenced in paragraph 14 of the original Consent Order, and place 5 MGD of the expanded facility into operation by January 1, 2005. Respondent shall certify the additional 5 MGD of the expansion to the North Facility, referenced in paragraph 14 of the original Consent Order, complete and place the additional 5 MGD of the expanded facility into operation by January 1, 2010. 16. Respondent shall complete an expansion of the South Facility to 16 MGD maximum monthly flow within thirty (30) months of the issuance of the required Department permits. 2002 OGC File Number: 01-0552-11-DW 4. Respondent waives its right to an administrative heating afforded by Sections 120.569 and 120.57, Florida Statutes, on the terms of this Amendment. Respondent acknowledges its right to appeal the terms of this Amendment pursuant to Section 120.68, Florida Statutes, but waives that right upon signing this Amendment. 5. Persons who are not parties to this Amendment, but whose substantial interests are affected by this Amendment, have a right, pursuant to Sections 120.569 and 120.57, F.S., to petition for an administrative hearing on it. The Petition must contain the information set forth below and must be filed (received) at the Department's Office of General Counsel, 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard, MS# 35, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000 within 21 days of receipt of this notice. A copy of the Petition must also be mailed at the time of filing to the District Office named above at the address indicated. Failure to file a petition within the 21 days constitutes a waiver of any tight such person has to an administrative hearing pursuant to Sections 120.569 and 120.57, F.S. The petition shall contain the following information: (a) The name, address, and telephone number of each petitioner; the Department's Consent Order identification number and the county in which the subject matter or activity is located; (b) A statement of how and when each petitioner received notice of the Consent Order; (c) A statement of how each petitioner's substantial interests are affected by the Consent Order; (d) A statement of the material facts disputed by petitioner, if any; (e) A statement of facts which petitioner contends warrant reversal or modification of the Consent Order; (f) A statement of which rules or statutes petitioner contends require reversal or modification of AC,~:.I~OA IT[I~ .e'--- 3 JUL 3 0 2002 OGC File Number: 01-0552-1 I-DW the Consent Order; (g) A statement of the relief sought by petitioner, stating precisely the action petitioner wants the Department to take with respect to the Consent Order. If a petition is filed, the administrative hearing process is designed to formulate agency action. Accordingly, the Department's final action may be different from the position taken by it in this Notice. Persons whose substantial interests will be affected by any decision of the Department with regard to the subject Consent Order have the right to petition to become a party to the proceeding. The petition must conform to the requirements specified above and be filed (received) within 21 days of receipt of this notice in the Office of General Counsel at the above address of the Department. Failure to petition within the allowed time frame constitutes a waiver of any right such person has to request a hearing under Sections 120.569 and 120.57, F.S., and to participate as a party to this proceeding. Any subsequent intervention will only be at the approval of the presiding officer upon motion filed pursuant to Rule 28-106.205, F.A.C. A person whose substantial interests are affected by the Consent Order may file a timely petition for an administrative hearing under Sections 120.569 and 120.57, Florida Statutes, or may choose to pursue mediation as an alternative remedy under Section 120.573 before the deadline for filing a petition. Choosing mediation will not adversely affect the right to a hearing if mediation does not result in a settlement. The procedures for pursuing mediation are set forth below. Mediation may only take place if the Department and all the parties to the proceeding agree that mediation is appropriate. A person may pursue mediation by reaching a mediation agreement with all parties to the proceeding (which include the Respondent, the Department, and any person who has filed a timely and sufficient petition for a hearing) and 4 JUL 3 0 200 OGC File Number: 01-0552-11-DW by showing how the substantial interests of each mediating party are affected by the Consent Order. The a~eement must be filed in (received by) the Office of General Counsel of the Department at 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard, MS #35, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000, within 10 days after the deadline as set forth above for the filing of a petition. The agreement to mediate must include the following: (a) The names, addresses, and telephone numbers of any persons who may attend the mediation; (b) The name, address, and telephone number of the mediator selected by the parties, or a provision for selecting a mediator within a specified time; (c) The agreed allocation of the costs and fees associated with the mediation; (d) The agreement of the parties on the confidentiality of discussions and documents introduced during mediation; (e) The date, time, and place of the first mediation session, or a deadline for holding the first session, if no mediator has yet been chosen; (f) The name of each party's representative who shall have authority to settle or recommend settlement; and (g) Either an explanation of how the substantial interests of each mediating party will be affected by the action or proposed action addressed in this notice of intent or a statement clearly identifying the petition for hearing that each party has already filed, and incorporating it by reference. (h) The signatures of all parties or their authorized representatives. 5 JUL 302002 ! OGC File Number: 01-0552-11-DW As provided in section 120.573 of the Florida Statutes, the timely agreement of all parties to mediate will toll the time limitations imposed by sections 120.569 and 120.57 for requesting and holding an administrative hearing. Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the mediation must be concluded within sixty days of the execution of the agreement. If mediation results in settlement of the administrative dispute, the Department must enter a final order incorporating the a~eement of the parties. Persons whose substantial interests will be affected by such a modified final decision of the Department have a right to petition for a hearing only in accordance with the requirements for such petitions set forth above, and must therefore file their petitions within 21 days of receipt of this notice. If mediation terminates without settlement of the dispute, the Department shall notify all parties in writing that the adrrdnistrative hearing processes under Sections 120.569 and 120.57 remain available for disposition of the dispute, and the notice .._. will specify the deadlines that then will apply for challenging the agency action and electing remedies under those two statutes. 6. This Amendment is final agency action of the Department pursuant to Section 120.52(7), Florida Statutes, and it is final and effective on the date filed with the Clerk of the Department unless a Petition for Administrative Hearing is filed in accordance with Chapter 120, Florida Statutes. Upon the timely filing of a petition this Amendment will not be effective until further order of the Department. FOR THE RESPONDENT: DATE James-N. Cole££&, Ch'~rntan Collier County Board of County ~ Commissioners ~ II' ~ 6 ,,v,, JUL 3 g 2 oz. OGC File Number: 01-0552-11-DW Please do not write below this line. For DEP use only. DONE AND ORDERED this day of 2002, in Fort Myers, Florida. STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Richard W. Cantrell Director of District Management FILING AND ACICNOWLEDGEMENT FILED, on this date, pursuant to {}120.52 Florida Statutes, with the designated Department Clerk, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged. Clerk Date RWC/KK/cap AGENOA ITEM ~" J u L ;3 0 2002 PG. . /~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO SET THE DATE, TIME AND PLACE FOR AN ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING WHERE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WILL ADOPT FEES (SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS) TO BE COLLECTED ON THE PROPERTY TAX BILLS FOR CURBSIDE TRASH COLLECTION SERVICES FOR THE 2003 BUDGET YEAR OBJECTIVE: Board adoption of resolutions to set the date, time and place for a public hearing to determine the fees for curbside trash collection services during the 2003 Budget Year. The adopted fees (special assessments) will be collected on the property tax bills to be mailed to owners of record in November, 2002. In addition, the Board is being asked to approve a statutorily required notification of the hearing that must be mailed, using first class postage, to each homeowner. CONSIDERATIONS: Ordinance 90-30, as amended, established a mandatory program for the collection of trash generated by single and multi family residential units and commercial entities in the unincorporated areas of Collier County. The mandatory ordinance (90-30) provides for the levy and collection of annual fees on the property tax bills for trash collection services associated with curbside (rollout carts) trash pickup. Trash collection services include twice a week curbside pickup for household garbage, once a week pickup for recyclable materials, once a week pickup for horticulture (yard waste) and once a week pickup for bulky items (stoves, refrigerators, furniture, etc.) Collection of the annual fees on the property tax bill is the most cost effective collection method available to the Board. Collection percentage is approximately 100% each year. In order to use the property tax bill as the collection vehicle, Section 197.3632, F.S., requires the Board to follow a specific process as outlined below: · Adoption of a resolution which sets the time, date and place of an advertised public hearing wherein affected property owners can comment on the fees and the process; ·Provide notification of the advertised public hearing by first class mail to each affected property owner; ·Conduct the advertised public hearing at the pre-determined time, date and place; · Adopt the fee or fees to be assessed on the tax bill; and · Adopt a special assessment roll which identifies the rates and affected properties. This roll will be merged with the property tax roll for collection of the assessment at the time property taxes are collected. The attached resolution and first class mail notification (today's requested actions) identify a proposed or recommended fee for the FY2003 budget year and a proposed not-to-exceed fee over a three year period. .0.. I Ly- )-I JUL 3 0 2DD2 The cost of the first class mail notification is in excess of $55,000. By using a not-to- exceed rate over three years, the Board can potentially avoid the cost of first class mail notification in the second or third years; a total savings of $110,000. If there is a technological, regulatory or unusual event occurrence that would require the Board to establish a fee above the not-to-exceed amount in either the second or third years, a new first class mail notification would be required. If this does not occur, the Board will have saved the cost of notification in these years. The annual fees for trash collection for the past five years are presented below with the estimated fee for FY2003. ACTUAL Estimated FY1998 FY1999 FY2000 FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 District 1 $107.96 $110.26 $109.70 $114.20 $127.27 $127.27 District 2 $110.52 $112.82 $112.26 $115.76 $127.27 $127.27 The estimated rate of S127.27 is consistent with BCC approval for FY2003 budget. This rate does not reflect the impact of an estimated CPI increase of 1.5% on the disposal side of the assessment. The July CPI (available in mid-August) is used to establish adjusted FY2003 tipping fees at the landfills. A final (firm) fee amount with CPi will be available at the advertised public hearing on September 10, 2002. The not-to-exceed amount is recommended to be set at $175.00. This will give the .... Board a certain amount of flexibility if there is an abnormal need to significantly increase landfill tipping fees. The unincorporated area of the County is divided into two (2) distinct Municipal Service Benefit Units (MSBU's) for trash collection services. The MSBU's are identified as District, 1 for the western half of the County and District 2 for the eastern half of the County. Each MSBU requires an individual resolution and notification. FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact can be broken down into two (2) distinct categories. They are: · Cost of direct mailing at 0.30 cents per notice $23,400 (approximately 78,000) Cost of postage is estimated at .35 cents each $27,300 (approximately 78,000 letters) Legal advertising $ 4,500 $55,200 · Direct impact or addition to the individual tax bills is as follows: FY 2002/03 - $127.27/unit/year or not-to-exceed $175.00/unit/year Funds are available in Mandatory Trash Collection Fund 473 Reserves. '"" GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no Growth Management impact associated with this item. .o._ I C JUL 3 0 2002 RECOMMENDATION: Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve the resolutions setting the date, time and place for a public hearing to approve a Special Assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) to be levied against the properties within the Solid Waste District 1 and District 2 Municipal Service Benefit Unit for solid waste collection and disposal services and approve the first class mail notice to be sent to all assessable units as well as approving the postage and mailing costs. Staff also requests approval of a/bu×dget amendment transferring funds from Mandatory Trash Co,,eo,,on,',,s,r, es. . .. T&r~sa A. Riesen, Revenue Manager Utility Billing and Customer Service Department ..v,.w~.Y: %~¢~ ~¢._ ~te: John A. Yonkosky, Director Utility Billing and Customer Service Department APPROVED BY: ~'~~~'"'"~ Date: Tom Wides, Fiscal Operations Direct.,pr~ Public Utilities Division // J J Date: tilities Divis' AGENDA ZTEM ~ JUL 3 0 2002 ,,, ~' ] RESOLUTION NO. 2002- ~-. 3 A RESOLUTION FIXING THE DATE, TIME AND 4 PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING .FOR 5 APPROVING THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT (NON- d AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT) TO BE LEVIED ? AGAINST THE PROPERTIES WITHIN THE SOLID $ WASTE DISTRICT NO. I MUNICIPAL SERVICE 9 BENEFIT UNIT FOR SOLID WASTE COLLECTION 10 AND DISPOSAL SERVICES. !2 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County Florida 13 intends to finance the collection and disposal of solid waste through the levy of special !4 assessments (non-ad valorem assessments) against residential units as defined in 15 Collier County Ordinance No. 90-30, as amended, that are benefited by the collection 16 and disposal services. Said properties are located within the boundaries of Solid Waste !7 District No. 1 Municipal Service Benefit Unit as described in Collier County Ordinance ~.8 No. 90-30 as amended, and more particularly described herein; and 19 20 WHEREAS, Section 197.3632, Florida Statutes, requires that a public hearing be 2! held to adopt a non-ad valorem assessment roll for purposes of utilizing the uniform 22 method collection. 23 24 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY 2.~ COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: 26 27 SECTION ONE: This Resolution is adopted pursuant to the provisions of 2S Section 197.3632, Florida Statutes, Ordinance No. 90-30, as amended, and other 29 applicable provisions of law. 3O 31 SECTION TWO: It is hereby found and determined that a special assessment 32 for the collection and disposal services for the Solid Waste District No. 1 Municipal ~ 33 Service Benefit Unit is necessary for funding the required payments for said collection 34 and disposal for a period of three (3) years beginning fiscal year 2002/03 and ending 35 fiscal year 2004/05. 36 37 SECTION THREE: A public hearing before the Board of County Commissioners 3S on the preliminary assessment roll (non-ad valorem assessment roll) of the estimated 39 costs to fund the collection and disposal of solid waste in Solid Waste District No. 1 40 Municipal Service Benefit Unit for a period of three (3) years beginning fiscal year 4! 2002/03 and ending with fiscal year 2004/05 between the County and each property 42 owner of lands within the Solid Waste District No. 1 Municipal Service Benefit Unit will be 43 held on September 10, 2002, beqinninq at 9:00 a.m., in the Board of County 44 Commissioners' Boardroom, Third Floor, W. Harmon Turner Building, 3301 East 45 Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida, at which time the Board of County Commissioners will 46 hear objections from the owners of the properties within the Solid Waste District No. 1 47 Municipal Service Benefit Unit or other persons interested therein, to the adoption of the 48 preliminary assessment roil (non-ad valorem assessment roll). The Clerk shall keep a 49 record in which shall be inscribed, at the request of any person, firm or corporation 50 having or claiming to have any interest in any lot or parcel of land within said Unit, the 5! name and post office address of such person, firm or corporation, together with the brief 52 description or designation of such lot or parcel. The Clerk shall cause the notice of such 53 public hearing to be published one time in the Naples Daily News, a newspaper 54 published in Collier County and circulating in the Unit, not less than twenty (20) days .55 prior to said date of the hearing. Notice of such public hearing to consider the adoption 56 of the preliminary assessment roll (non-ad valorem assessment roll) shall also be mailed 57 first class to all property owners in Solid Waste District No. 1 Municipal Benefit Unit as 58 listed on the preliminary roll (non-ad valorem assessment roll) at the address provided 59 for on said roll. 6O 61 SECTION FOUR: Notice of such hearing shall be in substantially the following 62 form: 63 '"" 64 NOTICE 66 Notice is hereby given that the Board of County Commissioners of Collier 67 County, Florida, will meet on Seotember 10, 2002, beqinninq at 9:00 a.m.,l", ;';':N0..D'V~¢~°~ J U L .3 0 200Z ] of County Commissioners' Boardroom, Third Floor, W. Harmon Turner Building, 3301 2 East Tarniami Trail, Naples, Florida, for the purpose of hearing objectionS, if any, by all 3 interested persons to the adoption of th~ preliminary assessment roll (non-ad valorem 4 assessment roll) allocating the assessable costs for collection and disposal of solid, 5 waste within Solid Waste District No. 1 Municipal Service Benefit Unit, which comprises 6 and includes those lands described as follows: ? $ Beginning at the intersection of the North line of Section 6, 9 Township 48 South, Range 25 East also known as the Lee- ]`0 Collier County line and the eastern shoreline of the Gulf of ! ]. Mexico; thence East along said Lee-Collier County line to the ]`2 northeast corner of Section 12, Township 48 South, Range 26 t3 East; thence South along the easterly line of Range 26 East, ]4 Township 48 South to the southeast corner of Section 24, I_5 Township 48 South, Range 26 East; thence east along the ].6 south line of Sections 19 and 20, Township 48 South, Range 17 27 East to the southeast corner of Section 20; thence north ].8 along the east line of Sections 20, 17 and 8 of Township 48 ].P South, Range 27 East to the southeast corner of Section 5, 20 Township 48 South, Range 27 East; thence easterly along the 2]. south tine of Sections 4, 3, 2 and 1 of Township 48 South, 22 Range 27 East to the southeast corner of Section 1, Township 23 48 South, Range 27 East; thence north along the east line of 24 Section 1, Township 48 South, Range 27 East; thence north 25 along the east line of section 36 and 25, Township 47 south, 26 Range 27 East to the southeast corner of Section 24, 27 Township 47 South, Range 27 east; thence easterly along the 28 south line of Sections 19, 20 and 21, Township 47 South, 29 Range 28 East to the southeast corner of Section 21, 30 Township 47 South, Range 28 East; thence southerly along 31 the west line of Sections 27 and 34, Township 47 South, 32 Range 28 East and continuing southerly along the west line of 33 Sections 3, 10, 15, 22, 27 and 34, Township 48 South, Range 34 28 East to the southeast corner of Section 34; thence easterly 3-5 along the south line of Sections 34, 35 and 36, Township 49 36 South, Range 28 East; thence west along the south line of 37 Township 49 South, Range 29 East and Township 49 South, 38 Range 30 East to the southeast corner of Section 36, 39 Township 49 South, Range 30 East, being also the centertine 40 of Alligator Alley (I-75); thence continuing easterly along the 4], centerline of Alligator Alley (I-75) to the northeast corner of 42 Section 4, Township 50 South, Range 31 East; thence 43 southerly along the east section line of Sections 4, 9, 16, 21, 44 28 and 33, Township 50 South, Range 31 East; thence 4_5 southerly along the East section line of Sections 4, 9, 16, 21, 46 28 and 33, Township 51 South, Range 31 East; thence 4? southerly along the east section line of Sections 4, 9, 16, 21, 45 28 and 33, Township 52 South, Range 31 East; thence, 49 southerly along the east section line of Sections 4, 9, 16, 21, _50 28, and 33, Township 53 South, Range 31 East to the Collier- 5 ]. Monroe county line; thence westerly along the said county line 52 to the easterly shoreline of the Gulf of Mexico; thence Westerly 53 and Northerly along the waters of the Gulf of Mexico to the 54 Lee-Collier county line being the north line of Section 6, -55 Township 48 South, Range 25 East and being the Point of 56 Beginning. Less and except all the lands located within the 57 corporate limits of the City of Naples and Everglades City. .58 Also, less and except those barrier islands as described in 59 Ordinance No. 90-30, as amended. 60 6]. A copy of the preliminary assessment roll (non-ad valorem assessment roll) for 62 each lot or parcel of land to be assessed is on file at the Clerk to the Board's Office, 63 County Government Center, W. Harmon Turner Building, Fourth Floor, 3301 East 64 Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida and in the offices of the Collier County Utility Billing and 65 Customer Service Department, 2685 S. Horseshoe Drive, Suite 103, Naples, FL 34104 66 and is open to the inspection of the public. 67 JUL 3 0 2002 PG. ! All affected property owners have a right to appear and be heard at the public 2 hearing and to file written objections to the adoption of a resolution approving the ~.--.. .3 preliminary assessment roll (non-ad valorem assessment roll) with the Board within 20 4 days of this notice based upon the grounds that it contains items which cannot be. 5 properly assessed against property, that the computation of the special assessment is 6 incorrect, or there is a default or defect in the passage or character of the resolution, or ? the preliminary assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) is void or voidable in whole or $ in part, or that it exceeds the power of the Board. At the completion of the hearing, the 9 Board shall either annul or sustain or modify in whole or in part the preliminary. !0 assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) as indicated on such roll, either by confirming 1! the preliminary assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) against any or all lots or !2 parcels described therein or by canceling, increasing or reducing the same, according to !.3 the special benefits which the Board decides each such lot or parcel has received or will !4 receive from the collection and disposal of solid waste. The assessment so made shall ].5 be final and conclusive as to each lot or parcel assessed unless proper steps are taken !6 within twenty (20) days with a court competent jurisdiction to secure relief. ]`? !8 The Board will levy a special assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) for !9 collection and disposal of solid waste based on the methodology of the number of 20 equivalent residential units located on the property. The total assessment for collection 2] and disposal of solid waste shall not exceed $175.00 per equivalent residential unit per 22 year for the next three (3) years commencing fiscal year 2002/03 and ending fiscal year 2.3 2004/05· This special assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) will be collected by the 24 Collier County Tax Collector on the owner's non-ad valorem tax bill pursuant to Section 25 197·3632, Florida Statutes. Failure to pay the special assessment (non-ad valorem 26 assessment) and your property taxes will cause a tax certificate to be sold against the 2"' property, which may result in a loss of title to the property. _.39 Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the Board will need a record of 30 the proceedings pertaining thereto and, therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim 3 ! record of the proceedings is made. The record shall include the testimony and evidence 30_ upon which the appeal is to be based. -- 34 Board of County Commissioners 35 Collier County, Florida 36 .3? James N. Coletta, Chairman 39 Dwight E. Brock, Clerk 40 4! By: /s/Maureen Kenyon 42 Deputy Clerk 4.3 44 (SEAL) 45 46 SECTION FIVE: The Clerk is hereby ordered and directed to spread this Resolution in 47 full among the minutes of this meeting for permanent record in his office. 48 49 SECTION SIX: This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its' passage. 5O 5], This Resolution adopted this day of 2002, after motion, 52 second and majority vote. 55 54 ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 55 DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 5d 5? 58 BY: 59 JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN 60 61 62 Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: 63 64 66 67 Assistant County Attorney 68 69 - " . JUL 3 0 2002 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2002- __ ,-) 3 A RESOLUTION FIXING THE DATE, TIME AND 4 PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR `5 APPROVING THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT (NON- 6 AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT) TO BE LEVIED 7 AGAINST THE PROPERTIES WITHIN THE SOLID S WASTE DISTRICT NO. 2 MUNICIPAL SERVICE 9 BENEFIT UNIT FOR SOLID WASTE COLLECTION 10 AND DISPOSAL SERVICES. 11 12 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County Florida 13 intends to finance the collection and disposal of solid waste through the levy of special 14 assessments (non-ad valorem assessments) against residential units as defined in 15 Collier County Ordinance No. 90-30, as amended, that are benefited by the collection ].6 and disposal services. Said properties are located within the boundaries of Solid Waste 17 District No. 2 Municipal Service Benefit Unit as described in Collier County Ordinance 15 No. 90-30 as amended, and more particularly described herein; and 19 20 WHEREAS, Section 197.3632, Florida Statutes, requires that a public hearing be 2! held to adopt a non-ad valorem assessment roll for purposes of utilizing the uniform ~-2 method collection. 24 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY 2_5 COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: 27 SECTION ONE: This Resolution is adopted pursuant to the provisions of 25 Section 197.3632, Florida Statutes, Ordinance No. 90-30, as amended, and other 29 applicable provisions of taw. 30 31 SECTION TWO: It is hereby found and determined that a special assessment 32 for the collection and disposal services for the Solid Waste District No. 2 Municipal 33 Service Benefit Unit is necessary for funding the required payments for said collection 34 and disposal for a period of three (3) years commencing fiscal year 2002/03 and ending 3`5 fiscal year 2004/05. 36 .~7 SECTION THREE: A public hearing before the Board of County Commissioners 35 on the preliminary assessment roll (non-ad valorem assessment roll) of the estimated 39 costs to fund the collection and disposal of solid waste in Solid Waste District No. 2 40 Municipal Service Benefit Unit for a period of three (3) years commencing fiscal year 4! 2002/03 and ending fiscal year 2004/05 between the County and each property owner of 42 lands within the Solid Waste District No. 2 Municipal Service Benefit Unit will be held on 43 Seatember 10. 2002 beqinninq at 9:00 am in the Board of County Commissioners' 44 Boardroom, Third Floor, W. Harmon Turner Building, 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, 4`5 Florida, at which time the Board of County Commissioners will hear objections from the 46 owners of the properties within the Solid Waste District No. 2 Municipal Service Benefit 47 Unit or other persons interested therein, to the adoption of the preliminary assessment 45 roll (non-ad valorem assessment roll). The Clerk shall keep a record in which shall be 49 inscribed, at the request of any person, firm or corporation having or claiming to have _50 any interest in any lot or parcel of land within said Unit, the name and post office address $! of such person, firm or corporation, together with the brief description or designation of .52 such lot or parcel. The Clerk shall cause the notice of such public hearing to be 53 published one time in the Naples Daily News, a newspaper published in Collier County `54 and circulating in the Unit, not less than twenty (20) days prior to said date of the `5`5 hearing. Notice of such public hearing to consider the adoption of the preliminary 56 assessment roll (non-ad valorem assessment roll) shall also be mailed first class to all 57 property owners in Solid Waste District No. 2 Municipal Benefit Unit as listed on the 55 preliminary roll (non-ad valorem assessment roll) at the address provided for on said roll. 59 60 SECTION FOUR: Notice of such hearing shall be in substantially the following 6! form: 62 63 NOTICE 64 6_5 Notice is hereby given that the Board of County Commissioners of Collier 66 County, Florida, will meet on September 10, 2002, beqinninq at 9:00 am, in the Board of 6? County Commissioners' Boardroom, Third Floor, W. Harmon Turner Buildin1, JJU~N0,__/~{,OAi. Z [T, rC.(~..t._..~ JUL 3 0 2002 [ Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida, for the purpose of hearing objections, if any, by all _'~ interested persons to the adoption of the preliminary assessment roll (non-ad valorem 3 assessment roll) allocating the assessable costs for collection and disposal of solid 4 waste'within Solid Waste District No. 2 Municipal Service Benefit Unit, which comprises, .5 and includes those lands described as follows: 6 ? Beginning at the northwest corner of Township 47 $ South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida; 9 thence east.along the Collier-Lee county line also the t0 township line to the northeast corner of Township 47 ].! South, Range 27 East; thence north along the [2 Collier-Lee county line also the range line to the ].3 northwest corner of Township 46 South, Range 28 }.4 East; thence east along the Collier-Hendry county t5 line also the township !ine for Townships 45 and 46 [6 south to the northeast corner of Township 46 South, t? Range 30 East; thence south along the Collier- [~ Hendry county line also the range line of Ranges 30 t0 and 31 East to the southeast corner of Township 49 20 South, Range 30 East; thence west along the 3]. township line for Townships 49 and 50 South to the 32 southwest corner of Section 34, Township 49 South, 23 Range 28 East; thence north along the section lines 24 to the northwest corner of Section 27, Township 47 35 South, Range 28 East; thence west along the section 26 Iines to the southeast corner of Section 24, Township ~_7 47 South, Range 27 East, thence south along the 2S range line for Ranges 27 and 28 East to the 39 southeast corner of Section 1, Township 48 South, 30 Range 27 East; thence west along the sections lines 3! to the southeast corner of Section 5, Township 48 32 South, Range 27 East; thence south along the 33 section lines to the southeast corner of Section 20, 34 Township 48 South, Range 27 East; thence west 3.5 along the section hines to the southwest corner of 36 Section 19, Township 48 South, Range 27 East; 37 thence north along the range lines for Ranges 26 and 3S 27 East to the northwest corner of Township 47 39 South, Range 27 East being the Point of Beginning. 4O 4]. A copy of the preliminary assessment roll (non-ad valorem assessment roll) for 42 each lot or parcel of land to be assessed is on file at the Clerk to the Board's Office, 43 County Government Center, W. Harmon Turner Bui.lding, Fourth Floor, 3301 East 44 Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida and in the offices of the Collier County Utility Billing and 45 Customer Service Department, 2685 S. Horseshoe Drive, Suite 103, Naples, FL 34104 46 and is open to the inspection of the public. 47 48 Alt affected property owners have a right to appear and be heard at the public 49 hearing and to file written objections to the adoption of a resolution approving the 50 preliminary assessment roll (non-ad valorem assessment roll) with the Board within 20 5! days of this notice based upon the grounds that it contains items which can not be .52 properly assessed against property, that the computation of the special assessment is .53 incorrect, or there is a default or defect in the passage or character of the resolution, or 54 the preliminary assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) is void or voidable in whole or 5.5 part, or that it exceeds the power of the Board. At the completion of the hearing, the 56 Board shall either annul or sustain or modify in whole or in part the preliminary 57 assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) as indicated on such roll, either by confirming 58 the preliminary assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) against any or all lots or 59 parcels described therein or by canceling, increasing or reducing the same, according to 60 the special benefits which the Board decides each such lot or parcel has received or will 6t receive from the collection and disposal of solid waste. The assessment so made shall 62 be final and conclusive as to each lot or parcel assessed unless proper steps are taken 63 within twenty (20) days with a court competent jurisdiction to secure relief. 64 65 The Board will levy a special assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) for collection 66 and disposal of solid waste based on the methodology of the number of equivalent 67 residential units located on the property. The total assessment for collection and 68 disposal of solid waste shall not exceed $175.00 per equivalent residential ,,i~N0.. ~ (.¢ '~Ju' X?,~o.^ ~.~ ~ JUL 3 0 2002 ! for the next three (3) years commencing fiscaJ year 2002/03 and ending fiscal year 2 2004/05. This special assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) will be collected by the .3 Collie~: County Tax Collector on the owner's non-ad valorem tax bill pursuant to Section 4 197.3632, Florida Statutes. Failure to pay the special assessment (non-ad valorem .5 assessment) and your property taxes will cause a tax certificate to be'sold against the' 6 property, which may result in a loss of title to the property. $ Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the Board will need a record of 9 the proceedings pertaining thereto and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim. !0 record of the proceedings is made. The record shall include the testimony and evidence ! ! upon which the appeal is to be based. !2 ~.4 Board ~)f County Commissioners t5 Collier County, Florida !6 ].7 James N. Coletta, Chairman !$ ]9 Dwight E. Brock, Clerk 20 2]. By: /s/Maureen Kenyon 22 Deputy Clerk 23 24 (SEAL) 25 26 2? SECTION FIVE: The Clerk is hereby ordered and directed to spread this Resolution in 3S full among the minutes of this meeting for permanent record in his office. 30 SECTION SlX: This Resolution shall become effective imnlediately upon its passage. .32 This resolution adopted this day of 2002, after 3.3 motion, second and majority vote. 34 .35 36 ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 3? DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 35 39 4O 4! BY: 42 JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN 4.3 44 4.5 Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: 47 48 49 RoUert N. ~acJ;;~t~y~ _90 Assistant County Attorney Dear Collier County Property Owner: The enclosed first class notice is to inform you that on September 10, 2002 the BCC will consider adoption of a resolution placing the annual So~id Waste Mandatory Collection and Disposal Assessment on the non-ad valorem portion of your property tax bill. This special assessment has been on the non-ad valorem portion of the tax bill since 1996. The previous resolutions to place the assessment on the non-ad valorem portion of the tax bill has ended. Per State Statute (197.3632), Collier County must adopt a new resolution and notify ali affected properties by first class mail. The special assessment you receive in November on your tax bill will cover the service period of October 1, 2002 through September 30, 2003. The rate for both Districts (serviced by Waste Management or lmmokalee Disposal) is proposed at $127.27/unit/year. This rate is only a proposed rate and can be increased up to and not to exceed the rate of $175.00/unit/year. The notice enclosed is set to allow the billing of the assessment on the non-ad valorem portion of the tax bill and not to exceed the rate of $175.00/unit/year assessed. Your services include the following: Twice-a-week trash collection, Once-a-week recycling collection, Once-a-week butky item collection, and Once-a-week yard waste collection. Collier County currently recycles magazines, plastics 1-7, steet and aluminum cans, newspaper and all glass. We encourage you to recycle to help keep the cost of service down. Please read the enclosed first class notice to make sure that the unit(s) for which you are being assessed are correct. If you have additional questions or would like someone from the Collier County Utility Billing and Customer Service Department to contact you about your specific account, please call our 24-hour message center at (239) 594-3024 and leave your name and address. We'll follow up in 5 business days. The enclosed first class notice establishes a date, place and time for a public hearing on the process of placing the Solid Waste Mandatory Trash and Disposal Assessment on the non-ad valorem portion of the tax bill. The date, time and location is September 10, 2002 at the regular public hearing beginning at 9:00 a.m. in the W. Harmon Turner Administration Building at 3301 Tamiami Trail East. Thank you for your cooperation. Please call us if you have any billing or service concerns or requests. Sincerely, Teresa A. Riesen Revenue Manager N0o JUL 3 0 2002 _?._ /b ,, ...... BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA SOLID WASTE, DISTRICT NO. 1 MUNICIPAL SERVICE BENEFIT UNIT SPECIAL ASSESSMENT (NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ***THIS IS NOT A BILL - DO NOT PAY*** Property Owner and Mailing Address Folio No. Property Description: Assessable Units: Preliminary Assessment Amount: Dear Property Owner: NOTICE Notice is hereby given that the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, will meet on September 10, 2002, be.q nnin,q 9:00 am in the Board of County Commissioners' Boardroom, Third Floor, W. Harmon Turner Building, 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida, for the purpose of hearing objections, if any, by all interested persons to the adoption of the preliminary assessment roll (non-ad valorem assessment roll) allocating the assessable costs for collection and disposal of solid waste within Solid Waste District No. 1 Municipal Service Benefit Unit, which comprises and includes those lands described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the North line of Section 6, Township 48 South, Range 25 East also known as the Lee-Collier County line and the eastern shoreline of the Gulf of Mexico; thence East along said Lee- Collier County line to the northeast corner of Section 12, Township 48 South, Range 26 East; thence South along the easterly line of Range 26 East, Township 48 South to the southeast corner of Section 24, Township 48 South, Range 26 East; thence east along the south line of Sections 19 and 20, Township 48 South, Range 27 East to the southeast corner of Section 20; thence north along the east line of Sections 20, 17 and 8 of Township 48 South, Range 27 East to the southeast corner of Section 5, Township 48 South, Range 27 East; thence easterly along the south line of Sections 4, 3, 2 and 1 of Township 48 South, Range 27 East to the southeast corner of Section 1, Township 48 South, Range 27 JUL 3 0 2002 East; thence north along the east line of Section 1, Township 48 South, Range 27 East; thence north along the east line of section 36 and 25, Township 47 south, Range 27 East to the southeast corner of Section 24, Township 47 South, Range 27 east; thence easterly along the south line of Sections 19, 20 and 21, Township 47 South, Range 28 East to the southeast corner of Section 21, Township 47 South, Range 28 East; thence southerly along the west line of Sections 27 and 34, Township 47 South, Range 28 East and continuing southerly along the west line of Sections 3, 10, 15, 22, 27 and 34, Township 48 South, Range 28 East to the southeast corner of Section 34; thence easterly along the south line of Sections 34, 35 and 36, Township 49 South, Range 28 East; thence west along the south line of Township 49 South, Range 29 East and Township 49 South, Range 30 East to the southeast corner of Section 36, Township 49 South, Range 30 East, being also the centerline of Alligator Alley (I-75); thence continuing easterly along the centerline of Alligator Alley (I-75) to the northeast corner of Section 4, Township 50 South, Range 31 East; thence southerly along the east section line of Sections 4, 9, 16, 21, 28 and 33, Township 50 South, Range 31 East; thence southerly along the East section line of Sections 4, 9, 16, 21, 28 and 33, Township 51 South, Range 31 East; thence southerly along the east section line of Sections 4, 9, 16, 21, 28 and 33, Township 52 South, Range 31 East; thence, southerly along the east section line of Sections 4, 9, 16, 21, 28, and 33, Township 53 South, Range 31 East to the Collier-Monroe county line; thence westerly along the said county line to the easterly shoreline of the Gulf of Mexico; thence Westerly and Northerly a~ong the waters of the Gulf of Mexico to the Lee-Collier county line being the north line of Section 6, Township 48 South, Range 25 East and being the Point of Beginning. Less and except all the lands located within the corporate limits of the City of Naples and Everglades City. Also, less and except those barrier islands as described in Ordinance No. 90-30, as amended. A copy of the preliminary assessment roll (non-ad valorem roll) for each lot or parcel of land to be assessed is on file at the Clerk to the Board's Office, County Government Center; W. Harmon Turner Building, Fourth Floor, 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida and in the offices of the Utility Billing and Customer Service Department, 2685 South Horseshoe Drive, Suite 103, Naples, Florida, and is open to the inspection of the public. All affected property owners have a right to appear and be heard at the public hearing and to file written objections to the adoption of a resolution approving the preliminary assessment roll (non-ad valorem roll) with the Board within 20 days of this notice based upon the grounds that it contains items which cannot be properly assessed against property, that the computation of the special assessment is incorrect, or there is a default or defect in the passage or character of the resolution, or the preliminary assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) is void or voidable in whole or part, or that it exceeds the power of the Board. At the completion of the hearing, the Board shall either annul or sustain or modify in whole or in part the preliminary assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) as indicated on such roll, either by confirming the preliminary assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) against any or all lots or parcels described therein or by canceling, increasing, or reducing the same, according to the special benefits which the Board decides each such lot or parcel has received or will receive from the collection and disposal of solid waste. The assessment so made shall be final and conclusive as to each lot or parcel assessed unless proper steps are taken within twenty (20) days with a court of competent jurisdiction to secure relief. The Board will levy a special assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) for collection and disposal of solid waste based on the methodology of the number of equivalent residential units. The total assessment for collection and disposal of solid waste shall not exceed $175.00 per equivalent residential unit per year for the next three (3) fiscal years commending with Fiscal Year 2002/03 and ending Fiscal Year 2004/05. This special assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) will be collected by the Collier County Tax Collector on the owner's ad valorem tax bill pursuant to Section 197.3632, Florida Statutes. Failure to pay the special assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) and your property taxes will cause a tax certificate to be sold against the property, which may result in a loss of title to the property. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the Board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and, therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made. The record shall include the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you have any questions regarding the preliminary assessment roll, please contact the Utility Billing and Customer Service Department at (239) 594-3024. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN, DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK By: /s/Maureen Kenyon Deputy Clerk JUL 3 0 2002 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA SOLID WASTE, DISTRICT NO. 2 MUNICIPAL SERVICE BENEFIT UNIT SPECIAL ASSESSMENT (NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENT COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ***THIS IS NOT A BILL - DO NOT PAY*** Property Owner and Mailing Address Folio No. Property Description: Assessable Units: Preliminary Assessment Amount: Dear Property Owner: NOTICE Notice is hereby given that the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, will meet on September 10, 2002, be,qinnin.q at 9:00 a.m., in the Board of County Commissioners' Boardroom, Third Floor, W. Harmon Turner Building, 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida, for the purpose of hearing objections, if any, by all interested persons to the adoption of the preliminary assessment roll (non-ad valorem assessment roll) allocating the assessable costs for collection and disposal of solid waste within Solid Waste District No. 2 Municipal Service Benefit Unit, which comprises and includes those lands described as follows: Beginning at the northwest corner of Township 47 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida; thence east along the Collier-Lee county line also the township line to the northeast corner of Township 47 South, Range 27 East; thence north along the Collier-Lee county line also the range line to the northwest corner of Township 46 South, Range 28 East; thence east along the Collier-Hendry county line also the township line for Townships 45 and 46 south to the northeast corner of Township 46 South, Range 30 East; thence south along the Collier-Hendry county line also the range line of Ranges 30 and 31 East to the southeast corner of Township 49 South, Range 30 East; thence west along the township line for Townships 49 and 50 South to the southwest corner of Section 34, Township 49 South, Range 28 East; thence north along the section lines to the northwest corner of Section 27, Township 47 South, Range 28 East; thence west along the .0._ ) -,- JUL 3 0 2002 PG. /'~" . section lines to the southeast corner of Section 24, Township 47 South, Range 27 East, thence south along the range line for Ranges 27 and 28 East to the southeast corner of Section 1, Township 48 South, Range 27 East; thence west along the sections lines to the southeast corner of Section 5, Township 48 South, Range 27 East; thence south along the section lines to the southeast corner of Section 20, Township 48 South, Range 27 East; thence west along the section lines to the southwest corner of Section 19, Township 48 South, Range 27 East; thence north along the range lines for Ranges 26 and 27 East to the northwest corner of Township 47 South, Range 27 East being the Point of Beginning. A copy of the preliminary assessment roll (non-ad valorem roll) for each lot or parcel of land to be assessed is on file at the Clerk to the Board's Office, County Government Center; W. Harmon Turner Building, Fourth Floor, 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida and in the offices of the Utility Billing and Customer Service Department, 2685 South Horseshoe Drive, Suite 103, Naples, Florida, and is open to the inspection of the public. All affected property owners have a right to appear and be heard at the public hearing and to file written objections to the adoption of a resolution approving the preliminary assessment roll (non-ad valorem roll) with the Board within 20 days of this notice based upon the grounds that it contains items which cannot be properly assessed against property, that the computation of the special assessment is incorrect, or there is a default or defect in the passage or character of the resolution, or the preliminary assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) is void or voidable in whole or part, or that it exceeds the power of the Board. At the completion of the hearing, the Board shall either annul or sustain or modify in whole or in part the preliminary assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) as indicated on such roll, either by confirming the preliminary assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) against any or all lots or parcels described therein or by canceling, increasing, or reducing the same, according to the special benefits which the Board decides each such lot or parcel has received or will receive from the collection and disposal of solid waste. The assessment so made shall be final and conclusive as to each lot or parcel assessed unless proper steps are taken within twenty (20) days with a court of competent jurisdiction to secure relief. The Board will levy a special assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) for collection and disposal of solid waste based on the methodology of the number of equivalent residential units. The total assessment for collection and disposal of solid waste shall not exceed $175.00 per equivalent residential unit per year for the next three (3) years beginning with Fiscal Year 2002/03 and ending with Fiscal Year 2004/05. This special assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) will be collected by the Collier County Tax Collector on the owner's ad valorem tax bill pursuant to Section 197.3632, Florida Statutes. Failure to pay the special assessment (non-ad valorem assessment) and your property taxes will cause a tax certificate to be sold against the property, which may result in a loss of title to the property. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the Board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and, therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made. The record shall include the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you have any questions regarding the preliminary assessment roll, please contact the Utility Billing and Customer Service Department at (239) 594-3024. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK By: /s/Maureen Kenyon Deputy Clerk JUL 3 0 20D2 , PC:- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AUTHORIZE CONVEYANCE OF A UTILITY EASEMENT TO FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY FOR THE INSTALLATION OF UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC FACILITIES TO SERVE WATER WELLS TO BE LOCATED ON COUNTY-OWNED FUTURE PARK PROPERTY, THE COST OF WHICH SHOULD NOT EXCEED $30.00. OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners authorize the conveyance of a Utility Easement to Florida Power & Light Company to provide underground electric service to water wells to be located on County-owned future park property on Vanderbilt Beach Road extension. CONSIDERATIONS: The Public Utilities Department will be installing five new potable water wells on County-owned property located on the north side of the future extension of Vanderbilt Beach Road at the north terminus of 9th, 11th and 13~h Streets N.W. This property was acquired for a park and recreational facility and the Board by a Declaration of Easement previously approved using portions of the property for the wells. In order for Florida Power & Light Company to provide underground electric service to the wells, it will be neceSsary for the County to first execute and record the attached Utility Easement. This request and Utility Easement have been reviewed and approved by the Parks & Recreation Department and the County Attorney's Office. FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost of recording the Easement will not exceed $30.00 and will be paid from Fund 411~ NORTH WELLF[ELD THPROVEIVlENT PROJECT (70075). GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This conveyance is consistent with the County's Growth Management Plan. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: 1. Approve the attached Utility Easement to Florida Power & Light Company; 2. Authorize the Chairman to execute the Easement; and 3. Authorize staff to record with the Clerk of Court the Easement in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. J U L 3 0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .... Easement to FP&L Page 2 ~1~"~, ~ro~rty AC~lUisition ~upervisor Property Acquisition & Construction Management Fa, ei~ities Management Dep..artment ~'~les E. Carrington, Jr., ~R/WA, IV~ager Prope~y Acquisition & Construction Management Facilities Management Depa~ment REVIEWED BY: ~~~~/ Date: Skip Camp, Director Facilities Managem~t Depa~ment REVIEWED BY: ~//~ <~ ~/~/¢~z,~ Date: Maria Ramsey, Direc~Or / Parks & Recreation Depca~ent REVIEWED BY: / C z./~> ~__ Date: Roy B. Anderson, P.E. Director Public Utilities Engineering D~ment APPROVED BY: ~/¢ ~'~~ Date: ~ Ja~es W. DeLony, P.E., Admi~strator ~lic Utilities Division AGENDA ITEM .o. /~. d_~ JUL 3 0 2002 wor~ or~r so. EASEMENT This Ins~'urnent Prepared By Co.~ame: FPaL ~cetI.D..~llqqqOCO~ ~d~ 4105 15th Ave. SW ~alntalned by coun~A~praJser) Naples, FL 3 41 1 6 Form 3722 (S~cke~) Rev, 7/94 pg 1 of ~. TEe undersigned, in consid~'radon of thc pa~m:nt of $1.09. m~. oth~ good and valuable consideration, the adequacy am:L receipt of which is nercDy acknowledged, ndant and give ~ Florida Power & Light Company, its licensees, agear3, successors, asslo'ns, an easement forever thr the constriction, operation and maintenance of overhea~ and underground electric utility facilitle~ (including wires, poles, guys, cables, conduits and appurtenant equipment) to be i=stalled from time to time; with [he right to reconstruct, improve, add to, enlarge, change the voltage, as well a~, the size of and remove such facilities or a~y of them within an casement [ 0 feet in width cl~¢ribed as follows: SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED To~ether with ~e rizht [o l:~rmit any other person, firm or corporation to attach wires t~ any facilities hereunder and lay cable and corid,,i[ wirhln the ea.~'emenfand to operate th$ same for communfcatio~ purposes; the right of iagress and egress t~ said premises at all times; the fight to clear the land and keep i[ cleared of all trees, undergrow~ an~ o~er obstruetkms within ~te easemen~ area~ m trim and cut and keep trimmed and cut all dead, weak, leaning or dangerous trees or limbs ou~ide of the easement area which mig~lt iaterfere w~.th or tall upon the ]ine~ or systems of communicatio~ or power transmission or dis~budera; and fur~er grant~, to the fullest extent ~e undersigned h~ the power to grant, if at all, the rights herelnahove granted on the 1sad heretofore described, over, along, under across the roads, street~ or highways adjoining or through said property. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned h~s signed and sealed this instrument on , Board of County Commissioners Sig~e~, s~'a/ed and d~liw~¢d Collier County. Florida  C'~,mcss' Signature) Pi'~t Name: JAM~$ ~. COLETTA ~rintName / PrintAddre~s: 3301 Tamiami Trail East Naples~ FL 34112 PrintName ...-/ ~. P~MtNam~: Dwight E. Brocke Clerk .... ./ (wire.ss) ~"-~ P:intAddress: 3301 Tamiami Trail East ..... -/' ~ Naples~ FL 34112 -/ (Corporam Seal) ST AND COUNTY OF . The foregoing imm~m~-m w me this day .20_, by , and respeetiv~ President and Secretsry of a ~n l~alf of said ¢orporation,~r~mdl¥ k~wn to me or have l~rodueed a~ idmtiflcafion, and who did (did not) ~ My Commission/~: /  t~fo~ ~/~J;e~al sufftcte~c), Assistant Count~ Attorne~ NO. T. ChaM JUL 3 0 2002 r DESCRIPTION OF PART OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER, COUNTY, FLORIDA (PROPOSED I 0' FLORIDA POWER AND LIQHT EASEMENT} ALL THAT PART OF SECTION 32, TOWNSH~ 48 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER, COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTH 1/4 CORNER OF SAiD SECTION 32; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAiD SECTION 32 SOUTH 87"34'05" WEST 181.13 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAD LINE NORTH 47°25'$5" WEST 56.57 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 87034'05" WEST gO.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 42°34'05' WEST 56.57 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 32; THENCE ALONG SAID LINE SOUTH 87034'05'' WEST 40.03 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION OF THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF 13TM AVENUE NORTI-D, VEST AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT OF GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, UNIT NO. 10, PLAT BOOK 4, PAGES 101 - 102, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AND THE SOUTH LINE OF SAiD SECTION 32; THENCE LEAVING SAID LINE NORTH 00°00'00- WEST I0.01 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87034'05'' FAST 35.46 FEET; THENCE NORTH 42034'05'' EAST 56.57 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87034'05'' EAST 88.28 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 47025'55'. EAST 56.57 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87°34'05'' EAST ! 76.98 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87°33'22" EAST 954.42 FEET; THENCE NORTH 42033'22.' EAST 56.57 FEET; THENCE NORTH $7°33'22" EAST 88.28 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 47°26'35" EAST 56.57 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87033'22" EAST I 152.44 FEET; THENCE NORTH 42033'22'' EAST 56.57 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87°33'22'' EAST 88.28 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 47026'38'' EAST 56.57 FEET; '. THENCE NORTH $7°33'22" EAST 58.16 FEET; THENCE NORTH 42046'07'' EAST 56.52 FEET TO A PO~qT ON A LINE LYING 25 FEET WEST OF AND PARALLEL TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 32; THENCE ALONG SAID LINE SOUTH 02013'53'' EAST 14.14 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID LINE SOUTH 42°46'07" WEST 50.64 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 32; THNECE ALONG SA_rD LINE SOUTH 87°33'22" WEST 66.43 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAiD LINE NORTH 47°26'38" ~,~,qEST 56.57 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 87°33'22" WEST 80.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 42°33'22TM ',~__.ST 56.57 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 32; THENCE ALONG SAiD LINE SOUTH 87033'22'' WEST 1160.72 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID LINE NORTH 47°26'38" WEST 56.57 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 87°33'22'' WEST 80.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 42°33'22" WEST 56.57 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 32; THENCE ALONG SAID LINE SOUTH 87033'22'' WEST 958.57 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE EASEMENT HEREIN DESCRIBED. BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING NORTH 87°33'22TM EAST. EASEMENT CONTAINS 0.70 ACRES MORE OR LESS. SUB.IECT TO EASEMENTS, RESTI~CTIONS, AND RESERVATIONS OF RECORD. WILSONMILLER, INC. REGISTERED ENGINEERS AND LAND suRvEYORS CER,~OF AUTHORIZATION #.LB43. REF. 1L-371/~ W.O.: N8232-002-002 DATE: MAY 25, 2002 -- XG?~l~ IT EM NO. Naples Fort Myers Sarasota Bradenton Tampa Tallahassee 3200BaileyL~e, Suite200 Naples, Flodda34105-8507 941-649-4040~941-643-S716~ JUL 3 0 2002 loe't~ Yec 0st- e,STOC~t.,~.~ WWW. wJlsonmJllBr, cor~ ~82~2.oo~-eee-- o PG. Wil nMiiler New D/rections In Planning, Design & Engineering DESCRIPTION OF PART OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 45 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER, COUNTY, FLORIDA (PROPOSED 10' FLORIDA POW'ER AND LIGHT EASEMENT~ ALL THAT PART OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 48 SOLrTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLt.]ER, COUNTY, FLORIDA, BElOnG MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRB3ED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 32; THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION NORTH 02'13'53" WEST 45.58 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID LINE SOUTH 87°46'07" WEST 15.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF B EGi'N'NING OF THE EASEMENT HEREIN DESCR.I]3ED; THENCE SOUTH 42°46'07' WEST 14.14 FEET TO A POINT ON A LINE LYING 25 FEET WEST OF AND PARALLEL TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTiON 32; THENCE ALONG SAID LINE NORTH 02°13'53" WEST 765.29 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID LINE NORTH 47°13'53" WEST 70.71 FEET; THENCE NORTH 02'13'53" WEST 85.28 FEET; THENCE NORTH 42°46'07TM EAST 70.71 FEET; THENCE NORTH 02°13'53" WEST 1048.36 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87°46'07" EAST 10.00 FEET; THECNE SOUTH 02°13'53" EAST 1052.50 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 42°46'07'' WEST 70.71 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 02°13'53" EAST 80.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 47°13'53" EAST 70.71 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 02°I '~'53" EAST 759.43 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE EASEMENT HEREIN DESCR2BED. BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE SOUTH HALF OF THE F. LIST LINE OF SECTION .32, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING NORTH 02°13'53" WEST. EASEMENT CONTALNS 0.47 ACRES MORE OR LESS. SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS, A. ND RESERVATIONS OF RECORD. WILSONMILLER, L~C. REGISTERED. ENGINEERS AND LAND SURVEYORS CERTIF1C~t~ OF A~TION #LB-.43. ANDREW B. BECK, PSM 6065 NOT VALID UNLESS EMBOSSED WITH THE PROFESSIONAL'S SEAL. REF. 1L-371 W.O.: N8232-002-002 DATE: MAY 25, 2002 REVISED: JUNE 12, 2002 AGENDA ITEM Naples Fort Myers Sarasota Bradenton Tampa Tallahassee NO._ J ~ ~ 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200 Naples, Flor/da 34105-8507 941-649-4040 ~ 941-643-5716 [~ J U L 3 0 20t]2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY REQUEST A BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR THE NORTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY FOR $241,400 TO BE TRANSFERRED FROM RESERVES TO COVER THE EXPENSES FOR OVERTIME, SLUDGE TRANSPORTATION, ELECTRICITY, OPERATING SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT REPAIRS. OBJE~CTIVE: To obtain approval from the Board of County Commissioner, Ex-Officio the Governing Board of Collier County Water-Sewer District authorizing a budget amendment for the North County Water Reclamation Facility (NCWRF) for $241,400 to cover operating expenses for Fiscal Year 2001-2002 (FY 01-02). CONSIDERATIONS: The NCWRF needs $241,400 to cover operating expenses for the remainder of FY 01-02. This is due to a shortage of funds for electricity, operating supplies, utility repairs, contractual services and overtime. There is now an increase in electricity usage, operational supplies and overtime with the 5 MGD Expansion start-up. The facility incurred unanticipated expenses with rehabilitation to the influent bar screens and secondary clarifiers. The contractual services expenses incurred with the hauling of sludge to the Okeechobee Landfill in order to remove wastewater sludge from the Naples Landfill as per the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (F.D.E.P.) consent order. FISCAL IMPACT: These expenditures were unanticipated in the FY 01-02 Budget. A budget amendment is needed to transfer funds in the amount of $241,400 from the County Water/Sewer Operating Fund (408) Reserve for Contingencies. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact associated with the Executive Summary. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board of County Commissioners, as Ex-Officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, authorize a budget amendment for $241,400 to cover the increase operating expenses for the NCWRF. AG£MDA ITEM JUL 3 0 200 , P~, t Joseph B. Cheatham,. Wa/~ ter Director REVIEWED BY: ~~ ~c/~~7 Date://~ ~..~. ~'~-  __~mes W. DeLony, P.E.,,~lic Utilities Admi~tral6r APPROVED BY: Date: James V. Mudd, P.E., County Manager (Act±ng) AG~NOA IT£1,'I ~ I JUL 3 0 ZOOZ PG.~ . ~'. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR $258,500 PRIMARILY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION WORK FOR THE PRICE STREET-BAREFOOT WILLIAMS ROAD WATER MUNICIPAL SERVICES BENEFIT UNIT (MSBU) SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FUND (409), PROJECT # 70077. OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners, as Ex-Officio the Governing Board of Collier County Water/Sewer District authorize and approve a budget amendment to start the construction work on the Price Street-Barefoot Williams Road Water MSBU. CONSIDERATION: On March 12, 2002, the Board of County Commissioners approved a Resolution No. 2002-141 (agenda item 17 b) to create the Price Street- Barefoot Williams Road Water MSBU. As part of the creation of the MSBU, the Board authorized staff to pursue interim financing and long term financing to be utilized for the project. The Board also authorized a budget amendment to transfer the initial design/engineering cost from the Water/Sewer Operating Fund 408 to MSBU-Special assessments Fund 409. The total estimated cost of the design and engineering fee is $34,800 out of which $8,287 has already been paid from the Water Capital Projects Fund 412. A budget amendment for $26,500 ~vas already approved and is in process. The design work is already in progress and is expected to be completed towards the end of August 2002. The construction work needs to start immediately thereafter. As was originally proposed in the executive summary approved by the Board on March 12, 2002, the project cost would be approximately $285,000. After the construction work is completed, the property owners will reimburse the entire cost of the project including the design fees, construction cost, and the interest on the use of the reserve cash in its entirety. Such a reimbursement will be made in one of the following methods: 1. A loan for the actual project cost will be obtained with the property owners as the debtors and the proceeds will payoff the commercial paper, or 2. The property owners will pay a lump sum amount equal to the actual cost of the project and thus payoff the commercial paper, or 3. A combination of the above. The loan to be obtained will include the actual project cost, financing cost and collection cost. All receipts from the debt proceeds, disbursements to vendors, debt service payments to the bank will be recorded in Fund 409. Payments made by the property owners to satisfy the debt will also be recorded in Fund 409. This will insure that the entire project cost is fully funded by the property owners. The details of the loan will be brought to the Board for approval before submitting a loan application. JUL 3 0 2002 PG. [ FISCAL IMPACT: None. The borrowers will repay the design and construction cost - initially paid by the County after the construction work is completed. This payment will include the interest on the use of the County's reserve dollars. This payment may be in one lump sum or in installments, or a combination of both. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management related to this project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners, as the Ex-Officio Governing Board of the Collier County water/Sewer District: Approve a budget amendment to transfer $258,500 from the Water/Sewer Operating Fund 408, Reserves to the Price Street-Barefoot Williams Road MSBU, Special Assessments Fund 409, project # 70077. Bala M. Sridhar, Sr. Accountant REVIEWED B/~' ~',-...- .;-) fl,; '~"-'"'-"'-~ DATE: i James L. M~Gee, P.E., Project Manager REVIEWED BY: ~,,~,~.~/r,~~ ~'r~,,.,_k./&.-.~,; DATE: Thomas G. Wides, Director Public Utilities-Operations DATE: ~PROVED B ~'J am~.?~Lony, Ad~nistrator Q ~~flities Division EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $200,000 TO FUND UNANTICIPATED EXPENSES WITHIN THE NORTH WATER TREATMENT FACILITY COST CENTER OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners, Ex-Officio, the goveming Board of the Collier County Water District, approve a budget amendment for the North Water Treatment Facility Cost Center to cover unanticipated expenses that have caused a shortfall in operating funds. CONSIDERATIONS: The Water Department has experienced an unanticipated reduction in raw water quality, which caused increased expenses through the purchase of water cartridge filters and membrane elements, as well as increased chemical costs. The North Water Treatment Facility provides approximately 40% of the potable water produced for the Collier County Water District. Several mechanical failures within the Hawthorn Wellfield have required unanticipated work by a wellfield contractor. Deep Injection Well #1 suffered a leak within the inner well causing additional unanticipated expenses. The daily demand for water has been higher this year than historical increases, and higher than projected in the budgeting process. This has caused an increase in overall expenses, and a shortfall in the amount of funds budgeted for water production. FISCAL IMPACT: Total increased expenditures for the North Water Treatment Facility are estimated at $200,000 and will be funded from Reserves for Contingencies in the County Water/Sewer Operating Fund (408). GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact in approving this budget amendment. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners, Ex-Officio, the governing Board of the Collier County Water District, approve a budget amendment for the North Water Treatment Facility Cost Center in the amount of $200,000 to cover unanticipated expenses that have been expended during this Fiscal Year. SUBMITTED BY: .~.,~7~,,.,, /~ St~epher~ L~g, Manager, Wat~ Production Date: zg?//Z/~J Paul E: Mattausch, Direct, ~ater Department APPROVED t~Y: ',,~r-~- ~ "~' - - I - ' ~ ~ ,/~J~es W. DeLony, Public Ut~ties Division Administrator EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $70,000 FOR THE DESIGN AND PERMITTING OF A SOCCER FIELD AT EAST NAPLES COMMUNITY PARK Objective: That the Board of County Commissioners approve a budget amendment for the design and construction permitting process of a soccer field so that construction may commence prior to the expiration of existing environmental permits. Consideration: During the original design and construction of East Naples Community Park, a second phase of athletic field was designed and permitted on an unused portion of the park. This section was left undeveloped because of the substantial clearing and fill costs associated with the development of this low-lying area. Recently the department has been advised that existing environmental permits for this area will no longer be extended and to re-permit will be a difficult process. In light of needs for additional soccer fields in this area of the County and the dramatic increase in property values, staff believes that it is best to construct the field at this time. This project is budgeted in the 02/03 Capital Project Fund 346, but due to the ruling that the permits will not be extended, funds are needed to trigger activity on the site. Growth Management: The field and improvements will be inventoried in the Growth Management Plan. Fiscal Impact: A budget amendments will transfer $70,000 from Community and Regional Park Impact Fee reserves (346) into the East Naples Community Park Soccer Field Project. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Board approve the budget amendment to transfer funds into the East Naples Community Park Soccer Field Project. Prepared by: ~/]e~y~ ~ ./~;~{/'.~ Date: /ames Fitzek, Ope~ra-ti~s Manager JDepartment of Parks and Recreation Reviewed by: ,/'?(f/~/~, ?~]- ~'-~//f'~ ,5.Y.5/.--, Date: Marla Ramsey, Dlrect;~'>~ ' ~ / Department of Parks arid RecreaJion Approved by: J nuck, Public Services Administrator DiviSion of Public Services JUL 3 0 2002 1 9141 ~ ""' ~ DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY JACY.~ONVII. t.E DISTRICT C0~IPS Of: ENOINEER$ ~'ORT MYEI~S FIE,~ULATORY OFFICE 2301 MCGI~EGOR BOUI. EVARD, 51Jil'E 300 July 10, 2001 Regulatory Division West Permlta Branch Fort Myers Regulatory Office lg9405904(MOD.MH) Modification Mr. Marco Espinar 3880 E~ttey Avenue Naples, Florida 34104 Deer Mr. Espinar: Reference is made to your letter dated September !,4, 2000, requesting a two-year extension to your Department of/he Army (DA) pen'r~it (19940~) issulKI to Collier County Board of County Commissioners for the ex,,,,,--~-- -., ,,- .......... ~a~East Naples Community, Park. The project is located at the East Nap ommunily in Section 24, Township 50 Soutl% Range 25 East, Collier CourtS,, Fk~rida. We have reviewed your request and have no objection to the tWO.year extension. Accerdingly, the expiration da~a of I~.e DA permit is hereby ~her extended until ~ 3.~.,.~p.~. Please be advised that no further extensions of time will be granted f~ this DA permit. All other conditkms, inc~ucling ar~y required mitigation, monitoring, anti reporting, of the DA permit remain unehanged anti lr~ Mi rome and effect. You aheuld attach a ropy of this letter to the DA permit. Thank you for your ¢0ntinuing cooperation with ~ur regulato~j program. BY AUTHORITY OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY: DWIrlG. t Engineer - Copy furnished: SI=VVMO; Fort My~rl, Fl. ~8 39~d S3OIA~3S 3I~BRd S~S~LI~6 BS:~"~-'~00~/~S/L~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AWARD BID #02-3386, TIRE SERVICES, TO COLLIER TIRE & AUTO REPAIR AS PRIMARY VENDOR AND COLLIER RETREADING, INC., AS SECONDARY VENDOR AT AN ESTIMATED COST OF $35,000 ANNUALLY FOR TIRE SERVICES AND $100,000 ANNUALLY FOR NEW TIRES. OBJECTIVE: Obtain Board approval to award Bid #02-3386, Tire Services, to Collier Tire & Auto Repair as primary vendor and Collier Retreading, Inc., as secondary vendor. CONSIDERATIONS: The Fleet Management Department oUtsources most roadside and heavy truck tire repairs and replacements. The successful bidder must have sufficient service trucks, equipment, and personnel to meet the tire service demand for the Collier County fleet at any location within the County. The successful bidder must also be an authorized dealer under the State of Florida Tires and Tubes Contract, and make tires available to the County at the prices stated in that contract. The term of this contract is t~vo years with two renewal option years in one-year increments. Notices of this bid were sent to t6 different vendors. Two vendors responded, Collier Tire and Auto Service in Naples and Collier Retreading, Inc., in Immokalee. Collier Tire and Auto Service was considered the loxv bidder and is recommended for award as primary vendor. Collier Retreading, Inc., is recommended for award as secondary vendor. FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of tire services is estimated at $35,000 annually. The cost of new tires purchased from the State of Florida Tires and Tubes Contract is estimated at $100,000 annually. Since Fleet Management operates as an internal service fund, costs will be charged back to the using operating depamnents within the County. :rh±s money ±s budgeted :in Fund 521-122/,10. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: No growth management impact is involved. RECOMMENDATION: Award Bid #02-3386, Tire Services, to Collier Tire & Auto Repair as Primary Vendor and to Collier Retreading, Inc., as secondary vendor. SUBMITTED BY: ( ./"'~2 ~n-v~/~'~~ Dat: Dan Croft,'Fl~e~' IV~ar~a-~'edment Director REVIEWED BY: ~(~ ~ ~ ~(~ Date: ~ (~[~ Steve~mell, Pur~asing Director APPROVED BY: ~4~ Date: ~/~ Jo-A~e Varcoe-Leamer, Administrative Se~ices Administrator lAG[~A. ITEM .lu L 3 0 2002 Pg. ~ ,, ~ _ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY "~ kPPROVE AN INCREASE OF THE RFQ # 99-0290 "FILE RETENTION" SERVICES $25,000 THRESHOLD TO $33,000 WITH ROBERT FLYNN MOVING AND STORAGE. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board approve an increase in the threshold limit for RFQ # 99-0290 File Retention Services from Robert Flynn Moving and Storage from $25,000 to $33,000. CONSIDERATION: The Department of Facilities Management is responsible for file retrieval and retention services using a private contractor. Constitutional Officers and BCC Departments utilize this service to store records and retrieve records on an as-needed basis. Annual expenses have previously ranged between $20,000 and $24,000. However, this year's expenses are slated to be between $25,000 and $33,000. Costs are higher than expected due to many Agencies and Departments moving their old files to off-site storage. Biannually, the Department completes a Request for Quotes (RFQ) utilizing the best-priced, responsive contractor. Robert Flynn Inc., a Naples based moving and storage contractor has provided these services through this process for the last four years. Under the RFQ, total annual expenses may not exceed $25,000 without Board approval. Staff is requesting that the Board of County Commissioners approve the increase from the $25,000 threshold to $33,000 to continue services while a formal bid is prepared (RFQ expires November 2002). ~ISCAL IMPACT: Funds are budgeted in the Facilities Management's building maintenance cost center. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This will not affect the Growth Management Plan. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board approve an increase in the threshold amount for RFQ 99-029 "File Retention Services" with Robert Flynn Moving and Storage from $25,000 to $33,000 as addressed within this summary. Daniel R. Ro--'driguez, F~ac.)tlitie~/Manager Facilities Managemen(~epartment S'kip/~p, CFM, D(re~tor Facilities Management Department Steve ~amell, D~[ector Purchasing Department Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer, Administrator Administrative Services Division No. //~'-~ .IUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE A LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR THE EMPOWERMENT ALLIANCE OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA TO SUBMIT A FRONT PORCH FLORIDA APPLICATION FOR DESIGNATION OF SOUTH IMMOKALEE AS A FRONT PORCH FLORIDA COMMUNITY. OB,IECTIVE: To receive approval for the Chairman to sign the attached letter of support for a Front Porch Florida application to be submitted by the Empowerment Alliance of Southwest Florida. CONSIDERATIONS: Front Porch Florida is a program initially announced by Governor Jeb Bush in 1999 designed to provide communities the means by which to develop a plan and participate in a process to take back their neighborhood and make it an exciting place to live, work and play. Since 1999, 16 neighborhoods across the state have been designated as Front Porch Florida communities. According to the Office of Urban Opportunity, Front Porch Florida is different. It is a grass roots, bottom-up revitalization initiative that focuses on the family and empowers residents to define and resolve neighborhood problems. The solutions for changing the neighborhood come from the community, not government, through a process that is holistic and builds on community assets and relationships. Applications are submitted by a nominating entity on behalf of a community. To be eligible to compete for the Front Porch Florida designation, the nominating entity must submit a holistic Neighborhood Action Plan and document that the Plan was created through community participation. The nominating entity must represent the diversity of the neighborhood residents and business owners in the neighborhood. The Front Porch Florida designation is awarded to the community, not to the nominating entity. The Governor makes the selection decision. This will be the third attempt by an agency in Collier County to seek the designation for Immokalee. The Collier County Planning Services Department submitted in 1999 for the entire Immokalee community. In 2000, the maximum neighborhood size was reduced to less than one square mile and the Empowerment Alliance of Southwest Florida submitted for the smaller area of South Immokalee that is the subject of the 2002 application. This year, the Empowerment Alliance will serve as the nominating entity and the community will be South Immokalee. The deadline for the 2002 cycle is September 6, 2002. FISCAL IMPACT: There will be no fiscal impact on the planned budget as a result of this request. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The designation and the subsequent benefits afforded to the community due to its ability to compete for a variety of grants generally supports the goals and objectives of the Immokalee Area Master Plan. Specifically, the designation supports "Goal lh Enhance Immokalee's quality of life, natural beauty, environmental quality and small-town character, its stable neighborhoods, and its status as the urban hub for the surrounding agricultural region." ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES RECOMMENDATION: Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached letter of support for the Empowerment Alliance of Southwest Florida to submit a Front Porch Florida application for designation of South Immokalee as a Front Porch Florida community. SUBMITTED BY: '"P~~ ~:t~N~_ Date: Marlene Foord, Grants Coordinator Administrative Services Division Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer, Administrator j nG£r~ ITe Administrative Services Division ] no./~ JUL 3 0 2002 3301 East Tamiarni Trail · Naples, Florida 34112-4977 Donna Fiala (941) 774-8097 · Fax (941) 774-3602 District 1 James D. Carter, Ph.D. District 2 Tom Henning District 3 Fred W. Coyle District 4 Jim Coletta District 5 July 18, 2002 Ms. Alison A. Hewitt Office of Urban Opportunity Sadowski Building, Suite 160 2555 Shumard Oak Drive Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 Re: Front Porch Application Dear Ms. Hewitt: Collier County Government has been a long time partner with the residents and business community of Immokalee to improve the quality of life in this community and happily support the Front Porch designation. More recently Collier County has offered and continues to offer its support to the Empowerment Alliance, the Immokalee Alliance, the Community Redevelopment Agency, and to the Weed & Seed Steering Committee for the recently designated Weed & Seed program. Collier County has also committed to improving the housing stock in Immokalee through the county-staffed and implemented Immokalee Housing Initiative. Many of these programs focus on bringing new housing and business opportunities into the Immokalee area. The goal of these programs is to offer home ownership and to reduce the poor housing conditions, as well as reducing the code enforcement and crime problems common in areas where rental units and mobile homes are the prevalent housing option. The County, the Sheriff's Office and many community groups have come together to implement the Neighborhood Plan for South Immokalee. The Front Porch Initiative will provide the framework for this implementation and will provide the South Immokalee Community with the recognition and necessary technical assistance from the State to help us to accomplish our objectives. We appreciate your consideration and look forward to working together on this important initiative. Sincerely, JAMES No COLETTA, CHAIRMAN Board of County Commissioners AG£/~:)A I T~M_._ JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT TOTALING $72,500 FOR EXPENDITURES RELATED TO THE TEMPORARY RELOCATION OF THE LAW LIBRARY. ~: To have the Board approve a budget amendment related to the temporary relocation of the Law Library. CONSIDERATIONS: In order to provide the Clerk of the Courts with additional office space, staff is recommending relocating the Law Library to the Supervisor of Elections Building (Rev. Dr. Martin L. King Building). This move would take place in early 2003, well after the 2002 Election. In the interim, the Law Library would move to portable temporary units located on the Main Government Complex. The costs associated with the relocation and space planning services for the redesign of the Clerk's space on the 5th and 6th flOOrS of the Courthouse is $61,300 and includes the "set up" of a triple wide portable unit, electrical, telephone and fiber optics lines, security elements, permits, etc. Reoccurring monthly costs ($1600) include leasing the unit itself, alarm monitoring, electrical, and janitorial service. When the space planning exercise is completed for the Clerk's Office, staff will construct a project budget and submit it for the Board's review and approval. The costs associated with the permanent relocation of the Law Library will be established once the programming stage has been completed. FISCAL IMPACT: The estimated cost for the temporary relocation of the Law Library includes a one-time cost of $61,300 and an additional $11,200 ($1600 per month) to cover lease costs. The attached budget amendment reflects costs for the next seven months (estimated time to relocate the Library to their permanent space). Funds would be transferred from 301 Reserves to Fund 301, General Improvements Project. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no impact on the Growth Management Plan. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board approve the attached budget amendment for the temporary relocation of the Law Library and space planning costs associated with the Clerk's Office. Prepared By: , '~"~e'~'~'z: ~''~ Date: ~kip Camp, CFM, Director The Department of Facilities Management Approved By: "7~~'''~''~' Date: ~//¢-/0-,~ .._, Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer, Administrator Administrative Services Division J O L 3 0 2002 Pg,~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CONVEY A GRANT OF UTILITY EASEMENT TO SPRINT-FLORIDA, INC., FOR RELOCATION OF A CABLE CONNECTION CABINET FROM AIRPORT ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE COUNTY'S MAIN GOVERNMENT COMPLEX PROPERTY. THERE WILL BE NO FINANCIAL IMPACT TO THE COUNTY AS A RESULT OF THIS REQUEST. OBJECTIVE: To convey Sprint-Florida, Inc., a utility easement to place a cable connection cabinet on the County's main government complex. CONSIDERATIONS: Sprint-Florida, Inc.'s, cabinet which houses the connections between Sprint's main circuits and its cables located on the County's main campus is located within Airport Road right-of-way, and, because of its close proximity to the pavement, the cabinet has been damaged on several occasions disrupting phone and data service to County buildings. Representatives from Sprint have contacted the Facilities Management Department to request permission to relocate the cabinet further from the pavement and onto County property. To do so will require the County granting Sprint the attached Grant of Utility Easement (Easement). The Easement has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's office. FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost to record the Easement will be $10.50 and will be paid from the General Fund (001). Sprint will reimburse the County for this cost. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This request is consistent with the County's Growth Management Plan. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: 1. Approve the attached Grant of Utility Easement to Sprint-Florida, Inc.; 2. Authorize the Chairman to execute the Grant of Utility Easement; and 3. Authorize staff to record with the Clerk of Courts the Grant of Utility Easement in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. 2002 ' EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Grant of Utility Easement to Sprint-Florida, Inc. Page 2 Ton~'~'. 'Mott,"iS~perty AcqUisition Supervisor Property Acquisition & Construction Management Facilities Management Department Ch~ries E. Carring~n, Jr., S~VA,~anager Property Acquisition & Consfruction Management Facilities Management Department ¢S1~~,- D~r~ctor ' Facilities Management Department APPROVED BY: '/~"~/~"/' DATE: 7//~"~/ Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer, Administrator Administrative Services Division JUL 3 0 2002 330! Eest T&mtaml Trill Na~le$. ~t~lda 34112 (94[) 774-8400 GRANT OF UTILITY EASEMENT This indenture made and executed this ~ day of 2002, by and between COLLIER COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as GRANTOR and SPRINT-FLORIDA, INCORPORATED, successor by merger to UNITED TELEPHONE COMPANY OF FLORIDA, whose mailing address is P.O. Box 2477, Naples, Florida 34106, hereinafter referred to as GRANTEE. WITNESSETH That for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the GRANTOR hereby grants to GRANTEE, its successors or assigns, a non-exclusive easement for the installation of utility facilities on the property more particularly described on Exhibit 'A" attached hereto and made a part hereof, hereinafter referred to as Easement Property. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the easement hereby granted unto said GRANTEE, its successors and assigns, for the sole purpose of installing a cross-connect cabinet to provide data transmission services to County facilities. GRANTEE, by acceptance of this easement agrees for itself, its successors and assigns, to maintain said easement and in no way 1o intertere with or hinder at any time access to the Easement Property or adjacent lands by GRANTOR, the general public, or any other party requiring access to any of the property over which said easement is granted. GRANTEE further agrees that it will at all times use extreme care to restore all grounds to as good or better condition than found prior to any construction, installation, maintenance or repair work performed by GRANTEE, or its agents, contractors, successors or assigns. In the event GRANTEE, its successors or assigns, shall fail to use this easement for the purpose of providing data transmission service to the County, this Utility Easement shall automatically terminate and the GRANTEE, its successors or assigns, shall vacate, cancel and annul said easement or relevant part thereof by recording in the Public Records an instrument evidencing said cancellation. GRANTOR, its successors or assigns, shall upon said vacation, have the right to require GRANTEE, its successors or assigns, to remove any structures, facilities or improvements from Easement proper'b/. GRANTEE hereby covenants and agrees to indemnify, save, protect and hold harmless GRANTOR against any loss, damage, injury, debt or expense (including attorney's fees) claimed or asserted by any person or entity, which claim relates to in any way, no matter how remote, or arises out of GRANTEE'S installation of facilities or use of the Easement Property described above. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the GRANTOR has caused these presents to be executed in its name by its Board of County Commissioners acting by the Chairman of said Board, the day and year first above written. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: , Deputy Clerk JAMES N. COLETTA, Chairman CERTInCATE OF AUTHORiZATiON /LB4J .~IOT VALIO WITHOUT THE CERTIFICATE AND ORIGINAL RAISED SEAL OF A FLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR AND I~APPER. ABSTRACT NOT REVIEWED. ~°~ ~ ~ //--EXIST/NC 5' SIDEWALK ~ r-20'XJO' CROSS BOX (~ EASEMENT ~ ExISFINO 5' SIDEWALK ~ACK OF CUR8 GRAPNIC SCALE 8EOlNNING ~ ~ NO ~NSrRUWEN[S OF RECORD REFLECTING EASE~EN[S, RlCHFS OF WAY AND/OR OWNERSHIP ~ WERE FURNISHEO FO SURVEYOR. ~ 2. BUILDINGS AS SHOWN ARE FOR PROJECt ORIENFA[ION ONL~ NOT SUR~YED. ~ ] DIMENSIONS ARE tN FEE[ AND OEClMALS [HEREO~ ~~ ~. B~RINCS ARE ~SED ON THE WES[ LINE OF SECTION I2, tOWNSHIP ~ ~S[ COLLIER COUN~ FLORIDA. BEING NORZH 00'I8'~0' WES[ ~ 5. OR.=OFFtC~I RECORD S.R.=SFA[E ROAD ~ 6. LINES SHOWN OUFSIDE THE ~NOS DESCRIBED ARE FOR REFERENCE ONL~ ~ D~IP~N ~ P~T ~ STOLON I2, TO~SHIP ~ SO~. ~G~ 25 ~ CO~ COU~ L~,~ ALL rHA~ PAR1' OF SECDON 12, ~OWNSHIP 50 SOU~H, RANGE 25 EAS~, COLLIER COUN~ FLORIOA, ~ 8E~NC ~ORE P~RDCU~RLY OESCR~BEO AS FOLLOW: ~ COMMENCI~ AT ~HE SOUTH~Sr CORNER OF ~10 SECTION 12; ~ [HENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF ~lO SECTION 12 NORTH 00'18'fi0' ~Esr ~9L22 FEET; ~ rHE~E L~ ~lO LINE NORTH 89'41'I0' ~Sr 70.~ FEET ~0 A POINt ON ~HE WEST ~ RIGHt-OF-WAY LINE OF ~RPOR[-PULLINO ROAD ~0 [HE POINt OF BEGINNING OF rile PARCEL HEREIN DESCRIBED: ~ THENCE ALONG ~ID RIGHt-OF-WAY LINE NORTH 00'18'50' WES[ 20.00 FEET: ~ [HENCE L~NG ~lO LINE NORTH 89'~I'I0' ~S[ ~0.~ FEE~' ~ [HENCE SOUTH ~'~8'50' EASt 20.~: ~ ~ENCE SOUTH 89'~'10" ~S~ ~0.00 FEE~ ~0 rile PO~Nr OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL HEREIN ~ DESCRtBED: PARCEL CONT~NS 6~ SOUARE FEET MORE OR LESS.  LINE r~SLE ~ LINE LENGTH BERING L2 20.~ flO.~ RANGE 25 ~SE COLLIER COUNm FL ORIDA ~ 50 SOUTH, ~N~E 25 EA5~ COLLIER COUN~ FLORI~. (20'XJO' SPRINT U~ILI~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVAL OF A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO THE GROUP HEALTH AND LIFE PLAN IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,217,100 RECOGNIZING ADDITIONAL PREMIUM REVENUE AND INCREASING BUDGETED EXPENDITURES FOR INSURANCE CLAIMS, REINSURANCE, AND LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUMS THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2002. OBJECTIVE: To seek approval from the Board of Commissioners of a budget amendment to the Group Health and Life Plan that recognizes additional unbudgeted premiums and increases budgeted expenditures for Insurance Claims and reinsurance costs through September 30, 2002. CONSIDERATIONS: The Board of Commissioners operates a self-insured group health insurance program to provide health insurance for its eligible employees and those of participating constitutional officers. The Board of Commissioners is required by Florida Statute 112.08 to complete an actuarial study as of September 30th each year to assure the proper funding of the plan. Staff has utilized these actuarial evaluations to project future plan costs for reserving, budgeting and rating purposes. Actuarial evaluations completed in FY 02 recommended that the County budget $10,500,000 for claims expenditures in FY 02. Actual claims expenditures are expected to be approximately $12,550, 100. The reasons for this difference are due to a number of large cases affecting plan costs and an underestimate of the enrolled employee count for FY 02. In addition to the above, the cost of reinsurance has increased significantly in FY 02. Originally, $650,000 was budgeted for reinsurance premiums. However, in December staff received a premium increase notice of over 15% from the incumbent carrier. The program was marketed and the incumbent was found to be the most competitive carrier. This increase will result in anticipated FY 02 expenditures of $770,000. In anticipation of a funding shortfall in FY 02, it was decided to collect all health premiums allocated within departmental budgets to assure sufficient revenue to the fund. Normally, premium billings are based upon actual filled positions and billed accordingly. However, due to attrition there are budgeted premiums for unfilled positions that are also available for collection. These "attrition" monies are also recognized as part of this budget amendment request. Approximately $1,347,100 of additional revenue is due to the underestimate of actual enrolled employees and approximately $870,000 is due to budgeted but uncollected "attrition" premium. All of these funds are already budgeted within departmental budgets. In order to avoid a delay in the release of claims payments due to a potential funding insufficiency, it is requested that a budget amendment of $2,217,100 be approved to fund claims and expenses through September 30, 2002. Please note the following projected information: FY 02 FY 02 Amended Difference Expenditures: Budgeted Claims $10,500,000 $12,550,100 $2,050,100 Reinsurance $650,000 $770,000 $120,000 Life Insurance Premiums $225,000 $272,000 $47,000 Total $2,217,100 AGE ND, A IT~t~ .! U L 3 O 2002 Revenues: Health Insurance Premiums $12,788,600 $14,958,700 $2,170,100 Life Insurance Premiums $225,000 $272,000 $47,000 Total $2,217,100 GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact associated with this item. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of said budget amendment to Fund 517, Group Health and Life, that will recognize additional revenue from budgeted but uncollected premiums already allocated within departmental budgets and increase appropriated expenditures by $2,217,100 as described above. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board approve a budget amendment as described herein to fund health and life insurance program costs for the remainder of FY 02. Je f.f.,~I(er, CPCU, ARM, Director, Risk Management Department APPROVED BY: DATE: "'22'"/ Jo-Anne Var dministrative Sen'ices Administrator J U L 3 0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT TOTALING $37,000 FOR THE INSTALLATION OF ADDITIONAL LIGHTING FOR THE HARMON TURNER BUILDING (BUILDING F) SOUTH PARKING LOT TO CREATE A SAFER PARKING AREA. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners approve a budget amendment totaling $37,000 for the installation of additional lighting for the Harmon Turner Building (Building F) south parking area to improve safety for County staff and the public. CONSIDERATION: The Harmon Turner Building (Building F) south parking area, located at the Collier County Main Government Complex, is in need of additional lighting to improve safety and visibility during the evening hours. This area has limited lighting with only tv~'o light poles creating the potential for accidents and possible security concerns. Several surveys conducted by the County's Security personnel (see attached Lighting survey), as well as complaints from the public and County staff relating to paring lot lighting, has not only prompted the recommendation of additional lighting, but has also proven the need for extra light poles. Total cost for this safety improvement is $37,000. Project scope of work includes the addition of five (5) aluminum light poles with concrete foundations to match existing light structures. A major expense in this project is for running power lines under existing parking areas. The addition of these light poles will substantially improve the lighting in the south parking lot of the Harmon Turner Building. Ancillary lighting will improve visibility and provide a more secured area for County employees and the public during County-held Board meetings and workshops. FISCAL IMPACT: Total cost of this project is $37,000. Funds are available in the 301 Capital Fund Reserves. Funds would be transferred from 301 Capital Fund Reserves into Capital 301 Building Improvements General. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no impact on the Collier County Growth Management Plan. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Collier County Commissioners approve the installation of light poles at the Main Government Center to enhance security and approve the necessary budget amendments as addressed within this summary. [-- AG~Np~ ITEM~- I No. /,~.-~-'X"- '/ I .IUL 3 0 2002 Executive Summary Additional Lighting for Harmon Turner Administration Building Page 2 SUBMITTED BY: .... Date: Dan~-el R Rodrigue~, Fac/es't~anager Facilities Management Department REVIEWED BY: ~~ Date: 7/~'''?~ ~'''' '--Ski~"~mp, CFM, Director Facilities Management Department APPROVED BY: ~'7),//~4/4/ ~'"' Date: ~' ~/~/'~ Jo-Anne V~rc~e-Leamer, CPA, Administrator Support Services Division Lighting Survey - April 15, 2002 .o?s .o~s ~lo Il 537 .~8 [ I .359 F Administration ~0.2 r 4.19 ~ , .053 · CP ~ 2.22 A 7~ m t ~ iS4 ~~ .039 S g .04 o This survey was conducted on the night of4/15/02 and dealt with Building F. Since Building B is adjacent these figures are relevant to this building as well. According to the Lighting Handbook of the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America, 8th Edition, the minimum safety illuminance level is .5 footcandles. As shown above the lighting for the most part around Building F, Building B and the Black Parking area is substandard. AGEI/Q.A NO. /~'- ~'~' 7 JUL 3 0 2002 Pg~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARy APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND INSURANCE AND RISK MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC. FOR THE PLACEMENT OF NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE AND BUILDER'S RISK INSURANCE POLICIES. OBJECTIVE: To assure that County properties are properly insured against loss through the purchase of Flood and Builder's Risk insurance and to seek an amendment to the insurance broker's contract allowing for remuneration for work performed to place these coverages on the County's behalf. CONSIDERATION: After the September 11th tragedy and prior to that date, the availability of various lines of property insurance became more difficult and expensive to place. Two of these types of coverage include Difference in Conditions (Flood insurance) and Builder's Risk insurance (property insurance on buildings under construction). Prior to FY 02, the County insured its Flood-prone properties through the purchase of Difference in Conditions insurance, a form of Flood insurance. However, the market for such coverage is essentially non-existent today. Other than the obvious need to protect these properties against loss by Flood, there is also the need to comply with the Stafford Act which requires local governments to show proof that they purchase Flood insurance in order to request reimbursement assistance.from FEMA for non-covered portions of a storm-related loss. Therefore, the Risk Management Department, through the County's broker, Insurance and Risk Management Services, is finalizing a project to place approximately 150 National Flood Insurance policies on Flood-prone properties. The current contract with Insurance and Risk Management Services is a fiat fee contract whereby policies are placed net-of-commission. The contract does not allow for the acceptance of commissions without County approval. However, the National Flood Insurance Program does not allow for policies to be written net of commission. Given the significant amount of additional work required to place these 150 policies, IRMS has requested that the commissions on these policies be assigned to them as remuneration for work performed that was clearly outside the scope of their contract. In addition to the above, the County purchases Builder's Risk insurance on properties under construction. Prior to FY 02, the County purchased a blanket reporting form Builder's Risk policy on these properties. However, the market for such coverage on a blanket basis is also essentially non-existent today. Therefore, it has become necessary to place individual Builder's Risk policies on every construction project. These policies must be individually underwritten and each requires 6 to 7 hours of work for each policy issued. Given the significant amount of unanticipated additional work required to place these policies, IRMS has also requested that the commissions on these policies be assigned to them as remuneration for work performed. The contract with IRMS is set to renew on January 1,2003. IRMS has agreed to hold their fixed fees at calendar year 2000 levels for the renewal of the agreement but have asked that the contract be amended to allow for the acceptance of commissions on Flood and Builder's Risk insurance policies placed on behalf of the County. Given the need to place these Flood and Builder's Risk policies at this time, these requests are brought as a package. FISCAL IMPACT: The fee schedule for calendar year 2000 was $89,999 and anticipates a full bidding of the program. This would be the fee schedule for calendar year 2003 as well. Their is no net additional fiscal impact to the County to amend the contract with IRMS allowing for the acceptance of commissions given the fact that commissions are already incorporated into the premium rate structure and cannot be reduced. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact. RECOMMENDATION' That the Board authorize staff to prepare an amendment to the contract with IRMS to allow IRMS to accept commissions on National Flood Insurance policies placed on the County's behalf; to allow the acceptance of commissions on Builder's Risk Insurance policies placed on the County's behalf; and to adopt the calendar year 2000 fee schedule as the fee schedule for calendar year 2003. Sheree Mediavilla, Risk Manager SUBMITTED BY: ,~_~.¢..._:j/~---~ Date: ¢/~¢/~ J~'ff. rCCalk%r: CPCU, ARM, Director, Risk Management APPROVED BY: ~. ~/z~¢~/~..~ ..~~ Date: JoA~ne V~rcoe-Leamer, Administrator Administrative Services Division EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVAL TO GRANT EMPLOYEES HIRED THROUGH THE RECAP PROGRAM WHO HAVE PROVIDED CONTINUED FULL-TIME, UNINTERRUPTED SERVICE TO THE COUNTY A VACATION ACCRUAL DATE CONSISTENT WITH THEIR ORIGINAL RECAP HIRE DATE. OBJECTIVE: To make "whole" those employees who were hired through the RECAP Program (Reduce Costs of Administrative Personnel) and who have continued to serve in their position as a full-time employee with no break in service, by setting the accrual date for vacation time consistent with their original hire date through the RECAP program, as opposed to the date that their position became a permanent full-time position. CONSIDERATION: Collier County adopted the RECAP Program on June 1, 1994 with the intention of filling white-collar, administrative-management positions below the key management level of division and department with mature, well-educated, and experienced individuals. These individuals would typically have retired from a military officer position or a retired industry or government executive. They would be put in a rotational type position for a period of four months, which at the time would have permitted then to earn a salary that would not impact their social security benefits. The program ran through May 1998 and the County had the opportunity through this program to identify a few individuals who proved to be viable, long-term assets to Collier County. They were granted a Florida Retirement System benefit back to their original date of hire through the RECAP Program, but to date have not been granted the same benefit for the purpose of accruing vacation time. There are approximately five individuals identified to date who would require an adjustment to their vacation accrual date for an additional 9 to 17 months. Additionally, there are employees who have petitioned privately for the adjustment to their vacation accrual date and have been granted on a case-by-case basis. This petition is being made to ensure that all employees eligible are treated in a fair, consistent, equitable manner. FISCAL IMPACT: Minimum fiscal impact would be recognized by granting an adjustment to the time served for vacation accruals since there are so few employees that have remained since their hire through the RECAP Program. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve granting an adjusted vacation accrual date consistent with the original date of hire with Collier County to those employees who were hired through the RECAP Program and have provided continued, full-time service to Collier County since that date. Interim Compens~ Benefits Manger /'-h / REVIEWED BY: ( .~/4~- ~,,-"~ Date: J~ff(~-A."~ Walker Director, Employee Services APPROVED BY: ~///~'/ Date: ~/~ ¢ ¢ ~ Jo-Anne Learner ASD Administrator EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVAL OF A FIXED FEE PERFORMANCE BASED AGREEMENT, IN THE AMOUNT OF $ 7,947.00, BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. THE AGREEMENT IS FOR THE REVIEW AND UPDATE OF HAZARD ANALYSES AT DESIGNATED FACILITIES WITHIN COLLIER COUNTY THAT POSSESS EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AT OR ABOVE THE THRESHOLD PLANNING QUANTITY. OBJECTIVE: Board approval of Agreement # 03CP-11-09-21-01-152 between the State of Florida, Department of Community Affairs (DCA) and Collier County by accepting the sum of $ 7,947.00 for the review and updating of hazard analyses for 33 sites that store extremely hazardous substances above the threshold planning quantity, as defined by the United States Environmental Protection Administration (USEPA). CONSIDERATION: With the enactment of the Superfund Amendment and Re- authorization Act of 1986 (SARA Title III) and the State of Florida Hazardous Materials Response and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1988 (Chapter 252, Part II, F.S.), each Florida county was tasked to develop a response plan that meets all Federal and State requirements. A Hazardous Material Response Plan was approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on August 13, 1991. In addition to Federal and State requirements, the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the County Growth Management Plan requires that hazard analysis site visits be made at all sites biennially. To better manage the workload, the Department of Community Affairs has allowed the County to perform 50% of the required visits each year. To comply with the terms of the Agreement, all hazard analyses must be completed and forwarded to DCA by February 1, 2003. The Agreement is fixed,fee and performance based for the sun of $ 7,947.00. Upon approval of the Agreement, the Emergency Management Director shall be the authorized official who will prepare and remit invoices as specified in the Agreement per Attachment "B", Scope of Work and Schedule of Payments. FISCAL IMPACT: $7,300.00 was included as revenue in the Emergency Management Grant Fund 118-144210 for FY 03. Revenue in Fund 118 will be increased by $700.00 to account for the increase in grant revenue. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The review and updating of hazard analyses is required by the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Count Grov~!;ENDA ITEM ...... Management Plan, Objective #9.1, Policy 9.1.7. No. /~/~ ../ J Uk 3 0 2002 Pg. / _ RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approves the Agreement between the State of Florida, Department of Community Affairs and Collier County for the review and updating of hazard analyses for the facilities listed in Attachment "C" of the Agreement. SUBMITTE~~ Date: l~nneth F. Pineau, Em~ergency Manet ~-ir-ector APPROVE~a~- Date: )Kenneth F. Pineau, Interim Emergen~yy ~ ~-~ministrator AGENDA ITE~ No,, ~, ~ / JUL 3 0 2002 Contract Number: 03CP-11-09-21-01-152 CSFA Number: STATE-FUNDED SUBGRANT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into by and between the State of Florida, Department of Community Affairs, with headquarters in Tallahassee, Florida (hereinafter referred to as the "Department'3, and Collier County Emergency Management, (hereinafter referred to as the "Recipient"). THIS AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FACTS: A. WHEREAS, the Recipient represents that it is fully qualified and eligible to receive these grant funds to provide the services identified herein; and B. WHEREAS, the Department has received these funds from the State of Florida, and has the authority to subgrant these funds to the Recipient upon the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth; and C. WHEREAS, the Department has authority pursuant to Florida law to disburse the funds under this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, the Department and the Recipient do mutually agree as follows: (1) SCOPE OF WORK. The Recipient shall fully perform the obligations in accordance with the Compensation and Financial Reporting Requirements, Attachment A of this Agreement, and the Scope of Work and Schedule of Payments, Attachment B of this Agreement. (2) INCORPORATION OF LAWS, RULES, REGULATIONS AND POLICIES. Both the Recipient and the Department shall be governed by applicable State and Federal laws, rules and regulations. (3) PERIOD OF AGREEMENT. This Agreement shall begin upon execution by both parties or July 1,2002, whichever is later, and shall end June 30, 2003 unless terminated earlier in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (9) of this Agreement. (4) MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT; REPAYMENTS. Either party may request modification of the provisions of this Agreement. Changes which are mutually agreed upon shall be valid only when reduced to writing, duly signed by each of the parties hereto, and attached to the original of this Agreement. All refunds or repayments to be made to the Department under this Agreement are to be made payable to the order of "Department of Community Affairs", and mailed directly to the Department at the following address: Department of Community Affairs Cashier Finance and Accounting 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee FL 32399-2100 ( AGENDA ITEM / No. JUL 3 0 2002 pg, In accordance with § 215.34(2), Fla. Stat., if a check or other draft is returned to the Department for collection, the Department must add to the amount of the check or draft a service fee of Fifteen Dollars ($15.00) or Five Percent (5%) of the face amount of the check or draft, whichever is greater. (5) RECORDKEEPING. (a) The Recipient shall retain sufficient records demonstrating its compliance with the terms of this Agreement for a period of five years from the date the audit report is issued, and shall allow the Department or its designee, Comptroller, or Auditor General access to such records upon request. The Recipient shall ensure that audit working papers are made available to the Department or its designee, Comptroller, or Auditor General upon request for a period of five years from the date the audit report is issued, unless extended in writing by the Department, with the following exceptions: 1. If any litigation, claim or audit is started before the expiration of the five year period and extends beyond the five year period, the records will be maintained until all litigation, claims or audit findings involving the records have been resolved. 2. Records for the disposition of non-expendable personal property valued at $5,000 or more at the time of acquisition shall be retained for five years after final disposition. 3. Records relating to real property acquisition shall be retained for five years after closing of title. (b) All records, including supporting documentation of ail program costs, shall be sufficient to determine compliance with the requirements and objectives Of the Scope of Work and Schedule of Payments - Attachment B - and all other applicable laws and regulations. (c) The Recipient, its employees or agents, including all subcontractors or consultants to be paid from funds provided under this Agreement, shall allow access to its records at reasonable times to the Department, its employees, and agents. "Reasonable" shall be construed according to the circumstances but ordinarily shall mean during normal business hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., local time, on Monday through Friday. "Agents" shall include, but not be limited to, auditors retained by the Department. (6) REPORTS. (a) If all required reports and copies are not sent to the Department or are not completed in a manner acceptable to the Department, the Department may withhold further payments until they are completed or may take such other action as set forth in paragraph (9). The Department may terminate the Agreement with a Recipient if reports are not received within 30 days after written notice by the Department. "Acceptable to the Department" means that the work product was completed in accordance with generally accepted principles and is consistent with the Compensation and Financial Reporting Requirements (Attachment A) and the Scope of Work and Schedule of Payments (Attachment B). (b) Upon reasonable notice, the Recipient shall provide such additional program updates or information as may be required by the Department. (7) MONITORING. The Recipient shall constantly monitor its performance under this Agreement to ensure that time schedules are being met and Scope of Work is being accomplished within specified time periods, and AGENDA ITF..,M No. j/~ / JUL 3 O 2OO2 Pg. ~ other performance goals are being achieved. Such review shall be made for each function or activity set forth in Attachments A and B to this Agreement. In addition, the Department will monitor the performance and financial management by the Recipient throughout the contract term to ensure timely completion of all tasks. In addition to reviews of audits conducted in accordance with OMB Circular A-133, as revised and Section 215.97, Florida Statutes (see "AUDIT REQUIREMENTS" below), monitoring procedures may include, but not be limited to, on-site visits by Department staff, limited scope auditS as defined by OMB Circular A-133, as revised, and/or other procedures. By entering into this Agreement, the Recipient agrees to comply and cooperate with any monitoring procedures/processes deemed appropriate by the Department. In the event that the Department determines that a limited scope audit of the Recipient is appropriate, the Recipient agrees to comply with any additional instructions provided by the Department to the Recipient regarding such audit. The Recipient further agrees to comply and cooperate with any inspections, reviews, investigations or audits deemed necessary by the Comptroller or Auditor General. In addition, the Department will monitor the performance and financial management by the Contractor throughout the contract term to ensure timely completion of all tasks. (8) .LIABILITY. (a) Unless Recipient is a State agency or subdivision, the Recipient shall be solely responsible to parties with whom it shall deal in carrying out the terms of this agreement, and shall save the Department harmless against all claims of whatever nature by third parties arising out of the performance of work under this agreement. For purposes of this agreement, Recipient agrees that it is not an employee or agent of the Department, but is an independent contractor. (b) Any Recipient who is a state agency or subdivision, as defined in Section 768.28, Fla. Stat., agrees to be fully responsible to the extent provided by Sectiot~ 768.28 Fla. Stat. for its negligent acts or omissions or tortious acts which result in claims or suits against the Department, and agrees to be tiable for any damages proximately caused by said acts or omissions. Nothing herein is intended to serve as a waiver of sovereign immunity by any Recipient to which sovereign immunity applies. Nothing herein shall be construed as consent by a state agency or subdivision of the State of Florida to be sued by third parties in any matter arising out of any contract. (9) DEFAULT; REMEDIES; TERMINATION. (a) If the necessary funds are not available to fund this Agreement as a result of action by Congress, the state Legislature, the Office of the Comptroller or the Office of Management and Budgeting, or if any of the following events occur ("Events of Default"), all obligations on the part of the Department to make any further payment of funds hereunder shall, if the Department so elects, terminate and the Department may, at its option, exercise any of its remedies set forth herein, but the Department may make any payments or parts of payments after the happening of any Events of Default without thereby waiving the right to exercise such remedies, and without becoming liable to make any further payment: 1. If any warranty or representation made by the Recipient in this Agreement or any previous Agreement with the Department shall at any time be false or misleading in any respect, or if the Recipient shall fail to keep, observe or perform any of the terms or covenants contained in this Agreement or any previous agreement with the Department and 'nas not cured such in timely fashion, or is unable or unwilling to meet its obligations thereunder; 2. If any material adverse change shall occur in the financial condition of the Recipient at any time during the term of this Agreement from the financial condition revealed in any JUL 3 0 2002 pg. ~ reports filed or to be filed with the Department, and the Recipient fails to cure said material adverse change within thirty (30) days from the time the date written notice is sent by the Department. 3. If any reports required by this Agreement have not been submitted to the Department or have been submitted with incorrect, incomplete or insufficient information; 4. If the Recipient has failed to perform and complete in timely fashion any of the services required under Attachment A (Compensation and Financial Reporting Requirements) and Attachment B (Scope of Work and Schedule of Payments) attached hereto. (b) Upon the happening of an Event of Default, then the Department may, at its option, upon thirty (30) calendar days prior written notice to the Recipient and upon the Recipient's failure to timely cure, exercise any one or more of the following remedies, either concurrently or consecutively, and the pursuit of any one of the following remedies shall not preclude the Department from pursuing any other remedies contained herein or otherwise provided at law or in equity: 1. Terminate this Agreement, provided that the Recipient is given at least thirty (30) days prior written notice of such termination. The notice shall be effective when placed in the United States mail, first class mail, postage prepaid, by registered or certified mail-return receipt requested, to the address set forth in paragraph (10) herein; 2. Commence an appropriate legal or equitable action to enforce performance of this Agreement; 3. W~thhold or suspend payment of all or any part of a request for payment; 4. Exercise any corrective or remedial actions, to include but not be limited to, requesting additional information from the Recipient to determine the rea'sons for or the extent of non- compliance or lack of performance, issuing a written warning to advise that more serious measures may be taken if the situation is not corrected, advising the Recipient to suspend, discontinue or refrain from incurring costs for any activities in question or requiring the Recipient to reimburse the Department for the amount of costs incurred for any items determined to be ineligible; 5. Exercise any other rights or remedies which may be otherwise available under law; (c) The Department may terminate this Agreement for cause upon such written notice as is reasonable under the circumstances. Cause shall include, but not be limited to, misuse of funds; fraud; lack of compliance with applicable rules, laws and regulations; failure to perform in a timely manner, and refusal by the Recipient to permit public access to any document, paper, letter, or other material subject to disclosure under Chapter 119, Fla. Stat.., as amended. (d) Suspension or termination constitutes final agency action under Chapter 120, Fla. _ Sta_._~t., as amended. Notification of suspension or termination shall include notice of administrative hearing rights and time frames. (e) In addition to any other remedies, the Recipient shall return to the Department any funds which were used for ineligible purposes under the program laws, rules, and regulations governing the use of the funds under the program. (f) This Agreement may be terminated by the written mutual consent of the parties. (g) Notwithstanding the above, the Recipient shall not be relieved of liability to the Department by virtue of any breach of Agreement by the Recipient. The Department may, to the extent AGENDA ITEM No. 1/. ,~' JUL 3 0 2002 Pg. authorized by law, withhold any payments to the Recipient for purpose of set-off until such time as the exact amount of damages due the Department from the Recipient is determined. (10) NOTICE AND CONTACT, (a) All notices provided under or pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing, either by hand delivery, or first class, certified mail, return receipt requested, to the Recipient's contact person. The Recipient is required to provide the name of a contact person and contact information as provided for in Attachment B, Section 1 (Scope of Work), Task 1. (b) In the event that a different contact person, address or telephone number is designated by the Recipient after execution of this Agreement, notice to the Department is required within 30 days and shall include the new contact's name, address, telephone number and E-mail address. (11) OTHER PROV SIONS; (a) The validity of this Agreement is subject to the truth and accuracy of all the information, representations, and materials submitted or provided by the Recipient in this Agreement, in any subsequent submission or response to Department request, or in any submission or response to fulfill the requirements of this Agreement, and such information, representations, and roaterials are incorporated by reference.' The lack of accuracy thereof or any material changes shall, at the option of the Department and with thirty (30) days written notice to the Recipient, cause the termination of this Agreement and the release of the Department from all its obligations to the Recipient. (b) This Agreement shall be construed under the laws of the State of Florida, and venue for any actions arising out of this Agreement shall lie in Leon County. If any provision hereof is in conflict with any applicable statute or rule, or is otherwise unenforceable, then such provision shall be deemed null and void to the extent of such conflict, and shall be deemed severable, but shall not invalidate any other provision of this Agreement. (c) No waiver by the Department of any right or remedy granted hereunder or failure to insist on strict performance by the Recipient shall affect or extend or act as a waiver of any other right or remedy of the Department hereunder, or affect the subsequent exercise of the same right or remedy by the Department for any further or subsequent default by the Recipient. Any power of approval or disapproval granted to the Department under the terms of this Agreement shall survive the terms and life of this Agreement as a whole. (d) The Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, any one of which may be taken as an original. (e) The Recipient agrees to comply with the Americans Wth Disabilities Act (Public Law 101-336, 42 U.S.C. Section 12101 et seq.), if applicable, which prohibits discrimination by public and private entities on the basis of disability in the areas of employment, public accommodations, transportation, State and local government services, and in telecommunications. (f) A person or affiliate who has been placed on the convicted vendor list following a conviction for a public entity crime or on the discriminatory vendor list may not submit a bid on a contract to provide any goods or services to a public entity, may not submit a bid on a contract with a public entity for the construction or repair of a public building or public work, may not submit bids on leases of real property to a public entity, may not be awarded or perform work as a contractor, supplier, subcontractor, or consultant under a contract with a public entity, and may not transact business with any public entity in AGENDA ITF_.,M 5 No. /~ ~ ~/' JUL 3 0 2002 Pg. ? excess of Category Two for a period of 36 months from the date of being placed on the convicted vendor list or on the discriminatory vendor list. (12) AUDIT REQUIREMENTS, (a) The Recipient agrees to maintain financial procedures and support documents, in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, to account for the receipt and expenditure of funds under this Agreement. (b) These records shall be available at all reasonable times for inspection, review, or audit by state personnel and other personnel duly authorized by the Department. "Reasonable" shall be construed according to circumstances, but ordinarily shall mean normal business hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., local time, Monday through Friday. (c) The Recipient shall also provide the Department with the records, reports or financial statements upon request for the purposes of auditing and monitoring the funds awarded under this Agreement. (d) If the Recipient is a nonstate entity as defined by Section 215.97, Fla. Stat.,.and in the event that the Recipient expends a total amount of State financial assistance equal to or in excess of $300,000 in any fiscal year of such Recipient, the Recipient must have a State single or project-specific audit for such fiscal year in accordance with Section 215.97, Fla. Stat.; applicable rules of the Executive Office of the Governor and the Comptroller; and Chapters 10.550 (local government entities) or 10.650 (nonprofit and for-profit organizations), Rules of the Auditor General. EXHIBIT 1 to this Agreement indicates State financial assistance awarded through the Department by this Agreement. In determining the State financial assistance expended in its fiscal year, the Recipient shall consider all sources of State financial assistance, including State funds received from the Department, other state agencies, and other nonstate entities. State financial assistance does not include Federal direct or pass-through awards and resources received by a nonstate entity for Federal program matching requirements. In connection with the audit requirements addressed in paragraph 12(d)above, the Recipient shall ensure that the audit complies with the requirements of§215.97(7), Fla. Stat...This includes submission of a reporting package as defined by §215.97(2)(d), Fla. Stat. and Chapters 10.550 (local governmental entities) or 10.650 (nonprofit and for-profit organizations), Rules of the Auditor General. If the Recipient expends less than $300,000 in State financial assistance in its fiscal year, an audit conducted in accordance with the provisions of §215.97, Fla. Stat, .is not required. In the event that the Recipient expends less than $300,000 in state financial assistance in its fiscal year and elects to have an audit conducted in accordance with the provisions of §215.97, Fla. StatLthe cost of the audit must be paid from the nonstate entity's resources (i.e., the cost of such an audit must be paid from the Recipient's resources obtained from other than State entities). (e) Report Submission 1. The annual financial audit report shall include all management letters and the Recipient's response to all findings, including corrective actions to be taken. 2. The annual financial audit report shall include a schedule of financial assistance specifically identifying all Agreement and other revenue by sponsoring agency and Agreement number. AGENDA ~EM No., /¢~'/ JUL :3 0 2002 3. Copies of financial reporting packages required under this Paragraph 12 shall be submitted by or on behalf of the Recipient directly.to each of the following: The Department of Community Affairs at each of the following addresses: Department of Community Affairs Office of Audit Services 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 and Department of Community Affairs Division of Emergency Management Bureau of Compliance Planning and Support 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 The Auditor General's Office at the following address: Auditor General's Office Room 401, Claude Pepper Building ; 111 West Madison Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1450 4. Any reports, management letter, or other information required to be submitted to the Department pursuant to this Agreement shall be submitted timely in accordance with OMB Circular A-133, Florida Statutes, and Chapters 10.550 (local governmental entities) or 10.650 (nonprofit and for-profit organizations), Rules of the Auditor General, as applicable. 5. Recipients, when submitting financial reporting packages to the Department for audits done in accordance with OMB Circular A-133 or Chapters 10.550 (local governmental entities) or 10.650 (nonprofit and for-profit organizations), Rules of the Auditor General, should indicate the date that the reporting package was delivered to the Recipient in correspondence accompanying the reporting package. (f) The Recipient shall retain sufficient records demonstrating its compliance with the terms of this agreement for a period of five years from the date the audit report is issued, and shall allow the Department, or its designee, the Comptroller, or Auditor General access to such records upon request. The recipient shall ensure that audit working papers are made available to the Department, or its designee, the Comptroller, or Auditor General upon request for a period of five years from the date the audit report is issued, unless extended in writing by the Department. (g) In the event the audit shows that the entire funds disbursed hereunder, or any portion thereof, were not spent in accordance with the conditions of this Agreement, the Recipient shall be held liable for reimbursement to the Department of all funds not spent in accordance with these applicable regulations and Agreement provisions within thirty (30) days after the Department has notified the Recipient of such non-compliance. AGENDA ITEM No. /z ,~' / _ ? JUL 3 0 2002 F'go (~' (h) The Recipient shall retain all financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and any other documents pertinent to this contract for a period of five years after the date of submission of the final expenditures report. However, if litigation or an audit has been initiated prior to the expiration of the five-year period, the records shall be retained until the litigation or audit findings have been resolved. (i) The Recipient shall have all audits completed in accordance with § 215.97, Fla. Stat. by an independent certified public accountant (IPA) who shall either be a certified public accountant or a public accountant licensed under Chapter 473, Fla. Stat. The IPA shall state that the audit complied with the applicable provisions noted above. (13) SUBCONTRACTS. (a) If the Recipient subcontracts any or all of the work required under this Agreement, a copy of the executed subcontract must be forwarded to the Department within thirty (30) days after execution of the subcontract. The Recipient agrees to include in the subcontract that (i) the subcontractor is bound by all applicable state and federal laws and regulations, and (ii) the subcontractor shall hold the Department and Recipient harmless against all claims of whatever nature arising out of the subcontractor's performance ol'work under this Agreement, to the extent allowed and required by law. (14) TERMS AND CONDITIONS. The Agreement contains all the terms and conditions agreed upon by the parties. (15) ATTACHMENTS. (a) All attachments to this Agreement are incorporated as if set out fully herein. (b) In the event of any inconsistencies or conflict between the language of this Agreement and the attachments hereto, the language of such attachments shall be controlling, but only to the extent of such conflict or inconsistency. (c) This Agreement has the following attachments: Exhibit 1 - Funding Sources Attachment A - Compensation and Financial Reporting Requirements Attachment B - Scope of Work and Schedule of Payments Attachment C - County Facilities Listing Attachment D - Financial Invoice Attachment E - Copyright, Patent and Trademark (16) FUNDING/CONSIDERATION. (a) This is a fixed fee agreement. As consideration for perfo~tlee~of work rendered under this Agreement, the Department agrees to pay a fixed fee of up to.$7,947.00. P~ayment will be made in accordance with the provisions of Attachment A (Compensation'aP~LEjJ!_a_r[cial Reporting Requirements). An invoice shall be submitted with each deliverable which is in detail sufficient for a proper preaudit and postaudit thereof. (b) The sole intent of this Agreement is to provide financial assistance to the Recipient to support the conduct of site-specific hazards analyses and hazardous materials emergency management activities. It is therefore required that all expenditures paid from this fund be directly related to hazardous materials preparedness, response, recovery or mitigation activities. Contract funds AGENDA ITEM No. //. ,~ / 8 JUL 3 0 2002 Pg. /(~ are not required to be expended within the contract period. Any payments received after termination of the Agreement shall be considered payments for work performed pursuant to the Agreement. (17) STANDARD CONDITIONS. The Recipient agrees to be bound by the following standard conditions: (a) The State of Florida's performance and obligation to pay under this Agreement is contingent upon an annual appropriation by the Legislature, and subject to any modification in accordance with Chapter 216, Fla. StaL. or the Florida Constitution. (b) The Department of Community Affairs reserves the right to unilaterally cancel this Agreement for refusal by the Recipient to allow public access to all documents, papers, letters or other material subject to the provisions of Chapter 119, Fla. Stat., and made or received by the Recipient in conjunction with this Agreement. (c) If the Recipient is allowed to temporarily invest any advances of funds under this Agreement, any interest income shall either be returned to the Department or be applied against the Department's obligation to pay the contract amount. (d) The State of Florida will not intentionally award publicly-funded contracts to any contractor who knowingly employs unauthorized alien workers, constituting a violation of the employment provisions contained in 8 U.S.C. Section 1524a(e) [Section 274A(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act ("INA")]. The Department shall consider the employment by any contractor of unauthorized aliens a violation of Section 274A(e) of the INA. Such violation by the Recipient of the employment provisions contained in Section 274A(e) of the INA shall be grounds for unilateral cancellation of this Agreement by the Department. (18) STATE LOBBYING PROHIBITION. No funds or other resources received from the Department in connection with this Agreement may be used directly or indirectly to influence legislation or any other official action by the Florida Legislature or any state agency. (19) COPYRIGHT, PATENT AND TRADEMARK. ANY AND ALL PATENT RIGHTS ACCRUING UNDER OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF THIS AGREEMENT ARE HEREBY RESERVED TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA, ANY AND ALL COPYRIGHTS ACCRUING UNDER OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF THIS AGREEMENT ARE HEREBY TRANSFERRED BY THE RECIPIENT TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA. (a) If the Recipient brings to the performance of this Agreement a pre-existing patent or copyright, the Recipient shall retain all rights and entitlements to that pre-existing patent or copyright unless the Agreement provides otherwise. (b) If any discovery or invention arises or is developed in the course of or as a result of work or services performed under this Agreement, or in any way connected herewith, the Recipient shall refer the discovery or invention to the Department for a determination whether patent protection will be sought in the name of the State of Florida. Any and all patent rights accruing under or in connection with the performance of this Agreement are hereby reserved to the State of Florida. In the event that any books, manuals, films, or other copyrightable material are produced, the Recipient shall notify the Department. Any and all copyrights accruing under or in connection with the performance under this Agreement are hereby transferred by the Recipient to the State of Florida. AGENDA ITi~M No. JUL 3 0 2002 (c) Within thirty (30) days of execution of this Agreement, the Recipient shall disclose all intellectual properties relevant to the performance of this Agreement which he or she knows or should know could give rise to a patent or copyright. The Recipient shall retain all rights and entitlements to any pre-existing intellectual property which is to disclosed. Failure to disclose will indicate that no such property exists. The Department shall then, under Paragraph (b), have the right to all patents and copyrights which occur during performance of the Agreement. (20) LEGAL AUTHORIZATION The Recipient certifies with respect to this Agreement that it possesses the legal authority to receive the funds to be provided under this Agreement and that, if applicable, its governing body has authorized, by resolution or otherwise, the execution and acceptance of this Agreement with all covenants and assurances contained herein. The Recipient also certifies that the undersigned possesses the authority to legally execute and bind Recipient to the terms of this Agreement. (2 I) VENDOR PAYMENTS Pursuant to Section 215.422, Fla. Stat., the Department shall issue payments to vendors Within 40 days after receipt of an acceptable invoice and receipt, inspection, and acceptance of goods and/or services provided in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Agreement. Failure to issue the warrant within 40 days shall result in the Department paying interest at a rate as established pursuant to Section 55.03(1) Fla. Stat. The interest penalty shall be paid within 15 days after issuing the warrant. Vendors experiencing problems obtaining timely payment(s) from a state agency may receive assistance by contacting the Vendor Ombudsman at (850) 488-2924 or by calling the State Comptroller's Hotline at 1-800-848-3792. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this contract to be executed by their undersigned officials as duly authorized. RECIPIENT: COLLIER COUNTY STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS By: By: James N. Coletta, Chairman Signature Collier County Board of Commissioners Date: Date: FED// 59-6000058 ATTEST: Dwight E. Brock, Clerk (Deputy Clerk) Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency - (/~---S'S~t County Attorney No. /r ~' JUL 3 0 2002 pg. /c~ EXHIBIT - 1 STATE RESOURCES AWARDED TO THE RECIPIENT PURSUANT TO THIS AGREEMENT CONSIST OF THE FOLLOWING: SUBJECT TO SECTION 215.97, FLORIDA STATUTES: Department of Community Affairs, Florida Hazardous Materials Planning and Prevention Program, Catalog of State Financial Assistance Number in the amount of $7,947.00. COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO STATE RESOURCES AWARDED PURSUANT TO THIS AGREEMENT ARE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorizafion Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C.s. 11001, et seq. (SARA). 2. Florida HaT~rdous Materials Emergency Response and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1988, Chapter 252, Part II, Florida Statutes REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY AGENDA I~'EM No, /~/,,' JUL 3 0 2002 Pg.. /~ Attachment A COMPENSATION AND FINANCIAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS A. Upon execution of this Agreement, the Recipient shall be compensated for tasks completed in accordance with the Scope of Work and Schedule of Payments, which are incorporated in this Agreement as Attachment B, except as provided herein. B. The payment of the percentages of the fixed fee amount will be made on a performance basis in accordance with the percentage of work tasks submitted, except that the final 25 percent will not be released until the final work product is completed, submitted, and determined to be acceptable by the Department. All hazards analyses shall be received by the Department not later than February 1,2003 except that a later date may be agreed upon in writing by both parties to this Agreement. Absent any extenuating circumstances, and except as otherwise provided in this Agreement work submitted after March 1,2003 will not be accepted, reviewed or compensated. The Department will be the sole authority for determining extenuating circumstances and granting extensions to the work submission deadline. C. Each request for payment shall be initiated by the Department upon receipt of an acceptable Financial Invoice (Attachment D). The Recipient shall submit an Attachment D, for payment that is commensurate with the percentage of hazards analyses submitted. The Recipient shall submit an Attachment D, for the twenty-five (25) percent final payment, to the Department with required corrections to the hazards analyses within forty-five (45) days of the contract termination date. The Department will release the final payment only upon a determination that all hazards analyses are complete and acceptable, an approved copy of the hazards analyses has been sent to the applicable Local Emergency Planning Committee and notification has been made to all facilities and response agencies that the hazards analysis information is available upon request. The Recipient's .huthorized official shall sign the Financial Invoice (Attachment D). No request will be processed until the Financial Invoice is correct and supported by the product which meets the requirements of this Agreement. D. In the event that the Recipient submits less than one hundred (100) percent of the hazards analyses on February 1, 2003, then the payment due may be reduced by an amount commensurate with the number of omitted hazards analyses and the number of days late, if any. E. If the Department finds that the Recipient is not in compliance with the terms of this Agreement, or is not in compliance with any other grant program administered by the Department, then without waiving its right to terminate this Agreement, the Department may, with written notice, withhold payment until the Recipient is in compliance with and is performing satisfactorily under this Agreement or the applicable requirement of any other grant program administered by the Department. The notice will be sent by Certified Mail, with return receipt requested, to the designated contact person. Noncompliance under this section includes, but is not limited to, the Recipient's failure to submit timely, accurate and complete products required under this Agreement. AGEND,~JTEM No. /~/~! JUL 3 0 2002 Attachment B SCOPE OF WORK AND SCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS PURPOSE. Submission of completed hazards analyses that comply with the hazardous materials site-specific hazards analysis criteria outlined in this Attachment. The primary guidance document is the "Technical Guidance for Hazards Analysis," All hazards analyses shall be consistent with the provisions of this document. Any variation from the procedures outlined in this document must be requested in writing by certified mail, return receipt requested and approved by the Department. I. SCOPE OF WORK_ TASK 1: Coordination of Activities. The following includes, but is not limited to, activities to be performed under this Agreement: A. Notification of the Recipient's contact person, address, telephone number, E-mail address and software utilized to the Department by September 1,2002_. B. Submission of one completed hazards analysis by September 1 2002 for review of consistency with the established planning criteria. C. participation in a technical assistance training session provided by the Department is necessary to fulfill the Scope of Work. The Department reserves the right to waive this requirement. D. Submit a list of facilities believed to have present Extremely Hazardous Substances (EHSs) as designated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in quantities at or above the Threshold Planning Quantity (TPQ), but have not reported to the State Emergency Response Commission (SERC). E. Notify response agencies within the District of the availability of hazards analyses information and make that information available upon request. F. Notify Section 302 facilities of the availability of hazards analysis information and make that information available upon request. G. Provide to the Local Emergency Planning Committee a copy of the approved Hazards Analyses update. H. Ensure that the Hazards Analysis information is reflected in the county Local Mitigation Strategy. AGENDA IT~.M JUL 3 0 2002. 14 pg. TASK 2: Review and Update of Hazards Analyses A. Review and update hazards analyses for all facilities listed in Attachment C, which have reported to the SERC that they have present those specific EHSs designated by the EPA in quantities at or above the TPQ. It is required that each Attachment C facility be contacted by on-site visit to ensure accuracy of hazards analysis. Each facility hazards analysis must include, but is not limited to, the following items: 1. Facility Information a. Facility name and address Provide both physical address (no Post Office Box) and mailing address, if different. Identify any discrepancies regarding facility name and/or address compared to the Attachment C listing. b. Facility Identification SERC Code and geographic coordinates (latitude and longitude in degrees, minutes and seconds). c. Facility Emergency Coordinator Provide the name, title and telephone number (include 24-hour) of the designated facility emergency coordinator. d. Transportation Routes List the main routes used within the County to transport chemicals to and from the facility. e. Evacuation Routes Based on wind direction from the North, South, East and West, identify the route(s) from the facility to exit the Vulnerable Zone (VZ). h. Historical Accident Record Describe any past releases or incidents that have occurred at each facility. Include date, time, chemical name, quantity and number of persons injured or killed (This information is available from the facility). If it is determined that a facility does not have a historical accident record, that shall be noted. 2. Hazard Identification a. Chemical identities Provide proper chemical name, CAS number and natural physical state of each EHS present at the facility at any given time according to exhibit C of the Technical Guidance for Hazards Analysis. AGENDA ITle~ No.. /~' JUL 3 0 2002 b. Maximum quantity on-site Express in exact pounds (not range codes) the maximum quantity of each EHS the facility would have on-site at any given time. c. Amount in largest container or interconnected containers Express in pounds the amount of each EHS stored in the largest container or interconnected containers (this is the release amount used to determine the Vulnerable Zone). d. Type and design of storage container or vessel Indicate the storage method of each EHS, i.e., drum, cylinder, tank, and their respective capacities (It is helpful to indicate system types such as manifold versus vacuum as well). e. Nature of the hazard Describe the type of hazard most likely to accompany a spill or release of each EHS, i.e., fire, explosion. 3. Vulnerability Analysis a. Extent of the Vulnerable Zone Identify the estimated geographical area that may be subject to concentrations of an airborne EHS at levels that could cause irreversible acute health effects or death to human populations within the area following an accidental release. Plot that geographical area on a map indicating the Vulnerable Zone for each EHS present at the facility at or above the TPQ. Enter the facility name, facility SERC code, chemical(s) name and vulnerable zone(s) radius on vulnerable zone map(s). b. Estimate Facility Population Provide an estimate of the maximum number of employees present at the facility at any given time. c. Critical Facilities Identify each critical facility and the facility's maximum expected occupancy, within each VZ, which are essential to emergency response or house special needs populations (schools, day cares, public safety facilities, hospitals, etc.). d. Estimated Exposed Popular!on. ' Provide an estimate of the maximum possible population (including facility employees, critical facilities etc.) within the VZ(s) that would be affected in a worst case release for each EHS on site. ! - AGENDA I~'EM No, I JUL 30 2002 4. Risk Analysis a. Probability of release Rate the probability of release as Low, Moderate, or High based on observations at the facility. Considerations should include history of previous incidents and current conditions and controls at the facility. b. Severity of consequences of human injury Rate the severity of consequences if an actual release were to occur. c.Severity of consequences of damage to property Rate the potential damage to the facility, nearby buildings and infrastructure if an actual release were to occur. d. Severity of consequences of environmental exposure Rate the potential damage to the surrounding environmentally sensitive areas, natural habitat and wildlife if an actual release were to occur. B. Identify those facilities in Attachment C for which a hazards analysis was not submitted. Supporting documentation must be provided with a list to account for the facilities for which a hazards analysis was not completed. In addition to the SERC Code Identification, supporting documentation should indicate: 1. Facility has closed or is no longer in business. 2. Facility is not physically located in the County (indicate appropriate County location, if known). 3. Facility does not have EHSs on-site or EHSs are below TPQ. These facilities require: a. A Statement of Determination from the facility representative for the previous reporting year; or b. A letter from the facility representative fully explaining why the EHSs are not now present at or above TPQ and a date when the EHS$ were removed from the facility. TASK 3: On-Site Visits A. Conduct a detailed on-site visit for all of the facilities listed in Attachment C, to confirm the accuracy and completeness of information in the hazards analysis (Task 2). B. Submit a site plan map with the location of each EHS at the facility and in sufficient detail to identify: 1. Location of major building(s) ~ 'No,AGENDA_/¢ ,r~IT~M/ 2. Location of container(s) of EHS(s) / JUL 3 0' 2002 3. Location of major street(s) and entrance(s) 4. North arrow and scale, if determined, or not to scale C. Provide the date of the on-site visit. TASK 4: Final Work Product. Submission of one (1) copy of completed hazards analyses (hard copy or electronic format) for all facilities listed in Attachment C in a format acceptable to the Department for review and approval. Upon final approval of all analyses submitted, a complete and corrected second copy shall be sent to the Local Emergency Planning Committee. A copy of the transmittal letter shall be submitted to the Department. Submit documentation that all subject facilities and response agencies have been notified of the availability of the hazards analyses information within the time frames provided in this Agreement. II. SCHEDULE OF PAYMENT_S A. The first payment of twenty (20) percent of the fixed fee amount is payable upon receipt of items listed in Section 1, Task 1 of this Attachment, which are due on or before September 1,200_2. B. After the initial payment, the payment percentage may be made on a performance basis that ~ is commensurable with the percentage of hazards analyse~ for facilities appearing on Attachment C submitted and approved as indicated on Attachment D, Financial Invoice. All hazards analyses shall be received by the Department not later than February 1, 2003. except that a later date may be agreed upon in writing by both parties to this Agreement. Absent any extenuating circumstances, and except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, work submitted after March 1, 2003. will not be accepted, reviewed or compensated. C. Twenty-five (25) percent of the fixed fee amount will be released when the final work product is completed and determined to be acceptable by the Department, a copy of the transmittal letter confirming that an approved copy of the hazards analyses has been sent to the Local Emergency Planning Committee, and documentation that all facilities for which a hazards analysis was conducted and response agencies have been notified of the availability of the hazards analyses information. This should be completed no later than June 1, 2003.. AGENDA ITEM J jUL30 200z- Attachment C COUNTY FACILITIES LISTING AGENDA ITEM No. tZ~ ! . JUL 3 0 2002 Attachment D FINANCIAL INVOICE FOR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS HAZARDS ANALYSIS UPDATE RECIPIENT: AGREEMENT ' # COST CLASSIFICATIONS AMOUNT AMOUNT APPROVED REQUESTED BY THE BY THE RECIPIENT DEPARTMENT 1. Contact and Timeline (20% Max.) $ $ 2. Hazards Analyses (55% Max.) $ $ 3. Final Work Product completed $ $ (25% Max) TOTAL AMOUNT $ $' (To be completed by the Department) I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief the billed costs are in accordance with the terms of the Agreement. Signature of Authorized Official/Title Date TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE PAID AS OF THIS INVOICE $ AUTHORIZED BY. AGENDA I'[EM No. /,'-~ / JUL 3 0 2002 Attachment E CopyriRht, Patent and Trademark (a) If the Recipient brings to the performance of this Agreement a pre-existing patent or copyright, the Recipient shall retain all rights and entitlements to that pre-existing patent or copyright unless the Agreement provides otherwise. (b) If any discovery or invention arises or is developed in the course of or as a result of work or services performed under this Agreement, or in any way connected herewith, the Recipient shall refer the discovery or invention to the Department for a determination whether patent protection will be sought in the name of the State of Florida. Any and all patent rights accruing under or in connection with the performance of this Agreement are hereby reserved to the State of Florida. In the event that any books, manuals, films, or other copyrightable material are produced, the Recipient shall notify the Department. Any and all copyrights accruing under or in connection with the performance under this Agreement are hereby transferred by the Recipient to the State of Florida. (c) W~thin thirty (30) days of execution of this Agreement, the Recipient shall disclose all intellectual properties relevant to the performance of this Agreement which he or she knows or should know could give rise to a patent or copyright. The Recipient shall retain all rights and entitlements to any pre-existing intellectual property which is so disclosed. Failure to disclose will indicate that no such property exists. The Department shall then, under Paragraph (b), have the right to all patents and copyrights which occur during performance of the Agreement. AGENDAJTEM No. JUL 3 O 2002 Pg. AGENDA ITEM JUL 3 ~ 2002 AGENDA IT. EM NO.__ /~'~/ AGENDA ITEM No. /,'~' / JUL 3 Pg._~~-~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE OCHOPEE FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT APPLICATION FOR A MATCHING (50150) GRANT OFFERED BY THE FLORIDA DIVISION OF FORESTRY IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,974.50 AND APPROVE THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS OBJECTIVE: To obtain Board of County Commissioner's approval of an application for a Volunteer Fire Assistance Matching (50/50) Grant for the purchase of 800 MHZ portable radios and, should the grant be awarded, approval of the necessary budget amendments. CONSIDERATION: For the past twenty-four years, the Ochopee Fire Control District has been awarded a Volunteer Fire Assistance Grant from the Florida Division of Forestry. This year, the Division of Forestry has set a high priority on communication equipment and the Ochopee Fire Control District wishes to purchase three (3) portable 800 MHZ portable radios and necessary accessory equipment by utilizing this matching (50/50) grant program. FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost of the 800 MHZ radios and equipment is $7,974.50 with the cost split 50/50 between the Division of Forestry and the Ochopee Fire Control District. The Fire District's share of $3,987.25 will be funded from the Ochopee Fire Control Reserves for Contingencies, Fund 146. If the application is successful, budget amendments will be necessary to: l) recognize and appropriate $3,987.25 in revenue and 2) transfer $3,987.25 from Reserves for Contingencies to Fund 118, Emergency Management and Fire Grants. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no Growth Management impact. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners authorize the Chairman to sign the Florida Division of Forestry Volunteer Fire Assistance Grant application and approve the budget amendments needed upon award of the grant. Chief Paul Wilson, O_chopee Fire Control Disr APPROVED B~ ., · - Ke~ F. Pineau, Interim Emergency Services Administrator AGEND~ ITE~I~ i JUL 3 0 200 [ t~'LLIKIDA DEFAI< I'MENT OF AGRIC U LTEtLE AND CONSUMER SERVICES DIVISION OF FORESTRY VOLUNTEER FIRE ASSISTANCE GRANT APPLICATION LEGAL NAM E: FO*M OF OP. GANEATION: (Municipal, Fire District, Non-Profik County) Collier County Board of Commissioners Ochopee Fire Control District ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 25 IF COUNTY, LIST VFD'S BENEFITING FROM GI:L-\NT: CITY: Ochopee F1. 34141 STATE: ZIP COUNTY: CO] I 'i~_F COUNTY ;: EMPLOYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (EIN) CURRENT COOPER,\T~T AGREEMENT WITH DOF~ YES X NO__ IS FIRE DEPARTMENT LOCATED IN AN INCORPOR.,XTED TOWN? yes DISTANCE OF CLOSEST MUTUAL AID FIR.E DEPARTMEN'T: IF YES. NAME OFTOWN: Eve~qlades City NAME OF FlEE DEPARTMENT: POPUL4TION OF TO%~q4: 500 }QNS APPLIC..\NT RECEIVED GRANT FULNDS FROM ANY SOURCE PROTECTED AREA: EST. POPULATION 3,©00 S'.ZEi,.]©O sG. TI{EPASTI2.,.O, iT,;b. YES NO mrle IF %'ES, FROM NUMBER OF FIREFIGHTERS: PAID 12 VOLUNTEER 17 ,\MOUNT: S NO. OF INCIDENTS PAST YEAR: WILDLANDFIRE 42 OTHER 411 LIST TOTAL FUNDS RECEIVED FP, OM OTHER TAXING AUTHORITIES NU:dBER OF FIREFIGHTERS CERTIFIED AS WiLDLAND FiREFiO[{TER i 9 SUCH ,\S Cn'C C0¥:; rY. TAXING DISTRICTS (Past 12 WILDLAND FIREFIGHTER Il ..\.MOUNT $ LIST OF FIREFIGHTING VEHICLES: TYPE ), ', -'d< E~' R ,MODEL ?UMP CAPACITY (GP:.I) [ WATER CAPACITY (GAL.) Mini-?umper 1992 GMC 5©0GPM 5OO Attack Truck 1981 SuotlEsda-l~ S2~27PD'i ,. 250 1000 Gal Pumper 1985 cab_Q,z.e~ ]OaOGDM ! 1000 1000 Gal Pumper 1977 AJ4C 325GP~,1 I '1000 ESTIM,',TED GRANT FUNDD;G KEQUEST k:ST OF EQUIPMENT OR SL:?PLIES TO PURCHASE WFFH GRANT FUiNDS' i'E D;2 P.-\.. S NL'MSNR [ DEE. C kI')-FlON AMOUNT ?,ai,L[C..\~'r is 3,987.25 ~nO~e~aSTGRP ' COUNt',' [ s NA --- '~ ~i~-~IYnit RaDld,C~aroer 3 beacner ~ase w-/~elc £oop 2~TD'i35..UO- iNm~:) s NA .... } prog[anmzng 112.50 TOTAL [S 7,974.50 __ ] ~hi?p~ng ,% Handling 12.50 (F;>'::rainot more than50% of to',EI. Apphcznt at least J0%% o: :ota[ - up lo 4055 in kind s:,"','~ces and at lea.st IO*/g matchm§ funds.) \,~,'e understand that this is a 50 perct'nt maximum cost-marc ?:osram (Cooperative Fo:::.;rr} ,.Bsistanz¢ .,\c: o:' 1975, PL 95-313). and that funds on deposit and in-kind contributions up to 50 percent of the actual purchase price of thc it;::ns approscd ,.'.ill bc c~m',mitt;:d to our prop:ct. '10 THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BEL:EF. ALL DATA IN THIS APPLICATION ARE TRUE AND CORRECT THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE APPL'.CA:;T HAS DULY AUTHORIZED THIS DOCUMEbFI;. [ T>'Ix Name ofAmhorized RepresenU. nve } Title '[c;:7. non¢ Number I James N. :'Coletta i Chairman ~941 ) 695 4114 i of Authorized Representanv¢ Da:;: Signetl and Submitted S~gnamr~. OMB Approval No. 0348-0040 ASSURANCES - NON-CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 15 minutes per response, including time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection cf information. Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this coIIection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to the O~ce of Management and Budget, Pape~'ork Reduction Project (0348-0040), Washington, DC 20503. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR COMPLETED FORM TO THE OFFICE O~ MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET. SEND IT TO THE ADDRESS PROVIDED BY THE SPONSORING AGENCY. NOTE: Certain of these assLJrances may not be applicable to your proiect or program. If you have questions, please contact the awarding agency. Further, certain Federal awarding agencies may require applicants to certiCy to additional assurances. If such is the case, you will be notified. As the duly authorized representative of the applicant, ] ce~iry that the applicant: 1. Has the legal authority to apply for Federal assis',anoe Act o~ 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. §794), which and the institutional, managerial and financial capability prohibits discrimination on the basis of handicaps; (d) (including funds su~cient to pay the non-Federal share ti'~e Age Discrimination Act of 197:5, as amended (42 of project cost)to ensure proper planning, management U.S.C. §§6101~6107), which prohibits discrimination and completion of the prcieot des::ribed in this on the basis of age; (e) the Dru9 Abuse Office and application. Treatmenl Act of 1972 (P.L. 92-255), as amended, re!atin9 to r~ondiscrimination on the basis o1: drug 2. Will give the awarding agency, t:~e Comptroller Goner'al aause; (,'} the Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and of the United States and, if approprio'.e, the SI~te, A,!cohclism Prevention, Treatment and Rehabilitation through any authorized representative, a:cess to and ,:,ct o," 1970 (P.L. 91-616), as amended, relating to the right to examine ail records, books, papers, or nondiscrlmination on the basis cf alcohol abuse or documents related to the av,'ard; ar, d v. ill ostab:!sh a ~Icohclism; (g) §§523 and 527 of the Public Health proper accounting system in accordance v,i~h ger-era'.ly Service Act of 1912 (42 U.S.C. §§290 dd-3 and 290 ce- accepted accounting standards cr agone'.,' dirocti','es. 3), as amended, relating to confidentia[ity'of alcohol and drug abuse patient records; (h) Title VIII of the 3. Will establish safeguards to prohibit em;',oyees from Civil Rights ,:,ct of 1968 (42 U.S.C. §§3601 et seq.), as using their positions for a purpose t,nat cgnsti'.u:es or 3men-Jori, ra'.~',:,ng to nondiscrimination in the sale, presents the appearance of persona: or cr::gniz;-.:ig::al rental or ;:~ancing of housing; (i) any other ¢ ~¢; .......· .... ,., F. rovis[ons in ,,h~ specific statute(s) conflict of interest, or personal gain. . .3 .................. n ,.ruder ,.,,,h!:h ~-::;F.i;cation for Federal assistance is being ~ ....... = ,';:ace; c,c:;, (i) :'~e requirements of any other 4. Will initiate and complete the work ,.v,:n?; time frame after receipt of apFro','~i c~ :"-a a',v::rc;ng rsondisc:;m::~,s::cn statute(s) whlch may apply to the agency. 5. Will comply with the Intergovernmental Persz:',ne! Ac'. of 7. '.','~r,I Or has already complied, with the 1970 (42 U.S.C. §§4728M763) rela:h",g :3 pres'stiLted ,-equ!r::,~.ems o~ Tit!es !1 and !~1 of the Uniform standards for merit systems for p, rogr3m3 ¢..:~ded J~::gr ~e'~ocL::ig:: '¢~:-'~° and Real Prope,'-tv Acquisition -: ,'*' ~ ~ for one of the 19 statutes or rcgvlatio~,s -~ ~:~ in r o~,.~.~ ,&:: of 1970 (P.L. ~1-G45) which provide Appendix A of OPM's Standards for a Merit Syst:m of fair 3:~d eq,.;;:3318 tree,men,' of persons displaced or Personnel Administration (5 C.F.R. 90.3, S'd'.':.p3r~ F). v,'hoso property is acq',:ired as a result of Federal or i.oder::'!y-assis:ed programs. These requirements apply 6. Will comply with all Federal st~:u~os re!atmg to ',o a',! in:o:~:sts in real prope~y acquired for projec~ nondiscrimination. These include but are F.o~. limited to: ~)urpc~:es re,seedless of Federal par!icipation in (a) TitJe VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ,',PL. 83-352) purchases. which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race. co!or or national origin; (b) Title IX of ~he Educat;on 8. ',Vi',l cern?)', as applicable, with provisions of the Amendments of 1972, as amended (20 U.S.C. §§1681- Hatch Ac~ (5 U.S.C. §§1501-1508 and 7324-7328) 1683, and 1685-1686), which prohibits discrimination on which [im:t the political activities of employees whose the basis of sex; (c) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation principal em~.loyment activities are funded in whole or in part with Federal funds. " : Standard Form 424B (Rev. 7-97) Previous Edition Usable Authorized for Local Reproduction Prescribed by OMB Circular A-102 AGENDA~TEM ..,. ..;.: . No,... ~,,,,- -.~ .. - :,~ '-'.._.: . -,-~-;r~ '..- ,---,e-.: . ...r~. ' ' ~'..,"'t:.~.::.%-..'..-t .:'-';-: · ."-'. .'' ',;-'.;.'t j',',,;%::'v:;~'.; ', .' .: :.: .::' ................ .. ,- .... ;,¢,;~...~,....__:::_ .,-,., Pg._ 9. Wili comply, as applicable, with the provisions of the Davis- 12. Will comply wilh the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 (16 U.S.C. §§1271 et seq.) related to protecting Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. §§276a to 276a-7), the Copeland Act (40 U.S.C. §276c and 18 U.S.C. §874), and the Contract components or potential components of the national Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. §§327- wild and scenic rivers system. 333), regarding labor standards for federally-assisted 13. Will assist the awarding agencyin assuring compliance construction subagreements, with Section 105 et' the National Histodc Preservation Act of 1966, 'as amended (16 U.S.C. §470), EO 11593 10. Will comply, if applicable, with flood insurance purchase requirements of Section 102(a) of the Flood Disaster (identification and protection of historic properties), and the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of Protection Act of 1973 (P.L 93-234) which requires 1974(16U.S.C.§§469a-1 etseq.). recipients in a special flood hazard area to participate in the program and to purchase flood insurance if the total cost of 14. Will comply ,.riCh P.L 93-348 regarding the protection of insurable construction and acquisition is $10,000 or more. human subiects involved in research, development, and 11. Will comply with environmental standards which 'may be re!a'.ed activities supported by this award of assistance. prescribed pursuant to the following: (a) institution of environmental quality control measures under the"Nadonal 15. Vz'iii comp;y v,'ith the Laborator! Anima~ Welfar--. Act of Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (P.L. 91-190) acd 1965 (P.L. 89-544, as amended, 7 U.S.C. §§2131 et Executive Order (EO) 11514; (b) nctificalion of violating seq.) pertaining to the care, handling, and treatment of facilities pursuant to EO 11735; (c) protection of wetlands warm blooded animals held for research, teaching, or pursuant to EO 11990; (d) evaluation of flood hazards in other ac:',vities supported by this award of assistance. floodplains in accordance with EO 11988,; (e) assurance of project consistency with the approved State management 16. Wi;l comply v,'i[h the Lead-Based Pain~ Poisoning Prevention Act (42 U.S.C. §§4801 et seq.) which program developed under the Coastal Zone Mano;ement, Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. §§1451 et seq.); (0 cocfo:mibj of prohibits ,',he use of Iead-based paint in construction or reh~bil;t~tion c,f residence structures. Federal actions to State (Clean Air) ira;lamentation under Section 176(c) of the Clea,n Air Ac~ of lg, 55, as amended (42 U.S.C. §§7401 et seq.); (g) prote.~ticn or 17. v,'i;', c~.~se, to be peficrmed the required financial and underground sources of drinking water under '"~ Safe compliance audits in accordance with the Single Audit .... ~ A ......... s of 1996 and OMB Circular ~No. A-133, ~3-:.o), "Audits ;.' c,-.=~ Local Governments, and Non-Profit Ddnking Water Act of 1974, as amended (P.L. ~' '~ ................... and, (h) protection of endangered s~.ec!es uncer the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as ,?.me~ded (P.L. 93- Or~aniz~:;o:-,s." 205). i $. ",Vi:', co.m~;7 v.;'.h a'.l a2?,icable requirements of ail other Federai !;',rs, ,-¢xe:uti','e orders, reguta[ions, and policies SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED CERTIFYING OFFICIAL IColl. ier County Board of Commissioners ~_u ~1Chairman -~~T ORGANIZATION ~ IDATF-' Ochopee Fire Control District Standard Form 47.48 .(Rev. 7-97) Back Approved a..s to form & ieg?l s?.f.~ien~;y AGENDA ITEM Form ,41)-I047 aaa U. S: D£PARTMENT OF AGRICU£TURE Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, and Other Responsibility M~tters - Primary Covered Dans'actions This certification is required by the regulations implementing Executive Order 12549, Debarment and Suspension, 7 CFR Part 3017, Section 3017.510, Participants' responsibilities. The reg'ulations were published as Part IV ofthe January 30, 1989, FedetalRegtster(pages 472--~,7o3). Copies of the regulations may be obtained by contacting the Department of Agricukure agency offering tee proposed covered transaction. fl~el'oce com?lefin~ certification, read instructions on reverse.) (1) The prospectivo primary participant certifies to the best o£its knowledge and belief', that it and its principals: (a) are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from covered transactions by any Federal department or agency; (b) have not within a three-year peried preceding this proposal been convicted of'or had a civil judgment rendered against them for commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection ,,with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public (Federal, State or Local) transaction or contract under a public transaction; violation ofF'doral or State antitrust statutes or commission of.embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or dcs:r'.:ction of records, making false statements, or receiving stolen property;, (c) are not presently indic:cd for or o:i-,:r',vise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental entity "" (Federal, State or Local) v, Sth com:::issioa of any of the offenses enumerateci in paragraph (1)(b) of this certification; and (d) have not within a three-year Fcrio'3 preceding this application/proposal had one or more public transactions (Federal, State or Lc:al) terminated for cause or default. (2) Where the prospective primary pzrtici.rz:',t is unxble to ceftin' to any of th;: s:atcr:~,ents in this certification, such prospective participant shall attac5 an expi::nation to this proposal. RG4&TZA TION NAA 1£ J F.Ugt; ~ i; ,:~D NU;',.'5£.~ CR, .:.~5bT _rET, ,',>k'. IE 2oilier County Board of Ochopee Fire Control District Commissioners NAME AND TITLE OF A UTHORIZED RL'??.~5~.,'~TA ! i '.'£ 1 DATE SIC~I FUR. E. AI3IENDA ITE~ Pg. MMUN CATIONS INTE A[TIC NAL, INC. 44~USHighw~vl,Vcr°~ach'~ 32967 407~3~9~ 95~967~349 B50~82-3107 919-936-~37 850-575-50~ ~1~3~3892 80~M5-3170 ~05-885-1585 8t3-887-1888 9~-761-~9 N~: O~op~¢ Fke Dep~ent Aa~ntion. C~ef Pa~ Wilaon ~: ~O Box 25 P~ne: 695~114 C~. 5~; O~o~, Flo~da F~x: 695-3473 ~p: 34141 Date: J~y 1, 2002 HgPgSX LPE-200 RADIO, PROVOICE, ?~M~3~ SOF~VA~ S2,096.25 ~6,288.75 ~PLIX 'ROSCAN ~225.~0 $675.00 HgPL3R SYS/G~ ~ 150.00 $450.~ 514.50 ~CH~ S~GLE ~IT ~APJD Ct~RGER 586.25 $258.75 HgHCTJ LEAHR C.~E W,MELT LOOi','S~VN:EL ~5.00 5t35.~ ~ROG~MM~G 537.50 $112.50 ;~P~G ~ND H,~N DL~G 512.50 $12.50 Sub T ora.11 $7,974..50 Note Por~ha~ Order To: COM.blUNICATIONS INT'L, LNC. SaJcs Tax} 1450 US Higl~way I TOTALl $7.974.50 Veto Be.ach, FL 32967 Deposit F~x: 561-.567-229Z BManc~ D~e $7,974.50 All otcte~ are subiect lo sbt?ping & handling, charg,es Proposal #[ TW2170 '"'" ~resented by Tom Wilson/'F~x ,130-3904 D;s~ict S',I~ Man~c,r AGEND,& ITEM~ pnc~ in ~t'~c~ for 30 DAYS No. ,.~.~s~, JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AWARD BID NO. 02-3389 TO PYRAMID II, INC. FOR THE PURCHASE OF JANITORIAL SUPPLIES FOR ALL COLLIER COUNTY DEPARTMENTS OBJECTIVE: To procure janitorial supplies in a cost-effective manner through the award and use of a term purchase order contract. CONSIDERATION: On May 29th 2002, the Collier County Purchasing Department sent bid invitation notices to twenty-five (25) vendors for the purchase of one hundred thirty-one (131) janitorial items. A total of three (3) vendors submitted bids. On June l0th, 2002 the bids were publically tabulated. In evaluating the bids, it became evident that there would be only one vendOr that was responsive to the terms of the bid. This vendor is Pyramid II, Inc. FISCAL IMPACT: Many of the Collier County Departments currently use the janitorial products included in the bid, therefore each department will have their own copy of the bid and do their own ordering. The monies for these purchases will come from the Funds of the various departments utilizing the bid. .-.. The estimated annual cost for the Emergency Medical Services Department is $22,000 and funds are budgeted in EMS Fund 490-144610-652610. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth impact RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commisioners award bid No. 02-3389 to Pyramid II, Inc. as recommended for the >urchase of janitorial supplies. SUBMITTED BY: ~~~ Date: 7/q/w /~'l~n' Alde~fer, ~1~ }l'y Officer Emergency Medic~ 1 Services Department REVIEWED BY: dT~'.,~ /~ _ Date: Je~r~, Operat~-s Director ' / Emergency Medical Services Department REVIEWED BY: .~~ q, ~.',~'~'// Date: "~ Stephen ~~-as~g Director APPROVED ~ Date: F. Pineau, In't~im Emergency Services Administrator '-" ~" AGENDA ITEM No._ JUL 3 0 2002 AGENDA IT,~. No. /¢/~. JUL 3 0,2002 Pla, ~ U~ AGENDA ITEM JUL 3 0 2002 pg. ~} . z AGENDA ITEM No. JUL 3 0 2002 A~E~NDA ITF..I~ JUL 3 0 200;" pg. ~ A~.-~NDA ITE.M J JUL 3 g 2002 Pg. ~ AGENDA ITeM _ ~,.., ~i ,.., ~ ,~ ! i i I AGENDA, ITeM No. /(,/~- JUL 3 I] 20112 Pg. JUL 3 0 2002 AGENDA ITEM No. /~ ~__._~ JUL 3 0 20O2 Pgo A'~:~ IDA ITEM No. /~/~ JUL 3 No. /~ JUL 3 0 2002 ~ =c ¢ ~- ~=c= -' -' - ~ = ~ , AGENDA ITEM JUL 3 0 ~. /¢ ' AGENDA ITEM JUL 3 0 20O2 " , ,, ~/1~ -'~ ~ ~ ~'° -~/1~ AGENDA IT~ No. /~ ~ ~ JUL 3 0 2002 Pg. ~ No. JUL 3 · I ..] ," :,. o ~',,~ -., o --, ,-, ' ~ ~ ~ 0~ o ~ = , ~ 0 0 ~ ~ o~ ~ o ~ oo _oo oo III JUL 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVAL OF FEDERAL HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT PROGRAM APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING TO IMPROVE HURICANE PROTECTION OF COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES AND RETROFIT THE FOUNDATION OF THE EVERGLADES CITY HALL AGAINST FLOODING OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached Federal Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) applications for hurricane protection retrofit and flood damage mitigation. CONSIDERATIONS: As a result of Tropical Storm Gabrielle which struck Southwest Florida in mid September of 2001, Local Hazard Mitigation Funding was made available to eligible Counties. As an effected area Collier County is eligible for up to $269,169. of Federal and State grant funding for qualified projects. .The following public safety facilities are planned: North Naples Fire Station 45, East Naples Fire Station 20, Golden Gate Fire Station 70, Immokalee Fire Station 30, Big Corkscrew Island Fire Station 12, Ochopee Fire Station 60, Isles of Capri Fire Station 90, County Helicopter Operations. Additionally, the foundation retrofit of the Everglades City Hall building is also planned as part of the County's Local Mitigation Strategy (LMS) program. FISCAL IMPACT: If approved, each department/district will have to provide 12.5% Local Matching funds. These matching funds have already been identified and are budgeted by each affected department/district. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no Growth Management Impact. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners authorize the Chairman to sign the attached Florida Hazard Mitigation Grant applications. SUBMITTED BY: I!'~a-~-~ Date: ~ .lames J. von Rinteln, Emergency Management Coordinator APPROVED~~ Date: _Kenneth F. Pineau, Acting, Emergency Services Administrator AGENDA ITE?V). J U L 3 '3 Pg. / STATE OFFLORIDA -JOINT HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT PROGRAM & FLOOD MITIGATION ASSISTANCE APPLICATION THIS SECTION FOR STATE USE ONLY FEMA- -DR-FL ~ Standard HMGP ~ 5% Initiative Application _m Application Complete ~- Standard FMA [] Initial Submission or ~ Resubmission Support Documents Eligible Applicant Project Type(s) , ~ Conforms with Stale 409 P~an C~ Stale or Local Government [] Wind D In Dec!amd Area C Private Non-Profit (Tax ID Received) C Fiood [] Storewide ~Recognized Indian Tribe or Tnbal Organization [] Other Community NFIP Status: (c~ =,~ [] Participating Community ID #: Reviewer Phone # [] !n Good Standing [] Non-Participating [] CRS Reviewer Fax # State Application ID Reviewer Email: State Reviewer Date Application Received Signed Date: This application is for all Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA Region IV) Hayard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) and Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) proposals. Please complete ALL sections and provide the documents requested. If you require technical ass/stance with this application, please contact your State Emergency Management Division at (850) 922-$269. A. To Fill Out Thi~ ApPlication: complete all sections which correspond with the type of proposed project General Application Sections: pp. I-6: All Applicants must complete these sections .~ Environmental Review: pp. 7-10: A// Applicants must complete these sections ~Waintenance/Jgreement: p. 11: Any applications involving public prop~ty, public ownership, or management of property /Icqui~ition Fr'orkzheet: pp. 12-14: ~cquisition Projects only - one worksheet per structure Elevation F/orksheet: pp. 15-19: Elevation Projects only- one worksheet per structure Drainage FYorksheet: p. 20: Drainage Projects only Flared Retrofit ~Yorksheet: pp. 21-22: ;Find retrofit projects only (~f~Gl~ only) - one worksheet per slxuctum Attachment ~: FEMA Form 90-49 (Request for Public Assistance): AH Applicants must complete, if applicable. Attachment B: HMGP/FMA Application Completeness Checklist: A/I applicants axe recommended to complete tl~s checklist. B. Applicant Information FEMA-I 3 9 3 -DR-FL Disaster name T [ S G a b r ~ ~ ~, 1, ~ E.~. FE~IA-I$OO-DR-~I~'i Hurricane Floyd Title/BriefDescrip.tiveProjectSumma~] ColiC. er County P~bl[c Safety Building [~el:ro-fS.t: 1. Applicant(Organization) Co].l~.er County 2. ApgUcant Type ~ State or Local Govertmaent r~ Reco?i~ed Native American Tribe [] l~ivat= Non-Profit 3. Coanty ColIier 4. Slate Legislative district(s). S e n 2 5 / ff S - 7 6 Congressional Diswict(s) 1 4 - G o s s 5. FedemJ Tax I.D. Numb=r 6. .FI~S Coda* 5 9 - 6 0 0 0 5 5 8 (*if your FI~S code is not known, please fill out. FEMA Form 90-49 (Attachment A) so that the Depar~eat may obla~t a FIPS code for you) 7. National Flood Insurance Program (HlCIP) Community Identification Number (this number can be obtained fxom the FIRM map for your arm) 1 2 0 0 6 7 8. N-FIP Community Rating System Class Number 7 '-' 9. Attach proof of currant Flood Insurance Policy (FMA only). Flood Insurance Policy Numb~ aC, FNI3A ITEM 10. PoiatofConm~ Jim yon Ri. nteln, Emergency ~anage,,ant Coorr J. nat~r /~1-- 301 Tamiami Tra~l., Ea.qt, Naple~ FL 34112 ~239) 774-8444 Fax (239) 775-5008 JUL 3 9 ?302 Attach any continuations or additional items to this page Page 1 of 22 p~. 2- __ ~Ms. ~Mr. OMrs. FL,~t Name 3 im ~z N~c v o n ~ i n t a 1 n Tklc EM Coordinator S~cctA~css 3301 Tamiami Trail. East Ci~ Naples State FL Z~pCode 36112 Tctcphonc239-774-8444 Fax 239-775-5008 E~il Ad~e~ (if available) J a m e s V o n R i n t e 1 n ~ c o 11 i e r g o v. n e t 11. App~donPrep~redby: ~s~. ~- FimtN~e Jim L~t yon Rinteln Title EM Coordinator Telephone239-774-8911 F~ 239-775-5008 12. Authored AppOint Agent ~roofof~ori~on a~oH~ requ~ed) ~s. ~. ~s. FiaNce James N. L~tN~ Cole~ta Title Chairman, BCC Tel~hone 239-774-8333 F~ 239-775-5008 S~tA~s3301 Tamiami T.rail., East Ci~ Naples Sm~ FL ZipC~ 34112 .,~ Da~ 13. AIl pmp~ ~j~ shoed bc ~l~ m ~e co~W's Loc~ ~fi~on S~ ~), pl~e a~ a le~ of ~~ f~ ~ project ~m ~a c~'s Lo~ Mi6gafon S~m~ Coo~. S~on I. Niitou of H~ds / Dm~ ~ ~e ~ea to be ~o~ted ~ ~ of Pmt D~ all prat ~g~ ~m ~ ~m ~ ~eproj~t ~ (~cl~ ~ of~ ff ~le), ~cb,~$ ~ md ~ cos~. ~1~ ~~Y ~cl~ ~ m we~ m ~ ~ ~d ~t ~t ~ a ~i~ ~~. A~ ~y s~po~g ~~. D~ ~ shoed ~c~ ~ m s~ ~ ~~ ~ ~e pr~ ~ a ~t of~ ~ ~ co~ shoed ~cl~ ~e co~ to ~e 1~ gov~t m ~ m ~ of~ ~ D~ Freq~en~ of E~nt ~ ($) ~ 1992 Hur~cane Alld~w $48 mil $15 mil 1993 Storm of the Ceat $1 mil $100k 1996 TS Josephine $500k $I00k 1997 E Naples Tornado $300k $100k" 97-98 E1 Nino Events $6 mil $200k 1999 TS Harvey $400k $50k 1999 --.. Hurdcane Irene $50k $47k 2000 Wildfires $1mil $500k 00-01 Freeze $1mil $200k 2001'" ...- TS Gabrielle $9mi! $250k AGENDA ITEM .... Approve~ ~ to form & legal ,uWl~y N°.----~/~?~ J' 0 Cou~tvA.o~v JUL 3 :] 2002 Attach any continuations or additional ttsrns to this page -- Section II. Project Description A. Hazards to be Mitigated / Level of Protection I. Select thc type of hazards the proposed project will mitigate: [] Flood ~l~Wind [] Storm surge [] Other (list)- 2. Identify thc rypc ofproposedprojcct: [] Elevation and retrofitting of residential or non-residential structure El Acquisition and relocation ~ Acquisition and demolition -'CJ:Wind retrofit :n M_inor drainage project that reduces localized flooding [] Other (please explain) 3. Liqt the total number of persons that will be protected by the proposed project: 2 5 - 50 @ e a 4. Fill in tho l~tet ofprotrcJion and the magnitude of event the proposed project will mitigate. (e.g. 23 slxucturcz pmtect~t against the 10Q-year (1%) flood) __ structures protected again, t the __ -year Flood (I0, 25, 5o, 1o0, or~00 8 s=ucmrcs protected against 1 4 0 mile per hour (m.,.ph) winds 5. Engineeredproject~ only (c.g. Drainage Improvements), include (atiach to tiffs page) ALL e-n~n~aing calculations and design plans used m determine thc above level ofprote~ion, 6. Project will provide protection against the h~Taml(s) above for 2 0 years (i.e., what is ibc mscful life of pmj~ B. Project Description, Scope of Work, and Protection Provided Describe, in detail, thc existing problem, ~he proposed project, and thc scope of work. Explain how thc proposed project will so/w thc problem(s) and provide the level(s) of protection described in Part A. Also, if available, atlach a vemtor's csfimale and/or a contractor's bid for thc scope of work. Scope of Work: The Collier County Emergency Management Department has received grant funding to provide wind protection for approximately thirty-seven (37) vehicle bay (garage) doors, located at eight (8) Public Safety facilities located at vadous sites throughout Collier County, Flodda. Armor ScreenTM or. equivalent system is' desired. Material/system must meet Miami-Dade certification'and all Collier County code requirements. Additionally, a number of roll down and/or accordion type window and door wind protection shutters will be required at some of the facilities (approximately fifty (50) openings). All shutters will be manually operated unless location warrants electrical operafien. These must also meet Miami-Dade certification and Collier County code requirements. .,. AGENDA ITEM No._ /cF: ~ J U L 3 l] 2.00?. ~orm lq~ HMi3P/FMA-001, ~ Attach any continuations or additional itoms to this page p~ 3 of 22 Section III. Project Location (Fully describe the location oft.he p:oposed project.) A. Site i. Describe the physical location o£this project, including street numbers (or neighborhoods) and zip codes: and ir' available, please provide precise longitude and latitude coordinates ,%r the site utilizing a hand-held global posttioning system iGPS) unit or the equivalent. See a~ached lis~ 2. Is the project site seaxvard of the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL)? [] YES Si NO 3. Provide the number of each structure type (listed below) in the project area that will be affected by the project. That is, all structures in project area. residential property businesses / commercial property 8 public I~uildings schools / hospitals / houses of worship other B. Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) showing Project Site :~c Attach a copy of the FIRM map, a copy of the panel m~ormafion from the FIRM, and, if available, the Floodway Map. FIRM maps are required for thi~ application (if published for your area). Also, all at~ched maps must have theproject site ~d structures clearly marked on the map. FIRMs arc typically available from your local floodplain administrator who may be located in a planning, la:lning, or engineeaSng office. Maps can also be ordered from the Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616. For more i~ormation about FIRMs, contact your local agencies or visit the FIRM site on the FEMA Web-page at http://www.fema.~ov/homefl~CFnardcopv-ht~. Using the FIRM, determine the flood zone(s) of the project site (Cheek all zones in the projec~ arm). (see FIRM legend for flood zone explanations)' [] VE or V 1-30 [] AE orA 1-30 [] AO or AH [2 A (no base flood elevation given) [] B or X (shaded) [] C or X (unshaded) [] Floodway Various [] Coastal Barrier Resource Act (CBRA) Zone (Federal regulations strictly limit Federal funding for projects in this Zone; please coor-41nate with youx slate agency before submitting an application for a CBRA Zone project) [] If the FIRM Map for your area is not published, please atlnch a copy of the Flood Hazard Boundary Map CFHBM) for your area, with thc project site and slrucmres clearly marked on thc map C. City or County Map with Project Site ~nd Photograpi~ ~1~ Attach a copy of a city or county scale map (large ~nough to show flu: entire project ama) with the project site and s~rucmres marked on the map. [] A~ch a USGS 1:24,000 urpo map with projcc~ site ~ merkcd on ~c map. [] Nor acquisition or elevation projec~ include c~py of P~ccl Map (Tax Map, Propcr~y Identification Map, cte.) .:.. showing each pmpcr~ ~o be accluir~ Thc map should include the Tax ID numbers for each parcel, if possible. []Al~ch photol~aphs (2 copies each) for each projcc~ si~e. Thc piu~ should be ~escnm~vc of thc projcc~ area, including any relevant sneers, crccks, rivers, ~c. and draln~c execs which effcc~ thc projec~ site or will be affc~ by ~ projec~ AG£NDA Section IV. Budget/Costs Attach a~¥ continuations or add~ona! items to this page Pngc 4 of 22 In this sec:mn, provide de,ails or'all ~e csrimamd costs of the proje¢:. ,-ks this intbrmafion is used ,"or the Benefit-Cost Analysis, reasonable cost est/mates are esscnnai. Since project admmisrraUve costs are caiculated on a sliding scale, do not include them in budget. ,t/so, do not include connngenc'/costs in :he budget. A. Ma£erials Wind Screens 35 538, 000. ilindo~ Snutzers 32 $26 , 000. B. Labor (Include equipment costs -- please indicate 'all "soft" or in-kind matches) Description H~urs. Rate Cost C. Fees Paid Include any other costs associated with the project. Description of Task Hours Rate, Cost Total Estimated Project Cost S 8 4,0 0 0. AGENDA iTEM. JUL 3 0 200Z Attach any continuations or additional items to thi~ page D. Funding Sources (round figures to the nearest dollar) ~. ,o can be made up of State and Local fimds as well as in- The maximum FE3/L4 share fbr FIYdGP/Fz~IA projects is 75%. The other ;<:nd se,vices. Moreover. :he ?v.b\ :rogram re,quires that me maximum in-kmti match be no more than :2.5% of the mtat ~roje.": [-~"MGP'FM.A fi.rods may be packaged with other Federal funds, but other Federal ~nds (except ~'or Federal ,"hnd$ which !ose the:r Federal idennty at the State lc,lai - such as CDBG..*.RS. HOME) may not be used for .'.he State or Local match. E~imated FE3~Dt Share $ 7 '3 , 920 , 75 '% ,ff Total tmax:murn Von- Federal Share Esumated Local Share $__ ~.0 , 080 , ' 7j.2_,_5_% of Total (Cash~ $ ~% of Total (In-k/nd) 10, 080. 'L2. 5 %of Total(Cash) Estimated State $ 'hare $ .... $ __% of Total (In-kind) Other Agency Share $ ~% of Total (Ideatify Other Non-Fedm'al Agemcy Total Funding sources from above $ 9/* ~ 080 , I00 Total % (should equal 100%) Othe. r Non-FEa~ Federal Fund~ $ (Do not inctudc in total) (Ideatify Other Fr. deral a~:aey ) E. Project Mileatonea List thc major milestone~ in this projc~ by providing an estimated time-linc for ~c critical activifi~. M'de. stone_ Number of Days to Complete 14 d~l [~.g., Demolimm of 6~a=d~m~v~l °fdgta~ Bd.d. project 45 day's Cont:ra¢l:or Hob~.l.~z~td. ort 60 day~ Iht al. ]. 30 days AGENDA ITEM J O L 3 9 PS.__~~ Attach any continuations or addiUonal items to this page Page 6 of 22 Section V. Environmental Review (NOTE: This application cannot be processed if this section is not completetL) 3ecause :he HMGP'FMA ~re federally ..'hnded programs, all projects are required to undergo an environmental review as parr of .the grant application process. Moreo~,er, all projects mu, st comply with the National Environmental Poiicy Act ~,NEPA) and associated Fe-',-'eral, State, Tribal. aha Local statutes to t~btam ,%riding. NO WORK. can be done prior to the NEPA review process. If work is done on ytmr prnposed pr,leer before the NEP~, revie~v is completed, it will NOT he.eligible fl}r Federal funding. A. National Environmental Pulley Act {.NEPA) Dncuments A ll?'ojec:s must have aa'eq,tate.VE?.t docz~mentat~on d~at ~nables the FE.¥[X ~eg~onal ~J~vtronmental Ql~cer m determine i£the prooosed prodec,, compiles with .VE?A and associated statures. TJte FE,1/M .Iffitigation Division Environmental St~ec'-atists provide compreh'ens~ve .VE?A technical assistance fbr 3'tares and .dpplicants. with their consent, to comt~tete the .VEPA revi~u. The .ape and quanti~ documents required to make this dezerrnination varig' depending upon the flrojecz'a' size, location, and compiextty. ,~owever. at minimum, please provide the applicable docrumentatwn from this section to fhcilitate the .VEP,~ compliance process. If your project./its into one of the descriptions listed below: development of mitigation pi .aris; inspection and monitoring activities; ~madies involving only ~naff time and funding; training activities using existing facilities; please include the following required N-EPA documentation: :EX Detailed project dmcripti~n, scope o£work, and budgct/c~sts (Section I1 (p. 3) and Section IV (p. 4)) For all other projects, attach/include the following NEP,-t documents/information: Detailed project de~cr/ption, SCOl~ of work, and budgcVcosts (Section II (p. 3) and Section IV (p. 5) of this application) Project arr, a maps (Section IH, pan A & ri of this application (p. 4)). Proje~ a.nm/structure photographs (Semion HI, part C of this application (p. 4)). I~roj~t alternatives cieacr/ption and/mpacts (pan B of th/s section of thc applical/on (pp. 7-9)),. [] A letter from thc Sta~ Historic Prescn-vation 0ffic~r (SHPO) regarding'cultural r~sonrces (archeological and historic) in d~ lxoj=t area (NOTE: Ptea~ inform the .gH'PO ifa strucaure to be altered is over 50years old.) [] Provid~ any applicable information or documentation referenced on the "Information andDocurnentat~on Needs by Project 7~pe" chart (pag~ 10 of this application) B. Alternative Actions Tim NHPA process r~[uinm ~ al l~ast two alternative amions be comsidta~d that address thc same problem/issue as thc proposed project. In this se~ion, lis~ two feasibl~ alternative projects to mifiga~ the h~"~rds fa~xi in the pmje~x ar~ One allnmafiw is the ~No A~on Alimmalive.' 1. No Action Alttrnative Discuss th~ impa~ on ga~ proj~c~ a~a if no action is Stuctura ~ould be prone to damage- in high ~ind situations AGENDA ITEM No.__/S._~__~ v. a. J U L 3 0 2002 ~ ~y ~nflnu~ona or a~Wo~! ~ ~ ~is ~ge .... ~ 2. Other Feasible Alterna~tive Discuss a feasible alternative ,o the proposed projec:. This could be an entirely different mitig~[io.n .me'hod ar a s~gnificant modification to the design af the c'etrrcnt ?roposed project. Complete ail of parts a-e (be!ow'! aha tnc:uac :ngin¢.'zrh'ng derails applicableS. ~, ?rojec£ Descrip£ion for die Alternadve Describe, in derml, :he altcmauve project. Also, :xpiam im~v the altcmaUVe prolc:: will solve thc pro eiem~ s} ~'or provide :rotec:ion :~om the hazara(s'}. Use of an aiterna~ive shutZer mater~aZ b. Project Location of the Alternative (deschb¢ briefly)S a m e [] Attach a map or diagram showing thc alternative site in retadon to the proposed project sit~ [] Photographs (2 copies) of alternative site Scope of Work for Alternative Project This would involve using large roll-down type storm shutters ': '":" AGENDA ITEM No.__//. ~_~ JUL 3 0 2002 (FmmNo. HI~I~P~MA-O01. F. ffi ~q30/01) Attach any continuations or additional it. ms to this page Pag= 8 of 22 Section V. Environmental Review; B..alternative Ac,ions, continued d. Impacts ofAlternarlve Proiect Beloxv, discuss thc impact of this alternative on ~.he project area. Inciudc comments an these issues as ac".rooriate: Environmental Justic& i~nriangered Soeaies. Wed.ands. Hydrology ,'[;~stre..,m and Do~vnsrream surt'-ac¥'.va'ter ~mpac:s). Floodplain: F~oodxvay, Historic ?rese~,atien and Hazardous Mamnais. *uch more cosriy e. Estimated Budget/Casts for Alternative Project In this section, provide detaih of all the est/mated cost~ of thc alternative project (round figures to the near~st dollar). 1. Materials item Dimension Ouant~ Cost per [fnit ..C. ost 2. Labor (Include ~Iuipment costs - please indicam all "soR" or m-kind matchr~) De4cription [flour'4 Rate ~ost 3. Feea Paid lacludc any other costa as~'iamd with thc pmjc~x. D~cript~on ofT, ask bloum Rate. Cast Secdon VI. Maintenance Agreement .tH applicants whose proposed project involves the retrofit or modification of e. risting public' proper~ or :vhose proposed project would result in rile public ownership or tnanagement of'propers., structures, or facilities, lnust f~rst si~,n the fi;llo,viltg a~,reement prior ro submitting their application to EE3~-t. [.YOTE: Those applicants whose project only htvolves the retrofitting; etevatio~a or other modi/k'ation to private property where the ownership will retnain private after project completion D O.VOT have to complete this form.) The County of Collier . StateofFlorida, hcrebvagrees ~at "tcTty, Z'owk Coun .ty~ it' it receives any Federal aid as a result of the attached project application, it will accept responsibility, at its own expe?e if,aecessary;.tbr~ the ,to. urine ,rna.i~, te~nanc.e of any real property,.strucmres, or titcilities acquir6d or ¢onsa-uctea as a resm~ o~ SUCh eeaerm am. ~outme maintenance shall include, but not be limited to, such responsibilities as keeping vacant land ¢liar of debris, garbage, and vermin; keeping stream channels, culverts, andst?rm drains clear of obstructions and debris; and keeping detention ponds l~e of debris, trees, and woody growm. The purpose of this agreement is to make clear the Subgrantcc's maintenance responsibilities following proiect award and to show the Subgrantee's acceptance of these responsibilities. It does not replace, supercede, or'add to any other maintenance responsibilities imposed by Federal Iaw or regulation and which are m force on thc date of pmjec~ award. · Signed by 3 a m e ~ N. C o 1 e t t a the duly authorized represenlative Chairman, Collier County, BCC (title} this (day) of (month), .(year). Signatu.m* *Please note: The above signature mst be by an int~idual with.legal signing autkority for the respective local government or county (~-g., the .Cludrpe~on, Board of Cotanty Co~ne~ or ti~ County Mtmager, Approved,a8 to form & legal AGENDA ITE~ JUL 3 2.002 County-Attorney Attach any camfinuations or additional items t~ t~is rmge '5~-1.1-~--2~----- East Naples FD Station 20 4798 Davis Blvd. 26 81.90 Naples, FL 34104 6 bay doors. 8 ~_ ~5.0z 239-774-7111 POC Gayland Moore North Naples FD Station'45 1780 lmmokalee Rd. Naples,_FL 34109 8 bay doors 26 ~ 6.13 239-597-3222 8 ~ ~ ~. 98 POC Jim Webb Golden Gate FD Station 70 26 10,984N 4741 Golden Gate Pkwy .: 8t 42. 238w Naples, FL 34116 6 bay doom 239-455-2121 + all windows/doors POC Don Peterson Immokalee FD Station 30 26 25.200N 502 New Market Rd. 81 24.41 ow Immokalee, FL 34142 4 bay doors 239-657-2111 + all windows POC Ray Alvarez Isles of Capd FD Station 90 25 59. 138N 175 Capd Blvd. 81 43.480w Isles of Capd, FL 34113 4 bay doom 239-394-8770 16 windows/doom POC Rod Roddguez Big Corkscrew Island FD Station 12 Immokalee Blvd & Everglades-Blvd z 6 21.5 4 ON' Naples, FL 34120 4 bay doom st 35.3zow 239-455-1204 +all doors/windows POC Frank Kovarik Medic 2 (Helicopter Operations) Naples Airport 2 6 0 9.1_ 7 0 N. 2375 Tower Dr. 2 bay doom 81 45.56 o w Naples, FL 34104 + all windows/doom 239-648-.. 5506 Anton Burtcher ~ Ochopee Fire Department 201 Buckner Avenue 3 bay doom z 5 53.78 5 a AGENDA ITEM EVerglades City, FL 34139 + all windows 81 1 ii. 90 7 W No.__j/_g~:' ~ 239-695-4114 JUL 3 O ZI]02 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM FIR FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA (UNINCORPORATED AREAS) PANEL 801 OF 1125 (SEE MAP INOEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTE'~) · --NOTE-- THIS MAP INCORPORATES APPROXIMATE BOUNOARIES OF COASTAL RARRIER RE- SOURCES SYSTEM UNIT AND/OR OTHER- WISE PROTECTFD AREAS ESTABLISHED UNDER THE COASTAL BARRIER IMPROVE- MENT ACT OF 1990 IPL 101-591). COMMUNITY-PANEL NUMBER: 120067 0801 E MAP REVISED: AUGUST 3, 1992 Federal Emergency Management Asency AGENDA ITE .Mr No. //./~' J U L 3 0 2002 Pg._ Tarpon Ba~ :, '/ Marco Marco Bay FIRM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP CITY OF EVERGLADES, FLORIDA. COLLIER COUNTY [ONLY PANEL PRINTED) COMMUNITY-PANEL NUMBER 125104 1010 D MAP REVISED: .~ JUNE 3, 1986 '"" '~ ' i Fedex~! 1~mergency Manngemm~t A~ency 3~Jt. 3 0 ZOOZ pg. / ~ (.;~:2 . ~'~L~O.~D. ~R,~:~ ~ . - _ _ ZONE AE: ' / .. ,.>.??' . ~ .... :-, ,':'~' .~.; -.:~--'----.:. -,.-. g ~:.'.::~F '- - .._' a~e limits (i:e. . See separately ., .- --' -. · ..~ix'.'.. -x .-. .~ .~ - JOINS MAP 38()t .... EVEEG~D ~ JUL 3 [~ ZOOZ OCHOPEE FIRE AGENDA ITEMJ~ No.___Z4_~___~' .J U L 3 0 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRA Fire FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PANEL 415 OF 1125 SEE MAP INDEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTED} COMMUNITY-PANEL NUMBER 120067 0415 D MAP REVISED: JUNE 3, 1986 ITEM .// · // .. .. ~ MAP PAGE 272 .... . .......... ~. ~ ~- ....... , ~ Green ~Blvd. : ., WestooM ~ a .~ [ ~ Blvd. SW Se~ Grass Ln Star Grass ~ i Gate ~ ~ 25t~ Ave. SW ~ ~ ~ GO.UN ~ATE Co~p~ Leat ~ t ~GOLF COURSE 34! t '8 paint~ Leal ~ DAVID ~WRENCE .~' MENTAL HEAL~ CENTER Goi( GATE ?' AGENDA COMM. PARIf ;?, J IJ k 3 rj ~.002 & pg.___~ ,;3 _ Palm Lal(e ,.::: ::;~.,v.~ Dr. ' " PALM SPRINGS t; ~,. ~_ Cr~ PARK k',*; L \' Bectzel Rey Or. 104 60LF and ~, i.. ~hle Or. --- Savannat~ ' Rival; GOLEN GATE r ~70 *PROGRA NATIONAL FLO00 INSURANC£ FIRM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA - PANEL 225 OF 1125 (SEE MAP INDEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTED) COMMUNITY-PANEL NUMBER 120067 0225 D MAP REVISED: JUNE 3, 1986 J ,~.~, ,-~DA ITEM .J u L 3 f~ lOO2 ~ - ~. ~ ', ~. _ - . . - ~. .,. -,,. -. .. .. -~- uti ~ - - ~ _- - - - ZONE D - - -- - _~-__:_r : .......... -- ._ .--.__--.-'-- - i.~ '" "- ' No. - - JUL 3 ,ri .~ ~.~ ~ IA 1 ~liillie MAP pAGE 207' lOINS >IAP / Li~le / Corkscrew [s~ / H~an ' I~nd -~341 341 2 AGENDA IT.EM No. ~ J U L 3 [I 2002 p~..,,.2 7 lmmokalee FIRE ~TA.r~ m ~112 ~ 72nd Ave. N.E. BIG CORKSCREW ISLAIIID FIR E NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM~, FIRM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP ~ COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PANEL 364 OF 1125 (SEE MAP INOEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTED) COMMUNITY-PANEL NUMBER 120067 0394 D MAP REVISED: JUNE 3, 1986 Federal ~,,,~-"~acy Manasefnent Agency J /',&£iqD,& ;TEM ,j ~ l_ ~ 9 ZOOZ AVENUE ZONE X NO. JUL 3 ' ~,, ., MAP PAGE 292,,,.,..~:,,~: .,.~_~.~ .......... ...... ~ ........ JOINS MAP .71~ ...... -~,,-.,, ~. ,..~., . : -- No~h ~J Ra. ' ~necy -Jo's , S ~ ~-Cla monna ',V&v ~o~nse~a Ave.~ . ;. Pcx Hollow L/ gr. ;~ :F~r~ Ln. ROC~ Himscu~ Ave. :...?: gr. ~'T '~ ~ _~" Esmv N~les '~ FIRE OE~~' Lee Gov'r ~ CENTER w. Crown Pointe WINOSTAR COURSE BarTett & COUNTRYsto,erAve. CLUB. Van Buren ~nda Dr. ~ i Short Rd. AVALON F'lodd~ Ave. Thomasson Dr. Or. EAST NAP£ES..~hAAt_ :Hi]lO. COMMUNIT~--~'J I I SOUARE __ $ou77tPo~r~ SOUTH WINDSTAR ,~ Andr~ Ave. 70LF COURSE & COU#TRY .. J U L 3 CLUB LELY AGEND A'~'EM. No.__/~/~ J U L 3 0 ?.002. Pg._,. ~'..~' FIRM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP COLLIER cOuNTY · FLORIDA MAP INIDI=X FOUR PANE~.S NC}'T PRINTED) COMMUNITY-PANEL NUMBER 120067 0193 D MAP REVISED: JUNE $, 1986 '-~ , o., , ~,-,,-, MAP PAGE 228 2]5 ' --, ~ ~ i ~ ....... ': ~' ,~ l~ ,~.l t ?~_, ~:~ / / / / ~~~90~ ~ ~ , ~c~. ~'% ~. ~ ?' ~/Z,~s"*"g ~ ~l~ . -' , _=r ~E ~ .... ~ .A~ ~/~~tu~ous~ GOLF COURSE , ~ C~rt¢~ ~ ~ & Bu~~ ;~~ Rus~ore Or. / C~ ~ , x. ~ I ~ ~ Cave ~ , Dr. o~ - ~ .~ -' ',. . ~ . .... ~ __N~ X I ' e ~ ' II :careers R~e Pfl ~-~ ' ~ }~ ~ ~ _~~ o CREEKSIDE~-, ~ l ' E~:_~,~-,~, ~ C~n~A~ ~ , 1~ A~. N. ~ . , ~,-~',% ~ I >l~ ~~' a~ . --~ --~ II . ~I ~ULU~~~.:~'i' : .ii",,HI9 ;:~K;: '/ ~ ,'t' ~~ ! ,- *,.- .-'t IL -.~ ~!. _~ J~No/~~ .... ~1 ' s-- ~ ~m A~. '~.- -~ '~~1~'" ~~ ..... ~-, ~ NORTH NAPLES ~45 AGENDA ITEM, No. /~: ,,~ ~' JUL 3 0 2002. Pg.. ~lIIIlllll NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANC£ PROG FIRM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PANEL 394 OF 1125 (SEE MAP INDEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTED) COMMUNITY-PANEL NUMBER 120067 0394 D MAP REVISED: JUNE 3, 1986 AGENDA ITEM Federal Emergency Management Agency No. J U L 3 rj 200Z pg._ ,.~ ,,o J ~ L 3 ~] ZOOZ p~,. ~._~.?~ : ~rcadwmg, OCom ~kes Way P.~ !~ K i ' ~Co~ ~kes Dr. ~, Pomaana Ponce de Leon School Gate SRAN§£ ~.c. i 2.002 I Clipper ~ River ReacA Dr. OFF/CE Homaehoe Dr. INB./MP.E '~: ", ~R~ SO~ HELICOPTER OPERATIONS Map PAGE 196 'OIN'S ~IAP Experimental AGENDA ITEM JUL 3 0 200~ :AL IMMOi LEE Ave. Lee SL P!ease fill out this Worksh¢=t zomplerely. A scparam worksheet is required for-cac,~ structure m bt wind retrofitted. ~lrAttach photographs (two copies) o£each side of the building to be retrofiUcd. ~)rovide evidence ~at the shu~ter system comvlies with the Dade Cotmm Specifications. The best evidence oy'rn~ :s a certificate issued by the Dade Count., ~uitding Department a'tanrtg that the proposed shutter praa'uc:s ;~ave been tested, approved, and compi? :verb :he Dade C')unty Specifications..Von-certi/ied shutters or.vroduc:~ cannot 5e :lsezl: Fill out the robie below. NOTE: .-IH shaded line items are ruired to arocess the eot Informadon ,----i(!:):Bailding:Name 0choppee ?~re Dept f/-60 (7) Pmjc~ N~cr (9) ~aly~ Buih Data (1) SCtCC~ B~g T~c ~ Nen=~e~ Wo~ - Wood b~ ~ not ~ve sp~ific ~g a~fion. ~1~ ~c ...... _ (5) ~Hc S~e and Use Wind Retrofit Worksheet continued - (HMGp only) Id. Buildinq, Value (~) BUilding ReplaCement Value (2) Demolition Threshold E~ Buiidinq Contents ~IF. Displacement Costs Due to Wind (1) Rental Cost of Tempom~ Building Space (2} O~er Displacament Cos~ (~mon~) Value of Public Non-Profit Se~ice D~p~on of Se~ices Pmvid~ (3) Post Di~er ~n~nui~ Pmmi~ (~Y) Rent and Business Income (1) To~l Mon~ly ~t ~m all Ten~m (~mon~) E~mat~ Net In.me of Comme~al Bu~n~ ation Proiect Data (1) Relo~-~ian ~me Due to Project (months) (2) Rental Cost During Occupant Relocation (~month) (3) Other Relocation Co-_sm (S/month) Attach any c~,tinuaflons or additional iten,.~ to this page ?.k~3. ~f.f~322D02 P!~mse ,~11 out this work, heat completely. A ~epmte wor~he~t is reqmr~ for~h a~e m be wind ~A~ p~oto~p~ (~o ~p~) oiea~h $i~ oith~ buiidMg to be re,stied. ~rovide e'/idc~ce that ~ shuaer system complies with ~e Dad~ Co=~ S~c~ifications. The b~t evidence ofth~ czr~ficate ~sued by the bade COIII~ Building Depar~ent xta~ng ~hat the proposed chatter ~rodztc~ ]:ave been :esze~ approved, and com~(v with ;he bade Co una, .~pec~ficat~ons. .Von-carq/~ed a'h:~tters or pro~tccs cannot be used. Fill out the table below. NOTE: .4H shaded line items are required to process the ~Hca~on) ~ (!)B~'di~Name Helicopter Opera:ions - Medic 2 :(2):~A~, 2375 To:car. B:~vd~. - ~'ap.l'e.s:' Airport~ (3:) ~i:~m~p ~ ~ Na p~l'e s~,..FL:. 3~4~.L0~4: ~. :q ' ~ -., ~. - ... · · ~ -.';, :.:;;;,-.71:..%1 . . ' '.';. _'.. , '. '. _L_' J.. ..;~'~:; '.ii ".. :. - .: ....... .... · .~'. 1 ;? ":~ ~:":;.":~:;"i;:&;~,/x, / ;, :. '.;-.. :....: ;':. ' .._'.",- ::-' .' ,:-;.' ../'-. .... . :L :~-'..-"; ,....t. .' .; ':.'7 .' '; ' 'l ~ ~:-'.r:":'%: ....... ' .......... ..' .............. ; .... '-' " ........... ' ...... '-":': ......... ' ' " (9) . ~uildin[ Data 1 I (l) Select Buil~g T~c ~ No~En¢~ W~d - WoM bmld~ ~ ~ ~vc s~c ~g ~. ~ b~ }C. Buildinu S~e and Use A~ch ~y ~nflnu~o~ or addiUonal i~ ~ ~ ~ eg' Wind Retrofit Worksheet continued - (HMGP only) liD. Buildin.q Value i (;1') BuiiUing:RepiaCementVaiue I(2) Demolition Threshold Buiidin,q Contents 4acement Costs Due to Wind Renal Cost of Tempomw Building Space (~sf/mon~) (2) O~er Displa~ment Cos~ (~mon~) Value of Public Non-Profit Se~ice (1)' D~p~on of Se~ices Pmvid~ (3) Po~ Diea~er ~ntinui~ Premium (~day) Rent and Income (1) To~! Mon~ly R~t ~m all Ten~m (~mon~) (2) ~ma~ Net In.me of Cornmeal Busin~ (~mon~) Data I (1) R~nn, lqme Due tn Project (months) ' t (2) Rental Cost Dudng Occupant Relocation (S/month) (3) Other Relocation C-o-~_q~ks (S/month) ._--.----.-- ~ .....AG£ND^ ITEM~ t J U L 3 rl ZOO2 (F~, N~. I~G1}/lq'~'4~l, ~ ?agc222 of ~ ,o ~' Attach any continuations or additional items m this page I g.~ P!ease fill out ~ worksh~:~ completely. A separam workzhect is required fbr-each struc.-ure to be w/nd retrofitted. ~rAttach photographs (two cop/cs) of each side of thc building to be retrofitted. '.~Provide e,zidemc~ that the shutter system complies with ~e Dado County Spemfications. Fhe best ~videnc~ c~rrz, l?cate issued by :he Dade County Building Department stating that the propo~'ed shutter ~roducts have been reste~ xpp;'ove~ and camp(v with :he Dade Coun~ ~pec~cat~ons. .Von-c~rrtfied shzttters or ?rodztcIs cannot 3e use.q~. ' Fill out the cable below. NOTE: .41l .vhaded line items are required to ,~rocess the a??/ica, tion) } (:~)B¢idihgName Big C'or:kscre:¢ ,_sland. F'ire Depr :'}' 1.2 (7) Project Number (9) )ara (1) Sclcct Building Type El Non-I~e,l.eer~l Wood - Wood buildin~ do n~t r~-~ive sp~ifia mginc~ring an~fion. ~ingla and mulfi-fiunily maid,mcca, iome onc- or two- ~tmgt apanmen~ unira, and some arnall ctmm',c~/al ia,,ildJngs. [] No~-gn~ine~rmi lt~oafy . ~ masonry I~_~!!,ql-8~ do not n~.~i~ sl~fic ~g amaaaon. Example, haclu~ ~ngle and multi-family msid__-'m'_~, aom~ on~- or .'wo- stot~ apm'nnc~ m~'u, and ~ (~g~ mobila laom~). ,M~mmS~ctm~ Imildin~ am pr~_,e_~ in latgg a~ ofidgn~al o~ aimilar mils. :~ Enginem'ed - Thio buildinp nasy mmbin~ n2~son~ wie,, ~1 fromin& open-web lC. Buildin~ S~e and ~se , ' ,, , Wind Retrofit Worksheet continued - (HMGP only) (.I) Bui!ding.:Replacemen. t Value . $: 7 S 0 lc : (2) Demolition Threst~old E. Buiidin~ Contents ment Costs Due to Wind (1) Renal Cost of Tempa~ ~uilding S~ce ($/sf/mon~) (2) O~er Di~pla~ment Cos~ (~mon~) G. Value of Public Non-Profit Se~ice (1)' Des~pOon of ~ices Pmvid~ (3) Po~ Dl~er ~nfinui~ Pmmi~ (~y) H. Rent and Business Income (1) To~i Mon~ly R~t ~m ~ Ten~ (~mon~) (2) Es~mated Net Inmme of Camm~ Busin~ses (~mon~) atica Project Data. (1) Reioca~n Time Due to Project (mo.nths) (2) Rental Cost During Occupant Relocation (S/mantis) (3) Other Relocation C,c~s (S/month) /:', ..~Z~'~DA ITEM ¢.=No.~,~o,.~,no~ ~ _ J_U_L.~.O 200?. Attach any continuations or addiUonal item to this page L_. g.. .... Please .fill out ~is worksheet completely. A separate worksheet is required for-~aeh' atruc.'ure to be wind retrofitted. ~Alxach photographa (two ¢~pies) of each aide of the builddag to be retrofitted. '~Provide e. videnc= that the shutter syste, m complies with the Dade County Spe¢ifieatians. The but evtdence ofr. h~s is cer:z/~cate !ss~ed 3y :he Dade Count. Building Depa;'rment stating that the proposed ghutter'produc:s have been zWprove~, and ~_':~ reply :virh :he Dade Ca un.ty 5'pec~ticatians. .Von-cerr. ified shutters or.~roa'uctx aannot 'Se used. Fill out ~he table belo~v. NOTE: .-11l ~'haded Hne dems are rertuired to orocess the 'eot Information ~(~.))Baildin~_Nam¢ ' isles of Capri Fire Station (9) Data (1) Select B~l~g T~c ~ No~~ Wood - Wood bml~ ~ ~t r~ve a~c ~g ~6~ ~pl~ ~cl~c (5) ~c ~i~ Wind Retrofit Worksheet continued - (HMGP only) i(1) Building: RepiaCement Value j(2} Demolition ThreshoicJ E. Buiidinq Contents ~iacement Costs Due to Wind (1) Renal 'Cost of Tempom~ ~uilding Space (~semon~) (2) Other Displa~ment Co~ (~mon~) G. Value of Public Non-Profit Se~ice (1)' Des~pfian of Se~i~s Provid~ (3) Post Di~ ~nu~ P~mium (~day) H. Rent and Business Income (1) Total ~n~ly R~t ~m ~ Tenan~ (~mon~) (2) ~m~ Net In.me of Comm~ial Busin~es ~ation Pro ect Data (1) Relocation ~me Due to Project (mo~ths) (2) Rental dost During Occupant Relocation (~month) (3) Other Relocation Costs (~month) Attach any ~rrtinuafions or additional items t~ this page L. ...... Please :5ii out this workshc=t comple-'~ly. A separa~ workshc=', is required ior.~ach smmrure to be wind rctroti~d. [~ Attach photographs (two copies) o£~ach sid~ of~e buildin§ to be retrofitted. I~ Provide evidcncz ~at the shutter system complies ~vittl the Dade CourtW Specifications. The b~'t evidence, ofrh~s z2rr!Hcate issued by ~.he Dade Coutt~. Building D~parrment ~'tating :hat the proposed ~hutter produc:s have 3een ~,pprove~ _:nd comply with :he Jade Count. Spec;.fic~zmns. .Von-.zzrzified chz~tters or ?'oduc:s ~'annot 5e used. Fill out the table below. NOTE: .4ll shaded line items ~tre retluired to ~rocexs the ~s~lication} 1IA. Proiect Information i(.!~)~B~ldi.ngName [:nmokalee Fire S~a.r. ian ~,~ 20 ~ .,-,.~-- I. (9:).~-;Statcla~d Zip. Imm o k a.L e e',. ' :~"~ ::::3::4.t:zf Z ' ::' ' ' "':!:- :' '';j' ' ~'' ]:!::''' '::':' (~ Project N~bcr / (9) / ~. Buildin~ Data b~ . : "' . . :" ;~...~i.. 'q~:~[ ":' (5) ~c B~a~ (~ D~ ~ Wind Retrofit Worksheet continued - (HMGP only) Value i (:1-) Ruitdinfl Replacernent:Value ~ - [[i,E. Building Contents IF. Displacement Costs Due t0 Wind , (1) Renal Cost of Tempo~ Building Space (~sf/menth) (2) O~er Displacement Cos~ (~mon~) p. public Non-Profit Se~ice II (1) Des~p~on of S~i~s P~v[d~ (3) Post Di~er Co~nui~ Pm~um (~day) I I IH. Rent and Susines~ Income .... !1 (1 ) To~i Mon~ly R~t ~m a~ Ten~ (~mon~) (2) Es~mat~ Net In.me of Comme~al ~sin~ I, Mitiq~ion Proiect Data , (1) Rel~ q~ Due ~ Pmje~ (mon~) (2) Re~ ~ Oudno O~nt R~o~n (~mo~) (3) O~ R~o~aon ~ (~mo~) Please fill out this worksheet completely. A separate worksheet is required for-each structure to be wind retrofitted. ~3 Attach photographs (two copies) of each side of thc building to be retrofitted. [~ Provide evide'nce that the shutter system complies with the Dado County Specifications. The best evidence of this ts a certificate issued by the Dade Coun~ Building Department stating that the proposed shutter products have been tested. approvea~ and comply with the Dade County S~eci/~cations. .Von-certt. fied shutters or produczs cannot be used. Fill out the table below. NOTE: .4//shaded line items are ,aired to the ~ct Information '(l:)BUil'din~Name Go l-den Gate Fi-re Station (2):A~s a741 Gold'on Gate Pk'W}~ (:3,).City;:Stateand;Zip Nap les:, FL 3.~I_I~6~ :. ~ : ' , ~ ~: -~ · :_c4).o,,,~li¢~i'-. . ....... . . . . c.'o~ ~-~ 'Co.k~n:~;.;~:~..':':'''~-'~ -:'-- ' ;:~'.-:~..'-::' .::?: :'.:: ''='~ " -'; ~- ,,..., · . : ~:'i ' .,_-...- ~ ~ .: -- : ' :'. ": ' (7) Project Number ~4";:..~: i'.:r-,~- ~._ .~7' ':-' '.;. i:j-.'~::5:;.' :.~:.:i?L~,'~7.~q ;~;,~-: · ' ...-, ~s: .;. :¢i!5~'~,j:~;~'. .:-.;~,,~:: ;,-.. ~., ;~:-' :&,:~:..:~-~ ' ~-- '~ s-; .:.. ~-: 'z': -L : ~ - . (9) Analyst (1) Select Building Type E1 N~m-Fa~tn~.zr~l Wood - W. ood buildings do not receive specific engingring ammfion. Examples include single and multi-family residencies, some one- or two- story apartme~ units, and some small comrmn'~iai buildings. ~ Non. En~in-.m'ed Mneonry -Timsomasonrybuilding~donotrgceivespecific~mgin~ringalx~nfion. Exampl~a include single and multi-family rmid~nces, santo one- or two- story aparml~t tm~, and some small commercial buildings. ~1 Manufac~r~l BMlding - Th~ buildinga ar~ t~pionlly light metal swucaa~ or manutacnm.'d housing units (e.g., mobile hom~s). Msnufactumd Imildin.os ar~ produced m Ira-ge numbers of identical or similar uaim. {ll:~,lghtty Emgiammrmd - ~ buildings may combine n~ with steel frm~& open--wcb ~el joist.s, wood framing, md wood ra.fle~. Some pmns of thc building receive engineering aVzmina while others do nor Exampl~ include motels, co~ial, a~d light industrial buildings. [] l~mily Engimmmml, md- Usually t~ buildings ~-e d~sigz~ for a specific sirra: cad ~us receive specific, individualized d~sig~ ,-~-lion from pmfm~ioual archi~ a~d roSins:rs. Examples ii,lade hi,h-dsc office clad hotel buildings, hospitmls, ~ m~x public buildit~. [] O~r - I'~ b~i~,Ss do not fit into m~y of tee deseriptio~ lismd above; ~~~ ~i~i~~ mm.?~!;f:i:F~J~'?i'~.'~t~'~i~y:l~g ;~..,,i;i~? ': · ~=:- i;E~!q~:~.'~-41'tU!~2~,; ;~'~, .' ~,. ,~'~._ :. : ;: :,.: .... ~ ' ~;~.' ~i~.i~?..'-:ii!?'?:'~'~i >'.?:4' ~;~:-',/:' '--"- .~,~"~i.~!:'::..i'?':!~ :.'~. ' ! -:-~;: ' ': ' · '~ ', ':!:: ' ' ', '$, ~- i 'e~-. ';"~-~V=v':¥'~':'~ 're.-- *.'~: ~i,"! ;'".';"~i? ,'~2..'l~,~f.*.]:":, !., '' "i .':~:;:~'!;~:'.:.:.'.'?."-; ~'? ::'; .,~ ': ' " (5) Historic Building Controls (6') Disaster Number lC. Bnildine Size and.I.l~e M ' (~=~o.,~o,~o,.~r~o,, ~ JUL3 ,q iOO2 Attach any c. ontlnuat{ons or additional Palms to tiq{s page I Page 21 of 22 ! Wind Retrofit Worksheet continued - (HMGP only) LD. Buildinc. I Value ( 1 ) Building Replacement Value ~ !2)'Demolition Threshold tiE. Buiidinq Contents. ~lacement Costs Due to Wind [(1)Renal Co~ of Temporaw Building Space (S/el/month) (2) Other Displacement Co~ (~monm) IG. Value o~ Public Non-Profit Se~ice (1)'~scfiptio~ of Se~ices ~rovided ~ ~ ~, ~ (3) Po~ D~ ~nui~ Premium (~day) Rent and Business Income (1) Toal Bon~ly Rent ~m ail TenanS (~mon~) (2) Es~mamd Net In.me of Commercial Business ($1mon~) ation Pre / (1) Relocation Time Due to Project (months) 1 (2) Rented Cost During Occupant Relocation (S/month) (3) Other RelocaSon Costs (S/month) ......... ~ ..... ;.,g£;',DA ~TEM J u L 3 Attach any continuations or additional items to this page ~ ?r'a~ 22. of Please fill out this work, heat =omplemly. A separate work~he~ is r~quired for-each structure to be wind retrofi~d. ~ Attach photographs (two copies) of each side of the building to be retrofitted. :{~[ Provide evidenc-', that the shutter system complies with the Dada County Specifications. The best evidence ~J'thts ~s a certificate issued by the Dada Coon.tv Budding Department stating that the proposed shutter products have been :ested. approved, and comply with :he Dade Count3' Spec~cations. .Von-czrtified shzttters or flroduc:s cannot '.:e used. Fill out the table below. NOTE: .-IH shaded line items, , are required to {~rocess the a~lication) I[A. Pro]ect Information [(!)BUi!dingName North ~aples Fire S~a~-i.on / ' '- -[ (2) Akiflr~' ! 780: Immok~at, e.e R'Oa~ (7) Project Number (9) Data (1) Select Bml~g T~c ~' Non-En~n~red Wood - Wood b~l~ngs ~ not r~civc sp~ific ~gin~ng a~fion. ~pi~ inciu~ s ~ not fit mm ~ of ae ~ ~ a~ (5) ~de B~l~g C~ N o (Form No. I. IMOP/FMA.O0 i, Eft. 9/30/01) t Attach any continuations or additional items to this page ;' g.~_._._~------ Wind Retrofit Worksheet continued - (HMGP only) (!).- Building Replacement Value (2) Demolition Threshold E. Buiidinq Contents dacement Costs Due to Wind (1) Ren~t Cost of Tempora~ Building Space ($/sflmon~) (2) O~er Displa~ment Cos~ (~mon~) G. Value of Public Non-Profit So--ice (1) Des~p~on of Se~i~ Provid~ ~' (3) po~ Di~er ~ntinui~ Premium (~day) / Rent and Business Income (1) To~l Mon~N Rent ~m all Ten~ (~mo~) (2) Esfimat~ Net In.me of Comme~al Businesses (~n~) ation ,ct Data (1) Relocation T~me Due to Project (months) (2) Rental Cost During Occupant Relocation (S/month) (3) Other Re!oc~___tion Costs (S/month) Attach any continuations or additional it. ms to this page Please fill out this worksheet completely. A separate worksheet is reqtm'ed t~r-each stracu~m to be wind retrofitt~i. ~ Attach photographs (two copies) o£ each sid~ of the building to be re~'ofitted. ~ Provide evidenc= ,J~at the shutter system complies with the Dade Caunty Specifications. 77,re b~st ewdencz of this is a ~'errificate issued by :he Dade County Suiidi, tg Department xtat~ng that the proposed,~'hutter proa'uc*.s have ,been rested, .~vvroved. and :omp(v :vzrh ;he Dade Couno, Zpec[fications. _Von-cen(fied shutter, ,sr ?roa'ucrs cannot be :tsed.' Fill out the table below. NOTE: ,4[l shaded [lite items are re~ub'ed to ~rocexs the application'} i (1) Building Name East t(2)Aditress: ,~798 Da~r[s Blvd. (7). -C:Jty; S rate and:Zip Naa I e-s, FL . (~)- OWncr½AppliCa~t-i .... ' }:[ C°t' L~e-r (7) Project Number (9) ~B. Buildin~ Data (1) Saleet Bml~ng T~ ~ Nn~g~ Wood - (~g., ~b~ ~). ~4 5-~ :.:'~"n:~ ,~.,' .~ . .., -~ ..... · .,. ............... (~ ~fic B~I~ C~ ~ o ~. Building S~e and Use ' ...... · * '~'~ -~;,s- 2. - ', ~ ,~.~,,. ~:4,:.~..~]..~-.~-~ .'~-~-: ..... ~* ~,2'.;~y..'~ ' .... 7~,' ,: ...... -- .-'. ~.;~:~;~'.'~;.: ,,~,-. ,.s_~ ,,,,~;- = A~I'IDA iTEM, ~~' No ~m.~o~i.~,) JUL 3 6 2002 A~ ~y m~nu~ons or addi~oml ~m~ Wind Retrofit Worksheet continued - (HMGP only) D. Buildinq Value (1) Buildin_c Replacement Value (2) Demolition Threshold E. Buildinq Contents !(:2iiCOnte:~ts.D~cd~bnI i:" ' T~p.i~ca.1 E£~e stat lacement Costs Due to Wind' (1) Rental Cost of Temporary Building Spac~ ($/sf/month) I N / A (2) Other Displacement Costs (S/month) IIG. Value of Public Non-Profit Service (3) Post Disaster Continuity Premium (S/day) Rent and Business Income (1) Total Monthly Rent from all Tenants (S/month) (2) Estimated Net Income of Commercial Businesses (S/month) .. Mitic ation Prelect Data (1) Relocation Time Due to Project (months) (2) Rentai Cost Dudng Oc_~_,pant Relocation (s/month) (3) Other Relocation Costs (s/month) JUL 3 ,~ 2002. : Pa~ Z2 of 22 Attach any continuations or additional items to this page i ~ ;~., ~,¢1 STATE OF FLORIDA - JOINT HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT PROGRAM & FLOOD MITIGATION ASSISTANCE APPLICATION THIS SECTION FOR STATE USE ONLY FEMA- -DR-FL [] Standard HMGP [] 5% Initiative Application [] Application Complete [] Standard FMA [] Initial Submission or [] Resubmission Support Documents Eligible Applicant Project Type(s) [] Conforms with State 409 Plan [] State or Local Government [] Wind C] in Declared Area ID Private Non-Profit (Tax ID Received) [] Ftood [] Statewide C]Recognized Indian Tnbe or Tribal Organization [] Other Community NFIP Status: (c~ [] Participating Community ID #: Reviewer Phone # [] In Good Standing C] Non-Participating [] CRS Reviewer Fax # State Application ID Reviewer Email:. i State Reviewer Date Application Received i Signed Date: Thi~ application is for all Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA Region IV) Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) and Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) proposals. Please complete ALL sections and provide the documents requested. If you require technical assistance with this application, please contact your State Emergency Management Division at (850) 922-5269. A. To Fill Out Thw Application: complete all sections which correspond with the type of proposed project General,4pplication Sections: pp.1-6: All Applicants must complete these sections Enviromea~ Review: pp. 7-10:`/11 Applicants mus~ complete these sections . Maiale~e `/greement: p. 11: ,/ny applications involv/ng public property, public ownership, or management of property Acqulsition Worksheet: pp. 12-14: ,/cquisition Projects.only - one workaheet per s~xucture Elm~ion F/ork~eet: pp.l$-lg: Elevation Projects only, -- one worksheet per structure Drainage ~P'orkshtet: p. 20: Drainage Projects only ~ind Retrofit Worksheet: pp. 21-22: ~/nd retrofit projec~ only (HMGP only) - one work'eot per `/ttachmentA: FEMA Form 90-49 (Request for Public Assistance): All Applicants must complete, if applicable, `/tlaclme~ B: HMGP~ Application Completeness Checklist: All applicants are recommended to complete th/s checkl/st B. Applicant Information FEMA-1393 -DR-FL Disaster name T / S G a I~ 1; i e 11 e F~, FEM~4-1$Od-DR-FL; Hurrica~ FioFd Title/BriefDescriptiveProjectSummary Everglades City HallFoundation Ret:re-fiT. P..roject I. Appllcant(Organizafion) Collier Count:y 2. Applicant Type ~l State or Local Government G Reco~nized Native American Tribe G Pr/vate Non-Profit '3. Coan~ ¢o111ec 4. State Lcg/slative district(s) S e n 25 [ H S - 76 Congressional D/sUict(s) 14 - G o s ~ 5. F_~!_¢_,al Tax I.D. Number 6. FIPSCode* 59-6000558 (*ifyour FIPS code /s not known, please fill out FEMA Form g0-49 (Attachment A) so that the Department may obtain a FIPS code for you) 7. National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Community Identification Number (this number can be obta/ncd from thc FIRM map for your area) 120067 8. NFIP Community Rating System Class Number 7 9. Attach proof of current Flood Insurance Policy (FMA only). Flood Insurance Policy Number _. 10. PeiatofContaet .Tim yon' Rinteln, Emergency Hanagement: Coord aat:o'~GEN~AITF~e 330~ Tam~am£ T. ca~.]., East:, Naples FL 34112 (239) 774-8444 Fax (239) ^tt.c , or .dd,t o..I ,,,,m. to ,,ag.J ElMs. ~IMr. ElMrs. First Name J i m Last Name v o n R i n 1: e 1 n Title EM Coordinator StrcetAddress 3301 Tamiami Trail, East City. N a p 1 e s State F L Zip Code 341 ! 2 Telephone239-774-8444 Fax 239-775-5008 Email Address (if available) J a m e s V o n R i n t e 1 n @ c o 11 i e r g o v. n e t 11. Application Prepared by: C3Ms.X3Mr. ElMrs. FirstNam¢ Jim Lastvon Rinteln EM Coordinator Telephone239-774-8911 Fax 239-775-5008 Title 12. Authorized Applicant Agent (proof of authorization authority required) ElMs. X~Mr. [3Mrs. First Name J a m e s N. Last Name _ C o I e t.~: a Title Chairman, BCC Telephone 239-774-8333 Fax 239-775-5008 Street Address 3301 Tamiami Trail East City Naples State FL Zip Code 34112 Date Signature 13. Ail proposed projects should be included in the county's Local Mitigation Strategy (LMS), please attach a letter of endorsement for the project from the county's Local Mitigation Strategy Coordinator. Section I. History of Hazards / Damages in the Area to be Protected A. Overview of Past Damages Describe all past damages from b-=,ardous events in the project area (include name of storm, if applicable), including direct and indirect costs. Include Presidentially declared disasters as well as events that did not result in a Presidential declaration. Ata~h any supporting documents. Direct costs should include damages to structures and infrastructure in thc project ama as- a result of the hazard. Indirect costs should include thc cost to thc local government to respond to victims of~he hazard in flac project an:a, any interruption to local busincsscs, and losses of public services (3 examples arc provided for yom' rcfe~enco). Date Freauencv of Event ~ ($) Indirect costs (describe) 1992 Hurrricane Andrew $48 mil $15 mil 1993 Siorm of the Cent $1 mil $100k 1996 TS Josephine $500k, $100k 1997 E Naples Tornado $300k $100k · 97-98 E1 Nino Events $6 mil $200k 1999 TS Harvey $400k $50k 1999 - Hurricane Irene $50k $47k 2000 Wildfires $1mil $500k 00-01 Freeze $1mil $200k 2001. TS Gabrielle $9mil $250k Approve~t a.s'to form & legal .Su~ficierx:y No...__~.~ Page 2 Of 22 ~ / Attach any e. onflnuations or additional Rams to this pags - Section H. Project Description A. Hazards to be Mitigated / Level of Protection 1. Select the type ofhnT-~rds the proposed project will mitigate: -~Flood 'Wind x~ Storm surge [] Other (list). 2. [dentify thc type of proposed project: :~:Elevation and retrofitting of residential or non-residential su'uctu~e [] Acquisition and relocation [] Acquisition and demolition Wind retrofit [] Minor drainage project that reduces localized flooding C.I Other (please explain) List the total number of persons that will be protected by the proposed project: I 0 0 4. Fill in the level of protection and the magpitude of event the proposed project will mitigate. (e.g. 23 structures protected against the 100-year (1%) flood) ]- stxuctures protected aga'.mst The ]- 0 0 -year Flood (I0, 2~, $0, 10o, or 500 ~ structures protected against ~ mile per hour (mph) winds 5. Engineered projects only (e.g. Drainage Improvements), include (attach to this page) ALL engineering calculations and design plans used to determine the above level of protection. 6. Project will provide protection aga~inst the b-7~rd(s) above for 5 0 years (i.e., what is the useful life of the project B. Project Description, Scope of Work, and Protection Provided Describe, in detail, the existing problem, thc proposed project, and thc scope of work. Explain how the proposeA project will so/ye thc problem(s) and provide thc level(s) of protection described in Part A. Also, if available, auach a vendor's estimate and/or a contractor's bid for thc scope of work. The foundation of the Everglades City Hall has deteriorated to a critical level. Original ten-inch diameter wood pilings are now approximately four inches in diameter where exposed to the atmosphere. Plans and specifications have been prepared to provide for the installation of screw pilings that will support the City Hall structure and thereby relieve the load on the existing pilings. Although not need to support the structure the existing pilings will not be removed. ,J u L 3 ZOO2 (From No, H~fOP~-OOt, Eft. Attach any continuations or additional Items to this page Page 3 of 22 Section HI. Project Location (Fully describe the location of the proposed project.) A. Site 1. Describe the physical location of this project, including street numbers (or neighborhoods) and zip codes; and if available, please provide precise longitude and latitude coordinates for the site utilizing a hand-held global positioning system (GPS) unit or the equivalent. Everglades City Hall 25 51 .444 N 102 Broadway St. 81 23.072 W Everglades City, FL 34139 2. Is the project site seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL)? ~ YES [] NO 3. Provide the number of each structure type (listed below) in the project area that will be affected by the project.. That is, all structures in project area. residential property businesses / commercial property 1 public buildings schools / hospitals / houses of worship other B. Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) showing Project Site :~x Attach a copy of the ~ map, a copy of the panel information from the F~Vl, and, if available, the Floodway Map. FIRM/naps are required for this application (if published for yom' area). Also, ail attached maps must have the project site and structures clearly marked on the map. FIRMs arc typically available from your local floodplain aamini-nU'ator who may be located in a planning, zoning, or engineering office. Maps can also be ordered from thc Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616. For more information about FIRMs, contact your local agencies or visit the FIRM site on the FEMA Web-page at http;//www.fema.~ov/homefMSC/hardconv.htm Using thc FIRM, determine thc flood zone(s) of the project site (Check all zones in thc project arms). (see FIRM legend for flood zone explanations) ~ VE or V 1-30 [] AE or A 1-30 [] An or AH [] A (no bas= flood elevation given) [] B or X (shaded) [] C or X (u~s. had=d). [] Floodway Various [] Coastal Barrier Resource Act (CBRA) Zone (Federal regulations strictly limit Federal funding for projects in tiffs Zone; please coordinate with your state agency before submitting an application for a CBRA Zone projoc0 [] If the FIRM Map for your ~rea is not published, please attach a copy of the Flood H_~zzrd Boundary Map (FH~ for your area, with the project site and structures ctcariy marked on the map C. City or County M~p with Project Site and Fhoto~r~phs :~c' At~ach a copy of a city or county scale map (large enough to show the cntire project are~) with the project site [] Attach a USGS 1:24,000 mpo map with project site de~/y marked on thc map. .[] For acqM.~iflon or elevaflo- projects, includc copy of Parcel Map (Tax Map, Property Identification Map, etc.) · ' showing each pmpen~ to be acquire~L The map should includc tho Tax ID numbe~ for each parcci, if possible. []AUach photographs (2 copies each) for each project si~e. The photographs should bc ~tativc of the project area, inchuiing any relevant sUeam~, creeks, rivers, crc. and drainage areas which'affec~ the project site or will be affected Section IV. Budget/Costs ~m No. HMOP/I;M~-O01, Eft. 9/31~01) 'i Attach any continuations or additional it~m~ to this page J ~gc~ NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM I FIRM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP CITY OF EVERGLADES, FLORIDA COLLIER COUNTY [ONLY PANEL PRINTED) COMMUNITY-PANEL NUMBER 125104 lOlO O MAP REVISED' JUNE 3, 1986 "'-" " . .................. AGENDA iTEM J U L 3 ~ 2002 ZONE AE ' ~EL 81 ate limits (i.e. unincorp · See separately published map~':':5~:':ii - JO~S MAP 380 Araaman File No. 0!-4909 Page 1 ~4 Photograph No. 1 - Front view of Everglades City Hall. Photograph No. 2 - Side (North) View of C~ ~11 ~o~ i~ add.on. N~ a~ ~i~ to AGENDA I~EM, JUL ~ 0 ZOOZ .',.raa~?ran ?iJe i, Jo. OJ-cg~g ~age 2 of-¢ Photo(;raDh No. 3 - View of deteriorated wood pile supporting a grade beam. The ground has subsided and exposed the bottom of the grade beam. ::,.?~:~:- ~-.: · .... ~~ Photo_clraOh No. 4 - View of deterior.;ad wood pile supporting a grade beam. On this site visit (715/01~ about 6-inches of water was in the craw~ space. A~NaA ~,~ No. /~/~ ~_ J U L 3 .n 200~ pg. ~J> ,~rdaman r-~i. i,.!o. :3'! ~909 P~ge :3 ,~ .4 Photo;Iraph No. 5 - View of grade beam showing rusted reinforcing steel that has spalled the concrete cover. Photograph No. 6 - V'mw of portico slab showing rusted fei.forcing steel that has spaibd cov.~. AGENDA iTEM No.~~-- J U L 3 pg._ ~'~ Ard~'nan Fiie No. C'iqgO9 Page Photoclral~h No..7. - View of crawl space showing wood pile-supported grade beam and masonry piers. The ground has subsided and exposed the bottom of the grade beam. ~ Photoqrai]h No. 8 - View of grade beam showing rusted reinforcing steel that has caused th~ ,_canr. m~ .........~ AGENDA ITEM to spall. No.~ J U L 3 0 ZOOZ pg._ 7o _ In this section, provide details of all the estimated costs of the project. As this information is used for the Benefit-Cost Analysis, reasonable cost estimates are essential. Since project administrative costs are calculated on a sliding scale, do not include them in the budget. Also, do ~,ot include contingency costs in the budget. A. Materials [tern Dimension Ouantitv Cost per Unit Cost P~i~ngs B. Labor (Include equipment costs -- please indicate all "soft" or in-kind matches) Description Hours Rate, Cost · '" 50% Install Retrofit C. Fees Paid Include any other costs associated with the project. Description of Task Hours Rat._.f.e Cost · 20% Engineering Total Estimated Project Cost $ 2 0 7,2 0 0. AGENDA ITEM No. /W¢ J U L 3 O Pg'--?/ -- (FormNo. I-IMOP/FMA-001, l~ff. 9£ mt? Attach any continuations or additional items to this page Page 5 of 22 D. Funding Sources (round figures to the nearest dollar) The maximum FE,}lA share for HMGP/FMA projects is 75%. The other 25% can be made up of State and Local funds as wetl as in- kind services. Moreover, the FM'A program requires that the maximum in-kind match be no more than 12.5% of the total project costs. HMGP/FMA funds may be packaged with other Federal funds, but other Federal funds (except for Federal funds which lose their Federal identiw at the State level - such as CDBG, ARS, HOME) may not be used ~br the State or Local match. Estitnated FEM.4 Share $ l 6 2 , 8 0 0 . 7 5 % of Total (maximum .Von- Federal Sh are Estimated Local Share $ 2 2 , 2 0 0 . 12 . 5/0 of Total (Cash) Additional City $ ? % of Total (In-kind) Estimated State Share $ 2 2, 2 0 0. 12. 5/0 of Total (Cash) S % of Total (In-kind) Other Agency Share $ % of Total (Identify Other Non-Federal Agency ) Total Funding sources from above $ 207: 200. . 100 Total % (should equa1100%) Other Non-FETkL4 Federal Funds $ (Do not include in total) (Identify Other Federal Agency ) E. Project Milestones List the major milestones in this project by providing an estimated time-line for the critical a~tivities. Milestone Number of Days to Complete [c.g., D~molition of 6 structures and removal ofdabt'is 14 days] Bid Project 45 days Contractor Mobilization 60 days Retrofit 30 days (FormNo. HMGP/FMA-001,~ ~/311tOIp~.~ Attach any continuations or additional items to this page ~. Section V. Environmental Review (NOTE: This application cannot be processed i/this section is not completed.) Because the I~,IGP/FMA are t~derally funded programs, all projects are required to undergo an environmental review as parc of the ~rant application process. Moreover. all projects must comply with thc National Environmental Policy Act {NEPA) and associated Federal, State, Tribal, and Local s~atutes to obtain funding. NO WORK can be done prior to the NEPA review process. If work is done on your proposed project before the NEPA review is completed, it will NOT be eligible for Federal funding. A. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Documents .~ll projects must have adequate.VEPA doc,tmentation that enables the FE~ Regionat Environmental Officer to determine if'the proposed project complies with ~VEP.-I and associated statutes. The FE~/~I Mitigation Division Environmental Specialists provide comprehet~'ive .VEPA technical assistance for States and.qpplicants, with their coT~'ent, to complete the ,¥EPA review. The type and quantity of NEPA documents required to make this determination varies depending upon the project's size, location, and complt'rity. However, at a minimum, please provide the applicable documentation from this section to facilitate the ~VEPA compliance process. If your project fits into one of the descriptions listed below: development of mitigation plans; inspection and monitoring activities; studies involving only staff time and funding; training activities using existing facilities; please include the foilowlng required N~P~4 documentation: E3 Detailed project description, scope of work, and budget/costs (Section II (p. 3) and Section IV (p. 4)) For all other projects, attach/include the following NEPA documents/information: Detailed project description, scope of work, and budget/costs (Section II (p. 3) and Section IV (p. 5) of this application) Project area maps (Section III, part A & B of this application (p. 4)). Project area/structure photographs (Section III, part C of this application (p, 4)). Project alternatives description and impacts (part B of this section of the application (pp. 7-9)). [] A letter from the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) regarding cultural resources (archeoiogical and historic) in the project area (NOTE: Please inform the SHPO ifa structure to be altered is over 50years old) [] Provide any applicable information or documentation referenced on the "Information and Documentation Needs by Project Type" chart (page I0 of this application) B. Alternative Actions The NEPA process requires that at least two alternative actions be considered that address the same problem/issue as the proposed project. In this section, list two feasible alternative projects to mitigate the hazards faced in the project area. One alternative is the "No Action Alternative.~ 1. No Action Alternative Discuss the impacts on the project area thO action is taken. Building will suffer severe structural damage. -' AGENDA 1TEN.~ ~ J U L 3 2002 Section V. Environmental Review; B. ARernative Actions, continued pg._ .... 75~ (Form No. H2vIGP/FMA-001, Eft. 9/30/01) Attach any continuations or additional items to this page Page 7 of 22 2. Other Feasible Alternative Discuss a t%asible alternative to the proposed project. This could be an entirely different mitigation method or a significant modification to the design of the current proposed project. Complete all of parts a-e (below) and include engineering details (if applicable). a. Project Description for the Alternative Describe. in detail, thc alternative project...\lso, explain how thc alternative project will solve the problem(s) and%r provide protection ~om the hazard(s). Move building onto new foundation. b. Project Location of the Alternative (describe briefly) [] Attach a map or diagram showing the alternative site in relation to the proposed project site [] Photographs (2 copies) of alternative site Not deturmine c. ScopeofWork~r Alte~afiveProject This would require the building of a new foundation, purchase of a suitable site and moving the building onto that foundation. AGEND~'I!~EM~ I- No. 1 J U L 3 d ZOO2 A~ch any co~nuations or additional items ~o ~is page Section V. Environmental Review; B. Alternative Actions, continued d. Impacts of Alternative Project Below, discuss the impact of this alternative on the project area. Include comments on these issues as appropriate: Environmental Justice, Endangered Species. Wetlands, Hydrology (Upstream and Downstream surface water Impacts), Fioodplaim Floodway. Historic Prescrx, ation and Hazardous Materials. Very costly e. Estimated Budget/Costs for AlternatiVe Project In this section, provide details of all the estimated costs of the alternative project (round figures to the nearest dollar)i 1. Materials ftem Dimension Quantity Cost per Unit Cost 2. Labor (Include equipment.costs - please indicate all "soil" or in-kind matches) Description Hours Rate Cost 3. Fees Paid Include any other costs associated with the project. ~ Task Hours Rate Cost TotsiEstlmatedProjectCost$ S 0 0 l~C-.,-~ "xlI)~t~l~ '~[ ' i No. /~ JUL 3 200Z P~e 9 of ~ ~ch an~ continuations or additional Rams to ~ia pa~a Pg. 7~ Section VI. Maintenance Agreement .4ll applicants whose proposed project involves the retrofit or modification of existing public property or whose proposed project would result in the public ownership or management of property, structures, or facilities, must first sign the following agreeznent prior to submitting their application to FE~I21. (NO TE: Those applicants whose project only involves the retrofitting, elevation, or,other modification to private property where the ownership will remain private after project completion DO NOT have to complete this form.) The C o u n t y of C o 1 1 5. e r . State of Florida, hereby agrees that I, LTty, l~wn. Lounty/ if it receives any Federal aid as a result of the attached project application, it will acceft responsibility, at its own expense if necessary, for the routine maintenance of any real property, structures, or ~acilities acquired o.r cohstmcted as a result of such Federal aid. Routine maintenance shall include, but not be limited to, sucta res onsibilities as keeping vacant land cie. ar..of debris, garb.age,.and vermin; k, ee, pings, tr, e,a~. channels, c, ulvert.?, an~storm drains clear of obstructions and debris; and keeping detenuon ponns ~ree ot aetms, trees, aaa wooay growth. The purpose of this agreement is to make clear the Subgrantee's maintenance responsibilities followin, g proje.ct. award and to show the Subgraatee's acceptance of these responsibilities. It does not replace, supercede, or aaa to any other maintenance responsibilities imposed by Federal law or regulation and which are in force on the date of project award. Signedby James N. Coletta the duly authorized representafive (l:}rinttat or t~tp~l name of signing o~tcial) . Chairman, Collier County, BCC .., (titt~) this (day) of (month), (year). Signature* *Please note: The above signature most be by an individual with legal signing authority for the respective local government or county (e.g., the Chairperson, Board of County Commissioners or the County Manager, etc.) No. ~.pp¢oveO as to form & ie,l~l sufficjP..~q.cyt JUL ~No. ~GP~I, Eft. 9a~l) P~-Hmf 22 A~ch any co~inuations or addigonal ~e~ to ~is page Ardaman & Associates, Inc. Gectecnnlc% Efvlronme¢~a! ~c..c Ardaman File No. 01-4909 Ma. fermis Consultants August 30, 200! Mr. Mike Lastovica, P.E. Anchor Engineering Consultants, Inc. 1520 Rcyal Palm Square Boulevard, Suite 200 Fort Myers, Florida 33919 Subject: Everglades City Hall Underpinning Everglades City, Florida Dear Mike: ... Following is a summary of what I know about the foundation problem with Everglades City Hall and I conclude with foundation underpinning alternatives. The existing City Hall was expanded from its odginal construction in the 1920s when it was the Collier County Court House. From the 1956 plans, I believe that the odginal building is about 36 by 66 feet in area and is supported on a perimeter masonry block wall and a single line of masonry piers down the center. The walls and piers bear on 8 to 9-inch thick.by 24-inch wide reinforced concrete grade beams that in turn are supported on wood piles. Over the years the ground has subsided under the building and the bottoms of the grade' beams are now exposed so that you can see the piles. From the holes in the bottom of the grade beams, the piles were originally about 12 inches in diameter. Now they are only about 3 to 4 inches in diameter where exposed. To make matters worse, the reinforcing steel in the grade beams is corroding from the brackish environment, which is causing, the concrete to spall. An~ that is the problem--the integrity of the foundation system is in jeopardy. For this portion of City Hall, resupport of the walls and piers that bypasses the grade beams and supporting piles is required. A reduced copy of the 1956 plans are attached, which shows the area of the odginal building. The 1956 plans show the additions to be supported on 10-inch diameter steel pipe piles filled with concrete. While the steel is rusting and flaking away, we did confirm by drilling into one of the piles that they are concrete filled. Therefore, we have no reason to doubt the integrity of these piles .or?heir pile capacity. Some of the pile caps are spalling also because of .reinforcing steel corrosion. The piles supporting the very back wall of City Hall were not visible because the foundation wall extended under ground. This area is an addition although we are not certain when it w~ ~d~NDA iTEM City personnel excavated a hole adjacent to the wall and exposed the foundation. Gr( Jndwater /(,/~ ~. JUL 3 f; ZOOZ Offices in: i~artow, C,.nc~a. Fort Laude,'~ale, Fort Myers. Miami. Orlando, Pcrt Charlotte, ,~ort St. Lucie, Sarasot~, Tail~nassee, Ta~o~ W. Palm 8eac~ -. p~._ 7,,~' Ardaman File No. 01-4909 2 Ever§lades City Hail Underpinning was encountered just belcw the sudace and 'Ne were unable to pump the hole dry., but by fee! 'Ne determined the masonr,/ block wail is supported on an 18-inch ,,vide by 28-inch thick concrete grade beam in turn supported by 12-inch diameter wood piles. The one wood pile we exposed was felt to be in good shape. I believe that only the odginal wood piles installed in the 1920's under the original Court House need to be replaced. The newer piles appear to be adequate. The grade beams over these piles also require replacement or repair, as do a few of the other pile caps showing corroded reinforcing steel. Also, the portico slab is severely corroded on the underside. Underpinning options will be limited by site restrictions that include · a headroom of 57 inches from bottom of floor joists to ground (69 inches from bottom of floor to ground), ·a groundwater table that fluctuates from just below to just above the ground surface (in July and August, 6-inches of water covered the ground). · questionable grade beam integrity that may limit its use as a reaction for pushing piles. Photographs of site conditions were taken and they are presented in Appendix I of this report. A description of each photograph is given so 1 won't go into any details about them. To help in underpinning design, two Standard Penetration Test (SPT) bodngs were performed: one at the southwest comer of the building and the other at the northeast comer. The bodng logs are included in Appendix I!. The soil descriptions shown on the bodng logs are based upon visual-manual procedure in accordance with local practice. Soil classification is in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D-2487), and is also based on visual-manual procedures described in Appendix III. The bodng logs showed a similar profile consisting of a thin sand veneer over peat extending to a depth of about 10 feet. Loose silty sands were then encountered (although SPT-2 encountered a thin. rock layer just below the peat) to the top of the limestone encountered at 17 feet. The limestone is weathered; therefore, there probably are softer zones in the rock. As a bearing stratum, I expect it to be very competent. Most notable in the profile disclosed by the test bodngs is the amorphous peat from 3 to 10 feet below the surface. This material offered almost no resistance to penetration and explains why the ground has settled so much in the area o~ ;r theAGEi,,iDA'- years. No. /c,,~ ~-- ~' ~ Ardaman & Associates, Inc. ,J U L 3 20( Ardaman File No. 01-4909 3 Everglades City Hall Underpinning Unde,rpinning will reduire some fcundation type to transfer building loads to the limestone encountered at a depth of iT feet beiow the ground. Typically minipites serve this purpose; t~,owever, the available headroom to install these piles is limited and most contractors may need to work through the first floor for any kind of economy. The ones I talked to pretty much indicated that they didn't think they could work under the floor because of the Iow headroom. Lowering the ground is not an option because the groundwater table is too high. Another option is the Helical Pulldown micropile, which is a heavy galvanized steel shaft and helix that is screwed into the ground using' a hydraulic drive (torque) motor attached to a-small tractor. At first I was concerned about corrosion of the steel in the extremely aggressive environment but the new Pulldown technology allows a grout, column to be constructed encasing the shaft. I separately attached some information about this system. Because of the shallow competent rock layer, I believe that a 10-ton and higher capacity pile can be developed and confirmed (without need for load testing) through torque, ddving or pushing. A preliminary foundation plan should be sufficient to get the input and costs we need to underpin the building. A separate approach would be to determine the extent of pile deterioration below the ground surface. It is possible that deterioration only occurs a few feet down, in which case the piles may be sleeved or a new grade beam brought down to sound wood. We attempted to perform this [ask under the building but the water table made it impractical. A new effort would be required to confirm the practicality of this approach. A test pit can be dug from the outside of the building adjacent to the odginal wall using a small backhoe. High capacity pumps will be needed to control the groundwater. Please contact this office if you have any questions. Very truly yours, AN & INC. ASSOCIATES, Gary A. Drew, P.E. Branch Manager GAD/egs AGENDA ITEM ~r ~ Arclaman & Associates, Inc. J U L 3 fl 2.002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECOGNIZE AND APPROPRIATE REVENUE FOR TWO FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, BUREAU OF EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES MATCHING (25%COUNTY FUNDS/75% STATE FUNDS) GRANTS TO APPROPRIATE AND TRANSFER COUNTY MATCHING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $53,346.80 FROM THE EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES 490 RESERVES, AND RECOGINIZE THE STATE FUNDS OF $160,040.40 OBJECTIVE: Board of County Commissioners approval of the necessary budget amendments to accept and utilize grant monies awarded to the Collier County Emergency Medical Services Department. CONSIDERATION: On November 13,2001, the Board of County Commissioners approved the submission of matching (75%/25%) grant applications to the Florida ~-- Department of Health, Bureau of Emergency Medical Services. Applications for 1.) the ~ purchase of Mobile Data Terminal technology and 2.) the purchase of Weapons of Mass Destruction response equipment have been approved for funding by the State. FISCAL IMPACT: A budget amendment will be required in the EMS Grant Fund (491). The total cost of the projects is $213,387.20; State of Florida grant revenues provide $160,040.40 and the County match is $53,346.80. (See table below). The funding source for the two EMS matching grants is EMS 490 Reserves The Mobile Data Terminal funds will be placed into Fund 491-144611 project number 44320. The Weapons of Mass Destruction funds will be placed in Fund 491-144613 project number 44321. ' Project State Grant County Matching Total Cost Fund (75%) Funds (25%) Mobile Data Terminal $59,625 $19,875 $79,500 Weapons Of Mass $100,415.40 $33,471.80 $133,887.20 Destruction Equipment Total $160,040.40 $53,346.80 $213,387.20_ GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT'.. EMS Impact fees will be used to purchase equipment for future EMS growth units. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board approve the necessary budget amendments for the purchase of mobile data terminals and equipment for response to Weapons of Mass Destruction incidents to fulfill the obligation of the State of Florida EMS matching grants. PREPARED BY: Diana Watson, GrantJResearch Coordinator REVIEWED BY: "~ N3 x,, DATE: ,'~ ~"\"~ Dia~n~ B. Flagg, Director of EMS Administration REVIEWED BY: DATE: Ken Pineau, Interim Administrator, Emergency Services Executive Summaries in Boards Absence Summer Recess 2002 1. Approval of Budget Amendment #02-354 - Medical Examiner. (Budget Dept.) 2. Approve funding for an event to celebrate the official launch of the South County Water Reclamation Facility Expansion Project. (Public Utilities) 3. Approval of Budget Amendment #02-355 - Library Impact Fees. (Budget Dept.) 4. Approval of Budget Amendment #02-427 - Health Care Responsibility Act, (Budget Dept.) 5. Acceptance of an additional $51,455 in State Aid to Libraries in FY02. '-" (Public Services) APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENTS In Board's Absence (BCC Agenda of 7/30/02) General (Fund 001) Medical Examiner Budget Amendment #02-354 Operating Expense~ Liability Insurance $3,640 Reserves Reserve for Contingencies (3,640) Total: -0- Explanation: Funds are needed to reimburse the Medical Examiner for Professional Liability Insurance per County's contract with the District Twenty Medical Examiner. AGENDAi'[~M . EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE FUNDING FOR AN EVENT TO CELEBRATE THE OFFICIAL LAUNCH OF THE SOUTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY EXPANSION PROJECT. OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners approve a resolution allowing the expenditure of County funds for Collier County's South County Water Reclamation Facility (SCWRF) Expansion Project's official launch, in an amount not to exceed $1,500.00. CONSIDERATION: The County's good neighbor policy continues to be a number one priority at the SCWRF, located on Warren Street between CR 951 and St. Andrews Boulevard. The County has collaborated xvith homeowner groups for nearly a decade in order to produce a plant that the neighbors can't see, hear or smell. The celebration event is a media tool to spread the nexvs that in anticipation of this project the design engineers have considered and will incorporate neighbor sensitive construction practices and procedures, manage traffic flow in and out of the facility, will complete road paving and maintenance to contain dust, will address more substantial odor control units that is atypical, equipment will have noise dampening enclosure where necessary, Iow night lighting levels will be maintained, containment of rainfall runoff will be onsite, and privacy-enhancing landscape plantings will conceal and surround the project. Collier County Ordinance No. 87-5 allows for expenditures of County funds; it is the purpose of the proposed attached Resolution to approve specific expenditures that will be incurred on July 10, 2002 in order to effectively promote and positively influence the public's understanding and perception of the project. Collier County staff wants to meet the goals and expectations of the COlnmunity by providing more efficient and responsible local government to serve the needs of the community through this planned event. Costs will include but not be limited to a tent, chairs, podium, lectern, easels, refreslwnents such as coffee, fruit, danish, donuts, utensils, paper products, and tablecloths. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds not to exceed $1,500.00 are available in County Wastewater Capital Projects. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This project is consistent with the 2001 Wastewater Master Plan Update as adopted by the Board on December 11, 2001, agenda item 8(A). RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners find through the attached Resolution that the event celebration and the expenditures not to exceed $1,500.00 serve a valid public purpose. The Board also authorizes disbursement of moneys to pay for said expenditures. ?.002 SCWRF Expansion Page 2 Alicia Abbott, Project Manager Public Utilities Engineering REVIEWED BY: (~ ~-, ?'- ~ Date: Roy B. Afider~on, P.E., Director Public Utilities Engineering REVIEWED BY: ' ~"~ Date: Jose~ B. Cheatha~ W~¢tjwater Dkector ~PROVED B .-~..L '- . -~ Date: james W. DeLony, P.E., Pubfic Utilities Administrator JUL 3 0 2002 RESOLUTION NO. 2002 - RESOLUTION NO. CWS-2002- A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE EXPENDITURE OF COUNTY FUNDS FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY'S SOUTH RECLAMATION FACILITY EXPANSION PROJECT CELEBRATION OF THE OFFICIAL LAUNCH OF CONSTRUCTION WITH AN ONSITE EVENT SPEARHEADED BY GOVERNMENT, COMMUNITY AND PROJECT LEADERS WHEREAS, the Collier County Water-Sewer District received its notice to proceed with the final phrase of expansion of the South County Reclaimed Facility after the issuance of the permit from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection; and WHEREAS, the $46.5 million project will enable the plant to handle an eventual maximum-month peak season flow of 16 million gallons per day (mgd); the flows may reach this level as early as 2014. Existing underground pipelines currently servicing the South County Facility already are sized to handle the associated flows; and WHEREAS, the County's good neighbor policy continues to be a number one priority at the South County Facility, located on Warren Street between CR 951 and St. Andrews Boulevard. The County has collaborated with homeowner groups for nearly a decade in order to produce a plant that the neighbors can't see, hear or smell; and WHEREAS, Collier County Ordinance No. 87-5 allows for expenditures of County funds to enhance County employee productivity, and recognized that the promotion and engendering of good will toward the county is an important factor affecting the pride of county employees in their work; and WHEREAS, this event will effectively promote and positively influence the public's understanding and perception of the project and the accomplishment of these goals will benefit the residents of Collier County by providing more efficient and responsible local government to serve the needs of the community; and , NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: I. The celebration event to spread the news that in anticipation of this project the design engineers have considered and will incorporate neighbor sensitive construction practices and procedures (including, but not limited to: manage traffic flow in and out of the facility, will complete road paving and maintenance to contain dust, will address more substantial odor control units that is atypical, equipment will have noise dampening enclosure where necessary, low night lighting levels will be maintained, containment of rainfall runoff will be onsite, and privacy-enchancing landscape plantings will conceal and surround the project) is hereby declared a valid public purpose. 2. In addition, the expenditures in an amount not to exceed $1,500.00 for the event are hereby found by the Board to serve a valid public purpose and are ratified and approved and the Board hereby authorizes disbursement of moneys to pay for said expenditures. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED AFTER MOTION, SECOND AND MAJORITY VOTE FAVORING ADOPTION THIS. DAY OF ,2002. DATED: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION"ERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF COLLIER COUNTY AND AS EX-OFFICIO THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK BY: JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN BY: Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legal sufficiency. Ramiro Mafialich Chief Assistant County Attorney .... APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENTS In Board's Absence (BCC Agenda of 7/30/02) Library Impact Fees (Fund 355) Budget Amendment #02-355 Capital Autos & Trucks $22,210 Library Impact Fee Reserves (22,210) Total -O- Explanation: Funds are needed to purchase an additional Library vehicle due to growth in demand for Library services. AGENDA ITEM JUL 3 0 2002 pg.. ~' APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENTS In Board's Absence (BCC Agenda of 7/30/02) General Fund (001) Health Care Responsibility Act Budget Amendment b~02-427 Operating Expenses Hospitalization In-Patient $15,000 Reserves Reserve for Contingencies ($15,000) Total -0- Explanation: Funds are needed pay actual and anticipated billings for Hospitalization In-Patient charges, in excess of the amount currently budgeted, per the Health Care Responsibility Act. AGENDA ITEM No. JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUT'ZVE SUMMARY ACCEPTANCE OF AN ADbZ'I"rONAL $51,455 ]:N STATE A3:D TO LZBRAI:~E5 TN FY02. OB3ECT:ZVE: To recognize and budget additional funds that the Collier County Public Library System is authorized to receive in State Aid for FY 2002. CONS'rDERAT'rON5: The Board approved submission of the Application for 5tare Aid on September 25, 200-1 (Agenda Item 16.d.3.) Florida Statutes stipulate the manner in which these funds may be expended. 5tote Aid to Libraries is, by legislative intent, provided to improve library services within the 5tare and is to supplement, rather than replace, local efforts towards that end. The Collier County Public Library has qualified for 5tare Aid to Libraries since the program inception in 1964. 5tare Aid was included as anticipated revenue ($350,000) in the FY 2002 Collier County Library Grant Fund Budget. The actual amount of 5tote Aid received depends on the number of Florida Counties qualifying and the amount of funds appropriated by the Florida Legislature. This program was funded by the Legislature at o level that will provide $401,455to Collier County. This figure is $51,455higher than anticipated in the F¥20C _2 Budget. As local government support for the Library increases, so does the amount returned to Collier County in State Aid. These funds can be used for any Library expense except fixed capital purchases such as construction expenses for a new library and cannot replace local funds. Library staff is recommending that funds be used to purchase additional books and other library materials for all of the bibrary Branches. FZSCAL ZMPACT: The Library Grant Fund (129) Budget ,~o~ FY 2002 w±11 ±ncrease from $350,000 to $401,455. ~c~,OWTH MANAGEMENT ZMPACT: None. RECOMMENDAT:ZON: Staff recommends Board approval of any necessary budget amendments that recognize additional 5tare Aid. Mc~rilyn/V~at;t'~es, Assistant Library Director I~eviewed and Approved by: ~( bunnuck, Public 5¢rvic~ Administrator BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE July 30, 2002 FOR BOARD ACTION: 1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED: A. Clerk of Courts: Submitted for public record, pursuant to Florida Statutes, Chapter 136.06(1), the disbursements for the Board of County Commissioners for the period: 1. Disbursements for June 8, 2002 through June 15, 2002. 2. Disbursements for June 16, 2002 through June 22, 2002. 3. Disbursements for June 20, 2002 through June 25, 2002 4. Disbursements for June 26, 2002 through July 2, 2002. 5. Disbursements for July 6, 2002 through July 12, 2002. B. Districts: 1. Fiddler's Creek Community Development District - Resolution 2002-2 to be attached to the February 25th 2002 Minutes., Unaudited Financial Stmnt, Description of Outstanding Bonds and Minutes of April 24, 2002; Minutes of May 22, 2002 2. Ceder Hammock Community Development District_ - Minutes of July 16, 2001, Proposed Budget, Adopted Budget and Financial Statement. 3. Immokalee Fire Control District - Annual Financial Report, Audit, Management Ltr and Response to Management Ltr. 4. Port of the Islands Community Improvement District - Unaudited Financial Statement and Minutes of April 19, 2002; Minutes of May 17, 2002 and Proposed Budget FY 2003 5. Key Marco Community Development District - Unaudited Financial Statement, Minutes of 2/16/99 and 1/17/01 meetings and Adopted Budget 2002. C. Minutes: AGENDA iTEM 1. Pelican Bay SerVices Advisory Committee- Agenda for tl~e__5, .2002 an_d_ "-' July 3, 2002, Minutes of June 5, 2002; Minutes of~ une 12, 2002. J U L 3 0 2002 H:DataJFormat Pg' '.... 2. Collier County Planning Commission - Agenda for June 10, 2002, Minutes of April 18, 2002; Agenda for June 20, 2002, Minutes of May 8, 2002 3. Parks and Recreation Advisory Board - Agenda for May 15, 2002; Agenda for June 12, 2002; Minutes of May 15, 2002 4. Collier County Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board - Agenda for May 23, 2002; Agenda for April 25, 2002, Notice of Meeting July 25, 2002;. 5. Collier County Library Advisory Board - Agenda for April 17, 2002; Agenda for May 22, 2002, Minutes of April 17, 2002; Agenda for June 26, 2002, Minutes of May 22, 2002. 6. Golden Gate Master Plan Restudy Committee - Agenda for May 22, 2002. 7. Immokalee Local Redevelopment Advisory Board -Agenda for May 23, 2002, Meeting Notice for June 27, 2002. 8. Lely Community Development District Minutes and Records - Minutes of March 20, 2002, Minutes of April 17, 2002,; Agenda for June 27, 2002, Minutes of May 10, 2002. 9. Hearing Officer Advisory Committee - Notice of Meeting June 26, 2002. 10. Collier County Airport Authority - Minutes of Workshop of May 30, 2002, Agenda for June 10, 2002 11. Workforce Housing Advisory Committee - Agenda for June 17, 2002 and July 1,2002; Minutes for May 20, 2002 and May 6, 2002 12. Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Local Redevelopment Advisory Board - Agenda for June 12, 2002 and July 3, 2002 13. Collier Soil and Water Conservation District - June 19, 2002, Minutes of May 15, 2002. 14. Historical and Archaeological Preservation Board - Agenda for June 19, 2002; Minutes of May 15, 2002. 15. Environmental Advisory Council - Agenda for June 5, 2002, Minutes of May 1, 2002. 16. Emergency Medical Services Advisory Council - Agenda for June,. 26 -- 2002; Minutes of May 29, 2002. - ^GElling& Ix'r~tq J U L 3 2002. H:DataJFormat P g · ~ 17. Community Character/Smart Growth Advisory Committee - Agenda for April 24, 2002, May 9, 2002; Minutes of April 30, 2002. 18. Lake Trafford Restoration Task Force Meeting - Minutes of April 12, 2002. 19. Enterprise Zone Development Agency- Draft Minutes of May 28, 2002 20. Environmental Advisory Council - July 3, 2002; Minutes of June 5, 2002. 21. 1-75/Golden Gate Interchange - April 18, 2002 22. Collier County Water and Wastewater Authority - Minutes of April 22, 2002. 23. Collier County Metropolitan Planning Organization - Agenda for June 14, 2002. AGE~ ~9E" No. ~'-~--~ I JUL 3 O 2002 H:Data/Format EXECUTIVE SUMMARY THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MAKE A DETERMINATION OF WHETHER THE PURCHASES OF GOODS AND SERVICES DOCUMENTED IN THE DETAILED REPORT OF OPEN PURCHASE ORDERS SERVE A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE AND AUTHORIZE THE EXPENDITURE OF COUNTY FUNDS TO SATISFY SAID PURCHASES. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners make a determination whether the purchase orders opened from June 18, 2002 through June 30, 2002 serve a valid public purpose and authorize the expenditure of County funds to satisfy said purdhases. CONSIDERATIONS: To ensure compliance with State law, the Clerk's Office has prepared a detail list of all purchase orders that have not previously been approved by the Board of County Commissioners that were opened for the period Junel8, 2002 through June 30, 2002. This report is' available for inspection and review in the County Manager's Office. FISCAL IMPACT: The goods and services included in the aforementioned report have all been previously appropriated. GRO}VTHMANAGEMENTIMPACI~ There is no Groxvth Management Impact related to this item. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners make a determination of whether the purchases of goods and services documented in the detailed report of open purchase orders serve a valid public purpose and authorize the expenditure of County funds to satisfy said purchases. , CBA (~irector of Finance and Accounting Reviewed and Approved By: Date: 7/~7,~a~. _ AGENDA ITEM unting Manager J U L 3 0 200?. Pg.. / EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NEW PRECINCT LINES TO REFLECT THE REALIGNMENT OF POLITICAL BOUNDARIES WITHIN COLLIER COUNTY AS ESTABLISHED BY THE FEDERAL JUDICIAL PANEL OBJECTIVE: To create new precinct lines to reflect the new political boundaries within the county as established by the Federal Judicial Panel overseeing Florida reapportionment. The proposed changes accommodate the inclusion of the western portion of State House District #112 in Collier County. CONSIDERATIONS: Pursuant to the requirements of F.S. 101.001, the Supervisor of Elections is recommending changes in the physical precinct boundaries to accomplish the above stated objective. The specific changes are outlined in the accompanying conversion list and map. Explanations of the precinct changes as well as legal descriptions or' the new boundaries are also attached. The Supervisor of Elections proposal minimizes (where possible) the number of district splits within the precincts affected by the inclusion of State House District #112 while conforming the precincts to census tract boundaries. The needs of Collier County's minority populations, which were cited by the Justice Department, and the ruling of the Federal Judicial Panel were given proper attention by the Supervisor of Elections in the formulation of the proposal. Care was given to avoid splitting minority communities except where district lines necessitated a split. New voter identification cards will be issued to all Collier County voters. These cards will inform voters of their districts and polling places. In addition, an internet-based precinct locator will be available to the public on the Supervisor of Elections website, ,.x ,.,.xx .co[licr~ox .net elections 'shttl,: xx'xxxx.collicro,x'.nct elections>. A precinct map will be published in the local newspaper prior to this year's election cycle and the a precinct map will be posted in at least ten conspicuous places in the county pursuant to Division of Elections Rule 1 S-2.033. The Supervisor of Elections will again be sending sample ballots to all voter households before the election. These sample ballots will inform the voters of the choices available to them. The Supervisor of Elections will record the legal descriptions of the precincts with the Clerk of Courts and submit the changes to the United States Department of Justice for preclearance. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact. AGENDA ITEM J U L 3 0 2002 GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPANT: There is no growth management impact. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board authorize the chairman to sign the appropriate resolution adopting the~new precinct boundaries. SUBMITTED BY: Supch'kisor of Ele~i6ns DATE: "~, ~, ."~. ~ AGENDA ITEM J U L 3 O pg. 2. Proposed changes to precinct boundaries to accommodate House District #112. Precinct 257 Combine the portion of Precinct 256 (Lely Golf Estates) and the portion of Precinct 255 (Lely Resorts) which now lie within the borders of State House District #112 with precinct 257. This creates a single precinct following the House District #112 borders. Precinct 627 Combine the portion of Precinct 627 west of the State House District #112 line with Precinct 626. Add those portions of precincts 626 & 632 (south of Golden Gate Main Canal) which lie within the borders of District #112 to Precinct 627. This creates a single precinct following the borders of House District # 112 borders. AGEFiDA ITE~ f'~o. __/_6 A~. JUL 30'2002 AGENDA ITEM ~o. /~' ~ J U L 3 0 ~00~ ~:~.__.. z/ .__ AGENDA ITEM No. /~;X' ~ JUL 3 0 200~_ /, NO. /4: ~ JUL 3 0 2002 AGEI~'DA~ No. J U L 3 0 P~.- ..~_~ AGENDA ITEM,,,-') No. /~,,~ .c~ J U L 3 0 ~.00Z ~..... AGENDA ITEM '"') No //.~ ~ JUL 3 0 2002 ~g. ~ . PRECINCT 255 Collier County, Florida Begin precinct comer at the intersection of Triangle Boulevard and Collier Boulevard (a.k.a. County Road 951); thence north along County Road 951 to its intersection with County Road 864 (a.k.a. Rattlesnake Hammock Road); thence west along County Road 864 to its intersection with the east boundary of Section 20, Township 50S, 26E; thence south on said boundary line to its intersection with St. Andrews Boulevard; thence southeast, south, southwest along St. Andrews Boulevard to its intersection Warren St.; thence southeast on Warren St. for .206 miles to its intersection with an unnamed stream; thence due east along said stream for .397 miles until it turns due south; continue south alonz said stream for. 198 miles to its intersection with another unnamed stream; thence southeast along said second unnamed stream to its intersection with Triangle Boulevard; thence southeast along Triangle Boulevard to its intersection with Collier Boulevard and the point of origin. AGENDA SEI~. No.___/_~/ J U L Pg.__ PRECINCT 256 Collier County, Florida Be~n precinct comer at the intersection of the centerline of County Road 864 (a.k.a. Rattlesnake Hammock Road) and the east boundary of Section 20, Township 50S, 26E; thence south on said boundary line to its intersection with St. Andrews Boulevard; follow St. Andrews Boulevard all the way to its intersection with United States Highway 41 (a.k.a. Tamiami Trl E); thence northwest along United States Highway 41 to its intersection with the Lely Canal; thence northeast, thence southeast following the Lely Canal to its intersection with a 1990 statistical census boundary line; thence north along said boundary line to its intersection with another unnamed stream; thence west to its intersection with Doral Circle; thence north on Doral Circle to its intersection with County Road 864; thence east on County Road 864 to its intersection with the east boundary of Section 20, Township 50S, 26E and the point of origin. AGENDA ITEM ..-.. No. //./~' J U t. 3 0 2002. ,%._ 11 PRECINCT 257 Collier County, Florida Beg'in precinct at the intersection of Collier Boulevard (a.k.a. County Road 951) and United States Highway 41 (a.k.a. Tamiami Trl E); thence northwest on United States Highway 41 to its intersection with St. Andrews Boulevard; thence east on St. Andrews Boulevard to its intersection Warren St.; thence southeast on Warren St. for .206 miles to its intersection with an unnamed stream; thence due east along said stream for .397 miles until it tums due south; continue south along said stream for .198 miles to its intersection with another unnamed stream; thence southeast along said stream to its intersection with Triangle Boulevard; thence southeast along Triangle Boulevard to its intersection with Collier Boulevard; thence southwest along Collier Boulevard to its intersection with United States Highway 41 and the point of orion. AGENDA ITEM No. J U L 3 0 Pg._ 12.--- PRECINCT 632 Collier County, Florida Be~n the precinct at the intersection of State Road 84 (a.k.a. Davis Boulevard) and Santa Barbara Boulevard; thence north on Santa Barbara Boulevard to its intersection with Interstate 75; thence east on Interstate 75 to its intersection with the extended line of Pine Vale Ct; thence south on Pine Vale Ct to its intersection with Palm Springs Boulevard; thence south on Palm Springs Boulevard to its intersection with Radio Road; thence east on Radio Road to its intersection with State Road 84 (a.k.a. Davis Boulevard); thence west, southwest, west along Davis Boulevard to its intersection with Santa Barbara Boulevard and the point of orion. AGENDA ITEM ..... JUL 3 0 2002 PRECINCT 627 Collier County, Florida Begin the precinct at the intersection of Golden Gate Parkway (a.k.a. County Road 886) and County Road 951; thence south on County Road 951 to its intersection with the Radio Road (a.k.a. State Highway 84); thence west along Radio Road to its intersection with Palm Springs Boulevard; thence north on Palm Springs Boulevard to its intersection with Pine Vale Ct; continue north on Pine Vale Ct to its intersection with Interstate 75; thence west on Interstate 75 to its intersection with Santa Barbara Boulevard; thence north on Santa Barbara Boulevard to its intersection with the Golden Gate Canal; thence east along the Golden Gate Canal to the extended line 0f44th St SW thence north along said si*_ht line and continuing along 44th St SW to its intersection with 25th Ave SW; thence-xvest on 25th Ave SW to its intersection 47th St SW; thence northwest on 47th St SW to its intersection with Golden Gate Parkway (a.k.a. County Road 886); thence east on Golden Gate Park~vay to its intersection with County Road 951 and the point of orion. AG END A I-i'E~,,.~_ i No.~/¢ C'( --- Pg.__KY PRECINCT 626 Collier County, Florida Begin the precinct at the intersection of Golden Gate Canal and the extended line of 44th St SW; thence north along said sight line and continuing along 44m St SW to its intersection with 25th Ave SW; thence west on 25th Ave SW to its intersection 47th St SW; thence northwest on 47th St SW to its intersection with Golden Gate Parkway (a.k.a. County Road 886); thence southwest on Golden Gate Parkway to its intersection with Coronado Parkway; thence northwest, then west along Coronado Parkway to its intersection with Santa Barbara Boulevard; thence south on Santa Barbara Boulevard to its intersection with the Golden Gate Canal; thence east along the Golden Gate Canal to the extended line of 44th St SW and the point of origin. AGENDA I,~M~ No. /~ JUL 3 0,2-002 Pg. /,~' 0 = ~ m m ~ ~ m m ° m. - · o o = A~EN )A ITE~ JUL 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ! APPROVE THE AGREED ORDER AWARDING EXPERT FEES RELATIVE TO EASEMENT ACQUISITIONS OF PARCEL 175C AND 575C IN THE LAWSUIT ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V. RICHARD H. EVANS, ET AL., CASE NO. 01-1235-CA, LIVINGSTON ROAD PROJECT NO. 60071. OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the Agreed Order Awarding Expert Fees to be paid for appraisal services, engineering services and planning services with respect to Parcels 175C and 575C in the lawsuit entitled Collier County v Richard H. Evans, et al., Case No. 01-1235-CA (Livingston Road Project). On May 31, 2001, an Order of Taking was entered in Collier County Circuit Court regarding the condemnation of a twenty foot road right-of-way, drainage, utility and maintenance easement for the Livingston Road project (Project No. 60071). On June 12, 2001, Collier County deposited with the Registry of the Court the sum of $39,200.00 for Parcels 175C and 575C in accordance with the Order of Taking. On January 10, 2002, the Board of County Commissioners approved a Stipulated Final Judgment. To conclude this matter, pursuant to Section 73.091(1), Florida Statutes, the County has agreed to pay reasonable appraisal fees in the amount of $3445.50; reasonable engineering fees in the amount ~..--.- of $1,005.85; and reasonable planning fees of $3,180.00 with respect to Parcels 175C and 575C, the terms of which are set out in the Agreed Order Awarding Expert Fees (attached as Exhibit "1"). (~ FISCAL in the of $7631.35 are available in Impact Fee District One. IMPACT: Funds amount Source of Funds are Impact Fees. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Consistent with the Collier County Growth Management Plan for CIE Project No. 53. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: 1. approve the Agreed Order Awarding Expert Fees; and 2. approve the expenditure of the funds as stated. Heidi F. Ashton Assistant County Attorney t~GENp~ ITEM I Nc). JUL 3 0 2002 1 REVIEWED BY: " . · to'''~ Date: ..... Dale A. Bathon, P.E. Pnnmpal Project Manager Tran sportati on/E&CM Gregg Strakaluse, P.E., Director, Transportation/E&CM REVIEWED BY: ~~~ Date: Norm/Peder, 'Administrator Tranf~portation Division APPROVED BY: ~ ~/'~~.~ Date: /~''-'~ ~ David C. Weigel t'-~t /--.3 County Attorney h: Li fxEmDomainXEvans'xExsu m-AgreedOrder AGENDA ITEM JUL 3 0 2002 2 pg. ~, IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL ACTION COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Petitioner, Case No.: 01-1235-CA vs. Parcel Nos.: 175C, 575C RICHARD H. EVANS, et al., Respondents. / AGREED ORDER AWARDING EXPERT FEES THIS CAUSE, having come before the Court upon joint motion of the parties, Petitioner, COLLIER COUNTY, and Respondents, RICHARD H. EVANS and EVANS HOLDING LLC, for entry of an Agreed Order Awarding Expert Fees, and the Court, being fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Respondents, RICHARD H. EVANS and EVANS HOLDING LLC, have and recover from Petitioner, COLLIER COUNTY, the aggregate sum of Seven Thousand Six Hundred Thirty-One and 35/100 ($7631.35) Dollars equaling One Thousand Five and 85/100 ($1005.85) Dollars for engineering services; Three Thousand One Hundred Eighty and No/100 ($3180.00) Dollars for planning services; and Three Thousand Four Hundred Forty-Five and 50/100 ($3445.50) Dollars for appraisal services, incurred with respect to Parcels 175C and 575C; it is further ORDERED that except as provided herein, no additional costs shall be awarded in connection with the above-styled cause of action as it relates to Parcels 175C and 575C; it is further  i AGENDA ITEM / ! ' "" 3 O 2002 ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Petitioner, COLLIER COUNTY, shall, within thirty (30) days from the date of this Order, subject to the approval of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, pay the sum of Seven Thousand Six Hundred Thirty-One and 35/100 ($7631.35) Dollars to QUARLES & BRADY, LLP TRUST ACCOUNT, c/o F. Joseph McMackin, llI, Esquire, 4501 North Tamiami Trail, Suite 300, Naples, Florida 34103 for the benefit of Respondents, RICHARD H. EVANS and EVANS HOLDING LLC., for proper disbursement of expert fees. DONE AND ORDERED in Naples, Collier County, Florida, this day of ,2002. Conformed Copies: Heidi F. Ashton, Esquire F. Joseph McMackin, III, Esquire Peter J. Iacono, Esquire CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire Jean G. Howard, Esquire Bernsen Nurseries, LC JOINT MOTION FOR ENTRY OF ORDER AWARDING EXPERT FEES The Parties hereby stipulate and respectfully request this Court to enter the foregoing Agreed Order Awarding Expert Fees as to Parcels 175C and 575C. Dated: Dated: F. JOSEPH MCMACKIN, III, ESQUIRE HEIDI F. ASHTON, ESQUIRE ~ Florida Bar No. 0163810 Florida Bar No. 966770 PETER J. IACONO, ESQUIRE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Florida Bar No. 399728 Harmon Turner Building QUARLES & BRADY, IJ.P 3301 East Tamiami Trail 4501 North Tamiami Trail, Suite 300 Naples, Florida 34112 Naples, Florida 34103 (239) 774-8400 - Telephone (239) 262o5959-Telephone (239) 774-0225 - Facsimile (239) 434-4999- Facsimile ATTORNEY FOR ~ET~"~I~t~avlq-£M ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENTS ~ NO. ~ 2 ! JUL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AUTHORIZE THE FILING OF A LAWSUIT AGAINST A COLLIER COUNTY EMPLOYEE TO SEEK REIMBURSEMENT OF A DEBT OWED TO THE COUNTY BY THE EMPLOYEE IN THE SUM OF ELEVEN HUNDREN THREE DOLLARS AND SIXTY-TWO CENTS ($1,103.62), PLUS COSTS. OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners authorize the filing of a lawsuit against a Collier County employee to seek reimbursement of a debt owed to the County by the employee in the sum of eleven hundred three dollars and sixty-two cents ($1,103.62), plus costs. CONSIDERATIONS: On March 14, 2001, a Writ of Garnishment against the salary or wages of a County employee, David Hedrich, was served upon the County. Through an internal oversight, the garnishment did not occur. On June 18, 2002, the Circuit Court for Collier COunty ordered that the $1,103.62 be paid by Collier County. Said money was paid and now the County seeks reimbursement of the money it expended from David Hedrich, a County employee, who is now indebted to the County in that sum, plus any additional court costs and interest. FISCAl, IMPACT: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners authorize the filing of a lawsuit against a Collier County employee to seek reimbursement of a debt owed to the County by the employee in the sum of eleven hundred three dollars and sixty-two cents ($1,103.62), plus COSTS. Prepared by: ~liTar~ 1~i Mountfor~t .... Assistant County Attorney Reviewed and Approved by: D-~v~d C. Weig~ ' c~-----.------~ Date:"7"' { ? "' ~5>,~ County Attorney AGENDA ITf,..~ ' .o. fa -- JIJL 3 0 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE GENERAL RELEASE SUBMITTED BY WCI COMMUNITIES PROVIDING FOR PAYMENT OF PREVIOUSLY UNPAID EDUCATION IMPACT FEES FOR MARBELLA AT PELICAN BAY, INC. OBJECTIVE: To obtain Board of County Commissioners approval for execution of a general release fi'om Collier County for unpaid impact fees in connection with the Marbella at Pelican Bay, Inc. condominiums. In exchange for the release, the Marbella at Pelican Bay condominiums will pay the amount requested by the County. CONSIDERATIONS: Pursuant to direction from the Collier County Board of County Commissioners, adult facilities that did not restrict school age children at the time building permits were issued or had no deed restrictions in place by the time of the issuance of Certificates of Occupancy were to be notified of and requested to pay outstanding impact fees. In all, approximately Twenty [20] collection letters have been sent. h~ the process of reviewing the payment histories of such facilities, it was discovered that some of them owed fees to the County and some were due to receive refunds from the County. One of these facilities, the Marbclla at Pelican Bay, Inc. condominiums, was notified in writing on May 28, 2002 that unpaid impact fees were outstanding in the amount of Fifty-Six Thousand, Three Hundred-Seventy-Two Dollars and Thirty-Two Cents [$56,372.32]. These funds were due because at the time of the issuance of the building permit, impact fees were not paid for sixteen [16] Assisted Living Facilities and Road Impact Fees were paid at an incorrect rate for one hundred-eighteen [ 118] other residential units. Staff also discovered an overpayment of EMS Impact Fees, for which an authorization of a refund is being requested in the amount of Five-Thousand Two-Hundred-Forty-Seven Dollars and Sixty Cents [S5,247.60]. The building permit was issued on April 30, 1997 and the Certificate of Occupancy was issued on December 30, 1998. There is no recorded deed restriction pertaining to this property. WCI Communities has submitted payment in full for the unpaid impact fees in the amount of Fifty-Six Thousand, Three Hundred-Seventy-Two Dollars and Thirty-Two Cents [$56,372.32]. In exchange for this payment, it is requesting a General Release from the County's collection efforts to secure unpaid impact fees from communities that are described as "adult" communities. WCI does not admit, by paying these fees that they are in fact, owed. FISCAL IMPACT: The receipt of these funds will result in a net recovery amount of Fifty-One Thousand- Ninety-Two Dollars and Seventy-Two Cents [$51,092.72]. Additionally, staff requests approval of a refund of Five-Thousand Two-Hundred-Forty-Seven Dollars and Sixty Cents [$5,247.60] for an over-payment of EMS Impact Fees at the time these fees were assessed. [ AGEND~,,iTEM ----- NO. bi JUL 3 O 2002 Pg. ~ GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board execute the General Release for the condominiums at Marbella at Pelican Bay, Inc. in exchange for a payment of Fifty-Six Thousand, Three Hundred-Seventy-Two Dollars and Thirty-Two Cents [$56,372.32]. Staff further requests the Board of County Commissioners authorize a refund to the developer of the excess EMS Impact Fees in the amount of Five-Thousand Two- Hundred-Forty-Seven Dollars and Sixty Cents [$5,247.60]. J0qu{jine Hubba;d Robinson Assistant county Attorney Approved by: ~ Z~/~_~__~ ~J Date: David C. Weigel, ~unty ~omey I AGENDhlTEM JUL 3 O 2002 '2, 2 GENERAL RELEASE KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, WCI Communities, Inc. hereby tenders Check No. 01312080 dated June 20, 2002, in the amount of $56,372.32 payable to the order of Board of County Commissioners. Such check is being tendered in response to the demand of Collier County and in exchange for a full release of any and all liability with respect to the impact fees which may be payable in connection with the Marbella at Pelican Bay, a condominium, and related amenities. Neither Marbella at Pelican Bay, Inc. nor its parent companies admit or agree that such funds are owed. in the event such amounts were proper, Collier County is now precluded from compelling payment of such amounts by virtue of the applicable statute of limitations. In exchange for the payment from WCI Communities, Inc. Collier County hereby remises, releases and forever discharges, and by these presents do, for themselves, their successors, personal representatives, heirs and assigns, remise, release, acquit, satisfy and forever discharge Marbella at Pelican Bay, a condominium, its parent companies, their executors, heirs, personal representatives, agents and assigns, of and from all, and all manner of action and actions, cause and causes of action, suits, debts, dues, sums of money, accounts reckonings, bonds, bills, specialties, covenants, contracts, controversies, agreements, promises, variances, trespasses, damages, judgments, executions, claims, and demands whatsoever, in law, or in equity, which they ever had, now have or which their heirs, successors, personal representatives, executors, administrators or assigns hereafter can, shall or may have, for, upon or by reason of any matter, cause, or think whatsoever, from the beginning of the world to the date of the date of these presents relating to the payment of impact fees in connection with the Marbella at Pelican Bay, a condominium and related amenities. AGENDAITEM 2002 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and seals this day of _, 2002. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk By: Deputy Clerk James N. Coletta, Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: A~si'-sta~nt County Attorney F:\DATA\WPDATA\LITI GATE\Wci\retease.wpd A C-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.~ N D A I T E M NO. ~b '~_~ JUL 3 0 2002 Pg- L.~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PETITION SNR-2002-AR-2239, THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION, REQUESTING A STREET NAME CHANGE FOR A PORTION OF THOMASSON DRIVE TO THOMASSON LANE, LOCATED IN SECTIONS 13 AND 24, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners render a decision on a request to change the street name for a portion of Thomasson Drive to Thomasson Lane. CONSIDERATIONS: The Petitioner is requesting that that portion of Thomasson Drive which begins at the intersection of East Tamiami Trail and continues west to the intersection of Normandy Drive be renamed Thomasson Lane. This change is necessary to avoid confusion on ..-.-- the part of emergency response personnel and the general public resulting from the creation of a new road in the Sabal Bay Development which would intersect the existing Thomasson Drive. The new road, which is to be constructed in the proposed location in accordance with a recommendation by the Collier County Transportation Department, will become Thomasson Drive. FISCAL IMPACT: Fiscal impact to the County Manager's agency will be incurred in the form of staff time spent revising plats and addressing records. Fiscal impact to fire, police (Sheriff's Office), Post Office, EMS, and 911 Emergency Services will be incurred in the form of costs to update records and maps. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The renaming of the street will have no impact on the Growth Management Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: There are no environmental issues associated with this petition HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: ,,, There are no historical/archaeological issues associated with this petition. JUL 3 O 2002 PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve Petition SNR 2002 AR-2239, changing the name of Thomasson Drive to Thomasson Lane. EAC RECOMMENDATION: The EAC does not review street name change petitions. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission does not review street name change petitions. PREPARED BY: ROSS GO(2/HENAUR, PLANNER D~,TE × CURRENT PLANNING REVlEWEB BY: SU~SAN MURRAY, AICP, INTERIM PLANNING DIRECTOR APPROVED BY: MUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES SNR-2002-AR-2239 JUL 3 0 2O02 ~. 2 SN R-2002-AR-2259 PROJECT #2002030022 DATE' 3/12~02 PEGGY JARRELL c -t A L APPLICATION FOR STREET NAME CHANGE DATE: March 8, 2002 AGENT'S NAME: Collier County D~ve]_o[xn~nt Services Telephone No. 941-4n3-2482 AGENT'S FIRM: Collier County Operations/Addre~.~ing Fax No. 94!_659_72~. AGENT'S ADDRESS: 2800 North Hor~omhoo DrSv~ PETITIONER'S N3dHE:Co.l.3. ier Co~mty ~f~ratq~ns/h~dressi~ePh°ne No. 94!-403-2482 PETITIONER'S ADDRESS: 2~OO North Nnr.~o.~hn~ nrivo COMPLETE THE FOLLOV*qNG FOR ALL ASSOCIATION (S) AFFILIATED ~,VITH THIS PETITION. ( Provide additional sheets if necessary) Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address City State __ Zip Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address City ~tate ~ ZIp Name of blaster Association: Mailing Address City State ~ Zip Name of Civic Association: Mailing Address City State Zip COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT/CURRENT PLANNING 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE- NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 ~l~lO& I~r~ TELEPHONE (941) 403-2300, FAX (941) 643-6968 ~-- J q 1_'~ JUL 3 0 2002 Applicalion for Strttl l~lmm Chingt- 09/2000 mg{ 3 ~ ~ __ PROPOSED CHANGE,: CURRENT NAME OF STREET: Thc-rr~n~nn PROPOSED STREET NAME: Thomasson Lane STREET IN QUESTION IS: [] public, or [] private Reason for proposed change: Saba! Bay Deve.l_ol3ment has b~_o_n ro~=..~t-ocl by t-ho ~-rnn~..r~rtation deparU,~nt to create a new roadway through thoro prnjoct that tio~ the existing Thcrnasson Driv~-- The ~wi~ng ~hc~n~_e~©n_ Drive off for fh,~- nowlv ~_roaf~ roadway- Thor~for~ fh~ owi.qfing ~~nn ~ivo east of Block 1, ~t 1 of Avalon Estates Unit ]. needs to ~ ren~ to Th~sson Lane for ].ess confusion for the public and ~erqencv res~nse. This wi!! make the new Th~asson r,an~ ond~ng ~t Ng~mnRy grSxr9 in Section !3, To, ship 50, Ranqe 25. Approximate length of street: t/2 mile Number of parcels or lots abutting street: Total Number of property owners abutting street to be renamed: 30 Total Number of property owners signing petition to change street name: None Percentage of property owners signing petition: Applicant [-'] does, or [-'] does not, agree to pay cost of street sign replacement for public street, (approx. $100.00 per sign ) ~ JVL 3 0 2002 LOCATION: Application for Street Name Change - 0912000 'age 4~1.6 DDRESSING CHECKLIST ease complete the following and submit to the Addressing Section for Review. Not all items will apply to every oject. Items in bold type are required. ~SX..Oc--'(-- \ 1. Legal description of subject property or properties (copy of lengthy dflFc~p_tion may be attached) Folio (Property ID) number(s) of above (attach to, or assoctate wtth, legal descrtptton if more than 2. 3. Street address or ad&esses (as applicable, ff already assigne~Z~' qq t 16~ , ~q ~~6q o of s~ev ~EEDED ONLY FOR ~PLATI LD FKuen~ng~G~ q~2~OO~ ~q 6. 7. Proposed Street n~es (¢applicable) 8. Site Development PI~ Nmber (FOR E~ST~G PROJECTS/SITES ONLY) SDP 9. Petition Type - (Complete a sep=ate Addressing Checklist for each Petition T~e) ~ SDP (Site Development PI~) ~ PPL (Pl~s & Plat Review) U SDPA (SDP Amendment) ~ PSP (Prelimin~ Subdivision Plm) ~ SDPI (SDP Insubst~tial Ch~ge) ~ FP (Final Plat) ~ SIP (Site Improvement PI~) ~ LLA (Lot Line Adjus~ent) ~ SIPA (SIP ~endment) ~ BL ~l~ting Pe~it) ~NR (S=eet Nme Ch~e) U ROW (~t-ogWay Pe~it) ~ Vegemtio~xotic ~eg. Removal Pe~iU) ~ E~ ~xcavation ~ L~d Use Petition ~ce, Condition~ Use, ~ VRSFP (Veg. Removal & Site Fill Pe~t) Boat Dock Ext., Rezone, P~ rezone, etc.) ~ Other - Describe: 10. Project or development n~es proposed for, or already appe~ng in, condomiNm docm~nm (if applicable; indicate whe~er proposed or existing) 11. Please Check One: ~ Checklist is to be F~ed Back U Person~ly Picked Up 12. Applicant NameO~t ~~ O~~ Phone Fax 13. Signature on Addressing Checklist does not constitute Project ~Wor SUeet N~e approval ~d is subject to ~her review by the Addressing Section. FOR STAFF US~ ~ ~qx tU ~o~ Address Number ~~g ~qz~ ~q :, JUL 3 0 2002 RESOLUTION NO. 02 - RESOLUTION RENAMING A PORTION OF THOMASSON DRIVE TO THOMASSON LANE. A LOCAL STREET LOCATED IN SECTIONS 13 AND 24, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST. COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners (Board) is authorized pursuant to Section 336.05, Florida Statutes, to name or rename County streets and roads, except for certain state roads; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Collier County Ordinance No. 99-76, as codified in Section 22-0357 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, the Board of County Commissioners is required to approve requests to rename streets or roads by a super majority vote of four or more Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Board has been requested to rename that portion of Thomasson Drive which begins at the intersection of Tamiami Trail East and continues west to the intersection of Normandy Drive to Thomasson Lane, a local street located in Sections 13 and 24, Township 50 South, Range 25 East. Collier Count.',', Florida; and \VHEREAS, there is no other street in Collier County with the name Thomasson Lane, or any similar sounding name; and WHEREAS, it is necessary' for identification purposes to confirm the new name of this street. NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that: Effective this date the name of the above described portion of the local street knox~m as Thomasson Drive is changed to Thomasson Lane, and the renaming of said street is confirmed as such. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that: 1 ) The Clerk to the Board will record this Resolution in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, and make note of this street name change on the referenced Plat, and; 2) The new name of this street will be immediately changed on the effected County's Zoning Atlases and likewise be noted upon all County maps depicting this street. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and super majority vote of the Board. JUL 3 0 2002 Done this day of , 2002. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLORDA BY: Deputy Clerk JAYMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency: ~1~.-~I ~, Patrick G. White ' Assistant County Attorney JUL 3 0 2002 pi. lC) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PETITION AVROW2002-AR2439 TO DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY'S AND THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST IN A PORTION OF THE ROAD RIGHT OF WAY FOR 14 TH STREET NORTH WHICH WAS DEDICATED TO THE COUNTY BY THE PLAT OF "NORTH NAPLES HIGHLANDS", AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 3, PAGE 12, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. LOCATED IN SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST. OBJECTIVE: To adopt a Resolution to vacate a portion of the road right of way for 14 th Street North. CONSIDERATIONS: Petition AVROW2002-AR2439 has been received by Planning Services from Lisa Barnett, Esq. of Cherry Passidomo Wilson & Johnson, LLP, as agent for the petitioners, George W. & Lorraine V. McKay and Carmen Rivera, requesting the vacation of a 60 foot wide by approximately 136 foot long portion of the right of xvay for 14 th Street North. There is no road constructed within this portion of the right of way and there are no plans to build a road at this location in the future. Letters of no objection have been received from the following Collier County Departments: Public Utilities, Engineering Services, Transportation, Stormwater Management, Sheriff, North Naples Fire and Rescue and also from the City of Naples, FPL, Sprint and Comcast. Zoning is RMF-6. This Executive Summary was approved by Greg Garcia in Transportation on 6-05-02 and by Roy Anderson in Public Utilities on 5-24-02. FISCAL IMPACT: Planning Services has collected a $1,000 "Petition to Vacate" fee from the petitioners which covers the County's cost of advertising, recording and processing the Petition. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None ~x.._2L/..._..q.~ JUL 3 0 2002 PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: 1. Adopt the Resolution for Petition AVROW2002-AR2439 for the vacation of a portion of the Road Right of Way for 14 th Street North; and 2. Authorize the execution of the Resolution by its Chairman and direct the Clerk to the Board to record a certified copy of the Resolution in the Official Records; and 3. Request the Clerk to the Board to make appropriate marginal notes on the recorded plat. PREPARED BY: ~,c_..w'_ ~?~,-~--'~ DATE: Rick Grigg, P.S.M. Engineering Services Thomas E. Kuck, P.E., Engineering Services Director J0s,eph K. Schn)i'tt, Administrator  ununity Development & Environmental Services JUl 3 0 2002 I RESOLUTION NO. 2002- 2 3 4 5 RESOLUTION FOR PETITION AVROW2002-AR2439 TO DISCLAIM, 6 RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY'S AND THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST IN 7 A PORTION OF THE ROAD RIGHT OF WAY FOR 14 TH STREET NORTH 8 WHICH WAS DEDICATED TO THE COUNTY BY THE PLAT OF "NORTH 9 NAPLES HIGHLANDS", AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 3, PAGE 12, PUBLIC 10 RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. LOCATED IN SECTION 22, 11 TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST. 12 13 14 15 WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 336.09 and 336.10, Florida Statutes, Lisa Barnett, Esq. 16 of Cheffy Passidomo Wilson & Johnson, LLP, as agent for the petitioners, George W. & Lorraine 17 V. McKay and Carmen Rivera, does hereby request the vacation of a portion of the right of way 18 for 14 th Street North; and 19 20 WHEREAS, the Board has tiffs day held a public hearing to consider vacating said Road 21 Right of Way as more fully described below, and notice of said public heating to vacate was 22 given as required by law; and 23 24 WHEREAS, the granting of the vacation will not adversely affect the ownership or right 25 of convenient access of other property owners. 26 27 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY 28 COMMISSIO*,rERS OF COLLIER COLrNTY, FLORIDA, that the County's Right o7 Way 29 interests over and across the following portion of the 60 foot wide Public Road Right of Way are 30 hereby vacated, extinguished, renounced and disclaimed, and this action is declared to be in the 31 Public's interest and for the Public's benefit: 32 33 See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein. 34 AGENDA I'l'~ JUL 3 0 2002 ,,. 36 37 38 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF 39 COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the 5 foot wide Utility Easement and the 20 foot wide 40 Drainage Easement more particularly described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated 41 herein, are hereby accepted as relocation easements for the Public Road Right of Way vacated 42 herein. 43 44 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Clerk to the Board is hereby directed to record a 45 certified copy of this Resolution, the proof of publication of the notice of public hearing and the 46 proof of publication of the notice of adoption of this Resolution in the Official Records of Collier 47 Count, Florida. 48 49 This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote favoring same. 50 51 52 53 DATED: 54 ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 55 DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 56 57 58 BY: 59 Deputy Clerk James N. Coletta, Chairman 60 61 62 63 64 65 Approved as to form and legal . 66 sufficiency:67 ~)~J 68 69 Patrick G. White, Esq. 70 Assistant County Attorney ~TW.l~ ITEM JUL 3 0 2002 EXHIBIT "A" SHEET I OF 1 AVROW2002-AR2439 SffNVgHOIH S]~d~N HI~0N m I 109 0 N~09ff 0 N009ff ~ZTM ~ u <~ I t~, - ~ JUl 3 0 2002 EXHIBIT "B" SHEET 1 OF 4 This instrument was prepared by AYROW20 0 2-AR 2 4 3 9 Lisa H. Barnett Cheffy Passidomo Wilson & Johnson, LLP 821 Fifth Avenue South Naples, Florida 34102 (941) 261-9300 (qpncP ahnv~- thiq lin- fnr r~rnrdlng data% UTILITY EASEMENT THIS EASEMENT, granted this '2'JO~-~ day of ~Yo,~l,.q , 2002, by American Funding and Service Corporation, a Florida corporation, as Trustee under Arfi/erican Funding Land Trust #330, Grantor, to the Board of County Conunissioners of Collier County, Florida, its successors and assigns, as Grantee. WITNESSETH: That the Grantor for and in consideration of the sum of ten dollars ($10.00) and other valuable consideration paid by the Grantee, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, hereby conveys, grants, bargains and sells unto the Grantee, its successors and assigns, a perpetual, non-exclusive easement, license, and privilege to enter upon and to install and maintain utility facilities, in, on, over and under the following described lands being located in Collier County, Florida, to wit: See attached Exhibit "A" which is incorporated herein by reference. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same unto the Grantee and its assigns, together with the right to enter upon said land, excavate, and take materials for the purpose of constructing, operating, and maintaining utility facilities thereon. Grantor and Grantee are used for singular or plural, as the context requires. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has caused these presents to be executed the date and year first above written. Grantor: American Funding and Service Corp., a Florida corporation, as Trustee under American Funding Land Trust #330 ~ 19.~:~'~,t~'J Its:President State of Florida ) County of Collier ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged personally before me on /~tQ~/]~. . 1 ~ ,2002, by Keith Basik, as President of American Funding and Service Corporation, Trustee of American Funding Land Trust #330, who is personally known to me. ,~,~l~Ir~r My ~ CC85557~ %,~w'~e,- Expires July 15, 2003 Notary Public AGENDA ITEM My commission expires: JUL 3 0 2002 ~,oo~ ~ ~ 031VOVA 3g 02 ~ z zZ ~z ~ ~ I~ ~,_~ JUL 3 0 2002 EXHIBIT "B" SHEET 3 OF 4 This instrument was prepared by A ¥ R OW 2 0 0 2 - A R 2 4 3 9 Lisa H. Barnett Cheffy Passidorno Wilson & Johnson, LLP 821 Fifth Avenue South Naples, Florida 34102 (941) 261-9300 (,~pnce ahnue, thiq line' fnr re.c'nrttin~o clata) DRAINAGE EASEMENT THIS EASEMENT, granted this :~/]'~' day of ~-~'u 1¢ , 2002, by American Funding and Service Corporation, a Florida corporation, as Trustee under Ame~can Funding Land Trust #330, Grantor, to the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, its successors and assigns, as Grantee. WITNESSETH: That the Grantor for and in consideration of the sum of ten dollars ($10.00) and other valuable consideration paid by the Grantee, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, hereby conveys, grants, bargains and sells unto the Grantee, its successors and assigns, a perpetual, non-exclusive drainage easement, in, on, over and under the following described lands being located in Collier County, Florida, to wit: See attached Exhibit "A" which is incorporated herein by reference. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same unto the Grantee and its assigns, together with the right to enter upon said land to maintain said easement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has caused these presents to be executed the date and year first above written. Grantor: American Funding and Service Corp., a Florida corporation, as Trustee under American Funding Land Trust #330 State of Florida ) County of Collier ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged personally before me on /~?, I] /¥ ,2002, by Keith Basik, as President of American Funding and Service Corporation, Trustee of American Funding Land Trust #330, who is personally known to me. ~/~ ,~', uv commm~ cc~ssgt6 ~"?.~ ~ u~y ~5 2ooa Notary Public ....... J - ' My commission expires: , JUL 3 0 2002 ~ ~ SHEET 4 OF 4 -, ~' ~ ~' e~ ~ ,4 ,.t~,~ AVROW2002-AR2439 ...... . .... ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ........ ~ ......... ~ ~ a~ ~ z Attachment "A" PETITION FORM FOR VACATION OF ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY Date Received: ~'-~-~, Z,~ .~.--'~o.. ~ Petition #: Petitioner: George W. and Lorraine V. McKa¥ and Carmen Rivera Address: Georee W. and Lorraine V. McKa¥ 3770 140' Street North Telephone: 941-564-3900 City/State: Naples, Florida Zip Code: 34103 Address: Carmen Rivera 1933 Frank Whiteman Blvd. Telephone: 941-564-3900 City/State: Naples, Florida Zip Code: 34103 Agent: Lisa H. Barnett and/or Keith Basik Address: 821 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 201 Telephone: 941-261-9300 City/State: Naples, Florida Zip Code: 34102 Road Name: A portion of Third Avenue n/k/a 14t~ Street North Location: Section 22 Township 49 S Range 25 E Plat Book 3 ..... Page(s) 12 Legal Description: See Exhibit "A" , ~-oD ~D~ Current Zoning: RMF~ ( ~OOF'-{~ ) Reason for Request: The right of way ("ROW") is approximately 60' wide x 140' long and is currently unimproved vacant land which has never been used for roadway purposes. The purpose of vacating the ROW is to allow for a park area for use by the adjacent property owners and residents of an adjacent subdivision to be known as Herningway Place, located on the north side of the ROW. It is a residential community with approximately 25 homes, being developed by American Funding and Service Corp. The proposed plat is currently under review by Collier County. The entrance into Hemingway Place will exist at the intersection of Cypress Woods Drive and 14'h Street North; thus, the subject ROW (Frank Whiteman/14th Street North intersection) will not be used. The park area will have park benches, playground, sidewalks with lighting, and may or may not be fenced/walled. There are no easements within the boundary of the ROW. There is Public Utility Easement ("PUE") that exists on the north side of the adjacent pxoperties. If necessary, Peutioner is willing to extend this 5' PUE through the vacated ROW. In addition, Petitioner does not object to providing a drainage easement along the eastern boundary of the vacated ROW. Does thl.q affect density? No I hereby authorize Agent abo~/e~ represent me for this petition: I81Yes [] No S. igna~y.3e of Petitioner,~ -/ George W. McI~ Date e'V McK - te I~ [~ Signature of Petitioner - [ ' · I~v D _ Signature of Peti~ione-r Carmen Rivera ' D t'~ Official Receipt - Collier County Board of County Commissioners CDPR1103 - Official Receipt ! Trans Number Date Post Date .Payment Slip Nbr i 1328834 4/26/2002 2:32:47 PM 4/26/2002 AR 2439 i Appl Name: KEITH BASIK/LISA BARNETT Appl Stage/Status: COMPLETENESS STAGE/PENDING Address: 821 FIFTH AVE S - SUITE 201 NAPLES FL 34102 Proj Name: HEMINGWAY PLACE Type: RSF TAZ: Subdiv Nbr: 1257 Project Nbr: 2001080011 Payor: AMERICAN FUNDING Fee Information Fee Code i Description I GL Account Amount I Waived 12TRVC j REV Acer! VAC EASEMENT-ROW 110116361032910000000 $1000.00~ Total $1000.00 Payments Payment Code ~ Account/Check Number Amount , CHECK 11019 $1000.00 Total Cash $0.00 Total Non-Cash $1000.00 Total Paid [ $1000.00 Memo: Cashier/location: CORZO_M / 1 User: SOTER_C AGENDA ITEM .., JUL 3 0 2002 Collier County Board of County Commissioners Printt ~ ucoul~ la omcnJ, ncon~ of ~ C~S JlJJOJ,# ~*,TO ilO,# LINDA GREGORY 4947 TAHIti TRAIL NAPLES' FLORIDA 34103 STRAP NO: 0000064~6176~2 GRANTEE'S SOCIAL SECURITY NO: THIS WAR~NTY DEED Hade this 11th day of December, 1996, by Billy F. Broxson, surviving spouse of Sarah R. Broxson, deceased, joined by his wife, Judy Bell Broxson · ' whose post office address is: 1399 Frank Whiteman Boulevard hereinafter called the grantor, to Cecilio Rivera Santana and Carmen Rivera, husband and wife whose post office address is: I~~~~ hereinafter calle~ the ~rantee: (~herever use~ here~n the ter~s "~rantor" and "~rantee" ~nclu~e all ?. the parties to this instrument and the heirs, legal representatives and assigns of individuals, and the successors and assigns of :-' corporations) WITNESSETH: That the grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of $10.~ ' and other valuable considerations, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, '~. hereby grants, bargains, sells, aliens, remises, releases, conveys and confirms unto the grantee, all that certain land situate in Collier County, Florida: The East Half of Lot 19 and all of Lot ~0, Block E. NORTH NAPLES HIGHLANDS. as recorded in Plat Book 3. Page 1~, in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. T~ETHER with all the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging or in anywise appertaining. TO ~VE AND TO HOLD. the same in Fee simple forever. ~D the grantor hereb~ covenants with said grantee that the grantor is lawFull~ seized of said land in fee simple: that the grantor has good right and lawful Buthorlty to sell and convey said land: ti~at the grantor hereb~ full~ warrants t~e title to said land and will deKend the same against the lawful claims all persons whomsoever: and that said land is free of al1 encumbrances, except taxes accruing subsequent to December 31, 1995, restrictions, reservations and ease~nts of record, if an~. ~ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said grantor has signed and sealed th~ presents the day and year above written. JJ ~--J'~l-I ~ Signed, sealed and~livered J in ~ pres(~/ J J JUL 3 g2OOZ m~ STATE OF ~ COUNTY OF ~ EXEC.~UTION OF ~he for~c~)going instrument was acknowledged before me this ~day of ~. 1996. by Billy F. Broxson, surviving spouse of Sarah R. 8roxson. deceased, joined by his wife, Judy Bell Broxs~n . who is/are personally known to me or who has/have produced j~~11~s (SEAL) co ssIo. EX . Notary Name/Commission No./Exp. Date - typed or printed FILE NO: N70480R JUL 3 0 2002 STATEMENT OF GENERAL PUBLIC BENEFIT (Right of Way Vacation - 14~h Street N at Frank Whiteman Blvd.) The right of way ("ROW") sought to be vacated is approximately 60' wide x 140' long and is currently unimproved vacant land which has never been used for roadway purposes. The purpose of vacating the ROW is to allow for a park area for use by the adjacent property owners and residents of an adjacent subdivision to be known as Hemingway Place, located on the north side of the ROW. Following are the general public benefits that would result if the ROW is vacated. 1. Currently the ROW is not subject to ad valorem taxes because it is a county right of way. After the vacation, the ROW would become a taxable parcel, increasing the tax revenue of Collier County. 2. The ROW is currently maintained by Collier County. If the vacation is granted, the Petitioner would assume responsibility for maintenance and Collier County's responsibilities for the ROW would be terminated. This would result in a financial benefit for Collier County. M:\~pdt)cs\REL~erFund\G[*odlette Suhdivis~m\publ~c benefit 2002 A?I~-10-2002 NED 04:10 PM AMERICAN FUNDING FAX NO. ]9412628594 P, 03 04/10/2082 14;40 cJ417322585 CC ENG Pt_Z~ ROON PAC..~ 82 American Funding ...and~rvice Corp. _ April 4, 2002 To: S~b~O~o, CoUi,r Co,? ~,~),u~ u~it~. .......... ~,~,, su~i~i,i~ From: Amodcaa ~tmct~g ~ ~ co~. - ~velo~ oz~~ Kep~ag ~dj~t ~ o~s Re: ~OfNO Obj~o~ V~ofC~ D~ ~: ' ~ ~ofo~ ~ ~ d~o~, ~~ your dep~ ~lui~ to ~ve [nt~flon of F~ ~~ ~d l~~ S~ Nc ~. ~e ROW b ~~ly 60 ~ ~de by la0 ~ d~. ~a ROW ~dy ~ p~ of ve~d-~ ~e ROW e~ hto Hem~y P~ ~ll S~t No~ ~, ~ subj~ ROW of~o O~e~fl~" ~ ~ dep~l. ~ ',6~ ~ a ~e ~~ ~ ~e e~ 20' po~on of mc ~o~ ~ te in~ ~c ~ ~ ~:~Y ~ o~ ~e n~ aide ~ ~ja~ Ift~ are no obj--, p{~o 5~ly, American Fu~din8 s~d S~-vi~ Co~p. American Funding and Service Corp. December 20, 2001 To: John Houldsworth From: American Funding and Service Corp. - Developer of Hemingway Place Subdivision Representing adjacent property owners Re: Letter of'No Objection: Vacating of County Right-of-Way (ROW) Dear John: On behalf of ourselves as the developer, as well as the adjacent property owners, we are requesting your departments permission to have the county vacate the established ROW at the intersection of Frank Whiteman and 14th Street North. The ROW is approximately 60 feet wide by 140 feet deep. The ROW currently is a vacant parcel. The purpose of vacating the ROW is to allow for a park area for each adjacent property owner to enjoy. The park area will be under the control/ownership of the new subdivision called Hemingway Place, located on the north side of the ROW. Hemingway Place is a proposed new subdivision currently under a PSP review by the county. It is a proposed residential community with approximately 25 homes, being developed by American Funding and Service Corp. The entrance into Hemingway Place will exist at the intersection of Cypress Woods Road and 14a Street North; thus, the subject ROW (Frank Whiteman/14a Street North) will not be used. The park area will have park benches, playground, sidewalks with lighting, and may or may not be fenced/walled. The property will have a road easement to allow for a driveway entrance for an adjacent undeveloped parcel. There are no easements within the boundary of property. There is Public Utility Easement (PUE) that exists on the north side of the adjacent properties that does not enter into the subject property. If necessary, we are willing to extend this 5' PUE through our property. In addition, we will allow for a drainage easement to exist along the east portion of property, if needed. If there are no objections, please provide us with a "No Objection" letter of your own or sign below. Please fax letter to (941) 262-8594 and retain original for your files. If there are questions or concerns, please contact me at your earliest convenience. I can be reached at (941) 262-4622 or fax to (941). President, American Funding and Service Corp. Acknowledgement: I have received the above reference right-of-way on the property described above and have no, objections to the approval of the vacating of the right-_of-way. No Objection: "4!( ITE~ Signature Date '.-, JUL 3 0 2002 American Funding and Service Corp. December 20, 2001 To: Dawn Wolf From: American Funding and Service Corp. - Developer of Hemingway Place Subdivision Representing adjacent property owners Re: Letter of No Objection: Vacating of County Right-of-Way (ROW) Dear Ms. Wolf: On behalf of ourselves as the developer, as well as the adjacent property owners, we are requesting your departments permission to have the county vacate the established ROW at the intersection of Frank Whiteman and 14th Street North. The ROW is approximately 60 feet wide by 140 feet deep. The ROW currently is a vacant parcel. The purpose of vacating the ROW is to allow for a park area for each adjacent property owner to enjoy. The park area will be under the control/ownership of the new subdivision called Hemingway Place, located on the north side of the ROW. Hemingway Place is a proposed new subdivision currently under a PSP review by the county. It is a proposed residential community with approximately 25 homes, being developed by American Funding and Service Corp. The entrance into Hemingway Place will exist at the intersection of Cypress Woods Road and 14~ Street North; thus, the subject ROW (Frank Whiteman/14th Street North) will not be used. The park area will have park benches, playground, sidewalks with lighting, and may or may not be fenced/walled. The property will have a road easement to allow for a driveway entrance for an adjacent undeveloped parcel. There are no easements within the boundary of property. There is Public Utility Easement (PUE) that exists on the north side of the adjacent properties that does not enter into the subject property. If necessary, we are willing to extend this 5' PUE through our property. In addition, we will allow for a drainage easement to exist along the east portion of property, if needed. If there are no objections, please provide us with a "No Objection" letter of your own or sign below. Please fax letter to (941) 262-8594 and retain original for your files. If there are questions or concerns, please contact me at your earliest convenience. I can be reached at (941) 262-4622 or fax to (941). ~---~.~Kei~Bas ik President, American Funding and Service Corp. Acknowledgement: I have received the above reference right-of-way on the property described above and h~/e no ~al~proval of the vacating of the right-of-way. No Objection: S ignatuL~..~ Date I~°'- I c7 : ' "" "' ' ...... >' 3 0 2002 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT HORSESHOE SQUARE, SUITE 212 2685 SOUTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FL 34104 (941) 732-2501 FAX: (941) 659-5790 3'anuary 7, 2002 Mr. Keith Basik, President American Funding and Service Corp. 720 Goodlette Road, Suite 305 Naples, Florida 34102 Subject: 14th Street North Vacation Letter of No Objection Dear Mr. Basik: The Collier County Stormwater Management Department has reviewed your request to vacate a portion of 14th Street North, north of Frank Whiteman Boulevard. After conducting a site visit, and looking at the information you submitted, the Stormwater Nlanagernent Department has no objection on the vacation of a portion of 14th Street North as depicted in the sketch and legal description submitted, provided the following conditions are met: 1. A twenty foot (20') drainage easement along the east side of the portion of 14th Street to be vacated, shall be dedicated to Collier County. 2. The existing roadside swale shall not be affected by any proposed improvements in this area. This approval is based on drainage issues only. The petitioner shall obtain other letters of No- Objection from entities that may have an interest in this area, including the adjacent property owners, and the County Transportation Operations Department Director. If you have any questions regarding this matter, do not hesitate to contact me. Since~ ~ John It. Boldt, P.E., P.S.M., Director Stormwater Management Department II-I~/jcam CC: July C. Adarmes Minor, P.E., Engineer,Senior, Stormwater Management Department ~q~:k~ Ed Kant, P.E., Director, Transportation Operations Department Bill Spencer, Engineer II, Engineering Services Department J[J{_ 3 0 200~} Reading File :{ SHERIFF DON HUNTER · COLL, ER COUNT'/ 3301 Tamiami Trail East, Bldg -J, Naples, FL 34112 (941) 774-4434 ~w.colliersheriff.org January 16, 2002 Mr. Keith Basik American Funding and Service Corp. 720 Goodlette Road, Suite #305 Naples, Florida 34102 RE: PETITION TO VACATE CERTAIN RIGHT-OF-WAYS IN THE HEMINGWAY PLACE PROJECT OF FRANK WItlTEMAN BLVD. AND 14TM STREET NORTH, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Dear Mr. Basik: Staff has reviewed your request for a letter of''No Objection" for the above-described project. The vacation of the right-of-way as described in your letter of December 20, 2001, as listed above, involves the vacation of a right-of-way at Frank Whiteman Boulevard and 14t~ Street North, being approximately 60 feet wide and 140 feet deep. This is further described as being on a vacant parcel and the purpose of the vacation is to allow the construction of a park to be utiliTed by adjacent property owners, who are all in agreement with this vacation request. The Sheriff's Office reviews these requests to determine if the granting of the vacation will have any foreseeable negative effect on our ability to provide law enforcement services to the area. These services include emergency response, patrol, and traffic enforcement. So long as the vacation, either now or in the future, does not impinge on our ability to deliver these services, the Collier County Sheriff's Office has "No Objection" to the granting of your request. If the agency can be of any further service, please advise. Si~e..e_rely? DH:GY:dv cc:ra~ ~, ~ ~ JUL 3 I1 2082 : '... ' 1~8.., December 20, 2001 To: Carl Reynold~ From: American Funding and Service Corp. - Developer of Hemingway Place Subdivision Representing adjacent property owners t' R~.. Letter of No Objection: Vacating of County Right-of-Way (ROW) On behalf of ourselves as thC develol~r, as well as the adjacent property owners, we are requcst~lg your dcp~mcnts pennissio~ to have die coun~ vacate the established ROW at the {n~erse~on ofFr~ ~Htem~ and 14~ S~eet No~h. ~ ROW is appro~mately 60 feet wide by 140 feet deep. ~e ROW cu~ently is a yacht Th~ purpose of vacating ~e ROW is to allow for a p~k m'ea for each adjacent prope~ owner to enjoy. ~e p~k ~ea will be under ~e conn'oi/o~mership of the new subdivision cal~ed Hemingway Place, I~ated on ~e nor~ ~de of the ROW. Bemin~vay Place is a proposed new subdivision cutTently under a PSP review by the, cotm~. It is a proposed residential community wish approxhliately 25 homes, being developed by ~erican Fundi~ and Se~ice Corp. ~e entrance into Hem ingw'ay Place will exist at ~e inte~ection of Cypress Woods Road and 14~ Street No~; ~us, the subject ROW ('Frank Whitem~n/14~ S~t No~h) will not be used. The park ~ea will have park benches, play~ound, sidewalks wi~ lighting, and may or may be fence~walled. The prope~' will have a road easement to allow for a driveway en~mce for ~jacent undeveloped parcel. There are no easements ~'i~in ~e bo~daty ofpro~. ~ere is Public Utility Easement (PL~) · at exists on ~e no~h side of the adjacent pro~nies ~at d~s not enter into the sub, ecl property. If necess~, we are willing to extend th~s 5~ PUE ~rou~ our prope~ In addition, we will allow for a drainage easement to exi,~ along the east ~ffion of prope~,, if n~eded. If~here ~e no objections, please provide us w~ a "No Objection" le~er ofyour own or sign below. Ple~e fax le~er to (941) 262-8594 and re~ original for your files. If~ere a~ queslions or concerns, please conmcl me ar yo~ e~liest convenience. I c~ be reached at (941) 262-4622 or fax to (ga 1 ). Sincerely. Keith Basik President, ^mericmi Funding and Service Corp. Acknowledgement: I have received the above reference right-of-way on the property described above and have~no obje,~:tioB.~ to the approval of'the vacating of the rlght-ot-way. Signature ~ , Date Prinl Name Tide JUL 3 O 2002 2.{ M~Y-07-2002 ?UE 09:32 AM ~MERIO~N FUND]HO FAX HO, 19412828594 ?, 02 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Naples, ~ 34102 De~ Mr. Bas~: .... Wc have no obj~cfio~m ~ cl~ of~e 14~ S~ ~opmed right-of-way j=st no~ of Fr~k ~m~n Bo~& Yo~ ~ered ~a~s, by L~dy En~eefing, show ~e exis~g ~le wat~ s~[ce to lot 20 be~ r~locate~*o F~ ~= B°~O~ fight-or-way. Paul McAllist~r Fmgineering Plans Review PM./pd ~ JUL302002 · t Z~5 Rt'VE'~ut't.,,n~'~--' .......... TOTAL P. 02- APR-23-2002 TUE 03:5? PM ~MERIOAN FUNDING FflX NO.19412628594 P, 02 ~ ool/ool 0~/2~/2002 TUE 1¢:59 F~ American Funding . ami Service Corp. A~'il 4, 2002 To: Geoff Gr~tmn, FP&L From: American Funding ~d Service Corp.- Developer o~H~ningw&y Flew Subdivision Rcprwmntlng adjacent prol~rtY own~$ I~: Lctmr of No Obj¢~on: Va¢~ of Co~ ~of-Way (RO~ D~ ~offi ~ b~alfof ~es u ~e d~clo~, ~ing ~ur ~en~ pe~iaion in~s~tion of P~ ~~ ~d 14 by 140 f~ d~mp, ~e ROW ~ l~ a v~mt p~l. ~e ~ose of~{ ~ KOW ~ m ~ow Hm~y P~. I~d on ~e uo~ si& of~ ROW, ~division ~mly ~d~ u PSP ~i~ ~ ~e ~. It is a pmpo~d mid,rial comm~ wi~ appr~ma~ 25 homes, being 4~eloped cn~ {n~ ~min~y Pl~e will ~i~ $~ No~; ~% ~e ~hj~ ROW ~k ~imman/l ~e ~ll bo a dmina~ e~t on ~s ~ you ~y M~. ~ ~ no ubj~om, plm~ ~o~de us wi~ bul~. Plomm ~ l~m (~1) 262-~594 ~d r~n ~ for yo~ ~le~. Iflh~ ~ ~e~ionm or ~aeerm. plume can,t me al yo~ ~li~t conveni~e, I ~ be m~ ~ (941) 262-4622 or e~m (94I) 2~-8594. Sin~mly. Y,~ith Bmik President. Ammic~u Funding and ~vi~e Corp. Acknowledsement: I havo reoeivcd ~e above refcrence rig, hX-of-v,~y on the property of thc vacatinlt of thc right-of-way. Print Nam~ Titlc ~ ~ L- _ Sprint Naples, FL 34106-2469 December 24, 2001 Mr. Keith Basik, President American Funding and Service Corp. 720 Goodlette Road, Suite #305 Naples, FL 34102 Re: Letter of No Objection: Vacation of County Right-of-Way Sec 22 Twp 49S Rng 25E Dear Mr. Basik, In response to your inquiry of December 20, 2001 about the vacating of the fight-of-way at the intersection of Frank Whiteman and 14th Street North, this is to advise that Sprint- Florida, Inc. has no objection to vacating said right-of-way as long as the existing 5' utility easement running along the north side of Lot 20 and continuing east across 14th Street North to Lot 1 remains in tact. The existing 5' utility easement contains telephone facilities that serve both Block E and G of the North Naples Highlands development and will serve as access to lot 25 of Hemingway Place. It is critical that we maintain this utility easement. If I can be of any further assistance, please contact me at (941) 263-6274. Sincerely, Sherlene Clevenger, Network Engineer I - E&C SKC:ns Attachment cc: Chron File JUL 3 0 2002 301 Tower Road Naples, FL 34113 Collier: 941-732-3834 Lee: 941-432-1801 FAX: 941-992-1289 ( omcast January 2, 2002 Mr. Keith Basik American Funding and Service Corp. 720 Goodlette Rd. Suite 305 Naples, FL 34102 Re: Easement Vacation of established ROW at the intersection of Frank Whiteman and 14'h St. North, Collier County, Florida Dear Mr. Basik: Comcast has reviewed the plans of the above referenced property. Comcast has no conflict with the easement vacation of the established ROW at the intersection of Frank Whiteman and 14th St. North, of Collier County, Florida. If I can be of any additional assistance regarding this project, please do not hesitate to call me (941-732-3816). Sincerely, rb Bradford ~ Project Coordinator AGENDA ITEM JUL 3 0 2002 Parcel Page 1 of 1 Collier County Tax Collector 3301 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FL 34112-4997 2001 Tax Roll Inquiry System '' · N I , I'ROPERTYINFORMATION OWNER INF ORMA FIOi I Name:liMe KAY, (; w & I. v 11Parcel:ll~-62~oo04 11 Acre:Il0'~ ~;I~EXI~MPTIONS TAX INFORMATION PAY TERMS PAYMENT INFO *~u~ Va'~e:ll2°°m I C°~tY:11785'06 I N°v:l13'09*'82 Paid Dt :llna~/0t ~,,~:11oo~ I 8~,~,s~:119~.~ I ~:11~,~.'o.o~ ~=p~:ll wioo~. ~:11o I ~'~:11~'-~-' ~ I ~:113'22~'9° I ~o~:11o ~,~.d ~qlo I Dep~"~:II~°~'4. I ~Pql°'°° -- S'rxrus ~'O. ~,~:11o I ~"~:11=~'~ I I ~:11o.oo I ~o.~v~:l[~ v~. ~qlo I vo~ ~pp~:]16..w I Civilian Ex:Ilo I Appr~:ll0.00 t ~"~p~::l[~ ~av~i~i~g:ll°'°° ~1 ~:11o COM M ENTS on Ad Valorem Amount Included in (;ross Tax NON Al) VALORENi INFORMATION IlAuth. [[Auth Name JlP~' IIAm°m ~ 1190~3 IIc;:~a~ IlmST~ 1¢09.08 Last Updated: 4/10/2002 5:00pm JUL 3 0 2002 Parcel Page 1 of 1 __ Collier County Tax Collector %i'7<Prev~ Rec°rd'~4!::I 3301 Tamiami Trail East, :~(Next~:~ec-pr~i~] Naples, FL 34112-4997 2001 Tax Roll Inquiry System O~VNER INIrORMATION PROPERTY INFORMATION Nam¢:IIRIVERA. CA ILMEN IParca:ll~42~]7~°°°2 II Ad.ess:HI39 FmXNK WIII~5[XN BLVD I [~:llx399 FmkNK WIIITEN~N BLVD ~am~:ll I [*~':IIN NAPLES itlGIILANDS BLK E EI/a Ao~:II [ L~ga~:llo~' LOX ,9, ALL LOT 20 VALL;FJI[XEMPT1ONS TAX INFORMATION I'AY TERMS ~ PAYMENT INFO W~do~, ~:11o I w~:tf,a.~,I M~r:ll,,4~.~9 I: ~odlo Blind ~:110 I Dinar'ed:Il0 [ Veteran ~dl0 I Vote~ App~:ll~.o9 I Civilian Ex:l~~ Appr ~:1[o.oo ~Pt::]IN COMMENTS l* Non Ad Valorem Amount Included in Gross Tax NON Al) VALOREM INFORMATION rype ][Auth # JlAuth Name ][Per IlAmount Garbage ]19013 ]IOA~AGE ]la,ST, t)27.27 Last Updated: 4/8/2002 5:00pm JUL 3 0 2002 -,,v ..... ~' .... o, ,,e~ ..... o~., rtecc: ,..~ ,.,~ .... }... oh oID-6-, 2d 1760002 4/9/02 t.]! ., '.' "' I,i .t ~ k. ~ ~ -_._~'-~:~-.-~ '--J~-~-.-:.-~. ---' -.- J '--""I-' ',~ ~1 ~ ....-%. ,....,..,.,d.., .-,... · / ~,l ,.- - ...... ----4-------- --~ ---'-K",,::~ ~- ·[ t i-~l'~ I! il ''~ ~ ~,, :/'--~,]1 '~)' e~,~ ti t Ii; 'g- / ~ I J JJ , · - all '"' ~, -" I, ~ ~ . -(/): ~., ~g II1 ' tt Il,l: ~ >.o.. o . . II,: , ,l ,, .,~ r'N _ c, (,~ ...... t,I, _.,.,._ . . .,- t . · . ~ o ..... .. o - .~ . ,,, ,l . ,,-, ~1"'=_==~_o-I- - - .dll ~1[~: ~.., VJ__Z~ =.. Z . - " il {! i ! ~,~ ..,,,o:......~_~ . ::E~3-~- ~. .fi ~',!l _ ....._., ..... .,,._ ...,,,,.. ~ ~z ~_._ o - -~'hh [ ,_~ . ,.Ih~!h LLJ ;z ~0 .d · · I1 . r,- .~:--'.-' . L--~--~.~' ' ' 'Ill · ' i"' "'" !! I ] ', ',~. Ih ~ ~~~~%__- . . :~-', ~-- '- '._L'?' - -,'.---=---- ..... ----. T.._ ._'~_~__~ .'-l!!i~ I I RES250[J 2001 REAL ESTATE COUNTY OF COLLIER I ', F 0 L_112_/_S T RA P_~/_P_G / ITM r,l A M_E/_G~_AD 12~F.~ ~___ L E GAI.__~E.S_C R I P T_I ~] N . ~1 LAST SALE DATE &AMT ~'ISITE ADDRESSI ~' ,j254~090000/'~ ~- NAGY TR, KATHY 6 CARiBE WOODS[LOTL 2~06 · ' 0 / O 1307 COOPER DR ~ 00000092 NAPLES FL 3~103 1729 iqSO o£0~1 COOPER 3~ 1~671 7 J 8; ;~e~ 209200 Z5 ~A2Z ~380 iS~ AVE SW 0 / 0 NAPLES FL 3~ii9 2622 ~ 19991 230 I~O~OQO ~ CGOPER D~ I3~9~ ~( ~2546104000/4 SHALLRIDGE, CLINT C VERA CARIBE NOUUSJLQT -,7; 209200 26 4A22 I95 PARKWOOD DR PG 2369 0 / 0 NUYAL PALM BEACH FL ~411 6204 -;~ 1500 23~9 .20 ~2~ HOODS[LOT 27~R o '~l 000003a6 59 ~900 mi COOPER OR 13991 'M /25~11200~/5 MAt(CIA~ ~ATHELEEN OLIDA CARI~E N~DDs~L'D'T 28 s;i 0 / 0 NAPLES FL 3~112 3705 ~; 2510 1601 P I ~~ ~ ' = ,i7 72724~t 25 ~' 019~5a~000/5 = AMERICAN FUNDING ~ SEV CORP TR 0 / 0 2150 GOODLETTE RD N STE 307 12 H ~ AND W 0~ GOO. ~' · 199~0~27 945~000 NAPLES FL ~102 ~all ER NK'~ .... . JUL302002 RES2500 2001 REAL ESTATE COLJNTY OF COLLIER F OL~ 0/S._~P_/P G/ITM NAME/&/ADDRE$~, LAST SALE DATE & ANT ~ISIT£ ADDRESS! e:_L~b4_2blbOQO-_O/7 PROKOP, LEE A N_NAP_L E~ItI GHLANDS 524500 E 14 4A22 1351 FKAhlK ~HITEMAN OLVD 3OFT JF LOT 14 + 0 / 0 NAPLES FL 34109, 387'-8 LOT 15 19950331 77~000 ~I'FRANK iiHITE,'~AN BLVD 1351J 2044 470 6420104000/9 CRITC~'FIELD~ COL~'EN N NA~'LE$ HIGHLANO$ 524500 E 15 4A22 1363 FRANK WHITEMAN DLVD 20FT OF LOT 15 · W 401 0 / 0 NAPLES FL ]410~ ~578 LOT lo 1~G70701 ~[FRANK WHiTEMAN SLVD 'I-~5 ? Z 3 .1 9 ~,42o10~U00/1 HILLIAMS, CHRISTINA N NAPLES HIGHLANDS BLt ~ ~ ~52q500 16 qA22 z~az FRANK NHITEMAN ~LVD lOFT OF LOT 0 / 0 NAPLES FL ~qlO~ ~878 1 99~9i~' 65,000 q'FRANK HHITEMAN 5L~D .... 2461 749 -~26172000/0 CARTER~ PATRICIA A N NAPLES HIGH~ANDS ~L~ ~ ~524500 E 18 4A22 O07g SHALLONS HAY 18 + Wl/2 OF LOT 20010119 119~900 =[PRANK WHITEMAN BLVD 1389J 2766 2986 ~ ~42617~ O00/2 R I VER A~ CARMEN N~PL~S~iG~L~]~ 139 PRANK NHITTMAN GLVD ~ L~T 19, ALL LOT 20 D 2450~ E 19 4A22 0 / 0 NAPLES FL 34103 3878 19961217 140,000 OIFRANK WHITEMAN bLVD 1399l 2261 1799 0 / 0 NAPLES FL ~4103 3972 _. /111 ~ n __~.__ 19950725 tOb,O00 ~IFRANK WHITEHAN 6LVD 13~4J ~uu ~O ~UUZ 2~2 ~-7 · ~ l RES2500 2001 REAL ESTATE COUNTY OF COLLIER j F gL IO/STRAP/P G/ITH NAHE/&/ADDR ESS ,! ~, LX~-T-S-ALE DATE & AHT ~I--S'-~?E ADDRESS] -- ~4:~b426220000/8 CAR.~ALLOt MANUEL 8. MARGARI/E N NAPLES HIGHLANDS bL~ '~ si 524500 F i5 ~A22 i354 F~ANK WHITE,AN ~LVD 15 + N IOFT OF LOT 1o ' ; 0 / 0 NAPLES FL 3W103 3872 aj 00000750 =[FRANK NHITEMAN ~LVO i~5~ 7~ 67~- 960 .19 9 ;~ 2o224900/0 AGN~I, VICTOR T ~ GLENDA L NORTH ~IAPLES HIGHLAND~ ~2j 524500 F 16 4A22 1170 F~ANK HHITEMAN ~LVD E 4OFT dF LOT I6 · W ~ 0 / 0 NAPLES FL 3410~ ~672 LOT I7 iT' 420 20003/2 COMPAGNONEt DIANA N NAPLES HIGHLAHDS ~L~ ~, 524500 F 17 4A22 1~76 FRANK WHITEt~AN ~VO 3OFT dF LOT 17 + N ~OF 131 96~000 ~[FRANK ~HITE~AN ' : 0 :~, 000003~6 ~IFRANK WHITEMAN ~LVD [~ V 52q500 G 1 GA22 3730 1GTH ST N I OR 019 PG bSO . .... , 0 / 0 NAPLES FL 34L03 3833 ~e~', 00000575 ~II4TH ST N 3770~ ~ ~ 0420240000/2 MC KAY ET UXe GEORGE W N NAPLES HIGHLAND~ BLK ,~V 524500 G 2 4A22 ~730 14TH ~4o; -' i JUL 3 0 2002 TRAIL TERRACE DRIVE , ~eeeee>. seee~. ~-~i , , ) ~ ~e : . ,. ~ ,.~ .~. .../ .... · , : ~ mt : ; : 3 : 4 : 5 : ; j 7 : 8 g : ,[~11 :t2:~3: 5 ? 8 9 · lO I~ . (213 t4 t5 26~, ~4 ~ I ~ 16 18: MICHIGAN AVENUE .... . ....... .... eeeoee e''eeeeeeeeeeeee WOODS DRIVE 43 LANE = ~ ~ 22 21 lg ~8 ~7 WHITE~ BOULEVARD .... ~ ~ · ~ .::,:.., eJe e e e~e,e e' ee~ CO~ DRIVE m ~<~ -,-p- ...... 1"1"]~12!~'i,,~'!?'I~].-['.'~.-~ ~i-~ "l '1 ~l -ll.-I.1 ITEM 2002 dap Output Page 1 of 1 CCPA GIS HTML Ma r'-] PLS~ ~3 D 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PETITION: PUDZ-01-AR-1553, MICHAEL R. FERNANDEZ OF PLANNING DEVELOPMENT, INC., REPRESENTING RELLEUM INC. AND GRANITE DEVELOPMENT II, L.C., REQUESTING A REZONE FROM "A" RURAL AGRICULTURAL TO A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) TO BE KNOWN AS THE BALMORAL PUD ALLOWING, MIX OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING TYPES FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE FUTURE LIVINGSTON ROAD (C.R. 881) AND APPROXIMATELY ONE MILE SOUTH OF PINE RIDGE ROAD (C.R. 896) IN SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER. COUNTY, FLORIDA. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners consider an application to rezone the subject site from "A" Rural Agricultural to PUD as noted above allowing 236 dwelling units that is consistent with all the applicable codes and regulations in order to ensure that the community's interests are maintained in this community. CONSIDERATIONS: The proposed 58.9-acre PUD is a planned residential development that is designed around a central "~ lake system and preserve areas. The residential lands are comprised of four tracts totaling 38.3-acres supporting a mix of residential dwelling types and recreational amenities. The list of permitted uses and structures includes single-family (detached), two-family, townhouses (attached) and multi-family dwellings. The petitioner is proposing the following · A maximum of 236 dwelling units with a density of 4 units per acre. An open space area that includes 9-acres of preserve/conservation, a 7.3-acre lake, landscaping and buffering totaling the minimum required 60 percent open space for residential PUDs. · The Master Plan also provides for the primary preserve area on the north side of the entrance road and a second preserve area is designated at the southwest half of the project. The project's primary access point is from Livingston Road while a secondary access point is depicted to the proposed Green Boulevard extension. FISCAL IMPACT: This PUD by and of itself will have no fiscal impact on the County. However, if this request meets its objective, a portion of the existing vacant land will be developed. The mere fact that new development has been approved will result in future fiscal impact on County public facilities. The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of building permits to help offset the impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects in the Capital Improvement Element needed to maintain adopted levels of service for public facilities. In the event that impact fee collections are inadequate to maintain adopted levels of service, ~e. {~cmntxt rmmt provide supplemental funds from other revenue sources in order to build needed facili es. I~ JUL 3 0 2002 The following impact fees will be applicable to this project: · Park Impact Fee: $578.00per unit · Library Impact Fee: $180.52 per unit · Fire Impact Fee: $0.15 per square feet of building · School Impact Fee: $827 per unit · Road Impact Fee: $890 per unit · Correctional Facilities: $117.98 per dwelling unit · Radon Impact Fee: $0.005 per square foot of building · EMS Impact Fee: $2 per unit · Building Code Adm.: $0.005 per square foot of building · Micro Film Surcharge: $1.50 per unit For an average unit size of 1,000 square feet, the total fiscal impact will be $2,757.18 per unit. Since this project proposes 236 units, the total amount of residential impact fees collected at build-out will total $650,694.48. It should be noted that because impact fees vary by housing type and because this approval does not provide this level of specificity as to the actual type of use, the total impact fee quoted above is at best a raw estimate. Additionally, there is no guarantee that the project at build-out will have maximized their authorized level of development. Other fees will include building permit review fees and utility fees associated with connecting to the County's sewer and water system. Building permit fees and utility fees have traditionally offset the cost of administering the community development review process, whereas utility fees are used on their proportionate share of impact to the County system. Finally additional revenue is generated by application of ad valorem tax rates. The revenue that will be generated depends on the value of the improvements. At this point in time a model has not been developed to arrive at a reasonable estimate of tax revenue based on ad valorem tax rates. Nevertheless, it should be appreciated that not withstanding the fiscal impact relationship, development takes place in an environment of concurrency management. When level of service requirements fall below adopted standards, a mechanism is in place to bring about a cessation of building activities. Certain LOS standards apply countywide and would therefore bring about a countywide concurrency determination versus roads that may have local geographic concurrency implications. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The Urban Residential Sub-district permits residential development along with a variety of unit types and at a base density of 4 DU/A. This district is intended to accommodate a variety of residential and non-residential uses, including mixed-use developments in the form of a Planned Unit Development. The petitioner originally requested a maximum of 296 dwelling units (5 units per acre) since the Density Rating System of the Growth Management Plan allows for one (1) additional residential unit per gross acre if the project has direct access to 2 or more arterial or collector roads as identified in the Transportation Element. JUL 3 O 2002 2 p~. Since Whippoorwill Road is not identified in the Transportation Element as an arterial or collector road and the extension of Green Boulevard is not within the Collier County's Five Year Capital Improvement Element, this project is not eligible for one additional unit per acre. As a result, the petitioner has agreed to a density of 4 dwelling units per acre resulting in a maximum of 236 dwelling units. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is not located within an Area of Historical and Archaeological Probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no Historic and Archaeological Survey & Assessment or a waiver is required. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) indicates that the site contains habitat suitable for numerous species of plants and wildlife. The subject property is approximately 59 acres in size, about half of which is vegetated with indigenous vegetation. Native habitats on site include pine flatwoods and pine-cypress communities. The other portions of the site have been cleared in the past and consist of a borrow lake, disturbed land, canal/ditch and berm. The surface water management for this project ~vill be reviewed by the South Florida Water Management District and therefore is exempt from review by the Environmental Advisory Council (5.13.6 CCLDC). In addition, approximately 1.8 acres of South Florida Water Management District/Collier County jurisdictional xvetlands and 4.9 acres of "other surface waters" occur on the property. The wetlands are composed of a single FLUCFCS type, pine-cypress-Melaleuca (FLUCFCS code 6249). Lastly, about 83 percent or 1.5 acres of the defined wetlands and 17 percent or 0.6 acre of the "other surface waters" will be impacted during construction of the project. Compensation for wetland impacts include the preservation and enhancement of the remaining 0.3 acre of on-site wetlands. An additional 2.4 acres of uplands will also be preserved on-site. No clear biological indicators were noted within the wetland areas to determine present seasonal high water levels. Currently an on-site well monitoring program has been established to help define the level. The wet season water table is estimated to be elevation 7.7 NGVD based on review of the South Florida Water Management District permit for Wyndemere Country Club and an existing control structure at the east end of the ditch along the south property line. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: The Environmental Advisory Commission (EAC) reviewed this petition on August 11, 1999 and they recommend approval subject to staff stipulations as contained in the EAC Staff Report. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) reviewed this petition during their public hearing on June 20, 2002. By a 7 to 0 vote, the CCPC forwarded Petition PUDZ-01-AR-1553 to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) with a recommendation of approval subject to staff sti ~"~+:i, tlg.~A~/_L~il,' ' - the maximum number of dwelling units to 236 units with a maximum density of 4 uni' perl~.cr_re. II [ [~ 3 JUL 3 0 2002 The Planning Commissioners found this petition (at 4 units per acre) consistent with the Growth Management Plan (GMP) and that the mixed residential development is compatible with the adjacent land uses. Since the petitioner has agreed to a maximum of 236 dwelling units (4 units per acre), this petition has been placed on the Summary Agenda. It should be noted that no person spoke in opposition to the petition during the public hearing. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Petition PUDZ-01-AR- 1553 as described by the amending Ordinance included in this Executive Summary. PREPARE~ ~ ~ ~ , __ ~_ 7. to.o~ RAY B .F~LfL, OWS, CHIEF PLANNER DATE CURRI~NT PLANNING SECTION REVIEWED BY: sIdSAN MURRAY, AICP, MANAGE~ DATE C~NT PLA~G SECTION M~GAREI ~ERSTLE, AICP, D~CTOR DATE PLA~G SERVICES DEP~TMENT APPROVED BY: JOSEPHg. SCHMIT. . MmSTRATOR PUDZ-OI-AR-1353/EX SUMMARY/RVB/rb JUL 3 0 2002 MEMORANDUM TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DATE: JUNE 3, 2002 RE: PETITION NO: PUDZ-01-AR-1553, BALMORAL PUD OWNER/AGENT: Agent: Michael R. Fernandez Owners: Relleum, Inc. & Granite Development Il, L.C. 5133 Castello Drive 801 Laurel Oak Drive Suite 2 Suite 700 Naples, Florida 34104 Naples, Florida 34108 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The property is located on the east side of Livingston Road (C.R. 881) and approximately one mile south of Pine Ridge Road (C.R. 896) in Section 18, Township 49S, Range 26E. (See location map following page). REQUESTED ACTION: To have the herein described property rezoned from its current zoning classification of "A" Rural Agricultural to "PUD" Planned Unit Development district to be known as the Balmoral PUD. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The proposed 58.9-acre PUD is a planned residential development that is designed around a central lake system and preserve areas. The residential lands are comprised of four tracts totaling 38.3-acres supporting a mix of residential dwelling types and recreational amenities. The list of permitted uses and structures includes single-family (detached), two-family, townhouses (attached) and multi-family dwellings. The petitioner is proposing a maximum of 296 dwelling units with a density of 5 units per acre. This requires a determination that the project has direct access to 2 or more arterial or collector roads in order to gain the one additional dwelling unit per acre over the base density of 4 units per acre. The PUD also provides open space that includes 9-acres of preserve/conservation, a 7.3-acre lake, landscaping and buffering totaling the minimum required 60 percent open space for residential PUDs. The Master Plan also provides for the primary preserve area on the north side of the entrance road and a second preserve area is designated at the southwest half of the project. Lastly, the project's primary access point is from Livingston Road while a secondary access point is depicted to the , . proposed Green Boulevard extension that is not funded for construction, nc,~,no~, i/Da 1 JUL 3 0 2002 FUTURE LIVINGSTON ROAD SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Existing: The entire 58.95-acre site is zoned "A" Agricultural and is currently undeveloped. Surrounding: North -To the north lies vacant Agricultural land and the undeveloped Arlington Lakes PUD that is approved for 590 units at 6 units per acre. East- The lands to the east across Whippoorwill Lane is the Whippoorwill Woods PUD that is approved for 462 dwelling units at a density of 5.5 units per acre. South -On the south side is vacant land that is zoned "A" Agricultural. West- To the west across Livingston Road is the developed Kensington PUD that permits 570 units and an 18-hole golf course on 370 acres. This results in a density of 3.36 units per acre. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: The subject 58.9-acre site is located within the Urban-Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict as designated in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). JUt. 3 0 2'002 FLUE and Density-The Urban Residential Sub-district permits residential development along with a variety of unit types and at a base density of 4 DU/A, This district is intended to accommodate a variety of residential and non-residential uses, including mixed-use developments in the form of a Planned Unit Development. The Master Plan indicates the subject property provides direct access to a future arterial road (Livingston Road) and Whippoorwill Road/Green Boulevard extension. The petitioner indicates that Whippoorwill Road is a future collector road so the project is eligible for one (1) additional residential unit per gross acre for a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre and 296 dwelling units. However, the Density Rating System states the project must have direct access to 2 or more arterial or collector roads as identified in the Transportation Element in order to be eligible for one (1) additional unit per acre. Livingston Road is identified in the Transportation Element as a collector road. The construction of Livingston Road is also within the Transportation Element's 5 year Capital Improvement Element. However, Whippoorwill Road is not identified in the Transportation Element as an arterial or collector road and although Green Boulevard is identified as a collector road in the Transportation Element, the extension of Green Boulevard is not within the Collier County's Five Year Capital Improvement Element. As part of the second submittal package the petitioner states, "the County Transportation Department is assessing the viability of the extension of this roadway and its alignment for a proposed collector road". In order for the project to be eligible for the additional (1) residential unit per acre the proposed road extension must be identified in the Transportation Element. As stated above the Whippoorwill Road/Green Boulevard Extension is not identified in the Transportation Element and therefore the project is not eligible for one additional unit per acre. Accordingly, in order for the proposed rezoning to be consistent with the FLUE, the density of development shall not exceed 4 dwelling units per acre. Transportation Element: Staff has evaluated the potential transportation impacts of a 236 unit residential project and has the following comments. The site-generated trips are estimated to be approximately 2,336 Weekday Trips. The project will have a significant impact on Livingston Road at the site entrance but the total trips will not adversely affect the roadway level of service. The project will not have significant impacts on the remainder of the roads within the radius of influence. The project trips will not lower the operational level of service standards on any of the roadways within the influence area where the project has impacts of significance (5% of the peak season, peak hour service volume). Therefore, this petition is consistent with Policies 5.1 and 5.2, of the Transportation Element. Lastly, Policy 9.3 of this Element encourages the interconnection of local streets between developments when feasible. While this project could provide an interconnect to both the future Whippoorwill Lane extension (North/South) and to the proposed Green Boulevard extension (East/West), the proposed project commits to neither connection via a local public roadway system. This is also the basis for not permitting the additional dwelling unit per acre, which would otherwise be permitted under the Density Rating System. Since the PUD Master Plan shows a secondary access point onto the Future Green Boulevard Extension, which is not listed in the County's Work Program, this secondary access may never be provided. Therefore, staff recommends that the secondary access be from the Whippoorwill Lane Extension when constructed. The construction of this road is planned for in the Whippoorwill Lane Corridor Master Plan Study. Conservation and Open Space - The PUD document indicates that a combination landscape, lakes, water management areas, and qualifying open space areas exceeds sixty (60) percent of the gross land area. The PUD will also achieve native vegetation preservation or re-vegetation ret uirements of the LDC and by re-vegetation of native species, therefore the Conservation and Open S ~ace elements of the GMP will be achieved by the PUD development strategy. JUL 3 O 2002 Utilities and Water Management - Development of the land will proceed on the basis of connection to the County's sewer and water distribution system. These facilities are to be designed, constructed, conveyed, owned and maintained in accordance with the Collier County Ordinance Number 88-76. Water management facilities will be constructed to meet County Ordinances and these will be reviewed and approved as a function of obtaining subsequent development order approvals. The above-prescribed course of action makes this petition consistent with this element of the GMP. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located outside an area of historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment is required. Pursuant to Section 2.2.25.8.1 of the Land Development Code, if, during the course of site clearing, excavation or other construction activity an historic or archaeological artifact is found, all development within the minimum area necessary to protect the discovery shall be immediately stopped and the Collier County Code Enforcement Department contacted. EVALUATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL~ TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE: The subject petition has been reviewed by the appropriate staff responsible for oversight related to the above referenced areas of critical concern. This primarily includes a review by the Community Development Environmental and Engineering staff, along with the Transportation Department. The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) indicates that the site contains habitat suitable for numerous species of plants and wildlife. The Environmental staff has developed conditions of approval that have been incorporated into the PUD document. The Environmental Advisory Commission (EAC) also reviewed this petition on August 11, 1999 and they recommend approval of this petition subject to staff stipulations as contained in the EAC Staff Report. Lastly, the Transportation Department has recommended approval subject to the conditions that are incorporated in the PUD Document. EVALUATION: Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and the criteria on which a favorable determination must be based. This evaluation is intended to provide an objective, comprehensive overview of the impact of the proposed land use change, be they positive or negative, culminating in a staff recommendation based on that overview. The listed criteria are specifically noted in Section 2.7.2.5 and Section 2.7.3.2.5 of the Land Development Code thus requiring staff evaluation and comment, and shall be used as the basis for a recommendation of approval or denial by the Planning Commission to the BCC. A summary of each of the potential impacts or considerations identified during the staff review is listed under each of the criterion and culminates in a determination of compliance, non-compliance, or compliance with mitigation. These evaluations are completed as separate documents and are attached to the staff report. Appropriate evaluation of petitions for rezoning should establish a factual basis for supportive action by appointed and elected decision-makers (See Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B"). Notwithstanding the above staff in reviewing the determinants for adequate findings to support a rezoning action advise as follo~ ;: ,~/r~l~I - 4 JUL 3 0 2002 Relationship to Future Land Uses - A discussion of this relationship, as it applies specifically to Collier County's legal basis for land use planning, refers to the relationship of the proposed zoning action to the FLUE of the GMP. In the case at hand, and based upon the Future Land Use Plan, we have an expectation that the subject site and adjacent land will be used for urban residential purposes, and in fact the subject property is near existing residential lands to the north, east and west. In addition, the petitioner indicates that Whippoorwill Road is a future collector road so the project is eligible for one (1) additional residential unit per gross acre for a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre and 296 dwelling units. However, the Density Rating System states the project must have direct access to 2 or more arterial or collector roads as identified in the Transportation Element in order to be eligible for one (1) additional unit per acre. Livingston Road is identified in the Transportation Element as a collector road. In order for the project to be eligible for the additional (1) residential unit per acre the proposed road extension must also be identified in the Transportation Element. As stated above the Whippoorwill Road/Green Boulevard Extension is not identified in the Transportation Element and therefore the project is not eligible for one additional unit per acre. Accordingly, the base density of 4 DU/A, or a total maximum density of 236 dwelling units, would apply. Relationship to Existing Land Uses: With respect to the matter of relationship to existing land uses and compatibility, this is an evaluation whose primary focus is similarity of land use. The petitioner's stated intent is to primarily construct single-family structures on the west half of the project and multi-family dwellings on the eastern half. This compares favorably with the surrounding land uses, which includes vacant agricultural lands to the north and south. To the west is the developed Kensington PUD that permits a total of 570 dwelling units on 370 acres. This results in a density of 1.54 units per acre. However, if the golf course were excluded from the density calculation, the resulting density would be 3.88 units per acre. Lastly, to the east lies is the Whippoorwill Woods PUD that is approved for 462 units at a density of 6.39 units per acre. In addition, the proposed dwelling units are integrated around the water management lakes, landscape buffers and preserve areas as depicted on the PUD Master Plan. The PUD Document also limits the maximum height of the single-family detached and duplex units to a maximum height of 35-feet for the single-family units and 45 feet for the multi-family structures. The proposed setbacks are 20 feet in the front yard, 7.5 feet for the side yard and a rear yard setback of 20 feet. It should be noted that the properties to the west and east are developed with similar dwelling types, and development standards. For example, the Whippoorwill Woods PUD to the east provides a maximum building height of 35 feet for the single-family structures and 40 feet for the multi-family structures. The PUD document also requires a front yard setback of 20 feet, 7.5 feet for the side yard and 20 feet for the rear yard setback. As a result, the proposed development strategy that allows for a mix of dwelling types such as: single family, two family and multi-family dwelling housing structure types is compatible with the surrounding residential zoned properties. Whippoorwill Lane Master Plan Study (EXHIBIT "C") - Planning Services Staff recognizes the need to insure that a coordinated review of this project's impact along with the impacts of other proposed developments within the Whippoorwill Lane area (south of Pine Ridge Road) are analyzed in a comprehensive way. In order to determine the overall stormwater drainage, traffic circulation and utility needs for the Whippoorwill Lane area, a Master Plan has been prepared to study those areas of concern. Collier County has coordinated with the local property owners in developing the Master Plan for the construction of roadway, water, sewer and stormwater improvements. This project has been reviewed for consistency with the Draft Master Plan is currently that is in the final sta :es of adoption. 5 JUL 3 0 2002 Based on the findings of the Draft Master Plan, Staff is of the opinion that the required improvements imposed on this and other developments should positively contribute to easing the burden of traffic impacts in the area. This will be accomplished by a proposed construction of Whippoorwill Lane in two phases. The first phase shall be approximately 1,450 feet and shall terminate just beyond the intersection with Nighthawk Road. The second phase will extend from the terminus of Phase I to the entrance of Whippoorwill Woods. A future connection of this road with a possible future extension of Green Boulevard to Livingston Road will lessen the amount of traffic at the intersection of Livingston Road and Pine Ridge Road. However, since the Green Boulevard extension is not listed in the County's Work Program and is not part of the Whippoorwill Lane Corridor Master Plan Study, staff recommends that the secondary access point as currently depicted on the PUD Master Plan be relocated to connect to Whippoorwill Lane that is planned for in the Corridor Master Plan Study. Lastly, the site generated traffic produced by this project by itself does not exceed the threshold that supports a decision to deny or phase development even though the aggregate projects proposed in this area will have a significant impact on Pine Ridge Road. However, this project can't commence construction until Livingston Road is constructed from Pine Ridge Road to Golden Gate Parkway in 2002/03. The subject petition is also consistent with the Draft Master Plan in regards to utility infrastructure since both the public sanitary sewer and municipal water supplies are available to the property and will be extended as a consequence of future platting. A potential looped water system or easement may be required for this project and will be determined at the time of preliminary subdivision plat revie~v. In regards to stormwater management, this petition is consistent with the Draft Master Plan for the area and is also subject the permitting process of the South Florida Water Management District and the surface water management requirements invoked at the time of subdividing or SDP approval. Community Services - The subject property is readily accessible to a whole range of community infrastructure that is enhanced by its interface with Pine Ridge Road. Shopping centers, and medical offices of various specialties are all within a short driving distance. Regarding the matter of timing, it should be appreciated that urban commercial development has been approved within the 1-75/Pine Ridge Road Activity Center. After considering the availability of community infrastructure and services it is clear that the development of the subject property is timely and consistent with the GMP. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward a recommendation of approval of Petition PUDZ-01-AR-1553 subject the conditions of approval that have been incorporated in the PUD document and as otherwise described by the Ordinance of Adoption and Exhibits thereto. It should be noted that the petitioner has not agreed to the following conditions: · The project density is limited to four (4) units per acre and a maximum of 236 dwelling units. · That the secondary access point shall be from the proposed Green Boulevard Extension and a minimum of 500 feet east of Livingston Road and a minimum of 660 feet west of the parcel's eastern property line. In the event that the Green Boulevard Extension is not funded for construction at the time Tracts R-3 and R-4 are proposed for site development plan or preliminary subdivision plan review, then the secondary access point shall be provided from Whippoorwill Lane. . 6 JUL 3 0 2002 PREPARED BY: RAY ~LLOWS, CHIEF PLANNER CURRENT PLANNING SECTION REVIEWED BY: PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT JNITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS. StaffReport for June 20, 2002 CCPC meeting. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: KENNETH L. RVB/rb/STAFF REPORT/PUDZ-OI - 1553 JUl 3 0 2002 FINDINGS FOR PUD PUDZ-01-AR-1553 Section 2.7.3.2.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code requires the Planning Commission to make a finding as to the PUD Master Plans' compliance with the following criteria: 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. Intensifying land development patterns produces economics of scale relative to public utilities, facilities and services, which are currently available in this area of Collier County. Development of land that has legal access, and is adjacent to existing residential development is particularly suitable for a mixed dwelling type housing project. Conversely, existing neighboring residents may perceive the proposed increase as intensification near their neighborhood as contributing factors to increasing noise, blocking views and reducing property values. Jurisdictional reviews by County staff support the manner and pattern of development proposed for the subject property. Development conditions contained in the proposed Balmoral PUD document give assurance that all infrastructures will be developed and are consistent with County regulations. Any inadequacies that require supplementing the PUD document will be recommended to the BCC as conditions of approval by staff. Recommended mitigation measures will assure compliance with LOS relationships as prescribed by the GMP. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Documents submitted with the application provide evidence of unified control. The PUD document makes appropriate provisions for continuing operation and maintenance of common areas. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). The subject petition has been found consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the GMP. The subject PUD proposes for a mix of residential dwelling types, which is consistent with the GMP (See Staff report). Exhibit "A" JUL 3 0 2002 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. Thc subject residential PUD has bccn developed with a common architectural design and development standards. In addition, landscaping has bccn provided to buffer the adjacent residential and non-residential tracts. Thc PUD Master Plan has been designed to optimize internal land use relationship through the use of various forms of open space separation. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The amount of open space set aside by this project is consistent with the provisions of the Land Development Code. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. The proposed Balmoral PUD will not adversely impact the timing or sequence of development that is currently allowed in the area. Furthermore, the adopted concurrency requirements ensure that further LOS degradation is not allowed or the LOS deficiency is corrected. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. Ability, as applied in this context, implies supporting infrastructure such as wastewater disposal system, potable water supplies, characteristics of the property relative to hazards, and capacity of roads, is supportive of conditions emanating from urban development. 8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. This criterion essentially requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. The development standards in this PUD are similar to those development standards for cluster housing. FINDINGS FOR PUDZ-02-AR-I S53/RVB/rb JUL 3 0 20O2 2 ~ REZONE FINDINGS PETITION PUDZ-01-AR-1553 Section 2.7.2.5. of the Collier County Land Development Code requires that the report and recommendations of the Planning Commission to the Board of County Commissioners shall show that the Planning Commission has studied and considered the proposed change in relation to the following, where applicable: 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives & policies of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan. Development Orders deemed consistent with all applicable elements of the Future land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) should be considered a positive relationship. The proposed development is in compliance with FLUE of the GMP. 2. The existing land use pattern; The adjacent uses include single and multi-family residential to the west and the approved Whippoorwill Woods PUD to the east. There is undeveloped Agricultural land to the north and south (See Staff Report) 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts; The parcel is of sufficient size that it will not result in an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. It is also consistent with expected land uses by virtue of its consistency with the FLUE of the Growth Management Plan. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. The proposed PUD district boundaries are logically drawn and they are consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. The proposed amendment will not change these boundaries. 5. Whether changed 'or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. The proposed Balmoral PUD is appropriate based on the permitted land uses and compatibility with adjacent land uses. Furthermore, the subject PUD has a positive relationship to the GMP. JUL 3 0 2002 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood; The proposed development standards (i.e. setbacks) made a condition of approval will go a long way towards offsetting any potential adverse influences and will not adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. Furthermore, the conditions for approval have bccn promulgated and designed to ensure the least amount of adverse impact on adjacent and nearby developments. Recommended mitigation (increased setbacks) should serve to ameliorate impact on the nearby residential area. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. This petition was approved by the Transportation Department subject to the conditions of approval as contained in the PUD Document. In addition, this project when developed xvill not excessively increase traffic congestion on the arterial road network. In the final analysis all rezone actions are subject to the Concurrency Management System. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem; The Land Development Code specifically addresses prerequisite development standards that are designed to reduce the risk of flooding on nearby properties. New development in and of itself is not supposed to increase flooding potential on adjacent property over and above what would occur without development. However, as urban intensification in the absence of commensurate improvement to inter-county drainage appurtenances may increase the risk of flooding in areas when the drainage outfall condition is inadequate. In summary, every project approved in Collier County involving the utilization of land for some land use activity is scrutinized and required to mitigate all sub-surface drainage generated by developmental activities as a condition of approval. This project was reviewed for drainage relationships and design and construction plans are required to meet County standards as a condition of approval. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas; All projects in Collier County are subject to the development standards that apply generally and equally to all zoning districts concerning the need to provide the required open space. The subject development standards are designed to ensure that light penetration and circulation of air does not adversely affect adjacent areas. 2002 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area; Typically urban intensification increases the value of contiguous underutilized land. However, this is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results, which may be internal or external to the subject property that can affect property values. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning, however zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since value determination by law is driven by market value. The mere fact that a property is given a new zoning designation or amendment may or may not affect value. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations; The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in the zoning division of the LDC is that their sound application when combined with the administrative site development plan approval process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning xvill not result in a deterrence to improvement of adjacent property. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare; The proposed rezone to the Balmoral PUD (with the limitation to a maximum density of 4 units per acre) complies with the Growth Management Plan, which is a public policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are consistent with said plans. In light of this fact the proposed change does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning; The subject property can be developed in accordance with the existing zoning, however to do so would deny this petitioner of the opportunity to maximize the development potential of the site as made possible by its consistency relationship with the Growth Management Plan. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County; The Balmoral PUD is designed in a manner that is compatible with surrounding and approved PUD property in size and scale. It is also consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. AGE~OA I~ 'I JUL 3 0 2002. 3 Pg._L.,~~ 15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. There are many sites, which are zoned to accommodate the proposed development. This is not the determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness of a rezoning decision. The determinants of zoning arc consistency with all clements of the GMP, compatibility, adequacy of infrastructure and to some extent the timing of the action and all of thc above criteria. (Sec thc Staffrcport for a more detailed review) 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed, zoning classification. The extent of site alteration will be determined as a function of obtaining a Site Development Plan and/or a preliminary subdivision plat approval to execute the PUD's development strategy. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended. A multi-disciplined team responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP has reviewed this petition and they have found it consistent with the GMP. The conditions of approval have been incorporated into the PUD document. Staff reviews for adequacy of public services and levels of service determined that required infrastructure meets with GMP established relationships. REZONE FINDINGS/02-AR-1553/RVB/rb I UL 3 0 2002 Whippoorwill Lane Corridor Master Plan Study Utility Study Introduction: The Whippoorwill Lane Corridor Study has been implemented in an effort to determine minimum potable water and sanitary sewer infrastructure facilities required to support existing and future development of the properties located within the study area. The Whippoorwill Lane Corridor Study area properties necessitating the utility analysis, comprise approximately 350.2 acres of varying ownership and zoning designation, lies within northern Collier County (Section 18, Township 49 South, and Range 26 East) and is located immediately south of the Pine Ridge Road right-of-way, east of the Livingston Road right-of-way, west of the Interstate 75 fight-of-way, and north of the Kensington Canal. The specific properties include; Sea Gate Baptist Church, Hospice House of Naples, Future Development Areas 1, 2, and 3, Arlington Lakes, Whippoorwill Lakes, Whippoorwill Pines, and Whippoorwill Woods. The utilities study area is divided into nine principal parcels with currently varying zoning designations - Arlington Lakes (Zoning PUD, 95.4 +/- acres), Hospice House of Naples (Zoning CF, 9.7 +/- acres), Sea Gate Baptist Church (Zoning Ag., 19.8 +/- acres), Whippoorwill Lakes (Zoning PUD, 76.9 +/- acres), Whippoorwill Pines (Zoning PUD, 29.5 +/- acres), Whippoorwill Woods (Zoning PUD, 83.9 +/- acres), Future Development Area 1 (Zoning Ag., 9.6 +/- acres), Future Development Area 2 (Zoning Ag., 15.6 +/- acres), and Future Development Area 3 (Zoning Ag., 9.8 +/- acres). All PUDs have a zoning density (gross) of approximately six (6) dwelling units (DUs) per acre. For the purposes of this study, the Future Development Areas, currently zoned A~iculture, were assumed to have build-out densities consistent with that of the surrounding properties zoning designations - six (6) DUs per acre. Three existing developments are located within the study area: Hospice House of Naples, Sea Gate Baptist Church, and The Reserve at Naples (a portion of the Whippoorwill Lakes PUD). Existing potable water and sanitary sewer utility infrastructure serving these developments consists of a 12" PVC water main and a 10" PVC force main located within the existing 60' wide Whippoorwill Lane right-of-way. Both pressure mains are connected to and extensions of the Collier County owned and maintained water and sewer distribution / collection systems located within the Pine Ridge Road right-of way. The Whippoorwill Lane Corridor Utility Study, using potable water demand and sanitary sewer flow estimates proposed to be generated by future developments, will determine minimum pressure line sizing for the study area' s proposed water and sewer needs. See attached Hydraulic Analysis for the proposed system operational performance and refer to the Whippoorwill Lane Corridor Master Plan Study -Water & Sewer Exhibit for illustration. EXHIBIT "C" JUL 3 0 2002 Whippoorwill Lane Corridor Master Plan Study Master Plan Study Summary: Utilities - Extending the existing 12" water main and 10" force main will adequately serve the proposed development needs of the corridor. Phasing of the water main construction, per the study's phasing limits, can be accommodated while maintaining adequate fire protection. A future looping connection may be required if minimum fire flow thresholds are not being witnessed within the Whippoorwill Woods development. Transportation - South of the Hospice House of Naples property, modification to the Collier County Local Street Typical Section for an 80' ROW width to allow for additional lanes using will adequately provide for the transportation needs of the proposed developments. The implementation of a future east-west interconnection road may be considered in future planning efforts by Collier County Transportation Planning. Drainage - The placement of the proposed flow-way will provide for the adequate release of storm water discharge for all properties having access provided that the developments release flows at or below the allowable discharge rate following the individual system's required water quality and volume attenuation. Existing water management facilities will adequately serve the remainder of the properties. J Ut. 3 0 2002 Scenario: Base WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY WATER PHASE 1 12° W J~. SOURCE ~ ?~ SEA GATE BAPTIST DEVELOPMENT ~.e0 *~- AC. WOO 0S T;tle: Whippoorwill Lane Corridor Study Potable Water Project Engin~ ;r: Scan Robert Weeks. P.E.I c:L..\watercad\whip master water(ph. 1).wcd SRW Engineering Inc V~t~rC/~Off~032]~ Scenario: Base WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDORWATER MASTER PLAN STUDY PHASE 2 16°W.M. SOURCE ~ I~,~ CHUECH ~~ ~H IPP O0 RWIL L~K ES J-9 KENSINGTON CANAL I ' ,tie: Whippoorwill Lane Corridor Study Potable Water Project En! ~er: Sean Robert Weeks, P. c:'~..\watercad',whip master water<ph. 2).wcd SRW Engineering Inc .~[~.rC_~l~ v~jr~.o03t] 04~6/02 08:06:21 AM ~ Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbu~, CT06708 USA +1-203-755- 6~6 ~ ~ 1 of~ Scenario: Base 7f~ WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY WATER PHASE2 WITH LOOPING CONNECTION ~NE RIOGE 80AD ROW ~essure: 47.~3 palI~ Oemana: 13240 gpm 7 80 +~- Ac ~ ~tle: ~ippoo~ill Lane Corridor Study Potable '~ter Project Em ineer:lp~n ~e~ks, F .E. c:~..Xwhip master water(ph. 2) with ~ture.wcd SRW Engineering Inc ~2~ 04~6/02 08:08:53 AM ~ Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road ~terbu~, CT06708 USA +1-203-7[ 66~ ~ Page 1 f 1 Scenario: Base WHIPPOORWILL LANE CORRIDOR MASTER PLAN STUDY Ll'.q NG STON VILLAGE PARCEL AR E.~$. FACtLT~ES (EXISTING &PROPOSED) ARE NOT~USVEY ACClJRATE - r- '~tte: VVhippoorwill Lane Corridor Study Sewer Project Engine( Sean Robert Weeks, P.E. c:L..\whippoor~vill\watercad\whip master sewer.wed SRW Engineering Inc W~I~J'~;AI~ '~.~32] 04/'20/02 08:10:21 AM © Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 USA +1-203-755-1 5.I ---- "' 'Pfft~-'~of 1 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR: PUD REZONE P U DZ-200'! -AR-'1553 Petition No.: Date Petition Received:. PROJECT #19990338 DATE: 10/5/01 Commission District: Planner Assigned:~ RAY BELLOWS ABOVE TO BE COMPLETED BY STAFF 1. General Information: Name of Applicant(s): Relleum, Inc. and Granite Development II, L.C. Applicant's Mailing Address: 801 Laurel Oak Drive, Suite 700 City: Naples State: Florida Zip: 34108 Applicant's Telephone #: 941-566-8700 Fax: 941-566-1505 Name of Agent: 31ichael R. Fernandez,, AICP Firm: Planning Development, Inc. Agent's Mailing Address: 5133 Casteilo Drive, Suite 2 City: Naples State: Florida Zip: 34104 Agent's Telephone #: 941-263-6934 Fax: 941-26,t-6981 COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING SERVICES / CURRENT PLANNING 2800 N. HORSESHOE DRIVE - NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PHONE (941) 403-2400 / FAX (941) 643-6968 Complete the following for all Association(s) affiliated with this petition. (Provide additional sheets if necessary). .,a,m.~¢.anoN Fo, ~,t~nL~C nZAm~G FOR VUU REZONE- S/98 JUL 3 0 2002 Page 1 Name of Homeowner Association: N/A Mailing Address City State __ Zip Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address City State __ Zip Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address City State Zip Name of Master Association: Mailing Address City State __ Zip Name of Civic Association: Mailing Address City State __ Zip 2. Disclosure of Interest Information: a. If the property is owned tee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary). Name and Address Percentage of Ownership 2002 b. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each. SOUTHERN PORTION (South 6604~ Feet.): Name and Address and Office Percentage of Stock Relleum, Inc. John Scot Mueller, President & Treasurer 100% Greg Wardeberg, Vice President & Secretary Mark ,~okoloff, Director Sheila Mueller, Director c. If the property is in the name ora TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. Name and Address Percentage of Interest d. . If the property is in the name ora GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners. NORTHERN PORTION (North 660-2: Feet.): Name and Address Percentage of Ownership Granite Development II, t C Relleum, ln~, Member 75°~ John Scot Mueller, Member. 25°~ APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FQR PUD REZONE - 5/98 /[ }~1o. ~.~ Amended 7/3/02 , JUL 3 0 2002 -'3 (~age 3 e. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries or partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership Date of Contract: f. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership or trust. Name and Address g. Date subject property acquired (X) leased ( ): NORTHERN PORTION: 1/22/92 and SOUTHERN PORTION: 6/6/00 Term of lease n/a Yrs/mos If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option: n/a and date option terminates: , or anticipated closing date n/a h. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. JUL 3 O 2002 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEAR[BIG FOR PUl) REZONE - 5/98 l~g.ff-~--~ Page 4 3. Detailed legal description of the property_ covered by the application: (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page.) If request involves change to more than one zoning district, include separate legal description for property involved in each district. Applicant shall submit four (4) copies of a recent survey (completed within the last six months, maximum 1" to 400' scale) if required to do so at the pre-application meeting. NOTE: The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If questions arise concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed survey may be required. Section: 18 To~vnship: 49S Range: 26E Lot: Block: Subdivision: Plat Book~ Page #:__ Property I.D.#: Metes & Bounds Description: Please see attached Exhibit "A" 4. Size of property.: 2,5954- ft. XI,320 4- ft.=Total Sq. Ft. 2,$77,009 4-. Acres 59.16 4- 5. Address/general location of subject property_: 3.800 +feet south of Pine Ridge Road and 8,500 +feet north of Golden Gate Parkway: with 1,320 +feet of frontage on the east side of the future Livingston Road_ 6. Adjacent zoning and land use; Zoning Land use N Agriculture Horse Farm and Vacant - Undeveloped - Borrow Pit S ,4griculture _ Vacant- Farming E PUD Vacatlt - }lTtipporwill Woods PUD and Borrow Pit W R/W Future Livingston Road JUL 3 O 2002 Does the owner of the subject property own property contiguous to the subject property? If so, give complete legal description of entire contiguous property. (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page). NO Section: Township: Range: Lot: Block: Subdivision: Plat Book Page #:__ Property I.D.#: Metes & Bounds Description: 7. Rezone Request: This application is requesting a rezone from the A - Agriculture zoning district(s) to the PUD zoning district(s). Present Use of the Property: Eastern Portion: Vacant - Farming - Borrow Pit Western Portion: Vacant- Vegetated Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property: Residential 1. Evaluation Criteria: Pursuant to Section 2.7.2.5 and Sec. 2.7.3.2.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code, staff' s analysis and reconm~endation to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission's recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners shall be based upon consideration of the applicable criteria noted below. Provide a narrative statement describing the rezone request with specific reference to the criteria noted below. Include any backup materials and documentation in support of the request. Standard Re~one Considerations (LDC Section 2. 7.2. 5.t I. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, attd policies and fitture land use map and the elements of the growth management plan. 2. The existing land use pattern. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby .aPPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUl) REZONE - 5/98 JUL 3 0 2002 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation lo existing conditions Oll the property for the proposed change. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment (rezone) necessary. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. 7. Wllether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create O'pes of trqffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes o1' projected types of vehicldar traffic, including activity during co11~'tructiott phases o f the development, or othelq¢ise affect public safety. 8. W-hether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. 9. [fhether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. l O. IS?~ether the proposed change will seriously affect property values in the adjacent at'ea. ! I. }~&ether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development qtr adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. 12. kghether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. 14. I,I/hether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. 15. I,[-?lether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed 11se in districts already permitting Sltch use. 16. ilT~e physical chctracteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which ;,'o~dd be required to make the property usable for any of the range of pot~ u,'td ~c. liOl* ttncter the proposed zoning classification, go._ [:3 AI:'PLICATI_O__N FgR!'UB_LIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE- 5/98 JUL 3 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County growth management plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch. 106, art. II], as amended 18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the board of county commissioners shall deem important itt the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. PUD Ret, one Considerations (LDC Section Z Z 3. Z 5t 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic crud access, drainage, sewer, water, attd other utilities. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitabifity of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas attd faciDties that are not to be provided or maintained at pubfic expense. Findings attd recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the county attorney. 3. Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives and poficies of the growth management plan. 4. The internal attd extental compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of intprovements, restrictions on design, attd buffering and screening requirements. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas itl existence and as proposed to serve the development. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available intprovements and facilities, both public attd private. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. 8. Conformit), with PUD regtdations, or as to desirable modifications of such ~ reguh~tions in the particular case, based on determination that such mo~ ~ca~ ~ ef just~ed as meeting public purposes to a de~ee at least equivalent t( lite~'J ~ t~_ application of such re~dations. JUL 3 O 2002 9. Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded from enforcing deed restrictions, however, many communities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact the civic or property owners association in the area for which this use is being requested in order to ascertain whether or not the request is affected by existing deed restrictions. 10. Previous land use petitions on the subject propertyl To your knowledge, has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? If so, what was the nature of that hearing? Planning Cornmission-ll/16/O0 and Board of Count_ Comrnissioners-12/12/O0 11. Additional Submittal requirements; In addition to this completed application, the following shall be submitted in order for your application to be deemed sufficient, unless otherwise waived during the pre-application meeting. a. A copy of the pre-application meeting notes; b. If this rezone is being requested for a specific use, provide fifteen (15) copies of a 24" x 36" conceptual site plan [and one reduced 8~A'' x 11" copy of site plan], drawn to a maximum scale of 1 inch equals 400 feet, depicting the following [Additional copies of the plan may be requested upon completion of staff evaluation for distribution to the Board and various advisory boards such as the Environmental Advisory Board (EAB), or CCPC]; · all existing and proposed structures and the dimensions thereof, · provisions for existing and/or proposed ingress and egress (including pedestrian ingress and egress to the site and the structures(s) on site), · all existing and/or proposed parking and loading areas [include matrix indicating required and provided parking and loading, including required parking for the disabled], · required yards, open space and preserve areas; · proposed locations for utilities (as well as location of existing utility services to the site), · proposed and/or existing landscaping and buffering as may be required by the County, c. ,~n architectural rendering of any proposed structures. d. An Enviromnental hnpact Statement (EIS), as required by Section 3.8 Development Code (LDC), or a request for waiver if appropriate. JUL 3 0 2002 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 5/98 ~ e. Whether or not an ElS is required, two copies of a recent aerial photograph, (taken within the previous twelve months), minimum scale of one inch equals 400 feet, shall be submitted. Said aerial shall identify plant and/or wildlife habitats. Such identification shall be consistent with Florida Department of Transportation Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System. Additionally, a calculation of the acreage (or square feet) of native vegetation on site, by area, and a calculation and location(s) of the required portion of native vegetation to be preserved (per LDC Section 3.9.5.5.4.). f Statement of utility provisions (with all required attachments and sketches); g. A Traffic Impact Statement (TIS), unless waived at the pre-application meeting; h. A historical and archeological survey or waiver application if property is located within an area of historical or archeological probability (as identified at pre- application meeting); i. Any additional requirements as may be applicable to specific conditional uses and identified during the pre-application meeting, including but not limited to any required state or federal permits. :kPPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 5/98. I~ jUL 3 11 2002 Page 10 TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT (TIS): A TIS is required unless waived at the pre-application meeting. The TIS required may be either a major or minor as determined at the pre-application meeting. Please note the following with regard to TIS submittals. MINOR TIS: Generally required for rezone requests for property less than I0 acres in size, although based on the intensity or unique character of a petition, a major TIS may be required for petition often acres or less. MAJOR TIS: Required for all other rezone requests. A minor TIS shall include the following: 1. Trip Generation: Annual Average Daily Traffic (at build-out) Peak Hour (AADT) Peak Season Daily Traffic Peak Hour (PSDT) 2. Trip Assignment: Within Radius of Development Influence (RDI) 3. Existing Traffic: Within RDI AADT Volumes PSDT Volumes Level of Service (LOS) 4. Impact of the proposed use on affected major thoroughfares, including any anticipated changes in level of sen'ice. (LOS) 5. Any proposed improvements (to the site or the external right-of-way) such as providing or eliminating an ingress/egress point, or providing turn or decel lanes or other improvements. 6. Describe any proposal to mitigate the negative impacts on the transportation system. 7. For Rezones Only: State how this request is consistent with the applicable policies of the Traffic Circulation Element (TCE) ofthe Growth Management Plan (GMP), including policies 1.3, 1.4, 4.4, 5.1, 5.2, 7.2 and 7.3. A Major TIS shall address all of the items listed above (for a Minor TIS), and shall also include an analysis of the following: 1. Intersection Analysis 2. Background Traffic 3. Future Traffic 4. T1Lrough Traffic 5. Planned/Proposed Roadway Improvements 6. Proposed Schedule (Phasing) of Development I APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUl) JUL 0 2002 Page 11 TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT (TIS) STANDARDS: The following standards shall be used in preparing a TIS for submittal in conjunction with a conditional use or rezone petition: 1. Trip Generation: Provide the total traffic generated by the project for each link within the project's Radius of Development Influence (RI)I) in conformance with the acceptable traffic engineering principles. The rates published in the latest edition of the Institute of' Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Report shall be used unless documentation by the petitioner or the County justifies the use of' alternative rates. 2. Trip Assignment: Provide a map depicting the assignment to the network, of those trips generated by the proposed project. The assignment shall be made to all links within the RDI. Both annual average and peak seasonal traffic should be depicted. 3. Existing Traffic: Provide a map depicting the current traffic conditions on all links within the RDI. The AADT, PSDT, and LOS shall be depicted for all links within the RDI. 4. Level of Service CLOS): The LOS of a roadway shall be expressed in terms of the applicable Collier County Generalized Daily Service Volumes as set forth in the TCE of the GMP. 5. Radius of Development Influence (RDB: The TIS shall cover the least of the following two areas: a) an area as set forth below; or, b) the area in which traffic assignments from the proposed project on the major thoroughfares exceeds one percent of the LOS "C". Land Use Distance Residential 5 Miles or as required by DRI Other (conunercial, industrial, institutional, etc.) 0 - 49,999 Sq. Ft. 2 Miles 50,000 - 99,999 Sq. Ft. 3 Miles 100,000 - 199,999 Sq. Ft. 4 Miles 200,000 - 399,999 Sq. Ft. 5 Miles 400,000 & Up 5 Miles project rather than a geometric radius. fq~.. i i ~,....--~ JUL 3 0 2002 .aPPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 5/98 -~t 6. Intersection Analysis: An intersection analysis is required for all intersections within the RDI where the sum of the peak-hour critical lane volume is projected to exceed 1,200 Vehicles Per Hour (VPH). 7. Background Traffic: The effects of previously approved but undeveloped or partially developed projects which may affect major thoroughfares within the RDI of the proposed project shall be provided. This information shall be depicted on a map, or alternatively, in a listing of those projects and their respective characteristics. 8. Future Traffic: An estimate of the effects of traditional increases in traffic resulting from potential development shall be provided. Potential development is that which may be developed maximally under the effective Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and the Collier County Land Development Code. This estimate shall be for the projected development areas within the projects RDI. A map or list of such lands with potential traffic impact calculations shall be provided. 9. Through Traffic: At a minimum, increases in through traffic shall be addressed through the year 2015. The methodology used to derive the estimates shall be provided. It may be desirable to include any additional documentation and backup data to support the estimation as well. 10. Planned / Proposed Roadway Improvements: Ail proposed or planned roadway improvements located within the RDI should be identified. A description of the funding commitments shall also be included. ! 1. Project Phasing: When a project phasing schedule is dependent upon proposed roadway improvements, a phasing schedule may be included as part of the TIS. If the traffic impacts of a project are mitigated through a phasing schedule, such a phasing schedule may be made a condition of approval. .IUL 3 0 2002 XPPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE- 5/98 .~ (~- Page 13 STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS FOR PUD REZONE REQUEST 1. NAME OF APPLICANT(s): Relleum, Inc. and Granite Development II, L. C. 2. MAILING ADDRESS: 801 Laurel Oak Drive, Suite 700 CITY: Naples STATE: Florida ZIP: 34108 3. ADDRESS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY (IF AVAIl.ABLE): 4. Section: 18 Township: 49S Range: 26E Lot: Block: Subdivision: Plat Book Page #:__ Property I.D.#: Metes & Bounds Description: Please see attached Exhibit "A" 5. TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED (Check Applicable System): a. COUNTY UTILITY SYSTEM X b. CITY UTILITY SYSTEM [] c. FRANCHISED UTILITY SYSTEM [] PROVIDE NAME: d. PACKAGE TREATMENT PLANT [] (GPD capacity) e. SEPTIC SYSTEM [] 6. TYPE OF WATER SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED: a. COUNTY UTYLITY SYSTEM X b. CITY UTILITY SYSTEM [] c. FRANCHISED UTILITY SYSTEM [] PROVIDE NAME: d. PRIVATE SYSTElVl (WELL) - APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FORPUD REZONE- 5/98 JUL 3 9 2002 P~ 7. TOTAL POPULATION TO BE SERVED: 2.2 x 2~6 = 651 2.2 x # units = 8. PEAK AND AVERAGE DAILY DEMANDS: A. WATER - PEAK: 40,114 gpd AVERAGE DAli JY: 296 x 2.2 x 154 = 100,285 gallons B. SEWER - PEAK: 26,048 gpd AVERAGE DAIIJY: 296 x 2.2 x 100= 6$,120 galions 9. IF PROPOSING TO BE CONNECTED TO COLLIER COUNTY REGIONAL WATER SYSTEM, PLEASE PROVIDE THE DATE SERVICE IS EXPECTED TO BE REQUHLED: October, 20O2 10. NARRATIVE STATEMENT: Provide a brief and concise narrative statement and schematic drawing of sewage treatment process to be used as well as a specific statement regarding the method of affluent and sludge disposal. If percolation ponds are to be used, then percolation data and soil involved shall be provided from tests prepared and certified by a professional engineer. 11. COLLIER COUNTY DEDICATION STATEMENT: If the project is located within the services boundaries of Collier County's utility service system, written notarized statement shall be provided agreeing to dedicate to Collier County Utilities the water distribution and sewage collection facilities within the project area upon completion of the construction of these facilities in accordance with all applicable County ordinances in effect at the time. Ihis statement shall also include an agreement that the applicable system development charges and connection fees will be paid to the Collier County Utilities Division prior to the issuance of building permits by the County. If applicable, the statement shall contain an agreement to dedicate the appropriate utility easements for serving the water and sewer systems. llte Written Notari:;ed Statement Will be Provided Prior to Approval 12. STATEMENT OF AVAILABILITY CAPACITY FROM OTHER PROVIDERS: Unless waived or otherwise provided for at the pre-application meeting, if the project is to receive sewer or potable water services from any provider other than the County, a statement from that provider indicating that th~ 'c :o ~~rrot ' capacity to serve the project shall be provided, iqo._/£~ _~ ._ APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE- 5/98 JUl 3 0 2002 PUD REZONE APPLICATION SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION PACKET! # OF NOT REQUIREMENTS coPn s REQUIRED REQUIRED 1. Completed Application 15 X 2. Cop.;' of Deed(s) and list identifying Owner(s) and all 15 X Partners if a Corporation 3. Completed Owner/Agent Affidax'it, Notarized 15 X 4. Pre-Application Notes/Ivlinutes X 5. Conceptual Site Plan X 6. Environmental Impact Statement - (EIS) X To be provided under separate cover. 7. Aerial Photograph - (with habitat areas identified) 15 X 8. Completed Utility. Provisions Statement (with required 15 X attachments and sketches) 9. Traffic Impact Statement - (TIS) X 10. Historical and Archaeological Survey or Waiver X Application 11. Copies of State and/or Federal pernuts N/A X 12. Architectural Rendering of Proposed Structure(s) N/A X 13. Application Fee, Check shall be payable to Collier X County Board of Commissioners 14. Other Requirements - X As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indic~'~'~ on '~';~ .~.~.vu~, ;c ;,,,-h,,~, in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. '-' /Agent / Applicant Signature __APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE- $/98 JUl_ 3 O 20112 [ge/L Relleum, Inc. being first duly sworn, depose and say that well am/are the owners of the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing; that all the answers to the questions in this application, including the disclosure of interest itformarion, all sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application, are honest and true to the best of our knowledge and belief. We / I understand that the bformation requested on this application must be complete and accurate and that the content of this form, whether computer generated or County printed shall trot be altered. Public hearings will trot be advertised until this application is deemed complete, and all required D~ormation has been submitted. As property owner [ge/Ifi~rther authorize Planning Development Incorporated/ Michael R. Fern an de~ AICP to act as our /my representative in any matters regarding this Petition. ~fP-ro;ert~Owff'~ Relleum, Inc. dohn Scot Mueller, President The foregoing instrument was actmowledged before me this ~ fam'day of __T ~t..y , 2000. by ~'~40 R~_.~>'r' ffI~--~e,-, who is personally to, own lo tne or State of Florida ;~ ~ ~ No~ ~b~, State of Flofi~ ,~ }~ ,~,.mt~v. ~s~,~. ;~ ~rint, Type or Stamp Co~ 'miss~n JU k 3 0 2002 ,~PPI,ICATION FO~ p~I,IC HEA~G FOR PUD ~ZONE - 5/98 A FFIDA VIT We /1, Granite Development II, L. (7. bemgfirst duly sworn, depose and say that well am/are the owners of the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing; that all the answers to the questions in this application, including the disclosure of #~terest information, all sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application, are honest and trite to the best of rmr D~owledge and belief. We/I understand that the information requested on this applicatfon must be complete ~d accurate and that the content of this form, whether computer generated or County printed shall not be altered. Public hearings will not be advertised until this application is deemed complete, and all required information has been submitted. .4 s property owner We / I fitrther authorize Planning Development In corporated / Michael 1~ Fern an de[, A ICP to act as our /my representative in any matters regarding this Petition. ~'~i~,,~iu, ¢ of Property Owne~,,~ Granite Development II, L.C. JOHN SCOT MUELLER, MEMBER Print Name and Title of Property Chvner 77qe foregoing instrument was acto~owledged before me this ~&~day of X'u~L.Y' , 2000, by ,?Y_~+~ ~c.~r' f~a.~t.c ~P~_. who is personally lo~own to me ~ has Froch:ccd- State of Flori~ ~~ ~. Coun~ of Collier (Sip~ature of Notaw Public - State of }{.~v'~ ~ s. Vest :~ Flori&) ~t '~O~n~ bty C~ui~ Exp. 0711112~1 ,~ ~ ~.~.m,~v. ~ ~ ~, ~,c, 1~ (Print, Type or Stamp Commissioned Name of Nota~ Public) APPLIC~TION FOR PUBLI~ HEA~G FOR PUD REZONE - 5/98 JUL 3 0 2002 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA: AS RECORDED IN O.R. BOOK 1681, PAGE 5 AND O.R. BOOK 803, PAGE 1483, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY. THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSI-]IP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSH~ 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORDA. ENTIRE SUBJECT PARCEL CONTAINS 59.16 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. jUL 3 0 2002 Pl nnin De re/opm en t Incorporated Development Consultants, Engineers, Planners and Landscape Architects 5133 Castello Drive Suite 2 Naples, Florida 34103 941 / 263-6934; Fax: 941 / 263-6981 PDIMRF @ AOL.COM FACSIMILE MEMORANDUM & TRANSMISSION COVER SHEET Date: Jrt/)' 10, 2002 To: Mr. Ray Bellows Collier County Plamfing Services Fax: 213-2916,/Original via courier ~~~-~' ~vC~._ Re: Balmoral PUDZ-OI-AR-1553 ~~z,~ rO~ ex: o~ oio.~4 Sender: Michae! R. Fernandez, AICP YOU SHOULD RECEIVE 9 PAGE(S), INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET. IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL 941 / 263-6934. Dear Ray: Pursuant to the discussion held during the Planning Commission meeting for Balmoral PUD, the County's no longer has a need for, nor desire for the right-of-way for the southward extension of Whippoorwill Lane. As you may recall, the Planning Commission and the County Attorney Office representative were not comfortable having the Planning Commissioners include the deletion of the right-of-way while it is required by another document / agreement which the County is party to; the Condemnation Settlement Agreement. In the interim, the Transportation Department (Norm Feder) and the County Attorney Office have worked out an Amendment to the Settlement Agreement which relieves/removes the requirement for dedication of 40 feet of right-of-way and the associated 10 foot slope easement for Whippoorwill Lane. Therefore, I have reviewed the current PUD Document and have identified the references to this previously requested County R/W from the document which require revision. These revisions do _ RECEIV -D JUL 3 O 2002 Page 1 of 5 JUL 1 0 21{t2' not change the commitment of the petitioner to be consistent with the Section 18 (Whippoorwill Area) Master Plan which relies on a County Utility Easement along the eastern property line of the subject property for the potential looping of public water / fire lines, and therefore this provision survives the revision. It is our understanding that these changes are considered minor and will not cause the petition to be removed from the CCBCC Consent Agenda for the meeting of July 30, 2002. See attached correspondence between the petitioner, petitioner's attorney and the County Attorney. Please call to discuss at your earliest convenience. Sincerely yours, PLANN1NG DEVELOPMENT INCORPOIL~,TED Michael R. Fernandez, AICP President JUL 3 0 2002 Page 2 of 5 '87/10/2002 09:55 9416435149 DON'rNIBUE RTHS Esr:] PAGE 01 D O.g~ ISkrxQu ~E RLq~S, P.~L $~3~ Su~tEn~r~y Court Haples,: f£ s4~ 04 (94~)643-~845 (94s)643-5~49 fax VIA FAX TO PARTIES: MICHAEL 263-6981 FR: DOMINIQUE RIHS, ESQ. RE: BALMORAL DATE: 7-1 0 -02 PAGES IN FAX: ~ Attached is letter agreement with County. I have telephone messages in with Atty Ashton to finalize the letter agreement and get answer for you on coordinating the revised PUD. I understand the urgency. Will call WHEN I have answer. THANKS! The information contained in the facsimile message is attorney privileged and confidential, and is intended only for the use of party or parties named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the law office of DOMINIQUE RIMS by telephone and return the original message to us at the above correspondence address via the U.S. Postal SE ~v4m~?~Al~-' ~R: FAX.CYA JUL 3 0 2002 '07/10/2002 89:55 941G435149 DOMINIQUE RIHS ESQ PAGE 02 $131 SUNBURY COURT NAPLES, FL 34~04-4731 (941) 643-i845 (941) 643-5149 (FAX) FLORIDA BAR BOARD July 3rd 2002 CERTIFIED IN Ha. Heidi Ashton Collier County Attorney 3301 Tamiami Trail E. Naples, FL 34112 RE: BALMORAL PUD Dear Heidi: ?ursuant to our conversations of July 2nd, this is written agreement by Relleum, Inc. to pay $35,100.00 to The Board of Collier County Commissioners contingent upon an Order signed by the presiding Judge in Case 01-0757-CA modifying the Stipulated Final Judgment so as to delete the language that provided that Re!leum, Inc. shall donate 40 feet of its property which fronts the proposed Whippoorwill Lane as a road, drainage & utility easement and that the Balmoral PUD document slated for the consent agenda of the Board of County Commissioners on July 30, 2002 will likewise have no requirement for any donation or grant of a 40 foot road, drainage & utility easement along the boundary of Balmoral and ~he proposed Whippoorwill Lane extension. I understand that Mr. Feder or your office will relay the agreemen5 for the PUD document ~o not require any road easement for Whippoorwill Lane to Ray Bellows, as the staff member assigned to the Balmoral PUD. I further understand that since Attorney Charlie Forman J s shown as attorney of record for Relleum on Case 01-0757-CA that he will sign off on the Modification and Order request to Judge Brousseau on the Stipulated Final Judgment. Kindly fax to my office the Modification and Order for final review by my office and forwarding to Attorney Forman. John Scot Mueller as President of ag~~eium~s ree to the above agreement this day of July, 20 John Sco~ Mueller, Pres. /~C: Mr. Charles Forman, Esq. 352-351-1690 JUL 3 0 2002 Item V.B, ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT MEETING OF AUGUST 11~ 1999 I. NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT: Petition No.: Planned Unit Development No. PUD-99-13 Petition Name: Balmoral PUD Applicant/Developer: Relleum, Inc. Engineering Consultant: Swanson & Associates Consulting Engineers, Inc. Environmental Consultant: Passarella & Associates, Inc. II. LOCATION: The subject property is located approximately 4,500 feet south of Pine Ridge Road and 8,500 feet north of Golden Gate Parkway on the east side of future Livingston Road in Section 18, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. III. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES: Surrounding properties are undeveloped with the following zoning classifications. ZONING DESCRIPTION N - Agricultural Undeveloped S - Agricultural Undeveloped / Actively Farmed E - PUD (Whippoorwill Woods) Undeveloped W - ROW Future Livingston Road Agricultural Undeveloped (FP&L Transmission Line) IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Balmoral will consist of a maximum of 154 residential units to be developed with a mixture of single and multi-family homes in a community of individual residential tracts linked by common primary vehicular and pedestrian circulation and shared open space and common recreational amenities. The project will be accessed from future Livingston Road with its proposed access to be centered within its frontage. Construction access will be from Whippoorwill Road which will eventually also serve as a secondary access to the subject property. JUL 3 0 2002 EAC Meeting ................................................................................. August 11, 1999 PUD-99-13 Page 2 Plan of Record: Environmental: Balmoral Collier County Environmental Impact Statement prepared by Passarella and Associates, Inc., dated June 1999, revised July 1999. Balmoral PUD document prepared by Planning Development Incorporated, dated April 30, 1999. V. STAFF COMMENTS: Water Management: The surface water management for this project will be reviewed by the South Florida Water Management District and therefore is exempt from review by the Environmental Advisory Council (5.13.6 CCLDC). Environmental: The subject property is approximately 39.6 acres in size, about half of which is vegetated with indigenous vegetation. Native habitats on site include pine flatwoods and pine-cypress communities. The other portions of the site have been cleared in the past and consist of a borrow lake. disturbed land, canal/ditch and berm. Approximately 1.8 acres of South Florida Water Management District/Collier County .jurisdictional wetlands and 4.9 acres of "other surface waters" occur on the property. The wetlands are composed of a single FLUCFCS type, pine-cypress-Melaleuca (FLUCFCS code 6249). About 83 percent or 1.5 acres of the defined wetlands and 17 percent or 0.6 acre of the "other surface waters" xvill be impacted during construction of the project. Compensation for wetland impacts include the preservation and enhancement of the remaining 0.3 acre of on-site wetlands. An additional 2.4 acres of uplands ~vill also be preserved on-site. No clear biological indicators were noted within the wetland areas to determine present seasonal high water levels. Currently an on-site well monitoring program has been established to help define the level. The xvet season water table is estimated to be elevation 7.7 NGVD based on review of the South Florida Water Management District permit for Wyndemere Country Club and an existing control structure at the east end of the ditch along the south property line. The design control elevation for the structure was 7.50 and the as-built elevation is 7.71. According to the Collier County Soils Map, two soil types are found on the property, Holopaw fine sand, limestone substratum (Soil Map Unit 2) and Hollowpaw fine sand (Soil Map Unit 27). Both soil types are listed as hydric by the Natural Resource Conservation Service. A survey of the property was conducted on April 12, 1999 to identify species listed by the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission (FGFWFC), Florida Department of Agricultural (FDA) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as threatened, endangered, species of special concern or commercially exploited. The survey included walking meandering transects across the property for a coverage of approximately 50 percent of the site. No listed wildlife species were observed during the surveys. Two listed plant species noted during the survey included inflated JUL 3 0 200 EAC Meeting... PUD-99-13 .............................................................................. August 11, 1999 Page 3 wild pine (Tillandsia balbisiana) and common wild pine (Tillandsia fasciculata). The wild pines were scattered about the different vegetation communities on-site. VI. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of Planned Unit Development No. PUDZ99-13 "Balmoral PUD" with the following stipulations: Environmental: 1. Amend section 2.2(A) of the PUD document as follows by adding the .underlined language~ Regulations for development of Balmoral PUD shall be accordance with the contents of this document, PUD-Planned Unit Development District and other applicable sections and parts of the Collier County Land Development Code (to the extent they are not inconsistent with the PUD Ordinance) and Growth Management Plan in effect at the time of issuance of any development order to which said regulations relate which authorizes the construction of improvements. Where the regulations of this PUD Document fail to provide developmental standards then the provisions of the most similar district in the County Land Development Code shall apply. 2. Amend section 4':-N~) of the PUD document as follows by adding the underlined laneuage. - An exotic vegetation removal, monitoring, and maintenance (exotic free) plan for the site, with emphasis on the conservation/preservation areas, shall be submitted to Current Planning Environmental Review Staff for reviexv and approval prior to Site Development Plan/Construction Plan approval. This plan shall include methods and time schedule fo, removal of exotic veo~etation xvithin conservation/preservation areas. 3. Add the following sentence to section_~. 10(E) of the PUD document. Permitted uses within preserve areas do not preclude the requirement of preserving 4.25 acres of native vegetation. 4. Amend section 4.10(E)(3) of the PUD document as follows by adding the underlined language and deleting th,. .... ~- ..~ ~. ~ .................. aug,, !anguag~. Water management structures e~a:,; .... ,~ ....."~ services. 2002 ORDINANCE NO. 02- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 91-102 THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WI{ICH INCLUDES THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS MAP NUMBERED 9618S; BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM "A" AGRICULTURAL TO "PUD" PLANNED U-NIT DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS THE BALMORAL PUD FOR A MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF FUTURE LWINGSTON ROAD (C.R. 881) AND THE WEST SIDE OF WHIPPORWILL LANE, IN SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 58.95+ ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Michael R. Fernandez, AiCP, of Planning Development, Inc., representing R¢lleum, Inc. and Granite Development II, L.C., petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that: SECTION ONE: The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Section 18, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from "A" Agriculture to "PLrD" Planned Unit Development in accordance with the Balmoral PUD Document, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference herein. The Official Zoning Atlas Map numbered 9618S, as described in Ordinance Number 91-102, the Collier County Land Development Code, is hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO: This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this day of ,2002. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ATTEST: BY: JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency Marjorie M. Student Assistant County Attorney PUDZ-2001-AT- 1553/RBIo JUL 3 0 2002 BALMORAL A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND SUPPORTING MASTER PLAN GOVERNING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PURSUANT TO PROVISIONS OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE Prepared For: Relleum, Inc. ¢,% John Scot Mueller, President 801 Laurel Oak Drive Suite 700 Naples, Florida 34108... Prepared By: Michael R. Fernandez, AICP of Planning Development Incorporated 5133 Castello Drive Suite 2, Naples, Florida 34103 941 / 263-6934 941 /263-6981 fax PDIMRF~AOLCOM Revised by Collier County ApH1 22, 2002 DATE APPROVED BY BCC ORDINANCE NUMBER AMENDMENTS AND REPEAL DOCUMENT DATE 03.24.02 PUD Exhibit "A" ~f..~OA ~ JUL 3 0 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE # of 29 TABLE OF CONTENTS & LIST OF EXHIBITS 2 STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE 3 I PROPERTY OWNERSHIP & DESCRIPTION 5 II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT 8 [fi TRACT R: RESDENTLKL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS 16 IV PRESERVE TRACTS 22 V DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS 23 LIST OF EXHIBITS ,' ATTACHMENTS EXHIBIT A PUD Master Plan JUL 3 0 200~ Page 2 of 29 ~'~. ~ STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE The development of approximately 58.95 acres of property in Collier County, as a Planned Unit Development to be known as Balmoral, will be in compliance with the goals, objectives and policies of Collier County as set forth in the Growth Management Plan. The Balmoral PUD will be consistent with applicable comprehensive planning objectives of each of the elements of the Growth Management Plan for the following reasons: 1. The project development is compatible and complementary to existing and future surrounding land uses as required in Policy 5.4 of the Future Land Use Element. 2. The Balmoral PUD implements Policy 5.6 of the Future Land Use Element in that a minimum of sixty (60) percent of the project will be open space. 3. The subject property's loqation, because of' its relation to existing or proposed community facilities and services, permits the development's residential density as described in Objective 2 of the Future Land Use Element. 4. The project development will result in an efficient and economical extension of community facilities and services as required in Policies 3.1.H and L of the Future Land Use Element. 5. The project will be served by a complete range of services and utilities as approved by the County. 6. Improvements are planned to be in compliance with applicable sections of the Collier County Land Development Code as set forth in Objective 3 of the Future Land Use Element. 7. All final local development orders for this project are subject to Division 3.15, Adequate Public Facilities, of the Collier County Land Development Code. 8. The project is compatible with adjacent land uses through the internal arrangement of structures, the placement of land use buffers, and the proposed development standards contained herein. 9. The subject property is within the Urban Residential Land Use Designation as identified on the Future Land Use Map as required in Objective 1, Policy 5.1 and Policy 5.3 of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and therefore is eligible for the base density of 4 units per acre as provided by the FLUE Density Rating System. The proposed density for the project is 4.00 units per acre, which is provided for by the FLUE Density Rating System contained in the FLUE and therefore is consistent with the Future Land Use Element Policy 5.1. ~t~ ~rOa Page 3 of 29 JUL 3 O 2002 In summary., the subject property has an area of 58.95± acres; therefore, the maximum number of units this development is eligible for and is proposed to have is a maximum of 236 units. The project site will have a density of 4.0 units per acre. This density is deemed consistent with the density provided for by the County's Growth Management Plan. ACREAGE UNITS PROPOSED (PER ACRE) YIELD (MAXIMUM) 58.95 - Acres 4.0 + 236 JUL 3 0 2002 Page 4 of 29 I:'l. ,~r~ SECTION I PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND DESCRIPTION 1.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the location and ownership of the property, and to describe the existing conditions of the property proposed to be developed under the project name of Balmoral PUD. 1.2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION The subject property being: THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA: AS RECORDED IN O.R. BOOK 1681, PAGE 5, AND O.R. BOOK 803, PAGE 1483, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY; AND THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST; AND THE SOUTH V2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST. SUBJECT PARCEL CONTAINS 58.95 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. 1.3 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP The subject property is currently under the o~vnership and unified control of Relleum, Inc. and Granite Development 12, L.C. hereinafter jointly called "Applicant" or "Developer". JUL 3 0 2002 Page 5 of 29 P~. ~ ~ 1.4 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AREA A. The total site area is 58.95+/- acres and is located approximately 3,800 feet south of Pine Ridge Road and 8,500 feet north of Golden Gate Parkway with 1,320 ± feet of frontage on the future extension of Livingston Road. This parcel is located within Section 18, Township 49S, Range 26E, Collier County, Florida. B. The zoning classification of the subject property prior to the date of this approved PUD Document was "A" - Rural Agriculture. 1.5 PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION The subject property is relatively level with elevations between 10.00 feet and 11.00 feet above mean sea level. The majority of the western portion of the parcel is vegetated. The eastern portion of the parcel was previously in farm production. This eastern portion also supports a 3.6+/- acre borrow pit lake which was permitted and created in 1983 to supply fill for the development of Interstate 75. The entire parcel is encumbered by a 40 foot drainage easement and the ditch within this easement provides a drainage way for tl,e Kensington development and other abutting lands. Natural drainage is south~vard and flows generally terminate into the existing ditch. Water management plans for the project shall utilize lake detention areas. The subject property has the following designation relative to FEMA Flood Area Zone X, Firm Maps 120067 0385D & 120067 0425 D; Dated June 3, 1986. 1.6 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed development has an area of 58.95 acres and is proposed to be developed concurrently with the extension of Livingston Road. The Balmoral PUD shall consist of a maximum of 236 residential units developed as a mixture of single and multi-family homes in a community of individual residential tracts linked by common primary vehicular and pedestrian circulation, shared open space and common recreational amenities. Each residential unit will be served with centrally provided potable water, sanitary sewer and electric power. Additional services will be provided as appropriate. A minimum of 9.0 acres of existing vegetated area will be retained on site. JUL 3 0 2002 The development's primary access will be fi.om its frontage on Livingston Road which is currently under construction. A singular access point along this future roadway has been identified as being located approximately 1,090 feet north of the parcel's southwest property comer. 1.7 SHORT TITLE This Ordinance shall be known and cited as the "Balmoral Planned Unit Development Ordinance." Page 7 of 29 JUL 3 0 2002 SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS 2.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to delineate and generally describe the project's plan of development, relationships to applicable County ordinances, the respective land uses of the tracts included in the project, as well as other project relationships. 2.2 GENERAL A. Regulations for development of the Balmoral PUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this Document, PUD-Planned Unit Development District and other applicable sections and parts of the Collier County Land Development Code and the Growth Management Plan in effect at the time of issuance of any develop,nent order to which said regulations relate which authorizes the construction of improvements. Where the regulations of this PUD Document fail to provide developmental standards, then the provisions of the most similar district in the County Land Development Code shall apply. B. Unless otherwise noted, the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code in effect at the time of issuance of the development order to which said regulations relate. C. All conditions imposed and all ~aphic material presented depicting restrictions for the development of the Balmoral PUD shall become part of the regulations, which govern the manner in which the PUD site may be developed. D. Unless modified, waived or excepted by this PUD Document or associated exhibns, the applicable provisions of other sections of the Land Development Code remain in full force and effect with respect to the development of the land which comprises this PUD. E. Development permitted by the approval of this petition will be subject to concurrency review under the provisions of Division 3.15, Adequate Public Facilities of the Land Development Code. Page 8 of 29 ~o._ i c]tw-,,va~A ~x~ JUL 3 0 2002 F. The development of any tract approved for residential development contemplating fee simple ownership of land for each dwelling unit shall be required to submit and receive approval of a preliminary subdivision plat in conformance with the requirements of Division 3.2 of the Collier County Land Development Code prior to the submittal of construction plans and a final plat for any portion of the tract or parcel. 2.3 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT PLAN AND PROPOSED LAND USES A. The project Master Plan, including uses of land for the acreage noted, is illustrated graphically by Exhibit "A", PUD Master Plan. TABLE I.: BALMORAL: ESTIMATED LAND USE SUMMARY TRACT LAND USE APPROXIMATE ACREAGE .. R1 ' RESDENTIAL 9.3 R2 RESIDENTIAL 14.3 R3 RESIDENTIAL 10.2 R4 RESIDENTIAL 5.0 LAKE 7.3 PRESERVES A+B+C+D+E RETAINED VEGETATION 9.0 Livingston Road Easement COUNTY R/W 0.8 Green Boulevard Easement COUNTY R/W ' 3.0 East Property Line Nonexclusive County Utility Easement COUNTY UTILITY EASEMENT 0.1 TOTAL 58.95± Note A. The maximum number of residential units within the PUD: 236 units, approximately 4± units per acre. Note B. The number of units and intensity of units per acre within specific residential tracts may be vaned provided the number within the entire PUD does not exceed 236 units. Residential tract acreage includes buffers, preserved areas, other open space or recreational areas, roads and water management systems. The total tract acreage is utilized in the determination of residential density. Page 9 of 29 JUL 3 0 2002 Table I is a schedule of the intended land uses, with approximate acreage of the total project indicated. The arrangement of these land areas is shown on the Master Plan (Exhibit "A"). The Master Development Plan is an illustrative preliminary development plan. Design criteria and layout that is illustrated on the Master Development Plan and other exhibits supporting this project shall be understood to be flexible so that final design may satisfy development objectives and be consistent with the project development, as set forth in this Document. B. Modification to all internal boundaries may be permitted at the time of preliminary subdivision plat or site development plan approval subject to the provisions of the Collier County Land Development Code or as otherwise permitted by this PUD Document. C. In addition to the various areas and specific items shown in Exhibit "A", such easements as necessary (utility, private, semi-public) shall be established within or along the various tracts or acreage as may be necessary. 2.4 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT DENSITY No more than 236 residential dwelling units shall be constructed in the 58.95 +/- acre project area. If all dwelling units are constructed, gross density will be 4 units per acre. 2.5 DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE The Applicant estimates completion of improvements to the property should occur within four (4) years. Year "one" (1) is the year Livingston Road construction adjacent to the site is completed. Year Units Cumulative Total 1 40 40 2 60 100 3 80 180 4 56 236 2.6 AMENDMENTS TO PUD DOCUMENT OR PUD MASTER PLAN Amendments may be made to the PUD as provided in the Collier County Land Development Code, Section 2.7.3.5. Page l0 of 29 trl JUL 3 0 2002 2.7 RELATED PROJECT PLAN APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS A. Prior to the recording of a record plat and/or condominium plat for all or part of the PUD, final plans of all required improvements shall receive approval of the appropriate Collier County governmental agency to ensure compliance with the PUD Master Plan, and as applicable, the Collier County Subdivision Code and the platting laws of the State of Florida. B. Exhibit "A", PUD Master Plan, constitutes the required PUD development plan. Subsequent to or concurrent with PUD approval, a preliminary subdivision plat, if applicable, shall be submitted for the entire area covered by the PUD Master Plan. Any division of property and the development of the land shall be in compliance with Division 3.2 of the Collier County Land Development Code and the platting laws of the State of Florida. C. The provisions of Division 3.3 of the Collier County Land Development Code, when applicable, shall apply to the development of all platted tracts, or parcels of land as provided in said Division prior to the issuance of a building l:ermit or other development order. D. Appropriate instruments will be provided at the time of infrastructure improvements regarding any dedications and method for providing perpetual maintenance of common facilities. E. Design and construction of all impro~,ements shall be subject to compliance with the appropriate provisions of the Collier County Land Development Code, Division 3.2. 2.8 MODEL HOMES AND SALES CENTERS Model homes, sales centers and other uses and structures related to the promotion and sale of real estate, such as, but not limited to, pavilions, viewing platforms, gazebos, parking areas, and signs, shall be permitted principal uses throughout the Balmoral PUD subject to the requirements of Section 2.6.33.4 and Section 3.2.6.3.6, of the Collier County Land Development Code. Model homes/model centers including, sales center shall be permitter2 in conjunction witl~ the promotion of the development subject to the following: 1. Single-family models may be constructed after administrative approval of the plat and construction plans but prior to recording of the plat. 2. Models may be permitted as "dry models" and must obtain a conditional certificate of occupancy for model purposes only. Models may not be an occupied unit until a permanent certificate of occupancy is issued. Page 11 of 29 ~'~~ JUL 3 0 200 3. Models may not be utilized as "sales offices" without approval by and ...... through the site development plan (SDP) process. The SDP process shall not be required for single-family dry models pursuant to this Section. 4. Temporary access and utility easements may be provided in lieu of dedicated rights-of-way for temporary service to model homes. 5. In addition to the use of model homes as sales offices or centers, a sales office or center may be maintained on-site for the sales, marketing and administration of recreation club memberships. 2.9 LANDSCAPE BUFFERS, BERMS, FENCES, WALLS AND GATEHOUSES Landscape buffers, berms, fences, walls and gatehouses are generally permitted as a principal use throughout the Balmoral PUD. Along the PUD boundaries, the landscape buffers, berms, fences and walls that may be installed shall have equal treatment and maintenance of the interior and exter/or of said landscape buffers, berms, fences and walls. The following standards shall apply: l. Berms shall have the following maximum side slopes: 1. Grassed berms over m'o feet in height - 4:1 2. Landscaped berms - 3' 1 3. Rip-Rap berms - 1:1 4. Structural walled berms may be vertical 5. Required buffer planting areas - 4:1 2. Height of Landscaped Berms and Depth of Swales: A 4:1 slope shall be required for berms and swales, except under the following circumstances: I. The maximum height of the berm may be eight feet, as measured from existing grade, if a 3:1 slope is utilized and the berm is landscaped. The maximum depth of a swale may be four feet, as measured from existing grade, if a 3' 1 landscaped slope is utilized. 2. A 3' 1 slope is also permitted if the height of the slope is two feet in height or less or if the open channel is two feet in height or less. 3. Fence or wall maximum height: The maximum height for all walls and fences around the perimeter of the development shall be ten (10) feet above the finished grade level of the nearest street. Walls and fences within the development shall conform with Collier County Land Development Code requirements. - tW.,O,IOA rl'Oa JUL 3 0 2002 Page 12 of 29 p(._/r.~")v_ 4. Fence or wall setbacks: Fences, walls and similar structures shall be set back a minimum of 5 feet from development boundaries where adjacent to a public right-of-way and a 2-foot setback from all other land uses. 5. Pedestrian sidewalks, bike paths, water management facilities and structures may be incorporated into the required landscape buffer areas, consistent with Section 2.4.7.3.4 of the Land Development Code. 6. Gatehouses and access control structures shall have no required setback from edge of pavement or back of curb. Gatehouses or access control structures shall not be located to cause interference to or backups on the public roadway system. Minimum setback shall be 75 feet from the edge of the pavement. 2.10 LAKE SETBACK AND EXCAVATION 1. The lake setback requirements described in Section 3.5.7.1 of the Collier County Land Development Code may be reduced with the administrative approval of the Collier County Development Services Director. Lakes may be excavated to a maximum depth of twenty (20) feet. Removal of fill from Balmoral shall be limited to an amount up to 10 percent (to a maximum of 20,000 cubic yards) of the total volume excavated unless a commercial excavation permit is received. 2. All setbacks shall be measured from the location of the contour of the control elevation of the lake. The required setback to any right-of-way, roadway or access easement ~nay be twenty-five (25) feet if supported by design calculations submitted at the time of development plan review. The required setback to any extended property lines may be twenty-five (25) feet if the property line is properly fenced. The required setback to any property line or tract line internal to the Balmoral development shall be zero feet, except that a twenty (20') foot lake maintenance easement shall be provided as required by the South Florida Water Management District. 3. Excavation of proposed lakes may utilize blasting provided such activities meet the minimum setbacks identified within this Section and shall be subject to all other development standards of the Land Development Code. Page 13 of 29 JUL 3 0 2002 2.11 FILL STORAGE Fill storage is generally permitted as a principal use throughout the Balmoral PUD. Fill material generated may be stockpiled within areas designated for residential development upon issuance of a Clearing and Filling Permit. Prior to stockpiling in these locations, a Letter of Notification along with the plans showing the locations and cross-sections shall be submitted to Collier County Engineering Review Services Staff for review and approval. The following standards shall apply: 1 Stockpile maximum side slopes: 3:1 2 Stockpile maximum height: Thirty-five (35) feet 3 Fill storage areas shall be screened with a security fence at least six (6) feet in height above ground level, except as may otherwise be approved by Collier County Engineering Review Services Staff pursuant to a submitted grading and filling plan. 4 Soil and erosion control shall be provided in accordance with the Collier County Land Development Code, Division 3.7. 2.12 ASSOCIATION OF PROPERTY OWNERS FOR COMMON AREA MAINTENANCE Whenever the Developer elects to create land area and/or recreational amenities whose ownership and maintenance responsibility is a common interest to all of the subsequent purchasers of property within said development in which the common interest is located, that developer entity shall provide appropriate legal instruments for the establishment of a Property Owners' Association or other appropriate entity whose function shall include provisions for the perpetual care and maintenance of all common facilities and open space subject further to the provisions of the Collier County Land Development Code, Section 2.2.20.3.8. 2.13 COMMON AREA MAINTENANCE Common area maintenance, including the maintenance of common facilities, open spaces, street trees and water management facilities shall be the responsibility of the Developer, its successors or assigns. The Developer, its successors or assigns, shall retain copies of the project's master plans for common facilities ,nd their associated maintenance programs/requirements. 2.14 EASEMENTS FOR UTILITIES All necessary easements, dedications, or other instnhments shall be granted to ensure the continued operation and maintenance of all service utilities in compliance with applicable regulations in effect at the time of development approvals. Page 14 of 29 JUL 3 0 2002 2.15 OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS A combination of the lakes, landscape buffers and other open space shall meet the sixty (60) percent open space requirement for development as set forth in Section 2.6.32.2 of the Collier County Land Development Code. Open space shall include all pervious green space within development parcels, lots and roadway easement tracts. JUL 3 0 2002 Page 15 of 29 Pl. ~ 8 SECTION III TRACT R: RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS 3.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to identify specific development standards for the areas designated as Tracts "R 1', "R2", "R3" and "R4" on the PUD Master Plan, Exhibit "A". 3.2 MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS The maximum number of dwelling units that may be constructed within this 58.95--- acre project is 236. 3.3 USES PERxMITTED Residential areas designated on the Master Plan are to accommodate a full range of residential dwelling units, recreational facilities, essential ser¥ices, customao, accessors' uses. and compatible land uses. No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used. m whole or in part, for other than the following: ~ A. Principal Uses: 1. Residential dwellings, including single-family, attached and detached, duplex and two-family dwellings, toxvnhouses, zero-lot line and multi- family dwellings, including garden apartments and timeshare facilities. 2. Guardhouses and entrance gates. 3. Common community and recreational uses and facilities such as sxvimming pools, tennis courts, children's playground areas, clubhouse and similar facilities that serve as an integral part of a residential development. Such uses shall be visually and functionally compatible · with the adjacent residences whose residents will have the t:oe ofsuct~ facilities. JUL 3 0 2002 Page 16 of 29 pg._6cci B. Accessory Uses: 1. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to uses permitted as of right. including private garages. 2. Recreational uses and facilities such as swimming pools, tennis courts, children's playground areas and similar facilities that serve as an integral part of a residential development. Such uses shall be visually and functionally compatible with the adjacent residences ~vhich have the use of such facilities. 3. Essential services as defined by Section 2.6.9.1 of the Collier County Land Development Code, including interim and permanent utility and maintenance facilities. 4. Any other use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and which the Development Services Director determines to be compatible. C. Conditional Uses: 1. Churches and other places of xvorship. 2. Schools, public and private. 3. Social fraternal organizations. 4. Child care centers. 5. Adult living facilities subject to Section 2.6.26 of the Collier County. Land Development Code. 3.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. The Balmoral PUD will feature an integrated and compatible architectural building style or theme, which will be incorporated into the design of all residential structures. Buildings will feature unifying and complementary, design elements such as roof treatments, building materials and building colors. To reduce mass, architectural design treatments such as articulated roof lines, balconies, building offsets, and unified landscaping will be provided. The individual buildings may vary in size and configuration. B. Table II sets forth the development standards for land uses within the "R" Residential District within the Balmoral PUD. Front yard setbacks in Table II shall be measured as follows: 1. If the parcel is served by a public right-of way, the setback is measured from the adjacent right-o f-way line. Page 17 of 29 JUL 3 0 2002 2. If the parcel is served by a non-platted private drive, the setback is measured from the back of the most restrictive of the curb or edge of pavement of the drivexvay. If the parcel is served by a platted private drive, the setback is measured from the road easement or property line. (a) Carports are permitted within parking areas within parcels supporting multiple units. (b) Garages are permitted at the edge of the vehicular pavement which provides access to a designated parking space within parcels supporting multiple units. AGENDA ITEH JUL 3 0 2002 ~age l~ o~ 29 ~,~. ~ / TABLE II Develo?ment Standards for Residential Areas desil~nated as "R" Tracts on the PUD Master Plan. Single- Zero Lot Two-Family & Single- Multi-family Family Line Duplex Family Detached Attached and Townhouse Minimum Lot Area (Sq. Ft.) 5,000 3,500 3,500 (per unit) 1,800 (per 43,560 unit) Minimum Lot Width 50' 50' 100' 30' 100' Front Yard Setback 20' 20' 20' 20' 20' Front Yard for Side Entry Garage 20' 15' 15' 15' 15' Rear Yard Setback 20' 20' 20' 20' 20' (Principal) Rear Yard Setback 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' (Accessory) Side Yard Setback (Pnncipal and 7.5' - 1 story, 0' or 6' 0' or 7.5' 0' or 0.5 15' or 0.5' Accessory) 10' if > 2 (note 3) Building Building story Height, but Height not less than 6' (note 3) Maximum Height (Principal and 35' 35' 35' 35' 45' Accessory) Min. Floor Area (Sq. Ft.) 1,200 1,000 1,000 1,000 1 br - 700 sq. ft. 2 br - 900 sq. ft. 3 br- 1100 sq. ft. Min. Distance Between Principal 7.5' -I story, 10' or 7.5' -I story, 10' or the lesser of Structures 10' if> 2 ½ SBH, 10' if> 2 story ¼ SBH, ~A SBH and 30' story whichever whichever is is greater greater BH: Building Height SBH: Sum of Building Heights - Combined height of two adjacent buildings for the purpose of determining setback requirements. > Greater Than NOTES: 1. Minimum lot areas for any unit type may be exceeded. The unit type and not the minimum lot area, shall define the development standards to be applied by the Customer Services Department during an application for a budding pemdt. For all zero lot line units, a conceptual exhibit showing typical building configurations shall be submitted to the Customer Services Department with the application for the first building permit. The conceptual exhibit may be modified as needed. 2. All distances are in feet unless otherwise noted. 3. Zero feet (0') or a minimum of six feet (6'), on either side except that where the zero foot (0') yard option is utilized, the opposite side yard shall have a minimum distance between structures of six feet (6'). Patios and pools enclosures may encroach into the side yard setback provided a minimum of a 1-foot setback is maintained. S~dqOA ~m~" · 19 of 29 I JUL 3 0 2002 I Screen enclosures may also encroach into the 10-foot rear yard provided a minimum of a 5-foot setback is maintained. Where this option is used, a conceptual site plan for all lots platted for patio and zero lot line shall be submitted to the Building Deptment with the application for the first building permit. This plan will be used to determine the 10-foot spacing requirement between structures. 4. Lot/Tract width may be reduced on cul-de-sac lots provided a minimum cord length of 24 feet is provided and the average width of the lot/tract is equal to or greater than the minimum standard. 5. Rear yard setback for waterfi.ont lots may be reduced to zero (0') feet where no lake maintenance is required. 6. Maximum height and number of stories shall be measured and calculated fi.om the bottom of the structural slab above the parking level when a structure is located above on-~ade parking. GENERAL NOTE: 1. Individual single-family structures maybe developed on Multi-Unit Tracts subject to site development plan approval. 20 of 29 JUL 3 0 2002 3.5 OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS As required by Division 2.3 of the Land Development Code in effect at the time of building permit application. 3.6 LANDSCAPING AND BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS PUD Boundaries: A 20 foot minimum width Type D buffer along Livingston Road, the parcel's west property line and the parcel's south line where abutting public road right-of-way. Required shade trees shall have a minimum height at installation of 16 feet. A 10 foot minimum width buffer along the parcel's remaining property lines. The buffer shall be constructed on a berm having a minimum height of 2 feet above the water management control elevation. Required shade trees shall have a minLmum height at installation of 14 feet. Sheet Trees: Street trees shall be provided on both sides of all internal roads or access ways. A Street Tree Master Plan shall be included with the application for a preliminary subdivision plat (PSP) or site development plan (SDP) as may be appropriate. Installation of individual trees shall be prior to or concurrent with the development of the adjacent dwelling unit or structure in proximity to the roadway or access way. Shade trees in proximity to sidewalks or other paved areas .shall be installed with a deep root barrier system. Street trees shall be placed at the more restrictive of one per lot or one per 60 linear feet. A minimum of 50 percent of the trees shall be canopy trees with a 14 foot height at installation. Trees must be located no more than 10 feet from the edge of pavement to be classified as street trees and shall be installed between the edge of pavement and sidewalk when viable. Once installed, should a street tree be displaced or die, it shall be replaced within 12 months. Replacement trees shall minimally meet the original specification requirements, including consistency with the Master Street Tree Plan. This tree requirement may count toward satisfaction of the tree requirements for individual lots or tracts as provided for by the Collier County Land Development Code. If utilized to satisfy Collier County Land Development Code requirements, trees shall be required to meet native species requirements. 3.7 ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS All buildings, lighting, signage, and landscaping shall be architecturally and aesthetically unified. Flat roofs as the primary roof element for buildings and accessory structures are prohibited and roof slopes shall have a minimum pitch of 4:l. All pole lighting, internal to the project, shall be architecturally compatible and limited to a height of 20 feet. nC, ENOh. II'F-M Page 21 of 29 no. ! r/ ~.~ JUL 3 0 2002 3.8 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR PRINCIPAL USES LISTED UNDER SECTION 3.3.A.3. A. Front yard setbacks shall be measured as follows: 1. If the parcel is served by a public or private fight-of-way, the setback is measured from the adjacent fight-of-way line. 2. If the parcel is served by a non-platted private drive, the setback is measured from the back of the most restrictive of the curb or edge of pavement of the dfivexvay. If the parcel is served by a platted private drive, the setback is measured from the road easement or property line. B. Setbacks 1. Front Yard: 25 feet 2. Side Yard: 25 feet 3. Rear Yard: 25 feet C. Maximum Height: 35 feet or three (3) stories, xvhichever is less. D. Minimum Lot Width: 75 feet E. Minimum Lot Depth: 75 feet F. Minimum Lot Area: 6,000 feet G. Minimum Distance Betxveen Structures: 10 feet Page 22 of 29 JUL 3 0 2002 SECTION IV PRESERVE TRACTS 4.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to identify specific development standards for the areas designated "PRESERVE "on the PUD Master Plan, Exhibit "A". 4.2 USES PERMITTED Permitted uses within preserve areas do not preclude the requirement of preserving 9.0 acres of native vegetation under the provisions of Collier County Land Development Code Section 3.9.5.5.3. No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used. in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Principal Uses: l. Passive recreational areas including recreational structures. 2. Biking, hiking, nature trails and boardwalks. 3. Water management structures. 4. Native preserves and wildlife sanctuaries. 5. Supplemental landscape planting, screening and buffering after appropriate environmental review. JUL 3 0 2002 Page 23 of 29 ~',. q~;) SECTION V DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS 5.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the development commitments for the development of the project. 5.2 GENERAL All facilities shall be constructed in accordance with the site development plans or final subdivision plats, as the case may be, and all applicable State and local laws, codes and regulations applicable to this PUD. Except where specifically noted or stated otherwise, the standards and specifications of the Land Development Code, Division 3.2 shall apply to this project even if the land within the PUD is not to be platted. The Developer, its successors and assigns, shall be responsible for the commitments outlined in this document. The Developer, its successor or assignee, agree to folloxv tne Master Plan and the regulations of the PUD as adopted, and any other conditions or modifications as may be agreed to in the rezoning of the property. In addition, any successor or assignee in title is bound by the commitments within this ageement. 5.3 PUD MASTER PLAN A. Exhibit "A', PUD Master Plan, illustrates the proposed development and is conceptual in nature. Proposed tract or special land use boundaries shall not be construed to be final and may be varied at any subsequent approval phase such as at final platting or site development plan application, subject to the provisions of the Land Development Code and amendments as may be made from time to time. B. All necessary easements, dedications, or other instruments shall be granted to ensure the continued operation and maintenance of all service utilities and all common areas in the project. 5.4 MONITORING REPORT AND SUNSET PROVISIONS A. The Balmoral PUD shall be subject to the Time Limits of Section 2.7.3.4 of the Land Development Code. B. Monitoring Report: An annual monitoring report shall be submitted pursuant to Section 2.7.3.6 of the Collier County Land Development Code. Page 24 of 29 I~. !q ~ JUL 3 0 2002 5.5 DEVELOPMENT EXEMPTION FROM STANDARD SUBDIVISION PRACTICE /REGULATIONS The Site Development Plan Division of the Collier County Land Development Code shall apply to the Balmoral PUD, the except for exemptions set forth herein or otherxvise granted pursuant to Collier County Land Development Code Section 3.3.3. 5.6 SUBSTITUTIONS AND EXCEPTIONS TO SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS The following design substitutions shall apply: A. LDC Section 3.2.8.3.19: Street name signs shall be approved by the Planning Services Director but not need to meet the U.S.D.O.T.F.H.W.A. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Internal street pavement painting and reflective edging requirements are waived. B. LDC Section 3.2.8.4.16.5: All internal streets shall considered local streets and their standard right-of-way width shall be fifty (50) feet. If these streets are to be public and dedicated to Collier County then a sixty (60) foot wide right-of-way is r-~quired. C. LDC Section 3.2.8.4.16.6: The 1,000-foot len~h for cul-de-sac streets shall be waived. The maximum len~h shall be 1,150 feet. D. LDC Section 3.2.8.4.16.10: The requirement for tangents between reverse cur,,'es shall be waived. E. LDC Section 3.2.8.4.16.12.d: The requirement for asphaltic courses shall be waived to allow the use of a surface course of paver brick or decorative concrete pavement except within public rights-of-way. F. LDC Section 3.2.8.4.16.12.e: The requirements that grass be required for all non- paved areas of the right-of-way shall be waived to allow the installation of decorative planters and alternative ground cover. G. LDC Section 3.2.8.4.22.9.c: The requirement that drainage facilities on lots be spaced in accordance with FDOT criteria may be varied upon submittal of the necessary data to support this subsitution at the time of development plan submittal. 5.7 TRANSPORTATION The development of the PUD Master Plan shall be subject to and governed by the following conditions: A. Arterial level lighting shall be provided at all project entrances. Installation shall be in place prior to issuance of any certificates of occupancy. B. The road impact fees shall be paid in accordance with the applicable Ordinance in affect at the time of development order application. Page 25 of 29 JUL 3 0 2002 ,,.__qB C. Site drainage shall not be permitted to discharge directly into any roadway ~.~ drainage system not specifically designed for such discharge. D. Gatehouse facilities, if any, shall be designed and located so as not to cause vehicles to be backed up onto any public roadway. Minimum setback from the edge of pavement shall be 75 feet. Safety access for emergency vehicles shall be provided. E. The Developer shall enter into a Developer Contribution Agreement with Collier County prior to approval of the parcel's initial subdivision or site development plan or within ninety days upon request of Collier County for the purpose of the conveyance of the future east-west collector road right-of-way. The Agreement shall require the Developer to convey within 30 days of its execution, a 50-foot road, drainage, utility and maintenance easement to Collier County along the southem boundary of the proposed east-west collector road in exchange for impact fee credits or other funding in accordance with County ordinances. F. The Developer may construct all or part of the proposed Green Boulevard Extension roadway connecting to Livingston Road and shall also be responsible for all necessary permitting. Impact fee credits or other funding shall only be available if the roadway, or portion thereof, is constructed to County design standards for a collector road under County ordinances and policies and is not a site related improvement. The entrance for the east-west collector road shall be ~_. located no closer than 500 feet from Livingston Road. Once the interests of any easement holder or lien holder are subordinated or released relative to the Kensington drainage outfall ditch, the Developer may cover and bury the pipes to construct the collector road within the easement. G. Within thirty (30) days of the County's adoption of the Balmoral PUD, the Developer shall donate, without compensation, the easternmost 10 feet of its property for a nonexclusive County Utility Easement. H. Per the Stipulated Final Judgment, Case No.: 0t-0757-CA, the County shall construct a directional median opening and mm bay within the right-of-way for Livingston Road, 1,090 feet north of the southern boundary of the subject parcel. After the initial construction, the County may close the directional median opening at the earlier o_~ (a) the installation arid opening of a traffic signal at the east-west collector road, or (b) based on safety and/or capacity measures. I. Platted project streets may be private or public, or may be owned by a homeowners' association and shall be classified as local streets. The private or public designation 'shall be made at the subdivision plat or site development plan stage of permitting, as may applicable. Page 26 of 29 ~ itl ~..~ JUL 3 0 2002 J. Access. The project's initial access shall be from Livingston Road and shall located approximately 1,090 feet north of the parcel's southwest corner. A second, access location may be required to be located along the proposed Green Bouleva Extension roadway located along the parcel's southern property line a minimum, 500 feet east of Livingston Road and a minimum of 660 feet west of the parcel' eastern property line. In the event that the Green Boulevard Extension is not fundec for construction at the time Tracts R-3 and R-4 are proposed for site development plan or preliminary subdivision plan review, then the secondary access point shall be provided from Whippoorwill Lane. Other than as prescribed in the Stipulated Final Judgment, Collier County has the right to modify or change any median treatment on the public road system and other than those points of access required by the Judgment, there is no vesting of number, type or location of access points. K. Sidewalks, pathways and bicycle lanes shall be i~quired in accordance with the provisions Section 3.2.8.3.17 of the Collier County Land Development Code as may be applicable at the time of development order application. 5.8 SITE LIGHTING Lighting facilities shall be arranged in a manner, which will protect roadways and neighborhood residential properties from direct glare or other interference. 5.9 SIGNAGE All signs shall be in accordance with Division 2.5 of Collier County's Land Development Code in effect at the time of Site Development Plan approval. The height of project identification signs shall be measured from the finished grade of the nearest street. 5.10 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Pursuant to Section 2.2.25.8.1 of the Land Development Code, if, during the course of site clearing, excavation or other construction activity an historic or archaeological artifact is found, all development within the minimum area necessary to protect the discovery shall be immediately stopped and the Collier County Code Enforcement Department contacted. 5.11 ENVIRONMENTAL A. Environmental permitting shall be in accordance with the State of Florida Environmental Resource Permit Rules and be subject to review and approval by the Current Planning Section Staff. Removal of exotic vegetation within on-site wetlands shall not be counted toward mitigation for impacts to Collier County jurisdictional wetlands unless otherwise provided for within the Land Development Code. Page 27 of 29 JUL 3 0 2002 B. All conservation areas shall be designated as conservation/preservation tracts or easements on all construction plans and shall be recorded on the plat with protective covenants per or similar to Section 704.06 of the Florida Statutes. Buffers shall be provided in accordance with Section 3.2.8.3.4 of the Collier County Land Development Code. In the event that the project does not require platting, all conservation areas shall be recorded as conservation/preservation tracts or easements dedicated to an approved entity or to Collier County with no responsibility for maintenance and subject to the uses and limitations similar to or as per Section 704.06 of the Florida Statutes. C. Buffers shall be provided around any retained wetlands, extending at least fifteen (15) feet landward from the edge of wetland preserves in all places and averaging twenty-five (25) feet from the landward edge of wetlands. Where natural buffers are not possible, structural buffers shall be provided in accordance with the State of Florida Environmental Resource Permit Rules and be subject to rex iew and approval by ':he Current Planning Section Staff. D. An exotic vegetation removal, monitoring, and maintenance (exotic-free) plan for the site. with emphasis on the conservation/preservation areas, shall be submitted to Current Planning Section Staff for review and approval prior to site development plan, construction plan approval. This plan shall include methods and a time schedule for removal of exotic vegetation within conservation / preservation areas. E. Approximately 36.0 acres of the subject property are vegetated with native species. The Developer shall preserve a minimum of twenty-five (25%) percent of the total vegetated ~'-' area consistent with the provisions of the Collier County Land Development Code Section 3.9.5.5.3, yielding a minimum preserve area of 9.0 acres. 5.12 WATER MANAGEMENT A copy of the approved South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) Surface Water Permit shall be submitted prior to any site development plan approval. 5.13 UTILITIES A. Water distribution and sewage collection and transmission facilities to serve the project are to be designed, constructed, conveyed, owned, and maintained in accordance with Collier County Ordinance No. 97-17, as amended, and other applicable County rules and regulations. B. All customers connecting to the water distribution and sewage collection facilities will be considered to be customers of the County, and will be billed by the County in accordance with the County's established rates. C. Temporary construction and/or sales trailers may use septic tanks or holding tanks for waste disposal, subject to permitting under Rule 10D-6 of the Florida Administrative Code, and may use potable or irrigation wells. Page 28 of 29 JUL 3 0 2002 D. The on-site distribution system serving the project must be connected to the Collier County Water-Sewer District's water main available and adjacent to the project boundaries. Said system shall be consistent with the main sizing and any other requirements specified in the project's Utility Master Plan and extended throughout the project. During design of these facilities, dead-end mains shall be minimized by looping the internal pipeline network, where feasible. E. The Developer shall be deemed a benefiting party of the Whippoorwill Lane utility extensions for water and sewer utilities and area-wide drainage facilities only if they hook up to and utilize these extensions. If the utility needs for water and/or sewer utilities and/or drainage facilities are provided by other means, the Developer will not be deemed a benefiting party of the Whippoorwill Lane area-wide utility extensions. F. A sanitary ~ewer collection system and potable water supply distribution system shall be designed having area-wide standard specifications as determined acceptable to the Collier County Public Works Engineering Division. Design specifications resulting in incurred costs to this project, but having area-wide benefits, will be prorated against this project but will be proportionately shared by the Developer with all benefiting projects. Said pro-rata costs shall be determined by Collier County on a per unit basis with all benefiting development projects having frontage on or access to these utilities along Whippoorwill Lane or its east/west extension. These costs shall be paid to Collier County prior to the issuance of any building permits for this development. Said costs with area-wide benefits incurred by this development shall be rebated pursuant to the terms of a Developer Contribution Agreement. G. The Developer's subdivision plan or site development plan application, as may be applicable, shall include a commitment to extend to and connect to the County's water distribution lines on Livingston Road and Whippoorwill Lane, establishing a looped syste~c,, if the County facility is within 50 feet of the parcel's boundary. 5.14 POLLING PLACES This PUD is subject to the provisions in Section 3.2.8.3.14 of the Land Development Code. Page 29 of 29 Jt3L 3 / - ~ ................... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.' :':':':-~ ~ ~ ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::: ::::::::::::::-:.:- : ::::::::.:.:.:.:-: ~ ~ . I - :~:~:~:~:~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~ : ::~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~: .... , ~ m m ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ · '.'-'-'.'-'-'-'-'-'.'.'.:-:.:-:-:.:.Z':':':':-:-:-:':-: ......... .'.'.'.'.'.'.' .. .,,............ .......... ~ .- ...... :.:.:.:.:..: . .:.: ..... :.:.:.:............. . ~ .:.:. ~ ~ ~ '~ ...... ......,..............,....,....~.~ ..... ~.- ... :.: ...... :.:.:.:.:.:.:.- ==~ ~~ = ,..:.:-:-:.:.:-:.:.:.:-:.' ' ::: :~:~:~:: :~: ::::::::::::::::::::: -~~ ~ _======~ - = = = E: ,.. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: , ...._. ::::::: ~ ~:~===~ ~ :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::; ~. ~..~ FUTURE LIVINGSTON ROAD PUD EXHIBIT "A" EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PETITION: DOA-2002-AR-2208, ROBERT J. MULHERE OF RWA, INC., REPRESENTING PARKLANDS DEVELOPMENTS, LP., REQUESTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE "PARKLANDS" DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT (DRD IN ORDER TO EXTEND THE DATE OF COMMENCEMENT FOR THE PROJECT BY ONE YEAR TO MARCH 11, 2004 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE FUTURE LOGAN BOULEVARD EXTENSION AND APPROXIMATELY 2 MILES NORTH OF IMMOKALEE ROAD (C.R. 846) IN SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. OBJECTIVE: That the community's interest is maintained through the consideration of an amendment to the Parklands DR[. CONSIDERATIONS: This petition seeks to amend the Parklands Development of Regional Impact (DRI) Development Order as noted above due to "problems with access to the site" and in response to recommendations received during the environmental permitting process. The Parklands DRI original commencement date was established in Development Order 85-4, which called £or commencement within ten (10) years of the date of approval (September 10, 1985). The commencement date was extended by four (4) years by DO-93-1 on July 27, 1993. On September 28, 1999, with the approval of DO-99-382, the Commencement date was again extended to March 11, 2003. The proposed change to the Development Order seeks to extend that date for one year, until March 11, 2004. The need and justification for the previous extensions included problems with the access to the site, the configuration of a future extension of Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951) northward and its possible impact to the project, environmental issues related to the preservation of wetlands and a "flow-way" through the project. Also under consideration, the provision of utilities and services to the site, which was delayed until surrounding services and utilities were developed to serve the surrounding projects. The petitioner now indicates that they are currently addressing the issues as noted above, and as a consequence, the commencement of the development of the Parklands DRI is expected within the timeframe of the proposed extension. The. petitioner has been working with the Collier County Transportation Department to develop a Roadway Construction Agreement for Logan Boulevard. This agreement will allow the construction of Logan Boulevard fi.om its current terminus at the Olde Cypress PUD northward through the Parklands PUD/DRI and connecting to Bonita Beach Road. As proposed, the Parklands applicant will pay for the construction of Logan Boulevard. JUL 3 0 2002 In addition, the applicant is working with the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) to address the regional flow-way and wetland preserve issues. The regional flow-way is intended to enhance the capacity for water storage, improved water quality, and habitat for wading birds. Furthermore, the petitioner has submitted an application to amend the Parklands PUD Document for the purpose of allowing for a conversion in the mixture of multi-family and single-family uses; adding 9 holes of golf and establishing a "Logan Boulevard Extension Construction Agreement" with Collier County. The petitioner has estimated that these efforts will take 8 to 14 months to complete. For this reason, it is necessary for the Parklands to request a one-year extension. It should be noted that this project was approved as a Development of Regional Impact (DRI), therefore, the time limit restrictions for the PUD zoning are superseded by the phasing plan and/or time limits contained within the application for development approval and approved as part of the Development Order. FISCAL IMPACT: This amendment to the Development Order is only to extend that date for one year, until March 11, 2004. Therefore, this amendment by and of itself will have no fiscal impact on the County. The fiscal impact for this development was determined at the time the property was rezoned to PUD. In addition, the County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of building permits to help offset the impact of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects in the Capital ..... Improvement Element needed to maintain adopted levels of service for public facilities. In the event that impact fee collections are inadequate to maintain adopted levels of service, the County must provide supplemental funds from other revenue sources in order to build needed facilities. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Approval of this amendment to the Parklands Development Order will only extend the commencement date for one year. Therefore, this amendment will not have an adverse impact on the Growth Management Plan. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staff's analysis indicates that the subject site is located outside an area of historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment is required. Pursuant to Section 2.2.25.8.1 of the Land Development Code if during the course of site clearing, excavation or other construction activity a historic or archaeological artifact is found, all development within the minimum area necessary to protect the discovery shall be immediately stopped and the Collier County Code Enforcement Department contacted. JUL 3 0 2002 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The Environmental Review Staff has recommended approval since the petition will not cause any impacts to any wetland preserve area. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: Since this petition is only to extend the commencement date by one year, this petition was not required to go to the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC). COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) reviewed this petition during their public hearing on June 20, 2002. During the meeting, the CCPC voted unanimously to forwarded Petition DOA-02- AR-2208 to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) with a recommendation of approval. The Planning Commissioners found that this petition is consistent with the Growth Management Plan (GMP) and is compatible ~vith the surrounding development. Since no person spoke in opposition to the petition during the public hearing, this petition was placed on the summary agenda. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Petition DOA-02-AR-2208 as otherwise described by the amending DRI Development Order resolution included in this Executive Summary. PREPARED BY: :~.:~:~ ...__. ~.~.o~ ~ky,I$~ELL~3~7~,- - '- -" CHIEF PLANNER DATE CLFRttENT PLANNING SECTION REVIEWED BY: SAN MURRAY, AICP, MANAGER DATE C~T PLANNING SECTION MARGARET/'~rUERSTLE, AICP, DIRECTOR DATE PLANNING gtERVICES DEPARTMENT APPROVED BY: JOSEPH K. SCH~ITT ADMINISafRATOR CpMMUNITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS. / DOA-02-AR-2299/EX SUMMARY/RVB/rb JUL 3 0 2002 MEMORANDUM TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DATE: MAY 30, 2002 RE: PETITION NO: DOA-2002-AR-2208, PARK_LANDS PUD/DRI AGENT/APPLICANT: Agent: Robert J. Mulhere Owner: Parklands Developments, LP RWA, Inc. c/o Ronto Development Group 3050 N. Horseshoe Drive 14013 Bonita Beach Road Suite 270 Bonita Springs, Florida 34109 Naples, Florida 34104 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject site is located at the east side of Future Logan Boulevard extension and approximately two (2) miles north of Immokalee Road (C.R. 846) in Section 9, Township 48 South, Range 26 East. (See illustration on following page) REQUESTED ACTION: This petition seeks to amend the Parklands Development of Regional Impact (DP_I) Development Order in order to extend the date of commencement for the project by one year. The original commencement date was established in Development Order 85-4, which called for commencement within ten (10) years o£the date of approval (September 10, 1985). The commencement date was extended by four (4) years by DO-93-1 on July 27, 1993. On September 28, 1999, with the approval ofDO-99-382, the Commencement date was again extended to March 11, 2003. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The proposed change to the Development Order seeks to extend that date for one year, until March 11, 2004. The need and justification for the previous extensio~ ~ ~'~"~"'~' problems with the access to the site, the configuration of a future extensior -o[-~~lr?~_ 4 Jtjk 3 0 2002 Boulevard (C.R. 951) northward and possibly impacting the project, environmental issues related to the preservation of wetlands and a "flow-way" through the project; and, the provision of utilities and services to the site, which was delayed until surrounding services and utilities were developed to serve the surrounding projects. The petitioner now indicates that they are currently addressing the issues as noted above, and as a consequence, the commencement of the development of the Parklands DRI is expected within the timeframe of the proposed extension. The petitioner has been working with the Collier County Transportation Department to develop a Roadway Construction Agreement for Logan Boulevard. This agreement will allow the construction of Logan Boulevard from its current terminus at the Olde Cypress PUD northward through the Parklands PUD/DRI and connecting to Bonita Beach Road. As proposed, the Parklands applicant will pay for the construction of Logan Boulevard. In addition, the applicant is working with the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) to address the regional flow way and wetland preserve issues. The regional flow way is intended to enhance the capacity for water storage, improved water quality, and habitat for wading birds. Furthermore, the petitioner has submitted an application to amend the Parklands PUD Document for the purpose of allowing for a conversion in the mixture of multi-family and single-family uses; adding 9 holes of golf and establishing a "Logan Boulevard Extension Construction Agreement" with Collier County. The petitioner has estimated that these efforts will take 8 to 14 months to complete. For this reason, it is necessary for the Parklands to request a one-year extension. It should be noted that this project was approved as a Development of Regional Impact (DRI), therefore, the time limit restrictions for the PUD zoning are superseded by the phasing plan anclJor time limits contained within the application for development approval and approved as part of the Development Order. SOUTH%VEST FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL: The SWFRPC heard the Notice of a Proposed Change to a previously approved Development of Regional Impact pursuant to Subsection 380.06(19) Florida Statutes. The Notice of proposed Change (NOPC) and the staff assessment for the Parklands NOPC was adopted by the SWFRPC without changes on March 21, 2002. The Regional Planning Council adopted the following report prepared by its staff: 1. Notify Collier County, the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) and the applicant that the proposed changes do not create additional regional impacts on regional resources or facilities not previously reviewed by the regional planning council and the Council participation at the local government public heating is not necessary. JUL 3 0 2002 2. Request Collier County provide the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council staff with copies of the proposed DO amendment to the Council to assure that it is consistent with the NOPC. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS: The Department of Community Affairs has not written any correspondence objecting to the Notice of Proposed Change (NOPC) for the Parklands Development of Regional Impact (DRI). The applicant is proposing to amend the date of commencement for the project by one year from March 11, 2003 to March 11, 2004. Pursuant to the criteria in Section 380.06(19)(e), Florida Statutes (F.S.), the change listed above is deemed to be consistent with the regional goals, resources and facilities as previously determined through the DRI process. As a result, this petition will not create additional regional impacts. Therefore, pursuant to Section 380.06(19)(0 4., F.S., the Department has not objected to this NOPC. STAFF REVIEW: Development authorizations contained in DRI Development Orders are prerequisite to zoning actions that implement DRI land use authorizations. DRI Development Orders are structured first and foremost to contain regulations that respond to relationships dictated by State Administrative rules. Specifically, those relationships and questions that an applicant is required to analyze and report on as part of their Application for Development Approval (ADA). Amendments as described by the NOPC deal with those same questions in the event they become applicable. To the extent they are applicable they become part of the technical data submitted as part of the NOPC. It is that information which upon review by SWFRPC concluded with a finding that the proposed changes do not create additional regional impacts or regional impacts not previously reviewed. This conclusion is essentially one that says the changes are of an insubstantial nature. Similarly, the Department of Community Affairs has not objected to the proposed changes and indicates that the changes were of an insubstantial value. The proposed revision to the Parklands PUD document and Master Plan do not adversely impact any adopted level of service standard. This amendment only extends the date of commencement for the project by one year from March 11, 2003 to March 11, 2004. Staff is of the opinion that this amendment will not adversely impact the development strategy for the Parklands PUD or effect residential properties within or adjacent to the PUD. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) recommends approval of Petition DOA-02-AR-2208 as described by the amending DRI Development Order resolution included in this Staff Report. ~.J~OA fl'~t JUL 3 0 2002 3 ' PREPARED BY' ~ RA¥"~ELI]0WS, CHIEF PLANNER DATB CURtLENT PLANNING SECTION REVIEWED BY: PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT APPROVED BY: ~TRATOR ~D~AT~/~) f)MMLFNITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS. StaffReport for the June 20, 2002 CCPC meeting. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: KENNETH CHAIRMAN RVB/rb/STAFF REPORT/AR-2299 JUL 3 0 2002 PETITION NUMBER DATE APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD AMENDMENT/DO AMENDMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION CURRENT PLANNING 1. Name of Applicant(s): Parklands Developments, LP c/o Ronto Development Group Applicant's Mailing Address: 14013 Bonita Beach Rd. SE City: Bonita Springs, FL Zip: 34109 Tel. No.: (941) 649-6310 Ext 406 Fax: (941) 495-2799 Email: farrarb~ronto.com Is the applicant the owner of the subject property? X Yes No .... (a) If applicant is a land trust, so indicate and name beneficiaries below. X (b) If applicant is corporation other than a public corporation, so indicate and name ~ officers and major stockholders below. (See Attached) (c) If applicant is a partnership, limited partnership or other business entity, so indicate and name principals below. (d) If applicant is an owner, indicate exactly as recorded, and list all other owners, if any. (e) If applicant is a lessee, attach copy of lease, and indicate actual owners if not indicated on the lease. ~X (f) If applicant is a contract purchaser, attach copy of contract, and indicate actual owner(s) name and address below. Dewey R. Gargiulo, Trustee , Michael Procacci, Trustee 649 5th Avenue South, Suite 221 JUL 3 0 2002 Naples. FL 34102 DATE: 3/4/02 Name of Agent: Robert J. Mulhere, AICP. Firm: RWA, Inc. Agents Mailing Address 3050 North Horseshoe Drive, Suite 270 City: Nar>les State: F__~LZip 34104 Tel. No.: 649-1509 Fax: 649-7056 Email: rjm@consult-rwa, com 3. PUD ORDINANCE NAME AND NUMBER: Parklands PUD (Ord. R-84-24/DRI-84-4C) DRI Originally Approved on September 10, 1985. (DO-85-4) DO Amended on December 17, 1985 (Resolution 85-267;DO 85-4) DO Amended on July 27, 1993 (Resolution 99-382; DO 99-3)) DO Amended on September 29,1999 (Resolution 99-288; DO 93-1) 4. DETAILED LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY COVERED BY THE APPLICATION (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page. If request involves change to more than one zoning district, include separate legal description for property involved in each district. If property is odd-shaped, submit five (5) copies of survey (1" to 400' scale). THE APPLICANT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SUPPLYING THE CORRECT LEGAL DESCRIPTION. IF QUESTIONS ARISE CONCERNING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION, AN ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION SHALL BE REQUIRED. All of Section 9,Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida 5. Address or location of subject property: Property is not addressed. It is located immediately adjacent to and south of Bonita Beach Road on the Lee/Collier border, bounded on the west by the Quail West PUD, to the east by the Mirasol PUD, and to the south by the Terafina PUD. The subject property will be accessible via Bonita Beach Road, Logan Blvd. Extension, and may be accessible from the planned east/west Livingston Road and the future Collier Boulevard (CR 951) Extension. 6. Does property owner own contiguous property to the subject property? If so, give complete legal description of entire contiguous property. (If space is inadequate, attach on separate Daee). Yes, the property owner owns lands immediately north of the Park Collier County portion of the Parklands DRI, which is the subiect of a separate Development Order and is located in Lee County. JUL 3 0 2002 TYPE OF AMENDMENT: A. PUD Document Language Amendment B. PUD Master Plan Amendment X C. Development Order Language Amendment DOES AMENDMENT COMPLY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: X YES No If no, explain: HAS A PUBLIC HEARING BEEN HELD ON THIS PROPERTY WITHIN THE LAST YEAR? IF SO, IN WHOSE NAME? N__qo PETITION #: DATE: D. HAS ANY PORTION OF THE PUD BEEN X SOLD AND/OR X DEVELOPED? ARE ANY CHANGES PROPOSED FOR THE AREA SOLD AND/OR DEVELOPED? Yes. X No. IF YES, DESCRIBE: (ATTACH ADDITIONAL SHEETS IF NECESSARY). 1. NamreofAmendment: The applicant is proposing to amend the date of commencement ~ for the project. The original commencement date wa~ established in Development Order 85-4, which called fo~ commencement within ten (10) years of the date of approval (September 10, 1985). The commencement date was extended by four (4) years by DO-93-1 (July 27, 1993). On September 28, 1999, with the approval of DO-99-382, the Commencement date was again extended, to March 11, 2003. The proposed changu seeks to extend that date for one year, until March 11, 2004. The need and justification for the previou~ extensions were as follows: significant transportation issues, including access to the site and configuration of a future Collier Blvd. (CR 951) extension northward to and into Lee County; significant environmental issues, especially related to the preservation of significant wetlands and a "flowway" which includes a large portion of the eastern ~ oi the project; and, the provision of utilities and services to the site, which was delayed until surrounding services and utility infrastructure was developed to serve surroundin~ properties. We are in the process of addressing the above conditions, parklands DRI is expected in the foreseeable future. future alignment of Collier Blvd (CR 9S1) is till JUL 3 0 2002 undetermined, and will likely remain so into the foreseeable future. The DO allows for the construction of an alternate collector road through the project. The applicant has been working with County staff to develop a Roadway Construction Agreement for a Logan Boulevard Extension from its current terminus (at Olde Cypress PUD), northward through Parklands DRI/PUD and connecting to Bonita Beach Road. This will provide an additional public north/south collector roadway that will, in part, act as a reliever for 1-75 for local traffic. A South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) permit for this project has been applied for. The applicant is currently working with the County to finalize a roadway construction agreement. As proposed, the applicant will pay for the construction of the roadway. In addition to the Logan Boulevard Extension issue, the applicant is working with SFWMD to address the regional flowway, wetland preservation issues associated with this project. The Olde Cypress, Terafina, and Mirasol projects have entered into an agreement with one another and with SFWMD to recreate and preserve a regional flowway. The regional flowway, once completed, will have significant benefits in terms of enhanced capacity for water storage, improved water quality, and habitat preservation and recreation, in particular for wading birds, including the endangered wood stork. All of these efforts, while underway, will take 8 to 14 months to complete. For this reason, although the timing for commencement of the Parklands DRI/PUD is finally right, it is necessary to request a one-year extension. 2002 A F FID.4 FIT ~'~~,,3 ~ '~ .being first duly sworn, depose and say that I represent the ~ntract Purchasers of the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the ,reposed hearing; that I have authority to legally bind all owners of the property in the course of ,btaining this Development Order Amendment; and, that all the answers to the questions in this tpplication, including the disclosure of interest information, all sketches, data, and other :upplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application, are honest and true to the ~est of our knowledge and belief./I understand that the information requested on this application rust be complete and accurate and that the content of this form, whether computer generated or iounty printed shall not be altered. Public hearings will not be advertised until this application is teemed complete, and all required information has been submitted. ~s authorized Contract Purchasers we further authorize Robert J. Mulhere, AICP, Director qf r>lannin~ Services_for R WA, Inc. to act as our representative in any matters regarding this °etition. By Ronto Developments Parklands, Inc. Typed or Printed Name of Authorized Contract te foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2002, by ~,.J ~'. F'~~ who is personally ~own to me or has produced 0~~ ~~ as ident~cation. State of Florida Co~~ ~¢~ /~ County of Collier Signature of Notary Publ 'c~ (State of Florida) ~¢A.~%~ ~ ~ t,. ~ (Print, Type, or Stamp Commissioned Name ~k~d'l ~. m ~7~z of Nota~ PubliO JUL 3 0 2002 Property Owner: Gargiu!o/Procacci Trust Names and oxvnership distribution of Trust: Name Percentage of Interest _Dewey Gargiulo 24.672% _Jeffrey Gar.aiulo 2.260% John R.Gargiulo 2.250% Lisa Gargiulo 2.250% -Michael Procacci __28.186% _Joseph Procacci 30.175% Michael Procacci, Jr. .663% Annette Procacci .663% Maria Procacci .63% Procacci Bros. Sales Corp. __8.218% Contract Purchaser: Parklands Development, LP JUL 3 0 2'002 LETTER OF A UTHORIZA TiON The undersigned do hereby swear or affirm that they are the fee simple titleholders and owners of record of property known as Parklands, and legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto. The property described herein is the subject of an application for South Florida Water Management District E.R.P. - Parklands Construction and Operation Permit. We hereby designate RONTO DEVELOPMENTS PARKLANDS, INC_,_. as the legal representative of the property and as such, these individuals are authorized to legally bind afl owners of the property in the course of seeking the necessary approvals to develop. This authority includes but is not limited to the hiring and authorizing of agents to assist in the preparation of applications, plans, surveys, and studies necessary to obtain development approvals on site and offsite for the South Florida Water Management District E.R.P. - Parklands Construction and Operation Permit. Notwithstanding anything contained herein, any substantial deviations from the existing DRYs on the Parklands are not permitted without the express written consent of the Owner specifically approving said deviation. - O~rne~' '~ (~ Date Dewey R. Gar.quilo, Trustee Pdnted Name STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER Th,e fo.rpgoing instrument was certified ,,and ,su~)scribed.~or-~ mc this ~0 day__p_f /.g.nm~( , 2001, by..~,~"P-q, 0¢,(~016 (~..who is personally known to me~'~ or'vfho has produced ,J a~identification. (SEAL) ~ ~>.~-., s~t. i NG'T. AP-'t pD-~L~C S'TATE OF ~D7 '.~;% · ".~, ~'~ .......... (Name typed, printed or stamped) ~¢..~O ~, g~a ..... ;O6jUL 3 0 200? RAY BELLOWS Pg. LETTER OF A U THORIZA TION The undersigned do hereby swear or affirm that they are the fee simple titleholders and owners of record of property known as Parklands and legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto. The property described herein is the subject of an application for Management District E.R.P. - Parklands Construction and Operation South Florida Water designate _RONTO DEVELOPMENTS PARKLANDS~ /NC. as the legal Permit. We hereby representative of the property and as such, these individuals are authorized to I~gally b/nd all owners of the property in the course of seeking the necessary approvals to develop. This authority includes but is not //m/ted to the h/ring and authorizing of agents to assist in the preparation of applications, plans, surveys, and studies necessary to obtain development approvals on site and offsite for the South Florida Water Management District E.R.P. - Parklands Construction and Operation Permit. Notwithstanding anything contained here/n, any substantial deviations from the existing DRI's on the Parklands are not permitted without the express written consent of the Owner specifically approving said deviation. ..... _ Michael Procacci, Trustee Printed Name - STATE OF FLORIDA ' COUNTY OF COLLIER i The ~.re~g,o!r~g instrument was certified~and. ,s~scdbed before me this ,~?r~ day of .. ./-r/.),,UCL , 2001, by Jl~-/c~ --._. or who has produced - /'/~'~, who is personally known to me as identification. (SEAL) .., .~,:?,,:.. ' N~Y~---' ....~. ~ ~o~r~ Ro~e, PUBLIC --'*: :*: ~C~M~SS~N~ CC912116 EXPIRES ~ :~ Morch 19, 2004 DOA-2002-AR-2208 JUL 3 0 2002 T2 RAY BELLOWS "l. I r7 EXHIBIT "A" Real Property Description Parklands Section 9, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida 644.78, acres more or less. JUL 3 0 2002 Real Property Description Parklands East ½ Section 4, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Lee Counbj, Florida 324.05 acres more or less. JUL 3 0 2002 EXHIBIT "A" Real Property Description Parklands Section 9, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida 644.78 acres more or less. AGrr_NDA JUL 3 0 2002 EXHIBIT "A" Real Property Description Parklands Section 9, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida 644.78 acres more or less. JUL 3 0 ?002 easDRESSING CHECKLIST e complete the following and submit to the Addressing Section for Review. Not all items will apply to every project. Items in bold t~pe are required. 1. Legal description of subject property or properties (copy of lengthy description may be attached) Section 9, Township 48 South, Range 26 East<Collier County, FL 2. Folio (Property ID) number(s) of above (attach to, or associate with, legal description if more than one) 00177600003 3. Street address or addresses (as applicable, if already assigned) N/A 4. Location map, showing exact location of project/site in relation to nearest public road right-of-way (attach) 5. Copy of survey (NEEDED ONLY FOR UNPLATTED PROPERTIES) 6. Proposed project name (if applicable) Parklands, PUD/DRI 7. Proposed Street names (if applicable) 8. Site Development Plan Number (FOR EXISTING PROJECTS/SITES ONLY) SDP - . Petition Type - (Complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition Type) [-'] SDP (Site Development Plan) [--] PPL (Plans & Plat Review) [-'] SDPA (SDP Amendment) ['-1 PSP (Preliminary Subdivision Plat) [--] SDPI (SDP Insubstantial Change) [~ FP (Final Plat) [--] SIP (Site Improvement Plan) [--[ LLA (Lot Line Adjustment) [--1 SIPA (SIP Amendment) 1---] BL (Blasting Permit) [--] SNR (Street Name Change) [--] ROW (Right-of-Way Permit) ['-] Vegetation/Exotic (Veg. Removal Permits) [--] EXP (Excavation Permit) X Land Use Petition (Variance, Conditional Use, [~] VRSFP (Veg. Removal & Site Fill Permit) Boat Dock Ext., Rezone, PUD rezone, etc.) ['-'] Other - Describe: 10. Project or development names proposed for, or already appearing in, condominium documents (if applicable; indicate whether proposed or existing) 11. Please Check One: 1--] Checklist is to be Faxed Back X Personally Picked Up 12. Applicant Name Bob Mulhere, RWA, Inc. Phone 649-1509 Fax 649-7056 13. Signature on Addres--~ing Checklist does not constitute Project and/or Street Name approval and is subject to further review by the Addressing Section. FOR STAFF USE ONLY Primary Number '3 ~4- ~ 6:, Address Number ~Address Number Approved by ~,,:: .'- :~ . . ,,~._ :-.'Date ~2 ~ '-ziPpi ! I JUL 3 0 2002 Revised 3-2 I-0 ! l~g. c~. ~ SOUTHWEST FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL RECEIPT AND REVIEW FEE AGREEMENT FOR REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENTS OF REGIONAL IMPACT APPLICANT (Name, Address and Telephone) REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL USE ONLY Parklands Development, LP PROJECT IDENTIFICATION by Ronto Developments Parklands Inc. NAME: 14013 Bonita Beach Rd. __Bonita Sprin.~s, FL 34135 NUMBER: Authorized Agent (Name, Address COORDINATOR: Telephone) DATE RECEIVED: Robert J. Mulhere. AICP Director ofPlannint. RWA. Inc. 3050 North Horseshoe Drive, Suite 270 _Naples. FL 34104 Location o f Project Section 9 Township. 48 South__Range__26 East County Collier GENERAL LOCATION Subject property is located south of Bonita Beach Road on the Lee/Collier border, bounded on the west by the Quail West PUD, to the east by the Mirasol PUD, and to the south by the Terafina PUD. The subject property will be accessible via Bonita Beach Road, Logan Blvd. Extension, and may be accessible from the planned east/west Livingston Road and the future Collier Boulevard (CR 951) Extension. Name of Project Parklands DRI/PUD, Collier Coun _ty The Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (SWFRPC) and Parklands Development, LP__ (Developer) on this 19m day of February , 2002 , agree as follows: 1. The developer is submitting an application for development approval of a DRI, Preliminary Development Agreement, Substantial Deviation, Development Designation for Florida Quality Development (FQD), Application for Abandonment of a DRI, or a Notice of Proposed Change to a previously approved DRI (Circle appropriate type of submittal). ! ! Jldb3 0 2002 ~ , DATE: 3/4/~ 2 ~' RAY BELL )wb " of $ $2.500.00 additional deposit of $ ., except that a Preliminary Development Agreement's fee shall be filed in accord with Rule 9J-2.0252. 3. It is understood the Developer is liable for 100 percent of the direct and indirect costs for the SWFRPC to review these applications or notice of proposed change. 4. It is understood the Developer must notify the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) and the SWFRPC in whting if any specific expenses which exceeds $75,000.00 and which are disputed and state why they are not reasonable and necessary within 15 days of its receipt of the notice to pay or any such dispute is waived. Within 15 days of any notice of dispute, the SWFRPC shall inform the DCA how and why the disputed expenses are reasonable and necessary. The DCA shall determine the expenses that are reasonable and necessary within 30 days. 5. The SWFRPC shall within 60 days, refund deposited funds which exceed its direct and indirect costs or that remain at the time the Developer withdraws the application or notice of proposed change. 6. Any direct or indirect costs of the SWFRPC in excess of the Developer's deposits shall be billed to the Developer which shall be paid with 30 days. 7. The SWFRPC shall maintain records of all direct and indirect costs associated with the coordination of the preappiication conr%rence, and Preliminary Development Agreement, issue methodology meetings and other activities through the review of the application for development approval (ADA) or abandonment, or notice of proposed change to a previously approved DILl and of the final or amended development order, its presentation to the Council and comments issued to I the local government preparation for and attendance of hearings that are reasonable and necessary in respect to the regional review of the impacts of the development. 8. The Developer shall provide additional deposits from time to time as required within 15 days after the receipt of notice from the SWFRPC that it estimates costs will exceed the funds on deposit. February 19, 2002 , ~,~/- ~,~/~/~/~/,~%,' '/J~cv//q~. Date Approval of the Applicant or Authorized Agent Date Received and Signed Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council JUL 3 0 2002 STATE OF FLORDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS DIVISION OF RESOURCE PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT BUREAU OF STATE PLANNING 2740 Centerviexv Drive Tallahassee, Florida 32399 NOTIFICATION OF A PROPOSED CHANGE TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ' DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT SUBSECTION 380.06(19), FLORIDA STATUTES Subsection 380.06(19), Florida Statutes, requires that submittal of a proposed change to a previously approved DRI be made to the local government, the regional planning agency, and the state land planning agency according to this form. 1. I, Robert J. Mulhere. AICP, am the undersigned and authorized representative of Ronto Development Group. Mr. De;vey Gargiulo and Mr. Michael Procacci, Trustees, are the o~aaers of the subject property. The o~.aners do hereby give notice of a proposed change to a previously approved Development of Regional Impact in accordance ;vith Subsection 380.06(19), Flor/da Statutes. In support thereof, I submit the following information concerning the amendment which information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I have submitted today, under separate cover, copies of this completed notification to Collier County, to the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council, and the Bureau of State Planning, Department of Community Affairs. JUL 3 0 2002 pROJECT//199 020~'-°Q~ I>~N~ ~isi~v~ ~. 2. Applicant (name, address, phone). Parklands Developments, LP c/o Ronto Development Group 14013 Bonita Beach Rd. SE Bonita Springs, FL 34135 (941) 649-6310 Ext 406 3. Authorized Agent (name, address, phone) Robert Mulhere, AICP RWA, Inc. 3050 North Horseshoe Drive Suite 270 Naples, Florida 34104 (941) 649-1509 David R. Underhill, Jr. Banks Engineering, Inc. 6640 Willow Park Drive, Suite 13 Naples, Florida 34109 (941) 597-2061 Charles Basinait, Esquire Henderson, Franklin, Starnes & Holt 1715 Monroe Street Fort Myers, Florida 33901 · (941) 334-4121 4. Location (City, County, Township/Range/Section) of approved DRI and proposed change. All of Section 9,Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida 5. Provide a complete description of the proposed change. Include any proposed changes to the plan of development, phasing, additional lands, commencement date, build-out date, development order conditions and requirements, or to the representations contained in either the development order or the Application for Development Approval. Indicate such changes on the project master site plan, supplementing with other detailed maps, as appropriate. Additional information may be requested by the Department or any reviewing agency to clarify the nffiure of the change or the resulting impacts. 'rder ~, I't L° ~ The original commencement date was established in Development i JUL 3 0 2002 t ' n-- 9L° - which called for commencement within ten (10) years of the date of approval (September 10, 1985). The commencement date was extended by four (4) years by DO-93-1 (July 27, 1993). On September 28, 1999, xvith the approval of DO- 99-382, the Commencement date was again extended, to March 11, 2003. The proposed change seeks to extend that date for one year, until March 11, 2004. The need and justification for the previous extensions were as follows: significant transportation issues, including access to the site and configuration of a future Collier Blvd.(CR 951) extension northward to and into Lee County; significant environmental issues, especially related to the preservation of significant wetlands and a "flow-way" which includes a large portion of the eastern 1/2 of the project; and, the provision of utilities and services to the site, which was delayed until surrounding services and utility infrastructure was developed to serve surrounding properties. We are in the process of addressing the above conditions, and as a consequence, the commencement of development of the Parklands DRI is expected in the foreseeable future. The future alignment of Collier Blvd (CR 951) is still undetermined, and will likely remain so into the foreseeable future. The DO allo~vs for the construction of an alternate collector road through the project. The applicant has been working with County staff to develop a Roadway Construction A~eement for a Logan Boulevard Extension from its current terminus (at Olde Cypress PUD), northward through Parklands DRIfP~ and connecting to Bonita Beach Road. This will provide an additional public north/south collector roadway that will, in part, act as a reliever for 1-75 for local traffic. A South Florida Water Management DisU:ict (SFWMD) permit for this project has been applied for. The applicant is currently worldng with the County to finalize a roadway construction agreement. As proposed, the applicant will pay for the construction of the roadway. In addition to the Logan Boulevard Extension issue, the applicant is working with SFW'MD to address the regional flo~avay, wetland preservation issues associated with this project. The Olde Cypress, Terafina, and Mirasol projects have entered into an agreement with one another and with SFWMD to recreate and preserve a regional flowway. The regional flowway, once completed, will have significant benefits in terms of enhanced capacity for water storage, improved water quality, and habitat preservation and recreation, in particular for wading birds, including the endangered wood stork. All of these efforts, while underway, will take 8 to 14 months to complete. For this reason, although the timing for commencement of the Parklands DRI/PUD is finally right, it is necessary to request a one-year extension. Complete the attached Substantial Deviation Determination Chart for all land use types approved in the development. If no change is proposed or has occurred, indicate no change. No change is proposed to allowable land uses or restrictions thereon. Proposed ch~.n~e is limited to e~:tendin? the commencement d~te frnm the Curt ,Mt 47*e ^r J U L 3 0 2002 6. List all the dates and resolution numbers (or other appropriate identification numbers) of all modifications or amendments to the originally approved DRI development order that have been adopted by the local government, and provide a brief description of the previous changes (i.e., any information not already addressed in the Substantial Deviation Determination Chart). Has there been a change in local government jurisdiction for any portion of the development since the last approval or development order was issued? If so, has the annexing local government adopted a new DRI development order for the project? DRI Originally Approved on September 10, 1985. (DO-85-4) DO Amended on December 17, 1985 (Resolution 85-267;DO 85-4) DO Amended on July 27, 1993 (Resolution 99-382; DO 99-3)) DO Amended on September 29,1999 (Resolution 99-288; DO 93-1) 7. Describe any lands purchased or optioned ~vithin ¼ mile of the original DRI site subsequent to the original approval or issuance of the DRI development order. Identify such land, its size, intended use, and adjacent non-project land uses within V.. mile on a project master site plan or other map Not applicable. q0 zo (cumulatively with other 8. indicate if the proposed change is less than ' o, previous changes) of any of the criteria listed in Paragraph 380.06(19)Co), Florida Statutes. 9. Proposed change will only extend the commencement date by one year and xvill have no impact (0%) on the Criteria listed in Paragraph 380.06(19)Co), Florida Statutes. 10. Does the proposed change result in a change to the buildout date or any phasing date of the project? If so, indicate the proposed ne~v buildout or phasing dates. No. The proposed change is limited to extending the commencement date by one year, until March 11, 2004. It will not result in a change to the buildout or any phasing date(s) of the project. 11. Will the proposed change require an amendment to the local government comprehensive plan? No. 2002 Provide the following for incorporation into such an amended development order, pursuant to Subsections 380.06(15), F.S., and 9J-2.025, Florida Administrative Code: 12. An updated master site plan or other map of the development portraying and distinguishing the proposed changes to the previously approved DRI or development order conditions. See the Conceptual Master Plan attached and labeled Exhibit "H" 13. Pursuant to Subsection 380.06(19)(0, F.S., include the precise language that is being proposed to be deleted or added as an amendment to the' development order. This language should address and quantify: a. All proposed specific changes to the nature, phasing, and built-out date of the development; to development order conditions and requirements; to commitments and representations in the Application for Development Approval; to the acreage attributable to each described proposed change of land use, open space, areas for preservation, green belts; to structures or to other improvements including locations, square footage, number of units; and other major characteristics or components of the proposed change: Proposed change is limited to the following: Para~aph 3, of an untitled Section of the Development Order 85-4, as amended, for The Parklands, is hereby amended to read as follows: The Development Order shall remain in effect for the duration of the project. However, in the event that significant physical development has not commenced by March 11, 20048 in Collier County, development approval will terminate and this development order shall no longer be effective. For the purposes of this requirement significant "physical development" does not include roads, drainage or landscaping but does include construction of buildings on or installation of utilities and facilities such as sewer and water lines. This timeframe may be extended by the Board of County Commissioners upon request by the Developer in the event that uncontrollable circumstances delay the commencement of development. JUL 3 O 2002 _ RECEIVED ~980 Bavlinc l)rivc, ~tl] lqrmr. N. Fl. ,Myers. FI, 33917-3!~19 (9~1) 6~i-7720 I!(). ~zx ;1~55. N. FI. Myers. H, 3:19IS-:t~a5 SCX('()M 749-7720 I(.kX 94.1-656-7724 March 22, 2002 Robert Mulhere, AICP RWA, Inc. 3050 North Hor,*.esho~' Drive Suite 270 Naples, FL 34104 Dear Bob: On Thursday March 21, 2002 the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (SWFRPC) adopted the Notice of Proposed Change (NOPC) staff assessment for the Parklands NOPC without changes. If you have any questions, please let me know. Sincerely, '-~ SOUTHWEST FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL Daniel L. Trescott Principal Planner/DRI Coordinator cc: Parkland Development, LP, c/o Ronto Development Group Charles Basinait, Esquire, Henderson, Frank!in. Statues &.'Holt JUL 3 0 2002 PROJECT #19990206 vii I.~N(;I]X'EEIL~- Developmenl& · .. · · .l,, ..~.Environmental Consultants DATE: 3/4/02 RAY BELLOWS February 19, 2002 Mr. Raymond Bellows, Chief Planner Collier County Planning Services 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104' Dear Mr. Bellows: Attached please find an application to amend the Development Order for Parklands DRI. The subject DRI consists of all of Section 9, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. Simultaneous to this application to Collier County, an NOPC has been submitted to South West Florida Regional Planning Council and DCA has been notified. Submitted with this cover letter, please find the following: A completed application for DO Amendment; A copy of an authorization letter from the current owner (as we are the contract purchaser); A copy of Form RPM-BSP-PROPCHNGE-1 (NOPC); A copy of the original D.O. for the Parklands DR/(Approved on September 10, 1985. (DO-85- 4)); A copy of the Amended D.O. (Amended December 17, 1985 (Resolution 85-267;DO 85-4)); A copy of the Amended D.O. (Amended on July 27, 1993 (Resolution 99-382; DO 99-3)); A copy of the Amended D.O. (Amended on September 29, 1999 (Resolution 99-288; DO 93-1)). As we have discussed, this DO amendmem is limited to extending the commencement date for one year (fi'om March 11,2003 to March 11,200~t.). We would respectfully request, given the limited nature of the proposed change, that this DO amendment be expedited through the County's review process. I have spoken with Dan Trescott and David Crawford at the SWFRPC and they indicate that extension of a commencement date of less than five years is an automatically deemed not to be a substantial deviation. Of course it is still necessary for us to submit the NOPC in order to officially receive such a finding. The need and justification for the previous extensions were as follows: significant transportation issues, including access to the site and configuration of a future Collier Blvd. (CR 951) extension northward to and into Lee County; si~tmificant environmental issues, especially related to the preservation of significant wetlands and a "flowway" which includes a large portion of the eastern ½ of the project; and, the provision of utilities and services to the site, which was delayed until surrounding services and utility infrastructure was developed to serve surrounding properties. We are in the process of addressing the above conditions, and as a consequence, the commencement of development of the Parklands DR/is expected in the foreseeable future. The furore alignment of Collier Blvd (CR 951) is still undetermined, and will h'kely remain so into the foreseeable future. The DO allows fnr . ........ c ...... ~ a,q..~:~,a:,, r,az ue, er, v,'oiicli-~ x¥itn County staff '[o deveiop a ~u~d~i~jiENDAiTFkM '[ Cans'~racfian_ ..... ____ .Agreement /or a Logan Boulevard Ex-tension from its current i : pi. ' RWA ~NC. Mr. Raymond Bellows Parklands DO Amendment/NOPC February 19, Page Two This will provide an additional public north/south collector roadway that will, in part, act as a reliever for 1-75 for local traffic. A South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) permit for this project has been applied for. The applicant is currently working with the County to finalize a roadway construction agreement. As proposed, the applicant will pay for the construction of the roadway. In addition to the Logan Boulevard Extension issue, the applicant is working with SFWMD to address the regional flowway and wetland preservation issues associated with this project. The Olde Cypress, Terafina, and Mirasol projects have entered into an agreement with one another and with SFWMD to recreate and preserve a regional flowway. The regional flowway, once completed, will have significant benefits in terms of enhanced capacity for water storage, improved water quality, and habitat preservation and recreation, in particular for wading birds, including the endangered wood stork. All of these efforts, while underway, will take 8 to 14 months to complete. For this reason, although the timing for commencement of the Parklands DRI/PUD is finally right, it is necessary to request a one-year extension. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions or require any additional information Sincerely, · Robert J. Mulhere, AICP Director of Planning cc: Robert Rogers, Esquire Charles J. Basinait, Esquire Brain Farrar,' I JUL 3 O 2002 ......... Development & PROJECT #19990206 ~.. ~r ~r /- -l~.Environmental Consultants DATE: 3/4/02 RAY BELLOWS February 19, 2002 Mr. Dan L.Trescott, DRI Coordinator South W,~s~ Florida Regional Planning Council ° P.O. Box 3455 North Fort Myers, FL 33918-3455 Dear Mr. Trescott: Attached please find a Notification of Proposed Change to a Previously Approved Development of Regional Impact (DRI). The subject DRI is Parklands DRI/PUD, which consist of all of Section 9,Twonship 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. Simultaneous to this notification to DCA, both Collier County and the South West Florida Regional Planning Council have been notified. Submitted with this cover letter, please find the following: A completed Form RPM-BSP-PROPCHNGE- 1; Copies of correspondence sent to Collier County and the DCA; A ..... -~-.w, .~-~'r et~,,~,~,.~ ,..4~;,,~,,,,s,~,,,, ,~'-'-'.r~ r~ for '~'~',,,~ Parklands DRI (Approved on September '~0, '~8~. ^ ' (DO-85- 4)); A coP3' of the Amended D.O. (Amended December 17, 1985 (Resolution 85-267;DO 85-4)); A copy of the Amended D.O. (Amended on July 27, 1993 (Resolution 99-382; DO 99-3)); A copy of the Amended D.O. (Amended on September 29,1999 (Resolution 99-288; DO 93-1)); A copy of the DO with the proposed amendment commencement date; A check in the amount of $2,500 to cover the filing fee. Please do not hesitate to contact me should have any questions or require any additional information Sincerely, Robert J. Mulhere, A!CP Director of Planning Cc: Robert Rogers, Esquire Charles J Basinait, Esquire Brain Fan-ar, JUL 3 0 2002 I! ~ ~ ~'~, 3050 North Horseshoe Drive. Suite ?Tr-~ 1 '~ DEVELOPMENT ORDER 3 4 RESOLUTION NUMBER 5 6 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER 85-4. AS 7 AMENDED, OF THE PARKLANDS DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT 8 (DM). BY PROVIDING FOR: SECTION ONE [,PTtlCH REFLECTS 9 AMENDMENTS TO I~HE DEVELOPMENT ORDER, IN PARTICULAR, SECTION 10 ONE A. WHICH REFLECTS REVISIONS TO PARAGRAPH 3, OF AN UNTITLED ! 1 SECTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER 85-4 EXTENDING THE 12 COMMENCEMENT DATE TO MARCH I1, 2004; SECTION TWO. FINDINGS OF 13 FACT; SECTION THREE, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW; SECTION FOUR, EFFECT 14 OF PREVIOUSLY ISSUED DEVELOPMENT ORDER, TRANSMITTAL TO DCA 15 AND EFFECTIVE DA TE. 16 17 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, 18 Florida (the Board) approved Development Order 85-4 (the Development Order) 19 on September 10, 1985, which approved a Development of Re.~ional Impact (DP, I) 20 known as the Parklands; and 21 WHEREAS, the Application for Development Approval (ADA) was 22 incorporated into and bv reference made a part of the Development Order; and, 23 WHEREAS. the real property which is the subject of the Development 24 Order is Ieually described in the Development Order~ and; 25 WHEREAS, the Parklands Development Order has been previously 26 amended several times and the owners are desirous of amendinR the Development -,. Order a~ain; and 28 WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission has reviewed and 29 considered the report and the recommendations of the Southwest Florida Rek, ional 30 Planninu Council (SWFRPC) and held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the. 31 amendments to the Parklands Development Order on 2002; and 32 WHEREAS, the Board has reviewed and considered the report and 33 recommendations of the SWFRPC and held a duly noticed public hearing to 24 consider these amendments to the Parklands Development Order set forth herein on 35 2002; 36 37 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF 38 COLrNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: 39 40 4I SECTION ONE: AMENDMENT OF DEVELOPMENT ORDER 42 A. Paragraph 3, of an untitled Section of the Development Order 85-4, as 43 amended, for The Parklands, is hereby amended to read as follows: 44 45 The Development Order shall remain in effect for the duration of the 46 project. However, in the event that significant physical development has not 47 commenced by March 11,200_43 in Collier County, development approval 48 will terminate and this development order shall no longer be effective. For 49 the purposes of this requirement significant "physical development" does 50 not include roads, drainage or landscaping but does include construction of 51 buildings on or installation of utilities and facilities such as sewer and water 52 lines. This timeframe may be extended by the Board of County 53 Commissioners upon request by the Developer in the event that 54 uncontrollable circumstances delay the commencement of development. 55 Paragraph 4. Findings of Fact, of the Development Order 85-4, as amended, 56 for the Parkland is hereby amended to read as follows: 57 ! JUL 3 0 2002 l 2 SECTION TWO: FINDINGS OF FACT 4 a. That the real property which is the 'subject of the ADA is legally 5 described as set forth m Exhibit "A." attached hereto and by reference made a part 6 hereof. 7 b. The application is in accordance with Section 380.06(19), Florida 8 Statutes. 9 c. The applicant submitted to the SWFRPC and the State of Florida 10 Department of Community Affairs (DCA), an Notice of Proposed Change (NOPC) 11 and the changes proposed were deemed not to be substantial in nature. 12 d. The applicant proposes the development of the Parklands on 13 '-642.2 acres of land in Collier County for residential, recreational and open space 14 uses. 15 e. The proposed changes to the previously approved Development are 16 consistent with the report and recommendations of the SWFRPC. t 7 f. The comprehensive review of the impact generated by the proposed 18 changes to the previously approved development order has been conducted by 19 Collier County and the SWFRPC, and determined not to be substantial in nature. 20 g. The development is not in an area designated as an Area of Critical 21 State Concern pursuant to the provisions of Section 380.06, Florida Statutes 22 23 SECT1ON THREE: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 24 25 A. The proposed changes to the previously approved Development 26 Order do not constitute a substantial deviation pursuant to Section 380.06(19), 27 Florida Statutes. The scope of the development to be permitted pursuant to this 28 Dex'elop~nt Order Amendment includes operations described in the Notice of 29 Proposed Change to a Previously Approved DRI, Exhibit "B", attached hereto and 30 by reference made a part hereof. 31 B. The proposed changes to the previously approved Development 32 Order are consistent with the report and recommendations of the SWFRPC. 33 C. The proposed changes to the previously approved development will 34 not interfere with the achievement of the objectives of the adopted State Land 35 Development Plan applicable to the area. 36 D. The proposed changes to the previously approved Development x7 Order are consistent with the Collier County Gro~th Management Plan and the 38 Collier County Land Development Code adopted pursuant thereto. 39 E. The proposed changes to the previously approved development are 40 consistent with the State Comprehensive Plan. 41 42 SECTION FOUR: EFFECT OF PREVIOUSLY ISSUED DEVELOPMENT 43 ORDER. TRANSMITTAL TO DCA AND EFFECTIVE DATE 44 45 a. Except as amended herein, Development Order 85-4, as previously 46 amended, shall remain in full force and effect, binding in accordance with its terms 47 on all parties thereto. 48 b. Copies of the Development Order ~ shall be transmitted 49 immediately upon execution to the Department of Community Affairs, Bureau of 50 Land and Water Management, and the SWFRPC. 51 c. The Development Order shall take effect as provided by law. 52 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the 53 minutes of this Board. 54 55 Commissioner offered the foregoing Resolution and 56 moved for its adoption, seconded by Commissioner and upon roll call, 57 the vote was: JUL 3 0 2002 . 1 2 AYES: 3 4 NAYS: 6 ABSENT AND NOT VOTING: 7 8 ABSIENTION: 9 10 DULY PASSED AND ADOPTED this__ day of i 1 2003. 13 DATE: BO.a.RD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 14 COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 15 16 ATTEST: BY: I ? BCC Chairman 18 19 Clerk 2O 21 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY 22 _~.., County Attorney 25 { JUL 3 {3 2002 lit _ ........ .= ............................... ' EXECUTIVE SUMMARY VA-2002-AR-2444, GOLDEN DREAM HOMES, REPRESENTING EDITH MONTERO AND OSVALDO RIVERO, REQUESTING AN AFTER THE FACT VARIANCE OF 2.5 FEET FROM THE REQUIRED 37.5-FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK TO 35 FEET FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON A CORNER LOT AT 1795 DESOTO BOULEVARD SOUTH, FURTHER DESCRIBED AS THE SOUTH 180 FEET OF TRACT 63, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT 85, IN SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. OBJECTIVE: That the community's interest is maintained in a single-family neighborhood. CONSIDERATIONS: The petitioner requests a 2.5-foot after-the-fact variance from the required 37.5-foot front-yard setback to 35 feet, for a house under construction in the Estates zoning district. Section 2.2.3.4.3 of the Land Development Code states that the front yard setback in the Estates district is 75 feet "except in the case of conforming comer lots, in which case only one full depth setback shall be required, along the shorter lot line along the street. The setback along the longer lot line may be reduced by up to 50-percent." For the subject lot, Section 2.2.3.4.3 would require a full 75-foot setback from DeSoto Boulevard and a 37.5-foot setback along 18~h Avenue SE. An application for a building permit was received by the Building Review and Permitting Department. The application indicated a setback of 30 feet along the south side. The Permitting Technician did not identify the property as a comer lot; therefore a 30-foot setback met the requirement for what was believed to be a side yard setback. The building permit (2001-082196) was issued on November 9, 2001. The spot survey was submitted and initially approved with a 35-foot setback along the south side (exceeding the "required" 30 feet indicated on the application). Another Planning Technician was reviewing the spot surveys and questioned the setback. It was determined at that time that the slab encroached into the setback. JUL 3 0 2002 The house will be a minimum of 132.5 feet from the nearest house to the south, across 18th Avenue SE (35 feet of the subject lot + the 60-foot ROW + the 37.5-foot setback of the neighbor). Increased distance from an encroachment can become an ameliorating factor and create compatibility. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this petition will have no fiscal impact on Collier County. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Approval of this variance will not affect or change the requirements of the Growth Management Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The site is a platted lot with a single-family home under construction. There are no unusual environmental issues associated with this petition. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is not located witl~in an Area of Historical and Archaeological Probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no survey or Waiver of Historic and Archaeological Survey & Assessment is required. EAC RECOMMENDATION: The Environmental Advisory Council did not review this petition because the EAC does not nom~ally hear variance petitions. CCPC RECOMMENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission heard this petition on July 18, 2002, after the deadline for the preparation of this Executive Summary. The Community Development & Environmental Services Administrator directed staff to schedule this petition for the July 30, 2002 BZA meeting. The CCPC recommendation will be presented verbally to the BZA. If the Planning Commission unanimously recommends approval, this petition will remain on the Summary Agenda; if they do not, the petition will appear on the regular agenda. JUL 3 0 2002 2 PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: There is no land-related hardship associated with this variance. Staff has considered two ameliorating factors: the 132.5-foot separation from the closest home; and the initial approval of the application by the County. Because the principal detriment is to the property owners themselves (having a house 2.5 feet closer to the road), Planning Services staff recommends that the CCPC for~vard Petition VA-2002-AR-2444 to the BZA with a recommendation of approval. PREPARED BY: FRE_D~ISCHL, AI~I:~'' DATE PRINCIPAL PLANNER REVIEWED BY: .'S'USAN MURRAY, AICP DATE CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER APPROVED BY: ?lc~ //JOSEPH K. SCHMITT D (;~)MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR executive summary/VA-2001 -AR-2444 JUL 3 0 002 3 Pg._ ~ AGENDA ITEM MEMORANDUM TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DATE: JUNE 28, 2002 SUBJECT: PETITION VA-2002-AR-2444 MONTERO VARIANCE AGENT/APPLICANT: OWNER: Edith Montero Osvaldo Rivero 1795 DeSoto Boulevard South Naples, FL 34117 AGENT: Golden Dream Homes 2610 39th Street SW Naples, FL 34117 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests a 2.5-foot after-the-fact variance from the required 37.5-foot front-yard setback to 35 feet, for a house under construction in the Estates zoning district. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located at the northwest comer of DeSoto Boulevard and 18m Avenue SE. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: .--- The petitioner requests an after-the-fact variance from the required front yard setb~ q,' ,~{' 37 _5 fee~; to 35 feet. JUL 3 0 2002 tc~6 u~ [c;6 ~ S JUL 3 0 2002 Section 2.2.3.4.3 of the Land Development Code states that the front yard setback in the Estates district is 75 feet "except in the case of conforming coruer lots, in which case only one full depth setback shall be required, along the shorter lot line along the street. The setback along the longer lot line may be reduced by up to 50-percent." For the subject lot, Section 2.2.3.4.3 would require a full 75-foot setback from DeSoto Boulevard and a 37.5-foot setback along 18th Avenue SE. An application for a building permit ~vas received by the Building Review and Permitting Department. The application indicated a setback of 30 feet along the south side. The Permitting Teclmician did not identify the property as a coruer lot; therefore a 30-foot setback met the requirement for what xvas believed to be a side yard setback. The building permit (2001-082196) xvas issued on November 9, 2001. The spot survey was submitted and initially approved with a 35-foot setback along the south side (exceeding the "required" 30 feet indicated on the application). Another Planning Teclmician was reviewing the spot surveys and questioned the setback. It was determined at that time that the slab encroached into the setback. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Subject: single-family house under construction; zoned E Surrounding: North - undeveloped lot; zoned E East - DeSoto Boulevard ROW South - 18th Avenue SE ROW West - undeveloped lot; zoned E HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staffs analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is not located within an area of historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, a Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment or waiver is not required. EVALUATION FOR IMPACTS TO TRANSPORTATION~ INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENT: Approval of this variance request will have no effect on infrastructure, transportation or the environment. ANALYSIS: Section 2.7.5 of the Land Development Code grants the authority to the Board of Zoning Appeals to grant variances. The Planning Commission is advisory to the BZA and utilize]t|~~. Ir~ f''i:'~i¥~'~~ ] L 2002 of Section 2.7.5.6.1 through 2.7.5.6.8, which are general guidelines to be used to assist the Commission in making a determination. Responses to the items in Section 2.7.5.6 are as follo~vs: 1. Are there special conditions and circumstances existing, which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land, structure or building involved? No. A house of this size could have been configured to fit on this lot. 2. Are there special conditions and circumstances, which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property, which is the subject of the variance request? Yes. The Building Permit application was approved with a 30-foot setback along 18th Avenue SE and the spot survey was initially approved at 35 feet. 3. Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this Land Development Code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant? No. There is no land-related hardship. A house of this size could have been configured to fit on this lot within the required setbacks. The petitioner may suffer a financial hardship in relocating the house (or seeking redress from the builder). Hoxvever, financial hardship is not typically a reason to grant a variance. 4. Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety and welfare? No. A reasonable use of the land can be attained by construction of a house within the existing setbacks. 5. Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district? Yes, the granting of this variance will allow the petitioner to have a smaller front yard along 18th Avenue SE than the minimum required in the Estates zoning district for a comer lot. 6. Will granting the variance be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this Land Development Code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare? No, this variance will allow a house to be closer to the front lot line than other houses on comer lots in the Estates zoning district JUL 3 0 2002 7. Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf courses, etc.? Yes. The house will be a minimum of 132.5 feet from the nearest house to the south, across 18th Avenue SE (35 feet of the subject lot + the 60-foot ROW + the 37.5-foot setback of the neighbor). Increased distance from an encroachment can become an ameliorating factor and create compatibility. 8. Will granting the variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan? Approval of this variance will not affect or change the requirements of the Groxvth Management Plan. EAC RECOMMENDATION: The Environmental Advisory Council does not normally hear variance petitions. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: There is no land-related hardship associated with this variance. Staff has considered txvo ameliorating factors: the 132.5-foot separation from the closest home; and the initial approval of the application by the County. Because the principal detriment is to the property owners themselves (having a house 2.5 feet closer to the road), Planning Services staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition VA-2002-AR-2444 to the BZA with a recommendation of approval. 2007. _ PREPARED BY: FR!~. _.~_J~EISCHL, AICP DATE PRINCIPAL PLANNER REVIEWED BY: SL~AN MURRAY, AICP DATE CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER & INTERIM PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR APPROVED BY: / 4 ~, -"' JOSEPH K. SGHMITT D/ATE / COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR ~../ Petition Number: VA-2002-AR-2444 Collier Count>' Planning Commission: KENNETH L. ABERNATHY, CHAIRMAN JUL 3 O 2002 V 4 RI'A Ne ~1~ 'PILTITIO~ (VAtYi1.AIqC;~E F~OM SE'I3}!ACt~ (S) llliQUDIED 1;OR A PAli.TICL~,AR Z()N]NG DISTI~ICT) VA.2002-AR-2444 Date Petition Received: pROJECT ~2002040056 DATE: 5/2/02 P ¢~i.ili on ~N o.. ........ FRED ~EIS CHL Planner Assigned: .... Commissio~ Dist~4c.i: GE.____NEI~4~ L INFORMATI ON: JUL 3 O 2002 l, Dane o£ Hc,~ neov,'n¢," A ssoci a6on: ...................................................................... Cil-v Stale .......Zip Maili2g Address ................. ]Name o~' Ho'xB e:(';x,,'t~c:t' ;kss()cialio'tu ........................................... State Zip CiD' ................ - ................. Mailing Address Name of Master Associaiio.: ........................................................................ State Zip ............. City ............. -~--' Mailing Address ......................................... Name ot Civic A..%so,.,iafion: ....................................................................... Stat:e Zip ClX5, ................... - ............... M aili~g .~, ~dt ..... _ .......................... tqF 2002 JUL 3 0 2002 · .g::: 1'2-. ............. JUL 3 0 2002 Aw ~l~crc spcd2l cmMifions and c~.cmmdances which do not rc~uh fi. mn dm ac6on of ~ applicant such a~ pre--c ~:~si~n~ co~,~id,:,~s r¢ladv¢ to the property which is flw ~ut .~ect r~l' The vadance request. Will a literal ixtt,-:tpr~t~.tiou uf thc provisions of fids zouk~g code work mmecessarY and umtue tmrdthip vu ~3m app!icaI~t or create pracdcM di~llculties on thc applica~tt. , t,.s~ibl~ the reasonable use of v:,rkauce ~t:,,t v:il! m: tw - .... " JUL 3 0 2002 Pg._ welfare. · ? .%rc ti;ere rt~tm'al vo~di6c, ns c~ l>hY,qCallY reduced conditions thai an~elioratc the goals ~d ,z,t:tiectN, e:' of thc re:~zulaf°u stxch as x]alm al preset-yes, lakes, golf course, _ _. 6n.o~h ~a~a?ment ......... ~,,~ ................. JUL ~ ~ 2~02 t'/, (-~,CE' ii'! # OF ......................... '!: 'E3 " 2. Completed OwuerlAgen( Affidavi(, Notarized 3. Pre,applica(io)) no(es/minutes 4. Survey of prope~', showing the encroachment I. (measured in feet) 5. Site Plan depicting tire following: a) Ali properq' boundaries & dimensions b) Ail existing aud proposed structures (labeled as such' c) North arrow, date and scale of drawing d) Required setbacks & proposed setbacks 6. Location map depicting major streets in area for reference ......... 7. Pr~Application fee, Applicaton fee and Data Conversion - fee, checks shall be made payable to Collier County Board of Commissioners 8. Other Requirements - ' As ihe authorized agent/applicani for fids petition, I attest that all of the fiffoHnafion indicated on Offs checklist i:,: i_nclud~.d hi this subnfittal package. I xmderstand that failure to hmlude all necessary snbmittal information re_ay rcsnlt in tee delay ofprocessiug of th/s petition. ........................................................ ! ................... 7 ''-.]-,.< ~ , ? ' :r .' :~1' ~:~:~!t,;~l~)~.J',2' !~, ,~ ..... JUL 3 0 2002 "~% "1 ,' :,'x ~ 732f ~_.~L~_&-~-- ~d '-_~: ..... T'--~ being fir,¥t dun sw,?~ n, dvl',o.~'e . r,s q/ d~e t,top~.~O d~:b~d herein and ~,.hich i.s' thc su[~ect matter ,/'brc t~'z;;~; in this n],t,lication, inch,cti,,~3' pro]9oxed ht.a~n,g, that all thc answers to the questions di.~closurc qf interest i~[fig~nu-ttion, all slcctches, data, and other sup~lementaty matt,;~ attache,i and mode? ,'~ ])a~'t Qf this al.¢~lic~tic, n ,v'~:' [?rote:st and true to thc t,est qf our Imowledg'e and }['2".~[ undcrstand that thc i~tformation requested on ibis application must be complcte ,~ccurate and that the content el this form, whether computer generated or County printed n,',t be altered. Public hearings will t~ot be advertised until thix ~g~plication is dcemed ,.~t:d ali required i~?ormation has been .xubmitted. ,4~' t~ropcro' owncr B;~/J.ihrther authorizc - a.s our/my r~nresentati¥'e in an)' motler,s' regarding this Petition, ,'~_ L~~~~"" ~ ............... Signature oJ'Froperty Sigt~,.~ ttu'e of ProperO' Own er (:~ i~1~ k~c', ~ ...... T~t~ed or I-'tinted Name of Owner o ef · R ,~d'JCED P'E.I([~.L~ i- ON i 1 .-09~ O l. '1 I=~5'. ] O-DAY SPOT (;'[j'f('VEY' Ob.i DEC[~3[,-[I .~0~s, A.'[ -EH. kY lTD. · ~ HE HOUSE; SET )3ACI( A 'V~ANCE WOLfLD HAVE 'TO ~BE p~Pi_IED FOR. ~&PPLICATION IS BEING SUB5, flT i'ED ~3TH 5UiRVEYS A_ND PERT.~.&NT PERT,~4[NG Y O Y FH S bL~7 TE It. 'NEED FURIHER INFOI-tXfATIGN, FEE'[ FREE lO CC;NTACT F, ~, ~b.,~, I. UND AT["~ E ~'.~1/I0'~,7 (- '"'-,:7.~,f ]7) -[ ~q~; ~[ ,_ I I AC.~r_NOA ITEM _lfl F JUL 3 0 2002 Dear Ms. Montero snd Mr R~vero: The Building Review and Permittin9 Depa~lment issued the above referenced permit on 0~. At the time of submittal the Permittin9 Technician who processe~ the permit dfd not identify ~.~!~,t~ as a corner ~ot and, consequently, a setback of 30 feet was identified as the side y~rd serbs, ok when it sllould have been a reduced front yard ~etback of 3~.5 feet on the s~de adjacent '18tr' Avent~e Th~ spot survey submitted in late December reflected the house ~et back 36 feet from the edge o~the right cf way. The spot su~,ey was initially approved: however, was questioned by one of the other Permitting Tecl;nioians who sought assistance from Planning Services. It was determined at that poh;t that the correct setback is 37.5 feet. The only way to correct this ~::c~'c:yohmant is to move fi~e ~iab b~ak 2.5 feet in order to meet ti~e required 37.$ feet setback o;' apply f)r a v:arie~nc~ through the Plsnning Services Department. I am sure, if that is the route you cho~se, they wi',l process this request as soon as they poss~bty can You should be aware, i, oweve~ ~ th~,~ there is no ass,.~rance the Board will approve the variance. ........ e[fl:,~ to ,-,,'ovid= accurate information to OLil' Cusb)mers. ~ov.iever, p~ imary i)urpose ,)~ ~h~ 'i O-day spot survey is to allow us to catch discrepancies at an early st~ge in case e ,,-r,;,stal.:,~ is m~,d,:, e~the~' on our part or on ti~e part of ti~e builder. Any construction th:~t occurs ?,,ff~r the slab inspection is conducted and prior to acceptance et the lO-day :,t th~ c~ui;.:~r'~ risl: ~tnd :T~ust '::~ removed if an encro~:~r:hment is iden~ffie;d al~d !~o variance ~f i ~;an ,,0: :.'..':tiC- ~L~:-~:~:~ [~'~f,:~r;~5~.~':,l~ ~ assists!loc, please ?iF r:.~r ~~, AGENDA ITEM JUL 3 0 2002 .... · . ~.'~ '~:~' laie):~l lm:)perip/line. ~ hL~ mistake ,'a ' ~.,..,~ ~verlooked on several prior inspectioi~s apparent]y, a~ roof ha~ ah'eady been c. on~;lmcted, At ti}is time I am inq~firing abc)ut ~ome U~pe ofpe. m~ ira' a ~,m'iance ~o be ~ranted so that my f~mi]y and I may comim~¢ construction on our reside(me. We have been waiting now since December, when ail co~%tmc, tion was ceased, and we are now in great noed to) complete ihe hr)~}~e a~ ~t i~ becoming a financial burden. l wm~ld 'be 'very aratefiH :gor an.v a<.~Ntance o~ this ma~er. Thru'ftc you ,,err JUL 3 0 2002 RESOLUTION NO. 02- RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER VA-2002-AR-2444, FOR A VARIANCE ON PROPERTY HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on all counties in Florida the power to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning and such business regulations as are necessary for the protection of the public; and WHEREAS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development Code (Ordinance No. 91-102) which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County, among which is the granting of variances; and WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Appeals, being the duly elected constituted Board of the area hereby affected, has held a public hearing after notice as in said regulations made and provided, and has considered the advisability of a 2.5-foot after the fact variance from the required front yard setback of 37.5 feet to 35 feet as shown on the attached plot plan, Exhibit "A", in "E" Estates Zone for the property hereinafter described, and has found as a matter of fact that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Section 2.7.5 of the Zoning Regulations of said Land Development Code for the unincorporated area of Collier County; and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given opportunity to be heard by this Board in public meeting assembled, and the Board having considered all matters presented; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida, that: The Petition VA-2001-AR-2444 filed by Golden Dream Homes, Inc., representing Edith Montero and Osvaldo Rivero, xvith respect to the property hereinafter described as: The south 180 feet of Tract 63, Golden Gate Estates Unit 85, as recorded in Plat Book 5, Page 24, in the Official Records of Collier County, Florida be and the same hereby is approved for a 2.5-foot variance from the required front yard setback of 37.5 feet to 35 feet as shown on the attached plot plan, Exhibit "A", of the "E" Estates Zoning District wherein said property is located, subject to the following conditions: 1. This variance is for the encroachment shown in Exhibit "A" only. Any other encroachment shall require a separate variance. 2. In the case of the destruction of the encroaching structure, for any reason, to an extent equal to or greater than 50 percent of the actual replacement cost of the structure at the AO.,FaNOA IIEM time of its destruction, any reconstruction shall conform to the provisions of the Land Development Code in effect at the time of reconstruction. I~lo._ ] f~ ~ J HI.- 3 0 2002 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution relating to Petition Number VA-2002-AR-2444 be recorded in the minutes of this Board. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote. Done this day of ,2002. ATTEST: BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency: ..,.... Mmjorie ~. Student Assistant County Attorney F~sp VA-2002-AR-244~. ITEM 2002 . ~ ...l~ ~ ~ / = :~ ,',~: :' ,- -' ,' ' ' ~ ~ ,~ '.~ ' ~ -'~ ~:iJUL EXHIBIT "t EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TO ADOPT THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH FEES FOR THE PROCESSING BACKGROUND CHECK AND ISSUING DRIVER IDENTIFICATION CARDS; TO REAFFIRM APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATION FEES FOR CERTIFICATE TO OPERATE A PUBLIC VEHICLE FOR HIRE BUSINESS; AND TO REPEAL COLLIER COUNTY RESOLUTION NO. 93-127, AS AMENDED. OBJECTIVE: To adopt an updated fee schedule for the regulation of the Public Vehicle for Hire process. CONSIDERATIONS: In 1993 the Board of County Commissioners adopted resolution 93-127 establishing a fee schedule for the Public Vehicle for Hire process. At the time the responsibility for verifying the drivers of these establishment had no criminal history was that of the certificate holder. We have since found that this verification is not being performed by business on a regular basis as required. Additionally, recent amendments to the Ordinance establishing the regulations of these businesses incorporated the requirement of a driver's identification card to be placed in each vehicle so that the public can be assured the driver is so authorized to do business in Collier County. Because of the above noted facts Staff is recommending a comprehensive re-write of the existing Public Vehicle for Hire Resolution of fees. The proposed amendments are as follows: Maintaining the following fees: Application fee for an Original Certificate To Operate $200 Annual Renewal fee for a Certificate to Operate $250 Vehicle permit fee $50/vehicle Establishing the following fees: Criminal background check $35 Driver's Identification (ID) Card $15 Replacement D Card $10 FISCAL IMPACT: The adoption of this resolution will increase revenues of the Vehicle for Hire fund by an estimated $20,000 annually (based on the number of vehicles in the system). GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the proposed resolution and repeal Resolution 93-127 AGENDA ITEM No.__ JUL 3 0 2002 Pg.. / / / Ekna Hu, Vehicle for Hire Liaison ~ A.ssist a~ County ADttAoTrnEiy Jg'seph K. Sgfi~ii~, Admini~rator /- / Community Development & Environmental Services / 2002 ] RESOLUTION NO. 2002- 2 3 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, 4 FLORIDA, REGARDING COLLIER COUNTY'S PUBLIC VEHICLE FOR HIRE 5 ORDINANCE; CONTINUING THE CURRENT TWO HUNDRED DOLLAR ($200) FEE TO 6 APPLY FOR AN ORIGINAL CERTIFICATE TO OPERATE; CONTINUING THE TWO ? HUNDRED AND FIFTY DOLLAR ($250) FEE TO BE ISSUED A CERTIFICATE TO $ OPERATE; CONTINUING THE TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY DOLLAR ($250) FEE FOR 9 ANNUAL RENEWAL OF EACH CERTIFICATE TO OPERATE; CONTINUING THE l0 CURRENT FEE OF FIFTY DOLLARS ($50) FOR EACH VEHICLE PERMIT; Il ESTABLISHING THE FOLLOWING NEW FEES: THIRTY-FIVE DOLLARS ($35) FOR l" EACH CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK; FIFTEEN DOLLARS ($15) FOR EACH 13 DRIVER'S ORIGINAL IDENTIFICATION CARD, AND TEN DOLLARS ($10) TO REPLACE ~4 AN IDENTIFICATION CARD; ALSO REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 93-127. ]5 16 WHEREAS, Chapter 142 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances ("Code") ~7 requires that all owners of a vehicles for hire business must apply for and obtain a Certificate to ~$ Operate such business in Collier County and must renew the Certificate each year, must obtain a 19 vehicle permit for each vehicle for hire, and each vehicle operator must apply for and be issued a 20 vehicle operator's identification card that identifies the respective vehicle operator, and 22 WHEREAS, the Code provides that criminal background checks of the owner, directors, 23 officers and managers of the business must be conducted as a condition of being issued a Certificate 24 to Operate a vehicle for hire business to provide services in unincorporated Collier County; and 25 2~ WHEREAS, the Code provides that these fees shall be as set from time-to-time by Resolution "7 of the Board of County Commissioners ("Board"), the former being Resolution No. 93-127; and 29 WHEREAS, Staff has calculated its direct and indirect costs to perform the following services _~0 and staff is recommending establishment of the following new fees: thirty-five dollars (S35.00) for each 31 criminal background check; fifteen dollars (S15.00) for each vehicle operator's original ID card; and .~2 ten dollars ($10.00) to replace an ID card; also to continue the existing application fee of two hundred 33 dollars ($200) to apply for an original Certificate to Operate; continuing the existing fee of two 34 hundred and fifty dollars ($250) for issuance of the Certificate to Operate; continuing the existing fee 35 of two hundred and fifty dollars ($250) for annual renewal of a Certificate to Operate; and continuing 36 the vehicle permit fee of fifty dollars (S50) per vehicle; and 35 WHEREAS, the Board accepts staff's recommendations. 39 40 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 41 OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: 4~_ The fees to be paid to Collier County pursuant to the Public Vehicle for Hire Ordinance are as 43 follows: Two hundred dollars ($200) to apply for an original Cedificate to Operate; two 44 hundred and fifty dollars ($250.00) for issuance of the original Certificate to Operate; two 45 hundred and fifty dollars ($250) for each annual renewal of a Cedificate to Operate, fifty 46 dollars; ($50.00) for each vehicle permit; thidy-five dollars (35.00) for County staff to conduct 47 each criminal background check; fifteen dollars (15.00) for each original vehicle operator's 4s identification card and ten dollars ($10.00) for replacement of an ID card. This Resolution 49 repeals and supersedes Collier County Resolution No. 93-127. 50 5~ ADOPTED this ~ day of , 2002 after motion, second and 52 majority vote in favor of adoption. 53 54 ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 55 DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 58 By:. By: 59 Deputy Clerk JAMES N. COLE -fA, (}l~a~ ~ . . 6O JUL 3 0 2002 62 Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: 66 Thomas C. Palmer, 67 Assistant County Attorney EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PETITION: PUDA-01-AR-2028, ROBERT DUANE OF HOLE MONTES, INC., REPRESENTING CYPRESS GLEN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, REQUESTING A REZONE FROM "PUD" TO "PUD" PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO BE KNOWN AS THE CYPRESS GLEN PUD FOR THE PURPOSE OF DECREASING THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT FROM 3 STORIES TO 2 STORIES, REDUCING THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER FROM 10 FEET TO 5 FEET, REVISING THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, REVISING THE MASTER PLAN TO DEPICT THE PROPOSED INTERNAL PLACEMENT OF STRUCTURES AND MODIFIED TRAFFIC CIRCULATION SYSTEM, AND TO ADD A WATER MANAGEMENT AREA ALONG THE WESTERN EDGE OF THE PROPERTY FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PINE RIDGE ROAD (C.R. 896) AND APPROXIMATELY ONE QUARTER MILE WEST OF LIVINGSTON ROAD IN SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners consider an application to amend the Cypress Glen PUD Document and Master Plan as noted above in a manner consistent with all the applicable codes and regulations in order to ensure that the community's interests are maintained. CONSIDERATIONS: The currently approved 29.7-acre Cypress Glen PUD was last amended on October 27, 1992 and permits 208 multi-family residential dwelling units, which results in a density of 7-units per acre. Of the approved multi-family condominium units, 88 units have already been constructed at this time. The purpose of this petition is to amend the Cypress Glen PUD Document and Master Plan in order to reduce the landscape buffer from I0 feet to 5 feet along a limited portion of the east property line to allow for a secondary interior roadway to provide independent access to the two residential areas. The petitioner is also requesting to reduce the maximum building height from 3 stories to 2 stories xvhile reducing the minimum building separation requirement from 30 feet to 15 feet. Other changes include the reduction of the perimeter setback from 30-feet to 25-feet along the north, east and south property lines and reducing the required 20-foot wide overall landscape buffer (10 foot wide Type "A" - each side) between the existing 3-story condominiums structures and the proposed two story structures. In addition, a proposed revision to the Master Plan includes the redesign of the internal placement of structures and the location of the internal roadway to now include a "round about" entry drive. Lastly, the Master Plan has been revised to eliminate the residential tract in the northwest comer of the project and convert it to preserve areas thereby increasing the preserve area from 10.3 acres to 13.70 acres. JUL 3 0 2002 1 Pg._ / FISCAL IMPACT: This amendment is only to provide greater flexibility in meeting the needs of the current market seeking single-family and multi-family residential dwellings. This includes the following comparisons of approved development to the proposed land uses for the Cypress Glen PUD: APPROVED. PROPOSED AMOUNT OF INCREASE PUD PUD OR DECREASE TOTAL ACRES: 29.7 Acres 29.7 Acres 0 RESIDENTIAL UNITS: 208 208 0 pRESERVE AREA 10.3 Acres 13.70 Acres +6.7 Acres Therefore, since the approved intensity xvill not change, this amendment by and of itself will have no fiscal impact on the County. The fiscal impact for this development was determined at the time the property was rezoned to PUD. In addition, the County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of building permits to help offset the impact of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects in the Capital Improvement Element needed to maintain adopted levels of service for public facilities. In the event that impact fee collections are inadequate to maintain adopted levels of service, the County must provide supplemental funds from other revenue sources in order to build needed facilities. .... GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The subject property is located in the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Sub-District, as depicted on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The Base Density in this area is 4 units per acre. The site is also eligible for a density bonus of 3 units per acre for being within the Residential Density Band of Designated Activity Center #13 that is located one mile around the intersection of Airport Road at Pine Ridge Road. As a result, the previously approved gross density of 7 units per acre is consistent xvith the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP). HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staff's analysis indicates that the subject site is located outside an area of historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment is required. Pursuant to Section 2.2.25.8.1 of the Land Development Code if during the course of site clearing, excavation or other construction activity a historic or archaeological artifact is found, all development within the minimum area necessary to protect the discovery shall be immediately stopped and the Collier County Code Enforcement Department contacted. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The Environmental Review staffhas recommended approval subject to the following conditions: . JUL 3 0 2002 2 ,~ ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The Environmental Review staff has recommended approval subject to the following conditions: · Buffers shall be provided around any wetlands, extending at least 15 feet landward from the edge of the wetland preserves in all places and average 25 feet from the landward edge of wetlands. Where natural buffers are not possible, structural buffers shall be provided in accordance xvith the State of Florida Environmental Resources Permit Rules and be subject to reviexv and approval by the Current Planning Environmental Staff. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: Since the project was not impacting the approved preserve areas as shown on the Master Plan, the petitioner was not required to submit an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). As a result, this petition was not required to go to the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC). COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) reviewed this petition during their public hearing on July 30, 2002. By a 7 to 0 vote, the CCPC forwarded Petition PUDA-01-AR-2028 to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) with a recommendation of approval. The Planning Commissioners found that this petition is consistent with the Growth Management Plan (GMP) and is compatible with the surrounding development subject to the folloxving conditions. 1. The developer shall provide sidewalks from the proposed Phase II area to the existing Phase I area as illustrated on the PUD Master Plan. 2. All landscaping shall be in accordance with the requirements of Division 2.4 of the LDC. However, the 15-foot landscape buffer along the eastern property line may be reduced to a minimum of 5 feet since there is not sufficient room area between the internal PUD road and eastern property line (that borders a private school). 3. Eliminate the 20-foot xvide landscape buffer (Type "A") between the existing multi-family buildings and the proposed two story multifamily structures since the existing 3-story multi- family structures (Phase I) and the proposed two story multi-family structures are both multi- family structures and are part of the same PUD project. 4. Reduce the "structural buffers" around any wetlands, extending at least 15 feet landward from the edge of the wetland preserves in all places and average 25 feet from the landward edge of wetlands since the currently approved site development plan and South Florida Water Management District Permit allows (and recorded as an easement), a setback .... the preserve boundary. JUL 3 0 2002 3 Pg. It should be noted that staff has not received any letters of objection to this petition. Since no one spoke in opposition to the petition during the public hearing, this petition has been placed on the Summary Agenda. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approve Petition PUDA-2002-AR-2028 subject to staff stipulations and the additional conditions as recommended by the Collier County Planning Commission which are contained in the PUD Document that is attached to the Ordinance of adoption. JUL 3 O 2{)02 4 pg. PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY: ./~USAN MURRAY, AICP, MANAGER DATE C -URRENT PLANNING SECTION M~G~T ~ERSTLE, AICP, D~CTO~ DATE PLA~G SERVICES DEP~TMENT APPROVED BY: ~~ ~_~/ JOSEPH K. SCHMI~T ADMINISTRATOR D/ATE coMMUNITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS. / / I / PUDA-01-AR-2028/EX SUMMARY/RVB/rb JUL 3 0 2002 MEMORANDUM TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DATE: JUNE 14, 2002 RE: PETITION NO: PUDA-02-AR-2028, CYPRESS GLEN PUD AGENT/APPLICANT: Agent: Robert Duane O~vner: Cypress Glen Development Corporation Hole Montes, Inc. 2180 Immokalee Road. 950 Encore Way Suite 308 Naples, Florida 34110 Naples, Florida 34110 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject PUD is located on the north side of Pine Ridge Road (C.R. 896) and approximately one-quarter mile west of Livingston Road in Section 12, Township 49 South, Range 25 East. (See illustration on following page) REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner is requesting a rezone from PUD to PUD for the purposes of amending the Cypress Glen PUD (Ordinance Number 92-83). PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The currently approved 29.7-acre Cypress Glen PUD was last amended on October 27, 1992 and permits 208 multi-family residential dwelling units, which results in a density of 7-units per acre. Of the approved multi-family condominium units, 88 units have already been constructed at this time. The purpose of this petition is to amend the Cypress Glen PUD Document and Master Plan as follows: · Reduce the landscape buffer from 10 feet to 5 feet along a limited portion of the east property line to allow for a secondary interior roadway to provide , independent access to the two residential areas. ,~7,~, ~ · Reduce the maximum building height from 3 stories to 2 stories. I~o.__/'~ ~_~ JUL 3 O ZOOZ '.?. , ! t / · :'.;:j.~ ......... ... ..... 7.'.. }'i · ],u~A-]oo:--~, :-=~,_,~ .JUL 3 0 2002 PROJECT ~.: DATE: 1/28 P~._~ -- :>...'~"~,, BELL' -' · ': . :- ii!::!.- !!i!., ?,iii.. ......... .... ''-'.'.7.~.~;'..'.'.~.'.'.~.8..','.%.'~'-'- .. -. .... '~.~ ..... 7 - ' ' -. .;..........%...-..~.-.-;.-¢:. ; .'... .' .- -'- .; .... .'.:.r.' ........... · .' .....-- - -' ....... , ..... 2~%',~. ~ - - ' .'.*.'~*.";'.'.I~*.. .,,... ('.., .....;-.-;...;..-.*.-..f.f.¢.',.~;'.'. -. ;';'.~.*.'.-:.."...-...... ~ ~ .-;.-.-...-~% '..*;, ~-'. -.'-..-...'~' ,:~ :..:.:,;....,,t., .-;~.-.-'.;..-....-.,-: ..:.-.cO' .'~'. ';'....-.' ~.-0-~-~-..~..".'.'.;;"..... .... -; ~. .... . . .. ..... ;,...~.;'..-,..;.%...%.;%~: · .-.7,-¢'.';TL'.r.%*.'.~.'.'..-... · ~-.-'.-.-..-.-...~.~.';'.'.%'..~..'. ,... .-.-.:.-.-.-.:.-.-.-.-.' ....... , . ..., . ~.. :.-.-..- · -~...-;-.:.%-.-.-.,~-,'.'.'¢:,:.~.':,, .'.....-;.,~.....-;-;~ ...... ; ....... :....... ................ .'.-...'.'.'.'.'.r..'.'.;'. ........ .. · - ~ ...:.~-,.: / .... ..,.. , ...,. -.-...:.'.'.:.',~,: .... .... , , '"''"";"" .... : .............. / I I I I I ~ · .-'.-.%.-;'.~;';'.'.'.% . . ........-.., 10' .'.%';'.:.'.'.% .... '-.-.-~-...%%'? _ . ........._----. ~o ;.oo~ w~ CYPRESS GLEN Neplea, ~ 54110 ,h,,,: (~*~) 2S~-2ooo P.U.D. Master Plan HO~ M~ Roflda Ce~flcate of ~.~.~ AuthoHzmlon .o.~ Exhibit 'A' A · Reduce the minimum building separation requirements from 30 feet to 15 feet for the proposed 2-story structures, while maintaining a minimum of 25 feet separation from the existing 3-story structures. · Reduce the perimeter setback from 30-feet to 25-feet along the north, east and south property lines. · Rearrange the approved Master Plan (see attached) to depict the proposed internal placement of structures and an internal roadway with a new "round about" entry drive as depicted on the proposed Master Plan (see attached). · Reduce the required 20-foot wide overall landscape buffer (10 foot wide Type "A" - each side) between the existing 3-story condominiums structures and the proposed two story structures. · Eliminate the residential tract in the northwest comer of the project and convert it to preserve areas. · Increase the preserve areas from 10.3 acres to 13.70 acres. · Add a xvater management area along the western edge of the property. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Existing Conditions: The subject site is partially developed with 88 multi-family residential dwelling units and is zoned the Cypress Glen PUD. Surrounding-North: Partially developed preserve areas that are part of Barron Collier High School and are zoned RSF-3. East: The developed Community School that is zoned "CF". South: Pine Ridge Road and the Kensington Park PUD. West: Undeveloped lands and preserve lands that are part of Barron Collier High School and are zoned "A" Rural Agricultural. GRO',VTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: The subject property is located in the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Sub- District, as depicted on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The Base Density in this area is 4 units per acre. The site is also eligible for a density bonus of 3 units per acre for being within the Residential Density Band of Designated Activity Center #13 that is located one mile around the intersection of Airport Road at Pine Ridge Road. As a result, the previously approved gross density of 7 units per acre is consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP). Transportation Element - The Transportation Department has reviewed the applicant's request and has the following comments. Since the approved project will not increase the number of approved dwelling units within this partially developed project, the proposed amendment will not generate trips that significantly impact any County road. 2 JUL 3 0 2002 lC HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: StafFs analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located outside an area of historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment is required. Pursuant to Section 2.2.25.8.1 of the Land Development Code if during the course of site cleating, excavation or other construction activity a historic or archaeological artifact is found, all development within the minimum area necessary to protect the discovery shall be immediately stopped and the Collier County Code Enforcement Department contacted. EVALUATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL~ TRANSPORTATION & INFRASTRUCTURE: This petition was referred to all appropriate County agencies for their review. Since the project was not impacting the approved preserve areas as shown on the Master Plan, the petitioner was not required to submit an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). As a result, this petition was not required to go to the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC). The Environmental Review staff has recommended approval subject to the folloxving conditions: · Buffers shall be provided around any xvetlands, extending at least 15 feet landward from the edge of the wetland preserves in all places and average 25 feet from the landward edge of wetlands. Where natural buffers are not possible, structural buffers shall be provided in accordance with the State of Florida Environmental Resources Permit Rules and be subject to review and approval by the Current Planning Environmental Staff. The Transportation Department has also recommended approval because no level of service (LOS) standard will be adversely affected by this amendment. Their approval is subject to subject to the following conditions: · At the time of site development plan review, sidewalks and bike path locations shall be provided throughout the project since there are a total of 208 multi-family units located close together on only 15.48 acres. In addition, the existing developed portion of the project has provided sidewalks. EVALUATION: Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and the criteria on which a favorable determination must be based. This evaluation is intended to provide an objective, comprehensive overview of the impact of the proposed land use change, be they positive or negative, culminating in a staff recommendation based on that overview. The listed criteria are specifically noted in Section 2.7.2.5 and Section 2.7.3.2.5 of the Land Development Code thus requiring staff evaluation and comment, and ~a|! "Kc.,E~'~ lB 3 JUL 3 0 2002 as a basis for a recommendation of approval or denial by the Planning Commission to the BCC. The evaluation by professional staff should typically include an analysis of the petition's relationship to the community's future land use plan, and whether or not a rezoning action would be consistent with the Collier County GMP in all of its related elements (See Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B"). Relationship to Future Land Uses: A discussion of this relationship, as it applies Specifically to Collier County's legal basis for land use planning, refers to the relationship of the proposed zoning action to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). In the case at hand, and based upon the Future Land Use Plan, we have an expectation that the land will be used and developed for a mix of residential land uses including multi-family residential as currently authorized within the PUD. The currently approved density of 7 units per acre is also consistent with the Density Rating System. After considering the availability of community infrastructure and services it is clear that the development of the subject property is timely and consistent with the FLUE to the GMP. Relationship to Existing Land Uses: A discussion of this relationship concerns the compatibility xvith the adjacent properties to the north, south, east, and west. The petitioner's stated intent is to primarily construct multi-family residential dwelling units within a master planned community that includes recreational amenities. In addition, the proposed amendment ~vill increase the preserve areas by approximately 3 acres along the western property line. To the east are the developed lands of the Community School and its entrance road. To the north are the undeveloped preserve areas that are part of the Barton Collier High School holdings. To the south across Pine Ridge Road are the developed multi-family residential areas of the Kensington PUD. In regards to landscaping from the adjacent land uses, the petitioner is requesting to reduce the landscape buffer from 10 feet to 5 feet along a limited portion of the eastern property line. The petitioner has indicated that their justification for this reduction of the landscape buffer is due to an insufficient area to meet this requirement and still construct a private roadway between the existing lake and the property line that borders the Community School entrance road. The petitioner's justification for putting the road along the eastern property line is to allow for improved traffic circulation to the proposed units. In addition, the petitioner is requesting to reduce the required 20-foot wide overall landscape buffer (10 foot wide Type "A" - each side) between the existing 3-story condominiums structures and the proposed two story structures. The justification for this reduction by the petitioner is that both the existing 3-story condominium structures and the proposed 2-story structures are multi-family uses within the same project, which would negate this buffer requirement. Conversely, the County's Landscape Architect has recommended denial of the petitioner's proposed landscape modifications as described above because these modifications are not consistent with the minimum requirements of the Land Development Code. In addition, the proposed 5-foot landscape buffer (if appro, _ed~ is not %¢._ 4 JUL 3 0 2002 wide enough to alloxv the landscaping to survive over time. Furthermore, since this residential PUD abuts a non-residential use (the Community School) and its entrance road, the landscaping plays a vital role in screening vehicular headlights from the two projects. In regards to the buffer requirement between the existing and proposed structures staff is of the opinion that a 20-foot wide overall landscape buffer (10 foot wide Type "A" - each side) between the existing 3-story condominiums structures and the proposed two story structures are required given the fact that the two developments are dissimilar in size, scale, and have separate road access points. Since the PUD is proposed to have two distinct product types, a 20-foot wide overall landscape buffer (10 foot xvide Type "A" - each side) is required. Lastly, staff is of the opinion that the proposed PUD amendment will not change any of the land use consistency relationships that were approved when the project was rezoned to PUD in 1992 since the multi-family residential density and use remains the same. In addition, the proposed PUD amendment is compatible with the adjacent properties subject to staff stipulations and landscaping as noted above. Utilitx Infrastructure - The site is accessible to a public sanitary sewer and potable water supply and shall be conveyed to Collier County pursuant to County Ordinance No. 97-17. This amendment will not change or adversely impact the previous approval. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) a recommendation of approval of Petition PUDA-2002-AR-2028 subject to staff stipulations that are contained in the attached Ordinance and including the stipulations as noted belo;v. Since the petitioner and staff are in disagreement concerning these stipulations, the petitioner has proposed the following exemptions. 1. Petitioner's request: That the project be relieved from the requirement of providing sidewalks due to Iow intensity and character of the proiect and due to the Iow traffic volumes, which do not warrant separate pedestrian areas. Staff recommendation: At the time of site development plan reviesv~ sidewalks and bike path locations shall be provided throughout the proiect since there are a total of 208 multi-family units located close tollether on only 15.48 acres. In addition~ the existinl~ developed portion of the proiect has provided sidewalks. 2. Petitioner's request: Reduce the 15-foot landscape buffer along the eastern property line since there is not sufficient room area between the internal PUD road and eastern property line (that borders a private school) to meet this requirement. The buffer area is proposed to be reduced to a minimum of 5 feet. ^GF. JUL 3 0 Staff recommendation: A 15-foot landscape buffer along the eastern property line~ except along the lake that is adiacent to the access road where it may be reduced to 10-feet. 3. Petitioner's request: Reduce the requirement for a 20-foot wide overall landscape buffer (Type "A") between the existing multi-family buildings and the proposed two story multifamily structures since the existing 3-stow multi-family structures {Phase I) and the proposed two stow multi-family structures are both multi-family structures and are part of the same PUD project, the petitioner is requesting an exception from this standard. Staff recommendation: Provide a 20-foot wide overall landscape buffer (Type "A") between the existing multi-family buildings and the proposed two story multifamilv structures. 4. Petitioner's request: Reduce the "structural buffers" around any wetlands, extending at least 15 feet landward from the edge of the wetland preserves in all places and average 25 feet from the landward edge of wetlands since the currently approved site development plan and South Florida Water Management District Permit allows {and recorded as an easement), a setback of 20 feet from the preserve boundary. Staff recommendation: A buffer shall be provided around any wetlands~ extending at least 15 feet landward from the edge of the wetland preserves in all places and average 25 feet from the landward edge of wetlands. Where natural buffers are not possible~ structural buffers shall be provided in accordance with the State of Florida Environmental Resources Permit Rules and be subiect to review and approval by the Current Planning Environmental Staff. JUL 3 0 2002 .,. [z/ PREPARED BY: RA~/BELLOWS, CHIEF PLANNER DATE CURRENT PLANNING SECTION REVIEWED BY: SUSAN MURRAY, AICP, INTERIM DI~dECTOR DATE PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT APPROVED BY: ., JOSEPH K. SCHMITT, ADMINISTRATOR DAI?~ COMMUNITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS. --Staff Report for the July 18, 2002 CCPC meeting. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: KENNETH L. ABERNATHY, CHAIRMAN RVB/rb/STAFF REPORTIAR-2028 JUL 3 0 2002 FINDINGS FOR PUD PUDA-02-AR-2028 Section 2.7.3.2.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code requires the Planning Commission to make a finding as to the PUD Master Plans' compliance with the following criteria: 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. Intensifying land development patterns produces economics of scale relative to public utilities, facilities and services, which are currently available in this area. Jurisdictional reviews by County staff support the manner and pattern of development proposed for the subject property. Development conditions contained in the Cypress Glen PUD document give assurance that all infrastructures will be developed and are consistent with County regulations. Any inadequacies that require supplementing the PUD document will be recommended to the Board of County Commissioners as conditions of approval by staff. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Documents submitted with the application provide evidence of unified control. The PUD document makes appropriate provisions for continuing operation and maintenance of common areas. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). The subject petition has been found consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the GMP. A review of consistency relationships with elements of the GMP is as follows: The currently approved PUD allows residential uses, which is consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. This amendment will not change that consistency finding (See Staff report). 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. Exhibit A AGENDA ITE~ && ,, J U L 3 0 2002 The subject 29.7-acre PUD has been designed to provide an architectural design and development standards that reflect the approved Cypress Glen residential character. In addition, landscaping has been provided to buffer the adjacent properties. The PUD Master Plan has been designed to optimize internal land use relationship through the use of various forms of open space separation and preserve areas. External relationships are automatically regulated by the Land Development Code to assure harmonious relationships between projects. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The amount of open space set aside by this project is consistent with the provisions of the Land Development Code. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. The proposed PUD amendment will not adversely impact the timing or sequence of development that is currently alloxved under the existing zoning. Furthermore, the adopted concurrency requirements ensure that further LOS degradation is not alloxved or the LOS deficiency is corrected. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. Ability, as applied in this context, implies supporting infrastructure such as wastewater disposal system, potable water supplies, characteristics of the property relative to hazards, and capacity of roads, is supportive of conditions emanating from urban development. This assessment is described at length in the staff report adopted by the CCPC. Relative to this amendment, the reduction in density and intensity of use of the subject property will not adversely impact any previous determination of consistency with the Groxvth Management Plan. The project is also timely because the supporting infrastructure is available. 8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. This criteria essentially requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. The development standards in this PUD are similar to those standards. FINDINGS FOR PUDA~02-AR-2028/RVB/rb JUL 3 0 2 L REZONE FINDINGS PETITION PUDA-02-AR-2028 Section 2.7.2.5. of the Collier County Land Development Code requires that the report and recommendations of the Planning Commission to the Board of County Commissioners shall show that the Planning Commission has studied and considered the proposed change in relation to the following, where applicable: 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives & policies of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan. Development Orders deemed consistent with all applicable elements of the FLUE of the GMP should be considered a positive relationship. The proposed development is in compliance with the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. The density permitted xvithin this Cypress Glen PUD is consistent with the Density Rating System contained in the Groxvth Management Plan. 2. The existing land use pattern; To the east are the developed lands of the Community School and its entrance road. To the north are the undeveloped preserve areas that are part of the Barron Collier High School holdings. To the south across Pine Ridge Road are the developed multi-family residential areas of the Kensington PUD. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts; The parcel is of sufficient size that it will not result in an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. It is also consistent with expected land uses by virtue of its consistency with the FLUE. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. The existing PUD district boundaries are logically drawn and they are consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. The proposed amendment will not change these boundaries. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. The proposed PUD Amendment is appropriate since the approved land uses will not change with this amendment. It is also compatible with the surrounding lands. EXHIBIT "B" Iqo._ ] 7 ? ' JUL 3 0 Iq .. 6. Whether the proposed change svill adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood; The proposed development standards (i.e. setbacks and landscaping) made a condition of approval will go a long way towards offsetting any potential adverse influences by the Cypress Glen PUD on the adjacent lands. In addition, the development standards and other conditions for approval have been promulgated and designed to ensure the least amount of adverse impact on adjacent and nearby developments. Recommended mitigation actions should serve to ameliorate impact on the adjacent school properties. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. Evaluation of this project took into account the requirement for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP and was found consistent. As a result, staff has determined that the proposed amendment will not excessively increase traffic congestion. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem; The Land Development Code specifically addresses prerequisite development standards that are designed to reduce the risk of flooding on nearby properties. New development in and of itself is not supposed to increase flooding potential on adjacent property over and above what would occur without development. However, as urban intensification in the absence of commensurate improvement to inter-county drainage appurtenances may increase the risk of flooding in areas when the drainage outfall condition is inadequate. In summary, every project approved in Collier County involving the utilization of land for some land use activity is scrutinized and required to mitigate all sub-surface drainage generated by developmental activities as a condition of approval. This project xvas reviewed for drainage relationships and design and construction plans are required to meet County standards as a condition of approval. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas; All projects in Collier County are subject to the development standards that apply generally and equally to all zoning districts concerning the need to provide the required open space. The subject development standards are designed to ensure that light penetration and circulation of air does not adversely affect adjacent areas. JUL 3 0 2002 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area; Typically urban intensification increases the value of contiguous underutilized land. However, this is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results, which may be internal or external to the subject property that can affect property values. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning, however zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since value determination by law is driven by market value. The mere fact that a property is given a new zoning designation may or may not affect value. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations; The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in the zoning division of the LDC is that their sound application when combined with the administrative site development plan approval process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in a deterrence to improvement of adjacent property. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare; The proposed amendment to the Cypress Glen PUD complies with the Growth Management Plan, which are public policy statements supporting zoning actions when they are consistent with said plans. In light of this fact the proposed change does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning; The subject property can be developed in accordance with the existing zoning, however to do so would deny this petitioner of the opportunity to maximize the development potential of the site as made possible by its consistency relationship with the Growth Management Plan. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County; The proposed amendment is compatible with the approved project, which is designed in a manner that is compatible with nearby Community School. It is also consistent with the GMP. A~A~ 17/-t - JUL 3 0 2002 3 ~ 15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. There are many sites, which are zoned to accommodate the proposed development. This is not the determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness of a rezoning decision. The determinants of zoning are consistency with all elements of the GMP, compatibility, adequacy of infrastructure and to some extent the timing of the action and all of the above criteria. Lastly, the proposed amendment to the approved PUD will not change the approved land use. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed, zoning classification. The extent of site alteration will be determined as a function of obtaining a Site Development Plan approval to execute the PUD's development strategy. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier Count)' Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier Count)' Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended. A multi-disciplined team responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP has reviexved this petition and they have found it consistent with the GMP. The conditions of approval have been incorporated into the PUD document. Staff reviews for adequacy of public services and levels of service determined that required infrastructure meets with GMP established relationships. REZONE FINDINGS/AR-2028/RVB/rb JUL 3 0 2002. I May 14, 2002 William L. Klohn Cypress Glen Development C¢)rporadon 2180 Immokalee R. oad #508 Naples FL 34110 Dear Bill: Congratulations on the recent groundbreaking ['or the Cypress Glen Village townhouse development. This letter will confwm that The Community School consents to your development company plating., irrigating and m0Jntaining the five-foot strip of land that is owned by The Community School. This strip ofhnd is located on the Community School's west property line, which is along the School's access road to?ine Kidge Road in the m-ca near the Cypress Glen lake. 'l~nis con.~ent is x~rlth the tmderstandmg that Cypress Glen Development Corporation or the Cypress Glen M,'~tcr Association L,~ responsible for all payment of planting the plmat mxterials, irrigation sys~m and monthly maintenance to include water and wimming. Please sign below on behalf of Cypress Glen Development Corpom6.on axed the Mastrm ,~ssoc~fion related to their future ,'mci c)ngoh'~g commitment~ noted above. Director of ~v~nt~ William L ~ohn, President W'dH~-n L. ~Cloh'~, President Cypress Glen Development Corporation Cypress Glen Ma.~ter Association JUL 3 0 2002 AMENDMENT APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR: PUD PUDA-2002-AR-2028 PROJECT #2002010040 Petition No.: Date Petition Received: DATE: 1/28/02 RAY BELLOWS Commission District: Planner Assigned: ABOVE TO BE COMPLETED BY STAFF 1. General Information: Name of Applicant(s) Cypress Glen Development Corporation Applicant's Mailing Address 2180 Immokalee Road. Suite 308 City Naples State FL Zip 34110 Applicant's Telephone # 941-594-8700 Fax # 941-596-4399 Name of Agent Robert Duane Firm Hole Montes Inc. Agent's Mailing Address 950 Encore Way City Naples State FL Zip34110 Agent's Telephone # 941-254-2000 Fax # 941-254-2099 COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING SERVICES/CURRENT PLANNING - ,~rr.~_.~ 2800 N. HORSESHOE DRIVE-NAPLES, FL 34104 PHONE (941) 403-2400fFAX (941) 643-6968 I~_, I'[ ' ' JUL 3 0 2002 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 10/98 PAGE Complete the following for ali Association(s) affiliated with this petition. (Provide additional sheets if necessary) Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address City State ~ Zip. Name of Homeox~q~er Association: Mailing Address City State __ Zip. Name of Homeox~er Association: Mailing Address City State ~ Zip Name of Master Association: Cypress Glen Master Association Mailing Address 2180 Immokalee Rd. City Naples State FL Zip34110 Name of Civic Association: Property Owner Association of North Collier County Mailing Address 141 West Ave. City Naples,__ State F~L Zip 3410____~8__ 2. Disclosure of Interest Information: a. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary). Name and Address Percentage of Ownership JUL 3 0 2002 PAGE 2 OF 17 b. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each. Name and Address, and Office Percentage of Stock MDG Capital Corporation 100% 2180 Immokalee Road. Ste. 308 Naples, FL 34110 William H. Klohn. Pres.. Sec. Patrick McCuan. Chairman. Treasurer c. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. Name and Address Percentage of Interest d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners. Name and Address Percentage of O~anership e. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership Date of Contract: JUL g 0 2002 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC ItEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 10/98 p~.~__ PAGE 3 f. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust. Name and Address g. Date subject property acquired (X) leased ( ): Term of lease yrs./mos. If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option: and date option terminates: ., or anticipated closing date h. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. 3. Detailed le~oal description of the properh' covered by the application: (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page.) If request involves change to more than one zoning district, include separate legal description for property involved in each district. Applicant .... shall submit four (4) copies of a recent survey (completed within the last six months, maximum 1" to 400' scale) if required to do so at the pre-application meeting. NOTE: The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If questions arise concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed survey may be required. Section: 12 Township: 49S Range: 25E Lot: Block: Subdivision: Plat Book Page #:__ Property I.D.#:00255400002 Metes & Bounds Description: See attached deed 4. Size of propertY: 754 ft. X 1245 ft. = Total Sq. Ft. 1.293.732 Acres 29.7 5. Address/l~eneral location of subject property: North side of Pine Ridee Road, West of Livingston Road - JUL APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC IIEARING FOR ptlD REZONE - 10/98 ~. PAGE 4 M 7 6. Adiacent zoning and land use: Zoning Land use N RSF-3 Preserve area for Barron Collier Hieh School S PUD Residential E CF CommuniW School W A Preserve area for Barron Collier Hi~,h School Does the ov,?ner of the subject property own property contiguous to the subject property? If so, give complete legal description of entire contiguous property. (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page). Section: No Township: Range: Lot: Block: Subdivision: Plat Book Page #: Property I.D.#: 00255400002 Metes & Bounds Description: See Attached Deed ?. Rezone Request: This application is requesting a rezone from the PUD/ST/WS4 zoning district(s) to the PUD/ST/WS4 zoning district(s). Present Use of the Property: Four existin~ condominium buildino~s/multi-familv Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property: Multi-family townhouses 8. Evaluation Criteria: Pursuant to Section 2.7.2.5 and Sec. 2:7.3.2.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code, staff's analysis and recommendation to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission's recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners shall be based upon consideration of the applicable criteria noted below. Provide a narrative statement describing the rezone request with specific reference to the criteria noted below. Include any backup materials and documentation in support of the . request. ~'c'~,~x~t~ APPLICATION FOR PUBIJC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE-10/98 JUL 3 0 20~2 PAGE 50 17 I~,._,~q .... Standard Rezone Considerations (LDC Section 2. 7.2.5) 1. l~Iq~ether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and future land use map and the elements of the growth management plan. 2. The existing land use pattern. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. 4. llq~ether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the proper~ for the proposed change. 5. [U~ether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment O'ezonO necessary. 6. lIq~ether the proposed change will adversely i~uence living conditions in the neighborhood. 7. l[~hether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create O~pes of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected Opes of vehicular traffic, including activi~ during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safe~. 8. ~'~q~ether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. 9. [[7,ether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. 10. IFhether the proposed change will seriously affect properO, values in the adjacent area. 11. H7wther the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent proper~ in accordance with existing regulations. 12. tlq~ether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public we~are. 13. lJq, ether there are substantial reasons why the proper~ cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. 14. IW, ether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the co~n~. 15.I~ether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the coun~ for the proposed use in districts ah'eady permitting such use. 16. The physical characteristics of the proper~ and the degree of site alteration which would be requh'ed to make the proper~ usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning class~cation. ~ I~ , APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC IIEARING FOR PIID REZONE - 10~8 JUL 3 0 ~2 PAGE D~ 17 ~ 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County growth management plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier Coun~ Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch. 106, art. Iii, as amended. 18. Such other factor& standards, or criteria that the board of counq commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safe~, and welfare. PUD Rezone Considerations (LDC Section 2. 7.3. Z5) 1. The suitabiIi~ of the area for the ~pe and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding area& traffic and access, drainage, sewe~; water; and other utilities. 2. Adequacy of evidence of un~ed control and suimbili~ of anyproposed agreements, contract, or other instrument& or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Findings and recommendations of this ~pe shall be made only after consultation with the coun~ attorney. 3. Co~(ormi~ of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the growth management plan. 4. The internal and external compatibili~ of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictio~,s on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. 7.The abili~ of the subject proper~ and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. 8. Conformi~ with PUD regulations, or as to desirable mod~cations of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such mod~cations of just~ed as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. 9. Deed Restrictions: The CounW is legally precluded from enforcing deed restrictions, however, m~y co--unities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact the civic or prope~ omers association in the area for which ~is use is being requested in order to asce~ain whether or not the request is affected by existing deed rest~ ~*; - APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC ,{EAR~G FOg PUD REZONE-1008 JUL 3 O 2002 PAGE )F 10. Previous land use petitions on the subiect properly: To your knowledge, has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year.'? If so, what was the nature of that ~ hearing? N/A 11. Additional Submittal requirements: In addition to this completed application, the following shall be submitted in order for your application to be deemed sufficient, unless otherwise waived during the pre-application meeting. a. A copy of the pre-application meeting notes; b. If this rezone is being requested for a specific use, provide twenty (20) copies of a 24" x 36" conceptual site plan [and one reduced 8½" x I 1" copy of site plan], drawn to a maximum scale of 1 inch equals 400 feet, depicting the following [Additional copies of the plan may be requested upon completion of staff evaluation for distribution to the Board and various advisory boards such as the Environmental Advisory Board (EAB), or CCPC]; · all existing and proposed structures and the dimensions thereof, · provisions for existing and/or proposed ingress and egress (including pedestrian ingress and egress to the site and the structure(s) on site), · all existing and/or proposed parking and loading areas [include matrix indicating required and provided parking and loading, including required parking for the disabled], · required yards, open space and preserve areas, · proposed locations for utilities (as well as location of existing utility services to the site), · proposed and/or existing landscaping and buffering as may be required by the County, a. An architectural rendering of any proposed structures. b. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), as required by Section 3.8. of the Land Development Code (LDC), or a request for waiver if appropriate. c. Whether or not an EIS is required, two copies of a recent aerial photograph, (taken within the previous twelve months), minimum scale of one inch equals 400 feet, shall be submitted. Said aerial shall identify plant and/or wildlife habitats and their boundaries. Such identification shall be consistent with Florida Department of Transportation Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System. Additionally, a calculation of the acreage (or square feet) of native vegetation on site, by area, and a calculation and location(s) of the required portion of native vegetation to ,o ,,,'o ...... -' (per LDC Section 3.9.5.5.4.). ~ l'"'l ~-~ APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC IIEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 10198 -- ' PAGE 8 :~?JUL 3,~0 ~2 d. Statement of utility provisions (with all required attachments and sketches); e. A Traffic Impact Statement (TIS), unless waived at the pre-application meeting; f. A historical and archeological survey or waiver application if property is located within an area of historical or archaeological probability (as identified at pre- application meeting); ~t. Any additional requirements as may be applicable to specific conditional uses and identified during the pre-application meeting, including but not limited to any required state or federal permits. h. An electronic version of the PUD on a disk as part of this submittal package. JUL 3 0 2002 APPLICATION FOR PI_IBLIC ItEARING FOR Pt~D REZONE- 10/98 TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT (TIS): A TIS is required unless waived at the pre-application meeting. The TIS required may be either a major or minor as detemfined at the pre-application meeting. Please note the folloxving with regard to TIS submittals: MINOR TIS: Generally required for rezone requests for property less than 10 acres in size, although based on the intensity or unique character of a petition, a major TIS may be required for petition often acres or less. MAJOR TIS: Required for all other rezone requests. A minor TIS shall include the following: I. Trip Generation: Annual Average Daily Traffic (at build-out) Peak Hour (AADT) Peak Season Daily Traffic Peak Hour (PSDT) 2. Trip Assigmnent: Within Radius of Development Influence (RDI) 3. Existing Traffic: Within RDI AADT Volumes PSDT Volumes Level of Service (LOS) 4. Impact of the proposed use on affected major thoroughfares, including any anticipated changes in level of service (LOS). 5. Any proposed improvements (to the site or the external right-of-way) such as providing or eliminating an ingress/egress point, or providing turn or decel lanes or other improvements. 6. Describe any proposal to mitigate the negative impacts on the transportation system. 7. For Rezones Only: State how this request is consistent with the applicable policies of the Traffic Circulation Element (TCE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP), including policies 1.3, 1.4, 4.4, 5.1,5.2, 7.2 and 7.3. A Major TIS shall address all of the items listed above (for a Minor TIS, and shall also include an analysis of the following: 1. Intersection Analysis 2. Background Traffic 3. Future Traffic 4. Through Traffic 5. Planned/Proposed Roadway Improvements 6. Proposed Schedule (Phasing) of Development JUL 3 0 2002 AeeL]C~T{o~ Fo~ PUBLIC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 108N '~ PAG~ ~uu~ ~7 TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT (TIS) STANDARDS: The following standards shall be used in preparing a TIS for submittal in conjunction with a conditional use or rezone petition: :1.. Trip Generation: Provide the total traffic generated by the project for each link within the project's Radius of Development Influence (RDI) in conformance with the acceptable traffic engineering principles. The rates published in the latest edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Report shall be used unless documentation by the petitioner or the County justifies the use of alternative rates. 2. Trip Assignment: Provide a map depicting the assigl~rnent to the network, of those trips generated by the proposed project. The assignment shall be made to all links within the RDI. Both am~ual average and peak seasonal traffic should be depicted. 3. Existing Traffic: Provide a map depicting the current traffic conditions on all links within the RDI. The AADT, PSDT, and LOS shall be depicted for all links within the RDI. 4. Level of Service (LOS): The LOS of a roadway shall be expressed in terms of the applicable Collier County Generalized Daily Se~wice Volumes as set forth in the TCE of the GMP. 5. Radius of Development Influence (RDI): The TIS shall cover the least of the following two areas: a) an area as set forth below; or, b) the area in which traffic assignments from the proposed project on the major thoroughfares exceeds one percent of the LOS "C". Land Use Distance Residential 5 Miles or as required by DRI Other (commercial, industrial, institutional, etc.) 0 - 49,999 Sq. Ft. 2 Miles 50,000 - 99, 999 Sq. Ft. 3 Miles 100,000 - 199, 999 Sq. Ft. 4 Miles 200,000 - 399, 999 Sq. Ft 5 Miles 400,000 & up 5 Miles In describing the RDI the TIS shall provide the measurement in road miles from the proposed project rather than a geometric radius. 6. Intersection Analysis: An intersection analysis is required for all intersections within the RDI where the sum of the peak-hour critical lane volume is projected to exceed 1,200 Vehicles Per Hour (VPH). APPLICATION FOR VUB/IC nEARING FOR PUD REZONE-10/98 ~. JO[-e-'~ .":k3 0 2~2 PAGE 1 OF l~Tt. &~) __ 7. Background Traffic: The effects of previously approved but undeveloped or partially developed projects which may affect major thoroughfares within the RDI of the proposed '~' project shall be provided. This infom~ation shall be depicted on a map or, alternatively, in a listing of those projects and their respective characteristics. 8. Future Traffic: An estimate of the effects of traditional increases in traffic resulting from potential development shall be provided. Potential development is that which may be developed maximally under the effective Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and the Collier County Land Development Code. This estimate shall be for the projected development areas within the projects RDI. A map or list of such lands with potential traffic impact calculations shall be provided. 9. Through Traffic: At a minimum, increases in through traffic shall be addressed through the year 2015. The methodology used to derive the estimates shall be provided. It may be desirable to include any additional documentation and backup data to support the estimation as well. 10. Planned/Proposed Roadwa'v Improvements: All proposed or planned roadxvay improvements located within the RDI should be identified. A description of the funding commitments shall also be included. 11. Project Phasing: When a project phasing schedule is dependent upon proposed roadway improvements, a phasing schedule may be included as part of the TIS. If the traffic impacts of a project are mitigated through a phasing schedule, such a phasing schedule may be made a condition of any approval. TlS FORM RVB[RJM I0/17/97 JUL 3 0 2OO2 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC ltEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 10/98 PAGE 12 OF 17 STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS FOR PUD REZONE REQUEST 1.. NAME OF APPLICANT: Cypress Glen Development Corp. 2. MAILING ADDRESS: 2180 lmmokalee Road CITY Naples STATE FL ZIP 34110 3 . ADDRESS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY (IF AVAILABLE): 4. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Section: 12 Township: 495 Range: 25E Lot: Block: __ Subdivision: Cypress Glen Plat Book Page #: Property I.D.#:00255400002 Metes & Bounds Description: See attached deed 5. TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED (Check applicable system): a. COUNTY UTILITY SYSTEM [~ b. CITY UTILITY SYSTEM [] c. FRANCHISED UTILITY SYSTEM ~-] PROVIDE NAME d. PACKAGE TREATMENT PLANT [--] (GPD capaciW) e. SEPTIC SYSTEM [--] 6. TYPE OF WATER SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED: a. COUNTY UTILITY SYSTEM [~ b. CITY UTILITY SYSTEM [--] c. FRANCHISED UTILITY SYSTEM I'-] PROVIDE NAME ~1,~._ ^2'fDa d. PRIVATE SYSTEM (WELL) ~] ~._ .,[ ~"71_JA JUL 3 0 APPLICATION FOR PUBI.IC HEARING FOR PUD REZONE - I0/98 --~.a.~j PAGE 13 £ 27 Phase II 7. TOTAL POPULATION TO BE SERVED: 120 units x 1.5 = 180 8. PEAK AND AVERAGE DAILY DEMANDS: A. WATER-PEAK 1~732 ~r}h AVERAGE DAILY 27~720 l~pd B. SEWER-PEAK 975 eph AVERAGE DAILY 18~000 gpd 9. IF PROPOSING TO BE CONNECTED TO COLLIER COUNTY REGIONAL WATER SYSTEM, PLEASE PROVIDE THE DATE SERVICE IS EXPECTED TO BE REQUIRED: September 2002 . 10. NARRATIVE STATEMENT: Provide a brief and concise narrative statement and schematic drawing of sewage treatment process to be used as well as a specific statement regarding the method of affluent and sludge disposal. If percolation ponds are to be used, then percolation data and soil involved shall be provided from tests prepared and certified by a professional engineer. 11. COLLIER COUNTY UTILITY DEDICATION STATEMENT: If the project is located within the services boundaries of' Collier County's utility service system, written notarized statement shall be provided agreeing to dedicate to Collier County Utilities the water distribution m~d sewage collection facilities within the project area upon completion of the construction of these facilities in accordance with all applicable County ordinances in effect at the at time. This statement shall also include an agreement that the applicable system development charges and connection fees will be paid to the County Utilities Division prior to the issuance of building permits by the County. If applicable, the statement shall contain shall contain an agreement to dedicate the appropriate utility easements for ser¥ing the water and sewer systems. 12. STATEMENT OF AVAILABILITY CAPACITY FROM OTHER PROVIDERS: Unless waived or otherwise provided for at the pre-application meeting, if the project is to receive sewer or potable water services from any provider other than the County, a statement from that provider indicating that there is adequate capacity to serve the project shall be provided. Utility Provision Statement RJM 10Il?D? JUL 3 0 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC ltEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 10/98 [~' PAGE 14 OF 17 PUD REZONE APPLICATION SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION PACKET! REQUIREMENTS # or NOT COPIES REQUIRED REQUIRED 1. Completed Application 20* X 2. Copy of Deed(s) and list identifying Owner(s) and all 2* X Partners if a Corporation 3. Completed Owner/AgentAffidavit, Notarized 2* X 4. Pre-application notes/minutes 20* X 5. Conceptual Site Plans 20* X 6. Environmental Impact Statement- (EIS) 4 Waiver 7. Aerial Photograph - (with habitat areas identified) 5* X 8. Completed Utilit)' Provisions Statement (with required 4 X attachments and sketches) 9. Traffic Impact Statement- (TIS) 4 Waiver 10. Historical & Archaeological Survey or Waiver 4 Waiver Application 11. Copies of State and/or Federal Permits 4 N.A. 12. Architectural Rendering of Proposed Structure(s) 4 Waiver 13. Application Fee and Data Conversion Fee Check shall . be made payable to Collier Count)' Board of Commissioners 14. Other Requirements - * Documents required for Long-Range Planning Review * 1 additional copy for affordable housing As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. Agent/Apphcant Signature Date ~"'~ JUL 3 0 2002 APPIACATION FOR PUBLIC llEARING FOR PUD REZONE - 10/98 PAGE 1: OF 12/18/01 UTE 16:55 FAX 19412542099 HOLE MONTES [~0~. Agent/Applicant Signature Date AFFIDA FIT }Ve/I, ~.ff//~g~.~.~('o~., being .first duly sworn, depose and say that we/I am/are the owners of the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing; that all the answers to the questions in this application, including the disclosure of interest information, all sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application, are honest and true to the best of our knowledge and belief. We/I understand that the information requested on this application must be complete and accurate and that the content of this form, whether computer generated or County printed shall not be altered. Public hearings will not be advertised until this application is deemed complete, and all required information has been ,ubmitted. ar our/my representative in any matters regarding this Petition. $'{~hatu'rb of Property Owner Signature of Properly Owner Typed or Printed Name of Owner Typed or Printed Name of Owner The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this / ~ day of . :/,~ ~ _ . ~e or has produced ~ Identification. . State of Florida Gi~mre of Notary ~ublic - State of Coun~ of Collier Florida) ~My C~ssi~ CC738872 *-.~e ~plres ~y 3 2~2 .... .(print, pe, or Etamp PAO~ 17 E73 0 2428972 OR: 2508 PG: 1573 Tills INSTRUMENT I'I~I'~D WITItOUT UC l]~ 2t. O0 LEGAL OPTION OF TITLE BY: DOC-.N D~vid N. ~orr~son, Esq. Morrison & Conroy, P.A. RORRISON i C0R~0I 3838 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 402 H)8 ~I~XI T~ g ItOZ Naples, Florida 34103 WARRANTY DEED THIS INDENTURE,. ma_de this ~x'74~ day of~/~'' x , 1999, twee, 31, 1997, whose address is 3838 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 414, Naples, Florida 34103 ("Gra9. for"), and CYPRESS GLEN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, a Florida corporation, whose address is 3838 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 414, Naples, Florida 34103 ("Grantee"). WITNESSETH: That said Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum ofTen and 00/100 Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration to said Grantor in hand paid by said Grantee, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained and sold to the said Grantee, and Grantee's heirs and assigns forever, the following described land, situate, lying and being in Collier County, Florida, to-wit: See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. Subject to real estate taxes for 1999; zoning and use restxictions imposed by governmental authority; restrictions and easements common to the subdivision; and outstanding oil, gas and mineral interests of record, if any. Subject to that certain Real Estate Mortgage, Assignment and Security Agreement from R.FA of Southwest Florida, Inc., a Florida corporation, to Gulf Coast National Bank recorded on February 5, 1997 at Official Records Book 2280, Page 822, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, in the original principal amount of Three Million Five Hundred Thousand and 00/I00 Dollars ($3,500,000.00). Subject also to that certain Mortgage in favor of Patrick M¢Cuan, Trustee of the MDG-CPK Cypress Glen Land Trust dated January 31, 1997 given by PYA of Southwest Florida, Inc., a Florida corporation, dated January 31, 1997 and recorded in Official Records Book 2280, Page 847, Public Records of collier County, Florida, securing a principal indebtedness of One Million and 00/100 Dollars ($1,000,000.00), as amended. Subject also to that certain Mortgage in favor of MDG-CPK Cypress Glen, Inc., a Florida corporation, given by KFA of Southwest Florida, Inc., a Florida corporation, dated January 31, 1997, and recorded in Official Records book 2280, Page 1518, Public Records of Collier County, Florida, securing a principal indebtedness of Five Hundred Twenty Five Thousand Three Hundred Sixty and 04/100 Dollars ($525,360.04). Property Identification Number: 00255400002 ' And said Grantor does hereby fully warrant the title to said land, and will defend the .same against thc lawful claims ofall persons whomsocvcr. REOORD 8, Iq~aTURN TO: PUDA-2002-AR-2028 MORRI$ON & CONROY PROJECT #2002010040 3838 TAMIAMI TFI^II- NORTH, STE 402 DATE: 1/28/02 Pg' NAPLES. FL 34103 PAY BELLOWS IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has hereunto set Grantor's hand and seal the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in our presence: ~Vime, ss # 1 · _ ..., PATRICK MCCUAN, Trustee of the MDG- t/7~.~ f, 75~/'/9e'_ /~. /~, C./3a rd 5 CPR Cypress Glen Land Trust, dated (Type of Print Name) January 31, 1997 Witness #2 (Type or Print Name) STATE COUNTY OF ~~ The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me thL~._~ y o ' 1999 by PATRICK MCCUAN, Trustee of the MDG-CPR Cypress Glen Janua. ry 31, 1997, who is personally known to me or who has produced~C.-~ dy, .,, n., ~ x_a (type of identification) as identification and who did (did ..... ~o-'~) take an oath. NOTE: Ifa type of identification is not inserted in the blank provided, then the person executing fids instrument was personally known to me. Ifthe words ia the parenthetical "did not" are not circled, then the person executing fids instrument did hake an oath. ....: '... '-.' '.).' ........ .'" ." ." Signature '...':. :-.':,'.;:'".:"" ~,/n ?t .,x-?', n,oj · : : (Type or print Namej?fAcknowledger) ":- '"'"' "' ~':-i.:'"' l.; ;-'~.7 ~"ritle or Ra~ .. ' -(Serial Number, if any) Exhibit "A" The East 1/2 of th~ Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 and the East 1/2 of the West 1/2 of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 12, Township 49 South, Range'25 East, Collier County, Florida, less the South 75 feet previously conveyed to Collier County for highway purposes. Less and Except the property described on attached Exhibit A-! and the property described on attached Exhibit A-2. Plus Unit 115, Cypress Glen I, a Condominium, according to the Declaration of Condominium thereof, recorded in Official Records Book 2371, Page 1527 through 1591, inclusive, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. · Plus Units 414, 418, 419, 422 and 423, Cypress Glen IV, a Condominium," according to the Declaration of Condominium thereof recorded in Official Records Book 2393, Page 2327, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. JUL 3 0 2002. " '" Exhibit A-1 Cypress Glen I, a Condominium Parcels of land lying in the East 1/2 of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 and the East 1/2 of the West 1/2 of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 12, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida and being more particularly described by mete and bounds as follows: Commencing at the intersection of the East line of the East 1/2 of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 and the South line of said Section 12, also being the centerline of Pine Ridge Road. (C.R. #896); 05" distance of 75.00 feet to the North right-of-way of thence North 00 degrees 26' West a said Pine Ridge Road; thence North 52 degrees 52' 20" West along said Northerly right-of-way a distance of 666.70 feet; thence North 00 degrees 07' 40" East a distance of 41.99 feet to a point, said point hereinafter to be known as Point "A"; thence continue North 00 degrees 07' 40" East a distance of 3823 feet to the Point of : Beginning; thence North 36 degrees 28' 04" West a distance of 72.33 feet; thence North 53 d.egrees 31' 56' East a distance of 225.67 feet; thence South 36 degrees 28' 04' East a distance of 72.33 feet; -'-' thence South 53 degrees 31' 56" West a distance of 225.67 feet to the Point of Beginning; thence returning to the aforementioned Point "A" North 53 degrees 31' 56' East a distance of 79.56 feet to the Point of Beginning; thence North 36 degrees 28' 04" West'a distance of 22.00 feet; c thence North 53 degrees 31' 56' East a distance of 90.00 feet; thence South 36 degrees 28' 04" East a distance of 22.00 feet; thence South 53 degrees 31' 56" West a distance of 90.00 feet to the Point of Beginning; thence returning to the aforesaid Point 'A~ North 53 degrees 31' 56' East a distance of .-, 179.56 feet to the Point of Beginning; thence North 36 degrees 28' 04' West a distance of 22.00 feet; thence North 53 degrees 53' 31' 56' East a distance of 90.00 feet; '-- then South 36 degrees 28' 04" East a distance of 22.00 feet; thence South 53 degrees 31' 56" West a distance of 90.00 feet to the Point of Beginning. JUL 3 0 2002 .-~ Exhibit Cypress Glen IV, a Condominium Parcels of land lying in the East 1/2 of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 and the East 1/2 of the West 1/2 of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 12, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida and being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: Commencing at the intersection of the East line of the East 1/2 of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 and the South line of said Section 12, also being the centerline of Pine Ridge Road, (C.tL #896): thence North 00 degrees 26' 05" West a distance of 75.00 feet to the North right-of-~vay of said Pine Ridge Road; thence North 52 degrees 52' 20" West along said Northerly right-of-way a distance of 323.76 feet; thence North 00 degrees 07' 40n East a distance of 301.54 feet to a point, said point hereinafter to be known as Point thence continue North 00 degrees 07' 40" East a distance of 14.81 feet to the Point of Beginning; thence North 36 degrees 28' 04' West a distance of 72.33 feet; thence North 53 degrees 31' 56~ East a distance of 225.67 feet; thence South 36 degrees 28' 04" East a distance of 72.33 feet; thence South 53 degrees 31' 56" West a distance of 225.67 feet to the Point of Beginnin.r ¢ C c JUL 3 0 2002 MDG CAPITAL CORPORATION 2180 Immok~l*e Ro~! S~e. $08, N~ples FL $4110 (941)594-8700 ph (941)$96-4599 January 17, 2002 George Hermanson Hole Montes, Inc. 950 Encore Way Naples FL 34110 RE: Dear George: Per Laura's request, the following is information you requested about our corporations: MDG Capital Corporation: William L. Klohn - Pres., Sec., Treasurer Patrick McCuan - Chairman Shareholders: MDG Companies of Naples - 50% William L. Klohn 1996 Irrevocable Trust- 50% Cypress Glen Development Corporation: : William L. Klohn - Pres., Sec. Patrick McCuan - Chairman, Treasurer Shareholders: MDG Capital Corporation - 100% Under separate delivery, enclosed is the Warranty Deed for Cypress Glen. Let me know if you need further information. Sincerely, MDG CAPITAL CORPORATION i~lo.~~.~U_~ Denise Larson ,1 JUL. 3 0 2002 Enc. P~. ~ ORDINANCE NO. 02- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 91-102, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH INCLUDES THE COMPREHENS1XTE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS MAP NLFMBER 9512S AND BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM "PUD" TO "PUD" PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT KNO\VN AS CYPRESS GLEN, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PINE RIDGE ROAD (C.R. 896), WEST OF LWINGSTON ROAD (C.R. 881), IN SECTION 12, TOWNSH~ 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORDA, CONSISTING OF 29.7+ ACRES; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NqJMBER 92-83, THE FORMER CYPRESS GLEN PUD; AND BY PROVDING AN EFFECTWE DATE. WHEREAS, Robert Duane of Hole Montes, Inc., representing Cypress Clen Development Corporation, petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY the Board of County Commissione" of Collier County, Florida: SECTION ONE: The Zoning Classification of the herein described real property located in Section 12, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from "PUD" to "PUD" Planned Unit Development in accordance with the PUD Document, attached hereto as Exhibit "A", which is incorporated herein and by reference made part hereof. The Official Zoning Atlas Map number 9512S, as described in Ordinance Number 91-102, the Collier County Land Development Code, is hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO: Ordinance Number 92-83, known as the Cypress Glen PUD, adopted on October 27, 1992 by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, is hereby repealed in its entirety. SECTION THREE: This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. JUL 3 0 2'I]02 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of Count), Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this __ day of ,2002. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN Approved as to Fom'i and Legal Sufficiency atjorie M. Student Assistant County Attorney PUDA/2002-AR-2028/RBqo JUL 3 0 2002 A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR CYPRESS GLEN 29.7+ Acres Located in Section 12, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida PREPARED BY: HOLE MONTES, INC. 950 ENCORE WAY NAPLES, FL 34110 EXHIBIT "A" Revised by Collier County Planning Services Department on July 10, 2002 DATE ISSUED: July 16, 1986 DATE REVISED BY CCPC: DATE APPROVED BY BCC: ORDINANCE NUMBER: ~t-.~.~,~ I DATE OF AMENDMENTS: - I - .IU L 3 0 2002 FAPUD Documents\Cyprcss~JlcnPUD.doc ?/10/2001 ' 9~43 AM TABLE OF CONTENTS Page SECTION I Statement of Compliance ............................................. 3 SECTION II Property Ownership, Legal Description, Short Title and Statement of Unified Control ........................................ 4 SECTION III Statement of Intent and Project Description ....................... 5 SECTION IV General Development Regulations ................................. 6 SECTION V Preserve Area Requirements ......................................... 10 SECTION VI Permitted Uses and Dimensional Standards for Residential Development ............................................. 11 SECTION VII Residential Land Use Regulations ................................... 12 SECTION VIII General Development Commitments ............................... 14 EXHIBITS Exhibit A - PUD Master Plan JUL 3 O 2002 FSPUD Documents\CypressGlenPUD.doc 7/10/2002 9:43 AM SECTION I STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE The development of 29.7 acres of property in Section 12, Township 49 South, Range 25 East Collier County, Florida, as a Planned Unit Development to be known as the Cypress Glen PUD, will be in compliance with the goals, objectives, and policies of Collier County as set forth in the Groxvth Management Plan. The residential component of the project will be consistent with the growth policies, land development regulations and applicable comprehensive planning objectives of each of the elements of the Growth Management Plan for the following reasons: 1. The property is located in the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Sub-district as depicted on the Future Land Use Map. The proposed gross density of seven (7) dxvelling units per acre is consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the Collier County Management Plan which allows up to four (4) dwelling units per acre at this location for the project Base Density and up to an additional three dwelling units per acre because the project is located within the Density Band of the Activity Center at Airport and Pine Ridge Road (Activity Center #13). Therefore, a gross density of 7.0 dwelling units per acre or 208 dwelling units can be found consistent xvith the Future Land Use Element and the Density Rating System of the Collier County Groxvth Management Plan. 2. The subject property's location in relation to the existing or proposed community facilities and services supports the development's residential density and commercial uses as required in Objective 2 of the Future land Use Element. 3. The proposed development is compatible xvith and complementary to existing and future surrounding land uses as required in Policy 5.4 of the Future Land Use Element. 4. Improvements are planned to be in compliance with applicable land development regulations as set forth in Objective 3 of the Future Land Use Element. 5. The proposed development will result in an efficient and economical extension of community facilities and services as required in Policy 3.1.G of of the Future Land Use Element. 6. The project is planned to incorporate natural systems for water management purposes in accordance with their natural functions and capabilities as required by Objective 1.5 of the Drainage Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element. 7. All final development orders for this project are subject to the Collier County Concurrency Management System, as implemented by the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance in Division 3.15 of the Land Development Code and further required by policy 2.3 of the Future Land Use Element. 3 .It3{- 3 0 2002 F:~PUD Docurnents\CypressGlenPUD.doc '~.~ SECTION II PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, LEGAL DESCRIPTION, SHORT TITLE AND STATEMENT OF UNIFIED CONTROL. 2.1 Property Ownership MGD Capital Partners are the owners of the subject property at the time of this application for the proposed PUD. 2.2 Legal Description The east ½ of the southwest lA of the southeast 'A and the east ½ of the west ½ of the southwest IA of the southeast ~A, Section 12, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, less the south 15 feet previously conveyed to Collier County, Florida for highway purposes. 2.3 General Description of Property The subject property is located on the north side of Pine Ridge Road west of Livingston Road and comprises 29.7 acres. 2.4 Physical Description The subject property is vacant at the time of the application for rezoning. The site currently drains from the Northeast to the Southwest. The property is located in Flood Zone X. The zoning classification prior to the date of approval of this PUD was PUD/ST/WS4. 2.5 Short Title This Ordinance shall be known and cited as the "Cypress Glen Planned Unit Development Ordinance". 2.6 Statement of Unified Control This statement represents that the current property owner has lands under unified control for the purpose of obtaining PUD zoning on the subject property. -' JUL 3 0 2002 - 4 - pg._~ F:~PUD Documents\CypressGlenPUD.doc 7/10/20 ~ 9:43 AM SECTION III STATEMENT OF INTENT AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.1 Introduction It is the intent of this Ordinance to establish a Planned Unit Development meeting the requirements as set forth in Section 2.2.20 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). The purpose of this document is to set forth guidelines for the future development of the project that meet accepted planning principles and practices, and to implement the Collier County Growth Management Plan. 3.2 Project Description The project contains 29.7 acres and includes land area for multi-family residential development, recreational facilities including a preservation area for a Cypress Slough including an Oak Hammock area. Access xvill be provided from Pine Ridge Road. 3.3 Land Use Plan and Project Phasing A. The PUD Master Plan provides for areas of residential use, water management areas, and preservation areas, as depicted on Exhibit "A". The PUD Master Plan is designed to be flexible with regard to the placement of buildings, tracts and related utilities and water management facilities. More specific commitments will be made at the time of Site Development Plan and permitting approval, based on compliance with all applicable requirements of this Ordinance, the LDC and local, state and federal permitting requirements. All tracts may be combined or developed separately subject to compliance with the applicable dimensional requirements contained within this document. B. The anticipated time of build-out of the project is approximately two (2) years from the time of issuance of the first building permit, or 2004. However, actual build-out will depend on market conditions. JUL 3 0 2002 F:~PUD Documents\CypressGlenPUD.doc 7/10/; ~ AM, SECTION IV GENERAL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS The purpose of this Section is to set forth the development regulations that may be applied generally to the development of the Cypress Glen Planned Unit Development and Master Plan. 4.1 General The following are general provisions applicable to the PUD Master Plan: A. Regulations for development of the Cypress Glen PUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this document, the PUD Planned Unit Development District and other applicable sections and parts of the LDC and the Collier County Growth Management Plan in effect at the time of issuance of any development order to which said regulations relate which authorizes the construction of improvements. The developer, his successor or assignee, agree to follow the PUD Master Plan and the regulations of this PUD as adopted and any other conditions or modifications as may be agreed to in the rezoning of the property. In addition, any successor in title, or assignee, is subject to the commitments xvithin this agreement. B. Unless otherwise noted, the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set forth in the LDC in effect at the time of building permit application. C. All conditions imposed and all graphic material presented depicting restrictions for the development of Cypress Glen shall become part of the regulations that govern the manner in which this site may be developed. D. Development permitted by the approval of this petition will be subject to a concurrency review under the provisions of Division 3.15, Adequate Public Facilities, of the LDC. E. Unless specifically waived through any variance or waiver provisions of any other applicable regulations, the provisions of those regulations not otherwise provided for within this PUD remain in full force and effect. 4.2 Site Clearing and Drainage Clearing, grading, earthwork, and site drainage work shall be performed in accordance with the Collier County LDC and the standards and commitments of this document in effect at the time of co nstruction pl an approval. JUL 3 0 2002 -6- F:XPUD Documents\CypressGlenPUD.doc 7/10/2~ )27,.43 ~xivi 4.3 Easements for Utilities Easements, where required, shall be provided for water management areas, utilities and other purposes as may be required by Collier County. All necessary easements, dedications or other instruments shall be granted to ensure the continued operation and maintenance of all services and utilities. All easements will be in compliance with the applicable regulations in effect at the time construction plans and plat approvals are requested. Easements dedicated to Collier County shall be counted toward the County's open space and the retention of native vegetation requirements. 4.4 Amendments to the Ordinance The proposed PUD Master Plan is conceptual in nature and subject to change within the context of the development standards in this Ordinance. Amendments to this Ordinance and PUD Master Plan shall be made pursuant to Section 2.7.3.5 of the Collier County LDC in effect at the time the amendment is requested. 4.5 Proiect Plan Approval Requirements Exhibit "A", the PUD Master Plan, constitutes the required PUD development plan. Subsequent to, or concurrent with PUD approval, a preliminary subdivision plat (if required) shall be submitted for the entire area covered by the PUD Master Plan. All division of property and the development of the land shall be in compliance with the subdivision regulations set forth in Section 3.2 of the LDC. Prior to the recording of the final subdivision plat, when required by the subdivision regulations set forth in Section 3.2 of the LDC, final plans of the required improvements shall receive the approval of all appropriate Collier County governmental agencies to ensure compliance with the PUD Master Plan, the County subdivision regulations and the platting laws of the State of Florida. Prior to the issuance of a building permit or other development order, the provisions of Section 3.3, Site Development Plans, shall be applied to all platted parcels, where applicable. Should no subdivision of land occur, Section 3.3 shall be applicable to the development of all tracts as shown on the PUD Master Plan. 4.6 Provision for Offsite Removal of Earthen Material The excavation of earthen material and its stockpiling in preparation of water management facilities, or to otherwise develop water bodies, is hereby permitted. If, after consideration of fill activities on buildable portions of the project site, there is a surplus of earthen material, offsite disposal is also hereby permitted subject to the following conditions: -7- F:XPUD Documents\CypressGlenPUD.doc 7/10/2002 3 0 2002 A. Excavation activities shall comply with the definition of a "development excavation" pursuant to Section 3.5.5.1.3 of the LDC, whereby offsite removal shall not exceed ten (10) percent of the total volume excavated up to a maximum of 20,000 cubic yards. B. A timetable to facilitate said removal shall be submitted to the Development Services Director for approval. Said timetable shall include the length of time it will take to complete said removal, hours of operation and haul routes. C. All other provisions of Section 3.5 of the LDC are applicable. 4.7 Sunset and Monitoring Provisions The Cypress Glen PUD shall be subject to Section 2.7.3.4 of the LDC, Time Limits for Approved PUD Master Plans and Section 2.7.3.6, Monitoring Requirements. 4.8 Polline Places Polling places shall be provided in accordance with Section 3.2.8.3.14 of the Collier County Land Development Code. 4.9 Native Vegetation The project shall meet the requirements of Division 3.9, Vegetation Removal, Protection and Preservation of the LDC for the subject property. The preserve areas depicted on the PUD Master Plan comprise a total of 13.70 acres or approximately forty-five (45) percent of the total site area. The preserve area is in excess of the requirement that a minimum of txventy-five (25) percent of the site be retained in native vegetation. 4.10 Open Space In addition to the areas designated on the PUD Master Plan as buffers and lakes, open space will be allocated within each subsequent development area. Open space may be in the form of landscaping, additional buffers, passive or active recreation areas and water management facilities. The total aggregate of such open space areas shall meet or exceed the open space requirements of Section 2.6.32 of the LDC. 4.11 Archaeological Resources The developer shall be subject to Section 2.2.25.8.1 of the LDC pertaining to archaeological resources in the event such resources are contained on the property. JUL 3 0 2002 F:XPUD Documents\CypressGlenPUD.doc 7/10/200:9:43 ~ ~.~t.~- 4.12 Common Area Maintenance Common area maintenance, including the maintenance of common facilities, open spaces, and water management facilities, shall be the responsibility of a homeowners' association to be established by the developer. 4.13 Si~na~e Ail signage shall be in accordance with Section 2.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code, as applicable. 4.14 Off Street Parkin~ and Loadin~ All off street parking and loading facilities shall be in accordance with Division 2.3 of the Collier County Land Development Code. 4.15 Landscaping All landscapipg shall be in accordance with the requirements of Divizion 2.4 of the Collier County Land Development Code. However, a five (5) foot landscape buffer will be maintained along the eastern edge of the property along the boundary of the lake and a ten (10) foot buffer shall be provided along the balance of the eastern property line. A five (5) foot landscape buffer will also be provided and maintained on the western edge of the Community School's property adjacent to the Cypress Glen PUD, as an alternate standard to a fifteen (15) foot buffer along the eastern property line. The balance of the total number of required plantings, (trees and shrubs) that would have been required in a fifteen (15) foot buffer along the eastern property line will be provided in other locations in the Cypress Glen PUD. JUL 3 0 2002 - 9- :~ ~.~D"'~~ W:\1996\1996076XPUD\CypressOlenPUD.doc 7/22 ~002 -- SECTION V PRESERVE AREA REQUIREMENTS 5.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to identify development standards for the Preserve Areas as shown on Exhibit "A", the PUD Master Plan. 5.2 PERMITTED USES The PUD Master Plan provides for 13.70 acres for upland and wetland preserve areas or forty-five (45) percent of the total site area. Minor adjustments may be made to the boundaries of preserve areas based on wetland permitting considerations. No building, structure or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in xvhole or part, for other than the following structures: A.Permitted Principal Uses and Structures: 1. Passive recreation areas. 2. Biking, hiking, and nature trails, and boardwalks. 3. Water management structures. 4. Native preserves and wildlife sanctuaries. 5. Supplemental landscape planting, screening and buffering within the Preserve Areas, after the appropriate environmental review. B. Any other passive recreational use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA). -- JUL 3 0 2002 F:~PUD Documents\CypressGlenPUD.doc 7/10/20029:43 AM SECTION VI PERMITTED USES AND DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 6.1 Purpose The purpose of this Section is to identify permitted uses and development standards for areas within the Cypress Glen PUD designated for residential development on the PUD Master Plan, Exhibit "A". 6.2 Maximum Dwelling Units A maximum of two hundred and eight (208) dwelling units are permitted on areas designed for residential use on the PUD Master Plan. All dwelling units are proposed to be multi-family. 6.3 General Description The PUD Master Plan designates the following use areas on Exhibit "A" The PUD Master Plan. AREA +ACRES +PERCENTAGE 1. Residential* 15.48 53.0% 2. Preserve Areas 13.70 45.4% 3. Addition R.O.W. 0.48 1.6% 29.66 100% *Includes 1.6 acres of Lakes The approximate acreage of the residential areas is depicted on the PUD Master Plan. Actual acreage of all development tracts will be provided at the time of site development plan or final subdivision plat approval in accordance with Article 3, Division 3.3, and Division 3.2, respectively, of the Collier County Land Development Code. Residential areas are designed to accommodate internal roadways, open spaces, recreational amenity areas, water management facilities, and other similar uses typically found in residential areas. JUL 3 0 2002 L F:XPUD Documents\CypressGlenPUD.doc 7/i 0/2002 10:12 AM SECTION VII RESIDENTIAL LAND USE REGULATIONS 7.1 PURPOSE This Section is to set forth the regulations for the residential areas depicted on the PUD Master Plan. Residential areas designated on the PUD Master Plan are designated to accommodate multi-family residential dwelling types, recreational facilities, essential sen, ices, customary accessory uses, and compatible land uses. 7.2 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered, or used, or land or water used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures: 1. Multi-family dwellings, including townhouses. 2. Water management facilities and lakes. 3. Manager's residence and offices for project sales and maintenance. B. Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures: 1. Customary accessory uses and structures. 2. Signs. 3. Recreational facilities. 4. Model units shall be permitted in conjunction with the promotion of the development subject to SDP approval. The model units shall be converted to residences at the end of a two-year period unless otherwise specifically approved by the County. 7.3 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Minimum lot area: one acre B. Minimum lot width: 150 feet C. Minimum distance between principal structures: Fifteen feet for townhouse structures and twenty-five (25) between townhouse and existing three story condominium buildings. ~t~a,,, ,vru - 12- F:XPUDDocuments\CypressGlenPUD.doc 7/10/2002 :.~3/~3~/0 2002 D. Setback from project boundaries: twenty-five feet (25) E. Maximum height or structures: Two (2) habitable stories for townhouse structures and three (3) habitable stories for existing condominium structures. F. Accessory structures: Accessory structures may be set back ten (10) feet from principal structures. JUL 3 0 2002 F:~PUD Documents\CypressGlenPUD.doc 7/10/2002 9:43 AM SECTION VIII GENERAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS 8.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the general development commitments of the project. 8.2 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC IMPACT A. In accordance with Ordinance 2001-13, requiring development to contribute its proportionate share of funds to accommodate the impact of proposed development on area roads; the developer, or its successors or assigns, agrees to pay road impact fees in accordance with the adopted fee schedule, at such time as building permits are requested. The Developer further agrees to pay its fair share for intersection improvements at the project's access point deemed necessary by the County Engineer. B. Access to the site and its median opening shall be located so as not to affect the design or use of the existing opening and left turn lane serving the Community School of Naples. C. The developer has provided a westbound right mm lane at the project entrance, as required ti'trough the prior rezoning approval. D. At the time of site development plan review, the developer shall provide arterial level street lighting at the project entrance. E. The developer shall provide up to 20 feet of right-of-way along the north side of Pine Ridge Road for future roadway, bike path and drainage improvements, the exact amount to be dedicated prior to final construction plan approval. F. The required improvements as noted above in Section 8.2 of the PUD Document are considered "site related" as defined in Ordinance 2001-13 and shall not be applied as credit toward any impact fees required by that Ordinance. G. A sidewalk shall be provided linking Phase I and Phase II of the Cypress Glen PUD and is depicted on the PUD Master Plan. (See Exhibit A.) Street lighting shall be provided along the edge of the access road along the eastern portion of the property in accordance with applicable county standards. 8.3 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS A. The petitioner shall comply with all applicable environmental sections of the Collier County Land Development Code, as amended and the Colli Jr Ccn~1~A~iF.~ -14- JUL 3 0 2002 W:\1996\1996076XPUD\CypressOlenPUD.doc 7/19/2002 3:1~ C. Prior to approval of construction documents by the County, the developer must present verification, pursuant to Chapter 367, Florida Statutes, that the Florida Public Service Commission has granted territorial rights to the developer to provide sewer service to the project until the County can provide these services through its sewer facilities. D. The utility construction documents for the project's sewerage system shall contain the design and construction of an on-site force main, which will ultimately connect the project to the future central sewerage facilities of Collier County. The force main must be interconnected to the pump station with appropriately located valves to permit for simple redirection of the project's sewage, when connection to the County's central sewer facilities becomes available. 8.5 ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS A. Detailed paving, grading, site drainage and utility plans shall be submitted to the Development Services Department for review. No construction permits shall be issued unless detailed paving, grading, site drainage and utility plans are submitted and until approval of the proposed construction, in accordance with the submitted plans, is granted by the Development Services Department. B. A copy of the SFWMD Surface Water Management Permit must be reviewed by the Development Services staff prior to any construction drawing approvals. C. The developer and all subsequent owners of this project shall be required to satisfy the requirements of all County Ordinances or Codes in effect at the time of issuance of any subsequent development order relating to this site, including but not limited to preliminary subdivision plat, site development plan and any other applications that will result in the issuance of a final development order. 8.6 WATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS The purpose of this Section is to set forth the water management commitments of the project developer. A. Prior to construction plan approval, verification of the capacity of the Pine Ridge swale to handle the project discharge shall be submitted. If water management improvements are deemed necessary, then such improvements shall be provided by the petitioner. B. Landscaping may be placed within the water management area in accordance with the criteria established within Section 2.4.7.3 of the LDC. C. A surface water management permit must be obtained from the SFWMD prior to any subdivision or site plan approval. - 16- J[J[_ 3 0 2002 F:~PUD Documents\CypressGlenPUD.doc 7/10/2002 gq AM 8.7 HOUSING Five percent of the 120 townhouse units will be sold only to individuals or families which qualify as low income. Furthermore, best efforts will be made to sell up to ten percent of the units to qualified low income buyers. - 17- JUL 3 0 2002 W:\1996\1996076LPUD\CypressGlenPUD.doc 7/19/21 }2 3:l~i~.M ~.. -'."-'..-'-'-'-:-'-'-*.:: '~' *.*-:-'-'::-'-~*~:.-'-;~::li~ ~ *.,..-..-,.~o,.;";*.',°'- o ..'.. O*.o.*.oo-,...,-:._.. ;'. ~ . .' ~ ... : ................ , ..,., ""'i!~t,~! ,-.'.% ....... ....;....o.:..-.',';'.'...::..~,.::.. ./ .... '"'""' ......... "' .... '"': ..... *.--,:...........,,.~,;-.~-..-.~..*.* .... ~... , · ......,-. ...... : ..., . .... ..... >. · . ...~, / o ..... . .- .° -.~ ...... ,o . . . · . · .,. -.o / ~1~ :-.':.'..'.','.~.:, :,~::.::~.....,~,..-~.':'.~'.'.: c~.:.'. .. o -.:., . o'~. : .-.... o, ......... .:. '_ ,., o.to°o~,.o~o°~';:..~. o.°'.. ,.°,.o°..o... , -..'.~ . . .. -'.-.-...-.-.':..-.',:~.. 10' L.B.F.. .... .?':'...'.:'.: ....,~..~..-..,::'. e~o .,or. ww CYPRESS GLEN Naple~, FI, ~4~ 10 c~ n.[ ~ ~ho..: ¢.4~) =~4-zooo P.U.D. Master Plan .7.P~ Florida Certificate of ~ ~ ~ 81~I~S.I'Jai~'SUI~ Authorization .o.~7= Exhibit 'A' EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ADOPT AN ORDINANCE CREATING A SITE IMPROVEMENT GRANT AND IMPACT FEE ASSISTANCE GRANT FOR THE BAYSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMENT AREA OF: THE COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners review and adopt the attached Ordinance creating and providing administration for a Site Improvement Grant and Impact'Fee Assistance Grant program for the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area BACKGROUND: The subject grant programs were reviewed and approved by the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) Board at a regular advertised meeting on April 30, 2002. The attached Ordinance provides for administration of the grant programs by the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency. The intent of these two grant programs is to revitalize the area by providing incentives that will encourage the private sector to invest in the Redevelopment Area. Both grant programs require funding to be allocated from the tax increment funds for the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area - Fund 187. CONSIDERATIONS: With the adoption of this Ordinance, the Board of County Commissioners will create the two grant programs. In addition, the Ordinance provides for annual appropriations by the Board of County Commissioners and administration of the grant programs by the Community Redevelopment Agency. FISCAL IMPACT: CRA redevelopment efforts are funded through Tax Increment Financing (TIF). Hence, the incremental difference in tax revenues between the original frozen assessment value (1999), and the new higher assessed value in the Redevelopment Area is used to finance redevelopment efforts in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area. On April 30, 2002, the CRA Board authorized 30% of the first year of accrued tax increment revenue be set aside to fund these two grant programs. More specifically, it is recommended that 20% of the annual tax increment funds be allocated for Site Improvement Grants, and 10% allocated to Impact Fee Assistance Grants. Accordingly, a Budget Amendment Request was processed for $36,300 to implement these two grant programs in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area. (Fund 187). $24,000 will be allocated for Site Improvement Grants and $12,000 for Impact Fee Assistance Grants for 2002, using 2000-2001 TIF funds. The Site Improvement Grant may provide up to 50% of the cost of improvements, up to a maximum grant amount of $4,000 (six grants). The Impact Fee Assistance Grant may provide up to 50% of the tgtal imp~r't fees for a project, up to a maximum grant amount of $6,000 (two grants). JUL 3 0 200~. CONSISTENCY WITH ADOPTED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN: The above-mentioned incentive programs generally support the objectives of the redevelopment plan. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Policy 4.7 of the Future Land Use £1ement of the Growth Management Plan states that redevelopment plans may be developed for specific areas within the County, including the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle, that may consider alternative land use plans, modifications to development standards, and incentives to encourage redevelopment. PLANNING SERVICES RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners adopt the attached Ordinance addressing the Site Improvement Grant and Impact Fee Assistance Grant Programs for the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area. PREPARED BY: TOMq~OMERLIN~, SENIOR PLANNER DATE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION APPROVED BY: . -x DATE STAN LITSINGER, AICP x HENSIVE PLANNING MANAGER MARGARET tV~UERSTLE DATE PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR J'O~'EPH K. SCFIMITT, ADMINISTRATOR DATE' y~)'MMUNITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES JUL 3 0 2007 I ORDINANCE NO. 2002- 2 3 AN ORDINANCE OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CREATING 4 A SITE IMPROVEMENT GRANT AND IMPACT FEE 5 ASSISTANCE GRANT FOR THE BAYSItORE GATEWAY 6 TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMENT AREA; PROVIDING FOR 7 ANNUAL APPROPRIATION BY TIlE BOARD OF COUNTY 8 COMMISSIONERS; PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION; PROVIDING 9 FOR ADMINISTI%kTION BY THE COLLIER COUNTY I0 COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY; PROVIDING FOR 11 CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR 12 INCLUSION IN THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND 13 ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 14 15 16 17 WHEREAS, Resolution No. 2000-83 was adopted by the County Commission on March 18 14, 2000 creating the Community Redevelopment Agency of Collier County, Florida (the 19 "CRA"); and 20 21 WHEREAS, Resolution No. 2000-181 was adopted by the County Commission on June 22 13, 2000 adopting a Community Redevelopment Plan (the "Plan") for the community 23 redevelopment area as described in that Resolution; and 24 25 WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 2000-42 was adopted by the County Commission on June 26 I3, 2000, establishing the Redevelopment Trust Fund which appropriates "incremental tax '~7 revenues" for community redevelopment purposes; and 28 29 WHEREAS, the County Commission desires to use a portion of the funds in the 30 Redevelopment Trust Fund for a Site Improvement Grant and Impact Fee Assistance Grant to 31 allow the use of tax increment funding for projects within the redevelopment area. 32 33 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY 34 CO*.EXlISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: 35 36 SECTION ONE: Title and Citation. 37 This Ordinance shall be known and cited as the "Collier County Redevelopment Grant Program 38 Ordinance". 39 40 SECTION TWO: Annual Appropriation. 41 The Board of County Commissioners shall annually, during its budget process, allocate funding 42 for grant programs from the Redevelopment Trust Fund for the community redevelopment area. 43 The Board of County Commissioners, in its discretion, may adjust the amount allocated for grant 44 programs at any time during its fiscal year. 45 AGENOA ITEM 46 SECTION THREE: Adoption of Site Improvement Grant and Impact Fee Assistance ~ 47 Grant Programs. 48 49 The Site Improvement Grant and Impact Fee Assistance Grant programs are hereby adopted. A '~ JUL 50 copy of said programs are annexed to this ordinance and adopted and made a part of this Page 1 of 2 I ordinance by reference. Either the Site Improvement Grant or the Impact Fee Assistance Grant 2 program may be amended by resolution of the CRA. 3 4 SECTION FOUR: Administration by CRA. 5 The Board of County Commissioners delegates the administration of the grant programs to the 6 CRA including, but not limited to, selection of recipients, contracting with owners and contract 7 enforcement. The CRA shall approve all applicants for funding after the Board of County 8 Commissioners allocates grant program funding for each fiscal )'ear. The recipients of any grant 9 funds shall be required to execute an agreement in a form approved by the County Attorney's 10 Office for legal sufficiency and approved by the CRA. 11 12 SECTION FIVE: Conflict and Severability. 13 In the event this Ordinance conflicts with any other Ordinance of Collier County or other 14 applicable law, the more restrictive shall apply. If any court of competent jurisdiction holds any 15 phrase or portion of this Ordinance invalid or unconstitutional, such portion shall be deemed a 16 separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the 17 remaining portion. 18 19 SECTION SIX: Inclusion in the Code of Laws and Ordinances. 20 The provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Code of Laws and 21 Ordinances of Collier County, Florida. The sections of the Ordinance may be renumbered or re- 22 lettered to accomplish such, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section," "article," or 23 any other appropriate word. 24 25 SECTION SEVEN: Effective Date. 26 This Ordinance shall be effective upon filing with the Florida Department of State. 27 28 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier 29 County, Florida this __ day of ,2002. 30 31 32 33 34 ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 35 DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 36 37 38 By: 39 JAM2ES N. COLETTA, Chairman 40 41 42 43 44 Approved as to form 45 and legal sufficiency: 46 ~...~d'~ A 47 ~ .//7 49 Heidi F. Ashton 50 Assistant County Attomey JUL 3 0 2002 52 h:HFA\Ord\CRA2002 Page 2 of 2 DRAFT COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SITE IMPROVEMENT GRANT PROGRAM General Provisions The Collier County CRA has created the Site Improvement Grant Program to provide financial assistance to residential and commercial establishments that want to redevelop in the Bayshore/Gatexvay Triangle redevelopment area. The program has been established to encourage rehabilitation and preser','ation of significant commercial buildings in the Bayshore Drive Mixed Use Zoning Overlay by offering financial and technical assistance for facade improvements. In addition, single and multi-family dwellings are eligible throughout the entire Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area. Improvements must be exterior improvements to the structure or surrounding site or improvements to windows/showcase areas if visible from the outside of the building. All improvements must meet the criteria listed below as well as the current requirements of the land development code, building code and any applicable zoning overlays. Improvements that remedy existing code enforcement problems also qualify if combined with other site improvements. The CRA is partially funded by Tax Increment Financing (TIF). TIF is a unique tool that CRA's can use to leverage public funds and to promote private sector activity. The CRA has allocated approximately $24,000 for Site Improvement Grants for year 2002, using 2000-2001 TIF funds. The CRA will provide 50% of the cost of improvements, up to a maximum grant amount of $4,000. For example, a project that will cost S10,000 total may receive a grant for up to $4,000, hmvever a project that will cost a total of $7,000 will only receive a grant for up to $3,500. Funding award will be evaluated based on the contribution made by each applicant as xvell as extent of improvements. Commercial and mulilt-family projects must include a minimum of five (5) improvements and single family residential projects nmst include a minimum of three (3) improvements (described below). For example, a project that consists of only one type of improvement (nexv sign only) will not qualify. All work must be approved by the CRA Advisory Board, the CRA and any applicable county departments that would normally review such improvements. All proposed xvork must be approved before beginning any work. Grant funding is not retroactive. All work must be completed within one year of approval by CRA. Grant applications must be submitted by MONTH, DA Y, 2002 at 5:00 pm. Applicants are required to request a meeting with staff prior to submittal of application. All meetings must be requested prior to AIONTH DA Y to ensure availabiliO, of staff time. Eligibility Grant funds are eligible to commercial structures (owner or tenant with a minimum lease term of 3 years) within the Bayshore Drive Mixed Use Zoning Overlay. Tenants must have a current occupational license and owner authorization. Authorization form must be submitted with application. Owner occupied residential structures are also eligible throughout the entire Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay as identified on the County's Future Land Use Map. Grants funds may be used for the following improvements: · Removal of false faq:ade, awnings, canopies, porches, signs or old entryway · Porches, awnings, canopies --'-- · Construction of new public entrances !~._. · Signs (commercial structures or approved conditional use bed and breakfast ;tablishments) · Painting (all colors must be approved) JUL 3 0 2002 · Window or door replacements or repairs SITE IMPROVEMENT GRANT PROGRAM DRAFT · Window boxes or showcase areas visible from outside of the building · Repointing of mortar joints for brick or stone fronts · Woodwork repair, replacement or new installation · Stucco work · Landscaping installation and improvement (commercial and multi-family residential projects only) · All work must be completed within one year of approval by CRA Grant funds may not be used for: · Working capital or administrative costs (payroll, rent, utilities, etc.) · Interior renovations (except for window boxes or showcase areas visible from outside building) · Demolition only · Loans or other capital support · Work that will extend beyond one year of approval by CRA Project Evaluation All projects will be evaluated based upon the following: · Applicant's financial contribution (greater the applicant's contribution, more points awarded) · Number and extent of improvements (minimum 5 for commercial, 3 for single-family residential) · Ability to begin work inm~ediately and ability to complete project within one year · Remedyofcode enforcement problems · Residential and commercial projects will be considered separately A point system will be used to evaluate projects, using the folloxving table (application must clearly indicate what project provides to get the points associated with that item): POINTS FOILM Project Provides Points Awardetl Removal of false facade, awnings, canopies, porches, signs or old entryway 1 New porch, axvning, anWor canopy 1 Construction of new public entrance 1 New signs 1 New paint only 1 Paint complements the "Old Florida" style 1 Design consistent with the "Old Florida" style 1 Replacement or repaired windows or doors 1 Windoxv boxes or showcase areas visible from outside of the building 1 Repointing of mortar joints for brick or stone fronts 1 Woodwork repair, replacement or new installation 1 Stucco work 1 Parking improvements 2 Landscaping improvements 2 Hurricane protection (storm shutters) 2 Subtotal Other Criteria Applicant has funding and is prepared to begin permitting process and hiring of qualified contractors 5 immediately follo~ving CRA approval and complete all work xvithin one year of approval by CRA Improvements will allow applicant to remedy existing code enforcement problems 5 1st time Site Improvement Grant applicant (repeat applicants qualify for points if grant not awarded previously) 5 Requires CRA contribution of 25% or less of the total project cost 10 Requires CRA contribution of 50% or less of the total project cost 5 St.li otal Any alterations in the project must be approved by the CRA to avoid revocation of funding. In the eve~ t thatth~ total funding request from all applicants exceeds the amount available for this grant cycle, funds will be awarded at th finaJO~]c~t~rr~tpe CRA based on the merits provided to the redevelopment area. SITE IMPROVEMENT GPANT PROGRAM p~. ~ ,.2 DRAFT Process Step 1: Applicant Meets with Staff · Applicant must request a meeting with staff prior to submittal of application; meeting must be scheduled prior to MONTH, DAY 2002. Step 2: Applicant Submittal Site Improvement Grant Application · Project Initiation and Completion Form Owner Authorization Form (if tenant is applicant) - requires notarization · Two 8X10 color photos of the existing building facade ("before" photos) · Sketch of proposed improvements (for commercial projects, sketch must be prepared by a licensed architect) · Budget estimates for the improvements Step 3: CRA Staff and Advisor3, Board Review · CRA staff reviews application and completes the Points Form, then places the application on agenda of next Advisory Board meeting · Advisory board checks project to make sure it meets all grant criteria and Redevelopment Plan criteria · Applicant is required to be present at the Advisory Board meeting to answer an)' questions that may arise during the revie~v or to provide additional material if requested · If project meets all criteria, the Advisory Board makes a recomrnendation to CRA to approve the '~ application with a reimbursement of 50% of the total project costs, not to exceed $4,000. · Grant funding is limited with first priority given to projects with higher points. Step 4: CRA Review and Approval · CRA staff prepares Site Improvement Grant Agreement for the CRA to reviexv and approve · Applicant signs Site Improvement Grant Agreement · Application with Advisory Board recommendation and ageement both placed on CRA agenda for review and approval; CRA reviexvs Advisory Board recommendation and a~eement during regular meeting and approves or denies project Step 5: Permitting and Site Plan hnprovement Process · If CRA approves project, applicant obtains all necessary permits and/or submits county site improvement plan to Community Development & Environmental Services Division. Step 6: Project Work · Applicant applies for and receives permits, then begins work Step 7: Project Completion and Submittal of Project Summary Report · Upon completion of work and after all inspections have been completed to insure work conforms to the work that was proposed, applicant submits: o Project Summary Report, including description of completed improvements, two 8X10 "after" photos, list of materials and construction techniques used, list of architects and/or ~" contractors and any additional information specific to the project. ~P~f~TEM . o Payment Request Form and all receipts and/or canceled checks as ,roofl~:,~'~tena] and contracted improvements have been paid , · The Grant Award is then paid to the applicant. JLl[_ 3 0 2002 .I SITE IMPROVEMENT GJ~'r PROGtMM Pg', DRAFT COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SITE IMPROVEMENT GRANT APPLICATION Section l: Applicant Information Owner Name: Owner Address: Site Address (if different from owner address): Legal Description of Site: Daytime Phone: Alternate Phone: How long have you owned this proper _ty?: How long is lease term if leased?: (attach copy of lease) Tenant Name: Tenant Daytime Phone: Tenant Alternate Phone: Number of Years in Business at Site Address: Occupational License Number: Other Tenant Names, if any: First Time Site Improvement Grant Applicant? Yes No If no, how many applications submitted? Grant(s) awarded? JUL 3 O 2002 SITE IMPRO¥£MENT GtLINT PROGR,IM pg.?~~ 4 DRAFT Section 2: Project Information Existing Condition of Proiect (attach additional sheets if necessary): ATTACH '~BEFORE" PHOTOS (INCLUDING AT LEAST TIFO 8XlOs, OTHERS MAY BE ADDED TO A CCURA TEL Y DESCRIBE THE SITE). Outline Proposed Improvements in Detail (attach additional sheets ifnecessar3,): List Materials to be Used and Construction Methods to be Utilized (i.e. red bricks, xvood panels, etc.) (attach additional sheets if necessary): ATTACH PHOTOCOPIES OF EXISTING CONDITIONS PHOTOS IDENTIFYING AREAS TO BE IMPROVED. ATTACH DRAWINGS OR SKETCH OF IMPROVEMENTS (FOR C03131ERCIAL PROJECTS, SKETCH ~vsr RE PREPAREO ~r ~ ~C~S~O ~cmr~cr). ~r~~o~ ~_~_ SAMPLES FOR EACH IMPROVEMENT. JUL 3 0 2002 SIrE IMPROVEME~ G~NT PROG~M 5 Pg. ~ DRAFT Section 3: Project Cost Information Estimated Project Cost: Estimated Request from CRA (up to 50% of the total project cost, up to, but not exceeding $4,000.) COPIES OF ALL RECEIPTS AND/OR CANCELED CHECKS II~ILL REQUIRED UPON PROJECT C031PLETION AS PROOF THAT ALL MATERIALS AND CONTRACTED IMPROVEMENTS HA VE BEEN PAID. NO REIMBURSEMENT It/ILL BE MADE BY THE CRA UNTIL ALL RECEIPTS AND/OR CANCELLED CHECKS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AND VERIFIED. Note: The CRA will l'eilnburse o11l3, 50% of the total project cost, up to, but not exceeding a ma.¥imlml amount of S4, 000 lq2on completion of the project and submittal of the Payment Request Form. JUL 3 0 2002 $IT£ [MPRO~'£~£~T GR~NT PROGP~M p~._ I 0 DRAFT Section g: Project Forms All applicable forms must be completed. Forms to include with application: 1. Project Initiation and Completion Form 2. Owner Authorization Form (if tenant is applicant) - requires notarization Form to complete and have approved by CRA prior to start of project: 1. Site Improvement Grant Agreement (provided by staff after Advisory Board recommendation and prior to CRA review and approva! of grant application) Forms to submit following project completion: 1. Project Summary Report Form 2. Payment Request Fon~n - - requires notarization JUL 3 SITE IMPRO~EMENT GRANT PROGRAM DRAFT Project Initiation and Completion Form (to be submitted with Site Improvement Grant Application) I, ., owner/tenant of the property located at __ , have the funding and capability necessary to begin the site improvements listed under Section 2 of the completed site improvement grant application and have the ability to complete all improvements within one year of the approval of the site improvement grant by the Collier County Comrnunity Redevelopment Agency. Signature of Owner/Tenant Date Signature of Owner/Tenant Date (if jointly oxxmed or leased) Signature of Owner/Tenant Date (if jointly owned or leased) JUL 3 0 2002 SITE IMPRO ~"E).fENT GRANT PROGRAM ~ DRAFT Osvner Authorization Form (to be submitted with Site Improvment Grant Application, if tenant is applicant) I, .., owner of the property located at __ , understand that , who has a valid lease for the above listed property, and authorize said tenant to complete the site improvements listed under Section 2 of the completed site intprovement grant application and to request matching funds front the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency. Signature of Owner Date Signature of Owner Date (if jointly owned) Signature of Owner Date (if jointly owned) STATE OF: COUNTY OF: The foregoing Oxxmer Authorization Form was executed before me this day of ,200_ by_ , oxxmer of the property located at , who: __ is personally known by me OR __ who has produced as proof of identity. Affix notarial seal Notary Public (Signature) ,~,. Print Name of Notary Public - ~GE~_ A II.~t Commission No: No._/_Q ~'- -- My Commission expires: JUL 3 0 2002 SITE IMPROVEMENT GRANT PROGRAM -- 9 DRAFT Project Summary Report Form (submit after project completion) (attach additional sheets if necessary) Describe Condition of Project: ATTACH ~AFTER' PHOTOS (INCLUDING AT LEAST TtVO 8X.[Os~ OTHERS MAY BE ADDED TO ACCURA TEL Y DESCRIBE THE SITE IMPROVEMENTS). List Materials and Construction Methods used, especially if unique methods were necessary_ to preserve or enhance some aspects of the improved site (attach additional sheets if necessary): List Names and Contact Information for Architects and Contractors Involved to Provide Proper Credit Provide any other important information specific to the project. All projects will be listed in the annual project report of the CRA so details and noteworthy information about the project is very_ critical. JUL 3 0 2002 pg._/~ --10 DRAFT Payment Request Form (project costs) (attach all receipts and/or cancelled checks) On the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency approved a portion of the following improvements (50% of the total up to $4,000) to be funded tl~ough the Site Improvement Grant Program: Improvement Cost Total I hereby confirm that all items listed above have been completed as per the Site Improvement Grant application submitted to the CRA and authorized by the CRA. Therefore, I am requesting the approved funding in the total amount of $ as approved by the CRA. The foregoing Payment Request Form was executed before me this day of ,200_ by_ , owner of the property , who: located at __ is personally ~kno~m by me OR ,,, who has produced as proof of identity. Affix notarial seal Notary Public (Signature) Print Name of Notary Public Commission No: My Commission expires: ~ITE IMPROVEMENT G~NT PROG~M -- DR,~T COLLIER.COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY IMPACT FEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM General Provisions The Collier County CRA has created the Impact Fee Assistance Program to provide financial assistance to residential and commercial redevelopment projects in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle redevelopment area. The program has been established to encourage rehabilitation of degraded structures and the installation of new structures that support the objectives of the adopted redevelopment plan. Improvements to existing structures may be funded through the Site Improvement Grant Program (see separate application and grant deadlines). The CRA is partially funded by Tax Increment Financing (TIE). TIE is. a unique tool that CRA's can use to leverage public funds and to promote private sector activity. For each project, the CRA may provide up to 50% of the total impact fees for each project. There is a maximum amount of funding allocated each year for impact fee assistance, so the program is managed on a "first come, first served" basis as well as an eligibility point system. Impact fee waivers or deferrals may also be available through the Collier County Housing and Urban Improvement SHIP program for low and very low- income first time homebuyers. All applicants must contact the Collier County Impact Fee Coordinator for an estimate of expected impact fee.s. CRA staff, the Impact Fee Coordinator and the Bayshore/Gateway Local Redevelopment Advisory Board will review applications and make a recommendation for assistance to the Community Redevelopment Agency. The CRA will issue final approval and authorize expenditure of funds. This is not a refund program. However, funding may be authorized if the grant application is submitted and reviewed by the Advisory Board prior to submittal of building permit. No "after the fact" applications will be accepted. This opportunity is only for applications in process and is offered to avoid a project being held up while waiting for CRA approval. Applications will be reviewed as received by staff, and periodically forwarded to the Advisory Board and the CRA in groups accumulated prior to the publicly scheduled meetings. Applications will no longer be accepted after all award funds are depleted. ,4II work must be completed within one ),eat' of approval by CRA. Applicants are required to consult with CRA staff and the Impact Fee Coordinator prior to submittal of application. Eligibility Grant funds are eligible for residential and commercial structures (owners only) within the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay as identified on the County's Future Land Use Map. Grants funds may be used for: Payment of up to 50% of the total of impact fees related to a single project · Commercial rehabilitation or renovation projects that increase the square footage of the project and therefore require payment of additional impact fees, e.g. change from 50,000 to 100,000 square feet ° Commercial rehabilitation or renovation projects that change the use of :he therefore require payment of additional impact fees, e.g. change from retail tc )ffi~.._?- · Single family residential projects that increase the square footage of the h.,me and therefore increase the impact fees, e.g. from 1,400 to 2,000 square feet JUL 3 13 2002 DRAFT · Larger single a. nd multi-family residential projects that involve construction or addition of new homes · All work must be completed within one year of approval by CRA Grant funds may not be used for: · Working capital or administrative costs (payroll, rent, utilities, etc.) · Renovations or code compliance (other grants are available for these costs) · Demolition · Loans or other capital support · Work that will extend beyond one year of approval by CRA Project Evaluation All projects will be evaluated based upon the following: · Applicant's financial contribution · Ability to begin work immediately · Ability lo complete project within one year · Remedy of code enforcement problems · Compliance with objectives of adopted redevelopment plan and any applicable development standards and/or zoning overlays A point system will be used to evaluate the accumulated projects, using the following table (application must clearly indicate how the project addresses these criteria in order to get the points associated with tBat item): POINTS FORM Review Criteria I Points Awarded ~ Applicant has funding and is prepared to begin permitting process and hiring of qualified 5 contractors immediately following CRA approval and complete all work within one year of approval by CRA (completed form attached) Applicant's financial contribution 5 Remedy of code enforcement problems (for renovations or restoration); new projects will have an 5 automatic 5 point handicap -Compliance with objectives of adopted redevelopment plan and any applicable development 10 standards and/or zoning overlays 5 .... Desien consistent with the "Old Florida" style 1st ti~e Impact Fee Assistance Grant applicant (repeat applicants qualify for points if grant not 5 awarded previously) 10 Requires CRA contribution of less than 25% of total impact fees TOTAL I Any alterations in the project must be approved by the CRA to avoid revocation of funding. Major changes to project that significantly changes the impact fees and changes points awarded may jeopardize funding. In all cases, the CRA contribution cannot be higher than 50% of the total impact fees. Program is contingent upon sufficient funds allocated to Impact Fee Grants and availability of funds in the Redevelopment Trust Fund. Applications will be accepted until funds allocated for impact fee assistance are depleted. JUL 3 0 2002 [MP.~.CT FE£A$$1STA^'C£ PROGRAM p~. I q DRAFT Process Step I: Applicant Meets with Staff · Applicant must request a meeting with staff prior to submittal of application. Step 2: Applicant Submittal · Impact Fee Assistance Application · Application for Site Development Plan or Building Permit application and written Proof of Total Estimated Impact Fees Required for project (written proof to be provided by Impact Fee Coordinator) · Project Initiation and Completion Form · Two 8XI0 color photos of the existing structure or parcel ("before" photos) · Sketch of proposed improvements (for commercial projects, sketch must be prepared by a licensed architect) Step 3: Impact Fee Coordinator, CRA Staff and Advisory Board Review · CRA staff and Impact Fee Coordinator review application and completes the Points Form, then places the application on agenda of next Advisory Board meeting · Advisory board checks project to make sure it meets all grant criteria and Redevelopment Plan criteria · Applicant is required to be present at the Advisory Board meeting to answer any questions that ma3, arise during the review or to provide additional material if requested · If project meets all criteria, the Advisory Board makes a recommendation to CRA to approve the application with a reimbursement of up to 50% of the total impact fees. Step 4:CtL4 Review and Approval · CRA staff prepares Impact Fee Assistance Agreement for the CRA to review and .approve · Applicant signs Impact Fee Assistance Agreement · Application with Advisory Board recommendation and agreement both placed on CRA agenda for review and approval; CRA reviews Advisory Board recommendation and agreement during regular meeting and approves or denies grant application. Step 5: Permitting and Site Plan bnprovement Process · Applicant obtains all necessary permits and/or submits county site improvement plan to Community Development & Environmental Services Division; when applying for permit, applicant must pay impact fees and submit a letter stating a portion of the fees are. being "paid under protest" to ensure efficient transfer of funds. · Step 6: Project Work · Applicant applies for and receives permits, then begins work .7'7. Step 7: Project Completion and Submittal of Project Summary Report JUL 3 0 21102 IM,O~,c"r FEE ASSlSTa,vC£ PRO6R,CM Pg'-- [ ~ -- i3 DRAFT · Upon completi.on of work and after all inspections have been completed to insure work conforms to the work that was proposed, applicant submits: Project Summary Report and as built specifications, including description of completed improvements, two 8XI0 "after" photos, list of materials and construction techniques used, list of architects and/or contractors and any additional information specific to the project. COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY IMPACT FEE ASSISTANCE APPLICATION Section 1: Applicant Information Owner Name: Owner Address: Site Address (if different from owner address): Leo_al Description of Site: Daytime Phone: Alternate Phone: How lono_ have you owned this property'?: Is this a renovation of an existin~ structure (s) Yes D No [] or a new structure (s) Yes [] No [] First Time Impact Fee Assistance Applicant? Yes [] No [] If no, how many applications submitted? Assistance awarded"? Yes I-1 No [] JUL 3 0 2002 pg. I q 4 ' DRAFT Section 2: Project. Information Existin~ Condition of Property or Structure (attach additional sheets if necessary): Existin~ Use of Property or Structure (attach additional sheets if necessary_): ATTACH "BEFORE" PHOTOS OR SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN (INCLUDING AT LEAST TWO 8XI Os~ 0 THERS MA Y BE ADDED TO A CCURA TEL Y DESCRIBE THE SITE). Outline Proposed Project in Detail (attach additional sheets if necessary): ATTACH PHOTOCOPIES OF EXISTING CONDI:ITONS PHOTOS IDENTIFYING AREAS TO BE IMPROVED. ATTACH DRAWINGS OR SKETCH OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS (FOR COMMERCIAL PRO.IECTS, SKETCH MUST BE PREPARED BY ,4 LICENSED ARCHITECT). A TTA CH COLOR SAMPLES FOR EA CH IMPR 0 VEMENT. ,,, JUL 3 0 2002 5 IMPA CT FEE ASSISTANCE. PROGRA *4 DRAFT Section 3: Project. Cost Information Estimated hnpact Fees (see Impact Fee Calculator and Schedule, available online at: h_ttp://collier~ov.net/or at 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104): Estimated Request from CRA (up to 50% of the total project cost) Note: Changes to project that occur after approval by CRA may jeopardize funding award if the changes significantly affect the required impact fees and therefore change the points awarded during the initial evaluation. FOR CRA USE ONLY Total Estimated Impact Fees: Request from CRA: Percentage of Total: J U L 3 0 200:> 6 IMPA CT FEE ,4 $SIS"L~ A'CE PROGRA~.'I - DRAFT Section 4: Project--Forms All applicable forms must be completed. Forms to include With application: 1. Project Initiation and Completion Form 2. Building permit and/or approved Site Development Plan Form to complete and have approved by CRA prior to start of project: 1. Impact Fee Assistance Agreement (provided by staff after Advisory Board recommendation and prior to CRA review and approval of grant application) Forms to submit following project completion: 1. Project Summary Report Form 2. As built specifications JUL 3 0 2002 IMPACT ~'£E ASS~STANC£ ~ROGRAM DRAFT .. Project Summary Report Form (submit after project completion) (attach additional sheets if necessary) Describe Condition of Project: ATTACH "AFTER~' PHOTOS (INCLUDING AT LEAST TWO 8XIOs, OTHERS MAY BE ADDED TO A CCURA TEL Y DESCRIBE THE SITE IMPROVEMENTS). List Materials and Construction Methods Used. especially if unique methods were necessary, to preserve or enhance some aspects of the improved facade (attach additional sheets if necessary)' List Names and Contact Information for Architects and Contractors Involved to Provide Proper Credit Provide any other important information specific.to the project. All projects will be listed in the annual project report of the CRA so details and noteworthy information about the. project is very critical. 2002 DRAFT .. Project Initiation and Completion Form (to be submitted with Impact Fee Assistance Application) I, , owner of the property located at __ , have the funding and capability necessary to begin the projects listed under Section 2 of the completed impact fee assistance application and have the ability to complete all improvements within one year of the approval of the impact fee assistance grant by the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency. Signature of Owner Date Signature of Owner Date (if jointly owned) Signature of Owner Date (if jointly owned) JUL 3 0 2002 8 IMPA CT FEE A S$1$TA NCE PROGRAM EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE A RESOLUTION TO AMEND ORDINANCE NO. 2000-70 FOR CHANGES TO THE BY-LAWS OF THE EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES ADVISORY COUNCIL. OBJECTIVE: To obtain Board of County Commissioner's approval amending Ordinance No. 2000-70 to make changes to the By-Laws of the Emergency Medical Services Advisory Council (EMSAC). CONSIDERATION;.. These changes will increase the Council members from twelve (12) to fourteen (14) and decrease the ex-officio members from three (3) to (1). The change will take into consideration the new Cleveland Clinic Hospital and the City of Marco Island Emergency Services giving them voting rights equal to Naples Community Hospital and the City of Naples Police and Emergency Services. The Ordinance was publically advertised for the required ten (10) days. FISCAL 131PACT;. There is no Fiscal Impact. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT;, There is no Growth Management Impact. RECOMMENDATION-: That the Board of County Commissioners approve and authorize the Chairman to sign the attached Resolution amending the By-Laws to the Emergency Medical Services Department Advisory Council. SUBMITTED B~ ~.~2> cot'1 Date:-I I 1 2-]0~' Barbara L. Brown, Administrative Assistant Emergency Medical Services Department REVIEWED BY: (~. ~',t" /~)~ Date: jeff~~peraUons Director Emer~gY M~. dical Sprqi~es Department APPROVED BY'~ffff~ , Date: Pin, , Interim Emergency Services Administrator No. JUL Pg., Exhibit A Revised .3/28/02 COLLIER COUNTY EMERGENCY M. EDIC.~L SERVICES AD¥-IdORY COUNCIL BY LAWS ARTICLE I Section 1. The name of this organization shall be the Collier County. Emergency Medical Se,-wices Advisory Council (hereinafter called EMSAC). ARTICLE II PURPOSE Section 1: The purposes, objec~ves, and functions of EMSAC are: A. To act as an advisory body to the Collier County. Board of County Commissioners (hereinafter called the BCC) on all aspects of EMS in Collier County.. B. To stud~' and analyze all opportunities and problems assodated with pro,~'idi~a optimal EMS through Collier County.. This shall include the right and the responsibility to hear and investigate any complaints formally received pertainins to the quality, of EMS se.wdces being rendered by any duly authorized pro,,dded. C. To encourage optimal performance standards for the pro~dsion of EMS. D. To encourase the training and education of both the professional provider and members of the general public in the provision of EMS care. E. To cccrdinztz Mt (foster) ser-Aces that impact in any way with the provision of EMS in Collier Count'. F. To foster and promote the de-ze!opment and utilization of improved methods of EMS. G. To promote area-wlde coordination and liaison of EMS with adjacent counties on matters of mutual concern. H. To establish liaison and planning with the County. ~mero, encv ManalemenX Department and other agencies as appropriate for the purpose of utilizing EMS resource-~ in an optimal manner in the event of a major disaster involving masi' casualties. I. Review complaints or problems brought before EMSAC. A procedure for the receiving, processing, and disposition of complaints shall be adopted. JUL 3 0 2002 J. To evaluate periodically and report to the BCC on the quality of EM$ in the County. mud to recommend corrective actions where deficiencies are thought to e~ist. Prior to June 1't of each year; EMSAC shall submit an annual - report to the BCC on its activities and accomplishments and an evaluation of EMS seN'ices and needs. If. To recomm~ncito the BCC the adoption of such resolutions or other measures as may be required to insure the accomplishment of the purposes stated herein. ARTICLE III ME~LBERSHIP Section 1. The regular membership of the Collier Count' Emergency .Medical Services ~dvisory Council shall consist of ~ ~ fourteen (14) members to be appointed by resolution by the Board of County Commissioners as follows: A. A ~ (resident) nominated by each County. Commissioner living in his/her District. (Total ~ residents) B. Two(2~~ (re~~'4n i~ ntheC°unrv'(T° be nominated by the Board of Countx' Commissioners~ C. One (1) representative of the Ciq' Manager of Naples who is in the orofession_ of Fire Rescue:'EMS. D. (One (1) representative of the CiD' of Marco who is in the orofession of Fire Rescue/EMS.) E. One (1) person to be nominated by the Collier County. Health Department. F. One (1) person nominated by the Collier Count..' Sheriff's Office. G. (One (1) person repres.entative of the Collier Count).' Fire Chiefs Association. H. One (1) person nominated by Naples Communi~' Hospital, who is inca resuonsible, administrative nosition uertaining t_o the uro~4ding of emer£encv medical se,,wices, on behalf of said organization. I. (One (1) person nominated by Cleveland Clinic, who is in a resnonsible.. administrative ~osition r)e~inin~ to the_ providing of emergency medical services, on behalf of said organization.) AGF_..Nr~A IT, EM JUL Sec:ion 2. The following or their designate will se,~e as ex-offido members to EMSAC without the right to Yore: A. EMS Medical Director Sec:ion 3. The follo~ng will se,we as staff advisors to EMSAC without the right to vote: A. Emergenc7 Services (Division) Administrator B. E.MS ~ ..... ;~. r'~;~r (DirecTor of Operations) Section 4. .MI regular members of EMSAC will se.we a three (3~ year period with a limit of t~wo consecutive terms. Section 5. The membership by majori~ vote shall have the authority, to recommend to the BCC the removal of any EMSAC member for failure to attend meetings. (See Article V, Section 5) .~RTICLE IV MEETINGS Section 1. The regular meetings of the membership of EMSAC shall be held not less than monthly at such time and place as designated by the Chairm"~u (Ch~rperson). The Chzlrmzn (Chairperson) may call special meetings of EMSAC when such meetings are deemed necessar?'. Notice of special meetings shall be ~ven to each member of EMSAC as proxdded in Section 2 be!oxy. Pursuant to Florida Statues, all meetings shaJ,1 be open to the public. This also includes committee meetings. Sec~on 2. Notice of the time; place and purpose of ail regular meetings and special meetings of E*iSAC shall be maiied ~o each.member not less than five days be~,%re such · ~' _o, Attendance by any members at such meetin~,s shall constitute his waiver of the me~~in__._ requirement of~vrirten notice. Section 3.~,,~r:"~ ~,~_~ e~ght. (8) voting members shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of any business at any regular or special meeting of EMSAC. ~ecrion 4. All official records of EMSAC, including meeting notices, agendas: minutes and resolutions duly adopted, shall be maintained by the Administrator of Emergency Services. ; Section 5. At the first regblar meeting, the Chairman (Chairperson) will establish the times for regular meetings and will file the results with the BCC and the Clerk of the Board. AGENDA J,.t'E M -- ..No. JUL 3 Pg. q ARTICLE V OFFICERS Section 1. The members of EMSAC shall elect from the members the following officers at each meeting held in October of each year: A. Chairmarf A. Chairperson E. Vice Chairman B. Vice Chairperson These officers shall serve as the Executive Committee for EMSAC and be selected from the ~ (resident) membership only. Section 2. The term of office of all officers of EMSAC shall be one ve~r or until their successors are elected. The terms will begin on the first meeting of October through the end of September the following year. All terms shall remMn in accordance with existing Collier County. Ordinances. Section 3. Any officer may be re-elected for the same office. Section 4. A vacanc7 in any office of Chairman or Vice-Chair,.~an may be filled by EMSAC ar any regular meeting or special ~,' o called for that purpose. Sec~on ~ Duties: A. CSairman: (Chairoerson: The Cka[rman (Chairperson) shall have the power, vdth the ad,rice and consent of EMSAC, to recommend oolicv actions in the ordinary' course of business to the BCC. The C5~2rman (Chairperson) shall pe,~form the normal duties of the Chief Policy Officer of EMS. He/she shall preside at ail meeting of EMSAC and be a member ex- officio of all committees. The Ghair--m,an (Chairperson) shall have further powers and duties as may be assigned by EMSAC. B. Vice-CSairman (Chairoerson3: In the absence of the Ckairman (Chairperson) or his/her inability to act, the Vice-CNa/tmon (Chairperson) shall exercise all po&ers and d~ties of the Chairman (Chairperson). The Vice-Chairman (Chairperson) shall have other duties and powers as may be assigned , by EMSAC. C. Secretary: The Secretary for the EMSAC shall be the Administrator for_ D/rat:ar Emergency Services or his or her designee. The Secretary shall cause to be kept all minutes of all meetings of EMSAC. Hedshe shall be responsible for' ~ving proper notice of all meetings of EMSAC and, in general, shall ~rform all duties incidental to the office of SecretarT. HeJshe shall have such further duties and powers as may be assigned to him/her by the Gh,alr-aum (Chairperson) of EM~SAC. It shall be the responsibility, of the Secretary. to report to the Executive Committee those EMSAC member who have missed two (2) unexcused consecutive or three (3) unexcused total EMSAC meetings within one year. JUL 3 0 2002 pg.~ ~ Included in his/her report shall be indication of follow-up contact, to establish cause, and recommendation as to the .~ppropriate disposition of said EMSAC member. The Secrerary:s report shall be submitted to the Executive Committee which, in turn, shall report to the EMSAC membership. Excused absences shall be coordinated with Secret.~rv 24 hours orior to each me~dn~ in order to meet artendnnce re(~uirements. ARTICLE VI COMMITTEES Section 1. The Ch,.'.-'.rman (Chairperson) is empowered to appoint such permanent or ad hoc sub committee chairs as are deemed necessary for the successful execution of the EMSAC program. All committee activities must be reported at a regular EM[SAC meeting. ARTICLE VII AME.N-I) MENTS Section 1. These By-laws may be amended by the Board of County Commissioners on its own initiative, or bv'ar~provin~ proposed amendments by the EMSAC. A proposed amendment must be passed by a two-thirds vote of the EMSAC membership present and voting at any regular, special or annual meeting after notice of such proposals for .-- amendment ha~ been given to all members as provided in these By-laws. Section 2. .Notice of any proposed amendment shall be submitted in writing to all members of EMSAC not less than thirty. (30) days prior to the meeting ar which such amendments are to be considered. ARTICLE 'viii RL-LES OF PROCEDURE Section 1. All meetings of EMSXC and any committees shall be conducted a.nd governed by Parliamentary procedure and usage as contained and set forth in .Roberr:s Rules of Order - Revised Edition unless otherwise provided for in these By-laws or except where modification of such rules is required because of the nature of the work to be accomplished by EMSAC. C ........ (Chairperson) Section 2. The ChcZrmnn (Chairperson) of EMSAC and the u~: .... 'of each committee may appoint, if they so desire, an individual to be designated as parliamentarian to assist them 'in the proper conduct of the business affairs of this organization. I RESOLUTION NO. 2002- _ 2 3 A RESOLUTION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY 4 COMMISSIONERS FOR APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENTS TO 5 SECTION 50-28 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND 6 ORDINANCES 7 Board of County $ WHEREAS, On April 23, 2002 the 9 Commissioners approved in concept, the proposed changes ~o the ]0 By-laws of the Emergency Medical Services Advisory Council and 1! authorized the County Attorney ~o prepare this Resolution. 12 WHEREAS, An amended Ordinance has been drafted and 13 presented to the Board of County Commissioners increasing the 14 Council members from twelve {12) no fourteen (14) and decreasing 15 the ex-officio members from three (3) to one (1); and 16 WHEREAS, the Emergency Medical Services Advisory Council =icial approval of the revised By-laws, attached 17 requests the of~ I$ hereto as Exhibit "A" by the Collier County Board of County 19 Commissioners. 20 NOW, THEREFORE, BE iT RESCLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY 21 COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: 22 The Collier County Board cf County Cor~issioners hereby 23 approves the changes to the By-laws of the Emergency Medical 24 Services Advisory Council by thzs Resolution and such By-law 25 changes shall be effective as cf %he date of the approval of the 26 amended Ordinance. 2? This Resolution adopted this day of ' 25 2002 after motion, second and majority vote favoring same. 29 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 30 ATTEST: 3! DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 32 By: 33 James N. Coletta, Chairman 34 Deputy Clerk 35 36 Approved as to form and 37 legal sufficienc~ 40 (~ac~uelin~XHubbard Robinson O~ ! -- 41 ~ss~stant County Attorney 42 ~JackiWE~rgcncy Services R~y-la~ rcsolunon " / JUL 3 0 2002 I OI~)INANCE NO. 2002- 2 3 4 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2000-70; AS 5 AMENDED; TIlE EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES 6 ADVISORY COUNCIL; BY AMENDING TIlE COLL1ER 7 COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES SECTION 50-28; 8 TO INCREASE TIlE NUMBER OF REGULAR MEMBERS 9 FROM TWEL'~qg (12) TO FOURTEEN (14) AND TO DECREASE 10 TItE NUMBER OF EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS FRObl TIIREE (3) 11 TO ONE (1); PROX, qDING FOR INCLUSION IN CODE OF LAWS 12 AND ORDINANCES; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND 13 SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE 14 DATE. 15 16 WHEREAS, On April 23, 2002, the Board of County Commissioners approved changes to the 17 By-laws of the Emergency Medical Services Advisory Council and therefore the Collier County Code of 18 Laws and Ordinances have to be amended to reflect this change. 19 WHEREAS, the change involves increasing the number of regular members of the Emergency 20 Medical Ser¥ices Advisory Council from twelve (12) to fourteen (14); and 21 WHEREAS, the second change in the Emergency Medical Services Advisory Council By-laws 22 was in the reducing of the ex-officio members from du-ee (3) to one (1) member. 23 24 NO\V, THEREFORE, BE IT OILDAENED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 25 OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: 26 SECTION ONE: 27 Section 50-28- MEMBERS: 28 The EMSA council shall be composed of 4-2 1._~4 regular members, g 1_ ex-officio members, and 2 29 staff advisors. The composition of the regular membership and the ex-officio members will be further 30 delineated in the bylaws, as will the staff advisors. 31 The EMSA council shall elect a chairman at its organizational meeting and annually thereafter. 32 SECTION TWO: INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCE 33 The provisions of th~s Ordinance shall bccmne and be made a part of the Code of Laws and 34 Ordinances of Collier County, Florida. The sections of the Ordinance may be renumbered or re-lettered 35 to accomplish such, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section," "article," or any other 36 appropriate word. 37 SECTION THREE: CONFLICT AND SEVER. ABILITY 38 In the event this Ordinance conflicts with any other Ordinance of Collier County or other 39 applicable law, the more restrictive shall apply. If any phrase or portion of the Ordinance is held invalid 40 or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, 41 distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. - I-,. I JUL 3 0 2002 1 2 SECTION FOUR: EFFECTWE DATE 3 This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. 4 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, 5 Florida, this __.day of ,200__. 6 ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 7 DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 8 9 10 BY: BY: 11 Deputy Clerk James N. Coletta, Chairman 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Approved ~s~to ~ jcn. d le~--~fi[~_~_cy: ~ 22 ~a~q.u~'~e Hubbard Robinson 23 )~sistant County Attorney 24 25 H: Jackie~Ernergency Services RLS/B>,-!av. amendment ordianance JUL 3 2002.