Loading...
CCPC Minutes 09/19/2002 RSeptember 19, 2002 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples, Florida, September 19, 2002 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Planning Commission, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 8:30 AM in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Kenneth Abemathy Frank Fry Paul Mindy Lindy Adelstein Russell Budd Dwight Richardson David Wolfley Mark Strain Lora Jean Young ALSO PRESENT: Joe Schmitt, Community Dev. & Environmental Services Ray Bellows, Chief Planner, Planning Services Dept. Kay Deselem, Principal Planner, Planning Services Dept. Greg Garcia, Collier County Transportation Planning AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 8:30 A.M., THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 2002, IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, 3301 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST, NAPLES, FL 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 6. 7. NOTE: INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES ON ANY ITEM. INDIVIDUALS SELECTED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZATION OR GROUP ARE ENCOURAGED AND MAY BE ALLOTTED 10 MINUTES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM IF SO RECOGNIZF~D BY THE CHAIRMAN. PERSONS WISHING TO HAVE WRrITEN OR GRAPHIC MATERIALS INCLUDED IN THE CCPC AGENDA PACKETS MUST SUBMIT SAID MATERIAL A MINIMUM OF 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC HEARING. IN ANY CASE, WRITTEN MATERIALS INTENDED TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CCPC SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. AI.L MATERIAL USED IN PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CCPC WII.I, BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF THE RECORD AND WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR PRESENTATION TO TI-IE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IF APPLICABLE. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE CCPC WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL BY CLERK ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA - APPROVAL OF MINUTES - AUGUST 1, 2002 PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES: BCC REPORT- RECAPS- NOT AVAILABLE AS OF THIS DATE CHAIRMAN'S REPORT ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS Ao VA-2002-AR-2392, Gerald A. McHale, Jr., Trustee, Naples Gateway Land Trust, requesting a variance from PUD Ordinance 2000-14, Section IV., 4.13, Landscaping and Buffering, Item (2), which requires a 10-foot wide Type A buffer along the eastem project perimeter boundary, to allow a 2.0-foot wide buffer area along the western edge of the sidewalk adjacent to the north-south portion of the accessway connecting to the Raggae PUD. The subject property is located at 3645 Gateway Lane, further described as Naples Gateway, Phase 2, Lot 6, as recorded in Plat Book 35, page 49, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Kay Deselem) Bo VA-2001-AR-1205, Vincent A. Cautero, AICP, of Wilkison & Associates, Inc., representing Shane Alan McIntosh, requesting a 7-foot variance from the maximum height requirement of 35 feet in the C-2 Zoning District to 42 feet and a 41-foot variance from the Corridor Management Overlay District (CMO) setback from Goodlette-Frank Road of 100 feet (50 feet plus 25 feet for each additional floor) for a proposed 3-story commercial building located on the northeast comer of Goodlette-Frank Road and 13th Avenue North, further described as Section 34, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, 'Florida. (COMPANION TO RZ-2001-AR-1204) (Coordinator: Ray Bellows) Co RZ-2001-AR-1204, Vincent A. Cautero, AICP, of Wilkison & Associates, Inc., representing Shane Alan Mclntosh, requesting a rezone from C-1 and RSF-4 to C-2 for general office space for property located on the northeast comer of Goodlette-Frank Road (CR-851) and 13th Avenue North, 1300 Goodlette Road North, in Section 34, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (COMPANION TO VA-2001-AR-1205) (Coordinator: Ray Bellows) CU-2002-AR-1943, Golden Gate Seventh Day Adventist Church, requesting a conditional use in the A-MHO zoning district per LDC Section 2.2.2.3.7, to allow a church/place of worship on 4.56+ acres located on the east side of River Road, 500+ south of Immokalee Road in Section 30, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Kay Deselem) mo CU-2002-AR-2366, Ron Beaver, requesting a Conditional Use in the "E" Estates zoning district per LDC Section 2.2.3.3.7, to allow a lake excavation on 6.6 acres located at 4640 31st Avenue NE, further described as Lot 144, Golden Gate Estates Unit 67, in Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Kay Deselem) 8. OLD BUSINESS: 9. NEW BUSINESS: 11. PUBLIC COMMENT ITEMS 12. DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA 13. ADJOURN 9/5/02 CCPC AGENDA/SM/SP 2 September 19, 2002 1. Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 2. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Kenneth Abernathy. Roll Call was taken - a Quorum was established. 3. Addenda to the Agenda - None 4. Approval of Minutes - August 1, 2002 Mr. Abernathy discussed the minutes of August 1st. Mr. Alelstein moved to table the minutes until the next meeting. Seconded - with discussion on cutting costs of the proceedings, an audio recording and video is taken of each meeting and if the Committee is unhappy with the minutes as they are taken as a summary, they will have to go back to a court reporter. Mr. Abernathy stated he doesn't mind the new procedure of minute taking, and has attended many meetings with the same summarization with meaningful sentences and paragraphs done correctly. He realizes it is difficult at times to understand what the Committee is talking about sometimes, and feels the past minutes under the new system has been quite acceptable. It is just the past meeting that needs to be looked at. Carried unanimously. Joe Schmitt mentioned they received two challenges this morning filed against the Rural Fringe. The ORC Report for their Eastern Lands Amendments was not as disfavorable as they had hoped - so will go back to the drawing board. The Rural Lands adoption hearing is scheduled for October 17th. There is no challenge on the Eastern Lands (Rural Lands) but there is on the Rural Fringe Amendment. Discussion followed on their schedule of meetings: October 9th -Rural Lands (Special Meeting), October 17th -- Regular Meeting and the Concurrency Amendment carryovers. Discussion followed on materials to the Committee in a timely basis. Mr. Paul Mindy asked why the meeting could not be held on the 10th. He has a conflict with the 9th. He also questioned why they couldn't continue on as originally planned. Mr. Schmitt said it was moved from the 3rd because of the work that needs to be done to prepare comments from DCA, also to allow time to work out details between staff and DCA. After polling the rest of the Committee, they will proceed on October 10th. 5. Planning Commission Absences: October is the month to elect new officers. Election of Officers will be put on the Agenda for October 3rd. 6. BCC Report-Recaps: None 7. Chairman's Report: None ge Advertised Public Hearings: A. VA-2002-AR-2392, Gerald A. McHale, Jr., Trustee, Naples Gateway Land Trust, requesting a variance from PUD Ordinance 2000-14, Section IV., 4.13, Landscaping and Buffering, Item (2) 2 September 19, 2002 Those testifying were sworn in by Mr. Abemathy. Disclosures were given. A letter from Ms. Madigan was received by Committee members. Kay Deselem-Principal Planner/Planning Services Dept. This site is known as Harley Davidson site as well as the Naples Gateway. She displayed an aerial photograph, which outlined the site. The roadway was displayed with the way the roadway would curve. She states that they are seeking a variance to reduce the width of the landscape buffer from 10 feet to 2 feet and only for the first southerly 260 feet. The address site is 3645 Gateway Lane. Pictures were shown of the different buffer locations. Staff has recommended approval with conditions starting on page 6 & 7 of the report. The existing vegetation will remain within the 2 foot wide strip along the sidewalk and irrigation along with a coco plum hedge will have to be maintained. Five oak trees will be transplanted. She reviewed the other conditions in the report. She did note that anything destroyed or damaged in the transplant process needs to be replaced. She also noted according to condition #7 that a new driveway was not addressed as part of the application and are putting them on notice. Since the report was prepared Kay stated she has received several letters regarding the petition with most being in opposition to the request. The variance will not extend to the north of Livingston Road. No effect north of the interconnecting roadway. Property owners that are concerned live to the north of Livingston Woods Lane. She spoke with some of them and explained the request and the difference between the vacant parcel next door (the Ragge PUD) and what is being proposed and what is part of the separate property of this particular variance request. They would have to address that as a separate issue with Code Enforcement. Mr. Adelstine stated it didn't make sense to him to take a 10 foot buffer down to a 2 foot buffer. He felt that if the applicant decides to do it his way first and then worry about what the Committee will say later is something they should look into. Mr. Richardson asked if the sidewalk was a requirement that has come along since the PUD was approved. Kay stated "yes". Marjorie said language says they have to comply with regulations in effect when they apply for any subsequent development order. If there was a sidewalk requirement that came into effect after that PUD was approved, and they came in for site plan or plodding, and the regulations were in effect at the time they came in for it, they would have to abide by it. Mr. Richardson couldn't see how this new requirement fits in at this late date. Kay stated the applicant and the adjacent property owner has agreed to get the sidewalk into the project as part of the northerly extension of Gateway Lane as a public safety issue. The roadway is not in. The road is a new element. Ray Bellows-Chief Planner mentioned he has worked on the Ragge PUD and that came after the zoning and site development plan approval of the Harley Davidson site. The Ragge PUD has an East/West road that runs through the middle of the property - the Gateway PUD has an East/West road closer to September 19, 2002 Pine Ridge Road. In order to make the roads connect providing a frontage road they need the North/South extension - the road came after the plans were approved for the Harley Davidson site - that being a problem with the landscape buffer and sidewalk requirements and this is to rectify an after the fact problem where the road had to be jogged to connect. Discussion followed concerning the sidewalk and not being put on the wrong side of the North/South road. Speakers: Greg Garcia-Collier County Transportation Planning - Transportation was involved at a late date and discovered there wasn't a sidewalk connection with this area. Everyone met and worked out this plan, limiting it so not to cross over traffic. Still enough room to put a sidewalk and to have some landscaping. He stated two feet is better than none. Discussion followed between Mr. Richardson and Mr. Garcia about property taken away from Ragge and fight-of-way purchase and saving dollars for the County. Staff was not aware of any Code Violations. Kay said the public from the different properties are expected to use the sidewalk. Mr. Abernathy asked if the sidewalk is going to go North on the West side of the road, on the Harley Davidson side, then turn & go East on the North side of that leg of the road as it goes across the Ragge PUD? Kay said that was her understanding. The Ragge PUD has not come in for any approval that she is aware of but that is the intent. Mr. Abernathy asked if the Eastern boundary of Ragge is extended to Whippoorwill. Discussion followed on the roadway interconnecting and traffic lights and whether it is a public road or not. Mr. Garcia will obtain more information. Mr. Abemathy asked if persons along Pine Ridge Road would be aware of the buffer. Kay did not think so. Conversation took place on the landscaping with Mr. Richardson asking why they don't put in a shield so it doesn't offend the traveling public - he is not sure why the three trees are a benefit. Kay stated they are looking at a compromise - rather than have them die, the applicant is willing to transplant or provide trees along the buffer. This will soften the effect overall. She also states that the "D" buffer has to be 15 feet wide. Mr. Schmitt said the issue is not the buffer between two commercial sites; it is to provide a safe egress and ingress for pedestrians with a sidewalk between the two commercial sites and a future site of Hooters location. Not looking for intense buffer just to provide a sidewalk. Intensify the buffer along Pine Ridge Road and shield Harley Davidson site. Mr. Richardson mentioned he felt it was poor planning. Mr. Richardson felt the fault lies with the Developer for not following the rules and not with staff. Mr. Mindy referred to Page 5 Item C - asked Kay to address the subject "of making major alterations" to the dealership site - how major would major be? The parking lot would have to be redesigned. If they lose parking spaces because of that, they might be back asking for variances from the parking. Ray felt this agreement solves all problems. Mr. Schmitt felt in meeting with both parties and addressing the issues, and the compromise that the staff reached was the Naples PUD. The buffer isn't the issue; it is providing adequate space for the sidewalk. 4 September 19, 2002 Speakers: Mr. Fry seemed to think they are talking about a sidewalk to no where. He didn't feel the people from the Hotel will use it. Not saying the sidewalk isn't needed, but not sure the public will be using it. He is wondering what one of the letters mentioned about a "break in the wall" in the Livingston Woods sub-division. Kay answered that the variance is only applicable to the southerly 260 feet. The wall is along the very northerly property line of the PUB. All the PUDs are required to put in the wall. What they are stating is incorrect. Mr. Strain asked if you need a variance on the Gateway wouldn't they need one on the Ragge as well? Kay understood they would provide the required buffer when they come in to develop. Ray stated if the road is impacting something stipulated in the Ragge PUB then they have to get an amendment or a variance. Mr. Strain asked if they need two variances for this rather than one, because under Section 413 Item 4 it says "all internal roadways are to have 5 foot wide buffers". Kay didn't think this was considered an internal roadway, it is a perimeter roadway. But she wasn't sure and would have to look at it more closely. After some discussion Kay had conferred with an Attorney staff and agreed this would not be an internal roadway, it is a perimeter roadway. Petitioner - Bruce Anderson representing Naples Gateway Trust - On behalf of the property owners association who hold a 15 foot roadway easement over the Harley Davidson dealership property. They are not the party of interest - it is the easement holder. It is a complicated mess. He showed the plat to the Committee. He stated they are in agreement with the staff conditions that they have set forth. He summarized how the County has changed their mind and changed regulations as to how it caused the variance request. March 2000 approved frontage road, October 2000 approved the plat Naples Gateway Phase II, after realizing the error, the County required his client to curve Gateway Lane north - being a responsible developer, he cooperated, and then after the County changed the frontage road interconnection location, and they also changed the land development code to require a sidewalk between the two PUDs. According to the staffs report none of the actions were of the petitioners making. He discussed the landscape buffer and a drainage area. He felt confusion occurred when the road was required to be curved up north and the 15 feet easement was platted, not enough was required by the County. Discussion followed on several of the items he felt was a complete mess to deal with i.e., - driveway, sidewalks, street lights, gutters, and the curving. Mr. Abemathy closed the public hearing and opened it for discussion and motion. Mr. Richardson stated there may have been mistakes made on several sides, not pleased with the result, but moved to approve the variances. Seconded Mr. Mindy. Carried unanimously 9-0. September 19, 2002 10:00 AM Break Meeting reconvened at 10:10 AM Mrs. Young wanted to amend the order of business for the Golden Gate 7th Day Church, but withdrew it. Each member received an Agnoli letter. B. Petition No.: RZ-01-AR-1204 McIntosh Property-Companion Item: VA-01-AR-1205. Applicant: Vincent A. Cautero, Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc. - Owner: Shane Alan McIntosh, 141 5th Street North, Naples, FL. Requesting a 7 foot variance for a 3 story commercial building. Subject property is located on the northeast corner of 13th Ave. North and Goodlette Frank Roads (C.R. 851) in Section 34, Township 49 South, Range 25 East. The application is for the Board to rezone 1.15 acres from C-1 & RSF-1 to C-2. Mr. Bellows states this is a Commercial Convenience permitting general office & depository institutions. Currently the land development has changed and there is new data criteria. Mr. Bellows referred to the handout and graphics shown. Staff is recommending proposed zoning be limited to office uses with banking and depository institutions being the only ones permitted in this zoning. Mr. Bellows discussed the traffic circulation and impact according to the handout. There are no environmental impacts. The property would be abutting two existing homes and staff is requiring a landscape wall be placed as a buffer. He discussed the Community Character Plan which encourages projects to be closer to the roadway. His question is "how do we balance the Counties adoption of future visions for the County which calls for revising the Land Development Code standards as we go along to implement various portions of the Community Character Plan?" He discussed the set-backs of the Post Office, the standard set-backs and staffs recommendation because of the CCP and changes in the City of Naples and other County ordinances. He brought up that the Board had been given a revised site plan by the applicant this morning with site plan changes as a result of negotiations with the Transportation Dept. This now has an access connection to 13TM street South and 14th Ave. North. They are not meeting all the variances as far as parking one space instead of three. The other variance is the front yard set-back. In the revised plan they no longer need a 41 foot variance. The applicant will explain. Mr. Abemathy asked if this puts the building 75 feet from the road, still 3 stories and the square footage has been reduced to 800 feet out of 21,000. The answer was "yes". Mr. Greg Garcia - Collier County Transportation Planning - Circulation around the building is one way rather than two way -only at the ingress and egress points. September 19, 2002 He mentioned the right turn lane at signal and stacking for drive -through going all the way around the building. Mr. Richardson stated that 13th Ave coming out of the post office is very heavily traveled. Coming out and making a left turn is difficult. Mr. Garcia talked about traffic calming devices. The traffic, lights and flow of traffic was discussed. An up-dated traffic report will be done depending upon what the Board decides today. Ms. Young stated that 14th street will have to be considered because of the Conservancy traffic. Mr. Garcia said that would be looked at. Mr. Abernathy stated he could not support a building that close to the road. Most buildings sited are one story buildings and only two story buildings in the area. Mr. Bellows discussed the different variances, but Mr. Abernathy has a problem with the height of the building. He is not sure a traffic light is going to solve the problem with traffic in and out of the Post Office. He feels this is a nice building in the wrong place. He was not sure Naples needs another Bank. Mr. Strain questioned the staff report page 3 - 6 criteria were listed (he assumed was taken out of GMP) he wondered why only 6 were chosen out the 10 criteria that is in the GMP? Item "F" reads "the parcel in question was not created to take advantage of this provision and was created prior to this adoption of this provisioning in the GMP on October 28th, 1997. The applicant owned the front parcels prior to that date, and purchased the back two residentially in 2000. According to F of the GMP he wouldn't be meeting his conditions of the GMP because it was "created" with the intent - that's prohibitive according to the GMP. Mr. Bellows said it was a matter of interpretation by what you mean by "creating". It says "the parcel" if residential, and going to Commercial, and bringing them into commercial through this rezone or change, it was "created" for this purpose only. He didn't buy them to keep them as residential. Mr. Bellows stated they are separate parcels not created for the purpose of meeting commercial criteria. Mr. Fry referred to page 3 in the analysis talking about the guidelines, as he reads, the property doesn't quality. He is troubled when staff brings recommendations for approval when they find so many of the guidelines don't apply. Mr. Bellows mentioned that his review of the front setback and staff is eliminating the CMO based on CCP - it doesn't make sense to hold the petitioner to something that may be modified or eliminated in a year or two. If they don't grant the front yard setback he will not be able to build a three story building. Mr. Fry stated that as he drove by the area he noticed most of the buildings are not abutted by residential as this is and is very concerned. He feels this is too much building for this site. He understands they want a return on there investment but doesn't feel it should be to the determent of the general public. Petitioner: Mr. Vince Cauterro - Coastal Engineering He apologized for the lateness of the revised site plan and that staff has been very cooperative. They were working with Transportation and also the traffic light on 13th street as late as last week. Had been working for the past year and thought it was significant enough to bring revised plan. A lot of the issues had been covered, he highlighted a few and used the visual for his graphics. Several 7 September 19, 2002 Insurance Companies have now become banks. Allstate is a bank, State Farm is a bank and Allstate operates in the existing building. Mrs. Mclntosh is an agent for Allstate. She will have her office in this building if it is constructed. He talked about the variances and traffic circulation patterns. He also discussed the traffic lights and creation of a full traffic signal at 13thavenue north and the signal at 14th avenue only during school loading and unloading hours with a flashing yellow light on Goodlette and a flashing red light on 14th for the remainder of the day. They did have discussions with Transportation conceming this issue. The landscape buffer was discussed along with the height of the building and parking variances. Mr. Richardson was concerned about the CMO overlay. He wondered why they did not purchase two more lots and then fit the criteria. Mr. Strain had a hard time understanding why all the variances are needed when the land is developable the way it is. Speaker: Bill Irvin - 1387 14th Ave. 1N -He is against the rezoning the two residential lots to Commercial and against the whole parcel being rezoned to C2. He did speak with Mr. Macintosh and saw the preliminary drawings. 13th Ave has a lot of problems- more traffic will compound the problem. Discussed purchasing neighbor's homes and abut his property for parking which he would not need a variance, but would be across from his home. He understands his wants as a business and he is a homeowner & has no plans to move or a desire to live next to a thriving commercial park. No one gains except Mr. Mclntosh. This is a nice residential and quiet street and doesn't feel he is the only one that feels that way. Gail Wood - 1381 13th Ave. N. - She has the home that adjoins this property. Has a concern about the buffer and landscaping. She lives directly across from the Post Office exit - traffic there all day and backing down the street, so to put another entrance and exit on the other side, only a few feet up, will be extremely congested. Marie Barnett - 1525 Bembury Drive - She checked the different variances and acquired a copy of the Land Development Code. She feels the building would change things in her area. She is concerned about the dumpster situation, the structure itself, traffic, parking and decreasing the value of properties next to the structure. None of the other buildings are 3 stories high and all blend with the character of Goodlette road and the surrounding residential uses. She would like to see: a building that fits into the neighborhood, one to two stories, proper parking and green space, everyone to comment on the proposal with a mailing or distribution, a proposal of the traffic issue, Collier County to study the area and the encroachment in a residential area. She feels the building is too large. Shane McIntosh - 141 5th Street N. - He and his wife own the property & have for several years. He stated there are two issues - one is rezone to C2. His wife is an Allstate Insurance Agent and in order for them to be in their own building, they have to be zoned C2. They're restricting it to financial institutions only. Do not need conditional use Cl. The variances are because he wanted to build a building that is September 19, 2002 gorgeous. He proceeded to discuss the different stories, roofs in other buildings, landscaping, liberty gardens and the setbacks. It was explained that the Insurance Company is now a bank and is required to be in a C2 zoning - not necessarily with tellers. They will occupy 2,000 sq feet of the building. He stated she does loans and mortgages with 3 employees. Another bank will be in the building, his wife's bank and a full service bank. Mr. Bellows said they can't expand non-conforming use. Ms. Young read from the report that the staffs opinion is that a smaller office building can be designed to meet the entire setback, parking height and landscape requirements. Mr. McIntosh said it would not be as eye appealing. Discussion followed on the roof and height limits and the heights Mr. McIntosh wants to build. Mr. Fry sympathizes with the applicant but not sure it is the problem for Collier County. Decisions are made based on what is good for the County and not necessarily the changes for a particular business. Hearing is closed. Mark Strain moved to deny Petition RZ-01-AR 1204 Rezone from C1 to C2, feeling it does not meet the criteria of the Growth Management Plan. Seconded Mr. Fry. Mr. Abernathy suggested he could support rezone of the RSF4 portion to C1 and make the entire parcel C 1. No other discussion. Motion carried 8-1. Mr. Budd voting no. Mr. Fry moved to deny the Petition which would include all the Variances. Seconded Mr. Adelstein. Mr. Strain stated he does not see a need or a hardship that would induce and reason to pass the variances. Mr. Richardson felt the vote is not necessary. Marjorie stated the County Commission would be acting on the rezone and if they should for some reason approve the rezone then the variances have gone to them without any recommendation from the Planning Commission. Mr. Mindy felt there is congestion in the area already with proximity to the residential area and doesn't see a justification for the variances. Motion carried unanimously. 9-0 CU-20023-AR-1943 - Golden Gate Seventh Day Adventist Church requesting CU "7" Agricultural Mobile Home Overlay. Subject property is located on Rivers Road, approx. 60 feet south of Immokalee Road. 4.56 acres. Kay Deselem - The applicant is seeking a conditional use to allow a church in its related accessory uses on a parcel of land located on Rivers Road. She presented a revised location and site map. The site was shown on the incorrect side that the Commission received in their packet. The site is south of Immokalee Road along Rivers Road and North of Ramsey road. She showed that there is a single family home east of the site and existing September 19, 2002 church to the northwest. The applicant has received the recent handouts. Kay stated she has not received any input from the public in opposition to nor in support. Staff is recommending the petition be approved with conditions and has provided the list in the staff report on page 6. Mr. Strain has a concern with the access in and out on Immokalee Road and that traffic is moving quite rapidly. If they were to make a left turn it could be dangerous. He wondered if there were any provisions to address this issue. Kay mentioned transportation had reviewed and would have to comply with any requirements as far as turn lanes etc. Mr. Bellows stated there are no requirements for the petitioner to improve the turn lane from Immokalee Road to River Road. They do have to provide a paved apron from Immokalee Road onto Rivers Road. Mr. Bellows also stated that if they wanted to proceed prior to getting assistance of the payment in the construction of the road, they can do that on their own. Petitioner: Terrance Kepple -representing the Petitioner - Transportation did not make any recommendations for turn lanes at this point. That road is under design for 4 lanes and not finished. There is a small portion of wetlands on the north side that they will be keeping, also removing the exotics and maintaining it in its natural state. Church will seat up to 500 members. The project will be constructed in accordance with all land development requirements. No immediate plans to build in the next 6 months to a year. Hearing is closed. Mr. Strain moved to go forward with Item 8D subject CU-2002-AR-1943 and recommend approval to the County Commission. Seconded Ms. Young. Motion Carried $-0. (Mr. Wolfley left earlier) CU2002-AR-2366- Ron Beaver asking for Conditional Use permit to allow a lake excavation on 6.6 acres in the "E" Estates zoning district located at 4640 31st Ave. NE Golden Gate Estates. Kay Deselem - Kay displayed the map of the location south of Oil Well Road along Desoto Blvd. Because this project exceeds the amount of cubic yards taken off the site they need to get the Conditional Use. Staff has reviewed and provides analyses in the staff report. She notes that Condition #13 duplicates 5 feet - it is an oversight and can eliminate Condition 13 to avoid confusion. The lake will be 20 feet and a minimum of 6 feet is required. The fill will be taken off and sold. Mr. Richardson mentioned he didn't know if they were in the business of promoting earth money. He asked how much of the remainder will be pulled off. Mr. Bellows said he raised a good point and wondered if this was a good place for the operation. It will not be an ongoing operation. Greatest concern we have had with earth mining is the disposal of material into the areas that are excavated. Sometimes construction debris has been put into the hole but has put a stop to that action. An excavation permit still needs to be applied for. Mr. Fry asked if the lakes are clean or become stagnant with a possible mosquito problem. The deeper the lake the better chances of it being healthier and, that's why they have the depth they do. 10 September 19, 2002 Mr. Bellows mentioned blasting is prohibitive, and all excavation permits are tracked through the engineering Dept. Kay said the excavation permit has to go to the BCC for an excavation permit. She also stated that they can remove some of the fill off site as an accessory use and there would be no condition attached to it limited to 4,000 cubic yards. Petitioner - Terrance Keppler - Representing the Petitioner. The Conditional Use is to construct a lake and removal of the fill. The property owners are currently constructing a home on the property. The depth of the lake has minimums but may go below that at dry times of the season. The lake will be 20 feet. Good lakes will support fish and provide amenities for the area. The excavation of the lake will be sold which will help defray costs of the home and property. Due to time constraints in getting permits he has had to truck in fill to build his home rather than from the lake. Heating is closed. Mr. Strain moved to forward Item CU 2002-AR-2366 onto the BCC for recommendation for approval. Seconded Mr. Budd. Discussion followed Motion Carried unanimously - 8-0. e OLD BUSINESS: The meeting for the review for the Eastern Lands Adoption Heating -will be held on Oct. 10th at 8:30-1:00. Mr. Fry asked about staff making a recommendation of getting materials to us - study has not been done at this time and has been advertised for the next meeting. 10. NEW BUSINESS: None 11. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None 12. DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA: None 13. ADJOURN: Meeting adjourned at 12:27 p.m. 11